Skip to main content

Full text of "A scholastical history of the canon of the Holy Scripture, or the certains and in dubitate books thereof as they are received in the Church of England"

See other formats 


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