The more sensible Papists reject them.
The more sensible Papists reject them.
§ 228. [V] The more sensible Papists reject the additions. Erasmus (whom Bellarmine here calls “semi-Christian” but whom Leo X calls his “beloved son”) makes the same claim as we in his scholia on the preface of Jerome on Daniel. Ludovicus Vives, commentary on De civ. Dei, bk. 18, c. 31: “Daniel 14[:33-38] mentions that the prophet Habakkuk brought his meal to Daniel from Judea to Babylon. Augustine has not used this testimony as a proof of the time because that story of Bel and all of c. 14, along with the story of Susanna, are apocryphal, are not found in Hebrew, and were not translated by the seventy elders.” Johannes Driedo says (Catal. de script. et dogmat. eccles., bk. 1, last chapter): “This is not canonical history, yet we must not despise it. Whoever believes that it is true is not deceived to his destruction. We are reading the deeds of the martyrs from which we do not take arguments that are of faith.” Sixtus Senensis (Biblioth., bk. 1, c. 8) rejects not only the last seven chapters of the book but also the story of Susanna as additions. Bellarmine concedes us the approval of Driedo and Erasmus.