Thousands of Rare Vatican Manuscripts to Go Online

Cordially, right back at ya’: http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/deut.html#St. Gregory the Great, Pope, [590-604, A.D.]

St. Gregory the Great, Pope, [590-604, A.D.]

Between 578 and 595 AD, in “The Moral Teaching”, St. Gregory wrote the following on what is ‘canonical’. He wrote this, or at least began this work (with no notes dividing the time he was in Rome from the time from Constantinople), according to the notes of Rev. James Barmby, in NPNF2, Vol. 12, Prolegomena p. XV, from Constantinople (prior to assuming the role of Pope). Thus, he is speaking of the canon from Constantinople where he was located. The following says that 1st Maccabees is not in ‘the canon.’ Notice he does not say that 1st Maccabees is ‘uninspired’ or not Scripture.

With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical, yet brought out for the edification of the Church, we bring forward testimony. Thus Eleazar in the battle smote and brought down an elephant, but fell under the very beast that he killed” (1 Macc. 6.46). (Joseph Gildea, Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 1991, Part 1, Book 3, p. 126.)
Remember, just because he is terming it non-canonical does not mean it is not Scripture. Again, he began this work in 578 and ended in 595. He began being Pope only in 590 AD and reigned to 601 AD. This book is divided into two parts, with each one having six books. This book is only part one, and only book three. Thus, this passage is done in the first quarter of his whole work, well before he was Pope, where he is in Constantinople, where Maccabees is not part of the canon. As we have seen with other Fathers who did not put these books in their canon, he still refers to these books as Scripture. Notice, even here, while he is in Constantinople, he does not term it Unscriptural, or uninspired. In Constantinople at the time, he most likely was only speaking of the canon in that area, which only consists of what is read in the Liturgy. The canon that he is speaking of is not the full extent of Scripture, as we saw with St. Athanasius and the other Fathers. Now, to go on to what he thought of the Deuterocanonical books in the very work where the above passage is cited. Did he consider the Deuterocanonical books as Unscriptural, which Protestants who make much hay about the reference to 2nd Maccabees as ‘uncanonical’, assume? Let us check this very work. The following quotes, not found in the Schaff NPNF2 edition, volume 12, which has some of St. Gregory the Great’s writings. I take these quotes from Joseph Gildea, St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job (New York: Peter Lang Publishing) 1991. I will put the book, part and page number as taken from the book:

Pride is of course the root of all evil, of which it is said, as Scripture bears witness: Pride is the beginning of all sin. (Sirach 10:26) Moreover; proliferating from this poisonous root as its first offspring are seven capital sins: vainglory, envy, anger malancholy, avarice, gluttony, lust. For because he grieved that we were held in bondage by these seven derivatives of pride, on that account our Redeemer, full of the spirit of sevenfold grace, joined spiritual battle for our liberation. St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 1, Book 3, p. 85.

The former, it is said by Holy Scripture: Do not become like the horse and the mule which have no understanding (Psalm 31:9). The proud effort of the latter is blamed when it is said: Seek not the things that are too high for thee, and search not into things above thy ability (Sirach 3:22). To the former it is said: Mortify your members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, lust, eveil consupiscence (Col. 3:5), to the latter it is said: Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceipt (Col. 2:8) St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Book 1, Part 3, 21, p. 116
Here is the same book and same part (Book 1, Part 3) as the mentioned quote which some Protestants will use to say that St. Gregory denies the Scriptural status of Maccabees. However, in the very same part of the same book, St. Gregory calls Sirach Scripture. Sirach is ‘Scripture bearing witness.’ Maccabees is in the very same category of books as Sirach on every list known to us. Not only does Scripture bear witness, but he affirms this even more when he teaches on morals, that Sirach is termed ‘Holy Scripture’ in the very same category as Psalms and Colossians. These two passages in and of themselves give further evidence that St. Gregory clearly shows that when he speaks of uncanonical, that does not mean that the book is ‘unscriptural.’ On the contrary, St. Gregory positively affirms Sirach, the very same category of books from which Maccabees comes, as Scripture.

Hence it is that with difficulty is eternal rest attained by the powerful who are surrounded by numberless hosts of lieges and bound with the tight coils of a great variety of concerns. In this regard Scripture says A most severe judgment shall be for them that bear rule. (Wisdom 12:6) Hence Truth says in the Gospel: Unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required (Luke 12:48). It rarely happens that those who possess gold strive for eternal rest, inasmuch as Truth himself says: How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God (Mt. 19:25). St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 1, Book 4, 3, p. 133.
Here we have St. Gregory term in the immediate book and part that is right after his denying the canonicity of a Deuterocanonical book (while at the same time affirming their Scriptural status), at the same time declare affirmatively, the Book of Wisdom, which is in the very category of books as Maccabees, as ‘Scripture says.’ Thus, we have yet another Deuterocanonical book, the book of Wisdom, in the immediate vicinity of the very same part of this book of Morals where Protestants quote to claim that Pope Gregory deny the inspiration of the Deuterocanonicals, termed yet again as Scripture.
I quote here again in the same book and part of the book (Book 1, Part 3) from St. Gregory:

He is king over all the children of pride (Job 41:25). It is written: Pride is the beginning of all sin ( Sirach 10:15). St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 1, Book 3, 2, P. 87.

In this regard it is written: By the envy of the devil, death came into the world (Wisdom 2:24). For when the decay of envy has corrupted the vanquished heart, exterior indications show how greatly mad impulses provoked the mind. St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job Part 1, Book 3, 7, p. 96.

Anger indeed killeth the foolish : and envy slayeth the little one (Job 5:2 ). Since it is written: But thou, Lord, judgest with tranquility (Wisdom 12:18), we must particularly take note that as often as we restrain our turbulent emotions by the virtue of mildness, we are trying to return to the likeness of our Creator. St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job Part 1, Book 3, 9, p. 98.

By anger life is lost although wisdom may seem to be retained, as it is written: anger destroyeth even the wise (Sirach 32:26), for indeed the confused mind is not effective even if it is able to judge anything wisely. By anger righteousness is abandoned, as it is written: The anger of man worketh not the justice of God (Jer. 9:14). St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job Part 1, Book 3, 9, p. 98.
We have Pope St. Gregory, in the very same Part and book of his work on the book of Morals, that we have focused on (where he denies the canonicity of a Deuterocanonical book) affirm the Scriptural Status of these books an additional four times, where the quotations of these books are preceded by the phrase It is written. As we have seen that phrase is an even more unmistakeable reference to these books as Scripture.
For hence it is said by Solomon: If a man live many years , and have rejoiced in them all, he must remmeber the darksome time, and the many days: which, when they shall come, the things past shall be accused of vanity (Eccl. 11:8). Hence again it is written: In all thy works, remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin (Sirach 7:40). St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 1, Book 2, 32, p. 82.

For now any sinner casts away the fear of God and yet lives, blasphemes and yet prospers, because the merciful Creator in seeing does not wish to punish the one whom he wishes to correct by waiting of him as it is written: Thou overlookest the sins of men for the sake of repentance (Wisdom 11:24). But when the sinner is looked upon hereafter, he shall be no more, because when the strict judge precisely examines his deserts, the guilty one is not equal to the torments. St. Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 2, Book 1, 11, p. 204.

Observe how through his angels he comes down to establish misdeeds and immediately strikes the evildoers. And he who is patient, who is mild, of whom it is written: But thou, Lord, judgest with tranquility, of whom (Wisdom 12:18) it again is written: The Lord is a patient rewarder (Sirach 5:4), Gregory the Great, A Synthesis of Moralia in Job, Part 2, Book 4, 15, p. 289
Three more times in the book of Morals we see the Scriptural identifying phrase It is written. In this one book of Morals, St. Gregory refers to the Deuterocanonical books approximately 37-40 times in the same way as other Scriptures. He takes for granted their Scriptural status. Not one quote did I see where St. Gregory treat them as anything but Scripture. This includes many more times where he used the Scripture identifying phrase It is written before giving the quote, but for space purposes I have not given further quotes. The evidence that St. Gregory provides is overwhelming: The Deuterocanonical books are Scripture and any attempt to read one quote which denies the ‘canonical status’ of the Deuterocanonical book, and go with that as denying Scriptural status, is absolutely false. These books are undoubtedly Scripture and any attempt to use Pope St. Gregory against the Scriptural status of these books is either badly misinformed and/or horribly misleading.
Now, on to the quotes which shows at what level of authority Pope Gregory gives the Deuterocanonical books in his other writings. In the NPNF2 series, vol. 12, which gives some of his writings (but does not give all his writings, for example it does not have Morals on the Book of Job which I cited extensively above), he quotes from the Deuterocanonicals 25 times.

But, if your Holiness knew both what I referred to in my letter and what had been done, whether against John the presbyter or against Athanasius, monk of Isauria and presbyter, and wrote to me, I know not; what can I reply to this, since the Truth says through His Scripture, “The mouth that lieth slayeth the soul” (Wisd. i. 11) St. Gregory the Great, Book III, Epistle 13, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 136.
To St. Gregory, truth speaks through God’s Scripture, which happens to be given through the Book of Wisdom, a Deuterocanonical book. This is an explicit and clear-cut citation of a Deuterocanonical book as Scripture. Thus, the attempt to read the prior quote against the canonicity of the Deuterocanonicals as a denial of their Scriptural status, is false: He is explicit in his affirmation of Wisdom as Scripture. Again, non-canonical does not mean uninspired as God’s truth is spoken dogmatically through the Book of Wisdom.
Lest they should give nothing at all to those on whom they ought to bestow something, let them hear what is written, Give to every man that asketh of thee (Luke vi. 30). Lest they should give something, however little to those on whom they ought to bestow nothing at all, let them hear what is written. “Give to the good man, and receive not a sinner: do well to him that is lowly, and give not to the ungodly” (Sir.. xii. 4). And again, “Set out thy bread and wine on the burial of the just, but eat and drink not thereof with sinners (Tobit iv. 17). St. Gregory the Great, Book of Pastoral Rule, Chapter XX, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 45.
St. Gregory uses the phrase “It is written” three times in this passage. As noted before, this phrase is used in Scripture to identify passage as Scripture. St. Gregory is speaking in the same vein here. He first quotes Luke as Scripture, but in the absolutely same manner, refers to both Tobit and Sirach. He says listen to what they say, because this is God speaking. God speaks through Scripture again.
But the Lord shews with what strong censure he disowns them, saying through a certain wise man, “Whoso offereth a sacrifice of the substance of the poor doeth as one that killeth the son before the father’s eyes” (Sir. xxxiv. 20). St. Gregory the Great, Book of Pastoral Rule, Chapter XXI, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 48.
The Lord censures through the book of Sirach. Censure is a strong word, meaning strong rebuke, using the passage from Sirach as the means to do so. Scripture commands one. Scripture speaks again through Sirach as a command. If the book was not authoritative as Scripture, the passage makes no sense.
For hence it is written, The dog is returned to his own vomit again, and the saw that was washed to her wallowing in the mire (2 Pet. ii. 22). For the dog, when he vomits, certainly casts forth the food which weighed upon his stomach; ... Hence again it is written, “Repeat not a word in thy prayer”(Sir. vii. 14). For to repeat a word in prayer is, after bewailing, to commit what again requires bewailing. St. Gregory the Great, Book of Pastoral Rule, Chapter XXX, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 62
St. Gregory uses the phrase “It is written” two times and in the same manner in reference to 2nd Peter and Sirach yet again. “It is written” is a phrase only used in reference in Scripture. No distinction between a supposed ‘uninspired Deuterocanonical’ as opposed to an ‘inspired Protocanonical’.
As to what you say you desire to be done for you near the most sacred body of the holy apostle Peter, be assured that, though your tongue were silent, your charity bids the doing of it. Would indeed that we were worthy to pray for you: but that I am not worthy I have no doubt. Still, however, there are here many worthy folk, who are being redeemed from the enemy by your offering, and serve our Creator faithfully, with regard to whom you have done what is written; “Lay up alms in the bosom of the poor, and it shall pray for thee” (Sir. xxix. 15). Epistles of St. Gregory the Great, Epistle XXXII, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 156
One serves the Creator, our Lord faithfully, by doing what is written in the following passage of Sirach yet again. According to St. Gregory, Sirach is unquestionably Scripture.
Yet surely this is a promise of the life to come, seeing that it is said, “The righteous shall shine forth as the sun” (Matth. xiii. 43; Wisd. iii. 7). For, in whatsoever virtue any one may excel, how can he shine forth as the sun while still in the present life, wherein “The corruptible body presseth down the soul, and the earthly tabernacle weigheth down the mind that museth upon many things” (Wisd. ix. 15); wherein We see another law in our members warring against the law of our mind, and bringing us into captivity by the law of sin which is in our members (Rom. vii. 23); wherein Even in ourselves we have the answer of death, that we should not trust in ourselves (2 Cor. i. 9); wherein also the Prophet cries aloud, Fear and trembling are canto upon me, and darkness hath covered me (Ps. liv. 6)? For it is written also, “A wise man abideth as the sun; a fool changeth as the moan” (Sir. xxvii. 12); where the comparison of the sun is not applied to the splendour of his brightness, but to perseverance in well-doing. Epistles of St. Gregory the Great, Epistle VII, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 214.
St. Gregory quotes seven times from the Old Testament and New Testament. He uses interchangeably Matthew, 2 times from Wisdom, Romans, Psalms, 2nd Corinthians and Sirach yet again, including the commanding phrase “It is written” applied yet again to Sirach. Again no distinction in the authority of these Scriptures.
It was that you would not speak by letters to a man, having by a good deed made your address to Almighty God. For this same deed of yours has a voice of its own, which calls to the secret ears of God, as it is written, “Hide thy alms in the bosom of the poor, and it shall entreat for thee” (Sir. xxix. 15). And indeed to me, I confess, it is sad to expend what is not my own, and to add to the accounts which I keep of the substance of the Church those also of the property of my most sweet son the lord Theodore. And yet I rejoice with your benignity that you carefully attend to and observe what the Truth says; Give alms, and behold, all things are clean unto you (Luke xi 41); and this which is written, “Even as water quencheth fire, so alms quench sin” (Sir. iii. 33). Paul the apostle also says, Let your abundance supply their want, that their abundance also may be a supply to your want (2 Cor. viii. 14). Tobias admonishes his son, saying, “If thou hast much, give abundantly; but if thou hast little, of that little impart willingly” (Tob. iv. 9) Epistles of St. Gregory the Great, Book VII, Epistle XXVIII, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 222.
“It is written”, yet again identifies two passages of Sirach as Scripture. Tobit (or Tobias) is quoted as well, in the same manner as the quotations of Paul and Luke. Again, the passages of both Deuterocanonical books are treated the same as other Scriptural passages.

To such, under the guise of a learner, it is well said in Solomon, “My son, do nothing without counsel, and after it is done thou shalt not repent (Sir. 32:24).” And again, Let thine eyelids go before thy steps (Prov. iv. 25). St. Gregory the Great, Book of Pastoral Rule, Chapter XX, NPNF2, vol. 12, p. 39.
St. Gregory quotes Sirach, alternatively known as Ecclesiasticus, and immediately after this quotation quotes from Proverbs. He uses the word ‘Again’ when quoting Proverbs. Proverbs is of the same level of inspiration as Sirach. He doesn’t write, here is the ‘uninspired’ word of Solomon, but here is the ‘real thing’ in Proverbs. No distinction between the Scriptural authority of one from the other.
This is the supposed ace in the hole for anti-Deuterocanonical Protestants. We have a Roman Bishop used by Protestants to supposedly deny the Deuterocanonical books. Again, all he denied was one book’s canonical status, not its inspiration. We saw him quote from the Deuterocanonical books, and call them Scripture. He uses the phrase ‘it is written’, which is only used of Scripture, and applies that phrase numerous times to varying Deuterocanonical books. He uses those books interchangeably with the other inspired books and treats them at the same level. Thus, the Protestant apologist’s ace in the hole, a Roman Bishop, does not deny, but only affirms the Deuterocanonicals’ Scriptural status.

Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St. Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed among the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned canonical. For the words as well as of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clear through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage’
Cardinal Cajetan - (Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament. Taken from his comments on the final chapter of Esther. Cited by William Whitaker, A Disputation on Holy Scripture (Cambridge: University Press, 1849), p. 48).

"Notice he does not say that 1st Maccabees is ‘uninspired’ or not Scripture."

I do notice that the author is arguing from what was NOT said. It is an argument from silence that simply assumes the conclusion instead of proving it. He does the same thing again with,

" Notice, even here, while he is in Constantinople, he does not term it Unscriptural, or uninspired. In Constantinople at the time, he most likely was only speaking of the canon in that area, which only consists of what is read in the Liturgy. The canon that he is speaking of is not the full extent of Scripture, as we saw with St. Athanasius and the other Fathers."

And how in the world does quoting from the other deuterocanonical books prove the canonicity of I Maccabees as inspired Scripture?

Eusebius of Caesarea was an early historian of the Church. In his Ecclesiastical History (written about A.D. 324) he discusses questions of canonicity in several places. His view of the Old Testament canon is described thus by Westcott:
Eusebius has left no express judgment on the contents of the Old Testament. In three places he quotes from Josephus, Melito and Origen, lists of the books (slightly differing) according to the Hebrew Canon. These he calls in the first place 'the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament, undisputed among the Hebrews;' and again,'the acknowledged Scriptures of the Old Testament;' and, lastly, 'the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament.' In his Chronicle he distinctly separates the Books of Maccabees from the 'Divine Scriptures;' and elsewhere mentions Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom as 'controverted' books. On the other hand, like the older Fathers, he quotes in the same manner as the contents of the Hebrew Canon passages from Baruch and Wisdom. On the whole, it may be concluded that he regarded the Apocrypha of the Old Testament in the same light as the books in the New Testament, which were 'controverted and yet familiarly used by many.' The books of the Hebrew Canon alone were in his technical language 'acknowledged.'
(Brooke Foss Westcott, The Bible in the Church: A Popular Account of the Collection and Reception of the Holy Scriptures in the Christian Churches [London: MacMillan and Co., 1896], p. 153.)

Bruce Metzger says:

Subsequent to Jerome's time and down to the period of the reformation a continuous succession of the more learned Fathers and theologians in the West maintained the distinctive and unique authority of the books of the Hebrew canon. Such a judgment, for example, was reiterated on the very eve of the Reformation by Cardinal Ximenes in the preface of the magnificent Complutensian Polyglot edition of the Bible which he edited (1514-17)...Even Cardinal Cajetan, Luther's opponent at Augsburg in 1518, gave an unhesitating approval to the Hebrew canon in his Commentary on All the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament, which he dedicated in 1532 to pope Clement VII. He expressly called attention to Jerome's separation of the canonical from the uncanonical books, and maintained that the latter must not be relied upon to establish points of faith, but used only for the edification of the faithful
(Bruce Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Oxford, 1957), p. 180)..

Cordially,

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.