Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Word of God · Book I: On the Canonical Books
Chapter 8: On the book of Baruch
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. I, De Verbo Dei, Book I: On the Canonical Books of Scripture. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Concerning the book of Baruch there was, and is, a controversy, both because it is not found in the Hebrew codices, and also because neither the ancient Councils, nor the Pontiffs, nor the Fathers whom we cited above, who weave the catalogue of the sacred books, mention this Prophet in express words. And therefore, of the Catholics, John Driedo denies this book to be canonical (book 1 On the Ecclesiastical Scriptures and Doctrines, last chapter, at the last argument); of the heretics, John Calvin (book 3 of the Institutes, chapter 20, section 8) and Chemnitz (in his Examination of the fourth session of the Council of Trent). But us the contrary persuades — the authority of the Catholic Church, which in the Council of Trent, session 4, numbers the Prophet Baruch among the sacred books, and on the eve of Pentecost commands a lesson out of the book of Baruch to be read publicly with the lessons of the other sacred books.
Nor are there wanting also testimonies of the ancient Fathers which we may oppose to the adversaries. Cyprian, book 2 against the Jews, chapter 5: “Likewise in Baruch: This is our God,” etc.; and in the Sermon on the Lord's Prayer he cites the epistle of Jeremias, which is the last chapter of Baruch: “Through Jeremias the Holy Spirit suggests and teaches, saying: But in the mind ought God to be adored by thee.” St. Hilary, in the preface of his Commentary on the Psalms, sets by name in the canon the epistle of Jeremias. Blessed Cyril, book 10 against Julian, cites Baruch by name. Clement of Alexandria, book 2 of the Paedagogue, chapter 3: “Beautifully somewhere says the divine Scripture,” etc., citing chapter 3 of Baruch. Blessed Ambrose, book 1 On the Faith, chapter 2, citing those words of Baruch 3, This is our God, and there shall no other be counted to him, says: “The Scripture calls him one God,” etc. And below: “Why do we discuss him, of whom so great a Prophet says, the Holy Spirit says, that beside him no other can be counted?” Theodoret expounds this whole book, and, writing on chapter 2, plainly calls it divine Scripture. Eusebius, book 6 of the Demonstration of the Gospel, chapter 19, cites chapter 3 of Baruch, and afterward says: “Nothing ought to be added to the divine words.”
Finally, the ancients everywhere allege this book under the name of Jeremias, because Baruch was the notary and disciple of Jeremias, as is plain from the book of Jeremias, chapter 36; which was the cause why the ancient Councils and Fathers set not Baruch by name in the canon — because, namely, they judged this book to be a part of the prophecies of Jeremias. Clement of Alexandria, book 1 of the Paedagogue, chapter 10, cites under the name of Jeremias that of Baruch, Hear, O Israel, the commandments of life; and that of Baruch, Blessed are we, O Israel, because the things that are pleasing to God are made manifest to us. Blessed Ambrose, book 1 On Penance, chapter 8, recites under the name of Jeremias certain things out of chapter 3, and certain out of chapter 5 of this book; and book 3 of the Hexaemeron, chapter 14, sets down others out of chapter 4. St. Basil, book 4 against Eunomius, not far from the end, and St. John Chrysostom, in the oration That Christ is God against the heathen, bring forward that place of Baruch, This is our God, under the name of Jeremias. St. Augustine, book 18 of the City of God, chapter 33, says that the same place is cited by some under the name of Baruch, but by more under the name of Jeremias. Finally the same place, under the name of Jeremias, cite Pope Sixtus, in the epistle to all the Faithful; Felix IV, in the epistle to Peter of Antioch; and Pelagius I, in the epistle to Vigilius. Since these things are so, Baruch surely cannot be rejected, unless Jeremias also be rejected. For as there was never any controversy among the ancients about the book of Jeremias, so also it must be judged that among them there existed no controversy about the book of Baruch.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT VIII. De libro Baruch. De libro Baruch controversia fuit, et est ; tum quia non invenitur in Hebraeis codici¬ bus, tum etiam quia nec Concilia antiqua, neque Pontifices, neque Patres, quos supra citavimus, qui catalogum librorum sacro¬ rum texunt, hujus Prophetae disertis verbis meminerunt. Itaque propterea ex Catholi¬ cis, Joannes Driedo hunc librum negat esse canonicum, lib. I. De Scripturis et dogma¬ tibus Ecclesiasticis, cap. ult. ad argumen¬ tum ultimum; ex haereticis Joannes Calvi¬ nus lib. III. Institut. cap. 20. §. 8., et Kem- nitiusin exam. IV sessionis Concilii Triden- tini. Caeterum nobis contrarium persuadet Ec¬ clesiae Catholicae auctoritas, quae in Concil. Trident. sess. IV, Prophetam Baruch inter sacros libros numerat : et in profesto Pen- tecostes palam lectionem ex libro Baruch cum lectionibus aliorum sacrorum librorum legi jubet. Nec desunt etiam veterum Patrum testi¬ monia, quae adversariis opponamus. Cy- prian. lib. II. Contra Judaeos, c. 5. «Item apud Baruch, inquit, hic est Deus noster, etc. » et Ser. de orat. Dominica citat episto¬ lam Hieremiae, quae est ultimum cap. Ba¬ ruch : « Per Hieremiam, inquit, Spiritus sanctus suggerit, et docet dicens, in sensu autem tibi debet adorari Deus. » S. Hilarius praef. Comm. in Psal. nominatim ponit in canone epistolam Hieremiae. B. Cyrill. lib. X. in Julianum, nominatim citat Baruch. Clem. Alexand. lib. II. paedagogi, cap. 3. « Pulchre, inquit, dicit alicubi divina Scrip¬ tura, » etc. citans cap. III. Baruch. B. Amb. lib. I. de fide, cap. 2. citans illa verba Ba¬ ruch III. Hic est Dem noster , et non cesti- mabitur alius ad eum , inquit : « Unum Deum dicit Scriptura,» etc. Et infra : «Quid discutimus eum, de quo tantus Propheta di¬ cit, Spiritus sanctus dicit, quod ad eum non possit alius aestimari? » Theod. totum hunc librum exponit, et in cap. 2. scribens, aperte vocat divinam Scripturam. Euseb. lib. VI. Demon. Evang. cap. 19. citat cap. III. Ba¬ ruch, et postea, « Nihil oportet, inquit, ad¬ dere divinis vocibus. » Denique Veteres passim allegant hunc li¬ brum sub nomine Hieremiae, propterea quod Baruch Notarius et discipulus fuerit Hiere¬ miae, ut patet ex libro Hieremiae, cap. 36, quae causa fuit, cur Concilia antiqua, et Pa¬ tres non posuerint Baruch nominatim in ca¬ none, quia nimirum hunc librum partem esse judicabantHieremiae vaticiniorum. Cle¬ mens Alexandrinus, libro I. Paedagogi, cap. 10. citat nomine Hieremiae illud Baruch ; Audi Israel mandata vitee (1), et illud Baruch; Beati sumus Israel , quia quce Deo placent , ma¬ nifesta sunt nobis (2). Beatus Ambrosius lib. I. de Poenitentia, capite 8. recitat nomine Hieremiae quaedam ex capite III., et quaedam ex cap. V. hujus libri ; et lib. III. Hexam. cap. 14. ponit alia ex cap. IV. S. Basilius lib. 4. in Eunomium non procul a fine, et S. Joannes Chrysostomus in oratione , quod Christus sit Deus, contra gentes adducunt locum illum Baruch : Hic est Dem noster (3), (1) Baruch. 111. 9. — (2) Ibid. IV. 4. — (3) Baruch. 111. 36. 88 LIBER I. % nomine Hieremise. S. Augustinus lib. XVIII. de Civitate Dei, cap. 33. eumdem locum di¬ cit ab aliquibus citari nomine Barucb, sed a pluribus nomine Hieremise. Denique eum¬ dem locum nomine Hieremise citant Sixtus Papal. in epist. ad omnes Fideles, Felix IV. in epist. ad Petrum Antiochenum, et Pela¬ gius I. in epist. ad Vigilium. Quae cum ita sint, non poterit certe Ba- ruch repudiari, nisi Hieremias etiam re¬ pudietur. Ut enim nulla fuit unquam apud Veteres controversia de libro Hieremise, ita quoque censendum est de libro Baruch nul¬ lum apud eos controversiam extitisse.