Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger (39 page)

^[469]
Ecclesiastical History
, Book
5, 24.

^[470]
De Temporum Ratione
, (
PL
90, 539). Emphasis added.

^[471]
Breen,
Introduction
, 486-87.

^[472]
Daubney also finds Bede, in his
Church
History
, 1.27, giving an answer from Pope Gregory to Augustine where the
pope’s remarks appears to be echoing 2 Mc 5:19. See Daubney, “Use of the
Apocrypha,”57.

^[473]
Commentary on the Revelation,
4.

^[474]
The Iconoclasts forbade Christians
from using religious art (particularly icons and statues) because they wrongly
believed the use of these objects to be idolatrous.

^[475]
The Orthodox Faith
, 4, 17.

^[476]
Ibide.

^[477]
Ex 25:21, Dt 10:2, 1 Kgs 8:9 and 2
Chr 5:10.

^[478]
See
On Weights and Measures
,
4; This dependence is noted in Westcott,
Bible
, 220; Reuss,
History
,
249, Gigot,
Introduction
, 65 and Breen,
Introduction,
477.

^[479]
Orthodox Faith
, 4, 15.

^[480]
Orthodox Faith
, 4, 6 “And although
the holy Scripture says, ‘Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the
oil of gladness,’ it is to be observed that the holy Scripture often uses the
past tense instead of the future, as for example here: ‘
Thereafter He was
seen upon the earth and dwelt among men
.’ For as yet God was not seen nor
did He dwell among men when this was said. And here again: ‘By the rivers of
Babylon, there we sat down; yea wept.’ For as yet these things had not come to
pass.” Bar 3:38 is quoted between Ps 14:7 and 137:1 without distinction or
qualification.

^[481]
Orthodox Faith
, 4, 16
[quoting Bar 3:38] and
Orthodox Faith
, 4.18.

^[482]
Orthodox Faith
, 1, 9 “For God
is a fire consuming all evils: or from [Gk] ‘theasthai,’ because He is
all-seeing [2 Mc 10:5]: for nothing can escape Him, and over all He keepeth
watch.”

^[483]
The heresy of Adoptionism believed
that Jesus was the Son of God by adoption (like all baptized Christians) and
not by nature.

^[484]
Against Elipandus
, Book 1,
18.

^[485]
Outside of Isidore’s quotation of Jerome
there is nothing to suggest that Isidore believed Sirach to be apocrypha.

^[486]
De Virtutibus et Vitiis
, 14,
18. Emphasis added.

^[487]
De Virtutibus et Vitiis
, 18.
Emphasis added.

^[488]
The
Codex Paulinus
(Carolinus) and the
Codex Statianus
(Vallicellianus) contains the entire
Deuterocanon minus Baruch.

^[489]
PL
101.731-734.

^[490]
Action VII under Proof II and
Canon,
16.

^[491]
Breen believes this manuscript is
evidence of Pope Gregory the Great’s acceptance of the Deuterocanon as
Scripture. Breen,
Introduction,
481.

^[492]
The Book of Revelation is included
among this second group.

^[493]
See
Stichomentry

^[494]
Gigot, 66; Breen 477-478. Scholars note
that Nicephorus’ catalogue has an affinity with the Synopsis of Sacred
Scripture of pseudo-Athanaius.

^[495]
Letter to Pope Leo III,
(
PG
100.189-190);
Antirrheticus I Adv. Constantinus Corp
., (
PG
100.249-250);
Antirrheticus I Adv. Constantinus Corp
., (
PG
100.443-444).

^[496]
See
Apologeticus Pro Sacris
Imaginibus
, (
PG
100.727-728).

^[497]
Antirrheticus III Adv.
Constantinus Corp.,
(
PG
100.473-474).

^[498]
Apologeticus Pro Sacris
Imaginibus
, (
PG
100.751-752).

^[499]
De Institutione Clericorum
,
II, chapter 53. Rhabanus Mauras, like Isidore, notes the correspondence of
seventy-two books of Scripture with the number of prophets elected by Moses and
the number of disciples Jesus sent to preach.

^[500]
Preface to Baruch
as quoted
in Breen,
Introduction,
489.

^[501]
Letter To the bishops of Gaul
(865), Pope Innocent I.

^[502]
Despite the contradictions within
these decrees, the East may have understood them as affirming the Deuterocanon
as Scripture along with 3 and 4 Mc.

^[503]
Westcott,
Bible
, 223; Breen,
Introduction,
478; Oesterley, 128 and Steinmueller,
Companion
, 79.

^[504]
This number is debatable. Only a few
bishops attended at the beginning, but the number grew to about 102 as the
Council proceeded.

^[505]
“Divina manifesto clamente
scripture: (Sir 11:7)/“tes theias … graphes:”

^[506]
See Breen,
Introduction,
485.

^[507]
De Interpretibus Divinae
Scripturae
, 3 (
PL
. 131.996) as quoted in Breen,
Introduction,
490-91.
Emphasis added.

^[508]
Westcott holds that Nokter’s views
represent the judgment of the ancient Irish Church (Westcott,
Bible
,
207). But Nokter’s position seems far too eccentric to be a common belief. It’s
likely the product of speculation on his part.

^[509]
Daubney, “Use of the Apocrypha,” 57.

^[510]
Gigot,
Introduction
, 68-69.
Emphasis added.

^[511]
Westcott,
Bible
, 209.

^[512]
Decr.
III. 217.

^[513]
Decr
. IV. 16.

^[514]
Decr. I. dist
. 15. C. 3.

^[515]
See
Dispute of a Jew with a
Christian
.

^[516]
The Divine Office is the official
prayer book that is read by priests and religious in the Catholic Church.

^[517]
Gemma Animae
, IV., 118.

^[518]
PL
212. 43.

^[519]
See
Aurora
, Fragment. 5.

^[520]
Bruce,
Canon
, 99.

^[521]
Preface to De Scripturis et
Scriptoribus Sacris
. Emphasis added.

^[522]
De Scripturis et Scriptoribus
sacris.

^[523]
De Sacramentis
, Preface.

^[524]
Bruce,
Canon
, 100.

^[525]
Breen,
Canon,
497.

^[526]
Commentary on Genesis
, 31.

^[527]
De Victoria Verbi Dei
, 12.

^[528]
Letter Against Peter of Bruys
,
Letter 2, Book 1 (PL 188.751). Emphasis added. Quoted in Breen,
Introduction
,
499. [L. …restant post hos authenticos ll. sex non reticendi libri (Ws, Jdt,
Tb, Mc) qui, etsi ad illam sublimem praecedentium dignitatem pervenire non
potuerunt, propter laudabilem tamen et perneccessariam doctrinam ab ecclesia
suscipi meruerunt.] Also see Reuss,
History
, 257.

^[529]
Breen,
Introduction
, 499. The
other New Testament writings were subordinated to the Gospels and were
considered, by Peter and his followers, as being of doubtful apostolic origin.

^[530]
Several issues remained even after
all the conciliar and papal decrees up until this point. Are all books of
Scripture equally inspired and equally canonical? Do all canonical books share
equal dignity or do some deserve greater honor? This latter view appears to be
that of Peter of Cluny.

^[531]
Letter Against Petrobrusiani
.

^[532]
Letter
34.

^[533]
Against the Jews
, 2.

^[534]
Against the Jews
, 4.

^[535]
In Leviticus
, 14,
Preface.

^[536]
Preface to the Book of Joshua. [L.
…eos apocryphos esse, quia auctor ignoratur eorum, sed recipiuntur ab Ecclesia,
quia de veritate non dubitatur].

^[537]
Historia Scholastic
, 13.

^[538]
Commentary on Daniel
, 2 and
Against
Rufinus
, 11:33.

^[539]
Rationale Divinorum Officiorum
.

^[540]
Epistle Ad Hugo
n
. De modo
et ordine legendi Script
..

^[541]
Letter
143. Emphasis added.
[L.
Quia ergo de numero libroum diversas et multiplices Patrum lego
sententias, catholicae Ecclesiae doctorem Hieronymum sequens
, quem in
sconstrudendo littera fundamento probatissimum habeo, sicut constat esse xxii
litteras Hebraeorum, sic xxii libros Veteris Testamenti in tribus distinctos
ordinibus indubitanter credo. (Emphasis added.)]

^[542]
Rationale div. Off
. 59.

^[543]
“Cum autem scriptum sit…” (70).

^[544]
Since Albert’s acceptance of the
Deuterocanon is not contested, we will forego an analysis of his usage.

^[545]
As quoted in Breen,
Introduction
,
503.

^[546]
Commentary on the Book of Wisdom
,
Preface. Quoted in Breen,
Introduction,
503-504.

^[547]
Breen,
Introduction,
503.

^[548]
Postillea  in Joshua
,
Prologue as quoted in Breen,
Introduction,
506.

^[549]
Preface to the Books of Judith
and Sirach
as quoted in Breen,
Introduction,
506.

^[550]
Thomas appeals to the Deuterocanon
throughout his
Summa Theologicae
not only in his “objections,” but also
in the replies and his “sed contra.”

^[551]
A thorough defense of St. Thomas on
this point would be beyond the scope of this present work, but a detailed study
of his usage may be found in the unpublished unabridged version of
Why
Catholic Bibles Are Bigger.

^[552]
Summa Theologicae
, I. Q. 109,
Art. 2, Sed contra et al.

^[553]
Summa Theologicae
, I. Q. 1,
Art. 3, Sed contra; also, Ws is called “Scripture”
in Summa Theologicae,
I. Q. 19, Art. 12, Obj. 2; Thomas uses Ws 11:20 to answer whether the
particular punishments of Adam and Eve were suitably appointed in Scripture;
See
Summa Theologicae
, II. Q.164, Art. 2, Sed contra.

^[554]
Summa Theologicae
, I-II, Q.
106, Art. 1, Obj. 1.

^[555]
Summa Theologicae
, III. Q.
55, Art. 6. Sed contra.

^[556]
Summa Theologicae
, II-II, Q.
110, Art. 3, Reply 3. Emphasis added.

^[557]
Summa Theologicae
, III. Q. 5.
Art. 6. Reply 1.