Empleo de prebióticos y probióticos en acuicultura

missing—that is, seven books fewer than there are in the Catholic Bible, and seven fewer than there were in every collection and catalogue of Holy Scripture from the fourth to the sixteenth century. Their names are Tobias, Baruch, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, I

Machabees, II Machabees, together with seven chapters of the Book of Esther and 66 verses of the 3rd chapter of Daniel, commonly called “the Song of the Three

Children”(Daniel 3: 24-90, Douay version). These were deliberately cut out, and the Bible bound up without them.

The criticisms and remarks of Luther, Calvin, and the Swiss and German Reformers about these seven books of the Old Testament show to what depths of impiety those unhappy men had allowed themselves to fall when they broke away from the true

Church. Even in regard to the New Testament, it required all the powers of resistance on the part of the more conservative Reformers to prevent Luther from flinging out the Epistle of St. James as unworthy to remain within the volume of Holy Scripture—“an Epistle of straw,” he called it, “with no character of the Gospel in it.” In the same way, and almost to the same degree, he dishonored the Epistle of St. Jude and the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the beautiful Apocalypse of St. John, declaring they were not on the same footing as the rest of the books and did not contain the same amount of Gospel (i.e., his Gospel).

The presumptuous way, indeed, in which Luther, among others, poured contempt and doubt upon some of the inspired writings, which had been acknowledged and cherished and venerated for 1000 or 1000 years, would be scarcely credible were it not that we have his very words in cold print, which cannot lie, and may be read in his Biography or be seen quoted in such books as Dr. Westcott's The Bible in the Church.

And why did he impugn such books as we have mentioned? It is because they did not suit his new doctrines and opinions.

He had arrived at the principle of private judgment—of picking and choosing religious doctrines. So whenever any book, such as the Book of Machabees, taught a doctrine that was repugnant to his individual taste—as, for example, that “it is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sins'” (2 Mach.

12:46)—well, so much the worse for the book! “Throw it overboard” was his sentence, and overboard it went. And it was the same with passages and texts in those books which Luther allowed to remain and which he pronounced to be worthy to find a place within the boards of the new Reformed Bible.

In short, he not only cast out certain books, but he mutilated some that were left.

For example, not pleased with St. Paul’s doctrine that “we are justified by faith” and fearing lest good works (in his view, a Popish superstition) might creep in, he added the word “only'” after St. Paul’s words, making the sentence run: “We are justified by Faith only,” and so it reads in Lutheran Bibles to this day. An action such as that must surely be reprobated by all Bible Christians.

What surprises us is the audacity of the man that could coolly change, by a stroke of the pen, a fundamental doctrine of the Apostle of God, St. Paul, who wrote, as all

admitted, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. But this was the outcome of the Protestant standpoint of individual judgment: no authority outside of oneself. However ignorant, however stupid, however unlettered you may be, indeed you are bound to cut and carve out a Bible and a Religion for yourself. No Pope, no Council, and no Church

shall enlighten you or dictate or hand down the doctrines of Christ. And the result we have seen in the corruption of God’s Holy Word.

4. Yet, in spite of all reviling of the Roman Church, the ‘Reformers’ were forced to accept from her those Sacred Scriptures which they retained in their collection. Whatever Bible they have today, disfigured as it is, was taken from us.

Blind, indeed, must be the evangelical Christian who cannot recognize in the original Catholic Bible the quarry from which he has hewn the Testament he loves and studies, but with what loss! At what a sacrifice! In what a mutilated and disfigured condition!

That the Reformers should appropriate unabridged the Bible of the Catholic Church (which was the only volume of God’s Scripture ever known on earth), even for the purpose of elevating it into a false position—this we could have understood. What staggers us is their deliberate excision from that Sacred Volume of some of the inspired Books which had God for their Author, and their no less deliberate alteration of some of the texts of those books that were suffered to remain.

It is on consideration of such points as these that pious persons outside the Catholic fold would do well to ask themselves the question—Which Christian body really loves and reveres the Scriptures most? Which has proved, by its actions, its love and

veneration? And which seems most likely to incur the anathema, recorded by St. John, that God will send upon those who shall take away from the words of the Book of Life?

(Apoc. 22:19.)

~CHAPTER VI~

The Originals and their Disappearance

1. Now, you may naturally enough ask me: “But how do you know all this? Where