Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 11.djvu/89

 NICHOLAS

63

NICHOLAS

thor as excellens postulator. The commentaries on the Books of Ecclesiastes, Ezechiel, and Daniel, while gen- erally attributed to Nicholas of Gorran, have at times been ascribed to a different authorship. His commen- tary on the Epistles of St. Paul is remarkably well done, and his gloss on the Apocalypse was deemed worthy of the highest commendation. Besides his Scriptural writings he commented on the Lombard's Book of Sentences and on the Book of Distinctions. His commentaries on the Gospels were published in folio at Cologne (1573) by Peter Quentel; and at Ant- werp (1(317) by John Keerberg. His commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul were published at Cologne (1478); Hagenau(1502) ; Paris (1521); Antwerp (1617).

QU^TIP - ECHARD. SS.

Ord. Prad.. I; I-.^jard, Histoire litt. de Francp, XX (Paris, 1842). .324-50:

Den

1 Cha

Chartulariun sien., II (Paria, ISUl). John B. O'Connor.

Nicholas of Lyra

(Doctor planus rt iili- Hs), exegete, b. at Lvra in Normandy, 1270;d. at Paris, 1340. The report that he was of Jewish descent dates only from the fifteenth century. He took the Franciscan habit at Verneuil, studied theology, re- ceived the doctor's de- gree in Paris and was appointed professor. at the Sorbonne. In the famous contro- versy on the Beatific Vision he took sides with the professors against John XXII. He laboured very successfully, both in preaching and writ- ing, for the conversion of the Jews. He is the author of numerous

I (II Moretto)

theological works, some of which are yet unpublished. It was to exegesis that Nicholas of Lyra devoted his best years. In the second prologue to his monumental work,"Postill£e perpetuie in universamS.Scripturam", after stating that the literal sense of Sacred Scripture is the foundation of all mystical expositions, and that it alone has demonstrative force, as St. Augustine teaches, he deplores the state of Biblical studies in his time. The literal sense, he avers, is much ob- scured, owing partly to the carelessness of the copy- ists, partly to the unskilfulness of some of the cor- rectors, and partly also to our own translation (the Vulgate), which not infrequently departs from the original Hebrew. He holds with St. Jerome that the text must be corrected from the Hebrew codices, except of course the prophecies concerning the Divin- ity of Christ. Another reason for this obscurity, Nicholas goes on to say, is the attachment of scholars to the method of interpretation handed down by others who, though they have said many things well, have yet touched but sparingly on the literal sense, and have so multiplied the mystical senses as nearly to intercept and choke it. Moreover, the text has been distorted by a multiplicity of arbitrary divisions and concordances. Hereupon he declares his intention

of insisting, in the present work, upon the literal sense and of interspersing only a few mystical inter- pretations. Nicholas utilized all available sources, fully mastered the Hebrew and drew copiously from the valuable commentaries of the Jewish exegetes, especially of the celebrated Talmudist Rashi. The "Pugio Fidei" of Raymond Martini and the com- mentaries of St. Thomas Aquinas were laid under con- tribution. His exposition is lucid and concise; his observations are judicious and sound, and always original. The "Postilla?" soon became the favourite manual of exegesis. It was the first Biblical com- mentary printed. The solid learning of Nich- olas commanded the respect of both Jews and Christians.

Luther owes much to Nicholas of Lyra, but how widely the principles of Nicholas differed essentially from Luther's views is best seen from Nicho- las's own words : "I protest that I do not intend to assert or determine anything that has not been manifestlydeter- mined by Sacred Scripture or by the authority of the Church .... Where- fore I submit all I have said or shall say to the correction of Holy Mother Church and of all learned men ..." (Prol. secund. in Pos- tillas., ed. 1498). Nicholas taught no new doctrine. The early Fathers and the great schoolmen had n'pcati'dly laid down the same sound cxe- gi'lii'al principles, but, owing to adverse ten- dencies of the times, their efforts had partly failed. Nicholas car- ried out these principles effectively, and in this lies his chief merit — one which ranks hiin among the fore- most exegetes of all times.

Wadding, Atmales (Rome. 1733). V, 264-7; VI, 237-9; Idem,

A'criyjiores (Rome. 1906), 3. v.: .Sba "

1806), s. v.; Fabbicics, Bilil. Int., 1736), 114 sqq.; Hain, ijcpx ... , .; CoPINQER, Supplement to II 1902). a. v.; Denifle and ( ii i II (Paris. 1891). passim; FtK, i ; docteurs les plus cilhbres, l\\ i. crii. des commenlaires d. \. I I crit. des princip, commenl'i'< Bergeu. Quam nolitiam litn/:/ i /. <rvi in Callia (Nancv, 1893) ; ( Test. Hhros sacros. t (Pi ' ' the sluiln of the Script

I'nris.

.. Hist. . Hist. 1(193);

utr.

, 1885), 660-2; GiaoT, Gen. Introd. to (Now York), 444 sq.; Neumann, Influ-

^iinfsxur


 * Hachi et d'autres com.

in Revue des itudes juivesj X\\ \ Is''.;. I,.-' |.| 230 sqq.; Maschkowski, /i'.. ' / ' -

leg. d. Exodus in Zeitschr. f. 'i I' ' n sgg. ; Lahuosme. BioffT. ei oi" .' •'' \ i I m/'"/ XVI ii'iiii,), ;in:; wiq.; XVII (1907). 4si) «|(|.., l.iii sqq., 368 sqq.; Bml.. Hot N.

no.flilles de Lyra \XVII (1893). /-. in d. Aus- \I (1891). 268 fronciscaines, r>93 sqq.; XIX u. L. in Erfurt . _. Vereins /. thilring. Oesch. u. AUertum., sqq.; see also a paper on Nicliolaa of Lyra by Mahchal m .Innuaire de I'universM cath. .de Loumin (1910), 432 sq. ThOM.\S PlaSSMANN.

Nicholas of Myra (or of Bari), Saint, Bishop of Myra in Lycia. <i. 6 December, 345 or 352. Though

/.

XX \ I I 1'.