« ÖncekiDevam »
bees*." This Author is so truely ours in this poynt, that Picus Mirandula professeth, Lyra saith, “Neither the bookes of Tobit, nor Judith, nor the Maccabees, nor Wisedome, nor Ecclesiasticus, nor Baruch, nor the last bookes of Esdras, are to bee reckoned in the Canon; but notwithstanding they are received of the Church, and are read for rectifying of manners, although their authoritie is of lesse account for proofe of those things which are in controversiet.”
In the Fifteenth Age, Ann. 1400 to 1500. Alphonsus Tostatus gives his voyce with the reformed Churches. Although (saith hee) the bookes (in question) bee received of the Church, yet are they not of any solid authoritie; and therefore they are improfitable to prove, and confirme those things which are called in question, according to Saint Hierom 1."
Dionysius Dionysius Carthusianus, in writing upon Ecclesiasticus, (saith) “ That booke is not of the Canon, (that is) amongst the Canonicall Scriptures, although there bee no doubt made of the truth of that booke *.”. This is confessed likewise by our adversaries : « Dyonisius Carthusianus, and Lyra, doe not denie the Historie of Susanna to bee true, but they denie the bookes of Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabees do appertaine to the Canonicall Scriptures."
Postquam auxiliante Deo scripsi super libros sacræ scripturæ Canonicos-alios intendo scribere qui non sunt de Canone, scil. liber Sapientiæ, Ecclus. Judith, Tobias, et libri Machabæorum. In Præfat. Tobiæ.
+ Nicholas Lyra in præfatione in librum Tobiæ dicit, neque eum, neque Judith, neque Machabæorum, neque Sapientiæ, neque Ecclesiasticum, neque Baruch, neque ultimos Esdræ in Canone haberi, recipi tamen in Ecclesia, legique ad mores informandos, quanquæm eorum authoritas ad probanda ea quæ in contentionem veniunt minus idonea reputetur. Job. Fr. Pic. Mirand. Theorem 5.
1 Quæquam isti libri ab Ecclesiæ recipiantur nullius authoritatis solidæ sunt, ideò ad confirmandum et probandum ea
Thomas Waldensis, cites out of Hierome, the Canon of the Olde Testament in these words " As there are twentie two letters, by which we write in Hebrew all that wee speake, so there are accounted twentie two bookes, by which as letters, wee are instructed in the doctrine of God; and withall addeth, that the whole Cannonical Scripture is contained in the two and twentie bookest.”
Antonius tells us, that Aquinas, and Nicholas de Lyra.say, “ The Apocryphall bookes rejected by the Hebrewes, are not of that authoritie that a man may argue from their sayings as efficaciously quæ in dubium venerint inutiles sunt, &c. Tost. præf. in lib. Paralip. q. 2.
* Denique liber iste non est de Canone id est inter Scripturas Canonicas computandus, quamvis de ejus veritate non dubitatur. Dyonis. Carth, prolog. in Ecclesiast. Perer. in Dan. lib. 16. p. 742
† Ita 22 volumina supputantur quibus quasi literis et exordiis in Dei doctrina, &c, Wald. doct. fidei lib. art. 2. circa initium,
touching poynts of faith, as from other writings of the sacred Scriptures ; and therefore happily they have such authoritie as the sayings of holy Fathers, which are approved by the Church *," but not as the Canonicall Scriptures themselves.
In the Sixteenth Age, Ann. 1500 to 1600. Cardinall. Cajetan tells 'us, “ The bookes in question betwixt us (as namely) Judith, Tobit, the Maccabees, the books of Wisedome, and Ecclesiasticus, are reckoned by Hierome amongst the Apocryphall books, neither be thou troubled, (saith hee) O Novice, if elsewhere you finde these bookes reckoned amongst the Canonicall Scriptures, both by sacred Councells, or by the holy Doctors of the Church, for they are to bee reduced to the rule of Hierome, that those bookes may not bee accounted Canonicall, that is, to regulate our faith, but they may bee termed Canonicall for the edification of the faithfull t." This
Anton. par. 3. tit. 18. ca. 6. just, finem. Dicit Thomas 2. 2. Nichol. de Lyra super Tobiam, scil. isti non sunt tantæ authoritatis quod ex dictis corum posset efficaciter argumentari
, in his quæ sunt fidei, sicut ex aliis libris sacræ scripturæ, undè fortè habent authoritatem talem qualem habent dicta sanctorum Doctorum approbato ab Ecclesia.
† Reliqui, viz. Judith, Tobiæ, Machabæorum libri, cum Sapientia et Ecclesiastico à Divo Hier. inter Apocryphæ locantur. Nec turberis (Novitie) si alicubi reperias libros istos inter Canonicos supputari vel in sacris Conciliis, 'vel in sacris doctoribus nam ad Hieronymi lineam reducenda sunt, tam verba
testimony of Cajetan, against the Tenet of the Church of Rome, fully agrees with us, in so much that Ambrosius Catharinus, a Romanist, professeth, that Cajetan in this poynt committed almost as many sinnes as hee delivered words. And his fellow Canus protesteth, that “Hee is ashamed, that a man otherwise ingenious and learned, and a godly pillar of their Church, should so much degenerate from the learned professors of the Romane Faith, that when all Writers agree, that the name of Canonicall is sacred and divine, onely Cajetan should say the Bishops and Councells did other. wise understand it *." And for a conclusion, Arias Montanus, in his Edition of the Bible, tells
“ There are added to that Edition bookes written in Greeke, (as namely, Toby, Judith, Hester, the Booke of Wisedome, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the Additions to Daniel, and the two bookes of Maccabees) the which bookes (saith hee) the Orthodoxe Church following the Hebrew Canon, reckons amongst the Apocryphat." And thus by Conciliorum quam Doctorum, sic ut libri isti non sint Canonici, id est regulares ad firmandum ea quæ sunt fidei, possunt tamen dici Canonici, id est regulares ad ædificationem Fidelium. Cajet. in fine com. Hist. veter. Testament.
* In hujus vero confirmatione argumenti Ambrosius Catharinus, Cajetanum affirmat tot peccata admisisse, quot verba penè effudit. Can. Jib. 2. cap. 11.
† Accesserunt et huic Editioni libri Græcè scripti quos Ecclesia Orthodoxa Hebraorum Canonem secuta inter Apochryphos recenset. Arias Mon. in the Frontispiece of the Bible. Edit. Antwerp. ex Offic, Plant. Ann. 1584.
our adversaries owne confessions, the true and Orthodox Church did reject those Apocryphall bookes which our Church refuseth, which the Trent Councell allowes at this day for Canonicall. And thus briefly I have produced a Catalogue of ancient Fathers, and moderne Writers in the Romane Church, who have witnessed with us the same Canon of Scripture which wee professe at this day, whereby I have given yon a taste of that challenge, (which God willing I purpose heereafter to make good in the principal points of our Religion) that our Church and doctrine hath continued Visible in all ages, even to the dayes of Luther.
OUR ADVERSARIES' PRETEXCES FROM THE AUTHO
RITIES OF FATHERS, AND COUNCELS, TO PROOVE THE APOCRYPHALL BOOKES CAXONICALL, ANSWERED.
The former Testimonies are so true, and pregnant in our behalfe, that our learned adversaries are inforced to confesse, that most of those Authours did reject the bookes in question for Apocryphall. To say nothing of the Trent Anathema, layd upon those reverend Fathers, and learned