AS well of the author, as of the authority of this book, have been divers opinions among the learned. But in process of time, the first is probably discussed, the other is clearly decided by the Church. For concerning the former doubt, Many ancient Fathers allege sentences of this Book, as the sayings of Salomon. Namely S. Ireneus (apud Eusebium, lib. 5. c. 8. Hist.) S. Clement of Alexandria, li. 5. & 6. Stromat. Origen. ho. 12. in Levit. & lib. 8. in Epist. ad Rom. S. Athanasius in Synopsi, & Or. 2. cont. Arrian. S. Basil. li. 5. con. Eunomianos. S. Epiphanius heresi. 67. S. Gregory Nazianzen. lib. de Fide. S. Gregory Nissen. in Testimoniis ex vet. Testam. cap. de Nativitate ex Virgine. S. Chrisost. hom. 33. & 34. in Mat. S. Cyril of Alexandria li. 10. c. 4. Also S. Cyprian li. de exhortat. Martyrum. c. 12. & li. 13. c. 59. ad Quirin. & li. de Mortalitate. S. Hilary in Psal. 127. S. Ambrose; li. de Salomone. c. 1. and divers others suppose Salomon to be author of this book. To whom likewise some of them ascribe the book of Ecclesiasticus. But S. Jerom Praefatione in libros Salomonis testifieth that some ancient writers affirm this book to be written by Philo a Jew, and the other by Jesus the son of Sirach. And S. Augustin very plainly (li. 17. c. 20. de civit.) saith, custom prevailed, that the books of Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus, for some similitude of speech are called Salomon's: but the more learned assuredly judge that they are not his. What then shall we say, seeing so many other ancient learned Doctors cite them as his. The answer is easy, and sufficiently insinuated by S. Augustin, that these two books being like unto the other three, which are Salomon's, were also called his. Whereto we may add a like example in the two first books of Kings, which are called the books of Samuel, though he writ not all the first, nor any part of the second. [Argu. li. Reg.] Moreover all these five are called by one general title Sapiential books. In so much that the Church readeth in the sacred Office before all Epistles, taken out of any of these five books, not Lectio Proverbiorum, or Ecclesiastae, &c. but still, Lectio libri Sapientiae. The solution therefore is very probable, that this book of wisdom was written by Philo Judeus, not he that lived after Christ, but an other of the same name, near two hundred years before. And Ecclesiasticus by Jesus the son of Sirach. Who not only imitated Salomon, but also compiled their books, for most part of Salomon's sentences, conserved till their times by tradition, or in separated scrolls of papers; yea they so utter some sentences in his person as if himself had written them. [Cha. 7. 8. 9.] As touching the authority of these two books, and some others, it is evident that the Jews refuse them. And therefore many ancient Fathers writing against them, spared sometimes to urge such books as they knew would be rejected. Especially having abundant testimonies of other holy Scriptures, for deciding matters of faith against them. Even as our Saviour himself proved the Resurrection of the dead against the Sadducees out of the books of Moyses, which they confessed for Canonical Scripture, denying other parts, where the same point might otherwise have been more evidently showed. [Mat. 22. Exo. 3.] And so S. Jerom in respect of the Jews said these books were not Canonical. Nevertheless he did often allege testimonies of them, as of other divine Scriptures: sometimes with this parenthesis (si cui tamen placet librum recipere) in cap. 8. & 12. Zachariae: other times, especially in his last writings, absolutely without such restriction, as in cap. 1. & 56. Isaiae, & in 18. Jeremiae. Where he professeth to allege none but Canonical Scripture. As for all the other ancient fathers here above mentioned, ascribing this book to Salomon, and many others cited by Doctor Jodocus Coccius (To. 1. Thesauri. li. 6. art. 9.) they make no doubt at all, but that it is Canonical Scripture, as appeareth by their express terms, Divine Scripture, Divine word, Sacred letters, Prophetical saying, the Holy Ghost saith, and the like. Finally, as well ancient General councils, namely that of Charthage, an. D. 419. with others, as the later of Florence and Trent, have declared this book to be Canonical. And that conformably to the most ancient and learned Fathers: as S. Augustin, not only judgeth himself, but also plainly testifieth (li. de Praedestinat. Sanct. c. 14. [Et li. 17. c. 20. civ.]) saying: The sentence of the book of wisdom ought not to be rejected (by certain inclining to Pelagianism) which hath been so long publicly read in the Church of Christ, and received of all Christians, Bishops, and others, even to the last of the Laity, Penitents, and Catecumes (cum veneratione divinae auctoritatis.) with veneration of divine authority. Which also the excellent writers, next to the Apostles' times, alleging for witness (nihil se adhibere, nisi divinum testimonium crediderunt) thought they alleged nothing but divine testimony.