The approval of the Papists themselves.
The approval of the Papists themselves.
§ 99. In addition to the testimonies above drawn from the writings of our adversaries, we can also confirm our opinion from certain hypotheses of the Papists. (1) The Council of Laodicea approves our opinion regarding the canon. Proof of this is in the Sixth Synod of Constantinople ([Jus canonicum,] dist. 16, c. Quoniam). Pope Hadrian confirmed the Sixth Synod of Constantinople (dist. 16, c. sextam). Therefore either the pope and council erred or our opinion regarding the canon stands firm.
(2) In [Jus canonicum,] dist. 15, c. sancta Romana, it says: “The Church accepts and approves those writings that Jerome accepts. It rejects those that he rejects.” Yet Jerome lists the canon in exactly the same way as our church does. Canus (Locor., bk. 2, c. 11) and Bellarmine (De verbo Dei, bk. 1, c. 10) respond: “Gelasius approves of this opinion of Jerome not in setting up the canon of Scripture but in condemning as authoritative those that Jerome rejects with the zeal of God and the scrupulousness of faith.” Yet if it is only attributed to Jerome that all the writers of the Church (named among these are Origen and Rufinus) are subject to his authority, why do they evade his authority in establishing the canon, because he was the finest scholar in Hebrew literature of all the fathers?
(3) Jerome’s Prologus galeatus is prefixed to all Latin Bibles, even those the Papists use. It clearly teaches the difference between canonical and apocryphal books.
(4) Bellarmine admits, De verbo Dei, bk. 1, c. 7, that “Ezra established the Hebrew canon.” But he counts Ezra among the prophets (De verbo Dei, bk. 2, c. 2). Therefore those who command under the threat of an anathema that those books of the Old Testament that Ezra did not take into the canon be considered as canonical writings resist the authority of that prophet.