FathersVia Patrum

Theological Theses · §146

Disputed New Testament books said to wait on Church determination

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

When even among the orthodox some truly divine and Apostolic books were sometimes doubted — Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2–3 John, and the Apocalypse — they claim this was because the Church had not yet given its judgment, and that the doubt was finally lifted by church determination: at Laodicea, the third council of Carthage, and the decrees of Popes Innocent and Gelasius.

By those, they say, not only the New Testament books just named, but also the Old Testament books still disputed between us and Rome, were received into the Canon — as they would have it.

For confirmation they cite Jerome on James: though it was being put about as written by someone else under his name, little by little it gained authority. On Jude: though most rejected it, antiquity and use earned it authority.

In the same vein Jerome writes to Dardanus on Hebrews and John's Apocalypse: We receive both, following not present custom but the authority of the ancient writers, who usually cite both not as they sometimes do the Apocrypha, but as Canonical and Ecclesiastical.

Latin

XXVIII. Cum vero de quibusdam libris vere divinis & Apostolicis aliquando inter ipsos orthodoxos dubitatum sit, ut ex. gr. de Epistola ad Hebraeos, de Epistola Jacobi, de Epistola Judae, & posteriore Epistola Petri, & de secunda & tertia Joannis, ejusdemque Apocalypsi, id inde factum afferunt & pertendunt, quod Ecclesia de his libris judicium & sententiam suam nondum pronunciarat: istam vero dubitationem tandem per Ecclesiae determinationem & judicium sublatam fuisse. Nempe in Laodicena Synodo, & III. Carthaginiensi, Innocentiiique & Gelasii PP. decretis, quibus non tantum praedicti Novi Testamenti libri, sed illi quoque de quibus adhuc hodie lis est inter nos & Pontificios, An ad Veteris Testamenti Canonem pertineant, in Scripturae Canonem, ut quidem illi volunt, recepti sunt. Atque in hujus rei confirmationem afferunt etiam quod de Epistola Jacobi scribit Hieronymus, Et si ab alio quodam sub ejus nomine scripta afferebatur, tamen paulatim procedente tempore obtinuit authoritatem. Et quod de Epistola Judae similiter dicit, Quod, etsi a plerisque rejiciebatur, tamen authoritatem vetustate & usu meruit. Quibus consentanea sunt quae de Epistola quoque ad Hebraeos, & Joannis Apocalypsi scribit idem Hieronymus epistola ad Dardanum, Nos, inquit, utraque recipimus, nequaquam hujus temporis consuetudinem, sed, veterum Scriptorum authoritatem sequentes, qui plerumque utriusque utuntur testimoniis, non ut interdum de Apocryphis facere solent, sed quasi Canonicis & Ecclesiasticis.

About this text

Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu, Sedan Theses, newly rendered from Latin: from theology proper through the Roman theses I–77 and the Reformed theses of Part Two. The theses only — not the collected works.

English follows locked Pitt Latin through Imaginum CLOSED + Sanctorum Cultu Romana CLOSED + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL. 1675 PDF ~384-390 (book ~370-376); Vision OCR + pdftotext + tess. No modern English. This slice densifies Sanctorum Pars Secunda I-XL. Next: Pars Secunda XLI–fin (~CI). Claim stays claimed (book densify not done).

Catalogue & scope

ESTC R17887; Wing L802. IA bub_gb_eOkHAW4G0-wC (+ EEBO 1675 for gap leaves). Densify through Sanctorum Cultu Romana I-LXXVII + Pars Secunda Reformata I-XL (Pars Secunda not closed; not whole folio).

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.