UmARY "^ UN. 'VERS! CAUFO im OF J G-^n. Wh f-ntr^'f f7Y -/m ^7^ ^^f^ t ^'^- A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF Holy Scripture BY A. E. BREEN, Ph. D., D. D. Tlaaa ypa(f>7j Oeoirvevcrro^ koX Q)(f>eXL/jLor] OeoirvevaTo^; koI dy^eXifio'i tt/jo? hihaaKoXCav^ Trpob eXey^ov^ tt/oo? iiravopOayaLV^ Trpbf; iraiheCav t^i' ev BLKatoavvrj.^^ The Vulgate renders the passage: **Omnis scriptura divinitus inspirata utilis est ad docendum, ad arguendum, ad corripiendum, ad erudiendum in justitia." The Roman Catholic version is in accord with the Vulgate: **A11 Scrip- ture inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice." It is evident from a scrutiny of the Greek text that the Vulgate does not adequately repro- duce it. No account is taken in such version of the /cat, which however appears in all the best codices. The Vulgate REVELATION AND ITS CRITERION 7 expunging KaC, would virtually insert the elliptical eo-rt, after a)(/)eXt/io?, thus making deoirvevaro^ a qualifying char- acteristic, warranting the predication of ft)€\ifto9, of Traca 'yparj. By the expunging of the important particle /cat, such sense can be gleaned from this passage; but, retaining such conjunction, whose presence rests upon the best data, I am at a loss to understand how they gather the meaning. More- over, the context and parallel passages demand the sense which results from the retaining of the particle. Of all the versions, the Ethiopic comes closest to the original. According to the Latin translation of the Ethiopic text by Walton, it is as follows: **Et tota scriptura per Spiritum Dei est, et prodest in omni doctrina et eruditione ad corrigendum et instruendum in veritate." Although this ancient and valued text departs somewhat from the verbally literal translation, it reproduces the full sense. We could perhaps literally translate the Greek : "All Scrip- ture is divinely inspired and useful to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in righteousness." Thus it is in con- formity with the Greek reading, with the Ethiopic, with the context, with other parallel passages, and with some of the best of the Fathers. We may instance one parallel passage: II. Pet. I. 20 — 21. We think then that this sense is sufficiently evidenced so as to become practically certain. The passage thus be- comes a direct testimony for the influence of God on Holy Scripture. Indeed, Paul's motive is to induce Timothy to entertain a divine regard for the Holy Writ; and for this reason he brings forward as a proof the divine element in all Scripture. It is not then a discriminative, conditional proposition, but a plain assertion of the authorship of God in the Holy Scripture. But this clear text may not be adduced with any profit as a criterion; because, first of all, it is, as Perrone says, begging the question to prove the divin- ity of the Holy Books from their own testimony. It is the circulus vitiosus. Again, even to those who grant the divine authority of the Epistle to Timothy, it only avails to prove the impress of the hand of God on Holy Scripture in a general way, but does not distinguish book from book, or form any 8 LUTHER ON INSPIRATION judgment concerning an official catalogue. We grant then that the text, as well as others of a similar nature, operates to prove the divine impulse of the Holy Ghost on Scripture in general, provided we once have received as granted that these books are of God; but we deny to all such texts any value to discern canonical from uncanonical books. It is not conformable to the scope of this book to follow the progress of protestantism through all its changes and vagaries. We see in it a constant tendency to limit the divine element in the Holy Scriptures. All the protest ant sects began with an exaggerated notion of the nature of the Scriptures. In the beginning Luther seems not to have formulated any theory of inspiration. He accepted the general principles then held by the Church from which he seceded, that God is the author of Holy Scripture, that the inspired writers are God's instruments, that the inspired writers had received an impulse from the Holy Ghost to write the words and the truths, and that the Holy Scriptures are the i'nfallible word of God, not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in other things, and are free from error, etc. But having once thrown off subjection to authority, with his characteristic genius of audacity, he formulated new theories to meet every emergency in his inconsistent heresy. Luther's opinions present many contradictions, and his defenders are divided against themselves. Speaking of his audacious at- titude toward Holy Scripture, Kier (Bedarf es einer beson- dern Inspirationslehre ? 1891, 8) cites Luther as a proof that there is no need of any fixed theory of inspiration, and de- clares of him : "Of Luther the greatest scriptural theologian, well known is his remarkably free judgment, not alone con- cerning St. James, but also concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews, some of the Prophets, and St. Paul. He read the Bible as a free blessed child of God." This freedom moved him to reject according to his caprice whatever did not please his humor. When the Holy Scriptures pleased him, he extolled them above all other things : " But I, against the sayings of the fathers, of men, of angels, of demons, set up not ancient usage, not a multitude of men, but the word of the one eternal Majesty, which they are forced to approve. LUTHER ON INSPIRATION 9 'This is the work of God, not of us. Here I stand ; here I sit ; here I remain ; here I glory ; here I triumph ; here I insult papists, Thomists, Henricists, sophists, and all the gates of Hell, and also the sayings of men even though holy, and erring custom. God's word is above all; God's power so strengthens me that I should not care if a thousand Augus- tines, a thousand Cyprians, a thousand Henrician Churches were opposed to me." (Contra Henricum regem. Opera Lat. Ed. Franc. VI. 437.) But when the papists urged against him the Scriptures, he repudiates the Scriptures: 'Thou urgest forward the slave, that is the Scriptures, artd not the entire Scriptures, nor their better part, but certain places concerning works. I leave this slave to you; I urge forward the Lord, who is the King of the Scriptures, who became to me my merit, and the price of my justification and salvation. Him I hold; to him I cleave, and leave to thee works, which however thou never hast done," (Comment, in Galat. HI. lo.) *' I care nothing for these. Do thou ever urge on the slave ; I am bold in the Lord, who is Lord and King over the Scriptures. I ask not concerning all the sayings of Scripture, even though thou bringest more against me, for I have on my side the Master and Lord of the Scriptures." The arch deceiver sets at variance with the Lord the message of God himself, and with marvelous arrogance begs the question. To the candid student of history, Luther must ever appear as a clever sophist, who, having thrown off all real belief in religion, played upon the ignorance, superficiality and credulity of the people. Against the Sacramentarians Luther declared that one tittle of the Scriptures was greater than the heavens and the earth; but in another mood he rejected Scriptures which pleased not his caprice: "Finally St. John's Gospel, and First Epistle, St. Paul's Epistles, especially the Romans, to the Galatians, and that to the Ephesians, and St. Peter's First Epistle are the books which present to thee Christ and all things which are necessary and saving, even though thou never see or hear another book or doctrine. There- fore James' Epistle compared to these is verily a letter of 10 LUTHER ON INSPIRATION straw, because it has not in itself the Gospel spirit. ' ' (Welches die rechten und edlisten Biicher des N. T. sind; LXIII. 115.) Of the Apocalypse of St. John, Luther declared: ''In this book I leave every one to his own opinion, and I ask no one to accept my opinion or judgment. I speak what I feel. Many things are wanting in this book, which move me to hold it as neither apostolic nor prophetic. My spirit is not drawn to the book, and a sufficient cause why I esteem the book no higher is that in it Christ is neither taught nor acknowledged, a thing which first of all an apostle should do." (Vorrede zur Offenbarung St. Johannis, LXIII. 169 et seqq.) According to Luther, "Ecclesiastes should be more com- plete; much has been excised from it; it has neither boots nor spurs, but rides in socks, as I was wont to do when still in the cloister." (Tischreden 2261, 2262; Ed. Erlang. LXII. 127— 131.) The genius of Luther pervades all protestantism, a false freedom, a subjectivism, and illogical sentiment alism. Well does Rabaud declare of Luther: ''His principle of critique was purely subjective: from the intensity with which Christ is preached he determined the inspiration and canonicity of a book. Is not this to abolish the authority of the Bible, and to substitute in its stead the individual con- science? Who shall determine the degree of faithfulness of the inspired writer? Who shall judge the purety of his doctrine? Who shall say if Christ is preached as it be- hooveth? This principle, in appearance more practical, but in reality equally as subjective as the principles of the other leaders of the Reformation led to the same result, the author- ity of the individual conscience, a theology read out of the Bible. Luther furnished the first and most remarkable ex- ample. By his audacious critique and his independence in regard to the exterior Scriptures, he placed the germs of the subsequent objections which were to shatter and ruin the doctrine of inspiration, which in common with his con- temporaries Luther held, but which he admitted only in the passages in harmony with his theology, or his reHgious RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 11 sense." (Histoire de la doctrine de I'mspiration des S. Ecritures dans les pays de langue frangaise, Paris, 1883, 39.) The seed of rationalism which Luther sowed has pro- duced dreadful fruit. All protestantism has became ration- alistic. In our own country no protestant theologian ac- cepts the Bible as the infallible w^ord of God. In the protest- ant church in America as soon as a man propounds some audacious heresy he is made a hero. Protestant Germany is thoroughly rationalistic. Cardinal Manning had to de- plore the drift of non-Catholic thought in England : *'It is therefore, no new thing in the history of the Church, nor, indeed, in the history of England since the Reformation. From the Deistical writers down to Thomas Paine, there has never wanted a succession of critics and objectors who have assailed the extrinsic or intrinsic authority of Holy Scrip- ture. ''So far it is no new thing. But in one aspect, indeed, it is altogether new. It is new to find this form of scepticism put forth by writers of eminence for dignity and personal excellence, and mental cultivation, in the Church of England ; by men, too, who still profess not only a faith in Christianity, but fidelity to the Anglican Church. Hitherto these forms of sceptical unbelief have worked outside the Church of England, and in hostility against it. Now they are within, and professing to be of it, and to serve it. Unpalatable as the truth may be, it is certain that a Rationalistic school imported from Germany has established itself within the Church of England ; that its writers are highly respectable and cultivated men, and that though they may be few, yet the influence of their opinions is already widely spread, and that a very general sympathy with them already extends itself among the laity of the Anglican Church. This is certainly a phenomenon altogether new. "Before entering upon the subject of this chapter, it would seem, therefore, to be seasonable to examine briefly the present state of the subject of Inspiration in the Church of England, and contrast with it the teaching of the Catholic Church upon this point. 12 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES *'And first, as to the doctrine of the Church of England on Inspiration, it is to be remembered that though the Canon of Scripture was altered by the Anglican Reformation, the subject of inspiration was hardly discussed. The traditional teaching of the Catholic Theology, with its various opinions, were therefore passively retained. The earlier writers, such as Hooker, repeat the traditional formulas respecting the in- spiration and veracity of Holy Scripture. Hooker's words are, 'He (that is, God) so employed them (the Prophets) in this heavenly work, that they neither spake nor wrote a word of their own, but uttered syllable by syllable as the Spirit put it into their mouths. '* Such was more or less the tone of the chief Anglican writers for a century after the Reformation. "Perhaps the best example of the Anglican teaching on the subject will be found in Whitby's general Preface to his 'Paraphrase of the Gospels.' His opinion is as follows. He begins by adopting the distinction of the Jewish Church between the 'Prophets' and the 'Chetubin,' or holy writers, and therefore between the 'inspiration of suggestion' and the 'inspiration of direction.' "He then lays down — "i. First, that where there was no antecedent knowl- edge of the matter to be written, an inspiration of suggestion was vouchsafed to the Apostles ; but that where such knowl- edge did antecedently exist, there was only an inspiration exciting them to write such matters, and directing them in the writing so as to preclude all error. "2. Secondly, that in writing those things which were not antecedently known to them, either by natural reason including education, or previous revelation — e.g. the Incarn- ation, the vocation of the Gentiles, the apostasy of the latter times, the prophecies of the Apocalypse — they had an immediate suggestion of the Holy Spirit. "3 . Thirdly, that in all other matters they were directed so as to preclude error, and to confirm the truth whether by illumination in the meaning of the previous revelation, or by reasoning. * Works, Vol. III. p. 62. Ed. Keble. RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 13 "4. Fourthly, that in the historical parts of the New Testament they were directed in all that is necessary to the truth of the facts related, but not as to the order or accesso- ries of such events, unless these things affected the truth of the facts. **5. Fifthly, that in relating the words or discourses of our Lord and of others, they were directed so as to preclude all error as to the substance, but not so as to reproduce the words. "6. Lastly, that the inspiration or divine assistance of the sacred writers was such as 'will assure us of the truth of what they write, whether by inspiration of suggestion, or direction only, but not such as w^ould imply that their very words were dictated, or their phrases suggested to them, by the Holy Ghost.* "In Bishop Burnet may be seen a somewhat less ex- plicit tone. He says, The laying down a scheme that asserts an immediate inspiration, which goes to the style, and to every tittle, and that denies any error to have crept into any of the copies, as it seems on the one hand to raise the honor of Scripture very highly, so it lies open on the other hand to great difficulties, which seem insuperable on that hypo- thesis. 'f. "Such was the current teaching of the most respectable class of Anglican divines, men of true learning and of sound judgment, in the best century of the Church of England. But I need quote no more. Let us now examine one or two of the modem opinions on the same subject. "A member of the University of Oxford writes as follows : — The Bible is none other than the voice of Him that sitteth upon the throne. Every book of it, every chapter of it, every verse of it, every word of it, every syllable of it, every letter of it, is the direct utterance of the Most High. 'J A member of Trinity College, Dublin, writes as follows : — The * Whitby's Para-phrase, Gen. Pref. p. 5-7. Ed, London, 1844. t Burnet, Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, p. 117. Ed. Oxford. X Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation of Holy Scripture, p. 89, quoted by Dr. Colenso, Part I. p. 6. . 14 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES Opinion that the subject-matter alone of the Bible proceeded from the Holy Spirit, while its language was left to the unaided choice of the various writers, amounts to that fan- tastic notion which is the grand fallacy of many theories of Inspiration; namely, that two different spiritual agencies were in operation, one of which produced the phraseology in its outward form, while the other created within the soul the conceptions and thoughts of which such phraseology was the expression. The Holy Spirit, on the contrary, as the productive principle, embraces the entire activity of those whom He inspires, rendering their language the word of God. The entire substance and form of Scripture, whether resulting from revelation or natural knowledge, are thus blended together into one harmonious whole.'* Once more. Dr. Arnold writes as follows : 'An inspired work is supposed to mean a work to which God has communicated His own perfections ; so that the slightest error or defect of any kind in it is inconceivable, and that which is other than perfect in all points cannot be inspired. This is the unwarrantable interpretation of the word Inspiration. . . . Surely many of our words and many of our actions are spoken and done by the inspiration of God's Spirit. . . . Yet does the Holy Spirit so inspire us as to communicate to us His own perfections? Are our best works or words utterly free from error or from sinP'f Mr. Jowett, in his well-known Essay on the 'Interpretation of Scripture,' after reciting the commonly-received theories of inspiration, proceeds as fol- lows: — 'Nor for any of the higher or supernatural views of Inspiration is there any foundation in the Gospels or Epistles. There is no appearance in their writings that the Evangelists or Apostles had any inward gift, or were subject to any power external to them different from that of preaching or teaching which they daily exercised ; nor do they anywhere lead us to suppose that they were free from error or infirmity. . . The nature of Inspiration can only be known from * Lee on the Inspiration of the Holy Scripture, pp. 32, 33, t Arnold's Sermons, quoted by Stanley, The Bible, its Form, and its Sub- stance, Preface, VII. VIII. IX. RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 15 the examination of Scripture. There is no other source to which we can turn for information ; and we have no right to assume some imaginary doctrine of Inspiration like the in- falHbility of the Roman CathoHc Church. To the question, What is Inspiration? the first answer therefore is, That idea of Scripture which we gather from the knowledge of it. '* Dr. Williams says, *In the Bible, as an expression of devout rea- son, and therefore to be read with reason in freedom, he [Bunsen] finds a record of the spiritual giants whose ex- perience generated the religious atmosphere we breathe.' *'I do not undertake to do more than recite these opinions of clergymen of the Church of England. It is not for us to say what is the authoritative doctrine of that body; but it has been recently declared by the highest Ecclesiastical tribunal, that the views of Inspiration last given are not inconsistent with the Anglican formularies. Dr. Lushing- ton expressed himself as follows : — *As to the liberty of the Anglican clergy to examine and determine the text of Scrip- ture, I exceedingly . . . doubt if this liberty can be extended beyond the limits I have mentioned, namely, certain verses or parts of Scripture. I think it could not be permitted to a clergyman to reject the whole of one of the books of Scripture.'! **It is evident from the above quotations that the theory of Inspiration among many prominent men in the Anglican Church has been moving in the direction of the German Neology:" (Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost pp. 138 — 145.) The tendency deplored by Manning has continued until now in protestant thought the Bible is a very secondary thing. **Dr. Driver, canon of Christchurch, Oxford, in his work on the 'Literature of the Old Testament,' quotes with approval the following words of Professor Sanday, in regard to inspiration : * Essays and Reviews, pp. 345, 347. t Judgment — Bishop of Salisbury versus Williams, p. i6. 16 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES ^' 'In all that relates to the revelation of God and of His Will, the writers of the Bible assert for themselves a definite inspiration ; they claim to speak with an authority higher than their own. But with regard to the narration of events, and to processes of literary composition, there is nothing so exceptional about them as to exempt them from the con- ditions to which other works would be exposed at the same time and place.' " Dub. Review, 1893, p. 533. Driver himself declares that, "applied to the Bible, as a whole, the expression 'Word of God' seems to savour of the old theor}" of inspiration, which no one now cares to maintain y (Driver's Sermons on the Old Test. p. 158.) ''But it may be said : These are the opinions of individ- ual Anglicans; men of influence and learning no doubt, but still only individuals ; they do not necessarily represent the formal teaching of the Church. What is the attitude of the bishops on this important question ? What is the view of the ecclesia docens on inspiration .f*' ''One thing may safely be said: a remarkable harmony pervades their lordships' words on the subject. Whether their teaching is likely to throw much light on the matter, we leave our readers to decide from the few specimens we adduce. 'We heartily concur with the majority of our opponents,' says the Bishop of Gloucester, in 'Aids to Faith,' p. 404, 'in rejecting all theories of inspiration.' 'Our Church,' says Bishop Thirlwall, charge for 1863, 'has never attempted to determine the nature of the inspiration of sacred Scriptures.' 'If you ask me,' writes Dr. Cotton, Bishop of Calcutta, 'for a precise theory of Inspiration, I confess I can only urge you to repudiate all theories; to apply to theology the maxim which guided Newton in philosophy, hypotheses non fingo.' Finally, to take one more instance, the Bishop of Winchester writes: 'It seems pretty generally agreed, that definite theories of inspiration are doubtful and dangerous." (Manning, op. cit.) When Dr. Frederick Temple was appointed Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury many took the appointment as a total surrender by the Anglican Church to the spirit of rationalism. RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 17 Mr. Jesse Locke thus speaks of Mr. Temple's theology: "What sort of theology has been enthroned at Canter- bury? What idea of religion does he hold and teach who now occupies what Anglicans like to call 'the chair of St. Augustine' ? Fortunately for our inquiry Dr Temple's views on religion are easily accessible. He was the first essayist in a volume published in 1861, and entitled 'Essays and Re- views.' This book was the signal for a blaze of controversy. Its authors were clergymen of the Church of England, and its teaching was the frankest, boldest rationalism, which emasculated religion of the supernatural, and reduced it to a purely humanitarian basis. Orthodox, evangelical protest- ants — pious but illogical — were deeply shocked. A few quotations will give an idea of what the essayist taught on some important subjects. "Dr. Temple, in his opening essay. The Education of the World,' plants himself squarely on that fundamental protest- ant principle of which rationalism is the necessary and legiti- mate fruit. The ulitmate basis for religion, he claims, is to be found only in that 'inner voice' which should guide every man. There is nothing external which can be an authority ; neither is the church. The Bible, ' he says, 'in fact is hindered by its form from exercising a despotism over the human spirit. . . . The inner voice by the principle of private judgment puts conscience between us and the Bible, making conscience the supreme interpreter, whom it may be a duty to enlighten, but whom it can never be a duty to dis- obey ('Essays and Reviews,' p. 53). Again: 'When con- science and the Bible appear to differ, the pious Christian immediately concludes that he has not really understood the Bible.' That is, his private judgment is certainly right, and the Bible must be made to conform to it ! This reduces re- ligion to the purest individualism ; makes as many different religions as there are individuals to hold them. And all are equally right ! Suppose this principle applied to the law of the land, each man assuming that the law had no other in- terpreter than his own 'inner voice' !" Mr. Locke then gives us a number of quotations from the essays of other writers in the same volume of "Essays 18 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES and Reviews," and though the ''usual statement" was found in the preface, to the effect that each essayist was responsible for his own essay alone. Dr. Temple has, in the writer's judgment, made himself responsible for the views of these other writers by his failure to repudiate them. Some of these other essayists spoke of the doctrine of inspiration as ''absurd," explained away the Messianic prophecies, char- acterizing as "distortion" the application of Isaiah's prophe- cies to the Messiah, and upheld the idea of a true national church as one that should include all the people of the nation, who should be bom into membership in the church as they are bom into civil rights. Refering to Mr. Temple's Bamp- ton lectures, 1884, Mr. Locke writes: "As to miracles, those of the Old Testament, he tells us, could never be proved. 'The times are remote; the date and authorship of the books are not established with cer- tainty ; the mixture of poetry with history is no longer cap- able of any sure separation into its parts' (p. 206). In the New Testament, he adds, we must admit that some unusual occurrences took place which struck the disciples and other observers as miracles, though they need not necessarily have been miracles 'in the scientific sense.' 'For instance, the miraculous healing of the sick may be no miracle in the strictest sense at all. It may be but an instance of the power of mind over body, a power which is undeniably not yet brought within the range of science, and which neverthe- less may be really within its domain' (p. 195). Our Lord's miracles of healing may have been simply the result of this power and 'due to a superiority of this mental power to the similar power possessed by other men. Men seem to possess this power over their own bodies and over the bodies of others in different degrees' (p. 201). Even our Lord's resur- rection from the dead is reached by this destructive criticism. 'Thus, for instance, it is quite possible that our Lord's resur- rection may be found hereafter to be no miracle at all in the scientific sense. It foreshadows and begins the general resur- rection ; when that general resurrection comes we may find that it is, after all, the natural issue of physical laws always at work' (p. 196). THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 19 **If we ask, What, then, can be the object of miracles? Dr. Temple has his answer ready. If these events, though not really miraculous, have 'served their purpose, if they have arrested attention which would not otherwise have been arrested, if they have compelled belief,' then they have accomplished their true end. In other words, they were 'pious frauds' impressing a people naturally credulous and easily deceived, as the best way of conveying ethical truth to them. The protestant tradition persists in giving' to the Society of Jesus the possession of The end justifies the means' as a principle of conduct; but Dr. Temple goes farther still, and carries the charge back from His faithful servants to the great Master Himself!" For these views of the new archbishop, says Mr. Locke, the Anglican Church must be held responsible, since it has twice passed in review of them and refused to condemn either him or them, and has now received him as its head. In May, 1904, Professor Marcus Dods of New College, Edinburgh, delivered a course of lectures before Lake Forest College, 111. on "The Bible: Its Origin and Nature." In his lecture on the Canon of Scripture he candidly declares : "If you ask a Romanist why he accepts certain books as canonical, he has a perfectly intelligible answer ready. He accepts these books because the Church bids him do so. The Church has determined what books are canonical, and he accepts the decision of the Church. If you ask a protest- ant why he believes that just these books bound up together in his Bible are canonical, and neither more nor fewer, I fear that ninety-nine protestants out of a hundred could give you no answer that would satisfy a reasonable man. The protestant scorns the Romanist because he relies on the authority of the Church, but he cannot tell you on what authority he himself relies. The protestant watchword is, "The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible," but how many protestants are there who could make it quite clear that within the boards of their Bible they have the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible? If you asked them to show you that no canonical writing has been omitted 20 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION and that no uncanonical writing has been received, how will they proceed to do so? If you ask the average protestant to say why he receives the second Epistle of Peter, which a large part of the early Church declined to receive, or wh}^ he accepts the Epistle of James, regarding which Luther him- self was more than doubtful, — what can he say but that the Church to which he belongs receives them? In other words, what is the difference between the protestant and the Ro- manist on this cardinal point of canonicity ? Do not protest- ants and Romanists alike accept their canonical books at the hands of the Church?" After reviewing the Catholic position superficially he endeavors to establish a protestant criterion by appealing to the direct influence of God upon the individual. Luther is his hero : "There w^ere tw^o questions which Luther found himself driven to answer: What assures me that Scripture is the Word of God, and therefore authoritative ? and, What books are Scripture? Prior to the question, What is the Canon of inspired Scripture? comes the question. Is there an inspired Scripture? Prior to the question. What writings contain the Word of God? comes the question. Is there a Word of God? We cannot understand Luther's answer to the one question unless we recognize his attitude toward the other. "Now, according to Luther, the prior question, Is there a Word of God? or. Has God spoken? is answered in the affirm- ative, and with certainty, by every man in whom the Word of God attests its own Divine origin and authority, and it can be answered with an assured affirmative by none beside. Luther's explicit and constant teaching is that this word is self -evidencing, and needs no authority at its back, but car- ries in it its own authentication. Let us hear some of his strong statements to this effect. Showing that the question between himself and Rome was not whether God was to be obeyed when he spoke, — for they were agreed as to that, — he goes on: 'The Romanists say. Yes, but how can we know what is God's word, and what is true or false? We must learn it from the Pope and the Councils. Very well, let them decree and say what they will, still say I, Thou THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 21 can'st not rest thy confidence thereon, nor satisfy thy con- science : thou must thyself decide, thy neck is at stake, thy life is at stake. Therefore must God say to thee in thine heart. This is God's Word, else it is still undecided. ' Again : 'Thou must be as certain that it is the Word of God as thou art certain that thou livest, and even more certain, for on this alone must thy conscience rest. And even if all men came, even the angels and all the world, and determined something, if thou can'st not form nor conclude the decision, thou art lost. For thou must not place thy decision on the Pope or any other, thou must thyself be so skilful that thou can'st say, God says this, not that; this is right, that is wrong; else it is not possible to endure. Dost thou stand upon Pope or Concilia ? Then the Devil may at once knock a hole in thee and insinuate, 'How if it were false? how if they have erred?' Then thou art laid low at once. There- fore thou must bring conscience into play, that thou may'st boldly and defiantly say, That is God's word; on that will I risk body and life, and a hundred thousand necks if I had them. Therefore no one shall turn me from the word which God teaches me, and that must I know as certainly as that two and three make five, that an ell is longer than a half. That is certain, and though all the world speak to the contrary, still I know that it is not otherwise. Who decides me there? No man, but only the truth which is so perfectly certain that nobody can deny it.' "Why is Luther so urgent on this point? He is urgent because he sees that the whole difference between himself and Rome hinges here. If he cannot make good this posi- tion, that the truth or the Word of God has power to verify itself as such to the conscience it awakens, he has no stand- ing at all. The principle which made him a protestant, and which constitutes men protestant s always, is simply this, that the soul needs not the intervention of any authority to bring it into contact with God and the truth, but that God and His truth have power to verify themselves to the indi- vidual. Luther did not accept the Gospel because it was written in a book he believed to be inspired, or canonical, or the word of God ; but he accepted it because it brought new 22 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION life to his spirit and proved itself to be from God. He did not accept Christ because he had first of all accepted the Scriptures, but he accepted the Scriptures because they testified of a Christ he felt constrained to accept. In short, it is the truth which the Scriptures contain which certify him that they are the word of God ; it is not his belief that they are the w^ord of God which certifies him of the truth they contain. The proclamation of God's grace quickening a new life within him convinced him this proclamation was from God. 'The difference between the Romanist and the protest- ant is not what it is so often said to be, that the Romanist accepts the Church as his infallible authority, while the protestant accepts the Scriptures as his infallible authority. The Romanist equally with the protestant accepts the au- thority of Scripture. The difference lies deeper. The difference lies here : that the Romanist accepts Scripture as the word of God because the Church tells him so, the protest- ant accepts it as the word of God because God tells him so. The protestant believes it to be God's word because through it God has spoken to him in such sort as to convince him that it is God who here speaks. This is the one sure founda- tion-stone of protestantism, — the response of the individual conscience to the self -evidencing voice of God in Scripture. He does not need to go to the Church to ask if this be God's word ; his conscience tells him it is. Deeper than that for a foundation of faith you cannot get, and any faith that is not so deeply founded is insecure — it may last, and it may bring a man to all needed benefit, but it is not reasonably defensible, and therefore it is liable to be upset. 'This, then, was Luther's first position regarding Scrip- ture ; this was the fundamental position on which protestant- ism is reared; viz. that through Scripture God Himself so speaks to the soul that the man is convinced without the intervention of any other proof or authority that this is the word of God. The individual does not need the Church to tell him that this is the word of God. God tells him so, and makes all other authority superfluous. THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 23 ''But next comes the question, What writings contain this word? Are we to carry through this fundamental principle, and maintain that only such writings can be ac- counted Scripture as approve themselves to be God's word by renewing or building up the fundamental faith in God which has already been quickened within us? This funda- mental principle of protestantism — that God's word is self- evidencing — can we carry it over to the subject of canonicity and make it the sole, absolute test of canonicity? Or can we at any rate say that whatever agrees with the word of God, which at first begot faith in us, and presents to us the same Gospel and the same Christ is canonical ? This Luther does, subject to the limitation that it springs from the Apos- tolic Circle. Or can we only use this fundamental faith of our own as a negative test, rejecting whatever does not harmonize with that faith in Christ which has given us spiritual life, or at any rate whatever contradicts it? In other words, can I sa^^ that all those writings are canonical which awaken faith in me ? or can I say that all those writings are canonical which present that same Christ, whose presen- tation at first awakened faith in me ; or can I only say that those are certainly not canonical which do not harmonize with faith in Christ ? ''Now we shall find Luther's answer to these questions in the judgments he pronounced on the books actually form- ing our Canon. Taking up his translation of the New Testa- ment, we find that the four writings — Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation — which he considered to be non-apostolic, are relegated to the end by themselves, and introduced with these significant words: 'Up to this point we have been dealing with the quite certain (rechten gewissen) chief books (Hauptbuecher) of the New Testament. But these four fol- lowing have in times past had a different position.' He then goes on to prove briefly but convincingly that Hebrews is not by Paul nor by any Apostle, and after extolling its ability, and pointing out what he considered faulty, he re- marks that 'although the writer does not lay the foundation of faith, which is the apostolic function, he yet builds upon it gold, silver, precious stones, and if, in accordance with 24 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION Paul's words, he mingles some wood, hay, stubble, this is not to hinder us from accepting with all reverence his teaching — although it cannot in all respects be compared to the Apos- tolic Epistles.' His criticisms on the Apocalypse are also very outspoken: 'My spirit,' he says, 'can't accommodate itself to this book : the reason being that I do not think Christ is taught therein.'"^ His judgment of this book, however, underwent considerable modification ; and although, in con- tradistinction to the body of modern critics, he seems never to have been convinced that it was written by the Apostle John, it is not probable that in his later years he would have spoken of it so slightingly. But in his introductory remarks to the Epistle of James he shows more explicitly his criterion or test of canonicity. He refuses to admit this epistle among the Hauptbuecher of the New Testament, or to allow its apos- tolic authorship, and he defends his judgment in these words : 'Herein agree all the genuine {rechtschaffene) holy books, that they all preach and exhibit Christ. This, indeed, is the right touchstone {der rechte Pruef stein) to test all the books, — if one sees whether or not they present Christ, for all Scrip- ture witnesses to Christ (Rom. iii. 21); and St. Paul will know nothing but Christ. That which does not teach Christ is not apostolic, though St. Peter or St. Paul teaches it. That which preaches Christ is apostolic, though Judas, Annas, Pilate, or Herod teaches it.' "Luther's direct test of canonicity, then, is, Does the book in question occupy itself with Christ or does it not? So says Dornerif 'The deciding principle as to whether a writing is to pass for canonical lies, in a dogmatic aspect, according to Luther, as well known, in this, whether it is occupied with Christ.' Luther, in short, recognizes that God has an end to secure in making a revelation, and this end is to bring clear before men His will for our salvation ; or, in one word, Christ. The books that promote this end he accepts as canonical. *Luther's "Prefaces" are to be found in old editions of his translations of the Bible. See also Reuss's "History of the Canon," p. 347. fHistory of Protestant Theology, E. Tr. I., p. 252. THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 25 ''But while this was Luther's final and determining test of canonicity, it is obvious that he at the same time employed some preliminary test. He applied his final test, not to all books he knew, but only to a number already selected and already passing for canonical. He never thought of carrying his principle through all literature and accepting as canonical every book that was occupied with Christ. He did not accept Augustine and Tauler as canonical, though to them he in great part owed his salvation, his peace, his light, his strength. And it may, on the other hand, be questioned whether, with all his boldness, he would have dared to reject any writing which was proved to be of apostolic authorship In point of fact he does not reject any such writing. His test of canonicity is, in short, only a supplemental principle which can be applied only in a field already defined by the application of some other principle, or by some universal usage such as the Church-collection of Scriptures had sprung from. Luther's method is really this : he first accepts at the hand of Jerome certain candidates for admission into the Canon, and to these selected candidates he applies this test. He was aware that up to Jerome's time the Church had always been in doubt regarding certain of these writings, and to these he freely applies the testing question, Are they occupied with Christ ? ''Theoretically, therefore, Reuss is right in saying that Luther did not look upon the Canon as a collection, more or less complete, of all the writings of a certain period or of a certain class of men, but as a body of writings destined by God to teach a certain truth; and accordingly the test of the individual writings must at bottom lie in the teaching itself.* But praUically what Luther did was to apply this test only to writings which already had some claim to be considered apostolical. The course of his thought was briefiy this: he arrived at faith in Christ before he reached any clear view of the inspiration or canonicity of certain writers ; he reached faith in Christ apart from any doctrine regarding Scripture. But having believed in Christ, he found that certain men ♦''History of Protestant Theology," E. Tr., I., page 344. 26 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION had been appointed by Christ to witness to the great facts of His hfe, death, resurrection, and gift of the Spirit. The same faith which accepts Christ as supreme, the same faith which produces self -verifying results in his soul compels him also to believe that the commission of Christ to His Apostles was actually effectual, and that they are the appointed, normative witnesses to Him and His salvation. The writ- ings of these Apostles he accepts, though holding himself free to reject them if they contradict the fundamental faith in Christ which gave him his new life. The other books, whose authorship is doubtful, but which from the first have claimed admittance to the New Testament Canon, he judges purely on their merits, rejecting or admitting as he finds they do not or do fit into the apostolic teaching. "This, it will be said, leaves a ragged edge on the Canon. It leaves much to be decided by the individual. A man may say to Luther, *I do not find in the gospel of John agree- ment with the three synoptic gospels, and as you throw over James because he does not agree with Paul, so I throw over John because he does not agree with the synoptists.' And Luther could have made no satisfactory reply. Better, he would think, let a man accept Scripture from his own feeling of its truth than compel him to do so by some external com- pulsion. Indeed, his boldness in pronouncing his own opinion is quite equalled by his explicit and repeated allowance of liberty to every other man. Thus, though he himself did not accept the Apocalypse as the work of John, he hastens to add, 'No man ought to be hindered from holding it to be a work of St. John or otherwise as he will.' Similarly, after giving his opinion of the Epistle of James, he concludes, 'I cannot then place it among the chief books, but I will forbid no one to place and elevate it as he pleases.' So that if we find ourselves in disagreement with Luther regarding the judgments he pronounces on some of the books of Scripture, this is only what he himself anticipated. Neither does the fact that his principle can never be applied without such dis- cordant results emerging, reflect any discredit on the prin- ciple itself. As Reuss says. To begin to speak to-day of the infatuation of Luther's method of procedure, because in the THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 27 details of its application one cannot always share in his opinion, this only proves that with the modem champions of a pretended, privileged orthodoxy, ignorance and fatuity go hand and hand in the van.' *The same vagueness which marred the Lutheran doc- trine of canonicity affected the Calvinistic position. The inward witness cannot reasonably be expected to be sufficient for the task of certifying every word that God has uttered to man. It cannot, in other words, be expected to form of itself a sufficient test of canonicity. *'The truth is there seems to have been some confusion of thought in Calvinistic writers, arising from the fact that in speaking of the authority of Scripture they viewed Scripture as a whole. Challenged by the Romanists to say how they knew the Bible to be from God, they said, We know it to be from God because God's Spirit within us recognizes it as His. But this inward witness could only become a test of canonicity if the Bible were an indissoluble whole, part hanging with part, so that each part stands or falls with every other part. ''If, in order to prove the canonicity of all the writings in the Bible, it were enough to say, the Spirit within me recog- nizes God's voice in the Bible as a whole, then this were a sufficient test. If, in order to prove the canonicity of the Epistle of James, it were enough to say, I recognize the voice of God in the Epistle of John, then the 'inward witness of the Spirit' would be a sufficient test. But the very thing we are seeking for is that which brought the parts together, the principle on which the Church proceeded when it took one writing here and another there and brought them into one whole. What is it which is characteristic of each part, so that even when the parts were lying separate, they could be and were recog- nized as properly belonging to the Canonical Scriptures? The question seeking solution is, why do we receive this or that book into the Canon? There is no question here as to whether we have a word of God, nor as to the general collec- tion of writings in which we find that word ; the question is, how do we know that the Epistle to the Hebrews or the Epistle of Jude, or any other individual writing, is the word of God? 28 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION "The Westminster Confession makes 'inspiration' the test of canonicity, although it does not in express terms say so. After naming the books of the Old and New Testament, it proceeds, 'all which are given by inspiration of God;' and then in section three it goes on, 'The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of Divine inspiration, are no part of the Canon of Scripture.' That is to say, writings which are inspired are canonical, writings not inspired are not canoni- cal. But how are we to discover what writings are inspired? The Confession, singularly enough, says nothing of prophetic and apostolic authorship, but refers us to the various marks of divinity in the writings themselves, and concludes in the well-known words, 'Our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and Divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts.' "There are two processes by which we can arrive at the conclusion that a writing is inspired. First, as in reading any book we form an opinion of it, and either pronounce it stupid or feel in it the touch of genius, so in reading the work of an inspired man we may arrive at the conclusion that it has been written with Divine aid. There may be that in it which makes us feel that we have to do with a Divine as w^ell as a human author. Second, we may believe in the in- spiration of a book, because w^e first of all believe in Christ, and find that He authorized certain persons to speak in His name and with His authority and spirit. When the well- authenticated w^ritings of such persons come into our hands, we accept them, if we are already Christian. "But there are books in the Bible whose inspiration can- not be ascertained by either of these methods. There are books of which we cannot say that they are written by prophet or apostle or otherwise commissioned person ; Chron- icles, Esther, Job, Ecclesiastes, — no one knows who wrote these books. One of the methods of ascertaining inspira- tion is therefore closed to us. And as to the other method, the inward witness, I am not persuaded that John Ow^en himself could have detected the book of Esther as an inspired book, had it been found lying outside the Canon. How, then, THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 29 can we justify the admission of such a book as Esther — a book of which the authorship is unknown, and to which the inward witness bears at the best a somewhat doubtful testi- mony so far as regards its inspiration ? *'To say that we accept it because the Jews accepted it, is simply to fall back to the Romanist position and take our Canon at the hands and by the authority of the Church. To affirm that the men who settled the Canon were inspired, is to assume what cannot be proved, and even to affirm what we know to be false, because discussion was still going on among the Jews regarding their Canon as late as the year 96 A. D. We can only justify the admission of these books on some such general ground as that of Luther — their con- gruity to the main end of revelation. If by 'canonical writings' we mean the writings through which God conveys to us the knowledge of the revelation He has made, if this be the prominent idea, and if their being the rule of faith and life be an inference from this, then we get a broader basis for the Canon and can admit into it all writings which have a direct connection with God's revelation of Himself in Christ. If the book in question gives us a link in the his- tory of that revelation, or if it represents a stage of God's dealings and of the growth His people had made under these dealings, and if it contains nothing which is quite inconsist- ent with the idea of its being inspired, then its claim to be admitted seems valid. Therefore I would be disposed to say that the two attributes which give canonicity are con- gruity with the main end of revelation and direct historical connection with the revelation of God in history.* 'Tt may indeed be said that if such a book as Esther were lost, nothing that is essential to the history would be lost, or that if several of the Psalms were lost nothing essential would be lost. But this is really to say no more than that a man who has lost a joint of a finger or a toe has lost nothing essential. No doubt he can live on and do his work, but he is not a complete man. And there are parts of the body of which it is very difficult to say why they are there, or why they are *A similar, if not indentical, conclusion was reached by the late A. B. Bruce, but I have lost the reference. 30 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION of the particular form they are ; but there they are, and the want of them would seem a deformity. So of the Bible, we may not be able to say of every part that it its exact relation to the whole ; nor yet may we be able in honesty to say that we think anything essential would be lost were certain por- tions of Scripture to be removed ; and yet he would be a rash man who would dare to aver that he could improve upon the Canon, or who should think it needful to excise from it such parts as to himself may seem unimportant. *Trom all this, then, we must gather (i) that churches should be cautious in speaking of the Canon as an absolutely defined collection of writings, thoroughly and to a nicety ascertained, based on distinct principles and precisely sepa- rated at every point from all extracanonical literature. There is no reasonable doubt that the bulk of the books of the New Testament come to us so accredited that to reject them is equivalent to rejecting the authority of Christ ; but a few are not so accredited, and it is a question whether our creeds ought not to reflect the fact that in the early Church some books were universally admitted into the Canon, while regarding seven of the books of our New Testament grave doubts were entertained. The position taken by one of the greatest champions of protestantism, Chillingworth, is one that commends itself: 'I may believe even those questioned books to have been written by the Apostles and to be canon- ical ; but I cannot in reason believe this of them so undoubt- edly as of those books which were never questioned : at least I have no warrant to damn any man that shall doubt of them or deny them now, having the example of saints in heaven, either to justify or excuse such their doubting or denial.' This was the position of Luther and of the Reformers gener- ally, and for my part I think it a pity it was ever abandoned. It is not a calamity over which one need make great moan, but unquestionably the combining of less authenticated books with those that are thoroughly authenticated has rather tended to bring the latter class under suspicion with persons ignorant of their history. "We also gather (2) what ought to be the attitude of the ordinary lay protestant toward this subject of the Canon. THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 31 Sometimes Romanists have taunted us with the absurdity of inviting each protestant, educated or uneducated, to settle the Canon for himself. The taunt is based on a misconcep- tion. It is the right of every protestant to inquire into the evidence on which certain books are received as canonical, and the more that right is exercised, the better. But even when the right is not used, it is not thereby resigned. Protest- ants receive the Canon as they receive historical facts, on the testimony of those who have pursued this line of inquiry. We may never have individually looked into the evidence for Alexander's invasion of India, but we take it on the word of those best informed regarding historical matters, reserving of course the right to examine it ourselves if need arises. So on this subject of the Canon, the lay protestant accepts the judgment of the Reformed Churches, feeling tolerably confident that after all the research and discussion which learned men have spent upon this subject, the result cannot be seriously misleading. But he of course reserves the right to inquire for himself if opportunity should arise, and does not dream that the decision of the Church binds him to accept certain books as Divine. The protestant accepts the decision of the Church precisely as he accepts the decision of engineers or medical men or experts of any kind in their respective departments — he accepts it as the result arrived at after deliberation by competent men. The Romanist accepts the decision of the Church as a decree of law issued because the Church wills it so, and not as the mere finding of learned men ; and the Romanist has no right to revise the Church's decision. The Romanist holds that the Church has power to make books canonical ; the protestant holds that irrespective of any ecclesiastical decision there is that in the books themselves which makes them canonical. To confound the two positions is ignorant or malicious. ''(3) Again, protestants are taunted with the diversity of opinion consequent on leaving such questions to individual research and private judgment. I reply that it is a vast advantage so to leave such questions, for it is to invite in- vestigation, and to invite investigation is to secure that one day the truth will shine in the eye of the world. What 32 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION value attaches to the unanimity that is secured by closing every one's eyes, and shutting every one's mouth? That unanimity alone is valuable which the truth itself commands. And this unanimity can only be attained by diligent, rever- ent, truth-seeking investigation. For my part, I think Luther was right in holding that regarding some of the books there must be difference of opinion always ; but of the great bulk of the New Testament, — the four Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles of Paul, the First of Peter, and the First of John, — as there was no difference of opinion in the early Church, so eventually there will be an entire agreement. Men do not differ regarding the authorship of 'Hamlet,' nor the esteem in which that writing should be held, neither will private judgment and liberty of criticism cause men to differ regard- ing the canonical books, but will rather bring them to the only agreement that is worth having. ''Lastly, let us remember that the true protestant order is, first, faith in Christ; second, faith in Scripture. Our faith in Christ does not hang upon our faith in Scripture, but our faith in Scripture hangs upon our faith in Christ. Our faith in Christ may depend on Scripture as a true history; but not as an inspired canonical book. It is Christ as pre- sented in Scripture or by other means, by preaching as in the first age, and often now, that evokes faith. He and he only is the true protestant who knows that God has spoken to him in Christ, and who knows this irrespective of any infallible authority separable from Christ himself, whether that authority be the authority of the Church or the author- ity of Scripture. We must not shift the ultimate authority form Christ to Scripture." We have presented this long quotation as it sums up the position of what might be considered the most conservative protestantism. The very principle on which protestantism was founded must lead to rationalism and it has led to it. Outside the Catholic Church dogma is decried as narrow and bigoted, and the Scriptures are only stray records of man's striving after God. According to them the Scriptures are the product of the thought of successive ages, and reflect the evolution of Man's conceptions of the Deity, and of his state THE PROTESTANT CRITERION . 33 of culture. Much therefore in them is to be attributed to the erroneous ideas of that cruder age, and therefore now must be discarded, as not in harmony with our finer ideas. When Dods wrote his statement he had not read Tolstoi's criticism of Hamlet. The force with which these liberal ideas are propounded and the popularity which they acquire have led astray some of the members of the Catholic Church. The progress of the movement evoked from the venerable Head of the Church a powerful denunciation in his address to the newly created cardinals on April i8, of the present year. We quote the following short passage: "For these modem heretics, the Holy Scripture is not a sure source of all the truths concerning faith, but an ordin- ary book. For them inspiration reduces itself to dogmatic doctrines understood in their own fashion, and differs but little from the poetic inspiration of ^schylus and of Homer. According to them the legitimate interpreter of the Bible is the Church, but the Church subject to the rules of so called critical science which dominates and enslaves theology. As for tradition, everything is relative and subject to muta- tions, consequently the authority of the holy Fathers is reduced to a nullity. All these nimierous errors are propa- gated by means of pamphlets, reviews, books on asceticism, and even novels. These errors are wrapt up in certain ambiguous terms and in vague forms in order that there may be always an opening for defense, so as not to incur a formal condemnation while at the same time the unwary may be taken in the toils. ' ' The protestant subjectivism crude and indefinite in Luther, was more definitely formulated by Zwinglius, Calvin, and their followers. Thus Zwinglius declares: 'T know that I am taught of God because I feel him. Let no one raise the objection : How knowest thou that thou art taught of God ? When I was a youth I had not progressed more in human knowledge than my equals. But when seven or eight years ago I began to devote myself entirely to the Scriptures, the philosophy and theology of cavilers continually aimed at me objections. Wherefore relying on the Scriptures and the 34 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION ^ord of God I came to this conclusion : Thou must leave all, and learn the pure teaching of God from his own plain word. Then I began to ask God for light, and the Scriptures, though I read only them, they began to be much clearer than if I read many commentaries and commentators." (Huldreich Zwinglis Werke, I. 79). Relying on this same spirit Zwinglius declares of Luther : ''Clearly and dispassionately I shall show that in the doc- trine of this sacrament (the Eucharist) the almighty God has not revealed the secrets of his counsels to Martin Luther." (Ibid.) For his criterion Calvin appeals to the secret testimony of the Spirit, area wwn testimonium Spiritus : "It remains there- fore firmly established that the Scripture is avroirta-Tov: neither is it right to subject the Scriptures to the logical demonstration ; and the Spirit establishes a certitude by his testimony. . . . Illumined therefore by his power we conclude with certainty, no less than if we saw in them the divinity of God himself, that by the ministry of men they have come down to us from the mouth of God." (Instit. Christ. Rel. 6). Calvin admitted as subsidiary helps the harmony, dignity, truth, simplicity, power, and sublimity of the Scriptures. In the year 1675 Henry Heidegger drew up a Helvetian Formula in which this declaration occurs: 'The Hebrew text of the Old Testament which we have received from the Jewish church, to which of old the oracles of God were com- mitted, we receive and hold fast, both the consonants and the vowel points, or at least their value, and w^e hold both the truths and the words to be inspired. ' ' (Niemeyer Collect. Conf.) This extreme formula was abrogated in 1725. All the Calvinist formulas, the Galilean, Scotch, Belgian, Anglican, and Bohemian, set up the testimony of the Spirit as the criterion of inspiration. The Westminister Conf . I. 5 reads thus: "We may be moved and influenced by the testimony of the Church to a high and reverent esteem of the holy scripture, and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 35 majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full dis- covery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire per- fection thereof are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the word of God ; yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof is from the inward work of the Holy Ghost bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts." We see a general tendency in protestantism to appeal to the tradition of the Jews as a criterion of the Old Testa- ment. Thus John Gerhard (De Locis Theol.) declares: "That a book of the Old Testament should be canonical, it is necessary that it should be written in the prophetic, that is, the Hebrew tongue." Hence those protest ants who saw the futility of the sub- jective criterion were more anxious to find a criterion for the New Testament. John David Michaelis of Gottingen (t 1 791) rejected all subjective criterions, and established for the New Testament one criterion, to wit, that a book of the New Testament is canonical if wTitten by one who has received the Apostolic commission. He therefore rejected the Gospels of Mark and Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. (Einleitung in die Gottlichen Schriften des Neuen Bundes.) Concerning the affirmative sense of this statement Catholic theologians differ. Perrone and Franzelin, and more recently Crets (De Div. Insp.) Schmid, Chauvin, Zanecchia, Scheeben, Heinrich, Hurter, and Pesch (De Insp. Sac. Script. Friburgi 1906) deny it; Ubaldi (Introd. in S. Script. 1878) and Schanz (Apologie) defend it. However it seems certain that if an apostle wrote as a teacher of the faithful, on a theme connected with religion, his writings ipso facto would be inspired. In other words whenever an apostle exercised his apostolic office of teaching he was inspired, whether he spoke or wrote. But Michaelis' criterion is inadequate, because the apos- tolic commission is not an exclusive condition of an inspired 36 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION writer. No one now would accept a criterion that excludes Mark, Luke and Acts. Again a criterion must tell me not only that, if a book be written under certain conditions, it is in- spired, but it must tell me that certain definite books uncon- ditionally are inspired. What avails it, if a man tell me that, if the Second Epistle of Peter be written by him, it is in- spired? What I must know is that it is the word of God. It is evident that the subsidiary criteria appealed to by Calvin are not sufficient to form a criterion. The Imitation of Christ, and certain sermons of the Fathers are more sub- lime than Chronicles and Ezra. The "inner voice" is re- pudiated by candid protestants. John David Michcelis, the learned professor of Gottingen, speaks thus of this means: "This interior sensation of the effects of the Holy Ghost, and the conviction of the utility of these writings to better the heart and purify us are en- tirely uncertain cr iter ions. As regards this interior sensa- tion, I avow that I have never experienced it, and those who have felt it are not to be envied. It cannot evince the divine character of the book, since the Muhammadans feel it as well as Christians, and pious sentiments can be aroused by documents purely human, by the writings of philosophers, and even by doctrine founded in error. ' ' (Einleitung in die Gottlichen Schriften des Neuen Bundes.) Burnett also, in his Exposition of the XXXIX Articles, speaks thus of this subjective criterion : "This is only an argument to him that feels it, if it is one at all; and, therefore, it proves nothing to another person." No subjective criterion could ever be apt for such use, since it would depend on the subjective dispositions of individuals, and one and the same individual would, at different times, be differently affected by the same book. Moreover, this pious movement can come from other than inspired books. A man will feel more religious emotion from the reading of the Imitation of Christ than from the Book of Judges. But experience itself disproves this system. Honest men attest that they do not feel this pious movement, and the opinion may now be said to be obsolete. The Calvinists' particular inspiration of the Holy Ghost in the individual's soul is cognate to the Calvinistic theor}^ of THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 37 the invisible church, and they both fall together. Once establish a visible authoritative Magisterium, and such means of interpreting Holy Scripture becomes incompatible with it. It is evident that such a system of private inspir- ation can never be proven. There never can be any avail- able data to establish such secret action. It must ever remain a gratuitous, groundless assumption. It is exactly opposite to the economy of God. When He would teach the world, He did it by means of divinely commissioned men, directly establishing that such mode of teaching truth would last always. This were absurd, were the evangelization of mankind to be effected by the sole direct inspiration of the Holy Ghost in the heart. To be sure, no man can be brought to Christ without that working of the Holy Ghost in his heart. ''Nemo potest venire ad me, nisi Pater traxerit eum." But the error of protestants is to believe that this energy of the Spirit in man's soul excludes the external authoritative Magisterium. The power of the Spirit and the Magisterium are two causes co-operating to produce one effect. All the texts of Scripture alleged by the protestants, in support of this system, simply prove that the Holy Ghost moves man to Christian belief and to Christian action; and the same power energizing in the Church vitalizes it, and renders it capable of its great mission to teach all mankind. We will leave the prosecution of this train of argument to the tract De Locis Theologicis, and content ourselves here with a few a posteriori arguments. In the first place, did the Holy Ghost exert such action, he would, doubtless, move to a unanimity of faith ; but the exact contrary is in fact verified. The sect of Presbyterians are split on some of the basic truths of Christianity. Can the Spirit of truth inspire them with doctrines directly opposed ? The recent Briggs contro- versy has shown the lack of any religious harmony in the Presbyterian church. I will here excerpt from Milner's End of Controversy a few examples of men who claimed this inspiration of the Holy Ghost. The instances are based upon incontrovertible historical data. Montanus and his sect first claimed this private inspiration ; we may see what spirit led him on, since 38 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION he and others of his sect hanged themselves. After the great i\postasy, commonly called the Reformation, had been inaugurated by Luther, there arose the sect of the Ana- baptists, who professed that it had been commanded them by direct communication from God to kill all the wicked ones, and establish a kingdom of the just.* Bockhold, a tailor of Leyden, was moved by the private inspiration of the Spirit to proclaim himself King of Sion. He married by the same impulse eleven wives, all of whom he put to death. He declared that God had given him Amsterdam, through whose streets his followers ran naked crying out ; *'Woe to Babylon ! Woe to the wicked!" Hermann, the Anabaptist, was moved to proclaim himself the Messiah, and to order: ''Kill the priests ; kill all the magistrates in the world ! Repent ; your redemption is at hand." f All these excesses were done upon the principle and under a full conviction of an individual inspiration. In England, Venner was inspired to rush from the meeting- house in Coleman St., proclaiming ''that he would acknowl- edge no sovereign but King Jesus, and that he would not sheathe his sword, till he had made Babylon [which emblem- ized monarchy] a hissing and a curse, not only in England, but also in foreign countries ; having assurance that one of them would put to flight a thousand, and two of them, ten thousand." On the scaffold, he protested that he was led by Jesus. The records of George Fox, the founder of Quaker- ism, furnish abundant evidence of the abominable absurd- ities into which this supposed inspiration led the Friends. One woman rushed naked» into Whitehall Chapel, when Cromwell was there. Another came into the parliament house with a trencher, which she there broke in pieces, say- ing : ' 'Thus shall he be broken in pieces. ' ' Swedenborg de- clared that he had received, at an eating house in London, the commission from Christ: "I am the Lord Jesus Christ, your Creator and Redeemer. I have chosen you to explain to men the interior and spiritual sense of the Scriptures. I * Sleidan De Stat, et Reip. t Hist. Abrege, de la Re forme par Brandt. THE CATHOLIC CRITERION 39 will dictate to you what you are to write." Here, in the very position of the system, he contradicts himself; for, if Christ gave him a command to teach men, they must needs pay heed to him. Muhammad, and the founder of the foul sect of Mormons, claimed private inspiration. Guiteau claimed the moving of the Spirit in the slaying of President Garfield. Wherefore, w^e maintain that the system of private inspiration, which logically leads to such absurdities, is in itself absurd and untenable. No man makes a better argument against the insuf- ficiency of protestant criteria than Marcus Dods in his article which we have quoted. If any man will weigh this able presentation of the necessity which confronts a pro- testant with the vague answer which Dods renders he must be convinced that protestants are at sea without compass or star. We have in series weighed these several criterions and found them wanting, we now turn to the Catholic Criterion. This criterion is no other than the Catholic Church, into whose custody the Holy Waitings have been given. The Church as an organized body has various elements and agen- cies, which functionate to teach man that truth w^hich the Redeemer promised should be taught by her to the end of time. One of these agencies is tradition, which is simply the solemn witness and testimony of what the Church taught and believed from her inception. We can see at a glance that the fountain source of our criterion is God himself, who, as the First Cause, wrought this effect in the mind of the writer. God through his living Magisterium of truth tells us what is Holy Scripture, and what is not, and those who refuse to hear that authoritative voice have come to reject even the Scrip- tures themselves. Such rejection must logically follow from disbelief in the Church. Augustine was never truer than when he said: "Were it not that the Authority of the Church moves me, I would not believe the Gospels." Re- jecting the authority of the Church, the protestants have passed through a wondrous transition. Beginning by ador- 40 THE CATHOLIC CRITERION ing even the Masoretic points, they have gradually lapsed to such a point where those who believe in the Bible as the in- fallible Word of God are the exceptions. There remains then one means, and one means only, to teach man not only the truths of Scripture, but also the Scrip- ture of truths. This means is the voice of God through the Church. The mighty mind of St. Augustine clearly saw and pro- claimed the necessity of the Church as the criterion of Scrip- ture. Arguing with a Manichaean he declares: *T ask: Who is this Manichaeus ? Ye will answer : The Apostle of Jesus Christ ; I believe it not ; and now thou art not able to do or say anything. Thou didst promise me a knowledge of truth, and now thou obligest me to believe what I know not. Perhaps thou wilt read me the Gospel, and thence endeavor to establish the existence of Manichaeus. But if thou findest one who not yet believes the Gospel what wilt thou say to one who declares to thee : I do not believe ? And I would not believe the Gospel were it not that the authority of the Catholic Church moved me." In placing the Church as the supreme judge of the Canon w^e do not assert that the Church has power to make an in- spired book. In the words of Melchior Canus: 'This is to be demonstrated that the Church of the faithful still on earth can not write a canonical book ; but that it can define whether of not a disputed book be canonical, because the solution of doubts regarding matters of faith belongs to the present Church. For it is necessary that there should be a visible judge in the Church to decide controversies, for the reason that God fails not the Church in necessar^^ things. And whether or not a book be canonical vitally concerns faith. Therefore to the Church on earth pertains this judg- ment. ... I firmly believe therefore that the Church is inspired not to give truth and authority to the canonical books, but to teach that these and not others are canonical" (De Locis Theol. 7,8). The Church must teach us two things ; what books are of God ; and what influence God had in such books. We shall treat first of God's influence upon the Holy Books; and. THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 41 secondly, of the official list of those books. As it is well to know the nature of the thing sought, before going in quest of it, so we believe that we shall be aided in constructing the list of books of Holy Scripture by a knowledge of the dis- tinguishing element required in them, before admitting them to such list. Our treatise will deal first, therefore, with the Nature and Extent of Inspiration, and secondly with The Canon. At this point we shall submit a document which, though not a dogmatic pronouncement, is still an authoritative di- recting voice from the Head of the Church. This document is the encyclical letter 'Trovidentissimus Deus" of Pope Leo Xni. on the study of Holy Scriptures, which appeared on Nov. 1 8, 1893. The immediate occasion of the encyclical letter was a defense of Lenorinant by d'Hulst entitled "La Question Biblique" which was published at Paris in 1893. We give the following translation of the papal document ^Trovidentissimus Deus:" — "The God of all Providence, Who in the adorable designs of His love at first elevated the human race to the participation of the Divine nature, and afterwards delivered it from universal guilt and ruin, restoring it to its primitive dignity, has, in consequence, bestowed upon man a splendid gift and safeguard — making known to him, by supernatural means, the hidden mysteries of His Divinity, His wisdom and His mercy. For although in Divine revela- tion there are contained some things which are not beyond the reach of unassisted reason, and which are made the ob- jects of such revelation in order 'that all may come to know them with facility ^ certainty, and safety from error, yet not on this account can supernatural Revelation be said to be abso- lutely necessary; it is only necessary because God has or- dained man to a supernatural end.' [Cone. Vat. Sess. HI. cap. ii. de revel.] This supernatural revelation, according to the belief of the universal Church is contained both in unwritten Tradition, and in written books, which are therefore, called sacred and canonical because, 'being written under the in- spiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author, and as such have been delivered to the Church.' [Ibid.] This belief has been perpetually held and processed by the 42 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL Church in regard to the Books of both Testaments ; and there are well-known documents of the gravest kind, coming down to us from the earhest times, which proclaim that God, Who spoke first by the Prophets, then by His own mouth, and lastly by the Apostles, composed also the Canonical Scrip- tures, [S. Aug. de civ. Dei. XL, 3.] and that these are His own oracles and words — [S. Clem. Rom. i ad. Cor. 45 ; S. Poly carp, ad Phil. 7 ; S. Iren c. haer. II., 28, 2] — a Letter written by our Heavenly Father and transmitted by the sacred writers to the human race in its pilgrimage so far from its heavenly countr}^ [S. Chrys. in Gen. horn. 2, 2 ; S. Aug. inPs. XXX., serm., 2, i ; S. Greg. M. ad Theo. ep. IV., 31.] If, then, such and so great is the excellence and dignity of the Scriptures, that God Himself has composed them, and that they treat of God's marvellous mysteries, counsels, and works, it fol- lows that the branch of sacred Theology, which is con- cerned with the defence and elucidation of these Divine Books, must be excellent and useful in the highest degree. "Now We, who by the help of God, and not without fruit, have by frequent Letters and exhortation endeavored to promote other branches of study which seem capable of advancing the glory of God, and contributing to the salva- tion of souls, have for a long time cherished the desire to give an impulse to the noble science of Holy Scripture, and to impart to Scripture study a direction suitable to the needs of the present day. The solicitude of the Apostolic office naturally urges, and even compels us, not only to desire that this grand source of Catholic revelation should be made safely and abundantly accessible to the flock of Jesus Christ, but also not to suffer any attempt to defile or corrupt it, either on the part of those who impiously or openly assail the Scriptures, or of those who are led astray into fallacious and imprudent novelties. We are not ignor- ant, indeed. Venerable Brethren, that there are not a few Catholics, men of talent and learning, who do devote them- selves with ardor to the defence of the Sacred Writings and to making them known and better understood. But whilst giving to these the commendation they deserve. We cannot but earnestly exhort others also, from whose skill and piety THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 43 and learning we have a right to expect good results, to give themselves to the same most praiseworthy work. It is Our wish and fervent desire to see an increase in the number of the approved and persevering laborers in the cause of Holy Scripture; and more especially that those whom Divine Grace has called to Holy Orders, should, day by day, as their state demands, display greater diligence and industry in reading, meditating and explaining it. HOLY SCRIPTURE MOST PROFITABLE TO DOCTRINE AND MORALITY. "Among the reasons for which the Holy Scripture is so worthy of commendation — in addition to its own excellence and to the homage which we owe to God's Word — the chief of all is, the innumerable benefits of which it is the source ; according to the infallible testimony of the Holy Ghost Him- self, who says : 'All Scripture, inspired by God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.' [Tim. HI., i6 — 17.J That such was the purpose of God in giving the Scripture to men is shown by the example of Christ our Lord and of His Apostles. For He Himself who 'obtained authority by miracles, merited belief by authority, and by belief drew to himself the multitude' [S. Aug. de util. cred. XIV. 32.] was accustomed in the exercise of His Divine Mission, to appeal to the Scriptures. He uses them at times to prove that He is sent by God, and is God Himself. From them He cites instructions for His disciples and confirmation of His doctrine. He vindicates them from the calumnies of objectors; He quotes them against Sad- ducees and Pharisees, and retorts from them upon Satan himself when he dares to tempt Him. At the close of His life His utterances are from the Holy Scripture, and it is the Scripture that He expounds to His disciples after His resur- rection, until He ascends to the glory of His Father. Faith- ful to His precepts, the Apostles, although He Himself granted 'signs and wonders to be done by their hands,' [Act. XIV., 3.] nevertheless used with the greatest effect the Sacred Writings, in order to persuade the nations every- 44 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL where of the wisdom of Christianity, to conquer the obsti- nacy of the Jews, and to suppress the outbreak of heresy. This is plainly seen in thedr discourses, especially in those of St. Peter ; these were often a little less than a series of cita- tions from the Old Testament making in the strongest man- ner for the new dispensation. We find the same thing in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. John and in the Catholic Epistles ; and most remarkably of all in the words of him, who 'boasts that he learned the law at the feet of Gamaliel, in order that, being armed with spiritual weapons, he might afterwards say with confidence, 'the arms of our warfare are not carnal but mighty unto God.' ' [St. Hieron. de stud. Script, ad PsLulin. ep. LIIL, 3.] Let all, therefore especially the novices of the ecclesiastical army, understand how deeply the Sacred Books should be esteemed, and with what eagerness and reverence they should approach this great arsenal of heavenly arms. For those whose duty it is to handle Catholic doctrine before the learned or the unlearned will nowhere find more ample matter or more abundant ex- hortation, whether on the subject of God, the supreme Good and the all-perfect Being, or the works which display His glory and His love. Nowhere is there anything more full or more express on the subject of the Saviour of the world than is to be found in the whole range of the Bible. As St. Jerome says, *to be ignorant of the Scripture is not to know Christ.' [in Isaiam Prol.] In its pages His Image stands out, living and breathing; diffusing everywhere around consolation in trouble, encouragement to virtue and attraction to the love of God. And as to the Church, her institutions, her nature, her ofhce and her gifts, we find in Holy Scripture so many references and so many ready and convincing argimients, that as St. Jerome again most truly says. *A man who is well grounded in the testimonies of the Scripture is the bulwark of the Church. ' [in Isaiam LIV. 12.] And if we come to morality and discipline, an apos- tolic man finds in the Sacred Writings abundant and excel- lent assistance; most holy precepts, gentle and strong ex- hortation, splendid examples of every virtue, and finally the THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 45 promise of eternal reward and the threat of eternal punish- ment, uttered in terms of solemn import, in God's name and in God's own words. "And it is this peculiar and singular power of Holy Scrip- ture, arising from the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, which gives authority to the sacred orator, fills him with apostolic liberty of speech, and communicates force and power to his eloquence. For those who infuse into their efforts the spirit and strength of the Word of God, speak 'not in word only, but in power also, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much fulness.' [I Thess. I., 5]. Hence, those preachers are foolish and improvident who, in speaking of religion and proclaim- ing the things of God, use no words but those of human science and human prudence, trusting to their own reasonings rather than to those of God. Their discourses may be brilliant and fine, but they must be feeble and they must be cold, for they are without the fire of the utterance of God [Jerem. XXHL, 29] and they must fall far short of that mighty power which the speech of God possesses : 'for the Word of God is living and effectual, and more piercing than any two- edged sword ; and reaching unto the division of the soul and the spirit.' [Hebr. IV., 12]. But, indeed those who have a right to speak are agreed that there is in the Holy Scripture an eloquence that is wonderfully varied and rich and worthy of great themes. This St. Augustine thoroughly understood and has abundantly set forth. [De doctr. Chr. IV., 6, 7.] This, also, is confirmed by the best preachers of all ages, who have gratefully acknowledged that they owed their re- pute chiefly to the assiduous use of the Bible, and to de- vout meditation on its pages. 'The Holy Fathers well knew all this by practical experi- ence, and they never cease to extol the Sacred Scripture and its fruits. In innumerable passages of their writings we find them applying to it such phrases as *an inexhaustible treasury of heavenly doctrine,' [S. Chrys. in Gen. Horn. XXL, 2 ; Horn. IX., 3 ; S. Aug. de Disc. Christ. II.] or *an overflowing fountain of salvation,' [S. Athan. ep. jest. XXXIX.] or put- ting it before us as fertile pastures and beautiful gardens in which the flock of the Lord is marvellously refreshed and 46 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL delighted. [S. Aug. serm. XXVI., 24; S. Ambr. in Ps. CXVIIL, serm. XIX., 2] Let us listen to the words of St. Jerome, in his Epistle to Nepotian: 'Often read the divine Scriptures; yea, let holy reading be always in thy hand; study that which thou thy self must preach. . . . Let the speech of the priest be ever seasoned with Scriptural reading.' [S. Hier. de vita cleric, ad Nepot.] St Gregory the Great, than w^hom no one has more admirably described the pastoral office, writes in the same sense : 'Those,' he says, 'who are zealous in the work of preaching must never cease the study of the Written Word of God.' [S. Greg. M., Regul. past. II., II. (al. 22); Moral. XVII., 26 (al. 14). St. Augustine, however, warns us that 'vainly does the preacher utter the Word of God exteriorly unless he listens to it interiorly;' [S. Aug. serm. CLXXIX., i.] and St. Gregory instructs sacred orators 'first to find in Holy Scripture the knowledge of themselves, and then carry it to others, lest in reproving others they forget themselves.' [S. Greg. M. Regul. past., III., 24 (al. 14).] Admonitions such as these had, indeed, been uttered long before by the Apostolic voice which had learnt its lesson from Christ Himself, Who 'began to do and teach.' It was not to Timothy alone, but to the whole order of the clergy, that the command was addressed : 'Take heed to thyself and to doctrine ; be earnest in them. For in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee.' [I. Tim. IV., 16.] For the saving and for the perfection of ourselves and of others there is at hand the very best of help in the Holy Scriptures, as the Book of Psalms, among others, so constantly insists ; but those only will find it who bring to this divine reading not only docility and attention, but also piety and an innocent life. For the sacred Scrip- ture is not like other books. Dictated by the Holy Ghost, it contains things of the deepest importance, which, in many instances are most difficult and obscure. To understand and explain such things there is always required the 'coming' [S. Hier. in Mic. I., 10.] of the same Holy Spirit ; that is to say. His light and His grace, and these, as the Royal Psalmist so frequently insists, are to be sought by htmible prayer and guarded by holiness of life. THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 47 WHAT THE BIBLE OWES TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. "It is in this that the watchful eye of the Church shines forth" conspicuously. By admirable laws and regulations, she has shown herself solicitous that 'the celestial treasure of the Sacred Books, so bountifully bestowed upon man by the Holy Spirit, should not lie neglected.' [Cone. Trid. sess. V. decret. de reform. I.] She has prescribed that a consider- able portion of them shall be read and piously reflected upon by all her ministers in the daily office of the sacred psalmody. She has ordered that in cathedral churches, in monasteries, and in other convents in which study can conveniently be pursued, they shall be expounded and interpreted by capable men ; and she has strictly commanded that her children shall be fed with the saving words of the Gospel at least on Sun- days and solemn feasts. [Ibid, i — 2.] Moreover, it is owing to the wisdom and exertions of the Church that there has always been continued, from century to century that cultiva- tion of Holy Scripture which has been so remarkable and has borne such ample fruit. "And here, in order to strengthen Our teaching and Our exhortations, it is well to recall how, from the beginning of Christianity, all who have been renowned for holiness of life and sacred learning, have given their deep and constant atten- tion to Holy Scripture. If we consider the immediate disciples of the Apostles, St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp — or the apologists, such as St. Justin and St. Irenaeus, we find that in their letters and books, whether in defence of the Catholic Faith or in its commendation, they drew faith, strength, and unction from the Word of God. When there arose, in various Sees, catechetical and theologi- cal schools, of which the most celebrated were those of Alex- andria and of Antioch, there was little taught in those schools but what was contained in the reading, the interpretation and the defence of the divine written word. From them came forth numbers of Fathers and writers whose laborious studies and admirable writings have justly merited for the three following centuries the appellation of the golden age of biblical exegesis. In the Eastern Church the greatest 48 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL name of all is Origen — a man remarkable alike for penetra- tion of genius and persevering labor ; from whose numerous works and his great Hexapla almost all have drawn who came after himi. Others who have widened the field of this science may also^ be named, as especially eminent ; thus, Alexandria could boast of St. Clement and St. Cyril ; Pales- tine, of Eusebius and the other St. Cyril ; Cappadocia, of St. Basil the Great and the two Gregories, of Nazianzus and Nyssa ; Antioch, of St. John Chrysostom, in whom the science of Scripture was rivalled by the splendor of his eloquence. In the Western Church there are as many names as great : TertuUian, St. Cyprian, St. Hilary, St. Ambrose, St. Leo the Great, St. Gregory the Great ; most famous of all, St. Augus- tine and St. Jerome, of whom the former was so marvellously acute in penetrating the sense of God's Word and so fertile in the use that he made of it for the promotion of the Catho- lic truth, and the latter has received from the Church, by reason of his pre-eminent knowledge of Scripture and his labors in promoting its use, the name of the 'great Doctor.' [See the Collect on his feast, September 30.] From this period down to the eleventh century, although biblical studies did not flourish with the same vigor and the same fruitfulness as before, yet they did flourish, and principally by the instrumentality of the clergy. It was their care and solicitude that selected the best and most useful things that the ancients had left, arranged them in order, and published them with additions of their own — as did S. Isidore of Seville, Venerable Bede, and Alcuin, among the most prom- inent; it was they who illustrated the sacred pages with 'glosses' or short commentaries, as we see in Walafrid Strabo and St. Anselm of Laon, or expended fresh labor in securing their integrity, as did St. Peter Damian and Blessed Lanfranc. In the twentieth century many took up, with great success, the allegorical exposition of Scripture. In this kind, St. Bernard is preeminent ; and his writings, it may be said, are Scripture all through. With the age of the scholastics came fresh and welcome progress in the study of the Bible. That the scholastics were solicitous about the genuineness of the Latin version is evident from the Correctoria Biblica, or list THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 49 of emendations, which they have left. But they expended their labors and industry chiefly on interpretation and ex- planation. To them we owe the accurate and clear distinc- tion, such as had not been given before, of the various senses of the sacred words; the assignment of the value of each 'sense' in theology; the division of books into parts, and the summaries of the various parts; the investigation of the objects of the writers ; the demonstration of the connection of sentence with sentence, and clause with clause ; all of which is calculated to throw much light on the more obscure pas- sages of the Sacred Volume. The valuable work of the scholastics in Holy Scripture is seen in their theological treatises and in their Scripture commentaries; and in this respect the greatest name among them all is St. Thomas Aquinas. "When our predecessor, Clement V., established chairs of Oriental literature in the Roman College and in the princi- pal Universities of Europe, Catholics began to make more accurate investigation on the original text of the Bible as well as on the Latin version. The revival amongst us of Greek learning, and, much more, the happy invention of the art of printing, gave a strong impetus to biblical studies. In a brief space of time, innumerable editions, especially of the Vulgate, poured from the press and were diffused through- out the Catholic world; so honored and loved was Holy Scripture during that very period against which the enemies of the Church direct their calumnies. Nor must we forget how many learned men there were, chiefly among the re- ligious orders, who did excellent work for the Bible between the Council of Vienna and that of Trent ; men who, by the employment of modern means and appliances, and by the tribute of their own genius and learning, not only added to the rich store of ancient times, but prepared the way for the succeeding century, the century which followed the Council of Trent, when it almost seemed that the great age of the Fathers had returned. For it is well-known, and We recall it with pleasure, that Our predecessors from Pius IV. to Clement VIII. caused to be prepared the celebrated editions of the Vulgate and the Septuagint, which, having been pub- 50 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL lished by the command and authority of Sixtus V. and of the same Clement, are now in common use. At this time, more- over, were carefully brought out various other ancient ver- sions of the Bible, and the Polyglots of Antwerp and of Paris, most important for the investigation of the true meaning of the text ; nor is there any one book of either Testament which did not find more than one expositor, nor any grave question which did not profitably exercise the ability of many in- quirers, among whom there are not a few — more especially of those who made most use of the Fathers — ^who have ac- quired great reputation. From that time downwards the labor and solicitude of Catholics have never been wanting ; for, as time went on, eminent scholars have carried on bibli- cal study with success, and have defended Holy Scripture against rationalism with the same weapons of philology and kindred sciences with which it had been attacked. The calm and fair consideration of what has been said will clearly show that the Church has never failed in taking due meas- ures to bring the Scriptures within reach of her children, and that she has ever held fast and exercised profitably that guardianship conferred upon her by Almighty God for the protection and glory of His Holy Word ; so that she has never required, nor does she now require any stimulation from without. HOW TO STUDY HOLY SCRIPTURE. "We must now. Venerable Brethren, as our purpose de- mands, impart to you such counsels as seem best suited for carrying on successfully the study of biblical science. "But first it must be clearly understood w^hom we have to oppose and contend against, and what are their tactics and their arms. In earlier times the contest was chiefly with those who, relying on private judgment and repudiating the divine traditions and teaching office of the Church, held the Scriptures to be the one source of revelation and the final appeal in matters of faith. Now we have to meet the Ration- alists, true children and inheritors of the older heretics, who, trusting in their turn to their own way of thinking, have re- jected even the scraps and remnants of Christian belief which THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 61 had been handed down to them. They deny that there is any such thing as revelation or inspiration, or Holy Scrip- ture at all ; they see, instead, only the forgeries and falsehoods of men; they set down the Scripture narratives as stupid fables and lying stories : the prophecies and oracles of God are to them either predictions made up after the event or forecasts formed by the light of nature; the miracles and wonders of God's power are not what they are said to be, but the startling effects of natural law, or else mere tricks and myths; and the Apostolic Gospels and writings are not the work of the apostles at all. These detestable errors, whereby they think they destroy the truth of the divine books, are obtruded on the world as the peremptory pronouncements of a newly invented 'free science ;' a science, however, which is so far from final that they are perpetually modifying and supplementing it. And there are some of them, who, not- withstanding their impious opinions and utterances about God, and Christ, the Gospels and the rest of Holy Scripture, would fain be considered both theologians and Christians and men of the Gospel, and who attempt to disguise by such hon- orable names their rashness and their pride. To them we must add not a few professors of other sciences who approve their views and give them assistance, and are urged to attack the Bible by similar intolerance of revelation. And it is de- plorable to see these attacks growing every day more numer- ous and more severe. It is sometimes men of learning and judgment who are assailed ; but these have little difficulty in defending themselves from evil consequences. The efforts and arts of the enemy are chiefly directed against the more ignorant masses of the people. They diffuse their deadly poison by means of books, pamphlets, and newspapers ; they spread it by addresses and by conversation ; they are found everywhere ; and they are in possession of numerous schools, taken by violence from the Church, in which, by ridicule and scurrilous jesting, they pervert the credulous and unformed minds of the young to the contempt of Holy Scripture. Should not these things, Venerable Brethren, stir up and set on fire the heart of every pastor, so that to this 'knowledge, falsely so called,' [i. Tim. IV., 20.] may be opposed the 52 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL ancient and true science which the Church, through the Apostles has received from Christ, and that Holy Scripture may find the champions that are needed in so momentous a battle? "Let our first care, then, be to see that in seminaries and academical institutions the study of Holy Scripture be placed on such a footing as its own importance and the circum- stances of the time demand. With this view, the first thing which requires attention is the wise choice of professors. Teachers of Sacred Scripture are not to be appointed at haphazard out of the crowd ; but they must be men whose character and fitness are proved by their love of the Bible and their long familiarity with it and by suitable learning and study. *'It is a matter of equal importance to provide in time for a continuous succession of such teachers ; and it will be well wherever this can be done, to select young men of good promise who have successfully accomplished their theologi- cal course, and to set them apart exclusive for Holy Scripture, affording them facilities for full and complete studies. Pro- fessors, thus chosen and thus prepared, may enter, with con- fidence, on the task that is appointed for them ; and that they may carry out their work well and profitably, let them take heed to the instructions we now proceed to give. "At the commencement of a course of Holy Scripture, let the professor strive earnestly to form the judgment of the young beginners so as to train them equally to defend the Sacred Writings and to penetrate their meaning. This is the object of the treatise which is called 'Introduction.' Here the student is taught how to prove the integrity and authority of the Bible, how to investigate and ascertain its true sense, and how to meet and refute objections. It is needless to insist upon the importance of making these pre- liminary studies in an orderly and thorough fashion, with the accompaniment and assistance of Theology ; for the whole subsequent course must rest on the foundation thus laid and make use of the light thus acquired. Next, the teacher will turn his attention to that more fruitful division of Scrip- ture science which has to do with interpretation, wherein is THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 53 imparted the method of using the Word of God for the ad- vantage of reHgion and piety. We recognize, without hesi- tation, that neither the extent of the matter nor the time at disposal allows each single Book of the Bible to be sepa- rately gone through. But the teaching should result in a definite and ascertained method of interpretation — and, therefore, the professor should equally avoid the mistake of giving a mere taste of every Book, and of dwelling at too great a length on a part of one Book. If most schools cannot do what is done in large institutions — take the students through the whole of one or two Books continuously and with a certain development — yet at least those parts which are selected should be treated with suitable fulness ; in such a way that the students may learn from the sample that is put before them to love and use the remainder of the Sacred Book during the whole of their lives. The professor, follow- ing the tradition of antiquity, will make use of the Vulgate as his text ; for the Council of Trent decreed that 'in public lectures, disputations, preaching, and exposition,' [Sess. IV., deer, de edit, et usu sacr. libror.] the Vulgate is the 'authentic' version ; and this is the existing custom of the Church. At the same time, the other versions, which Christian antiquity has approved, should not be neglected, more especially the more ancient MSS. For, although the meaning of the He- brew and Greek is substantially rendered by the Vulgate, nevertheless, wherever there may be ambiguity or want of clearness, the 'examination of older tongues,' [De doctr. chr. III., 4.] to quote St. Augustine, will be useful and advantage- ous. But in this matter we need hardly say that the great- est prudence is required, for the 'office of a commentator,' as St. Jerome says, 'is to set forth not what he himself would prefer, but what his author says.' [Ad Pammachium.] The question of 'reading' having been, when necessary, carefully discussed, the next thing is to investigate and expound the meaning. And the first counsel to be given is this: that the more our adversaries contend to the contrary, so much the more solicitously should we adhere to the received and approved canons of interpretation. Hence, whilst weighing the meaning of words, the connection of ideas, the parallel- 54 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL ism of passages, and the like, we should by all means make use of such illustrations as can be drawn from opposite erudi- tion of an external sort ; but this should be done with caution so as not to bestow on questions of this kind more labor and time than are spent on the Sacred Books themselves, and not to overload the minds of the students with a mass of infor- mation that will be rather a hindrance than a help. HOLY SCRIPTURE AND THEOLOGY; INTERPRETATION; THE FATHERS. 'The professor may now safely pass on to the use of Scripture in matters of theology. On this head it must be observed that, in addition to the usual reasons which make ancient writings more or less difficult to understand, there are some which are peculiar to the Bible. For the language of the Bible is employed to express, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, many things which are beyond the power and scope of the reason of man — that is to say. Divine mys- teries and all that is related to them. There is sometimes in such passages a fulness and a hidden depth of meaning which the letter hardly expresses and which the laws of interpre- tation hardly warrant. Moreover, the literal sense itself fre- quently admits other senses, adapted to illustrate dogma or to confirm morality. Wherefore, it must be recognized that the Sacred Writings are wrapped in a certain religious obscur- ity, and that no one can enter into their interior without a guide; [S. Hier. ad. Paulin. de studio Script, ep. LIIL, 4.] God so disposing, as the holy Fathers commonly teach, in order that men may investigate them with greater ardor and earnestness, and that what is attained with difficulty may sink more deeply into the mind and heart, and, most of ail, that they may understand that God has delivered the Holy Scripture to the Church, and that in reading and making use of His Word, they must follow the Church as their guide and their teacher. St. Irenaeus long since laid down, that where the charismata of God were, there the truth was to be learnt, and the Holy Scripture was safely inter- preted by those who had the Apostolic succession. [C. haer. IV. 26, 5.] His teaching and that of other holy Fathers, is THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 55 taken up by the Council of the Vatican, which, in renewing the decree of Trent declared its 'mind ' to be this — that 'in things of faith and morals, belonging to the building up of Christian doctrine, that is to be considered the true sense of Holy Scripture, which has been held and is held by our Holy Mother the Church, whose place it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures ; and, there- fore, that it is permitted to no one to interpret Holy Scrip- ture against such sense or also against the unanimous agree- ment of the Fathers.' [Sess. HI., cap. IL, de revel. ; cf. Cone. Trid. sess. IV. decret. de edit, et usu sacr. libror.] By this most wise decree the Church by no means prevents or restrains the pursuit of Biblical science, but rather protects it from error, and largely assists its real progress. A wide field is still left open to the private student, in which his hermeneut- ical skill may display itself with signal effect and to the ad- vantage of the Church. On the one hand, in those passages of Holy Scripture, which have not as yet received a certain and definite interpretation, such labors may, in the benig- nant providence of God, prepare for and bring to maturity the judgment of the Church; on the other, in passages al- ready defined, the private student may do work equally valuable, either by setting them forth more clearly to the flock or more skillfully to the scholars, or by defending them more powerfully from hostile attack. Wherefore the first and dearest object of the Catholic commentator should be to interpret those passages which have received an authentic interpretation either from the Sacred writers themselves, imder the inspiration of the Holy Ghost (as in many places of the New Testament) , or from the Church, under the assist- ance of the same Holy Spirit, whether by her solemn judgment or her ordinary and universal magisterium [Cone. Vat. sess. HI., cap. II., de fide.] — to interpret these passages in that identical sense, and to prove by all the resources of science, that sound hermeneutical laws admit of no other interpretation. In the other passages the analogy of faith should be followed, and Catholic doctrine, as authoritatively proposed by the Church, should be held as the supreme law ; for, seeing that the same God is the author both of the 56 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL Sacred Books and of the doctrine committed to the Church, it is clearly impossible that any teaching can, by legitimate means, be extracted from the former, which shall, in any respect, be at variance with the latter. Hence it follows that all interpretation is foolish or false which either makes the Sacred writers disagree one with another, or is opposed to the doctrine of the Church. The professor of Holy Scrip- ture, therefore, amongst other recommendations, must be well acquainted with the whole circle of Theology and deeply read in the commentaries of the Holy Fathers and doctors, and in other interpreters of mark. [Ibid.] This is incul- cated by St. Jerome, and still more frequently by St. Augus- tine, who thus justly complains, *If there is no branch of teaching, however humble and easy to learn, which does not require a master, what can be a greater sign of rashness and pride than to refuse to study the Books of the Divine myster- ies by the help of those who have interpreted them?' [Ad Honorat. dentil, cred. XVH., 35.] The other Fathers have said the same, and have confirmed it by their example, for they * endeavored to acqure the understanding of the Holy Scriptures not by their own lights and ideas, but from the writing and authority of the ancients, who, in their turn, as we know, received the rule of interpretation in direct line from the Apostles.' [Rufinus Hist. eccl. LI., 9.] The holy Fathers 'to whom, after the Apostles, the Church owes its growth — who have planted, watered, built, governed, and cherished it,' [S. Aug. C, Julian. H., 10. 37.] the holy Fathers, We say, are of supreme authority, whenever they all interpret in one and the same manner any text of the Bible, as pertain- ing to the doctrine of faith and morals ; for their unanimity clearly evinces that such interpretation has come down from the Apostles as a matter of Catholic faith. The opinion of the Fathers is also of very great weight when they treat of these matters in their capacity of doctors unofficially; not only because they excel in their knowledge of revealed doc- trine and in their acquaintance with many things w^hich are useful in understanding the Apostolic Books, but because they are men of eminent sanctity and of ardent zeal for the truth, on whom God has bestowed a more ample measure of THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 57 His light. Wherefore the expositor should make it his duty to follow their footsteps with all reverence, and to use their labors with intelligent appreciation. ''But he must not on that account consider that it is for- bidden, when just cause exists, to push inquiry and exposi- tion beyond what the Fathers have done ; provided he care- fully observes the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine — not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires ; [De Gen. ad lift. LVIII. CC, 7. 13.] a rule to which it is the more necessary to adhere strictly in these times, when the thirst for novelty and the unrestrained freedom of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate. Neither should those passages be neglected which the Fathers have understood in an allegorical or figurative sense, more especi- ally when such interpretation is justified by the literal, and when it rests on the authority of many. For this method of interpretation has been received by the Church from the Apostles, and has been approved by her own practice, as the holy Liturgy attests ; although it is true that the holy Fathers did not thereby pretend directly to demonstrate dogmas of faith, but used it as a means of promoting virtue and piety, such as, by their own experience, they knew to be most valuable. The authority of other Church interpreters is not so great ; but the study of Scripture has always continued to advance in the Church, and, therefore, these commentaries also have their own honorable place, and are serviceable in many ways for the refutation of assailants and the explana- tion of difficulties. But it is most unbecoming to pass by, in ignorance or contempt, the excellent work which Catholics have left in abundance, and to have recourse to the work of non-Catholics — and to seek in them, to the detriment of sound doctrine and often to the peril of faith, the explanation of passages on which Catholics long ago have successfully employed their talent and their labor. For although the studies of non-Catholics, used with prudence, may some- times be of use to the Catholic student, he should, neverthe- less, bear well in mind — as the Fathers also teach in numer- ous passages [Cfr. Clem. Alex. Strom. VII., 16 ; Orig. de princ. 58 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL IV., 8; in Levit. horn. 4. 8; Tertull. de praescr. 15, seqq.; S. Hilar. Pict. in Matth. 13. i.] — that the sense of Holy Scrip- ture can nowhere be found incorrupt outside the Church, and cannot be expected to be found in writers who, being without the true faith, only gnaw the bark of Sacred Scrip- ture, and never attain its pith. "Most desirable is it, and most essential, that the whole teaching of Theology should be pervaded and animated by the use of the Divine Word of God. This is what the Fathers and the greatest theologians of all ages have desired and re- duced to practice. It is chiefly out of the Sacred Writings that they endeavored tp proclaim and establish the Articles of Faith and the truths therewith connected, and it was in them, together with Divine Tradition, that they found the refutation of heretical error, and the reasonableness, the true meaning, and the mutual relation of the truths of Catholicism. Nor will any one wonder at this who considers that the Sacred Books hold such an eminent position among the sources of revelation that without their assiduous study and use, Theology cannot be placed on a true footing, or treated as its dignity demands. For although it is right and proper that students in academies and schools should be chiefly exercised in acquiring a scientific knowledge of dogma by means of reasoning from the Articles of Faith to their consequences, according to the rules of approved and sound philosophy — nevertheless the judicious and instructed theo- logians will by no means pass by that method of doctrinal demonstration which draws its proof from the authority of the Bible ; 'for (Theology) does not receive her first principles from any other science, but immediately from God by revel- ation. And, therefore, she does not receive of other sciences as from a superior, but uses them as her inferiors or hand maids.' [S., Greg. M. Moral. XX., 9 (al. 11).] It is this view of doctrinal teaching which is laid down and recommended by the prince of theologians, St. Thomas of Aquin; [Summ. theol. p. I., q. I., a. 5 ad 2.] who moreover shows — such being the essential character of Christian Theology — how she can defend her own principles against attack : If the ad- versary,' he says, 'do but grant any portion of the Divine THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 59 revelation, we have an argument against him ; thus, against a heretic we can employ Scripture authority, and against those who deny one article, we can use another. But if our opponent reject Divine revelation entirely, there is no way left to prove the Articles of Faith by reasoning ; we can only solve the difficulties which are raised against them.' [Ibid a. 8.] Care must be taken, then, that beginners approach the study of the Bible well prepared and furnished; otherwise, just hopes will be frustrated, or, perchance, what is worse, they will unthinkingly risk the danger of error, falling an easy prey to the sophisms and labored erudition of the Rationalists. The best preparation will be a conscientious application to philosophy and theology under the guidance of St. Thomas of Aquin, and a thorough training therein — as We ourselves have elsewhere pointed out and directed. By this means, both in Biblical studies and in that part of Theology which is called positive, they will pursue the right path and make satisfactory progress. the authority of holy scripture; modern criticism; physical science. "To prove, to expound, to illustrate Catholic doctrine by the legitimate and skillful interpretation of the Bible is much ; but there is a second part of the subject of equal im- portance and equal diffixulty— the maintenance in the strong- est possible way of its full authority. This cannot be done completely or satisfactorily except by means of the living and proper magisteritim of the Church. The Church by reason of her wonderful propagation, her distinguished sanct- ity, and inexhaustible fecundity in good, her Catholic unity, and her unshaken stability, is herself a great and perpetual motive of credibility, and an unassailable testimony to her own Divine mission.' [Cone. Vat. sess. III. c. II. de fide.] But since the divine and infallible magisterium of the Church rests also on Holy Scripture ; the first thing to be done is to vindicate the trustworthiness of Sacred records, at least as human documents, from which can be clearly proved, as from primitive and authentic testimony, the Divinity and the mission of Christ our Lord, the institution of a hierarchi- 60 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL cal Church and the primacy of Peter and of his successors. It is most desirable, therefore, that there should be numer- ous members of the clergy well prepared to enter on a con- test of this nature, and' to repulse hostile assaults, chiefly trusting in the armor of God recommended by the Apostle, [Eph. VL, 13, seqq.] but also not unaccustomed to modern methods of attack. This is beautifully alluded to by St. John Chrysostom, when describing the duties of priests: 'We must use every endeavor that the 'Word of God may dwell in us abundantly' [Cfr., Coloss. III., 16.] not merely for one kind of a fight must we be prepared — for the contest is many-sided and the enemy is of every sort ; and they do not all use the same weapons nor make their onset in the same way. Wherefore it is needful that the man who has to con- tend against all should be acquainted with the engines and the arts of all — that he should be at once archer and slinger, commandant and officer, general and private soldier, foot- soldier and horseman, skilled in sea-fight and in siege; for unless he knows every trick and turn of war, the devil is well able, if only a single door be left open, to get in his fierce bands and carry off the sheep.' [De Sacerdotio IV., 4.] The sophisms of the enemy and his manifold arts of attack we have already touched upon. Let us now say a word of advice on the means of defence. The first means is the study of the Oriental languages and of the art of criticism. These two acquirements are in these days held in high estim- ation, and, therefore, the clergy, by making themselves fully acquainted with themi as time and place may demand, will the better be able to discharge their office with becoming credit; for they must make themselves 'all to all,' [I. Cor. IX., 22.] always 'ready to satisfy every one that asketh them a reason for the hope that is in them.' [I. Peter III., 25.] Hence it is most proper that professors of Sacred Scripture and theologians should master those tongues in which the Sacred Books were originally written ; and it would be well that Church students also should cultivate them, more especially those who aspire to academic degrees. And en- deavors should be made to establish in all academic institu- tions — as has already been laudably done in many — chairs • THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 61 of the other ancient languages, especially the Semitic, and of subjects connected therewith, for the benefit, principally, of those who are intended to profess Sacred literature. These latter, with a similar object in view, should make themselves well and thoroughly acquainted with the art of true criticism. There has arisen, to the great detriment of religion, an inept method, dignified by the name of the 'higher criticism,' which pretends to judge the origin, in- tegrity and authority of each Book from internal indications alone. It is clear on the other hand, that in historical ques- tions, such as the origin and handing down of writings, the witness of history is of primary importance, and that histori- cal investigation should be made with the utmost care ; and that in this matter internal evidence is seldom of great value, except as confirmation. To look upon it in any other light will be to open the door to many evil consequences. It will make the enemies of religion much more bold and confident in attacking and mangling the Sacred Books; and this vaunted 'higher criticism' will resolve itself into the reflection of the bias and the prejudice of the critics. It will not throw on the Scripture the light which is sought, or prove of any advantage to doctrine ; it will only give rise to disagree- ment and dissension, those sure notes of error, which the critics in question so plentifully exhibit in their own per- sons; and seeing that most of them are tainted with false philosophy and rationalism, it must lead to the elimination from the Sacred Writings of all prophecy and miracle, and of everything else that is outside the natural order. 'Tn the second place, we have to contend against those who, making an evil use of physical science, minutely scruti- nize the Sacred Books in order to detect the writers in a mis- take, and to take occasion to vilify its contents. Attacks of this kind, bearing as they do on matters of sensible ex- perience, are peculiarly dangerous to the masses, and also to the young who are beginning their literary studies ; for the young, if they lose their reverence for the Holy Scripture on one or more points, are easily led to give up believing in it altogether. It need not be pointed out how the nature of science, just as it is so admirably adapted to show forth the 62 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL glory of the Great Creator, provided it is taught as it should be, so, if it be perversely imparted to the youthful intelligence, it may prove most fatal in destroying the principles of true philosophy and in the corruption of morality. Hence, to the professor of Sacred Scripture a knowledge of natural science will be of very great assistance in detecting such attacks on the Sacred Books, and in refuting them. There can never, indeed, be any real discrepancy between the theologian and the physicist, as long as each confines him- self within his own lines, and both are careful, as St. Augus- tine warns us, 'not to make rash assertions, or to assert what is not known as known.' [In. Gen. op. imperj. IX., 30.] If dissension should arise between them, here is the rule also laid down by St. Augustine, for the theologian: 'whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scrip- tures ; and whatever they assert in their treatises, which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so.' \DeGen, ad litt., I., 21 — 41.] To under- stand how just is the rule here formulated we must remem- ber, first, that the Sacred writers, or to speak more accu- rately, the Holy Ghost 'Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe) , things is no way profit- able tmto salvation.' [S. Aug. ih. II., 9 — 20.] Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses ; and somewhat in the same way the Sacred writers — as |';the Angelic Doctor also reminds us — 'went by what sensibly appeared,' [Summa theol. p. i. q. LXXX., a. i. ad 3.] or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to. THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 63 ''The unshrinking defence of the Holy Scripture, how- ever, does not require that we should equally uphold all the opinions which each of the Fathers or the more recent in- terpreters have put forth in explaining it ; for it may be that, in commenting on passages where physical matters occur, they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times, and thus made statements which in these days have been abandoned as incorrect. Hence, in their interpretations, we must carefully note what they lay down as belonging to faith, or as intimately connected with faith — what they are unanimous in. For * in those things w^hich do not come under the obligation of faith, the saints were at liberty to hold divergent opinions, just as we ourselves are,'[/'n Sent.ll., Dist.II.,q.I.,a.3.] according to the saying of St. Thomas. And in another place he says most admirably : 'when philosophers are agreed upon a point, and it is not contrary to our faith, it is safer, in my opinion, neither to lay down such a point as a dogma of faith, even though it is perhaps so presented by the philosophers, nor to reject it as against faith, lest we thus give to the wise of this world an occasion of despising our faith.' [Opusc. X.] The Catholic interpreter, although he should show that those facts of natural science which in- vestigators affirm to be now quite certain are not contrary to the Scripture rightly explained, must, nevertheless, always bear in mind, that much which has been held and proved as certain has afterwards been called in question and rejected. And if writers on physics travel outside the boundaries of their own branch, and carry their erroneous teaching into the domain of philosophy, let them be handed over to phil- osophers for refutation. INSPIRATION INCOMPATIBLE WITH ERROR. "The principles here laid down will apply to cognate sciences and especially to history. It is a lamentable fact that there are many who with great labor carry out and publish investigations on the monuments of antiquity, the manners and institutions of nations and other illustrative subjects, and whose chief purpose in all this is to find mis- takes in the Sacred Writings and so to shake and weaken 64 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL their authority. Some of these writers display not only extreme hostility, but the greatest unfairness ; in their eyes a profane book or ancient document is accepted without hesitation, whilst the Scripture, if they only find in it a suspicion of error, is set down with the slightest possible discussion as quite untrustworthy. It is true, no doubt, that copyists have made mistakes in the text of the Bible ; this question, when it arises, should be carefully considered on its merits, and the fact not too easily admitted, but only in those passages where the proof is clear. It may also hap- pen that the sense of a passage remains ambiguous, and in this case good hermeneutical methods will greatly assist in clearing up the obscurity. But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the Sacred Writer has erred. For the system of those who, in order to rid them- selves of those difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that Divine inspiration regards the things of faith and morals, and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think), in a question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which He had in mind w^hen saying it — this system cannot be tolerated. For all the Books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost-; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and re- jects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the Supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church solemnly defined in the councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican. These are the words of the last: The Books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, as enumerated by the decree of the same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are to be received as Sacred and Canonical. And the Church holds them as Sacred and Canonical, not because having THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 65 been composed by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority; nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their Author.' [Sess. III. C. II., de Rev.] Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot, therefore, say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary Au- thor. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and im- pelled them to write — He was so present to them — that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Other- wise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers. Therefore,' says St. Augustine, 'since they wrote the things w^hich He showed and uttered to them, it cannot be pretended that He is not the Writer ; for His mem- bers executed what their Head dictates.' [De consensu Evangel. L. i, C. 35.] And St. Gregory the Great thus pro- nounces : 'most superfluous it is to inquire who wrote these things — we loyally believe the Holy Ghost to be the author of the Book. He wrote it Who dictated it for writ- ing ; He wrote it Who inspired its execution. ' [Praef. in J oh, n. 2.] ''It follows that those who maintain that an error is pos- sible in any genuine passage of the Sacred Writings, either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration, or make God the author of such error. And so emphatically were all the Fathers and Doctors agreed that the Divine Writings, as left by the hagiographers, are free from all error, that they labored earnestly, with no less skill than reverence, to recon- cile with each other those numerous passages which seem at variance — the very passages which in a great measure have been taken up by the 'higher criticism' ; for they were unan- imous in laying it down, that those writings, in their entirety and in all their parts were equally from the afflatus of Al- mighty God, and that God, speaking by the Sacred Writers, could not set down anything that was not true. The words 66 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL of St. Augustine to St. Jerome may simi up what they taught : *0n my own part I confess to your charity that it is only to those books of Scripture which are now called canonical that I have learned to pay such honor and reverence as to be- lieve most firmly that none of their writers has fallen into any error. And if in these Books I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand.' [Ep. LXXVIL, i, et crebrius alibi.] *'But to imdertake fully and perfectly, and with all the weapons of the best science, the defence of the Holy Bible is far more than can be looked for from the exertion of commentators and theologians alone. It is an enterprise in which we have a right to expect the co-operation of all those Catholics who have acquired reputation in any branch of learning whatever. As in the past, so at the present time, the Church is never without the graceful support of her accomplished children; may their service to the Faith grow and increase ! For there is nothing which We believe to be more needful than that truth should find defenders more powerful and more numerous than the enemies it has to face ; nor is there anything which is better calculated to impress the masses with respect for truth than to see it boldly proclaimed by learned and distinguished men. More- over, the bitter tongues of objectors will be silenced, or at least they will not dare to insist so shamelessly that faith is the enemy of science, when they see that scientific men of eminence in their profession show towards faith the most raarked honor and respect. Seeing, then, that those can do so much for the advantage of religion on whom the good- ness of Almighty God has bestowed, together with the grace of the faith, great natural talent, let such men, in this bitter conflict of which the Holy Scripture is the object, select each of them the branch of study most suitable to his circumstances, and endeavor to excel therein, and thus be prepared to repulse with credit and distinction the as- saults on the Word of God. And it is Our pleasing duty to give deserved praise to a work which certain Catholics THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 67 have taken up — that is to say, the formation of societies and the contribution of considerable sums of money, for the purpose of supplying studious and learned men with every kind of help and assistance in carrying out complete studies. Truly an excellent fashion of investing money, and well suited to ;the times in which we live ! The less hope of public patronage there is for Catholic study, the more ready and the more abundant should be the liberality of private persons — those to whom God has given riches thus willingly making use of their means to safeguard the treasure of His revealed doctrine. SUMMARY. "In order that all these endeavors and exertions may really prove advantageous to the cause of the Bible, let scholars keep steadfastly to the principles which We have in this Letter laid down: Let them loyally hold that God, the Creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the Scriptures — and that, therefore, nothing can be proved either by physical science or archaeology which can really contradict the Scriptures. If, then, apparent contradic- tion be met with, every effort should be made to remove it. Judicious theologians and commentators should be con- sulted as to what is the true or most probable meaning of the passage in discussion, and hostile arguments should be carefully weighed. Even if the difficulty is after all not cleared up, and the discrepancy seems to remain, the con- test must not be abandoned ; truth cannot contradict truth, and we may be sure that some mistake has been made either in the interpretation of the Sacred Words, or in the polem- ical discussion itself; and if no such mistake can be de- tected, we must then suspend judgment for the time being. There have been objections without number perse veringly directed against the Scripture for many a long year, which have been proved to be futile and are now never heard of ; and not infrequently interpretations have been placed on certain passages of Scripture (not belonging to the rule of faith or morals) which have been rectified by more careful investigations. As time goes on, mistaken views die and 68 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL disappear; but 'truth remaineth and groweth stronger for- ever and ever.' [3 Esdr. IV., 38.] Wherefore, as no one should be so presumptuous as to think that he understands the whole of the Scripture, in which St. Augustine himself confessed there was more that he did not know, than that he knew, [Ad lanuar. ep. LV., 21] so, if he should come on any- thing that seems incapable of solution, he must take to heart the cautious rule of the same holy Doctor: 'It is better even to be oppressed by unknown but useful signs, than to interpret them uselessly and thus to throw off the yoke only to be caught in the trap of error.' [De doctr. chr. III., 9, 18]. "As to those who pursue the subsidiary studies of which We have spoken, if they honestly and modestly follow the counsel we have given — if by their pen and their voice they make their studies profitable against the enemies of truth, and useful in saving the young from the loss of their faith — they may justly congratulate themselves on their worthy service to the Sacred Writings, and on affording to Catholic- ism that assistance which the Church has a right to expect from the piety and learning of her children. "Such, Venerable Brethren, are the admonitions and the instructions which, by the help of God, We have thought it well, at the present moment to offer to you on the study of Holy Scripture. It will now be your province to see that what We have said be observed and put in practice with all due reverence and exactness; that so. We may prove our gratitude to God for the communication to man of the Words of His Wisdom, and that all the good results so much to be desired may be realized, especially as they affect the train- ing of the students of the Church, which is our own great solicitude and the Church's hope. Exert yourself with willing alacrity, and use your authority and your persuasion in order that these studies may be held in just regard and may flourish in Seminaries and in educational institutions which are under your jurisdiction. Let them flourish in completeness and in happy success, under the direction of the Church, in accordance with the salutary teaching and example of the Holy Fathers, and the laudable traditions REVELATION AND INSPIRATION 69 of antiquity ; and, as time goes on, let them be widened and extended as the interests and glory of truth may require — the interests of that Catholic Truth, which comes from above, the never-failing source of man's salvation. Finally, We admonish with paternal love, all students and ministers of the Church always to approach the Sacred Writings with reverence and piety ; for it is impossible to attain to the profit- able imderstanding thereof unless the arrogance of 'earthly' science be laid aside, and there be excited in the heart the holy desire for that wisdom 'which is from above.' In this way the intelligence, which is once admitted to these Sacred studies, and thereby illuminated and strengthened, will acquire a marvellous facility in detecting and avoiding the fallacies of human science, and in gathering and using for eternal salvation all that is valuable and precious; whilst, at the same time, the heart will grow warm, and will strive, with ardent longing, to advance in virtue and in Divine love. 'Blessed are they who examine His testimonies; they shall seek Him with their whole heart. ' [Ps. XVni. , 2]. "And now, filled with hope in the Divine assistance, and trusting to your pastoral solicitude — as a pledge of heavenly grace, and a sign of Our special good will — to you all, and to the Clergy, and to the whole flock entrusted to you. We lovingly impart in Our Lord the Apostolic Benediction. "Given at St. Peter's, at Rome, the i8th day of Novem- ber, 1893, the eighteenth year of Our Pontificate." POPE LEO XUL In common parlance, revelation and inspiration are con- vertible terms, but, in reality, they differ greatly. Revela- tion, from revelare, means to uncover, unveil, disclose to the view something hidden, and, in the present instance, to make known to the mind a concept not before known. This took place with the Prophets, and in every portion of the Holy Writings where the truths enunciated were impervious to the human understanding, or depended on the free w^ill of God ; in fact, wherever the idea portrayed was not acquired by the industry and labor of the writer. When, therefore, the writer expresses truths which he had acquired by the 70 REVELATION AND INSPIRATION ordinary .method of human research and observation, there is no revelation from God requisite or given. Thus St. Luke tells us that, ''it had seemed good to him, who had followed studiously all things from the beginning, to write in order these things. " Thus the author of the II. Book of Macca- bees testifies, Cap. II. 24 — 27: **And thus the things that were comprised by Jason the Cyrenean in five volumes, we have attempted to compendiate in one volume. We who have undertaken to compendiate this work, have taken upon ourselves a task abounding in vigils and sweat. " This book then is not, properly speaking, revealed. But usage has prevailed and prevails to speak of the whole body of the Scriptures as revealed writings, and we do not wish to cor- rect this usage, but only to define and fix our terms for the greater facility of our treatise. Inspiration then pervades the whole structure of Scripture: it is its formal principle, its soul ; revelation is only called in, as we have said, where the writer could not, or, de facto, did not acquire his know- ledge in the ordinary manner. This distinction is of great moment, as many difficulties are solved by the same. The neglect of this distinction gave rise to a censure of one of the propositions of the famous Leon Lessius, which, had it been couched in precise terms, would have challenged contradiction. The Holy Ghost, then, is the directing and impelling agent in all the Scripture, but not in the same manner. He discloses the truths un- known before in revelation ; he impels to write infallibly the things which God would communicate to man in inspiration. We have defined above the concept of inspiration ; we shall now scrutinize more closely its object and extent. The Vatican Council has given us a definition which will serve as our guide in dealing with the present subject, for, as we have proven above, the Church can be the only guide in such a question. In Cap. II. De Revel, we find: ** Qui quidem veteris et novi Testamenti libri integri cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ejusdem Concilii decreto recensentur, et in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur, pro sacris et canonicis suscipiendi sunt. Eos vero Ecclesia REVELATION AND INSPIRATION 71 pro sacris et canonicis habet, non ideo quod sola humana industria concinnati, sua deinde auctoritate sint approbati; nee ideo dumtaxat, quod revelationem sine errore contineant, sed propterea quod Spiritu Sancto inspirante conscripti Deum habent auctorem, atque ut tales ipsi Ecclesiae traditi sunt." And in Canon IV. De Revelatione: "Si quis sacr^ Scripturas libros integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout illos sancta Tridentina Synodus recen- suit, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitus inspiratos esse negaverit ; anathema sit. " Hence it is of faith that God is the Author of the Sacred Scriptures, and of the integral hooks with all their parts. It is not here asserted that God with his own hand wrote the books materially, but that he is the Auctor principalis per conscriptores suos. Now, we shall bear in mind the relation of the author to his work, in weighing and judging of the correctness or falseness of opinions which deal with this subject. Inspirare is the Latin equivalent for the Greek deoirveveiv^ which word S. Paul uses in his II. Epist. to Tim. III., i6., '*7rd(Ta >ypaep6/jL€vo^, borne on, 76 CHAUVIN impelled by the Holy Ghost, not always is this impelling force active in the same way. It is different in prophecy than it is in the inspiration which guided the Evangelists in infallibly committing to writing things to which they had been eye-witnesses. Inspiration does not preclude the examining of existing documents, the patient toil and re- search which always accompany the natural acquisition of knowledge. Moses may have made use of existing docu- ments, when giving an account of Creation. But the cer- tainty of inspiration is not measured by the certainty of these existing documents, nor by the certainty of fallible htmian observation and research. Always the hand of God is there, guiding, and positively influencing the agent to write all those things, and only those things which God would have written; and this assistance is not merely a negative one, but a positive act exercised in every concept of Holy Writ. Such is the relation of an author to his work, and we know by divine faith that God is the Author of the Holy Scriptures. It may not be amiss here to indicate some of the principal writers on this theme in our times : Franzelin (De Divina Traditione et vScriptura, Romae 1882) : Ubaldi (Introductio in Sac. Script. Romae 1888): Schmid (De Inspirat. Bibl. Vi et Ratione, Brixinae 1885) ; Crets (De Divina Bibliorum Inspiratione Lovanii 1886); Holzhey (Die Inspiration der Heil. Schrift, Miinchen 1895); Zanecchia (Divina Inspirat. etc. Romae 1899, Revised 1903) ; Chauvin (L' Inspiration des Divines Ecritures, Paris 1896) ; Billot (De Inspirat. Sac. Script. Romae 1903) ; Pesch (De Inspirat. Sacrae Script. Friburgi 1906). Of the Abba's Chauvin's work, the Dublin Review (1897 pp. 215 — 218) has the following favorable review: ''Although inspiration is very frequently spoken of, yet, like progress, civilisation and liberty, it is rarely undersood. The vast majority of those who refer to it do, no doubt, in- tend to suggest some kind of mysterious influence from on high ; but their ideas are vague and indefinite. They think of it as of a dark figure, veiled and hooded, that moves in silence and never reveals its features. CHAUVIN 77 ''All will readily admit that inspiration necessarily im- plies a divine influence. But divine influences are many; and it is a task of unusual delicacy to define that specific in- fluence which constitutes inspiration. There is a divine in- fluence which actively pervades all creation and rules mighty from end to end; but it is not inspiration. We call it law and providence. Another kind of influence enriches man with virtue, and blossoms out into holiness of life; but we name it grace, not inspiration. Even when inspirations of grace are mentioned by theologians, the word has not the same meaning that it bears when we speak of the inspiration of Scripture ; for when a man has been inspired to write, we say : 'God speaks thus,' but when a man under the influence of grace makes an act of faith in the Creed, we do not say : 'God beheves thus.' God is personally identified with in- spiration in a manner very different from that by which He is identified with the works of grace in general. Lastly, it is only by a divine influence that the Church is preserved from error in all her solemn definitions of faith and morals. But here again, this influence is not termed inspiration, but merely assistance. Ecclesiastical definitions, although in- fallible, are not inspired. "What, then, is inspiration? What are our means for detecting its presence in this or that particular instance? Before we can venture to answer these questions we must first determine what are the reliable sources of information on the subject; but it is precisely in this preliminary work of determination that discordant voices are making them- selves most loudly heard. One company of explorers is con- tent to accept, on the general consent of Christians, the abridged Bible of protestant tradition as being truly inspired. Starting with this assured fact, the discovery of what is meant by inspiration is merely a matter of induction from Biblical phenomena. The chief merit claimed for the system is that it makes the doctrine of Biblical inspiration abso- lutely secure against every form of literary and scientific analysis. He who believes in the inspiration of Scripture may, with unruffled serenity, admit the presence in the Bible of flagrant contradictions, or gross historical errors, and of 78 CHAUVIN a low moral tone ; for, since the Bible is inspired, the more clearly we understand what the Bible actually is, the deeper will be our insight into the nature of inspiration itself. So far removed, then, are the results of analysis from being opposed to the doctrine of inspiration, that they are an essential factor in its due apprehension. "Another company of searchers after inspiration have been endowed by a merciful heaven with, or have created for themselves, an a priori and quite subjective idea of the true nature of inspiration. This idea they employ as a sort of search-light which they steadily flash around, and are then able to inform us of the varying degrees of purity in which inspiration may be found, not only in the several books of Scripture, but also in the literature of the world at large. Unfortunately, the initial idea of inspiration is not uniform, and the results of its application are consequently divergent. In general, however, it seems to be taken for something freshly informing, deeply suggestive, and highly stimulating. The inspired writer is the man with a special message to the world. Hence those solemn disquisitions on the inspiration of our modem prophets, Browning, Tennyson Ruskin, and Carlyle. *To readers desirous either of refreshing their memory, or of acquiring clear ideas on this subject, we heartily recom- mend the Abbe Chauvin's little book. Judged for what it professes to be — an 'essai theologique et critique' — it de- serv^es all praise. Brief as it is, it leaves nothing to be desired on the score of clearness ; in dealing with the central points of the doctrine it is fuller, and certainly more able, than many volumes far more pretentious. With acute mind and independent judgment the author has availed himself of the previous labors of Schmid, Crets, d'Hulst, Loisy, Didiot, Brucker, Brandi, Holzhey, and others. He has thus laid under contribution the most recent commentaries and magazine articles on the encyclical Providentissimus Deus. "The essay is divided into eight chapters, as follows: The idea of inspiration ; its psychology ; false theories bearing upon it; true and false tests of inspiration; the proof of Scriptural inspiration ; the subject matter of inspiration; the CHAUVIN 79. controversy on verbal inspiration ; the consequences of ple- nary inspiration. Of these chapters, that on the psychology of inspiration is undoubtedly the most important and the best. We are so interested in the essay that, even at the risk of spoiling what the author has done so well, we shall venture on a brief account of this main position. ''Inspiration implies a divine breath or movement by which a man is stirred to write what God wishes to be written. That movement plays along man's intellect, imagination, memory, and will, till man becomes the responsive instru- ment of the divine purpose. But man is a living instrument, and is moved by God in accordance with his free and living nature, freely and deliberately — often with much painful effort — to the desired goal. Hence the mental gifts, the literary talents and characteristic qualities of each inspired writer are employed, not destroyed, by God. St. Thomas's principle here also stands good : 'Motus primi moventis non recipitur uniformiter in omnibus . . . sed in unoquoque secundum proprium modum.' We have not space to follow the author in his patient analysis of the divine action on man's several faculties, but he leads us to the clear conclu- sion that, when God inspired the Scriptures He supematu- rally, and as a principal cause, employed the faculties of the inspired writer, as His instruments in the psychological labor which man would have undergone if he had been writing in his own name instead of writing in the name of God. If writing for himself, the man would have had the same labor, but he would not have had the same divine impulse and guidance, the same divine assistance, the same divine illum- ination in the doing of his task. The whole result belongs, not partly to God and partly to man, but in its entirety to God and in its entirety to man. The effect, as a whole, pro- ceeds from both God and man; from God as the chief cause, from man as the free and living instrumental cause. 'Effectus tot us attribuitur instrumento, et principali agenti etiam totus . . . sed totus ab utroque secundum alium modum.' **0n the principles of sound psychology not only does that mechanical speaking-tube theory, introduced by the Reform 80 METHOD OF INQUIRY Churches, appear in all its grotesqueness and its inconsist- ency with the plainest facts, but also does the theory of some Catholic theologians who distinguish between Verba' and 'res et sententias' show itself to be most unnatural. Inspiration covers everything the inspired writer whites — thoughts, opinions, judgments, surmises, the collection and arrangement of materials, method of treatment, style and language. An inspired book is a living whole ; and the whole is inspired." Pesch's work merits still more approbation. It has been said by eminent scholars that the Catholic doctrine on inspiration is summed up in the one sentence, authoritively defined by the Church : " God is the author of the Holy Scriptures. " Certain it is that all that is deter- mined by the Church on this theme is drawn from that sure principle. The Church has made a few applications of the principle, but has left a very large field open. In entering this field every writer must recognize that however much he may differ from advocates of views differing from his own, he is bound to refrain from branding with any note of in- famy opinions which the Church has not yet condemned. In all ages of the Church good men have been material here- tics : and on the other hand the odium theologicum of those who had a " zeal for God, but not according to knowledge" CRom. X. 2) has injured the very cause which they wished to defend. It is only by toleration and patient examina- tion of the views of all that we can advance our knowledge of these deep problems. No right-minded, candid seeker after truth will object to arguments against his opinions, but personalities wound the opponent, without promoting their author's side. If passion could be set aside, it would be greatly beneficial to scriptural science if, of the sincere scholars of the Church, there were a conference regarding the different views on Inspiration, that all the argu- ments pro and con might be weighed dispassionately, and the best adopted. Of course that which we here state only applies to candid, sincere seekers after truth. There are in the Church certain sycophants who angle for popularity by copying the German 3LiS PROTEsmmn 'ehedry SB ^^!ifcplX^SP#PF'I*iino\wo'^ oUu h':>-^-^o\ ad l8um lie^ft sldia Prof. Dods in his lecture on Inspiration degj^y^^^^l^ • DHoriiTBD rhirh/ m bhh ad 1 i^ds ^'lo'\^T^di saa oYJ not gone to it with a preconceived theoi-y of whj^t^.ij f^^$i m^Jc|l^c^.^yha,tis j^yiga^ orinafacjifax^i.e^j^the^eji^^^^ ^^p^^t^ "in Professor Bowne's small but excellent SoQk.p|j)tl^ inspiration isd^ceBnibpJip.tte pJ9.4upt.r^^^4;liejm^^gi|^ ^^^ nieasure,,Qldnsgiratip|ij. j^^i^i^qt-be .decidefit,b)^)^b,^^'¥^^' ^^- flectioii^ ^ut^^Pfily, byj-^^,putcome, Wh^^r inj^gjrp^^ia^ mu^^ bejegrnejdlriQm,^^^ it does. rW^p[^^st n,(jt^c^t,enpf^ the chaf af^tef-jpf ^life^ l^ok^ ; f rprn .th,e, ,jns,piT§ii<^n p^ ;^jUt^ ^'^^ rathe^;4e%{jin^ ^^,^^^\^lf^^^^ ^S^Ma iWmH-m^^^odi b^orirjorrriB Iuib 'u^ rliod qhoIb spsiIT ,,. ;, " g^e^pblgfiy^rjf eg^d. ta ^e, Diyjine^ an^ t5br?)[^ti;iyaaa3r^a9tQ^^ wj]jk:j^^ h^verbg^p j^i^yfv^^^^d^h^i. |^^^^fr/i|;^-.or^9f^i^pi^g PTf^P^?iJ^fflrft^£^ri1^^.f^f.^-^^ doimi V19V pf rth$f)r^j^tioiI[of .i|}^rpfe§e}i6ti^^ ;:fi)^ff^fe3tQ7^3^ (ati^T5?h;^ teachingit fy,:^ ^p^^^^0Ah^MM^m^h^ pniy:.ii^pa{?4.^(^k in: the. ^vprld ; rifeSMw^ct^feiat ,- it[ i^ iiaapfO^sible j«C;'^P*^^'^'<-^ ^St Ar lish -^ :p^iif e^|r^j(^^^^^ ^j^hfelif '3^-^11/ eI]ftfea^e:^ay^r3l,pr^p§$i^^ ptt^pnc^Btfei^ f^ wb^tvi^f^, b'd^i^ QtmreJUf pf .fe^',; tQf\^hm 52 THE FATHERS Bible is a book of God's authorship, that it is the word of God, and every theory based upon an examination of the Bible itself must be forced into conformity with this infallible definition. We see therefore that the field in which Catholic theolo- gians may differ is in applying the principles which the Church has defined to the specific statements of the Bible ; and here it must be granted that the divergency of opinion is very great. Many of the difficulties which science and the investiga- tions of criticism have brought up were unknown to the Fathers, and we find in them an unquestioning acceptance of the Scriptures as the word of God. Clement of Rome declares : "Ye have searched the Scriptures, which are true, which were given through the Holy Ghost; and Ye know that nothing unrighteous or counterfeit is written in them" (I. Cor. 45)- Justin the Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, Chap. VII. clearly asserts the inspiration of the Holy Books : " There existed, long before this time, certain men more ancient than all those who are esteemed philosophers, both righteous and beloved by God, who spoke by the Divine Spirit, and foretold events which would take place, and which are now taking place. They are called prophets. These alone both saw and announced the truth to men, neither reverencing nor fearing any man, not influenced by a desire for glory, but speaking those things alone which they saw and which they heard, being filled with the Holy Spirit. Their writings are still extant, and he who has read them is very much helped in his knowledge of the beginning and end of things, and of those matters which the philosopher ought to know, provided he has believed them. For they did not use demonstration in their treatises, seeing that they were witnesses to the truth above all demonstration, and worthy of belief ; and those events which have happened, and those which are happening, compel you to assent to the utterances made by them, although, indeed, they were entitled to credit on account of the miracles which they performed, since they both glorified the Creator, the God and Father of all things, THE FATHERS 83 and proclaimed His Son, the Christ [sent] by Him: which, indeed, the false proj^hets, who are filled with the lying un- clean spirit, neither have done nor do, but venture to work certain wonderful deeds for the purpose of astonishing men, and glorify the spirits and demons of error." Again in the same treatise he answers Trypho : '*If you spoke these words, Trypho, and then kept silence in simplicity and with no ill intent, neither repeating what goes before nor adding what comes after, you must be for- given ; but if [you have done so] because you imagined that you could throw doubt on the passage, in order that I might say the Scriptures contradicted each other, you have erred. But I shall not venture to suppose or to say such a thing ; and if a Scripture which appears to be of such a kind be brought forward, and if there be a pretext [for saying] that it is contrary [to some other], since I am entirely convinced that no Scripture contradicts another, I shall admit rather that I do not understand what is recorded, and shall strive to persuade those who imagine that the Scriptures are con- tradictory, to be rather of the same opinion as myself." Athenagoras applying to every inspired agent the name of prophet describes their inspiration thus : ''But w^e have for witnesses of the things we apprehend and believe, prophets, men w^ho have pronounced concerning God and the things of God, guided by the Spirit of God. And you too will admit, excelling all others as you do in intel- ligence and in piety towards the true God that it would be irrational for us to cease to believe in the Spirit from God, who moved the mouths of the prophets like musical instru- ments, and to give heed* to mere human opinions." (A Plea for Christians). Irenaeus makes the Holy Ghost the Author of the Scrip- tures. In n. Against Heresies, XXVHI. 2, he thus de- clares : **If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all those things in Scripture which are made the subject of in- vestigation, yet let us not on that account seek after any other God besides Him who really exists. For this is the very greatest impiety. We shotild leave things of that nature m^j^c^^M^'^^fe^ M<«p«t^i4d^ tbispth^ Wba3i)of>1^(]jdmiid) His Spirit, are on tte«'5^rfe;^iae^Jtftiaii*tde^titj^t©^^ edge of His-M^t§3i^pv/^ft^3t3n^^4iiAarcKasiErItoiwb^ if tM§i4^^t@^^e>*lfeias^afiq^lJe^«rli$ dio^^.<5M^tJ^(^iWitfe>cfmtfeceMiit)teia3ow^ c^lfrfti^:^-^ ^-^'-''2 lo 3d ot a7£9qq£ rioirfv/ DiutqriD'S b ii J^rrB (^fflsty^^ d'^s^'fiihfMf %M^i^€.te#^ jf^^^ ^'limmm^e^ ss^m fe^te 6&§f)ei:''^'^#y^iMa^te?6¥ai3M<^^^?^^^^^'#^^ StB^m^^cf^m^ 4f;^^£m;piii Bfe^ii^itesg "^mmfe^Ai&i to Moses, so also, h^iM(^'d^mW¥/me'^mmr^'^ ^^ propm&Mrellk^^fd^^s^'mm^'p^ ^KukI again, t¥e^^IIMl-Hi^iM¥ *€5?^RM¥^-A^^aM-^a§M^^^ •§8tMh6 km Mify k HaS,'Mess^ W^iiiHpMfi^eM ^iSi VevS^led^aha shown to "believers by one and the same God through th6 i^Sf&^m B,'^^i^(t^%M^ at aff6tM^ pr^ofini^fli^ la^f 2t^e^!fflg?4g^ fypro^^fx^ ^.t another. exhorting, and then setting free His servanf,^Sff3 a!&)piiri^^6?i"i^'^£f ^ot?TS^^^/^?a^^ i^Mm,^i^i dte^^|i:if Jc^M' V^ 46, 4^ oJJLum'mvjti'^U^-t P^eri, r^nd increasb/iiaSi the§&ii|^ija¥s§€i,y^:brLji«JEe^^^ xm^- tiply.' "* ".riEsbn:.; s: il mrri oJ .nnslorm af ^i a^irtrrlj or{77 rnrrf . ; .Origen-i^iy^ry ']&>^Wt;t i^^ttisfie^^i^^ii^^^e .^gipjn^^ we take in addition, for the 'pl^f f-pj^ ^U^cSJ^^tej^^^^s^ te^i^- fwjTici i§^^jt(^^1*b.^fc'i^b§nI^^n^H^ fSpoken^ttjhosc^iWng^jrqe (^MSoiS^ti<9%-^ rr . / 4gkin'm^tk€ Stroinn^ata^ ^Pi:9ifcQlerr[f|(j|r^^ fefeYrf^r Q^ •miii4hacrd^3lBa&^a'/jtosijte|lfeadfe 2lAS^ASti($ttS5l^Ilili64b§fflp- iture£''3n?Albl)M^,iHriiitingsiamjfedJ trf> r^v^f^li^^j ^ltl|§oi^jF Scriptures as the infalHble ^f (:ydI$f/^S. aurmonna cTarrrBgA) &:j:irSpacejisIiu3± affiordedifWllrhj^iJiuPiQyp^^riM^^e^ feq^ the -iKearks qfeiSt..^BGisil/tn>l5s^tti^ te d©Ojare§Tfcte;P$rij?|]^S)jt@ t>e adi^rineD ^I[^tiQiiiiie/«hoilr^a|>sagfi$^TM^^^ ^,'\^iii^s^rI:rMBi93tert4feiiiiQ0gIIOffe?i^ : aagiBEirxea[diag:;3especiall>!-iQ§Ithpr: Ne\t'3!gst5tien;^ab§p'g?Ljge ,^e^ 'fteqaaJerttlyimiaehMfc Q@£a0Srpf(Tj$aiJtigiMt; ,i^$li>e- ':€M3e:i;yii^tjiS wfjt,li6iv/is[ilaftr^flui,r ktit,fb^c^,u^»&.§r#^in4?Wf ?;b© injurious (fed JthensJckrlJiJiisti^^ aMiBcn^lm^iSiQc^i'^WP^ ,fID£[n;l.s23. 4£Ma3WaX£*fe £is3 .a.i £;. f .di .III .miT s .^3 * 86 THE FATHERS and profitable,* and there is nothing in it unclean : only to him who thinks it is unclean, to him it is unclean." St. Athanasius to Marcellinus (Migne 27. 11) speaks thus of Holy Scripture: "All Scripture, O Son, both of the Old and of the New Testament is divinely inspired and useful for teaching, as it is written." In his Thirty-ninth Letter St. Athanasius appeals to the constant tradition regarding the divinely inspired Scripture : "In proceeding to make mention of these things, I shall adopt, to commend my undertaking, the pattern of Luke the Evangelist, saying on my own account: * Forasmuch as some have taken in hand,' f to reduce into order for them- selves the books termed apocryphal, and to mix them up with the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which w^e have been fully persuaded, as they who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, delivered to the fathers ; it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto by true brethren, and having learned from the beginning, to set before you the books included in the Canon, and handed down, and accredited as Divine." One passage will illustrate the belief of Gregory of Nyssa : "The Scripture, 'given by inspiration of God,' as the Apostle calls it, is the Scripture of the Holy Spirit, and its intention is the profit of men. For 'every scripture,' he says, 'is given by inspiration of God and is profitable;' and the profit is varied and multifoi*m, as the Apostle says — 'for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.' " % (Against Eimomius Bk. VII. i.) It is superfluous to review the enormous bulk of writings of the Latin Fathers. No one will deny that they unani- mously taught the doctrine on inspiration which the Councils of the Church has now defined. St. Ambrose (On the Holy Spirit, Bk. III. XVI. 112) clearly enunciates the doctrine: " How, then, does He not possess all that pertains to God, Who is named by priests in baptism with the Father and the Son, and is invoked in the oblations, is proclaimed by the vSeraphim in heaven with the Father and the Son, dwells * Cf. 2 Tim. III. 16. t 4a i.e. Ezra and Nehemiah. :|: 2 Tim. III. 15. THE FATHERS 87 in the Saints with the Father and the Son, is poured upon the just, is given as the source of inspiration to the prophets? And for this reason in the divine Scripture all is called deoTTveva-To^ , because God inspires what the Spirit has spoken." St. Jerome fills his works with declarations like these: '' I am not, I repeat, so ignorant as to suppose that any of the Lord's words is either in need of correction, or is not divinely inspired." (To Marcella Letter XXVII.) ; ''the Scriptures were written and promulgated by the Holy Ghost." (On Ephesians I. to); "all the Scriptures were written by the one Holy Spirit, and therefore are called one book." (On Isaiah XXIX. 9.) We shall close these few representative quotations with these declarations of St. Augustine: "For it seems to me that most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books : that is to say, that the men by whom the Scripture has been given to us, and committed to writing, did put down in these books anything false. It is one question whether it may be at any time the duty of a good man to deceive ; but it is another question whether it can have been the duty of a writer of Holy Scripture to deceive : nay, it is not another question — it is no question at all. For if you once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement as made in the v/ay of duty,* there will not be left a single sentence of those books which, if appearing to any one diffi- cult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal rule be explained away, as a statement in which, inten- tionally, and under a sense of duty, the author declared what was not true. " (Letter XXVIII. 3) : " For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture : of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the ms. is faulty, or the trans- lator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I * Officiosum mendacium. Ijidlmy^lfllin eaajaqtitj^; ^nsft/ieaHlitLgi^ ]fid3Q;'3iotrdjcce^ftei;3^^t?^ ^^i^ imfeff§.^&%5^M?rfjOf>fe9^9^^^^^ eve ry p art of the Scripture was w ritt£ii__by a peculiar in- stinct and impulse of the Holy Ghi!^p.i[-.rtoilyxja5idttflaghtly MELCHIOR eA*:J^^rSrAND BANNEZ (S® f:>mit^j^4iq:-AfA^nl^j^jiti§it\^^ vmrejknms&i to t)^^yhjo:^!^^T^%^tiViS&l} i^'^dKta-oj^ aM 'l otters : rbyr:: irattiral ^Tipwle^f ^^ib^ ^ctcfeIrJ^,ttet7i>H^yidi((f^/^Oitf heed a^-stipebnattiml ligfej^I'^i^ '^5prj^$3ir©^^iajti0il;:tiliTiTOteltfofee)j Mfeiferi .triiJtii^ ^^t^QS^Hi^h^l tfe^f^/tJiiEgS', jtihOu^rit^e^TTw^reirhTtmahi jirutte ^i^n^fftgi^ (\jylitb^riaoyI-$rreri5rfnn^M Lrcio^g'hfiQi. Ilcli6). rrniS?PI?li|ii^^B§tJ>^2 M deepei^arid^imDferJelqiidtrir'bEbicrcbMe jBj^^bli%te^©^%l(^ femtii ^^inmsti'ktiOwriliaib-^beiDitrifi sradd fe:9k^i#r]Sgri|^^jjl|-qriisiif^^r^4)\<3f^fi£^ i^^caa^rbpjiihdferst 00^3111 ^Vjieji ii}iQitl¥l?^/itQ)|^^ iwritenji^i;e 'jrfifctH35^iit:tdxl;h^o^itdE:s i^(j6ed jteoiWJ^; tj5ctl^MiiMJ/ib^ ita iwDcte nrt> bairpe |t<5Si ar,«^fii9i^J:Tc©i9Mif)>g'j^»d3iiijL^imrg)tec^ed b^^ sp^dJbdssistmiLbe of libelHoly gibMl te$t fe>^flmlie©i^/fC)ii^©tfeLibifes3-ikdvsht]fuld bei'dec^ved ij|,-^i^4hiT^B0 9d omiqrnS ^rLt iBrl.t 'labio n't ,2335 9rf rforrfv/ sii'J^ t;^elit'J|irfaW&]6'vS'i'tbi,§9-jbel>ibke7^jsat aconcIasabniit'iFiiel^Holy ^n-0hV^ 6di ^i^iMef^|3eaik/pmc$;ed^0r(^Mi¥iiteai^Veto jfci^)/l sorft4tto^ri$t) Ite iM -marim^D-iikfLdirsomefeimesi injilire ^e^R^)^ oTOt^dsJ>§)wl<;i;til^ tb© ifinB3'Jf«9Hefi-df,[ai^rjeqtk]toli(ck |^'llE^f^^^ui^rp^3v^iaHbfiC^i£i^3-/y(jbb^ oSfiBi^^ftife)^ k^jkHneDjp^rlbs i^pr^ir^^mm^jtUm^ MbkH trajieesend'Jetery ci^artddfimrid gueb 9^ tlielM^stertyel; tii$ IC'toity fSciy[jtbfeQln(2^mtdctor.aM mtoy mtoT) i^bteg^-toi^l^:^' lpia4?tsTit)f«t.^i)"elt^^ t^Mc^'^; tef^qgf^te^'^^cgnfsi^^^^^'O^ l^odwikti sMr DouaJi.,!j-fFlae disapproved the censures ; but Sixtus V. imposed^.satorae £iMti^"ctM%^^fiG4}^(S^6'i.^tw)dld^^^ ipnotmmitevn'^ht ^Tab^^i. has 4i@^er:453dnoliepctei^^:ik^ " . i this he states : "In the^ebe B^ difii- -Gt^yr if i^iii^rfoie/uia)d«]DstiQodLrasritd^ey^ been ex- plained bytqsiD?i^xeg^ds>^hjeritw^fh-^t the^.sacCBdJWiriteafsjwJ-alfe'i)^ 8ir.p^u^ai^:^ii^pir^tit)Qi ^d (iir^r 'ti()a,:a(i[aMi3tdncpiofyth^/H^Jyo61ioB^7irTlvlt'^ -tMtrfo^Mveary i-senien)2^ astdribv:&t^tJ^^TAdp'^^^'M^U necessary ithEffe'*heyr Af^d X!eG^t$ra.©ewTa?nd-pO§i):M im§|?m1^ip5ar|rf¥n Ite HiJl^fSpiritr^'ltetr is^^as^^wiritotJRi^^tiftiJk^iv^hiefor^^^^ new HaBrine^UMeycihoiild ^t\(m)t^e^ri}i^'^)mU'-^ tniqfe;:biM tiiiktH^>^asfM>ffif5iMfe1&^t)1^rH^^ 4n:a spebkrL^j^aryoiiBiusxf A^r':tedr xmV^ -t^^mMmE^dt^^ things which they had heard or ^t^mu^'m^^Wj'f^^^v^J^'^J ]a:]<]>WT3ii'^ndhtlmt^tQB-^ovdd ^m^% thmfdV(Jm^^rAJ^^: the :oJ:liressi6nsiamd ther^oirdsi^, ®rMcy!gMifer»e^(^r'^^^/j^WQ^rth^fg. .:i:o*^'THi& opiflidli^^^^^^to ipjllie ffiiore.probablejohe; \Mrst, «l^caa^ th^vE v^ri^t^sts kMlX3thJeri^Mte4 ^writers I jse^m^riat W W-fhi neisMMqif fl^^ ff^^dQ^tie(jTiit© >WriteItfc , thangsothey saw'd?i'te'&M^r©M'Sfe^hMlwitti"ds'^es;v,a^I&u^ learned an -a I^M-|^n>wrg*irt6atrWMclflheigaw;iagis:6vididntI gi^th6'saMeHva¥^Mu$tMdwfWrbtey^ Sst'MaTk^'s^cfel^j^.a^iie jEJsin Comment. in-^^^2fad TU'^wefe^ca^icII^'asd^oMlT .k>5s\T ooS LEssius KKD -imwmu 93] hesdd:>inom ¥Me!i:/i :::::•.: ru ^^lAxid/cX/likQ \Yliat h^vx^^eim^ And'Cnehr.wholkttow:.^ tMngfl^l^^bi^trlsintyealiiii^m) iJi^Iart af-eDcpreBsmgt'thoiig|hfe3i^f?v^pabler^ ,vffibe|-^f(;^j if 'the Molyi(^h(^iwMiesrtb!fmqMetri^. a[fnaiiuensesTrti is. kiotrnecessatyr Mat'to Iw^p^Mc^h^fU steS!^ tlrir^st a/rieTO7hut is iSniDjuighfthatf h^^d^^ tter^ imjl^-^^s^-i already jkriowAartd thafc jhera^$i:£!t;othemiiv-a.)5gefd§ti Ml^y.%L^U/ words-Taaid sEntences// tJasaA ijliey rcomiri^viaytrtb^/l^Mtr'j^rMc^ "For the better explaining of thi^jo*??'ernw^k!te¥ifc^^'#i thing' inayibeivwitteh.-tiitoMghinspi in • twoi ways;/ iiFifstr, Jbhat^ tthe^Molf^ 'iGkpst )^fLJ^'M^ sup^rr natural inspiiatiibti-^mi^ke mandf'@st.#lrtb^jt^ingiii^9be5Wril^-:r ten and. alt". the [word.^, and thu^itfee -^ropheXs^mm^ Mi^iVi propheeiiEs; a^ isieivid^ntj dmrJerei^ialt/X^KMI. /Mbp idi4iJ.f^^ and : sentence . o v And I : kc^dr it .^tol "bie o 'pmh^syiQ n lb)at. , - 5:nMn^) E.vang^lists^onirdfsacrMrihistpiaalns^aerjilqterrfhtis^^^^^ tha^t tijte^j needed nortea .faew, aM^pQsiti\^daspiraJbitto&»4i Jlhimi^^ aboMt' ei^ery ilhingj ; ■:i:todfio^irioSe^)mjW\m^fc ()piniqnrf8r4hHrea^wtx/that hyL^ j^amtraryiip!i?in^ipjg"i M wHt Spirit by [a joew insj^initi-oo, mfe^riy .(te^eH^ic^X)^ J)ur ^y r-^r^^nt^ prove' thaii thef (books ) of :M£t:coabees. arsj TOtr ;^n05iiieal: Senpn tiireq ■:;.:l: » iri;Ifit[>^K<3?e't'}4iis['Stv^Iittk'er]TO)i^d^ tha^t he wrote the things which he received ir6'mth^gk^^(i:^^^/Wh^ bad seea-t/hen3t,43iitibe'WcmMifeay iitbalt h&fw^tg) 'ife jbings whisDhrhe xec^iv/ediifrom the.Koly/^Jbfc^sfeml^oji^peeaalJyi^o 94 LESSIUS AND HAMEL tated them. . . . Now it is enough for the sacred his- torians that God by a special impulse move them to write the things which they already know, and infallibly assist them in all things. By this is not removed the labor of calling to mind things heard, seen, and read, and of coordinating them, and, as one judges most fitting, of expressing them in proper words. Wherefore it comes to pass that the more eloquent speak more eloquently, and the less eloquent less ornately." It is evident here that the difficulty lies in the ambiguous use of the term inspiration. Lessius did not distinguish between revelation and inspiration. In his explanation he makes his meaning clear, that he extends inspiration to all the Scriptures, and in a proper degree to the words them- selves ; while he restricts revelation to those things which the writers did not know by natural means. If this distinction be inserted we believe that no one has written on the theme more clearly or correctly. In treating the third proposition Lessius is no less fortu- nate: "The third opinion, leaving out the clause in paren- theses, seems to me wholly certain, unless there be question about terms. Let us suppose that by a pious man well furnished with the knowledge, a pious history be written b}^ the impulse of the Holy Ghost, and that the writer without the special assistance of inspiration write the truth, and com- mit no error. If the Holy Ghost, by some prophet or other- wise, attest that what is there written be true and saving, I see no reason why that book should not have the authorit}^ of Holy Scripture, since it has the same motive of credibility that any other prophecy has, namely, divine authority. And I say this not that I assert that such was the method of inspiration of any part of Holy Scripture ; nay, more, I believe that in fact nothing of this kind is found in Holy Scripture, but I speak only of possibility. Hence the proposition is conditional. If God willed he could have acted in this manner in the Scriptures, for it does not imply a contradic- tion, and such Scripture would be equal to the other parts in divine authority." We see here that Lessius has retracted somewhat. By cutting out the parenthetical clause he removes the question LESSIUS AND HAMEL 95 to the region of speculations on the possible, and no man can object to his reasoning. The Faculties of Louvain and Douai had charged Lessius with the error of the Anomoei, an obscure sect described by S. Epiphanius. Their capital error was to divide the Scrip- tures into the divine and human parts, and to deny authority to the things which the writers wrote as men. Lessius in his defense shows how absurd it was to accuse him of their error, and adds: "We say, therefore, that all parts of the Scripture are of infallible truth, and are of the Holy Ghost who inspires by a new revelation, or moves by a special im- pulse, and assists in every word and sentence ; and as we have elsewhere abundantly demonstrated, we hold that there is not in them the least error, for it would redound upon the Holy Ghost, and the authority of the whole Scripture would totter; although it is not necessary that the Holy Ghost inspire everything, in a special manner illumining the writer. " (In Schneeman Controv. de div. grat. Friburgi, 1881, 467 seqq.) We see here the same confusion between inspiration and revelation. The Faculty of Louvain answered Lessius in a treatise called " Antapologia, " and Lessius again delivered a defence in which he makes the issues still clearer. Among other things he says that even when God did not give to the sacred writers new revelations, ^^he directed them in everything, lest they should write other things, or in a manner different from his good-pleasure ; but this took place without a new revela- tion, or new mode of understanding. Thus it is plain in what sense the writer of H. Maccab. could declare his tongue to be the pen of a ready scribe, because he was moved and directed by the Holy Ghost ; and also (it is plain) in what sense he could not so declare, for the Holy Ghost did not beforehand form all the words in his mind, as one does who in the proper sense dictates For the concept of Holy Scripture does not essentially include that all the material words be dictated by the Holy Ghost, but this is an accessory and ornament (of inspiration). Otherwise if the Hebrew and Greek exemplars were lost the Church WQuIdorhe:-witk©uiIct1ite)cfMtnSGdrpt^^ Latin Church would not have the Scr^ttfe^^fcatriM 3^t& edi'fekail w0$tld^fmdt3:beiiSGBjitm3rff;iiv/i;o.J 'to aBtk^^H^m^Thok clds^lyJiY9f'9ba}bsee)-tha^[ibh®i3e3seiicefiQ(f MkM}i mf^e'^imr^3^'^m^'fpid^^'^Q^ depends not on the author but on the authority Oio\^. ^hwRhB^^.k^^h^yflm^ !^jm^w§^mm^i^.etr^m:dStM in- faUible, whoever he said to be the author, whom I sh§M^^^7 4§S9j'^?^^WQ^rr|gbl5ef^^^fp^gj^9vW$i|e|oOf j$^§r^ 'Mftter. T^isij.js, |i^-^pii9.pi>fjr>TS^e;;^id>jnjE)jt£apjM^^ te^^J^^^i^^lie a^rJte (^fjM§§e^bee^iiw^Ijarr|aithMrt53an{ lk¥^ift.%^r JS^^?^ L^^t^ ff^Qo suefe r]^ wil:^j4t;J^ii,f #^§ist^^^ ^Ji9§feq S-^pMT ^m-dibriBtd-iebnu lo ebom v/sri lo jio'd k^^'fifc'^lfeffeSO:hi;^:4fct^io^i^fothfe'B^^^ ^InfO^tiiin^ ae-riianner mi-^^^jUo^iOni^ , JbMrii(n^t!t^, :^nt;^h(^ tefter^i-woMijaM "^th^ f)a|4er: -of t^tys -j^y^rds and the vvh^e; ^Itru^j^jw^ mTof cfOodr, as thg>uig: Ij hims41^^^14%ra^5wrjtim^':'>[{^titafi'0Jfi IIL' SHitij lill{if>-h I JcodD vIoH 9fIJ vd bs:tiiJoib od abiov/ Im'isJ;^m t: slmtk^tEteat f of itheiqjoiit^oiretsynthato t^hb^ wagfisioaboniLt diyinfe'^rja^e , riiBBsijasi^ras-narfifiiisdi^sf ood^Andrinisreprede^ LESSIUS AND HAMEL 97 His statements were torn from their context, and often garbled into a distorted meaning. It is true he used an ambiguous term in his first two propositions ; but his explan- ation does honor to his knowledge and his faith. His third proposition is not well enunciated. His own expunging of the parenthesis is a retractation ; but dealing with a possi- bility he utters nothing contrary to faith. As Bishop Gasser rightly argued in the Vatican Council, that Council's condemnation of the theory of a subsequent inspiration does not ax3ply to Lessius. He spoke of a possibility ; the Council spoke of the existing books. Moreover^ Lessius admits into his hypothetical book the element of present inspiration; because the Holy Ghost must approve the book "through a prophet, or in some other manner." Therefore Lessius makes the authority of the book the effect of the Holy Ghost. For instance let us suppose^ as every one is free to do, that Jason who wrote the original of IL Maccab. was not inspired. Let us suppose that the writer who abridged these books into the one book of H. Maccab. wrote no word of his own, but only selected from the five books. Still the element of inspiration would be there, not disclosing new truths; but moving the writer to make the abridgment, and positively aiding him to ar- range these things into an infallible book. Of course we are speaking of a mere hypothesis ; for it seems evident that the writer of Maccabees did not servilely copy passages from Jason ; but compendiously wrote for a religious end certain things, in an epoch which had been more extensively de- scribed by the historian Jason. Of Lessius' three propositions Bellarmine speaks thus: **The three propositions on Scripture, enunciated without explanation, sound bad, and are liable to calumny. But Father Lessius has rightly explained the two first. For the third he has recently written an apology, and although he has not satisfied me fully, yet the opinion as modified and tempered by him seems tolerable." (Apud Schneeman, op. cit.) The system of inspiration taught by Bellarmine in the main agrees with the two first propositions of Lessius. Thus 98 SUAREZ he declares: 'The first is that the Scripture is the word of God. immediately revealed, and written as it were by the dictation of God. . . . But this is not to be understood as though the sacred writers always had new revelations, and wrote what they beforehand were ignorant of ; for it is cer- tain that the Evangelists Matthew and John wrote what they saw ; but Mark and Luke, what they heard, as Luke declares in the beginning of his Gospel. The sacred writers are said therefore to have an immediate revelation, and to have writ- ten the words of God himself, either because certain new things, before unknown, were revealed to them ... or because God immediately inspired and moved the writers to write the things which they had seen and heard, and di- rected them lest they should err in any matter. " (De Cone. I. 2. 12.) Suarez defines Holy Scripture to be "a writing by the impulse of the Holy Ghost, who dictated not only the sense but also the words." After describing the necessity of verbal inspiration, he tempers the doctrine as follows: "In two ways the words of Holy Scripture may be understood to be of the Holy Ghost, either by a special antecedent motion or only by an assistance, and as it were, safeguarding. The first way is when the Holy Ghost either imprints the mental word by infused ideas, or specially moves and calls up pre- existing ideas, and this mode is the most proper to (the Holy Ghost), and the most perfect, and most probably was fol- lowed w^hen the mysteries to be written were supernatural, and surpassed human reason. But it seems not necessary, although recent learned men so teach, that always the words be dictated in this special way. For when a sacred writer writes something which is of natural reason and within the compass of the senses, it seems sufficient that the Holy Spirit specially assist him and save him from all error and untruth and from all words which are not profitable or becoming to Holy Scripture, re- moving everything which might suggest such (unfitting) words, and for the rest permitting the writer to use his mem- ory, and his ideas, and diligence in writing as Luke acknowl- edges in the beginning of his Gospel. It is enough there- MARCHINI 99 fore that either in one way or in the other according to the exigency of the matter, the words be of the Holy Ghost." To the question: Whether there be anything in the Holy Scriptures which was not written by the action of the Holy Ghost, and consequently is not Holy Scripture, Suarez replies: "The Holy Writer writes nothing purely of him- self, but everything and each thing is by the direction of the Holy Ghost." (De Fide V. 3.) A classic writer on this theme is Marchini (ti773)- In his work De Divinitate et Canonicitate Sacrorum Bibliorum, Art. v., he defines the concept of inspiration: "The first question which demands solution is whether the Holy Ghost placed every word in the sacred writer's mind and mouth. This truth is evident to those who study the question that not to leave to the writer's natural faculties the selection of the words and the diction is needless and superfluous for our defence of the truth, dignity, and infallibility of Holy Scripture. It is enough for this defence that as regards the things written, God infuse them into the writer's mind, or call them up in his mind, and that he assist him that he employ apt words, and leave aside unfitting ones. Why therefore should the Holy Ghost inspire every word, who is neither wanting in the necessary, nor redundant in the superfluous?" Marchini confirms this from the sacred writers' diversity of style, from the fact that the same thing is de- scribed in different words by different writers, from the literary imperfections of Scripture, and from the authority of the versions. He promulgates more accurately Lessius' principle that revelation does not extend to all parts of Scripture. He defines inspiration to be "a special impulse of the Holy Ghost to write, and a directing and assistance governing the mind and soul of the writer which permits him not to err, and causes him to write what God wills." Marchini strongly condemns "the error of those who violate the Scriptures by teaching that in certain minor things as they say, not necessary to salvation, the Prophets and Apostles wrote merely as men without that special action of God, without which a book can not be divine." He alleges as proof H. Tim. IH. 16; H. Peter. I. 21, and the 100 FRANZ ELIN authority of the Fathers. He declares that the whole authority of the Scriptures would totter if in minor things, errors be admitted, since certain limits between great and small can not be admitted." Marchini differentiates the Holy Scriptures from other* infallible documents by the fact that a positive divine action pervades the whole Scripture. And, he says, "this divine afflatus or inspiration can be present, even though God does not by a special action fur- nish the words nor the sentences. . . That is, if the Holy Ghost assists the writer whom he beforehand moved to write ; if he aptly suggests that which he wishes written, if perchance the writer's memory fail him ; if he enlightens the mind with that light which expels all pernicious ignorance, and removes rashness; if he strengthens with such power that things are written faithfully, plainly, and consistently ; if he brings to the mind things hidden, sublime and unknown; if he leaves no part of Scripture deprived of his protection, surely the books will be written by God's inspiration, al- though the manner of speech, and the sentences often pro- ceed from man's mind, memory, study, thought, and dili- gence. " Among the great theologians of the XIX. Century, Cardinal Franzelin holds an eminent place. His system of inspiration has been made the subject of a special attack by that reaction which in our day has set in towards a more liberal view of inspiration. In his work "Tractatus de Divina Traditione et Scriptura" (Ed. 3, Romae, 1882) he treats the question of inspiration at length. Among other things he declares that the books of Scripture are of divine authority " for the reason that they are the books of God, and God is their author by his supernatural action on the human co-writers, which action by ecclesiastical usage drawn from the Scriptures themselves is called inspiration. " " A book is divine in the strict sense for the reason that it is written by God through the instrumentality of a man whom God so moves to write, and in whom God so operates in writing, that God himself in the strict sense should be considered the principal Author. This supernatural and ex- traordinary action of God is called inspiration" (Thesis II.) FRANZELIN 101 From intrinsic and extrinsic evidence Franzelin places the essence of inspiration in a charisma gratis datum enlight- ening so that the minds of inspired men understand in order to write the truths which by Scripture God wishes to give to his Church, and the wills are moved to consign these only to writing; and thus assisted man under the action of God, the principal cause, infallibly executes the divine coimsel. Hence distinguishing between inspiration and assistance, inspiration must be said to embrace the truths, and the formal word ; while assistance is extended to the material words." (Thesis III.) The teaching of T^essius that revelation is not essential to inspired Scripture has now become the universal teaching. Franzelin distinguishes the formal part of a book which he calls the veritates from the material part, that is the words. He demands inspiration as he has described it for the formal element ; but for the words he requires only an assistance to guarantee that they aptly express the thoughts : " Regarding the words it is clear that the truths, that is the thoughts of the principal Author, can not be expressed in writing unless terms be chosen fitting to express the sense. If therefore, God by his inspiration of the things and thoughts thus acts on the inspired man to the intent that he write, so that the writing, infallibly in virtue of the divine operation, truly and sincerely contains the thoughts of God, there must ac- company the divine inspiration or be included in it such a divine operation that the man writing, not only actually elect, but also infallibly elect terms apt truthfully and sincerely to express the inspired substance and sentences, and that he be thus made infallible in choosing words and other things which pertain to the material part (of the inspired writings) . A man inspired in mind and will to write the thoughts of God, but left to himself in the election of the terms would remain fallible in expressing the inspired thoughts ; and by this therefore it would not follow infallibly that a book written by such inspiration would be in the full sense in- spired Scripture and the word of God. " ''From what has been said it is evident what is this divine operation which we declare to accompany inspiration. The 102 FRANZELIN aim of most, at least, of the Holy books is such that the for- mal object of the book is not affected if the same things and sentences he expressed by different words or different style, provided that words apt and befitting the subject be chosen. . . . ^For we do not believe that the Gospel consists in the words of Scripture but in the sense ; not on the surface, but in the marrow; non in sermonum foliis sed in radice ratio nis. ' " (S. Jerome on Gal. I. II. 12.) "Therefore, from the definition of inspiration and from the fact that God is the Author of the Scriptures by means of human co-writers, so that through the very action of God upon inspired men it is infallibly certain that the Scriptures are the books of God as their Author ; in most cases, that is where the choosing of certain words instead of other equiva- lents pertains merely to the material part, there is no reason to afhrm that God by an antecedent supernatural action furnished the words and the style of writing, and individually determined them. But there is a reason of affirming God's assistance by which he so aided the writers in choosing apt terms, that in expressing inspired thoughts, they were fully infallible." Franzelin adduces three classes of arguments to refute the mechanical idea of verbal inspiration. One proof for the thesis under consideration is found in the variety of style prevailing among the different authors. Isaiah is polished and cultured in his diction ; Jeremiah, on the contrary, and Amos are less polished and coarser in their style. Isaiah was in high social rank, while Jeremiah was a burgher from Anathoth, and Amos, a cowherd. And differences of style exist among all the inspired writers, due to their different characteristics. Secondly in the Scriptures, sometimes the same fact is related by different writers in different ways. For instance, the consecration of the chalice is related in four different ways by St. Math., XXVI. 28; St. Mark. XIV. 24; St. Luke, XXII. 20, and St. Paul, I. Cor. XL, 25. These speak of the same words of Christ, as he used them once for all at the Last Supper. If the Holy Ghost had inspired the words, how could we account for these divergencies? Here applies BONFRERE 103 aptly what St. Augustine said of the inspired writers: *'Ut quisque meminerat eos expHcasse manifestum est." The writers of the New Testament rarely or never quote the old Testament literally, but only the sense. In the words of St. Jerome: ''Hoc in omnibus pene testimoniis quae de veteribus libris in novo assumpta sunt Testamento observare debemus, quod memoriae crediderint Evangelistae vel Apostoli, et tantum, sensu explicato, saepe ordinem commutaverint, nonnunquam vel detraxerint verba vel addiderint." (Comment, in Epist. ad Galatas.) Thirdly, the inspired writers themselves disclaim verbal inspiration, asserting that their compositions had been the result of toil, observation and research. The text of II. Maccab. already quoted is an example of this. Also the preface of the Gospel of St. Luke, and various other passages. Now, if the inspiration had been verbal this labor and re- search would be inconceivable. Again, the writer of the second book of Maccab. XV. 39, in closing his work, speaks thus of his work: "I also with these things, will draw my discourse to an end. And if (I have written) well, and as is befitting history, this I should wish; if only weakly and com- monly, /x€T/}tW, mediocriter, (not above the average) this is all I could achieve," etc. No such apology for shortcom- ings were necessary, had the Holy Ghost inspired the words. Bonfrere, the disciple of Lessius, had taught a doctrine in some points identical with that taught by Lessius. He de- fended a three-fold relation of the Holy Ghost to the in- spired writings; antecedent, concomitant, and consequent. According to Bonfrere, the antecedent relation had actuated the Prophets, who committed to writing the things revealed, without any part in their conception except a passive action, simply as an amanuensis writes down the dictated ideas, always, of course, in their own terms, as we have just seen. The concomitant relation directed the writer as one would direct another in writing a human document, not permitting him to fall into error. Bonfrere even admitted in this mode a vague general impulse of the Holy Spirit to write such a history. He also admitted a sort of prompting influence, in case the writer's memory failed him, according to that pas- 104 BONFRERE sage in St. Matthew: ''He (the Holy Ghost) will suggest all things to you, whatever I shall have said to you." Bonfrere asserted this mode of inspiration to have had place in historical books, and in things known by natural means. He therefore applied it to the Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, Books of Maccabees, and the other historical books, except the parts of Genesis which treat of the origin of the World. The consequent relation of the Holy Ghost to Scripture Bonfrere describes thus: "The Holy Ghost has a con- sequent relation to Holy Scripture if something be written by merely himian agency without the help, direction or assist- ance of the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost afterward give testimony that all that is there written is true. For it is certain that then the whole writing would be the word of God and would have the same infallible authority as other things which were written by the direction or inspiration of the Holy Ghost, as it is the King's word when some secre- tary or notary by his own authority draws up a royal decree or public document which the King afterwards ratifies and to which he affixes his seal, and it is of equal authority as that which the King himself, conceives, writes or dictates." Bonfrere believes that in this manner the Holy Ghost accepted the sayings of Aratus and Epimenides, Acts XVII. 28 ; Titus I. 1 2 . * *In the same way the Holy Ghost may make Holy Scripture, by testifying that all is true in it, a whole history or a book treating of morals or of anything else which was written by a iminspired author." (Praeloquia in Script. Sac.) Bonfrere expressly denied that such had been the origm of any of the books now possessed by the Church, but as- serted the non-repugnance of such action, and the possibil- ity that such might have been the origin of some of the in- spired works which the Church has lost. Of Bonfrere's consequent inspiration it must be said, that to assert it of any of the existing books of the Holy Script ture, is condemned in express terms in the definition of the Vatican Council ; if it only deals with a possibility, then it is false and absurd; for a subsequent inspiration is a contradiction in JAHN 105 terms. As Comely rightly says: ''repugnat in adjecto." For to constitute inspiration, we must have this supernatural psychological action in the mind of the writer, and if this be not verified, no subsequent action can supply it. * 'Factum infectum fieri non potest." But one might say, God is free to approve a book in such way, and if he were to do so, would not the book be made inspired Scripture? It would be an infallibly true writing, rendered infallible by its subsequent approbation, but not inspired Scripture] for the essential element required for inspiration never was there. Where- fore, that such was the origin of any of our Holy Books is denied by the Council of the Vatican ; the possibility of such origin is disproved by a consideration of the essential elements of inspiration. Nevertheless sentences, parts of books, and in fact, any document whatever, passing through the hands of an in- spired writer, and used by him in writing a book, under the influence of inspiration, would become inspired Scripture. This is not consequent inspiration, but the employment of an inspired writer's natural faculties in collecting material. It is not probable that any great part of any inspired book was produced in this way; but some data most certainly were thus employed. Jahn departed farther from the truth than Bonfrere had gone: asserting inspiration to be, in general, only a negative assistance protecting from error, he defended that such was the general origin of our books. Logical in his opinion, and recognizing that inspirationimported something positive, he boldly proclaimed that inspiration was a misapplied term ; but, consecrated by usage, it was difficult to change. The concomitant relation of the Holy Ghost to Scripture is also erroneous. This mode is a merely negative influence. The Holy Ghost, as it were, watches the inspired writer to protect him from error, and actually does save him when he would otherwise err. This is not sufficient to make God the Author of the Holy Books.. Inspiration is an active, positive influence in every part of the Holy Scripture. No other relation can constitute God the author of the Holy Writ. If, indeed, we were to defend 106 SCHMID that God only preserved from error, as Calmet asserted, it would follow, that if the writer were exempt from error of himself, unaided by any other cause, God would not be the author of the book so written ; and, as this would doubtless have happened in many passages and whole chapters, there would thus be parts of which God could not be said to be the author, as He would have had no part except a general supervision in their production. This the definition of the Vatican Council forbids to assert. Again, there would be no difference, in such case, between the definitions of oecumenical councils and of the Pope's *'ex cathedra", and the Holy Scriptures ; for in these defin- itions there is the negative assistance of the Holy Ghost. But we know that the dignity and rank of such documents are far below that of the Holy Writ ; for these are human docimients, infallible in their truth, but they can not be said to have God for their author. In 1885 Dr. Franciscus Schmid, complaining that no- where could he find a fitting treatise on inspiration, published at Brixen his work entitled: "De Inspirationis Bibliorumvi et ratione, " a volume of 422 pages in octavo. It is divided into seven books. In the first book Dr. Schmid expounds the common Catholic doctrine,, that there can be no error in the Scrip- tures ; that all the statements of Scripture rest on the testi- mony of God and are of divine authority. The reason is that the Scriptures being written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost have God for their principal Author, who em- ploys human writers as instruments. God is not the only Author, because he did not immediately produce the books by miracle ; but he wrote them by means of men. That God writing through men, be the true Author, an assistance saving from error is not enough, neither a subsequent appro- bation, for neither can give to a book the prerogative of a divine origin. There is necessary therefore a positive action of God on the man, by which the things which God has in mind and will to write, the (inspired) man also conceives in his mind, and adequately accomplishes. Then the book is to be given to men as divine. The intrinsic and principal SCHMID 107 argument is drawn from this that God is the Author of the sacred books. To write a book, or to be a book's author, in the last analysis, means nought else than by writings to speak to the readers ; that is, to express in writing that which one thinks in the mind, that they who read may know from his writings the writer's thoughts. But if God did not by his action determine all things that were to be written he himself would not have spoken these things; therefore he would not be the Author of the whole book. This applies to the action of God upon the understanding of the inspired writer. But since the inspired writer is an instrument of God, it is required that he write not merely by his own good pleasure, but in the name of God ; consequently there is necessary that there should be a divine action on the will of the man and through the will upon his executive faculties. " ''There is a great difference between an inspired book and the definitions of the Church ; for an inspired book is infallible in all that it affirms ; it is a basic fount of revelation ; besides divine assistance it requires an extraordinary posi- tive action of God ; that it should be written in the name of God, and as God's book delivered to the Church; and even for the words, it requires a special assistance. All these qualities are not found in the definitions of the Church. Nevertheless the labor and vigils of the author do not con- flict with the inspiration of a book. " Regarding verbal inspiration Schmid speaks as follows: " It is asked : What is truly required that a book be formally called the word of God? And, to particularize. Is it required that the individual words, just as they are, be of God? We answer, No. But it is not the same to deny that God ante- cedently determined and inspired in the writer the individual words, as to say that God left to the inspired writer an unre- stricted liberty concerning the words and forms of expression. Rather another mode of inspiration which is a mean between the two extremes seems possible. In other words, one can grant that in our books the words and the style are not determined by God for every individual part, and yet main- tain that the whole manner of speech which is found in the Scripture, is in a certain manner antecedently determined 108 CRETS by God, and by God's providence, in a manner known to God, brought out in the inspired books by the act of the inspired writers." '' We understand that God brought forth the Scriptures that men in matters of faith and morals might have a book which they might readily and safely believe." ^'Therefore all things whether they pertain to faith or morals or not, if found in the Scriptures, should have divine authority. Otherwise confusion and doubt will shake the foundations of faith. Therefore, there is no limiting the inspiration of the things affirmed in the Bible, and the words of Scripture must be such that they adequately express God's thought and will. " "And God assists the words as far as is necessary for this end." In 1886, G. J. Crets of the order of the Premonstratensians published at Louvain "De divina Bibliorum inspiratione." After a review of the various opinions, he institutes an analysis of the dogmatic formula, "God is the Author of the Holy Scripture;" for the reason that nothing conduces more to the knowledge of the true concept of inspiration than to ascertain what is required on the part of God, in order that God writing by means of men be called in the common use of the term the Author of the Scriptures. Having made a distinction between the material and formal element of the book, he places as necessary in inspiration that, as regards the formal element of the book, the writer receive a divine af- flatus by which he may conceive in his mind and be in- fallibly moved in his will to write all those things, and only those things, which the Holy Ghost has decreed should be written by him. Moreover there is required a certain assist- ance or some direction from the Holy Ghost that the writer be saved from error and defect in executing the work to which he is divinely moved. By this assistance Crets understands a divine action by which the human writer chooses words apt to express the thoughts of the principal Author. Crets refutes the theory which made inspiration a mere assistance, and he also rejects the theory of subsequent approbation. In the things which the inspired writer ac- quires by his own faculties Crets teaches that God moves CRETS 109 his will by a special action to write, and to choose the things which God wishes written, and supernaturally enlightens him to know what to write. He believes that it is prob- able that all the inspired writers w^ere conscious of their in- spiration. Regarding verbal inspiration Crets declares: "We con- clude that besides the inspiration in the strict sense of the words and sentences, by which indeterminately and remotely the words and form of expression are furnished, there is not in the main to be admitted a special action of the Holy Ghost in the mode of expression, except the special direction and assistance by which the mind of the writer, in choosing forms of expression characteristic of his temperament and education, is so led that leaving aside incongruous and less exact expressions, he employs words and expressions be- fitting the inspired thoughts, by which the divine truths may be truthfully and fully expressed in a manner befitting the destination of the books to all the generations of men." Crets extends inspiration "to all the statements of the Bible, whether they be of faith and morals, or of profane things; whether they be great or small; for if any error be admitted in the Scripture its whole authority is shaken ; and also because God is the Author of the whole Scripture with all its parts." Those who argue against this, base their argument on the purpose of Scripture, which they assert to be not profane but religious. Crets answers: "The adequate and the ultimate end intended by God in giving us the Holy Scriptures was not that all the truth pertaining to faith and morals should be systematically condensed into certain books, and thus deliv- ered to us ; or that in books partly written by purely human agency, portions written by their authors while under divine inspiration should be interspersed; but (the end was) that in things pertaining to faith and morals, for our present life and our eternal life in Heaven, we should be taught by means of books having divine authority for each and every statement ; in which books the truths at times are presented in a familiar form ; as, for instance, in the form of historical 110 ZANECCHIA accoiints, narrations and letters ; all which not only contain things strictly religious, but also profane matter, which however either from the nature of the thing or from the in- tention of God, has a proximate or remote relation to the religious truths. Therefore the things essentially religious by the primary intention of God are for their own sake inspired ; the other matter is the word of God, written by the divine influx, though accessorily, and for their relation to the things of faith and morals." Crets affirms that in things of the physical order the sacred writers spoke according to the popular conception of these things, based on the appearances of things. Also in indicat- ing numbers or time the writers at times expressed a certain indetermination as the matter demanded. By this most ex.cellent theory all that is in the Scripture is inspired, but must be properly interpreted according to the principles approved by the Church. In 1899 3-t Rome, Zanecchia O. P. published his work on inspiration. This contains little that is new, and its chief feature was an unreasonable attack on Card. Franzelin's theory of inspiration. Zanecchia was ably answered by Fr. J. P. van Kasteren, S. J., of Utrecht in the periodical ''Studien." Utrecht 1902. Zanecchia answered in a work entitled "Scriptor sacer sub divina inspiratione juxta sententiam Card. Franzelin", published at Rome in 1903. The main point urged against Franzelin is that he made the formula "God is the Author of the Scriptures" the fundamental first principle in investigating the nature of inspiration. Zanecchia, Prat and Lagrange argue that the term author is ambiguous and can not be made the basis of the clear concept of inspiration. It appears that there is much sophistry in the opposition to Franzelin. The word author has, it is true, several meanings as guarantee, cause, writer, etc. ; but as used by the Councils of the Church, the sense in which it is employed in the conciliar formula is made clear by the setting, and it is evident that it means to predicate of God the divine Authorship of the Holy Books. They say that the term "author" does not contain the term "inspirer" no more than the term "animal" contains ZANECCHIA 111 of necessity the concept "man". Therefore, they say that it is not logical to prove God's inspiration from his author- ship. But here again there is sophistry. The term ** author" generically considered does not contain the concept of inspira- tion; but the concept "author" as used by the councils and as used by Franzelin clearly contains the concept " inspirer. " While the concept "inspirer" is ontologically prior to the concept "author", in the order of our cognition the concept of authorship is the clearer ; and we understand the essential elements of inspiration from authorship. Therefore, we believe that Billot's remark is k propos: "The new critics seem to themselves to have brought forth a great apparatus of learning (against Franzelin) ; but in vain, for it would seem that it is their own logic, and not the logic of Card. Franzelin that is defective." (De inspiratione, 25.) At this point it is well to insert the eminent author Christian Pesch's note on the controversy: "Although it is scarcely necessary,. I acknowledge that I have never con- sidered Card. Franzelin's theory definitive ; nay more, there are many things in it which I do not approve. The* under- standing of the dogma of inspiration, not less than that of the other dogmas, continually develops in the Church ; nor can any man in this life formulate an immutable theory, beyond which progress will not be possible. God's providence so governs human affairs that there is never closed the way to the knowledge of truth and the love of good. But that Zanecchia never wearies of repeating that the theory of Franzelin is absurd, obscure, unreasonable, arbitrary; that (Franzelin's) method is unreasonable, false, illogical, and such like, serves indeed to show us the charac- ter of the mind of the one who writes such things, but will avail nothing with wise men to overthrow Franzelin's doctrine." (De insp. sac. script, p. 313, note.) Holden, the English professor at the Sorbonne (f 1662), was the first among Catholics to distinguish between the doctrinal parts of Scripture, which, he asserted, were to be believed fide divina, and the historical and other parts, which he held to be written without any special influence of the Holy Ghost. Thus in his Analysis of Faith, V. : " The 112 LIBERAL OPINIONS Special divine assistance given to the author of whatever book the Church receives as the word of God, extends only to those things which are doctrinal, or have a proximate or necessary bearing on doctrine; but, in these things which are not of the primary intent of the writer, or are relating to other things, we believe him to have received from God only that assistance which is common to other pious writers" ; and, II. 3 : "Although it is not licit to impeach as false aught contained in the Holy Code, nevertheless, the things which do not relate to religion do not constitute articles of Catholic faith." Holden's doctrine was examined by the Sorbonne and condemned. Richard Simon in his "Histoire Critique du Nouveau Testament" (Rotterdam, 1689) declares that he dares not condemn the opinion of Holden ; and dares not approve it in all its parts. Simon himself delivers his opinion obscurely, but seems content with a negative assistance preserving from error. Thus in his R^ponse aux Sentiments de quel- ques Th^ologiens de Hollande, he asserts : "Therefore when the Gospels are said to be inspired, this is not to be under- stood in the rigor that all things in these books came im- mediately from the Holy Ghost ; but the sense is that God so controlled their writers that they fell not into error. Men wrote, and the Holy Ghost directed them, and did not deprive them of reason or memory, that he might inspire things which they already knew; but in general he deter- mined them to write certain things rather than other things which they knew equally well. " Chrismann,in his ''Rule of Faith" went farther. He de- clares that while all things in Scripture are true, only the truths of faith and morals are to be believed with divine faith: ''Those things which neither antecedently or in the actual writing were revealed are not to be believed with divine faith, . . as for instance that Pilate was prefect of Judaea when Christ was crucified; or that statement of Paul, II. Tim. IV. : * Only Luke is with me, ' and many other things which merit not divine faith but only Catholic faith. In these things that inspiration suffices by which the Holy Ghost assisted the writers that they might not err. " THE VATICAN COUNCIL 113 Some other obscure theologians both before and after Chrismann held these opinions. It was therefore to eradicate these errors that the Vatican Council promulgated its decree : "Qui quidem veteris et novi Testamenti libri integri cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ejusdem Concilii decreto recensentur, et in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur, pro sacris et canonicis suscipiendi sunt. Eos vero Ecclesia pro sacris et canonicis habet, non ideo quod sola humana industria concinnati, sua deinde auctoritate sint approbati; nee ideo dumtaxat, quod revelationem sine errore contin- eant ; sed propterea quod Spiritu Sancto inspirante conscripti Deum habent auctorem, at que ut tales ipsi Ecclesiae traditi sunt. "(Cap. IL De Revel.) And in Canon IV. De Revela- tione : ''Si quis sacrae Scripturae libros integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout illos sancta Tridentina Synodus recensuit, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitus inspiratos esse negaverit ; anathema sit." One of the bishops in the Council proposed an emendation to the decree for the reason that it is not the same to declare a book sacred as to declare it canonical. A book is sacred by inspiration; it is canonical by the approbation of the Church. Bishop Gasser ably answered that though the two terms, etymologically differed, in the concrete they were identical, for the books of the canon were both sacred and canonical. Canonicity does not pertain to the essence of in- spiration but to its manifestation. The Council first de- clared the intrinsic character of inspiration, and then the external condition, that it be delivered to the Church as a divine book. Soon after the Vatican Council August Roh- ling published in Germany a treatise "De Bibliorum inspira- tione ejusque valore ac vi pro libera scientia." Rohling distinguished between things of faith and morals, and pro- fane things. In things of faith and morals the human writer was preserved from error by inspiration. In all things profane the wTiter was left to his own resources, and hence what he wrote was to be treated as the work of any uninspired historian. To distinguish between inspired and uninspired accessory matter, Rohling gave the criterion that 114 F. LENORMANT such matter was inspired only when it bore a necessary re- lation to religious truth, as for instance that Israel came to Mt. Sinai. This theory was ably refuted by Franzelin, "De Trad, et Script." pag. 564 sqq. Rohling's theory rests on a false principle that God inspires only a part of the Scrip- tures, whereas the Councils of the Church declare that they are all inspired with all their parts. The profane matter is inspired per accidens, that men might have a deposit of writ- ings of infallible truth. A far greater impetus was given to the tendency to limit inspiration by the work of the French orientalist, F. Lenor- mant. In his work, "Les Origines de I'histoire," 1880, he declares that all the Scripture is inspired, but all that is in- spired is not infallibly true. In faith and morals the Scrip- ture is an infallible guide, but this infallibility is not to be extended to other matters. The first eleven chapters of Genesis are myths serving to present religious ideas, but in the history the fabulous is inseparably intermingled. Lenormant speaks with great clearness. Of inspiration he says: '*In regard to biblical questions one of which is here treated, I firmly believe the divine inspiration of the sacred books, and with perfect submission I accept the doctrinal decisions of the Church pertaining to inspiration, but I know that in these decisions inspiration is not extended beyond the things which relate to religion and the things of faith and morals, that is the supernatural teaching contained in the Scriptures. In other things the human faculties of the biblical writers is supreme. Everyone impressed his character on the style of his book. Regarding physical sciences, the writers had no special light ; they followed the common opinions and prejudices of their times. The end of Scripture is,' says Cardinal Baronius, 'to teach us how to go to Heaven; not how the heavens move' ; much less is it the end of Scripture to reveal how earthly things move through their changes. The Holy Ghost did not reveal scientific truths nor universal history." Applying his theory to Genesis he believes that in its first chapters it is a collection of myths and traditions common to all the peoples inhabiting about the Euphrates and Tigris. Under the influence of the CARD. NEWMAN 115 religion of Israel the polytheistic element has been elimi- nated from these traditions, and they became the instrument of conveying the high truths of the monotheistic religion of Israel. Lenormant differs from other non-Catholic orient- alists. These assign an evolution of human conscience as the cause of a transition from the crude beliefs of polytheism to the more elevated character of monotheism in Israel. Le- normant invokes a special intervention of divine Providence inspiring the Law and the Prophets. Lenormant 's work was placed on the Index by a decree of Dec. 19, 1887. The theory of Lenormant was plainly contrary to the Catholic idea of the total inspiration of the Bible. It would no longer be a book of inspired truths, but a book in which inspired truths were intermingled with myth and fable. Many Catholic writers took up the defence of the Bible against Lenormant. Notable among these were Lefebre (Revue Catholique de Louvain, 1880) Desjacques, Lamy, and Brucker (La Controverse 1881, 1882). Franz von Himi- melauer (Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, 1881) pointed out the danger of Lenormant 's theories, declaring: ''Er riickt sich mit Sack und Pack in die Linie der rationalistischen Er- klarer ein. " Tentatively and cautiously Card. Newman advanced some views on inspiration in an article '* On The Inspira- tion of Scripture" published in the Nineteenth Century, LXXXIV. Feb. 1884. In this article, inspiration and allied topics are studied. Card. Newman wrote his article to put the Church in a true light against the calumnies of Renan. The latter argued that the Catholic Church in- sisted on certain things which criticism and history proved to be impossible. Newman takes up to consider whether the Church does insist on matters in defiance of criticism and history. Hence, rather than the formulation of a theory of inspiration the great cardinal presents his view of what the Church insists on. Of inspiration he says : " Now then, the main question before us being what it is that a Catholic is free to hold about Scripture in general, or about its separate portions or its statements, without com- promising his firm inward assent to the dogmas of the Church, 116 CARD. NEWMAN that is, to the de fide enunciations of Pope and Councils, we have first of all to inquire how many and what those dogmas are. " " I answer that there are two dogmas; one relates to the authority of Scripture, the other to its interpretation. As to the authority of Scripture, we hold it to be, in all matters of faith and morals, divinely inspired throughout; as to its interpretation, we hold that the Church is, in faith and morals, the one infallible expounder of that inspired text. '^ I begin with the question of its inspiration. "The books which constitute the canon of Scripture, or the Canonical books, are eniimerated by the Tridentine Council, as we find them in the first page of our Catholic Bibles, and are in that Ecumenical Council's decree spoken of by implication as the work of inspired men. The Vatican Council speaks more distinctly, saying that the entire books with all their parts, are divinely inspired, and adding an anathema upon impugners of this definition. "There is another dogmatic phrase used by the Councils of Florence and Trent to denote the inspiration of Scripture, viz., * Deus unus et idem utriusque Testamenti Auctor. ' Since this left room for holding that by the word ' Testa- mentum' was meant 'Dispensation,' as it seems to have meant in former Councils from the date of Irenseus, and as St. Paul uses the word, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, the Vatican Council has expressly defined that the concrete libri themselves of the Old and New Testament 'Deum habent Auctorem. ' "There is a further question, which is still left in some ambiguity, the meaning of the word * Auctor. ' 'Auctor ' is not identical with the English word ' Author. ' Allowing that there are instances to be found in classical Latin in which ' auctores ' may be translated ' authors, ' instances in which it even seems to mean ' writers, ' it more naturally means 'authorities.' Its proper sense is 'originator,' 'inventor,' 'founder,' 'primary cause;' (thus St. Paul speaks of our Lord as 'Auctor salutis,' 'Auctor fidei;') on the other hand, that it was inspired penmen who were the CARD. NEWMAN 117 * writers ' of their works seems asserted by St. John and St. Luke and, I may say, in every paragraph of St. Paul's Epistles. In St. John we read, 'This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and has written these things, ' and St. Luke says, ' I have thought it good to write to thee'&c. However, if any one prefers to construe 'auctor' as 'author ' or writer, let it be so— only, then there will be two writers of the Scriptures, the divine and the human. "And now comes the important question, in what re- spect are the Canonical books inspired? It cannot be in in every respect, unless we are bound de fide to believe that 'terra in setemum stat', and that heaven is above us, and that there are no antipodes. And it seems unworthy of Divine Greatness, that the Almighty should in His revela- tion of Himself to us undertake mere secular duties, and assume the office of a narrator, as such, or an historian, or geographer, except so far as the secular matters bear directly upon the revealed truth. The Councils of Trent and the Vatican fulfil this anticipation ; they tell us distinctly the object and the promise of Scripture inspiration. They specify 'faith and moral conduct ' as the drift of that teach- ing which has the guarantee of inspiration. What we need and what is given us is not how to educate ourselves for this life ; we have abundant natural gifts for himian society, and for the advantages which it secures ; but our great want is how to demean ourselves in thought and deed towards our Maker, and how to gain reliable information on this urgent necessity. "Accordingly four times does the Tridentine Council insist upon 'faith and morality,' as the scope of inspired teaching. It declares that the 'Gospel' is 'the Fount of all saving truth and all instruction in morals, ' that in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, the Holy Spirit dictating, this truth and instruction are contained. Then it speaks of the books and traditions, 'relating whether to faith or to morals,' and afterwards of 'the confirmation of dogmas and establishment of morals. ' Lastly, it warns the Christian people, 'in matters of faith and morals,' against distorting Scripture into a sense of their own. 118 CARD. NEWMAN ^'In like manner the Vatican Council pronounces that Supernatural Revelation consists 'in rebus divinis/ and is contained 'in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus ; ' and it also speaks of ' petulantia ingenia ' advancing wrong interpretations of Scripture 'in rebus fidei et morum ad aedificationem doctrincE Christianae pertinentium. ' ^'But while the Councils, as have been shown, lays down so emphatically the inspiration of Scripture in respect to faith and morals, it is remarkable that they do not say a word directly as to inspiration in matters of fact. Yet are we therefore to conclude that the record of facts in Scripture does not come under the guarantee of its inspiration? We are not so to conclude, and for this plain reason : — the sacred narrative carried on through so many ages, what is it but the very matter for our faith and rule of our obedience ? What but that narrative itself is the supernatural teaching, in order to which inspiration is given? What is the whole history, traced out in Scripture from Genesis to Esdras and thence on to the end of the Acts of the Apostles, but a manifestation of Divine Providence, on the one hand interpretative, on a large scale and with analogical applications, of universal history, and on the other preparatory, typical and predictive, of the Evangelical Dispensation? Its pages breathe of providence and grace, of our Lord, and of His work and teaching, from beginning to end. It views facts in those relations in which neither ancients, such as the Greek and Latin classical historians, nor modems, such as Niebuhr, Grote, Ewald, or Michelet, can view them. In this point of view it has God for its author, even though the finger of God traced no words but the Decalogue. Such is the claim of Bible history in its substantial fulness to be accepted de fide as true. In this point of view, Scripture is inspired, not only in faith and morals, but in all its parts which bear on faith, including matters of fact. ''But what has been said leads to another serious question. It is easy to imagine a Code of Laws inspired, or a formal prophecy, or a Hymn, or a Creed, or a collection of proverbs. Such works may be short, precise, and homogeneous ; but inspiration on the one hand, and on the other a document, CARD. NEWMAN 119 multiform and copious in its contents, as the Bible is, are at first sight incompatible ideas, and destructive of each other. How are we practically to combine the indubitable fact of a divine superintendence with the indubitable fact of a col- lection of such various writings. ''Surely, then, if the revelations and lessons in Scripture are addressed to us personally and practically, the presence among us of a formal judge and standing expositor of its words is imperative. It is antecedently unreasonable to suppose that a book so complex, so systematic, in parts so obscure, the outcome of so many minds, times, and places should be given us from God without the safeguard of some authority ; as if it could possibly, from the nature of the case, interpret itself. Its inspiration does but guarantee its truth, not its interpretation. How are private readers satisfactorily to distinguish what is didactic and what is historical, what is fact and what is vision, what is allegorical and what is literal, what is idiomatic and what is grammatical, what is enunciated formally and what occurs obiter, what is only of temporary and what is of lasting obligation? Such is our natural anticipation, and it is only too exactly justified in the events of the last three centuries, in the many countries where private judgment on the text of Scripture has pre- vailed. The gift of inspiration requires as its complement the gift of infallibility. ''Where then is this gift lodged, which is so necessary for the due use of the written word of God? Thus we are intro- duced to the second dogma in respect to Holy Scripture taught by the Catholic religion. The first is that Scripture is inspired, the second that the Church is the infallible interpreter of that inspiration." "Such then is the answer which I make to the main question which has led to my writing. I asked what obliga- tion of duty lay upon the Catholic scholar or man of science as regards his critical treatment of the text and the matter of Holy Scripture. And now I say that it is his duty, first, never to forget that what he is handling is the Word of God, which, by reason of the difficulty of always drawing the line between what is human and what is divine, cannot be put on 120 CARD. NEWMAN the level of other books, as it is now the fashion to do, but has the nature of a Sacrament, which is outward and inward and a channel of supernatural grace; and secondly, that in what he writes upon it or its separate books, he is bound to submit himself internally, and to profess to submit him- self, in all that relates to faith and morals, to the definite teachings of Holy Church. "This being laid down, let me go on to consider some of the critical distinctions and conclusions which are consistent with a faithful observance of these obligations. ''Are the books or are the writers inspired? I answer, Both. The Council of Trent says the writers Cab ipsis Apostolis, Spiritu Sancto dictante') ; the Vatican says the books Csi quis libros integros &c. divinitus inspiratos esse negaverit, anathema sit'). Of course the Vatican decision is de fide, but it cannot annul the Tridentine. Both decrees are dogmatic truths. The Tridentine teaches us that the Divine Inspirer, inasmuch as he acted on the writer, acted, not immediately on the books themselves, but through the men who wrote them. The books are inspired, because the writers were inspired to write them. They are not inspired books, unless they came from inspired men. ''There is one instance in Scripture of Divine Inspiration without a human mediimi; the Decalogue was written by the very finger of God. He wrote the law upon the stone tables Himself. It has been thought the Urim and Thum- mim was another instance of the immediate inspiration of a material substance; but anyhow such instances are excep- tional ; certainly, as regards Scripture, which alone concerns us here, there always have been two minds in the process of inspiration, a Divine Auctor, and a human Scriptor ; and various important consequences follow from this appoint- ment. " If there be at once a divine and a human mind co- operating in the formation of the sacred text, it is not sur- prising if there often be a double sense in that text, and, with obvious exceptions, never certain that there is not. "Thus Sara had her htmian and literal meaning in her words, ' Cast out the bondwoman and her son, ' &c. ; but we CARD. NEWMAN 121 know from St. Paul that those words were inspired by the Holy Ghost to convey a spiritual meaning. Abraham, too, on the Mount, when his son asked him whence was to come the victim for the sacrifice w^hich his father was about to offer, answered 'God will provide;' and he showed his own sense of his words afterwards, when he took the ram which was caught in the briers, and offered it as a holocaust. Yet those words were a solemn prophecy. ''And is it extravagant to say, that, even in the case of men who have no pretension to be prophets or servants of God, He may by their means give us great maxims and les- sons, which the speakers little thought they were delivering? as in the case of the Architriclinus in the marriage feast, who spoke of the bridegroom as having 'kept the good wine until now;' words which it was needless for St. John to record, imless they had a mystical meaning. ** Such instances raise the question whether the Scripture saints and prophets always understood the higher and divine sense of their words. As to Abraham, this will be answered in the affirmative ; but I do not see reason for thinking that Sara was equally favoured. Nor is her case solitary ; Caiphas as high priest, spoke a divine truth by virtue of his office, little thinking of it, when he said that ' one man must die for the people;' and St. Peter at Joppa at first did not see beyond a literal sense in his vision, though he knew that there was a higher sense, which in God's good time would be revealed to him. *'And hence there is no difficulty in supposing that the Prophet Osee, though inspired, only knew his own literal sense of the words which he transmitted to posterity, 'I have called my Son out of Egypt, ' the further prophetic meaning of them being declared by St. Matthew in his gospel. And such a divine sense would be both concurrent with and con- firmed by that antecedent belief which prevailed among the Jews in St. Matthew's time, that their sacred books were in great measure typical, with an evangelical bearing, though as yet they might not know what those books contained in prospect. 122 CARD. NEWMAN " Nor is it de -fide (for that alone with a view to Catholic Biblicists I am considering) that inspired men, at the time when they speak from inspiration, should always know that the Divine Spirit is visiting them. ''The Psalms are inspired; but, when David, in the out- pouring of his deep contrition, disburdened himself before his God in the words of the Miserere, could he, possibly, while uttering them, have been directly conscious that every word he uttered was not simply his, but another's? Did he not think that he was personally asking forgiveness and spiritual help ? " Doubt again seems incompatible with a consciousness of being inspired. But Father Patrizi, while reconciling two Evangelists in a passage of their narratives, says, if I understand him rightly (ii. p. 405), that though we admit that there were some things about which inspired writers doubted, this does not imply that inspiration allowed them to state what is doubtful as certain, but only it did not hinder them from stating things with a doubt in their minds about them ; but how can the All -knowing Spirit doubt ? or how can an inspired man doubt, if he is conscious of his inspiration ? " And again, how can a man whose hand is guided by the Holy Spirit, and who knows it, make apologies for his style of writing, as if deficient in literary exactness and finish? If then the writer of Ecclesiasticus, at the very time that he wrote his Prologue, was not only inspired but conscious of his inspiration, how could he have entreated his readers to ' come with benevolence, ' and to make excuse for his ' com- ing short in the composition of words'? Surely, if at the very time he wrote he had known it, he would, like other inspired men, have said, ' Thus saith the Lord, ' or what was equivalent to it. "The same remark applies to the writer of the second book of Machabees, who ends his narrative by saying, ' If I have done well, it is what I desired, but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me.' What a contrast to St. Paul, who, speaking of his inspiration (I Cor. VII. 40) and of his 'weakness and fear' {ibid. II. 4), does so in order to hoast that CARD. NEWMAN 123 his 'speech was, not in the persuasive words of human wis- dom, but in the showing of the Spirit and of power. ' The historian of the Machabees, would have surely adopted a like tone of 'glorying, ' had he had at the time a like con- sciousness of his divine gift. "Again, it follows from there being two agencies, divine grace and human intelligence, co-operating in the production of the Scriptures, that, whereas, if they were written, as in the Decalogue, by the immediate finger of God, every word of them must be His and His only; on the contrary, if they are man's writing, informed and quickened by the presence of the Holy Ghost, they admit, should it so happen, of being composed of outlying materials, which have passed through the minds and from the fingers of inspired penmen, and are known to be inspired on the ground that those who were the immediate editors, as they may be called, were inspired. " For an example of this we are supplied by the writer of the second book of Machabees, to which reference has already been made. 'All such things, ' says the writer, ' as have been comprised in five books by Jason of Cyrene, we have attempt- ed to abridge in one book.' Here we have the human aspect of an inspired work. Jason need not, the writer of the second book of Machabees must, have been inspired. "Again; St. Luke's gospel is inspired, as having gone through and come forth from an inspired mind ; but the extrinsic sources of his narrative were not necessarily all inspired any more than was Jason of Cyrene ; yet such sources there were, for, in contrast with the testimony of the actual eye-witnesses of the events which he records, he says of himself that he wrote after a careful inquiry, ' according as they delivered them to us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word ; ' as to himself, he had but 'diligently attained to all things from the beginning. ' Here it was not the original statements, but his edition of them, which needed to be inspired. " Hence we have no reason to be surprised, nor is it against the faith to hold, that a canonical book may be com- posed, not only from, but even of, pre-existing documents, it being always borne in mind, as a necessary condition, that 124 CARD. NEWMAN an inspired mind has exercised a supreme and an ultimate judgment on the work, determining what was to be selected and embodied in it, in order to its truth in all 'matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, ' and its unadulterated truth. "Thus Moses may have incorporated in his manuscript as much from foreign documents as is commonly maintained by the critical school ; yet the existing Pentateuch, with the miracles which it contains, may still (from that personal inspiration which belongs to a prophet) have flowed from his mind and hand on to his composition. He new-made and authenticated what till then was no matter of faith. "This being considered, it follows that a book may be, and may be accepted as, inspired, though not a word of it is an original document. Such is almost the case with the first book of Esdras. A learned writer in a publication of the day* says: *It consists of the contemporary historical jour- nals, kept from time to time by the prophets or other author- ized persons who were eye-witnesses for the most part of what they record, and whose several narratives were after- wards strung together, and either abridged or added to, as the case required, by a later hand, of course an inspired hand.' " And in like manner the Chaldee and Greek portions of the book of Daniel, even though not written by Daniel, may be, and we believe are, written by penmen inspired in matters of faith and morals ; and so much, and nothing beyond, does the Church 'oblige' us to believe. " I have said that the Chaldee, as well as the Hebrew portion of Daniel requires, in order to its inspiration, not that it should be Daniel's writing, but that its writer, whoever he was, should be inspired. This leads me to the question whether inspiration requires and implies that the book inspired should in its form and matter be homogeneous, and all its parts belong to each other. Certainly not. The book of Psalms is the obvious instance destructive of any such * Smith.' s Dictionary . CARD. NEWMAN 125 idea. What it really requires is an inspired Editor ;* that is, an inspired mind, authoritative in faith and morals, from whose fingers the sacred text passed. I believe it is allowed generally, that at the date of the captivity and under the per- secution of Antiochus, the books of Scripture and the sacred text suffered much loss and injury. Originally the Psalms seem to have consisted of five books; of which only a portion, perhaps the first and second, were David's. That arrange- ment is now broken up, and the Council of Trent was so im- pressed with the difficulty of their authorship, that, in its formal decree respecting the Canon, instead of calling the collection ' David's Psalms, ' as was usual, they called it the Tsalterium Davidicum, ' thereby meaning to imply, that although canonical and inspired and in spiritual fellowship and relationship with those of 'the choice Psalmist of Israel, ' the whole collection is not therefore necessarily the writing of David. " And as the name of David, though not really applicable to every Psalm, nevertheless protected and sanctioned them all, so the appendices which conclude the book of Daniel, Susanna and Bel, though not belonging to the main history, come under the shadow of the Divine Presence which primarily rests on what goes before. "And so again, whether or not the last verses of St. Mark's, and two portions of St. John's Gospel, belong to those Evangelists respectively, matters not as regards their inspira- tion ; for the Church has recognised them as portions of that sacred narrative which precedes or embraces them. ** Nor does it matter whether one or two Isaiahs wrote the book which bears that Prophet's name; the Church, without settling this point, pronounces it inspired in respect of faith and morals, both Isaiahs being inspired; and, if * This representation must not be confused with either of the two views of Canonicity which are pronounced insufficient by the Vatican Council — viz. i, that in order to be sacred and canonical, it is enough for a book to be a work of mere human industry, provided it be afterwards approved by the authorities of the Church; and 2, that it is enough if it contains revealed teaching without error. Neither of these views sup- poses the presence of inspiration, whether in the writer or the writing; what is contemplated above is an inspired writer in the exercise of his inspiration, and a work inspired from first to last under the action of that inspiration. 126 CARD. NEWMAN this be assured to us, all other questions are irrelevant and unnecessary." ** Nor do the Councils forbid our holding that there are interpolations or additions in the sacred text, say, the last chapter of the Pentateuch, provided they are held to come from an inspired penman, such as Esdras, and are thereby authoritative in faith and morals. *' From what has been last said it follows, that the titles of the Canonical books, and their ascription to different authors, either do not come under their inspiration, or need not be accepted literally. " For instance: the Epistle to the Hebrews is said in our Bibles to be the writing of St. Paul, and so virtually it is, and to deny that it is so in any sense might be temerarious ; but its authorship is not a matter of faith as its inspiration is, but an acceptance of received opinion, and because to no other writer can it be so well assigned. ''Again, the 89th Psalm has for its title *A Prayer of Moses, ' yet that has not hindered a succession of Catholic writers, from Athanasius to Bellarmine, from denying it to be his. "Again, the Book of Wisdom professes (e. g., chs. vii. and ix.) to be written by Solomon; yet our Bibles say, 'It is written in the person of Solomon, ' and 'it is uncertain who was the writer;' and St. Augustine, whose authority had so much influence in the settlement of the Canon, speaking of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, says : 'The two books by reason of a certain similarity of style are usually called Solomon's though the more learned have no doubt they do not belong to him.' (Martin. Pref. to Wisdom and EccL; Aug. 0pp. t. iii- p. 733.) ^'li these instances hold, they are precedents for saying that it is no sin against the faith (for of such I have all along been speaking), nor indeed, if done conscientiously and on reasonable grounds, any sin, to hold that Ecclesiastes is not the writing of Solomon, in spite of its opening with a pro- fession of being his ; and that first, because that profession is a heading, not a portion of the book; secondly, because, even though it be part of the book, a like profession is made CARD. NEWMAN 127 in the Book of Wisdom, without its being a proof that 'Wisdom' is Solomon's; and thirdly, because such a pro- fession may well be considered a prosopopoeia not so difficult to imderstand as that of the Angel Raphael, when he called himself 'the Son of the great Ananias. ' " On this subject Melchior Canus says : 'It does not much matter to the Catholic Faith, that a book was written by this or that writer, so long as the Spirit of God is believed to be the author of it ; which Gregory delivers and explains, in his Preface to Job, ' It matters not with what pen the King has written his letter, if it be true that He has written it.' {Loc. Th. p. 44.) ^'I say then of the Book of Ecclesiastes, its authorship is one of those questions which still lie in the hands of the Church. If the Church formally declared that it was written by Solomon, I consider that, in accordance with its heading (and, as implied in what follows, as in 'Wisdom, ') we should be bound, recollecting that she has the gift of judging 'de vero sensu et interpret atione Scrip turarum Sanctarum, ' to accept such a decree as a matter of faith ; and in like manner, in spite of its heading, we should be bound to accept a contrary decree, if made to the effect that the book was not Solomon's. At present as the Church (or Pope) has not pronounced on one side or on the other, I conceive that, till a decision comes from Rome, either opinion is open to the Catholic without any impeachment of his faith. "And here I am led on to inquire whether obiter dicta are conceivable in an inspired document. We know that they are held to exist and even required in treating of the dogmatic utterances of Popes, but are they compatible with inspiration? The common opinion is that they are not. Professor Lamy thus writes about them, in the form of an objection : 'Many minute matters occur in the sacred writers which have regard only to human feebleness and the natural necessities of life, and by no means require inspiration, since they can otherwise be perfectly well known, and seem scarcely worthy of the Holy Spirit, as for instance what is said of the dog of Tobias, St. Paul's penula, and the saluta- tions at the end of the Epistles. ' Neither he nor Fr. Patrizi 128 BISHOP HEALY allow of these exceptions ; but Fr. Patrizi, as Lamy quotes him, 'damnare non audet eos qui haec tenerent, ' viz., ex- ceptions, and he himself, by keeping silence, seems unable to condemn them either. " By obiter dicta in Scripture I also mean such statements as we find in the Book of Judith, that Nabuchodonosor was king of Nineve. Now it is in favour of there being such unauthoritative obiter dicta, that unlike those which occur in dogmatic utterances of Popes and Councils, they are, in Scripture, not doctrinal, but mere unimportant statements of fact ; whereas those of Popes and Councils may relate to faith and morals, and are said to be uttered obiter, because they are not contained within the scope of the formal defini- tion, and imply no intention of binding the consciences of the faithful. There does not then seem any serious difficulty in admitting their existence in Scripture. Let it be observed, its miracles are doctrinal facts, and in no sense of the phrase can be considered obiter dicta. '*It may be questioned, too, whether the absence of chronological sequence might not be represented as an in- fringement of plenary inspiration, more serious than the obiter dicta of which I have been speaking. Yet St. Matthew is admitted by approved commentators to be unsolicitous as to order of time. So says Fr. Patrizi {De Evang. lib.ii. p. i), viz., 'Matthasum de observando temporis ordine minime soUicitum esse. ' He gives instances, and then repeats, 'Matthew did not observe order of time. ' If such absence of order is compatible with inspiration in St. Matthew, as it is, it might be consistent with inspiration in parts of the Old Testament, supposing they are open to re -arrangement in chronology. Does not this teach us to fall back upon the decision of the Councils that 'faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine' are the scope, the true scope, of inspiration? And is not the Holy See the judge given us for determining what is for edification and what is not?" In the Irish Ecclesiastical Record of March, 1884, Rev. John Healy (afterward Bishop Healy) published an article in w^hich he dissented from Card. Newman. As Healy 's BISHOP HEALY 129 article seems to us to express a clear statement of the Catholic doctrine we reproduce it here nearly in full: "With regard to the Cardinal's views on the interpretation of Scripture, we have nothing to say ; he merely expresses the common teaching of theologians on this point. We shall, therefore, confine ourselves to the first question which he discusses — the authority or inspiration of Sacred Scripture, ''In answer to his own question on this point — What is de fide with regard to the inspiration of Scripture? his reply is : — 'As to the authority of Scripture, we hold it to be, in all matters of faith and morals, divinely inspired throughout/ In No. 1 1 he tells us that the Coimcils of Trent and the Vati- can 'specify "faith and moral conduct" as the 'drift' of that teaching (in Scripture) which has the guarantee of inspira- tion.' In No. 12 he says that the Vatican Council pro- noimces that supernatural Revelation consists 'in rebus divinis,' and is contained — the italics are not ours — 'in libris scriptis et sine scriptis traditionibus.' And finally, in No. 13, he asserts that while the Cotmcils, as has been shown, lay down so emphatically the inspiration of Scripture in respect to 'faith and morals,' it is remarkable that they do not say a word directly as to its inspiration in 'matters of fact ;' and hence he raises the question — but does not answer it — whether there may not be in Scripture, as there are in the dogmatic utterances of Popes and Councils, obiter dicta, 'unimportant "statements of fact," not inspired, and there- fore unauthoritative' (No. 26), and, we may add, not even necessarily true. "The merest tyro in the schools of Catholic theology will at once perceive the startling character of these statements, and the pregnant consequences which they involve. Hence we propose to examine them very briefly, in order to ascertain if the de fide utterances of the Church on this mat- ter of the inspiration of the sacred volume are exactly of the character described by Card. Newman; and we shall for the most part confine ourselves to an analysis of these dogmatic utterances themselves. "Of course, when the Cardinal says it is de fide that Scripture, in all matters of faith and morals, is divinely in- (9) H.S. 130 BISHOP HEALY Spired throughout, he says what is true; but he certainly seems to imply that it is not de fide that Scripture is inspired in those things (if there be any such) which are not 'matters of faith and morals.' Now, here precisely we join issue, and we say that, in our opinion, the Catholic dogma, as defined both in the Council of Trent and the Vatican, admits of no such restricting clause ; that it is adequately and accurately expressed only by eliminating that clause ; or, in other words, the Catholic dogma is, to borrow some of the Cardinal's own words, that Sacred Scripture is divinely inspired throughout. "The Coimcil of Trent first enumerates the books that constitute the canon of Scripture, and then, in the strictest language, formulates its decree in the following words : — 'Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ecclesia Catholica legi consueverunt, et in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, et traditiones praedictas sciens et prudens con- tempserit, anathema sit.'* There is here no restriction of inspiration or canonicity to matters of faith and morals; the entire books, with all their parts, are declared to be sacred and canonical, that is, inspired Scripture, recognised as such by the Church ; for, as we shall see, that is the meaning of sacred and canonical, as applied by the Council of Trent and of the Vatican to the books of Scripture. If we take the expression 'entire books, with all their parts,' to be equiva- lent to the Cardinal's word throughout, we have a right to conclude that the Catholic dogma, as enunciated in that canon, proclaims that these canonical books are inspired throughout, and therefore not merely in questions of faith and morals. "Lest there might be any doubt of the meaning of the expression 'pro sacris et canonicis,' we beg to append the analogous canon in the Vatican Council, which, in our opinion, leaves no doubt about the matter. Here it is: — 'Si quis sacrae Scripturae libros integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout illos Sancta Tridentina Synodus recensuit, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitus inspiratos esse * Quarta Sessio, Deer, de Canonicis Scripturis. BISHOP HEALY 131 negaverit, anathema sit.' (Can. 4, De Revelatione.) It is impossible to enunciate in clearer language the great Catholic truth, that the entire books of Sacred Scripture, with all their parts, are divinely inspired ; or in other words, that the books of Sacred Scripture are inspired throughout. If any one should urge that perhaps 'eos,' in the last clause of this canon is not necessarily the exact equivalent of the subject of the preceding clause, our answer is, that both grammatically and logically *eos' and 'illos' stand for the subject of the preceding clause, and are therefore exactly co-extensive with it. At any rate, the Council pronounces the entire books — eos, scil, libros integros — to be inspired, without making any distinction between 'matters of fact' and 'matters of faith and morals,' and that is quite enough for our argu- ment. "Every one trained in theological discipline knows that it is not always easy to ascertain, from the wording in the body of a dogmatic chapter of a General Council, what is strictly and exactly de fide. But when a Council wishes to express Catholic dogma with the utmost accuracy and ex- actness, it formulates it as a canon, and pronounces anathema against the gainsayers. I have a right, therefore, to infer from this canon, as a Catholic dogma, that Sacred Scripture, without exception or restriction, is inspired throughout. ''Cardinal Newman says that the dogmatic phrase used by the Coimcils of Florence and Trent to denote the inspiration of Scripture, viz., that one and the same God was the author of both Testaments — Deus unus et idem utriusque Testa- menti Auctor — left some room for holding that the word 'Testament' might mean 'Dispensation, rather than the Books of the Testaments, although he admits that the Vati- can Council has settled the question by inserting the word •"books." "It appears to us that the Council of Florence left no doubt about the matter, for it has explained the meaning of the word 'Testament' in its decree, as may be seen in so common a book as Franzelin (De Inspir. S. Scrip. Thesis. IL, No. I.) Here are the words: — 132 BISHOP HEALY " Tirmissime credit, profitetur et praedicat (Sacrosancta Rom. Ecclesia) tinum verum Deum Patrem et Filitim et Spiritum Sanctum creatorem. . . . Unum atque eundem Deum Veteris et Novi Testament!, hoc est, Legis et Pro- phetarum atque Evangelii profitetur Auctorem, quoniam eodem Spiritu Sancto inspirante utriusque Testamenti sancti locuti sunt, quorum libros suscipit et veneratur, qui titulis sequent- ibus continent ur.' "Surely the expression 'Old and New Testament,' when explained to mean 'the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel,' can mean nothing else but the Sacred Books that commonly go under these names. "But if there could be any doubt about the matter it would be removed by the reason that is subjoined — God is the author of the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel, because it was under the inspiration of His Holy Spirit that the saints of both Testaments spoke, whose books, therefore, the Coun- cil receives and venerates. The word 'locuti' evidently re- fers to the written word, as in 2 Peter L, 21, and, in conjunc- tion with libros, clearly shows that by Testament the Coim- cil meant the books of the Old and New Testament — that is, as it explains, the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospels. "It is difficult to see how this explanation given by the Council itself can be reconciled with the statement that the Councils of Florence and Trent left the meaning of the word Testament in the phrase referred to somewhat doubtful. The Council of Florence certainly did not; and, Pallavicini tells us, the Council of Trent, in framing its decree, was careful to follow the very words of the Council of Flor- ence.* "It is defined both by the Councils of Trent and of Flor- ence, that God is the auctor utriusque Testamenti, and as we have just seen, that is the same as to say he is the author of all the books of the Old and New Testament ; and so it has been expressly defined by the Vatican Council, as the Card- inal himself admits. But, he says, the Latin word auctor still leaves some ambiguity, for it is not equivalent to the * Hist. Concil. Trid. Lib. VI. c. 11, n. 11- 14. BISHOP HEALY 133 English word author. That may be very true, when there is question of the words auctor and author in their generic sense; it is too delicate a point for us to discuss, and it is quite unnecessary to discuss it. For there is no question ilow of the generic meaning, which as Cardinal Franzelin clearly points out (Thesis III., No. i.) is determined by the context, that is, by the special efficiency of which there is question. Generically, both in English and Latin, 'author' means the person who gives origin or authority to anything, but in its specific sense the meaning will very much depend on the kind of origin or authority of which there is question. The same may be the author of a law, the author of a book, and the author of a crime, but in very different senses. Now it is de fide that God is the author oj the Books of the Old and New Testament, and will the Cardinal undertake to say, that when thus used in regard to books, auctor in classical Latin is not equivalent to 'author' when said in reference to books in English? We do not pretend to the Cardinal's knowledge of classical Latin, but we know something of ecclesiastical Latin, as used by the Coimcils of Trent and Florence, and we are quite sure that auctor lihri in ecclesiasti- cal Latin is pretty much the same as the 'author of a book' in English. 'Tt is de fide, therefore, that God is the author of all the Books of the Old and New Testament; and we have seen that it is de fide that they are inspired throughout, whole and entire, without any distinction between 'matters of fact' and 'matters of faith and morals.' Well, now, in No. ii, the Cardinal asks, in what respect are the Canonical Books inspired? 'It cannot be in every respect,' he says, 'except we are bound de fide to believe that 'terra in aetemum stat,' that heaven is above us, and that there are no antipodes.' If by 'respect' is meant every signification which a word of phrase might have, scientific or popular, literal or meta- phorical, he is evidently right ; but then it is hardly necessary to tell us so. Surely the phrases 'terra in aetemimi stat,' 'and heaven is above us,' 'the sim rises,' and the like, have a popular meaning which is perfectly true, and which might 134 BISHOP HEALY be revealed by God, and which if revealed by God, in- cidentally or otherwise, in that popular sense, we should be bound to believe it de fide. "But apparently this is not what Cardinal Newman means, for in the next sentence he says : 'And it seems unworthy of Divine greatness that the Almighty should, in His revela- tion of Himself to us, undertake mere secular duties, and assume the office of a narrator as such, of a historian, or geographer, except so far as the secular matters bear di- rectly on the revealed truth.' Does any one assert that God in His Revelation undertakes the office of narrator, as such, or historian, or geographer? We thought it was a well- known distinction made by Catholic theologians of every school between the things revealed propter se, or, as the Cardinal caUs them, matters of faith and morals, and things revealed per accidens, including every other statement made in Sacred Scripture, whether in narration, history, geography, or anything else. God reveals none of these things propter se. He does not undertake the work of annalist, historian, geographer, as such. They are revealed on accoimt of their connection, necessary, useful, or accidental as the case may be, with the main purposes of Divine Revelation. But as Benedict XII. in his Dogmatic Catalogue of the Errors of the Armenians very clearly signifies, they must be all believed even those which have been revealed per accidens, because they are all equally the word of God, and all serve a useful purpose in the Divine economy of our salvation.* 'For whatsoever things were written, were written for our learning ; that through patience and the comfort of the Scriptures we might have hope.' Rom. XV. 4. "And what is man that he should undertake to pronounce what is worthy, or what is unworthy of Divine Majesty? If we were to attempt to do so, especially in God's revelation, where should we stop? Does not the Socinian think it un- worthy of God to reveal mysteries? The Rationalist, for a somewhat similar reason, denies miracles. The ordinary * See Franzelin note, Thesis iii. p. 352. The 114th error in the Catalogue seems to consist in the fact that the Armenians assumed a historical statement in Genesis to be false. BISHOP HEALY 135 protestant contends that the CathoHc teaching about the Blessed Eucharist is utterly unworthy of God, and so he gives up the literal, and adopts a metaphorical sense. It is the old story — Durus est hie sermo, et quis potest eum audire? Our reply is — Quis cognovit sensum domini, qui instruat eum? Human wisdom left to itself would say that of all unworthy things the most unworthy of God was to re- deem the word by the 'folly' of the cross ; and it did say it by the mouth both of Jew and Gentile. "We have no objection to the statement that faith and moral conduct is the 'drift' of the teaching that has the guarantee of inspiration, or that the Council of Trent insists on faith and morality as the 'scope' of inspired teaching, provided always it is not thereby implied that Scripture is not also inspired throughout, even in those things which to us seem to have least connection with faith and morals. It is in this sense and in no other sense the Council of Trent speaks. In the preamble of the chapter it states, as Cardinal Newman says, that faith and morality is the 'scope' of in- spired teaching, and that the Gospel is the 'fount' of all sav- ing truth and all instruction in morals ; and this is perfectly true, but the main proposition to which everything else is incidental is contained in the following words, which neces- sarily imply the inspiration of every single statement made by sacred writers. 'Sacrosancta. . . . Sy nodus . . . orthodoxorum patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tam Veteris quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, necnon traditiones ipsas, tum ad fidem, tum ad mores pertinentes, tanquam vel oretenus a Christo, vel a Spiritu Sancto dictatas et continua successione in ecclesia Catholica conservatas pari pietatis affectu et reverentia suscipit et veneratur.' From the beginning of the chapter to the word veneratur is one single sentence ; the last part, as written by us, contains the main assertion, the purport of which is perfectly clear : that as God is the author of all the books of the Old and New Testament, and, as the divine traditions regarding faith and morals were either spoken by Christ himself or dictated by His Holy Spirit, therefore the Council accepts and venerates both with equal affection of 136 BISHOP HEALY piety and reverence — and why? because they are both equally the Word of God. It must be carefully observed that the words 'turn ad fidem, turn ad mores pertinentes' — refer only to the traditions, and have nothing at all to do with the preceding words. And they were inserted, as Pal- la vicini tells us, in order to distinguish the divine traditions, of which God is the author, and which concern faith and morals, from purely apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions, which are of their own nature disciplinary and mutable. So far, therefore, is the Council of Trent from lending any count- enance to the idea that all Scripture is not inspired, that it distinctly affirms the divine authorship of all the books of Sacred Scripture, and we have seen, pronounces anathema against those who would dare to assert that they are not 'sacred and canonical,' and inspired Scripture throughout. "There is one point to be carefully kept in mind in any discussion on this important question, if we wish to avoid grave errors — the difference between inspiration and revela- tion. Inspiration, as we shall see further on, in its plenary sense, implies three things, the Divine afflatus moving , en- lightening, and guiding the writer — inspiratio active sumpta : the state of the himian agent under this Divine influence — inspiratio passive stmipta; and, lastly, the product of the combined action of God and man, that is , the book written by the Holy Spirit through man's agency — which is inspir- atio terminative simipta. Inspiration therefore, in reference to Sacred Scripture, essentially regards the writing — the writing in fieri, and the writing in facto esse. Not so in the case of revelation. It need have no connection with in- spired writing at all. In its active sense it is simply the Di- vine manifestation of hidden things, and sometimes of things not previously hidden ; in its objective sense it merely means the things so made known by God. Inspiration, therefore, necessarily implies revelation in the wide sense given above ; but revelation, as in the case of Divine traditions not con- tained in Scripture, may have nothing at all to do with in- spiration. Let our readers bear this in mind, for the Card- inal goes on to say that 'the Vatican Council pronounces that supernatural revelation consists in rebus Divinis, and is con- BISHOP HEALY 137 tained in libris scriptis, et sine scriptis traditionibus,' italicis- ing as above, and implying thereby, it seems to us, that all Sacred Scripture is not necessarily Divine truth or a Divine revelation, and that revelation and inspiration are identical. ''What the Council says on the first point is contained in the following sentence, and certainly will not admit the meaning given above by implication : — *Huic Divinae revela- tioni tribuendum quidem est, ut ea, quae in rebus Divinis humanae rationi per se impervia non sunt, in presenti quoque generis humani conditione ab omnibus expedite, firma cer- titudine, et nullo admixto errore cognosci possint." I do not think the Council declares in that sentence that revelation consists 'in things Divine,' but even if it does, then all w^e can say is, that every statement in Scripture is Divine, or, w^hat comes to the same, is the Word of God — as St. Paul himself asserts, at least by implication, regarding the Scriptures certainly of the Old Testament, if not also of some of the New, iraa-a ^pa<^r] Oeoirveva-TO^; , If every scripture is Oeoirveva- T09 it may well be called Divine. "As regards the second point, the Council does say that the supernatural revelation is contained in the written books and unwritten Divine traditions ; but concerning these same books it says in the very next sentence, that the church does not regard them as sacred and canonical, merely because they contain this revelation without error, but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God for their author, and as such have been handed down to the church. 'Eos vero (libros) ecclesia pro sacris et canonicis habet, non ideo quod sola humana industria con- cinnati, sua deinde auctoritate sint approbati, nee ideo dumtaxat, quod revelationem sine errore contineant; sed propterea quod Spiritu Sancto inspirante conscripti, Deimi habent auctorem, atque ut tales ipsi ecclesiae traditi sunt.' To say, therefore, that the Divine books contain the revela- tion of God, and even without any error, is declared by the Council itself to be an inadequate description of their sacred and canonical character.* The reason is manifest. A book * See Franz, page 375 Thesis IV. 138 BISHOP HEALY might contain the whole revelation of God, and contain it without error, and yet not be at all an inspired book, because inspiration essentially regards the writing or authorship of the book. If it is an inspired book, God is its author ; it must have been written in all its parts under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God, so much so, that God becomes responsible for every single statement it contains, and therefore quite as much responsible for its statements 'in matters of fact,' as for its statements in reference to 'faith and morals.' All these truths will not have the same intrinsic importance in relation to each other, or to the economy of man's redemption ; but they are all divine as re- gards their origin and their authority. "And now this leads us to give, in conclusion, a very brief explanation of the nature of inspiration as taught in all Catholic schools, and it is as contained in the writings of the Fathers, and of all our eminent theologians, since the, Council of Trent. Catholic teaching on this point has be- come still more definite and dogmatic since the definitions of the Coimcil of the Vatican already referred to. ''The points of Catholic dogma clearly defined are, (a) that God is the author of all the canonical books of the Old and New^ Testament, (b) that these books have been written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God, (c) and hence the entire books are inspired. The second of these points more clearly and accurately defines the meaning of the first ; and the third expresses the abiding consequence of the other two, that is, the inspiration of the sacred books terminatwe, as the theologians call it. "God, then, is defined to be the author of all the Sacred Scriptures, because they were written under the inspiration of His Holy Spirit. Now, what is meant by being the author of a book in this sense? It must mean here, as it means everywhere else, either that He Himself wrote it, as He wrote the Tables of the Law, with his ow^n finger, which, of course, is out of the question ; or that he dictated the sacred books word for word to the inspired penmen, an opinion which has been held by few, but is now justly and generally rejected ; or finally, as a minimum, it must mean according to the use BISHOP HEALY 139 of language, that He directed or procured the writing of all these sacred books ; that He suggested to the sacred writers all the mutter to be written — res et sententias — even that known before, and finally gave them such constant, ever watchful assistance in the composition of all these books as to insure that everything which He wished should be said, and that nothing should be said except what He wished, and hence that there should be no trace of falsehood or error, for which He, the principal and infallible i\uthor of the book, would, in that absurd hypothesis, be held responsible. The very nature of Divine authorship requires this at least ; if the instrumental author begin to write motu proprio, it is in no special sense God's w^ork; if he write anything which he is not directed to write, it is not God's work so far ; and if there could be errors or mistakes in any book written by Divine authority, God could never claim that book whole and entire, with all its parts, as purety and simply His own — as written in its entirety under the inspiration of His Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Divine authorship of the Sacred Books, in the sense defined by the Churchy imperatively requires that as a minimum, the impulse to write should come from God, that He should suggest at least the matter, and that He should preserve the sacred writers from all error, which, if it were possible, would not be the error of man, but of God. It is as absurd to say that a man could commit sin under the impulse of the Holy Ghost, as to say that the sacred writer could write error under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Therefore, as it is de fide that the Sacred Books, whole and entire, were written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, it follows, at least as a conclusion theologically certain, that everything written by the sacred writers is, what is called in Scripture, and by the Church, and by the Fathers, and by the people, verily and indeed the Word of God, unmixed with any false, or erroneous, or merely human element. "This doctrine, regarding the nature of inspiration, does not imply that God did not, in most cases, leave the choice of the words to the sacred writer. It does not even imply that the words chosen were the most elegant, or most appropriate, for expressing the Divine ideas in the writer's mind. It does 140 CANON DI BARTOLO not imply the adoption of the graces of style, nor the niceties of grammar, nor the exactness in scientific or rhetorical arrangement. But it does imply that the words must be suitable to express the writer's Divine thoughts, that his language must be intelligible, and that the arrangement must not be such as will necessarily lead the readers astray. "Again, inspiration does not exclude antecedent knowl- edge of much of the matter to be written, nor labor in its acquisition, provided always it is written by the human author of the sacred Book, not motu proprio, but in virtue of the Divine impulse, consciously or unconsciously followed, and written also under the Divine guidance, lest any error might creep in, of which, as it could not originate from God, He could not accept the authorship or responsibility. ''Neither does our doctrine on inspiration imply that it is confined to the autograph of the sacred writer. Inspira- tion does not, terminative sumpta, consist in the material book as such — in the handwriting, the ink, and the vellum ; but it consists in the book as a series of signs, with a definite objective significance for the mind of man: and hence the inspired books remain, although the autographs have all perished." Others who opposed the views of Newman were Brucker (La Controverse et le Contemporain) , and Corluy in the same periodical. Later Brucker published his views in a work entitled "Questions Actuelles d'Ecriture Sainte." In Ger- many Franz Schmid vigorously opposed Newman's theory. In 1889 Salvatore di Bartolo published his "I Criteri Teologici." This was placed on the Index of prohibited books by the decree of May 14, 189 1. A corrected edition which appeared at Rome in 1904 is permitted to be read. The most widely circulated form of this work is a French edition with certain additions by'the translator. This was made from the proscribed edition. Di Bartolo aimed to bring about a union between the Catholic Church and all those who dissent from it by keeping in abeyance everything non essential on which there is difference of view, and insisting only on the things that are clearly revealed, and on the things of common belief of all Christians. Applying this theory to CANON DI BARTOLO 141 inspiration he says: ''Inspiration is a supernatural assist- ance acting on the intelligence and will of the sacred writer, and causing him to write the true doctrine in things of faith and morals, and true facts which are essentially connected with things of faith and morals; and to write other things with a sincere purpose and divine commission to save man- kind." Explaining his meaning he declares inspiration to be such a co-operation of the Holy Ghost that the whole Scripture should be attributed to the Holy Ghost as its author." Conceding that the Church has defined the divine author- ship, di Bartolo affirms "that the Church has never deter- mined the constituent elements of inspiration, and that theologians are not agreed as to its nature." Hence this author gives a very wide stretch to the free ground in this great question. The substance of his own views may be summed up as follows: Inspiration has three degrees. In the things of faith and morals and facts essentially therewith connected the highest degree of inspiration takes place, even at times extending to the very words. Whenever there is a doubt of the degree of inspiration the presumption is in favor of the biblical expression until the clearest arguments force us to admit the evidence of the human element. In- spiration is not present in all sentences, neither always in the forms of expression. The least degree of inspiration is present in the acces- sories to the things narrated in Scripture, knd here inspira- tion does not guarantee infallibility. Here therefore not all doubt, equivocation, and error are excluded. These things are not to be said to the common people who are unable to make the necessary distinctions; but di Bartolo believes it not irreverent to speak of an error in the material part of Scripture. Such opinion, he says, offends not God, for the error is not attributed to God, but to his secretary. If the Son of God in his incarnation had natural imperfections ; if God permitted errors gradually to creep into the text of the Scriptures as they were preserved by men, why could not God permit his secretary the inspired writer to commit cer- tain defects in the narration of accessory things, when they 142 OTHER LIBERAL VIEWS could not be imputed to God, but to the writer whom God employed? It conflicts not with inspiration when the writer uses old documents, therefore, why should it be ex- cluded by inspiration that a writer in secondary things should commit equivocations ? that he should follow popular beliefs ? that he should fall into error? God, permitting that human weakness should be manifested, saved intact the entire divine message. The least degree of inspiration is present in things non-religious in character, and here the human ele- ment is not guaranteed infallibility. There is a certain in- spiration here ; for the writer had a special commission to write for the salvation of men, and his end in writing was good. Inspiration extends itself to all the sacred writers have writ- ten ; but in these accessory and non-religious things it is the least degree of inspiration, w^hich leaves more to the human factor. Therefore the writer being by nature limited and fallible, he may in these secondary things err and doubt. To the non-religious order of Scripture pertain geography, chronology, natural history, physics, defective philosophy perhaps, and defects in literary style. Though di Bartolo's views are in some things extreme, and rightly condemned, there is every evidence that he wrote in good faith, and with the sole purpose of seeking the truth. At Turin in 1892, Canon Berta published his *'Dei cinque libri mosaici," wherein he defended the views similar to those of Lenormant. The Bamabite Semeria (Revue Biblique 1893, P- 434) went further, and declared that it would be a most useful thing for the Church if some one of sufficient ability would separate the inspired portions from the uninspired portions of Holy Writ. The same views were advocated by the Bamabite Paolo Savi in the '* Science Catholique," 1892 — 93. Canon Jules Didiot, professor at Lille in **La logique surnaturelle sub- jective," 1891, rejected the absolute infallibility of the Scrip- tures, but after the appearance of the Bull 'Trovidentis- simus Deus" he retracted his opinions in favor of the more conserv^ative opinion in his, 'Traite de la Sainte Ecriture d'apres S.S. Leon, XIIL, (Paris, 1894). MSGR. d'hulst 148 In the year 1893 a little before the appearance of the Bull of Leo XIII. Msgr. D'Hulst, Rector of the free theological faculty of Paris, pubhshed in the *' Correspond - ant" an article entitled ''La Question biblique. " In this article d'Hulst takes up the defense of Lenormant on the ground that the placing of a work on the Index is not of necessity a condemnation of its doctrine. After enumerat- ing some of the reasons which may move the Congregation to prohibit a book, he declares that the ideas of Lenormant may have been prohibited for the reason that the world was not ready for them. He declares that "The hypothesis by which inspiration is extended to the things narrated of the origin of the human race, in such wise that the inspira- tion confers not infallibility on these narrations, but only joins doctrinal and moral truth to them, is adopted by a certain number of learned and orthodox men Such men admit that there may be in the Bible propositions not strictly true. God is not responsible for these, although he is the Inspirer of the whole work. The reason is that to reveal is one thing ; to inspire, another. Revelation is divine teaching which must be true. Inspiration is an impulse which determines the sacred writer to write, directs him, moves him, watches over him. In the hypothesis which I am explaining this moving (motio) renders him immune from error in faith and morals ; they believe that this preservation does not go further ; they believe that it has the same limits as has the infallibility of the Church.' The promise of inerrancy was made to the Church for the sole end that it might with certitude promulgate the rule of faith and morals. It is true that the Scriptures are not alone infallible, but also inspired. Yet although inspiration extends to everything, perhaps it confers not infallibility on all the statements of the inspired writer; perhaps this privilege is restricted to the things of faith and morals. Perhaps the other statements which are not by inspiration rendered infallible, are only employed as the vehicle of the teaching concerning faith and morals. It may be that God, the Inspirer, who could have corrected the material errors of the sacred writer judged it not useful to do this. These are the opinions of the liberal school (ecole large). 144 MSGR. d'hulst ''The adherents of this school assert: First, that the best way to determine the effect of inspiration is to inquire into its motive. . . . But the end which God proposed in dictating the Holy Books is to teach man what he should believe, hope, and do, that he may bring him to his super- natural end. Therefore all the statements of Scripture which conduce to this end must be divine affirmations, but as to other things there seems to be doubt. ''Secondly, the Council of Trent declared the Vulgate authentic, but only in things of faith and morals. Therefore if the divine authority of the Vulgate is not defined except as regards the things of faith, the authority of the Holy Scripture is practically restricted within the same limits. Why should it not be theoretically ? *' Moreover, the Vatican Council renewing the decree of the Council of Trent declares the true sense of Scripture to be that which holy Church holds. . . . But it adds that the interpretation of which it speaks, and to which the rules apply, is the interpretation in things of faith and morals. " Speaking of Cardinal Newman d'Hulst says: ''Cardinal Newman restricts the liberty afforded by this theory to the obiter dicta. This timidity may readily be understood if we reflect that the eminent author located the question in a very dangerous point ; for he treats of the object or extent of inspiration. Now if inspiration is of limited extent, there are uninspired portions of Holy Scripture. This is a new and dangerous formula, which it is difficult to bring into accord with the decrees of councils and the teaching of tradition. Hence it is evident why the prudent theologian restricted the application to fragments merely accessory. This difficulty is greatly lessened, and almost vanishes if we hold the total inspiration of Scripture, but in such a sense that in certain things not pertaining to faith the infallibility be restricted, which, however is the proper effect of inspiration. To ex- empt from infallible inspiration obiter dicta would be of little use to solve the great exegetical difficulties. . . . Wherefore other writers diligently considering not the ex- tent of inspiration, but the effect of inspiration, apply the principle in a wide range not to merely accessory things, but MSGR. d'hulst 145 to considerable portions of Scripture ; in the first place to the portions which treat of, or seem to treat of scientific ques- tions, then to other texts of greater moment and extent which have, or seem to have, a historical character." Msgr. d'Hulst afiirms the sound doctrine concerning the relation of the Scriptures to the natural sciences : '* The Scriptures do not convey scientific instruction, and therefore there can be no conflict. The Scriptures speak of these matters in accordance with the opinions then in vogue; such matters are not written for their own sake, but for a setting of religious ideas." And now Msgr. d'Hulst comes to the most difficult question of all ; the question which Pere Lagrange has worked into his famous Methode Historique ; the question which divides the greatest minds in the Catholic Church, namely: May we apply to the portions of Scripture which are historical the same theory which without detriment to the faith we apply to the scientific statements of the Bible ? Msgr. d'Hulst declares this to be the axis about which all future Biblical questions will revolve. Indeed were it not for it there would not be a biblical question. The doctrinal and moral parts of the Bible give us no difficulty. All the world accepts the principles enunciated above concerning the matters of natural science in the Bible ; but the history in the Bible is the source of the greatest difficulties. With admirable acumen, Msgr. d'Hulst declares that if the question were to be submitted whether the historical parts of the Bible should be treated in the same manner as the scientific parts a negative answer must be given. "For although we may deny that cosmology is taught in the Bible no man may in any way imagine that history is not taught. . . . At least a part of history is divinely taught, for revelation itself is a dogmatic fact, and the whole series of human events is bound up with revelation. The creation, the primitive state of man, the fall, the promise of a Saviour, the various divine covenants and the signs attesting them, the events which prepared the way for the Messiah, the life itself of the Saviour, his preaching, his death, his resurrec- tion, the foundation of the Church, these are historical facts. (10) H.S. 146 LAGRANGE If these are false all religion is false. If they are not inspired nothing is inspired. If the inspired writers who deliver them are not by inspiration preserved immune from error, inspiration is of no avail. Therefore the question is not whether there is history in the Bible, but whether all the historical facts which are found in this divine collection are revealed, or at least attested by inspiration." It seems to us that the principles here enunciated prove the historical method of Lagrange to be impossible. And yet Lagrange himself admits these principles. Thus we read in the opening paragraphs of Lecture VI. in the "Methode Historique:" ''When, in the previous Lecture on the authority of the Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, I applied to history the same principles as to science, the thought must have occurred to you, that for every point of similarity there might be be- tween science and history, viewed as matter for biblical criticism, there v/ere many more points of difference. Every kind of knowledge has its own rules and methods. In the first place, granted that we may hold that there is no science in the Bible, it would be more than paradoxical to maintain that the Bible contained no history, seeing that the Bible is the history of salvation. Science, moreover, based as it is upon experiment and calculation, is naturally outside the sphere of the greater number of men as soon as it goes beyond the mere observation of natural phenomena, while history, in itself, is nothing but the record of the doings of men as established by testimony. If in late years it has seemed to move in a somewhat mysterious region, it is simply because of the attention given to the study of sources which calls for specialized knowledge and a critically trained mind ; but, in itself, history is but the record of what eye-witnesses have seen. So that while scientific theories like our own could not possibly have found a place in the Bible without an abso- lutely unnecessary revelation, and without doing violence to men's minds, on the other hand, no supernatural help was needed to write sound history. "Hence there is no science in the Bible, although through- out, an elementary knowledge of arithmetic is supposed, for LAGRANGE 147 that is well within the range of man; there are no meta- physics in the Bible, although the normal use of the intellect is always assumed; there is much history in the Bible, be- cause the writing of history is familiar to all people who have reached the same stage as the Israelites. Now, if God did not reveal to His chosen people any scientific or metaphysical proposition, at that time beyond the range of their mind, because it was not profitable for their salvation, we have good ground for holding that neither did He reveal to them any history that was beyond the range of what could be seen or known except in so far as it was necessary for salvation. Hence, and this is a further difference, we have no hesitation in placing history, that is to say, the record of men's deeds^ in a different category from the sciences and from meta- physics, because a man's salvation is inseparably connected with his actions. Thus it is quite possible that God may have made a revelation of history, and hence it is, that I wish to exclude from the conclusions which follow, all that concerns the Fall of man." It is evident to all that there is an illogical sentence in this statement. After declaring that history is not in the category of science, Lagrange by inference places it in the same category by declaring : "Now if God did not reveal to his chosen people any scientific or metaphysical proposition, at that time beyond the range of their mind, because it was not profitable for their salvation, we have good ground for holding that neither did he reveal to them any history that was beyond the range of what could be seen or known, ex- cept in so far as it was necessary for salvation." The exact opposite should be the logical influence : from the fact that history enters more intimately into the very essence of revelation, God might well be supposed to safe- guard it more especially, lest an error in one statement might cast doubt on others more essential. Msgr. d'Hulst rightly affirms that it is indifferent whether we consider certain books such as Ruth, Job and others to be historical, or doctrinal and moral treatises presented under the form of history. The thing is uncertain and in no wise pertains to faith. "A more difficult question is presented by 148 MSGR. d'hulst the first eleven chapters of Genesis. Certainly they should be held as historical were it not that grave reasons persuade us that we have to deal here with a mythological tradition of the most ancient oriental people, as F. Lenormant shows. His theories indeed seem new and bold in the Church. That they are new is not strange, since the documents of which he treats were only lately found; but they are not more bold than, for instance, the theory of St. Augustine concerning the six days of creation. But they say: 'Errors are in- troduced into the Scripture. Error excludes inspiration.' We answer: This is rashly said. Error excludes inspira- tion as far as it is imputed to God, not in as far as it is com- mitted by the sacred writer. God could make himself sponsor of all that goes into the Scriptures; but also God could have limited inspiring action to these effects : to move the writer to write ; to reveal to him certain truths ; to direct him, and preserve him from all error in things of faith and morals; and yet, when the writer employs doctmients, not enter to correct their imperfections and less accurate state- ments, except where they were contrary to the doctrinal and moral end of inspiration. . . . There has always been admitted the human element subordinate to the divine ele- ment in the composition of the sacred books. All the com- mentators and all the Fathers of the Church have pointed out the differences of style, of genius, and of intellectual equipment of the different sacred writers. If the Holy Ghost could permit such defects, why not defects, in his- torical narratives which pertain not to faith ? If the infalli- bility which is founded on inspiration be restricted to re- ligious truths, there will be removed the gravest difficulties which are moved against the Scriptures." With true Catholic spirit Msgr. d'Hulst proclaimed that he submitted his opinions to the infallible authority of the Church, whose voice he was ready to obey. After the con- demnation of Lenormant 's book many other treatises had been published which advocated analogous views. Rome had kept silent; and Msgr. d'Hulst interpreted this silence as a liberty to speak his views, always in subjection to the Church. LEO XIII. 149 The silence of which this writer spoke was soon broken. In the same year Pope Leo XIII. pubHshed his Bull, **Pro- videntissimus Deus, " in which the principles of Msgr. d'Hulst are tacitly condemned. True to his profession Msgr. d'Hulst and his associate faculty signified their obedience to the Soverign Pontiff. They begin their letter thus ; " The Rector and professors of the canonical theological Faculty of the University of Paris, after carefully reading and meditating on the encyclical letter * Pro v. Deus, ' declare themselves prepared with a willing mind to accept and obey all that Your Holiness therein teaches, commands, and advises, especially con- cerning the effect of inspiration which extends itself to all the parts of all the canonical books so that it excludes all error." Against Msgr. d'Hulst's article Jaugey wrote in **La Science Catholique, " 1892-93, and Brucker in the *' Etudes, " 1893. Jacquier, recognizing that the historical difficulties had brought about the new concept of inspiration, suggested that the adherents of the ''new exegesis" should collect all the scientific, chronological, and historical difficulties. The conservative theologians should then attempt their solution ; and perhaps thus concessions might be made on both sides, and the points of difference lessened. This is the wisest advice, but it is a great undertaking, and still awaits men capable of accomplishing it. In a letter to the Archbishops, Bishops and Clergy of France under date of Sept. 8, 1899, Pope Leo XIII. reitera- ted with great earnestness his condemnation of the liberal theories of inspiration: ''Venerable Brethren, regarding the study of the Holy Scriptures we again call your attention to the instructions which we have given in our encyclical " Providentissimus Deus" which we desire that professors should make known to their pupils, and add the necessary explanations. Let them warn (their pupils) against the alarming tendencies which seek to thrust themselves into the interpretation of the Bible, and which if they prevail will soon ruin inspiration and the supernatural order. Under the specious pretext of removing from the adver- 150 LAGRANGE saries of revelation arguments which seems irrefutable against the authenticity and veracity of the Holy Books certain Catholic writers have thought well to accept their arguments on their side. Pursuant to these strange and dangerous tactics they have labored with their own hands to make breaches in the walls of the city which they have a mission to defend. In our aforesaid encyclical and in another document (Letter to The General of the Friars Minor) we have justly dealt with the dangerous temerities. While encouraging our exegetes to keep abreast of progress and criticism, we have firmly maintained the principles sanctioned by the traditional authority of Fathers and Councils and renewed in our days by the Council of the Vatican." It is clear to all that the Supreme Pontiff in these utter- ances has in mind the theories taught by Lenormant, Loisy, and Lagrange, and thought possible by Msgr. d'Hulst. In the Revue Biblique of 1896-97 Pere Lagrange publish- ed a series of articles entitled ''The Inspiration of the Holy Books." His theory is spread out over a great mass of words, and often obscurely enunciated, but we may gather from it the following principles. "God teaches all that is taught in the Bible ; but he teaches nothing except what is taught by the inspired writer, and the inspired writer teaches nothing except what he intends (by his writing) to teach." Lagrange calls this a very simple theory, declaring that thus inspiration does not change the sense of terms, nor the character of propositions, nor the species of literature to which the books belong. It is only by studying these that we may come at the idea and intention of the author. The illustrations given to prove this principle seem to us puerile and illogical. Lagrange cites the sentence from the Psalms: " There is no God, " as an evidence of a statement which the author did not wish to teach, and as therefore a proof that the author teaches only what he wishes to teach. Issues are confused here. No man believes that every sentence in the Bible, without regard to whose utterance it be, or its con- text, is true. In such absurd supposition Christ would be a malefactor, a blasphemer, and God the Father would give LAGRANGE 151 place to Baal. But there is no logical connection between these simple self-evident facts and a system that is pro- pounded in order to allow its author later to say that the primitive history of the Bible is closely allied to myths. Thus he continues: ''On the other hand, no one will deny that not all that appears to be historical is really historical ; and so I need not insist upon the now generally accepted and perfectly simple theory — so simple indeed that I can hardly claim as my own the words which express it — to the effect that the value of statements seemingly affirmative or negative depends en- tirely upon the style of literary production in which such apparently categorical statements appear. The first thing to be done is to determine the various literary styles found in the Bible and presenting the appearance of history. Catholic sentiment rightly shrinks from the use of the word 'myth,' but between myth and history there lies a very wide field. Let us examine, then, the different forms of literary production known to the ancients, so as to find out how many of them the Bible contains, in order to be able to estimate the true character of the expression used. "Can it be said that there are myths in the Bible? The very idea jars on the ordinary mind, and it will not allow the word to be uttered. A few Catholic writers, daily grow- ing more numerous, prefer to draw a distinction. "Naturally they are not anxious to retain the word if it gives pain. But they find its use convenient to express the likeness — at least the external likeness — there is between myths and primitive history; only, they carefully add that the mythological elements found in the Bible have been carefully 'stripped of any polytheistic tinge, and are only used to express lofty religious ideas.' The phrase is that of Dom Hildebrand Hopfi, a Benedictine, used in a pamphlet directed against the rationalistic methods of the higher critics.* "No one, as far as I know, has attempted to analyze this statement or any equivalent one, so that the popular mind, * Hopfl, Die hoehere Bibelkritik, Paderborn, 1902, p. 63. Cf. Revue Btbhque, 1902, p. 603. 152 LAGRANGE is uneasy and not favorably disposed. Speaking for myself, I think it would be well definitely to put the word aside, on the ground that words — which in themselves are of little importance — should only be used, in the sense assigned to them by general use. We are accustomed to associate the word 'myth' with the idea of a false or even childish religion. Let us leave the word alone, and try and reach the root of the matter. "We may take as an example the story of Lot's wife, changed into a pillar of salt, in circumstances with which you are familiar. The passage is quite definite: 'and his wife looking behind her, was turned into a pillar of salt.' (Gen. XIX. 26) To imderstand its full meaning you should have seen the locality. To the south of the Dead Sea, on the western side, there lies a long hill, resembling a whale cast ashore. It is an inexhaustible salt mine, and supplies all the homes of Jerusalem. On the side of the sea, by erosion or by some other geological phenomena, blocks have been formed which look like statues. There has always been at least one for the tradition, which now no longer speaks of the wife of Lot, but of bint Lout — the daughter of Lot. Now, ask those who are interested in folklore or mythology — ask yourselves, ask your own common-sense and your conscience. There can be no doubt what the answer will be. Were we to find this phrase elsewhere than in the Bible, we should simply say that popular imagination had personified a thing, and having found in some block of salt a human likeness, con- nected it with the memory of a woman who disappeared in some great catastrophe. To be changed into stone is gener- ally a punishment, as in the case of Niobe." (Methode Historique, VI.) The falsity of Lagrange's principle must be evident to all. We may concede that God is responsible for all that is taught in the Bible, without committing God to a solid firma- ment, a geocentric system, etc. ; for these things are not taught in the Bible. The language of a people was accepted to express truth without affirming or denying their ideas on scientific phenomena. But when Lagrange affirms that the inspired writer teaches nothing except what he wishes LAGRANGE 153 to teach, the statement is evidently false. Many prophets uttered prophecies which were sealed for ages after they wrote. In many cases the inspired writers did not com- prehend the full sense of what they wrote. The typical sense of Holy Scripture is a legitimate sense, and yet the human writers did not know it . Will any man say that Moses knew that the brazen serpent in the desert was a type of the Crucified Saviour? Lagrange next declares that scientific criticism was satis- fied the moment the principle was conceded that the Scrip- tures spoke according to appearances. He then asks : ^'May we apply the same principle to the historical books?" All his subsequent argument, all his illustrations are in defense of an affirmative answer to this question. As we have before stated, he makes some restrictions of his theory. There are some strictly revealed historical facts, as for instance the fall of man. Thus he declares in his VI. Lecture of the M^thode Historique : "But it is quite evident that the first chapters of the Bible are not a history of mankind, nor even of one of its branches, for the simple reason that we could with difficulty find one fact for every thousand years, and even then we should not know where to place it. ''You may object that you are anxious to retain those first chapters as so many landmarks in the history of the con- tinuity of religion. Very good; but we must bear in mind that that is what they are, for their only importance is that of fingerposts along this wide waste. But let us take care to recognize their true character. You will agree with me when I say that among those persons there are perhaps some names of peoples : if I go so far as to suggest names of towns, you will recall Sidon to mind. That being so, why not allow that among these fragments there are also names which merely stand for an impersonal progress of mankind, lost memories, the source of which no one knows, occupying in history the same relative position as the ether with which we fill space, without fully realizing what it does, simply because we must put something between the starry spheres ? 154 LAGRANGE "The very fact that nothing so restrained is found any- where else, that mythology proper is excluded, itself suffices to guard from error anyone who seeks to see things as they really are. These characteristics, taken by themselves, would suffice to show forth the influence of monotheism, and that all is in keeping with the dignity of the dogma of in- spiration. "When I began, I said that I placed the history of Orig- inal Sin on one side. Not that I desire to affirm the his- toricity of all the details of the account ; on that subject I have elsewhere clearly expressed my mind.* But some might perhaps be tempted to conclude, from the ideas I have been developing, that the essential fact itself cannot have been handed down by tradition. I do not think that follows from the premises. I have endeavored to draw a distinction between the details and the core of stories which may be handed down most faithfully for centuries in the most varied surroundings, everywhere undergoing some transformation because it is everywhere tinged with bor- rowed colors, yet remaining everywhere recognizable. "The study of religious histories, and particularly of primitive histories, has familiarized folklorists with this fact. There seems to me, therefore, no impossibility what- ever in the transmission of the accotmt of the Fall from generation to generation for thousands of years. "But even supposing such transmission to be impossible, dato, non concesso, we have only to see whether Original Sin, which evades any strict historical proof, is or is not part of the divine revelation. It is quite certain that it is included in revelation. The conclusion therefore is that it has been revealed. And its revelation seems quite what might be expected, considering its capital importance, and its neces- sary connection with Redemption. If the dogma involves as a necessary consequence the unity of the human race, our reasoning will be the same. And really I fail to see that in this matter ,we are all awkwardly placed. History is silent; so there can be no objection from that quarter. * Revue Bibhque, 1897, p. 341 seq. LAGRANGE 155 Natural science brings against it the difference of races. It was perhaps somewhat of a difficulty, and is perhaps a difficulty even now, for those who maintain the immutability of species. But if moderate evolution tends to predominate science, I should be much surprised if it were not able to explain this phenomenon by its own principles. "On account of the Church's definition, I believe in Original Sin according to the Church's meaning ; but ab- stracting from this dogmatic point, based upon the tmshake- able foundation of revelation, there can be no objection to assigning primitive history its true character, even though it may not have been sufficiently understood by the men of bygone days." Lagrange divides historical books into three classes: The romance, history proper, and primitive history. The romance is a creation of the imagination, and may be the means of inculcating truth or falsehood. Strict history has a certain fallible latitude in details without ceasing to be true. Primitive history holds a middle place between romance and real history: "No ancient people has solved the mystery of its origin. There are certain annals which are the foundation of history, and there are legends. In the latter case if a historian reproduces the narrations current in his day, to preserve them to future generations, he gives them for what they are worth. Everyone is familiar with this kind of history. For example, it is well known that to indi- cate the origin of different peoples men derive them from an eponymic hero. The Dorians have as ancestor Dorus; the Phoenicians, Phoenix. The method deceives no one, there is therein no properly called affirmation. Men have only wished to reduce the confused questions of origins to a certain order." Lagrange believes that an imaginative historical narra- tive, provided it teach a true lesson, may have place in the Scripture. He cites the Book of Tobias. Whatever we may say of the example chosen, certain it is that the principle is applicable. Even though we hold that Job is a historical personage, no one will deny that the substance of the book is the creation of an inspired imagination to inculcate a great moral lesson. 156 LAGRANGE Of course the chief place in the historical books of the Bible is held by history properly so called. But even here Lagrange declares that the inspired writers did not affirm the precision of facts and words "avec la demiere acribie. " Absolute exactness in all details is not in the nature of his- tory ; the inspired writers reproduced the substantial truths of words and facts. This part of Lagrange's theory pleases every right- minded scholar. Certain modal differences in the Evan- gelists are well explained by this theory. But venerium in Cauda. Lagrange comes to the third application with a certain timid hesitation: '*But the history of origins, this strange history where the narration of facts and the uncertain legend jostle each other {se coudoient) in close contact, if (such history) enters into the Bible, how shall we recognize it there? How discern the true from the false ? The imagi- native narration and the parable teach no fact ; real history teaches all facts ; but (in primitive history) where lies the truth? How may we arrive at certitude? And most of all in this mixture what becomes of the divine illumina- tion? the infallible judgment, judicium infallibile de acceptis? '^Indeed it is a most delicate question, but we can not draw back. A difficulty encompasses us on all sides. Let us endeavor to solve it after having implored light. ^'In the first place I ask: In what consists this infallible judgment when there is question of a work of the imagina- tion or a parable? The facts related have no objective reality ; they have no purpose except to present a lesson ; to present a truth under the convenient form, as the parable of Lazarus, or the Canticle of Canticles. The same holds in our hypothesis; (primitive history) aims to present a truth, nothing but a truth in the most apt manner, whether it be -a simple affirmation or the adapting of an ancient legend to national forms. But how shall we discern? Is it proven that we must effect this discernment so quickly and easily? Is the Scripture so clear as some protestants pre- tend ? On the contrary is it not of faith that it is obscure ? We know that a parable declares the existence of no object- LAGRANGE 157 ive entity. Do we always know when we are dealing with a parable ? Some speak of the parable of Lazarus ; others believe it to be real history. . . . The same is true of Tobias, Judith, Jonas. If therefore God leaves us uncertain whether Judith be true history, why could he not leave us in the same incertitude when there is question of distin- guishing the various elements which compose a book? Who shall decide the question? The Church as a final resort; exegetes in the first attempt, as humble servants of the Church." After attempting to find proof for his system in the fact that Fathers and theologians have admitted allegories and metaphors in the first chapter of Genesis, Lagrange continues : " Having established these preliminaries we definitively ask: Is primitive history found in the Bible with the same literary characteristics as among other peoples, save only that it is the medium of an infallible teaching?" It is equivalent to say : Is the history of Noah and his sons to be placed on the same plane as the legend of Romulus and Remus ? Lagrange answers his question: '* Here is our conclusion: There exists in the Bible a primitive history, the basis of which is guaranteed by divine truth ; but certain circum- stances may be considered either as metaphors and alle- gories ; or a Hebrew accommodation of the oral tradition. These circumstances are more the clothing of the truth than the truths contemplated in the teaching, and in interpret- ing one may occupy himself less with their material object than with their relation to the principal truth taught. But when the sacred writer employes documents or uncertain oral traditions he has the guidance of the infallible judg- ment. The judgment preserves him from all formal error in his statements, and assures the fitness of what may be called national or popular metaphors to render correctly his proper teaching. I distinguish between the foundation and certain circumstances which have place in all primitive history; and I say that the foundation of primitive biblical history is always true. But if even the foundation of the primitive history of other peoples may be false, why make an ex- ception in favor of the Bible? It is simply on account of 158 LAGRANGE the divine truth, because the Bible is inspired. ... It is most reasonable to ascribe such action to God, and to hold that he teaches us a true history, whatever be the means chosen by him to deliver it to us. He could have taught us all the circumstances with the same certitude, and we are disposed always to believe them true, except when an examination of the text shows us that the writer did not intend them as true history. . . . For example, if it be proven, as M. Oppert alleges, on whom I leave the responsi- bility, that the ages of the patriarchs are artificial reductions of Chaldean epochs, it is evident that the man who made this mathematical operation has not pretended to write history, and does not give us as history the result of his cal- culations. He has only wished to supply the defect of positive chronology. Our rule shall be to accept as true all that the author delivers as such, substance and circum- stances. We shall always consider the foundation to be true history ; and we shall never cast doubt on the circum- stances except when we are persuaded thereto by what we believe to have been the intention of the author. " Revue Biblique 1896 pp. 510 et seqq. Lagrange has made many applications of his theory: ''Berosus tells how the fish -god Oannes, by a series of apparitions, led men on to civilization ; then he enumerates kings with very long and empty reigns. The Bible is more serious, is closer to truth, and, I venture to say, closer to history. On going back in thought to the beginnings of the race, the historical deeds of individuals entirely escape us, though we do possess the elements at least of the history of civilization ; in other words, the progress it has made, and the great discoveries which have led it on to the point reached. When the Bible tells us that the arts developed little by little, that nomadic life gradually assumed its own general characteristics, different from those of town life, that men did not always play the kinnor and flute, nor work brass and iron. ... I suppose anthropology recognizes it to be quite correct, and that it is impossible otherwise to conceive the beginning and progress of civilization. LAGRANGE 159 ''But can that be said to constitute history, duly noted and handed down? I do not think so, the reason being that history, or rather what we mean by real history, de- mands some knowledge of the circumstances, or at least of the time and place. The Bible, of course, cites proper names. But, as I pointed out at the beginning, that is not enough, because those proper names are given in a Hebrew form which is not their own ; and besides, what is the value of a proper name, of which the form has undergone change, in the midst of such a vast expanse of time? And if the syllables do not correspond to syllables, nor yet, doubtless, the sense to the original sense, what is there left of the his- torical setting of the fact? Can anyone see therein an his- torical reality which involves the truthfulness of the sacred writer? To what extent is it of faith that Jobal invented music ? ''And yet, those proper names are a most interesting study. They often seem to me to be the very name of the object invented, thus perhaps witnessing to a marked de- gree the admirable wisdom of the biblical writer. Could anything, in fact, be more restrained, prudent, and soimd than the statement that this or that art, known in our own day, had a beginning, that music was invented by a musician ? It is a great virtue to be able to say nothing when you know nothing. It called for much more than that, to put an obstacle in the way of the Greeks; though they, too, were well acquainted with this elementary method. ''Let me give you some examples found in Pliny.* Klos- ter invented the distaff (/cXcoa-rrip, distaff) ; Staphylos (o-ra- (jivXij bunch of grapes) mingled water and wine. The oar was discovered in two places — the handle at Kopae U(07nj handle) and the blade at Plataea (TrXaTtj fiat). Or it may even take the form of a genealogy: thus, according to Philo of Byblos, fire is descended from three brothers named Light, Fire, and Flame. It is all true enough, and deceives no one. Turn to the first story we have in the Bible. I pass over the name of Abel, which probably means shep- * Hist. Nat., vii. 57 Cf. Etudes sur les religions s^mitiques. 160 LAGRANGE herd. The first town is called Henoch, derived from a word meaning dedication. All have heard of the trumpet of Jubilee, jobel: jobel in Phoenician means ram: the connec- tion between the two is very natural; the ram's horn was used as a musical instrument. Can we wonder that Jabal was the father of shepherds, and Jobal the father of musicians ? The name Cain means blacksmith in Arabic; and it was Tubal-Cain who was the first maker of musical instruments. I do not seek to lower the Bible by making this analysis ; on the contrary, I think it works out to its honour. "It was quite out of the question to write real history, and yet is was of importance to show by a continuous chain of evidence the unity of the history of salvation. The Bible avoids absurd or obscene accounts ; there is no pretence of ignoring sin, but sin receives its due punishment, and is not glorified, as though it changed its character by becoming the privilege of heroes. The Bible avoids even unfounded stories. It is taken up with tangible things, with discoveries which are still known; it relates their origin and progress, and leaves them in a hazy light, which has no outward sem- blance of actual history. If the personality of Lamech seems to stand out against this background it is only in an elegy. Could the author have told us more clearly that there exists no history of these periods ? ''I find a similar regard for reality, in so far as it can be reached and set forth, in the story of the Deluge and the Tower of Babel. "There is a modem school, represented by Canon Cheyne, which considers the Deluge mythical — mythical, that is, in that it is the translation of an astronomical phenomenon into history. But the great majority of anthropologists con- sider that the Deluge, of which accounts are everywhere foimd, is the memory, more or less modified, of real floods.* M. Suess, professor of geology at Vienna, and M. Raymond de Girard, professor of geology at Freiburg, have even con- sidered they could indicate the physical causes of the Baby- * M. Loisy does not seem to have definitely made up his mind about these two systems, nor does he point out in his work on Babylonian myths how fundamentally different they are. LAGRANGE 161 Ionian deluge .J Be that as it may, the general character of the biblical story points to a real flood, the religious interpre- tation of which has far surpassed its historical importance. Nor is the Tower of Babel a mere product of the imagina- tion. The biblical writer had certainly seen the gigantic unfinished temple of Borsippa, which Nabuchodonosor find- ing in ruins in consequence of the bad state of its gutters, made a boast of achieving. It was no mere flight of the imagination to look upon Babylon as a proud city where all languages were to be heard. And after M. Blanckenkorn's careful investigation, the results of which were accepted as satisfactory by M. de Lapparent, we are entitled to hold that the sinking of the south part of the Dead Sea may have taken place at a time when there were men on the earth, and that the account of the destruction of Sodom and Gom- orrah cannot be simply set aside as purely mythical — as the picturesque expression of the horror inspired by scenery unique in the world for its sublime desolateness. Undoubt- edly the biblical story goes far beyond the mere fact, other- wise it would not faithfully express what it wishes to ex- press ; but it is always careful to have as the background of its picture some striking reality which fills the horizon, whether it be in the depths of the desert or of the past." (Methode Historique, VI.) Withal Pere Lagrange believes in an unrestricted inspira- tion extending even to the words. In his third conference before the Catholic Institute of Toulouse, which conferences were afterward published under the name of **La Methode Historique," he speaks of inspiration thus : "We must have recourse to the principles of faith and to psychology if we would understand what the grace of inspiration really is, what special light it communicates to the intellect, and how the will is moved. From the Church's definitions we may conclude that God's help is antecedent and not consequent, that it is an impulse, and so necessarily a light bestowed upon him, for man is no mere machine, and his will does not de- termine anything without a corresponding light in the in- tellect. Now since this help is antecedent to the whole t Cf. M, de Girard's article in the Revue Thomiste. (11) H.S. 162 LAGRANGE Operation, it must extend to the whole work, and conse- quently even to the very words ; but since the sacred writer used his ordinary faculties, it impressed nothing ready- made upon the mind — not even the thoughts. On this particular point I have nothing new to say, and nothing clearer to propound. *'So far reason has been working within its proper limits ; it is but fitting, however, that it should show more reserve in dealing with the divine historical fact. Our guiding prin- ciple in this matter must be clear to all. It is no business of ours to decide what God must have done, or what it was fitting that He should have done ; all we have to do is humbly to note whatever forms part of His work. Such questions are not to be solved by each man according to his taste ; we must be content to be guided by facts. 'The demands of reason are to be taken into account as long as the question merely concerns what God may or may not inspire, and to whom it is fitting that He should betake Himself to do so. We may never affirm that God could teach error — that would be blasphemous — but we ought to be very careful about confidently concluding that a thing is fitting or unfitting. Let casuists, by all means, use probable reasons, in obscure cases, but, as straightforward critics, we will confine our attention to facts. What we want more especially is that vigorous care in reasoning characteristic of true theologians: the opinion of such men is far less to be feared than the routine of those who make theology a mere matter of professional knowledge, who are unable to bring the light of reason to bear upon what they dislike, except through prejudices begotten of the necessarily narrow out- look they allow themselves. '*If a French priest were to celebrate Holy Mass with covered head, he would be guilty of an act of grave irrever- ence, which could only be paralleled by celebrating in China with head uncovered. We have not the same ideas as had the ancients concerning history, morality, literary property, use of pseudonyms, borrowing — in more or less disguised form — from other books, the revision and re-editing of works. Your respect for inspired authors may make you wonder LAGRANGE 163 whether you are to attribute to them what to you seems im- proper. Do you not see that you are condemning the ac- tions of the missionary in China? **But we must subject the historical idea of inspiration to a more searching analysis, and as we have dealt with the person inspired, let us now turn to the aim of inspiration. If we only knew the exact relation in which inspiration stood to divine teaching a great result would be achieved. No one hesitates to say that inspiration goes far beyond the limits of religious teaching, since it extends to everything, even to the words themselves, while religious teaching is not everywhere found. It would be a mistaken application of St. Augustine's principle that God does not teach in the Bible what is not of use for salvation, to suppose that God ceases to inspire when not actually teaching a religious truth. "The consequence would be that all that is non -religious in the Bible would not be inspired. Now it is difficult to see, for instance, where lies the religious teaching of the Book of Ruth. In controversy with protestants it has often been maintained that all dogma is not contained in Scripture, for the simple reason that the sacred writers had no intention of always teaching it ; they wrote as particular circumstances demanded, sometimes to teach, but also to encourage, con- sole, or recommend, as in the letter to Philemon ; and we may add that throughout the whole Psalter, rich as it is in the loftiest religious truths, it is never the Psalmist's direct object to inculcate religious truths, since he addresses himself to God, whom he has no intention of instructing when he con- fesses his iniquities and asks for assistance from Him. Still less does the Psalmist teach God historical or natural truths. So that one may quite fairly ask whether the aim of inspira- tion really is instruction. That it is not its direct aim seems clearly to follow from the distinction between revelation and inspiration. The Bible contains God's teaching : the religious truths He taught were communicated by revelation, and it is not essential that revelation should coincide in point of time with inspiration. On the other hand, if, in that teach- ing, we take the facts not directly bearing upon our salvation, we may say that generally speaking, in their natural and 164 LAGRANGE historical aspect, there was no absolute need of God's teach- ing them, since man's memory would have sufficed to retain them. ''Inspiration leads to writing ; and the aim of writing is to fix and record previously-acquired knowledge, so that the grace of inspiration has as its primary object not to teach, but to preserve the memory of revealed truths, and of the historical facts which enable the order and sequence of reve- lation to be understood, and that, although the aim of the sacred writer himself be to teach : the notion of inspiration is wider in range. "It follows from this first point, that the doctrine con- tained in an inspired book is not necessarily perfect in its literal and historical meaning. God, in wishing to preserve the memory of facts of importance in the history of man's salvation — occasionally merely of secondary importance, as in the case of the Book of Ruth — determined, perhaps, to preserve the memory of the imperfect ideas men had of the Godhead at a given stage of revelation. You remember we admitted the idea of essential progress in the Old Testament. He does not teach those imperfect ideas to us in the form in which they are expressed, nor does He desire that we should confine ourselves to them. Were we to do so, we should be making a mistake, for through His Son we have a higher knowledge of His infinite perfection ; it was His wish that we should have knowledge of those ideas, the better to appreciate the need in which we stand of His light and grace. And so it is quite possible that we may find in the Bible inferior senti- ments expressed, not only by the impious, but even by such as lived in the hope of a clearer light ; thus the tone of the Books of Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus is no doubt practical enough, yet often wanting in moral elevation, and lacking that exquisite delicacy which constitutes the glory of Chris- tian virtue. The meaning has to be spiritualized in order to raise it to the Christian standard, and through its spiritual meaning the Holy Scriptures regain in our eyes their full value. And hence the Church, full of reverence as she is for the Word of God, obliges no one to read it, and all instinct- LAGRANGE 165 ively feel that they derive more profit for their souls from one chapter of the Imitation than from the whole Book of Leviticus. " If we consider the Spirit of God which inspired it, the Bible is the noblest of books ; but its aim and object is not so lofty. God inspired the preservation of this teaching, but it is far inferior to the teaching we find throughout the Church. They are egena elementa, the words spoken to them of old : for us our Lord reserved more saving words. The facts speak for themselves. " Yet we must not go too far. Let us remember what we said before — reason itself, as well as faith, will bar the way when it needs must be barred. It is impossible that God should teach error. It is therefore impossible, not that the Bible, recording the words of all kinds of men, should con- tain no error, but that an intelligent study of the Bible should lead us to conclude that God taught error. *' But what do the sacred writers teach ? They teach, we are told, what they categorically affimi. Now it has long since been pointed out that the Bible is not a mere collection of theses or categorical affirmations. There are certain forms of literary composition in which no absolute state- ment is made as to the reality of the facts related : they are used merely as the groundwork of a moral lesson — of this the parable is an example. Now inspiration does not change the forms of composition : each must be interpreted according to its own particular rules. It is not necessary that I should insist on this point ; it has been fully accepted in the Etudes by Pere Prat, and to m.e it seems the very best means of meeting current objections to the truthfulness of the Bible. To-day, however, I wish to look at the question from another standpoint, and consider the method of divine teaching as shown by the Bible itself. "As our starting-point we shall take the facts we have just noted. " We all agree that everything God teaches must be re- ceived with reverence, but it is quite clear that in the Bible this teaching is not to be found in ready-made statements standing in a state of splendid isolation. It is mingled with 166 LAGRANGE numberless stories, discussions, poetical effusions, anecdotes, prayers, and metaphors. We all willingly admit that the inspired writer has not always the intention of giving instruc- tion in the name of God, as is quite clear, for instance, when he prays to God for pardon of his sins ; though it is none the less true that few prayers of the Bible contain such valuable teaching as does the Miserere. And so it is possible that there may be divine teaching, even when the sacred writer seems to make no mention of it. On the other hand, we must not be in too great a hurry to receive as a statement made by God what the writer is merely relating, without taking the trouble to indicate it as his own. If religious teaching itself is frequently a resultant whose formula the Church alone is competent to state, with still greater force does this apply to those secondary elements which only figure in Scripture to clothe the truth, or, if you prefer St. Augustine's figure, to serve as the sounding-board of the lyre. All this goes to prove that God's teaching is infinitely beyond our own, even in the method of which He makes use, and that, consequently it is not to be judged by our standards. ** Some few years ago one of my brethren Pere Lacome, in a little book, entitled Quelqiies considerations exegetiques sur le premier chapitre de la Genese, which was published with the fullest approval of Pere Monsabre, drew the exact distinction that is here needed. His theory had not the success it would have to-day, because less attention was then paid to such problems. I shall take the liberty of quoting a few ex- tracts : This small nation (Israel) owed to its Prophets, and to them alone, its rise above all others. Thanks to them, their ideas were purified from errors concerning the Godhead. But apart from and outside this one point, the Prophet had no call to rectify the ideas of his people, and he left them as they were : he took them as he found them, as inconsistent as are the ideas of a child, false figures of the true, radically incomplete ideas, as the ideas of men will ever be. Yet the Spirit of God gave himself full play in the maze of our illusions, without ever adopting, to the extent of identifying Himself therewith, an erroneous opinion; He LAGRANGE 167 may be said to have leaned upon it, or better, to have glided over it, even as do the rays of sunshine over a faulty mirror, or a pool of muddy water, without thereby contracting any stain.' **How are such faulty statements to be reconciled with the dignity of the Holy Ghost ? After all, we are concerned with a book whose author is God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived. It is the standing difficulty. 'Even grant- ing,' P. Lacome proceeds, 'that the sky spoken of in Genesis is a solid vault, which in reality it is not : can the Holy Spirit be said to have fallen into error? Our own common-sense can give the answer. When a teacher wishes to teach a child science — astronomy, for example — he proceeds step by step, not being able to convey at once the whole of his knowl- edge to the mind of his pupil. Before he can go forward he must have a starting-point, and so the ideas already in the mind of the child will have to serve as the foundation of all his teaching. Those ideas are the only material to hand, the only forces wherewith to work to set the mind in motion and cause it to go forward. "When a master has to enter into the mind of his pupil, he endeavors to discover the weird and foolish ideas it has ; and when he has found them, he makes use of them to insinu- ate some particles of truth ; and then to help him to digest the first lessons of astronomy, he goes back to the myths and gropings of old, he personifies the sun, speaks of its going forth on its daily course from its rise to its setting ; but can it be fairly said that in so doing the master approved of all the illusions that fill that youthful mind? Now in the Bible the Holy Spirit is such a master, such a preacher. *'He is a teacher in the midst of the other teachers of this world ; He teaches as they do, and in their own way ; He has a teaching of His own knowledge, of His own super- natural knowledge, and He wishes to impart it to man. . . .' Speaking of the Wisdom of God rejecting the knowledge of man, he says: 'With the sole qualification of Teacher of Divine Science she came, and established her chair by the side of other chairs, in the public places and cross-roads she gathered together all the passers-by without any distinction, 168 LAGRANGE and to them set forth her teaching ; she marked out her own definite position, and outside that position she spoke the language of the people, as all great teachers of the himian race have done. And if to man, who is all his life but a little child, she spoke in childish terms, and spelled out to him the mysteries of Heaven, we really cannot blame her for our own stammering and inconsequence, she whose teaching is so justly pure and lofty. Our own ignorance alone should be blamed.' 'This theory, I said, created no sensation. Yet there was a watchman on the alert. Pere Brucker, in the Etudes, denounced the views as dangerous, and concluded that, 'Pleasing as Pere Lacome's hypothesis may at first sight appear, it seems to me fraught with ruinous consequences. . . . No wise and conscientious human teacher would act in such a way; nor would he bolster himself up on the wrong ideas of his pupil even to begin his work, and run the risk of their being mistaken for truth, or of discrediting his own lessons in advance. Still less, therefore, could the divine master, Truth itself, make use of error, in any degree what- ever, to open human intellects to His supernatural doctrine. He could only exploit (if I may be allowed the word) what is good and true in our ideas.'* 'The theory is perhaps painted in rather dark colors. Pere Lacome had said, to lean upon, or better, to glide over; Pere Brucker interprets him to mean, 'to bolster himself up.' "P^re Lacome was particularly careful to draw a dis- tinction between two essentially different forms of teaching, where his critic would appear to see only one form. It would be foolish for a teacher of geometry to tolerate in his pupils wrong ideas about a straight line: how could he 'bolster himself up' with that? But need the teacher of grammar trouble himself about the truth of the examples cited to prove the rule, and when he is teaching them how to spell the name of King Pharamond, may he not pass lightly over the obscurity of the early history of France? * Etudes, p. 504. 1895. LAGRANGE 169 "Now if it be the case that St. Paul and our divine Saviour have argued from Holy Scripture according to the mental habits of the Jews, without seeking the exact text and with- out binding themselves down to its precise meaning, and that the Apostles set forth as the fulfilment of a prophecy what is merely an application based upon the similarity of the incidents, with how much more reason may they not have made use of current Jewish ideas in matters literary and scientific without seeking to rectify them? And if this course of action is not unworthy of the Author of our faith, why may we not presume that a similar course may have been adopted by other sacred writers in their exposition of divine teaching ? The theological statement of the fact is not of recent origin: as is so frequently the case, the idea was stated by St. Augustine, St. Thomas moulded it, and, in his Encyclical, Providentissimus Deus, Leo XIII. has con- secrated it anew. The rule is so excellent as to need no apology for its repetition. " 'We have first to consider,' says Leo XIII., 'that the sacred writers, or, to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable to salvation.'* Hence they do not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figur- ative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordi- nary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses ; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers — as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us — 'went by what sensibly appeared,'! or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to' (Providentissimus Deus, § 28). "Then after a section working out the same idea, the Pope concludes that, 'The principles here laid down will apply to cognate sciences, and especially to history' (§ 30). * Etudes, p. 502. 1895. fST Augustine, De Genesi ad litt., 9, 20. 170 LAGRANGE "F. Brucker accepts St. Thomas' formula, but takes it to mean that the Bible, 'in relating, for instance, the formation of the firmament, the standing still of the sun, etc., speaks according to outward appearances, and consequently speaks truly, though its language is not properly scientific.'^ **It would be more correct to say that in such cases the Bible is neither right nor wrong. It is quite clear that the ancient writers knew no more than they appear to know. When I use similar statements, I know, like everyone else, that it is wrong, so much so that the error has become a mere figure of speech. Now, can an author who looks upon the sky as a solid vault, and who definitely states his opinion in that sense (for otherwise we should never have guessed it), be really said to express himself in a manner at once exact and true, though not strictly scientific? Is it possible in such a case to make a distinction between science and truth ? *'It may be objected that if the statement is not true it must be false, and then what becomes of the truthfulness of the Bible? The objection admits of a simple answer. A statement must be either true or false : but here, there is no question of a statement. Remember what St. Thomas says : the sacred writer Vent by what sensibly appeared.' If you confine yotirself to mere appearances, you do not judge the thing in* itself ; and where there is no such judgment there is neither affirmation nor negation. Now it is an elementary logical fact that truth and error are only to be found in a formal act of judgment. 'The Holy Father very briefly states that the same cri- terion should be applied to history." Lagrange cites the following passage from Cornely: "The interpreter ought to pay great attention to the manner in which the sacred writers give their historical accotints. For, as St. Jerome points out, 'it is customary in Scripture for the historian to give the common opinion as generally received in his own day ;' and again ; 'many things are related in the Scriptures according to the opinion of the day in which the facts occurred, and not according to what in * St. Thomas, Summa TheoL, p. 1. q. Ixx., a i. ad 3. LAGRANGE 171 reality took place {et non juxta quod ret Veritas continehat) .' This observation of the holy doctor is most important. He thus warns us not to press the words of Scripture to make them meet the present state of scientific knowledge, but to explain them in accordance with the ideas and intentions of the sacred writer. What a number of difficulties would never have been raised had all interpreters always kept St. Jerome's word of warning before them?" Lagrange con- cludes : " It means to say that historical accounts, and even those which bear the fullest token of their historical character, must not be understood in the light of the knowledge of God who knows all things, but in the light of man's limited out- look, and, that it is quite conceivable that God should not communicate further information to the sacred writer, who knows no more than other men on a particular point, even though, in consequence, he should make use of a materially wrong expression. "Use all the arguments ex convenientia you like — these are facts, clear biblical facts, and easy to check. From this it follows that the sacred writers speak according to what appears to them. The theory is a traditional one. It has merely to be applied to particular cases as the needs of criticism call for it, making due allowance for the distinction between history and natural science. And it is precisely in that application of traditional principles to the results of human industry that consists the progress of theological science," (Methode Historique, pp. 91 — 116.) The defect in the system of Lagrange is its excess : falsis vera involvit. Though he disclaims to place history on the same plane as natural science, in some of his applications he does so. Nay more, as we have seen in his own words, he makes Leo XIII. in his encyclical ''Providentissimus Deus" sponsor for this new theory. As we have given the papal encyclical complete in our present treatise, we refer to that to show the falsity of Lagrange's appeal. The Pope gives rules for dealing with the objections drawn from science ; and then declares that men are to deal with kindred sciences and with history in the same manner. That is by showing that our 172 LAGRANGE adversaries often demand more for their hypotheses than they are worth ; by showing that many things formerly held by them are now abandoned; and by showing that what is clearly proven does not conflict with Scripture. These are the principles which the Pope advises to apply to history. Fr. Delattre, S. J., has shown this conclusively in his "Autour de la Question Biblique" wherein he ably exposes the excesses of the system of Lagrange. It seems also that a recent decision of the Biblical Commission sanctioned by the Pope, forbids some of the applications of Lagrange's theory. This is the wording of the question proposed to the Commission: "Is it lawful for the Catholic exegetist to solve the difficulties occurring in certain texts of Sacred Scripture, which appear to relate historical facts, by assert- ing that in these we have to deal with a tacit or implicit quotation of a document written by an uninspired author, and that the inspired author did not at all intend to approve or adopt all of these assertions, which cannot, therefore, be held to be free from error?" The answer reads : "In the negative, except in the case when, due regard being paid to the sense and judgment of the Church, it is proved by solid arguments; (i) that the sacred writer has really quoted the sayings or documents of another ; and (2) that he has neither approved nor adopted them, so that he may be properly considered not to be speak- ing in his own name. " This answer was submitted to the Holy Father, and signed and sanctioned by His Holiness on February 13, 1905. In a private audience granted me in June of 1905, the Holy Father Pius X. spoke sadly of the tendencies of some Catholic scholars, who have been led away by the labored erudition of the Rationalists ; and w1io have accepted some of the false principles of "higher criticism." When Pere Lagrange defends the theory that in scientific facts the inspired writers spoke according to appearances, he says nothing new ; the principle has been handed down from the Fathers. When he admits the presence of allegory, parable, and metaphor in the Holy Books, especially LAGRANGE 173 in the early chapters of Genesis, we agree fully with him. But when he applies his theory of appearances to real his- torical personages there is an excess. For instance, when the Scriptures declare that Joshua arrested the course of the sun it affirms a truth, a truth that could not have been better enunciated by the most accomplished astronomer of our day. It affirms that a day was miraculously lengthened. The same is true when it is asserted that God created a firmament. It assigns to God the creation of the universe which is spoken of as the ancients saw it. But when the Scriptures assert that Sarah went down into Egypt, and was taken into Pharaoh's house, if the account be not true as history, nothing is true. Every circumstance proclaims that the writer wished to be understood as writing genuine history. And yet, Lagrange disposes of the event as fol- lows: "Can that whole story which God willed to be preserved be said to be above the imperfections of the religious truth of those days ? Did it come more directly from God to our souls than does the religious truth on which we look to the Church for a final decision?" Lagrange asserts that he preserves the groimdwork of the history, and applies the theory of folk-lore only to the details ; but one may see by his own application of his system that he treats as details substantial records of events such as the incest of Lot, the destruction of Sodom, the rape of Sarah, etc. Now these events are recorded as history; they have no purpose if they be legendary ; and it seems incom- patible with the Church's definitions to declare such narra- tives to be merely folk-lore. The phrase folk-lore is a favorite expression of Lagrange. In his theory, primitive history ceases to be history. It is simply a collection of folk-lore ; and its relation to religion lies only in this, that no false ideas of faith or morals are found therein. Thus monotheism purifies primitive history from the errors of the folk-lore of the idolatrous nations. We believe that this theory is false for the reason that it does not leave to the Bible the character attributed to it by the Church. The error is in an excessive application of a 174 LIBERAL THEORIES principle which has a substratum of truth. It may well be admitted that in the mere details of facts of history abso- lute precision is not demanded in order that it be true his- tory ; but no theory may lawfully be applied to the history of the Bible which makes any part of it anything but true history. It must be true history ; and its facts must be true, even though they have no immediate relation to doctrine or morals. We can not reason here a priori; it is not for us to determine how God should have delivered his message: the definition of the Church, though it leaves a free ground fot discussion, allows no man a theory which makes any part of the Bible other than true history. Allegories, par- ables and metaphors presented in their proper setting are not inconsistent with the truthful character of a book; but the myths, fables, and legends of folk-lore presented as history are formally false, and can not be a part of a book of which God is the Author. In 1904, the Rev. Ferd. Prat, S. J., published a small brochure entitled La Bible et I'Histoire. The work is a synthesis of the opinions of Lagrange, and adds little that is new. He also invokes the Encyclical Providentissimus Deus in support of the historical method. Others who have in a more or less degree favored the new exegesis are Alfred Durand (Revue du Clerg^ frangais), F. Girerd (Annales de philosophic chr^tienne), P. Batiffol .(Bulletin de litterature ecclesiastique) , G. Bonaccorsi (Studi religiosi), Vincent Zapletal, and Vincent Rose. As before stated, we believe the evil of the new theory to lie in its excess, and hence care must be taken to distinguish what sound dogma may admit in the new exegesis. This is an exegetical question and can not be treated here. It is however not in accordance with truth to invoke the encyclical of Leo XIII. in support of these theories. The words of the encyclical itself and many other utterances of the pontiff manifest that he condemned the ultra views of the very men who cite the "Providentissimus Deus" in support of their theories. It is also ridiculous to allege St. Jerome as authority for the historical method. The be- fore mentioned work of Fr. Delattre has clearly demon- strated the falsity of this claim. LOISY 175 The able presentation of the new theories has proven the truth of the Latin proverb : ' 'Nihil est tarn improbable quod probando not fiat probabile." The Belgian Benedictin Dom. Sanders published in 1903, a treatise under the title ''Etudes sur St. Jerome" in which he attempted to base the liberal exegesis on the authority of St. Jerome. The Literar. Rundschau, XXXI. , 1905, has ably shown the defective critique of Dom. Sanders' work. It is a mangling of history to compel it to support a theory already determined. Alfred Loisy has drifted so far from orthodoxy that it is scarcely worth our while to examine his views on inspira- tion. In his Etudes Bibliques (Paris, 1901) he discusses the new science of criticism as applied to the Bible. He de- clares that "Scripture contains a divine and a human ele- ment; but these two elements so compenetrate each other that they form a divine -human work in which the divine action and the human action cannot be separated. These two operations act per modum unius, as the Scholastics say. An inspired book is wholly the work of God, and wholly the work of man. To distinguish the inspiration of the matter from the non -inspired words ; or to assign the dogmatic and moral texts to God, and assign other things to the human author is to operate the vivisection of the books." M. Loisy next proceeds to admit a ''relative element in the scriptures. This relative element comes from the fact that the books express the beliefs of the times in science and in certain parts of history. The Scriptures were adapted to the conditions of the times, and hence with the progress of science an imperfection is revealed, and this must always be verified in human progress. That which men call errors in the Scripture is nothing more than its relative part, which marks the stage of human progress at the date of the origin of the book. There will thus be an ever changing element in exegesis as human progress goes on; and there will be a fixed element, for the church safeguards the truths which never change. In a word the inspired book is a product of the times, and reflects the state of learning, of customs, and in a way, of the moral code of the times. Hence the first 176 ZANECCHIA eleven chapters of Genesis are not historical ; but a presenta- tion of the philosophy of creation in the form of the Chaldean traditions. In consequence of these views M. Loisy was compelled to leave the Catholic Institute of Paris, where he had taught for twelve years. Five of his works are on the Index of prohibited books. It seems quite evident that Pius X. had the opinions of M. Loisy in mind when in his allocution to the newly created cardinals on April i8, 1907, he declared: **As for tradition, everything is relative and subject to mutations; consequently the authority of the holy Fathers is reduced to a nullity." Zanecchia is a pronounced advocate of the new exegesis. He follows closely the teaching of Lagrange, but is bolder in applying them. We reproduce here a few passages in the original Latin from his most recent work, ''Scriptor sacer sub div. Insp. juxta sent. Card. Franzelin, Romae 1903:" "In sacris ergo libris qui historici appellantur, sub forma historica qua conscripti fuerunt, non semper vera historia factonmi eorumque chronologicus ordo reperitur, quia Scopus hagiographorum non erat ubique veram his- toriamhumanarum rerum tradere, sed commimiter utebantur historicis notionibus, et prout in vulgo erant, ad religiosas vel morales veritates docendas. Qui proinde in ea quae sacra historia vocatur accuratam veramque historiam ubique reperire praesumit, se exponit certo periculo inveniendi non historicam veritatem sed historicos errores, qui tamen neque Deo inspiranti neque hagiographo scribenti imputari possunt, sed unice inquirenti historicam veritatem ubi nee Deus nee hagiographus eam docuerunt [docuit]." *'Demum nihil prohibet scriptorem sacrum ad ostenden- dam processionem omnium creaturarum a Deo, uti docu- mentis ac traditionibus in quibus rerum eventus plus vel minus poetica descriptione narrantur. Sic in primis Genesis capitibus introductio dierum in instantanea creatione, ordo quo res a Deo processerunt, descriptio format ionis proto- parentum, eorum felicitas ante lapsum, descriptio paradisi voluptatis, arboris vitae et arboris scientiae boni ac mali in medio paradisi, fiuvii qui inde egrediens in quattuor partes HOLZHEY 177 dividebatur, relatio colloquii Dei cum lapsis protoparentibus, ttinicarum pelliceartim quibus Deus eos vestivit etc., sunt narrationes veridicae quantum ad radicem eventuum, sedin earum forma descriptiva orientalis poetica extranea non fuit. Hagiographus autem narrationes illas accepit prout in usu erant apud populos, et in sacro Libro retulit, non quidem ut auctoritate propria illas approbaret, praesertim in earum forma, sed quatenus lumine inspirativo iudicavit conscribendas esse, ut populi cognoscerent cuncta mundi bona non alium praeter Deum auctorem habuisse, qui specialem providentiam erga hominem manifestavit, singu- laremque misericordiam una cum iustitia in eimi ostendit." . . . "Ut igitur concludamus, narrationes biblicae neque omnes historicam veritatem habent, neque omnes historica veritate destitutae sunt, et quamplures ex eis inveniuntur in quibus fundamentum designat veridicum atque histori- cum factimi, forma vero et circumstantiae quibus traditur ex poetica arte proveniunt. Similiter omnes biblicae asser- tiones veritatem continent, haec tamen neque semper abso- luta est, neque ubique relativa manet, sed in aliquibus absoluta est et in aliis relativa. Vera itaque intelligentia Scripturae maximam eruditionem requirit, ubi vero haec non sufficit, exspectandum est indicium Ecclesiae, cuius est iudicare de vero sensu ac interpretatione Script urarum." For more than twenty years the new exegesis was being propagated with great activity in France, England, and in other lands before CathoHc scholars in Germany entered into the movement. In 1903, the Bulletin de Litterature Ecclesiastique reproached the German theologians (Bard- enhewer, Hoberg, etc.) with being stationary, and with not realizing that there was a biblical question. In 1902, Prof. Karl Holzhey published his work ''Schoepfung, Bibel imd Inspiration," (Vienna and Stuttgart). Though more temperate than the French ''ecole large," Holzhey admits an imperfect side of the Scriptures. The inspired writer has his own individuality, and impresses it on his work. He is also the child of his times, and impresses on his work the beliefs of his age. Divine inspiration is consistent with (12) H.S. 178 VON HUMMELAUER ♦ these imperfections. The inspired writer never utters a formal lie ; but is not necessarily ahead of his age except in the case of direct revelation. Holzhey then asks the ques- tion: Whether inspiration so strengthens the writer's human judgment that he commits no substantial error. In his answer he distinguishes between the main truth which the writer wished to express and the mode of expression. The mode of expression is not necessarily determined by divine power. Again as the very nature of a human work is to be human and therefore imperfect, without a series of miracles the work of the inspired writer cannot be totally preserved from imperfections. In these there is no formal falsehood: the writer has made use of his data honestly and truthfully ; but yet as the work bears the impress of a human author, it will also have human imperfections. Holzhey condemns the theory restricting inspiration to things of faith and morals, and will not exempt ''obiter dicta" from inspiration. He extends inspiration to all the Scrip- ture ; but the cooperation of the divine and himian elements leaves a certain human imperfection in the work, not of a nature to defeat God's purpose. In 1904, Fr. Franz von Hummelauer, S. J., published in the series of "Biblische Studien" a brochure entitled ''Exe- getisches zur Inspirationsfrage." This work caused much amazement to those who had known the learned exegete's work in the ''Cursus Scripturae Sacrae." Fr. von Hum- melauer" is a pronounced advocate of the new Exegesis. The ground principle of his whole system is the greater role given to the human side of inspiration. He confesses in the foreword that he has made large study of French works on the subject, which admission prepares us to find in his work the influence of the ''ecole large". He declares that the time is not yet come to formulate definitive theories on in- spiration; but yet he puts forth his hypothesis in a very positive manner. Von Hummelauer groups his views under three heads: "(i) the form of literature in which the nar- rative portions of the Old Testament have come down to us ; (2) the human side of Biblical inspiration; (3) the human authors of the inspired books." VON HUMMELAUER 179 Von Hummelauer acknowledges that he is more a col- lector of what others have written than an original creator of his treatise. And true enough on the first page we find the principle of Lagrange : Every word in the Bible is true in the sense that God and the inspired writer understood it and wrote it. The sense of the human author is determined by what von Hummelauer calls the remote context, that is the literary form of the inspired work. Father von Himimelauer draws the attention of his readers not merely to the historical novel, but also to the fable, the parable, the epic; again, to the form of religious history, of antique history, of national tradition or folk-lore, of the Midrash, and of the prophetic or apocalyptic narrative. The author believes that God can move the inspired writer to make use of one and all of these various literary forms in his naratives. And what becomes of Biblical inerrancy in this case? An inspired parable, or epic, or historical novel is truthful in the same way in which profane works of the respective literary form are considered'truthful. The reader well knows that the religious historian makes the material and the form of his narrative subservient to edification ; he knows that the antique historian represents his facts in an artistically free form ; that in folk-lore, fiction is not limited to form, but extends to the contents of the narrative, though some, and perhaps a great many, of its statements, may be historically true; that the Midrash resembles our passion- play in representing a Biblical narrative in such a way as to inculcate a religious or moral lesson; finally, that the apo- calyptic narrative contains a great many symbolic repre- sentations. According to Fr. von Hummelauer, several of the Old Testament narratives actually present some of the fore- going literary forms. Scholz had suggested that the Book of Judith might be a parable, but Fr. Prat mentions the Book in connection with the Midrash.^ The epic is repre- sented in the psalms on creation, e. g., Ps. 135, and on Pharaoh's death in the Red Sea. The historical novel is I Etudes, 1902, iv., 625. 180 VON HUMMELAUER mentioned in connection with the Books of Ruth, Judith, Esther, and Tobias by such writers as Fr. Prat,^ Fr. Brucker^ Scholz,^ Schanz,^ Vigouroux,® E. Cosquin,' L. Fonck,^ A. Durand,^ Lagrange,^" and Gayraud.^ Finally, von Hum- melauer is of opinion that the Book of Genesis presents the form of national tradition or folk-lore, while the Book of Ruth may be considered as a form of family tradition. He gives three reasons for his view as to the Book of Genesis : (i) The formula 'these are the generations' or 'this is the book of the generation' occurs some ten times in Genesis, and replaces the Hebrew expression 'elle toledoth; it appears to be agreed that the rendering is not exact, but the Rev. author belives that the rendering 'this is the national tra- dition concerning heaven and earth,' or 'this is the folk- lore concerning Adam,' would be correct. The author of Genesis claims, therefore, to write a series of national tra- ditions. (2) The primeval records of all other nations have passed into national tradition or folk-lore ; now, there is no evidence to prove a special divine intervention in favor of the earliest Hebrew records. (3) The first eleven chapters of Genesis present a remarkable affinity to the national tra- ditions of other nations, so that we naturally consider them as their Hebrew parallels. Fr. Von Hummelauer considers in the second part of his pamphlet the historian of the Old Testament rather than any other inspired author. The author supposes the wellknown principle that by merely quoting a source we do not become responsible for the objective truthfulness of the same. A quotation is true if it faithfully reproduces 2 Etudes, 1902, iv., 624 ff. , 3 Etudes, 1903, i., 231. 4 Kommentar iiber d. B. Judith u.iiber Bel u Drache; Leipzig, 1898- 5 Apologie, 576, 582. 6 Revue Biblique, 1899, 50, 7 Ibid., pp. 50 ff. 8 Civilta Catt., 1903, x., 580. 9 Revu£ du Clerge frang., 1902, xxxiii., 8. 10 La m^thode historique, Paris, 1903, 83 S. ; Revue Biblique, 1896, 511. 11 Revue du Clerge frang., 1903, xxxiv., 118. VON HUMMELAUER 181 the original text. In the same way, a history of Rome ac- cording to Livy, e. g., does not vouch for the objective truthfulness of the narrative; such a history is true, if it faithfully represents the history of Rome according to the record of Livy. It cannot be called in question that the Bible contains quotations, and at times these quotations are said to be colorless so that they cannot be distinguished from their context except by critical means.* Rev. Fr. von Hummelauer maintains that the Books of Samuel, of Kings, and of Paralipomenon are a history of Israel according to the Annals quoted in these books and corrected according to the prophetic source utilized by the writers; that II. Mach., III. — XV. professes to be a history according to the writings of Jason, that the Books of Joshua, Judges, and of I. Mach. must be considered historical in the same way in w^hich the foregoing books are historical ; that most of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are citations according to the Septuagint translation; that several typical applications of Old Testa- ment passages on the part of New Testament writers may have been made according to the current interpretation of Judaism; that finally the names of the Old Testament authors are given by New Testament writers according to the current Jewish tradition. In none of these cases, therefore, can we hold the inspired writer responsible for the objective truthfulness of his course, unless he freely vouches for the same. This does not impair the historical character of the inspired books ; for they are as truthful as historical docimients usually are. In fact, they are more reliable than other historical documents, seeing that gross errors are incompatible with the dignity of an inspired work. Nor does this ex'planation conflict with the Fathers, seeing that they explained away their historical difficulties by hav- ing recourse to a spiritual meaning of Sacred Scripture. Von Hummelauer cites Pope Leo's encyclical as author- ity for his views, and repeats the formula of Lagrange, that the inspired writer is the child of his times, that he stands * Cf. Prat, Etudes, 1901, i, 485; Durand, Revue du Clerge frariQ., 1902, xxxiii., 20 ff.; Lagrange, Revue Biblique, 1896, 508. 182 LIBERAL OPINIONS on the scientific plane of his age, and his knowledge is limited by the horizon of his age. Therefore we must not read our opinions into the books, but draw the author's opinions out of them. He concludes that the question within proper lim- its belongs not to dogma, but to literary criticism. Fr. von Hummelauer quotes the following sentence from Durand (Revue du Clergy frangais XXXIII., 1902) : "Men have compared the inspired word of God with the Incarnate Word of God. The Apostle says that the Incarnate Word was made like to us in all save sin : we may say that the in- spired word becomes a human utterance in all save error." Von Hummelauer evidently accepts this as a most apt simile. He develops it still further: ''Yes, that (error) is the bound which is reached butr not passed. The Son of God was sinless, but he was tempted : he was not to see cor- ruption ; but he died and was buried. Man's word having become God's word is free of error, but it comes to the bound of error. Not to it is stranger the argumentum ad hominem which uses error, though it does not affirm error." It seems that this example is most unfitting and irrever- ent. It proves nothing for the new exegesis. In the cate- gory of sin there was no weakness in the Son of God : he was not tempted from within. He did not come to the hound of sin, and there stop. So likewise we may logically argue that in the category of error there is no weakness in the Scriptures ; they do not stop at the boimdary of error. They have human elements corresponding to the human in Christ ; they are not always written in the finest style ; the expres- sion may not always be the most apt ; they employ the scien- tific notions of their time ; but their enunciations are always true. Though they treated history without the critical method, they were upheld by the power of God to write true history. In our review of the liberal opinions on inspiration w^e have not contemplated to give all the authors. We have given the ablest exponents, and we believe that those omit- ted add nothing new to the principles here reviewed. Fr. Hildebrand Hopfl (das Buch der Bucher, Freiburg, 1904), closely follows Zanecchia; Engelkemper (die Paradieses ST. JEROME 183 fliisse, 1 901) and Norbert Peters (die grundsatzliche Stellung der Katholischen Kirche zur Bibelforschting, Paderbom, 1905). add nothing to the theories of Holzhey and von Hummelauer. Before closing this review of the liberal opinions we sub- mit a brief notice of the manner in which the adherents of the New Exegesis present what they choose to call St. Jerome's "law of history." In the XXVII. chapter of Jeremiah is narrated that Jeremiah prophesied the Babylonian captivity. In the XXVIII. chapter, Hananiah, the son of Azzur, contradicts Jeremiah, and declares that within two years the God of Israel shall break the yoke of the King of Babylon. The Lord reveals to Jeremiah that Hananiah had spoken a lying prophecy. Jeremiah charges the false prophet with the lie, and annoimces to him that he should die- that same year, which duly came to pass. The Hebrew mentions Hananiah as ''Hananiah the son of Azzur the prophet who was of Gabaon." The Septuagint departs from the Hebrew, and calls him a pseudo-prophet. "In his comment, on Jer. XXVIII. lo-ii, Jerome writes: ' 'The Seventy do not translate the clause 'two years. ' Neither do they speak of Ananias as a prophet, lest they should seem to call him a prophet who was not a prophet: as if many things were not spoken of in the Sacred Scriptures according to the opinion of that age, in which the events are related, and not according to the intrinsic truth of the thing itself (quasi non multa in Scripturis Sanctis dicantur juxta opinionem illius temporis quo gesta referuntur, et non juxta quod rei Veritas continebat) . Even Joseph is called in the Gospel the father of the Lord.'^ A little further in his commentary on Jer. XXIX, 5 ff., St. Jerome repeats: ''How could Holy Scrip- ture thus call him a prophet, although it is denied in Holy Scripture itself that he had been sent by the Lord? But truth and the law of history is observed, as we said before, not according to what was, but according to what was believed at that time (Sed historic Veritas et ordo servatur, sicut praedix- imus, non juxta quod erat, sed juxta id quod illo tempore putabatur." 184 ST. JEROME In the first place it is a strange process to appeal to Jerome as supreme judge to decide a matter of criticism. Jerome was of impulsive temperament, often expressed his opinions hastily, and often contradicts himself. No Catholic accepts his theoretical views on the deuterocanonical books. Hence we might set aside this testimony by a mere transeat. But it seems to us that the ecole large have stretched its application far beyond what Jerome intended. In the Scriptural passage itself there is no difficulty. Everyone knows that in the Scripture false prophets are often called prophets. The interpreters of the Septuagitnt were hyper- critical in substituting pseudo-prophets, since there was no danger of error in the original text. Now if Jerome's re- mark has any point at all, it must mean that the Scriptures call these men prophets for the reason that they were com- monly so termed, and not for the reason that the people believed them to be true prophets. In his Commentary on Ezekiel (M. t. XXV., Col. io8) Jerome makes clearer his meaning. He there treats of the same case, false prophets (Ezek. XIII. i), and Jerome justifies their being called prophets in the Scripture : "Let it not disturb anyone that they are called prophets; for the Holy Scripture usually calls a prophet any one prophesying; thus are called the prophets of Baal, the prophets of idols, and the prophets of confusion. And also Paul the Apostle calls the Greek poet a prophet (Titus I. 12): 'One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said: Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies.' " It is evident in Paul's quotation that he uses that word prophet in a loose sense, meaning that the verse of Epimenides was prophetically true of the Cretans. Jerome's meaning is simply to justify the Scriptural use of the word prophet. We do not assert that his statement is clear or cogent, but it can not have the wide application that the liberal school give it Let us hear how St. Jerome explains the fact that in Holy Scripture, St. Joseph is called the father of Christ ; and the Virgin Mary the wife of St. Joseph. [*' Ad versus Helvi- dium," n. 4.] ST. JEROME 185 '* Excepting Joseph and Elizabeth and Mary herself, and some few others who, we may suppose, heard the truth from them, all considered Jesus to be the Son of Joseph. And so far was this the case that even the Evangelists, expressing the opinion of the people, which is the true law of history (quae vera historias lex est), called him the father of the Saviour: as, for instance, 'And he (that is, Simeon) came in the Spirit into the temple ; and when the parents brought in the child Jesus ;' and elsewhere, 'And his parents went every year to Jerusalem.' And afterwards, 'The boy Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem and his parents knew not of it.' Observe also that Mary herself, who had replied to Gabriel with the words : 'How shall this be, since I know not man?" says concerning Joseph: 'Son why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I sought thee sorrowing.' We have not here, as many maintain, the utterance of Jews or mockers. The Evangelists call Joseph father ; Mary says he was father. Not , as I said before, that Joseph was really the father of the Saviour: but that, to preserve the reputation of Mary, he was regarded by all as his father. . . . But we have said enough, more with the aim of imparting instruction than of answering an opponent, to show why Joseph is called the father of our Lord, and why Mary is called Joseph's wife.' In his commentary on St. Matthew XIV., 9, St. Jerome applies the same principle, which he calls "the law of history," to the statement read in the Gospel that King Herod ''was struck sad,'' because the daughter of Herod ias said: "Give me here in a dish the head of John the Baptist." St. Jerome does not believe that Herod was sorry. ''It is the manner of Scripture," he says, 'Hhat the historian relates the opinion of the multitude, as it was commonly viewed at that time. (Consuetudinis Scripturarum est opinionem mul- torum sic narret historicus quomodo eo tempore ab omnibus credebatur). As Joseph was called, even by Mary herself, the father of Jesus, so here Herod is said to have been struck sad, because the banqueters thought he was. The hypocrite indeed and the homicide simulated sadness in his counte- nance, although he was really joyful in his heart." 186 MURILLO The best answer to these two testimonies is to admit that Jerome erred in both cases, and consequently his opinion is based on error, and is worthless. The Scriptures call Jesus the son of Joseph, not to accommodate themselves to a popular error, but because he was bom in a lawful wed- lock, and not of fornication ; and because Joseph was the real husband of the Mother of God. Secondly, it is clear that Jerome errs in believing that Herod was not at heart sad. There is not the slightest warrant for such supposition. Jerome's supposition makes the Gospel ridiculous. In fact one of the ardent disciples of the ecole large admits that Jerome is in error: "As a matter of fact, we believe that, not the Evangelist, biit St. Jerome was mistaken. King Herod was indeed 'struck sad' because he feared the people. But his mistake does not , of course, touch our question about the exegetic principle of St. Jerome." (H. Poels in Catholic University Bulletin, Jan., 1905). How may Catholic writers ever expect to harmonize their views, when such argtmients are used? In order to add authority to their theory, they cite Jerome's weaknesses, of which he had many, as the supreme law in this crisis of Catholic faith. It is not our intention to mention all those who have arisen to defend the Church on the question of inspiration. Two however, deserve special mention. Fr. Murillo [El Movimiento Reformista y la Exegesis; Razon y Fe, December, 1904; January, etc., 1905,] has published a series of articles against Fr. von Hummelauer's views and all kindred theories of exegesis. Among those reasons which he urges against the view of Oriental or ancient history assumed by our recent Catholic apologists, he appeals to Cicero's canon of history : ne quid falsi dicer e audeat, ne quid veri non audeat : ne qua suspicio gratiae sit in scribendo ne qua simultas. [De Orat. 11 15.] Murillo denies that historical fiction or romance is as effective as historical truth for inculcating moral principles ; he does not see why it cannot be said that the Evangelists too related the life of Christ according to the Oriental historical method, if the latter be compatible with the character of an inspired book. BILLOT 187 A still more important work in defense of a safe and sane theory of inspiration is the work "De Inspiratione Sacrae Scripturae, Romae, 1903," by Fr. L. Billot, S. J. After reviewing the various forms under which the new doctrines present themselves, Billot declares them to be contrary to the attributes of God and to the veracity of the Scriptures. He takes up their principles as follows : 'Their first principle is that the inspired writers were neither more nor less than profane writers. This is false; for an instru- mental cause is not in the same category of causality as a principal cause. Profane writers are the principal cause of their works ; while the inspired writers are only the instru- mental cause of their works : therefore there is no parity. ''Their second principle is that it pertains to the inspired writers to determine the literary form of their books. This is false, for the reason that it pertains to the principal author to determine the species of truth which is to be presented in a book, and sought therein. For our literary critics have in mind that literary form on which the whole sense of the book depends, and which is the directive principle of the entire interpretation. Therefore it is the literary form which de- termines the character of the book. Now if that by which a book receives its specific character be not from God, but from man, how is God the principal Author? 'Their third principle is that there is no literary form re- ceived among men which the inspiration of the Holy Ghost rejects. This is false, if it be understood of the literary forms which they imagine, especially that unspeakable genius of Oriental history. ... It is false for the reason that divine inspiration can not accept our defects, our ignor- ance, our vices, our rashness, our vanity. For the genus of literature, which they imagine, more properly should be called a genus of vanity, wherein there is no excuse; or if there be an excuse, ignorance must excuse the error, and rashness the ignorance. Now God corrects our defects but does not accept them. And if we appeal to the simile which the new biblicists employ, the Word made flesh did not assume any of the defects which springing from sin take away something of the plenitude of knowledge and grace ; 188 BILLOT but he dwelt among us full of grace and truth. Much less therefore in that operation (inspiration) which is proper not to his assumed nature, but to his divine nature can he participate in our defects by inspiring books of primitive myths and Oriental history." Here Billot especially aims to overthrow the theory of Loisy: "La verite divine, pour se manifester aux hommes, s'est "incamee comme le Verbe etemel. Le Fils de Dieu nous est **devenu semblable en tout, sauf le peche. Et la Bible "aussi resemble en toutes choses k un livre de I'antiquite ''qui aurait 6te redige dans les memes conditions historiques, **k I'exception d'un seul defaut qui la rendrait impropre k "sa destination providentielle, et ce defaut serait I'enseigne- "ment formel d'une . . erreur quelconque presentee comme "verite divine. Mais. ... les interpretes de la revelation "divine . . . se sont conformes aux procedes litteraires "employes de leur temps, et ils ont moule en quelque sorte "la verite revelee dans le cadre des opinions communes et " des traditions de leur race, sa\if k rectifier dans ces donnees ". . . ce qui pouvait contredire les principes essentiels de "la verite religieuse." Loisy, Etudes bibliques, p. 34. Billot severely handles the theory of implicit quotations : "Let us now come to the implicit quotations which are a great part of the new invention. . . . Under the name of an implicit quotation is understood the tacit employment of a document which the author inserts in his narration on its own authority, and for whose truth the author does not vouch. . . . Whatever literary form be supposed, what- ever customs and conventions prevailing in different times and places, we must always believe in our hearts and confess that the holy books were written at the dictation of the Holy Ghost, and indeed the entire books and all their parts, and therefore all and every one of the so called implicit quotations. For if a properly so called explicit quotation is a true part of a book which proceeds from the author as any other part . . . how rauch the more an implicit quota- tion which is incorporated into the body of the narration without any reference? It must be conceded therefore that the implicit quotations were inserted by the inspired INSPIRATION 189 writers not of their own motive and industry, but under the direction of God. . . . The human writer finds a docu- ment of whose value he is ignorant; nevertheless he copies it, and inserts it into his narration, taking a certain risk, judging that in any case he may be excused, partly on ac- count of a prestimptive probabiUty of the veracity of the document, partly on account of the considerations which our critics have ingeniously invented; let this pass. But what shall we judge of him to whom the falsity of the docu- ment is known, and who notwithstanding this certain con- science, should insert this document into his narration? Shall we forsooth distinguish historical honesty into western and Eastern? into ancient and modem? In this case even Oriental honesty would hardly be preserved. Wherefore since God is neither western nor eastern, neither ancient nor modem ; since moreover those things which are false he does not apprehend as probably possibly true, but cer- tainly knows them to be false ; since finally with him avail nothing those usages and conventions which the ignorance or vanity of men has introduced, we understand how from- his dictation there can not come forth an implicit quota- tion of a false document. And therefore from first to last, the doctrine of implicit quotations, understood in the sense and to the end that the new exegetes understand it, most evidently is to be rejected. ''Let the final conclusion be that in treating of literary forms they would argue more wisely if instead of seeking a genus of literature in which to place the Holy Books they would acknowledge that the Holy Scriptures form a genus apart, transcendent, imlike all other books. . . . It is fitting that the books of which God is the principal Author should have a manner of speech proper to themselves." The examination of the various theories of inspiration has brought us now to a point where we must adopt certain principles as our working theory of inspiration. Most of the adherents of the new exegesis in investigating the nature of inspiration make their point of departure not the action of God in inspiration, but the books themselves. In this there is excess. Inspiration is a supernatural effect, and is 190 SPECIES OF LITERATURE not revealed to us by the books themselves, but comes to us from God through the founts of revelation. Therefore we can not build up a theory of inspiration a posteriori from an examination of the books themselves. The process is legiti- mate to study the books to see what effects the action of God works in them ; but there must always be the directive principle in our minds that these books were written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and have God for their Author. In seeking the nature of inspiration we must separate it from extraneous questions. The Church does not admit as inspired, any writing of later origin than the Apostles. This has been a consistent teaching of the Church. But if this principle be accepted, the question of inspiration does not occupy itself with the question: Who are the authors of the inspired books? Neither does it concern inspiration to discern whether a book be of one human author or of many. To treat of the human authors is a separate question . Inspiration is sure of one divine Author ; but it is not essen- tial to it to define its htiman authors. At times it has done it, but only per accidens. Certain books, as many of St. Paul's epistles, declare their human authorship under the guarantee of divine inspiration ; of other books the authors will ever remain unknown; of some, the authorship is merely prob- able. Fr. Christian Pesch believes that no genus of literature is per se excluded from inspiration. It seems to us that this principle needs some restrictions. By the fact of in- spiration the Holy Books are unlike all other books. They are a transcendent genus of literature. Their modes of presenting truth may have affinities with the various forms of literature; but there is not an identity. And moreover there are certain species of literature whose end seems to be incompatible with the end of Scripture. For instance the epic poem is based on mythical heroes, and we can find no place in the plan and purpose of the Holy Scripture for the epic poem. The novel is a fictitious prose narrative or tale, involving some plot of more or less intricacy, and aiming to present a SPECIES OF LITERATURE 191 picture of real life in the historical period and society to which the persons, manners, and modes of speech, as well as the scenery and surroundings are supposed to belong. We look in vain in this definition for anything which could have been the aim of any of the Holy Books. The fable is a story or history untrue in fact or sub- stance, invented or developed by popular or poetic fancy or superstition, and to some extent or at one time current in popular belief as true and real. Now rigorously speaking perhaps we may apply the term to some portions of Holy Writ. Lexicographers tell us that the parable is a species of fable. But certainly the fable as popularly understood finds no place in Scripture. There are two species of literature which we believe must absolutely be excluded from Scripture. The legend is an unauthentic and improbable or non-historical narrative handed down from early times. It is the product of a people's imagination, a mere creation of fancy. Some legends teach moral truth, but not as we expect it to be taught in Holy Scripture. Once admit the presence of legends in the Scriptures and the basis of the Holy Scriptures is shaken. Parables and allegories are also fictitious history, but of another kind. The parable openly bears evidence that it is a species of similitude : in the allegory, one thing true and real is described under the image of another. In parables and allegories the symbolical character of the nar- rative is distinctly recognized. Still more do we exclude from Holy Scripture the myth, which is false history believed to be true. It is imaginary history having no existence in fact. It is not aimed to point a moral; it only expresses a people's superstitious concep- tions of primitive history. We believe that the divine ele- ment of inspiration excludes from Holy Scriptures the novel, the fable in its popular sense, the epic poem, the legend, and the myth. And the reason is that they are not true, and the Scriptures are true. These forms of literature being excluded, there remain many other forms of literature which Holy Writ employs, and consequently the divine influence manifests itself in 192 PROPHECY Holy Scripture in different modes. We find in Jeremiah a good description of the manner in which the Holy Ghost delivers a written prophecy. We do not say that all proph- ecy in the strict sense was delivered in this way ; but it is a representative specimen : ' 'And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, that this word came imto Jere- miah from the Lord, saying, Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day. It may be that the house of Judah will hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them ; that they may return every man from his evil way ; that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin. Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah ; and Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord, which he had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book." [Jer. XXXVI., 1-4.] Jeremiah executes the command, and Baruch reads the message. Then the princes ask the manner of the com- munication from Heaven: "And they asked Baruch, say- ing. Tell us now, How didst thou write all these words at his mouth? Then Baruch answered them. He pronounced all these words imto me with his mouth." [Jer. XXXVI. 17-18.] King Jehoiakim bums the scroll, and God commands that another be written: "Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying. Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned. And concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah thou shalt say. Thus saith the Lord: Thou hast burned this roll, saying. Why hast thou written therein, saying, The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land, and shall cause to cease from thence man and beast? There- fore thus saith the Lord concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah : He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David : and his GOD THE AU^^THOR OF SCRIPTURE 193 dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost. And I will punish him and his seed and his servants for their iniquity; and I will bring upon them, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and upon the men of Judah, all the evil that I have pronounced against them, but they hearkened not. Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein fom the mxouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire : and there were added besides unto them many like words." [Jer. XXXVI. 27—32.] While the direct influence of God here is most potent, it does not justify a mechanical theory of verbal inspiration. God's message came to the Prophet in mental words ; as it came forth from Jeremiah's lips the impress of God was upon thoughts and words ; but still it is not necessary to make the mind of Jeremiah act as a mere phonograph. Intellect and memory exercised their proper functions in receiving and delivering the words of God. It is evident from the account that the consigning of it to writing did not take place at the very moment that God spoke to the prophet. Jeremiah received the message, and his memory preserved it. In re- producing it for writing, his memory was supernaturally aided by God ; but there is no warrant for multiplying mir- acles to the extent that every word be placed ready made in Jeremiah's mind. In dealing with this subtle action of God it is difficult to describe in words the mental processes with which God co-operates. We may ilkistrate by an example. Let us suppose that the same identical message came to Jeremiah and to another prophet; and that both executed the command to write it. In the two accounts we should expect to find the same modal differences that are found in the several accounts of the words of institution of the Blessed Sacrament at the Last Supper. In investigating the nature of inspiration we have the certain principle that God is the principal Author of Holy Scripture, and that the human authors are the instrumental causes. It follows also that they are living rational in- struments, and in conformity with the certain theological (13) H. s 194 REVELATION principle, God employed the faculties of these instruments to write the Holy Books. Inasmuch as these created facul- ties were incapable of effecting the Holy Books, God elevated and strengthened them, and thus used them to deliver his message, so that one effect the Holy Books, comes forth from a double causality. This action of God thus enabling a man to accomplish a writing above his natural powers is aptly called charismatic. The Church has done more than tell us that God has inspired the writers of Scripture; St. Thomas, St. Gregory the Great, the author of the Imitation of Christ, and many others have been given of the grace of God which might truly be called inspiration; but the in- spiration which moved the human authors of the Bible was of that nature that it made God the Author of the Scriptures : they are the word of God. By this definition of inspiration the negative theory of inspiration of Chrismann and Jahn is excluded. Neither could a subsequent approbation by the Church give to any book the character which the Church infallibly declares to belong to her canonical books. As Franzelin rightly declared in the Vatican Cotincil: ''Be- cause the Church is infallible she can define nothing as revealed truth which is not revealed by God; and in like manner through the same charisma of infallibility she can not put any book in the Canon of Holy Scripture which was not divinely inspired." (Coll. Lac. VII. 162 1). It can not be argued against this theory that St. Paul thus approved the sayings of Aratus and Epimenides (Acts XVII. 28; Titus I. 12). St. Paul not only approves these sayings, but by incorporating them into his book makes them a part of his book. God is not the Author of those sayings as existing in the works of the two poets ; but he is the Author of the cita- tion of them and the approbation of them by which they became an integral part of an inspired book. In every question there are two extremes. So here in defending full inspiration for the Holy Books, we must not r\m into the other extreme. We have said before that revelation does not enter into the essence of inspiration. We mean here revelation in the strict sense. This takes place when God directly in- REVELATION 195 fuses the ideas into a created mind, as in the Prophets and the Apocalypse of St. John. But there is an influence of God wherein he enlightens the mind better to receive and use naturally acquired knowledge. This is sometimes called revelation in a wide sense. It is clear that this is always present in inspiration. Sometimes this distinction is not adverted to, and the divine influence in Holy Scripture is spoken of as revelation. It is clearly evident that revelation, strictly speaking, does not extend to all the Scriptures. Often the writers indicate their human sources. The annals of the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel are in large part the indicated sources of the Books of Kings. In the Books of Chronicles we find sixteen different documents cited as sources. The writer of II. Maccabees certainly employed existing documents ; and St. Luke asserts that he had gath- ered his materials from others. St. Thomas clearly explains this doctrine of the Church as follows: "If into the mind of a man light be infused by God, not for the purpose of knowing certain supernatural things, but that he may know with the certitude of divine truth things which can be known by human reason, that species of prophecy is inferior to that which by mental visions imparts the knowledge of supernatural truth, which (later) prophecy all they had who are placed in the order of Prophets, for they fulfilled the prophetic office. Where- fore, they spoke in the person of God, saying to the people : 'Thus saith the Lord ;' but the hagio graphs spoke not so, for most of them spoke in most part of those things which can be known by himian reason, and (they spoke) not in the person of God, but as men, but with the help of divine light." (2. 2. q. 173, a. 4.) From the fact that this divine light is omnipresent in the Holy Scriptures the whole Scrip- ture is divinely revealed, and is the object of divine faith. But in this regard, we must bear in mind the principle of St. Thomas: '*A thing pertains to the precept of faith in two ways: (i) it pertains to faith directly as the articles of faith which are promulgated to be believed for their own sake. . . . (2) Other things pertain to faith indirectly,^ inasmuch as they are not proposed to be believed for their 196 THE DIVINE AFFLATUS own sake, but for the reason that from the negation of these, something would follow contrary to faith, as for in- stance if one should deny that Isaac was Abraham's son, there would follow something contrary to faith, viz., that the Scripture contains falsehood." (I. Cor. XI. 4). This teaching is of value against those who would re- strict inspiration to things of faith and morals. It is true that our act of faith more immediately finds its object in the things of faith and morals; but it embraces this other equally immediate truth : We believe all that God has re- vealed (in the broad sense). Therefore the things revealed per accidens are included in our act of faith. Of course our act of faith presupposes the application of true hermeneu- tics to determine what is the true sense of the things not yet defined by the Church. To produce a book the author must conceive the ideas in his mind and consign them to writing either in person or by another. Therefore in employing man as an instrument to execute a writing, God must illumine his mind in the very act of conceiving the thoughts. This illumination will be a strict revelation in certain cases, as before explained ; in things of natural reason or even mysteries learned through natural means it will be revelation in the larger sense, and both degrees of God's action are inspiration. God also moves the will of the author to write, and assists him so that he properly executes the writing in a manner worthy of the word of God. Not alone by an internal moving of the will does God bring about the writing — he uses external circumstances and agents. Thus the things impelling to write may be friendship, or a special request, or a special need of a particular church, etc. But with the natural knowledge of the things to be written and with the natural motives impelling to write, God co-operates, strength- ening the intelligence, and moving the free will so that there is inevitably produced a book which God wills to be his word, inspired and free from error. It is not difficult to understand why God should illumine the created intelligence even in the act of writing things naturally known. Without the help of God, man could not THE DIVINE AFFLATUS 197 impress upon his writings the stamp of absolute infallible truth, even in the things which he knows by his own industry. We know that at times we experience a greater intellectual vigor, and that we can then judge better, and write better. In dealing with natural phenomena, or with the events of history, one writer is more accurate than another ; one writer is better able to judge of the nature of things and events and of their relations. In inspiration God's action gives the strength necessary to deliver adequately God's message. God's action on the will of the inspired writer is both physical and moral. Inasmuch as God as the principal Author wills to deliver to men a certain definite message through the instrumentality of the inspired writer, there corresponds to this will of God a charismatic physical mo- tion of the will of the inspired writer which does not de- prive it of liberty. The human will — thus moved by God still retains the absolute power to resist. The moral in- fluence of God at times may be a direct command to write as was given to some of the writers. In more instances it will consist in a supernatural illumination of the mind by which it conceives ideas and judgments which impel a man to write. The delivering of the books to the Church is not an essential of inspiration, but supposes it. We cannot say that God ordained the delivery of the books to the Church as an absolute end in giving inspiration; for some inspired books have been lost. The purpose of inspiration was to deliver a message of salvation to the world, and the ordi- nary custodian of that message is the Church. We may distinguish three elements in God's action in in- spiration, God supernaturally illumines the intellect to conceive rightly the truths ; He moves the will to write faithfully these truths ; and he assists the inspired writer to give written expression to these truths without admixture of error. It is indifferent to inspiration whether the inspired man himself do the material writing or execute it by means of an amanuensis ; but in the latter case the assistance of God protects against errors which would affect the sense of the propositions. 198 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION The curious question is raised by some: Does inspira- tion admit of different degrees? as for instance: Is Isaiah more inspired than the writer of the Books of Maccabees? This question must be answered with a distinction. As re- gards the essence of biblical inspiration all the books are equal, and are received by the Church pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia. (Cone. Trid. Sess. 4.) Therefore one book can not be said to be more inspired than another. But since the illumination of the mind and the motion of the will are finite entities they may admit of various degrees of intensity. Of what degree was given we know nothing, since it is not revealed to us. But it is perfectly compatible with the right idea of inspiration that God may have given to one a deeper insight into divine truth, a greater feeling in expressing it, a poetic power in presenting it. These are not of the essence of the inspiration. CHAPTER II. EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. In all these questions we seek first if there be any author- itative teaching on the subject. In the present instance we find that in his universal proposition, "all Scripture is in- spired," St. Paul extends inspiration to all Scripture. The same persuasion is in Christ in his use of Scripture. He cites it as a thing of absolute authority : he bases the great proofs of his character and mission on the statement: "It is written." The very fact that a thing is written in Holy Scripture was an absolute proof. The Apostles and other inspired writers did the same. The Fathers are unan- imous in asserting that all Scripture is inspired. The coun- cils of the Church have defined this by asserting that all the books with all their parts are inspired. But now we must see in what sense all Scripture is in- spired. The question of the inspiration of Obiter Dicta is a cele- brated one in Biblical Criticism. Obiter Dicta may be called those details of minor moment related in Holy Writ, which are inserted en passant, not seemingly comprised in the main scope and intention of the writer. The passage in OBITER DICTA 199 Tobias XI. 9. relating to the wagging of the tail of Tobias' dog: ''blandimento suae caudae gaudebat," and the pas- sage in St. Paul's letter to Timothy, II. Tim. IV. 13. relat- ing to the cloak left at Troas: "Penulam, quam reliqui Troade apud Carpum, veniens affer tecum," are usually quoted as examples of obiter dicta. Concerning these, two questions may be raised : i . Are the Obiter Dicta in- spired? 2. Is it of faith that these are inspired ? Catholic theologians generally answer the first question in the affirm- ative. And, in truth, such must be defended, for the same danger would menace us as before mentioned, were we to reject the inspiration of these passages, namely, that of gradually widening the circle of these, and inducing un- certainty into the Scripture, by the freedom with which men might reject these details. Card. Newman asserted that, in his opinion, these w^ere not of faith. Patrizi, quoted by Lamy, and by him fol- lowed, does not dare condemn the opinion of those who deny that the Obiter Dicta are of faith. Schmid says: "Credimus doctrinam quam proposuimus quoad illam specia- lem assertionem, quae immunitatem ab errore, divinam auc- toritatem, et inspirationem ipsam ad res indifferentes etiam minimas extendit, non esse de fide, et contrariam non esse haeresim. Nihilominus, persuasum nobis est doctrinam nostram omnino certam esse, nee contrariam ullo modo proba- bilem aut tolerabilem judicamus.'' Newman, in the 19th Century for 1884, excludes from the fide divina credenda "obiter dicta"; such as, for instance, that Nabuchadnezzar was king of Niniveh, Judith I. 7 ; or that Paul left his cloak at Troas ; or that Tobias' dog wagged his tail. Tob. XI. 9: "And here I am led on to inquire whether obiter dicta are conceivable in an inspired docu- ment. We know that they are held to exist and even re- quired in treating of the dogmatic utterances of Popes, but are they compatible with inspiration ? The common opinion is that they are not. Professor Lamy thus writes about them, in the form of an objection : 'Many minute matters occur in the sacred writers which have regard only to human feebleness and the natural necessities of life, and by no 200 OBITER DICTA means require inspiration, since they can otherwise be per- fectly well known, and seem scarcely worthy of the Holy Spirit, as for instance, what is said of the dog of Tobias, St. Paul's penula, and the salutations at the end of the Epistles.' Neither he nor Fr. Patrizi allow of these exceptions; but Fr. Patrizi, as Lamy quotes him, 'damnare non audet eos qui haeC'tenerent', viz., exceptions, and he himself, by keep- ing silence, seems unable to condemn them either. By obiter dicta in Scripture I also mean such statements as we find in the Book of Judith, that Nabuchodonosor was king of Nineveh. Now it is in favor of there being such unauthoritative obiter dicta, that unlike those which occur in dogmatic utterances of Pope and Councils, they are, in Scripture, not doctrinal, but mere unimportant statements of fact ; whereas those of Popes and Councils may relate to faith and morals, and are said to be uttered obiter, because they are not contained within the scope of the formal defin- ition, and imply no intention of binding the consciences of the faithful. There does not then seem any serious diffi- culty in admitting their existence in Scripture. Let it be observed, its miracles are doctrinal facts, and in no sense of the phrase can be considered obiter dicta." The Fathers were concurrent in extending inspiration to everything contained in Holy Scripture. *T believe," says St. Augustine, ''that no Sacred writer has been deceived in anything." (Epist. 72. ad Hieron.) St. J. Chrys., Hom. XV. in Gen., says that every word is to be pondered, as they are the words of the Holy Ghost {i. e. the sense of the words.) So, St. Jerome reproaches, for the same reason, those who do not receive the Epistle to Philemon. St. Thomas, Summa Theol. 1. Q. I. art. 10. ad. 3.: 'Tt is evident that there never can be falsehood contained in the literal sense," and Q. 32. art. 4: "A thing pertains to faith in two w^ays. In one way, directly, as those things which are principally co- signed to us ; as for instance, that God is triune. Things per- tain indirectly to faith, from whose contrary would follow something pernicious to faith; as, for instance, if one were to say that Samuel were not the son of Helcana; for from this it would follow that the Scriptures were false." OBITER DICTA 201 The encyclical "Providentissimus Deus" in express terms condems the theory that exempts the obiter dicta from, inspiration: "But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Hol}^ Scripture, or to admit that the Sacred Writer has erred. For the system of those who, in order to rid themselves of those difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that Divine in- spiration regards the things of faith and morals, and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think), in a question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which He had in mind when saying it — this system cannot be tolerated. For all the Books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost ; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incom- patible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the Supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church solemnly defined in the councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican. These are the words of the last : 'The Books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, as enimierated by the decree of the same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are to be received as Sacred and Canonical. And the Church holds them as Sacred and Canonical, not because having been composed by himian industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority ; nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspira- tion of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their Author.' [Sess. in. C. II. de Rev.] Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot, there- fore, say that it was these inspired instruments who, per- chance, have fallen into error, and not the primary Author. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write— He was so present to them — that the things which 202 OBITER DICTA He ordered, and those only, they first rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers. There- fore,' says St. Augustine, 'since they wrote the things which He showed and uttered to them, it cannot be pretended that He is not the Writer; for His members executed what their Head dictates.' [De consensu Evangel. L. i, C. 35.] And St. Gregory the Great thus pronounces: 'most super- flous it is to inquire who wrote these things — we loyally be- lieve the Holy Ghost to be the author of the Book. He wrote it who dictated it for writing; He wrote it who in- spired its execution.' [Praef. in Job, n. 2.] **It follows that those who maintain that an error is possible in any genuine passage of the Sacred Writings, either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration, or make God the author of such error." The error of those who have excluded the obiter dicta from inspiration seems to be to regard these details in them- selves, without considering their relations to the general text. Considered apart from the other portions of the book, they are unimportant : they could have been omitted without substantial loss to the book. They are not written for their own sake ; they are a part of the setting of more im- portant truth. The inspired writer under the influence of inspiration conceives his book in his hiiman mind. It is written in a human manner of expression. These details are not irrelevant; they fit in naturally into the account. The motive moving us to extend inspiration to them is not their own importance; but the fact that if they be denied inspiration the integrity of the Holy Books is assailed. Who shall fix the limits of the obiter dicta? Hence they claim inspiration not on account of their own importance but because they are parts of an inspired book. Their claim to inspiration rests on the basic truth that there can not be error in any part of the Bible. The positive teaching of the Church condemns the opinion which asserts that some parts of the Bible are inspired and others are not. The obiter DICTA ALIORUM 203 dicta can not be said to be so few as not to form a part as here contemplated. The greater part of the XVI. Chapter of Romans is made up of salutations which are set down as obiter dicta. It seems therefore to follow from the definitions of the Church that inspiration must be extended to all the parts of Holy Scripture. In answer to the second question, Is it of faith that the obiter dicta are inspired? we believe that a negative answer must be returned. Bellarmine, however, holds that it is of faith: *'It is heresy, to believe that in St. Paul's Epistles and in other sacred books not all things are written at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; but that some things proceeded solely from human reason and judgment." (De Verbo Dei, Lib. i.) Melchior Canus (De Locis Theol. Lib. 2, 1 6) calls the theory an impious error: "How impious is the error to assert that in the canonical books the writers at times wrote as mere men without the divine and super- natural revelation (inspiration), I demonstrate first by the argument that in this opinion the authority of the Holy Scriptures is in great part shaken." He proceeds then to show how easy it were to widen the field of the obiter dicta ; and then concludes: "Let us therefore confess that every- thing whether great or small was written by the sacred writers under the dictation of the Holy Ghost." But the Church has not defined the issue with sufficient clearness to warrant a theological censure of the opposite opinion. In relation to the inspiration of "dicta aliorum," no definite rule can be given. The character of the person, the circumstances in which such saying is uttered, the mode of quoting, and the nature of the proposition must be weighed. For instance, the sayings which the inspired writers make their own by their approbation are inspired. St. Peter was inspired, when he confessed the divinity of Christ, not when he denied Christ. The words of impious men sometimes are quoted, but " in persona illorum," not intending them to be as truths. In regard to these, although no fixed rule can be laid down, still there is no difficulty in distinguishing the true from the false. 204 DICTA ALIORUM Sometimes the statements are formulated as the sayings of others, but are in reality the creations of the author him- self. He sometimes expresses the ideas of impious men in order to condemn them. Thus in the book of Wisdom, speeches are placed in the mouths of Epicureans in order to illustrate and condemn these errors. Again, the inspired writer may reproduce the words of good men and approve them, without thereby extending the prerogative of absolute infallibility to them. Thus in Acts St. Luke relates St. Stephen's great discourse before the San- hedrim. He declares also that Stephen was filled with the Holy Ghost in his discourse. And yet St. Luke does not become responsible for the lapse of memory whereby Stephen declares that Abraham bought the tomb "for a price in silver of the sons of Hamor in Shechem" (Acts VII. i6). Genesis (XXXIII. 18-19) states that Jacob bought this tomb, and the context warrants the statement of Genesis. The divine inspiration of Luke aided him faithfully to report Stephen's words. Stephen, though filled with the Holy Ghost, was not inspired as an inspired writer. The main truth of his words is not affected by the accidental error. St. Luke approves the substantial truth of Stephen's words. Again, it may happen that a writer may present his teaching in a species of drama. Care must be taken then to discern when the actors in the drama convey the ideas of the writer of the book. Thus in Job there are various speakers who discuss the great questions of human life and destiny. With consimimate art the writer has so con- ceived the discourses that, though there is an error of fact in Job's friends, inasmuch as they believe him guilty of grave sin, nevertheless they discourse rightly upon the great issues of human life. If the inspired writer relates the words of others without either implicit or explicit approbation, the words thus re- lated do not become a part of divinely inspired Scripture, but have only their own intrinsic authority. This principle will apply to the letters written to the Jews by the Spartans, and by the Romans, and according to some to the letters DICTA ALIORUM 205 (II. Maccab. I. 15, seqq. ; IX. i seqq.) written by the Jews to their compatriots in Egypt. In a word therefore, the sayings of others related in Holy Scripture are inspired if they become the sense of the inspired writer. Sometimes the writers express an indetermination of mind, or a state of doubt; or they express an estimate of certain things. St. Luke seems to have been uncertain whether it were eight or ten days that Festus tarried at Jerusalem (Acts XXV. 6) ; St. John describes the water pots as holding two or three firkins (John II. 6) ; the number fed by the multiplication of the loaves was not with mathe- matical precision known to St, Matthew ; but it was a num- ber which the correct judgment of men would estimate at five thousand. The truth of history demands nothing more for such a statement. The state of indetermination is not to be ascribed to the Holy Ghost. He uses human instru- ments to deliver all truth as required by the nature of the things written. It is an inspired fact that Festus tarried at Jerusalem a period of time of which an adequate idea was conveyed by declaring that it was eight or ten days ; and so in all other cases. This principle is very useful in its appli- cation to such biblical facts as the size of armies, the number of the slain, etc. We must distinguish between these num- bers as they came from the inspired writers and the present numbers of the text. Many accidental errors have crept into the present numbers. It is clear also that opposed to the very nature of in- spiration is the theory that the inspired writer may de- clare a thing which is false in the sense which the human writer intended to convey; but true in the sense that the Holy Ghost delivered thereby. God's action as the prin- cipal cause of the writing excludes such a condition in the instrument; for an essential element of inspiration is the illumination of the mind of the inspired writer that he may rightly conceive what he is to write. It would be the opposite extreme to hold that inspira- tion banished all ignorance and false persuasion from the mind of the inspired writer. As far as regards the things which they were not called to write as inspired agents 206 VERBAL INSPIRATION God left them to their own resources; not, of course, ex- cluding that illumining influence that grace works in all the saints. Thus for instance it is clearly proclaimed in revela- tion that the day of general judgment is hidden from all creatures. This all the inspired writers accepted as a fimda- mental truth. Yet from their own human reasoning some of them at least seem to have believed that such event was near at hand. This is not in any way prejudicial to inspira- tion. They do not proclaim that it is near at hand. Per- haps some of their arguments relating to human conduct in a certain sense imply that they believed that the con- summation were not far off ; but the arguments do not assert it, nor do they become false from the fact that ages have elapsed since they wrote. The uncertainty of that great day is a true incentive to a right order of life ; and thus they used it. A most important and most difficult question is to de- termine what influence the Holy Ghost has on the words o^ Holy Scripture. This question is usually treated of under the heading of Verbal inspiration. The term verbal in this connection is badly chosen; for it admits of such meanings that to the question. Are the Holy Scriptures verbally in- spired? we may return an affirmative and negative answer, both true. Hence we have need to present the question in clearer terms. The words of Holy Scripture may be divided into formal words and material words. The formal words are the men- tal conceptions of the writer, and corresponds to the ideas expressed in the books. In this sense all the words of Holy Scripture are the words of God; they are all inspired; and are free from error. The external signs by which these ideas are expressed are conveniently called material words; and the question is now to be discussed : Are these inspired? Here again we must distinguish. All must admit a certain influence of the Holy Ghost on the words. The question therefore narrows itself down to this. In what sense are the material words of Holy Scripture inspired? VERBAL INSPIRATION 207 We can readily understand that the mental word con- ceived in the mind in one sense compels and determines the material word; and in another sense leaves it free. For example: the inspired writer tinder the influence of divine inspiration conceives the idea: The Son of God became man. The nature of human speech limits him to a certain range of words and expressions to convey that idea. But still within that range there is a latitude of freedom. If the writer knows more than one language he may choose one or the other. Thus Matthew had a choice between Hebrew and Greek for his Gospel. We do not deny that God may determine the tongue to be used, but such de- termination would not be of the essence of inspiration. Again, the writer may express the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity as the Son of God, or the Word of God, and the same freedom of choice is applicable to the predicate. Let us take as another example the truth : Jesus Christ died for us. A man may express that truth in different material words, viz.. The Son of God gave his life for us; The Redeemer suffered death for all mankind, etc. Now the question to answer is, Did God in inspiration determine the Holy Writers to use one form of expression instead of another, when both were equally apt? Some of the early protestants answered this question in the affirm- ative. It was a part of that exaggerated sentimentalism which endeavored to set aside the Magisterium of the Church, and set up the Scriptures as the sole rule of faith. We have seen that this error died amid its worshippers. In Catholic thought there have been certain changes of thought and certain differences of opinion in those things in which the Church has not defined. The Fathers at times, speaking oratorically, in their de- sire to demand for the Scriptures fitting reverence, speak in such terms that without due caution one might be led to believe that they held the theory of absolute inspiration of the material words. But a deeper insight into the con- sistent principles of the Fathers, and a comparative study of the system of their faith will persuade that what they de- manded for the Holy Scriptures was reverence for every 208 VERBAL INSPIRATION truth of Holy Scripture as it exists clothed in fitting words for us. Though we believe that the inspired writer had a certain liberty in choosing words and expressions, provid- ing they be fitting, when he has made this choice and clothed an inspired idea in words, these words become sacred as signs of a divinely inspired idea, and they will merit the veneration which the Fathers paid them. Moreover, since the writer's intellectual faculties are supematurally enlight- ened by the action of inspiration, this illumination will in- fluence the choice of words ; the inspired writer will be aided by God to convey his inspired concepts in a manner that befits the infallible message of God ; hence our purpose here is not to deny a certain verbal inspiration, but to prevent its exaggeration. The Fathers used synonymously the two expressions, The Holy Scriptures are inspired by God, and. The Holy Scrip- tures are dictated by God. Their clear statements demon- strate that they did not use the term dictation to signify the mechanical theory of inspiration. All will consider Origen a capable witness of tradition, the greatest mind of his age. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. VI. 25) transmits to us the following testimony of Origen on the Epistle to the Hebrews : "That the verbal style of the epistle entitled 'To the Hebrews,' is not rude like the language of the apostle, who acknowledged himself 'rude in speech,' [II. Cor. XL 6] that is, in expression ; but that its diction is purer Greek, any one who has the power to discern differences of phraseology will acknowledge. Moreover, that the thoughts of the epistle are admirable, and not inferior to the acknowledged apostolic writings, any one who carefully examines the apostolic text will admit. '*If I gave my opinion, I should say that the thoughts are those of the apostle, but the diction and phraseology are those of some one who remembered the apostolic teachings, and wrote, down at his leisure what had been said by his teacher. Therefore if any church holds that this epistle is by Paul, let it be commended for this. For not without reason have the ancients handed it down as Paul's. But who wrote the epistle, in truth, God knows. The statement VERBAL INSPIRATION 209 of some who have gone before us is that Clement, bishop of the Romans, wrote the epistle, and of others that Luke, the author of the Gospel and the Acts, wrote it." We may logically argue that if Origen considered it not inconsistent with inspiration that another should write down the inspired writer's thoughts at his leisure as he re- membered them, he was far from holding the absolute inspiration of the material w^ords. At times we find that under the prepossession of his excessive mysticism, Origen extended inspiration to the very material letters of Holy Writ, (Hom. in Ps. I. 4) but he tempered this extreme view by statements such as we have adduced. St. Ambrose in many things followed the excessive mys- ticism of Origen. Touching our present theme he says: ''Though sometimes, according to the letter, the Evangelists seem at variance, the truths they utter are not discordant, for the mystery is the same." (On Luke X. 171) Again he says (On Luke VIIL 63) : "In the Holy Scriptures it is not the order of words but the substance of the things which we should consider." St. John Chrysostom is sometimes cited as an advocate of inspiration of the material words of Holy Scripture. In his Homily on Genesis, 11. 2, he writes thus: "Ye have heard just now the Scripture declaring: 'But for Adam there was not found a help meet for him.' What is the meaning of the brief clause: 'But for Adam?' Why does (the Scripture) place there the conjunction (5e)? Did it not suffice to say : 'For Adam?' It is not from vain curios- ity that we discuss these things, but that by interpreting all things we may teach you not to pass over any brief saying, or even syllable of Holy Scripture. For they are not mere words, but the words of the Holy Ghost, and therefore a great value may be found in one syllable." Again in the same work, XXI. i, he continues : "In the Holy Scriptures there is nothing written which has not a great wealth of meaning ; for since the prophets spoke by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost , therefore the writings proceeding from the Holy Ghost contain in themselves a great treasure. There is not a syllable or tittle in Holy Scripture in whose depths (14) H. s. 210 VERBAL INSPIRATION there is not a great treasure." In his Homily on ** Salute Priscilla and Aquila," Chrysostom declares the purpose of his homily to be ** that ye may know that in the Holy Scriptures there is nothing superfluous, even though it be an iota or a tittle. And even a simple salutation opens up to us a vast sea of meaning. And why do I say, a simple salutation? often even the addition of one letter adds the value of sentences. This may be seen in the name of Abraham. A man who receives a letter from a friend, not only reads the body of the letter, but also the salutation at the end, and concludes from it the writer's affection; and since Paul, or rather not Paul, but the grace of the Holy Ghost, dictates a letter to a whole city, and a numerous people and through them to the whole world, is it not most imbecoming to judge that any thing therein is superfluous and pass it by, not realizing that thus everything is per- verted?" This is a strong patristic argument for the inspiration of the obiter dicta, but it does not maintain the absolute in- spiration of the material words. In the first place if we press the testimony too much it becomes absurd, and we are unwilling to believe that the mighty mind of Chrysostom should have so betrayed him. He well knew that the material words of the Old Testament were not the material words of the inspired writer, but the words of an interpreter, and as Ambrose rightly says: '*We must always seek the sense, which the frequent translations from Hebrew into Greek, and from Greek into Latin attenuates." (On Ps. XXXVII. 49). Chrysostom himself admits the same principle: "We have not the Old Testament writ in our mother tongue : it was composed in one tongue ; we read it in another. It was first written in Hebrew ; we have received it in Greek. By its translation into another tongue it becomes difficult. All who are versed in many tongues know that it is impossible with equal clearness to translate everything from its own language into another. This is a cause of difficulty in the Old Testament." (On The Obscurity of Proph. 11. 2.) Therefore the letters and tittles of the Greek text could not VERBAL INSPIRATION 211 have been considered by Chrysostom as dictated by the Holy Ghost. St. Chrysostom 's meaning is therefore that the deep sense of Holy Scripture is to be sought in every word of Holy Scripture. Acting within that range of liberty that we have explained the writers chose certain words and expressions as the sensible signs to convey their inspired ideas. Therefore the ideas which might have been ex- pressed in other ideas, de facto lie in these words. We may therefore call these words inspired; for by them as sensible signs the conceptions of inspired minds are delivered to us. The words therefore merit all reverence, and we can not come at the deep sense of Holy Scripture without weigh- ing every word. The conjunction in Genesis specified by Chrysostom has a value, for it makes more forcible the con- trast between the completeness of the other orders of crea- tion, and the incompleteness of the himian race as existing in Adam. We must also know that Chrysostom spoke oratorically, and used the arts of oratory. In other works he distinguishes between the inspired sense and the material word. In his work Contra Judaeos II. XLVIII. he says : "When thou hearest Paul crying out and saying: 'behold, I Paul say to you, if you be circumcised, Christ profits you nothing,' the voice, 4>^vq, only recognize to be that of Paul, but the sense and the dogma recognize to be of Christ by whom he was interiorly taught." St. Jerome is most reverent to the * 'syllables, tittles, points, etc." of Holy Scripture, since they "are of divine origin and full of meaning," (On Eph. V. 6). Again he declares: "For I myself not only admit but freely pro- claim that in translating from the Greek, except in the case of Holy Scriptures, where even the order of the words is a mys- tery, I render sense for sense, and not word for word." (Epist. LVII. 4.) A superficial observation of such passages might move one to believe that Jerome asserted the mechanical theory of verbal inspiration; but deeper study of his works demon- strates that he allowed to the human writers the same range of liberty in the use of words and expressions for which we are pleading. In his commentary on the well 212 VERBAL INSPIRATION known hyperbaton of Ephesians, III. i, Jerome declares: "I believe that the -expression here is defective." Jerome could not attribute a defective expression to the Holy Ghost. Again St. Jerome in his CXX. Epistle, 1 1, has this testimony : "Though he (Paul) had knowledge of all the Scriptures, and knew many tongues, he was unable to render the august sense of the Holy Scriptures fittingly in Greek. He had therefore Titus as an interpreter, as Peter had Mark, whose Gospel was composed by Peter's dictation and Mark's writ- ing. Moreover the two epistles which are called Peter's differ in style, character, and composition of words. From which we know that by the necessity of the case, Peter used different amanuenses." Jerome will not be said to have held that God inspired thoughts to Paul and Peter, and words to different interpreters who wrote their thoughts. Jerome traces a man's origin and education in his in- spired writings: "We must know that Isaiah is eloquent in speech, being a man of noble birth and of cultured elo- quence, and free from everything imcouth." (Prof, on Is.) "Jeremiah the prophet is held by the Hebrew to be ruder in speech than Isaiah and Hosea and other prophets, but he equals them in sense, for he prophesied in the same spirit. The plainness of his language comes from the place of his birth. He was of Anathoth, a village to this day, three miles distant from Jerusalem." (Prol. On Jer.) "Amos the prophet was of the shepherds, imskilled in speech, but not in knowledge; for the same Spirit who spoke by all the prophets spoke by him." (Prol. On Amos.) This is a clear argument that the Holy Ghost delivered the sense of the Holy Scriptures through men, leaving to them to employ words and expressions in conformity with their education. A strong argument against the theory of the inspiration of the material words is the fact that the inspired writers of the New Testament, when quoting from the Old Testament do not quote the exact words, but only the sense. Now if the material words were inspired by the Holy Ghost, they would have taken care to reproduce them. Jerome develops this argument at great length: "In Matthew [XXVII. 9, ic] when the thirty pieces of silver are returned VERBAL INSPIRATION 213 by the traitor Judas, and the potter's field is purchased with them, it is written: — ^'Then was fulfilled that which was spoken of by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, 'and they took the thirty pieces of silver the price of him that was valued which they of the children of Israel did value, and gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.' This passage is not found in Jeremiah at all but in Zechariah, in quite different words and an altogether different order. In fact the Vulgate renders it as follows : — 'And I will say unto them, If it is good in your sight, give ye me a price or refuse it. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said imto me. Put them into the melting furnace and consider if it is tried as I have been tried by them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them into the house of the Lord.' [Zech. XL 12, 13, Vulg.] It is evident that the rendering of the Septuagint differs widely from the quotation of the evangelist. In the Hebrew also, though the sense is the same, the words are quite different and differently arranged. It says: 'And I said unto them. If ye think good, give me my price; and, if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said unto me, Cast it unto the potter; [statuarius.] a goodly price that I was priced at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord.' [Zech. XI. 12, 13.] They may accuse the apostle of falsifying his version seeing that it agrees neither with the Hebrew nor with the translators of the Septuagint: and worse than this, they may say that he has mistaken the author's name putting down Jeremiah when it should be Zechariah. Far be it from us to speak thus of a follower [pedissequus.] of Christ, who made it his care to formulate dogmas rather than to hunt for words and syllables. To take another instance from Zechariah, the evangelist John quotes from the He- brew, They shall look on him whom they pierced,' [Joh. XIX. 37 : Zech. XII. 10] for which we read in the Septuagint 'And they shall look upon me because they have mocked me,' and in the Latin version, 'And they shall look upon me for the things which they have mocked or insulted.' Here 214 VERBAL INSPIRATION the evangelist, the Septuagint, and our own version [i. e. the Italic, for the Vulgate, which was not then published, accurately represents the Hebrew.] all differ ; yet the diverg- ence of language is atoned by oneness of spirit. In Matthew again we read of the Lord preaching flight to the apostles and confirming His counsel with a passage from Zechariah. *It is written,' he says, *I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.' [Matt. XXVI, 31 ; Zech. XIII. 7.] But in the Septuagint and in the He- brew it reads differently, for it is not God who speaks, as the evangelist makes out, but the prophet who appeals to God the Father saying: — 'Smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.' In this instance according to my judg- ment — and I have some careful critics with me — the evan- gelist is guilty of a fault in presimiing to ascribe to God what are the words of the prophet. Again the same evangelist writes that at the warning of an angel Joseph took the young child and his mother and went into Egypt and remained there till the death of Herod; ' that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.' [Matt. II. 13-15.] The Latin manuscripts do not so give the passage, but in Hosea [Hos. XI. I.] the true Hebrew text has the following: — 'When Israel was a child then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.' Which the Septuagint renders thus: — 'When Israel was a child then I loved him, and called his sons out of Egypt . 'Are they [t. e. , the Septuagint and Vulgate versions] altogether to be rejected because they have given another turn to a passage which refers primarily to the mys- tery of Christ? . . . Once more it is written in the pages of the same evangelist, 'And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.' [Matt. II. 23.] Let those word fanciers and nice critics of all composition tell us where they have read the words ; and if they cannot, let me tell them that they are in Isaiah. [Isa. XL I.] For in the place where we read and translate, 'There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots,' [So AV. ; the Vulg. VERBAL INSPIRATION 215 varies slightly.] in the Hebrew idiom it is written thus, "There shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall grow from his root.' How can the Septua- gint leave out the word 'Nazarene,' if it is unlawful to substitute one word for another? It is sacrilege either to conceal or to set at naught a mystery. ''Let us pass on to other passages, for the brief limits of a letter do not suffer us to dwell too long on any one point. The same Matthew says: — 'Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, Behold a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel.* [Matt. I. 22, 23; Isa. Vn. 14.] The rendering of the Sep- tuagint is, 'Behold a virgin shall receive seed and shall bring forth a son, and ye shall call his name Emmanuel.' If peo- ple cavil at words, obviously 'to receive seed' is not the exact equivalent of 'to be with child,' and 'ye shall call' differs from 'they shall call.' Moreover in the Hebrew we read thus, 'Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel.' [AV.] Ahaz shall not call him so, for he was convicted of want of faith, nor the Jews, for they were destined to deny him, but she who is to con- ceive him, and bear him, the virgin herself. In the same evangelist we read that Herod was troubled at the coming of the Magi, and that gathering together the scribes and the priests he demanded of them where Christ should be born, and that they answered him, 'In Bethlehem of Judah : for thus it is written by the prophet; and thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah art not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall come a governor that shall rule my people Israel.' [Matt. II. 5., 6.] In the Vulgate [i. e. the Versio Itala which was vulgata or 'commonly used at this time, as Jerome's Version was afterwards] this passage appears as follows: — 'And thou Bethlehem, the house of Ephratah, art small to be among the thousands of Judah, yet one shall come out of thee for me to be a prince in Israel.' You will be m.ore surprised still at the difference in words and order between Matthew and the Septuagint if you look at the Hebrew which runs thus: — 'But thou Bethlehem 216 VERBAL INSPIRATION Ephratah, though thou be Httle among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel.' [Mic. V. 2.] Consider one by one the words of the evangelist : — 'And thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah.' For the land of Judah the Hebrew has 'Eph- ratah' while the Septuagint gives 'the house of Ephratah.' The evangelist writes, 'art not the least among the princes of Judah.' In the Septuagint this is, 'art small to be among the thousands of Judah,' while the Hebrew gives, 'though thou be little among the thousands of Judah.' There is a contradiction here — and that not merely verbal — between the evangelist and the prophet ; for in this place at any rate both Septuagint and Hebrew agree. The evangelist says that he is not little among the princes of Judah, while the passage from which he quotes says exactly the opposite of this, 'Thou are small indeed and little; but yet out of thee, small and little as thou art, there shall come forth for me a leader in Israel,' a sentiment in harmony with that of the apostle, 'God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things that are mighty.' [I. Cor. I. 27.] More- over the last clause 'to rule' or 'to feed my people Israel' clearly nms differently in the original. "I refer to these passages, not to convict the evangelists of falsification — a charge worthy only of impious men like Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian — but to bring home to my critics their own want of knowledge, and to gain from them such consideration that they may concede to me in the case of a simple letter what, whether they like it or not, they will have to concede to the Apostles in the Holy Scriptures. Mark, the disciple of Peter, begins his gospel thus: — 'The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in the prophet Isaiah: Behold I send my messenger before thy face who shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.' [Mark I. 1-3.] This quotation is made up from two prophets, Malachi, that is to say, and Isaiah. For the first part : 'Behold I send my messenger before thy face who shall prepare thy way be- fore thee,' occurs at the close of Malachi. [Mai. III. i] VERBAL INSPIRATION 217 But the second part: The voice of one crying, etc.,' we read in Isaiah. [Isa. XL. 3.] On what grounds then has Mark in the very beginning of his book set the words : *As it is written in the prophet Isaiah, Behold I send my messenger, ' when, as we have said, it is not written in Isaiah at all, but in Malachi the last of the twelve prophets? Let ignorant presumption solve this nice question if it can, and I will ask pardon for being in the wrong. The same Mark brings be- fore us the Saviour thus addressing the Pharisees: 'Have ye never read what David did when he had need and was hungry, he and they that were with him, how he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the highpriest, and did eat the shewbread which is not lawful to eat but for the priests?' [Mark II. 25, 26.] Now let us turn to the books of Samuel, or, as they are commonly called, of Kings, and we shall find there that the highpriest 's name was not Abiathar but Ahimelech, [I. Sam. XXI. i.] the same that was afterwards put to death with the rest of the priests by Doeg at the command of Saul. [I. Sam. XXII. 16-18.] Let us pass on now to the apostle Paul who writes thus to the Corinthians: Tor had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written. Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him.' [I. Cor. II. 8, 9.] Some writers on this passage betake themselves to the ravings of the apocryphal books, and assert that the quotation comes from the Revela- tion of Eliah ; [This book is no longer extant. It belonged to the same class as the Book of Enoch.] whereas the truth is that it is found in Isaiah according to the Hebrew text : 'Since the beginning of the world men have not heard nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, be- side thee what thou hast prepared for them that wait for thee.' [Isa. LXIV. 4, LXX. AV. has 'what he hath pre- pared for him that waiteth for him.'] The Septuagint has rendered the words quite differently : 'Since the beginning of the world we have not heard, neither have our eyes seen any God beside thee and thy true works, and thou wilt shew mercy to them that wait for thee.' We see then from what 218 VERBAL INSPIRATION place the quotation is taken and yet the apostle has not rendered his original word for word, but, using a paraphrase, he has given the sense in different terms. In his epistle to the Romans the same apostle quotes these words from Isaiah: 'Behold I lay in Sion a stumbling stone and rock of offence,' [Rom. IX. 33.] a rendering which is at variance with the Greek version [Lit. with the old version.] yet agrees with the original Hebrew. The Septuagint gives an opposite meaning, 'that you fall not on a stumblingstone nor on a rock of offence.' The apostle Peter agrees with Paul and the Hebrew, writing: 'but to them that do not believe, a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence.' [I Pet. II. 8; AV. is different.] From all these passages it is clear that the apostles and evangelists in translating the old testa- ment scriptures have sought to give the meaning rather than the words, and that they have not greatly cared to preserve forms or constructions, so long as thy could make clear the subject to the tmderstanding. "Luke the evangelist and companion of apostles describes Christ's first martyr Stephen as relating what follows in a Jewish assembly. 'With threescore and fifteen souls Jacob went down into Egypt, and died himself, and our fathers were carried over [So the Vulg. : AV. punctuates differently.] into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor [i. e. Hamor] the father of Sychem.' [Acts VII. 15, 16.] In Genesis this passage is quite differently given, for it is Abraham that buys of Ephron the Hittite, the son of Zohar, near Hebron, for four hundred shekels [Drachmae.] of silver, a double cave, [Spelunca duplex.] and the field that is about it, and that buries in it Sarah his wife. And in the same book we read that, after his return from Mesopotamia with his wives and his sons, Jacob pitched his tent before Salem a city of Shechem which is in the land of Canaan, and that he dwelt there and 'bought a parcel of a field where he had spread his tent at the hand of Hamor, the father of Sychem, for an himdred lambs' [AV. marg.], and that 'he erected there an altar and called there upon the God of Israel.' [Gen. XXXIII. 18-20; AV. varies slightly.] Abraham does VERBAL INSPIRATION 219 not buy the cave from Hamor the father of Sychem, but from Ephron the son of Zohar, and he is not buried in Sychem but in Hebron which is corruptly called Arboch. Whereas the twelve patriarchs are not buried in Arboch but in Sychem in the field purchased not by Abraham but by Jacob. I postpone the solution of this delicate problem to enable those who cavil at me to search and see that in dealing with the scriptures it is the sense we have to look to and not the words." None of the Fathers treated the question of verbal in- spiration with the clearness and depth of Augustine. He distinguishes between sense and material word, and de- clares that in employing the material word, the writers use that liberty that we here demand for them. A good specimen of St. Augustine's principles concerning this ques- tion is found in his ''Harmony of the Evangelists," Bk. H., 27-29: "If now the question is asked, as to which of the words we are to suppose the most likely to have been the precise words used by John the Baptist, whether those recorded as spoken by him in Matthew's Gospel, or those in Luke's, or those which Mark has introduced, among the few sentences which he mentions to have been uttered by him, while he omits notice of all the rest, it will not be deemed wor1±i while creating any difficulty for oneself in a matter of that kind, by any one who wisely understands that the real requisite in order to get at the knowledge of the truth is just to make sure of the things really meant, whatever may be the pre- cise words in which they happen to be expressed. For although one writer may retain a certain order in the words, and another present a different one, there is surely no real contradiction in that. Nor, again, need there be any an- tagonism between the two, although one m'ay state what another omits. For it is evident that the evangelists have set forth these matters just in accordance with the recollec- tion each retained of them, and just according as their several predilections prompted them to employ greater brev- ity or richer detail on certain points, while giving, never- theless, the same account of the subjects themselves. 220 VERBAL INSPIRATION "Thus, too, in what more pertinently concerns the mat- ter in hand, it is sufficiently obvious that, since the truth of the Gospel, conveyed in that word of God which abides eternal and unchangeable above all that is created, but which at the same time has been disseminated through- out the world by the instnmientality of temporal symbols, and by the tongues of men, has possessed itself of the most exalted height of authority, we ought not to suppose that any one of the writers is giving an unreliable account, if, when several persons are recalling some matter either heard or seen by them, they fail to follow the very same plan, or to use the very same words, while describing, nevertheless, the self -same fact. Neither should we indulge such a supposi- tion, although the order of the words may be varied; or although some words may be substituted in place of others, which nevertheless have the same meaning; or although something may be left imsaid, either because it has not occurred to the mind of the recorder, or because it becomes readily intelligible from other statements which are giveri; or although, among other matters which (may not beaf^' directly on his immediate purpose, but which) he decides on mentioning rather for the sake of the narrative, and in order to preserve the proper order of time, one of them may introduce something which he does not feel called upon to expound as a whole at length, but only to touch upon in part ; or although, with the view of illustrating his meaning, and making it thoroughly clear, the person to whom author- ity is given to compose the narrative makes some additions of his own, not indeed in the subject-matter itself, but in the words by which it is expressed; or although, while re- taining a perfectly reliable comprehension of the fact itself, he may not be entirely successful, however he may make that his aim, in calling to mind and reciting anew with the most literal accuracy the very words which he heard on the occasion. Moreover, if any one affirms that the evangelists ought certainly to have had that kind of capacity imparted to them by the power of the Holy Spirit, which would secure them against all variation the one from the other, either in the kind of words, or in their order, or in their number, that VERBAL INSPIRATION 221 person fails to perceive, that just in proportion as the author- ity of the evangeHsts [under their existing conditions] is made pre-eminent, the credit of all other men who offer true statements of events ought to have been established on a stronger basis by their instrumentality : so that when several parties happen to narrate the same circumstance, none of them can by any means be rightly charged with untruth- fulness if he differs from the other only in such a way as can be defended on the ground of the antecedent example of the evangelists themselves. For as we are not at liberty either to suppose or to say that any one of the evangelists has stated what is false, so it will be apparent that any other writer is as little chargeable with untruth, with whom, in the process of recalling anything for narration, it has fared only in a way similar to that in which it is shown to have fared with those evangelists. And thus as it belongs to the high- est morality to guard against all that is false, so ought we all the more to be ruled by an authority so eminent, to the effect that we should not suppose ourselves to come upon what must be false, when we find the narratives of any writ- ers differ from each other in the manner in which the records of the evangelists are proved to contain variations. At the same time, in what most seriously concerns the faithfulness of doctrinal teaching, we should also imderstand that it is not so much truth in mere words as rather truth in the facts themselves, that is to be sought and embraced ; for as to writers who do not employ precisely the same modes of statement, if they only do not present discrepancies with respect to the facts and the sentiments themselves, we ac- cept them as holding the same position in veracity. **With respect, then, to those comparisons which I have instituted between the several narratives of the evangelists, what do these present that must be considered to be of a contradictory order? Are we to regard in this light the circumstance that one of them has given us the words, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear, whereas the others speak of the unloosing of the latchet of the shoe? For here, indeed, the difference seems to be neither in the mere words, nor in the order of the words, nor in any matter of simple phrase- 222 VERBAL INSPIRATION ology, but in the actual matter of fact, when in one case the bearing of the shoe is mentioned and in the other the unloosing of the shoe's latchet. Quite fairly, therefore, may the question be put, as to what it was that John declared himself unworthy to do — whether to bear the shoes, or to unloose the shoe's latchet. For if only the one of these two sentences was uttered by him, then that evangelist will appear to have given the correct narrative who was in a position to record what was said ; while the writer who has given the saying in another form, although he may not indeed have offered an [intentionally] false account of it, may at any rate be taken to have made a slip of memory, and will be reckoned thus to have stated one thing instead of another. It is only seemly, however, that no charge of absolute un veracity should be laid against the evangelists, and that, too, not only with regard to that kind of unver- acity which comes by the positive telling of what is false, but also with regard to that which arises through forgetfulness. Therefore, if it is pertinent to the matter to deduce one sense from the words to hear the shoes, and another sense from the words to unloose the shoe's latchet, what should one suppose the correct interpretation to be put on the facts, but that John did give utterance to both these sentences, either on two different occasions or in one and the same connection? For he might very well have expressed himself thus, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose, and whose shoes I am not worthy to hear: and then one of the evangelists may have reproduced the one portion of the saying, and the rest of them the other ; while, notwithstanding this, all of them have really given a veracious narrative. But further, if, when he spoke of the shoes of the Lord, John meant nothing more than to convey the idea of His supremacy and his own lowliness, then, whichever of the two sayings may have actually been uttered by him, whether that regarding the unloosing of the latchet of the shoes, or that respecting the bearing of the shoes, the self -same sense is still correctly preserved by any writer who, while making mention of the shoes in words of his own, has expressed at the same time the same idea of lowliness, and thus has not made an}^ de- VERBAL INSPIRATION 223 parture from the real mind [of the person of whom he writes]. It is therefore a useful principle, and one particularly worthy of being borne in mind, when we are speaking of the con- cord of the evangelists, that there is no divergence [to be supposed] from truth, even when they introduce some say- ing different from what was actually uttered by the person concerning whom the narrative is given, provided that, notwithstanding this, they set forth as his mind precisely what is also so conveyed by that one among them who re- produces the words as they were literally spoken. For thus we learn the salutary lesson, that our aim should be nothing else than to ascertain what is the mind and intention of the person who speaks." In view of this clear testimony, it is strange that Pere Lagrange hesitates not to say: ''That we maintain, with the Fathers, that inspiration extends itself to everything, even to the words, is precisely to the end to establish that the term inspiration is not synonymous with the dictation" (Revue Biblique, 1904, p. 293). While such reckless disre- gard of historical facts and such party spirit prevail in those who demand a more liberal exegesis, there is no hope of effecting a harmony among Catholic scholars. Far more truthful is the doctrine which Venerable Bede drew from the Fathers, that the prophets ''secretly were taught the mysteries by clear mental visions, that they might make these things known to their hearers by whatever words they pleased". (On II. Peter i.) Most of the older scholastic writers did not expressly treat the question of verbal inspiration. St. Thomas leaves men in doubt as to his view. However, in his prologue to Hebrews, he declares that in this epistle Paul "is more elegant in style, because although he knew all tongues (I. Cor. XIV. 18) nevertheless, he knew better the Hebrew as his mother tongue in which he wrote this epistle. And there- fore he could speak more eloquently in that tongue than in another. . . . Luke, a most excellent interpreter, trans- ferred that eloquence from Hebrew into Greek." This certainly admits the himian element in the words of Scrip- ture for which we are contending. 224 VERBAL INSPIRATION Henry of Ghent, a disciple of Albertus Magnus, asserted verbal inspiration, but no other writer of authority is found of that opinion among the older scholastics. After the Council of Trent opinion was divided on the question. Towards the end of the XVII I. Century, the opinion denying verbal inspiration in the material sense became the common opinion. Marchini (ti773) expresses the common opinion of his day as follows: "The divine afflatus and inspiration can have place even though God by special action furnishes neither words nor sentences. Truly if the Holy Ghost is present to the writer whom he has moved to write ; if, in case memory should fail the writer, (the Holy Ghost) opportunely suggests what he wishes written ; if he enlightens the mind with a light that dispels all ignorance and lack of judgment ; if he strengthens the mind with such power that all things are written faithfully, plainly and consistently; if he brings to the mind hidden, sublime, and unknown things ; if he leaves no part of Script-ure devoid of his care, verily the books will be written by the inspiration of God, although the speech, and the expressions proceed for the most part from the genius, memory, study, medita- tion, and diligence of man." (De Div. et Can. Sac. Lib.) The sense and the words are the effect of a man writing under the influence of divine inspiration, and in that sense the words are influenced by divine inspiration; but this influence leaves to the writer more of the human element in the words than in the sense ; for the sense is the direct object of God's action : the words are intended only as a means of conveying the sense. God as the principal author can not be indifferent as to the sense of any part of Holy Scripture, for the sense of every part is attributable to Him. He may and does permit a liberty of choice of words to convey this sense, provided they be an apt medium to express his mind. God inspired writers in order that they should write deter- minate truths, not determinate words ; he inspired them to write his message in fitting words which their faculties furnished. There are times when the Holy Ghost determines the material words, but this pertains not to the essence of VERBAL INSPIRATION 225 inspiration, and more rarely is verified. Again when God gives command to "speak the words" of God, or to "write the words of God " it is evident that the meaning is to deliver to men the formal words of God, not the material words. A legitimate argument against the inspiration of the material words of Scripture may be drawn from the follow- ing consideration. In God's plan entities are not to be multiplied without necessity. God employs the ordinary course of created agents where their causality is adequate to attain the end. Now there is no reason why God should have exercised a special action in determining words and expressions for the inspired writers. That God could have thus acted on the inspired writers, all admit. It may be that he did determine the very material words in some instances; but the evidence is against admitting that such determination pertains to the essence of inspiration. Many of the arguments against verbal inspiration have already been adduced. An additional argument may be drawn from the manner in which the inspired writers record facts. In the Scriptures, sometimes the same fact is related by different writers in different ways. For instance, the con- secration of the chalice is related in four different ways by St. Matt., XXVI., 28; St. Mark, XIV., 24; St. Luke, XXII., 20, and St. Paul, I. Cor. XI., 25. These speak of the same words of Christ, as He used them once for all at the Last Supper. If the Holy Ghost had inspired the words, how could we account for these divergencies? Here applies aptly what St. Augustine said of the inspired writers: " Ut quisque meminerat eos explicasse manifestum est. " We may add that certainly the determination of the material words can not enter into the essence of the message of God, for such message was destined for the whole world, which it did not reach, and could not reach in the original words in which it was first delivered. It may be said that the same argument evinces the same latitude for the things of Scripture that pertain not to faith and morals. In the versions accidental errors have crept into these in more or less degree ; therefore, why demand a more absolute standard of inerrancy in the original? To 226 VERBAL INSPIRATION answer this difficulty we must know that the conditions of the sense of Holy Scripture differ from the conditions of the words. It is defined by the Church that God is the Author of the entire Scriptures with all their parts, for the reason that they were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost. This definition extends inspiration to every enunciation of Holy Scripture, and the definition goes farther, and declares that the whole Scriptures thus inspired contain no error. Now if we exempt certain passages of Holy Writ from this infallible inspiration, we sever the vital unity of the Scriptures, we practise vivisection in the strict sense. A proposition may be enunciated in different words, and still preserv^e its identity of sense; but a sentence can not be true and false at the same time. When we say that inspired w^riters wrote the message of God with infallible truth, but with words which they themselves determined within the range of fitting words, we leave to God his right- ful character as Inspirer and Author of the Scriptures ; but when we say that the inspired writers wrote partly true things and partly false, we can not make God the Author of such a medley of truth and falsehood. The divine action of inspiration enlightens the mind of the writer to conceive ideas of the truths he is to deliver. These concepts must be true. Truth is one. But without detriment to their truth these concepts may in general be expressed by different words. They demand apt words, but not determinate forms of expression; and here we place the liberty of the inspired writer. When Abraham goes down with his wife Sarah into Egypt, and she is taken from him into the house of Pharaoh, there is but one concept that corresponds to it. It may be expressed in different words, but the event has an individual unity, and there can be but one true idea of it. Therefore when the writer records that event, he must reproduce that determinate fact. Therefore when we find such historical statements in the Bible we must conclude that they are historically true. They cannot be allegories, or parables: all the characteristics of allegory and parable are absent. They form a part of a real history; their context shows that the writers meant them as real history. VERBAL INSPIRATION 227 If we characterize them as myth and folk-lore, we impeach the veracity of the word of God. The reasonableness of the doctrine just enunciated can be seen from a commonplace example. A professor de- livers his lecture to his hearers, and they commit the sense of his discourse to writing, each in a different manner. Pro- vided they relate faithfully the sense of what he says they may all be said to have his lecture ; though the words differ, the sense remains the same, and the sense is the proper result of inspiration. In the latter part of the last century a new theory was proposed regarding verbal inspiration. The advocates of the new theory refuse to admit that God's inspiring act affected the ideas differently from the words. They extend the act of inspiration to the sense and the words. They depart from the cruder mechanical theory of verbal inspira- tion, and raise the question more into the psychological order. But among the advocates of this new view of verbal inspiration there is not a consensus. Some of them in sub- stance are in accord with the views which we here defend. It is in many cases merely a question of terms. We admit an influence of God on the words ; and the words of Scripture are inspired words, because they are the signs of inspired ideas. We do not say that God is the Author of the ideas, and man is the author of the words ; because the inspired writer was under the influence of inspiration when he wrote the words, and the action of God upon his faculties is re- flected in the words he employed ; h^M we believe that God's action left to man to use his faculites in expressing the con- ceptions of his mind, even while he remained under the influence of inspiration. Hence, as Jerome says, Paul may have used a defective expression in Ephesians, though the expression can at no time be so defective as not to convey God's meaning.. Lagrange, though an advocate of verbal inspiration, is obliged to admit that the action of God does not affect the words in the same manner as the sense: "Without doubt between the thought and the word there exists an intrinsic dift'erence ; therefore inspiration does not affect them in the 228 VERBAL INSPIRATION same manner. The thought should be true, the word should be apt; therefore under the influence of the divine light the judgment will be true, the terms and other ac- cessories will be fittingly chosen. If this is what certain modem writers mean in distinguishing between inspiration for the thoughts and assistance for the words we are sub- stantially in accord with them." (Revue Biblique, 1896, P- 215.) • It would seem at first sight that there were no substantial difference of opinion between the advocates of the new exe- gesis and us on the subject of inspiration, but in reality one of the fundamental tenets of their system lies here. While they grant to the inspired author the same liberty that we grant him, they insist that his material words be still termed inspired. They do this for the purpose of demanding the same liberty of the human element in the thoughts them- selves. Thus Lagrange proposes the system: 'Tt would be imreasonable to say that God in the same manner wills the thoughts and the words, that he attaches the same im- portance to the words as to the thoughts, or inspires both in the same manner. We do not wish to be narrower than Franzelin, but broader. He abandoned the theory that the words were the (material) words of God, because he foimd it difficult to find in them the perfection of things immediately revealed. We demand the same liberty for the thoughts, and it is scarcely exact to call them (the thoughts) sensa Dei, an expression which easily might be- come exclusive" (Revue Biblique, 1904, p. 294). The argu- ment here is most illogical and inconsistent. If, by his own admission, the thoughts are more important than the words ; if inspiration affects them differently, how can he demand the same liberty for the thoughts as Franzelin demands for the words ? In his work, (Die Schriftinspiration, 1891), Dr. Dausch declared : "To separate inspired elements from non-inspired elements of Holy Writ is like the distinction between verbal inspiration and sense inspiration, more or less a vivisection of the living efficacy of the Spirit." This phrase has been adopted by many to support the theory of verbal VERBAL INSPIRATION 229 inspiration. Without doubt to remove the influence of God entirely from the actual words of Holy Scripture might be called vivisection ; but that term can not apply to the theory which we have defended. We believe therefore that in- spired thoughts influence the words by which, with God's assistance, they are expressed; we believe that the super- natural enlightenment of the mind favorably reacts upon the power of expression ; we believe that God assisted the writers so that infallible truth was competently expressed ; but we believe at the same time that the writers exercised a certain liberty in the choice of words and expressions; that they reveal their genius and education in these ; that certain liter- ary defects are found in the words ; and that certain things might have been better expressed. We believe also that the action of God is directed, as to its more immediate ob- ject, to the sense of Holy Scripture; and consequently the human element is greater in the words than in the thoughts. The authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church pro- claims the Scriptures to be God's infallible word, and con- sequently free from error. It is clear that it is the mind of the Church to make the inerrancy of the Scriptures the effect of its inspired character, to derive it from God's authorship. If a man denies the infallibility of Holy Scripture in things of faith and morals he is a heretic : if he limits the inerrancy of Holy Scripture to things of faith and morals only he is not far from being a heretic. Of course this applies to the Scrip- tures as they came from the inspired writers; and to the versions in the measure that they are authentic. The defin- ition of the Council of Trent guarantees that the Vulgate is authentic in things of faith and morals. While all Scripture is true, all Scripture is not true in the same way. The sense that the Scriptures affirm is always true. The parable and allegory are not true as history, ^ because they are not written as history. They are true as moral illustrations, because their sense is a moral illustra- tion. That which is written as parable is true as parable; that which is written as poetry is true as poetry ; that which is written as allegory is true as allegory ; that which is writ- ten as history is true as history; and that which is written 230 INSPIRATION AND HISTORY as doctrinal or moral teaching is a true law of belief and conduct. For this cause the historical method of Lagrange is rejected, because it makes a congeries of folk-lore, legends, and myths that which is written as history. There may be times when it is difficult to discern that which is strictly historical from that which is fictitious his- tory. Such difficulty will never obscure the way of belief or conduct. Some believe that Tobias or Judith or Ruth is a fictitious history. The Church has not defined the ques- tion. To deal with it, one must examine the evidence, and see whether the object of the writer be to write real or fictitious history. The object of the writer is always to write the truth; his fictitious history is not less true than his real history : it is true in the sense proper to its nature as a genus of literature which the Holy Scripture can use. It incul- cates principles of truth and duty by concrete examples. While conservative opinion holds that Job is a historical personage, the great drama of the Book of Job is largely a creation of the poet's inspired mind to illustrate infallibly true principles. Hence in judging of an inspired book, we must have regard to its character to determine in what sense it is true. Prophecy has its peculiar character, its visions and its symbols; poetry has its poetic flights of im- agination ; parable and allegory make fictitious entities act and speak their message; while real history declares its message by relating facts. There is no place in Scripture for folk-lore or myth, for these relate the legends of a people as real history. We must realize also that inspiration is only a partial participation of the divine light. God does not speak to us in the Scriptures more divino, but in a human manner. He condescends to us as we condescend to address a child. The books therefore of Holy Scripture contain the evidences of imperfection due to their human origin; but God's in- spiration moves the writers to write nothing but the truth- The writers were not critical historians ; but the Spirit of God supplied where human knowledge failed. Another important hermeneutical principle is that the sense of an inspired writer may have a wider range than he DEVELOPMENT 231 comprehends. That which he means to utter is the sense of God, but that very sense may be greater than he compre- hends. This principle was clearly admitted by the Fathers : "Perhaps not even St. John spoke (of the Word) as it is, but as he, being a man, was able ; because he, a man, spoke of God, he was verily inspired but still a man. . . . There- fore being a man inspired, he uttered not all; but what he could, being a man." (Aug. On John I., i.) St. Jerome (On Eph. III., 5) admits that the mystery of the incarnation "was not known to the patriarchs and prophets as it is now known to the apostles and saints: it is one thing to know future things in a vision ; it is another thing to contemplate them now fulfilled." St. Thomas sums up the question in his usual clear way: "We must know that since the mind of the prophet is an imperfect instrument, even the true prophets did not know all that the Holy Ghost intended in their visions, words, and deeds." (2. 2. 173. 4.) This principle is also promulgated in the bull "Providentissimus Deus. It results therefore that the Church, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, may grow in the understanding of certain truths whose full import not even the original writers grasped. We see also a certain growth in the clearness of the revelation of Christ in the Old Testament, and those closer to the ful- fillment of the prophecies saw with clearer view than those of old. Similarly in the Church there is a lawful growth in the understanding of doctrine. The Church has always taught the infallible truth; has always been adequately equipped to teach men ; and must always preserve an identity of doctrine. But she is a living Church; and the Holy Ghost abides with her all days to teach. It follows from her life, and from the abiding of the Spirit that she grows in knowledge of the truths which were delivered to her in the beginning. Thus her unity and identity of teaching stand with her growth in knowledge. We have before spoken of the manner in which the in- spired Scriptures deal with natural sciences. St. Augustine rightly declares: "It is not read in the Gospel that the Lord said: *I send you the Paraclete who shall teach you of 232 INSPIRATION AND SCIENCE tJ:ie course of the sun and the moon.' He wished to make them Christians, not mathematicians. ' ' (De actis cimi FeHce Manichaeo, I., lo.) It does not follow from this that when the Scriptures speak of the stars, plants, animals, etc., that they are not veracious, for ''no one except an impious man or infidel doubts of the veracity of Scripture." (Aug. On Gen. VII., 28.) The truths of salvation are directly inspired; the other truths are indirectly inspired, on account of their relation to the direct object of inspiration. But in speaking of things of natural science, the Holy Scriptures have not treated them to the end to teach the people science ; they have not treated such matters from the scientist's viewpoint : ''Moses con- descending to a rude people, spoke of things as they sensibly appeared." (St. Thomas, Summa, I., q. 70.) The sacred writers make use of the common parlance of the people: "secundum opinionem populi loquitur Scriptura." (S. Th. I. 2. 198.) A question of vital importance, in our days, is the relation of Scripture to science. Men's minds have been active ever since the writing of Scripture itself, and have found many things unknown at the time of the writing of the Holy Books. They have delved down deep into the mysterious storehouse of nature, have discovered her treas- ures, have imprisoned her mighty forces to do their will and serve them in the affairs of their civil and domestic life. They have penetrated the heavens, and investigated the secrets of the vast expanse which men call the firmament. Many truths, and many more or less reasonable hypotheses have been thus found out. But science, proud of her achieve- ments, and restless under restraint, too oft turns her powers against the God-given truths of the Sacred Text, and here the warfare waxes bitter indeed, and many there are who incline too much to the side of science, even of those of the household of faith. Since the time of Galileo, men have conceded that the Scriptures spoke according to the com- mon opinions of the people, and attributed significations to words, which the vulgar speech of the day warranted. For God made use of a human medium to convey his message to , INSPIRATION AND SCIENCE 233 man, and he did not startle the people by strange expres- sions, which would have been unintelligible to all people at that stage of human development. Men speak thus to- day, and are not accused of inexactness or with combating science. Hence, with this in mind, we can reconcile the assertions of true science with the inspired Word of God, for there can be no combat between truth and truth; for the Author of both human and divine science is the Essential and Infinite Truth. ''For although faith is above reason, no real discussion, no real conflict can be found between them since both arise from one and the same fount of im- mutable and eternal truth, the great and good God. ' ' (Pius IX., Encyc. of Nov. 9, 1846.) Some hypotheses broached by the incredulous and shallow dabbler in science may con- flict with the truths of Scripture, but this imports nothing. The Church blesses scientific research, and fears nothing therefrom. She invites investigation into every field of htmian thought, and only good to herself can come there- from. The greatest scientists and historians are her faith- ful children. The Vatican Council approved of scientific research explicitly, even when all the resources of science were brought to bear to oppose the Church. It leaves science free to use its own methods. * 'Neither does the Church forbid that these sciences should, in their own do- main, use their own principles and methods." (Cone. Vat. De Fide, IV.) Hence we should guard against attributing to a passage of Scripture a signification, which in se it has not, but which may have been given to it by some interpreter. When we find by incontestable evidence that science has demon- strated a truth, which is in seeming opposition to what has by some been held to be the opinion gleaned from the Holy Scriptures, we should seek some other interpretation, which the text must bear, as truth and truth can not conflict, and we can thus reconcile these two truths coming from different sources. In this manner, we may reconcile Gen. I. 14 : "And God said let there be luminaries in the firmament of heaven. . . . And God made two great luminaries, a greater lumin- ary to rule the day and a lesser luminary to rule the night, 234 INSPIRATION AND SCIENCE and the stars." Now it would seem from this that the stars were less in magnitude than the moon'. As science has in- disputably proven the contrary, what must we admit? That the inspired writer spoke according to the appearance of things, and for us the moon is a greater luminary than the stars. Hence, even' the sun is not necessarily asserted to be a greater luminary in fact than the stars, but only in appear- ance. Two obstacles obstruct the way of harmony between Scripture and science ; videlicet, the narrowness of view of many who essay to defend the Scriptures, and the pride and presimiption of orientalists and scientists who fail to recog- nize that there is: '*A deep below the deep, And a height beyond the height ; Our hearing is not hearing. And our seeing is not sight." Shallow draughts of science intoxicate the brain ; drink- ing deeply sobers us. The man of large mind will be con- scious of his own limitations; conscious that much that passes as science is a congeries of hypotheses, many of which change with the course of time. The exegete must also realize that where the Church has not defined the question **one should not so tenaciously adhere to any exposition formerly believed to be true, that he would not abandon it when clearly proven to be false, lest the Scriptures be de- rided by the unbelieving, and a way to belief be cut off from them" (St. Th. 2. Sent. 12.) At no time in the history of the world have men's ideas of natural science been absolutely correct. In time they never will be absolutely correct. We may know some things better than the ancients; but there are many more which we shall never know. God decreed to use men at certain epochs of history to deliver a body of truths to men. Incidentally they spoke of certain natural phenomena. They used the language of their time, as men have done in every age of the world. They spoke of the material universe as it appeared to men. The language which they employed was scientifically imperfect; but they uttered no falsehood. INSPIRATION AND HISTORY 235 They used an imperfect medium to convey to man the in- fallible message of God. The inspired writer's conceptions of nature were imperfect, and God did not by a necessary miracle remove this imperfection before making him an in- strument to utter a message in which scientific facts are only indirectly contemplated. In these enunciations concern- ing natural phenomena there is a direct sense and an in- direct sense. When it is said that at the voice of Joshua the sun stood still, the direct sense is that the light of day was miraculously prolonged; and that fact is affirmed in the language of the writer's time. A question of paramount importance is now to determine whether we shall apply to history that same latitude that we give to things of natural science ; that is whether we shall concede that the inspired historians wrote history according to popular belief. Lagrange and his school affirm this, and make that the cardinal principle of the so-called "historical method." Not content with asserting the theory, some of them, with amazing audacity, appeal to the encyclical 'Trov- identissimus Deus" in support of their hypothesis. It is to set a low^ value on human intelligence to ascribe such a view to the encyclical. The Holy Father wishes **his principles applied to cognate sciences and especially to history;" but it is clear that what he means is that we must defend Scrip- ture not only against scientists, but against orientalists and historians, whose methods the Holy Father exposes in the very same paragraph. There is not a word in the whole encyclical favorable to the "historical method." The con- text clearly estabHshes the pontiff's meaning to be that, as we are to refute scientists when they teach falsely, and as we are to show that what they have proven is not contrary to the Scriptures, so we are to deal with history and other cognate sciences. And the pontiff immediately proceeds to state the errors of historians who wage war on the Holy Scriptures. It is clear that there is a vast difference between the scientific statements and the historical statements of the Bible. The very essence of history is to narrate facts. We have given a fit place to allegory and parable, lyric poem and 236 INSPIRATION AND HISTORY drama. Here we speak of history which the writer wrote as history. Every genus of literature which the Bible employs must be true in the mode competent to its nature. Therefore that which is written as history must be true as history. When the Scriptures say: "God made the firma- ment, and divided the waters which were under the firma- ment from the waters which were above the firmament," the purpose of the proposition is not to teach men the nature of the heavens, but to assert that God created the heavens, and gave to nature her laws. The truths of Scripture are conceived in a human manner. Nature is spoken of as men contemplated it : in this regard the inspired writer is a child of his time, and his scientific knowledge is not in ad- vance of his epoch. There is truth in his statement, the truth he intended to convey: there is imperfection in the accessory. But when the Scriptures say that Cain rose against Abel and slew him, or that God rained fire and brimstone upon Sodom, if these events be the creation of folk-lorists, there is no truth in them; they are false beliefs narrated as his- tory. The nature of the narration of such facts and their context take them out of the category of allegory and para- ble ; they are narrated as history, and must be true as his- tory. The object of the writer is to teach men this very history, and to move men to believe it. It may be called primitive history; but it still remains true history. The fact that many myths and fables mingle in the primitive history of other peoples does not necessitate that the history of the origin of the universe as related in the Bible must also have its myths and legends. By the fact of divine inspira- tion the history narrated in the Bible transcends all other history, for the reason that it is infallibly true. The his- torical parts of Holy Scripture, and in fact all its parts, are subject to proper hermeneutical laws to determine their sense ; but in the last analysis every sentence of the Bible, as it came from the inspired writer, must be true in its proper sense. History according to popular beliefs is false history, and can not be a part of the word of God. INSPIRATION AND HISTORY 237 Moreover the historical parts of the Bible are in great part the foundation of our faith. The history of the fall of our first parents bears an essential relation to the doctrine of original sin. The Redemption, the Resurrection of Christ, the foundation of the Church, the descent of the Holy Ghost are historical facts. It is needless to declare how vital these are to faith. One of the common phrases of the "new exegesis" is to declare the historical parts of Scripture relatively true. If they wish to assert that the Scriptures are not God, that the Scriptures are not God's own infinitely perfect utterance, it is well. The Scriptures are God's message through human utterance by the power of God. They have the impress of their human origin upon them ; but they also bear the stamp of their principal Author, and by His power they are true in every part. Wherefore if by the phrase relatively true they mean to say that the Scriptures contain anything that is not objectively true, the statement conflicts with Catholic belief. It is evident therefore that while we admit fictitious history which has its proper sense of truth, we exclude myth, legend and folk-lore; for these are false narrations in the guise of history. It is an abuse of the relative sense theory to assert that ''all the wonders related during the forty years in the desert make no necessary claim to be miracles as we define them, i. ^., strictly supernatural occurrences." (The Tradition of Scripture, Barry, p. 254) The writer of "The Tradition of Scripture" falls in with the tendency to pare down the supernatural, and exalt the natural. It is the trend of the age ever since protestants invented a religion that is not religious. If the miracles of the Exodus are in reality only natural phenomena believed by a credulous age to be miracles, the Bible has spoken falsely, for not in one place only does it proclaim these to be true miracles. The tendency that endeavors to eliminate miracles from the Old Testament will not stop there. It will invade the New Testament even to a "clever cut" at Christ himself. In the Syllabus of Pius IX. this proposition was condemned : "The prophecies and miracles set forth in narration in the Sacred 238 INSPIRATION AND HISTORY Scriptures are the creations of poets, and the mysteries of Christian faith are a synthesis of philosophic investigations : myths are found in both testaments, and Jesus Christ is himself a myth." The "Providentissimus Deus" most ex- plicitly deplores and condemns the myth and legend theories of the "historical method." We have before explained that when the inspired writer cites a testimony without either explicit or implicit approb- ation, inspiration does not vouch for the truth of the testi- mony. In such case it is only inspiredly true that the writer has made such a citation ; the matter of the testimony stands on its own merit. But when the writer uses a historical source, and embodies it into his history without sufficient indication that he is relating the words of another without endorsing them, then, by every law of history, the inspired writer confers his own authority to what he writes, and makes it his own. If it were not so, history would become a jugglery of words, and no man could know what to be- lieve. It can not be denied that many of the sources whence Moses drew his knowledge of the first chapters of Genesis were popular tradition. The form in which facts are handed down by popular tradition differs from the style of written history. In the course down from age to age as a general thing many legends, myths, and superstitions mix in with the stream of truth. The divine agency of inspiration saved the inspired writer from handing down to us any thing false ; it allowed him to preserve the popular mode in which the truths were expressed. Abstract principles are expressed as concrete facts. The true historical fact that man was created immediately by God in a state of happiness, was tempted by the devil, and fell through ambitious pride, is expressed in the form of the allegory of the garden scene at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God becomes anthropomorphic, walks in the garden, communes with Him- self, descends to see the tower of Babel, etc. The truth of history only demands that there shall be always an objec- tive reality of fact in all these narrations. The fact is his- torical; the mode in which it reached us through popular tradition is sometimes allegorical. THE CANON 239 CHAPTER III. The Canon. Canon, from Greek Kavcov, originally meant any straight rod or bar. From this basal signification were formed the cognate meanings of the amussis or carpenter's rule, the beam or tongue of the balance, and then, like "norma," any rule or standard, whether in the physical or moral order. Hence it came to be generally applied as a rule or measure of anything. It is much controverted, and quite uncertain, just w^hat particular shade of the general meaning the old writers had in mind when they first applied this word to the official list of the Holy Books. Such question is, in fact, of no real value to any man, and yet writers quibble and haggle about it, as though upon it depended some great question. Some contend that, in applying the term to the Holy Books, the early writers passed from the active signification of the term to its effect, and used the measure for the thing meas- ured; thus the canon would be the list officially ruled and measured by the Church. Others hold that the said writers had in mind that the Holy Books formed a rule of faith and morals. We are of the persuasion that the term was applied to the collection of Scriptures to signify that such list formed the criterion and measure of a hook's divine origin. The list was thus a rule; for only the books which satisfied its requirements, by being incorporated in it, were of divine authority. At all events, the signification of an official list of things or persons dates back to a great antiquity. Thus, in the Councils of Nice and Antioch, the catalogue of the sacred persons attached to any particular Church was called the canon. Thus, to-day, those who constitute the chapter are called Canons. The appositeness of the term all must concede, for such sanctioned catalogue forms a measure of inspiration, and we receive only as inspired that which con- forms to its measurement. The canon of Holy Scripture then is the official catalogue of the Books that the Church authoritatively promulgates as the product of the Authorship of God. This official list is found in the Council of Trent, Sess. 4. De Can. Script. : "The Synod has thought good to sub- 240 THE CANON join to the decree an index of the Holy Books, lest to any man there should arise a doubt as to which are the books that are received by the said Synod. These are the follow- ing: Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, to wit : Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four Books of Kings, the two Books of Paralipomenon, the First Book of Esdras and the Second which is called that of Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesi- astes, The Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, The Twelve Minor Prophets, to wit: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michasas, Nahum, Habakuk, Sophonias, Haggasus, Zachary, Malachy, and The First and Second of Maccabees. Of the New Testament : The Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Acts of The Apostles, the fourteen Epistles of the Apostle St. Paul, to wit : The Epistle to the Romans, the two Epistles to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Galatians, the Epistle to the Ephesians, the Epistle to the Philippians, the Epistle to the Colossians, the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, the two Epistles to Timothy, the Epistle to Titus, the Epistle to Philemon, the Epistle to the Hebrews ; the two Epistles of St. Peter, the three Epistles of the Apostle John, one Epistle of the Apostle James, one Epistle of the Apostle Jude, and the Apocalypse of the Apos- tle John. " In this catalogue, there are recorded forty-five books of the Old Testament, and twenty-seven of the New. As the Holy Books are divided into two great classes, the Old and New Testament, so we must treat separately of the canons of these two Testaments. Chapter IV. The Canon of the Old Testament. The books containing God's covenant to man are desig- nated by three equivalent terms in the three great Scriptural tongues. In Hebrew it is n^*13r i^ Greek, AcaOtjKTj and in Latin, Testament um. Although the etymological con- struction of these terms is not exactly identical, still, in fact, their accepted sense in this predication is the same, that of a THE CANON 241 pact, treaty or covenant; and they designate the written instruments of God's solemn covenant with mankind. A fimdamental variation took place in God's dealings with his creature in the mission of the Messiah, and, as the Greek language became at that time the principle medium of religious thought, the changed and better economy was called in that language the Y^aivrj ^LaOrjKr], in contradis- tinction to the HaXaia IS,ia6r}K7)\ hence in Latin, which later preponderated as the vehicle of religious thought, the terms were rendered by Vetus and Novum Testamentum, whence come our equivalent English terms. The books of the Old Testament can, from their very nature, be easily divided into three great classes : the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. Such division, in fact, existed among the Jews from the very earliest times, but their arbitrary, ill-founded ranging of the different books under each particular class renders their data worthless. By their division, we must include Daniel among the Hagio- grapha, while Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are enrolled among the Prophets. Of course the Law remained ever and with all a unique element, admitting no other book to be classified with itself. There was also in vogue among the Jews a well-known liturgical section of Hol}^ Scripture, the n1^3D ^'Dn or five volimies: The Canticle of Can- .... .J. tides, Ruth, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes and Esther. These formed a collection which was wont to be read on certain festal days of the year. Our Saviour and the Apostles oft divided the Old Testa- ment in two great divisions, the Law and the Prophets ; thus, in a general way, designating all that was subsequent to the Law as the Prophets. The Jews were wont also to divide the Pentateuch into liturgical divisions which they call Ht^^'lBfrom root t^'^lD, T T T - T to expound. These were first arranged so that every third year the Pentateuch was totally read in the synagogues. Now, however, the Babylonian mode prevails in all the synagogues, which divides the Pentateuch in fifty-four para- shas, so arranged that, by reading them on every Saturday, (16)H. s. 242 THE CANON they finish the Pentateuch within the course of the year. To this usage St. James alludes, Acts XV. 21 : *Tor Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him in the synagogues, where he is read every Sabbath." These para- shas are designated in the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch by three £♦ or three D* They are designated by Q* if the section begins on the beginning of the line ; by D* if it begins in the middle of the line. The ©♦ is initial for nlniHS open, to signify that the section is an open one, as it begins with the line; while D* is initial for nlDIJlp closed, im- plying that the section is shut up, as it were, beginning in the middle of the line. Thus, for instance, the first parasha. Gen. I. I — VI. 8 inclusively, is open; so also the second, ex- tending from VI. 9 — XI. inclusively, is open and designated by three Q* The parasha, enclosed from Gen. XXVIII. 11 — XXXI I. 3, inclusive, is closed, and designated by three Q* The parashas were subdivided into minor sections, designated in the Hebrew text by single Q* or D* as they respectively began either in the beginning or middle of a line. Later, they conjoined the reading of select portions of the Prophets to the sections of the Law. They called these n^lBDH from root ICOD to dismiss; because, after they T T : - - T were read, the people were dismissed. It was in accord- ance with this usage, that Jesus Christ at Nazareth read in the synagogue the passage from Isaiah, Luke IV. 16-19. This haftara is not now found among those assigned for synagogical readings. The antimessianic tendency of the Jews has probably expunged it. Setting aside, therefore, rabbinical opinions, we can easily arrange all the books under the three great heads. First, the Law, comprising the five books of Moses; second, the Prophets, comprising the four great Prophets and the twelve minor Prophets, and lastly, the Hagiographa, com- posed of all the remaining books. However, modern writers find it convenient to divide the books in still another way, to facilitate their treatment. In this modern division, the motive of classification is the nature of the theme of the book. They thus divide them into Historical, Sapiential, THE CANON 243 Poetic, and Prophetic books. We shall employ this division in our special introduction to the different books. The well known division of both Testaments into the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books seems to have first been employed by Sixtus Sennensis (1520 — 1569). In his Bibliotheca Sancta, Book i. Sec. i, he writes thus : "Thus Canonical books of the first order we may call protocanonical ; the Canonical books of the second order were formerly called ecclesiastical, but are now by us termed deuterocanonical ^ Although retaining and making use of this nomenclature, we in no wise attribute an inferior degree of dignity to the books of the second canon ; they are in such respect equal, as God is the Author of all of them. We designate by the name of protocanonical, the books concerning whose divine origin no doubts ever existed; while the deuterocanonical books are those concerning which greater or less doubts were en- tertained for a time by some, till finally the genuineness of the books was acknowledged, and they were solemnly approved by the Church. The deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament are seven; Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch and the two books of Maccabees. Together with these, there are deuterocanonical fragments of Esther, (from the 4th verse of loth chapter to 24th verse of i6th chapter, and Daniel III. 2 4-9 o ; X 1 1 1 , X I V . ) The deuterocanonical books of the New Testament are also seven in number : The Epistle to the He- brews, the Epistle of St. James, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third Epistle of St. John, the Epistle of St. Jude, and the Apocalypse of St. John. There are also deuterocanonical fragments of Mark, XVI. 9-20 ; Luke XXII. 43-44; and John VII. 53 — VIII. 11. Many of the protest- ants reject all the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testa- ment, and apply to them the term Apocryphal. It shall be a part of our labors to defend the equal authority of these books. The Jewish mode of enumeration of their Holy Books was as arbitrary and as worthless as was their system of division. Taking twenty-two, the number of the letters of their alphabet, as a number of mystic signification, they 244 THE CANON violently made the number of the Books of Holy Scripture conform thereto. Josephus makes use of this mode of enumeration. In his defense against Apion, he says : "For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us {as the Greeks have), disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all past times; which are justly believed to be divine." [Contra Apion I. 8.] St. Jerome also, in his famous Prologus Galeatus to the Books of Kings, testifies of the existence of such number, and explains its mystic foundation: *'As there are twenty-two elements, by which we write in Hebrew all that which we speak, so twenty-two volumes are computed, by which, as by letters and rudiments, the tender and suckling infancy of the just man is trained in the doctrine of God." "And thus there are of the Old Law twenty-two books ; five of Moses, eight of the Prophets, and nine of the Hagiographa. Some, however, reckon Ruth and the Lamentations among the Hagiographa, and consider that these are to be numbered in their individual number, and thus they think to be of the Old Law twenty-four books, which John personifies in the number of the twenty-four Ancients who adore the Lamb." We see then that there were two modes of enumeration, and the Fathers confused these modes in trying to adjust their enumeration to the Jewish tradition. We can not tell who was the first to find a mystic relation between the Greek alphabet of twenty- four letters and the twenty-four books, but it must have been done after the preponderance of the Hellenistic in- fluence. The appended schema will more vividly illustrate the Jewish mode of enumeration of the Holy Books : L ^^- n^^^^'^^nn - - Genesis 2. D* ntol?^" nb^) Exodus 3. y ^np^l ________ Leviticus 4. 1* "1?T.l — — — — — — — — Numbers 5. n* D^";)^?!]! nb^^ _____ Deuteronomy 6. V r^ln^ _________ Joshua 13. D* nl^j; no ci'^'^^ — ^ EZRA 245 7. V nni D^pDt^' - - - - Judges and Ruth 8. r\^b^^r2^ i Samuel I and II commonly : ( called I and II Kmgs. 9 D* □''D^D — — 1 -^^^S^ ^ ^^^ -^^' commonly • T : ( called III and IV Kings. 10. ^^ ^(TJ!1^: Isaiah 11. y ^\^Tp^ ^n^On^ — f Jeremiah and The ' • • "^ • = • ( Lamentations. 12. b* ^^^p.in: Ezekiel "Hosea, Joel, Amos Obadiah,Jona,Micah Nahum, Habakuk Zephaniah, Haggai Literally the twelve Prophets, whom we I V q /^"h q -ri q "h Malo designate as the twelve minor Prophets. I -^ciJ-Aiariail, iViaia- These, by the Jews, were computed one book, |^ chia 14. J* D^^nn *ipp — Liber Laudum, or The Psalms 15. D* ^b^r? — The Proverbs of Solomon 16. y* nV^^ Job 17. S* ^i^^jn Daniel 18. !i* ^Nniy Ezra I and II 19. |>DWn5^ Chronicles I and II 20. n* nnpi^il Esther 21. ^* nSnIp — — — Ecclesiastes 23. n* Dn;i^*n TC:; — — TheCanticleofCanticles By separating Ruth from Judges, and the Lamentations from Jeremiah, twenty-four books resulted, and these are the books of the Jewish Canon, or as it is commonly called the Canon of Ezra, from his supposed influence upon it. As no doubts have ever arisen concerning these books, they have been called the protocanonical works or books of the First Canon. Which mode of computation is prior, it is impossible to ascertain with certainty. Loisy believes the number twenty-four to be prior, as it seems to be the Tal- mudic number. Against this is the authority of Josephus, 246 EZRA who speaks of the number twenty-two as the sole traditional one. A question of so little importance may well be left in its uncertainty. Chapter V. Ezra and his Influence. The history of the canon of the Old Testament is ob- scure and difficult, through default of reliable documents. In tracing it through its remote antiquity, we shall endeavor to bring forth in their clearest light the certain data, filling up the lacunae by the best warranted conjectures. The nucleus of the Old Law was the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses. Around this centre of development were aggregated all the sacred writings of the Jews. . It was the n^llH/ the Law, par excellence, the divine book. The subsequent books, even though by them considered divine, were never held equal in dignity to "the Law by the hand of Moses." They were but adjuncts, participating in the great fount. As less reverence was entertained for these later works, so less care w^as taken in their preservation. The Pentateuch was kept in the temple ; it was the war- rant of Israel's preeminence over all the nations of the earth. It needed no authority to canonize it; the character of its author, and the nature of its contents were all sufficient. No other book in Israel was equal to it. The other books came into being by degrees. Most of them were first written as detached chronicles, annals, or diaries and subsequently compiled into their respective volumes. The Jews revered them, and acknowledged their divinity, but there was not, at least before Ezra's time, any central authority charged with the office of fixing the canon. Neither was there, before his time, any official list of the books of Holy Scripture. This is clearly proven by many proofs. The Samaritan Codex contains only the Penta- teuch.* Had the other books been placed in a canon with the Pentateuch, the existence here of the isolated Pentateuch would be inexplicable. Comely, in his Introductio in *The Samaritan Codex contains a spurious text of the Book of Joshua, but it is evident that it is a later interpolation. EZRA 247 Libros Veteris Testamenti, maintains that, even before the time of Ezra, there existed a collection of sacred books, conjoined to the books of Moses. His argument to prove this is that there is evidence that the subsequent books were known and revered by the Jews, and that the preceding prophets influenced the later ones. Loisy, in refuting this, rightly says that it is quite another thing to assert that an official collection had been constituted, and to say that divers books existed, were known, and were revered. We hold that these books as they came into being were received by the Jews, but that no list was made of them, and the sole motive of their inspired character was the nature of the writing, and the authority of their authors. There is no convincing data that the prophets were commissioned by God to determine the canon of Scripture. There seems to be sufficient evidence to conclude that, previous to the time of Ezra, the five books of Moses occupied a unique place in the literature of the Jews. It was the written constitution of Israel's Yahvistic polity. At times of great defection in religion, even the Thorah fell into disuse and oblivion. Thus the passage in 11. Kings,XXIL 8: "And Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the scribe: T have found the book of the Law in the house of the Lord' ; and Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, and he read it," implies a pre-existing period of neglect and disuse of the Thorah. In those fierce idolatrous upheavals in Israel, a stiff necked people, led by an impious king, soon reduced all to religious anarchy. In the restoration of the divine worship by Josiah, no mention is made of any other book than the Law. Had the other books formed a collection with the Pentateuch, they could hardly be passed over in such complete silence. The Pentateuch then from the beginning was always the basis and directing principle of the religious and national life of the Jewish people. It suffered some vicissitudes in the various religious defections of that people, but on their return to Yahveh's Law^ the Pentateuch was the centre of their reorganization. The other books came into being by gradual growth. Most of these contained data that by living tradition was 248 EZRA well known to the people. The books formed a scattered sacred literature. The writings of the Prophets gradually were collected by their disciples and by the learned in Israel. Thus copies of the books subsequent to the Pentateuch existed in many places through the nation but they were not united with the Thorah, nor considered of equal dignity with it. We come now to deal with Ezra and his influence on Scripture, The Babylonian Captivity, wrought by Nebu- chadnezzar, had overthrown all the institutions of Israel. The temple was destroyed ; the priests dispersed and led into captivity ; the Holy Books in a state of disorder, and Yahveh's altars demolished. To bring Israel out of her religious dis- order, Ezra was sent with full power from Artaxerxes. His fitness for his commission may be inferred from I. Ezra VII. 6: '^ — and he was a ready scribe in the Law of Moses." Of Ezra's work as the restorer of Yahveh's worship and the reorganizer of Israel's polity, we have certain data. Concerning, however, the nature and extent of his labors on the divine books, we can only form, at most, probable judg- ments, and, full oft, but conjectural opinions. Up to our days, the belief has been almost general that Ezra revised the sacred books, and fixed the Canon. That he wrought some important effects on the sacred books, we may not reasonably doubt. But to determine the exact nature and extent of his influence is impossible, through de- fect of documents. In all questions of this nature, the judg- ments of men will be divergent. And so in this question men have thought differently. The preponderance of Catho- lic thought has been that Ezra compiled and fixed the Canon. Prominent among those who have held this opinion are Serarius, Bellarmine, Bonfrere, Huet, Frassen; and more recently Welte, Herbst, Glaire, Scholz, Himpel, Ubaldi and Comely. The most eminent Catholic writers who reject, in whole or part, the old theory of the constitution of the Canon by Ezra are, Richard Simon, Movers, Nickes, Malou, Danko, Kaulen and Loisy. As rationalistic principles have thoroughly pervaded protestant Scriptural thought it will not aid our investi- EZRA 249 gation to bring forth and classify the protestant opinion concerning the influence of Ezra on the Jewish Canon. The Talmud furnishes us some curious data on the Canon. The treatise of the Mischna, called nlD^^ ''P*!?' (the Chap- ters of the Fathers) opens with a testimony concerning Holy Scripture: ''Moses received the Law on Sinai and delivered it to Jehoshua. Jehoshua delivered it to the Elders. The Elders delivered it to the Prophets. The Prophets delivered it to the men of the Great Synagogue.'' The Talmudic treatise ^^"^2 ^^23, (The Last Gate) of T : - T T the Babylonic Gemara is more explicit. In folios 14 b and 15 a, it is written: ''Who wrote the Holy Books? Moses wrote his book, the section concerning Bileam and Job. Jehoshua wrote his book and eight verses in the Law. Sam- uel wrote his book, the book of Judges and Ruth. David wrote the Book of Psalms by means of ten Ancients, Adam the first, Melchisedech, Abraham, Moses, Heman, Iduthun, Asaph and the three sons of Kore. Jeremiah wrote his books the Book of Kings and the Lamentations. Hezekiah and his colleagues wrote Isaiah, Proverbs, the Canticle of Canticles, and Ecclesiastes. The men of the Great Synagogue wrote Ezechiel, the twelve Prophets, Daniel, and the volume of Esther. Ezra wrote his book, and continued the genealogies of the Chronicles up to his time." We now join with these testimonies that of the apocry- phal fourth book of Ezra, IV. Ezra XIV. 22-26: "For if I have found favor in thee, send in me the Holy Spirit, and I will write all that which was done in time since the beginning, the things that were written in thy law, that men might find the path ; and that they who will live in the last days may live. And he made answer to me and said : 'Go and summon the people, and say to them that they shall not seek thee for forty days, and do thou prepare for thyself many writing tablets, and take with thee Sarea, Dabrea, Salemia, Echan and Asiel, those five, who are able to write quickly, and come hither, and I will enkindle in thy heart the light of intellect, which shall not be extinguished imtil thou shalt * The commentatorial treatises of the Gemara were called gates, since they opened the way for the intelligence of the different truths. 250 EZRA have finished the things thou shalt have begun to write. And then, a part thou shalt openly manifest to the perfect, and a part thou shalt deliver secretly to the wise; on the morrow, at this hour, thou shalt begin to write." ''And I was brought to the morrow; and, behold, a voice called me saying: 'Ezra, open thy mouth and drink that which I will give thee to drink.' And I opened my mouth, and behold a full cup was held out to me. This was filled with water, and the color thereof as of fire, and I took and drank ; and when I had drunk, my heart was ex- ceedingly filled with knowledge, and in my bosom wisdom grew. For the memory of my spirit was strengthened. And my mouth was opened, and was no more closed. The Most High gave understanding to the five men, and they wrote the visions of the night which were told them, and which they knew not. And at night they ate bread. But I spoke through the day, and through the night I was not silent. And there were written, during forty days, 204 books. And it came to pass, after forty days, the Most High spoke say- ing : 'The first things thou hast written make openly mani- fest, and let the worthy and the unworthy read ; but the lat- ter seventy preserve, that thou mayest give them to the wise men of thy people. For in these is the vein of under- standing, and the fount of wisdom, and the stream of knowl- edge.' And I did so." (Ibid. 38-47.) Up to the eighteenth century, the Latin of the Vulgate was the only text preserved to us of IV. Ezra. Since then there have been discovered the Arabic, Ethiopian, Syriac, and Armenian versions. In these the whole number of books is placed at ninety-four instead of 204; w^hence, if we subtract the seventy which were to remain hidden for the sole use of the wise men, we shall have the traditional num- ber twenty-four of the Jewish Canon. Comely makes much of this testimony as being built upon the true basis of Jewish tradition. We confess, though admitting some basis of truth, we can not find anything in it that would convince the intellect that Ezra fixed the Canon. The role of Ezra as a second promulgator of the Law would be sufficient basis for the rabbinical fable. EZRA 251 We have not adduced these testimonies as peremptory- proofs of anything. They are all more or less imbued with rabbinic fable. But perhaps, there may be some slight truth in these which has been distorted by the vagaries of the Rabbis, till it is hard to glean it from the composite mass. We believe that the tradition of the Christian Fathers will give us small help in this investigation. As it was merely a critical question, and in nowise connected with faith, the authority of the Fathers could only be considered in its critical character. Now it is evident to the tyro of patrology that the Fathers are least valuable as critics. As simple witnesses of the faith, they are beacon lights; but when we turn to their critical character, we find little of value. Most of those who have delivered to us that Ezra fixed the canon, based their assertions on the Fourth Book of Ezra, a book filled with rabbinic fable, impossible supersti- tion, and erroneous dogma. St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Basil, Theodoret, St. Optatus, and others have relied implicitly on the testimony of the Fourth Book of Ezra. Some, as St. Chrysostom, St. Isidore of Seville, St. Bede, have tried to make the passage of the Fourth Book of Ezra credible by restricting the character of Ezra within somewhat narrower bounds. (See Loisy, Hist, du Canon de r Ancient Testament.) Having brought forth these preliminary testimonies, we now proceed to more closely examine the question of Ezra's influence on the Scripture. Ezra restored the Yahvistic worship, and promulgated the Law. This rests on the clear testimony of an inspired book. The 8th and 9th Chapters of the n. Book of Ezra firmly establish the character of Ezra as reorganizer of Israel and promulgator of the Law; but when we would extend his influence on the Scripture further than this, we are unsustained by certain data. In view of these facts, it is well to first set forth what Ezra did not do, and, secondl}^ proceed to establish the most reasonable probable judgments concerning what he did. We place, therefore, as a thesis, that there are no adequate data to establish that Ezra promulgated an official list of the holy 252 EZRA books of the Jews ; but, on the contrary, probable data seem to warrant that no such official list was ever promul- gated among the Jews by any authority. To prove this thesis, we find one convincing proof in the fact that there is not a testimony in the patrimony of Scrip- tural science which asserts any such fact. Men, it is true, have asserted such fact; but they lacked one requisite ele- ment of a faithful witness, knowledge of the fact. The Fathers followed the pseudo Ezra ; hence their authority is no greater than his, which is nothing. The Babba Bathra of the Talmud, quoted above, speaks of the Scripture as though reduced to definite list, but its authority, even though believed implicitly, would prove nothing for the supposed character of Ezra. The Baba Bathra does not antedate the second century of the Christian era, and, at that time, the list of the Jewish Canon was complete, not by definite authority, but by the common consent of the Jewish people and its teachers. The Baba Bathra does not attribute the fixing of the Canon to Ezra, and no other document worthy of faith does so. We think that a fact of such im- portance would not be passed over in silence, while so many others of much less importance are detailed to us in the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and the Maccabees. The Talmud records many disputes concerning the can- onicity of some of the books of the Old Testament. Behold an example: "Rabbi Juda has said that the Canticle of Canticles defiles the hands; but Ecclesiastes is contested.* Rabbi Joseph said : 'Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands.' Rabbi Simon said : The disciples of Schammai judged more unfavorably of Ecclesiastes than the disciples of Hillel.' Rabbi Simeon, son of Azai, said: T have learned from every one of the mouths of the seventy ancients that this question was settled when Rabbi Eleazar, son of Azarias, was installed in office.' Rabbi Akiba said: 'May it please God, no Israelite has ever doubted that the Canticle of Can- ticles defiles the hands. The world has nothing more precious *To render the hands impure was the rabbinic expression to express that a book was inspired, as they must needs wash their hands after touching an inspired book. EZRA 253 than the day on which the Canticle of Canticles was given to Israel. All the Hagiographa are holy, but the Canticle of Canticles is most holy. If discussion has existed, it was con- cerning Ecclesiastes.' Rabbi Jochanan, son of Joshua, son of the father-in-law of Rabbi Akiba, said: 'It was discussed and decided as has said the son of Azai. ' " (Tr. Jadaim III. 5 .) Again: "The doctors wished to place in obscurity the Book of Ecclesiastes, for the reason that its discourses were contrary to the Law. Why did they not place it apart ? Because it be- gins and ends w^ith the words of the Law." (Tr. Sabbath 30.) These contentions among the Talmudists give evidence of doubts concerning various books of Scripture. If the Canon had been made out and promulgated by Ezra, would' not his authority have been cited here to decide concerning these books? If, as our opponents assert, the fixing of the Canon by Ezra rests on Talmudic tradition, we ought certainly to hear some word of him in these disputes. On the contrary, he is only mentioned as the author of his book and the con- tinuator of Chronicles. The Book of Ecclesiasticus, written very probably about the year 180, B. C, in Chapters XLIV. to XLIX. speaks of Israel's heroes and sages, and, although it exhorts that Nehemiah be a long time remembered, it has no word of Ezra. This would seem incomprehensible had Ezra collected and authoritatively promulgated the Canon. Moreover, Daniel and Esther are not mentioned among the illustrious ones of Israel, and there seems to be no other credible reason than that these books had not, at that date, entered the Jew- ish Canon, and, consequently, were imknown to the author of Ecclesiasticus. The Jews of Palestine, in their second letter to their con- freres of Alexandria, make offer to send them the books that Nehemiah and Judas had collected : ''And these same things were set down in the memoirs and commentaries of Nehemiah, and how he made a library, and gathered the writings con- cerning the kings, and the Prophets and the (writings) of David, ra rod AavtS, and the letters of the kings treating of the oblations. And in like manner Judas also gathered together all such things as were lost by the war we had, and 254 EZRA they are in our possession." We see in this testimon^^ a de- scription of a collection of books of national importance to Israel, partly sacred and partly profane. It is quite probable that the sacred books therein included were the first and later Prophets, according to the Jewish mode of enumeration, and the Psalms of David. The other works were, doubtless, epistles of the Persian kings, of importance in the govern- ment of a coimtry now a vassalage of Persia. It is plainly evident that Nehemiah did not collect the Canon of Scripture but a collection of important books sacred and profane, which, joined to the later collection of Judas Maccabasus, formed a sort of national library, to a participation of which the Jews of Palestine invited their brothers of Alexandria. This testi- mony also is a factor to refute the generally received opinion that Ezra closed the Canon. Most probably, he co-operated with Nehemiah in this enterprise ; but the very fact of a collection of certain sacred books into the national library presupposes that no complete authentic list of the Scriptures was in possession of Israel. Had it been made subsequently, some trace of it would have been left in the records of the Jews. , We believe, therefore, that the opinion which attri- butes to Ezra the collection and closing of the Canon to be devoid of historical basis and imtenable. We now pass to consider what influence Ezra did exert upon the Holy Books. The selection of him, "a scribe able in the Law," implies that there was some reconstruction of Holy Scripture for him to do. We have before said that he promulgated the Law to the returned exiles. What revision he wrought on the Thorah, it is impossible to say, but we are ready to believe that he revised in some respects Israel's great code. He also evidently explained this law to the people, and put into execution its enactments. This is Ezra's dis- tinguishing fimction in history. As reorganizer of Israel's polity, we are ready to believe that he did collect and revise Israel's sacred literature, and that many books came under his influence. How many, we can not say. We must here simply rely on conjecture. But, from the fact of the collec- tion by Nehemiah, one may see that the reconstructive spirit of Nehemiah and Ezra tended to bring together Israel's sacred EZRA 255 deposit of writings. They did this without any ex professo declaration of promulgating a canon; and it is highly prob- able that not all the Holy Books of the first Canon were col- lected into a body of writings at their epoch. Gradually the sacred collection was made up, and, at the time of Christ, the Jews considered the list of Holy Books as complete and fixed. The nucleus of the collection was the Thorah. Around this centre, the Holy Books formed themselves into a recognized collection by the concurrence of various causes, and their warranty for entrance into the sacred collection was not any decree or order of canonization by any authority but the fact that their contents were comformable to the living tra- ditions of the people, and reflected the things which a tena- cious Eastern memory had learned from law and prophet. Concerning Daniel the Abbe Glaire declares thus: **It seems to me, admitting, as I also do, the perfect canon- icity of Daniel, that the book being collected at Babylon, possibly after the death of its author, it was later brought to Jerusalem, and found place only at the end of the works already in the Canon." (Introduction I. 1868.) Ezra may have revised maAy of the holy books ; he may have collected all those attainable at that time ; we are ready to admit his influence upon Scripture to have extended even to the correcting of the Pentateuch, but we deny him an official promulgation of an incomplete canon of Scripture, at the very time when other books of divine origin were in actual existence, although not in his possession. In the Talmudic testimonies adduced above, mention is made of a great syna- gogue, n^n^n npJDr organized by Ezra. Much that is fabulous has been written concerning this great synagogue. Many reject it in toto as a rabbinic fable. Here again his- torical data are wanting. Besides the Talmudic authority already quoted, the Jews of the middle age, Abarbanel, Abra- ham ben David, and Maimonides recount that the Great Synagogue was composed of 120 members. Ezra was presi- dent, and the Prophets Haggai, Zachary and Malachi were among its members. It endured from the year 444, B.C., down to the time of Simon the Just, about the year 200 of the Christian era. The writings of the middle age are char- 256 EZRA acterized by the same spirit of extravagant fable which robs the Talmud of all historic worth, hence we can not treat these assertions as historic data. At most, there may be in them a basic thread of true tradition, which is well nigh lost amid a web of fable. Even those who have credulously accepted the legend of Ezra's Canon have rejected the story of the Great Synagogue. No convincing data are at hand to estab- lish the existence of such a body organized by Ezra, and yet such an organization, though not of such proportions as the Rabbis assert, may have been created by him,. That a body of men called the Synedrion or Sanhedrim existed at the opening of the Christian era is not doubted. It is quite certain that Christ referred to this body in Math. V., 22: "But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of the judgment, and whosoever shall say to his brother, J^p1# (cerebro vacuus), shall be in danger of Itt the coimcil. " It is impossible to fix the date of origin of this assembly. Many Jews refer it back to the origin of their polity under Moses. Of course this is a vagary. Christian writers diverge widely in their opinions concerning it. Noth- ing certain is available. Without admitting the fables of the Rabbis, might it not be the evolution of a legislative body organized by Ezra to aid in administering the civil and religious affairs of re-organized Israel? The question, like many others of a like nature, only admits of a conjectural answer. It is certain that the Providence of God entered as chief factor in preserving the Holy Books through so many vicissi- tudes. He, as ever, did this suaviter et fortiter. As he was back of the collection, they were safe, and there is no need of bringing the unsubstantial legend of Ezra's Canon to pro- tect a collection of books which the Providence of God pro- tected in his own way. But in the accessions to the central nucleus of the Jewish Canon, after the fourth century, a distinction was made, whence has sprung a leading question in the history of the Canon. Malachi closes the series of the Hebrew prophets. Nothing certain is known of the identity of this prophet. Some have believed the Hebrew name *'pi^/'D (angelus meus) to be an appellative of Ezra, or of EZRA 257 another Jew of that period, designating the particular func- tion of the last of the Prophets. Cornely sustains by prob- able arguments, that Malachi is the proper name of an in- dividual. The Jews recognized in him the last of the Pro- phets, and termed him DHin D^^DJil (sigillum Prophet- arum). Whatever view we adopt, Malachi's period must have been about four himdred years B.C. The accessions to the Palestinian Canon subsequent to Malachi were ac- corded a secondary rank. They were by no means con- sidered as mere profane creations, but from the fact that the series of the Prophets was closed, the effusion of the Holy Ghost was not believed to be so directly reflected in these books as in the others. This secondary influence of the Holy Ghost they denominated the ^)p HS (filia vocis). We find in no place an explicit enumeration of the several books whose writers were supposed to be actuated by the bath kol, but all indications seem to evince that they were the deu- terocanonical works of the Old Testament. From the first, these books existed in the Alexandrian Canon, which was totally derived from the sacred books of the Jews of Palestine, and the celebrated testimony of Flav- ins Josephus, now to be adduced, clearly asserts the exist- ence and preservation of certain semi-divine books, which had been collected after the close of prophecy in the reign of Artaxerxes. Now these books can be naught else than the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament. The testimony of Josephus exists in his "Defense Against Apion/' Bk. I., Parag. 8: "For we have not an innumerable multi- tude of books disagreeing from and contradicting one another, as the Greeks have, but only twenty-two books, which con- tain the records of all the past times, which are justly be- lieved to be divine. And of them, five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death. This interval of time embraces nearly three thousand years. From the death of Moses to the reign of Artaxerxes, who reigned after Xerxes, the Prophets who were after Moses wrote down what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of (17) H. S. 258 EZRA human life. It is true, our history hath been writtten since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of Prophets since that time: and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation, is evident by what we do ; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one hath been so bold as either to add anything to them, or take anything from them, or make any change in them ; but it is become natural to all Jews, immediately and from their very birth, to esteem these books to contain divine doctrines, and to persist in them and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them." Although some of the deuterocanonical books contain his- tory that must have antedated Artaxerxes, nevertheless, as the date of their accession to the Hebrew Canon was subse- quent to Artaxerxes, Josephus confounds the date of their accession with the date of their origin. These books, then, existed in the Palestinian collection as secondarily divine books. The Talmuds of Jerusalem and Babylon contain quotations from Ecclesiasticus. Josephus, who was an apt expounder of Pharisaic traditions, makes use of the deu- terocanonical fragments of Esther and the second book of Maccabees. Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. VI. 25) gives us the Canon of Scriptures according to Origen. After enumerating the protocanonical works, he says: 'There are also the Maccabees which are inscribed Sarbeth Sarbaneel^ St. Hilary in Prol. in Psalter, testifies that Tobias was read among the Hagiographa of the Jews. St. Epiphanius, Haer. VIII. No. 6, testifies that Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus were in honor among the Jews, and distinguished from the apoc- ryphal works. St. Isidore says of Wisdom: "As a certain one of those who know has recorded, the Hebrews received this work (Wisdom) among the Canonical Scriptures. But after they had seized and killed the Christ, remembering the most evident testimonies concerning Christ in that same book, in which it is written: The impious said among themselves, 'let us seize the just,' etc., taking counsel, lest we might lay upon them such an evident sacrilege, they cut THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON 259 it off from the prophetic volumes, and prohibited its reading to their people." The Apostolical Constitutions testify that Baruch was read in the Jewish synagogues.* St. Jerome testifies in his preface to the book of Judith that among the Hebrews Judith is read ''among the Hagio- grapha." 'Its authority," he continues, "is considered less apt to decide things about which there is dispute. It is written in Chaldaic, and reckoned among the historical books." We think it to be a position admitting of no rea- sonable doubt that the deuterocanonical works of the Old Testament primarily existed in the collection of the Jews of Palestine. The narrow, nugatory, reactionary spirit of the latter day Jews, exemplified in the Pharisees, denied to these books canonicity, as we understand the term ; but we can find no evidence that they denied them a divine origin. They are not found in the Hebrew collection of books to-day, but this can be readily explained. The same spirit which moved the Jews of Palestine to deny these books equal rank with the others, impelled them later to entirely exclude them. It would be hard to fix the date of this exclusion. It is probable that they gradually died out of the different codices, till, at last, all trace of them disappeared in the Palestinian Canon. Chapter VI. The Alexandrian Canon. Opposite causes effected the preservation of these books in the Alexandrian Canon. The Jews of Egypt depended in matters of religion on the Jews of Palestine. Abundant data prove that they received their collection of Holy Books from Palestine. This was not accomplished all at once. It began with the translation of the Law, made under Ptolemy Philadelphus in the third century B.C., and continued down to the first century B.C. The influence of Greek *The Constitutions of The Holy Apostles are a composite work, some of which may be as early as the second century of the Christian era. It seems quite probable that they originated in Syria. The only relation that they bear to the Apostles is that they reflect the Apostolical tra- ditions of the times. They were declared apocryphal by the decree of Gelasius, but still are of value inasmuch as they preserve for us the tra- ditions of the first ages of Christianity. 260 THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON thought and customs on the Hellenistic Jews modified the narrow national spirit of that nation. Later, in the time of the Maccabees, the pagan Greek customs were readily adopted by the Jewish youth. This liberal trend of religious thought effected that the deuterocanonical books were re- ceived and intermingled promiscuously with the other hooks. It is quite probable that there was always a certain degree of uncertainty and indecision in the synagogues of Alexan- dria. The minute, sharply drawn, Pharisaic distinctions did not obtain there. They had left home and home tradi- tions, and, blending with a highly cultivated nation, even those who clung to the substance of the Mosaic covenant lost much of their conservative spirit. As they read the Scriptures in Greek, the deuterocanonical books were not distinguishable by difference of tongue from the books of the first Canon. On the contrary, in Palestine the Scriptures were inseparably cast in the mould of the Hebrew mother tongue. The strong love of the Hebrews for their mother tongue would naturally incline the Jews of Palestine to look with less favor on a sacred book not written in the Hebrew language. Now some of the deuterocanonical books, such as Wisdom and H. Maccabees, were of Greek origin. It is quite probable that some of the others were already translated into Greek before their aggregation to the sacred collection, hence is explained their secondary place among the sacred books, and also why they are not found in the Hebrew Canon of to-day. It seems also quite certain that the Hellenistic Jews made no distinction between the protocanonical and the deuterocanonical books. Had such distinction been made, the books of secondary importance would have been relegated to the end of the collection. Now the direct opposite is found to have prevailed. Pro- tocanonical and deuterocanonical works are indiscrimin- ately intermingled in the Alexandrian Canon. This indis- criminate adoption of the deuterocanonical books was not the canonizing of these by the Alexandrians. It was a mere fact, which its authors had never taken thought to explain. Had they formally rendered equal these various books by an explicit declaration, it would have led to controversy between THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON 261 the Hellenists and the Jews of Palestine. No trace of any such controversy is found in the records and traditions of antiquit}^ The Jews of Palestine were not hostile to the deuterocanonical works, but, from the causes alread}^ enu- merated, refused to accord them equal rank with the others. The Jews of Alexandria, without deciding the issue, received and revered them all, and intermingled them in the sacred collection. There is plainly evident in this fact the workings of the Providence of God. The Almighty had decreed to effect the transition from the old to the new covenant through the medium of Greek language and culture. Israel was to re- ceive the Christ in fulfillment of Yahveh's promises, but the great Gentile world was to be the chosen people of the New Covenant. Under the Providence of God, Alexander the Great brought the known world under Greek influence, and gave it the Greek language as the medium of thought. The Romans reduced this vast extent of territory to peace with- out changing the language. Thus two conditions favor- able for the evangelization of the world were accomplished, peace and a uniform adequate vehicle of thought. It is easy to see how these two factors aided in the spread of the Gospel. Now, it was also expedient that the existing Scrip- tures should be in the universal tongue of the civilized world. We can see how the teachers of the New Covenant availed themselves of this element, since, with a few exceptions, they always make use of the Greek text of Scripture when quoting the Old Testament. Hence, the Providence of God brought it about that in the Greek there should exist a complete body of Scriptures. God was less solicitous about the Palestinian collection, because that was not to be the medium of graft- ing the new scion on the old stock. Thus the Alexandrians were instrimients in the hands of God in collecting a com- plete body of Scriptures, which that same Providence has ever protected as the great basic element in the deposit of faith. The first virtual canonization of the deuterocanonical books was the approbation of the Alexandrian collection of books by the teachers of the New^ Law. 262 THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON We have hitherto assumed that the deuterocanonical books were indiscriminately intermingled with the other books in the Alexandrian collection. That we may not be thought to assume unproven things, we shall adduce a few proofs of this well warranted fact. In the first place, we may remark that the only ones who would be likely to deny this would be the protestants. Now Davidson, a protestant, in his Canon of the Bible admits this as an obvious fact. **The very way," he says, "in which apocryphal (deutero- canonical) are inserted among canonical books in the Alex- andrian Canon shows the equal rank assigned to both." We may consider a first proof, the presence of these books in the Christian Canon of the first ages. Now certainly they received their collection of the Old Testament from the Greek Canon. Though the codices whence they took their Canon have perished, yet the exemplars now existing were faithfully reproduced from them. The translation known as the Vetus Itala, which dates back to the 2nd century of the Christian era, had all the deuterocanonical works, and this was certainly made from the Alexandrian collection. The great codices of the Vatican and Mt. Sinai, going back prob- ably to the fourth century, contain these works. The early Fathers were as conversant with the deuterocanonical works as with the rest of Holy Scripture. The subjects of the art of the Catacombs are largely taken from the deu- terocanonical works. Such early and universal approba- tion could not be effected, had not these books been delivered to the Christian Church by the Old Covenant through the medium of the Greek. It should not appear strange that all our attention is now centering upon the deuterocanonical books. This is the great issue between the protestants and us. The pro- tocanonical works need no defense, except against the rationalists. Our defense against them will appear later in our work. Those who reject the protocanonical works attack the whole basis of religious belief. But those who reject the deuterocanonical works profess still to accept God's word to man. With them, is the first issue. We shall first endeavor to prove that the writers of the New Law, by THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 263 accepting and employing the Alexandrian text of Holy Scripture, in which were the deuterocanonical books, virtu- ally canonized that collection of Scriptures. Chapter VII. The Canon of the Church. There is no trace in writing or tradition of any formal decision rendered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles concerning the Canon of the Old Testament. However, their use of the Alexandrian text of Scripture is equivalent to an express decree. It were incompatible with the character of the teachers of mankind and organizers of the Church, to make use of a collection of Scripture in which profane and inspired books were commingled. That they formulated no de- cree concerning the Canon of Scripture, proves that the Scrip- tures are subordinate to the Church. They, in virtue of the power given by the Master, were to found a living teaching body. The institutions of men exist by force of the fixed decrees and constitutions upon which their stability is based. The institution of Christ exists by virtue of the perpetual living vigor that energizes within her. She may pay small heed to human enactments, even though of infallible agents, for her warranty is in her living constitution, which is the almighty power of the Holy Ghost, her vital principle. Hence the Scrip- tures are only an instrument in the hands of the Church. Christ and his Apostles foimded the teaching body, which should guard the Scriptures, and at the proper time fix the Canon. In all our investigations concerning the Canon, it is the authority of the Church in the background which forms the great complement of the motive of credibility. No man can go securely through the dim vista of those remote times without the beacon hght of the Church. It is not by the sole force of historical data, that we believe that the deu- terocanonical works have God for their author. We receive them on the authority of the Church, and then trace the conformity between the books' history and the dogma of the Church. A man would defeat his own purpose, should he attempt to convert one to Catholicity by proving that the 264 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH deuterocanonical works had equal title to canonicity. Prove first that there is a God; then that there is a Christ; then that there is a Church ; and lastly exhort him to humbly ask Christ's teacher what to believe. St. Jerome after much hedging was forced to admit that the Alexandrian collection was approved by the Apostles. He would, indeed, have us believe that, where the Septua- gint differed from the Hebrew, the Apostles made use of the Hebrew. This is contradicted by the other Fathers, and is disproven by an examination and comparison of the two texts. St. Irenseus' authority is explicit in favor of our thesis. "The Apostles, being older than all these, (Aquila and the other Greek interpreters) are in accord with the aforesaid (Septuagint) translation, and the translation cor- responds with the tradition of the Apostles. For Peter and John and Matthew and Paul and the others and their fol- lowers announced the prophetic things according to the Septuagint.'' [Contra Haer. III. 21, 3.] Origin testifies that Paul, in Epist. to Romans, follows the Septuagint in every- thing, except, perchance, things of minor moment. [Orig. in Rom. VHI. 6.] The Syrian Jacobites, by the testimony of their primate Barhebrseus preferred the Syrian version of Scripture, that had been made from the Septuagint to the earlier one made from the Hebrew, because the one made from the Septuagint was more in consonance with the discourses of Our Lord and his Apostles. From the sixteenth century down, critical collation has been made of the passages of the Old Testament, quoted in the New. From the labors of Serarius, Morini, Capelli, Kautzsch, and others, it results that, of three hundred and fifty passages of the Old Testament quoted in the New, more than three hundred so agree with the Septuagint that it is evident that the writer was using that text as a source. Sts. Peter, James, Mark, Luke, and the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews always quote from the Septuagint; St. Paul, almost always; and Sts. Matthew and John very often quote from it. The reason for such course of action is evident. They were to convert a Greek world. By the Providence of God, a version of Scripture existed in Greek. They were THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 265 but following out the great plan of Salvation, by employing the resources of this existing text of Scripture in the evan- gelization of the world. Had such text been interspersed with spurious books and fragments such line of action would ill fit the teachers of the world. Our adversaries en- deavor to enfeeble the force of this argument by alleging that no deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament is expressly quoted in the New. This fact we admit ; but we deny that it weakens our position. Davidson, in Canon of the Bible, though not in the least friendly to Catholic opin- ions rejects this argument against the deuterocanonical books. On page 77 : ''When Bishop Cosius says that in all the New Testament we find no passage of apocryphal (deu- terocanonical) books to have been alleged either by Christ or his Apostles for the confirmation of His doctrine, the argu- ment, though based on a fact, is scarcely conclusive; else, Esther, Canticles, and other works might be equally dis- credited." In the New Testament Obadiah, Nahum, the Canticle of Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Ezra and Nehe- miah are neither quoted from nor alluded to. It needs not an explicit quotation to approve a book. The approbation of the version which recognized these books was a sufficient warranty for their inspiration. Express quotations in the New Testament are generally taken from the Law or the Prophets ; the other books are more oft implicitly cited, and it is only by the general similarity between the passages that we may detect that the writer of the New Testament had in mind any particular book of the Old Testament. Now there are many passages in the New Testament, which, when closely examined, bear evidence that the writer had in mind some book of the deuterocanonical collection. As this identity of thought appears to better advantage from the Greek, we collate a few texts in that tongue. 2o9taS£tpax. x£9. E. 11 'Ia/.w6ou 'ExigtoXtq x£9. A'. Ftvou Ta^uq ev dxpoacst aou, l^- — ^'^"^^ ^^ xa<; ^fvOpwxoc; xa- xac ev ii.axpo0u^ia c^U-^^ou axo- X"^? st? xb axoucrat, gpaSuc; stq ih xptffiv. XaXfjaat, ppaBu<; etq dpyi^v. 266 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH Ecclesiasticus V. ii. Jas. I. 19. Esto velox in auscultatione Sit omnis homo velox ad au- tua, et in longanimitate profer diendum, tardus ad loquendum responsum. tardus ad iram. So^, he explicitly adds ''ut testatur Scriptural His insertion of Pastor and the Doctrina Apostolorum among the books of the second canon is a critical error of his own, and not warranted by the usage of the Church. Canon- icity and divinity were not in the mind of Athanasius con- vertible terms. There had been no official promulgation of a canon, and hence he applied the term to the list of books which of old had received the sanction of the Synagogue. We feel warranted, then, in saying that as a witness of tra- dition in his practical use of Scripture the weight of Athana- sius' authority is with us, while, in his capacity of critic, he accords to the deuterocanonical books in general a venera- tion which the Church never gave to any but divine books. We omit the Synopsis Scripturse, formerly falsely ascribed to Athanasius, since it covers the same ground as the testimony already quoted. Another Father whose authority is invoked against us is St. Cyril of Jerusalem.* *St. Cyril of Jerusalem was bom about the year 315 A. D. He was ordained deacon by St Macarius of Jerusalem and priest by St Maximus, whom he succeeded in the see of Jerusalem in the year 350 A. D. His episcopate was troubled by the opposition of the Arians, then powerful in the East. He was often exiled by the intrigues of these, and was marked for death by Julian the Apostate; but the death of Julian prevented the execution of his project. Cyril died in his see in 386. In one of his letters to Constans he testifies of a marvelous luminous apparition of a cross which extended from Mt. Calvary to Mt. Olivet which was witnessed by many for several hotirs. His chief works are his Catecheses to the Cate- chumens and Neophytes. Although some of Cyril 's opinions are strange, he was a staunch defender of the faith, and he merits to be considered a coryphaeus in patristic theology. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 381 The testimony upon which his authority is invoked against us is foiind in his fourth Cathechesis, Chapters 33,35, and 36. The following excerpts will illustrate his position: ''Studiously also learn fro7n the Church what are the books of the Old Testament, and what of the New. Read to me nothing of the Apocrypha. For thou, who art ignorant of those books which are recognized and received by all, why dost thou wretchedly lose thy labor about those which are doubtful and controverted? Read the divine Scriptures, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, which the seventy-two interpreters translated . . . Read these twenty-two hooks, and have naught to do with the Apocrypha. These alone studiously meditate and handle, which we also read in the Church with certain confidence. Much more prudent and more pious were the Apostles and the ancient bishops, the rectors of the Church, who handed them down. Thou, therefore, being a child of the Church, overstep not the established laws." Continuing, he gives the same canon as that of Athanasius, except that he conjoins Ruth with Judges, and includes Esther, thus preserving the number twenty-two. And he adds: "But let all the other (books) he held outside (the canon) in a second (inferior order) . And whatever are not read in the churches, do thou not read these even privately." In truthfully weighing this testimony, we find in the first sentence the adoption of our criterion of inspiration: ''Studi- ously also learn from the Church what are the books of the Old Testament, and what of the New.'' In the enunciation of this eternal verity, Cyril spoke in the name of the whole Church. It was always believed, and always will be believed by those of the faith of Christ, that it was the province of the Church to regulate the code of Scripture. This every Father be- lieved and taught. Neither does Cyril characterize as apo- cryphal the deuterocanonical books. He considered them doubtful and of an inferior rank, and hence, exhorts the catechumens to make use of those concerning which there was no doubt. In forbidding the converts to read privately the books which were not read in the Church, he tacitly allows such private reading of the deuterocanonical books. 382 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY The spirit of the Church at Jerusalem was extremely con- servative, tinged with Judaism. Naturally for such the books which the Synagogue did not recognize would be re- garded with some disfavor. Cyril was influenced by the trend of religious thought reigning at Jerusalem. He sacri- ficed nothing by his strict views on the canon. The pro- tocanonical books are the most useful ; the Church had not defined the Canon ; and Cyril safeguarded the rights of the Church by bidding everyone go to her for the Canon. The protocanonical and deuterocanonical books were not made absolutely equal imtil the decree of the Council of Trent. The Fathers considered the latter as useful, edifying, and most of the Fathers considered them of divine origin, but they, in general, accorded them a less dignity and venera- tion than that given the protocanonical books. The slight doubt that reigned in some churches regarding their divine origin induced Cyril to place them in an inferior rank. In the uncertainty of religious thought of his time, he judged it better that the neophytes should devote their study to the absolutely certain sources of divine truth. Were C3nril alive to-day, he would learn from the Church to receive the complete Canon. In his practical use of Scripture, Cyril follows the usage of the Church, and often quotes the deuterocanonical books, as the following examples will show • Dan. III. 27, 29. Catech. II. XVI. ** — quia Justus es in omnibus " — illicque pro malorum re- quae fecisti nobis, et universa medio dicebant: 'Justus es, Do- opera tua vera, et viae tuae rec- mine, in omnibus quae fecisti tae, et omnia judicia tua vera, nobis: peccavimus enim et Peccavimus, et inique egimus," inique egimus.' " etc. Eccli. III. 22. Catech. VI. 4. **Altiora te ne quaesieris, et "Profundiora tenequaesieris, fortiora te ne scnitatus fueris: et fortiora te ne in vestiges: quae sed quae praecepit tibi Deus, ilia tibi praecepta sunt, ea mente cogita semper, et in pluribus agita." operibus ejus ne fueris curio- sus." THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 383 Sap. XIII. 2. ** — sed aut ignem, aut spiri- tum, aut citatum aerem, aut gyrum stellarum, aut nimiam aquam, aut solem et lunam, rectores orbis terrarum deos putaverunt." Sap. XIII. 5. " — a magnitudine enim spe- cie! et creaturae, cognoscibiliter poterit creator horum videri."- Eccli. XLIII. 2. **Sol in aspectu annuntians in exitu, vas admirabile opus excelsi." Ibid. 8. "Deum nonnulli ignem esse senserunt." Sap. XIII. 5. " — magnitudine enim spe- ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter poterit Creator horum videri." Baruch III. 36-38. "Hie est Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius adversus eum. Hie adinvenit omnem viam disciplinae, et tradidit illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel dilecto suo. Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." Catech. IX. 2. "juxta Salomonem qui ait: 'nam ex magnitudine et pul- chritudine creaturarum, pro- portione servata, Procreator earum conspicitur. ' " Ibid. 6. " — ^nonne admirari oportet eum qui in solis fabricam in- spexerit ? nam modici vasis ap- parens vim ingentem complect- itur; ab oriente apparens et in occidentem usque lumen emit- tens." Ibid. 16. ** — et ex his quae dicta lec- taque sunt, quaeque ipse re- perire aut cogitare poteris, ex magnitudine et pulchritudine creaturarum, proportione ser- vata, Auctorem earum con- spicias." Catech. XL 15. ** — audi Prophetam dicen- tem: *Hic est Deus noster, non reputabitur alius adversus eum. Invenit omnem viam scientiae, et dedit eam Jacob puero suo, et Israel dilecto a se. Post haec in terra visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." 384 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Eccli. II. 22. (Already quoted.) Sap. II. 24. "Invidia autem diaboli mors introivit in orbem terrarum — ." Eccli. IV. 36. "Non sit porrecta manus tua ad accipiendum, et ad dandum collecta." Dan. XIV. 35. "Et apprehendit eum Ange- las Domini in vertice ejus, et portavit eum capillo capitis sui." Sap. VI. 17. "Quoniam dignos se ipsa cir- cuit quaerens, et in viis ostendit se illis hilariter, et in omni pro- videntia occurrit illis." Dan. XIII. 42-45. "Exclamavit autem voce magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus aeteme, qui absconditorum es cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante- quam fiant, tu scis, quoniam falsum testimonium tulerunt contra me, et ecce, morior, cum nihil horum fecerim, quae isti malitiose composuerunt adver- sum me. Exaudivit autem Do- minus vocem ejus. Cumque duceretur ad mortem, suscita- vit Dominus spiritum sanctum pueri junioris, cujus nomen Daniel— " Ibid. 19. **Ne extoUas te ipsum, ne ca- das. Quae tibi mandata sunt ea sola meditare." Catech. XII. 5. "At maximum hoc opificio- rum Dei in paradiso choros ag- ens inde diaboli ejecit invidiam Catech. XIII. 8. ^ "Nee enim ad accipiendum tantum porrecta, verum etiam ad operandum prompta tibi sit manus." Catech. XIV. 25. "Si enim Habacuc ab angelo translatus est, per comam sui capitis portatus," etc. Catech. XVI. 19. " — tantum illi ostia aperia- mus ; circumit enim qucsrens dig- nos.'' Ibid. 31. "Idem (Spiritus Sanctus) sa- pientem effecit Danielis ani- mam ut seniorum judex esset adolescens. Damnata fuerat casta Susanna tamquam impu- dica; vindex nullus; quis enim eam a principibus eripuisset? Ad mortem ducebatur, in man- ibus lictorum jam erat. . . scrip- turn est enim: 'Suscitavit Deus Spiritum sanctum in puero juvenculo.* " THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 385 Catech. XXIII. Mystago- Eccli. XXXIV. 9. gia, V. 17. "Qui non est tentatus, quid ** — et quomodo alicubi dic- scit.?" turn est: *Vir non tentatus, non est probatus.' " We must admit that Cyril's use of deuterocanonical Scripture is more restricted than that of other writers, but it is sufficient to show how the general belief and usage of the Church overcame the critical views of the individual. The force of such general acceptance of the Church may easily be judged from this alone, that in the very catecheses in which he recommends to the catechumens the use of only the protocanonical books, he himself employs the deutero- canonical books as divine Scripture. There is also alleged against us the authority of Epiphanius.* The passage upon which his opposition to the deutero- canonical works is founded, occurs in the fourth chapter of the treatise on Weights and Measures. In this chapter he endeavors to make the number of canonical books of the Old Testament accord with the twenty-two letters of the He- brew alphabet. Of course, he only enumerates the books of the Jewish Canon. The closing words of the chapter are: *St. Epiphanius was bom in Palestine, about the year 310 A. D. His youth was spent in the life of a solitary in the desert. He founded at the age of twenty a monastery in the desert, and devoted himself to the study of sacred and profane writers. The result of his continued application to reading is apparent in his works. In 366 he was made Bishop of Salamina the metropolis of Cyprus. In the capacity of bishop, he was a sturdy bul- wark against the teeming heresies of that age. He bitterly opposed the theories of Origen, and, in his zeal to anathematize him, was discourteous to John Chrysostom. His imprudent zeal often led him to encroach on the jurisdiction of other bishops. He died on a return voyage by sea from Constantinople to Cyprus in 403. The works of Epiphanius exhibit a vast erudition, marred by a lack of criticism and by the insertion of many fables. He was a compiler more than an original thinker. His style is harsh, negligent, obscure and often without logical sequence. He lacked the power and discerning mind to master and order the vast amount that he had read. His chief works are his Panarium or Treatise against the Heresies, the Anchorage, the Treatise of the Weights and Measures of the Jews, and a treatise concerning the twelve precious stones of the rational of the High Priest of the Jews. (25) H.S. 386 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY "Regarding the two books that are written in verse, that is, the Wisdom of Solomon, which is called Panaretus, and the book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, the grandson of Jesus, who wrote this book of Wisdom in Hebrew, which his grandson Jesus translated into Greek, although they are useful and profitable, they are by no means placed in the Canon of Scripture. Hence, they were not placed in the Ark of the testament." The obscurity and lack of critical acumen of the writer appear in this short extract. It is evident that he supposes that the divine books of the Jews were placed in the Ark of the covenant, whereas only the Decalogue was therein placed. The term canonical with Epiphanius, signified the official approbation by the Synagogue. Being a native of Palestine, his mind was in a measure tinged by Judaizing theories. In his day, the deuterocanonical books were not officially canonized by any universal authority. They had the sanction of usage and the veneration of the Church, but this did not make them equal in extrinsic author- ity to the books that Jew and Christian had always con- sidered divine. Although Epiphanius speaks only of Wis- dom and Ecclesiasticus his words equally apply to the other deuterocanonical books, since their history has always been the same. The reason that Tobias, Judith and Maccabees receive no recognition from Cyril and Epiphanius is most probably that they are not so useful to impart dogmatic truths. Comely and others think that Epiphanius, in giv- ing in this place the restricted Jewish Canon, tacitly infers the existence of an enlarged Christian Canon. We fail to find this opinion credible. Everything seems to demon- strate that the canonization spoken of in those days was simply the official sanction of the Synagogue. This was the one and only Canon that these Fathers recognized, but in excluding the other books from it they did not deny them divinity, although many accorded them an inferior dignity. All the books were read ; all were venerated by the faithful ; but the books of the first Canon had the external sanction of the Synagogue, which raised them theoretically above the others. It was only in the Council of Trent, that the official declaration of the Church made the two classes perfectly THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 387 equal. Now, such official declaration being wanting, it is not strange that these Fathers, theoretically treating the question should not place these books in the Canon. Neither is it strange that individuals should have doubted concern- ing the divinity of these books. It shows the need of the Magisterium of the Church, which entered at the appropri- ate time, and took away all doubt by her authoritative voice. That Epiphanius, at least, considered Wisdom and Ec- clesiasticus as divine Scripture appears from the following passage from Ad versus Haereses, Haeres. LXXVI. 5 : "For if thou wert begotten of the Holy Ghost, and taught by the Apostles and Prophets, this shouldst thou do : Examine all the sacred codices from Genesis to the times of Esther, which are twenty-seven books of the Old Testament, and are enu- merated as twenty-two ; then the four Holy Gospels. . . the Books of Wisdom, that of Solomon, and of the Son of Strach, and in fine all the books of Scripture." Hence, Epiphanius, as it were, made two classes of the Old Testament Scrip- tures ; the books canonized by the Jews, and those adopted and used by the Church as Holy Writ. In favor of the former was the authority of the Synagogue ; while all used and venerated the latter, as, individuals, they did not feel warranted in according them a prerogative that the Church had not yet given. Epiphanius' use of the deuterocanonical books will ap- pear from the following passages: Ad versus Haereses, Lib. I. Eccli. VII. I. Haeres. XXIV. 6. "Noli facere mala, et non te "-quemadmodum Scriptura apprehendent." testatur: 'Qui quaenint mala, mala eos apprehendent.' " Sap. III. 14. Ibid. Haeres. XXVI. 15. " — et spado, qui non opera- "Ad haec alio in loco Spiritus tus est per manus suas iniqui- Sanctus . . . hoc modo vaticina- tatem " etc. ^^^ ^^^* 'Beata sterilis incoin- quinata, quae nescivit torum in delicto, et spado, qui non oper- atus est manibus suis iniquita- tem.' " 388 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Maccab. I. i Dan. XIII. 42. "Exclamavit autem voce magna Susanna, et dixit: Dens aeteme, qui absconditorum es cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante- quam fiant — ." Eccli. XIII. 20. "Omnis caro ad similem sibi conjungetur, et omnis homo si- mili sui sociabitur." Eccli. XLIII. 26. "Qui navigant mare, enar- rent pericula ejus ; et audientes auribus nostris admirabimur. " Eccli. XIV. 5. "Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii bonus erit?" Sap. VII. 2. "Decem mensium tempore coagulatus sum in sanguine," etc. Baruch III. 36-38. "Hie est Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius adversus eum. Hie adinvenit omnem viam dis- ciplinae et tradidit illam Jacob puero suo et Israel dilecto suo. Ibid. Haeres. XXX. 25. "Quae causa est cur in Mac- cabaeorum libris scriptum sit: * — e Cittiensium terra genus quodam esse propagatum.' " Ibid. 31. "Novit enim omnia Deus an- tequam fiant, 'ut est Scrip- turn: " Ibid. Haeres. XXXII. 8. "Quoniam avis omnis secun- dum genus suum congregatur, et omnis homo simili sui sociab- itur 'ait Scriptura: " Ibid. Haeres. XLII. 9. " — ut haec in nobis vera sit Scripturae sententia : * Qui navi- gant mare,virtutes Domini nar- rant." ' Ibid. Haeres. XLII. Refut. 70. "Quis seipsum in praeceps impellit, impletque quod scrip- tum est: 'Qui sibi nequam est, cui bonus erit.'" " Ibid. Lib. II. Hares. II. 29. "In quo ad Salomonis dic- tum illud allusisse videntur: 'Decem mensium spatio con- cretus in sanguine." Ibid. Hseres. LVII. 2. " — ut Scriptura declarat: 'Hie est Deus tuus: non reputa- bitur aHus ad ipsum. Invenit omnem viam scientiae et dedit illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 389 Post haec in terris visus est, et dilecto suo. Post haec in terra cum hominibus conversatus visus est, et cum hominibus est." conversatus est.' " Baruch III. 36. (Already quoted.) Ibid. 9. "Scriptum est, in quit: 'Iste Deus est noster, et non aestima- bitur alius.' " Eccli. XX. 2. "Concupiscentia spadonis de- virginabit juvenculam — ." Eccli. XXVII 2. "Sicut in medio compaginis lapidum palus figitur sic et in- ter medium venditionis et emptionis angustiabitur pecca- tum." Sap. I. 13. "Quoniam Deus mortem non fecit, nee laetatur in perditione vivorum." Ibid. Hceres. LVIII. 4. ** — a Sapiente dicitur: 'Con- cupiscentia spadonis devirgina- bit juvenculam." Ibid. H«res. LIX. 7. "Atque 'ut palus,' inquit, in- ter duos lapides conteritur, sic peccatum in medio ejus qui emit et vendit.' " Ibid. Haeres. LXIV. 19. "Deus enim mortem non fe- cit, nee delectatur in perditione viventium. Invidia vero dia- boli mors introivit in mundum, ut per Salomonem Sapientia testatur.'' Sap. I. 14. "Creavit enim, ut essent om- nia: et sanabiles fecit nationes orbis terrarum: et non est in illis medicamentum exterminii, nee inf erorum regnum in terra. ' ' Sap. II. 23. "Quoniam Deus creavit ho- minem inexterminabilem, et ad imaginem similitudinis suae fe- cit ilium." Ibid. Haeres. LXIV. 31. * ' — id quod Sapientia confirm- at his verbis: 'Creavit enim ut essent omnia Deus; et salu- tares sunt mundi generationes. Nee est in illis medicamentum exitii.' " Ibid. 34. "Creavit enim, ait Sapientia, hominem in incorruptione ; ad imaginem aetemitatis suas fecit ilium." 390 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Sap. III. 1-4. "Justorum autem animas in manu Dei sunt, et non tanget illos tormentum mortis. Visi sunt oculis insipientium mori: et aestimata est afflictio exitus illorum: et quod a nobis est iter, exterminium : illi autem sunt in pace. Et si coram hominibus tormenta passi sunt, spes illo- rum immortalitate plena est." Sap. VII. 2. " — decem mensium tempore coagulatus sum in sanguine, ex semine hominis, et delecta- mento somni conveniente." Eccli. X. 13. "Cum enim morietur homo, haereditabit serpentes, et bes- tias, et vermes." Sap. III. 4-6. "Et si coram hominibus tor- menta passi sunt, spes illorum immortalitate plena est. In paucis vexati, in multis bene disponentur: quoniam Deus tentavit eos, et invenit illos dignos se. Tamquam aurum in fomace probavit illos, et quasi holocausti hostiam accepit illos, et in tempore erit respectus il- lorum." Ibid. 36. "Idem vero per Salomonem in eo libro qui Sapientia inscri- bitur ostendit ubi: 'Justorum,' in quit, 'animae in manu Dei sunt, et non tanget illos tor- mentum. Visi sunt oculis insi- pientum mori, et aestimata est affiictio exitus illorum, et quod a nobis est iter, exterminium. Illi autem sunt in pace, et spes illorum immortalitate plena est.' " Ibid. 39. " — Christi corpus non ex vol- untate viri, ac voluptate som- nique congressione in iniquit- atibus esse susceptum." Ibid. ' * Quam ob causam sapiens ille Sirach ita pronuntiat: 'Cum enim morietur homo, haeredit- abit serpentes, et bestias, et vermes.' " Ibid. 48. "Quam vero consentanea iis de martyribus a Salomone pro- nuntiata sint, attendite. Neque enim aliarum Scripturarum testi- monio caremus. 'Deus,' inquit, 'tentavit eos, et invenit eos dig- nosse. Tamquam aurum in f or- nace probavit illos; et sicut ho- locaustum suavitatis accepit illos; et in tempore visitationis illorum,' etc. Cum an tea dixis- set: 'Et si coram hominibus tormenta passi sunt, spes illo- rum immortalitate plena est. In paucis correpti magna bene- ficia consequentur.' " THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 391 Sap. I. 4. ** — q-uoniam in malevolam animam non introibit sapientia, nee habitabit in eorpore sub- dito peceatis." Sap. IV. 12. "Faseinatio enim nugaeitatis obseurat bona, et ineonstantia eoneupiseentiag transvertit sen- sum sine malitia." Sap. IV. 8-12. "Senectus enim venerabilis est non diutuma etc." Ibid. 54. "Praeterea Salomon: 'In ma- levolam,' inquit, 'animam non introibit sapientia, nee habita- bit in eorpore obnoxio pec- cato.' " Ibid. H^res. LXV. i. "Nam in illo ScripturcB dic- tum illud impletur: 'Fascinatio enim nugaeitatis obseurat bo- na, et ineonstantia concupi- scentiae transvertit mentem sine malitia." Ibid. Haeres. LXVII. 4. "Hie igitur: 'Senectus,' in- quit, 'venerabilis non longae- Sap. IV. 13, 14. "Consummatus in brevi, ex- plevit tempora mult a, placita enim erat Deo anima illius: propter hoc properavit educere ilium de medio iniquitatum; populi autem videntes, et non intelligentes, nee ponentes in praecordiis talia. — " Baruch III. 36. "Hie est Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius adversus eum." Ibid. 37. "Hie adinvenit omnem viam disciplinae, et tradidit illam Ja- cob puero suo, et Israel dilecto suo." Ibid. 38. "Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." Ibid. "Ut autem de pueris loqui ilium appareat statim adjicit: 'Consummatus in brevi (quasi dicat: mortuus juvenis) imple- vit tempora multa. Placita e- nim erat Domino anima illius: propterea festinavit eum edu- cere de medio malitiae." Ibid. Hffires. LXIX. 31. "Alter eum ipso minime comparabitur. " Ibid. "Quid porro? Ut de Filio ser- monem esse cognoscas, dein- ceps ista subjecit: 'Invenit om- nem viam scientiae et dedit illam.' " Ibid. "Tum postea: 'In terra visus est, et cum hominibus conver- satus est.' " 392 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Ibid. 37, 38. Ibid. 38. Esther XIII. 9. " — et dixit: Domine, Do- mine, rex omnipotens, in di- tione enim tua cuncta sunt pos- ita, et non est, qui possit tuae resistere voluntati, si decreveris salvare Israel." Baruch III. 37, 38. Sap. I. 7. ''Quoniam spiritus Domini replevit orbem terrarum: et hoc, quod continet omnia, sci- entiam habet vocis." Eccli. XIV. 5. "Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii bonus erit ? et non jucundabitur in bonis suis." Sap. IX. 14. "Cogitationes enim morta- lium timidae, et incertae provi- dentiae nostras — ." Ibid. 53. Ibid. 55. Ibid. Lib. III. Haeres. LXX. 7- **Sed et illud proinde certum, posse ilium quae velit efficere: 'Nullus est enim qui ejus volun- tati resistat.' " Ibid. Haeres. LXXI. 3. * ' Qui in venit omnem viam sci- entiae. Exstitisse vero divina Scrip tura non dubitat. Nam quae sequuntur ante ilium ex- stitisse declarant. Velut quod omnem viam scientiae reper- isse dicatur, deinde in terris visus esse." Ibid. Haeres. LXXIV. "Spiritus enim Domini re- plevit orbem terrarum." Ibid. Haeres. LXXVI. Con- fut. VIII. "Ecquis igitur illius misere- bitur, qui sibi ipsi malus, nem- ini alteri bonus est?" Ibid. LXXVI. Confut. XXXI. '* — siquidem divina majes- tas, Patris inquam et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, angelorum mentes omnes longo intervallo superat, nedum kominum quo- rum timidcB cogitationes.'' THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 393 Baruch, III. 38. "Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." St. Epiph. Expositio Fidei XVI. " — ac denique verus ut ap- pareret Filius, et illud Propheta vaticinium expleret: *Et post haec enim in terra visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est. " The frequency with which this passage is quoted by the Fathers manifests that they considered it a classic text to prove the Incarnation. Sap. XIV. 20. "Initium enim fomicationis est exquisitio idolorum — ." Eccli. III. 22. "Altiora te ne quaesieris, et fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris: sed quae praecepit tibi Deus, ilia cogita semper, et in pluribus operibus ejus ne fueris curio- sus." Dan. III. 57. "Benedicite omnia opera Do- mini Domino — ." He repeats this passage Canticle in the twenty-fourth Sap X. 21 " — quoniam sapientia aper- uit OS mutorum, et linguas in- fantium fecit disertas." Sap. VIII. 2 "Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a juventute mea, et quaesivi spon- St. Epiph. Ancoratus II. " 'Initium quippe fomica- tionis est exquisitio idolorum,' ut ait Scriptura. ' ' Ibid. XII. "Etenim cum nos Scriptura reprehendit his verbis: 'Quae prascepta tibi sunt, haec cogita; neque arcanis et occultis tibi opus est: et altiora te ne quae- sieris, ac profundiora te ne in- quiras.' " Ibid. XXIV. " — et creaturas a Creatore discernentes, hunc in modum (tres pueri in fomace) locuti sunt: 'Benedicite omnia opera Domini Domino.' " and other portions of the and twenty-fifth Chapters. Ibid. XXXI. ** — quique balbutientium linguam disertam praestitit," etc. Ibid. XLII. "Ad haec Salomon aliam quamdam sapientiam appellat: 394 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY sam mihi earn assumere, et amator factus sum formae il- lius." Banich III. 38. "Post hsec in terns visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." Esther XIII. 9. (Already quoted.) Sap. II. 23. "Quoniam Deus creavit ho- minem inexterminabilem, et ad imaginem similitudinis suae fe- cit ilium." 'Amavi,' in quit, 'pulchritudi- nem ejus et eam mihi sponsam duxi.' " Ibid. LXXVIII. "Christus autem Deus e coelo, verbum e Maria caro fac- tum est hominemque suscepit, et nobiscum, ut ait Scriptura, versatus est." Ibid. XCVI. (Already quoted.) St. Epiph. Epist. ad Joan. Episcopum Hieros. Cap. VI. "Dicit enim (Salomon) in Sa- pientia quae titulo ejus inscribi- tur: 'Creavit Deus incorrup- tum hominem, et imaginem suae proprietatis dedit ei.' " Here, in the clearest terms, Epiphanius makes known that his exclusion of a book from the list of those called ca- nonical, was not equivalent to denying it the authority of divine Scripture. He certainly believed that he was quot- ing the revealed word, when he introduces these passages in the solemn formulae, **ut ait Scriptura," "Scriptum est," etc. Neither did he quote these passages at random, not advert- ing to the fact that they were not in the Canon. He often specifies the hook, and speaks of the authors. We believe that had the other deuterocanonical books been equally service- able for dogmatic argument, he would have drawn also from them as from Scriptural sources. At least, our adversaries must admit that Epiphanius is a staunch supporter of the divinity of at least three deuterocanonical books, and also of the deuterocanonical fragments of Daniel, and that his exclusion of the deuterocanonical books from the list then termed canonical, cannot be construed to signify non- inspiration of the same. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 395 Among the adversaries of the deuterocanonical books is placed Gregory Nazian^enus.* Two passages in Gregory's works form the basis of his pretended opposition to the deuterocanonical books. The first passage occurs in Carmen I. 13 : "Accipe a me selectum hunc, amice, numenim, Sunt quidem historici libri omnes duodecim, Antiquioris Hebraicae sapientiae: Primus Genesis, deinde Exodus et Leviticus ; Postea Numeri, tum Deuteronomium, Deinde Josue et Judices : Ruth octavus est, Nonus decimusque liber, res gestae Regum, Et Paralipomena ; Esdram habes ultimo loco. Quinque versibus scripti stmt, quorum primus Job, Postea David, tum Salomonis tres, Ecclesiastes, Canticum, et Proverbia. Similiter quinque Spiritus prophetici; Ac uno quidem continentur libri duodecim : Osee, et Amos, et Micheas tertius; Deinde Joel, postea Jonas, Abdias, Nahum, Habacuc et Sophonias, Aggaeus, deinde Zacharias, Malachias, Uno hi continentur libro: secundo Isaias, Tertio qui vocatus est Jeremias ab infantia, Quarto Ezechiel, quinto Danielis gratia. Veteres quidem numeravi duos et viginti libros Hebraeorum elementorum numero respondentes," ♦Gregory Nazianzenus, takes his distinctive title from Nazianzus, a small town in the south-west of Cappadocia, which is not known to the early geographers, and owes its chief importance to its connection with our author. It is impossible to fix with exactness the date of his birth ; accord- ing to the BoUandists it should be placed before the year 300. His father, at first an infidel, was converted by his wife Nonna, and afterwards was Bishop of Nazianzus; his mother St. Nonna, considered the infant Gregory as given her in answer to her prayers. Gregory studied at Caesarea, Alexandria and Athens, and became pro- ficient in Greek oratory and poetry. He contracted in youth a friend- ship for St. Basil which lasted through life. The two soiight together the solitude of the desert, whence Gregory was afterwards stmimoned to assist his aged father in the cares of the Episcopate. He was soon after or- ordained priest by his father, and then bishop, by St. Basil. Gregory, however, soon after abandoned his see for the solitude, but emerged thence again at the instance of his decrepit father, and executed the episcopal functions in Nazianzus without assuming the name of bishop. After the death of his parent, he again sought the desert, but was brought thence by his friends, and placed in the see of Constantinople. He was favored by Theodosius the Great, and resisted the swarming heresies of the time, chief among which was the heresy of Arius. 396 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY After enumerating in succession all the books of the New Testament, excepting the Apocalypse, he concludes : "Si quid est extra hunc numerum non est ex germanis Scrip- turis." In the celebrated Carmen ad Seleucum, a Canon occurs differing from the foregoing only in this, that he admits in it Esther, which did not appear in the first Carmen, and also the Apocalypse with the qualification : "Apocalypsim autem Johannis Quidam vero admittunt, pars vero major Spuriam asserunt." Basing their judgment on this difference in the Canons, and on the testimony of some codices, some have denied to Gregory the authorship of the Carmen ad Seleucum, and have attributed it to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium (344 — 394), the friend of Gregory, called by him the "irre- proachable pontiff," the * 'angel," and "hero of truth." The opinion rests principally on the authority of Combefis, the editor of Amphilochius' works, and in my judgment has little foimdation. I see no good reason for denying to Gregory this Carmen, since the presence of Esther and the Apocalypse therein would simply show that Gregory, in endeavoring to follow the trend of religious thought, could not be consistent in excluding books which the Church con- sidered divine. Gregory concludes his canon in the Carmen ad Seleucum with these words: — "His certissimus Canon tibi sit divinanim Scripturarum." It would seem, at first sight, that these testimonies mani- fest a certain opposition to the deuterocanonical books. However, in the Carmen ad Seleucum, 252-257, Gregory The perfidy and envy of his enemies induced him to resign again the see of Constantinople, and he finally sought the solitude of the desert again, where he died in 389 A. D. Gregory was by nature severe and inclined to the life of an ascetic. His vast erudition caused Jerome to journey to Constantinople to hear him. His writings are at times excessively ornate, and sometimes uncritical. His chief works are fifty-five orations, a great number of letters, and many poems. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 397 declares that he allows to the deuterocanonical books a sort of middle place between uninspired and inspired Scripture : "Non omnis liber pro certo habendus Qui venerandum Scripttirae nomen praefert. Sunt enim, sunt (ut nonnunquam fit) inscripti falsi nominis Libri : nonnulli quidem intermedii sunt ac vicini, Ut ita dixerim, veritatis doctrince ; Alii vero spurii et magnopere periculosi." Gregory accorded to the deuterocanonical books a middle rank. He made a distinction much like that made of old by the Jews in assigning an inferior degree of inspiration to the products of the 'Tilia vocis." This was an erroneous ex- planation of a fact. The fact was that these books bore the name of divine Scripture ; they entered into the deposit of faith of the Church ; the faithful learned them by memory ; Gregory himself, as we shall see by numerous passages from his writings, had drunk deeply from these fountains. On the other hand, they were not in the official list of the Synagogue. This alone was sufficient to cast such doubt upon them with the extremely conservative Cappadocian school, of which Gregory is a representative exponent, that they stopped short of inserting them in the Canon; at the same time they honored them as sources of divine truth. The other Cappadocian Fathers, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa and Caesarius, frequently cite Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as they are the books most fitted for dogmatic argument. Basil quotes Judith: Lib. De Spiritu Sancto VIII. Judith IX. 4. 19. "Tu enim fecisti priora, et ilia "Sicuti Judith: 'Cogitasti,' post ilia cogitasti, et hoc fac- inquit, 'et praesto fuerunt om- tum est quod ipse voluisti." nia quae cogitasti.' " Epist. VI. ad Nectarii uxo- II. Maccab. VII. i. rem, i. "Contigit autem et septem "Maccabaeorum mater sep- fratres una cum matre sua ap- tem filionim mortem conspexit, prehensos compelli a rege edere nee ingemuit, nee ignobiles lac- contra fas cames porcinas, fla- rymas effudit, sed gratias ag- gris, et taureis cruciatos." ens Deo quod videret eos igne et ferro et acerbissimis verberi- bus e vinculis camis exsolvi, 398 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Deo quidem probata fuit, Cele- bris vero habita est apud hom- ines." How deeply Gregory had been influenced by the practical usage of the Church can be learned from the following collated passages : Dan. XIII. 5. "Et constituti sunt de popu- lo duo senes judices in illo anno: de quibus locutus est Dominus : Quia egressa est iniquitas de Baby lone, a senioribus judici- bus, qui videbantur regere populum." Eccli. III. II. "Benedictio patris firmat do- mos filiorum — ." Sap. V. 15. " — quoniam spes impii tam- quam lanugo est, quae a vento toUitur," etc. Sap. XVI. 13. "Tu es enim, Domine, qui vitae et mortis habes potesta- tem, et deducis ad portas mor- tis, et reducis. — " Eccli. XXXVIII. 16. "Fili, in mortuum produc lacrymas, et quasi dira passus, incipe plorare," etc. Sap. III. 15. "Bonorum enim laborum gloriosus est fructus," etc. Sap. V. 10, II. " — et tamquam navis, quae pertransit fluctuantem aquam: cujus, cum praeterierit, non est vestigium in venire, neque semi- tam carinas illius in fluctibus: . St. Greg. Naz. Orat. II. 64. " — ^nempe quod egressa est iniquitas ex Babylone a seniori- bus judicibus qui populum re- gere videbantur." Ibid. gb. "Benedictio enim Patris fir- mat domos filiorum." Orat. V. 28. " — tamquam lanugo quae a vento disjicitur — ." Ibid. 29. "Ecquis novit num Deus qui solvit compeditos, gravemque et 'humis vergentem a portis mortis in altum subvehit — .' " Orat. VII. I. "Super mortuum plora, et quasi dira passus, incipe plor- are." Ibid. 14. "Bonorum enim laborum gloriosus est fructus." Ibid. 19. "Insomnium sumus, minime consistens, spectrum quoddam, quod teneri non potest, avis praetereuntis volatus, navis in mari vestigium non habens. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 399 pulvis, vapor, ros matutinus, flos momento nascens et mo- mento marcescens." Orat. IX. 2. "In malignam enim animam non ingressuram sapientiam recte dictum est." Orat. XI. I. "Amico fideli nulla est com- paratio ; nee ulla est digna pon- deratio contra bonitatem illius. Amicus fidelis, protectio for- tis." aut tamquam avis, quae trans- volat in aere, cujus nullum in- venitur argumentum itineris," etc. Sap. I. 4. " — quoniam in malevolam animam non introibit sapien- tia, nee habitabit in corpore subdito peccatis." Eccli. VI. 14, 15. "Amicus fidelis, protectio fortis: qtii autem invenit ilium, invenit thesaurum. Amico fideli nulla est comparatio, et non est digna ponderatio auri et argenti contra bonitatem fidei illius." Eccli. I. 2. Orat. XIV. 30. "Arenam maris, et pluvise "Sed quis arenam maris et guttas, et dies saeculi quis dinu- pluviae guttas et abyssi pro- meravit? Altitudinem coeli, et funditatem metiri . , . queat?" latitudinem terrae, et profun- dum abyssi quis dimensus est ?" The fifteenth oration of St. Gregory is in praise of the Maccabees, whose feast the Church celebrated in his day. Frequently in the course of the oration he adverts to data taken from the first and second Books of Maccabees. The very fact that he composed such an oration shows clearly that he recognized the books. Comely 's animadversion here that Gregory has in mind only the fourth book, is erron- eous. [Comely, Introduc. Gen. p. 98, note 18.] Gregory in the second paragraph speaks of a book, qui rationem per- turbattonibus animi imperare docet, which evidently refers to the apocryphal fourth book of Maccabees, but this would only show that he united the fourth with the others in col- lecting his argument. Most of the data of the oration are taken from the first and second Books of Maccabees. 400 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Eccli. XL 30. "Ante mortem ne laudes ho- minem quemquam, quoniam in filiis suis agnoscitur vir." Baruch 11. 12. ** — peccavimus, impie egi- mtis, inique gessimus, Domine Deus noster, in omnibus jus- titiis tuis." Dan. XIV. 33. "Dixitque angelus Domini ad Habacuc: Per prandium, quod habes, in Babylonem Danieli, qui est in lacu leo- num." Sap. XL 21. "Sed et sine his uno spiritu poterant occidi persecutionem passi ab ipsis factis suis. et dis- persi per spiritum virtutis tuae : sed omnia in mensura, et nu- mero et pondere disposuisti." Dan. XIIL Sap. L 7. "Quoniam spiritus Domini replevit orbem terrarum, et hoc, quod continet omnia, scientiam habet vocis." Orat. XVI. 3. "Nam si, ut ego cum Salo- mone sentio, hominem ante mortem beatum praedicare non oportet." Ibid. 12. " — adjungam: Peccavimus, inique egimus, impie tat em feci- mus." Orat. XVIII. 30. ' ' — aut per prophetam in sub- lime raptum satians, ut Daniel- em, an tea cum fame in lacu premeretur." Orat. XXIV. i. " — atque ut hinc initium du- camus, quam commode, pul- chrisque Dei mensuris, qui om- nia cum pondere et mensura constituit ac moderatur," etc. Ibid. 10. "(Deus) qui et Susannam mortis periculo libera vit, et Theclam servavit ; illam a saevis senioribus, hanc a tyranno ipsius proco et a matri adhuc crudeliori." Orat. XXVIII. 8. " — ait Scriptura . . . 'Spiri- tus Domini replevit orbem ter- rarum.' " Orat. XXIX. 17. He calls the Son of God "Imago bonitatis," evidently assuming the phrase from Wisdom, VII. 26. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 401 Baruch III. 36-38. "Hie est Deus noster, et non aestimabitur alius adversus eum. Post haee in terns visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." Orat. XXX. 13. " *Hic Deus tuus, et non aestimabitur alius praeter eum. ' Et paucis interjectis: Tost haec in terra visus est, et cum hom- inibus conversatus est.' " Sap. VII. 22. "Est enim in ilia spiritus in- telligentias, sanctus, unicus, multiplex, subtilis, disertus, mobilis," etc. Sap. I. 4. "Quoniam in malevolam ani- mam non introibit sapientia, nee habitabit in corpore sub- dito peccatis." Sap. III. II. "Sapientiam enim, et disci- plinam qui abjicit, infelix est: et vacua est spes illorum, et la- bores sine fructu, et inutilia opera eorum." Eccli. V. 14. "Si est tibi intellectus, re- sponde proximo: sin autem, sit manus tua super os tuum, ne capiaris in verbo indisci- plinato, et conftmdaris. " Eccli. VII. 15. "Noli verbosus esse in multi- tudine presbyterorum." Eccli. XI. 27. "In die bonorum ne imme- mor sis malorum, et in die mal- orum ne immemor sis bono- rum.—" Orat. XXXI. 29. "Spiritus intelligens, multi- plex, apertus, clarus, incon- taminatus, minimeque imped- itus," etc. Orat. XXXII. 12. " — quoniam in malevolam animam non introibit sapien- tia." Ibid. 20. " — ac Deus faxit ne quid un- quam' huic occupationi prasver- tendum ducam, ne alioqui ab ipsa Sapientia miser appeller, ut sapientiam et eruditionem spemens ac pro nihilo ducens." Ibid. 21. "Si est tibi sermo prudentiae, inquit ille, nee quisquam prohi- bebit: sin minus, haereat vincu- lum labiis tuis." Ibid. "Noli celer esse in verbis, ad- monet Sapiens." Orat XXXV. 3. "In die enim laetitiae, inquit, malorum oblivio est." (26) H. S. 402 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY es Dan. XIII. 5. "Et constituti sunt de popu- lo duo senes judices in illo anno, de quibus locutus est Dominus: Quia egressa est in- iquitas de Babylone a senior- ibus judicibus, qui videbantur regere populum." Dan. XIII. 42. "Exclamavit autem voce magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus aeteme, qui absconditorum e cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante quam fiant." Eccli. III. II. "Benedictio patris firmat do- mes filiorum: maledictio au- tem matris eradicat funda- menta." Eccli. III. 12. "Ne glorieris in contumelia patris," etc. Eccli. I. 16. **Initium sapientiae, timor Domini, et cum fidelibus in vulva concreatus est, cum elec- tis feminis graditur, et cum justis et fidelibus agnoscitur." Sap. III. 7. "Fulgebunt justi, et tam- quam scintillas in arundineto discurrent." Eccli. XXXII. 3. " — ut lagteris propter illos, et omamentum gratiae accipias coronam, et dignationem con- sequaris corrogationis , ' ' Orat. XXXVI. 3. " — ^juxta Danielem egressa est iniquitas a senioribus Baby- lonicis, qui Israelem revere ex- istimabantur. " Ibid. 7. . " — imo non videor, sed per- spicuus atque manifestus sum ei qui omnia priusquam orian- tur novit." Orat. XXXVII. 6. "Item alio loco: 'Benedictio patris firmat domos filiorum; maledictio autem matris erad- icat fundamenta.' " Ibid. 18. "Quod si hoc etiam probas: *Fili, ne glorieris de ignominia patris.' " Orat. XXXIX. 8. "Unde Salomon nobis legem statuit: 'Principium sapientiae,' inquit, 'posside sapientiam.' Quidnam vocat hoc principium sapientiae? 'Timorem.' " Orat. XL. 6. " — quo tempore nimirum justi fulgebunt sicut sol." Ibid. 18. "Honore eum complectere ut te omet, capitique tuo gratia- rum coronam nectat." THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 403 Sap. IV. 8. "Senectus enim venerabilis est non diutuma, neque anno- rum numero computata: cani autem sunt sensus hominis." II. Maccab. VII. i. "Contigit autem et septem fratres una cum matre sua ap- prehensos compelli a rege edere contra fas cames porcinas, fla- gris, et taureis cruciatos." Sap. II. 24. "Invidia autem diaboli mors introivit," etc. Orat. XLIII. 23. "Quis prudentia perinde ca- nus erat, etiam ante canitiem? Quandoquidem hac re senectu- tem Salomon quoque defini- vit." Ibid. 74. "Mitto septem Maccabaeo- rum dimicationem qui cum sacerdote et matre in sanguine atque omnis generis tormentis consummati sunt." Orat. XLIV. 4. "Quoniam autem invidia diaboli mors in mundum introivit," etc. The reference to Judith V. 6, in Orat. XLV. 15: ''quod et semen Chaldaicum sublatum atque oppressum Scriptura vocat," is somewhat uncertain. Eccli. III. II. St. Greg. Epist. LXI. "Benedictio patris firmat do- "Ita fiet ut ab ea non modo mos filiorum : maledictio autem pecunias habeatis, sed mater- matris eradicat fundamenta. Baruch III. 38. "Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." Eccli. IV. 32. "Noli resistere contra faciem potentis, nee coneris contra ic- tum fluvii." Ecclli. XXXI. 32. "^qua vita hominibus vi- num in sobrietate: si bibas illud moderate, eris sobrius." nam etiam benediction em, fili- orum domos fulcientem, conse- quamini." Epist. CII. " — atque ad hsec verba con- fugientes: Tost haec in terra visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est.' " Epist. CLXXVIII. "Porro non esse vi cohiben- dum fluminis cursum, paroemia quoque ipsa docet." Epist. CLXXXI. "Sin autem tibi praestantiore monitore opus est, illud quidem monet Salomon ut cum consilio vinum bibas, ne mundi hujus temulentia et vertigine agaris." 404 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY These references leave no doubt that Gregory believed that he was there quoting divine Scripture. The whole Church used them, committed them to memory, proved and illustrated their dogmas by them. This influence was so powerful that even the most conservative came under it, and as we shall see, even those who wished to turn the tide of this tradition were inconsistent. Another Oriental authority of this period that is objected against us is the sixtieth canon of the Council of Laodicea. This canon explicitly defines that the books to be read in the Church are those which we now comprehend in the protocanonical class. The date of the Council of Laodicea is uncertain, but it is generally be- lieved to have been celebrated about the middle of the fourth century. Some have doubted the genuineness of the sixtieth canon [Herbst, Vincenzi, Malou, Danko], but as it is recog- nized by Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. p. 749-751, we shall not base our treatment of it upon its doubtful character. Ad- mitting all its claims, it simply establishes that some bishops of Phrygia in a particular council refused to allow to be read publicly in the Church any book excepting those that were absolutely certain. We are not endeavoring to prove that the position of protocanonical and deuterocanonical books were equal in the early ages of the Church. Their equality was wrought by the Council of Trent. What we wish to show is that these books were known to the early Christians, venerated by them, committed to memory by them, and considered by them as the inspired word of God. The Council in Trullo, which the Greeks hold to be ecu- menical, received the Canons of the Council of Laodicea, but, as they also received the Canons of the Council of Carth- age, they evidently intended that the decree concerning the canonical Scriptures should be modified in accordance with the complete Canon of the Council of Carthage. The Greeks also in the Council in Trullo received various Apocryphal documents of the fifth century called the Canons of the Apostles. The eighty-fifth canon of this collection is sometimes cited against us, as it does not contain any of the deuterocanonical books, save the books of Maccabees. This canon can have no weight, since it embraces three books of THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 405 Maccabees, two epistles of St. Clement of Rome, and the eight books of the Constitutiones Apostolorum. The Council in Trullo in receiving this Canon could not have excluded the Canon of the Council of Carthage, whose decrees and canons it ratified. In fact, the Council in Trullo expressly stated that the Constitutiones Apost. were adul- terated, and hence not to be read. It seems, however, due to this canon that the Greeks, even to this day, recognize as canonical three books of Maccabees. We can scarcely expect the guiding hand of the Holy Ghost in the members who composed the Council in Trullo. One who candidly examines the data here presented must admit that the Oriental Church during the fourth and fifth centuries recognized and used the deuterocanonical books as divine Scripture. Turning now from the East to the West, we meet the first objection taken from the writings of St. Hilary.* The objection is found in the fifteenth paragraph of his Prologue on the Book of Psalms. After seeking mystic reasons for the number eight in the Scriptures, he proceeds as follows: ''And this is the cause that the law of the Old Testament is divided into twenty-two books, that they might agree with the number of letters. These books are arranged according to the traditions of the ancients, so that five are of Moses, *St. Hilary was bom in Poitiers in France in the opening years of the fotirth century. His parents were pagans of noble rank. They procured for their son every educational advantage, and the youth, applying him- self with diligence, soon came to be regarded as the most learned man of his age. His reading of the Holy Scriptures brought him to recognize the truth of the Christian faith, which he, his wife, and child Abra embraced. He was consecrated Bishop of Poitiers in 350 or 355 and became the staunch defender of the Church against Arianism. The Arian Satuminus of Aries banished Hilary to Phrygia. He was called from his exile to be present at the Council of Seleucia; in which council he made such head against the Arians that to rid themselves of such a powerful antagonist they sent him back to France. The people received him as a hero from the arena, victorious over the heretics. He set in order his diocese, and there passed the remaining years of his holy life. He died in 367 or 368. His most celebrated work is his Twelve Books on the Trinity, composed during his exile in Phrygia. This treatise is a classic work on the Trinity. He has left also Commentaries on the Psalms and Gospels, a treatise De Fide Orientalium, and numerous other shorter works. 406 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY the sixth is of Jesus Nave, the seventh is Judges and Ruth, the first and second of Kings form the eighth ; the third and fourth (of Kings) form the ninth; the two books of ParaHpo- menon form the tenth ; the discourses of the days of Ezra form the eleventh; the book of Psalms, the twelfth; Solo- mon's proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticle of Canticles form the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth; the twelve Prophets form the sixteenth ; while Isaiah, then Jeremiah, the Lamentations and the Epistle, Daniel, Ezechiel, Job, and Esther complete the ntimber of twenty-two books." Hilary gives only the protocanonical works, and then continues : "To some it has seemed good to add Tobias and Judith, and thus constitute twenty-four books according to the Greek alphabet," etc. We see here an excessive mysticism impelling a man to reject or admit a book for the sole purpose of completing a mystic number. This tendency had been brought into patristic thought by Origen and the Alexandrian school. Hilary does not reject the deuterocanonical books, but con- siders the protocanonical as forming a class by themselves. Hilary's weak, unsubstantial arguments are attributable to the man impressed by the spirit of his age. The great cur- rent of tradition w^as greater than any one man, and drew Hilary with it, so that we find him ranking the deuterocan- onical books on an equal footing with the others, as the fol- lowing quotations mil show : Eccli. I. 33. St. Hilary Prol. in Ps. 20. "Fili, concupiscens sapien- " — secundum id quod dic- tiam, conserva justitiam, et turn est: 'Desiderasti sapien- Deus praebebit illam tibi." tiam? Serva man data, et Dom- inus praestabit tibi eandem.' " Eccli. XI. 30. Tract, in XIV. Ps. 14. "Ante mortem ne laudes ho- 'Tdcirco apud Salomonem minem quemquam, quoniam in omnis laus in exitu canitur." filiis suis agnoscitur vir." Dan. XIII. 56. Tract, in LII. Ps. 19. "Et, amoto eo, jussit venire "Sed et Daniel presbyteros alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha- condemnans ita dicit: 'Non se- naan, et non Juda," etc. men Abraham, sed semen Cha- ♦ naan, et non Juda.' " THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 407 Eccli. I. 1 6. "Initium sapientiae, timor Domini," etc. Baruch III. $8. "Post haec in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est." Sap. XVII. I. "Magna sunt enim judicia tua, Domine, et inenarrabilia," etc." Sap. VII. 27. "Et cum sit una, omnia po- test: et in se permanens, omnia innovat, et per nationes in ani- mas sanctas se transfert: ami- cos Dei et prophetas con- stituit." Sap. I. 7. "Quoniam spiritus Domini replevit orbem terrarum," etc. II. Maccab. VI. 18 VII. i. et seqq. Tract, in Ps. LXVI. 9. "Et per Salomonem: 'Initium sapientiae timor Domini est.' " Tract, in Ps. LXVIIL 19. " — postea in terris visus sit, et inter homines conversatus sit." Tract, in Ps. CXVIII. 8. " — et rursum propheta: 'Mag- na enim sunt judicia tua, et inenarrabilia.' " Ibid. Littera V. 9. "Si Apostoli docent, prior ille docuit: 'Constituit enim Sap- ientia amicos Dei et pro- phetas.'" Ibid. Littera XIX. 8. "Et Spiritus Dei, secundum Prophetam, replevit orbem ter- rarum." Tract, in Ps. CXXV. 4. "Testes sunt mihi tres pueri inter flammas cantantes (Dan. III. 24 et seqq.), testis Daniel in fame leonum prophetae pran- dio saturatus (Dan. XIV. 35); testis Eleazar inter jura dom- inorum patriis suis legibus li- ber; testes cum matre sua martyres septem, Deo gratias inter nova mortis tormenta referentes." Tract, in Ps. CXXV. 6. " — et cantantes ex Lege: 'Do- minus conterens bella, Dom- inus nomen est illi.'" Certainly Hilary denied not inspiration to a book which he honored by the august name of the "Law." Judith XVI. 3. "Dominus conterens bella, Dominus nomen est illi." 408 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Sap. VIII. 2. "Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a juventute mea, et quaesivi sponsam mihi earn assumere, et amator factus sum formse il- lius." Ibid. 3. ''Generositatem illius glorifi- cat contubemium habens Dei: sed et omnium Dominus dilexit illam— ." Ibid. 8. **Et si multitudinem scien- tiae, desiderat quis, scit praete- rita, et de futuris aestimat," etc. Ibid. 2. (Already quoted.) Tob. XII. 12. ' ' Quando orabas cum lacrymis et sepeliebas mortuos,,et dere- linquebas prandium tuum, et mortuos abscondebas per diem in domo tua, et nocte sepeliebas eos, ego obtuli orationem tuam Domino." II. Maccab. VI. 21. "Hi autem, qui astabant, ini- quamiserationecommoti, prop- ter antiquam viri amicitiam, tollentes eum secreto, rogabant ailerri cames, quibus vesci ei licebat, ut simularetur mandu- casse, sicut rex imperaverat de sacrificii camibus — ." Tract, in Ps. CXXVIII. 9. ** Salomon itaque ait: 'Quae- sivi sapientiam sponsam ad- ducere mihi ipsi.' " Ibid. " — hujus sponsae suae opes memorat dicens: 'Honestatem glorificat convictum Dei ha- bens, et omnium Dominus di- lexit eam.' " Ibid. " — et si multam quis cog- nitionem desiderat, novit et quae a principio sunt, et quae futura sunt conspicit." Ibid. ** — de qua et rursum ait: *Ju- dicavi igitur hanc adducere ad convivendum mecum, et ama- tor factus sum pulchritudinis ejus.' " Tract, in Ps. CXXIX. 7. "Sunt, secundum Raphael ad Tobiam loquentem, angeli as- sistentes ante claritatem Dei, et orationes deprecantium ad Deum deferentes." Tract, in Ps. CXXXIV. 25. "Sanctus etiam Eleazar, cum a principibus populi sui degus- tare ementitum sacrificium co- geretur, gloriam martyrii sub hac eadem voce consummat, sciens," etc. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 409 Sap. I. 7. *'Quoniam spiritus Domini replevit orbem terranim," etc. Eccli. XXVIII. 28, 29. "Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin- guam nequam noli audire, et ori tuo facito ostia, et seras. Aunim tuum et argentum tuum confla, et verbis tuis fa- cito stateram, et frenos ori tuo rectos — ." Sap. II. 12, 13. "Circumveniamus ergo jus- tum, quoniam inutilis est no- bis, et contrarius est operibus nostris, . . . et filium Dei se nominat." Sap. XIII. 5. " — a raagnitudine enim spe- ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter poterit Creator horum videri." Dan. XIII. 42. "Exclamavit autem voce magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus aeteme, qui absconditorum es cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante- quam fiant — ." II. Maccab. VII. 28. "Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad coelum et terram, et ad omnia quaejin eis sunt, et intelligas, quia ex nihilo fecit ilia Deus, et hominum genus — ." Tract, in Ps. CXXXV. 11. " — docet propheta dicens: 'Spiritus Dei replevit orbem terrarum.' " Tract, in Ps. CXL. 5. " — ita monemur: *Ecce cir- cumvalla possessionem tuam spinis; argentum et aurum tuum constitue, et ori tuo fac ostium, et seram, et verbis tuis jugum et mensuram.' " Tract, de Ps. XLI. 12. "Vox cataractas fuit: 'Oppri- mamus justum, quia in-utilis est nobis, et contrarius est operibus nostris, et filium Dei se nomi- nat.' " De Trinitate Lib. I. 7. *' — hunc de Deo pulcherri- mae sententiae modum pro- pheticis vocibus apprehendit: *De magnitudine enim operum et pulchritudine creaturarum consequenter generationum Condi tor conspicitur. ' " Ibid. Lib. IV. 8. " — sicut beata Susanna dicit: 'Deus aeterne, absconditorum cognitor, sciens omnia ante genera tionem eorum.' " Ibid. 16. "Omnia enim secundum Pro- phetam facta ex nihilo sunt." 410 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 11. Maccab. VII. 9. ** — et in ultimo spiritu con- sti tutus, sic ait: Tu quidem, scelestissime, in praesenti vita nos perdis: sed Rex mundi de- functos nos pro suis legibus in aetemae vitae resurrectione sus- citabit." Eccli. XXI. I. **Fili, peccasti? non adjicias iterum: sed et de pristinis de- precare, ut tibi dimittentur. " Sap. II. 23. "Quoniam Deus creavit ho- minem inexterminabilem," etc. Lib. Contra Const. Imp. 6. " — sciat a martyre esse dic- tum regi Antiocho: 'Tu quidem, iniquus, de presenti vita nos perdis, sed Rex mundi defunc- tos nos pro suis legibus in aeter- nam vitam in resurrectione suscitabit.' " Ex Operibus Historicis Frag. III. 24. "Nee Dominum audiunt di- centem: 'Peccasti? quiesce.' " Epistola VIII. ** Salomon clamat dicens: 'Deus condidit hominem ad im- mortalitatem.' " Ibid. IX. "Clamat Propheta dicens: *Et pauperem et divitem ego feci, et pro omnibus asqualis cura est mihi.' " Sap. VI. 8. "Non enim subtrahet perso- nam cujusquam Deus, nee vere- bitur magnitudinem cujus- quam; quoniam pusillum et magnum ipse fecit, et aequaliter cura est illi de omnibus." Hilary has here explicitly canonized every deuterocanonical hook. He sought the mystic niimber in the books that the Hebrews received, not with the view to exclude the others from divine inspiration but only classifying the Scriptures of the Old Testament in two general categories which ex- isted down to the time of the Council of Trent. The next objection which is urged against us is taken from the fragmentary writing of Rufinus.* The objection is *Rufinus was bom at Concordia, a small village of Italy, towards the middle of the fourth century. He early devoted himself to the acquisition of knowledge, for which cause he took up his abode at Aquileja, whose renown as a seat of learning had merited for it the name of the second Rome. A desire for sanctity drew him into a monastery in this city wherein St. Jerome first met him. There was fonned between Jerome and Rufinus the closest friendship, so that when Jerome left Aquileja to journey through France and Germany, Rufinus, inconsolable by the separation, went in search of him. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 411 taken from the Commentarius in S^^mbolum Apostolorum 36-38: "And therefore it seems apposite to clearly enu- merate, as we have received from the testimonies of the Fa- thers, the books of the Old and New Testaments, which, ac- cording to the tradition of the ancients, are believed to be inspired by the Holy Ghost, and delivered to the Church." Then follows a list of only the protocanonical works. Con- tinuing, he says: *Tt is to be known, however, that there are other books which have been called by the Fathers not canonical but ecclesiastical. Such are the Wisdom which is called of Solomon, and the other Wisdom which is called of the Son of Sirach, which book in the Latin tongue is called by the general term of Ecclesiasticus, by which term not the author but the quality of the Scripture is designated. Of the same order are the books of Tobias and Judith and the books of Maccabees, and in the New Testament the book which is called the Pastor of Hermas, and the Two Ways or Rufinus visited Egypt, and there formed a lasting friendship with the celebrated St. Melania. He siiifered many persecutions from the Arians. He was sent into exile, from which Melania ransomed him, and both re- tired to Palestine. The esteem in which Jerome at this time held Rufinus may be known from the following, written to a friend in Jerusalem: "You will see shine in Rufinus the character of sanctity, while I am but dust. My feeble eyes can scarce bear the effulgence of his virtues. He comes even now from the cleansing crucible of persecution, and is now whiter than snow, while I am stained by all sorts of sins." Rufinus built a monastery on Mt. Olivet, and there labored zealously and fruitfully in apostolic work. Having become conversant with Greek while in Alexandria, he translated into Latin various works of the Greek tongue. Among others, he translated the Principles of Origen. This led to a rupture with St. Jerome, and there is nothing so bitter in patristic literature as Jerome's subsequent invective against Rufinus. This divis- ion was a cause of much scandal in the Church. That Rufinus led a saintly life can not be doubted, but it seems quite certain that he became in his later years infected with the errors of Origen. Rufinus declared that he had acted as a mere translator of the works of Origen, and Pope Anastasius, before whom he was cited, declared that he would leave to God to judge of his intention. We must do the same, but in justification to St. Jerome, it must be said that his zeal for orthodoxy caused him to re- pudiate the man whom he had once called friend. The most important of Rufinus' works are : De Benedictionibus Patri- archarum, Commentarius in Symboliun Apostolorum, Historia Monacho- rum, Historia Ecclesiastica, Apologia contra Hieronymum and an Apologia ad Anastasium Papam. He died in Sicily in 410. 412 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Choice of Peter. All these books, they (the Fathers) wished to be read in the churches, but not to be used for the con- firmation of dogma." The testimony of Rufinus well illustrates the position of the deuterocanonical books in that age. The Church, as the divine institution of Christ, used them, and the faith- ful drew their spiritual teaching from them. At the same time, some of the Fathers induced a scientific distinction between them and the books of the first canon. This scien- tific distinction was purely a critical judgment of the Fathers, and was not aimed at denying to these books divine inspira- tion. There had been no decree of the Church, and these books had not as much extrinsically in their favor as the others. The extremely conservative spirit of the Fathers was content to use them as divine Scripture in their practical use of Scripture ; while, in drawing up official lists of Scrip- tures, they hesitated to make them equal with the books which the Church had received from the Synagogue. In the growth and development of doctrine, this hesitancy has been excluded by the vital power in the Church. In the few writings of Rufinus which remain to us, we find the following quotations of deuterocanonical Scripture : Eccli XXXIV. 9. Benedictio Gad 3. "Qui non est tentatus, quid " — ^ita enim Scriptura dicit: scit? Vir inmultisexpertus, CO- 'Qui non est tentatus, non est gitabit multa ; et qui multa didi- probabilis. ' ' ' cit, enarrabit intellectum. ' ' Eccli. XI. 30. Benedictio Joseph 3 . "Ante mortem ne laudes ho- " — sed et sanctoe Scripturce minem quemquam, quoniam in sententia est: 'Ne laudaveris filiis suis agnoscitur vir." quemquam ante obitum.' '' Comment. inSymbolum Apost. Baruch III. 36-38. 5. ''Hie est Deus noster, et non ''Quod et Propheta prsedixe- aestimabitur alius adversus eum. rat ubi ait: 'Hie Deus noster, Hie adinvenit omnem viam dis- non reputabitur alter ad eum. ciplinae, et tradidit illam Jacob In venit omnem viam disciplinae, puero suo, et Israel dilectosuo. et dedit eam Jacob puero suo et Post haec in terris visus est, et Israel dilecto suo ; post haec in THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 413 cum hominibus conversatus terris visus est et inter homines est." conversatus est.'' Sap. III. 7. Ibid. 46. "Fulgebuntjusti,ettamquam '' — non erit difficile credere scintillae in arundineto discur- etiam ilia quae Prophetce prce- rent." dixerant: 'Quod justi scilicet fulgebunt sicut sol, et sicut splendor firmamenti in regno Dei." Certainly the man who quoted these lines believed that he was employing Holy Scripture. - In his Apologia Contra Hieronymum, Lib. II. from the thirty-second to the thirty-seventh paragraph, Rufinus bit- terly inveighs against St. Jerome for having dared to cut off the deuterocanonical books.* Hence in justice and right, Rufinus must be considered in every way favorable to the deuterocanonical works. We now come to the Achilles of our adversaries, St. Jerome, a man more versed in the Scrip- tures than any other of the Fathers up to his day. He has in many places, in no dubious terms, expressed his opposi- tion to the deuterocanonical books. As Jerome is insepar- ably linked with the Latin Vulgate, we deem it not amiss to insert here an abstract of his life. Jerome was bom about the year 342 at Stridon, on the borders of Dalmatia and Pannonia, in the midst of a semi- barbaric population [De viris illustribus, cap. CXXXV.] *An ut divinarum Scripturarum libros, quos ad plenissimum fidei Instrumentum Ecclesiis Christi Apostoli tradiderunt, nova nunc et a Judaeis mutata interpretation e mutares? . , , Quis praesumserit sacras Sancti Spiritus voces et divina Voltiniina temerare ? Quis praeter te divino muneri et Apostolorum haereditati manus intulerit. Et quidem cum ingens copia fuisse ex initio in Ecclesiis Dei, et preci- pue Jerosolymis eorum, qui ex circumcisione crediderant, referatur, in quibus utique linguae utriusque perfectam fuisse scientiam, et legis per- itiam probabilem, administrati pontificatus testatur officium. Quis ergo in ista eruditorum virorum copia ausus est Instrumentum divinum, quod Apostoli Ecclesiis tradiderunt, et depositum Sancti Spiritus compilare? An non est compilare cum quaedam quidem immutantur, et error dicitur corrigi? Nam omnis ilia historia de Susanna, quae castitatis exemplum praebebat Ecclesiis Dei, ab isto abscissa est et abjecta atque posthabita. Trium pueromm hymnus, qui maxime diebus solemnibus in Ecclesia Dei canitur, ab isto e loco suo penitus erasus est. Et quid per singula com- 414 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY His parents, however, were wealthy Christians, and in a letter to Theophilus, the Patriarch of Alexandria, he testified to the pious care which from his earliest childhood had nourished him with the milk of the Catholic doctrine . [Epist . LXXII. ad Theophilum, 2.] He was called Eusebius after his father, for Hieronymus or Heirome was merely a sur- name, or what in Latin is termed cognomen. His mother's name we do not know. Besides an aunt, Castorina, who seems to have shown him small affection, [Epist. XIII. ad Castorinam Materteram] Jerome had a sister, a cause of many anxieties, and one brother, Paulinian, whom he later took with him to Palestine from Rome. The young Dalmatian began his studies at Stridon, and at the age of eighteen he went with Bonosus, a friend of his childhood, to continue them at Rome, where he attended the lessons of Donatus, the grammarian, and possibly those of Victorinus, whose humble and courageous conversion has been immortalized in the Confessions of St. Augustine. [Confession, lib. VIII., cap. 11.] Reading, in which his eager soul found its outlet (he tells us himself that he studied Prophyry's Introduction, Alex- ander of Aphrodisias' Commentaries upon Aristotle, and Plato's Dialogues), completed his masters' teaching; and his passion for books, which he confesses were indispensable to him, enabled him to acquire, at the cost of the most arduous memoro de his, quorum comprehendere numerum nequeo? De quo ut omittam illud dicere, quod Septuaginta duorum virorum per cellulas in- terpretantium unam et consonam vocem, dubitandum non est, Spiritus Sancti inspiratione prolatam, et majoris id debere esse auctoritatis, quam id quod ab uno homine, sibi Barraba aspirante, translatum est. Ut ergo hoc omittam, vide quid dicimus, verbi causa. Petrus Romanse Ecclesiae per viginti et quatuor annos prasfuit: dubitandum non est, quin sicut cae- tera, quas ad instructionem pertinent, etiam librorum Instrumenta Eccles- iae ipse tradiderit, quag utique jam tunc, ipso sedente et docente, recita- bantur? Quid ergo? Decepit Petrus Apostolus Christi Ecclesiam, et libros ei falsos et nihil veritatis continentes tradidit, et cum sciret, quod vertim est haberi apud Judaeos, apud Christianos volebat haberi quod falsum est? Sed fortasse dicit, quia sine Uteris erat Petrus, et sciebat quidem Judaeorum libros magis esse veros, quam istos, qui erant in Eccle- sia : sed interpretari non poterat propter sermonis imperitiam ? Et quid ? Nihil in isto agebat ignea lingua per Spiritum Sanctum caelitus data ? Non ergo omnibus Unguis loquebantur Apostoli ? . . . THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 415 labor, that is by copying them with his own hand, an exten- sive Hbrary. Epist. XXII ad Eustochium, 30.] Thus was Jerome unconsciously preparing himself for the great works which were to fill his life. He was as yet only a catechumen, for in those early centuries they frequently waited until the perilous ways of youth had been safely traversed before conferring baptism, and the Christian initiation was sometimes deferred from reasons of prudence. To know, however, that this prudence was liable to terrible mistakes one has only to recall the anguish of Gregory Nazianzen and of Satirus, St. Ambrose's brother, who both, when overtaken by a tempest at sea, were terrified at the thought of dying unbaptized. It was especi- ally the fear of the restraints imposed by the Christian life which deferred for years the baptism of many, and we are told by St. Augustine that the deviations of the unbaptized were freely excused by a spirit of general tolerance. [Con- fession, lib. I., cap. XI.] More fortunate in this respect than the son of Monica, Jerome, as he wrote to Theophilus of Alexandria, never fell into error. He used often to interrupt his studies in order to visit the basilicas of the saints or to descend into the cata- combs, and when an old man he thus described these pilgrim- ages in. his ''Commentaries upon Ezekiel." "In my youth, when I was studying literature in Rome, it was my custom to visit on Sundays, with some companions of my own age and tastes, the tombs of the martyrs and apostles. I often wandered into those subterranean galleries whose walls on either side preserve the relics of the dead, and where the darkness is so intense that one might almost believe that the words of the prophet had been fulfilled : 'Let them go down alive into hell.' A gleam of light shining through a narrow aperture, rather than a window, scarcely affected the awful obscurity, and the little band, shrouded in darkness and able only to proceed one step at a time, would recall this verse of Virgil's 'Everywhere horror and even the very silence appal me.' " [Comment, in Ezech., lib. XII., CXL.] In his youth Jerome witnessed the attempts made by Julian to restore paganism, and he saw also the utter failure 416 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY in which they resulted. * 'While I was attending the schools of the grammarians," he wrote, "when every town was stained with the blood of idolatrous sacrifices, suddenly at the very height of the persecution Julian's death was announced to us. *How,' exclaimed a pagan, and not unreasonably, *do the Christians say that theirs is a patient and a merciful God? There is nothing more terrible, nothing more swift than His wrath. He could not even for an instant defer His vengeance.' " [Comment in Habacuc. Lib. II. cap. III.] The faith which had so early been instilled into Jerome and which was so precious to him, did not, however, shield him from the seductions of Rome, but unlike Augustine, who wrote the humble confession of his protracted sins, he only alludes to his in passing. "You know," he wrote Chro- matius, "how slipper>^ are those pathways of youth where I succumbed." In a letter to Heliodorus, whom he wished to take with him into the desert, and whom he rebuked for his delay, he was more explicit: "Why linger in the world, thou who hast already chosen solitude? If I give thee this advice it is not as if my ship and my cargo were undamaged, not as if I were ignorant of the deep, but rather as one ship- wrecked and just cast up upon the shore, in feeble tones I warn the navigators of their peril." [Epist. XIV. ad Helio- dorum, 6.] There is another difference between Augustine and Jerome worthy of notice. It is evident that after the supreme struggles of which Augustine has given us a dramatic account he experienced no further aggression of the vanquished foe. The luring voices which made one final effort to woo him to excess were silenced, and no doubt remained so forever, for after his conversion Augustine seems to have inhabited serene heights inaccessible to any disturbing memories of the past ; but Jerome, who was by nature more ardent and perhaps less gentle than the son of Monica, could not forget so quickly. Beguiling visions followed him to the desert of Chalcis, and he succeeded in exorcising them only through ceaseless work and penances. From Rome the young Dalmatian, with Bonosus, passed into Gaul and repaired to Treves, where Valentinian I. then THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 417 resided, and it was in Gaul that Jerome determined to re- nounce the world which had so wounded him and devote himself to the service of Jesus Christ. He accordingly returned to Rome and was baptized there by Liberius. This Pope having died on the twenty- fourth of September 366, Jerome's baptism could not have taken place at a later date. Leaving Rome he started for Aquileia, where religious studies and monastic discipline flourished, and which was at that time an important town and the capital of its native province. His stay at Aquileia was only the first halt in a life of travel. From that time forth trials beset him. "He was already beginning," says Tillemont, ''tomake enemies whose persecutions were sufficiently violent to oblige him to move from place to place, and serious enough to reach the ears of the Pope Damasus." [Memoirs, etc., St. Jerome. Article IV.] One of his adversaries was the Bishop Lupicinus. Finally he determined to go to the East and, following Bar- onius' example, before leaving the Western Hemisphere he paid a visit to his native town and there bade farewell to his own people forever. He did not attempt to conceal the painful effort the breaking of these family ties cost him. "Whenever the impress of your familiar hands recalls your dear faces to me, then am I no longer where I am, or rather you are there with me." [Epist. VH. ad Chromatium Jov- inum et Eusebium.] The man who sent such a message, a message perhaps more touching than well expressed, to those from whom he was separated, the man who appreciated so keenly the bonds of friendship, was certainly not insensible to those of blood. "Full do I know," he wrote to Helio- dorus, "what fetters hold thee back. My heart is not of stone nor my bowels of iron, I was not begotten by rocks nor suckled by the tigresses of Hyrcania ; I also have gone through the anguish which thou dreadest." [Epist. XIV. ad Heliodorum, 3.] Jerome probably had as travelling companions this same Heliodorus, and also Innocentius and Hylas, whom we again meet at his side in the East when, as Tillemont, who translated the works of the Saints, tells : "He set out carrying with him the library he had collected in Rome, travelled over many provinces, passed through (27) H.S. 418 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Thrace, Pontus and Bithynia, crossed the whole of Galatia and Cappadocia, suffered the intolerable heat of Cilicia . . . and finally in Syria found the peace which he sought as a safe harbor after shipwreck." Before retiring into the desert, however, he spent a few days at Antioch with Evagrius, a priest of that city, whom Jerome had known in Italy, whither he had gone to lay the discords in his Church before the Western bishops, and who on his return became the guide and sponsor of Jerome and his companions in Antioch. Jerome, inflamed with an ardor for study which never cooled, wished to hear the men most learned in the Scrip- tures, and especially Apollinaris, Bishop of Laodicea, who at that period had not yet fallen into his later notorious heresy. It was probably about this time that Jerome knew the her- mit Malchus, but it was not until long after that he related his wonderful history, which Lafontaine has translated into graceful verse. Jerome, however, had left Aquileia, not for Antioch, but bound for the wilderness. He plunged into the heart of the desert of Chalcis, where, under burning skies and amid vast tracts of sand out of which sprang here and there a few scattered convents, he had gone to seek repentance, and where he found fresh sorrows awaiting him. Heliodorus returned to the West, and Jerome's friendship for Innocent and Hylas was ruthlessly severed by their death. But the memories of his libertine youth, which troubled the peace of his soul and threatened to sully a chastity so dearly bought, caused him a still keener grief than the loss of his friends, and he has left us a description of his anguish, of his almost desperate but finally victorious struggles, in pages of striking eloquence and immor- tal beauty. "How often," he wTote, "buried in this vast wilderness, scorched by the rays of the sun, have I imagined myself in the midst of the pleasures of Rome. I sat alone because my heart was filled with exceeding bitterness. My limbs were covered with imsightly sackcloth, and my black- ened skin gave me the appearance of an Ethiopian. I wept and groaned daily, and if in spite of my struggles sleep overcame me, the bones in my emaciated body, which sank THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 419 to the naked earth, barely clave together. I do not men- tion my nourishment or drink, for in this desert even the sick monks scarcely dare touch fresh water, and to eat cooked food would be considered an excess. And I, who, through the fear of hell, had condemned myself to this prison inhab- ited by scorpions and serpents, imagined myself transported into the midst of the dances of the young Roman maidens. My face was pallid with fasting, my body cold as ice, yet my soul burned with sensual emotion and in flesh already dead only the fire of the passions was still capable of kindling. Debarred from all help I threw myself at the feet of Jesus, watered them with my tears, wiped them with my hair, and strove to subdue my rebellious flesh by weeks of abstinence. I do not blush to own to my misery, rather do I weep that I am no longer as I once was. I remember having often spent the entire day and night in crying aloud and in beating my breast, until, at the command of God, who rules the tempest, peace crept back into my soul. I even dreaded my cell as if it had been an accomplice to my thoughts. Angry with myself I penetrated alone further into the desert, and if I discovered any dark valley, any rugged motintain, any rock of difficult access, it was the spot I fixed upon to pray in, and to make into a prison for my wretched body. God is witness that sometimes, after having long fixed my eyes upon heaven and after copious weeping, I believed myself transported among the choir of angels. Then in a trusting and joyful ecstasy I sang unto the Lord : * We pursue Thee by the scent of Thy perfumes.' " [Epist. XXII. ad Eustochium, 7.] In order to subdue his flesh and curb his imagination, Jerome had recourse to other means besides corporal punish- ment. ''When I was young," he wrote, "although buried in the desert, I could not conquer my burning passions and ardent nature, and in spite of my body being exhausted by perpetual fasts my brain was on fire with evil thoughts. Finally, as a last resource, I put myself under the tutelage of a certain monk, a Jew who had become a Christian, and, forsaking the ingenious precepts of Quintilian, the floods of eloquencejpoured forth by Cicero, the grave utterances of Fronto, and the tender words of Pliny, I began to learn the 420 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Hebrew alphabet, and to study this language of hissing and harsh-sounding words. I who have suffered so much, and with me those who at that time shared my life, can alone testify to the efforts I wasted, the difficulties I went through, and how often I despairingly interrupted my studies, which a dogged determination to learn made me afterwards resume ; and I give thanks unto God that from such a bitter sowing I am now able to gather such sweet fruit." [Epist. CXXV. ad Rusticum monachum, 12.] It was probably at this period, that is in 374, that the mysterious dream of which Jerome has left us a dramatic account came to him. Imbued with the works of classic antiquity, he cherished a love for them . ' ' Miserable wretch , ' ' he wrote, "I fasted before reading Cicero; after nights spent in vigil, after tears wrung from me by the memory of my sins, I would take up Plautus, and when, on coming to my senses, I read the Prophets, their speech seemed to me uncouth and unfinished. Blind, I blamed the light instead of condemning my own eyes." A vision cured him, for a while at least, of this passion. "Towards the middle of Lent (probably the Lent of 375), while Satan was thus mocking me, I was seized with a fever which, finding my body ex- hausted by want of rest, consumed it to such an extent that my bones barely clave together. My body was becoming cold, a faint remnant of warmth however still enabled my heart to beat. They were preparing my funeral obsequies, when suddenly my soul was caught up from me and carried before the Tribunal of the Supreme Judge. The light was so dazzling, those who surrounded Him shed , such a blaze of splendor, that, falling back upon the ground, I dared not gaze aloft. They asked me who I was and I answered a Christian. Thou Jiest,' said the Judge, 'thou are a Ciceronian and not a Christian, for where thy treasure is, there is thy heart also.' I was silent; and whilst the blows rained down upon me, for the Judge had commanded that I should be scourged, suffering even more from the torment of my bitter remorse, I repeated to myself this verse on the Psalms: 'Who will render thee glory in hell ?' Then I cried out weep- ing: 'Have pity on me. Lord, have pity.' This cry rang THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 421 out in the midst of the blows, and at last those who were present, throwing themselves at the feet of the Judge, en- treated Him to have mercy upon my youth, to grant me time to work out my repentance, and to punish me severely if I should again peruse a pagan book. I, who, to escape from the terrible straits in which I found myself would have promised far more, swore to Him and said, calling His name to witness: 'Lord, if hereafter I harbor or read any secular books, may I be treated as if I had renotinced Thee.' After this oath I was released and I returned to earth. Those present were astonished to see me reopen my eyes, which were bathed in such a flood of tears that my grief convinced the most sceptical. That it was not one of those vain dreams by which we are deceived, I attest the Tribunal before which I lay prostrate and the sentence which so appalled me. Please God that I may never again be submitted to such an ordeal. When I awoke my shoulders were bruised and I could still feel the blows. From that moment I studied religious books with far more ardor than I had ever read pro- fane ones." [Epist. XXII. ad Eustochium, 30.] Did Jerome abide by this oath throughout his life? Although making allowances for the saint's vigorous mem- ory, to which reminiscences of Terence, Lucretius, Cicero, Virgil and Seneca were continually recurring (Augustine, at Hippo, preserved the memory of his classical education in the same tenacious manner), we have reason to believe that Jerome more than once opened the works of these pagan authors whom he had renounced. To Rufinus, whose insid- ious hatred accused him of the crime of perjury, he replied that the keeping of a promise made in a dream could not be exacted of him. However, even if Jerome did not deem himself irrevocably bound by his pledge, he applied himself more and more to the study of the Bible, and his classical reading and recollections were exclusively devoted to defend- ing and embellishing the truth. This is what he pointed out in a celebrated letter to Magnus, the orator, in which, with skilful and weighty arguments he cited the example of all his predecessors, reminding him that according to Deuteronomy the Israelite must needs cut the nails and hair of his slave 422 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY before marrying her. "Is it astonishing that profane liter- ature should have seduced me by the grace of its language and by the beauty of its form, or that I should wish to con- vert a slave and a captive into a daughter of Israel? If I come across anything dead, any passage breathing idolatry, sensuality, error, or evil passions, I suppress it, and from my alliance with a stainless spouse are bom servants of the true God ; thus do I increase the family of Christ . ' ' [Epist . LXX . ad Magnum, oratorem urbis Romae, 2.] The questions of discipline and dogma which were agitat- ing the Church of Antioch, disturbed Jerome afresh in his retreat. Four bishops were contending for the Patriarchal See of the East. In 361, after the death of Eustathius, the intrepid champion of the Nicene faith, the Arians and many Catholics had agreed to elect Meletius of Sebaste, whose orthodoxy, already attested at the time of Constantine's persecution, asserted itself at Antioch from the very first, with the result of alienating the Arians, who chose Euzoius as their leader. Those Catholics, however, who were most devoted to Eustathius' glorious memory, refused to give their support to a bishop who had counted Arians among his electors. Towards the end of 379 Lucifer of Cagliari, on his return from the exile to which he had been banished by the son of Constantine, appointed the priest Paulinus, who was recognized by Alexandria and the West, as Bishop to the Eustathians. At the beginning of 376, to support his heresy in introducing the Bishop of Laodicea into Antioch, ApoUin- aris had the audacity to assign the government of this great Church to his disciple Vitalis, whom he had consecrated. Quite outside of all this, the inhabitants of Antioch and of the monasteries at Chalcis were discussing whether they should recognize in God three hypostases or three persons. In the theological language of to-day the two terms are synonymous, but in the fourth century they were not con- sidered so by all. At Antioch the Meletians preferred the term hypostasis to that of person, as being more explicit against the heresy of Sabellius ; the partisans of Paulinus, on the other hand, conforming themselves to the Latin custom which understood hypostasis and substance to be synonym- THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 423 ous, considered it an Arian impiety to say that in God there were three hypostases. Urged by the monks amongst whom he lived to pronounce upon the legitimate vicar and the orthodox expression, Jerome addressed himself in two famous letters to Pope Damasus. Certainly these letters are sufficient proof that he disliked the word hypostasis, which seemed to him equivocal or erroneous. Meletius too, the champion of this word, was especially displeasing to him, and his sympathies were entirely drawn towards Paulinus, the patriarch favored by Latin Christianity. Upon these points he asked the judgment of the Roman Pontiff, which he valued above everything, and to which he was will- ing to submit. **I thought," he wrote, Damasus, ''that I ought to consult the Apostolic See and the Roman Faith which St. Paul the Apostle extolled. I crave spiritual nourishment from the Church where I received the baptis- mal robe. . . . You are the light of the world, the salt of the earth, in your possession are the vessels of silver and gold, elsewhere are the vessels of clay and of wood destined for the iron rod which shall shatter them, and for the eternal fires which shall consume them." In terms which succeeding centuries have freely quoted Jerome proclaimed the Roman pre-eminence and the obliga- tion imposed upon all to conform to it. "I know that on that stone the Church was built ; he who eats of the Paschal Lamb outside of its walls is an impious man. He who has not sought refuge in the Ark of Noah will be overtaken by the deluge." He then asked Damasus to inform him which vicar he was to follow and which term he was to employ. "I do not know Vitalis, I repudiate Meletius, I ignore Pau- linus. Whoever reaps not with thee, scatters; whoever belongs not to Christ belongs to Antichrist." It is evident that Jerome could not accept the term hypostasis with enthusiasm; he declares as much in bitter, almost haughty tone ; nevertheless he was willing to accept it should Dam- asus pronounce its usage to be legitimate. "I pray you decide this matter for me, and I will not shrink from saying that there are three hypostases in God. ... I implore your Holiness by the crucified Lord, by the consubstantial Trinity, 424 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY to write and authorize me either to suppress or use this word." [Epist. XV. ad Damasum papam.] Jerome left Chalcis, probably driven from the desert by- some foolish persecution, and joined Evagrius in Antioch, where Paulinus compelled him to enter the priesthood ; but so strong was his love of solitude, so jealous was he of his liberty that he stipulated that his ordination should not bind him to any one particular church. By a peculiarity which the Jansenists willingly proposed as a model, Jerome never ascended to the altar. In virtue of this liberty which was justly dear to him, he contended, in a dialogue written at Antioch, against the heterodox rigorism of Lucifer of Cagliari, the bishop who had consecrated his friend Paulinus. Towards 380 we meet the indefatigable traveller at Con- stantinople, where St. Gregory of Nazianzus, placed against his will upon the episcopal throne of that town, was re- establishing the true faith in the hearts of a people who for forty years had been given over to Arianism, and with poetic and touching eloquence was distributing the treasures of his irreproachable doctrine among them. It was to the tuition of such a master that Jerome submitted himself, and in after years he took pleasure in evoking his reminiscences of him, and in repeating his lessons. In 381, Jerome left Constantinople and passing through Greece came to Rome. Jerome arrived in Rome accompanied by two Eastern bishops, Paulinus to whom he adhered, and Epiphanius of Salamis. Important work, illustrious friendships, struggles, and also bitter trials, awaited him in the capital of the Chris- tian world. At the Council which Damasus convoked Jerome gave evidence of his erudition and of the soundness of his doctrine in defending, with the authority of St. Anthan- asius a name ascribed to Christ {homo dominicus), the orthodoxy of which was contested by the Apollinarists. The Pope, impressed by the talent he was well fitted to appreciate, made Jerome his secretary, empowered him to reply in his name to the inquiries of the Synods, and often referred to the wisdom of the learned exegete on his own account. Further, Damasus forcibly influenced the whole THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 425 life of his collaborator. Pope Damasus had seen Jerome's tendency to omnivorous reading, and he roused him from this beguiling torpor by urging him to useful work. At his request Jerome translated two of Origen's Homilies on the Song of Solomon, and began to translate the treatise upon the Holy Ghost by Didymus, the blind sage of Alex- andria. Was it St. Ambrose's work on the same subject which Jerome criticized in such severe terms in his Preface ? ("Nihil ibi dialect icum, nihil virile at que districtum . . . sed tottim flaccidum, molle. . . .") Rufinus in his Invectives pretended that it was, but the Benedictines who edited the Bishop of Milan's work , disputed this assertion, which Tille- mont, however, seems inclined to believe. [Memoirs, etc., St. Ambrose, note XI.] From the pen of such a censor as Jerome the harshest criticisms are by no means surprising, and this was especially a criticism of a literary order. Damasus exacted a task of still greater importance from Jerome. The Gospel had at an early date been translated into Latin for the benefit of Western Christianity, but the primitive version, the ancient Itala, had suffered in the manuscripts in circulation corrections and also innumerable alterations and additions. Moreover, through the need of a concordance, in order to make the copy already owned as complete as possible, the various narratives of the Evangel- ists were frequently united in a single text. Alarmed at the danger introduced by these divergencies, Damasus entreated Jerome to revise the New Testament according to the orig- inal Greek. Jerome, who was by nature intolerant of con- tradiction, had no illusions as to the criticism to which this task would expose him. He was about to disturb old ways of thought, and possibly startle timid consciences; neverthe- less, strong in the support afforded him by the Pope, he began and successfully terminated the work demanded of him, suppressed the interpolations, re-established the invert- ed sequence of the sacred text, and presented this meritor- ious achievement to Damasus, having added to it the ten canons or tables of concordance translated from Greek into Latin, in which Eusebius of Caesarea, and also Ammonius of Alexandria, had shown what was special to each Evange- list and what was common to all four. 426 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Jerome undertook another revision, that of the Psalter. The translation current in the Latin Church had been made from the Greek text of the Septuagint, but owing to the numerous alterations which had crept into the manuscript copies, it was incorrect in many places. From the Hieronym- ian revision sprang the Psalterium Romanum, which was in use in Rome up to the reign of St. Pius V., and to which the Venite Exultemus in the Invitatory and the passages of the Psalms cited in the missal still belong. "This first work was in its turn soon altered by the copyists, and at the urgent desire of St. Paula, Jerome decided to make a second revision, which this time he based upon Origen's Hexapla. This was the Psalterium Gallicanum (anno 389), so called because it was first adopted in Gaul. . . . The Gallican Psalter is the one inserted in our Vulgate and used in our Breviary." Somewhat later, about 392, he translated the Psalms from the Hebrew. These works, and the austerity of Jerome's life while accomplishing them, drew much attention upon the secre- tary of Pope Damasus, and won him many illustrious and priceless friendships. In a palace on the Aventine, some noble-hearted women of earnest faith, gathered together and confronted the pag- anism which was still general, and the immorality of an all too large number of Christians, with the humble and cour- ageous exhibition of their virtue. The mistress of this noble dwelling was Marcella, who had consecrated her premature and irrevocable widowhood to God, to the poor, and to the study ©f holy works. With her were also her mother, Albina, Asella, whose meekness was extolled by Palladius the historian of St. John Chrysostom; Furia, the heiress of the Camilli, Fabiola, who, although less strong in righteousness than her pious comrades, eventually atoned for the sins of her youth by penance and charity. Lea, the widow and Principia. We must especially mention three women who were more cherished by Jerome than all the others, and whose names are closely linked with his in history, namely Paula and two of her daughters, Blesilla and Eustochium. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 427 It is unnecessary here to give an account of Paula's early history. By her mother she was authentically connected with the Scipios and the Gracchi, and her father, Rogatus, a wealthy proprietor of Nicopolis, claimed descent from Aga- memnon, the king of kings. At the age of thirty-five, after the death of her husband, Julius Toxotius, a reputed descen- dant of ^neas, for in the genealogy of patrician Rome legend blends easily with history, Paula was inspired by Marcella's example to adopt the ascetic life, in which she soon equalled her heroic friend. Her eldest daughter, Blesilla, left a widow after seven months of marriage, re-entered the narrow path from which the world had momentarily tempted her, and died in the flower of her youth, lamented in pathetic accents by Jerome. Eustochium, another of Paula's daughters, was reserved for a longer career than Blesilla, the tenderly-mourned. She followed her mother to the East, where she succeeded her in the direction of the convents in Palestine, and, always calm, always invincible to temptation, she retained Jerome as consoler and guide until the end. The love of the Scriptures glowed in the hearts of these Christian women who, in order to acquire a deeper knowl- edge of the holy books, resolutely began the study of Greek and Hebrew. In these researches, where the knowledge of truth and not the elusive joys of vainglory were sought, they were directed by Jerome ; and Marcella, whose guest he had become, outstripped all her companions in this arduous pur- suit. Later on, the recluse of Bethlehem, in his "Commen- tary on the Epistle to the Ephesians, ' ' wrote of her : ' 'When- ever I picture to myself her ardor for study, her vivacity of mind and her application, I blame my idleness, I who, retreated in this wilderness, with the manger whither the shepherds came in haste to adore the wailing Christ-child constantly before mine eyes, am unable to accomplish what a noble woman accomplishes in the hour she snatches from the cares of a large circle and the government of her house- hold." Jerome was reproached for teaching only women. He answered what too often, alas, the priest of the present day 428 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY would have the right to reply : "If men questioned me more about the Scriptures I would speak less to women." He added: "I rejoice, I am filled with enthusiasm, when in Babylon I meet Daniel, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael." [Epist. LXV. ad Principiam virginem, 2.] He found Daniel, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael in a few chosen friends who frequented the Aventine and attended the religious school. They were Pammachius, Marcella's cousin, who was to marry Paulina, Paula's second daughter; Oceanus, a learned man who later visited Jerome at Bethlehem ; Marcellinus, who in Africa, in the time of Augustine, was the most conscientious of magistrates; and Domnion, a priest advanced in years, the praises of whose charity were sung by all. In spite of the austere sweetness of these friendships, in spite of the substantial support which the protection of Damasus secured for him, Jerome did not taste peace in Rome. Was peace, however, what he sought? Jerome surely did not shrink from contention. He had defended the incomparable benefits of perfect chastity against Helvid- ius, a contemner of the dogma of the perpetual virginity of Mary, and, without denying the legitimacy of marriage, he pointed out its drawbacks, I was about to say its evils. He encouraged young girls, for whom honorable or brilliant marriages were in contemplation, in their desire to lead a monastic life, and at the sight of the Roman virgins who, through his advice, thus renounced their families, there were many who would readily have accused him of murder, more especially after the death of Blesilla, whom he was reported to have killed by dint of the fasts he imposed upon her. That was not the only grudge harbored against him. He denounced with eloquent indignation and inexhaustible fer- vor the licentiousness, avarice, intemperance and hypocrisy which had crept in among the priests and the monks at Rome and it may easily be imagined that those stung by his power- ful satire, and those who recognized themselves or were recognized by others in his portraits, became incensed, and that anger and resentment broke out against him on every side. Calumny soon came to the aid of spite, and at the expense of all justice as well as truth the relations between THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 429 Paula and her spiritual director were incriminated. The death of Damasus, which took place on the i ith of Decem- ber 384, deprived Jerome of his protector, excluded him from the Apostolic Chancery, and completed his severance from Rome. His thoughts turned once more to the desert, but this time it was the Biblical desert in which he wished permanently to establish himself, and he left Rome forever, taking with him his brother Paulinian, the priest Vincent, and a few monks. From Ostia, on the point of embarking, he wrote a letter to Asella, in which his affectionate and saddened soul reveals itself. "If I believed myself capable of thanking thee worthily," he wrote, *'I should be incensed. But God can reward thy saintly soul for me for the good thou has done me. As to me, I am unworthy of it, and I never had any right to hope or even to wish that thou would- est grant me in Jesus Christ so great an affection. And even if certain persons believe me to be a vile wretch overwhelmed by the weight of my sins — in comparison to my sins that is but little — yet thou art right in letting thy heart distinguish for thee between the righteous and the unrighteous. ..." Jerome then proceeded to exonerate himself from the calum- nies which had assailed him and invoked the memory and testimony of Asella and of all those who lived on the Aven- tine. "Many a time have I been surrounded by a flock of virgins, and to the best of my ability expounded the divine books to several of them. Study creates assiduity, assiduity familiarity, and familiarity a mutual understanding. Call upon those virgins to answer if they have ever had any thought from me other than those one should receive from a Christian. Have I ever taken money from any of them? Have I not always repulsed every gift large or small ? Has my neighbor's lucre ever soiled my hand? Have I ever uttered a dubious word or cast too bold a glance?" Jerome journeyed to Rhegium thence to Cyprus, and thence to Antioch; St. Paula leaving Rome forever joined him here. She brought with her her daughter Eustochium • and a band of Roman virgins who had consecrated them- selves to God. In the middle of winter St. Jerome and St. Paula and her companions set out for the Holy Land. 430 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY In praef. 2 ad Paralip. he describes the finis of this jour- ney: ''As those who have seen Athens better understand Grecian history; and as he, who has traveled from Troas through Leucadia and the Acroceraunian mountains to Sicily, and thence to the mouth of the Tiber, will better understand the third book of Virgil, thus a man will more clearly understand the Scriptures, if he shall have seen Judasa with his own eyes, and shall have examined the memorials of the old cities, and the names of places whether unchanged or changed. Hence we took the pains to undergo this labor with most learned Hebrews, that we might journey through the country of which all the churches of Christ speak. Com- ing to Csesarea, Jerome came upon the Hexapla of Origen, and from this copied all the books of the Old Testament. He descended into Egypt and listened at Alexandria to Didymus, the celebrated teacher of Scripture: "My head was now sprinkled with gray hairs," he says, " and seemed more fit for the master than the disciple ; but I went to Alex- andria, I heard Didymus, and for many things, am thankful to him." Jerome now returned to Palestine and established himself at Bethlehem, where, out of the wreck of his inheritance, con- sisting of farms partially destroyed by the barbarians, which Paulinian was commissioned to sell, and with the aid of Paula's bounty, he erected a monastery which he fortified with a tower of refuge. He selected for his cell a cave close to the one where our Lord was bom. Paula, meanwhile, after having built some temporary cells, was engaged in construct- ing convents, and her indefatigable charity endowed as a hospice for pilgrims the hamlet where, as Jerome observed, Mary and Joseph had been without shelter. In Palestine Jerome was once more thrown with Rufinus, a friend of his youth, who had left Rome in 371 and after six years spent in Egypt had settled at Jerusalem not far from the widow Melania, celebrated for her austere sacrifices and her continual journeys. The intimacy which absence had interrupted without destroying, was renewed between the two friends. Jerome used even to have the manuscripts of secular literature needed for his disciples copied by monks THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 431 belonging to the convent of the OHve Trees, which Rufinus directed. The early days of Jerome's sojourn in Bethlehem were most serene; everything charmed and satisfied him, and a tremor of joyous admiration, a breath of spring, one might almost say, seems to vibrate through the pages which he wrote or inspired during that period. 'The most illustrious Gauls congregate here, and no sooner has the Briton, so remote from our world, made any progress in piety, than he abandons his early setting sun to seek a land which he knows only by reputation, and through the Scriptures. And what . of the Armenians, the Persians, the nations of India and Ethiopia; of Egypt herself, so rich in monks, of Pontus, Cappadocia, Coelesyria and Mesopotamia? All these East- em countries send us hordes of monks . . . they throng here and set us the example of every virtue. The languages differ, but the religion is the same, and one can count as many different choirs singing the psalms as there are nations. Yet in all this — and this is the triumph of Christianity — there is no vainglory, none prides himself upon his chastity ; if they quarrel it is as to who shall be the humblest, for the last is here counted first. . . They do not judge one another, for fear of being judged by the Saviour, and slander, so prev- alent in many districts where they malign each other out- rageously, is here completely unknown. Here is no luxury, no sensuality. ..." Either Jerome or Paula closes this description with a few lines of idyllic grace. 'Tn this land of Christ's all is simplicity, and except when the Psalms are being sung all is silence. Wherever you may go you hear the laborer, with his hand upon the plough, murmuring Alleluia. The reaper, with the sweat pouring from his brow, finds relaxation in singing the Psalms, and the vintager recites some passage from David while pruning his vines. They are, so to speak, the love songs of the country; the shepherds' lilt, the laborers' accompaniment." [Epist. XLVI. — Paulae et Eustochii ad Marcellam, 9, 10, 11.] These peaceful years were also years of toil for Jerome. The direction of the convents which had sprung up about the cave of Bethlehem, the active correspondence he main- 432 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY tained with his friends in the outer world, even the gram- matical instruction he gave to the young men, which brought back to him those secular works of antiquity he had vainly striven to hate or to forget, would have been sufficient in themselves to fill his life. They were, however, but a minor portion of his work. He had undertaken the study of the Scriptures at the advice of Damasus, but the Providential attraction which also drew him to them, was continually stronger and surer. Everything seemed to lead him to the Bible. Sulpicius Severus, who spent six months with him at Bethlehem, thus describes his life: "He is wholly absorbed in reading, he takes no rest by day or by night; he is ever reading or writing something." Jerome was a man of great physical endurance. His literary activity at Bethlehem may be compared to that of Origen. He translated the book of Tobias in a single night, and even, when ill, he dic- tated from his couch to an amanuensis. To perfect his knowledge of Hebrew, he employed a Jew to teach him, and, as this preceptor feared the fanaticism of his race, the lessons were given by night. Jerome speaks of these things in his Epist. ad Pammachius, 84, 3: ''With most great labor, and great price did I have Baranina by night as preceptor. He feared the Jews, and was to me another Nicodemus." Coupled with this, he assiduously studied the Fathers and writers of the Church. Villarsi declares that no one, Greek or Latin, read more authors than Jerome. In the year 389 Jerome began the great work of his life, a translation of the protocanonical books of the Old Testament from the original Hebrew. He was not able to devote all his time to the great work, but it was the chief object of his labors for fifteen years. He also trans- lated the deuterocanonical books of Tobias and Judith from Chaldean exemplars. This translation of Jerome forms our Vulgate, concerning which we shall speak later. His trans- lation of the Psalter from the Hebrew was not received into the Vulgate ; its place was occupied by the Psalter which he revised from the Hexaplar text of Origen at Csesarea. THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 433 A long and painful ordeal was about to disturb what St. Augustine called **the peaceful joy" which Jerome tasted in his work. It arose from the most unexpected quarter, his adversary being no other than Rufinus, with whom he en- gaged in a fratricidal conflict over the writings of Origen. Jerome had first met Rufinus at Aquileia, and they had contracted one of those friendships which seem eternal. It was to this friend of his youth, who had left him to visit the Egyptian Thebaides, that Jerome, isolated in the desert of Chalcis, wrote from a bed of sickness: "Oh! if the Lord Jesus Christ would grant that I might suddenly be trans- ported to thy side as was Philip to the minister of Candacia, and Habakkuk to Daniel, how tenderly would I clasp thee in my arms!" He closed this letter with the following words, which subsequent events so cruelly belied: "I beseech thee, let not thy heart lose sight, as have thine eyes, of a friend so long sought, with such difficulty found, and so hard to retain ! Let others gloat over their gold ! Friend- ship is an incomparable possession, a priceless treasure, but the friendship which can perish has never been a true one." [Epist. III. ad Rufinum monachum.] This last is a somewhat bold assertion, and one which fails to take into account the inconstancy of the human heart which is liable to take back what it once gave in all sincerity. St. Augustine, who was the most devoted and faithful of friends, the mere mention of whose name recalls those of so many beings dear to him whose lives were inseparably inter- woven with his own, in speaking of this rupture between Rufinus and Jerome has deplored in touching accents the frailty which undermines or menaces our affections. * 'What hearts will hereafter dare open themselves to one another; is there any friend to whom one may freely unbosom oneself; where is the friend one does not fear some day to count an enemy, if this rupture which we deplore could have taken place between Jerome and Rufinus? Oh! wretched plight of mankind, and worthy of pity! How can we put faith in what we see in our friend's souls when we cannot foresee what may change them? Yet why lament thus over others when we do not know what we may be ourselves? Man (28) H. S. 434 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY barely and imperfectly knows what he is to-day; he has no conception of what he may be to-morrow." [Epist, CX. inter Epist. Hieronymi, 6.] A famous writing of Origen's gave rise to a stormy quarrel and an irrevocable rupture between the two friends. It was curious that the timid writer, who took exception to the most legitimate of Jerome's innovations and behind whose watchful orthodoxy lurked a conservative and moody spirit of distrust, should have been the champion of the brilliant and audacious Alexandrian, who seems to us one of the most dazzling and in certain respects one of the most sympathetic personalities of the Christian school of x^lexandria. Jgrome had proclaimed Origen the master of the Churches after the apostles. But he tells us that he praised Origen as an interpreter, not as a dogmatist. [Epist. LXXXIV ad Pam.] This is an awkward apology. A false dogmatist can not be a good interpreter The fact of the matter seems to be that Jerome himself was deceived by the views of Origen. The vehemence and intolerance of Jerome's nature can be gleaned from the following passage, Epist. XXXIII. 4. It was written concerning the condemnation of Origen : "Rome consents to his condemnation; it brings together its senate against him, not because of the novelty of his doctrines, not because of heresy, as the dogs who are mad against him now pretend, but because they could not bear the glory of his eloquence and his knowledge, and because when he spoke they were made to appear as mutes." A few years later he abused Rufinus in a similar manner because he sustained the defense of Origen. Like violent changes of opinion characterize his whole life. His judg- ments are not uniform and consistent, and this is to be taken into account when adducing him as an authority. Rufinus died in Sicily in 410, and Jerome thus speaks of his death in the opening chapter of his Commentary on Ezechiel: 'The scorpion lies underground between Encel- adus and Porphyrion, and the hydra of many heads has at last ceased to hiss against me." **Tantaene animis coelesti- busiras? " THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 435 Rufinus also was a bitter foe. Anyone who has read his Apology, his ''Invectives against Jerome," for such is the name which has clung to this work, will be fully persuaded of this. "He devoted three years to this work," says Amedee Thierry, "which appeared fragment by fragment ; he divided it into two books to which he later added a supple- ment. He had a double aim, first to exonerate himself from the crime of heresy by casting upon Jerome the accusation directed towards himself, and then to dishonor Jerome and to throw odium on his name by personal imputations, lament- ing the while being forced to such measures." [St. Jerome, Lib. IV.] Indeed no pamphlet has ever been composed with more cunning hatred, nor has ever struck the adversary more surely. According to him, Jerome was the enemy of man- kind; a traducer of the faithful, whose customs he had calumniated in his book upon Virginity, at the risk of justify- ing and even magnifying the calumnies of the pagans; a traducer of the works of Ambrose the great bishop; a traducer of Rome, the capital of the Christian world; and a traducer of all authors, either Greek or Latin, who had pre- ceded him. One grievance which Rufinus put forward with malignant insistence, was the important part the pagan authors played in Jerome's works and in his thoughts. In vain had Jerome after a famous vision sworn never to reopen any secular book. "Peruse his writings and see if there is a single page which does not point to his having again become a Ciceronian, and in which he does not speak of 'Our Cicero,' 'Our Homer,' 'Our Virgil' ; he even boasts of having read the works of Pythagoras, which according to the erudite are no longer in existence. In almost all his works quotations from secular authors are far more numerous and lengthy than those from the Prophets and Apostles. Even when writing to women or maidens, who in our holy books seek only subjects for edification, he intersperses his letters with quotations from Horace, Cicero or Virgil." [Rufinus Apol. Lib. sec. 7.] A controversy arose between St. Jerome and St. Augus- tine between the years 395 and 405. The origin of the con- troversy was St. Jerome's commentary of Galatians II- 1 1 — 14. 436 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY "I have read," Augustine wrote Jerome, ''a commentary upon the Epistles of St. Paul which is ascribed to you, and I came across the passage in the Epistle to the Galatians, where the Apostle Peter is reproved for the deception into which he had been drawn. I confess with no small sorrow that in it you, even you, or the author of this writing who- soever he may be, have defended the cause of untruth. I consider it a fatal error to believe it possible to find any- thing in the Scriptures which is untrue, in other words, to believe that the men to whom we are indebted for the sacred works could have inserted therein any falsehood. Once admit any officious untruth in the Holy books, then, in accordance with this pernicious principle, in order to escape from a moral which imposes too much restraint upon us, or from dogmas which are beyond our comprehension, we may attribute any part of these works to the artifice of an author who has not told the truth." Having pursued his urgent argument pointed by illustrations from the Bible, Augustine, scarcely hoping that his request would be acceded to, de- manded an explanation which would dispel his doubts. In conclusion he claimed a fraternally severe criticism of which he had just given an example, for those of his works which Profuturus was to offer to Jerome. Meanwhile Profuturus, who had been made Bishop of Cirta in Numidia, instead of starting for Palestine took possession of his see, where he very shortly died. The letter, therefore, which had been given to him never reached its destination, but unfortunately fell into indiscreet hands, and the copies of it which were circulated in Dalmatia and Italy, encouraged Jerome's enemies in their criticisms. Augustine had also been raised to the episcopacy in 395, and amid new cares and duties had no doubt forgotten not only his letter, but the commentary which had provoked it, when a note which the deacon Presidius brought him from Jerome, recalled them to his mind. As Jerome's missive did not in any way answer the questions Augustine had put to him, the latter thinking that his letter had gone astray wrote another, which was longer but not less peremptory and no less aggressive. After having again tried to demonstrate THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 437 the dangers of the Hieronymian explanation, Augustine exhorted the aged historian to a courageous retraction of it, reminding him of the fable of Stesichorus who, struck with blindness by the demi-gods Castor and Pollux for having decried the chastity and beauty of Helen in a satire, did not recover his sight until he had sung the praises of the grace and virtue he had outraged, upon his lyre. '*I implore you," he wrote Jerome, *'gird yourself with a sincere and Christian severity, correct and amend your work, and so to speak sing its recantation. The truth of Chris- tians is incomparably more beautiful than the Helen of the Greeks, for it indeed, have our martyrs fought more bravely against the Sodom of their century, than did the Greek heroes against Troy. I do not urge you to this disavowal, so that you may recover your mental sight, for God forbid that I should think that you had lost it, yet suffer me to tell you that through I know not what inadvertency you have turned aside your eyes, sound and far-sighted though they may be, and have failed to see the disastrous consequences of a system which would admit that one of the authors of our sacred books, could once, in some part of his work, have conscientiously and piously lied." [Epist. LXVII. Augus- tini ad Hieronymum, inter Epistolas Hieronymi, 7.] The man, by name Paul, to whom this letter had been confided, overcome by his terror of the sea, did not embark for Palestine, and another messenger chosen by Augustine also failed to deliver the missive to Jerome. The letter, however, spread abroad, and with it a report that Augustine had composed and sent to Rome a book against Jerome. The deacon Sisinius, a friend of the hermit, found Augus- tine's letter, together with some other writings by the same doctor, on an island in the Adriatic, and lost no time in sending it to its destination. This certainly was enough to rouse a soul less ardent, and a writer less harassed by envy, or less surrounded by admirers quick to take alarm and even to be angered at all criticisms directed against their master ; yet Jerome controlled himself and refrained from answering. He explained his silence in the letters which later he wrote to the Bishop of Hippo. It 438 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY seems that, although he unmistakably recognized Augus- tine's familiar style and manner of argument, the material evidences of authenticity were wanting. Besides which, the veteran soldier of orthodoxy shrank from opening hostilities with a bishop of his own communion whom he had loved before even knowing him, and who had sought him in friend- ship; one, who already illustrious, was to continue his Scrip- tural works, and one in whom he gladly welcomed a legiti- mate heir. When at last Augustine heard of the pain his letters, divulged in such an unaccountable manner, had caused in the solitude of Bethlehem, he wrote to Jerome: ''A rumor has reached me which I have difhculty in believing, yet why should I not mention it to you ? It has been reported to me that some brothers, I know not whom, have given you to understand that I have written a book against you, and that I have sent it to Rome. Rest assured that this is false ; God is witness that I have written no book against you" (the book in question was the letter, or letters, of which Jerome's enemies had taken a perfidious advantage). *'If there be anything in my works contrary to your views, know or believe that it was written not to antagonize you, but to explain what seemed to me the truth. Point out to me anything in my writings which could offend you; I will receive your counsels as from one brother to another, glad to make any corrections, glad also of such a token of your affection. I ask and entreat this of you." Then followed one of those effu- sions in which Augustine's soul so often found its outlet. "Oh, why, if I may not live with you, may I not at least live in your vicinity, and hold sweet and frequent intercourse with you. But since that has not been granted me, consent at least to uphold and draw closer the ties which render us present to one another in the Lord; disdain not the letters which I will sometimes write you." [Ep. ci. Augustini ad Hieronymum, 2, 3.] Sincere and touching as were the tones of this letter, it failed to disarm Jerome, who did not think it sufficiently explicit. Moreover the advice, and even the appeals, which it contained offended the somewhat proud susceptibility of THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 439 the aged Biblical student. After evincing his doubts, which we have already mentioned, upon the authenticity of Augus- tine's letter, he proceeded to add these words : "God forbid that I should dare to censure the works of your Beatitude ; let it suffice me to defend my own, without criticising those of others. Your wisdom knows full well that every man is wedded to his own opinion, and that it were childish boasting to imitate the youths of old who, by slandering famous men, sought to become famous themselves. Neither am I foolish enough to be offended by the divergences which exist between your explanation and mine. You yourself are not hurt at my holding different opinions. But where our friends have really the right to reprove us is when not per- ceiving our own wallet, as Persius says, we look at that of another. ''I have still one thing to ask of you, which is that you should love one who loves you, and that being young, you challenge not an aged man upon the battlefield of the Scrip- tures. We too have had our day, and we have run our race to the best of our abilities, and now that it has come to be your turn to do likewise, and that you are making great strides, we have a right to rest. To follow your example in quoting the poets, remember Dares and Entellus, think also of the proverb which says, 'As the ox grows weary he plants his foot more firmly.' I dictate these lines with sadness; would to God I might embrace you, and that in brotherly intercourse we might have instructed one another. . . . Think of me, saintly and venerable pontiff! See how much I love you, I who, although challenged, have been unwilling to reply, and who do not yet resign myself to ascribe to you what in another I should blame." To this letter, which was brought him by the subdeacon Asterius, Augustine made a modest and touching answer. He vindicated himself of having, so to speak, defied the aged athlete upon the field of the Scriptures, and merely asked to be enlightened. "Far be it from me that I- should take offence, if by sound reasons you will and can prove to me that you understand the Epistle to the Galatians or any other like part of the Scriptures better than I. Far from resenting it, I 440 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY should deem it a privilege to be instructed or corrected by you. But, beloved brother, you would not think that your answer could have hurt me had you not thought that I had been the first to wound you. My best course is to acknowl- edge my fault, and to confess that I offended you in writing that letter which I cannot disown. If I offended you, I con- jure you by the meekness of Jesus Christ do not render me evil for evil by offending me in your turn. Now, to dissimu- late what you find to alter or correct in my writings or my discourses would be to offend me. . . . Reprove me with charity if you deem me in the wrong, innocent though I may be, or treat me with the tenderness of a father if you think me worthy of your affection. . . . Innocent, I will receive your reproaches in a spirit of gratitude ; guilty, I will acknowl- edge both your benevolence and my own error." The unbiased judge of this controversy must feel that St. Augustine was entirely right in his criticism and that Augus- tine's magnanimity and meekness prevented a bitter contro- versy. St. Jerome manifests here that sensitiveness to crticism which was a prominent characteristic in him. Jerome died at Bethlehem, according to the Chronicle of Prosper, in the year 420, and was interred close to the Grotto of the Nativity of Our Saviour. His body was afterwards brought to the Church of St. Maria Maggiore in Rome. His sanctity and austerity is of the kind that awes rather than attracts, and is provocative of admiration rather than of imitation. For this reason he has been looked at with cool, temperate eyes; and since, moreover, he has so fully written himself down for us, there is little difficulty in dis- cerning the broad outlines of his personality. A strange, strong man, strenuous and intense even to the verge of ferocity, as was the fashion of his day with the the champions of orthodoxy. In him is exemplified the sort of antagonism that exists between delicacy of perception and strength of execution, and renders their equal development so rare in one and the same character. With great capacity in both directions, St. Jerome seems alternately to sacrifice one of these interests to the other. In his zealous self -hatred it never occurred to him apparently that the difficulties he THE CAxVON OF THE IV. CENTURY 441 was contending with were more probably the effect of mental strain and nervous exhaustion than of an overplus of animal energy, and therefore w^ere rather augmented than alleviated by his violent methods. In the feverish vision of his judg- ment before Christ's tribunal — embodying no doubt the state of his conscience at the time — the whole apparatus of secular learning by which he himself was subsequently enabled to become so acute an exponent and defender of the faith, and which the later Church blessed, sanctified, and consecrated to the service of religion, was condemned with- out qualification as repugnant to Christianity; even as the body and all natural affections were indiscriminately con- demned as inimical to virtue and sanctity. It is mainly to the gigantic force of his intellect, to his stupenduous power of work, to his prodigious scholarship — as scholarship went in those days — ^that he owes his prom- inence in the history of Christianity. When we think of what he did, and did single-handed, for Scriptural criticism and exegesis: how he created order and coherence where previously there had been wild chaos and confusion, how he expanded and applied the critical principles then in vogue as far as the material to hand would permit we cannot help wondering what he would do, what he would be allowed to do, were he among us now, and were he master — as doubtless he would be — of the rich harvest of learning and information that has been accumulating during the intervening centuries. Jerome's attitude towards the deuterocanonical books was not consistent. At times he bitterly attacks them, as in the following passages. In his celebrated Prologus Galeatus, after the enumera- tion of the protocanonical books, he continues : "Whatever is outside of these is to be placed among the Apocrypha. Therefore the Wisdom which is commonly ascribed to Solo- mon, and the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobias, and Pastor are not in the Canon. The first Book of Macca- bees I found in Hebrew, the second is originally Greek, as appears from the dictiort." Again in the Preface to Ezra : "What is not received by them, (the Hebrews) and what is not of the twenty-four 442 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Ancients (the protocanonical books) is to he repulsed far from one.'' In his Preface to the Books of Solomon: "There exist also Panaretus, the book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and another of the pseudepigrapha which is called the Wisdom of Solomon. The first I found in Hebrew, not called Ecclesias- ticus, as with the Latins, but Parables: the second is nowhere with the Hebrews, and the very style savors of Greek eloquence, and some of the old writers have ascribed it to Philo the Jew. As, therefore, the Church reads Judith, Tobias, and the books of Maccabees, but does not hold them canonical, thus let her read these two volumes for the edifi- cation of the people, not for the confirmation of ecclesiasti- cal dogmas." In his Praef. in Esther: *To this book the received Latin version has added various ragged patches of words, adding the things which might be suggested by the theme." Here is an evident condemnation of the deuterocanonical fragments of Esther. Writing to Laeta, Epist. 107, 12, on the mode of instruct- ing her daughter, he says: *'Let her shun all Apocrypha (the deuterocanonical books), and if ever she should read them, not for confirmation of dogmas, but out of reverence for the words, let her know that they are not of those who appear in the titles, and that there are many false things inter- mingled in them, and that one has need of great prudence to seek the gold in the slime.'' In his Commentary on Daniel, although he comments the deuterocanonical fragments, he is inclined to think that they are fables of Greek origin. It does not increase our esteem of Jerome's critique to find that one cause of his doubt of the fragments is that in the four- teenth chapter, first verse, the King of Babylon is said to cry out with a loud voice ; whereas Jerome had maintained that only the saints are said in Scripture to cry out with a loud voice. In his prologue to Daniel, he justifies himself for having fixed an obelus to the fragments of Daniel, alleging that "Origen, and Eusebius, and Apollinaris and other church- writers and doctors of Greece declare that these visions have THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 443 no place with the Hebrews, and that they needed not to respond to Porphyrius in defense of those things to which the Holy Scriptures gave no authority." In his prologue to Jeremiah he declares that he has omitted the book of Baruch, and the pseudepigraphic Epistle of Jeremiah, ''setting at naught the rage of his calumnia- tors.' ' We have no wish to minimize Jerome's opposition to the deuterocanonical books. At times it was pronounced and violent. But he could, at most, only be termed a vio- lent doubter. He never was calm and constant in his re- jection of those books. The fact that, in such strange oppo- sition, he was at variance with all his contemporaries, made him waver, and we find more quotations from deuterocanonical Scripture in Jerome, than in any other writer yet quoted. Oft when opposed by his adversaries for his Scriptural views he vented his resentment upon the books themselves. Then, when asked by a friend, he would calmly discuss the merits of these same writings. He translated Tobias from the Chaldaic at the instance of Chromatius and Heliodorus, the bishops, ''judging it better to displease the Pharisees, in order to grant the requests of the bishops." Praef. in Lib. Tob. In Jerome's mind there was ever a conflict between two principles. By conviction and education he was a Chris- tian, moulded by Christian tradition. His higher studies had made him in a certain sense a Jew. The weird quaint beauty of the Hebrew tongue, the deeper insight into the substance of the Old Law which only Hebraists can have, the conviction that of all the Christian writers of his time, he alone knew Hebrew, made him look with disfavor upon the books which the Jews rejected. It is an evidence in favor of the deuterocanonical books that they retained their place in the list of Scripture after the many tests to which they were subjected. The genius of Jerome was not able to draw even one Father to entertain his views on the deuterocanoni- cal works. He fluctuated between his reverence for the Christian tradition, and his respect for the Synagogue till his death, and contradicted himself many times in his views on the books in question. 444 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Dan. XIII. 6i **Et consurrexerunt adver- sus duos presbyteros (convi- cerat enim eos Daniel ex ore suo falsum dixisse testimonium) feceruntque eis sicut male ege- rant adversus proximum. ' ' Dan. XIV. 35 " Et apprehendit eum Angel- us Domini in vertice ejus, et portavit eum capillo capitis sui, posuitque eum in Babylone supra lacum in impetu spiritus sui." Sap. I. II. "Custodite ergo vos a mur- muratione, que nihil prodest, et a detractione parcite linguae, quoniam sermo obscurus in va- cuum non ibit: os autem, quod mentitur, occidit animam. " Sap. VI. 7. * * Exiguo enim conceditur mi- sericordia; potentes autem po- tenter tormenta patientur. ' ' Dan. XIII. SI. ''Et dixit ad eos Daniel; Se- parate illos ab invicem procul, et dijudicabo eos. ' ' Judith XII. 10. ** — et percussit bis in cervi- cem, et abscidit caput ejus, et abstulit conopeum ejus a co- lumnis, evolvit corpus ejus truncum etc. St. Jerome, Epist. I. 9. "Nunc Susanna nobilis fide omnium subeat mentibus, quae iniquo damnata judicio, Spiri- tu Sanctopuerum replente, sal- vata est. Ecce non dispar in utraque misericordia Domini. Ilia liberata per judicem, ne iret ad gladium; haec a judice damnata, absoluta per gladium est." Epist. III. I. **0 si nunc mihi Dominus Jesus Christus .... Habacuc ad Danielem translationem conce- deret!" Epist.XIV. 6. "Os autem quod mentitur occidit animam. ' ' Ibid. 9 'Totenter potentes tormen- ta patientur. ' ' Ibid. "Presbyteros puer Daniel ju- dicat. ' ' Epist. XXII. 21. 'Tunc Holofemis caput Ju- dith continens amputavit. ' ' THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 445 Esther XIV. ii. "Ne tradas, Domine, scep- trum tuum his, qui non sunt, ' ' etc. Sap. II. 23. "Quoniam Deus creavit ho- minem inexterminabilem, et ad imaginem similitudinis suae fe- cit ilium. ' ' Judith VIII. 6, et XIII. 9,10 Eccli. XXV. 12. ''Beatus, qui invenit ami- cum verum, et qui enarrat jus- titiam auri audienti." Certainly Jerome does not mitted to memory Apocryphal Eccli. III. ss. "Ignem ardentem extinguit aqua, et eleemosyna resistit peccatis — . ' ' EccH. IV. 25. "Est enim confusio adduc- ens peccatum, et est confusio adducens gloriam et gratiam. ' ' EccH. XI. 27. "In die bonorum ne imme- mor sis malorum: et in die mal- Epist. XLVIII. 14 "Ne tradas, inquit Esther, hereditatem his qui non sunt, idolis scilicet et daemonibus. ' ' Epist. LI. 6 * * Dicit enim (Salomon) in Sa- pientia quae titulo ejus inscribi- tur: ' Creavit Deus incorruptum hominem, et imaginem suae pro- prietatis dedit ei. ' ' Epist. LIV. 16. * ' Legimus in Judith (si cui tamen placet volumen recip- pere) viduam confectam jeju- niis et habitu lugubri sordida- tam, quae non lugebat mortu- um virum sed squalore corpo- ris, Sponsi quaerebat adventum. Video armatam gladio manum cruentam dexteram. Recog- nosco caput Holophemis de me- diis hostibus reportatum. ' ' Epist. LVII. I. ' ' Legerat enim (Paulus) illud Jesu : * Beatus qui in aures loquitur audientis. wish to say that Paul com- Scripture. Epist. LXVI. 5. " — sciens scrip tum; ^Sicut aqua extinguit ignem; ita elee- mosyna peccatum.' " Ibid. 5. "Est confusio quae ducit ad mortem, et est confusio quae ducit ad vitam. ' ' Epist. LXXVII. 6. " — scilicet in die bona malo- rum non oblita est. ' ' 446 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY orum ne immemor sis bono- rum..— ." Sap. IV. II. *' — raptus est ne malitia mu- taret intellectum ejus, aut ne fictio deciperet animam illius. ' Sap. IV. 8. "Senectus enim venerabilis est non diutuma, neque annor- um numero computata: cani autem sunt sensus hominis. ' ' Sap. I. 7. * ' Quoniam spiritus Domini replevit orbem terrarum, ' ' etc. Epist. LXXIX. 2. "Raptus est ne malitia mu- taret mentem ejus, quia plac- ita erat Deo anima illius. ' ' Ibid. 6. "Cani enim hominis sapien- tia ejus. ' ' Epist. XCVIII. 13. "Et alibi legimus: 'Spiritus Domini replevit orbem terra- rum. ' Quod nunquam Scrip- tura memoraret nisi irrationa- bilia quaeque et inanima illius nomine complerentur. ' ' Ibid. 19. " — et in illius perse verantes amore cantabimus/ Amator fui pulchritudinis ejus. ' ' Sap. VIII. 2. "Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a juventute mea et quaesivi sponsam mihi eam assumere, et amator factus sum formae illius. ' ' A testimony that can be joined with those of Jerome is that of Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, which was trans- lated by Jerome. It is designated as Epist. C. in Migne's Works of Jerome. In the ninth paragraph Theophilus speaks of the Maccabees as follows : II. Maccab. Passim. ' ' Quid memorem insignes Maccabaeorum victorias ? qui, ne illicitis camibus vescerentur et communes tangerent cibos, corpora obtulere cruciatibus: totiusque orbis in ecclesiis Chris- ti laudihus prcudicantur, forti- ores poenis, ardentiores quibus comburebantur ignibus. ' ' THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 447 Could the universal Church give such honor to Apocryphal martyrs ? Sap. IX. 15. * — corpus enim, quod cor- rumpitur, aggravat animam,et terrena inhabitatio deprimit sensum multa cogitantem. ' ' Eccli. XXII. 6. "Musica in luctu importuna narratio. ' ' Epist. CVIII. 22. * ' Si non erit sublata diversi- tate sexus eadem corpora non resurgent: ' Aggrava etnim ter- rena inhabitatio sensum multa cogitantem. ' " Epist. CXVIII. I. ''Divina Scriptura loquitur: 'Musica in luctu, intempestiva narratio. ' ' ' If words can express thoughts, the man who penned these lines believed that he was quoting the inspired word of God. Eccli. XXVII. 28 ''Qui in altum mittit lapid- em, super caput ejus cadet; et plaga dolosa dolosi dividet vul- nera. ' ' ' Esther XIV. 16. * * Tu scis necessitatem meam, quod abominer signum super- bise et gloriae meae, quod est su- per caput meum in diebus os- tentationis meae, et detester illud quasi pannum menstrua- tae, ' ' etc. Eccli. IV. 28. ** — nee retineas verbum tempore salutis. ' ' m Eccli. XXVIII. 28. "Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin- guam nequam noli audire, et ori tuo facito ostia et seras. ' ' Epist.CXXV. 19. "Et alibi: 'Qui mittit in al- tum lapidem, recidet in caput ejus.' " Epist. CXXX. 4. "Oderat omatum suum et cum Esther loquebatur ad Do- minum: 'Tu nosti quod ode- rim insigne capitis mei, et tan- tas ducam immunditiae velut pannum menstruatae. ' ' ' Epist. CXLVIIL 2. " — illud mecum Scripturae reputans: 'Tempus tacendi, et tempus loquendi. ' Et iterum: 'Ne retineas verbum in tem- pore salutis.' " Ibid. 16. "Noli." inquit Scriptura, 'consentaneus esse, etc. ' Et alibi: 'Sepi aures tuas spinis, et noli audire linguam nequam.' " 448 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Eccli. XXVIII. 29-30. "Aunim tuum et argentum tuum confla, et verbis tuis faci- to stateram, et frenos ori tuo rectos : et attende, ne forte labaris in lingua — . ' ' Eccli. III. 20. "Quanto magnus es, humilia te in omnibus, et coram Deo invenies gratiam — . ' ' Eccli. X. 10. "Quoniam a Deo profecta est sapientia, ' ' etc. Sap. VI. 26. "Multitudo autem sapienti- um sanitas est orbis terrarum; et rex sapiens stabilimentum populi est. ' ' Tob. IV. 16. ' * Quod ab alio oderis fieri ti- bi, ' ' etc. Sap. XI. 27. "Parcis autem omnibus, quoniam tua sunt, Domine, qui amas animas. ' ' Dan. XIII. Passim. Ibid. 18. "Unde Scriptura dicit: 'Ar- gentum et aurum tuum confla, et verbis tuis facito stateram et frenos ori tuo rectos: et attende ne forte labaris lingua.' " Ibid. 20. "Unde Scriptura dicit : 'Quanto magnus es; humilia te in omnibus, et coram Deo invenies gratiam. ' ' ' St. Jerome Interpretatio Lib. Didymi, 10. " ^ Dominus, ' in quit, 'dabit 'sapientiam, et a facie ejus sap- ientia et intellectus procedit.' " Ibid. 21. * ' Multitudo quippe sapien- tium, salus mundi. ' ' Ibid. 39. ' ' Quod tibi non vis fieri, etc. Ibid. 46. " — ^juxta illud quod alibi scribitur: Tarces autem omni- bus, Domine amator anima- rum, quia tuae sunt, neque en- im odies quos fecisti.' Adversus Jovinian, 25. "Erat igitur Daniel adhuc puer, et notus populo vel prop- ter interpret ationem somnio- rum regis vel propter Susannse liberationem et occisionem presby t er orum . THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 449 Sap. VI. 7. ' * Exiguo enim conceditur misericordia; potentes autem potenter tormenta patientur. ' ' Sap. I. 4-5- * ' Quoniam in malevolam ani- mam non introibit sapientia, nee habitabit in corpore sub- dito peccatis. Spiritus enim sanctus disciplinse effugiet fic- tum, et auferet se a cogitationi- bus, quae sunt sine intellectu, et corripietur a superveniente iniquitate. ' ' Adversusjov. Lib. II. 25. ** — quanto majoris criminis, tan to majoris et poenae. * Po- tentes enim potenter tormenta patientur.' " Apologia Adversus Rufinum 17- ' * Loquitur et Sapientia quam sub nomine Salomonis legimus: 'In malevolam animam nun- quam intrabit sapientia, nee habitabit in corpore subdito peccatis. Spiritus enim Sanc- tus eruditionis fugiet dolum et recedet a cogitationibus stul- tis.' " Sap. I. II. "Custodite ergo vos a mur- muratione, quae nihil prodest, et a detractione parcite linguae, quoniam sermo obscurus in va- cuum non ibit: os autem, quod mentitur occidit animam. ' ' Eccli. III. 22. "Altiora te ne quaesieris, et fortiora tene scrutatus fueris, ' ' etc. Adversus Rufinum Lib. Ill 26. "Os quod mentitur occidit animam. ' ' Adversus Pelagianos Lib. I. 33- "Respondet stultae interro- gationituae liber Sapientia: *A1- tiora te ne quaesieris, et forti- ora te ne scrutatus fueris.' " 11. Maccab. V. Passim. Adversus Pelagianos Lib. II. 30- "Antiochus Epiphanius rex crudelissimus subvertit altare, ipsamque justitiam fecit concul- cari, quia concessum erat a Do- mino, causasque reddit prop- ter peccata plurima. ' ' (29) H. S. 450 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Tob. XII. 7. " Etenim sacrament um regis abscondere bonum est, ' ' etc. Eccli. I. 33. "Fili, concupiscens sapien- tiam, conserva justitiam, et Deus praebebit illam tibi. ' ' Eccli. XXVII. 29. "Et qui foveam fodit, incidet in earn: et qui statuit lapidem proximo, offendet in eo: et qui laqueum alii ponit, peribit in illo. ' ' Sap. VI. 7. (Oft quoted.) Sap. II. 12. " Circumveniamus ergo jus- tum, quoniam inutilis est nobis" etc. Dan. XIII. Passim. Sap. IV. 8. "Senectus enim venerabilis est non diutuma, neque anno- rum numero computata: cani autem sunt sensus hominis. ' ' Comment, in Eccles. Cap. VIII. * * Et hoc est quod in libro To- biae scribitur: 'Mysterium regis abscondere bonum est.' " Ibid. Cap. IX. Dato nobis itaque praecepto quod dicit: 'Desiderasti sapi- entiam, serva mandata, et Do- minus ministrabit tibi eam.' " Ibid. Cap. X. " Siquidem et alibi ipse Salo- mon ait: 'Qui statuit laqueum, capietur in illo.' " Comment, in Isaiam, Cap. I. Vers. 24. " — de quibus scriptum est: 'potentes potenter tormenta patientur.' "(Oft quoted.) Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. III. Vers. I. " — cogitastis consilium pes- simum dicentes: 'Alligemus jus- tum, quia inutilis est nobis. ' ' Ibid. Vers. 2. * * Et in Vetera tos dierum mal- orum duos presbyteros juxta Theodotionem in Danielis prin- cipio legimus. ' ' Ibid. " — de qua scriptum est: 'Ca- nities hominum, prudentiaest." Ibid. Vers. 3. ' ' Unde et illud in nostris lih- ris legimus: 'Amici tibi sint plu- rimi, consiliarius autem unus demille.' " THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 461 Eccli. VII. 6. "Noli quaerere fieri judex, nisi valeas virtute irnimpere iniquitates, ' ' etc. Eccli. XI. 30. "Ante mortem ne laudes ho- minem quemquam, quoniam in filiis suis agnoscitur vir. ' ' Eccli. XIII. I. "Qui tetigerit picem, inquin abitur ab ea, " etc. Esther. Passim. Dan. XIII. 56. '*Et amoto eo, jussit venire alium et dixit ei: Semen Cha- naan, et non Juda, species de- cepit te, " etc. Sap. IV. 8. (Oft quoted.) Eccli. I. 33. (Oft quoted.) Sap. VI. 7. (Oft quoted.) Ibid. Vers. 7. * * — aliudque man datum : ' Ne quaeras judex fieri: ne forte non possis auferre iniquitates.' " Ibid. Vers. 12. " — nee praevenit sententiam judicis sui, dicente Scriptura sancta: 'Ne beatum dicas quem- quam hominem ante mortem. ' ' Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. VI. Ver. 5. "Ex quo ostenditur noxium esse vivere cum peccatoribus: 'Qui enim tan git picem, inquin- abitur ab ea.' " Ibid. Lib. V. Cap. XIV. Vers. 2. "Potest et in Assueri tempo- ribus intelligi, quando, occiso Holopheme, hostilis ab Israel est caesus exercitus. ' ' Ibid. Lib. VII. Cap. XXIII. Vers. 12. "Unde et ad senem adulte- rum dicitur: 'Semen Chanaan et non Juda, species decepit te. " Ibid. Lib. VIII. Cap. XXIV. Vers. 21. (Oft quoted.) Ibid. Cap. XXVI. Vers. 4. "Unde et in alio loco scribi- tur: 'Desiderasti sapientiam, serva mandata, et Dominus tribuettibi eam.' " Ibid. Lib. IX. Cap. XVIII. Vers. 23. et. seqq. (Oft quoted.) 452 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Sap. IX. 6. "Nam et si quis erit consum- matus inter filios hominum, si ab illo abfuerit sapientia tua, in nihilum computabitur. ' ' Eccli. X. 9. * ' Avaro autem nihil est sce- lestius. Quid superbit terra et cinis ? ' ' Sap. III. 13, 14. "Maledicta creatura eorum, quoniam felix est sterilis, et in- coinquinata, quae nescivit tho- rum in delicto, habebit fruc- tum in respectione animarum sanctarum: et spado, qui'non operatus est per manus suas in- iquitatem, nee cogitavit ad ver- sus Deum nequissima: dabitur enim illi fidei donum electum, et sors in templo Dei acceptis- sima. ' ' vSapI. I. "Diligite justitiam, qui judi- catis terram. Sentite de Dom- ino in bonitate, ' ' etc. Eccli. XXV. 12. " — ^beatus, qui invenit ami- cum verum, et qui enarrat jus- titiam auri audienti — . ' ' Sap. I. 4. * * Quoniam in malevolam ani- mam non introibit sapientia, nee habitabit in corpore sub- dito peccatis. ' ' Ibid. Cap. XXIX. Vers. 15, 16. " — cum scriptum sit de Dei Sapientia: *Si enim quis perfec- tus fuerit m filiis hominum abs- que tua sapientia, in nihil repu- tabitur.' " Ibid. Lib. XIV. Praef. "De quo scribitur: 'Quid glo- riatur terra et cinis ?' " Ibid. Lib. XV. Cap. LVI. Vers. 4, 5. ' * Qui sint eunuchi supra dixi- mus. . . . quibus loquitur et Sa- pientia quae titulo Salomonis inscribitur: 'Beata sterilis im- maculata quae, non cognovit stratum in delicto ; habebit fruc- tum in visitatione animarum. Et eunuchus qui non est opera- tus manu iniquitatem, neque cogitavit contra Dominum mala. Dabitur enim fidei ejus electa gratia et pars in templo Domini delectabilis.' " Ibid. Cap. LVI. Vers. 10-12. " — et audiamus Scripturam monentem: 'Sapite de Domino in bonitate.' " Ibid. Lib. XVI. Pr^f. "Ac ne a profanis tantum sumere videor exemplum, nim- irum hoc illud est aliis verbis Propheta demonstrat: *Bea- tus qui in aures loquitur audi- entium. ' ' Ibid. Vers. 15. "Et quomodo in perversam an imam non ingreditur sapi- entia, neque habitabit in cor- pore subdito peccatis.' " THE CA'NON OF THE IV. CENTURY 453 Sap.L 5. "Spiritus enim Sanctus dis- ciplinae effugiet fictum, et au- feret se a cogitationibus, ' ' etc. Eccli. XVI. 18. "Ecce coelum, et coeli coelo- rum, abyssus, et uni versa terra, quae in eis sunt, in conspectu illius commovebuntur. Esther. XIV. 16. ' ' Tu scis necessitatem meam, quod abominer signum super- bise et gloriae meae, quod est su- per caput meum in diebus os- tentationis meae, et detester il- lud quasi pannum menstruatae, et non portem in diebus silen- tii mei — . ' ' Esther XIV. 11. '*Ne tradas, Domine, scep- trum tuum his, qui non sunt, etc. Eccli. XL 27, 29. "In die bonorum ne imme- mor sis malorum, et in die mal- orum ne immemor sis bonorum. MaUtia horae obHvionem facit luxuriae magnae, et in fine ho- minis denudatio operum illius." Sap. VI. 7. (Oft quoted.) Ibid. Lib. XVII. Cap. LXIII. Vers. 10. "De quo et in Sapientia re- perimus quae nomine Salomo- nis scribitur: 'Sanctus enim Spiritus disciplinae fugiet do- lum, et recede t a cogitationi- bus stultis.' " Ibid. Vers. 15. "Denique Salomon qui aedi- ficavit domum Dei, ad eum pre- cans loquitur: 'Coeli coelorum et terra non sufficiunt tibi.' Ibid. Lib. XVII. Cap. LXIV. Vers. 6. " — cui et Esther diadema suuili quod erat regiae potesta- tis insigne comparat quod ne- quaquam voluntate sed necessi- tate portabat: 'Tu scis necessi- tatem meam: quoniam detestor signum superbiae meae, quod est super caput meum in diebus os- tensionis meae: abominor illud sicut pannum menstruum: nee porto in diebus quietis.' Ibid. Lib. XVIII. Cap. LXV. Vers. 3. ' ' Unde et Esther loquitur ad Dominum: 'Ne tradas haeredi- tatem tuam his qui non sunt.' " Ibid. Vers. 17, 18. " — ^juxta illud quod scrip- tum est: 'In die bona, oblivio malorum, et alibi: Afflictio ho- rae oblivionem facit delicia- rum.' " Ibid. Vers. 20. (Oft quoted.) 454 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Ibid. Comment, in Jerem. Lib. III. Cap. XII. Vers. 13. Ibid. Lib. IV. Cap. XVIII. Vers. 18. " — dicente Scriptura: 'In perversam animam non intra- bit Sapientia.' ' ' Ibid. Cap. XXI. Vers. 14. " — ^juxta illud quod scrip- turn est: Mors viro requies cui clausit Deus viam suam. ' ' The same quotation appears in the twent^^-third Chap- ter, fifth and following verses. Sap. I. 4. (Already quoted). Eccli. XXII. II. "Modicum plora supra mor- tuum, quoniam requievit. ' * Sap. VIII. 2. Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a juventute mea, et quassivi spon- sam mihi earn assumere, et am- ator f actus sum formae illius. ' ' Dan. XIII. 56, 57. "Et amoto eo, jussit venire alium. et dixit ei: Semen Cha- naan, et non Juda, species de- cepit te, et concupiscentia sub- vertit cor tuum: sic faciebatis filiabus Israel, et illae timentes loquebantur vobis, sed filia Ju- da non sustinuit iniquitatem vestram. ' ' Eccli. XXIL 6. "Musica in luctu importuna narratio," etc. Sap. VI. 7. Dan. XIII. 32. "At iniqui illi jusserunt ut discooperiretur (erat enim co- Ibid. Lib. V. Cap. XXIX. Vers. I et seqq. "Et in alio loco (scribit Salo- mon): 'Hanc exquisivi spon- sam accipere mihi, et amator tactus sum decoris ejus. ' " Ibid. Cap. XXIX. Vers. 21 et seqq. ' ' — quorum uni loquitur Daniel : ' Inveterate dierum malorum. Et alteri: Semen Chanaan et non Juda, species decepit te, et concupiscentia subvertit cor tuum. Sic facie- batis filiabus Israel et illae me- tuentes loquebantur vobiscum, sed non filia Juda sustinuit ini- quitatem vestram. ' ' ' Comment, in Ezechiel. Praef. " — ^nec putavi illam senten- tiam negligendam: 'Musica in luctu, importuna narratio.' Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. V. Vers. 8, 9. Ibid Cap. VI. Vers. 9, 10. ' ' Quam ob causam et in Dan- iele duo presbyteri praeceperunt THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 465 operta) ut vel sic satiarentur decore ejus. " Dan. XIII. 56. (Oft quoted.) Sap. VII. 22. " — est enim in ilia spiritus intelligentiae, sanctus, unicus, multiplex, subtilis, disertus, mobilis, incoinquinatus, certus, suavis, amans bonum, acutus, quern nihil vetat, benef aciens — . In the fifth book Jerome quotes frequently the sentence of Wisdom VI. 7 : 'Totentes potenter tormenta patientur." Lib. V. Cap. XVI. Vers. 59, revelari Susannam ut nudati corporis decore fruerentur. ' ' Ibid. Lib. IV. Cap. XVI. Vers. 3. "Mirabilis Daniel qui ad pres- byterum delinquentem, et adul- terio jungentem homicidium puer ausus est dicere: 'Semen Chanaan et non Juda, species decepitte.' " Ibid. Vers. 10. ' ' Nam et in libro Sapientise qui a quibusdam Salomonis in- scribitur, spiritus sapientiae unigenitus et multiplex tenuis et mutabilis appellatur.. ' ' Eccli. XV. 9. ' ' Non est speciosa laus in ore peccatoris. ' * Eccli. III. 22. "Altiora te ne quaesieris, et fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris: sed quae praecepit tibi Deus, ilia cogita semper, et in pluribus operibus ejus ne fueris curio- sus. ' ' Eccli. XXXII. I. "Rectorem te posuerunt? noli extoUi: esto in illis quasi unus ex ipsis. ' ' Eccli. X. 9. **Avaro autem nihil est sce- lestius. Quid superbit terra etcinis?" et seqq. "Non est pulchra laudatio in ore peccatoris. ' ' Ibid. Lib. VI. Cap. XVJII Vers. 6. et seqq. "Sed et illud quod alibi dicitur : 'Majora te non requiras, et fortiora te non scruteris.* " Ibid. "De quibus scriptum est; Trincipem te constituerunt ? ne elevens: esto inter eos quasi unus ex ipsis.' " Ibid. " — cui illud convenit: 'Quid gloriatur terra et cinis ?' ' ' 456 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Esther XIV. ii. "Ne tradas, Domine, scep- trum tuum his, qui non sunt, ' ' etc. Ibid. Lib.VIII. Cap. XXVII. Vers. 19. Unde et Esther contra idola loquens: 'Ne tradas,* inquit, 'sceptrum tuum his qui non sunt.' " The same quotation occurs again in the thirty-third verse of the same chapter of the commentary. Ibid. Lib. IX. Cap. XXIX. Sap. VI. 7. ' * Exiguo enim conceditur misericordia: potentes autem potenter tormenta patientur. ' ' Eccli. I. 2. "Arenam maris, et pluviae guttas, et dies saeculi quis dinu- meravit? Altitudinem caeli, et latitudinem terrae, et proftm- dum abyssi quis dimensus est?" Eccli. XXVII. 29. "Et qui foveam fodit, inci- det in eam, " etc. Eccli. XX. 32. "Sapientia absconsa et the- saurus invisus: quae utilitas in utrisque ? ' * Eccli. VII. 6. "Noli quaerere fieri judex, nisi valeas virtute irrumpere iniquitates: ne forte extimes- cas faciem potentis, et ponas scandalum in aequitate tua. ' ' EccH. III. 29. "Cor nequam gravabitur in doloribus, et peccator adjiciet ad peccandum. " Vers. 8. et seqq, Ibid. Cap. XXX. Vers. 20 et seqq. "Et in alio loco: 'Abyssum et sapientiam quis investiga- bit?' " Ibid. Lib. X. Cap. XXXII. Vers. 17. et seqq. ' * Qui enim fodit foveam inci- det in eam. ' ' Ibid. Cap. XXXIII. Vers, i et seqq. "De magistris negligentibus Salomon loquitur: 'Sapientia abscondita, et thesaurus occul- tus, quas utilitas in utrisque?' Ibid. Lib. XI. Cap. XXXIV I. * * Unde magnopere caven- dum est et observanda ilia prae- cepta: *Ne quseras judex fieri, ne forte non possis auferre ini- quitates, et iterum: quanto major es, tanto magis te hu- milia, et in conspectu Domini invenies gratiam. ' Et rursum 'Ducem te constituerunt, ne THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 457 Eccli. XXXII. I. elevens: sedesto inter eos quasi "Rectorem te posuerunt? unusexillis.' " noli extolli: esto in illis quasi unus ex ipsis. ' ' Eccli. I. 2. (Already quoted.) Eccli. XXXII. I. (Already quoted.) Eccli. XXVIII. 29. " — et verbis tuis facito sta- teram, et frenos ori tuo rectos." Ibid. Lib. XIII. Cap. XLIII. Vers. 13. et seqq. * * Scriptum est : * Abyssum et sapientiam quis investigabit?' " Ibid. Cap. XLV. 9. Ibid. Vers. 10 et seqq. " — dicente Scriptura: Ser- monibus tuis lacies stateram et appendiculum.' " Sap. I. 4. (Already quoted.) Comment, in Daniel, Cap. II. Vers. 21. "In perversam autem ani- mam non introibit sapientia. ' ' In this same chapter he inveighs against the deutero- canonical fragments of Daniel. In the twenty-third verse he says : "And observe that Daniel is of the sons of Juda, not a priest as the fable of Bel declares." Coming to the Canticle of the youths in the fiery furnace, he prefaces his commentary on it as follows: "Hitherto the Hebrews read: what follows even to the end of the Canticle of the three youths is not con- tained in Hebrew; concerning which, lest we may seem to have passed it by, a few words are to be said." He then proceeds to comment it in the same manner as the other portions of the book. Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 14. * ' Legamus Maccabaeorum libros et Josephi historiam. ' ' Ibid. Cap. XL Vers. 34, 35. "Lege Maccabasorum libros. ' Ibid. Cap. XIL Vers, i et seqq. "Ponit quoque historiam de Maccabaeis in qua dicitur mul- I. et II. Maccab. Passim. 458 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY tos Judaeorum sub Mathathia et Juda Maccabaeo ad eremum confugisse, et latuisse in spelun- cis et in cavemis petrarum, et post victoriam processisse. ' ' Comment, in Osee Lib. II. Cap. VII. 8, lo. (Oft quoted.) Ibid. Cap. X. Vers. 14. "Beata sterilis immaculata quae non cognovit cubile in pec- cato. ' ' Sap. IV. 8. (Oft quoted.) Sap. III. 13. "Maledicta creatura eorum, quoniam felix est sterilis, et in- coinquinata, quae nescivit tho- rum in delicto, ' ' etc. Sap. III. 16. **Filii autem adulterorum in inconsummatione erunt, et ab iniquo thoro semen extermina- bitur. ' ' He quotes again Sap. VI. 7. in Lib. III. Cap. XI. Vers. 8 and 9. Ibid. "Ex iniquo enim concubitu semen peribit. ' ' Dan. XIII. 56. "Et, amoto eo, jussit venire alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha- naan et non Juda, species de- cepit te, et concupiscentia sub- vertit cor tuum — . ' ' Eccli. XVI. 19. " — montes simul, et colles, et fundamenta terrae ; cum con- spexerit ilia Deus, tremore con- cutientur. ' ' Ibid. Cap. XII. Vers. 7, 8. ' ' Semen Chanaan et non Ju- da, species decepit te. ' ' Comment, in Amos, Lib. II. Cap. IV. Vers. 12, 13. "Iste est qui firmat tonit- ruum, sive montes confirmat, ad cujus vocem ccBlorum card- ines et terroB fundamenta qua- tiuntur. ' * In Lib. III. Cap. VI. Vers. 7 et seqq., he quotes again Sap. VI. 7. Ibid. Vers. 12 he repeats Esther XIV. II. Eccli. XV. 9. Ibid. Cap. V. Vers. 25. ' ' Non est speciosa laus in ore * ' — quia non est pulchra lau- peccatoris. ' ' datio in ore peccatoris. ' ' THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 459 Tob. XIV. 5-6 (juxta LXX.) "Magnopere autem senuit: et vocavit filium suum et filios ejus, et dixit ei: fili, accipe filios tuos: ecce senui, et ad exeun- dum e vita sum: abi in Mediam, fili, quoniam credidi quaecum- que locutus est Jonas Propheta de Ninive quia subvertetur. ' ' In Jonam, Prologus. "Liber quoque Tobiae, licet non habeatur in Canone, ta- men quia usurpatur ab Ecclesi- asticis viris, tale quid memorat, dicente Tobia ad filium suum: ' Fili, ecce senui, et in eo sum ut revertar de vita mea: toUe filios meos, et vade in Mediam; fili, scio enim quae locutus est Jonas propheta de Ninive, quoniam subvertetur.' " When Jerome speaks of the Canon, he evidently means the collection of the Jews. He clearly testifies here that tradition favored Tobias, although it was not received by the Jews, and he is disposed to give a certain reverence to the book on account of its use by the Fathers. Judith XVI. 3. ' ' Dominus conterens bella, Dominus nomen est illi. ' ' Eccli. XX. 31. "Xenia et dona excaecant oculos judicum, et quasi mutus in ore avertit correptiones eo- rum." Eccli. VI. 7. "Si possides amicum, in ten- tatione posside eum, ' ' etc. Eccli. IV. 25. "Est enim confusio addu- cens peccatum, et est confusio adducens gloriam et gratiam. ' ' Comment, in Michaeam,Lib. I. Cap. II. Vers. 6, 8. "Recedente autem pace et auxilio Dei, quia restiterant Do- mino, dequodicitur: 'Dominus conterens bella, Dominus no- men ei.' " Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 9 et seqq. ' ' Munera excaecant oculos etiam Sapientium, et quasi fre- num in ore avertunt increpatio- nem. ' ' Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. VII. Vers. 5. 7- "Unde dicitur: *Si habes amicum, in tentatione posside eum.' " Ibid. Vers. 14 et seqq . " — et erunt in confusion e quae ducit ad vitam. ' ' 4^ THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY In Nahum, Cap. III. Vers, oft-quoted sentence from Dan. Dan. XIV. 35. * * Et apprehendit eum Angel- us Domini in vertice ejus, et portavit eum capillo capitis sui, posuitque eum in Baby lone su- pra lacum in impetu spiritus sui." Eccli. I. 2. (Already quoted.) Eccli. XX. 32. "Sapientia absconsa et the- saurus invisus: quas utilitas in utrisque ? ' ' Dan. XIII. 56. "Et, amoto eo, jussit venire alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha- naan, et non Juda, ' ' etc. Sap. VI. 7. (Oft quoted.) Eccli. XXVII. 28. "Qui in altum mittit lapi- dem, super caput ejus cadet: et plaga dolosa dolosi dividet vul- nera. ' ' Judith. Passim. 8 seqq., he quotes again the XIII. 56. Prologus in Habacuc. " — Daniel docere te potent, ad quern in lacum leonum Ha- bacuc cum prandio mittitur. ' ' Comment, in Habacuc, Lib. I. Cap. III. Vers. 11, seqq. * * Et pulchre opinationem phantasiae altitudinem vocat juxta Jesum filium Sirach, qui ait: 'Abyssum et sapientiam quisinvestigabit?' " Comment, in Sophoniam, Cap. II. Vers. 3, 4. " — hoc est, alios doceant: * Sapientia enim abscondita et thesaurus non comparens, quae utilitas in ambobus ? ' ' Ibid. Vers. 8 et seqq. "Et ad presbyteros cupien- tes sub figura Susannae Eccle- siae corrumpere castitatem di- cat Daniel: 'Hoc est judicium Dei, Semen Chanaan et non Juda.' " Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 8, 9. Ibid. Vers. 19, 20. " — et de Jesu filio Sirach tes- timonium proferamus: 'Qui mittit lapidem in excelsum, su- per caput suum mittit.' " Comment, in Haggai, Cap. I. Vers. 5, 6. "Similiter qui penitus non bibit, siti peribit, sicut et in Ju- THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 461 Eccli. IV. lo. "In judicando esto pupillis misericors ut pater, et pro viro matri illorum — . ' * Sap. I. 2. " — quoniam invenitur ab his qui non tentant ilium: apparet autem eis, qui fidem habent in ilium—. ' ' Sap. IX. 15. "Corpus enim, quod corrum- pitur aggravat animam, et ter- rena inhabitatio deprimit sen- sum multa cogitantem. ' ' Maccab. Passim. Sap. I. 14. "Creavit enim, ut essent om- nia: et sanabiles fecit nationes orbis terrarum : et non est in il- lis medicamentum exterminii, nee inferorum regnum in terra.'' Sap. IX. 16-18. "Quae autem in caelis sunt quis investigabit ? Sensum au- dith (si quis tamen vult librum recipere mulieris) et parvuli siti perierunt. ' ' Comment, in Zachariam,Lib. II. Cap. VII. Vers. 8 et seqq. "Viduam quoque et pupil- lum de quibus nobis praecep- tum est: * Esto pupillis pater, et pro viro matri eorum, judicans pupillum et justificans vidu- am.' " Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 21,22. " Appropinquat enim Domi- nus his qui non tentant eum, et ostendit faciem suam his qui non sunt increduli. ' ' Ibid. Cap. IX. Vers. 15, 16. '' — quia aggravat terrena hab- it atio sensum multa curan- tem. ' ' Ibid. Cap. X.Vers.i.et seqq. "Ita felicitas Maccabaeorum tempore promissa est, quando sancti lapides elevati sunt su- per terram, ' ' etc. Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. XII. Vers 9. * ' Unde in Sapientia quae Sa- lomonis inscribitur (si cui ta- men placet librum recipere) scriptum reperimus: 'Creavit ut essent omnia, et salutares generationes mundi, et non erit eis venenum mortiferum.' " Ibid. "Et in supradicto volumine continetur: 'Quae in ccelo sunt 462 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY tern tuum quis sciet, nisi tu de- deris sapientiam, et miseris spiritum sanctum tuum de al- tissimis: et sic correctae sint semitae eorum, qui sunt in terris, et quae tibi placent didicerint homines ? ' ' Sap. IV. 8. *'Senectus enim venerabilis est non diutuma, neque anno- rum numero computata: cani autem sunt sensus hominis. ' ' Sap. VI. 7. (Already quoted.) Eccli. XXV. 12. "Beatus, qui invenit ami- cum verum, et qui enarrat jus- titiam auri audienti. ' ' Sap. VI. 7. (Oft quoted.) Sap. I. 6. "Benignus est enim spiritus sapientiae, et non liberabit maledicum a labiis suis, quon- iam renum illius testis est Deus, et cordis illius scrutator est verus, et linguae ejus audi- tor." quis in vestigabit ? nisi quod tu dedisti sapientiam, et Spiritum Sanctum misisti de excelsis, et sic correctae sunt semitae eo- rum qui versantur in terra; et quae tibi placent eruditi sunt homines.' " Ibid. Cap. XIV. Vers. 9. " — de quo scriptum est: 'Ca- ni hominis sapientia ejus.' " Comment, in Malach. Cap. II. Vers. 1,2. Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 7. et seqq. *' — et consequetur illud de quo scriptum est: 'Beatus qui in aures loquitur audientium. ' " Comment, in Evang. Math. Lib. I. Cap. V .Vers. 13. (Oft quoted.) Ibid. Cap. VI. Vers. 7. "Deus enim non verborum sed cordis auditor est. ' ' Judith V. Tob. IV. 16. "Quod ab alio oderis fieri tibi, vide, ne tu aliquando alteri facias. ' ' Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 18. Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. XXI. Vers. 28. " — hoc est: 'Quod tibi non vis fieri, alteri ne feceris.' " THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 463 Sap. XII. I. "O quam bonus et suavis est, Domine, spiritus tuus in omni- bus. ' ' II. Maccab. VI. et^VII. Pas- sim. Sap. XI. 25. "Diligis enim omnia quae sunt, et nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti: nee enim odiens aliquid constituisti, aut fecisti. ' ' Sap. IX. 15. " — corpus enim, quod cor- rumpitur, aggravat animam, et terrena inhabitatio deprimit sensum multa cogitantem. ' ' Eccli. XXVII. 12. "Homo sanctus in sapientia manet sicut sol; nam stultus sicut luna mutatur. ' ' Sap. VI. 7. (Already quoted.) Sap. I. II. "Custodite ergo vos a mur- muratione, quae nihil prodest, et a detractione parcite linguae, quoniam sermo obscurus in vac- uum non ibit: os autem, quod mentitur, occidit animam. ' ' Comment, in Epist. ad. Ga- latas Lib. I. Cap. III. 2. " — de quo (Spiritu Sancto) alibi scribitur: 'Incorruptus Spiritus est in omnibus.' * ' Ibid. Lib. II Cap. III. 14. ' "Eleazarus quoque nonage- narius sub Antiocho rege Syriae, et cum septem filiis gloriosa mater, utrum maledictos eos aestimaturi fuerint, an omni laude dignissimos ? ' ' Comment, in Epist. ad Ephe- sios Lib. I. Cap. I. 6. "Dicitur quippe ad Deum: 'Diligis omnia, et nihil abjicis eorum quae fecisti. Neque enim odio quid habens condi- disti.' " Ibid. Lib. 11. Cap. IV. 2. " Corruptible enim corpus aggravat animam, et terrenum hoc tabemaculum sensum op- primit multa curantem.' " Ibid. 4. " — neque in morem stulti quasi luna mutetur. ' ' Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. V. 30. Breviarium in Psalmos, Ps. IV. "Os enim quod mentitur oc- cidit animam. ' ' 464 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Sap. VII. 27. "Et cum sit una, omnia po- test, et in se permanens omnia innovat, et per nationes in ani- mas sanctas se transfert; ami- cos Dei et prophetas consti- tuit. ' ' Eccli. I. 16. "Initium, sapientiae timor Domini, ' ' etc. Maccab. Passim. Ibid. Ps. IX. " Et alibi (ipse Deus ait) : An- ima justi sedes sapientiae. ' ' Eccli. XXVII. 12. ' ' Homo sanctus in sapientia manet sicut sol; nam stultus sicut luna mutatur. ' ' Eccli. XIV. 18. "Omnis caro sicut foenum veterascet, et sicut folium fruc- tificans in arbore viridi. ' ' Eccli. X. 9. "Avaro autem nihil est sce- lestius. Quid superbit terra et cinis?" Eccli. III. 17. " — et in justitia aedificatur tibi, et in die tribulationis com- memorabitur tui, et sicut in sereno glacies solventur peccata tua. ' ' Sap. I. II. (Already quoted.) Ibid. Ps. XXXIII. "Ut illud: 'Initium sapien- tiae, timor Domini.' " Ibid. ' * Filii Maccabaeorum vel modo unusquisque sanctus clamaverunt, et illos et modo unumquemque ex omnibus tribulationibus liberat. ' ' Ibid. Ps. LXVII. "Insipiens enim sicut luna mutatur. ' ' Ibid. Ps. LXXXIII. ' * Ilia autem caro de qua dici- tur: Omnis caro foenum, non desiderat Dominum. ' ' Ibid. Ps. CXII. "Quia de terra et putredine peccatorum nostrorum erexit nos, ut illud: 'Quid superbis, pulvis et terra?' — fiat nobis illud quod scrip tum est: 'Si- cut glacies in sereno solvuntur peccata tua. ' ' Ibid. Ps. CXIX. ** — nostras interficimus ani- mas quod mentimur: *0s THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 465 enim quod mentitur occidit animam. ' ' * Liber De Expositione Psalm- Sap. VIII. 2. onim, Ps. CXXVII. "Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a "Dicit Salomon quia volue- juventute mea,etquaesivispon- rit sapientiam ducere scilicet sam mihi eam assumere, et am- sponsam. ' ' ator f actus sum formae illius. ' * These are the quotations which a cursory examination of Jerome's works reveals. We see in them that he quoted with great frequency the deuterocanonical books as divine Scripture. Three causes are usually assigned for the doubts that pre- vailed among some Fathers concerning the deuterocanonical books. I. — Disputations between Jew and Christian were fre- quent in those days. The chief intellectual adversaries of the Church during the fourth and fifth centuries, were Jews, and the works of the Fathers of this period are filled with refutations of their attacks. As the Jews rejected the deu- terocanonical books, the Fathers were obliged to draw Scrip- tural materials from the protocanonical writings. Hence, gradually these were preferred in authority to the deutero- canonical books ; and, as they furnished all that was needed from a source accepted by both sides, the deuterocanonical works were often given a secondary place, and sometimes left out altogether. 2. — A second cause is found in Origen's critical edition of the Hexapla. In this work, which we shall describe more fully in the progress of this work, Origen compared the Sep- tuagint text with the Hebrew and other Greek texts, then existing, marking the passages which were in the Septua- gint, and not found in the Hebrew by an 6^€\6<;, Copies made from this text, reproducing the diacritic points, soon filled the East. Now the Alexandrian grammarians were wont to use the offeXo^;^ to denote a spurious passage. Orig- en's intention was evidently not to brand these books and fragments as spurious, but the error arose in the East especi- ally to distrust what was denoted by this sign. (30) H.S. 466 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY 3.— Finally, the fourth and fifth centuries were an age fertile in heresies, apocryphal productions, absurd fables, and fictitious revelations, and in their caution against what was spurious, the Fathers sometimes erred in slowness to receive those books which have in their favor all the evidence that is necessary, and that we have a right to expect. It was by them judged safer to refuse the quality of canonicity to an inspired book, than, by excessive credulity, to approve an Apocryphal work. These causes operated principally in the East, and thence the most of the opposition came. The status of the deuterocanonical books might be compared to the growi;h of a healthy tree. It lost now and then a branch, in whose stead it acquired new ones, and grew to perfection because there was in it a Divine vigor, which came not from the branches, nor was impaired by their occasional dropping off. There never was any conflict between the Fathers on this point, for in practice, they were a unit. The lists they drew up were mere disciplinary opinions, which never entered to change their practical use of the Scripture. We find at first the most doubt in the East. This line of thought was brought into the West by Jerome ; and while the doubt gradually passed away in the East, we find the in- fluence of Jerome, in the subsequent centuries, engendering some doubts in the minds of Fathers and theologians of the Westen Catholic world. We shall pass in brief review the centuries from the fifth down to the Council of Trent. Chapter IX. The Canon of the Old Testament from the End of THE Fifth Century to the End of the Twelfth Century. The Hexaplar version of Syriac Scriptures made by Paul of Telia, in 616, contains all the deuterocanonical works. THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY 467 DiONYSius, sumamed the Little, approved the catalogue of Scriptures promulgated by the Council of Carthage in 419, which embraced all the deuterocanonical works.* Cassiodorus, writing for his monks a sort of introduc- tion to the Holy Scriptures, sets forth three catalogues of Holy Books.t The first list is that of Prologus Galeatus, the helmeted prologue of Jerome. The second list is the Canon of St. Augustine from his Doctrina Christiana, which we have already reproduced in full. The third list of Cassiodorus is identical with the catalogue of the Vulgate, except a slight variation in the order of the books. Cassiodorus was more reverential than critical. He plainly received all the deuterocanonical books, and failed to see any repudiation of them in the celebrated Prologue of Jerome. He certainly can be claimed as a witness of a tra- dition in the sixth century, which accorded to the deutero- canonical books the quality of divinity. It is evident that, in the East, in the sixth and seventh centuries, the deuterocanonical books were held to be can- onical, since the schismatic churches of the Chaldean Nestor- *Dionysius, surnatned the Little, on account of his low stature, was a native of Scythia. He came to Rome, and was abbot of a monastery in that city. He was the inventor of the mode of reckoning the years of the Christian era since the birth of Christ, which method is erroneous by sev- eral years. He is the author of a "Codex Canonum" and other minor works. His death is placed about the year 540, in the reign of Justinian, *Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator belonged to a family most probably of Syrian origin, who were established at Scylaceum in Bruttium in the fifth century. His father was administrator of Sicily in 489, when Theodoric took Italy, and he filled high positions under Theo- doric. Cassiodorus was bom about 490 or perhaps a little later. He filled important public offices under the Gothic sovereigns, Theodoric Athalaric, Theodahat and Witiges. About the year 537, Cassiodorus renounced his public charges and retired to the Monasterium Vivariense, founded by himself at Scylaceum, where he devoted his life to study and prayer. His death is placed about the year 583 . He was a prolific writer. He devoted much time to Scriptural studies, and gave thought that the monks of Vivarium should have good texts of Scripture. The monastery possessed an excellent library and many choice manuscripts. Many excellent manuscript texts of the Vulgate of Jerome were copied by the monks of Cassiodorus, and spread through the world. 468 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY ians, the Jacobite Monophysites, Syrians, Ethiopians, Armenians and Copts, all have the deuterocanonical Scrip- tures in equal place with the other divine books.* It is needless to attend to the absurd catalogue of Junil- ius Africanus, an obscure bishop of Africa in the sixth cen- tury. This list places Chronicles, Job, and Ezra with Tobias, Judith, Esther, and Maccabees among the non-canonical books, t His opinion represents the tradition of no church or sect, nor is it found in any writer of note, and is rejected by every- body. An unfavorable testimony is found in the work "De Sec- tis" of Leontius of Byzantium, a priest of Constantinople in the sixth century. He drew up a canon of only the pro- tocanonical books excepting Esther, and declared that, * 'these are the books which are held canonical in the Church." Leontius lived many years in the monastery of St. Saba, near Jerusalem, and the ideas of the Church of Jerusalem are reflected in his works. It can be said of him, as of Cyril, that exclusion from canonicity was not with him exclusion from divinity. With them the divine books of the Old Testament were arranged in two classes canonical and non- canonical. They used the latter as divine Scripture without according them the pre-eminence of canonicity. Leontius used in several places quotations from deuterocanonical works as divine Scripture. The opponents of our thesis cite at this juncture St. Gregory the Great.! *Assemanni. Bibliotheca Orientalis, III. tjtinil. Afric. De part. div. Legis I. 3-7. Migne 68, 16 et seqq. JSt. Gregory, suniamed the Great, was bom of an illustrious Roman family, and was praetor of Rome in 573. Despising the inanity of worldly grandeur, he retired into a monastery which he had built under the patron- age of St. Andrew. Pope Pelagius II, drew him from his retreat and made him one of the seven deacons of Rome. He then sent him as Nuncio to Constantinople, to implore the succour of Tiberius II. against the Lom- bards. At his return, he was made secretary to Pelagius. After Pelagius' death, by tmanimous consent of people and clergy, he was created Pope. He strove to avoid the papal dignity, but in vain ; he was created Pope in THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY . 469 In the Moral Treatises XIX. 21, citing a passage from Maccabees, he prefaces the citation by saying: ''We shall not act rashly, if we accept a testimony of books, which, although not canonical, have been published for the edifica- tion of the Church." In the phraseology of St. Gregory canonical signified something over and above divine. It signified those books concerning which the whole world, with one accord, united in proclaiming the word of God. The other books were divine, were used as sources of divine teaching by the Church, but there was lacking the authoritative decree of the Church making them equal to the former in rank. The Jews of old made such distinction regarding the Law and the Hagio- grapha. All came from God, but the Law was pre-eminent. The influence of St. Jerome was strong upon St. Gregory. The tradition of the Church drew him with it to use freely, as divine Scripture, the deuterocanonical books; while the doubts of Jerome moved him to hesitate in his critical opinion to accord to these books a prerogative of which Jerome doubted. Had the Church not settled the issue in the Council of Trent, there would, doubtless, be many Catholics yet who would refuse to make equal the books of the first and second Canons. Christ established a Church to step in and regulate Catholic thought at opportune times, and her aid was needed in settling, once for all, the discus- sion of the Canon of Scripture. This isolated doubt from St. Gregory reflects merely a critical opinion, biased by Greg- ory's esteem for St. Jerome. To show what was St. Gregory's opinion as a witness of tradition, we need only examine the following references : 590. His reign was characterized by great ability and holiness. He, by divine aid, checked a pestilence that ravaged Rome, extinguished the schism of the Three Chapters, evangelized England through means of St. Austin, reformed the divine office, reformed the clergy, checked the am- bition of the Patriarchs of Constantinople, and upheld the rights of the Holy See. Gregory died in 604. His principal writings are his Moral Treatises, his Dialogues, and exegetical Treatises on Holy Scripture. He had more piety than learning, and his exegesis is excessively mystic. 470 . THE CANON Eccli. II. 14. Eccli. II. 16. Sap. I. 7. Eccli. XXIV. 8. Eccli. XXXII. 26. Eccli. XI. 27. Sap. XII. 15. Eccli. IV. 24. Eccli. XXI. I. Eccli. II. I. Eccli. I. ss. Sap. IX. 15. Sap. IX. 16. Sap. IV. II. Eccli. V. 4. Sap. IX. 15. Sap. VII. 26. Sap. XII. 18. Sap. II. 24. Sap. V. 21. Sap. XVI. 20. Tobias IV. 16. Eccli. XII. 8. Eccli. II. 16. Sap. XI. 24. OF THE VI. CENTURY Com. on Job. Bk. I. 36 Ibid. 55. Ibid. Bk. 11. 20. Ibid. Ibid. Bk. III. 13. Ibid. 16. Ibid. 26. Comment, on Job, Bk. IV 32. Ibid. 39, Ibid. 42, Ibid. 61 Ibid. 68. Ibid. Bk. V. 12. Ibid. 34. Ibid. 35, Ibid. 58. Ibid. 64, Ibid. 78, Ibid. 85 Ibid. Bk. VI. 14. Ibid. 22. Ibid. 54. Ibid. Bk. VII. 29. Ibid. 45. Ibid. Bk. VIII. 31, THE CANON Sap. IX. 15. Eccli. XXXIV. 7. Sap. IX. 15. Eccli. XL. I. Sap. V. 6. Eccli. I. 13. Sap. II. 12. Eccli. VII. 40. Sap. VI. 7 et 9. Tob. IV 16. Eccli. VII. 15. Eccli. I. 13. Eccli. XXXIV. 2. Sap. III. 2 Sap. XII. 18. Sap. XVII. 10. Eccli. XI. 27. Eccli. X. 15. Eccli. XXII. 2. Sap. I. 4. Eccli. III. 22. Sap. IX. 15. Eccli. XXII. 6. Sap. I. II. Sap. V. 8, 9. Eccli. II. 5. OF THE VI. CENTURY Ibid. 12. Ibid. 42. Ibid. 50. Ibid. 55. Ibid. 76. Ibid. 88. Ibid. Bk. IX. 89. Ibid. 92. Ibid. 98. Ibid. Bk. X. 8. Ibid. 28. Ibid. 35. Ibid. Bk. XI. 68. Ibid. Bk. XII. 6 Ibid. 14. Ibid. 46. Ibid. Bk. XIII. 48. Ibid. Bk. XIV. 19. Ibid. Bk. XV. 5. Ibid. 9. Ibid. Bk. XVI. 8. Ibid. Bk. XVII. 39. Ibid. Bk. XVIII. 2. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 29. Ibid. 40. 471 472 THE CANON OF Eccli. XXXVIII. 25. Sap. IX. 15. Eccli. XV. 3 Sap. IV. 8, 9. I. Maccab. VI. 46. Eccli. XXX. 24. Eccli. XIV. 5. Sap. XII. 18. Eccli. V. 4- Sap. IX. 15. Eccli. II. II, 12. Eccli. IV. 18, 19. Eccli. I. 13. Eccli. XVIII. 15, 17. Eccli. XX. 32. Sap. VII. 15. Eccli. X. 15. Sap. III. 5. Eccli. II. I. Sap. III. 7. Eccli. XXXII. I. Sap. VI. 5. Eccli. V. 4. Sap. XIIL 5. Sap. VI. 17. THE VI. CENTURY Ibid. 68. Ibid. 71. Ibid. Bk. XIX. 9. Ibid. 26. Ibid. 34. Ibid. 38. Ibid. Ibid. 46. Ibid. Ibid. Bk. XX. 8. Ibid. 51. Ibid. Ibid. 56. Ibid. Bk. XXI. 29. Ibid. Bk. XXII. 7. Ibid. Bk. XXIII. 31, Ibid. 44. Ibid. 52. Ibid. Bk. XXIV. 27. Ibid. 49. Ibid. 52. Ibid. 54. Ibid. Bk. XXV.6. Ibid. Bk. XXVI. 17. Ibid. THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY 473 Eccli. III. 22. Sap. IX. 15. Sap. XVII. 10. Eccli. III. 17. Sap. II. 24. Sap. VII. 24. Eccli. V. 7. Sap. IX. 15. Eccli. XV. 9. Eccli. X. 15. Sap. XII. 18. Eccli. X. 15. Eccli. XXIX. S7, Sap. III. 7. Eccli. V. 6, 7. Eccli. XXI. 10. Sap. V. 6. Eccli. XXVII. 12. Eccli. XXXII. I. Eccli. X. 9. Sap. II. 8, 9. It is needless to go through the entire works of St. Greg- ory. These passages, taken from the books of his Exposi- tion of Job, are a good specimen of his use of deuterocanoni- cal Scripture. And no man can say that Gregory considered these books as merely pious treatises. He introduces his frequent quotations from them by the solemn formulas: **It is written," etc., and oft declares them the Scripture of Ibid. 27. Ibid. Bk. XXVII. 45. Ibid. 48. Ibid. 53. Ibid. Bk. XXIX. 15. Ibid. 24. Ibid. 54. Ibid. Bk. XXX. 15. Ibid. 74 Ibid. Bk. XXXI. 87 Ibid. Bk. XXXII. 9. Ibid. II. Ibid. 19. Ibid. Bk. XXXIII. 7. Ibid. 23. Ibid. 55- Ibid. Bk. XXXIV. 25, Ibid. Ibid. 53. Ibid. Ibid. 55 474 THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY God. Gregory received the Scriptures, where he learned his faith, from the Catholic Church ; hence, in drawing from his fund of Scriptural knowledge, he made no distinction in practice between the books of the first and second Canon. The faQt that Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus are most used by him, results from the richness of their moral teaching; they were adapted to his scope. Quotations from all the deu- terocanonical books except Judith and Baruch are found in his works; but the proving force of these quotations covers all these books, because it gives evidence that he received the edition of Scripture, in which they all stood on equal footing. The question of canonicity was to him more of a question of discipline. He was willing to receive all the books since the Church used them ; but he did not essay to decide the exact degree of inspiration of the several books. In the seventh century, three celebrated Fathers flour- ished in Spain. First among these is St. Isidore of Seville.* We find the following valuable testimony in the sixth book of the Etymologies of St. Isidore, 3-9 : **The Hebrews, on the authority of Ezra, receive twenty-two books of the Old Testament, according to the number of their letters ; and they divide them into three orders. The Law, The Prophets, and The Hagiographa. The first order. The Law, is received in five books, of which the first is Beresith, that is, Genesis ; the second is Veelle Semoth, that is. Exodus; the third is Vaicra, that is Leviticus; the fourth is Vajedabber, that is Numbers ; the fifth is Elle hadebarim, that is Deuteronomy. The second order is that of The Prophets, in which is con- tained eight books, of which the first is Josue ben Nun, which is called in Latin, Jesus Nave; the second is Sophtim, *The biography of Isidore of Seville is involved in obscurity. His father was Severianus, of the province of Cathagena, in Spain. By some he is placed as governor of that province, but this is doubted by others. The precise year of Isidore's birth is uncertain, but we know that he was Archbishop of Seville for nearly forty years, and that he died in 636. He was undoubtedly the greatest man of his time in Spain. He was versed in all the learning of his age, and was well acquainted with the classic and sacred languages, Greek, Latin and Hebrew. The Council of Toledo in 653 called him the Doctor of his age and the Ornament of the Church. His works are many, and embody all the science of his age. THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY 475 that is Judges ; the third is Samuel, that is the first of Kings ; the fourth is Melachim, that is the second of Kings ; the fifth is Isaiah; the sixth, Jeremiah; the seventh, Ezechiel; the eighth, Thereazar, which is called the twelve prophets, who on account of their brevity are joined to one another, and considered as one book. The third order is of the Hagio- graphers, that is the writers of holy things, in which order are nine books, of which, the first is Job; the second, the Psalter ; the third, Misle, that is the Proverbs of Solomon ; the fourth is Coheleth, that is Ecclesiastes ; the fifth is Sir Hassi- rim, that is the Canticle of Canticles ; the sixth is Daniel ; the seventh, Dibre hajamim, that is the Words of the Days, that is Paralipomenon ; the eighth is Ezra; the ninth is Esther. These taken together, five, eight, and nine, make twenty- two books, as were computed above. ''Some enumerate Ruth, and Cinoth which is called in Latin, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, with the Hagio- grapha, and make twenty-four books, according to the twenty-four Ancients, who assist before the Lord. ' ' There is a fourth order with us of those books of the Old Testament, which are not in the Hebrew Canon. The first of these is Wisdom ; the second, Ecclesiasticus ; the third, Tobias ; the fourth, Judith ; the fifth and sixth, the Maccabees. Although the Jews separate these and place them among the Apocrypha, the Church of Christ honors them and promulgates them as divine books.'' In this list Baruch is not explicitly men- tioned, being considered a part of Jeremiah. In his treatise De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, Bk. I. XL 4, 5, 7, St. Isidore writes thus : *'In the first place, the books of the Law, that is of Moses, are five. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Sixteen historical books fol- low thcvse, viz., Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, two of Ezra, Tobias, Esther, Judith, and the two books of Maccabees. Then ihere are six- teen prophetical books, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, and the twelve minor Prophets. After these come eight books in verse, which are written in various kinds of metre in Hebrew. They are Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesi- astes, the Canticle of Canticles, the Book of Wisdom, Ecclesi- 476 THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY asticus, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah, and thus there are made up forty-five books of the Old Testament These are the seventy-two canonical books, and on this account Moses elected the elders, who should prophesy. For this cause, the Lord Jesus sent seventy-two disciples to preach." The number here agrees with the number of the Council of Trent, but there is a slight variation, in that St. Isidore considers Baruch a part of Jeremiah, and detaches Lamenta- tions as a separate book. Excepting this slight variation, the testimony of Isidore well represents the belief of the Church of his age. The first testimony quoted also explains the writings of preceding Fathers, in constituting a two- fold order of books of the Old Testament : those that were in the Canon of the Hebreivs, and those that were not, but which by the Church were honored and promulgated as divine books. The first w^ere often called by the Fathers the can- onical books of the Old Testament, and in excluding the deuterocanonical works from this order, they left them in the second order of Isidore. In his prologue to the books of the Old Testament, I. 7, 8, we find the following: "Of these (the historical books), the Hebrews do not receive Tobias, Judith, and Maccabees, but the Church ranks them among the Canonical Scriptures. Then follow also those two great books — ^books of holy teaching, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus ; which, although they are said to be w^ritten by Jesus the son of Sirach, neverthe- less, on account of the similarity of diction, are called of Solomon. And these are acknowledged to have, in the Church, equal authority w4th the other Canonical Scrip- tures." St. Isidore does not represent tradition, when he states that Wisdom is said to be the work of Sirach. He was there explaining a fact, and had only the warrant of his ow^n criti- cal knowledge on which to rely; but the fact itself he re- ceived from the Church, and this was that the Church of his day made equal those books that she afterwards proclaimed equal by solemn decree in the Council of Trent. The second witness for the Church of Spain, in St. iLDfi- FONSUS, the disciple of St. Isidore, afterward Archbishop of THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 477 Toledo, who died in 669. In his Treatise on Baptism, Chap- ter LXXIX. he received the Canon of St. Augustine, in St. Augustine's identical words, with perhaps the addition of one word to strengthen the authority of the deuterocanonical books. St. Eugene, bishop of Toledo, who died in 657, sets forth the Canon of St. Isidore in Latin verse.* There is sometimes invoked against us the authority of St. John DAmASCENE, a priest of Damascus, who flourished about 730 A. D. He has drawn up a catalogue of the books of the Old and New Testaments : concerning the former he says : *' It is to be observed that there are twenty-two books of the Old Testament, according to the letters of the Hebrew language." The only deuterocanonical works which he mentions are Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, of which he declares that *^they are excellent and useful, but are not numbered, nor were they placed in the Ark." The Damascene is evidently simply stating the status of the deuterocanonical books with the Jews, and in this he is influenced by the extravagant ideas of St. Ephrem. His own judgment of the books is set forth in his declaration that they are excellent and useful, and one could legitimately make the inference from his testimony: Therefore, the Church receives them, because they are excellent and use- ful, even though not in the Canon of the Jews. His practice warrants the inference, for he quotes both Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus as divine Scripture. At the beginning of the ninth century Nicephorus, Patri- arch of Constantinople, drew up (in his Stichometry) a cata- logue of books, which contains twenty-two books. In this *"Regula quos fidei commendat noscere libros, Hos nostra praisens bibliotheca tenet : Quinque priora gerit veneranda volumina Legis ; Hinc losues, optimaque hinc Ruth Moabitica gesta Bisbis Regum nectuntur in ordine libri Atque bis octoni concurrunt inde prophetas ; En lob, Psalterium, Solomon et Verba dierum, Esdrae consequitur Esther, Sapientia, lesus, Tobi et ludith ; concludit haec Machabaeorum ; Hie Testamenti Veteris finisque modusque." 478 THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES list, Baruch finds place, while Esther is passed over in silence. After the list of the canonical books of the Old and the New Testaments, there is placed, a list of avrtXeyo/xeva which comprises The Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, The Psalms of Solomon, Esther, Judith, Susanna and Tobias. This list has a close afhnity to the Synopsis of the Pseudo- Athanasius, and is of no worth in establishing the tradition of the Church of Constantinople, for at that very time, in virtue of the decree of the Council in Trullo, the Canon of the Carthaginian Council was adopted by the Greek Church. Nicephorus, like many of his time, held in great veneration the ancient documents, which had been preserved. He most probably reproduced here some old writing without essaying to judge its critical value. Photius has placed in his Syntagma Canonum, the eighty-fifth Canon of the Apostles, the sixtieth Canon of Laodicea, and the twenty-fourth Canon of Carthage.* ♦Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, was descended from one of the most illustrious and richest families of that city. His brother Sergius married one of the sisters of the Emperor. Photius made use of his splen- did advantages to acquire a vast and varied education. Bardas, the restorer of letters, was his tutor. Photius became eminent in all the departments of human knowledge. His birth and his talents elevated him to the highest dignities, even to become Secretary of State to the Cotirt of Constantinople. After passing through these civil posts, he embraced the ecclesiastical state, and became a great theologian. The character of Photius was proud and cimning. By intrigue, he deposed Ignatius the legitimate patriarch of Constantinople, and placed himself on the throne. By flattery, he kept his usurped post by favor of the Emperor Michael. By similar means, he corrupted the legates of Pope Nicolas I., so that they assisted at the Conciliabulum in 86 1, and con- firmed Photius in the See. On hearing these acts. Pope Nicolas declared null and void the said acts, and anathematized Photius Photius in turn, convoked a council at Constantinople in 866, and pronounced sentence of deposition and excommunication against the Pope. When Basil, the Mac- edonian, succeeded Michael in the empire, he deposed Photius, and restored Ignatius. At this juncture was celebrated at Constantinople the VIII. (Ecumenical Council, in which Photius and his partizans were anathema- tized. Photius composed a chimerical history, in which he made Basil de- scend from Tiridates, the Armenian King. Basil was, in fact, low-bom, and this coup won his favor for Photius, whom he restored in 877. Pope John VIII. deceived by Basil, and Photius, at first received him into the com- munion of the Church of Rome, but afterwards, ascertaining the falsehood of Photius, excommunicated him. The successive Popes, Martin, Adrian THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 479 From the fact that he receives the decree of the Council of Carthage, it is evident that he is at one with us on the ques- tion of the Canon. He evidently believed that the curtailed canons were completed by the decree of Carthage. Even after its defection from Rome, the Greek Church has always received the deuterocanonical books. To this Zonaras and Balsamon testify.* When, in the seventeenth century, Cyril Lucar endeav- ored to introduce protestant ideas into the Greek Church, he failed to expel from the Canon the deuterocanonical books. t Against him the members of the Council of Jerusa- lem decreed that, "following the rule of the Catholic Church, we call Holy Scripture all those books which Cyril received from the Council of Laodicea, and in addition those books which Cyril, unwisely, ignorantly, or rather maliciously called Apocryphal, viz.. Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, Tobias, the History of the Dragon (deuterocanonical fragment of Daniel), The History of Susanna (idem), The Maccabees, and The Wisdom of Sirach. We judge that these should be and Stephen, anathematized him. It was at this point that Photius brought against the Church of Rome the charge of heresy, in having joined the "Filioque" to the Creed. This was the origin of the Greek schism, which divided the East from the West, and drew from the Church of Christ the Greek world Photius was finally imprisoned in a monastery by the Emperor Leo the Philosopher; and he died in his retreat in 891. Fleury gives a good resume of the character of Photius in these words: "He was the greatest mind and most learned man of his time ; but he was, at the same time, a perfect hypocrite: while acting like a villain, he spoke like a saint." The works of Photius are many, characterized by great erudition. *Zonaras, and Balsamon's Explanation of the Council in Trullo, Chap. II. See Synod. Beveregii, Migne, 137, 524; 138, 122. fCyril Lucar was bom in the Isle of Candia in 1572. He studied in Venice, Padua and in Germany; and in the latter place became imbued with Lutheran ideas. He was placed in the See of Alexandria, and after- wards in that of Constantinople. As it became clear that he embraced the tenets of Lutheranism, the clergy rose against him, and he was exiled to Rhodes. He was soon afterwards restored to his see, and subsequently for six or seven times he was deposed and restored. He was finally strangled, while returning from exile. He had the real qualities of a heretic presumption and intrigue. 480 THE CANON OF THE GREEK CHURCH enumerated with the other genuine books of Holy Scripture, as genuine parts of the same Scripture."* In the council which Parthenius, Patriarch of Constanti- nople held in 1638 at Constantinople, in which sat two other patriarchs and one hundred and twenty bishops, a synodical letter was drawn up and sent to the provincial synod con- vened at Jassy, in which the opinion of Cyril Lucar, who expunged from Holy Scripture holy and canonical books, and as such received by the holy synods, is declared to be heresy, breathing forth from all parts, and utterly contrary to the orthodox faith. t In later centuries, protestant ideas have invaded in some part the Russian Church to the extent that Philaretes (ti868) authorized the following catechismal text, and this was approved by the Synod. *'Q. How many are the books of the old Testament? A. St. Cyril .of Jerusalem, St. Athanasius the Great, and St. John Damascene reckon them at twenty-two; agreeing therein with the Jews, who so reckon them in the Hebrew tongue. Athanas. Ep. XXXIX. de Test. [Fest.]; J. Damasc. Theol. 1. IV. c. 17. Q. Why should we attend to the reckoning of the Hebrews? A. Because, as the Apostle Paul says, unto them were committed the oracles of God: and the sacred books of the Old Testament have been received from the Hebrew Church of that Testament by the Christian Church of the New. Q. How do St. Cyril and St. Athanasius enumerate the Books of the Old Testament? A. As follows: i. The book of Genesis : 2 . Exodus: 3. Leviticus: 4. The book of Numbers: 5. Deuteronomy: 6. The book of Jesus the son of Nun: 7. The book of Judges, and with it, as an appendix, the book of Ruth: 8. The first and second books of Kings, as tw^o parts of one book : 9. The third and fourth books of Kings: 10. The first and second books of Paralipomena : 1 1. The first book of Esdras, and the second, or, as it is entitled in Greek, the book of Nehe- * Cfr. Kimtnel, Monumenta Fidei Orientalis, Jenae, 1850, I. 42. fKimmel 1. c, page 415. THE CANON OF ALCUIN 481 miah: 12. The book of Esther: 13. The book of Job: 14. The book of Psalms: 15. The Proverbs of Solomon: 16 Ecclesiastes, also by Solomon: 17. The Songs of Songs, also by Solomon: 18. The book of the Prophet Isaiah: 19. Of Jeremiah : 20. Of Ezekiel : 21. Of Daniel : 22. Of the twelve Prophets. Q. Why is no notice taken, in this enumeration of the books of the Old Testament, of the book of Wisdom, of the Son of Sirach, and certain others? A. Because they do not exist in Hebrew. Q. How are we to regard these last named books? A. Athanasius the Great says, that they have been appointed by the fathers to be read by proselytes, who are preparing for admission into the Church." Philaretes was a disciple of Cyril Lucar, and introduced many protestant ideas into the Russian Church ; but in the days when the tradition of that Church was worth aught, it was not so. All the Churches of the East were in accord in accepting the deuterocanonical books. Up to recent times the Codex Amiatinus, was believed to date back to the miiddle of the sixth century. M. de Rossi has demonstrated that this manuscript was copied in the first years of the eighth century in the Monastery of Wearmouth, in Northumberland, by the monks of the Anglo-Saxon Ceolfrid.* It was given to Pope Gregory II. in 716. It is considered the finest Codex in all this world of the Vulgate of St. Jerome. It contains all the protocanonical and deuterocanonical hooks ^ uniting Baruch with Jeremiah, and making explicit mention of the same. This is important in proving force, since it repre- sents the text of Scripture brought into England by the mis- sionaries of Gregory the Great. In the first years of the ninth century, Alcuin, by order of Charlemagne, made an edition of the Scriptures. f *Vide infra. t Alcuin, sumamed Flaccus, was bom, towards the year 735, of a noble Anglo-Saxon family in Northumberland. His education was placed under the care of Egbert, Archbishop of York, and he had for tutor ^1- (31) H. S. 482 THE CANON OF ALCUIN The Codex Paulinus or Carolinus, preserved at the Basilica of St. Paul outside the walls of Rome, executed in the ninth century, contains Alcuin's recension, in which we find all the deuterocanonical books except Baruch. The Codex Statianus or Vallicellianus in the Vallicella Library at Rome, and other manuscripts called the Bibles of Charle- magne, at Zurich, Bamberg, and in the British Museum, contain the same list of Alcuin's revised books. Moreover, Alcuin has dra^vn up a complete Canon of both protocanoni- cal and deuterocanonical books in the following verses ; *"In hoc quinque libri, retinentur Codice Mosis, Bella ducis Josue, seniorum et tempora patrum, Ruth, Job, et Regum bis bini namque libelli; Atque Prophetarum sancti bis octo libelli ; Carmina praeclari Christi patris hymnica David, Et tria pacifici Salomonis opuscula regis. Jungitur his Sophias Jesu simul atque libellus, Et Paralipomenis enim duo nempe libelli. Hinc Ezras, Nehemiae, Hester, Judith atque libelli Et duo namque libri Machabaea bella tenentes. bert of the ecclesiastical school of York. Aelbert took him on a pilgrimage to Rome, and, on the return, visited with him Charlemagne. Albert was elected to the See of York in 766, and thereupon, placed Alcuin director of the school of the diocese. Alcuin held this post till 780. In 781, he was sent to Rome to bear thence the pallium for Eanbald, successor of Albert in the see of York. On his return, he again visited Charlemagne, who in- vited him to fix his abode in his dominions. Having sought and obtained the authorization of his archbishop and king, he arrived in France in 782, and took the post of teacher in the royal school . Charlemagne became his pupil, and, later on, conferred on him the abbeys of Ferrieres, St. Loup de Troyes, St. Josse in Ponthieu, and St. Martin of Tours. In 790, Alcuin revisited England, but Charlemagne soon summoned him into France to ^combat the heresy of Adoptionism. In opposing this heresy, Alcuin's principal theological works were written. Towards 796, Alcuin retired to St. Martin of Tours, and devoted himself there to teaching, whereby the school became famous. By his orders, a rich library was collected, and many manuscripts copied. Alcuin remained through life a deacon of the Catholic Church. His last years were troubled by a dispute with Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, regarding a priest who had been condemned to imprisonment by Theodulf, and who had sought refuge at Saint Martin . In this affair, Charlemagne treated him with severity. He died in 804. at the age of sixty years, and was interred in the Church of St. Martin. He is the author of many works, mostly treating of scriptural subjects. One of the most important of his works was his correction of the Bible, by order of Charlemagne . *P. L. Migne, loi, pag. 731-734. THE CANON OF ALCUIN 483 Matthasi et Marci, Lucas liber, atque Joannis Inclyta gesta tenens salvantis saecula Christi. Sanctus Apostolicos Lucas conscripserat Actus; Bis septem sancti per chartas dogmata Pauli, Jacobi, Petri, Judae et pia dicta Joannis: Scribitur extremo Joannis in ordine tomus. Hos lege, tu lector felix, feliciter omnes, Ad laudem Christi propriamque in saecla salutem." "Tres Salomon libros mirabilis edidit auctor, His duo junguntur per paradigma libri; Quorum quippe prior Sapientia dicitur alma, Notatur Jesu nomine posterior Hinc Paralipomenonis adest sacer ille libellus, Qui veteris Legis dicitur epitome Hinc EzrcB Nehmice, Judith, Hesterque libelli; Tunc Tobiae pietas, angelus, actus, iter. Inclyta nam binis Machabaea bella libellis Scribuntur, victis gentibus et populis. Haec est sancta quidem Legis Scriptura Vetustae, Divinis tota quae titulis redolet." Some endeavor to shake Alcuin's authority for the deu- terocanonical books by citing a passage from the eighteenth paragraph of his first book against EHpandus. This Elip- andus had cited, in support of Adopt ionism, the text from Ecclesiasticus XXXVI. 14: "Miserere, Domine, plebi tuae, super quam invocatum es nomen tuum, et Israel quem cose- quasti primogenito tuo. " Alcuin repHes : *'In the book of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, the aforesaid sentence is read, of which book blessed Jerome and Isidore positively testify that it is placed among the apocryphal, that is to say, the doubt- ful books." In relation to this testimony, we must first observe that Alcuin errs in stating that Isidore placed Ecclesiasticus among the Apocrypha. A close examination of his works reveals no such statement ; he is a plain advocate of Ecclesi- asticus and all the other deuterocanonical works. We know what was the opinion of Jerome, and what were its causes. The present question, therefore, is: did Alcuin adopt the opinion of Jerome? We answer this question in the negative, on the clearest evidence. To say nothing of the complete lists of Scripture in the verses already quoted, to say nothing of the recension of all the books of the Catholic 484 THE CANON OF ALCUIN Canon, in the edition prepared by Alcuin for Charlemagne, we have clear and express statements from Alcuin that Ecclesiasticus is divinely inspired Scripture. We select the following passages: Eccli. V. 8. "Delay not to be convert- ed to the Lord, and defer it not from day to day." De Virtutibus et Vitiis, XIV. XVIII. ''The saying is read in the divinely inspired Scriptures, 'Son, delay not to be convert- ed to the Lord; because thou knowest not what the coming day may bring forth.' These are the words of God, not mine." In the fifteenth chapter of the same treatise, he quotes EcclesiavSticus three times as authoritative Scripture. In the eighteenth chapter this passage occurs : "Eccli. XVIII. 30—31. "Go not after thy lusts, but turn away from thy own will. If thou give to thy soul her desires, she will make thee a joy to thy enemies." De Virtutibus et Vitiis, XVIII. "Holy Scripture, there- fore, admonishes us, saying." 'Go not after thy lusts, but turn away from thy own will. If thou give to thy soul her desires, she will make thee a joy to thy enemies.' " If words mean anything, Alcuin 's position was that Eccle- siasticus was divinely inspired Scripture, and the word of God. The Council of Trent asks no more than this for the book. In practical usage Alcuin made no difference between the two classes of books. The passage objected to by our adversaries relates only to Ecclesiasticus, and we honestly claim to have shown that Alcuin did not make his own the opinion of vSt. Jerome. To reconcile the aforesaid passage with Alcuin 's real belief, we must observe that it occurs in a controversial work directed against Elipandus, the heretical Archbishop of Toledo. In that treatise, his aim was to obtain victory over his opponent, and to that purpose, he was willing to use every argument that would have any THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 485 weight, even though it did not express his personal convic- tion. EHpandus had quoted a passage from Ecclesiasticus that seemed to make for Adoptionism. Alcuin first endeav- ors to weaken the adversary's position by throwing the doubt of St. Jerome on the book, and then directly meets the objection by explaining the passage. Such mode of dealing with adversaries characterizes the writings of many of the Fathers. In the treatise, De Virtutibus et Vitiis, Alcum speaks as a calm exponent of the Church's doctrine, and draws his materials from the commonly received deposit of Holy Scripture of that time. In face of all this, it is nauseating to find the protestant writer Home placing Alcuin among those who testify that the apocryphal {deutero canonical) hooks form no part of the Canon of divinely inspired Scripture,^ The Codex Toletanus, of Toledo in Spain, which, according to critics, dates back to the eight century, con- tains all the deuterocanonical books except Baruch. The Codex Cavensis, of the Abbey of La Cava near Salerno, contains all the deuterocanonical books. This manuscript is probably of Spanish origin, of the end of the eighth or beginning of ninth century. It contains the text of Jerome. Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, contemporary with Alcuin, made a recension of the books of Scripture, of which two copies are in the National Museum at Paris, and another is preserved in the Cathedral at Puy. In the Bible of Theo- dulf all the deuterocanonical books find place. Venerable Bede wrote an allegorical exposition of the book of Tobias, and in his use of Scripture makes no dis- tinction between protocanonical and deuterocanonical books, t ♦Home's Introduction to the Study of Scripture, Vol. I. Appendix I 484. fBede was bom at Jarrow, on the confines of Northumberland and Scotland in 673. His parents were Anglo-Saxons who had embraced the Catholic religion. At the age of seven years, they confided the child Bede, which means in their tongue frayer, to the Abbot Benoit Biscop, who was a second father to the child. After three years passed with Benoit, Bede 486 THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES Against the authority of Bede two objections are raised. In his treatise, De Temporum Ratione, he writes as fol- lows: 'Thus far divine Scripture contains the series of events. The subsequent history of the Jews is exhibited in the book of Maccabees, and in the writings of Josephus and Africanus, who continue the subsequent history down to the time of the Romans."* According to our adversaries, Bede here draws a sharp distinction between divine Scripture and the mere profane history of the books of Maccabees. In dealing with this objection, we place first of all that it leaves the canonicity of all the deuterocanonical books, except the Maccabees, intact. This is self evident since he is speaking of historical books alone. In the second place, w^e must interpret the obscure passages of a writer according to his certain posi- tion, revealed in his other works. Now Bede has quoted all the deuterocanonical books in the solemn formulas, cus- tomary in introducing divine Scripture. Did he therefore reject Maccabees, he would disagree with himself, and be absurdly inconsistent. We believe, therefore, that in dis- tinguishing Maccabees from the other historical books of divine Scripture, he merely wishes to point out that it does not alone continue the series of historical events from Ezra to the era of the Romans. Up to the time of Ezra, indeed, not all historical events were written, but enough was writ- ten to form a continuous chain of chief events, and no other writings contain the events of those times except the Holy was placed with the famous Ceolfrid, who taught him the elements of sacred and profane literature. As disciple of Ceolfrid, Bede acquired all the science of his times. At the age of nineteen, he became deacon and at the age of thirty, priest. He began to write at the age of thirty, and has left extended commentaries on nearly all the books of Holy Scripture. Except- ing Augustine and Jerorae, no Father has wrought such a vast exegetical work. Boniface, the Apostle of Germany, was wont to term Bede the wisest of the exegetes of Holy Scripture. Full oft, however, he drifts away from the literal sense into an excessive mysticism. The whole life of Bede was passed in the cloister. He died in 735. Bede and Isidore of Seville were the chief sources of Christian education during the Middle Ages. *P. L. Migne 90, 539. THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 487 Books, which follow each other in a certain historical series. But after Ezra a great lacuna occurs in the history of the Jews down to the time of the Romans, which is only partly bridged over by the combined data of Maccabees, Africanus, and Josephus. The second book of Maccabees covers a period of only about sixteen years ; the first, of about forty. * They are partly synchronous, and combined would not cover a period of over fifty years. Hence Bede could not say that divine Scripture contained the series of events down to the Roman epoch. He, therefore, drew a distinction between Maccabees and the preceding historical books, not from the nature of the books, but from the fact that the Scriptural history of the Jews became broken at Ezra, and the frag- ment of it which existed in Maccabees had to be supplemen- ted by the two cited authors. The second objection is taken from Bede's commentary on the Apocalypse, Chapter IV. Therein he states: 'The six wings of the four animals, which are twenty-four, signify so many books of the Old Testament, in which the authority of the evangelists is confirmed, and their truth is corrobo- rated."* It is pitiably absurd to make Bede, who throughout his vast works has quoted the deuterocanonical books side by side, and in equal place with the protocanonical Scriptures, reject them on the warrant of this one passage. It is Bede's evident opinion here to consider the protocanonical books as a class by themselves, without detracting from the divinity of the deuterocanonical works. The classing of the pro- tocanonical works in a distinct class, was warranted by patristic literature, and this diligent student of patrology drew therefrom a mystic argument, without throwing doubt on the deuterocanonical books, which formed a class by themselves. The last factor in removing this class distinc- tion, and making the two classes perfectly equal, was the decree of the Council of Trent. In our review of these centuries, we can not notice every writer who has written, relating to the books of Holy Scrip- *P. L. Migne 93, 144. 488 THE CANON OF THE IX. CENTURY ture. We shall content ourselves with adducing represent- ative men as the exponents of the Church's belief through these ages. Rhabanus Maurus follows on the question of the Canon St. Isidore of Seville.* As Rhabanus was a faithful follower of the Fathers of the Church, his Canon may be called the Canon of tradition of this century. In his work, De Institu- tione Clericorum, Chap. LIII. he formulates the following Canon: "These are, therefore, the books of the Old Testa- ment; in love of doctrine and piety the chief men of the Churches have handed down that these should be read and received. The first are of the Law, that is, the five books of Moses, viz.. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deu- teronomy. There follow these fifteen historical books, viz., Josue, and the books of Judges, or Ruth (as one of them is called), the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Tobias, Esther and Judith, two of Ezra and Two of Macca- bees. With these are sixteen prophetic books. There fol- low eight books in verse, which are written in different kinds of metre with the Hebrews, that is the book of Job, the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Can- ticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah." After giving the complete Canon of the New Testament, he continues: ''These are the seventy-two canonical books and on this account Moses elected seventy elders as prophets; and Jesus, Our Lord, sent seventy-two disciples to preach." The testimony of Rhabanus is identi- cal with that of Isidore of Seville, and is valuable inasmuch as it evidences that the teachers of the Church found in St. Isidore a concise statement of the Church's belief. Rhabanus *Rhabanus Maurus was born at Fulda in 788 of one of the first noble families of the country. At the age of six years, he was offered by his parents to the monastery of Fulda, wherein his childhood was passed. He was sent later on to Tours, and studied under Alcuin. On his return to Fulda, he was elected abbot, and distinguished himself by reconciling Louis the debonnaire, with his sons. He was elected Archbishop of May- ence in 847, and, as such, was distinguished for learning and zeal in guard- ing the faith. He died in 856 at the age of sixty-eight years. His works, printed at Cologne in 1627, form six tomes in folio, bound in three volumes His works on Scripture are mostly extracts from the Fathers, which was the mode of the study of theology of that time. THE CANON OF THE IX. CENTURY 489 wrote commentaries on Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith and the two books of Maccabees. Walafrid Strabo, must also be added to the advocates of the Catholic Canon.* In his Glossa Ordinaria, he has adopted the commenta- ries of his master Rhabanus Maurus, on Wisdom, Ecclesias- ticus, Judith, and the Maccabees ; he has adopted Bede's com- mentary on Tobias, and reproduces the text of Baruch with- out commentary with this preface: 'The book which is called Baruch is not found in the Hebrew Canon, bi«it only in the Vulgate edition, as also the Epistle of Jeremiah. For the knowledge of the readers, they are written here, for they contain many things relating to Christ, and the last times." The influence of St. Jerome was strong in Walafrid. He has inserted in his Glossa the prefaces of St. Jerome concern- ing the deuterocanonical books. That these prefaces find place in his work, would not prove that he adopted Jerome's views, for the prefaces are printed in the Clementine edition of our ow^n day. In the obscurity of the age when Walafrid lived, men, with reverence, accepted the writings of the great saints, suspending judgment when they were in con- tradiction with other approved data. He testifies that Baruch is in the Vulgate of his time, and that it contains much that is good. It is equivalent to say: 'The Church receives this book, but I know not what degree of divinity she accords it." With full right, therefore, Pope Nicolas I., writing to the bishops of Gaul in 865, speaks of the catalogue of Scripture of Innocent I. as the law of the universal Church : * ' — if the Old and New Testaments are to be received, not because they are to be found in a code of Canons, but because there exists a sentence of Holy Pope Innocent ^ concerning their recep- tion, it follows that the decretal letters of Roman Pontiffs are *Walafrid, sumamed Strabo, the squint-eyed, was the disciple of Rha- banus Maurus. He was bom in 806, and was reared in the monastery of Fulda under Rhabanus. He joined the Benedictine order, became Dean of St. Gall, and afterwards Abbot of Reichenou in the diocese of Constance. He was a man renowed for piety and profound learning. He died in 849. His chief works are De Officiis, and Glossa Ordinaria in Sacram Scripturam. 490 THE CANON OF THE X. CENTURY to be received, even though not embodied in the code of Canons." We have before seen that the decree of Innocent I. is identical with the catalogue of the Council of Trent. Nicolas here places as a truth conceded by all that the decree of Innocent was the law of the Church on Scripture, In the tenth century, doubts again arose in the Western Church, founded solely on the authority of St. Jerome. On one side stood the use of the Church and the testimony of tradition ; on the other, the declarations of Jerome, the * 'doc- tor of doctors." Hence doubt arose and uncertainty in many minds, and many were the attempts to reconcile Jerome with the belief and usage of the Church. These doubts endured down to the time of the Council of Trent. It would be impossible to pass in review over all the writ- ings of these ages. We can only signalize some representa- tive men of both sides. We find that the great body of the Church's teachers preserved the old belief and tradition, and the few who, through an excessive adhesion to St. Jerome, broke away from the common belief suffice not to break the consensus of tradition. We find that most of those who fol- low the opinion of Jerome try to reconcile him with the Church, by according to the deuterocanonical books a place among the Holy Books, just short of certain canonicity. By this, they strove to harmonize the universal usage of the Church with Jerome's rejection of these books from the Canon. NoTKER Balbulus opcns the tenth century with an unfavorable testimony.* In his work, De Interpretibus Divinae Scriptur^e, Chap. III., he has the following obscure statement: "Of the book which is called the Wisdom of Solomon, I have found no author's exposition, except some testimonies (therefrom) explained in relation to other books. The book is totally rejected by the Hebrews, and is by Chris- tians considered uncertain, nevertheless, since on account of ♦Notker, sumamed the Stammerer, from his defective speech, was a monk of St. Gall who died in 912. His life was passed in the retirement of the cloister, and little of it is known to us. His chief works preserved to us are: De Interpretibus Divinag Scripturae, Liber Sententiarum, and a Martyrology. THE CANON OF THE X., XL, AND XII. CENTURIES 491 the utility of its doctrine, our forefathers were accustomed to read it, and the Jews have it not, it is called with us Ecclesi- asticus. What thou belie vest of this, it behooveth thee to beHeve also of the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, except that this latter is possessed and read by the Hebrews. . . . The priest Bede wrote some things on Tobias and Ezra, more pleasing than necessary, since he has striven to convert simple history into an allegory. What shall I say. of the books of Judith, Esther and Paralipomenon ? By whom, or how shall they be explained, since their contents are not intended for authority, but only as a memorial of wonderful things? This thou mayest also suspect of the Books of Maccabees." (Patrol. L. Migne, 131, 996.) There is no precedent in the writings of Jerome, or of any one else for the opinion of this monk. It is the sole testi- mony of one man against the Church. Any testimony that places Paralipomenon among the deuterocanonical books may well be set aside without further argument. It is simply the case of a man, admirable in other things, who erred on this subject. In the collections of the decrees of Councils and Popes, collected in the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, the Canon of Innocent I. or of Gelasius always finds place. The collection of Canons of the Church of Spain, published by Gonzalez from a Codex of 976 contains the decree of Pope Innocent. Burchard of Worms (tio2 5), Ives of Char- TRES (fill 7), and Gratianus (tii55) have received the decree of Gelasius. These collections formed the basis of the discipline of the Church, and show us plainly the place given to the deuterocanonical books to have been, in fact, not inferior to that accorded them in the Church to-day. At the beginning of the twelfth century, St. Stephen Harding, Abbot of Citeaux, made a recension of the Latin Vulgate. In this recension of the year 1109 we find all the books of the Catholic Canon. GiSLEBERT, Abbot of Westminister (tiii7), in his ''Dis- pute of A Jew with A Christian," defends the authority of Baruch: * 'Although that which the book contains is not found in the book which bears the name of Jeremiah, never- 492 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY theless, Jeremiah has produced the data ; for he who wrote this book wrote not otherwise than under the dictation of Jeremiah." (P. L. Migne, 159, 102 6- 1027.) Although there is here an error of fact, nevertheless, the abbot is true in his defense of the authority of the book, which Catholic belief of his day adopted. An Anonymous Writer of the middle of the twelfth century, writing upon the reading of the Bible, expresses himself thus: ''Besides the aforesaid (the protocanonical books), there are five books which are called by the Hebrews apocryphal, that is to say hidden and doubtful, but the Church honors these and receives them. The first is Wisdom; the second, Ecclesiasticus ; the third, Tobias ; the fourth, Judith ; the fifth, Maccabees." (P. L. Migne, 213, 714.) This is the exact Catholic position, which endured and lived down every opposing agency. Aegidius, deacon of Paris (fiiSo?) sets forth the Catho- lic position on the Canon in the following Latin verses : Qui tamen excipit hos; Tobi, Judith, et Machabaeus, Et Baruch, atque Jesum, pseudographumque librum. Sed licet excepti, tamen hos authenticat usus Ecclesise, fidei regula, scripta Patrum. Scito quod ista Dei digito digesta fuerunt. Altus hie est puteus, grandis abyssus inest. Patrol. Lat. Migne, 212, 43,. Peter of Riga, the friend of Aegidius, endorses the Catholic Canon in the following verses : "Lex antiqua tenet cum quater octo decem, . Isti terdeni libri sunt et duodeni Antiquse legis, si numerando legis. Quinque Moys ; Josue ; Judex ; Paralipomenon ; Job' Bis bini Regum ; Ruth ; David ; et Salomon ; Ezechiel ; Daniel ; Isaias ; Jeremias ; Esdras ; Philo ; Sirach ; plena vigore Judith ; Hester amoena genis ; Tobias ; et Macchabaei ; Scripta prophetarum sunt duodena simul ; Nempe Neemias dedit hospitium liber Esdrse ; Et Ruth judicibus hospita facta subest ; Scriptorisque sui Baruch librum Jeremias Post libri recipit posteriora sui." — P. L. Migne, 212, 23.. In this testimony, Peter adopted the erroneous opinion of some that Wisdom was written by Philo, the Jew ; but the THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 493 value of his opinion is not impaired by this error since, in such opinion, he is not a witness of the Church's behef . Peter of Blois (ti2oo) adopts the following testimony verbatim from St. Isidore of Seville: "There is a fourth order with us of the books of the Old Testament, of the books that are not in the Hebrew Canon, the first of these is Wis- dom ; the second, Ecclesiasticus ; the third, Tobias ; the fourth Judith; the fifth and sixth, Maccabees. These books, the Jews place apart among the apocrypha ; but the Church of Christ honors them among the divine books and promulgates them." (P. L. Migne, 207, 1052.) This may be called the common opinion of the time. It is always enunciated with the certainty and boldness of men conscious that they have no adversary among the teachers of the Church. It is never challenged, never denied : those who depart from it, at most, only try to pare away a little of the equality of the books of the second Canon, to be in line with Jerome. HoNORius, the celebrated theologian of Autun (tii2o?) in his Gemma Animae, Chap, cxviii, establishes the mode in which the Holy Books are to be read in the divine office, in which testimony, he has the following: "These books are authentic, and these are to be read in the divine offices. . . . From the Kalends of August up to September, let there be read the Parables of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, The Canticle of Canticles, and The Book of Wisdom, all of which Solomon wrote, and Ecclesiasticus, which Jesus the Son of Sirach com- posed. From the Kalends of September, for two weeks, let there be read the book of Job, which he composed ; then for a week the book of Tobias, which he wrote. Then for a week, let there be read the book of Judith, which she or Achior wrote. . . . From the Kalends of October to the Kalends of November, let there be read the books of Macca- bees ; the first of which, Simon the pontifex wrote, and its last part John his son is said to have written; but the second book, Philo, the Jew, taught by the Greeks, is known to have written." (P. L. Migne, 172, 736, 737.) In these testimonies Baruch is not explicitly mentioned, because it was always considered a part of Jeremiah. It is evident that this theologian is not advancing an individual 494 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY Opinion here, but practically ordering the reading of books which the Church read as Holy Scripture. His opinion of the authorship of the second book of Maccabees is worthless, since there he is not a witness, but a critic, and a very poor one in this case. John Beleth, the theologian of Paris (1180), in his Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, establishes the same order of reading of the Scriptures.* Peter Comestor (f 1178) has a testimony favorable to us.f In the history of the book of Joshua, Praef ., he has the following: ''Job, David, three books of Solomon, Daniel, Paralipomenon, Ezra, Esther, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Jud- ith, Tobias, Maccabees are called the Hagiographa (al. Apo- crypha), because their author is unknown; but since there is no doubt of their truth, they are received by the Church." (P. L. Migne, 198, 1260.) Great confusion exists in this age in the use of Hagiographa and Apocrypha. Many con- founded these terms, as this author did here, if the text of Migne is right. They seem to have wished to reconcile Jerome with the Church by attributing to the word apocry- phal, the sense of a book, whose message was received by the Church, but whose author was unknown. A peculiar testimony is found in that part of Peter's his- tory which treats of the history of the Book of Daniel. In the XIII. Chapter he states: "There follows the history of Susanna, which the Hebrew (text) does not contain in the *Novein quae deinceps sequuntur, reputantur hagiographa, ita tamen ut sint authentica, nimirum liber Psalm orum, liber Jobi, tres libri Salo- monis, scilicet Parabolae, sive mavis dicere Proverbia, Ecclesiastes et Canti- cum Canticorum, liber Paralipomenon, Judith et Esther. Quatuor tan- dem enumerant apocrypha, librum videlicet Tobias, Machabaeorum, Phil- onis, cujus principium est : Diligite justitiam, et Jesu filii Sirach, qui sic incipit: Omnis sapientia a Domino, etc., appellaturque etiam Ecclesiasticus. Verum hos quatuor quidam non recipiunt, Ecclesia tamen eos approbat, quod argumentum fere habeant librorum Salomonis, etiamsi eorum auctores pro certo ac vere non sciat. (P. L. Migne, 202,66.) tPeter, sumamed Comestor, low latin for an eater, a gourmand, was of Troyes in France. He was called Comestor, the eater, to signify that he had devoured all the erudition of his time, or from the fact of his prodigious memory of Scripture. His best work is his Scholastic History, from which he merited to be called the Master of Historv. THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 495 Book of Daniel. It calls it a fable, not that it denies the history, but because it is falsely stated there, that the priests were stoned, whom Jeremiah testifies to have been burned ; and because we fable it to have been written by Daniel, whereas it was written by a certain Greek." The loose ideas of inspiration then prevailing, made it possible for this uncritical mind to believe that historical falsehood could exist in Scripture. A testimony unfavorable to the Book of Wisdom is found in the writings of Rupert, Abbot of Deutz.* In his Commentary on Genesis, Chap. XXXI., he denies the can- onicity of Wisdom : ' 'Concerning whom (Adam) , whether he ever obtained through Christ mercy, by which we are saved and freed, certain ones in these days discuss, for the reason that nowhere does the canonical Scripture testify that he did penance. Only in the book, which bears the title of Wisdom, it is thus written concerning him: 'She (Wisdom) pre- served him, that was the first formed by God, the father of the world, when he was created alone, and she brought him out of his sin, and gave him power to govern all things. (Sap. X. 1-2). But this Scripture is not of the canon, nor is that sentence taken from canonical Scripture. . . . What, therefore, is therein said: 'She brought him out of his sin, and gave him power to govern all things,' is more readily rejected than received." (P. L. Migne, 167, 318.) In his Commentary on Jeremiah, Rupert mentions not Baruch (Ibid.) ; and he omits all the deuterocanonical frag- ments from Daniel, (Ibid.). In his work De Divinis Officiis, he renders clear testimony that all the deuterocanonical books were read side by side with the books of the first Canon as divine Scripture, and then throws a doubt on Tobias and Judith: "These two volumes are not in the canon with the Hebrews, but, on the authority of the Nicene Synod, they *Rupert of Deutz was bom in the territory of Ipres. He entered the Benedictine Order in the Abbey of St. Lawrence near Liege. He passed thence to the Abbey of St Lawrence of Oosbourg, near Utrecht. His great piety and deep knowledge of the Scriptures moved Frederic, Archbishop of Cologne, to make him Abbot of Deutz near Cologne, where he died in 1135. He has left numerous works, principal of which is his Commentary on Holy Scripture. 496 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY are adopted for the instruction of the Church." (P. L. Migne, 170, 332.) In his work, De Victoria Verbi Dei, speaking of the causes of Aman's wrath, as set forth in the deuterocanonical Twelfth Chapter of Esther, he contrasts the data with the protocanonical Third Chapter of the same book, saying: "But a greater and more certain cause of this hate and great wrath is that which the truth of Scripture asserts thus: 'Mardochai alone did not bend the knee and adore Aman.' " (P. L. Migne, 169, 1384.) It is evident, therefore, that the deuterocanonical data are not ranked as the truth of Scripture. In the same work, from the Seventh to the Twenty-sixth Chapter, Rupert dis- courses on the books of Maccabees, which he clearly recog- nizes as divine Scripture. (P. L. Migne, 169, 142 8- 144 2.) We find in Rupert a man strongly imbued with the opin- ions of Jerome, of whose writings he had been an assiduous reader. Jerome was the classical authority of those days on Scripture, and it is not strange that Rupert, his disciple, should have adopted some of his opinions. Like his master, he is not consistent, and in his practical use of Scripture regularly quotes the deuterocanonical books as divine Scrip- ture. He breaks away from the common voice of tradition, when he denies the divinity of the same. It was only the safeguarding power of the Holy Spirit, acting through the Church, that saved these books against the authority of Jerome, who was the great authority on Scripture in the middle age. This protection of God permitted an occasional word against the divinity of the aforesaid books. Hugh of St. Victor also adopts the opinions of the Pro- logus Galeatus.* In his prefatory remarks, De Scripturis et Scriptoribus Sacris, after giving the list of the protocanonical books, he continues: "All, therefore, make twenty-two. There are besides certain other books, as the Wisdom of Solo- mon, the Book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, The Book of Judith, *Hugh of St. Victor was Canon regular of St, Victor at Paris. His origin is controverted. So great was his fame in theology in Paris that men called him the second Augustine, He died in 1 140 at the age of forty- four years. THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 497 Tobias, and the Maccabees, which are read, but are not written in the Canons After enumerating the books of the New Testament, the decretals of Popes, and the writings of the Fathers, among whom the first in place is Jerome, he continues : ''But these writings of the Fathers are not computed in the text of the divine Scriptures, just as we have said that there are books which are not embodied in the Canon of the Old Testament, and yet are read, as the Wisdom of Solomon and other books. The text, therefore, of Holy Scripture, as one body, is princi- pally made up of thirty books. Of these twenty-two books are comprised in the Old Testament, and eight in the New. (Hugh made one book of the thirteen Epistles of Paul, and another book of all the Catholic Epistles) . The other writ- ings are, as it were, adjuncts, and deductions from the fore- going.", (P. L. Migne, 175, 15, 16.) In his Prologue, De Sacramentis, he manifests the same views: ''There are, besides, in the Old Testament certain other books, which are read, indeed, but are not within the Corpus Scripturarum, or in the authentic Canon. These are Tobias, Judith, Maccabees, and that which is inscribed the Wisdom of Solomon, and Ecclesiasticus." Hugh is also a Jeromist of a pronounced type. All that the Church had done up to his time was to place these books before the faithful as Scripture. She had not defined the exact degree of their inspiration. It is only concerning this degree of inspiration that Hugh errs. He testifies to the presence of the books in the divine deposit. The degree of their inspiration was yet an open question; in judging of this degree, he went with his great master Jerome, and excluded the books of the second Canon from an equality with the first. The authority of Hugh of St. Victor was great in the Church ; and, doubtless, he contributed much to keep up the uncer- tainty which was finally removed by the Council of Trent . It was not with those writers a question of the rejection of the deuterocanonical books — these books had a place in the deposit of the sacred literature of the Church — but it was a question of equality with the other books ; and on this point some limited the authority of the books to something less than canonicity. (32) H.S. 498 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY Rudolph of Flavigny (fuss), divides the books of Scripture into four classes, historical, prophetical, books of proverbs, and books of simple doctrine. He places Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus with protocanonical books in the fourth class, but declares that * 'Tobias, Judith and Maccabees, although read for the instruction of the Church, have not perfect authority."* That the books should be read in the Church, was the Church's work, infallible and uniform; she preserved them for her children, because they were divine : the fluctuation of individual opinions regarding their exact degree of inspira- tion was the work of man. As long as the main point, the deliverance of the message of these books to the people, was safeguarded, the Church could permit the conflict of individ- ual opinions'in the speculative order, till, in her own good time, she declared authoritatively what character she had always given to these books. Peter of Cluny, sumamed the Venerable, is by some quoted as an adversary of the deuterocanonical books. f In his letter against Peter of Bruys and his sect, called the Petro- brusiani, after enumerating the protocanonical books, he continues: 'There remain besides these authentic books of Holy Scripture six other books which are not to be passed over in silence, viz., Wisdom, the Book of Jesus Son of Sirach, *Radulphi Flaviacensis in Levit. XIV. I. (Biblioth. Max. Patnim Lugduni, 1667, Tom, VIT. 177 ) (The work is not in Migne's collection ) tPeter. the Venerable, entered the order of the monks of Cluny and in 1 121 became general of the order. His great piety and learning placed him in this post at the age of twenty-eight years. Abelard found an asylum with him, and was moved by him to retract his errors. Peter was indefatigable in combating the errors that arose in France at that time. He merits to be named with St. Bernard as one of the foremost churchmen of that age. In defense of his order, he opposed St. Bernard, who re- proached the order for their worldliness and sumptuousness in their build- ings and table. These vices wrought their downfall, and they shamelessly bartered the rights of the Church to the revolutionists for secularization. Peter died at his monastery in 11 56. There are preserved of his writings six books of Letters, a Treatise on The Divinity of Christ, a Treatise against the Jews, a Treatise on Infant Baptism against Peter of Bruys, a Treatise on The Authority of the Church, Treatises on The Basilicas, The Churches and The Altars, etc. THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 499 Tobias, Judith, and the two books of Maccabees. Although these do not reach the subHme dignity of the preceding, nevertheless, on account of their laudable and very necessary doctrine, they have merited to he received by the Church. There is no need that I should labor in commending these to you. For if ye value the Church in any wise, ye will receive some- thing, at least a little, on her authority. But if (as Christ said of Moses to the Jews) ye will not believe Christ's Church how will ye believe my words ?" (P. L. Migne, i88, 751.) Viewed in a proper light, this text has nothing unfavor- able to the complete Canon. Peter is arguing with men who boasted that they received only the Gospels, and he asks them to receive the other books on the authority of the Church. There is a perfect accord in all these exponents of Catholic thought in stating that the Church received the deu- terocanonical books. The only difference of opinion that existed regarded the rank and dignity of these books. They received and used them ; some of these writers hesitated to pronounce the last word regarding the canonicity of these books, because the Church had not yet defined the question. That Peter, the Venerable, in limiting the dignity of these books, did not deny their divine inspiration, is evident from his copious quotations from all of them, as divine Scripture. Witness a few examples. In the aforesaid treatise, speaking of the Book of Maccabees, he declares : "But of Judas Mac- cabseus, the excellent leader of the Hebrews, the truthful Scripture commemorates that, after the destruction of the pagan army, he took the sword of the general Apollonius whom he had slain, and fought with it all his days." I. Maccab. III. In the same treatise, he establishes from the II. of Macca- bees, "that it is a holy thought to pray for the dead, that they may be re^leased from their sins." II. Maccab. XII. 46. In his Thirty-fourth Epistle, quoting the sixth verse of the twenty-second chapter of Ecclesiasticus, he says ; "That divine philosopher saith : 'A tale out of time is like music in mourning.' " In his treatise against the Jews, Chapter II., he proves the divinity of Christ from the authority of Baruch: "And 500 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY although these things should suffice to prove the divinity of Christ to even brute beasts, let the Prophet or prophetic man come forth, Baruch the notary or colleague of Jeremiah. Let him come forth, and, although he draws his spirit from another, nevertheless it is from the prophetic heart of Jere- miah, and therefore as of one spirit with the Prophet, let him state, not in enigmas, but lucidly and openly, what he thinks of the divinity of Christ. This man manifestly, after many things said of God, adds: 'This is our God, and there shall be no other be accounted of in comparison of him. He found out all the way of knowledge, and gave it to Jacob, his servant, and to Israel his beloved. Afterwards, he was seen upon earth, and conversed with men.' " Baruch III. 36-38. In the same treatise. Chapter IV., he declares thus : **Who i^ it that in a certain one of your books speaks by the wise man: *My memory is unto everlasting generations' (Eccli. XXI V. 2 8 ?) Is it not God ? Verily it is Godr The Coun- cil of Trent asks no more than is substantially declared in these passages, and by its everlasting sanction, it has made canonical the books that Peter considered divine. John of Salisbury follows Jerome on the Canon.* In Epistola CXLIII. he declares thus: "Since, therefore, con- cerning the number of the books, I read mam^ and different opinions of the Fathers, following Jerome, a doctor of the Catholic Church, whom I hold most approved in establish- ing foundations of Scripture, I firml}^ believe that, as there are twenty-two Hebrew letters, thus there are twenty-two *John of Salisbury receives his name from his birthplace in England. The date ol his birth is about 1 1 10 He was sent to France to study, and was afterwards sent by the King of England to the papal court to manage the interests of England there. Recalled to England, he was advanced to high offices by the High Chancellor, Thomas a. Becket. John became inseparably attached to Becket, and went with him when Becket was made Archbishop of Canterbury. He tried to defend him against the murderers sent by Henry II., and parried the first blow aimed at Becket's head by receiving it on his arm. John was subsequently made Bishop of Chartres, which charge he filled faithfully and well. He was one of the finest spirits of his age, a man of deep piety and learning He died in 1 180. He has left many works, principal among which is Polycrati.cus or the vanities of the Court. THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 501 books of the Old Testament, arranged in three orders . . . And these are found in the Prologue to the Book of Kings which Jerome called the Galeatum Principium of all Scrip- ture. . . . But the Book of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias, and Pastor, as the same Father asserts, are not in the Canon, neither is the book of Maccabees, which is divided in two." (P. L. 199; 125, 126.) In the same work, he speaks again of the deuterocanoni- cal books thus: ''Concerning Tobias, Judith, and the Book of Maccabees, which are not received in the Canon, by whom they were written, the common opinion does not teach us, neither do the followers of Philo mention them; but since they build up faith and religion, they are piously admitted^ Philo wrote the Book of Wisdom, and it is called Pseudo- graphus; not that he wrote falsely, but because he falsely entitled it ; for it is called the Wisdom of Solomon, whereas, it was not written by Solomon, but is called of Solomon, on account of its style and excellent moral teaching. Jesus Son of Sirach wrote Ecclesiasticus, which also, from the similar- ity of its style and moral teaching, is called Solomon's." The practice of John of Salisbury is in direct opposition to his theory here announced. His works are full of quota- tions from the deuterocanonical Scriptures as divine Scrip- ture. He was infected by a sort of hero worship towards St. Jerome, somewhat similar to that which in our day set in towards St. Thomas, which is in itself neither to the glory of the saint, nor conformable to the truth. Without sufficient depth or critical acumen to penetrate the question- and form a comprehensive judgment of it, John paid a blind allegiance to his master, and, at the same time, made much use of these very same books as Scripture. Jurare in verba magistri was the motto of these schoolmen, and often they extolled the opinions of the master over the voice of tradition. The error of John, then, is due to defect of proper investigation, and to an excessive addiction to the opinions of St. Jerome. 502 THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY Chapter X. The Canon of the Church from the Beginning of Thirteenth Century to the Council of Trent. Throughout this epoch, the Bible of the Church con- tained the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books, with- otit any indication of difference in them. This truth is clearly proven by the many manuscripts existing of this period. Whether the work of chaptering the Bible was done by Hugh of St. Carus or by Stephen Langton is uncertain, but it extended to all the books of the Catholic Canon, and the Correctoria of this period also embrace the books of both classes. Albertus Magnus, in his exposition of the Prologue of St. Jerome on Baruch, manifestly defends the divinity of the book.* Commenting the words of Jerome: 'The Book of Baruch, the secretary of Jeremiah, which is not read by the Hebrews, nor possessed by them," etc., Albert endeavors by scholastic subtlety to benignly interpret Jerome: "Never- theless, the truth of the book is not thereby called in ques- tion, because it is joined to canonical Scripture. For it contains nothing except what was enunciated by Jeremiah, and for this reason, it is united in the same truth with the Prophet Jeremiah. For the Hebrews compute twenty-two books in the Canon of Scripture, in accordance with the twenty-two letters of their alphabet ; or twenty-four books, corresponding to the twenty-four ancients. But the added *Albert was bom at Lauingen, in Swabia, about the close of the twelfth century. He was descended from'the Counts of Bollstaedt. He studied at Padua, and in 1223 entered the Dominican Order at Cologne. His life was given to teaching in the schools and to preaching. In 1254, he was made provincial of the Dominicans of Germany; and in 1260, Bishop of Ratisbon. He renounced the bishopric for the monk's cell, and died at Cologne in 1280. The saying of Cicero could be applied to Albert, that he had left writings enough to cremate his body. But his works are more vast than solid ; they manifest indefatigable toil in reading and collating the works of others, rather than profundity of personal thought : the pom- pous verbiage of the schoolmen, and excessive mysticism characterize them throughout. It was remarked of Albert by a French writer, that he was called great, only because he lived in an age when men were little. He is withal a good witness of the tradition of his times. THE CANON OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES 503 books they reckon in the same number, as Baruch is added to Jeremiah, for the reason that he received from Jeremiah whatever he wrote, ... .so that the whole truth of this Scrip- ture rests on the revelation of God made to Jeremiah." Whatever be the defects of this data, it is evident that Albert is an avowed advocate of the deuterocanonical books. He quotes from all of them in his works, assigning them equal place with the books of the first Canon. St. Bonaventure comprises all the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books in twenty-six books. f He evidences in many ways that he held the books in equal esteem. In the preface to his Commentary on Wisdom he says : "The efficient cause of the book is threefold : God who inspired it, Solomon who produced it, and Philo who compiled it." His works evince that he held the like opinion of the other deuterocanonical books. Alexander Neck am, professor at the University of Paris at the commencement of the thirteenth century, wrote a commentary on the difficult passages of Holy Scripture and includes the books of both classes in the same category. Robert Holkot (f 1340), a learned Dominican of North- ampton in England, is bold in favor of the deuterocanonical books. *'St. Augustine," he says, ''expressly declares in his Christian Doctrine (II. 8) that the Book of Wisdom should be enumerated in the Sacred Scriptures; for, enumerating the books of the Canon and the Bible, he says thus of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus : 'AVisdom and Ecclesiasticus, since they have merited to be received in authority, are reckoned among the prophetic books.' Wherefore, it is evident that the hook {Wisdom) is counted among the Canonical Scriptures in fThe secular name of St. Bonaventure was John Fidanza. He was born at Bagnorea, in Italy, in 1221. He entered the Franciscan Order at the age of seventeen years. He studied at the University of Paris under the celebrated Alexander Hales. Bonaventure rose by his merit to be called the Seraphic Doctor, one of the greatest doctors of the Church. In 1257, he was made general of his order, and in 1272, Gregory X. created him Cardinal and Bishop of Albano. He was one of the first theologians of the Council of Lyon, but he died after the first session in 1274. He has left voluminous works, more than twenty of which treat of sacred Scrip- ture. His works are characterized by a moderation and wisdom, re- sembling that found in the works of John Chrysostom. 504 THE CANON OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES the Church, though the contrary is held by the Jews . . . and therefore, although by the Jews rejected, the books are of great authority among the faithful."* Thomas Netter, better known as Thomas Waldensis, from his birthplace Walden in England, a Carmelite of such learning that he was sent by Henry IV. of England to the Councils of Pisa and Florence, maintains stoutly in his Doc- trinaleFidei that the canonicity of a book must be determined by the authority of the Church. He appeals against the fol- lowers of Wicklif to the Decree of Gelasitis, to establish the books that are to be held in full authority. John of Ragusa (ti45o) a Dominican doctor of the Sorbonne, who was president of the Council of Basle, announ- ces in no doubtful terms, in the aforesaid council, the doc- trine of the Church : * 'Moreover, it is manifest that there are many books in the Bible, which are not held in authority with the Jews, but are by them reckoned apocryphal, which, nevertheless, by us are held in the same veneration and authorit}^ as the others, and our acceptance of them rests on nothing but the tradition and acceptance of the whole Catholic Church, which it is not lawful pertinaciously to con- tradict."! The voice of the Church speaks through this man, which spoke again through the Fathers of the Council of Trent. St. Thomas aquinas (11274) does not treat the question of the canonicity of the deutero canonical books ex professo. He is falsely, however, placed by some protestants as an adversary of these books. A just way to judge of a man's opinion of Scripture is by his practical use of it. In his Summa Theologica St. Thomas has quoted Baruch twice: I. Maccabees, more than twelve times; II. Maccabees more than fifty-two times; Judith, more than nineteen times ; Tobias, more than seventy times ; Wisdom, more than one hundred and twelve times; and Ecclesiasticus, more than one hundred and thirteen times. *Postilla super Lib. Sapientiae, Cap. I. Sect. 2. tMansi. Coll. Concil. XXIX., p. 88; THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY 505 The protestant Hody endeavors to shake St. Thomas' authority in favor of the deuterocanonical books by the three following testimonies. In his seventh opusculum, Chapter IV., commenting the work of the ps6udo Areopagite, De Divinis Nominibus, St. Thomas speaks of a quotation from Wisdom thus : ''From which it is evident that Wisdom was not yet held (nondum habebatur) > among the canonical Scriptures." That this testimony is not unfavorable to our case is evident from a mere reading. But we hope to show that it is a direct testimony in favor of the books. If there is any point to the declaration, in saying that at a certain time, a book was not yet, nondum, in the canonical Scriptures, the writer supposes that at his writing it was there. The second text objected against us is from the Summa Theologica, I. Q. 89, art. 8, ad 2. There, commenting on the apparition of Samuel to Saul (I. Sam. XXVIII. 11 et seqq. et Eccli. XLVI. 23), he answers the objection first by the authority of Ecclesiasticus, and then subjoins: ''Whence it can be said of Samuel that he appeared by divine revelation, as it is stated in Eccli. XLVI., 'that he slept and made known to the King the end. of his life.' Or the apparition was pro- cured by demons, if the authority of Ecclesiasticus is not received, for the reason that it is not among the canonical Scrip- tures with the Jews.'' This proposition is of a man who him- self receives the book but grants to his opponent the right to .doubt it. It is also of a man little interested in the ques- tion of the canonicity of Scripture. In saying that the book was not received by the Jews, he does not establish that it is not received by the Christians ; in fact, he seems to imply that it was received by them, but not in such manner as to preclude all doubt. The mind of St. Thomas was not much given to these critical questions. He used the Scriptures as the Church used them, and this is the sole passage in all his works, where he allows any place for doubt concerning them. The third objection is urged by Hody that St. Thomas speaks of the Fable of Bel and the Dragon, Dan. XIII. But all critics now agree that this work is supposititious. The learning of that time consisted chiefly in a command of 506 THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY what the Fathers had written, and often we find conflicting statements made by the same writer, due to the fact that he had drawn from different sources, without weighing the question in se. So this unknown writer of this supposititious work had probably read Jerome and adopted his phrase- ology. Among the works of St. Thomas is found a commentary on the books of Maccabees, in the preface of which it is stated, "that these books have no authority with the Jews, as have the twenty-four which compose the Canon according to Jerome, but they have authority in the Latin Church, which approved them in a certain council, and ordered them to be read." The authenticity of this work is rejected by many critics, and the work is believed to belong to an English writer named Thomas, and to date from about the close of the fourteenth century, but it still remains a testimony of that time to the Catholic Canon. PIuGH OF St. Carus (ti26o) follows Jerome on the Canon.* After enumerating the protocanonical books in verse, he continues thus in Latin verse : Restant apocrypha: Jesus, Sapientia, Pastor, Et Machabasorum libri, Judith atque Tobias, Hi quia sunt dubii, sub canone non numerantur; Sed quia vera canunt, Ecclesia suscipit illos. — (Postil. in Jos., Prol.) That he does not reject these books from the Scriptures, appears from his prologues in Judith and Ecclesiasticus, wherein he says : 'The palace of the king is made up of four things : the foundation, the walls, the roof, and the interior ornaments. The foundation is the Law; the walls are the Prophets and the Epistles ; the roof is the Gospels, and the ornaments are the Hagiographa and the Apocrypha." *Hug:h was called of St. Carus, because the place of his birth was close to the church of this name in the environs of Vienne in Dauphin^. He entered the Dominican Order, and was made doctor of the Sorbonne, and afterwards Cardinal. He was a man of commanding genius, both in the speculative and practical order. He was the first to invent a concordance of the Bible. By his suggestion the Dominican Correctorium was started, and it was finished by his own personal labors. He is also the author of Commentaries on the Scriptures. THE CANON OF THE XIV. CENTURY 507 Hugh was hard pressed to keep with the Church, and fol- low in everything St. Jerome. He called the deuterocanoni- cal books dubii, not that their message was uncertain, but because their authors were unknown, and he admitted them into the deposit of Scriptures because, as they contained the inspired truth, the Church received them. The most extreme of the Jeromists are forced always to confess that the Church received these books, and that is what we are seeking. We wish to know what the Church held in these ages, not what were the personal leanings of the theologians. Hugh declares in his preface to Ecclesiasticus that the Church receives these books, not to prove doctrine, but for moral instruction, but this is a mere fiction borrowed from Jerome. The Church received them as Scripture, and ''all Scripture is divinely inspired." Hugh has commented all the deutero- canonical books. William Occam (ti347) appeals to Jerome and Gregory the Great in asserting that "Judith, Tobias, Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom are not to be accepted to con- firm that which pertains to faith. . . . The Church reads them, but does not receive them among her Canonical Scrip- tures."* When Occam testifies that the Church receives the deu- terocanonical Scriptures, he testifies to the fact which we are seeking to establish, and is in line with the whole course of tradition; when he limits the authority which the Church accorded these books he is advancing a mere personal criti- cism on a fact which the Church had not decided. To be sure, the Church up to that time had not canonized these * Occam was a native of Surrey, in England. He entered the Order of Gray Friars, and became an ardent follower of Duns Scotus. His unquiet spirit soon revealed itself in a radical departure from Scotus, and in his advocacy of opposite subtilties. He was so powerful in dialectics that men called him the doctor mvincihilis. In Occam we find an extreme representative of that scholastic hair-splitting of dialectics which did much to make men distrust and despise the schoolmen. Occam sustained the part of Louis of Bavaria against Pope John XXII., who excommuni- cated him. He was the author of many other bizarre opinions. He died at Munich in 1347, according to general opinion absolved of ecclesiastical censures. 508 THE CANON OF THE XIV. CENTURY books by formal decree; whereas, the first books had beeii received by her, canonized by the approbation of the supreme authority of the first covenant; so that the denial of can- onicity was not the denial of inspiration. In saying that the Church did not use these books to confirm faith, Occam speaks against the plain evidences of fact, for we have seen that the representative men in the Church from the begin- ning, made equal use of these books to teach doctrine and to confute error. Nicholas of Lyra (11340) is unfavorable to the deutero- canonical books.* According to him the canonical books are of such author- ity that anything that is contained in them should be firmly and without discussion held as true, as also that which fol- lows directly from them . . . but the books, which according to Jerome, are not of the canon are received by the Churchy to to be read for moral instruction^ although their authority seems less fitted to decide those questions concerning which there might be discussion. In his commentary on Ezra he says : "I intend, for the present, to pass over the books of Tobias, Judith, and Maccabees, although they are historical; because they are not in the Canon of the Jews or Christians. Jerome indeed, says they are reckoned among the apocrypha." He afterwards commented all the deuterocanonical books, except the fragments of Esther, ' 'because they are not in the Hebrew nor in canonical Scripture, but seem to be invented by Josephus and other writers, and inserted in the Vulgate, as Jerome says." In his preface to Tobias he says : ** Since by God's assistance, I have written on the canonical books of *Nicolas, called of Lyra from his birthplace in Normandy, was by birth a Jew. He had studied under the Rabbis, but became converted to the faith of Christ, and entered the order of the Friars Minor in 1291. He re- ceived the degree of doctor at Paris, where he taught Scripture for many years with great success. He wrote commentaries on all the Scriptures, except some of the deuterocanonical fragments. He was much versed in Hebrew and Chaldaic, which gave to his commentaries of the Old Testa- ment a solidity unlike that found in the other writers of his time. He founds all on the literal sense, and thus is not marred by that excessive mysticism, which has so much prevailed in past ages. He died in 1340- THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY 509 Holy Scripture . . . trusting in the same assistance, I purpose to write upon the other books, which are not in the canon, viz.. Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias and Maccabees." In these testimonies we find two elements, first what the Church held, and second what Nicolas held. He bears wit- ness that the Church receives the books, and she in her sub- sequent councils tells us in what sense she received them. Nicolas certainly doubted of the divinity of the deutero- canonical books ; perhaps he fully judged that the fragments of Esther were spurious. He was a Jew, and like causes moved him and Jerome whom he follows. It would be unreasonable to say that the mere doubts of one man or of a few men on a question not yet defined by the Church should overthrow the weight of tradition. On the 4th of Februar}^ 1441, Pope Eugene IV., by and with the approbation of the Council of Florence pro- mulgated the following bull respecting Holy Scripture : 'The holy Roman Church . . . professes that one only and the same God is the author of the Old and New Testament, that is to say, of the Law, the Prophets and the Gospels, because under the inspiration of the same Holy Ghost, spoke the holy men of both Testaments whose books the Church receives and venerates, which are contained under the following titles: The five books of Moses . . . Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehe- misiSyTobtas, Judith, Esther, Job, The Psalms of David, Prov- erbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Eccles- iasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, twelve Prophets, . . . and the two Books of Maccabees.''"^ *Labbe Coll. Concil. XVIII. 1222. Concilio Florentine perperam hoc decretum attribui asserit Hodius (De text. orig. 659 col. III.) et post eum Bleek (Einl. Ed. 2. p. 705), etc. Contra omnes hos ilia transcribere sufficit, quse Card, de Monte, primus Cone. Trid. praises, ad similem objec- tionem repondit: "Bulla ilia Eugenii, in qua recipiuntur libri sacri et est super unione lacobitarum, et eius data est Prid. Non. Febr. 1441, vere edita est in Cone. Florentino ante eius dissolution em. Falsum enim est, et ab omni veritate alienum, quod concilium illud dissolutum fuerit an. 1439 statim post unionem Graecorum, hallucinanturque maxime, qui putant finem dicti concilii fuisse unionem Grsecorum, qtium longe post, per tres sc. fere annos, perduraverit, usque videlicet ad an. 1442, quo anno 6. Kal. Mai. celebrata 10. sessione, concilium ipsum Romam translatum fuerit. . . 510 THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY We see here that the Church attributed no importance to the individual doubts and theories of the writers whom we have cited in opposition to the books of the second Canon. With no evidence of uncertainty, she announces here what she had held in practice from the beginning. The dogmatic import of this decree is incontestable, but still it did not abso- lutely settle the question. The Council promulgated a list of inspired books which the Church received as the work of God, but it did not use the word canonical. Now perhaps none of those who had opposed the full authority of the deu- terocanonical books had denied their inspiration. No one of them had studied the exact concept of inspiration or canon- icity, but they had made use of vague distinctions to restrict the dignity and value of the deuterocanonical books some- what below that of the books of the first Canon. Moreover, the bull of Eugene IV. did not define the Catholic notion of canonicity, neither did it define the question of the absolute equality of all the books . It seems also that the decrees of the Council of Florence were not diffused much through the Western Church in the first years after its celebration. Its legislation affected more especially the Eastern world, and the art of printing had not yet effected the general diffusion Prasterea,quod bulla unionis lacobitarum data 1441, in qua ipsi libri reci- piuntur, edita fuerit in ipso concilio, potest sciri ex originali manu pro- pria ipsius Eugenii et Cardinalium ibi prsesentium subscripta et plumbeo sigillo obsignata, quam ego ipse his oculis vidi Romas una cum aliis actis concilii ab eisdem Eugenio et Cardinalibus subscriptis et plumbeo sigillo obsignatis, quae nunc in arce molis Adriani inter alias scripturas Sedis Apostolicas conservantur. . . . Verba autem: 'sacro approbante concilio,' in principio bullae unionis lacobitarum non ponuntur, quia dictum princi- pium totum pertinet ad prooemium ; ubi autem incipit dispositiva, ponun- tur quidem, ut in aliis bullis in concilio editis. Ibi enim sic habetur: 'veram necessariamque doctrinam hodie in hac solemni sessione, sacro approbante Q^cumenico Concilio Florentino in nomine Domini tradimus. etc' " {Theiner Acta genuina SS. oecumen. Cone. Trident. Zagrabias 1847 I. p. 79, sq. Cfr. etiam Praenotata ad buUam unionis in Labhe 1. c.) Quod si Bleeh (1. c.) post Keerl (Die Apocryphen des A. T. 1852, p. 150 sq.) asserit, ante Concilium Tridentinum neminem quidquam de decreto isto audivisse, ad eos refutandos sufficiet testimonium Caietani ante primam Concilii Tridentini indictionem demortui, quod sic se habet: "Cum hac distinctione discemere poteris et dicta Augustini . . . et scripta in Concilio Florentino sub Eugenio IV." etc. (Cajetani Com. in script., Lugd. 1639.) (Comely, op. cit.) THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY 511 of knowledge. Hence we find writers after this decree doubt- ing of the divinity of these books. Such a one is Tostatus,* Bishop of Avila (ti455). Tostatus gives evidence that he knew nothing of the decree of Florence. He is thoroughly at sea on the question of the Canon, and from his conflicting statements it appears evident that he had not mastered the question, and knew not clearly what either himself or the Church held on the subject. Commenting the Prologus Galeatus of Jerome, he says: "It is said that the Book of Wisdom is not in the Canon, because the Jews expunged it thence; in the begin- ning they received it, but after they had laid hands on Jesus and slain him, remembering the evident testimonies concern- ing him in the same book . . . taking counsel, lest we should impute to them the evident sacfilege, they cut the book off from the prophetic volumes, and interdicted its reading. But we on the Church's authority, receive the hook among the authentic Scriptures, and read it at stated times in the Church. Again, the Book of Jesus, the son of Sirach, is not in the Jew- ish Canon . . . and although the Jews never received it into the Canon of Scriptures, the Church receives it and reads it.'' Of the Book of Judith he speaks in a confused manner, and concludes: 'These things are true according to the Jews; but with us it is otherwise, for the Book of Judith is received among the authentic Scriptures, for the reason that the Church approved it in the Council of Nice, and received it into the Canon of Scriptures ; otherwise the Church would not read it in her divine liturgy, as she reads the other authentic books." Continuing, he asserts the very same of Tobias and Maccabees . Had he remained consistent in these views, no one could have written better on the question than he. This was the Church's position clearly and definitely enunciated. But in trying to reconcile this position of the Church with Jerome, *Tostatus was one of the most noted of the doctors of Salamanca in Spain. He filled with credit the highest offices in Church and State. His works reveal a vast erudition, but his critique is often defective, and his judgment does ribt correspond to the vastness of his erudition. Bellar- mine styled him the wonder of the world. He died in 1455. This is his epitaph : "Hie stupor est mundi, qui scibile discutit omne." 512 THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY he becomes oblivious of his former position and assails the authority of the books which he here calls authentic Scrip- ture. Commenting the first preface of Jerome on Chronicles, he speaks thus of the deuterocanonical books : ' There is a difference between them (deuterocanonical books) and the canonical books that are called authentic (in his former testi- mony he called all the deuterocanonical books authentic) ; from the authentic books we may receive a proof of doctrine, and validly argue against both Jew and Christian to prove truth ; but from the apocryphal (deuterocanonical) books we may receive doctrine, because they contain holy doctrine, wherefore they are called at times hagiographa; but their authority is not sufficient to adduce in argument against any- one, nor to prove things which are in doubt, and in this they are inferior to the canonical and authentic books. . . None of these apocryphal books, even though it be included among the other books of the Bible, and read in the Church, is of such authority that the Church may from it prove doctrine and in this regard the Church does not receive them, and thus is to be understood the declaration of Jerome, that the Church receives not the apocrypha." Again, in explaining the prologue on the Gospels, he states : "The Church knows not whether writers inspired by the Holy Ghost wrote these (deuterocanonical) books . . . When, therefore, there is doubt concerning the writers of certain books, whether they were inspired by the Holy Ghost, their authority is taken away, and the Church does not place them in the Canon of Scrip- tures. Furthermore, regarding these books, the Church is not certain whether or not heretics have not added to, or taken from that which was written by their proper authors. The Church, therefore, receives such books, permitting every one of the faithful to read them ; the Church also reads them in her offices on account of the many devout things which are contained in them ; but she obliges no one to believe what is contained therein, as is the case with the books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, Judith and Tobias. For though these books are received b}^ Christians, and f)roof derived from them in some degree may have weight, because the Church retains those books, yet they are not effectual to THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY 513 prove those things that are in doubt against heretics and Jews, as Jerome says in his prologue upon Judith." We must agree with Tostatus that up to the Florentine Council the deuterocanonical books were not of absolute authority in doctrine, because there existed no definitive decree, and therefore one who rejected these books could not be branded with heresy. He errs greatly, however, in say- ing that the Church was ignorant of the inspiration of the books. The contradictions in Tostatus result from the fact that he tried to keep in line with the Church, and St. Jerome. In saying that the Church received these books as authentic Scriptures into the Canon of Scriptures, he is with the Church: in doubting of the inspiration of the same books, he is with Jerome against the Church. We are building our Canon on what the Church held, and to this his testimony serves. The authority of Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence (ti459) is sometimes invoked against us. He knew but vaguely of the decree of Florence.* According to him, "the Church receives these books as true, and venerates them as useful, moral treatises, though, in the discussion of those things which are of faith, not conclusive in argument. . . . Wherefore, perhaps, they have such authority as have the sayings of holy doctors approved by the Church." The opinions of Antoninus are often strange and uncriti- cal. His piety moved him to an excessive veneration of the opinions of St. Jerome, in explaining the fact of the Church's approval of the deuterocanonical books. His testimony is of no avail, since against him stands the authentic decree of Florence, making known to us, that the Church received these books as divine Scripture. St. Antoninus quotes St. Thomas, H. 2., as authority for his strange opinion, but a close examination fails to disclose any such text in the Summa. *Chron. III. 11, 2, Lugd 1586. III. p. 551: "In aliquibus vero, in quibus a fide vera discrepabant (Jacobitas et Armenii) prohibentur, uti quod sacramentum confirmationis non habebant in usu conferendi illi nationi, declarato eis, quod illud, sicut et cetera sacramenta deberent accipere, credere et conferre, et aliqua alia, quae nunc non occurrunt rnenti." 33 (H.S.) 614 THE CANON OF THE XVI. CENTURY Denis of Chartreux (ti47i) declares, that the Church receives the deuterocanonical books as true, but not ca- nonical. He does not regard the fragments of Esther as divine Scripture. Cardinal Ximenes (fisiy), in the preface of his Com- plutensian Polyglott Bible, says: "The books, indeed, without the Canon, which the Church receives rather for the edification of the people than as an authoritative confirma- tion of the doctrines of the Church, are only found in the Greek." We see that the old theory of Jerome endured in some minds, who, while they received the books with the Church, in defect of any absolute decree of the Church, inclined much to the great Scriptural doctor of the Church. The decree of Florence, though it defined the issue in se, failed to establish the absolute equality of the books, first because it was not widely disseminated in those obscure times, and secondly because it did not employ the term canonical. Erasmus (11536) finds "that it is not unreasonable to establish different degrees of authority among the Holy Books, as St. Augustine has done. The books of the first rank are those concerning which there has never existed a doubt with the ancients. Certainly Isaiah has more weight than Judith."* The great humanist evidently considered the books as divine Scripture, though of less importance in doctrine. We close the list of the antetridentine writers with Cajetan (11524). At the close of his commentary on Esther he con- cludes: "The Church receives such books, permitting the faithful to read them; the Church also reads them in her offices, on account of the many devout things whcih they contain. But the Church obliges no one necessarily to believe what is contained therein, which is the case with the books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, Judith, and Tobit. For though these books are received by Christians, and proof derived from them may, in some way or other, have weight, because the Church retains those books; yet they are not *Apud Malou, II. io8. THE CANON OF THE XVI. CENTURY 515 effectual for proving those things which are in doubt, against heretics or Jews. We here terminate our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament : for the rest (viz., the books of Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabees) are reckoned by Jerome without the canonical books, and are placed among the apocrypha, together with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as appears in his Trologus Galeatus' (or Helmeted Prologue). Nor should you be disturbed, O novice, if you should any- where find those books reckoned among the canonical books, either in the holy councils, or in the holy doctors. For the words of the councils, as well as of the doctors, are to be submitted to the correction of Jerome ; and according to his judgment [expressed] to the bishops Chromatius and Helio- dorus, those books (and if there be any similar ones in the Canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, they are not those which are given as a rule for the confirmation of the faith. They may, however, be called canonical (that is, given as a rule) for the edification of the faithful ; since [they are] received and authorized in the Canon of the Bible for this purpose." Cajetan was not a strong independent thinker. He gave himself up to study in two great departments of the Church's science, dogma and Scripture. In both, he simply followed the master. In dogma he followed St. Thomas, absolutely; in Scripture he followed in the same manner St. Jerome. Study for him simply meant to find out what these two men held. He paid slight heed to the other theologians of his time. Thomas and Jerome for him were supreme. His writings are characterized by a certain self-assurance and contempt for the opinions of others, indicative of a narrow mind. The compass of his knowledge had been narrowed by exclusive devotion to the Summa. Cajetan is the author of many strange opinions, some of them directly opposed to faith. Certainly when he says that the decrees of general councils must be submitted to the correction of Jerome, the statement is false. It was placing Jerome above the Church. And yet this extreme Jeromist had to confess that the deu- terocanonical books were received and atithorized in the Canon of the Bible. 516 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT Chapter XL Decree of the Council of Trent. The necessity for the decree of Trent arose from two quarters. Within the fold of the Church there was some uncertainty produced by the opinion of Cajetan; and the sect of protestants which arose at this time rejected the deu- terocanonical books. To make head, therefore, against the great apostasy and to make known to CathoHcs the abso- lute position of the Church, the Council of Trent, was opened on the 15th of December, 1545. The first deliberations of the Council were concerned with the question of Holy Scrip- ture. An evidence of the views of the protestants on the Scripture may be learned from the following statement of Luther : . "That which does not teach Christ is not apostolic, even if Peter or Paul said it; on the contrary, that which announces Christ is apostolic, even though uttered by Judas, Annas, Herod or Pilate." In the famous dispute of Leipsic in 15 19, when John Eck invoked the authority of Maccabees to defend the doctrine of Purgatory, Luther made answer: "There is no proof of Purgatory in any portion of sacred Scripture, which can enter into the argument, and serve as a proof ; for the book of Maccabees not being in the Canon, is of weight with the faithful, but avails nothing with the obstinate." In the spread of these extreme ideas, men looked to the Church for a definition, and she responded to the need. A Council held at Sens, in 1 528 declared,that he who held not the tradition of the Church, and rejected the decrees of the Third Council of Carthage, and those of Popes Innocent and Gelasius, should be condemned as a schismatic, and inventor of all heresies ; but tliis body was only local, and could not command all men's faith ; wherefore a decree from the supreme authority in the Church was necessary. On the nth of February, 1546, the members of the Council, who had been divided into three particular congregations, assembled. The subject of deliberation respecting the Canon was : DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 517 I. — Whether the Council should receive the books of Scripture simply, or after a previous examination by the theologians. 2. — Whether two classes of books should be constituted, so that some should be declared authoritative to prove doctrine; others useful for instruction. (Acta Genuina, Theiner.) Cardinal Cervini, president of the Council, afterwards Pope Marcellus II., proposed the questions in all their bear- ings to the Fathers.* Certain Fathers were of the mind that it would be well to examine, at least summarily, the objec- tions of the adversaries against the deuterocanonical books, but the majority decided **to receive the books simply and entirely as the Church had done in other councils, and espe- cially in the Council of Florence." (Theiner 1. c.) We see here that thercvwas no new legislation in this regard in the Council of Trent. The Council simply re- iterated and confirmed what had been believed and pro- mlilgated in the Church from the earliest times. The question was then submitted by the general of the Augustinians, and Seripando, legate of Paul IV., "that a distinction should be made between those books which" are authentic and canonical, and upon which our faith rests, and those which are merely canonical, and useful to be read for instruction in the Church, as St. Jerome places in the Pro- logus Galeatus." (Theiner 1. c.) This proposition found no favor and was straightway abandoned. In the Council of Trent, we find often a lack of precision in the views of individual members; but the conclusions arrived at are always clear and profound. *Duo ego subiiciam, quae in mea particulari congregatione tractata fuerunt; unum est, utrum simpliciter facienda sit approbatio Scripturag, proiit factum fuit per Cone. Florent.et iuxta etiam antiquiora concilia, an potius distinguendum ; qui sint libri sacri, ex quibus fundamenta nostras fidei et doctrinae eruantur, et qui sint quidem canonici, sed non eiusdem auctoritatis, ut priores illi, sed ideo ab Ecclesia recepti, ut ex his multitudo instrui possit, quales sunt libri Sapientiw, Praverbiorum, et alii similes; idque forsan non abs re esset, quoniam videtur ankbiguum ab Ecclesia determinatum, quamvis et Augustinus et Hieronymus et alii veteres de lis nonnuUa tradiderint. Alterum est, utrum sicco pede approbatio ista 518 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT So here, it is not evident just what distinction this man wished to induce. But in every case, his proposition was useless. If he wished merely to say that the import of some divine books is more important in Christian doctrine than others, the truth is understood by all Christians, and needs no definition. The Council was not about to define that Maccabees was as valuable to use as Matthew. But if he wished to say that the relation which God bore to any book was less than inspiration as we have defined it, the proposition is false. The Council simply extended proper inspiration to all the books, and left the question of their respective dogmatic and moral values intact. On the 1 2th of February, 1546, Cardinal Cervini moved on the part of his particular congregation that the Council set forth in brief the motives why it receives the books con- tested by the protestants ; but it was decided by common accord "that the Holy Books should be simply approved according to the decree of the Council of Florence." (Thei- ner, I. 52.) The next question was whether the books of both classes should be received with the same reverence, (pari pietatis affectu). This was for a long time discussed, the majority being in favor of the affirmative, but no conclusion was then reached. The following meetings, both particular and gen- eral, were given up to various questions regarding Scripture and tradition. On the 2 2d of March the secretary of the Council, Angelo Massarelli, proposed to reject the decree of the Council of Florence as of doubtful authenticity, but he was refuted by the president of the Council. Cardinal Del Monte, legate of the Pope, had, on the 26th of February, refuted the same objection. facienda sit, an vero additis rationibus et solutis argumentis, quibus adver- sarii maxime innituntur ad eorum nonnullos impugnandos et confring- endos. Ab ipsis enim, ut omnes vos scitis, infringitur imprimis Hher Machahceorum, quem penitus reiiciunt, itemi Epistola Pauli ad Hebr., una lacobi et altera Petri ac etiam Apocalypsis et alia pleraque." Acta genuina p. 52. — Quod Proverhiorum liber cum Sapientia coniungatur, lapsum calami diceres, nisi etiam Pallavicini (1. c. I. p. 220) haberet: "Proverbiorum et Sapientias libri." (Comely, op. cit.) DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 519 A detailed list of fourteen propositions was at this junc- ture drawn up to he examined and voted on in detail. Not all these regard our question. The tenth contains the pith of our present theme. This was whether the deuterocanoni- cal books should be approved as sacred and canonical. This was resolved in the affirmative by forty-four votes, against three negative votes and five doubtful ones. (Theiner, I. 77.) The thirteenth proposition submitted the question, whether to make a distinction between the two classes of books, or enumerate them according to the Council of Flor- ence. It was decided to receive the deuterocanonical books without examination or discussion by forty-one votes, against four in opposition and eight doubtful ones. The Council also unanimously decided that the things carried by a major- ity vote should not be subject to further discussion. On the 3rd of April, the corrected Schema was placed before the Fathers. The Cardinal of Trent moved that the deuterocanonical books be placed after the protocanonical ones, "because Tobias, which Jerome held to be apocryphal, is placed in the decree ahead of other books whose authority no one has ever questioned." The motion was lost, since it was against the former vote that they should approve the decree of the Council of Florence. The Bishop of Castellamare remarked that the words sacred and canonical were objectionable on account of Judith, and some others which are not in the Hebrew Canon. He moved to substitute: "in the Canon of the Church." Car- dinal Cervini, the president, responded: *Tt is true what thou sayest, but we follow the Canon of the Church, not of the Jews. When we say Canonical, therefore, we understand of the Canon of the Church." And the Bishop of Castella- mare responded : ' 'Placet . ' ' On the 8th of April, 1546, two months after the question of the Scriptures had been submitted to the Council, after mature deliberation and discussion, the Council promulgated its famous decree : "The thrice holy, oecumenical, general Council of Trent . . . following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives 520 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT and venerates with equal piety and respect all the books of the Old and New Testament, because one and the same God is the author of both. , . . The Council judges good to join to this decree a list of books, so that no one may doubt con- cerning the books received by the same Synod. These are the books: Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, that is to say : Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deu- teronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Chronicles, the first of Ezra; and second which is called Nehemiah, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter of one hundred and fifty Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jere- miah with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Proph- ets, viz., Hosea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micha, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Haggai, Zachary, Malachi, the two books of Maccabees, first and second. ... If anyone shall not receive these same books as sacred and Canonical with all their parts, as they are read in the Catholic Church, and contained in the Latin \^ulgate ; and shall knowingly and wil- fully reject the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema."* The clause, with all their parts, was inserted primarily to include certain passages of the Gospels, concerning which doubt had existed. In the general congregation on the 2 7th of March, 1546, Cardinal Pacheco asked that these portions of the New Testament should be specially mentioned. The words of the decree are of such comprehension that they include all parts, annulling all doubts that had existed both concerning the Old and the New Testaments. In virtue of this decree, every Catholic must accept as divinely inspired, the deuterocanonical books and fragments as they are read in the Latin Vulgate. The Council did not treat this as an open question, but added corroboration and precision to preceding documents. The history of the Coun- cil by Pallavicini might induce one into error. He states that the question was submitted, whether all the books of both Testaments should be approved. This would imply that the Council felt itself not bound by the Council of Flor- *Conc. Trid. Sess. IV. De Can. Script. DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 521 ence. The authentic acts by Theiner give an entirely differ- ent sense to the dehberation. The proposal was couched in these terms: That in the proximate session, the books of Holy Scripture should be received, and the way and manner determined, in in which they should be received. To be sure, the discussion of the project revealed much lack of clearness in the ideas of certain Fathers, but the great body of the Council always treated the question as decided by the existing documents of the Church. The Council of Trent admitted no different degrees of inspiration in the Holy Books, because inspiration has no degrees. A book is either the product of God's authorship, or it is not. The Council accepted the deuterocanonical books as having God for their author. The old distinction of greater and less degrees of inspiration had some ardent supporters in the Council. The ground of their opinion seems to have been an imperfect understanding of the nature of inspiration. The vast major- ity of the Council announced to them : * 'All the books of our Bible, whatever be their contents, and the profit one may draw from them, have been regarded as inspired by Chris- tian tradition, and for us, they are canonical." The oppo- nents finished by adding their placet. The absolute equality of all the books in their inspiration is assured by the Council ; for if a book be sacred and canonical, and have God for its author, it cannot be inferior to the others of which the same is asserted. Some theologians still confuse the issue by declaring that the question of equality was not explicitly defined on account of its difficulty; and the question zvas left as the Holy Fathers left it. (Loisy, 1. c) . This is nothing. The Council did not deem it necessary to promulgate an explicit decree, making the book equal in inspiration, because such was equivalently contained in the main decree; the Council did not declare the books equal in value, because they are not thus equal: God spoke in divers manners in the Scriptures, and some truths therein contained are more valuable than others, though these latter are no less the inspired writing of God. The decree of Trent was definite, final and clear but yet it took some time for it to take absolute hold upon all the rep- 522 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT resentatives of Catholic thought. If men's minds were always clear and virtuous, there would be far less confusion in the world. But often from lack of intellectual penetra- tion, or from excessive addiction to some theory, men of note give utterance to false opinions. Especially is this true in the harmonizing of schools of theology, with some definitive sentence of the Church. Those who have assimilated -^ome theory in conflict with the new decree, will retreat from their position slowly, and will endeavor, by restricting the decree, to cling to as much as possible of the old opinion. Thus Cajetan tried to conform the decree of Florence to his own opinion. With time these struggles and gasps of dying error cease, and the authority of the rock-built Church remains the absolute guide of the faithful of Christ. Thus, for a few years after the Council of Trent, there was some slight friction between its decree and certain theo- logians. This was augmented by the fact that the precise concepts of inspiration and canonicity were not then well understood. The Council gave us the text, and, as men examined the precise significance of its words, this looseness of opinion vanished from Catholic schools of theology, so that every Catholic holds to-day that the deuterocanonical books are as much inspired and as canonical as the Penta- teuch or the Gospels. An intentional falsehood is contained in Home's Intro- duction, Vol. 11. p. 489, where he places Bellarmine (ti62i) against the deuterocanonical books, by taking certain pas- sages out of their proper context in the works of the great controversialist. Bellarmine in his works clearly declares: "That the deuterocanonical works are not only good and holy, but they are sacred and of infallible truth. The Church has never doubted of their canonicity in the sense that she lacked testimonies to attest the divinity of their origin, but simply certain persons doubted, and the Church did not wish to define the question at that time."* From this it appears that Bellarmine 's opinion was that the deuterocanonical books always had the right to canon- *De Verbo Dei. I. i, Cap. IV. DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 523 icity; they came into actual enjoyment of this right by the timely decree of Trent. The aforeS'aid Home also falsely adduces the testimony of SixTus OF Sienna.* In his Bibliotheca Sancta (Tom. i. pag. i8), Sixtus dis- tinguishes two classes of books. There he invented the terms protocanonical and deuterocanontcal, and speaks of them thus: 'The first class is formed of those books, which may be called protocanonical, regarding which there has never been doubt or controversy in the Catholic Church. The second class comprises the books which were formerly known as ecclesiastical, but which are now by us called deuterocan- onical. These latter were not recognized by all since the times of the Apostles, but long afterward, and for this reason Catholic opinion concerning them was, at first uncertain. The early Fathers regarded them as apocryphal and non- canonical, and only permitted them to be read to the cate- chumens ; then with time they permitted them to be read to the faithful, not for proof of doctrine, but for edification of the faithful ; and since these books were read publicly in the Church, they were called ecclesiastical. Finally, they have been placed among the Scriptures of irrefragable authority.'' Sixtus exaggerates the doubts that existed concerning the books. He was probably more conversant with Jerome than with the other Fathers, and takes him as a representa- tive of the opinions of his time. Against his testimony stands the united testimony of the Council of Trent, com- posed of the greatest body of theologians ever assembled, declaring that the Church, relying on tradition, receives these books as sacred and canonical. The Council promulgated officially what had been always implicitly held. But Sixtus *Sixtus was by birth a Jew. He became converted to Christianity, and entered the Franciscan order. He was afterwards convicted of having taught heresies; and as he obstinately refused to abjure them, he was con- demned to be burned at the stake Just as the sentence was to be ex- ecuted, Cardinal Ghisleri, the Inquisitor-General, afterwards Pope Pius V., overcame his obstinacy, and transferred him from the Franciscans to the Dominican order. He consecrated his life to the study of the Scriptures, and died at Genoa, in 1569. His greatest work is his Bibliotheca Sancta. Many of his opinions are excellent, but, at times, his critique is defective. 524 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT is disposed to accord these books a place among the canonical Scriptures on the authority of the Church. He accepts the decree, as he understands it. But the opinions of St. Jerome moved him still to reject the deuterocanonical fragments of Esther. Thus, in the aforesaid reference, he disct)urses of it: "The appendix of the Book of Esther, which comprises the seven last chapters, consists of various rags and patch- work, of which we find nothing in the Hebrew exemplars . . . But it occurs to me here to admonish and entreat the good reader not to accuse me of temerity, that I cut out these seven chapters from the canonical Scriptures and place them among the apocrypha, as though I were unmindful of the decree of Trent, which, imder pain of anathema, commands that all the books entire should be received, as they are read in the Church, and as they exist in the old Latin Vulgate edition. •'But that Canon is to be understood, of true and genuine parts of Scripture, pertaining to the integrity of the books, and not of certain ragged appendages, and patches rashly and disorderly tacked on by some unknown author, such as are these last chapters, which not only Cardinal Hugh, Nicolas of Lyra, and Denis the Carthusian deny to be can- onical ; but also St. Jerome cuts off from the volume of Esther as a spurious part, to use his own words, 'made up of ragged fragments of words, which could be said and heard in the (several) occasions, just as it is customary for scholars to take a theme, and excogitate what words one would use, who received or wrought an injury. Origen, also, in his letter to Julius Africanus, rejects these appendages.' " Sixtus knew more of the opinions of Jerome, than of the value of oecumenical decrees. No part of the deuterocan- onical books is treated so severely by Jerome as the frag- ments of Esther. As it was hopeless to make Jerome agree on this point with the Council, as generally understood, this avowed disciple of Jerome sought by his strange distinction to maintain the old opinion of his master. But anyone can see the flimsiness of the attempt. In fact, in the subsequent centuries, there is not found one to endorse such opinion. The words of the Council were too explicit. Every part that DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 525 was in the Vulgate and read in the Church was declared sacred and canonical; the fragments of Esther fulfill both these conditions. The only way to reject deuterocanonical books and fragments is to reject the Council of Trent. In fact it is a remarkable fact, that, in the ages following the Council, Sixtus' is the only voice raised in opposition to the equal canonicity of the books, and he only aims at these frag- ments. It is an evidence of the universal obedience of faith, among the children of the Church, to the voice of authority. Among the authors of the seventeenth century Bossuet has expressed the position of the Church with the most force and precision. In a letter to Leibnitz in 1 700, he resumes as f oUow^s : "Nous dirons done, s'il vous plait, tous deux ensemble, qu'une nouvelle reconnaissance de quelque livre canonique dont quelques-uns auraient doute ne deroge point a la per- petuite de la tradition. . . . Pour etre constante et perpetu- elle, la verite catholique ne laisse pas d'avoir ses progres : elle est connue en un lieu plus qu'en un autre, en un temps plus qu'en un autre, plus clairement, plus distinctement, plus universellement. II suffit, pour etablir la succession et la perpetuite de la foi d'un livre saint, comme de toute autre verite, qu'elle soit toujours reconnue; qu'elle le soit dans les plus grand nombre sans comparaison ; qu'elle le soit dans les Eglises les plus eminentes, les plus anciennes et les plus reverees; qu'elle s'y soutienne, qu'elle gagne et qu'elle se repande d'elle-meme, jusqu'k tant que le Saint-Esprit, la force de la tradition et le gout, non celui des particuliers, mais 1 'universal de I'Eglise, la fasse enfin prevaloir comme elle a fait au concile de Trente." He insists on the practical usage of the Church in reading the books, and on the constant quotations of the Fathers; ''Ajoutons . . . que le terme de canonique n'ayant pas tou- jours une signification uniforme, nier qu'un livre soit can- onique en un sens, ce n'est pas nier qu'il ne le soit en un autre ; nier qu'il soit, ce qui est tres vrai, dans le canon des Hebreux, ou re^u sans contradiction parmi les Chretiens, n'empeche pas qu'il ne soit au fond dans le canon de I'Eglise, par I'aut- orite que lui donne la lecture presque gen^rale et par 1 'usage 526 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT qu'on en faisait par tout Tunivers. C'est ainsi qu'il faut con- cilier plutot que commettre ensemble les Eglises et les auteurs ecclesiastiques, par des principes communs a tous les divers sentiments et par le retranchement de toute ambiguite." The abbe Dupin, a contemporary of Bossuet, had at first held loose opinions concerning the deuterocanonical books, but under the influence of Bossuet, he modified his position to the following clear and just statement : ''Toutes ces raisons et ces considerations jointes ensemble sont suffisantes pour etablir I'autorite de ces livres, dont la definition du concile de Trente ne laisse aucun lieu de douter. Car, quoiqu'il ne se fasse point de nouvelle revelation k TEg- lise, elle peut apres bien du temps etre plus assuree de la verite d'un ouvrage qu'elle ne I'etait auparavant, quand, apres I'avoir bien examine, elle a trouve un legitime fonde- ment de n'en plus douter et une tradition suffisante dans quelques Eglises pour le juger authentique. C'est la raison pour laquelle saint Jerome dit que la seconde epitre de Saint Pierre avait acquis de I'autorite par I'antiquite et par I'usage, et meritait d'etre mise au rang des livres sacres du Noveau Testament.* Bernard Lamy (tiyis), of the Congregation of the Ora- tory, has a singular opinion concerning the deuterocanonical books. In his Apparatus Biblicus, after setting forth the opinions of Rufinus and Jerome, he concludes : ''Therefore the books which are in the second Canon, though joined to those of the first Canon, are not of the same authority.'' He evidently accords to these books canonicity, but believes that the degree of inspiration is not so intense in them. Loisy (Histoire du Canon de I'Ancien Testament, pag. 235) favors this opinion, and cites Ubaldi in support of it.f But ♦Dissert, prelim, ou Proleg. sur la Bible, i. 52, 53. fVerum in specie et in concreto nihil vetat quominus in quibusdam locis intensiorem veluti gradum inspirationis admittamus, atque ita diver- sos modus inspirationis distinguamus. Imo hoc omnino faciendum vide- tur: siquidem diversa rerum natura, et diversa Scriptoris conditio hoc requirere videtur. Itaque, ut aliquid magis in specie dicamus, dis- tinguere possumus loca Scripturas prophetica, vioraUa et historica, et in his nirsus substantiam historias a minutis quibusdam adiunctis. Ad loca prophetica quod attinet, duo casus distinguendi sunt : vel enim vaticinium DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 527 it is plainly evident that Ubaldi there means to distinguish between revelation, designated by him as the more intense mode of inspiration, and inspiration proper, which permitted the acquisition of knowledge by natural means. There is nothing in Ubaldi in support of this vainly imagined distinc- tion of degrees of canonicity. A greater departure from the decree of the Council of Trent was made by Jahn (ti8i6) who declares: 'That by the testimony of the Fathers of Trent, the difference between protocanonical and deuterocanonical books has by no means been removed, and the Fathers well understood that it could not be removed, no more than the fact upon which it stood, namely: that the deuterocanonical books had not been received everywhere, and by all in past times." [Einleitung in Die Gottlichen Biicher des Alten Bundes. (2 edit.) I. 140.] There is evidence of exceeding shortsightedness here. The Fathers did not change the external facts concerning the Scriptures. They could not change the past. They did not reverse the opinion of Jerome ; they did not declare that the deuterocanonical books had never been doubted, neither did they declare that the doctrinal import of these books was equal to that of the first Canon. But they did declare that they were all sacred and canonical having God for their author. By this definition they added nothing intrinsically to the books; but they infallibly declared that, in virtue of their inspired character, they always had a right to canon- icity, which they now officially recognized ; and they right- a propheta antea editum fuit, et postea scripto consignatum, ut sunt pleraque vaticinia S. Scripturse, vel in ipso scribendi actu vaticinium edi- tum est: in primo casu sufficit communis et ordinaria inspiratio ut Scrip- tura prophetica etiam formaliter, seu quatenus scripta est, divina et inspir- ata dici possit ; in altero vero casu non solum inspiratio, sed vere ac propria dicta revelatio necessaria fuit, cum futurorum cognitio nonnisi ex divina revelatione haberi possit. Talia sunt quasdam leremiee vaticinia, ut colligi videtur ex Jer. XXXVI, 17, 18, ubi leremias dicitur dictasse Baruch tamquam amanuensi suas prophetias. Quod pertinet ad partes didacticas et historicas, generatim loquendo non amplius quam communis inspira- tionis ratio requirebatur : siquidem tum moralis doctrina, tum historia Agiographis nota erat sive ex naturali lumine cum revelatione coniuncto^ ut in Libris Sapientialibus, sive ex audita pr^dicatione, ut in Evangeliis et Epistolis Apostolorum, sive ex scriptis documentis, vel etiam ex propria experientia, ut generatim fiebat in scriptoribus sacras historise utriusque Testamenti." Ubaldi II. 11 1. 528 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT fully based their action on the mighty preponderance of the tradition of all times. The opinions of Jahn have always been characterized by error .* Itisnottobe expected that one with such pronounced rationalistic views would accept the decree of the Council of Trent. The decree of Trent formed a new starting point for Cath- olic opinion. No longer did one question whether or not certain Fathers held these books, but, accepting the definition of the Church, they interpreted it to have extended divine' inspiration to all the books of the Catholic Canon, and the Council of Vatican has ratified this consensus of Catholic opinion by defining: "If anyone shall not receive all the books with all their parts, as the Tridentine Synod enumer- ates them, as sacred and canonical ; or shall deny that they are divinely inspired, let him be anathema."! Protestant opinion has been consistent in nothing since its beginning ; it has varied much regarding the Canon. The Gallican Confession of 1559, the Anglican Confession of 1562, the Confession of Geneva of 1564, declare that the apocrypha (deuterocanonical books) are useful for pious reading, but not available to prove doctrine. The conciliabulum of West- minster, in 1648 declared: 'That the so-called apocryphal books, being not divinely inspired, by no means belong to the Canon, wherefore they have no authority in the Church of God ( ?), and are to be treated as merely human writings." The Biblical Society of London, declared in 1826, that no edition of Scripture was to be circulated which contained the apocrypha, and no aid was to be given to anyone circulating such edition. What they hold to-day on the Canon, it is hard to say. *Jahn was bom in Moravia in 1750. He devoted his early years to the study of Oriental languages and the Scriptures. In 1789 he held the chair of Oriental languages, Introduction to the Old Testament, and Archaeology in the University of Vienna. In 18 13, he was also made professor of dogma in the same university. He was a man of much erudition, but thoroughly infected with rationalism. His greatest work is his Introduction to the Old Testament. This was prohibited by the Congregation of the Index in 1822. Several other of his works have also been prohibited He died in 1816. +Constit dogmat. de fide Cath. Can. 4, De Revel. The New Testament Chapter XII. The Canon of the New Testament. The formation and preservation of the Canon of the New Testament is certainly due to the direct influence of divine Providence moving second agents to execute the will of God. Still it was not the primary design of Christ to deliver to the world a written code of his doctrines. He inaugurated the great work of the Kingdom of God by oral preaching. He wrote nothing ; neither did He impose any precept on those whom He had chosen to write. He bade them preach. He redeemed the world from sin; taught it his Gospel by word of mouth, and founded a living, teaching agency to carry on His work forever. These were principal. Out of these came the divine Scriptures in the designs of Providence ; not to supersede Christ's way of teaching the world, but to be a means, a deposit, whence the Church should draw, and give to the people. In fact, all the terms which Christ used in enunciating his design of teaching the world, demonstrate that the principal and ordinary means of teaching mankind was ever to be the living word by preaching. No other means would be ade- quate to accomplish that which Christ willed. The world of that day could not be reached through the medium of letters. Since the invention of printing, and the general diffusion of literature, ideas may be rapidly spread by the press ; but the message of Christ was given to man before such means existed for the communication of thought. Moreover, the message of Christ was for the poor and the illiterate, as well as for the savant ; for busy toilers who had not time nor philo- (529) 34 (H.s.) 530 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT sophical depth to draw the Message from the written instru- ment, and Christ estabHshed the only means capable of teach- ing all nations — the magisterium of the Church. The children of men were lambs who had need to be fed, and Christ gave them an eternal succession of shepherds. The Apostles adopted the method of their Master. ' 'Aided by the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and relying on the sole power of Christ, which wrought many miracles by them, they announced the Kingdom of Heaven throughout the world ; neither did they take thought to write books, for they fulfilled a far greater and sublimer office. Paul, who is pre- eminent among all the Apostles in richness of diction and depth of thought, wrote nothing except a few epistles, although he could have expounded man}^ mysteries. . . . And the other co-laborers of the Lord, the twelve Apostles, the seventy disciples, and many others, were by no means ignor- ant (of these mysteries). Nevertheless, of all the disciples of the Lord, only Matthew and John left us a written word ; and we are told that they were moved to w^rite by a particular need." (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. IIL 24.) "What," says Irenaeus, "if the Apostles had not left us the Scriptures? Would it not be necessary to follow the traditions of those to whom they committed the Churches ? Verily this method many barbarous nations adopt, who believe in Christ without ink and paper, having the law of salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit, and faith- fully holding to the old tradition, believing in one God, etc." (Irenaeus, Migne 7, 855.) Again: "The tradition of the Apostles, manifested in the whole world, may be learned in every Church by those who wish to know the truth, and we can enumerate the bishops constituted by the Apostles and their successors even to our day." (Irenaeus, Migne, 7, 848.) Wherefore, they err greatly who constitute the Scriptures the sole means of teaching Christ's message; for many churches were flourishing before any of the N. T. existed. The dates of the Gospels can not be fixed with precision. For the Gospel of Matthew, Catholic opinion ranges over the period included between the years 36 and 67 of the Christian era ; the period for ]\Iark is from the year 40 to the year 70 ; THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 531 Luke's Gospel is variously placed from the year 47 to the year 63, while the Gospel of St. John is assigned to the closing years of the first Christian century. Many concur in the opinion which places the Acts of the Apostles in the year 64 of our era. The dates of some of the Epistles of Paul may be assigned with a good degree of certitude. The Epistles to the Thes- salonians were written about the year 53 ; the first Epistle to the Corinthians, in the first months of the year 57 ; the second Epistle, in the autumn of the same year. The Epistle to the Romans was written toward the close of the year 5 7 or in the beginning of 58 ; the Epistle to the Galatians preceded that to the Romans, and ranges between the year 55 and 57. The Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians, the Epistle to the Colos- sians, and the Epistle to Philemon are by Loisy placed during the captivity of Paul, from the year 61 to 64. It is more difficult to assign the proper date of the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Modem exegetes are of accord in placing them at a later date than the preceding. The Epistle of St. James is later than the Epistle to the Romans, and internal evidence is therein that St. James was conversant with the Epistle to the Romans. Its probable date might be placed about the year 60. The Epistles of St. Peter are ascribed to the last years of his life. According to Eusebius and Jerome, the prince of the Apostles was martyred in the third year of Nero's reign, about the year 67. The Epistle of vSt. Jude has a close affinity with the second Epistle of St. Peter, but whether Peter drew from Jude, or Jude from Peter is not clear. They who defend the first hypothesis assign the year 65 as the date of St. Jude's Epistle ; while the advocates of the second hypothesis assign a later date. The first Epistle of St. John may be considered as a sort of preface to his Gospels, and written at the same time ; the second and third Epistles are of a little later date. The Apocalypse according to the most ancient testimonies, and particularly that of St. Irenaeus, was written toward the close of the reign of Domitian, about the year 95. Though these are approximate dates, they are precise enough to establish the fact that' several years of intense 532 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Apostolic work had elapsed before the first writing appeared. And in that period churches had been founded in Palestine, and other parts of the Eastern world, and probably also at Rome. The Church and the apostolic priesthood was princi- pal ; the Scriptures were a means which the Church was to use. But as God wished to provide adequately for the propa- gation and preservation of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven, he also brought it about that there should be pre- served in writing some of the most important truths of the New Dispensation. The spirit of truth who was sent to sug- gest all things necessary in the new economy, moved the holy men to commit certain things to writing. But these writings owe their origin to special occasions, and particular circumstances. Primarily they were intended for some one or few individuals or churches. Gradually they became interchanged and disseminated among the churches, and it is only in the third century that we find any church having a complete list of the Holy Books of the New Law. We place, therefore, as a leading proposition, that the writers of the New Law wrote with no design to compile a code of Scripture. They wrote to supply some particular need that which they knew to be the Word of God ; the future destiny of their writings to form a sacred deposit was hidden from them. The mode of the formation of the body of Scrip- tures of the New Law was by gradual accession. Documents written to some individual person or Church were copied and sent to others. Paul recognizes and makes use of this method in his Epistle to the Colossians: **And when this Epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans ; and that ye likewise read the Epistle from Laodicea." [Coloss. IV. i6.] That it was likewise characteristic of the early Christians to carefully preserve writings of doctrinal import may be inferred from a passage in the writings of St. Polycarp. "The Epistles," he says, "of Ignatius (Martyr), which were sent us by hira, and others, as many as we had, we have sent to you, as you requested ; they accompany this letter, and from them you will receive much profit." (S. Polycarp, ad Phil. 13.) If such diligence and care were bestowed on the THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 533 Epistles of Ignatius Martyr, much more would be bestowed on t'he writings of the Apostles and Founders of Christianity. We see also in the testimony an evidence of the method of communicating writings among the churches. Both agen- cies combined brought it about that the several churches soon had their sacred deposit of the New Law ; though many years elapsed before we find the list complete in any church ; and many more, before all the churches had the complete Canon. Even in the writings of the authors of the New Testa- ment, we find allusions to certain collections of the Scriptures of the New Law. In his second Epistle, Peter speaks of the Epistles of Paul as of writings generally known to the Chris- tians : ' 'Wherefore, dearly beloved, waiting for these things, be diligent ... as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, hath written, as also in all his Epistles, speaking in them of these things ; in which are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and the unstable, wrest, as also the other Scriptures, to their own per- dition." (II. Peter III. 14-16.) "In this place," says Estius, "Peter canonizes, so to speak, Paul's Epistles. For in saying 'as also the other Scriptures,' he, in truth, declares that he placed them among the Holy Scriptures." Comely adduces a proof from the First Epistle to Tim- othy to prove that Paul was conversant with the Gospel of Luke. Paul speaks thus: "For the Scripture saith, 'Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the com'; and, 'The laborer is worthy of his hire.' " (I. Tim. V. 18). The first sentence of Paul's quotation is taken from Deuteronomy XXV. 4. From the context, it is plainly evident to him who reads that the second sentence is also adduced as Holy Scripture. The passage exists in Luke X. 7, and the illation is just that Paul quotes here as divine Scripture a passage of the Third Gospel. Hence we infer that, at the writing of the Epistle to Timothy, Luke's written Gospel existed, and was known to the Christians as Holy Scripture. Up to our times, the universal belief of Christians held that the disciples and first successors of the Apostles placed 534 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT the works of the authors of the New Testament with the books of the Old Testament, as of equal divinity and author- ity. The rationalistic plague which infected the world in our times, first essayed to overthrow this universally accepted truth, claiming that the writings of the Apostles are never quoted in the solemn formulas used of the Old Testa- ment, and that the words of the Lord are quoted from oral traditions. To meet this opposition, we must first set forth some of the characteristics of those early times. It is true that oral communication prevailed in those times. Not every one could have a manuscript of the writ- ten word, but all heard the voice of those **who preached peace." The intense activity of the first teachers of the New Law made Christ and his Law a living reality in every land. The Gospel was not so much a written reality as a liv- ing reality. The events had taken place in no remote age ; the first Christians received their doctrine from those who announced that "which they had heard, which they had seen with their eyes — which they had looked upon, and their hands had handled." Therefore, it is not to be expected to find numerous explicit quotations from the written deposit in those early days. The early teachers preached much, and wrote little. Much of what they wrote has succumbed to the ravages of time. They used the Gospel of Christ, not so much as a written deposit, but as a present living reality, and part of the life of the people. Men of those days received the doctrine of Christ not from books, but by the living word of preaching ; they handed it down to others in the same man- ner in which they had received it. But yet there is evidence that when one of the Books of the New^ Testament did come into existence, it w^as recognized as the word of God. Those who received it did not make an analysis of the concept of inspiration to canonize it. It came from the men who had brought them the message of peace ; it embodied what they had received from those who preached Christ to them, and this was its perfect warrant. Thus the Books of the New Law first came into the churches as individual instruments ; then as groups; and, lastly, a com.plete list w^as formed by communication between the churches. the canon of the new testament 535 Hence, in the age immediately succeeding the Apos- tles, WE find several of the books of our Canon recog- nized AS DIVINE Scripture. In the Epistle vulgarly attributed to St. Barnabas, we find a quotation from St. Matthew in the solemn formula "sicut scriptum est^" («? yey pairTai).'^ In the final sentence of the IV. Chapter of this Epistle is as follows : ''Let us pay heed lest we be found as it is writ- ten: 'Many called, few chosen.' " Now, the only place where it is thus written is the Gospel of Matthew XX. i6. ; XXII. 14. Some of the older rationalists considered this quotation as an interpolation of the Latin interpreter. After the Codex Sinaiticus had overthrown this hypothesis, Volkman, Renan and Strauss, advanced the opinion that the quotation came from IV. Ezra, VIII. 3: "Multi quidem creati sunt; pauci autem salvabuntur." But a comparison of the two texts clearly evinces Matthew as the authority. Wherefore, Mangold attempted to destroy the force of the quotation by showing that the pseudo Barnabas quotes Henoch in the formula: "As it is written." But this would not prove ♦The Epistle of Barnabas was first published in Paris in Greek, and Latin by Menard and d'Achery 1645 but not complete. The entire Greek text was first found by Tischendorf in his famous Codex Sinaiticus in 1859. The contents of the letter show plainly that it is not the work of the companion of Paul, Before his conversion, the author of the letter was a pagan, for he declares, XVI. 7, that "before believing in God, his heart was full of idolatry. " Barnabas was a Jew, and worshipped the true God. Again, the author is not conversant with Jewish rites, and obligations. Moreover, the letter speaks of the pimishment of the Jews in the destruction of their Temple; whereas, critics conclude that Barnabas did not live to see the taking of Jerusalem by Titus. But the value of the letter is considerable, even though not the writing of Barnabas. There is in it elevation of ideas, and logical presentation of truth. Who- ever be the author, he touches the apostolic age, and cannot be placed later than the first years of the second century. The work is marred by excessive allegory, which makes the writer forget that Greek is not the tongue of Abraham. He sees a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ in the number of Abraham's servants who were 318 (Gen. XIV. 14). The numerical value of I (Greek) is 10 ; of H, 8 ; and T, 300. IH signifies Jesus, and T (by its form,) his cross. Therefore, that Abraham took 318 men with him in pursuit of Chedorlahomer, was prophetic that Jesus Christ was to be crucified! 536 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT that he did not consider Matthew divine Scripture but that he also placed Henoch among the Holy Books. We admire the honesty of Hilgenfeld, who concedes that the author quotes Matthew, and also that the Epistle is of the year 97. St. Poly carp, in his Epistle to the Philippians, Chapter XII., has this testimony: "As it is written in these Scrip- tures: *Be angry and sin not,' and: 'Let not the sun go down on your wrath.' " It is evident that Polycarp here unites two passages of written Scripture. The second passage is from the Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, IV. 26. As the proving force of this passage is cogent, the rationalists try to weaken it by denying its authenticity. But its authentic valor is sufficient to satisfy all just criticism. This short Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, contains according to Funk (op. cit.) sixty-eight allusions to the New Testament. The verbal parallelism is so exact, that it is evident that they were drawn from the written deposit. We here exhibit some of the clearest ones : St. Polycarp. Epist. ad Philip I. " — quern resuscitavit Deus, solutis doloribus infemi. In quern non videntes creditis, credentes autem exultatis lae- titia inenarrabili et glorificata." Act. II. 24. " — quern Deus suscitavit, solutis doloribus infemi, juxta quod impossible erat teneri ilium ab eo." I. Pet. I. 8. " — quern cum non videtis. diligitis: in quem nunc quoque non videntes creditis ; credentes autem exultabitis laetitia ine- narrabili et glorificata — ." Epist. II. 8, 9. "Gratia enim estis salvati per fidem, et hoc non ex vobis: Dei enim donum est, non ex operibus, ut ne quis glorietur." I. Pet. I. 13. "Propter quod succincti lum- bos mentis vestrae, sobrii per- fecte sperate in cam, quae of- Ibid. " — scientes, quod estis salvati, non ex bus—." gratia operi- Ibid. II. "Propter quod succincti lum- bos vestros servite Deo in timore — . ' ' THE CANON OF N. T. OF POLYCARP 537 fertur vobis, gratiam, in revela- tionem Jesus Christi — " I. Cor. VI. 14. "Deus vero et Dominum sus- citavit, et nos suscitabit per virtutem suam." I. Pet. III. 9. " — non reddentes malum pro malo, nee maledictum pro mal- edicto." Math. VII. I, 2. "Nolite judicare, ut non ju- dicemini. In quo enim judicio judicaveritis, judicabimini: et in qua mensura mensi fueritis, remetietur vobis." Luke VI. 36-38. Estote ergo misericordes, si- cut et Pater vester misericors est. Nolite judicare, et non ju- dicabimini: nolite condemnare, et non condemnabimini. Di- mittite, et dimittemini. Date, et dabitur vobis: mensuram bonam et confertam, et coagit- atam et supereffluentem da- bunt in sinum vestrum. Ea- dem quippe mensura, qua mensi fueritis, remetietur vo- bis." Math. V. 3. "Beati pauperes spiritu, quo- niam ipsorum est regnum coelo- rum." Ibid. 10. Beati, qui persecutionem pa- tiuntur propter justitiam, quo- niam ipsorum est regnum coelo- rum." Ibid. "Is vero, qui ipsum suscita- vit e mortuis, et nos suscita- bit—." Ibid. " — non reddentes malum pro malo, nee maledictum pro maledicto — ." Ibid. " — memores autem eorum, quae dixit Dominus docens: 'Nolite judicare, ne judicemini; dimittite, et dimittetur vobis; miseremini, ut misericordiam consequamini ; qua mensura mensi fueritis, remetietur vo- bis'; et: 'Beati pauperes, et qui persecutionem patiuntur, quo- niam ipsorum est regnum Dei.' " 538 THE CANON OF N. T. OF POLYCARP Gal. IV. 26. "Ilia autem, quae sursum est Jerusalem, libera est, quae est mater nostra." I. Tim. VI. 10. "Radix enim omnium malo- rum est cupiditas. Ibid. 7. "Nihil enim intulimus in hunc mundum: baud dubium, quod nee auferre quid possu- mus." Gal. VI. 7. "Nolite errare: Deus non irri- detur. ' ' I. Pet. II. II. " — carissimi, obsecro vos tamquam advenas et peregri- nos abstinere vos a camalibus desideriis, quae militant ad- versus animam — ." Rom. XIV. 10, 12. "Tu autem, quid judicas fra- trem tuum? aut tu, quare sper- nis f ratrem tuum ? Omnes enim stabimus ante tribunal Christi. Itaque unusquisque nostrum pro se rationem reddet Deo." Ibid. III. "Neque enim alius mei similis beati et glori- osi Pauli sapientiam asseqm potest ; qui cum esset apud vos, coram hominibus tunc viventi- bus perfecte ac firmiter verbum veritatis docuit; qui et absens vobis scripsit epistolas, in quas si intueamini, aedificari poteritis in fide, quae vobis est data, quasque est mater omnium nos- trum—." Ibid'. IV. "Principium autem omnium malorum est habendi cupidi- tas." Ibid. "Scientes ergo, quod nihil in- tulimus in hunc mundum, sed nee auferre quid valemus — ." Ibid. V. "Scientes ergo, quod Deus non irridetur — ." Ibid. " — quia omnis cupiditas mil- itat adversus spiritum — ." Ibid. VI. " — omnes ante tribunal Christi stare, et unumquemque pro se rationem reddere opor- tet." THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 539 I. Jo. IV. 3. " — et omnis spiritus, qui sol- vit Jesum, ex Deo non est; et hie est Antichristus, de quo au- distis, quoniam venit, et nunc jam in mundo est. Math. VI. 13. "Et ne nos inducas in tenta- tionem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen." Ibid. XXVI. 41. "Vigilate, et orate, ut non in- tretis in tentationem. Spiritus quidem promptus est, caro au- tem infirma." I. Pet. II. 22-24. " — qui peccatum non fecit, nee inventus est dolus in ore ejus: qui peccata nostra ipse pertulit in corpore suo super lignum — . ' ' I. Pet. II. 12. " — conversationem vestram inter gentes habentes bo- nam. — " Ibid. VII. "Omnis enim qui non con- fessus fuerit Jesum Christum in came venisse, Antichristus est—." Ibid. " — rogantes omnium con- spectorem Deum, ne nos indu- cat in tentationem, sicut dixit Dominus: 'Spiritus quidem promptus est, caro autem in- firma.' " Ibid. VIII. " — qui peccata nostra in corpore suo super lignum per- tulit, qui peccatum non fecit, nee inventus est dolus in ore ejus — ." Ibid. X. "Omnes vobis invicem sub- jecti estote, conversationem vestram irreprehensibilem hab- entes in gentibus — ." Ibid. XI. "An nescimus, quia sancti mundum judicabunt? sicut Paulus docet. Ego autem nihil tale sensi in vobis, vel audivi, in quibus laboravit beatus Pau- lus, qui estis in principio Epis- tolae ejus." Among the genuine works of St. Clement of Rome are two Epistles to the Corinthians, and two on Virginity. The two latter were assailed by some rationalists, but they have I. Cor. VI. 2. "An nescitis, quoniam sancti de hoc mundo judicabunt? Et si in vobis judicabitur mundus, indigni estis, qui de minimis ju- dicetis?" 540 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME been defended by such an excellent critic as Wet stein. The following schema exhibits Clement's use of the New Testa- ment. Luke VI. 36—38. "Estote ergo misericordes, sicut et Pater vaster misericors est. Nolite judicare, et non ju- dicabimini: nolite condemnare, et non condemnabimini. Di- mittite, et dimittemini. Date, et dabitur vobis: mensuram bonam et confertam, et cogita- tam et supereffluentem dabunt in sinum vestrum. Eadem quippe mensura, qua mensi fueritis, remetietur vobis. ' ' ' Math. XXVI. 24. "Filius quidem hominis va- dit, sicut scriptum est de illo; vae autem homini illi, per quern Filius hominis tradetur: bon- um erat ei, si natus non fuisset homo ille. ' ' Luke XVII. 2. ' ' Utilius est illi, si lapis mola- ris imponatur circa collum ejus, et projiciatur in mare, quam ut scandalizet unum de pusilUs is- tis. ' ' St. Clementis Epist. I. ad Corinthios, XIII. "Sic enim dixit: 'Estote misericordes, ut misericordiam consequamini ; dimittite, ut di- mittatur vobis; sicut facitis, ita vobis fiet; sicut datis, ita da- bitur vobis; sicut judicatis, ita judicabimini; sicut indulgetis, ita vobis indulgebitur ; qua men- sura metimini, in ea mensura - bitur vobis.' " Ibid. XLVI. ' ' Recordamini verborum Je- su Domini nostri. Dixit enim: 'Vae homini ilH: bonum erat ei, si natus non fuisset, quam ut unum ex electis meis scandaH- zaret: meHus erat, ut ei mola circumponeretur, et in mare demergeretur, quam ut unum de pusillis meis scandaliza- ret.'" I. Paul, I. Cor. 12. "Hoc autem dico, quod un- usquisque vestrum dicit: Ego quidem sum Pauli: ego autem Apollo: ego vero Cephae: ego autem Christi. ' ' Ibid. XLVII. "Sumite Epistolam beati Pauh ApostoH. Quid primum vobis in principio EvangeHi scripsit? Profecto in Spiritu ad vos htteras dedit de seipso et Cepha et Apollo, quia etiam tum diversa in studia scissi era- tis. ' ' THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 541 I. Peter IV. 8. "Ante omnia autem, mutu- am in vobismetipsis caritatem continuam habentes, quia cari- tas operit multitudinem pecca- torum. ' ' Math. IX. 13. "Euntes autem disci te, quid est: Misericordiam volo, et non sacrificium. Non enim veni vocare justos, sed peccatores. ' ' Ibid. X. 32. "Omnis ergo, qui confitebi- tur me coram hominibus, con- fitebor et ego eum coram Patre meo, qui in ccelis est — . ' ' Ibid. VII. 21. "Non omnis, qui dicit mihi: Domine, Domine, intrabit in regnum coelorum, sed qui facit voluntatem Patris mei, qui in coelis est, ipse intrabit in reg- num coelorum. ' ' Ibid. VII. 23. "Et tunc confitebor illis: Quia nunquam novi vos: disce- dite a me, qui operamini iniqui- tatem. ' ' MathX. 28. "Et nolite timere eos, qui occidunt corpus, animam au- tem non possunt occidere, sed Ibid. XLIX. "Charitas nos Deo agglu- tinat: charitas operit inultitu- dinem peccatorum : charitas omnia sustinet — . ' ' St. Clementis Epist. II. ad Corinthios, II. ' * Aha quoque Scriptura dicit *Non veni vocare justos, sed peccatores — . ' ' Ibid. III. "Ait vero etiam ipse: 'Qui me confessus fuerit in conspec- tu hominum, confitebor ipsum in conspectu Patris mei.' Ibid. IV. "Non modo igitur ipsum vo- cemus Dominum ; id enim non salvabit nos; siquidem ait: ' Non omnis qui dicit mihi, Do- mine, Domine, salvabitur; sed qui facit justitiam. ' ' ' Ibid. "Idcirco, nobis haec facien- tibus, dixit Dominus: 'Si fueri- tis mecum congregati in sinu meo, et non feceritis mandata mea, abjiciam vos, et dicam vo- bis: Discedite a me; nescio vos unde sitis, operarii inquita- tis.' "* Ibid. V. "Ait enim Dominus: 'Eri- tis velut agni in medio lupo- rum. ' Respondens autem Pe- *Clement is wont to unite passages from the several Gospels into one quotation. In the present instance, he has taken the first part of the quotation from some apocryphal gospel. 542 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME potius timete eum, qui potest et animam et corpus perdere in gehennam. ' ' Math. VI. 24. "Nemo potest duobus domi- nisservire: " Math. XVI. 26. "Quid enim prodest homi- ni, si mundum universum lucre- tur, animae vero suae detrimen- tum patiatur ? Aut quam dabit homo commutationem pro ani- ma sua ? * ' This passage is also quoted by Irenaeus, Lib. II. 64, as a saying of the Lord. Grabe be- Heves it to be from the apoc- ryphal gospel according to the Hebrews. Math. XII. 50. Quicumque enim fecerit vo- luntatem Patris mei, qui in coe- lis est, ipse meus f rater et soror, et mater est. " trus ei dicit: 'Si ergo lupi ag- nos discerpserint ? ' Dixit Je- sus Petro: *Ne timeant agni post mortem suam lupos: et vos nolite timere eos qui occidunt vos, et nihil vobis possunt fac- ere; sed timete eum, qui post- quam mortui fueritis, habet po- testatem animae et corporis, ut mittat in gehennam ignis, ' 'f Ibid. VI. * Dicit autem Dominus: Nul- lus servus potest duobus domi- nis servire. ' ' Ibid. ' ' Si nos volumus et Deo ser- vire et mammonae, inutile no- bis est. Nam 'quae utilitas, si quis universum mundum lu- cretur, animam autem detri- mento afficiat. ' ' ' Ibid. VIII. "Ait quippe Dominus in Evangelio: 'Si parvum non servastis, quis magnum vobis dabit? Dico enim vobis: Qui fidelis est in minimo, et in ma- jori fidelis est. " Ibid. IX. "Etenim Dominus dixit: ' Fratres mei sunt ii qui f aciunt voluntatem Patris mei. ' ' ' fMost of the passage is taken from some apocryphal gospel. The test of time and judgment of the Church had not yet divStinguished between the genuine and the apocr3^phal books of Holy Scripture. But the citation of some apocryphal books weakens not Clement's testimony to prove that the books of our Canon existed then as written instruments, though some apocrypha were mingled with them. THE CANON OF THE N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 543 Math. V. 1 6. ' ' Sic luceat lux vestra coram hominibus, et videant opera vestra bona, et glorificent pa- trem vestrum, qui in coelis est." St. Paul ad Ephes. V. 6. ' * Nemo vos seducat inanibus verbis: propter haec enim venit ira Dei in filios diffidentiae. ' ' St. Clementis Epist. I. ad Virgines, II. * ' — sicque adimplentur Chris- ti verba: 'Videant opera ves- tra bona, et glorificent Patrem vestrum qui in coelis est. ' ' ' Ibid. III. "Itaque nemo vos seducat inanibus verbis — . ' ' II. Tim. III. 5. " — habentes speciem qui- dem pietatis, virtutem autem ejus abnegantes. Et hos de- vita. ' ' Ibid. " — de talibus enim scrip tum est: 'Habentes speciem quidem pietatis, virtutem autem ejus abnegantes.' " I. Cor. VII. 34. * * Et mulier innupta et virgo cogitat, quae Domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu. Quae autem nupta est cogitat quae sunt mundi, quomodo pla- ceat viro. ' ' Luke. VII. 28. "Dico enim vobis: Major in- ter natos mulierum propheta Joanne Baptista nemo est: qui autem minor est in regno Dei, major est illo. " Ibid. V. * * Solicita sit necesse est quae Domini sunt, quomodo placeat Deo, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu. ' ' Ibid. VI. "Angelus fuit Joannes: ta- lem esse decebat Domini nostri praecursorem, quo major non fuit inter natos mulieinxm. ' ' Phil. IV. 3. "Etiam rogo et te, germane compar, adjuva illas, quae me- cum laboraverunt in Evangelio cum Clemente, et ceteris adju- toribus meis, quorum nomina sunt in libro vitae. ' ' Ibid. "Eamdem viam amplexati sunt et Paulus, et Barnabas, et Timotheus, quorum nomina sunt in libro vitae — . ' ' 644 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME Heb. XIII. 7. ' * Mementote praepositorum vestrorum, qui vobis locuti sunt verbum Dei, quorum in- tuentes exitum conversationis, imitamini fidem. ' ' I. Cor. IV. 16. "Rogo ergo vos: Imitatores mei estote, sicut et ego Christi." Ibid. "Scriptum est enim: 'Mem- entote praepositorum vestro- rum, quorum intuentes exitum conversationis, imitamini fi- dem.' " Ibid. "Et alibi dictum est: Imi- tatores mei estote, fratres, si- cut et ego Christi.' " In the Eighth Chapter of this First Epistle of Clement to Virgins, ten phrases occur bearing on them clearest evi- dence that they are taken from the Pauline Epistles, such as for instance, "avarice which is the serving of idols." (Ephes. V. 5.) Jo. III. 6. "Quod natum est ex came, caro est, et quod natum est ex spiritu, spiritus est. ' ' Ibid. 31. "Qui desursum venit, super omnes est. Qui est de terra, de terra est, et de terra loqui- tur. Qui de coelo venit, super omnes est. ' ' Rom. VIII. 7. " — Quoniam sapientia car- nis inimica est Deo; legi enim Dei non est subjecta, nee enim potest. ' ' Rom. VIII. 9. ** — Si quis autem Spiritum Christi non habet, hie non est ejus. ' ' I. Cor. V. II. " — cum ejusmodi nee cibum sumere. ' ' Ibid. VIII. "Camales sunt isti omnes eorumque similes: 'quod enim natum est de came caro est; qui est de terra, de terra est, et de terra loquitur, et terrena sapit:' 'quae sapientia inimica est Deo: legi enim Dei non est subjecta, nee enim potest — .' ' ' Ibid. " — si quis autem Spiritum Christi non habet, hie non est ejus. ' ' Ibid. X. "Cum ejusmodi suademus ne cibum quidem sumere. ' ' THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 545 II. Thess. III. II, 12. "Audivimus enim, inter vos quosdam ambulare inquiete, nihil operantes, sed curiose agentes. lis autem, qui ejus- modi sunt, denuntiamus, et ob- secramus in Domino Jesu Chris- to, ut cum silentio operantes, suum panem manducent. ' ' I. Tim. I. 7. " — volentes esse legis doc- tores, non intelligentes neque quae loquuntur, neque quibus affirmant. ' ' I. Cor. XII. 28. "Et quosdam quidem posuit Deus in ecclesia primum Apos- tolos, secundo Prophetas, ter- tio Doctores — . ' ' St. Jac. III. 2. "In multis enim offendimus omnes. Si quis in verbo non offendit, hie perfectus est vir; potest etiam freno circumdu- cere totum corpus. ' ' I. Pet. IV. II. ' ' Si quis loquitur quasi ser- mones Dei — . ' ' Coloss. IV. 6. ' ' Sermo vester semper in gra- tia sale sit conditus, ut sciatis, quomodo oporteat vos unicui- que respondere. * ' Rom. XVI. 18. "Hujuscemodi enim Chris- to Domino nostro non serviunt, Ibid. "Sed reipsa sola ducuntur otiositate, cum sint ipsi non solum otiosi, sed et verbosi, et curiosi, loquentes quae non op- ortet. Hi, per dulces sermo- nes , quaestum venantur in no- mine Christi. Hos sinistra praefigit nota divinus Aposto- lus multa mala in eis redar- guens. ' ' Ibid. XL "Sed sunt inquieti, non in- telligentes quae loquuntur, ne- que de quibus affirmant. Ibid. "Hanc autem viam multi sequuntur, quia non animad- vertunt quod scriptum est: 'Non multos in vobis, fratres, positos esse doctores et prop- betas'; et iterum: 'Si quis in verbo non offendit, hie perfec- tus est vir. Potest etiam freno circumducere totum corpus. Si quis loquitur, quasi sermo- nes Dei — . ' ' Ibid. " — et iterum: Sermo ves- ter semper in gratia sale sit con- ditus, ut sciatis quomodo opor- teat vos unicuique respon- dere—. ' ' Ibid. ' ' Quidam tandem beatum populum dicunt, et per dulces 35 (H.S.) 546 THE CANON •OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME sed suo ventri; et per dulces sermones et benedictiones seducunt cor da innocentium. ' ' Math. XV. 14. "Sinite illos: caeci sunt, et duces caecorum: caecus autem si caeco ducatum praestet, ambo in foveam cadunt. ' ' This is a scriptural mosaic made up of Galat. V. 10; Jas. III. 15; I. Cor. II. 4; and Ephes. II. 2: ' " — in quibus aHquando am- bulastis secundum saeculum mundi hujus, secundum princi- pem potestatis aeris hujus, spiritus, qui nunc operatur in fihos diffidentiae. ' ' Math. XVII. 20. "Hoc autem genus non ejici- tur nisi per orationem et jeju- nium. ' ' Math. X. 8. "Infirmos curate, mortuos suscitate, leprosos mundate, dsemones ejicite: gratis accepis- tis, gratis date. ' ' Math. XXV. 36. " — ^nudus, et cooperuistis me: infirmus, et visitastis me: in carcere eram, et venistis ad me. " sermones et benedictiones, se- ducunt corda innocentium. ' ' Ibid. "Hi sunt veluti caecus qui caeco ducatum praestat, quique ambo in foveam cadunt. ' ' Ibid. "Hi portabunt judicium, quia sapientiam animalem va- numque mendacium garruU in- anique scientia inflati praedi- cant in persuasibihbus hu- manae sapientiae verbis, secun- dum saeculum mundi hujus, secundum principem potesta- tis aeris hujus, spiritus qui operatur in filios diffidentiae, et non secundum doctrinam Chris ti. ' ' Ibid. XII. " — non enim agunt cum recta fide, et juxta doctrinam Domini qui dixit: 'Hoc genus daemoniorum non ejicitur nisi per orationem et jejunium.' " Ibid. "Vos igitur quibus dictum est: 'Gratis accepistis, gratis date—.' " Ibid. "Pr£eclarum ac utile est ut servi Domini morem gerant, in- ter caetera similia, huic prae- cepto divino: 'Infirmus eram, et visitastis me.' " THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 547 II. Cor. XL 29. ' ' Quis infirmatur, et ego non infirmor? quis scandalizatur, et ego non uror ? ' ' Math. IX. 37, s^. "Tunc dicit discipulis suis: Messis quidem multa, operarii autem pauci. Rogate ergo Dominum messis, ut mittat operarios in messem suam. ' ' Jo. VI. 27. "Operamini non cibum, qui perit, sed qui permanet in vi- tam aetemam — . ' ' Luke I. 75. " — in sanctitate et justitia coram ipso omnibus diebus nostris. ' ' Coloss. I. 10. " — ut ambuletis digne Deo per omnia placentes — . ' ' II. Cor. VIII. 21. ' ' Providemus enim bona non solum coram Deo, sed etiam co- ram hominibus. ' ' I. Tim. II. 3. "Hoc enim bonum est et ac- ceptum coram Salvatore nos- tro Deo—. ' ' II. Cor. VL 3. Nemini dantes ullam off en- sionem, ut non vituperetur ministerium nostrum — . ' ' Ibid. ' ' — memores verborum Apos- toli: 'Quis infirmatur, et ego non infirmor? Quis scandali- zatur, et non uror?" ' Ibid. XIII. "Memores enim esse debent messem quidem esse multam, operarios autem paucos: ideo- que rogent Dominum messis ut mittat operarios in messem suam — . ' ' Ibid. ' ' — operarios qui operentur non cibum qui perit, sed qui per- manet in vitam aetemam — ." Ibid. "Sic Domino serviemus in sanctitate et justitia coram ipso, per omnia placentes, providentes bona, non solum coram Deo, sed etiam coram hominibus: hoc enim bonum est et acceptum — . ' ' St. Clementis Epist. II. ad Virgines, III. " — solliciti quippe sumus ne quis in nobis offendatur aut scandalizetur: Nemini dan- 548 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 11. Cor. V. II. "Scientes ergo timorem Do- mini hominibus suademus, Deo autem manifesti sumus. ' ' I. Tim. V. lo. " — in operibus bonis testi- monium habens, si filios edu- cavit, si hospitio recepit, si sanctorum pedes lavit, si tribu- lationem patientibus submini- stravit, si omne opus bonum subsecuta est. " I. Cor. X. 33. " — sicut et ego per omnia omnibus placeo, non quaerens, quod mihi utile est, sed quod multis, ut salvi fiant. ' ' Rom. XIV. 15. Si enim propter cibum frater tuus contristatur, jam non se- cundum caritatem ambulas. Noli cibo tuo ilium perdere, pro quo Christus mortuus est. " I. Cor. VIII. 12. ' * Sic autem peccantes in fra- tres, et percutientes conscien- tiam eorum infirmam, in Chris- tum peccatis. ' ' Math. X. 16. "Ecce, ego mitto vos sicut oves in medio luporum. Es- tote ergo prudentes sicut ser- pentes, et simplices sicut col- umbae. ' ' tes ullam offensionem, ut non vituperetur ministerium nos- trum. ' ' Ibid. '*Scientes ergo timorem Do- mini, hominibus suademus; Deo autem manifesti sumus. ' ' Ibid. IV. "Haec autem prae aliis senes- cens mulier eligitur quas diu probata est assiduitate medita- tionum, hincque perspecta si filios educavit, si hospitio re- cepit, si sanctorum pedes lavit." Ibid. V. ' ' — ^nec quaerimus quod nobis utile est, sed quod multis, ut salvi fiant. ' ' Ibid. "Hinc Paulus: 'Noli cibo tuo, inquit, ilium perdere pro quo Christus mortuus est;' et alibi : ' Sic autem peccantes in fratres, et percutientes con- scientiam eorum infirmam, in Christum peccatis.' " Ibid. VI. '' — debemus esse prudentes sicut serpentes, et simplices sicut columbae, non quasi insip- ientes, sed ut sapientes — . ' ' THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 549 Ephes. V. 15, 16. "Videte itaque, frates, quo- modo caute ambuletis: non quasi insipientes, sed ut sap- ientes. ' ' Math. VII. 6. Ibid. "Nolite dare sanctum cani- " — ^ne demus sanctum cani- bus: neque mittatis margaritas bus, mittamusque margaritas vestras ante porcos— . ' ' ante porcos — . ' ' I. Cor. X. 12. Ibid. XIII. "Itaque, qui se existimat stare, videat ne cadat. ' ' I. Tim. V. II. " Adolescentiores autem vid- uas devita: cum enim luxuri- atae fuerint in Christo, nubere volunt — . ' ' Joa. IV. 27. "Et continue venerunt dis- cipuli ejus et mirabantur, quia cum muliere loquebatur," etc. "Et iterum: Qui se existi- mat stare, videat ne cadat. ' ' Ibid. XIV. * * Nullum porro sanctum ani- madvertetis frequenter fuisse conversatum cum virginibus aut adolescentioribus virorum uxoribus vel viduis, quas devi- tandas esse divinus docet Apos- tolus. ' ' Ibid. XV. ' ' De ipso Domino Jesu Chris- to scriptum est, quod venientes discipuli, et videntes eum prope fontem seorsim cum Samarit- ana sermocinantem mirabantur quia cum muliere loquebatur. ' ' Therefore the Fourth Gospel scriptum est, and was recog- nized as Holy Scripture in Clement's time. Jo. XX. 17. " Dicit ei Jesus: Noli me tan- gere, nondum enim ascendi ad Patrem meum: vade autem ad fratres meos, et die eis: Ascen- do ad Patrem meum^et Patrem vestrum, Deum^meum et Deum vestrvim. ' ' Ibid. "Insuper, postquam Domi- nus a mortuis surrexit, cum Maria ad sepulcrum properas- set, eumque adorans, ipsius pe- des tenere voluisset: 'Noli, in- quit, me tangere: nondum enim ascendi ad Patrem meum." 550 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME Phil. III. 1 6. Ibid. XVI. " VeFumtamen ad quod per- "Idcirco, fratres, rogamus, venimus, ut idem sapiamus, vos in Domino, ut idem sapia- et in eadem permaneamus mus, et in eadem permanea- regula. ' ' mus regula — . ' ' I. Jo. IV. 6. Ibid. "Nos ex Deo sumus. Qui " Qui no vit Deum, audit nos: non est ex Deo, non audit qui non est ex Deo, non audit nos," etc. nos. " We have only selected some of the clearest quotations from our books. Many more allusions to New Testament books exist in Clement's works. Eusebius testifies that Clement, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, "gives many sentiments taken from the Epistle to the Hebrews, and also literally quoting the words, he most clearly shows that this work is by no means a late production. Whence it is probable that this was also numbered with the other writings of the Apostles." (Hist. Eccles. III. 38.) More than twenty texts, some of them of considerable length, are found in Clement's Epistle, which in the sense and order of the words agree with the Epistle to Hebrews. Those who would still contend that these quotations come from oral tradition, merit to be classed with those of whom divine Dante sings: '*Non ragioniam di loro, ma guardae passa." "Let us not speak of them, but look, and pass." (Inferno III. 51.) The works of Clement show that at Rome, toward the close of the first century, at least the Four Gospels, Eleven Epistles of Paul, the First Epistle of Peter, the First Epistle of John, and the Epistle of St. James were known and recog- nized as Holy Scripture. The testimony of Basilides, a heretic of the first part of the second century, confirms the existence of the written Gospels, and certain of Paul's Epistles. According to Euse- bius, Hist. Eccles. IV. 7., Basilides edited a commentary on the Evangelium. In the Philosophumena, VII. 20, we find this testimony: "Basilides said that out of nothing (eK ov/c ovTcov) was made the germ of the universe, the THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS 551 word, as it is said : Xet there be light' ; and this is what is said in the Gospels: 'He was the true light that enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world.' " Quotations from the Pauline Epistles are often used by Basilides with the formulas : " It is written , " * 'The Scripture saith . ' ' Accord- ing to Origen, Basilides commented the Epistle to the Romans. In Origen's Commentary on Romans, Lib. V. i, we find the following : "Sed hasc Basilides non advertens de lege naturali debere intelligi, ad ineptas et impias fabulas sermonem apostolicum traxit, et in fieTeva-co/xarcoo-eco^ dogma, id est, quod animae in alia atque alia corpora transfundantur, ex hoc Apostoli dicto conatur astruere. Dixit enim, inquit, Apostolus, quia 'ego vivebam sine lege aliquando': hoc est, antequam in istud corpus venirem, in ea specie corporis vixi, quae sub lege non esset ; pecudis scilicet, vel avis. Sed non respexit ad id quod sequitur, id est : 'Sed ubi venit mandatum, peccatum revixit.' Non enim dixit se venisse ad mandatum, sed ad se venisse mandatum ; et peccatum non dixit non fuisse in se, sed mor- tuum, fuisse, et revixisse. In quo utique ostendit quod de una eademque vita sua utrumque loqueretur. Verum Basi- lides, et si qui cum ipso hoc sentiunt, in sua impietate relin- qiiantur." The works of Ignatius, (Martyr) reveal that he was con- versant with a written code of the New Law. However, not all the texts that are usually brought forward from Ignatius' works are valid to prove that he spoke of a written Gospel. The first text is taken from the fifth chapter of his Epistle to those of Smyrna : "Fools deny him (Jesus Christ) . . . whom the prophets could not convince, nor the Law of Moses, nor the Gospel, even to this day." Although I believe that Ignatius here speaks of a written Gospel, nevertheless, in con- troversy it could be maintained that the words would be apposite, even though the oral teaching of Christ alone existed. The next passage is from the seventh chapter of the same Epistle: "It behooves us ... to pay heed to the Prophets, and especially to the Gospel wherein the Passion is taught us, and the Resurrection perfectly demonstrated." This is 552 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS somewhat cogent, but not apodictic. It is certainly far more probable that Ignatius, in placing together these two sources of doctrine in the present phrase, spoke of two things of similar nature, both being written instruments. The next testimony of Ignatius is taken from Ignatius' Epistle to those of Philadelphia, VIII -IX. : "I hear certain ones saying: * 'Eai^ /jltj ev toU apxeLOi<; evpco^ ev rw evayyeXiw ov iriaTeM . And when I say to them that it is written, they answer: this is to be demonstrated. But my archives are Jesus Christ, my spotless archives are his cross, his death, his resurrection, and the faith which comes from him. . . . The priests are good, but the High Priest is better . . . through whom the Prophets and the Apostles and the Church enters (into the Holy of Holies) . But the Gospel has some- thing of special excellence, to wit : the advent of Our Lord Jesus Christ, his Passion and Resurrection. The beloved Prophets announced him ; but the Gospel is the perfection of eternal life." The key to this testimony consists in the Greek passage. Some expunge the comma after the t« euayyeXLco, and translate it : Unless I find evidence in the ancient writings, I will not believe the Gospel. This version is approved by Light foot, Apostolic Fathers, Vol. III. p. 37. This version is rejected by Funk, (Patres Apost. i, 230), Comely (Intro- duction I. 159), and Loisy (Canon du Nouveau Test., 28). They insist on the fact that the laws of the Greek language permit no such sense. They instead place to) evayyeXio) in apposition to rot? apxeioL^;, in which case it would certainly refer to a written Gospel. Though the Greek con- struction is somewhat rough, I am disposed to accept the first opinion. The context and line of argument evince that Ignatius was arguing against those who demanded an exces- sive verification of prophecy for faith in the Gospel. The TO, apx^la were the prophecies of the Old Law. Against them he first responds, that the doctrines of the New Law are founded on the prophecies. And then to their cavils, he exclaims that for him there is no need of prophecy to sub- stantiate New Testament teaching. For Christ and the Cross merit faith, irrespective of prophecy. Finally, he says, THE CANON OF N. T. OP IGNATIUS 553 as Jesus Christ is greater than the Prophets, so the Gospel is better than the Prophecies. Although the mere textual structure of the sentence does not necessarily imply a written Gospel the context and sense of the testimony plainly point to such. Not so much in any one word as in the whole pas- sage does it become evident that Ignatius is speaking of a written instrument which he is comparing, like with like, to the Prophets, and extolling above them. This sense is cor- roborated by a testimony in his Epistle to those of Philadel- phia, Chapter V. : "Let us turn to the Gospel, as to Christ corporally present, and to the Apostles as to the priesthood of the Church. Let us love also the Prophets, because they announced Christ." This testimony evidently speaks of the Gospels, and the other writings of the New Law which per- petuated Christ and his Apostles on earth. In his practical use of Scripture, in his genuine Epistles, Ignatius assimilates the truths of Scripture, and then adduces them in his own words, so that exact quotations are not therein found, but many places evidence that he drew largely from the New Testament writings. Such allusions are very frequent in the Apostolic Fathers. This the rationalists themselves concede.* *Reuss (Hist, du Canon Strasb. 1863, p. 23): "A la v^rit6 on ne d6- couvre pas encore dans ces epitres (Patrum apostolicorum) des citations nominatives k de rares exceptions pres. . .et surtout les textes des apotres ne sont nulle part invoqu6s express^ment et lit^ralment comme des autor- it^s (Cfr. tamen Polyc, ad Philip. 13). Mais ils sont quelquefois exploit^s tacitement de fagon qu'il est impossible de s'y tromper; en certains en- droits, les exhortations rev6tent les formules employees par ces illustres pr^d^cesseurs, et Ton se convainc facilement que les ecrivains de cette seconds generation faisaient dejd une etude des autres de la premiere. C'est ainsi que la lettre de Clement offre des reminiscences assez precises de quelques passages des 6pitres aux Romains et aux Corinthiens et surtout de celle aux Hebreux; celles d'Ignace, plus nombreuses (quee tamen simul sumtffi vix priorem Clementis longitudine aequant) et en tout cas beau- coup plus recentes, en presentent d'autres <^ui nous ramenent aux epitres aux Corinthiens et aux Galates ainsi qu'al'Bvangilede Jean; enfin la toute petite epitre de Polycarpe contient de fr^quentes allusions k des passages apostoliques, notamment aux Actes, a la premiere 6pitre de Pierre, k celles aux Rom., aux Cor., aux Gal., aux Ephes., et k la premiere k Timoth^e. Encore une fois, cet usage est purement homiletique ou rhetorique; nulle part un nom d'apotre, une formule de citation (?), vm avis quelconque n'avertit le lecteur que les paroles, que nous reconnaissons imm^diate- ment comme des dl^mentes d'emprtmt, aient une valeur particuliere et diff^rente de celles de I'entourage." (Comely, op. cit. pag. 160). 554 THE CANON OF N. T. OF PAPIAS We may also adduce here the testimony of Papias, who, according to Irenasus, was a disciple of St. John, and a com- panion of Polycarp. The testimony as preserved to us by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. III. XXXIX.) is as follows: "That priest (St. John) was wont to say that Mark, the interpreter of Peter, wrote down diligently whatever he remembered, but he followed not the order of the Lord's words and deeds. For he had never heard the Lord, or followed him . . . Where- fore, Mark erred in nothing, writing certain things as he remembered them." Of Matthew, Papias writes thus: "Matthew, he said, wrote the discourses (of the Lord) in the Hebrew tongue; men translated them as every one was able. ' ' The Gospel of Matthew is termed the Xoyia (KvpLaKci), since it contains more of the Lord's discourses than any other Gospel. Though it is impossible to fix the certain date of Papias' writing, we are sure that he touches the Apostolic age, and records that which he received from those of the Apostolic age. His testimony is conclusive for the existence in the first century of the written Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Eusebius also, in the same place, declares that "the same Papias made use of testimonies taken from the first Epistle of St. John and the first of Peter." The Gospel of Matthew has also in its favor the testimony of Eusebius concerning St. Pantaenus, "who moved by divine zeal, and fired by the example of the Apostles ... is said to have penetrated even to the Indies, and to have found there the Gospel of Matthew, which had preceded him, and was held by certain ones who had em- braced Christianity. It is said that Bartholomew, one of the twelve preached to these, and left them the Gospel of Matthew, written in Hebrew." We find, therefore, that at the end of the first century the Canon of the four Gospels was in universal acceptance in all the Christian communities. In the first quarter of the sec- ond century we find the Epistles of St. Paul in all the great Churches. Certainly Clement of Rome, Ignatius (Martyr) and Polycarp had a collection of Pauline Epistles, and sup- posed the same to exist with those to whom they wrote. The whole fourteen Epistles may not have been equally THE CANON OF N. T. OF II. CENTURY 555 known, but Loisy (op. cit.) who is not disposed to be too favorable to the Catholic position, admits thirteen in the col- lection then received. The Acts of the Apostles are used by Ignatius, Poly carp and Clement of Rome. The Epistle of James, the First Epistle of Peter, and First of John, have clearest testimonies. St. Irenaeus (Contra Hsereses V. 30) declares that those who saw John face to face bear witness to the Apocalypse. He evidently means by such phrase, Papias and Poly carp. There is no clear testimony of the Apostolic age for the Epistle of Philemon, the Second Epistle of Peter, the Second and Third of John, and the Epistle of Jude. It would not be just to infer from this that they were not known then. But little of the literary product of that age has come down to us ; and besides, the character of these writings was less useful for the scope for which the early Fathers employed the Scrip- tures. Passing from the Apostolic Fathers to their immediate successors, the testimonies increase in number and clearness. St. Justin (ti63) testifies (Apologia I. 66) : "For the Apostles in their Memorabilia (airoiJLVTjfiovevfjiaTa) which are called Gospels, declare that Jesus thus commanded them ; that he took bread, and, having given thanks, said: *Do this in rememberance of me ; this is my body' ; and also taking the chalice, and giving thanks, he said : 'This is my blood.' " Justin's peculiar term for the Gospels is, nevertheless, apt ; for they wrote down the principal words and deeds of the Lord, as they remembered them. In paragraph 67, he again speaks of the Gospels: *'0n what is called the day of the sun, all the dwellers of the cities and the fields gather in one place, and the Memorabilia of the Apostles, or the writings of the Prophets are read, as time permits." Again in his dialogue against Tryphon, 103 : "For in the Memorabilia, which I place to have been written b}^ his Apostles and their disciples, it is stated that sweat like drops of blood flowed from him, when he prayed and said: *If it be possible, let this chalice pass. ' " There is an evident allu- sion to St. Luke's Gospel here, for only Luke speaks of the sweat like drops of blood. 556 THE CANON OF N. T. OF JUSTIN Again in the same paragraph we find: " Immediately- after Jesus ascended from the River Jordan, where the voice came upon him : Thou art my son ; to-day have I begotten thee/ it is written in the MemorabiHa of the Apostles, that Satan approached him, and tempted him, saying : 'Adore me.' And Christ answered: 'Begone from me, Satan; the Lord thy God shalt thou adore, and him only shalt thou serve.' " We find an allusion to the fourth Gospel in Paragraph 105 of the Dialogue: **I have before demonstrated, as we learn from the Memorabilia, that the Only-begotten of the Father of the universe is properly the Word, and power begotten of him, and afterwards bom a man of the Virgin." Only John calls Christ the Word. St. Justin in his Dialogue against Tryphon the Jew, 81, has a clear testimony for the Apocalypse: **And in addi- tion to these things, a man from among us, John by name, a disciple of the Lord, in an Apocalypse made known to him, prophesies that those who have believed in Christ will dwell at Jerusalem for a thousand years, and then will be the gen- eral, in a word, the eternal resurrection, and the future judg- ment." The few works that remain of Justin are filled with pas- sages taken from the Gospels, without acknowledgment of source. St. Justin, in Apologia pro Christ ianis, L 63, speaking of Christ, says: ''He is called an angel and an Apostle." It is only in the Epistle to the Hebrews, III. i, that Christ is called an Apostle. In his Treatise against Tryphon, 33, he draws a com- parison between Christ and Melchisedech, clearly revealing knowledge of Epistle to Hebrews, V. 8-10. Traces also are found in his works of all the other books of the New Testa- ment, except the Epistle of St. Jude, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, and the Second and Third of St. John. One of the disciples of St. Justin was the famous Tatian. According to the most probable critical data, Tatian was by origin a Syrian. He visited Rome with Justin, and then returned to his native country and fixed his domicile at THE CANON OF N. T. OF CHURCH OF EDESSA 557 Edessa. He composed there his famous Diatessaron, or harmony of the four Gospels in Syriac. This work was, in 1888, translated into Latin b}^ Cardinal Ciasca, from the iVrabic version of Abul-Pharag. The Diatessaron was a harmonized account of the Gospel data taken from the four Gospels. It remained the official Gospel of the Syrian Church, through the time of St. Ephrem, even to the fifth century, when it was superseded by the individual Gospels. It is certain, therefore, that the Church of Edessa, in the first half of the second century, possessed the written Gos- pels in the form of the Diatessaron. It is not easy to fix what other books entered into their collection. ^ In the "Doctrina Addai," which reflects the old tradition of the Church of Edessa on the Canon of Scriptures, the following declaration is placed in the mouth of the dying Addai:* "The Law, the Prophets and the Gospel, which you read daily to the people, and the Epistles of Paul, which Simon Peter sent us from Rome, and the Acts of the Apostles which John, the son of Zebedee, sent us from Ephesus — these are the Scriptures that ye should read in the Church of Christ , and ye should read naught else . ' ' (Doctrine of Addai ed. Phillips, 1876, p. 46). This testimony is valuable only in its affirmative sense. It makes known that in the Church of Edessa, the Gospels, the Epistles of Paul, and the Acts had been canonized. The omission of the other books is due to the strange genius of Tatian, which moved in independent lines. The Canon of the early Church of Edessa, was, doubtless, formed by him, and he excluded those books which his caprice found less acceptable. *The name Addai seems to be a Syriac approximation to the name of Thaddeus the Apostle. The "Doctrina Addai" is the apocryphal acts of this Apostle. This work was published in the Syriac original by Cureton. (Ancient Syriac Documents, London, 1864.) It has more recently been studied by Lipsius CJ)ie cdciienijdie ^bgor — fope, Bininswick, 1880) and the Abb6 Tixeront (Les Origines de I'Eglise d'Edesse, Paris, 1888). It is a work ranging between the end of the third and beginning of the fourth century. Its source is a legend known to Eusebius, and extending back to the first half of the third century. Though the work is apocryphal it is founded on the tradition of the Edessene Church of that period. 558 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MARCION The Epistle to Diognetus speaks of the Gospels in the plural number as a body of writings existing side by side with the Law and the Prophets.* "The reverence of the Law is chanted, and the grace of the Prophets is known, and the faith of the Gospels is built tip, and the teaching {7rapd8oatavei7)) the Apocalypse. It is evident that Euse- bius includes the Epistle to the Hebrews in Paul's Epistles, since it was universally known in his day, and he places it in no other class. Moreover, in lib. cit. III. he had declared, ''that the fourteen Epistles of Paul were manifestly known to all." The second class is made up of the avrtXeyo/jieva, yvayptfia Se Tot9 TToWot?, the books which had been doubted of by some, but received by the many. These are the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, II. Peter, and II. and III. of John. The third class he calls spurious, voOa, composed of the Acts of Paul, Pastor, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Doctrine of the Apostles, the Gospel accord- ing to the Hebrews, and, if it seems well, the Apocalypse of John. In an inferior place he ranges the impious books, the inventions of heretics. This document contains not so much the present status of the books, as their past history ; Eusebius fills the role of a chronicler, not a critic. THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS 591 The peculiar position of the Apocalypse is the effect of the causes before mentioned. Up to the middle of the third century the work had been received by all. In virtue of this universal acceptance Eusebius gives it its place among the books of the first Canon. The rise of the Millenarian heresy drew opposition upon the book. Its mysterious sense was abused by the Millenarians ; and the defenders of the faith, being hard pressed, began by casting doubt upon the authenticity of the book, and later, upon its divine char- acter. Hence, some rejected the book as spurious. As Eusebius rightly says, it was accepted by all in one period of history ; it was rejected by some in another. He does not decide the issue ; he adduces the historical data, and allows the reader to decide. In op. cit. Lib. 3, Eusebius speaks thus: "As to the writing of Peter, one of his Epistles called the First, is acknowledged as genuine. For this was anciently used by the ancient Fathers in their writings, as an undoubted work of the Apostle. But that which is called the Second, we have not, indeed, understood to be embodied with the sacred books, ivhaOrixov, yet as it appeared useful to many, it was studiously read with the other Scriptures . Again, ibid. : ''The Epistles of Paul are fourteen, all well known and beyond doubt. It should not, however, be con- cealed, that some have set aside the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying, that it was disputed, as not being one of St. Paul's Epistles ; but we shall in the proper place, also subjoin what has been said by those before our time respecting this Epis- tle." Eusebius is inclined to magnify the importance of the individual doubts, lest he should be thought to have been ignorant of them. The fact that a book was not mentioned by many ancient Fathers, though explainable from the nature of the writing, was often taken by him as an evidence of doubt. And yet, the testimony of tradition even at his hands is most favorable to our books. The Church of Alexandria seems to have cleared itself from all doubt in the fourth century. 592 THE CANON OF N. T. OF ATHANASIUS St. Athanasius, its oracle in that age, thus manifests its faith : 'The books of the New Testament are the four Gos- pels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively; the Acts of the Apostles ; Seven Epistles, which are one of James, two of Peter, three of John and one of Jude. The Fourteen Epistles of Paul follow in this order: Romans, two to the Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus and one to Philemon. Lastly comes the Apocalypse of John. These are the fountains of salvation, where the thirst of those who thirst for the living words is slaked. Through these alone the doctrine of faith is delivered. Let no one add to them or take from them." (Epist. Fest. XXXIX) There is an air of security in these words that indicates that the faith of the Church of Christ was back of the speaker. The Canon of Athanasius is the Canon of Trent, because the faith of the Church in whose name he spoke was the same then as when she pronounced her definitive decree. Cyril of Jerusalem formulates the same canon with the exclusion of the Apocalypse, (Cyril, Cat. IV. 36). In the fourth century this book encountered severe opposition in the East, on account of its abuse by the Chiliasts. St. Epiphanius enumerates the books of the Canon : The Four Gospels, the fourteen Epistles of Paul, the Acts of the Apostles, the seven Catholic Epistles, and the Apocalypse. (Haer. 76) Gregory of Nazianzus has the same Canon, with the exception of the Apocalypse, which is placed among the books that are not authentic. (P. G. 41. 892.) The Canon of Amphilochius is the same. He defends the Epistle to the Hebrews against those who term it apoc- ryphal . ' Tt is , " he says , * ' verily inspired . ' ' His testimony is rather unfavorable for the Apocalypse, which he says "is judged apocryphal by the greater num- ber." (P. G. 37, 1595-1598.) The doubts of these doctors seem to have regarded more the authorship of the Apocalypse than its divine inspiration. It was an echo of the opinion of Dionysius the Great, who THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF III. CENTURY 593 called in question not the divine character of the book, but John's authorship of it. In fact, Gregory of Nazianzus, St. Basil, and Gregory of Nyssa have employed the Apocalypse as divine Scripture. The Council of Laodicea in its sixtieth Canon receives all our books except the Apocalypse of John. (Mansi II. 573.) No clear reference is found in the works of John Chrysos- tom of the II. and III. of John, the II. of Peter, the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse. But this is not an indication that he rejected them. It was due to the minor doctrinal importance of the four. Epistles that he found no occasion to employ them, and most probably the peculiar mysterious character of the Apocalypse moved him to seek his materials from other sources. His temper of mind always favored the literal interpreta- tion of Scripture, and there is little in the Apocalypse that appeals to such a mind. However, Suidas in his Lexicon, at the word '\(odvv7}<; declares that St. John received the Apoc- alypse as canonical. In the works of St. Ephrem we find commentaries on all the books of our Canon of the New Testament. He seems to have paid slight heed to the doubts of some concerning the Apocalypse. As St. Ephrem knew not Greek, his use of all the books is an evidence that they then existed in Syriac. The testimony of the four great Codices is favorable to the Catholic Canon. Codex ^, of Mt. Sinai, contains all the books. Codex B, of the Vatican, undoubtedly did contain all the books, but as it is now mutilated, a portion of Hebrews, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Apocalypse are wanting. Codex A, Alexandrinus, contains all the books. The palimpsest Codex C, of St. Ephrem, originally con- tained all the books.* The Bohairic version of Scripture contains all the books of the Catholic Canon. The Sahidic version, also, though existing now only in fragments, plainly shows that it con- tained the same Canon. *An accurate description of these Codices will be given later on in this work 594 THE CANON OF N. T. OF W. CENTURY The same Canon is found in the Ethiopian version, and in the Armenian version. The Peshitto, as it exists now in the Nestorian Church, contains not II. Peter, II. and III. John, the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse, but it is certain that St. Ephrem recognized these books, as frequent quotations from all of them are found in his works. This gives us cause to suspect that the Nestorians, after the time of St. Eph- rem, expunged these books from the Canon of Scripture. In the Western Church, as time goes on, we find con- tinued evidences that the Catholic Canon of to-day was then the practical Canon of the Church. Hilary of Poitiers cites Hebrews, and attributes it to Paul. (De Trin. IV. II.) He cites also II. Peter (De Trin. I. 17), and the Epistle of St. James (De Trin. IV. 8). Lucifer of Cagliari, (t37i) cites the Epistle to He- brews, and the Epistle of Jude (De non conv. cum. Haer. 10, ed. Hartel).* St. Ambrose (t397) also employs often in his works the Epistle of the Hebrews and the Epistle of Jude. St. Philastrius of BrescIa (Haeres. 8S) fonnulates this Canon: *Tt has been established by the Apostles and their succfessors, that nothing should be read in the Catholic Church except the Law, the Prophets, the thirteen Epistles of Paul and the seven Catholic Epistles." The omission of Hebrews and the Apocalypse is due to some shade of doubt that possessed his mind at that time. In other portions of his works he characterizes as heretics those who do not receive the Apocalypse and the Epistle to the Hebrews. f *Lucifer was Bishop of Cagliari, metropolis of Sardinia, about the mid- dle of the fourth century. He vigorously defended Athanasius in his com- bat against Arianism, and for this was exiled by the Arian Emperor, Con- stance. In his exile, he wrote his work against Constance, whereupon the Emperor sent him into upper Egypt. After the death of Constance, he was recalled by Julian in 361. He went to Antioch where the church was rent by the dicussion between Paulinus and Meletius. He consecrated Paulinus bishop of the see, and thus augmented the schism. The saddest act in his whole career was his refusal to hold communion with the Pope after his restoration of the fathers of the Council of Rimini. He had many followers who took the name of Luciferans. He died in 371 at Cagliari. tPhilaster was Bishop of Brescia in Italy, about the 3^ear 374. He was with Ambrose in the Council of Aquileia in 38 1 . His death is placed about the year 387. In his work on heresy he reveals much piety, but there is there great lack of critique. THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME 595 • RuFiNus OF Aquileia (Expos. Symbol. 37) has formu- lated the complete Catholic Canon, and terminates his list with these words : * 'These are the books which the Fathers have placed in the Canon, and upon which they build our faith." The history of the New Testament has this advantage over that of the Old Testament, that it has not St. Jerome as an adversary. The works of Jerome are vast, and his references to the New Testament many. We can only adduce here some representative passages to show forth what was his mind on our Canon. In his Epistle to Paul- inus (Migne, Patrol. Lat. 22, 548) he has the following testi- mony: *T will touch briefly upon the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the 'quadriga' of the Lord and the true Cherubim. . . . Paul wrote to seven Churches : the eighth to the Hebrews is placed by many outside the Canon. He exhorts Timothy and Titus, and entreats Phile- mon for the fugitive slave Onesimus. . . . The Acts of the Apostles seem to contain but dry history, and to portray the infancy of the Church, but when we know that the writer was Luke, the physician, 'whose praise was in the Gospel,' we will understand that all his words are medicine for a sick soul. James, Peter, John, and Jude wrote seven Epistles, brief but deep, in mystery; brief in words, but long in the sense, so that many stumble in the understanding of them. The Apocalypse contains as many mysteries as words. This is insufficient praise; the book is above all praise." Though made in an oratorical way, and somewhat lack- ing in precision, this list contains Jerome's views on the Canon. He receives all the books, but records the doubts concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews. We shall now examine a few special references in the works of Jerome to the books of the New Testament, concerning which there existed doubt. In his treatise de Viris IllUvStribus (Migne Pat. L. 23, 615 Cap. V.) he enumerates Paul's Epistles thus: "Paul wrote nine Epistles to seven churches, to the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Galatians one, to the Ephe- sians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to the 596 THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME • Thessalonians two, and besides two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon. The Epistle which is styled, 'To the Hebrews,' is not believed to be of his authorship, on account of the difference in style and diction. By Tertullian it is ascribed to Barnabas; others attribute it to Luke the Evangelist; and some believe it to be of Clement of Rome, afterwards Pope, who, they say, was associated with Paul, and ordered and embellished Paul's teaching in his own language, or to speak more precisely, since Paul wrote to the Hebrews, and on account of their hatred of his name, he omitted it in the salutation in the beginning. He wrote as a Hebrew in Hebrew, eloquently in his own tongue, and what was eloquently spoken in Hebrew, was more eloquently translated in Greek, and for this cause the Epistle differs from the other Epistles of Paul." Jerome estimated the thought of the Eastern world above that of the Western. The doubts concerning Hebrews were nearly all centered in the West, and moved him little. Though he is ready to adopt any plausible theory to explain the absence of the Pauline style in Hebrews, he, in no imcertain terms, vindicates to Paul the formal creation of the work. In his Epistle to Dardanus (Migne, 22, 1103), he is even more explicit in favor of the Hebrews. "The Epistle which is entitled: To the Hebrews, is received as the Epistle of Paul, not only by all the churches of the Orient, but also by all the Greek writers up to the present time ; although many claim that the words were written by Barnabas or Clement. It matters not who the writer was, since he was an ecclesias- tical man, and the Epistle is promulgated by the daily read- ing of the churches. And if the Latin usage does not receive it among the canonical Scriptures, neither do the Greek churches receive the Apocalypse with full sanction ; but we receive them both, following not the usage of our time, but the authority of the old writers." Jerome has exaggerated the doubts of the Western Church in regard to Hebrews. It was received by that Church, and the doubts were only scattering and individual. No doubt had properly invaded the corporate belief of the THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME 597 Church. Jerome rises above these doubts, and receives the book on the warrant of tradition and the usage of the Church. Wherever he mentions elsewhere in his works these doubts, it is simply to historically state that which he did not per- sonally entertain. In his Commentary on Ezekiel, VIII. (Migne, 25, 1465), he introduces a quotation from Hebrews, with the remark: *'If, in receiving the Epistle, the Latin people do not reject the authority of the Greeks." I believe this to be a rhetori- cal figure to belittle the importance of the occasional doubts of the West. It was equivalent to saying: Against the few doubts of the West is arrayed the authority of the whole Greek world. Jerome also records a doubt which regarded not the divine character, but the authorship of II. Peter. 'Teter," he says, "wrote two Epistles which are called Catholic. The second of these is not believed to be his by many, on account of its difference from the first in style." The statement of Jerome's own views is clear enough, namely, that Peter wrote two Epistles ; but it was inexact to say that many re- jected the second. The doubt of Peter's authorship of the Second Epistle only existed in some Greek churehes, who strove thus to justify its omission from their incomplete Canon. In his Epistle to Hedibia, (Migne, 22, 1002) he sets at naught this doubt, and ascribes the difference in style to dif- ferent amanuenses: "The two Epistles ascribed to Peter differ in tenor and style, whence we understand that he used different scribes." In the before-mentioned treatise, De Viris Illustribus, II. (Migne, P. L. 23, 607), Jerome delivers the following testi- mony concerning the Epistle of James: "James, who is called the brother of the Lord, wrote one Epistle which is one of the seven Catholic Epistles. It is said that it was published under his name by another, and that gradually, with the course of time, it acquired authority." The evi- dent reason why Jerome does not deal with the opinion which he here notices is that it left intact the divine inspiration of the book. 598 CANON OF N. T. FROM END OF IV. TO XV. CENTURY In Op. cit. (Migne, 23, 613) he makes a similar state- ment respecting Jude's Epistle: "J^p2*nr^iaii^'y*^arii/*iir7r^'»^^:iA^ ^nr.vV:iP2*^^2/V'Pv^^ ^ :!;vijT*^^^^*^nryt2P2*2v2iii?^ ly t^*/7rA•iJiy^*^[w^'i^***i^i5A•/7r*^^2A^*^iyiV^^ ** 9 i3/7r*pV^*5[rTr2i/*i^*^!a5dii^2t»*^v'^yV'^>^ar7r2*^^2A '=^A^'MTtJt*%^ZA-''^^/f'^ ^ :5^*v^2^*^^2a:*^^^^ :i»^avm'^3*ii2i7rA^t:2ti*^v^^^*2i^v*^Am jiiA^^ * :iiii^*^^^^*5iv^yV*2v^a»5Ev^^'=y*^^ii2 t : ^^^ it 2* :Si:222' 2222;3 *a:^v^ A^or* ^v^ a 2A%livir*3i.^^iii2*^a*^A-^3w^p*s**/7r^2*^/Trav 5f/7r i5^^'.p?2:^a*iir?r<^/7r^i^*nr^/7r*^^2/V*^^A^^ '^^ 14 ;/1t2 nr2*^m ^^♦^iy^w*i3nt2i»p^3iy2^*^v'=^yV*2v*^«i^ii5y2 liam- ;^' ^*iym'ii;^rTri;^*ijnr!i^v2ri/ffhiynr^2*^i^/7r^ pv ^A-p fVERS.SA.COpcrflansfa per /"fcicm aqux(fc') feminantcm (c) progermiaantcm gcrnicn Cd^ rilantam (Ocujas fruiftificatio in tcirrfa citcn orbccoeli TtXT.ETVEH.SAl Ti an flat 10 Latina t 10 n 10 II 12 CAP. I. Princii>io crcazik t us c&lum e> ttiYam. Ti raautemcr^ inank ( ^'^f«^, & tenebr^ era fiipcrfmm ahyffi:fpi: tiis qiioquc Dei (a)fe-i batur fupc'f aqurns. I xUqueDeiMyfiatlttx, ( faCia eflWX'kt vldt L m liKepn quod bond ejfe Et feparavit Dem hit tucem & inter. tcmb/A VdcavitqUe Viiis lucei. dim^ &'t;tntbras voc vit noUem: ^tfa^lim i vcjpere y, jfa^iimqite t mane^dics unm. Etdix Deus, fiat ftrmamentu. in medio aquamm :fcpi ret que aquas ab airm. 1 fecit Dem fimamentum fcparavitque aquas qa trant fubier. pmamci turn ah ayds qux erai fuper firtmmenium: d ^a^umeft tta. Vocavh jue Deus firmithehtun ccelum : Etfa^um eft vi pe'/^, fadiumque efi trn nCydies fecundm, Etd\ xii DeuSy' conp-e^entu aqu^ie,quafubccclofunt i licum umm^ & apparea mda_: &fa6iime^it(^ Et vocavptp^sm aridm lerram^ &''iin'i^vegaxion iqfiamH0t:uutj/ima iidit?ji^pem.i luminana in(f)firmaf/m to cceHy ut luccant jupc terram, & feparcnt d^i a no^e : pntquc in jign^ ^ injepipora^ & in dies *-& mnos. THE HEBREW TEXT 641 Justin (martyr), Origen, Chrysostom, the pseudo Atha- nasius, Tertullian, Jerome and others accused the Jews of corrupting the Scriptures.* Martianay, Nicolas of Lyra, Paul of Burgos, Salmeron, Melchior Canus, Morini, and others also have laid this accusation upon them.f Jerome, in another place, stoutly defends the integrity of the Hebrew text. Augustine, Sixtus of Sienna, Bellarmine, Genebrard, Mariana, Richard Simon and others have also de- fended its integrity, t In studying the question, we are led to the following con- clusions : I . — They err greatly who believe that any extensive corruption was wrought into the Hebrew text in hatred of the Messiah. That such corruption could not have been wrought before the time of the Christ is self-evident. There was lacking the motive for such movement, and, moreover, had it been done in hatred of the Messiah, he would have charged them with this great crime. That such corruption were wrought after the advent of Christ is disproven first from the impossibility of the work. There were many codices scattered abroad through the world, several of which were in possession of those who would not conspire in such under- taking. No system would suffice to reach them all. And, moreover, some of the sublimest of the Messianic prophecies never arrive, in their translations, at the grandeur that they have in the original. We believe, also, that the Providence *S. lustin. c. Tryph. 71, 72, etc. (M. 6, 644) ; S. Iren. c. haer. III. 21 ; IV. 12 (M. 7, 946, 1004) ; Origen. Ep. ad Afric. 9; in lerem. horn. 16. 10 (M. 12, 65 sqq.; 13, 449 sqq.) ; S. Chrys. in Matth. horn. 5, 2 (M. 57); Ps. Athan. Synops. S.S. 78 (in textu latino tantum; M. 28, 438) ; Tertull. decultufem. I. 3 (M. I, 1308); S. Hier. in Gal. 3, 10 (M. 26, 357). fRaym. Mart. Pug. fid. II. 3, 9 p. 277; Lyran. et Paulus Burg, in Os. 9; Salmer. Proleg. 4; Cani Loci theol. II. 13 ; Morin. Exercit. bibl, I. i, 2 p. 7 sqq. eorum et aliorum multorum testimonia recitat. JS. Hier. in Is. 6, 9 (M. 24, 99) ; S. Aug. De Civ. D. XV. 13 (M. 41, 452); Bellarm. De verbo Dei II. 2; Sim. de Muis Triplex assertio pro veritate hebraica. Opp. II. p. 131 sqq.; Genebrard in Ps. 21, 19; Sixt. Sen. Biblioth. s. VIII. haer. 13 ; loan. Mariana Pro Vulgata c. 7 ; Rich. Sim. Hist. crit. du V. T. III. 18; Marchini De divin. et canonic, libr. sacr. I. 6; Lamy Introd. in S. S. I. p. 83 sqq.; Reinke Beitraege VII. p. 292 sqq., etc. etc. 41 (H.S.) 642 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT of God would not permit that code to be essentially corrupted in which he had first covenanted with the chosen people. But it is not our mind to deny that an occasional corruption has been wilfully fastened upon the Hebrew text. Hatred of the Messiah is bound up in the heart of the Jew. Now, as they were the chief custodians of the Hebrew text, it is quite probable that, wherever the reading or the sense was doubt- ful, they would incline to that reading or interpretation which was less favorable to the Messiah. Again, some cer- tain texts may have been deliberately corrupted in some codices, whence the corruption spread, and gradually inva- ded them all. This we admit, but it is in so small a part that it does not rob the great text of its value. The corruption of one passage, or the attempt to obscure the sense of a passage, would have sufficed to bring upon the Jews the accusations spoken of in the Fathers. Moreover, it is not clear that the Fathers charged them with changing the the Hebrew text, but rather with obscuring the sense, or that they rejected the Septuagint. Justin, it is true (1. c), accuses them of deliberate mutilations, but an examination of the passages does not substantiate his charge. The rejec- tion by the Jews of the deuterocanonical books might also have been taken by the Fathers as a corruption of Scripture. We believe, therefore, that the way of truth lies in a middle course. We admit that some passages of the Hebrew text are corrupted, but we believe that in the main it is authentic, and of the greatest value for him who would arrive at the deeper sense of the message of the Old Law. Chapter XVII. The Greek Text of the New Testament. We have before spoken of the evidence of the Providence of God in bringing about a state of peace in the civilized world, preceding the advent of Christ. It is also attributable to this benign Providence that one universal tongue was the medium of thought in this vast extent of the habitable globe. When, therefore, the Apostles entered upon the execution of the mandate of Christ to teach all nations, they adopted the THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 643 Greek language which was the great medium of thought among the nations. After the Macedonians had subjugated the whole of Greece, and extended their dominion into Asia and Africa, the refined and elegant Attic began to decline ; and all the dialects being by degrees mixed together, there arose a cer- tain peculiar language, called the Common, and also the Hel- lenic; but more especially, since the empire of the Macedo- nians was the chief cause of its introduction into the general use from the time of Alexander onwards, it was called the (later) Macedonic. This dialect was composed from almost all the dialects of Greece, together with very many foreign words borrowed from the Persians, Syrians, Hebrews, and other nations who became connected with the Macedonian people after the age of Alexander. Now, of this Macedonian dialect, the dialect of Alexandria (which was the lan- guage of all the inhabitants of that city, as well of the learned as of the Jews,) was a degenerate pro- geny far more corrupt than the common Macedo- nian dialect. This last mentioned common dialect, being the current Greek spoken throughout Western Asia, was made use of by the writers of the Greek Testament. "The materials on which writing has been impressed at different periods and stages of civilization are the follow- ing: Leaves, bark, especially of the lime (liber), linen, clay and pottery, wall-spaces, metals, lead, bronze, wood, waxen and other tablets, papyrus, skins, parchment and vellum, and from an early date amongst the Chinese, and in the West after the capture of Samarcand by the Arabs in a.d. 704, paper manufactured from fibrous substances. The most ancient manuscripts of the New Testament now existing are composed of vellum or parchment (membrana), the term vellum being strictly applied to the delicate skins of very young calves, and parchment to the integuments of sheep and goats, though the terms are as a rule employed convert- ibly. The word parchment seems to be a corruption of charta pergamena, sl name first given to skins prepared by some improved process for Eumenes, king of Pergamum, about B. c. 150. In judging of the date of a manuscript on 644 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. skins, attention must be paid to the quality of the material, the oldest being almost invariably written on the thinnest and whitest vellum that could be procured; while manu- scripts of later ages, being usually composed of parchment, are thick, discolored, and coarsely grained. Thus the Codex Sinaiticus of the fourth century is made of the finest skins of antelopes, the leaves being so large, that a single animal would furnish only two (Tischendorf, Cod. Frid. August. Prol.) Paper made of cotton (charta homhycina, called also charta Damascena from its place of manufacture) may have been fabricated in the ninth or tenth century, and linen paper {charta proper) as early as 1242 a.d. ; but they were seldom used for Biblical manuscripts sooner than the thirteenth, and had not entirely displaced parchment at the era of the invention of printing, about a.d. 1450. "All manuscripts, the most ancient not excepted, have erasures and corrections ; which, however, were not always effected so dexterously, but that the original writing may sometimes be seen. Where these alterations have been made by the copyist of the manuscript, (a prima manu^ as it is termed,) they are preferable to those made by later hands, or a secunda manu. These erasures were sometimes made by drawing a line through the word, or what is tenfold worse, by the penknife. But, besides these modes of obliter- ation, the copyist frequently blotted out the old writing with a sponge, and wrote other words in lieu of it ; nor was this practice confined to a single letter or word, as may be seen in the Codex Bezae. Authentic instances are on record in which whole books have been thus obliterated, and other writing has been substituted in place of the manuscript so blotted out; but where the writing was already faded through age, they preserved their transcriptions without further erasure. "These manuscripts are termed Codices Palimpsesti or Rescripti. Before the invention of paper, the great scarcity of parchment in different places induced many persons to obliterate the works of ancient writers, in order to tran- scribe their own, or those of some other favorite author in their place ; hence, doubtless, the works of many eminent THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 645 writers have perished, and particularly those of the greatest antiquity ; for such as were comparatively recent were tran- scribed to satisfy the immediate demand, while those which were already dim with age were erased. "In general, a Codex Rescriptus is easily known, as it rarely happens that the former writing is so completely erased, as not to exhibit some traces; in a few instances, both writings are legible. The indefatigable researches of Cardinal Angelo Mai (for some time the principal keeper of the Vatican Library at Rome) have discovered several valu- able remains of biblical and classical literature in the Am- brosian Library at Milan." The Scriptures were not formerly as now divided into chapters and verses. The mode of designating particular passages was by specifying the theme. Thus Jesus Christ designates to the Sadducees the passage from Exodus treat- ing of the resurrection of the dead, Mark XII. 26 : " And as concerning the dead that they rise again, have you not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush, God spoke to him say- ing : * I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?' " This method presupposed those to whom the discourse was directed to be much versed in the Scriptures. The first attempt at fixed divisions of Scripture seems to have been made by Ammonius of Alexandria, the contemporary of Origen. The first attempts were rude and imperfect. Ammonius (A. D. 220), selected as his standard the Gos- pel of Matthew, and arranged in parallel columns by its side passages from the other Gospels ; thus of necessity divid- ing the text into sections which have been called the Am- monian sections. Eusebius was perhaps influenced by the labors of Ammonius in dividing the Gospel text into sections which have been called the Eusebian Canons. In the thirteenth century Cardinal Hugh of S. Carus, the inventor of the Concordances of Scripture, is believed to have been the first to divide the Scriptures into chapters. Some, however, attribute this work to Stephen Langton, the Archbishop of Canterbury, of the same century. This mode of division passed from the Vulgate to the primal texts, and 646 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT later even the Hebrew text was thus divided. The subdi- visions of the chapters were in this system marked by the letters of the alphabet. The distinction and enumeration of the verses is due to Robert Etienne, the celebrated printer of Paris, who first thus divided the Holy Scriptures in his edition of the Vulgate in 1548. This system was also soon applied to all the texts of Scripture. The division of the Scriptures into chapters and verses is the pure work of man, and subject to critical analysis, and may be altered if good data w^arrant a different division. In fact, in many cases it is expedient to change the divisions of Robert Etienne, as also the chapter divisions. The Scriptures were also in the beginning written with- out any elements of punctuation or accentuation. By this mode of writing the page presented one compact mass of characters, and their division and construction into words were left to the reader's judgment. See plate on page 647. This mode of writing remained in vogue till about the ninth century of the Christian Era. As by different group- ings, and combinations of characters, different meanings resulted from the text this was a fertile cause cf error, and many of the variantia are traceable to this cause. A system of accentuation had been invented by Aris- tophanes of Byzantium in the second century before Christ, which was employed by the Greek grammarians in the works of profane argument. Its application to the Sacred Codices was rare. St. Epiphanius testifies that certain ones have thus written copies of the Alexandrine Codex of the Old Test- ament, but Tischendorf affirms that no Codex anterior to the eighth century is written with accents. It is only after the tenth century that accentuation becomes general. This was also a source of variantia, as the different positions of the accents oft induced a different meaning. In some of the old codices, as for instance the Codex Sinaiticus the spiritus lenis and gravis are indicated, but this is judged by Tischen- dorf to be the work of a later hand. More ancient than the use of either accents or signs of punctuation is the use of the lineola, — , to designate the abbreviation of certain words of more frequent occurrence. Thus: 0C for ©eo?, KC ioT/cvpio';^ THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 647 IINA for TTvevfia. The iota subscript is never found in the old Codices of Holy Writ, hence another cause of error. How these different factors effected many divergencies in the Sacred text may be inferred from the following examples. The group of letters avrrj became avrrj or avr^ or avTrj; every one of different import by modifications which can only be based upon the fallible, varying, judgments of men. The opening verses of St. John's Gospel form a good speci- men of the difference in interpretation which may result from different insertion of the sign of punctuation. The Vulgate and its dependent versions insert the period after yeyovev. ''Without him was made nothing that was made. In him was life. " etc. St. Irenseus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasius, and others close the period after ovBe ev; whence would result: ''Without him was made nothing. What was made was life in him. " To remove this cause of error Origen in his Hexapla divided the text into orr^ot, and this mode of writing was termed aTix^fxerpCa. In this stichometric arrangement of the text, every complete phrase occupied a separate line. St. Jerome wrote in this manner his version of the pro- phetical books of the Old Testament. In the middle of the fifth century Euthalius, a deacon of Alexandria, employed this mode of writing in his successive editions of the Pauline Epistles, of the Catholic Epistles and the Acts, and of the Gospels. As this served well the convenience of the reader it became quite general in those early codices, although but few thus written are extant to-day. Principal among those that remain are the Codex Bezae of Cambridge (D) of the Gospels and Acts ; the Codex of Clermont (D) of the Pauline Epistles ; the Codex of St. Germain (E) of the Pauline Epistles; and the Codex Coislinianus (H) of the Pauline Epistles. This mode of writing, though very convenient to the reader, required much material upon which to be written, as large portions of the superficies remained blank. We reproduce on the following page a specimen of stichometry from the Codex of Beza; Math. XXIV; 51- XXV. 6, with English translation in same form of writing. 648 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT KAtOBryrMOCTODNIOAOMTCDM Cl^H TOTeOMOlCU!9HC6TMHBA.ClAeiXTCONOYT^Na3M AeKMnr^jeeMoic MTiMecA^Boyc^i exH\eoMeicATiXMTHCiNToY^»Y^4^«oY KAilTHCMYMHC ^e^JT6Ae6X^Y'^^^^"CX^lMcoJ^l J<:^ltT6MT6JOMlMOl ^loYMMCDJ'M^^BoY^^iT•xc^^MTr^A^c^Y*^^^*^ oYKexxBOMMeeexYTcoMexMOM eNToic Arreipic^Y*^^^^ AiAe<|>j'ONiivioi ex^Bo^l6Aeo^sIeMTOICA^^6JOlC MeTATCDMAAMTTAAODN^Y*^^^^ XJP0IMI2:0NT0CA6T0Y«^Y'^4^«0Y eKlYCTAZM^TTACAlKM6KAe6Y-^Oh4 iviecHCAeNYJ^TocKjXYrHreroMeM ANDGNASHINGOFTEETH THENSHALLTHEKINGDOMOFHEAVENBELIKENEDUNTO TENVIRGINSWHOTOOK THEIRLAMPS ANDWENTFORTHTOMEETTHEBRIDEGROOM ANDBRIDE ANDFIVEOFTHEMWEREFOOLISH ANDFIVEWEREWISE THEYTHATWEREFOOLISHTOOKTHEIRLAMPS ANDTOOKNOOILWITHTHEMINTHEIRVESSELS BUTTHEWISE TOOKOILINTHEIRVESSELS WITHTHEIRLAMPS WHILETHEBRIDEGROOMTARRIED THEYALLSLUMBEREDANDSLEPT ANDATMIDNIGHTTHEREWASACRYMADE THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 649 Hence, it was modified so that the (ttIxqi were separated by points. From the seventh century the custom began to prevail to indicate the greater or less textual division by different location of the point. The KOfx^ia or briefest division was indicated by locating the (.) punctum at the base of the line; the kcoXov (-) or middle division, by inter- posing it midway between the base and top ; while the full period was terminated by the punctum (*) at the top of the line. Although this was the most ordinary mode in those times, sometimes the point at the base designated the full period, and vice versa. Our modem mode of punctuation did not come into use till after the invention of printing in. the fifteenth century. The autographs of the New Testament perished in the first centuries of the Christian era. There is almost a com- plete silence in tradition concerning any such original writ- ings. Some adduce a passage from Tertullian to prove that the autographs were preserved in his day. "Percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas, apud quas ipsse adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesident, apud quas ipsae Authenticae Literae eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem, et reprassentantes faciem uniuscujusque. Pi'oxim^ est tibi Achaia, habes Corinthum. Si non longe es a Macedonia, habes Philippos, habes Thessalonicenses. Si potes in Asiam tendere, habes Ephesum. Si autem Italiae adjaces, habes Romam." (De PrcBscriptione HcBreticorum, c. 36.) Attempts have been made, indeed, and that by very eminent writers, to reduce the term '' AuthenticcB Liter cb'' to mean nothing more than ** genuine, unadulterated Epistles, " or even the authentic Greek as opposed to the Latin translation. Others defend that he evidently speaks of the autographs. But the weight of evidence is clearly in favor of the former opinion. Tertullian was not ignorant that the sacred writers did not commit their thoughts to writing with their own hands; and, therefore, faithful copies of the original docu- ments, if faithfully executed, would be as authentic as the 650 "" THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT first documents. And for this cause also, greater care was not bestowed on the autographs, for the faithful copies were held in equal veneration. The dissemination of the writings of the Apostles began immediately, b}'- means of manuscript copies, and a great number of these was soon spread abroad through the churches. Owing to various causes, errors crept into the copied texts. Hence Origen complains: **Even now, through the inattention of certain transcribers, and the rash temerity of those who would amend the Scriptures, and the arbitrary additions and suppressions of others, a great diversity has come into our Scriptures." As time went on the evil grew. In fact, those early Christians, attending mainly to the sense, w^ere not deterred by an excessive reverence from slight textual changes, which affected not the sense. By comparative criticism, many of these variants have been brought to light. The English critic Mill esti- mated that the discovered different readings of the New Testament in his day amounted to thirty thousand; they probably to-day are four times that number. But the great mass of these variants leave intact the substantial correct- ness of the sacred text, so that the remark of Bentley is just : "The real text of the sacred writers does not now (since the originals have been so long lost) lie in any MS or edition, but is dispersed in them all. 'Tis competently exact indeed in the worst MS now extant ; nor is one article of faith or moral precept either perverted or lost in them; choose as awkwardly as you will, choose the worst by design, out of the whole lump of readings. ' Or again : 'Make your 30,000 [variations] as many more, if numbers of copies can ever reach that sum: all the better to a knowing and serious reader, who is thereby more richly furnished to select what he sees genuine. But even put them into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet with the most sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not extinguish the light of any one chapter, nor so disguise Christianity, but that every feature of it will still be the same. " Thus God's Providence preserved pure the substance of His written word. THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 651 Perhaps the gravest variants in the New Testament are in regard to Mark XVI. 9-16, and John VII. 53, VIII. 11. Various causes have conspired to bring the various read- ings into the text of holy Scripture. Sometimes spurious additions have been made in accord- ance with the copyist's dogmatic prepossession. Passages are interpolated from one writer into another to bring the text into a fancied agreement. Marginal notes have been incorporated into the text. The interpolation of the Lord 's Prayer as found in King James ' Version is an example of this. Genuine clauses are lost by homoeoteleuton (ofjLOLOTeXei/- Tov), when two clauses end in the same word or words. The transcriber 's eye wanders from one clause to the other, and omits one, since its ending is identical with what immediately preceded. Such minor changes as a change in the order of the words are often found. One word is taken for another from the fact that it is sim- ilar, or one letter is mistaken for another, thereby changing the sense of words. Sometimes the copyist has written at another's dictation, and has mistaken the other's pronunciation. This is rare in the better MSS. Sometimes the copyists have changed the New Testa- ment quotations from the Old Testament to bring them into closer conformity with the original. Synonyms are sometimes employed. Readings have been altered to avoid dogmatic difficulty : others have been omitted for the same reason. The copyist may be tempted to forsake his proper func- tion for that of a reviser, or critical collector. He may sim- ply omit what he does not understand (e. g. to /jLaprvpiov I. Tim. II. 6.), or may attempt to get over a difficulty by in- versions and other changes. Thus the fjLvartjptov spoken of by St. Paul I. Cor. XV. 51, which rightly stands in the best codices Traz^re? fjLev ov KoifirjOrja-o/JLeOa^ irdve^i Se aWayqa-ofieda was easily varied into iravre^ KOLfirjOrja-ofieda^ ov TraVre? Be aXXayrjcrofieOa^ as if in mere perplexity. 652 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT It is very possible that some scattered readings cannot be reduced to any of the above-named classes, but enough has been said to afford the student some general notion of the nature and extent of the subject. As early as the third century attempts were made to restore the text to its original purity. It was thought that by critical collation of the best manuscripts and by selecting the best readings, a correct exemplar might be had as a fount for correct copies. Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, mar- tryed under Diocletian, wrought a recension of the Greek text of both Testaments. The text was adopted in the churches of Egypt, and became the basis of the Alexandrine family of codices. About the same time, Lucian, a priest of Antioch, martyred in the same persecution, executed a recen- sion of the text of both Testaments, which was received in all the Eastern churches, from Constantinople to Antioch. Of the nature of the labors of Hesychius and Lucian we can form no secure judgment. Jerome accuses them of adding to the Scriptures (Ad. Dam. Pr^f. in Evang.), and Gelasius, in the decree, "De recip. et non recip. libris, " rejects **the Gospels which Hesychius and Lucian falsified. ' ' Hug believes that Origen made a recension of the New Testament, but proof is lacking to support the statement. Though fragments of Greek Scriptures had been printed by Aldus Manutius at Venice in 1497 and again in 1504 the first complete New Testament printed in Greek was that of the complutensian Polyglot the munificent work of Ximenes (143 7-1 5 1 7) Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo. The New Testament was published in 15 14. The Old Testament was finished about six years later. The work is estimated to have cost £23,000. The protocanonical books are printed in Hebrew, Greek and Latin, the deuterocanonical books and the New Testament in Greek and Latin. While Ximenes was laboring on his great work, Erasmus, that scholarly vagabond, hastened an edition of the New Testament for John Froben a publisher of Basle. Froben's object was to forestall the Spanish work, and the character of Erasmus' work may be judged from his declaration that the volume " precipitatum fuit verius quam editum." He THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 653 employed no valuable MSS, and sometimes translated por- tions from the Latin into Greek to supply lacunas. Thus in i\cts ix. 5, 6, the words from o-KXrjpov to Trpo^ avrov are interpolated from the Vulgate, partly by the help of Acts xxvi. The result is that the text of Erasmus' Greek Testa- ment has no critical worth. And yet so strong is prejudice that this corrupt text was received by the protestants as the received text instead of the far better text of the Complu- tensian Polyglot. This fact is regretted by Mill who declares (Proleg. p. iii. Oxford 1707) that it would have been far better for all if the Complutensian were with some few corrections accepted as the received text. Delitzsch (Handschr. Funde I. p. 5.) also declares: "Es wsere in der Gliick gewesen, wenn nicht der eras- mische Text, sondern der complutensische die Grundlage des spaetern textus receptus geworden waere. " In 1 5 18 appeared the Grceca Bihlia at Venice, from the celebrated press of Aldus, which professes to be grounded on a collation of the most ancient copies. The editions of Robert Etienne, mainly by reason of their exquisite beauty, have exercised more influence than those of Erasmus; and Etienne 's third or folio edition of 1550 is by many regarded as the received or standard text. In the folio or third edition of 1550 the various readings of the Codices, obscurely referred to in the preface to that of 1546, are entered in the margin. This fine volume derives much importance from its being the earliest ever published with critical apparatus. Robert Etienne in these editions first divided the New Testament into verses. The brothers Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir set up a printing press at Leyden which maintained its reputation for elegance and correctness throughout the greater part of the seventeenth century. Their undeservedly popular Greek New Testament of 1642 was considered the received Iq-xX on the Continent. It is based on Erasmus' corrupt text. Robert Etienne also 654 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT took Erasmus' text for the standard. His edition was the received text in England. In 1657 Brian Walton published his great Polyglot, in 6 vols, sometimes called the London Polyglot. In the Old Testament it contains the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, the Chaldean Paraphrase, the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Latin Vulgate. The fifth of his huge folios is devoted to the New Testament in six languages, viz. Etienne's Greek text of 1550, the Peshitto- Syriac, the Latin Vulgate, the Ethiopic, Arabic, and (in the Gospels only) the Persian. None of Walton's texts are of special critical worth. It is evident from what has been written, that the Greek text has not been preserved to us in all its pristine integrity, as it came from the inspired writers' hands. But neither has corruption so invaded it that it should be considered an unreliable fount of Scripture. The Hebrew, Greek, and Vulgate Latin, remain three authentic founts. At times, one is more correct than another, and the collation of all three is useful to the understanding of any one. But it must always be considered that in far greater part the fulness and richness of the sense can only be received from a perusal of the original texts. In the last century arose what may properly be called the science of Textual Criticism, which may be defined as a METHOD OF STUDY WHEREBY WE SEEK TO DETERMINE THE CHARACTER, VALUE, AND MUTUAL RELATION OF THE AUTHOR- ITIES UPON WHICH THE TEXT OF THE HOLY ScRIPTURES IS BASED. The mode of procedure is to examine first the age of the documents, the circumstances of their origin, the causes that may have produced certain readings and the accord of one document with another. Robert Etienne was the first to collect and collate MSS with the purpose of emending the N . T. Brian Walton ( 1 600 —61) in his great Polyglot employed the edition of N. T. prepared by Etienne in 1550, and added an apparatus criticus collected by Ussher. The first really great work of textual criticism is that of Dr. John Mill of Oxford which appeared in 1707. Mill labored through thirty years on his critical THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 655 edition of the New Testament, and died a fortnight after it appeared. Mill's contribution to the science of Biblical Criticism places him in the first rank. Bentley (ti742) believing that the oldest MSS of the Greek original agreed almost exactly with Jerome's Latin version, contemplated a critical text wherein the Greek of the fourth century and Jerome 's version should be critically compared. Bentley was diverted to other work, and died without accomplishing his Scriptural design. Bengel (1687- 1752) published a critical edition of the NewTestament in 1734, He collated sixteen codices, but so negligently that most of them have needed examination from those who followed him. He deserves credit for having first contemplated the grouping of the codices into families or recensions a theory which was subsequently skilfully de- veloped by Griesbach. Bengel divided all codices into two families: the Asiatic written chiefly at Constantinople, which he inclined to dis- parage, and the African, fewer in number, but better in character. The next step in advance was made by Wetstein (1693- 1754) who published a critical edition of the New Testament with a Prolegomena prefixed. He was the first to cite the MSS under the notation by which they are generally known. The character of the man is revealed in his "Prole- gomena." He was an assiduous student, audacious, rebel- lious, full of contempt and hate for others ; a man- tinged with Socinian errors, arrogantly intolerant of all men, while demanding full liberty of thought for himself. The product of his impetuous labors forms a chaos where men may find much that is good amid the mass of conjectures. Matthaei (i 744-181 1) is more valuable as a collector than as a collator. While professor at Moscow he found many Greek MSS both patristic and Biblical brought thither from Mt. Athos. The manner in which he examined these has been severely criticised. The justice of the sever- ity of the criticism which Matthaei encountered may be judged from the fact that he assigned to the Uncial Codex 656 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 50 of a Greek Lectionary a value above all the codices which were known in Europe in his day. Hence it results that Matthaei's text, which of course he moulded on his own view^s, must be held in slight esteem: his services as a collator comprehend his whole claim (and that no trifling one) to our thankful regard. To him solely we are indebted for Evan. V. 237-259; Act. 98-107; Paul. 113-124; Apoc. 47-50; Evst. 47-57; Acts Apost. 13-20: nearly all at Moscow: the whole seventy, together with the citations of Scripture in thirty-four manuscripts of Chrysostom, being so fully and accurately collated, that the reader need not be at a loss whether any particular copy supports or opposes the reading in the common text. Matthasi annexed the Latin Vulgate to his Greek text, as this was the only version which he valued. Francis Karl Alter (i 749-1804) a Jesuit, professor at Vienna published in 1 786-87 a critical text of the New Testa- ment. He accepted as his standard good MSS of the Imperial library at Vienna, (Evan. 218, Acts 65, Paul 57, Apoc. 83) and collated with these twenty-one other MSS of the same library together with readings from the Old Latin, Coptic, and Slavonic versions. The labors of Alter were of a very high order, but religious prejudice has prevented him from the recognition which is his due. Birch, Moldenhawer, and T3^chsen were sent into various countries in 1 783-4 by Christian VH. of Denmark to examine MSS. Moldenhawer and Tychsen visited Spain, while Birch traveled in Germany. The first result of their combined labors was an edition of the Four Gospels published in 1788. As much of this edition and the rest of the New Testa- ment prepared by the collators were destroyed by fire in 1 795 . Birch later collected and published the fragments. Moldenhawer and Tychsen were so filled with hatred of Spain and its religion and so puffed up by a vain arrogance that the ** Prolegomena" contributed under the name of Moldenhawer are worthless. Birch was more temperate, but his examination of many authorities was superficial. John James Griesbach (i 745-1812) is the next name in the history of Biblical textual criticism. He was intensely THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 657 hated by Matthaei who declares that though he had never '' ut credibile est,'' collated a MS even of the tenth century, he yet presumes to sit in judgment on those who have col- lated seventy. Though Griesbach did some original collating of MSS, his great work was to select readings from the great mass collected by those who had gone before him. He is famous for his theory of families or recensions of codices. At the outset he was disposed to group all extant materials in five or six families. He afterwards limited these to three, the Alexandrian, the Western, and the Byzantine. He assigned to the Alexandrian family the pre-eminence. Of course Griesbach 's theory would simplify the science, for then one would not need examine the great mass of codices, but only some worthy representatives of the different families. But for the lack of evidence to support this theory it is now^ quite generally abandoned. John Leonard Hug (i 765-1846) merits a place among the Biblical textual critics on account of his De Antiquitate Cod. Vat. Commentatio published at Freiburg in 18 10. Hug was a Catholic, a professor of Scripture at Freiburg. He published in 1808 an Einleitung in Die Schriften Des Neuen Testaments which has great critical value. It w^as Hug who first placed the date of origin of Codex B in the fourth century, a judgment which has been generally accepted, although Tischendorf declares that he holds it "non propter Hugium sed cum Hugio." John Martin Augustine Scholz (11852) was a pupil of Hug, and afterwards professor at Bonn. He was a Roman Catholic. The labors of Scholz in the cause of the Greek text of the New Testament were stupendous. The results of his great labors were embodied in an edition of the Greek New Testament. This work, which forms two volumes in quarto, has been published at Leipsic. The first volume, containing the four Gospels, made its appearance in 1830, and the second, con- taining the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of St. Paul, the Catholic Epistles, and the Apocalypse, in 1836. The prole- gomena prefixed to the work consists of one hundred and 658 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT seventy-two pages. In it the learned editor gives ample information respecting the codices, versions, Fathers, and councils, which he used as authorities, together with a his- tory of the text, and an exposition or defence of his peculiar system of classification of MSS. Scholz spent twelve years in preparing the materials for his work. He visited the libraries of the principal cities of Europe, and in addition to these, the libraries of the Greek monasteries of Jerusalem, of St. Saba, and the Isle of Patmos. He collated, either entirely or in part, six hundred and six manuscripts not previously collated by any editor of the New Testament. Scholz refers all the MSS to two recensions or families — the Alexandrian or African, and the Asiatic or Const anti- nopolitan — in other words, the Occidental (same as African), and Oriental. In 1 83 1 Karl Lachmann (i 793-1851) published his Novum Testamentum Greece at Berlin. In this work Lach- mann enters on a new road in textual criticism. His prede- cessors had taken as a point de depart the texttis receptus of the Greek testament. Lachmann recognized the well-nigh critically worthless character of this text, and therefore directed his labors to restore the ancient text from MSS and the works of the Fathers. Lachmann founded his system upon the principles of St. Jerome and those of Richard Bent- ley, who acknowledged St. Jerome as a leader. In fact, Bentley had projected a work entitled "Proposals for Print- ing a New Edition of the Greek Testament and St. Heirom 's Latin Version." The Anglican theologians opposed Bent- ley's work on account of the just place it accorded St. Jerome, and this opposition prevented the execution of Bentley 's purpose. Lachmann entertained the same estimate of Jerome. He declares that the "excellent" and "very reasonable" principles of St. Jerome "should always be the rule which one should follow in determining the reading of the New Testament." In 1842 Lachmann pubHshed the first volume of his Novum Testamentum Greece et Latine at Berlin: in 1850 the second volume appeared at Berlin. Lachmann 's apparatus criticus is unfortunately restricted. THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 659 The Vatican Codex, Codex of St. Ephrem, the Codex Claromontanus, the Amiatinus of the Vulgate, and of course the Sinaitic were not available to him. He had the true principles and the true temper of mind of a critic. His work is sound and just as far as it goes. He was the first to establish the principle that an array of codices is not an array of authority. He rejected en masse a great number of codices, and any unbiased competent judge who will ex- amine these must admit that in this he has done the world a service. The Vulgate and the Fathers he rightly considers as primary authorities. He was a true scholar both in spirit and in execution. He restored the Latin versions to their rightful place and established the principle that to ascertain a true reading one must consider, not the number of codices but the character of codices. The next great name in the science of Biblical text- ual criticism is that of Tischendorf (1815-1874). This scholar declares that when he set out on his first literary journey he could not pay for his coat. His first labors were editions of the New Testament, for booksellers, of no great value. He traveled extensively in the interest of scholarship. He visited Italy twice, England four times, and went four times into the East, where on Mt. Sinai he discovered the great Codex of which an account will be given later. In fact the fame of Tischendorf rests not so much on his critical editions of the New Testament, as on the uncial codices which he has published. His eighth and last edition of the Greek testament is the most complete edition existing. His death prevented him from adding the "Prolegomena" to this edition. Speaking of his prede- cessors Tischendorf declares that "instead of deriving a history of the text from documents, they had created a his- tory of the text in their own minds. ' ' (Tischendorf N. T. Grasce, ed. 7.) It is amazing what Tischendorf accom- plished during thirty years of unremitting toil. In 1843 w^s published the New Testament; in 1845 "the Old Testament portion of * 'Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus" (Cod. C), 2 vols. 4to, in uncial type, with elaborate Prole- 660 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT gomena, notes, and facsimiles. In 1846 appeared '*Monu- menta sacra inedita," 4to, containing transcripts of Codd. F^LNW^Ye* of the Gospels, and B of the Apocalypse; the plan and apparatus of this volume and of nearly all that follow are the same as in the Codex Ephrsemi. In 1846 he also published the Codex Frederic -Augustanus in lithographed facsimile throughout, containing the results of his first dis- covery at Mount Sinai: in 1847 ^^^ Evangelium Palatinum ineditum of the Old Latin; in 1850 and again in 1854 less splendid but good and useful editions of the Codex Amia- tinus of the Latin Vulgate. His edition of Codex Clar- omontanus (D of St. Paul), 1852, was of precisely the same nature as his editions of Cod. Ephraemi, &c., but his book entitled *'Anecdota sacra et prof ana," 1855 (second and enlarged edition in 186 1), exhibits a more miscellaneous character, comprising (together with other matter) tran- scripts of O* of the Gospels, M of St. Paul ; a collation of Cod. 61 of the Acts being the only cursive copy he seems to have examined; notices and facsimiles of Codd. IFA tisch. or Evan. 478 of the Gospels, and of the lectionaries tisch.®'' (Evst. 190) and tisch.^-*- (Apost. 71). Next was com- menced a new series of ''Monumenta sacra inedita" (pro- jected to consist of nine volumes), on the same plan as the book of 1846. Much of this series is devoted to codices of the Septuagint version, to which Tischendorf paid great attention, and whereof he published four editions (the latest in 1869) hardly worthy of him. Vol. I. (1855) contains transcripts of Codd. I, xerf\ (Evst. 175); Vol. II. (1857) of Codd. N^RO^ Vol. III. (i860) of Codd. QW^ all of the Gospels; Vol. IV. (1869) was given up to the Septuagint, as Vol. VII. would have been to the Wolfenbiittel manuscript of Chrysostom, of the sixth century ; but Cod. P of the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse comprises a portion of Vols. V. (1865) and of VI. (1869) ; while Vol. VIII. was to have been devoted to palimpsest fragments of both Testaments, such as we have described amongst the uncials : the Appendix or Vol. IX. (1870) contains Cod. E of the Acts, etc. An improved edition of his system of Gospel Harmony (Synopsis Evangelica,i864) appeared in i864,with some fresh THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 661 critical matter, a better one in 187 1, and the fifth in 1884. His achievements in regard to Codd. ^ and B we shall speak of in their proper places. He published his ''Notitia Cod. Sinaitici" in i860, his great edition of that manuscript in 1862, with full notes and Prolegomena; smaller editions of the New Testament only in 1863 and 1865; "an Appendix Codd. celeberrimorum Sinaitici, Vaticani, Alexandrini with facsimiles" in 1867. , His marvellous yet unsatisfactory edi- tion of Cod. Vaticanus, prepared under certain unavoidable disadvantages, appeared in 1867; its ''Appendix" (includ- ing Cod. B of the Apocalypse) in 1869; his unhappy "Re- sponsa ad calumnias Romanas" in 1870. To this long and varied catalogue must yet be added exact collations of Codd. EGHKMUX Gospels, EGHL Acts, FHL of St. Paul, all made for his editions of the New Testament. He reduces all the codices to four great families, i. — The Alexandrian, used by the Jewish Christians. 2. — ^The Latin family, used by the Latin race, who, in those days, used Greek in liturgy. 3. — The Asiatic family, used by the Greeks, both in Asia and their own country. 4. — The By- zantine family, used by the Churches of the Byzantine realm. He states that there is great affinity between the Alexandrian and Latin on one side, and between the Asiatic and Byzantine on the other. He cautions all not to put too much trust in the systems of recensions. It is an evident fact that the Scriptural codices of the world bear such relation to one another that they have in them foundation for grouping them into certain families. The very mode of their origin demonstrates this. But the actual assigning of the codices to their different families, and the determining of the number of the recensions, is an extremely difficult work, one that has not been accomplished. Tischendorf groups the codices in two pairs of recensions: the Alexandrian and Latin forming one pair, and the Asiatic and Byzantine forming the other pair. But he wisel}^ cau- tions that the theory of these recensions is but a theory, and that it would be rash to make it the supreme norm in criti- cism. 662 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Samuel Prideaux Tregelles (i 813-1875) merits a place with the foremost critics. He traveled in Europe collecting materials for several years. In 1857 appeared, for the use of subscribers only, the Gospels of SS. Matthew and Mark, as the first part of his "Greek New Testament" (pp. 1-2 16); early in 1861 the second part, containing SS. Luke and John (pp. 217-488), with but a few pages of "Introductory Notice" in each. In that year, paralysis, merctirialium pestis virorum, for a while suspended Tregelles' too assiduous labors : but he recovered health sufficient to publish the Acts and Catholic Epistles in 1865, the Epistles of St. Paul down to Second Thess. in 1869. Early in 1870, while in the act of revising the conclud- ing chapters of the Apocalypse, he was visited by a second and very severe stroke of his fell disease. The remaining portion of the Pauline Epistles was sent out in 1870 as he had himself prepared it ; the Apocalypse without the Prolegomena in 1872, as well as the state of Tregelles' papers would enable his friends S. J. B. Bloxsidge and B. W. Newton to perform their ofhce. The stricken author could contribute nothing save a message to his subscribers, full of devout thankful- ness and calm reliance on the Divine wisdom. The text of the Apocalypse differs from that which he arranged in 1844 in about 229 places. Except Codd. OS, which were published in 1861 (see under those MSS) , this critic has not edited in full the text of any document, but his renewed collations of manuscripts are very Extensive: vi^. Codd. EGHKMN'RUXZPA i, 33, 69 of the Gospels; HL 13, 31, 61 of the Acts; DFL i, 17, 37 of St. Paul, I, 14 of the Apocalypse, Am. of the Vulgate. Tregelles is a most accurate collator; he followed the excellent principles of Lachmann, and his opinions are sound and useful. He gave no importance to the received text, neither to the great mass of the cursive MSS. He acted on the principle that only the ancient authorities have a voice in determining the text. In 1879 Dr. Hort published an appendix to Tregelles ' New Testament in which he collected the Prolegomena left by Tregelles. THE UNCIAL CODICES 663 In 1 88 1 Westcott and Hort published "The New Testa- ment in the original Greek " at Cambridge and London. In the same year Hort published an "Introduction" and "Appendix" to the same. The Greek Testament of West- cott and Hort was the result of twenty-five years' labor. They depart more from the textus receptus than any previous editor had done, and the best authority is adduced to justify most of their different readings. As they had the labors of all those who preceded to draw from, their Testament is the most correct Greek Testament yet published. The excel- lence of the Revised Edition of Oxford is due to the fact that the revisers followed the same principles. CHAPTER XVIII. The Uncial Codices. Greek characters naturally divide themselves into "maj- uscules ' '.and " minuscules. ' ' The former class is subdivided into capitals proper, square in form, suited for lapidary inscriptions; and modified capitals somewhat rounded which we call uncials. The minuscules are employed in the cursive MSS. The term "uncial" may be derived from uncia an inch referring to the size of the letter. In uncial MSS the letters are not joined, and marks of punc- tuation are very few. In general no greater space separates word from word than separates letter from letter. Uncial letters prevailed up to the tenth century, and some specimens are found in liturgical books in the eleventh century. The cursive mode of writing began in the ninth century, and continued until the invention of printing. It is conventional among scholars to designate the uncial codices of Scripture by the Roman and Greek capital letters. One is designated by the Hebrew. The cursives are gen- erally designated by Arabic numbers. According to Scholz's enumeration, the whole number of codices of the New Testament, which had been wholly or partially collated up to his time, amounted to six hundred and seventy-four. The whole number known up to the present day would exceed two thousand. Many have not 664 THE UNCIAL CODICES yet been examined. Only a small number of these contain all the books. Some exist only in scattered fragments; others contain some particular book, or class of books. About one hundred are written in uncial characters, and are older than the tenth century. Of these, only the Codex of Sinai contains the complete New Testament. The others are written in small letters, and are of date more recent than the tenth century. About three hundred of these contain all the books. The uncial codices receive their name either from the place where they are preserved, or from the person to whom they have belonged. In classifying the codices of the New Testament the Testament is divided into the Gos- pels, The Acts, The Pauhne Epistles, The Catholic Epistles, and The Apocalypse. Some codices originally contained the whole Bible, some the whole New Testament, others some section or sections of the New Testament. Thus Codex D of the Gospels and Acts is Beza 's Codex in the University Library of Cambridge; Codex D of the Pauline Epistles is the Codex Claromontanus 107 of the Royal library of Paris. In the collation of MSS the editors have indicated the various corrections which have been written in the codex by later hands. A correction by the original copyist is called the reading prima manu. The corrections are sometimes, indicated by asterisks thus C* would be the Codex of St. Ephrem as corrected by the first hand ; C** as corrected by the second corrector ; a third corrector is indicated by three asterisks. Other collators use the Arabic numbers in the same manner : Tischendorf sometimes uses the small capital letters as exponents. Codex Vaticanus B is perhaps the oldest and certainly the most valuable codex of Scripture, Its early history is not known. It seems to have been brought into the Vati- can library by Pope Nicholas V. in the fifteenth century. It was taken to Paris by Napoleon I., where it was partially examined by Hug. It was afterwards restored to the Vati- can where it has since been jealously preserved. It is a quarto volume, arranged in quires of five sheets of ten leaves each, like Codex Marchalianus of the Prophets written in the sixth or seventh century and Cod. Rossan- THE UNCIAL CODICES 665 ensis of the Gospels to be described hereafter, not of four or three sheets as Cod. {<, the ancient, perhaps the original numbering of the quires being often found in the margin. The New Testament fills 142 out of its 759 thin and delicate vellum leaves, said to be made of the skins of antelopes : it is bound in red morocco, being ten and one-half inches high, ten broad, four and one-half thick. It once contained the whole Bible in Greek, the Old Testament of the Septuagint version (a tolerably fair representation of which was exhibited in the Roman edition as early as 1587), except the books of the Maccabees and the Prayer of Manasses. The first forty- six chapters of Genesis (the manuscript begins at iroXcv, Gen. XLVI. 28) and Psalms CV— CXXXVII, also the books of the Maccabees, are wanting. The New Testament is complete down to Heb. IX. 14 Ka6a: the rest of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse, being written in by a later hand. In 1533 Sepulveda writing to Erasmus declared of the Codex Vaticanus that it is most carefully written and agrees in great part with the Latin Vulgate against the received Greek text, and to support his statements he furnished Erasmus with 365 readings. In 1669 Bartolocci the Lib- rarian of the Vatican made a collation of the MSS, but it was never published. Scholz and Tischendorf have used his collation. Bentley made an imperfect collation of it through Mico. Birch examined it superficially about 1780. Hug examined it in 18 10 and published the result of his incom- plete examination under the title, "De Antiquitate Cod. Vat. Commentatio, " He was the first to assign its date as the fourth century, a judgment generally accepted. In 1 843 Tischendorf obtained the privilege of examining it for two days, three hours each day. In 1844 Edward de Muralt examined the Codex Vat. nine hours a day for three days. He published the result of his labors in an edition of the New Testament in 1846. Tregelles saw the MS in 1845, but was not allowed to transcribe any of its readings. The care which the Vatican authorities bestowed on this great codex is just and reasonable. It is one of the greatest treasures on earth. To men having any just right to see it, 666 THE UNCIAL CODICES the Vatican authorities accorded every just and reasonable right. One of the tendencies of protestantism was to depre- ciate the Latin text, and extol the Greek text ; and precisely the so-called textus receptus which has been proven to be of little worth. They were anxious to be the first to collate the greatest Greek codex, and as this was not granted them, they manifest their spleen. The Vatican authorities con- templated publishing this codex in a worthy manner; and they have accomplished this through the great Cardinal Mai, and Charles Vercellone. This edition appeared in 1857 three years after Cardinal Mai's death. It is in five volumes ; the fifth contains a preface by Vercellone. Even the great fame of Mai did not save him from the calumny of those who have always invoked the aid of falsehood in attacking the Catholic Church. While no human work is absolutely perfect, the true estimate of Cardinal Mai's work will place it above any other codex of Scripture thus far collated. This is to be expected. The great learning and sound judgment of the man, the unlimited resources at his command, the length of time expended, from 1823 to 1854, all persuade of the excellence of the work. It is urged against him that he has taken certain liberties with the codex. One can judge of the animus of such an objection, when we find the great critic blamed for having supplied from other sources portions omitted in the Vatican manuscript, although the fact is duly notified. Again he is blamed for having selected what in his judgment was the more probable of the readings of the first and second hands. The Pharisees who impugned the known truth find real successors in these envious hypocrites whose name is legion. In 1867 Tischendorf published an edition of the Vatican Codex under the title: "Novum Test. Vat. post Angeli Mai aliorumque imperfectos labores ex ipso codice edidit Ae. F. C. Tischendorf." In his Prolegomena, p 143 he con- fesses that he had the Codex on two occasions for six hours in his hands. It is clear that such rapid collation could be of but little avail. The fact is that Tischendorf has em- ployed the labors of others, and claimed them for himself. He was most intolerant of all rivals, and unfair in his judg- THE UNCIAL CODICES 667 ment concerning them. And yet Tischendorf 's edition is by Scrivener preferred to the great work of Mai. Another great edition of the Vatican Codex has been published by Vercellone and Cozza. The first volume containing the New Testament appeared in 1868. Vercel- lone died in 1869. The work was carried on by Cozza and Sergius and completed in 1881. Another splendid edition appeared in 1 889-1 890 under the care of the Abbot Cozza- Luzi in which the original text is reproduced by photography. The envious Tischendorf continued to calumniate the labors of these great scholars in terms so injurious and false that even Scrivener cannot praise his pamphlet. On the con- trary when Tischendorf published the Sinaitic Codex Fabian who had taken Sergius' place in editing Codex B, hails Tischendorf 's discovery with unfeigned absence of all jealousy, ''Quorum tale est demum par, ut potius liber Vaticanus gaudere debeat quod tam sui similem invenerit fratrem quam expavescere quod aemulum" (Praef. p. VIII.). All men must feel grateful to the Vatican authorities for giving to the world such editions of the greatest Codex of Scripture. A specimen page of the Vat. Codex is shown on page 668. The second in importance of the great Codices is undoubt- edly the Codex Sinaiticus ^ of Tischendorf. The history of this great Codex is related by its discoverer in his preface to his great edition of 1863: " Through the particular favor of Frederic Augustus, the excellent King of Saxony, I spent most of the year of 1844 in exploring the countries of the Orient ; chiefly those in which the old monasteries exist. It is well known that this Oriental journey has become famous through some Greek fragments of the Old Testa- ment which I sent to my native country, dedicated to my royal and noble patron as a pledge of love and fidelity. They were deposited in the library of Leipzig, and shortly afterwards published. I discovered these fragments of a very old Codex of the Septuagint in the month of May, 1844. While investigating old books in St. Catherine's Monastery on Mt. Sinai, I 668 THE UNCIAL CODICES ^1? Am€m xr. X A n ro cxbisieM n A^M^--r*«^i^TT6yereMc •iro '^^^/XCJD p c WpnSy e re' K{ eTo 6 ")ri^^ ^ ^:j Q re rotviJ" :zcjph HMrrocucv>cAixo ^T"0 XM ® f no Oj^flG C TXA M <£ M ojQ n ^ p x ey o M o x/f #<' AyTiJb VijL^KM H c 6y -roc jVXe eWe re M X p nry r i a>i y M >wM X p T;:y r Honnep t^ cnrGy ceo c i^N a r xy Toy XAXIMA.M xPT^yr^H Chfric^ •:zei n/noN >5' X i^o K o c M p c zs I >^ y -r 6 y ily 7170 ^JpyK€r^^JelC, ^nrxiJV»x>iAje€ M kXioii'aj 01 Ay T"o Ni p y n i^v p e /v x s o c /kcb NT € #M X Y 'no I 0€ Toy cr I'xM -re KM^e y re'w e'ceAi T-oico rcTne^yoyciiMeic ^0,6 HOM>»-^YToy 6167, Ke "5 A^ i-« jKHTcuKi oyx^^ K e e A H M x-TTocc A p KTo c . Codex Beratinus. This symbol was taken by Herr Oscar von Gebhardt to denote the imaginary parent of Cursives 13, 69, 124, 346, of which the similarity has been traced by the late W. H. Ferrar and Dr. T. K. Abbott in "A Collection of Four Important MSS. " (1877). But it is now permanently affixed to an Uncial MS. seen by M. Pierre Batiffol on the instigation of Prof. Duchesne in 1875 at Berat or Belgrade in Albania. It may date back to the end of the fifth century. A fragment in the Monastery of Laura at Mt. Athos is designated as "^ ; and another in the Monaster of St. Dionys- ius on Mt. Athos is cited by the sign fl. 3 designates a fragment in the Monastery of St. Andrew on Mt. Athos. We shall only mention a few of the most valuable uncials of Acts and Paul's Epistles. Codex Laudianus E, 35 is one of the most precious treasures preserved in the Bodleian at Oxford. It is a Latin- Greek copy, with two columns on a page, the Latin version holding the post of honor on the left. It is written in very- short o"Tt%o£, consisting of from one to three words each, the Latin words always standing opposite to the corresponding Greek. The character of the writing points to the end of the sixth century as its date. The Latin is not of Jerome's or the Vulgate version ; but is made to correspond closely with the Greek, even in its interpolations and rarest various readings. This manuscript contains only the Acts of the Apostles, and exhibits a remarkable modification of the text. This manuscript, with many others, was presented to the University of Oxford in the year 1636, by its Chancellor, Laud. Thomas Heame, the celebrated antiquary, pub- lished a full edition of it in 171 5, which is now very scarce, and is known to be far from accurate. THE UNCIAL CODICES 685 Tischendorf collated it in 1854 and 1865 and published it in his Monumenta Sacra hiedita in 1870. Codex Mutinensis H, 196, of the Acts, in the Grand Ducal Library at Modena, is an uncial copy of about the ninth century, defective in Act. I. i V. 28; IX. 39 — X. 19; XIII. 36 — XIV. 3 (all supplied by a recent hand of the fif- teenth century) ; and in XXVII. 4--XXVIII. 31 (supplied in uncials of about the eleventh century) . The Epistles are in cursive letters of the twelfth century, indicated in the Catholic Epistles by h, in the Pauline by 179. Scholz first collated it; then Tischendorf in 1843, and Tregelles in 1846. P, Cod. Porphyrianus is a palimpsest containing the Acts, all the Epistles, the Apocalypse, and a few fragments of 4 Maccabees, of the ninth century, found by Tischendorf in 1862 at St. Petersburg. D, Cod. Claromontanus, No. 107 of the Royal Library at Paris, is a Greek-Latin copy of St. Paul's Epistles, one of the most ancient and important in existence. Like the Cod. Ephraemi in the same Library it has been fortunate in such an editor as Tischendorf, who published it in 1852 with complete Prolegomena, and a facsimile traced by Tregelles. This noble volume is in small quarto, written on 533 leaves of the thinnest and finest vellum. See following plate. Beza declares that he found it at Clermont near Beauvaitr hence its name. It's judged to be of the second half of the sixth century. Codex Sangermanensis E. is Greek-Latin manuscript, and takes its name from the Abbey of St. Germain des Pres near Paris. In 1895 Matth^ei found this copy, at St. Petersburg, where it is now deposited. Wetstein thor- oughly collated it ; and not only he but Sabatier and Gries- bach perceived that it was, at least in the Greek, nothing better than a mere transcript of Codex Claromontanus, made by some ignorant person about the tenth century. Codex Augiensis F, in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B, 17. i), is a Greek-Latin manuscript of the ninth century. Codex Boernerianus G, so called from a former pos- sessor, now in the Royal Library at Dresden. 686 THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS VERSIONS Herr Corssen believes that F and G are independent of each other, and that they are translations from the Latin. The date is uncertain. Chapter XIX. The Septuagint and Its Versions. The Septuagint is the first authentic Greek version of the Old Testament. It is called the Septuagint from the fact, that it was supposed to be the work of seventy or seventy- two interpreters. Of its origin w^e have many accounts all of them more or less legendary in nature. Aristseus gives us the first account of its origin. According to him, Ptolemy Philadelphus in the third century B. C, wishing to found a great library in Alexandria, and hearing much of the Jewish Law sent messengers to Eleazar, the high priest, desiring a copy of the Books of the Jewish Law for his library. The high priest, Eleazar, choosing six interpreters from every tribe, sent the seventy-two interpreters to translate the books into Greek. These, after being kindly received by the King, betook themselves to the Isle of Pharos, to a great hall, where for nine hours each day they labored for seventy or seventy-two days, conferring with one another in difficult passages. The work was transcribed with care by men employed by Ptolemy, and was pronounced authentic, and an anathema was pronounced against all who should ques- tion its authority. This in brief is the story of Aristasus as related by Flavius Josephus, Antiq., Bk. XII. II. passim. Philo, the Alexandrine Jew, has an account much similar, giving to the interpreters divine inspiration. He does not, however, mention Aristseus, who according to his own story, had a great part in the translation. Nor does he mention Demetrius Phalereus who, according to Aristseus, was the Librarian of Ptolemy. St. Justin the Martyr (ti63 or 167 A. D.), has a different version of the origin of the work. According to him, the interpreters were sent to the Isle of Pharos in separate cells, so all mutual communication was cut off. There they executed every one a translation of the Hebrew text, which versions were afterwards found to agree in the most minute details, even to the number of ?»>.f.Vt^^ ,_./rApliMhllc'HTHmpKi ' ■ ill AO fi M A*"r4Til>M4 I^AFIitD! :HTo k:m eX eci h ikicu. .oyf-J€fqyMe A^ ^. i[- f * i\oTLiiovfxevo^ 'A/cuXa? (Origen, Comment, on Genesis, I. i6), and, on the other hand, in places censured, as SouXevo)!/ rrj 'EfipaLKrj Xefet (Origen ad Afrtcanum § 2). His method is, at times, the reductio ad absurdum of a literal rendering; and yet where he is most useless as an exegete he may be an important witness on questions as to the form of the Hebrew text which lay before him. Jerome, in his Epistle to Pammachius (§11, Vol. I. 316), comparing Aquila with the LXX, writes as follows : " Aquila autem proselytus et contentiosus interpres, qui non solum verba sed etymologias quoque verborum transferre conatus est, jure projicitur a nobis. Quis enim pro frumento et vino et oleo possit vel legere vel intelligere %€0/ia, oirwpiaixov^ ariX- TTvoTTjra, quod nos possumus dicere, fusionem, pomationemque, et splendentiamf Aut quia Hebraei non solum habent dpdpa sed et irpoapOpa ille KaKol^rfKo)^ et SYLLABAS interpreta- tur et litteras, dicitque avv tov ovpavbv /cal avv rr^v yrjv^ quod Graeca et Latina lingua non recipit. " But elsewhere he compares him favorably with the LXX, describing him as a translator who "non contentiosus, ut quidam putant, sed studiosius verbum interpretatur ad verbum" (Ep. ad Damasum, §12, Vol. I. 167). The former passage aptly indicates the two leading principles of Aquila, which were to give a Greek or quasi-Greek equivalent for every fragment of the original, and to maintain a rigid consistency by ren- dering each root with its real or apparent derivatives by one and the same root in Greek ; new forms being freely coined as the occasion demanded, and the Greek idiom being sacrificed to the Hebrew. The peculiar etymological rendering of |*1 p , in Ex. XXXIV. 29, which, through the Vulgate, gave rise to the popular representation of Moses with horns on his forehead, is found to have originated with Aquila : " Unde et in Exodo juxta Hebraicum et Aquilse editionem legimus, Et Moyses nesciebat quia cornuta erat species vultus ejus, qui vere dicere poterat. In te inimicos meos cornu ventilo. " Aquila has been accused by Epiphanius of changing the Messianic testimonies. Not enough of his work remains to examine if this charge be true. Jerome declares in an Epistle to Marcella, that he had examined his work with THE VERSION OF SYMMACHUS 691 especial attention to this charge, and had found instead many- things most favorable to Christian faith. I am disposed to believe, however, that at times he drew some passages to the Jewish position. The second Greek version which deserves special mention is that of Symmachus. Eusebius relates that Symmachus was an Ebionite, and that in certain of his writings which were still extant, he alleged arguments from St. Matthew's Gospel in support of his heresy. Jerome likewise, in his Commentary on Habakuk (III. 13, Vol. VI. 656), describes Symmachus and Theodo- tion as Ebionites: "Theodotio autem, vere quasi pauper et Ebionita, sed et Symmachus ejusdem dogmatis, pauperem sensum secuti Judaice transtulertmt ; ' ' and in his preface to Job he speaks of them as '* judaizantes hseretici, qui multa mysteria Salvatoris subdola interpretatione celarunt, et tamen in 'EfaTrXot? habentur apud ecclesias et explan- antur ab ecclesiasticis viris" (Vol. IX. Col. 1142). *' Epiph- anius" writes Montfaucon, "Conspecto hexaplorum or- dine, ubi Symmachus ante Theodotionem positus secun- dum locum in Graecis editionibus occupabat, putavit Sym- machum prius Theodotione editionem suam concinnasse. " He assigns the version of Symmachus, perhaps rightly, to the reign of Severus (A. D. 193-21 1) — the Chronicon Paschale specifies the ninth year of this reign — but this account of the author is at variance with the statements of Eusebius and Jerome. Symmachus (he tells us) was a Samaritan, who, from disappointed ambition, became a proselyte to Judaism, and set to work to compose his Greek version of the Scrip- tures with a specific anti-Samaritan bias. The version of Symmachus was distinguished by the purity of its Greek and its freedom from Hebraisms. Jer- ome (following Eusebius) several times remarks: *' Symma- chus more suo apertius/' or '' manifestius'' \ and he praises him as an interpreter, " qui non solet verborum Ka/co^rjXiap sed intelligentiae ordinem sequi" (Comment, on Amos, III. II, Vol. VI. 258). In his preface to Lib. II. of the Chronic. Euseb. (Vol. VIII. 223-4), he writes: ''Quamobrem Aquila et Symmachus et Theodotio incitati diversum psene opus in 692 THE VERSION OF THEODOTION eodem opere prodiderunt ; alio nitente verbum de verbo expri- mere, alio sensum potius sequi, tertio non multum a veteribus discrepare.'' Jerome not only commends Symmachus as above, but frequently adopts his renderings, as may be shown by a comparison of their versions. Symma(^us shows his command over the Greek language by his use of compounds, where the Hebrew can only represent the same ideas by a combination of separate words ; and no less by his free use of particles to bring out subtle distinctions of relation which the Hebrew cannot adequately express. In like manner, his rendering of the name of Eve by Zcooyovo^ preserves the word-play in Gen. III. 20 ; but other names are less happily rendered. The last column of Origen's Hexapla contained the ver- sion of Theodotion. St. Epiphanius states that Theodotion was of Pont us, of the sect of the Marcionites, which he abandoned to embrace Judaism. St. Irenaeus affirms that he was an Ephesian, who became a proselyte to Judaism. His epoch is very probably the second half of the second century. Jerome writes of Theodotion: "Qui utique post adven- tum Christi incredulus fuit, licet eum quidam dicant Ebion- itam, qui altero genere Judaeus est;" but elsewhere he seems to adopt the tradition of his Ebionism. Montfaucon argues from his rendering of Dan. IX. 26 that he was a Jew. His aim as a translator being (again in the words of Jerome) **non multum a veteribus discrepare," not so much to make a new translation as to revise the old, correcting its errors and supplying its defects, it not unnaturally came to pass that Origen made free use of his version in constructing the Hexaplar recension of the LXX ; and that, in the case of the Book of Daniel, even the recension of Origen was popularly discarded in favor of Theodotion's version in its entirety. His style does not present such marked peculiarities as those of Aquila and Symmachus. Suffice it to notice that he is more addicted to transliteration than they or the LXX ; and that, on account of the number of the words which he thus leaves untranslated, he has been regarded as an ignorant interpreter. The charge, however, cannot be sustained. THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN 693 Besides the aforesaid versions, three others were in exist- ence of which but little is known. They are designated as Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh, from the position which they occupied in Origen's Hexapla. It is probable that they did not contain all the books. The old writers so differ in des- cribing where they were found, that nothing definite can be known of them. Of the seventh no trace remains, and we only know of its existence from the fact that Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. VI. 1 6) declares, that Origen added it to the other in the edition of the Psalms, thereby making the edition Enneapla. The great use which had been made of the Septuagint by the Jews previously to their rejection of it, and the constant use of it by the Christians, naturally caused a multiplication of copies, in which numerous errors became introduced, in the course of time, from the negligence or inaccuracy of transcribers, and from glosses or marginal notes, which had been added for the explanation of difficult words, and which had crept into the text. In order to remedy this growing evil, Origen, in the early part of the third century, undertook the laborious task of collating the Greek text, then in use, with the original Hebrew, and with other Greek translations then extant, and from the whole to produce a new recension or revision. Twenty-eight years were devoted to the preparation of this arduous work, in the course of which he collected manuscripts from every possible quarter. Origen commenced his labor at Cassarea, A. D. 231, and, it appears, finished his Polyglot at Tyre, but in what year is not precisely known. This noble critical work is designated by various names among ancient writers, as Tetrapla, Hexapla, Octapla, and Enneapla. The Tetrapla contained the four Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion, disposed in four columns ; to these he added two columns more, contain- ing the Hebrew text in its original characters, and also in Greek letters. These six columns, according to Epiphanius, formed the Hexapla. Having subsequently discovered two other Greek versions of some parts of the Scriptures, usually 694 THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN called the fifth and sixth, he added them to the preceding, inserting them in their respective places, and thus composed the Octapla ; and a separate translation of the Psalms, usually called the seventh version, being afterwards added, the entire work has by some been termed the Enneapla. This appella- tion, however, was never generally adopted. But, as the two editions made by Origen generally bore the name of the Tetrapla, and Hexapla, Bauer, after Montfaucon, is of opinion that Origen edited only the Tetrapla and Hexapla ; and this appears to be the real fact. The accompanying plates will give some concept of Origen 's great work. Aquila's version is placed next to the Greek translitera- tion of the Hebrew text; that of Symmachus occupies the fourth column; the Septuagint, the fifth; and Theodotion's, the sixth. The other three anonymous translations, not containing the entire books of the Old Testament, were placed in the three last columns of the Enneapla. Where the same words occurred in all the other Greek versions, without being particularly specified, Origen designated them by A or AG, Konroi, the rest; — Ot F, or the three, denoted Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion; — Ot A, or the four, signified Aquila, Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodo- tion; and n, Ilaz/Te?, all the interpreters. Where any passages appeared in the Septuagint, that were not found in the Hebrew, he designated them by an obelus -^ with two bold points (:) also annexed. This mark was also used to denote words not extant in the Hebrew, but added by the Septuagint translators, either for the sake of elegance, or for the purpose of illustrating the sense. To passages wanting in the copies of the Septuagint, and supplied by himself from the other Greek versions, he pre- fixed an asterisk .x. with two points (:) also annexed, in order that his additions might be immediately perceived. These supplementary passages, we are informed by Jerome, were for the most part taken from Theodotion's translation; not unfrequently from that of Aquila ; sometimes, though rarely, from the version of Symmachus ; and sometimes from two or three together. But, in every case, the initial letter of each THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN 695 translator's name was placed immediately after the asterisk, to indicate the source whence such supplementary passage was taken. And in lieu of the very erroneous Septuagint version of Daniel, Theodotion's translation of that book was inserted entire. Further, not only the passages wanting in the Septuagint were supplied by Origen with the asterisks, as above noticed, but also where that version does not appear accurately to express the Hebrew original, having noted the former read- ing with an obelus, -^, he added the correct rendering from one of the other translators, with an asterisk subjoined. In the Pentateuch, Origen compared the Samaritan text with the Hebrew as received by the Jews, and noted their differences. Since Origen 's time. Biblical critics have distinguished two editions or exemplars of the Septuagint — the Koivrj or common text, with all its errors and imperfections, as it existed previously to his collation, and the Hexaplar text, or that corrected by Origen himself. For nearly fifty years was this great man's stupendous work buried in a comer of the city of Tyre, probably on account of the very great expense of transcribing forty or fifty volumes, which far exceeded the means of private individuals; and here, per- haps, it might have perished in oblivion, if Eusebius and Pamphilus had not discovered it, and deposited it in the librar}^ of Pamphilus the Martyr, at Caesarea, where Jerome saw it about the middle of the fourth century. As we have no account whatever of Origen 's autograph, after this time, it is most probable that it perished in the year 653, on the capture of that city by the Arabs ; and a few imperfect frag- ments, collected from manuscripts of the Septuagint and the Catenae of the Greek fathers, are all that now remain of the work. As the Septuagint version had been read in the Church from the commencement of Christianity, so it continued to be used in most of the Greek churches ; and the text, as cor- rected by Origen, was transcribed for their use, together with his critical marks. Hence, in the progress of time, from the negligence or inaccuracy of copyists, numerous 696 THE PRINCIPAL EDITIONS OF THE SEPTUAGINT errors were introduced into this version, which rendered a new revisal necessary ; and, as all the Greek churches did not receive Origen's BibUcal labors with equal deference, three principal recensions were undertaken nearly at the same time, of which we are now to offer a brief notice. The first was the edition, undertaken by Eusebius and Pamphilus about the year 300, from the Hexaplar text, with the whole of Origen's critical marks ; it was not only adopted by the churches of Palestine, but was also deposited in almost every library. By frequent transcriptions, however, Origen's marks or notes became, in the course of a few years, so much changed, as to be of little use, and were finally omittted ; this omission only augmented the evil, since even in the time of Jerome it was no longer possible to know what belonged to the translators, or what were Origen's own cor- rections ; and now it may almost be considered as a hopeless task to distinguish between them. Contemporary with the edition of Eusebius and Pamphilus, was the recension of the KoLVT}, or Vulgate text of the Septuagint, conducted by Lucian, a presbyter of the Church at Antioch, who suffered martyrdom A. D. 311. He took the Hebrew text for the basis of his edition, which was received in all the Eastern churches from Constantinople to Antioch. While Lucian was prosecuting his Biblical labors, Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, undertook a similar work, which was generally received in the churches of Egypt. He is supposed to have introduced fewer alterations than Lucian ; and his edition is cited by Jerome as the Exemplar Alexandrinum. All the manuscripts of the Septuagint now extant, as well as the printed editions, are derived from the three recensions above mentioned, although Biblical critics are by no means agreed what particular recension each manuscript has followed . There are four principal printed editions of the Septua- gint. The first in time was that of Cardinal Ximenes, printed in his Polyglot, in 151 7. The second principal edition is called the Aldine Edition, published in Venice in 15 18. It was called Aldine from the printer Aldus Manutius, though it did not appear till two years after his death, and was executed under the THE VETUS ITALA 697 care of Andreas Asulanus, the father-in-law of Aldus Manutius. The third principal edition in order of time, though first in excellence, is that called the Sixtine Edition. It was undertaken at the suggestion of Cardinal Montaltus, during the reign of Gregory XIIL, and when, at the death of Greg- ory, Montaltus ascended the papal throne under the name of Sixtus v., he brought the work to completion and hence it bears his name. Its full title is *H liaXaia ALudrjKrj^ Kara Tou? 'Fi^8ofir)KovTa Bl avOevTia^ BiVaTOv K- Afcpov Apxtepeco^ cKSoOetaa.. — Vetus Testamentum Graecum, jtixta LXX Inter- pretes, studio Antonii Cardinalis Carafe, ope virorum doctorum adjuti, cum prefatione et s'choliis Petri Morini. Romae ex Typographia Francisci Zannetti, 1586, foho. It is a beautiful edition, of great rarity and value. It contains 783 pages of text, preceded by four leaves of prelim- inary matter, which are followed by another (subsequently added), entitled Corrigenda in notationibus Psalterii. This last mentioned leaf is not found in the copies bearing the date of 1586, which also want the privilege of Pope Sixtus V. dated May 9, 1587, at whose request and under whose auspices it was undertaken by Cardinal Antonio Carafa, aided by Antonio Agelli, Peter Morinus, Fulvio Ursino, Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal Sirleti, and others. The cele- brated Codex Vaticanus 1209 was the basis of the Roman or Sixtine edition, as it is usually termed. The first forty- six chapters of Genesis, together with some of the Psalms, and the book of Maccabees, being obliterated from the Vat- ican manuscripts through extreme age, the editors are said to have supplied this deficiency by compiling those parts of the Septuagint from a manuscript out of Cardinal Bessa- rion's library, and from another which was brought to them from Calabria. So great was the agreement between the latter and the Codex Vaticanus, that they were supposed to have been transcribed, either the one from the other, or both from the same copy. Various readings are given to each chapter. This edition contains the Greek text only. In 1588, Flaminio Nobili printed at Rome in folio, Vetus Testa- mentum secundum LXX. Latine redditum. 698 THE VETUS ITALA The fourth of these principal editions is that published by Grabe, at Oxford. This edition exhibits the text of the celebrated Codex Alexandrinus, now deposited in the British Museum. Though Grabe prepared the whole for the press, yet he only lived to publish the Octateuch, forming the first volume of the folio edition, in 1707, and the fourth volume containing the metrical books, in 1709. Chapter XX. Versions Derived from the Septuagint. While the Covenant of God was restricted to the Jewish race, the Hebrew and Septuagint texts sufficed for the world. But when the Message of Christ spread abroad through the nations there arose a need for other versions of Scripture. Among these old versions, one of the most important is the old Latin version commonly called the Vetus Itala. The origin of this version is involved in obscurity, and like many questions of its kind, furnishes a theme for many different learned conjectures. We shall be content to briefly set forth the most probable data. The language in which the message of Christ was first presented to the Roman world, was Greek. Sufficient evidence warrants the conclusion that the liturgical lan- guage of Italy for the first two centuries was Greek. De Rossi believes that it was not till toward the close of the third century that Greek was superseded by Latin in the Western Church.* But in Pro-Consular Africa, though the language of the masses was Punic, the liturgical language must have been Latin from the earliest times. This has led many to assign Africa as the place of origin of the "Itala." Wiseman, Hug, Maier, Hagen, Lehir, Himpel and Comely support such opinion. Reithmayr, Gams and Kaulen place the origin of the version in Italy. The supporters of the *G. B. de Rossi (Roma Sotteranea, Roma 1867, II. p. 236 sq.) : "L'uso costante della lingua greca in quegli epitaffi (dei romani pontefici) . 6 prova manifesta, che greco fu il linguaggio ecclesiastico della chiesa romana nel secolo terzo. . . , Circa la fine del secolo terzo, o volgendo il quarto, la greca lingua ecclesiastica cedette in Roma il luogo alia latina. " THE VETUS ITALA 699 first opinion allege that the version would originate where it was needed, and it would be assigning too late a date to the version, to place it in the epoch of the decline of the Greek language in the West. They say, moreover, that the diction of the Vetus Itala, is like to that of Tertullian. Against this it may be urged that Greek never was the language of the masses in Italy, and that the low, humble diction of the Vetus Itala shows that it was not the work of savants ; and it bears evidence that it was especially intended for the humbler classes, and was most probably made by men of limited literary ability. Its Latinity is exceedingly barba- rous, so that Amobius felt called upon to defend it against the ridicule of the pagans. This very fact proves that it was not made by the principal men in the Church, but by private individuals for private use, while Greek held the post of the authentic Scripture of the Church. Moreover, the barbarisms of the Vetus Itala, are by no means simply Africanisms, but are found in all the low Latin of the first centuries. It seems that if the edition were made in Africa, where Latin was the liturgical language, as they contend, it would be made by the chief men of the Church, who certainly could write better Latin than the text of the Vetus Itala. We believe, therefore, that in this question, which does not admit of a certain answer, the greater weight of probability stands for Italy as the place of origin of the first Latin trans- lation. Regarding the mode of its origin, it seems quite certain that it was the work of many private individuals. St. Augustine, a most competent judge in this matter, declares the manner in which the early translations were made: " For the translations of the Scriptures from Hebrew into Greek can be counted , but the Latin translators are out of all number. For in the early days of the faith, every man who happened to get his hands upon a Greek manuscript, and who thought he had any knowledge, were it never so little, of the two languages, ventured upon the work of transla- tion." (Enchirid. of Christ. Doct. Bk. II. XI.) ) It is evident that the numerous translators did not trans- late the whole Bible, but certain books, so that there were 700 THE VETUS ITALA many different translations of the several books made by different authors. Jerome complains bitterly of these nu- merous translators: ''With the Latins there are as many different versions as there are codices, and every one arbi- trarily adds or takes away what he pleases. " (Hier. Praef. in Josue.) In this multiplicity of versions of the different books it soon resulted that the whole Bible existed in Latin with considerable diversity in the different codices. It must have been also that some of the books were more faithfully translated than others. The next step seems to have been that the churches collected these various translations of the individual books into complete catalogues of Scripture. Here, also, diversity resulted, for the different churches collected different versions, and the works of the Uhrarii dormitantes and the imperiti emendatores, was continued. Such was the condition of the Latin text when Jerome took it up and revised it according to the Greek. Now, among the various complete versions thus brought together, Augus- tine designates one as the Italian version: "Now among the translations themselves the Italian is to be preferred to the others, for it keeps closer to the words, without prejudice to clearness of expression." (op. cit. 15.) It is certain, therefore, that in Augustine's time, out of the various trans- lations of the individual books, there had resulted several complete versions, among which, in his judgment, the Vetus Itala was pre-eminent. It is probable that a beginning was made to translate the Scriptures into Latin even in the Apostolic age. As in that age intense activity was mani- fested in all things that pertained to religion, without doubt several translations of the different books were soon in exist- ence. It is quite probable that one of these complete ver- sions, at a very early age, obtained a place of eminence in the churches of Italy ; perhaps it was in a certain sense author- ized by the authorities in those churches. Thus it came to be termed the *' Itala, " and, as Jerome called it the old in in contradistinction to his version, it thus became known as the Old Latin Version. REVISIONS OF JEROME 701 Its language was ruder than the ordinary Latin of the period. It coined many new words, adopted many Greek words and idioms, and confounded genders, declinations, and conjugations. The condition of the Latin text in the beginning of the fourth century was deplorable. Innumerable codices existed widely differing from each other. Translators, correctors, and transcribers had rendered the text in a great measure uncertain. To remedy this evil Pope Damasus (1384), commissioned St. Jerome to revise the Latin text. Jerome began his labors at Rome in ^S^, and first revised the Psalter " juxta septuaginta interpretes, licet cursim, magna tamen ex parte." This emendation is called the Roman Psalter. It was immediately adopted in liturgical use at Rome, and remained in use in the churches of Italy, till the time of St. Pius V. (ti572). The same year he also corrected the Gos- pels, " Evangelia ad Graecam fidem revocavit. " The norm of Jerome in this emendation was to depart as little as possible from the usual reading; therefore, "ita calamo tempera vit ut, his tantum qu^ sensum videbantur mutare correctis, reliqua manere pateretur ut fuerant." (Hier. Praef. in Evang.) We find no prefaces of Jerome, relating to the other books of the New Testament, for which cause, some have doubted whether he extended this emendation beyond the Gospels. As he speaks in several places in his writings of his emendation of the New Testament, and declares that he restored the New Testament to the purity of the Greek, it is highly probable that he revised the whole New Testament. When Damasus died in 384, Jerome returned to the East, and, happening upon the Hexaplar Text of Origen, at Caesarea, he made from that text a second emendation of the Psalter, retaining Origen 's diacritic signs. This emendation was immediately received into liturgical use in the churches of Gaul ; hence, it came to be called the Gallican Psalter. It gradually came into use in other churches, and St. Pius V. authorized it for the text of the Roman Breviary. An exception was made in the case of the Psalm called the 702 CODICES OF THE OLD LATIN VERSION Invitatorium, XCIV. of the Vulgate, which was retained from the Roman Psalter. The Vatican Basilica, the Duomo of Milan, and the Chapel of the Doges of Venice, by special privilege, retained in their liturgy the Roman Psalter. The Roman Psalter is also retained in the Roman Missal. The Psalterium Gallicanum is placed in the Vulgate. St. Jerome next revised Job by the Hexaplar text, which revis- ion was received with much favor by St. Augustine. We are certain from Jerome's prefaces that he emended in the same manner Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles and Chronicles. It is probable that Jerome also corrected, at this time and in this manner, the remaining books of the Old Testa- ment, though explicit data are wanting to prove it. Jerome soon after entered upon the greatest work of his life, the translation of the protocanonical books of the Old Testament, from the original Hebrew. Of this great version we shall treat in a later chapter. Suffice it to say here, that forth from the sixth century, the great translation of Jerome displaced the Vetus Itala, so that the greater part of this old version perished. Certain por- tions of it are preserved in the Vulgate, and in the writings of the Fathers. The New Testament of the Vetus Itala as emended by Jerome, the second emendation of the Psalter, the books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I. and II., Maccabees, and the deuterocanonical parts of Esther and Daniel, are retained from the Vetus Itala in the Vulgate. Various collections have been made of the other frag- ments of the Vetus Itala from codices and works of Fathers. Flaminius Nobilius and Agellius were the first to collect and publish these fragments in 1588. Since that time fragments have been collected and published by Martianay, Thomas Heame, Sabatier, Blanchini; and in more recent times by Vercellone, Ranke, Haupt, and Muenter. The Codices of the Old Latin version are designated by minuscule Italic and Greek letters the most important of the New Testament are: CODICES OF THE OLD LATIN VERSION 703 a. Codex Vercellensis, at Vercelli. A tradition asserts that this was written by Bishop Eusebius of Vercel- li, who died in 370. Other scholars place it much later. h. Cod Veronensis of the IV. or V. century. c. Cod. Colbertinus at Paris (Lat. 254) of the XII. century. d. Cod. Bez^ of the VI. century, the Latin parallel of Cod. D. e. Cod. Palatinus of IV. or V. century at Vienna (Pal. 1185). /. Cod. Brixianus of the VI. century at Brescia. ff^. Cod. Corbeiensis I. of the VIII. or IX. century at St. Petersburg. fj^. Cod. Corbeiensis II. of the VI. century at Paris. Both these formerly belonged to the monastery of Corbey, near Amiens. ^. Cod. San germ anensis I. of the IX. century now at Paris (Lat. ii,553)- ^. Cod. Sangermanensis II. of the X. century at Paris. (Lat., 13,169). h. Cod. Claromontanus of the IV. or V. century now in the Vatican (Lat. 7,223). i. Cod. Vindobonensis of the VII. century at Vienna (Lat. 1,235). j. Cod. Saretianus of the V. century, discovered in 1872 in the church of Sarezzano near Tortona. It is being collated at Rome. k. Cod. Bobbiensis of the V. or VI. century in the National Library at Turin. The Codex Bobbiensis is more ancient than any of these. It belongs to the National Library of Turin; it is designated in the Latin x\pparatus Criticus by the minuscule letter k. The Codex forms a quarto volume of 96 leaves of fine parchment. The leaves measure 185 millimeters by 105. The pages contain one column of 14 lines. The script is uncial, without ornament. Its date is placed in the fifth century ; and it must thus be considered as one of the most ancient of the New Testament. Traces of two correctors 704 THE CODEX BOBBIENSIS are recognizable in the text. One of these was contem- porary with the original scribe; the other more modern, is believed from the Irish characters used to be S. Columban. The Codex in its present state only contains the following fragments of Matthew and Mark; Math. I. i to III. lo; IV. 2 to XIV. 17; XV. 26-30; Mark VIII. 8-1 1, 14-16, and from VIII. 19 to XVI. 9. It is estimated that the MS. originally consisted of 415 leaves. The first 256 leaves are lost. The fragment that remains is believed to be a portion of the 33d cahier; the following 20 are lost. It originally contained only the Gospels, written in the following order: John, Luke, Mark, Matthew. This order also obtains in the Codex Monacensis X of the Gospels. A modem note that Tischendorf read on the Codex, but which has since disappeared, made known that the Codex, according to tradition was one that St. Columban used to carry in his wallet. St. Columban was bom about the year 543, in Leinster. In 613 he passed the Alps, and founded at a short distance from Piacenza, the monastery of Bobbio, where he died in 615. The Irish pilgrims were wont to carry the Scriptures in leathern wallets, **sacculi pellicei, " and the celebrated Irish Bible known as the Book of Armagh is enclosed in its leathern case. The identification of the Codex Bobbiensis with St. Columban is a possible hypothesis but not an established fact. After the Renaissance, the MSS of Bobbio were distributed in the great libraries of Europe, and this Codex found its resting place at Turin. It was edited by Fleck in 1837; by Tischendorf in 1847; ^^^ ^Y Wordsworth and Sanday in 1886. The Latin versions before the time of Jerome can be reduced to three groups: i. — The African, conformable to the citations of Scripture of St. Cyprian; 2. — The European, which circulated in Western Europe during the fourth cen- tury ; 3. — ^The Italian, whose use is represented by St. Augus- tine. The Codex of Bobbio is a faithful exemplar of the African text. See Codex Bobbiensis in Vigouroux, Dic- tionnaire de la Bible. THE TARGUMS 705 I. Cod. Rhedigeranus of the VII. century in the Rhe- digeran Library at Breslau. m. This letter indicates fragments extracted by Car- inal Mai from the "Liber de divinis scripturis" ascribed to St. Augustine. n. Fragmenta Sangallensia of the V. or VI. century in the Stiftsbibliothek at St. Gall. 0. Another fragment at vSt. Gall, perhaps of the VII. century. p. A fragment at St. Gall perhaps of the VIII. century. q. Cod. Monacensis of the VII. century, at Munich (Lat. 6,224). r. Cod. Usserianus I. of the VII. century, formerly belonging to Ussher, now at Trinity College, Dublin. rl Cod. Usserianus II. of the IX. or X. cent, also at Trinity College, Dublin. s. Fragmenta Ambrosiana of the VI. century, in the Ambrosian Library at Milan. t. Fragmenta Bernensia of the V. century, palimp- sest, at Berne. V. Frag. Vind. of the VII. century at Vienna. aur. Cod. Aureus of the VII. or VIII. century now at Stockholm. z. Cod. Sangallensis the interlinear Latin of Cod. D. Besides these there are many fragments of the several books of the New Testament. Chapter XXI. The Targums The Chaldee word DI^^IH Targum signifies, in general, any version or explanation ; but this appellation is more par- ticularly restricted to the versions or paraphrases of the Old Testament, executed in the East Aramaean or Chaldee dia- lect, as it is usually called. These Targums are termed paraphrases or expositions, because they are rather com- ments and explications, than literal translations of the text. They are written in the Chaldee tongue, which became familiar to the Jews after the time of their captivity in Babylon, and was more known to them than the Hebrew 45 (H.S.) 706 THE TARGUMS itself; so that, when the law was "read in the Synagogue every Sabbath day," in pure Biblical Hebrew, an explana- tion was subjoined to it in Chaldee, in order to render it intelligible to the people, who had but an imperfect knowl- edge of the Hebrew language. This practice, as already observed, originated about the epoch of the Maccabees. As there are no traces of any written Targums prior to those of Onkelos and Jonathan, who are supposed to have lived about the time of our Saviour, it is highly probable that these paraphrases were at first merely oral; that subsequently, the ordinary glosses on the more difficult passages were com- mitted to writing; and that, as the Jews were bound by an ordinance of their elders to possess a copy of the law^ these glosses were either afterwards collected together and defi- ciencies in them supplied, or new and connected paraphrases were formed. There are at present extant ten paraphrases on different parts of the Old Testament, three of which comprise the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses: i. — The Targum of Onkelos; 2. — ^That falsely ascribed to Jonathan, and usually cited as the Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan; 3. — The Jerusalem Targum ; 4. — The Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel (i. e., the son of Uzziel) on the Prophets; 5. — The Targum of Rabbi Joseph the blind, or one-eyed, on the Hagiographa; 6. — An anonymous Targum on the five Megilloth, or books of Ruth, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and the Lamen- tations of Jeremiah ; 7, 8, 9. — Three Targums on the book of Esther; and, 10. — A Targum or paraphrase on the two Books of Chronicles. These Targums taken together, form a continued paraphrase on the Old Testament, with the excep- tion of the Books of Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah (anciently reputed to be part of Ezra). These books being partly written in Chaldee, it has been conjectured that no para- phrases were written on them, as being unnecessary. The Targum of Onkelos. According to the Babylonian Talmud Onkelos was a proselyte who lived in the first Christian century ; but there is no confirmation of this in the Jerusalem Talmud. Indeed, THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 707 it seems probable that the name is a corruption of Aquila the translator. The Targum seems rather a progressive work, the work of several hands, which may have originated during the second and third Christian centuries. It is first quoted as the Targum of Onkelos by Gaon Sar Shalom in the ninth Christian century. It is sometimes called the Babylonian Targum, as it was revised at Babylon in the fourth and fifth centuries and officially authorized. Though at times paraphrase takes the place of transla- tion, and there are halakha and haggada in it, the translation has merit. The first edition of it was published at Bologna in 1482. The other targums are of secondary importance. Chapter XXII. The Ancient Versions. The Syriac. One of the most important of the ancient versions of Scripture is the Syriac ; some of the Syriac Bible MSS ap- pear to be the oldest in any language. One in the British Museum is dated in the year 464. The Aramaean or Syriac (preserv^ed to this day as their sacred tongue by several Eastern Churches) is an important branch of the great Semitic family of languages, and as early as Jacob's age existed distinct from the Hebrew (Gen. xxxi. 47). As we now find it in books, it was spoken in the north of Syria and in Upper Mesopotamia about Edessa, and survives to this day in the vernacular of the plateau to the north of Mardin and Nisibis. It is a more copious, flexible, and elegant language than the old Hebrew (which ceased to be vernacular at the Babylonian captivity) had ever the means of becoming, and is so intimately akin to the Chaldee as spoken at Babylon, and throughout Syria, that the latter was popularly known by its name (2 Kings xviii. 26 ; Isa. xxxvi. 11; Dan. ii. 4). As the Gospel took firm root at Antioch within a few years after the Lord's Ascension (Acts xi. 19-27; xiii. I, &c.), we might deem it probable that its tidings soon spread from the Greek capital into the native 708 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS interior, even though we utterly reject the venerable tradition of Thaddaeus' mission to Abgarus, toparch of Edessa, as well as the fable of that monarch's intercourse vv4th Christ while yet on earth (Eusebius, Eccl.Hist., i. 13; ii. i). At all events we are sure that Christianity flourished in these regions at a very early period ; it is even possible that the Syriac Scriptures were seen by Hegesippus in the second century (Euseb., Eccl. Hist., iv. 22); they were familiarly used and claimed as his national version by the eminent Ephrem of Edessa in the fourth. Thus the universal belief of later ages, and the very nature of the case, seem to render it unquestionable that the Syrian Church was possessed of a translation, both of the Old and New Testament, which it used habitually, and for public worship exclusively, from the second century of our era downwards. The great heresies of Eutyches and Nestorius in the middle of the fifth century rent the Syrian Church, and drew great numbers into one or the other of these sects, but they seem not to have induced any difference of opinion among them regarding the Holy Scriptures. The Peshitto. The greatest of their versions is the Peshitto or " simple.' ' Some derive this name from the fact that it was unprovided with the diacritical signs employed by Origen in his Hexaplar edition of the Septuagint. Others derive it from^its faithful literal character. The Syrians say that a part of the O. T. was translated in the days of Solomon at the request of King Hiram Another tradition dates it from the advent of the priest sent by the King of Assyria into Samaria. It seems reasonably probable that at least a part of the Syriac Old Testament is pre-Christian. Though the twen- ty-two books of the Hebrew Canon were the first translated, at a very early date the deuterocanical books were embodied in the Canon, as appears from an inspection of the most ancient MSS. The value of this version differs in the differ- ent books, as it is not all of a single hand. THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 709 The Peshitto was the only recognized Syriac version up to the sixth centuiy. A tradition prevails among the Syrians that St. Mark the Evangelist translated the New Testament into Syriac. Jacob of Edessa (f 701) derived the version from King Abgar and Thaddaeus (Addai) the Apostle. Without ac- cepting these legends we believe that at a very early age the New Testament existed in Syriac. Tatian's Diatessaron, made in the middle of the second century presupposes a very early Syriac translation. The Philoxenian and Harkeleian Versions. In the year 508 Aksenaya or Phtloxenus, bishop of Mab- bogh (485-519) with the help of his Chorepiscopus, Polycarp undertook a literal translation of the Bible. Besides the New Testament the Psalms of this version are mentioned by Moses of Aggel (between 550-570). A portion of Isaiah is in the British Museum (17106 Additional), This has been edited by Ceriani. A hundred years later Paul of Telia in 'Mesopotamia revised it in Alexandria from MSS which were derived from Origen's Hexaplar text. Hence it is often called the Syro-Hexaplar text. The New Testament of this version was made by Thomas of Harkel, as the following subscrip- tion attests: "This book of the four holy Gospels was translated out of the Greek into Syriac with great diligence and labour. . .first in the city of Mabug, in the year of Alexander of Macedon 819 (a.d. 508), in the days of the pious Mar Philoxenus, confessor, bishop of that city. Afterwards it was collated with much diligence by me, the poor Thomas, by the help of two [or three] approved and accurate Greek Manuscripts in Antonia, of the great city of Alexandria, in the holy monas- tery of the Antonians. It was again written out and collated in the aforesaid place in the year of the same Alexander 927 (a.d. 6 16), Indiction iv. How much toil I spent upon it and its companions the Lord alone knoweth . . . &c." It is plain that by **its companions" the other parts of the N. T. are 710 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS meant, for a similar subscription (specifying but one manu- script) is annexed to the Catholic Epistles. This version contains all the N. T. except the Apoca- lypse. In 1627 L. de Dieu published at Leyden a MS of the Apocalypse which is now proven by the labors of Gywnn to be of the hand of Thomas of Harkel. An earlier MS of the Apocalypse of St. John was published by Gwynn in 1897. The perikope of the Adulteress (John VIII. 2-1 1) is wanting in many Syriac texts; but numerous ancient MSS of it have been found and published. The Karkaphensian Version. Assemani (Biblioth. Orient., tom. ii. p. 283), on the authority of Gregory Bar-Hebraeus, mentions what has been supposed to have been a Syriac "version" of the N. T., other than the Peshitto and Harkeleian, which was named ''Karka- phensian" whether, as he thought, because it was used by Syrians of the mountains, or from Carcuf, a city of Mesopo- tamia. Adler (Vers. Syr., p. 33) was inclined to believe that Bar-Hebraeus meant rather a revised manuscript than a separate translation. Cardinal Wiseman, (Horae Syriacae, Rom. 1828), discovered in the Vatican (Ms. Syr. 152) a Syriac manuscript of readings from both testaments, with the several portions of the New standing in the following order; Acts, James, i Peter, i John, the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, and then the Gospels. . According to the subscription it is of the year A. D. 980. Cureton's Version. In 1842 Tattam brought from the convent of St. Mary Deipara in the Nitrian Desert a mass of MSS. Out of these Dr. Cureton one of the officers of the British Museum picked eighty leaves and a half. Cureton published these in 1858 with an English translation, and a beautiful facsimile by Mrs. Cureton. In his preface Cureton declared that he had here a most ancient Syriac translation whose antiquity is proved by the fact that the fragments of Matthew's Gospel were made from Matthew's original. The MSS contain fragments of the Four Gospels. Cureton succeeded in per- THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 711 suading few of the great age of his MSS. Scholars are divided on the question of its age and value ; but few agree with its discoverer regarding the same. The Abbe Martin believes that Cureton's Syriac is a recension of the Peshitto dating from the end of the seventh century or beginning of the eighth, and that it never had much vogue. The Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest. In 1892 Mrs. Agnes Smith Lewis discovered in the Mon- astery of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai some palimpsest leaves of a Syriac text of the Gospels. This was published in 1894 by Bensley Harris and Burkitt, with an introduction by Mrs. Lewis. She has supplemented this work by a transla- tion of the Syriac text published in 1896. This is visually spoken of as the Sinaitic palimpsest. The greatest divergency exists among scholars regarding its date, and in the present unsettled state of the question it is useless to venture a judgment. The Palestinian Syriac. There exists in the Vatican Library a Syriac Evangelis- tary called Evangeliarium Hierosolymitanum. This was first described by Assemani and Adler in 1789. P. Lagarde published it in 1892. It is of secondary importance. The Syriac printed editions are in a deplorable state, be- ing all derived from the uncritical Paris Polyglot of Michael le Jay (1645). Walton's Polyglot reproduced this text without any important emendations. The best edition up to date is that of the Dominicans of Mosul. (3 vols. 1887-92). The Egyptian or Coptic Versions. The Coptic language is derived from the old Egyptian tongue with numerous Greek words intermingled. This language did not cease to be spoken in Egypt, until towards the middle of the seventeenth century. The study of the Coptic literature is at present in a very imperfect state. Learned men have been studying the language for over two centuries, but much of that study was given to the hiero- 712 THE ANCIENT VERvSIONS glyphs, and the importance of studying the Coptic Bible has only recently been realized. The great decadence of learn- ing among the Copts, the neglect into which their sacred books had fallen, rendered the study difficult, and its results uncertain, and unsatisfactory. The Coptic MSS are in a very bad condition, and we can not hope to give a full treatise on this subject in the present condition of the science. The Coptic language existed in several important dia- lects, of which the first is the Bohairic. This name is derived from Bohairah, the Arabic name for Lower Egypt. It was spoken principally in the Delta of the Nile, and at Alexandria, and, for a time, was the only Egyptian language known to Europeans, who called it simply the Coptic tongue. Later, it was called the Memphitic, in contradistinction to the Thebaic dialect. The term Memphitic applied to this language, is incorrect; for it was only in later times, when the Coptic patriarchs transferred their seat from Alexandria to Cairo, that it spread at Memphis. The usage of the best scholars is to call it Bohairic. The Sahidic Dialect is derived from Es-Sahid, the Arabic designation of Upper Egypt. It was at one time spoken through all Upper Egypt. It has been called The- baic from Thebes, the capital of Upper Egypt, but it is un- certain, whether the tongue originated at Thebes, and it is more scientific to call it Sahidic, until new discoveries may bring forth a more correct appellation. Much uncertainty prevails regarding the third dialect, which current usage calls the Fayoumian. It was discov- ered by Giorgi (Frag. Evang. Joh. Grsco-Copto-Thebaicum, Rome, 1789). He termed it Ammonian, believing that it had been spoken in the Oasis of Ammon. According to Quatremere, it was spoken in the greater and minor Oasis. Zoega calls it the Bashmuric, while Stem denies the identity between the Fayoumian and the Bashmuric. There was a dialect spoken in middle Egypt in the prov- ince of Memphis, when this city had a certain importance, to which the name of Memphitic would rightly belong, were it not for fear of confounding it with the Bohairic. It was THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 713 first made known by the publication in 1878 in Paris, by M. Revillout of some documents on papyrus coming from the old monastery of St. Jeremias, near Serapeum. The fifth dialect is made known from some fragments found in the excavations of the cemetery of Akhmim, the ancient Chemmis or Panopolis; M. Bouriant who first pub- lished these fragments has termed this dialect the Bash- muric. By strong proper characteristics we can divide these dia- lects into Northern and Southern. The Northern dialect is represented by the Bohairic, the other four dialects are grouped in the Southern family, of which the Sahidic bears the greatest divergency from the Bohairic. Concerning the antiquity of these dialects the data is very uncertain. Athanasius, Bishop of Kos, in the eleventh century testi- fied, that the Bohairic and Sahidic alone possessed literary importance in his age. In that epoch, the monophysite pa- triarchs moved their seat from Alexandria to Cairo, through which cause their tongue, the Bohairic dialect, began to prevail over the Sahidic, which latter receded further south- ward. The Sahidic had at that date absorbed the other Southern dialects, but was itself in a state of decadence owing to the ascendancy of the Arabic in all Egypt. Thus the Bohairic became the sole sacred tongue of all Egypt. The Arabic has now almost entirely supplanted it as the spoken language of the people. Quatremere (Recherches, pp. 118) testifies that Marcel possessed a copy of a complete version made at Cairo, by the Patriarch of the See from old Coptic MSS. After the death of Marcel, this copy was bought by J. Lee Hart well. This copy was seen in Hartwell's Library in 1847 ^Y Bardelli, professor of Sanskrit and Coptic, in the University of Pisa. It was then incomplete, containing only Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, the Psalms, the twelve Minor Prophets, the four Gospels, the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, the Epistle of St. James, and the first Epistle of St. Peter; in all, forty-one volumes in 4to. The missing volumes perished in the burn- ing of Marcel's house at Cairo. The books bear an Arabic 714 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS translation opposite the Coptic text. These books are somewhere in England, though, thus far, they have not all been located. The ruin of the Sahidic literature is greater. Only frag- ments remain of the several books which have been dug out of the ruins of convents, and sold by the Arabs to explorers and tourists. These are scattered through the libraries of Europe. Before speaking of the date and nature of the Coptic Scriptures, we shall first briefly notice some of the principal publications of this version in Europe. In 1 731 Wilkins published at London the Bohairic Pen- tateuch. In 1837, de Lagarde published a complete edition of the Pentateuch, but in neither of these editions was use made of the Vatican MS, the most ancient and best of all known Coptic MSS. Of the other historical books we have only fragments gathered from Coptic liturgical books. De Lagarde collected these and published them in 1879. In 1846 Tattam pub- lished the Book of Job. The Bohairic Psalter was published in 1 744 by Tuki from MS 5 of the Vatican. Other editions of the Psalter have been given by Ideler, Schwartz, de Lagarde, and F. Rossi. The fragment of Proverbs I. i - XIV. 26, were published in 1875, in Latin characters. The same chapters were pub- lished again by Bouriant in 1882. The last named savant has also published fragments of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus. In 1836, Tattam published at Oxford the Bohairic text of the Minor Prophets. Baruch was published in 1870 at Rome from a MS of Cairo by Mgr. Bsciai. In 1849, Bardelli published the Bohairic text of Daniel, which contains all the deuterocanonical fragments. In 1852 Tattam published a second edition of the same text, with a Latin translation. In 1852, the Coptic text of Isaiah and Jeremiah and Ezechiel was published by Tattam at Oxford. This is the only edition yet published of these three Prophets. THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 715 In 1 716, David Wilkins published the entire Bohairic New Testament. He made use of excellent MSS, and his work is the editio prince ps, of the Bohairic Version of Scrip- ture. In 1846, appeared the Gospels of Matthew and Mark in Coptic, by Schwartz; and in 1847, the Gospels of Luke and John, by the same editor. He had a better knowledge of Coptic than Wilkins, though his edition does not show it. Schwartz was prevented by death from finishing the edition of the complete New Testament. P. Boetticher, better known as Paul de Lagarde, completed it in 1852, on a more critical plan. The first specimens of the Sahidic version published in Europe, were by R. Tuki in his Rudimenta Linguae Coptae, in 1778. In 1785, Mingarelli published fragments fromSS. Matthew and John from MSS furnished him by Cav. Nani. Mingarelli, left the third part of the MSS unpublished at his death. In 1789, A. Giorgi published a fragment of St. John, with a Greek translation. About the same time, Miinter, the Dane, published several fragments at Copenhagen. In 1778, Woide was commissioned by the University of Oxford to publish the Sahidic New Testament. Materials accumu- lated, and he died in 1790, without finishing the work. Henry Ford brought it to completion in 1 799. It is enriched by excellent notes. In 1801 or 1802, Zoega was employed by Cardinal Borgia to edit the Coptic Scripture from MSS then in the Cardinal's possession. In 1804, the Cardinal died, and left his library to the Propaganda. Zoega con- tinued his work from the Propaganda's deposit. The work went to press in 1805. Litigation with Cardinal Borgia's heirs delayed it so that the edition did not appear till 18 10, nearly a year after Zoega 's death. It is the best collection of Coptic literature ever published. In the collection there are several Sahidic fragments. Nothing more was done in Coptic publication, till in 1875 Peyron published the Sahidic Psalter. Since that time, important Coptic publications have been published by de Lagarde, Agapios Bsciai, Ciasca, Hermann, Bouriant, Amelineau, and Maspero. 716 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS Passing over some isolated and feeble testimonies of certain ones who would make the Coptic a version derived directly from the Hebrew, we look for the proofs of its real date in the rapid spread of Christianity in Egypt. The first Christians of Egypt were probably Hellenist Jews, who made use of Greek Scriptures, but from the advent of St. Mark the religion of Christ spread rapidly among the native people, so that at his death in 62, or at the latest, in 68, Egypt had many bishops. During half a century after his death, peace reigned, and the faith of Christ was allowed to fix its roots deeply in Egypt. At the end of the third century, Egypt was solidly and universally Christian ; it had bishops in every place, and monasticism, inaugurated by St. Anthony, was a strong and growing institution. The first evangelists of Egypt, doubt- less, made use of the Greek tongue. In fact, for centuries, Greek remained the official liturgical and Scriptural tongue. This is clearly proven by several Graeco-Coptic MSS which have been preserved for us. But it is probable that, at the same time, Coptic translations of Scripture were made in the second century. At that epoch, the native population formed the body of Christian laity and clergy. Now the common people knew no Greek. What is a probability in the second century, is a certainty in the third century. Many passages in the life of St. Anthony (25 1-256) (Patr. Grasca, Tom. XXVI. Col. 841, 944 et seqq.) prove that the saintly hermit knew no tongue but the native Egyptian ; and yet he was moved to leave the world by hearing the reading of the passage concerning the rich young man (Matth. XIX. 16). St. Athanasius informs us that Anthony was well versed in Scripture, and, therefore, it must have been in the Coptic Scriptures. In fact, in the writings that have come down to us of St. iVnthony, frequent quotations of both Testaments appear. History bears record of a great number of bishops and monks of that epoch who were well versed in the Holy Scrip- tures, and yet they knew no Greek. The tongue of the monasteries was Coptic. St. Pacomius (292-348) did not learn Greek till at an advanced age (Rosweyde) ; and in the THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 717 rules of his monastery (Patr. Lat. Migne, 23, Col. 70) it was established that the study of the Scriptures was one of the chief employments of the monks. Postulants were required to memorize the Psalter. Epiphanius informs us that Hierax, the heretic, being well versed in Greek and Coptic and in the Scriptures, seduced certain monks of Egypt by arguments drawn from the Scriptures. Hence we place the date of the Coptic Scriptures about the close of the second century. Wetstein and Stem denied the antiquity of the Coptic version, but the former was ably refuted by Woide, and the latter by Headlam. It is evident from these data that the Coptic version was made from the Septuagint, except in the Book of Daniel, where the text of Theodotion is taken for the basic text. The Bohairic and Sahidic versions are independent from each other, and seem to have been made from different recensions of the Greek text. The Coptic versions are of great worth in textual criti- cism. They exhibit a reproduction of the Greek text before it had suffered the numerous modifications that came into it, after the issue of the Hexapla of Origen. The learned Catholic, A. Schulte, has given us a critical edition of the Prophets. The celebrated reference of Matthew XXVII. 9-10, is found in both the Bohairic and Sahidic texts of Jeremiah.* The Bohairic New Testament is purer than the Sahidic, which gives indication of its remoter date. Mgr. Ciasca has made a critical study of the Sahidic version. He finds that it has felt the influence of the hex- aplar text, and it is probable that the version as we have it, *Iteruin dixit Jeremias Pashori: Eritis aliquando cum patribus vestris repugnantes veritati, et filii vestri venturi post vos, isti facient iniquita- tem magis abominandam quam vos. Nam ipsi dabunt pretium pro eo cui nullum est pretium. Et nocebunt ei qui sanat morbos, et in remissionem peccatorum. Et accipient triginta argenteos in pretium ejus quem tra- dent filii Israelis. Et ad dandum id, pro agro figuli, sicut mandavit Dominus. Etdicent: Veniet super eos judicium perditionis in setemum et super filios corum quia condemnaverunt sanguinem innocentem. 718 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS is a later recension, made to accord with some recension of the Greek text. The Sahidic New Testament, has been studied by Muen- ter. It is inferior to the Bohairic version. The fragments of the Akmimian version, commonly- called the Bashmuric fragments, were published by Bou- riant. Krall has also given us a specimen of a fragment of the Minor Prophets. But it has not been studied suffi- ciently to judge of its critical value. The Fayoumian version and the version of Middle Egypt, which once were identified with the Sahidic version, must be considered as separate groups, but our knowledge of them is very imperfect. The Ethiopic Version of Scripture. Concerning the evangelization of Ethiopia, Rufinus gives us the following data. Meropius, a philosopher of Tyre, set out on a voyage, having in mind to visit that region which in those days was called India. He brought with him two youths, Edesius and Frumentius, for whose education he was providing. Having concluded their observations, they set sail for their own country, and while passing the coast of Abyssinia, the}^ touched at a certain port for water and other necessary articles. The natives w^ere at that time incensed against Rome, and they set upon Meropius and his crew and slew them. They spared the two youths, Edesius and Frumentius, whom they brought to the King. Edesius was appointed his cup-bearer; and Frumentius, his secretary. Forthwith the King held them in high honor, and love. At his death, he left the kingdom to his Queen and infant son. He gave Edesius and Frumentius their liberty. The Queen besought them, that they would remain and administer the kingdom till her son should come to that estate in which he could sustain the burden of the office. She especially required the help of Frumentius, whose prudence all recog- nized. They remained, and Frumentius became regent of the realm. As they were both Christians, Frumentius began to make use of his great power by favoring the Christian merchants, who came to the kingdom to trade ; and by his exhortation and active help, many churches were con- THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 719 structed, and many natives converted to Christianity. When the Prince came to his majority, Edesius and Frumen- tius set out for their own country. Edesius came to Tyre, and was made Bishop of that See. Frumentius went to Alexandria and laid before St. Athanasius, the Patriarch, the condition of the land, which he had left, and its need of a bishop and priests. Athanasius, in a council of priests, elected Frumentius himself to be bishop of the strange country. He soon after received ordination and consecration from St. Athanasius, and returned to the scene of his first labors. The richest fruits rewarded his apostolic labors, and an immense number of the natives received the faith of Christ. Rufinus declares that he received these data from Edesius himself. (P. L. Migne, 21, 478.) This would bring the evangelization of Abyssinia in the beginning of the fourth century. In that time Abyssinia formed the old kingdom of Auxuma. When Constantius succeeded Constantine, he endeavored to move the King of Auxuma to expel Frumentius, and receive Arianism. This attempt failed, but in the sixth century, through the influence of the Monophysite Patri- archs of Alexandria, the Copts fell into the Monophysite heresy, and there is little of orthodox Catholicity left in the country now. The Ethiopians call Frumentius, Abba Salama. It is evident that he could make little progress in evangelizing the country by means of Greek Scriptures, of which the people knew nothing. The data seem to warrant that Frumentius chose the Ghez dialect, which was spoken at the court and among the upper classes, and translated into this the Holy Scriptures. We believe, therefore, that the Ethiopic liturgy and version of Scripture go back to the fourth century. The Ghez dialect no longer prevails in Abyssinia. In 1300 the Amharic dialect began to supplant the old Ghez, and now the Amharic is spoken throughout the country. In the years between 1810 and 1820, AsseHn de Cherville, the French con- sul at Cairo, translated, by the aid of Abou-Roumi, the Scriptures into Amharic. His version was purchased by the 720 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS British Bible Society. J. P. Piatt revised it, and published the Gospels in 1824. He published the whole New Testa- ment in 1829, and the whole Bible in 1842. In 1875 the society published a new edition, under the supervision of Krapf and several Abyssinians. An inspection of the Ethiopic text, clearly reveals that it was made from the Greek. Many difhcult Greek words are left untranslated. Certain errors also are explained from a misapprehension of the Greek text. Evidences are found that more than one interpreter labored in the translation. The original interpreters followed the Greek text closely, and the edition would be of much critical worth in restoring the Greek text of that age, if it had come down to us uncor- rupt ; but great freedom was used by later hands in interpo- lating many passages, so that a critical edition is necessary before the book will be of any critical worth. No complete edition of the ancient text has ever been published. In 15 13 John Potken published the Psalter and some canticles from the New Testament. In 15 18 he published the Canticle of Canticles. In 1548 the New Testa- ment was published at Rome. Some other unimportant and modern editions have been wrought, but the codices anterior to the fifteenth century have not been examined, and the outlook for the old text seems dark. The Gothic Version. The Goths were a Germanic gens who, in the second centur}^ spread from the Vistula to the Danube. Some of them were converted in the third century to Christianity. Theophilus, the Gothic bishop, sat in the Council of Nice, and signed the decree of the Consubstantiality of the Son of God. In the fourth century, they were expelled from their lands by the Huns. They receded Eastward, and took up their abode within the realm of the Byzantine Empire. As Arianism was in the ascendancy at the court of the Emperor Valens, and in the realm, they soon lapsed into that heresy. The Gothic version is inseparably associated with Ulfilas. According to Philostorgius his contemporary Ulfilas was bom of Christian parents in Dacia between 310 and 313. He was THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 721 consecrated bishop about the year 340. It seems probable that it was after the retreat of the Goths into Moesia that Ulfilas translated the Scriptures. It is probable that at that time he had embraced the Arian heresy. The Goths in that age had no alphabet. Ulfilas adopted the old Runic characters with some additions from the Greek. Philostorgius testifies : "that Ulfilas translated into his mother tongue, all the books of Holy Scripture except the books of Kings, for the reason that these contain the account of wars, and the Goths naturally delight in warfare, and have more need to be held back from battles than to be spurred on to warlike deeds." (Hist. Eccles. XI. 5.) This seems improbable, and is disproven by the discovery by Mai, in 181 7, in the Ambrosian Library, of a palimpsest fragment of the Gothic text of Kings. The version of |Ulfilas was in universal use among the Goths, while they retained their individuality as, a race but later their language, and their version passed into oblivion. In 1669, the Chancellor of Queen Christina of Sweden, Gabriel de la Gardie, presented to the University of Upsal several MSS, among which was one which is since known as the Codex Argenteus. Investigation proved it to be a Codex of the Gothic Gospels. It is called Argenteus, either because its binding is of massive silver, or because its letters are of silver. In 181 7 Cardinal Mai discovered among some palim- psest Codices in the Ambrosian library at Milan fragments of Kings, Ezra, Nehemiah of the Gothic version. By the help of Carolo Ottavio Castillionei five other fragments were deciphered under other writings. The portions of the Gothic version of the Old and New Testament, printed by Signors Mai and Castillionei, are I. Nehemiah, Chap. V. verses 13-18; Chap. VI. 14-19, and VIII. 1-3 ; II. ; a Fragment of Saint Matthew's Gospel, contain- ing Chap. XXV. 38-46; XXVI. 1-3; 65-75, and XXVII. i; III.; part of St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians, Chap. II. 22--30, and III. 1-16; IV.; Saint Paul's Epistle to Titus, 46 (H.S.") 722 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS Chap. I. 1-16; II. I.; and V. Verses 11-23 of his Epistle to Philemon. It is to be regretted that we have no critical edition of the Gothic Scriptures. The Armenian Version of Scripture. The evangelization of Armenia was wrought by Gregory the Illuminator, in the first years of the fourth century. Sozomen informs us that Tiridates was first converted, and then by public edict bade Armenia receive the faith of Christ. (Hist. Eccles. II. 8.) For more than a century the Armenians had no proper version of Scripture nor liturgy. They made use of the Syriac text. At that time they had no alphabet. When Isaac became patriarch (390-440), St. Mesrob, his co-laborer, gave himself to invent an alphabet. He traveled much and consulted many learned men, and finally, in 406, he perfected an alphabet of thirty-six letters, by which all the sounds of the Armenian language are expressed. When Mesrob had arranged the Armenian alphabet (406 A. D.) he undertook, under the direction of the Patri- arch Isaac, and with the aid of his principal disciples, John Egueghiatz and Joseph Baghin, a translation of *' the twenty- two canonical books of the Old Testament and a translation of the New Testament." This work was finished in 411. Cfr. Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, in Langlois' Collection of Ancient and Modern Histories of Armenia, 2 vols, in 4mo, Paris, 1839, t. II. p. io;T. Neve, Christian Armenia and its Literature, in 8mo, Paris, 1886, p. 13, 22. Cfr. Moses of Khorene, III. 53. This first version was made by Saint Isaac from the Syriac, says Moses, the historian. III. 54, because no one possessed the Greek text, and the more, because the Syriac tongue had been, for different reasons, the liturgical language in certain countries of Armenia, up to the time of the invention of the Armenian alphabet by Mesrob. Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p. 11; Lazare de Pharbe, Histoire X. in Langlois' Collection, t. 11. p. 226. Cfr. Saint Martin, Historical and Geographical Memoirs of Armenia, 2 in 8mo, Paris, 1819, t. I. p. 11 ; Tchamitchian, THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 723 History of Armenia Translated by Avdall, 2 in 8mo., Calcutta, 1827, t. I. p. 239; R. Simon, Critical History of the Versions of the New Testament, in 4mo, Rotterdam, 1690, p. 196. This first work, made in haste, from indifferent exemplars doubtless was defective in many things. Some years later, Isaac and Mesrob sent John Baghin with Eznik, another of their disciples, to Edessa, that they might translate the Holy Scriptures from the Syriac into the Armenian. [Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p. 11 -12.] These two young men repaired from Edessa to Byzantium, where they were rejoined b}^ other disciples of Mesrob, among whom was Gorioun, the author of the Biography of Mesrob. They passed several years at Byzantium, and were still there at the time of the Council of Ephesus (431). Their labors ended, they returned to Armenia, having among their literary effects the Acts of the Council, and authentic copies of the Holy Scriptures in Greek. [Gorioun, ibid.] Isaac and Mes- rob immediately sought to turn these latter to good account, and retouch the old version made from the Syriac, by exactly comparing it with the authentic copies which had been brought to them. But the translators who worked under their orders did not have a sufficient knowledge of the Greek language, and their labor was judged very imperfect. They, therefore, sent other young men to study Greek at Alexan- dria. Moses of Khorene was among this number. (Moses of Khorene, III. 61) They doubtless brought back from Egypt, other Greek exemplars of the Bible, which they used to perfect the work of their predecessors in faithfully trans- lating the text of the Septuagint from the Hexapla of Origen ; because the same signs and asterisks are found in the old Armenian manuscripts of the Bible. Cfr. P. Zohrab, Armenian Bible, 4 in Smo, Venice, 1805, Introd. p. 6, 7. See Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p. 11, 12. Moses of Khorene, III. 61 ; Tchamitchian, History of Armenia, I. i. p. 239. Langlois, {Collection, t. II. p. 168, note), says that this version was officially adopted by the Fathers of the Council of Ashdishad, in 434. If the fact and the date are correct, the approbation of the Fathers can refer only to the first version made from the Greek. Vide P. Donat Vernier, 724 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS Histoire du Patriarcat Armenien Catholtque, in 8mo, Paris, 1891, p. 128-129. The Armenian version follows very closely the Greek text for the Old Testament as well as for the New. The Greek text which it follows can not be reduced to any known recension, which is explained, perhaps, by the fact mentioned above, that some of the Greek manuscripts which the translators used, came from Constantinople, or Ephesus, while others came from Alexandria. Bertholdt, Einleitung, t. II. p. 560, believes that the former belong to the recension of Lucian, and the latter to that of Hesychius. The Armenian version is very little known. The major- ity of scholars who have occupied themselves with the criti- cism of the Greek text of the Bible, did not know the Arme- nian language. In 1662, the Armenian Patriarch James IV. sent Bishop Uscan to Europe to manage the publication of an Armenian Bible. He came to Rome, and sojourned five months. As the Propaganda was not certain of his orthodoxy, he was unable to realize his project at Rome; whereupon, he withdrew to Amsterdam, where he published a complete Old Testament in 1666, and the New Testament complete in 1668. The edition of Uscan was not approved by Rome. It is very imperfect. The work of Uscan was perfected by the Armenian religious, called the Mekhitarists at Venice. In 1805 appeared the complete edition of the Scriptures by Zohrab, one of the Mekhitarists. At first, the book of Ecclesiasticus was placed in the appendix with certain apoc- ryphal books. They discovered later a Codex of Ecclesias- ticus of the fifth century, and in a later edition in 1859, re- stored Ecclesiasticus to its proper place. The verse of I. John V. 7, is omitted in this edition. Many editions have been published since that time, of which there is no need to speak. The people living about Iberia and the region about Mt. Caucasus, who are termed Georgians, or Grusians, are said to have been converted in the fourth century by Armenians. In the life of St. Mesrob, it is stated that he also gave an alpha- THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 725 bet to this people. They received their Scriptures from the Armenians, and it is uncertain whether the translation into their proper tongue was made in the sixth or eighth century. It is also uncertain whether it was made from the Greek or Armenian text. The Georgian tongue is but little known, and no scholar has given us the resources of the aforesaid version of Scripture. There was printed at Moscow, in 1743, an edition of Georgian Scripture, based upon the Russian text, whence it is evident that it is of no critical worth. The other Eastern versions are late and unimportant. In the ninth century, SS. Methodius and Cyril gave to the Slavs a Slavonic translation of Scripture, most probably made from the Greek text. The Arabic translations, some of which appear in Wal- ton's Polyglot, were made in the tenth and twelfth centuries and are of no critical worth. The Persian text of the Gospels which appears in Wal- ton's Polyglot, was made from the Syriac Peshitto. Its date is uncertain, but it is later than the eighth century. Saadias Haggaon, a Jew living in Egypt in the tenth cen- tury, translated the Pentateuch from the Masoretic text into Arabic. In many places the work assumes the nature of a paraphrase. Translations by Saadias also exist of Isaiah, the Minor Prophets, the Psalter and Job. The Arabic text of the Pentateuch by Saadias is pub- lished in Walton's Polyglot. In 1662, Erpenius published an Arabic translation of the Pentateuch from a MS belonging to Joseph Scaliger. This is called the Arabs Erpenii. It was made from the Mas- oretic text by a Jew in the eighth century, and is of no criti- cal value. We know not the date or the author of the Arabic text of Joshua published by Walton. There are also Arabic frag- ments of Kings, and of Ezra whose origin is uncertain. There is also a version of the Pentateuch made by Abou Said, a Samaritan, at an uncertain date ranging between the tenth and eleventh centuries. It was made from the He- brew text of the Samaritan Codex in Samaritan characters. 726 THE VULGATE The Arabic text of the Prophets which appears in Wal- ton's Polyglot, was made from the Septuagint, and Theodo- t ion's version of Daniel. The Arabic text of the other books which appears therein was made also from the Greek at uncertain dates, but all later than the tenth century. The Arabic text of the New Testament was made directly from the Greek. Its date is unknown, but the eighth cen- tury would be the earliest possible date. The Persian Pentateuch of Walton was made by a Jew of the sixteenth century. It follows the Masoretic text ser- vilely, and is of small critical worth. The Persian text of the Gospels which was made from the Greek, is assigned to the fourteenth century. Other versions may exist, but they have not been studied. Chapter XXIII. The Vulgate. We have sufficiently discoursed of the causes and move- ments which led up to Jerome's great translation, which, from its constant and universal use in the Church of God, has been aptly called the Vulgate. It was in his cell at Bethlehem, about the year 389, that Jerome began his great work. His design was not favored by the clergy of Rome, who accused him of endeavoring to set aside the Septuagint and the Vetus Itala. He declares that such was not his intent, but only to furnish a translation that the Jews could not reject in controversy with the Christians. Jerome never foresaw the great results that were to follow from his labors. He began with the books of Samuel and Kings. In 393 he had completed these, together with the sixteen Prophets, the Psalter and Job. The work was then intermitted for some time. In 395 he translated Ezra and Chronicles. These were followed by a translation of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Canticle of Canticles. The work of translating the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges and Ruth was begun in 398 and terminated in 404. Some time in this period, Jerome translated Tobias and Judith from the Chaldaic text. THE VULGATE 727 Jerome's version of the Psalter was never received into common use by the Church. The probable cause was the danger of scandal to the common people, who committed much of the Psalter to memory. Had Jerome's translation been substituted for the old text, the simple people would have been unable to reconcile the wide divergency of the two texts with their reverence for Holy Scripture. Jerome was guided in his method of translation by two norms, i . — The great and principal norm was to reproduce the sense, not binding himself to text, word for word. What ever may be Jerome's declaration concerning his work, an examination of the Vulgate will reveal this general design running all through it. Thus, at times, he changes com- pletely the order and form of the Hebrew sentence ; again, he avoids the excessive minuteness of description and fre- quent repetitions of the same text. The following two examples will illustrate this : Genesis XXXIX. 19-20. (Literal Hebrew.) "And it came to pass, when his master heard the words of his wife, which she spake unto him, saying: After this manner did thy servant to me ; that his wrath was kindled. And Jos- eph's master took him, and put him into the prison, a place where the King's prisoners were bound: and he was there in the prison. " Exodus XL. 12-15. (He- brew.) ' ' An^ thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the tabernacle of the covenant, and wash them with water. And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments, and anoint him, and sanctify him, that he may minister unto me in the Genesis XXXIX. 19-20 (Vulgate.) "His master hearing these things, and giving too much credit to his wife's words, was very angry, and cast Joseph into the prison, where the King's prisoners were kept, and he was there shut up. " Exodus XL. 12-13. (Vul- gate.) "And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons to the door of the tabernacle of the covenant, and having washed them with water, thou shalt put on them the holy vestments, that they may minister to me, and that the unction of them may pros- 728 THE VULGATE priest's office. And thou shalt per to an everlasting priest- bring his sons, and clothe them hood. " with coats: And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: for their anoint- ing shall surely be an everlast- ing priesthood throughout their generations. " Jerome omits two whole verses, and condenses their import in the other two. This is praised by some as a certain elegance in Latin diction, but I must confess I prefer the quaint simplicity of the old text with no abridgment. At times Jerome has failed to apprehend the sense of the Hebrew. The following is a notable example : Gen. XLIX. 22. (Hebrew.) Gen. XLIX. 22. (Vulgate.) "Joseph is a fruitful son "Joseph is a growing son, a (bough), a fruitful son (plant- growing son and comely to ed) by the fountain whose behold: the daughters run to branches run over the wall." and fro upon the wall." It is evident that the holy text likens Joseph to a vine planted in well irrigated soil; and Joseph's prosperity is likened to the healthy growth of this vine which sends forth its shoots over the wall. It is easy to see that this is more congruous to the grave sense of Scripture, than the picture of maidens running about on an eminence to see the beautiful Joseph. Again when Jerome essays to translate proper names into their supposed signification, he sometimes errs. The following text will illustrate this assertion : * Joshua XIV. 15. (Hebrew.) Joshua XIV. 15. (Vulgate.) "And the name of Hebron " The name of Hebron before before was Kiriath-Arba (the was called Cariath-Arbe ; city of Arba) who was a great Adam, the greatest among the man among the Anakim. And Enacim was laid there ; and the the land had rest from war. " land rested from wars. " THE VULGATE 729 The sense is simply that Hebron was called the city of Arba, who had been a great hero of the Anakim. How far Jerome has departed from this sense we leave the reader to judge. Again : H. Ezra IX. 7. (Vulgate.) 11. Ezra IX. 7. (Hebrew.) "Thou, O Lord God, art he "Thou art the Lord God, who chosest Abram, and who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of the broughtest him forth out of Ur, fire of the Chaldeans, and gav- of the Chaldeans, and gavest est him the name of Abraham. " him the name of Abraham. ' ' It is plain that the inspired text wishes to state, that Abram was called by God out of the Chaldean city Ur. Jerome's love for Hebrew led him to accept much from the Rabbis, and here they have deceived him. Sometimes, in things relating to the substantial sense, he has failed to catch the meaning. An example of this is the following passage : Exodus XXIII. 13. (Literal Exodus XXIII. 13. (Vul- Hebrew.) gate.) "And in all things that I " Keep all things that I have have said unto you, be circum- said to you. And by the name spect: and make no mention of of strange gods thou shalt not the name of other gods, neither swear, neither shall it be heard let it be heard out of your out of your mouth. " mouth." The precept is against idolatry, not against profanity. A similar serious defect occurs in the well-known passage of Isaiah XI. lo, wherein Jerome translates the close of the verse: ** — and his peace will be glorious, " by" — -and his sepulchre will be glorious. " The Prophet predicted the glorious reign of Christ, which succeeded to his period of suffering, and not, as the Vulgate leads some to believe, the honor that is paid to the Holy Sepulchre. Although these and certain other such defects occur in the Vulgate of Jerome, it remains, in the main, the best of all 730 THE VULGATE the versions of Scripture. This is even admitted by ration- alists and protestants.* A translator is not an inspired agent, and these few defects simply show that the translation was a human work. The world has been studying languages, studying the Scrip- tures, thinking, and writing for a decade and a half of cen- turies since Jerome lived, and it is not strange that in a few cases some slight betterment could be now wrought in his translation, but considering the time and circumstances in which it was done, the translation of Jerome must ever remain one of the great works of man. The labors of Jerome met with much opposition, both during his life and after his death. Jerome's character was one to antagonize a certain element of mankind. He was a man of power, high-minded, noble, intolerant of baseness and pettiness. By his talents he had outstripped his fellows , and then had to look down upon the envy of those of a lower plane. His prefaces to the several books, and his letters to friends, show that he was not of a temper of mind to concil- iate his opponents by bland words. These opponents decried Jerome and his work on the plea that he was attacking the Septuagint, which had been prac- tically adopted by the Church. But there was another element in the opposition, composed of good men, who, actuated by zeal for the Church, feared that the people would be scandalized by this new presentation of the truths of Scripture, with which, in the old form, they were now familiar. St. Augustine was of this number, but towards * Haevernick Einl. I. p. 444: "Seine im Ganzen sehr wahren hermen- eutischen Principien . . . Machen seine Arbeit zu einer der ausgezeichnet- sten Leistungen des kirchl. Alterthums." Keil Einl. p. 572: "Seine Uebersetzung . . . iibertrifit alle alten Versionen an Genauigkeit und Treue." Uti "orthodoxi, " ita rationalistse quoque, inter quos De Wette- Schrader Einl. p. 137: "Vermoege seiner Sorgfalt . . . brachte er vieleicht das Vortrefflichste tax Stande, was in dieser Artdasganze Alterthum aufzuweisen hat." Bleek-Wellhausen Einl. p. 598: "Die Arbeit im Gan- zen ist von unbefangenen Richtern allezeit als sehr gelungen anerkannt." Distel Gesch. des A. T. p. 93: " Unmittelbar aus dem Hebr. Text ge- schoepft, meist in moegliclist gewandter Sprache, mehr auf die Wieder- gabe des rechten Sinnes als auf sklavische Woertlichkeit gerichtet, erhielt sie mit vollem Reeht den Rang einer Vulgata," etc. (Apud Comely, op. cit.) THE VULGATE 731 the end of his life, he was more favorably disposed to Jer- ome's translation, which he commended and used. There was no sudden transition from the old to the new version. It was a gradual movement, sustained by the intrinsic excellence of the Vulgate. The earliest and most universal endorsement of Jerome's translation came from Gaul. Cassian (t432), during Jer- ome's life, called it the more correct edition. Soon after his death, Eucherius of Lyon (t454), Vincent of Lerins (t45o), Prosper (t45o), Sedulius (t45o), Avitus (t532), and Caes- arius of Aries (t542) adopted it as the received text of Scrip- ture. At Rome, during the fifth and sixth centuries, the drift was decidedly in favor of the Vetus Itala. against the Vul- gate. St. Leo the Great (440-461) and Pope Hilary (461- 468) made some use of the Vulgate. With John III. (560- 578) the tide set in strongly towards the Vulgate, and St. Gregory the Great (590-604), who considered the Vulgate the truer translation, is witness that only small use was made in his day of the Vetus Itala. From that time forth the Vetus Itala was neglected, and Jerome's translation became, in very deed, the Vulgate. St. Isidore of Seville (1636) declares that Jerome's translation ''is universally used, for the reason that it is truer in its sense, and clearer in its diction." (De Off. I. 12). Ven. Bede, (t735) made almost exclusive use of the Vulgate. Rhabanus Maurus and Wala- frid Strabo declare, that *4n the principal books the whole Church of Rome uses the translation of Jerome." (Instit. Cler. II. 54). The ascendancy of the Vulgate was accom- plished, not by any official decree, but by the steady growth of the recognition of its excellence. The mode of diffusion of written data of those days made them greatly liable to corruption. When a book is printed, it is fixed and unchangeable. But in the old days, when the publishing of a book was by means of manuscripts written by men who were ever prone, either by ignorance or negli- gence, to permit errors, or by active, arbitrary design to insert certain judgments of their own into the text, the more a book was copied the more it was corrupted ; for it was made 732 THE VULGATE tojreflect something of every one through whose hands it had passed. This was augmented, in the case of the Vul- gate, by the contemporaneous existence for centuries of the two Latin versions. Passages were copied from one into the other. There was much revision, and re -revision, remo- deling, and sciolism, till the two texts were well mixed and corrupted. Hugh of St. Victor, testifies of this state as follows: "It has come about by a perverse usage, since different ones follow different translations, that both are now so mixed that no man knows what is proper to each text." (Pat. Lat. Migne, 175, 17.) Learned men arose in the Church and strove to remedy this evil. Cassiodorus emended the text for his monks. Alcuin, at the bidding of Charlemagne, revised the entire Latin version, and presented the corrected copy to Charle- magne in 801. From this text were made the Bibles of Alcuin, or of Charlemagne, as they are sometimes called. They were much in use up to the thirteenth century. Many of the codices of the Vulgate are of this recension. Other corrections were made by St. Peter Damian (tio72), St. Lanfranc of Canterbury (tioSg), and the Cister- cian St. Stephen (tii34). As the corruption was universal in character, these private efforts were inadequate to remedy the evil. Hence, in the thirteenth century, theologians formulated a design for an Apparatus Criticus, which should serve as a norm to correct all texts. The data of the Apparatus Criticus were taken from the old codices, from the writings of the Fathers, from the commentaries of Jerome, from the Glossary of Strabo, and the interlinear Glossary of Stephen Langton. Some collation was also made of the original texts. The results of these labors were, in 1226, embodied in the Cor- rectorium of Paris. This work afterwards received the approbation of the Archbishop of Sens, Primate of Gaul, for which cause it is sometimes called the Correctorium Senonense. This work of the University of Paris in nowise benefitted the text. It w^as simply the multiplication of a poor text, with some additional corruption, so that Roger Bacon said of it: THE CORRECTORIA OF THE VULGATE 733 *' Textus pro ma jori parte horribiliter corruptus est . . . et ubi non habet comiptionem, habet tantam dubitationem qu2e merit o cadit in omnem Sapientem. " (Apud Hody, De Text. Orig.) The method employed by those who wrought the Cor- rectoria of the thirteenth century was to note down on the margin of a manuscript copy of the text the judgments con- cerning individual passages. Hence, we find in the margin: "est de textu, " "non est de textu, " "vera est lit era, " "falsa est litera," etc. Sometimes, also, the margins con- tain different readings from other manuscripts. The critical worth of these Correctoria is to us considerable. The Dominican Chapter of France in 1256, condemned the Correctorium of Sens, and proscribed its use in the Order. Some efforts had been made by the Dominicans to have a corrected and uniform text, and the first work worthy of note was executed by Hugh de St. Cher, general of the Order. As Hugh knew Hebrew, he essayed to remove all glosses from the Vulgate, and restore it to its pristine state. He made no use of old MSS, but corrected it according to the Hebrew and Greek. It is more a second translation than a critical recension of the Vulgate. There were some other minor Correctoria executed by the Dominicans, of which but little is known. Albertus Mag- nus, St. Thomas, and other theologians employed the texts of Scripture as found in the Correctorium of the Dominicans. Although great erudition and labor was expended on this work, it failed through a defective critique. They had, in a measure, substituted their work for the work of Jerome, and Jerome's work was the better. They had also placed in the margin many readings judged to be erroneous, underlining them in red, or affixing to them some other sign, that readers might be warned against them. In time the indications were unobserved, and the readings crept into the text. Roger Bacon, said of this text: "Eorum correctio est pessima corruptio, et destruitur textus Dei ; et longe minus malum est uti exemplari Parisiensi non correcto quam eorum correctione. " (Apud Hody, 1. c.) 734 THE CORRECTORIA OF THE VULGATE The Correctorium of the Franciscans has been erron- eously termed the Correctorium of the Sorbonne, from the fact that it became known from a manuscript of the Sor- bonne, which is at present in the National Library in Paris (Latin 15554). Its method was similar to that of the Dominicans, but of its value little is known. The Correct- orium of the Vatican, so called from its MS in the Vatican, was executed about the beginning of the fourteenth century by William de Mara, a Franciscan of Oxford. The man was a disciple of Bacon, and his work shows much erudition and critique. He made use of Hebrew and Greek, not to sup- plant the version of Jerome, but to perfect it. His Correct- orium is the best of all. He fails sometimes, especially in Greek, of which he knew less than of Hebrew. Many other Correctoria existed which merit no mention here. We insert here some mention of a few of the principal manuscripts of the Vulgate. Chief among these is the Codex Amiatinus. This manuscript, the most celebrated, if not the oldest of the Vulgate of Jerome, belongs to the Laurentian Library at Florence. It is registered Amiatinus I., because it is one of the manuscripts, which were brought from the Abbey of Mount Amiato, near Sienna, to the aforesaid monastery, at the time of the Abbey's suppression in 1786. The script is the uncial lettering of Italian caligraphy. The parchment is divided in cahiers of sixteen pages each. Every page has two columns of text, and each column forty-four lines. The whole width of the initial letters of the verses or stichs is displayed on the margin of the MS. There is no punctua- tion. The text is divided into stichs. It has no adorned initials, such as the beautiful ones we see in the manuscripts of the Carlovingian epoch. Its height is fifty centimeters, its width thirty-four. The manuscript forms only one volume of one thousand and twenty-nine leaves. It con- tains the whole text of the Vulgate, every book prefaced by an introduction or prologue by St. Jerome. On the back of the first page of the manuscript is read the following inscription in verse : CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE 735 "Coenobium ad eximii merit o venerabile Salvatoris, Quern caput Ecclesiae dedicat alta fides, Petrus Langobardorum extremis de finib. abbas Devoti affectus pignora mitto mei, Meque meos optans tanti inter gaudia patris In coelis memorem semper habere locum. " The Abbot Peter is unknown. The expression, head of the Church, applied to the monastery of Mt. Amiato is very- strange . Moreover, the words ' * Coenobium , " * * Salvatoris , ' ' and ** Petrus Langobardorum" are words written by a second hand upon an erasure. Evidently the dedication of the manuscript was defaced at the time of the change of ownership. The question has engaged many to ascertain for whom the manuscript was originally intended. Bandini of the last century, in drawing up a catalogue of the Lauren- tian manuscripts, proposed to correct the first verse as fol- lows: *'Culmen ad eximii merito venerabile Petri." The hexameter is restored at the same time, and the first verse is made to agree with the second: "Quem caput Ecclesiae dedicat alta fides. " Thus it would result that the manuscript were one offered to the Roman Church, Caput Ecclesice. For the ''Petrus Langobardorum," Bandini proposed to substitute ''Ser- vandus Latii.'' In fact, at the beginning of Leviticus, we read the name of such copyist, who labored at the production of the manuscript. We know of an Abbot Servandus of the sixth century, a friend of St. Benedict of the neighbgrhood of Alatri, on the boundaries of Latium. The Codex Amia- tinus was thus considered a manuscript of the sixth century, of Italian origin : it has been accepted as such by Tischendorf . The finding of the authentic original, and the age of the Codex Amiatinus, is one of the most brilliant discoveries of M. de Rossi. In a memoir on the sources of the library of the Holy See, published in 1886, which memoir is used as a preface to the catalogues of the Vatican library, he relates how in the seventh or eighth century, the bishops and the abbots outside of Italy desired much to receive manuscripts from the Popes, so that Pope Martin (649-653) could write: "Codices jam exinaniti sunt a nostra bibliotheca, unde ei 736 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE (the carrier of the letter) dare nullatenus habuimus ; trans- cribere autem non potuit, quoniam festinanter de hac civi- tate egredi properavit. " Bendict Biscop, the founder of the Abbeys of Wear- mouth and Yarrow, was one of those prelates of the seventh century, devout to the things and books of Rome. Five times (in 653, 658, 671, 678 and in 684), he made pilgrimages to Rome, bringing back every time, according to Bede's testimony, " innumerabilem librorum omnis generis cop- iam. " At his death he left to his two Abbeys **bibliothe- cam quam de Roma nobilissimam copiosissimamque advex- erat. " His successor was Ceolfrid, who was the master of Bede, of whom Bede tells us, that he took a great care of Benedict Biscop 's library, and had three manuscripts of the Holy Scripture executed according to a copy brought from Rome, and that he gave a copy to each of his two Abbeys, Wear- mouth and Yarrow, and then, when he started for Rome, he took the third copy, in order to offer it to the Holy See. Ceolfrid died on the way, at Langres, Sept. 25, 716. But the monks, who accompanied him, proceeded towards the Eter- nal City, and it is to be supposed that they accomphshed their Abbot's intentions, thus expressed by Bede: "Inter alia donaria quse afiEerre disposuerat misit Ecclesise sancti Petri pandectem a Beato Hieronymo in Latinum ex Hebrseo vel Grieco fonte translatum. " M. de Rossi based a conjecture upon those facts, that we should read in the dedicatory of the Codex Amiatinus, neither *' Petrus Langobardorum'* nor '' Servandus Latii/' but ''Ceolfrtdus Britonum.'" The two words proposed by M. de Rossi fitted exactly the place of the erasure. The poetical quantity only was still defective. M. Samuel Berger proposed '' Ceolfridus Anglorum." While the Eng- lish reviewers were theorizing for and against this conjec- ture, which brought down to the eighth century the most important manuscript of Jerome's Vulgate, and made of it an Anglo-Saxon work. M. Hort pointed out in an anony- mous Life of Ceolfrid, very likely Bede's work, published for the first time in 1841, a passage in which it is related, in the CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE 737 same terms as above, how Ceolfrid had made three copies of the Roman Bible in his possession ; that he intended to offer one of those three copies to the Church of St. Peter at Rome ; that he died during his pilgrimage; and that the Bible destined for St. Peter's bore the following verses : ' ' Corpus ad exitnii merito venerabile Petri Dedicat Ecclesiae quern caput alta fides, Ceolfridus, Anglorum extimis de finibus abbas, Devoti affectus pignora mitto mei, " etc. We could not wish for a conjecture a more perfect verifi- cation. The Codex Amiatinus, therefore, was executed between 690, date of Benedict Biscop's death, and 716, and rather about 690 than towards 716, in Northumberland, either at Yarrow, or at Wearmouth, and it is the copy of a manuscript of Jerome's Vulgate brought from Rome. The Codex Amiatinus is at present held to represent the most ancient condition of Jerome's Vulgate, that is to say, it approaches closest to the text executed by Jerome. It played a considerable part in the history of the Vulgate in the middle age. "It is from Northumberland that the good texts of the Vulgate have been spread, not only in Italy, to whom Eng- land paid thus its debt, but moreover, in France, for Alcuin came from York and was selected by Charles the Great (Charlemagne), for correcting the text of the Bible." — Samuel Berger, De 1' Histoire de la Vulgate en France, Paris, 1887, p. 4. Tischendorf published the text of the New Testament of the Codex Amiatinus, C. Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum ex Codice Amiatino, Leipzig, 1 890-1 894. See Bandini, Bibliotheca Leopoldina Laurentiana, Florence, 1891. t. I., p. 701-732; Wordsworth, Novum Testamentum Latine, p. XI., Oxford, 1889; De Rossi, La Biblia offerta da Ceolfrido abbate al sepulcro di S. Pietro, Rome, 1888; J. White, The Codex Amiatinus and its birthplace in the Studia Biblica, Oxford, 1870, t. 11, p. 273-308. (P. Batiffol in Dictionnaire de la Bible.) The next great Codex of the Vulgate is the Codex Ful- DENSis. It contains only the entire New Testament, and 47 (H-S.) 738 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE can not be made equal to Codex Amiatinus. Its colophon declares that it was made under the supervision of Victor, Bishop of Capua. Victor ascended the episcopal throne in 541. From the Roman dates afhxed to the instrument, chronographers establish that it was finished in 546. St. Boniface, the Apostle of Germany, is believed to have carried the Codex into Germany, and it is not improbable that he had the Codex with him when he was martyred in Frisia in 755. The Codex bears certain explanatory notes from the hand of Boniface. It is preserved at Fulda. It has been published and accurately described by E. Reinke, Marbourg, 1868. The Codex Toletanus contains all the books of both Testaments, except Baruch. It is written in Gothic capital characters, hence it is sometimes called the Gothic Codex. It was used in the Sixtine and Clementine correction of the Vulgate. Its date is placed in the eighth century. It is the present property of the Metropolitan Church of Toledo. The Codex Cavensis is a MS of Jerome's Vulgate, the property of the Abbey of La Cava, near Salerno. It con- sists of 303 leaves, in three columns of 54 and 55 lines. The titles and prologues are in uncial characters ; the body of the text is in minuscule Roman characters. M. Berger advances the theory that the Codex is a production of the Visigoths of Spain, in the ninth century, if not of the end of the eighth. It contains all the books of both Testaments. The Codex Foroiuliensis of the sixth century, formerly contained the four Gospels, but now is mutilated in Mark. The Codex Ottobonianus contains the Octateuch com- plete. The Codex Paulinus or Carolinus, and The Codex Statianus or Vallicellianus of the ninth century, contain all the books of both Testaments of the recension of Alcuin. They were much prized by Sirleti and others in the emenda- tion of the Vulgate. After the invention of printing in the fifteenth century, the first book ever printed was the Vulgate printed at Mainz, in 1450. From that time up to the close of the century, THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 739 great activity was exercised in the printing of the Latin Vulgate, and more than a hundred different editions were printed in that period. But little critical care was bestowed on these early edi- tions, and the best MSS were not employed, so that they are of no critical worth. The Dominican Castellanus issued an edition at Venice in 1506, in which he printed some marginal readings, collected principally from other printed editions. The first real criti- cal edition of the Vulgate text was the Complutensian, whose text was excellent for that time. After the rise of protestantism, the protestants threw off all reverence for the Vulgate. They changed its readings at will, and made for themselves new editions from the original texts. The Dominican Sanctes Pagninus (ti54i) and Cajetan made new Latin versions. Augustine Steuchus, and Isidore Clarius, revised the text of the Vulgate in conformity with the original texts. Hittorp endeavored, in his edition of Cologne in 1530, to restore the text of Jerome to its original purity. Robert Etienne collected at Paris a considerable number of codices and spent upwards of twenty years, from 1528 to 1 548 and beyond, in emending the text of the Vulgate. His labors w^ere profitable to the study of the text, but he unwisely inserted certain of Calvin's annotations in some of his editions, and drew upon his work the censure of the University of Paris. The best of Etienne 's editions is that of 1540, and the faculty were unwise in extending their cen- sure to this excellent text, wherein was naught of Calvinism or other error. Chapter XXIV. The Authorization of the Vulgate by the Council OF Trent. On the 17th of March, 1546, in the general session, the Fathers who had been charged to investigate the status of the Latin text of Scripture reported four abuses. Only the first two are relevant to our present theme. 740 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE The first abuse was the existence of many Latin versions of the Scriptures, which were used as authentic in public readings, disputations, and discourses. The remedy sug- gested was to have the old Vulgate as the sole authentic edition which all should use as authentic in all public read- ing, and in the exposition and preaching of Holy Scripture ; and that no one should reject it or impugn its truth ; and not thereby to detract aught from the genuine and true version of the Seventy Interpreters, which the Apostles sometimes used, nor to reject other editions which help to find the source of the authentic Vulgate. The second abuse was the corruption of the codices of the Vulgate. The remedy was to expurgate and amend the codices and restore to the Christian world the genuine text of the Vulgate, free from error. And the Fathers petitioned the Pope to cause this great work to be done and also to bring it about that the Church'of God^might also have a correct Greek and Hebrew text.* Several particular assemblies and three general sessions discussed this proposition, and finally, the Council promul- gated its famous decree. H^^The same thrice holy Synod, believing that much bene- fit may accrue to the Church of God, if from among all the Latin versions of the Holy Scriptures which are in circula- tion, an authentic one be recognized, decrees and declares *" Primus abusus est: habere varias editiones S. Scrip turae, et illis velle uti pro authenticis in publicis lectionibus et praedicationibus. Remedium est: habere unam tantam editionem, veterem scilicet et Vulgatam, qua omnes utantur pro authentica in publicis lectionibus, expositionibus et praedicationibus, et quod nemo illam reiicere audeat aut illi contradicere ; non detrahendo tamen auctoritati purae et veras interpretationis Septua- ginta interpretum, qua nonnunquam usi sunt Apostoli, neque reiiciendo alias editiones, quatenus authenticae illius Vulgatae intelligentiam iuvant . — Secundus abusus est corruptio codicum qui circumferuntur Vulgatae huius editionis. Remedium est, ut expurgatis et emendatis codicibus restituatur christiano orbi pura et sincera Vulgata editio a mendis libro- rum, qui circumferuntur. Id autem munus erit Smi. D. N., quem S. Syno- dus htuniliter exorabit, ut pro ovibus Christi Suae Beatitudini creditis hoc onus ingentis fructus et glorias sui ipsius animi magnitudine dignum susci- piat; ctirando etiam, ut unum codicem Graecum unumque Hebrasum, quoad fieri potest, correctum habeat Ecclesia sancta Dei. " THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 741 that the old edition of the Vulgate, which has been approved by the Church by the usage of so many centuries, shall be held authentic in all public readings, disputations, and in the public exposition and preaching of Scripture, and that no man may reject it upon whatever pretext And having in mind to establish also a rule for printers . . . the Council decrees and establishes that, hereafter, the Holy Scripture, especially this old Vulgate, shall be most carefully printed."* Some believe that the Council of Trent established two conditions that a book be judged canonical: i. the fact that it had been read in the church, — '' prouti in Ecclesia Cath- olica legi consueverunt;'' 2. its presence in the Vulgate — '' et in Veteri Vulgata Editione habentur. Thus they judge that the mere presence of a book in the Vulgate edition is not sufficient; but there must be present the constant reading in the Church. This seems to us unfounded. The Council did not con- template a possible discrepancy between the Vulgate and the Church's traditional use of Scripture. In fact the reason of the Vulgate's authority is the fact that it was constantly read in the Church. The test of Canonicity is one, that is the constant reading of all the books in the Church's text of Scripture. The presence of the books in the Vulgate is not a second condition but an explanation of the first. The Vulgate is the concrete expression of the constant use of the Church. This is clear from the Acts of the Council wherein we find that the clause concerning the Vulgate was added simply to determine what was the Church's use of Scripture. What the Council of Trent decreed for the Vulgate could have been decreed of the Old Latin Version. *"Eadem sacrosancta Synodus considerans non parum utilitatis accedere posse Ecclesias Dei, si ex omnibus latinis editionibus, quae cir- cumferuntur, sacrorum librorum, quaenam pro authentica habenda sit innotescat, statuit et declarat, ut haec ipsa vetus et Vulgata editio, quae longo tot saeculorum usu in ipsa Ecclesia probata est, in publicis lection- ibus, disputationibus, praedicationibus et expositionibus, pro authentica habeatur et ut nemo illam reiicere quovis praetextu audeat vel praesiunat. . Sed et impressoribus modum in hac parte, ut par est. imponere volens, . , decemit et statuit, ut posthac S. Scriptura, potissimiun verohaec ipsa vetus et Vulgata editio quam emendatissime imprimatur." 742 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE The decree of the Council of Trent set in motion a turbu- lent movement especiall37" in Spain. The power was in the hands of those who defended the absolute infallibility and absolute sanction of the Vulgate. These by violence and the power of the law prevented any expression of honest thought which came short of adoration of the Vulgate. Men were cast into prison for attempting to explain the legitimate sense of the great Council's decree. Others, through fear of the Inquisition, either adopted the views of the party in power or kept a prudent silence. "I know," says Bannez, "what I would respond by word of mouth, if asked by the Church ; meanwhile, I maintain a prudent and religious silence. " (In I. S. Thom.) The position of these extremists was that the Council had defined the absolute infallibility of the Vulgate, even in the least details; that no error of whatever nature was to be found in the Latin Vulgate ; that since the Greek Schism, the Latin Church had remained the sole depository of the truth, and hence her Scriptures alone were authentic, and abso- lutely authentic. Of this movement Richard Simon truly wrote: "There were but very few persons who accurately comprehended the sense of the decree of Trent which pro- nounced the Vulgate authentic. . . . The greater number of those who agitated this question scarcely under- stood anything of it, and they were moved more by prejudice and passion, than by sense and judgment. " Periit judicium postquam res transiit in affectum." (Hist. Crit. du V. T. 11.14.) We find an accurate and dispassionate description of these causes and effects in the Disputation on the Vulgate of John Mariana.* What he has written of Spain, could be affirmed in less degree of other countries in that period. *John Mariana, S. J. was bom in the diocese of Toledo in Spain, in 1537. He was endowed with great mental power and uprightness of char- acter. He studied in the Complutensian Academy, and in 1554 entered the Society of the Jesuits. In 1561, he came to Rome and taught Scrip- ture for four years. In 1569, he went to Paris and expounded the Summa of St. Thomas, in the great Academy for five years. His character was honest and severe, and his insight into truth profound. Through failing health he was forced to remit some of this study, and in 1574 he returned THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 743 ''Opus molestum suscipimus, multaque difficultate impeditum, periculosam aleam, ac qua nescio an uUa dis- putatio his superioribus annis inter theologos, in Hispania pr^sertim, majori animorum ardore et motu agitata sit^ odioque partium magis implacabili, usque e5, ut a probris et contumeliis, quibus se mutu5 foedabant, ad tribunalia ven- tum sit; at que quae pars sibi magis conMebat, adversaries de Religione postulates gravissime exercuit, quasi impios, superbos, arrogantes, qui divinorum librorum auctoritatem, atque ejus interpretationis fidem, qua Ecclesia utitur passim, et quae vulgata editio nuncupatur, audacter elevarent, no vis interpretationibus prolatis invectisque contra divinas leges et humanas, concilii Tridentini decreta non itk pridem pro- mulgata. Tenuit ea causa multorum animos suspenses expectatiene, quem tandem exitum habitura esset, cum viri eruditienis epinione pr^stantes, e vinculis cogerentur' causam dicere, baud levi salutis exist imationisque discrim- ine : miseranda virtutis conditio, quando pro laberibus, ques susceperat maximes, cempellebantur eerum a quibus defendi par fuisset, edia, accusatienes, contumelias tolerare, quo exemplo multorum praeclaros impetus retardari, viresque debilitari atque concidere necesse erat. Omnino f regit ea res multorum animos alieno periculo considerantium, quan- tum precellae immineret liber e affirmantibus quae sentirent. Itaque aut in aliorum castra transibant frequentes, aut tempori cedendum judicabant. Et quid facerent, cum frustrk niti neque fatigando (ut ille ait) aliud qukm odium quaerere, extremae dementiae sit? Plerique inhaerentes per- suasieni vulgari, libenter in epinione perstabant, iis placitis faventes, in quibus minus periculi esset, baud magna veri- tatis cura. Quidam enim editionem vulgatam sugillant, quasi multis vitiis foedam, ad fontes identidem prevecantes, to Spain, and in a studious retirement at Toledo, he lived to an extreme old age, dying in 1624. Mariana was a man of unblemished life, and intol- erant of evil. He was no timeserver, and attacked evil wherever he found it. Having attacked some abuses of the State, in a treatise De Monetcs Mutatione, he was judged guilty of loesce majestatis, and in his seventy- second year was imprisoned in a Franciscan monastery. His writings consist of numerous short treatises on various subjects, several being on the Scriptures, 744 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE unde ad nos ii rivi manarunt, ac contendentes Graecorum Hebraiconimque codicum collatione castigandam videri, quoties ab illis discrepant, linguarum peritia tumidi, eccles- iasticam simplicitatem ludibrio habentes; quorum prefect 5 audacia ac temeritas pronuntiandi merit 5 fraenanda est. E contrario, alii majori numero adversariorum odio nefas putant vulgatam editionem attrectare, atque in impiorum numero habent, si quis vel levem vocem castigare tentet, si locum aliquem aliter explicare contendat, quam vulgata interpretatio prae se ferat (quos imitari profectb non debe- mus) pusillo homines animo, oppleti tenebris, angusteque sentientes de Religionis nostras majestate, qui dum opin- ionum castella pro fidei placitis defendunt, ipsam mihi arcem prodere videntur, fratemam charitatem turpissime violantes. Ergo extrema et devia vitata, quas in praecipitia desinit, mediam viam tenere constituimus, qua fere in omni disputatione vitatis erroribus ad veritatem pervenitur. " The protestants, taking the statements of the Spanish theologians for the position of the Church, loudly pro- claimed that the Council had bound Scriptural science with chains of iron, and condemned it to a sterile immobility.* The labors of Catholic theologians in establishing the real sense of this decree, have removed the cause for this calumny, and it is only the presence of a dense veil of ignorance, that in our days peiTaits a repetition of this old falsehood. The Church was not responsible for the course of thought in Spain. The best institutions of God and man have been, and will be abused. The Council spoke the truth, and men, in an inconsiderate zeal, misunderstood its words. Some misunderstand them yet, but the current of thought in this regard is better now than then. We place, therefore, as a thesis: That the Council of Trent, in declaring the Vulgate the authentic text of Scrip- *Cfr. ex. gr. Kiel Einl. p. 579 : " Mit diesem Decret war zwar der Grund- text nicht ausdriicklich verworfen, aber doch fiir ganz iiberfliissig erklart und die Uebersetzung kanonisirt worden." De Wette-Schrader Einl. p. 145: "Was man aiich zur Milderung dieses Decretes sagen mag, immer ist damit der exegetischen Forschung der Eingang in die offentliche Kir- chenlehre verschlossen." Alii alio modo eadem repetunt. (Comely op. cit.; THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 745 ture, did not place the excellence of the Vulgate above the original texts of Scripture, nor above the old versions of Scripture which had been in use in the Church, neither did it deny the authenticity of these texts. A sufficient argument for this position is in the very words of the decree, and in the nature of the abuse which it was intended to remove. There was no mention of original texts or versions other than the Latin. A mtiltiplicity of Latin versions created confusion, and the Council chose one Latin version, which should be the official text of Latin Scriptures for the Latin Church. The original texts and old versions have the same merit as before, and are as authentic as when they formed the Scriptural basis of the decisions of councils, prior to the Council of Trent. Cardinal Pole and others demanded that a text in Greek and Hebrew might also be declared authentic. Although this was not done, we have every reason to believe that it would have been done if the need existed. In the Greek Church no great variety of translations existed. The Greeks used their authentic text, which had been always sanctioned by the Church's use, even before the Latin existed. No one denied its authen- ticity, and the Council left it in the peaceful possession of what it always had. The Hebrew text was not in use as a practical text of Scripture by any Christian Church, and there was no need to declare it authentic. It is character- istic of the Catholic Church not to indulge in superfluous legislation. Her decisions are few, and framed to meet actual needs. The deliberations of the Fathers, as related to us by Pallavicini (Storia del Cone, di Trento), show plainly that the Fathers wished to save the credit of the original texts and the old versions : '' It was the common opinion that the Vulgate edition should be preferred to all other (Latin) editions ; but Pacheco petitioned that these others should be also condemned, especially those made by heretics ; and he extended this afterwards to the Septuagint. Bertram opposed this, maintaining that there was always a diversity of versions in use with the faithful, which usage the Fathers had approved. And who would dare, he said, condemn the 746 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE translation of the Septuagint which the Church uses in her psalmody? . . . Let one version be approved, and the others be neither approved nor condemned. " After the expression of these views, Card. Del Monte, one of the presidents of the Council, closed the disputation in these words: "The matter has been discussed and prepared. We come now to the form. The majority holds that the Vulgate should be received, but care must be taken lest the others should be thought to be tacitly rejected." The "others" are evidently the orginal texts and the old ver- sions. Could anything be clearer? The Fathers took thought lest their action might seem to be the tacit repudia- tion of the other texts. This sense is confirmed by the express declarations of some of the principal theologians of the Council. Salmeron, S. J., who was one of the Pope's theologians in the Council, declares : " We shall show that the approbation of Jerome's translation imported, in no way, the rejection of the Greek or Hebrew texts. There was no question of Greek or Hebrew texts. Action was only taken to determine which was the most excellent of the many Latin versions. The Council left every man free to consult the Greek and Hebrew texts, that he might thereby emend its errors, or elucidate its sense, hence, without infringement on the authority of the Council, where the texts differ, we may make use of the text from the Greek or Hebrew copy, and expound it as a text of Scripture. We may use such text, not alone for moral instruction, but also use it as a Scriptural basis for the dogmas of the Church. " The same testimony is rendered by the Franciscan, Andrea Vega, whose wisdom was held in great repute by the Fathers of Trent. In his work, De Justificatione XV. 9, he thus addresses Calvin: " Lest thou shouldst err, O Calvin, regarding the approbation of the Vulgate, give ear to a few things, which I would wish Melancthon also might hear, who also, before you, arraigned the Fathers for this. The Synod did not approve the errors which linguists and those moderately versed in Holy Scripture find in the Vulgate. Neither did they ask that it be adored as though it had THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 747 descended from Heaven. The Fathers knew that the inter- preter was not a prophet, . . . and, therefore, the Synod did not restrain, nor wish to restrain, the labors of linguists, who teach us that certain things might be better translated, and that the Holy Ghost could signify many things by one and the same word, and, at times, a sense more apt than can be obtained from the Vulgate. But con- sidering the Vulgate's age, and the esteem in which it was held for centuries by Latin Councils which 'used it, and in order that the faithful might know— -which is most true — that no pernicious error can be drawn therefrom, and that the faithful can read it safely without danger to faith, and to remove the confusion caused by a multitude of trans- lations, and to modify the tendency to continually produce new versions, the Council wisely enacted that we should use the Vulgate in all public readings, disputations and exposi- tions of Scripture. And it declared it authentic in this sense, that it might be known to all that it was never vitiated by any error from which any false doctrinal or moral teaching might result; and for this reason it decreed that no one should reject it on whatsoever pretext. And that this was the mind of the Council, and that it wished to decree nothing further than this, you may draw from the words of the Council. And lest you should doubt of this, I am able to invoke a veracious witness, his Eminence the Cardinal of Holy Cross (Card. Cervini, afterwards Pope Marcellus II.), who presided over all the sessions. Both before and after the decree, more than once, he testified to me that the Fathers wished nothing more for the Vulgate. Hence you are not hindered neither is anyone else by the approbation of the Vulgate from recurring, in doubt, to the original texts, and one may bring forth out of them whatever he may find, in order that the sense of the Latin may be cleared and enriched, and that he may purge the Vulgate from errors, and arrive at those things most consonant with the sense of the Holy Ghost and the original texts. " (Mariana, I.e.) We come in possession of two truths in this testimony : first, that Vega has the mind of the Council of Trent, and, 748 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE secondly, that the action of the Fathers was just and tem- perate. While Mariana was teaching at Rome, question arose relating to the real sense of the decree of Trent. The General of the Jesuit order at that time was James Laynez, a man of great erudition and judgment, who had himself taken part in every session of the Council of Trent. He was petitioned to explain to the Order the real sense of the de- cree, and on the testimony of Mariana, his response was sub- stantially the same as the testimony of Vega. Didacus de Andrada deserves to rank among the first theologians of the Council.* He was not in the fourth session, in which the Vulgate was approved, but as a subsequent member of the Council he certainly knew the mind of the Fathers. He approves the declaration of Vega and declares ''that we are to so defend the excellence and dignity of the Vulgate, that we in no way obstruct the Hebrew founts whence the saving streams of truth have flown forth to us. And on the other hand we are so to venerate the old Hebrew text that we reject not the authority and majesty of the Vulgate. " (Andrada, Defens. Trid. Fidei IV. p. 257). The excellence which the Fathers of Trent attested of the Vulgate is well expressed by Sixtus of Sienna: ''Although errors are found in the Vulgate, it is certain that neither in the old edition nor in the new was anything ever found which is dissonant from Catholic faith, or false or contrary *Diveen the Sixtine and Clementine editions was made the subject of a fierce attack on papal infallibility by Thomas James, in a work entitled " Bullum Papale," London, 1600. He has been ably refuted by Henry Bukentop, in the excellent work ''"ll^^p 'lli*^, Lux de Luce," Brussels, 1710. The line of defense is the same as we have pointed out in treating of Pope Sixtus' work. In the preface to the Clementine edition it is frankly ad- mitted that certain things which ought to be corrected were left unchanged lest the people might take scandal on account of too many changes, Lucas of Bruges examined and noted over four thousand places in the Clementine Vulgate which demanded correction. This long deferred work is now in some measure to be done. Pope Pius X. has entrusted to the Benedictines the first work, that of collating the MSS of the Hieronymian version. What the next move in the work of Correction will be one can not say. It is to be hoped that a more thorough revision will be effected than that of the Council of Trent. To make a competent revision is a labor whose magnitude can scarcely be realized. Jerome's own labors must be revised, and this necessitates the colla- tion of the MSS of the ancient versions, and the revision of their texts. In the New Testament the Revised Edition of Oxford effected a very creditable revision, because the Greek MSS had been collated by many eminent scholars ; but the Old Testament of the same edition is merely a servile translation of the Masoretic text, with conjectures where the sense is defective. Such a translation of the Masoretic text for a revision of the Vulgate would be of no avail. The Catholic Church can command the cooperation of many scholars ; the times demand a thorough and com- plete revision ; and the labors now auspiciously begun will be watched with interest. 766 MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE Chapter XXVI. Modern English Versions of Scripture One of the calumnies often brought against the Catholic Church is that she withheld the Bible from the people, by preventing its being translated into the vernacular. It is commonly said and believed that Wyclif was the first to give to the English people the Bible in English.* The most hard -lived of all lies, is a controversial lie, and the so-called Reformation has found in such its most power- ful ally. The Church recognized that in the Scriptures " are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as they also do the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction." (II. Pet. III. i6.) The Church therefore regulates the vernacular reading of Scriptures according to what she judged best for the people. The wisdom of this policy is acknowledged by candid protestants. Mr. Karl Pearson (Academy, Aug. 7. 1886) declares : *' The Catholic Church has quite enough to answer for . . but in the fifteenth century it certainly did not hold back the Bible from the folk, and it gave them in the ver- nacular a long series of devotional works, which for ie^nguage and religious sentiment have never been surpassed. Indeed, we are inclined to think it made a mistake in allowing the masses such ready access to the Bible. It ought to have recognized the Bible once for all as a work absolutely unintel- ligible without a long course of historical study ; and, so far as it was supposed to be inspired, very dangerous in the hands of the ignorant." *John Wyclif was bom in York in 1324. He studied at Oxford, and by- intrigues afterwards obtained the position of master in Balliol College from which post the friars had been ousted. The friars appealed to the Pope, and he restored them. Wyclif then raised his voice against Rome and the temporal power. The Archbishop of Canterbury summoned Wyclif to defend himself before a Council held at London in 1377. The powerful Duke of Lancaster defended him, and he was absolved by the Council. Wyclif was in grace with the State because he advocated the giving of church property to the State. He was again summoned to a Council at Lambeth, and escaped condemnation. The bishops of England, servile to the State, winked at heresy. Those were the days of the schism at Rome between Urban VI. MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 767 To the same end in 1530 a royal proclamation was made in England which decrees as follows : — " Having respect to the malignity of this present time, with the inclination of the people to erroneous opinions, (it is thought) that the translation of the New Testament and the Old into the vulgar tongue of England would rather be the occasion of continuance or increase of errors among the said people than any benefit or commodity towards the weal of their souls, and that it shall be now more convenient that the same people have the Holy Scriptures expounded to them by preachers in their sermons as it hath been of old time accustomed." For these reasons all are ordered to deliver up the copies of the printed Testament "corruptly translated into the English tongue," the king promising **to provide that the Holy Scripture shall be, by great learned and Catholique persons, translated into the English tongue, if it shall then seem to his Grace convenient to be." (Gasquet, The Old English Bible, footnote pp. 132 and 133.) The Church was rightly hostile to unauthorized trans- lations of Scripture especially as many in those days made these the means of propagating the most dangerous errors. This is frankly acknowledged by the protestant Dean Hook. {Lives of Archbishops of Canterbury, III. p. 83). '' It was not from hostility to a translated Bible, considered abstractedly, that the conduct of Wiclif in translating it, was condemned. and the anti-pope, Clement VII. The time was apt for the theories of Wyclif. He preached much, and his writings were spread through the realm. In 1382 the Archbishop of Canterbury condemned, in a Council held at London, twenty- four propositions of Wyclif, in which among other errors he denied the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist ; affirmed that priest or bishop in state of mortal sin could not baptize, consecrate or ordain ; declared that confession was useless to a contrite man ; denied that Christ instituted the Mass; declared that, if the Pope were in sin, he had no authority over the faithful ; that it was against the Scriptures for the eccles- iastics to have property ; and declared that after Urban VI. the primacy of Peter had failed, and the nations should be free in the government of the national church. Wyclif died at Lutterworth in 1384. The opinions of Wyclif invaded Bohemia and gave rise to the heresy of John Huss. The remarkable success of these heresiarchs is due to the fact that they extend the power of the State, and flatter the pride and inde- pendence of the human heart 768 MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE Long before his time there had been translators of Holy Writ. There is no reason to suppose that any objection would have been offered to the circulation of the Bible, if the object of the translator had only been the edification and sanctifica- tion of the reader. It was not till the designs of the Lollards were discovered, that WiclifT's version was proscribed. " Maitland {Dark Ages p. 252) a writer who will not be suspected of being too friendly to the Catholic Church declares that he found no evidence that the Catholic Church *' strove to prevent the reading, the multiplication, the diffu- sion of the Word of God. " In the British Museum alone there are eleven German editions of the Bible ranging from 1466 to 15 18; three Bohemian editions of between 1488 and 1506, one Dutch edition of 1 47 7 . There are five French versions from 1 5 1 o to 1 53 1, and seven Italian versions of between 147 1 and 1532. These are all Catholic versions. It has been conclusively proven that in Germany in the Middle Ages there were seventy-two partial versions of the Scriptures, and fifty com- plete versions. These all emanated from Catholic sources. Seventeen of such versions were made before the time of Luther. And yet many still believe that Luther was the first to give to the Germans the Bible in the vernacular tongue. The Library of St. Gall contains many fine Bibles in the vernacular made before Luther's time. The explanation of the fact that no complete English Bible existed before the time of Wyclif is thus given by Dom Gasquet : " We are apt to forget the fact that till past the middle of the fourteenth century French was actually the tongue of the Court and of the educated classes generally. Only in 1363, for the first time, was the sitting of Parliament opened by an English speech, and in the previous year only had it been enacted that the pleadings in the courts of law might be in English in place of the French which had hitherto been the legal language ; but even then the record of the proceedings was still to be in Latin. French, however, continued for almost a century longer to be the language of the upper classes, and in it were written the rolls of Parliament, and THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSIONS 769 such wills and deeds as were not in Latin. An explanation of this retention of the French language is of course to be found in the circumstances of the time. Before the era of Wy cliff consequently, the reading public, that is to say, the higher classes or the clergy, found in the Latin version of the Holy Scriptures, or in such French versions as existed in England, what they required. "Such, then, is the very simple explanation of the non- existence of any English translation of the entire Bible before the time when Wy cliff came upon the scene. In the first half of the fourteenth century probably the only entire book of Scripture which had appeared in English prose was the book of Psalms translated by Richard Rolle, who died in 1349. This work he undertook at the request of Dame Margaret Kirby, a recluse at Hampole. At the same time, probably about 1320, another translation of the Psalms was made by William de Schorham, a priest of Chart Sutton, near Leeds, in the county of Kent. ** Besides these, however, there were the metrical para- phrases of Genesis and Exodus, the Ormulum, or poetical version of the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, the work of an Augustinian canon called Orm, and more than one metri- cal translation of the Psalms, approaching almost to a literal translation, all productions of the thirteenth century. It is, moreover, of interest to remark that after the Norman Conquest, whilst the wants of the educated class were satis- fied by the Norman-French translations, the Anglo-Saxon version of the Gospels was copied as late as the twelfth century." {The Old English Bible, London 1897). It is very doubtful whether the entire Scriptures have ever been translated into Anglo-Saxon. We have no tradi- tionary account of a complete version, and all the Biblical MSS. in Anglo-Saxon now in existence contain but select portions of the sacred volume. The poems on sacred sub- jects usually attributed to Caedmon, afford the first feeble indications of an attempt being made by the Saxons to con- vey the truths of Scripture in their vernacular tongue. Caedmon lived in the seventh century ; he was a monk in the monastery of Streoneshalch in Northumbria. His poems An /•XT C3 N 770 THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSIONS have been strung together so as to form a sort of metrical paraphrase on some of the historical books of Scripture. He commences with the fall of the angels, the creation and fall of man, and proceeds to the history of the deluge, carrying on his narrative to the history of the children of Israel, and their wanderings in the desert. He also touches on the history of Nebuchadnezzar and of Daniel. The authen- ticity of this work has been doubted, some writers being of opinion that it was written by different writers at different periods ; the striking similarity between some of the poems and certain passages in Milton's Paradise Lost has been repeatedly noticed. Two editions have been printed; the first by Francis Junius at Amsterdam in 1655, and the second, with an English translation and notes, by Mr. Thorpe in London, in 1832. The literal versions of such portions of the Scripture as have been translated into Anglo-Saxon have chiefly been transmitted to us in the form of interlineations of Latin MSS. A Latin Psalter, said to have been sent by Pope Gregory to Augustine, is still preserved among the Cottonian MSS, and contains an Anglo-Saxon interlinear version, of which the date is unknown. Aldhelm, bishop of Sherborne, and Guthlac, the first Anglo-Saxon anchorite, translated the Psalms soon after the commencement of the eighth century, but their MSS are lost, and nothing is known with certainty respecting them. The same may be said concerning the portions of Scripture reported to have been translated by the Venerable Bede. At the time of his death, this renowned historian itvas engaged in a translation of the Gospel of St. John, and almost with his latest breath he dictated to his amanuensis the closing verse of the Gospel. Alfred the Great also took part in the translation of the Scriptures. He translated the commandments in the twentieth chapter of Exodus, and part of the three following chapters, which he affixed to his code of laws. He likewise kept a **hand-boc," in which he daily entered extracts from various authors, but more especially verses of Scripture translated by himself from Latin into Anglo-Saxon. FORMATIVE PERIOD OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE 771 There are three different versions of the Four Gospels at present known to be in existence, The most ancient of these is the famous Northumbrian Gloss, or Durham Book, preserved among the Cottonian MSS. in the British Mu- seum. This MS. is one of the finest specimens extant of Saxon writing. The Vulgate Latin text of the Four Gospels was written by Eadfrid, bishop of Lindisfame, about A. D. 680 ; his successor in the see adorned the book with curious illuminations, and with bosses of gold and precious stones; and a priest named Aldred added an interlinear gloss or version, probably about the year 900. The second Anglo- Saxon version of the Gospels belongs to the tenth century, and was written by Farmen and Owen at Hare wood, or Harwood, over Jerome's Latin of the Four Gospels. The Latin text was written about the same period as that of the Durham Book, having been made during the seventh cen- tury. This valuable MS. is in the Bodleian Library, and is called the Rush worth Gloss, from the name of one of its former proprietors. The other translation of the Gospels was made by an unknown hand, apparently not long before the Norman conquest, and is thought to have been trans- lated from the Latin version which was in use before Jer- ome's time. Two editions of the Anglo-Saxon Psalter have been published. The first appeared in 1640; it was printed in London under the care of Spelman, from an ancient MS. by an unknown translator, and collated with other MSS. of equal antiquity. This version was undoubtedly made from the Latin Vulgate, which interlines with the Anglo-Saxon. A splendid edition of the Psalms was published in 1835 at Oxford: the MS. which forms the text formerly belonged to the Due de Berri, the brother of Charles V., king of France, and was preserved in the Royal Library at Paris. Mr. Thorpe, the editor attributed this MS. to the eleventh century ; and by some it is supposed to be a transcript of the version executed by Aldhelm, bishop of Sherborne, in the early part of the eighth century. It is, however, rather a paraphrase than a version, and is written, partly in prose, and partly in metre. 772 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE A partial interlinear translation of a Latin version of Proverbs, made in the tenth century, is preserved among the Cottonian MSS in the British Museum. To the same century- belong the celebrated translations of ^Ifric, Archbishop of Canterbury: they consist of the Heptateuch, or first seven books of the Bible, and the Book of Job. An edition of this version was published by Mr. Th waits, at Oxford, in 1699, from an unique MS. belonging to the Bodleian Library ; the Book of Job was printed from a transcript of a MS. in the Cottonian Library. ^Ifric in some portions of his version adheres literally to the text ; but in some parts he appears to aim at producing a condensation, or abridgment, rather than a translation of the events related by the inspired historian. Like the other Anglo-Saxon fragments, his translation was made from the Latin version. A few MSS. of the Psalms, written shortly before, or about the time of the Norman conquest are extant, and show the gradual decline of the Anglo-Saxon language. The history of the language may still farther be traced in three MSS. yet in existence, which were made after the arrival of the Normans. They are MSS. of the same translation, and two of them are attributed to the reign of Henry the Second : but the language in which they are written is no longer pure Anglo-Saxon; it has merged into what is designated the Anglo-Norman. The exact period of the transmutation of Saxon into English has been disputed, but it seems most reasonable to believe that the process was gradual. A fragment of the Saxon Chronicle, published by Lye, and concluding with the year 1079, exhibits the language in the first stage of its transi- tion state, no great deviation having then been made from Anglo-Saxon. But in the continuation of the same chron- icle, from 1135 to II 40 A. D., the commencement of those changes may be distinctly traced, which subsequently formed the distinctive peculiarities of the English language. The principal change introduced about this period was the gradual substitution of particles and auxiliary words for the terminal inflections of the Anglo-Saxon. The English has happily retained the facility of its parent language in com- EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 773 pounding words, the only difference in this respect being, that, in the formation of its compound terms, the Anglo- Saxon drew only from its own resources, whereas the Eng- lish has had recourse to the Latin, the Greek, the French, the Italian, and other languages. It has been remarked by a distinguished foreigner, that ''everywhere the principle of utility and application dominates in England, and consti- tutes at once the physiognomy and the force of its civiliza- tion. " This principle is certainly legible in its language, which although possessed of remarkable facility in the adap- tation of foreign terms and even idioms to its own use, is at the same time free from the trammels with which the other languages of its class are encumbered. In the gender of nouns, for instance, we meet with no perplexity or anomaly, every noun being masculine, feminine or neuter, according to the nature of the object or idea it represents ; and as the adjectives are all indeclinable, their concordance with the noun is at once effected without the apparently useless trouble of altering the final letters. This perfect freedom from useless encumbrance adds greath^ to the ease and vigor of expression. After the gradual disappearance of the Anglo-Saxon and evolution of the English language, the Anglo-Saxon versions became useless from the alteration in the language, and until the fourteenth century the efforts made to produce a new translation were few and feeble. An ecclesiastic named Orm, or Ormin, supposed from his dialect to have been a native of the North of England, composed a metrical para- phrase of the Gospels and Acts, in lines of fifteen syllables, during the latter part of the twelfth century. This work is entitled the Ormulum, from the name of its author, and is preserved in the Bodleian Library. A more extensive metrical paraphrase, comprising the Old and New Testa- ments, is to be found amongst other poetry of a religious nature in a work entitled Sowle-hele (Soul's health), belong- ing to the Bodleian Library : it is usually ascribed to the end of the twelfth century. Another metrical version, probably of the same date, is preserved in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge : it comprises only the first two books of the Old 774 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE Testament, and is written in the dialect then spoken in the north of England. In the same college, a metrical version of the Psalms, apparently written about the year 1300, has been deposited: this version adheres to the Latin Psalter, corrected by Jerome, as closely as the nature of the composi- tion will admit. Several other MSS. of the old English Psalter, preserved in the British Museum and the Bodleian Library, are supposed to be exemplars of the same version, with the orthography altered in conformity with the state of the language at the periods in which they were written. A translation of the Psalms from the same text (the corrected Latin of Jerome), was executed by Richard Rolle, of Ham- pole, near Doncaster, during the early part of the fourteenth century. This version is remarkable as being the first por- tion of the Scriptures ever translated into English prose. Rolle, or Hampole as he is more generally called, also wrote a paraphrase in verse of a part of Job. Two other versions of the Psalms, belonging to the same period, are likewise extant. In Bene't College, Cambridge, there is a version of Mark, Luke and the Pauline Epistles, but the translator and the date are unknown ; and in the British Museum there is a translation of the Gospels appointed to be read on Sun- days, written in the northern dialect. A version has been commonly ascribed to John de Tre- visa, vicar of Berkeley in Gloucestershire, who flourished toward the close of the fourteenth century ; but he only trans- lated a few detached passages, which he introduced in certain parts of his writings. Some texts translated by him were painted on the walls of the chapel belonging to Berkeley Castle. A popularly believed error is that Wyclif made a com- plete translation of the whole Bible between the years 1378 and 1382, As Blunt {Plain Account of the English Bible p. 1 7) says : ** The name of Wyclife has been used as a peg to hang many a work upon with which the owner of the name had nothing whatever to do." Sir E. Maunde Thompson {Wy cliff Exhibition British Museum p. XX) says that only the New Testament portion can be said probably to be due to the hand of Wyclif himself. Of the other portions of the EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 775 version the same eminent authority declares that ''Wyclif may have commenced the work of revision but he did not live to see it accomplished." Blunt, op. cit., declares: ''There is scarcely any contemporary evidence, except that of his bitterest opponent, that Wyclife was really the author of this translation, but there can be no doubt that tradition is to be believed when it associates his name with it. ... The popular idea of Wyclife sitting alone in his study at Lutterworth, and making a complete new translation of the whole Bible with his own hands is one of those many popular ideals which will not stand the test of historical inquiry." Dom. Gasquet believes that many of the versions popu- larly credited to Wyclif were made by Catholics. {The Old English Bible) Certain it is that the rdle of Wyclif has been exag- gerated. That the Bible, at least portions of it, were in use in the vernacular tongue in England is attested by the best evidence. Sir Thomas More [Dyalogues (ed. 1530,) p. 138] is a most competent witness: ''As for old translations, before WyclifEe's time (he writes), they remain lawful and be in some folks hands. Myself have seen and can show you, fair and old Bibles, in English which have been known and seen by the Bishop of the Diocese and left in laymans hands and womens. " Again, in another place he says : — "The whole Bible was long before his {i.e., Wycliffe's) days by virtuous and well learned men, translated into the English tongue and by good and godly people with devotion, and soberness, well and reverently read." Cranmer himself in his prologue to the second edition of the "Great Bible." says: " If the matter should be tried by custom, we might also allege custom for the reading of the Scripture in the vulgar tongue, and prescribe the more ancient custom. For it is not much above one hundred years ago, since Scripture hath not been accustomed to be read in the vulgar tongue within this realm, and many hundred years before that, it was trans- 776 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE lated and read in the Saxon's tongue, which at that time was our mother tongue, and when this language waxed old and out of common usage, because folk should not lack the fruit of reading, it was again translated into the newer language whereof yet also many copies remain and be daily found." Foxe the Martyrologist in his dedication to Arch- bishop Parker of his edition of the Saxon Gospels writes : "If histories be well examined we shall find both before the Conquest and after, as well before John Wickliffe was bom as since, the whole body of the Scriptures was by sun- dry men translated into our country tongue. " Finally it is proven that the opposition to the protestant versions was not for the reason that they translated the Scriptures into the vernacular, but that they brought in false opinions into doctrine. When one alleged against Sir Thomas More that the ecclesiastical authorities burned all the protestant versions, More answered: ''if this were done so, it were not well done; but," he continues in reply to one who had asserted this, * *I believe that ye mistake it. ' ' And taking up one case objected against him in which the Bible of a Lollard prisoner named Richard Hun, a London merchant, was said to have been burnt in the Bishop of London's prison, he says: ''This I remember well, that besides other things framed for the favour of divers other heresies there were in the pro- logue of that Bible such words touching the Blessed Sacra- ment as good Christian men did abhor to hear and that gave the readers undoubted occasion to think that the book was written after Wyclif 's copy, and by him translated into our tongue, and that this Bible was destroyed consequently not because it was in English, but because it contained gross and manifest heresy." " In some editions of Tyndale's New Testament, " writes the Protestant historian Blunt, "there is what must be regarded as a wilful omission of the gravest possible char- acter, for it appears in several editions, and has no shadow of justification in the Greek or Latin of the passage (i Peter ii. 13, 14)." (Blunt, History of the Reformation, p. 514). EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 777 ''Green in his History (vol. ii., pp. 127-8,) though by no means unfriendly to Tyndale on this point, writes as follows : — 'We can only fairly judge their action by viewing it in the light of the time. What Warham and More saw over the sea might well have turned them from a movement which seemed breaking down the very foundations of religion and society. Not only was the fabric of the Church rent asun- der, and the center of Christian unity denounced as 'Baby- lon,' but the reform itself seemed passing into anarchy. Luther was steadily moving onward from the denial of one Christian dogma to that of another; and what Luther still clung to, his followers were ready to fling away. Meanwhile the religious excitement was kindling wild dreams of social revolution, and men stood aghast at the horrors of a peasant war which broke out in Germany. It was not, therefore, as a mere translation of the Bible that Tyndale 's work reached England. It came as part of the Lutheran movement, and it bore the Lutheran stamp in its version of ecclesiastical words. "Church" became "congregation"; 'Spriest" was changed into "elder." We can hardly wonder that More denounced the book as heretical, or that Warham ordered it to be given up by all who possessed it. " (Gasquet, The Old English Bible, footnote pp. 130- 131.) In 1850 a complete edition of both testaments of the version commonly called Wyclif 's was published at Oxford under the editorship of J. Farstall and Sir F. Madden. In 1388 John Pumey revised Wyclif 's translation. These translations were based on the Latin Vulgate. In 1525 or 1526 Tyndale published a translation of the New Testament at Worms. He published also portions of a translation of the Old Testament. Miles Coverdale con- tinued Tyndale 's work, and in 1535 the first printed English Bible was published. Other translations now followed rapidly, the best known of which is Matthew's Bible. Its real author was John Rogers, alias Thomas Matthew. From Matthew's Bible all later revisions of the protestant Bible have been formed. In 1539 Richard, Taverner published a translation of the Bible. 778 THE REVISED VERSION As none of these translations pleased Cromwell, he com- missioned Coverdale to bring out a new translation. This is called "The Great Bible," published in 1539. Cranmer's Bible was published in 1540, and five other editions followed in the next eighteen months. As Mary's accession had arrested the progress of heresy in England, some of the protestants fled to Geneva. There in 1557 Wm. Whittingham brought out the N. T. Prin- cipally by his labors a translation of the whole Bible was published at Geneva in 1560. This is called the Genevan Bible. This version is sometimes called the "Breeches Bible," because the translators rendered the n^"n^n of Genesis III. 7, by "breeches." As Cromwell and Cranmer were opposed to the Calvinism of the authors of this edition, in 1568 several protestant bishops revised Coverdale 's version. This is known as the Bishops' Bible. In 1604 King James of England convened a conference to reform things amiss in the Church. In the second day's conference Dr. Reynolds declared that the translations of Scripture made in the days of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. "were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the orig- inal. " King James immediately ordered a new translation. It was begun in 1607, and in 161 1 the work was published. Forty-seven revisers were appointed for the work. We know but little of the history of their work. This edition is the authorized edition of the protestant English Bible. None of these versions have any critical value. In May 1870 the work of revising this translation was begun. The revision of the New Testament was completed in about ten years and a half, and was published in 1881. The revision of the Old Testament was completed in 1885. A revised translation of the deuterocanonical books was published in 1895. The New Testament differs from the edition of 161 1 in 5788 places, besides numberless minor differences. THE RHEIMS-DOUAY VERSION 779 In the year 1582, William (afterward Cardinal) Allen, Gregory Martin and Richard Bristow made a translation of the New Testament at the English Catholic college of Rheims under the following title : * ; The New Testament of lesvs Christ, translated faithfvlly into English out of the authentical Latin, according to the best corrected copies of the same, diligently conferred with the Greeke, and other editions in diuers languages: Vvith Argvments of bookes and chapters, Annotations, and other necessarie helpes, for the better vnderstanding of the text, and specially for the discouerie of the Corrvptions of diuers late translations, and for cleering the Controversies in relig- ion, of these dales: In the English College of Rhemes. Printed at Rhemes by lohn Fogny. 1582. 4to. Thomas Worthington affixed the notes to the text. From the place of its origin it was called the Rheims version. After the college was removed to Douay, the same scholars translated the Old Testament under the title : The Holie Bible faithfvlly translated into English ovt of the Avthentical Latin. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greeke, and other Editions in diuers languages. With Argvments of the Bookes, and Chapters : Annotations : Tables: and other helpes for better vnderstanding of the text : for discouerie of corrvptions in some late translations : and for clearing Controversies in Religion. By the English College of Doway by Lavrence Kellam. 1609-10. 2 vols. 4to. These being united form the Rheims-Douay Bible, the "editio princeps" of all English Catholic versions. In 1750 it was revised by Dr. Challoner, and this revision is the one usually in use. CHAPTER XXVII. The Interpretation of Scripture. In the acquisition of all knowledge, man should order all its different branches to one grand scope : namely, to develop the powers of the soul, and make the being of man God-like. Now in that cultivation of the soul, the science of Holy Scrip- ture is most immediate to the end of all study. The other 780 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE departments of human knowledge contain but the faint and broken accents of human reason ; the Holy Scriptures con- tain the clear voice of God from Heaven. Hence there should also be this order in the human knowable, that all the sciences should be subservient to the study of God in the Holy Scriptures. Man should study the different sciences with the view of coming closer to the Creator through the consideration of his works. The man, then, who essays to interpret the word of God, should bring to his task the possession of vast and varied knowledge, that truth may beget truth, and the mes- sage of the Creator may be received in its fulness, in the mind made receptive by careful preparation. The student of Scripture takes up the grandest and sublimest system of philosophy, the truest and best system of ethics, and the grand basis of dogmatic truth. The human mind is limited, the compass of its cognitions is never vast, and it would be presumption in it to undertake to find the sense of the Holy Code without much laborious preparation. A man with some happy faculty of expression may treat of many themes of human knowledge without great mental application. But if a man would draw anything more than pious generalities out of the Scriptures, he must study. In the words of Jerome : ''Agricolse, casmentarii, fabri, metallorum lignorumve csesores, lanarii quoque et fuUones, et ceteri, qui variam. supellectilem et vilia opuscula fabri- cantur, absque doctore, esse non possunt quod cupiunt. Quod medicorum est, Promittunt medici; tractant fabrilia fabri. Sola Scripturarum ars, quam sibi omnes passim vindicant: Scribimus indocti doctique poemata passim. Hanc garrula anus, hanc delirus senex, hanc sophista ver- bosus, hanc universi prsesumunt, lacerant, decent, antequam discant. Alii adducto supercilio grandia verba trutinantes inter mulierculas de sacris literis philosophantur. Alii dis- cunt, proh dolor! a feminis, quod viros doceant : et ne parum hoc sit, quadam facilitate verborum, imo audacia edisserunt aliis, quod ipsi non intelligunt .... Puerilia sunt hsec et circulatorum ludo similia, docere quod ignores, imo, ut cum THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 781 stomacho loquar, ne hoc quidem scire, quod nescias." (St. Hier. ad Paulin. Ep. 53, 6, 7, Migne, P. L. 22, 544.) The student of Scripture should study natural science to see the design of the Creator in his works, and the evidence of his wisdom in Nature's laws ; and also to defend the truths of God against the inflated sophists, who speak in the name of science. He should study philosophy that by the pos- session of the truths of one order, the mind may expand and rise by the right laws from one order of truth to another, in its upward course towards the Infinite Truth. He should study the languages, for the resources of human thought are expressed in the different languages of the races of man. No man can well come at the thought of the world through the knowledge of any one tongue. He should study the tongues in which the holy men of God spoke, for the fulness and the clearness of the thought remains in the original tongue in which it was first delivered. It will not suffice to say: "Jerome translated the Hebrew for me, and as I can not equal Jerome's knowledge of Scrip- ture, I shall desist from fruitless toil." Neither Jerome nor any other man, put into the translation the fulness and the clearness of the original. He should study dogmatic theology, that he may be guided by the analogy of faith in all interpretations. It may be safely stated that no man ever became an able inter- preter of Scripture, who was not a profound dogmatic theo- logian. He should study archaeology, that he may know the cus- toms and modes of life of ancient people ; for a knowledge of these will throw light on certain expressions of such people. It is an evident fact that the science of archaeology has made remarkable progress in our times. Remarkable dis- coveries have been made on the sites of Babylon, in Egypt, Palestine, and Greece, and these monuments bear a most important relation to Holy Scripture. It is a source of satisfaction to every believer to know that the testimony of the monuments has confirmed the truth of the Scriptures. The student of Scripture should study textual criticism, 782 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE that he may be able to judge of the sense of various readings, and, may intelHgently use the different codices. Finally, he should read and ponder much upon the Holy Text, for it does not reveal its depths of truths to the casual reader. In proper degree the common laws of interpretation for all written documents are applicable to Holy Scripture ; but inasmuch as the Scriptures form a unique transcendent class of literature, they have also laws proper to themselves. The argument or occasion of the writing of a document often determines the peculiar sense given to words by an inspired writer. Thus a knowledge of the gnostic heresies gives us the key to St. John's anathema against the man who should divide Jesus Christ. The grammatical and logical context must be weighed ; for both the words and the ideas of a writer are connected in a manner affecting the sense. Attention must also be paid to the character of the writing ; for in impassioned discourse the ideas may be somewhat disconnected. The hermeneutical laws proper to the Holy Scriptures are based on the fact that God is the Author of the Scrip- tures. God must therefore guide the interpretation of his writings. The first great law therefore in the interpretation of Scripture is the teaching of the Church. It is clear that the nature of the writings demands in the soul of the interpreter certain virtues to fit it to receive God 's message. Prayer, an honest teachable heart, and humility are necessary: "When as a youth I sought the sense of the Scriptures by the power of the intellect rather than by pious petition, by my perverse method I closed against myself the door leading to the Lord. When I should have knocked that it might be opened, I caused it to be closed. I sought in pride what only the humble can find. . . . Wretched man ! When I thought myself able to fly, I left the nest, and I fell before I flew. " (Aug. Sermon 51, 5). All the Fathers have recognized that there are many things difficult to understand in the Scriptures. To deal THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 783 with these Origen counsels : "Being assiduous in the reading of Scripture, with a true firm faith in God seek the sense of the Holy Scriptures, which is often hidden. " (Ep. ad Greg. Neoc.) A most useful counsel is that of St. Augustine: ** For I confess to your charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture : of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the MS. is faulty, or the translator has not caught the mean- ing of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it." As St. Paul says: *'The natural man receiveth not the things that are of the spirit of God : for they are foolishness to him, and he can not understand them, because they are spiritually examined. " This fact underlies rationalism and modernism; men have brought in false theories of inspiration and interpreta- tion to reduce the supernatural character of the Scriptures which the natural man finds it hard to understand. The whole tendency it to make the Scriptures more acceptable to the natural man. Many of these theories have been treated of in our tract on Inspiration. The Encyclical *' Providen- tissimus Deus ' ' which we have produced in full is an excel- lent treatise on the interpretation of Scripture. Hence we shall refrain from repeating here what has been treated of in the first part of our work. The Council of Trent in its famous decree of the fourth session, ''with a view to restrain the petulance of human minds, decreed : That no one relying on his own judgment, in the doctrinal and moral parts of Scripture, should distort the Holy Scriptures to conform to his opinions against the sense which our Holy Mother the Church has held and holds, whose ofiice it is to judge of the true sense and interpreta- tion of Holy Scripture ; and that no one shall dare interpret the same Holy Scriptures contrary to the unanimous con- sensus of the Fathers. 784 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE Though this decree is formally disciplinary it presup- poses a dogmatic truth. The Vatican Council repromulgated the decree of the Council of Trent, and authentically interpreted it: ** Since therefore that which the Council of Trent wisely decreed to restrain rash minds in the interpretation of Holy Scripture, has by some men been falsely interpreted, we renew the aforesaid decree, and declare its meaning to be that in mat- ters of faith and morals pertaining to Christian teaching that is to be held as the true sense of Holy Scripture which holy Mother the Church has held and holds; for her ofhce it is to judge of the sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. Therefore it is not allowed to any man to in- terpret the Holy Scriptures against the sense (of the Church) or against the unanimous consent of the Fathers." (Const, de Fide. II.) The Fathers of the Vatican have here brought into the decree the dogmatic fact on which the disciplinary ruling of the Council of Trent was based, and have promulgated a dogmatic decree. A long series of discussions preceded the definition, and it is made evident from these that the decree does not contemplate two disparate criterions ; but held the unanimous consent of the Fathers to be a competent witness of what the Church held. The sense of some texts has been directly defined by the Church. It was defined by the Council of Trent, that Paul spoke of original sin, Rom. V. 12. (Cone. Trid. Sess. V. 2-4.) It was defined in the same session, and again in the seventh session, that the sense of the text, John III. 5, establishes the necessity of baptism by natural water. In the thirteenth session it is established, that the words of in- institution of the Blessed Eucharist prove the real presence of Christ in the Host. In the fourteenth session it is de- fined that the words of Christ in John XX. 23, convey the power of binding and loosing sin ; and that James V. 1 1 pro- mulgates the Sacrament of Extreme Unction. The indirect force of the Church's definitions pervades the whole body of the Scriptures. In condemning heresies, she shows us indirectly what is the sense of many passages ; THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 785 and her authentic teaching forms a general norm of inter- pretation which we call the analogy of faith. We may define the analogy of faith to be the constant and perpetual harmony of Scripture in the fundamental points of faith and practice, deduced from those passages, in which they are discussed by the inspired writer, either directly or expressly, and in clear, plain, and intelligible language. Or, more briefly, the analogy of faith may be defined to be that proportion which the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures hear to each other, or, the close connection between the truths of Revealed Religion. The analogy of faith is an expression borrowed from Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans, (XII. 6.) where he exhorts those who prophesy in the church (that is, those who exercise the office of authoritatively expounding the Scrip- tures), to prophesy according to the analogy of faith. The clause, ''in rebus fidei et morum,'' occasioned much discussion in the Council, and has occasioned much since. By this clause the Fathers did not restrict inspiration to the doctrinal parts ; but only declared that in these parts, the sense was vital to the religious life of the people, and consequently in these things the Church fulfilled her com- mission of teaching all peoples. As Bishop Gasser of Brixen, one of the leading bishops of the Council declared, the Church has the right of regula- ting the interpretation of all the things in Scripture, but, "regarding the historical parts, either the interpretations are not against the dogma of the inspiration of Holy Scripture and of all its parts, or they are against this dogma. In the first hypothesis it is a free ground of discussion; in the second hypothesis, if the interpretation of the historical truth violates the dogma of inspiration, certainly it be- comes a matter of faith, and hence the Church has the right to pass judgment on it." (Coll. lac. VII. 226.) Hence all the parts of the Holy Scripture are inspired, but the inspired sense of all is not so clearly known by us. In the necessary things of faith and morals, the Church exercises a special care to help us to come at the inspired sense. In other things, though they are equally inspired, 50 (H.S.) 786 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE she leaves the interpretation free, on condition that it con- flict not with the fundamental dogma of the inspiration of the whole Scriptures. When the Church explicitly inter- prets a passage, we call it an authentic interpretation. While therefore we recognize that there is a wide range of truths of Scripture where men may freely exercise their scientific methods, we see at the same time that the great fundamental truth must underlie all these interpretations, namely that all parts of the Holy Scriptures as they came from the inspired writers are divinely inspired. We have already discussed in the treatise on Inspiration the false argument of those who wished to establish non-inspired parts in Holy Scripture. Concerning the sense of Scripture a few principles will suffice. When we speak of the sense of a writing, we mean not the mere signification of the words. The signification of a word is the power that it has from its own nature, and the institu- tion and use of man to convey a determinate idea. Hence one term can have many significations. But the sense of a word is the actual value that the term has in a particular predication ; and the sense in a right ordered proposition can be but one. The first and main sense of Scripture is the literal sense. Usage prevails to class under this head the historical sense, and the metaphorical sense. " By the literal sense a thought may be expressed in two ways: that is, either according to the ordinary force of the words, as when I say, 'the man laughs' ; or according to a simile, as when I say, 'the mead- ow laughs.' We use both manners of expression in Scrip- ture, as when we say according to the first mode, 'Jesus ascended': we say, 'he sits at the right hand of God,' according to the second mode. And therefore under the literal sense is included the metaphorical." (St. Thomas in Gal. 4. 7). Now the sense of Scripture is that thought which the Holy Ghost has expressed by written words. The historical sense is that, which results immediately from the ordinar>^ force of the words, as when I say: "The THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 787 Word was made flesh. " This is the basic sense in all Scrip- ture, and in all the expressions of the creations of mind. The metaphorical sense of Scripture is a deviation from the ordinary application of words, in which we predicate concepts of objects, not proper to them in their essential nature, but founded in some wide general similarity. Thus we speak of the ''arm of the Lord" not to predicate the cor- poral member of God, but to assert of him the power of action. We include under the heading of metaphorical sense of Scripture, all figurative sense, whether it consist in simile, parable, personification, allegory, synecdoche, metonymy, apostrophe, irony, hyperbole, or other figure. The main office of figurative speech in Scripture is to heighten the force of the enunciation, to give clearness to abstract ideas, and to express ideas with something of the fulness and vividness of the objects of sense. The state of a man perplexed by many thoughts, could scarcely be better expressed than by saying : "I scarcely understand my own intent; But silkworm like, so long within have wrought, That I am lost in my own web of thought. ' ' The allegory is a common form of Scriptural figure. It is a form of expression in which the real subject is not men- tioned but described by a consistent, intelligible statement, and the subject is left to be inferred by the aptly suggestive likeness. A fine allegory is in Isaiah V. 1-2 : ** My beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill ; and he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a wine-press therein; and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes." The parable was much used by the Lord. This figure of speech is properly a species of allegory, in which a religious truth is exhibited by means of facts from nature and human life. The statements are not historically true, but are offered as a means of conveying a higher general truth. But the propositions are always true to nature ; the laws of the nature of the different beings introduced, are strictly 788 THE INTERPRETATION" OF SCRIPTURE observed, and the events are such as might have taken place. The Prodigal Son, The Sower, The Ten Virgins, Lazarus and Dives, are good examples of this form of expression. The knowledge of the sense of Scripture, has been much obscured by the addition of what is called the sensus consequens. Such is the nature of the mind, that it evolves truth from truth by logical process. The truths which are by logical deduction drawn from other truths of Scripture, are by some writers classed under the sensus consequens. Since God endowed man with the reasoning faculty, it is natural and right for him to proceed in syllogistic process from truth to truth. And if the fundamental position be the sense of the Holy Ghost, and the logical process be legitimate, the con- clusion will be equally the sense of the Holy Ghost. While, therefore, we justify the process, we see no need of multiply- ing entia by placing this division of the sense of Scripture. As the infinite knowledge of God comprehends all future things and events, he alone can order a being or event to prefigure some future being or event. This prefiguring of future beings, actions, and events is called the typical or spiritual sense of Scripture. It is evident that it can only be properly verified in inspired writings, for no other being can thus comprehend and describe the future. The TYPICAL SENSE is therefore verified when some being, action, or event which has its own proper mode of being, is taken to signify some future ens. Therefore the typical sense is founded upon the literal sense. It leaves to the sen- tence its proper literal sense, and is formed upon it by apply- ing the great leading concept of the present reality to future being. It is evident that it differs from the metaphorical sense, though it comes close to allegory. But it is distin- guishable from allegory in this, that it imports as its basis some real existing being, whereas allegory is the application of an imaginary ens to signify present or future truth. Thus the ten virgins can not be called a type of the kingdom of Heaven, but an- allegorical ''description of the different relig- ious conditions of human life, in its journey towards eternity. THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 789 The typical sense is also different in nature from the sense of the symbolic actions of prophetic vision. The vision of Ezekiel, I. 4-28, for example, was not a type of the Almighty, but a symbol of some of his attributes. Thus also the Woman seen by John in the Apocalypse, XII., is not a type of the Church, but the life of the militant Church there por- trayed by symbolic vision. The type is properly built on some ens in rerum natura; the symbol is only a creation of the mind. Usage has determined that the ens adumbrating the future verity should be called the type, while the future verity thus prefigured is called the antitype. The old writers here again induce useless divisions, divid- ing types into prophetic, which relate to Christ, anagogic which regard man's supernatural destiny, and tropologic, which contain laws of morality. These divisions serve no useful purpose. The existence of types in the Scripture is self-evident from the reading of the Holy Books. Adam is called a type of Christ, TVTTo? Tov ixeWovTo^, Rom. V. 14; the sacrifice of Melchisedech is a type of the Eucharist ; Sara and Hagar are types of the Old and New Testaments, Gal. IV. 24; the Paschal Lamb was a type of the Crucifixion, Exod. XII. 46, compared with Jo. XIX. 36 ; the Brazen Serpent was a type of the Vicarious Atonement, Num. XXI. 9 ; the Manna was a type of the Eucharist, Exod. XVI. 15, compared with Jo. VI. 49-50; Israel in the Exodus was a type of Christianity, ravra Be TVinK(a<; avveffaivev eKelvoi^^ I. Cor. X. 11. Such evident proofs render the existence of the typical sense as well founded as the existence of inspiration. From the express declarations of the inspired writers, and from the nature of the truths themselves, it is evident that the entire Old Testament with its history and its rites is a type of the New. Thus Moses and Joshua are types of Christ, the Ark of Noah a type of the Church, the old sacri- fices a type of the Eucharist, etc., but it is absurd to seek this typology in every individual proposition. This has been done even to the extent of finding a typical significa- tion in the snuffers used to remove the snuff from the candles 790 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE in the temple. The vanity of such position is very evident. There is much in the first Code that has only its plain historical sense, such as, for instance, the Decalogue. The question has been moved by some, whether there are types in the New Testament. This question admits of a definite and certain answer. There are no Messianic types in the New Dispensation as there were in the Old, which was but the shadow of the perfect covenant. But still, as the Church was a future ens in the time of Christ, there were typical actions in his life; and certain events connected with his first coming are t3rpical of their counterparts in his second coming. Thus St. Paul finds a typical ratio in the fact that Christ suffered death outside the gate ; the bark of the Apostles, tossed by the tempest, is a type of the Church, and the destruction of Jerusalem is most certainly a type of the dissolution of the world. Now of the senses of Scripture, the greatest and most valuable is the literal sense. This should be first sought in every passage of Scripture. In every enunciation of Holy Scripture there is a literal sense, whether it be historical or metaphorical. This law of interpretation is now received by all. It was opposed by Origen in his excessive mysticism ; but the Fathers repud- iated his extravagant theories as "old women's fables," "aniles fahulcB.'' (St. Basil) The very nature of human speech demands that words be used in their historical or metaphorical literal sense. In no other supposition is human speech intelligible ; and it is not to be supposed that God violated the nature of human speech in his message to man. A question of more difficult solution is whether a sentence of Holy Scripture may have more than one literal sense. Augustine (Conf. 12, 30, 31, 32.) concedes the possibility of a multiplex sense of Scripture. St. Thomas seems to have contradicted himself in his treatment of this question. In the Summa (I. q. i. a. 10) he places the objection "that a multiplex sense of Scripture would create confusion and error, and destroy the certitude of the argument :" he answers THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 791 that such results can not follow, since ''all the senses are founded on the one literal sense." Nevertheless a little farther on he writes : "Since the literal sense is that which the author intends, and the Author of the Holy Scriptures is God, who comprehends all things in his knowledge, it is not unfitting, as St. Augustine says, that there may be a multi- plex literal sense of Scripture. " In his treatise De Potentia, q. 4, he is still more explicit in defending a multiplex sense. A multiplex literal sense is also taught by Melchior Canus, Catharinus, Bellarmine, Bonfrere, Serarius, Salmeron, Molina, Valentia, and Vasquez. The tendency of later writers has been quite generally opposed to admitting a multiplex sense, for internal reasons. Thus Schmid (De Insp. 248) declares that the greater weight of authority is for it; the stronger internal evidence is against it. He leaves the question undecided. Those who hold the negative opinion argue that it is the nature of human speech that there be but one literal sense in a proposition, and the inspired writers acting under the influence of the Holy Ghost, are not to be supposed to have changed the nature of human discourse. In fact the under- standing of the Scriptures would be much impeded, if more than one literal sense was contained in them, for one, after receiving one certain literal sense, would be ever uncertain whether there were not others yet to be explored. Now it must be understood that the advocates of a multiplex sense of Scripture, Augustine excepted, admit it only in rare cases, especially in prophetic utterance where God directly speaks. They believe that his infinite compre- hension of truth may give a comprehensive meaning to expressions, which might in a certain sense, be called a multi- plex sense of Scripture. There is a certain relation between these senses, but it is not clear in every case that they can be reduced to the relation of type and antitype. We have no wish to insist on the name ''multiplex sense"; but there seem to be a few places in prophecy where two entities alike in nature are contemplated in one proposition. In such cases the declaration of St. Thomas seems to be applicable : "A term is ambiguous, and furnishes an occasion of decep- 792 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE tion when it is used to signify many things of which one is not coordinated to the other; but when it signifies many things which by a certain order are contemplated as one, then the term is not ambiguous but certain." Summa Th. III. q. 60, a. 3). A remarkable instance of the mode in which the same proposition may have two senses is furnished in the Gospel of St. John XL 50: ''Ye know nothing at all, nor do ye take account that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. " Caiaphas gave a counsel that it was a wise political expedient to put Jesus to death to please Rome. The Holy Ghost made use of him as the high priest to prophesy that Jesus must die for the redemption of men. Now it is true that Caiaphas was not in the real sense a prophet, but this passage at least shows that it is compatible with the laws of human speech, as the Holy Ghost used it, that one proposition should have a multiplex sense. There is only one sense here intended by the Holy Ghost ; but we can conceive a similar case where a human writer might express a holy and true thought, and one inspired by the Holy Ghost, an(9. yet unconsciously utter a deeper prophecy. The sublime passage of Isaiah LII., 4-6, certainly refers to our redemption from sin; but Matthew (VIII. 16-17) applies it also to Jesus' healing of the sick. The only just explanation here is that the comprehensive sense of prophecy contemplated both Jesus' redemption of the world from sin, and his merciful healing of the sick. The two effects are essentially related. This theory may be applied to other prophetic places. Care must be taken not to receive the error of Origen, who defended that at times only the typical sense was intended. The typical sense stands not alone, but is always built upon the literal. The Fathers have at times extolled the typical sense above the literal, on the assumption that it treated of higher concepts. This is erroneous. The typical sense is more sublime in those passages in which it is found than its type, but it is not more sublime than the literal sense in general. The typical sense of the passage relating to THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 793 the Paschal Lamb is more sublime than its type, but it is not more sublime than the declaration of St. John : " The Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us," or the Beatitudes; and these are to be accepted in their literal sense. There- fore, where there is a typical sense it is to be principally sought, because it was in such passage principally intended by the Holy Ghost ; but the great body of the Scriptures especially of the New Testament contain their truths in the literal sense. The excessive looking wide of the literal sense in search of types is one of the great defects of pulpit use of Holy Scripture. Finally the typical sense of any passage can only be cer- tainly known, by some authentic declaration of the Holy Ghost. The ordering of one ens to signify another is the work of God, and can only be fully known to us through some manifestation of the mind of God. Therefore, we can only found things which are of faith on those types, whose typical signification has been opened up to us by some inspired writer. When this is done, it is evident that the sense is as certain as the literal sense. In the liturgical offices of the Church, and in the writings of the Fathers, often a passage of Scripture is applied to an object, which was not in the mind of the inspired writer, nor comprehended in the scope of the Holy Ghost in the inspired writing. This is called tbe accommodated sense. It is based upon some resemblance between the two themes. To speak properly, it is not a sense of Scripture, but the adaptation of the sense of Scripture to another theme of simi- lar nature. This accommodation takes place in two dif- ferent ways. The first species occurs where the passage retains its real signification, but is extended to another theme, which is analogous in nature and circumstances. Thus a man who falls in temptation may say : " Serpens decepit me. " Thus, the Breviary applies to the Holy Pontiffs, what was said by the Siracida of Noah: "Inventus est Justus, et in tempore iracundiag f actus est reconciliatio. " In the same manner, ■ the Breviary extends to Holy Pontiffs, what was said of Moses : " Similem fecit ilium in gloria Sanctorum ; " and of Aaron : " Statuit ei testament um seternum. ' ' 794 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE This use of Scripture is legitimate and useful, provided always the first sense is not obscured, and the application is justly made, but it is never to be taken as the sense of Holy Writ ; it can never prove a dogma. Even the material words of Holy Scripture possess a sort of divine virtue. And when they become the vehicles of even human thoughts, they are capable of moving the soul of man to piety. The second species of accommodation is founded in no real similarity in nature or circumstances of the two themes, but in a mere ignorant distortion of Scriptural words to express some human thought. Thus, when Yahveh showed visible signs of his majesty in certain places, the Psalmist cried out: "Deus mirabilis in Sanctis suis (in Sanctuario suo). " " O God, thou art terrible in thy holy places. " It is not uncommon to apply this to the mysterious ways of God to his elect, or even to the idiosyncrasies of holy people. Again in Psalm XVni. 26, (Hebrew) the Psalmist declares the action of God towards man to be fashioned by the quali- ties of a man's own life: 'Xum sancto sanctus eris, et cum perverso perverteris. " It is lamentable to hear a man tear this text to tatters, to prove the ill effect of evil associations. It is related that after the Duke of Montmorency was executed by the order of Cardinal Richelieu, the sister of the Duke, passing the tomb of the Cardinal, directed to him an apostrophe in. the words of Martha, the sister of Lazarus: "Domine, si fuisses hie, frater meus non fuisset mortuus." It was much in vogue in the sixteenth century to apply the sacred words to profane subjects. When St. Francis de Sales lay ill, his physician in com- pounding some micdicine for him, addressed him thus: ''Quod ego facio, tu nescis modo ; scies autem postea. " Jo. XIII. 7 . St. Francis reprehended him saying : ''You profane the Scripture of God in applying it to profane things. The Scripture should only be used of holy themes, and with pro- found respect. ' ' So great was the abuse, that the Council of Trent in its fourth session formally forbade that the Scripture be applied to profane subjects. JEWISH INTERPRETATION 795 Chapter XXVIII. Jewish Interpretation. Through defect of documents, we know nothing of the exegetical systems of the Jews before the time of Christ. Flavius Josephus declares (War I. 5, 2.) that the Phari- sees interpret the Law accurately. We can only come at a knowledge of their system through the Talmud, which reflects the Jewish thought of the early ages. The Talmud is a composite form of the Mishna and the Gemara. The Mishna, from r\^\^f ^^s the radical signifi- T T cation of D enter sis, a repetition of the Law, it being a repetition and explanation of the Law. In the Mishna itself we read: — ''Why is it called the Mishna? Because it is the second Law. For the first Law which Israel received on Sinai, is the written Law. But Moses received the Mishna from the mouth of the Almighty the second time, and it is the oral Law. It is called Mishna because it is second to the first Law. " It is certain that the Mosaic origin of the Mishna is a fable. It is simply a collection of the opinions and legal decisions of the ancient Rabbis. Chief among those who collected the data of the Mishna, was Rabbi Jehuda Hak- kadosh, or the Holy, bom about the middle of the second century. The Mishna summed up all previous rabbinical labors, and moulded all the subsequent philosophy and theology of Judaism. Rabbinic interpretation is called by the generic term of 2^''n*IO Midrash from ^'^1, to enquire. These Midrashim are of two kinds, the Haggadah, ni^H T T - from n;|j, to narrate, was a free exposition, inclining to ~T allegory and mysticism, and generally aimed to console the saddened spirit. This was preferred by the Jews in the dreadful calamities which befell them. The other species is r{^hr\f Halakah, from Tj^n ^o proceed. This interpre- tation keeps more strictly to the traditional acceptation of the Law. "These traditional ordinances, as already stated, bear the general name of the Halakah, as indicating alike the way in which the fathers had walked, and that which their chil- 796 JEWISH INTERPRETATION dren were bound to follow. These Halakoth were either simply the laws laid down in Scripture ; or derived from it, or traced to it by some ingenious and artificial method of exegesis; or added to it, by way of amplification and for safety's sake ; or finally, legalized customs. They provided for every possible and impossible case, entered into every detail of private, family, and public life ; and with iron logic, unbending rigor, and most minute analysis pursued and dominated man, turn whither he might, laying on him a yoke which was truly unbearable. The return which they offered was the pleasure and distinction of knowledge, the acquisi- tion of righteousness, and the final attainment of rewards. The Halakah indicated with the most minute and pain- ful punctiliousness every legal ordinance as to outward observances, and it explained every bearing of the Law of Moses. Altogether, the Mishna comprises six ''Orders" (Sedarim), each devoted to a special class of subjects. The first * 'Order" (Zeraini, "seeds") begins with the ordinances concerning "benedictions," or the time, mode, manner and character of the prayers prescribed. It then goes on to detail what may be called the religio-agrarian laws (such as tithing. Sabbatical years, first fruits, etc.). The second "Order" (Moed, "festive time") discusses all connected with the Sab- bath observance and the other festivals. The third "Order" {Nashim, "women") treats of all that concerns betrothal, marriage and divorce, but also includes a tractate on the Nasirate. The fourth "Order" {{Nezikim, "damages") con- tains the civil and criminal law. Characteristically, it includes all the ordinances concerning idol-worship (in the tractate Ahodah Zarah) and ^'the sayings of the Fathers" {Ahoth). The fifth "Order" (Kodashim, "holy things") treats of the various classes of sacrifices, offerings, and things dedicated to God, and of all questions which can be grouped under "sacred things" (such as the redemption, exchange, or alienation of what had been dedicated to God.) It also includes the laws concerning the daily morning and evening service (Tamid), and a description of the structure and arrangements of the Temple (Middoth, the ''measure- JEWISH INTERPRETATION 797 ments"). Finally, the sixth "Order" (Toharoth, "clean- nesses") gives every ordinance connected with the questions of "clean and unclean," alike as regards human beings, animals, and inanimate things. These "Orders" are divided into tractates (Massikioth, Massekttyoth, "textures, webs"), of which there are sixty- three (or else sixty-two) in all. These tractates are again subdivided into chapters, {Perakim) — in all 525, which severally consist of a certain number of verses, or Misknas (Mishnayoth, in all 4, 187). The language is Hebrew, though of course not that of the Old Testament. The words ren- dered necessary by the new circumstances are chiefly derived from the Greek, the Syriac, and the Latin, with Hebrew terminations. But all connected with social intercourse, or ordinary life (such as contracts) , is written, not in Hebrew, but in Aramaean, as the language of the people. But the traditional law embodied other materials than the Halakoth collected in the Mishna. Some that had not been recorded there, found a place in the works of certain Rabbis, or were derived from their schools. These are called Boraithas — that is, traditions external to the Mishna. Finally, there were "additions" (or Tosephtoth), dating after the completion of the Mishna, but probably not later than the third century of our era. Such additions are added to fifty-two out of the sixty -three Mishnic tractates. When speaking of the Halakah as distinguished from the Haggadah, we must not, however, suppose that the latter could be entirely separated from it. In point of fact, one whole tractate in the M^'^/^na (Aboth : The Sayings of the "Fa- thers") is entirely Haggadah] a second {Middoth\ the "Measurements of the Temple") has Halakah in only four- teen places; while in the rest of the tractates Haggadah occurs in not fewer than two hundred and seven places. Only thirteen out of the sixty-three tractates of the Mishna are entirely free from Haggadah. In course of time the discussions, illustrations, explana- tions, and additions to which the Mishna gave rise, whether in]^its application, or in the Academies of the Rabbis, were authoritatively collected and edited in what are known as 798 JEWISH INTERPRETATION the two Talmuds or Gemaras. If we imagine something combining law reports and notes of a theological debating club — all thoroughly Oriental, full of digressions, anecdotes, quaint sayings, fancies, and legends, and too often of what, from its profanity, superstition, and even obscenity, could scarcely be quoted, we may form some general idea of what the Talmud is. The oldest of these two Talmuds dates from about the close of the fourth century of our era. It is the product of the Palestinian Academies, and hence called the Jerusalem Talmud. The second is about a century younger, and the outcome of the Babylonian schools, hence called the Babylon (afterwards also ' 'our") Talmud. We do not possess either of these works complete. The most defective is the Jerusalem Talmud, which is also much briefer, and contains far fewer discussions than that of Babylon. The Babylon Talmud, which in its present form extends over thirty-six out of the sixty-three tractates of the Mishna, is about ten or eleven times the size of the Mishna, and more than four times that of the Jerusalem Talmud. It occupies (in our editions) , with marginal commentations, 2,947 folio leaves (pages a and b). Both Talmuds are written in Aramsean; the one in its western the other in its eastern dialect, and in both the Mishna is discussed seriatim, and clause by clause. Opposed to the Talmudists were the Karaites, a sect formed in the seventh or eighth century. They rejected the oral traditions of the Talmud, and while seeking the literal sense, rejected the literalism of the Talmudists. The EssENEs and the Alexandrian Jews adopted a purely mystical interpretation of the Scripture. We may judge of the system of the Alexandrians from their represen- tative Philo. According to him, although at times the literal sense must be developed for rude minds incapable of higher wisdom, the real sense of the Scripture was the occult understanding of the symbols which were contained in the letter. Thus Abraham is the symbol of the learning of vir- tue ; Isaac, of the acquisition of virtue ; Jacob, of its exercise. Adam, is a symbol of man in his rude state ; Cain, of selfish- ness ; Noah, of justice ; Sara, of womanly virtue ; Rebecca, of wisdom; Egypt, is a symbol of the body; the dove, of the JEWISH INTERPRETATION 799 divine wisdom, etc. Philo compares the literal sense to the body; the allegorical, to the soul, and in many places rejects entirely the literal sense. His work is worthless in exegesis. The Cabalists surpassed Philo in mystic jugglery. The Cabalists derive their name from 72p, to receive, since they fable that their system was secretly delivered to the elders on Sinai. Of the Cabalistic theosophy, we shall say nothing. We shall only briefly indicate some of their artifices, by which they find foundation for their vain theories and beliefs. The first artifice is called Gematria, in which occult senses are drawn from the text, by the numerical value of the letters. For example, the first verse of Genesis and the last verse of the Hebrew Bible, II. Chron. XXXVI. 23. contain six {«^* The letter J.^ is the first letter of H'p^^, a thou- sand; therefore, the world will endure six thousand years. The first two words of Genesis ^^^ n''C^'^^^3 ^7 ^^^ ^^- T T • •• : merical value of the letters, make 1,116; the same number, results from the numerical value of the phrase ^^^^^J HJti^'n T: • TT - ^■^•^2, "in the beginning of the year it was created'': therefore, the world was created at the autumnal equinox, which is the beginning of the Jewish year. By another artifice, they accept the several letters of a word for signs of complete words, and thus build a sentence from the letters of one word. For example the first word of Genesis n^ti^^^'*)D ^^ ^7 "^^i^ method made to signify the sen- tence: 3 = i<^3, he created, *^ = t;*'r5^- the firmament, ^ = Y'l^?, the earth, ^ = U^'Q'^, the heavens, •) = Q\ the sea, n = Dinn the abyss: he (God) created the firmament, the earth, the heavens, the sea and the abyss. Some Christians have resorted to Cabalistic methods to find the mystery of the Trinity in the same term : D = |j)^ the Son, *) = YVH, ^^e Spirit, ^ = 3^, the Father, ^ - T\vh^f three, ^ = ^^r\^ unity, n = HDn, perfect; the 800 JEWISH INTERPRETATION Son, the Spirit, and the Father, the threefold perfect unity. By adopting just the reverse, from the initial letters of riD^'DuS'n 1^^"n^i7'' ^r2 who shall lead us to Heaven? They T -T -. T V-:- • formed H'P^IO, the rabbinic form of H/ID/ circumcision. T • T The third artifice, called Themurah from ^^ "^^ change, is founded in a metathesis of the letters. This may be wrought in various ways. i. — The trans- position may be wrought of the letters themselves of any word, so that it may change its signification. Thus the '^D^bD, my angel, of Exod. XXIII. 23, by the Themurah becomes ^^^i^O Michael, the name of the angel. The second species of the Themurah consists in a substitu- tion of letters, and may be wrought in two ways. It is C^DH^^/ where the last letter of the alphabet is substituted for the first letter, f^ for ^ ; the second last letter for the second, (^' for ^^ hence its name t;!^"2"ini^- The second species is called Q^^^, and differs from the preceding only in that they divide the alphabet in two equal halves, and substitute the first letter of the second half, ^^ for the first letter of the first half, ^, and so through both halves. Some believe that the Masoretic text has suffered an interpolation from the Cabalists in Jer. XXV. 26, and LI. 41, where we read No such kingdom is known in history. Jerome informs us that we should read by Athbasch 7 2^^ ^^^ ^^ believes that Jeremiah with design concealed the real name, leaving it to the Cabalists to interpret. It is far more probable, that if 722 should be read there, that the text has been cor- rupted from 72D to Tl^^ by the Cabalists. The most famous Cabalistic treatise is the Book of Sohar, i. e. the Book of Splendor. Though the Cabalists assign its origin to the second century, it is most probably not more ancient than the thirteenth century. Though purporting to explain the Law, it is simply a Cabalistic treatise on their occult doctrines concerning God, the Messiah, the Angels, etc. Two minor works of similar argument are the Books Bahir and Jezira. JEWISH INTERPRETATION 801 After the eleventh century of our era a new school of Scriptural interpretation arose among the Jews. The doc- tors of Judaism began to discard the old fables, and to seek the literal sense of the Scripture. Of course, as they refused to recognize Christ as the Messiah, they could not come at the full sense of the Old Testament. But still their labors are useful to us in giving us a fuller knowledge of the Hebrew tongue. The following are the most famous among these late Talmudists : Rabbi Salomon Ben Isaac, frequently called Jarchi, or Rashi, was bom at Troyes in Champagne in 1040. He com- mented the entire Scripture and the Talmud. He obtained great fame among the Jews, and the first Hebrew book ever printed was his commentary on the Pentateuch. His hatred of Christianity is evident in many places in his works. His style is obscure, and he has received many of the fables of the early Talmudists. He died in 1 105. Rabbi Abraham Ben Meir ben Ezra, commonly called Abenezra, was born at Toledo, in Spain, in 1093. He dis- tinguished himself in philosophy, astronomy, medicine, poetry, mathematics, the languages and exegesis. He trav- eled much, visited the principal cities of Europe, Egypt, and other parts of the East. He died in 1167, on his way from Rhodes to Rome. He is one of the greatest of the Talmudists. He com- mented the entire Old Testament except Chronicles. In this commentary he seeks the literal sense of the text, and breaks away from the old fables. He. was infected with a certain rationalistic turn of mind, and was most inconstant in his opinions. Though his commentary on the Scriptures is free from the fables of the Cabalists, in other works he indulges his genius in this species of jugglery. He was endowed with prodigious memory, which made him easy master of the Jewish thought of his time. Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, commonly called Maimoni- des, and sometimes Rambam, was bom at Cordova, in Spain, in 1 1 35.. Cordova was at that time a Mussulman strong- hold, and the vernacular tongue of Maimonides was Arabic. He is styled Rabbi Abram, the last of the sages as regards (51)H.S. 802 JEWISH INTERPRETATION time, and the first in worth. His life is enveloped in a web of fable. The few certain data attainable are, that he studied medicine, and made such progress in it, that he was made court physician to Saladin of Eg>-pt. He was versed in the Arabic philosophy, and in mathematics, but his greatest claim to fame, is founded on his Talmudic labors. He wrote partly in Hebrew and partly in Arabic. His greatest work is his "Mishnah Thorah," a systematic codification of the whole Jewish Law, as found in the Bible, the Mishnah, the Tal- mud, and minor books. The Jews have held this book in great esteem, and declare that by it Maimonides merits a place next to Moses the Lawgiver. It remains a great source of rabbinic learning, even to this day. Some Jews have even neglected the Talmud, to concentrate their study on Rambam. It forms a sort of tournament for all later Talmudists, and to explain a difficult "Rambam," is a test of learning with the Talmudists. A MS. of the work is in the library of Cambridge. Various editions have been printed of it ; the last and most complete is that of Leipsic in 1862. The most important of Maimonides' other works is the "Dalalatu' 1-Hkirin" in Arabic; in Hebrew Qi^^n^H nilDf ' 'The Guide of the Perplexed. ' ' ' x - .- This work essays to explain the difficult passages of the Bible. Maimonides was conversant with Aristotle, and made much use of his philosophy in this work. The work is a curious medley of symbolism, mysticism, Greek philosophy and rationalism. Maimonides left several other works, which merit no special mention here. He died at Cairo in 1204. The next great Talmudist of the Middle Ages is Rabbi David Kimchi, sometimes called Radak. He was bom at Narbonne after 11 55, and died probably in the same city about 1235. His father Rabbi Yoseph, or his grandfather Rabbi Isaac (Yishak) Ibn Kimchi, had immigrated into Provence from Spain, whence Arab fanaticism had com- pelled the Jews to flee. In Provence the family* took the Gentile surname of Petit. Rabbi David lost his father (who JEWISH INTERPRETATION 803 was himself a grammarian, Bible commentator, and poet of no mean order) very early ; but his elder and only brother, Rabbi Mosheh (a fair scholar, but famous chiefly through his younger brother) , was his principal oral teacher. The valu- able literary treasures of his father, however, falling into his hands, Radak grew strong by studying them, and, as we know, eclipsed them completely, although he lacked his father's originality. But, if Rabbi David lacked original- ity, he had abundance of instinct for finding out the best in the works of his predecessors, and abundance of genius for digesting and assimilating it till it became his own in a peculiar way. Although preceded by Hayyuj, Ibn Jankh, and others, and succeeded by Abraham de Balmes, Elias Levita, and others, Kimchi has maintained the position of the greatest Jewish grammarian and lexicographer. And, although much inferior as a Biblical scholar and Talmudist to Rashi, and as a critic and philosopher to Abraham Ibn Ezra, he has outstripped both in the eyes, not only of the Christians, but to some extent even of the Jews, and thus reigned supreme for more than five hundred years, as a com- mentator on the Bible. From the fact that he was master of the Targums and Haggadoth as few before or after him, that he had Hebrew, Arabic and Greek philosophy at his fingers' ends, and that he was endowed with a truly poetical soul, the mystery is explained how the merely reproductive scholar could cause original scholars of the highest eminence, but who were one-sided, to be all but forgotten. Not only have his works, in whatever field they are to be found, been printed and reprinted, but the most important of them are translated into Latin, into Judseo-German, and even into English. Kimchi has commented all the Old Testament, except the Pentateuch, and of that he commented the greater part of Genesis. His most valuable contribution to Hebrew liter- ature is his Grammar and Lexicon. All subsequent Hebrew lexicographers have drawn from his Q'^t^^''^^* "^DD ^^e Book T T V •• of Roots. Of course comparative philology has amplified these data, but it has by no means superseded the work of this Rabbi. He died at Narbonne about 1235. 804 JEWISH INTERPRETATION Isaac ben Juda Abarbanel, or Abravanel, was born at Lisbon in 1437. His family was opulent, and he received a liberal education. He entered the political career, and became Minister of Finance to Alphonsus V. of Portugal, and afterw^ards to Ferdinand the Catholic of Castile. A decree of expulsion in 1492 forced him to leave Spain, and he withdrew to Naples, where he occupied an eminent post at the Court of Ferdinand I. and his successor Alphonsus 11. At the French invasion, he fled to Sicily, and finally fixed his domicile at Venice, where he died in 1 508. During his wanderings, he composed numerous works treating of Holy Scripture. The principal works are Com- mentaries on Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Kings, on the other four books of the Law, on Daniel, Isaiah, on the other Prophets, and two Dissertations on the Messiah. He has also other treatises on special passages of Holy Scripture. Richard Simon regards him as the most useful of the Rabbis, and makes him equal in Hebrew to Cicero in Latin. This is excessive praise. Like all his class, he hated the Chris- tians, and gives evidence of this hatred in his use of Scrip- ture. At times he is more of a rhetorician than an exegete. Long digressions are often found in his works, made up chiefly of dry, stupid subtilities, and attacks on Christianity. Other Jewish doctors of minor note are R. Levi ben Ger- son, R. Elias Levita, R. Salomon ben Melech, R. Moses Nachmanides, called Ramban, R. Chajim, R. Jacob ben Reuben, R. Aaron ben Joseph, R. Aaron ben Elia, R. Abra- ham de Balmes ben Meir, R. Abraham Halevi, and Abra- ham Usque. The End of the General Introduction. Index of Subjects Abarbanel - - - - - - 804 Abgarus' letter to Jesus 615-616 Accentuation of Scripture 646 Accommodated Sense - 793-794 .-Egidius on O. T. Canon - 492 ^Ifric -------772 "Aetemus lUe" - - -759-761 African Councils on N. T. Canon ------598 Albam ------- 800 Albertus Magnus on O. T. Canon - . _ - 502-503 Alcuin's Canon . - - 481-485 Alexander of Alex, on O. T. Canon - - - - - - 372 Alexandrian Canon - 259-263 Alexandrian Codex A - - 674 Allen, Card. - - 762-763,779 Alter ---_--- 656 Alterations in Manuscripts 644 Ambrose on Inspiration 86-87 Ambrose, St. on N.T. Canon 594 Amiatinus Codex - - 734-737 Ammonius ------ 645 Analogy of Faith - - - 785 Andrada on Decree of Trent - - _ . 748-749 Anglican Views on Inspira- tion ------ 16-19 Anglo-Saxon Version 768-772 Anonymus Writer of Twelfth Century ----- 492 Antilegomena - - - - - 590 Antitype - - - - - - 789 Antoninus on O. T. Canon 513 Apocalypse - - - - 583-584 Apocalypse of Moses - - 615 Apocrypha and N. T. 559-560 (805 Apocrypha quoted by Fathers - - - . 358-360 Apocryphal Books - - 606-624 Apostolic Constitutions - 259 Apostolic Constitutions on O. T. Canon - 276; 336-340 Aquila, Version of - - 689-691 Arabic Version - - -725-726 Archaeology - - - - - 781 Archelaus on Canon of O. T. 330 Argenteus Codex - - - 721 Armenian Canon - - - - 368 Armenian Version - -722-725 Arnold on Inspiration - - 14 Assumption of Moses - 61 4-6 1 5 Athanasius on Inspiration - 86 Athanasius on N. T. Canon 592 Athanasius on Canon of O. T. - - - - -368-380 Athbash ------ 800 Athenagoras on Inspiration 83 Athenagoras on O. T. Canon 273 Athia -7----- 63 5 Augustine's Canon of O. T. ------- 362-366 Augustine's Canon of Scrip- ture 87-88 Augustine on Interpretation of Scripture - - - - 783 Authentic Interpretation - 784 Author, God the, of Scrip- ture - - - 194, 196, 198 Authorization of Vulgate - 739 Authorship of Holy Scrip- ture ----- 74-76 Autographs of Scripture ------- 649-650 ) 806 INDEX OF SUBJECTS Baba Bathra ----- 249 Bannez on Inspiration 89-90 Barnabas' Epistle on Canon ofN. T. - - - - - 535 Barnabas' Epistle - -621-622 Bartolo, di, on Inspiration - 140-142 Bashmuric Versions - - 712-718 Basilides on Canon of N. T. ------- 550-551 Basil on Inspiration - - 85-86 Bede on O. T. Canon - 485-487 Bellamiine on Canon of O. T - - - - - 522-523 Bellarmine on Inspiration - 98 Bellarmine's Opinion of Lessius - - - - 97-98 Bengel ------- 655 Bentley - - - - -650,655 Beza's Codex D. - - - 675-677 Beza's Codex, Specimen - 648 Billot on Inspiration - 187-189 Birch ------_ 656 Bishops' Bible - - - - 778 Bobbio, Codex of - - 703-704 Bohairic Version - - 712,718 Bohairic Version's Canon of N. T. 593 Bohemian Versions of Scrip- tiu-e -----_ 768 Bonaventure on O.T. Canon 503 Bonfrere on Inspiration 103-105 Books of Scripture Lost 624-625 Boraithas ------ 7^7 Bossuet on Canon of Trent ------- 525-526 Bossuet on Canon of N. T. - - - - - - - 605-606 Bowne on Inspiration - - 81 "Breeches" Bible - - - 778 Bukentop ---... y(f^ Burnet on Inspiration - - 13 Buxtorf --_-__ 635 Cabalists ----__ ^gg Cajetan, Card., on N. T. Canon - - - - 601-604 Cajetan, Card., on O. T. Canon _ - . _ 514-515 Calvinist Formulas of In- spiration ----- 34 Calvin 's Theory of Inspira- tion ------ 34 Canon of Codex Toletanus - 485 Canon of Jews - 241 , 242-246 Canon of N. T. - - - _ 529 Canon of N.T. at Beginning of Third Century - - 584 Canon of N. T. of Council of Trent - - - 603-605 Canon of Old Testament ------- 240-528 Canon of Scripture Defined - 239 Canon of Scripture of Coun- cil of Trent - - 239-240 Canon of Syro-Hexaplar Text ------ 466 Canons of the Apostles 619-621 Canon of the Church (O. T.) - - - - - 263-528 Canon of Trent - - - - 113 Canus, Melchior, on Inspira- tion ----- 88-89 Carolinus Codex - - - - 738 Cassiodorus on Canon of O. T. ----- 467 Causes of Variants - - 651-652 Cavensis Codex - - - - 485 Challoner's Revision - - 779 Chapters of Bible - - - 645 Chauvin on Inspiration 76-80 Chemnitz ------ 365 Chrismann on Inspiration - 112 Church of Alexandria on N. T. Canon - - - - - 591 Clemens Alex, on N. T. Canon - _ - - 578-580 Clement VIII. - - - 762-764 Clement of Alexandria on Canon of O. T. - 279-293 Clement of x\lexandria on Inspiration - - _ - g^ Clement of Rome on Inspira- tion ------ 82 Clement of Rome on N. T. Canon - - - - 539-550 Clement of Rome on Canon of O. T. - - - - 267-269 Clementine Edition - - 762-764 Codex Alexandrinus A - - 674 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 807 Codex Amiatinus - 734-737 Codices R. . . _ - 679-680 Codex Am iatintis Cano"" '^f /<8t Codices T - - fiRn Codex Argenteus - - - - 721 \^K/\J~l\^\^^ JL , •■ — — — Codices, Uncial - - - 000 - 663-686 Codex Augiensis F - - - 685 Collections of Canons - - 491 Codex Barberini Y - - - 681 Concordances of Scripture - 645 Codex Basiliensis E. - - 677 Consciousness of Inspiration 4 Codex Beratinus c^ - - - 684 Consequent Inspiration 104-105 Codex Bezae D. - 675-677 Constitutions of the Codex Blenheimius Y 683-684 Apostles - 619-621 Codex Boemianus G. - - 685 Context of Scripture - - 782 Codex Boreeli F. - - - - 677 Coptic Versions - - 711-718 Codex Campianus M. - - 679 Correction of Vulgate - - 754 Codex Cavensis - - - - 738 Correction of Vulgate or- Codex Claromontanus D. - 685 dered by Pius X. - : 765 Codex Coislin. I. F^ - - - 677 Correctoria of Vulgate 732-734 Codex Cyprius K - - 678 Correctors - - - - - - 664 Codex Dublinensis Z - - 681 Cosius on Canon - - - - 265 Codex Ephraemi C. - - 673-674 Council in Trullo - 404-405 Codex Forojulianus - - - 738 Council of Florence - 509-510 Codex Fuldensis - 737-738 Council of Hippo on O . T. Codex Harleian. H - - - 677 Canon _ _ - - 361-362 Codex Laudianus E - - - 684 Council of Jassy on . T. Codex Monacensis X - - 681 Canon - - . - - 480 Codex Mosquensis V. - - 681 Council of Laodicea - - - 404 Codex Mutinensis H. - - 685 Council of Laodicea on N. T, 593 Codex Nanianus U. - - - 680 Council of Trent on Holy Codex N'> - - - - - - 679 Scripture - - - 70-71 Codex of Bobbio - 703-704 Council of Trent on 0, . T. Codex Porphyrianus P. - - 685 Canon _ _ _ - 516-522 Codex Petrop. U - - 683 Council of Trent on Canon Codex Purpureus N. - - 679 of N. T. - - - - 603-605 Codex Regius L. - 678-679 Cotmcil of Carthage on Codex Rossanensis S - - 683 0. T. Canon - - -361-362 Codex Sangallensis A - - 682 Coverdale's Bible - - - - 778 Codex Sangermanensis E - 685 Cozza's Edition of Codex B. 667 Codex Sinaiticus ^ - 667-673 Cozza-Luzi's, Edition of Codex Toletanus - - - - 485 Codex B. - - - - 667 Codex Vaticanus S. - - - 680 Cyprian on O. T. Canon 343-355 Codex Vaticanus B - 664-668 Cranmer on the Catholic Codex Wolfii A - - - 677-678 Use of Scripture 775-776 Codex Wolfii B - - - 677-678 Cranmer' s Bible - - - - 778 Codex Zacynthus 2 - - 683 Crets on Inspiration 108-110 CodexI.Tisch.il. - - - 678 Criterion, the Catholic, of Codex 0. Tisch. - - - - 682 Scripture _ - - 39-41 Codex P. (Guelph. A.) - - 679 Criterion of Inspiration Criticism, Textual 6-41 - 654 710— 711 Codex Q. (Guelph. B.) - - 679 Cureton's Syriac - - Codex r (Tisch. IV.) 681-682 Cyril of Jerusalem on N. T. Codex y^ - - - - - - 684 /-A v^anon _ _ _ - _ f r\'> Codex A (Tisch. III.) - - 683 Cyril of Jerusalem on O. 592 T. Codices of Vetus Itala 703-705 Canon - - - - 380-385 808 INDEX OF SUBJECTS Cyril Lucar on O. T. Canon 479-480 Damasus ------ 701 Dates of N. T. Books - - 531 Davidson - - - 265,3^00-301 Decree of Trent on Interpre- tation of Scripture - 783 Decree of Trent - -739-754 Decree of Vatican Council on Interpretation of Scripture - - - - 784 Denis of Chartreux on O. T. Canon ----- 514 De Rossi ------ 635 Deuterocanonical Books 465-466 Deutcrocanonical Books - 243 Deuterocanonical Books cited by N , T . Writers 265-267 "Dicta Aliorum" - - 203-204 Didiot 142 Diognetus, Epistle to - - 558 Dionysius the Areopagite on O. T. Canon - - 270-272 Dionysius the Great on Apocalypse - - 589-590 Dionysius the Great on O. T. Canon - - 335-336 Dionysius the Little on Canon of O. T. - - - 467 "Doctrina Addai" - - - 557 Doctrine of the Apostles 619-621 Dods on Inspiration 19-32, 81 Dogmatic Theology - - - 781 Driver on Inspiration - 15-16 D'Hulst, Msgr. on Inspira- tion ----- 143-149 Dupin, Abbe on Canon of Trent ------ 526 Durand -------- 182 Dutch Versions of Scripture 768 Eadfrid ------ 771 Ecclesiasticus - - - - - 253 Edesius ----- 718-720 Egyptian Versions - -711 -7 18 Elzevir Editions - - - - 653 English Versions of Scrip- ture ----- 766-779 Enneapla ------ 693 Epiphanius on N. T. Canon 592 Epiphanius on O. T. Canon ------- 385-394 Epistle of Barnabas on Canon of O. T. - - - 269 Erasmus' Greek Testament ------- 652-653 Erasmus on N. T. Canon - 600-601 Erasmus on O. T. Canon - 514 Errors in Manuscripts - - 650 Errors of the Vulgate - 751-754 Essenes - _ _ . - 798-799 Estius on Canon of N. T. - 533 Estius on Inspiration - - 96 Ethiopian Canon - - - 368 Ethiopic Version - - 718-720 Eugene, Bishop of Toledo, on O. T. Canon - - - 477 Eugene IV. on N. T. Canon 600 Eusebius' Canon of N. T 590-591 Eusebius gives Origen's Views ------258 Extent of Inspiration - 198-238 Ezra ------ 246-255 Ezra, III Book of - - 609-610 Ezra, IVBookof 249-251, 610-611 Folk-lore ----- 173-174 Families of Codices - 657-662 Fayoumian Version - 712-718 Flavius Josephus' Canon ------- 257-259 Frumentius - . - - 718-720 Gasser (Bishop) on Inter- pretation - - - - - 785 Gasser on Council of Trent - 113 Gaul, Canon of Church of ------- 571-575 Gelasius' Canon of N. T. - 598 Gelasius, Decree of - 366-367 Georgian Version - - - 725 Gerhard on Inspiration - - 35 German Versions of Scrip- ture ------ 768 Gematria ------ 799 Geneva Bible - - - - - 778 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 809 Gislebert ----- 491-492 Glaire (Abbe) on the Canon 255 Gothic Version - - - - 720 Greek Text - - - - 642-698 Green on WycHf's Version - 777 Greg, of Nyssa on Inspira- tion ------ 86 Greg. Nanz. on N. T Canon 592 Greg. Nanz. on O. T. Canon ------- 395-404 Gregory XIII. - - - 756-757 Gregory the Great on O. T. Canon - - - _ 468-474 Griesbach - - . _ 656-657 Haftara ------242 Haggadah _ - _ - 795-798 Halakah - - _ - _ 795-798 Hamel on Inspiration - 91-97 Hampole ------ 774 Harkeleian Version - - 709-710 Healy's (Bishop) Answer to Newman - - - 128-140 Hebrews, Epistle to - - 581-582 Hebrews, Gospel of - - - 621 Hebrew Text - - - - - 625 Hebrew Text, Editions of - 634 Hebrew Text not Corrupted - - - - - - - 641-642 Hen ten's Revision - - - 755 Henoch, Book of 358, 613-614 Hermas - - - _ _ 622-623 Hesychius ------652 Hexapla of Origen - - 693-695 Hilary on O. T. Canon 405-410 Hilary of Poitiers on N. T. Canon ----- 594 Hippolyte on N. T. Canon ------- 560-561 Hippolyte on O. T. Canon - ------ 273-276 Historical Method - - 230-238 Historical Sense - - 786-787 History and Inspiration 230-238 Holden's Theory - - 111-112 Holkot, Robt. on O. T. Canon - - - - 503-504 Holzhey on Inspiration 177-178 Homoeotelcuton - - - - 651 Homologoumena - - - - 590 Honor ius of Autun - - - 493 Hooker on Inspiration - - 12 Hopfl ------- 151 Home - - - - - - - 522 Hort ------- 663 Houbigant - - - - 635-636 Hug -------- 657 Hugh of St. Cams - 506-507, 645 Hugh of St. Victor on O. T. Canon _ - - _ 496-497 Hummelauer, von - - 178-182 532 Ignatius (Martyr), Epistles of ------ - Ignatius (Martyr), on Canon ofN. T. 1 - - -551-553 Ildephonsus of Toledo on O. T. Canon - - - 476-477 Innocent I, Canon of - - 367 Innocent I, Canon of N, T. of ------- 598 Inspiration, Criterion of 6-41 Inspiration Defined - 71-73 Inspiration, Definition of - 2 Inspiration Drawn from Bible Alone - - - 81-82 Inspiration, Franz el in's View of - - - - - 4 Inspiration, how Evidenced 5 Inspiration incompatible with Error - - - - 63 Inspiration, Private - 37-39 Inspiration, whether Known to Writer ----- 3 Inspired Writings, Existence of ------ - I Interpretation of Scripture 779 Irenseus on Canon of N. T. 530 Irenaeus on Inspiration 83-85 Irenaeus on N. T. Canon Irenasus on O. T. Canon Isaiah, Ascension of - Isidore of Seville on O Canon _ - - Itala, Vetus - - - 571-575 276-279 - 615 T. 474-476 698-701 Italian Versions of Scripture 768 Jablonski - 635 Jason of Cyrene - - - - 3 Jahn's Theory of Inspiration 105 810 INDEX OF SUBJECTS Jaugey ------- 149 Jerome and Rufinus - 434-435 Jerome's Controversy with Augustine - - - 435-440 Jerome, Life of - - - 413-441 Jerome on Canon of O. T. ------- 441-465 Jerome on Inspiration - - 87 Jerome's Canon of N. T. 595-598 Jerome's Influence - - - 490 Jerome's "Law of History" ------- 183-186 Jerome's Revision of Vetus Itala ------701 Jerome's Vulgate - - 726-732 Jesus' Letter to Abgarus - 616 Jewish Canon - - - 243-246 Jewish Interpretation - 795-804 John Beleth on O. T. Canon 494 John Chrysostom's Canon ofN. T. - - - - - 593 John Damascene on O. T. Canon ----- 477 John, Epistles of - - 582-583 John of Ragusa - - - - 504 John of Trevisa - - - - 774 John of Salisbury on N. T. Canon - - - - 599-600 John of Salisbury on O. T. Canon - - - - 500-501 Jowett on Inspiration 14-15 Jude, Epistle of - - - - 582 Jude's Use of the Apocrypha 614 Julius Africanus - _ - - 468 Julius Africanus on O. T. Canon ----- 294 Justin on Canon of N. T. 555-556 Justin (Martyr) on Inspira- tion ----- 82-83 Karaites ------798 Karkaphensian Version - 710 Kennicott - - _ - 636-637 Kimchi - - - _ - 802-803 King James' Bible - - - 778 Lachmann Lacome, P^rc Lagrange - - 658-659 - 166-167 146, 150-172 Latin Versions - - - 698-701 Lamy, Bernard, on Canon of Trent ------526 Lenormant on Inspiration ------- 114-115 Leo XIII. ----- 149-150 Leo XIII. on Holy Scripture ------- 41-69 Leontius of Byzantium on Canon of O. T. - - - 468 Lessius, Theory of, on In- spiration - - - 91-97 Letters of Blessed Virgin Mary _ - - _ 617-618 Literal Sense - - 786,790-793 Liturgy of St. Mark - 618-619 Liturgy of St. Matt. - 618-619 Liturgy of St. Peter - 618-619 Loisy on Inspiration - 175-176 Lost Books of Scripture 624-625 Lou vain, University of, on Inspiration - - - - 88 Lucian -------652 Lucifer of Cagliari on N. T. Canon - - . _ - 594 Lutherans' N. T. - - - 606 Luther on Inspiration - - 8-1 1 Maccabees, III Book of 612-613 Maccabees, IV Book of - - 613 Macedonian Dialect - - - 643 Mai (Card.) Edition of Co- dex B. ----- 666 Maimonides _ - - - 801-802 Maitland on Catholic Church ----- 768 Malachi ----- 256-257 Manasseh, Prayer of - - 612 Manning, Card, on Inspira- tion - - - 11-15, 72-74 Marcion on N. T. Canon 558-559 Marchini on Inspiration 99-100 Mariana on Decree of Trent ----- 742-744 Masorah ----- 630-633 Masorites ----- 630-633 Materials for Writing 643-644 Matthaei ----- 655-656 Matthew's Bible - - 777-778 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 811 Mechanical Theory of In- spiration ----- 193 MeUton on O. T. Canon 355-358 Memphitic Version - 712-718 Mesrob - - - - - - - 722 Metaphorical Sense - 787-788 M^thode Historique 146, 150-172 Methodius on O. T. Canon ------- 330-335 Michaelis, John David, on Inspiration - - - 35-36 Midrash ----- 795-798 Mill - - - - 650,654-655 Milner on Inspiration - 37-38 Mishna _ - - - _ 795-798 Moldenhawer - - - - - 656 More, Sir Thomas, on Wyclif 775 Moses, Apocalypse of - - 615 Moses, Assumption of - 614-615 Muratori's Canon - - 562-571 Murillo ------- 186 Neckam Alex, on O. T. Canon ------ 503 Nehemiah's Collection - 253-254 Newman, Card, on Inspira- tion ----- 1 1 5-1 28 New Testament of Sects 605-606 Netter, Thos. ----- 504 Nicephortis on O. T. Canon ------- 477-478 Nicholas of Lyra - - 508-509 Nicolas I, Pope, on the O. T. Canon - - - 489-490 Nestorian Canon of O. T. - - - - - - - 467-468 Notker, Balbulus, on O. T. Canon - - - - 490—491 " Obeli " of Origen - - - 694 "Obiter Dicta" - - - - 128 Occam, Wm. - - _ 507-508 Octapla ------- 693 Origen's Hexapla - - 693-695 Origen on Canon of O. T. 293-330 Origen on Inspiration - - 85 Origen on N. T. Canon - 584-588 Onkelos, Targum of - 706-707 Ormulum, The - - - 769, 773 Ottobonianus Codex - - 738 Pagninus ------ 739 Palestinian Syriac - - - 711 Palimpsests - - - _ 644-645 Pamphilus (Martyr) - - - 695 Paper ------- 644 Papias on Canon of N. T. - 554 Parasha ------ 242 Parchment _ _ - - 643-644 "Pastor" on O. T. Canon - - - - - - - 269-270 Pastor of Hermas - - 622-623 Paul's Epistle to Laodiceans 621 Paul's Letters to Seneca - 618 Paul of Telia - - -709-710 Paul's witness to Inspira- tion ------ 6-7 Paulinus Codex - - - - 738 Persian Version - - - - 725 Pearson Defends Catholic Church ----- 766 Pesch -------190 Pesch on Inspiration - - 80 Pesch, Zanecchia - - - m Peshitto, Syriac - - - 708-709 Peter, II. Epistle of - - - 582 Peter Comestor on O. T. Canon - - _ - 494-495 Peter, Judgment of - 619-621 Peter of Blois _ - - - 4Q3 Peter of Cluny on O. T. Canon - - _ . 498-499 Peter of Riga on O. T. Canon ----- 492 Peter, St., on N. T. Canon - 533 Philaretes on O. T. Canon - 480-481 Philastrius of Brescia on N. T, Canon _ - - _ 594 Philoxenian Version - 709-710 Photius on O. T. Canon 478-479 Pirke Aboth - - - - - 249 Pius V. ------- 756 Pius X. ------ 172 Poly carp on N. T. Canon 536-539 Poly carp on O. T. Canon ------- 272-273 Polyglot Complutensian 652-653 Polyglot, Walton's - - - 654 Poncius on Decree of Trent 749 Plantin ------- 635 Prophetic Inspiration - 192-193 812 INDEX OF SUBJECTS Prat -------- 174 Protestant Canon - - - 528 Protestant Criterion of In- spiration - - - - 7-39 ' ' Providentissimus Deus ' ' - - 41-69 Psalms of Solomon - - - 612 Psalters ----- 701-702 Punctuation of Scripture - - - - - - - 646-649 Quotations from O. T. by N. T. Writers - - - - 264 Rabbi Solomon Ben Isaac - 801 Rationalistic Views of In- spiration - - - 11-19 Relative Element in Scrip- ture - - - - 175, i88 Rescripti Codices - - 644-645 Revelation - - - -194-195 Revelation distinguished from Inspiration 69 , 70 , 71, ^72, 73, 91, 92, 93, 95 Rhabanus Maurus on O. T. Canon _ - - - 488-489 Rheims-Douay Version - 779 Richard Simon - - - - 112 Robert Etienne - - - - 646 Rohling _ - - - . 113-114 Rudolph of Flavigny on O. T. Canon - - - - 498 Rufinus on N. T. Canon - 595 Rufinus on O. T. Canon 410-413 Rupert of Deutz on O. T. Canon - - - - 495-496 Russian Synod on O. T. Canon - - - - 480-481 Savi -------- 142 Schmid on Inspiration - 106-108 Scholz ----- - 657-658 Science and Inspiration 231-235 Science and Scripture - - 59 Semeria .-----142 Seneca, Paul's Letters to - 618 Sense of Scripture - - - 786 Sepulveda ------ 665 Septuagint - . - - 686-689 Septuagint Editions of - 696-698 Septuagint quoted by N. T. Writers - - - - 264-267 Sinaitic Codex - - - - 593 Sinaitic Codex ^ - - 667-673 Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest - 711 Sirleti ------ 755-756 Sixtine Edition of Vulgate ------- 757-761 Sixtus of Sienna on O. T. Canon - - - - 523-524 Sixtus V. - - - - - 757-761 Sixtus Senensis - - - - 243 Slavonic Version - - - - 725 Solomon, Psalms of - - - 612 Species of Literature - 1 90-1 91 Statianus Codex - - - - 738 Stephen Harding - - - 491 Stephen Langton - - - 645 Stichometry - - - - 646-649 Suarez on Inspiration - 98-99 Subjective Criterion of In- spiration - - 26-32, 36-37 Symmachus, Version of 691-692 Synagogue, the Great - 255-256 Syriac Canon ----- 368 Syriac Versions - - - 707-711 Syro-Hexaplar Text -709-710 Sahidic Version - - -712-718 Sahidic Version's Canon of N.T. ------ 593 St. Augustine's Canon of N. T. - - - - 598-599 Salmeron on Decree of Trent 746 Samaritan Codex - - 638-640 Sanday on Inspiration - 15-16 Sanders O. S. B. - - - - 175 Sorbonne, Censure of - 91-95 Talmud - - - - -795-798 Talmud on the Canon - - - - 249-250, 252-253 Targums ----- 705-707 Tatian's Canon of N.T. - - 557 Temple (Archbishop) on In- spiration - - - - 17-19 Tertullian on Canon of N. T. - - - - -575-578 Tertullian on O. T. Canon ------- 340-343 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 813 Tetrapla ------ 693 Textual Criticism - - - 654 Theodotion, Version of - - 692 Themurah ------ 800 Theodulf on O. T. Canon - 485 Theophilus of Antioch on N. T. - - - - - 561-562 Thomas of Aquin - - 504-506 Thomas of Harkel - -709-710 Thomas. St., on Inspiration ------- 195-196 Tischendorf - - - - 659-662 Toletanus Codex - - - - 485 Toleti ------ 762-763 Tostatus on O. T. Canon ------- 511-513 Tregelles ------ 662 •'Two Ways" - - -619-621 Tychsen ------ 656 Tyndale's Version - - 776-777 Type ------- 789 Typical Sense - - 788-790, 793 Ubaldi on Inspiration - 526-527 Ulphilas - - - - - - 721 Uncial Codices - - -663-686 Ussher -------654 Vallicellianus - - - - - 738 Valverde ----- 763-764 Van der Hooght - - 635-636 Variants, Causes of - - 651-652 Vaticanus Codex and N. T. 593 Vaticanus Codex - - - - 664 Vega on Decree of Trent 746-748 Verbal Inspiration 101-102, 107-108, 109, 206-229 Vercellone's Edition of Co- dex B - - - - 666-667 Verses in Scripture due to Robert Etienne - - 653 Vetus Itala . - - - 698-701 Vulgate, Authorization of - 739 Vulgate, Correction of - - 754 Vulgate, Errors of the - 751-754 Vulgate of Council of Trent ------- 739-754 Vulgate of Jerome - - 726-732 Walafrid Strabo on O. T. Canon ----- 489 Walton's Polyglot - - - 654 Wetstein ------ 655 Westcott ------ 663 Westminster Confession on Inspiration - - - 34-35 Whitby on Inspiration - 12-13 Williams on Inspiration - 15 Worthington Thos. - - - 779 Writing Materials - - 643-644 Wyclifs Version - - 766-777 Ximenes, Card. Canon O. T. 514 Zannecchia on Inspiration - - 91, iio-iii, 176-177 Zwinglius on Inspiration 33-34