The Doctrines and Practices of the Church of Rome, Part 11 – Part 13
XI. Of Apochryphal Books.
1. WE do not charge the Church of Rome with m… king P. 21.what Additions to Scripture they thi… good, as the Misrepresenter saith; but we charge the… with taking into the Canon of Scripture such books … were not received for Canonical by the Christian Church as those Books himself mentions, viz. Toby, Judith, Eclesiasticus, Wisdom, and Maccabees.
2. We do not only charge them with this, but with Concil Trident. Sess. 4. 8. Apr. de Canon Script.Anathematizing all those who do not upon this Decla… tion believe them to be Canonical; since they cannot … but know, that these Books never were in the Jewish … non, and were left out by many Christian Writers. A… if the Church cannot add to the Scripture, and … Author thinks it damnable to do it; how can it ma… any Books Canonical, which were not so received by t… Church? For the Scripture in this sense is the Canon; a… therefore if it add to the Canon, it adds to the Scripture i. e. it makes it necessary to believe some Books to be … infallible Authority, which were not believed to be … either by the Jewish or Christian Church, as appears … abundant Testimonies to that purpose produced by Learned Bishop of this Church; which ought to ha… been considered by the Representer, that he might … Bp. Cosins Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture.have talked so crudely about this matter.
But however, I must consider what he saith,
1. He produces the Testimony of Greg. Nazia… who is expresly against him, and declares but Twe… Greg. Nazianzen. in Carmin, 2. Vol. p. 98.Two Books in the Canon of the Old Testament but how doth he prove that he thought these Boo… Canonical? He quotes his Oration on the Maccabe… where I can find nothing like it; and instead of it … Orat. de Mac. cab. vol. 1. p. 308.expresly follows, as he declares, the Book of Josephus, … the Authority of Reason concerning them. So that if …his proves any thing, it proves Josephus his Book Canonical, and not the Maccabees.
2. He adds the Testimony of St. Ambrose, who in the Ambros de Jacob & Vi…ae Erat l. 2. c. 10, 11, 12. Cocci. Thes. Catho. l. 6. Act 18.Place he refers to, inlarges on the Story of the Maccabees, …ut saith nothing of the Authority of the Book: And even Coccius himself grants, that of old Melito Sardensis, Amphilochius, Greg. Nazianzen. the Council of Laodicea, S. Hierom, Ruffinus, and Gregory the Great, did not own the Book of Maccabees for Canonical.
3. Innocentius ad Exuperium speaks more to his Purpose; and if that Decretal Epistle be allowed, against Scholastical History, n. 83.which Bishop Cosins hath made considerable Objections; then it must be granted, that these Books were then in the Roman Canon; but that they were not received by the Universal Church, appears evidently by the Canon of the Council of Laodicea, c. 60. Wherein these Books are …est out; and this was received in the Code of the Uni…ersal Church; which was as clear a Proof of the Canon Euseb. l. 5. c. 24. Orig. pref. in Psal. Athan. in Synopsi. Hilar. pref. in Psal. St. Cyril. Catech. 4. Epiph. haer. 8. 76. Basil. Philocal. c. 3. Amphil. Epist. Canon. ad Seleuc. Chrys. hom. 4. in Gen. Scholastical History. n. 71.…hen generally received, as can be expected. It is true, the Council of Carthage took them in; and St. Augustine seems …o be of the same Opinion: But on the other side they …re left out by Melito Bishop of Sardis, who lived near …he Apostles times; Origen, Athanasius, St. Hilary, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, St. Basil, Amphilochius, St. Chrysostom, and especially St Jerom, who hath laboured …n this point so much, that no fewer than Thirteen Places …re produced out of him to this purpose, by the forementioned Learned Bishop of our Church, who clearly …roves there was no Tradition for the Canon of the Council of Trent in any one Age of the Christian Church. But our Author goes on.
4. It is of little concern to him, whether these Books were ever in the Hebrew Copy. I would P. 22.…nly ask whether it be of any concern to him, whether they were divinely inspired or not? He saith it is damnable to add to the Scripture; by the Scripture we mean Books written by Divine Inspiration Can the Church make Books to be so written, which were not so written? If not, then all it hath to do, is to deliver by Tradition what was so, and what not. Whence should they have this Tradition, but from the Jews? and they owned no Divine Inspiration after the time of Malach How then should there be any Books so written afte… that time? And he that saith in this Matter, as he doth It is of little concern to him whether they were in the Hebrew Canon, doth little concern himself what he oug… to believe, and what not, in this matter.
5. Since the Churches Declaration, he saith, no Cathlicks ever doubted. What doth he mean by the Church… P. 23.Declaration, that of Innocentius, and the Council of Cathage? Then the same Bishop hath shewed him, th… since that time, there have been very many, both … the Greek and Latin Church of another Opinion. An… but a little before the Council of Trent, Catharinus saith that a Friend of his, and a Brother in Christ, deride Cathar. Adv. Cajet. p, 48. ed. Paris 1535.him as one that wanted Learning for daring to assert the… Books were within the Canon of Scripture; and it's plain, Card. Cajetan could never be perswaded of it: B… if he means since the Council of Trent, then we are … turned to our first Difficulty, how such a Council c… make any Books Canonical, which were not received … such by the Catholick Church before? For then they … not declare the Canon, but create it.
XII. Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible.
1. WE do not dispute about the Vulgar Editi… whether it may not be prefer'd before modern P. 24, 25.Latin Editions because of its great Antiquity in som… parts of it, and its general Reception since the time of Gregory I. But our dispute is, whether it be made so Authentick since the Council of Trent, that no Appeals are to be made to the Originals, i. e. whether that Council by its Authority could make a Version equal to the Originals out of which it was made? Especially since at the time of that Decree, the Vulgar Edition was confessed to be full of Errors and Corruptions by Sixtus V. who saith, In hac Vulgata Editione visa sunt nonnulla mutanda, quae consulto mutata non sunt. Clem. VIII. in Bullâ.he took infinite pains to Correct them, and yet left very many behind, as appeared by Clement VIII. who corrected his Bibles in very many places, and grants some faults were left uncorrected still; Now, how was it possible for the Council of Trent to declare that Edition Authentick, which was afterwards so much corrected? And, whether was the correct Edition of Sixtus V. Authentick or not, being made in pursuance of the Decree of the Council? If not, how comes Clemens his Edition to be made Authentick when the other was not, since there may be corruptions found in that, as well as the other; and no one can tell, but it may be Reviewed and Corrected still; as some of their own Writers confess it stands in need Luc. Brugens. in variis Lect.of it?
2. Our Controversy is not so much about the Authority Nat. Alexand: dissert. de vulg. vers. Quaest. 6.of the Vulgar Latin above other Latin Versions to those who understand them; but whether none else but the Latin Version must be used by those who understand it not? And here our Representer saith, That he is commanded not to read any of these Translations (speaking of P 26.Tindal's, and that in Q. Elizabeths time) but only that which is recommended to him by the Church. If this relate to the Vulgar Latin, then we are to seek, why the common people should have none to Read but what they cannot understand; if to Translations of their own, then we doubt not to make it appear, that our Translation allowed among us, is more exact and agreeable than any they can put into their hands.
XIII. Of the Scriptures as a Rule of Faith.
THE only thing insisted on here is, That it is not P. 27.the Words, but the Sense of Scripture is the Rule; and that this Sense is not to be taken from mens private Fancies, which are various and uncertain; and therefore where there is no security from Errors, there is nothing capable of being a Rule.
To clear this, we must consider,
1. That it is not necessary to the making of a Rule, to prevent any possibility of mistake, but that it be such that they cannot mistake without their own fault. For Certainty in it self, and Sufficiency for the use of others, are all the necessary Properties of a Rule; but after all, it's possible for men not to apply the Rule aright, and then they are to be blamed, and not the Rule.
2. If no men can be certain of the right sense of Scripture, then it is not plain in necessary things; which is contrary to the Design of it, and to the clearest Testimonies of Antiquity, and to the common sense of all Christians, who never doubted or disputed the sense of some things revealed therein; as the Unity of the Godhead, the making of the World by him, the Deluge, the History of the Patriarchs, the Captivity of the Jews, the coming of the Messias, his sending his Apostles, his coming again to Judgment, &c. No man who reads such things in Scripture can have any doubt about the sense and meaning of the Words.
3. Where the sense is dubious, we do not allow any Man to put what sense he please upon them; but we say, there are certain means, whereby he may either attain to the true Sense, or not be damned if he do not. And the first thing every man is to regard, is not his security from being deceived, but from being damned. For Truth is made known in order to Salvation; if therefore I am sure to attain the chief end, I am not so much concerned, as to the possibility of Errors, as that I be not deceived by my own fault. We do not therefore leave men either to follow their own fancy, or to Interpret Scripture by it; but we say, They are bound upon pain of Damnation to seek the Truth sincerely, and to use the best means in order to it; and if they do this, they either will not err, or their Errors will not be their Crime.