A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

NOTES.

(a) WE call the Books of the Bible Canonical, &c.] Some Persons say, that they are thus called, because they are the Rule of Faith; but the other Opinion is far more probable.

(b) Books that are called Apocryphal.] We don't know well why they were so called. This word comes Originally from the Greek, where it sig∣nifies to hide or conceal. St. Austin, L. 15. de Civit. Dei, Ch. 23. says, they are so called, because the Original of them is not known. Others, as St. Je∣rome and Gelasius, believe they had this Name given them, because they contained the hidden Mysteries of the Hereticks. St. Epiphanius ima∣gines this distinguishing Appellation was set upon them, because they were not kept in the Ark. The Signification also of this word is doubtful, one while they give this Name to all Books that are not in the Canon, another while only to erroneous or ill Books. Some of the Fathers make three Distinctions of Books, viz. The Ca∣nonical, the Doubtful, and the Supposisitious. Consult Origen upon the fourth Chapter of St. John. St. Athanasius in his Festival Letter, St. Gregory in the Poem to Seleucus. Eusebius, and the other Fathers, divide them but into two sorts, Canoni∣cal and Apocryphal: But then they distinguish the Canonical into two Classes. Indeed generally speaking they are ranged into three Classes, the Ca∣nonical of the first Rank, the Canonical of the second Rank, and the Apocryphal.

(c) Some Persons distinguish three Canons made at several times by the Sanedrim, or the great Sy∣nagogue of the Jews.] Serarius makes only two: The first made by Ezrah, and the Synagogue in his time: The second, either when they sent the LXX Elders to Translate the Bible, or when the Dispute about the Resurrection was so warmly discussed between the Sadducees and Pharisees: Genebrard supposes there were three; The first, composed by Ezrah, and approved of by the Sy∣nagogue; The second, appointed by a Grand As∣sembly of the Synagogue, when they sent the LXX, at which time, as he pretends, Tobit, Ju∣dith, Ecclesiasticus, and the Book of Wisdom, were added to the Canon; The third, at the time of the famous Controversie between the Sadducees and Pharisees, when the Books of the Maccabees, according to him, were Solemnly approved and received.

(d) But 'tis a great deal more probable, that they never had but one Canon.] It is unquestionably true, that Ezrah received, and collected the Sacred Volumes, and consequently that he was the Au∣thor of the Canon amongst the Jews. Neither they, nor the ancient Christians acknowledged any other. As for the Books, which as they pretend, were inserted into the other Canons, 'tis certain they were never owned by the Jews; and what they talk about the two great Assemblies of the Syna∣gogues, that were Convened upon that Occasion, is all a Chimera and Fiction. The Ancients themselves never make the least mention of the Approbation of the Synagogue or Sanedrim of the Jews, which our Moderns boast of so mightily. Some are of Opinion, That Nehemiah added the two Books of Ezrah to the Canon, and found their Notion up∣on what is said in the 2d. Book of Maccabees, ch. 2. v. 13. that he gathered together the Books of Da∣vid, and the Prophets, and the Books of the Kings, &c. But this only proves, that he erected a Library, as it is intimated in that place, and not made a Collection of the Sacred Books. Others say, that we ought to attribute this Canon to Judas Mac∣cabeus, because it is said in the first of Maccabees, Chap. 1. Verse 56. that Antiochus and his Ministers burnt and tore to pieces the Books of the Law: And in the second Book, Chap. 2. Verse 13, 14. the Jews of Jerusalem acquaint their Brethren that were in Egypt, that Judas Maccabeus had gather∣ed together all those things that were lost by rea∣son of the War. This does not prove that Ezrah's Canon was intirely lost, and that Judas com∣posed another, but only that he got other Copies of those Sacred Books that were burnt and torn under Antiochus, and made a Collection of seve∣ral pieces relating to the History of their Wars, which was never received into the Jewish Canon. Our Opinion is invincibly proved by the Con∣curring Testimonies of Josephus and St. Jerome.

(e) But it is visible, that this Citation has been since inserted into the true Text of Josephus.] The passage which, as they pretend, is cited by Jose∣phus, is in Chap. 42. of Ecclesiasticus, Verse 14. Better is the Churlishness of a Man, than a Courte∣ous Woman. 'Tis beyond dispute, that it was af∣terwards added, for Josephus proposes in that place to cite the Laws of Moses, and this passage makes nothing at all to the purpose. In the Ancient Version of Ruffinus this Quotation is not to be found, which makes it evident, that it has been added since.

(f) There are no others cited in the New Testa∣ment, but those that were received into the Canon of the Jews.] Some Persons say, that the Book of Wisdom is cited by St. Paul, Rom. 11. in these words, Who hath known the Mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his Counsellor? Which they say are the very same in effect with those in Wisdom, Chap. 9. For what Man can know the Counsel of God? But this passage cited by the Apostle is to

be found word for word in Isaiah, Chap. 40. Vers. 13. where the Greek Terms are the same that are used by St. Paul. St. Basil, L. de Spir. Sancto, Ch. 5. Ter∣tullian in his fifth Book against Marcion, Ch. 14. St. Ambrose, or rather the Author of the Com∣mentaries upon St. Paul, that are falsly attribu∣ted to him, Peter Lombard, and several others observe, that it is taken out of Isaiah. 'Tis also pretended, that the passage in his Epistle to the Hebrews, where it is said, that Enoch was transla∣ted, that he might not taste of death, is taken out of that Book. But it is in Genesis, Chap. 5. Vers. 25. It is likewise said, that there are several Allusions in the Gospel and the Epistles of the Apostles to some places in Ecclesiasticus, the Book of Wisdom, Judith and Tobit. Every one abounds in his own sense, and can find out what Resem∣blances or Allusions he pleases; but it is not ne∣cessary that two Persons that have happen'd upon the same thought, should take it one from the other. St. Justin, and the Ancients, don't accuse the Jews, for not acknowledging all the Books of Holy Scripture for Canonical. Theophilus says, that Zechariah is the last of the Prophets, and concludes the Holy Scripture with Ezrah.

(g) A great part of these are quoted there.] These are all Books that are cited there; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, the second Book of Samuel, the first of Kings, Job, the Psalms, the Proverbs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Eze∣kiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Jonah, Micah, Haggai, Habakkuk, Nahum, Zechariah, Malachi.

(h) Gregory Nazianzen distributes the Books of Scripture into Historical, Poetical, and Propheti∣cal. This Distribution in my Opinion, seems to be the just••••t, and most natural.

(i) By that of the Roman Council held under Gelasius, Anno Dom. 494.] There is mention made in this Catalogue but of one Book of Ez∣rah, and one Book of Maccabees, although the Number of Books is not exactly distinguished in all the rest. For Example: Regnorum libri qua∣tuor—Esdras liber unus, Maccabaeorum liber unus. In some Manuscripts Job is not men∣tioned there, and they read Maccabaeorum libri ••uo.

(k) St. Jerome, who frequently rejects it as A∣pocryphal, and puts it out of the Canon, not only of the Jews, but the Christians also.] Every time that St. Jerome treats expresly obout the Canoni∣cal Books in his Prologues to the Kings, to the Books of Salmon, Ezrah, and Esther, in his E∣pistles 7 and 103 to Paulinus, in his Commenta∣ry upon Ezekiel in l. 17. ch. 43. he always re∣jects those Books that are not to be found in the Canon of the Hebrews as Apocryphal, and only fit to be considered as such. But when he speaks without making any manner of reflection, he frequently cites these very Books as parts of the Holy Scripture, and attributes the same Chara∣cter to the Book of the Wisdom of Salomon, al∣though it is certain, that he believed the contra∣ry. In his Prefaces before Judith and Tobit, as if he had a mind to restore the Reputation of these Books, he speaks very advantageously of them.

(l) The Books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus.] Besides several Allusions to the Scripture, which might be produced, but don't prove, that they were cited from thence, St. Barnabas cites a pas∣sage drawn out of the Book of Wisdom, Chap. 2. Vers. 12. and another out of Ecclesiasticus, Chap. 4. Vers. 36. Clemens Romanus, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, has quoted the Book of Wisdom, Chap. 11. Vers. 22. Tertullian likewise has quo∣ted the same Author in his Book against Marcion, towards the end, and in his Prescriptions. Cle∣mens Alexandrinus has also quoted him frequent∣ly. St. Cyprian very often quotes these two Books, and ascribes them to Salomon. Origen mentions the Book of Wisdom under the Name of Scripture in Epist. ad Hebr. in his third Book against Celsus, and in his eighth Homily upon Exodus, as he also cites Ecclesiasticus, Tom. 2.—upon St. Matthew, Treatise the 24th: And Euse∣bius, l. 6. of his History, Chap. 13. says, That although St. Clement cites these Books, yet they are for the most part rejected. St. Hilary cites them upon the Psalm 104. St. Basil also cites them sometimes, and particularly in his fifth Book against Eunomius. So does St. Jerome fre∣quently, in his Commentary upon Psalm 73. in his 16th Book upon Isaiah, and in his 33d Book upon Ezekiel, and in his second Book upon Isaiah. St. Austin does the same in abundance of places. They are likewise cited by the Author of the Book of Divine Names, and of the Hierarchy, in the last Book, Chap. 2. in the first, Chap. 4. In the Letter of the Council of Sardica, set down by Theodoret, Hist. l. 2. c. 8. By Anastasius Sinai∣ta, lib. 9. In Exam. Orat. 2. De incircumscripto, and Quest. 8. and 10. By Johannes Damascenus, l. 4. Of the Orthodox Faith, Chap. 16. In his third Oration of the Nativity, and in his Sermon of the Dead. But to cite a Book, as Gretzer observes, is not to declare it to be Canonical. These Books are thrown out of the Canon by those very Persons that cite them under the Name of Scripture, and they that attribute them to Salomon, when they cite them, at other times formally deny it. Some seem to think, that the Book of Ecclesiasticus is cited by those who pro∣duce this Sentence as from the Scripture, Do no∣thing without advice. Such as St. Basil in his short Rules, Quest. 104. Eusebius de Praep. Evang. Lib. 12. Cassian, Conference 2. Boniface, Epist. 98. The council of Ephesus, in the Epistle to the Sy∣nod of Pamphylia. But the same Sentence is in substance in the 13th Chapter of the Proverbs, Vers. 16. and is word for word in the 24th Chap∣ter, Vers. 13. of the Septuagint Version, from whence these Fathers quoted it; as well as Isidore Pelusiota, who frequently uses it. The Proverbs likewise are very often cited by the Ancients un∣der the Name of Wisdom, by Melito in his Cata∣logue, Proverbia quae & Sapientia, for so it ought to be translated, and not Proverbia & Sapientia; by Origen, Hom. 17. upon Genesis, upon Exodus, and Numbers; by the Author who has written under the Name of Dionysius of Alexandria a∣gainst Paulus Samosatenus; by the Author of the Constitutions, frequently by St. Basil, Const. Mo∣nast. C. 3. and 16; by Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. 1. and 26. And by Gregory Nyssene in his Book of The Life of Moses, and in his 7th Book against Eunomius. By the Council in Trullo, Chap. 64. By the second Council of Nice, Act. 6. The Pro∣verbs

are also called by St. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata. By Hegesippus, and the Ancients, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

(m) St. Basil sufficiently observes, that he did not own the Books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for Canonical.] In his Epist. 406. to Amphilochius, he tells us, that Philo speaking of the Manna, has said according to the Tradition of the Jews, that it had a different Taste according to the diffe∣rence of Palats or Appetites. Now this is expresly said in the Book of Wisdom. St. Basil therefore believed it was written by Philo, if this is the Book whereof he speaks, or at least that it was no Book of Scripture, for otherwise he would not barely have called an Opinion, that is so clearly esta∣blished there in the 16th Chapter, by the Name of a Jewish Tradition. The same St. Basil, Lib. 2. contr. Eunom. says, that this passage, Dominus creavit me initium viarum suarum, is only to be found once in Scripture. Socrates says the same thing, Lib. 4. Chap. 7. If they had acknowledg∣ed the Book of Wisdom to be Canonical, they ought to have said that this Sentence is twice to be found in the Bible, because we read it in the Book of Wisdom, as well as in the Proverbs.