3^te&cxdth to

H.A. Pottinger 8SQ. M.A.

of Worcester College Oxford to aid the loss caused by th3 fire of Feb, 14th 1890.

I

C

A T^HOL ASTRAL HISTO'^

THE CANON

HOLY SCRIPTVRE

OR The Certain and Indubitate Books thereof as they are Received in the Church of England.

C o

M P ILE I>

,BvD'CosinD".o£P

'; AND

iVl^- of 3' F. C. in the U n i ye r $ i t T

ij of ^AMBraiDGE^ (Now Se^uefiredj

*Ii<uc. XVI

Ha^jit Mo/en (^Trophetas • AudUat illou

LONDON. Printed by ^ . Norton for Timothj Cmhvpait at tl*e Little ^ ""-^r^h door

of S. PahIs. MDCLVII.

,0^

InChristo Patri, AC Domino n

D" Matthceo

EUENSI EPISCOPO.

ANTia.UiE FiDEI V I R o, EtIn Rebus Sacris

EXERCITATIS S"^°*

DocTn. Et Relig. In Eccl. Angu

Adsertori Ac Confessori

Maximo.

V£RiE Invict. Que Magnanimitatis

P R JE S U L I,

Er Coll. S. Petri In Acad. Cantabr,

P A T R O N O,

^OH. COSI^' Dec. Petrob.

J u J D. FiDEI, DOCTR. ReLIGIONIS, EccLEsiiE Et Coll. Administer HANC SUAMHIST. SCHOLASTICAM E Sacris Pacini s, VETERIB. QUE AC RECENTIOR. SCRIPHS adornatam ATQUE A VIRTS RER. DIVIN. PERITIS LECT. ET APPROBATAM,

L. M. D. D. D.

i^iwrwiumm-ijium

THE

CANON of SCRIPTURE,

Recited

In the Vl'^ Article of Religion,

Set forth by

The Church of England,

An. Dom. MDLXII.

HOLT SCRIPTURE conUineth all things necefary to Salvation ; So that whatfoever is not read therein , nor maybe proved thereby^ is not to be rec^uired of any many that itfhouldbe believed as an Article of the Faiths or be thought re^uifite^ or necejjary to Salvation.

In the Name of the HOLT SCRIPTURE^ we do underhand thofe CAJiplsl^lCAL BOOKS of the OLD and NEW TE^ STAMENTy of vphofe Authority was never any doubt in the CH!i%CH. '

The NAMES and NUMBER of the CANONICAL BOOKS.

Cenefis. I. Of Samuel. The B. of Hefier.

Exodus. II. Of Samuel. The B, of Job.

Leviticus^ I. Of Kings. The Pfalmes.

l^umbers. II. Of Kings. The Proverbs,

^Deuteronomy, I. of Chronicles. The B. of EcclefiafieS.

Jofuah. II. Of Chronicles. The Songs of Salomon,

fudges. I.OfSfdras. ir Greater Prophets.

Ruth II.OfEfdras. XII LeJ[er Prophets.

A i AND

The Qanon of Scripture.

fiyiNT> the other BOOKS {as Hierome faith) the Church doth read for Example of Life^ and I/ijiruBion of OHa/mers^^^ tut yet doth it not apply them to eftabUjh any DoBrine.

SUCH are THESE following.

The Third Book of Efdras. Baruch the Prophet,

The Fourth Book of EfdniS. The Song of the Three Children^

The Book of Tobias. The Story of Su^anna^

The Book of Judeth. Of Bel and the Dragon.

The refi of He Her. The Frayer of ManaJJes.

The Book offVifdom. The Firft Book ofMaccabes.

pfus the Son ofsiracho. The Second Book ofMaccabes^

ALL the BOOKS of the VJEfV TESTAMENT^ a$ thy §re commonly received y m do receive and acc9mpt them CA- NONICAL^

IHE

v^^

THE

New Canon of Scripture

Firft fet forth by

The COVHfSL of T%SJ\CT,

And after confirmed, and declared to

be received with other Articles of Faith by

the BULLS of Pope PIUS thelV^h.

CoNC. Trid. Sess. IV, Decret. !♦ Decrct. de Canon^ Scripturis.

SS. QYnodus— Prsefidentibus in ca Tribus Apoftolicae Sedis Lega- ijtts — Ptrfpiciens Vcritatcm falutarem & morum difciplinam contineri in LIBRIS SCRIPTIS, & SINE SCRIPTO TRADI- TIONlBUSj-^Orthodoxorum Patrum Excmpla fequuca, OMNES LIBROS tam Vctcrisquam Novi Teftamenti, (cum utriufque unus DeusfitAudor,) ncc non TRADlTIONES ipfas, turn ad Fidem, turn ad Mores pertinentes , tanquain vel oretcnus a Chrifto, vd a So. S. diftatas, & continua Succeflione in Ecdefia Catholica confcr- vatas, PARI PIETATIS AFFECTU, AC REVERENTIA fufci- pit & vencratur.

SACRORUM verb LlBRORllM Indicem huic DECRETO ad- fcribendum cenfuic^ ne cui dubitatio fuboriri poffit, quinam fxnt, qui ab ipsi Synodo fufcipiuntur.

Sunt vero infra fcripti

Teft. V. Quinque Mod?, Jof. Judic. Ruth, IV Reg. II Paralip.' Efdrae I, & TT, qui dicitur Nehem. TOBIAS, JUDITH, Heftcrjob, f falterium David, CL Pfal. Parab. Ecclcfiaftes, Cantie. Canticorumg. SAPIENTIA, ECCLESIASTICUS, Ifaias, Hieremias cum BA- KUCH, Ezcch. Daniel, XII Proph. Minores, DUO MACCA* BiEORUM I. & II. ' Teft. N. Quatuor Evang, &g.'

. 5r

The •!A(£» Canon of Scripture.

Siquis autcm LIBRGS IPSOS INTEGROS CUM OMNIBU5 SUIS PARTlBUS,Prout in Ecclefia Catholica Icgi confuevcrunc.& ih vetcri volgata Latiiaa Editione habcnrur, pro SACRIS ET CA- NONICIS NON fufceperit 5 & TRADITIONES PRi£DICTAS fcicns & prudenscontempfcrit, ANATHEMA fic.

Omnes itaque intelligant, quo ordine, & via ipfaSy nodus, poft jadum fidei Confellionis fundaraentum , fit progrcffura ] & quibus potiffimum TESTIMONIIS , AC PRiGSIDlIS JN CONFIR- MANDIS DOGMATIBUS, & Inftaurandis in Ecckfia Moribus, (ic ufura.

BULLA PAl^ P/2. QIIARTI

Super Forma Juramenti ProfeJJ. Fidei. Juxti ConciLTrid.in ^ne eju^d.^onc.

ITEM OMNIA a S5. TRID. SYNODO tradita, d^fiHita&de- clarata indubitantcr recipio, atque profiteer; Simulqiic contraria OMNIA..DAMNO, REJICIO, ANATHEMATIZO. Hanc VE- RAM CATHOLICAM FIDEM , Extra quam NEMO SALVUS ESSE POTEST, vcraciter tcnco, & eandcm integram a noeis te- ncri Guraturum me fpondeo, voveo ac juro. Sic Mc Dcu$ ad juvct • & haec S. Dei Evangdia, &c.

TO

IK.

To the Reader.

N this Scholaftical Hiftory / give an Ac» compt of the Canonical and undubitate Books (?/Holy Scripture^ £k% they are numbred ^ in the VI Article of Religion [et forth hy the Church of England^ and have been recei- ved by the Catholick Church in allfeverall Ages fence the time of the Apoflles^ till the Church ot Rome thought fit ^ compofe and drejfe up a New- Additional Ganon tbereofforwemfehes in their late CouucqI

* V. Art; Vi.Eccl. Ang« Su— p.irccic;

of Trent,

fvhere it was one of tjje fitfk things they did^ to lay this Voun- dation for all their New Religion ivhich they built upon it ^ ^^That the Apocryphal Writings and Traditions 0/ Men^ ^^ were nothing inferiour^ nor lefje (Canonical , then the Sovc- ^^raign Dilates of GoA as well for the Confirmation of Do- •^ drinal Voints pertaining fo Faith, as for the Ordering ^/Life *^ 4«rf Manners ^ but that both the One and the Oihcr ought to ^ be embraced with the fame A ffc6i: ion of Piety 5 and received ^^ with the like religious Reverence ynot making any difference *^ betweenthem.

Thofe Writings of holy and learned men^ who have been^ next after the Trophets and tyipofiles^ as the Shining Lights of the fyorldin their [ever al Generations before uSy we reverence and hc-^ nour in their kind-^ and thofe Ecclefiaflicjil TradkionSj which have been in ufe among us^ and tend to the Letter prefervation of Qruer and Piety in that Religion only^^ * which was oncedeli-

. ^ vexed.

V. Decrer:

Con.Trid; Suprsi re« cicat#

v.^. Fjdet- fmel San* IVu tradU-

To the Reader.

■^

nAturd and ffiKirn SuhjeBsfrom their Bond of Faith andAUegi^ ance towards^, him j {which are the Didates (?/ rope Hilde- brand 5) B^^ note only at frefent the Authority that he ajju- meth over /f^Scriptures of God {the SubjeEi of ail our Hitto- ryj) which ^ Wo: and his «i VoWos^qxs make to Le greater then tiny thofe Scriptures have ; for it is another of the fame Pope's Didates, confirmed by the Bull ofVmsthelSf.inhis " Pro- fe^ion of the Tridentine Faith ^ " That ^ the Canon icall " Scriptures themfelves Ihall be no Canonical Scriptures, "unleflc he gives them Authority and Allowance fo to be. which is as much as to (ay^ that when he P pleafethy he may take may all Authority from them. Ill, Then^ s ^ « That all Scrip- "tures are to be expounded according to the Senfe of this « Roman Church ^ which muft herein be held to be the « only Judge ; and to follow the unanimous confent of the « Ancient Fathers. IV. Next^ That there are r truly and « properly Seven Sacraments, neither more nor leffe, infti- "tuted by Chrift himkliintheVjwTefiament. V. "Tto ^^ f in their MaflTe there is a Real Tranlubftantiation of the ^« Elements into the Body and Blood of Chrift, t remain-

l Gre^.VIL diS}atus in Ccncil.Rom.SuprJicitzt. m Sihefi.Prkr.RomdiaKadv.Lutb.Ejui enim (PontificisV auftoritas major eft quasn Scriptora?. n Vbifufrh. Cartcra omnia k Sacris CiXiomhwi^^c. fvphtrtof this Dilate of Greg, the feventh is one.J o DiHat^ie, Suprhcitati. Nullum Capitulum, nuUufquc Liber Canonicushabeturabfqaeilliusau(^orirate, Nicol. Papal. Can.fi Rmar10r.diii.19. Vctusfe Novum Teftamcntum funt recipienda, non Codici Ganonum annesca, fed quod dc illisrccipiendis S. Papst Innocentiiprolaia eft fentcntia, cujusauftoritate utrumque recipiendum eft. Addit BaToniui ad An, ^S^.n,22i\. Ab arbitrio enim Pontif Rem. pcndetj quid Tclit cffc in univerfa Ecclefia Sacfofan^am. Ittio Presbyter alter Congreg' Oratorii thorn, BsTiius, dum Rmand Curidy Ejufque Pmifci adulaiur^ eoufqt(eprovehituriiitaffirmet{De Sign. Eccl. \b.i6. cap.io.) Qcod fitfjlfo & impiidentcrdiftuni, Divinam Scripturam cffc ma- joris iuftoritatis, qu^m fit Ecclefia?, {i.)P.R. p Qiiod Tertullianus Ethnicis reponebat, Apoh- g^etic. cap,S. Apud vos de Humano Arbitratu Divinitas penfnatutnifiHomini Dcus pkcuerit. Dens non eric. Nam Papa fut habetur in Ghlfa ad Cap,Qi(anto.tit,7* Primi Decretal, ad verbaf Veri Dei vicem,) dicitur habere cajlefte Arbitrium j 8c idco etiam Naturam rerum immutare p6- teft— quia in his, qua? vulr, ci eft pro ratiore voluntas j nee eft qui Ei dicat,Cur ix^ facis? &c» luntj Olof in Extravag. Joh.22. Tit, de verborum Signify cap. Cum inter. Credere Dominiim Deun) noftrum Papam— fie non polTe ftatucre, prouc ftatuit, hxrecicum cenfcretur. q Cenc.Trid. Seff. ^. Decret, de ufd S. Scr. fy Bulla PiiQ^drti, Sacram Scripturam iuxta cum Scnfnmj&c. r C9nc. trid. Sejf.7, Can, i,de Sacrm. in genere. Siquisdlxerir, &c. Anathema fit. Et Bulla fr^rf/fl* Profiteer VII cffc SacramcBta, &;c. f ConciLtrid,Se^,i^,Can2, t IbidXanA*

To the Reader.

« ing after the Communion is done ; and likewifc » a pro- €« per and propitiatory Sacrifice there offered up by the « Pricft for the Sinnes of the Quick and the Dead, the fame «« that Chrift offered upon the Croffe. VI. ThM when x the « Prieft receiveth the Sacrament alone, and when y he ^^ giveth to others but under one kinde only, yet it is a la\y*' "iiiljandacompleat Communion, "^ notwithftanding ^//^ our Saviour otherwife a^fointed it, VII. That after « this ^c Life there is a ^ penal Purgatory to be undergone for ^^the Expiation as well of venial Sins, as the payment of ^^ temporal punifhments due to mortal fins ; and that dead '<mens fouls there detained are help'd by the Suffrages of ^^the Living, and the faying of Maffes. VII [. That a The *^ Saints above in heaven, (or any whom it fhall he the Popes ^^pleafure to Canonize) ought to be religiaufly ipvocated j ^<and th^t they ^ underltand as well the minSes'as thei "words of thofe that pray to them. IX, That cVVhofo- " ever will not fall down before Reliques and ^ Images, to " kiffe and worftiip them according to the prefent pradifc ^

"of the Church of %ome^ and the Decrees of the^Secphd -r. " Councel at Nice^ are to be accurfed and damned. '3Cf¥hai' , "the plenary power and prefemufe of Indulgences, ^was "ordained and left by Chrift in his Church, which "anciently put the fame into praitife; and that the de- "nial hereof ought to be anathcmatiz'd. XI. And lafilyj

n Ibid, Stff, li. cap, 2, fy Can.t, Et in Bulla Pr4f, Fidei* Profiteor Pariter rn Miffi offerri D«o vcrum, proprium, 8e propitiatorium SacrificiwHij &c. Et fieri Gonvcrfionem,8rc. quamCath. Eccl. Tranfubftantiadonera appellat. x Cone Trid.S((f. 22. Can.S, deSacr.Mif y Ihid* Self.2i.Can.j^2,^.deCom.fiibutraque,BHll.pradill. Fatcorctiam fub altera tantum fpecic totiim, &c. vcrumquc Sacramcnrum fumi. ^ Synod. Conffantien. Hoc non obftaute, quod Chrift hs Do- minus fab ntraquc fpecie inftitucrir. Be adminiftraverit. ^ Conc. Trii, Se(f. 6. de Jujfificat, Can.^o. ffy Seff.2i» de Sacr, M'tjf, Can. 3 . & Seff.is. decret. de Purg hem, Bull prof.pr^. a /- hid. Sejf, 2$, dccret.de Invocat, Sanlf, b i^/^. Voce vcl Mente fupplicarc. c /3fi. Affirman- tes Sandorum Reliquiis vcnerationem non deberi, danmandi Tunt. d Ibid, Ut per Imagines qaas ofculam«r,fe cor^m quibus procumbimiis Chriftum adorcmus & Santos vencrcnjur,!d quod 2zNlcenx Synodi decrctis eft fancitum.— Si quis autem hisdccretis contraria fcnferiti Anathe- ma fie. t Ibid, decret. de Indulg. Potcftas conferendi Indulgentias a Chrifto Ecclefias concefla eft, qua ctiam antiqaiflimis tempovihus ilia ufa fucrit, Ufus igirur Indul^entiarumrctincndus eft, ft; 6oncr<idrcentes Anathemate diunnandi.

a 2 «c That

To the Reader.

"That ^ all the Definitions, Decrees, Canons^ andDecIa- " rations made in their former Councels, and efpecially in "this their laft Councei of Trent, ought to be wholy and « inviolately, undoubtedly and devoutly profeffed, taught, " preach'd, and received as the true Catholick Faith, out *^ of which none can be laved.

/ Ibididereeip.dtcr.Cone. Ut quardccrctafuBt, ab omnibus devote rccipiantur, & fidelitcr obfcrvcntun Item BhH. prof, fideu Caswra item omnia ^ Sacris Can & Cecum. Cone. & prstcipui d Sacro-fan^a Trid. Synodo tradita, dcfinita &dcclarataindubitantcr rceipioarque profiteer* fimulq> contraria omnia damno, rcjieio atque anathematizo. Hanc vcram Ci»tholicamfid€m,&c. intcgram & inriolatam veracitcr cenco, & ab aliis teneri, &c. me curaturum juro.

But all thefe New Traditions, as they have r^o ground in Scripture, /b have they as little Teftimony of Antiquity to h brought for them ; out of both vphich we prefcribe againfi them all.

Far it is hut avain pretence of Antiquityy and ameer abufing if the fVorldy tfihen theyg-o about to make fimpte people believe^ that all which they prcfejj'^ and believe hath the confent of all %/[gesfor thewy and that all the Anient Fathers andBijhops of the Church never taught^ nor believed othermfe then they now do.

The Truth and Strength of which their Afjertion , in one of their peculiar and prime Traditicwis, firji [ec forth in their late Afjembly at Trent, / examine in this Hiftory. whereby I trufi it will be made manifefl to the Reader^ That thofe Men^ who do nowfo bufily endeavour to f educe the Sons and Daughters of the Church of Bnglsind from the Grounds andTruth ^our Reli- gion, which is no other then what we have received from Q\\n{i. and his Univerfal Church, termed never thelefje by them a New Church, ^W/zNewReligion, that began in the day es of Kin^^ Henry the VIII. {which is astrue^ as iftheyfhouldfayy Afici per [on began thenfirfi to live^ when he reccnjeredfrom the difeafe and difiemper that was before upon him '^ for we are the isLme:] Church ftiUj (as he the fame pcrfon,) that we were before^., though in a better eft ate and health of our [ouUSy in a greater^ foundneJJ'e and purity of Religion j then indeed we were bef or e^^, when they had to do with it^ andinfeBedus^) thatthefe Men^Jt^ fay^ who untruly term us Novelifts, are in truth themfelves the^

greate^

To the Reader, i x^

greatefi Novelifts ofa/y in the world hefides : Andmu^ htcon- tent (loth />/ this peculiar Article of their Religion^ v^hich we /iow fet forth and examine through the fever d Ages cfthe Churchy and likemfe in otherSy which we maj^ hy the grace of Cod^ examine in. the like manner hereafter-^ tocomehehmdeintimey after dtvtrs efthofe NovelillSj and dijturi?er$ of true Religion^ that mvp hear 0/ogue among us ^

It is a matter of Faft this^ that is here trjed^ nhich maj he put- to A Jury of twehe UMeny that harue no lawful Exception to he taken againft them\ hut J give them more ^ and put it to many fuchyone after another \ that there may he no want, fvhichinfuch^ Cafes 5 as this is y will he the faireft way of Trial tofinde outthe^ Truthy and leave the Reader to judge ofity on whofefide itftandeth^

In the gathering of my WitneUes together^ and ColleBingthii Scholaftical Hiftory, / muft acknowledge to owefomewhat unto thofe learned Is/lcuy that have heretofore taken pains in this hehalfy as well at home in o/^r own Church, as abroad in oih^x^. Tet (let it he f aid without derogation from any ofthem^) this Book hath heenjudgdy ly "^ Him that firfl requefted me to make it a ^Mr.p, part of my Imployment^ (though he was a "^ Perfon well ahle to ^"""'"^' have more perfemy done it himfelf) and hy other Men of know- ^'^^^ ^ ledge^ (ProfeJJors of true Religion and Learning^') who have read ^^ ' it after himyand many times moved him to commit it to the Prefs • that itwouldgive more ample fat is faBioriy and clear the Pafj ages in Antiquity from the OhjeBions that fome late Authors on the Roman fide bring againjt uSy then thofe other writings of Home or Foreign Divines have doney that are extant in this kinde. For lefides the whole Frame and order of the Booky infixing upon the right and heft way of enquiry into this matter by an Hifiorical Dif- quifition of the Univerfal Tradition and Te\iimonyofGoc!s Church* herein unanimoufly delivered in all Ages from the Apoflles Times (and before) to ours - My Obfervations as I pafje along both through the Ancient and Later Writers that have faid any thing of thiii^S^bjeHy are many of them New *y and where Ihave followed others y even there al[o I have added much of m^own^to advance and manifefi the Truth that is in them 5 having no other aimy then

kere^-

To the Reader.

herdnto be [erviceahle to the Truth of God> fet forth andfrO'- Med by the Church of England ^ which TYuth we endeavour ^in thefe wdvering and lapfingtimes^ to ^referve entire and upright among us.

My Difcourfe is continued^ and not interrupted with quotations of Authors, which I have diligently fearched^ and placed^ all the wayy in rfc^ Margin. The language that I u^e^ is familiar^ clear^ and inoffenfivey (which I truft will make it the more acceptable^) for 1 neither afjjeB^ nor approve any other. r But if I may unwittingly have faid any thing ^ that jh all be found to dif agree either with any pajjageinthe Holy Scriptures, wr with the confent of Antiquity in the Se/fe and Interpretatiopi of thofeSctiptutcSy (which yetyl hope welly will not be found-^) I dohere beforehand revoke andunfay it already^

At my Retirement in (ff^U r^C^

fU this 17 Feb- J^' LPP^'

AN

x^{/|

AN ADDITION

Of Certain Testimonies

to fee Noted

For the clearer undcrftanding of

divers places in this Book.

Ad. NUM. L

S. Afiguliims de Civit, Vet, Lib. XL cap, IIL

FIIiusDeipriusperPROPHETAS, dcindc per SEIPSUM, poftea per APOSTOLOS, quantum SATIS cffe judicavit, loquutus, ctiam S^RIPTURAM condidit , quae CANONICA nominatur, Eminentiffiinae Audoritacis, cui Fidem habemus dc his Rebus, quas ignorare non expedit, nee per nos ipfos noffe idonei fumus. (fy^lph. ToSlatus prafap, in Matth* q* V. Magna, imo maxima omnium Aiadoritatunii quae fub Ccelo effc potcft, ell Audoritas S. SCRJPTURiG.

Ad NUM. IL Thorn* Prima^ q. i . in corp. An, X. Innititur fides «oftra Revelation! Apoftolis & Prophetis fafta?, qui CANONieos LlBROS fcripferunt ; non autem Revclationi , fi quae fuerit ALUS DOCTORIBUS fada.

Ad NUM. VIII. Joh» G erf on de vita Sp, LeEh» 2. Hie apcritur modus inteliigendi illiJd Auguftini diftum ^Eg9 Svangelie n9n crederemy nijt EccleftA Cathelictt me commovent Au- Veritas; contr. Ep* ftindam. c4p, 5.] Ibi enim Ecclcffam fumitpro Primitivi Gongregatione fidelium eorum, qui Chriftum viderunt, audierunt, & fui Tcftcs exriterunt.

Th, JVald' do^rinaL Lib, 2. cap, at. faffidat Univerfali Ecclcfiae prapracconio potcftatis ftiae: iBodcr-

53%.

Das, quod olim hoc fecerit , unde gloria poteftatis ejus valcrct ad pofteros; ita quod adhuc fine Primae Ecclcfiae audoricate {qtat eft aftStoritas feftificandiy ftcHt poftea explicet) Scripcura aliqua ncc legi potcrit, ncc habcri pro ccrta. Et hoc fapuit, cum dicerec AuguftiniiS, Svayfgelio non crederem, &c.

Non laudo Apercilidm, quod quid am attollunc, volentes occa- fione hujus t>iB;t Decretum Patrum in Ecclefia ma/ons effe audo- ritatis, culmiois, & ponderis, quam fit Audoritas Scripturarum, Quod quidem non tarn videcur ineptum, quam latuum ; nifi quis talis dicat, Phih'ppum ftiiffc tna^em Chrifto , quando induxic Nathanielem ad credendum , Chriftum eft illutn , qu^m fcripfic Mofes in Lege & Prophctis, fine cujixs audoritatc (reftimonio) tunc non advertiffct. Et fi fie ; dicat conforraiter , Parentes no- ftros carnales aut Paedagogos e(reakiorcs& eminentiores Chrifto ; quia Eorum audoritatc (teftimcaiio) ab infantia didicimus , quid de Chrifto fie credendum, quid fperandom.

Joh, Driedo de SccL Script. & Dogm* L^.c,^

Auguftinus autem cum dicit. Ego Evattgelio non crederem^ nlf me Catholic A EccleJiA commoner et atiShoritas^ incelligit de Ecclefia Catbo- lica, quae fuit ab initio Chriftianae fidei , fccondiim fucccflioncm Epflcoporum crefcens ad haec ufquc tempora ; quae lane Ecclefia compleditur Collegium Apoftolorum^ qui Chriflum & miracula ejus videntes, Dodrinamque fidei ex ore ejus audientes, SCRIP- TURAS TRADIDERUNT.

Cferard. foh, Vojfms^ Pr^ef- in dijfertat. de GeneaL Christ,

Unde potius Codices eos, qui GANONEM SCRIPTURiE con- £ciunt, a Prophetis cfle & Apoftolis profedos calligatur , quam quod Tecuti apud Nationes lampada alii aliis dabant,Mta, conge- que certius Ecclefia,. fidelis Scripturarum cuftos , has ipfas, quafi dc mtnu in manus , TRADIDERIT Nobis ? Nee eo ofFcndi ali- quis debet, quod de ^cripturis, ut Traditionibus loquar- cum hac in iis, quae Apoftoli TRAf^fDER^ fantijtjiam ducanc.

Ad NUMl' 1(il, Xllt. & XLIII. Vmc^ Lfrin, ^ommonitor. Cap. 4. 25. 3P« ^..Qgicquid »on unu5i> autduo tantum, led omnes pariter uqo eoii^emque ! cpnfenfu aperte ,' frequentci: , perfeveranter tenuifle^ ftripfifle, docuifte cognoverimus ; quicquid UNIVERSALlTERi TRADITUM fit, quod UBIQJIE, quod SEMPER, quod ab OM^* I>U^S.crjedicam|,id pro indubitaco, cerco, ratoque habeatur^

Qgicquid vero, quamvis ille Sandus & Doftus, quamvis Epif- copus, quamvis Confeffor & Martyr, praecer omncs, auc etiam con- tra Omncs fenferit, id inter Proprias & Occultas (Apocrypbas) & privatas opiniunculas a communis , publica: , ac generalis 5encen- tiae auftoritatc fccrctum fit*

Antiqua .Janftorum Patrura Confenfio non inomnibus Divinae Legis Quaeftiunculis , kd foliiai, certc praecipue, in fidei Regulaj magno nobis ftudio inveftiganda efl-, & fcqucnda.

Ad NUM. CXCIX. in Margine. Co»r» Horn£tiS de Sdctd Scriptnra* Confenfus enim Ecdefiae non efl: Principium confticutivum re- rum credendarum, fed confirmativum feu roborativum tantiim.

Ad Corollarium poft NUM. ult. Vifjc* Lirimn, Commonmr, Cap^2* & antepe?iHlr. €iui in fide fahus atque integer permanere vult , duplici modo munire fidem fuam. Domino adjuvante, debet, DIVlNiE LEGIS AUCTORITATE, mm deindc ECCL. CATHOLICE TRADI- TIONE .• Non quia CANON SCRIPTURiE folus non fibi ad univerfa fufficiat, led quia verba Divina pro fuo pkrique arbitra- tu intcrpretantes, varias opiniones, errorelqiie concipiant.

Ph^ MelanUhon^ Refp, ad Clernm Q^lon. Rcgulam doarina? fequimur ccrtara, SCRIPTA PROPHET A- RUM & APOSTOLORUM ; Symbola Apoflolicum , Nicacnnm , & Athanafii; Sententias Synodorum veterum, quae probantur,Ni- caenaf, Byzantinac, Ephefinae, Chalcedonenfis, & fimiiia purioris Ec- defiae vetufta: Tettimonia. Nee dubitamus hoc genus dodrinae , quod profitentur Ecdefiae noftrae , verc eflc Cojifenfum Ecclefiae Catholicae. ^j

Ecclefiae Noftrae habent evidens & firmum Teftimonium Prima! Ecdefiae, quod non dubito Omnium Pofteriorum judiciis oppone- re , qui vcterem Dodrinara, vetercfque Ritus moltis Erroribus con- caminarunt.

MiVft* Chemnit, I . Tarte Exam* Cone* Trid, de Traditionih. Simplex Veritas firmiter fundata, & fibi bene confcia nee refor- midat, ncc fubtcrfugit vera Antiquitatis Teftimonia,

f Nullum

Nullum eft dubium, Priraitiyam Ecclefiam accepiffc ab Apofto- lis & viris Apoftolicis non tantum TEXTUM, ut loquimur, SCRIP^ TURiE, verum ctiam legitimam & nativam Ejus Intcrprctatio- nem.

Fatemur nos ab ilUs difTentlre, qui fingunt Opiniones, quae nul* la habent Teftiraonia uliius Temporis in Ecclefia ; Scncimus ctiam nullum Dogma in Ecclefia Novum, & cum TOTA ANTIQyi- TATE pugnans recipiendBm.

A table;

AND A SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTERS.

m

C H A P^ I.

rHE PREFACE, Page i

I.

T

HE Bookes of Scripture why called Cammall.

II. Five proper CharaBers belonging to them,

III. Their Divifion into the Old and Nejp Tefta- merit. IIII. No Prophet after Malachy in the One. V. No Writer after S. John in the Other. VI. Thefe Tm Tefta- ments delivered to the Church. VIL By whofe fublick voice in all Ages the Number and the Vjimes of all particular Books contained in them are to be known. VIIL But their <^-e«- tial or intrinfecal Authority they have from GOD alone. IX. All Churches at accord for the Books oi the New Tefia- ment. X. Not fo, fince the late Canon made by ^ifew Men at the Councel of Trent ^ for thofe of the Old Teftament^ where- unto they have added Six entire Bocks, befides fome other Pieces. XT, Xll, XIII. Which Additions the Catholick Church never acknowledged to be truly Canonical. XIIII. The State of the Queftiony what it is, and what it is not. XV,

^ XVI. The

<iA T^ahle and Summary

XVir Th(tDrder to be obferved in the Chapters follovvingj for the juftifying of that ancient Canon oi Scripture^ which by the Church of England^ and by all other Reformed and Chrifim churches abroad(except the ':R^ma/^ only J is now received.

Chap, IL Xhe TtUimony of the Ancient Judaiqne Church, p. 1 1 .

XVII. The Oracles of God delivered in the time of the Old Teftame^t only to the Jei^es. XVIII, XIX, XX, XXL Which being rcvifed by Ez>ra after the Captivity oi Babylon^ they di- vided into Three feveral C^affes^ and Tfpo and Twenty Books ^ in Number equal to the Letters of their Alphabet, XXII. The fame Books without addition or imminution were preferved unto the time of our Saviour^ and by Him delivered over to the Chrifiians^ XXIII. (jenehrards dreaming Fidetur about a Second an d a Third Canon of Scripture. XXIIII. The Teft i- mony of Jofephus and Philo., XXV, XXVI, XXVU. The Objedions of Cardinal Perron refuted. XXVIII. The Je- fuite Gretfers Vertigo. XXIX. An Anfwer to Genehr^rdy ^nd Others..

Chap, III. "the Tejiimony of the jirft ChrijiiaH and Apoftolical Church. p. 23.

XXX. The CharaBers of the Books belonging to the Old Teftamentj given us in the "Kiew. XXXI. The Teftimony of CHRIST himfelf. XXXII. And of his Apofttes. XXXIII, XXXIV. No Apocryphall Book alledged or confirmed by them, _ XXXV. The objeBions examin'd and anfwered.

XXXVI.

of tke Chapters. 0Z

XXXVI. Of the Bookoimfdom, XXXVII. OiEcclefia^i^ cus. XXXVIII. Of Judith. XXXIX. Oi Tobit and Ba^ ruch'j the Prayer of MamJJes^ and the Bookes o{ Efdras, XL. Of the Maccabes. XLI. Of other Apocryphal Books.

Chap. IV. TheTeJlimony of the Fathers^ or Ecclefiajiical fVri- tersy next: after the Apoflles^ in the Second Cen^ tnry. P* ^9*

XLIL The Canon of Scripture determined. XLHL Ne- veij altered but by a few tjden in the late Councel at Trent. XHV. The Teftimony of Clemens %^manuSy and the Apo-- Bolicd Qonftitutions. XLV. The ApoHles Canons. XLVL Dionyfws thQ Areopagite. XL VII, Melito. XL VIII. and Jufiin Martyr.

Ghap. V. 'the Teftimony of the ancient Ecclefiajlicall Writers ^ in the 'third Centnry. p. 34,

XLIX. Origen. L. Julius AfricanuS. LL pJl^A^ LII, CUrifiens of Alexandria ^ and ^t ^Jt^il^*

^ ^ Chap.

aA Table md Summary

Chap. VI.

The Tefiimony of the Ancient Fathers in the Fourth Century. P 39'

Lltt. Eufehius^ LIV. The Firjl Come el of Nice. LV, LVL S. ^thamfius. LVII. S. Hilary. LVIII. S. Cyril oijerufalem. LIX, ThcCouf^cel of Laoclicea. LX. Whcie- of the laft Cmon is explained, LXI. And the 0^;>&'(?;;5 a-

fainft it anlwered. Of Baruch^ and the Epiftle of Jeremy. .XII. Of the isyfpocalyps. LXIII. The Roman Code defe- flive. The Code of the Vmv.er[al Church anciently in ufe. LXIV. The Teftimonies ofEpiphamus. Objediions anfwc- red. All Books that be otherwhiles termed Divine writings are not Canonical Scripture.. LXV. The Tcftimony of 5. Ba- pi. The OhjeHions either not brought outof his true wri- tings^ or nothing to the purpoie. LXVL The Tcftimony oi S. Greg. Nazianzen. Car-dinal ? err on noted. LXVII. The Tcftimony oi S. Amphilochius. The moft /^y«^ and ^^r- tain Canon of Divine Scripture. Gretfer the Jefuite^ The 7<j?- man Sxpurgatory Index^ and Gentian Hervet noted. LXVIIL The Tcftimony of Philaftrius. LXIX. Of 5. Chryfoftome. LXX. S. Hierome's high eftimation in the Church: His Prologues prefixed, and placed in the Front of all the Vulgar Latin Bibles. LXXI. Thirteen fevcral and clear TcAimo-- nies produced out of fc/Vw. LXXII. Six fxrf/?^/W again ftf bira. LXXIII. All invalid. LXXIV. The commenda- tion oiRuffinus and his Tcftimony agreeing with all the F^- thers of the Church before him. LXXV. Five Exceptions againfthim. LXXVI. Anfwered and cleared. LXXVIL The citing of the Controverted Books by the Father Sy under the name of Divine 2Lnd Propheticalif^ritings^no good ArgumQnt to prove them Canonical and Infallible Scripture. Some Sen- tences

of the Chapters. ^/iV

,^i»'""'

tences of S. Augufiine and the Popes Decretals^ called 'Diime and Holj Scriptures. Why the Apocryphal Books are bound up with our Bibles^ and read in our (Churches. LXXVIII. No one Father during the firft four Centuries to be brought againft us. The State oi the Quefiiof^y concerning the Tejtimomes of the Fathers.

Chap, VII.

The Tejiimony of the Fathers in the Fifth Century. p. 96.

LXXIX. The common Latii^ Bible which the Church of Africk ufed in S:Augufline's time. LXXX. Eight Teftimo- nics produced out of his ivorkSj tor our true Canon of Scrips ture. The firft Edition of the Septuagint Tran/lationhad none of the controverted Books in it. The Helleniji Jem at Babylon and Alexandria. The Roman Septuagint fct forth by Pope Sixtus V. The Apocryphal Books contained in our Bible pre- ferr'd before all other Tr abators upon the Scripture. Profi- table if they be advifedly read. LXXXI. The Rowanifts endeavour to make S.^//^«/?/>^ to confute himfelf. Their ObjeStion out of his Book oi Chriftian DoBrine^, examined and anfwered. S. Augufiine^s Caution before his general Cata- logue of Scripture Bool^^ The Councel oi Trent noted. Two Sorts of C^«o;2/V^/ waitings. Cardinal Cajetans a.d\ice to the Reader of S. Angufline. The Church oi England hath put as many Books m our Bible^ as S. Augufiine had in his. He plea- deth for a citation brought by him out of the Book oimfdom^ . but doth not fayj that it was Canonical and Equal in authority jto the Law and the Prophets. The infer iour Officers of the Church read the Apocryphal Books in a lower ^Xaee'^ the Cano- nical \sjeie read in a higher y hy Bifljops and Priefls. Cardi- nal Bellarmine's Thumb laid upon S. Augujlines words, which

Cardinal .

(tA Table and Summary

Cardinal Perron difguifeth. The Donaiifts^ of whom the C/>- cumcellions wcr^ a i>e£t. They hatl no Scripture to defend their fury^ and their felf-homicide but the Book of the Macca- les 'y which therefore S. Augu^ine excludeth from the di- vine and indubitate C^mn. LXXXIL The Canon of the Councel of Carthage. The Roman DoBors agree not about it among themfelves. The African Code. In what fenfe that Councel is neceffarily to be underftood. The African Bible. Cardinal Bellarmine troubled how to reconcile it with the Roman. LXXXIII. The pretended Teftimony ofPope/;?- nocent the fir ft, alledged in favour of the Apocryphal BookSy examined and refuted. The Decretal Epiftles ofthc Popes not fo ancient as they are pretended to be. The Code of the Vni- verfal Church. The Code ol'Dionyfius Exiguus. The Collegians of Canons ma,dQhy F err andus and Crefconius. The Original of the Roman Code. LXXXIV. The Teftimony of the 'Di- vines in France at CMarfeilles^ in this particular concerning the un-C^nonical Books y unqueftioned. LXXXV. Of the General Councel of Calcedon receiving and confirming the Code of the Vniverfal Church. Wherein is included the Teftimo- ny of Pope Leo thefirft. The Councel oiCarthage^ no part of the Ancient Code. LXXXVI. The pretended Teftimony of Pope Gelafius in favour of the Apocryphal Books, examined and refuted. The Copies of 6>^^/^« various and uncertain. LXXXVII. The fine Pageant ofPopeSy and their Traditions of the Trent'Canony that Bee anus drefled up. LXXX VIII. The ^udaicfue and Chriftian Canon of the OldTeflament one and the lame. What the Omnipotent faculty of the Pope cannot do. The Prefaces before the Latin Bibles,

CHAP.

of the Chapters. KxyH

Chap- YIII. T^he Tejiimony of the ancient EccUfiafiical Writers inthe Sixth Age. p* 129.

LXXXIX. Cafsiodore's agreement herein with S, Hieromcy and ours with them both. XC. Ju^imans Law confirming i\\Q four F irfiger/er all Councels^ and the P^mverf ale ode. XCl, The Teftimony of Junilius an African Bi(hop for the ex- plication oftheirC^/^o/^5 andthe exclufionofthe^^er^^/^W Bookes from it, XCII. Primafius foUoweth our Account. The vanity of P. Cottoa and Coeffeto. XCIII. The Tefti- mony oiA/2aftafius the Patriarch of Antioch for the number of Canonical Books, XClIII. Leomius excludcth the Apocryphal j^ritings , and is therefore cenfured by the UHr, of the Popes Palace in his Jndex Expurg. XCV. ViBorinm the Martyr, or an ^m^/?/:-^«^W under his nam e^acknow- ledgeth no more Canonical Books then S.Hierome did. XCVL S. Augu^in and the' Councell of Carthage differ not herein from the fathers that were before them 5 as they all doe from the Councel of Trent.

Chap. IX. T^he Tejiimonies of the Eccleftajlical Writers in ths Seifenth Age. p. 1^5.

XCVII. The Ancient Canon o( Scripture ^iW obferved. XCVIII. All the five "Patriarchal Churches teftifie for it. XCIX. S. Gregorie's Teftimony to it. C. The Pretences to the contrary examined and anfwered. At what time he wrote his Morals, Imploy'd to be Nunce to Conflantinople^ where-with the irefi Church at that time agreed. Card, Per- rons device to defeat S, Gregorys teftimony s which is

giveii:

A Table and Summary

given and granted to us by others of his fide. CI. The Book let forth under S. Augu^ir/s name, and called The mnders of the Scripture^ excludeth the Maccahes from the Canon. ClI. The Teftimony of ^/^^/WtoaGreekDoftor. Thcthreefcore Queens in the Canticles. CIII. The Teftimony of Jfidore Biftiop oi Siville in S^aine. The Rank and honour given to the Apocryphal Books ( which were written firft in Greek moft of them by unknown Authors^ ) not equall to the Trophets. The Septuagint and other Tranflations^oithQ Bible. The Tale that was told Jftdore by a Quidam Sapientum^ and Card. Perrons vaine belief of it. CIIII. The Fifth Generall Councel at Conftantinople , and the Quini-text there in Trullo. The Canons of it rejefted by many K^pmaniftSy but received into the (Jreeke Code. The CouncelsofLaodicenandCarthage both confirm'd. Their agreement together.

Chap. X. the Teftimony of the Eccleftaftical Writers in the Eighth Century. p. 145.

CV. Damafcen's number of Canonical Books. Hethefirft ^ that reduced the Body of divinity into a Scholaftical method. From him P. Lombard took his patterne. The Arke of the Covenant. The ingenuity oi fome "Bjman Writers mortthGn others in confefsing that ^D^w^/i-f/? is againft them. Thefup- pofititious Sermon fathered upon him, and impertinently urged againft. us. CVI. The feverall teftimonies of re- nerable Bede for the Church of England^ and our Vjimber of Canonical Books. Andr. Schot noted. CVIL The Teftimony of Adrian an ancient Greek i^Author recommended by Photius.

CHAP.

of the Chapters.

Chap. XL T^he tejiimonies of the Ecchftaflical Writers in the Ninth Century . p. 149.

C VIII, zAlcuirHs teftimony for the Churches of England and France. CIX. The tcilimony oi Charlemaine%'Bi{hops. Their Book againfl Jmages and the Second Councel of Nice. ex. The ditlinaion that ^w;;/;or«5 the Patriarch of Con- ftantinople made between the Councel and contefied Books of Scripture, CXI. %abanus Maurus foUoweth S, Hieromes account. CXII. The Teftimony of Srr^^//5whofirftwrote the Ordinary GloJJe upon the Bitle. CXIIL Agobardus Bifhop oi Lions. CXIV. ^naftajius BilUothecarius at Rome, CXV. hnd Amhro[m Anshertus,

Chap. XIL The Tejiimonies of the Ecclejiafiical Writers in the Tenth and Eh'venth Centuries. p. 153.

CXVI, %adulfhm Flaviacenjis againft the perfedl authority of the Apocryphal Books. CXVII. Hermannus ContraBm ranketh them among the Writings oijofephm^ and Julim the African. CXVIIL The Teftimony oiGifilbert Abbot oiWeftminfier forthe Church of England.

Chap. XIIL The Tejiimonies of the Ecclefiaftical Writers in the Twelfth Century. P^ ^55*

CXIX. Zonaras referreth for the Canon of Scripture to the ancient Rules of the Creek Fathers. The Canon Law of the

* ^ " Greek

(lA^ TTable and Summary

Greek Church. CXX. The witneffe oi Rupertus {xQcd^hom Cardinal Bellarmmis .Sii^^tixon. CXXL Oi Honorius Au- gujlodmenfis^ CXXII. Of Tetr^s Mauritius the Abbot of Clugnj in France-^ who refuted ihQ Err our soiih^Petrohufi' m. CXXIII. Of Hugo de S, FtBore. The mitings of the Ancient Fathers publickly read in the Church , as well as the Apocryphal Books of the Bii^le. CXXIV. Oi'Kichardus de S. fiBore^ and S. Bernard. CXXV. Oi Philip the Solitary, gret- fe/s cavil. CXXVI. The fabulous Tale concerning the ^Wb- ther oiGratian^ Lombard^ and Cofneflor. ' CXXVII. Cow^- ^or's Teftimony. CXXVIH. And his Scholiaft. CXXIX. The Teftimony of Belethy the Edition of whofc Book is faulty. CXXX. Of Joh. Sarishurienfis bred in the Church of England^ and Bifbop oi Chartresm France. CXXXI. OiPetrusCeU lenfis at Troys. CXXXII. Of theod. Balfamon the Patriarch oiAntioch. The Camns whereby the Greek Churches were go- verned*

Chap. XIV. The 'teflimonkf of the Ecclefiajiical Writers in the Thirteenth Centnry. p. 165.

CXXXin. The Age wherein the (Mendicant Friers , and ihe Schoolemen began nrft to let up in the world. CXXXIV. The Ordinary GloJJ'e upon the Biile received with great Applaufe 5. wherein appeareth the Common DoBrine and Belief of the Latin Church concerning our Canon oi Scripture. The Councel of Trent noted. CXXXV. And by the Ord, GloJJe branded ( bcfore-haiid ) with ignorance , and folly, for making the Apocryphal Bocks of equall authority with the Canonical. CXXXVl, S. ty€ugufiin cxplayncd. CXXXVII. S. Hieromes Prologues a dire£lion (generally received ) for the Readers of the Bible. Becanus noted 5 with the pretended authority of Pope Jmocent thefirfl , and

gdajius

of the Chapters. ^^^

GeUfius. Lemder oiDoipay his vain excufe made iotSMieromey who needed it not, CXXXVIJI. The expreffe Teftimony oi Hugo Cardindis, He the firfi DoBor if^ Divinity y and the frft Cardinal among tl=je Friers Preachers. Thefirft ColleBors oixheConsordanceoiihe Bible. CXXXIX. Thomas of At^uine againft the V^w-Camn of Trent. His la. 2£. Clipped. The Cavills of Cams and Catherin anfwered. CXI. The Glojje upon the CanQn^Law^ in what great eftimation it was. The teftimony of Semeca the F/V/J Author of that Glojl'e. The Apocryphal Books were not generally read in all 0ourches^ An Anfwer to the Exceptions of Driedo and Andradim. GXLI, And the Emendators of gratia/^. CXLII. The Catholic on of John Balbw.

Chap. XV. The Tefiimonies of the Ecclefiajiical Writers in ths Fonruenth Century. p. 174,

CXLIIL The Agreement oi the Oriental Churches herein with the JVeft. The Teftimony of Nicephorus Callifius. CXLIV. Of Joh. de Columna Archbiftiop of Mefsina in Sicily. CXLV. Of Brito the Expofitur^ joyn'd heretofore unto the Ordinary Glojje upon the Bible. CXLVI. Of Nicholas de Lira the Commentator upon all the Scriptures. CXLVII. Oimlliam Ocham a DoOiotoitheEnglifh Church. CXLVIII. Of Herveus Natalis the Generall of the Preaching Friers in France. CXLIX. The reft of the Schoolmen of the fame mind herein with their fellows.

^*a CHAP.

(lA Table and Summary

Chap. XVL the Tejiimdnies of the EccUftajlical Writers inthc Fifteenth Cent Hry. p. 178.

CL. Thomas furnamed nAnglicus. CLI. And Thorn at of Walden , both E/igUjhme/i , follow S. Jeromes aceompt. CLIL Faulm the Biihop of Burgos in Spam , in his Notes printed with the ^lojje upon the Biile continueth the fame Di^inBion between the Canonical^ and Apocryphall Books, CLIII. The Councel of Florence urged againft it. Becmus the lefuirs excravagancie. CLIIII. A brief Hifiory of that Councel 2lI Florence, Schifme among divers Popes. Decrees of the Councel oi Confiance ^ wherein T/?^^*? ?<?^f 5 were depofed. A Councel began at Favia and ended at Sienne ^ whereof no jiBs are extant 5 but that the Clergy wsls deluded inky and another Councel appointed at Bafil ^ which ^ affoon as they began there to Ipeak of Reformation , proved formidable to the Pope Engenius the fourth. His Bull fent forth to diflfolve them. Which they refilled, A(^^o[mg th at F ope ^ and choofing another. CLV. The bleeding condition of the Empire and 0ourch in the Ea(t, The Turks invade them. Seeking help from the lVe[i 5 the Fope ( Hoping to get them under his I)ominion ) inviteth them to a Councel in Italy. They are likewife invited by the Frinces of the Smpire in Cermanie 5 and the Councel at Bafil. But the Greeks went to the Fope-i who had made them large promifes. CLVI. His {^ouncel tranflated from Ferrara to Florence. Difpurations betweene the Greek and Latin Church. The Greeks at home in great perill to be overrun by the Turks. A fuddaine Seeming-agreement made in iht Councel Sig^infi which the Biihop of Sphefus protefleth in the name of the Greek Church. CLVII. The Articles oiihQFretendedVnion. CLVIIl. The Legates from the Patriarch of Armenia. The ending of the Councel^ and the. departure of the Greeks. The InJtruBion

faid

of the Chapters.

faid to be there given by the Tope lo the Armenians ;i con- cerning the Seve/i Pretended Sacraments and other Rites of the %omifh Churchy an improbable TVi/^ AH this while /^o^ a word fpoken there oiihc Scripture Canon. CLIX. Only Caranza ( a Spaniard^ and Confeffor to Q^ UMary of England) in his Epito?ne of the Councels hath lubftituted a Decree to that purpofe, which in the Co/^we/ it felf was ne- ver made. CLX, And this f forfoothj is the Canon of the pretended General Councelat Florence^ that is ur|ed by i5ff^- nus and other Romanics againft us. Florence no Oecumenical Councel ; condemned by the Councel of Bafily then fitting : The pretended union made there, renounced by the Greeks after their return home. CLXI. The Teftimony of An- toninuSy (who was prefent in that Councel^ afterward made Archbifhop of the place^ and not long fince Sainted by the Popery for the common judgenient of the Latin Church sl- gainft the prefent %omanifts. CLXII. The like ample Te- ftimony given by Alphonfus Toftatus, the moft renowned Man of his Age. The Councel of Trent noted. CLXIII, The reading of the Apocryphal Books how far permitted. CLXIV. The Teftimony of Denys the Carthufian (a great Man with Pope Eugenius^) that the fhurch doth not receive then! to prove any Artic'e of Faith by them.

Chap. XVII. TheTeflimomes of the Eccleftaftical Writers in the Sixteenth Century. p. 193^

CLXV. The Teftimony oi Fr. Ximeniuf the Cardinal, and Archbifhop oiToledc^ together with other Learned Men:, that fet out the Complutenfian Bible ^ exprefly putting the Apo-- cryphal Books out ot the Canon of Scripture. CLXVI. The Preface before Lira's Bible printed at BafiK CLXVII. ^icm

Count

dA T'ahle and Summary

Count of MiranduU adhcreth firmly to S, Jerome^ as to the common voice of the Church. CLXVIII. J^c, FaberStapu- lenfis. CLXIX. Jod. Clickoveus, CLXX. Lud. rives. CLXXL. Georg. renetus , all vvitnefles for us. CLXXII. Erasmus (now in great reputation with all men , but the i^Morjk^ that hated him^j His Teftimony for the ancient Churchy and for his own time. Cen(ured by many for other matters, but not for his judgement and belief in this parti- cular. CHXXIII. Card. Cajetan the Oracle of Divines that then lived. His large and exprelfe Teftimony for the Article of Our Church. His explication of S. Aug. and the Councel of Cartfjage^ reconciling them to S. Jerome^ and the ^ouncel of Laodicea. Ten yeeres before the Councel began at Trenty all this went for good CathoUck DoBrine^ even at Rome it felfe. C^therin infulted over Cajetan as a Dog over a dead Lion. No man wrote againft him in his life-time. CLXXIIIL Ca- therin ( who was the firft that fet forth the New-Canon ) reprehended and derided by his own friend^ for oppofing Cajetan and the Church herein. CLXXV. Joh.Briedoim- ployed to write againft Luther , acknowledgeth ikeApocry- phal Books to be out oitht Scripture-Canon. CLXXVI. So doth loh. Ferus. CLXXVII. And the feveral Tranflations oi the Bible ^ {et ioithhy Fagnin j Bralidus y Birkman^ Rob. Stephen and Vatablm. CLXXVIII. A Recapitulation of the former Tefiimonies in all the feverall Farts and Churches of Chrifiendome.

Ghav. XVIIL the neno Decree of the Councel at Trent againft all the former Tefti monies of the Vni^erfal Churchy p. 204.

CLXXIX. Againft all thefe a feip men at Trent made a

Decree^

of the Chapters.

Becree^io contTOul the jphleCbriftianv^orld ; AndthcPopCy when he Confirmed this Decree^ commanded it to be held as a necefsArie Article of Faith-, without which TSls man might he Solved. CLXXX. Whereby they have miferably rent the ^fc«rrfc in pieces. CLXXXL ABriefHifioryohhe(^al/ingy jijJemUingy and Proceedings y in the Councel of Trent. The Reformation of Ahufes begun in Luther siimQ. Pope I.^othe Tenth 5 fendeth out his Bull 5 and commandeth that both Luther and all his Adherents (among whom wer^lthc Duke of Saxony 3 and divers Princes ot the Ewpre^ ) iliould be driven out of their Countries. The Princes for the preventing of further Trouble and Schifme, dcfire 2Lfree and general Councel in fome convenient place of G'^rw^/^/V. But Pope L<?(? (to whom it was dreadful! to heare of fuch a Councel^) declined it , and prefcntly dyed. CLXXXIL Adrian the Sixih his SuccefTor promikth Reformation ^ but lived not to doe any thing in it. CLXXXIII. Clement the Seventh likewife, that followed him , ftudioufly avoyded the Calling of a Councel 5 and dyed not long after. CLXXXHII. But the next Pope ( Paul the Third , ) upon certaine conditions made with the Emperor, condefcended to have called at Mantua in Italy. Which came to nothing ; as did alfo a Second Summons that he made of it to V^icenza ^ and at laft he fent forth his Bull of Indidion to have it held at TRENT by all Bi^p and Ahhots that were Svp(^nexo\{ViOhedience. CLXXXV. Publick Proteftations fet forth againft it.. CLXXXVL The Councel deferred. CLXXXVU. The League betwecne the Emperor and the King of England^ at which the Pope ftormeth, CLXXXVIIL The Emperor and the French King agree to reform xht Court of Rome ^ and to reftore the Church to her ancient Puritie ^ which made the Pope to begin and order the Co^/?^^/ to his owne bcft advan- tage. CLXXXIX. His JnftruBions to his Legates. CXC.. His Oecumenical Councel made up firft with Twenty , and afte^ WithForty three Prelates. Titular BifhopSy and Penji oners to the Pope^ fent to iiacrcafe the ^//w^^r.. CXCL The firft foure

Sefsiont

A Table and Summary

Sessions. Their Anathema, added to their Decree for their Neji^ Canon of Scripture. CXCII. Againft which many learned men pleaded there ^ but the Fojces oiCathar/'ns FaUion pre- vayled.for it, CXCIII. The words ofthe;Z)faef itfelfe. CXCnil. For which they had no Catholkk ^ Tradition ^ Councely Father^ Schoolmen y or other Ecclejiaflicall writer in former Ages. The fmall and inconfiderable Number ofmen^ that now gave their Voyces to it. CXCV. Thevanitieof their yrete^ed Tradition for it. CXCVI. The difference betweene Them^ and 5. Augu^in. The CouncelofCarthagey 'Popejnnocenty Gelafius^ and Eugcmus. The noveltieoftheir Accurfed ANAT:HEMA. CXCVII. for which they have nothing to plead. CXCVIII. The POPES NEW CREED 5 the laft Article whQVGoi curfeth and damneth thofe, u>hom GOD hath ilejjed.

Chap. XIX. The Conclnfton^ and Summary of all the former Chap* ters. p. 2 2 2.

CXCIX. A defence of the Church of England ^ and thofe that adliere to it^hytho: ancient Church oith^ Old Teflament-^ by Chrifi and his Afo^le in tht'HevPy and by all the FatherSy and Dolors of the Church that followed. All ^^'hich are condemned by the decrees and Anathema o( the later Ajjemhly at Trent : which is Caufe enough ( if there were no other^ as many other there be ) to rejed it.

Chap. XX. The Remainder. p 223^

; CG. The Canonical and undoubted Scriptures being our Foundation 5 we are to believe and live according to the Rules therein prcfcribed us. The Golden Rule of the Church of England. ^

<*J SchoUJhcal Hijlory of

THE CANON

O F T H E

HOLY SC%ITrV%ES.

O R,

T^he Certain and Induhitate ^?sQmber ^

of Canonical ^oo/^ that belong there^ ' f

, unto.

Chap. I. THS PREFACe.

:He BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE arc ^ ^r\mt x6

therefore called CANONICAL, AiiscriftuHUBfdU

becaufe as they had their Prime and '^''^ a'^pitfr/

Sovereign A U T H O R 1 T Y from the ^oly mn\'fOiii

GOD Himfelf, by whofe divine £jjjj ^ **^ ^^*

mil and » Irjfpiration they were ZZfl, ^ ^ ' ^"^^

firft written , and by whofe bleffed Providence they s. Luke i ."o.

have been ever fincc preferved and delivered over to m«t*'o/^i^io5'prt!< ^^

Pofteriiy, fo have they been like wife received, and pteu. '^iJ_f

in all times acknowledged by his Church to be the ^mm0 Infallible b RULE of our FAITH, & the PERFECT

b aTimj.if.&iT.S.johnao.;!. teml adv. H«-mog. c. aa. Adore S^rfptttr^ pUmtudintm Orig Traft*a7.inM.it. 5? Scyiptwr* Ver'tffimA KEOVLAindoimatibus. S. Chrifoft hom i- jq a ad Tim Exquifiu Omnium Aernm TRVTIHA fy REGVL 4. S. Atig lib.a concr. Donat. c. 6, DhinaSTATEKA. Idem.d<'do«^r Chrift lib.a. c.9* ^n quibus inieniunfur Ufg omnia', qua coni tinent flDEM^ MO KES iut VIVENDI. Idem dcbonovid c i. Sacra ScriptHra noffyjt do^yina KEOVLA Mfigit Vine Lcrin. Commonitor. c. a &. 41. CANON Scripiurari^m PERFECTVS f)f, fibique adomtaafatis fuperque fHgicit S Achanafiu ,lib contr. Idol, ad Mac, SmA^VivhU tks infpmt^ SaiptrndptrftfufR^tHnt ad verltam Ind'icatUnm,

B SQilARE

A Scholajlicd Hijlory of

1

' SQUARE of our ACTIONS in all things that are any way neediul tor our Eternal Salvation.

11. Other BOOKS , What Honour loever they have heretofore had in the Church, or wtiat is there ftill continued to them ^ yet it they cannot lliew all thele Marks and Characters upon them ^ i. That theyareofSupremeandDivine Authority 5 2. That they were written by iMen fpecially Aded and Infpi- red for that purpofe by the Spirit of God : 3. That they were by the fame Men and the fame Authority delivered over for fuch to all Pofterity : 4. That they have been Received for fuch by the Church of God in all Ages: and 5. That all Men are both to regulate their Faith , and to meafure their Ani- ons bythem, as by the undoubted Witneffes of Gods Infallible Truth, and Ordinances declared in them ; if they want any ofthefe peculiar and proper Notes of Difference, whereby the BOOKS of GO D are di- ftinguiftied from the WRITINGS of MEN s Pious and Ufeful Books they may be in their Kinde, but they ftiall want that Honour, which is fpecially re- ferved to the Dignity of SOVEREIGN and DIVINE SCRIPTURE, whereunto this Honour is due (faith S. Aug,) and to no other Writing befides , -^ That zAs!'maon^' Eto ^^^^f^^*^^^ ^ ^^^^^ faidfs undoubtedly True ^md ought mojl SolheU ScriprararQ firmly to he helievedy without any further t Quepon or dif- ^^ibri^9«ydmCaHo- ceptation about it ; which cannot be faid ot any other

~ ^klblllZlumM ^^^^ ^^5 ^^^^ y^^ Compos'dy and fenta-

mrmqut deftnty Mt broad into the World,

fmllum eorum AuHq-

remfcribendo uliquiderralfejirmijjjmecredam. 'RursSs, TantummedhScupmisCirionkhhancinie'- mamdibeefervitutem, qua eas SOLAS itafeqnar^ utconfcripttresearnnihilinitsommnheTraffe, nihil filiadter pofkiffc mn dubitem. f Idem dcBapt,contr.Donatift«,tib.2. cap.^. Q^isvefcmSm- Aam ^cripturam Canonicam timVeteris qum KeviTeftamenti ctrtisfuis terminis contineriy Emqi •mnibw Liuris itaprdponi^ ut de ilia cmmo Mitirit & di[ctpmi tipnpo^itf utrum vfTum vtluliumph ^cq^idintt^ ffriptm tit COT fill ttitt

ni. The

•»

the Canon of the ScriptHre.

I

III. The BOOKS that make up the BODY and Strudure of this CANONICAL Scripture are di- vided into the OLD and NEW TESTAMENT. For the coming of our SAVIOUR into the World di- vides the whole Age of the World into Two Parts ; One that went before his Comings and Another that began a New Accompt of Time with it. In the firft He was Expcded;, & in the fecond he was Exhibited. The BOOKS therefore of the OLD TESTAMENT belong all to the Former Part, wherein He was Pro- miled and fet forth by CMofes and the Prophets -^ The BOOKS of the NEW appertain all to theLatter, wherein the Truth and Perfedion of all that the Pro- phets had faid ofhimbefore, is clearly Declared by his own bleffed Evangelifts and Apo^les^ with whom the CANON of the SCRIPTURES ended. And no BOOK 5 which cannot be referred to One ofthe{e Claffes, may be faid to be any Part of the Divine and Authentick Rule of Religion, that the Sons of Men received by Revelation from the Spirit of God.

IV. For of all the Law and the Prophets, which delivered the Holy Oracles to us, Malachi was the laft 5 by whofe ^ Prophecy ending at St. John the Baptift under, the Title and Type of £//W, there is a manfeft Combination of the Old and Tsijw Teftament together : the Ending of that laft Prophecy being fet forth and declared by S^.Mark b, tohtihe Begin- ning of the Gofpel ^ whcreunto CHRIST himfelf alio gave his own Teftimony, and faid, ^ That ALL the Prophets and the Law prophecied until John ; which is as much to fay, as that after the prophecy made of Him, there came no other Prophets between them. For where Malachi ends the OW Teftament, all the Evangelifts d begin the Xf ^*

Frophetia fcripta ab gliquo ProphtU^ qui Canonicus hdbemr^ quoufque Ulepromijfks ventret ; B quo inci^h S^^ri^tHja A. teft, ut bine inttlligtre licnt miraifilm Connexiontm ScriPtHT^t N» T, cum P^phetit, - ■'

B 2 y. And

b 5. Mark 1.1,2.

The beginmng of the GefpelofJefinCbTJfl the Son oj God, as it is written in the Pro- phety Behold I fend my Afejfe tiger before thy face, ^c.

c 5. Matth. ir.ij. 5. Luke i6.i6, d S. Matth.g.i. ^ .S". Mark I.I. 5» Luke 1.5. S.]obni,6. d nine Corn. Janfcn^ in Ecclcf. 48.2. Mi' lachias de Johanne Bgj ptifta aperte vaticins- tns eft. Obfervandum itaque^ quod novifsitm omnium Pnphetiarum^ qua in Ctmone apud Heb> ms habenturjver" ba funt de J&bann§ Baptiffa y pofl queta promifum nulla extat Frophetia fcripta

A Scholajlical Hiftorj of

rRevd 22.18.

/ OhftrvaUoTofiZih qiuit. i.in4< Dcut. ytjjeSo nee addipo- te(i 9 nee anftrri debet, StcAfscalyp eap Hit. quia ton Reveiationn fericf claudeb.turjdi' cuur,fi quis appofMtrit id bdc, apponet Dem fnptr UlupUgas^ifyc.

f;Roro»3.V

V. And the NEW Teftament was likewife do- led up and finiftied by S^ John the <^pofile ; who, to exclude all Writers that fhould come alter h'lmjfrom having any partor t'ellowl>iipin the Divine CANON of SCRIP iilRE, fetteth this Seal upon his Book, wherewith the whole body of the BIBLE is now con- cluded i e That if any man ^ all Adde unto tbefe Things^ God jilpaiJ ADDh the- Plagues unto hirr?y that are mitten in this Book^&c. ^ Forto that which is Perfed nothing may be Added, nor nothing Taken away trom it.

VI. Thole BOOKS therefore which were thus deli- vered to Gods Church at firftjas his undoubted Word and Vcrity5,whereby all Points of Faith and Religion are for ever, to be ordered, ought ftill to be Retain- ed , and no more to be Added to them in either of thele Two Teftaments.

VII. And to know exaftly what the True NUM- BER and NAMES of thofe. BOOKS are, which be- long to them Both, there is no fafer Courfe to be ta- ken, then herein to follow the Puhlick Voice^ and//?e Univerfal Tejiimony of the fame Church 5 which from hand to hand receiving thofe BOOKS into the Di- vine and Authentick CANON of SCRIPIURE, hath brought them down from the Times of MOSES and the PROPHETS to the Time of CHRIST and his APOSTLES, and fo from their Time to ours fucceffively in all Ages.

VIII. For though there ht many Internal Teftimo- nies belonging to the Holy Scriptures, whereby we may be fufficiently aflurcd, that they are the True and lively g Oracles ofGod^ (inch as be. The Height and Majefty of the Things there delivered above all other. Conceptions and Writings in the World 5 The Per- petual Analogy and Conformity of all the feveral Parts therein contained , one with another 5 The Greatnefe and Dignity of thofe Prophecies which be

there

the Canon of the Scriptures.

there fore-told ^ and the Truth or Certainty of them ail, which be there fulfilled; together with the Di- vine Power and Providence, that iiath confirmed and prelcrved them to all Pofterity ; befides the h Spi- * ^: chiyfoft. orat. ritual Force and Eflicacy, (which is never there b7njgnmhabmw,Et wanting unto them thatdo not wilfully refill it,) to abtvidtrit nosfoiiici- move and induce us unto a moft certain and firm Be- %lfiu^^ZTi7iNA lief of them 5) Yet for the Particular and ju It X«??2- oracvla inuiii- her offuch Books^ whether they beMoix^ or LelTe, then mdaadfene^mnper^ either [ome Pnvate Perjo/^s , or lome One Partuular gerc, fed ifaijm iliu- Church of late, have been pleafed to make them. We firAtmeiUiiJi n^ftru, have no better nor other External Rule or TeHimony ttt%ZTqu^d% herein to guide us , then the » Conftant Voice of fapkmu t]usprociive the Catholick and Univerfd Church:, as it hath been fr'r?^^^5^ii^ delivered to us upon -K^rc^mtrom one Generation to voctKWAMmnti

anOthen noftrainferit,

JTcrtul. dc prajfcript. cap. 3^. J^e jam qulvsks curiofiut em melius exercereinnegotiofxluth tu£*- Fercwrre Eccleftas Apofiolkas^ apud quat jpf^adbHcGatbedrdApoftolorumfuislocispr/ifidentHr, apud quas ITSM AVTHENtirM LITER M mif4mMr,-S. Aug. lib. 28. contra Fauftum. cap. a. I^os iff LIBKIS fdem tccmmedare debemw, quos Ecclefia ab ipfe Chriifo incheatay ^pef Apsftolos pmveSlA terth Succeffionum [trie ufquead hac tempora, toto terrarum or be ditatats^ ab initio traditos i^ conferva" tos agnofcit, atq; approbat Whiuk. de S. Scriptur. «[ 3. cap. 2. Ecclefia munus efJ, non tantum ut Te- ftis 5*r euftot fit SCRIfTVRARVM ^ Qtmtintu 4 nongenHiniJ difcermit, fedetiamcat divalitt^ {fy-proptnat.

IX. Concerning the BOOKS that belong to the NEW TESTAMENT, there is not any difference . between Us and Other Churches, about them. For though fomc few Particular and Private PerJ'ons have both of late and heretofore, either out of their Error rejcfted, or out of their curiofity (more then befit- ted them) debated, the Canonical Authority of the Epiftle of S.Paul to the Hebrews^ the Ej^iftle ofs. James^ the 2d Epiftle of S.Petery the 2^ and 3d cf S.John , the Epiftle ofs, ludey and the Apocalyps^bQCidts fome other lefjer parts of the G of pels • Yet can it never ' be (he wed, that any entire Churchy not thsiii any Vjtional or Pro- vincial Councel^ nor that any Multitude of Men in thQii Confefsions or Catechifms y or other /«^fe Publick

Writings^

A Scholajlkdl Hijlory of

Trident.

pari pietatis afeifu ac reverentik fufeipix^ fy veneratur^ Ibid, m Si quis atttem It- bros ipfos mteg,ros ciim omnibus fuis pttrtibufy ^cpraCanonicumn fufceferit. Ibid.

mitings have rejeifted them, or made any doubt of rhem at all. IndiQ^di Luthery and iomt cenain Men that lived with him in Germany^ (no great number, nor Party of them,) were otherwhiles of that minde, that the Efi^le of S. James^&c, might be called into queftion. Whether they were Canonic al^ or no 5 but afterwards they amended their judgement, and per- fifted no longer in that Error, wherein fome others of the Latin Church (but never any confiderable Number or Eminent Perfons there,^ had been in- volv'd before them. And at this day all the Churches of Chriftendom are at one accord for the BOOKS of the NEW TESTAMENT.

X. But for the OLD TESTAMENT they are notfo. For herein ^ ti^^Ganon oiiYiQCouncel at Trent hath made the %oman Church to differ both from it felfy (confidercd as it was in former Ages,) and from all Other Churches hcMcSy by adding to the Old CA- NON (flridly and properly fo taken,; Six intire Books which were never in it before, that is to fay, 7bfo>3 Ecclefiafiieu^y jvifdomy ludithy the firfiy and the fecond of the Maccahes^ together with certain other Pieces of Baruch^ Efthery and Daniel i all which be- fore the time of this New Councel (where the Pope and his Partifans, both in this and in many other Di- vine matters befides, took a mofl enormious liberty to define what they pleas'd) were wont to be fever'd, even among themfelves, from the True (Canonical Scrip- tures. To the Body whereof they have now not on-^ ly annexed them, and made the One to be of 1 Equal Authority with the Other, but they have likewifc ad- ded this above all, ^ That whofqever fhall not Receive them^ as they do^md B.eli eve them to ied^ good Canonical Scripture iis the?Refty (that is, all equally infoir'd by GOD, and delivered over to his Church iot'fuchj ever^ fincc they were firft written), rnufi undergaethe : ^urfe

the Canon of the Serif ture.

Curfe a of their unhallowed Sentence^ mdht made in^ • Aufhimft.Md, capdle of Eternal Salvation. The Capacity and affu- red Hope whereof, though (thanks be to Go d^) it never was, nor ever will be in their power to take from us, yet have they laid their moft unchriftian Anathema upon all other Churches and Perfons of the World, and excluded them from all ^ Pofsihility of being [avedy unleffc their New Decree in this Particu- lar, and the Popes V^w Creed in this and many other particulars (as unfound and as falfe, as this^) be firft Received and Believed for the 7rue Articles of our Chriftian Faith.

h Mancverm,^ Catholicmfidm, EXtRA QpAM NEMO SALVVS ESSE POtESl^Spon-' ikpoptoTy fyc. Omnia X JRlDEl^tlNA STNODO tradita ^ definUa induhUAnttr recipio j DamnatM tgo parittr datnno ^ <inathemaxir,o. Idtm fpondeo^ voveo, ac juro. Sic me DEVS adjuvety ^ Sdniia Ejus. EVAmELlA, Ibid in Bulla Pii P. Ull. fupcr Formi tomcnti Profeflionjs Fidel.

XI. By which their unfufFcrable and inexcufable Determination in that Councel, they have given the World fufficient Caufe to rejeft the Counce],if there were no other Reafons to be brought again ft it (as many and very other many there be) but this alone ^ That herein againft the Common Faith, and the Cor tholick CANON of the Church of GOD, they have . gone about to binde all Mens Confciences to TheirSy and given no more Faith or Reverence to the True and infallible SCRIPTVRES of God, then they d© to other Additional Books and Writings of MEN.

XII. For the whole Current of Antiquity runs a- gainft them. And theVniverfal Church of Chrift, as well under the OLD as the NEW Teftament,did never fo Receive thofe BOOKS, which are now by us termed APOCRYPHAL ; nor ever acknowledg- ed them to be of the fame Order, Authority, or Re- verence with the Reft, which both they and we, call ftriOly and properly CANONICAL.

XIILIft

3 J Schdafticdl Hijiory of

t'.ui>

. Xin.:IftF^(K)fwhei:^of; We {hall here tetitc the TeAimony of the Church in every Age concerning the CANaK of the OLD TESTAMENT 5 and the BOOKS that belong thereunto. ^

, XIV. Where the Queftion will not be i. Whe- ther thofe j4pocriphal Books either have been hereto- fore^or may ftill l^e read in the Churchy for the better In- ftrudtion and Edifying ofthe People in many good Precepts of Life .* 2. Nor whether they may be Joyn'd together in one Common Volume with the Bible, and comprehended under the general Name of //o/y Scripture y as that Name is largely and improperly taken : 3. Nor whether the Moral Rules, and profi- table Hiftories or Examples therein contained , may be let forth and cited in a Sermon or other Treatile of Religion : 4. Nor whether the Ancient Fathers thought thefe Books, (at leaft many Paffages in them) worthy of their particular confideration both for the Elucidation of divers places in the Old Teftament, and for the better inabling of them to get a more pcr- fedundcrftanding ofthe Ecclefiaftical Story; 5. Nor yet, whether in the very Articles of Faith, fome cer- tain Sayings that arc found in thofe Books, ( agree- able herein to the others that are Canonical, ) may not be brought for the more aboundant Explaining and Clearing of them. For all this we grant. And to all ^ hefe purpofes there may be good ufe made of an Apocryphal Book. But the Queflion only is. Whe- ther aU or 4;^' ofthofe Books be purely , pofitively, and fimply "Divine Scripture^ or to All Purpofes, and in All Scnfes Sacred and Canonical^ fo as that they may befaid, (or were ever fo accounted j to be ofthe fame Eciual and Soveraign Authority with the Reft, for the E[\ahli\hing and Detrrmining of any Matter ofFaithy or Contr over fie in T^ligion , no Icfle then the True and undoubted Canonical Books of Scripture themfelves.

XV. And

the Canon of the Scriptures.

XV. And in thisSenfe what BOOKS were And- ently Received into the CANON^ and what were not, we are to enquire in order. Of Them firft, whom it fir ft concern'd to know them PerfeBlj • and then of Others that Received the jufl Number of them, and lo delivered them over to Pofterity. For thus doth every Nation take knowledge of their own peculiar Lawes and Hiftories that belong unto them ; of which 3 as there is no better aflurance to be had then from the Records of thofe Times, wherein they were firft enrolled, and the joynt Teftimony of thofe Perfons, who then lived upon the Place 5 So in our prefent Cafe, They that were the neareft, both in regard of Time and Place, to the firft writing and delivering of thofe BOOKS, which G o p then com- mitted to the Cuftody and Care of his Churchjought certainly before all Others to be of moft Credit with us in'giving their Tejlimony unto them.

XVI. To make it therefore undeniably appear. That the Church of England, together with all Other Reformed and Chrillian Churches abroad, are better Obfervers of this SCRIPTURE-CANON, then the Cnurch ofRomenowis: i. We are firft to enquire of the Ancient Judaicall Church, which received the CANONICAL BOOKS of the OLD TESTAMENT from MOSES and THE PRO- PHETS.- 2, And then of the Chriftian Church, which Received The BOOKS both of the OLD TE- STAMENT and the NEW from CHRIST and his Holy APOSTLES. For The ORACLES under the OLD TESTAMENT had their Period with The PROPHETS ^ and under the NEW fpake no more after the Time of CHRIST'S DISCIPLES. And what Writing foever it be, that hath not firft been Received and Delivered by them, as properly be- longing to the undoubted CANON of DIVINE

C SCRIP-

10

« /Lih.i Dcvcr.Dc'u CIO. Sett. itaq-tFd- lemur Ec cleft a NVL^ leMODOpf^jfejace- leLibrum CANONI- CVM di SON CA- NOMCOyHCC contri.

h Ib)f?.in prinr (7m- nes Librof quos prote- Mantes non recipiunt, ttiam Htbrd mn ad* Tnittuntj & Scdt* ad locum.

e Ihid.StA.jamhtc & Scd. Rcfpondent

J Scholajlical litjlory of

SCRIPTURE, cannot cither by any Trad of Time, or by all ttic Power under Heaven, be made CA- NONICAL ; whi^h IS fo great and fo irrefragable aTrUkh, chat Cardinal BeUrmme himlelf is forced to 2 Confeflb it, even in his greateft heat and oppa- fition againft us. Nor can his Evafion here ierve him to any purpofe 5 to fay, That though the Church may not at her own pleafurc y^/^i^ a Book Canoni- cal, whj^ch was not fo before 5 Yet by vertue of fonie Ancient Teltimonies fhe may Declare it to be Cano- nical, (as the Church of Rome hath lately done,.) for all after- Ages to Receive it. tor, as it fliall ap- pear by this following Difcourie, that thofe Anaent Tefiimomes are but pretended , and that none can clearly be produced to that purpofe, they being made, both by him and others, to ipeak that which they never meant ; So if any fuch might be brought^, yet would they ftand him for the Church of Rome)in no ftead at all, for the Addition of any New BOOKS to the OLD- TESTAMENT, (wh?fh are the Books now onely in Controverfie ;) For leaving ^ formei:- ly acknowledged, as he doth often c after, that the Church of the Jews had no fuch BOOKS in their BIBLE, that is, neither more nor lefTe then we have in Ours, (wherein he fayes very true,) all the Te- ftimonies that he can pretend to bring againft it^ will be brought asainft the Truth and himfelf both 5 there being no fublequent Ages able to give good Teftimo- ny to a Thing which never was, or to lay, they recei- ved from the Jews fuch BOOKS as the Jews never Had, nor Received themfelves. For then ftiould they Tj^ftific that, which were altogether Falfe,

CwAFa

the Canon of the Scripture.

II

Chap. II.

The TeHimonj of the Ancient fudaical Church.

XVII.

THc Honour and Priviledge, which the d Pofterity of Jacob fometimes had above

d Pfil, 147.IP. Ver-

all the World bcfides, was tobethat ^^^JV'SSfe peculiar People 01 God, to whom he was pleated ma ifrdtii -, mn fie to make his Lam and his Scriptures known '^ Nor was f^^i^<^^^^^^^^^^^ there then any other Church but TheirSy or any other c Oracles of God ^ then what were committed to Them. For they had All ^ that were then Extant ^ and all written in their own Language.

e Rom.;. 2. Quihus credm funt Ehqnia Del f S. Aug. in Pfal.4©. Pfoferantur Codicet J^uJ£' orum y apnd ipfosfunt Lex ^ ProfbetSj in quibus Cbriflus -prddicatus tS, Et in Pfil. 5^, OMNES^ ipfos Libras ha.bent Jud^i,

XVIII. Thefe they divided into rtr^^/^'y^r^/ C/^/1 fes. Whereof the Firft comprehended The Five Books of Moses ^ the Second All The Prophets ; and the Third Those Writings which they called g The Chethubim^ or BOOKS that were written by ^ Th« Greeks «!- the Holy Men of God, who were not fo properly J^^^ chcm 'a,.5k*^ to be Rank*d among the Prophets : From whom both the Five Books of Mofes^ and thefe Chethubim were diftinguifhed, becaufe howfoever they were all writ- ten by the fame Prc^hetical Spirit and Inftinft, which the Books of the Prophets were j yet Mofes having been their Ipecial Law-giver , and the fVriters of thefe Other BookSy having had no Publick Miflion or Office of Prophets y (for fome of them were iC/'/if^y, and others were great and potent Perfoas in their Times,) they gave either of them a Peculiar Clafs by themfelves.

Cz XIX. Ill

11

A Scholafiical Hifiorj of

XIX. In this Divifion as they reckoned Five Booh in the Firft Clafs^ fo in the Second they counted Eight-y and in the Third 7S(/;?^ ^ h Tm and Twenty in * a' ^'gT^'^'f^ ^^^^ ^^ Number equal to the i Letters of their ^Z- ^^pmurlettluLl' fhdet^ and as fully comprehending all that was then gisLibrixxu. (i.) necdful to be known and Believed, as the Number ft<^fro^.>t of their Letters did all that was requifite to be faid peijaphoium Nlvem, OT Written. And hereof after this manner they made t Sixt scntnfis lui. ^^eir Enumeration.

p. a. Vt quemaaimon

apud Hehr A. i XXII Liter d, quibus Omnia qua did fcriblqiepojfmt, eomprehenduntur'y ith XXJlVc--

htmina firth qwbus contitumr Ottmith ^«^ d& DivitiJs Rebns fcir't ^ nuticiari qMcant,

rGenefis.

^Exodm, V TT

The Books of Mo[es ^Leviticus. ^ V j'Humhers, ( Beuteronomj ->.JofuaK Four Books of the( J«^tf5 & f I^uth. former Prophets ?5/w7»^/ 1. & ^ 2. ) Kings i„&*2.

^ Jeremy ^ndi\xi^^La Four Books of the mentations. later Prophets \Ezechiel. ,

a The Book of the\ jXIIlefTer Prophets J f King David's P falter.

I King Solomons Proverbs^ His Book of the Preacher. And the Reft of His Song oi Songs. the Holy Wri-^^ The Book of >^. ters j The Book of DanieL

I The B. oiEzra and t Nehemia. 'iTheBookof£i?i!^^. 'l^The B^of -^ Chronicles i. & 2. 1

t which was put as an AppcRdix to the

Judges, * Tfi

The Hcbrewcs

counted them but «72«B(}oi^ apiece.

B Counted but for •ne Biokf

4 Which were all put into Onf, and cal- led the Bo9k of the Fropbcts, A^s ^.42.

iin.

■?

VIIL

mi,

f The Jews recko- ned them both toge- ther for One, "• And thefc Two vient wirhthcmbui &» Qm Bfiok

I

XXII,

the Canon of the Scriptures. i^

Which laft Book of the ChromcleSj containing the Sum

of all their former Hiftories, and reaching from the

Creation of the World to their Return from Bdjlon^

is a perfevJj * Epitome of all the Old TeBamentj and a S, Hler. Epift, ad

therefore not unfitly fo placed by them, as that it ^comm'ef%mm^^^

concluded and clofed up their whole BIBLE. vlifrisEfttamT*

XX. Other D/x///^o«5 of thefe Books were b after- ^ vide Pag. i$.num. wards made, and the Oy^r of them was fomewhat ^^^*^^» altered, (as in divers refpeds they may well be, J but The BOOKS were (till the Same ^ and as the TS^mher of them was never augmented, during the Time of the Old Teflament, loihtrtwercno Additional Pie- ces brought in, or fet to any of them at all.

XXL It is generally Received, That after the Re- turn of the Jews from their Captivity in Babylon^ all the BOOKS ofthe SCRIPTURE having been Revi- fed by Szra^ c (then their Pricft and their Leadcr,J who ^ digefted them likewife into thofe feveral Claf- fes before rehearfed, were by him, and the Prophets of G o p that lived with him, Confign'd and deli- vered over to all Pofterity. But this is lure. That af- ter his Age, and the Time of the Prophet Malachiy (who was One among « thofe that prophecyedin that time,) there were no more Py'o/^fcm heard of a- mong the Jews f till xhQXimtoiS.JohntheBaptiFty and therefore no more Propheticall and Divine SCRIPTURES between them.

c Nch.8. 1. 3*8a 9* S. Hicr. contra Hely, c.i. Thcodorct Prsefit.in Pfal. 4 Hiltrius Prolog© in Pfalmos. (^oj(ait) EfdrasinvolumenummMlUgit (kr rnulh. ifidoras Grig. lib.d. rap.i. Hedrsi v.teflam, Efdrk AuHar »■> )uxta Kumtmm Uterarumfmrum XXII Libr'u Aecifiunt, dlvUtnUstosin Jres Ordines . Legis Scilicet^ ^ Prophetayum, ^ Hagiegraphorttm, Genebr. Chr. p. 1 8 3 . fe 2 5 1 « £n^- ras autor fuit divifionu L'k\ Sacr. Ltgis in Qainq. Frophet. in OHo. Hagiogr. in Ne^enu e Haggai^ and Zachdry were Two other. / vide pag. 2. fupra. Itenty Genebr. Ghron. ad an. m. ^640. Se*^ cundum T^mfium carebat SpiritUy five afflatu SanSo, qui Propbetas olim arripiebat. Nam i Mala- thia ad Johanmm Chrifii baptiHam nulti Fiophetaextitirt, Itcm,]anrcnium adcap.48 Eccl Po^ prormffum Jnhnnnem Bapt in Prophetia Malachia, nulla extat Pf&phetiafcripta ab aliquo Frspheta^ ^i CanonicHs babgrnr, quQufyi ille promijfiu venmt, h qno mipit N» Tfjf,

XXII. The

J A A Scholajlical Hijlory of

XXII. The BOOKS then of the OLD TESTA- MENT5 fuch and fo many as they were after the Captivity of Babylon, in the time of Efdras ^ the fame and fo many beings, accurately prefervcdby the Jem^ and continuing among them unto the Time of our BleJJed saviour (as they do likewife ftill unto this very Day,) without any Addition, Immi- nution, or Alteration defcended to the Chriftians.

XXIII. That which is here pretended by g Gene- hrard. That befides this f /V/i^ CANON of SCRIP- TURE made in the Timeof£/^r^, there was Ano- ther made in the Time of^/^^z^r the High Prieft, by a Councel then affembled at Jerufalem , when .they fent their LXXII Interpreters to Ptolomie King of Egypt for the Tranflating of their Hebrew Bible into Greeks in which Councel they Canonized the Books of Tohit J Ecclejiafticus and fome h o/k/5: More- over, That befides this ^^roW CANON, there was alfo J a Third eftabliftied, by a Councel there affem- bled in the time of Sammai and Hi/Iel^ wherein they Canonized the Books of the Maccabes 5 All this, is but a Device and an Imagination of his own Head only ; For other Proof of what he faith in this Caufe hath he None, either out of ^ Epiphmius for Tobit^ or out of * Jofephus for the Book of Ecclejiafticus ; as will k hereafter clearly appear. Nor indeed is there any probability or likelyhood in it at all, when all the World knowes, that the Jews (who have alwayes been both religious and * fupcrftitious obfervers of their Fathers Traditions,) never yet admitted, never

/ Chronogr.lib.a. pjg. ipo.col.2. Symdus Werofol. (fy'c, in qua vjdttur editw Secundus Htbrdi^ rum Canon. Nam pfttr XXII Libros Saeros^ alii in Egyptum ddatjfunt, ut tobid, ^c. And pag.284. col. I. who is herein followed by Maldonate, De SacramPoenic. q. dc purg.p.145. And by Serarim inMaccab.praBloq 5. h BdrwcAandy^/i/fJE; at thelcaft. Id. Gencbr.p 284. i Idem pag. 197. Vbi corfrmati Libri Judith, Tobja^ffy-c. Vbi ^ Libri Maccab^rtunvidtniur inter Sacrssprirnhnrc' Uti^ Et Tertius Htbrao;um Cdtion conditus, * Bo»^ cited for this purpofc by (/^nr^r. pag. 190. K Pag.23. & pag-loS. & pagti^J. num.So. / ^i fuaftcamantj ut nulla^ens infamh. Erafmus in 1 Tim.i,

acknow-

the Canon of the Scripture. ^ 15

acknowledged , nor never heard of any fuch Second , or ikiTcl Cauo/i of Scripture among them 3 having moft exadly kept tlenfeivesto The Firfly asicvvascon- figncdand delivered to them by the Trophets. W hich is lb fully attefted not only by the Modern and Anci- (:nt Jews, but confirmed likewife by the Greek and Latin Fathers of the Churchy as it is moft an end fo freely acknowledged by the Writers in the Romaii Church it felf, that it would be too importune and iupertluous a labour to recite here all their Depofiti- ons to this purpole.

XXmi. It will be enough to produce only the Te- flimony of Jofephus who lived in the Time of the A- ftles, & wrote the Antiquities of the Jews (ofwhorri he was one himfelfj ma moft exaft and diligent man- ner. His Teftimony io great in this matter, that ic is repeated by a EufeLius & pwt into his Ecclefiaftical Hi^ i^^^f' "||^'^ f "'* ^ory full at length ^ being to this effed which follov^ - * '^'^'^' '^ ' ^ *°' . cth,. « ^ That the judaical Church had on-

' ly XXII BOOKS of SCRIPTURE, which ^^"t?^' j^;J:^^ « might juftly challenge credit and Beliet hmoi C/CaU, &c. Sunt mbu cm 'among them. Whereof FIVE were the tantkm(i<r Vigmi LibrummtempQ'

^T^r^^^n r KM ' ' 1 • 1 1 rT 71 s defer iptwhe c^ntirtcntts, qkibus mt'

« BOOKS ot M0SES5 containing little lefie rhhfid(shabem.mrumQvwj2^E <then 3000 years V and THIRTEEN the Mosisfunt,qui(tstiegesconumnt.ttr cBOOKS of thePKOPHBTs, wherein they 'ZZffX'S:^,^:^ * wrote the ACTS of their Times from the }us hoc tribus Annomm miiubuspakih « Death oi Mofes to the Reisn of ^r^^x- '"'»«^</^'/'^'^'*.*''^^^^/^i«^^^''^ Urxes King of Perfia : and FOUR more, perfarum Rex fuu, prophet^ < containing both Hymns to God, and Axl- J^fefepo^friowfiiorum Temporum Ra

<moniHons to M^ (or the amti^dmcnt o£' fjjli^^.^'^Zr^^^^^^^^^^ ^ their Lives. But from the time of Artax- of jofua j ]udgc$ and Ruth 5 Samuel;

Kings, Efay; ]crcmyand Lamen- tatioBs; EzechicI; The XII Prophets; Daniel; Job; Ezras and Nchemias; Efther; and the Chronicles,) Rtiiqui ^AtVOR HymnosadDeum, ^ Admomxionts admrigeniamhmmum wtmctntintnt, (Thcfc be K. Davids Pfeltcr j Thtf Proverbs; Ecdefiaftcs; and the Song of Solofnon.) Ab Artaxerxe autem ad noftra ufqut tempera funtqutdtrnquadam SCRIPT 4, mn tamet iafidtdigMjtcHtPR^CEDENJIAjqut^nonfuUcerta fROFHEJARVMSVCCESSW,. , i*) All thcfcfo counted by Crcf/rjhimfclfil^cV;D.C.7.«nlcffcitbc/<>6and^<r;f<r, ofwhk^. fc^Jicrcafccr, Paragr.3^. ^^ erxeSy

i<J A Scholajiical Hijlory of

«« erxes^ that though certain Books had been written, « yet they deferv'd not the fame Credit and Belief, ^^ which ihtFormerhsiA'^ becaufe there was no Cer- « tain Succeffion of PROPHETS among them. In «c the mean while what Belief they had of THE "TRUE SCRIPTURES, which they onlyacknow- " ledged, and how Faithful they were towards them, " c vvas from hence moft manifeft. That though they <^were WRITTEN SO LONG TIME BEFORE, " yet durft NEVER ANY MAN PRESUME either " to ADDE, or Diminifh, or Alter ought at All in ^<^ them : it being a Maxime ingrafted into every one "of that Nation from their youth, and in a manner " born with them, To hold thefe WRITINGS for "THE ORACLES of GOD, and remaining con- «c ftant to them, if need were, willingly to Dye for " them.

c Idem. Ib.Ae/ i^fa vtro o^tndJt.quantam nos SCRlPtVRIS KOStRIS Fidern haheamus,Qj}Hmmm lANTUM INtEKEA M^l SIT ELAPSVM, NEMOtam^n ILUSvel ADjliEKE Q^OID- ^AMf vel Admere, vel Mutareaufmeft. Nempe Omnibus Jfudais ab ineunte atate infitum^ ^quaji innmm t^, hAc DEI DOdMAlA txiiiimare, inq', Illis Permantre,((^pro lilts cupjdiji neceffe fit^morh

Agreeable whereunto we have the Teftimony alfo of Pbilo , who lived in the fame Age with JoJephuSy ^ " That the Jewes would rather have fuffered a «^ Thoufand deaths , then that any thing (hould be " Once altered in all the Divine Lawes and Statutes "of their Nation.

d Philo "Judxus apud Eufeb- dcpratpar Evan?eMib,8. Neunkamquideminhisvoculamimmuta' runt y qujn iml malm Millies mori, quam Ugibiu illis ^ Smutis quidquam dcrog^re.

XXV. It is therefore but a vain and groundleffe Affertion of Them , who fay here. That the Other Books y now in Controverfie, were O/^c^ Received in- to the CANON by the Jews that lived hefore Chrift's time, but that they were from that time after reje<9:ed by their Followers ; which is Cardinal Perrons Con- tfjag,442, cciptinhis a Reply to King Jams. For firft there is

no

the Canm of the Scriptures. , ly

no Author to be produced (^unleffe it be out of (j<?/2^. irard's dreaming ^ rideiur^) by whom it mayap- * Supra.num.2j.Ti. pear, that ever they had any ixxdk Canon among them. ^^ ""'^°' Secondly , liad there been any fuch, they were too tenacious ot their Lawes, and Traditions of their El- ders, (o luddenly to have parted with it. Thirdly, to what purpofe fhould they have done it ? or what iliould they have gained by it ? Some fufpition there might be indeed, that they would have been content to abolifh thofe Scriptures that prophecyed of the coming of Chri^ into the World, at the fame time when they reje£ted him ^ but in thefe Additions of Scripture , there are no fuch Prophecies at all. If the Jews would have mutilated any Books that here- in made againft them, they would rather have reje- cted £/4j, and Daniel^ then 7ofo> and Judith. IwOne c pfalm of David^ in One ^ Chapter of Efay there is c pfal.ia. more faid concerning o«r 5^i;/W, againft the Jf»'^^, d chap.sj, then in all thefe controverted Books put together : and it cannot be well imagined, that they would rcjed thefe Booksy which did them no hurt, and retain thofe^ which made moll againft them, but that the One was True Scripture, which they durft not rejcdl, and the Other was none, which they had never received. For Fourthly, had thefe Other ever been Parts of the (Cano- nical Scriptures, it had been a wicked Sacriledge in the Jews to rejedt them : and Chrift, that fo often and fo Iharply reprehended thefe Men for taking away the True Senfe of the Scriptures , would he not much more » have condemned them, and laid fo great a Crime to their charge , if they had taken likewife away any Parts (oTwhole Books) oixht Scriptures themfelves I but in that neither He nor his Apojtles ever accufed them of any fuch Sacriledge, it is as good as a clear Evi- dence to us, that they never committed it. Fifthly, and Laftly, in what Language were they firft writ-

D ten?

1 8 A Scholajiical Hijlory of

"''^enTFor all the Camnical Booh of the Old Tcfta- ment were originally written in Hebrew^ (except a few parts only of Daniel and Ezras , written m the (^halde DiahBy whcreunto the Jews during the time of their Captivity in Babylon had been accuflomed,) but thefe Other Books were all confeffedly firft writ- ten in the Greek Tongue^ which was for the ulc of the Hellenics or Difperfed Jem abroad , and not for them that dwelt at Jerufahn^ or in Palefti/^e at home, wJierc it was but little underftood : and where thofe Books were fo. far from being Received into their Scriptures^ that they were never publickly read , or admitted into their Synagogues.

XXVL What therefore was not Canonical to Them, cannot be, as any part of the Old Teflament, Canonical to us. For it imply es a Contradiction, That a Book fliould be C/i/^o^/V^/ under the Old Te- Jlament, and yet under that Tcftament fhould never be taken into the Canon^ nor numbred among thofe Books, that were then only Received andBeliev'd to be Camnicall'^ of which Nature and Account thefe controverted Bocks muft have truly been, or elfe, it is not the rote of a few Pcrfons in the Councel of Trent J nOr of all the World befides, that will ever make them to have been fo, while the World ftands. ITotes may do much, but rotes fhall never make that to have heen^ which never »?^y, norany thing tobe a Truths which Men know to be fal^e. The Truth is^ : that the Judaical Church never had more the n XXII

Books of Scripture^ flridly and properly fo taken, as is clear by the Former Teftimonies , and rik refore the Chri^i an Church which was to follo>V,''''and own the fame Scriptures which they di^^, as being left to their charge and cuftody by MOSES and THE PRO- PHETS , ueithcr miglit ^ nor did Receive any othr ff'oni them,

XXVn. The

the Canon of the Scripture.

ip

'■ XXVII. The Exception which Cardinal a Tenon here taketh againft- us for producing the Teftimony of Jofephtt^^ wherein he layes ^ The Book of J OB is omitcedj is a nfieer Divination and Fancy of his own. For from wliat words'of all the Paflagereeired be- fore out of Jofq^hus may any Man colieftj that he counted not the Book of JOB to be Canonical .^ or what other Book would the Cardinal have had ad- ded^ to make up the Number of Two and Tare /^ty ^ To aftcdge for his; Proof, that in c AlP the Writings of jfofephuS:^ there is no Mention made ofjoh's Hifloryj is nothing to the purpofc ; For j(?/>/;fa/^ ^ propofingto himfelf, to write onlj'The Antiquities of the Jem^ and to Defend ^ the Honour and Lawesofhisown Na- tion againft Aftony had no occafiori to write any thing concerning- the Hiftory, or the Defence of JOB at alJ^ who was of another Countrey^ and needed not any further mention here, then to be reckoned by hit Book among the -f Re^-y as a known and undoubted Part of the Bible}

XXVIII. ^ut Cretfer the Jefuice hath not fo much Reafon as the Cardinal. For out of the XIII Books reckoned by Jofepbus in his Second ClajJ'e there, this § Jefuite excludeth the book of ESTHER, and giveth no Reafon for it at all ; but to make up the full num- ber of Xlil, counting Sfdras for the XP^, and Job for the XII^^, he runs round with a vertigo^ and count- eth'£p/r^y over again, riot remembring what he faid before. • ^

XXIX. That which Geneb. h and the Cardinal, (befides fdmi^ other?,; pi^ctend here to objeft out of Ji)/V/;to againft himfelf, for the Canonizing of the OI^Hccabes and the Book of Bcclefiafticus, if the Greek Copies of J<?f^/;te 'be vievv'd, or the Trariflation fol- lowed that Ruffinus made of him, will appear to have but little ftrength of Reafon in it. For firft his Rela-

D 2 tion

a Repliq,libAx,$o^

b^ig-^^2.AuCat4^ hgue df Jofepht au. theiiT Hekieu U Uure c^e Job eft obmjs.

c Etentmetles An- fjquite^ ludaiques du tnefmc Jofiphe, jln\fl fai^ aucmie mention de r hifldredeJOB, Ibid.

d Proxm. An tiq. Ju- daic. e LIb.contr.Apion.

/Of the 2d Clafle,

g Gretf.defenf.If.r. r>c Verb. Dei cap. 7.

h Oenehr.chTow.W.i.^ p. 190 159 VuPiY^ ron.ui(i.p,Pt;uard. hot.inArnob. $c-SeJ' rapoi?i$-^6rtfli^. 1.2. MalddQ'i>ict. panic., pag. 14^. Serar, in Maecab, praslcq.j.

20 AScholaJlical Htjlmj of

tion concerning the iMaccdes is a different Stery from that Epitome which we liave givenusof J^/0/2 the Cyrcnian 5 and Secondly the Book oiEcclepajiu cus he citcth not at all 5 as we may learn from St^ijw. Gelenm^ who took pains to review the^uerjio/i- of Ruf- finus 5 and from P.PnhcsuSy (one of the mod appro- ved Writers for learning and judgement in all mat- ters of this nature,) wlio gives his Ceniure of the Co- pie printed at Bajil in the words here cited, at the * Margin. For the words of the 6'o/^ 0/5/ wfc have very little or no agreement with the Difcourfe of Jo- fephus J the OA^£ipeaking hyperbolically of the a Ma- lice and wickedness of a Wornan^. but the Other only of the ^ Inferiority andfuijeBion to her Husband^ vphereun- to \\ the Laxp of (Jli of es had 731 ofljufily olliged her. Indeed ^j^poev (which is the word that jofephusukthj fignL- fietn fometimes More mcked^ or tvorfey and fomctimes. Inferiour ; and this was it which deceived his Inter^ tcrpreter who took it in the fir ft fenfc, when he fhould have taken it in the latter : For fo the old Verfionof ^ Rufjinus took ix^ fincewhofetimethofe words that now follow in Jo/iff fc/^53 concerning ^ the wickednefje of a wcman^ have been added to his Text by fome bold ajidinconfiderate Tirankriber of his Book, herein peradventure following fome miflaken Reader or other, that to the word x^^j-odv had noted the laying of£f^/^/^pV/^y in his Margin, without any. further regard had to the true intent and fcope at which Jofepkus aimed. "

♦ Vi Pirbapoirin cpofc. pag. 8-; Safi^ quidentj quod apad Jofephum lib 7, contra Apionm in Exem* pkried'to BafiU^, ex Eccf^ia^ici c<3p.^2. in MuUeresdiilum legimus, aliunde inepfijfc^prdter Arpi^ menti ipfius (fyt Tr<Ufatnsraiionem, vetuflkr Ruffini Tnierpretathfacit, ut exir^ catumnufufpiticnem, facile aJmiitam. a Ecclus.42 14. Betier ism. Afanthat doth ill, then a Womin doing well, b Mu- lier nutem (inquit) inferior eflviro per omnia^ Obedit igitHr,jfy'c» in vcrfionc Ruffini.Ifb.a. Jofephi contra ApioD, B Gcncfjs 5.15. c iiouHTnytfclei.k^/TVVTnfuya^'jrohyiwtuxSf^

Chap,

the Canon of the Scripture l

zi

C

HAP.

III.

The TeHimony ofthefiM ChriHianand^ Jpo^olkal Church i

XXX. ^K' the Writings oi the "Hfw Tefta^ent^ I though we have no particular Catalogue gi- ^ven us of all the Several Books which be- longed to the OLD,, yet by the fpecial Notes and Characters, that are there both by Chrifiy and his ^po- ^les^ fet upon them, we may evidently diftinguifli them from all other Booh whatloever.

XXXL And firft the SCRIPTURES, thatar/ji recommended to his Difciples, related to the former Partition that had been made of them by the Jervs^ and wereno other, then what were then found ^ written in the Lavp of OHofes^ in the Prophets^ and in the ?f alms ^ (where the Pfalmes comprehended all the Hagiogra- fha^ and being the Firft and moft Eminent Book a- mong them, gave theDf/^ow/W/o^totheReft ^J So that aU thofe Scriptures which are not contained with- in this Divijion , and cannot be referr d to One of thek Three ClaJJ'eSy (as none o{ the Controverted Scrip- tures can be,) arc by Chrifi himfelf excluded out of the CANON of the OLD TESTAMENT. For « to thofe Three he b reduced ALL THE SCRIPTURES that were then Extant, or acknowledged by him. Which is likewife S. Augu^ines own Confefiion , and the true fenfc that he gives to this place in S.Z/«/^<?, when for, this very rcaton he excludeth the Maccahes

out

a S Luc. 24. vcr.17. 44,4^, Et gxorfiis i Msyfe interpretabatur eis in OMSIBVS SCKIBWKlSy&c^

b Ambr. Catharin.in opufcdc Script. Ct- nonicis. Sixt.Scnen. Bibliothlib.i Scft. Partitioi. &MaIdo- nat. in 24. Lues, do

IZ

A Scholdjlical Hijlory of

out of that Divifton ^ becaufe they hadmt the TeftimO" ny of Chrift to he his mtnejjeSy and were neither compre- hended in the Books of the Law of LMofes^ nor in the? ro^ ^hets^ nor in the. P/^/w5 ;« for thefe were || all the Ca- nonic all Scriptures, that the OLD Church received Vi^on Bivine tsAuthoritj^

^ S. Aug. lib. 2. contra Gaud, c 25. Najic quidem Scripturamiqua appeliatnr Afaccah^oruw, non ha- bent jfmidfi fr cut Legem, fy Propbetas, ^ Ffalmos^ flVlBVS Vsmmw TeWmmvm perhibet tanquim TES/IBVS SVIS. II Idem de unit, Eccl. cap. 16. Demonjlrent Ecclefiamfuam inpr<efcripto le- j;/, in Propbetartim pradiSljs^h PfalmorumCanttbuSf hoceft^in OMNISVS CANONICIS SAN- CtOKVM LIBKORVM AVtHORltATIBVS.

XXXII. Nor did the u4;;o/?fa after C^r/'ii^ ever re- commend any other Scriptures^ of this nature^ to us, then what were contained-under tho[e Three Heads. Whereof they give us thefe diftin£tive and proper Chjra^ers^ by which we may know them ; That a thej were written hj Mofes and the Prophets ; That by ^ thofe Prophets God f pake of old time to our Fathers '^ That all their c Prophecies were fur e and certain ; That ^ not fo much as one ivordor Tittle of them fhould ever fail -^ That e all Scripture is of Divine Infpiration -^ And that ^ the Oracles (f (Jod were committed to the Jews, None of all which Notes can be fet upon the B(>(?^y that are now controverted.

a A^s 24. 14' IBelhvwg all thingt which ar.e vfrhten in the Law and the Prophets^. Ads 16.22, S4mi ns 9\ber things then t^cfe ^hich the Prophet i and Mofes did fay A ^s 28.2?. To whem he expoundeaand tePrficd ibe kingdom of Qod, ptifwadtng them concerning Jeft^y Uth out ef the Law »f Mofes^ and out ef the Prophets, b Hebr.i.i. c 2Pct.i.i9« ^ iPct.i.25, e 2X103.3.1^. / Rom, 3. 2.

g Index remmenioiii XXXIII. Then, in all the "Hew Teflament we finde

Sttotf^ir^' ^^' a^y one Paffage o(the^pocryphalBookswha^JC

exveteri.infineBib' bcctt § allcdgcd either by cfcr^^ or his\^//oi*te for

nerumvuig.edn sixti the :Ct)nfirmation of thdir Doctrine, no Examples

'K.ffy' Clem.B.pp.iuJju . , ^ . > i -t • ^

retoenityemft.i6i6, produced from tocm, no advertitemenc given 5 no

And remarkable it if, mention m^^de of them fmore then of other Foreim

"^cl^vti^^ ^m%0^t all. Which is an evident Signe, TlSt

iiwony fet down \vliac- accoumfo ev(*r they hata thcm in bc^^ yet

TaiBoo^ifs ^^'^" ^^^y neverheldthemtobeofthefemcE^^^/r///?/?^!)/-

the Canon of the Scripture.

^

vine Autheritj with the Prophetical and CmonicalScri f- tures themfelves , whereof, (over and above the high and venerable CharaBers that they give of them "in general) they mention not much fewer then Three . Hundred paj] ages in pavtkuhr.

XXXIIU. Lallly^ befides the Common Voice of the Ancient Fathers ^ (whom we fhall ^ hereafter « Pag. produce to this purpofe,) we have the Acknow- ledgement of iundry the chief writers even among them of the Roman Professions That the Books which they have lately introduced into the Canon b, were never either Confirmed^ or "JR^eceivedhy the Aperies..

b Catharin. Opnfc. de Scr'tpt. Canoajcis« Qiiod authn Apoftoli multos Libros viterh Teflamenij, qut dicunm ^ verefunt hahjti utCansnici, falttin APPROBAVEKINT, KVLLVM EXTAt TE- STIMONIVM, vr PER SE PATET. Sraplcton. de AHtorit. S. Script, lib. 2. cap.4. Scft-M- ^Sapifntiam, Eccleftajiicum, Mianty Judith, ^ tlihs V, t, Libm APOStOLOKVM Imporibhs NON CONFIRMATOS-Slc.

XXXV. And yet becaufe there be Some Others a- mong them , that pretend the contrary , and under- take to fhew. That both Chrifi^ and his Apofles have not only ufed divers Phrafes that are to be found in thei^c Apocryphal BookSy c but likewife alledged many remarkable PaJJages out of them, and thereby given them their Canonical ay^uibority ^ it will not be alto- gether unnecefTary to examine the Particulars^ where- upon they infift ^ and to declare the invalidity of them all.

XXXVI. I. In the Firft place, for the Canonizing of the Book of mfdom d they produce S. Paul^ and. fay, that Rom. ii. 34. {who hath knownthe mind of the Lordy or who hath been his Councellerl) is taken out of wisdom, p . 1 3 . {For what man is he that can know the Councel of God^ or who can think what the will of the Lord is I) But e Gretfer is fomewhat afham'd of this In- ftance ; and our Ahfwcr to it is, that the Sentence which S.Paul citethis clearly taken out of i^pj 40.1 3.

where

£ Cocffct. enfonA-

pologic* Au Noveau T. twHt avens degrtin* des traces de /' AV^ to RUE' de UplHs* partdecesLIVRES*

d Catharin. Opufc. de Script. Canm, Sixt. Scncnf. BibIioth.lib. 8. ha?r. 9.

e Dcfcnf. Bcll.c»ig.'

NhUhs eo Htitur argU' mmo , Ht dtmnflTfh tfvo.

H

A Scholaflical Hijlorjof

Efai.40.13. So Tcr- taJI. contra Marcion. /.$.f.i4. S.Bafildc Sp. S. c. 5. S. Ambr. Lorrtb. Thorn. & Ca- jetanus in Rom, ir. S^. all rfftr this place to Efay.

Where both the Senle and the * Words (in tha; Tranflation which the Ap^lle followed) are altoge- * JuictaLXX uur- *^h^^ ^^c fame as in the Book of mfdom they are not, pretcs, TU^tyta Secondly, As much may we fay to what t they note m^?i««7TV.v'^. y^j^ii ^^^ J 2 Where Ctr/;^ is called ^/^f^Bwfc^ m[s of hts Fathers olory^ alluding to Sap. 7. 2 6. Where mfdom is called the Brightne[s of SverU^ling Light j for as it is not certain Whether S, Paul ever law that Book of mfdom J or no, which, for ought we know was not Extant before his time, nor compiled by any other Author, then ^ Thilo the Hellem^l-Jew of Alexandria j t Catharin. opufc . lo. there be fevcral Expreffions in the undoubted Scrip- 5cn«1fs BU^Tn^^^^^^ ^^^^^5 concerning the Reprefentation^ the Splendor^ the lia?r.9.CoeciusTo.i.' fV/fdom and the Glory ofGod^ whereunto he might al-

J Fl^^'^^iV^nl' in ^"^^ ^" ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^A^^ ^^ ^^^ Hebrews^ as he had done ]shL%eLnTqHh^^n before in his ^ Eptfle to the Colofsians^ & in his c 2d £- cii, ad Heb. f(^c.6. pifl/e to the Corinthians^ fetting forth Chri^ there, to be ^ ixurcMi, ^^^ /w^^f of the invifble God^ and the Firjl Born of eve- ry Creature^ by vphom all things rvere created^ anddoflill confijt • the lubftance and ground whereof may be foundin d Ezek. 1.2S. Efay ^.6. &c 6c. 1. Vfal.z.^.Sc 13(^.5. 2 5^^^.7.14. J^/. 51.15. & 10.12, tofomeof wch places the -/4/?o^/^himfelf refers in this ^ place to the Hebrews. 317 That which is faid oi Enochs f (Heir. 1 1.5.) needs not the g Book of mfdom to confirm it,for the Story is clear in h Genefisy and in the tranflation of the Septuagint (which S. P^/^/ followed j the words arc alike. Fourthly, » That the Vorvers which be^ are or- dained of God^ w^s faid by the mifdom o/(7o^itfelfin ^ Solomon : and Fifthly, That l God is no accepter of Verfons is taken out of the words ot Mofes in »« Deti^te- ronomy. And yet there are, that refer both thcfc Max- imes to " the ^ook ofmifdomy as if S,P^/^/had found them no where clfc.

Sap.nullahabeturcon venientia,

a 5.Bafil. Ep. ad Amphiloch. S.Hicr. prcf. in Li bros Solo- mon. Belech.dc dif. offic.€ap.6o. ]o,Sa- risbar. Epift. 172. Thorn, in Dionyf. dc div.Nom. c.4. left.9. Bonavcnc. in lib Sa- pient. Lyranusinc- undcm Librum. Ec alii quamplurimi, b Color.i.i5i>^. c 2Cor.4.4. d So was the App;a' ranee oftheBRlQ fit- I^E.S,tbeLrKf-NES cf the QLOKT of GOD. e yafc$, fHchr II. 5. /r vvifd.4.io. h Gcn.j5:.24.

10.11 , n Wifdf^.3.&.7,

^ Prov.8.i5,i5. / Rom.2.ii.Gal.a.^,Ephef, 6.9. Colof.5.15. w Dcut.

XXXVII. Next,

the Canon of the Scriptures,

i?

XXXVII, Next 5 for the Authorizing of the Book of Ecclejiapcus they produce h S.P^/^/'and theEpi- ftle of » S.jfameSy bothof them citing this Sentence out of the Old Teftanient^ Allplhisi^sGrajje^ and all the G lor J ofwmy^^s thejiower oj Grafjef^ the GraJJe withe- reth^ md the Jimer thereof f^Ueth away ^ But the Word of the Lord endurethfor ever. Which though it be word for word taken out of the P/o/;;;^^ ^ Efay^ yet Sixtm of $ienna^ Coccm 3 and P. Cotton will needs liave it fetched out of the Fo^r^f^/^^^ ^ ofEc€leJiafiicii4^'y\s/liQXi^-^ with the words ot the v^/;o/?/f5 have no better agree- ment then the GraJJe of thejield with the wearing of a Garment,

XXXVIII. Thirdly, in favour of the Bock of Ju^ diththi^Y^ bring Two Citations^onc made by S. Paul, when he fa id, "^ They tvere dejlroyed ly the Dejiroyer^ and another by S. James j whofaid, t The Scripture wdi fufiUedy — And Abraham wa^ called the friend of God *^ botii which paffages (if there were any credit to be given to Serarim^) are borrowed out of the " Eight 0)avter of Judith ^^ as we read them in tb*e o Latin Fa- raphrafe ot that Book j For in the greek Copies there is never a word like them to be found. But whom (hall the Jefuite pcrfwade, that the -^/;o/Jto cjuoted a Latin Paraphrafe^ which was not extant in theu: time > or if we lliould grant that the Greeks oir, the Caldean Copies^ had as much in them ot old, as theX^to hath now5yet who would bclieve,that S. P^^arid S. James alluded rather to the B6ok of j^^/rfc, then tp the Book of ^ '^umSers^ where they that were dejiroyed hy che ^ejlroyer are upon Record at large, and to the Book of ^ GeneJiSj where the Story 01 ALraham isrecited^ together with -the Second Book of the r chronicles^ \^h^tt Air aharn is called the Friej:^d of ^od^ and the Book ot ^ Bfayy where 6'(?j^himIeinaithot hrni^bra- hammyjriend.

E XXXIX. For

h 1 PeM.?4, i James i,io.

k Efay4o.^j7. / Ecdus. 14.17.

•^ Serar. in lib. Ju- dith cap. 8. q. 19. Sc prolcg,4. tn I Cor.io.io. t S.James 2.25.

n Judith 8.V. 25, and V. 2^1

0 Illi apiie quitentati- ones nonfufceperunt c% i'tmore Domini,^ im^ paiienti'd fmm ^ im- properium mumureitu onis fu£ contra. Domu mm prmln'mty Ex- ttrmimi funt ah Ex- terninatore, ct a Ser* pentihuf perJe^unt^^V, 2 5- Mm ores ejfede- bent, quomod'j pater m- fter Ab^ ahum tent ai tit e/?, ((^ per muhas tri- hulathnes pnh'tHs , t^ei arrkw efe^iH

P t^Um chap 14. £c chap,i<f. ; •

q Gen i^.r^. r 2 Chron.2o.7»

z6

i aCor.y.S. c 4 Ef r.i.

e Catharin iri;/«;>. Dn. Ptrrf)n. Repllib. T;cape^o. Scrdi.pro' {oq.^JnMaccab..

'^For that rhis Feaft vas for nothing but tbciniaking « New

yf Scholajlical Hijlory of

XXXIX. For the Bookb of Tohh and Baruch^ or for tlk Additions to Epjer and Da/.ielj I find not any Allegations produced out ot the Ti/ip Teftafhem^^ wherby to give them the Authority ot Cano/ncAl Sm^tures ^ A.tew Resemblances oiPhrafes and Expressi- ons there are in many places between them^ (as between Job. 4. 7. and Luc. ii. 41. Give Almes ofihy Sub\iance. Tob^ /{.. ij. and i.7hejs./\..'}. Beware of all v^horedow^ az-idjly fornication, Toh. 4. 1 5. and Matth. 7. 12. Do that to no man whtch thou hatejl to be done to tby felf Baruch 4. 7. and 1. Cor. 10.20. Sacrificingunto Dizels^ and not unto God:) But if Refcmblanccs of words be any Reafon tomake^/^^f/i^^^oi^^Canonicalo by the lame Reafon we fhould have more Canonical Books yetj then the Canon of Trent will allow: For the Frayr of Manajjes^ together with the 3d and' 4' h sook of EfdraSy that C^^on reje£teth out of the Canonical Number^ as well as we \ And yet in that Prayer of Ma- nafjes^vjhcTc he (siith^That Repentance is not for the ;>/?, l^uifor finners^thcTQ is a fair Refcmblance with the fay- ing of C/;n.r^ ^ / ca?ve not to call the J uji^ but finners to repentance: And in the 3"^ i5oc»^ of l/i^/r^ that which is faid of a Truth is conformable to the laying of the j^poHle^ ^ IVe can do nothing again jrt the Truth -^ as in the 4^^ ^ook of £p/>^^ there, be many more of the iike nature, and lo me of them c more plain then any other that can be brought out of all the Co.^^r^yai^y'/^firf Books befides.

XL. Eut Laftly,* for the Canonizing of the Mac- cakes they produce S. John's Teftimony — ^ And it rras at Jerufalem. the Feait of the dedications which, they ^fay, refcrreth to i ^^^f.4.5^. Yet firft, here is no place of that Booh quoted ^ and Secondly, they, had a F'eafl of Dedication inftituted by Ezra^ which might then be kept at Jerufalem -^ but be it undcrftood of

the ^ Fea^ that Jud^ ^t'^i^b^. ^^ his Brethren or-r

daincd..

the Canon of the Scripture.

^7

daincd for the ckaicatlon of the SanBuary which Antio- ch'M and his Souldiers had profaned, the beft that can be made of it, is no more then the fpecifying of a Time which the lewes then obferved, and wherat Chrijl took occafion to preach and manifeft his dodrine to them the more publickly ^ but what makes this cither to the Citing oi the Booke, or to the Adding of any Canonical oAuthoritie ihcttunto > The lewes are faid to obfcrve that Feaft of Dedication at this day, and yet they do not acknowledge the Books, of the Maccahes to be Canonical Scripture^ no more now, then they did in S. John's time, who whether he referred to that Maccabifian Dedication or no, is uncertain 5 but how- foever, to this purpofe he mentioned it not ; which is the Confeflion of II P, Cotton the Jefuite himfelf. Another Argument they bring from S, TmVs Cata- logue of Inftances in his Eftf^le to the Heirews ^ where among other Sufferings that the Saints endured , he rcckonethup a Thoje that were Tortured -^ and though he nameth no perfons here in particular j yet ^ Mon- Jieur du Perron^ c Serarim , and d Catharinm^ apply- ing this paffage to the Story ofEleazar and his Seven Brethren mentioned in the Second Book ^ oi the Mac- cahes^ are not only peremptory in it, that the Apojile alludeth there to no other Perfons^ but that he al- Icdgcth it as a part of ^ Canonical Scripture, Where for the Perfons the matter is not io fure : For other

fis

Alrar, and it being upon the 25 of De- cember, it may well be thought to have \,r-r. been To pre-ordai. ^' "^ nedby God in pre- figuration of Chrifts birth, & thacinihls rtgard Chrift would be prefcnt at it^

'^n

men are of another minde ; and Vaulus Burg (whofe Additions have the honour, even among the %07nanifis themfelves, to be printed \v i h Lyra's Notes and the Ordinary Glofje upon theBihle^) underftands not S.Paul here to have fpoken ot Eleazar SinAhb Brethren in the time of the Maccabes^ but of the Saints & f^artyrsofGod g,that had been Tortured [n his own time, under the New Te^ament. And for the Canoni- cal Authority of the Book^ (if any Book be here cited,)

E 2 what-

II Dcprav. i^%. l* dsdrcace du Temple ne prouue pas que let Lmes des Maccabees foyent Authentiqugt. a Heb.i .35. b Du Perron, Rcpl. lib,i.c.')0.

c Scnr.pr.'iJn Mac, d CazbdrJefcr.Can, e 2 Mac.cap.6 847. / Sim'tli y in Epjfla, la ad Hebvdis Ca- noni^atur ilk Liber Maccab, Secundui, Cathar. S. Paul cite P hijloirg des Martyrs tympaniT^eTi en Matte- re de foy, ^ pour ve* Yffier CCS Deux prepo- fit ions Thec'.'ogques f Lafoy eii la preune det (hofes non apparemes^ et.par lafoy !es Saints out vaincu les Royau^ tries t ^ opci e )U^ice^ Du Perron. i Eurgcns. Addir. Hcbr.ii. De his au^ tern qui fub. N. Tejfa- memofuerunt, fubdit, ALU VEKO DIS-^ TENTl SVNT(fvc,

28.

A Scholaftkal Hiflory of

h S. Hieron-inEfai- am c. $7. NoQmum pluriffii illud quod de paftone SinHoyum 7n Epiflokm ad Htbr .}0' tiituT , SEKRAtl SVh't, ad ESAIM ttfrum Paffiontm* I Hebr.11.57. k Burgcnf. Addit* Hcbr. II. D^ EfAia auitm ^ MACCA-

Teftimonin j c»m Per" fecutiones Eorn nen le- gmturin AVTHEN- JICASCRinVKA

/ Unlcfs Jiretnx by the Errour of Tran- fcribcrs be put there for Zicbary in whom thofe words recited by S. Afat.iTC foond. m Or who ever elfe Was the AutkiT of that pims and learned iPork, upon the Can- tides. An anient and approved water he is. n Origen , Prol. in Canric. lUud tamtn paUm efi , rr.ulta ab Apflnns cffe prclafa, (fn& in his Scripturis quas CaMnicMS hate- f7J«5, mnqustn legi- rms : in Apocryphis au- tern inveniuntur : fed ne fie qui Jm locui A- peryphis danhs pi?, i^c Nonenimtrartfe' undifHnt]7tmini,qkCs ftaiuermxEAnUiKt^

what ever it was^ the Reference here made to it, gave it no more Authority of ^uthentick Scripture^ihan the words immediately following gave to another Re- ceived h Story among the Hebrews 3 that Ef^y the Prophet was [awn a[under to deathy whereunto though the Apoftle might have Reference, when he faid there^ [J Theyvpereftonedy they were (avpn afunderyVpere temptedy were flat a with the [wordy they wandred about in Sbeep^ skim^andGoats-skinSyheing defiitutey afJiiBedy tormentedyj yet who ever made all thefe ^ Inftances (before S,. Paul wrote them,) to be Authentick and Canonical Scripture ^ or who can with reafon deny (iiMonfieur Perrons reafon were good j but that the Story oiBfafs death ought to be Canoniz^y as well as the Story of Eleazar and his Seven Brethren in t\\Q Maccabes ^ [qc- ing ihere is av- much Rcafon for the Oney as there can be given for the Other,

XLI. To conclude this Chapter, There be many other PalTages in the New Teflament that have Refe- rence to feveral Stories and Writings of Old time^which are not to be found either in the //Wc//^^/^^ or in the Controverted Bocks of Scripture^ as Mattb. 27.^, rela- ting to the Prophet ^ Jeremy, Ephef.5j4.tG ^//a^/?^r. 2 Tim. 3^8. to Jannes and Jamlres. James 4.5 to a known Saying, and |ude 14 Verfc to the PfOphe'cy of Enochy (not to count the Sentences taken out oi Aratu^y Menander^ and Epimenides^yN\\\c\\ be three Heathen Authors, & yet quoted by S.Paul.) But ^ Origen faid well and rightly to this matter.. " Mauife^ it iSy that the Apofiles alledgedmany Things ^ which are not elfewhere to lefeen in the Canonical Scriptures^ being only taken cut of Apocryphal Books ^ and yet thofe Apocryphal Bocks muft not be aceountecl by m to be of Squal Authority with the Scripture ^ for we ought not to pafje the bounds which our leathers have [et a^. And herein we reft,

CHAP.

the Camnof.tJyeSmpH^ 2p

.if;'

Chap/ IIII.

(■ r»

terSj or Fathers of the Churchy nexti after the Jfoflles m the Second Qi^X tury. '^ •'

\

XLIL .j4 Ftcxidie" Apo^ks (in wJbofe time the whole CAN(>N\of SCRIPTURE was leceitnined, )' ^ The ffour was pafi^ and ^:';ii-*^3fi?w,sn7 4 theDore W4S fhut : No Addition might be made, nor- •'^''*'^--'^

any Other Books taken inj^but what they had firft received) and left ^4r/e^/:;t0c the Churdi. Which is not only a^cknas^ltxis^dby'^S.^c^ugi^iv^^^ wife by theDodors of the Church of 7^«w^ it felf, both c thofe that lived before the Councei of TV^/^f y and d thole that have wj-itten fmce, >^ : .. .. i :;

a ThoiD. Waidcii. Doft* fiaci, Kb. 2.«rt. 2, c&^. 2b,/rfi^fiU eiP^lhrni -mh pit^jmtnfiertCA* XONin PkralitateLlBRORVM. b S. Augaft.contra Fauft. Munich. liba i. c.5. K#r?<rf/ Dwi^ narum Scnpimamm mn h Qmbu^ibeU fi^ ah IP SIS APOSl^OLIS tidnoBrmFiim sdificmdmrnt- ntoTM comrnendtiu eB. Ac VER HOC in CAi^Ot^JCVM AVTORlTAtlS tklmenrtctpta. c Du^ rand. in|3..d/24. q. i. St^.S- Gcrfon. dcrit Sp. kft. 'COTOl. 7. Cajec. in i Corinth. 12/ << Canus in loc. com, lib. 2, c. 7. .^/c eniwi <i/ioi Libns habemuf-Canonkosfive . V.fiveN. Ttfiitpump^ HHot i4j)oyf»/f]>ro3avffr«/ir,^'£c(;/rj?<c rrd^^^r«n^ BeUarm. dc vefb. Jpp ].i,,c.2o. Grccf.def.I.idipa.:

XLIII. And this was it > that • held the j^vj^/^^ Fathers to the OLD CANQN ; from which the Greek ^ ^^^ ^ Church neveryet departedto this day^&till iomc'^fenr aJi, 'ti^mdllbeTr wen (of the Latin. Church oncly J met lat^lytogether ^^ <^<^^ ^« '*^4- at Trent, the NEW CANONv(tm M ^^^«^^ ^s fffL"^,^'^"^, riiey there Dcvifed it, ) was never heard ofc To tht m^ pirt) itaik which purpofe having already pafs'd through the ^^^f^M^^ time, of ^fo?^|»o^te 5 we will now proceed in Order 5

and

50

A Scholajlical Hijlorj of

102

I Con(t. Apoft«lf2. c. $/♦

h Ezra,Nchcmia,& Efthcr.

and fcarch into the Several Records ^ that have bin left unto us concerning this Matter in all Ages after them.

XLIIII. The Apefiolicall Conflitutions ^ (which go An^Otfl^ under the Name of Pope ^ C/^w^^^ the firft, ) are of no great Credit with us ; yet they that otherwhiles plead for them fo earneftly, (as the later Writers in the Church of Rome . do^ ) and think they yet fo much advantage by them in Other t^atterSyha-^chmliiilQ Reafon to retiife them in rfc/5 5 Where s there is an Enumeration made of fuch Books ^ as were then appointed to be Read in the Church and pertained to the Old Teftameut^ (thcBooks oi L^ofes and lofua ^ af the Judges and the Kings^ of the Chronicles and the Return h from Babylon^ oflol?^ David and Salomon^and of the Xf^I Prophets^ ) but oiTohit and ludith^ or any other oi the Books that are now in queftion, there is no mention at. all, which is a figne^that inthofedayes they were held to be no Canonical Parts of the Serif -^ tare.

XLV. In the Canons of the Apoftles^ (which are » faid like wife to have bin written by Him that wrote the Conftitutions^ ) after a particular k Rccitall of all the Books that be contain'd in the Old Teflamenty the mfdome of the Sonne ofsirach is recommended only (as a Book J Out of the Scripture-Canon^) to l^e learn d and read hy Toung Beginners^ but oithcfvifdom of Salomon y the Books of ludith and ToUt , arid the refi that we acknowledge not to he Canonical^ there is not a word fpoken, unlefle it be of the Ih/ee Bocks of the MaccakSy which is One more then the Canon of Trent will allow, and more by all the Three then either "^ Damafcen^ or 'mcephorus ^ and m^xvj Greek Authors hcdiicSy ever found in the Copies oithofe CanonSy that came to their ex^^v^ivtt.^»<rm^ hands, with leUe corruption then they come now to vayuKiiAvMn. ours. For u IS evident by Zonaras " (however that

Canon

iBdIarm. dcVerb. Dei, lib. I. cjp. 2o. Sij^s Canor.es vel tpf< Clttnens condidtt^ vtl ^od vtrius eff^ ab A- poftelis conditos , ipfe SccUfiis cemmenda'

K Cair, Apoft. Can.

/ Ibid. *ES«^2j^ <^

^tUm* attpioM Td^'

m Infi^citandi. n Zonar.inoin. $p. CoflC.Laodic. Katvo-

jjij.

the Canon of the Scripture.

Cmon of the ^//'6/2/^5 upon which he makey his

Commentary te now printed with this addition of the

Three MaccaUan BcoUy) that the Copie which he had

then before him differed not fromthe C^^^o/^ of the

Councel at ^ Laoduea ^ where the Maccdes are not ^ ^"^" citandi.

named at all.

XLVI. Though the Author of the Ecclefiafxical * /^ H^nm Hierarchie be not fo ancient as DIONYSIUS the ^'^^^^ -^^^^^* AREOPAGITE, to whom that Book is commonly 1 10.

attributed •, yet becaufe he is numbred both by a ^ Bcllarm.de ScripCj Card. Bellarmine^a,nd others^ amongtht Fathers of thiS' £ccl. ty^ge^ we will here produce his Teftimony 5 which is cleerly again ft them that pretend luch great Veneration towards him. For treating of what was done in his time at the put lick Ajfemblies ofchrifiiamy and declaring the Order ofDi'Vu/e Service then in ufc among them^ he reciteth (after his manner of senig- matical language, ) all the Books of Scripture that were held to be Sacred in the Church, And having firfl named The PfalmeSy which were often imployed in Divers Parts of the Service ^ he reckoneth up thefe following for ^ All the Authentick vpritings oiiho. Old Teftarnent hcfidcs J ^^Thofe that relate either the. Birth 5 Dlonyf. Eccl. Hic- « and Ornament of the worlds (as the Book of GENESIS • 'T^^'l'Kf"^^ ^ "doth,) or the Legal Hierarchy and Polity of thelewes^ '^ni^luiitX^^ <^(as the Books of EXODUS ,^ LEVITIGUS, <^ NUMBERS 3 and DEUTERONOMIE do,) or ^^the Divifions and Pofjejjions of their Sever all Inherit ^^tanceSy (which the Book of lOSUA doth,) or the <^ Prudence of their Judges (as the Book of JUDGES " doth , whereof RUTH is an Appendix,) or the mf- « dom of their KingSy (in the Books of S AM U E L, " KINGS, and CHRONICLES,) or f^^e Piety of their « Prie^Syiin the Books of EZRA and NEHEMI AH^ « whereunto ESTHER is added,) or the firm and un- *^mvedle< Fhilofophy of Ancient and Holy Men in the

^mid^

ti AScholaJlical Hijlory of

«2 niid^ efmany (JUiferies mdTroukles^ (in the Book of

^!^ JGBO ^^ ^^^^ Ag^ "Vrecepts of Life^ in the PRO-

^^VE^lBSj and ECCLESIASTES,) or the Songs ofDi*

^^ vit^e Lovcy. (in the CANTICLES,) or the PrediEiu

^^ ens <{f ihi/igs: to come^ (in the Four greater^ and the

«• Twelve lefler PROPHETS.; And further then thus

this Author^ (under the Name oiDiqnyfim the Areola*

^/>^) in recounting the Books of the O/^ TT/f^wf/^f^pro-

fj^f ' ceedeth not> but immediately fubjoyneth tlie Books

« DeDWimNomia. th^t belong tQ. ^(^^w. In ^- another place he cites

C.4. * * ' a frying out of the Book of ^//ij/<?W5 which he calls ^;;

InirodulUan tQ the Divine Or deles ^^hm by the Confeflion

of ^3^«/V»^ who wrote a t Commeninryw^^ow him, this

makes not that Book to be Canonic al-^ no more then it

does the SpisHes oflgnatitis^ and iomQ others^ there ci-

tecj wi^h it tjo the like purpofe. -

t Thorn, in Dionyf. De Divim Nomin, cap* 4. led 9, Dknerghprimh quod quibufd^m VeStrutfifqui Sanihs Sermonts traliavcrmt^ Iktt SCKIFI'VRAS CANONIC A.S imeomerent, vifHtnefl^itfc*-^ Ex quopatetf quU Liber SAPIEKJJM nondumljabeatur inUr CANONIC AS SCKlPtVRAS,

inXLVlI, before S.John dyed,, (who dyed the laft

« oidlth^ Apo(HeSy)t]ic Canon of the Scriptures- wsis made d Narrant vctercs Yo- - ^ 1 1 i- 1 1 /^: -n- ^^\ 1

bamem AfiatkaruEc- * perfeM and delivered over to the Ctiriltian Church. ciefiaTum rogituy ger- Divers years before his death he had made chief ^"Ttr^ffi^E^' 3)x)dcj^bomEphefus, ^d S^wdtSyand the other Church-^ fcb. ■ es in Afia.y to. which he b wrotc^, when he was b^riir'

b ApotaJjfp. chat' «•' jftied ii)tK5 che j^f of P^i^(j5 bythe Empcr6ur Dcmtian. From thi^.S^nifement he . was -released by Ji^rxja in the yeer of our Lord.XCVII> and about III yecrs af- ter he quieilly .aiiiiiA^his dayes. It haph^tiriiat about' I4X ^\Qacs| tromjhe time of his deoeafev t>i^rc was' ^ jln.T^Otn. ^^^^^ qiH^ftioij^'mad^/ byccnainMenrFiatcanieand lived in^thofe Quareers conctTfiing thejEx^S A^^w^^r l6o» of, the Canonical BQ(^ki diSifyf^u^. For R<etelution

* Scripfit Apokgiam hctfini ]^ M^LITO y *: 'wli© was thefi Biftiopaf S^r- cimnk'''^' ^'' ^iir' .{:a, Man famous:. a|>ave43crabte»hfeth^

whom Volycra^s the Metropolitan Bifhop oiEphefus^ '

gave

the Canon of the Scriptures.

V>

b Apud Eufe. hi^,EC cU.lib. S.c. 24,

C Katu TV <Of^0lfJU Of

ho')fiV^ Apud Eund. Eufcb. lib.4.c.2 5. d lU^'TWV TttLKeuav CtChlav AKeiCeteUf^

TTCOTX. 70? AeX^UOVyi^ • 710/ fit TlW TW^/I'W-

gave this honourable ^ Tcftimonyjthat lie vpos led^ guided^ in all things he did^ by the Holy Ghofiy) having bin formerly requefted thereunto by Onefimm^ made a perfedt Catalogue oi All the Books c that by common con- j'ent of the Oriental Chriflians were received 4^ Canonical parts of the Old Tfftament ^ and returned him this An- fvver. That he had diligently inquired into d the Timber and Order of thofe Bocks 5 that for this purpofe he had made a journey into the Eaify where they were firfl preach* d'^ that he had compiled Six Bookes of Commentaries upon them 5 and that to fatisfie his Defire^ and to [et forth the DoBrine ofFaithy he had Sent unto him the N A MSSef **'* ^''^^*^™* them ally (that is to fay^ ) The five Books ofMofes^ GE- NESlSy EXODUS y LEVITlCVSy NUMBERS yDEVTE- RONOMIE ; The Book of jOSVAHy JUDGES and RUTH 5 The Four Books of the KINGS -y The Two Books of the CHRONICLES'^ The PSALMS of David -^ The PROVERBS or the WISDOM of Salomon y (for fo Ruffi- nus tranflated the words in Sufebim ^y The Proverbs of Salomon which is alfo called His fVifdomy) The Book of the PREACHE%j, The CANTICLES ; The Book of JOB ; The PROPHET ESATy and J ERE MI E i The Twelve PROPHETS comprehended in One Book -^ DA- NIEL y EZECHIELy and ESRAy whcreunto f Nehe- miah and £flher were commonly "^ annexed 5 as were alfo the Lamentations to Jeremie,

XLVIII. In this Age iivedt JUSTIN MARTYR, . j Tinrn Who in all his works citeth not fo much as any one ^^* i^om. Paffage out of the Apocryphal BookSyUor Qiakeththe leaft mention of them at all .- For the Questions and tAnfwers ad Orthodoxos (wherein a fcntencc is brought omoi EcclefiafticuSy) were written long after his time. And in his Conference with Trypho againft the leweSy though he reproacheth them for many ^ other things, •/^^^ ^f^i^f *»^ '^^e yet for this that they had rejeded any of the intire f^^^'^' fmr^JT^d b, Canonical Books of Scripture , he reproacheth them nor.

€ T[de^t(Aai ^ (f9» ^lA'y Sahmsnis Pro^ verbkj qudt ^ Sapi- entia. Ibid. VbiSa* pietitia dccfpitnda f/f expofithe pro ipfis P rover bits , Pineda in Ecclcf. praef. c. 2. Sca.i9. / Supr^Pag.18.

Martyrio coronatus.

Even cencernrtii fame Parts tr Parages

I

.\»^

^ ... n?r

^ ^m^^

•It

V

A

tT, "^

1*^^ € r t^

54

A Scholajlical HiJlorJ of

A Signc, that what Books they did not acknowledge^ he rejected hinafelfe ; or at leaft made no fuch account ofthemjashedidof thei^e^jwhichhe !l appropriates to our Religion,

d ]uft. Mart, in Cohort, ad GfaEcos. ^uhd apud Jud^»s PIETATiS NOSTRA Libri ajerventurj B'tvinx idde Hibis Ofnt eft Frovidemu,

Ch

A p.

V.

The TeH'mony of the Ancient Scclefia- Hical f4^'riters in the Third Qenturj,

An.T>m. ^Lix.

Oi

RIGEN a was better learned in the knowledge of the Scriptures^ and took Z2 O. "V-^ more paines to fet them forth, both in

I fetupu, Nexdpfa, the Original^ b and in their feverall Tranflatiom^ then ^ oaapia, origenis ^y belides that lived in his time, or long after him ; and therefore is his Tcftimonic herein the more to be regarded. In his Preface upon the Pfalmes f recorded by a Eufehius^ b s. Bafil and 5. Greg, ^zianzen 5 c Suidas 5 and ^ Nicephorus.) Firft he giveth us this general Advertifement , That the Cammcal Books of Scripture contained in the OldTefiamentareTiVentyand Two in number y which the Hebrews ^ have left unto us y according to the number ^ ofthofe letters which they have ^. ^.. ^^ their Alphabet i and then he Reckoneth them up Vet ad Kos tranfl^u by their NamtSy every one m particular ; GenejiSy Ex- fm. orig. Proi. in odus^ &c. as wc do at this day : For thedefed in the **id.in I pfal. Ik CopiQ oi Eufebius f where the Book of the XllleJJer ayvofiiiov cT' Vl) -rdf Prophets ^ is Omitted,) is nothing elfc but a fault of the

«\ iCf> sMoi 7m£/>J)J)sdfftV9 J\Jo i^ tiMffty g«j. / Without which th< numbtr oftvrenij/ two Beokf (men-

Tranfcrx-

lab97i anttxta.

4Eufeb.HiftorJib.^

cap. 2$.

* In Origenis Philo-

car!a,c. ;.

c Suidas in rcrbo O-

rigincs.

d Niceph hift.Hb.^.

c 16. & Hilar, praf.

in Pfalntos.

A qtiibus Elotjuh

u

Ai,

^^4 f > t^ ^ 54

the Canon of the Scripture.

5?

TxsLnicxihQX'^^iwdi'Hicefhorus g that had a more perfcd Copie to follow, then that which is now extant with usj hath fupplycd it, as likewife doth the Verfion of ii Rujji-^/us. But Origen here joyneth Kuth to the Book

g Xll pTopbetarktn^ Librnthereafar, Ni- ccph. ubi feprl. Rbiffini vtrfioEii-

h fcbiilib.5.

of luc/aes^ and the Lamentations to the Book of a * Jfrjmiascumthre'

nu CT Epijtola. mum funt. Apud Eujcb. Icco citato. Epifiola. aBtcrri kjeremk Hi- crofolynus Baby lo- ne m ad dt per rates milfa habctur Jercm, c 29.

b Ofig. ibidem, a- pud Euffbium/E^^

c Sixt Senenf. bibl. fanft.lib. i.Sea. 3. Origenes quoquc in E- pjfloU ad Jul Afri" cauH hdc Cad E^he^ rtm J Additaimntd txplodit. EYtzt.2.To, d Qua mper admo- dumpredih in Imem^ ^ voBivaiof fufpeifa efl ; iametft certum fttf Oiigenemea dertolim aliquid ad Afrkanum fcyipfijfe.

e Oiigen. Epmola ad lul. Afric. apud l-yf tdnqum Scriptum confi^um & tdulterinum, ne trisScripturasabEccUfiareceptas,(^facrisvolH' minibus inmftas, quales funt Oratjo^ ^c' f KifSw Homil. i. in lib. Jiadfcnm. Qui cuHodit wan" datumnon fciet verbum malum. Sic n. Scriptum eff. Which refers to Ecclefiafles chap.8. 5. (Vidt O- rigincm in Matth.Tra«^. 50.) and not to Ecclefia^icuf, as Cofo»(Juft.l.2.c.g2,) and Cocciw ,The- faur. 1. 6. art. 1 7.) would have it* And Hom.i. in Excch. Scriptum eji in Huodam Libro, quia mms Credtntes dccipient coronam falignam. And, Homil.4. in Jofuam. Sed memento quod fcriptumeff^ flui appnxmantmihi^ apiroximant fgni, which refer neither to ihc Canonical nor to the Apocrypha I Books, g. As, in Homil. i . in LeTiticun?, (urg'd by Card. Bellarm for the Canonizing of Stffan' ras fiifloryy de vcrbo Dei, I. i* c. 9. SeA. Auguftinus,) which yet is confefs'd to be of unccrc^in and fmall anthority (by the fame Cardinal Bfl/armine. De Verbo Dei, lib. 4. cap. 1 1. Scft. Oftav.) And, Homil. 18. in Num. ("produced by Ocdk/Ioeo citato,) In Libro qui apud NO S qui dem inter SalomonhvoluminahaberifoUt, fy ECCLEl^IAStlCVS Dicij apud OK^COS vtrk SAPIEN-

leremie. Of ludith^ and Tohit 3 Eccle[ia^icu$^ and H?/jf- dom he maketh no mention at all. The Maccaies he declares expreffely, in the words immediately following the Enumeration of the XXII Canonical BookSy to be ^ cut of the Canon. The aAdditions to the Book of ^]?(?r are in the like manner c exploded by him. And as lor the Hiflory ofsufanna^ (together with the Other Supplements of Daniel^) iithat ^ Epiftlehe his which he is faid to have written to his friend jfi^- lius AfricanuSy though he defends it there to be no ^ fabulous Impjiure^ but fit to be retained among other Ecclefaftica' Books for the ufe of the Church, yet he gives it not an equal Au^hoyity with the Canonical Books of Scripture.The pretended Places that are brought out oiOrigens other writings for the Authorizing ot Eccle- Jiafticus 5 mfdom^ Tobit , ludhh^ and the (JHaccabeSy are either impertinc^nt f and rcfering to fome Other Bocks then theje which be now inControverfie^or elsthey be produced out of uncertain and § Supposed mrks

Sixt. Senenf. lib. 5. An 2$o. Kon r^pudiandi eademratione cegamur <bjicere multas e]ufdemg

riAjESV FILJI SIR AC fippelktur, whom Origen was none.

Where he rcckonj himfclf among the LATINS, ot F 2 of

I I ' ' "'

^6 ^ Scholaftical Hijlorj of

of his 3 which he never wrote ^ and both the one and the other are infufficient for that purpofe. Sometimes he citeth, under the general name otSCRiPTURES, the Book of ^ Tohit^ 2i\\dithe Maccabes -^hMixhisbno greater argument^ that he held them to be Cmonicd Scripures:, then it is to fay, that he held the Book of Henoch 5 and of Hermes his Pajlor to be Canonical 3 becaufe we find them alfo often i alledg'd by him under the fame general name of the Scriptures. For which reafons UHekhior Canus (more ingenuous herein then the Cardinalls Ballarm. and Perron) is wil- ing enough to acknowledge, ^ thsit OrigenrejeBed all the six controverted Books out of the CANON of Divine SCRIPTV 'K3. And it is to no purpofe for him to an- fwer 5 that the Church in 1 after Ages brought them in ; for firft, the Councel of Trent is not the Church ^ and then, it is not in the power of the whole CathoUck Church together, to make ^ any Book Canonical in thele latter times, which, was not/b received, and acknow- ledged to he [uch in the Primitive times^ for this would imply a Contradiftion. Others " therfore fay, that herein Origen was no more then One particular D^Bor ; but there will be found Company good ftore for him hereafter. And if he followed his Oivn minde in fome Other matters J for which he is many times accus'd, yet in this he follow*4the minde and Tradition of the Apo- ftles^ for which he is as much to be commended.

i!> Lib.8. in Ep. adRom. de princ. l.a.ci.Hom.?. in Cantic. Whereupon Cofc/«^ (loco citato) $c Card, Perron, Repl. 1. -;. c. 20. conclude it for certain, that Oriien held thefe Boeks ts be truly Di- wne and Canonical Scriptures, i Orig. deprine. I.i. c.2. &I.2. c. i. Item, Sixt. Sentn,\\h» 4. vcrbo Origines. Ad imitatiomm pACtptmsfui CUmtntU multis utitur Apsctyphis Teftimoniis, ut funt libri F<- iffl^i/, ^Henoch ; Evangelium Secundum Hebr. i^c, K Canus, loc. cona.lib. 2. cap 10. & 1 1 . Or'u genes etiam in Pfal. i. hes SEX LIBROS, cum Hebrdit h CANONE rej/cif, guod Eufibm refirtjib,6^ I Idem, in cap. 11. At et tempore res nondum erat definita^ qui ramne excufandw efi. m Bcllarm. de verb. Dei lib. i. cap. 10. Scft. Itaq^ Fatemur- enim Ecclefiam nulio modopoffe faeere Ubrum CANO" JilCVM de NON CANONICO nee contr^ *, fedtantum Declarare, quisfit habendui Camnhus, ^ hoc mn temtr^, nee pro arbitratu, fed ex VETEKVM Tcfiimoniis, n Cocon. Dcpray. ip8. Oiigent tjhih M DoSeur pmkHlitr : tf ^/ defe^oit xnp ifonfens,

L, Follows

the Canon of the Scriptures. 27

L. FoUow's then JULIUS AFRICANUS , who J crs lived in Orige/is time^ and had the honor to be fent lyOrn.

upon an Embaffie to the Smyerour, Hewasthefirft 111.

oi all other Chriftians j that wrote a Chromlogie ^ which he compiled in » Five Volumes from the Be- ginning of the world to his own Age 5 and a great b part of the Chronicle that we have from £<f^m is Lfnr^FrT^'T'^f but a TV^^/a//?/: out 01 his. Oi all his c Other miUngs Afric. there is not any now remaining but his d E/^//?/^ to ^ JoH Scariger in O//^^/^ concerning the i^/^^ry 0/ ^/ir/i;^;?^, which he is ^^"^onJconEufebii, folar from acknowledging to be f^/^o/^/V/i/^OT;;^/^^^, }efA\hTltplzX that by ^ Eight feveral Arguments he endeavoureth hy Phitiw in his to prove it f a Fable. Wherein though we allow him ^'^^' ^°^- 5- not, no more then g O/z^f/^did, and the Churches in gci^s'^xonfr^ ^^**' his time, that then received it to be 7^^^^ among . ' them, as we doe ^ yet thus far we take hold both of li^rK^Zlto^'"' O/zg^^'sTeflimony, and his^ that neither of them both / Jui- Afric' in Ep. received that Book into the C^non of the Old Bible. ^^""^ff ^«'^';" ^Z"

lum iuod muhis opnditur & convinc'mrmodis, neotericum (jfe^ ((^rgr&ce^ Or^co Ant ore conffium, g Grig, in Ep. ad Jul. Affican.

LI. In this Age lived TERTULLI AN among the J^^ T)om. Latin Fathers (ot whom he is the firft, whole Wri- tings be now extant,) as the former did among the 204-. Greek. And though the writings of the Latin Church before him, have not bin preferved, to be delivered over into our hands ^ Yet by what a S. HiJar% ^ • s. Hilar, prxf. ia Thilaftrius^ c s. Jerome^ and ^ Ruffin have expreflely YmM. dc Hscref. told us concerning the number ot the Canonical Books c s, Hicr. prxf. in of Scripture^ received in their Several Churches, J'^'^y^^^^'".* ("which were all of the Latin Communion^ ) that herein bolum. '" ^""" they followed no Other then the Account of their Ancient *FredecejjorSyfrom the time of the Apoftles y We may have good reafon to think, that thofc Ancients were elder then Tertullian^ and that the LatinChurch before his time, difFer'd not at all from the greek^ in this particular. But from him we have a cleer Tefti-,

mony^. ;

28 A Scholajlical Htfiory of

' ' inony, * ^^ That the Books ef the OLD TESTA MENTy

« designed by the XXII 11 ^Iders^, md the XX 1 1 II mngSy " (thereof S, John writeth in his ^pocalyps^ ) fvere «' Certain 5 or fufficiently known to he So CM ANT in '^liUMBER. In which ^<rro;w/^/: of his, though there may feem to be Two more 5 then eommonly the He- hrem reckon in theirs ; yet this maketh not any Reall difference between them ; for as a Some added the Lamentations to the Book of leremie^ and the Hiflory of '^th to the Book ofthejudges^io b Some reckoned ihem apart by themfelves. Neither doth he augment the C^non^ if at any time he produceth an Example or a Sentence out of the Other Books that belong not to it, (as oncehenameth c jW/Vfc, and once the ^ Macca- les'y J (or in like manner otherwhiles he citeththe J Apocryphal ^ Book of Efay^ and the 4th Book ^ o/Ef-

dr as J and the § Prophecie of Henoch y which no man ever yet accompted among the CERTAINE and CANONICAL BOOKS of SCRIPTURE.

* TcrtuIIian. comra Marcion* Carm. lib. 4.cap. 7. Alarum numerusantiquaVOLVMINAJigmt EjfefatisCertaVlQINTI^AtVORlSJA, Q^ADmmcecmreviau ir tempera Pads. Hdcco- h£rer€ NOVO turn FOEDERE cmtia videmus'. Sic quoque Johannes, fie pwdh SPlKlWSille JOT NVMEKO SqUs SENIOKTBVS, istc. a S. Hicron, in PrologoGjleato. hii XXil Volu- ndnafkpptitantur. b Idem S. Hicr, in eodem Prol. Quanqu^m Nonnulli RVTH ^ CHINOIH in- ter Hagioirapbafiriptitentify bos Libros in SVOputent W MEKO fu\putandos % acper hoc ejfe Prif' cs, Legis Libros XXIIII i quosfub Numero XXllII Semorum Apocalypftf Johannu indudi adordntes Agnum, fy Coronas fuas proftratis vultibus offerentes, (fy-c^ c Li br. dc Monog. C4p. 17. d )Li b. advcrsusjud.c.4. e Libr. de patience. 14. Scorp.c. 10. SeCarra. contra Marc. Jib. 3. eap. ^. / tib. de habiCt mul. cap.^, & contra'Marcion. loco cit. g Lib; dc Idololatria cap. 15. & dfi lu{)iyc«flau|. cap.Sv

ft' I^lirfYnr^ LII. h S. CYPRIAN was in this Age r^y'^«///>/5 /in.UQm. ^^f^^^i^^ . ^j^j i CLEMENT of ALEXANDRIA

250. was Origens Mafter,%iicrc is h\ neither , of their work^

» An,T>om.2 o 5 . ^^^y particular Catalogue of the Scriptures given m ^ but

it jnay be well preium'd^ that herein the Schollers.

wpre of the fame Belief, ^nd. had no other BIBLE

^0 fee thiQir ,CANQN>;then their M^fters l:iad before

' ithcm.

the Canon of the Scripture. \9

them. And therefore when ^ S. Cyprian had cited a Saying in one of the Jpocr, Books^ he thought it necef- ary to confirm that Saytm (as being too weak of it felf) by a proof from on^ oi the CanomcaL Tht Sentences that we find in Him io be taken out of ^ Tobit^zndi ^xh^Book ofmfdom^ &c. together with the ^4)/;i5g5 of the Sonne of Sirach alledg'd by c clement of Alex- andria are no greater proof, that they held them to be Canonical Farts o/5^r//;/-«rd'3 then their Citing of ^ the rt/V^and ^ FourthBooksofEfdrash^^T:ooi'iXh2it they held them likewife to be Canonical^ which on all fides are ^ confefs'd to have ever been Apocryphal. For to alledge an Author is one thing ; and to give him him the honor of Divine and Soveraigne author itie is another.

''' S. Gypr. de cper. & elccm. Uecftcfmres cbarjjjiimifiapoftrmuSiUt non quod Rdphael Anielttt dkh VEKJfAlIS tEStJMONIO COMPROBEMVS, In Ambus Ap9flolorum,(fy-c. gfjidreipro* bdttme compertum eft. a S. Cypr. dc opcrc & Elcemofynis. Et mncfitiymando tlbi^ftrii Dee in "veritatCyffy'c, b /i/Ep. 52. Cum fcriptum fit, Dtus mortemnon fecity & jrjibi. c Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 7. Citat.cap.4. Ecclefiafiki. & ait. Sequentes aunm Scripturaseonfirmemus quoddiSum fftj&c, d S. Cypr. Epift.74» Relics errore fequamuT veritatem, Scientes quia cjr apudEfdram Veritas vicity ficut SCRIPfVM eft, Veritas manetyfyc,^ Efdr^^-J2. (^ ^.^9. d^c.v.eund.defin'^ gul. cleric, e Clem. Alex, lib. Strom, i. vide Eufeb. 1.6. c. 1 2« / BelUrm- de Verb. Dei. lib.i. C.20. Sed. Poftrcmo Apocrypbi funt Librilertius (^ Huartus Efdrdt, fy licet citentur hTatribus^ ta* men fine dubio nonfunt Canmici : cum anullo C end lid referantut in Canonem^ partus <J neque Hebroick mque OxMeinvenitur, ^ continet cap 6 . quddam fabuhfa de Pi fee Henoch i^ Leviathan, quos Afaria caper e nonpoterant ; qudt Rabbinorum tahnudJSkrum /omnia funt, Itaqhe mirandum eSquid Oenebrardo ^cnit in mentem, ^c.

Chap. VI.

The TeHimony of the Ancient Fathers in the Fourth Century.

^III'l Y 7^ ^^^ ^^ ' EVSEBIUS, (who was ,^^ rr)^^ XA/ the chiefeft Metropolitan of all the ^^^ ^^^-j ^ ^ Churches in l^e^i^^^ and the^Eldcft 110^

40

J Scholajlical Hijlorj of

of all the Ecckfiaftical Writers in this Fourth Century^) the Teftimonies of MELITO and ORIGEN before recited. And becaufe he recitcth them fo, as that he doth alfo 4/;/?roi;^ thenij and preffe the iV^r^j]///> b of knowing and Kecor^ling them to all VoUQtitie ^ Wcare to reckon him likewife in the Number of our Other WitnefTes : And the rather becaufe his owne Tefti- monie is clcerely given us to this purpofe in many other places oihis ivorks befides ; As Firll, where he fayes, ^ That ^k>4//^W5 of thofe Books, which bear the Names of the mfdome of Salomon^ and the mfdome of the Sonne of Sirach^ are writers contradiBedy ox not allowed in the Canon, Secondly^ where a he Severeth the Maccahes from the other divine ^ooks of Scripturey and placeth them among the writings odofephus^ and Julius the African^ adding moreover, that they are no part of the Old Teftamenty ^ nor 'hooks received into the Holy Scriptures. Thirdly ^ where he laith, that he is not able to number the governors of the people, that were fet over the lewifti Nation after Zorobabel y a diftinft and exa6l manner, c hecaufe that from

b Eurcb.EccI.Hm. I.4,c.25.

e Id.l. 5.cap. I2*de Cltmtnte loqaens 5 VtiiuT (insult) ttiam taril Stripiurarnmle' ftimmnsi quibuscon- tradicmr ejus qua Sa- hmtnis SMpientiavo- catur.et e'jHs quA dicu turJefnSjritch, d Eufeb. Chron.1. 2. juxta verfionem S. Hieron. ffuc-ufq^Di' vinA Scrjptnrd He- brdorum AnmUs lem- poTMm continent. Ea veto qudpoflh£c kpud eosgefiafunt, txbibeo de Ubio Maccab£§^ rum, ir Jofephi, (fyr Africani Scripris. Ex Editione a.ScJaligeri.

^fflt )^ Nss/ix/k eu ivJia^rot ECfeii-

b Eod« Lib. ad an- nnm i.Seleuci Mac- eabaorH Hiftoria hinc fupputat Regnum Gi£- corum.VerHm HI LI- BRI INTER Dip"!' NAS SCRIPtV- RAS KON RECl-

FivmvR,

i Idem. lib. 8. demcnftr. Evang. ^od ab illo tempore ufque adtempora Servatorts KVLLVM ixtet SACRVM VOLVMEN, d S. Hicr. Proxm. Com. in Daniel. Et miror quefdam, irc.^ cum ^ Ongtnti ^ EVSE.BIVS fy Apollinarius aliiquc Ecdefiafiki viri fy Dolores Gr£cU has vr^ pones non haberi apud Hebrdos fattantnr, nee fe debere refpondere Porphyrio pro Hk qua UVLLAM SCRIPtVRy^ SACR^AVrORlTATEM pr Abeam, e Sixr. Scnenf. bibl. Sanft. lib. 4. in vcrbo, Eufebius. Et cum Divinorum Likrorum effet Studioffimus, plura ad ipforum elucidatienem compQ* frit volumina ', fecutus in his Origenem, cujusadmtratory {^fedulwfuit imitator. HorumqitAadlO* nVS DlVlNM SCRIPtVRM intelligentiam pertinent , hAc funt , LISRORVM OMNIVM V. T. qui in CANONE HEBRjEOKVM funt, inOrAcam Linguam Tranflittifi cu]us rccordantur Socrates ^SoJC^menus^ire, in^A 1^^ L^

OU

m

his time to the time of our Saviour y there was no SAC%fD BOOK ofSCRIPtVRE extant, and Fourthly, where he anfwcred Porphyrie objeding fomewhat out of the New Pieces annexed to the Book of Daniel in Greek, that ^ he was not hund to defend them, becaufe they had no Authority of Holy Scripture,yW\\tX(tunto we may adde what Sixtus of Sienna ^ reciteth of him

4l- ■ ;

the Canon of the Scriptures.

¥

out of the Ecclefiaftical Hiftories written next after his time. That be trmflatedKLL THE BOOKS of the OLD TESTAMENT extmintheU^mEVsrCPir NONj^^^o the Greek Tongue. Whichjif it be true, may certainly intorm us, what manner oi Scriptures ^ thoie were, whereof at the Commandment and charges of the Emperor Con^ amine the Great^ he caufed Fiftic ^opies to be fairly written in Parchment, and put in- to the Churchci then newly ereded at Co/iftammple. True it is, that other whiles he citcth the Scripture g of the LMaccahesyhnt m that place the word {Scripture) Signifieth no more with him then a Common writings as under the Same term elfcwhere he citeth the Scrip- ture h (or Writing j of lofephus and the Scripture » ^>4;^//?<e^x, befides fome other ^ of the like nature.

Llin. In his time was the Firfi Ge/^eral I Councel I 4yi ^nnt held at NICE ; Wherein were CCCXVIII Bijhops , -^^^^*

(oi Whom Himfelfe was one, and "^ One of the greateft in Eftimation among them all,; befides F/iefls and Deacous , with many multitudes of other ^hriftiansj gathered together from all the Provinces and Cliurches of the Roman 'Empire. In this Councell the Herefie oi Arrius was condemned by the Tefti- moniesand " Autority of the i/c?/)/ S^r/p^^r^j , which they were wont in fuch oAjJeml^lies » firft of all to r^^^'^^^f^X^^^ Produce and eminently to place in themidfihdore fZlit^LlcmEufii them •, and out of which alone both the nArians them- ^^«w> ^«^ non unm ur-

bis , fee' Orbis prop^ totius Epifcspatu dignus ejfet, n Thcodoret. hift.lib. i ♦ cap.7. Cum auttm ad caput negotii (de Aria- wfm9 dJJKdicandoJ accedendum ejfety Imperator ConfiantinusDenulEpjfcoposallecutus-^fMbindeyncuU cavity ut comuni Uuderent confenfut ^ in dijudicatione 'D()gmatHm calef^ium fcum in FROMPtV habe^ rent Evangelices, Apoffolicos fy PROPHEtlCOS Libros inde CenfuxA f^ytmlas pnerent. Ec Epi- flola Conftant. ad Ec cl. Alex, apnd Socrat. lib. i . c- p- & in Tom. i. Concil. Ex SCRIPtVRIS VlVimrVS INSPIRAtlSy -Ex veritate, 6* (xquifttjs LEG IS DIVINE Teflitnoniis.^c vera, fides confrmabatur. o Ep. Synod. Concil. Aquilien. (coi praMt S. Ambr.) ad Gratian. Val. fy Theodo$.Val.Impp.Frop»/fr<e in m?dh divindt Scriptura. Ec Cyrillusin ApoKad Theodof.dc Synod. Ephefina 0«rcumen. HI. SanSa Synodus Chriibim AJfefforem Capitis Loc9 adjunxit wenerandum enim Evangelium in Sanffo ThnnccoUocaW, in aures Sacerdotum damans:, jVStVM JVDICIVM JV- VIC ATE. Hinc paffim in Ate Concilior. Caked. & Conft. in Trullo, Anftpofnis in medio Sa-- cris^invielatisCodicibus,

G fclves.

/ Eufeb. de tIm

eonftan.i.4.cap.?5.

& Sccratcs Scholaft.

lib. I.e. 6 Q^inquA*

ginta ixempUria^feH

SACRM SCRIP^

IVRM velumina^

ad ufum Ecckftarum^

&c.

g Dcmonftr. Erang,

lib.p. &.lib.io.

h Prsp. Evangel.

lib lo.

* Prap.Er.l. 8.

K Ibid.i.io.

?i5.

m Sixc. Senenf. ub* fopra. Eufebius tan* taLiterarum Dtvina- rum Exercitaiione iu' ter Omnci fui fdculi Epifcnpos floruit, ut N bthfims Cwfta^titti Jmpcratoris Ehgio cf-

i^z A Scholafiical Hijlory of

fclves, and the Orthodox Fathers there difputed. But th^.iit\the(e Scriptures ihtic were none of the Contro- verted hooks contained, apeares by the Evidence and Atteftation, which both the ^ Emperor^ b EufeipiuSy and c AthamfiuSy (thechiefeft A£torsinf/?/VC(?«;?rf/) have hereunto given us. For it is no way probablc;^. that they would admit any Other Scriptures there, to be laid publickly before them for the deciding of that jirian Comroverjie^ then what both themfelvcs, and the Churches of ^ Alexaf^dria^Sc ^ rdejiinej from whence they came, had formerly acknowledged. ^ Befides, to that f place intht Proverbs of Salomon^wKichih^ t/irians g there prefled fo often againft the uncreated and Eternal Deitie of Chrift , among other clear Anfwcrs, that the Q^W/V^ F^r/?^y5 then returned to it by h Eufebius , this was one > That i thefe words were BUT ONCE to he foundin allthehl^'LE^i^.^ S. Bafil ^ likewife faid afterwards againft the ob- jeftions of Eunomius ;) which if the Book of the Son o/5/V4^ had bin then, in their accompt, any Authen- tick Part ot their BIBLE, could not have been affir- med by them : for to the fame purpofe are thofe words . to be found again in f Ec^lefiafticus. The Authority of the Councel ofVjce hath ever been great and vene- rable in the Church ^ and as in many other matters of importance, fo in this^ we have juft reafontoplead it againft the Contrivers of the New Scripture- (^anon ; for which they can pretend nothing out oUhis Ccun- ceK And the words that they bring out of S. Hierome^

4'S'jpra, ad lit. c. Libn PKOPHEtlCJ, <i^ Scrjptur£ DIVINIIVS IKSPJKArj^., of wh'ch kinde afccr the Prophet Mdacbi until Chrifts time there were ncMie. p. 40. ad lir. c« b Supr^, Num. t3« c Infra, Numb. $5. d Supra, in OrJgine. e Supr^ in Afelitone^ f Prov. 8. 22, 23' Vomhus creavit me ab initio, Ki/f/©- %>t7j(ri /ixi, &g, g In Aft. Cokc. Nic; h Ibidem. / Apud Socrac.Jib« 2. cap. 21. '£/ ^amj vvrf -^d^l^i ivel-^Ktiy fee. htS. Baf. adv. Eiinom. "Athc^ h TruTzcK Tcuf '^±-pm «f>t7«/ ; Ku'et©: iKTjcn' fxiy &c. t Ecci05..24,i4. Al^i'iifJ9 i^ ante f£CHlacr(atj fuTi'^yct ^12, bmiiius ^ui cuavitrne^

^^ concern •

the Canon of the Scripture.

45

^ concerning tlie Book of Judith^ (which they c fay he acknowledged to have been Canoniz,''d^ and received into the number of Divine Scriptures^ by thefe'jSlJcen Fa- thers^ ) will not be made to fcrvc or reach to their purpofc. I. For Fir ft, S, Hier0}n€ is other whiles in their account as great an Adverjary to them in this cafe, as any of the Fathers befides ^ and therefore da they refufe his judgement, and fay that ^ they are not hound herein to follow it. 2. Secondly, it is well known what S, Hieromes own miiid was both about thisy and the Other Bosks which they have lately exalted into the Divine Canon^ for in that very plac^ which they pro- duce here for the Reception of Judith imhc Nicen Councely lie fayes that ^ the Hebrem (that is, the He/- lenifl jfetPSj or tho, Hebrews converted to Chrifianitie) So received itj •as not to judge an) matter ofControverJie in Religion by it : and elfwhere, that c though the Church reads it^ yet it is not received by the Church into the Num- ber of Canonical Scriptures. 3. Thirdly, neither doth he here lay, that the Co^/irf/o/X^/V^ufelf made any (uch accompt of that Book, but that only it was (o d ^^^ .^^ ,,^^ ^.^^^^^^^

prdf. in Judith^ Ec cap.12.Scft.r4 Libium jHdith egregium tfftimonium habere a Synods Nie£Tta i, cmnum Sjnoderum gensralium celeberrimt teftatur S. JHieronymusfrdtf. in Judith. ^Ighm tefle Hieronyms Nic£mSynodpu Librum Judith it a retuUt in Numerttm Sacrorum Librorurrit ut eum idamum tjfe cerfiierit ad jidd dogmata confirmanda' Binius in Notis id Concil. Licdic. Liber Judith autoritate hu]ut Provincialis Conalii in- ttr Apocrypbof rcjicitur, quern ttSe S. Hieron. Fanes Nic, Cenc. velut facr of auburn, in Canonem Scrips tuxdi receferunt. Ibid, (lua de Canonicis Libris in Magna Oecum. Cone, mag'fia conftdtratione decreta erant Catharinus in Cajetan.PamcL'n Symb.Ruff Gcncbr.chr.Pcrron Rtplic. a Ganus dc locis Theolog. lib. 2. cap. 11. Fateor enim tempore S. Hierenymi quod NV SC tenemus^ idnon fuiffeadeo certum.—Kec enim verum efty in Li bris Canonicis decefmndis EccUfin ReguUm ejfe Hierai^ymum : quad Cajetanusperperhm , ne dicam ptrniciose exiftimavit. Hie quippe (ut Jo. Cod^us verkdixit^) inConnu- mtratio^e Canonicorum Librorum V, J. Jifephum fecutus eff, qui in t.lib.adverjus Apmem^ ex Ma* jorum f^orum traditiane Cut intuit J XXU Libros enumerat, Autor efl Eufcbiuslib. %»c.^.(i^ 19. —AGelafioveron^mprobaiurSententiaffieronymi in Cancne San^ArumScripturarutn, b 5. Hier. prscf. in Judith. Apud Hehrjtos Libtr Juditlj inter Hagtographn (Apocrypha) /e^ifwr, cu]us Aut<^ri^ Us ad rcboranda ilia qu£ in comemionem veniunt MINVS IDONEA yudicaiur. c idem przf. in Libr. Salom. Librum Judith legit qui detn EccUfta, fed eum inter CANONCa^ Scrip'uratnon recipit. Et in prol. gil. Liber Judith mneftinCanone, And more then this we fay not of it our fclvcs. d Idem, ubi fupr^ prasf. in Judith. //««c Librum Kic&ua Synodiis LE^IIVK €omputa^e,^c,

G 2 reported^

b S. Hicr. prjf. in Libr. Judith, fedquja hunc Ltbrum Symdut Nic ana in numero 6'. Scripturnrum legitur computaffe , acqu xvi poftuUtioni veftrjSy im* mlexa^ionij(^c,

c Eiiron.Anoal.T.5. Anno?2$.Scft.T57- Sluis enim neget^ imh quit nen affirwety atqj tuth conjirmetj inea- dem Magna SynodD Nicana de divinit Scripturis Authemicis tditum ejfe Camnem ? cutn S, Hiercnymtti in praf.fuper Lib Judit^ C^c. Bellarm. dc V, Dei, lib. !^ cap. 10. Seft. Altero. Ve Li^ bro Juditb fuit initio dubjtatum, tamenNi- cana Sy nodus eum Li- brum in Canonem re-

44-

A Scholaftical Hijlory of

I Supra pag, 43. td. lit. c.

€ Erafm. in Cenf. prxfat. Hieron. Kon affirmat Hieronymus approbatunfujjfe hunc Likum Judith in 5>- nodo KicAnay fed aity in numero SMterarH LEOITVK apHtajfe, d Staplcton lib. 9. princip. c. 1 2. HietQ- nimuf hoc dt Synodo Uic£na tantum EX FAMA refejuvide- tur, Synsdus , inqitit^ LEGirvX compM thffe, nam alibi apcyti- dubitat,

e Ljndanas li.;. Pa- ii«pl. c. 5. Sed LE- (jJtVK computAJfe , ait, Hieronimus, quod mihi dubitantis fufpi- cienem fubindicare w- i^rMr.-&csceraqiue fe^.pag«4$.adliLb. SalmeroQDi(p.2.ad Sea. Second o. Nieu Libru Judith^ ut Lib. Sap. 79b. isc, afft' ruit tjfe Apocrypbn. A Cofta Iib.2. dc Chri- fto revclaro cap. i ^. Nebr. LibrujHdithl Canont eximit^ which he would never have done, if he had bc- lieved,that the Conn- eel of Nice had recei- ved it into the CA- 2S0K

/Cone. Laod. infia nmnb. $9. I Su{ .nu.5?. b Inf.citand.nii.5$«

*Infrjlcican.nu,64.

8c 57.

4 Baron. &BelIarm.

ubifi]p.p.4Si^dlit.c.

reprtedy md faid of that Councel by fome Others^ (for in the ABs of this Councel thQTQ is no fuch thing to be foundj ) which is far ftiort of that extravagant fenfe, whereunto ^ the CardinAlls and their followers would ftretch his words. And that S. Hi eromeai^vmtd not any thing of his own minde herein, is ingenuoufly confefs'd not only by c £r^|w«5 who conienrs with him, but by ^ *S'^4/;/f^o;?likewifeand ^ Dizers Others that differ from him in his judgment oi thefe Books^ 4. Fourthly, if the Co«>?^^/o/>Ar/V^ had approved this Book ofJudithyWhy did the Councel of ^ Laodicea (which was held fortie yeeres after) rejed it ? or why did g Eufehius and h Athmafius , (who knew better what was done in the Councel ofNicey whereat they affifted^ then any others that could tell 5. Hierome what lome unknown perfon had written of it,) put both it, and all the reft, thztthtCouncel of Laodicea reje- cted, out of the Scripture Canon received in the Church from the Apoftles time to theirs I befides whom, wc have "^ Epiphanius making honorable mention of the t^icen Councely and ^ S. Hilary that fuffered much trouble and exile for it, together with ^ S. Bafily * S. Greg, Kazianzen^ and * Amphilochius^ (all of themneerer toitin timethcn S. Hierome v/Sis^) that never heard of any fuch Book to have been received and Canoniz'd in it. 5. Fiftly, To be Vjtmbredot '%Sad with the Scriptures for the better edifying of Manners^ and to be of Squall Authoritie with them for the determining of any Controverfie belonging to Taith are Two Diflfcrent things : In the firft (enfe we receive the Boek of Judith our felves ^ inthefecond neither did S. Hierome nor the Councel of Nice re- ceive it. 6. And therefore laftly, they that urge the decree and Authority of this Councel agsiinii. us in a one place, are content, upon better advife taken, to Re-^

fall

the Canen of the Scriptures. ^5

^all themf elves in ^ another^ and to confeffc, a that there was mfuch Deter^nination made ty the Church (^that is, neither by any Councel^ or Fathers in the Church, ) before S, Hierome's time. But the BifhopofT^jtrmonde fhali conclude this defence for us, againft all them that oppofe the Councel of Nice tous. For (as great a Roman- (^atholick as other- wife he is) after this manner he plead's our cafe. '^ ^ That, if the Ntcen Councet «^ held the Book of Judith-^ (^and the other Bookes of ^^ that Ranke) to be Canonical, why did the Councel '« ofLaodicea omit it I And wliy did Naz,ianzen make ^^ no mention of it I sMierome leemeth to me to fpeak " as one that doubted of it 5 unleffe a man might thinks *^ that this and many more Decrees befides, which the ^^ Councel of Nice made, were afterwards fared away ^^ from it by fraudulent Hereticks j whereunto I can- ^« not give my affent for the religious honor that I

*■ Baronlus in Append, Tom. lo.notationead An.^aJ^Sc^. i$8. qu» cum prlmSm conficicnj Anralcs putaflct Dtcretum de Libra Judith in Synedi Nicdna fttiffefaifum^ ^iqy it^ iS.Hieronyno diSum, poftcamutavitfentcntiamj&ait j Haud affirmandum emninh exj^imarem Canonemde Ubrir Sacris ftatutiim effe <J Concilie Nic^o, l quo nermntm aufumfuiffe reccdere/jure debet exiflimari. Sed n^m ex Canone de Sacrh Libris cmfe3o idaffcrwfe Hieronymum. vtrum potih ex AHis ejus (qase nufquinn fjdtnrurj in quibus obiter citatus idem Liber inventus fuerit, nifidixerimus Librum quern apudOcci^ iintaUs invenerit, fyc. a Bellarm. de Vcrbo Dei, lib. i . cap. i o. Admitte Hieronymum in eafuijfe efinione (Ecclefiam non tantum fudaicamt fed ctUm ChrinianamUhTosJudith,tebJafyMacc4b» itiere quidem, fed eos inter CanoMcas Scripturas nonrecipere) quia XONDVAt GENERALE CONCh LIVM D£ ms LIBRIS ALIf^JD StArVERAt. Ubi fatcri cam ncccflc cfl ConcilimNi- tdnum Nihil dcHiftoria7«^itA<< ftatuiiTc, Mclch. Canus, de loc. Theol 1.2. c.ii. At tempore Kuffini (Hieronymi aequalis) res NONDVM ERAt DEfMTA. b Gol. Lindanus Epifcopus oUm Rurcm. in Panopl. I.^. c.%: Si Nicana Synodui Librum Judith (cumaliis) in Canenem redeye- rat , cur Annis 80 (debaiffet dictre 40) poif, enm non accenfet Syntdus Laodicena ? Cur Na!(ian7^enit4 ejus non meminit ? Sed Legitnr comfutajfe, ait tiieronymus, quod mihi dubitantis opinionem fubindicare videtur y nififortaffe quis epinetur-, hunc de Libris Canenicis Nicdnum Canmem^ unh cnmpiurjmis aliisy fbrc. bdreticorumfraudefuiffe accifum ? cui ne fuffragemur, cogitpia de SanHijfimk P ambus in Coneu Ho Laodieeno congregatis exij^imatio. Non iUos eh etate , qu& Canonum Scienti4 inprimis ernabat EpifcO' f«/, tamfuiffefui fy nominis qfir ogtcii oblitos, ut illesaut nefeierint,aut deftdtratos non requifierint. Ad' bdCifi verh legimr quod ait Hieron^muiLEOl, Librum Judith Concilium Nicdnum inter Canonicos CM i^mitC^nomeoiJ<^ompMt&lfe,quidftbivulty quod idem prdf. in Libros Salom, Scribit, Ecclefiam Li^ bros Judith y tobidi, ^c. legere quidem,fed inter S. Scripturat non recipere ? veritm nihil hac de re in Coiu- cilio Nicdno fuijfe definitum ut exiflimem, invitat quod hunc Laodicenum de Scriptw^is Canonicis Canonem, unh cum reliquis, Stnodus Con^antinopolitand VI. in Trulhy approbavity quod minimi videturfallura, fh dtfignatum k CCCXHIL illis Pambus Nicdnis^ DoBijJimis ]uxth as San^Uffimis, Lasdhcni aut Mn re* €epijknt, ant Deairtajfm Sacrarum Scripturarum CANONEM*

«beai

A <j A Scholajiical Hijlory of

^<^b^SLt to the fathers of Laodicea. Who in that age, ^ when Bifhops knew the Canons of the Church beft^ «^ and when it was their great commendation to be '^skilfull in thera^ could not be fo far negligent both «c of their credit, and their dutie, as neither to know <^ them, if they were extmt:^ nor to feek after them, «^ if they were lo^. Befides, if that were true^ which ^^S, Hierome faith was read of the Book of Judith^ that ^^ the Nicen Fathers took it into the Canon^ how fhall «^ we conflrue that which he writes in his Preface he- ^^fore the Books of Salomon , That though the Church ^' indeed read's the Hijlory of Judith andTobit^i^c. Yet ^^ it doth not %eceive them into the Number of Canonical ^^ Scriptures ^ But that the T^^/V^/? Co«;?r^/ determined ^'nothing in this matter, I am the rather induced to « believe, for that the Sixth General Councel at Conftan-* ^^ tinople approved the Canon of Laodicea ; which it ^<^ would never have done, if the Fathers that met ^^ there, had either rejeded, or mutilated the Canofs ^^ of Nice.

Jn.T)om. ^^- ^^ ^^^^§ ^^^^^ ^y^^ ^^"^^' ^ ^* '^^'^A-

N ASlllS was made Patriarch of Alexandria 5 whom 2±0. the Nicen Councel had appointed to write fo'5 Lf^f^r^

unto all other Churches , from yeer to yeer , that they might certainly know when to keep their Ea^er. And to that purpofe the Patriarchs of this Sea fent their Pafchal Epifiles abroad upon every annual Return of the Epiphanie. In thefe Epifiles they were wont othcrwhiles to give inftrudlions likewife concerning any point of Religion, which they thought needful! to be publifhed unto the people. And bccaufc ATHA- NASIUS had among other things underflood, that certain z^pocryphal Books went about in thofc dayesj, under the name of Sacred and Divine Scriptures^ he thought it a duty belonging to him, in that Office of a Patriarch to inform the Churches throughout all

Chriftcn-

the Canon of the Script we.

4-7

Chriftendomc, what were the Certain and undoubted Scriptures both oi the old and NexfTejlament. Thcre- fore, in One of his ^ Pajcbal ^pifiles he giveth them a pe^feB Catalogue as well of the C^/^o/^/V^/, as ofthe Ecclejiaftical Bocks , then received by the Orthodox Chrijiians 5 and chargeth them to abftain from all other Apocryphal n^ritings introduced by Heretic^s. And firftj he declareth 3 That ^ All the Books oi thQ

Old Teflament are in Number XXII. Naming them one after anotl^rj in the fame order, that we do (ashkewife he doth thofeoftheiV^/j?;) Then

now

he addeth. That tbefe Books ONLY be the Fount aines

<« 5. Athanaf. Eptft, 59«m2. Tom.opcr; & apud Ealfamoncm p.9ao. 5**^ quoniam

of Salvation^ from whence all DoBrine of Piety and ntbVauum'ut^'i<it^-^

Religion is FreacVd^ and whereunto none ought to ^'"''^ scripturas ad

adde, nor none to ^^^r/zfl^ any thing from them. And '^t^Zt^tlZ'l!:'!:^-

alter wards m the end, to diltinguilh thele C^/^o/^r^/ modHmfafpfttadco-

Books the more e^si&lyjivom them which were termed rmhksPaMiHsyiiqui

only Ecclefiafticaljhchdd it ^ necelTary to tell them, fiS^lberrm.^'tx

That there were al(b fome 0//?fy jBoo^y, not admitted quorundam hominm

mo the canon of the Bthle, but regiftred and propofed l^l^l^^' ^^Z

by the Fathers of the Churchy to be read by thole that decfptijeinccpsinA-

were A^^fi^ -5^j^//?/?^5 in Religion, fuch as d The mf dame ^i^ <i^*dkmurApC'

ef Salomon^ The wifdome of' the Sonne of S track ^E^her anr! Ex^hucrprew-

(10 be underftood of the Greek Additions to Sjther^ tionc Hervcti.

for e clfwhereheacknowled2eththei//;ftoryo/£/f/;^^, l/^"'^^^'''^^''^^

wen we have from the Hebrews to be Canonical) Judith^ acwS? ^a^k^^ Ct^

Tobit:, and a Book called The Ap.oflles DoEirinej befides, ^^* rf^ex^i^^jri^

The Paftor of Hermes, Of the Mac cab es and Sufanna -t^ j ^^i^^}^^ ^^ll

here is no mention, (peradventure omitted in the vof^v %siv tKsf.<^v

Tranfcript, ) but he will name them alfo, and give ^^Z^^^dImI

them their ^ own e place by and by,. In the mean -muTtt ^>.ai -^^ (ro-

while,. the diftindion which he makes here between '^p'^-'^ ^Wt^/^

tvetyyiKil^iTziti fjunS^Hi TtVTv If Im^A'^inm-, &c. c ^^Ibid. 'A>a' tviv^yirrhHov^Ait^^Hcu cr^^^fju }y TBUTC ^Afav etvetfteucof ui ov %^ iL) iri^ ^tChict Thivv 'i^o!^V, » Jt^VOVti^O" f.^a^^,Scc, d Ibid. 2o^totcriiA0/M4>fOf ;i^ ap^irtov^;)^i &c, e Vide nisUiib.S*^. / Yide^, numb. $6. f Yidcaumb.^o.

the.

+8

J Scholajlical Hi/iory of

the Canonical and the Ecclejiaftieal Books ^ fevering all other Apocryphal writings from them both 5 (of which ^r//;/f D/i;///oAt we (hall give a further acompt e here- after,^ is in this place propofed by him ^ as a mat- ter conflantly Delivered inih^ Churchy from the Apo^Ues day cs to his.

* Epift.citata. We<AV6p,8cc. Qiionkm nonnuUtauft funh eA^£ dtcuntur Apocrypha fibicomptnne^ 6* en Dwin£Scriptur£p€pnifceret (de quare ctrtiores faffi fumuSi) mihi qvoque vifitm tft ^ Germtnis fratribus admonitOy ab alto per feumtxprntrty qui in CANONEM recepti^ ^ traditiy ^ crcdunm ejfe DirrVI LIBRIy -^utrndmodlimtradiufknt PATRIBVS, qui AB INITIO ipfiverbi Afpc^o- W & Mmjftrifuermu

4 S. Athanaf.Synop-

fisSacr.Scripturaj,

b Du. Perron. Rcpl.

1.1. c $0.

€ Serar. Proloq. 4.

in Judith. Grecfer.

dct lib.i.c.7.

d Baron.adAn.342.

Sea.41.

e Athanaf. Apol. ad

Conftancium. Imp.

/ Bell.d^ Vcrb.DcJ,

J.i.c.7.Sca. 1.&2.

g Catena Gr. Patr. iiirenucloc cic.

LVL Among other Works of S. ATHANA- SIUS there is a Book which is called, a ^ perfeE^ Fiew of the Scriptures. And though ^ Card.Perron^ and c Some Others (becaufc it maketh fo much againft them,) would not have it to be hiSy but written by fome latter Greeks^ yet d Card. Baronius^ (being in this more ingenuous then Du Perron is,) proveth it out of e Athanafius himfelf , to be his owne work : And f Card. Bellarmine citeth it very often , without any fcruple againft it, f like as g moft men doe befides, ) under his Name. However it be 3 if ^^ were the Author of it, his former Tcftimony for us will be the more enlarged and confirmed by it; Andifiome Other of the Ancient Fathers wrote it, (as fo much we may prefume upon, at the leaft, for a Card. Perron brings no rcafon, to prove that it was any later writer^ then have we got another Old wit nefs to dcpok for us no Icffe then ATHANASIUS doth him{elf. i. For fir ft ^ 7he Books arehereT^umbred as they were before ^ and he acknowledgeth no Other Scriptures to be Cano^ nical among the-^ ^ ChriftianSy then what are likewife

i^i ac incipit tnumtrare.Genefis^Exod.^c. QnumcnHmcraiTtt,rubiicit, 'O//? TUH^vovi^ou^'df &c. Sunt in univerfum vettrit teftamemi Libr'i CamnUi XXIL Pares Numero Uteris HehrAontm, c Ibid. rifltGrtt y^du^n ifMv Xe(?7Ar«i', Sec Omnis Noffra^ qui CMRISTIAM fumusy Scriptura Divinitis eSi infpirarta. Libras auttn habet non indtfinitos, fed CEKTO CANONE cmpreb^njos. £t cnumerat ut fuprsi,

fo

4 Loco citato.

b S. Athanaf. in Sy- nopfi S. Scrip, Kcu Ifj, gee. Et veterU quide Teftamemi funt

the Canon of the Scripture,

49

io accompted to be among the Hebrews. Which is againft the common Evafion^ that "^ Card. Bellarm. ^error?^ and their followers here make^ when they an- Iwer US5 that the Fathers^ whom we produce againft them never intended the Chriflian but the Jem f Camu only, in numbring no more then XXI f Books oi the OLD TESTAMENT. For in this place Atham[ms{^% Melitofirtgen^ and Eufebius before) numbers no more for them both 5 & layes the Canon of the one^ as a foun- dation for the Other. 2. Secondly, in the next place he addcth, a Xhat befides thefe there be alfo 5ow^ O/^fr Books which are not Received mto the {oxmex C^non^ but Reckoned without^ and Read only to Beginners for their better inftruftion in Manners, that is to fay. The jvifdome of Solomony and the reft heioxc recited, 3, Thirdly,in the Conclufion he mentioneth ^ the Books of the Maccabes^ and the Story ofSufanna together with the fcarmer 5 but gives this note upon them all, That they are in the Vjumher ofthofe Bocks which be contra- diBed. In this EnumerSLtionwe UndThe Book of Efther named ; but it is that Book ofEfther which beginneth c (as there he faith himlelf,) with the ID re am of Mordecai 5 and not that Canonical Hiftory of Efther^ which in Our Bibles ftandeth next in order to Szray and "Hehemiah. For this he acknowledgeth to be among thofe Books^ ^ that the Hebrews had in their Canon of the Bible 5 And though he makes no Particular mention of it, when he reciteth the reft which belong properly to that Canon^ yet he omitteth not to give us notice immediately after, ^ That as Ruth was

^A'nji7rtLKeudiiJ)dL^Kii. Per n7BA«/t«t/V^ autcmvidcturintclligi Liber, qui dicicur iV^c'-tf- b&rirwn lertius, (ea recenfens qux a Ptokm&9 Philepatore advcrsns Judcos in /Egypto fa^a funt,) qui que habctur in Exemplaribus LXX hodie innpreffis. c Ibid« Inhium ejus hoc tii^ An, 2. reS" nante Artaxerxs;^c. Somnhm vidh Mardoch^us^fy'c. Hscc autem verba funt nonHebrxi Libri, fed Graci, qui adfutnscft j uti in vulgata Latina annotatur* And fo begins our Apocryphal Eflher, d Ibid. poft^Canonicorum Librorum Enumerationcm fubjungit, & rcftrc, )i^vovi^fe^ ^rttp* e^^!/- tis Tov EcS-Hf . e Ibid.— ;^ iiy /^ Pb-S- ^ rmv kcatwp «V h QtQhm cte«^//e<{v»t,> ttj' q Ec9-a^

«,;? Iniov er. H (fome-

* PafTim, iocls Sa- pcriiiscitatis. f Baron. Anno 17 1^ Scd.5.deMelltonc. Ex Cansne Hebr^orn. TAmVM Ubros re^ cetifuit. Yet Melit§ went to the Apeftoli^ cal Churchts of the Chrifiians to bee rightly informed in it, and brought his Catalogue of the Ca* nonical Beokes from them.

a S. Athanaf. in Sy- nopfj.S. Script. *E;c- 7TJ Q rinruv ticn Ttd^

&c. Extr^ verh hos Libros funt etiam ali^ nsmulliV^T^ mnqui- dm in CANONEM recepti,fed iui tantiim Catechumenis praU" guntur^ Hi funt Sa* pientky Sirac^Efther, Judith ^ Tobias. b Ibid, in fine:, T«

fJ^ Giw *{'77A.S^'/U€-

va TVi fittXeuAf^ &c. Illos qu'idim , quibui eontradicitur , K. T. Libros fupT^ recit&vi* rnus^ 'ueluti funt Sa- pjeniid Sohmenis, Sy* rac, EUhtr , Judith^ iy Tobit. Siuj ex^x- VGiii 3 )^ Tewnt ri^iQ^

50

A Scholajiical Htjlorj of

f fomctimcs) compted One Book with the J^dges^ {q was thh with Amiher '^ (that 0;/;(fr was jE^iyvr, who is moft probably held c to have been the Author of it.) And this I take to be a far better reafon, why S. Aiha^afjus^ here, did not fpsciallj name it, then that which ^ Sixtus-y the Dominican^ gives us for it in his BihliQtheqfie ; where he rejedeth the Isfew additions made to this Book ofEjlher^ as we our felves do, toge- ther with AthanaJiuSy and all the Fathers before us : But that either, he or they (hould therefore rejed the Book of Efiher it felfj (which they never did,) becaufc of thefe later and uncanonical Pieces^th^t bad been annexed to it by the Hellenics -^ or that neither of thejn made any more EftimationoftheO/^^then they did of the Other y or thai this undouUed Book of S^fther was never received into the Cauon before the ThirdCouncel of Carthage '^a\\ thefe are but the ground- IcfTe and falle affertions of this Dominican Frier ^ for though ^ LM4ito and ^ Naz>ianzen named it, nor, yet they comprehended it under the name of EfraSy as they did alfo the Book of Nehemial?^ thefe Thrre being by » many accompted butfor O^Y.-and A:hanafms is io far from rejeBing it, that he refers to the Hehrepp Canon for it, where it was never wan- ting ; upon which Canon founding himfelf for the Qanon of the Chriftia^s^ (as he dotli expreffelyj he cannot, or at leaft he. ought not to be fo taken, as if he meant in his oa^ne judgment to vary from it. But that none received this Bock among the Canonical Scriptures before the Councel of Carthage^ is a manifefl^ untruth : For Origen and Eufehius reckon'd it, as received, (before 5) and on. this fide oithatCouncely

B*9:>k of Ruth from

tic B'-iok oi Ji^dgeS' (vWc p.^g.anr^p.iig )a$ v4//j<«». here did. a Sub E(rx nomine s'lwiK* tlhyty,c^< \nrt\\cy.LTimt Nehemitm (^ Eflberam, quosetiam ffiersnymus jnngif in petitione DemnU' ly & Rf^git'iivu «)"' ah co intrrprtt^rioncm conitn pofecbant , tertiui (inquit) Annui eft, quddfeni' l^ffcrihjiis^ il rtfcribiiJi, uiEfrd L'lbrum fyEStHer vobis ex Hebr^o tr<«n</rr<rfn Praf.in Efr.& Nch»

c IfidorMify.ORKf. lib.6,c.2.

d SIxc Ssn. Bibl. lib. I. Sta. I. Liber

E(ihtr ]uxta, ordimm Hibraki Canonis he Is^o leceriftndus effct. (fe Seft. a.) J^ofiri dutem Cediees ad fi- mm bujus volttminis Sex capitulaifite^pO' mnu Acciditvtrh ut propter has Appendu cum Laciniis, hinc m-< de quorundam Scripto^ rum temeritate infer- tafy Liber hie, qHnn- V!sHdr4kuf,(^ He^ braise receptus , fir\ tidmodum(i\\\'\ wh\c Sixtus).dpMi Ch ifli. ams CAnonicam Auto ■ ritatem rectperit, un- de nee ipfum Melito nee Nas^ian:(cnus in ter Sicros Librot enu xmrhunl : a^ Atha- vafiui in Synopft de Catalogo Canon'corum VslkminHm tanquam Nothum (hie vero Sisru^ falfascftjno vtinatim ahjeciti quern denique Cone, Carthi" ginenfe Tertium inter Sacra Vclumina com' pktavit

* ^ who to n^ake up The nnmbcr of vxii. f^iv^deH the

the Canon of the Scriptures. 51

we {hall produce the Teftimonies oi Sundry Others yXhat receive'd itjChcre after.) In the mean whilethe ohjedi- ons which ^ Card. ? err on and ^ Coccius pretend to bring out oi Athanapus^ for the Canonizing of Tohit^ Judith^ mfdom &c Ecclejiafiicus^undct the name oi Divine Scrip- tureSj arelome of them taken from luch writings as be c None ofhiSy but ^ confeffed to be Suppofititious ; and otherfome are exprefle ^ Paffages ot the Holy Scrip- tures themfelves, which need not thefe Forram Books to authorize them j the f reft are only fuch General Termes of fpecch, that they may be applyed (as they have been often) to O/kr Ecclefiaftical writings at well as tkefey and make nothing againft us.

a Du. Pcrron.RepI lib.i.cap.^o. ^ Cocc. TheOur. lib. 5. art. 9.12.17. c Athanaf dili?. cumArioLaod.cxhortac. adMonachos. Lib. de Virginitate d Nannius praf. in A than. Ba- ron. An. 3g8. Scd. 8. &. 9. Bcllarm. dc Ser. Eccl. e Athan. Epift. Dc Deer. Syn. Nican. & Orac 5. concra Arian. fe Apolog. dc Fug. / Epiit. Synod. Alex. & Synop.

LVII. ^ S. HILARY3 the BiOiop o{ Poitiers in ^ Jfi.T>om

France (a Man highly honoured by g S. Augufiine^ ' *

approved in all his writings by ^ LXXBifhops met 3^0.

together in a Councel at Rome^) was Contemporary - § ^^ ^

to AthanafiuSy and (uffered with him under the op- rdag. iib.^°cap*2.° *

predion and crueltie of the Arians-, by whom they * Gelaf.inConcyo.

were both exiled. From his Teftimonie concerning ^ s/Hfiar"pI*oi. cx-

the Canonical Books of Scripture (whcrin he agreed like- pian ?t. in pf^imos.

vvife with ^thanafius^ no lefle then he did in the ^ r^dlmam^^''

Articles of his Creed, ) we fhall have the Confent of cum Literarn mZi

the Latin Church with the G'/fifi^ in this Age, as we SirmoMsconvemrenr.

had it before in the Time o(OrigenandTertullian. mfMrRADniol

For after this manner doth S. HILARY ^ Number nes vetekvm

thofe BookSy and the Churches o( France then received ^f't^-tTrT- T^*

que ; Jcfu Nmvc Stxtus ',JVDJCVMfy KVtH Septimus *, i e5r 2 il EONOKVMin OSfavum ; ^^ 4mNinumiPARALIPOMENONDuoinDecimumftnt',SERMONES DIEKVM ESDR^ (m Duodecimum', SALOMONIS PROVERBIA, ECCLESIASTES. CANtlCA CASTICORVM h Tertium Dedmum, ffy' HuintHm Dtcimum. DVOOECIM autem PROPHETS in Sextum Dedmum. ESAIASDehde, (^ HIEREMIAS cumLAMENTATlONE ^ EPIStOLA,(qu£ habetur cap. 2^. Jeumh^O fedi^ VANIKL, ify'EZECMIELy fy JOB^ir ^StHER,Vigimi;'OmHmUhrQrum NVMERVM COmVMMEtit

W % no

5Z

A Scholajlical H'tjlorj of

no other. ^«The firft YivtoiMofesy thefixthof J^- ^^[uah 5 the feventh of Judges and Ruth 5 the Eighth *«ofthe I. and 2. o/iC/;?g5; the Ninth of the 3. and *f 4. of Kings y the Tenth of theTh^o Books called the ^< Chronicles^ the Eleventh oiEzra (wherein ^ehemiah *« was comprehended.) The Book of Pfalmes made ^^ the Twelfth 5 The Prauerls of Salomon ^ EcclefiafteSy ^^and the Song of Songs ma.dQ the Thirteenth, Four- ^^teenth and Fifteenth. The Tnpehe Prophets made the ^^ sixteenth. Then Jfaiahy and Jeremy together with his <^ Lamentations^ and his Epi^le (now the XXIX Chap- '^ ter of his Prophecy ; ) Daniel^ and Ezechiel^ and Jo^, ^^and E^hery make m^ the Full Number oi XXII Books^ Unto all which Enumeration he fetteth like wife his Prefacey f which is fpecially to be noted,) "^ That in this fort The Ancient Fathers had delivered over thefe Books to Pofteritie. And this Teftimonie is fa clecr 5 that Cardinal Bellarmine hath nothing to fay againft it, but t rangcth S. Hilary among thole AncientSy who herein evidently followed the Hebrew Canon of the Old Bible 5 and are therefore, by his own confcffion, fo to be underftood, a that they acknow- ledg'd not any of the Controverted Books to belong thereunto. ^ Some indeed there were in S. Hilary's time, who of their owne heads augmented the Number of XXII by adding the Books of To^/> and Judith ; but he approves them not. And though otherwhilcs he quoieth the Bookes of ^ mfdome^ d %t^T'm'lih-^t £r^/^y/^j?/V«y, c Tohity and f the MaccaleSyycth^^xt" miiOMNKs [mu, ^Y hc never intended to give them that Canonical JuditbySapkntiAEc' ^uthoritie^ which the 8 Law and Prophets had pQCUr^ 2S%,^r«; liarlyrefervedtothembyGorfhirafelf.

ab HehTAts.

I S. Hilar, loco cit. poA ennmcrationem prapdiftam. ^ibufdam autem VISVM eJ? , addith Tobja ^Judith , XXIIll Libros Stcundum Nmemm Grdcarum Liurarum connumerare, c S, Hil. m Pfalm. 127. d Id. in 7. Ca. fuper S. Match, e Id, in Pfal. u8. / IdinPfal. ia5. < Id. Ibid, Difcentes bsc Omnia d U^e, ^ Prophetis. & Eisapgcliis,

£ IbidjUtfupr^.i^? ItA fecnndum Tradi- fmes VE7EKVM tomfutantur,

b Bellarm. 6c Verb. Dei, Iib.i.c.2o.Scft. penult. Mulii VE* TERVMy lit Melu9y EpipbanJUf, HiUrim, ^c. in Cdtimt V. 7, txponendo ftcuij fiint Htbrsos,

the Canon of the Scripture.

n

Jn.T>om. 5d.

o.

h Catechefcs ad

II'

luminatos. .iQuiDialo|0 2.non- nulla affcrt ex Cacc- chcfi4.

k Qui Orat. g de I- mag. qu^dam cicac ex Cat 12. II S. Hieronymus dc Scrjptor. Ecclcf.

LVIII. -^ S. CYRIL Was Bi(hop of Jerusalem at the fame time when S. Athanafius was Patriarch of jUxmdria , and S. Hilary Bifhop of Poitiers, In the tlowcr of his Age he was famous in the Churchy B being the Author of thofe h Catechifiical Sermons or I/^fUtutio^Sj which are mentioned by S. Jerome^ cited both by Theodoret and ^ Damafcen^ ot Old, and are now, of late,' fthough not without Sufpition of fome corrupted paffages in them,) fet forth to the world. Among the Biihops met together in the Second Ge/ier at Coumel^tConftantinoplehQWOLS ^ rec- koned for One 0/ rfc^ Cfc/>/^ which render's his Tefti- monie to be the more confiderable withus. The ^' Catalogue then which he gave to his Auditors of the Canonical Books of Serif ture^^ was the lame at Jerufalemy that Origen and Athanafius gave to theirs at ^/fX4^?- dria^ every way agreeing with other Churches abroad , in the "kumher and Names of them all. Only the Vjime of Baruch-y (which is not the controverted ^Qok oi Baruchy ) is added here to Jeremie^ becaufe he

£ Socraf.hift.Ecc1. 1*1.5. G. 8. b S Cyril. Catech.4» (the fame that I'^fteo^oreKircd) de Sa- cra Scriptura. Hojutti '^ J)<hL<n(,Hmv iiuZi eu ^oTrnv^i ^ct^ea 'f -mtKeuS^ 7% i^ Keuvn^ Jia- SVkm^j &c Eet ve^i docent nos h Deo infpiratd V. ac N. Teftamenti Scriptur£i ^c, Kc) ipt\o(jut^i cmyvct)^ Tti£^ nf onKhnoittf, Tnltu /uSf/ eiffiy d-r^i'mKcudi^ thA^KHi jSi^A(Ji,&r. Vifce ^o- quefiudiose ab Ecdtfia, qui namfint V» t. Likri > neque mibi leges quicquam Apocryfhorum-divinaj tegt Scripturas V. t. Libros XXihquts LXXduointerpretes travflulerunt. Hos SOLOS medhare^ quos ^ in Ecelefiafecure tutoque rtchamns. Multo prudentiores te erant AFOSTOLI, VETERESUVE ILLl EPISCOPI, Ecclefi£ Antiftitef, qui hos tradiderunt^ tu ergo cum fts flius ECCLESIJE, Leges fy JnfiitutM Patrum ne evertis, corrumpafve. Ac veteris qujdem Infirumenti, ficut diximus, XXlILibru meditarty quos fi difcendiftudio teneris, me N&MINATIM enumeramey daoperamntmemineris. Legis fnim primt MO SIS Qunque Lihri funt^ Gen- Ex. Lev. Num. Deut, Veinde JESVS FILIVS Nave^ JWICVM una. cum KVtH Liber Septimus Numero: reliqmrnm autem Jiifloricorum Li- Irorum i & i. REG. Vnus Liber e^Hebr sis. Vnus item i & A' Similiterque apnd eos PARALl- FOMEKOl^ I 6* 2 unus efi Liber- ESVKM etiam i 6* 2 (id eft, Nchcmiar,) unus reputa- tus. ESTHER (ita fsepe compuubatur) Duodecimus liber eft; fy hi quidem hi florid funt. Scrip' If autem veriibusfunt fluinquey JOB, Liber PSALMORVM, PROVERBIA, ECCLESIASTES, ^ CAKJICVM CAHTTCORVMj qui Liber efi Septimus Vecimm, Acceduv^t ad hos Qidnque Fro- fbetki'y VVODECIM PROP HEtARVM Liber urns 'f ESAIj^unus-, Et JSREMJ^ cum Ba- Tuch^ Lamentatienibus^fy Epifiela-y Deinceps EZECHlELy turn DANIEL, qui Vicefimus StcutidtH^ efi V*Tr Novi auiem,^c,- Reliqui omnes EXTRANEl, Secundoque ^^co babeantur : iff qui in E^- tiepis non leguntuTf eos omnts nequt per tt tei4S, quernddmodum audifii, Ac de bis quidem ha^tik,

is

54

AScholaJlical Hifiory of

a Catcch. 4. & Cat. 9,ExSaf.fyEccL b S. Athanaf. Ep, Paulo ante liudacl,

fjS/JAfjSp,8cc, Li.bri Mfi quidem in Cane- nem relati. fed h Ma- pribus noVtris Pr^poji- ti^ ut Fntlegintur iisy qui primum accedunt,

c Et nihil ex 4p9' cry phis fegas, S. Cy- ril, locociraco. dDivinasJege Scrip- turas^ nempeV.t. Li- bres JrXn,quos LXX ■ Dm {nterpretes tranf- tklevunt. Id. ibid. - ^ f Neque enim i LXX- Senibks veifafiintfuj^- plementay ficHt nee in Hebrao codicehaben- tuT. Lud. Viv.in Aug. deciv. Dei. Iib/i8. c 3^1. SKpplemenium in Hebrdio nen babe- tur,fedex Gr£ci The- odmonif Edithne tratifcriptum eji. S. ScnJib.i.Bibi.Sca.

2.

is io often mentioned, and hath fo great a part in tha>t Firophede -yhm S. Cyril makes but Oae Book of them hth^ joyning the Lamentations and the Epi^lle of Jeremy with it befides, to complete , fand not to exceed,^ the Number ot XXII Booh in ail. For howfoever the Ancient Manner oi Dividing and Ordering them was otherwhiles fometimes different from one another, yet the Bookes themfelves, and the TSijiml^er oi thcruy were ftill the lame. We have cited S. Cyril's Tefti- monie here at large in the UHargin, Where, that we may not miftake him, when he forbiddeth the Read- ing of any Jpocryphal Book^ we are not to underftand him fo, as if he meant hcteby the Books of Tol^it and Judith:, and the reil of that Clafje^ which we now call Apocryphal (though we might more aptly call them Ecclejiajlicaly ) for he read them, and ^ quoted fome of them himfelf, being Such Booksy ^ that had been of ancient time received in the Churchy to be read un- to the People^ at their Firfi Entrance and Introdudion to a Chriftian life. By S. Qril's ^ Apocryphal Books therefore we are to underftand fome other difappro- ved and ohfcure jTritings^, that over and befides both the Canonic4l, and Scclefiaftical ^oo^/, certaine private i)crfons 0\ei^) went about to bring in, and recom- mend tothe church at Jerufalem^ as they had like wife endeavored to doe in the Church at Alexandria^ and Other places abroad. And whereas he fpecially ex- horteth them here, to ^ Read the XXII Books of the Old_ Teftamenty which the Septuagint tranjlated^ we are further from hence to oblerve, that although both he atjerufalem^ andAthanafius at Alexandria^ together with Other Churches^ had not the ufe of the Hebrew Bible among thern, but kept themielves only to the greek Tran/lation of the LXX, whcreunto were after- wards commonly e added thofe Ecclejiaflical Books which the Hellenijl Jem firft introduced, and received

into

the Canen of the Scriptures,

IS

tf ItaOriginesinEp.

ad Jul. Afric. Snp^ pkmemum Dun. apud LXX Interpretes ha- btri, d^ in Ecclefth Ifgi ah j fed Camnu cum elTc nufpiam af- fcric ', imo difcne ncgac in locis fupr^ ciutis.

into their Churches, that lo all the moft eminent Books ot Religion written in the Greek tongue before Chili's time might be put together and contayned in One Folume \ a yet nevcrthelefTe they were alwayes careful to prcfcrve the Honor o( the Hel^rew Cmon^ which confifted oiXXIlYiOoks only. Divinely inf fired ; and accurately to diftinguifh them from the ^^/f, which had but Ecclefiafiical Authoritie • A diftin£tion which our and other Reformed Churches are ftill carefull to keep up at this day.

LIX. Atha^nafms and Cyril were herein followed by all the Biiliops affembled together in xhe f ^ y, ^-^ COUNCEL of LAODICE A, out of (! Several Pro- ^t^* Dom. vinces in -^//^. Which was a Councel hM m fiich 2/>/L Reverence and Eftimation by All men in thofe elder ., j.^^^^^ « * . »Ages following, that The fanonsoik were generally nynExigmfm. ' '^ received into t The Code oftb^Vniverfal Church^whciQ + codex cako'^ the yeerCCCLXIIII is fpecified when it was held. S/j^'S/f- Baronius in his ^ Annals placeth it before the general fimam implrame Councel of Nice, (^but brinseth very weak Arguments ^'^''f^'^^^"*^- iflff^> to prove his Cnronologie ^ ) an(|^, » x!)tntus here a BarGn. Ann;ii. in followeth ^aronius ^ (whom for t^^; moft part- he Append, ad Tomum tran{bribes inalltoiVomuponthe ^^^^fe^fearing %%^^^:^::Z left the Yiook of Judith fl\ould''otherw_^d ftj3&r fom^ ^^f^/crn/w^ c^

ea-

prejudice, unleffe the greater Authoritie of the JV/V^;? £d!icHhmcL%^ '" Councel be reckoned to come after this Lacdlcem tafult! necTn^jsVia Synode , and reverfe the Conftitution that was here P^'°^^^^ '"'"^'o hMbea-

rum eadem Hatutnti- um, argumenium efty ante}<iQ£n. Conc.ea k Patrjbus Swodi Lae- dicenjt decreta fkiffe,

b Concil Tom.r, c In Notis ad Cone, Laodi'c. Scft. SubSilveftro Uber Judhh aumhaU hu]us PrmncUlis Cmciiil Laodi cent inter Apdcryphos rejicittir^ quern {S. ffier. tefle) Fatres Goncilii tiicMi vtlut Sacre-SanSfum in Camnem Scripture rec-epaunt, Oporteligitur csncedere hoc Laedicenfe ante ^icenum celebratum fuijfe y vel Saltenty quod di^uinconvenienikseft. Catholics EecleftJi Epjfc«^ f9i ea qudi de Canonkis Lihris in Magno Oecumehico Concilio Magna Cnnftderationc decreta erant,{it niag« • m crat hie Bar. &. Bin, inconfidcrinti?,) convdltre if retraliurc aufos fuijfe. d Niira. 54^:

place*

made concerning the Apocryphal Books of Scripture, For fo they prefume that the Councel of Nice did^ but upon what flender grounds they prclumed it, we have at large fct forth ^ before, and here we

56

A Scholafiical Hijiory of

&c.

t ConciU Laodic,

i^od «on Gfortetpri- vitQs Ffalmos in £c- c/r^4 legere , tfwt I./- brosnonCAnonicdSiftd filos Cinomcos veterk irnmt* HAcnuttm funt qu£ legi oportet v.t.Scripta, i. Oe- nefts, 2 Exod. i Le-

6jdjua,7jfudicej(^ Ruthy 8 EfleT, 9 Reg, I. 6' 2« 10 /Ir^. 9 Paralip.

place this S;';?<?^ of LAODICBA in that time and order which the Code hath affigned to it. In the laft e Canon whereof, (which in that Fmverfal Code is numbred to be the CLXIII.) this Decree was made, ^ That no 'Books which had been compofed only iy private perfons fhould he read in the Churchy nor any other that were not Canonical^ hut only thofe^which belonged to the CANON of the OLD ^WNEW TESTAMENT, that is to fay, of the OLD, Genefis^ Exodus^&cc. till we come to the Prophet Daniel^ which is there made the XXII Book ^ and of the NEW, Matthew^ Marky &c. till wc come to the Revelation of S. lohn^ which for the high and hidden myfteries that arcin it, was not then ufuaUy Read in their Churches^ no more then it is now in Ours. But for all the reft they number them3> as we do, and leave all the ControvertedBooks out oi their Accompt.

^4, II Pardip, i,

ib 2. 12 Efdr. I. e5r 2. (id eft Nchem.) 13 Liber Pptlmdrunit 14 Proverbia Sahmonis, 15 EccUft*

mQtSy 16 Cant. C antic, ij Jot, iB Duodecim Fnphtta, i^Ifaiof, 20 Jermi as (cumBarHch, La-

incntat. & Epiftola qua in Latina vcrfionc omittuntur.) 21 E^cch. 22 Danzf/. Now Antem 7*. h*s»

E-vangeliaiuatuor^i^c,

LX For the better underftanding of which C^;?^;?, and removing thofe 5'cruples that be otherwhiles rais'd about it ^ we are firft to confidcr, i . That they had an Ancient Cuftome in the Church to Read unto the People there, not only thofe Bocks which were properly and ftridly t Canonical^ but likewife » Some Other:, which were in honour among them, both for their Antiquitie , being written before Chrift's time , and for their many good Rules and Examples of Piety, that tended to edification, and the well ordering of Mens Lives, i. Of the Firft, fort were the XXII Books, which Mofes and the Prophets left behinde them ^ thefe they called Canonical 5 2. Of the Second fort were the Books of TT^^/V, Judith^ Ecclefiafti^ cus^ fvifdome^ and the Maccahes^ added by the Hellenifts

to

a S. Athan. ubi fup. S. Hicr. prafat. in Libr. Salom. Ruffin. in Symbolum.

I

the Canon of the Scriptures.

V

'^toth^ old TeflameMy and the Paftor of Hermes^ the .DoBrt/^e ef the Jlpojiles, and the Epiflle of Clement ^ lub- joyned by fame Others to the New -^ And the(ethey called ^ Bcclefiaftual Scriptures. 3. There were 0^/7^/* Books yet beiides thefe ot a Third fort , that divers Private men endeavoured to introduce among the people ^ which becaule they were found to be fraught with Erroneous and Pernicious DoBrines^ many uncer- tain and fabulous Relations being therewith in- ter mixed, the Fathers utterly /(?r^W to be ^^iti^/«^^^ Church at all. And thefe they properly called f Apocryphal Scriptures. Thofe that were of the Second %ank had otherwhiles by fome particular men the 'Hj'Yne of the 71fc/>rf5'c)r^ given them, bjdt the name of the Pir^ they never had, till after this\Age y and even then alfo, often were they caWd Apocryphal^ but Cano- nical very feldome j nor were they in thofe after Ages termed /b at all , otherwife then by a popular way of Exprefsion, and taking the wc^d Cano/dcal in a larger Senfe, then ever the Fatherstj^ok it in thefe Elder times of the Church. 4. Moreover of thole Ecclefiaftical BookSy which were permitted to he Read to the people-, they had both in this, and m the former Age, Divers Kinds. For in all places they had not one and the fame Cuftome ; nor were the Books of Toiit and Judith only, with the refl of that order, that were written before C^^rift came into the world, allowed to be Read in the Church ^ but SomeOtherheCideSj {Ecclefiaftical and profitable 5(?c/&5 alfoj that were writ- ten after his time. To which pur pole we have the Teftimonie of ^ EufehiuSy for Reading the Book of ^imsTanc EpiSokm HermeSy in fome Churches j and the Teftimonie both ^^f^f^^" & oiim,^ of b him and c Dionyfws d the Biftiop of Corinth, ZVcUfiVl.^'^^^^

niter legtfolere. c Apud. cund. I.4.C. 22. Celebravimus dim Dominicum, <^ Adtmnhims gratia (addit Eufcbiusrfn- tiqtto more) fy legimuf ^femper Ugemus priorem Clemtntis Epiftolam ad nos Scriptam. d Antiquus Scriptor. Eloqutntiamain^ ^ induftria nomint a S. Hier©nym» hudatus in lib de Script. Eccl.

I for

— I

* Ruff. ibid. j^«j

mnu legt quidemin Ecclefta maJQres ns- ftrivoluerunt, id. I- bid; Sciendum efi » qu9d fy alii Libri f^^U qui non CANO- ^iCIfed ECCLESI'. ASJICI h Mapribui appellati funt, ut cfi Sap, Salom, fy- alia Sapient ia qu£ didtur filii Siracy qui Liber apud Latinos HOG IPSO 0E13EKALI VOCABVLO EC' CLESlASTlcySapm pellatur, quo vocabuh non Auaot Libdlijed Scripture QpALU TAS cogmminata eft,' Ejufd. erdinis^ fyc. t SicuE Tunc ABa Petri, Evang. Pctrr^ Apocalyp. Petri, A^a Pauli, apud Eufcb. Hift. EcGlIib,? c,?. Item, Evang Them. Matth'idiy Andr. ab hdreticispubtiaie^a. Eod^Iib. cap 22. Item, Scripiura Apo^ cryph£ abbdreticisin publicum produSldi. A- pud eund.ii.4. C.2I^ ex Irenko.

a Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. h^*c.^.NovimusLi- brn Hermetitqui did' tur Pa§ior,publice £e- HumfuiffeinEcclejia. b Id. Jib. 3. CI 4. ATo-

58

A Scholajlical Hijlarj of

e A^han. ubi fapra.

mrtmtur Apocrypbi..

for Reading the Epiftle of dement^ in other Churches ; when they met together pMikely ta celebrate the Lord's Bay, And to the fame purpol'e we had the Teftimonie of e Athanafius in his /'^/ffcj/ E/;/^/^, mentioned be- fore, for the Reading oi The 1>oHri/2e of the Jpofilesy W,j^7bV no/^otiVrf, (which perad venture was the Book ofCmons fet forth under their Vjme^ few at firft, but in procelTe of time much augmentedjj and the 'book that was called The Paftor. All which being Ecclefiaflical writings and ufefull for the inftrudion of the people, were put into a Divifion or Clafs by themfelves, and cleerly / '^.'"^^^^^^^'^^.^•^^;; diftinguifhed ^ both from the C^nonical^ and from %^ inter EccUfi<niKo^ tyi focrj ph al bokes ^TO^ttly {oXQTmQA, 5. But when Kii9modo^iJif^pL^)me' among this Ecclejiafiifal C/^^fome other men had in divers places brought in and mingled thole Boo;^^ that were meerly ay^pocryphal^ Reading them alfotothe people under the fpecious Title oi Holy and Bivir^e Scriptures-^ from hence it was, that the Fathers in the Councehf Laodicea took occafion to make their Canon-^ and held it neceffary to declare the iV"//w7i(?r of thofe Auihentick B<?o/^5 , that were publickly to-be %f,ad unto the people in the Church.

LXI. Yet agamft our producing o[ this Canon jk is alledgM, that Baruch is added in the OLD Tefla- ment, & the Apocalyps left out in the NEW. For An- fwer whcreunto, we lay. Firft, (as we did before to the place a in S. Cyril^) that this is not the Boo)^ of Baruch^ which flandeth feparate by it felf in the Rank ofthofe^hat be Controverted, but an ^ Exege- tical or fuller Expression only of what is contayn'd in the book of Jeremie. And fo Origen exprefi'd it when he faid, c that Jeremie^ with the LawentationSyand vj ith his E pi file made but One Tiook '^ (that Epifile, therefore mufl be contained and written in that Book^ as it is inthe XXIX Chap, oi his Prop^ecie 5 ) where-

uato

«,Nuin..5rr

"y.

Ba-

fOVX^ ^t'^VOt )C)07n

^\ai Caa^cic.

c Sup. mim 49. Je- umm cum tbrenu et £$jjkUmumfint,

the Canon of the Scripture.

59

unto ^ ^;fc^^?^j/^ and C^r/7 have added Baruch, (like ds the Coun.cel at Laodicea did here) and made but One and thepw^ ^oo/t of them all. For 'Raruch's Name is famous in Jeremiej who[e Difciple and ^ Scrile he was, fuffering the fame Perfecutian and ^ Bmijhment that Jeremie did , and ^ publifhing the fame ^or^:? and Proi?hedes , that Jeremie had required him to write i fo that in feveral relations a great Part of the Book may be attributed to them both. And very pro- bable it is, that for this Reafon, the Fathers that fol- low d Origen^ did not only (after his Example) joyn the Lamentations and the Epijlle to Jeremie , but the Name of ^ Baruch befides ^ whereby they intended nothing elfe , (as , by keeping themfelves precifely to the Number of XXII Bookes onely, is cleer^) then what was infcrted concerning Baruch in the ^ook of Jeremie it felf; (for other wile they mufthave^^^- rnented their Account^ and added One Book more to their Vjimber ^ which they Jiever do :) Nor could Card, Bellarmine take thefe Fathers in any other fenfe, when he confefled and faid, (though afterward he a- greeth not with his own words,^ * " That neither any ^^ Ancient C^upcel-i nor Po^e^ nor Father^ in %jciting the ^^ B^GolcS'i^f J^gly Smp:ure^ had made any peculiar mention ^^ of thiSi^JProjjhet Baruch iyhimf elf : which would be falie, if either the Councel ofLaodicea^ or ^thanafiw^ or Cyril of Jerufalem , had not by the Mention that they make of Baruch ^ underftood thofe pajjages of him which are comprehended in the Book ot Jeremie^ written in Hetreve^ but that other DiftinEl Book^ which is now extant under his Name^ and was firft written only in the Greek Tongue 5 A. Bookio different in the prefcnt Editions from the Old Latin Tranflatipn, that we have no affurance, whether there be a true Copie of it, or no; and therefore t S.H/Vr(?we would not meddle with it.

I 2 LXII. Then

4 EpiftolaPafch,ru- pra citat. yeremim & una cum ilk Ba- ruch, LamentatmtSf C5r Epjflola. b Jcr.55.4, c Jcr.4v<5,7. d ]cr.36.8. e Nifi viriKm fit in Or^coQont. Laodi- ccni Codice, nam in Latino (qui ante vef' ftontm Qenihni Her^ v«fcxtabat)7^tf em- rAa mmina. prxtcr- wifla funt, & Jiremi- as folus ponitur. I fid, Merc, Merlinus & P. Crab.

"^ Bellarm. de Vcr- bo Dei, lib. 1, cap. 3, Ve Libro Baruch Cen- tr^verfia fuity et efl, turn quik noninvev\i' tur in fiebrdds Codh' cibus^ turn etiamqu'a nee Concilia antiqua^ neque Pomificts, neq-, PatreSi quos fuph. ct- tavimui , qui Catalo- gum Librorum Sacr»<- rutn texunt^bujiu Pro- ^eU difertis verbis memintrunu f S. Hier. pratf. in Jerem. Librum autem Baruch, quiafudHe^ brAOS nee legitur^ ncr. habttur , pr^tctmift' tnui. Item prxf. in Commtnt.quibusT*- r emi am evpon\t, Li- btllu Baruch J qui vul- gl Editioni LXX c9* pulatur y nee habetur apudHetrjtis^ef^itj*

remi£ nequaquam cen^ [hi differ endam.

^o

A Scholajiicai Hijlory of

tf Cone. Li exile. loco citato Huodmnopor- tetprivAtO' Vfalmos in ECCLESIA LEGE' KE<t3rcM£cau\€f«nt qu^LEGIoportet.Scc. b S. Hicr.in Trol. galcar. Tot'b betSa- cramenta quot verba. <: Litiirg^tiGcl.Angl. in CaUnd, & praEfar. //<?» xht re3 of the holy Scripture (befiJtf the f filler) is appdin- ted 10 be read. Jhe old Tuft (^x. except cer- tm Bock/ and Chip- ters which be lea^ edi- fying, <^c. The Ktxv ieft. except the Afo- Cilypfi fyc.

fl.Juftin.Mart.in Di- al, cum Tryph. lt£- nxus J. s.ccntr. hsr. Theoph. Anrioch. & Mclito apud Evifcb. liifl. Eccl.Iib,4C.24. Br 26. Dionyf Alex, apudeand, I.7.C.25. & 24. Ckm. Alex. lib.2. psdag.cap 12. Origen. in i Pfalra. Eufcbius in Chrcn. Athaiaf. in Synop, Epiphm.hxrcf. 5r. Cho'roft.inFfal. 91. Bifil.Gf.Naz.&Cy- rillas.

b Epiph.loGO ciwro, Uh^r. 54« fXcrnil lib. 4. con- tra Marcion. d S. Aug. dc hscrcf. cap go,

f Eufeb.lib.7,hift. Eccl.c.25*

LXII. Then, as to the leaving out of the Jpotalyps^ (which is a Second Exception againft this Camr/ of Laodicea^) though the Queftion between the follow- ers of the Trent-Canon and Ours^ be not concerning Q\\^ Books of the Neif Teflament^iwhcTQin we al agree,) yet we have thus much to (ay tor the Councel, i . That the Preface which they make to their Canon^ fheweth their intention, only (or at leaft, chiefly^ to have been, thereby to declare ^ yf^h£it Canonical Bookes were pullickiy to he READ among them in the CHURCH , where becaufe their Cufiome wasnotufually to-^f^^ the Apocalyps^ therefore they forbare to l^ame it. 2, That this Cuftome was not grounded upon any Opi- nion they had, asifthatB5oJ^were//o/?^y'^oftheiV(?a? Teftamentj but becaufe it was fo repleniflied with ab- ' ftrule and hidden ^ Myfteries^ as that (kw or none being fit and able Pcrfons to Explain it, j the people would receive the leffe inftrudion and edifying by it ; which is the reafon that iivpur ^ puhlick Calendar {ox Reading the Books of the Nm Teftament in the ordinary courfe of the Year, our own Church hath likcwife omitted it : and yet we hold it to be 0/ir(?;5/V^/ ; (as they a of the Gr^ek Church did ^) often aMedging it in our Sermons and Treatifes ; and othcrWhiles Rea/ding Divers parts ofit in our P/^//V^5fmVfV^;/Iti^^^^^^^^ gethcr improbable, that the Fathers of this Councel fhould abfolutely reject that Book out of the Canon, wlien it was in their t» own time fas it was alfo c before and ^ after their time) held an Herefie to rcjeft it : For though fome /^»^ men in the Greek Church were not alwayesfo well fatisfied concerning the Author of thts Book, but ^ doubted whether it was S. John the £^angelift, or (omc other Apoftolical }Vritfr of that Name ; yet as the Reafons which they brought for themfelves were of little weight, fo they wjcrc at all times opppfed and anfwer'd by the Greater

Pan

the Camn of the Scriptures.

6\

^ InCodiceJ^^.

nuK

I

Fart^ and the moft confiderable Perfons of the Church 5 whereof there cannot O^e be nam'd that ever luffer'd iho. Author hie of the E 00^ to be either rejefted, or doubted of, whether it \wqvq£l Canonical -P^nofthe New TejiameM^ or no, without cenfuring^ and con- demning them, that did lb. 4, Laftly then, The Omiffion of this ^ook in ih^Canon oiLaodicea (liyQt the Omiffion benotrather inthe<7o/;/V5that wehave of it, then in the ^anoniz felf 5 for infome ^ Copies the Epifile to Philemon is left out, afwell as the -r4/?(?- calyps^) can be no juft pleaforthe Authoritieofthofe BookSy which the Councel oi Trent hath lately annexed to the Cano?z of the OW7>j?^w<?;;j/, for though /^f/V/?^^ of them be here nam'dy yet it is one thing not to be nam'd in the Canon of Laodicea^ and another thing to be excluded out of the Canon of the B/^/f, which ma- keth the great difference between them 5 for certain it is, that by the common confent of the f^r^^rs and Churches abroad, (which are the beft Interpreters of what they decreed , rejedcd, or acknowledged , in this Synod of the Afian Provinces,) the Apocaljps if it were not ufually read to the people^ ytt it was puhlickly receiied as a Canonical hook of Scripture among them all ; which the other Controverted Bocks never were, neither in thofe places^ where they were ^//owrf to be Ready nor at Laodicea^ where for the Reafons afore mentioned they thought meet, at that time, to forfoW them.

LXIII. Some other Exceptions there are againft this Councely which wiU give us no great trouble to anfwer. As Firft i. That it is not fo certain whe- ther there be any fuch Canon or Catalogue oiScripture^ Books in it, or no i for in the Latin Tranflation^ a which Dionyfius Exiguus made of that Councel^ it is omitted ; and in the Roman b (^ode there is no par- ticular Recital of thofe Books to be feen 5 nor hath

GtAtim

4 Codex Csin. Eccl. Dionyfii Exigui. b Codex Can. Ecd, Romans,

6i

A Soholajlical Hijlory of

II Gratianidccret. g rattan B entered it into his Decree. But in thcfe

Unh^lr ^*"* ^^^^' matters the Greek Copies are to be trufted before the

A^auAffalltrifyle' Latin^ and the Vniverfal t Code before the Roman t

gtre in Eccitfiis con- jj^ ^i[ ^]^q Several Editions of the Councels both Greek

]ormiM^^^ and Latin fet forth by Mercator, Merlin, Crab, Surius,

in EcclcfiA cantarey Tilius, Binius, and thofe that we find in B^i^^wo/^ and

nee ^ibros pmirca^ Zonaras, this Canon is to be read at large r and ftiould

mnmUm fed SOLA ' u r, ° V- ; i

Sacra VeUmina V, 6* We reft our lelves either upon the Roman Code, or the iv, teftameiAti, Reg. Qg^^ Qf q^iomfius Exiouus, we fhall be to feek for all the 8. Canons oithtCouncel of Ephef us, the 3, laft Canons of the F/Vj? Councel at Confiantimple, and the 2. laft Canons of the Councel at Calcedon, which which are all cut off and left out in both thofe Codes, af- well as this Canon oiLaodicea is; the a Preface and Title whereof they have fuffered nevertheleflc to ftand Enchirid.cap.i.Bcl- ftill • and yct that Preface and Title refer to the Books irrc2o!4'Ku- of Scripture, that follow in all o^/;^r Co;;/V5 and Colle^, Bions of the Councels whatfoever ; which is fo clear an evidence for us, that generally this Councel is ^ given us, and confels'd to be upon our fide. 2. OnlyC^- tharinus, having nothing elfe to fay againft it, fufpe- .fteth, that this LIX Canon of this Councel c hath been larger then it is, and that the Bookes now contro- verted have been taken out of it, though in the mean d Bdiarm.lib. 2. dc while he knowes not when or by whom it fhould be Cone. cB.Laodiccnu done 5 which is an Exception that anfwcrs it felf,

;>/rlm"jrx/j, e^ ncn much rcafon he might have fufpeded all the reft of onfimatHaVomifice. i\\q: Fathers HTritings, that numbred r^^/>Bo<?/('/ of the Ancient Testament , as the .Fathers of Laodicea did. 3. The laft Exception therefore againft them is. That they were but a ^ Provincial Councel, and of very /m/^ ^«i'/7om)' in the Church, having never been confrmed by the Po/;^. But there is no part of this Exception true. For Firft, it was a Co»//^f / that con- fifted of c Divers Provinces or Regions ofAfia -, which

makes

152. in God. Dion. &Can.59.Conc.La- od. in Cod. Rom. b Baronius & Binius ubifup. Alph.^Ca- ftrolib.i.C2.contra bar. Gcorg. Edcruj inOeconBibl.lib.i. Tab. 42. Coftcrus in

mcraBtur.MclcCan. li 2.ca.ii.Lindanus ubi fuprsl. Et a!ii complures. c Amb. Cathar. o- pufc. de Scr. Cano- nicis. Vehtmcnter fu- fpicorfhijfe has Libros i Sciolis quibufd'a Se- motos^ ^c.

e Prima hujmSy no- di verba Sat]^a 5>- nodus qudi apuilLdodi- ceam FhrygU Parati- andt convtnit ex dU verfis Prmndis fnc Kegmibw Afidt,

the Canon of the Scripture. 6^

makes it greater then any ^ Fmvincial Sjnod, Se- condly, itvvasalwayes held to be oi g great Fenera- tion and ty^utbority both in the Greek and in the La- tin Church. And Thirdly although "^ the Oriental Councels in thofe dayes needed no Con^rwation from the Pope ^ (who claina'd no flich jurildidion then, as he did in after ages, over thofe places that were out of his' owne a Limits ^ ) yet that among other Councels oi the Eafty the Popes %ecetved this inxhQ weflj .and. acknowledged the Canons of it to hcaP^rt of t]^pi^'Ejtclefiafiical %ules^ whereby both themfelves and ^^ijliiir^i^Qps were to be guided, wefinditmanifeftin ^ the Letter that Pope Leo the 4^ h fent to the BifhopS 'joi Bmannie-^ For in thole Elder times the Codeoi the Vniver^d Church governed them all j And into that Code was this Synod oi Laodicea taken not only by the Sixth General CounceloiConjiantinopIe in c Trullo^ (the Canons whereof have otherwhiles fome ^ Ex- ceptions made againfl them,^ but by the 4th Gene- ral Councel likewife of ^ Calcedon 5 and the Imperial f Law of the Emperor lujtinian^ befides divers other Teftimonies fet forth to that purpofe by the Two Learned Antiquaries g Lefchafsier^ and ^ Juftel'^ whofe Reafons herein are fo clear and convincing, that as no juft Exception can be taken to them, fo are they freely acknowledged to be fuch, & highly mag-

/ Bcl.lib. i^ de Cone. cap, 4. Pro'bincialk Concilia fmt, in quibus convemunt Epifcspi tANTVM VNIVS PROVING Ij¥., quibm pr^efi MetiopolitanHs , ftvf ArchiepifiopUs^ g Binius ex Ba- ronio , Not. i . in Lacd. Concil. Hoc Concilium antiqui nobilitate celeberrirmm^ Grdcerum atque Latinorum Scriptis celebri mtmoria commendatum fuit. ^ Ancyr. Ncocjcs. Gangr. Antioch,^c. a Cone. Niccn. can. 6. b Can. de Libel, Diftin^: 20. IS on ' convent t tliqMem judicare eSr SanHorum Cgnciliitum Canones ulinqutre. fiuibus autem in omnibus Ecclefiaflicis utinrnr judiciis^ funt STA^VTA Can, Apo(l Nic£n, Aricyran, Neocdifar. Gang. Antiocb, LAODICENSJVM^^c, € CM,2,0bfignamusetiam Canones^ qui ^S. Patribus noflris exptfitifunt. (i.) a-^ifi. Sanilis ac divi' nis patribusi qui Nic££ convtnerunt, iifque qui Ancyu^ NiocAfar. Gangr. AMioch. atq'y iis etiam qui in LAODICEA Phrygi£j&c. Ad hxcBikKivnon HU}uspr£fentisCanonifperpetuorecordare. d Melcb. ean.lib«i. c ult. Baron. Tom. 8. ad An. 692.&. ilium tranfcribcns Binius , adiftud Concilium quil nifextnm. e A^.4. Aft.Ji.&A<?t i?. / Novcl.igi. g Lefchajjjeri opufc. in Confulr. de Controvcrfia inter Papam Paul. $. & Rcmp. Vener. h Chr. Juffellut prajfat. inCod, Eccl. uni^i vcrfas. & Tcftim. f rafixa at^tie ofdinc rcccRfua ante God. Dion. Exi^ui .

nified

6^

A Scholajlical Hiftorj of

nified by » them^ that ftiled themfelves the Fofes Apologifis. And this makcth the Councel of Laodtcea to carry with it the force and authority of an Oecume- nical Synody by which it was firft Received and Ap- prov'dj and afterwards Numbred with all the Reft in the General Code of the Church.

^ Is qui Apologiam

pro Pontifice fcrip-

fic ad vends Conful-

tatfonem LefchalTc-

t'iuC9nfultator dt Con*

cilioTum Ordine tt Au-

toritate feliciter dijfc-

fit , tenebras dijfipat,

ttodoj enodaty i^c. quo

nomine non exigmm ckmapudOmneSy tHmnmxm^apudTheologosinivUgmkm, inplanifintingratt.

Item, ApoIogcticnsfupcrDccretaGrcg.7.Tbm.7. GonciL Edit. BiniansB, part.i.pag,469. Paris,

Impref. Prdttrtu San^a el Veneranda Synedur^halcedoneiifisetiam ProvincialU Concilia ante ipfttm

tranfalia canoni^affe non Vubitatur^ id decernenSy Cap. i. Kcgulas Sanftorum Pacrura 'J)er finguk

none ofque Concilia conftitutas proprium robur halpere Decrevimus. Mdic autem Concilia antejp^

fum CHALCEDONENSE legantur fmffe Ancyr. Neocrfar. quA et Nicans Concilio antiqui&ra traJmUTy

Item Gangr. Sard. Antiocb. LAODICENSE', Ergh eadem et in CHALCEDO^E^STSymcf^non

dubitaniur e([e roborata- Qiid etiam cum Africanis Canonibus beatus Hadrianus Papa Cmlo Itj^pm^ii^

Difpenendas Ecclefias in Regno fuoyRorndtradidiffelegitur, , '; u.

Jn. T)om. LXIIII. S.EPIPHANIUStheBi{hopof^4/4;w/«(*

or Con^ance in the J/land oi Cypru^^ wrote his Books

574"' ^g^i^ft Herefies about Ten yeers after the time of the

Laodicean Councel. a There and ^ elfewhere (thrice

in all for failing) henumbreth the Books of the Old Te-

ftamentj as fVe do now, and as the Fathers of the Chri-

ftian Church had done before him, to be neither more

nor lejje (if the Five double Books be reduced to the He*

Pond. Habent He- krew Mcount) theuXKlh Of Tobity Judith^ Baruch and

l[1Lfv!L^n^am^^^ ^^^ ^^'^ccabes he makethhere no mention at all, nor

Uifo, ratione qkum any where elfe befides. 0( the prifdom of Salomon^ and

"^■^^^i^/rri"^^^-'"' the mfdom of the Son ofSirach he declareth expreflv,

tuTyXXyil reperjun- S , y , , , -^ , ., . _ , ^ t ... * , '*

tuTyquid. ex ilLis Hum-

que gemnentur ; puta

Liber Ruth cumju'

dicum Libro conjungi-

tur,etunusab HebrA-

is cenfetuTy r"* Para-

iipxumpofleriore.^c.

Pera^a Enumcrati-

one condudij:. 'E'or-

?^fi^a^fl<mv oZ vau Hvjo<nS)jo Ci^Koiy^c. Completiitaque funt XXll Libri ]uxta l^umerumXXlI, apud

HebrAos Elementorum. c d Id. Ibid. Sunt in ambiguQ, Ec exempli gratia profert. Sapientiam

Sirach et.Sdom»ws (inter cAteroSy) Uui Libri (inquit) etft utiles fmt eicommodiy tamen in Numerum

Receptorum non referunmy neque in Arcam Teftimonii repofiti fuerunt, ^ Which yet is not to be tin-

drrftood of the firii Ark. before the Captivity ^ but of another that rcfcmbicd it after. Vide

Num* 10 f.

cak

«f Ep'iph.hasr.S.con, tra Epicur. & Her. 7 ^.contra Anomasos. b Id. Iib.dcMens.&

not only that they be both ^^ c Doubtful mitings^ but ^^ that they arc ^ not to be counted within the Number " of the Holj Scriptures (how ufeful and profitable fo- "ever they might be befides,) having never been put ^Unto the Ark of the Covenant -^ ^ where all the Book9 were, that nlay be acknowledged by us to be Canonic

the Canon of the Scriptures. 6f

sal. And it need's not trouble us, if « Card, Perron^

and b Gretffr the leiuite, here objed Epiphamus

againft himfelf, and fay 5 that in his difputation c nb.i"c.5^o!p"g^4]8i

againrt c/£tius (who was the Mafterofthe^/^ow^e^/^ iliiand Epiphme dif^

Herettcks) he followcth the New Accompt of the Roman %nUfumt1th^^^

Church:, and rangeth the Two Books of ^//^^c^wz^ and cEssoiKEdeV Eg-

Bccleiiailicus among the rf/? of die Dm/?^ and C^//o^//- ^jT^' ^ "^} ^' «» ic ' . T- P /I I • - I . ^/ autre tme (la

cal Scriptures. For hr it, this is not true^ that every ivn- peuy Sapienctsynir) ting-i which he oihcrwhiles calleth Divine -, (as in ^^^ ^f rimes Divines another d place he doth tht Apojhlick Constitutions) f§^S%ct(^t in a /^y^e ^ and popular fenfe, muft prclently be taken Dcf.i.,,c.i4. ^w/z^m in a 5^ri^]^ and Proper fenfe to be Canonical Scripture ; f^^^/* ^'^ diftrentiam between which Tm there is a great difference. A '4^^. sTjThAnnis% Writing may be faid to be Divir.e^ that treatethof Sapimim sdomlnii Dizi/^e OHatters ; but Canonical Scripture it cannot cort^!fAecil^m^'i^«f^ be, unlcffe it be "Divinely injpird^ as the fVri tings of fi regematus ejjes a the Prophets were in the Old Teft amen t^ and of the Apo- fy^p^^^^^^^ ^ ^ ftles in the New. And therefore S. Epiphanius not f\l]isWo^uT,\ponc^ placing thefe Tvpo^ookesamon^xhtProphets-ihux.^wx.'' retudiligmterinqui' ting them in a Rank and order by themfelves, after ^^eadtfrnpus^is-iL the Prophets and Apoflles hoxh ^ cannot a other wife R^^perxxvnu^ be underftood, but that he intended them as Writinos f *' Jf* ^ ^"^ ^t'^7r or an inferiour Clajje to the tormer. 2. tor Secondly, reda^hs ) per // £- why did he els reckon them behind the Apocaljps^ ^^"^: ^^^ ^Pfl- s, when they were in order oftime written before all eIwouI^^ cifhoika^^ the ^ew Teftament ? And 3. Thirdly, Why did he s. Jac. s Petr. s. not adde Two more to his Number of XXII (or ^JpoXhitht XXVII) whcreunto he confines all the Books of the nis-, PerqueSapknti- Old I But the Truth is, that he alledeeth ho\h thefe <ff" r^ die tnr saio.

° •' monuy (^ qudi appelk'

tur flit Siracb, atque /tdehperOmnes Vivms Scripturat, tegue per illas condenmare. d Id. H^rcf. 80. 'Er 7a7j cO^tTu- 0«<r7j&G. ^eiov hhy>v. Has auem Conftitutioncs inter Apocrypha ponic Ha?rtr.7o. e Canus lib 5, C.5. Sc^. Acp'imus^-Ep'p^dnw hdireft poSrema refellenda, ApoftohrumCoY^ftitutiones DlVlNAM SCRIPfVRAM vecat. Loquitur autemftnt dubio debts Cotifinutinwbus qua in S CKIS BIBLIIS Scrrpta KON SVICT Sed ALIA efi ilia dm Veritas ipfa LIMAtVR in Difmatidne Subtilitas ', ALU ehm OBITER ify' IN TRANSCVRSV ad VVLOAREM Q^ANDAM OPINIONEM ac» cotfimodatur Orat'o. i^uamnbrew.Ht Sapi^ntes^ita Ifoshoc Iocs VERBIS ECCLESlASllClS utimnr^ ut EosSOLVM.qui sPlRltV DICTANTE fcripti funt Libri, SACROS & CANONICOS app(L itnus. a Vidcnnm,77. K and

66 A Scholaflical Hijlory of

and other the like mitir^gs f which were never received into the C4;^o^ ot the JS/^/^'^j the more to confound, and l"hame the Heretick ^tiu$y who could not any way defend ijimfelfj either by x\\q Autheutick %jcords of the oil and T^ew Tejtamerjt^ or by Ol^her Divine Wri- tings y that were fometimcs Read and ufed in the Church, .

An: T)0W . ^XV. in this time lived S . BASIL the Great^^Arch- bifhop of C^prf^ in Cappadoce i, whom we may well 575« reckon among the Fathers ^ that have ftridly held

themlelvcs to the Number of XXII ^r^cis belonging tothcC/J/^o/: oftheO/iTV^/^/wf/^^. For in ^ the Phi lo- d ?hiIoc.c.^A/it77 c^lia^ or hard placesvfScripture^ gathered by ///w and x,C' Ttt ^ioTTvivca. S.Gregory 'Hjzianzen out oiOrigensyVoikSy hepro- Lfb!^iD\^itus'f^pf- poundeth this Quejlion ^ and anfwereth it as Origen mi / Rcfp. /^on/tfm had done before. That which C^rd.}^ Bellarwine objc- inmmtio^n ^^^^'^^^- fteth out of S. Bafil for the Canonizing of the Book of (ilim\P^oTv Tt, Tdit:, is neither to be found inTolity nor in S.BaJiL libriCutHebrditra' c 5". ^^y/7 faulteth the "Fjch Man y hccsiU^Q he had no S/S^?lt: regard to the Precept (let it be asBellarm. addeth, Xhc werHi Elmmorum Divine Precept,) withhold not doing good to them that Hcbrso^um.non^ahs^ ^.^^^ /^^ 1^1^ ^^qI^ Me^rcj and Truth forfake the^. And , Liters htfoduaio ad Break th) Bread to the Hungry. But of thefe Tit^rf f ^i- s^pientiam , (fy-c. it^ rii^^e Tyecepts ^ the ^ Two Firft are in the P/6X;'^r^55 t't::^^K and the r Third in efay, whc-K the CarcHnd mi^ht darmntum funt ^ havc fouud thcm without tumiug to Toi/^ for then\„ ''''rl'^D^fft'^i'f^T Such another Teftimony it is^that ^ Coccius hath fought rBdi.dVverblDti. out in s S, BaJIl [oT thc Canonizing of the^cc^of lib. I. cap. 1 1 . dc Li- mfdorn ; In that tiwe the prudent M^n. fkall keep filence^ £™frl^o;//^" ^/caufe h is an evil time ; which S. Bafd calls the/.;- vjr/JM , Stntm'um ing of a Prophet, And fo do we : For we finde it in- vivfrnM^PK^^ ^^^^^^ ^'" the PAJ/^to h Ames y hut in the Bhck of mf;' cEPiv.yf affdiat. li ^/«^ ncirfier can J Ce?^T/«y finde it ^ nor any body elfe.

r S. Bafil. hontil in

Lvcani & Scrm. Dc Av2rit v)c%i^ivvet Ko^v^ gyrr^^^, li/7rci«i',&c. \xiv\fM<7vveu )^ 'mgiiCy &c. J>«t9fOTle TWf^fT/ w ctfTor 5-K. t/ Pfov. 3, ver. 2 7. & ver. ^. t Eray.58.7. | C^^ccti Xtteraur,lih.5.Art.p. g S. B^frl dc Sjjiritu Sando,. /? Amos 5.13. » Cjut, S^p cap.8.

the Canon of the Scripture.

^7

As little to the purpofe are the other Objediom that they a bring in tavour of EcdepajitcuSy which they fay b S. Bafil believed to be written by Salomon him- fclf. But they cite us luch Bods of S,BaJil , as ei- ther be none of his, or elfe have rw fucb matter in them. For in his own c Works he acknowledgeth no more then Thme Books of Salomon^ and nameth them, the fame that we do.

LXVI. To him we joynS. GREGORY NAZI- An. Dom. 37^ AN ZEN 3 furnamed The DIVINE, S.Bafils Con- d miocmfup.nM temporary, and Companion wiih him in his Studies. Who not only in the d Cclle^ions out of ^ Origen^ (which they made together,^ but in a Peculiar fTork of his own befides, (which he wrote for this very purpofe, and fo ^ intituled it^) hath clearly delive- red himlelf , touching all the Authenticky True^ and genuine Bocks of Holy

a Can.IocIib.5.c.ir. Bellarm.dc vcrvDcJ, I.i.c,i4.

b Citant Bafil.contra Ennorwium lib 4. & Reg.fufiasdifpuc. c.Bjfil. horn, 12. ia princip. Prcrcrb.

e In quo Excerpt a ha^ bentur Sudofis utilia^ Gr.Naz. Ep. id Thc- odoriim Epifcopum. / Id. De Viris il<r g<:' min's LibrisS Scrip- tura dhinhks infpjra- td'y in LibroCarm.

Scripture, Mak ing the H threw Canon of the Old Teffament^ to be the Rule & S^uare^that herein the Cbriflians are to follow;& count- ing onely XXII Books ; whereof He Num- brethXIItobeH/7?(?. ricallj & V Metrically & V Propheticall ^ Na- ming them all in their Order ; but making at all of

Sufcipe SanSorum Numemmy Kowenqiii Ltbrorum.

Etpriwitm hifiorkos bis Seues Ordine^ Quorum

Primus adcft 0 emits, dein Exodus^ atquc LeviteSf

Et Xumeri, Lfgifqns iteriim repenta vsluntas.

Hos JofuA^Cri'dque. ^ Ruth Moaf itafe^uuntur.

Hint Ncnust Becimufqn: tenent Geflamclyta Regum.

Vndecimo Annates veniunt^ed Vltimus Efira

Sunt quoque Carminei Huinque s Horum primus Job ejl 9

Proximus eO huic David Rex^ (fyr Ires Salomonis,

Scilicet Ecciejiaf^esy (fy" Pioverbia, Camus,

PoU hos Saniiorum tmx Quinque VoUmina vatum 9

Ex quibns bis Sex L'bro vetinentur is Vm ;

Ofeas, i^ Ames J Micheas, Joek.ne J nafqne,

Ahdias, i^ Nahumt Aba-uc^ ^ Sophmias,

Agg<£us l£tus, Zacharjas^ (fyr ^alachias-

Hi primum Litrum ; tenet Jfaia Securrc'um ;

Poji hos frmias Matns de ventre vocaus ',

Ezechiel Domini Robur sDanieli^n; fupretms,

Hac veterisSeptemae Ter ^'nque Volumina PaBi

Etna. ^ Vigmti Solymoruttf Element a fgur ant.

no mention

Toiit and Judith^ or tho[e that follow in the "H^w Cata- logue : which can therefore have no other place in iiis « jj jy^ siprAter. Account, then among * thdfe that are not II Canonical hosqurdejf, negama^

numpHtes. \\ Id. Ibid. Ne tud Codhibus falUtur Mens alienisy ^Namiite adfiriptitiimuLi^ Jalji^is vagMturtJ Legitimum hmc habus Numerum a me. Le^or amice,

K 2 or

68

A Scholajiical Hijlorj of

b CarA Perron. Re piiq. 1.I.C.5Q.P44S c Num,55. d Du Perron, ib.

f Du Perron, ib.

or LegitiwMe Parts of the Bille. Againft this evident Teftimony of Nazianzeriy there is nothing objeded. But I. That b he omitteth the >5oo^ of £^^^^5 which wc have anfwered c before 5 and 2, That he ^ al- ledgeth the Book oim[domy which nevertheleffe will not make it C^/^o;?/V^/ ; and 3. That thefe r<?r/(?5 and all this Catalogue of the True Scriptures^is ^falfe/j mpc- fed upon fc/w/, which never any Man faid before Card^ Perron^ who durft venture for a fhift to fay any thing : But we have little reafon to believe him upon his own word, wherein we finde him fo often failing. LXVn. Conform to the Teftimony of s. Bap/, and S. Greg. Naz^ianzen, is the Canon of 5. AMPHI- 57^*^ LOCHIUS5 the Metropolitan Biihop oilconium in

Lycaonia 5 an intimate friend to them both, and one of the Fathers that met together in the Second General founceL ^ S^ Jerome i^Siycs, HhatoithQk Three Bif hops he knows not which he ftiould admire moft, their Se-^ Tdri debeas Eruditto- cuUr Learnings or their Knowledge in the Holy Scrip- SSr^'"*"' t«m. rhc Epiftle oi Jmphilochius is c extant, written to 5^/f«^/^5in JambickVerfcs, wherein he cxhorteth him to the ftudy of Piety and Learning, both Humane and Sacred. But among the 5^^rf^ Writings he gi-^ veth warnings that Some be added to them, which be altogether Falfe and Spurious , and fome inter- mixed, which do not /^/o/;fr/)/ belong unto them ^ and therefore that due heed be taken to diftinguifli well d between thcfe Three forts of Books. After this Ad-

Huin maxima hu quoque convenu te difcete, .ITJOnitlOn he reck-

NontutlCVIVISeffecrfdendumLlBROy Oneth Up for the

J^j BIBLICI pr^nomtn auguftum ferat, BOoks of the OL*D

^andcqh FALSO nominali funt Ljbri : . ^ .,

^IDAM INtERMEDH velprepinqui terminis^ Tejtament: whlcU

(Vt ftc loqmr) funt Veritatis Dogmati, were Divineh in^

(intelligitfincDubioTobia?,]iiditha AwV^,/ *-U« /V.*v,^

& fimilcs, qnos Ecclefiaflms appellamus.) Jp^^^^ > tne lame

Q^iDAM spVKii, Perjculoftqh admodkm that Nazianzen

Janqum Nothd^ ftvt adiiltmna NHwifrMta jj^^ done before

him ;

Jn. T>om.

k S. Hieron. Ep. ad

Magnun). Nefc'io quid in iSif primumadml

c ApudBaifam.pag icSa. edit. gr-Ut.

d S.Amphiloch.Ep. ad Seleucum. inrer Canonicas Epiftolas i Balfamonc Notar.

the Canen of the Scriptures. <jp

him 'y and addeth^ Infcriptmtm Regis equidm habtntU

that other whiles ^^^ ^.^*^^!f ''^"^"^ vithfiSima. mac ucner wimcb (incdligicApocryphospropriefic

the Book 01 ESWer Di«Jtos,dc quibus fupra nam. i o,)

wa«^ named with '^^ erghliquidbboj ndris^tibi SINOVLOS

was namcu WlCl vmmrvs INSPIRAtOSnurr.erabo Lihos

tnem ^ (,0t wnicn PrimumqAe Prifci feedtrh Seripta eloquar, ^^^

I have siven an - (EnnmeracautcmOmncsquiprinsa

account be tore ; AdytcimtiftisVmdtEstEKdiiuu

But O/^^/ Books he

Nameth None 5 Concluding f after the Recital of

thofe "Books that appertain to the N. T.) a jhat this is . u tu^

the MOST TRVE '^ ^ m ^' ^

and v>iiJ\iru.lN l^Avav a,y «H Tuv ^O'TTViv^ov ^et(pap, CANON of the — hice^Volnmims

DIVINE SCRIP- ^^^^^^^"^-^ ^'"^ C^^^^.V (TemiJ/mKx.

TURE5. To which ^ he that wrote the Expurgatery ^ loh. Mar. Brat in Index of Rome, & ^ (?^^^pr the Jcfuite, will needs make c^or'eVf oTf 1 1 c f^ the World believe that Amfhilochius added the Book ' * '

of mfdom y when in his Enumeration of Salomons Books, between the Proveris and Ecclefiafles that Ad- dition fas they fay) is manifeftly to be feen. But here- in they abufe both themfelves and their Readers, For d Trefq, Satmonh ' though the ^ Latin Tranflatov nameth mfdom after Prf>verb]a(Sap7emia) the Proverbs, ^Qt he cannot mean the ^oc/& of ^//^^ow, ^^^^^Mfh cantko- runleffe Salomon wrote Four Books, whereof both SeHermi^'^^^^" e Amphilochim and that f Latin Tranflator himfelf ^ Jf^^^^'^^^^fl- fay expreUy, that he wrote no more then r/w^,) but /urnipr'Sfiw^w muft be underflood (as z CMelito was before) to saimonis, ' ^ ^** have added that word as an Exegetical Expreflion f iThiS'^vj ' onely of the Former. Andif weconfultthe h Greek Tf«^V^*2(?ll' Text, there is not fo muchasthe7V4w<?of^//%win /«^'"^^'r«<w9»,^- it, more then that Salomon is called a ^^^e or^//-. ^TZ^J^rTX Perfon ^ which he may well be , without being the ^'oWtwi^. Author of a Book that was written many hundred Ld Nazfan^'"* ^' yeers after his time. But the » Tranflator of this fie Ycrtirl^Swo" fj . P(?^w (which was fomctimes attributed to Gr. Nazi- ^^[^^TresLibmyPd^ mz.cn, becaufe it was lo like to hi$) that rendrcd the Sc;i'c&

Greek

yo A Scholajlical Hijlorj of

Greek mrds without any fuch addition oimfdom^ hath been held to be as knowing and as wile a Man, as gen- tian Hervet-^ and c P/V^f^a'^ (whofe acknowledgement we have to the fame purpofe,) as coniiderate in what he faid, as ever was (jretfer^ or the Author of the "B^- wan Purge,

c Joh. Pineda in Ecclcfiaftcn, pratfat. cap.2. Scft. i p. Itemqie evidenter ctnfimAtur feflimmn Am- phUichii Epifcopi Iconih qui in Carmine de SCRIFTVR^ LIBRIS LEGENDIS, (iimlRES Sa- lomonis Libros numeret.tamen Sapientiam sfatimpojf Proverbia (in verfione Hcrvcti)yrm«/f«m Ecelefi- dfle i^ eanticiiconftituit Q^au necejfe fit Sapientim efe IPSA PROVERBIA^ nifi Hudttrnarium Librorum Sdomnis Numerum velis fffictre, *

Jn. T>Om. LXVIII. About this time S. PHILASTRIUS the Bifhop of Brejje in Italy^ and one of the Fathers in the ^ O 0« Councel of Aquilea^ wrote his Book of Herefies , men-

tioned by a S.Aufiin. Wherein befides the G^/^^y^/ Cenfure which he gives of ^ Apocryphal fVrhings^ not to be commonly read by all men^ he reproacheth a certain fort of c Hereticks in particular, tor ufing the mfdom of the Son ofSirach ; a figne that he accounted not the Book to be (Canonical Scripture,

a S. Aug. in lib. dc Hxrcr. Epift ad Quod vult Dcum. b Philaftr. dc Hxrcf. ap. de Apocryph.

Stamum eft nb Apoftolis fy' £« urn Succefforihu^, mn aliud legi in Ecclefia debere Catholicaj nifi Legem, 5^ Frophetas^ (^ Evangelia ^c: c Id. de H«rcf. Prodiant. Hi Sapicmix Libro wuntur Spach mi' Ks^quijcripfitpoft Salomentm, id r/f, poft multa temporal Li brum mum de Sapient Ja^

d Jn^^Q^Yi^ LXIX. To the{e we may adde d S. JOHN CHRY- SOSTOME5 the Patriarch of Conjlantmople , and a

39^' Man moft exad in the Study and Knowledge of the

e S.Chryr,homiI.4. Sacred Scriptures, W\\omhi% Sermons yy^owGenefis ^5

^^HoT^iCK^^m- acknowledgcth no other Bocks oftheOW Teft amenta

/.audii ctict^'Ki\iTyi I- then n'hat were fr^ written in the Hebrew Tongue, The

/ge^/«. ^aJtJh ^e ^ooks therefore that were afterwards written rfirft)

J^eiiiivca, y} tSto m the Greek Tongue^ (as all the Books were, that are

Wm< £v Yi[£iv cu- now in Debate,) were with him no Canonical Botks of

^^eTDmn^Ub!iv/r ^^'^^^ Testament, And again, in one of his Sermons upon

pyim'jtus Ncbr. lingua thc^ EpiflU %o thcHetrews hctcckoueth thofe Bocks

fcilptifuerHTit.fyboc (, :.\ ■

omneinobjumfatentur, f S. Chryf. horo.8. in F.p ad Hcbr. 'Evif « rmXiv AvJ^e), Slc. Alium rur- siu vvum infphaut admirabikm, ut eas expemrett Efdram, inqmm^ &ffcity ut compenerentur ex reli^ qujs FoJ^ea AUt'mcuravrt^ ut LXXeatinterpretMrentur, llli Ess funt ihterpYctati, Advenii Chrt^ufy Easfufi'"'-. ApofioliEisinomntsdiifminmt. Only

the Canon of the Scripture.

71

Jn, T)om^ 392.

only to appertain to the OldTefiamera^ and to be tran- flated by the Septuaginty which Efdras left behinde him. Such therefore as he left not (and fuch were all which we now call Apocryphal^) neither did thej tranflate , nor did S, Chrjfoftome acknowledge to be thofe Writings, which Cbrift and his Apoftles tqcci- ved, and delivered over to the Catholick Churclvfor the Authentick Books oi Divine Scripture,

LXX, But of all other the Ancient Fathers:, S, HI- E'ROME (who lived in the End of the 4^^^ and in the beginning of the 5^^ C^ntury^) is moft plentiful in gi- ving Teftimony to the Truth y and to the conflant Reli^ gion of the Chrijiian Churchy in this Oiiatter, For here- in he was the moft diligent, and the moft curious,. among them all. A Man fo highly efteemed for his knowledge and judgement in the Scriptures^ that as his Latin 7V^^//?/j//o/?cfthem hath prevailed above all the reft, fo his feveral BroldgueshQioTQ them have been generally received , and propounded in the Latin church as a Rule a whereby to difcern the Canonical Books {vom others'^ for which purpofe, we fliall finde no Bible either Manufcript or *Pr///^^^ among us5(com- monly fct forth and ufed for the Vulgar^) wherein thofe Prologues are not added and placed in the Front of them all, which is at leaft a very great prejudice, (if it be not a forcing and concluding Argument,) a- gainft thofe Men that now DifTent from their Prede- cefTours, and have made a Canon to condemn their own Bibles. ^ „„. ^. .

fupcrEfiher. Hocm loco terminamut Commentaru Librorum Hiftorialtum V.T/Nam rtliqu\('mxjJiidhh,'T9bks^fyc.)k S, Hieronymo extra Canonhos Libros fu^putdntur, Winter Apocrypha locantur^ utpatetin Prolego Gale' aio. Bellarm. de rerbo Dei J. i . c. lo. Sc&. Poftrcm. Cajetanus fic argumentatur, Ecckfia eat libros recipit, qmsB. H'uronymm recipU^ eos reprobate qms Hit reprobate C SunSfa Rom. Diji. i $. Beatusau* tern Hmonymns in Prol. Gal. afferithos Libros Centrove}fisnontjfe in Canone. Cajetan.in lo.cap. Efteris. Ad Itmam Hiercnym reducenda funt verba tamConciliorum quamDolforum: fyjuxtaejui Sententiam, ^c. ]oh. Fr. Picus Mirand. dc Fide & Ord. credcnd. thcor. j. teflimmum S. Hiero*: nymi fqnoad hocj in Eulcfia Sacro ftn^um habetnu

LXXLFor.

tf Cajetan.in prafat* fuperJofuaadCIcm* 7.5 HUrmymoVSU VERSA Ecckfia U- tint phrimiim debet i nonfoiitm ob annetatas AbEQ in Libris V. T. particulas turn adject' tias^ tkmambjgtias.fed etiam propter difcretot ab Eodem C^nonius ^ non Cdnoticis. I- dcm in Commenr.

— — «"— - -"- ■-■111

7* AScholaftical Hijiory of

LXXI. For S.HIEROME both in thefe, and in many other places of his Works is fo clear for our DifiinBion ot the Canonical Bocks from thofe which we Number among the Apocry^hal^ that certainly we had far greater Reafon to make honourable mention A Artie. Eccl. AngK of his Name to this purpofc in our own a Article^ then ^' the Matters of the Church of Rome have to preface their

Ordinary Bibles ftill with his Prologues^ wherein they * S.HicrJnPrologo are fo often refuted, i. ^ in his Preface upon the .S'^R^g'I'l^. ^ooks of the Kings (which he calleth his ^.^t;.^ Pr(?- XXII volumina fup- logue^) having recounted tho[e Books ^ for the Oi^ely Crr^-fit^Xt ^^"^ ^"^ Authentick Parts of the Old Teftament ^ D« Doarinal unlra. which iVe do ^ he excludcth all the Reft from the C^- fdhuc ^ laSmt \jiri non qf the Scripture. 2. ^ In his P/f/4^^ before the PrlZapX^T^^^^ ^ooks of Salomon, he acknowledgeth no other Bi^o/^ to ber voctim Genefts^ bc (Canonical, but what he had tranflated out of the faktelTtlruut ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ 3- ^ In ^/?o^/?f/of his Prologucs upon Libri Vilinti\)m% the fame Books 5 he addeth thus much to the former, Frfbt'rno^r^ That THE CHURCH indeed l^^adeth the fVritingi glnfralhTnNorEM^ oiTohit, Judith, aud-^hc Macc ah es ', but that 5/;^ doth quanquam-'NennuSi not Receive them into the Number of Canonical Scrips Ruth ^cinoth inter ^^^^^ ^j^j e That the Books of ^//^o;^ and £r^/f//^- xtnt, i^btis Librosin fncus are (or ought to be J read for Popular Edtpcatton Sh9 pntent N«mrr« in Life and good Manners, but not for the E(lal?lifhina S^L^'ut <f^>^y ^oBrine in the Church. 4. f In his Preface be- XXP^ qmsfuhm- ioxQ: Ezra, ho: rQ]Q:Qitih all Other iVriiings {vom the Cd-^ 7ZM^fu%t7nil ^^^ ^f^^^ ^^^^^' ^^^^^ ^^^ Judaical Church did not

inducit^ ify'c. Hie ?rologuj Scripturarum^ qua ft Oaleafum Pmcipium.ommhus Lihris quos de Hebrjio ver- timus in Latinum convenire pot f, utfcin vaUamus Q^VICQpID EXTRA HOS EST, inter A 0^ CHTPHA fffe Ponendum Tgnur Sap.qu£ vulgo Salomonis infcribitur, et filii Sirach Liber, et Judith etTobia^ et Pafior NOii SVNT IN CANONE. c Idem, Frol. in L.br, Salom. ad Faul. & Eu- floch. Porrt in €9 Libro qui a phnfque Sapientii Salomonis infcribitur-, ^ in ErclefiaUice, quern fjfe Jc fi{filiiSiracbnullungnoratycalamumtet?jperaviy TANIVMMODO CANONIC AS SCRIPIVRAS tjebisemerJirede'ftderant, etftudiummeumCERTiS magisqu^m DV3IIS commendare. d Irem» prol. in Libr. S^lom. ad Chromar. & Heliod. Tohir^ Judith, et MaccabAoium Ljbres LEGiT quidem ECCLESIA , fed eos inter CANONIC AS SCRIPT JR AS non Recipit,(f^c. e Ibid, Sic &ha;c duo Volumina legac ad aid ficacionem plebi*, n(>n ad AVtORlTATEM Eccleftafticorum Dogmatum confirmandam. f Id<m, Fraf. in Ezram, Q^iAmnbahnturafudillos^ntcdeVigintiHuatuorSeni' busfunt, Vroculabjicienda,

acknowledge

the Canon of the Scripture.

7i

acknowledge , or belonged not to that Number , whereunto the XXIV EUlers alluded a in the l^ve- Utionoi S.John. 5, In his ^ Preface \y^o\\t\\Q Chro- -nicies, having faid, That THE CHURCH recci- veth none of the Jpocryphat Bocks ^ he concludeth ^ That therefore we are to have Recourfc to the He- Ireiv Texty from whence boih Chriji, and his zApoflles took their Teflimonies. 6, In his c Preface upon Je- remy ^ the Reafon that he rendreth for omitting the Book of Baruchy is, becaufe the Hebrew (^hurch nei- ther read it, nor had it among ihem. 7. In his ^ Vre- face upon Dar^iel^ heaffixcththis Note to the Stories of Suf anna, The Song of the Three Children, and Bel mth the Dragon, That the Jews give no credit to them, as being no pares of Daniels Prophecie, nor written in their Language. 8. Of ^ Tol?it he faith. That they cut it off from the Catalogue of "Divine Scriptures -, and f ot Judith, That it was counted among the Apocrypha. p. In his Spiftle to Paulinu^, having exhorted him to the ftudy of the Holy Scriptures^ and reckoned up all the Bocks that belong thereunto, ^neither more nor leffe then we do^) he endeth his whole Difcourfc a- bout them with this remarkable Sentence, g That thefe Books ought to be the %ule of his Life, and his continual CMeditation , being not curious to know or feek after any thing iefides. 10. In his Preface h to the Book oi Eft her, he noteth, That the Fulgar Editi- on of it h^ contracted many corruptions, and that Di- vers Pieces had been added to it, according to Mens fancies, and conceipts of what the perfons there na-

A Uc fupri 72, t^

Jic. b,

b Idem, inprsf. fn- pcr Paralipcrn. Apo- crypha nc fat Ere LE^ SI A, Ad Hebr^osigim tur revertendnm eft ^ unde (^ Vominus lo^ quifur ^ Difcii)uli Exempla pr^fhtrMnt. c Idtm, piaef. in Je- rem. Ljbrum auum BAKVCHNetarilt' jus.qui apkdHebra9f nee leguuTy nee habe- turypr£termijimus^ d Idem, prafac. m Danitlem. DanieU- pud HebrAQs nee Su^ fann£ habet hiflortamy nee Hymnum trium Puerorum, nee Belts Draconif^tie FabuUs j quas nosy quiaintoto erbg Difperfdfunt VE^ RV antepojits, eafqtte jugulmeyfubjecmw. e Idem , prafac. ia Tob. Libmm Tcbre Hebrai de Catalego DJvinarum Sajptu- raru fecant*Sy hisqm Hagiographa (fcribi d^htt. Apocrypha me- morant^ wan'-jparuntt f Wem, prsef. m Ju- dith. Apud Hcbrms Liber Jur'ith inter Httgiographa (Apooy' pba) legitur ^ €m]hs autctrjtas ad roboran" da Ula, quA in contentionem venimt^ miniti idoneajudicatur. g I Jem, Ep. ad P^nlin. Manifefhfhfta eft Genefis.Pdtet Exodas^ (fy'c (iifquc ad ApoealypfinJ Oro tefrater churifime, inter h£c vivcre, ifta pxeditari^ nihil alind noffe, nihil quArere. h Idem, pracfat. in Lib. Efther Librum EUher variis

Tranjlauribus confiat- effe vitiatum^ Q^em ego de Arcbivis HebrmrUm fevelans , 'berhurh e verbs c^xpreffins nanflulr. Quern Librum Editio vulgata laciniofts hinc inde verkorum finibus trabit^ addens eu qux ex umpore did potmntj fy audiri ', ficHtfilitum efl Schokribus excogitare, ^c.

L med

yA A Scholajlical Hijlory of

med might probably do or fpeak : which he therefore correftcd by the Original^ and fevered them from the reft? as they now ftand alfo diftinguiflied both in the

'^ Idem, in Ep. ad T^^^^g^^^ ^^^^^^ Biblcs:, and in Ours. II. * In his Epjlle

Lxtam. D?fcar;^/mi to L.f/-^, gi^i^g her advice how to inflruft her

FfaUerJm,bhfc tan j)^Ui,hcer in 2odly and religious Exercifes, his dire-

vebiisSaiomniseru 6hons are to have her altogether kept unto the D///-

diatur ad vitam. In ^gy^f; Readiug of the Holy Scriptures^ rehearfins them

^Hffi:!^ in that order which he thought moft fit for tlfe fame

rt injohvirmui^ purpofe. But among them all he fpecifieth nothing

P4f/enii^ £xfmi)/^/e- ^\xh^y> of rolit^ or Judith, or mfdom, or EcclefiaffuuS;

tranfeat mnquhm ta &c. giving Warning, That heed be taken of all ^/;.--

pfttura de ma^ibw, cryphal pvritingSy and that they ought never to be read

StTfl'rl^ vvithouc great fr^^^^^^^^^^^ 12. In his

imbibatvBlitmate.CH' Commentary upon ^ Ezechiel, (which he WTOte in his

^i\)fpn7e'!i'm- ^'^ ^S^'^ ^^ declareth himfelf to be of the fame

uuuchJm o'^' €f^ y mindc herein, which he had alwayes profefled be-

Quinqnc Libros Mo- fore, 1 3 . Laftly, (omitting fundry other places that

c«^)tATi«m,e\t: might be alledgedO in his b .4^.%/.againft i^/./]?;.,

raitpom. Libres, Etr£ he avovveth what he had formerly faid and written in

^)7a' Ad^^vithrum ^is Prologues concerning this matter.

d 'feat Cant'uHmC ami corum (^c. Caveat OMNIA AFOC RTF HA', ^ ft quando ea, non ad Dogmalum 'vtritatem^ fed adfigmrum reverentiam^ Ifgert vsluerit^ fciat non eorum effe. quorum Titulispy^notantur, nmltaqnit bis adnuxta VITIOSA, ((^y grandis effe prudemidt 4urum inLutoquArere. a Idem, in Ezech C.4;. Grades hu]us Prophiatorii, yd XXlV Libri y.T.Debentaccipi, qui habebam Chharas in Apocalypft ^^(fhnnmsy et CQronm inCApinbnifuif^vd,(^c, b Fdcm, in Apol. 2. contraRnflinwm. Ctnms P,afamncuU V.t, quarum expirte Exewpla fubieci, htiic KeiTeftesfunt ', i^fupeifluumelf., quod in illii dillum eft aUtjrquatn tbi ditium eSJcribtre, Incipim igiiur a Qentft , ^u]w Prohgus tatii

LXXII. The Exceptions t\\2it are.mad^againff all ^ ^ . thcfe deer Teftimomes of S, Jerome, I findeiohe Six,

Caktaonm Sca.'^de T, a That hc-fpeakcth not fo much here according to Libr. Mjccal). Co- his own minde , or the Canon of the Chriftian Churchy as iVcr in ^"l^^^f^Y^: he doth according to the ^Account and Canon oi the

CaVion. Ooccfus in o

Th«f Tom.f.ldf.a4

Canus jn Locis, lib. 2«c.i t. Mar. Vidor. in Schol. ad Ep.i i^. HieroBymi. Ndn refert (inqulunt

h't omnes) quod in Canone illos controveffos Libros non effe in Cmne, quia d('fiebr£'>rum Canone^ mn

dt Ealifi^ ' Cmne ii WtlUgiy

. -^ Jem

— > • • '

the Canon of the Scriptures.

75

jews only. 2. b That he varieth in his Tsljdmher of the Books 3 and is not conflanx to himfelf, fomctimes rec- koning XXIIjand otherwhiles XXIV belonging to the old Tejiame/it, 3. ^ That ivhe/i he wrote all tbefe P^JJageSj which we have cited, hewasnot^'f/: come . to the Maturity of bis Studies -^ being at firft, upon his ccccfTlik 16. co- great affedion that he had to the Hebrew tongue , and cffct. Apoiog p. 107. his familiar Acquaintance with the Jf^'^, (by whofe nonfl%tieTxZx help he tranfl^ted the Bthle-^) brouglit to fay , what he Uvres, didj againft the liooks now conteikd , which , upon ^ card. c?u Perron, te^f/ ^ix//Vf taken about them, he would not Defend, or maintain any longer. 4. ^ That he rejeded no lefle the Epiflle to the Hebrews belonging to the New Teftamenty then he did the Books oi the Afaccabes^&c. appertaining to the Old: and that therefore his Au- ^^^^e pierre parte com- thority IS no more to be regarded agamit the One^ /^^ ^«^y> ^^ /^ p^[g, then it is againft the 0/fcf>^. 5. e T^h^^t the Church ha,d not at this time determined what the Canon of the Scriptures fhould be, or at leaft that he had not heard of it fo foon ; For when he was tojLd, that the Fir ft General Ccuncel of Nice had Canonized the Book of Judith^ he began prefently totranflate it, and re- Hdrieux'du canon ccivcd it into the 5/^/.. 6. f That having been af- t^^^if^lT/^ tcrwards more exadly inftru(3:ed , he changed his pmri'exdufmdeCum minde, and retraced all that he had faid ^ffbrf. For decesphcts^aujivaut m his dy^pologte againli "B^ufpn:, hecorreBethwhsithQ defautre. had formerly written to the prejudice of thofe Pieces^ that e Marian, viaor. in are annexed to P^;^/V/ ; in his Preface upon Toto, he revcketh what he had elfewhere affirmed concerning the PerfeElion of the Hebrew Canon j In his Prologue

i.c.ioSeif^ Admirto

/ Card. Perron ubi fupra. S. Jerome^ Leflant depuis plus exa^ement infimit de la vtrhk dufent de I* Eglifgy changca d'avis ^ retraSla ^ en general, (fy' en particuHer, tout ce quit avoit efcrit en ces trois Prologues, Car en fen Apologie contre Ruffin il cor^ige ce quit avon dit au prejudice dts fragmens de Di- niel'y Enfon Frologuefurtobie^ cequil avoit dit en general pour la perfe^ion du Canon des Hebrieux ^ En fon Froloqne fur Judith, ^ enfon Expofitiondu Pfeaume 4^. ce quit aveit efcit au prejudice dit Liare de Judith j Brefen fon Commsnt aire fur le 23. d'Efaie, ce quit avoit cfr it avparavant contrt Vautoritk des Maccabees,

Repliqconcr.IcRoy d'Anglcterre, lib. i. chap. 50. S. Jetomt avant laparfaite^MU' turin de fes EJludes— fut indiut a, remuer

ftine, (^c. d Card. Pcrron.ibi<!. S. Jerome eclipfe les Maccabees du Viet Tejiawent', Maisauf- flilesbranlequand iy quand tEpijire au^

Epift. III. Hieron. SixtusSencnilsIib.8. Bibl.haer.p. Melch. CanusinIoc.I.2,c.ii. Beli. de v. Del, lib.

L 2

upon

7<5

A Scholaflical Hijlory of

* Cocclus Thcf.lib. 6.Z. 17.Bcllarm.de yerb.Dti,lib.i.c.i4.

upon Judith^ and in his Expofition of the Pfdimes he retraBeth what he faid before againft theJ5co/tof J//- dith. And in his Commentary upon Bfay^ he amendeth his former judgement concerning the Maccdes. As much iikewife do ^ they objcd again ft him^ for the Books of mfdom and Ecclefiaituus,

LXXIIL But all thefe Exceptions will not fervc their turn^ and there is not one of them, that is of force enough to invalidate S, Jeromes former Tejlimo- mes. I. For Firit, the £xrey^/o;^ which they make concerning the Canon of the Heirews^ (whereuntothey would have his words fo to relate, as it that Canon were different from the Canon of the Chrijiian Church-^) is but a vanity of thofe men that know not what elfe to fay: Fot befides ^ s. Jeromes own exprejjc words to the contrary, we have the acknowledgement of ^ Card, Bellarmme himielf, that herein S, Jerome can be no otherwife taken, then to have declared his minde as well concerning the Canon of the ("hurch^ as the Ac- count & Rule qf the Synagogue^ which for the OldTefia- ment ought not to vary one from the other; Nor was it then, or is it now in the power oiall the Churches in the World , to make any Book Canonical to the c Chrijiian which had not been formerly loto the Jen>s^ From whom we muft Derive all the Ancient Scriptures we have. S.Jeromes allegation therefore of the Hehrevp Ca- non in this point , is a forcible Argument ufcd by him (as it is by all xS\(i Fathers before) to juftifie the Canon of the Chriftian Church, which herein had no other to follow but the Hebrew. 2, The variation of his Numbers maketh no difference or augmentation of the

<iert his Ljbros mn ejfc

Canonicos apun Judges ; at cmh in Frol Gat. fmulcMm iflit Libris K. t. numerat etiam Librum Pafiorjs, qui eft N^ T, ^ omnes SIMVL dun mn effit in Camne. Non igituY de Carftie Juddorum tantum loquitur, ilyc. Admhio rgjtur Hitronyirum in ea fviffe Bp'inknc. c ^ow.^.2. /iluia cTeditafumillis Eloquja Vei. Rora.p 4. Sjforum AdopnueS, (&• Gloria, fy teSf amentum, (i^ Lfgijlatio, i/^ Frcmijfa, Origcn, l?rol. in Cam, A fluibusElo jiia Vei ad nos tranflatafunu

Books

a S. flier. Prol. in Libros Salomon. EC- CLESlAlegitquidem Judith^tsbiAtt Mac- cab, Libros, fed eet in- ter Canonias Scriptu- rasnon recipit. Sic PanaretK jilii Sirach, fy Pfeudipigrafham Sapient! am Salcmonis legat (cade ECCLE- SlA^fdadijicatio-nem PLEBIS,ncnadvt' Tiiatm ECCESIA- StlCOKVM \)9g- matum confirmandam, Similittr , in Pfol. Gal.

b Bcllarm. de verb. Dei,l i.c* 10. Sc^. Refpondcnt. Refpon- dentaliqut B.Hitro- 9LVTUW SOLVM di-

the Canon of the Scripture. yy

Books. 5ome counted Ruth^ and the Lamentations by thcmfclves 5 fome joyn'd the One to the Book of Judge$^2iVid. the Other to the Prophecy of Jeremy. When thele Books were fevered, the Total made XXIIII 5 when they were put together, the Number of all was no more then XXII ^ whereof ^ s. Jerome giveth an ac- count in his Prologue upon the lOngS'^ as likewife he doth ot them, that other whiles reckon XXVII Books belonging to the Canon 5 which are in fubftance the lame with the former. And take which of thefe Three Numbers we will, they are all 8xclu[ive of thofe other Books, that we reckon among the ^/^o^/j'/^W 5 and leave no Room for C^r^.P<??^ro/^tocomein with his b Two Books of Tobit and Judith^ who knew well enough (but that he intended to amule his Rea^ der J how to have made up the Number of XXIV, without them. 3. As to t\\Q Maturity of S.Jeromes Studies^ He was no Icfle then LXIII yeers old, c when he tranflated the Bible^ and wrote thofe Prologues that are now fet before it ; having been formerly brought up under the beft ^ Learned Men of the World that flourifhed in his time, and living in great honour ^ and eftimation among them all. Nor can it be rea- fonably imagined, that at thefe yeers he fhould be igno- rant in the Canon of the Scriptures , (^that were then ge- nerally received by the Church:,)who at the fame time had not only tran/lated them:, but wrote fo many lllu- ftrations and Commentaries upon them, being in that

a S. Hier. in Prol.^al 5i3pr^ citato. Itafimt ParherV, T. LibriXXJl ideS, c5^f. qmnquam nonnuUi Ruth et Cinoth infuopHtttit Numero fupputandosy acper hoc effe Prifcs Legu Libros XXIV ^ fyc. Porro Siuhque Liter izduplicei apudHebrjissfunt y mde et Uuinque h Plerifque Libri Duplkes sfiimantury Sa- muel^ Mahchim (id eft, Reges,) Di^rrAtfJomim (id tft, Paralipomcn*) £/i/r^ij et Jer emus cum fuk LamenwiQnibus. Hi fcparatim fumpti faciuntcum reliquis XXVIf. b Da Perron lib. i. cap, 50. c S. Hicr. de Scrip. Eccl. Vfque in prdfentem Annum, ide^y Theodofii Principis XIV (c^w incidit in A D. CCCXcn.) hdcfcripft, fyc, N. T. juxtd Grrdcamjidem reddidi, vetusjuxta Hebraicum tranf- tuli,^c. 4 Didymut Alex. Or- Nyjfenus. Gr, N4V^nx^t"if^' e Evagr. Anihch. Amphikc. Jan. VamafusKom. Ambrof Mediol. AnguSiinus Hipp Fl, Luc Vtxuu Et aliiqumplHrimi, inter quos Pauhnuj M, & Chromatius Aquil, Epifcopi,

behatf

78

J Scholajlical Hijlory of

a Which is otw of the times afllgned by the Cardinal^ (or the perfeftion of S« Je- romes Studies, b Atino^92. c Which is another of the times named ns by the Cardinal. d Anno 402. Which is the Cardinals third writing affigned out o{S.J^erome. e Anno 409. Which IS the fourth time fet forth by the Cardi- nal,

f Anno 420, MtatU fuA pi.

Infr^,

behalf more curious and diligent, then in any of his other S tudics. But let it be, that he came to a greater CMaturity of judgement in his latter time, yet if that Maturity oi his judgement in other matters^ altered not his former affercions in this particular^ what advan- tage hath the Exception of the Cardinal got again ft him > Then what time will he afligne for the Maturi- tyoiS. Jeromes Studies I (will the Cardinal go by his own Age, or whofe elfe }) For when he wrote his a Prologues upon Tobit and Judith , he was not much older then when he wrote ^ his Prologues upon the Kingi andthc Proverbs 5 nor was it above F/^f^ yeeres following 3 c when he is faid to have written his pretended Comment upon the 44th pfdme. Two yeeres after this, he wrote d againft Ruffin ; and Seven yeeres after that, ^ he wrote his Notes upon Efay ; which was Eleven yeeres before his ^ Death. More times or Writings i]\Q{\ thefe ^ wherein S. Jerome manifefted the Maturitie and TerfeEiion of his Judgment ^ Monfieur du Perron afligneth not : And let any man take which of thefe^ht will , he fhall be never the necrer to that purpofe, for which they are produced. For S. Jerome both m thefey and in fome Other Writings of a later Date then thefe^ befides divers that he wrote about the fame time^ was alwayes constant to himfelf, and to his dy- ing day retraced nothing of what he faid before con- cerning the Doubtful and Apocryphal condition of the Books now contefted between us : which I (hall by and by make evident in our Anfwer to the "^ Sixth Exception againft him. In the mean while his defire of knowledge in the Hebrew Tongue^ and his Conver- fing for that purpofe with the Learned Mafers among the Jews^ was fo far from being any %eproach to him, that above all the Latin Fathers he hath moft dclcr- vcdly been commended and honour d for it ever fince. And to whom iTiould he rather have gone for the Ori^

ginal

the Canon of the Scriptures,

19

gind Booh of the Old Tejfamem^ then to //;(?p whom the Apoflles:, and all their Succejjors in the Church be- fore hi ni^ had acknowledged tobetheF/rj? H Depofi- tdries that God appointed to keep f and pre{cr\e his Oracles ? 4. Tliat S. Jerorrie rejefted the Epi^le to the Hehrem from the Ca/^on of the New Tefiamerjt^ no lefie then he did the Maccdes and Toiit^ &c. from the 0/^3 is an Aflertion more ^^W then rr»^^ for his Au- thority is exprelTe in rejedling the 0/ie^ and fo far ■^ from excluding the Oiher^ that oftentimes he cites a the Epiftle to the Hehrem under S.Pauh Name , and urgeth it as a^l Authentick Book of the New Teflament^ which he ix^ver did the cordeftecl Books as any True Parts of the Old, Nor did be ever doubt of that Epifile ^ himfelfj but faid only, that fome c others doubted of it, and that divers of the Lati/2 Church rccQivcd it not, (as they ofthe ^'^^^'^^^^^'-''^alwayesdid,) who being but certain t Particular and Private Men^ and they alfo doubting rather of the ^ Author^ then of the Epijlle^ make little or nothing againft it. But as for Totip and Judith^ with the reft of that Order^ wc have not only S, Jerome^ or iomc oxhct Particular Perfons^ hutxheUmverfalConkmoiJewSy Greeks ^ and Latins and all, to exclude them from being any iheTrue^ and Authentick Books of the (lAncieht Scriptures. 5. To fay, that the Churchhad not yet ^letermined what their Camn of Scripture fhouldbe, is to deny the -Catholick Teflimony of the Churchy and the Common Confent oi thofe Fathers (before alledged to the contrary,; who

li Roin.5,2,

f S. Augufl. control Fauftum.iib. 12.C.25 Et quid eft aliudhodi- eque gens iffa Jud^o^ rumnift qu£da SCKU mAKlA Cbriftum^ Yu^-, ba'julans Legem et Prophetas ad Tejfi- moniuECCLEST^^ Idem in Enarr. Pfal. 40. Judd't tanquitn CAPSARII NoSri funt. Nobis CodicfS portant' Eria Pfal.. 55. Ubrarii noSfri faWfunt, quomodofo^ lint Servipcft Vomi^ nos Codices ferre. '^ S Hier. Epift. ad Dirdinmr* Nos et A' poc. et Ep. Pauli ad Hebr, recipimus, a S. Hicr. adver, Jo* vin/l2C.2, Com.iir S. Matth. Iib.3.c.2i.^ Com. in Galac.Iib.g.' c»r. Com.inTitum. lib.i.c.2. Epift. 1 2^. ad Evag^

b Canus loc. Jib. 2.. c. 1 1 , Neganws Hiero- nymum ancipitem hoc- loco (qmd iUi FAL. SISSIME impingi' tkr) habere fenientia, c S.Hier.Ep. ad Paulin. Pauks Apoflolus adi. Scribit Ecckftas, OSlava ad fiebraos A Plerifqut extra numerumPonitur. f S, Hicr. in arg. faperEpiftoIa ad Titum. H<xretici funt qui earn repK^ diarunt. Vide Thoraara fuper ea Epiftola. d Idem, de Scrip. Eccl. Epiftda aniem qudfertur ad Uebrassnon ejus cieditur propter nylifermonifquediifantiamy fedvelBarmbajuxta Tertullianum, Luc^ juxti Huofdamy vel dementis Rom. qutm AlVNTfetitentias PAVLlproprk ordinate Sermone^ vel certe quiti PAVLVS fcribebat ad Hebr^os ^ fy propter invidiam fui apud eos nminis:, Titttlum in principio falutanonis awputaverat, ScrJpferat ut Hebrdfis Htbrais Hebraichj id eft y SVO ELO»^ ^10 difertijfime^iirc,

knew

8o

A Scholajlical Hijlorj of

* Mclch, Canus in loc. eom.li.2.cap.7. Seft. Ego vcro Ego ven primkm fentio ad ApoMos pertinuijfe Libros SicrosproharCi non Sacros rejicere^ Uec enim alhs Libras CANONICOS habe- musyftveV.fivsNX

knew better then thefe late exceptors, what the Church had then determmed hcrcm. (I under ftand Determining here after that manner whereof the Church was capa- ble, which was to determine the Reception of no o- ther Books properly belonging to the if o/}/ Sm^/«r^5-5 then fuch -^ as the ^poftles oiChriB had left behinde them ; For the Church of God in thofe daycs took no fuch Soveraign Authority upon them, as the Church of Rome doth in thefe, to determine what Books fhall be Canonical Scripture, and what not, at their own will and pleafure -,) But were their ingenuity as good as their knowledge, they would never make this Excep- tion : For before S. Jerome's time, they may read it in S. Cyril, that the Church was very well afTured, what precrfe ^ Canon of Scriptur e)i\a.thhtQn determined and ^oblvemnt, atlfEc^^ l^ft among them by their Anceflors. In S. Greg. Nazi- citfiA tradiderHTit. an z en thcy may read it in exprefle Tcrmes, that the l^bll'^^'so V/^:^dc- ^^^^^^^ of the Books by him affigncd to the Old Tejla- indcinifto. Ecclefia ment, oughc to be fo Received, as a Matter ^judged qu^poSi ijomojfujt, ^^ determined in the Church. In the Counceloi Laodi- L.briftmcamnKu^ ^f^ they may read c the C^^on and Determination it quinonftnt, quhm ex jelf; and fuch a determination, as by theacknow- rs''c7rifo^^^^ ledgementofCW/;.^/ d Baronius , excluded both the fupracic.u.nuFn.58. Book of Judith and others out oi tht Canon. In ^ Phi- H'^^tfr°f.%^ m/^/ ladrius they may fee as mucli. And if all this will not NAM siNt V. r. lufticc them, they may read it atterwards in S. Augu- Li&KL Neque mihi jn^e himfclf 5 who though he were prefent at the ^l^mTZivL Councel of Carthage ^hereafter to be confidercd, yet

kge ScriptHrof V, t. _

LIBROS XXlh quQi LXXn Intetpretes trarflulerunt. Ho/ SOLOS medhare, Hi funt qmshEC- CLESIA SECVRE legi^r.uf. Multh prudeiitnres te erant APOSTOLl, VEtEKEsipE ILLl EPISCOPI EC( ESfj^. ASIISTITES, qui hos mdiderunt. Tu ergh, cvrnfiijl'm^ ECCLESiJE, LEOES <t<r iNStnvrA PATRVM necDerUs^ conumpapue. b Supr^'num. 66. S Gr^Naz. dcverisfe gcnuinisLibris S. Script a Deo infpirar*. ^kyvvfn rki^v k^JiHo tov tyiczircv S piV det^lMv. c Supra num. 59. Canonici Libri, V. t. quos foldt kgere in ECCLESIAoponct^ til SVNI.fyc^ d Baron. Aanal. Tom. 4 in Append* In [trie Canonicsrum Librorum Liber Jitdith ^ Fdifibus Laodiceacongreitiit cxplofus ei? a Canone, una cum nennulltj atiis, e Phil, dt hser. SI A- 7VtUM e(f ab Ap^Mu ^ torum 6VCCESS0KIBVS , non aliud tegi in ECCLESIA debgre CAthOUCAjirc.

did

the Canon of the Scriptures.

%i

did he never imagine (as thefe Men do,) that the ^rf- non of Scripture wasnevcr^^^frw/W^ before the time of that Councelj but he firmly believed, (as we doj '

that a the ^poflles had ^f^f/w///W it long before, and Pa^ft. Manieh.Tii.

that the Church hy cominualSuccelmngiiiQtihtmhdidi cap.s.Diflhaaej} a

in like manner receti^'cl and confirm diu That the Coun^ cfLLiNm' If-

eel of Nice had this Cami^ certain and indubitate a- nokicm avTo-

mong them we make no queftion x but that they de- ^^^^^^frX'^Ji'I'

termm'd there the Book ot jucmb to be Canonical^ rvmconfirma-

(^which was not in their power to do, unleffe it had ^^ JEEmpori^

been Canonical before,) or that S. Jerome knew not of Yioms l^^^f;!^

it , till he was paft LXni yeers old, is a matter alto- ' ^ ^

gether improbable, and we have faid enough againft It already, 6. Of S, Jeromes RetraBations we can read no where elfe, but in a Feigned b Letter written

to that purpofe, and in UHonJieur Du Ferron^ who fs, Hier. Apol. 2.

never read any fuch RetraBation in S, Jerome himfelf. adv. Ruffin. Scribit

I. ForFirft, in his ^/;o%> againft i?«/]?« concerning 5f/4Sv^!

the Hiftories ot Suf anna ana Bely vvhich in his Pr<?/^r^ qui propter EccUfu^

upon Daniel he had faid before to be efteemed by the fi^^^' '^f^'ft ^T^'

Hehrem but as Fabulous or Varaholical Narrations -^ (o ^S ^QZ^ASi mo

far was he from Retracing what he had (aid, that he scriptam nomi.

fayesitc cw4§:^/X And though he related rather d llTf^miT^:

6* propagation nes ecclesia^

RVAf tanquam infe^ de quadam fublimitet CONSinVTAESr,

their fenfe of thefe flories^ then bis own^ (for he held riAM, ^meab He^

them not to be fuch Fables^ as t^^;* did, but thought f^^j^^^/^^lf|^^^

them fit enough, as good and ufeful e T arables^ to RER^^tHebr^av^l

be read in the Churchy) yet for all that, he did not imina in Latum vtr^

account them to be any ?^r^5oftheC^/^o^/V^/5^n/;- ftZ\ZrQ!iTau^

tures divinely infpiredj nor did i?///|/;^ himfelf plead dicns obflupui,fyc.

Ibid. Ponam ^ aliud Ttflitnoniuwy tie nunc mtrerumntctlJitate computfum, dicas MVTASSE SENtEHtlAM, fyc* Ibid. Cur menonfufcipi- urn Latini meiy qui, IW 10 LATA EDltlONE VETlRl, ita NOVAMcondidi, utlaboremmeum Jiebrdisy et quod his majus eff, APOSTOLIS auporibus ^rohm ? c Hicr. Apol. 2. adverfus RQffin. Huod autem refero qnidadveuiim Sufanndt Hiflomtn^ et Hymnum trJum Puerorum, et Belis Draconif^ne fubuloi^quA in volumine Hebraico non habtntUYy Hebr£ifoleant dicere-, qui we crjwinatur Jfultumfe S)cq' phantamprobat. d Idem ibid, ^on enim quid ipfefemirem, fed quid iHicontrims dicere foleant ex- pljcavi. e ApudeundcFnTom.3. Horuil.i. Orig. in Canric. eodcm interprcte. Hm fi mnfpiri- tualiter intelligdntur, nonne fabuUfunt .^ nifi aliquid habeantfecreti mnne indignafunt Veo ? Et praf. la Libr. Salom. Legit {uidem Ecclefta hujufmodi Libw,fed eos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit, ^c,

M for

■

8i

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

for them to that degree ^ but he appealcth to II what he had formerly noted againft Por^byrie out of Ori- gen^Eufebius^ and Apllinarmy together with other fa- mous men in the Church, a w-ho held not themfelves bound to anfwer iorthefe Stories ^that had no Author itie of the Holj Scriptures 5 And in the end he concludeth for the ^ r^nV/V ofthc//^^r^a?^/^/f5 and that Copic oi Daniel' s Prophecie^ which they only allow, not with- out fome indignation againft thofe men, that will not reft, and be contented with it. 2. Secondly, In his Preface upon Tobit he c yieldeth to the defire of certain Bifhops that importuned him to tranflate that Book out of C^ldee into Lati /7yContraTy to the mind of the JeweSy who did not only exclude it out of the Scripture-Qmon (wherein S. lerome joyn'd with them,; but were utterly againft the Tranflating and the r/i? of it at all, fwhcrein he difagrced from them, ) choofing rather to pleafe his friends, & to follow the mind ot thofe Bijhops that were inftant with him for that purpofe, then to content the Rabbins that fo eagerly oppofed it. For he accompted the BoJce to be a good and a holy Book, though he held it not to be Canonical^ no more then the ^ church of his time did. And (o farre is he from RetraBing any thing here, that in fatiffying the defire of others , he profeffeth freely, that he did not fo well fatiffie himfelf in the tra- duftion of fuch Bo^^y, as belonged not to the Canon of the Bible : For that either he^ or the /^a?^ reckon'd it among the ^ Hagiographa fwhich is the ThirdCUffe

quid non vuh. (i.) Prsefit. fnam. c Idem adChrom.&Heliod^prsefat. inToMam. Mirarinon defino ExaWonis vefir^ infiantram Exigh'ts enim ut Librum Chalddio Serrmne confcriptum ad Latinum ftylum trahanii Librum utique tobix, quim Hibrm de Catikgo divharum Scripturarum fecanttSy his qus Hagi^gra^ha (legerc oportet Apocrypha) memorarHy manciparunt. Feci fatis defiderio vefiro, non tatmn meoftudio. Arguuni enim nos Hebr^i^ et imputant Nobisy contr^fuorum Canonem Laiinis auribus ifta tranf" ferre. Sedmeltm effejudicavi Pkirif&orum difpHcerejudicio^ et Epifcoporum 'juffionibus defervire, in^iti utpotui. a Idem praf. ia Proverb. Librum Tobiji leg't quidem ECGLESIA^ fed eum inter StriptU' xat Canonicas uon recipit, b Vi^l citatum Tob. Libmm tobi4i lis qm Hagiograpba mmonnh mami-

of

11 Vkienimdlhquin^ €t ex es qued ajferui Forphpiii contra Da- nielis Fraphetam mul- ta dixijfe, vocavique hu'jHs rei tejfesy Con- tra Ruffiii,ApoI.2, flS.Hicr.prxf.in Da- niclem. Eufebiuf tt Apqllinarius pari f.n- temik rejponderunt , ^c, unde et nes ante anms flwimoi cnm vtrteremus Vanielem^ has lifiones obelo frS' notavimus, ffgnipcan- tes eas in Hebrao non haberi, Et nttror quof-

dam f^/ji^'tf^h^^ ^^' dignari mihi, quafi egQ decurtaverim Librumt ciim Originesy fy Eu^ febiusyet ApolliHariw^ aliique Ecclefiaflici viri et Deports Gr^" ci^f has ut dixi VifiO' net non haberi apud HehrA^sfateaniur^nec ft dehe e refpondere Porphyrio pro his-, qua nuWa Scripture S An- toritatemprdbeant. b Idem Apol.citara. flni iUiusmdi Njini- as confetlatur^ ^ Scripture Hebraicdt veritatem non vult re^ cipere , audtat libere pfoclamantem i Nemo legere

the Canon of the Scripture. 85

of the true Books appertayning to the OldTe^ament^) c ibid, Hehr^i a.

as the word is now Pnnted , or was iormerly prritte/i ^^oTi^mtm

in the Copies now given us of S. leromes Prefaces and rarumfecantes, ^c. ^'

Epijilesj this is a contradidion //2 c adjeBoy & a moft ^j^^^^g^^; j5 ^'^''^'

raanifeft Error in the 5(rr/^f5 plainly confeft fo to be^ mc^n'txiran^&Addl

both by ^ the Ordimry and Ir/terlmearie Glolje^ and Paul; Burg. &c. iv?-

' " mmmmoient quodin

tobU et Judnh£prdogis dkmr ^ quhd apud HebrMs inter HAGIOGRAV HA leguntur, qmiMANl. FKSrVS EKKOR efl j & APOCRTPHA, non HAOlOORAPHh eU Ugendum. Qui Error in cmnibus qms videnm Codicibus iRvenitur-, et inolevu (utputo) expietate a^Devotione Exfcribentiumy qui Devetiffin. as Hi^iorias honebant annumerare inter Apocrypha. Nam quhd hie Error muhis retrk annii Codices occupaverity oifsndit Magi^fer HiftortA Schdla^iae Petrus Cemeftor in MiSioria Judith ubi dicit : Hie Liber apud Chald^os inter Hi^orias c&mpumur , ist afud Heiraos inter Apocrypha ; quod dicit Hie- jonymui in ProhgSy qui fie incipity XXII Lji eras. Si ergo alicubj in Protogofuper Judith legitur inter Hagiographa vitium Scriptoris eft-. Namquum Hkronymusin ProL galem poft Enumerationem Canonic eorum Librorumdicat, *' Hie Prologus Scriptur arum quaftOakatum Primip'mm omnibus Libris.quos de *' Htbrdio vertimM in Latinum, convenire poteS^utJcire valeamus, quicquid extrh hos eVt, inter Apocry. " pba ejfe ponendum ', igitur Sap qud vulg^ Salomonis infer ibitur, (fy Liber Jefu filii Sirach, ^ Judith, i^fy-TobiaiytfyrPafiornonfufitinCanone', quomodo credcndum eft ilium poftea in illis Prokgisjcripjiffe INTER HAOIQQRA fHA^ et fibi ipfi contradicert / Si quis prater ea libratiori examine Hieronymi verba in diSis Prologis perpinderjt^ animadvenet ilium fcrip fijfe APOCRTP HA, non HAQIOOkA- FHA,Dicit enim in Prelogo lOBI^'y '* Exigitis ut LibrumChadao Sermone confcriptum ad Latinum ftj' " lum trahamMbrum utique tobia^ quern HebrAi de Catalogo Divinarum Scripturarum^^cmist^Hii^qudt <« APOCRTP HA memorantf manciparunt. In Judith autem ait, Apud Hebr<£os Liber Judith inter APO- ** CRTPHA leghur^ cu]\tf antoritas ad roboranda ea qudt in contentionem veniunt, minh idonea judicature Cum itaque dicat Hebrdiis SecareTebi.tm de Catalogo Divinarum Scripturarnm-tet Judith auHovitatem minks idoneam judicari-, ft inter HaOIOOR k? HA. numeraret,et non inter kfOC RTF Hh,contr aria videretur in eedem loco fcrip fife. Sed^ ut dixi, Scriptores hocnomen APOCRTP HA horrentes devotions ac pietate quadam, rejeilo APOCRTPHAf HAOlOORAPHh Scripferunt. GIolTa ordinar. in ex- pofir. Prol. B,Hicron. in Li br. Tob. ad vcrbum Apocrypha, T.l. Hagiographa. Alia Liter ah abet APOCRTPHA quod melius eft, quia Hreronymus in Prologs QaUato numeraiis Libris Canmicts, inter qms ifte none^, infert, Quicquid extrahos efl^inter Apocrypha e^ cempHtatum. Et poftca, Olojfaqudtdam fcribitur fuper iflum locum, qu£ talis eft : Potiics <(^ Verius dixiffet inter Apocrypha j vel large accipit Ha- giographa, quafi Santlorum Scriptu^ j^c^

by Cofneflor^ a Hugo the Cardinal, ^ Brito^ c To^a-

m, cl Driedo:, e Catharw, and f Others. Moreover, Prdog^'s^p^r Tom"

after this Preface written upon Toiit, S. Jerome both am.

in his Troeme upon "^ Jonas^ and in his Commentaries ^ ^."^^9 "^ E^cpofic.

c Toftatus in Vto- lop. Gikat. quaft. 29. A Driedo, lib.i. de Scriptura S. cap.4, t Otharin. Annotat ad?, Cajctan.p 48. f Garf. Galarza Hifp. Epifcopus Caurienfis, fnftic. Evang. I.4.C.I. £/?*«-, Tohiasy Judith, Baruch, ^c.—^os omnes veteres Orthodoxi Patres pr'mitiis, Apocryphos nuncup4runt, ut autot est HierAn Prol ad Tob.ifyt Judith ', quamvis in Codicibus mendum r5? ', fy pro Apocryph Hagiogr Uguntur, ^c. Legendum igitur Apecrypha, quaminoriscertitudinis funt. * S. Hier« Pioxm in Jonamcirca Annunn 398. Liber quoqut T^biA licit non habeatur in Canone 3 amen quia ufurpatur ab Ecclefiaftici^ x/iris^ tale quidmemorat>

M^ 2 upon

84.

A Scholaflical Hijlorj of

brum recipere. An 400.

b Vih.i^. inEzcch. circa Annum 41 2 ♦ Viginti Q^atuor Li- brivturis In^iumen- ti. Ec. Inhi^oriatie- ro fant Moyfi ^.Libri, et Jjfudy et Judkes, Ruth quoq-j et Efther

Alios non numerar. c Praf. in Judith. Pi^Hlamni veftrji i- tnh Exaliimi acquie- vif ^ftpofnis tceupa- tionibusy quibus nehe-

upon a i>amel and b Ezechiel^ declareth himfelf to a In Dan.f,8. Si cut be of the fame minde \ which he had profefs'd before tmen placet Tobj^Li- [^ j^^^ P^oloQues^ as Well touchinff this /;4r//V/^/^r ^(?c/^ as others ot the hke condition. 3, Thirdly in his Preface upon Judith^ for ought that can be feen there, he revoketh nothing : and though the c Requefi of his Friends was fo/^rf/w;^^ and //;^^f;^r upon him, that at laft he condefcended to their delires, and tranflated that Book out of the ^haldee (wherein it was firft writ- ten) into the Latin Tongue, which he did the rather, /^^.'"i^^/^'t >;Ja becaufe there were good d Examples of Piety, Chaftity^ fibi pariter Nehemia, and y^^^«^;^/Vw/V) in it, and becaufc the fame ^ went, that the Councel of Nice had numtredit among other Holy Writings ; yet all this makes it not Canonical Scrips ture^ nor did he ever acknowJe-dge it fo to be. For there may be many Excellent %ules and Examples of tntmer arMar, huic njertuoui ABions in fundry Holy Bcoks^ over and bcfi jes wJr^'''''""'"' //;o/^ that properly belong to the i/c//j 5/W^ ; and the d Acciple Judith vi. Councel of Nice^ orfome particular pcrfon in that dsanhcaftjtatisexcm- (^ouncel might not onelyr/V^fuchaBook, but reckon VimduMuncLi- it likewife among -^ the tiered Scriptures (as we in tram Sy nodus Nicdtra the Church of England 2inAoi\\Qr Reformed church'es do 'sJimr^^^^^ at this day,) without allowing it zkc fa?ne honour and

authority that the Scriptures themfelves have, which wc only acknowledge to have been written by the Prophets and Apo^les^ as they were i-rfallihly direded Ly the Holy gho(t. For this honour the Bock of Judith had not-^ and S.Jerome here f fayes, tliat it was counted (rm,H/grographa,'- among the Apocrypha, having no 8 Authority to efta- ^«ie cji.2 anuotara f^^jy matters of faith y about which any Controverfie ^•k6)'A^ccypha le. fhould arilc. Bcfidcs , lie is not h certain whether

gltur* . . ,

^ Ibid Cu]ut au^or'ititt ad rohoranda illa^ quA in -continent ien em venium, mirini idoneajudicatur,

h Snpl. fleprincip. fid I9. c.i2. Ifiud S. Hter. tantum exfama referre videtur^ idetnq\ alibi deeodem

Libro duh'iUi. Erafm. in Cnfurapra^far. Hier. in Judith. Nonaffimat approbatttmfuiffehunc Librum

in Spodo Nic£najedait, Legttur computaffe. Idem, in Epift. Hicr. ad Furiam. An ver^decretum fit-

irit,dub'narefe fuhfi^nificat, (um aii^Lfgim cm^HtaJle^ Lindafl. panopl. I.j.c.^, Uj^od tnihidubitm'

liffiifpicionftnJ'ubiiidkarevidftHU

the

€omfufajfe.

* Dion. Garth, in

lob, Extensifhtnen-

do Scr7pluras-8c in-

fra ad lit. d

/ md- AptidHehrji'is

Liber Judith inter

the Canon of the Scriptures.

85

the T^cen Councei computed it among other Holy

Scriptures^ or no ; but it they did, he doth not fay, * Hugo Cardin. in

that they ^ counted it to be a fart of the Canon j from fj^i-l"^^]^^>'^^*7.*

which both here and hereafter he al way es excluded e^nemmorum,^ion]

it 5 as in his ^ Commentariesy and ^ EpiHles^ written l^^^'^^- Proam. in

after this time, doth evidently appear. As for his Com^ me^cirscrip^^^^ fe

wentary upon the44fJi Pfalm, (which is his ^ Epiftle vinos, puta pro otr.m~

to a Roman Viro^in,) it makes no more for Juditk ^^\ ^\^f"Jn Bibiu

then that Judtth is a Sacred Story 5 and this it may well tra£fantibus,iiber We^

be, without having 2i\vj Canonical or Divine Authority fj^^t& Liber Judith^

given to it ^ as in the fame Epiftle d S^/i^«;^/zlikewife llTsSZ^'ud^

is highly commended for a vertuom wowany and yet Carbaii. Hifp. Lib.'

her ftory was never counted by S, Jerome to be Canoni- l^f^^-T^^^oi.c.ij; cal Scripture. For i?«^^ and jE'//^^y elfewherehe brings « undeniable Reafons, that they arerr^^r^mofthe Canon 5 but for ^ J^&fc & g Sufanna he never brought any ; which makes a very great difference between the One and the other. 4. Fourthly, the Exr^/^^/c;?,

which is brought out oi his Commentaries upon Efajy cTAsi^mnTainendf^

is no better then all the former. For though this i^^ c^As^'%di^^^^-

Commentary was written long after his P/o/og^s (7^/^^^ an i/fecerit SyZdi/s

tuSy and the firft Book of the Maccahes be there al- ^^<^- cmhinAmsH.'

Icdged under theNameof5m>//r^5 yet his i Cow- ^H^^^'^c^l,'^

wentary upon Szechiel was alfo written long after this venitur!

Commentary upon Ef ay y and the general Name of Scrip- ^„.^'^j.^^}^^MJ'

tare is oftentimes given both by Ancient and Modern (fi^ninamen mitUJ

Authors, as well to fuch ^ocA 5 which they held to be brum redpere,) Et

Neque dicit Hieronyl ms, Judith a Ccna Kic, inter CANOKl- CAS Scripmroi fuijfe receptam fed Legitur^ inquity illam Synodiftn anr.umeralfe Indith in- ter ScriptHTM SAN^

Apocryphaly as to the C^^^o/^/V/z/ J5oc^5 themfelves , a- ^^Tztch^^b.p^r^^^^^

& Vih.i^SA^.fupra citatis. & in D<in.8. b Idtm, Epif>. ad Furiam'. Legimus in Judithy fft cut tamtn placet volumen reciperey) viduam^ (fy'c. Idem, Epift. ad L^ram. Superius citata. e Idcm,Ep. 1 40. ad Principiam. Ruth ct EUher et Judith tant^- glori&funt^ ut Sacris voluminibus nomina iwpefue, rint, Citac. ^ Perron, d Ibid. Huam mult£ SufannA^ qupd inter pretatur Lilium, qu£ candorepudici- ti^fponfofena componuntidtf c9'cnam Spineam mutant in gloiiatn tmvnphamis.' e In Prol,gal.& Pra:- fat. / Pracfjc in Judith A Chalddis inter HiSorias computatur^ftd ejus autoritas ntinh idonea 'judica- turad roboranda, ^c. Toftat. Pra?f. in Paralip. q 2. Hie Liber nuUim autoritatis Sdiddt eH* Sic n, ait Hier. g S Hicr. Prxf. in Dan. ^£ nulkm S. Scripture automatempr^bet. Scrar. in Tob. Pro!. 5; & in Maccab. praloq. g. SvfannamJ^obiamqni Hieronymus mnpnbat. h Du Perron, Rcpliq.p.44g. En ce Ommenuire compose long temps Depuii le Prologue Morionne ilallegue le i. //Krr dssMacoabe^i esutc le titte d' Efmturer i Supri citat, ubi Pf ologum fuum Galea turn tiictur*

mong^.

26

A Scholajlkal Hijlorj of

fcb.1.2. VtrumhiLu bri MACcabsarn inttr VIVWAS Scripturat nenrecipiuntur. e Idem, DiftoProI. JF{£c duo volumina It-

d s. Hier. Froi. in mong ^ which S.Jerome never counted the Maccahes, libr. Saiom. Judhb^ And the fame Answer will ferve to clcer the other like Umm^UbmTegit ^>^ceftion$ that are made concerning e the Books of qwdem ECCLESiAy mfdom & Ecdefiafiicus j but when to this purpofe they fedets inter canontcas produce his ^, Commentary upon the Pfalms. they bring. idem,inChron.Eu- ma ^ falfe wmejje^ and contutc S. JdTow^ by a h Md impojlor. And thus have we made it to appear^ (other- wife then Cardinal Du Perron pretended) that S. Jerome was alwayes conflant herein to himfelf. For in the year 392 he » tivowcdhis Tran/lation of the BiHey hC'- gZ^raTldifTcttil't'e fore which he placed his Pro/(?^^5 ^^/^^^//^j k asaHeU pubis, non ^^Ji^"j ^<i met of defence aeainft the Introdu61:ion of any other Books^thdii fliould pretend to be of S^ual Authority with it.Not many years after he wrote his Prefaces xa^on Tc* bit and Judtth^ and therein he changed not his minde. About the fame time he wrote his Commentary upon the Prophet Haggai^ and his Epif;le to Furia^ wherein the Book oi Judith remaineth uncanoniz*d. In the year 3P ^ he wrote his Bpijlle to L^ta^ and therein he is ftill conftant to his Prologue. About the fame year he wrote upon the Prophet Jon^y where the Book of Tol>it is kept out of the Canon. In the year (400 or fomewhac after J he wrote upoix Daniel^ and there Sufanna^Bely and the lyragon^ have no authority oi Divine Scripture. And at the fame time he wrote his Apologie againfl Ruffiny where he referreth to his former Prologues^ and exprcfly denieth any RetraBation of them. About the year 409 he wrote upon Efay^ where herevoketh no- thing. And in the latter end of his age hefet forth his Commentary upon Ezechiely wherein he acknowledged no more Books of the Old Tefiament^ then he had coun- ted before 5 but continued his belief and judgement herein to the day of his deaths which followed not long after.

amoritAtem EccUfia

iiuorum Dogntatn con-

firmandamt neqyemm

inter Canonkat Scri-

fturas recipiuntur.

f Goccius in The-

faurolib.d.art.17.

g Melch. Canus in

Ioc.Iib.2. C.14. Cir-

cuwferuntur fub titulo

Hieronymt Comment a.

riAinPfalmos EAve-

)oB, HiersfiymQ tri-

buere manifeilArU ig-

nor mtidt eft.

h Sixt. Scnenf. BibJ.

J.4. verbo Hicrony-

Hius Ineptk Sermonif

horti Commentary bat'

tologijs fy fdUcjfmis

uhique fcAtens ^phra-

ft HioonymianA ab-

horret—. Sunt qui exi-

ftimant^ eos abincerto

impo^ore ndnik nugif-

queinnumeris effe eon-

taminatcs.

i S. Hicr. de Script.

Eccl.

i^ Idem, in Prologo

Gal. hie ProhgWy

SiriptuYAJK quAfi Ga-

katum P rincipinm^ omnibus Libris^ quos de J^ebr^o verthnus in LAiimmy convenirepote^ ; vtfcire valea*

mi4s, quicquid extra bos e3,inter Apocrypha effeponcndm, fgitnt SAp, Syrachj Judith, tob. fyc. nonfunt

inCANOm. LXXIII.To

the Canon of the Scripture. 87

LXXIIIL To S. Jerome we may adde his Ancient yjy, T)om and moft ^ intircly beloved Friend^ ("though after- * *

ward his b open and profefTed Adverfary) RUFFI- ^P^.

NUS s a Man, when time was, even in *S'. Jeromes c own account, eminent both iorSanBity and ^ Learn- />^,and not only made equal to him by S. ^ Auguftincy

(who endeavoured to renew thtiv friendfhipi) but in ^S. Hier. Ep.5. ad

divers refpeds likewife preferred before him by e Gen- diviM mf hifemanf--

nadtus^ who lived not long after them both. Among tatiscamateconnexuf

other of his Works we have his Expofition of the Chri- f;,^^^^^^'^^'' ^^^

flian and Jpoflolical Sjmbole^ which he did fo well, that nunc m ariiu flm-

it got the Approbation above all others, that had fJJ^f^"^ com^kxu

been written upon it afore his time. In this ^ Treatife /i^j*^\^ ol

he numbreth the Books oi the old and JSTewTeftament^ comra^imn^^Novi

as S.Jerome did, and the Books of 7o^/>, Judith^ mf- maUtMgenus.&c.fub

dom, Ecclefiafiicus, and the MaccdeSy he excludeth from tnrtdiaT%M

Nunc tadtm inim'icus ^yicit, qu£ tunc amicus Uudnverat. c Id. Ep. ad Florcnt. Noli nos Ruffini dftimare virtutibus ; in in illo cmfpicies expreffa SanBiiatii vefiigia-o Saik babeo^fifplendorem illius imbccillitas oculomm tneoy rumferrefuflineit. "^ Id. Apol.g. contra Rufti M^i tantam babes Grsd Latmique Strmonis Sciinti^, d S. Aug. Hieronym. Ep p^. apud Hicr.. Acerrimis dolerum ftimulk fedtoVy dam cogito inter Vqs, qui* hm \)eu4 hoc ipfum, guoduterque veflrumoptavit, largum prdixumq-kt concefftrat^ ut conjunSijpmi melU S» Scripturarum Pariter lamktretis^ fie tant£ amarmdms imp/if e perniciem, ^c» t Gcnnad. dc Script. Ecclcf. Ruffinui, Aquilienfis Eccltfi a Presbyter, non rr i,ma parsfuit decorum Ecclefid, (fyde transferends de Grace in Latinum elegins ingenlum habuit. Maxima parte Grdicorum Bibliothecam Lati- nisexbibuit, Bafilii^ Gregerii Nazjanzeni^ ^c, Proprioautem labor e, iml gratia Bei ^ Vontf expofuit idem Ruffinus Symbolum^ ttt in ejuf comparamng alii necexpofuiffe credantur, Scripfit ^ Epiflolas adti' mrtm Vei hertatorias multas—. HiftoridiEcclefia^icaab Eufebiefcript^addiditdecimumetundecimum Librum. Sed ^ Obirepatoriopufcukrufmrum (i .) Hicronymo refpondit duobus veluminibus, arguens ^ convincens />, Vei intuitu, et EccUfia utilitate auxiliante Domino, ingenium agitaffe. Ilium verb dtmu" lationis fitmuloincitatumy adobloquiumMumvertijfe. f RuffinasinSymb. Apoft.Sed 35>?^. // ergo Spiritus Santlus eft, qui in K. T. Legem et Propetas, in N. verb Evangel, et Ap^ftolos infpiravit^ unde et Apoiiolus dicity Omnis Scriptura Divinitusinfpirata, utilii eU ad docendum. Et ideo qu£ funt Novi ae veteris Inftrumenti volumina, qu£ fecundum Maprum 7raditionemper ipfum Sp, Santiumiufpiratacrt- dMMury et EGCLESIIS CHRISII TRADltAy competens videtur in bee hco^ EVIDEI^TI NV- MEROy ficut ex Patrum Monumentis accepimus defignare, Itaque veterit In^rumenti Priml omnium MOrSl Gjtinque Libri funt traditi. Gen. Ex. Levit. Num. Dcut, pofl hos JESVS Ni4K£, JV^ VICVM fimul cum RVTH. Qudtmr pofth^c Reg. Libri, quos Hebrdii du9s numerant,PARALIP, Librum, i<r EZRM Libri Dwo, qui apud illo s finguli computantnr, et ESTHER. Prophetarum ver^ ESAIAS, HIEREM EZECH. fy DANIEL j pratere^XlIPROPH, Liber unus', JOB quoque, & PSALMl DAVID fingulifunt Libri ; Salomonisverh Tres Ecclefiis traditiy PROV, ECC'LES. CANT^ CANtlC. IN HIS conduferunt Librorum NumerumV.tfftamenti Neviverlquatudf Evangyfy-c, As we number them. Hac funt qua PAtRES intra CANONEM conduferunt ',E»quibjisfIDElMOM StR^ Affertionti conflare volusrant,

the

88

J Scholajlical Hijlorj of

the Canon of the Bible 5 all in the Jiame:^ not oihim- [elf only, but of the CURCHES of CHRIST^ and the ANCIENT FATHERS^ to whom the Canonical Books were fo delivered. For he makes a Three forts t idcw,ibid. Scien- ^f writings in the Church, diftinsuifliing every one ^aiii LibrifHnt]qui mto their Icveral and proper Clajje-y the Firft Canont- MH CANONIC h f(d cal^ the Second Ecclefiajiical^ and the Third Apocryphal 5 S^H^^^Sii ^^ ^^^ ^hich we have faid enough before. And we Junt^ut ffi sapknuA have nothing to note further here, but that for c ^u SaiomoMs, ^ alia ^}^q j^^^j^^ oixho. New Teftament y as they are now com- - monly numbred, and among them, S. Pauls Epifile to

the Hebrews ', the Epiftle of 5. J^wf5^ the Second o( S. Peter 'y the Second andThirdo(S. John -^ the Epiftle of 5. Ji/<^^5 and the nApocalyps^) we have the CON- SENT of the ANCIENT CHURCH exprefly de- livered to us by Rufftn ; who was better acquainted with it, then fome laterMen have been. In which regard , they that pretend to the fame Antiquity for ^ fevering thefe Books from the New Teft amenta which we do for diftinguifhing the other from the OW, have not the like Reafon on their fide. For let them fhew fuch a Teftimony for themfelves, if they can, as this of Ruffin's is for Vs^ f which neither they, nor any Man loiuerunt] non tamen elfe {hall be able evcr to do,) and then we will grants

^croKiTArEM ^^^^ ^^^ 0/*<at/2^r)' £xrf/?f/o;^againft us hath fome Rea- EX HIS FiDEi fon in it, which now hath none at all, when our Op- coNFiB^MANBAM. pofites rctum upon us and fay, that we have as little ^aTAPoclrrfl^ R^^afon to fever Tobit and the Maccahes, &c. from the nminarunt, quas in Canon of the OldTeftawenty as (ome other Men have fan!!f!lcnotslt^^ ^^ ^^^^^^ ^- ^^^^^^ ^^ S. Judey ^c. iwm thc Body oi

TRIBVS, ut dixiy ih^New. traSla.

b Supr^ Num. 5o. c Ruffin. in Symb. ubi Supri. Noli vtro TeSamenti Qifatmr Evangelia, Mat, Afarc. Luc. Joh. A^s Ap^ quos defcripftt Lucas ', Pauli ApoMi Epifloldi QHatuordec'm^ (qi!2abfqnc Epiflolaad H'br. rantumcflcntTrcdecira,) Pttri Apoftoli EpisfoU Du^-jjac^bi Fratrii Domini ^^ ^- pcUeli una ', Judd nna •-, Johannis ins , Apocalypfis Johannii. h^cfum^qu^ P At RES intra CANON EM concbtferunt, (^c. * But this no Chnrcb Synod ever did , only (ome pmiiular perfons have been noted for ic. VidcMm^lX*

LXXV. But

Filii Syracb. qui Li- ter apud Latinos HOC IPSO gtntrali VO- GABVLO ECCLE- SlAStlCVS appel- Utur y quo vQcabulo nonAu^tr Libellijei Scripm£ Qjialitas cognominata e9* E- JVSDEM OKDU NFS eft Libtllus To- bidt , ^ Judith , 6* Maccab£orum Libii, In N^ verb t. Libel - lui qui dicitur PaSlo- Talis, five Hermttis, (^c. ilka omnia legi quidem in EccUfik

the Canon of the Scriptures.

89

LXXV. But againft the Teftimony of %jifHn they

have certain 0^;>^f/o;^5 to make befides. i That * he * Mar. viaorinyi^

was but of fmall account among others in whofc time ^^^ fnt^^dla ^^h^*

he lived. 2. That t he was unskilful and ^^/^oy^^nn HreruJpit!^^^ ^^

the Ancient Traditions o^ the Fathers, 3. That he was + ^5^^^- Canns m

blemi{hedwiththe£rw5ofO//;^e';?. 4. That ^ when rRu/nH?(plce^

he wrote his Treatife upon the Apofths Sjmhole^ he was ^'^ris dmum fit) p^'

S. Jeromes Difciple ^ but afterwards retraced his opi- ^^^^^'^"^^^^^^^f^ km^

niony and reproached S.Jerome himfelf for rejefting a cird. du Perron

the Hiflorj of Sufannay and the Song of the Three Rep%pag.44i. &

Children^ together with the Story of Bel and the Dragon^ tucm AutkwTHtin,

from the Canon of the Bible. 5, AndLaftly, that he q^j fi fiit licentu dc

confuted his own DoBrine y ^ when in the fame Treatife Z^^'dtsZlTcLv

upon the Symbole he quoteth the "^ook ofmfdom under avant s. Jerome,^

theNameofaP^Opfc^/-. Ruffin apus luy, pen-

* dantqutlfutfrn D:f-

aphi mats sUflm depuis rendu fon ennemy^ il luy fan Ripmhesfur le fHJetparticulier des Hiftories de Sufanna, et Beh et du CantiqHe dts trots Enfans. b Cccc. Thefaur. \ih,6, arc, 9, Cotton Inftitur* lib.2. cap. ^r.

LXXVI. I. To the firft oi xhdtObjeBionSy the Account (noted c htioxt')xh2iX.S.JeromeyS,Augujliney and Gennadim made ofhim^ befides the Credit that he had with ^ PauUnusy and the Approbation that he received (^even for this very Treatife) from ^ Pope GelapuSy is a fufficient Anlwer, 2. The Second is re- futed by the Tradition of all thofe Ancient FatherSy whom we have in their feveral Ages produced be- fore him, and in particular by the writings of iS'. HiU laryy S. Cyrily S, AthanafiuSy and MelitOy who delivered the fame Doftrine that he did^ as they had received it from f their ^ncejlors. 3. To the Third we fay, that as § Origen was accusM of many mote Errors then he had, ffor his Works were much corrupted ^^^^sdeRuffin^txcip^

^ ^ A teslesckfesqus SJe*

rome y avoh reprifes ; c'efi une vaine etfrivole gdrantie *, dautant que le Pape GeUfeparhh dts otuurej Ok verfions dogmatiques de Ruffin y commt eQoit U Continent aire fur la Symbole^ fyc. f Vide Ncrr,47, 5$>5^5 57>,53. g Si xt. Scnenf. lHb.4. Verbo On^inw. C^ferum cum talis tantufqtieejfet Or ig^nesf gravem tamen Uborumfuorum ja^uram pajftn «/?, fraude ac nitio H^retjcorum > qui omnia ejui Opera iff rtvmeris hdirefibm contamittorunt, u\ fuh prdtiexxu acfavore KorttiwsOrjgenisimpiaf coghationes fuas faci- liiif ptrfuadertnt^ fy^ cbarih vepderent- Hvam hareticorum adulterationem multi velnon animadiitritn' tes^ vtl autcris crimen id effi magis^ qunm hjireticoTHm depravaiUnm credcntes^ Originm am Optribus fuif inter Hdtrgtices rejecerunt*

N by

Num,74;

d Paulin. Epifcopus Nolan, in Epift. 9. ScSixt.Scn.in Bibl. 1.4. verbo Ruffinuu e Gelaf Pap3,in de- crct. De Script is Apo- crypbk. Du Perron, Repliq.b>. i.ch.35. pag.2ip. Car quant I ce qu aucuns alk- guent^ que le Pope Ge- la ft app^ ouua ks op if*

^o

A Scholajlical Htjlory of

j^^crlpftruntpro^- ligene varies libros Apologeticcs Fam- fhyJHsMaryr^GT f^e- cc4amnfis Eufebius Csf^ritnfu^ Vydmuf AUxandrinusy ^t- tkQdius Ol)7VpJus,Ba' pljus Magrus, 6* ^^ NAXJanTjnus,

7 S.Hicr. in H m. Orig. fupcr Cantic. cumprafdicat Sacro- rutn Omnium Expoft- torum vifforem. Et Hicronyn^i Precep- tor Dydimns Alcx- indrinus. Secundum fo^Apoflolos Eccltfi- arumMagiStum. k Hicr.Ep.adRuff. & Apol. I. conira Puff.

/ S. H'cr. Apol. g. contr. Rcff. Vydimui Alexandiinus Magi- Ser McMffyTuus. ^V\6c Epift, S. Hi- tkS adFlofcnt,

by BeretickSy that borrow 'd the credit and fplcndor of his Name to vent their own prefumptuous fan- cies ) fo %f4fii^ was fufpedcd to be a Spreader of them all, only becaufe he trar^/lated iomo. of his BockSy and wrote an nApologie for them 5 which in thofe bufie and curious times made a greater noife , and procured him more envie and obloquie^ then either he or Origen deferv'd. For there were fundry other h Fathers bcfides Rt4f^ri^ that had written their Ape- logies for Origen^ and yet never fuffer^ any fuch ^e-- fYoach for itj as He had the ill hap to do. But the Fa- dionran io ftrongly that way in the day es wherein He lived, that no Man, without danger of obloquie, and lofle of his credit, might adventure to fay any thing for Origen^ againft the ftream and voices of the multitude, which'had been rais'd up, to cxy him down. And this was ir^ vvhich made S. Jerome (the great admirer i of Origen above all others in former times,) now to decline that Envie,. and to lay it ^ upon Ruf fin's {houldcrs. Yet what ever either Origens or %uffin's Errors were, certain we are, that this diftinBion and fevering oi the Canonical Bocks of Scrij;- ture from thtEcclefiafiical atidApocrjphal fVriti/2gs of other Men, was none ofthem^ for herein ^. J^yo/w^ altogether accorded with him, and He with S.Je- ronie^:, as both the One and the Other did with the Church ofgodj that was in their dayes,. and in the old time before them; 4, Fourthly, that i^///j^;? was *?. J^- yowAD/fr;]p/eisrafhly faid ^ for they had l hothane Mafter-^. and the time was, when S, Jerome »" thought it no difparagement to learn oihim^ and to letT^ji/. pns credit before hisow'^ \ but that Ruffin afterwards retraced any ihin^ of his former opinion, in this par- ticular Subjeft abovit tht Canonical Bocks ^ it is as un- truly faid, as that S. Jerome retraced any thing of that matter himfelf. , For the Controvcrfie between

them

I

the Canon of the Scriptmre,

91

them concerning "^ the Hiftory of Sufama^ and the So^g of the Three Children y &c, was not^ whether they * which were ad- were Canonical Scripture^ or no ; (being both agreed, ^^^ °"^ ^IJ.^f^^^^'

1 1 I J J ° » J? /T . "'^ new Edition of

that they were never comprehended in ^fc^^ C/^jf/^ ^) xhtmu, and not

but whether they were fuch " Fabulous and Falfe Sto- ^^ of the Htbrev? or

rie$ or no, as that they might not be fufferM to come %ltu1ihT ^'"*

into the Ecclefiafiical Clafs ot Scriptures^ic were altoge- « Ruft. in Hier. in-

ther unfit to be read in the Church. This %uffinus ap- ;:€aiv.2.citac. ^ Per- , J J , ^ ^ , . , y-'J . -V ronio pag.443. ^«w

prehended to be 5. Jerome s meaning, and therein mil- ctux done quipenfit^

. took him 5 For though the J^irs *> were of that mind, ^jt^ qfte sufanna eujf

- yet S.Jfre^we was not, who had only faid, p that thefe fte4T2r;V^^

Fieces were no true Parts oi Daniel's Prophecie^ and itnenmrmjomerri^

that they had not the fame Authority^ with the Cano- lijfjitr^'/^' ^^

meal Scriptures. Nor can there any more be made of qui ont chame i' hym^

this * difference between them. 5. To the laft 0^;V- ne des trois Enfans^

Bionj (which prefuppofeth, that 7?jij^;^ cited ^ the VhanTchfaFAV%

Book ofmfdom as a ^rophecie, when he faid in his Tr^^ -y^^.

riryv upon the Sjmtole, that ^ now it would be no hard * j^; ^^^i ^^dat

thing to believe what the Pr()/;fc^/5 had foretold, that tem'referequidadvT^

The jufl [halt (hine as the Sun. and as the hriohtnede of the '«^ Suf^mA hmrU

Virmamenty tn the Kingdom of God^) we lay, that as it umpuemum.((^c.He'

is not credible, Ruffn would contradid himfelf (o braifoitamdkere.qui

foon,and quote rto Author (ox a Prophet, whom he f^;kanZ7Uit.

had already, in the fame Treatife, excluded out ot the Non enim quid iffi

Number of the Prophets ; fo he nameth not the Book ^^f'^V^^H i^^'^f^

of ivifdom (here) at all 5 and there is little refem- mtexpuLi^!^^ ^'

blance between his words and the words of that Book : p idem, lib. com. in

which if fuch a phrafe as this (The j 4 jh all Shine,) tT^,"^!";^:.

were fufficient to make Canonical Scripture, the Fourth plmimos cum venerea

Book ofEfdras would be as Canonical, as it ^ for t there ^^ VaniekmMvi^

alfo we read as much as this phrafe importeth. But Z"'fi[niltntTeu

in lUbidonon habert. Et mil or quofdm (Aifx^^tfio ipaf indiimrj m/w, qua^ eg* decurtdverim Libmm, cum Orjgincs, tt Euftbt- us, tt ApollinaTJus aliiqne EccUfuflici viri) <fyr Doliores Gucix, has, ut dixi,vifiones non haberi apud He^ brdio! fiteantuT, necfe debtre refpondere Porphyrio pro hi/, qu£ nullam Sctiptura San^x Autoritdtem pre^ {)eant. r Sip.-^.j. Fulgebuntjufti.^ tanquimScimilUinarundtnetodJfcurrtnt, / RjjffininSymb. Non eritjam difficile credtre etiam ilia qua Prophets prddixerunt, quod JuWtfulgebKni ftcut Sol^f^fcut Splendor firmamenti in Regno Dei, Verf.fincm. t 4» Efdr,T,$5.Super Stellas fulgiebunt fiiiis mum. * Vide Teftim. Dricdonis infta. N 2 there

9^

A Scholajlical Hifiory of

there is enough befides in the Canomcal Books them- felves, to verifie "Kjifjins Citmon -^ which is clearly • Dan.12.^. drawn from t the Provhecie of Darnel^ whcreunto the

fiitidehi fmufuige- /k)/«g of ^i?y^^ hath reference in II S.Matthevp.

bwit QUifi fpUndoT pT'

mamenti • fy qui ad}«fiitiatH erHdiunt mhos quafi SteUa in perfttuas dtumtates. \\ S, Matth. 1 3 .4 ?^

tuncjufii'fulitbmtftcHt SqI, w ^fi^ Patrk Eorum.

LXXVII. In the mean while we deny not^ but that the ^nctem fathers have often cited thefe controverted BookSy fome under the Name oi Divine Scri^ture^^ and others under the Title oi Prophetical Writings. So a Cle^ mens of Alexandria^ and Theodoret cite the Book of Baruch ; ^ S. Cyprian the Books oimfdom and the Mac^ cabes^ befides the ]M^OTy oi Sufanna z, ^ S.Cyril th^ Book o£ Ecclejiafticus'^ and ^ S..AmirofethQBookoi Toifitywith Many More to the like purpofe. And we ac- t ifcD. apud Eurfcb. knowledge alfo that e divers of them have quoted the tuil?an?dc"f2rcrip" Book of mfdom^ in particular, under the Title of rt^ mfdom of Salomon. But all this will not make thefe Books to be of Canonical y and Infallible Authority ; which is a priviled^e that was referv'd (ioi the Oki Teftamenty) to the Law and the Prophets only, that were delivered to the A.went Church of the Jews. For we can produce ipany of the fame FatherSy and fundry otherSy that have in like manner alledged ^ the 3^ and. g 4fh Book of EfdraSy the ^ Prayer of Manafjesy » the 3d Book of the Maccahes y ^ the Prophecy oi Henochy I the "FaftoroiHermesy and »" tht Antiquities oi Jo* fephus. AH thefe, (which notwithftanding thofe Fa- J- • i„ n.^tin ^hers of the Catholick Churchy and the Do(aors of the

^fanaffifynee won 5.^

4. Efar£ Iquibufdam Patribus cUanlur, z Clem, aut alios in Can. Apoftolorum, Thcodoret.in, Dan. cap. 11. k. S. Ind. Ep,vcr. 14. Iren.CJcro. Al- Athcnag. Tcrtel. Cypr. La(?tanc. Sulp, Sev. Proclus, Pfcliuf^ citaii ^ BoMhco /. f , c. i 4 / Orig. lib. i o. (n Ep. ad Ron?, j!^/ PaSerm Her- metis DivinitHs infpiratum efe putavit, Eufeb. hift, jib. J.c.?. Hicr.de Script. RuS in Symb, Tcr* nil. de Orat. Clem. Alex, \ib.6, Strom. Athan. de Dccrct. Syn. Nic. Caflian- Collat^ij;. c. i a. Ircn, lib. 4. cap. 57. ^ Hier. in Sophoniam c. i: tfgamus J^feplfum fy Frophenam illius cernenms Hijimam. Idcm,lib.i2, in Ef^iara c.45. (& lib.5. w Efaiam c. 25. Sc lib.p. in Ezcch cap. 29.

Roman

n Clem. Alex. lib. 2. fad. c. $, Theodo- icr. in Expofit. ejus. * S.Cypr. de habit virg. Idem, lib. i. Epifl. ). ad Cornel. Idem,Serm. de Lap- lis, aut all ^. e S. Cyril. A/ex.I.j. in Julian.

d S. Ambr.in lib^de Tob.c.i.

tionibus. Cypr Ser de Mortal! tare. Hi- larius in PfaJ. 127. Ambr.Ser.g.in.Pf.nS Bafil. lib. 5. contra Eunomium. Epiph. te. ABomaeorum. / Athan. orat. g.in Arianos. Clcm.AHcx. Strom. I. Cypr, Ep. 74. ad Pom. g Ambr. de bono Mortis & 1.2. inLu- cam. Iren.Ii.g.c.2$. Bafil, Ep.ad Chiloa. Przf. illi prxmifk in

the Canen of the Scriptures,

n

a Nic. I. Epift.ad Mich. Impcr. Stnitn' iks Fatrum divinitMt infpiwas, Innocen. | . cap.Cu Marthse^cx- tri de celebrac. Mlf.

Rpma/i Churchy themfelves accompt to be but jipocyphd jVntings^) we fhall findc cited by Ancient Authors^ fome under the Name oi Scripture^ and fome under the Titles of Sacred and Divine Scrifture^ other fome with the Epithets of i^^i'^/^^/^/^^jPro^iE?^^^ and Holj Infpirations added to th(em 5 All which they may well be in a large ox popular fenfe^ and yet never be of that ^ Aifolute andCanonical Auphoritj that ^ UMofes and the mbrnm^f^n^ prophets are. Fpr wetruftj that neither Po/;? iV/Vfcoto Prophetas, audiamU' the Firft, npr Pope Innocent the Third, nor Gratian^ /ci.^'c. Etcap. 24. nor the Glojj'e upon the Decretals^ nor Card, Bellarmine ' ^' ^^* himfelf> ever intended to make Canonical^ and Ahfo^ lately Divine Scripture cither oiS.Augu^ine's and o- Hh^r the Farthers Sentences^ or oi the Pope's Epiftles and Decrees oiCouncelSy when ^ they attributed the gene- ral Name of divine and Holy Scriptures to them. Which they did onely ^ to diftinguifh them from vcrfus fincm. supeV Profane and Secular Writings. And in that fenfe we ^'sACR^^'^VKi ackaowledge thofe JBooks^ vyhich are now in del^ate pivk^ dtcat au' between them and us, to have been cited, and termed ^j^^'^' quhdhjurim by Imdryoi the Fathers, SACRED, and DIVINE, iXtTis^i^^^^^^ and HOLY SCRIPTURES : whereof they made «« eft s. Augaftini no other ufe, then to^rf/" them from Cow;77o;^ Books, %o^ohj fjjf^^l and to illuftrate the proper and Canonical Scriptures hy ratme confmiu &c^ them. For where at any time they come to {peak di- GratianusmDecrc-

■' ' ^ to Juris Canon. Dift.

ip.c.<5.InCanonicis. hter Canonkat SCRlPTVRAS Vecretaks Ep'^ftoU connumerantur.-'DlP'lNARVM SCRIPIV- RARVM filer tijjimus inddgator Auioritatewfequatur^ tnier guasfane ilUfint, guax Apsftolicafedes ha* lere, fy ab ea alii meruerunt acdptrt Epi^oUs^ Johannes Andrajas Author Olofla? fupcr Decretal, in ^ap.CumMartha?. Sea. Tertio loco. SACRA SCRIPTVRA bic appillantur SCRIPTA AVQV- S7IKI, mde hdic defummm. Bellarm. de Concil. autoritat. liKa. c. 1 2. Licet Canones Genciliorum ^Pontificum Veer eta diftinguantur ^ poJIpopanturScriptttrdt divindt^ tamtn SVO M9D0 funt (fy' diet $oJfi(nty SCRJPWRK SACRA ^ CANONIC A', quomodoVnSynodus AB.^.vocatVicretaCon- cilijy Divinitiis infpiratas Onftitutionef. b Melch. Canns locJ,5, c,^. Innocentius verba Auguflini SAC RAM SCRJPWRAM appellavit , quemadmodtim Leges Pontijica SACR^ dicuntur, Ht I Legibus principum difcrmineiitkr Bellarm. dc Cone. 1.2. c.12 Se<^. DicoSccundo. Decreta Fen^ tificum dicuntur SCRIPTVRJ^. SACK^^ ut diftinguantur A Proph^nis,^ Concilia, ut diSlinguantHT ^Scriptis Patrum-, qus non funt ReguU. LoyliosSenttnt. theol. I.i, c.i^* Non moveat quenquam, quid Patres ex bis Librisfdei teSlimonia f^mant, Nampropurth nonfeqwiur Eos inttr Librcs CanonicoSi sollocalfei non magis quam Librum Henoch^ ^c«

ftinajy

■

H

A SchoUJlical Hijlory of

4 Vkle Nam. 1. 8(2.

b Bellarm. dc vcrbo Dcilib.i.c.xo.ScS. Ecclelit* Kotandum fft , Chettmitium non rugare hot Libros ejfe bcnos & SanQos^ (st digMS qui leganturi fid tamen non efft f<- ies, ut exits fimaar' gumenta dud f6jfmt ,

diftindly & accurately, there they make a difFerence between the Oncy and the Other ^ forting either of them into their own peculiar Cl^jj^:> ^^ allowing no Divine or Canonicall tAuthority (in that a Senfe wherein Divine^ and Canonical is ftriftly and proper- ly taken,^ but to thofe Books only, which were con- lign'd to the Churchy for Abfolute and infallible Rules ot all our Religion^ by ih^ Special Apf ointment oi God himfelf. In a larger and general fenfe (as Divine is applyed to Hoi) and Divine Matters^ and Canonical to the Rules of good Life and Manners^ or to the Con- firming of us in that Faith , which is founded upon the Infallible Scriptures alone,) we ^ fcruple not to call xhQ Debated Books y Holy and Divine Scriptures^ no more then the Fathers did ^ and though we make them not of equal Authority with the Canonical Boots of Mofes and the Prophets y yet this honour we do them, that we binde them up with our B/^/^y, for the good and religious ufe which may be made of them by all Men y otherwhiles we read many parts of them in our Churches ; and we prefer them before any private jvritings or Books that are not Canonical what- foever.

LXXVIII. And here we conclude the frf: Four Centuries. In all which time , the greateft Searchers into Ecclefiaflical Antiquities, are not able to produce any Councel^ or fo much as the Teftimonie ot any One Father y who purpofely treating, and declaring the exaft Number of^all the hooks^ that properly belonged to the OldTefiament , did not either exprefly exclude, or at leaft omit , thofe which are now made Equal to the former , by the New Canon of the Roman Church. For it is not enough , to bring the Sayings of any Scclefaiiicahrriters , which will evince nothing more, tlicn, whiles they were difcourfingupon other matters, that they made an honourable mentton oiioniQ One or

Tm

the Canon of the Scripture. ^ ^$

two of thcfe Books 5 and cited a feiv Sentences out of

them 5 which either in fo many words, or in the faniie

rcnfc, are to be found in the Canonicd Books themlelves.

But the QuciUon is 5 whether ever any Churchy or

Ancient Author^ during thefe Firfi ^g^s^ can be

ftiewed, to have profefledly made [u(.h a Catalogue

of the True and Authentick Books of Scripture, as

the Comcel of Trent hath lately addreffed, and obtruded

upon the world 5 which will never be done. In the

mean while , they all fpeak fo perfpicuoufly for our

Church^Canony (and to that purpofe we have produced

their feveral and joynt Teftimonies, ) that there can

be no deny all of their Agreement hercm with us. We

will therefore end this Chapter with the Preface that

Amphilochm made « before to his Z^frf^/, (for it is > Numb.#7«

worth the Repeating again, )

Non tuto cuivis eft credendum Lihroy Qui venerandum Nomen S.Scripturd prefer at 5 By which words he giveth usa faire intimation , that there were in fc/5 time , (as there are in Ours^) Certain Eookes annexed to \^e Bible ^ that bare the iVie/wf and Uenerable Title oi Divine Scriptures^ which yet ought to be diftinguiftied from them, as not having the fame EjJentiallSy Approbation^ and Authority^ that the Genuine and Canonical Books had. And this is the true Senfc and Scope, at which all the reft of the Fathers ay mcA^ both thole that have bin cited ^f/c^^, and thole that ^ ihall follow 4/ifr.

Chaf»*

p^ AScholaJlical Hijlory of

Chap. VIL

The Tejlimony of the Fathers in the Fifth Century.

IXXIX. T Y 7 E begin this C(?«^/irji withS. AH-

Y/V/ GUSTIH who though he lived

^ ^ in the Churches of -4fnV/t, where

their common Latin Bibles and their Greek LXX^had

thofe later Books of Tohit and Judith^ &c. annexed to

them^ as Theodotion firft coUeded them, and fet them

A In diflfcrtatione forth in one Volume ; and though he was a ever wil-

ZtT^ZT^ ling to keep the rranflation, which they had there,

Iib.I8♦dcCiv!^Dei. accordkig to the Septuagint^ ftill inufe, and topre-

f .^l' f l-****^ ^?^ ftrve that priviledsc and honour to thefe Additional

ztt Lariwm i./«^«4m BookSy which by long ule and continuance they had

interpreutumeft^qmd gained (in thofe parts of the World efpeciallyj) ^ to

mnt%m^s\oTdi ^e read and publiftied to the people, as having many

futr'u umprihus no' good ^«/^5 of Life^ and Canons oi Religivn in xhtva^

arts Presbyter Hiero' y^j. j^^ ^^5 alwayes careful, to fet that .^/zri^ of 2>/.

mus^fyommumtrium ftwBton upon them, which might y>i;fy thcm (in ma- I'lnguarumperms^qui j^y vej-y weighty and confiderable refpeds,) from the MZohLiinume- ^ooks SLixd Canon of the Hebrew Bible -y v/hercuntohe hquitimeafdm Scrip' allowcd a far greater prc-cminence, (both in regard ^Inc"S'ci')7^g'' oi infallible verity^ and unqueftion'd Authority,) then he infr^ citando, cu'npi evcr did to the other ; and herein agreed with all the [tAugujtims inter- "fathers of the Chriftian Church that had been before him. For the clearing whereof, we will firft fet down what he faid to thispurpofe, fc/w/J?//; and then exa- mine what others objed, and would fain make him fay to the contrary.

LXXX.

fait*

the Canon of the Scriptures. py

LXXX, I. The ^Fathersih^,ihQ\AEzra^ Nehemi- <« vide Nam, 4. u dh:, and cMalachjio be the laft ProphetSy f after whofe ^^^' ^}* time, until the coming of O.r/^, there was no other^) held likewife this Conclufion j That b thofe Bockes which were .written, during all that fpace ofyeers, . ^, . wiicrein there was ^^0 Prophet feen in Ifrael:, cannot u^f jJifdJ^mfy properly be faid to belong tothc Canon of Scripture^ Nehemim ufq haife- or to have equal Authorm with thofe other ^oo^5.which "^^ ^^^'^rik^ ^j}^^^: by Gods ipecial will and inlpiration were let lorth be- Ann.prin cm Seicoci fore. Ot thele Fathers S. Augu^ine was one j from i"^«vcrfioneS Hie- whofe c words, concerning the Ceffation and Expi- 'mfi^lollcltn^^^^^ ration of all Prophetical iVntings after the dayes of fiippntatRfgrnm-^ve- Ezra, and Malachy, the fame Conclufion will undeni- JTi'sSr^ «^^ ably follow. That till the Time ofC/?;'/^, "(who faid computamur. idem, as much himfelf,) there were no more Books to be rec- ^'^- ^' ^^no^^tr e- koned, that had anyluch Canonical Authority, as the ]mpore ufylead tliZ former had. And fo far was he from admitting tho^e p^ra Servatom miii Books, which they wrote that were no Prophets, into ItfrnXdlfoLmTn- the C^/?o/2of(jo^*^ divine and indubitateOr^rfo 5 that terpr'. Gcnchr An^ ^ what the Prophes wrote themfelves, without a fpe- 52. ^ffJe.rPrr/•mor- cial Inlpiration, and precept ot (70^ to that purpole, et Mdachm a^^ he excluded from it ; making a cleer di(lir.Bion be- ttmpore ceffavit Pn-

^ ^ fhetjadelpael

€ S. Aug. de Civir Dei. 1 17. c nit. Toto autemUlo tempore, tx quo udieruntdfBahy lone ^ poQ MaU' cbiam* Aggd^H ■ t Zachdiam^ qui tunc Pyophetatjerunt, et Efiram \ mn habuerwt Propketas. ufq\ ad Sai* vatoris Adventum ; - P 9pter quod ipfe Dofrimt ait. Lex ^ P of beta ufque ad JohMnimm.- MaUchiam vero , Agg£um. Zarharhm. et ffd im, ethm Juddti rep -obi in Autorjtat^m Canoniram receptos. fiovifjimts habent Suit e iti e ^oipta Eorum, ftcut Aljo^umyqui in tnagunnultitHdinepyo^be'arunt -, pirpauciea fcripfe utiK qud AVtORlTAtEM CANONTS obtine unt, Ec \ih 8. ao 2^ Vfque ad hoc tempus Pr^phetas hahnit populism Ifrael^ qui cum multi fuerint paucerMmetapudJud^oSyetapudNosCanenJca Scriptaret'-nenrur Erli7.CT Hoctotumtempus eft P^opbet arum, d Icem, dcCivit. Dei, I«i8. C.58. Jnipfa hiftoria Regum Jud<g^ et Regum JfraeK qyA res gtfias continet^ de quibuseidem Scrips %UT£ Cammed credimus^ cemmemrranturplurimaquaihinon expliimtur, et in Libris aliis inveairi di- cufffur quss Prophexdt Scripferunt^ et aliubi Earumqucqw Prophttarum Nomina mn t^rentur (intelligic Satpuclewt Nathan^ dd ProphctJS, dequilus, i Chron.29 29. Sc Abijah.dc Idd ncmyun^ cum Shemafa^\ti<{en\ Propherss, dc qutbus, 2 Chron^ 19 &: 12,1^. Itcw Sahmoneniy iic quo 17. dc Civ^ Dei, c. 20,) Nee tamen inveniuntur in CANONS, quern opulus Dei recepit, Cujusrei^fateor, eaufa me latet, nifi quU Ego exiflimo, etiam Ipfot^ quibut ea, quatnautoriMte ReUg'onjs ejf^ deberent^ SanShs utique Spiritus revelabat *, alia ficut homines hiSoricii diligentik. alia ficut Prophetas hfpira* tione Divinafcrihere potuijfe , atque HMttafuijfe VISTlNCTAy utiUa tanquam fPSI?, Wa vet h tail' cuim DEO v«T ipfos loqaenti judicarentur e(fe tribuenda ', ac fie ilia pertinerent adubertatem cognititnif) b£c ad Religioms AVrOKlTAtEMy in a!VA AVtORlTAtE cuftoditur CANON.

O tween

■

p 8 -^ Scholajlical Hijlory of

. ^ ___ ^vvecn Every Writing that was compos'd oneljr by

Humane Diltgence^ (as all the contefted Books were>) and thofe that were let iorth by "Divine Revelation ^ ct S. Aug.1nPfal.40. in the AUTHORITY whereof the Certain Canon of St Aiiqms pejflrtpit Scripture confifteth. 2. Nor was there herein any Xp;o;LS«x' difference between S. ^Auguftin, and the Jem, or be- iftis'y profermur CO- tween the Hebrew Canon and ti:ie Chrijlian j For when RVM.J^d^i^a^ it ^vas objeded to the Cbriftians, ^ that they proJu- ^Mdfh Capfarii m^ri ced their own C^non of Scriptures for themfelves, he ap- ^cTdk^^^m^^ pealeth to thofe Jei^s, who were the Chriftians profcft jiiol%nt\^'wph^^^ & Enemies ; and acknowledgeth no other Canon, where- Lex •, in qua Lege, fy upon the Chrijlian Faith and Religion was founded, 'chir pZkZ then what the Jews had ftill preferv'd intire and un- tfl, idcminPfa.^d. corrupted among them ^ having learn'd from 5. pW, Propttreh adhuc Jn- ^ ^j^^^ the Oy^r/^5 o/GWin the OWr^to^;^^ had beeti ftrospormtadconfii- /^//committed to their C«_^o.j/y5 whcrc they were kept fmem fuam. Uuando without any mixture or Confufion oi other iVritinas • and ;fF:;ir;5t from a»}J >> hlmfelf, that the c i,^«/^<,/-«, and \n chrjftm^ profcri- the Books ofthe Prophets, (^to which only he referr'd as wj«jF.^<:;j/i//i^iL/. ^^ j^j^ d ownmtnefjes,) comprehended ^ M the Scrip- j^p LITERS, qui tares, that beiore his time had been Penn d and let bus chnfiufpropheta- forth by Divine AUTHORnr, 3. Ofthe Greek Sep- fZtfotLs iF^ t^^gi^^^ Bihle,(^s it was firft fet forth in the time of SAS LitEKkshA- Btolem<eus Philadelphus,) ^ S. Augujline acknowledged ^ms^toDic^EtZ'b ri^ ^ore ^ao^^y, then what were then Tranflated out

Jnimicis ^ ut confundamus alies Inimkos, CODICEM portat Juddus, unde CREDht Chrifliarus. Libiammfirifaliifunt Idem, lib 12. contra Fauft c»pig. Et quid ej} aliud hodieqiie gens ipfa J^u- .d^'iTumymftqu.-edimScrinia^i^.Chriftianorum, bajulans Lrgem fy PRO ^HEtAS ad teflmonmmaffcr' mnis ECCLESJM / Item, lib.18 de Civic. Dei, cap.41. Atverogens illciy iUepopuks, ilia chiiaty Ufa republica, Hli Jfraeliu,'^ Q^I&VS CREDITA SVNT ELOOV^^ DEI, nulto modopfeudo- prcph etas. cum verts Frophethpari Licenttk confuderunt, fed Concordes inter fey alque in nullo diffentithtes Sacrayum Literamm veraces ab eis agnofcebantur ^ ^ tentbcn'ur Autores, b Vide Num. 31. c, S. Luke 24 27. d S. Aug lib. 2. contra Gaud. C3p.29. HancquidemScipturam(Afaccabieorum) mri habent Judsi SlfVT Legetn, et Fy^phetas, (fy' Pfalmos, J^uibus DOMINVS teQ:monium perhibit tarqunm lEStlBVS SVIS. e Idem, de u* it Eccl,c.i5. Demonfirent Ecckftmfuminpr£* fcrj^fo Legis^ in Vrnphetarum pr^diBiSy in PfaltnorumCanUbHS^ hoceft.inOMNlBVS CANONICIS SANctORVM UBRORVM AVCTORITMJBVS. f Idem, de Civit. Dei, cap. 42. Has Sa- a s Liter as ctiam PtoUm.ius Rex Egypu ncffefluduit^ et habere.— Petivitque ab EJea^arQ tuncPontifce da i fibi Scripturas—Has ei cum idem Pontifex mifijfet Hebrxas y po§l etiam illc InUrpretespoSHlavit^fy' dfilifm ei SsliitaginldduO) i^c.

of

k

the Canon of the Scnpmre.

99

of the Hebrew Copies fent from Jerusalem ^ where nci- thcr Tohit nor Judnb^ nor any ofthacC/^jf/fwcreto be founds for f whatever (jenehrar£^{2iix!i\ of his own head to the contrary 5) thofe additional mitings were brought in afterwards^ and ufcdonlyby thei/^'//^;?//? Jem abroad at Bahjlonoindi Alexandria^ from whom they v/ere , in time following 5 commended to be read by the Chrijlians^ but never made equal with the Other Sacred Scriptures^ as they are now fet forth in the ^oman Seytuagint by the Authority of Sm^y ^//?^//y, which is an Edition of^to^/^/^ many wayes depra- ved. 4. Fourthly, 5. Augu^ine a gives the Autho- rit) of all Canonical Scripture^ that he held needful to be known, to the Revelation that Chrifl made of it, hrft by his Prophets^ and afterwards by Himfelfy and his Qy^poftles 5 among all which thefe New Canonical Bocks can not be reckoned. And fo many Teftimonies (o- mitting divers others,) we produce out of S.Augu- ftin^ againft the Roman Plea that is made for them, in genera!. 5. Then in particular,againft the Cano- nizing of the Books of Judith^ we produce his {pecial Exception, ^ That the Occurrences mentioned and written in it, were not received into the CANON by the people of God. To which C^/^o;^ he had before ap pea I'd. r -r 6. Againft the 5overaign Authority of the ^//^mo/ Ai^ot?S^^!v' Salomon^?iL Ecclefiajlicus^wc produce the difference that ^"^^ •satis esse he c maketh between rhem^ and the true Books ofsalo- qm!^!^^P scrip.. mon^ (^whereof he numbreth but Three^iihsit the Old Ca- T^ram conidit, non acknowledged,) reckoning theCe among; the Cano^ ^^f- ^anos'ica no-

^ °- '^ .,, ^ !, ° mma\ur , EMINEN^

TlSSIMM AVTORITATIS, cut fidem hahemuj dt his Rebus y quas ignorare non expeditynec per ms jp - fes nojfe idoneifumus. b Idem,He C'vit. Dev/ib. 1 8 . c.26. Qudi confcriptafHnt in Libro Judith, fan^ in CANONEM ^CRlPTVRARVM Jud£i non recipijfe dicuntur. And of what theyreceiycd nor, he afterwards giveth thisr€afon,(cod.lib.cap.38.)fpeakingof©therlikebooks. IJoninvenruntur in Canone^ quen Populus Dei recepity — quia aiiaftcut hemines hiflorid diligentia, aliaftcut Prcpheu in.' fpiratione divtna fcribere potueruat *, iUa adubtrtaum cognitionis, h£c adReligionis Autoritatcmpenint- bant ; in qua Autiontate cuUodhur Canon : prster quemt &c, a S, Aug.de CIv.Dci, lib. 1 7. cap.so. Stflotmn Profhetaffe etism reperitur infuis Libris, qui 7RES receptifunt in Autoritatetn CANONICAL PtQverbia^ tcclefiaSes, (fy Canticum Cariticorum Alitverh WO, quorum unuiSAPIEWlAy alur ECCLE?>I\^tI^VS dicituY, propter Eloquit mnnulkm fimilltudinemy ut Sahmonis dicantur obtinuit CONSi^ETi^DOr Non amem ejje IpfiHsn9ndubitantDo^iores,-^Et adversitscontradiSoresnontant^ firmitate pYoferamur. Q 2 nical

% C^enebr.Cftron.I,^ Pipo.coJ.2. .Vide^ m inhac l/SyKod^ HierofQlymitam Se~ fundus Canon S Scrip, editus. in quo hi Libri rtcenfebantur. To which piirpofe he produce rh Epiphani^ «jOib. de pond.fe menfor.) who after the rcrical of Ptofe- ms EpiAle nicntio- ncth the fending of diyers ether Books to ^»m» b< fides the XXlI that belonged' to the Hebrew Bible. Buc Genebrard abu- feth his Reader. For Epiphanius faid no more, then what he had out of ferae k»- certain Story, that there were fenc -07/ gm'ne Books^ and LXXII Apocry- phal, which will not help Gre'-JcK at all. <« S. Aug. de Civ; Dei, Jib. 1 1, cap. 5, Eilius Dei prius per Prophetas, deinde per

100

A Scholaftical Hijlory of

. /fc f^ nical Scriptures thtmklvQS^andi thofeoth^r 2Lmon^(\ic\\ '':}:r^^^ only, as by C^5ro^£ had pre-

'Vid€m^cpr«<Jcft' vailed, to be ^ i^^W in publick Congregations under Sanft.c.i4.A7««</<^K- the Vjime oiSalorr^on 5 and were therefore to be ^pre- itrepudmi Stntentia f^^red bcforc all TraBators upon the Scriptures, what- wirKiV /n Ecciefin foever ; which IS an honour that we deny them not , but allow it to them , our felvcs» Yet wc allow them not the fame degree and equalitie of honour , that the proper Canonical Books of Salomon have with us, no more then ^ S. Augu^ine did, and thofe that li- ved in his time. 7. But againft the Auhority of £^- clefiafticuSyWQ bring another of his Teftimonies,wherc e he acknowledgeth it to be a Contradi&ed Book j (fx- cepted out of the Ancient C^non-^) and faith nothing for it to the contrary, (when he had made the fame ObjecStion againft his own alledging of it) but al- ledge th another Book^ that could not be co/itradiBed^t alh 8, Againft the Canonizing of the ^^/ir^^^^5 we are able to produce more Teftimonies out of him,, then one ; for in one ^ place he doth clearly difiin- guifh them, from the Canonical Scriptures^ purely and and properly fo called ; In g another he confeflfeth, that neither the Jews nor Chrifi held them in fuch ac- count, as they did the Law and the Prophets : And in ^ Two places befides he leffenetb the Efteem, and the

mus hinc deceit ,

€ S. Aug. Lib. de ciara pro mortuis, c^ipA'; . Liber Ecclefsaflieus^qnem Jtfus filiuf Sir ach fcripfiffe indiiur^ ^ propter Eloquii mmullamftmilitudfem Salomonispronunciatur, continet in laude PatrHm,^uhd Smutletietm mortUMs prepbetaveiit. Sed fi huic Libro.tx HebrAorumtQ^lA IN EO NON EST, CANONE CONtRAVIClTVRtquid de Mojfe, qui in Veuteronomio Q$r in Evangeliejf^c. f S. Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. i8. cap. 5^. Sv.pputatio temporum h reftituto Temph Wff IN SCKIPtVRIS SANCJlSy QpM CAmmCM AFFELLANtVR^ fed in ALUS inven'ttury inquihusfuntf^ Maccab. Lib-ri. g S. Aug. contra Epift. Gaud. Donatifta',cap.2g. Hanc quidem Scripturam qua appelUiur Miccab^orum^ «om habent Judduficut Legenty (fy^ Vrophetas, quibus Dominus teflimonium per^ bibettanqnam Ic^ibusfuiu- h Ibid. Recepta tfi ah Eccfefta non INVTlLItER^ ft SOBRIE lega- tur^velaudiatur. Idem, Epift. 5i. adDulcitium, Go.;tra DoHatif^asCircnmccIliones, qaifihlmct ipfis mira vxfania nccem confcifcercnt. Summa. Exemphrum TNOPIA COARCTATly in Maccabao* rum Ljbrif perfcrutatis nnnibuj ECCLESIASTlCIS AuBoritatibusj vix diquando, quod pro foa fcn- tentia adducerent, hvemnm, De rtiQ Divinis ac CANONICIS noR tkm dilute ioqucjrcur

Honour

in

ChriQi de gradu Lt- ^OYUm-Audiri y fyc, [Ac the Readers Dcsky ihcughnotat the Bilheps] c Ibid. 0/)orrrt ut Librum iflum Sapitit- tidt-OrrmibHs tra^A" toribus cnteponant y that is,H ought to be honour'd and placed next totheCrfTwnicd/ Scripturts. d Ibid. flHod ^me qkequefofitumy nimi- rum teftimonium de Libro Sapienti£ Fra- tres ifios itd refpuiffe dixiftis (Profperam & Hilarium alloqui- rur,) tanquim non jit Libro CAmNICO adhibitum Q^aft ^ EXCEPT A HVJVS LIBRI AJtEStA- JIONEy Resipfanm ckra fit^ quam volu-

the Canon of the Scriptures.

101

tf BcIIarm. dererb^ Dci,Iib, LcicSca.

Primdm.

Honour of them J which of any Canonical Bock ^ abfo- lutely and fimply "Divine^ he would never have done 5 nor was it lawlui for him to do it. So we lee S. Augu^ ftines minde. I LXXXI, Now they that contend for the ^^;^o/^ of ' the prefent Roman Churchy would f am make S. Au- guftm to confute himfelfjand, notwithftanding all this that he hath faidbetorCjtobe a Special witnefs upon their fide 5 and to hold the Books ^ contefted between them and us , to be every way as {^anonicaly and of as much Authority y assiny oi the Scripture avQ ^ig^^oi^^ ji Jl!^'; befides. i. To which purpofe^ in the fir ft place they par'ucan^ndesliJls » Ufually cite his Treatife ofChri(lian DoBrine^ b where ?"JW^1j ,.^"'^*''* they fay, (but their Saying is not alwayes to be iTlur^'chrlmnm trufted,) that he numbreth AUthe Books oiScrifturey deS.Akiumn, cuUs .alike, as they do 5 and that he maketh no diftinftion ttl^tltpfife: or dirference between the One fort and the Other, tntntcmenuj,^ an- And indeed to them, that read no more words of his, ^"^! f; ^"^' f/'" ^

brenenfuuvartipar gncunt addition , ou fouftrMsn, npu^e pourfeau^ En ces xJiiii Livres e§i termkit author iih du V» 7'<ftament. Sixt.Scn.Bibl.Lib.S.Catharinas dc libr.Canon & alii multi. Sapientiam ^ Ecckfiaflickm inter Prophtticos Libras nutneravit Aug. 2. de \>qUk Chrifiiana. Libns tobidt ^ Judhh SanSia ChriSi Ecclefta in Canone recipity iy Pari veneramne cum ali'u S, Libris Ugn atque colit. Vtrba Hieronymif fine uUa. difcretione confideratay nonfuntprorfusvera, quoniam Aug in2,lib. dtVoSr.Chnfl.capk, uttumqut in or dine Camnicorum Libr^ enumerat.—Aug. quoque 1.2. de Do^r €hrili. a" Maccab. Libros in Canone Vivinarum Scripturarum coHocat. Use omnia Sixt. Sen. difto libro 8.. b S* Aug. lib, a.deDoar.Chriftianacap.S. TOtVS autem CANON Scriptunrum, in qm IStAM CON SIDE- KATWNEM vcpindam dicimus.,his Libris continetur : Quinque Mofis^ id eft, Genefi, Exod.Levit, iVktfi. DfMJ. fy uno Librd Jefu Nave,^ uno JudicHtn^um Libello^qui appellatur Ruth, qui maffs adRegn«- rum principia videtur pertintre , deinde quatnor Kegnorumi ^ duobus Paralip. not) confequentibus, fed ^afi <i latere adjunct fimKlqueptrgentibus : Hac (§f Nigeria, quA ftbimet annexa tempera continet^ atque erdimm rerum. Sunt alidi tanquam ex diverfo orditte,qu£ neque huic erdini, neque inter fe conmSumur^ fi- €ute^ Job, et Tobias, et HeUer, et Judith, ^ Uaccabdorum Libri due^ et Efdra duo, qui magisfubfequi videntur,ordinatam ilUm Hiftoriam ufque ad Rtgn. vel Paralip. teimnatam. Deinde Prophets, in quu hus David Uf\iu Liber Pfilm,fy Salomonistrest Proverbiorumy Cant. CanticoruWi fy EaUfiaSes, Nam tin duo Libri, unusjui Sapientia>et alius qui Ecclefiaflicus ir\fcribjtur, de quai am ftmilitudme Saltmonfs gffe dicuntur. Nam Jejusfilius Sirach eos Scripftjfe conftantijfmi perhibetur ', (hoc autem, quod ad Sa- pientiam pertinet, rcvocavic 2 lib. Retrafl.) Hjii tamen quoniam in Aulioritatemrecipi meruemnt, inter Pro^heticos numerandifunt. Reliquifunt eorum Libri, qui PROPRIE Prophets appellaiifunt, XII ProphetdYum Libri finguli, qui conn exifibimet.^ quoniam nunquamfejun^ifunt, pro uno habentur : quorum Prophetarum Nomina funt hac, Ofea, Joel,Amos, Mich. Naum, Abac. Obad* Jonas, Soph. Agg- lach.Md" Uchias. Deinde IV Prophets funt majorumvoluminumy^faiasyJeremias^DanieUET^eihieUHisXLW^^ Libris V' t, terminatur moritai, Ncvi autem IV libr, Bvang, (^c,

then

lOZ

A Scholajlical Hijlorj of

then What they are pleas'd to cite, this One pajjage may make a fair {ho Wjthat after the fpace of C C C C years 3 they feem to have gotten O/ie Father upon their fide. But whofoever will look into the words of S.Augu^in^ c immediately going before it^/V/;^^^^f^ c Ibid, ante verba ^nd hced Well the termes ot his Advice which he citata.£r/f/^rfarD/- giycs there to his Reader, (and whereunto he d re- VwKARVMfdlr^ tcrreth again when he begins to enumerate All the tiffiims indagaxQuqm Books that Were then comprehended in the African primoTOTAS leitrit, Bible.) {hall clearly perceive, that O//^ 0/;/;o//^tf5 and fmndiimeiieau,)m ^e are not zSloiOnemind:, nor thetr Ser.fe the Same^ tame itSme.duntax' in delivering the Canon oi Scripture, i. Tor Firft^ Z!^^cTnVnw^1'. he putteth a X^^^o/'2)/jf^y'^;^^^ between thofe e Books NmCMTEKASfe' that have the General "iiame oi Divine Scriptures^ and TeriTavs M'H' thofe. that are //;f(r/W/y called C^/^o;?/V^/. 2. Then, he /?«i, ne praoccupent fetteth a f ^=1/^^^ upon thofe, that for their undoubted imbecjllem ammum, et verity^ are more fecurely read then Others. 3, Next, C5L;;;;"S S hediftinguifhethther.../a«.;, ox Number o{ the tludentes pT^judictnt Books^ into Tvpo feveral kmdes , 01 which fome were dkuid cmrA fanam Received by All churches^, and lome but by a Few-^ and mmaT^' lutem ^ preferreth thofe that were acknowledged either by SQKiPtVKis Ec- All or the mo^ Eminent 2ind » nApoftolicalChurcheSy CAKVM^^Q^AM before thofe, that certain particular Churches onely, PLVKiMVM Au- and of lejje Authority accepted. 4. Moreover, he ad- tmtAimfeqMxuryn- niittcth a Subdivifion even oi t\{\s> latter kinde. whcre- qurAPOsroLicAS of k/b??7f might be Received by the ^y^^/^^r, and/ow^

SEDES habere, (fyr

Epiftolas accipere memermt. Tenebit jgitur HVNC MODVMin SCRlPfVRIS CAmmciS, ut EASquAab 0 MNIBVS accipiuntur Ecdefiis CAtholkh, PR^FONAt EIS, quas QV^DAM non Mccip'mnt In EIS vero qua mn accipiuntur ab OMNIBVS^ PR^FONaT EAS^quas PLVRES, ' GRAVIORESOVE accipjunt, ehqum PAVCIORES, Minorifqne Auteritatis Ecclefijt tenent. Siautem ALlAs inventrii a FLVRIEV^, ALIAS h ORAVlOfilBVS haberi^ qumvjs hoc facile invenire non pofjiUAqualis tamtn autoritatii ens babendas puto.Totus aut, fyc. d Ibid.ln^«f> IST^.V CON SIDE- RAflOUEffverfandamdicimvsyVtfupr^. e Ibid, DW^m ARVM Scnpturarum WNTaXaT £A5, quaappellantur CASOmc^. f Ih.'^ame^tERkSfecuriusleget FIDE VER[t^t[S inflrullut, £ Ih, Eai , qua ab OM^lBl^S Eccltfus accipiuntur^ prsponai eis, qua non accipiuntur ab OMWBVS. h lb. Prdiferaktur qui i pluribus, ^ gravioribus Eccleftis rccipiunturi iis qui ^ pauciari- buf, i^ minoris iiutoritatis. i lb« fludrnplurimiimautoritatemfiquaturearumf qu£ Apoflolicrhfed^s habere merttnunt, k. lb. Si autem alias invener it ^plmibut, aliits ^ gravioribus baberi, (quanquam hoc facile invenire non pojfity) squalls lamen autoritatis eoi habmdas PVIO,

* by

the Canon of the Scripture.

105

by the Letter fort of Nlen j which not withftanding (becaufc that had feldome hapncd^ and was not ufu- ally noted, J he thought to be ot equal authority, 5 . And Lalllyj he prcmifeth ^ this Caution before the Recital oi\\i^G^eneral C^mn-i that all ih^i^"^ -particular Confi- derations may not be neglefted by him thatrcadeth it. If the Councel olTrent (whereby the %oman Church is now governed) had fet fuch a 'Preface before their Ca- non o(ScriptureSy as this is, that S. AugujliniQi before his 3 and had added no more tp the End of it, then He did -, they might have had the fairer plea for ihem- felves. But lo far are they from allowing their Canon to be received with any fuch Qualifications ^ and ^ijlinBions\ as thefe be ; that firft, tliey ^ corhmand all the Books recited in it, (among which are ^/;^/<?o that All ChurcheSy atleaft, received not, and none at all, in their fenfe,) to be equally accepted, and taken with the felf-fame veneration^ as having all a ///t^ ^^/o- lute and Divine Authority annexed to them, without preferring one before another ; and then, ^ they damn all the churches of the World befides, that will not thus receive that Canon upon their own termes : which neither S. AuguHine^ nor any other Father before or after him, ever did. Who when they give us fuch a Canon or Catalogue oi Holy Scriptures^ as we read here in his Book ofChriflidnDoBrine^ they give us a fair la- titude withal, of taking the Canon in a common and large fenfe^W\^Qi\xt reftraining it,(as otherwhiles when they Ipeak after an exaB^ and diBinB manner, they- do themlelves,j to that ^riB and univocal acception , which makes it only to be of pure and Scrueraign Au- thority^ for this is the diftinBion that preferves the dif- ference between that Canon ofBooks^ which is aifolute and divine^ and that which is notj/w/;/)! To, but mixt and Ecclefiaftical. Nor can SI Auguftin here be taken in any other fenfe. For of the Canonical Bocks fflrift-

/lb. tenehit igitur

{LeBn)HVNCMO'

WM in Scripturk

Canenicis,

m lb. rotVS autim

C^^ON ^cripturaru,

inquolSTAMCON-

SWERMiONEU

verfandam diclmus ,

ire.

a Concil. Trid. Scff. 4. —Omnes Libros PARI riETATlS affeSuy revtrentia, ^ veneratione^ pro C(t- nonicis uctperit\

b WiA. St qms msm non fufceperit, ^c. A- KATHEMhfn. Et Bella Pii Papa? 4, ibid, fuper forma ]u- ramcnti. D4amnat<i d Concjlio Tridentm ego parmr damnoy ^ ana- ihematj:(p. Item, Ex- tra banc fidem ntmp Salvia ejfcpotejf.

I

104

JScholaJlical Hi/lory of

t VldcHom.^

ly lo called, none can be preferred hdore another ^ (becaufe m refped of their Authority, Infallibility, and Cenainty, there is no difference between thenij) nor is it in the chojce oiany C^urches^ whether they will receive them, or no 5 as it is not in the EleBio/i of any peribn , whether he will follow any Church , that ihowli mt receiiJe thcmy (whereof there is no Exam- ple or t inftance to be given ;; but of the Canonical and Scripture Books (largely and mixtly taken) there is no better advice, then 5. -^«^»/?/^ here gives; to pre- fer thofe, that all Churches receive^ (and luch are the XXII Books of the Old Teftamenty) before thole othery that but a feiv receive, (and fuch are the FI Books con- tefted,)To this Advice we will adde another,which is to the lame purpofe given every Man, that reads this & other places oiS.Augufiin^ by one of the moft learned a Cardinals (but he lived not to fee the Neap Canons made at the Synod of Trent;) that ever the Church of Rome had : Who, f acknowledging no more Books of im inter onmts fui i\^^oldTe^ame/it^ to bc properly Canonical ^ then We, *FKiNcEPS cenfeia- ^^d all the Churches that confent with Antiquiry,do,) tury h counfelleth his Reader not to be troubled at any

L&"fiJem^£; thing, that may be brought out of ^. Auguflin, or hoc in bco urnnnAmm Other Fathers to the contrary. For if at any time they cmmentartA Libro- ^^[j ^j^^ Controi^erfed Booh Canonical^ fas there are but T!\^m reiil^ivi^. a very /(fw' that do fo,) they are not to be underftood judith,robu,et Mac in fo exaft and ftflft a fenfc, asiftheyhdd them to itymEXri^A^^A ^e uo lelTe Canonical then ihQOihQTuaco^aefied Books N0N/C05 LiBKOS are, or as firm %ules and Principles ofFaiib 5 but only

fitpputAntuT , ^ inter

APOCRTPH^ locantur, ckm Libra Sapientidt et Eccleftaftico^ utpatet in Frologo Odeato. Hectmherit Kovitie ft alickbi repereris Lib os ifios inter CANOU]rOSfMppkt(tri^ velin Sicris Cunciljis^ vel in Sd" cris Doitd'jbus Nam ad Hieronymi timam reducenda fumt thm verba Cinc'tlimum^ qu^m Dolhrvw ; Et juxtaillius fententkmad Chrom. iy Heliod, Epifcopos, Libri ifti, fet fiqui ali'tfuntin CANOSE BlBLlMfmileJ NON S^NT CANONICl, hoeefi, non fmt REiVLA^ES ad firmandum ea quM funtFlDEl j pejfunttamen rf/cJ CANONIC!, boceffj Regularesad dtdificationem fidelium^ utpote in Ca» none Biblia ad hoc recepti ffy" autbsrati Cum hkc enim diWnBione difcemere poteris ^ VICT A AVOY^ 5T1NI in 2. Ae DoSr Chnflhna iy ScriptatnConc. Flor.fub EHg,^, ScriptaqneinFrovinciiiiibus Coficiliis Ctirtbai* et Laodic* iy sb Innocentio^ac Gelajio Pontificibus,

in

d Aub. Mirsras de Scriptor. Sacc. XV I» thomas devioCajeta-

the Canon of the Scripture.

105

a Bella rm. dcv^rbo Dc', lib. I. cap, 15. Scft.2. B, Aug. ex

in a modal or qualified fenfe^ as they be S acred WrU tings fie to be Ti^ad for xh(t Benefit 2LnA 8 dijication oi the Church. In which regard^ though they be no In- fallible Rules J yet are they honour'd above all other Humane Scriptures:, as having more Beams of Divine Light and Wifdome in thcm^ then the Books of other Ordinary and Common Dodors have. So that this Authority of S. Jugufiinyinhis Book oiChriflia^ Do- ^rine^ hurteth us not : for we have as many Books of Scripture (largely taken) in our Bihle^ as he had in his. 2. The next Authority that our a Oppofites produce out of him for themfelves, pretending that it makes againft us, is in his Book of Predeftinatton y where vvri- ting to Hilary and Trofperj he picadeth for the Di- vine Authority of that ^ TejUmonj^ which he had iox- mQx\yQiit<^o\xtoi the jvifdom of Salomon ',^Vidi hereby Ti!Mbts%L f if Cardinal Bellarmins Colleftion from hence might entU psffe confirmar'i ftand^and hold firm,) he maketh tht trHOLE Book t^^''c^^%icv^ ofmfdom to become Canonical^ no lefle then the Books Uba. de pr^dsftinat, of the Law and the holy Prophets are. But that S. Augu- c^>- M» ec Sca. 4. fin was of another minde, we have divers clear Ar- itr^tpZlfripi^^ gumcnts to evince it. For ffirft,) when he had pro- nmur. Non debuh duced this Teftimony out oimfdom,(that c The Rioh- ^"^"'/.^ repudim teous wan is fpeedtly taken avpay^ lejt mckednefe jhould piewu^ qui mruhin /7/rer/7/V«;2<^^r^^;2<^//^^5) and fome exceptions had been ^"^^/'^ ^^"7^^* de taken againft him, by tht'DivmesofMarfeiUes, for f/^^t.mtK." citing a Book ^ vphich rvas not Canonical^ (as, in thofe fi^^i^e remari , ^ ab dayes, they had no fuchQ«o;^/V^/ ^00^ in the CWrii T"'^"' chrimms,

rL / L J .1^ ^ r J I 1 1 Crc cum veneratione

of France^) he dotn not anlwer and reply, that they divhAAuterhmsau^

dirt, Ethfra. Opor- tet^ ut Librum i^um Sapieniia ammbus Tra^atoribus anteponant ', qmniamfibi eum pofuerunt etim tempo ^ ribus prox'mi ApnUolojum rgregiitra^atores, quieumtt^emadhibenteSy nihil fe adhibere nifi divhmm Tefiimonium crediderunt, Du Perron Repliq* contrc Ic Roy de la grand Bretagne. Pag 440. Let Juifs ne tenoient non-plus d< Liure de U Sapience, au mefme degie de la Loy^ des P(fmnes,ify' des Frcphe' tes; iy nofire Signettr ne r avoitnen plut alltgve, ^c. Et neantmoinsS. Augn§fif) ne laijfe pas de dire. (Deprjidefi. li.c, 14.) Le Liure de la Sapience ^merite^^c d* eOreleuenT Eglife de Chriilpur let LeSeurs de VEgliffe, (fyrc. ^ d'eHre ouy^ d^c. avec veneration dt authorite divine. Et derechefy m fu- pra in BelUrm, b Raptusefl, nemalitiamutaretinteUe^^m. Sip ^,11. c Wird.4.11. d Ep HiUrii ad Aug. inter Ep. S, Aug. Hunc Librum tanqnm NOH CMOmcVM dcfin'tunt m'ntendum

P laid

■

io6

A Scholajiical Hifiory of

entU.

d Idem , ibid. Slu't meruit in Ecckfia Chiifti tarn longaaJi' noptatfy (fy-c, cum ve neratjune, ^c. audiri. lit fupra.

faid not true^ or that the Book was of equal Authority with any other of the JBiile^ (and yet this he would lJ:st!^luIiX have faid, if it had been equally Car^onical,) but he ifendebuitrepudiari pkads Only, that it ought not to be t reje^ed^ for the Stntenth Libri Sapi- gj.^^^. || r^'^^^yation that it had in the Church : Where (^Secondly,) notwithftanding that veneration , it- had certain marks of difference fct upon it, (and here no- ted by S. Auguflin himfelf,) to diftinguiili it from be- ing as Dtvtne and Canonical^ as the Law and the Pro- phets be. Of which Marks, this was One 5 that the Book of wifdomj and the reft of that Clajje^ were given xo the a LeBors^ or the Inferior Officers of the Ctiurch, to be y^^<^ there by them in a lower place, then thofe of the h/gher Clafje were ; which the Priefls and Bifhops read themfelves, in a ^ more eminent andconfpicu- ous manner: And this was aAnother ; that fuch Au- thors as He that wrote the 5(j(/^ 6/>F//^ow2, hadonely the honour to be fet firfl and c preferred before all other TraBators upon the Canonical Scriptures ^ but d it is one thing to be fet before the common TraBa- itkmft de dhinamm torSy and another thing to be the Authors of the Cano-

cTAt^KisvZt^t ^^*^^' ^^^^^ themfelves, for this fuppofeth them to be

fuerunt ante not, pro- thofe Me^y that Were immediately inspired by God -

fmemdefenfwnemhu^ vvhich of that e uncertain Author that composed the

mJ%To^inig^M^ ^ifdom of Salomon, (though many things he wrote

atque copiofih contra rniglit be confirm'd by Canonical Scripture, and were

f^Je'ufgemK^Er^ therefore received as Divine Truths and Teflimonies,)

jorem-si m]us ergo S. AuguHin could not fay. And (Thirdly) for the

Sintentu defen^onem f^^^^ rcafon, he urgcth the ^ Truth and zy4uthority of

orum MS pr £ cedent! ■

bus Cathoticis TB \CT^TOR\BVS promerew^trofelio hifratref.pro quibuf nunc agmus.acqukfcerent : hoc enim fignijicaj^k Littrk vejlrU—. Sedc^mSententiii'TR^Ct\TORV'MinftruivQlunt,opotet',Mt ffturn librum S^FlENT\/£, uhi legitur^ Raptus efi ne malitiamMtaretynteHe^Hm ejus, OMNlBVS TRfiCV^TORlBVS ANTfii^ONANTj quonkm fib^ eum antepefuerunt etiam temporihw proximi Apo^ilorum egregii "XRkCX kXORES^ quicumTe^etnadhibentes.nihiifeadhiheremrtmVl^VM Tejimnnium cred'derunt, d S. Hitronym. Epift. 6i. Scio me aliter habere t^poMs aliter TRA- CT ATORES. e VideS, \u%. de Doar Chr. I.2.C.8 fe Retrart, 1. 2. c.4. * S, Aug. de prae- 4c^,}ib\(up[f., Sententi(mvtriplanmi&ant'fqiihusChrJQianam,

the

a S, Aug. ibid. Qiii (^Uber Sap'untu) me- ruhin lEcclefia Chri- Hide GRADV IE CTORVtArecJtari. b De GRADV E- FISQOPORVMy ft- veexAMBONE. c Idem, ibid. Certk

the Canon of the Scriptures.

107

the Sentence only that he had cited, (being willing enough to ^ forgoe xSxo, Authority of xSxQBook^) anS ftandcth upon thefe Tcrmes about it •, that it is c cer- tainly a work of Gois Divine Grace and favour, if the jufl man he token away hetiwes^ lejt otherwise he fhould he exposed to the danger of worldly wickednejje-^ and that no Chriftian will deny, but that this ju^ man^ fo taken away, is in re^ and peace ; and therefore whofoever faid it, that it was 2i faithful faying (this,) and groun- ded upon d Divine Authority. In which fenie ^ s, Qyprian alfo alledged the fame faying under the Name and Teftimony of the Divine Scripture. But neither did he, nor S.Augujiin^ call it a Divir/e Teflimony fo much in refpeft of the Book wherein it is, or the Au- thor that wrote it, as in regard of the Matter it [q\(^ that is there written. However, to the OhjeBion made againft this Bock^, that it was not Canonical^ he maketh no dired Anfwer, that it was -^ which, ii he or the Church had held it fo to be, would have been the rea- dieft way tohaveanfweredaIltheI>mW5of Fr^^z^^, and ended that Controverfie between them. But here- in ^he would not he their Adverfary^ as the Matters of the %oman Church are pleas'd to be Ours. 3. In the third and lafl: place, they bring his Authority for C^- nonizing the Books of the Mace ales. To which purpole they g cite Two of his Sayings ^ One, That the Churchy and not the Jews^ accounted thofe Books to he Canonical :

b Ibid. Quod a me quoque pofitum teWimo- nium dt Litro Sapkn- tUfratresHfos itaj^c fpujjfe dixiSis, tan- quam non dt Lihro Cd" tjonico adhibitn. Hua- ft,et EXCEPT A HV^ JySLlBKlATTE. STAT 10 NE, RES IPSA non CLARA fit, quam volumus kinc dneri.

c Ib'id.^^^semm aw detnegareCbrWmw, juftuw^ fi tnorte pr£OC' cupitusfuerhj in Re^ friitriofutu^umi qui- Itbti hoc dixerh, quk homo faudi fide't reft- SiendZ putabit I- Use e!i TOTA CAVSA cnr d0um eft J Q^O- CVfiQYE fitdimim, R^PTVS ESTy ne malm muturet imeL ' le^um e'jift- Qua cum iTASlNT.nondetuk repudkri fiti^entia Li- briSapientidi, qui tre- run in Ecdefta Chri- ftitegi^—^ cum ve- neratione divina A«- toritatis audiri. d Ibid. Eum teflem

adhibentes, nihil fe adhibere niftDivinumJeftJmoniumcrediderunt^ e S. Cypr, lib. de Moitalitate. & lib. Tcftim. 3. ad Quirinum. / S. Aug. de Civit. Dei, lib.17. c.20, fopr^ citac. Salmonis Li- bri TRESrecepti funt in AVTORlTATEm CANONICAM, Froverbia, Ecclefiaftes^i^Canticum Camimum'-Aliiven Dug, quorum unus SAPlENTlA, alter ECCLESIASTlCVS dicitur propter elo- quiinonnullamSimilitudineniy utSaUmonif dicantur, ebtinuh Cof\fuetudo. Non autem ejfe ipfius, NOH dubitant dntliores ', Eos tamen in Autoritatem (Scriptorum vide/icct Ecclefiaftico: u r, 8c Populo pnb- lice pralegi folitorum,) mfiximc Occidentalit antiquitus recepit Ecclefia— Sed adverjia Contradi^ores N(?N TANTA F I RMIT ATZ pnfetuntury qua Scripfa non funt in CANONEj^ud^iorum. g B^l- larm. de vcrbo Dei, I t.c.i 5. Sc6t. i .San^u4 autem kugfiftinus (cui multum auli ritatiifaph tribuh CaU vinus^^ lib.iB, deCiv. Vei, wp.55. Libros finquitj Maccabaorum n n JtudAi^ fed EccUfiapro Caroni- cis habtt. Idem Iccus a Card, Perronioy (Replic. pag, 439.) multifqae aliis, proferturunacSm Sequent!.

P 2 Another,

io8

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

Another, ^ That they have been received hy the Church for holy Scripture^ not unyrojitakly^ if they he joberly read^ or heard. Upon which words ^ Card. Beliarmme laid his Thumb, that they might not be feen and exami- ned ; but ^ Card, Perron brings them forth to the view, and afterwards ^ difguiieth them, as his man- ner is to do in moft of his other Citations. The Do- natijls in S. Augujtin's time were ^ divided into di- vers SeBs : of which the Circumcellions were one ; a SeU more noted then the reft, and fo called , from ranging up and down the Countrey, where they li- ved (in Africk^) and fetting up their Cells abroad in the Fields, every one at firft like Eremites by them- felves, and afterwards taking in xhQivH^omen to coha- bit there among them. And a fort of people they were, fo furious, and full of mifchief and violence, both to themfelves and others ^ that they ^ did not only fet upon tho[e who chanc'd at any time to pafle vriLEMfNtyciie by that way, and come within their reach, (making bke'^rnT^^ 50 HQ Confcience to murder them if they found them not c idem.ibid. p.440. to be of their Party ;) but many times alio they would £r ct (fAii ajQujie-, lay violent hands upon their orr;? Perfons, and either TarfEg1ife%Tjl^- ^^^^^^ themlelvcs , or threaten other i^erfons with VTiLEMENT.pur- prefcnt death, if thofc perlbns would not do it for '^soBKEYENr n\i ^hcm, whcn they were in danger to be taken , and pas 4n Vf dnZuer punifhcd by tlic Law, which the Secular Powers had

* Bcl'arm. ibid. Et

hb, 2. centra Epiftolam Oaudent'th cap.i^.co- rundem Librorum au- tmtatem ftudiosc de- fendity Scrjpturam S* COS appellant, a Btllarmjbid.ver- ba S. Aug, non pre- fer t.

b Da Perron. Repl. pag. 459.S. AuguSiin £U2, l.contrelEpiftre de Oaudent^ VEfcri- tureiniiiulie des Mac- cabees, Us Juifsnela tjennent pas comtne la loy, les Prophetes, fy Us Vfeaumes, que no~ Sre Seigneur allegue pour Ics Jefmoms ijc. Afais elk a. e^e recev'e parfEglife^SONlN-

In fy. qui y doit ejire defer c

ce, mais afiuderefritPerlesfurJeufcsconfequeifcesquelesVcnati^feseninftroiefif^ f^ nc fignife autre chofe^finor^ Fourveu quellefnu hue avecfens rajjis, ^ mn avec mAnie ^pkreneffe, cewne la li- foient Ics Dcnattftes, qui prensient occafion de Ccxempk de Samfm (^ de RaTiiat, dont te x^ele eff loiie, ^ tvn lefii0, defe tuer ^ precipitir eifx mrfines. Et Dcflus, Auquel paffage^ ceque S. Aug. dit,qut its Juifs retienneni pas I (failure des Maccabeis an tvcfme rang que la Lny^ tfstc* n eft pa pour affoiblir I'au* thorn € di I'efcriture des Maccabet. Car les Juifs ne ttncient non plm le Liure de la Sapience, au mefme dfgre ie la Loj^t^c. Ef neantmms S. Auguiiin ne laifepas de dire, Le Liure de la Sapience a merife,(i^c, Vt fupra pag. i c 5 . d S Aag. de Hai^rif. cap. 59. Mulu fy' inter rpfss (Donatiftai) failafunt Schif- tnata <fy ah its fe diver ft c^tibus alii atque aliifepayarunt. e Idem, ibid. Ad hanchdtrcftn in Africt ^ iUi pertinent, qui appellamw Circuwcelliones, genus hemrnum agreSle, et famcfijjitna audaci^^ non /a- litm in alios imv^ania facinora pcrpeirandsy fed rec fibi infana feritate parcendo : hamper Mortesvari as maxiTD^prdcipitiorvm ^ a^ua urn, (f<r ignium feipfos necare confueverunt, et in ifiurn fusrorem alios^ quos fatikTint^ utrjyfq'i Sexw ftducf) e, aliquar.djut occjdantifr ab aliU^mmtettt^ nift fecerm, cctnminantts.

thea

I op

* Idem, Epift.<^i .ad Dulcitium , Summ& Exemplorum inopia co^

the Canon of the. Scripture.

then made againft them. And this they call'd their Martyrdcme , teaching and exhorting all their fol- lowers, rather to dejlroy themfehes , or to kill one mother y then to fuffer any publick {hame or punifh- ment , as common Malefaclors, For which impious Phrenefie and madneffe of their Sed, being general- ly condemned by all other Men, and challenged by S. Augu^in to fhew any allowance, or Example in Scripture for it, they had none to bring, but the Ex- ample of "^ Razia^ in the Maccabes^ who to avoid the fury of his Enemies, wade an ^ end of himfetf^ and being enfamed with anger againfi thent^ plucked out his ar^atu in Maccab^o* own Boweh. Whereupon S.AuHin took occafion to IZmMliSf^^^ declare his judgement concerning that Book of the cuAuaorimibus^i^x Ma.cc ales y and faid the T>onatijls were hard driven, ^^^^"''"^o, (quod pro that they had no other Scripture^ or ^ Ecclefiafticall d"ucercnT^(cfrcum* Authority to fhew for themlelves. And though he de- nieth not , but that Razias was to be commended for a Man of great refolution and valour , yet he admits him not to be a Martyr {or his Religion, or in this particular faft of Self-Homicide to be fet forth as any Example that might be followed by the Donatifls^ or Other perfons whatfoever. But perceiving that this An(wer would not latisfie thofe Men, who defended themfelves herein by the Credit and Authority that the Book of the Maccakes had among the Africans^ he proccedeth yet further, and leffeneth the Authority oithat ^ook by a triple Teftimony ; firft ^ by the Teftimony of the Judaical Chureh^ which made no fuch account of it, as they did of the Law^ thePro- phets^ and the Pfalmes : Secondly, by the Teftimony of d Chrifty which that Book wanted , and the others

c Idem, 'conirS^ Epift. Ciudentii Donit\i{de\\K2sap.2^.NoJ}rumeflautem,licutAportoIiifadni9' ntt^omnhprobarfy quod borjum efl tenere^ ab 9mni fpecie malt abfimri ; Et hancquidem Scripturam^. quA appellatUTWaccabaorum, nonhAhmJWJEl, ficttt Ltggm, Prophetas ^ Ffalmes : QiiibusVO-^ MINVS teSimomumperhibet tanquamTESTlBVS SVIS. SedmeptatSab ECCLESIAnonmtili' ^txfic, d Ihid) HuibHiDominmji^c'

had>

ccllioncs,) invene-

runt.

a 2 Maccab 1441.

b S. Aug. Ep. ad Dulcitiujamcitata.

no

AScholaJlicai Hijlorj of

Eeclefi<t,non inutiliter fi fobr'th legatur, vel 4udiamr,max'miprQ* fttr illos, (be.

hadj as his own Proper Wimejjes 5 and thirdly by the conient and Teftimony of the ^ (^hri^lian Church 5 which received it^ not unprofitablj^ if it were difcveetly or [oberlj read ; that is, as S. Augufiin elfe where ex- poundeth himlelf, if thofc things that we read there be conferred vfithxhQ Sacred siXidCanonicalScriptureSy that whatfoever is thereunto agreeable, may he appro- ^vecly and what is othermfey may be rejeHed. To col- lect therefore (as the Cardwals and their followers do) out of thefe bare words. The Books of the Macca- bes are received in the Churchy that they are not in the Jews but in the Chriftian Canon oi Scripture^ and pro- perly fo called, is altogether againft common Senfe and Realon j for S. Augujlin here intendeth to abate and weaken the Argument of the C/V^«wre///o;^y, and this CoUedion of the fardinals addeth no more ftrength and force to it, then it had before ; when from hence Gaudentius the Donatift might havere- ply'd and faid, that S. Auguftin was fo far from con- futing himy as that he had fo/2^rw'rf him in his former opinion, and given him a fair advantage to infult o- ver the Orthodox Chriftians^ who allowed him a Te- ftimony taken out of a Book that belonged to their own Canon , and not to any Canon or Scripture oi the Jews. For this had been enough to have yeelded him the vidory^ which was none of S.-^/^^«/?/V5 mean- ing ^ who by his c Limitations and 7<jftriBions here mentioned, makes it evident, that the Law and the Tz-o/^fc^f^^ were another manner of Scripture, and car- ryed a greater Authority with them, then the Books of the Maccaies did, or any fuch Ecclefiaftical mitings^ as were like unto them. Elfe, why did he not abfo- lutely fay, that they were Canonical^ which had made an end of the bufineffe on the Donatifi's fide, without any more ado. But what his belief was con- cerning thefe Books , hath been declared before in a

mrk

c Ibid. J^on inutili- ter', ^Sifohuhlegci- tur^ tnaximi propter illos Afaccibsos, qui pro Vti lege ficut vert Martyres, iperficuio- ribus tarn indigna^ atque horrenda per^ef. fifiinty ut ETIAM HINC POPVLVS CHRISIANVS ad- vertereti quoniam uon funtcondign£pajJionei hujus tetnporiJ ad /«- turAmgloriam^qu£re- veUbitHr in Njbit,

the Canon of the Scriptures.

Ill

pvork of his tiiat he wrote towards the en^'of his dayes-, wherein he ^ [evereth^ and excludeth the 3 idem, de ciWr. iJHaccabes :, and other fuch Church- Books ^ from thofe J^«^J» (ficut antca cil Scriptures, that are called Canonical -^ acknowledging ^^lZ}}V^/ ^^'^''^^: neverthelefle, that mjome reJpeH^ the Church anoid' rimtuo Tempio non eth them that Appellation. For in one and the fame re- ^f^Ncris^^r^^^^ fpeti this can never be intended j unlefle we fhall aliis inveniturjfn make S,Auguifin to contracUB himlelf in the very fame ^^^^' /««' Et Period'^ or the Church to hold thofe Socks Canonical, Liflj^^^^^^^^ which are not within the Canonical Scriptures. For d^xi, fid ecclesia the avoiding of which Contradidion we muft of ^beup'lm^^^ force fuffcr S. t^uguflin to explain his orpn words, and Mmyru^a^ones vt^ to adde (as he doth there,) the reafon c why the ^f"*^"^'^ ^m^ mha- Church caird them Canonical, and in whatfenfefhe Qb"LT\rn$'!^rn did fo, that is to fay. Not becaufe the Authors of ^^^^^m, ufqueadmer- them were Prophets, or WLeninfpiredhy god, to write llZ^lf'^^^ J^ticn- and give us the ':Rjiles of our Faith, but in regard of c ibid. Profter quo- the many pious direBions and Examples o( Zealand ^""^^"I'^^rtyrHpaf- conftancy in %eligion, that are there to be found ; for ''"'^'^^* which caufe ^ the Church received them into the lower ^ ^h'ld. ^luos Ecchfa Canon of Ecclefiaflical Books, but not into the Supreme %lpf^Xf/ *''^''' Canon oi akfolute and Divine Scriptures. According to which diftinftion alfo the Helleniil; Jews held them to be as Canonical as any ChriBian Church did ; for from thofe Jews only the Chrifiians received them ; and ^ not ^ l^'jf- <?«^ non /«- from the i/^^r^«^5. ''^'^^'•

LXXXIL In 5. Auguflins time was held The j rn COUNCEL of CARTHAGE , which the Roman ^^* ^OW. DoBors urge fo much again ft us, though they cannot A,IO*

agree among a themlelves, which of all the Co«/2^f/5 ■ ^*

of Carthage it was. Ulually they * (ay it was The ^ vide Bam, Anna^

les. ad An 397, & An. 419. & "Binium (qui illam exfcribit) in notisad Gone. dnhag.^.Card. PemnTum, en fa Rc- plique, chap.48, Chiffletium in notis ad Brcviationem Can. Ftrrandr. Et Concil. Cdrthaginenfcin Codice Romano. '^ Bcllarm. dc verbo Dei, lib. i . cap.io. Seft. Prininm. Primnm ighur bos Lu bros, unA cum cdi\eris, in Canontponit Concil, Carth 3, can, 47. et trident. Sejf.^. Idem, ibid. Se^/ Prattrci. Covdl. Carthag, ex qnocjittrACenciliAi^HmCanontttideJnmpferMnt, vocat hos Ljbns Cms* nkis €t Vivinos.

THIRD

I

m

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

- ~ THIRD5 whereat S.AuguHin himfelfwasprefent;

and wherein there was a ^ Decree made, what Scrip- h concil carthag. ^«^^^ fhould be r^^fl^in the CWr^, and which fhould 5, (apud Binium) be Canonical. But if the Third Councel of Carthage Ctn.A7.it€pUcuh,ut ^^^.^ Y]dd uttdcr the Confulate of C^farius^ and Ani- TlscTmNicAS cm, in the yeer CCCXCVII, (as the c infcription, mhti inEcdefiiHi' or Title, of that Councel J in all Copies, is given us,) there can be no fuch Canon in it. For ^ Boniface^ (to whom this Canon referreth ) was not at that time Pope o( Rome^ nor more then Tw^f/^rjjf^/'j after. And if the ^ Canon next following there be true, (which referreth to Pope Siricim , ) this Canon that goes before it , mutt needs be altogether falfe ; For be- tween siricius and Boniface , there were no lefle then b Three Popes , and One and Tmnt) years di- ftance. Soj that fixing this Canon ^ (about which diib, Efther, Efdra Pope Boniface was to be confulted,; upon the Tit^/Vrf ^l^'lXilmm Councel oi Carthage, (wherein order was taken to confult Pope Siricius,) there is but little credit to be given to it. Let it therefore be the C^^o^offome c other Councel, that was held at Carthage in the time of Pope Boniface y for in the d Code oiiho. African

tur^fub nomine Viii muim ScriptuuTHm. Sunt tute CAKONl- CMSCKlPtVKM, Gen. Ex. Lev. Num. Vm. J'jf. Ji*d. Ruth, Keg, Librt 4"'- Pdralip. Libri dno. Job, Pfalttu Davidi. cum, Sal^monis Libri U^inqne, Libri 12". Fropbet.Efti.ffierem. 'EX.fch.D3n,Tob. Jh

teSiameml , Evang, ifyrc. HQcetiam¥Tatri et Confacerdoti noflro Uomfacioy vel aliis ea- rumpirmm Epifcopis.

%i::!ZA:lii Chunh we finde (uch a like Cano» in a Councel kept i tttribM ifl* accept- there under the Confulate or Homriui XII, and The- TimT'ii % "'^ofi'*^ Vni. which was in the year CCCCXIX,

Binius. Quidam ve-

tuflut Codex fic htibet ', De Conflrm^do ifio Canone Tranfrnarina Eccltfta confuUtur, Habetur idem Can. apud Vionyf. Exig & omncs Latlnof Qodiat. c Ihid^Cjifario et Attico, vjris clarijjimisy 0«- fuHbus CgUnd, Septemh. Cartbaginein Secrttario Bajilka ReftitHtdi., qmm fi^urelius Epifcopus mh cum Epifcopis con ft dJjftt, adjjantibus eti am DidCdnibw, conffittttafunt bac, qu£inpr£fentiConcilio definita funr. Adhafc Binius. An nimhum g97, quiefl Siricii Pontifidt ig, *" Bonifacius C^fario & Ar- tico Confuliluis, nondum crat Epifcopus ; quern fub confularu Honorii XII. fe Theodofti VlII. Ah. Doai.418. Kal. lanuarii ordinatumffiifleconftat Papam Roraanum, a Cone, Orthag. %. (apud Bfnium) Can.48 . D< DonatiSiispUcuit^ut ctnfnlamusftatrei fy Cenfscerdites mftros Siricium et Simpli* cianum. b Anaftafius, fnnocenrius,ZozimBS. c Binius in notis ad 47 Caa tjufd. Gone li^A eel i^d Cip ^1 '.in pr efenti exemplari tanqutm aliquod huiut Concilii capitulum babeatur^ in aliir tamen ceftij Cokciliorum Librii dicitur effe Carthag Coni:ilii€ap.2^. celtbrati pefi Co,']fulatum Honorii 12'". ^ Yheodoft'ti 8 ". quorum Annus currit fub Bmifado Papa, d God. Ganon. Eccl. Africana; Can. 24. Gra?c^, 84 Larine cdir, ^J/fletlo, atqueaBwwrcpctic.

the

I

the Canon of the Scripture. in

Three yeers before Pope Boniface died 5 yet in that jifricm Canon there is not fo much, nor Ip many Books to be feen, as there is in the Roman Edition j for nei- ther in the ^ Greek Code, one or other, nor in the Col- leliion^ of Canons that Crefconius made, (who was an

^/nV^;i! Bilhop himfclf,) fhali we finde any mention * Melius in notis

at all of the Bocks of the ^accabes, or of the ^.6v^ of clr c^tt^^

^ Earuch 'y towards the Canonizing whQrQoi this C a- concua extat inCoU

non therefore will do no good. And for the i^^'/J that ''f^f/f?'''"! ^Z'^-

be now contelted, it we admit them to be C^;^(?^?/(r^/ mndnmedita'/f<dibi

upon c S. u4uguftins terms, ("whom herein the Coun- ^^^<^^bmum uhi

eel followed,) it will do us no hurt. Voim^ large ZZ^TdM

and common Senfe, as they be Books appointed to be cibus edhh {^ Manu'

read in the Church for the more ample diredion and {""'which is alfo o-

inftruftion of the people in a pious &: regular courfe mitred in s. AUgZ

of Life, (in which fenfe ^ thatCoumelioo\.^tm';) ^If^.^T^'^'f^- "^^

or as they are to be /^y^/^y^'^ before all other £rr/^j?/r- Sap4'ckaf. 'andTn

fiical Books ^ fin which fenfe e s. Auguf^in took them^ J aji the Laun copies

and as they are oppofed to fuppofititious,JpocryphaI,^nd ^^'Tc1£T^l

rejeBed Books^ (in which fenfe both ^ S. Augusiin^ and both 7f,and the Mac

this g C^^^^^^^ befides divers h other of the fathers Tcxrand"in^ther^

took them 5 j all thefe wayes they may be called Ca- th^v^^\oTdi Baifa-

nonical : but in a StriB and Proper fenfe, fo as to make ^^^ ^"^i lonctrcn.

them in all things forcible Rules oi our Faith, or of '^ caf ciJ^tT*^.).

e^«/t/ authority with the I^^^? and the Prophets:, they are ^ P^triiH/ z/fd dccr/»/-

i neither here in ^^/V, nor in any other Co^//^r^/ or ^//- q^ej^I,^'^^^^"^ ^^'

e Supra num. 8r. f S* Aug. lib.i§. de Civit. Dei,cap,i5. Omhtamus earum Scripiurarum fabulas, qu£ APOCRT' PH^ nominantur, eh quid earum occulta orrgo non cl&yuit Patribus, a quibus vfquc ad ms auHorhns vf r actum Scripturarnm certiffma^ nouffimh fucceffioneptrvenit. In hU autem AFOCRTPHiS etfiinvs- nmr diqua veyitat-, tamen proper multi falfa, nulla eft Canonica Aufforitas. g Can. ci c. Nihil in Ec- ciefta LEGAtVR fub Nomine Divinat urn Scripiurarum prater Scripturas Canonist, h S. Athan. fub. fincm Synopf l^a magis digna funt utabfcondantur, qu^mut Uganiur* S. Hicr. Ep.y.ad Lxtam. CaveAt kPOCRT ^Hk ^' quibus multa. vitiofa aimixta. Vide num. 60. &c. / Card. Cajetanus, in fine Comment, ad hiftor. V. & N. T. Suprzl citat. Neturberis Novitie, ft alicubi repmes Libras iftos inter Canonicosfupputatos, vtl in Sacris Conciliis,iel in Sacris Do^oribus—Libri ifli non funt Canonici ad coafitmanda ea qu£ funtfidtiy Poffmt tamen diet Canonici ad adificatinnem jidelium, utpote in Canone Biblidtad hocrecepti ^ autorati^Cum bac DISTWGTIONE difcernere poteris fcriptdhuguftini.et Scri- pta in Provinciali Synodo Carthaginenji, Qri diftindione CajctanM defiimpiic ex Hier. prxfat in Prov. & Ru^no in Expof, Symb. vide qux annouta funt dc Scripturis VivinU & Canonicis large fiamptis ', Supra pag, Q^ ter

II A A Scholajlical Hijlory of

ter before or after it^ (till the jVi^a? ©^r/*^^ was made at Trent-i) termed by that Name^ or adaiitted into the Cmon oi Divine Scriptures. Elfe^ if 5. nAugu^in and this African Councel ftiould be otherwife undcrftood, m Bellarm.dcvcrb. there will htmOTQ Canonical Booksthtn the Romanics ?e1?*At dc^le^^- themfelves will admit. For in Jfrick^ (where they ksnturenimVerfmem ufcd the Vulgar ^ Tranflation^ as it was rendred out Septuaginta interm: of the LXX5 with the Additions of the i/^/Ze'/^z/^yj an- Zflrl^'DvrLiBRi nexed thereunto by HefychiuSy Lucian^ Origen^ and nsvK^ nomtnan- Theodotion,) their "^ Tjpo Books 0/ ^/<5/r^ (mentioned ^'ihid.jilHeckave' here in this C^/io^) comprehended as much as Three riftmikefl, antiqua of Ours 5 that is to fay, Ezra^ and JVehemia among Concilia y & Patres, ^^ ranonicaU and the FM 566^ of £p/r^ among the j>vos Libros ES- ApocYjfhaly 10 termed, and lo accompted as well m VRMJnteiiigerera- ^he ^ Roman Bibley as our owny nor did c s.Augu- fm^^^omES fti^ himfclf make any other reckoning of it, then as tKES-'Acceditquod an Ecclefiaftical Book only 5 and in that C/^^ he held 'd'^^b^At^ZTo^ AM' ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ Canonical as the Maccabes. Wherewith tuflino, cu^te A- Card.Bel/armin'isio much troubled, that he knoweth kxandrino^&cyprU j^q^ how to frame a nv tolerable Anfwer to it. For »"'item Lnc. Brug. Firftj having confefs'd, that according to the LXX in3.EWr». tertiuf Sibley (^ which was then inufe,) The Tm Books o( ^f^'^^^^l'lll^"^''^ £/yr^5 were the fame that all the 7*yef^ are now, he is ^"Bi'hiiaTacr'a sixti forccd tocontradift himlelf, and to fay, ^ that ma- 5. & Clem. 8 . juffu j^y Qf the Ancient fathers (as MelitOy Epiphanmy Hi^

edita, juxta decree. ^ ^ -^ k i :>

Cone Trid. tibri

Ducquifub Libritertiitfy'^artiEfdr^mmJnecircMmferunm, EXTRA SERIEM CANONICCT^ KVM librorum quos S Trid, Syuodus fufiepiu d^ pro CANON [CIS fufciphndosdecrtvit^ SEPOSITI funt. c S. ABg dc Civ. Dei, lib.iS.cap.^^. Pt^ft hos tret Prophetof Ag^.tach. ir Malacb. Scrip- pt etiamESDR\S, qui magis mum gedAYum Scriptor eS habitus, quamPropheta^ — Ntfi fort^ Efdrds in eo Cbrtjfumprophetajfe intelligendHs e^, quod inter juvenesquofdam orta quaflione (5 Efdr.g. to.) quid tmplius valertt in rebus ', cum Reges unus dixijfet 5 alter Vinum, tertius MuliertSf qua plerunque Regibus imptrartnt., idem tamen tertius Veritatemfuptr omnia demonftravit ejfevi^ricem, Confulto autem Evan- gelto Chrtiium cognnfdmus effe Veritatem. Abhoctempcre,^c, Supputati* temporum mn in Scripturit Sanctis, qu£ CANONIC M appellantur-, fed in ALUS invenitur. In quibusfunt (fyr Maccabdtirum Libri, d Bell, dc verb. Dei, l.i. c.7. Seft. Priraam. Concil Carthag, 3. Ctfn.47. Veterefqh Patres Orm f^ Laiini ntibantuns tempore Libiis Sacris'yuxta earn Editionem qua nomine LXX Inte^pretum clcumftre' batur, e Idem. cod. lib, cap;2o. Seft. Ad alteram. Multi veterum(ut Melito^ Epipbanim, Hila* riufy Hieronjmus^ iy Ruffinus} in Ganont V* T. txpontndo^ upert^ftmi fmt Hebntos^ nsn] Orders. HebTjd mem ;. Efdrd nonkabtnt^

the Canon of the Scriptures.

"5

* Ibid. Dehde nihil

txhoc^°Libroin Ei>

laryy Hieromey and '2^«/j5^/) followed the C/^/^o/^ of the Hebrews^ wherein there is no Third Book of Efdras to be found. Which though it be very true, yet it is no- thing to the purpofe ^ for the queftion is not here concerning Melito and Epiphamus^ &c. but concern- ing S. August n and the ^African Councel^ what Books they followed j who it they had followed the He* brew BMes^(sLS he acknowledged before they did not,) would neither have Caj7ouiz*d the ^^oi Efdras ^ nor any other of the Gyeek controverted Books befides ; for the Hebrews had m^e of them alL His Second An- fwer therefore is, * That in dXl iht Church-Liturgies there is nothing y^^^outotthis Third Book oi Efdras '^ which is a Reafon as little to the purpofe, as the for- ^^am ^IeqitorI mcr was 5 for though they read it not now in the Ro- guod Agumentum eft^ ma^-Ofpce, yet in the Cour.cel of Carthage theyap- li^f^lS pointed It to he resid m thG African Churches '^ and if habituminmmmSA' the hsiXt Reading oi^, Book vfOuldi^toycittoheCanO' ^^'^^^* nical^ what ever becomes of the 7l?/V^, the Cardinal (^contrary ^ to his own minde) will Canonize t> the Fourth Book diEfdr^^ before he be aware of it. Then Thirdly, he anlwereth, that c ^ope Gelafius put no more then One Book o( Efdras into the Canon oi Scrip- ture ; which One mufl needs be Our Two. But the matter is not, now, how many Gelafius reckoned, but how many S.Auguftin and the Fathers in the Councel ^canoZml^''^ oi Carthage reckoned, who put no leffe then Two into '^/"^tar mq-, Hebrai their Canony as we fee before. AH this then being no- dcmZZ'nth[7ca^6 thing to his purpofe, at the lafl ^ he denieth that in gu^dam fabuiofa de the LXX 5.-^/., there were any (nch Booh, as the 3d ^^^'^^^^ and 4'^f» of Efdras. Which for the 3^, is not true of c^ere nm poterant,

qud Rabbinorum lal- mudiflarum Somniafunt. Itaque mirandum e(f, quid Gentbrardo vtnerit in menttmy ut hunc etiam Libvum ad Canontm ptrtinere veliet in Chroml.fua, ;>. 90. b Siquidern Ferii ^» PentecoSies aliquid cx 4 . £/: d»-£Cip.2 .^Sy^'j Aegitur'm Officio Komam. Kt\n Soltnmtate Marty um. [^ ver.4f. c Bell.Ibid. Seft. Ad alteram. Pr£tere^(xJiftunnConc.Rom.'io'\ Efifcoporum,VNVMtantiim Efdr£ Librum ponitin Canone. Huo Vnoftne dub'^o noflros DVOS intelUiii. d Ibid. ScS. Dcnique. Denique, Li- at Quida Codiicei Qrm baberftit Tm vokmim EldrA in duobus Libris, ane^ioret tmtn non babtbant.

Q^ 2 the

a Ibid. Sed. Poftrc- mh. Quartus EfdrA fink dnbio non tft Ca- mnicus , ciim a nulla Concilio referatur in non in-

ii6

A Scholajlical Hifiory of

the Greeks and for the 4^^ is not iruc o( the Latm Church. For though the amiem Septuagint^ which was made firft in Ptolemie's time^ had not fd much as the 3d Book^ no more then any of the r^/?, that were not in the Hebrew Bihle^ yet in fubfequent times , when the Hellemft Jem had once made their Additions to thatLXX) both thai Third of Efdras^ and divers o^fc^^ Books befidesj were received into it, and delivered over to the Greek Church ; from whom the Lati/^s took it, and made ufe of all thofe Additions to it, long be- fore this Councel of Carthage met together, and took order, that more Hooks then thefe fhould not be puhlickl'j read in their Churches. In fome other places they made their ufe of the 4^^ Book of Efdras and all^ which we finde cited by the a Latin Fathers, as we do the 3d by the ^ Greek, and the Latins both*, (though neither of them ever made fuch Books to be of equal Authority with thofe which they received from the Hebrews through the hands oichrift and his holy Apo- ft Its, hut kept them in a foa^fx* ^ i^^;^* by themfclves, as we have already made it evident for CCCC yeeres together. ) It is true, that in fome d later Editions of the LXX, thefe Two Bocks are omitted, (the 3d as well as the 4th,; and they that omitted them had good rcafon fo to do, both in the greek and in the Latin Impreflions of the Bible ^ yet this hindreth not at all, but that in former times, and in particular, when xh^: Fathers of the Councel of Carthage lived , the Sep- tuagint, (from whence their ^ Fulgar Tranjlation was takeni> andufed in Africk,) had the 3d Book ofpjdra^, among others, annexed to it, as it hath at this day in

fluarto Efdrdti mn

inrtquim tx CAKOIUCJS^ ftdtanqulm txLihmcontmntibus dogmata quAdam pa, d Vatablus. "^ Librum Efdr^ Gr^ie nee fibi cuntigijfe 6\c\t viderty nee quicquam qnod fciat alteri Sed ncquc ifn Complktenfibus Exemplaribus , ncquc in Bibliis Regiis habctur hie tertius Liber Efdra grxc^. tr S. Aug dc Giv. De'f, Jib. 19. cap. 24. Shut Or Act Codices habent, unde in Latinam litiguam Scriptura converfa e{f. Et Lud. Vivc5 ad eund. Iccom. O.lim Ecclefia Latlna vf^ fmt interprmti* 4M Latinacx'/O"^, vtrsa.

the

£■ S. Ambr. Lib De bonoMortis,8: lib. 2. in Lucam ac inEp. 21. ad Horatianum. S, Cypr. Ep.74. ad Pompcium.& adver- fus Dcmetrianum. b S Athan. Orat. g. control Arianos. Et Cicm. Alcy. lib. 2. Strom. Bafil in Ep. ad Chilonem. Au- thor opcris imperfe- ^^,Hom.i.in Matth. S. Aug. lib. 18, Dc €iv. Dci, cfp 35. c Joh.DricdoinCa- tal Script, lib.i.c.4. addifficult. 4. ^.r/. friat^us ^ Ambrojius y cattriqn^ Patrts cihnt ■Stnttnttas ex Libn BartKb, ^ Icrtio at

the Canon of the Scripture.

II

the Vatican y and the P^emce Edition, though (hcrej accompted by Carsi, BeiUrmin Icife corrected Copies^ then others be. But when "^ he bring's in S. Hie- rom's teftinionie , to exclude this Book out of the ancient and vulgar Bibles , that were in ufe before his time 5 this is fo far from truth, that in the very fame place which the CardinaWiKo.^^ S. Hieromes difcourfe is altogether to the contrary ^ a pleading' to have the[e Bocks rejeBed out oi\\\Q Bible ^ which were not acknowledged by the Hebrerves iohQ,oi\\i2Lt number that alludeth to the ^ XXIIII Slders ; which it fhould leem, the Cardinal f not well regarding the CharaBers) miftook for the LXX Interpreters. Indeed afterwards S.Hierome fayes of the LXX Copies^ that they were various one from another, and in many things perver- ted-^ but there he fpeaks of the whole Body of the Bible in general, and not of the ^00^5 of ^/^^V-^^ in particu- lar, wfiich he had noted before to have been taken into the Bibles then in ufe, though they were but d Apocryphal Writings of themfelves. Yet as Apocry- phal as they were with him , or any other of the Church, S, Augujlin thought fit to retain One of them at leaft, ^ whereunto the people of ^/r/V^ had been long accuftomed, and theFathersoiiheCouncel of Carthage made it lofar f Canonical among thcmy that they ordered it to b^ read in their publick AJJem- llieS'y from whence it will evidently follow, that ci- ther He and They were in an evident Errour^ (to ob- trude as a canonical Book upon their Church, that was

eQe demonfljat. Nee pttft utique verttm afftru quod dhtrfum efi. Mintie eum ad Evangelia. : in quibus multa ponuntur quafi de V,t. qua apud LXX Interfretes non habemury velutilludj IHitonJam NaT^arenusvocabitur , ^ tx. Egypto vQcavi filiumy fyc, d Ibid, utfupra*, Apuryphorum I'irtii fy' Q^mi Libri (Efdrdi) Som- njis, e S. Aug, de Civit. Dei, lib. t8. e. g6.&c. 45. Item Epift.io. &19. adHieronymum, ^Prepterea me nolle tuam ex Hebrao interpretationem in tccleftis Ugi^ tie contra LXX AutmtaUm, tail' quam Novum aliquidproferentes. magno fcandah perturbeTmif Plebes Chri^i, quammauret ^ corda it- lam interpretatidnem fex LXXJ audire confttevemnt. f Can. citato. Sunt autem CANONIC^ Scriptur£,~Oen, Exod. ^c.-Salomms Libn V.-^Efdu Libri DHo.—Tobias, j^ndith, i^c.-^uid hFn*. tribHiiSfaaccepimus LEGEND A.

^ Bell.lib,&cap.cit. Scft. Deniquc. Dent- que B, Hiersnymus prdifaiione in Efdranty aperi^fjgnificat, 3. ^ 4. Efdra nojifolitma'- pud Hebraos uon ha^ beri-, fedneapudSep^ tuaginta quidcm Inters pretes.

a S. Hicr. praf. in Efdram. Nee quen- quammoveat^ quod It- ber h nobis £dituseftf qui Apocryphorn i' ^ 4' Somniis non dele- iietur. Q^ia iy apud Hebr^os Efdrd Nelj^" miAqie Sermones in unum volume n coar^ ^antur : ({^ qua non habemur apud ilhs^ nee de XXIV Senibuf funt.procul ABjlCU ENDA.

b Id. Prol. Galeato. It A enirfi nonnulli fwp* putant,z\\\XX\\, c Pra?f. clear. Si quis autem Septuagin- ta, a^c. quorum Ex- emplaria varietas ip' fa lacerata fy inverf$ effe demonjirat.

iiS

J Scholajlical Hijlory of

not Canonical , which no Man , that hath any Ho- nour for them, will grant j or elfe that they bor- rowed, and ufed the word Canonical in a large and extended acception, that might in one regard be ap- ply ed to the Cmtro-uerted Books^ and to the undoubted Scriptures in another 5 which will leave the Error up- on their fide , that forbid Men now under pain of damnation (as the Church oi Rome diOih) to admit any diftinBion between them. For they muft themlelves admit a DiftinBion between the y^^, and the 3d Book of EfdraSy which nevertheleffe is here qualified with the general Term of g Canonical Scripturey as likewife be Five intire Books under the Name of Salomon^ when .all wife men know that he wrote but h Three^ and jKEsticelH^^ ^hat the other Tm^ though they were commonly^ yet jbitoritats CAmNi- they were improperly faid to be Hif. But the Councel

CAAf, ProverbUyEc- - . -.

cUfiaftes^ {y CamcH Candcorum, Aliiveih duo quorum unus Sap. titer EccUftaflicus di^ cituu propter Eloquii nomulUm fimilitudi- neniy ut Salomonitdi- cantur obt'tnuit Cinfuc- tkdo.

I InConc.Trid.Scff. 4.& Bulla Pii 4* AS. Aug.de Civ. Dei. Iib.i7.cap.20, SaIo- monprephetajfe reperi-

of Carthage Ipake by a kinde oi Similitude ; and as the Popular Cujtome then carried it. The Sum is. As thefe Five Books are promifcuoully received into the nAfri- can Canon under the Name of Salomon^ So are all the other under the Name oi "Divine and Canonical Scrips tures ^ which (for all that) may, and ought to be rf/- ftinguifhed into their f ever al and proper Clajjes.

LXXXni. The next is Pope INNOCENT the FIRSl ; Who in bis EpiftletoExuperiuSy (a man highly commended by a S.Hieromey and thenBiihop ot Toloufe in France^ ) ^ i% laid to have fent him a Catalogue of Srripture-Books 5 conform to that, which we have already recited out of ^. u4ugu(lin and the Councel oi Carthage. But who knowes whether this be any genuine and true EpiftleoiVope Innocent ^ or .no? For there is great reafon to doubt it. i. Fir ft,

antur in Canont Sift- ^ ^

pturarHWy brevis anaexui oftendit. Gen. Exod. Lev. Num. Deut, Jof. Judk. Reg. a. Ruth ^Prophet X^L Sahmnnis Lib)i V, Pfalt. Job, (Tobias^) Hefler, Judith, Maccab. duo^ Efdrji duo, Paralip.duo, ^c^' Bcliarm. devcrboDcijl. i.c.io. Seft Prinium Priniumigiturhos Librosuna cum cdtteris in Canont ponunt ConcilJA Carthag, %. can,^7. trid. Seff. 4. d^ Pontiff x Imoctntius i. in £/« ad Exupmum. $i. militcr, Perron, CanuSj Bccanus, & alii plorimi.

becaufe

An. T>om. 405.

a S. Hier. Ep. 4, ad

Rufticum.

b Innocent i,inE- pift. g- ^d Eyuperi- um. Tom. i. Cone, Se^^ 7.apud Binium. Qui vti 0 Libri accipi

the Canon of the Scriptures.

bccaufe thcrt is no EccleJiaftualfVriter^ that took any notice of it , ( as many did of fome others his c epiftles^ ) in all that Jge wherein he lived ^ nor till he had been neer upon CCC yeeres dead. It is now got into the Body of the Councels ^ being placed there among the "Decretal epiftles of the Popes 3 but it was firft taken Out, and brought in thither, from the d Roman (^ode , which of a long time had no fuch Epiftle in it. The Church of old was wont to be regulated by the Canons of the e rniverfal (^ode^ that confifted of 'Hjne C^mcelsy that is to fay , the Councels of Nice , Amy a , "Hjoc^^area , gangres , jintiochyLaodicea^ Conftantinople^ Ephefm^ and Calcedon ; whereof the Vir^ and the Three laft were General 5 the other Vive , though Particular ^ yet generally ^ approved. And the whole intire Code contayned only CCni Canons J following one another in an exaift order, to the end, that the ^«w^f^ of them might neither be augmented nor diminifhed. And thus it continued till a Dionyfius SxiguushistimQ^whohdng an Ahifot oi%ome , tranflatedthatCo^(?outof greek into Latin , after another manner tlien it had been in ufe before 5 and made many Alterations in it. For he ^ retrenched divers of the Ancient Canons^ (which feemed to be moft difadvantagious to the Po/;^y,)and ^ added divers others, that the ^/2/^'frp/ Church did not acknowledge : yet in all his ColleBion was there never any Decretal Epiftle added. In the d Abridgment of Eerrandus , who lived at the fame time , there is no mention made but of * One Epiftle onely, which Siricius fent from a Councel in Rome 5 to the Churches oiAfrick ; and for the Reading of the Canonical Scriptures he quoteth no other ^ Decree^ihcn what was made in the Councels of Laodicea and Carthage. So that for more then a Hundred Yeeres together this l^pi^le of Pope //?;?a^^/?/; was not heard

of

lip

c Inter Epift.5.i4^^. y\Ac ctiarw S. Aug, contr. Pelag / 2.c.p. A Codex CanonetDc' cretorum EcclefiaRo^ ttianjif cdic. Mogun- tiaj. Anno 1525. fLechaffemsinCon- fultacione fup. Con- trorerf. inter Papam Pauiy. 8c Remp.Ve. »ff.acinTradatudc Libenatibus Eccl.Qa- lie. Item, Hincmarui Arch. RemcHfisino- pufcuJocontr^ NinC' wi<ir»Lauc!unenf.c.ai / Vide Cone. Galcc- don,Aft.4.ii.i3.& Anton.Aug.Ii, de £. a Vionyf Exigui Co- dex Canonum Ec- clefiaft. Anno 525^ b Omnes VIII, Cji- nones ConcUii Epbe* finu Magnam partem ultlmi Canonis Coa- cilii Laodiceni^ Tre$ ulrimos Canones CS* c'lL Conflantiitopolita^ nh Duos poftrcmos dnonei Condi. Cd^ cedonenfts,

c Canones , qui di- cuntur i4;oi?o/orw,5o. Canones Cone. Sardi' cenftj, Canones Cone. Africani.

d Ferrandi Diaconi Brcviatio Canonum. Anno ^;o. ^ And yet it is not tht Epiftle which is now put into the Roman Code. e lb. Tit. 229. Vl pMter Scripturas Ca. nonicat nihil in Ecde-^ fia legatur, Conc.lH^ dicenMt.sj^Conc^CMf" thai, w.4f .

IZO

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

d Crcfconii Brcvia-

rium Canonumv An.

69S,

b S'trki'u Innoc, Zo-

fimi^CeUQitih ^eonii.

c Titulus ejufdcm Breviarii, Hichabe- tuT Concordia Cano- num Ctnciliorum, (fy Prafulum Romannu. d Ibid.inpr^f.^K:^- th veifrum imperiuw, cunila EccUfiaflica ConSitutaj qua ad m- Uram notitiam perve- nerunt, in hec operefub ■TitJdoTK fcrie prsno- tavimui eorumq; Con- cordiam faciemes y col. legmus in unum. a Ib'd. Canon

xxi^ii, ecxx. ccxxi. ccxxii. ccxxin. ccxxii^,

ExD'ecretis Fapa In- mcentii ^aliorum. ' h Ibid. Canon CCXCIX. Ex ConciL Carthag. tit.. 24 Vi prater Scrjpturai Ca- nomas Mil in Ecdt' fiahgpiir. . ' cHjii vcro Ubri at- CTpruntu-jnCanoneS' Scrrpfura-um^ (irc,z- y>v.d Bin'ium & aUif* Sea. five tit. 7.^ nJtimo.

of at all, nor any other of his , that is now entered into thQ RomanCode. But about CCyecres after , (When the Popes had in the meane while begun tofetup, and enlarge their pretended power fo tarre , as that they might make Decrees by themfelves alone , and give Larves to other Churches abroad, wherein notwithftanding they had much oppofition, j chej:e was another Breviary of the Ca/^om made by a Cre[comus<y who added the Decretal Epiflles o( ^ six Popes to the Code that Dionyfius Sxiguus and Verrandus had collected before him. Among thefe EpiftleSy this of Innocent's was one, or at leaft given to this /\r<?»7 ColteBor for one , though when it came to his hands there was nothing in it that concerned the Catalogue or Canon oithe Scriptures. For having undertaken to make a ^ Concordate between the decrees of Councels and Popes together , and to d alledge all that either the one or the Other had written, for the autoritie and confirmation oithofe C^;?o;?j which he had coUedled into his Breviary ; and having there alfo, accordingly, cited this EpiftleoiPope Innocent^ a six feverall times , as it related to So many Headsy and agreed with So many Councels a.nd Tapal Conflitu- tionsy that had written any thing of them 5 yet when he came to the ^ Titleor Canon of "Reading no other Bookes in the Church , but fuch as belonged to the Canonical Scriptures ^ (where ii Innocent's Epifilehad then contayn a that Catalogue oi Scripture-Books^ which was afterwards annexed to it, and is now printed with it, the ColleBor would certainly, upon his former undertaking and promifc , have quoted it, ) he pro- duceth only the Canon ohheCouncel of Carthage ^ and maketh no mention of Pope Innocenfs epiftle at all : which isafigne, that there was nothing in ic to that purpofe ; but that c the y^han^/^^ i/t'^iofit, (as it is now publifhcdf or the better advantage 4nd

plea

the Canon of the Scripture.

Ill

plea of the Roman Churchy ) hath fince the time of Crefco/iius been added to ic by the fleight of fomc other hand. At which Ifi^ore Menator , ( and as cunning a Merchant as He, Be^et the Petit^ ) wasfo skilful! 3 that within a C yeeres after there was a ^ ColleBion made of more "Decretal Epifiles then any honcft man knew what to do withall j till ^ Pope Leo the ^^^^ and c N'icholas the Firft , faw that there was great ufe to be made of them for their own turnes , and fent them abroad into the world for Law. And as this was the original of the Roman Codcy fo that Code is the firft , wherein wc meet with this Decree of Pope Innocent concerning the Scriptures y that is, no lefle then CCCC. yeeres after his death. Which is one Reafon why wedothemorefu(pe6l it. 2. Another is , becaule in this matter the ^ Councel of Carthage being not altogether fo fure of their Canon ^ intended to confult their Brother Pope Boniface^ and other Bifhops that lived abroad, about it 5 which they needed never to have done , if Pope Innocent had fent out any fuch Decree before. For it is pretended that this JD^^r^^ was out XIIII yeeres before the time of that Councel and Pope Boniface. 3. And a third is, becaufe wefindethoie wordsof the Apoftle in it, (They that are in the Flejb cannot pleafe Gody %om 8.8.) fo grofTely mifapplyed to perfons that \i\Q, in Marriage. But after all this, ifwefhould grant this Epiftle to be true , and allow it afmuch -^ authority as the Two Popes did in Gratians Canon Law^ yet will the fame Anfwer to it be fufficient, which we gave a before to the Authority of S. Auftn^ and the Councel of Carthage. And fomewhat it is befides, that in the ^ Firft Editions of the Councel^ together with the Popes Decretal Epiftles^ which Merlin fet forth at C^len , and Paris^ there is not in all Innocent*s Catalogue the Book oiTobit to be founds as neither in

R S.Auftins

a Tftdori MetcdtDris CoIJe<Jtio Cone, ai Epift. Dccrcralium. Anno 800. b Can. dg Libellfs. Di{\.20,Leo Papa IV, Epifcopit BiitannU. Decretalmm ReguU habentnr apud nos ft- mutcH Canonibus^^c Anno85o» c C. Si Roman. dift*. 19. Nicolaus PapaU Epifcopis GallU, De- cretales Epi^oU vim an^orjtath babent : quanquam quidum ve- firumfcripftrint^ baud ilk DecretaliaprifcQ' mm Pontificumin to- to Canonum Codicis corpore contineri, ^ ad imminktmem Se^ dis ApofiolicdipotePa' tis prohibeant^ ^c. Anno 85o. d C4n. Citato.

* Which is more then Pope Innocent afliimeth to himfclf, when he faith, Scr7/>)f pro captu JnteBigemU mea.

a Nura.8».&82. b Colon,i5go.info|. & Paris 1 595. in 80. per JHttlimm,

i

u»

t . - ,.

A SchoUJlical Hijlorj of

An. T>om.

a Sap. 4. 1 r. Kaput

efl, ne maHt'ta mutartt

intelleSium ejus.

/'b Hilarius Arelatcn".

»» Uui fuin Epift. ad Aug.

rol^tri Pi^oc TeQimonium tan-

lu 'porihYf*'*^ "<'" Canonkum

r I,' 'Vtfupra,ntm.

S, Aupn's Catalogue y nor in the Canoa of Carthage fhall we find the Book oiBaruch, Hitherto therefore it is certain 5 that no Ancient Author can be produced,, to juftifie the Nevp Canon of the Councel y\S\dLi was held, at Trent,

LXXXIIII. About this time it was 5. when the DIVINES at {MarfeilleSy and other places in Francey took Exceptions at S, Auflin's alledging a ^ Teftimony out of the Book oimfdom ; which in points of dodrine they faid ought to have been omitted 5 becaufe it was ^^ no Canonical Book o{ Scripture. And foraimuch as all the rf/?of^^^^C/^/5^ wcreofalike Condition with this , (that they were not written by any Prophet y nor received into any fuch authoritie by the ancient Churchy) therefore upon the fame reafon diat thefe Divines of the Trench Church refufed to acknowledge the Oney it may be juftly prelumedj that they difallowed the Other 5 there being no reafon. at all 3 to be given, why they fhould Q^o;?/^;^, the Books oiTohity ludithy EcclefiafticuSy or the LMaccaheSy, and yet out ot the fame Canon rejpd the Book of mfdomeyas here they did.

LXXXV. We have in this Ce/ztury ,. the Generall Councel of CALCEDON y under LMartianus the Empcror5& in the time of Pope Leo the Eirft,.confifl- ing of DCXXX Bifliops ^ which received the ^bde of the Church univerfally in ufe before them, and by their a F/V^ C^/70;^ confirmed it. In that Co^^, often 4 Concil. Caked; b rncntioned in this Councely were contained among; T'MZlnti others the Canons oUaodiceayC wherein we had the q^iaque S)nodo, hue Catalogue of the Canonical Books o^ S.cripture before -J ufque cetiQitHii Junt, {y^^ xh^ d Canons of the Councel oiCmhaQe had vet

rJec^-evimiu, HO place in It. And therefore we may fafely con-

b . In cod. Concil.

A3 A- Al}.\i, Alf. I ^ Epifi. Synod. Epifccporum Piftdia, ad Lecnem Imp. Et Epij}. Epifrpirum Eu- rof£ Pfovincr^ h ac Epifl. J^gaphi Epifcopi Rhodi adeund. Imp. c In Codicc Can. unircrf. Eccle'^ /ijCjCsin.CLXIII, d Qao!)D/t)n;;/7«j £xjg««; primus omnium adjecic, Anno 525. . .

dude.

An. T>om.

the Canon of the Scriptures.

123

dude, that neither Pope Leo ^(yNh.o{Q. Legats {uhicTi- bed the (^oa/?celoi Calcedon for him, all but tlie XXVII Camn^) nor gny of the Bifhops there gathered toge- ther 3 acknowledged any other Books of Canonicall Scripture^ then what the Councel oi Laodicea {yNhich left out e all the Apocryphal^ or Scclejiaftical Books e Supra. Num.59.' of the old Teftamem^j had declared to be received:, and read for lucb in the Church-^ before their time.

LXXXVI. In the latter end ofthis^^f lived Pope j q< fafius t of whnfe Dpcr^e^ wehave but a 0/7e onlv -^f^* UOfTJm

4P4-

GelafiuS'y of whofe Dd'rr^'^svvehave but » 0/7e only given us in the Roman Code^ where it is divided into XXV III Seftions. Yet in the Tomes oi the Councels they have added many more^ and among others a cer- tain ^Decree that he made in a Synod at Kowe with LXX Bijhops about him, concerning the Authentick Books of Scripture. And this Decree was then fir ft heard of, when ifi dor e' the Merchant began to vent his Apocryphal Wares to the World, and when Gela- [im had been already CCC yeers in his Grave. From him <^ Surchard and "^ /uo received it, and ^ Gratian from them all. But in the ^ Copies which they bring us out of the pretended Original.^ there is (o great an uncertainty, and difagreement betwixt them , that the % Roman Emendators of G'y-^^/^;^ them felves know not how to truft it. For in fome Copies they can finde neither the Book of JW/V^, nor the Second Book of Geiajfo7A7.Dom!^9l MaccabeS'j in others they have but One Boo^of the c Anno 1014. Kings^ and One of the Chronicles • fometimes Three^^ ^ Annousl' and fometimes Tm]y and otherwhiles Five of Salo- f Dift.is.c. Sana« won. So that no Man can tell what Gelafius herein ^ E^'m^datorcs Ro- faid, if he faid any thing at all. But let it be , that mani in Notis ad e- fome fuch Catalogue was digefted in his time: All ""^em canoncm,

«^ o Verb. Mandamus, ^c

cote in toto hoc capite tot modis difcrtpant CoIUSmes ab Orighdi^utfatis cert 0 ^atui non po fit ^ qu£ VEKAyS' PurafitGeUftiU^fio, necmagnopere fnmmndum, finonnulUfmt,qu£difficultatemfaciunt. Item, ad verb. casterum. Hinc ufque adfinem rub[recenfcntur Libri Scri>tur^Canonjci^& Ecgicfi* afticiiirdgmimniixtiQ neque in ColWone Jftdortj nsqut in uUo vetsri CodiceVrnfimeofm qvs col- latajunt, invcmntur,

R 2 that

a Vecretum Gelafii Pap£ ad omnes Epif- cofos. inCodiccCan. VecEccl.Rom.Edk. Mog. 1525. & Paris.

b In Tomis CoHcili- ornm apud Biniura Tom.g. ConciU Ro- manunty quo h 70. £- pifcipis Ljbri S&cri et Authenticiab Apocry- phis funt difcretif fub

11^

A Scholaftical Hifiory of

£ Dccrct. Gelafii m Synodo7o.Ep, Or- do Librorum veteris JcSamcnti.

that is gain'd by it againft us, is as good as nothing ; for it is but sl (Catalogue of Ecdejiaftical Books mixt with the Canonical ; and the » Title of it bears no more, then we ufually give itourfelves^ tbfignific, that thefe were the Books, which were written in the time of the Old Te^amenty and afterwards received by the Church to be putlickly r^^^unto the people, though in a ftrid and exad manner of fpeaking, we intend not to call them all alike Canonical ^ no more then Gelafim and his Bi^hofs did ; who muft either be taken in fuch a latitude, as we defire to be, or elfe they will be put, not only to difagree with the Mature of the Thing it felf (to fay that any Book was a Canonical Bock of the Old Tefl omenta which during the time oithat Tefta- tnent was never fo,^ but to depart likewife from the Confent of the Ancient and Primithe Church before them 5 which God forbid we fhould ever conceive of fo many Reverend and Excellent Perfons, as ei- ther met with S.Aufiin. in the Councel of C^r^fc^^^ or with (Jelafius in the Synod at %cme.

LXXXVII. But here at this place it will not be amiffe to iland awhile, and look upon the Fine Fa- geant , that M. Becanus the Jefuite hath drels'd up, and fet in our way. Becanus was a Man of an acute wit, and fubtil enough y but herein (as in many things befides) he (hewed little of it J when a he brings m Pope Innocent delivering the Trent-Canon of Scrips tures to the Councel of Carthage^ and the Counceloi Carthage recommending it to S. Au^in^ and S, Au^in prefenting it to Pope GelafiuSy and Pope gelafius in his Councel at Rome reaching it over to Pope Eugenius . in his Councel at Florence^ (which is a leap no leffe

Eugenms ilium accepJt *

J Oelafie Papa in Conciho Romano ; Iternm Gelafius ab Auguflino ; ^ Auptfiinus h Conciiio Cartba" ginenfi; denique Patrei hujuiCoMciliiab Innecenth I. Vixitautemlnnocentius Anno Chrijii 402. Igitut itbillo tempore PRIMITIVE ECCLESJjS. adnosufqucfer CONTINVAM TRADITIONEM per- fever ax idem ille SCRlTTVRj^ CAWNy qiiem nos tinnc tenmttf, i; mpleStmur, Vide cund. Trad . dc fide, c jp. ^ q i . qbit). 3^

then

• M. "Bccarm MS- iHiaKComrcv.lib.1. eap. I. q. I* Canon Scripturarum (quern Fontificii ampUBi- mur) babetur in Con- ciiio Trident. Sef^, Et Patres illiusCon- tilii acceperunt ilium per tradiiionem ab Eu- genio Pa\a in Conciiio Florentino, Rursitm

the Canon of the Scripture.

Ujf

then Nine Hundred and Fifty years long, j and P(>^^ Bugenius putting it into the hands of the Councelof Trent. We fhall Ipeak with the Councel of » Florence and ^ Trent hereafter j and what all the refi of thi^ fherp can fay, we have already heard before , and heard nothing that makes to the Jefuites purpofe 5 which is 5 to fet all the apocryphal ^ or Ecclefiaftical Books of the Bihle^ in e^ual %ank and Authority with the Canonical. But between Eugenius and Gelafius there will come in fo many to the contrary, that Be- cams will never be able to maintain either his Conti^ nual Tradition againft them, or to fetch his leap over all their Heads. That gelajius received his Catalogue from S. Au^in^ or S. Au^in from the Councel of Car- thage^ and the Councel from Pope Innocent^ is no way probable. For fir ft Gelafius received his Decretal Epi- jiles^ all but One, and his Sy nodical Declaration of the Scripture-Bocks from Ifidore Mercator^ and Iftdore MeV" cator 5 for ought that any body knowes , onely from himfelf. Next, the Councel oi Carthage j and Pope In- mcenty rather received their Catalogue from S. Au^in^ then S. Au^in from them 5 For he wrote his Books o{ christian DoBrine before he was made a Bifhop^ to which Office he was a Or^-<«/W^ VII years before Pope Innocent ^ came to that dignity, and X years before c the Epiftle to Exuperius is faid to be writ- ten ; an EpiHle that S. Aufti» perhaps never faw, fat leafl he makes no mention of it,) and which the ^ouncel of Carthage never heard or, who following the Enumeration oi Scriptures that S. Auftin had (with his reftridions and limitations) fet down before, fent it to Boniface and other Bifhops of Italy , to fee if they would approve it ; which they would never have clone, if they had known of any former Declaration that Innocent had there made about it. Laflly, if £1;^ genius had it from Gelafius^ and terfrom S.Au^iny

and

A Infra, Num. 154. b Num. 1 81.

tf Anno^^^.Secwn-

dfim Vuf^n Chro-

nicon.

h Anno 402.

c Anno 405.

A Anno4if;

126

J Scholajiical Hijlory of

4 Loco citato. /^tw'" db ilh tempore Primi- tiv£ EccUf.ad ms ufq'y

b ScrinioPcdoris?

c BccanusHb. dea- nalogiaV.&N.Teft. c.i. q.i.Qjtinam Li- briV.T.futitCanoni. d? K. Canon feu Catalogus Librorum V. t. duplex eii^Vnus Judaicus) qui tempore EfdfA confeSus rf?.— Alter Chrifliauujy qui Automate INNO- CENTII PKIMI anftlhis eft.- Et auidem de prion- tut non eft difputat'io^ Omnes ta Juddd qH^m Chriftiata agnofcur.t illos pro Canonicis. Ve poffer'toribus alt- qua dijftnfio eil.

and S, AuHin from the Councel^ and they from Pope Innocent ; from whom did this Po])e receive it ? f tor he lived in the I^ifth ^ge^ which is lomewhat too late a time, to begin the a Primitive Church withal, as Becmu%\i^i^ doth s) did he take it from himlelf, and fetch it out of his b oipnBofome ^ or did he alone give forth his Sentence about it, without the Confent and Teftimony oi Others ^ and which is morejagainft all the Teftimony and Confent of the Primitive church for the fpace of CCCC years before him > Into lo many Errors and Straights doth this Jefuite caft himfelt, by undertaking the defence of a rprong caufe,

LXXXVIII. Nor is he in any leffe Error, when c having ask'd the Qjueftion, What Books oi Scrip- ture were received into the Canon oi iht Old Te la- ment ; he anfwereth. That there be Two Canons of that Tfeftament 5 one Judaical^ which was made up in the time of Ezra ; and another Chriftian^ which was made up by the Authority of //^^^o^f/^nhe F/>]?: A diftindion that ftanding upon no Foundation de- ftroyeth it felf. For the Canon oi the Old Teflament if it be properly and ftridly taken , (and Becanus would not have it othcrwife taken,) neither is, nor can be any other but Judaica/^ from which if there fhould be a different Chriftian Canon ^ making and avowing tho^e Books to be VsLVtsoi the Old Tefiament^ which the oldTe^ament never had, it would imply a ContradiBion ; which Pope Innocents Epijile will ne- ver make good. For no Bock can be (aid to be a Cano- nical Book of the OldTeflamet/t^ (that ended in Ezra^s time,) but fuch only as was received into the C^/^o/? while that Teftament and the ancient Judaic al Church Houriflied under it. Therefore in this matter we can no more believe the Jefuites faying concerning Pope Innocent^ then we can believe Pope Innocent himfelf,

when

the Canon of the Scriptures,

\ij

when in this his Decretal Ejjift/e he tcllcth us (if yet it were He^) that ^ Solomo/i King of Juclah wrote a Bock in the time of ^ p tc'eme King of eg jpt -^ for he attributeth Five c Bocks to ^^/owo;?^ whereof EcclefiajH- cm muftbe One, that was written by 5/W/? ^ DCC and LX yecrs after Salomon was dead. The queflion in our Cafe is concerning a matter of F^flf^ in a time long fince paft, which no power is able to change in- to any other thing then at that time it was^ and make it what it was not. The demand then being. What are the C^nonual Books of the OldTe^ament^ which was now paft and gone Four whole Ages before the time of Pope Innocent^ recourfe is to be had unto the time of the OldTe^awent it lelf, that herein mufl on- ly give us our fure and certain refolution. For if the Fope had an omnipotent faculty5yet that faculty could not revoke a timey nor make things then to le^ that then had no heingy as it is both contefTcd here by the Jefuitey and was made clear ^ before, that his New- Canonical Books had then no fuch being at all. Befides Pope Innocents Anfwer was not given to Sxuperius in ^fuch high termes of ^^^/^oy/Vjf whereby to regulate and binde the Chriflian Church a,{tQt him^) as Becanus here would have it 5 for he aniwereth f only as far as his unclerflanding gave him leave y and according as _ his reafon perfraded hiwy having fir ft confulted the Books^ ' and the order of times wherein they were written. But if he had made the Ecclefiaftical Books o( equal Autho- rity with the Canonical^ or determined thofe fVritings to be parts oi the Old Te^ament^ which never were acknowledged by them that lived under it, properly to belong thereunto ^ his Anfwer had been clear o- therwile then what his underflandinglead him to ;and would have bin altogether contrary to reafon^ both in regard of the Books themfelves, and of the rimes when . they were firft fet forth y which was after Ezra g and

CHdachy,

M An. Mundi 2940. t> An. Mundi 3704.

c Innoc. I. in Epi- ftoia Salomonis Ltbri

d Prsfat. Siracidis filii in Ecclcfiafticu. i^itn in ^B.annOytem- port bus Ptolem^i Eu^ ngetjj Regis, fo9~ quamperveniinEgyp- tm-, i^c.

e Snpra, Chap. IL

/ Innoc. I, in Epi- ftola ad Exupcr. Pro cdptu intelligentid me<£ reffondij quidfequen* dum vet dociljs ratio perfuaderet^vel auSo* ritas leiiionis ofiende^ ret, vel cuftodita feries . ttmpoium dmonflr&T ret.

g Vldecap.iinu.4j

il8 A Scholajlical Hijiorj of

Malachy had clos'dupiAitCam^. Again, ii Innocents %jfcripi; had then carried the preknt rRjmanfenfe^' and been of fuch Authority as is now pretended 5 how came it to paffe, that from the next Ages after him, to the time of theCo^/^r^/ofTr^^^^itfelf, there was no greater Regard and Confideration had of it ? For certain it is, that from his time to ours, never was any Bihle found, that had either his Epiftle^ or the Ca- talogue of S. jiuftin^ or the Canon oiCarthage^ or the Decree oiGelafius fet before it 5 as in all, Manufcript and Printed, ^ the Prologue of S. Hierome is, there placed by a common and univerfal Confcnt of the Latin Church , to be a fure ^ Jndex and difcrimina- tion of the Apocryphal or Ecelejiafiical Books from the Canonical. For herein he was preferr'd before c all other PVriterSy that fpakenotfoDiftinftlyandexadly of this particular^ as ^^ did. And to make it manifeft, that in the fubfequent Ages the Church followed not the pretended definition oi Innocent^ or Gelafius , but the diftindion that S. Hirome made, and the Ancient Canon that the Chriflians received from the Hebrews^ we fhall in the Chapters enfuing , take a full view of the next Ages^ and fee the Teiiimonies which both the Elder and the Later iVriters have given us herein,

4 Prol. Oaleat. B. Hieronymi. b Ibid. Vtfcite vaUatmSy qutdquid eU Extra Hot (in Galeato re- cenfitos) Ubros^ inter Apocrypha psnendum^ Igitut Sapientia qu^ vuJgo Sulomnis infcribmr, isf ^^« Smc Liber, ^ Judhh^^ Tobias,^ PaSlor nonfunt in CANONE, c Alph. Toftat. in i . cap Mat, ad vcr.i2. & feq. Magis credendum efl Uieronymo q\ihm Auguftino, max'm^ ubi agitur de Veteri 'teflct- mento, ^ dt Hiftorrits \ nam in hoc ipfe exctjfit omnes Dolores Ecclefia, d Idem, Defcnfcrii part 2. €.23. Ifta, Vifliniiio falia eft ab ECCLESlAVNIVERSAU.qu^ concolditertenet illamVISTIN' CTlONEMfaaamaB.HlERONrMOy Nm iSa tentbmr ^ Jnd^is FidelibHs ante Chrijii Advtn- turn i ^^fuitpoM continma in EQCLESIA.

CHAP.

the Canon of the Scriptures.

up

Ch

A P.

VUI.

The Tejlimdnies of the ancient Eccleji^ afiical JVriters in the Sixth Century.

M.

An. T)om, 530.

a CafTiodorus dc Di- vinis Lcftionibus.

LXXXIX. 1ft. /r AURELIUS CASSIDORE,

(iometimes a Senator of ^dve- nam^ and Consul of Rome^ but afterwards one that retired himfelf to a Collegiate life in a ^ %^Ugious Houfe which he had built for that * Vivmtnfe M&m^ purpofej) though he lived many years in the /or;?2fy fieriumiuiitkKavea^ Century^ yet in his old age he reached to this j and ^^^^' wrote an a introduBion to the Reading of 'Divine Scriptures. Among which he comprehendeth not on- ly the Canonical^ but the Ecclefiajtical Books alfo of the Bitle^ together with the beft ^ Expofitors^ and Tra- Bats that had been made upon them. In the firft place c he reciteth the ftri^er Catalogue of S. Hierome^ (which is an Argument that he preferred it before any otherj) and afterwards the larger Enumeration ot S. <iAu^in^ and the common Septuagint: but of thefe Two lafi his judgement is not io well known to US5 as otherwife it might have been, if the Copies of his writing had come perfefl: to our hands. For they that fet him forth confeffefomewhat here to be want- ing. In the mean while how highly he approved S.Hieromes Edition^ which confifted of XXII ^ooks according to the Hebrew Canon^ he dcclareth at large :

3 Ibid.cap.24.j^oi diHum rationahjlher in traSfatoribus pro- batiffimis invenitur^ kocpYoculdubiocred^' mui effe DIVIKVM. c Ibid. cap. 12. Set- tndum efl plane S.Hi^ eronimum idth diver-, forum Tranflatjones U' iijfey atque coyrexijfey eo quhd AuSoritmi Hebukd nequaquam fiOt perfpiceret confa- nare. VndefaBum e3 ut OMNES EIBROS K. 1*. diligenticurain

Latinnm Sertmnem de HEBRMO fontetunsfunderet, ^ad VIGINTI DV ARV /if Literarum mo- dumj qui Mpud HebMosmanet, COMPEtENTER adduceret^ per Quis Omnis Sapientia difcitur ^ ^ tnetmria di^orum in avum Scripta Strvatur, Huk etiam adjecSi funt N. T. Libri XXVII, gMt colligunm ftmul XLIX, Tituks hujus Capitis cft, D/K/^/C) SCRIPTURE VlVlff^Sccundi HIERONTMVM,

S But

n

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

^But of Pope Imoce/its Epiflle^ and the Decree o^Gelor- fiuSy he laith not a word ; which is a figtie, that they came into the World after his time. And becaufe he could not finde among all the Ancient Writers any * Ibid, cap, f. 54c Expofitions of the OihQi EccleJiaJiicalBooiSy "^ which mm autm Pater yy^rc added to the Tranflation out oi the Sevtuagint^ HwonymusaSemSa. ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^ mS.Augufiines Catalogue, he commit- ted the care of that work to a Prieft ^ of his own acquaintance 5 ^ commending the ^ooks for many excellent r<?r^^c^3 and inftruftions of Manners iw Pa- tience ^ in Hope^ in Charity^ and in- Fortitude^ tliat are to be found in them. And thus far S. Hierome was of hisminde. And fo are we.

txpofit. Presb)ter Bel-

litor, &c. a Ibid cap 6. Bellatori amkp mfiro, b Ihid. Propter vktutet exceJlenti^mai mrum CO nfcripios ejfecogncfcite^- ut patient jam^ ut fpem, ut caritatem, utetuminfsmmsfort'mdmmyUtpn Veo csnttmptawpr^fintiifecuiivitam, ^c, noftrh amm'is competetiKT infunderent.

fieniis Librum non h Salomcne (ut ufus ha- bet) fed a Philonedo- Siffimo quodam Juddo fujjfe confcriptH'' qutm Ffiudographum prA- notavity quii ufuTpati- onem nominis portat altems, Hujus libri

An. T>om.

54-

I.

« Novella I? I, 06-

A-^'av Tiojtl^oiv av- rocAyf l¥.TiM'>'TcUy «

b Concil. Calccdon. Cai). 1. ut fupra ci- u\uv. Nuni.8$. t In ccd. Concil^

A. Vide Num.59. •t Num. 82. /t Anno 52^. ^; Anno $30.

Aiu T>om.

XC. Among other Lawes, that JUSTINIAN the Ew per our made concerning Ecclefiajiical matters^ this was one 5 ^ xhat the Camns made , and confirmed by the Four Firjl General CouncelSy fhouJd be Received^ and. have the force of Lajves. In the laft of which Gouncels (^as appeared before , both by the ^ Councel it lelf, and by the ^ Code there approved,) the ^ Ca-^ non of the Councel at Laodicea was confirmed ; and the e Canon of the Councel of Carthage (which that Code contained not,) let alone by it- felf. From whence it appcareth, that though ^ Dionjjtm and g Ferran- dm had already madelomeufeofthe .^/w^/^Cow;?- celin their particular and private CoUeBions of the CanonSyyut in the general and publick i^d'^^/^^/W of the Church 5 this of Carthage carried not then any fuch binding a^uthority with it, as that o( Laodicea did. .

XCI. But we have in this Age the Teftimonies of Two African Bifhops to explain their own Canon ; oac of JUNILIUS5 who notwithftanding the mix- ture

the Canon of the Scripture.

n^

mre that S, Augu^in and the Councel of Carthage made of the Ecclejiajtical and Cmonical Books together, acknowledgerhagreat ^ m/;^mjy betwixt them^ and parteth them again (them and others) into their leveral Clajjes. For Firft he declareth that the Cmonicd Books only are of Sovereign and PerfeSl Authoritie ; then that there be fome others of a lejjer^ and others of ;^o Authority at all : which is anfwerable to the Order of the greek Church which divided the Canonical Books from thofe that were fufferd to be Read in publick Affemblies , and thefe from the A])o- cryphaly thatwere utterly r^;>^^^5 dLXidforhiddenioho^ ufed among them. Secondly he ^ exclndethout of his Canonical Clajje the Books o( ludith^mfdome y and the MaccabeSy which he expreflely nameth , and ( by the reafon that followeth, ) the re^ oithat Rank alfo, which he nameth not. For Thirdly y the Reafon that he giveth of this his diftindlion , is becaufe c the Hehrevps , and S. Hierome , and other DoUors of the Churchy had fo diftinguifhed them before him. Which is a cleer profeffion, that he received no more Books into the Canon then they did ; and a cleer argument withal, that the Copie of his writing is corrupted^ where lome of the Canonical Bookes recited in it are fet d out of their own Order.

XCII. Another of the African Bifhops, isPRI- M Asms 3 the Prelate of^rfr«we/«w? there, and one of thofe Fathers that were prelent c at the Trh, generall Councel in Conftantinople y who after the Councel of Carthage had been divulged and j/^/'^/i^af in his Country , now more then C yeers together, d knew of no other Books to be Received there into 'PerfeB and CononicalAuthoritieofScriptureyihen what S, Hieromey and others that followed the Hebrew Accompt^had ^ formerly numbred. It is therefore

.S 2 a

tf JuniliusAfricaiTus dc pirtibus Divina; legis,].i.ca.7.(Scri. brcautemadaiodum dialogl.) Difdpalw. ^omodo Divinorum

2UC rcrera Divini funtjiut talcs haben- tur,) eonftderatur Au^

^h quidamperfeSdi AuSoritatis funt, QhL dam Medidi, Quidam NkUim, D. Huifunt perfe^a Au^otUaiUI M' Q^ds CAVONU COSinfingulis fpeci- thus euumeravmus i D. Qiii MedU > M, ^os adjungt apluri- bus diximus. D. Qjii Nullm.^M. Reliqui Omnes.

b Vide ejurdem Li- bri, cap. g. c IbJd.DT/cip. Q^ire hi Lihri non inter C<t- mricas Scripturas cuT' runt ? Mag, Huoniam spud Nebraosqusqite fuper bac differentia rtcipiebanturyficut Hi* eronymus y C^terjque teftantur. d Eod.cap. An.rDom. 553, c Concil.Conftami- nop. Genera 1. V.Coi- lat.fiveAa2. d Primafius in Apo- caIyp.cap,4.S.7^/-''Wj nts Vtteris 7ejfamenti Libros (per 2^. Al(tf) infinuat, QuosEjufde J^uweri CAKOtSiCA Au^oritate fufcipi^ mufytanquam 24. 5r- moresfupcr Tribunalia, pYdfidmes^

n^

AScholaJlical Hijlory of

f cotton.Dcpr.184.

g Cocffet. Apol. p. 95.

Jn. T)om.

* Evagr.Hift.iib.4,

cap.Sp^

4 Anaftafios in Hex- jnncron, lib, 7. ^^k- mergt iguur Dens to- turn fuum vttus tefla* menium in XXII Li' brit,

b Cocc.Thcfaur.l.^. Art, 17.

f Qnseft. S. apud A- luftaf*

i AnaAaiius ia

580.

ff Henr. Onls. An- ti<j.i«^ TQm.4. Baronius in Annal. AiUK)553»Scft.4^.

a great vanitie in ^ Co^to;^ and g Coeffeuau to fay as they do ^ that from the time of the African Councel in Carthage , their 'Hew Canon of Tr^/^i was received and believed throughout ^// Chrijtendome ^ and that there are not above One or Trvo to be found among the Ancient and later writers in the Church fince that Age , who have been of another mind. But we fhall find them many more : and it wil be no eafie matter for thofe of their fide to find any one that ever maintayn'd the Dodtrine of the Councel oi Trent ^ before that Councel fent out their Anathema againft the whole CJb^rrfc of (?o<^befides both before diVid, after them.

XCIII. In Syria at this time lived AN ASTASIUS the Patriarch of -r^/^^/Vfcj a perfon ^ highly efteemed in the Church ^^ as forallother things wherein he ex- celled 3 fo efpecially for his ftudie and knowledge of xh^ Scriptures ^ Who in his work that he made upon the Creation of the fVorld^ a exprcfsly (etteth forth the dumber of thofe Books which God had appointed for hisOLDTefiament^ to be XXII. And it is to no pur- pole for b Coccius to bring him out ofhis Treafurie againft us. For though hQcitethEccleJiafticuSyinthc fame Book, yet neither there nor any where elfe, doth . he make it 'to be a part oiGods OtdTeftament. And if he for fome c other under his name) hath thought good to ailed ge the mfdome of SahnonanAtocsill it a Divine Scripture^ yet this is no more then other- whiles d he attributeth to the F^irkr5 of the Nicen Councel.

XCIIII. As deer a Teftimonie have vve from LEONTIUS 5 accompted both in thofe dayes and thefe c a very learned and exaft writer 5 who in his Booke againft The SeBs 5 acknowledgeth no other Canonical Parts of the Ancient Bible to be Received by the Chri^ian Churchy then what the Hebrews ha4

received

the Canon of the Scriptures.

n^

received before, that is to fay, XII Hijlorical Books^ Five Frophetfcal:, four of Y)oBrine andi/i-flruclion , ^

One of Ffalmodie 5 all ^ which he namcth in par- a Lcontius Byzaii-

ticular without making mention of any other. And ^"F,sdeSeaisAd.a.

therefore the Ma^er of the Popes Palace at Rome is very fhgaXs^^Lifm tb

angry with this paffage inI.f(?;^^/W3andputtethhim ^cclesia recepL

into his Expurgatory Index with this Cenfurc;, 'imr'''dn' scri^

<^ b That he did exceeding ill^ to make lo jlon a ivkm veteris

«f Catalogue of the Old divine Scriptures^ and therein to ^^^^ '^^" ^^^^> ^e-

<^Omit the Books oiTohit, ludnh, Sfther, JVifdome , %7amam^ll

^^ ecclefiaflicus^ & the Maccahes, Which is cleerly to ^f"'*"" ^^'^'« M5

confeffe, that this Teftimony is wholy for us and full IZTm, Veteriufti

againft the New Trent-Canon. - fint xxii, p^rtim

phetki, partim PdYdtneiicu part'tm ad Pfallendum faH'u Ethtqiadem funt V, T, Libril(fy'c, Qeum h05, & qui id N. T. pertinent, rcccnfailfct, fubjicit. TaJj-rrt ^joi Jt^vovt^o^et^tC^fa. ly c^- K^tiffjcL )^ TiaKsiitL }^ vicL ' ^v Tot 'mtKeuA ydrrxt Ji'/oVT^i 1/ 'ECjcMo/. Hi funt Llbri inGANONEM recepti in ECCLESIA, tiim Vetere turn KOVA j £ qjiibus Omnes illos Prifcos HEBR^l recipjunt b ]oh, Maria, Magifter S. Palatii, Judic.Rom. p.r 1 7. Viminuth CataJogum Divimrnm Librorum tixuit. Nam tobiam , Jfuditb y ESber , Sapiintkm , Ecclefufiicum^ ^ ^^cabaot PERPERAM

OMisir,

XCV. There is a Commentary upon the Af oca- J ^nm' lyps extant under the Name of VICTORINUS the ^^^^* -^om^ Martyr, Bifhop of Pot Biers in France ^ Another fet ^99* forth among the works of S. Auguftin ^ and a Third AutStcnioPMsfe-- attributed to S. ^??2^ro/> ^ which though they be not s"'"^^* their writings whofe Vjimes they bear 5 yet very Ancient they are , and have many True and remark- able paffages in them, whcreot this is One in them a All, That the XXIV Seats of the Elders ^Wyxd^e^Ko the XXIV Books of the Old Teftamentj which is the fame both Explication and Application^ that b Ter- tullian and c s. Hierorm fc^^made hereof before.

a ViflorinJn Apoc.4 ■ Sunt autetn Libti ve* veris teftamentiy qui recipiuntuTy Viginti Qitatmr,

]HosinEpi' tome theoaori tuveni"

ts, Aag.Hom. %* in Apoc. 4. Pit XXIV Senmes poffumus ttiamintelligtre XXIV Ubrosviterh Tiflmcntu Ambr. in Apoc* 4. Per Sedilid igitur XXI f deftgnantur XXIV Libri Veteris tejtom^ mtmu b VideN«m.5i. c VideNum.73.

XCVI.

i^A A Scholajlical Hiflorj of

XCVI. And thus far it is evident, what the ^/2- cient Fathers both oftheCj^f^^ and L^^/'/^CWr/? held and taught concerning the proper and Authentick CANON ofSCRIPlURE: Wherein S. Jtuguftw, and they that followed him y or the C^uncel of Car- thage ^ in effefl: differed not from them. For thofe Fathers that take the CANON in the ftridleft fenfe, (allowing m Books to be received in the Christ an Churchy as C ANONIC AL;> but fuch only , which the Ancient 0)urch of the lewes had received from <]od before, and by the Sole Authority whereof all matters of Faith were to be learned and decided ; j they doe not yet deny, but that the Ecclefiefiical Books , (^vfually thereunto annexed , ) may in a General and large fenfe , (as they have many profitable Rules of life and InilruBion in them,) be termed Canonical ^ and efleemed as holy and Divine writings ^ fet forth by pious and religious men under the OldTeftament , to be publickly Read and made known to faithful! * Locis fupri cita- people. So much "^ S. Hierome , Ruffin and AJtha- W' nafiuSy fbefides the reft oi the Old Fathers^) granted;

and S. AuguBiny with all his followers in Africky or elfwhere , would ask no more. For neither did hey nor they , make them to be of EQVAL AVTHO- RITIE, nor did they pafTe their Cenfure oi Damnation a Scfr.4.& Bulla Pa- (as the Matters at ^ Trent have done, ) upon any rvrdcN m^8o ^^^* that did not So T^^^r^f/i;^ them ; but gave Advife and urn. o, Counfel to ^ Prefer the One hciote the other. And here an end of the sip^ firft Centuries.

Chap.

I

the Canon of the Scripture. qj

Chap. IX.

The Tejlimonies of the Ecclefiajlical JVriters in the Seventh Centurj.

XC VII. T^ tit to make it manifcftly appear, that mr^mihQAgesfolIomngihQTQyN2isnoOb'» J^ ligation put upon any Man, to oblerve either the pretended 'Decrees oi Innocent^ and Gelafiptf^ or the Car/on of the African Councel^ and the Catalogue of S.Aujlin, (at leaft not in that ftriift fenfe and ac- ception, wherein they are all now produced by our OppofiteSj and urged againft us J but that the church continued ftill to obierve the Ancient Canon oi Scrip- ture^ which the Chriftians had received from the Jeivs^ and which both S. Hierome and Rufi^n^ and the other Old Writers before them, had accurately delineated ; we fhall for this purpofe take a view of the Suhfequent times J and the Te(iimomes of ihoi Ecclefiajlical Authors that lived in them, and left any Record of this matter behind them, every one in their Order.

XCVIII. We have already feen that Four Pa^ triarchal Churches have declared themfelves for us. I. For the Church of /<fr«/k/^^w furnifhed us with S. CyrilL 2. The Church oi Alexandria with S. Atha- nafius. 3.. The Church of Antioch with Anafiafius^ 4. And the Church oiConftantimple with Sr Gregorie i^azianzen^ befides many Others that depended'up- on thofe fe veral S eas. And if any credit may be given to the writings oi Clemens^ the Church of RomedXio hath furnifhed us with the firft ?^n>ffc and J?//fcf>/^ ihe had. But whether hh Tefiirnony be received or

¥

. » !J^„iU.^J.*- -' - - -~" —

J Scholaftkal Hijlory of

An. T>om. 600.

a Vide Num. 10©. vcrfus finem. b S. Grcgor. Moral. Expofic. in Job. Ub. 19. cap.i7.(aHilsi3.) Ve qua re (Scilicet Elatione) cavenda, mn mrd'matk fad mw, SiexLibrisJi' cet NON CANONL ClSy fed tamen ad a- difcathnem Ecckfia editis teflimnhmp9^ fermus.

a Gretfcri dcf.cap.7. Ve Libro Judith NI- HILrrmns dicitS, Oreiorius in Operibus fni4,

b S. Grcgor. Moral. Iib.<.cap.i6. &Ho- mil.9. in Ezechiel. c Idem, moral, l.xo. C.4.

d 5. Greg. Moral. lib-^ cap.ii. * Idem, PAffim,

no, we are more affiired that S. GREGORY the GREAT, who was another Bijhop of that Patriar- chal Sea:, will give in his mtne[s and Suffrage for us.

XCIX. S. GREGORY then (as divers of the late a Roman Writers do confeffe,) hath herein declared himfeif to follow the Canon of the Ancient Church let forth by S. Hierome and the Fathers befQre him ; when in his Morals being about to alledge a pafTage in the Book of the Maccahes^ he firft maketh an Ex- cuse for it, and faith, ^ cc jhat though it be not pro- « duced out of the CANONICAL BOOKS oiScri- ^^ future J yet allcdged it h o\xi oi (uch a Book^, as was publifh'd for the Edification of the Church. By which words he acknowledgeth, that Some Books oi the Bible there are, which be not Canonical^, and that the Books of the Maccabes are of that Number. And what can any Man defire ^ be faid more exprefly ?

C. Yet bacaufe there are Two Pretences made ; Oney that elfewhere he Canoniuth all the reft of the Conte- fied Bocks ; and another^ that in this place he detraft- eth nothing in that behalf from the Books of the Mac-^ cabes , we will clear the way before us, and anfwer them both. i. And Firft, for all the other Books ^ Gretfer the Jefuite, (that contendcth for them, ) will be our witnefs , ^^ ^ ( That S. Gregorie in all his ^^ Works ^ maketh not any mention of the Book or " Hiftory of Judith. And if otherwhiles he nameth tobity it is but very Seldome that he doth fo, and moft an end, under tlie Name oi^ A certain Sage perfon^ c or a certain Holy Man^ without any peculiar appellation, or citing of his 5oo/^; as like wife under the fame termes he often alledgcth the fayings ot the Books of d wifdomj and ^ Scctefiafticus 5 which are fo far from being Termes proper to the Canonical Writers of Gods Divine Scriptures^ that many of the

Fathers

the Canon of the Scriptures. 157

Fathers both ^ Greek and g Latin give them not / Dion. Alex. Epi,

only to divers CimlUa/i. Author s^, but to the Phtlofophers 1;, ^'^i* i^ ^^'"Sj"-

1 /' - All T r ;- • I iNdZianz. Itp. 120.

theniieives. And what it at lomc other time lie ma- ^ Scrm. apud Ang.

keth a more honourable mention botho£ Ecclefiafti- ^^/^^^^' J* ?^Pf-

cus and the mfdom of Salomon^ attributing to them c. lo. idemdcoffic*.

the title of h holy mmngs ? yet this lodgeth not eccI. J.2.C.19.

thofe Bocks higher then in the SecondRar^k oi Scrip- ih^cl^.'^^h'u

tures^ that be ot a leffer, imperkci, and doubtful] cia.idcmin licg!

Anthority, as ^ lunilius Afrtcmus faid of them be- I'^^.c.^&Jib.s.c.is, fore ; or as S. Gregory faith here himfelf in the place which we firft alledged , thatbe;^(?^Q/^o;^/Vtf/j but written only by wife and good men for the

Edification of the Church, But Cocctus built his vpall f^ Ezcch.15.1r.

with k uMemfered Mortar^ when 1 he fet up S. ' Cocc.Thcfaur.l.^.

(jregory to cite the Y>Qok oi Sirach under the Name m^'plo^^ ,j

and Authority of Salomon himfelf, alledging for this « s. Greg. Pro^m.

purpofe his Firft Sermon upon Ezechiel^ and pre- 0" card ^'cf * p '^°'^*

tending thatthefe words {My Son ^ def^ife not thou the Rcpiique comre le

Chaflemng of the Lord^ neither he thou weary of his Cor- ^^y ^^ I« grande

reliion^) are to be found there quoted out of the fhap"frp.44T it

VII^^. chapter of Ecclefiafticus 5 For neither is this quant aceque s/ore-

Sentence in Ea/^Tz/j^/V^y, fbeinga vcrfetakenoutof cmml^J^sn/k^^

the m Proverbs^) nor is it to befeeninall S. Gre- compofi pres deJeux

gories Sermon upon Ezechiel j who in his »"a Proeme ^entansapreiU canon

upon the Canticles acknowledgeth S^/(3wo;^ to be the Jmtl" Ljvres^des

Author of no Other Books but thofe 7fc/f^ which we Maccak.ajouSe.Ores

properly receive for his, and number among the true ^j^es^ Lf^^Cei

Canonical Scriptures, 2. For eluding the Authority, da-utam'que iaprtm*

or Teflimony, produced out of ^. Gregory asainft the ^' mime dece coot"

Canontztng 01 the Maccabes^ Monjieur du Perron^ or rient.car, s.Oregoi-

thofe that magnifie his ^<?/;/y to X". J^w^f 5 moft, may re neftoit point encore

not think to carrry it away trom us, by laying, o That ^''f^vtTlr &

S, Gregory^ when he began firft to write his Morals Comment. Sur Job^

upon Job. was but yet a timpe Deacon^ and not Bijhop "^'^'^^ ^'^^l^l ^l^^'^>

^ -^ V ^ 1 • 1 • • ! 'J T.r • exerceant a Ccnftantt-

or Po/^^orJ^ow^jbemgatthat timeimploy dasM^//r/o „epie u Numimie

at Conftantinople among the Greeks. For firft, if the nrwyUsOms.

T Macca"

i}8

A Scholajlical Hijiory of

* Gal.2.i3»M.

4 S. Gfcg. Moral, lib.u^c. ap/^Baron. adAn. 58d.Scet,3.

# S.Grc^Jib.4. E- pift46. ft Baron, ad

n Card. Perron loco «itato. Acefleoicafi- $n dotic parlant en Ori' tm , ^« I.rur« des

par forme dt CAS FOSE', is ^OU CONCEDE^ : Ores que I^on Canoniqufs, ify-c, C(U h dire 9 tefqiiels Ores qu Us f\€ fujfent point Cam- mqufSi ne4intmoins ont tile efcrits pour C edi' fkcAt'm defeiUfc,

Maccahes and the like Books had been held and belie- ved to be Canonical Scriptures at %jme^ (as Cardinal Ferron fuppofed here they were, both at %^mej and all the miiern Church over J it is no way probable, that 5. Gregory:^ who had all his life time before been brought up, and inftruded in that (^burch , would have chang'd his belief fo lightly as foon as he came into the Eaftern (^hurch among the Greeks at Conftan- tinople ^ which had been at leaft a ^ dijjemhlirjg in him, and no upright walking according to truth. But he that durft there a oppofe Eupfychtus the Pa'riarchy and defend another Point of true ^f//>/againft him, would never (furej have fupprefs'd or diffembled this at Cenilantinople^ if he had known it to be an Article or a Principle of their Faith at %Qme^^ where we may therefore lafely conclude^ thatno/i^^fc Article was at that time kelieved. Nor will it ferve the Car- dinals turn here to fay, ^^ That S, Gregory was but a ^^ simple Deacon when he began firft to write thefe « his Morals in the EaB 5 for he ^ finifhed that Book in the ?r<?/?, and it was publifh'd, and <^ fent by him af- terwards, even then when he was Pope oiRome^ to Le- ander the Bifhop oisii;ill^ 5 at what time, if there had been any fuch Error in it at the beginnings he might have mended it at the la^. But he put it forth at %omes as he had wrote it at Confiantinople ; which is an evident Argument, that herein the if ejlern Church differed not from the EaB. As little is it to the pur- pofe , when the fame Cardinal would evade this Te- ftimony of S. Gregorie^ by pretending, " a That he « fpake not here according to his own minde^ but by "way of a Ca^e put oncly, and not granted '^ fothat " the fcnfe {hould be, Though the Books of the Maccahes^ *c and the refi of that Claffe^ he not Canonical (as indeed *^ they arej, j^f we-re they written for the edification of the « Church. \Vluch is a fine device of the Cardinal if

he

the Canon of the Scripture.

^9

he could by this artificial Interpretation of his own, defeat us ot S. (jregories Suffrage. But that S. (jrego- ry wrote his own judgement herein, and put not the matter as a Cafe fuppofed only (otherwife then he be- lieved himfeUj) is too cieer to be fo contefted by Monfieur du Perron^ or any other that are of his par- ty. For elfe, why ihouldS. (//(f^^jry make any ^ Ex- cufey for citing thefe Books of the Maccdes I And why did he not in all the refl of his mrks fo much as bring any one Sentence out o{thofe Books ^ as we cannot finde he did, even then, when f they fay^ he was ma- king his (pretended) Dialogues^ and building his Pur- gatory. And therefore not onely ^ Ockam ^ (who maintaineth our Caufe, as we {hall fee hereafter,) but c Cathaririy and ^ Canus themfelves (who are a- gainft it,) do all interpret S. Gregories words in the lame fenle that we do , and fay , that he followed S.Hieromej and other Fathers herein, both for the MaccaheSy and the refl oi that Rank. We conclude therefore •, If it were lawful for S. Gregory to fay, that thofe Books were not Canonical-, it is as lawful for us to fay it. And if he that wasBifhopa.nd'Popeoi %ji^^ (to whom they attribute now more authority then ever he took to himfelf) might, and did, after the times of Innocent^^Gelafius^ and S, Auif inland the Coun- celoi Carthage^ deny the pretended Canonization oi the[e Writings^ why is it now maintained by our Op- pofites, that the Church had then determinedthe con- trary > or why do they go about to binde us, (upon pain of being curfed by them, and excluded from all hope of Salvation^) to receive fuch definitions for the Articles of our Faith^ which in S. Gregories time were not yet received for the common Opinions of Men >

Librum, ubi fuprci cammemoravirms* Beams autem GREGORJVS lib. Moral. 19. rejicii ambos. Rejicit Ewfeb Rkardut^Ock^mus', ac S.Aug. contraGaud, docetabEcclefia qui dent ejfereceptos, ftd Non cert^ fide.— At refpondemus, Non idModh h dubium vocare licet, quod B^ GREQORIO, Eufebio, atque Reliquis Ucnit tUqmnio dubitart.

T 2 CI. Among

a S. Grrg. loco cita- to. iVa/! inordimt^fa' cimusyftexLibris, It. cet Non Canonicis^fyc, (ut ftjpr^) teSimonU umproferamus. b Gul. Ockam. dia- log, pan. 3. trad. I. yih.^'C»i6,Stcmdum Hieronymum etihmin Prologo in Lib. Pro* verbiorumy ^ GREm GORlVMinMoraU- bus. Liber Judith, To* bi<£i ist MaccaJbMru^ Eccleftajlicus , atque Liber Sapienti<x i^on pint recjpiendiadcon- firmandutn aliquid in fide.

c Catharinus, in O- pufe, de Libris Ca- non. Beatuj veri GREGORIVS auto- ritate (ut epinor) Hie* ronymimotksj videtur concedere iUos (Mac- cab. &c- Li bro^ ^oi

9ffe cA.somcos^

ckm tamen deeispro-e ducat teSiimonJa, £*• cufat autem ilhsver^ bis-, Non inordinate agimuj^^c. d Melch. Canus, in locisthcol. li.a.ci*. Scft.PorroQuartum. & cap. 1 1. Sea. ad Quartum verb. Ar- gumentu ^artum pe* culiare ei?, ut Macca- bsorum Libri e numt" ro Canonimum ex* pungantur. NamGela- fius Papa rejecit 2*

^o

AScholaJlical Hijlorj of

Cl. Among the works oiS.Aujlin there are THREE

BOOKS intitled, THE WONDERS oftheSCRl-

PTURE5 which though they be none of His^ yet

they feem to have been written about this time. In

the two former Books are reckoned up r/?^ ^oWm

of the Old Teltamem^ and in the Third thofe of the

New. a The fecond of them fo concludcth, that th,c

^^ Books of the Maccabes^ though containg divers won-

<^^ciers, are never the leffe excluded out of the jD/x;/'/^^ ^ , ''^C anon oi Scripture,

feyendum csnventeris ^ r •

fuiffe nrdtni inveniatur, de hoc tamtn mlla curh fatigabimur : £luU TANTVAf ag^re protofumu< de DlVim CANONIS exigftaWy qmmvU ingenioli mflri modulum exce^ientm, hiftorkm ExLhr mem ex parte altqua langermus, ^ ^ ""^^

Jn. Dom. 61Q.

a Apud Aug, 1.2. de MirabilibusS.Scrip- turx. In Maccah<soru Ljbris^ eifi aliquid Mirabilm nwnerom-

An,Dom, ^30.

h' gjxt. Senenf. Bib- lioth. 1.3. vcrboAn- tiochiis. Virin Divi ms SaipturJs valde eiudiiusH

t Antbchus Prol. in Hom.in Biblioth.Pa

CIL In this Age likewife are extant TheSermans of ANTIOCHUS^ whom Sfxtus oi sienna ^fetteth forth to be a very well learned Man in the Scriptures He was a Greek Doftor, and livedo at the time when Heracltus was Empcrour, in the great Colled^c of S. Sahas 5 but his Sermons (highly commended for their worth) are given us in Lattn^ by Dr. Godfrey TiL wan a C^rthufian. Where c in. his P/o W^ diicour trum.Tom..Edit.2 f|"§ parabolically upon the d mrds oi Salomon, he if Cam ^.8. thtre " compareth his ZX Queens to the number of //rof^ ^ethreefcore^eens, ^' Bocks, whkh We hold to hcoi Eminent Author it An <^'- "the Old and New Tei^ament. And though we are

e Tilmanus in pr^- here advcrtilcd by e ttlman not to regard ^^nurnhfr

t^^!:ir!:Z ?f ^'^'^ ^-$ (whereof he fuppofetlf there bcTSfo

mori\at'js)praboiick many as LA m the Btble) but the "Dignity and Autho

c.iimoneconfenLX ^^ rity of them Only above 0^/?^. YetifwecalrnbJ

.S^Ur^S the C.W./ Bocks\uothth.reilaments7^st^^^

brlCAteriim nonnu- and ^ lomc Other of the Greeks di&)yNc{\\M pvoAi.r

^ni'irfc SlV^e-mberofLX. Forfe Jg aparrlhe" m!

ber ot XXVII belonging to the A^w rw?4w*f. The r Ftve Bocks of Mofes, 6. Jof.y, Judges a»d Ruth, 8 Sam 9. Kings, 10. chron. 11. Ezra and Nehem 12 Eliher II. Job, 14. The Pfaker, 15, .1^,1 7. The Three Booh

dignititem f.Pbihp. Silitar

in-

the Canon of the Scriptures.

14.1

* Where if the XII Uf-

fer Prophets be compred but tor one Bi}o\ (as the Hebrews reckoned it) this number of XXXllIwill agree juflly ^vih their

67,6:

cfSalcmoj7j and 18, &c. The fixteen Books of the ^ Pro- ^hetSy will furnilTi us with the re^^ and make up the number of Three and Thirty., neither more nor leflTe. So that here was no room either for Tobit^ or them that follow in that order.

cm. At this time lived ISIDORUS the Bifhop J^ T)om oiSivil/e in Spain^^nd Schollar to S. Gregory the Great, ' •

In a Three places oi his PVorks we may fee what he hath written concerning the Canonical Books oi Scrip- ture, Where he fetteth forth both S. //'/Vro^?^d'5 and S,u4ufiins Catalogue I, and having firft faid, ^ "That " the ^00^5 are divided into Three [everal Orders, that « is to fay. The Latp, The Prophets, and the Hagio- ^^ ^^ graph a-, (reckoning them as S. i//Vrowf did before hAt v, Tefl.'juxtl in his "Prologue) he addeth afterwards, < " That there "«'^^''»w Lmrarum "is a Fourth Order oi Books among them, which are ^^ not tn the Hetrew Canon oilht Old Te^ am ent, (^And

4 Ifid. Hifp, Lib, I

Lib. Prc£m'wum in V' &N. left, lihrt 6. Ot igin. five Etym^ b Idem, Lib <5. Ori-

fkarum XXII Libris iccipmnt , dividenteJ eos in Tres Ordints Lfgiiftilket, iy Pro- pbetarum ^ HagtQ' grcpkoYum, c Idem, ibid.j^tfr- tus est apud Not Ordo V. Tift, eorum Libro^ rum^ qui in Cdnorte Hebraico nonfiinu d Idem, ibid. Sap. Ecduf, fob. Judith^ Libri Maccab. Huss

if they be not there, they can never be made any Ca-

mnical parts oithat Teflament, truly and properly un-

derftood.) Then lie ^ reciteth the Names of thofe

Bocks that belong to this Fourth Order', faying no more

of them, then ^ S. ny^uHin did before , whom he

chiefly affeds to follow in exprcfling the fco/^o/^y that

the Church gave to them ; which was to numler them

among the C^/^o/^/V^/^oci^S ^o^ake «/> of them, and ^.^ uh • ^

to^^Wthemtothepeople^ but not to fet them in an pVcRrpnT^fc^.

Equall Rank or Authority with them. As therefore rent ,_Ecciefia tamen

S. Auflin ought to ^ be interpreted, that he may

not be concciv'd in the fame place and period to con--

tradid himlelf, fo is Ifidore. For other wife his own

words will be againft him, where he faith exprefly,

<^ 8 That as the Holy Scripture confifteth oftheOW nis tiiuio prdtmtantur,

LibrosqM/deTob.Jnd, (fy Mdccab. Bebrsi non recipiunt, Ecdefia tamen eafdem inter CtLnonicas Scripturas-enumerat. e Vide Nam. 81. nbi S. Aug. Supputatio temporum ^ yeftituto tewplo non in Sen S qu£ Canmicd appellantHr, fed in aliis invenitur^ quos non yndaifedEcdeftdpro Canonkis babet. f Vide num 8o.fe 8i, g Ifid. Hifp. de Eccl. Off. 1. 1. g.i i. Conftat autemeadem San^a Scripiura ex veteri Lege (fyr Nova, VE7VS LEXillaeft. qu£ data eli primhtn JVD^fS per MOISEN ify PKOPHEtAS, quA didturVETVS tESTAMENTVM, reftmentumMUmdk'nnr^qMkidmii7eftibHh utiq^yiFHOPHEJlSfcriptftm e^ atque fignatum*

Chriiii inter Divinos Libros ^ honor at fy prdtdicat. Item, Lib. proam. Sap. ^ £c. duf propter quandam fimilitudinem Salomon

I42r

A Scholajlical Hijlorj of

" Lawy and tfje New ; fo the old Law was firft given " to the Jem by OHefes and the Prophets ^ and is " therefore called the Te lament ^ becaulc it was writ- ^^ ten, figned, and attefted by the Py'o/;^^/5. (Andific WQre figf'jed or fealed by thew^ there could be nothing added to itj as a true part of that Tejlament^ when they Were gone.) " Again, ^ That Ezra the Prophet fct " forth and ordained e/4'LL the OLD TESTAMENT ^^ in XJf// BookSy according to the number of the He- ^^ hrew Letters '^ which were all ^ tranllated after his " time out of the Hebrew inio Greek^ by the LXX In- ^^ terpreterSy Aquila^ Theodotion^ and Sjmwach us -^ but " into Lati^ by *S'. Hierome only s whofe Edition (be- " caule it was the befl^ that the Latins had,) generally " 4// the Churches received and ufed. And out of the Hebrew^ they could tranflate no more Books^ then Ez- ra left behinde him in Hebrew^ or were extant in that Tongue ^ as the Books^ now in controverfie were not : For as they were all written in the Greek Tongue^ (at leaft no Hebrew Copie of them can be feen,) fo who "were ^ the, c/^uthors thatwrote mofi of them^ neither " Jfidore^ nor any in his time, or fince, ever knew. All which, is foclearly, and fo truly faid by him againft the new Roman fancy (for the upholding whereof he is other whiles produced,) that if elfewhere he feemeth to fay any thing in favour of it, (be it to make c Salo- mon the Author of the Book oimfdom^ or to ^ number Ecclefia^icus^dinA the rett of that 4^^ order ^ among the Canonical Books oi Scripture^ either muft he be under- ftood, fas S, Au^in was ) to fpeak in a Popular & layge /(?///>, or elfehe willbemade toCo/2/rM'^andr^^'(?^tf his own words, (before recited^) which he * never did. For how can thefe following Afjertions Hand

urth.Judnh', fyto-

bianty five Maccdmorum tibros,quiAnihoresfcrtpferm^mintmecon^at. c th\^ Li brum SapimU SahmintmScripftjfcprobdtuf.fyc. a Idem, lib. Prcxmior. Ecdefta tamen eofdem inter Canonicas SitipturdsEmMERAT, '^ vide Teftimonium Alcuini de Ifidm, i&fri num.ioS,

together

* IdeiB,ib«capi2, Omnes autem bts Li- bros idem Et^tos PrO' pketarepaTdvit'^Cun- Haqie Propheuru vo- lumina, qu4ifueruntd Gemibus corrupta^cor- rexihtOlVAfQVE Y. 7ES7AMEK- TOM in VIQINTI VVOS Libros cen^i- tuit y ut tOT Librt ejfent in Lege, quit fy Liters hibemtur. a Idem, ibid, Pri- num po^ Exram Edi- tionemdeHEB?^MO in Gr4uum LXX In- terpretes edtdernnt— Hos Libros meditari Bmnium gentium Ec- clefid primiim cdtpe- runt 9 EOSQJJE de GR/ECOinLitinutn inteipretantes P^lMl ECCLESIABJJM PROVISOKES TRADIDERVNt Pifl h£c fecmdum E- ditionem Aquila, ter- tiam fy quartam 'The- odotion 0" Symmachus ediderunt.—De HE- BR^O autem in La* tinnm eUquin tantum- modo HIERONT- MVS Presbyter S, Scriptur/ts convertit^ CfUjVS EDITIONE GENERALlTER OMNES ECCLE- Sl/¥. ufquequaqne u- TfrntHTypro eo quhd ve- radoY fitin SenientiUj fy clarior in verbis, b Idem, IVfd. Fr^

the Canon of the Scripture,

4-5

together in the fame StrrBahd Proper Senfe^ \ «< Salo- h EtymoI.<5.2. M<r

^^man rpas the Author of the Bock of m'f do fn -^ and yct^ SafUmh Phiknl at-

ci b Hefpas /jottheAcithorofit, Th e Books of H^ifdom^ and c ihid,' Liber S^i-

^^ Ecclefafticus were Two of thofe which the Hebrews had ^"''^ ,4«^ Hebuns

<^Ua CUeeter, and yet, e the Hebrem had them not 3roff!^iibTc.i2^S

^^ at dll^'] Vnlcfle there be (as certainly there is J brum'amm Ecckf.

a Propruty of Speech in O/^^ofthelefayings; anda ^^"JP'f^^jf'^Jf/Siracb,

in-} • Jt, } %^ r ' ' qMtapud Latinos tm-

Catachreftical , or improper^ and Popular expression m let doqun fimUttuSi-

the Other ^ The Tale therefore that was told him by «^"^ SAtemomtitv^

a a ^Quidam Sapientum, that the Hebrews once faL7{'!^)ft

^^ received the Booke of mfdom among the Canonical fit Frov/Ecdef. ' '^ Scriptures ^ till they had taken and put our Saviour *« to death 3 but after that time rejeBed it out ol the Canon^ ^^ and forbad it to be Read y bccaule they pcxcebjed that ^^ there was a playn Prophecie ofChrifl in it againfl them^

Cant- Cantkorjim. d Ih.Hoc opus (Sap.) Hebrai, ut flujdam Sapientiyim tnetmnii^ inter Canonicas Scrip' \uras recipiebant. Sed

ttrfcitrunt , ^c. /e-

gendHtn fnif prohibue'

runt.

a Du Perron en (t

Replique,pag442»

An. Dom. 6%i, and 6^1.

( which is one oi Cardinal ^ Perron's wi{e Arguments ptfifum cbriflm in-

{onhcCanenizingbithis Bopke^) if itbenotmiflakcn,

a^d the Hebrews put for the Hellenift Jews ( who

indeed numbred f^^/- ^i?o^ at large among the Q/^o/^/-

cal Scriptures , and read it to their people ) it muft

either go foraF/tWf, or Jj/^or^ (being fuppoled by

the ^W/;?/i/ to believe it, j will never be reconciled

to him f elf

CIIII. Towards the End of this Centurie the Sixt GENERAL COVNCEL was held at Conftantinople, and the QVINI-SEXT there in Trullo. The Canons whereof though in fome other matters the late ^ . ,.« > ^ %oman Writers will by no meanes endure, became Exhv coMigmr^qM they find there ^ the Bifhop of Conftantinople made ^^- Synodm bjs^ con- Equal to tloe Eifhop of Rome ^ c and Priefts Forbidden ^l^ft^^f^'fubjL to be Separated from their wives ^ fbefides fundry * ftin.t\itCanones fecit. Decrees more, that pleafe them not ^ ) yet when they ^ i^Truiio'canT^J' feek for a Confirmation ofthe5y;?o<^^ at Or/^^^^, ^ c*ibidCan.i/"

d Can. in locis, Iib.2, cap.i o Hoc docet Condi Carthag. 5™ quodfi provinmk fuity tmen cenfimn* turn eft a Synodo in IruUo celebrata, Gul. Bailius Jcfuica, in Catcchifm^traft. i . q. i J. in App. Cone, Cartb, 3"". S^odabuniverfali Ecclefia receptumeft,

thejf

l^^

A Scholajikal Hifioryof

d BironiuSi BiniuJ in notis ad Can, TruUa- nos 9 Si Alii q«am plurimi inter quos ipfcctiamCanusre- peritur.

b Utpatetjdift. i^. cap P/dc««.cap ft«o- niam. cap. Sextant Et 27. q. I. c. 5/ quis EpifcQpus» Et dc Conf.dift.i.c/ico- ^K/.Etib.dift.2.C3p. Vidic'inus. Et ibid. dift. 3 cap. Sextant. Iccir,Extrsk,de2Eta- te & qua!, ordinand. cap. imultis. c U: pact, in Synod, quadiciturVII.Can.

in Nomo canone Pho- r/i,Pafrinij Acipud Balfamonem & Zona^ ram in Caticnes Trul- lams.

d Conc.VI/mTruI- lo. can. 2,0bfi^namm ettam uliqms omnes Canones, qui X San^u 6; Bcatii noSiris Pa- tribusexpofitifutitjd efl^aCCC&XiniL *San^is et DivinU Pa- trihus qui Nicea con- venerunt^ iifque qui Ancyrd, Neocefaredi, Oungris^ Antiochi£ , gtt(]ue iis etiantquiin LAODICEA Phry- gid ', pTSttre^ auteWy <l^c. Similiter fy Us qui CARTMAGINE, ^c. Quineuam Ca- nones Vionyfii Alex, ■Greg. 'Heocafar.Atha- nafti, Bafilii., Grig. Nyf Greg Na^iaiX' Ampbihciijfyc,

they are willing enough to receive them 5 and to bring thcin forch^ for their own advantage, as the Ca/ions of an Oecurnemcal Councel, But whether they receive them now 5 or no, (as many times a they are very angry againfl: them ) certain it is , that in Gratian's time the ^ Lattice Church acknowledg'd them, and in all times fince they were firft made, the c orientall Churches received them into the Body of their Canon Law. It was a Councel that confifted of CCXXVII Bidiops who after the Emperor all fubfcrib'd it ; And in their ^ second Canon they confirme (among others) the Councel of Laodicea^ together with the Canonical Epiftles of Athanafws^ (jregMaz^ianzen and Amphilochius (^before cited,) which number the Canonicall Book so{ Scrip- ture only as we doe, and exclude the Re^^ as not properly belonging to them. When therefore in the Same Canon they allow alfo the Councel of Carthage , it cannot be , that their meaning was , inftantly to y<f^^// and contradiBxhtrnklvQ^^ (as the late Roman writers, by alledging their Autority herein againft us, would inforce them to doe,) but that they vnderftood the I/^o^V^^^^ Councel to betaken in 0/7f fenfe, and the Councel oi Carthage m another 5 this extended , in a large acception oiScripture^to the Ecclefiajlcall Books , and that reftreined , in a more ftriEl and proper acception, to thole Books only which be Authentick and Divine. For in One and the Same Senfe they cannot loth be taken, nor Confirm' d and ftand together. Which will be made the clccrcr by the next Teftimonie out of Vamafcen who lived not long after this CounceloiTrulloy or the Qui ni-S ex tat Conflantinople^ and a little before the r//th pretended generall Councel atNice^ that in divers places acknow- ledged the Canons and Conjtitutions of it.

CHAP,

the Canon of the Scripture.

1^5

Chap. X.

T^he Tepmonies of the Ecdefiajlicall Writers in the Eighth Century.

T

C V. > a ^Hcrc are but Two confiderable Writers in this Age^ that have faid any thing concerning our prelent Queftionj whereof one is Damafce/$> among the Greeks^ and the other Fenerdle Bede among the E^gliflj Saxons ; both of them being perfons of great learning and renown, Damafcen was a Prieft of Sjria , and wrote many Books ; but thofe of the greateft Note are his Four Books De Fide Orthodoxa ^ wherein he fet forth the Body of Pivinity in aisit btttci Method and Order then had been feen before his time. And from him did Peter Lombard^ and the Schoolmen of the Latin Church take their pattern. In the/^]?ofthefeFo«rBoo/^5 he treateth of the Canonical Books of Scripture^ and num- breth them as his Ancefiors in the Oriental Churches had alway es done before him, firmly adhering to the Hebrew Canon^ and a'« comptingbut Two and Twenty «' Books only , belonging to the OLD Teflament which he reciteth all in Order , without fpcaking fo much as one word either of the Maccahes^ or oi Judith^ oxoiTobit J nor faith he more concerning the Books of mfdome , and Ecclejiafticus , then that they are ^ «^ elegant and Vertuous writings ^ hut not to be "Humbred ^^ among the Canonical Books of Scripture ^h aiding never ^^been laid up in the Ark of the Covenant, In which paffage he altogether followeth c Epiphanius. And yet fby the way^ forafmuch as concernes the Ark

V of

An. Dom. 720.

a. Joh. Damafcen. de fide Orthod. lib. 4. cap. J 8. IfiEOK, ai "Eticoai )^ JSjo ^iChoi « en T^i iKLKala; J)m «^»)twf, ^c. Quae ad hunc modum rcrtic ^ac. Billius. Sciendum eii XXII Libros ejfe V. t. totidem nempe quot Hehakdi Imgud Element a funt^ ex quu bus V duplicantuT^atqi itA XXV II fiunt, — Cxtera nihil opus eft adfcribi.

b UetveipiJQ' autern^ hoc eS Sapient ja Sah- monis^et Sapientia l^ fu flit Shdchi^ta- rmtft alioqui prscUri et elegantes Libri fint^ WN TAMEN AH' IS ADNVjytERAN- 7VR, NEQJJE IN A RCA Sni £- RANT. 'EvdifiTzt

%KivTt h vi KtCc/jf), c Epiphan. lib. dc Pond.&Mcnf. fupii citat. Num«64,

^6

g Exod. 40.20.

1 Rcg.S.p.

2 Chro,5.io.

J Scholajlical Hijlory of

ef the Covenant y if either Epiphanius^ oiHe^ be fa underftood, as that they intended it properly of the Arky which was made by Mofes ^ and afterwards placed in the Firjl Temple^ there is an Error in it ^ For in that ark there was no Other writing put , but r o A J ^- r^ • ' T^he Tm Tables of the Conjenant : and when the F/>/i lib.is.c.ag. c&mn Temple wasburntj the S^w^^/^ was loft with it, yet scriptumHm Serva- y^^y likely it is , that after the J^w'jj had built their Second Temple ^ and received their compleat Canon of Scripture from Sfra^ and the Prophets that lived in his time 5 ^ they were carefull to lay it up, and to keep it there for all fucceeding Generations , in Armaria Judaicey as ^ Tertullian calleth it ^ but this was different from the Ark of the Covenant^ being only a Refemhlance of it. Howloever > this is certain that neither Damafcen , nor Epiphanius acknowledged any more Canonical Books of the OldTeflament y then what the Hebrews held to be Sacred^ and diligently preferv'd among them. Which though + Coc, and II Cojfeteauy together with fome other fuch fmall-wared men , as they be , are not willing to allow us , yet ^ CliBoveus^ and ^ Canus, and c Covaruvias and ^ Ederus deal more freely and ingenuoufly with us^ confeflGng that Damafcen , and many more be for us. Sixtas Senenfis^ to prove that the mfdom ofSalomony 7nu!tZSZt and Ecclefiaflicus are hth of them CamnicalM^oksoi fnmjmentionemfacL Stripturey ^ produceth this place of Tiamd^cen and corrupteth it with an "^ addition of his own, for that the Chriftians were herein contrary to the JeweSy Damafcen never faid, nor any thing to that purpofe.. More fincere are they (but now be fore cited,) who acknowledge it to be moft true, that herein "Damafcen and the Jews were both o{one mind. The ^ Excufe

A?VD JVDj^OS NON NVMERENTVRy IKTEK FIDELES TA- MEN MAXIMA AVCtORltATIS HABEmVR. f Canus, loc. com. Ijh.i. c.ii. Kf/}>on- 4*0 (Dmafcenum cum reliquis) id to tempore affimiffe, quo Res WSDV M em Definna,quaetiMi tttione tuufmus €4i(j9S, (Inter c^yaos etiiiin 8c Vmajfcemm protulit, cap, 10,)

which

batur in Tcmplo He-

brdipofuli, diligentiSt

fiiccedentiMm Sacerdo-

turn.

c TcrtuIJib.dchab.

t Cocc.Thcfaur.I.i^.

arc.9.

II Coff.Apol.

4 Com. in h»nc lo- cum Damafc.

b Loc. com. lib. 2»

c.io.Se II.

c VAr.Refolut.lib.4.

CI 4.

d Occon. bibl. tab.

24.

e Si5t. Scncnf. bibl.

lib. 8. ha^r. 9. HuU

ente Sapienth ^ Ec^

tlefiafticHs fint in Ca-

none 5. Scripturarum

recept£ Vemonftra-

tur—Patrum tefiimo-

ins lib^4.defide, hk fcribit, VlAvdfiiTQ' intern hoc efl Sapien- tia Salom. iy Sapien- m Sirach virtudfi qnidem ^boniUbri Junt^fed non numeran' tuT , neqKe in Arct

jacebint.

**■ EtIDEO LTCE7 APVD JVDj^OS NON NVMERENtVR

the Canon of the Scripture.

H7

which Cams here pretendeth jto make for him , (as if the LMatter had never yec been determin'd in the Church before Damafcens time, what Eooks were Canonical^ ) is altogether vain. For both the Judaical^ and the uipoflolicalChmchhaddeternji^'dity and all the churches following had fubmitted to ihsLtdetermi^ nation ; though in the mean while , if we {hould take Canus at his word , he would be taken by it in his own Snare : For if the Queftion were not yet de- termined at the time when "Damafcen lived , he cannot with any colour fay (as he doth often,) that either Jnnocent , or the Councel of Carthage^ or Gelafius had determin'd it fo long before. After all this , there is 4 a Sermon i2LihQT'di upon Damafceny wherein the Books ofthe Maccabes are faid to be Divine Scriptures 5 but in the fame5^rwo« the writings alfo of S. Be- nys are faid to be Divine and Venerable Bookes; /which yet never man lodg'd or numbred among the Canonical Tarts of the Bible^ ) befides, this Sermon is fo full of fables and impertinences, that no wife or fober man can ever take it, to be any part of liis writing , whofe Name it beareth. And yet they have nothing elfe to bring out of Damafcen againft us.

CVI. VENERABLE BEDE (So ftiled in the Councel of ^ Aixy ) Who was born and bred up, lived and dyed in the Church of England ^ yieldeth ^'divers Teflimonics, that he knew o? no other Boois to be Received there ^ as the Canonical Parts of Divine Scripture , but what we Receive there alfo at this day in our PubUck Confession or Articles of Religion. For in his b Commentary upon the Revelation^ he reduceth the Books of the Old Tf^^w^/^^ to the fame Number, wherein both Tertullian^ S. Jerome ^ and Primaftus^ which others above cited , had reprefented them

V 2 before 5

4 Sermo dcdcfun-

An, T>om, 7;o.

a Cone* Aquifgr. fuh PipinoLiidov.Piifi- lio. Bedd Venerabilk Vo^or^ €t admhabilU, b Beda in Apoc. 4. AU animalium , qus funt Vigmti Quituor^ totUem V. T Libros infinuant , Qjiibus £- vtngeliftamm ^ful" eitur Au^orJtaj, ^ vtr'UAs cowprobituu

14.8

JScholaJlic^l Hijlorj of

before ^ and in his c Commentaries upon the Kings he doth afmuch j elfwhere making no other ^ Divip- on of them , then into thofe Three Clajjes ( commonly received by the Hehrem) of i. The Law^ 2, The Prophets^ and 3. The Hagiographa. Bcfides in his Bock of the Six Ages ofthemrlcJy e he folio we th the AcQom^toiSufebius (aforementioned) and remarke- c Idem, rib.4. Com. ^j^jy diftinguKheth the Bocks ofthe cJ^^r<r^/f5from D«o"Jerim 7««^ ^oum the Dlvine Scripture^, coupling them with the writings oilofephuSy and lulius the African , which is an evident Argument^ that he reckoned them not to be Cmonicd. And though he allegorifeth the Hiftorie of Father Tobit ( as he call's itj ) where if he had held it to be a Book of Canonical Scripture^ he might have taken occafion enough to have faid it, yet in all his difcourfe there, he fpcaketh not a word to any fuch purpofe. His Commentaries u^on g enejis^ and the Kings y. were fomtimes falfly attributed to Sucherius the Bifhop of L/oM-5 and howfoevcr ^- Andrew Schott imagined, that neither He^v\OT>Bede ^ was the Author of them, yet we have morercalon ta believe the ^//ffcorhim- felf, declaring both his own ^ Country^ and his own % ivritings^ which were his Books of the T^^^z/^^r/^^ and the Pr/>y?/j; H^^//:5 , belonging to h Bede^ and to none el(e. .

Jug

XXlVVeterJs tefia mentijiguyaliteraccL fundi fmtUbu. d Idcm,Lib.? Com- ment, in Gcntfin. "IrU Caniflra fuper Caput e]us,i/^c. quid aliud ffgnijicant niji TRIPARTITA ipft p'ipklo conce(fa. DlVI- N^ LEGJS ELO-

SUPTA

LEGE^f

videlicet, ^ PRO- PHET AS, (t^T AGIO • GRAPH A 2 € Bcda de Sex ^- tat. Mundi. tom. 2, Hue ufque DIVINA SCRIPiVRA tem^o- rum Seriem contimt. Hujt autem pofih^c tf. -pudJuiAtsfmt digt-

Ha^de LIB H.. MAC' ^ . . ,., ...

CABMORVM, (fy" JfOSEPHly atgue AFRICANI Scnptis exhtbentur , qm demceps univtrfdm HiSarim ufque ad Romana temporaprofecutifunt^ * Andr. Schotcus prxfat. in Eacher. Lugd. in Biblioth. Fatrum. / Corp.in Lib.Rcg-lib.9.cap.22« g Ccm.inRcg.Iib.^.cap 2^, h Bcda inHift.Gcnt.Angl.

i Phct.Bibl. Ccd.2. de^a e^ IrQruBio A dmni in S. Saiptu- ram. Viilis Liber ei? its qui prim^mftudii S' Bibliorumaggiedi' untur.

kj Anno t6o2.- per >%y, Hocfclielium.

GVII. Photius in the beginning of his J Biblio- the que telleth us, that amc^g other Books he had read an JntroduBion to the Holy Scriptures^ written by a certain known Author in thofe times under the name oi ADRIAT^^ and he commendeth the Bock to them thsLtfludy the knowledge of the Bible. At the beginning of thi? ^ laft Age this Book was fet forth at Aufpurg^

And

the Canon of the Scripture. ij.^

And though we finde no exprefle Catalogue in it of the Canonical Bocks oi Scripture ttcitcd in their order, yet the Teftimonics that he bringeth out of the Scrip- tures being very ma^iy^ we finde never a One produ- ced out of thofe Bocks that be now in debate ; which is an evident iigne, that he held them not to be any p^ns oi Canonical Scripture. We addc this Author lo 4vj T^ryyt the end o{ i\\h Century^ for if T^o^/«5 read him, he was at Icaft fo zAncient^ if he lived not in the ^y4ge y6o.

before,, AutChdter.

C H A P. Xf,

Ihe Tejlimonies of the Tcclefiajlkdl Writers in the J^nth Qenturj.

GVIIL A T the beginning of this A^e our J^^ ^om. ZJk Country-man ALCV I Nlivtd in *

-^ A^great honour and eftimation of the oOO.

World s who being brought u^undtx Venerable ^j ^^^ ^^ ^^^i Bede m the Church ofEnglaud^wsLS atterwards inivted i^^^^ AUuinM , % Ca^U M by Charles the Great into France^ and there imployed ^Ahc^ as his chief Tutor in all Learning.both Secular and Sacred. Among other of his y^orksj there is One that he wrote againft Slipantm the Bifhop of Toledo in Spain 5 a vvha to maintain his Error touching the ji- doptionofChrifty had produced for his proof a faying out of ^ Ecclefiafticus '^ having no other Scripture^ or <« Elipantus in Epift, proof out of all the Canonical Prophets to alledge for ^^^^^'^^^"""^ ' ^°^- himfelf. The Anfwer that Alcuin returneth to this b EcciHCg5.14.Se- Proof, makes it clear^ that frJ^y/^j^/V^^ was none of vu°g^^^^^

Dom'mc plebitHd/fy-i • perqum invnatum c^ nomtn tHHm,iy ^fi^clj quern coequafli Prmitn'm tuo,

tlie

I50

A SMaJlical Hijlory vf

a Alcnmus advents oith^ Canonical Booh in his BiMe. For firft, a he tdls Eiipantum , lih. i. ^Eupantus,^^ That the Prophets ofGoatsLUQa hinijwhere- ^^ of he had never a one to bring for the defence of his cc £y.^or ; And then^ ^ that the Book of the Son ofSirach^ ^^ which he had produced, was both by S.Jeromes ^^ and ifidores undoubted Teftimonies, reputed but an « APOCRTPHAL , and a DVBIOVS SCRIPTURE ; «^ having not been written in the time ofthe Prophets^ " but in the time of the Priefts only, under Simon sindi « Piolomie, By which words it is manifcft, that nei- ther Alcuiny nor the church oi England ^ where he had been bred, nor the Church of France^ where he c then lived, had any fuch belief concerning thokApocry^ phal and Dubious Books oi Scripture^ (^whereof Ecclejia-- b im In Librojefu fticus is but One^ as tht Church of Rome^ andhcTAdhe- u%tZmk^^^^^ rents hsivc had of them all, ever fince the Councel of quern Librum B. Hie- Trent made them Canonical^ and E^ual to the Law and rS^/oc^rl the Prophets of God.

FliAS, idefl, DVBIAS SCRIPtVRhS deputatumejfe abfque dHMwionete^antur. HuietiamZd' ber non tempore Propbetarum, fed Sacerdotumfitb Simone Fontifce Magno^ regnme Ptolom^o Euergete, cerfcriptus efl. c Abbas S. Martini Turonenfis.

col. 94 u Dum tu£ ferverfiun defece^ runt in PKOFHE^ tlS DEI teflimoma, Errori tuo conveniens tia, finxiftj tibi NO- rVM^ENDAM PROPHEtAMdix- ijfe, Afiferere Domi- ne.fyc. Ecce falfitas in Nomine Prophets, Ecce perverfitas in in- tcTpretatione Sent en- tid'y fynonfruftr^O' portebit Novum Do- fforem Novum fibi in- venire Prophetam.

An. T>om. 8io.

h Car. Magnus de Imaginibus, Tub ini- tiomLib.g. Confefjio fidei Catbolic£ a Sm- His Patribus accepts, V.(bt V,7eflamentum recipimus in E'oium LibrotH mJMEROy quern S.CatholEccle' fis tradidit AuHoritat,

CIX. This that hath been faid by Alcuin^ will help us to another Teftimony given for us in his time, and to underftand it right. When CHARLES the GREAT^ or fome other Ecdefaftical C^f« under his Name, that wrote the J?co^5 of /w^^^5 in oppofition to the Greeks ar\d ^e Second Councel of Nice^) made an open profeffion of the Catholick Faith which they had received from their Anceftors, and the holy Fa- thers of the Church, Of that Faith this was one Artie le^ b « Thatthey acknowledged the OLD and^NSfV TESTA- ^^ME'HT^ contained in that NUMBER of BOOKS ^ «' which the Authority of the CATHOLICK CHURCH " had delivered to them. And the[e wett no other^ then what rve acknowledge our felves. For Charle- mainehcrem followed Alcuin's doctrine, to whom he

had

the Canon of the Scripture.

15»

had eommitted the care of fetcing forth the Bible. ex. At this time NICEPHORUS was Patriarch of Cori^arainofle ^ whole Chronologie is extant, as it was fet forth of old by Anajlajius in Latiny and not long fince by CameraYm-y and Comius ; The Greek Copie of it is to be fcen at the end oiscaligers Notes upon SufehiuSy and among the leffcr works of P/r^o- eus. a In this Chronologie he numbreth the Books firft, that aie received by the Church for certain and Cam- med Scriptures j atterwards he addeth both ^ them that are cmtradiHed or doubtful, and them that are c meerly Apocryphal J herein following Atha^aftuSyhe- fore alledged.

Jn. T)om. 820*

^ Nrccph.Patr. CR Canon ScripturarS^ ex vctcri Codice; Kc«/ %<3-exji «?tf7 ^iicu ^itfouiy See. Hdfiiut divin£ Scripture, qud redpiuntur ab Ecdt- fiat iy CammrjaitMX,

Ec s^'^B^ cHBfReraflTct, fubdtt. *0^» n< frttheuAi J^aMicnf ^iCkia K^. S'mul veteris TtU.fmt Li- bri XXIL b Ibid. K^tt otreu dvTJKi^vieUj &c. Et quibus contradichur, ^ non redpiuntur ab Ec deft A. 1 Maccab.^,^ 2Sap.^. Ecdus. 4. Pfalm ^ Cant. Sal, $ . EShcr, 6. Judith. 7. Sufanni. 8. 7i- bit, c ibid. KoAoffsuMp 'imK^vtpd, JtinerarmmPetripfyc,

CXI. RABANUS MAUms the Arch-Bifhop of ^^^ ©OW.

Mentz»y and SchoUar of ^Icuiriy altogether follow- *

Qih Ifidorey and a tranfcribes him. IlidoreeLndS.Je- o^O.

rome are ^ laid by i^lcuin to be both of one minde j < Rab. Maurus dc

and we may well number them ^i?for our own mt- ^"supm'nu^ nejjes 5 for as Jfidorey fo is %ahams to be underftood.

CXII. ^ri?-/^i5^*y the Benediftin 3 who firft wrote JL 7)/jm|

the Ordinary Glojje upon the Biiley was Scholar to * ^

Kabanus 5 and writing upon St. Jeromes b prologues o25#

there placed before the OLD TESTAMENT, .^ , .

(wherein^ according to the Copies then in ufe, the pcrproi.gau/eill

Book of 7l?^/t is faidtobep/^^r^WfromthePm;?^ tuius Leiiori Peritiam

5^i/;^«m, and num^^^ Hagiographay) []'^::i^,^^^^^

he findeth fault with tmTran\cnberSy andlaitn, that Hebr^eosinCanonere-

Tohit is to be fet among the Apocrwhal BookSy and not cipiantur, quive intgt

^ I- ^'^ ^ Apocrypha deputenttir.

Et fiipcr Prol. in Tobiam, Librum TobU Mebrdii deCatakgo divinarum Script^rarum ftcantes, iis qu^ Hagiographamemorant.manciparunt. Pot'int \n(\uh) ffy^ '^^T^i^sdixifetAPOCRTPIfA. VelLAKQE mepit HAOIOGRAPHA^ quaft SANctORVM SCRIPTA, (^ non de NVMERO lUorum NOVEM^ qua propria dicuntur HAQlOORAPHk ; qua funt de NVMERO Catahgiyh, e^ de numtro XXJl librorum y conpjfU enimin PENlAtEVGHO, ^ o^oPropbetu, ir IX Hagiographn.

among

i5i

A Scholajlical H'tjlorj of

a Agobard. de Pri- vil. & jure Sacerd. Omnts LevUdi quos numeuvernnt Moyfts ^3 Aaron ]uxtA pr^e- ceptum \>omin't-'fue- rumXXlImllia, ft- cut XXll funt Libri DIVIKM AVCTO- RlTAJiS in V.t.

An.Dom. 850,

Anaftaf Bibl. apu^ Pvtho- iewriy in opufc.p.i <5.£t qui V. T. fimt qutlms coniradi- citm {& A'OiV jiECiPi-

VNTVR ^B ECCLE- Sl^.) I MaacMidtres, a Sapemid Snlnntms. 3. Sap Jtfu fi'ii 6iuch-i &c. Uc fupra. c Num. no.

An.Dom. 8^0,

cSigcb.Trith.&Sixt. Scn.de Scriptoribus^ d Ambr.Ansbert.in Apoclib.g./^w/T/- oris Tcflamenti Ecde- fta XXIV Librisuti' tur.quos(fyAVCTO- filTAtECANONCA tkfcefityinquibuseti- am N. T. reviktum a^nof(,mr, idcirco in XXlV Senioribus Ec- e^efid figuratur, Ideo ei'm e^>i.'X.py<^(f\'^ ctmfiutimfa , quia ex vettyi ffiboratur : unqvam Scilicet ab eifdm vahat.Kume- rum Ecclefta.qufbujin tanilitite lerpciur.

among the Hagiographal^ (properly fo calledj) where- of there be but Ni/ie^ the whole Number ot the Cam- nicd Books being no more then XXII in all.

CXIII. AGOBARDUS wasnowBiftiopofZjo;^^ in France j who in his ^ Difcourfe of the Levitt call Priviledges , taking occafion from the Number which Mo[es and Aaron by Gods commandment had made of them in the Deferc, laith exprefly. That of the Old Te^ament there are but XXII Books oiT>ivine Autho- rity. Wherein he clearly maintaineth the Dodrineof Jofephus 5 and the Greek Fathers , together with the Prologues of S. Jerome^ and ih^ Article of the Church of Enr^land.

. CXIV. ANASTASIUS BIBLIOTHECARIUS, and an Abbot of "T^pw^, did not only tranflate^ but *> amplifie.the words oi Nicephorus c (before recited) in his Chromlogie^ as knowing well, that neither the Maccates^ nor mfdom^ nor Ecclefiafiicus^ nor Sufanna^ nor Judith^ nor 7ohit were received for any Canonical Books by the Church.

CXV. AMBROSIUS ANSBERTUS , commen- ded by c sigel^ert^TritkewiuSyand Sixtus Senenfisy for a perfon very Learned in the Scriptures^ fhall end this Century. Who in his ^ Commentary upon the Apoca- lyps receiveth no more Bocks into Canonical Authority ot the firft Teftamenty then thele already named had done before him. For the Number of XXIV maketh no diifercnce from the former Accompt of XXI I, the one joyning the Book of J//<^r5 with Ruth , and the Prophecy of Jeremy with the Lamentations ; the other reckoning them apart , every one by themfelves, but Loth excluding, the fame Bocks that z^f exclude from the Authcntick ar\d True Canon oi Divine Scripture. And in this Age there are no other Ef<r/^/M///V^/ o^/^- thors to be found, that haVe faid any thing to this parr ticular Quejlion.

Chap.

the Canon of the Scripture. 15^

Chap. XII.

The Tejlimonks of the Ecclefajlicall JVriters in the Tenth and Eleventh Qenturies.

THefe Two were very obfcure Ages^ and had but few Writers in them. Yet both the One and the Other will afford us their Teftimony^ and let us know, that they ftill continued the common diftin- diiotiy which had alway es been received in the Churchy between the CammcaUnd Ecclefiafticalfiooks of Scrip* ture.

CXVI. In the Tenth Age we have RADULPHUS J^ Tinm" FLAVIACENSIS, a Divine of high accompt both ^* ^^^^^ with a Trithemius and Sixtus Senenjis^ for his abili- 9^^»

ties in all kinde of Learning, but fpecially for his < Trithcm. & sfxts; knowledge of the i/o/v ^ry/>///r^^ ; who in his Cow- fcndcScrEcci; mentary upon ^^ Levtttcus^ Ipeakmg ot the Hfjtoricat Librum hh difiiu. Books oi the OldTeflamenttnatareofahfoluteandper" pj^i&irudit^perom- feB Authority inthe Church, maketh an exprcffe c ex^ Zp7lti^%slJe. ception againft the Books of Totit , Judtth, and the n ejufdem Ubri Ex- Maccabes. asbeinsnoneofthat :^(«w^^r5 but belong;- PSf^oretmmmc expo. mg to an mfenour lort ot Books, that were or a lejler c Raduiph. Fiav, ii> and imperfeB Authority. Nor will it be any Argu- J^^^^ic. imtio lm ment either againft him, or us, ifitfhouldbeobje- J^fjf,, ^mccliml died, that in the fame place he mentioneth the Books ^ibr'u qmmvisadm" of wifdom and Ecclefiafticus to be written in the like t^JZT pek^^^^^^ ftile with the Proverbs 2indi\\t Canticles, for the like cXAMtmennonhA' ftile makes them not of the like ^^^W/'O', no more ^^n^^AvcTORiTA^ then ihQ Hiflories of tobit;, Judith, and the Maccabes

X made

15+

A Scholajlkal Hijlory of

4

Jn. T>om. 1050.

made them Authentick or Canonical Hi ivories of the Old Teflament.

CXVII. In the Eleventh Age we have HER- MANNUS CONTRACTUS, an Author of great credit and approbation in the World. Who in his h Hcrm.contraa.in b chramle^ following the Doftrine of-E^p^//^^, S. Jf- df^'utarAn. rome,md.renerable Bede before him, placeth the Mac- Mundi, 3/29. Hue cahes with the Hiftories of Jofephus ^-xd Julius Africa- ^FiVRAfem^^^ ^^^ 5 feparating them all from the Bocks of Divine rJemcontinet:qu£ve' Scripture '^ whercof if the Maccahes had been part^ why are they here Oppos'd one to the other I But with him the Canonical Scriptures went no further then the time oiNehemias. And in the ^^f but one before him, c ADO the Bifhop of Vienna f whom we there omitted j faid as much as He.

CXVIII. Towards ihQcn&oixhis Eleventh Century

rhpofth^c apudjucf.^' osfiintgtfta^ de Libr, Maccahaoriij Jofephi^ ^ Afiicani Scrtpt'ts exhibentvr. c Ado Vien. (qui floruit ^yinJD. Syj^Oin Chronico. jS-utc 5.

Jin. Vom. GISELBERTUS ^ was Abbot o( ?f^eftminfier , and wrote that Altercation between the Synagogue and the Churchy which was not long fince fet forth in Print at Colen. In this Book we have likewife his Te}timonyy " e That the OldTefiamentconCiAed oiTmo and Twenty ^^ Volumes, and was diftinguifhed into the LaiPy the ^^ Prophets y and the Hagiographa. For other Books o£ Scripture he knew noiie, that were properly Canonical.

1090.

i Trithcm. in Chr. Hirfaug. & in Libr. de Scriptor. CUruit his teitrporibHS in An- glk Gifelbertus Abbot WeHmonafttrU B. An- ftlmi Diffipulus, vir tarn in Dhinis Scrip -

iuris^ quam in Stcukribus egrtgi^ doSus, qui inter cetera fkiingmimonumentaSitipfn centra Jud^oi Ahercationem, ^c^ nonineteganter. e Gifelb. Altcrcatio, cap, i, Tub fincm. VeterisTeftamtnti ,XXlJfnnt volumina j & diffinguHntur in Legem} Prophet as, ir Hagiograpba^,

CHAP^

the Canon of the Scripture.

155

Ch

AP.

XIII.

T^he Teftimonies of the Ecclefafiicall Jj^riters in the Tiapelfth Century.

CXIX.yN the beginning of this Age ZONARAS ^^^ T)om

I wrote his Co?nmmentmes upon the Canons * *

J^ that were then received by the Greek Church. 1 1 1 8 • Where reciting the Canon of the Councei of Carthage^ concerning the Books of Scripture^ which they appoin- ted publickly to be r^^^ in tht African Ajj'emhlteSy he

fetteth this Scholie upon it 5 a That the beft %ule / . < ' .

whereby to know what ought to be %eadm the Ea^ ^^TcmKc^l^

pern Churches (for among them he lived, j is to have Uie} ^fi. J7V* >«

^i recourfe to the Apoflles Canons^ the Councei oi Laodi^ f^A^W^^^^^ ^'^

cea^ and the Canonical Epiftles of Athanafius^ 9^^&' Zcc^ ^ostibn^e-

Nazianzen^ and Amphilochius y who had given them ^^''' in^ccUfia epor-

their b ^ules, as they received them from the ^/;o. cl^^^^S^

iif^/t?5 and their Succeff'orSy for that purpofe long be- Symdi can, 59. 6*

fQ*-Q Magnus Atbanajim ,

((i«m 5«f Libri Ugen^ difint omnes enumerant,) (fyt Magnus Oregorius Theohgus^ & SanHus Amphilochius dmonftrant. b Su- pr£lcJtat.Num55,59^M7.

CXX. In the Churches of Germany^ at this time An.Dom. 1120^

was RUPERT Abbot of r«/Vy 5 a very a grave and a Honor. Auguftod-

learned Author 5 and though ^ Cardinal H^//^rw/>5 c^ '"S-hi ^'h ^* ^*^^'

and lome other later Writers in the Church of Rome^ ^^Btulrm. ' dc' Scr.

lay the common afperfion of an Heretical or Erroneous Ecci,ad An.mp. &

DoBor upon him, becaufe he agreeth not with them in cap*'5*i^& ^, 5^"Aobl-

their 'Hf^ DoBrine oiTranfui>fiantiati on in the Sacra- Mir«us*&alil.*

ment-j yet c Pererius more ingenuoufly acknowledg- ^ Perer.inOcn.c.s.

ethandcommendethhimfora^oo^C^^Wf/t. Of the ^^* *^ * ^ "*^'

X 2 Book

h4

AScholajlical Hijlory of

SententU hJic e Idem in Apoc

Book of wisdom this RUPERTUS writeth exprefly, rfRopert.m Gen.l.?. d That it is not in the Canon 5 and to a Sentence brought cap.9^» /d^Libro oxxx. oi that Book ^ he anfwereth plainly, ^^That it is no ^Sc^lZu loquUur) " Canonical Scripture. By which Anlwer the Books of neque dt Canonc efi, j^ohit and Judith^ and the Son ofsirach^ and the Mac- ""sai^Jl fmpTfi cabes, are likewile excluded 5 for they belong no more ■ to the Authentick Canon of the Bible^^ then the Book of

mfdom doth. Again, in his difcourfe upon the XXIV Elders in the %jijelationy though ^ he applyeth them to the XII Judges of Ifraely and the XII ApoHles of Chrifi^ yet there he approveth of the other Interpre- tation; (often before alledged out of the Ancient Fa- thers) which herein alludeth to the XXir Books of the old tefiamenK And how could he approve of that Number -y if that Number of Books had been defeBivcy or the ^w Roman Catalogue held then to be Canonical^ CXXI. HONORIUS, a Priefl ofAOUSTvN'm the Duchie of Burgundie^ was contemporary to Rsi- pertuSy and fet forth many Works, which are men- dmcnil'vw^Tn tioned by himfelfintheendofhisBook DeLumin^ v(^^seKtPtVRA ribus Scclefi^^ or the miters of the Church. Among V. t. spir'nu SmBo others his Expofition of Davids P falter is one 5 in the 5cXV,et^'ffi M^'' whereof he a divideth the Scriptures of the U f/f, mfioium (five cc q/^ TeHament into Three Parts^ the X^b?, or the Hi^ v&^ffnX "'fi'^y oiMofes, the Prophets, and the /T^^/V^/.^^ ; iraphhm dividitur, placing the pp/^^y in order among thelaft. And trc. herein he followed S. Jerome, and the Ancient Canm

of the Church.

CXXII. PETRUS MAURITIUS the Abbot of

CLUGNY in France, was alfo in great accompt at this

time, highly » favoured by Pope Eugenius, and a

foecial friend to S. Bernard. He wrote many Treati-

fis in Traa. contr^ fes, coUefted, and fet forth together in the Bibliotheca

^if^mtJmmL Cluniacenfis at Parif. Inhis Difcourfe agaixiA the Jef^s

frum quicqWivospro h he rejedeth all they can alledge as any Authentick

^«rfer«ico /ir/c^/^ ref^imnj for themfelves, which is not in their 5^rr^rf

Anno Vom. iia$

^AnJ)om.iilo.

4Baron.adanii45.

sca.?4.&ii26Sca.

b Petrus Cluniacen

veifufd^e,

Canon

the Canon of the Scripture.

IJ7

Canon of Scripture. In his B^iflle^ or Treatife againft the FetrobujiaaS he VQiuxQihj^ve [ever al Heads ot their do£i;rine 5 among which the firji was 5 their denUl of Bdpifm to Infants. And bec^ufe c the fame went, " that they detraBed much from the Majefiy of the '^ Scripture-Canon^ contained in the Bocks of the Old ^^ and JVew Teftament 'y he prove th the Divine Autho- rity oi every Bock in particular, to them, one gftcr ano- ther, reckoning no mqre^ then are in the Mehrew Co- noriy and fpecified in S. Jeromes Prologue. He endeth the old TeflameM with the Book of E/J/;^y, Cwhichis otherwhil^s compted as ap Appendix to iV<?fc^w/^^.) And after all the Authentick Scriptures of that Te^a- ment though he d addeth thofe '^ other Six of fVif- ^^ doniy Ecclefiafticus^ Toiity Judith^ and the MaccabeSj '^ as Books very ufefuland commendable in the Church 5 yet he faith exprefly of them, " that they are not to be ^^pkced in the (arnQfublime and equal dignity with the refi , that he had mentioned before 5 and thereby plainly diftinguifhing between the Divine Canon of Scripture-Books^ and the Bcclefiaflicaly thereunto ^ an^ nexedy for the ufe and benefit of the Church. And, that which is remarkable, he maketh this diftin- €lion between them, even in that very place, where he bringeth in the 2 Book of the Maccabes^ as a iTeftitimonie againft the Fetrobufians , upon the point, then in controverfie, about ^ Frayers

c Idem In EpiAo- h contra Pctfoha. fianos. Fam^ vufga^^ tumefli'vosMa]tflAti

ab antiquo totum or* bemfubdidhy detra^

htre Quidam vos

rorVM DIVTNVM CANONEMabjeci^ ajimant.Alii^^- DAM' ex IPSO vos fufcepiffie contendunt. Kdlo Vis cklpare de incertis , quia falUci rumorum moniiro noit facile affenfum pribe- redebto ; fednecejfa- m707VM CANO- NEM qui ab EC^ CLESIA fufcipitUTy V9S fufcipert debere , certjs AuSoritatibui prohabo^Dcindc enu- meratisfinguliSsK/M- tnus (inquit) in Jfa-' giographjj, hoc rJP^ SanltaScrrpturji Lu bris^ fequitur Liber EStMER , cut Au^ Soritas alioTHm Naff- giciraphorum auDorh mem confert. Si e- mm illi ab Hebraica veritate originem trO' bentes huncficiwity ^ paris au^orititis in r-

%i(m Jiebraico Canone habuerunt •, fequitur^ quia mlk eorum Librorum exceptor OMNES PARI MO' VO fufcipidebuerunt. Sed non folnm CHRISTIANIS, fed ^ipfts jy'DAIC IS Uteris atteftantibm Cmms]maSVPRA'SCRlPtVM ORDINEM Libri h Libra Jib ufque ad Hunc Librum Eflheti eBfcilicetnonexclufo^fednddito, paris autioritatisfunuifc, d Ibid. Reflantpeft bos AVtHEH* 7IC0S S. Scr, Libros^ SEX non reticendi Libri Sap, EccleftaUici, Job.Jud, 6^ uterque Maccab. Lu ler: qui etftad SVBLIMEM ILLAM PR/^-CEDEKTlVM VlOmtAtEM pervenirenenpetw trunt propter laudabilem tamen fy^ pernecejfarim do^rinam ab Ecclefta fufcipi meruerunt. Super quibus vobis commendandisife lahorare dpus non eft. Nam fi Ecclefta alicujus precii apud vss efi, ejus auSoritate ghquid, faltem PARVM HVID, ^ vobis fufcipiendum e3. t Ibid/ Succedat tamen Sacrorum Libror% aunoritaf,(^tJimCANONIS DlVmi,quJim ALIORVM VOLVMWVM EICOHERENtiVMy l^abEcclefiatraditorumclarifluusfonus, f Ibid, flittu bmm fnidamy & Catbolici mfiri tftih. ioris nfi<irmtf {vi^, pTfco) pro M^mU*

for.

158

A Scholajlkd Hifiory of

g in Bulla pttfcflio nisfidei.

h SdB;4.

Anno Vom. 1140.

Tor the dead : Which he would never have done 5 but that he knew full well 5 the church in his time held none oi thofe Books 10 h^ Canonicd Scripture. But g Po^ Pius the fourth , and his Nea> iVorkmen in the Church at ^ Trent have broken down this Partition wall between the Divine and the Ecclejiafiical Canon^ which all Ages kept up, before them.

CXXIII. HUGO deS. VICTORE, 2i Canon Re- gular^ and a Saxon by Nation, was about this time Abbot of S.riBor's at Taris-y whofe knowledge in the Scriptures hsith » been held equal to S.-r^/ig^/f/;?^^, and his Authority k at the Sori^on fet above Thomas Aquinas himfelf. It is confefs'd by 1 Serarius the Je- fuite, that this ^i^oi was altogether of our minde in fetting forth the Canon of Scripture. . For in divers pla- ces ot his fVorks he doth formally and amply main- tain 5 that there are no more Books of the Old Tejla- fnenty then we now receive (as He and the Church in his time did) for D/'-u//?^ and C^^o^^/r^/. "^ five feve- ral times he fetteth down the C/j/^^/o^^f of them all ; whereof it will be lufficient here to confider Tm. In his " j5(?(?^of5^rr^^frir/>^y'y3 having firft begun to fay, " That all "Divine Scripture is contained in Two Tefia- ^^mentSy theF/V/i^whereof comprehendeth the 5 Law " of MofeSy the 8. ProphetSy and the 9. Hagiographay heenumerateth them every one in order, as S. Jerome doth in his Prologue y " concluding y that they make

.._ ^. ,., ^^_ «' altogether XXII i\\ Number, Whereunto he o fub-

£a7f//*,w5.8.item, joyneth thofe oxhQn oi Wi[domy EcclefialiicuSy Tobity ^Sm^!L^t^* Judith and the yt/^f^^^^j with this note upon them, n HugodcS.via.de "That though they be Read andufedin the Churchy ^!s^lc^S "y^^ ^h^y ^^notmm)^^ computing

nil Divina Scriptura

in duob.TeSamentu contineturyVeteri videlicet ffyt novo,—V^t, continet Legem-, Prcphetas, (^ Hagm graphcL. Enumcratis Libris fingulis, concludit, OMNES ergofiunt Nnmero XXIl. o Ibid. Sunt pra^ ttreh alii quidem Ltbri, ui Sapientia Salomonis^ Libtrjtfu fin Sirachr(/<r Judith, (y tohiasf ^ Libri MACCAbmmyquikgmurqyiidm, SED^ON SCRIBVNJVIL W CAWNf.,

a them

i Trithem. in Chr, Hirfuagienfi. k. Artie. Parifien. contr^ ]oh. dc Mon- tcfono.

/ Scrar. in Tobiam, Pfolcg.5. &in Mac- cab. prdElGq.3. m Hugo dc Sanfto Via. Tom. I. de Scrip - mis J {(<; Sciipttribm Sacrisy c, 6. torn, 2. Excerptiommpr jorum Hb.i.c.^.Xom.^.E- ruditionis didafcaHc£, lib.4. c.2. Item, £- rud. theolog. in fptc

the Canon of the Scripture.

I5P

4 Ibid. S. Patrnm

Scripta, id 1 5, hier^- nymufi^uguftini. Am- brofii, Gregorii, On- genii, Btda, ^aiio* rv Decorum, in Tcxtu Vivinarum Scripiura' turn mn computatiti&y quemadmodum in VX» i^ tamen legjmtur^ut

a them among the Writings of S. Amlro^e^ S. ft^ugu- fihej and other fathers of the Christian Church ^ which were otherwhiles puhlicklj read in AflemblieSj as well (^ tkey. In the fanne Book ^ he calleth them fas we ufualiy do now) Apocryphal writings ; and m another, c iwdi^i^h^MQm (Canonical Authority.

ut dix'tnus, quidam Librifunt, qui NON SCKlBVNTrK IN CANINE

Sapient, Sdom. ((fycAteri. b lbid.cap,i2. Apocf>])^;/««f. c Eriid. in Spec. Eccl cp.S. 5wit

in V, T. alii Libri, qui leguntur,fedin Canone Au^oritatis nonf.ribunturj ut fitter tobia, jKdith,fyc.

CXXIV. Contemporary to him was RICHAR- jinno Doni' DUS de S. VICTORE5 a ScottiQvman, and a C^nop iiac Regular in the fame Abby of S. ViBors at Paris^ where 45 •

he was fometimes likewife the Pr/W among them ; Many learned and excellent writings of his are ex- tant, and among the reft his CoUeUions^ or ^ Four Books of Excerptions^ wherein he foUoweth his fellow HUGO for e the Number of the Canonical Books oi Scripture in all things, adding with him, that the o- thers of ififdom^ Ecclejiafticus^ Tobitj Judith^ and the Maccahes had not the Authority oith^Canon^ though they were priviledged to be Read in the Church. Which is the fame thing that we fay ftill in our Arti- cles of Religion. S. BERNARD givQihus no particular Cano'nilumenieg^^^ Catalogue of the Scriptures in all his Works : but he ^**^'^^^^^lf^"^^t lived m great amity and unity with thefe Three laft ^Eahf, 7ob!jud.% tAuthors^ and we may juftly prefume, that neither Librimccab. He^ nor any I>o5?or oftheCterrfc inhistimewas of other minde.

CXXV. Among the Greeks in this Age lived PHI- Jfj^^ Dom. LIP the SOLITARIE, whofe Rules of Chriftian life we have in the Colen-Bibliotheque of the Ancient wri- ters^ publifhed and tranflatcd by Tontanus^ together with the Notes that Michael Pfellus , Phialite , and Cretfer made upon that Treatife. a Wherein he re-

d Qpi illi ab om- nibus atrribuuntur,- prajteruna Btllarm.- lib. de Scriptor. ubi abfqiie caufa proba- bili de Authorcam- bigit.

e Rich, de S. vid:. Excerpt. 1.2. c. 9. £/- bri V.r.fmtXXlL Alii non habentur in

1145

a Philip. Sol. DiopM trxfivcRfguIaf, 1. 4. C.I 9, It^pergratim*

dQufdHi, pmgAti, f^ Spirhu corroborati Sermones Vivinoj ediderunt^irLibrss Omnts nmm Sexagvs^/

H cowpofueTHnti XXVll N. X. & reliqms V,I,

ducetb*

i6«

A Scholaftical Hifiory of

A Suprik , num 102. i> Antioch. ^Grcrf.dcf.l.i.c.iS^ c Ja, Pontanus praf. ad Lcftor. J/tf^noprr^ velUm Phklmm il- hminifta mendatio' ng accuratiHS tgifsi.

1150.

d TrithcmiusinLib. de Scriptor. € Antonin. Sum. hi- ilor.Tit.iS.c. 6. A quibufdam p^tdicatur in populif^ (jvhi hi 7res folennes Virifuc' runt Germani fratrei exadulterioMtlQuo' rum Mater dm in ex- tremis admonereturyUt in confejjione criminiiy qua perpttr&ffet , hoc faterttur^ refpondjjfe dicitur y Adulter m qui- de grave peccatK ejfej fed tamen quoniam it- deretf Tres fuos filios tammoffiaejfe Lumi- naEcclefidiJtpoenite' renonpojfe. f Anton, ib, Sedhoc non reperitur Authen- ticn. Ima nonfuerunt contemporaneiiCtfii v't- dni tempore. OR \7U Al^VS enimfuit ante ALIOS DVOS,

duceth the Books of the Old and New Teflament to the Number oi Sixty. From which number taking XXVII belonging to the New Teftament (for fo many there are,) the Remainder will be butXXXIII for the OU. And out of that Number as we made the Accompt clear ^ before) muft our Jlpocryphal Books necefla- rily be excluded. For the Cavil of ^ Gretfer againit that Accomptj is grounded upon nothing elfe, but the negligence of the Printers^ or the falfe Copie that Phimte and c pontanus followed , when they change one Number into another^ and divide Sixty in- to XLVI of the old Te^ament, and XXVII of the New ; which is XIII more then the whole will con- tain.

CXXVI. This was the Age, wherein lived GR A- TIAN5 a Monk oi Bomnia in Italy, (who out of cer- tain and uncertain, true and fuppofititious Writings made up his Concordance ofdifagreeing Canons 5 which we now call his Decree ;) and PETER LOMBARD, the Bifhop oiParis, (who iothisSyfleme of Divinityy collected out oimany Sentences thathc found difpex' fed in the Fathers, was filled the C^after of the Sen- tences 0 and PETER furnamed COMESTOR, (a Prieft of the Church odroyes in Champagne,) fo cal- led, becaufe he was ^ held to be Heluo Librorumythat is, a Great devourer of Learning. There was ^ a Re- port fpread about the World, That thefe Three Men were all ^^ Sons oi one adulterous woman, who when fhc came to die, refus'd to fhew any Repentance for bcT fault, becaufe fhe had been the Mother oiiuch excellent and admired perfons, as they all proved to be ; which fhe thought a fufficient Reccmpence or £x- cufe for her fm. Yet all this was a ^ devifcd and a flying Tale, having no certainty or 7>«^/; in it. For they were fo far from being Brothers, that they were oifeveral Nations, and hardly Contemporaries, the

one

the Canon of the Scripture.

i6i

t Pctr. Correftor. pra?f. in hift. Jofuac, Hebr£t dijlingumt V^ i; tn tres erdines, Pf'tmum vocant Le» getriy StcHndum Prs*

a Ibid. In Lege V.

Libr. Moyftt. \n P^. phetisVni. Jn Hagio^ graphis iXLibr. VX qmSVPERSVNT.

one an Hetrurim , the other a Lomhardine ^ (from whence he had his Name, J and the third a f y^/^fi&- man^c^tiy ovc born of afeveral ^Mother.

CXXVII. But PETRUS COMESTOR abbre- viated the Hiftories of the Bible ^ and called it the AnnoDom. SchGlajticall Hiftory, Where in his f Preface upon jfofuah he reciteth the^oo^yotthe OWTi?/?^^^;^^^ and divideth them into their 7l7rd'^0/'<3^(??^5 5 asS, Hierome and the Hebrews doj without faying, or infinuating fo much as by one word, that the C^ri^ian Church had any other Canon ^ which differed from t\\Q Hebrew. * In the firft order be the Five Books ofMofes ; in the £r.X^''""'" ^'' fecond, the Eight Books of the Prophets^ and in the third, the Nine Books^ that %jmain^ of the Hagiogra- fha. If Comeftor had known any more, that yet He- wain'd of the Old Teftamenty he would never have been fo perfidious to himfelf and the ChriftianSy for whofe ufe and benefit alone he wrote this his Schola- ftical Hi^oryy as not to name any one of them. But clear it is, that he affirmeth abfolutely, as well in his ovvnfenfe, as in the fenle of the Old Churchy That af- ter the V Books of the Laiv^ and VIII of the ProphetSy there Remain but IX more ior the firftTeftament. A- mong which the \T debated Bookes can have no room. Otherwhere, when he cometh to Ipcak in par- ticular of the 5oe^ of Toto, he faith exprefly, ^ That /> is in no order of the Canon : and oi Judith^ That S. Je- rome^ and the Hebrem^ lodge it among the Apocrypha^ and That it was but a ^ fault in the writer ^ x,o fay, they placed it among the Hagiographa. Befidesall this, he is bold to call the Story of ^f/, andtheD/4- gon^ a d Fable^ and to fay, That in the Hiftory of Sufanna-i all is not fo true as it ihould be \ which cer- tainly he would never have faid of any Canonical Part oi Scripture.

CXXVIIL There is a certain Sch^\ia^yX\i2X maketh

Y Anno^

b Idem,prjEf.inhif!. Tobia?. Di Null$ Ou dine e^^

c Vide fupri, num.' 7?. ubicitaturG/o/« Ord^ & ineaP.C'- meSor. p. 142. d P. Comeftor prsef. in Dan. & cap. ij. Itcmapudi^#rrf,Ib,

i6i

A Scholajiical Hijlory of

jimotations and additions to this Scholaflual Hifiory oiComeftor. And being fomewhat troubled at what was there faid concerning the jV^w^^r of the /f^^/'o- graphay that they were but Nme^ and that no mentioii at all is made of the Mated Books that were after- wards annexed^ and admitted to be Read in the Churchy he fetteth this ^ Note upon Comeflors Preface^ " That "indeed the Books of mfdom^ Ecclefi amicus ^ Judith^ « Tobit^ the Paftor^and the Maccal^es^^bc all Apocryphal^ "becaufe the Author of them is not known, (that is to fay, c whether they were indited by the Spirit of God-y or of Men onljy) " but for as much as there is no «^ douk made of their verity ^ the Church hath received them. Where he doth not fay, that the Church hath altered the Nature and Condition of tliem, fo, as to make them Canonical Books oi Scripture , which were dubious and Apocryphal before, but that it hath recei- ved them only as Books to be read for infiruBion of manners^ and for the knowledge of divers Ecclefiaftical um^'dit\u7n'^ H/J?on>5, and Occurrences, not for grounding of any turn inter CER7VM Articks of Faith upon them. For othcrwife, the?/i- c!^A'Oiv/a^nur ^^^ ^f ^^^^^^-^5 (reckoned here by this Scholiaft among feaiSF-sJm^^ntl] the reft,J which in former ^ Ages the Church -, m '*"^""'' lome other places, permitted to btpublickly read to the people, would augment the number of the New Canonical Bocks^he^ond. the Accompt of the Maftcrs

at Trent themfclves. mi.

Item, Toftar. prxfi in Matth. q 3 . Df AVCtORlBVS enlm hmm non conSat Eccleft^^ an SPlKltV S* dWante fcripfnint, d Vide fupra. Num. do.

^ Addic- ad P. Co-

mtftor. prstf. ia ]o-

foam. Sapientiay Ec-

cleftaiiicus , J^udith ,

tobtj Paflor^ Mac

eab. AFOCRTPHA

fUnt, quiA AVrOR

EoYHmignoratur, Std

fiitidt veritate eorum

non dkbitatur, ab Ec^

cUfiA recipiuntur.

c Glof. ordinnar. in

mN'CANOSlCl m^tmfiveAPOCRT' F Hint fit ur quo tem- pore, quibufve AV- 7H0RIBVS ftnte-

Jn. T>om. 1174.

CXXIX. In Cow(r/?(/r'5 time lived JOHN BE- LETH, a Doftor of Divinitie in the Schooles at Paris ; who , in his Bock of Divine Offices , de- claring in particular what Lef[ons were then read in the Church -^ according to the 6'^x'fr^/5'^4^;?5 of the yer. ^ after thdfjrce Books oi Salomon , henameth the

Other

the Canon of the Scripture.

i6i

d Job. Belcth. d div. offic. cap^^a. A Caltndisighur Augu-

Other Two ^ of wifdom^ and the Sonof ^/V^r^j and

he notcth then:i to be apocryphal. But when he

declarcth in general, what Books are contained in the

Biile 5 he b putterh TofoV and the MaccaSes, together tetTelutLrTr^esU.

with Fhilo and Ecdejiafi/cus ^ into the Apocryphal briSaiomoms.ttuvo

Number : and faith plainly , that though the ^/;/^rf^ ^apock^h^^^^

alloweth them 5 ( that is, to be Read^ ) yet jhe receiveth b idem, c. 60. Sunt

them not ^ (that is, amongthc Cammcal Scriptures.) autem xxii voiumi-

where, a Laurima^'s Copie, (which he followed in J,f>Lw^^^

fettingout5^/^^fc) hadbeen^Wjashe c complairtes holpaaoemmtramur^

that it was in many places very bad, we might have J'f J^^'^^- ^''i«^ <^«

had the Book of Judith added to them , and left out

among the Hagiographa before. For it is manifeft,

that in all this Chapter >S^/^/fc intended to follow S

Jerome y whofe Catalogue oi Scriptures \^2iS then only

received in the Church for Authentick and Certain. ^^^' , , ^ x- . ^ .

»R« volumhe XII Prophet a mimres. KOVEMy qu£ deiticepsfequuntur, reputantur Hagiographa^ m fa^ men ut fint Authemica^ nimiriim Pfalm* Job, Tres Libri Sahmonisj Paralip. J^udith(Tuistiyhi\jm Scriptoris) ^ Kfter. siuatuor tandem kPOCRTPHA, 7eb. Afaccab. Philo, ^ Jefu Sirach, qui appel" Umr Eccleftafiicus, Verum has quatuor quidem NON RECIPIT EBCLESlAy tameneds approbate quiei 4trgumentum fere habeant Librorum Satomonisy etiamfitorum AuSloresprocertaacverenonfciat. Alios Dms crtdimus EZRAM cowpofuiffey qui tOTAM BiBLWTHECAM veterit Teflamenti r«- ifituit^ cum h BMbyloniis effet combufta. c Corn. Lauriman. in prxf. ad pinm Ledorcm Codex MS. ita arUis acprejfis chara^eribus fuit exaratus,ut legere admtdiim mihifuerit difjiciki ufque adeiy utft' pemmerhi ft quam fententiam elicere volujjfemy debuerim profelio divinare^

trema pericepe pars efi Libri Mtij (vitium eft hie Scriptoris, nam dcbui-t dicere , cujus cxtrcma pars cfmberRHth,)Sam. ]faias^ Jerem.

CXXX. Among others , that were famous in this Age, we have lOHN of SALISBURY, born and brought up there in the Church of England , but after- wards made Bifhop oiChartresmFrance y a man as a highly honor'd for his learning as any in his time ^ who in one of his ^ Epiftles handling this matter at large, profelTeth to follow ^^S. J^row^ herein before

Diverfas (fy- multiple ceslego Patrum SententiaSy Catholics Ecdefidi'DcBorem Hieronymumfequens, quemin con^ituendo liters fundameato probatijjimum habeo^ ftcut canftat effe XXIIliterasHcbraorum,(icXXllLibiesV,T.tri^ bus dijVtnlios ordinibus INDVBlThNTER CREDO, fit fie colligmtnr in fummaXXW Libri V.T: licet nonnuUi Librum Ruth, ^ Lament. Jerem. in Hagiograpborum numero recenfeanty ut in XXIIH Summa. omnium dilatetur, c Ibid. Liber verb Sapientid, ^ EcclefiafiicuSj Judiih-,Tohiasy (fy- PafloYy ut idem afferit, NON reputantur in CANONE^fed neque MaccahAorum LibtXy qui in Duo volumiiutfcindi" tuTy quorum primHs Mtbr^mrum redolet eloquentiamy alter QrAcamt quodflHus ipfe convincit,

Y 2 ^^all

Jn. T)om. 1180.

a Baron, ad Ann. iiSi.Sca.i^. b ]oh, Sarisbur. Ep, 172. Jluiti ergh de NV MERO Librmm

i^A, J Scholajlical Hijlory of

«c all others, and undoubtedly to believe 5 that there are «cbut XXII Books in the Camn of the Old Teflament. «c All which having named in order according to «^ their Several Clafjes^ he concludeth , that neither the « Book ofmfdomy nor Ecclefiaftcus^ nor Judith ^ nor « To to 5 nor the P^j?or , nor either of the O^accabeSy « are to be reputed Canonical. Which is a cleer Teftimonie for us, without any ContradiBion to be made againft it.

Jn. Dom* CXXXI. in this Biftioprick at cW^m 3 PETER

the Abbot oiLa CELLE at Troyes^ was lohn ofSalif-

1 190. lurfs Succeffor. And as he followed him in his o/-

fice^ fo did he in his DoBrine ^ concerning our pre-

fent Queftion. For a in a Treatife that he wrote of

icn^t Hb^^de' p^ni^ ^^e XXI II I Loaves and the Tabernacle y making divers

bu$,cap.2. Hh enim allufions to that Number y his laft is, that So many are

mmem cxxiiuj ^^e Books of the Firfl Teflamnt.

um filmum Jacobs J r -r

fiam Apoftdorum Chr'M drndencirmm numerum duplicatum ftinjftcaK Sub hoc etiam numero Libri con^

tinentur V.t.plenaru igitur inlrui^iommrumprslibatur tx hoc numero Librorum,

An. T>om. cxxxii. Theodore balsamon, the

Patriarch of Antiochy in his ^ Commentaries upon the 1 1 pi. Councell of Carthage y referreth , for the dumber o(

Canonical Books y (as Zonaras did before) to the h Thcod. Balf. in Afo^oHcal Canons y the Councel of Laodiceay and the ^n^7"\«.£m if : Epiftles of Athanafiusy Hazianzeny and AmphilochiuSy 4^rQs Ugi in EccUfu who reckon no more then we doc. And here an End V''cl"ll% oitUs Century.

LXXXV, Laodiccn, S/nod, Cm, IX, S, Qrtg, tbeologi 94 iua Metro fcripfify fy S.Athmft Cmnn<h tf S. AmfhiMfi^

ChaK

the Canon of the Scripture. rtfy

Chap. XIV.

l^he Tejlimonies of the Ecclefiajlicall Writers in the 7 hirteenth Qenturj.

CXXXIILY^ JC TE are now come to the ^^f, J'^. Tinypf %/%/ wherein the Me/^dicam FrierSy ^ '^* -^^'^* ▼ ^ and the De^^orxj that we ufual- IlOO* ly term the Schoolmen^ began firft to fet up in the World. Whofe chief work was to ftudie, and to write Commentaries upon the Ma^er of the Sentences^ But becaufe He^ in all his Four BookSy doth not any where propofe a. Catalogue o( the Scriptures^ nor give his /interpreters any occafion to treat of that particular Quefion^ for the moft part they all paffe it over in filence3&: take no notice of it. Yet neverthelefs di'vers there be among them^that have GloJJed^atid Commented upon the Scriptures themlelves^ fome upon the vphole Bible together, and fome upon [ever alp arts of it..

CXXXIV. TheF/Vj? ^Authors of theORDINARY GLOSSE upon the BIBLE, although it be not fo well and certainly known , what particular perfons they were^ (for ^ Antoninius the kxc\h\{ho^oiF lor ence^ 4 Part2.Tit.4.c.i$ and ^ Gaguims the General of his OrderinFr^/^r^', L^ Franc. ii?.** make eX/^«//?r our own Countryman, to be the firft ap<i. beginner of it; but c Trithemius and ^SixtusofSi^ ^ BfbniCi^^*'' ima give that honour to Strabus^ (both whom we produced as our mtnejjes before ^) yet this is certain^ that whoever began it, others had by e this time f jin^DoHi much augmented it, andthatit was^^ow? witha^(?;?^- y^/ Confeat and Applaufe of all the Payors and DoBors 1200* in the ffyltjrn ChmheS:^ received, as a mrk of fpecial

i66

A Scholaftical Hijiory of

ufe and benefit, for the better knowledge and un- derftanding of the Holy Scriptures^ and for the clearer fctting forth of the common Do^rine^ and Religion then profelfcd among them ; for the Abuses in %jligion (wliereof the \\Q.yN Canonizing oiApocyjphal Scriptures^ is one j were not^et become the DoBrines of the Churchy as the New-Coiincel at Trent hath fince ordered them to be.

CXXXV. In this GLOSSE upon the BIBLE we have a ^refaccy wherein ^ Firfl:, the Compofersy and Defendors of the Trent-Canon y are branded (^before- hand) with Ignorancey and a worfe matter, for hold- " ing all the BoQk$yX}i\2X are contained and put into one " Volume of ScriptureSy together, to be of a like and '^ eq^ual Venerationy or that they ought fo to be recei- ved in the Church. Secondly, " The Canonical Books " are there diflingui(hed from thofe which be not Co- " mnicaly and as ^ great a difference made between " thefe Tvpoy as between that which is Certaiuy and ^^ that which is Doubtful ^ For the Canonical were « written by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghofiy but who '^ were the Authors of the othery or at what time they " were written no man can tell. Thirdly, we are there informed, ^ « xhat the Church permitteth the reading " of the Apocryphal Booksy only for devotion and inflru^ «c Bion of mannerSy but not for any Authority that they " have to conclude Controverfies in matters of Faith. Fourthly , That d there be " but XXII Canonical} " Books of the Old Teftament ^ and what Books foevcr " there be hefideSy that they ought to be put among ^^ the Apocrypha. This was the judgement of all lear-

'HOHlCIfuntcovfe^i

SPIRItV SAUCro DIcrAntE-.-^O^-CA^OWClduiem^ive APOCRTPHLnefcmr qmiem- pore, quibufve Au^oribus fint editi. c Ibid. Eccltfia eos leghj f(y pnmittit, ut ad devotionem, ^ ad muruminfirmatmem afidclibus legantur '3 Eorum tawen an^oritas ad probandum eat qu£Vfnikntin du- Hum autincontentiomm, ^ ad confirmandum Ecclefta^icorum Degnwum au^orhatemj non reputatur ida^ ha. d iHid. Sunt igitur Libri Canonici v/'t. XXII. Hkicquid^autmextra hoceflj (dc V.T.to'

d Gloir. Ord. Pratf. de Libris Bibl. Ca- nonicis & Non-Ca- nonicis. /^/i funt nultiy quit ex to quod non rnultam operant dant Sacrs Scriptur^c, cxiftimant^ OMUES LIBROS, &!VTIN BlBU COmiNEN- IVR , PARI VI' KERAtlONE (quae func verba Cone. Trid. Sea. 4O # Reverendos atq; ado- randos, NESCIEN- TES diflingmre inter LIBROS CANOM' COS ^ NON-CA- NOmCOS, quosHe- brai inter APOCRY- FHAcomputanty un~ de [dpi coram doHis RlDICVLl vidcn^ tur,(rc,

b Ibid. Inter quos tantttm diUat quantum inter CERtVM^ iy \iV%lVM.'^amCA-

f«or) Kj d^m Hieron)m4f, inter APOCRTPHA eilponendum, &c

ned

the Canon of the Scripture,

i<7

md Men^ and the Cowwon Belief of the Church 5 in thofe dayesj wherein if any particular or private performs were ot another minde, they are here con- demned of ignorancej and want ofknowledgeinthe Scriptures,

CXXXVI. Which judgement is not only here d&- clar'dj and propos'd by the Authors oi this ordinary Glojje themfelves; but confirmed likewife by the Te- ^irrionies of the Ancient fathers \ among whom , though the chiefeft atteftations which they bring, are out of Origen^ S. Jerome^ and Rufpn , yet they take notice o{ S . Augustine 2^(0^^ and of his diftindion be- tween thofe Apocryphal or EC'i:lefjaftical Bock f^ that are oi greater Authority^ f which therefore he putteth into his larger Catalogue) and thofe that are of a ^ lejjer accowptj (which therefore he leaveth out^J But what- foever S, Auguftine had faid^ the common consent oithe Church now was, to acknowledge no more Books for Canonical Scripture , then thofe that Rufjin^ and S.Je- romey had received from their Anceflors^ and recor- ded to Fofierity. In which regard, when they come to the feveral Books oitobit^ Judith^ mfdom^ Scclefta- fiicuSy and the Maccabes^ they prefix this Title 10 them all? ^ " Here heginnelh the Bock ofTobit^ which is not in <^ the Canon. Here beginneth the Book of 'Judith^ which is «^ not in the Canon. Here beginneth the Book ofmfdom^ ^^ which is not in the Canon. The Bock of EcclefiaHicus '^ <c The Firjf^ and the Second Bock of the Maccabes ; which «« are not of the Canon, Which is to write this diflinBi- on^ that we now maintain^ with a Pen of iron^ that it mi^ht;?et;frbe forgotten.

tXXXVII. And to this purpofe, before all their Bibles^ and all their GloffeS:, or Commentaries uponthe Bible^ they were wont then^^ (as moil an end the cu- ftome is to do ftill,) to fet S. Jeromes a Epiftle to Pau- Urns concerning all the Books of Scripture •, which is

ama*

^ Baruchy and the g and 4 ofEfdras, b Glofla Ordinar. In- cipit Liber Tobia, qui non eft in Canong.

Tncipit Liber /«- dith, qui non eft in Ca* none*

Incrpit Liber SapU entia, qui non e^in Canone.

Incipit Liber Ecclf fiaftici, qui non eft dt Canone,

Incipit primus li- ber Maccabdorum, qui non eS in Canone-

Incipit Secundus LU ber Maccab£orum,qHi non eft in Canone.

a Hoc Titulo. Eph ft da Hieionymi ad Paulinum Presbytern de OMNTBVS S* mSlOKl/E. LI* BRIS,

j^8 A Scholajlical Hijloryof

a manifeft argument, that they intended to give eve- ry Reader warning, and direftion, at the beginning, not to confound the Apocrjphatl and the Canonicall Scriptures together, or to receive and read them all with one and the fame veneration^ as the Po^e and his Councel hath lately commanded the World to do. h vidcntim.87. And therefore ^ Bee anus the Je[uite leap'd over thefe Mens heads clean, when he ftretch'd fo far at once, with his Trent-Tradition in his hands, from Pope Eu- genius to Gelafius 5 for in this Age the Church knew no fuch Tradition^ nor in any Age between, which was not much leffe then a Thousand years together. Of c Num. 85. c Celafius we have faid enough already, and of Pope

d Num. 83. ^ Innocents pretended Decree before him. If there

had been any fuch Authority in thole Tafal Conftitu- tionSj as is now given to them, why were not the ^- MJ«iJ'adm'i2'& fcriptsof Innocent and Gelafius (cthdore all the BiUes fcq.MagiscreMum evcr fince, raihcT thcti the Epiftle oi S, Jerome to Pau- ^^^^'^''"^"^'^'^•^^fj^ linusi But fince their time^^ it hath been the fo;^/^/?^ 4tgmr^7eT/l!^fy'de PraBice of the Latin churchy to prekr S. Jerome not Ntfloriis', Nam inboc only before them^ but before 5. Auftiny and the C^^;^- fonor7ilk?r' ''^ of Carthage and all: for ^ herein he excelled^// * Anno 1^34. the DoBorsoithe Church bQ{xdt%. F.LeanderofS.Mar- /Idem, dcfenforii tins in Doway (who was Mr. Jo/^ff fometimcs a Stu- G^^ll^sLibmuJv' ^^"^ ^^ ^- J^^^^^ CoUedge in Oxford,) in his Prefacehe- r'^difiiniluntur^^^B. forc the "^^ la ft Edition of the Or^/^^r)/ gloffey and Hkionymo in Prologo Lyra's Commentaries upon the ^/^/f , at AntwerVy con- Kii^^^s^fficI f^ff^^l^^ "That by the Consent of TtmeSy andther^^w- CLESU vniVEK' " mon judgement of the Churchy S. Jeromes Prologue hath ^Ai^r^Jrt ^^^.' "bcenufuallyaflix'dtotheSm>^/^y'^y, and that upon

CO RDITER tenet il' ,, ^ • 1 • . . r, / A 71 1 r ^

/.m diflMmem fa- " ^loft jj^^/^fc/)/ or important Reafons. What thofe ^^^-

Gm i B, Hjmnymo. fons wcre he cxplaincth not ; but a f ^e-^^^r cJT/^;?

y2lStT^^^ 'h'" k hath done it before him, whoavoweth S J.-

Ci^r//?«m , (t Wii " ^ow^^ diftinftion between the Canonical and Apery-

^KVATAinEccLt '^ t^^^^ ^^^^^ of the oldTejlamenty to have been ?;74^^

SI A, '" ' "and continued by the Univerfal Churchy both before

- ' < ''Chrifis

the Canon of the Scripture.

i6p

cc

Chri(ts coming, and ever after. What the fame a f. Lemd.in Com-

F, Lemder therefore addeth in his Commentary upon T,entar. fuo'ad ProL

S.Jeromes Prologue y a cc That at the time when he ^^^\^^^p^qP°^

" wrote it, Qhat^ and his other Prologues) he had not iflos m^smatSaL*^

^^yet been acquainted with xh^ judgement 2iV{di Decree J?^^' afeconverjas

^^ of the Church, which P./;^ Innocent not long after S'^e^'tmiTm

^^ fet forth in his Epiftle to Sxuper/us, as he was there- ^ccUfMifgerau quod

^^ unto moved both by the Smodkal Epiftle of the ^- ^^I^.Tp ^'-^ ''^ ^"" -"

^^jncan Councel, and by Lf^^d-zs from Exupertus him- £;/:^o/d ^^i £««;m.

^^felf^ In which Decree, the Books oiTobit^Judithy ^"^ Prodi^rat', quem

^'fvifdom, Ecclefiafticus, and the Maccahes, are Cano^ Z%tTdumZ"d

^^nizdi And, that there is no doubt, but S, Jerome t^ifn Africans Ecdefi^

'' would have admitted the Authority of this Decree if he fgutlf the^S^'«

" had known it ; All this is nothing elle, but fo much Synode wrote any £^

faid to little purvofe, or rather to none at all . ^j^^^ ^^ ^^s to Boni^

I- t i ^ face{v\dtm^. )

divers yeers after Innocent was dead, and not to Innocent himfelf,) titm etiam ipjius Exuperii adeum miffdi Liters, In eo autem decreta Ponnfex Sapieni. Ecclefiajiicum^ Tob, Jitd. ^ Mac» Librot Sacro Ca- noniannumerandos effedocuit, Kec dubium eSjquinD. BieronymusDecretihuJHitmScritatem admi" fiffet^ ft iffum ei videre conUgiffet,

' CXXXVIIL HUGO CARDINALIS wasaPt?-, J^^^ T>om minican, oroneof theFw/'5P^f^^fcfrj,andthe ^ Fir ft * *

oi thsLt Order, that afcended the Cfc^jr^, and became 12^^.

a DoBor ofDivinity ; the fir ft Frier » that was made a a Henr. Gandav. dc

Cardinal', and the firft Man, ^ that (with the help ?"ir?'^' ^'l^- ,

r n i7j^. V 1 I 1 \^ " Platma, & Onufr-

of/x'e hundred Frters more) gathered together the ininnocent.4.

Concordances of the Bible, which have been fing:e his ^, Antonin.Sam.hift.

time, by the induftry of^'x/myw^;;, very much aug- anVd^eRXHifpj[b'

mented. In xht Commentaries, that he wrote upon /^Z^ i^, cap. 2. Bjbiiorum

the Scriptures , (which were then univcrfally rccci- ^'^T^fnl^'^f^Jiirii'

1 S 1 J J ^ r J u- /iMi r • ^umpeniopus^ primus

ved, and applauded,) we hnde him ftiU preierving excogitavit e5r 500

and keeping up ihQ Common dijiinBionhttWQcnthc ^onachorumopeadjH^

Canonical and Ecclejiaflical Books ; for otherwhiles he '"' P^^f^'^^^- fayes, " cl That Ecclefiaflicus, mfdom , Judith, Tobit,

^^ QXiA xht Maccabes 2iXQ^ Apocryphal ', {omtiimt^, that fn^iXam^'^^k^rit

" they are dubious -, fometimes, e that they are Not ^Apo.yThTfffusI L-

pientia, PuSor'y Et Michabsomm Ljbriy Judity atque Tobks. Hi, quiafunt dubii, fub CANONE nan IiVM6.KMitVK. Sedqwh veu canmt, ECCLESlAfufcipit iUos, e Idem, in Prol. Tobia?.

Z > ^^ Canonical^

I n o ^ Sckolajlical Hijlory of

^Cammed '^ and other whiles, b that they are not h Idem, in Prol. Ga- cc received Ly the Church for poving any waiters of Faich^ lllm%'ffcdld ^'hvMioTmformation of Manners. And lor the C^.^c- morum MuBionm. nicai ^06)^^5 chcmlelves, he altogether lolloweth 5'. J^- , \lmlrm coiTri f/* ^^^^^ Come^or^ and the Gloffe^ accompting thena in the tos\HUn7ucuntAPO^ fame Order:, that they did, and making c the 0/ir^- CRTPHA pro VE- flament perfe^ by them.

€ Idem, Prol. in ]of. Lex vetus his Libris PERFECtE tOtA tene^ur.

An T)om C^^^^- THOMAS AQUINAS, whoisreek- Hn . x/t> . ^j^^ J ^^ ^^ ^[^^ chief efl DoBor among all the Schoolmen^

I Ci 7 O . v^^as 1 ike wife one of the Trenching Friers^, that made a

d Them. Aqtiin. in difference between tliefe Tm forts oi Books^ and kept

Dionyf.de di'. Norn, ^^p $j^yomes Doftrine, which was then generally

Tuhfrimh quid qui. received in the Church. For ^ in his Commentaries

hufdamVo^oTuw.qui uoou DionyfWj reckoning Philo to be the Author of

ffel^^rJT/- the Book ofmfdow (whether truly or no, it skills not,)

j^omcAS SCRIP- he putteth that Bock into the fame rank and order with

iVRAS ncn conde- the writinpis of Ignatius and other EcclefafticalPer-

Tent, vjjiiin fif, quo<^ ,9 i ,- j • cy i i

nomen Amsris conve- [oKS^,^^ that ha\ c lett S acred 7 r ^1:7^^5,. though no Canont- nitntius eft rebus du cc ^^/ Scrivtures^hthindc thcm ; and thereupon conclu- Zl\^nd^l^h^ '' ^^^0 thattheBockoi mfdom was not yet held to he a Manjr dicit. Mens ec^^y^of the Canon. Again, ^ he termeth the ftory of tlm:!:^:t:r ^el and the <Dr agon a Fahle ; and of £../^.y?/.«5,(when efty cruiifixus e3. Et f he cometh to anfwer thoie words^ ^^ where Samuel

Pbih dicjt in Libro cc is faid to appear , and toproohecie after his death.") he auem feat d( Sai-iai- ^ y r r-- i t. • i i i> •• ^

L, Aimtorfa^usfm fpcaks fo /^//^r/y, that no man can judge by his £x-

puichritudinjs ejus, ception ^ he hcld and belicvcd it, to be of any D/x;/«e

Kiff;4tS: orC4«o;./V4/^«/^«m> AUwhxh, though a.«5 will

tiwdumhabeaiur inter «^ by S /^o w^^/^J endure to be (aid of Jquin^^tSy^Qt he

Camnicas S.criptnras.

e Thorn, in Dan« c. 1.5. 7'ertiapars e^ incident alis, continens duo ultima Capita, in (juaponitur Suf&n. Hi^. ^ Belis ac Vrarws FabuU . f Idem, Siim.Pjr.i q.Sp.art. 8.ad 2. VtliUaappayitiofuit pocurataper DAmor.es, SI TAMEN ECCLESfASTICI AVTORltAS ^'ON RECIPIATUR pro- pter hoc, quod ir.ter C A MONICAS SCRIPtVRAS apud Hebrsos non habetur. g Cannsin locis, lib.2. cafi, 1 1 Se^. Qnid F.cclcfi;ifticun,i ? Nam quod D. Tuomasin earn Senteniism advccatHr^id h'E' RENDVM KVLLO- MOVO tH, Vtexi. Parte, q. i . art ?, coWgere licet, (^ ex CcmTentariis in 4.ccp de divinis Kominibus. Sid in ilia quiffl.S^. nihil defwi dixit, quin ad verbuw rctklit Auguftu trnm. Ob.jcctrai.fibi Canus (cap. i © ) quh^ nee D. thomis di Ecclefta3ico certus eff.

knows

i7«

a Num.^

b Supr^, Num.

hoc ipfo

the Canon of the Scripture.

knows not how to help it, nor to bring any good ar- gument againft it. For that which he brings firft out oixhQ,prjt pan ot Aquinafs Sum (" where the Book of '^mjdom hath the honourable Title of a i/o/^ Scrips ture^ or Sacredwriting given to it, which is no more then many times hath been given to other Ecclejiafti- cal writings) we have anfwered ^ before. Then that which he brings out oi the Commentaries upon Diony- fiuSy is altogether ^ againft him. And that which he pretends to be brought out of S. Aufiiriy) (^though At^uinas maketh no mention ois. Au^in^) will be no lefle againft him, then if iiA(iuim% had faid it him- (elf, as it is moft manifeft he did. But there is a c greater CMan then LMelcbior Canus^ that hath long fince given usTkw^sof e/^'^/z/V/Teftimony, out of his 2a 2^5 f where peradventure this pafTage is not nonf to be feen, -for clipping of fuch coyn hath been lately concluded to be lawful,-- but Antoninus in his time faw it, and read it there,) '^ that the[e debated ^^ Books had no fuch authority Sisthe other Sacred Scrip- ^^ tures had, whereby any man might ejfeBuaUy argue^ ^^or firmely prove any matter of Faith from them. Be- fides, there was a great Thofvifly d vvho maintained it againft Catharin^ that there was nothing more clear^ then thatTi&ow^5-/^2'«/W^ wasofthismindej and for proof thereof he (ends him to the place before cited. However therefore Canus^ and Catharin were pleafed to take it, it was the judgement of o^fc^y Learned and unbiafs'd Men, that this gxt^t Schoolman hQiQindii- fcrr'd not from the "DoBors of his own Age.

IS LIBRIS SCRIP' 7VRyE SACR/F.. Vnde firte hahent mhoritatm ulem qmlem hahm VICTA SANCIORV^f itpprobatorum in EccUfta, d Catharin. Annot. in Cajet. p. 54. impref Paris i $3$, Scrih'u enim. Vis idem quoque tibioftendam ex S. Thoma, Aliquot fcilicet Libros Sacrosrecipiquidemab Eccltfta, qui tamen non funt CANONICh neque idonei ad probandam FlDEMy quibus frequenter utitur in divim cultu ? fed ut magis tibi crubefcendumfit, hoc ofiendam ex Libro Ecclefia^ici, quam tu manifefto mendn- do dixiSi ejfe Canonicum Secundiim Sententiam Thom£. Vide 5, thomm^ 1. partem ^.8^. art, nit, ad 2. ubidicit,irc. Q^id CLAKWS DICERE POtOIT,^

. Z 2 CXL.

c Sandos Amoninus (for he was alfo^a- r.onif(d a Saint y as wcliSi4^K/n<u)Part. 3.Tic.i8.ca,6,Seft» Sccundo & Tcrtio. &19. c.s.inSumma Majori. Idem etiam dicit Thomas 2a, 3 a, (ff Ni:Ql. de Ljra fu' per 7obiam, fcilicet, qu$d ifli Libri non funt tantdt Authoritatisy ut ex din'is eorum pef' fet egicaciter argun en- tart in his qu£ funt FJDEIJcutexALI'

171

A Scholajlical H'tjlory of

Anno Dom. 1375-

^^ Anton. Sum .Hift. Tit iJJ. cap. ^.initio. Fr'tmut Gloffator De- creti fuit JHugo feu Buguitio f Secundus qui gloffavit fuit Jo- hmnts teutonicus ; ^ ifta eft Oloffa Cmmu- niscumtextu

CXL. At this time 5 after Gratian had fct forth his Decree^ the CanoniHs that made their GLOSSES upon itj were in great accompt ^ and next the Or di- nar j Glojje upon the Bii^le^ no Books were more eftee- med then theirs. The Firft for the ^ Second a,x, leaft J that (j/o/5Wthe Canon Law, was JOHN SEMECA, commonly called TEUTONICUS, being a German^ and the Provoil of Halkrftade ih^rQ^m the Duhck JBrunlwicks Countrey. But Alb. Krantzius a gives him the honour, of writing his Glojfe upon the De- cree, before all others 5 and fayes , that None did it better after him. Hpwfoever this Tellimony he hath both from ^ the Pope^ and from his c cardinals, that he was a Tious andaCatholick^P'riter. In this f^r/V^y* then upon the Canon Law, ^ '^ the Books oi mfdom^ ^^ Ecclefiafticus , Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabes are Krantz. Saxon, cc f^ij plainly to be u^pocryphal^ though they be per- il.^,'s^^^^cf 7^^^^^^^^^ "niittedtobei^.^^, adding, that the very i?..^/;.^ of cwyinfignis Juris Do- "them, was, peradventure> not fo^^/^er^//; neither, Hot, qui Prims aufus cc received, and ufed in all Churches. Whereupon

eft glome decretuwy - ^ ir^r • ^ i - ^ r

quod ante Eum Nemo, they were wont bctore Luthers time , and the time of i^ po^^Eiiin Nullus the Trent'Councel to print it in the ^ Margin of thi^

""'"' Canon-GloJJe, "that the Bible had fomc ApocryphaU

^ Books in it* Neither will the Exceptions of ^ Driedo,. and g Andradius ferve their turn , when they fay^, « that the Glojje:^ by the reafon which it here gives for *^ excluding thefe Booh from the Canon of Scripture^ " may as well exclude the Books of Job and the ^^ J^^&^h becaufe it is not certainly known who was the " Author of them. For the Glojje intended not only

d GloflTa in C Canoncs, dlft. 1 6. Sapiemia, Liber EcdefiaHici, Judith, 7obidi, ifyt Maccab, dicuntur APOCRTFHI; fy tamen leguntury fed forth non GENERALltER, e Ibid, ad Marg. cdit.Paris. I $10. Biblia habetaliquos Lihos APOCRTPHOS. f Dricdo. dc dogm. Eccl. I.i. c.4. ad p. dif- ficult. Nee admhtenda eft Olojfa Juris Canonici, quando dicity Hos libm ejfe Apocryphos, quia fcripti funt per incertum Authorem. Nam hoc tnodo alii quoque Libri Apocryphi dicerentur, qui Sacri funt ^ Cam^ itici. Non eft en'tm certum de Libro Job^ hqm Scriptus fuerit. Nee Author Judicum cognofcitur^ quern M Smuelettti alii Extch, alii E:(ratn ejfe volunt, g Andrad. DcfcnK Fid. Trid. Jib. 3. Similia li)li)Ct cum Driedojie,

excellentius fecit b Greg. XIII. Vix- fat. in Dccret. Gr# Veteres Olo^arum Art- iboresy viri Pit et Ca- ibolicifiterunt. € Ccnforcs Cardinal, praemonit. ad Left or, siuodadOloffasperti- ret, ilU Pios fy Ca- tbolices AuHores ha- iuerunt.

the Canon of the Scripture.

173

* GIofTa, ubi fopr^.

Inter Apocrypha^ id efiy fingCERTO Au- thored

to apply that * uncertainty to the fimple and bare Names of the Authors^ but to their condition and qua- lity 5 becaufe the Church was not certain^ whether they that wrote thefe later and controverted BockSj had the infpiration oiGods Spirit to guide them^ as we are fure the JVriters of the Canonical Bookes of Scripture had ^ who ever they were that penn'd them. For thus are we taught to undcrftand them, both by d the Ordinary Glojje before, and by c othe^ DoUors of the Church hereafter.

CXLI, Little re afon is there in this Exception^ that Driedo and Andradius took againft i'f/w^r^ ; but the reafon that the Gregorian and Cardinal Cenfurers of bis GloJJe^ have given againft him., is much worfe. For they have nothing elfe to fay, a but that the Councel of Trent hath decreed to make thefe Books ^ Cano- nical^ which he and the Confent of the Church in his time accompted to be Apocryphal. Of the Qo^ncel at Trent we {ball fay enough when we come in order to it hereafter. In the mean while there was no fuch Decree^ or Councel in Semecas Age, who proposed the Common and Received DoBrine ot nis ovm time.

CXLII. There was yet another Pc^oy- in this Age, AnnoDotHi among the Schoolmen^ that wrote a Book-^ which he intitled The CathoUcon. A Book which is not now ex- tant, but mentioned by ^ Antoninus -^ and c six- tus Senenfis telleth us, that his name was JOHN BALBUS an Italian, and one of the Preaching Friers, In this Booky though he diftinguiflieth wefi between ^ Trvo Sovts^ oi Apocryphal iVritings^ among which, he holdeth thofe that be in the Bible to be the beft 5 yet he lets them ftand there with that

d Glofla ordin. fii'- pra.

e Toftatus & alii in- fia.

a Cenfores Grcgc* riani in ilia verba Glofla toris. Dift.i^. Sluimml tlli Librinon funt Apocryphi, fed Canmci, utcHnq',Ca-> tholici de Us dubiu» bant. SicenmConciL Trident. Sef 4. defi* tiJvit,

1290.

b Antonin. Paft. 31

Tlr.ip.c.5.

c Sixt. Scncnf, Bib*

lioth. Iib.4>

d Antonin.Sum.fu* prSlcitata, Etdknnr Vuplkher Liber Apo- eryphujivelqui^AX'

tbw jgnoratur, 6* Veritas pAtet, ^ talemrecipitEcclefiaNON AD FIOEl PROBATlONEMt fed

AD MOKVM mStKVCtJOKEM'^ quales funt Q^OS POUIT HIEROKTMVS IN PRO.

LOao fuper Lib. Return : vel dkitur ApocryphHs, qujk de ejus veritate dubitatufy iyuUsiunmi^

^itMccUfia^ n^ichCatbolkoti,

Namey,

174-

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

Name^ and this Mark^ upon them, «« That the Church ^^ receives them not for any proof oi our Faith ^ but for ^«the wfiruBion of our Life. To which purpofehe produceth S.Hieromes Prologue upon the Ktngs j which was then the general known %ule for the True Cmon of Scripture^ and approved by all Men, in their fub-- lick LeBures , both Schoolmen and Camnifls.

Chap. XV.

The Tejlimonies of the Eccle/Iajiicall Winters in the Fourteenth Century.

CXLIIL yr jir 'irE will begin this jige with one \J \/ of the greek pyriters^' the bet- ▼ ▼ ter to fliew the Agreement ^ which in this particular was Still commedhctwcQn the Oriental and the Occidental Churches, Andronicus the£WerwasnowEmperour of the £^/ j and under him lived NICEPHORUS CALLISTUS , a known writer^ though not greatly commended for his Hijlory ; but the Teftimonie that we now produce from him, is attefted ^ hy SiVoBor oi Salamanca in Spain ; wherein he numbreth i\\q Books oi Scripture^ that the ^ Church acknowledged in his time ; and thofe of the OldTeflament he c reckoneth to be XXII ; taking notice oithem^ (but not approving them j that receive * E^her^ Tobit^ and Judith into the Bible^ over

VI viw TA ^tChU Thi /mV 7itLK(UA< ^(HV HM^ Jvo. Nhhc ciifce Scripiurklibrt qui fint Sdcr^j A«- ttqUdVigintifyduosfibixindicat. H^anTivin^^^cc. Et quiim tnumerSJfet^'KKm 9 Tvuiz^y vlf nffitfiJjf cc/TttK Fo^r, f^icqui<iextr^hoseilScrrpttir<iiyefifpumm. '^ Vidcfupra. Nura.s5.

and

Anno Dom. 1300.

potypJib.i.c,7.A^ ram tamen duo Ep'u grammata Nictphori Callifli, in quibus u- trmfque Infirumenti Libros hreviter colli- git i ex KaTjanxjino defumpta.

b Idem, ibid. IntzUi- gt Libros quibus Nice- phori £tate EccUfta, auHoritatm tribuebaf. c Niccph. Callift.

the Canon of the Scripture,

'7S

I

and bcfides the legitimate Number of Hiftoricall ^oc/t/thcrcj vvhercoihe * accomptcth but XII, toge- ther wich V Poetical^ and V Propbetical^ concluding, that all the reft are no genuine Scriptures. And there was never yet any of the Greek Church that laid other- wife.

CXLIV. In Sicily at a this time JOHANNES de COLUMN A was Arch-Bifhop oi Mtfsina, the Author of the 500^5 that iscalled, ^ The SeaofHifto- ries. ^Vhere all the Six Apocryphal Bocks arc named, and faid ^ ^^ not to le numhred within the Cauon of ^^ Divine Scriptures^ though otherwife /^//ch?^^ by the Church. And this AUovpance of them he maketh to be, ^ " for Edification in good Life and Manners, be- « ing in the mean while infufficient for the %e[olution " ot any doubts mmatters of faith.

CXLV. BRITO rfo called either by his Name, or by his Nation,) a Frier Minorite of thofe dayes, is mentioned with fome honour by ^ Lira , to have written before him an Rxpofition of S. Jeromes Pro- logues upon the Bible • (which was heretofore wont to be printed, and joyn'd to the Ordinary (jlofje , though the latter Editions have now left it out^)where- in he followed the lame Do6lrine that S.J^/o^w^ did, f defending the 5ry//;/-i5/r^5 againftthofeMen, ^^that '^ brought in any Apocryphal Book^ and made it Hagio- graphal, Again^ in his Prologue upon Tobit, he cor- refteth the g word that was mifwrittcn there, be- ^^ caule that ^ This Book was not Canonical, nor any '^ elfe befides^ which was not in Saint Jeromes Number. In his Prologue upon Judith he produceth, and commendeth the ^ words of P. Comeftor, before

S^i alh litera habet Apncypha quod tnAim efl. h Ibid. Qjih HUrcnjmUi JNOMCIS , imtr quos ISJE NONf EST, infert , Qujcqmcl (xtrh hi efl egm^uHtuu i V i dc n am . fu p. de vitio Scriptorif*

citeda

^ '1

funt gemma Seriptura Hi^orica,

Jn. T>om.

d GeRcbrard.Chron. Iib.4.

b La mer det Hijfoi- reS} according to the French Vcrficn. c Ib.a.vol.d.Aage. Chap. I ? .

d Ibid. V^Dl.i.Aage 4. Chap. I .

1512.

e Lira 2. in poftil" Prol. Omiffis Proh- gisy aPrJncipJo Qtne- feos incip'iaw — -quia nunc alius frater Bru to, de ordine nsQro, P/ologos Bib I. valdh- fuficienter expefuit , quod opus babetur communiter^ f Brico, Prol.in Jof. & sd Prol Gal. ftic def<hdit S, Scriptu- ram contra iffos, qui inducunt APOCRT- PHA pro HAGIO- GRAF HIS. g Idem, Pr. in Tob. verb. Hagiographa. , mmcratis Libris CA^ inter APOCRTPfiX'.

i7d

A Scholajiical Hijlory of

cited. And in his Prologue upon the Maccahes^ he re- quireth it to be k efpecially noted^ « That the[e Books '^are not in the Canon of Scripture^ though they " be fublickly read by the Confiitution of the %Qman " Church.

CXLVI. But the Commentaries of NICHOLAS Anno Dom. LIRA upon the n>hole Bible were at this time in the

It Id.adProl.inLib.

Libri Maccab. KON SVNT DE CANO- UEj hguntur tmtn in Ecclefiis fer Con- ftitutmem Romandi Ecclefia,

1320,

greateft vogue and credit of all other. 1 Trithemius thought him to be an Englifh mm^ but he was »" born at Lira in Brahanty from whence he had his V^me^ and where he wa^ converted from Judaifme to chri- fliamtyyandbccamc Si Frier Minor. Of him, we have not only the Confeffion of " Canus^ o Fererius, and P SerariuSy " that his Tefiimony maketh clearly for us, but the acknowledgement of 4 F. Leander^(\vho lately Jet him forthj ^^ that herein he was plainly averfe from ^^ the judgement, and the Senfe of the prefent (Triden- ^^ tine) Roman Church. For in his Preface upon the Book oi Tobit having faid, ^ '^ That by the favour of God ^^aflifting him, he had already written upon^Z^^fc^ " Canonicdl Books of Scripture from the beginning of '' genefis to the end of the %evelation ; he declareth " his further intention now to write upon thofe Bocks " alfo that were not Canonical , naming them every " one , wifdom , Ecclefiafticus^ Judith-, Tobit^ and the cf Miiccabes 5 and diftinguifhing them from the other by thefe Two "Uptes^ ^ " That the Canonical Books are ^' not only before them in Time^ but in Dignity and " Authority ; thefe, ^ that are not in the C^non-^ be- " ing received into the Churchy to be there read for

i TrUh€m.dc Scrip- tor.

inEpiwphiumLlra- ni. Cm vtteris per- humam dabat Brd- banm Litdt. cognomen: Ltrh nam fun urbe fitut.

n Canus Loc. 1. 2. c. lo.&ii.Arg.^. 0 Pcrcr Jn Dan. lib.

16.

p Serar, Prolog, m

Tob. & Judith.

5 Lcand.de S.Mar-

tinopraEfat.dtat. Li'

rams h commmi Ec-

clefts noSrd (hodi-

cmae fcilicet Ponti-

ficix , Tridcntino

Cencilio rcccntio-

ris) Senfn difceditin

Lib) is Canonicis re-

anfindis.

r Liran. prafat. in

Libr. TobiSB- Pofl'

qu^m auxiliante Veo

fcripft fuper libres S.

ScripmA CANONICOS^ incipiendo ^pmcipioGeneftos, (^ procedendo ufque ad finem Apocalypfcos'y

de ejufdem conffus auxiljo fuper ALTOS intendo fcribere QVI NON SVNT DE CANONE, fci^

licet. Sap, Ecclcftdflicus, Judith^ tobit^ ^ MACcabmrnm, f Ibid. Veritas fcript a in UbrtsCano^

ticis prior eji tempore, <ly Aigrxnaxcy quantum ad omnia, quhm ftt ilkqudifcribitur in\^on-Canonicis»

t Ibid. Libri, qui nonfui-.t de Ca'ioncy receptifuntab Eccleiia^ ut ad Moruminformationemin £i 7^-

gmiuT j tamin Enum a^jlhritas adprobandum ea^ qua in Contenuonem veniunt, miniis idonea reputatur,

ut dicit HieronytTiUs ', proper quod funt minor is efficaciaj quhi Libri Canonici,

Mens

the Canon of the Script tire.

177

c ihid^LibriS.Seri* ptHr£, qui CANOm- CI mincupaaturj tanu fmt auSoriutis, quod qukquid ibi contine' tur, VERVMttnem FIRMIUR^i^ IN-

«^Mcns JnjirMim in mmriers ^ not forany ^i?^^//]/i?;- <^ ment of their Faith 5 whereas c the other be the ^^ prime frincij)les of our Religion^ and contain nothing «c in them , but what is frmly and imlifcufsiuelj True. To. this difcourfe he referreth again in his Preface before the Book of mfdow. And beginning to write mscvssE, Nm upon Ezra^hQ^ expreflcth himfelt yet more cleerly, ficHmScripturism' « and paffeth by the Hiftories of Tobit, Judhh, and Igt'^^t'X- " the LMaccabes^ becaufe they be rM in the Canon of n?m ad prima cc Scripture either with the Jews^ or with the CHRI- ^sV^mtA' //h STIANS J then whichj nothing can be faid more fully scripturu icMt againllthe Common evafion of our Trent-Canonifls. ^\^ DoSmbus tradi-

° •* f tu verjtds fognofdtur

qvantkm ad ea qu£ funt FIDE tenenddj per reduWonem ad Scriptural S, Scripma CANONIC AS, qu£ funt hahitA h REVELATIONE DlVlNA, cut nuUo modo falfum pote^ fubejfe. d Idem, in I . Ezras cap. i . Libros autem tobis^ Judith , ^ Miccab . Itctt fint hiftoriales, tamen iniendo eas ad prat^ fenspertranfire, quia nmfum de CANONE apud JudAOSy ntc apud CHRISTIA NOS, Imo de ipfts dicit Hieronymur, quod inter APOCRTPHA cotnputantur.

CXLVII. In Sngland at this time lived WILLI- AM OCCHAM5 the Difcipleof SCOTUS, and a

Student of Merton CoUedge in Oxford^ much magni- fied by all Men, and accompted the moft ^ profound and Learned DoBor of his Age, Who in his Dialogues^ ^ ^^acknowledging that %fverence and Honour to he cujus Dodinmtani ^^due only to the Divine jvr iters oi Scripture, whereby ^^<^^,^^^<irioYem fie- «^ we believe them, to have b^^n free from all Error^ b Gui.occham.Dia fubfcribeth to the Dodrine of 5. Jerome in his Pro- logues^ and of 5. Gregory in his Morals^ « that neither ^^Judithy nor Tohit^ nor the Maccahes^ nor mfdom^ ««nor Ecclefiaflicus are to be T^r^/x/f'^ into any fuch ^^ height of honour j for that the Church doth not number ^^them among the Canonical Scriptures. And after- wards he c leaveth them rasi/^^?oand/^/V/;^r^«f of 'i\2T^olZ.

S.FiBor's did) " to be ranged among the £x/>op/V;5 inMordibus, ubri «'of Billjops and other DoBors of the Church. . clt%2fi%k^^^

Sapi€ntia,nonfuntredpiendiadc(infrmandumALIQVID IN FIDE. Dicit enim Hieronymusy ficui'^ Gregoriusy Jud. Ttb. ^ Maccab. libros legit quidtm Eiclefia , fed inter Canonicas Scripturas non rC' cipit, c Ibid. Sed ifyr Expofitiones Epifcoporurn^ (fy Aliorum qui futrunt pnji ScriptorfJ Canonicarttm Sctipturarum nonfunt ma'pris ftn^oriidtis quam Lihipradi^i,

A a CXLVII.

u^nno Dom. 1330.

a Bicl.in4. dift.14. q. 2. arc, 5. Gul. Oc- chamus profundifflmus veritatis indagattr -,

log. part. 9. Trad. I. 1.3. cap, J 6. Securt" dum Augujiinum SO^ LIS Scriptoribus Bibl, deferendus efl hie r- mret honor, Nul/i de- fir endus eft POST IPSOS. Secundum Hieronymum etiam in rium

yg A Scholajlical Htjlorj of

1

An.Dom.1^^0. CXLVIII. HERV.EUS NATALIS BRITO, (of

6 Herv.Natal. Brito Little Bntannie inFrance^) iht General oit\-\Q,T reach-

inEp.s.Pauii,(Com. i^q Qy^ier at thsLt timc. was aiiothcn "Who ^ be-

inferto.)adRom.3.i. " lievcd m S cn f t ur es lo bo, tr ulj Cmontcaly or ot D/-

jVai cret/imKJ Ker4i cc<^/^^ Authority ^ fas pertaining to the ^yy?7>j?^wf;2^5J

g{rff J^iD^^^^J- " but thofe which the Hebrews, (to whom the Ora-

ievunt nobis i ^ a « cles of God Were committed, ) have delivered unto

vuUa. alU gente Libros ^c yg

KitATis recepimus. CXLIX. The reft of the Schoolme/; who Wkcwik

AnnoDom, wrote their Commentaries upon the Scriptures, mahi

I -^ < O. ^^ profeffed, or particular difcourfe, concerning this

^^ * Matter. But we have no rcafonj (and none can be

brought^) to think, they weie ot any other judgement

herein then their fellowes.^

Chap, XVL

The Teftimonies of the Eccle/ia/iicall iFriters in the Fifteenth Qenturj.

An. Dom. ^L- '^'^ ^^^^^g^^^'^^^go( this Century, TilObA AS

I Surnamed ANGLICUS, (being born and

I^OO.. Abrought up in thQ Church of England,) was

numbred among the D/r/W/of his own time, for a

Man fo grave and found in his judgement, and of

fuch an excellent fpirit, that in latter Ages a he hath

4SiKc.Sencnf.Bibl "been taken tobethe^TNTG'fZ./C^L Do^oy, that is,

lib.4« Thom£Angiici i< jljomas Aquinos himfelf, upon whom his followers

'Z'^^c^a^^ beftow^d that Title. In his Commentaries upon the

V. 7homJi h cui ciim

honoris cansa tributum ejfet Angelid c*gmmen, (fy- magna tffet inter Anglicum fy Angelicum vocit fmi -

Imdo ; paulatim efft^Htn ffly ui per incuriam fy morm JnomA Anglkifcriptay Ihoma Angelid tiiulo

Revelaiion

the Canon of the Scripture. lyp

Revelaion he ^ numbreth the Books oi iho. Old Te- b Thom. Angi. in

jlament (as others had done before him,) to be XXIV, fZTxxlv! fi^Itb

« if the Book of Ruth be reckoned afan from the mn computltur cum

c^ Judges y and the Lamentations irom Jeremie -^ buto- ^^^^ J^dicm, fed

cither wife 3 if they be compted together ^ he makes libr^' JeremU^ ^"^sl

c^ the whole number to be but XXII. ^n^"» ^^^ uiu ccwpu.

tentur , 720/1 funt nifi XXII. ficut dicit B. Hkronymut in Pmogofuper Libros Ktgum,

CLI. About the fame time 5 lived in England J^ ^nvpt THOMAS of WALDEN, the ?roi;/W^/ of the ^^r- ^ ^^- ^^^^ fneliteSy and a Writer of very great reputation, not lAlO.

long after the Councel held at Conftance. For his Books a Breve Apojf. Mur* were ^ approved by Bope Martin the Fifth, and al- {j;' J"- ^'"". 5, taaw. ledged b with high commendations in the Co///^^^/ of St/' ^'''''"''''' ^^/// 5 which maketh his Testimony to be the leffe ^ 7<?^. de Rasufia , fubjed to EXf f/^r/o;^ ; « When in the fame Bo«?/^5 c he ToBafiifenff'"^'""' cf acknowledgeth no more then Tm and Twenty Vo- c Thom! wald. Do- «c ////w^; of "Divine Scripture to be oi Canonical Autho- |?rJnal,fid. Tom. i^ mj, conformably to S. Jerome in his Prologue^ that piJig^sfciil^tVcl was placed before all their ^/^/^/. cujdi future xxn

volumina in Scripturt & kuliaritate CANONICAyfecundhmquodreutatJuper Lib.Kcgum Prologo Galeato Wersnymw^

CLIL There was at this time in Spain^ a Jeiv ^ of j ct)

great Nobility and Learning, converted to Chriftian -^^* J-yOm.

Religon-y who for his excellent worth both in piety, I4-20.

knowledge, and probity, was firft made Bijhop there ^ j^ ^TL/c Re

of Carthagena^2indi afterwards oi Burgos^ from whence busHifpjib.ip.cS,

he had his Name oi PAULUS BURGENSIS. This ^z^^''^^' A"T^''

Bifhops Notes e upon the Bme are printed together fastis Ubm edidit

with the Ordinary Glojje^ and the Commentaries oiLira^ mirandos ; erat enim

whom though he made it his bufine(s there in many llif^^J^^^^^^^^

places to ^ contradiB 'j Yet finding fault g with 0- narumLiterarumcog.

ther matters, he blames him not at all in this, that ^S^S;/^^^

pifcoiut Burgenffs creams eQ, Id probitath, erudhhnifqne pramium fuU, {^c, e S. Biblia, cum Gloffd ordhmU. Gomment. Lirani, ir Additimibus Pauli Burgenfts, ^c. / Vt patet in eifd, Addi- thnibus. g Lud. Carvajala de Reftitura Theologia. Keq\ minorem admirationem mihipr^bet Bur- gmfu, qui cum r^w/fd minutiora f^pe notet in KicoUo Lirano, hie tamtn MVTVScJff quuminvenilfti JHlaminvebsndi^dccafmem.fyc,

Aa 2 con-

i8o

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

i Bnrg.Addic. i.ad cap. I. Efter. U^d autem habeiur i^.cap* ubidicmr^ ife bono- rem Bet mei trance- ram ad bominem^ {yc^

concern'd the di^in'tMon (fo often infifted on by Lira") between the Canonical and the Apcryphal Books of Saipture 5 as certainly he would have done^ if there had been no fuch difimBio/j then received in the ChurcK But he was fo far from it, that in ^ divers of his Notes hekeepethupthe pw^^/^/V^a^/^^^himfelfj and « rejedeth thofe Books from the Cam/2y which the vuU icgar Latin had annexed to the Hebrew Text-^ and which the New Decree at Trent hath fince commanded

non efl tenendum tan- , . , j \ r 1 ^ 1 -

qu^mAutfmticiim.et to hc received^ and made oieq^ual Amhoritj^ otvene^

in Scripma CANO- y^^tion with it.,

i^ICAcontmum»Kon , . .^ , ^ ^ , . •,/••,.

enim habetur ab Hebrats de iffo Libro mfi tanium ufqut addeamum cap. mcluftviAten)^ m cap.7. ^d

in hoc Libro continetur pofl decimum cafut, non tU de LibrU Canonicisy nee recipitur ab HebrAU,

CLIII. And now we are come to the time of the pretended COUNCEL at PLORENCE s where a Becmus the Jefuite imagined, ^^ that he law Top " GeUfius (alnioft a thoufand years after he was deadly " reaching forth the Trent Canon (more then a hundred eUium ^^"^^^^ijj^lff^ ^^ years before it was horn^)x.o Pope Euoenius the Fourth. «#....* r,_ ^^^ vvhich is the only CounceJ^ that » Canus^ and ma-

ny others (for Cardinal c Bellarminei^t^kshMi faintly of it^ have to bring againft us, between Trent and Carthage^ for the fpace oi Eleven hundred and forty years together. For the better difcovering of whofe vanity herein, (^and in fome other matters befides) it will not be amilie to look into the true Story of this preten- ded Councel of Florence:, and briefly to fet it forth. .

CLIV. In the Eighteenth yeer of this Century the Councel o{ Conftance ended. Wherein, (after the La- tin Church had, for Forty years together, been rent afunder into divers Fa£i:ions, by the oppofition and fchifm of fundry Popes^^ that had fet themfelves up, one againft another,) a Decree was made , « That all ^^ perj'ons^ of what ^ate or dignity foever they were^ (though «^ it were the Papal dignity itfelf) ought to le (ubjeB ^fxxnio a General Councel^ and to obey u in all things,

that

t/inno Bom. H39'

M Becan. Man. Con- trov.Ub.i«cap.i,q.i. b C anus toe A. 2. c,i I Sca,Ad Tertiu Con

Fhrentinum, fytri dentfnum bos Libros tanquam facros Eccle- fiA tradidtrunt. c Bcllarm.dcvcrbo Dci,l.i.G,4.&c.io. Scft. Primum. Alii vcro plurimi pafTim citant Concilium Flo- 9intimmj in InfUtnti- $ne Armmomm,

Ibt Brief Hiflory 0/ %be Counc.of Florence, a Concil.Conft Self. 4. Sancitumejl^Qeve' j4li Concilio qutm libit , cu]ufcmque ^aius vel dignitatfSi etiamfi Papalis, exi- fiat, teneri obedire in his qua pertinent ad fdem-, extirpationem Schifmatii, ^ Refn- muonem Ecclefia,

the Canon of the Scripture. igi

<^ that concerned either Matter ofFaithy or SxtirpAtion ^^ofSchifme^ or Reformation of the Church. Three^^wlx) pretended to he all Popes of Rome s^t once j being there depoiedj Martin the V^^ was by that Couacel fur- rogated, and taken into their place. There was ano- ther t» Decree like wife made for the more frequent ^^^^^•}9' PrimmA holding of fuch general Comcels:, in time to come, qlUZmTsllnZ ^' One to btgmfiJe years after this founcel of Con fiance <^« ^f^e iUm in sepj "was ended, a Second at the end of p^./. years fol- TCLtie"i^il ^^ lowing 3 and afterwards every tenth year bcfides. cehbumur. According to which Decree, the c City oi Pavia^ wv»^/ ot «m %^''' in the Duchie of MiUain , was by the nei^ Pofe^, with /^rTJmejSrS- the approbation o( the Emper our Sigifmund^ appoin- ^^f- ted for the place where the next Councel fliould be E^StaTai^^^^ held. And there at the term allotted it began ; but iis.Epiii,ad£«^en.4. ^fter a while, upon certain Reafons, it was remo- 1^5". ^IT ^"f;^. %Qa to Stena ; and a Decree was there made tor the Confiammfu quin^ celebration of the next appointed Councel^ at the end 9^^nniQeiapfo ceUbra- of Seven years following, to be kept in the City ofBa^ Tne!fn&fhuj!^ fil : d To which purpofe they cauled a Solemn Jnfiru- fint ehpfo Septenm went:, with the confent of ^// F^r^/Vj, to be drawn up ^^S^r 'rlf'^Ir'^^ in writings anapgnea, vv hat ellc was done at Pavta or Sienay we have no Adts extant to teflifie. But that ^ j^^ j^y^^^ ^ l^^ affoon as the Councel wasmetatJ^^j//, they began to adEugen. Dkebantl {peak oi Reformation^ and faid, ^ that at the Councel of f[^^^nddixjiii futa Stena they were all deluded, Eugemusx\-\e\y^^\v2isnoyj mus delvsi in Pope^ Siud Julian the Cardinal was his Deputie at Bajit. comiuosENEN^ But hearing from thence, that they all talked of i^^- /^Georg.phranza in formation , and being terrified with the Example^ that in chron.Ub.2, c.15. riie Councel oi Constance had lately before given of it, ^Jni^icrln^BafUA he fent forth his BuU^ and went about to ^/^o/'U^ this colgrt^til^dlfidtm^^^ Councel oi Bafiljoeiote it was well begun. On the other fintenuu contra £«- fide, they that were met, openly refifled the Bui/, f;;r^irS and denied that the Pope had any fuch Authority over kmnt pmijicem m- the Councel ; urging; the Decree made at Confiance. that ^{"^ Ftiicnn,vmm the Councel rather had Authority over him 3 ^ and prmsprobrntis.

there-

i8t

A Scholajikal Hijlorj of

thereupon when he grew RefraBary againft them, and would not revoke his Bull ^ they depofedhim^ andfub- ftituted Amedeus^ the Duke oisaojoy^ in his room, by the name of FELIX the V^h. So, there were Tm Popes together again at once.

CLV. In the mean while, the Empire oi the Ea^ lay a bleeding, and the Greeks being not able to re- fiit the greatnefle of the Turkish Forces^ then brought againft them, they began to leek for help and relief from thefe JVe^ern parts. Eugenius being defirous to free himfelf from the oppolition and troubles, that the Council at Ba[iI had brought upon him, and fup- pofmg that the prelent diftreife, whereinto the Ea^ jiern Empire was now fallen, would be a fair occafion to bring the Greek Church under his own Papal Bomim- on J b inviteth ^ the Smperour to come into Italj^ and to bring his Greek Bifhops with him to a Councel there, that fhould be caird, and held at E err aria 5 where if an Vnion might be firft made between the Latin Churchy and Theirs^ he promis'd them large a[sijlance againft the Turks^ from all parts of thefe fr(?/?fr;2P5- minions^ and the Smpire of Germany, The Councel of Bafil likewife ^ invited them to come thither, that there might be an Agreement made in all matters of Religion, wherein they diffented from the Occiden- tal Churches^ and that the "Princes of the Empire might be the rather ftirr'd up to^^rfthem. T^Mt the Greek Emperour having had hisj/r/ invitation and prom ife from the Pope^ and being t> more willing to take the offer of the nearer ayd, that was made him in Italy-y

dd Se traherf', ut Res

Bafiled inchoata majoris ejftt ponderis', parat^qne fuerant "Naves in Narbonenfi Gallia apudMajJiliam, qudi turn ex Gr^cia depntarent. b Item, Antonin. Sum. Hi ft. Tit. 22 . cap. 1 1 . Congregnti Baft- led-, pojl dijfolutionem ^ irritatiorjem fa^am Cenciliiper Eugenium non depSebant ^ profecutione incep' tiffed folliciti invitabaniGrxcosBafileam ad Concilium id accedere. b Ibid, Pr^alHlttmenatt' Uritas EHgenii cumfuafmibM$ plurimQrum, m adprxftntiamfHmfe conftrrent,

then

b Ih'id. Pontifexigi' tur Eugenius triremes intuit, fy Johannem By^antii Kegem ac- cerfebat. Concilium e- nimfubfeagitari vo- lebat.

* Johannes PdUolo- ins.

a Sabclli<:. Enncad. 10. lib.3. Fuerat id negotium per Legator motHm^Manim adhuc fedente. Tentavit Baft- Uenfe Concilinm Pa- leologum magnisf&lli' citationtbus pelleSum

the Canon of the Scripture.

i8,

trhrchh, Epjfioph, ^ tnagno commitatu nu^ mm quingentoru Con^ ^aniinopoli fs moveti'" Us J Venetias Mpplku- ere,

a Sabcllic loco. dr. Fofcarusprineeps eum honorifictmifime ex- ctpit.ExVtnetiislm- perator Ferraria pro- cejfit, quh Pont'} f ex ex

then the other , which was further off, excufed him- c ibid, imperator 6* felfe to the meflcngers that were fent from the Coumel {7/rt^;,l^"i^',T!^-/i! at Bajil ^ and came to Venice^ c Ue and his ^/o^/^^y- with him 3 befides the Patriarch o( Conftaraimple^ to- gether with many other B/jibo/;5 , and aTrai^oi five Hundred followers. At V^enice a they were hon- orably received ^ and from thence conveyed to F^r- rara>^ whether the Fope had Summoned his New Councel^ and was there ready to entertain their Com- ming.

CLVI. At the Councel in Ferrara they had xn ^"^nonu femtuitVau Sessions 5 and at FLORENCE C to which place^ by reafon of the Peflilence in Ferrara^ they were forced to remove J they had IX. In all thefe 5.^/5/o;^5 little or nothing elfe was done , but that they fpent the whole time in difputing with the Greek Bifhops about « the Addition of FILIOQUE to the CREED, and <^ the PROCESSION of the HOLY GHOST from ^^ the Father and the SONNE ^ wherein nevertheleffe not any thing was as yet concluded. In the mean while the Greeks were in great peril at home, to be over-run and utterly fpoiled by the Turks^ who in the abfence of the Emperoury had ^ taken a Refolution to befiege the City of Conflaminople^ being then al- ready in great diftrefTe, and altogether unable to lefifl them, without ipeedy and prefent fuccour. Where- upon c Letters were fent to Florence^ d to inform the Emperour in what extream danger they ftood, and to prelTe him unto a timely union with the Pope and the Latin Church:, from whom they expected help^, upon ^ %c\\^it Grcgor. any terms. After all the former altercations there- Schoiarii mtr AOa fore about the SYMBOLE3 and the PROCESSION, f-^lf^"'' wr

-'a Phranza, ubi fu- pra. Miltunt Procerts in ItilUm, qui Impentori indicium fac'tant^ quhrn ancipites cogitationtSi ^fluBus curarum ingentes erant Conflantinopoli', quodque nulla alia falutis vii fitpererat, quamut exunienefa^SicumLatinis, 4«xi- lia ah tis mittereniur. Si en'm non adejfet advent itiumfub ft dium (cipivvifX^a^y trw[xfjiAyiai)n^. pimum qkidem Hofiis impetum ferrcpctuerunt.

at

b Phwnza loco dm: Ammathes mi f sis Co- pits Conflantinopilin oppugmre conftituit^

84.

A Scholajiical Hijlorj of

*^eoHi:.fer.''S(A ^t length there was upon the fuddain, * kn abrupt

s$. Tunc Rumui ir e Agreement made in the Councel, concernins thofe

KiXt^ Tm Points, whereof they had fo long difputeil, and

runtqueMi; En Sere- Ttpo more be{idcSy which were the Two Points:, of Pur-

^ffimujimpemorcm' gatory 5 and the Pnmac) f oitYicPopeofT^jme. And

^dcun^t \uA X"«Ti- ^hele were the Heads whereof that fuddain union con-

iudo po^uiavit, ^ nos fifted, though ^ lome of the greek Bifhops made their

rjU'^rX" Proteftations there againft it^ and it lafted not long,

LAQVE ALIA dc But concemittg the Camn of Scripture there was not a

CAVSA rehaarim- ^^j. J {poken.

lumus, mft ut Res *

quXmClTlSSWE abfohmr : fy ft quid erat Nobis dicendum, prdtemifmus, quia triremes VeneU

CITO funtfoluturdt, e Literse llnionis ab Eugenia promnlgataj, in eonc, Flor. f Viz. fuxta

Canines di^a Sanfforum iy Sacram Sciipturam 6* non aliter* Vide Cone. Flor. Scff.as. vcrfos finem.

* MarcEphefms,

CLVII. The a Archbishop oi Florence^ who was

prcfent at this Councel^ rcciteth the Popes Letters to

the iame purpofe 5 and of the ^/^/o;? there made^ we

are no otherwife inform'd. Some other Difputations

and Differences had pafs'd there between them ^ but

in the end 5 upon condition that the Greek Church

would acknowledge ^ firft their Patriarch ofConBan-

tinople to he infer tour to the Pope of Rome '^ then^ that

there vpas a Purgatory after this life ^ (neither of which

nil de unione, fub- they wiU yet acknowledge to this day 5) and laftly,

P':J:iSonZ 'That the Holj Ghofi proceeded from the Father and the Son

Hmfm (licet ratio, (which they never abfolutely denied, j the Pope was

kSl' oMmUs ^O^"^^^^^^^ ^^ "^^^^ xhis further Accord with them,

fiuRmans)%rIci That they {hould without his offence be permitted,

fmruntpermifi marie- To celebrate the Eucharifl in leaVened Bread -^ to Baptize

Ze\fin%rZnwo] After their own accuflomed manner -^ to let their Prie^s

quod Baptizjr^t in afia live in lawful Matrimonj ; to let their Beards grow ; and

^kTnmi ftur %t '^^ S^'^^ ^^^ Communion unto allperfons in BOTH kindes 5

%us Dei 2V. in mmine together with many other things befidcs.

Pair is J itt Filii, (f<y

Spiritus Santii, Amen, Item, quod Ordirati in Sacrisutamur Mat) hnonio confra^o ante fnfaptionem ipforum ordinum Sacrorum. Item, quod nutriant Barbatn, Pew, qui ^ dent Sacrame^itum Euchariiiidi SVB VTR AQ:UE SFECIE Omnibus, ^ Mutta Alia.

CLVIII.

tf Anion! nus in Sum Hift^Ioco citato. Re citatis Literis Euge-

the Canon of the Scripture.

i^i

a Narratio Aftis Sy- nod! Florcncinx in- fer t4.

CL\'III. While thefe matters were in doing, there a came certain Legates to the Councel from the ? mi- arch of ARMENIA, and having faluted both the Tofe and the Emperour/iov in this order they are pla- ced in the uiEts oi this Sjno^ey) theyfaid, that their church agreed with the Church Caiholickj and that they would be willing to obferve the Decreeo^thc Cou/icel^ for which they were very much commended ; and when this was done, they and the Greeks together, de- parted from Florence. Among the ABs of the Synode^ there is an INSTRUCTION to the ARMENIANS, given them under the Name and Authority of T^oye Eugenius , and pre{cribing them the SEVEN SA- CRAMENTS according to the Rites of the Roman Church J with fome other things thereunto annexed. This INSTRUCTION is ^ Dated in the year c^, CCCCyXXXIX, X Kalend. of December. But the ^ Greeks and the Armenians with them, were gone from F/o- rence^ Five Moneths before ^ for they made c an end^ and departed in the Mf)neth oijuly. Which fo much pofeth the Author j ^ who colIecSed the Sessions of this Councel into a iliort Summary^ that he knoweth not how to reconcile the one to the or/?^/, but by faying, That either the Greeks and the (^Armenians tarryed longer (contrary to what he hadfaid before,) or that the Synod continued longer after they were gone , f whereof there are no ABs to be feen,) or at leaft, that fome other Synod was held at Florence^ (when ^ib/V was ended) in theMonethof2)<?ffw^^y, at what time the JD<?^r^eoftheP(?p(f is dated. Wherein £«^f- j^„,y/^^^^ ^^

d Apnd Surlum, fe BIniuniinuItim, cdit.Conciliorum. Poflfubfcriptiones (& difcejJionemGrdc, una cum Armenis) extat fub fnem Epi^ola qttadam Eugenti Papd de unionc Armenorum ^ Grtcorum cum Laiinis inita, qu&'que hoc eodem Anno Mtnfe Decembri in quadampublica Sejjione Synodali Florentu Uta (^fcrjpta hahetuy, Vnde necejfarih colligituTj autOfMot fy- Armenos hue ufque Ftountiapgrman^ ftffe ', vel^ quod probabilius e§iy tandem Sj/nodum.po^ abitum GrAcorum ^ Armenorum^ aliquot Seffioni^ bus J {quorum AHa nulla €Xtant,) continuatam j vdfaltem aliam quandamy ab hac Otcumenica Synoda diverfam^ eodem Anno 14^^. loCiknd. Decemb, (quodicfcrJptahabeturpr^di^aEu^eniiSynodica, Epifiola,) celebratam fuijfe,

B b nius

'^ Decretutti Eii|c- niiPapi4'. fivcln- ftruftio pro Airtlenis port Concil Florcnr. Datum Florentis in publ. Sef Synod. Ah. Dom. 1439. 10 C<- lend. Decemb. Anno Poniif. Eug p. b Compend. Self. Synod. Flor. apud Snrium 8e Binium. Legaii Armemru unk dm Gracis Fkrentidt difcefferunt An. Dom. J4^9'CinddJemmfn- fij Jklii 22. vet 2^, c Antonin. ubi (up, Eteo Anno 1439. in die Dominica Men ft s lalii celebrata eQ^^c* & faSaeftdiSAKi" conciliato.

i86

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

nius (if his "Decree be not rather counterfeit,) whatfo- ever he was pleas'd to (ay and to command befides, faith never a wordy all the while, concerning the Cano- nical Books of Scripture^ or in what number ^ one or other, they are to be received.

CLIX, In the large Tomet , and Editions of the CouncelSj which Crab^ Surius^ Nicolinus^ the J^atican^ and Binius have fet forth, there are in this P^ry^^ of Pope Eugenius but Eight <!y4rticles 5 nor did all a the X/^y'^/'/V5,whereinto they could make fcarch by thcm- felves, or others, afford them any more : Only ^ Ca- ranza^ and out of him Longus Coriolanus have in their Epitomes of the Councels given us isijne or Ten • (but in fuch an order and manner, as the Tm laft Articles given us in the larger VolumeSy are by ^fc^w omitted, & Three others fubftitutcd in their room,) the Seventh whereof (which is not at all found in the c Tomes cf the Councels neither) is an Extravagant concerning the Maniches ; from the naming of whom, occafion is there pretended to be takcrl*, of fetting down the «^ Books that pertain loth to ^ the OldandVjvp Teflamenty whereof a Catalogue is there likewife given us with all " the *^/x Apocryphal and debated Bocks in it, befides the « Canonical ^ and all faid to be mitten by the Holy Men ^^ofGod^ as they were infpired by the Holy Ghoft -^ and . ^ ^ " every one of them to be received by the Church.

quun funt , Qjiorum -^ -^ '

Likosfufciph 6" 'i^eneram EccJefia, qui Tiiulis fequentibus continentury Gen. Exod. ire 8? texitur.

Caulogus laxior, qualis ibAuguflino & Concilio Carthag. terth allatus fuic.

€ Canus in loc.Thc- CLX. And this (for footh) is the Canon of the Oecu- cl.ubi fupra. menicalCouncel oi Florence y that ^ Canus^ and ^ Beca-

nuSy and g many others bring againft us. For from Caranz^a they had it, and from no body elfe -y who it is moft likely had it from fome ImpoHor or other, that made this Decree of his own head, when there was no copy of the Councel to be found , that had the like. Though if it were true, all this that Caranz^a ad- ded

tf tetrns Crab in prima fua Editior.c FlHfquam QuingenW Bibliethecaspcrlu^ra- viper iiarias regiones, b A Dominican Fri- er, and ^Maries Confcffor in England after flic was marri- ed to K. Philip of Spain,

c Ubi habctur. Sep- timo, decretum mionis cum QrAciii istc in decrcto Eugtnii dc InftruStone AmtM- rum.

d Sum. Caranzae in decrct.y.Conc.Flo- xtni.Vnum atque tm' dem Deum V. is ^' Teji, profitemHr, Eo- dem Spiriiu infpirante SanSi Dei homines lo-

f Bccanus in Manu- al. Contr. ubi fupra. g Sixt.Seacn.lib.8. ha?r. ii.Aiph. 3lCa- ftrocont.h2Er,I.i.c.2. Andcad. dcf.Fidei. Trid. J.g.Harkm.iii Otal. libr. Canonic. %. ajultialii^

I

the Canon of the Scripture. 187

ded to it J yet in the fame fcnfe that S. nAu^in^ and ^

the Comcel of Carthagewere interpreted before, may thefe words of the Epitome be taken here. But in Epi- tomes of Coumels there ought not to be more , then is in the great and va^ Volumes of the Councels them- lelves, where no fuch thing is to be feen in all the/^- veral editions that have been printed of them. And as for the Councel of Florence it feif, the Story of it (which we have briefly and truly reprelcnted) hath made it manifeft, that it cannot be rightly accompted tohc a Generalor an Oecumenical Councely were it but in refpe(9: of the Latin Churches alone j whereof a great part remained at Bajil^ and acknowledged not either Sugenius or his Councel a,t Florence. Indeed they were called thither, but when ^ ;^o;^^ of them came, and i\\t Greeks began to be troubled at it, xhcPope faid, that where " He and the Emperour of the Eajfy " (without any notice taken of the fVeflern Emperour) <c with his Patriarch were met together j there needed no ^^ more to make a General Councel^ for all Chriflendome ^^ met in Them ; and no man believed otherwise. But who can here believe the Fope I fpecially, when the Councel at Bafd ^ condemned that at Florence^ for a Schifmatical Synagogue^ (as that at Florence did It) and with wor[e terms then thofe. But whatfoever either of thefe Two Synods did , or what ever it was that Pope Eugenius decreed , certain it is , that neither the Greek^not the Latin Church f before the Synod at Trent) ever obferved any fuch Decree^ or received all the Books of Scripture that Caranz»a reciteth, as equally y

a Afti in Concil. Florent. Proxime ante SeflT.i: Pr^flimum quatuor Menfium dilapfHtn e3 tern- pus, & nee Baffle Ji quifquam nee alkuh alius Italus venit, Curnqnt h nobis aliud fieri nonpojfet, res jpfa cogebat ccfebrari Synodum ad difputandum , abfentibus etiam iis qui Synodo interejfe debebant, AitbcLt enitn Pontifex , ubi Ego fum cum Imperatore {fr Patriarcba, ibiChrijiianorum omnium Syno- dus ejfe credituu b ]ac. Meycrus in Annalib. Flandr. Iib«i6. Bafileenfe ^ Fkrentium adek nihil comordJJi hubebant , ut utrumquc alterum Schifmaticum > Synagogamqxe Satand mminarct,

Bb 2 firiatyy j

88

J Scholajiical Htjlory of

K Cbalcondylat I. i Gr&ci domum uvcrji mn amplius hhy qu^ in Italia a^afutranU Han voltitrunt. Ve- mm Sententhm dt- 'verfam tenentes, nolu- trunt in Religmis negotio adh^rere Ro-

/n. T>om.

h S. Antontnns in Sum. hift. Tic, 22. Cii.Seft.i.

flriBly and properly Car^onical, For the Lati/,s (thofc that were of the chiefert name among them both thea and afier^) made no more accompt ofany/i^r^D^f- rr^ff (if any fuch were,) then the greeks did ot the pre- tended U^ion 'y who a aflbon as they were return'd, and got home to Con^mtinople 5 would ttand to no- thing y that their own [udclain fear 5 and the Popes perfipafons^ had 5 for the time, brought them torn Italy.

CLXI. Among the L4^//^5in this Age, that, not- withftanding this pretended Papal Decree at the Councel ot Florence y were of no iuch mind , as they that follow the Councel oiTre/n are now , firit of all We have ANTONINUS ; who knew, far better then Cfi^ranza did , what was done at Florence 'y\^j\\Q.XQ, he was ^^ prefent at divers ofthedifputations there held between the Greeks , and the Latins^ and being afterwards made Archbifhop of the fame P/^ff, was not long iince Sainted by Pope Adrian tlie 5/xr 5 which will make his Teftimonic the leffe lyable to their Exceptions that have fo grcatanEftimationofhim, And that He denyeth thofc Six Books now debated to be any p^rts 01 the Sacred and Canonical Scripture^ c Francifcus Picus^ and ^ Melchior Canus are both forced to confeffc. For otherwhiles in particular he denyeth ^ Some of them the honor and authority that the Canonical Scriptures have ; and otherwhiles in gencis^l he denyeth ^ afmuch to them all -y acknow- ledging no more then XXII Books of the Old Teftament (five canonicos) effe ^^ \^q ^Hthentick ^ not Only by the Accomptofthe rs! Antonin. Sum. Hebrews y but by the common judgment of the L^//«

hift.parti.Tit.3.c.4.

Impr.Lugd. ^i Liber (Ecclefiaflici) quamvisplenus fit morali Sapient}^, fy ideoab Ecckftarecep.' mad LEGENDVMi mn tamtn AVTffENUCVS efiad PR03ANDVM ea qfUveniuntinCon- untiontm FIDEL f Ibid. c. ^. Seft. 12. EtftcintoturnXXriponuntHtbrdiLibrosAuthenticos, Apocrypha appellant Librum Sapientia^ Ecclepaflicum, Tob. Jud. tf Maccab. Ecckfia famen etUmAPO- €R7PfiA reciph ut veraj mlit^ ((y moralja^ et ft in content tone Eorum qua fum FID El nonurgentk 4d argaendHm,

c Church,

c ]oh« Fran. PIcus de fide 8c ordinc crc- dendi Thcor. d Canus loc. Thcol. lib.2.cap.io&ii. At g,^» Antoninus ali- os fex Libras Sacros

the Canon of the Scripture.

i8p

« Idem Si'm Theo- iog. parr. ^.Tr. 18. c. 6 Se^.i J. I-i{br<id Seiundum NitronymU inProL.Gal.Ubrorum V. 1*. quatuor facimt Partes. Rt Primam

Church J for proof whereof ^ he produceth both S.

Je/oms Prologue^ which was then generally received^

and ihc'XQilimoniQS as wcWoi Thomas A(]uu/as^ as of

Nicolas Lira J who were then likewifc in great ac-

compt among them : and concludeth^ That thofe

Books,, which arc called ^/^orry/;/;/z// may peradven- appeiUnt'iegem-s'J*^

ture have the like Authoritie 5 that the writings of ^j^^dam Prgpheus-

other holy Doclors have , which be approved in the %aLmf(%1m^^^

Church I But more then this he doth not attribute to men mn pmnt if ft

i[\qq:] f^^br^ in Canone S.

Scriptmarum^ fed ap- pellant ^pocr}pha,J faciunt de aliis Cluinque Libris,fcilicet Sap. Eccl, Jud. Tob. ^ Maccab. qui in dues Libros dijWnfius e/?; Vnde ^ de bis Quinque Libris d cit Hitionymus in Prol.fupsr Judith j quod Auto- titas cornm adroborandailla^ qu^incontentionem veniunt, minut idoneajiidicatur.—Et idemetiam dicit 7hcnns 2a. xt c^r Nicolaus Lirafuper tob.Scilictt quoi ifti mnfunr tanu Au^oritaiis, quy ex dibits eo* rumpofjlt efficaciter argurr.entari , in his qu^funt £/D£I, ficT^t*. ex aliis Libris S. Serif turdi, Vndefoni babjnt I\u^hritattmtaUm,qua!emhabent LICtA S. DOCTQKV M approbata ab Ecdefia.

CLXII. Contemporary to Antoninus was AL- A, ^nm PHONSUS TOSTATUS5 theBilTiopof^uV^in ^^''* ^^^^^*

S^ai/i , and the moft learned perlon of all others that ^^^^^

lived in this Age ^ fo admired for his induftry^ and

knowledge in all ^aV/^r^^, but ipeciallyrn the 5'^r//?-

tures 5 that fince his time no man ever had a greater

Elogie then He 5 being ufually (tiled ^ The wonder

and Ajlonijhment of the mr Id, TheTeftimonieofthis

great Author is yielded to us both by b ^anus y and

c Serarius ^ But becaufe there is none that fetteth

forth our DoBrine in this Controverfie more fully

then he doth , we defire that he may be heard at

large. For in divers Places of his Coilimentaries he

reje^teth the six delated Books from being either

Authentic^ or Canonicall Scripture^, or fufticient to prove

any Article of our Faith ; ^ acknowledging that the

Church in his time did not command them to be yf-

^»W^ received s nor condemn any man of 2>//b^^^/-

a Mariana in Hift. Hifp Elogium Joflati, Hie Stupor efi Mmdi qui Seibile difiutit Omne.

b CanusIoc.TheoU lib.2.cap. 10. & II, Arg.^.Alph.TeftatHS hosfex Libras, Sacros ftvt Canonicoj effe in^ ficiatur,

c Scrar. Prol. j. in Tob. feprcloq.j.in Maccab.

d Toftar. prcfat.in-

S. Matth. q.i. Ont'

putatio noflracommn^

jiis eii, quod csmpit^

tentur Omnes Libriy

quotquot Ecclefia legit fyfufcipity cu)ufcunque Ordinis vel Canonis fint-HujiQ, 2. Aliifnnt Libriy {ptilr-

cet ab Ecclefia teneantur^ CANONE tamen nonponmtiir,quia non adhibet iUis Ecclefia banc fidemy nee jw-

iitillos REOVIARITER legt aut recipiy ^ non RECIPlENtES nonjudicat inobediemes aut infideUsi^

tnce

IpO

A SchoUJlical Hijlorj of

ence and infidelitie , ( as the Church of %ome doth

now, ) that received them not into ei^uiill Authoritic

^'*^^^^^^ and veneration with the reft oithcScripturef. And

Two Reafons ^ Firft^ be'cau(e the'cW^fc is not only uncertain who be the Authors oithefe Books ^ but knoweth not neither, whe- tlier they were written by the diftate and infpiration of the Holy Ghofl ^ which taketh away the Authoritie of the Car/on from them. ^ Secondly, becaufe the church is no leffe uncertain , whether there be not fomewhat mingled with thefe Books by Heretiquesy and more added to them then the firft writers of them ever intended. Whereupon he concludeth , <-' That the Church receiveth and permitteth them to be ready (as cur church now doth, ) for many devout paffa- chcT tales Libm, an ges in them, but obligeth no man necejjarily to Mi eve "int'^/l?ml!4«<Sol ^^^^ which is therein contayned 5 becaufe they are wL nlmkiJqutd not of fufficient force to prove any thing that ftialbe contefted in our Religion by us againft Jewes , or Heretiques. Moreover, he diftinguifheth (as the Ancient Fathers did ^ before ) betweene Tm forts of Apocriphal Books ; ^ whereof Some are fo called,

ipfa. quoque in Officiis fuis illos legitpropter muUa devota f«^ in illis hahentur. Neminem tamen OBLl- GAT ad NB.CESSAPJO credendumid quodibi habttur hficut e^ de Libris SAP. ECCL» MACCAB, JfV D. ^ TOBIj^ I9i enim licet a bri^'anis recipiantur, ^probatio ex ei fumpta fit aliqualiter effi - cox, quid Ecckfta iftos libros tenet j contra Hereiicos tamen, aut Hebr^os^ adprobandumea^ qu£ indu' biumveniunt^nonfuhteficaces. d Num. e TcAu.\hidqimf\^^, Libridicunlur APOCRT'

PHI ditpliciter, Vno modo, quih non conQat de eorum Scriptoribus an Sp. S di^ante fcripferint fy etiam non coniiat de omnibus-, qua iniishabentur,anverafinty Non efl tamen in eis aliquid, quodmanifefte falfumfit, vflquod valdefufpe^umftt defalfitate. Alio modo dicmtur Lihri Apocryphi, de quorum AuSo- yibus non coniiati an k Veo fint iffpirati, ^ infuper multa, qu£ habettm in eis^ vel funtmaniftftb falfa, vel de Errore valde fufpeSa. Accipiendoprimo modo Libros Apocrypha f, Scriptura nonponit illos in CA- hOKH Librorumfuorumi ita utdebeat illis fidet de necejjitatc adbiberi j permittit tamen volentibus lege- re, quod I'gant, quia non viderur indefcqui aliquod inconvenms ; ipfa quoque Ecdefia illos legit. Accipi^ endo fecundo modo Apocryphis Libros^ non folum Ecdefia non pomt illos in Canonc, jmo nee aliquo mo* do ponit COS cum Libris fuh nee legit^ nee Itgentibus favet—. Prim") wodofunt Apocryphi Libri quidam^ qui ponuntur EXTRA CANON EM V.T. computaniur tarreninter Libros S Scripture, fcilicet. Liber Sapiemisy ^ Ecdefia^ticus^ (fy' Judith, ([<y Tobias, iy Libri Maccabjiorum : de Au^hribus enim horum mn conftat Ecdefia, an Sp. S. diSla^ie fcripferinf, non taminreperit in eit aliquiJ falfum, aut valde fufpelium defalfitate *, fedpotius in eis efl do^rina copiofi, Sanlh, ^ Dev^ta ; id^h Ecckfta legit illos, ifyr compmat inter Libros fnos. Sic dicit HieronymHs in P,ol. fuper Judith^ quad Liber Judith, qui eft de Apocryphis, isTC- bccaufc

a Ibid. Hoc au- tem efi proper duo, Primh quia non e§i certa de AuSlo-

ribus Eommy imml to this purpofe he siveth

mf:it an SPIRITV . r. r . . .o

SANCTO INS PI-

RAII diSaverunt

Eos, Cum autem du-

bitatur circd aliquos

Libros, de fcriptoribwi

eorum,anSPIRrtV

SANCTO MOrifinty

ADTMITVR AV*

CTORlTAS ILLO

RVM, ^ Hon ponit

illos Ecdefia in CA-

NONE Librorumfuo-

rum.

h Ih'id. Secundo quiei,

Ecdefia non eftcerta

vel fub^

tnifcutrint

traxerint.

c Ibid. Tales autem

Libros Ecdefia red-

pit, permittens eos fin-

gulis fidelibus legere i

the Canon of the Scripture.

191

becaufe it is noc known for certain, either ^ho wrote them, or by what Spirit they were written, or whether all things, that are contained in them, be undoubtedly true ^ O.hen , that befides all thefe uncertainties have many things in them either w^i>^//;?^/)i/4//>, or fhrewd- ly Su[j)eBed fo to be. Both \^hKh Sorts oi Books hQ\ng excluded from the Canon ot Scripture , the Church per- mitteth the One to be Read 5 but giveth not the like libertie ioti\\Qi Other. And among thofe that are thus permitted , and yet not received into the Canon^ he reckoneth expreflely the six Apcrjphall Books^ which (ince his time the Tope and a jerv Bifhops at Trent have commanded , upon perill of their Curfe and damnation , to be; Canonical ^ and fo to be received, in defpight of all churches ^ and slII peopU, before and after them, in the world.

.CLXIH. Yet this is not the only place, wherein this great and eminent writer declareth thecommoa voice of the Catholick Church to be againft them. For elf where his Sayings are as cleare to the fame purpofc. a As where he denyeth any of thofe -r^/^c- cryphal Books ^ ("though they be written^ and readto^ gether with the other Books of the Bihle^ ) to be received by the Church into the like Authoritie with thofe that are ^uthenticall and Canonical, Whatfoever there- fore may be objefted out of his ^ Commentary upon S, Jeromes Prologue to Faulinus^ concerning the %eception of the[e Books into the Churchy cannot be otherwife underftood , then of fuch a ^eception^ that took them onely into the Bible ^ to be %ead among Chrifiians (which was c more then the

quam veritatemj fy

quMium ad hoc KON RECIPit eos. Et de hoc inteWgitur quod dicithic Hieronynaif, fdlket, A- POCRTPHA NESCIT ECCLESIA — Et ifiud habent minus quhm Libri CANONICI ^ AV^ JHElSiTlCI. b Idem Comment, in Prolog. Gal. Nos tamen EccleftA au^oritate inter Ljbros Ah ^ thenticos illos fufcipimus, atque in Ecclefia fuistemporibuslfgimusy^c, c Ihid^q.iB. LibrumKc- tUfia^ici qutmquhm Judm nmqH^m babuerint in Canone ScriptHtarumt Ecchfia tmen SVSClFiT 4itque LEQIT,

HehrevdS^

(L I^em in Enar.prae* fat. in Lib. Paralij^. q. 7. I^mUus tamenr iHorum Librorum A- POCKYPHORVM, (etiamfifttfcriptMs m- ter alios LibrosBibU et legaturinEccefia,) tant£ AuHiiitatis eft, ut ex eo Eickfia ar- iuatadprebandamali-'

ipl

A Scholajiical Htjlory of

Hebrews would allow them, ) as ufually they were, both in xhdv private Studies^2iX\(i in their puUick Offices j which is an homur that we deny them not.

C LXIIII. After Antoninus and Tofiatus^ there lived in this Age DENYS the CARTHVSIAN^a voluminous writer upon the whole ^/^/c, and a pcr- fon in luch great reputation wkhPope Eugenius the 4fh. (inwhofe name the pretended "Decree at Florence is publifhed^) that he efteemedhim ^ as one of the ieft Sonnes which the Church then had. Who in this particular never learned any other dodrine oihis Mother^ then c that there vpere hut XXII Books of the OLD Testament, For when he beginneth tofpeakof ^ Ecclefiafticus ^ of the Book e oi Tobit-y of the ^ Maccabes , of Judith 5 and the Hiftories of § Sufannaj Bel and the Dragon^ he forewarneth his Readers, and telleth us expreffelyj "that they are " not to be computed among the Canonical Scriptures^ "and that the Church diOthnox. receive them to prove " any Article ofFatth by them. Which is aboundantly enough, to have, been faid for this Centurie.

clefiaftieum. Libtr

ifie n§n e/f de Canonty id eft, inter Scripturas Canonkas nonefi computandus. e Jdem Prol.in Tob. Liber iiie non computatur inter Scripturas Canonkas-propter quod eum red fit Mater Ecchjiay ^ legtn* dum infiituit, non ad conjirmationem Dogmatum, atque probationetnCredendorum^ ftdadmorummfor- matJonem* f Idem jn Maccab. cap.i. lion eft autem hie Liber in Canone, tamen ab Ecclefta tan- quamverMsreceptuseft. g Idem in Dan. i^. VerumeUauttmquhdhacduoCapitulanonpertineutai Scripturam Camnicaw, ftm nee Tobias^ nee JfudUh, i^c.

An. T>om. 1470.

b Vita Pauli 2. in 8. Tom. Concil. apud Bin. floruit ea tem- peftate Dionyftus Car- thuftamiSj tot exccllen- tium Ljbrorum AuSor^ de quo illud TeJlJmO' nium protulit EugenJ- U4jL^tetur Mater Ec- clefia, qudt tatem habet filium.

c Dion. Carthuf. praf. in Gcncf.art-4. Sicut in Prohgo fuper Libros Regn Sanl^m Ait Hieronymus.XXU funt Libri V. t. d Idem Prol. in Ec-

Chaf.

the Canon of the Scripture,

m

Chap. XVII.

l^he Tejl'monies of the Ecckjiaflicalt iVriters in the Sixteenth Qnturj,

1

CLXV. WN the faegitining of this Age FRAN- J„ l^nn^^ CIS XIMENIUS the Cardinal and "^^^ -LJOm. •ArchbiiTiop oi Toledo in Spai/ie^ a man I5®Z«

very famous to all pofterity , founded the Vmverfnie of Complutum^ now called IaIcaU y and fet forth that great and ufeful edition of the Bihle^in many volumes, and in divers languages, which from that place where fo much induftry and paines, together with fo much II time ^ -^ Coft and charges , was fpent about it , hath ever fince carryed the Name of Biblia Complu-^ tenfia. In this work he had the affiftance of that whole Fmverfitie^ befides the Advice and Care of many other the beft learned men abroad s and in the Preface to the Reader there is a Speciall Admoni- tion given, a That the Books oiTohh-^ Judith^ mfdom Scclejiafiicus , and the Maccabes^ with the Additions to E^er^ and "Daniel^ which be there fet forth in greek only, are no Canonicdl Scripture. In the reciting of which Admonition Frier ^ Sixtus Senenfis is not fo honeft, as he {hould be , when he reltraines that to the Hebrew Cmon only , which Cardinall Ximenius extended to the Chriftian Accowpt and all j whereunto

he addeth, (more then the Frier doth,) that the ^

Church received not thofe Books for Confirming the fticormdogmatiim

fimandB recipit, QyA' cam tantnmhabent Scripturanti fed cum duplki merprewme, b Sixc* Scncnf, Bibl. lib. 4. verba Fran.Ximcn.Scft.i. Libri veto qui EXtRA €ASONEMfuntHebr£orum,qHosEccieftaad^dif<(i^ thnem Itgit^ Gucam tantnm habm Scripturaramj ^c.

C c Author itjf

H Durdvh Ah Ann I $02. Annos continuot plh mims X/ bac Cura.

^ Ad Summam j:^in^ quagintA Millmm^ (y amplius> Anreorum,^ Ita Ahar, Gomedni in vita XimenJi. a Fr. Ximenius in Bibl. Complut. pra?- fac.ad Le^cr. At ve-> rlLibriEXt^ACA. NONEMyqussEccle- fia potih ad adificdti' onem FopuH^ quam ad AnSoritatem Ecclefa*

iP4.

4 Ex motH propU6^& coU Scuntia Opus comprobatrus , ^c. Leo Dccinius«

Jn. Vom. 1506.

b Pfafit. in Biblia Bafilea cdita cum Gloflis Ordinaria & intcrlincari An 1506 HuQniam flint muhiy qmd non

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

Auihoritie of any her foundamentall Points inReliglon^ though for the edifywg of tlie People fhc ordered them to be %ead. This Bible , and this Preface to it, was publifhed a by the Authority and conient ot Pope Leo the X^h. ( to whom the whole work was dedica- ted, J for as yet Rome it felfhad not received thefe Apcrjphall Books into the Canon.

CLXVL About this time it was, that they prin- ted the Fulgar Btble with Lira's Commentary , and the . Ordinary Glojje , at Bajil ; whereunto He that then made THE PREFACE (^before mentioned,) » [et as great a difference between the XXll Bocks that we have from thtOld Canon ^ and the VI, (or IX,) that are now put into the A^-fw^, as there is between quj ex to , quoa non Things^ certain , and dubious. And he taxetli them not mutiom operam dant ouly With indiltgence and ignor an ce^ but with /oZ/jyalfo,

^* ^'^tTn^Tiibrfs' ^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^y ^^'^ printed together in

^uiin Bibi. conthen- the Common volume of the Bille^ to be of a Itke ,. or

m, PAKiVENE- ^in equal Feneration. The Cenfure concernes them

nt^^nntTdi- that made , and them that follow ihQrrent'-Canony

ftinguee inter Libros upon whom it is licre layd , before hand , take it off

e.«omco.6'i^o«.c^^^ a^ainastheycan.

httr Apocrypha, compuunt^^ unde [Ape coram do^is Ridmli videntur-^idcircodiftinximus, ^diQirM^' tiutneravimusjprmo Ljbros Canonjcos, i^poftei ^on Canonkos ^ inter qttos tantum diflat, quantum inter CEK'fVM (^ DVBIVM, N m Canonici funt vonfi^i Sp.Sa'^jdiSfante. Ktn Canonici autem^ five Apocryph't^ nefatur quo tempore, qmbufii Au^loribus fint editt—At Libri Canonici tantsfuntAu^^ ritatis, quod qukquid tbi continetur^ verum tenet firmitcr ^indifcufse,

CLXVIL Now alfo lived lOHANNES PICUS, the great * learned COVNT of MIR ANDULA, who in this matter ^ adhered firmely to 5, "Jd'- ^^rome ^ For herein 5. Je/c;wfV Authority and Tcfti- ^^mony was then held to be moft facred intheCW^^, "whereunto he addeih ihc Advko: oi AtbanafiuSy ^^ Damafcen y (jregprie Nazianzen y and AmphilochiuSy all of them being: our witneffes beiore.

Jn. Dom. 1510.

* Bcllar,7c Scrip;

V'tr ingenio <^ do^ri- m maxmies, a ]oh. Picos, comes MlranduK decrdinc ciedendv Theorem.

^, firwver tawcn k£- ^ , ^^. . ,

rendum cr^dj Stwenti^ Mteror.ymi, cujus amn'itas me movn^EtVen^vm ejus Tepmcmumab ECGLE.

4IA pro S^Mffm bibmr.. CXLVIII

the Canon of the Scripture.

i5?5

Trium virorum & Virg-. Spiritual. Ecce quomodo conne^it Hi- eronymus VaSorem Lu hro SapkntUi EccU- fiajiice, fuditba, ^ TobU, eandcm tiibu* ens au^oritatentj qufi eandem continent ad

CLXVIII. To him vvc may joyn JACOBUS J^ T)nnj FABERSTAPVLENSIS.aDoaorintheVniverfity ^ '"* ^c/aa/., of Paris at this time bearing a great Name and re- IJIf*

putation in the world ^ who, as earneft as otherwhiles he was to keep up the credit of rfc^/> ^oo^^, yet a he ^ Jacob. Fabcr Sta- acknowledgeth nevcrtheleffe, "that they are not pui. prxf. in Ubr". " within the CanofT. nor in tliat Suprem Authoritie with ^^th^ Churchy wherein the Olher Books oi the Scripture are ; and therefore numbreth them among the Books oiHermes's Paflor , and the Prophecie of Henoch ^ being all Apocryphally though none of the vporfl and molt rejeBedSort oivpritings which bear that Tsljiwe.

adificationempietatis vhtutemjed <fy bos omnts nominat Apocrypbos, quU de CANONE NON SVNT, i^ in PRIMA SVFREi\1AQ!VE EcckfiA AVTORITATE. In alea tmen Apocryphorum plani damnandoTumn0f\furit, ficut nee Libir Henoch^— fed inprima ApocryphoiumNoth, fy laudabilijjima pofl. S. Eloquk fignificatione.

CLXIX. It was at this time, when JODOCUS /Jy. T)nm

CLICHTOVEUS^aSorbonift, andaCanonofthe " ^^^^'*

Church at ChartreSy wrote his Commentary upon 1^2 O. Damafcen ^ wherein he ^ excludeth all thefe con- troverted Books from being numbred among the

Canonical Scriptures ; and briiigeth ^S'. Hierome's Tefti- _

monie to aflert his own , together with the writings briCSaphmia^et Ec^

oi Damafcen, that thefe Books were oiltSc Authoritie 'SSnttZ^^

and weight in the Church, then the XXII Bocks of the ne sacrorum utr^

AncientTe^ament. rum-JedetiamTobiat,

fHduhy et Ubri Mac^ ca.b<xorum^ h Numero Canenkorum Volumhum V. t. funt exclufi, quemadmodum tefintut Hieronymus. —Itaque hi Librt quodminoris babcbantur Au^oritatis ^ponderis^ qu^m Hit XXII Libit V,T.in littr A explicate, mn ponebanturin Arcn^fed Duntaxat CANONICI LIBRI.

CLXX. Then likcwife did LVDOVICUS

VIUES (one of the moft learned men that thefe times had ) write his Commentaries upon S. Auguflin's Bookes he Civit. dei. Wherein, a ( befides xhQ Third and Fourth Booke oi FfdraSy) he ^ rejeiiieth

b Jod. Clichtoy. in Damafcen. 1. 4. C.I 8. Et non modo bi duo Lt^

An, Bom, 1525

a L.Vivcs in S.Aug. dcCiv. De!,I.i8.c.3^ teyxins et Quartui Li^ bri Efdra inter ApO' cr)ipba rejiciuntur quoi. Hieron.vQcat Somnjti,

b rd.ib.c? J .Fit menlio' Prophet.^ Abacuc^Daa.ii.quodpyanditimfuH ex Jnda Babylone tulerit ad Banin elem. ^o Te^'m onto idprtbaiione temporu AuguQinus non eft ufw i qmd ea Belt Hifloria e$r Totum Xl\^ Caput, cU Hiftom SVSANN^, APOCRTPHA. fint, nee in Hcbrxo babeantur^ nee fint vnfa a LXX Senibus, C C 2 the

196

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

the Hiftorics oiSufmna and Bel^ as Afocryfhd Scrip- tures 5 and fo did 5; Augujlin before. The Books of Tobit^ and Judith are t elfewhere in no greatx^r credit with him : Of mfdom and EcclefiaHtcus , he fayes enough to exclude them from the Camn 5 for a of the One he makes Philo to be the Author, who lived in the timeofthe^/;<?^/^x ^ and ^ oitliQ Other Sirach^'s Sonne , who lived in the time of Ptolemie^ above 100 yeers after all the Prophets were dead. And c oii\\tMaccdes he is uncertainjwhethcr Jofephus be the father of them, or no ; which he could never «- I. have faid, if he had believed then to be C^/^o/^/V^/.

,ftfus films Srrach * ^

ttmort Ftolemai Eutrgeta Regis MgJ^U. c Idcm,ineuncl- lib \B,cz\>,%6. Maccab. lib.j.He- hraici Utius tU db Hierenym, alter Or£ce tantion^ Idem adverfw Pelag, Jofepbum nominat Maccab, biQorU Scripterem. NESCIO an kuUorem ftgnificet horum duorum voluminum Mactab, hijior. qnam h^ HT fma babmus.

f Idem dc tradcndis Difcipl.lib.5. tobiasj ifjudhb Afocryphi.

g Idem,in S.Aiig.dc Civ.Dc!,lib.i7.c.2o. hie LiberCSapientis) ereditm Ph'iknis Ju- dJ Alexandmi^ qM vixit tempmbus A|)<»- ftihrum.

b \\i\A,Hunct\brum ( Eeclefiaft'tci ) fecit

CLXXI. Of the fame mind and belief was FR^ GEORGIUS the Venetian Minorite, and a famous writer in his time j who in his Harmonie of the vporldy d fecludeth dl thofe Books from the Canon , that have no place among the XX ill I Books of the Old Teftame^at^ And though the c UHafier of the Palace at Kome be highly dilpleafed with him , and hath lately com- manded hif Book to be purg'd^ yet heheld7o^/no be no Authentick part oiScriptur.e

_ _ ]oh. Maria Indice Rom. Liber, cxpnrgand. Otorgm in Probknui, afferit^

ZibrHmtobiinon habere artm Auaorem, & NON ESSE IN CkNOME BIBLIM,

An !Z)c/W. CLXXH. ERASMVS was now in great reputa- * * tion with all men , ( but the Monks that hated him, )

for the excellency of his Spirit, and the perfedl knowledge that he had in all kind of Learning. And (o much was given ^ to his skill and judgment in the Scriptures , that few or none were thought that way to be comparable to him. Inhis Explication oi

V Sadokc.inEpift.adErafm. Nihil mihj meorum probari poteft, quid ad literasS4Ci'aspemnety fi 4dnonank^tibi irebmmfnerit,

the

An. T>om.

d Fr. Gcor* vcn. in Harm.Mand.Cant.3. Ton.8,Mod.i2.Con- ccnt't i Nee tamtn re- ceptainSaeroCANO- NE^ neque inftrta nw- mero XXIV Libmum vUt, niji cafligata , ^approbatat ^c. e

1530,

the Canon of the Scri^ure.

ip7

* Erafm. in ExpL Symb. Apcft.&De- cal. Catcch. 4. iVb- men S(riptur£ dno- ntca quot volumm compleSitur^ Refp^ Jflud expedite docuit

the Apples Creed and the Decalogue^ ^ he propoleth this Queftion about thc]>iumhti oi Canomcal Bocks ^ « anci anfwcreth , that Rujfi/i ( under the name of "5. Cyprian) had given the bell Relolucion to it; « That to the Old Teftament belonged the Five Books « of MoJeS:y Jofuahy Judges , and the Refi that we « number 5 concluding that the Ancient Fathers ad- 'c mitted no more 5 of whofe Autoritie it was not law- ^cfull for any man to douht. Of the Other Books that «^ were afterwards - received into Ecclejiafiicall Vfe ^- Cyprknut (Ruffi. « ( naming all thofe that we accompt to be Apocry- pILu^ckui'm^^^^ ^^fhaJ^ as "Rjiffmus and the Old writers did, j he is Hisaccedumdmjefti ^<- Uncertain J what manner oi Author itie they have: ^l^f' i'a'u^ ^ ^^but addeth, » That tht Canonuall Scriptures axQio mr Lihi Rtgn, quot recalled, which without any Controverfie all menac- ^^^/^^^ duos tantkm «« knowledge to have been vi^ritten by the Inspiration ber%Uip^!Tein^u9 ^^ of God, And b in his Scholies upon Saint lerome's priores Ubri Efdra^ Freface to the Prophet P^;?/>/ , he maketb a wonder lZeutt%mtlrZ at it, that fuch Stories^as Bel and the Dragon is , fhould & quartus inter Apo- be publickly read in the Church ; which he would never ^^^^^^ cenfentur. suc* havexione, nor found any fault with it at all, \ithat ^pheuJ^^TtslHuZ'^ Scripturehadin his time been believed to be C^;?oi2/- )^mw 12, Proph^ cat. But for the Reception oi the^e Books to he "Bjad 7dll'^j^'Jp'f^^\ in the Churchy it is his Admonition to c all them that Sahmonts ihri ires i ftudie the Scriptures , " to confider well , how far, If^fJ^l^pJ^^^^ « and into what degree of Author itie the Church had %7riZWT'!>^iurX

na^ de quorum fidi n#- fas efit dubttare. Kmc verhmeptus efi in VSVM ECCLESIAStlCV M fy Sapientia, quern quidtm fifpicamur e(fe Philonis Jfuddii, fy alius q«i dicitur Ecclejiafticus, quern putant ejfeJefu^liiSirach. Kt^ ctptus eU ^ Liber lob^ ^ Jud. ff^c, quos Hebr^i mn habebant. Sed Hieronyims te^amfe vertiffeett tditiont theodoiionit. CMtrum an Ecclefta receptrit hos Libros eadem AuSoritate,i[Ht cdtteros, novit Ec- clefidt Spiritus. a Ibid^ Canonicam appellant Scriptwam, qus. dtri contrcverfim affatu S. Spiritm frodita eft. b Idem in Schol. fupcf prxfat. Hieron in Dan, Mirum quod Hieronymus veru jugulat, id nunc pafjim legiiur ^ canitwf in Templis, imh nuUo deleSu legimus de Bel(fyr Dracene^ quam tile mn veritus eft appellate fabulam j nee additurus, niyeritusfuiffet^ nebonamvolummis pattern detrunca^ \ideretur : fed apud quos tandem / apu4 imperites, inquh ipfe. Tamo plus valet corfuetudo tttultitudinis im-- peril A, quhm hommit erudiii judicium, c Idem,Epift.ad divin. literarum ftudioros,prxfixa Tom. 4. Opcr.Hicr. Magni certe refert^ quid quo Animo cowprobat Ecdefia, VtenimFAKEM tribnatAV^^ eiORTtAtEM HebrAorum voluminibus^ fy Huetuor Evangeliis^ certenon vult IDEM ESSE PQU>' DVS Judit^'iobisy fy S<tpienU£ Ltbrisy quod Mofis Pentateucho,

«fo

ip8

A Schoiajlical Htjlorj of

. « fo received them ; For fhe intended not to give the «^ Same weight of Authority and honour to the Books of " Tohit'y ludithj and mfdom^ which is given to the F/t/e " ^00)^5 of ^(?/<?5 or the Four Evangelt^s, But maketh a great difference between them ; though it hath pleafed the late Congregation at Trent ^ to make them all alike and equall , and to give no more Authoritie and Honor to the One^ then they do to the Other: wherein they had neither Father^ nor, any other good fVriter to go before them. And it is remarkeable here , that in Erafmus his time ^ who had io many Corrivals both envyous of his glory, and defirous of his ruine, yet there was not one among them all, (not Sutor and Bedda^ not any Dodors ofi^/^^/'/^or Italy 5 not the Sorhoni^'s themfelves, who Centred divers other oi his Writings^) that found any fault with him for allthefe^ which he had publifhed con- cerning the "Difference betwixt the Canonical:^ and Apocryphal or Ecclejiaftcal Scriptures,

CLXXIII. Cardinal CAJETAN was at this time the common ^ Oracle^ to whom moft of the Divines intheChurchofjRow^hadrecourfe, for their better refolution in any difficult or doubtfull Queftion , that occurred about the Scriptures , and the publick dodrine of the Schooles : So that his Teftimony will involve many more , and be of as good authority , as if vye fhould now produce ^ a great Number of witnefTes for us together. And in this particular Qucflion he declareth himfelf ( oftener then once ) to be formally for us. Somewhat he had faid to that purpofe in his c Commentaries upon Thomas Aquinas ; but afterwards in his Commentaries upon the Bible ( which he wrote at %ome ) he fpake more cleerely.

An. T)om.

M Thorn. Stroz. in Epift. dcdic. ante Commcnrar. Cajeta- ni in Parab. Salom. Ad quern velut com- mune Oraculum, feu pro S/tcr. liter arum jnvolHcrii^fgu pro cd- fihus Confcientu, jive pro allionhui Jheoh- gu Myfteriis, dc di^- cillimis QuA^ionibus cnnfugere foUbamu s . b Eifcngren de Cer- titu.grat!a?.c.p. 3/i^- rus ifte Cdrdinalis

tdntdt nobis authoritaiis ejfeddbet, dc ft magnum Scriptorum numerum proffrrmus in medium. ;«an.Com.in 2a. 2ae. q.;;.art.4. ad 2.& in i.qSp. arc. 8. ad. 2.

c Ca-

For

the Canon of the Scripture.

ipp

d Idem, Comcnt. in I. cap. ad Htbr ///e- ronym't Sowti fumut ReguUm, ne erremuj in difcretkne Libroru Canonkorum j na qu&s Hie Camnkos tndi- dit y Canonkos habe^ mus , ^ quos ilk k Canonists difcrevit , extra Camntm babe- mas.

For firft in generall, he ^ giveth lis this as a. Rule of the church ^ ^^ I hat what Books were Canonical^ '^ or not Ciirfonical^ to S. lerome^ the fame ought either " way to be fo with us : And ^ that the whole Lati/i ^^ Church is herein very much obliged to SJereme^ ''who by fevering the Canomcal Bocks of Scripture " from thofe that are not (Canonical ^ hath freed us '' from the Reproach of the Hebrews , that otherwif e '' might fay^ we had forged a New Canon of our own, *' which tne Old Church never knew. And then in particular, iQllcth Pope clement the ni^^y (whofe ap- probation he had,) ^ " that for this reaion he would "letpafTethe Apccrjphal Bocks ^ and fpcndiio timein "writiug any Commentaries upon them, ^ for that ^^ Judith , andro^/V,anJ the Maccahes , together vyith ''the Books oi wisdom ^ Ecclefiafticus, and the ^ "T^f/? of efiher are all excluded from the Canon^, as "^ being infutficient to prove any Chatter of Faith ^ " though they may be ufed and read , as profitable ic^'^fa 'Ltha]i'/rl "and Regular Books for the Edifying oithe People. In '^«^^^*«^ mnfoiiim " which fenfe, and with which f DiftinBion (as he "there concludeth) both S, Auguflin^ and the " Councel of Carthage are to be taken , to reconcile them " with S, lerom , and the Councel ofLaodicea , before produced. Whereby it is evident , that in the dayes of Cardinal Caietan (which was but 7>;^jffrf; before the Councel began aiTrent^) all this went for good

A IdeminEplft.de- dicat. ad Papam Clem VII ante Com. in Libr. bift. V. T. S Hieronymo (Pater beatijfmej Vniverfa

ob annotataj,^c.~fed etiam propter dtfcretos ab eodem Libra Ca' mnicos a non Canoni* cis Liber avit fiqujdem nos ab Hibrdtorum op- frobrio quodftngamui nobis Amiqui Canonis- libreSy aut Librorum Pa}tes, quibusTpfipe' nitut carent.

b Ibid, d^ocirch quum difpofuiffem profequi Commen^arios in librosV.T. pnQ Moyfi Expofttionemjam editam, Libros Hiftoriales OMNES in unumvo lumen coegiy omijjis rel'tquis^ Hieronymo inter Apocry- pbafupputatis, c Ibid«comnienr. inult cap. Efther. Et hoc loco terminamus CommentariaLibrO'^ rum hiftorialium V.T. Nam reliquj, videlicet Judith, T$bi£^(fyr MaccabsorumLihri k B. Hieronym* €xtrfi Canonicos Ltbrosfupputantur, Winter APOCRTF HA locantur, cum Libr o Sapientid^y ^ Eccle- fiafiico, d Ibid. Sex feu SeptemfequtnttaCapitulafunt Apocrypha; ^propterti nonexponenms ilia. e Ibid, Noufunt hi Libri'CaT 0 'ici^hoc eS, nonfuntKegHkresadpmandumeaquAfuntflDEI: pof' funt tawen dkiCanonici,hoc€ifi Regulares ad^tdrficatknemfidelium. f Ibid- Necturberis Novitie^ ft aliiiihi repereris Libra's ifios inter Canonicosfupputari, velinfacris Comiliis^ vtlinfacrisDolhribui. Nam ad Hieronymi limam redmenda funt tarn verba Conciliorum, quam Do^orum, iyc. ut fupr^. Curn' hac enim difiin^ione difcernere p9teris (pr' di^a Augufiini in 2°de dolir,chr—[criptaqutinConciliiii

tCmlhag. fy Laodki. b Caholick

200

A Scholajlkal Hijlorj of

^Bcllarm.de Script Eccl. Cajetanus vtr fuitfummi ingenih nic ndnompietatis, Soto m4'". dift. ^qlKEft. unica. art. 2. Excel- lenti^mi Catholicus

b Catholick dodrine at c %ome 5 that is to fay, in the ycer MDXXXIIII. Wherein (^writing upon the

ien^femuns, dy de Thtologia optimi me- ritus. & in cap.i 9.1'ir admodiim Catholkm, Sixt.Sciien.l.4,Bibl. Incomparabilis theo- logus, ^ inter Do^if- fms fuifeculi Eiudt- tiffmus,

c Cajetan. in Eccls- fiaft.c. 12. ad fin. £t

Prophets , and having gone no farther then the Third Chap, of Hf^;' j he dyed 5 when d he was moft likely to have been choien Pope aderClememthenith^ if PcrcrVin i.cap.Gen. he had outlived him, I know how hot and angry Viy de tny^eriijfdei ^^^j^ e catharin and Cmus were in this matter againlt Cajetm^ but as Homer faidof i/d'^i^rjthey ^ bark'd, and infulted over him, as Dogs over a dead Lion. And yet it is obfervable , that as no man wrote any thing herein againft him while he was alive ^ and able to anfwer lor himfelf 5 Xo the Sorhonney or the Faculty at Paris , that afterwards cenfur'd him for fome other matters , (for they took upon them to cenfure all fcf!^m'icci4aflcs mitings that difpleas'd them, ; yet in this particular cummnibus Sakmoras they had nothing to find fault with him.

(5r Sap. libris, Salo-

monis quidtm-Reliquof eutem quivocantur Libri Sapientiales^quoniam Hieronynms EXTRA CANO* NICOS ad authoritatem FIDEIfupputat, omittendos Vuxirms^ adPr&phetarumOracuUproperantes, Romddie2iJunnyAnnoi^%/\. d Or^ror, qui eum port mortem laudavit. e Homo ad carpen- dumpromptulus. Canus loc thcol. lib.2. c. 1 1. / Bannez Tom.2. q.92. art.;* Ctrthpoteft dicide Hiit, quodde Qrscis infultantibus He^orijam mortuo dixit Homerusy S^odLeonimortuoetiamUpores fy Canes infitltant,

CLXXIIII. But for Catharines oppofition and heat againfl him , (which brake forth not long after his death,) it was prefently abated by another learned a DOCTORofhisownOrder , andoneof Cartharin's great friends , ( much loved, and much honored by him s ) who both reprehended and derided that new opinion , which Catharin firft began to fct out againft Cajetan^^ and all the Doctors of the church before him. For Catharin had nothing b Fi-atretriki in chri^o herein to fhcw or produce for himfelf, but the preten- I'lCoTcrvM^DE^ ^^^ ^^^^ uncertain Authorities of r/^y'^fPi?/;^^- who,

RISIT, quod HOS

LIBBOS in CANONd ECCLESI^eJfeprdfeJfusfumJibenterhabeboSermonem. b Cafharin. ib; p ?y. Edit.2. Etft enim alii aliter opinatifunt, non opinor hu]ufmodihomimm av^oritatem Fonvfi.um decretis pr£ferri,'-Fatet enim in decrttis hmocentil Oelafti, iy Eugenii in Concilio Floremino^ hos Li* bros in Canonc computariiify in eodem ording^cum refiquis Scripmis Sdn^is-MittoConcjllud Carihag^.

to

Jn. T>om. '535-

« Anonymapod Ca- tharin. adverfus Ca* jctan. pag 48. & 72. Edit. I. VeLibrisau- tem Tobi£ , J^udith , Sapientia, Ecclefiafti- ci ^ MaccabAvum cum Amico mec illo^^

the Canon of the Scripture. loi

to make the beft of them which can be made , will "

never make up a Churchy and to whofe decrees^ as

likewife to iho^Cmon of the Councel at CarthagCy

we have a already given a full and fufficient ac-

compt.

CLXXV. About the fame time lOHNDRIEDO, Jy^^ en a Profeffor of divinity at Lovaine 5 was imployed to *

write againft Luther ^ and yet in his Book a of I535»

Ecclefiaftical Scriptures ^ which he dedicated to the ^ wirseusde Script

Kingof Portugall y Firft he acknowledgeth , ^ That Sccuiis. Edidh &

the Hiftories of Judith and Tohit , &c, were not ^^ ^^'^ff^-^* ^-f*'

numbred in the time of the OWTV/f^wf;^/* among the quatulr^MomUvZ

Canonicall Books of Scripture 5 but fome of them ac- inminihus ajferendis

compted ay^pocryphal ^ as the writings oi unknown Tmt6o% Zcc\.

ayiuthorSy and otherfome no true Hiflories at all 5 And Scrip. & oogm. 1. r!

Secondly , heconfefleth , That under the Nerp Tefta" ^•.4' ^^ ^''^'"'^- ?/

ment the Cbnfitan Church haxhnot xccQivcdthefe Books Gal. libm Judith &

into the pwe ^^^^/Z, or ///t^ Authoritie with the C/t;?^?- ^o^* '"f'^ Jipocrypha

nical Scriptures. Which is a pregnant Teftimonie Tr7%Tr'%T&

againft the Councel oiTrenty that will follow by and ^ob. dm apudHeh,

Uy inter Hagiographci t:u»

de CAVONE S. Liter arum effe SEPARAtOS. Ad banc difficultatm (finonplaceatmendofumejfe CpdicimJ dicemus duplida effe apud Hebr. HagUgrapha^ ficut ^ dixjmus duplim effe Apocrypha, Hagi' ogr.i . SanHoYum Scripta qu<£dam funt^quorttm auHoriias idonea ei? adco) roborandum ea^qudifknt FlDEl : JJujus generis funt Hagiogr. in C'AKONE BIBLIM. Alia vero fmt Hagiogr. quorum au^oritas ad af- fertionts FIDEIcorrobsratidds non e3 idoneayquainvishibeantur vera fySanlk ficut habentur Hieronymi ^ Augusfihi Scripta, qudVQcanUtr jHagiogy-cpha (^i. San^a velSanStorumfcriptaJ Ethujus generis Apud Hebr. funt Htflni A Judith, etlobidt, etiamEccleftafticus^ ^ Maccab.pritmts : qmsfane Libr&s qnamvis habeant ^ legarrt^ non tamen inter Camnicos Libros connumer ant, fed inter Apocrypha, non quhi falfi fintf fed quod tales fmt ^quorum occulta origo non cUruit toti eorum Synagoga ; 3'" . awetn i^ i^ , Efdr, t\ Maccab. trium puerorum Hymnum, Sufanndi, ac Belis Draconifqie hifl§rUtyaut non habent.aut proT' fits rejiciunt , ^ confittas tradunt.—Ecckfta tamen Chriftiana propter du^crit^tem vetsrum quorundam Sanliorum, qui Itguntur uftfuiffe ttftiinoniis ex hujufmodi Hi^oriis,eafdempi^ftde legit, f[y non PROR^ SVS rejicjt, nee contemnit, tametfi non PARI AVCtORItATE rectpiai illos Libros cum SCRIP JV^ RIS CANOmciS,

CLXXVI. Not long before this Councel met , J^^ T)om JOHN FERUS, a very learned man, and a moft * *

diligent Preacher/et forth his Book^^ which he intitled, ^ 5 4^» The E>;amimtion of thofe that were to be Ordain'd

Dd for -

201

AScholaJlical Htjlorj of

for the Sacred Mi/iiiiery of the Church yand howfo

ever in after times the m^afier-Ir/quijitors put his

works into their Expurgatory l/.clex ^ yet wiiile he

lived 3 and had the general approbation of all forts

of men boih for life and learning, there was no ex-

iT Fcrus in Exammc ception made againft him. a In this Book he xnQimdi-

ordinand. Sunt au- eth his Scholars, as a known and ordinary accomvt

iZt^^A.Etro: which they were to give oi their fahh in thoicdajes,

bias , Judith y Liber That befides thc XXVIII CanonicaU Bocks oiScripture,

^uf^Baru^^^^^^^ ^^^ fumini which number they reckoned either

chabmum 'ubri dm. Book of Samuel^ the Kings and the ChronicleSy with

Omnes ahi dkuntur "j^th^ T^hefn. and tht Lament at iohS^ apart by them-

i^r7fl\ams^^^^^ felves, ) there were IX Apocryphal. Which Nine of

tUetimapudJuddiQs. old time Were not publikely Read in the Church ^ nor

y^^7 mmtTo ^funt ^^^ any man prefs'd with their Authority,

XXxVlI, hoc eft, CAKOmcOKVM XX/IU', APOCRTFNORVM IX, Olim verhinEcclefia Apocrypbi publke non recitabantur, nee guifquam auto) hate torumpremfbatHr j fed iomiquidem ^ pxu vatim pro fuo cu]ufque animo fas erat illos lege; e.

Anno Dom. CLXXVlI. Laftly , the Severall Tranflations of K4I ^h* BIBLE 3 fet forth at thele times with fpecial

o ' Pr^^ff5 before them ^ made as well by S antes Pagni-

^ nus the Dominican at Lyons , by Antonius Braciolus ia

^545* Italy ^ and by the Author of Birhnans Edition at Antwerp ^ as by Robert Stephen in the Edition of Fatahlus at Paris -^ every one declaring the DijiinBion^ that was then commonly known and received j between the Canonical and the Apocryphal Books of Scripture s all thefe (being joyn'd with the former Authors whom we have produced in all Ages) arc moft evident and fufficient witnefles, that neither vpe in the Church of England^ nor the Proteflant Churches abroad, have herein tranfgrefs'd thofe bounds, which the Prophets , and Apoftles^^ and generally all our Fore- fathers in the Faith > had fet out ^ and prefcribed for

/" CLXXYIII..

. ! '■•'''■' ■ ' — ' '" — .

A Scholajlical Hijlory of 205

CLXXVIIL And thus have we hitherto taken an exad and perfect yiew of what the C^tholick Church of God hath de- livered, concerning the CANON of DIVINE SCRIP- TURE5 in all Times, and In all places ; In JUDAEA , by the Ancient Hebrem^ by CHRIST hmfelfy and by his Holy Apoftles', In PALESTINE and SYRIA, by Jujiin Martyr^ Eufebm^ S. Jerome ^&c ^Damafcen-^ In the Apoftolical Church- es of ASIA, by MelitOy FolycrateSj and Onefimus ; In PHRY- GIA,CAPPADOCIA, LYCAONlAand CYPRUS, by the Councel ofLaodicea^ S. Bajilj Amphilochius^ and Epiphanm ; In EGYPT, hy Clemens ofAlexandria^ Origen^ and Athana- fm y In the other Churches of AFRICK, by Julius, Tertulli-^ arh SXyprian, S.Auguftine, the Councel of Carthage, Junilius, and Primafim-, Ir; all the FIVE PATRIARCHATES, by S. Cyril, 5, <jreg. Nazianzen, S. John Chryfofiome, AnaflafiuSy S, Gregory, Nicefhorus, and Balfamon 5 In GREECE, by D/o- njfius, Aritiochus, Adrtanus, Leontius, Zonaras, Philij^pus^ and Caliiftus ', In ITALIE, by Philaftrius, RuffnyCafstodore, Come- flor, Balhus^ Antoninus, Mirandula, Cajetan, and Pagnin 5 In SPAIN, by Ifidore, Hugo Card. PauluS Burg. Tofiatus, and Xi- menius 5 In FRANCE, by S. Hilary, The Divines ofCMarfeil^ , les, riRorinus ofPoiBiers, Charlemaignes Bishops, Agobard, Rom i dulphus, Honorius , Petrus Cluniac. Hugo, and Richardus of S.ViBors at Paris, Beleth, Petrus Cellen. Hervdus Natalis, Fa- her , and Clichtoveus-, In GERMANIE , and the LOW- COUNTREYS, by Rabanus, Strahus, Hermannus ContraB^ Ado, Rupertus, the Ordinary and Interlineary-Glofs upon the Bi- ble^ the Glcfs upon the Canon Law, Lyranus, Dionjfius Carthuf Erafmus, Driedo, and Ferus ; And in the Church of ENG- Land, by Venerable Bede, Alcuin, Gifelbert, Job. Sarisburienfis^ Brito, Ocham, Thomas Anglicus, and Thorns iValden >^ befides Divers others, that are not here numbred. Of whom, it muft not be denied , but that Some there were, who in many Other Matters of Religion were violently carried a- way with the Abufes and Streams of the Times • but in

Dd 2 this

20^ the Canon of the Scripture.

this particular i which we have examined and followed through all the Ages of the Church > the Current ran clear and fmooth among them.

CHAP. XVIII.

the New Decree of the Conncel at Trent againft all the former Tejiimomes of the Z>mverfai Church.

CLXXIX. XJO^^ ^ft^^ ^'^ M^^ followed an Affemhlj x\l of a Few Men at Trent , (who took upon them the ftile and Authority of a ^^/^<?/'4/ and O^^^w^/^/V^/ AnJ>o. Councel j)thsit made a "^ Decree among themfelves^ to controul 1 54^. ^hc ^f^^^^ worlds and as in Sundry Points befides, fo in thiSy to 8 ApriL devife a New Article oiFaith^ for their own pleafure^ where- of neither their ob?;^ CWr/?, nor any other Church oi Chriften- domey had ever heard before.

GLXXX. An Ajjemhlj of men, fuch a one as it was, that

by their Magifterial and undue proceedings there, have

done more hurt, and made a greater Schi[m in the church of

Gody then all the Malice of wicked and unpeaceful perfonsy

was ever able to do, fince Chrijl left his legacie of Truth

and Peace among his Difciples^ and foretold the Offences that

would afterwards arife, to pervert and miflead others, who

were not the better aware of them.

fto^"offhe CLXXXI. But this Ajjemhly at Trent^ had this occafi-

firToccafi- on. When divers Ahu[es in Religion, (wherewith many

gbnTngtV men in thofe dayes were juftly fcandalizM ,) began firft

of*Trcn"*'^^ to be Reformed in Germanie^ Pope Leo the Tenths and thofe

that followed the interefts of the Court at Rome^ with

great violence and direful! proceedings oppofing themfelves

againft all Perfons that favoured that Reformation^ there was

a Schifm made oi one part from the other ; and the Popes Bull

of

the Canon of the Scripture.

205

a Petr. Suav. inHI^ ftor. Concil. Trid. lib.i^

•f S>:ecmrnumcation went abroad 5 wherein all men were commanded to drive the Reformers and all their Adherents (among whom Fredrick the Duke oi Saxony was one, ) out of their Lands and Countryes. But this manner of proceeding with them, augmented the Schifwy and made the Rent greater then it was before. For the healing whereof, and for the preventing of further Troubles that might enfue , it was the common judgment, anddefire both of the German Princes ^ and of all others that affcdedthc unitie and Peace of the Churchy that a free & Lawful Councel might be generally fummoned, through thefe We^ern Parts , to be held in fome convenient place of the Empire. But the very Name of a Councel abroad , (out of the LaXeran Palace, ) was dreadfull to Pofe Leo , who » living in his Magnificence and Eafe at T^jw^, where he had plenty and pleafure daily to attend him ^ and fearing left peradventure this New Councel , if it fliould be call'd together^ might prove as fatall to himfelf^ as the C^uncets of ConBance and Bafil did to fome of his PredeceJJ'orsy he was not very willing to hear of it at all. And while he was deliberating how to decline it , and to put it off, he fell fick, and dyed.

CLXXXIL After him fuccecded Adrian the Sixt s b who in former times had been the £7??/;ero/5 Schoolemafter, but was then his Lieutenant, or the chief Governor under him in Spain. From whence comming Speedily to "Rs^mey and there advifing with himfelf , what was beft to be done for the fatisfying of the Princes and people in Germanie , he fent his Legate to the 'Diet at Norinberg , with Letters, and large Promifes to the Princes there afTembled, ^ c Pctr.Stwv.lbld, ^^ that if they would proceed againft Luther (in cafe f « they could not otherwife reduce him) as their

b Sleidam Cona^lib.

20^ A Schola/iical Hijlory of

«f predcceffors had done againft lohn Hus^ and Jerome « of Prage in the Councel oiConjlance^ his own intcn- " tibn 5 and full reiolution was ^ to fet his chiefeft « Cares upon Reforming the Abufes of the Churchy '^and the Abominations of x\\t Sea Siwd^ Court oiRome^ '^ from whence peradventure all the prelenr mifchiefs « had proceeded : and that this He would the rather « do y becaufe he faw that all the world did earneft- « ly defire it. Whereunto the Aniwer of the Diet «^was ; that ii Luther's cafe^andtheconfeffed JEryory «^ of the Church:^ might be both confidered, and treated '^ on together , there was no better meanes to reduce «« all things to tranquillitie , then a free, Chriftian « Councel to be appointed, by the Emperors confent, «« in fome convenient place ot germanie^ where every ^^one might have liberty to come , and give that ad- « vice 5 which fhould moft tend to the honour of "CjW, and the Advancement of his true Religion. And though the Legate was not fo well pleafed with thele Conditions which they annexed to their demand of a Councely yet they flood ftriiSly upon them , and thought them both neceffary, and modeft enough, and that the Pofe could not be juftly offended with them. But affoone as this Anfwer was carried back to Rome y the Pope had no leifure either to begin his intended Reformation , or to determine any thing about the defire that was made of a Councel. For prefently after, he alfo dyed , and Clement the Seventh was put into his place.

CLXXXIII. But this man, during all the time of 4 Peter. Soar. ibid, his Papacie, a ftudioufly declined the neceffitie of a Councel y and would by no meanes heare of it, efpecially with condition to have it celebrated in German'^ •, whereunto notwithftanding he was often prcffedby the£w7^^/'orhimfclf, who on^ while was

minded

the Canon of the Scripture.

207

minded 3 in cafe the Pofe would not affcnt unto ir, to call it by his owne Authority, andotherwhiles loUicited the Colledge of Cardtualh to doe it. But the Pope and C^rdtnah both, fearing it was impoffible to make the Germa/^s accept of luch a Councel , as miglit be moft ferviceable to the Court oiRowe , and being refolute to have no other ^ they fcnt a » Nuncio to propofe thofe Conditions about it, which they knew would never be taken. And thus the time palfedaway, till this Po/^^ likewife fell into a fharp infirmitie, which made an end of his life.

CLXXXIIII. To him fucceeded Paul the Third ^ who was a ^ Prelate that among all his other qualities, made more efteem of noiie> then of ^ diflimulation. And therefore making fhow, that he feared not a Councel , as Pope Clement the r//th did, and being well affured that he could not be inforced to give his affent to the Calling of it in fuch a manner, and in fuch a place , where he could have no advan- tage by it, but that he might make ufe of the Court and the Clergie , if need were, to contradift and hin- der it , when he pleafed ^ he feemed by all meanes to defire it. To this purpofe he fent his feverall Nuncios to the EmperouryB,nd other Chriftian Princes, to declare unto them all, that He and his Colledge of Cardinals had abfolutely determined the Cele- bration of a Councel y butthatfor the time and place of it He was not yet refolved what to doe. After- wards upon conference with the £w/^^y(?r, who went in perfon to Rome about it , and upon fuch Conditions as might no way derogate from the power and greatnefs of the Papacie , he condefcended fo farre that a Synod {hould be fummoned at Mantuorin Italy and fent forth his "^ Bull of JndiBion tohsivcithc^m there, about a II yeer following. In the mean

while>;

Joh.Slcidan.lib.S,

b Pccr.Suav. ibid. c Peer. Suay/ibiA

* Dated 12. Jun* II 27MauAn*i$^,

zo8

A Scholajlical Hiflory of

while, the King of England^ and the Princes of Germany making their publick Remonftrancesagainft it, and the Duke oi Mantua refufing to admit the Councel into his Citty , but upon luch conditions as would have been too coftly for the Court oi%ome'i, that defigne was layd afide , and the Indiftion that the Pope made there , came to nothing. Not long € I Mail. An. 1$%^. ^fter he fent out another Bull for a, Councel to be » held at ricenza^ a Citty under the dominion of the Venetians ; but this*S'^^oW/M%'o;^ meeting with the fame oppofitions that the former did , and the Popes Legats attending there to no purpofe , ( for there was not any Prelate or other Ecclejiajlical Perfon that repayred thither to them, ) at the laft after divers prorogations and Sufpenpons , there came forth a Third Bull^ which comm^LwdiQiAsiWBi^ops and Abbots ^ to- gether with other Priviledged pcTlonSy ^ (that had all taken an Oath to be obedient to the P(?/?<? and fca of Rome^ ) to repayre to the Citty of Trent upon the Confines of Italy , and there to attend the Popes Legates for the Celebration of a Councel which he intended to begin the firlt day oi November in the yeere MDXLIL

CLXXXV, But the Princes, and all the Reformed Churches in Germany , together with the Kingdomes of England^ and Denmark ^ and many other places befidcs, immediately let forth their Proteftations, and made their juft Exceptions againft it ; alledging^ That the Calling of this Councel by the ^o/f 5 Author i^ tie alone, was contrary to the Rights of X'/;2^5, and the Ancient Cuftomes of the Church 5 That he had fummoned no other Perfons thither , nor inteiided to admit any , either to debate or to give their voyce there , but fuch only as had firft fwornc obedience to him J That he tooke upon him naoft unjuftly , to

be

b Verba in Bulla In- diftionis contcnra- V't Jurisjurandi quod Papjt Komanoy & Se- di ApMk£ prdt^itc runt, ac San^£ virtu - te ObtduniU, &c.

the Canon of the Scripture. 200

be Judge there in his own caufe^ knowing well what Accufations were layd againft him^ both for arro- gating tohimfelf an abfolute and univerfall Monarchy over all the Churches of the world , f falfely pre- tended to be given him either by Divine right , or by any humane Concessions ) and for many other enormi- ous Abufes in Religion, which by that ufurped power he fought ftill to maintain 5 and to fufter nothing elfe to pafle in that Councel • but what fhould be moft advantagious to his own ends. They protefted there- fore againft it, as being a politique and Papal device, wherewith to delude the world under the name of a Councel,

CLXXXVI. Nor did the Po/;e5 proceedings here- in give them any caufe to change their mind, or withdraw their proteftation. For Firft, he fent his Three Legates to Trent^ with a bare Mandate only to entertain fuch Prelates and Ambafladours as fhould come thither , by giving them fair words, but in no wife to make any publick Ad , before they had received further Inftrudions from him , which he meant to fend them at his own time , and as he faw caufe himfelf. A few Bifhops likcwife , whom heefteemedtobemoftaddiftedtohim, were com- manded to goe thither , and had fpeciall order not to make too much haft in their journey. Befides thefe , and fome three or four Neapolitan Bifhops, whom the Emperor lent along thither with his Ambafiador, rather to watch what the Pope did, then for any thing els, (for as the cafe then ftood, he hoped for no good to be done,) there were not any more to make up a Generall Councel. Where- upon after they had been there feven Months, and did nothing, they all departed, and the Pope recalled his Legats> deferring his Councel to another feafon,

£ e that

■

210 AScholaJlical Hijlorj of

that might be more commodious for him.

CLXXXVII. In the mean while, there was a League mad^ betweene the Emperour and the King of England , which the Pope took as one of the greateft affronts and -^cornes that could be put upon him. For he had not only excommunicated and curfed the King, as a Schifmatick deftinated to eternall damnation \ but depos'd him from his Regal Authcrity^and deprived him of all his Rightful dominions, giving away both from him and his adhe- rents whatfoever they poffeffed, & commanding that his fubjeds (hould render him no obedience, that ftrangers fhould have no commerce in his Kingdome> that Chriftian Princes fhould joyne together to pcrfeeute him, and that all men fliould take armes ^againfthim, whofe Eftate and Goods, (byiitrtue o? his Papall and plenary power, J he granted them for their Prey, and his perf on for their Slave. Befides> he had declared the proteftants of Germanie to be Hereticks y whom nevertheleffe the Emperor had received into his protection, and done divers favours to them. All which , together with the warrs that were now on foot abroad , and wherein the Pope himfelf alfo had a hand, put the thoughts of his Councel, which he had begun at TV^;^^, to lay ftiU and quiet all the yeer iong.^

CLXXXVIII. But after the Termes of peace between the Emperor and the French King wer« concluded, whereof one was, that they fhould joyntly endeavour to reflore the Church unto her ancient "purity and concord in Religion, and to re- form the Court oi Romcy from whence ail the pre- lent diffenfions were derived , the Pope thought, it concerned him neerely now , to go on with the €omcel j and having no further pretext whereupon

to

the Canon of the Scripture.

in

to delay it any longer, all his Cares were, how to call and order it to his own beft advantage. For this purpofc therefore he let forth another Bull , and lent his Legates to Trent , to begin the Councel there upon the XV. of March , in the yeere MDXLV. but he gave them no Commiflion , or Letters of Inftruftion, after what manner to proceed in it, till he had further advifed about it , meaning to governe him- felf in that behalfe , as he found occafion, beft fitted to his own ends.

CLXXXIX. When the Legates came to Trent^ they found no Prelate there but the Bifhop of the place. Yet within a few dayes after there came Three Italian Bifhops to them, who being dependants upon the Court of Rome , and men very ready to promote the Popes fervice , had order from him to be there with the firft. For his defire was , that the Councel {hould begin with as few as might be , and peaarentiquihncTn they to regulate the reil that came after. In order whereunto , he fent his Brief, and gave his Legates a Faculty , to prefide in the Councel under his Name and authoritie ^ with fpeciall direftions, ^ not to fuffer any thing to be propos'd and offered there to publick debate, which had not firft been privately approved by themfelves , nor * any thing to be put 7d'q7JnZ^l''Tiim to the Queftion and defined, which had not been commdiorem^de qui formerly lent to Rome, and affented to by Himj and with power , if need were to do him fervice in it, a either to break up the Councel for altogether, or to fufpend and prorogue it from time to time , or to remove and tranllate it from one place to another, at their pleafure : which was a device, ^ whereby all Attempts and motions that might be made againft the Enormities of the Roman Court , iTiould be fure to be defeated. For above all other things

Ec 2 this

* Hift. Cone. Tri- dent* IiK2. Papa Lf- gatos fuos mcnuit, Ne dtcretnm uUitinCon- ftfu promul£arentjpri' tifquamiffudRomafi' bi commmcaJfent.Sed ut mandata ab Eo ex*

ciliopr^p^nendHm, dc' iiberandum ^ concln- dendnmeffeu a BuJlaPiuVi 3 -Pie' nam ^ Ijberam pote^ ^atem ^ facultatem. quandocunque vobii videbitur^ Concilium deCivitg'etrtdentmi.

vobis etiam videbitur^ transferendi^ ^ mu" tandj, ac illudin ipfa Civitate Tridentini fapprimendi ^ d'foL vendi vnbis concedu truf,

b Hift. Cone. Trid* Jib. 2. Q^o arcano, omhem deliberauonem Curia Romans flndiis adverfam facile grat inierturbau*

Zli

A Scholajlical Hijlory of

this was the principall matar, which was given them

h Ibid. Ne unquam in charge 5 ^ that they jfhould not in any cafe fuffer

qujcunque de causUd ^j^^ Authority and power of the Pope to be qucilioned.

lioitate Pafjt venia- Thcrc was a provilo m tiTc hril words of the Bull,

m. c that they fhould doe nothing without confent of

d/fiS^^^^^^ the Councell , but d afterwards that claufe was

facietida. . thought needfuU to be altered , and the Legates had

d Ibid. ^l^^Kjf- an abfolute power given them, independent of any

was Fom^ci pgnif- " nuri? uri-i 1 "^

aunt , ciaufuiam ii- but the Po/?^ himielt 5 whole lervice they only at-

hm in agendo ipfos ^q^^q^^^

plusfatit confiringere^

(^ mnutjjiimumquemqueprdifulem i egatis exdiquare-Itaque re raiMbufqh Romdi diligenier cmftdc

ratify atque mendato de Iggitorumfcntentia diplomate, ahjoluta iis conceJ[a eft pste^as^ (^c^

CXC. Two Months paffcd after their comming to Tre^tj before they got Twenty Prelates into their company, and becaule they were fomewhat afham'd to begin their Oecumenicall Councel, fas they are not afhamed to call it) with fo imall a Number, they perlwaded the Pope to put it off for Eight Months longer ; though much adoe they had to f perlwade the Prelates to ftay all that while with

L - them. But by the Months of December and lanuary

following ("having in the mean while contented the poorer fort of Bifhops with a penfion of forty duckets a piece procured for them out of the Popes Coffers, ) they grew to fomewhat a greater Number. For befides the Legats ^ and xht Cardinal BifhopoiTrent^ there were prelent Four Archbi^ops , Eight and Twenty Bifhops^jhree Ablots^ and Four Generals. And a thefe g Hift. Cone. Trid. Three and Forty Perfons made the Generall CounceL ibid. Ex quibus 4?. Among whom t> Two of the Archbifhops were

Concilium i I Ikd Gene- °

rale con^abat.

b Ibid. ^i^\iA^k\^2ix\A\h,iT'GmeiuminqHatuorillisAYchiepfiopserantduo^ velutperfonati,

Claus Magnus Vpfalenfis, fy Robcrtus Venantius ScQtus, Armachanus. Erat autem hicucus^ ^ ta-

men nonfolum mifjficabut , verum eti^mper aleres equos currebat. Hos trgo duos Pontifex in Cd.\u Tri-

dentino effe voluit, cifentationis causSi taniiimy qua ft ifti duo populi tarn longmquifiM ^ Hibtrni, potefla"

J«n ipffus agnofierent, cAm illi rfvtri, prater utntrartiy a nudum tuulum, nihil haberent,

only

the Canon of the Scripture,

215

only Titular, being the Popes Penfioners at Romcy andnow fent to Trer^t^ to incrcafe the Number 5 and to depend upon the Legates , but in thofe Churches, whereof they bare the Names , had they nothing to do ^ nor were they any lawiuil and true Bifhops at all. The one of thefe was Olaus Magms the Goth^ who went for the Archbiiliop oil^pfale in Suedeland ; and the other Blind Sir Robert the Scot^ who appeared for the Primate of Armaugh in Ireland, and ot whom it was then commonly faid , that as poreblind as he was 5 yet had he the commendation to ride poft the beft in the world. And with thele men they began their Oecwnemcal Chapter at Tre/it.

CXCI. Wheie the a pirfi Seffion was fpent in Ceremonie, and opening the Councel ; the ^ second in prefcribing Orders to themfelves and their families j the c third in reciting the Symbole of the Church, which we call the Nicen Creed; (and it had been well , if they had extended it no further, with * adding fo many New Articles of Faith to it 5 as afterwards they did ^ ) But in the ^ Fourth Seffion they began their Anathema's and Curfed all other perfonsofthe world 5 that did not receive their NEW CANON of SCRIPTVRE , in fuchmanner and form , as they were then pleased firft to appoint it. And this bringeth the ftory of their proceedings home 3 to that matter which we have fet forth in all Ages of the Church before.

CXCII. At this Affembly in Trent , they had their private Congregations ^ which were appointed to be kept twice a weeke at one of the Legates Houfes, for the propofing, debating , and framing oi all their Decrees^ before they were brought to be voted and defined abroad in any publick Seffion j for by this means the Legates would be fure ^ either to have

every

nDecci!nb.i$4$. 7 Januarij 1546.

c 4 Febrnarii 1 54^-

"*- In BuIIji Papa Pii

QOarti.

rfS A prills An.Doiiu

1545.

%i^ A Scholafiical Hijlorj of

every thing prepared to their own mind , and be able to number the. voyces before hand which way they would be given , or els not to fuffer the matter to be brought to any open definition in thckCou/^celat all. The CANON ot the SCRIPT VRE therefore being proposed and difcourfed of in four Congregations ^ Ibme urged the diftiniiion that Saint Jeromh^A, herein made, as a known Rule and diredion for the Churchy to whom they added S. jiugujiineand S, Gregory^ who both made a difference between the ^4«(?;?/V^/ and the Other Bookes oi Scripture in the Old Tefiament. Some thought it better to make no diftin(9:ion at all, but to follow the Councel oi Carthage^ or Pope Jnnocent the firft by making a generall Catalogue oi all the Books togtt\:\QT^ and to fay no more. Others defired to have them forted into Three Ranks , the fir^ of thofe which have beenalwayes held and be- lieved to be divine 5 the Second of fuch, as have been queftion'd by lome particular men , but received into Canonical Authority by the Church ; andtheTi^/Vrf of thofe, whereof there hath never been any affurance, which are the feven Books of Tobit^ mfdom^ Eccle- fiaflicuf 5 Judith , Baruch , and the Maccales , befides lome Chapters of ^W^/ and Hefter. But there were certaine perfons among them, (of whom Catharin was the chief , who made it a mayne part of his bufines, to oppofe the writings of Cardinal C^/V^^/;, ) that would needs have them ^//declared, tohe in alt farts ^ as they ftand in the Latin Bible ^ oi Divine and Equal Authority : Only thcBookof^^y^rfc troubled them, which was never put into the Number , cither by the Pope^ or theCouncelofC'^/r^^^^jbuthowfb- ever, becaufe it was fometimesr^^^ in the Church, this alone was thought reaion enough by them, to have it made Canonical. And in the end the voyces

of

the Canon of the Scripture.

215

of thefe men , with feme others that were got to be of their faftion ^ ( though by divers of the more learned fort there confronted^ ) made the major part of XLIII , or fome Few Perfons more 5 and prevailed for aa Oecumenical Decree oi all the hiihops in the world.

CXCIII. For whenthedayofSf/y/o/^camej this Decree was drawn up and voted by them, » " That ^^tbe Synod doth receive with EQF ALL Veneration y all ^^the Books of the old andls^ewTesiament^ together jvith ^the unwritten Traditions belonging hoth to Faith and ^^ Manners^ as proceeding from the Mouth ofchrift , or ^c dilated by the Holy Ghofi. — That among thefe BookeSy «c Tohit and Judith ^ Wifdom and Ecclejiajiicus^ Baruch ^^and the MaccabeSytogether with the Parts of Daniel and " Hejier ought to be numbered ; —And That if any ^erfon ^c doth not receive them All as Sacred and Canonical — Let *« him be Accurfed,

A Cone. Trident. SeC 4. Sacro-SanBaj xcu' menicA ^ itntrn^s Synodus ttidtntina^ OmntsUbros tamvf- ter'ti quam Novi Teflt'* menti , cum utriujtfit mvs Deui fit AmboTy tiecnon tradmontsip* fai (fine fcrjpto) turn ad FIDEM, turn id MoreSfpertinentes^tart' quhm ore terns X Cbri" SoyVtl^SpirituSan' /?« diSatas — PARI

fittitit affe^k ac Rg"

vertntiAfiifcipu efveneratur. Sunt vgrh libri Sacrj^ ne cut dubitatiofuborhipojjit,quinamfint, hitn* frafcripti 5 TeSiamtnti Veteris Huinque Mofis, Jofua, Judkes, Ruth, Q^atmr Regum^ Duo ParaHp, Ef- dras, Nehermas^ Tobias, Judith, Eft her , Job^ Pfal. Parab. Ecclefiaftes, Cant, Canticor, Sap. EcckfaftU CHS, Efatas^Jertm, Barue^ E^ech.Dan. XJI Proph mimres,^ Duo MAccabdorum-Si quis autem Libroji- ipfosintegros cumomnibusfuis paitibus*^pro Sacris et Canonjcisnonfufcfperh ANATHEMA SIT*

CXCIIII. Wherein that which they define con- cerning unwritten Traditions y is no lefle againft the Truth, and againft all Antiquitie, then what they determine fo rallily, and yet lo magifterially y with- out any example, or Catholick Tradition before them>. about the Neif^ Scriptures. But as they had neither Councely nor Father, nor Schocleman , nor other mitery that ever fpake like them in former Ages , fo at this very time, they had none but their ownimalland inconfiderable number togiveafuffrageto thistheir Synodicall, or (as they moft untruly and vainly called it,; their Oecumenical "Decree. For of the Greek Church they had not one, unleffe it were fome fuch

as

ii6

A Scholaftical Hijiory of

as blind Sir %obert of Scotland was ; of the Englijh as few, (for the Biftiop of Worceikr %ichardTates was not yet come among them, and when afterwards He went thither , He was there but in a private and perfonall capacity , having no employment given him from the Church of England^ ) oi the Helvetiar^y German^ and Northern Churches none ; of the ^ French Scarce Two, of the Spanijh not many ; all the reft we find to be Italians^ (and they, asyet, nofuch great number of them neither,) among whom divers a were the Popes Penfioners , and fent thither ^ to outballance other mensvoyces^fomeofthem titular , and fome c unlearned. And was it ever heard of in the world before , that XL Biftiops of Italy ^ alsifted peradventure with half a Score others, fhould made up a General Councel for all Chrifiendom > wherein, as there was not a any one greatly remark- able for learning, that voted this Canonical Authoritie to thofe Bookes , which by the Confent of the Oriental and Occidental Churches were ever held to be uncertain and Apocryphal , fo fome of them were Lawyers, perhaps learned in that profefsion , but of little undcrftanding in Religion j and though other- fome were Divines, yet many of them were of leffc then ordinary fufticience 5 but the greater Number

*Skidan.Commcnc.

lib. 17, In bis duo

Gdllu q^inque Hiffi-

nuWhicusunuSyRe'

I'tqui omnei Itali.

a Hift.Concil.Trid.

lib. 2. iMulti inopes^

fie ac poUicitationibw

jUeilii quibus prcfpici'

tndum fuhi nee enim

tarn pATch ac tenuiter tridtnti atqueRoma

fuflentari potuerunt, Rome enim quiim VVLLA tjfent Au- liermte, vitam humi- lem^ et alih obnoxiam toltrabant 5 in Concilio autem major is ftbi ant' mosfumcbant, et crtf- cente exi^imatione , rem quoque auH'mem expe^abant. Item , ]oh. Slcid lib. 17. Anno. i$4^. Erat Romdt Olaus Magnus, hkic Pontifex Archi- ep-fc0patum GothicuW', Iktt extra comwerci- um EcclRom. pofmmj confert, 5$r Concilio

Trid. interejfe jubet, ^ ad viBum quotidianum aureos dat Afenftruos quindecim. b Claud* Efpenf. digrclT. I. td. I . cap. cpift. ad Titum. Faffum eft pofterioribus Seculis^ ut qusdmerith in Cone. BafiL Ludovicui Arelatenfis querebatur 5 in ConJliis id Demiimfiat, ^ necejfariofiatj quod Nationiphceat Ita- licsy ut quafola Epifcoporumt (qui et ipftfoli vocem illie decifivam habent',) numero Nationcs alias squet, aut fuperety ftcut Ccripfit lib.i. di Gejhs ejus Condi ^neas Sylvius nondum Pius. Hac ilia eft Helena^ qus r.uper tridenti obiinuit. c Alf, a Caftro. de hxr, Puint. lib. 15. Eorum aliqui nee beni Latine le^ gere noverunt. Cujus rei exempla funt Epifcopi Italici- a Hift. Cone. Ti id. lib.2. Audax in captum lidebatur 5- Card. ^48. Ep'fcopos, auBnritatem Canonicam Libris antea inctrtis et Apocryphis dare. In his tamen ptdfulibus non temer^ reperiri aliquempTAcellentis dnthind laude infignem ^ Leguleios efe ali- quot, in juris pro fefftone forth doSos,fed Religionis non admodk-n intelligcntes, perpaucos Tbeologos. eofqiie eruditiene infra vulgut Theologorum, plerofque Aulicos^ ex its aliquos titular es tantum, fy Epifcopos Mag^ mm partem Civitatum adeo minutarum, utft qurfqut clerum ^ ^opukm cuiprsftt) refcraty vix cmnes Mil" hfimam Orbit Cbr ftiani partem reprefentent,

were

the Canon of the Scripture.

117

were Courtiers, and Biiliops of (uch fmaUpl-aces (or dignities only titular,) that Suppofing every one to reprefent the Clergy and people from whom' he came , it could not be faid, that one of a Thouiand in Chnjle/iciome y was reprefented in this pretended Councel,

CXCV. Thofe few Perlons that voted tYiis'Hew Decree y alledged for themlelves the Canon of the Councel Sit Carthage^ and the doubtfull Decrees of Pope Innocent and Gelafius. But if they had followed any of thcfe Patterns , they would never have put the Book b of Baruch into their Canonical Catalogue '^ nor {aid, that any of the Reji (now contefted) ought c to be the Rule of Faith , no leffe then thofe which are not contefted ^ nor would they have added their Ana- thema againft all men that were other wife minded. How thofe Two Popes^ together with d s. nAuguflin^ and the African Councel^ are to be underftood , and taken in that fenfe , which may not contradid both themfelves, and the univerfall dodrine of the Church in their times, and in all times before them , we have at large fet forth in their own Ages , nor can any thing be brought more to the purpofe or better and more truly to expound them, then the judgement of ToftatuSj and Cardinal Cajetarij who for the happinels and depth of their underftanding , as likewile for their admirable induftry and diligence , wereaccom- pted the prime Divinesof thofe times wherein they lived, and many more ages befides, being fo well read in tht Scriptures^ together with xhQ.ancientsind later DoBors^ whom they had ttudied from their child-hood, that there was no Prelate or perfon in the Councel of Trent ^ who might have thought him- felf too good to learn of them. And if in this little new Councel and decree they had proceeded no fur- ther then S. z/ium^in ox the Africans and Jnnocent

Ff did

b Concil. Tridenr. Seir.4.

c Ibid. Omnentaque intelligant quibus po^ tijjjmnm tejiimoniij ac prafidiis in Oinfir- mandis Vogmatibuf y (b'c. ipfa Synodus ufw ra fit. Hoc eft, Li- bris omnibus prxdi*

d Lib. 2. de Doftr. Chriftiana^

2l8

4Concil.Trid.Seflr.4.

St quis ipfoi Libros cum mnibus fuis par- tibHi,(yc. Nonfufcg- pent, ANATHEMA SIT, Et in Bulla Pa- px Pii 4* ad finem Conciliide Profefli- onc Fidci Tridcnd- nsE EXTRA HANC JflDEM NEMO PO- TEST ESSE SAL-

vvs.

A Scholajiical Hijlory of

did 5 there might have been fome tolerable fence and explication given of it 5 whereas by the Ternies wherein they have now addrcffcd it , they have left the world no way 5 either to reconcile it to the former, or to render it fufFerable to the future ages of the Church. For whoioever receiveth this ^0^//^^/ of Trent , he muft not only receive the controverted and additional Books of the OldTeftameM 5 as permit- ted to be readier inftruCtion and good examples of manners, ( which was all that ever the Church allowed to them 5 ) but he muft likewife take and believe them 5 under pain of eternall damnation , to be in all parts E(^uall and of W^ ^/^^W/V/> to the writings of Mo[e$ and the Prophets , for the eftablidiing of his Faith 5 and founding the maine points of his Religion upon them : And , which is more , muft not only believe {ohim[elj\ but be bound alfo to believe , that a every one is damn dy wlx) doth not herein believe as much as he^or thinketh any man can be Saved^ that believeth otherwife then he^ and the Comcel of Trent doth. Which (hutteth up the dores againft all mode- ration, & Chriftian Charitie, from ever comming in, to abide in their dwellings that are tyed to maintaine their owne Error ( this and many more ) with luch paffionatefeverity. .

CXCVI. Somewhat they think is faid to defend this Decree of their CounceKrom novcltie, when they produce Pope Eugenius^ and the Councel of F/orf/^rf) delivering to them the fame Canon of Scripture ^ which they have delivered to others ; and which he received ( at necrea thoufand yeeres diftance ) from Gelafius ; Gelafius from S. Auguflin ; S. Auguftin from the Councel oi. Carthage -^ and the Councel of Carthage from Pope Jnnocent ; For thefe be all the Authorities, vuhereuftto they are able to pretend for XV hundred yeeres together , and upwards > fince their New

Canonical

the Canon of the Scripture. 219

Canonical Scriptures were firft written. But 5 befideT that thefe Authorities are fome of them uncertainj and fome mifconftruedj and that none of them were ever taken (during all the refpcftive ages before , neither by one Writcrj nor other,) in that fenfe to which the Matters and theDifciples oi Trent hsiVQ, lately ftretch'd them 5 we will be bold to (ay , that they fhall never be able to fhew the Curftnefsof their Anathema out of any 5 or all thefe Authorities together. For howfoever after S. ^ugu^in's time, they may happen to find Two or Three Writers, that fometimes numbred the Booh promifcuoufly , asfe^ and the Councel of Carthage did , yet they can never find 5 that any of thofe writers either made the Ec- clefiaftical Books EQV AL to the Canonical in their proper nature and Authority , or that GelafiuSy or Eugenius himfelfj ( if the wandringD^i:r^f5 that goe under their Names were worth the while to be hera mentioned,) fet their ^Anathema and xhclx Curfc upon any man, to exclude him from the Communion of God's Church upon Earth , and from all intereft in the Kingdome of Heaven , if he would not forfakc the OU Canon :y to follow the ^V^;^ , and make no dif- ference at all between Mofes and the LMaccdes : For this is it 3 ( making the Two Canons EQVAL , and pronouncing them ACCVRSED that were other- wife minded,) which the Councel oi Trent hath done, and done it the firft of any other Perfons in the world.

CXCVII. For which their doings herein they have nothing to plead. For either mufl they plead the common Tejiimonie of the Church before them, or a peculiar Revelation given them to this pUrpofe by God himfelf , or the Ipecial power of their owne Church, to alter and advance the former condition of the Books (now debated) at their pleafure. But

F f 2 . firft,

zzo

AScholaJlical Hijlorj of

firft, the Te^imouy ofthc Catholick Church ^'whereby this Controvcrfie) (to maniicft the Pcrpctuall Tradi- tion 3 or matter of fad in it, ) ought to be decided, is altogether againft them , as we have produc'd and proved it in every >4^^both under the Old Teftamer/ty and under the 'Hew. Then, to any fpecial Revelation that they had about this matter, they doe not pretend thenifeives j nor are there any {nch New Rcvelatior.s given in thefe times , (and where they are pretended, they are never to be admitted, ) which be pppolitc to the (iy^nc tent Rules of l^erity ^nd Religion xeLtiVQA, by the Church of God in all times heretofore. And for the Pomr that they had at Trent^ to regulate either their owne Church, or any other, in things of this nature ; as we know none they have, lo is it their owne ^ Confeflion that none they ought to have , challenging no other power in this particular, then only to "Declarey^h^it Bocks were truely and properly Cdnonicd in the Church before, and not to wake 'them lo, otherwife then ^'oihad formerly both made and *r/^m/the pcrfed CANON of HIS SCRIP- TVRES to their hands.

CXCVIIL When they cannot tell elfe what to fay, they are ( fome of them ) content now, to let the Booh , ( promifcuoufly numbred in one general Catalogue, ; be diftributed into Two feveralRankcs of a ^^ F/Vj? and a Second canon. And truly. for as- Fmr esi, alter Poife- much as pcrtcincth to them in the OJdTeJlamenty ( for rior.-camnki Primi vve acknowledge no fuch diftiibution in the A^<f»7, ) c:i::Ltp'ii^^':) ^hcre may be a good ule made of this difHnaion, whereby to reconcile the Epiftle of Pope J/^/^o^f;^^, ( if ever there was any fuch, J and the Catalogue, that S. Augujlin and the Councel of Carthage made.

4 Bcllarm. de verb© Bci, lib. I. cap. lo. Scft. Icaque. Nondi- c'lmusj Ecdefiftm , id eft, ?apam pofe pro fko arbitratu facerey Librum Canonkum de Non Canonjco , ^c. Fatemur enim Eccle- fiam r.uflo modo pojfe facere Librum Cano~ nkum de Non Cano- nicQ, nee contra -^ fed tantum declarare, quis fit habendus Canonu cus ; ^ hoc non tewe rii ntc pro arbitratUj fed ex veterum u^i- moniisy fy:. Which TefiimmJes have been fully related, & pro- ved to be agair.fl him in this Schola^kal Hiflory^ and TrtdUfe of them al!..

b Sixt Senenf.Blbl lib.i.Seft.i.Cd/Joni- ci Libri dmbus inter fe Ordinjbus diftingu- Hfitur ', quoTuxn alter alter Poffe-

funt indubitatA^dei—, Canonici Secundi Or- dinisy^qu.1 olim Eccle- ftaftici vocabantHr, ^ rmnc a Nsbis Deutero-

Canonici dicuntur^yillifuntj de quibuu quia non flniimfub ipfts ApoMorum terr^poribus^ fed long^p^H ad mtitiam tot'ius Eccle fiaperytnerHnty inter Catholicoj fun aljquandofenlentiaarjcepiy xetutifHnt in V. T, Ub i Tobi£, Judith ^ Baruch, ^bc.

to

the Canon of the Scripture.

zii

to the Vfiiverfall Confent of the Church ^:^dotQ^^r\A af- ter their times. Yovihi^ Seco/id Cmon was never made EQVAL totheF/zyf, nor did they intend to attribute ^ ^ m t m • the LIKE Authority in all things to ^//the i5oc^iof Bulirfupcr '^'fOTma either fort together. But in the meane while there Jurarrenti Profcffio- will be no fuch ule of this dilHndion had. to reconcile

the Decree ot the Councel at Trent ^ either to S,

nis fidei.— t;^ wiiks

tjufdem FJdci Pro- fiffio miformiter ab Omnibus exhtbetttwr^ unicaque ^ cfrta. iU lius Forma cunSis in- notefcaty—Formam ip' fampublkari fecimm —^jaxtahancacnon a/iam formam^ pro- fejfionem Fidei filen - niter fieri aulhritAte ApofioUa diflriiiy

(iy^uou^in^ or to S. Augu^ins Anceftors ^ or to any

other Ecclefiaftical writer that followed him. For

our nevvMaikrs will by no mcanes grant, that the

Books oi iho. Second Order are to be diftinguifhed

from the firjl^ as any way Second or infer tour to them

in dignitie, but contend and believe, that they have

both alike as much Truth^^&c Equally as much Authorities

the one as the Other ^ admitting nq other difference P^^^^P^^^^o Mand^t-

betweenc them 5 then a difference of Time only , ^^y^ TioN.firmi

wherein they were written , and made knowne to the fide credo ^ profit sor

world s and hereupon commanding all the world, f^^^tf^^^^^

upon paine and perill of their Eternal perdition, to ftdei, quo s.ro^

believe as they doe, (or at lead fay they doe, if a man ^^^'^ ecclesia

might believe and truit them, j that it is no le lie a in vnum Veum p^-

neceffa'ry Article of the C/^rz/f/^.-^ F*z/V^ to believe the ^^^ Omniporentem ^

Books which we call Ai^ocryphal, to be as Canonical u^f^in%mm^DZ

as the other are, and both to be penn'd by the Holy minum Jefum chri^n

Chofts then to believe that God is the Creator of Heaven ^l^^^^f ^oT"^*' ^^''

and Earthy or that Chrijl was Borne of the BiefjedTtrgin 5 ^x ^ mJix Virgine \

for they have ^ put ^o//;7^^/f, and the D(fr/'^^5 ot the ^c.-EjufjemEaU'

. , .. ft^ Obfervationes &

Covftittttionetj—Senfum S. SaipluiA—Scptim Propria Sacranenta-DoBrinamdepeccato Originally f^ Jujtificatime^--Propimiorium fypro^rium Miffdi Sicrificiumpravivis ^ defun^iif^—Tranfubflantiatio^ nem,—Comtr>unionem fab alter & tantiim Specie,— Purgatorium^—Invocationem San^orum^'-^lmiginmn ve-- nerationem^—Indulgenliarum poreflattm^-Rcmanam Ecclefiam omnium Ecclefiarum Matrem ^ Magu Sramy—Ritnanum Pontificem B. Petri Succefforem, (fy" Jefu ChrijTt Vicariumy-Cditera item OMNIA a "tridentina Synodotradita^ definita (fy" declarala, indubitanter recipio atqae profiteer^ fimiilque contraria Omnia, atq'y H^refsab EccJefta (B^omz a ]priTe6\fia)damnata{y rtjelhs,^ ANAtHEMAllZAtASf- EOO PariterDAMNO, REjlCIO, ANaTHEMAIIIO. HancveramCatholicam FIDEMy Extri quam NEMO SALVVS ESSE POt EST— veraciterteneo-fpondeoyvoveo^acjuro. Sic me Dens ad» juvtiy ds^hsc San^aDei Ev^ngdia — NuUi ergo omnino bominumliceat banc paginamno^rdtvoluntatity (fyr M<indatiinffingere,—^i quis autetn hdc attentarepy^fumpferit, itidignatimtm omnipormis Dih 4c ^.■' Petri J ^ Fault Apoflolorum ejus,fe nivirit inwifmrum,

Councel

ZZl

A Scholajlicai Hifiorj of

Councel of Trent together 5 all into One and the fame Creed ^ without which, (according to their New 5 un- charitable 5 and unchriftian Religion, ) "Ho Body cm he Saved, Wherein they have fet themfelves at open defiance with the Church, and Curbed that which ?*■ Rcvd.22»i8. God hath Blejjed. But while we are in awe of S, "^ John's Curfe, we fearenot theirs 5 and by the grace of a Ephcf.2,20. (jod our foundation^ which is ^ built Vi^ontheFro-

i2Tim.2,i9. phets and tApofiles ^ b ftandethfure.

Chap. XIX.

T^he Qonrclufion and Summary of all the Former CHATTELS.

CXCIXTpHe Conclufion therefore of all this dit JL courfe will be. That the Religion of the church of Engl, in her Article concerning the Holy Scri- ptures f whcreunto the publick Confeflions of ihe '^^- formed & Proteiiant Churches abroad, befides the Chri- ftians of the Eaft and South Parts of the world be agree- able) is truly Catholick. That the Ancient Church of the OldTeftament acknowledged no other Books to be Canonical^ then we doe. Thar our Blejjed Saviour and his Apoflles after him received ho other. That the Several Ages following adhered to the f3.me Canon. That the Authors of the Books oiToiitandJudith^ and the reft of that order , were no Prophets infpired ot God to write his Aathentical Scriptures. That they who firft put thefe Deutero-Canonical or Ecclefiaflical Bocks into the Volume of the BiMe^ did not thereby intend to make them E^iual to the Books of A^ofes

and

the Canon of the Scripture.

225

and the Prophets ^ but only to recommend them unto the private and publick Reading oi the Church ^ both for ihc many excellent Precepts and Examples of life ^ that be in them , and for the better knowledge of the Hijtorie and Ellate of Gods people from the time of the Prophets , to the Coming of Chrift. That it is not in the power of the Roman Churchy nor any Other 5 either to make New Articles of Faith^ or to make any Books Sacred mA Canonical Scriptures , ( fo as to be the binding Rules of our Faith and %£ligion^ ) which were not fuch in their mne Nature before, that is 3 certainly infpiredb^God^ and by ^ his Authority only ordained to be fuch , irom the time when they were firft written. And laftly , That adhering to the ancient Catholick Faith and DoBrine of the Churchy we cannot admit or approve anyfuch'I^(/»^I>^^^^^as it hath lately plcafed the Mafters of ihzCouncelsit Trent to maKc 5 who have not only obtruded ^/?f/!? Bookes upon their owne people, to be received as true and authentic al Parts 01 the Ancient Te^ament , but have likewife damn d all the world befides 5 that will not recede from the Fniverfall Confent of the Chriftian Churchy and lubfcribe to that horrid AN ATHEMA, whereby they have moft irrfhly condemn'd fo many Ages of Fathers and Writers ^ before them. And if there were no other caufe to rejedt the pretended Authoritie of this late and exorbitant Afjmbly , ( as there be many more, ) this only is enough.

a NoTa.EccUftaenim Teflis tantiim tt tndtx eSi dt Receptjs omni temport Scripturh Sacrif, qu£ ab ipfo Dfo prim^m ^ cdle- jfemfuam habent orU ginem j Idcirch, neque QZ^OAD NOS Au^ ^ornate ullam ab ho* mimm teftimoniis nrn" tuantur.

Chap, XX,

The ^emdinder.

CO

, T^Here remaines nothing now, but that having 1 layd our Foundation lure upon the Canonical

and

m

A Scholajiical Hijlory of

* Editnscfthic Cd- non>unstcdmi4rticM- /// Keligmu Anno PominiMDLXXJT.

SLndundouked ScriptureSy wherein the will of God, and the Myfteries of our whole Religion are Revealed to US5 we proceed from the Truth and Principles of our Beliefs to a Righteous, fober 5 and holy Regulation of our Lives y in the ftrid and uniformeP/*^^//'^ of all Religious duties and Obligations, that thefe Divine Scriptures have layd upon us,

COROLLARIVM.

^ CANON ECCLES. ANGLIC— i^-^ quid Vn({uam*T>oceiituY y quod religiose teneri & credideheat^ nifi quod confentaneum Sit DoBrina VETERIS (^ NOVl TESTAMENTI5 quod^ exillaipf^DoBrini Catholici P aires & Veteres Epifcopi coUegerint.

^ DEO OPTIMO lM A X I M O.

SACRARUM SCRIPTURARUM

CONDlTO%^Iy

Sit

LauSy Honor ^

Et Gloria^ in SecuU

Seculorum.

Amen.

A Table of the places of Scripture that are cited in this Book^

the Number refer reth to the Paragraph. The Old Testament.

chap, Ferfe. Numb.

GENESIS, m. 1 6. A Nd thy Huf- JLjL band fhal rule over thee. 2^

DEVTERONOMY. X. if. God accepteth no . man's perfon. 3 6.

II, CHRONICLES. XX. 7. Abraham the friend of God. 38.

NEHEMIAH. I VIII. 2. 8. And Ezra the Scribe brought the Book of the Law- 21.

PSALMES. XXII. My God^ my God , looke upon me, &c. 25.

CXLVII. i^. He fhewed his words unto Jacob, and his Z^- tutes unto Ifrael, &c. 17.

PROVERBS.

HI. 3. Let not mercy and

Truth forfake thee. ^5.

II. My Sonne , deTpife

not thou the chaftcningofthe

Chap. Ferfe. Numh^

Lord. 100.

27. Withold not from doing good to them that need it. ^j.

VIII. 1 5. By me Kings reigne &c. 3^.

2 2. The Lord from the beginning created me. 54.

ECCLESIASTES. VIII. 5. Who fo keepeth the Commandements, (hall feele no eviil thing. 4^,

CANTICLES. VI. 8. There are threefcore Queenes. 102.

ESAY.

XL. 6. All fiefli is grafTe,

&c. 37.

13. For who hath

knowne the mind of the Lord;

&c. 3^.

XLI. 8. God the friend of

Abraham. 38.

LIIL Who hath believed

our report &c. 2 5;

Aaa LVIU.

QL/f Table of the

Chap. Ferfe, Numb.

LVIII. 7. Break thy bread to

the hungry. ^5.

lEREMY. XXIX. Thefe are the words of the Letter^ that Jeremy lentj &c. • 61.

XXXVI. 4. And Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremy all the words ofthe Lord 5 upon a roll of a Booke. 61.

8. And Baruch did ac- '' cording to all that Jeremy the prophet commanded him, reading in the Book. &c, 6 1 . - XLIII. 5.^. And they tooke all the remnant of Judah,- Jeremy the prophet , and Baruch the Sonne of Neriah. 61.

LI. /4.Thus farre are the words of Jeremy &c. 6 1 .

EZECHIEL. I. 28. The appearance of the Brightnefs was as the like- nefs of the Glory of God, 3 6.

DANIEL. XIL 3. They fhall ftiine as the brightnefs of the firma- ment. j6.

AMOS. V. 1 3 . In that time fhal the prudent man keep filcnce. 6<^.

MALACHY. III. I. Behold, I will fend my Meffengcr 5 and he fhall prepare the way before me. 4.

Chap. Ferfe. Numb,

nil. 5. Behold, I will fend you Eliah the prophet 5 before the comming of the great and dreadfuU day of the Lord. 4.

APOCRYPHA. I. ESDRAS. IIL 1 2. Truth is the ftron-

n. ESDRAS.

I. 30.1 gathered you to- gether as a Hen gatherethher chickens under her wings. 3 5?^ VIII. 3. There bemanycre^^ atedjbut few {hal be faved. 3 9,

TOBIT. ^ nil. 7. Give almes of thy r Subftance. 3^,

1 5. doe that to no man, which thou hatefl to be done tothyfelf. 3^»

17. Beware of all whor- dome. 3^,

IVDITH. Vm. 3^. What things be^did to Abraham. '38.

ESTHER. X. 5. Then Mordochy faid 5 I remember a dreame, &c., 5^.71-

WISDOME. III. 7. The juft {hall Ihine astheSunne. 7^,

lUI. I O.Enoch wastranfla- ted&c. 1^6.

1 1, The

of the T laces of Scripture.

Aa?

chap, f^erj'e. Numb,

1 1. The righteous man

is fpeedily taken away, leaft

wickcdnefs fhould alter his

underftanding. 8i, 84.

VII. 2^. Wifdome is the

Brightnefs of everlafting

light. 3^.

IX. 1 3. What man is he,

that can know the counfel of

God. 3^.

tECCLESIASTICVS. Preface. In the 38.yeereand the time of King Ptolemy , after I came into Egypt. 88. VIII. 5. Whofo keepeththc Commandement ^ {hall feele no evil thing. 49.

j^XIIII. 1 7. AH fiefh waxcth ^ old as a Garment. 3 7.

XXIIII. 1 4. From the beginning, and before the world , I was created. 54-

XLII. 1 4. Better is a man that doth ill 3 then a woman doing well. ^9.

BARVCH. im. 7. Sacrificing to Di- vels. 39-

SVSANNA. I . There was a man in Babylon, &c. 4^.73-

BEL, AN D THE DRAGON.

3. Now the Babyloni- ans had an Idol called Bel, ^c, ibid.

Chajf. rerfe. Numb.

PRAYER of MANASSES.

o. Repentance is . not for the juft , but for Sinners.

I.MAC€ABES.

nn. 5 9 . Judas and the whole Congregation of Ifrael or- deined, that the dayes of the Dedication of the Altar fhould be kept in theit feafon, from yeere to yeere. 40.

II.MACCABES. VII. I. And it came to pafTe alfo, that Seven Bretheren with their Mother were tor- mented, &c. 40, XIIII. 41. He fell upon his fword , choofing rather to dye manfully, then to cpme into the hands of the wicked. 81,

THE NEW TESTAMENT. S. MATTHEW.

VII. 1 2 . Whatfoe ver yc

would that men fhould doe ^ unto you , even fo doc ye unto them, for this is the Law ^ and the Prophets. 39.

IX, 13. I came not to call the Juft , but the Sinners to re- pentance. 3^.-

XI. 1 3. All the prophets 5

and the Law prophecyed till

lohn. 4.

Aaa 2 XIIL

<iA Table of the

Chaf. Verfe. Numh.^

XIIL 43. Then {hall the Juft thine as the Sunne. 7 6.

XXVII. p. By Jeremy the pro- phet. 4^- S. MARK. L 1.2. The Beginning of the Gofpel of JelusChrift, as ; it is written in the Prophet ^ &c. 4- S, LVKE. I. 70. As he fpake by the mouth of his holy prophets, i . XU 4 1 . Give Almes of what ' you have. 3^. XXIIII. 27. And beginning at Mofes and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures. 3^« 44. All things muft be fulfilled 5 which were written r in the Law of Mofes, and in the prophets 3 and in the ' Pfalmes. 3^. S. lOHN. X. 22. And it was the feaft of the Dedication. 40. ACTS of the APOSTLES. VIL 42. The Booke of the Prophets. 19. XXIIIL 1 4. Believing all things which are written in the Law, and in the Prophets. 3 2 . XXVI. 2 2. laying no other things, then thofe which the Prophets and Mofes did fay. 32,

Chdf. rerfe. Numh.

XXVIII. 2 3 . Perfwading them concerning Jefus both out of the Law > and out of the Pro- phets. 32. ROMANS. III. 2. To whom the Or- acles of God were commit- ted. 17. VIII. 8. They that are in the flefh, cannot pleafe God. 83.

IX. 4. Whofe is the Adop- tion &c. 73.

XI. 34. Who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his Counfellor ? 3 6.

XIII I . The powers that be, are ordeined of God. 3 6.

I.CORINTH.

X. 10. They were deftroy- ed by the deftroyer. 3 8.

20. Sacrificing unto Di- vels. 3^.

IL CORINTH. XIIL 8. We can doe no- thing againft the Truth. 3j>. GALATHIANS. II. 6. God accepteth no mans'perfon. 3 6.

" EPHESIANS. VI. $. Neither is there re- fpe(5t of per fons with him. 3 6^ COLOSSIANS. I. 1 5. The Image of the invifible God. 3^.

LTHESSALON.

^Places of Scripture.

^Af

chap. Ferfe. Numb.

Iin. 3. Fly fornication. 3^.

II. TIMOTHY

III. 8. As Jannes and

Jambres refifted Mof es. 4 1 .

i^. All Scripture is of

divine Infpiration. 1.32.

HEBREWS.

I. I. God fpake of old time to our fathers by the pro- phets. 32.

3. The Brightnefs of his father's glory. 3 6.

XL 5. Enoch was tranfla- ted. 3<^.

3 5. They were tortu- red. 40. 37. They were fawne afunder. 40. S.IAMES. I. 10. All flefh is as Graffe. 37.

II. 23. The Scripture was fulfilled, which (aid. And Abraham was called the ft iend of God. 38.

IIII. 5, The Scripture faith.

Chap. Ferfe. Numb.

The Spirit that dwelleth in us lufteth to Envie. 41.

I.S.PETER.

I. 24. All tierti is as Grafs, &c. 37.

II. S.PETER.

I. i^.We have a fure

word of prophecy. 3 2.

2 1. The Holy men of

God fpake as they were moved

bytheHolyGhoft. i.

S.IVDE.

Ver.14. And Enoch alfo the

Seventh from Adam, propheli-

ed of thefe, faying, Behold , the

Lord commeth with ten thou-

fand of his Saints. 41.

REVELATION. '^^^*^

II. I. Unto the Angel of the Church of Ephefus. 47.

III. I. Unto the Angel of the Church in Sardis^ 47.

XXIL 18. If any man (hall

adde unto thefe things, God

fhall adde unto him the plagues

that are written in this Book. 5.

FINIS.

J hxi JAb-lr t^ ccnsvjrcd, Irv. 'KjMry TcTn. '2.. h

SI/.

A Chronological Table of the Authors^

whofe Testimonies are produced in this

Scholafiical Hijiory.

the Number nferrtth h the Cent.

cfjiil 1>»c,Z3.lQ0

CenU An.€hu Numb.

y h 34 (^Hri§i"s own Te- ufqHea(\^^ ftimony. 31 ^^^^ UisYioly Apjlles 32,

&c.

r |.r«>n;k^K4l eodem JofephuS 7 for the ancient

I Li - *J.f •/ T J > church of the

^lcf\>o. t^rnpore Philo Jud.i ficbt. 24

II.

. 102 Clemens Rowanus Epif-

'Dkc.T.-i. 10ft k * , ^

copus, * 44

j^poftoUcal Canons 45

/ 1 10 Dionyfius the Areopa-

have written the Eccl.

Hierarchy, 4^

l^o MelitOy the Biftiop of

Sardis in Afia, 47

h^2 nierfu^ «,k- 1 ^'4 Juftin thc Martyr 5 . a

Doftor in Paleftine.,

' '48

A'i

ttlclihsnP

m.

204 Clemens^ a Doftor of Alexandria, and Ori- gen's Mafter, 52

205 Tertullian^ a Prieft of Africk, and S, Cypri- ah'sMafter, 51

220 OK/^^/?5aDovi:orof A-

Paragrapb:

AmChr. ^umb.

lexandria, who fet forth the Original, and [fevcral Tranflations of the Bible, 49

225 Julius Africanus, who On.- ^— lived with Origen, 50 250 S. Cyprian the Martyr, frx^rhff.its ^nd Bifhop of Car- thage in Atrick, 52

IV.

oiijf^oiUt

320 EufebiuSy theBiftiopof Csefarea in Paleftine,

53

325 The Firft general Coun-

eel of iiice under Con- ' famine the Emperor.,

, n 54

340 S. Athanapuf , the

Archbifhop and Patri- arch of Alexandria, 5 5 &c. 3<o 5. Hilary:, Bifhop of > ^'^^-'^Poidiers in France, 57 3^0 S. Cyrill^ Bifhop of .

Jerufalem, 5 8

3 ^4 The Councel of Z^t?<3V-

r^^3 5^ &c.

'374

of the Authors.

A3/

Cent.

An.Chr. Numb.

374 S. Epiphamtis , the Bifhop of Calamine in the Hand of Cyprus, 6^

375 5. ^^j//, the Billiop oif

Caefarea, in Cappado- ^5

^76 S, Gr, ISTazta/^zenj the Biiliop of Conftantin- ople, 66

378 «^, Amphilochiu} 5 the BiQiop of Iconium in .Lycaonia, ^7

380 S. Philaflrm^ the Bp. ofBrefcia in Italy, ^8

3^0 5. Chryfofio7nej the l>ut^^vor t^^ A/^^^Archbiftiop and patri-

I

H*- 397

3P2

3?8

400

arch of Conftantin- ople, 6^

S. Hi er erne, who tranf- lared the Bible ^ out of the Hebrew into Latin, 70 &c. Rufji^ 5 a Dodtor of Aquileia, in the Patri- archate of Venice, 74

Annis 1'$.

S. Avgu^ine^ Bifhop

of Hippo in Africk, 7^ 405 Jnnocent the Firft, ^«5«^^^- Bifhop of Rome, 83 41P The Councel of Car-

thage^ 8 2

42^ The DoBors at cJ^/tr-

/«iZ^5 in France, 8 4 451 The Fourth General

Cent, ^^'^^^'

'Hjtml. '"

VL

Councel oiCakedo^^ 8 5 452 Leo the Firft, Bifhop

of Rome, ibid.

4P4 Gelafjusy Bifl:iop of

Romcj 8^

530

Aur, Cajjidore a Con- fular man , that wrote the Tripartite Hifto- ry> 8^

luftiman the Empe- who gave the Four Firft Gencrall Councels the force of Lawes, ^o

543 Junilius^ a Bifhop in Africk, p I

553 Primafius^ an African Bifhop, ^%

5^0 Ana^afiuSy the patri- iici-au jjt»*« arch of Antioch in Sy- ria, ^3

580 LeontiuSj the Byzan- tine, p4 C7-4, 5^^ r/^ay//^^ the Martyr, tj»7 ?ahiuiawriBi{hop of poiaiers in L f>« -.^r. Trance,

H'f

5P^

199

VII.

^5

An Ancient Author

under the name of S. Auguftine^ ibid.

An Ancient Author under the na^me of S. Amlrofey ibid.

^00 5*, Gregory^ ifiifhop of

<tA Chronological Table

Cent. Aw.c^r. Numb.

Rome, 9^

620 hn Ancient Author

Augujitncy I o I

^30 Amiochm^ a Greek

Dodor, 102

f.^ ^3^ Jfidore. the Biihop of

*^V^t-^^SivilleinSpaine, 103

♦ ^p I The Sixt general Coun-

eel at Conftantinople,

inTruUo, 104

VIII.—

710 lohn Damafce^y the

Syrian Dr. 105

730 Venerable Bede^QidioOiQt

of the Church in En-

glandj 106

^6o^Adrian ^ a Greek

ij^^U-? "'Doftor in Photm^ 1 07

kvrior 3^«»

Sr

800 Alcuin^ Bedes SchoUer, and Charlemaine's Tu- tor 5 a Doftor of the Church, in England and France, 108

810 C&^y/^w^/W^ Bifhops , that wrote againftthe worfliipping of Jma- ges. 109

820 Mf^/?fcoy//^5 the Bifhop ^*ayc.LKi J^rtf)-? and patriarch ofCon- '^' ftantinople, no

830 %jibanui Maurus , the sucu^ly O^a^o Bifhop of Mentz , in f-r-

835 StrabuSj the Firft

5fy«^^ inR^Writer of theOrdina-

^c^it AycUr^'^Ty Gloffe upon the

Bible, 112

835 Agobardm:^ the Bifhop

of Lions in France, 113

850 ayinaflafiu^jthQ Keeper

of the Library at

Rome.

114

d'^^,j79 Ado, the^(hopom-

■ '^' enne m France, 117

8^0 Ambrofim AMertit6 y a

^H* 17S, Doftor of Lombar-

X.

XI.

dy.

115

910 rRjdulphm Flaviacen-

fis, the Benedidine,

116

1050 Hermannus ContraEf-

us, the Chronologer,

117

lopo Gifelbert, Abbot of Weftminfter, 118

XIL

Germany,

III

1 1 1 8 lohn Zonaras, a G reek, who commented upon the ancient Ecclefiafti- call Canons, 11^

1 1 20 %jifenus, aii. Abbot in Germany, 120

1 1 25 Honorius Auguftod. • in Burgundy, 121

1 130 Petrus (JUauritiu^y Ab- bot

of the Jmhofs,

%'bd

Cent. ^«-^*''- Numb.

bot of Clugny in

France, ' i 122

H40 Hugo At S. ViBore ^

in the Suburbs of

Paris, .123

1 145 Richardus de S,Vi Storey

a Canon-Regular there,

124

1 14 5 S. Bernard^ Abbot of Clervalle, in Bur- gundy, 124

1 145 Philif the Solitary, a Greek Doctor. 125

1 1 50 Gratian , of Bononia, the CoUecStor of the

Canons.

126

1160 Peter Lombard ^ the Matter of the Sen- tences, and Bifhop of Paris^^ 126

1 170 Petrus Coweflory the Writer of the Scho- laftical Hiftory of the Bible, and Deane of the Ghurch at Troyes ki France, 127

The Scholiaft upon Co- meftor, 128

1 1 74 Joh.Belethy Reftor of the Univerfity at Pa- rk I2p

1 1 80 tJoh. Sarifburienfis y an Englirti Doftor, and Bifhop of Chartres in France, 130

Cern;An£hf, Xafhb.

li^d Petriii CeUenfis ^ his Sufceffpr there, 131 i i^i The'oddre B^lfarhoriy the Commentator upon the anci^ht Ecclefiafti- call Ca:rioiis, and Pa- triarch 6f Antioch, 132

XIIL

1200 The Ordinary GloJJc upon the Bible, 134 &c. 1 244 Hugo Cardmalis , the Author of the Con- cordance upon the Bible, 138

1270 Thowdf jiquinaSy the Matter ol the Schooled in Italy, A: ^ 139

1275 '^^^ ^^W ^P^" ^^^ Canon Law written by lohn Seniec^ixi Ger- mamy, '' ^ 140

i2po lohn BatbuSy Author of the Catholicon, Z42 XIV. —

1300 Nlcefh. CailiBus , the Greek Hittorian, 143

Jjio lohn de Columnay Archbifhop of Meffina in Sicily, 144

1 3 1 2 Bfitoy one of the Glof- fi^rs upon the Bible, 145

1320 Vjnoolas de Liray a

Brabantine, the Com-

Bbb men-

^A Chronological Table

mentator upon the Bi- ble, h6

1330 GuL Ocham^ a Doftor of Oxford. 147

1340 ffervaus Natalis ^ a Doftor of Bretagne in France, 148

1350 The Schoolmen of that time, 14?

XV. —

1400 Thomas ^ngUcuSj a

Doftor of the Englifli Church, 150

142Q Thorn, ivdden^ the Pro- vincial of the Carme- lites in England, 151 143.0 Paulus Burgenjis^aBi' fhop in Spain, 152

1 4 3 p The Councel oi Florence in Italy, 1 5 3 3 &c.

1445 Antoninuy ^chhiHao'p oiFlorencey i6i

1450 Alfhonfu$T<^atuSy Bi- fhop of Avila in Spain,

I^25&C.

1 470 Denys the Carthufian of Gelderland, i ^4

XVI.'

1 5 o 2 Fr. Ximenius^ the Car- dinal, and Archbiftiop of Toledo in Spain,who fct forth the Complu- tenfian Bible, 1^5

150^ The Prefac^r to the

Cent.^'Chr. Tiumh.

Baffl Bible. 166

15 10 Picut Earl oi MirAti"

dula-, in Italy, i ^7

I51J Pahef StapulenJlSy a

Doftor of Paris, 1^8 1520 pdocvs CiiBoveuSy si

Dodlorofthc ^orbonne

1525 LudovicusFiveSy an Ita- lian Dodor, 170

152^ Framfcus Georgius^ a Venetian, 171

1530 "Defiderius Erafmus of Roterdam, 172

1 5 ^^ Cardinal Cajetany an I- talian Bifhop, and a Commentator upon the whole Bible, 173

153$ Catharines AnonymuSy who wrote againll him, 174

1535 J^h. DriedoyaDodiOT ofLovaine, 175

1 540 Joh. Ferwy the Preach- er at Mentz, ij6

1 540 S antes PagninuSy an I- talian, and Tranflator

ofthe Bible, 177

1540^/?^ Braciohy hisi Ita- lian Bible, 177

1 541 Birkmans Bible, at Antwerp, 177

^ 54 5 ^^- y^tablus Bible, 1 77 1545 R.Stephens Bible, 177 N I S.

p^sr

An Alphabetical Table of the former

Authors, and others, alledged in Confirm

mation of this ScholaBical Hijiory^

The Nnmber referreth to tht Paragrgfk

Numb.

A Do the Biftiop oiVienne in France. 117

Adrian^ an ancient Greek Author recommended by ?/W«5. 107

Agobardus^ the Biftiop oi Lions in France, 113

Alcuin^ Ven. Bedes Scholar^ and Charlemaine'sTutor. 108

Alphonfus a Caftro^ granting us the Councel 01 Laoaicea. 6^

S. Ambrofey citing the fourth Book ofEfdras. ' 82

ty^mbrojius Ansbertus^ a Dodor of Lombardy. 1 1 5

S. tAmphilochiuSy Biftiop of Iconi- umy his Certain C^non of Di- vine Scripture^ excluding the A- pocrjphal Books, 6']

Anaftajius Bibliothecarius Romanus.

114

AnaftaJiuSy the Patriarch oiAnti- och. 93

Job. AndraaSy the firft Author of the Gloffe upon the Decretals^ ex- plaining the Pope's Citation of

Numl. S. Atiguftines words under the name oi Divine Scripture. 77

Th. e/€nglicus , a Doftor in the Church oi England. 150

Anonymus apud Catharinum^ deri- ding the New-Canon of Scripture^ which v/asfa-jl let out & main- tained by Catharin againft Car- dinal Cajetan^ and the Tradition of the Vniverfal Church. 13^.

and 174

AntiochuSy a Doctor in the Creek Church. 10 z

AntoninuSy the Archbiftiop oi Flo- rence. 161 Who aUo giveth us theTefti- mony of Thomas v/fquinasy and Nic. Lira. i^p. rejedeth the Tale concerning P. Lombard's, GratianSy & Comeftor's Mother, 126. maketh Alcuin to be the firji Author of the Clo[je upon the BtbUy 134. relateth what in- vitation the Greeks had to the Councel at Bafil.i^ 5, and what fpecial Indulgences the Pope Bbb 2 granted

(iAn Alphabetical "Table

granted them in the Counccl BXllorence. 157

D. Areofogita , the writer of the Ecclejiapcal Hierarchji. 4^

jipologeticus fuper De^Ha GregyiL fetting forth the Authority of the Umuerfal-Church Code. 6 3

Th. A(iuim% who is againft the Reception of the Afocry^haU Bodes into ^he Divine Cmon^ 13^

^ His opinion cpncerning the Au- thor of the Book oiwtfdow. 3^. A paffage in his ta. 2<e. now dip'doff. 13P

S. AthamfiuSy the Arehbifhop and Patriarch of ^/fx^^jjrfmj 55. di- fldnguilhing the Canomcal Books from all other ecclefiafiical and Apocryphal n>riti/^gSy iU and 5 6. affirming the C^rf/?/^;i?5 and the ^^uflaique Canon oiihQ OldTefi. |o be one and the/^wf, ibid, ac-

.;4^nowledging the Canonical

: ;. Authority 01 the Apocaljps of

Ant. AugufiimSy concerning the Code oft^ons^rtceivcdan d ufed ' by the uqiverfal Church, 83 S. AMgu^in who givetb,£^^^f. fq>ve r^l Tejlimmies againftjthe Cam- niz,ing of the o^pocrjphd BookSy 80. The peculiar honour that he had iot xh^CanfimcdSfrip- ture:^ 2t ap^ f9C tb^ qQnftant

JSTuml;, Tradition oUhc Catholick Churchy whereby to know the true Books that belong to it, 8.17.3 1.42.111 his general Enumeration of Scri- pture Books he hath many reftri- dions, 87. The Book oiBaruch omitted m it, 82. And yet he preferreth the Apocryphal Books beiore all other EcclefjajticM writingSy^ ibid.

Author Mir4hilium S. Scr. apudS. Auguftinumy excluding the Books of the Maccahes out ot the Canon of Divine S cripture^ 1 0 1

ir- B.

'Bailius the lefuite, acknowledging the Canons of the Ccuncel in Trul- lo to be univerfally received ,

104 Joh. Balhus^ the Author of the C^ tholicony 142

Th. Balfamony the Patriarch of An- tiochy r - fcrreth for the number of Canonical Books to the Councel of Laodice^iy and the Fathers of that Age. 132

Card. BaromuSy acknowledging, that the Book oi Judith was not received into the Canon by the Councel of Nicey 54, that S. A- thanajius was the Author of ^j- nopfis S, Scriptur^y 5 6. that fun- dry other minings ( produced under his name by the %$man

DoSors

of the Authors Alledged. 5^37

ill

I

DoBors for the Canonizing of the jipocryphal BookSy) are lup- pofititious, it. granting us the teftimony of the Laodicean Coun- cely ^3. and 73

S, Bap the Great, one of the Col- leftors ot the Philocalia out of Origens works, where he num- breth the Camnicall Bookes of Scripture to be no more then we do, ^5. Tohity mfdom^ and Eccle- fiaflicus neither Canoniz'd, nor cited by him , in thofe places which the Romamfts alledge out of him for that purpole. Hid, Elfewhere he maketh Philo to be the Author of the Book of wifdom. 3 6

Ven. Bedcy his Teftimony for the church of England concerning the number o{ Canonical BcokSy

106 0. Beleihy the Reftor of the Vni- verfity in Paris, noting the Bcok of fVifdom^ EcclefiaflicuSy Tohit , and the UHaccabes to be Apocry- fhal^ and not received by the Churchy 12^

Card. Bellarmine^ acknowledging that after the time of the Jpo- files no addition can be made to 'the Canon oi Scripture^ /^2. that it is not in the power of the (Roman) Church to make an Apocryphal Book become Canoni-

Numb, caly \6. ip7. that the contro- verted writings were not recei- ved into the Canon in $. Hie- rome*s time, 54. that S.Hilary excluded them, as the Hebrem did, 57.that S. Athanajius wroic the Synops S. Scr. and that fun- dry f^y^^^y, produced under his name in favour of the Apocry- phal BookSy arefuppofititious,5^ that the Councel of Laodicea is for us, 6 1, that the Book of Baruch is not numbred by itfelf among the Canonical prritersol the Scriptures either by any Councely Father^ or ancient Po/^f, 61. He is much troubled about the Third Book of Efdras y and the Roman Edition of the Septuagint Bible. 82

S» Bernard, agreeing with T^jch., de S. viBore^ 124.

The Bibles , fet forth by the Septu- agint, 82, 58,(^5>,7^,8o, 103^ the Additions of the Hellenifis thereunto annexed by Theodo- tion, Lucian, Hefy chins, and others, ufed in the African Churches, 7^. 82. The Vulgar printed at ^^/;/ with an ancieot P/^/^r^jthatacknowledgeth the Apocr. to be uncertaine and "Dubious Bocks, taxing thofe men of ignorance and/o//)', who make them to be of B^uall Autoriif

with

An Jlphabetical Table

Numb. with the Canonical ^ 166. kt forth with the Ordinary GloJJe^ 134, 1355 13^5 137. and with Liras Commentaries ^ 14^. by Card. Ximenius^ i ^5 . by fagnin^ 'BraciolayBirkman^Vatablus^ and jR. Stefhen^ all witneffes for us. 177

lac. BiUins^ defending S^ Amphi- lochias. 6y

Sev. Binius, granting usthe Com- cetoiLaodiceay ^3. andacknow- ledging the Third Councel of Carthage in the Roman Edition to differ from other Copies.

82 Bonaventure^ concerning the n'r/W of the Book ofmfdom. 3 6

The Breviary ufcd in the Church of Rome^ which appointcth certain Lejjons to be read out of the Fourth Book of£/y/-^y5andyet it is not held by themfelves to be CamnicalK 82

^ritOy the Expofitor of 5. Hieromes Prologues upon the Bible^ exclu- ding the jipocriphal Books horn the Canon of Scripture. 145

Luc. BrugenfiSy concerning the Third Book oiEfdras. 82

P. BurgenfiSy an Hebrew borne 5 and aBifhop inSpaine. 152 affirming the Story of the ^^r- cabes to be no Canonical Scrip- ture y 40, and that 5. faults"

Numb. ferrcd not to that Story in his Epi^le to the Hebrews. 40

c.

Card. Cajetany ( fo great an Oracle of 'Divines in his time, that there was no Prelate or DoBor in the Affemblyatrr'f^^, who might have thought himfelf to good to learne of himy 19$.) his large and expreffe Teftimony for us. 175

Healledgeth S. Hierome as the Guide of the Latin Church, to be herein followed, 7c. advifeth how to underftand S. Augu- ftiny together with the Councel of Carthage , and fome other ancient Fathers y that other- whiles call the Apocriphal Books Holy and Canonical writings. 8 1. and 82

The Canons of the Apoflles. vide Conftitutions.

Mel. Canus , acknowledging, that no Bookeoughttobe received for Canonical Scripture , which the Apoftles did not receive and deliver to the Church, 42. He alloweth us the Teftimony of Origeny 54. the Councel o^Laodi- ceay 67,. EpiphaniuSy ^4, Damaf- ceny JO ^. S. Gregory y 100. Liray 14^. Antoninus, i^i.and To- ^atus y 162. granteth the Canons made in Trullo to have been

generally

of the Authors Alledged.

Numb. generally received in the Church, 104. and cenfureth CatbArin for a Caviller againft Cgndi.Cai^tAn. 173

Lud. Carhajoly a Spanifh Dodor, denying that Judith was canoni- z'd in the Councel of"h(jce. 7 3

Aur, Cafsiodore^ his agreement with S. Hierome. 8^

QAtem Gr. ?a>tYum^ citing Alhar^afi- m as the Author oi Synopfis S. Scr. 5^

Amb. Caharm (he that cavilled againaCajeta/i^ andwsis the jirft mainteyner of the New Scripture Qmon^ which he got to be paflcd. by the voices of him{elf and his fadion in a very fmall Aflembly at Trent^ T^9^y) con- felling, that neither Chrijiy nor bis Apojlles in the Vjw Teft, ci- ted any o{ the Apocryphal Books in the OW, 34. that S, Hierom's Prologues upon Tohit and Ju^ dith are corrupted by the Scribe who chang'd the word Apocry- pha there into Hagiographa^ 7 3 . and that ^.^^^^o?^ is for usjioo

The Catholick Churchy in allu^f^^^ fince Chrift's time, and in all parts of the world, giving Tefti- mony for us againft the Cano/t oiTrenty 178

Lad. Chalcondjlus , recording the Renuntiation that the Gr^ek

Numb. Church made, and fent againft the pretended 7) ecrees and Tni^ on at the Councel oi Florence^ 1 60

Charlemaine and his i?//J[;o/;5 Tefti- mony for the Church oiFrance^

I op

Jef.Cfcn^himfelf, ttd\xcmg all the Scriptures of the OldTefiamenr^ to Mofesy the Prophets, and the PfalmSy f which is the firft Book of the Hagiographay) of which Three Clajjes the Apocryphal Books were lione, 3 1.

S. Chryfoflomcy referring us to the Teftiwony of the Catholick Church for the number oi Names o( the Canonical BoookSyS, and atteft* ing himfelf, that there be no o- ther Canonical Books oi the Old Teft. then what were firft writ*' ten in the Hehrevp tongue, €^

Clemens Alexand. Origens Matter, agreeing with him, 6%

Clemens Romanus, V. Conftitutions.

Jod. CliBoveuSy granting us the te- ftimony oiDamafcen and exclu* ding allthe controverted Books from the Canon^ 10 j.

Ion. C^lumnay his teft. for the CbJ oisicilyy ' 144

The Code of the African Church^ve^ lating the Canon of the Council of Carthage otherwife then the Roman doth, 8x

^htQode oiDionyftus Ep^iguus hath

(tAn Alfhahetkal Table

Numb. no Decretal Epiftle of the Popes initj 83. It recraacheth clivers of the ancient Canons y and ad- deth many others that ihQ uni- versal Church did not acknow- ledge, ibid.

The Code of the Roman Church now differing from what it was of old, <^3.83.and8^

The Code of the uniierfal Churchy by which the ancient Chrifti- ans were governed, ^3,83. con- firmed by the great generall Councel oiChalcedon^S 5 .Of what Canons and Decrees ofCouncels it confiftedj 83. No Decretal Epi- ftlc of the Pope in it, 8 3

Per. Comeftor^and his Scholiafljiiy,

and 128,

The Complutenfian Bible , which bath not in it, the third Book of Efdras in Greeks 82. aifd noteth the other Afocrifhal Books ^ 1^5

The Conftitutions and Canons^ fet forth under the Ambles names, both of them excluding the A- pecrjphal Books from the old Te- ftament, 44iand45

Fr. CofteruSy granting.us the Councel oiLaodicea, 6^

*P. Cotton^ acknowledging that the Tenth Chap, of 5. lehn doth not Canonize the i. Book of the Maccahes. 40

Ccfvaruvias , granting us the Teft.

Numb. oiDamafcen. 105

The Councel ofAiXy the Reverence and honor that they had there for our Countryman Venerable Bede. 10 5

The Councel of Aquileia^ attefting the Cuftome of the ancient Councelsy to lay the Bible ofGod^ as their %itle , in the midft be- fore them. 54

The Councel of Bafil invited the greeks thither, depofed the Fope and condemned the Councel of Florence. 1 54 and 1 60

The C^unceloiCarthagey enumera- ting the Books of the Bible ^s S. ^y^uguftin did , and taking the word Canonical in a large fenfe. 82, 8& 87. ^6. The Canons of this Councel were not confirmed by the general! Coun- cel of Chalcedony as thofe of Laodicea were. 85. being fir ft added to tht Code by Dionyfius the Abbot at Rome. ibid, but the Fathers in this Councel differ, not in effed from the Fathers before them , 8 (^, 9 6y they fent notthtit Decree 10 be confirmed by Pope Jnnocent the firft,8^, received by the Councel in Trullo.

^h^ Councel oiChalcedon y con- firming the Code of the P^niver- fal Churchy and the Councel of

Laodicea

of the Juthors Medged. p, m

Numb LaodiceA j but not the Coumel of Carthage. 8 5

The C^uncel ofEphefus^ laying the Divine Scriptures^ as their Guide^ in the midtt before them, 54

The Councel oiFerara and Florence^ The Hiftory of it. 1 5 4. &:c.

The Councel of Laodicea^ excluding the Apocryphal Bocks from the Canon of Scriptures. 5 ^

The Canons of this Councel were received into the Code of the Vniverfal Churchy and confirmed by the Fourth and Sixth General! CouncelSy 853not fo ancient as the Councel of Nice. ^3 y and

85,

The Councel oi Nice^ ThcTefti- mony produced out of it againft the receiving of the Apocryphal Books as Parts of the 'Divine Scripture y 54. 'I'hc Book of Judith was not Canonized in it, /^, and 73

Naztanz. and Amphiloch. 1 04 The Councel of Trent. V. Trent.

P. Crab 3 his Edition of the Coun^ eels. ^i.and 15^

Crefconius , his Col/eBion of the Ecclejiafiical Canons y 82. and

S. Cyprian agreeth with his Ma- fter, 82. The Book oi fVifdom no more Canonical with him , then the Third and Fourth Bock of SfdraSy which are not Canoni- cal with the Romanifts them- felvcs. 82.87

S. Cyrill Patriarch of ^lexandriay teftifying that in the ancient Councels they were wont to lay the Scriptures of God before them 5 as their Guide and Rule whereby to proceed. 54

S. Cyrill Bifhop of lerufalem , his ample TelUmony againft Cano^ nizing the eApocryphal Books.

58

Tl.c Second Councel ofVjce con- Concerning the late Edition of

dcmned by Charlemaine andhis Bifhops. I op

JhG Councel oiSardiSy fir ft added to the Code by Dionys^ Sxig. the Roman Abbot, ^ 83

The Councel called the Quini-fext inTruliOy confirmm^^ the Canons of the Councels at Laodicea and

his Catechetical Sermons. ib.

D.

loh. Damafcen 5 his Teftimony for

the Number of Canonical

Books. I o 5

Dionyfius Alexandrinus defending

r Origen againft his Oppofers

7^

Carthage y together with i\\q.\ Dionyfws Carthufianus y excluding Canonic all Epifiles of Athanaf. I C c c the

^An Alphabetical "Table

the Aj)ocrjphd Books from the CanotJ- of Divine Scripturey 73

and I ^4

Ion. Driedoy a Dodlor oiLovaine^

that lived and wrote not long

before the Councel at Trent,

his large and expreffe Tefti-

mony

that the Chriftian

Church received not the Apocrj- phd Books into Equal Authority with the Cmonicd 5 and that no point of laith is founded upon them 5 1(^4. Taxing alfo the Scribe's Error in S. Hieromes prologue 3 about the word //4- giographa applyed there to the Book of Totit and Judith 5 in iktsid oi Apocrypha. 73.andre- Jefting the Booke of Baruch no lefTe then the Third and Fourth ofEfdras. 82

Durandy the Schooleman^ rejefting all additions oi Divine Scripture ? after the time of the Apoftles.

42 E. G. EderuS , granting us the Couucel of Laodicea , ^3. and the Tcfli- mony of Damafcen. 105

G.EiJ'engren^ his great Commen- dations oiCarJ, Cajetan. 173 The Emendators of Gr^^/^;?, ailed g- ing the Approbation , given by Pope Gregory y XIII. and his Cardinah^oUhQ Old gloffe upon

the Canon- Law , wherein the Apocriphal Books are rejected out of the S cripture- Canon, 140

S» Epiphanim , his Teftimony di- ftinguifhing the Apocryphal from the Canonical Books. 6^ D, Erafmiu , attcfting the Care of the Jejves in prdcrvingintircly j the Books of the Old Tefi amenta 23. denying Judith to be re- ceived into the Canon by the Councel of Nice y or that S. Hierome faid fo, 54. referring to Ruffinus and S. Hierowe for the number of Canonical Books ^ which the Church acknowledg- ed 5 and Complayning of fome of the Apocryphal Books y which were pullickly read in his time.

172 Pope Bugenius the Fourth depofed by the Councel of Bafil and his proceedings in the Councel of Florence at the fame time. His pretended V"nion with the GreekSy and JnftruBion to the Armeni- ans. No Decree made by him there concerning the Canonical Books of Scripture. 154, &c\

EufeSiuSy citing the Teftimony of Jofephus for the Bocks of the Old Teftament 24. rejeding the Apocryphal Books from the Canon. 533 80. and defending 0//^<?/?.

y6

F,

of the Authors Medged.

ii^I

F.

lac. Fder SUpulen/is , feparating the conufied fVritings from the Equal and Supreme Authority of the Divine Serif tures ^ He lived in great reputation 5 and wrote but a while before the Councel at Trent began, 1 6?>

Ferrandus Diaconus \\1sAbridg7nent of the ancient Church-Canons^

83

loh. Ferus , f five yeeres before the Trent'Councel) continued the old diftinition between the Canonical and the ^/^pocryphal Bocks oitht Bible. ij6

G.

G. Galazzay attefting the Cor- ruption of S, Hieromes Prolo- gue 5 in the word Hagiographa^ and that the Ancient fathers numbred Tobit^ and Judith amongthe u4pocrypha. 73

Pope GelafiuSy who put but One Book of Efdras into the fanon ^ 82. his Decree in the %Qman Synod concerning Scclefiaflical

. writings, received, and tejeded

8^

Gilb. Genebrard^ acknowledging, that betweene the time of CMalachy and S. John Baptift ^ there was no Prophet among the Jewes y and that Ezra left but XXII Books of the OldTefiarnent.

21

Numi. Gennadiut , his high Commenda- tion o(Rujfinus. 74 Fr. Georgius T^f/^ff/z^i*, excluding the Apocryphal Books from the Canon,

171 loh. Gerfon^ the Chancellor of Paris J denying the receipt of any additional Books to the Scrip- tures of God, after the age of the A po files, 4 a

Gifelberty Abbot of H^eftminftery teflifying in this parcicularfor the Cburch of England, 113

The GlojJ'e , called The Ordinary GloJJe upon the Bible^ firfl fet forth by Strabus the BenediBine, • finding fault with the Copic of 5. Hieromes Prologue^ where Tobit is numbred among the Hagiographa, 7 3 . and 1 1 2 .

Calling it ignorance and folly ^ to fay ( as the Councel oiTrent doth, j that the Apocryphal and Canonical Bookes are of Epall Veneration, 135, and 13^

The ^lojfe upon the Canon-Law y firft compiled by John Semeca^ a German, calling the y^/^or/jf- . phay Ecclejiafticall Books that are not generally read. 140

Alv. gomeziuSy concerning the great Care and Coft in letting forth the Complutenfian Bible.

1^5

S, gregoTfy his exprefTc Tcftimony

Ccc 2 for

^ Jlphahetical Tahlt

Numb.

for the Ca>nQn of tlie ancient

Chriftfan Church excluding the

Book of the Maccabes. p p

H.

Henj£us NiitaliSy a, French Doftor of Bretagne , referring to the Hebrews for the Bible-Canon.

148

Bermannus ContraBuSy the Chrono- loger J ending the Canon of Scrip- ture in Nehemiah's time, 117

IJefychiuSy his Tranflation of the Bible, 82

S. Hieromcy out of vvhofe writings XIII feverali Teftimonies are produced againft the New Decree SiiTrenty 70. and 71. His judg- ment cencerning the Author o^thc'BookoijV/fdomj 38. and the New Pieces annexed to "Daniely 53. what he faith con- cerning the Third, and Fourth Book, of Efdras^ together with other apocryphal Bocks rejeftcd by the Church. 82

Hilarius of Aries ^ hisEpiftleto^. ey^ugufline conccrnuig the Di- uines at OHarfeilles^ who took Exception at his Citing of an uncanonical Bocky 84

S. Hilary Bifhop of To- H/V/f, ac- knowledging no Book of the OlclTefl. but what Ezra collc£l- cd into one Volume, 21. and xcjeiling the Books of Jpocry-

Numb,

pha from the Canon^ 5 7

Hincmarus %hemenjis, concerning

the Code of the univerfal Church

83 Honor. Augu^od. who acknow-

ledgeth no part of the oWrrj?.

but the Law of Mofes^ the Pre-

phetSj and the Hagiographa. Of

which Tobity and the reft are

none.

121

Hugo CardinaliSy accounting the Apocryphal Books to be dubious and uncertain writings, not re- ceived by the Churchy to prove any point of Religion and Faith by them, 138. Acknowledging alfo the error of the writer in S. Jeromes Prologue concerning the word Hagiographa^ 7 3

Hugo de S. FiBore, confeffedby the %gmanifls to be altogether againft them,in this matter, 1 2 ? I.

Cornel. Janfenius^ acknowledging that between the time of Mala- chy, and S. John Bapt. there was no Prophet, 4.and 2 1

The Index annexed to the Fulgar Bille of the Texts ohhc Old T. cited by Chrift and his Apoftles in the ^ew • among which there is not one noted out of the Apo- cryphal BookSy 3 3

JofephuSy recording the number of Books that were only acknow- ledged

of the Authors Alledged.

m^

ledgcd to be parts of the Old Bihle^ 24

Ifidorus Hifpalenfis ^ of the fame

' minde herein withS, Hierome^ 103.108.and III '

Julius Africams^ rcjcdting the Sto- ry oi Su[anna^ 5 o. The Chronicle let forth by Eufetius , for the moft part a Tranfcript cut of hjSy which is not now extant, 5 o

Junilius Africanus^ concerning the imparity between t\\Q Canonical and Apocryphal Books ^ ^ 1

thr. Ju^eJIus , who (et forth the Code of the uniierfal Church^S^, and the Councel of Carthage in the African Code^ 8 2

Jufiinian's Imperial Law^ con fir m^ ' ing the Code of the univerfalt Churchy and the Firft four general ^ CouncelSy e?3,and ^o

Jujlin Martyr^ neither approving nor citing any of the Apocryphal Books ^ 48

K.

Alb. Krantzius^ of the frf (jlofjer upon the Canon Law^ 1 40

Laodicea^ vide Councel oi Lao dice a.

Pope Leo the F/V/?, who affented to the Councel of Chalcedon , ail but the lajl Canon^ 8 5

Leo the fourth^ afferting the autho- rity of the Laodicean Canons. 6^

LeontiuSy (let forth by Henr. Cani- fus) his Teft. for the number of

Canonical Books, ^4

Jac. Lefchafsiery who declareth the Order of the Canons ^ and the Authority of the Code of the univerfal Churchy ^3 .and 83

Gul. LindanuSy his reafons againft his own fellows, that fay , the Book of Judith was Canoniz'd in the Councel of Nice ^ 5 4

LoyfiuSy rejcding his fellows Ar- gument, who fay, that the Fa- thers accounted the Controverted Books to be Canonical Scripture^ becaufe they cite them other- v/hiles under the name of P/- vine writings^ 77

Lucian's Tranflation of the Bible^

82

Nic. Lyra^ his ample Teflimony foru?5 14^

M.

Joh. Maldonate^ acknowledging, that our Saviour Chrift reduced All the Scriptures of the Old T, to three ClafjeSy ("whereof the A- pocryphal Books are none,) 3 1

Joh. Mariana^ of the frft Authors that colledcd the Concordance of the BiUey 138. his high com- mendations of Paulus Burgenjif^ 152, and of AlphonfusToftatuSy

i6z

The Marfel/ian Divines in S.Au^ guflines time, not acknowledg- ing the Book of mjdom to be o£

any

^Jn Mfhaheticd Table

Numb. any Canonical authority ,8 1, and

84

Martinez^ a Doctor of Salamanca^ producing and approving here- in the teftimony oiNice^h. Cal- lifiusy 143

MelitOy the ancient Bifliop of S<ir- dis^ his Catalogue oi all the Ca- nonical Books of Scripture^ 47

Methodius^ one of the defendors of Origen^ J 6

Merlin^ his Edition of the Coun-

celSy and the Popes Decretal Bpi-

ftles^ as they were firft printed,

^i. and 85

Pet. Mauritius^ Abbot of Clugny^ his expreffe teftimony for us.

122

N.

P. iyr^/^/^/W^affirming, that therrn- tings produced by divers Ro- man-Catholicks under the name of Athanafius^ for Canonizing i\\Q Apocryphal Books ^ arefuppo- fititious, 5 6

Gr. Nazianzeriy his ample tefti- mony for the true number oi all the Genuine & Authentick Books of Scripture, 66, his defence of Origen^ ^6

Gr. Neoc£[arienfis^ another of Ori- ^^«'5 defenders, y6

Nice^ vide Councel of Nice,

Nicephorus CalliftuSy attefting the true number of the ^anonicall Books ^ 143

l^icephoruSj the Patriarch of ^o«- ftantinopley putting a difference between the Canonical and Apo- cryphal Books oi Scripture^' no. Explicating Origen^ 49

O.

Cu\. Ocham^ a School I>o£tor in the church ofEnglandy ranking the Apocryphal writers with o- thcr Expojitors o[ the Scripture, and denying them an Equal ho-* nor with the Divine fVriters, 100

and 147

Origen, his expreffe Teftimony for the Number oiXXII Books only belonging to the Old Te[iamentj and that all the reft ( now con- troverted) are out of the Canon.

His great learning and know- ledge in the Scriptures above all other men of his age 5 His in- duftry in fetting them forth in Sever all Languages, ibid, and 8 2 P.

Pamphylus the Martyr, one of Origens defenders. 7 6

Padr. Paul's Hiftory of the Coun- cel of Trent. 181, 182,8

Ben. PereriuSy ac^knowledging %u- pertus ( one of our witneffes ) to be a good Catholick, which Card, Bellarrfiin dcnyeth, 120, granting us the witncfTe of Lyra, 1^6, and highly commendeth Caje:an. 173

of the' Authors Alledged.

%^1

Petrut Cellenfis^ o[ the Vj^m her oi Bocks belonging to the Old Tefta- me/it. 131

rkilafirius^ who is again ft the ad- mifiion of Ecclejiajtuus intoihe Scripture'Canon. 6%

Ihilo Juddius^ concerning the great Care and refolution which the 'jew% had to preferve the Re- cords of the Old Tefiamerd in- tireiy. 24

Fhijippus the Greek Soli tar at- tefting for us. 125

G. Phranza^ of the proceedings in the Councel of Bafil againft Pope SugeniusllW:, 154. And of the fame Popes proceedings in the Com eel at Florence with the Greek Emperor and fome of his Bifbops. 155

Fr. Picu^y con f effing that Antoninus giveth teftimony for us, 161

loh. Picus 5 Count of MirmduU^ adhering firmly to S.Hierome herein 5 whom the Church fol- loweth, 16 J. And alledging his authority as a Rule to all others. 70

Jo. Pineda 5 acknowledging , that the Book of the Proverbs is other- whiles cited under the lS[jme of the fvifdom of Salomon, 47

P, PithcsHs y noting the corruption of a place in Jofephm^ as he was

fet forth in Latin at Bafil. 2^

Polycrates , his honorable mention oi Melito, 47

PrimafiuSy an African Bijhopcon- tinuing to aflert the Hebreof Canon there 5 after the time of the Councel a t Carthage, ^ 2

Prof per y oiAquitainCy concerning the time when S. Augujlin. was firft made a Bifcop.

87 R.

Rabanus Maurus ^ following S. Hierome , and tranlcnbing Ifidore. 1 1 1

Radulphus Flaviacenfis^ excepting againft Tobit , Judith , and the Maccabes , as Books of an in- fer i our Order. Ii6

%jchardii6 de S. FiBore, agreeing with Hugo 5 that the Apocryphal Books are not in the Canon, 124

%upnmy his cleere Teftimony for the ancient €ano/} of the -B/%5whichwereteine.74. He was firft S. Hieromes beloved friend, and afterwards his pro- feflid Enemy : yet herein he agreed with him, and followed the Common Belief oi the Churchy ibid, was fufpcdted without caufe to follow Origens Er- rors, which procured him more Obloquy then either he or Or/gf/^defervedj 7^. The high

com*

An Alphabetical Table

Isfumh. commeadation for his learning and fanftity , which Gemadius gave him, 74«

Rupertm^ plainly denying the Boo^ of mfdom to be Canonical Scrip- ture 5 and allowing but XXI III Books to the Old Tefiament. 120 S.

Sahellicui^ concerning the Bifhops of the Greek Churchy that were invited to the Councel of Bafil.

loh. SarisburienfiSy teftifying for the Churches of England ^nA France^ 130. His opinion , that Fhilo wrote the Book of mfdom.

lot S caliper y concerning the Chronicle of Sufehim^ and Julius Africantu. 50

G. Scholarim 5 of the proceedings in the Councel at Florence. 15^

The Schoolemen , generally follow- ing S. Hieromes Account here- in. 14^. and 173

The Scholiafl upon Come f or ^ giving reafon why the Apocryphal Books being not of the Canon , are by the Church admitted to be read with the B/^/f. 128

Seder Olawj one o( the JewsBooks^ acknowledging no Prophet among them after Oiialachy.

80

Ion. SemecA 5 the Author of the

Numb. Glojje upon the C^non-Law , his Teltimony ^ that the Apocriphal Books were but Ecclefajtical Writings ^noi generally read, as the Divine Scripture were.

140

^^/•^r/^y^granting us tlie Teftimony oi Lyra. 1^6, Hugode S. T/f- tore. 123. and Tofatw. 1 6z

Pope Si>:tm 5. his Edition ofthe Septuaginty 82

Sixtus Senenfis y numbring the Canonical Books of the Old Tefia- ment to be XXII. i^. and rejed- ing the Additions to Efher. 5 6

loh. Sleidany of the calling, and proceedings in the Councel of Trent. i82,and 183

The SorbonifSy they neither Cen- fur*d ErafmuSy nov Caietan (as in other matters they did ) for fetting the Apocriphal Books out ofthe Canon. J 7 2 and 17^

Kg. of Spaynes Bible y which hath not the I'hird Book of Efdras in Greek. 82

Th. Stapletony acknowledging, that the Apocriphal Books were not received and confirmed by the Apoftles. 34. And denying the Canonizing of Judith by the Councel ot Nice. 5 ^

Strabus , the Author of the Ord.^ Glofje upon the '^ibky vide the GloJJe.

Th.

of the Authors Jlledged,

h^^

Numb. Th. StrozzAy of the great Accompc that all learned men made of CdcUn. 173

T. TertuUim^ excluding the Apocriphal Books trom the Caf^on of Scrip- ture. 51. And referring to the Teflament of the Cath. Church. 8. Theodoret^ of the proceedings in the Councel of Nice by the Rule of the Holy Scripture. 54

theodotioris Tranllation of the Bible. 58 and 82

loh. Tilij Codex , concerning the OmiSion oi Philemon ^ and the Revelation in fomeCo/;/>5ofthe Laodicem Cmon. 61

Codf. Tilmm's notes upon An- tiochus the Greek Do£l:or- 102 Alph. ToftatuSy applying S. Johns laft words in his %evelaion to thofe that adde any thing to the whole Bible. 5. preferring S. i//>^owfsTeftimony againft the Addition oi the eyApocryphall BookSy before all other wrirers. 88. 137. and his orpne Tcfti- mony for us at large. 162

loh. TrithemiuSy acknowledging thofe Dodors of later times ^ ( whom we produce lor bear- ing ?r/>/^<^jf/^ to the Truth here- in, ) to be very learned in the Scriptures^ and highly eftecmed in the Latin Church, 1145 n^^ 123, 12^5 1 34, and 14^.

V.

Fr. Vatablus y his Bible. i77.con-i cerning the Edition of the LXX, and the 3 Book oiEfdras. 8 2

FiBorinus the iVtartyr, attefting the Number of Canonical Books received in his time. ^ 5

Lud. Fines :, the Commentator upon S. (^uguftin^hiskvQtall Cenfures oithcApocriphal Books.

170 W.

Th. pvaldenfis y attefting the C^;7o;jj of Scripture to have determined with the '^pofllesy 42. And acknowledging no more then XXII Book's oiihe Old refia?nent.

Gul. fvhitaker, pleading for the Right of the Church to be the Wttneffe^ and Interpreter of Scripture. 8

X. Card. XimeniuSy and other Learned tJMen 3 ( that affifted him \x\ letting forth the Bible at Com- plutum in Spaincj ) diftinguiili- ing the Apocriphal Books from the Canonical. 16%

Z, loh, Zonaras , Commentator up- on the Ecclelsiaftical Canonsx^i the Greek Church , excluding the Apocriphal Books iiom the Canon of Scripture, ^'^. and concerning the Councel of Carthage^ 8 2 and

115?

FINIS,

Ddd

A TaUe

A Tabue of the Authors Refuted in this Scholajlical Hiflory.

A

T^hc Number refer Mh to the Paragraph.

A. T^umh.\C^rd. BeHarmwj his difference be-

LphoKffis a A/?r<7, alledging the twcene C^lakiyjg and DecUrwg a fVQtc{\dedDecrer^ofihtCou»cel\ Book to he (^a?tanical v/hkh was not

at Florence. i6q

Andr^diw , endeavodng to evade the Gle^e upon the Careen-Law, 140. And producing theVurfe whicji was never made, ibid

^Armenians , The J*iftruUim pretended to be given them by Pope SngeniHs IIII. in that C^knctl^ dftbions, and improbable. 138

6. Card. Baremus^ pretending the Ccwicel of "Kice for the Canonizing of Judith, 54« diftinguifhingtheC^r/- fii^n^ and the Judatque Cnnon. $6. imagining the Com eel of Laodkea to be more ancient then the r(?;/»(rf/ •/ Nice. 59. citing 5. Bajtl for the Book of Tol?a. 65. and theCouncel of Carthage for all the reft. 82

lA^Becanm^ citing the uncertaine Ejfifile of Pope Jnnocem the fir fi. 83 . dieifiing up his pageant of Popes, whom he fancieth to deliver over the Trent'Qdyion otit to another, at IX. Hundred and L. yeers diftance 87. 137. And prcfTing the pre- tended autority of the Florentine QomeeU IJJ

fo before. 1 6. Citing a falfe writing under Origeitsmm^ for the Canoni- 5Ling o^Sufmna^ 49. and the Comcel ef Nice for J (idith. 54. pretending that the Jews C^»<?«differeth from the Qhrifitan, $6, excepting againft xhtCoHHcel of Laodicea ^ 63. Citing S. Auguftin againft us, 81. but lay- ing bis thumb upon feme of S. Apt^ ^;(/?;>A words , that they might not be feene. ihid. al!edgingtheC<?/^»ff/ of Carthage^ 82 contradi(flinghim- felf about the Books ofSfdras^ and the LXX EditioH, ibid, appealing to the £/>//?. of lnn9cent^ 83. abuiing Rapertus^ whom he calleth an He- reticall DoBor. 120. and faintly al- ledging, the. Comcel of Florence,

SeV. Bwms^ a Tranfcriberof J?^rfl;»;«/,

; 54^ 59, 82,S5. Pretending the Df-' cree of GeUfm , 85. and contradid- iog himfelf about the C<^Hnctl of Fioremer 158

Btirchdrd yViho had his P/tfaJt Epifiles fi/Om Iff dor e Meircaterm %6

C.

Mel. Canw y vainly making the QohkcU

at.

of the Juthors Kchtcd.

^Q

Nnmb. At Yrent CO be The Cath. Church' 4p. rcfufing the Teftimony of S. Hie- rom, 54. againft whom his Ob jcftions arc anfwcrcd. 71, 73. ex- cepting againft ^nffmus^ 75, 76. relying upon Pope Innocent the firft. 83. Eluding the teftimony of Da- mafcen. 1 05 . rcjeding the autority oi Th» t/^^Hinas ^ 139. producing the pretended Decree at Florence, 153. and joyning with Cat harm the barker againft €a]etati. 173

Amb. Cathdrwt^ , pretending that trie A^ocryfhalhookjditz cited in the New TeftamenP. 35, 36, and that the C ounce I of Ntce received ludith into the ^4«tf;7, ^4. vainly fufpeding the C/?«o» of the Laodicean C ounce I to have bin larger then it is. 63, and as vainly excepting againft S. Hiereme^ 72, 73. Herein the Fir(^ oppofcr of Ca]etany and the common C^«^» of the Church, 173, 174. againft which he got another Nt^-Qanon made by a few men of his fadion in the Affembly at Trent. 192

Bart, faranz^a^ in whofe Epitome of the Councels there is a Catalogue of the QanomcAl Books of Scripture { whe re in the Six Apocryphal are numbred,) . pretended to be made in the C ounce! dt Florence ; which is more then can be found in the great Volumes of the CouKcels , and juftly fufpedcd to be a forgery. 159, and 160

Iiid.r(?cr/>/x,pretcnding the Apocryphal

' ' Books to be cited intheA^eiv TcJIa ment^ 35> 3^j ^"d by On gen. 49. a-guing for them out of the fup-

NumK poficitious writings that go under the name of ^^anafius, $6, ex- cepting againft 5. Hterome^ 7^i7^t and againft Ruffinns ^ 75*1 76, re- jcfting Dantafcen, 105, citing a falfc Book, 73 , AnaliaJtMf P3. and S. Gregory • loo

IoXocUhs^ rejefting the Teftimony of lofephw^and S, Hierome, 54

The Code of Dionys, fA-/^, adding Di- vers New Canons^ and retrenching

. many of the (?/y. 63 andSj

The C^de of thsRoman Churchy Simili- ter. 63,82 and 83

Ci'jf^/ (^pretending the Apocryphal Bookj to be cited in the Newleflament. 35. 36, and. after the C ounce! of Carthage tp have been generally received zs CanonicallScnpturetgi, rejeding the Teftimony ofDamafcen.

Pet. Cottoft^ fimiliter,: 3 7, 49, 75, and

* - . . • 7^

Long. Coriolanus , following Caranz^a

in his pretended Dr^rf^ ?Lt i\x^ Conn- eel oi Florence, 159

T)amafcei%s Sermon for the dedd^ a fup- pofititious writing, ^nd imperti- nently urged againft us, i O) The Decretal Spi files of ancient Popes, forged. 8j lo. Driidoy evading the Cjlo^} upon the Canon- Law, 140 E. Emendators of G rattan , excepting a* gainft the Glojfe upon him. 141 Sxpnr^atory Udex ^ pretending the authority of Amphilochius for th« Did z Cano-

<tA Alphabetical Tabic

Numb, Canonizing of the Book.cf fT^fdom^ 67. Cenfuring L>eontiM for omit- ting the Apocriphal Books, 94. and commanding Georgim Vemtm to be purged , 17 1- raedled not with the writings of M. TerHs in his life time.

176 F.

Fr. Feuardemlm^excQ^ting againftthe teftimony of lofephns. 29

Florentine Coimcel, vide Caranz,^ , and Coriolanui,

G.

Vopt'(jelaJtHS, his pretended Decree in favour of the apocriphal Bookj-, examined and refuted, 8(5. not Knowne to the world before he had been CCC yeeres dead, ibid I fid, Mercator the firft Author ofitjSy. and other arguments againft it-

137

Gill, (jenehrard^ pretending a Second and Third Canon of Scripture made by the lercs after the timeofE-tr^ 2^v\^ maUchy ^ 23. 80. excepting a- gainfttheTcftimonyof/o/^pW. 29 citing the Councel of Nice for C^ino nizing Indihy 54. and Epiphamns for more Books then XXII tranf- lated by the Septuagint, 80

Cjratian, defcAive in his Citations of Councels 63 . from whom he had his Papal Epifties 86. The Copies of his Decree various and uncertainc

86

lac. Gretfery excepting againft lofephm 28. rejeding the Symps, S, Scr. written by A^han^fimy^6, obje6l:ipg Epiphamns. againft himfelf, 64 citing

Numlr^ Amphilochlni y 6j, and cavilling a- gainft Phtlip the Solitary, ^ j 25 H- Gent. llervety falfely tranflating Am^- philochim^ in favour of the Boohjof JVifdom^ 6^

I. Pope Inmcent the firft , bis pretended Teftimony examined and refuted, Ji 3 . 87.88.137. Ifidore Mercator the firft publiiher of the feigned Decretal Eptfi^ks under the Names of the ancient Roman Bijhops. ., 83,85,87

Indithy the Latin Paraphrafe v^pon that Book. 38

L. Pope Leo the Fourth adding the decre- tals of Mercator to th^ Roman Code.

M. lo. Maldonate , pretending the lews to have canonized, the Apocriphal Bo qJ^. 23, and excepting againft hfephus.

29 Aub. Miram^ cenfuring PfipertHs.

120

N. Pope Nicholas the firft j adding the feyned Decretals to the Roman Code.

O;

Origens Suppofititious Writings^ alledged in favour of the aApocryphal Books.

lac. PameliiUy citing the Councel of

Nice» ^^

Card T^rr^?^, affiraiing vainly, that

the

of the Authors Refuted.

AfJ

the I ewes fir ft received the A^acri- fh4 Bjokj into the Canan of Scripture before Chrirt*s time, and afterwards rejeded them, 25. 103^ Excepting againft lofephns. 27. the Sj?20ps, of jithanaftpis^ 56 Gr, Ndz,ianz,en, 66, S. HieUme^ 72. 73. knd- Ruffims, 74. Citing the Cof*ncel of Nice for the Canonizing of //^^*V^ 54 and the fiippolititious vjxhingso^ At ha^ aft us for the Other Apocriphal Bookj^ $6. pretending a difference bctweene the ffidiicj^e and the Chrtftun {^anon, th d, i'ctting Epiphamus againft him- felfe, 64. laying any thing for a fliifc, 66^ ailcdging the teftim. of Rujfi» for the Additions to Daniel^ 74. and S, Augufltn for the reft of the debated Books, 81. helping C^Hdenttus thtVonauli SNiih an Ar- gument againft S. Auguftin ; /^/^. quoting the Councel of Carthage ^ he knows not which, 8 2 - and the uncer- tain tcftimony of Pope y;?^^'^'^;?? the firil, 8 3. eluding the words of S, Gre- gory , too* ailcdging Origen for the Canonizing of Tobit and the Mac^ cabes ,49. and Ifid. Hifp^ for the Book ef ^Tifdom^ 1 03 . and imagining tnat t\xt Second Book^of Maccabes is quoted in the New Tehamem. 40 Pope ^ius the Fourth his^W/, and his New Creed, wherein he faith , That no man can be Saved, unleffe he be- ^ I'ieveth all the definitions of the Councel of Trenty among which this is one, that the ^/^pccrjfhal Books of the

Humb,

Bible are to be had in EqudlFener^^on with the Canonical^' ■ lOxji i, and

^idam Sapiemum , the Tale that he told to Ifid, Hifp. and Card, Per- ron^ of thc^tf^jfirft receiving, and then ( after the killing of Chnfi) rejedingthc Sanonicall Autorityof the Jpcriphal Book of wifdom.

105

Andr* Schot ^ denying ^^<^^ to be the Author of his Commentaries upon Gene/is and the Kings • wherein he contradidcth Bede himfclf. 106

Nic. SerartHs^ conccipting that the Apocriphal Bool^ were Canonized by the ferves^ 23. Excepting againft: Jofephus 5 29. Imagining that the Boek^ of ludith, and the 1 . Bookj>f the Maccabes are quoted in the New Teflament, 3 8. 40 and rejeding the Teftimony of Athanaftus in his Sjnops, S. Script ura, ^6

Sixtus Senenfs , conceipting the Book^ of JVifdom to be cited in the Nert^ Tefiament, 36, bringing falfc tefti- monics ot Fathers for rejeding the irhole Book^ofEjiher^ 56. excepting againft S» liter ome , 72. 73. And alledging S, Auguftin^ 81. corrup- ting the words of Damafcen, i o j.

and.

■^ •" '■■ • - ■' '■■■ -x^ll-l I.U--H

^ Table y^c.

Numb.

and relying npon the improbable Ve^ cree at Florence. 1 60

Suritis^ pofed about the pretended InfiruBhn of the Pope to the ^r- mcHfafts in the Floremine CounceL

158

T.

The Trent Counccl > Damning all me ft

Nnmb.

that arc not of their mind^ 10, 11,

79, 82, 179, 191, «93i '94^ IP5.

196> and 198

V-

Mac« VtCtoripfs, excepting againft S. Hierome , 71, 73, and againft Rnf^ finus^ 75, and 7^

A Table

i^Ci'

A Table of Matters Remarkable in this Book.

The Nnmber nferreth to the Puragrttfh.

Numb. A.

Who fet forth the ^«% for the ufe of the Church in the time ofChark- waine^ I Op. and was thought to be the firft Author of the Ordin^j C/ofe, 154

Who hcln^Jyffks of Savoy J was chofcn

Pope Gf%sme in the CtHftceUt Bs/ii^

where SttgeniHS the Fourth was de-

pofed, 154

Anathema*

The unhallowed Anathema madein the Corned at Trent ^ 1 0, 1 1 .8 1 .92 . 1 00 . I5?5,ip6.andi5>8 Apocalyps,

Wherewith S.Iohrjc\o(cdtheC4fjo9tcf Divifte Scriptttre, % The Authority of it never re jcded, or queftioned by any entire Church, or Councel, nor by any publickConf^ffionermMlti- tudc ofChriftians, 9,61.192, Why it was not anciently read to the peo- ple? 59. and 61 Apocryphal Books*

Pious atid ufeful in their kinde, but nor of Soveraign Authority, 2. 14 59- No legitimate parts of the Bil^ie 66. not tranllated by the Se^tttftgint^ 58.

69. Po. firft written and ufed by the Hdlemft: hvps at Bahyhn and Alex- andria^^ o. 1 0 ^ the Authors of them not infpired by the Holy (Jh^fi, 140* 146. and for the moft partunknowo 10^128.135.140.152.165. not, numbrcd among the Hagiografha, 73.112. ranked with oihcx DoBors and Ex wfurs of the Bth'le^'i 47. x6 1. 168. uncertain writings, 135.172. never acknowledged by the ancient; Htbretvs^ 23-25. nor by C/^r//?, ^i. or his ApoftIes5 3i,33.&c. nor by any Father^ C ounce l^ or Scclefiaflical iVrittrihn lived before the Co//»cf/ of Trent ^ 43, &c. ufqfie ad 179. by which late Affembly only, of a few partial men, they were Canemz/d^^ and made e^ua/ to the reft oi the jPi- hle^ 10. I79.i9i.i93.i98,and 199 Of old time they were not ptthlkkjy read in the Church Service^ ^6. and afterwards when they were permit- ted to be read there, it was for the inflrudion of Men in Hiftory and in : Manners only, not for the proof of DoUrinal points^ or for the ground- ing any Articles of cnr Faith upon them, 54. 56. 71.84.95. 122.128, 135. 14Z. 145, 152.154. 1 <J5. 173.

t9»

A TM

Nnmb, to be read with great warinefs and prudence, 71.81. read in the Church at a lower place, then the Canmical Bsoks were, and by more infcriour Officers 5 ilpid. No man neceffarily bound "to believe them , 162. and yet preferred before all other Eccle- fiaftical and private writings, 77,78. 80,81. 142. bccaufe of the many ex- cellent ScSacred InfirH^ionsm them, Sp.pd. In regard whereof they are otherwhiles called Holj Scri^ttires, and Divwe Bookes^6^.jj. too A05* In what fenfe they were fometimes, and by feme men termed Canonical, 79. 8i.9(J.i03. The difference be- tween thofc Apocryphal Bookj^ that VJ^xtfufferedto be read in Churches, and thofe that v/crcfori>idden,j'^,6o. 74.91. i62»i 68. which by the Co/iK- eel of Carthage were opposed one a gainft another, 82

V Afofiles Canons*

Not fo ancient, as they are pretended to be, and yet our Apocryphal Bo^k' arc not Canoniz^ed by them, 45. (nor by the Conflitntws that go under their name, 44.) When tbefc dim^.' came fir ft into the Rom* Code, which the miverfaU (^hmch did not re- ceive, 83 Ariamfm*

Condemned in the Comicel o^Nice^ by the Authority only of the C.?;fo- fiical Scriptures^ 54

Ay\ofthe Covenant.

Wherein Ml the CammcalBookj of the Old teftament were- placed,. ^4. and

.105

Armenians.

The InflrHUion^ which is pretended to have been given them by the Tope in the C$f£ncel of Florence^ an improba- ble and a vain Tale, lyg S, Aag^^flin,

His Treatife of Chrtjlian DoSirine , Cwherein he reckoneth up XLIV Books of the Old Te/^ament, exami- ned, and explained according to his own minde,8r. The Caution herein given by himfelf, /^iW. His agree- ment with the Fathers of the Church before him,79* The difference be- tween him, and the New Decree at Trent, Si. I g6 ip8. The honor that he gave to the Apocryphal Books, nut fo great, as what he gave to the Ca- nonical, jg» How he '\s interpreted by the Ordinary (Jlofe upon the Bi- hle^ 137. by Card Cajetan, 814I73. and by fome DoBors in the Affem- bly atrrmit felf, 192. 195. 198. A Sentence of Saint Augfifiwes cited by Tope Innocent the Third, under the name of Holy Scripture, j-j His nvritings publickly read in fome' Churches, as the Apocryphal Books were, " 122

Baruch.

Not cited in the NewTeflament, 39.

Not mentioned in S.Augufiins^*

ncral Catalogue oi Scripture Book^^% i

nor in theCouncel q's Carthage^%i,

. nor in the pretended EpiJlIeoiPope

1 Innocent iht Frft, 89. nor in the old

. L^//>7 Copie of the Councelof Lao-

\ dicea, 60. pretermitted by S.i//t-

rome^

of Matters Remarkable in this ^ool{. ^cj

Numb* Yome^ as being no part of the Cmo^ Ktcal Bible ^ 71. The difference be- tween the Apffcryphal Baruch ^ and BavHch the Scribe of the Prophet leremy^ 58.^1. To whom Bitrnch's name is added in the Catalogue of tAthanafins^ S. Qyril^ &: fomc Greeks Copies of the Laedicean Councel^ be- caufc be is fo often mentioned, and hath a large part in that pr^pheaeyS^ which therefore may in divers re- fpeds be attributed to them bothy6i But the controverted Book ofBaruch, which ftandeth feparate by it fclf, is not peculi^ifly and cleerly mentioned either by any ancient Conncel^ or by any Father, or by any Pope , that Card. Bellarmwe^ in his moft diligent fearch for that purpofe, could finde out, ibid^ 61

Moreover, befides the confefTion of Card. BelUrmiae , that '' this di- " ftin<fl and debated Book of Ba^- '* ruchy was neither written in He- ^^brew^ nor taken into t\\QCanono{ *'• the Old Teftament by the lewes^ *'nor mentioned by any ancient " writer among the Chifiians; We have the Acknowledgement of di- vers other learned Men, (writers of no mean account with the Roman Catholicks,) to the fame purpofe. As Firft 0^ Johannes Vriedo^ (Lib. I. de Catal. S, Script.) *'whodenieth *' BArnch to be Canonical : Secondly, of SixtHS SenenfJs (L\h. I. B bliorh. 54«^^,Sed I .) who faith, that '* the ^^ Ancient Fathers, {i^ndi AthAnapm ** by name,) held it to be Jp<}crypy.U

Ntimbi Thirdly, of Melchior Canus (Lib. 12. cap. 6. ) who fpeaketh there but nteMftly of it, and will not be fo bold (as the Synod at Trent is,) *' to con* ^* demn any mmof Herejie^ that be- *• lieveth it not to be a Canonical^ ''pan of the Bible. Fourthly, and laftly, of many BoBors together, in their CongregMtons at that Trident tine Synody where they were more troubled about Canonizing this A- pocryphal Book of Barucb^xhtn any the other. For fo we read it recor- ded by Padr, Fanl in his Hiftory of that Cotincely (Lib. 2.) ^' Liber ati" *' tern BaruchTrideminos F Aires ma- **^// Solicit OS habnit^ qui neqtie inter '' Laodieeni , (for Gentian Hervet .*' had not then found one aCopie ** of it to their purpofe,) am Car^* *' thaginenfis Concilti LihroSy nee in *' PontificHm 'F^manorum Qataloga ** recenfetnr, Atqus turn earn ob can^ ^^fam , turn ej^od principiiin% ejus rren ^' reperitur, eliminandum (ex Libra- '^rfim Qanontcorumnumero) illisvi- *' debatur ; nifi obftitijfct^ qtiodin Ec* ** clef a Leciio inde aliqna interdum '* delibatur ; Qutt ratio jatis valuit ad '' Qcngregationem in illins favorem ^^ fletlendan; Malt is iHr^mantiquitus '' Jercmiae partem habit nm^ Eiqiteap- ^^ ponendtim affirmantibas. And if they could finde no fuch i?ci?/^rccei- ved into the Canon by the ancient Councels and Fathers that were in the Church before them, they had no reafcn to put it there chemfelves. But to make it yet more manifeft , E c c tha:

<iJ Table of Matters

Ni4rnb» that the true BArHch was anciently reckoned for difart o^ leremj-^ both of them making but or^e j and the fame BooJ^, if wc look upon the end of the LI Chapter of that Pr(?/?/?.?^7, we (hall finde there, that Thus far are the words of Jeremiah* Where- unto that all the LII Chapter fol- lowing was added by Baruchy is ac- knowledg'd and fet forth by SixtHs Sene4sh\mk% (Lib. i. Btblioth. SanUd y de Libris & Amhoriypts K Teft, verba Jeremias, ** Scriffit an- *' tern leremias^ excifieme ex ore ilU' '* us Barficho NeertA filio , Ltbrnm ^^ Prophetiarum ac V^fionum ^ &c- *^ Ctii volnmini Baruch ad]ecit uiii- ** mtim QafHt ex fine Qtitirti Libri ** Re gam iifdem pene verbis mutHa- ^^tum ; m ex QommemoYiitione clad is ^^ Hterofolymitandty qitA in eo Qapite ** refertur^ viam flernsret Le[lonbus ** ad froximi feqtientem hanjentatio- *< num Librtim. And this maketh it clear, why Athanafins and C^r/V, to- gether with the CanonQ^{\}\tQ<iHn- eel at Laodicea (if yet the Copy of that Ca^o?} be not faulty) infer ted the name of. Baruch between the Pro- phecy ^ and the Lamentations of lere- my* The Greek Church at this day (which may well be thought to know the fenfe of the Laodicean Fathers, Athan. and Cyril, better then fome of the Latin Church do) exdudeth the other Barnch exprefly out of the number ofCwonical Books, and pla- ecth it, (as their Anceftors alwayes did before^ and as wc Ukeiv-ife do

Numb^ now,) among the Apocryphal j.v/hich is at large declared by Metroph, Qri- topuL in his Epitome of the Oriental Confejfion, Where after the Enume- ration of the XXII Books received into the Canon of the OldTefl.ht faith, that for Barnch and the reft, though they be good and ufcfull Books in their kind, yet the Church ofChrifi never acknowledged them to beany CanonicaUnd AmhenticJ^ parts of the Bible, Thefe be his words, [''Tot Ao/TToJ 3 I^^Kloc, &c. ^'Cateros amem Libros^ quos Hiiq^i *' Script fir a Sacra, connumerare vs- '* ImtyUt Ltbrum Baruch, Teb, Ind. *' Sap, Jefu Sirachy & (JA^t ace abator urn '* Libros^fane contemnendos mnputa- ^^mus; mnlta enim CA^oralia Uude ^^ plurima digna its continent ur • cSj '' Kavov/Kot^ 3 ^^^ otu9evT/Kots iHnor ** ocTroJlefaTo v\ tS X€/^ ERKAno-foc.] And as for the Epiftle of leremy which maketh the P^I Chapter o£ this Apocryphal Saruchf (and was never written in that Language, wherein the Prophet /^r^T^j', and the true Baruch wEote ihtw Epiftle^) it can be no part of the XX// Hebrew Bookj, to which Athan. Cyril^ and the Laodicean Fathers ftridly held their accompt ; and therefore the SpiUley named in their Catalogues , mufl of force have relation to the Prophecy of leremy it felf j with whofe liile and manner of writing, this£- piflle of the other Baruch little a- grccth . And yet we cannot but ac- knowledge , that both the matter

and.

%emarkahlein this ^oo^

a^rf

Nnmb. ■nd the form ©fit, arc otherwife ve- ry highly to be regarded by us ; For it is the largeft dehortmon aga'nfi: the vanity of Idois^ and the worfhip ing onmagesythsLt we have in all the ^;^/<r befides ; for which verycaufe, were ic not to prefer vc the credit of the New Decree it Trent^ the Roman C^tholicks (many of them) would be content to put it out of their C^- fton : but (ince they have brought it itjy and are now bound to defend it, (here let it fland as one of their cano* fjizfd fVitnejfes againrt themfelves. Baftl. See The C^mcehfEafl in C.

Breviary. The Breviary of the Roman Church appcinteth certainc Lejfons to be read out of the Third and Fourth Books of Efdras , which neverthe- Icffe that Church acknowlcdgeth to be Af9cryfhaL 82

C.

Ca'etan,

The great accompt had oiCardXA- jetan , being held as an Oracle of Divines in his time, 173- whofe teftimony involveth many others, ib. againft whom no man wrote while he was alive, ibid, but after his death Catharin oppofcd him , as in many other points, foin this con- cerning the Camn of Scripture i and inlulted over him, asaD^^ over a Dead Lion, ibid, 1 92. and 195

Catharin.

The firft man among the Romanifts

Vjimb. that began the Neiv^Cancn of Scrip* tttre againft Card. Caietan, and got it confirm'd by his fadion insifmaU Afffmhly itTrent, againft the com- mon and VniverfalL belief of the Church, 1 74 and 191

Qjutin Law

Of the C7«fi^CW^^y wherein it con- fifteth. 119

Qanen of Scripture, The Canon ofSpripture for the Books of the Old Tejlament , all one and the fame to the Je^^^es , and to the Chriftiani^ 88. not firft determined by theC<>^«f^/of Carthage^ or Pope Innocent the firft, 73. 1 05. The diftindion betweene the ^rfi, and Second Canon of Scripture., not to be rejcded , but they are not oUikeor Eqmll Antority^ 1 98

Canonical Script fires. Five Charaders, or Notes of difference, whereby the Canonical Scriptures ofGodjZie diftinguifhed from a^ f^ritings of Men. 2

The Names and Number of the Qanoni- cd Bookj of Scripture , how to be linowne. 7 and 8

None to be made, or declared for fuch, by any power under Heaven , but thofe that were at firft appointed to be fuch by God himfelf, 1 6 and

73 All that belong to the (9/^ r^y^^w^/^r, written in the fews Language , and delivered to them as the only Oracles of God , before the time that the New TeJ^ament began, I7,^5,7r>

8d,and88 Ece 2 The

A Table of Matters

Numb, The Nftmher of them XXII, equjillto the Letters of the Hebrexp Alphsht; divided into ihree CUjfes ,. The Law , The Prophets , and The Ha- gisgrapbay l8, 19, 21, 31,49,66,

and 106 ^hich Humhr was not in Bsokj augmented , or altered by any other divifion that was after Chrift*s time I made of them 20, 51, 58, 64, and 73. The dii^indion between 0;j^??/- cal. SccleftafticAly and Apocryphal Books, 55, 5^3 59> S2, 91, and

no The Canonical Scriptures read in Churches by Bi^9fs and fr/i/?/ in an emmnt place, and not by any in- ferior Clerks^ as the Apocryphd JSook^ were , in a loiter, 8 1

Canons of the Apoftles Sec The Ap^ftles Canons ^ in A. tew at firft, and afterwards much augmented. 6©

Read in Churches, z$thcAp$crjffhall Bookj were. ibid.

Caranz.^*, Confeffor to Q^ Mary of England , who made an £"])»; «wf of the Cmncel's^ therein the Cancns of the Florentine Council concerning the Canonical 3ookj o{ Scripture ^^it fuppofititious.

160 Celeftin. When his Vecretd Spiflles caflie firft intotheC^»*«/of the Roman Code,

83

drcumcelUar.s* A Scft among the D<?«^rJ/?/jfo called from their ranging up and downe

at liberty in the Country of y^/nc)^. 81. men full of Fury and mifchief both to themfelves and others, Murthering thofc that were not of their owne party ; and othcrwhiles either murthering themfelves, or forcing others to doe it, that they might avoyd the Law , which the Emperor then made to put them to death ; and this they called iJbcir Martyr dome , having no Bookc of Scripture whereby to plead for themfelves, and defend their y?//- homicidey but the Book of the Mas^ cal?es, 81

Clement. L His Epifile to the Cor im hi an s anciently "^k^ to be read in Churches. ^o The Apofiolical Co^fiitutious attributed to hina, a Bookc of no great Credit, and yet making nothing for the "ivOw Canon oi Script ttre. 44

Clement, FIT. Studioufly declined the Meeting of a Councel , which was defired in (Jer* many* 183

Codes ofCanpns, The Code of the African Churchy ( wherein are the Canons of the Comcel of Carthage,) was not; generally received , nor confirmed cither by the. fm^eror, or by the great Councel ofChaJced$n, 90

The Code^ orC olleBion of (^ano>Js , made by Crefconius^ had the Decretal Epiflles of Six P^pes^ more then the other CelkUions had , which were made before him. 83

Th? Code of Dia^ypHs Exiguus^ where-

io

'\Rimarkable in this ^oo\.

%U

Nnmh, in it diffcreth from the Ancient Code o(^aKo»s , from which it retrenched many. ii^id. and 90

The Code of Canons fct forth by Fer^ rand us DUconns^ to what Councds it rcfeneth for the CataUgne of Canonicall Scyi^tures, tbid and 90

The T^^w^wfo^^, different from others, and the Original of ic^ 85, and

86.

The Code of Canofts uf:d by the^.i-

verfali Churchy 59, 63, confirmed

by the Conncelo^Chaicedon^ 85^ and

hy IfiJ^inians L^w, 8390

Concordance of the Bthle,

By whom it wisfirft colleAed. 138 Conji^aniin.

His care and charge for the furnifliing

of the Churches at Conftatttimple

with llore oi Bibles, , 53

ConftitntioHS AfoJloUcaL

Fide Clement the firft, SufrL

Councels,

The CoHncel of Bafil formidable to the ^ofe, Etigenius the Fourth y depofcd in it ; and the Duke of Savoj chofen in his roomc. 1 54. The Emperor of the Eajl , and the ^reek, Bfjhops in- vited to come thither, 155. Su- genius and the Florentine Councel condemned it, and were alike con- demned themfelves by it. 1^0

The Councel of Carthage, which it isy that the Roiniin DoBors now urge againfl: us , is not knownc , nor agreed on by them, 8i. At what time it was held, >W. S. AugHfiin one of the Fathers that were pre- fent at it, iUd, Not fominy Apo-

Numb. crjphal Beohj of the "Eible named in it, as there be in the Reman Canon made at Trent ^ ibid. Not confirmed by the Councel oi Chdce don ^ or by the haw of Jufimian the Emperors, as the Councel of Laodiceav/2LS,^$* 90. In what fenfc the r^»o» con- cerning the Reading of Scriptures^ is there to be undcrftood. 104, 192, 1 95, and 198

The Fourth G enerAH Councel of (fhalce^ don , which confirmed the Code of Canons , whereby the Fniverfal Church was regulated, 85* All the Decrees of it (except the XXVIII ) fubfcribed by Pope Leo's Legates, ibid. The Tifpo lafl Canons omitted in the Roman Code, and in the Code of Dion. Sxig. 63. which yet were confirmed by the Emperor and needed no Confirmation from the Pope. ^3,^0

The Councel of Conjlance^ the Decree there made a gain ft the Pope ; and Three HP opes depofed by it. 1 54

The Second Generull Councel of Con- ftantinople , Three Canons of it omit- ted in the Roman, and in Dion, Ex g* his Code, 63

The Fifth and Sixth Generall Councels ofConfiantin'^ple^ received into the Body of the Greek,Canon Law. The Canons of the Quini. Sex: in TruUo rejeded by many of the Romanifls^ and why. In what fenfe it con- ftrmeth both the LaodiceanCouncel^ and thofe of Carthage, reconciling aliem together* 104

The Third Geufr^ Csuttcel ofEphefusy

whereof

A Table of Matters

Numb. wbcrcof "^i^t Canons are omitted both in the Roman Code^ and in DionyfiHS Extgntis* ^3

The Corned of Florence^ V. Florence,

The Councel of LaoMcea, wherein the Fathers were moft skilfult in the Caf<tons of the Chf^rch , $4. not fo ancient as the Qomcel of Nice, which it did not contradid, iyid.

The Ul^ Canon of it concerning the 'Book^ of Script fire left out by Dion, Exig, and the Roman Cdde^ 63. con- firmed by the (jenerallConncels O? Chalcedon and the ^Im-Sext. 85. 104. And received into autority by the Emperor luftinians Law.

90

The rirft Generall Councel of Nice , wherein the Herefy of Arias was condemned only by the Autority of the 5*mpt^w, which the Fathers layd there in the midft before them, as the Gmde and Rule of all their Decrees ^ 54. The BooJ^of fudith was not there canoniz,ed by them , ibid, and 73

The Councel or Jjfemblj of Trent, V. Trent.

D Damafcen,

The firft that brought the Body of divinity into a ScholafticallMethode.

105

Decretal Epi files.

Cited by G rat tan under the name of

Divine Scripture , 77. when they

were firft brought iu iQi\\t Roman

■ -Code. ^3

Dtonyf^Sxig'iUs.

Numb^

Vide , The Code of Dion, Exig. in C* Donattfts,

Divided into divers Secis , whereof the CircumceUians were the word, who had no other plea to make for their felf homicide , but the example given them ( as they faid ) in the Book of the (J^f^ccabes ( V. 0>- cumcelL) 81

E. Ecclejiafiicus,

Cited under the name of Salomonhy popular cuftome, 82. and yet writ- ten DCCLXyeers after his time, 88 afn hundred years after all the Pro- p/;^/^; were dcad> 170

England*

The Church of England, together with many other Reformed and Chriftian Churches abroad, better observers of the ancient Scripture-Canon, then the pre fen t Church of Rome hath been fi nee the Councel of 7r^«r, i5. 177. Why we refer to S,Hier$mi

\ in our fxth Article of Religion, ji. Why we binde up the (Apocryphal Books with our Bibles.^ and read fome of them in our Churches^ jj.^i. The Remonftrances of 0ur Church and others agzind the Pope^tind hi$ Trent. Afembly^ 184, 185. The King of England excommunicated and depo- kl by the Popes Bull, 187. No Bi- fhop wirh Commiilion for the Ck of England^ prefent in the Synod at Trent.^ 194. The golden Rule of our Church the dcdrine oiHolyScrir* tare , and the interpretation thereof

by the

anctem

Path

ers^

2CO

Eremites,

I

^Bmiarkabkin this ^ook.

8 remit eu That admitted vfomtn into their Qells^

8i Efay. The flory of his death , that he was fa-iven m fnnder by M^najfes^ cited by S. Fanl^ and yet it was no Cano- nical Horj of the Old Teli^iment^ 40 E[drAS» Iv/jore plain places in the Foptrth BooJ^of f/dras, that allude to other places of the New Te/h then in any of the A- fceryfhd Bookj befidcs, S9 cited by the Fathers^ 51, 5i-7^- and readjn Churches,^!, yet for all that exd* ded from the Canon ef Scrip ure^tvzn by the Affemhlj at Trent it felf, 3 9. The Third Bookof £/^r^j inufe on- ly among the Greeks^^i. The Fourth (wherein fome things are fabulous) written only in Lmn^ ihid, In the Q^non of the Qotincel o{ Carthage. the Third i?i?e4 is contained, which notwithftanding the Roman^htirch doth not acknowledge to be Qanoni- cal; (o that they agree not either with the Africans^ or the Greeks, or with themfelves^ ibid* 82

Efther. Compted with Ez^ra fovoneB^k^ $6. Corrupted in the vnlgar Latin Edi- tion, 71 S^ra, YVho came from the daptivity in Baby- lon to leru^dem^ and there revifed all the Qanomcal Scriptures, digeft- ing them into Three Claps, and XXII Bookjy 11. 69AOT,, Some parts of Sz.r^. (and I>Anid) written in the

?4V7 3

Chald^n tongue , and why ? z$ F. Florence.

The Councel of Florence pretended to be againft us, 152. AbriefHiftory of the beginning and proceedings there, I53»i54> 155. Difputations between the Greekj and the Latins^ I $6. The pretended //.'7/(?« between them, againft which the Biftiop of Epheffts and others in the name of the Greekj Chwch protefted, ibid» The priviledgcs that are faidtobe there granted them by the P^^^.Thc Story of the Armenians coming'thi- ther and their fudden fubmiffion to the Tofe and his Comcel^ofno great credit, 1 5 8. and the Popes InfirftEii- on to thofe Armenian s, an improba- ble Tale, ibid, as likewife is the De- cree pretened to be made therefor the new Canon oix Scripture ^\ ^9,160. It was no (j neral Cotmcel^ ibid* The Comcel^X Bajtl then fitting oppoled it, and condemned ic for a Schifma- tical Ajfembly. The Greek Church renounced it, 1 60

France,

The ancient Church of France acknow- ledged not the Apocryphal Books to be/74r;ofthe C.inomcai Scriptnre^i, 103,109150,131 Friers.

Vide Mendicant and Preaching Friers.-

G.

CjelafiptSk

His pretended Decree concerning the new Canon of Script ure, not known to the world, till he had been three hun- dred;

A Table of Matters

iJred years in his grave, 86,87. The Emen£it9rs of <^ratian confcffe the Copies of it to be very uncertain, and difagreeing between themfelves, ibid. At the befl: it is but a Cata- logue, of Eccleftaflicd Bookjs mixed with the C^7o;?/(r^/, 85

Glojfe Hps?i the Bible, who were thtfirft Attthors of it, 1^4. Received in the Wcfiern Qhfirches with great applaufc, il. 1 34

Glojfe upon the Camn Law, By whom it was firft written- In the gteatcft acGompt, at that time, of any other Books, except the Ordi- nary Glojfe on th e Biblc^ 1 40 Gratia^, The Cofies of his collefted "Decrees and Canons very uncertain) and often not to be truftcd, Kd, 126, The Story of his adulterous Birth, improbable. ?. Qomefior, and P. Lombard were nei- ther his Brothers, nor his Qountrey- men ^ ibid. \16 Greek Qhurch, The Cat70ns whereby it is governed, 1 19.132. It hath alwayes obfervcd the difpariij between the Canonical and Apocryphal ^ookj of Scripture^ 4?.pT. The coming of the (jr^e-i^j to the Florentine Councel^ 155. w here- unto they were invited by i^op^f/^- genius the Fourth , who promifed them great aids agalnll the Turks^ but gave them none, /W. and 156. &c. which lofl them their £;;^;/>^ in the Eaft, ibid. Their difputationsin the ( e^incel'y to which in fome things they yielded for hope of afliftance

Numb*

from the Pope, but after their return

home they prefently renounced it,

I5<5,i')7,and 1^0

There was not one of the Greeh^Chnrch

prefent in the Councel of Trent ^ 1 94

H.

Hagiographal Books*

Whereof tbere^be but nine in thtOld

Teftamentf among which none of the

Apocryphal are to benumbred, 7^.

Ii2.i27.i29,andi45

Hermes*

Cited by the Fathers under the general

^narae of Scripture^ no lefTe then the

Apocryphal B<?o^jofthe B/^/^,49.and

anciently read in Chftrches, 60, 77.

and 128

S, Hiereme.

His Prologues (which rejeft the Apocr,

Bookj out of the Canon <?/ Scripture,)

prefixed before all the Latin Bibles^

that were in ufe after his time,7o.8B

corrupted in the word Hagiogravh^

by Scribes, 73. He was firk a great

admirer of C?r/^^;7, and afterwards a

great declaymer againft him , and

why, 75. His Tr an flat ion of the Bible

generally received in the Latin Cht4r^

and his judgement concerning the

Canonical Books, preferred before all

others, 10S.137.173.and ipi

R, Hunter,

ABlindemiin, but ose that couldride

/7o/? the bell ofany man in die world.

He vvas the titulrr ArMi(hop ofAr^

magh(vj\\Qn the See was lawfully pof-

fv fifed by another, and the Popes Pen^

foner at the Affsmhlj in Trent ^ i po

%emark^ble in this ^ca

Numb*

I.

5'. James^hisEfiflle, Never rejeded , or doubted of by any entire Churchy or by any Multitude of men in their publick.^W^jand Qonfejfions ; but by fome particular ferfons only, who afterwards refor- med their Error. 9« 74« and 15)2 lannes and lambres^ C ited by S, Paul out of no Canonical

Book* 41

leremy his Spifile, To be fonnd in his owne Prophecy^ without turning to Baruch^sApocry- phalBook for it. 5Band6i

ferns. The Church of the ancient J ewes never had or received more then XXIL | BooJ^ of Scripture into their Canon. 23.25. which was one and the fame ( unalterable for the OU Tefiament, ) with the Ca^on of the Chriftian Churchy 26. $6. 71.73.^0. 88. 146. 165. Ihe Scriptures kept entire by them , and uncorrupted. 25. 80. The HeHenifl Jews ^ and net the Hebrews^ had the Apocriphd Books in ufc among them, 54. which ne- verthelcife they did not accompt to be a part of Divine and infallible Scripture. 8 1 . 82. and i o^

Inn-ocent. L His Epifile to Sxuperius concern- ing the C amnio al Bookj of Scrip- ture , either forged , or corrup- ted, 8 3 . not known, or brought into the Ro??jar. Code^ till four hundred

years after his death, ibid, S.Taul's words grofly mifapplyed in it, which makes it the more to be fufpedcd,

87

Iftdore Mercator.

Who was a cunning Merchant , and

firtt vented the Decretal Epifiles of

the ancient Popes, which were never

feen before his time, 83

ludith.

Not cited in the New ?>/?♦ 38. not re- ceived into the Cunon by the Councel of Nice ^ 54« tranflated out of the Chaldean tongue by S. Hierome^ not as a part of the Authentick^Bible^ but for the examples of Piety, Chaftity, and Magnanimity in it, 73

luflinian^

His Law^ which confirmed the firfl: four (general C ounce Is ^ and the Code of the univerfal Churchy 90

Laodicean Qouncel, Vide the Councel of Laodicea.) in C.

I/fo the Tenth Who dreaded a general and free ^oun* celt, and therefore would not alTent to have any called ; but fent out his BmII of Extermination againft Lu- ther^ and all his Adherents^ (where- of the P;^;^^of i'^A:o»ywasonc, be- Mti many other Princes of the Em- pire ;) but it took no fuch cffed, 1 8 1 Lira, Where he was born , and converted from fudaifme^ His Commentaries upon the Btble Cwhereinhe exclu- F f f deth

A TaUe of Matters

deth the Jpocrjphal Bookj horn the Ctt-non) generally applauded, 148 Lomhsird* The Mafler of the Semsnas^ took his pattern from DAmafcett^ who had reduced the Body of Divinity into a Scholaftical Method before him ,

Nnmk Mendicant Frisrs^ When they began to fet u^firfi in the world, 133.

N,

Nehemiah^

X05. The improbable Tale concern- Anciently reckoned with Ex>ra and £/?-

ing his adulterous Mother, 1 26 Luther* Who perdfted not in his doubt and er- ror concerning the Epifile of S James, and fome other Canomcd pans of the Scripture, 9. His Reformation oi fxclefiafticall Abufes \ti Germany ^

181

M.

Maccahes 1 . and 2. Neither of them cited in the New Tt Hamentj 40

There is z, third Book^o^thc Maccahs (in true order the firfi) printed with the LXX , whereof fcfephus is ac- compted the Author, 170

Manajfes his Grayer* Ixcllided from the Canon @f Script nre by the Cemcel of frcnt it felf. And yet there is a ^hintr Sentence in it, alluding to ^f'^ji^g of thrift in the Ne^ Tejiament^ then there is in any Apocryphal Bookhcfiies, 39

Marfcilles Divines, y^ho excepted againfl: S. Augul^in for citing the Book^of ffifdom (held then to be no Canonical Scripture^) in which particular .y.^^^j^z/i^/'/^ would Bot oppofej^ or contradict theixi, 8 1

her, all for one Bwk^^ 1 9. and 47 Vide the ComceloiNxcy in C.

O,

Olam Ala^ttHS*

The Cjothy a TitnUr Btfhop ^ and the

Popes Penjtoncr in the uijjemhly at

Trent. ipo

Origen,

Accufed of many more Errors , then

he had 7C>. His works corrupted by

Hereiickj , that fought to gainc

credit from i U Name. ibid. The

<i///?<?/o^/f J written for him by divers

ancient Fathers^ tbid- His tranHati-

ons and Editions oi the Bible. 49,

and 82i

%^ Pates

The Bifhop of Wtrcejl^er ^ prefentinthe A^embly at Trent ^ as a private per^ fon , and not in any publick capacity for the Church of England , from which he had no miffion. 1 94

?<^/</ the Third.

A great diffembkr of his mind , which was held to be one of his fpeciali vcrtues. Jt was tJey that furamoned

Che

%emarJ{ahle in this ^oof{.

Nnmh,

the I Ate Councel fir ft at MuntuA^ then at Vicen^a^ and laftly at Trent ^ 184. where he gave his Legates Inftrudions , all for his owne advan- tage ; among which the chief was, that they fliould not fuflfer his Power to be there difputed at any hand.

189 Petrohujtans, And their Errors > by whom refuted*

122

Philo

By whom faid to be the Author of the

Bo$kjfwifdom. 3 ^> » 03 > and i jo

Pirn the Fourth*

Who confiirmed the C^nncelof Tre^t ;

out of which his New Creed is

extraStedf and inioynedufonferil and

paine of his Damnation* 1 5>8

Po^e

A Pefe that faid. There needed no

more perfons to make vpaGenerall

Comcel^ then Himfelf, and Two

Others. 1^0

The Pofes Pageant dreffed up , and

let forth by Becsnus the leiuite.

87

Preaching Friers. The Domimcans , when they began to fet up, 1 3 3 . who was the firfi Do^or in Divinity , and the firft Cardinal among them. 13S

Priefts Marriage^ Allowed to the Greeks byihtfofezt Florence. ^57

Prophets. None after the time of Malachy ; till the time of S, phn Baptifi ; in which interim the Aj^ocrjjhal Bookj

Nnmlf.

were written by them that were no

Prophets. 4, 21, 24, 53, 80, 88.

The XII Lefer Prophets anciently

reckoned but for One Book together.

19, 47? and 49

Proverbs of Salomon

Sometimes called by the ancient

writers, The Wifdm of Salomon.

Purgatory*

The Roman DoQrine concerning it, fought to bee impofed upon the Greeks in the late Comcel ©f Flo- rence^ where the Bi(hopof£/>/?<?/«i and others proteft againft it, 157. and renounce it, 160

S. ^regories Dialogues ufually cited for it, a dubious Book, and of fmall cre- dit, 100

R.

Roman Church.

Now differing from it feIf(confidcred

as it was in former ages) and from

all other Chriftian and Cacholick

Churches, 10,11.173. and 178

Salomon.

Five Books put under his name in the

C ounce I of Carthage ^ which be (wo

more then be wrote ; but they were

fo called by popular cuf^ome onely,

and not bccaufe they were all Ca^^o^

nicaly 82

Schifme.

Who have been the chief Authors of it

Fff 2 is

^^ Table of Matters

Numb in the Church, i8o

Schoolmen,

When they began; raoft of them were Triers Mendicant , 13 3

H. Scrtptfires.

Have their prime and Soveraign Au- thority from GOD himfelf. i. The Church being only the witneffc, the picferver, and the Interpreter of them, 8. 200. The JntemalTeJiimo^ tiies that they carry with them : but there is no other means that God bath left or appointed to know the number and names oi^z Bookj^ that they be neither more nor iefe^ then the pHblickjuoke of his Church in ali Ages, 8. They are the only Foun- tains of our Religion y and the infalli- ble Rules of our Faith ; nothing to be added to them, and nothing to be detraHedkom them, i.2.5.55.They were brought and laid before the Fa thers^ as their (jt^de , when they met together in the fiAnei^ent Coun- cehy 54. Other Bookj cited under the general name ofScripture^ no good argument to prove them (Canonical ^ 4p. 53.77. 81. 93. and ico Seftuagint Tran^Mion,

None of the ayfpocrjjfhal Books tr2in(ia ted by the Sepuagint ^ whercunto they were added after their time by others, 58. 69. 79,80. Si* The Rom:^y> Seftuagint^ as it was fet forth by the authority of Pope Sixtns V. out ot the Vatican^ many wayes faulty and depraved, /^^U 808 2. The Editions of it various from one another, 1 03

Numb*

Seven Sacra^nents,

Which the Romanifts pretend to have

been prefcribed in the Florentine

Councel, a new Invention, and an

improbable, if not a forged Story,

158

Siricius,

His decretal Spiftle, the firfi^ that was

put into the Romm Code , above

(SCCycers after his death. 85

Shfanna.

No Fable^ and yet no Canonical Scrips

ture. 49, 127. A good and ufefull

parable ( if not a true ilory, ) to be

read in Churches, 73. The ancient

Fathers held not themfelves bound

to anfwer the Exceptions that Fi?r-

phyrie made againfl it, ibid. The

Controverfy between S, Hierome

and Ruffinm , about the fame , and

other Additions to DanieL j6j and

T.

TeflamentyOldand New,

The Connexion betweene them ; for

where the Old Teftament cndeth in

Mala:hj , th^ Ney? beginncth in S.

Mark. 4, and 5

All Churches at accord about the Books

belonging to theTVc'wr "teftament* 9

The Books y which the Old Teftament

never had in the time of the lafl

Prophets\ and were no Parts of it

then, cm never be {zldnow , to he

what they were not before^ nor is

it in the power of any Church to

Declare them for other , then they

Wcreatj5ri?. 16, 88, and 105

^mark^hlein thU ^ooJ^

Nn-mb. Theodo'Ufi. The firfi , who in his Tranflation and Edition of the 5/^/^, added the Ec- cleftafticd or Apocryphal ^oo^s of iht Hellenifts^ to the Canonical l^ook^ of the Hebrews. 5^> 7P, 82, and

103

And this was the B/^/^r, which the

jifricans turned into Latin ^ and

was in ufc there in 5. Aftguftin's

time. 19

Tobiu Not cited in the New Teslament^ 39. not named in the pretended Cata- loapte of Pope Innocent the firft. ^ 83

TeftatHi. His Excellent Learning, andinduftry ; his judgment largely fct forth m this Queftion concerning the Boekj of Scrtftnre , i62. There was no pre- late or Perfon in the <^^cmbly at mnt , who might have thought themfelvs too good to learne of htm.

Trent*

The horned ^ or Ajfembly there of a

few wen^ accurfing anddamnmg^//

men in all the Churches of i\itVJoM,

that are not of their mmd. 11,81,

193, 19^- The Vecree made there for Receiving the Apocryphal Bookj into the Canon y condemneth ail their owne ancient and modefne Bibles, 70. Abnfes in Religion, and New Traditions commanded there to be received as ^Articles of faith. 1 34>

194, 198. Their A^embly at firfl made not up above rWf«/;T^^A»^>

Numb. and wichin a while after T)!7r«W forty made up their OecHmenicall Qomcely 190. The Voyces of C4- tkarin sfaBion there prevay ling for this New-Decree againft the Ow- mort Confent of the Vhiverfall Church, X78. 192. For which caafc ( if there were no other , as many other there be,) the Autority of this pretended Generall Councel is moft juftly rejeded by us. 1 1 . and

199 Turkj. The Tfirkj overrunning the Empire of the S'afi, andbefiegingCo;?/?^»fj- nsple (of which within a fewyeers after they made themfelves Matters,) whiles the Pope held the Smperour at the CoHHcei ef Florence^ to vjhom hepromifcd great Ayde, but gave him none. i95

^ W-

B, ofWifdom. Not cited in the New Teftament^ g^* The Amhor of it ( for ought any man certainly knoweth, ) was Phi/o the Jew ofAlexandriay ibid, and 170. Named the mfdom of SMomBn by popular cuftome only. 82

FINIS.

%

9BL'

HNDIIMG DE.PT. MAY 2{7 liiM

/	Uoivenity of Toronto
	Library
	DO NOT /^
	REMOVE /
	THE //
	CARD 11
	FROM ^
	THIS \
!	POCKET \^
\^	Acme Library Card Pocket LOWE-MARTIN CO. LIMITED

i

Wn

F

	m
		mm