SEARCH
0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Prev | Current Page 14 | Next

Daubney, William Heaford

"The Three Additions to Daniel, a Study"

Probably the
phrase "libros integros _cum omnibus suis partibus_" was introduced into
the decree with special reference to these additions and those to
Esther. This decree, making them "sacred and canonical," was carried,
according to Loisy (p. 201), by 44 placets to 3 non-placets and 5
doubtful.[1] Dr. Streane, however, says (_Age of the Maccabees,_ 1898,
p. 102) it was passed by "a small majority." Even writers so late as
Nicholas de Lyra (?? 1340) and Denys the Carthusian (?? 1471) speak of
these additions as true, but not parts of Holy Scripture (Loisy, p. 223,
quoting Corn. ?  Lap. on Dan. xiii. 3). And they were of the Roman
obedience.
Bleek (_Introd. to O.T._ II. 336, Eng. tr.) says that the seventh decree
of the Council of Florence (1439), making mention of apocryphal books as
canonical, which no one was acquainted with before the Tridentine
Council, is very probably not genuine. Denys the Carthusian, it will be
observed, was subsequent to the supposed Florentine decree, and
seemingly ignorant of its existence.


Pages:
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26