eS^75. 37 J8f,
C 5 SEM MSM
^
s^
-p
>
A GENERAL AND CRITICAL
INTRODUCTION
TO THE STUDY OF
HOLY SCRIPTURE
Copyright, 1897,
BY
A. E. Breen.
A GENERAL AND CRITICAL
INTRODUCTION f^:^ Sf °'
TO THE STUDY OF
Holy Scripture
BY
A. E. BREEN, D. D.
Jldaa ypa(l>r) OeoTTvevaro^ kuI Q)(f>€XifjLO^ Trpo? SiSaa-KaXiav^
7r/309 €\€<y)(^ov, TT/Jo? iiravopOcocriv, tt/oo? vaiSeiav rrfv iv
SiKaioavvT). "\va aprio^ y 6 rov deov avOpwirofi,
irpo^ irav epyov ayaObv i^r]pria-/x€PO<i.
ROCHESTER, N. Y.
THE JOHN P. SMITH PRINTING HOUSE
1897
(,}5<\n\<>
,yfQ^ t>^^r>^/-
fi^lU.
/^w-ygV/A^
y^^ ^/^ .^1^ . yr^^/. ^^A ^. ^^-f^.
r^jy, <Pc.A ^. ^^.
LOAN STACK
AUTHOR'S PREFACE.
No man can speak much of himself or his own achievement
without being vain. Therefore, I shall be brief. My justifi-
cation for adding one more to the vast number of the world's
books, is the need of an English Introduction to Holy Scrip-
ture. Many treatises on this subject exist in the languages of
Europe, and in the Latin tongue ; but when, in 1893, I was
appointed to teach Holy Scripture in St. Bernard's Seminary,
I was unable to find in the English language a work of this
nature to place in the hands of our students. While the
English language surpasses every other known language of the
world in the vastness and excellence of its literary resources, it
is deficient in scriptural science.
The works on Scriptural Introduction that we have in
English are chiefly of protestant authors, and are inaccurate,
filled with partisan hatred of Catholicity, and they have not
kept pace with the progress of thought of this last half
century.
Thereupon, I conceived the design of writing my book,
and it is the result of four years* unremitting toil.
In this work, my aspirations have been very high. How
far the achievement has come short of the aspirations, I leave
to be decided by the judgment of the public.
I have tried to write justly, not having in mind to advance
any cause save the cause of truth.
A chief feature of the present work is the arrangement of
the traditional data favoring the deuterocanonical books in
parallel columns with the scriptural passages therein quoted.
This is the result of great labor, but I believe that the enhance-
ment of the evidential value of such data thus arranged repays
such labor.
Another feature of the work, which, I hope, will be grate-
ful to students, is the wide margins of the pages, which render
it possible to write thereon things of special importance heard
from the teacher.
It would fill all my hopes of this present work to know
that, in some degree, I had made the message of God more
known and more loved.
Rochester, N. Y., Oct. 13, 1897.
53^75"
33^
CONTENTS.
Chapter. Paob.
I. — The Existence of Revelation and the Criterion
Thereof, 1
II. — Nature of Inspiration, --.... 17
III. — Extent of Inspiration, 31
IV.— The Canon, 37
V. — The Canon op the Old Testament, . - - - 38
VI. — Ezra and his Influence, 43
VII. — The Alexandrian Canon, 56
VIII. — The Canon of the Church, 59
IX.— The Canon of the Fathers of the Fourth Century,
AND First Years of Fifth Century, - - - 143
X.— The Canon of the Old Testament from the End of
THE Fifth Century to the End of the Twelfth
Century, 218
XI. — The Canon in the Church from the Beginning of
Thirteenth Century to Council of Trent, - - 258
XII.— Decree of the Council of Trent, . . - . 270
XIII. — The Canon op the New Testament, - - - 282
XIV. — The New Testament of the Sects, .... 348
XV. — The Apocryphal books of both Testaments, - - 349
XVI. — The Lost Books of Both Testaments, .... 377
XVII. — The Hebrew Text op the Old Testament, - - 379
XVIII. — The Greek Text of the New Testament, - - - 411
XIX. — Some Account op the Uncial Codices, - - - 441
XX. — The Septuagint and its Versions, .... 477
XXI.— Versions Derived prom Septuagint, - - - 491
XXII.— The Targums, 495
XXIII.— The Syriac Versions, 502
XXIV.— The Egyptian or Coptic Versions, .... 507
XXV. — The Ethiopic Versions of Scripture, - - - 513
XXVI.— The Gothic Version, - 516
XXVII. — The Armenian Version op Scripture, - - - 519
XXVIII. — Jerome and the Vulgate, 525
XXIX. — The Authorization op the Vulgate by the Council
op Trent, - - 588
XXX. — The Correction op the Vulgate, .... 550
XXXI. — Modern English Versions of Scripture, - - - 559
XXXII. — Biblical Hermeneutics, 577
XXXin. — The Interpretation op Scripture, .... 585
XXXIV. — ^Jewish Interpretation, 588
Appendix, 593
INDEX OF PLATES.
PAGB.
The Samakitan Pentateuch, 409
Specimen op Stichometrt, Codex Bezae, 423
The Vatican Codex, 445
The Sinaitic Codex, - . . . . 453
The Codex op St. Ephbem, - - 458
The Codex Claromontantts, 460*
The Hexapla op Okigen, - - 486-487
Early English Translations of the Bible, .... 575
Appendix.
Origin op Alphabet 600-601
The Kosetta Stone, ......... 603
The Moabitic Stone, 605
A General Introduction to
Holy Scripture.
Chapter I.
The Existence of Revelation and the Criterion
Thereof.
Any scientific treatise should first fix its subject and its
limitations, before beginning to deal therewith. The first
step, therefore, in this Introduction will be to delineate clearly
the subject matter.
The existence of inspired writings is a fact warranted by
the most convincing data. The tradition of the Jews, the
approbation of Christ, the traditions of Christians, the sublim-
ity of the writings, the verification of prophecies, and the
universal belief of civilized mankind are alone natural motives
of credibility which logically produce certainty. Moreover,
those who are incorporated in the organized economy of the
New Law have the living voice of the Holy Ghost, declaring
through the Church: '■'■And this supernatural revelation,
according to the faith of the universal Church, declared in the
Holy Tridentine Synod, is contained in the written books and
unwritten traditions, which have come down to us." [Vat.
Council, Cap. II, De Revelatione.]
There are those who deny the existence of inspired writ-
ings ; but this mere denial, based upon arbitrary assertions, is
no valid reason to doubt of the existence of that sacred deposit,
whose marvelous nature and preservation are alone proofs of
its supernatural character. Few are the higher truths that
have not been attacked by those puny sophists, who fritter
away their lives in creating systems, which a credulous unbelief
readily embraces. Error is oft more specious than truth.
Error loves the maxims of the vapid philosophy of the day.
Error skims the surface ; it is the easy acquisition of labor-
hating, thoughtless souls : the pearl of truth of purest ray serene
2 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
lies hiding in the caves of deepest ocean, only found by the
patient toil, the calm thoughtfulness, and the unbiased mind
•of the honest truth-seeker.
Having once placed as a basic position that there exist
•divinely inspired writings, the next step is to determine how
we may infallibly discern and know what is inspired and what
is not. We must establish an adequate criterion, which can
discriminate, from all other books, the products of the author-
ship of God.
Inspiration, in its formal concept, is a supernatural psycJwl-.
ogical fact, wrought in the mind of the inspired agent by the
First Cause. We might define it, using the conciseness and pre-
cision of the Latin idiom : Illustratio mentis et motus efficax
voluntatis a Deo, ad exprimendum infallibiliter sensum Dei, seu
ad exprimenda ea omnia et sola quae Deus vult. Now it is
plainly evident that a fact of such nature can be immediately
known but to two beings, God and the person inspired. The
action takes place in that inner theatre of action, impervious
to our sense, and is as barred from our cognition as the thought
in its fount, before it is externalized by sensible medium.
Neither is it necessary that it should always be known to the
person inspired. Caiphas, Jo. XI, 49 — 52, prophesied, not
knowing that he did so. Card. Newman seems to incline to
the belief that the writer of the 2d book of Maccabees was not
<:onscious of his inspiration ; and, also, he would extend this to
the writer of Ecclesiasticus.* I believe, however, that the in-
*"Nor is it de ^^ (for that alone with a view to Catholic Biblicists I
am considering) that inspired men, at the time when they speak from inspi-
ration, should always know that the Divine Spirit is visiting them.
The Psalms are inspired ; but, when David in the outpouring 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 on
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 coiild he have entreated his readers to 'come with
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 3
spired writers, properly so called, were conscious of their in-
spiration.
In relation to the prophets, we may not doubt, since they
solemnly assert in their books : " Thus saith the Lord." From
all the writers of the New Law breathes forth a subtle authori-
tative voice, telling us that the Spirit of God is back of what
they say. Let us then assume that the fact of inspiration is
known to God its author, and to the agent in whom he has
wrought this effect. How may this knowledge be commnni-
cated to us? This leads us to the consideration of the CRI-
TERION OF Inspiration.
An examination of the issue will convince us that the testi-
mony of the inspired agent, unsupported by the corroborative
attestation of God, is not sufficient. In the first place, this
means would be subject to hallucination, error, and fraud.
Long would be the list of those who, from one or other of these
motives, claimed inspiration from God. It would suffice to
mention Mohammed and the founder of Mormonism, to specify
the weakness of this criterion. But granted that the inspired
agent did, in any case, so testify as to merit credence, the faith
that these motives of credibility would produce would not be
divine faith, which has for its formal motive the authority of
God\ but, at most, it would be only human faith ; for the effect
cannot be greater than the cause, and, as the cause of this cred-
ibility was not divine but human, the faith, its effect, would be
no more than human faith. Now it is exacted that we be-
lieve in the Scriptures with a divine faith. Hence, granted
that the testimony of the inspired writer might be trustworthy
of itself, it could never produce more than human credibility,
which is not sufficient to form a basis for absolute and divine
faith. No creature can be trusted infinitely, but, when we are
dealing with " God's epistle to his creature ", absolute trust and
benevolence,' and to make excuse for his 'coming 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. ( XIX Century for 1884.)
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 (1 Cor. vii. 40) and of his ' weakness
and fear ' (jMd ii. 4), does so in order to hoast that his ' speech was, not in the
persuasive words of human wisdom, but in the showing of the Spirit and of
power.' The historian of the Maccabees, would have surely adopted a like
tone of 'glorying,' had he had at the time a like consciousness of his
divine gift." (Ibid.)
4 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
certainty are required. It was fitting that an all-provident
God should provide man with this means of certitude, and we
believe that he has done so, and these considerations are lead-
ing us to investigate and establish it. The Prophets and
Apostles merited divine faith for what they taught, because
they, by miracles, established their divine commission to teach.
In such case, this faith was rendered divine by the corrobora-
tive attestation of God through these miracles. But how shall
man always and in every case be able to discriminate between
the divine writings and books of purely human origin ? The
Prophets are gone, the Apostles are gone ; their writings have
undergone great vicissitudes. " We live amid the dust of sys-
tems and of creeds." In this remote age, is there any ade-
quate criterion, in virtue of which man can say, this book is of
God, and this other is not ? Were there not, God would not
have sufficiently provided for man ; he would no longer be the
Heavenly Father. Men, who still believe in a personal God,
and a definite form of religion, generally admit that some such
criterion must exist, but differ widely in defining it.
The early Anglicans set up as a criterion, the sublimity of
the doctrines, and the divine harmony of the elements in
Holy Writ. We admit that such propriety does exist in the
Holy Books, but we deny that it can form a criterion by which
we may discern the effect of God's authorship always and in-
fallibly from everything else. The mutilated gospel of Marcion,
the Koran of Mohammed, the apocryphal gospels, all have
more sublimity than the Books of Chronicles and the Book of
Nehemias. Yet the Chronicles and Nehemias are divine ; and
the others are founded in error.
Luther and his followers place their criterion in the effect
produced in one's soul by the reading of the book. Food, they
say, is judged by its savour ; so, also. Holy Scripture, by the
soul's taste. That which feeds the heavenly hunger of the soul
is of God ; that which does not, is spurious. This system
once received much favor, but it is now considered untenable
by the protestants themselves. John David Michaelis, the
learned professor of Gottingen, [f 1791] 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 entirely uncertain criterions.
As regards this interior sensation, 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
Mohammedans feel it as well as christians, and pious sentiments
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 5
can be aroused by documents purely human, by the writings
of philosophers, and even by doctrine founded in error."^
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 and Presbyterians set up as a criterion, the
particular inspiration of the Holy Ghost in the individual's
soul. This system is cognate to the Calvinistic theory of the
invisible church, and they both fall together. Once establish
a visible authoritative Magisterium, and such means of inter-
preting Holy Scripture would be incompatible with it. It is
evident that such a system of private inspiration can never be
proven. There never can be any available data to establish
such secret action. It must ever remain a gratuitous, ground-
less 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 on 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 pros-
ecution of this train of argument to the tract, De Locis Theo-
*(SinIeitung in tie ®ottIid)en ©diriften be8 9?euen S3unbe«.
6 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
logicis, and content ourselves here with a few a posteriori argu-
ments. 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 controversy has shown the lack of any religi-
ous 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 histori-
cal data. Montanus and his sect first claimed this private in-
spiration ; we may see what spirit led him on, since he and
others of his sect hanged themselves. After the great Apos-
tasy, commonly called the Reformation, had been inaugurated
by Luther, there arose the sect of the Anabaptists, who pro-
fessed that it had been commanded them by direct communi-
cation from God to kill all the wicked ones, and establish a
kingdom of the just.* Bockhold, a tailor of Leyden was
moved by tht private inspiration of the Spirit to proclaim him-
self 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 magis-
trates 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 Cole-
man St., proclaiming " that he would acknowledge no sovereign
but King Jesus, and that he would not sheathe his sword, till
he had made Babylon [which emblemized 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 thous-
and, 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 Quakerism, furnish abundant evidence of
the abominable absurdities into which this supposed inspiration
led the Friends. One woman rushed naked into Whitehall
Chapel, when Cromwell was there. Another came into the
♦Sleidan. De Stat, et Reip.
\Hi»t. AJbr^e, de la Re forme par Brandt.
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 7
parliament house with a trencher, which she there broke in
pieces, saying : " Thus shall he be broken in pieces." Sweden-
borg declared that he had received, at an eating house in Lon-
don, 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 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. Mohammed, and the founder of the foul sect of Mor-
mons claimed private inspiration. Guiteau claimed the moving
of the Spirit in the slaying of President Garfield. Wherefore,,
we maintain that the system of private inspiration, which logic-
ally leads to such absurdities, is in itself absurd and untenable.
We have before adduced David Michaelis' rejection of the
subjective criterions. He substituted for these an objective
criterion, but one entirely inadequate to effect the certitude of
inspiration. I am not aware that Michaelis invented a criterion
for the Old Testament ; his criterion for the books of the New
Testament was that any book that was written by one who had
received the " Munus Apostolicum " was divinely inspired. Of
course, Michaelis speaks only of such writings as the Apostles
wrote on things in some way pertaining to religion. If, for
instance, St. Peter bought a horse, and gave therefor a promis-
sory note, that note would not be inspired. We fully admit,
in its affirmative sense, the position of Michaelis. If one who
had received the apostolate wrote a book, it would be inspired.
Yet, we deny that this is a criterion. In the first place, a cri-
terion must tell me not only that, if a book be written under
certain conditions, it is inspired, but it must tell me that certain
definite books UNCONDITIONALLY ARE INSPIRED. What avails
it, if a man tell me that, if the Second Epistle of Peter be
written by him, it is inspired? What I must know is that it is
the word of God. Again, although we admit the affirmative
supposition of Michaelis proposition to be true, we, by no
means, admit it in the exclusive sense ; that is, we do not admit
that only those books written by the Apostles are inspired. It
is quite certain that Michaelis intended the exclusive sense of
his criterion, but, thus, it becomes manifestly false. Any
criterion that would exclude Mark and Luke from the Evan^
gelists must be rejected, even for that alone. We have in
series weighed these several criterions and found them want-
ing, we now turn to the CATHOLIC CRITERION.
This criterion is no other than the Catholic Church, into
8 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
whose custody the Holy Writings have been given. The
Church as an organized body has various elements and agen-
cies, which functionate to teach man that truth which 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 Scriptures
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 moved me, I
would not believe the Gospels." Rejecting the authority of
the Church, the protestants have passed through a wondrous
transition. Beginning by adoring even the Masoretic points,
they have gradually lapsed to such a point, where those who
believe in the Bible as the infallible Word of God are the ex-
ceptions. It excited no great surprise among protestants, when
Dr. Francis L. Patton of Princeton University, at the session of
the Presbyterian General Assembly in 1895, gave utterance to
the following views : " It is enough when we are assured that
the Bible is the infallible rule of faith and practice, and that it
is given by inspiration of God. This question can not be ade-
quately handled by quoting proof texts out of the Bible to prove
its inspiration. It involves a great deal more than some sup-
pose. Men are handling a very large topic when, under the
conditions of modern thought, they ask. What is the Bible?
What does it mean ? How did this great literature step into
the place it holds, and by what right does it claim to rule the
hearts and consciences of men ? I have great faith in the out-
come of this discussion. I believe that we shall know the Bible,
and value it and reverence it as we never did before. But I
am not, I can not be, blind to the fact that the discussion is a
broad one and a deep one ; that it involves history and philosophy
and literary criticism ; that it was inevitable ; that it is irre-
pressible ; that it could not have come earlier ; that it could not
be postponed. The attitude which men are taking in science,
philosophy, and criticism makes it a foregone conclusion that the
Bible must be subjected to the critical handling that is the subject
of to-day.''
The literature of the day abounds in expressions of defec-
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 9
tion in faith in protestant thought. We quote the follow-
ing:
Some time ago Prof. Samuel Ives Curtis of the Congrega-
tional Seminary at Chicago read a paper before a ministers'
meeting in that city in which he called in question the accur-
acy of the generally accepted interpretation of certain passages
in Isaiah and other parts of the Bible, in which these passages
have been taken to prefigure the coming of the Messiah. More
recently Professor Curtis has published an article in The Bib-
lical World, a periodical conducted under the auspices of
Chicago University, setting forth the same views.
The Interior excerpts the following paragraph from Prof.
Ives' article, with the statement that it had been " absolutely
incredulous of the charge that such views were held by any
school of Christian teaching," and would have " resented the
imputation as a slander."
" The Jews in the times of the writers of the New Testament
held erroneous views of the Messianic prophecies of the Old
Testament. It was next to impossible for the New-Testament
writers to free themselves from these errors, and they did
not succeed in doing so. Even if they could have done so,
they had a motive against the truth. It was to their advan-
tage to employ false premises in order to make a popular
argument. They even went beyond this and employed false
etymology, by which they could mislead the unlearned into the
acceptance of Christ by twisting a passage out of its meaning
to make it prophetic."
The appointment of Dr. Frederick Temple as Archbishop
of Canterbury is taken by a writer in The Catholic World
(January) as a total surrender by the Anglican Church to the
spirit of rationalism. This writer, Jesse Albert Locke, reviews
Dr. Temple's views as expressed years ago in his writings, and
makes from them quotations that will just now be of much
interest to those who have had no opportunity to examine the
writings for themselves. Mr. Locke concedes that the new
archbishop is "a man conspicuous for ability and force of
character," that "there are many things about him which we
must all admire" — naming especially his consistent advocacy
of temperance and total abstinence, and his assault upon the
possession by private persons [as private property] of the pre-
sentation to livings in the Church of England. But Mr. Locke
has no words of approval for the archbishop's theology. We
quote from his article as follows :
"What sort of theology has been enthroned at Canterbury ?
10 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
What idea of religion does he hold and teach who now occu-
pies 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 pub-
lished in 1861 and entitled ' Essays and Reviews.' 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 protestants — 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 protestant
principle of which rationalism is the necessary and legitimate
fruit. The ultimate 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. . . .
This it does by the principle of private judgment which 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 disobey ' Essays and Reviews,'
p. 53). Again: 'When conscience 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 1
This reduces religion 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 interpreter 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 and Re-
views," and tho' the " usual statement " was found in the pre-
face, to the effect that each essayist was reponsible 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, characterizing as " distortion "
the application of Isaiah's prophecies to the Messiah, and up-
held the idea of a true national church as one that should
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 11
include all the people of the nation, who should be born into
membership in the church as they are born into civil rights.
"These are the views," The Catholic World writer assumes,
" for which the new arcHbishop stands." He then proceeds
to quote further from the archbishop's later writings. Refering
to his Bampton 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 certainty ; the
mixture of poetry with history is no longer capable 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, tho'
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 nevertheless 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 in his 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 resurrec-
tion 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).
" If we ask, What, then, can be the object of miracles ?
Dr. Temple has his answer ready. If these events, tho' 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 accom-
plished 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 prin-
ciple of conduct, but Dr. Temple goes farther still and carries
the charge back from His faithful servants to the great Master
Himself!"
12 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
For these views of the new archbishop, says Mr. Locke, the
AngHcan 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 a paraphrase on the Book of Jonah, Dr. Lyman Abbott
of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, resumes :
" This is, in brief, the story of Jonah. Such scholars as
Ewald and Driver regard it as fiction, not because of the miracle
of the great fish. That is not a greater miracle than others,
not so great as some. But, in the whole scope and spirit and
structure of the story, this book reads to these scholars like a
product, not merely of imagination, but of Oriental imagina-
tion, not merely like a satire but almost like a caricature. Out-
side of ecclesiastical circles this story invariably produces a
smile. Might not this suggest that it was intended by the
author to produce a smile ? That he wrote it to smite with ridi-
cule that narrowness of spirit, that religious provincialism,
which is more amenable to ridicule than to any other weapon?
That the prophet of Jehovah should think to escape from his
God by fleeing from the province of Palestine is the first point
in this satire ; that he who would not preach to pagans is com-
pelled to mingle his prayer with pagans is a second satire ; that
pagan sailors should do their utmost to save a prophet of
Jehovah from the consequence of his own misdoing is a third
satire ; that he should be angry with the Lord because the Lord
is gracious to Nineveh is a fourth satire ; that he should care
for his gourd and himself, and not for Nineveh and its thous-
ands of inhabitants, is a fifth satire. And over against this
picture of ecclesiastical narrowness is set the portrayal of God
— who saves the sailors, saves Jonah, saves Nineveh, and com-
pels even this provincial prophet to declare of Him that He is
' a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kind-
ness, and repentest him of the evil.' "
Rev. Samuel Eliot, of the First Unitarian Church of Brook-
lyn, criticizes Dr. Abbott from a different standpoint. He
personally agrees with Dr. Abbott, and honors him for his in-
sight and candor, but does not think he is justified, as a Con-
gregational minister, in an effort to overthrow doctrines for
which Congregationalism has always stood. He says :
" I can not help thinking that straightforward methods
demand that the men of the liberal orthodoxy no longer remain
within the orthodox church. They are in a false position, open-
ing the gates of the citadel to all forms of new thought, while
apparently defending it. Having really broken with the old
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 13
tradition, they ought to be brave enough to break also with
the old associations. A position outside of the orthodoxy to
which they still outwardly conform would vastly increase their
power for good, improve their reputation for honesty, and
make them worthier champions of the truth that makes men
free. I think that unconscious insincerity in church connec-
tions is one of the most serious perils of the Christian Church.
The pressing need of our time is absolute intellectual honesty
that uses no ambiguous phrases, that makes no mental reserva-
tions, but dares to think freely and to speak openly. Having
frankly outgrown the dogmas of the old theology, is my dear
friend and neighbor, Dr. Abbott, justified in remaining within
an organization which still nominally supports the declarations
of the ancient creeds ? I have not the slightest sympathy with
bigotry or heresy-hunting. Old-fashioned orthodoxy seems to
me a monster intellectual error, but this modern liberal ortho-
doxy may contain a moral error. Therefore I believe that the
ministers of the Manhattan Association are honorable and con-
sistent in the action taken by them at their meeting yesterday."
The religious journals are having some amusement at the
expense of the secular press over the serious treatment given
by the latter to the report of Dr. James M. Buckley's "heresy."
At a recent meeting of the Methodist preachers in and around
New York city. Dr. Buckley (editor of The Christian Advocate),
in discussing a paper read by Dr. Curtis, took occasion to say
that there were not four men in the room who believed in the
infallibility of the English version of the Scriptures. The state-
ment being challenged, he called for a vote ; but the meeting
adjourned without its being taken.
Prof. Charles A. Briggs, D. D., whose inaugural address a
few years ago, when installed in the chair which he still fills in
the Union Theological Seminary, had such an important bear-
ing on the affairs both of the Seminary and the Presbyterian
Church, handles the Old Testament with at least as much free-
dom as that displayed by Dr. Lyman Abbott in his recent
course of sermons. Professor Briggs writes in the latest num-
ber of The North American Review on "Works of the Imagin-
ation in the Old Testament," and six pages of the article are
devoted to the book of Jonah, the conclusions reached being
almost, if not quite, identical with those for which Dr. Abbott
has been so severely criticised in the last few weeks.
Professor Briggs begins his article as follows :
" It is not so much the supernatural power in the miracle
that troubles us as the character of the miracle. There is in it,
14 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
whatever way we interpret it, the element of the extravagant
and the grotesque. The divine simplicity, the holy sublimity,
and the overpowering grace which characterize the miracles of
Biblical history are conspicuously absent. We feel that there
is no sufficient reason for such a miracle, and we instinctively
shrink from it, not because of lack of faith in the supernatural
divine power of working miracles, but because we have such a
faith in God's grace and holiness and majesty that we find it
cftflficult to believe that He would work such a grotesque and
extravagant miracle as that described in the story of the great
fish."
The wholesale and sudden repentance of Nineveh is still
more marvelous. Nothing like it meets us in the history of
Israel or of the church. Jesus uses it for illustration because
there was no historic repentance so well suited to his purpose.
The prayer in the story is not appropriate unless the story be
considered ideal. This prayer is a mosaic from several more
ancient psalms and prophecies, used by the author as appro-
priate to his story.
As for the reference made to the story by Jesus, Professor
Briggs speaks as follows :
" It is objected that Jesus in his use of Jonah gives sanction
to the historicity of the story. But this objection has little
weight ; for we have seen that his method of instruction was in
the use of stories of his own composition. We ought not to
be surprised, therefore, that he should use such stories from the
Old Testament likewise.
" It is urged that Jesus makes such a realistic use of it that
it compels us to think that he regarded it as real. But in fact
he does not make a more realistic use of Jonah than he does of
the story of Dives and Lazarus.
" Paul makes just as realistic a use of the story of Jannes
and Jambres withstanding Moses ; and compares them with the
foes of Jesus in his times (2 Tim. iii. 8.)
"And Jude makes just as realistic a use of Michael, the
archangel, contending with the devil, and disputing about the
body of Moses, and compares this dispute with the railers of
his time (Jude 9).
" These stories by Paul and Jude are from the Jewish Hag-
gada, and not from the Old Testament. No scholar regards
them as historic events. If apostles could use the stories of
the Jewish Haggada in this way, why should not Jesus use
stories from the Old Testament? Jesus uses the story of
Jonah just as the author of the book used it, to point import-
CRITERION OF INSPIRATION. 16
ant religious instruction to the men of his time. Indeed Jesus's
use of it rather favors the interpretation of it as symboHc. For
it is just this symbohsm that the fish represents Sheol, the
swallowing up death, the casting forth, resurrection, that we
have seen in the story of Jonah interpreted by the prayer,
which makes the story appropriate to symbolize the death and
resurrection of Jesus."
Speaking of the lesson of the book — the triumph of divine
grace, in the salvation of Nineveh, over the sentence of judg-
ment uttered by Jonah — Professor Briggs has this to say :
"Jonah represents only too well the Jew of Nehemiah's
time, the Jew of the New Testament times, and also the Chris-
tian Church in its prevailing attitude to the heathen world. If
the Roman Catholic Church had learned the lesson of Jonah,
its theologians would not so generally have consigned the un-
baptized heathen world to hell-fire. If the Reformers had
understood Jonah there would have been more of them than
Zwingli and Coelus Secundus Curio, who thought that there
were some redeemed heathen. If the Westminster divines had
understood Jonah they never would have coined those remark-
able statements of the tenth chapter of their Confession, in
which the entire heathen world and their babes are left out of
the election of grace. The present century, brought face to
face with the heathen world, is beginning to learn the lesson of
Jonah. Jonah is the book for our times. Tho' written many
centuries ago as a beautiful ideal of the imagination to teach
the wonderful grace of God in the salvation of repenting
heathen and their babes, it has been reserved for the present
age to apprehend and apply its wonderful lessons. The repent-
ance of Nineveh is a prophetic ideal."
The affinity between protestant and rationalist daily grows
closer.
Although tradition would be worthless as a motive of
credibility, if separated from the Church's infallible authority ;
in her hands, and under her guidance, it becomes an important
factor in her means of teaching. The testimonies of the Fath-
ers are not so much valuable for their critical authority^ as for
their simple witness of what the Church believed in their time.
The Fathers are, in the Church, what the arteries are in the
human organism, avenues whither the blood is propelled from
the great centre to vitalize every part.
Many writers on Holy Scripture adduce the testimonies of
the New Testament as a means of certitude of the deposit of
Holy Scripture. The chief text brought forth to substantiate
m:
16 CRITERION OF INSPIRATION.
such position is from the second epistle of St. Paul to Timothy
III, i6. The passage, according to the Greek is as follows:
"Ilao-a jpaipT) deoirvevrao^^ kuI ox^eXt/AO? tt/uo? 8i,8aa-Ka\.{av,7rpo<i
eke'^'Xpv, 7rp6<; eiravopdmatv, 7rpb<; traiheiav ttjv iv hiKaLoavvr]"
The Vulgate renders the passage: " Omnis scriptura divini-
tus inspirata utilis est ad docendum, ad arguendum, ad corri-
piendum, ad erudiendum in justitia." The Roman Catholic
version is in accord with the vulgate : "All Scripture 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 reproduce it. No account
is taken in such version of the /cat, which however appears in
all the best codices. The Vulgate expunging koI^ would vir-
tually insert the elliptical ean after dxfjeXifio^, thus making
deoTTveva-To^ a qualifying characteristic, warranting the predica-
tion of a(f)€\ifJbo<;, of irdaa <ypa^r). By the expunging of the
important particle koI, 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. Moreover, the context and parallel pas-
sages demand the sense which results from the retaining of the
particle.
Of all the versions, the Ethiopic comes closest to the orig-
inal. 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 corrigen-
dum et instruendum in veritate." Although this ancient and
valued text departs somewhat from the verbally literal trans-
lation, it reproduces the full sense. We could perhaps literally
translate the Greek : " All Scripture is divinely inspired and
useful to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in righteous-
ness." Thus it is in conformity 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 suflficiently evidenced so as
to become practically certain. The passage thus becomes 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, brings
forward, as the Causal ratio, 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 Scrip-
NATURE OF INSPIRATION. 17
ture. 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 divinity 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 distin-
guish book from book, or form any 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 un-
canonical books.
There remains then one means, and one means only, to teach
man not only the truths of Scripture, but also the Scripture of
truths. This means is the voice of God through the Church.
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, 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 distinguishing element required
in them, before admitting them to such list. Our treatise will
deal first, therefore, with the NATURE AND EXTENT OF INSPI-
RATION, and secondly, with The Canon.
Chapter II.
Nature of Inspiration.
In common parlance, revelation and inspiration are convert-
ible terms, but, in reality, they differ greatly. Revelation, from
revelare, means to uncover, unveil, disclose to the view some-
thing 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 under
standing, or depended on the free will of God ; in fact, wherever
the idea portrayed was not acquired by the industry and labor
of the writer. When, therefore, the writer gives forth truths
which he had acquired by the ordinary method of human
research and observation, there is no revelation from God re-
quisite or given. Thus St. Luke tells us that, " it had seemed
18 NATURE OF INSPIRATION.
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 Maccabees 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 Scrip-
tures as revealed writings, and we do not wish to correct this
usage, but only to define and fix our terms for the greater facil-
ity of our treatise. Inspiration then pervades the whole struc-
ture 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 knowledge 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 unknown 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 recen-
sentur, 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 concin-
nati, 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 sacrse 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."
NATURE OF INSPIRATION. 19
Hence it is of faith that God is the AUTHOR of the Sacred
Scriptures, and of the integral books with all their parts. It is
not here asserted that God with his own hand wrote the books
materially, but that he \s the auctor principalis per conscriptores
suos. Now, we will bear in mind the relation of the author to
his work, in weighing and judging of the correctness or false-
ness of opinions which deal with this subject.
Inspirare is the Latin equivalent for the Greek Oeoirveveiv,
which word S. Paul uses in his II Epist. to Tim. Ill, i6.,
^^iraaa jpa<f)r} Oeoirvevaro'i" . It signifies that one is impelled
by God, that the Spirit of God is in him, moving him to action
and guiding him in that action. Hence, God is the principal
author, the principal cause ; and the inspired agent is the in-
strumental cause.
In every action wrought by a creature, there is a concursus
of two causes, the causa prima, and the causa secunda ; the
Creator and the Creature. We exist by reflected existence, as
the moon shines by reflected light. The same act, which
brought us into being at our creation, preserves us in that be-
ing, and this is what is called the conservatio in esse ; and the
conservative act is all that prevents us from relapsing into the
primal absolute chaos. God must then cooperate with his
creature in every act, for the second cause must depend on the
First Cause essentially^ and, therefore, in every act, it must be
upheld by the conservative power of God. This cooperation of
the First Cause is called the Concursus Generalis, and is found
even in acts which are morally bad. The murderer and the in-
cestuous receives the conservatio in esse in his act, without
thereby making the crime imputable to God, for man's will is
free ; God preserves him in his being, but gives him the free
will to do right or wrong ; nay more, God calls, assists, urges to
do right; but, if the second agent wishes to do wrong, God does
not withdraw his "conservatio in esse ". He does not necessi-
tate virtue nor eliminate vice ; for he made his creature free.
This then is the concursus of the First and second cause in
every act. But there are certain acts where this concursus is
more marked and potent on the part of the Creator, and Inspir-
ation is one of these acts.
It is declared in the definition of the Vatican Council that
God is the Author of the books of the Old and New Testaments
with all their parts. We also assert and prove that the various
inspired writers were authors of the respective books which
history and tradition attribute to them. Therefore, there is a
20 NATURE OF INSPIRATION.
concursus of two causes here, of two authors. A book maybe
defined to be a "Contextus Sententiarum seu sensuum scripto
consignatus ". We here denominate book, every complete com-
ponent factor of the Old or New Testaments, even though it
consist of but a few sentences, as for instance the Epistle to
Philemon, consisting of but 25 verses, comprised in one chap-
ter. In every book or writing, there are two elements, the
material and the formal element. The formal element com-
prises the " Complexus " of ideas and judgments signified by
the words and propositions in the book. These by some are
called the "res et sententiae"; by others, the "sensa"; by
Franzelin, the " Veritates ". The material element of the book,
" in fieriy is the consigning of these veritates to writing. The
author of a book needs not necessarily consign the veritates to
writing. St. Paul employed an amanuensis to commit his
teachings to writing in his Epistles, and, yet, he is their author.
It is the creations of the soul reflected in a work that denomi-
nate an agent an author. Any hand may do the material
work, but the mind back of the truths is the factor to which is
rightly attributable the authorship.
When we, therefore, assert for God the authorship of the
Scriptures, we do not mean to say that he consigned the ideas
to writing with his own hand, but that he was the formal cause
of the " res et sententiae," of the " sensa," of the " veritates."
Now the relation of an author to his work is to be measured
by the object of the work. In a rhetorical or poetical work,
the words and style would be "per se intenta." They would
be in the formal ratio of the work, and, consequently, the work
could not be called the creation of any certain author, unless
he had per se produced such beauty of diction. But in a book
whose scope was to convey truth to the mind, and naught
else, the style or the selection of the words would not neces-
sarily need be the effect of the author principalis. Provided
they be adequate and fitting to convey the truths which he
might wish to impart, the book can attain its end, even though
the principal cause have no special influence in the selection of
words or the style. Now, it is evident that no being can be
termed the author of a book, unless he produces the formal
element of the book. God is the author of all the books of
Scripture, and, therefore, he produced all the " veritates," or
"res et sententiae" therein contained. These are true and in-
spired; the other part may be defective. God produced these
" res et sententiae " either by revelation or by inspiration ; by
revelation, if the truths were impervious to human reason, such
NATURE OF INSPIRATION. 21
as fiitura contingentia, mysteries, or any other truth which the
writer could not acquire by natural means : by inspiration
always, illumining the mind and moving the will to write all
those things and only those things which God wished to com-
municate to his creature, whether those things were then for
the first time known by revelation, or were the acquisitions of
human industry and observation. For even in this latter case,
the special action of God is necessary to impel the writer to
write all and only the things which God wishes written, and to
write them infallibly, without mixture of error.
We see thus that there is always a greater concursus than
the concursus generalis in inspiration. God does for the in-
spired writer more than " conservare in esse." He is the im-
pelling power within him. Sometimes, as was the case with
the Prophets, the second agent is thrown into an ecstacy, and
his mind is imbued with ideas, in the creation of which he is
only the passive agent. The inspired writer is vivo IIi'ev/x.aTO?
*A.<yCov ^€p6fievo<;, borne on, 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 pre-
clude the examining of existing documents, the patient toil and
research which always accompanies the natural acquisition of
knowledge. Moses may have made use of existing documents,
when giving an account of Creation. But the certainty of in-
spiration is not measured by the certainty of these existing
documents, nor by the certainty of fallible human 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.
Having thus established this relation of God to the Holy
Scriptures, we pass to consider the effect of this relation on the
Holy Writ, that is, we consider here the Extent OF INSPIRA-
TION.
Chapter III.
Extent of Inspiration.
On this subject there have been many different opinions.
Up to the time of Lessius (born 1554), Verbal Inspiration was
22 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
quite generally admitted. This opinion sustained that the
material words were the work of the Holy Ghost, and some
extended it even to the dotting of the letters, and other such
minutiae. Lessius having entered the Jesuit Order, and having
been appointed Professor of Theology at Louvain from 1585
to 1605 ; he, in concert with Du Hamel, his confrere, published
certain theses, among which were the three following :
I. — " Inspiratio non se extendit ad omnia verba divinae
Scripturae."
2. — " Divina Inspiratio non se extendit ad omnes sententias
divinae Scripturae, sed Auctor inspiratus potest scribere ea quae
aliunde noverit."
3. — " Liber aliquis, qualis est fortasse secundus Maccabae-
orum, humana industria, sine assistentia Spiritus Sancti scriptus
si Spiritus Sanctus postea, testatur ibi nihil esse falsum, efificitur
Scriptura sacra."
Lessius was condemned by the Universities of Louvain and
Douay, but Stapleton the famous professor of Louvain defended
him. Called to defend himself, Lessius explained his doctrine,
in relation to the second and third proposition. He declared
that he did not exclude the positive influence of the Holy
Ghost in the writings, but wished to assert that the inspiring
power so acted on the second agent, as to leave him the free
use of his memory and other intellectual powers, whose use the
Holy Ghost presupposed. In relation to the third proposition,
he defended that he did not wish to assert such action of any
particular book ; neither did he mention the 2nd of Maccabees
as an example of such action ; but, simply, he meant theoret-
ically to assert such possibility. Pace tanti viri, I would call
this a subterfuge. However, we are not dealing with possibili-
ties, but with realities. To assert that such were the inspiration
which actuated any of the books of our Holy Scriptures is con-
demned by the Vatican Council ; while, of the possibility, the
council says nothing. We shall now examine every one of
these propositions in detail. The first marks a new era in theo-
logical opinion, in relation to Holy Scripture. As we have
said, up to this time, verbal inspiration had been generally held
by all. From Lessius' time, there was a gradual abandonment
of this idea, a gradual trend to the opposite, until now verbal
inspiration is held by none who merits aught for his authority.
And, indeed, it is patent to him who considers, that verbal in-
spiration could not have taken place.
I. — God does not operate out of the ordinary course of
nature, unless for necessary or useful reasons. Now the choice
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 23
of words and the style of the discourse needed not the direct
intervention of God, but could be adequately accomplished by
the ordinary faculties of the writer. In the words of Marchini,
De Div. et Can. Sac. Bibliorum, pag. 84: " Dici nequit a Spi-
ritu Sancto ademptum fuisse Apostolis aut Prophetis, rationis,
memoriae, judicii usum ; hsec igitur omnia scribendo adhibu-
erunt." Another 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 ; Jere-
mias, on the contrary, and Amos are less polished and coarser
in their style. Isaias was in high social rank, while Jeremias
was a burgher from Anatoth, and Amos, a cowherd.''*' And
differences of style exist among all the inspired writers, due to
their different characteristics. No one can fail to detect the
sublimity of conception in St. John over the other Evangelists ;
and the massive genius of St. Paul gleams forth in those inim-
itable Epistles, which have been and are the great treasure of
the Christian religion. Now, if the Holy Ghost had inspired
the very words, such differences could not exist.
2. — Moreover, in the Original text of the new Testament
barbarisms and violations against the Greek language exist.
Can we, for a moment believe that the Holy Spirit, inspired
these also ?
3. — In the Scriptures, sometimes the same fact is related by
different writers in different ways. For instance, the consecra-
tion 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 aptly what St. Augustine said of
the inspired writers : " Ut quisque meminerat eos explicasse
manifestum est."
4. — Again, the author of the second book of Maccabees
dates certain events differently from the manner in which they
are dated by the author of the first book: II. Maccab. XI, 21,
33, 38 ; XII, I ; XIV, 4, date certain events in the 148th, 149th
*Very little that is certain is known of the life of Isaiah. According
to the Rabbis he was of the tribe of Juda, and of the gens Davidica,
They make Amos the father of Isaiah, the brother of Amasia, the King
of Juda. Some of the fathers have received this opinion from the Rabbis ;
and Jerome himself calls Isaiah a vir nohilis. But there is nothing trust-
worthy to prove that he was of the royal line. His style gives evidence
of his liberal education and may well be called regal, but we have noth-
ing to warrant that his blood was of the kingly line.
24 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
and 150th year of the era of the Seleucidae ; while the author
of the first book places the events, I. Maccab. VI, 16, 20 ; VII,
I, in the 149th, 150th, 151th year, one year later. There is no
contradiction ; but the inspired writers, making use of the liberty
which God allows them, depart from a different point of de-
parture.
5. — 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, non-
nunquam vel detraxerint verba vel addiderint." Comment, in
Epist. ad Galatas.
6. — The inspired writers themselves disclaim verbal inspira-
tion, 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 research 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
would wish ; if only weakly and commonly, /Lterptft)?, mediocriter,
(not above the average) this is all I could achieve, etc." No
such apology for shortcomings were necessary, had the Holy
Ghost inspired the words.
7. — Furthermore, if the inspiration extended to the words,
either of two things must be true ; either the translations of
the original texts would be also verbally inspired, or we, who
do not make use of the original texts, would not have the true
word of God. The first hypothesis is absurd, and broached by
none; the second is false, for the Church, with unerring judg-
ment, proclaims that she has the word of God in the Vulgate.
Therefore, the inspiration consists in the sense not in the
material word ; in the res et veritates, not in the sound ; and the
word of God becomes the patrimony of the whole Church,
through the different versions, of whose correctness the Church
judges.
In general, the greater part of the Fathers spoke of the
Scriptures as verbally inspired, but this was owing to the fact
that the question was not studied ex professo, and they spoke
oratorically. St. John Chrysostome, with his characteristic
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 25
acuteness, distinguished 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, (fxovr), only recognize to be that of
Paul, but the sense and the dogma recognize to be of Christ by
whom he was interiorly taught." Salmeron, Maldonatus,
Bannes, Billuart, Calmet, and others defended verbal inspira-
tion ; but, as to the opinion of St. Thomas, though it is not
very clear, still some claim to find in his Summa, 2. 2, Q. 176,
art. I, ad i., a defense of the doctrine just promulgated. Be
that as it may, it is certain that, in those times, the question
was not so well understood as in later times, when men have
studied these questions "ex professo."
The reasonableness of the doctrine just enunciated can be
seen from a commonplace example. A professor delivers his
lecture to his auditors, and they may for instance, commit
the sense of his discourse to writing, each in a different manner.
Provided they referred faithfully the sense of what he said,
they might 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.
Is there then no influence of the Holy Ghost on the words
of Holy Scripture. Verily there is an influence. Though he
does not directly inspire the words, still he preserves the
sacred writer from expressions which would be inadequate to
convey the meaning intended. God, then, " qui suaviter omnia
disponit ", assists the inspired writer to convey his inspired
thoughts in apt and adequate terms, at the same time leaving
him free in his style and diction. Again, there are times when
it is necessary to admit the verbal inspiration. This takes
place whenever it is necessary for the sense of the dogma or truth
enunciated. Such was the case in the revelation of the name
of Jahve to Moses, Exod. Ill, 14. Similarly, when God im-
poses a name of mystic signification, or whose signification
reveals some truth which God wishes to make known, as the
name of " Abraham," " Sara," " Israel." Also, when the word
is essential to the strict formula of the forma of the Sacra-
ments, as the word corpus and est. Sanguis, etc., in the
Eucharist.
Corollaries: i. Verbal inspiration is neither required nor
given, when the verbal expression does not determine the sense
intended to be conveyed, hence the inspired writer is free in
the choice of words of synonymous import to convey the in-
26 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
spired concept, and may even use a less fitting expression, pro-
vided it be not incapable of conveying the truth intended.
2. When the inspired writer makes use of expressions accord-
ing to the ordinary signification of the words, it is not aflfirmed
that the import that these words have in common usage is
inspired. Thus, when it is stated that there is 2, firmamentum
above the earth, dividing the waters above from those below,
it is not intended to be an inspired truth that the firmament
is a solid body, although the first signification of arepew^ia is a
solid body. Thus in the celebrated passage, Josue X, 13., it is
not intended by the Holy Ghost to assert that the sun and
moon actually stood still, but to assert that the day was
lengthened, until the Lord had taken vengeance on the Amor-
ites ; and the writer simply uses an expression which the people
could understand to express such fact. If one were to speak
in inspired language of the close of the day, in our day, he
would say : the sun set ; the sun sank to rest ; because these
expressions are warranted by the common language of all
peoples.
If the object of the Holy Spirit were to teach the people
science, then the wording of these passages might be different,
but the object was to convey higher truths, and this object was
attained without correcting their erroneous scientific opinions.
Thus St. Luke in the second chapter of his Gospel, Vers. 1.,
tells us that an edict went out from Caesar Augustus that the
whole world should be enrolled. Now it was only the Roman
world that was really enrolled, but that was the whole world
for the Jews at that time. Now here dif^culty often arises ;
and, on this line, the conflict between science and religion is
fought. A thorough knowledge of the position of the Church,
and the defined extent of inspiration, and a calm, conservative
judgment must be brought to bear on this conflict, which waxes
so fiercely. In our special exegesis of the different books of
Holy Writ, we shall apply our principles to the disputed
passages.
Of the second proposition of Lessius, this only can be said,
that, having confounded revelation with inspiration, his expres-
sion, as it stands, can not be admitted, but what he meant is
probably what we have already defended, that inspiration does
not necessarily imply that the Holy Ghost then for the first
time disclose these truths to the writer, but is compatible with
the ordinary acquisition of the truths enunciated ; which truths
the Holy Ghost afterwards impels the writer to infallibly give
forth in writing.
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 27
Of the third proposition, it must be said, that, if it is
asserted of any of the existing books of the Holy Scripture, it
is false and heretical, and condemned in express terms in the
definition of the Vatican Council ; if it only deals with a possi-
bility, then it is false and absurd ; for a subsequent inspiration
is a contradiction in terms. As Cornely rightly says : " repug-
nat 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 ? We answer,
no. 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.
Wherefore, 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.
Bonfrere the disciple of Lessius taught a doctrine nearly
identical with that taught by Lessius. He defended a three-
fold relation of the Holy Ghost to the inspired writings;
antecedent, concomitant, and consequent. According to Bon-
frere, 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 aman-
uensis writes down the dictated ideas, always, of course, in
their own terms, as we have just seen. This coincides with the
Catholic idea of revelation just now treated.
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 passage
in St. Matthew : " He (the Holy Ghost) will suggest all things
to you, whatever I shall have said to you." This mode Bon-
frere asserted had taken place with all the books, except the
prophetical works and the Pentateuch. The subsequent rela-
tion coincides with the third opinion of Lessius, except that
Bonfrere expressly denied that such had been the origin of any
of the books now possessed by the Church, but asserted the
non-repugnance of such action, and the possibility that such
might have been the origin of some of the inspired works which
28 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
the Church has lost. This opinion falls under the same censure
as that of Lessius. The Church simply infallibly declares a
book to be inspired which the Holy Ghost, as principal author,
has produced ; but it does not, by its definition make inspired
that which antecedently had been by only human industry.
We have only to deal therefore with the second opinion, which
constitutes inspiration to be something negative, a protecting
influence, that protects the writer from error, and we assert
that such action is not sufficient to constitute God the author
of the book.
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 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 hap-
pened 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. Moreover, if the Holy Ghost did not move
positively and impel to write what God wished to give forth to
man, many useless details would be intermingled in the Scrip-
tures, and no means would be forthcoming to warrant that the
truths which God wished to communicate to us were all deliv-
ered to us. For the preservation from error would never bring
about that " ea (?;««/^ et sola quae Deus communicare vult "
would be transmitted to us. The dispensation of God would
depend on the fallible judgment of man, which is inadmissible.
Again, there would be no difference, in such case, between the
definitions of oecumenical councils and of the Pope's " ex cath-
edra," and the Holy Scriptures; for, in these definitions, 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 documents, infallible in
their truth, but they can not be said to have God iox \.\i€\x author .
Jahn departed farther from the truth than Benfrere had
gone, asserting inspiration to be, in general, only a negative
assistance protecting from error; and he defended that such
was the general origin of our books. Logical in his opinion,
and recognizing that inspiration imported something positive,
he boldly proclaimed that inspiration was a misapplied term ;
but, as it was consecrated by usage, was difficult to change.
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 29
Here therefore, as in other things, " in medio stat virtus."
The Fathers and the older theologians exaggerated inspiration,
extending it to the utmost minutiae ; the later protestants,
rationalists, and some Catholic writers have derogated in such
manner from inspiration, as to reduce it almost to a mere gen-
eral supervision of the Holy Ghost, which might take place
with any pious writer. The Fathers sometimes compared the
inspired writer to a musical instrument played on by the Holy
Spirit. (St. Justin, Cohort, ad Graecos, VHI ; St. Athanasius,
Legat. pro Christo, IX.) These comparisons admit of a benign
interpretation, as they were written in the ages of the simplic-
ity of faith, before the terrible conflict with error and heresy
had necessitated the use of precise concepts. This general
remark applies to the writings of the Fathers in every depart-
ment of knowledge.
The second agent is an instrument but not an inanimate
one. He is a sentient rational instrument, making use, in the
very act of inspiration, of all his faculties. In our treatise on
inspiration, we must not disguise the fact, that many deny that
we are held by the definition of the Councils of Trent and
Vatican to extend the decree to all the res et sententice ; and
even some Catholics hold that we are bound to believe " fide
divina" only that the dogmatic and moral parts and those
others which directly refer to these are inspired. They allege
as ground for their assertion, that the Vatican Council did not
add anything to the definition of the Council of Trent, in rela-
tion to the extent of inspiration, and the Council of Trent did
not define what it meant by a part. It would seem at times,
that there was no medium in human language to so define a
concept as to preclude different opinions regarding it.
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 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, neverthe-
30 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
less, the things which do not relate to religion do not constitute
articles of Catholic faith." His doctrine was examined by the
Sorbonne and condemned ; but, still, this condemnation does
not end the controversy, for this condemnation was of several
theologians, but not of the Church. Chrismann asserts nearly
the same doctrine. Newman, in the 19th Century for 1884,
excludes from t\iQ fide divina credenda " obiter dicta " ; such as,
for instance, that Nabuchodonosor 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 in-
quire whether obiter dicta are conceivable in an inspired docu-
ment. 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 inspira-
tion, 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
allow of these exceptions ; but Fr. Patrizi, as Lamy quotes him,
' damnare non audet eos qui haec tenerent,' viz., exceptions,
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 Nineveh. Now it is in favour of there being such unauthori-
tative 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 con-
tained within the scope of the formal definition, 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 chro-
nological sequence might not be represented as an infringement
of plenary inspiration, more serious than the obiter dicta of
of which I have been speaking. Yet St. Matthew is admitted
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 31
by approved commentators to be unsoHcitous as to order of
time. So says Fr. Patrizi {De Evang. lib, ii. p. i), viz., ' Mat-
thaeum 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 edifi-
cation and what is not ?"
Lenormant, Les Origines de Thistoire d'apres la Bible et les
traditions des peuples orient., Paris, 1880, pref., pag. VI, denies
that any of the historic parts of the Bible are inspired, and be-
lieves that Genesis is is largely made up of myths. Rohling
in „jDtc 3n[^iratton ber^ibel", Munster, 1872, rejects inspiration
in these things which pertain to science and natural history.
This work has been ably refuted by Franzelin in his work De
Tradit. et Sac. Script.
Now it is not, I believe, in the province of any private in-
dividual to term these opinions heretical, but we hold them, if
we except that of Card. Newman alone, to be theologically
false. Newman's opinion we do not embrace, but still it were
too much to term it false. The protestants began by asserting
inspiration for the Masoretic points, with which the Hebrew
text was adorned in the ninth century, A. D.; they now limit
inspiration to a few truths of dogma or morals, and daily drift
farther and farther from the old faith regarding the Scriptures,
and embrace more and more the tenets of rationalistic criticism.
The opinions above quoted have for their chief basis, that
the scope of the Holy Books is to teach us faith and morals,
and as the Holy Ghost protects the Pope only in the affairs of
faith and morals, so they say. He protected inspired writers
only in that which was necessary ; secondly, they assert that it
were unworthy of the Holy Ghost to inspire these minute
details. We answer briefly, that the influence of the Holy
Ghost is far more potent in the inspired writer than in the
Pope, as we have already explained: for God is not the Author
of pontifical definitions " ex cathedra." But God is the author
of all the parts of the Scripture ; therefore, an error in the work
[I speak of the res et Sententiae, not of a defective word made
use of by the writer] would be imputable to God, an hypo-
32 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
thesis which we can not admit. The Vatican Council has de-
fined that the Scriptures contain the inspired truth, without
admixture of error. This could not be said, if historic, chron-
ological geographical, or scientific error were there found.
Moreover, grant that such error may be found in the Holy-
Scripture, and the bases of Scripture are shattered, for it will
then be uncertain, what is inspired, and what is not; and, "in
aestu passionum," men will interpret the Holy Writ always
favorably to their own preconceived ideas ; and, thus, the certi-
tude of the Scriptures is destroyed. Again, such opinion is
contrary to the unanimous voice of tradition. " I believe,"
says St. Augustine, " that no Sacred writer has been deceived
in anything." (Plpist. 72 ad Hieron.) S. J. Chryst., 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. I. Q. I, art. 10, ad. 3.: " It 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 ways. In one way,
directly, as those things which are principally consigned to us ;
as for instance, that God is triune. Things pertain indirectly
to faith, from whose contrary would follow something perni-
cious 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."
When Erasmus, in the XVI. century, hinted that the Evan-
gelists, in quoting from the Old Testament, had relied on their
memory, and had been faulty in some respects, he was so hotly
attacked by the theologians that he abandoned his position
and apologized. St. Liguori in his Tract Contra Hereticos,
IV, 5 — 28, in speaking of the opinion of those who separated
truth from truth in the Holy Scriptures, maintaining that some
things were from the Holy Ghost, and others from the human
mind, calls their opinion false and impious. We have seen
what the result has been of private interpretation in the protes-
tant church ! A similar result would be verified in the Catholic
Church, should we make such distinction as regards Holy
Scripture, for all would be free to say that this or that passage
did not pertain to Holy Scripture. Finally, if inspiration did
not extend beyond the questions of faith and morals, or what
is related thereto, a great part of the Holy Scriptures would
not be inspired ; for the books, for instance, of Josue, Judges
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 33
and a great part of the Pentateuch pertain in no wise to faith
or morals, but are a history of events of the people of God.
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 Tobias XI,
9. relating to the wagging of the tail of Tobias' dog : " Blandi-
mento suae caudae gaudebat", and the passage in St. Paul's
letter to Timothy, II Tim. IV, 13. relating to the cloak left at
Troas : " Penulam, quam reliqui Troade apud Carpum, veniens
afTer tecum", are ordinarily quoted as examples of Obiter
Dicta. Concerning these, two questions may be raised: i.
Are the Obiter Dicta inspired ? 2. Is it of faith that these are
inspired ? Catholic theologians generally answer the first ques-
tion in the affirmative. 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 were not
of faith. Patrizi, quoted by Lamy, and by him followed, does
not dare condemn the opinion of those who deny that the
Obiter Dicta are of faith. Schmidt, a recent writer quoted by
Vigouroux, says: "Credimus doctrinam quam proposuimus
quoad illam specialem assertionem quae immunitatem ab errore,
divinam auctoritatem, et inspirationem ipsam ad res indiffe.
rentes etiam ■minimas extendit non esse de fide, et contrariam non
esse haeresim. Nihilominus, persuasum nobis est doctrinam
nostram omnino certam esse, nee contrariam ullo vtodo proba-
bilem aut tolerabilent judicamus^ This is a succinct statement
of the Catholic position ; hence, we are introduced to the
answer to the fi r s t question : are those details inspired ?
This we answer in the affirmative.
The theologians, Newman excepted, quoted above, gener-
ally, while denying that there was any dogma to force us to
admit the inspiration of these details, defend, at the same time
that they are inspired, and that an error in these can not be
admitted in the Sacred Scriptures, as they came forth from the
inspired writers' pen. Schmidt openly and explicitly teaches
such to be the case. And, indeed, there is danger in the oppo-
site views. Newman in the 19th Cent, for 1884 seems to mini-
mize this danger, and claims that similar danger would come
c
34 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
from the admission of accidental variations in the text, through
the ravages of time, which all admit ; but such is not the case,
for in relation to the obiter dictum, we are directly attacking
the influence which the Holy Ghost had on the books ; while, in
the other case, we are only bringing to bear on documents, the
light of critics, to determine whether or not the document has
been preserved through the vicissitudes of time. St. Jerome,
whom no one will accuse of excessive conservatism, held ex-
pressly that these details were inspired, and cited the instance
of Paul's cloak. (Prol. in Phil. Tom. XXVI, col. 600.) The
Fathers are unanimous in proclaiming for the Scriptures
exemption from all error. The objection is made that these
details are too minute for an inspiration, which, as we have
stated, is a special influence of the Holy Ghost in the mind of
the inspired writer ; and that it would be unworthy of God to
inspire such minutiae ; but we must remember that " Deus
creavit Angelos in coelis ; vermiculos in terris, nee major fuit in
illis, nee minor in istis." (St. Augustine, quoted by St. Jerome,
ibid.) These details have their utility also. For instance, the
description in Tobias is a vivid pen picture of the return of one
to his home, after a protracted absence. St. Paul shows his
simple and tender confidence in Timothy by bidding him bring
his cloak from Troas. But what we assert for the obiter dicta
as they came from the hand of the inspired writer, we do not,
in any wise, assert for them, as they exist to-day. As the ob-
ject of the Holy Scripture could be obtained without a stupen-
dous miracle, wrought on the part of God, to preserve these
from error, we admit that in these, owing to the various vicissi-
tudes through which our Holy Books have passed, accidental
errors may have occurred. In another treatise, we shall defend
that the text of the Holy Scripture, as we have it to-day is sub-
stantially correct, but admits of accidental errors. Here we
might quote the golden words of St. Augustine : " If, in the
Holy Scriptures, we find aught that seems incredible, it is not
to be said that the author of this book has not known the
truth ; but we should say: the manuscript is defective, or the
transcriber erred, or we do not understands Many of these
errors are the result of the ignorance or inexactness of the
transcribers ; as, for instance, St. Jerome translates the No-
Amon, Nahum III, 8. to be Alexandria, whereas Alexandria
was not built by Alexander M. till three centuries later, and
then was not the site of No-Amon, which was the city of
Thebes,the capital of Upper Egypt. (Bible et Decouverts
Modernes, Volume, IV. 259 — 262.) Also St. Jerome confesses
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION. 35
that he rendered the Jl'^p^'p' o^ Jonas, by "hedera", ivy, as
he thought his readers unacquainted with the plant which is
really signified, the ricinus, or Castor plant.
Moreover, as has already been stated, 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 un-
known at the time of the writing of the Holy Books. They have
delved down deep into the mysterious storehouse of nature,
have discovered her treasures, 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 hypo-
theses have been thus found out. But science, proud of her
achievements, 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. The question, then, is asked : does inspira-
tion extend to the scientific details of the Bible ? God has not
directly revealed the scientific truths of the Bible. This all
admit, but, nevertheless, he could have indirectly revealed
these, as they form a component factor in a narrative, the ob-
ject of which is to teach men their relations to the Author of
their being. The majority of Catholic interpreters hold that
the scientific truths in Genesis are indirectly revealed. How-
ever, all scientific truths are inspired, in the sense that God
impelled the Sacred writer to write those truths with infallible
veracity and certainty. Hence, we join our voices with the
voice of all the learned in asserting that the scope of the Holy
Books was not to teach men science, while we demand immun-
ity from error for those scientific assertions in this sense, that
the truth intended to be conveyed by every sentence and pro-
position in the Bible, as it came from the pen of the writer, is
inspired. Galileo, in a letter to the Grand Duchess of Milan,
quoted a celebrated saying of Baronius : " Spiritui Sancto men-
tem fuisse nos docere quomodo ad ccelum eatur, non quomodo
coelum gradiatur." Since the time of Galileo, men have con-
ceded that the Scripture spoke according to the common opin-
ions of the people, and attributed significations to words,
which the vulgar speech of the day warranted. For God made
36 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
use of a human medium to convey his message to man, and he
did not startle the people by strange expressions, 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 immutable 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 conflict
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 human thought,
and only good to herself can come therefrom. The greatest
astronomer of this century. Father Secchi, S. J., was one of her
faithful 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 domain, use their own prin-
ciples and method." (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 demonstrated 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 man-
ner, 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 luminary to rule the day and a
lesser luminary to rule the night, and the stars." Now it would
seem from this that the stars were less in magnitude than the
moon. As science has indisputably 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 lum-
inary than the stars. Hence, even the Sun is not necessarily
asserted to be a greater luminary in fact than the stars, but
only in appearance.
THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 37
In relation to the inspiration of "dicta aliorum", no definite
rule can be given. The character of the person, the circum-
stances in which such saying is uttered, the mode of quoting,
and the nature of the proposition must be weighed. For in-
stance, 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 prior rule can be laid down, still
there is no difficulty in distinguishing the true from the false.
Chapter IV.
The Canon.
Canon, from Greek kuvcov, originally meant any straight
rod or bar. From this basal signification were formed the cog-
nate meanings of the amussis or carpenter's rule, the beam or
tongue of the balance, and then, like norma, any rule or stand-
ard, 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 what 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 pre-
dicting the term of the Holy Books, the early writers passed
from the active signification of the term to its effect, and used
the measure for the thing measured ; 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. I can not entertain as
probable this second opinion ; it seems far-fetched, and not well
founded in what the early writers have written. I am of the
persuasion that the term was applied to the collection of Scrip-
tures to signify that such list formed the criterion and measure
of a book'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
38 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Church was called the canon. Thus, to-day, those who consti-
tute 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 conforms 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 subjoin
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 following : Of the
Old Testament, the five books of Moses, to wit : Genesis, Ex-
odus, 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, Ecclesiastes, The Canticle of Canticles,
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias with Baruch, Ezechiel,
Daniel, The Twelve Minor Prophets, to wit: Hosea, Joel,
Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Nahum, Habukuk, Sophonias,
Haggaeus, 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 Corinthi-
ans, 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 Apostle 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 V.
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
THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 39
tongues. In Hebrew it is H*''!!?* i" Greek, ^LadrjK-q^ and
in Latin, Testamentum. Although the etymological construc-
tion of these terms is not exactly identical, still, in fact, their
accepted sense in this predication is the same, that of a pact,
treaty or covenant ; and they designate the written instruments
of God's solemn covenant with mankind.
A fundamental 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 KaLvrj Atad-^Kij, in contradistinction to the UaXuLa
Aiad-^KT}-, 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 Eng-
lish 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 arbi-
trary, ill founded ranging of the different books under each
particular class renders their data worthless. By their division,
we must include Daniel among the Hagiographa, while Josue,
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. Many
try to assign reasons for the classification of the Jews. We are
not minded to do this. It is to us a groundless, worthless
division, never adopted by any writer of modern times. There
was also in vogue among the Jews a well known liturgical sec-
tion of Holy Scripture, the Hl/^D CL^'DH^ oi" five volumes :
The Canticle of Canticles, Ruth, the Lamentations of Jeremias,
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 lit-
urgical divisions which they call nti^'"*)Df from root tl^'IS, to ex-
T TT -T
pound. These were first arranged so that every third year the
Pentateuch was totally read in the synagogues. Now, how-
ever, the Babylonian mode prevails in all the synagogues, which
divides the Pentateuch in fifty-four parashas, so arranged that,
40 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
by reading them on every Saturday, they finish the Pentateuch
within the course of the year. To this usage St. James
alludes, Acts XV, 21 : " For Moses of old time hath in every
city them that preach him in the synagogues, where he is read
every Sabbath." These parashas are designated in the Hebrew
text of the Pentateuch by three Q* or three Q* They are
designated by Q* if the section begins on the beginning of the
line ; by 0» if it begins in the middle of the Hne. The Q* is
initial for nlninC/ ^/^« 5 to signify that the section is an
open one, as it begins with the line ; while D* is initial for
nlDinp^ closed; implying 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, extending from VI, 9 — XI, inclusively, is open and
designated by three ©♦ The parasha, enclosed from Gen.
XXVIII, II — XXXII, 3. inclusively, is closed, and designated
by three D* The parashas were subdivided into minor sections,
designated in the Hebrew text by single ^* or D* ^s they re-
spectively 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
niC^Drir from root *1[0D/ to dismiss ; because, after they were
T T : - - T
read, the people were dismissed. It was in accordance
with this usage, that Jesus Christ at Nazareth read in the syna-
gogue the passage from Isaias, Luke IV, 16 — 19. This haftara
is not now found among those assigned for synagogical read-
ings. 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, composed of all the re-
maining books. However, modern writers find it commodious
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, 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 pro-
tocanonical and deuterocanonical books seems to have first been
employed by Sixtus Sennensis (1520 — 1569). In his BibHo-
THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 41
theca Sancta, Book I, Sec. i, he writes thus : "The Canonical
books of the first order we may caSS. protocanonical ; the Canon-
ical books of the second order were formerly called ecclesiasti-
cal, but are now by us termed deuterocanonicaiy 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 oi protocan-
onical, the books concerning whose divine origin no doubts
ever existed ; while the deuterocanonical books are those con-
cerning which greater or less doubts were entertained for a
time by some, till finally the genuinity 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 deutero-
canonical fragments of Esther, (from the 4th verse of 10 to 24
verse of 16 chapter, and Daniel III, 24 — 90 ; XIII, XIV). The
deuterocanonical books of the New Testament are also seven
in number : The Epistle to the Hebrews, 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, II. Many of the protestants reject ali the deuterocan-
onical books, 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 violently made the
number of the Books of Holy Scripture conform thereto.
Josephus makes use of this mode of enumeration. In his de-
fense against Apion, he says : " For we have not an innumer-
able multitude of books among us [as the Greeks have), dis-
agreeing 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
42 THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
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 Proph-
ets, and nine of the Hagiographa. Some, however, reckon
Ruth and the Lamentations among the Hagiographa, and con-
sider 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 mixed these modes
in trying to conform their enumeration with the Jewish tradi-
tion. We can not tell who was the first to find a mystic rela-
tion 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 influence. The appended
schema will more vividly illustrate the Jewish mode of enum-
eration of the Holy Books :
1. i<* ri^irXnj -------- Genesis.
2. 2* nto^ n^xi Exodus.
3. y i<^p11 -------- Leviticus.
4. ^^* ^2n*'1 -------- Numbers.
5. n^D'ID^nn^H _ _ _ _ Deuteronomy.
6. r j;C^1n^ Jehoshua.
7. rn^llD^PS^- _ - - Judges and Ruth.
r> «.« L^«,pi..*4 (Samuel I and II, commonly
5. n 75SiD;? - - I called I and II Kings.
Ck *M* ■Bkfc^^Lws (Kings I and II, commonly
y. U U'J7Q - -] called III and IV Kings.
10. ^* in;y^^^ Isaias.
-t-i m,* ^s^i.^*, «.«>««i^«k^ Heremias and The
11. y mrp) inp-l^ - - | lamentations.
12. !'*!'i<pTri^ Ezechiel.
fHosea, Joel, Amos,
10 -^i^n^i-^n n^S>^*i^ - - Obadia,Jona, Micha,
13. "li|^^ nr) D^N'?; jNahum, Habakuk.
Literally the twelve Prophets, whom we Zephania, Haggai,
designate as the twelve minor Prophets, [y^t^y.-.^ Malarhia
These, by theJews, were computed as one book '-^cn.iidiici, ivididunia.
THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 43
14. y D^?nn *1SD Liber Laudum, or The Psalms.
15. D* ^?^D - - - The Proverbs of Solomon.
16. ^''nVii Job.
17. ?^'bii^:i Daniel.
18. )i' Xlty. - E^ra I and II.
19. P*D'^D^n^13^ - - Chronicles, I and II.
20. n^inpi^ Esther.
21. ^* ^^.'n'}P ------ Ecclesiastes.
22. ri* D'^*1*''^n ^^t^ - The Canticle of Canticles.
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 Talmudic number.
Against this is the authority of Josephus, 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 VI.
Ezra and his Influence.
The History of the Canon of the Old Testament is obscure
and difficult, through default of reliable documents. In trac-
ing it through its remote antiquity, we shall endeavor to bring
forth in their clearest light the certain data, filling up the
lacunas by the best warranted conjectures.
The nucleus of the Old Law was the Pentateuch, or five
books of Moses. Around this centre of development was
aggregated all the Sacred writings of the Jews. It was the
niln^ the Law, par excellence, the divine book. The sub-
T
sequent 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
44 EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE.
fount. As less reverence was entertained for these later works,
so less care was taken in their preservation.
The Pentateuch was kept in the temple ; it was the warrant
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, i. The
Samaritan Codex contains only the Pentateuch.* Had the
other books been placed in a canon with the Pentateuch the
existence here of the isolated Pentateuch would be inexplica-
ble. We may not say with certainty at what date the Samari-
tan Codex was written, but the most probable opinion would
fix such date soon after the Schism of the ten tribes. (975
B. C.) Comely, in his Introduction in Libros Veteris Testa-
menti 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 con-
stituted 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 commis-
sioned 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 Consti-
tution of Israel's Jahvistic polity. At times of great defection
in religion, even the Thorah fell into disuse and oblivion. Thus
*The Samaritan Codex contains a spurious text of the book of Josue,
but it is evident that it is a later interpolation.
EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE. 45
the passage in II Kings XXII, 8: "And Helcias the high
priest said to Saphan the scribe : * I have found the book of
the Law in the house of the Lord ' ; and Helcias gave the book
to Saphan, and he read it", implies a preexisting 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 Josias, no mention is made of any
other book than the Law. Had the other books formed a col-
lection 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 in their return to
Jahve's Law, the Pentateuch was the centre of their reorgani-
zation.
The other books came into being by gradual growth. Most
of these contained data that by living tradition was 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 Scrip-
ture. The Babylonian Captivity, wrought by Nabuchadnezzar,
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 Jahve's altars demol-
ished. To bring Israel out of her religious disorder, Ezra was
sent with full power from Artaxerxes. His fitness for his com-
mission may be inferred from I. Ezra VII, 6: " "^ISlD ^^IHl
TW'O ni1n3 "TTID " " ^"^^ he was a ready scribe in the
Law of Moses." Of Ezra's work as the restorer of Jahve'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, proba-
ble judgments, 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
46 EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE.
extent of his influence is impossible, through defect of docu-
ments. In all questions of this nature, the judgments of men
will be divergent. And so in this question men have thought
differently. The preponderance of Catholic thought has been
that Ezra compiled and fixed the Canon. Prominent among
those who have held this opinion are Serarius, Bellarmine, Bon-
frere, 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, Mov-
ers, Nickes, Malou, Danko, and Loisy.
As rationalistic principles have thoroughly pervaded the
protestant scriptural thought currents, I think that it will not
aid in our investigation to bring forth and classify the protes-
tant opinions 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 fltD^ "'D'lS* (The Chapters
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
{^"in^ ^D2' (The Last Gate) of the Babylonic Gemara is more
T : ^ T T
explicit.* In folios 14 b and 15 <?, it is written : " Who wrote
the Holy Books? Moses wrote his book, the section concern-
ing Bileam and Job. Jehoshua wrote his book and eight verses
in the Law. Samuel wrote his book, the book of Judges and
Ruth. David wrote the book of Psalms by means of ten An-
cients, Adam, the first, Melchisedech, Abraham, Moses, Heman,
Iduthun, Asaph and the three sons of Kore. Jeremias wrote
his book, the Book of Kings and the Lamentations. Ezechias
and his colleagues wrote Isaias, Proverbs, the Canticle of Can-
ticles, 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.
In this testimony properly understood, there is nothing
impossible. The presence there of the names Adam, Mel-
chisedech, Abraham, and Moses as contemporaries of David
*The commentatorial treatises of the Gemara were called gates, since
they (ypened tlie way for the intelligence of the different truths.
EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE. 47
has caused much discussion among those who thought these to
be the original patriarchs. Such is evidently not the case.
By these names the talmudists meant not the patriarchs but
contemporaries of David, who bore the names of Israel's ances-
tral patriarchs. Thus we have among the Rabbis of the mid-
dle ages Solomon, Moses, David, etc. This point is so evident
that I shall not dwell more upon it. Thus understood, the
testimony is, at least, not impossible, and shows us that, at its
writing, the Jewish canon, comprising the protocanonical books
was fixed. The attribution of the Authorship of Isaias to
Ezechias most probably means that he compiled into a volume
the disconnected documents and diaries left by the prophet.
We say this simply to show the possibility of the testimony,
not to advocate its opinion.
We now join with these testimonies, that of the apocryphal
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 let those who would live in the last days live. And
he made answer to me and said : ' Go and summon thy 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 en-
kindle in thy heart the light of intellect, which shall not be
extinguished until thou wilt have finished the things thou shalt
have begun to write. And then, a part thou shall 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." Ibidem, 38 — 47. " 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 exceed-
ingly 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
48 EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE.
pass, after forty days, the Most High spoke saying : * The first
things thou hast written make openly manifest, and let the
worthy and the unworthy read ; but the latter seventy pre-
serve, that thou mayest give them to the wise men of thy
people. For in these is the vein of understanding, and the
fount of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge.' And I did so."
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 Ar-
menian versions. In these the whole number of books is
placed at ninety-four instead of 204 ; whence, if we subtract the
seventy which were to remain hidden for the sole use of the
wise men, we shall have the traditional number, twenty-four, of
the Jewish Canon.
Cornely makes much of this testimony as being built upon
the true basis of Jewish tradition. I confess, though admitting
some basis of truth, I can not find anything in it that would
convince the intellect that Ezra fixed the Canon. The role of
Ezra as second promulgator of the Law would be sufficient
basis for the rabbinical fable.
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 Rab-
bis, till it is hard to glean it from the composite mass.
I 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 no wise, 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 IV Book of Ezra, a book filled with rabbinic
fable, impossible superstition, and erroneous dogma. St.
Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Basil,
Theodoret, St. Optatus and others have relied implicitly on the
testimony of IV Ezra. Some, as St. Chrysostom, St. Isidore
of Seville, St. Bede, have tried to make the passage of IV Ezra
credible by restricting the character of Ezra within somewhat
narrower bounds. See Loisy, Hist, du Canon de I'Ancien
Testament.
EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE. 49
Having brought forth these preliminary testimonies, we now
proceed to more closely examine the question of Ezra's influ-
ence on the Scripture. Ezra restored the Jahvistic worship,
and promulgated the Law. This rests on the clear testimony
of an inspired book. The 8th and 9th Chapters of the II Book
of Ezra firmly establish the character of Ezra as reorganizer of
Israel and promulgator of the Law ; but when we would ex-
tend 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, secondly, proceed
to establish the most reasonable probable judgments concern-
ing what he did do. We place, therefore, as a thesis, that there
are no adequate data to establish that Ezra promulgated an
offlcial list of the Holy Books of the Jews ; but, on the con-
trary, probable data seem to warrant that no such official list
was ever promulgated 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 scriptural
science which asserts any such fact. Men, it is true, have
asserted such fact ; but they lacked one requisite element 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 Babba
Bathra does not antedate the second century of the Christian
era, and, at that time, the list of the Jewish Canon was com-
plete, not by definite authority, but by the common consent of
the Jewish people and its teachers. The Babba Bathra does
not attribute the fixing of the Canon to Ezra, and no other
document worthy of faith does so. I think that a fact of such
importance would not be passed over in silence, while so many
others of much less importance are detailed to us in the books
of Ezra, Nehemias, and the Maccabees.
The Talmud records many disputes concerning the canon-
icity 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
*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.
60 EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE.
Simon said : "The disciples of Schammai judged more un-
favorably of Ecclesiastes than the disciples of Hillel." Rabbi
Simeon, son of Azai, said : " I 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 Canticles defiles the
hands. The world has nothing more precious 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 concerning Ecclesiastes."
Rabbi Jochanan, son of Josue, 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 reason
that its discourses were contrary to the Law. Why did they
not place it apart ? Because it begins and ends with 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 continuator
of Chronicles.
The book of Ecclesiasticus, written very probably about the
year 180, B. C, in Chapters XLIV to XLIX inclusively, speaks
of Israel's heroes and sages, and, although it exhorts that
Nehemias 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 Jewish
Canon, and, consequently, were unknown 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
Nehemias and Judas had collected : " And these same things
were set down in the memoirs and commentaries of Nehemias,
and how he made a library, and gathered the writings concern-
ing the kings, and the Prophets and the (writings) of David,
EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE. 51
ra Tov AaviS, and the letters of the kings treating of the obla-
tions. And in like manner Judas also gathered together all
such things as were lost by the war we had, and they are in
our possession." Cornely would distort this text till it would
be made to comprise the whole Canon [Introduction 1,45 — 46.]
His attempts are too arbitrary to merit an extended notice.
No book would suffice to include all we should write, if we set
out to refute every arbitrary assertion that has been made con-
cerning the Holy Scriptures. With Loisy, we see in this testi-
mony a description of a collection of books of national import-
ance 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 enumera-
tion, and the Psalms of David. The other works were, doubt-
less, epistles of the Persian Kings, of importance in the govern-
ment of a country, now a vassalage of Persia. It is plainly
evident that Nehemias did not collect the Canon of Scripture
but a collection of important books sacred and profane, which,
joined to the later collection of Judas Maccabseus, formed a
sort of national library, to a participation of which, the Jews of
Palestine invited their brothers of Alexandria. This testimony
also is a factor to refute the generally received opinion that
Ezra closed the Canon. Most probably, he cooperated with
Nehemias 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 posses-
sion of Israel. Had it been made subsequently, some trace of
it would have been left in the records of the Jews. We be-
lieve, therefore, that the opinion which attributes to Ezra the
collection and closing of the Canon to be devoid of historical
basis and untenable.
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 promul-
gated 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 distinguish-
ing function In history. As reorganizer of Israel's polity, I am
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
52 EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE.
conjecture. But, from the fact of the collection by Nehemias,
one may see that the reconstructive spirit of Nehemias and
Ezra tended to bring together Israel's sacred deposit of writ-
ings. They did this without any ex professo declaration of
promulgating a Canon ; and it is highly probable that not all
the Holy Books of the first Canon were collected 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 canon-
ization by any authority, but the fact that their contents were
comformable to the living traditions of the people, and reflected
the things which a tenacious Eastern memory had learned from
Law and Prophet.
Ezra may have revised many 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 offi-
cial promulgation of an incomplete Canon of Scripture, at the
very time when other books of divine origin were in actual ex-
istence, although not in his posession. In the talmudic testi-
monies adduced above, mention is made of a great synagogue,
n^iliin HD^w 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 historical data are
wanting. Besides the talmudic authority already quoted, the
Jews of the middle age, Abarbanel, Abraham ben David and
Maimonides recount that the Great Synagogue was composed
of 1 20 members. Ezra was president, and the Prophets Hag-
gai, 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 characterized 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 credul-
ously accepted the legend of Ezra's Canon have rejected the
story of the Great Synagogue. No convincing data are at
hand to establish the existence of such a body organized by
Ezra, and yet such an organization, though not of such propor-
EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE. 63
tions 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, ^p*l/ (cerebro vacuus), shall be in danger of the
ITT
council." 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. Nothing 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
reorganized 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 protect a
collection of books which the Providence of God protected 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 "'^^T'^ (angelus
• T : -
mens) to be an appellative of Ezra, or of another Jew of that
period, designating the particular function of the last of the
Prophets. Cornely sustains by probable arguments, that
Malachi is the proper name of an individual. The Jews recog-
nized in him the last of the Prophets, and termed him ^H^H
T
D'^^''!I3^n (sigillum Prophetarum). Whatever view we
adopt, Malachi's period must have been about four hundred
years B. C. The accessions to the Palestinian Canon sub-
sequent to Malachi were accorded a secondary rank. They
were by no means considered 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 in-
fluence of the Holy Ghost they denominated the ^^p ^3
54 EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE.
(filia vocis). We find in no place an explicit enumeration of
the several books whose writers were supposed to be actuated
by the da^/i kol, but all indications seem to evince that they
were the deuterocanonical 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 Josephus
Flavius, now to be adduced, clearly asserts the existence and
preservation of certain semi-divine books, which had been col-
lected after the close of prophecy in the reign of Artaxerxes
Longimanus. 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 multitude of books dis-
agreeing from and contradicting one another, as the Greeks
have, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of
all the past times, which are justly believed 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 human
life. It is true, our history hath been written 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 evi-
dent 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 subsequent
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 Ecclesiasti-
EZRA AND HIS INFLUENCE. 55
cus. Josephus, who was an apt expounder of Pharasaic tradi-
tions, makes use of the deuterocanonical fragments of Esther
and the second book of Maccabees.
Eusebius, in the VI book of his Ecclesiastical History,
Chapter 25, recording the catalogue of Scriptures, after enu-
merating the protocanonical works, 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 Jews. St. Epiphanius Haer. VHI. No. 6,
testifies that Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus were in honor among
the Jews, and distinguished from the apocryphal 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 testi-
monies 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 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 Hagiographa." " Its authority," he continues, " is con-
sidered less apt to decide things about which there is dispute.
It is written in Chaldaic, and reckoned among the historical
books." I think it to be a position admitting of no reasonable
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
*The Constitutiones Apost. are apocryphal writings dating back to
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 traditions of the times. They were
declared apocryphal by the decree of Gelasius, but still are of value
inasmuch as they preserve for us the traditions of the first ages of
Christianity.
66 THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON.
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 VII.
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 Phila-
delphus in the third century B. C, and continued down to the
first Century B. C. The influence of Greek thought and cus-
toms 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 received and uitermingled
promiscuously with the other books. It is quite probable that
there was always a certain degree of uncertainty and indecision
in the synagogues of Alexandria. The minute, sharply drawn,
pharasaic distinctions did not obtain there. They had left
home and home traditions, and blending with a highly cultivat-
ed 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
II 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 distinc-
tion between the protocanonical and the deuterocanonical
books. Had such distinction been made, the books of second-
ary importance would have been relegated to the post of an
THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON. 67
appendage. Now the direct opposite is found to have prevailed.
Protocanonical and deuterocanonical works are indiscriminately
intermingled in the Alexandrian Canon. This indiscriminate
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 de-
claration, it would have led to controversy between the Hellen-
ists and the Jews of Palestine. No trace of any such contro-
versy is found in the records and traditions of antiquity. The
Jews of Palestine were not hostile to the deuterocanonical
works, but, from the causes already enumerated, refused to
accord them equal rank with the others. The Jews of Alex-
andria 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 receive
the Christ in fulfillment of Jahve's promises, but the great
gentile world was to be the chosen people of the New Coven-
ant. 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, without changing
the language. Thus two conditions favorable for the evangeli-
zation 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 ex-
pedient that the existing Scriptures 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 grafting the new scion on the old
stock. Thus the Alexandrians were instruments in the hands
of God in collecting a complete body of Scriptures, which that
same Providence has ever protected as the great basic element
in the deposit of faith. The first real canonization of the deu-
terocanonical books was the approbation of the Alexandrine
collection of books by the teachers of the New Law.
68 THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON.
We have hitherto assumed that the deuterocanonical books
were indiscriminately intermingled with the other books in the
Alexandrine collection. That we may not be thought to
assume unproven things, we shall adduce a few proofs for 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 (deuterocanonical) are inserted
among canonical books in the Alexandrian 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 transla-
tion 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
probably to the fourth century, contain these works. The
Jewish sect of the Falashas, who have been in Abyssinia since
before the coming of Christ have a version of Scripture in
Ethiopean in which no discrimination is made between the pro-
tocanonical and deuterocanonical 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 deuterocanonical works.
Such early and universal approbation could not be effected,
had not these books been delivered to the Messianic 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 protocanonical
works need no defender, 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 accepting and employing the
Alexandrian text of Holy Scripture, in which were the deutero-
canonical books, virtually canonized that collection of Scrip-
tures.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH, 59
Chapter VIII.
The Canon of the Church.
There is no trace in writing or tradition of any formal deci-
sion rendered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles concerning the
canon of the Old Testament. However, their use of the Alex-
andrian text of Scripture is equivalent to an express decree.
It were incompatible with the characters of the teachers of
mankind and organizers of the Church, to make use of a collec-
tion of Scripture in which profane and inspired books were
commingled. That they formulated no decree concerning the
canon of Scripture, proves that the Scriptures 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 liv-
ing constitution, which is the almighty power of the Holy
Ghost, her vital principle. Hence the Scriptures are only an
instrument in the hands of the Church. Christ and his Apos-
tles founded the teaching body, which should guard the Scrip-
tures, and at the proper time fix the canon. In all our investi-
gations 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 light of
the Church. It is not by the sole force of historical data, that
I believe that the deuterocanonical works have God for their
author. I receive them on the authority of the Church, and
then trace the conformity between the book's 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 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 Septuagint dif-
fered 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. Irenaeus'
60 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
authority is explicit in favor of our thesis. " The Apostles,
being older than all these, (Aquila and the other Greek inter-
preters) are in accord with the aforesaid (Septuagint) transla-
tion, and the translation corresponds with the tradition of the
Apostles. For Peter and John and Matthew and Paul and ihe
others and their followers announced the prophetic things ac-
cording to the Septuagint.'' [Contra Haer. Ill, 21, 3]. Origen
testifies that Paul, in Epist. to Romans, follows the Septuagint
in everything, except, perchance, things of minor moment.
[Orig. in Rom. VIII, 6]. The Syrian Jacobites, by the testi-
mony of their primate Barhebraeus preferred the Syrian version
of Scripture that 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 dis-
courses 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 con-
vert a Greek world. By the Providence of God, a version of
Scripture existed in Greek. They were but following out the
great plan of Salvation, by employing the resources of this
existing text of Scripture in the evangelization of the world.
Had such text been interspersed with spurious books and frag-
ments, such line of action would ill fit the teachers of the
world. Our adversaries endeavor 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 opinions rejects this argument against the deutero-
canonical books. On page yy : " When Bishop Cosius says
that in all the New Testament we find no passage of the apo-
cryphal (deuterocanonical) books to have been alleged either
by Christ or his Apostles for the confirmation of his doctrine,
the argument, though based on a fact, is scarcely conclusive ;
else, Esther, Canticles, and other works might be equally dis-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
61
credited." In the New Testament Abdias, Nahum, the Can-
ticle of Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Ezra, and Nehemias 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 simi-
larity 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 col-
lection. As this identity of thought appears to better advan-
tage from the Greek, we collate a few texts in that tongue.*
^o^ia "Eeipax fC€(f). E. 11. laK(oj3ov 'FimaroX'^ K€(f>. A.
Tlvov Ta')(y<i iv a/cpodaei aov, 19. — eaTco Se 7ra? av6p(07ro<;
KoX iv fjuaKpodvfMia (pOeyyov
aTTOKpiCLV.
Ecclesiasticus V. ii.
Esto velox in auscultatione tua,
et in longanimitate prefer respon-
sum.
1>o<f)La ^eupa'x^ /ce<^.KH. 2.
A(/>e9 a^iKrjfia rat irXr^aiov aov,
KoX t6t€ SerjdevTO'i crov at afiap-
Tiai (Tov XvOrjcrovraL.
Eccli. XXVIII. 2.
Remitte injuriam proximo tuo,
et tunc deprecanti tibi peccata
solventur.
^o(f)ia 'EaXcofjLoov Kecf). T. 5, 6.
Kat oXiya, Traihevdevre'^ fxeyd-
\a evepyerrjOijaovrat on 6 @eo?
eireCpaaev avTOv<i koL etpev a^Cov;
eavTov, 0)9 ^(^pvcrov iv ^oovevTTjpiq)
iSoKifiacrev avTOv<i kol o)? oXokci-
ra^u? et9 to aKovaai, ^paSis ii9
TO XaXrjcraL, ^pa8v<; itf opyqv.
Jas. I. 19.
Sit omnis homo velox ad audi-
endum, tardus ad loquendum,
tardus ad iram.
'Eva7. Kara MaO. VI. 14.
'Eai* yap acfyiJTe rol<; avdpco-
TTOt? ra TrapaTTTrnfiara avrcov,
CKprfcreL koL vfilv 6 Trarrjp vfiwv
6 ovpdvLO^.
Math. VI. 14.
Nam si dimiseritis hominibus
delicta sua, dimittet et vobis pater
vester coelestis,
Jlerpov A. /ce^. A. 6 — 7.
'Et* CO ayaXXidade oXCyov dpri
el Seov XviTT} devre^ iv iroiKiXoi<i
TreipacTfiol^, Xva to SoKifiiov vfiMv
tt)? 7ricrT€co<; ttoXv reifXLcoTepov
'y^pocrov rod diroXXv/Mevov Sia
pTTcofia Overtax irpoaehe^aro av- ttu/jo? Se SoKifia^ofievov evpedy
T0v<;. et9 eiratvov kuI So^av /cat reifirjv
iv awoKaXvy^et Jrjaov ^picrov.
* The parallelism would be scarcely traceable in English.
62 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Wisdom III. 5-6. I Pet. I. 6—7.
Et in paucis vexati, in multis In quo exultatis, nunc ad breve
bene disponentur. Quoniam tempus afflicti variis tentation-
Deus tentavit eos, et invenit eos ibus, si opus sit: ut probatiofidei
dignos se. Tamquam aurum in vestrse multo pretiosior auro
fornace probavit eos; quasi holo- quod perditur, et tamen per
caustri hostiam accepit illos. ^ ig^em probatur, reperiatur in lau-
dem et gloriam et honorem in
revelatione Jesu Christi.
Ke</). Z'. 26. Upo9 'E/3paLo<i K€(f>. A. 3.
'Airavyaafia ydp iari <f>coTO^ '^^ ^"^ airavyaafia tt)? B6^v^
ai8{ov Kal 'ecTonrrpov aKrjXihcorov ""-} X^P^'^'^VP ri}^ viroardaeco^
T?7? Tov v)€ov evepyeiwi kul clkcov '
7779 ayaOoTTjTO'; airrov.
Ibidem VII. 26. Epist. ad Hebraeos I. 3.
Etenim lucis seternse splen- Qui quum sit splendor gloriae
dor est, atque speculum virtutis et impressa imago substantiae
Dei nulla macula aspersum, ejus- illius, etc.
que imago bonitatis.
Many more texts of this character may be collected from a
comparison of the deuterocanonical books with the New Testa-
ment. See Huet, Demonst. Evang. Prop. IV. and Vincenzi,
Sessio IV. Cone. Trid. Vindicata.
The Fathers of the Church continued the approbation of
the Apostles, and made no distinction in their frequent cita-
tions from Scripture between protocanonical and deutero-
canonical works. None of the Apostolical Fathers has drawn
up a Canon of Scripture. The injury of time has robbed us of
much of their writings, but, in the few preserved to us, most
frequent passages are found from the deuterocanonical works,
of such mode of quotation that it is evident that they recog-
nized these books as divine Scripture. St. Clement of Rome,
who holds a high place in the primitive church, in his Epist. to
the Corinthians, employs the book of Wisdom and Ecclesiasti-
cus. He made an analysis of the book of Judith and the Greek
version of Esther with its deuterocanonical fragments.*
His use of the deuterocanonical books, may be seen from a
comparison of the following collated passages :
*St. Clement of Rome, was a disciple of St. Peter, from whom, accord-
ing to Tertullian, he received ordination. He succeeded Anacletus in the
Roman See in the year 91 of the Christian era. He is mentioned by St.
Paul in the Epist. to the Philippians. His death is placed about the year
100. Although some have controverted his martyrdom, he is placed among
the martyrs in the Canon of the Mass.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
63
Sap. IV. 24.
'* Invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit in orbem terrarum."
Sap. XI. 22.
" Virtuti brachii tui quis re-
sistet ?"
Sap. XII. 12.
" Quis enim dicet tibi : Quid
fecisti ?"
Judith VIII. 30, et seqq.
Esther V. XIV. XV.
Clem. I. ad Cor. III.
" Sed secundum pravas ipsius
concupiscentias incedit, iniquam
et impiam invidiam resumendo
per quam et mors in mundum
intravit."
Clem. I. Cor. XXVII.
"Quis resistet virtuti fortitu-
dinis ejus ?"
Ibid.
"Quis dicet ei : Quid fecisti ?"
Clem. I. Cor. LV
" Beata Judith, cum urbs obsi-
deretur, rogavit seniores ut sibi
liceret in alienigenarum castra
transire, ac seipsam periculo
tradens propter caritatem patriae
populique obsessi egressa est ; el
Dominus tradidit Olophernem in
manu feminae.
Nee minus perfecta secundum
fidem Esther periculo se objecit."
Among the genuine works of Clement of Rome, are rightly
reckoned the two Epistles ad Virgines.*
Ecclesiasticus V. 14.
" Si est tibi intellectus, re-
sponde proximo ; sin autem, sit
manus tua super os tuum."
Ecclesiasticus IX. 8.
" Averte faciem tuam a muliere
compta, et ne circumspicias
speciem alienam. Propter speciem
mulieris multi perierunt, et ex
hoc concupiscentia quasi ignis
exardescit."
Ibid. 12.
" Cum aliena muliere ne sedeas
omnino, nee accumbas cum ea,
super cubitum."
Clem. I. ad Virg. XI.
" Si est tibi intellectus, re-
sponde proximo ; sin autem, sit
manus tua super os tuum."
Clem. II. ad Virg. XIII.
" Ne circumspicias speciem
alienam. Propter speciem muli-
eris multi perierunt."
Clem. Ibid.
"Cum muliere aliena ne sedeas
omnino."
*Funk in his Patr. Apost. rejects the genuinity of these two Epistles, but
his chief argument is that in them the texts from Scripture are more literally
quoted than in the Epist. ad Corinthios. Beelen and others have defended the
authenticity of these Epistles, and we see no reason why a sane criticism
should reject them. They have come down to us through the Syriac, and
have been translated into Latin by "Wetstein, and later by Villecourt.
64
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Ibid. IX. 4.
'* Cum saltatrice ne assiduus sis,
nee audias illam, ne forte pereas
in efficacia illius."
Dan. XIII. 8.
" Et videbant earn senes quo-
tidie ingredientem, et deambu-
lantem : et exarserunt in concu-
piscentiam ejus."
Ibid. 42 — 44.
" Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant, tu scis quoniam fal-
sum testimonium tulerunt contra
me : et ecce morior, cum nihil
horum fecerim, quae isti mali-
tiose composuerunt adversum
me. Exaudivit autem Dominus
vocem ejus."
Clement. Ibid.
" Cum saltatrice ne assiduus
sis, nee audias illam, ne pereas in
efficacia illius."
Ibid. XIII.
"Nonne ex iisdem Scripturis
notum tibi est quid, ad tempora
Susannae, narretur de senibus
illis qui, cum frequenter starent
inter mulieres, contemplati pulch-
ritudinem alienam, in concupis-
centiae barathrum praecipites de-
derunt sese. Castitatis quidem
pretium noverunt, sed ipsius
jugum fregerunt. Hinc appe-
titui perverse venumdati, in
beatam Susannam conspirarunt
ut earn constuprarent. At ilia
turpe ipsorum desiderium frus-
trata est, Innocentiae suae testem
invocavit Deum, qui de manibus
impiorum senum earn liberavit."
The document of the first century, commonly known as the
Epistle of St. Barnabas, also employs the deuterocanonical
books.*
Ecclesiasticus IV. 36.
" Non sit porrecta manus tua
ad accipiendum et ad dandum
collecta."
Epist. S. Barnabae XIX. 19.
" Noli porrigere manus tuas ad
accipiendum, ad dandum vero
contrahere."
The Pastor of Hermas, a document that goes back to the
1st or 2d century, makes use of deuterocanonical works. It is
impossible to fix the identity of the author of Pastor. Some
believed him to be the Hermas mentioned by Paul to the
Romans XVI. 14 : " Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas",
hence the book was regarded by some as canonical Scripture.
It is conjoined to the other Scriptures in Codex {»5 of Mt.
Sinai. Irenseus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen reputed
*St. Barnabas was a Cyprian Jew of the tribe of Levi. Having embraced
Christianity, he was associated with Paul in the Evangelization of the Gentiles.
Tradition places his death to have occurred in Cyprus, at the hands of the
Jews. Tillemont and others have rejected the genuinity of this Epistle. It
is not our intention here to defend such genuinity. It is of value to us in
making known to us the use of Scripture of the 1st Century.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 65
it divine Scripture. It was declared apocryphal in the Canon
of Gelasius. It has always been considered a treatise valuable
for Christian erudition. Its author's identity will always remain
uncertain, but the document makes for our scope by showing
the Christian tradition of the age immediately succeeding the
Apostolic times. It is called the Pastor, because in it an angel,
under the form of a shepherd, speaks. Its trend is chiefly
parenetic.
Ecclesiasticus XXVIII. 3. Pastor, Similitudo IX. 23.
" Homo homini reservat iram, " Deus at Dominus noster, qui
et a Deo quaerit medelam." dominatur omnium rerum, et
creaturae suae universae habet po-
testatem, offensas memmisse non
vult, sed ab his qui peccata sua
confitentur facile placatur. Homo
vero, cum et languidus, mortalis,
infirmus sit repletus peccatis, ho-
mini perseveranter irascitur."
St. Dionysius, the Areopagite, employs deuterocanonical
Scripture.'*
*Dionysius the Areopagite was a citizen of Athens, at the time that Paul
preached the Gospel of Christ in that city. He was among the first men of
the city, a member of the highest judicial court, called "ApeiO? 7rd<yo<;,
Hill of Mars, from its location over against the Acropolis, on the West side.
Before this tribunal, Paul was taken to be judged, for his doctrine, Acts XVII.
By his preaching in that assembly, he converted Dionysius. In the Roman
Breviary, the feast of Dionysius is placed on the 9th of October, and he is
there declared to have been sent by Pope Clement as bishop of France. The
falsity of this opinion has been proven by the labors of the Bollaodists and
others. We find the first clear, succinct statement of the identity of the Areo-
pagite and Bishop Dionysius of Paris in the work which the Abbot Hilduinus
compiled at the command of Louis, the Pious, in the year 835 of the Christian
era. In the obscure writings of Hilduinus, we find it positively stated that
Dionysius, the Areopagite, was the Bishop of Paris ; though, at the same time,
he mentions the doubts of those who refused to believe this. It seems that
Hilduinus was a man of no critical acumen, and was deceived into his error
by the anonymous Acts of the Passion of St. Dionysius, published about the
middle of the 8th Century. Th© BoUandists have clearly proven that all the
Founts of Hilduinus were spurious. It is certain, then, that the opinion of the
identity of the Areopagite and the Bishop of Paris was unknown before the
middle of the eighth century, and that it had then no good foundation. It
results from the voluminous testimonials adduced by the BoUandists that
from the earliest times, the Greeks recognized that the Bishop of Paris and the
Areopagite were different persons, and such opinion seems to have obtained
with the Latins prior to the eighth century. One positive proof that Dio-
nysius did not become the Bishop of Paris is in a canon of the Synod of
Sardis, held in the year 347, which aflirms as follows : " Niullus in hac re in-
ventus est episcopus qui de majori civitate ad minorem transiret." This
plainly establishes that, up to the year 347, no bishop had ever been trans-
E
66 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
The works, De Coelesti Hierarchia, De Ecclesiastica Hier-
archia, De Divinis Nominibus, De Mystica Theologia, and some
Epistles, are believed to be of his authorship. The Bollandists
maintain as the more probable opinion that these works are
not the genuine productions of the Areopagite. Their value
as patristic testimonies is independent of his authorship, since
certainly they reflect the tradition of the first ages of the
Church.
Sap. VIII. 2. De Div. Nom. IV. 12.
" Hanc araavi, et exquisivi a " Et in iis quae aditum ad
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon- Scripturam prseparant quemdam
sam mihi earn assumere, et ama- invenies de divinia Sapientia
tor f actus sum formcB illius." ajentem : Amator f actus sum
fortncE illiusy
Sap. VIII. I. De Div. Nom. VII. 4.
'' Attingtt ergo a fine usque ad "Et quia (Deus) per omnia
finem fortiter, et disponit omnia meat pervadens, ut ait Scriptura,
suaviter." usque ad finem omnium."
In the Epistle of St. Dionysius to Demophilo Monacho, it
is evident that he alludes to the angel in Tobias, when he
speaks in the first chapter of the " beneficis angelis de quibus
theologia quaedam tradit."
St. Polycarp, the martyr bishop of Smyrna, in his Epistle
to the Philippians incorporates a clear quotation from Tobias.
Polycarp Epist. ad Philippen-
Tobias XII. 9. sesX.
"Quoniam eleemosyna a morte " Cum potestis benefacere, no-
liberat, et ipsa est quae purgat lite differre, quia eleemosyna a
peccata, et facit in venire miseri- morte liber at."
cordiam et vitam asternam."
As Polycarp was a disciple of St. John the Evangelist, his
use of Scripture must have been acquired under the super-
vision of St. John himself. This isolated quotation impHes a
liberal knowledge of Scripture, for the Fathers quoted from
memory ; such cognizance of Tobias could scarce result from
ferred from a greater to a less see. Therefore, Dionysius was not transferred
from Athens to the Paris of that time, which was so small as to be called by
Julian the Apostate 'Ko\i')(y't)^"oppidum" and by his historian AmmoniusMar-
cellinus " Cos^eKttm PaHsiorum." Finally, the identity is clearly disproven
by the fact that Dionysius, the bishop of Paris, came with Rusticus and
Eleutherius to Paris, in the reign of Decius, about the year 250 A. D., as is
clearly proven by the Bollandists. This is centuries after the period of Dio-
nysius, the contemporary of St. Paxil. We conclude, therefore, that the distinc-
tion between these two persons is a clearly proven fact.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 67
cursory readings. It must have resulted from assiduous study
and use of a collection that recognized the book of Tobias as
divine Scripture. Polycarp certainly reflects the teaching of
his master, and we have here the implicit approbation of St.
John the Evangelist.* These are but scanty data, it is true,
but the Apostolic age was more the age of oral teaching than
of writing. By the vicissitudes of time, much of the literary
product of that age has perished, and more is hid in obscurity.
As when looking upon objects from afar, many are but dimly
discernible, while the others are lost to the limited sense of
vision ; so in looking back through the long, dim vista to the
remote age of Apostolic times, we see but little with satisfying
distinctness ; other things appear bedimmed and shrouded by
the haze of time, while many other things are entirely lost to
our intellectual perception. As we recede from the remotest
object of our vision, and concentrate our gaze upon nearer
and nearer data, the fulness and distinctness grows with equal
pace ; and we must then take thought not to obtain testi-
monies, but to select the more fitting from the available many.
The few cited should evince to an honest mind that those,
who succeeded the founders of the everlasting teaching
organism, recognized and used the deuterocanonical Scriptures
in the same manner as the protocanonical ones. We shall
now pass down through the ages, and adduce some represent-
ative testimonies of every age.
Athenagoras, a Greek writer who presented the famous
Legatio pro Christianis to Marc Aurelius and Commodus,
A. D. 177, quotes Baruch in that work.
Athenag, Legatio pro Christia-
Baruch III. 36. nis, (secundum Gesner, 10).
" Hie est Deus noster ; neque " Dominus Deus noster : non
est alius qui cum ipso compare- comparabitur alius ad ilium.'"
tur."
*0f the early history of Polycarp, we know nothing. His disciple, St.
Irenseus, testifies that he was taught by the Apostles, and lived in close
fellowship with many who had seen the Lord. [Adv. Haer. III. 3.] He also
testifies that he was constituted bishop of Smyrna, and that he finished his
life by martyrdom at a very advanced age. He is celebrated for his strict
adhesion to the true doctrine, and his corresponding aversion to heresy. It
is Polycarp who relates that John, his teacher, at one time, ran from the bath,
wherein was Cerinthus, crying : " Let us flee, lest the bath should fall in, as
long as Cerinthus, that enemy of truth, is within."
The same Polycarp, once meeting Marcion, who said : " Dost thou know
us?" replied: "I recognize the first born of Satan," They stabbed him
with a sword, after a futile attempt to burn him at the stake.
68
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
St. Hippolyte wrote commentaries on the deuterocanonical
fragments of Daniel, and, in his exegetical treatises, makes
frequent use of the deuterocanonical works.'*'
I. Maccab. II. 33 — 38.
" Exite et facite secundum ver-
bum regis Antiochi et vivetis. Et
dixerunt: ' Non exibimus, neque
faciemus verbum regis di-
centes: Moriamur omnes in sim-
plicitate nostra ' .... et mortui
sunt usque ad mille animas homi-
num."
Tob. III. 24.
" In illo tempore exauditae sunt
preces amborum in conspectu
glorise Summi Dei, et missus est
Angelus ut curaret eos ambos,
quorum uno tempore sunt oratio-
nes in conspectu Domini reci-
tatae."
II. Maccab. VI. 7.
" Ad agitandum colendumque
Bacchanaliorum solenne coge-
bantur Judaei hedera redimiti
S. Hip. Frag, in Dan. XXXI.
XXXII.
"Exite et facite praeceptum
regis et vivetis. Illi autem dixe-
runt : ' Neque exibimus, neque
faciemus praeceptum regis : mo-
riemur in simplicitate nostra : * et
interfecit ex eis mille animas
hominum."
S. Hip. In Susannam V. 55.
" Porro ostendit, quo tempore
Susanna ad Deum oravit, fuitque
exaudita, missum ei fuisse ange-
lum qui eum adjuvaret baud secus
ac se res in Tobia et Sarra ha-
buit ; ambobus enim eadem die
eademque hora orantibus, exau-
dita est amborum oratio, missus-
que est angelus Raphael qui eos
sanaret."
S. Hip. De Christo et Anti-
Christo XLIX.
" Nam et ille decretum tulit
. . . cunctis immolaturos atque
hedera coronatos Baccho circui-
*From the testimony of Photius, we know that St. Hippolyte was the
disciple of Irenaeus, who died about the year 202, A. D. The common
opinion of the old writers makes him a bishop, but there is a great difference
of opinion concerning his see. Eusebius and Jerome confess that they can
establish nothing certain concerning it. Anastasius, Rom, Ecclesise apocrisi-
arius, Georgius Syncellus, Zonaras, Nicephorus Callisti, and the author of
The Paschal Chronicle make him bishop of Porto in Italy, one of the
suburban bishops of Rome. He is also commonly designated in the works
of Greek and Latin writers as a "Roman bishop," which is confirmatory of
the preceding testimonies. The greatest diversity of opinion exists among
modern writers concerning his see. The Bollandists [Aug. Tom. FV., p. 510]
conjecture that he was a bishop of Arabiae, who was martyred at Porto on
his way to Rome ; that thus gradually the error arose to confound the
unknown bishop with the See of Porto, where he was martyred. His see is
uncertain, but his martyrdom may safely be placed under Alexander
Severus, 222-235. His authorship of the Commentaries and other works
from which we shall quote is undoubted.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
69
Baccho pompam ducere. Quod
si qui minus in Grgecorum ritus
ac mores transire voluissent inter-
ficerentur."
Sap, II. 12 —20.
" Circumveniamus igitur jus-
tum, quoniam inutilis est nobis,
et contrarius est operibus nostris,
et improperat nobis peccata legis,
et diffamat in nos peccata dis-
ciplinse nostrse. Promittit se
scientiam Dei habere, et filium
Dei se nominat. Factus est nobis
in traductionem cogitationum
nostrarum. Gravis est nobis
etiam advidendum, quoniam dis-
similis est aliis vita illius, et im-
mutatae sunt viae ejus. Tamquam
nugaces aestimati sumus ab illo,
et abstinet se a viis nostris tam-
quam ab immunditiis ; et praefert
novissima justorum, et gloriatur
patrem se habere Deum. Videa-
mus ergo si sermonis illius veri
sint,et tentemus quae ventura sunt
illi, et sciemus quae erunt novis-
sima illius. Si enim est verus
filius Dei, suscipiet ilium, et libe-
rabit eum de manibus contrario-
rum. Contumelia et tormento
interrogemus eum, ut sciamus
reverentiam ejus, et probemus
patientiam illius. Morte turpis-
sima condemnemus eum : erit
enim ei respectus ex sermonibus
illius."
Sap. V. I.
" Tunc stabunt justi in magna
constantia adversus eos qui se
turos. Qui nolint parere, hos
cruciatibus atque tormentis ex-
agitatos neci tradendos esse. Ac
si quis haec sigillatim legere velit
singulaque lustrare, in libro
Machabaeorum praescripta inve-
niet."
S, Hip. Adv. Judaeos, IX.
" Producam in medio etiam
prophetiam Salomonis de Christo,
quae aperto et perspicue quae Ju-
daeos spectant edisserit. Ait
enim Propheta : Non recte cogi-
taveruntimpii deChristo,dicentes :
Circumvenianus justum, quoniam
inutilis est nobis et contrarius est
operibus et sermonibus nostris, et
improperat nobis peccata legis ;
et promittit se scientiam Dei
habere, et Filium Dei se nominat.
Postea dicit : Gravis est nobis
etiam ad videndum, quoniam dis-
similis est aliis vita illius, et im-
mutatae sunt viae ejus. Tamquam
nugaces aestimati sumus ab illo
et abstinet, se a viis nostris tam-
quam ab immunditiis, et praefert
novissima justorum Ait igi-
tur iterum Salomon in persona
Judaeorum de hoc justo qui est
Christus : Factus est nobis in
traductionem cogitationum nost-
rarum, et gloriatur Patrem se ha-
bere Deum. Videamus ergo si
sermones illius veri sint, et tente-
mus quae erunt novissima illius.
Si enim est Justus Dei filius, sus-
cipiet ilium, liberabit ilium de
manibus contrariorum. Morte
turpissima condemnemus eum :
erit enim respectus ejus ex ser-
monibus illius."
S. Hip. Adv. Judaeos, X.
"Et iterum Solomon de Christo
et Judaeis dicit quod,quando sta-
70
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
angustiaverunt et qui abstulerunt
labores eorum. Videntes turba-
buntur timore horribili, et mira-
buntur in subitatione insperatae
salutis, dicentes intra se, poenitu-
dine affecti et prae augustia spi-
ritus gementus : Hi sunt quos
habuimus aliquando in derisum
et in similitudinem improperii.
Nos insensati vitam illorum aesti-
mabamus insaniam et finem illo-
rum sine honore : ecce quomodo
computati sunt inter filios Dei,
et inter sanctos sors illorum est.
Ergo erravimus a via veritatis, et
justitiae lumen non luxit nobis,
et sol intelligentiae non est ortus
nobis. Lassati sumus in via ini-
quitatis et perditionis, et ambula-
vimus vias difficiles, viam autum
Domini ignoravimus. Quid nobis
profuit superbia ? aut divitiarum
jactantia quid contulit nobis ?
Transierunt omnia ilia tamquam
umbra, et tamquam nuntius per-
currens."
Baruch III. 36—38.
" Hie est Deus noster, neque
est alius qui cum ipso compare-
tur. Hie adinvenit omnem viam
disciplinae, et tradidit illam
Jacob puero suo et Israel dilecto
suo. Post haec, in terris visus
est, et cum hominibus conversa-
tus est."
bit Justus in magna constantia
ante faciem eorum qui eum afflix-
erunt et sermones ejus repudia-
runt : Videntes turbabuntur ti-
more horribili, et mirabuntur in
subitatione insperatae salutis, et
dicent intra se,poenitudine affecti,
et prae augustia spiritus gemen-
tes : Hie est quem habuimus
aliquando in derisum et in sinn-
litudinem improperii. Nos in-
sensati vitam illius existimaba-
mus insaniam et finem illius sine
honore. Quomodo computatus
est in filiis Dei, et in Sanctis sors
illius est ? Ergo erravimus a via
veritatis ; et justitiae lumen non
luxit nobis, et sol non ortus est
nobis. Lassati sumus in via ini-
quitatis et perditionis. Ambula-
vimus vias difficiles ; viam autem
Domini ignoravimus. Quid nobis
profuit superbia nostra ? Tran-
sierunt omnia ilia tamquam um-
bra."
S. Hip. Contra Noet.
" Dicit Scriptura in alio loco :
Hie est Deus ; non reputabitur
alius ad eum .... Invenit omnem
viam scientiae, et dedit illam
Jacob puero suo et Israel dilecto
suo .... Post hsec in terra visus
est, et cum hominibus convcrsa-
tus est."
In the Constitutiones Apostolicae, I found the following
quotations or equivalent allusions : Ecclesiasticus, eight
times ; Judith, four times ; Wisdom, four times ; Tobias,
once ; I. Maccab., once.
Old Irenaeus, the stern defender of the Catholic truth
against heresy, is a certain advocate of the deuterocanonical
books.*
*St. Irenaeus was a native of Greece, in the first half of the second cen-
tury of the Christian era. He was a disciple of Polycarp, and was sent to
Gaul in 157 A. D. He was, at first, priest of the church at Lyon, and, after-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
71
Dan. XIV. 3—4.
" Porro Daniel adorabat Deum
suum. Dixitque ei rex : quare
non adoras Bel ? Qui respondens
ait ei : Quia non colo idola ma-
nufacta, sed viventem Deum qui
creavit Coelum et terram, et habet
potestatem omnis carnis."
Ibid. 23 — 24.
" Et dixit rex Daniel : Ecce
nunc non potes dicere quia iste
non sit Deus vivens : adora ergo
eum.
" Dixitque Daniel : Dominum
Deum meum adorabo, quia ipse
est Deus vivens ; iste autem non
est Deus vivens."
Dan. XIII. 20.
" Ecce ostia pomarii clausa
sunt, et nemo nos videt,"
Dan. XIII. 52—53-
" Inveterate dierum malorum,
nunc venerunt peccata tua quae
operabaris prius ; judicans judi-
cia injusta,innocentes opprimens,
et dimittens noxios, dicente
Domino : innocentem et justum
non interficies."
Ibid. 56.
" Semen Chanaan et non Juda,
species decepit te, et concupis-
centia subvertit cor tuum."
Contra Hsereses Lib. IV. 5.
'* Quem (Deum) et Daniel
Propheta, cum dixisset ei Cyrus
rex Persarum : 'Quare non adoras
BelV annuntiavit dicens ; quon-
iam non colo idola manufacta,
sed vivum Deum, qui constituit
Coelum et terram, et habet omnis
carnis dominationem. Iterum
dixit : Dominum Deum meum
adorabo, quoniam hie est Deus
vivus."
Iren. Contra Hsereses Lib.
IV. XXVI. 3.
" Qui vero crediti quidem sunt
a multis esse presbyteri, serviunt
autem suis voluptatibus et
dicunt : nemo nos videt y
Iren. Contra Haereses Lib.
IV. XXVI. 3.
'* Audient eas quae sunt a
Daniele Propheta voces : Semen
Chanaan et non Juda, species
seduxit te, et concupiscentia
evertit cor tuum; inveterate dier-
um malorum, nunc advenerunt
peccata tua quae faciebas antea,
judicans judicia injusta ; etinno-
centes quidem damnabas ; dimit-
tebas vero nocentes, dicente
Domino : Innocentem et justum
non occides."
wards, bishop of that see. He made of that city the most flourishing centre
of Catholicity in all Gaul. His erudition was vast and precise. He advo-
cated moderation in the schism of the Asiatic bishops under Pope Victor I,
The influence of Papias drew him into the error of the mitigated Millenar-
ianism. His chief work is his Treatise against Heretics, in five books. He
was martyred in the fifth general persecution in 302. By the testimony of
Eusebius, he recognized the Epistle to the Hebrews and Wisdom, and quoted
from them. [Hist. Eccles. V. 36.] We shall collate a few passages. In the
fourth book Contra Hereses, we find scriptural use of the deuterocanonical
fragments of Daniel.
72
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Sap. VI. 19 — 20.
" Custoditio autera legum con-
summatio incorruptionis est, in-
corruptio autem facit esse proxi-
mum Deo."
Baruch IV. 36— V.
" Circuraspice, Jerusalem, ad
orientem et vide jucunditatem a
Deo tibi venientem. Ecce enim
veniunt filii tui quos dimisisti
dispersos ; veniunt collecti ab
oriente usque ad occidentem, in
verbo Sancti gaudentes in hon-
orem Dei."
Cap. V. Exue te, Jerusalem,
stola luctus et vexationis tuae, et
indue te decore et honore ejus
quae a Deo tibi est sempiternae
gloriae. Circumdabit te Deus
diploide justitiae, et imponet
mitram capiti honoris aeterni.
Deus enim ostendet splendorem
suum in te, omni qui sub coelo
est. Nominabitur enim tibi
nomen tuum a Deo in sempi-
ternum ; pax justitae et honor
pietatis. Exsurge, Jerusalem, et
sta in excelso, et circumspice ad
orientem, et vide collectos filios
tuos ab oriente sole usque ad oc-
cidentem, in verbo sancti gau-
dentes Dei memoria. Exierunt
enim abs te pedibus ducti ab ini-
micis : adducet autem illos Dom-
inus ad te portatos in honore
sicut filios regni. Constituit enim
Deus humiliare omnem montem
excelsum et rupes perennes et
convalles replere in aequalitatem
terrae ut ambulet Israel diligen-
ter in honorem Dei. Obumbra-
verunt autem et silvae et omne
Ibid. XXXVIII. 3.
" Visio autem Dei eflficax in-
corruptionis est ; incorruptio au-
tem proximum facit esse Deo."
Iren. Contra Haereses Lib. V.
XXXV. I.
"Hoc significavit Jeremias pro-
pheta:* Circumspice, dicens,
ad orientem, Jerusalem, et vide
laetitiam quae adventat tibi ab
ipso Deo. Ecce venient filii tui
quos emisisti, venient collecti ab
oriente usque ad occidentem
verbo illius sancti, gaudentes ea
quae a Deo tuo est claritate.
Exuere, Jerusalem, habitum luc-
tus et afflictionis tuae, et induere
decorem ejus quae a Deo tuo est
claritatis in aeternum. Circum-
dare amictum duplicem ejus
quae a Deo tuo est justitiae, im-
pone mitram super caput tuum
gloriae aeternae. Deus enim
demonstrabit ei quae sub coelo
est universae tuum fulgorem.
Vocabitur namque nomen tuum
ab ipso Deo in aeternum, pax
justitiae et gloriae colenti Deo.
Surge, Jerusalem, et sta in ex-
celso, et circumspice ad orien-
tem, et vide collectos filios tuos a
solis ortu usque ad occidentem,
verbo illius sancti gaudentes, ip-
sam Dei recordationem.
"Profecti sunt enim a te pedites
dum adducerentur ab inimicis.
Introducet illos Deus ad te por-
tatos cum gloria tamquam thron-
um regni. Decrevit enim Deus
ut humilietur omnis mons ex-
celsus et congeries aeternae, et
ut valles impleantur ad redigen-
*Baruch was by many considered an integral part of Jeremias.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
73
lignum suavitatis Israel ex man-
dato Dei. Adducet enim Deus
Israel cum jucunditate in lumine
majestatis suae, cum misericor-
dia et justitia quae est ex
ipso."
dam planitiem terrae, ut ambulet
Israel tuti Dei gloria. Umbra-
cula autem intexuerunt silvae, et
omne lignum boni odoris ipsi
Israel, praecepto Dei. Praeibit
enim Deus cum laetitia, lumine
claritatis suae cum misericordia
et justitia quae ab ipso est."
Clement of Alexandria has drawn a large part of his
scriptural references from deuterocanonical sources.*
Ecclesiasticus XXI. 7.
" Qui odit correptionem, vesti-
gium est peccatoris ; et qui timet
Deum, converteturadcor suum."
Sap. XI. 25.
" Nihil odisti eorum quae
fecisti : nee enim odiens aliquid
constituisti aut fecisti."
Eccli. XXII. 6—8.
" Flagella et doctrina in omni
tempore sapientia. Qui docet
fatuum, quasi qui conglutinat
testam. Qui narrat verbum non
audienti, quasi qui excitat dor-
mien tem de gravi somno."
Eccli. XXXIV. 14—15.
" Spiritus timentium Deum
quaeritur, et in respectu illius
benedicetur. Spes enim illorum
in salvantem illos et oculi Dei in
diligentes se."
Clem. Paed. VIII.
" Scripturam perperam intelli-
gentes quae sic dicit. Et qui
timet Dominum convertetur ad
cor suum."
Clem. Paed. Ibid.
"Nihil enim est quod odio
habet Dominus."
Clem. Ibid.
" Flagella enim et disciplina
in omni tempore sapientia. Qui
testam conglutinat, et stultum
docet ad sensum,inquit .... Prop-
terea aperte subjunxit : Excitans
dormientem e profundo somno,
qui est ex aliis rebus omnibus
maxime morti similis."
Clem. Ibid.
*' Quoniam spiritus timens
Dominum vivet. Spes enim est
in eum qui ipsos salvos facit."
*Clement of Alexandria was a Platonic philosopher of Alexandria. He
was converted by St. Pantenus, who was at the head of the Alexandrian
school in the latter half of the second century. After the death of Pantenus,
Clement became chief of this famous school in 190, A. D. Origen was one
of his pupils. He died about the year 217, A. D. His chief works are
Cohortatio ad Gentes, Psedagogus, ^rpcofiara or Miscellanea, Quis Dives
Salvetur, and Fragments. Among all these, the Stromata are the most
famous. Clement is the great representative of Alexandrian tradition.
74
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. I, 27 — 28.
"Timor Domini expellit pecca-
tum, nam qui sine timore est non
potest justificari."
Ibid. 22.
Corona sapientiae, timor
Domini, replens pacem et salutis
fructum."
Eccli. XVI. 13.
" Secundum misericordiam
suam, sic correptio illius hom-
inem secundum opera sua jud-
icat."
Ibid. 12.
" Misericordia enim et ira est
cum illo. Potens exoratio, et
effundens iram."
Eccli. VII. 25—26.
"Filii tibi sunt? erudi illos,
et curva illos a pueritia illorum.
Filiae tibi sunt ? serva corpus
illarum, et non ostendas hilarem
faciem tuam ad illas."
Eccli. XXXII. 21.
"Peccator homo vitabit correp-
tionem, et secundum voluntatem
suam inveniet comparationem."
Eccli. XVIII. 13—14; XVI. 12.
Baruch IV, 4.
" Beati sumus, Israel, quia quae
Deo placent manifesta sunt
nobis."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. VIII.
'"'Timor enim Domini pec cat a
extrudit : Qui est autem sine tim-
ore non poterit justificari, inquit
Scriptural
Ibid.
" Corona itaque sapientiae, in-
quit Sapientia, timor Domini."*
Ibid.
" Virum, inquit, secundum
opera sua judicabit."
Ibid.
" De eo quoque aperte dicit
Sap.: Misericordia enim et ira
cum ipso. Dominus enim his
utrisque solus est potens, iram
effundens ad propitiationem ex
magna sua misericordia. Ita
etiam ejus reprehensio."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. Cap. IX.
" Sunt tibi filii ? Castiga eos,
suadet Sapientia, et inflecte eos
a juventute sua. Sunt tibi filiae ?
attende corpori earum, et ne vul-
tum tuum apud eas exhilara-
veris."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. Cap. IX.
" — quoniam peccator homo
fugit reprehensionem."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. Cap. IX.
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. X.
" Jam quoque per Jeremiam
enarrat prudentiam : Beati su-
mus, Israel, dicens, quod quae
Deo grata sunt, a nobis cognita
sunt."
* Ecclesiasticus was frequently termed by the Fathers, Sapientia
Sirach.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
75
Baruch III. 9.
*' Audi, Israel, mandata vitae :
auribus percipe ut scias pruden-
tiam."
Baruch III. 13.
" Nam si in via Dei ambulas-
ses, habitasses utique in pace
sempiterna."
Eccli. XXXIII. 6.
" Equus emissarius, sic et ami-
cus subsannator, sub omni su-
prasedente hinnit."
Sap. VI. 19.
" Cura ergo disciplinae dilectio
est, et dilectio custodia legum
illius est; custoditio autem legum
consummatio incorruptionis est."
Sap. XVI. 26.
" — ut scirent filii tui quos
dilexisti, Domine, quoniam non
nativitatis fructus pascunt hom-
ines, sed sermo tuus, hos qui in
te crediderint conservat."
Eccli.XVIII.32(iuxtaGraecum)
" Ne delecteris multis deliciis."
Eccli. XXXI. 36—38.
" Exultatio animae et cordis,
vinum moderate potatum.
" 38. Vinum multum potatum
irritationem et iram et ruinas
multas facit."
Eccli. XXXI. 31.
" Ignis probat ferrum durum ;
sic vinum corda superborum ar-
guet in ebrietate potatum."
Ibid.
"Audi, Israel, mandata vitae,
ausculta ut cognoscas pruden-
tiam."
Ibid.
" Quinetiam . . . per Jeremiam
hortatur (psedagogus) dicens :
Via Dei si ambulasses, habitasses
in pace in saeculum."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. XIII.
" Hinc etiam dicit Sapientia :
Equus ad coitum libidinosus, et
adulter irrationali jumento assi-
milatus ret ideo subjungit : Quo-
cumque super eum sedente
hinnit."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. I.
*' Cura autem disciplinae est
caritas, quam dicit Sapientia, car-
itas vero observatio legum est."
Ibid.
" Discant, inquit, filii tui quos
dilexisti, Domine, quod non gen-
erationes fructuum nutriant hom-
inem, sed verbum tuum eos qui
tibi credunt conservat."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. I.
" Ne laeteris autem propter
execrandas delicias, dicit Sapi-
entia."
Ibid. Cap. II.
" Illud ergo bene dictum est :
Exultatio animae et cordis vinum
creatum est ab initio, si quantum
satis est bibatur."
Ibid.
" Atque ante Tragoediam cla-
mavit Sapientia : * Vinum quod
bibitur multum in irritatione et
omni lapsu replet.' "
Clem. Ibid.
" Praeclare profecto dictum
est : Fornacem quidem inter tin-
gendum probare ferri aciem,
vinum autem cor superborum."
76
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Ibid. 30 (juxta Grsecum).
" In vino virum ne te exhibeas :
vinum enim multos perdidit."
Eccli. XXVI. II.
" Mulier ebriosa ira magna, et
contumelia et turpitude illius
non tegetur."
Eccli. XXXI. 23.
"Vigilia, cholera et tortura
viro infrunito."
Baruch III. 16 — 19.
" Ubi sunt principes gentium ?
et qui dominatur super bestias
quae sunt super terram ? qui in
avibus coeli ludunt ? qui argen-
tum thesaurizat et aurum in qua
confidunt homines, et non est
finis acquisitionis eorum ? qui ar-
gentum fabricant et solliciti sunt,
nee est inventio operum illorum ?
Exterrainati sunt, et ad inferos
descenderunt, et alii loco eorum
surrexerunt."
Eccli. XXI. 23.
" Fatuus in risu exaltat vocem
suam ; vir autem sapiens vix
tacite ridebit."
Eccli. XX. 5.
" Est tacens qui invenitur sapi-
ens, et est odibilis, qui procax
est ad loquendum."
Ibid. 8.
" Qui multis utitur verbis
laedet animam suam ; et qui
potestatem sibi sumit injuste,
odietur."
Clem. Ibid.
"In vino, in quit, ne te virum
fortem praebeas ; multos enim
vinum reddidit inutiles."
Ibid.
" Ira autem, inquit, magna est
mulier ebria .... quoniam suam
non celat turpitudinem."
Ibid.
" Labor autem vigilise, inquit,
et bilis et tormentum est cum
homine insatiabili."
Clem. Paed. Lib. 11. Cap. III.
" Pulcherrime itaque alicubi
dicit dtvina Scriptura, ad eos qui
sunt sui amantes et arrogantes
verba dirigens : Ubi sunt qui
gentibus imperabant et qui dom-
inabantur feris quae sunt super
terram ? qui in coeli avibus illude-
bant : qui argenti et auri thesau-
ros congregabant in quibus hom-
ines habebant fiduciam, et non
est finis acquisitionis eorum ? qui
aurum et argentum fabricabantur
et erant solliciti ? non est inven-
tio operum illorum. Evanuerunt,
et ad inferos descenderunt."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. V.
" Stultus autem in risu extollit
vocem suam, inquit Scriptura :
vir autem astutus vix sensim
subridebit."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. VI.
"Est enim tacens qui inveni-
tur sapiens ; et est qui odio hab-
etur ob multam loquacitatem."
Ibid.
" Quin etiam ipse nugator af-
fert sibi ipsi fastidium ac satie-
tatem : Qui enim multiplicat
sermonem, edit animam suam."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
77
Ibid. XXXI. 41.
" In convivio vini non arguas
proximum, et non despicias eum
in jucunditate illius."
Eccli. XIV. I.
" Beatus vir qui non est lapsus
verbo ex ore suo, et non est
stimulatus in tristia delicti."
Eccli. IX. 12.
" Cum aliena muliere ne sedeas
omnino, nee accumbas cum ea
super cubitum."
Ibid. 13.
*' — et non alterceris cum ilia
in vino, ne forte declinet cor
tuum in illam, et sanguine tuo
labaris in perditionem."
Eccli. XXXI. 19—20.
" Utere quasi homo frugi his
quae tibi apponuntur, ne, cum
manducas, multum odio habearis.
Cessa prior causa disciplinae, et
noli nimius esse, ne forte offen-
das."
Eccli. XXXII. 15.
" Et hora surgendi non te
trices : praecurre autem prior in
domum tuam."
Eccli. XXXII. 4, 10, II.
" Loquere, major natu ; decet
enim te. Adolescens, loquere in
causa tua vix. Si bis interroga-
tus fueris, habeat caput respon-
sum tuum."
Eccli. IX. 25.
" Terribilis est in civitate sua
vir linguosus."
Ibid. Cap. VII.
*' In convivio autem, inquit, ne
argueris proximum, et ei oppro-
brii sermonem ne dixeris."
Ibid. Cap. VII.
" Beatus revera vir ille est qui
non est lapsus in ore suo, vel non
compunctus est in molestia pec-
cati."
Ibid.
" Cum muliere quae viro sub-
jecta est ne omnino sedeas, et
ne super cubitum cum ea accu-
bueris."
Ibid.
" Et ideo subjungit : neque
cum ea in vino congrediaris, ne
quando inclinet cor tuum in ip-
sam, et sanguine tuo labatur ad
interitum."
Ibid.
"Comede, inquit, ut homo quae
apponuntur; cessa autem primus
disciplinae gratia. Et si in medio
plurium sederis ne ante ipsos
manum porrigas."
Ibid.
" Cum est, inquit, tempus sur-
gendi, ne sis postremus, et rever-
tere in domum tuam."
Ibid.
" Senior, loquere in convivio,
te enim decet Adolescens,
tibi quoque permittit Sapientia,
loquere si te opus sit, vix cum
bis interrogatus fueris; sermonem
autem tuum paucis in summam
redige."
Ibid.
" Terribilis est in interitu suo
vir linguosus."
78
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. VII. 15.
" Noli verbosus esse in multi-
tudine presbyterorum, et non
iteres verbum in oratione tua."
Eccli. XXXVIII. I, 2, 7.
" Honora medicum propter
necessitatem ; etenim ilium crea-
vit Altissimus. A Deo est enim
oranis medela, et a rege accipiet
donationem. 7. In his curans
mitigabit dolorem, et unguenta-
rius faciet pigmenta suavitatis et
unctiones conficiet sanitatis."
Eccli. XXXIX. 17-19.
" In voce dicit : obaudite me,
divini f ructus, et quasi rosa plan-
tata super rivos aquarura fructi-
ficate. Quasi Libanus, odorem
suavitatis habete. Florete flores,
quasi lilium, et date odorem, et
frondete in gratiam, et collaudate
canticum, et benedicite Dominum
in operibus suis."
Ibid. 31.
" Initium necessari^e rei vitse
hominum : aqua, ignis et ferrum,
sal, lac, et panis similagineus, et
mel et botrus uvae et oleum et
vestimentum."
Eccli. XXIII. 6.
" Aufer a me ventris concupis-
centias, et concubitus concupis-
centiae ne apprehendant me, et
animae irreverenti et infrunitae
ne tradas me."
Eccli. XXIII. 25.
" Omnis homo qui transgredi-
tur lectum suum contemnens in
animam suam et dicens : quis me
videt ? Tenebrae circumdant me
et parietes cooperiunt me, et
nemo circumspicit me ; quem
Ibid.
"Ne nugeris in multitudine
seniorum Sermonemneitera-
veris in oratione tua."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. VIII.
" Honora autem medicum
propter ejus utilitatem, inquit
Scriptura. Ipsum enim creavit
Altissimus. A Domino autem est
medicina. Deinde subjungit :
Et unguentarius faciet mistio-
nem."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap.VIII.
" Exaudite me, inquit, et tam-
quam rosa plantata in fluentis
aquarum germinate ; tamquam
Libanus,suavem odorem emittite,
et benedicite Dominem super
opera ejus."
Ibid.
" Dicit itaque Scriptura: Aqua,
et ignis, et ferrum, et lac, simila
frumenti, et mel, sanguis uvae et
oleum et vestis ; hsec omnia piis
ad bona sunt."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. X.
" Quocirca amove a servis tuis
spes inanes et indecoras, inquit,
cupiditates averte a me. Ventris
appetitio et coitus ne me appre-
hendant."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. X.
" Homo qui ascendit super
lectum suum, qui dicit in animo :
Quis me videt ? circa me sunt
tenebrae, et parietes sunt tegu-
menta mea, et nemo aspicit pec-
cata mea. Quidvereor, ne me-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
79
vereor ? Delictorum meorum
non memorabitur Altissimus. 28.
— et non cognovit quoniam oculi
Domini multo plus lucidiores
sunt super solem, circumspicien-
tes omnes vias hominum, et pro-
fundum abyssi,et hominum corda
intuentes in absconditas partes."
Eccli. XVIII. 30.
"Post concupiscentias tuas
non eas, et a voluntate tua aver-
tere."
Eccli. XIX. 2—3.
" Vinum et mulieres apostatare
faciunt sapientes, et arguent sen-
satos, et qui se jungit fornicariis
erit nequam ; putredo et vermes
haereditabunt ilium."
Eccli. XI. 4.
" In vestitu ne glorieris un-
quam, nee in die honoris tui ex-
toUaris."
Eccli. XXV. 8.
" Corona senum multa peritia ;
et gloria illorum, timer Dei."
Eccli. IX. 7.
" Noli circumspicere in vicis
civitatis, nee oberraveris in plat-
eis illius."
Eccli. XI. 31.
" Non omnem hominem indu-
cas in domum tuam, multae enim
sunt insidiae dolosi."
Eccli. IX. 22.
"Viri justi sint tibi convivae,
et in timore Dei sit tibi gloria-
tio."
Eccli. XXI. 24.
" Ornamentum aureum pru-
denti, doctrina, et quasi brachiale
in brachio dextro."
minerit Altissimus?.... Nescit
enim, Scriptura dicit, oculi Do-
mini Altissimi quanto sint soli
splendidiores qui respiciunt om-
nes vias hominum, et partes oc-
cultas intelligunt."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. X.
" Post tua desideria ne ambules
et acearis a tuis appetionibus.
Vinum enim et mulieres faciunt
sapientes deficere, et qui adhseret
meretricibus evadet audacior.
Putredo et vermis erunt ejus
hseredes et efferetur in majori
ludibrio."
Ibid.
" In amictu vestis ne glorieris,
neque in omni gloria quae est
praeter leges efferaris."
Clem. Paed. Lib. III. Cap. III.
" Senum autem corona, inquit
Scriptura, est multa experientia."
Clem. Paed. Lib. III. Cap. IV.
" Ne circumspicias autem, in-
quit, in vicis civitatis, nee erres
in ejus solitudinibus."
Ibid.
"Unde Scriptura constantis-
sime admonet : Ne introducas
quemvis hominem in domum
tuam ; dolosi enim hominis mul-
tae sunt insidiae."
Alibi autem: "Viri justi, in-
quit, sint tui convivae, et in ti-
more Domini tua permanebit
gloriatio."
Clem. Paed. Lib. III. Cap. XI.
" Ut vult enim Scriptura ; Au-
reus prudenti mundus est dis-
ciplina."
80
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. XXVI. 12.
" Fornicatio mulieris in extol-
lentia oculorum, et in palpebris
illius agnoscetur."
Eccli. IX. 8—9.
" Averte faciem tuam a muliere
compta, et ne circumspicias spe-
ciem alienam. Propter speciem
mulieris multi perierunt, et ex
hoc concupiscentia quasi ignis
exardescit."
Eccli. I. I.
" Omnis sapientia a Domino
Deo est, et cum illo fuit semper,
et est ante aevum."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum."
Sap. VII. 17.
" Ipse enim dedit mihi horum
quae sunt scientiam veram, ut
sciam dispositionem orbis ter-
rarum, et virtutes elementorum
differentias virgultorum et
virtutes radicum, et qusecumque
sunt absconsa et improvisa didici;
omnium enim artifex docuit me
Sapientia."
Eccli. XV. 10.
" Quoniam a Deo profecta est
sapientia '• sapientise enim Dei
adstabit laus, et in ore fideli
abundabit."
Tob. IV. 16.
" Quod ab alio oderis fieri tibi,
vide, ne tu aliquando alteri
facias."
Sap. III. I.
"Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis."
Ibid.
" Fornicatio autem mulieris in
elevatione oculorum."
Ibid.
" Averte autem oculum a mu-
liere gratiosa, et ne discas alie-
nam pulchritudinem, inquit
Scriptura ; et si causam roges,
ipsa tibi enarrabit : In pulchri-
tudine enim mulieris multi se-
ducti sunt, et ex ea tamquam
ignis accenditur amicitia."
Clem. Strom. Lib. I. Cap. IV.
" Quoniam omnis sapientia a
Domino, et cum ipso est in sae-
cula, ut dicit Jesu Sapientia."
Clem. Strom. Lib. I. Cap. V.
" Quoniam Spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrse."
Clem. Strom. Lib. II. Cap. II.
" Dicit itaque in Sapientia :
Ipse mihi dedit non falsam eorum
quae sunt cognitionem, ut cog-
noscam mundi constitutionem
. . . . et vires radicum . . . . et quae-
cumque sunt occulta et operta
cognovi ; auce est enim omnium
artifex me docuit Sapientia."
Clem. Strom. Lib. II. Cap. V.
" Merito ergo dictum est apud
Salomonem : Sapientia est in
ore fidelium."
Ibid. Cap. XXIIL
" Hoc breviter Scriptura sig-
nificavit dicens: Quod odio habes,
alii ne feceris."
Clem. Strom. Lib. IV. Cap. XL
" Justorum enim animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget eas
tormentum."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
81
Ibid.
" Visi sunt oculis insipientium
mori, et sestimata est afflictio ex-
itus eorum et quod a nobis est
iter, exterminium ; illi autem sunt
in pace. Etsi coram hominibus
tormenta passi sunt, spes illorum
immortalitate plena est. In pau-
cis vexati, in multis bene dispon-
entur, quoniam Deus tentavit
eos, et invenit illos dignos se.
Tamquam aurum in fornace pro-
bavit illos, et quasi holocausti
hostiam accepit illos, et in tem-
pore erit respectus illorum. Ful-
gebunt justi, et tamquam scin-
tillse in arundineto discurrent.
Judicabunt nationes et domina-
buntur populis, et regnabit
Dominus illorum in perpetuum."
Eccli. XXVII. 13.
"In medio insensatorum, serva
verbum tempori ; in medio autem
cogitantium, assiduus esto."
Sap. VII. 24.
" Omnibus enim mobilibus mo-
bilior est sapientia ; attingit
autem ubique propter suam mun-
ditiam."
Sap. VI. 8.
"Non enim subtrahet personam
cujusquam Deus, nee verebitur
magnitudinemcujusquam; quon-
iam pusillum et magnum ipse
fecit, et aequaliter cura est illi
deomnibus."
Sap. IX. 17—18.
"Consilium enim tuum quis
sciet, nisi tu dederis sapientiam,
et miseris spiritum sanctum tuum
Ibid. Cap. XVI.
^''Divina Scriptura dicit de mar-
tyribus : ' Visi sunt oculis in-
sipientium mori, et reputata est
vexatio eorum exitus, et a nobis
discessus contritio ; illi vero sunt
in pace. Etenim si in oculis
hominum suppliciis affecti fuer-
int spes eorum plena est immor-
talitatis Et in paucis castigati,
magnis afficienturbeneficiis,quo-
niam Deus tentavit eos. . . .et in-
venit eos se dignos, ut scilicet
vocenturfilii. Tamquam aurum
in fornace probavit eos, et tam-
quam solidam sacrificii obla-
tionem excepit eos, et in tempore
inspectionis eorum fulgebunt, et
tamquam scintillae in stipula
percurrent. Judicabunt gentes,
et dominabuntur populis, et rex
eorum erit Dominus in ssecula.' "
Clem. Strom. Lib. V. 3.
" In medio insipientium, ob-
serva occasionem ; in medio au-
tem cogitantium, versare per-
petuo."
Clem. Strom. Lib.V. Cap. XIV.
" Quibus illud Sapientiae im-
posuit : Pervadit autem ac subit
per omnia propter suam mundi-
tiam."
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap. VI,
" Non enim personam respicit
et reveretur qui est omnium
Dominus : neque curabit magni-
tudinem, quoniam ipse fecit mag-
num et parvum, et similitur om-
nibus providet, et omnium curam
gerit."
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap. XL
" Veritas autem per Dominum:
* Consilium enim tuum, inquit,
quis novit, si non tu dederis sapi-
82
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
de Altissimis ? et sic correctse
sint semitae eorum qui sunt in
terris et quae tibi placent didi-
cerint homines."
Sap. VI. II.
" Qui enira custodierint justa
juste justificabuntur, et qui didi-
cerint ista invenient quid re-
spondeant."
Sap. VII. 1 6.
" In manu enim illius et nos,
et sermones nostri, et omnis
sapientia, et operum scientia et
disciplina."
Ibid. 28.
"Neminem enim diligit Deus,
nisi eum qui cum sapientia in-
habitat."
Sap. XIV. 2-3.
" Illud enim cupiditas acqui-
rendi excogitavit, et artifex f abri-
cavit sapientia sua. Tua autem,
Pater, providentia gubernat — ."
Sap. VIII. 9.
" Et si justitiam quis diligit,
labores hujus magnas habent vir-
tutes, sobrietatem enim et pru-
dentiam docet et justitiam et
virtutem, quibus utilius nihil est
in vita hominibus, et nescierunt
sacramenta Dei .... Quoniam
Deus creavit hominera inexter-
minabilem, et ad imaginem sim-
ilitudinis suae fecit ilium."
Tob. XII. 8.
" Bona est oratio cum jejunio,
et eleemosyna magis quam the-
sauros auri recondere."
entiam, et miseris sanctum tuum
Spiritum ab altissimis, et ita cor-
rectae fuerint viae eorum qui
sunt in terra, et didicerint hom-
ines ea quae tibi placent, et salvi
fuerint sapientia.'"
Ibid.
"Qui enim sancta, inquit,
sancte servant sanctificabuntur,
et qui ea didicerint inveniunt re-
sponsionem."
Ibid.
"Et rursus licet audire : 'In
manu enim ejus, hoc est, virtute
et sapientia, et nos et verba nos-
tra, et omnis prudentia et operum
scientia. Nihil enim diligit Deus
nisi eum qui cohabitat cum sapi-
entia. Praeterea autem non
legerunt quod dictum est a
Salomone. Nam cum de templi
constructione tractasset, aperte
dicit : Artifex autem construxit
sapientia ; tua autem, Pater, gub-
ernat providentia.'"
Ibid.
" Et si quis diligit justitiam,
labores ejus sunt virtutes; tem-
perantia enim et prudentia docet
justitiam et fortitudinem, quibus
nihil est in vita hominibus
utilius."
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
XII.
" Sed, ut videtur, Dei non
novere mysteria, quod, scilicet,
Deus creavit hominem ob immor-
talitatem, et fecit eum imaginem
suae proprietatis."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
83
Sap. IV. 17.
"Videbunt enim finem sapi-
entis, et non intelligent quid cogi-
taverit de illo Deus, et quare
munierit ilium Dominus."
Ibid.' Cap. V. 3.
" — dicentes intra se, poenitu-
dine acti et prae augustia spiritus
gementes : hi sunt quos habui-
mus aliquando in derisum, et in
similitudinem improperii ; nos
insensati vitam illorum aestima-
bamus insaniam, et finem illo-
rum sine honore ; ecce quomodo
computati sunt inter filios Dei, et
inter sanctos sors illorum est."
Eccli. XVIII. 8.
** Numerus dierum hominum,
ut multum, centum anni ; quasi
gutta aquae maris deputati sunt,
et sicut calculus arenae, sic exi-
gui anni in die aevi."
Sap. III. 9.
" Qui confidunt in illo, intelli-
gent veritatem, et fideles in dilec-
tione acquiescent illi."
Sap. Ill 14.
" — dabitur enim illi fidei do-
num electum, et sors in templo
Dei acceptissima."
Sap. VI. 13 — 21.
" Clara est et quae nunquam
marcescit sapientia, et facile vi-
detur ab his qui diligunt eam, et
invenietur ab his qui quaerunt
illam. Praeoccupat qui se con-
cupiscunt ut illis se prior osten-
dat. Qui de luce vigilaverit ad
Ibid.
" Exaudiens Scripturam quae
dicit: *Bonum est jejunium cum
oratione.' "
Clem, Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
XIV.
" Videbunt enim mortem sapi-
entis, et non intelligent quid de
eo decreverit, et ad quid eum
stabilierit Dominus, et dicent de
ejus gloria : *Is est quem ali-
quando habuimus in derisum et
in parabolam opprobrii insipien-
tes. Vitam ejus existimavimus
insaniam, et mortem ejus ignomi-
niosam. Quomodo est enumera-
tus inter filios Dei, et in Sanctis
est sors ejus.' "
Ibid.
** Reputati sunt, inquit, ut pul-
vis terrae, et ut gutta ex cado."
Ibid.
"Merito ergo dictum est : *Et
qui in ipso confidunt, intelligent
veritatem, et fideles in dilectione
in ipso permanebunt.' "
Ibid.
" Ecce enim Salomon : Dabi-
tur enim ei, inquit, fidei gratia
electa, et sors in templo Domini
jucundior."
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap. XV.
"Salomon haec dicit : 'Clara
est et non marcescit sapientia, et
facile cernitur ab iis qui ipsam
diligunt : eos qui cupiunt prse-
venit, ut praecognoscatur. Qui
mane surrexerit ad ipsam non
laborabit ; de ipso enim cogitare
84 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH,
illam non laborabit, assidentem est perfectio prudentiae. Et qui
enim ilium foribus suis inveniet. propter ipsam vigilaverit cito
Cogitare ergo de ilia sensus est erit cura vacuus ; quoniam eos
consummatus, et qui vigilaverit qui ipsa digni sunt, ipsa quaerens
propter ilium cito securus erit. circuit, et in semitis ab ipsis
Quoniam dignos se ipsa circuit benevole visione apprehenditur.'
quaerens, et in viis ostendit se Mox subjungit : 'Et in omni
illis hilariter, et in omni provi- cogitatione occurrit ipsis ejus
dentia occurrit illis. Initium enim principium verissimum est
enim illius verissima est discip- desiderium disciplinae, hoc est,
linae concupiscentia. Cura ergo cognitionis ; cura autem discip-
disciplinae dilectio est, et dilectio linse est dilectio ; dilectio autem
custodia legum illius est ; custo- est observatio legum ejus ; atten-
ditio autem legum consummatio tio autem legum est incorruptibi-
incorruptionis est ; incorruptio litatis confirmatio ; incorrupti-
autem facit esse proximum Deo. bilitas autem facit ut ad Deum
Concupiscentia itaque sapientiae prope accedatur. Sapientiae ergo
deducit ad regnum perpetuum." desiderium attollit ad regnum.'"
Clement of Alexandria weaves the woof of his fabric from
Scripture. His II. Paedogogus could be properly called a com-
mentary on Ecclesiasticus. He uses the deuterocanonical
works as divine Scripture ; plainly terms them so ; and was
evidently very familiar with them. As he was the coryphaeus
of the Alexandrian church in that age, we can deduce from his
line of action that the great Alexandrian church in the age
succeeding the Apostles, received and used the deuterocanoni-
cal books with equal honor as the books of the first Canon.
Turning from the master to his greater pupil, Origen, we find
him to have prosecuted the same line of teaching as Clement.*
*Origen was born of Christian parents at Alexandria in the year 185, A. D.
He was surnamed Adamantius, by reason of his indefatigable application to
mental toil. The vastness of his erudition is not surpassed by that of any of
the Fathers of the church. He was taught by Clement of Alexandria, and,
at the age of 18, was given the charge of the instruction of the faithful at
Alexandria. To preclude the taint which calumny strove to attach to his name,
he, by means of a drug, destroyed the energy of his generative organs. He
was led to this move by a false literal interpretation of the praise of eunuchs
by Christ, in the Gospels. Origen visited Rome, Palestine, Greece, Arabia
and other lands. While in Palestine, he was deputed by the bishops to explain
publicly the Holy Scripture. Demetrius, his bishop, objected to this, on the
grounds that it was not fitting for a layman to teach the Holy Scriptures.
Origen was afterwards ordained priest by Theoctistus, bishop of Caesarea in
Palestine. Demetrius then deposed Origen on the grounds that he was a
eunuch, that he had been ordained without consent of his own bishop, and
that he had taught heresy. Origen was obliged to retire to Caesarea till after the
death of Demetrius in 231. Under Maximin he was cast into prison and
treated with great indignity. It is charged by Epiphanius, and others, that,
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 85
It is impossible to give a detailed mention of his many-
works. Later in our book we shall treat of his great Hexapla.
Other of his chief works are : Eight Books against Celsus, De
Principiis libri quattuor, and Homilies and Commentaries on
Holy Scripture.
We have thought good to transcribe and collate many
citations from Origen, since the adversaries of the deutero-
canonical books have alleged his authority in support of their
curtailed canon. Nowhere in patristic literature do we find
such copious and apposite use of Holy Scripture as in Origen.
His works that have been preserved to us resemble a mosaic
in which his own creations serve only as the setting in which
are infixed the scriptural gems. No discrimination is made in
favor of the books of the first canon. He rejects and treats
with irony the adoption of the Jewish canon. In his letter to
Julius Africanus,f he defends the deuterocanonical fragments
of Daniel, and imphes that the canon must be sought from
the authority of the Church, and not from the Jews: " Know,
therefore, in answer to these things, what should be our line
of action, not only concerning the history of Susanna, whichy
in its Greek exemplar, circulates through the whole Church of
Christ, although it does not exist with the Hebrews ; and not
to escape from prison, Origen offered incense to Serapis. The data are want-
ing to establish either the truth or falsity of this imputation. He died at Tyr
in 254. To Origen, have been imputed many pernicious errors. He was con-
demned by the fifth general council, and again, Martin the fifth anathematized
him in the first Council of Lateran in 649. In that formative period, before
the Christian dogmas became moulded with the precision and deflniteness,
which the natural development of doctrine subsequently gave them ; when
men strove to unite the philosophy of Plato with the divine teachings of
Christ, it was not strange that a man deeply imbued with Greek thought,
should in good faith, have advocated theories which closer investigation found
to be untenable in the Catholic Church. Without the aid of divine revelation,
it would be strange that a man should write so much on the subjects on
which Origen wrote, and never write amiss. These errors should not be con-
sidered as a malicious intent to infect the teachings of the Church, but an
evidence of the def ectibility of human reason. Origen has done the church in-
valuable service, and, though not ranked with the Fathers, he will always be
appealed to in questions which need the testimony of tradition for their
solution.
f Julius Africanus was a Christian historian, who flourished in the third
century, under Heliogabalus. He was of Nicopolis, in Palestine. He is t
author of a universal history from Adam down to Macrinus, whose scope
was to prove that paganism was an innovation. Only fragments of the
work are preserved to us by Eusebius. Africanus controverted the genuinity
of the history of Susanna, concerning which he wrote to Origen. One of
his most valuable contributions to the patrimony of science is his reconcilia-
tion of the diverse genealogies of Jesus Christ in Matthew and Luke.
86 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
only concerning the other parts, which, as you have said, are
written in the end of the book, namely, concerning Bel and
the Dragon, which also are wanting in the Hebrew text ; but
also concerning many other parts, which, while we compared,
according to our powers, the Hebrew with our own text, we
found in many places." Soon he breaks forth into irony:
" Forsooth, the time is at hand, if we have discovered these
things, to abrogate the exemplars of Holy Scripture of our
churches, and impose the law upon the brethren that, reject-
ing the sacred books which they have, they, by adulation,
persuade the Jews to concede to us the Scriptures pure and
devoid of figment. * * * In relation to these things, con-
sider whether it be not good to remember the saying : pass
not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set.
(Prov. XXII. 28). And I say this, not, indeed, that I, through
sloth, refuse to examine the Scriptures which the Jews have,
and compare them with ours, to see what diversity between
them exists. This, forsooth, if it be not arrogant to say, we
have diligently, and, according to our ability, done ; comparing
with great care the editions, and observing their divergencies*
thus, however, that we have bestowed somewhat more labor
on the Septuagint, that we might not bring anything spurious
into the Churches, which are beneath the whole heavens,
•x- * * \Yg endeavor not to be ignorant of the Scriptures
which the Jews have, so that, discussing with them, we may
not bring forth those things which are wanting in their
exemplars, and we also make use of those portions which are
found with them, and are not in our books."
Many of the early Fathers were forced to meet the Jews
on their own ground, and thus in disputes with them, to use
only the curtailed canon which the Jews recognized. Thus
Jerome in Praef. in Isaiah affirms : " May He give me my
future reward who knows me to have labored and sweat in the
acquisition of this foreign tongue, so that the Jews might not
longer insult the Christians on the charge of the falsity of their
Scriptures." This need also, was the motive for the lists drawn
up by some of the Fathers, in which the deuterocanonical books
were excluded. Even Origen himself has made such list, but
he openly declares that it is thb canon according to the Hebrews.
The Jews by their ridicule of the deuterocanonical books
may have led some individual Fathers to doubt of the
equality of inspiration of the books of the second canon.
As the rationalists of to-day sometimes obtain from Cath-
olics unwarranted concessions, lest they should seem to be
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 87
ignorant ; so those other earlier enemies of truth may have
diminished in the minds of some the authority of the deutero-
canonical works. This they certainly effected in the mind of
Jerome. We see that Africanus rejected the deuterocanonical
fragment of Susanna. Origen describes the existing state of
things very well in his response to Africanus. The complete
canon circulated throughout the universal Church ; the Jews
and some few individuals advocated the restricted canon of
the Jews. Origen in plain words ridicules the theory which
the protestants of to-day advocate, and yet they would claim
his authority.
Origen endorses Tobias in Hist. Susannas, 13 : ** We must
know, therefore, that the Hebrews use neither Tobias nor
Judith. For the Hebrews have not these books even among
the Apocrypha as we ourselves have learned from them. But
since the Churches use Tobias, we must know that also in the
captivity some captives were opulent and prospered." Origen
essays to defend the book of Tobias, not that the Hebrews ac-
knowledge it, but because the Churches use it.
Two things result for us from Origen's testimonies. First,
that the usage of the Churches of his age recognized the
divinity of the deuterocanonical books ; and, second, that he
considered this usage a criterion of inspiration. He can never
be honestly claimed to have favored the protestant theory of
accepting the canon from the Jews.
The Canon of Origen is found in his Commentary on
the first Psalm, Parag. I : " The twenty-two books according
to the Hebrews are these ": The first which is called by
us Genesis is termed by them, from its opening words,
Beresith which signifies " In the beginning." Then Exodus,
with Hebrews Vellesemoth, interpreted, "These are the names."
The third, Leviticus, with the Hebrews, Vajicra, that is, " And
he called." The fourth, Numbers, with the Hebrews Hammis-
phecodim.* The fifth, Deuteronomy, with the Hebrews Elle
haddebarim, that is, "these are the words." The sixth, Jesus
the son of Nave, in Hebrew, Jehoshua ben Nun. The seventh,
Judges and Ruth, by the Hebrews comprised in one volume,
which they call Sophetim. The eighth is the first and second
book of the Kingdoms, which with them constitute one volume
which is called Samuel, that is " The called of God." The
*The appellation Hammisphecodim for the book of Numbers is only-
found in Origen. Its signification is unknown to us. The common designa-
tion of the book in Hebrew was *12T^ \ " et locutus est."
88 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
ninth is the third and fourth of the Kingdoms, which they also
comprise in one volume and call Vammelech David, that is,
" The Kingdom of David." The tenth is the first and second
of Paralipomenon, by them comprised in one volume, which
they call Dibre Hajamim, that is, " The Words of the Days."
The eleventh is the first and second of Esdras, which with
them constitute one volume, which they call Ezra, that is,
" The Helper." The twelfth is the book of Psalms, with the
Hebrews Sepher Tehillim. The thirteenth is the Proverbs of
Solomon, with the Hebrews Misloth. The fourteenth is
Ecclesiastes, with the Hebrews Koheleth. The fifteenth is the
Canticle of Canticles, with the Hebrews Sir Hassirim. The
sixteenth is Isaias, with the Hebrews Jesaia. The seventeenth
is Jeremias with the Lamentation and Epistle, by them com-
prised in one volume, which they call Jirmia. The eighteenth
is Daniel, with the Hebrews Daniel. The nineteenth is
Ezechiel, with the Hebrews Jeezchel. The twentieth is Job,
by the Hebrews designated by the same name. The twenty-
first is Esther, which is also thus designated by the Hebrews.
Outside this enumeration are the books of Maccabees which
are inscribed "Sarbet Sarbaneel."
In this list, the twelve minor Prophets, by the Hebrews com-
prised in one book is omitted. It must have been, however,
through inadvertence on the part of Origen or the amanuensis,
since this book was never doubted. The care bestowed by
Origen and other Fathers in preparing these lists was for the
purpose of fitting the Christians to meet the Jews on com-
mon grounds. This was necessary in that age, when the chief
intellectual attacks on Christianity came from the Jews. The
following collated passages will illustrate Origen's attitude
towards the deuterocanonical works :
Tob. I. 13 — 22. Orig. De Hist. Sus. 13.
(Already quoted.) (Already quoted.)
Judith XI. Passim. Orig. Frag. Ex Lib. VI. Strom.
" Homo autem, cui incumbit
necessitas mentiendi, diligenter
attendat ut sic utatur interdum
mendacio quomodo condimento
atque medicamine, ut servet
mensuram ejus, ne excedat ter-
minos quibus usa est Judith con-
tra Holophernem, et vicit prudenti
simulatione verborum."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
89
Dan. XIII.
" Et erat vir habitans in Baby-
lone, et nomen ejus Joakim, etc."
Sap. VII. 25.
" Vapor est enim virtutis Dei,
et emanatio quaedam est clarita-
tis omnipotentis Dei sincera — "
Orig. Ex Lib. Stromatum.
"Et erat vir habitans in Baby-
lone, et nomen ejus Joacim, et
accepit uxorem nomine Susan-
nam, filiam Helciae, pulchram
nimis et timentem Dominum. Et
parentes ejus justi edocuerunt
filiam suam juxta legem Moysi.
Hoc utendum est testimonio ad
exhortationem parentum, ut do-
ceant juxta legem Dei sermon-
emque divinum, non solum filios,
sed et filias suas , .
Quia Hfcbrsei re-
probant historiam Susannae, di-
centes eam in Danielis volumine
non haberi, debemus inquirere
nomina o-p^tVov, ^koL irpCvov quae
Latini ilicem et lentiscum inter-
pretantur, si sint apud Hebraeos,
et quam habeant etymologiam, ut
a a'x^ivw, scissio, et a Trpivo), sec-
tio sive serratio dicatur lingua
eorum. Quod si non fuerit in-
ventum, necesitate cogemur et
nos eorum acquiescere sententiae,
qui Graecitantum sermonishanc
volunt esse irepiKoirrjv, quae
Graecam habeat tantum etymolo-
giam, et Hebraicam non habeat.
Quod si quis ostenderit duarum
scissionis et sectionis in Hebraeo
stare etymologiam, tunc poteri-
mus eliam banc Scripturam reci-
pere."
Orig, De Principiis, Lib. I.
Cap. II.
" Invenimus nihilominus in Sa-
pientia, quae dicitur Salomonis,
descriptionem quamdam de Dei
Sapientia hoc modo scriptam :
'Vapor est enim, inquit, virtutis
Dei et ajroppoia gloriae omnipo-
tentis purissima.' "
90
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Ibid. VII. 25—26.
Sap. XVIII. 24.
" In veste enim poderis, quam
habebat, totus erat orbis terra-
rum — ."
Eccl. XLIII. 22.
ventus
aquilo
Ibid.
Orig. De Princ. Lib. II. Cap.
III. 6.
" — sicut in Sapientia Salo-
monis invenimus, cum dicit quia:
* In vestimento poderis erat uni-
versus mundus.' "
Orig. Ibid. Cap. VIII. 3.
" — sicut scriptum est in Sapi-
entia: 'Frigidus ventus Boreas.' "
Ibid.
" Anima mala perdit eum qui
possidet earn."
Ibid. Cap. IX. i.
" Porro autem, sicut Scriptura
dicit: *In numero et mensura,
universacondidit Deus — .' "
Orig. De Prin. Lib. IIL 14.
" * In manu enim Dei, et nos, et
sermones nostri,et omnis pruden-
tia atque operum disciplina
est ' sicut Scriptura dicit."
Orig. De Prin. Lib. IV. 26.
"Quia scriptum est : *Quam-
plurima ex operibus Dei in secre-
tis sunt.' "
Ibid. 33.
" In Sapientia quae dicitur
Salomonis, qui utique liber non
ab omnibus in auctoritate habe-
tur. Ibi tamen scriptum inveni-
mus hoc modo : * Non enim,'
inquit, ' deerat omnipotenti
manu tuae, quae creaverat mun-
dum ex informi materia, immit-
tere eis multitudinem ursorum
vel feroces leones.' "
Origen here records the doubts of some, without making
them his own. Certain individuals have doubted concerning
the deuterocanonical works ; the Church never doubted. In
quoting the book as Scripture, Origen follows the Church.
" Frigidus
flavit— ."
Eccli. VI. 4.
" Anima enim nequam disper-
det, qui se habet."
Sap. XL 21.
" — sed omnia in mensura et
numero et pondere disposuisti."
Sap. Vli. 16.
" — in manu enim illius et nos,
et sermones nostri, et omnis Sapi-
entia et operum scientia, et dis-
ciplina."
Eccli. XVI. 22.
" Nam plurima illius
sunt in absconsis — ."
opera
Sap. XL 18.
" Non enim impossibilis erat
omnipotens manus tua, quae
creavit orbem terrarum ex mate-
ria invisa, immittere illis multi-
tudinem ursorum, aut audaces
leones — ."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 91
This can be said in general ; the Fathers, in their practical use
of Scripture, reflect the belief of the Church. If they put
forth, at times, speculative doubts, they are then speaking as
fallible individuals. This principle has been recognized by the
protestant Davidson.
" It is sometimes said that the history of the Canon should
be sought from definite catalogues, not from isolated quota-
tions. The latter are supposed to be of slight value ; the
former to be the result of deliberate judgment. This remark
is more specious than solid. In relation to the Old Testament,
the catalogues given by the Fathers, as by Meliton and Origen,
rest solely on the tradition of the Jews ; apart from which,
they have no independent authority. As none except Jerome
and Origen knew Hebrew, their lists of the Old Testament
books are simply a reflection of what they learned of others.
If they deviate in practice from their masters by quoting as
Scripture other than canonical (protocanonical) books, they
show their judgment, overriding an external theory.
" The very men who give a list of the Jewish books, evince
an inclination to the Christian and enlarged Canon. Thus the
Fathers, who give catalogues of the Old Testament, show the
existence of a Jewish and a Christian Canon in relation to the
Old Testament ; the latter wider than the former, their private
opinion more favorable to the one, though the other was his-
torically transmitted." [Davidson, Canon of the Bible, p. 132.]
This last clause is not well said. It is not the private
opinion of the Fathers that constitutes the basis of traditional
proof of our complete Canon. It is the universal usage of the
Churches of the Christian people, which subjugated even
those who theoretically were disposed to doubt. It is the
belief identical with the life of the Church, which manifests
itself in the use which these Fathers made of Scripture. As
individuals they could err and doubt ; as faithful witnesses of
the belief of the Church, they hand down to us the faith
which was the same in the beginning, is now, and ever shall
be. This capacity they fulfill, as Davidson rightly says, when
quoting the Scriptures as they were familiar to the Christian
people. Neither is Davidson correct in saying that the cur-
tailed canon of the Jews was historically transmitted. If he
means by this that the restricted canon was transmitted to us
by the Jews, it is well ; but it is utterly false to say that the
existing, recognized Canon of the Christians were such Canon.
Impartial historians, such as Eusebius, record the doubts of
isolated churches concerning several books, but these doubts
92
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
never could be said to have pervaded the whole Church.
Such a critical mind, as was that of Origen, would have more
readily tended to reject the deuterocanonical books, had he
not been convinced by the belief and usage of the universal
Church. As Origen's authority is most valuable, we have
taken the trouble to collate many passages :
Sap. IX. 13 — 16.
" Quis enim hominem poterit
scire consilium Dei ? Aut quis
poterit cogitare quid velit Deus ?
Cogitationes enim mortalium
timidae ; et incertae providen-
tiae nostrae ; corpus enim quod
corrumpitur aggravat animam, et
terrena inhabitatio deprimit sen-
sum multa cogitantem, et difficile
aestimamus quae in terra sunt, et
quae in prospectu sunt inveni-
mus cum labore. Quae autem
in coelis sunt, quis investigabit ?"
Sap. XI. 25.
" Diligis enim omnia quae
sunt, et nihil odisti eorum quae
fecisti — ."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam Spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum."
Tob. III. 24—25.
"In illo tempore exauditae sunt
preces amborum in conspectu
gloriae summi Dei, et missus est
angelus Domini, Sanctus Raph-
ael, ut curaret eos ambos."
Tob. XII. 12 (juxtaGraecum).
" Ac modo cum tu, et Sara
nurus tua orastis, memoriam pre-
cum vestrarum coram Sancto
retuli."
Orig. Lib. De Oratione, I.
" Quis enim hominum poterit
scire consilium Dei ? Aut quis
poterit cogitare quid Deus velit ?
Cogitationes enim mortalium
timidae; et incertae providentiae
nostrae, corpus enim quod cor-
rumpitur aggravat animam, et
terrena inhabitatio deprimit sen-
sum multa cogitantem; et difficile
aestimamus quae in terra sunt.
Quae autem in coelis sunt, quis
investigavit ?"
Ibid. 5.
" — diligitque omnia quae sunt,
et nihil odit eorum quae fecit."
Ibid. 10.
" Magis idoneus fit commisceri
' Spiritui Domini qui replevit
orbem terrarum.' "
Ibid. II.
" Quae inde patent, quod Ra-
phael obtulerit Deo rationabile
obsequium Tobiae et Sarae.
'Nam post utriusque orationem,
exaudita est, inquit Scriptura,
deprecatio utrorumque coram
gloria magni Raphael, et missus
est ad sanandum ambos.* "
Ibid.
" * Et nunc quando orasti tu,
et nurus tua Sara, ego obtuli
memoriale orationis vestrae co-
ram Sancto.' Et post pauca :
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
93
Ibid. 15 (juxta Graecum).
" Ego sum Raphael, unus ex
septem Sanctis Angelis qui pieces
sanctorum ad Deum offerunt, at-
que ambulant ante majestatem
Sancti."
Ibid. 8 (juxta Graecum).
" Bonae sunt pieces quae cum
jejunio et beneficentia justitiaque
conjunctae sunt."
II. Maccab. XV. 13 — 16.
" Post hoc apparuisse et alium
virum aetate et gloria miiabilem,
et magni decoris habitudine
circa ilium ; lespondentem veio
Oniam dixisse : Hie est fiatrum
amator, et populi Israel : hie est
qui multum orat pro populo et
universa sancta civitate, Jeremias
propheta Dei. Extendisse autem
Jeremiam dexteram, et dedisse
Judae gladium aureum dicentem:
accipe sanctum gladium, munus
a Deo, in quo dejicies adveisaiios
populi mei Isiael."
Judith XIII. 9—10.
"Cumque evagina«set ilium,
apprehendit comam capitis ejus,
et ait : Confirma me, Domine
Deus, in hac hora ; et percussit
bis in cervicem ejus, et abscidit
caput ejus, et abstulit conopeum
ejus a columnis, et evolvit corpus
ejus truncum."
Judith VIII. 22. (juxta Grae-
cum.)
" Mementote quae cum Abra-
ham egerit, quibusque rebus
Isaac probarit, quae item Jacob
in Mesopotamia Syriae pascenti
oves Laban avunculi ipsius acci-
derint. Etenim sicut illos ex-
periundi cordis ipsorum gratia.
'Ego sum Raphael, unus ex sep-
tem Angelis qui offerunt orationes
sanctorum, et ingrediuntur in
conspectu gloriae Sancti.' Itaque
juxta Raphaelis sermonem : * Bo-
num oratio cum jejunio et elee-
mosyna et justitia.' Item quod
Jeremias, ut in Machabaeorum
libiis habetui : ' appaiueiit can-
itie et gloria eximius, ita ut miia-
bilis quaedam et maximi decoris
fueiit piaestantia ciica ilium :
extendeiitque dexteram, et de-
derit Judae gladium aureum, de
quo testatus est alius sanctus qui
ante obierat : Hie est qui mul-
tum orat pro populo et sancta
civitate, Jeremias,propheta Dei.' "
Orig. De Oratione, 13.
" Judith, Sanctis oblatis preci-
bus, Holophernem, Deo adju-
vante, superavit, et una Hebrae-
orum femina labem domui
Nabuchodonosoris inussit."
Orig. De Orat. 29.
" Recordamini enim," ait Ju-
dith, "quaecumque fecit cum
Abraham, et quaecumque tentavit
Isaac, et quaecumque eveneiunt
Jacob in Mesopotamia Syiiae pas-
centi pecoia Laban fratris matris
suae, quoniara sicut illos examin-
94
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
ita nos probat, et non ulciscitur ;
sed commonitionis causa Domi-
nus castigat eos qui ei appropin-
quant."
Sap. XVI. 28.
" — ut notum omnibus esset
quoniam oportet praevenire so-
lera ad benedictionem tuam, et
ad ortum lucis te adorare."
Tob. XII. 12.
(Already quoted.)
II. Maccab. VI. 19 — 31.
" At ille gloriossimam mortem
magis quam odibilem vitam com-
plectens, voluntarie praeibat ad
supplicium. Intuens autem,
queraadmodum oporteret acce-
dere, patienter sustinens, desti-
navit non admittere illicita prop-
ter vitae amorem. Hi autem, qui
astabant, iniqua miseratione
commoti, propter antiquam viri
amicitiam, toUentes eum secreto
rogabant afferi carnes, quibus
vesci ei licebat, ut simularetur
manducasse, sicut rex impera-
verat de sacrificii carnibus : ut,
hoc facto, a morte liberaretur :
et propter veterem viri amicitiam,
hanc in eo faciebant humanita-
tem. At ille cogitare coepit
aetatis ac senectutis suae eminen-
tiam dignam, et ingenitae nobili-
tatis canitiem, atque a puero
optimae conversationis actus : et
secundum sanctae et a Deo con-
ditae legis constituta, respondit
cito, dicens: Praemitti se velle in
infernum. Non enim aetati nos-
trae dignum est, inquit ; fingere ;
ut multi adolescentium, arbi-
avit in certamen cordis eorum,
etiam nos ulciscitur, quia ad
emendationem flagellat Dominus
appropinquantes sibi."
Ibid, 31.
" — et de parte mundi, in Sa-
pientia Solomonis, dicitur : ' Ut
notum esset, quoniam oportet
praevenire solera ad benedic-
tionera tuara, et ante ortura lucis
te adorare.' "
Ibid.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Exhortatio ad Martyr-
ium, 22.
" Quam autem aequius est raor-
tuum laudari quara qui mortem
sponte ac libere pro religione
oppetiit ? Qualis fuit Eleazar, qui
' gloriosissimara raortem magis
quam odibilem vitam complec-
tens, voluntarie praeibat ad sup-
plicura,' quique 'strenuara as-
sumens ratiocinationem dignam
aetate sua nonagenaria, et senec-
tutis suae eminentia, illustrique
canitie, atque optima a pueritia
educatione, maxime vero sancta,
et a Deo condita lege dixit : non
est aetate hac nostra dignum fin-
gere, ut multi adolescentes,
arbitrantes Eleazarum nonagenta
annorum transisse ad vitara ali-
enigenarum, et ipsi propter raeam
simulationera,et propter modicum
corruptibilis vitae tempus decipi-
antur propter rae, et execrationera
atque raaculam senectuti ac-
quirara ; nam etsi in praesenti
tempore suppliciis horainura erip-
iar, sed manus Oranipotentis nee
vivus nee defunctus effugiam.
Quamobrem fortiter excedendo
senectute quidem dignus appar-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
95
ebo, adolescentibus autem exem-
plum forte relinquam, ut prompto
animo ac fortiter pro gravissimis
ac sanctissimis legibus honesta
morte perfungantur.'
Oro autem vos cum ad portas
mortis imo libertatis constituti
eritis, maxime si tormenta objici-
entur, dicere Domino, qui sanc-
tam habet scientiam : *Mani-
festum est quia cum a morte
possem liberari, duros corporis
sustineo dolores, secundum ani-
mam vero propter timorem ejus
libenter haec patior.*
Talis ergo fuit Eleazari mors,
'qui non solum juvenibus, sed et
plerisque suae gentis mortem
suam exemplum fortitudinis et
memoriale virtutis reliquit.' "
trantes Eleazarum nonaginta
annorum transisse ad vitam
alienigenarum : et ipsi propter
meam simulationem, et propter
modicum corruptibilis vitse tem-
pus decipiantur, et per hoc
maculam atque execrationem
mesQ senectuti conquiram. Nam,
etsi in praesenti tempore suppli-
ciis hominum eripiar, sed manum
Omnipotentis nee vivus, nee de-
functus effugiam. Quamobrem
fortiter vita excedendo senectute
quidem dignus apparebo: adoles-
centibus autem exemplum forte
relinquam, si prompto animo, ac
fortiter pro gravissimis ac sanc-
tissimis legibus honesta morte
perfungar. His dictis, confestim
ad supplicium trahebatur. Hi
autem, qui eum ducebant, et
paulo ante fuerant mitiores, in
iram conversi sunt propter ser-
mones ab eo dictos, quos illi per
arrogantiam prolatos arbitraban-
tur. Sed, cum plagis perimeretur,
ingemuit, et dixit : Domine, qui
habes sanctam scientiam, mani-
feste tu scis, quia, cum a morte
possem liberari, duros corporis
sustineo dolores : secundum ani-
mam vero propter timorem tuum
libenter haec patior. Et iste
quidem hoc modo vita decessit,
non solum juvenibus, sed et uni-
versse genti memoriam mortis
suae ad exemplum virtutis et
fortitudinis derelinquens."
The 23d, 24th, 25th, 26th, and 27th numbers of the Exhor-
tatio ad Martyrium are a commentary on the death of the
mother and her seven sons, as recorded in the second book of
Maccab., seventh Chapter, and he concludes by saying: "I
believe that I have selected these things as most useful to my
scope from the Scriptures, that we may see how, against bit-
terest tortures and heaviest torments, piety and the love of
96
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
God, mightier than any other love, can avail." It is evident
that the faith for which the martyrs died recognized as divine
Scripture the deuterocanonical books.
Sap. XV. lo.
"Cinis est enim cor ejus, et
terra supervacua spes illius, et
lute vilior vita ejus."
Sap. III. 6.
" Tamquam aurum in fomace
probavit illos, et quasi holo-
causti hostiam accepit illos, et in
tempore erit rcspectus illorum."
Sap. I. 4.
" Quoniam in malevolara ani-
mam non introibit sapientia, nee
habitabit in corpore subdito pec-
catis."
Sap. VII. 25—26.
" Vapor est enim virtutis Dei,
et emanatio quaedamest claritatis
omnipotentis Dei sincera : et ideo
nihil inquinatum in eam incurrit;
candor est enim lucis aeternae,
et speculum sina macula Dei ma-
jestatis, et imago bonitatis illius."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum : et hoc,
quod continet omnia, scientiam
habet vocis."
Orig, Exhort, ad Martyr. 32.
" — idque postquam cognovi-
mus ' cinerem esse cor idolis ser-
vientium, vitamque luto turpio-
rem.' "
Ibid. 35.
'* Quodsi probatus est et ille, et
qui similes illi sunt ; quos ' tam-
quam aurum in fomace ' tormen-
tis et quaestionibus 'probavit
Dominus, et quasi holocaust!
hostiam accepit.'"
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. III.
60.
" Quoniam vero docemus ' sa-
pientiam in malevolam animam
non introituram, nee habitatu-
ram in corpore subdito pecca-
tis.' "
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. III.
72.
" — aut quomodo ilium divina
Scriptura definit : ' vapor divinae
potestatis, limpida omnipotentis
ejus gloriae efHuentia, splendor
lucis aeternae, speculum sine ma-
cula Dei majestatis, et imago
bonitatis illius.' "
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. IV. 5.
" — nescit : * Spiritum Do-
mini replere orbem terrarum, et
hoc quod continet omnia scien-
tiam habere vocis.' "
Sap. XI. 25.
" Diligis enim omnia quae
sunt, et nihil odisti eorum quae
fecisti : nee enim odiens aliquid
constituisti, aut fecisti."
Ibid. 18.
" Legimus ac novimus : 'Deum
diligere omnia quae sunt, et nihil
odisse eorum quae fecit ; nihil
enim constiturum fuisse quod
odisset.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
97
Eccli. XVIIL 12.
" — misericordia autem Dei
super omnem camera."
Sap. XII. I.
" O quam bonus, et suavis est,
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni-
bus ! "
Eccli. XXXIX. 26.
" Non est dicere : Quid est
hoc, aut quid est istud ? omnia
enim in tempore suo quaeren-
tur."
Tob. XII. 7.
" Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est : opera
autem Dei revelare et confiteri
honorificum est."
Sap. X. 5.
" Haec et in consensu nequi-
tiae, cum se nationes contulissent,
scivit justum, et conservavit sine
querela Deo, et in filii misericor-
dia fortem custodivit."
Tob. XII. 7.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore subdito
peccatis."
Eccli. XXI. 21.
" Tamquam doraus extermi-
nata, sic fatuo sapientia : et
scientia insensati inenarrabilia
verba."
G
Ibid.
" — et misericordiam Domini
esse super omnem camera."
Ibid. 37.
" — de quo dictum est: 'In-
corruptibilis autem tuus Spiritus
est in omnibus.'"
Ibid 75.
" Ne dixeris : quid hoc ? aut :
quorsum hoc ? omnia enim ad
illorum usum creata sunt. Et ne
dixeris : quid istud ? aut quor-
sum istud ? omnia enim in tem-
pore suo quaerentur."
Orig. Contra Celsum,Lib.V. 19.
" ' Queraadmodum, et apud
Tobiam legitur : ' Sacraraentura
regis bonum est abscondere ; sed
opera Dei sincere revelare
pulchrum est.' "
Ibid. 29.
" Sic enim ibi de sapientia :
* Haec et in consensu nequitiae,
cum gentes confusae fuissent,
scivit justum, et conservavit sine
querela Deo, et in filii misericor-
dia fortem custodivit.' "
Ibid.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid.
" — de qua pulchre scriptum
est : ' In malevolam animam non
introibit sapientia, nee habitabit
in corpore subdito peccatis.' "
Orig. Contra Celsum,Lib.VI. 7.
" Modo Jesu Sirach filius, qui
librum, Sapientiam (Sirach) in-
scriptura, conscripsit : ' Scientia
stulti, sermones inextricabiles.' "
98
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Sap. IX. 6.
" Nam et si quis erit consum-
matus inter filios hominum, si ab
illo abfuerit sapientia tua, in ni-
hilum computabitur."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. XVII. I.
" Magna sunt enim judicia tua
Domine, et inenarrabilia verba
tua : propter hoc indisciplinatae
animae erraverunt,"
Sap. I. 5.
" Spiritus enim sanctus discip-
linae effugiet fictum, et auferet
se a cogitationibus, quae sunt
sine intellectu, et corripietur a
superveniente iniquitate."
Eccli. XXI. 21.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 13.
" Nam et si quis erit consum-
matus inter filios hominum, si ab
illo abfuerit sapientia, quae a te
est, in nihilum computabitur."
Ibid 63.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 79.
"Verum nihil mirandum est
quoniam : ' Dei judicia magna
sunt, et explicatu ardua; indis-
ciplinatas animas,' adeoque Cel-
sum, 'errare.'"
Contra Celsum, Lib. VIII. 8.
" Spiritus enim sanctus dis-
ciplinae effugiet fictum, et auferet
se a cogitationibus quae sunt
sine intellectu."
Ibib. 12.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. XII. 1—2.
" O quam bonus, et suavis est,
Domine, spiritus tuus in omnibus!
Ideoque eos, qui exerrant, parti-
bus corripis : et de quibus pec-
cant, admones et alloqueris : ut
relicta malitia, credant in te, Do-
mine."
Sap. VII. 25—26.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. XVII. I.
I. Maccab. IX. 55; II. Maccab.
III. 24; IX. 5.
Ibid. 51.
" Incorruptibilis spiritus tuus
est in omnibus, quapropter de-
linquentes paulatim arguit Deus."
Orig, Contra Celsum, Lib.
VIIL 14.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid, 32.
Ibid. 46.
" — et alii qui, Judaeorum cul-
tum violare in templo ausi fuerint,
referunt Machabaeorum libri."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
99
Eccli. X. 23.
" Semen hominum honorabitur
hoc, quod timet Deum : semen
autem hoc exhonorabitur, quod
praeterit mandata Domini."
Eccli. X. 4.
"In manu Dei potestas terrae:
et utilem rectorem suscitabit in
tempus super illam."
Sap. I. 13.
" Quoniam Deus mortem non
fecit, nee laetatur in perditione
vivorum."
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi earn assumere, et ama-
tor factus sum formae illius."
Sap. VIII. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXII. 24.
" Pungens oculum deducit la-
crymas : et qui pungit cor, pro-
fert sensum."
Sap. II. 20.
" Morte turpissima condem-
nemus eum : erit enim ei respec-
tus ex sermonibus illius."
Baruch III. 9.
" Audi, Israel, mandata vitae :
auribus percipe, ut scias pruden-
tiam."
Eccli. VII. 40.
"In omnibus operibus tuis
memorare novissima tua, et in
aeternum non peccabis."
Ibid. 50.
" Hoc docet divina Scriptura :
* Ecquod semen in honore ?
semen hominis; ecquod semen
in contemptu? semen hominis.' "
Ibid. 68.
" — quique utilem rectorem
suscitat in tempus super terram."
Orig. Selecta in Genesim.
" Deus enim mortem non fecit,
nee delectatur in perditione vi-
vorum."
Orig. Homilia VI. in Gene-
sim, I.
" — sicut et ille sapiens qui
dicebat de sapientia: ' Hanc quae-
sivi adducere mihi sponsam.' "
Homilia XI. in Genesim, i.
"Sicut et ille qui dicebat de
sapientia : * Hanc ego cogitavi
uxorem adducere mihi.' "
" Orig. in Exodum, Homilia
IV. 5.
" Pro illo vero alia Scriptura
dicit : ' Punge oculum, et produ-
cit lacrymam ; punge cor, et
producit sensum.' "
Horn. VI. in Exodum, i.
" De quo etiam Propheta prae-
dixerat : * Morte turpissima con-
demnemus eum.' "
Hom. VII. in Exod. 2.
" Sicut et alibi (Scriptura)
dicit ; * Audi, Israel, mandata
vitae.'"
Hom. IX. in Exod. 4.
" Memor esto novissimorum
tuorum, et non peccabis."
100
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Dan. XIII. 22 — 23.
" Ingemuit Susanna, et ait :
Angustiae sunt mihi undique : si
enim hoc egero, mors mihi est :
si autem non egero, non effugiam
manus vestras. Sed melius est
mihi absque opere incidere in
manus vestras, quam peccare in
conspectu Domini."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum : et hoc,
quod continet omnia, scientiam
habet vocis."
Sap. VIII. 20.
" Et cum essem magis bonus,
veni ad corpus incoinquinatum."
Eccli. XXVIII. 22.
" Multi ceciderunt in ore gladii,
sed non sic quasi qui interierunt
per linguam suam."
Sap. VII. 20.
" — naturas animalium, et iras
bestiarum, vim ventorum, et cogi-
tationes hominum, et virtutes ra-
dicum."
Horn. I. in Leviticum, i.
"But it behooves us to use
against the impious presbyters
the words of the blessed SusannaCy
which they indeed repudiating,
have cut off from the catalogue of
divine Scripture the history of
Susannae. But we receive it, and
appositely adduce it against
them, saying : * I am straitened
on every side : for if I do this
thing (follow the letter of the
Law) it is death to me ; and if I
do it not, I shall not escape your
hands. But it is better for me
to fall into your hands without
doing it than to sin in the sight
of the Lord.' "
Hom. V. in Leviticum, 2.
" Et iterum alibi : ' Spiritus
enim Domini replevit orbem ter-
rarum.' "
Hom. XII. in Levit. 4.
" Ipse (Jesus) enim erat qui et
dudum per Salomonem dixerat :
* Magis autem cum essem bonus,
veni ad corpus incoinquina-
tum.' "
Orig. Hom. VIII. in Nume-
ros, I.
" Non legisti ? ' Dicunt quia
vulnerant gladii sed non ita ut
lingua ?' "
Hom. XII. in Numeros, i.
** — de quorum scientia dice-
bat ille qui repletus est sapientia
Dei : ' Ipse enim . mihi dedit
eorum quae sunt scientiam veram,
ut scirem substantiam mundi et
elementorum virtutem, initium
et finem et medietatem tempo-
rum, vicissitudinem, permuta-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
101
Sap, VII. lo.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 22 — 23,
" — est enim in ilia spiritus
intelligentiae, sanctus, unicus,
multiplex, subtilis, disertus, mo-
bilis, incoinquinatus, certus, sua-
vis, amans bonum, acutus, quem
nihil vetat, benefaciens, humanus,
benignus, stabilis, certus, secu-
rus, omnem habens virtutem,
omnia prospiciens, et qui capiat
omnes spiritus, intelligibilis
mundus, subtilis."
Eccli. I. I.
" Omnis sapientia a Domino
Deo est, et cum illo fuit semper,
et est ante aevum."
Eccli. XIX. 19.
" Et non est sapientia nequi-
tiae disciplina : et non est cogi-
tatus peccatorum prudentia."
Sap. III. 16.
" Filii autem adulterorum in
inconsummatione erunt, et ab
iniquo thoro semen extermina-
bitur."
Eccli. XVI. 5.
" Ab uno sensato inhabitabitur
patria, tribus impiorum desere-
tur."
tiones et commutationes tempo-
rum, anni circulos, et astrorum
positiones, naturas animalium, et
iras bestiarum, spirituum violen-
tias et cogitationes hominum,
differentias virgultorum, et vir-
tutes radicum.' "
Ibid.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Hom.
XVII. 6.
in Numeros,
" — quia et spiritus sapientiae,
qui intelligibilis et sanctus et
unicus et multiplex dicitur, sim-
iliter et subtilis esse perhibetur."
Hom. XVIII. in Numeros, 3.
"In libro, qui apud nos quidem
inter Salomonis volumina haberi
solet, et Ecclesiasticus dici, apud
Graecos vero Sapientia Jesu filii
Sirach appellatur, scriptum est :
* Omnis sapientia a Deo est.' "
Ibid.
" Non est enim sapientia ma-
litiae disciplina."
Hom. in Numeros XX. 2.
" — de quibus scriptum est :
* Filii autem adulterorum imper-
fecti erunt, et ex iniquo concu-
bitu semen exterminabitur.' "
Hom. XXI. in Num. 2.
" Denique et scriptum est :
'Per unum sapientem inhabita-
bitur civitas ; tribus autem ini-
quorum desolabitur.' "
102
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Sap. IX. 15.
" Corpus enim, quod corrum-
pitur, aggravat animam, et ter-
rena inhabitatio deprimit sensum
multa cogitantem."
Eccli. XIV. 23.
" Qui excogitat vias illius in
corde suo, et in absconditis suis
intelligens, vadens post illam
quasi investigator, et in viis illius
consistens — ."
Eccli. II. I.
" Fili, accedens ad servitutem
Dei, sta in justitia, et timore, et
praepara animam tuam ad tenta-
tionem."
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. III. 20.
" Quanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo in-
venies gratiam — ."
Ibid. XXXII. I.
" Rectorem te posuerunt ? noli
extoUi : esto in illis quasi unus
ex ipsis."
Eccli. X. 15.
" — quoniam ab eo, qui fecit
ilium, recessit cor ejus ; quoniam
initium omnis peccati est super-
bia — ."
Eccli. XXV. 3—4.
"Tres species odivit anima
mea, et aggravor valde animae il-
lorum : pauperem superbum :
divitem mendacem : senem
fatuum et insensatum."
Horn. XXIII. in Num. 11.
" ' Corpus enim corruptibile,'
ut ait ille sapientissimus, ' aggra-
vat animam, et deprimit sensum
multa cogitantem.* "
Horn. XXVIII. in Num. i.
" Sed et ego qui lego de sapi-
entia scriptum : ' Exi post eam
sicut investigator—^.' "
Orig. Hom. XI. in Jehoshua, 2.
" Sed et Salomon similia dicit :
* Fili,' inquit, ' accedens ad ser-
vitutem Domini, praepara ani-
mam tuam ad tentationem.' "
Hom. XXII. in Jehosua, 6.
" — Cui dicitur a Propheta,
' Semen Chanaan et non Juda,
species seduxit te.' "
Hom. XXIV. in Jehoshua, 2.
" — quod dicitur: 'Quanto mag-
nus es tanto magis humilia te, et
ante Dominum in venies gratiam,'
et iterum quod scriptum est: 'Si
te ducem ordinaverint, ne extol-
laris, sed esto inter eos quasi
unus ex ipsis.' "
Orig. Hom. III. in Judic i.
" — quia sicut Scriptura dicit :
' Initium discedendi a Domino,
superbia — .' "
Ibid.
" Nihil invenies tam foedum
neque execrabile, sicut Scrip-
tura dicit, quam ' pauperem su-
perbum et divitem mendacem.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
103
Judith XIII.
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
" Homo sanctus in sapientia
manet sicut sol : nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur."
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 curiosus."
Eccli. I. II.
" Timor Domini gloria, et glo-
riatio, et laetitia, et corona ex-
ultationis."
Sap. V. i8 — 21.
" Accipiet armaturam zelus
illius, et armabit creaturam ad
ultionem inimicorum. Induct
pro thorace justitiam, et accipiet
pro galea judicium certum ; su-
met scutum inexpugnabile aequi-
tatem : acuet autem duram iram
in lanceam, et pugnabit cum illo
orbis terrarum contra insensa-
tos."
Dan. XIII. 45 et seqq.
" Cumque duceretur ad mor-
tem, suscitavit Dominus spiritum
Hom. IX. in Judic. i.
" Quid ego illam magnificam
et omnium feminarum nobilis-
simam memorem, Judith, quae
jam perditis pene rebus, non du-
bitavit sola succurrere, seseque
suumque caput immanissimi
Holophernis neci sola subjicere,
et processit ad bellum non in
armis, neque in equis bellicis aut
in subsidiis militaribus freta, sed
in virtute animi ; et confidentia
fidei, consilio simul et audacia
hostem perimit."
Orig. Hom. I. in Reg. 4.
" — quia et secundum Scrip-
turas : ' insipiens sicut luna mu-
tatur.' "
Hom. II. in Reg. 4.
" Nam et Salomon dicit : * Al-
tiora te ne quaesieris, et fortiora
te ne scrutere, sed de quibus tibi
praeceptum est, haec intellige.' "
Orig. Selecta in Ps. XXI. 32.
" Generatio autem Sapientiae
est secundum Salomonem : * ti-
mer Domini, divitiae, gloria ac
vita.' "
Selecta in Ps. XXXIV. 2.
" Accipiet armaturam zelum il-
lius, et armabit creaturam ad
ultionem inimicorum. Induet
pro thorace justitiam, et accipiet
pro galea judicium certum, sumet
scutum inexpugnabile aequita-
tem, acuet autem duram iram in
lanceam."
Hom. IV. in Ps. XXXVI. 2.
" Respice beatum Danielem,
qui a puero et prophetiae gra-
104
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
sanctum pueri junioris, cujus
nomen Daniel."
Sap. V. 4.
" Nos insensati vitam illorum
aestimabamus insaniam, et finem
illorum sine honore."
Esther XIV. 11.
"Ne tradas, Domine, sceptrum
tuum his, qui non sunt, ne ride-
ant ad ruinam nostram : sed con-
verte consilium eorum super eos,
et eum, qui in nos coepit saevire,
disperde."
Eccli. VIII. 6.
" Ne despicias hominem aver-
tentem se a peccato, neque im-
properes ei ; memento quoniam
omnes in correptione sumus."
Eccli. XXVIII. 28—29.
" Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guam nequam noli audire, et ori
tuo facito ostia, et seras. Aurum
tuum et argentum tuum confla,
et verbis tuis facito stateram, et
frenos ori tuo rectos — ."
Eccli. XXIII. 2.
"Quis superponet in cogitatu
meo flagella, et in corde meo
doctrinam sapientiae, ut ignora-
tionibus eorum non parcant mihi,
et non appareant delicta eorum?"
Eccli. XXI. 29.
" In ore fatuorum cor illorum :
et in corde sapientium os illo-
rum."
tiam meruit, et iniquos arguens
presbyteros, puer coronam jus-
titiae et castitatis obtinuit."
Hom. V. in Ps. XXXVI. 5.
" — ita ut illi qui in poenis
sunt, videntes eos in gloria di-
cent : Nos stulti vitam eorum
putabamus insaniam."
Ibid.
" Et in libro Esther dicitur :
' Non tradas, Domine, sceptrum
tuum his qui non sunt.' "
Hom. II. in Ps. XXXVII. i.
" — nee memores Scripturae
sunt divinae dicentis : * Noli
improperare homini convertenti
se a peccato, sed memor esto
quoniam omnes sumus in culpis."'
Hom. I. in Ps. XXXVIII. 3.
" Alibi quidem scriptum est :
'Vide, circumduc sepem spina-
rum circa possessionem tuam.'
Et iterum : * Pecuniam tuam et
aurum tuum alliga, et ori tuo
facito ostium et seram, et verbis
tuis, jugum et stateram.' "
Hom. II. in Ps. XXXVIII. 7.
" Sed novi ego et alia flagella
quibus vehementius cruciamur,
ilia scilicet quae per prophetam
describit sapientia (prophetam
enim eum dico): ' Quis dabit in
cogitatu meo correptionem sa-
pientiae, ut ignorationibus meis
quae feci non parcatur, et pec-
cata mea non praetereantur?' "
Orig. Selecta in Ps. LI. Vers. 4.
" — in ore stultorum cor eorum
est."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
105
Eccli. XV. 9.
'* Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris — ."
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia, nee
habitabit in corpore subdito pec-
catis."
Sap. I. 4.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
" Homo sanctus in sapientia
manet sicut sol : nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur.
Baruch III. 38.
" Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Eccli. XV. g.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 25.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. IV. 13.
"Consummatus in brevi, ex-
plevit tempora multa — ."
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi earn assumere, et ama-
tor f actus sum formae illius."
Eccli. I. S3-
**Fili, concupiscens sapientiam,
conserva justitiam ? et Deus prae-
bebit illam tibi.
Selecta in Ps. LXV. Vers. 2.
" — quia non est speciosa laus
in ore peccatoris."
Selecta in Ps. LXXXVIII.
Vers. 32.
" Qui non custodit mandata
Dei desivit esse thronus Dei,
nam: *In malevolam animam,
non introibit sapientia, neque
habitabit in corpore subdito pec-
catis ' "
Selecta in Ps. CXVIII. Vers.
155-
(Already quoted.)
Selecta in Ps. CXX. Vers. 6.
" — Stultus ut luna mutatur."
Selecta in Ps. CXXV. Vers. 2.
" Post haec enim in terra visus
est, et cum hominibus conversa-
tus est."
Selecta in CXLIX. Vers. i.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Fragmenta in Prov. I. 2.
(Already many times quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. XXX.
" — siquidem *in brevi con-
summatus, explevit tempora mul-
ta.' "
Orig. Prologus in Canticum
Cantic.
" Sed et in eo libello qui dici-
tur Sapientia Salomonis ita scrip-
turn est de ipsa sapientia : * Ama-
tor factus sum decoris ejus.' "
Ibid.
" — et intelligere illud quod
scriptum est : ' Concupisti sa-
pientiam ? serva mandata, et Do-
minus dabit earn tibi.' "
106
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Sap. XI. 27— XII. I.
" Parcis autem omnibus : quo-
niam tua sunt, Domine, qui amas
animas. O quam bonus, et sua-
vis est, Domine, spiritus tuus in
omnibus."
Sap. VII. 17 — 20.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXVIII. 29.
" Aurum tuum et argentum
tuum confla, et verbis tuis facito
stateram, et frenos ori tuo rec-
tos — ."
Eccli. IV. 33.
** Pro justitia agonizare pro
anima tua, et usque ad mortem
certa pro justitia, et Deus ex-
pugnabit pro te inimicos tuos."
Sap. VII. 22.
" — est enim in ilia spiritus in-
telligentiae, sanctus, unicus, mul-
tiplex, subtilis, disertus, mobi-
lis— ."
Orig. in Cant. Cantig. Lib. III.
Vers. 4.
" — quamvis verum sit ut dici-
tur ad eum : ' Parcis autem om-
nibus, quia omnia tua sunt, Do-
mine, amator animarum. Spi-
ritus enim incorruptionis est in
omnibus.' "
Ibid. Vers. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. VII. Vers. 8.
" — juxta illud : ' Ori tuo fac
ostium, et vectem, et verbis tuis
fac modum et stateram.' "
Ibid. Cap. VIII. 6.
** Et usque ad mortem certa
pro justitia."
Hom. VI. in Isaiam, 5.
"Dicitur enim de S. Spiritu, qui
est secundum sapientiam, quia
sit multifarius, tenuis, mobilis."
Sap. I. 13 — 14, et II. 24.
" Quoniam Deus mortem non
fecit, nee laetatur in perditione
vivorum. Creavit enim, ut es-
sent omnia : et sanabiles fecit
nation es orbis terrarum : et non
est in illis medicamentum exter-
minii, nee inferorum regnum in
terra. Invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit in orbem terrarum — ."
Eccli. XXI. 18.
" Verbum sapiens quodcumque
audierit scius laudabit, et ad se
adjiciet — ."
Hom. II. in Jeremiam I.
"'Deus mortem non fecit,
neque delectatur in perditione
viventium. Creavit enim ut
essent omnia, et salutares gene-
rationes mundi, nee est in eis
venenum mortis, neque inferni
regnum super terram.' Deinde
paululum ultra procedens invenio
unde sit mors : ' Invidia autem
diaboli, mors intravit in orbem
terrarum.' "
Hom. VI. in Jerem. i.
"Quoniam vero: 'Verbum
sapiens si audierit scius, laudabit,
et ad illud adjiciet.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
107
Eccli. XXIII. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Baruch III. 9 — 13.
" Audi, Israel, mandata vitae :
auribus percipe, ut scias pruden-
tiam. Quid est, Israel, quod in
terra inimicorum es ? inveterasti
in terra aliena, coinquinatus es
cum mortuis : deputatus es cum
descendentibus in infernum. De-
reliquisti fontem sapientiae ; nam
si in via Dei ambulasses, habi-
tasses utique in pace sempi-
terna."
Sap. III. II,
" Sapientiam enim, et discipli-
nam qui abjicit, infelix est : et
vacua est spes illorum, et labores
sine fructu, et inutilia opera
eorum."
Eccli. XXXI. 10.
" Qui probatus est in illo, et
perfectus est, erit illi gloria aeter-
na : qui potuit transgredi, et non
est transgressus : facere mala, et
non fecit — ."
Baruch III. 10 — 11.
"Quid est, Israel, quod in terra
inimicorum es ? inveterasti in
terra aliena, coinquinatus es cum
mortuis: deputatus es cum de-
scendentibus in infernum."
Sap. III. I.
" Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis."
Eccli. I. 2.
"Arenara maris, et pluviae
guttas, et dies saeculi quis dinu-
meravit ? Altitudinem caeli, et
latitudinem terrae, et profundum
abyssi quis dimensus est ?"
Ibid. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Horn. VII. in Jerem. 3.
" — et abire in terram de qua
scriptum est : * Audi, Israel,
quid est quod in terra inimico-
rum es ? Computatus es cum
descendentibus in infernum ; de-
reiiquisti fontem vitae,Dominum:
in via Dei si ambulasses, habi-
tasses utique in pace in saecu-
lum.' "
Hom. VIII. in Jerem. i.
" ' Sapientiam autem et dis-
ciplinam qui abjicit, infelix est,
et vana spes ejus, et labores ejus
insensati, et inutilia opera ejus,'
ait Sapientia, quae dicitur Salo-
monis."
Selecta in Jerem. Cap. II. 32.
"Gloria enim aeterna super
caput justorum "
Ibid. Cap. XXXI. 16.
" Scriptum est in Baruch :
* Quid est quod in terra inimi-
corum es, et coinquinatus es cum
mortuis ?' "
Ibid. Cap. XLV. 5.
" — Nam 'justorum animae in
manu Dei sunt.' "
Orig. Hom, IV. in Ezechiel, 2.
"Arenam maris et pluviae stil-
las et dies saeculi, quis dinumer-
abit ? Altitudinem coeli et lati-
tudinem terrae et profundum
Sapientiae, quis investigabit ?"
108
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. VII. 6.
" Noli quaerere fieri judex,
nisi valeas virtute irrurapere ini-
quitates : ne forte extimescas
faciem potentis, et ponas scan-
dalum in aequitate tua."
Dan. XIIL 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. X. 9 — 10.
" Avaro autera nihil est sceles-
tius. Quid superbit terra et
cinis ? Nihil est iniquius quam
amare pecuniara ; hie enim et
animam suam venalem habet ;
quoniam in vita sua projecit in-
tima sua."
Eccli. III. 20.
" Quanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo in-
venies gratiam — ."
Sap. VI. 7.
" Exiguo enim conceditur mi-
sericordia: potentes autemjpoten-
ter tormenta patientur."
Eccli. XVIII. 30.
*' Post concupiscentias tuas
non eas, et a voluntate tua aver-
tere."
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
" Homo sanctus in sapientia
manet sicut sol : nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur."
Hom. V. in Ezech. 4.
" — et ante oculos mihi propo-
nens ilium judicii ordinem qui
in Scripturis continetur, recordor
dicti illius : ' Pondus ultra te ne
leves.' Sed et illud : ' Noli quae-
rere fieri judex, ne non valeas
auferre iniquitates.' "
Hom. VI. in Ezech. 3.
"Saepe miratus sum id quod
dictum est a Daniel ad presby-
terum peccatorem, cui pro pec-
cato nomen imponens: 'Semen,'
inquit * Chanaan et non Juda.' "
Hom. IX. in Ezech. 2.
" Quid enim ait Scriptura ?
* Quid superbit terra et cinis ?'
et : * In vita ejus projecit intera-
nea ejus.' "
Ibid.
" — dicente Scriptura: 'Quanto
magnus fuerit, tanto humilia te
ipsum.* "
Hom. X. in Ezech. 2.
" Justum est quippe judicium
Dei, et 'potentes potenter tor-
menta patiuntur.' "
Orig. Comment, in Math. Tom.
XII. 22.
" Post concupiscentias tuas
non eas."
Ibid. Tom. XIII. 4.
" Nobis proderit is qui in
Sapientia de justi quidem ae-
quabilitate et constantia ait :
* Narratio pii semper est sapien-
tia .... stultus autem sicut luna
mutatur.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
109
Esther XIV. 2.
" Cumque deposuisset vestes
regias, fletibus et luctui apta in-
dumenta suscepit — ."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXVII. 28.
" Qui in altum mittit lapidem,
super caput ejus cadet : et plaga
dolosa dolosi dividet vulnera."
Sap. II. 21 — 22.
" Haec cogitaverunt, et erra-
verunt : excaecavit enim illos
malitia eorum. Et nescierunt
sacramenta Dei — ."
Sap. VIII. I.
" Attingit ergo a fine usque ad
finem fortiter, et disponit omnia
suaviter."
Eccli. IV. S3-
"Pro justitia agonizare pro
anima tua, et usque ad mortem
certa pro justitia, et Deus ex-
pugnabit pro te inimicos tuos."
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi eam assumere, et ama-
tor f actus sum formae illius."
Eccli. III. 20.
" Quanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo in-
venies gratiam — ."
Eccli. XXI. 2.
" Quasi a facie colubri fuge
peccata : et si accesseris ad ilia,
suscipient te."
Ibid. 20.
"Simile in libro Esther dic-
tum esse de illo, inquies, cum
scriptum est : ' Cum deposuisset
omnem ornatum suum.' "
Ibid. Tom. XV. 10.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. Tom. XVI. 3.
" Nam ' qui in altum mittit
lapidem, in caput suum mittit.' "
Ibid.
" — quoniam * excaecavit illos
malitia eorum, et nescierunt sa-
cramenta Dei.' "
Ibid.
" — cum, ' attingit a fine terrae
usque ad finem fortiter, et dis-
ponit ' ecclesias ' suaviter.' "
Ibid. Tom. XVII. 25.
" — illudque dogma observan-
tes : ' Usque ad mortem certa
pro veritate, et Deus pugnabit
pro te.' "
Ibid. 32.
" Mulier quidem dicta est Sap-
ientia propter illud : ' Quaesivi
sponsam mihi eam assumere.'"
Orig. in Math. Comment. Se-
ries, 12.
" — cum deberent recordari
Sapientiae verbum dicentis :
' Quantum magnus es, tantum
humilia te, et coram Deo invenies
gratiam.' " (Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 42.
" — et quod ait Sapientia :
• Quasi a facie serpentis, fuge
peccatum.' "
110
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. IX. 4.
" Cum saltatrice ne assiduus
sis : nee audias illam, ne forte
pereas in efficacia illius."
Eccli. XXL 2.
(Already quoted.)
Dan. XIII. 55.
" Dixit autem Daniel : Recte
mentitus es in caput tuum: Ecce
enim Angelus Dei, accepta sen-
tentia ab eo, scindet te medium."
Sap. IX. 6.
" Nam et si quis erit consum-
matus inter filios hominum, si ab
illo abfuerit sapientia tua, in
nihilum computabitur."
Sap. VII. 17 — 20.
(Already quoted.)
II. Maccab. VII. 28.
" Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad
coelum et terram, et ad omnia
quae in eis sunt : et intelligas,
quia ex nihilo fecit ilia Deus, et
hominum genus."
Esther XIV. 11.
(Already quoted.)
Judith, IX. 2.
" Domine Deus patris mei
Simeon, qui dedisti illi gladium in
defensionem alienigenarum — ."
Baruch III. 38.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 44.
" Cum saltatrice noli assiduus
esse, ne forte consumaris in de-
sideriis ejus."
Ibid.
" Ideo bene dixit Scriptura :
'Quasi a facie serpentis, fuge
peccatum.' "
Ibid. 61.
" — quoniam Angelus Deus ;
habens gladium, scindet te me-
dium."
Ibid. 69.
" — quod ait Salomon : * Et
si fuerit quis perfectus inter filios
hominum, si abfuerit ab illo
Sapientia tua in nihilum reputa-
bitur.' "
Orig. Horn. XXI. in Lucam.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Comment, in Joannem,
Tom. I. 18.
" Secus vero apud nos est, qui
credimus ex non entibus Deum
entia fecisse, ut mater ilia septem
Martyrum in Machabaeorum ges-
tis, et poenitentiae angelus in
' Pastore ' docuit."
Ibid. Tom. II. 7.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 16.
"Verum Eliae profecto etiam
est Deus, et, ut inquit Judith,
patris sui Symeon."
Ibid. Tom. VI. 15.
(Already quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Ill
Eccli. XVIII. 6.
" Cum consummaverit homo,
tunc incipiet : et cum quieverit,
aporiabitur."
Sap. XVII. I.
" Magna sunt enim judicia tua,
Domine, et inenarrabilia verba
tua : propter hoc indisciplinatae
animae erraverunt."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Oft quoted.)
I. Maccab. I. 22 — 23.
" — et ascendit Jerosolymam
in multitudine gravi. Et intravit
in sanctificationem cum superbia,
et accepit altare aureum, et can-
delabrum luminis, et universa
vasa ejus, et mensam proposi-
tionis, et libatoria, et phialas, et
mortariola aurea, et velum, et
coronas, et ornamentum aureum,
quod in facie templi erat : et
comminuit omnia."
Eccli. III. 22.
" Altiora te ne quaesieris, et
fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris — ,"
Sap. 25 — 26.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXI. 18.
" Verbum sapiens quodcumque
audierit scius laudabit, et ad se
adjiciet — ."
II. Maccab. XV. 14.
" Respondentem vero Oniam
dixisse : Hie est fratrum amator,
et populi Israel : hie est, qui
multum orat pro populo, et uni-
versa sancta civitate, Jeremias,
propheta Dei."
Ibid. 19.
" * Quoniam cum absolverit
homo, tunc incipit ; et quum
quieverit, tunc incertus erit,'
juxta Jesu filii Sirach Sapien-
tiam."
Ibid. s6.
"'Magna enim judicia Dei,'
eaque aegre nee facile narrantur,
atque 'ob banc causam rudes
animae erraverunt,' "
Ibid. 37.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Tom. X. 22.
" Apparet etiam apud Mac-
chabaica, multam inconstantiam
et confusionem fuisse, circa
templum et circa populum — ."
Ibid. Tom. XIII. 5.
"Te difliciliora ne quaeras, et
te fortiora ne vestiga."
Ibid. 27.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 46.
" — quoniam autem * si sermo-
nem sapientem audierit sapiens,
laudabit eum, et ad ipsum
addet— .' "
Ibid. 57.
" — quemadmodum in Macha-
baeorum gestis scriptum est, post
plurimos annos ab obitu Jere-
miae : ' Hie est Jeremias, Dei
Propheta, qui multum orat pro
populo.' "
112
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Dan. XIII. 42.
" Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant — ."
Sap. VII. 9.
" — nee comparavi illi lapi-
dem pretiosum ; quoniam omne
aurum in comparatione illius,
arena est exigua, et tamquam
lutu«i aestimabitur argentum in
conspectu illius."
Sap. X. 3—4.
" Ab hac ut recessit injustus
in ira sua, per iram homicidii
fraterni deperiit. Propter quem,
cum aqua deleret terrara, sanavit
iterum sapientia, per contempti-
bile lignum justum gubernans."
Sap. X. 7.
" — quibus in testimonium ne-
quitiae fumigabunda constat de-
serta terra, et incerto tempore
fructus habentes arbores, et in-
credibilis animae memoria stans
figmentum salis."
Dan. XIIL 56.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. XII. II.
" Semen enim erat maledictum
ab initio : nee timens aliquem,
veniam dabas peccatis illorum."
Sap. II. 24.
" Invidia autem diaboli, mors
introivit in orbem terrarura."
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi eam assumere, et ama-
tor f actus sum formae illius."
Ibid. 58.
"Quoraodo etiam servat illud:
'Qui videt omnia ante ortum
iosorum.'"
Ibid. Tom. XIX. 2.
" Sapientia siquidem erat qui-
vis ejus sermo, de qua dicitur :
'Omne aurum coram sapientia
est pauca arena ; et ceu coenum
reputabitur argentum coram ea.' "
Ibid. Tom. XX. 4.
"Sapientiae liber, Salomoni
inscriptus, his verbis docet :
' Recedens autem ab ipsa, injus-
tus in ira sua periit cum animis
fratricidis, per quem inundatam
terram rursus servavit Sapientia,
vili ligno justum gubernans.' .
' — quorum etiamnum malitiae
testimonio f umosum restat solum,
et plantae intempestivum fruc-
tum ferentes.' "
Ibid. 5.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
" — dicente Sapientia: ' Semen
execratione devotum ab initio.'"
Ibid. 21.
"Sic * Invidia mors introivit in
mundum.' "
Ibid. 33.
" — qui dicit: ' Amator f actus
sum pulchritudinis illius.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
113
Eccli. V. 8.
" Non tardes convert! ad Do-
minum, et ne differas de die in
diem."
Dan. XIII. 9 et 35.
" — et everterunt sensum suum,
et declinaverunt oculos suos ut
non viderent caelum, neque re-
cordarentur judiciorum justorum.
Quae flens suspexit ad caelum:
erat enim cor ejus fiduciam
habens in Domino."
Sap. I. 5.
" Spiritus enim sanctus discip-
linae effugiet fictum, et auferet
se a cogitationibus, quae sunt
sine intellectu, et corripietur a
superveniente iniquitate."
Sap. II. 24.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXXI. 17.
" Ne comprimaris in convivio."
Dan. XIII. 42.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 25—26.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XV. 17—18.
"Apposuit tibi aquam et ig-
nem : ad quod volueris, porrige
manum tuam. Ante hominem
vita et mors, bonum et malum :
quod placuerit ei, dabitur illi — ."
Sap. XI. 21,
" — sed omnia in mensura, et
numero, et pondere, disposuisti."
H
Ibid. Tom. XXVIII. 3.
" Quocirca memores simus
necesse est illius dicti : ' Ne
percuncteris reverti ad Dominum
neque differas de die in diem.' "
Ibid.
" *Et averterunt mentem suam,
et declinarunt oculos suos, ne in
coelum suspicerent, neque mem-
ores essent judiciorum justorum.'
Adducemus etiam in medium
quae de Susanna scribuntur hoc
modo dicta : * At ilia flens sus-
pexit in coelum, quoniam cor
ejus fidebat Domino.'"
Ibid. 13.
" Spiritus sanctus disciplinae
effugiet dolosum, et recedet a
pravis consiliis."
Ibid. Tom. XXXII. 3.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 14.
" Scriptum est enim et hoc
quoque : ' Ne comprimaris cum
eo in catino.' "
Orig. Comment, in Epist. ad
Rom. Lib. I. 3.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 5.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 18.
" — sicut scriptum est : ' Ecce
posui ante faciem tuam vitam et
mortem, ignem et aquam.' "
Ibid. Lib. II. 3.
" Sed sicut omnia in men-
sura facit Deus, et pondere et
numero — ."
114
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Tob. XII. 7.
" Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est : opera
autem_Dei revelare et confiteri
honorificum est."
Baruch IV. 4.
" Beati sumus, Israel : quia
quae Deo placent, manifesta
sunt nobis."
Eccli. XXVIII. 28.
" Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guam nequam noli audire, et
ori tuo facito ostia, et seras."
Eccli. XI. 30.
" Ante mortem ne laudes hora-
inem quemquam, quoniam in
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Sap. IX. 15.
" Corpus enim, quod corrum-
pitur, aggravat animam, et ter-
rena inhabitatio deprimit sensum
multa cogitantem."
Sap. I. I.
" Diligite justitiam, qui judi-
catis terram."
Tob. IV. 16.
"Quod ab alio oderis fieri
tibi, vide ne tu aliquando alteri
facias."
Eccli. XV. 9.
" Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris — ."
Ibid. 4.
" * Mysterium ' vero ' regis ab-
scondere bonum est.' "
Ibid. 7.
" — et ipsi dicunt : * Beati su-
mus, Israel, quia quae placent
Deo nobis nota sunt.' "
Ibid. 13.
" — et dicet circumcidi aures,
cum secundum Salomonis monita
non recipiunt vanam auditionem,
etcum oppilantur, ne audiant ju-
dicium sanguinis, et cum sepiun-
tur spinis ne recipiant obtrectatio-
nem."
Ibid. Lib. III. 2.
" — sicut et Scriptura dicit :
* Ne beatificaveris hominem ante
mortem, quia nescis quae erunt
ejus novissima.' "
Ibid.
" — nunc vero, ut ait Scrip-
tura, ' Corruptibile corpus aggra-
vat animam, et demergit terrena
habitatio sensum multa cogitan-
tem.'"
Ibid. 7.
" — et ideo (Sapientia) ait:
* Discite justitiam, qui judicatis
terram.' "
Ibid.
"Ilia enim lex potest sentire
quod inter homines justum sit,
ut quod in se quis pati non vult,
hoc ne proximo faciat."
Ibid.
" Et iterum alia Scriptura di-
cit : *Non est speciosa laus Dei
in ore peccatoris.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
115
Sap. VII. 26.
(Oft quoted.)
II. Maccab. VII. i, et seqq.
** Contigit autem et septem
fratres una cum matre sua appre-
hensos compelli a rege edere
contra fas carnes porcinas, fla-
gris, et taureis cruciatos."
Baruch III. 36—38.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. X. I.
*' Haec ilium, qui primus for-
matus est a Deo pater orbis ter-
rarum, cum solus esset creatus,
custodivit."
Sap. IX. 6.
" Nam et si quis erit consum-
matus inter filios hominum, si ab
illo abfuerit sapientia tua, in
nihilum computabitur."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Dan. III. 86. Deut. Frag.
" Benedicite, spiritus et ani-
mae justorum, Domino : laudate
et superexaltate eum in saecula."
Eccli. I. 16.
" Initium sapientiae, timor
Domini — ."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. VII. 40.
" In omnibus operibus tuis
memorare novissima tua, et in
aeternum non peccabis."
Ibid. Lib. IV. 8.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 10.
"Legant Machabaeorum libros,
ubi cum omni instantia mater
cum septem filiis martyrium sus-
cipit, quique non solum martyr-
ium patienter excipiunt, verum
et contumelias ingerunt in tyran-
num — ."
Ibid.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. V. 2.
" — sicut de Sapientia dicitur :
' Haec,* inquit, ' ilium qui primus
factus est patrem mundi, cum
solus esset creatus, custodivit, et
liberavit eum de peccato suo.' "
Ibid. 3.
*' — quia et si perfectus sit
quis in filiis hominum, si non
adsit ei justitia a Deo, in nihilum
reputabitur."
Ibid. Lib. VI. 3.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. VII. i.
" Et Daniel nihilominus testa-
tur et dicit : * Benedicite, spiritus
et aniraae justorum, Dominum.' "
Ibid.
" — quia 'initium sapientiae
timor Domini.' "
Ibid. 4.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 10.
''Mementote novissimorum tu-
orum, et in aeternum non pec-
cabis."
116
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Sap. VII. 25.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. I. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXVII. 6.
" Vasa figuli probat fornax; et
homines justos, tentatio tribula-
tionis."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. I. 2.
" — quoniam invenitur ab his,
qui non tentant ilium : apparet
autem eis, qui fidem habent in
ilium—."
Tob. XII. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. IX. 6.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. VIII. 6.
Ibid. 13.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 17.
"Et Sapientia dicit : 'vasa
figuli probat fornax; et homines
justos, tentatio.' "
Ibid. Lib. VIII. 4.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 5.
" Sed audi quid etiam in Sa-
pientia Salomonis dicatur, quia :
* non invenietur ab his qui ten-
tant earn : apparebit vero his qui
non sunt increduli ad eum,'"
Ibid. II.
** ' Mysterium enim regis,' ait
Scriptura, * celare bonum est * "
Ibid. Lib. IX. 3.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. X. 31.
" Ne despicias hominem aver- " — didicerat enim a Scriptura
tentem se a peccato, neque im- non improperare homini conver-
properes ei ; memento quoniam tenti se a peccato y
omnes in correptione sumus."
From these numerous quotations, taken from the fragments
which remain of Origen's vast writings, we may infer what
was his use of the deuterocanonical books. His authority is
especially valuable, because he was conversant with Hebrew,
and had examined the canon of the Jews upon their own
grounds. He defends the deuterocanonical books against the
attack of Africanus and the Jews ; he establishes the authority
of the Church as criterion of the Canon ; in his use of Scrip-
ture he makes no discrimination between the books of the
first and second canons, and unreservedly asserts that the
deuterocanonical works are divine Scripture. Hence we claim
the authority of Origen in support of the Catholic Canon of
Scripture.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 117
In the acts of the disputation of St. Archelaus with Manes,
we find a quotation from Wisdom.*
This quotation is of much worth, since it manifests that in
that early day the canon of the Syrian Church comprised the
deuterocanonical works. The quotation is found in the
twenty-ninth chapter of the disputation :
Sap. I. 13.
" — quoniam Deus mortem "Archelaus dixit: Nequa-
non fecit, nee laetatur in perdi- quam : absit ! ' Deus enim mor-
titione vivorum." tem non fecit, nee laetatur in per-
ditione vivorum.' "
We shall here subjoin some quotations found in the extant
works of St. Methodius, surnamed Eubulius, Bishop of Tyr,
the bitter adversary of Origen.f
These two writers, though antagonistic in doctrine, both
aid in building up our thesis, since both recognize the accepted
divine Scripture of the third century. In the first discourse,
that of Marcella, in the symposium, we find the following :
Eccli. XVIII. 30, et XIX. 2.
" Post concupiscentias tuas " Post concupiscentias tuas ne
non eas, et a voluntate tua aver- eas, et ab appetitibus tuis pro-
tere. Vinum et mulieres aposta- hibe te. Vinum enim et muli-
tare faciunt sapientes, et arguent eres apostatare faciunt sapien-
sensatos — ." tes."
Sap. IV. 3. Ibid.
"Multigena autem impiorum " — de quo et alibi: ' Multi-
multitudo non erit utilis, et spu- gena impiorum multitude non
ria vitulamina non dabunt radi- erit utilis, et spuria vitulamina
ces altas — ." non dabunt radices altas.' "
Eccli. XXIII. I, et 5—6. Ibid.
" Domine, pater et dominator ** * Domine,' dicens * Pater et
vitae meae, ne derelinquas me in Deus vitae meae, ne derelinquas
consilio eorum nee sinas me ca- me in cogitatu illorum. Extol-
*St. Archelaus was a bishop of Mesopotamia, renowned for piety and
wisdom. The date of the disputation with Manes is the year 277 A. D. It
is uncertain who has committed the disputation to writing.
fThe Roman martyrology honors St. Methodius on the 18th of Septem--
ber. He was of Olympius, in Lycia, and afterwards bishop of Tyr. He
suffered martyrdom in Chalcis, in Greece ; according to some, under Diocle-
tian ; according to others, under Decius and Valerius. De Feller inclines to
the first opinion, and places the date of such event about the year 311. His
doctrine, though at times inaccurate, has been much praised by Jerome,
Epiphanius, Gregory of Nyssa and others. His most celebrated work is the
" Symposium of Virgins," in which he extols the virtue of chastity.
118
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
dere in illis. Extollentiam ocu-
lorum meorum ne dederis mihi,
et omne desiderium averte a me.
Aufer a me ventris concupiscen-
tias, et concubitus concupiscen-
tiae, ne apprehendant me — ."
Sap. IV. 1—2.
" O, quam pulchra est casta
generatio cum claritate ! immor-
talis est enim memoria illius,
quoniam et apud Deum nota est,
et apud homines. Cum praesens
est, imitantur illam, et deside-
rant eam, cum se eduxerit, et in
perpetuum coronata triumphat
incoinquinatorum certaminum
praemium vincens."
lentiam oculorum amove a me.
Cordis concupiscentia et con-
cubitus ne apprehendant me.' "
Ibid.
" In libro vero Sapientiae pa-
lam jam, et sine ambagibus audi-
tores ad continentiam, et castita-
tem attrahens Spiritus sanctus
talia modulatur . damans :
' Immortalis enim est in memoria
illius : quoniam et apud Deum
nota est et apud homines. Cum
praesens est honorant illam et
desiderant eam, cum se abduxe-
rit, et in perpetuum coronata
triumphat incoinquinatorum cer-
taminum agone superato.' "
Sap. III. i6.
" Filii autem adulterorum in
inconsummatione erunt, et ab
iniquo thoro semen exterminabi-
tur."
Sap. IV. 6.
" Ex iniquis enim somnis filii,
qui nascuntur, testes sunt nequi-
tiae adversus parentes in interro-
gatione sua."
Sap. XV. lo— II.
"Cinis est enim cor ejus, et
terra supervacua spes illius, et
luto vilior vita ejus, quoniam ig-
noravit, qui se finxit, et qui in-
spiravit illi animam quae opera-
tur, et qui insufflavit ei spiritum
vitalem."
In the second discourse, that
of Theophila :
"Et ne confugias velut in
arcem securam, prolato testi-
monio Scripturae dicentis : * Filii
adulterorum in inconsumma-
tione erunt.' "
Ibid.
" ' Ex iniquis enim,' inquit,
* somnis, filii qui nascuntur, testes
sunt nequitiae adversus parentes
in interrogatione persuasibilium
sermonum.' "
Ibid.
" — in libro Sapientiae ait:
' Cinis est cor eorum, et terra su-
pervacua spes illorum, et luto
vilior vita eorum, quoniam igno-
rarunt qui se finxit, et qui inspi-
ravit illis animam quae operatur,
et qui insufiiavit eis spiritum vi-
talem.'"
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
119
Baruch III. 14.
" Disce, ubi sit prudentia, ubi
sit virtus, ubi sit intellectus, ut
scias simul, ubi sit longiturnitas
vitae et victus, ubi sit lumen ocu-
lorum et pax."
Sap. VII. 9.
" — nee comparavi illi lapidem
pretiosum, quoniam omne aurum
in comparatione illius arena est
exigua, et tamquam lutum aesti-
mabitur argentum in conspectu
illius."
Judith XIII. Passim.
Dan. XIII. 19 — 20.
" Cum autem egressae essent
puellae, surrexerunt duo senes, et
accurrerunt ad earn, et dixe-
runt: Ecce ostia pomarii clausa
sunt, et nemo nos videt, et nos in-
concupiscentia tui sumus; quam
ob rem assentire nobis, et com-
miscere nobiscum."
Sap. I. 14.
" Creavit enim, ut essent om-
nia, et sanabiles fecit nationes
orbis terrarum : et non est in illis
medicamentum exterminii, nee
inferorum regnum in terra."
In the eighth discourse, that of
Thecla :
" Discite ubi sit prudentia,
ubi sit virtus, ubi sit intel-
lectus ; ut scias simul ubi sit
longiturnitas vitae et victus, ubi
sit lumen oculorum et pax. Quis
invenit locum ejus ? et quis in-
travit in thesauros eorum ? "
In the eleventh discourse, that
of Arete :
" Neque si quis pecuniarum
cupiditate capitur, virginitatem
vere studet colere : spernit enim
illam, verius lucrum exiguum
ipsi praeferens ; cui tamen nulla
est eomparabilis rerum in vita
pretiosarum."
Ibid.
" Peregrinum ductorem nume-
rosissimorum exercituum fortiter
aggrediens, ardua feliciter exe-
quens destinata, Judith dolose
decollavit pulchritudinis suae de-
linitum specie priusquam ullam
membris corporis obtulisset ma-
culam — ."
Ibid.
" Videntes speciem decorara
nudi Susannae corporis, duo ju-
diees amore furentes dixerunt :
* O mulier, hie adsumus te clam
potiri cupientes.' "
St. Method. De Resurrectione
(Fragmentary).
" — sapienta adstruit his ver-
bis : ' Creavit enim Deus ut
essent omnia, et salutares sunt
mundi generationes, et non est in
illis medicamentum exterminii.' "
120
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Sap. II. 23.
" Quoniam Deus creavit homi-
nem inexterminabilem, et ad ima-
ginem similitudinis suae fecit
ilium."
Sap. VII. 21.
" — et quaecumque sunt ab-
sconsa et improvisa, didici : om-
nium enim artifex doeuit me sa-
pientia."
Eccli. XV. 18.
" Ante hominem vita et mors,
bonum et malum ; quod placu-
erit ei, dabitur illi — ."
Eccli. I. 2.
" Arenam maris, et pluviae gut-
tas, et dies saeculi quis dinume-
ravit ? "
Sap. XV. 3.
" Nosse enim te, consummata
justitia est ; et scire justitiam
et virtutem tuam, radix est im-
mortalitatis."
Baruch III. 24.
" O Israel, quam magna est
domus Dei, et ingens locus pos-
sessionis ejus ! "
Eccli. XVI. 7.
" In synagoga peccantium ex-
ardebit ignis, et in gente incredi-
bili exardescet ira."
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei : Semen Cha-
naan et non Juda, species dece-
pit te, et concupiscentia subver-
tit cor tuum — ."
Ibid.
" Atqui homo est immortalis :
'Creavit enim,' inquit Sapientia,
* hominem inexterminabilem, et
imaginem aeternitatis suae fecit
ilium.* "
Ibid, in fine.
"Quamobrem etiam Salomon
'artificem omnium ' apellavit — ."
Ibid, ex fragmentis.
" Posui enim,' inquit, ' ante
faciem tuam vitam et mortem.' "
St. Method. De Creatis. (frag-
mentary).
" — quomodo Sapientia in Jesu
Sirach dicit : ' Arenam maris, et
pluviae guttas, et dies saeculi
quis dinumerabit ?' "
S. Method. De Simeone et
Anna.
" Porro : ' Nosse te consum-
mata justitia est, et scire poten-
tiam tuam radix immortalita-
tis."
Ibid.
" — ut quodam loco inclytus
Propheta ait : * Quam magna
domus Dei, et ingens locus pos-
sessionis ejus ! Magnus, et non
habet finem.' "
Ibid.
" Item alio loco : * In gente in-
credibili exardescit ignis.' "
S. Methodius, in Ramos Pal-
marum.
"O Chanaan impudentis se-
men, non pii ac timentis Deum,
Juda ! "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 121
Method, quoted by Olympia-
Sap. XII. I. dorus in Catena Nicetae.
" O quam bonus et suavis est, *' Methodius autem, Spiritum
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni- divinum qui a Deo omnibus con-
bus ! " cessus est, et de quo Salomon
dixit: 'Incorruptus tuus Spiri-
tus in omnibus', pro conscientia
accipit, quae et animam peccatri-
cem condemnet."
There are several quotations from deuterocanonical Scrip-
ture in the works of St. Gregory of Neocesarea, which we omit
here, since they are found in works which Migne judged
dubious.
There are a few certain citations from the deuterocanonical
books in the fragments which have been collected of the works
of Dionysius the Great.*
Eccli. XVI. 26 — 27. Dionysius, De Natura III. B.
" In judicio Dei opera ejus ab " Audite vero divinorum or-
initio, et ab institutione ipsorum aculorum vocem : ' In judicio
distinxit partes illorum, et initia Domini opera ejus. Ab initio et
eorum in gentibus suis. Ornavit a creatione ipsorum distinxit
in aeternum opera illorum, nee partes illorum. Ornavit in aeter-
esurierunt, nee laboraverunt, et num opera sua, et principia
nondestiterunt ab operibussuis." eorum in generationes eorum.' "
*Tlie precise date of the birth of Dionysius the Great is uncertain.
He was in Egypt when Cyprian was in North Africa, and he came under
the influence of Origen. He succeeded Heraclas in the Episcopal See of
Alexandria in 247 A. D., which see he held for 17 years, till his death in 265.
He was forced to flee in the Decian persecution, and, at one time, his life was
only saved by a miracle. Under Valerian, he made a public profession of
faith, and was exiled to Cephro in Libyia. Having strenously opposed the
Sabellian Heresy, he was denounced to Dionysius. the Roman Pontiff, that
his tenets were not soimd concerning the consubstantiality of the Son and
the Father. As Sabellius had denied that there were any distinction between
the Father and the Son, Dionysius, in opposition, may have exceeded bounds
somewhat in extending the distinction between these two persons, but his
error was not formal. Dionysius cleared himself of imputation of heresy,
publishing four books in his own defense. There came a lull in the persecu-
tion under Gallieno, and in 261 Dionysius returned to his see. He was called
to Antioch to give judgment in the trial of the heretic Paul of Samosata, but
feebleness prevented a personal appearance there. He signified his opinions
in writings, fragments of which remain. Dionysius wrote many things, but
only small fragments of these remain. The most important of his works are
his Apology and his Letters.
The few quotations which we shall adduce will place Dionysius in the
rank of those who considered the deuterocanonical books as divine Scripture.
122
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. XVI. 30—31.
" Post haec Deus in terrain
respexit, et implevit illam bonis
suis. Anima omnis vitalis de-
nuntiavit ante faciem ipsius, et
in ipsam iterum reversio illorum."
Tob. XII. 7.
" Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est : opera
autem Dei revelare et confiteri,
honorificum est."
Ibid. V. A.
" — et illud: 'post haec enim
Dominus in terram respexit, et
implevit illam bonis suis. Anima
omnis animantis operuit faciem
ejus.' "
Idem. Epist. X. (Adversus
Germanum) IV.
*' Sed quoniam arcanum qui-
dem regis occultare, ut ait Scrip-
iura, laudandum est ; Dei autem
opera praedicare, gloriosum; ad-
versus Germani impetum comi-
nus decertabo."
The Constitutiones Apostolicae also manifest that the
Church, in the third century, recognized the deuterocanonical
books as divine Scripture.*
Eccli. XXVIII. 16.
" Lingua tertia multos com-
movit, et dispersit illos de gente
in gentem — ."
Dan. XIII.
Dan. XIII. 48—49.
" Qui cum staret in medio
eorum ait : Sic fatui filii Israel,
non judicantes, neque quod ve-
Const. Apost. Lib. II. 21.
" Multi quippe sunt malevoli
dicaces, tertiam linguam haben-
tes."
Ibid. XXXVII.
" — ut olim Babylone duo
senes adversum Susannam — ."
(The same allusion is repeated
in the XLIX. Chapter.)
Ibid. L. I.
"Quoniam Susannam quidem
Dominus per Danielem eripuit e
manibus iniquorum ; reos autem
*The age and author of the Apostolical Constitutions are uncertain.
They are inserted by Migne among the Opera dubia of St. Clement of Rome ;
but no one now attributes to him their authorship. De Magistris contends
that their author was St. Hippolyte, although he admits later interpolations.
It is quite generally admitted now that the work is a product of the third
century which has siiffered later interpolations. The work consisted of eight
books, o/cra/St/SXoi', containing practical precepts of Christian life, and prin-
ciples of church polity. Though of uncertain authorship, and often erroneous
in its present state in dogma, it is valuable to illustrate the traditions of the
Church in that early age. Opinions differ as to the date of its origin, but all
agree that it goes back to the third century. The name does not indicate
that its author wished to deceive by making it appear that his book was
written by the Apostles. The Constitutions were called Apostolic, because
they were founded on the applied teachings of the Apostles.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
123
rum est cognoscentes, condem-
nastis filiam Israel ? Revertimini
ad judicium, quia falsum testi-
monium locuti sunt adversus
eam."
Judith XII. 8.
" Et ut ascendebat, orabat Do-
minum Deum Israel, ut dirigeret
viam ejus ad liberationem populi
sui."
Eccli. XXVI. 28.
" Duae species difficiles et
periculosae mihi apparuerunt:
difficile exuitur negotians a neg-
ligentia : et non justificabitur
caupo a peccatis labiorum."
Eccli. XXX. 12.
"Curva cervicem ejus in ju-
ventute, et tunde latera ejus,
dum infans est, ne forte induret,
et non credat tibi : et erit tibi
dolor animae."
Esther IV. 16.
"Vade et congrega omnes Ju-
daeos, quos in Susan repereris,
et orate pro me. Non comeda-
tis, et non bibatis tribus diebus
et tribus noctibus, et ego cum
ancillis meis similiter jejunabo :
et tunc ingrediar ad regem con-
tra legem faciens, non vocata,
tradensque me morti et peri-
culo."
Judith, VIII. 6.
" — et habens super lumbos
suos cilicium, jejunabat omnibus
diebus vitae suae, praeter sab-
bata, et neomenias, et festa do-
mus Israel."
sanguinis feminae senes ad ig-
nem damnavit : vobis vero per
Danielem exprobravit dicens :
* Sic fatui filii Israel, non dijudi-
cantes, neque quod manifestum
est cognoscentes, condemnastis
filiam Israel ? Revertimini ergo
ad judicium, quia falsum testi-
monium isti locuti sunt adversus
eam.'"
Lib. III. 6.
" Quemadmodum ergo sapien-
tissima Juditha, pudicitiae testi-
monio Celebris, nocte ac die
Deum pro Israel deprecabatur."
Lib. IV. 6.
" — quia non justificabitur
caupo de peccato — ."
Lib. IV. II.
"Et adhuc : Tunde latera ejus,
dum infans est, ne forte indura-
tus non credat tibi."
Lib. V. 20.
" Item Esthera et Mardochae-
us, et Juditha insultationem im-
piorum Holophernis et Amanis
jejunando declinarunt."
124
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. XXIV. 35.
" — qui implet quasi Phison
sapientiam, et sicut Tigris in
diebus novorum — ."
Eccli. XXV. 36.
" A carnibus tuis abscinde il-
1am, ne semper te abutatur."
Eccli. V. 8.
" Non tardes converti ad Do-
minum, et ne differas de die in
diem — ."
Baruch IV. 4.
" Beati sumus, Israel : quia
quae Deo placent, manifesta
sunt nobis."
Sap. III. I.
"Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis."
Sap, II. 23 — 24.
" Quoniam Deus creavit homi-
nem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fecit
ilium. Invidia autem diaboli
mors introivit in orbem terra-
rum : — ,"
Tob. IV. 16.
" Quod ab alio oderis fieri tibi,
vide, ne tu aliquando alteri fa-
cias."
Lib. VI. 5.
" — detractoque eis Spiritu
sancto ac imbre prophetico, im-
plevit ecclesiam suam gratia spi-
rituali, velut fluviura Aegypti in
diebus novorum"
Ibid. 14.
" Abscinde enim eam," inquit,
"a carnibus tuis."
Ibid. 15.
" Ne differas enim converti ad
Dominum."
Ibid. 33.
"Beati sumus, Israel, quia
quae placita sunt Deo manifesta
sunt nobis."
Ibid. 30.
"Justorum animae in manu
Dei."
Lib. VII. I.
" — naturale quidem est vitae
iter, adscitum autem iter mortis ;
non illius quae ex voluntate Dei
exstitit, verum illius quae ex in-
sidiis diaboli."
Ibid. 2.
"Omne quod non vis tibi fieri,
et tu hoc alteri ne facias."
Esther XIV. 12. Ibid. 33.
"Memento, Domine, et ostende " Aeterne Salvator noster, rex
te nobis in tempore tribulationis deorum."
nostrae, et da mihi fiduciam, Do-
mine, rex deorum et universae
potestatis — ."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
12d
I. Mac. II.
Judith VIII.
Dan. XIII. 42.
" Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante-
quam fiant — ."
Judith VIII.
Sap. III. I.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 37.
"Tu, Domine Deus, nunc quo-
que suscipe pieces labiis prolatis
populi tui congregati ex gentibus
sicut suscepisti munera
justorum in eorum saeculis
Mathathiae et filiorum ejus in
zelo tuo — ."
Lib. VIII. 2.
" Sed et mulieres prophetave-
runt Holda et Juditha."
Ibid. 5.
" Qui es here, Dominus Deus
omnipotens, .... qui omnia nosti
antequam fiant — ."
Ibid. 25.
" Vidua non ordinatur ; sed si
multo ante amisit virum, et caste
et inculpabiliter vixit, ac domes-
ticorum optirae curam gessit ut
Juditha — ."
Ibid. 41.
Eccli. XXXI. 35.
" Vinum in jucunditatem crea-
tum est, et non in ebrietatem, ab
initio."
— quia cunctorum animae
apud te vivent, et spiritus justo-
rum in manu tua sunt, quos non
tanget cruciatus."
Ibid. 44.
" Hoc autem dicimus non ut
vinum nequaquam bibant : eo
enim modo contumelia afficerent
id quod a Deo factum est ad laeti-
tiam."
For the tradition of the African Church, we turn to the two
great lights of that Church Tertullian and Cyprian.*
*Quintus Septimius Florens TertuUianus was the son of a centurion in the
Roman armies stationed in Proconsular Africa. It appears evident that he
had first given himself to a forensic career. The faith and constancy of the
Martyrs impressed him deeply, and in the fourth year of the reign of Septimius
Severus he embraced the faith of Jesus Christ. At Carthage he was ordained
priest, and passed thence to Rome, where he published his Apology for the
Christians, a masterpiece of erudition and eloquence. Tertullian was
126 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Dan. XIII. 32. Tertull. De Corona IV. A
" At iniqui illi jusserunt ut " Si et Susanna in judicio re-
discooperiretur (erat enim coo- velata argumentum velandi prae-
perta) ut vel sic satiarentur de- stat — ."
core ejus."
Adversus Hermogenem XXI.
II. Mac. VII. 28. A.
" Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad " Ita si ex nihilo Deus cuncta
caelum et terrain, et ad omnia fecisse non potuit, Scriptura non
quae in eis sunt : et intelligas, adjecisset ilium ex nihilo fe-
quia ex nihilo fecit ilia Deus, et cisse — ."
hominum genus — ."
Ibid. XLIV.
An evident allusion to the " — cui etiam inanimalia et in-
Benedictus of Dan. III. corporalia laudes canunt apud
24, — 90. Danielem."
endowed by nature with a capacious mind, endowed with a peculiar ardor and
natural severity. For some years he used his splendid powers for the best
interests of the Christian Church. He was naturally inclined to that which
was rigorous. He seemed to find a lack of severity in the Gospels of the
Christian dispensation. This natural impetuosity made him a prey to the
fanatic Montanus. A very probable opinion sustains that baffled ambition,
and the opposition of the clergy of Rome, conspired to cause his defection.
Montanus pretended that Grod, having failed to save the world by Moses, the
Prophets, and even by the Incarnation, had sent the Holy Spirit into him to
execute the salvation of the elect. He associated with himself Priscilla and
Maximilla, two women of high rank but of immoral lives. They affected
great austerity, and rigid fasts. They forbade second marriages, denied the
absolving power of the Church for certain sins, and considered flight from
persecution as apostasy. They laid claim to prophecy, inveighed against the
hierarchy of the Church, proclaimed that they were to raise the Christians
from their spiritual infancy in which they had hitherto lived. The apparent
severity of their morals drew many to the sect, but being founded on a
violent misconception, it failed. Montanus is said by Eusebius to have hanged
himself. The last years of TertuUian's life were spent in this wretched
heresy, and he wrote many of his works while a Montanist. There is no good
evidence that he ever abandoned the error. TertuUian's works may be
divided into two classes : those written before his lapse into Montanism, and
those written after. ■ The first class includes Apologia pro Christianis, Libri
duo ad Nationes, De Testimonio Animae, ad Martyres, De Spectaculis, De
Idololatria, Ad Scapidam, De Oratione, De Baptismo, De Poenitentia, De
Patientia, Ad Uxorem, libri duo, De Cultu Feminarum, lib. H. In the
second class are De Corona Militis, De Fuga in Persecutione, Adversus
Gnosticos, Adversus Praxeam, Adversus Hermogenen, Adversus Marcionem,
lib. v., Adversus Valentinianos, Adversus Judseos, De Anima, De Came
Christi, De Resurrectione Carnis, De Velandis Virginibus, De Exhortatione
Castitatis, De Monogamia, De Jejuniis, De Pudicitia, De Pallio.
It is uncertain whether the work De Praescriptionibus was written before
or after his defection.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
127
Judith passim.
Eccli. XI. 14.
" Bona et mala, vita et mors,
paupertas et honestas a Deo
sunt."
Dan. III. 24 — 90.
Sap. I. I,
Diligitejustitiam, qui judicatis
terram. Sentite de Domino in
bonitate, et in simplicitate cordis
quaerite ilium.
Eccli. XLIV. 17.
" Noe inventus est perfectus,
Justus, et in tempore iracundiae
factus est reconciliatio."
I. Mac. passim.
Sap. I. 6.
" Benignus est enim spiritus
sapientiae, et non liberabit male-
dicum a labiis suis : quoniam
renum illius testis est Deus, et
cordis illius scrutator est verus,
et linguae ejus auditor."
Adversus Marcionem, Lib. I.
VII.
" Si communio nominum con-
ditionibus praejudicat, quanti
nequam servi regum nominibus
insultant, Alexandri, et Darii et
Holophernis ?"
Ibid. XVI.
" Cur in hac sola specie uni-
formem eum capiunt, visibilium
solummodo et vitam et mortem et
mala et pacem."
Adversus Marcionem, Lib. V.
II.
" Quod non alius quam Creator
intelligetur qui et universa bene-
dixit, habes Genesim ; et ab uni-
versis benedicitur, habes Dan-
ielem."
Adversus Valentinianos II.
" Porro facies Dei spectat in
simplicitate quaerentes, ut docet
ipsa Sophia, non quidem Valen-
tini sed Salomonis."
Adversus Judaeos II.
*' Nam unde JVoe Justus inven-
tus— V
Ibid. IV.
" Nam et temporibus Maccab-
aeorum, Sabbatis pugnando, for-
titer fecerunt, et hostes allophylos
expugnaverunt, legemque pater-
nam ad pristinum vitae statum,
pugnando Sabbatis, revocave-
runt."
De Anima XV.
" Si enim scrutatorem et dis-
pectorem cordis Deum legi-
mus — ."
128
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. XV. 1 8.
" Ante hominem vita et mors,
bonum et malum : quod placu-
erit ei, dabitur illi — ."
Baruch VI. 3 — 5.
" Nunc autem videbitis in
Babylonia deos aureos, et argen-
teos, et lapideos, et ligneos in
humeris portari, ostentantes me-
tum Gentibus. Videte ergo ne
et vos similes efiiciamini factis
alienis, et metuatis, et metus vos
capiat in ipsis. Visa itaque turba
de retro, et ab ante, adorantes,
dicite in cordibus vestris : Te
oportet adorari, Domine."
Dan. XIV. 3, 24.
" Rex quoque colebat eura, et
ibat per singulos dies adorare
eum : porro Daniel adorabat
Deum suum, Dixitque ei rex :
Quare non adoras Bel ? Dixit-
que Daniel : Dominum Deum
meum adoro : quia ipse est Deus
vivens : iste autem non est Deus
vivens."
Sap. I. I.
(Already quoted.)
De Monogamia XIV.
" Ecce, inquit, posui ante te
bonum et malum: elige quod
bonum est."
Adversus Gnosticos VIII.
" Meminerant enim et Jere-
miae scribentis ad eos quibus
ilia captivitas imminebat : * Et
nunc videbitis deos Babyloni-
orum aureos et argenteos et lig-
neos portari super humeros, os-
tentantes nationibus timorem.
Cavete igitur ne et vos consimiles
sitis allophylis, et timore capia-
mini, dum aspicitis turbas ado-
rantes retro eos et ante : sed
dicite in animo vestro : te, Do-
mine, adorare debemus.' "
De Idololatria XVIII.
" — statimque apparuisset Dan-
ielem idolis non deservisse, nee
Bel nee draconem eolere, quod
multo postea apparuit."
De Praescriptionibus VII.
'* Nostra institutio de porticu
Salomonis est, qui et ipse tradid-
erat, Dominum in simplicitate
cordis esse quaerendum."
*Closely allied with Tertullian, is St. Cyprian. He declares himself that
TertuUian had been his master. The style of Tertullian is rough, and tinged
with certain African barbarisms. In the words of Balzac : ' ' Tertullian's is
an iron style, but it must be allowed that with this metal he has forged
excellent weapons. " Cyprian tempers the roughness of his master, but still
he retains much of the genius of his country. He has been called by Lactan-
tius the first eloquent father of the Latin Church. Cyprian was descended
from an illustrious, rich family in Proconsular Africa in the first half of the
third century. As a pagan, he first devoted himself to eloquence. He was
converted through the labors of the priest Csecilius in 246, A. D. He sold
what he had, and gave to the poor, embraced continency, took the habit of a
philosopher, and substituted the reading of the Sacred Scriptures for that of
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
129
Eccli. XI. 30.
" Ante mortem ne laudes hom-
inem quemquam, quoniam in
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Dan. XI 11.
Cyprian. Epist. V. 2,
" — cum scriptum sit : ' Ante
mortem ne laudes hominem
quemquam.' "
Idem. Epist. XL. 4.
"Nee aetas vos eorum, nee
auetoritas fallat, qui ad duorum
presbyterorum veterem nequi-
tiam respondentes, sicut illi Su-
sannam pudicam eorrumpere et
violare conati sunt, sieet hi, ete."
Idem. Epist. LXII. i.
" — et iterum scriptum sit:
' Disciplinam qui abjicit infelix
est.'"
Idem. Epist. LXVI.
"Et iterum (Salomon): ' Ho-
nora Deum ex tota anima tua, et
honorifica sacerdotes ejus.' "
Sap. III. II.
" Sapientiam enim et discipli-
nam qui abjicit, infelix est : et
vacua est spes illorum, et labores
sine fructu, et inutilia opera eo-
rum."
Eceli. VII. 29, 31.
" — honora patrem tuum, et
gemitus matris tuae ne oblivis-
caris — . In tota anima tua time
Dominum, et sacerdotes illius
sanctifica."
Eccli. XXVIII. 28. Idem. LXIX. 7.
" Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin- " — nee recordaris scriptum
guam nequam noli audire, et ori esse : ' Sepi aures tuas spinis, et
tuo facito ostia et seras." noli audire linguam nequam.*"
the profane authors. His great talents placed him in the Episcopal see of
Carthage in 348. His labors in the see of Carthage were immense. He was
the father of the poor, the light of the clergy, and the consoler of the people.
The Decian Persecution forced him to flee from his see for some years, but he
again returned to his post. The character of Cyprian was firm and uncom-
promising. When he was accused before Pope Cornelius by Privatus, he
sent no defense to Rome. To the Pope, who asked an explanation of this, he
responded, that it was established among the Bishops that a crime should be
examined where it was committed. This natural firmness led Cyprian to
oppose Pope Stephen in the celebrated question of the baptism by heretics.
The only justification that can be offered for Cyprian is, that the Pope's
province in the Church was not so well understood then as now. Hatred of
heresy led him into an error that was by no means formal. He suffered
martyrdom for the faith in 258. Whatever was blameworthy in his conten-
tion with Pope Stephen was washed out in the blood of martyrdom. He was
a prolific writer. His chief works are : Eighty -three Epistles, De Habitu
Virginis, De Lapsis, De Unitate Ecclesiae, Ad Demetrianum, De Idolorum
Vanitate, De Mortalitate, De Opere et Eleemosynis, De Bono Patientise, De
Zelo et Livore, Ad Fortunatum, Ad Quirinum.
I
130
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. XXXIV. 30.
"Qui baptizatur a mortuo, et
iterum tangit eum ; quid proficit
lavatio illius ? "
Sap. III. 4—8.
"Etsi coram hominibus tor-
menta passi sunt, spes illorum
immortalitate plena est. In pau-
cis vexati, in multis bene dispo-
nentur, quoniam Deus tentavit
eos, et invenit illos dignos se.
Tamquam aurum in fornace pro-
bavit illos, et quasi holocausti
hostiam accepit illos, et in tem-
pore erit respectus illorum."
Sap. III. II.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. V. 8, 9.
" Quid nobis profuit superbia ?
aut divitiarum jactantia quid
contulit nobis ? Transierunt om-
nia ilia tamquam umbra, et tam-
quam nuntius percurrens — ."
Dan. XIV. 30 et seqq.
" Qui miserunt eum in lacum
leonum ; et erat ibi diebus sex."
Tob. XII. 7.
** Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est : opera
autem Dei revelare et confiteri,
honorificum est."
Sap. V. 1—9.
" Tunc stabunt justi in magna
constantia adversus eos, qui se
angustiaverunt, et qui abstule-
runt labores eorum, etc."
Idem. Epist. LXXI. 1.
" — non considerantes scrip-
tum esse : ' Qui baptizatur a
mortuo, quid proficit lavatio
ejus ?' "
Idem. Epist. LXXXI. 2.
Et iterum ubi loquitur Scrip-
tura divina de tormentis quae
Martyres Dei consecrant, et in
ipsa possessionis probatione sanc-
tificant : ' Et si coram homini-
bus tormenta passi sunt, spes
eorum immortalitate plena est.
Et in paucis vexati in multis
bene disponentur — .' "
De Habitu Virginum I.
" Et denuo legimus : ' Discip-
linam qui abjicit, infelix est.' "
Ibidem, X.
" — cum dicat Scriptura di-
vina : * Quid nobis profuit su-
perbia ? aut quid divitiarum jac-
tatio contulit nobis ? Transierunt
omnia ilia tamquam umbra.' "
De Oratione Dominica XXI.
"Sic Danieli in leonum lacu
jussu regis incluso prandium di-
vinitus procuratur, et inter feras
esurientes et parcentes homo Dei
pascitur."
Ibid. XXXIII.
" Sic et Raphael angelus To-
biae oranti semper, et semper
operanti testis fuitdicens: 'Opera
Dei revelare et confiteri, honori-
ficum est — .' "
De Idolorum Vanitate, XXIV.
" Et iterum (dicit Sancta Scrip-
tura): 'Tunc stabunt justi in
magna constantia adversus eos
qui se angustiaverunt, etc' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
131
Eccli. II. I, 4, 5.
" Fili, accedens ad servitutem
Dei, sta in justitia et timore, et
praepara animam tuam ad tenta-
tionem. Omne quod tibi appli-
citum fuerit, accipe, et in dolore
sustine, et in humilitate tua pa-
tientiam habe : quoniam in igne
probatur aurum et argentum,
homines vero receptibiles, in ca-
mino humiliationis."
Tob. II. i6.
"Ubi est spes tua, pro qua
eleemosynas, et sepulturas facie-
bas?"
Tob. XII. II— 15.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. III. 33.
" Ignera ardentem extinguit
aqua, et eleemosyna resistit pec-
catis — ."
Tob. XII. 8.
" Bona est oratio cum jejunio,
et eleemosyna magis quam the-
sauros auri recondere — ."
Tob. XIV. 10— I L
" Audite ergo, filii mei, patrem
vestrum : Servite Domino in ver-
itate, et inquirite ut faciatis quae
placita sunt illi : et filiis vestris
mandate ut faciant justitias et
eleemosynas, ut sint memores
Dei, et benedicant eum in omni
tempore in veritate, et in tota
virtu te sua."
De Mortalitate, IX.
" Docet et praemonet Scrip-
tura divina dicens : * Fili, acced-
ens ad servitutem Dei, sta in
justitia et timore, et praepara
animam tuam ad tentationem.
Et iterum : * In dolore sustine,
et in humilitate tua patientiam
habe, quoniam in igne probatur
aurum et argentum, homines vero
receptibiles, in camino humilia-
tionis.' "
Ibid. X.
" Et Tobias post opera mag-
nifica quern et ipsum
uxor depravare tentavit dicens :
* Ubi sunt justitiae tuae ? Ecce
quae pateris.'"
Ibid.
"Quem postmodum Raphael
Angelus collaudat, et dicit :
* Opera Dei revelare et confiteri
honorificum est — .' "
De Opere et Eleemosynis II.
" Item denuo dicit: 'Sicut aqua
extinguit ignem, sic eleemosyna
extinguit peccatum.' "
Ibid. V.
" Raphael quoque Angelus. . ,
hortatur dicens : * Bona est ora-
tio cum jejunio et eleemosyna,
quia eleemosyna a morte liberat
et ipsa purgat peccata.' "
Ibid. XX.
" Et nunc, fili, mando tibi :
'servi Deo in veritate et fac coram
illo quod illi placet : et filiis
manda ut faciant justitiam et
eleemosynas, et sint memores Dei,
et benedicant nomen ejus omni
tempore.' "
132
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Tob. IV. 2—16.
" — dixitque ei : Audi, fili mi,
verba oris mei, et ea in corde
tuo, quasi fundamentum con-
strue Omnibus autem die-
bus vitae tuae in mente habeto
Deum : et cave ne aliquando
peccato consentias, et praeter-
mittas praecepta Domini Dei
nostri, etc."
Ibid.
" Et iterum : * Omnibus diebus
vitae tuae, fili dilectissime, in
mente habeto Deum : et cave ne
aliquando peccato consentias, et
praecepta Domini Dei nostri,
cet.'"
Eccli. II. 4.
" Omne, quod tibi applicitum
fuerit, accipe : et in dolore sus-
tine, et in humilitate tua patien-
tiam habe — ."
De Dono Patientiae XVII.
" — sicut scriptum est : * In
dolore sustine, et in humilitate
tua patientiam habe, quoniam in
igne probatur aurum et argen-
tum.' "
Tob. Passim.
Ibid. XVIII.
" Tobias quoque post justitiae
et misericordiae suae opera mag-
nifica, luminum amissione ten-
tatus, in quantum patienter cae-
citatem pertulit, intantum gran-
diter Deum patientiae laude
promeruit."
Sap. XV. 15—17.
" — quoniam omnia idola na-
tionum deos aestimaverunt, etc."
De Exhortatione Martyrii I.
" In Sapientia Salomonis :
* Omnia idola nationum aestima-
verunt deos — ."
Sap. XIII. 1—4.
"Vani autem sunt omnes ho-
mines, in quibus non subest
scientia Dei : et de his, quae
videntur bona, non potuerunt
intelligere eum, qui est, neque
operibus attendentes agnoverunt
quis esset artifex : sed aut ig-
nem, aut spiritum, aut citatum
aerem, aut gyrum stellarum, aut
nimiam aquam, aut solem et
lunam, rectores orbis terrarum
Ibid.
" Item apud Salomonem de
elementis : ' Neque opera attend-
entes agnoverunt, quis esset arti-
fex : sed aut ignem, aut spiritum,
aut citatum aerem, ant gyrum
stellarum, aut nimiam aquam,
aut solem et lunam, rectores orbis
terrarum deos putaverunt. Quo-
rum si specie delectati deos puta-
verunt, sciant, quanto his domi-
nator eorum speciosior est : spe-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
133
deos putaverunt. Quorum si
specie delectati, deos putaverunt:
sciant quanto his dominator
eorum speciosior est ; speciei
enim generator haec omnia con-
stituit. Aut si virtutem, et opera
eorum mirati sunt, intelligant ab
illis, quoniam qui haec fecit,
fortior est illis — ."
ciei enim generator haec omnia
constituit. Aut, si virtutem et
opera eorum mirati sunt, intelli-
gant ab illis, quoniam qui haec
fecit, fortior est illis.' "
Eccli. II. 5.
" — quoniam in igne probatur
aurum et argentum, homines
vero receptibiles, in camino hu-
miliationis."
Ad Fortunatum IX.
"Et iterum apud Salomonem:
* Vasa figuli probat fornax ; et
homines justos, tentatio tribula-
tionis.' "
Dan. XIV. 4.
" Qui respondens, ait ei : Quia
non colo idola manufacta, sed
viventem Deum, qui creavit
caelum, et terram, et habet po-
testatem omnis carnis."
Ibid. XI.
" Et Daniel, Deo devotus et
Sancto Spiritu plenus, exclamat
et dicit : * Nihil colo ego nisi
Dominum Deum meum, qui
condidit coelum et terram.' "
Tob. XIII. 6.
" Aspicite ergo quae fecit no-
biscum, et cum timore et tremore
confitemini illi : regemque saecu-
lorum exaltate in operibus ves-
tris."
Ibid.
" Tobias quoque. . . .praedicat
dicens: * Ego in terra captivitatis
meae confiteor illi, et ostendo
virtutem ejus in natione pecca-
trice.' "
II. Mac. VII. 9.
" — et in ultimo spiritu consti-
tutus, sic ait : Tu quidem scele-
stissime, in praesenti vita nos
perdis : sed Rex mundi defunc-
tos nos pro suis legibus in
aeternae vitae resurrectione sus-
citabit."
11. Mac. VII. I— 41.
Ibid.
" At ille (Martyr Maccabaicus)
in martyrio suo fidens, et resur-
rectionis sibi praemium de Dei
remuneratione promittens, ex-
clamavit et dixit : ' Tu quidem
impotens, ex hac presenti vita
nos perdis, sed mundi rex de-
functos nos pro suis legibus in
aeternam vitae resurrectionem
suscitabit.' "
Prosequitur et refert mortem
septem Fratrum et matris eor-
um.
134
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
II. Mac. VI. 30.
" Sed, cum plagis perimeretur,
ingemuit, et dixit : Domine, qui
habes sanctam scientiam, mani-
feste tu scis, quia, cum a morte
possem liberari, duros corporis
sustineo dolores : secundum ani-
mam vero propter timorem tuum
libenter haec patior."
Sap. III. 4—8.
" Etsi corum hominibus, etc."
Sap. V. I — 9.
" Tunc stabunt justi in magna
constantia adversus eos, qui se
angustiaverunt, etc."
Tob. XII. 15.
" Ego enim sum Raphael An-
gelus, unus ex septem, qui ad-
stamus ante Dorainum."
Eccli. XXIV. 5—26.
" Ego ex ore Altissimi prodivi
primogenita ante omnem creatu-
ram : ego feci in coelis, etc."
Sap. II. 12 — 17.
" Circumveniamus ergo jus-
tum, etc."
Tob. II. 2.
" — dixit filio suo : Vade, et
adduc aliquos de tribu nostra,
timentes Deum, ut epulentur no-
biscum.'
Ibid.
" At ille (Eleazar) ingemiscens
ait : ' Domine, qui sanctam
habes scientiam, manifestum est
quia cum possem a morte libe-
rari, durissimos dolores corporis
tolero, flagellis vapulans ; animo
autem propter tui ipsius metum
libenter haec patior.' "
Ibid. XII.
Per Salomonem Spiritus
Sanctus ostendit, et praecinit
dicens : * Et si coram homini-
bus, etc' "
Ibid.
" Item apud eundem vindicta
nostra describitur : * Tunc
stabunt justi in magna constan-
tia adversus eos qui se angustia-
verunt, etc' "
Ad Quirinum (Vocantur quo-
que hi tres libri, Testimonia
adversus Judaeos) Lib. I. XX.
" — ut angeli septem qui assis-
tunt et conversantur ante faciem
Dei, sicut Raphael angelus in
Tobia dicit."
Ibid. Lib. II. I.
Item apud eundem Salomonem
in Ecclesiastico: 'Ego ex ore Al-
tissimi prodivi, primogenita ante
omnem creaturam. Ego in coelis
feci, etc' "
Ibid. Lib. II. XIV.
" In SapientiaSalomonis : 'Cir-
cumveniamus justum, etc' "
Ibid. Lib. IIL I.
" De hoc ipso apud Tobiam :
* Et dixit Tobias filio suo : Vade
et adduc quemcumque pauperem
inveneris ex fratribus nostris, qui
tamen in mente habeat Deum ex
toto corde suo, Hunc adduc, et
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
135
Tob. IV. 5— II.
" Cum autem et ipsa comple-
verit tempus vitae suae, sepelias
earn circa me. Omnibus autem
diebus vitae tuae, in mente ha-
beto, etc."
II. Mac. XL 12.
" — et cum nee ipse jam foe-
torem suum ferre posset, ita ait :
Justum est, subditum esse Deo,
et mortalem non paria Deo sen-
tire."
I. Mac. II. 62 — 63.
** Et a verbis viri peccatoris ne
timueritis, quia gloria ejus ster-
cus et vermis est. Hodie extoUitur,
et eras non invenietur : quia con-
versus est in terram suam, et
cogitatio ejus periit."
Eccli. XXVII. 6.
" Vasa figuli probat fornax; et
homines justos, tentatio tribula-
tionis."
Tob. II. 22.
" Ad haec uxor ejus irata re-
spondit : Manifeste vana facta
est spes tua, et eleemosynae tuae
modo apparuerunt."
Eccli. XXIII. II.
" Sicut enim servus interroga-
tus assidue, a livore non minui-
tur, sic omnis jurans, et nomi-
nans, in toto a peccato non
purgabitur,"
Sap. III. 4.
(Oft quoted.)
manducabit pariter meum pran-
dium hoc : Ecce sustineo te, fili,
donee venias.' "
Ibid.
" Item illic : * Omnibus diebus
vitae tuae, fili, Deum in mente
habe, etc' "
Ibid. IV.
" De hoc ipso in Maccabaeis :
' Justum est subditum Deo esse,
et mortalem non paria Deo sen-
tire.' "
Ibid.
" Item illic : * Et verba viri
peccatoris ne timueritis, quia
gloria ejus, in stercora erit, et in
vermes. Hodie extollitur, et eras
non invenietur : quoniam eon-
versus est in terram suam, et
cogitatio ejus periit.' "
Ibid. VI.
"Apud Salomonem : 'Vasa
figuli probat fornax ; et homines
justos, tentatio tribulationis.' "
Ibid.
" De hoc ipso in Tobia : * Ubi
sunt justitiae tuae ? Ecce quae
pateris.' "
Ibid. XII.
" Apud Salomonem : ' Vir mul-
tum jurans replebitur iniquitate,
et non diseedet a domo ejus
plaga ; et si vane juraverit, non
justificabitur.'"
Ibid. XV.
" De hoc ipso in Sapientia Sa-
lomonis : ' Et si coram homini-
bus, etc.' " (Oft quoted).
186
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
I. Mac. II. 52.
"Abraham, nonne in tentatione
inventus est fidelis, et reputatum
est ei ad justitiam ?"
Sap. V. 1—9.
(Oft quoted.)
II. Mac. VII. 9—19.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. I. 16.
" Initium sapientiae, timor Do-
mini ; et cum fidelibus in vulva
concreatus est, cum electis femi-
nis graditur, et cum justis et fide-
libus agnoscitur."
Dan. XIII. 1—3.
Eccli. X. 29.
" Noli extoUere te in faciendo
opere tuo, et noli cunctari in
tempore angustiae."
Sap. I. I.
" Diligite justitiam, qui judica-
tis terram. Sentite de Domino
in bonitate, et in simplicitate
cordis quaerite ilium — ."
I. Mac. II. 60,
" Daniel in sua simplicitate
liberatus est de ore leonum."
Ibid.
" De hoc ipso in Maccabaeis :
* Abraham, nonne in tentatione
inventus est fidelis, et deputatum
est ei ad justitiam ?* "
Ibid. XVI.
"Item (Salomon) illic : 'Tunc
stabunt justi in magna, etc' "
(Oft quoted).
Ibid. XVII.
" De hoc ipso in Maccabaeis :
* Domine, qui sanctam habes
scientiam, etc' " (Oft quoted).
Ibid. XX.
" De hoc ipso in Sapientia Sa-
lomonis : * Initium Sapientiae
metuere Deura.' "
Ibid.
" Item in Danieli : * Fuit vir
habitans in Babylonia cui nomen
erat Joachim, et accepit uxorem
nomine Susannam, filiam Hel-
ciae, formosam valde ac timen-
tem Deum, et erant parentes ejus
justi et docuerunt filiam suam
secundum legem Moysi.' "
Ibid. XLI.
"Apud Salomonem in Eccle-
siastico : * Noli te extollere in
faciendo opere tuo.' "
Ibid. LIII.
" Item apud Salomonem in Sa-
pientia : ' Et in simplicitate cor-
dis quaerite ilium.' "
Ibid.
"Item in Maccabaeis : 'Daniel
in sua simplicitate liberatus est
de ore leonum.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH,
137
Sap. IV. II, 14.
" — raptus est ne malitia muta-
ret intellectum ejus, aut ne fictio
deciperet animam illius. Placita
enim erat Deo anima illius, etc."
Sap. XV. 15—17.
"Omnia idola nationum, etc."
Sap. XIII. 1—4.
(Already quoted.)
Tob. IV. 12 (juxta Graecum.)
" Uxorem accipe ex semine
parentum tuorum, et noli sumere
alienam mulierem quae non est
ex tribu parentum tuorum."
Sap. III. II.
" Disciplinam qui abjicit, infe-
lix est."
Eccli. IX. 22.
*' Viri justi sint tibi convivae,
et in timore Dei sit tibi gloria-
tio."
Ibid. LVIII.
" Item in Sapientia Salomonis:
' Raptus est ne malitia mutaret
intellectum ejus. Placita enim
erat Deo anima illius.' "
Ibid. LIX.
" In Sapientia Salomonis :
' Omnia idola naticnum, etc' "
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
" De hoc ipso : ' Neque opera
attendentes cognoverunt, etc' "
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. LXII.
" Apud Tobiam: * Uxorem ac-
cipe ex semine parentum tuorum,
et noli sumere alienam mulierem
quae non est ex tribu parentum
tuorum.' "
Ibid. LXVI.
" Item in Sapientia Salomonis:
* Disciplinam qui abjicit, infelix
est.'"
Ibid. XCV.
" Item apud eundem in Eccle-
siastico: 'Viri justi sint tibi con-
vivae.' "
Eccli. VI. 16.
" Amicus fidelis, medicamen-
tum vitae et immortalitatis : et
qui metuunt Dominum, inveni-
ent ilium."
Eccli. IX. 18.
*' Longe abesto ab homine po-
testatem habente occidendi, et
non suspicaberis timorem."
Eccli. XXV. 12.
" Beatus, qui invenit amicum
verum, et qui enarrat justitiam
auri audienti."
Ibid.
" Et iterum : ' Amicus fidelis,
medicamentum vitae et immor-
talitatis.' "
Ibid.
" Item illic: * Longe abesto ab
homine potestatem habente occi-
dendi, et non suspicaberis timo-
rem.' "
Ibid.
" Item illic : ' Beatus qui in-
venit amicum verum, et qui e-
narrat justitiam auri audienti — ' "
138
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
Eccli. XXVIII. 28.
"Sepi aures tuas spinis, et noli
audire linguam nequam — ."
Eccli. IV. 34.
" Noli citatus esse in lingua
tua: et inutilis, et remissus in
operibus tuis."
Eccli. V. 8, 9.
" Non tardes convert! ad Do-
minum, et ne diflferas de die in
diem ; subito enim veniet ira
illius, et in tempore vindictae
disperdet te."
Eccli. VII. 39.
" Non te pigeat visitare infirm-
um : ex his enim in dilectione
firmaberis."
Eccli. XXVIII. 15.
" Susurro et bilinguis maledic-
tus : multos enim turbabit pacem
habentes."
Eccli. XXXIV. 23.
" Dona iniquorum non probat
Altissimus, etc."
Sap. VI. 6—7.
" Horrende et cito apparebit
vobis: quoniam judicium duris-
simum his, qui praesunt. fiet.
Exiguo enim conceditur miseri-
cordia ; potentes autem potenter
tormenta patientur."
Eccli. IV. 10 — II.
" Esto pupillis misericors ut
pater ; et pro viro matri illorum,
et eris velut filius Altissimi, si
obedieris."
Ibid.
" Item illic : ' Sepi aures tuas
spinis, et noli audire linguam
nequam.' "
Ibid. XCVI.
" Apud Salomonem in Eccle-
siastico : ' Noli citatus esse in
lingua tua, et inutilis et remissus
in operibus tuis.' "
Ibid. XCVII.
"Apud Salomonem in Eccle-
siastico : ' Ne tardes converti ad
Deum, et ne differas de die in
diem. Subito enim venit ira
illius.' "
Ibid. CIX.
"Apud Salomonem in Ecclesi-
astico: 'Ne pigriteris visitare in-
firmum. Ex his enim in dilec-
tione firmaberis.' "
Ibid. ex.
"In Ecclesiastico apud Salo-
monem : * Susurro et bilinguis
maledictus. Multos enim tur-
babit pacem habentes.' "
Ibid. CXI.
" Apud eumdem : * Dona ini-
quorum non probat Altissimus.' "
Ibid. CXII.
"Apud Salomonem: 'Judicium
durissimum in his qui praesunt
fiet. Exiguo enim conceditur
misericordia ; potentes autem
potenter tormenta patientur.' "
Ibid. CXIII.
"Apud Salomonem: ' Esto pu-
pillis misericors ut pater ; et pro
viro matri illorum ; et eris velut
filius Altissimi si obedieris.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 139
Eccli. II. I. De Laude Martyrii XIV.
" Fili, accedens ad servitutem " pili, inquit (Dominus), ac-
Dei, sta in justitia, et timore, et cedens ad servitutem Dei, sta in
praepara animam tuam ad tenta- justitia et timore, et praepara
tionem." animam tuam ad tentationem."
Eccli. II. 4- Ibid. XVI.
" Omne, quod tibi applicitum « Scriptum est et legimus : * In
fuerit, accipe : et in dolore sus- dolore sustine, et in humilitate
tine, et in humilitate tua patien- tua habe patientiam, quoniam
tiam habe — ." per ignem probatur aurum et
argentum.' "
Sap. III. 4. Ibid.
(Oft quoted.) " — sicut per Prophetam suum
dixit : ' Et si coram hominibus,
etc' " (Oft quoted.)
These numerous quotations evince that the Church, for the
first three centuries, received as Divine Scripture all the books
which, later in the Council of Trent, she solemnly canonized.
These quotations were a product of the life of the Church.
The Fathers incorporated into their works these numerous
quotations, not by means of Concordances of Holy Writ, or
other easy method of reference ; but because their Christian
education had been mainly derived from the Holy Books.
They spoke from the fund that they had assimilated from the
spiritual food of the Church ; and, hence, in these quotations^
they are exponents not of their own opinions, but of the un-
animous belief of a Church daily baptized in the blood of her
martyrs.
Against this harmonious array of evidence from tradition,
our adversaries bring certain objections, based upon the same
source of information. Their Achilles to break the chain of
tradition is Meliton, Bishop of Sardis.* The celebrated
passage, a fragment from his 'E/CX07CLI/, is as follows: " Mel-
iton sends greeting to his brother Onesimus. As you have
frequently desired, in your zeal for the Scriptures, that I
should make selections for you both from the Law and the
Prophets, respecting our Saviour and our whole faith ; and you
were moreover desirous of having an exact statement of the
Old Testament ; how many in number, and in what order the
*St. Meliton was bishop of Sardis in Lydia in the second half of the second
century, under Marcus Aurelius. He presented to this prince in 171 an
Apology for the Christians, remarkable for candor and truth. Of his num-
erous writings but small fragment have came down to us.
140 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
books were written, I have endeavored to perform this ; for I
know your zeal in the faith, and your great desire to acquire
knowledge, and that especially by the love of God you prefer
these matters to all others, thus striving to gain eternal life.
When, therefore, I went to the East, and came as far as the
place where these things were proclaimed and done, I ac-
curately ascertained the books of the Old Testament, and send
them to thee here below. The names are as follows : Genesis,
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave,
(Joshua), Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipo-
mena, Psalms of David, Proverbs of Solomon, which is also
called Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles, Job, the
Prophets Isaias, Jeremias, and of the twelve prophets one book,
Daniel, Ezechiel, and Esdras. From these I have made six
books of Selections."
This list omits Esther and all the deuterocanonical books.
The omission of Esther has been variously explained. Some
have attributed it to a lapse of memory ; others to an error of
the copyist. It is far more probable that such omission is
due to the uncertainty and discussions that then existed
among the Rabbis concerning this book. Meliton depends
on the Jews entirely for his canon. He finds it necessarj'' to
go to their country to ascertain the true canon of the Old
Testament. His exclusion, however, of the deuterocanonical
books is not equivalent to their condemnation. In his Clavis
in S. Scripturam, he employs Wisdom and a deuterocanonical
fragment of Esther.
Sap. VIII. I. Ibid.
" Attingit ergo a fine usque ad " — et in Salomone : ' Sapien-
finem fortiter, etc.* " tia Domini attingit a fine usque
ad finem fortiter.' "
Esther X. 12. Ibid.
" — et recordatus est Dominus " — et alibi : * Recordatus est
populi sui, etc." Dominus populi sui.' "
There seems to have been in vogue at that time a distinction
of the Sacred Writings of the Old Testament, founded more
on their origin than on any internal difference. The books
which the Church had received from the Jews, and which
were recognized by all were termed ofioXoyov/jLcvoi. The
others were those that the Church had received from the
Septuagint, and which the Jews rejected ; these were the
'afji(f>L^a\\6fi€voi. Now there is no voice in tradition, with
the sole exception of St. Jerome, that ever rejected these
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH. 141
books. As witnesses of tradition, they make no discrimina-
tion between these two classes ; but as critics, in which capacity
they are of least worth, they sometimes omit these from the
official list of the Holy Scriptures. It may be that some one
among them doubted of the divinity of the writings. We are
not seeking of them what they individually held, but what the
Church of their day taught and believed.
In the growth and development of doctrine this has always
been verified, that certain truths were less clearly conspicuous in
the deposit of faith in the beginning, which afterwards grew to
their full life in the body of the Church's doctrines. Meliton
may have doubted ; he does not deny. Other truths, which have
been defined on the warrant of tradition, have encountered
stronger opposition. St. Thomas strenously denied the Immac-
ulate Conception, and yet that truth triumphed, and finally
entered among the defined dogmas. In tradition, we must lose
sight of the individual, and of his private opinions, and seek only
the faith of the Church reflected in his writings. Again, Meli-
ton's position may be explained as only an indication of the
greater extrinsic authority of the protocanonical books. The
question in his day had not been defined by the Church.
The protocanonical books could claim a sort of official promul-
gation, inasmuch as they were transmitted by the old cus-
todians of Jahve's law. The deuterocanonical books had only
the usage of the Christian people in their favor. Now, in
such case, a man, even though revering the second class as
God's word, could rightly restrict the word canonical to the
first class. Ail Catholics receive and honor all of Mary's pre-
rogatives, but no one can place among the dogmas of faith
her Assumption, and it is only in our own times that we may
incorporate among the dogmas the Immaculate Conception.
But even were we to concede the worst, that Meliton rejected
the deuterocanonical books, our thesis is not weakened. His
would be the critical error of one man, availing naught against
the voice of the Church of truth, reverberating through the
practical usage of the " pars docens " and " pars discens " of
the Church.
The value of this proof from tradition is not impaired by
the Fathers' occasional references to the Apocryphal books.
Tertullian, De Cultu Fceminarum Lib. I. 3, approves the
Book of Henoch. " I know," he says " that the work of
Henoch which gives such order to the Angels is by some not
received, because it is not admitted in the Jewish deposit. I
believe that they judge that the book written before the deluge
142 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH.
could not endure after such universal abolition of all things.
If that is their plea, let them remember that the great grand-
son of Henoch survived the cataclysm of Noah ; and he, for-
sooth, had heard and memorized in the domestic tradition his
ancient progenitor's favor with God, and all his noted deeds;
since Henoch commanded nought else to his son, except that he
hand down these things to posterity. Therefore, without doubt,
Noah could succeed in the line of the tradition ; and, moreover,
he (Noah) would not have kept silent the disposition of God,
his preserver, and the glory of his house. Moreover, by the
Holy Spirit he (Noah) could have restored the Scripture that
perished in the deluge, in the manner that Ezra restored the
Jewish literature, that was destroyed in the Babylonian cap-
tivity. Wherefore, since Henoch in that same Scripture
announces concerning the Lord, in our judgment, nothing is
to be rejected. And we read (H. Tim. HI. i6) : 'All Scripture
having power to edify is divinely inspired.' It may rightly be
thought that it is rejected by the Jews in the same manner as
the other things which treat of Christ. Nor is it surprising
that they reject the Scriptures which treat of him whom they
rejected when he spoke in person to them. We add that
Henoch has a testimony in the Epistle of Jude the Apostle,
(Jude I. 14)."
We shall see later on that Tertullian errs in saying that St.
Jude quotes from Henoch. The sentence of Jude was taken
from a tradition, which afterwards formed the basis of the
Apocryphal book of Henoch. The Epistle of Barnabas (IV.
3; XVI. 6.) quotes as divine Scripture the Book of Henoch ;
Clement of Alexandria quotes the IV. Book of Ezra as " Ezra
the prophet." III. Strom. 16.
St. Athanasius, Apolog. Ad
III. Ezra IV. 41. Imp. 11.
" Et desiit loquendo, Et cm- " Hanc cum Zerobabel sapiens
nes populi clamaverunt, et dixe- ille vir ceteris anteferret, alios
runt : Magna est Veritas, et prae- superavit, universusque populus
valet." in hanc vocem prorupit : 'Magna
est Veritas et praevalet.' "
Ibid. IV. 37, 41, 47. Idem Sermo Major de Fide, 35.
"Et omnes populi clamaverunt, " Quemadmodum et Ezra pro-
et dixerunt : Magna est Veritas, et phetico spiritu dicit ex persona
praevalet." Zerobabelis, idque de Filio Dei :
' Vivit Veritas, et vincit, et robor-
atur, manetque in saecula saecu-
lorum.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 143
Origen quotes from the same book :
III. Ezra IV. Orig. Comment, in Josue, VI.
Ex praefatione.
" Quia Ezrae tempore cum vi-
num et inimicum, regem ac de-
nique mulieres vincit Veritas, re-
aedificatur templum Dei."
Orig. In Lib. Josue, Hom. IX.
III. Ezra IV. 59—60. ^q.
" — et dixit : Abs te est vie- " _ jta ut et nos dicamus, sicut
toria, et abs te est sapientia et in Ezra scriptum est : ' Quia a
claritas. Et ego servus tuus sum. te, Domine, est victoria, et ego
Benedictus es, qui dedisti mihi servus tuus : benedictus es, Deus
sapientiam, et tibi confitebor, veritatis.' "
Domine Deuspatrum nostrorum."
The chain of tradition is not broken by these few isolated
references to some of the Apocrypha. In these few cases, the
Fathers are exponents of their individual opinions, and are to
be valued only as mere individuals. They do not quote the
Apocrypha as witnesses of the belief- of the Church. The
absolute line between the Canonical and Apocryphal books had
not been promulgated by any definite authority, and, using
their liberty as individuals, some few erroneously extended
inspiration to certain books, which never were factors in the
life of the Church. This critical error then of the Fathers in
these rare cases, prevails not against the solemn universal wit-
ness that the writers of these early ages bear to the appro-
bation of the deuterocanonical books, in the practical usage of
the Christian people.
Relying upon the certain data that we have adduced, we
assert that if tradition be taken as the criterion of inspiration ;
and if the traditions are most valued that go back closest to
the Apostolic age, then the deuterocanonical books of Holy
Writ rest on a solid foundation.
Chapter IX.
The Canon of the Fathers of the Fourth Century,
AND First Years of Fifth Century.
In this period, the unanimity which prevailed for the first
three centuries is somewhat broken, especially by Jerome.
The doubts which arose in this age concerning the deutero-
canonical books prevailed more especially in the East. We
find, however, that not one of the Fathers of this epoch,
144 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
excepting Jerome, rejected the deuterocanonical books. Their
opposition to them never passed beyond a mere doubt con-
cerning them. We find, also, in this period, many in the East
and in the West, who defend a Canon identical with the
Canon of Trent. Lastly, we find that "the very men who
give a list of the Jewish books, evince an inclination to the
Christian and enlarged Canon." Thus, we see, that the prac-
tical tradition of the Church was so powerful, that it overcame
in the life of the Church the doubts of individual men and
isolated churches.
As we come down from the first ages of the Church, the
patristic data multiply, and, hence, we could not set forth here
ever)' particular writer's views and use of Holy Scripture.
Neither is such now necessary. No one will deny that in this
period, Jerome is the only positive opponent of the deutero-
canonical books. All likewise recognize, that the most and the
greatest of the Fathers of this epoch received these books as
divine Scripture. Many adduce here the authority of the
Council of Nice, 325. They believe that in that council there
was formulated a catalogue of books, which included the
deuterocanonical Scripture. The proofs for the assertion of
this are so feeble, that we pretermit it here as worthless to
establish our theory.*
*Comely defends the genuinity of the canon of Scripture of the Council
of Nice. Among his proofs are the following :
1. St. Jerome in his preface to Judith declares that the Nicene Synod is
said to have included the book of Judith, among the canonical Scriptures.
The proving force of this testimony is not very great, for any approba-
tion of the book in the deliberations of the Council, would justify Jerome's
statement. We believe that the Nicene fathers recognized the deuterocanon-
ical books as divine Scripture, but we hold that it is not sufficiently substan-
tiated by historical data, that they drew up an official list of the Holy
Scriptures. Had they done so, it would have had a greater influence on the
trend of thought of the Greek fathers. St. Athanasius would not have
declared that it was a bold and difficult thing to fix the list of the Holy Books,
had there been promulgated a catalogue of the same by a council of which
he was an important factor, and whose decisions he venerated.
2. Comely quotes some obscure words from Cassiodorus, reproduced
from Hefele Conciliengesch. II. p. 486 ; but they form no forcible proof.
3. Comely also adduces the 36th canon of the Council of Hippo, A. D. 393:
" Ut praeter Scripturas Catholicas, nihil in Ecclesia legatur. Capituli XXIV.
Nicaeni Concilii. Item ut praeter Scripturas Catholicas nihil in ecclesia
legatur sub nomine divinarum Scripturarum. Sunt autem Canonicae
Scripturae, etc." The books of both canons are there mentioned. This Canon
exists but in one sole codex in the Vallicellian library, in Rome. We are not
disposed to detract from what force it may have, but we do not feel warranted
to refer the Council of Nice among the proofs of the Canon in the fourth
century. Hefele accords no certain authority to the aforesaid Canon.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 145
The Council of Hippo A. D. 393 ; the Council of Carthage
A. D. 397; and the second Council of Carthage in 419 A. D.
officially promulgated canons of Scripture which included all
the deuterocanonical books.
Council of Hippo, Can. 36:
'* The Synod defines that besides the canonical Scrip-
tures nothing be read in the Church under the name of di-
vine Scripture. The Canonical Scriptures are : Genesis, Ex-
odus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue, Judges,
Ruth, four books of Kings (Regnorum), Paralipomena two
books. Job, The Davidic Psalter, the five books of Solomon,
the twelve (minor) Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Eze-
chiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Ezra two books, Maccabees two
books." The first Council of Carthage, 397 A. D., confirms the
same canon.
The second Council of Carthage, 419 A. D., has the fol-
lowing : " It is decreed that nothing but the canonical Scrip-
tures may be read under the name of divine Scripture. The
canonical Scriptures are the following: Of the Old Testament,
Genesis, ... Job, the VaaXter, five books of Solomon, the Prophets,
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, (Ezechiel is wanting), the Twelve
(minor) Prophets, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Ezra,
two books of Maccabees .... This decree shall be made known
to our brother and fellow priest Boniface, the Bishop of Rome,
or even to the other bishops for its confirmation ; for we have
received from the Fathers, that thus {the Scriptures) should be
read in the Church^
Some have found it strange that the three African Coun-
cils were held at such short intervals. The reason of the
repetitions of the Canon seems to be in the fact, that Catholic
thought had been disturbed in those days by Jerome, who in
his Prologus Galeaticus to the Books of Kings, rejected out of
the Canon the deuterocanonical books, A. D. 390. Repeatedly
in his subsequent labors, he inveighs against the deuterocanon-
ical books and fragments, and it was to retain the Catholics
faithful to their old traditions, that these three councils repeat
their Canons in such quick succession.
No doubt can reasonably exist, regarding St. Augustine's
attitude towards the deuterocanonical Scriptures. He was an
important factor in the three councils just mentioned : and re-
peatedly in his works he declares himself clearly for the deu-
terocanonical books. It would be a long and needless task
to set forth Augustine's use of deuterocanonical Scripture.
It will not be contradicted by any patristic scholar, that Angus-
146 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
tine held in equal veneration, the protocanonical and deutero-
canonical books. He gives his views of Scripture and a complete
canon in the Enchiridion of Christian Doctrine, Book II. VIII.
" But let us now go back to consider the third step here
mentioned, for it is about it that I have set myself to speak
and reason as the Lord shall grant me wisdom. The most
skillful interpreter of the sacred writings, then, will be he who
in the first place has read them all and retained them in his
knowledge, if not yet with full understanding, still with such
knowledge as reading gives — those of them, at least, that are
called canonical. For he will read the others with greater
safety when built up in the belief of the truth, so that they
will not take first possession of a weak mind, nor, cheating
it with dangerous falsehoods and delusions, fill it with preju-
dices adverse to a sound understanding. Now, in regard to
the canonical Scriptures, he must follow the judgment of the
greater number of Catholic Churches; and among these, of
course, a high place must be given to such as have been
thought worthy to be the seat of an Apostle and to receive
epistles. Accordingly, among the canonical Scriptures he will
judge according to the following standard : to prefer those that
are received by all the Catholic Churches to those which some
do not receive. Among those, again, which are not received
by all, he will prefer such as have the sanction of the greater
number and those of greater authority, to such as are held by
the smaller number and those of less authority. If, however,
he shall find that some books are held by the greater number
of churches, and others by the churches of greater authority
(though this is not a very likely thing to happen), I think, that
in such a case, the authority on the two sides is to be looked
upon as equal. Now the whole Canon of Scripture on which
we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the
following books : — Five books of Moses, that is : Genesis, Ex-
odus, Levicticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy ; one book of Joshua
the son of Nun ; one of Judges ; one short book called Ruth,
which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings ; next,
four books of Kings and two of Chronicles — these last not
following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and
going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are
history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and
follows the order of the events. There are other books which
seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither
with the order of the preceding books nor with one another,
such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 147
books of Maccabees and the two of Ezra, which last look more
like a sequel to the continuous regular history which termin-
ates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the
Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David ;
and three books of Solomon, viz.: Proverbs, Song of Songs,
and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the
other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain
resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they
were written by Jesus, the son of Sirach. Still they are to be
reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have
attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder
are the books which are strictly called the Prophets : twelve
separate books of the prophets which are connected with one
another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one
book ; the names of these prophets are as follows : — Hosea,
Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi ; then there are the
four greater Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezechiel. The
authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits
of these forty-four books. That of the New Testament, again,
is contained within the following : — Four books of the Gospel,
according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke,
according to John ; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul —
one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Gala-
tians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessa-
lonians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus,
to Philemon, to the Hebrews ; two of Peter, three of John,
one of Jude, and one of James ; one book of the Acts of the
Apostles, and one of the Revelation of John."
St. Augustine's practical use of the deuterocanonical books
may be judged from his De Civitate Dei and Contra Manichaeos
taken as specimens. In the former work, he has fifteen quota-
tions from Wisdom, fourteen from Ecclesiasticus, two from
Baruch, Judith, and Tobias respectively, and one from the Bene-
dictus of Daniel. In his work against the Manicheans he has
twenty-three quotations from Wisdom, six from Ecclesiasticus,
two from Tobias, one from Baruch and one from the Macca-
bees. In his work Contra Faustum XXXIII. 9, he promul-
gates the Catholic criterion of the canonical Scriptures : " I
admonish briefly you, who hold the execrable error (of the
Manicheans), if ye wish to follow the authority of that Scrip-
ture which is to be preferred to all others, that ye follow that
Scripture which from the time of Christ, through the dispensa-
tions of the Apostles, and of the Bishops, who succeeded them
148 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
in their sees by certain succession, has come down even to our
day, preserved throughout the whole earth, approved and ex-
plained." Chemnitz, objected against Augustine's authority
for the deuterocanonical Scripture, citing a passage from his
Contra Gaudentium, XXXI. 38 : " And indeed the Scripture
which is called the Maccabees the Jews have not, as they have
the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, to which the Lord
bears testimony as to his witnesses saying : ' That all things
must needs be fulfilled which are written in the Law of Moses,
and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me ' (Luke
XXIV. 44) ; but it (Maccabees) is received by the Church not
unprofitably, if it be soberly read or heard.'' This is a direct
testimony that the Church to whom Augustine directed all who
would receive the genuine Scripture had received and sanc-
tioned a book, not contained in the Jewish Canon, and that
such book was not without profit to readers and hearers.
Later on in the same chapter he explains what he means by
the restrictive clause : " if it be soberly read or heard." " For
we should not," he says, " assenting approve all things that we
read in the Scriptures that men did, even though they be
praised by the testimony of God ; but we should consider and
discern, using the judgment not of our own authority, but of
the divine and holy Scriptures, which does not permit us to
approve or imitate all the deeds of those to whom it bears a
good and excellent testimony." Augustine's words restrict
not the authority of Maccabees beneath divine Scripture, but
regulate its use. The same words might have been applied
by him to the Gospel of Matthew.
There are sometimes alleged against us the words of Augus-
tine which occur Lib. Retract. X. 3 : " Thus also I appear not
to have rightly called the words prophetic in which it is written :
'Quid superbit terra et cinis?' Eccli. X. 9, since they are
not written in the book of one whom we certainly know to
have been a prophet." We believe that it is not the intention
of Augustine here to throw doubt on Ecclesiasticus, but to be
accurate in drawing a distinction between Prophets and Hagio-
graphers. Such subtlety leaves intact a book's divinity.
In the first book of his De Predestinatione Sanctorum XIV.
against the Pelagians, who rejected the book of Wisdom,
Augustine argues thus : " These things being so, there should
not be rejected a sentence from the book of Wisdom, which
has merited to be read by the order of lectors in the Church of
Christ for so many years (tam longa annositate), and which has
merited to be listened to with the veneration of divine author-
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 149
ity by all Christians, from bishops to the extreme lay faithful
penitents and catechumens." Iterum ibidem : " But those
who wish to be taught by the works of the Fathers (Tracta-
torum) must needs prefer the book of Wisdom to all the
Fathers ; for the celebrated Fathers nearest in time to the
Apostles preferred it to their own opinions ; and they, using it
as an authority, believed that they were making use of nothing
short of a divine testimony.
" It is evident, that with Augustine, the condition of all the
deuterocanonical books was the same, hence by applying this
testimony to the entire collection we have not alone the view
of Augustine, but a succinct statement of the belief and usage
of the Church from the Apostles to his own day."
A document which sets forth the official attitude towards
the deuterocanonical Scripture in this age is the Decree of
Pope Gelasius, A. D. 492 — A. D. 496.*
*' Nunc vero de Scripturis divinis agendum est quid
universalis recipiat Ecclesia, vel quid vitare debeat. Incipit
ordo Veteris Testamenti, Genesis liber I. Exodi liber I.
Levitici liber I. Numeri liber I. Deuteronomii liber I. Jesu
Nave liber I. Judicum liber I. Ruth liber I. Regum
libri IV. Paralipomenon libri II. Psalmorum CL. liber I.
Salomonis libri III. Proverbia liber I. Ecclesiastes liber I.
Cantici Canticorum liber I. Item Sapientiae liber I.
Ecclesiastici liber I. Item ordo Prophetarum: Esaiae liber
I. Jeremiae liber I. cum Chinoth, id est, Lamentationibus
suis, Ezechielis liber I. Danielis liber I. Osea liber I. Amos
liber I. Michaeae liber I. Joel liber I. Abdiae liber I. Jonae liber
I. Nahum liber I. Abbacuc liber I. Aggaei liber I. Zachariae
liber I. Malachi liber I. Item ordo historiarum: Job liber I.
ab aliis omissus. TobicB liber I. Hesdrae libri II. Hesther liber I.
Judith liber I. Machabaeorum libri II."
In the year 405, St. Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse (t4i7)
wrote to Pope Innocent I. asking among other things " what
books should be received in the Canon of Holy Scripture."
The Pontiff responds : " The subjoined brief will show what
books should be received into the Canon of Holy Scripture.
These are therefore (the books) concerning which thou hast
*This decree is not found the same in the different codices. It is by some
ascribed to Damasus (A. D. 366— A. D. 384) ; by others to Gelasius (A. D.
493— A. D. 496) ; and by others to Hormisdas (A. D. 514— A. D. 523). Cor-
nely believes that it was originally a decree of Damasus, which was after-
wards enlarged by Gelasius. All agree that it was an authentic promulgation
from the Roman See in that period. Hefele Conciliengesch. II. 620.
160 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
wished the admonition of a longed for voice. The five books
of Moses. .. .The book of Jesus, son of Nave, one book of
Judges, the four books of Kings and Ruth, sixteen books of
Prophets, five books of Solomon, the Psalter ; also of historical
books, one book of Job, one of Tobias, one of Esther, one of
Judith, two of Maccabees, two of Ezra and two of Paralipo-
menon." In all these canons Baruch is considered an integral
part of Jeremiah. The canons of Gelasius and Innocent are
not ex cathedra definitions, but plain stditQvnQnts of the belief and
usages of the Church from her central authority.
The testimony of the fourth and fifth centuries to the
divinity of the deuterocanonrcal Scriptures is evinced in the
four great codices of that period : The Vatican and Sinaitic
of the fourth century, and the Alexandrian and Codex of St.
Ephrem of the fifth century. An accurate description of these
codices will be given in the course of our treatise. Suffice it
to say here that they all make no discrimination between the
protocanonical and deuterocanonical books.
The Ethiopian Version of Scripture, made in the fourth
century, and the Armenian version, made in the beginning of
the fifth century, contain all the books canonized by the
Council of Trent. At what time the deuterocanonical books
were placed in the Syriac translation known as the Peshito
is not known, but they were there in the time of St. Ephrem
(t379)> ^s we shall see in the course of the present work ;
hence, we may add the testimony of the Syriac Peshito to the
data for the deuterocanonical books.
Sacred archaeology also affords proofs for the divinity of
the deuterocanonical books. In the Catacombs, we find fre-
quent representations from the deuterocanonical books, proving
that those books were a part of the deposit of faith of the
Church of the Martyrs. The recent researches in subterra-
nean Rome has clearly demonstrated this proof, as can be
seen in the works of Vincenzi (Sessio IV. Cone. Trid.) ; Malou
(Lecture de la Bible II. 144); Garrucci (Storia dell' Arte
Christiana), and others. The constant and universal tradition
and usage of the first three centuries are corroborated in the
fourth and fifth century by the express declarations and
praxis of Fathers, by solemn decrees of Councils and Popes,
and by the preserved evidences of the practical life of the
Church.
The adversaries of the deuterocanonical books bring against
us the authority of the Fathers who have edited canons in
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 151
which the deuterocanonical books find no place. Preeminent
for age and authority among these is St. Athanasius, the
decus orthodoxiae.*
We reproduce here the entire quotation from which the
opposition of Athanasius is inferred ; " Since many have
indeed tried to place in order those books which are called
Apocrypha, and mix them with the divinely inspired Scripture
which we have received upon certain testimony as the Fathers
handed down to us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses
and ministers of the word, it has seemed good to me also, the
brethren exhorting, to compute in the Canon, as I have
learned, from the beginning, and in order, the books that have
been handed down and are believed to be divine, that everyone
that has been seduced may convict the seducers, and he who
has persevered incorrupt may joyously remember these. The
books of the Old Testament are in number twenty-two ; for so
many, as I have heard, are the elements (of speech) with the
Hebrews. In this order, and by these names, they are severally
enumerated : The first is Genesis, then Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua son of Nun, Judges and Ruth
follow ; then the four books of Kings, of which the first and
second are considered as one, and, in like manner, the third and
fourth. Following these the two books of Paralipomenon are
also considered as one, as also the first and second of Ezra.
Then come the book of Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the
Canticle of Canticles and Job ; then the Prophets of whom
twelve are considered as one book. Then Isaiah, Jeremiah and
with him Bartich, the Lamentations, and the Epistle ; then
follow Ezechiel and Daniel, thus far the books of the Old
Testament."
After enumerating the complete Canon of the New Testa-
ment, he continues : " These are the fountains of salvation,
so that who thirsts may be filled by their discourses ; in
these alone, the Christian doctrine is taught. Let no one
add to them or take anything from them. But for greater
accuracy, I deem it necessary to add this also, that there are,
forsooth, other books besides these, which, indeed, are not placed tn
*St. Athanasius was descended of an illustrious family of Alexandria.
He was ordained deacon by St. Alexander, whom in 326 he succeeded in the
see of Alexandria. He was the Charles Martel against the Arians in the
Council of Nice, and combated this dreadful heresy throughout his life.
His long episcopate of more than forty years was a perpetually troubled one.
Many times he was forced to fly to the exile of the desert to escape his
insidious foes. He is the great patristic authority on the Trinity and the
Incarnation.
152 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
the Canon, but which the Fathers decreed should be read to those
who have lately co^ne into the fold, and seek to be catechized, and
who study to learn the Christian doctrine. (These are): The
Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus),
Esther, Judith, Tobias, the so-called Doctrine of the Apostles,
and Pastor. Therefore, while the former are in the Canon, and
these latter are read, there is no mention of the Apocrypha,
which are the figment of heretics who arbitrarily write books,
to which they assign dates, that by the specious semblance of
antiquity they may find occasion to deceive the simple." Ep.
Fest. 29.
To judge rightly St. Athanasius' attitude towards Holy
Scripture, we must recall what has been said respecting
Meliton. We must readily admit that in these ages a distinc-
tion was made between the two classes of books, but it did not
deny divine inspiration to the deuterocanonical works. A greater
dignity was given by some Fathers to the books that had come
down to the Church from the Jews ; but these same Fathers
testify to the veneration in which the deuterocanonical works
were held by the Church, and to the part they played in the
life of the faithful. It must also be borne in mind that
Athanasius flourished in Alexandria the fertile source of
Apocrypha, and in his zeal to repel the inventions of heretics
he was most conservative in treating the Canon. His location
of Esther among the deuterocanonical books is unique, and
was probably caused by the sanguinary character of the book,
which also led some Jews to doubt of its divine inspiration.
His omission of Maccabees seems to be an oversight since
he adverts to their history in his writings. We do not seek to
establish that the status of the two classes of books was the
same with Athanasius ; but we judge it evident from his writ-
ings that he venerated these same books as divine, although
not equal in extrinsic authority to the books officially handed
down from the Jews. The testimony of Athanasius that the
Fathers of the Church had decreed that these books should be
read in the Church manifests clearly the Church's attitude
towards these books ; and the following passages, taken from
the writings of Athanasius, show how deeply he also had
drunk from these founts.
Athanas. Oratio Contra Gen-
Sap. XIV. 12. tes, 9.
" Initium enim fornicationis " — quod et Dei sapientia his
est exquisitio idolorum: et adin- verbis declarat : ' Initium forni-
ventio illorum corruptio vitae cationis est exquisitio idolo-
est — ." rum.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
153
Sap. XIV. 12—21.
"Initium fornicationis, etc."
Sap. XIV. 21.
" Et haec fuit vitae humanae
deceptio : quoniam aut affectui,
aut regibus deservientes homines,
incommunicabile nomen lapidi-
bus et lignis imposuerunt."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei, et creaturae cognoscibiliter
poterit Creator horum videri — ."
Sap. VI. 19.
" Cura ergo disciplinae dilec-
tio est : et dilectio custodia le-
gum illius est : custoditio autem
legum consummatio incorrup-
tionis est — ."
Sap. II. 23, 24.
" Quoniam Deus creavit homi-
nem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fecit
ilium. Invidia autem diaboli
mors introivit in orbem ter-
rarum — ."
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."
Tob. XII. 7.
" Sacramentum regis abscon-
dere, etc."
Ibid.
** Haec. . . .jam olim Scriptura
his verbis complexa est: ' Initium
fornicationis, etc' " Pergit usque
ad Vers. 21.
Ibid. 17.
" — sed cum incommunicabile,
ut loquitur Scriptura, Dei nomen
et honorem iis qui non dii sed
mortales homines fuere ascribere
studuerunt — ."
Ibid. 44.
" Ex magnitudine et pulchri-
tudine rerum creatarum conveni-
enter Creator conspicitur."
S. Athanas. De Incarnatione
Dei, 4.
" — sicuti Sapientia ait: ' Ob-
servatio legum confirmatio est
incorruptionis. "
Ibid.
" — ut et Sapientia his verbis
testatur: * Deus creavit hominem
ut incorruptus esset, et imaginem
propriae aeternitatis : invidia au-
tem diaboli mors introivit in
mundum.' "
Ath. Apolog. et contra Arianos,
3-
" — nee timeant illud quod in
Sacris Litteris scriptum est :
* Os quod mentitur occidit ani-
mam.' "
Ibid. II.
" — cum oporteat, ut scriptum
est : ' Sacramentum regis abscon-
dere.' "
154
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Eccli. XXX. 4.
" Mortuus est pater ejus, et
quasi non est mortuus: similem
enim reliquit sibi post se."
Baruch III. 12.
" Dereliquisti fontem sapien-
tiae— ."
Ibid.
This quotation is not made use of by Athanasius, but is
found in an apologetic treatise directed to him by a synod
held at Alexandria, of the bishops of Egypt, Thebais, Libyia
and Pentapolis. It is thus the testimony of the East to the
divinity of the deuterocanonical works.
In the letter of St. Alexander of Alexandriae to his co-
laborer, we find the following :
Ibid. 66.
" Mortuus est enim, ait quodam
in loco S. Scriptura, pater ejus
et quasi non est mortuus."
St. Ath. De Decretis Synod.
Nicenae, 12.
" Verbum item Israelem objur-
gans ait : ' Dereliquisti fontem
sapientiae.' "
Ibid. 15.
"Hujus porro sapientiae fon-
tem esse Deum nos docet Baruch,
ubi videlicet redarguitur Israel
fontem sapientiae dereliquisse."
S. Ath. De Sententia Dionysii,
15-
" — congruenter rursum Chris-
tus vapor dictus est : 'Est enim,*
inquit, ' vapor virtutis Dei.* "
Idem Epist. ad Episcopos
Aegypti et Libyae, 3.
" Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris."
Idem Apolog. ad Const. Imp.
5-
" Nam OS quod mentitur occi-
dit animam."
Sap. VII. 25.
" Vapor est enim virtutis Dei,
etc.
Eccli. XV. 9.
" Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris.*'
Sap. I.
(Already quoted.)
Tob. IV. 19.
" Consilium semper a sapiente
perquire."
Sap. III. 5.
"In paucis vexati, in multis
bene disponentur, quoniam Deus
tentavit eos, et invenit illos dig-
nos se."
Ibid. 17.
" Scriptum est : * Ab omni sa-
piente consilium accipe.' "
Idem Apolog. DeFuga Sua, 19.
" Nam sicut aurum in fornace
probatos, ut ait Sapientia, 'in-
venit illos Dominus dignos se.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
156
Sap. II. 21.
" Haec cogitaverunt, et errave-
runt : excaecavit enim illos ma-
litia eorum."
Eccl. XIX. 26.
" Ex visu cognoscitur vir, et
ab occurso faciei cognoscitur sen-
satus."
Baruch IV. 20, 22.
" Exui me stola pacis, indui
autem me sacco obsecrationis, et
clamabo ad Altissimum in diebus
meis. Ego enim speravi in aeter-
num, salutem vestram et venit
mihi gaudium a sancto, etc."
Dan. XIII. 42.
** Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant."
Baruch III. 12.
" Dereliquisti fontem sapien-
tiae — ."
Eccli. XXIV. 12.
" Tunc praecepit, et dixit mihi
Creator omnium : et qui creavit
me, requievit in tabernaculo
meo — ."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter
poterit Creator horum videri — ."
Judith XIII. 15.
" — non enim quasi homo, sic
Deus comminabitur, neque sicut
filius hominis ad iracundiam in-
flammabitur."
Ibid. 71.
" In his itaque eorum mentem
excaecavit malitia."
Idem Contra Arianos Orat.
1.4.
*' — sapientia ait : ' Ex verbis
suis cognoscitur vir.' "
Ibid. 12.
"Susanna quoque aiebat: 'Deus
sempiterne.' Baruch item scrip-
sit : ' Clamabo ad Deum sempi-
ternum in diebus meis.' Et paulo
post : ' Ego enim speravi in sem-
piternum salutem vestram et
venit mihi gaudium a Sancto.' "
Ibid. 13.
"Et apud Dan.: 'Exclamavit
voce magna Susanna et dixit :
Deus aeterne, qui absconditorum
es cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant.' "
Ibid. 19.
" — item apud Baruch scriptum
est : * Dereliquistis fontem sapi-
entiae.' "
Idem Contra Arianos, Orat.
II. 4.
" — vel si ipse de seipso ait :
' Dominus creavit me.* "
Ibid. 32.
" Siquidem ex magnitudine et
pulchritudine rerum creatarum,
illarum Creator convenienter
conspicitur,"
Ibid. 35.
" ' Deus autem non ut homo
est, quemadmodum testatur Scrip-
tura: "
166
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Baruch III. 12.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. IX. 2.
" — et sapientia tua constituisti
hominem, ut dominaretur crea-
turae, quae a te facta est — ."
Baruch III. 36.
" Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus eum."
Sap. VI. 26.
" Multitude autem sapientum
sanitas est orbis terrarum : et
rex sapiens stabilimentum populi
est."
Eccli. I. lo.
" Et effudit illam super omnia
opera sua, et super omnem car-
nem secundum datum suum, et
praebuit illam diligentibus se."
Dan. XIV. 4.
" Qui respondens, ait ei: Quia
non colo idola manufacta, sed
viventem Deum, qui creavit cae-
lum, et terram, et habet potesta-
tem omnis carnis."
Dan. XIII. 45.
" Cumque duceretur ad mor-
tem, suscitavit Dominus spiritum
sanctum pueri junioris, cujus
nomen Daniel — ."
Baruch III. i.
" Et nunc, Domine omnipo-
tens, Deus Israel, anima in an-
gustiis, et spiritus anxius clamat
ad te."
Dan. III. 86.
"Benedicite spiritus, et animae
justorum. Domino ;laudate et sup-
erexaltate eum in saecula."
Ibid. 42.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 45.
" Et in libro Sapientiae legitur:
* Et sapientia tua constituisti ho-
minem ut dominaretur creaturis
quae a te factae sunt.' "
Ibid. 49.
" Et Baruch: 'Hie est Deus
noster, non aestimabitur alius
adversus eum.' "
Ibid. 79.
" Vel si nulla est sapientia, cur
multitude sapientum in Scriptura
memoratur ? "
Ibid.
" — ut hisce verbis testatur
filius Sirach : ' Effudit illam in
omnia opera sua cum omni came,
secundum donationem suam, et
praebuit illam diligentibus se.' "
Idem Contra Arianos, Orat.
III. 30.
" Item Daniel Astyagi dixit :
' Ego idola manufacta non colo,
sed Deum viventem qui coelum
et terram creavit, et in omnem
carnem dominatum habet.' "
S. Athanas. Epist. I. ad Sera-
pionem, 5.
" Et apud Danielem : ' Susci-
tavit Deus Spiritum pueri junioris
cujus nomen Daniel, et exclama-
vit voce magna : Mundus ego
sum a sanguine hujus.' "
Ibid. 7.
" Baruch item his verbis preca-
tur : ' Anima in angustiis et spi-
ritus anxius clamat ad te,' et in
Jfymno trium Puerorum. ' Be-
nedicte spiritus et animae justo-
rum Domino.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
157
Baruch III. lo, 12.
" Quid est Israel, quod in terra
inimicorum es ? Dereliquisti fon-
tem sapientiae."
Sap. I. 5.
" Spiritus enim sanctus discip-
linae effugiet fictum, et auferet
se a cogitationibus, quae sunt
sine intellectu,"
Sap. XII. I.
" O quam bonus et suavis est,
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni-
bus ! "
Dan. III. 57.
" Benedicite omnia opera Do-
mini Domino, etc."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum, etc."
Dan. XIV. 4.
" Qui respondens, ait ei: * Quia
non colo idola manufacta, sed
viventem Deum, qui creavit coe-
lum, et terram et habet potesta-
tem omnis carnis."
Eccli. I. 32.
" — exsecratio autem pecca-
tori, cultura Dei."
Dan. XIII. 42.
" Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : ' Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant.' "
Baruch III. 36—38.
" Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus eum.
Hie adinvenit omnem viam dis-
Ibid. 19,
" Et iterum apud Baruch :
'Quid est Israel, quod in terra
inimicorum es ? dereliquisti fon-
tem sapientiae.' "
Ibid. 26.
" ' Spiritus sanctus,' inquit,
'disciplinae fugiet dolum, et
auferet se a cogitationibus quae
sunt sine intellectu.' "
Ibid. 25.
" — iterum in Sapientia legi-
tur : * Tuus enim incorruptus
spiritus est in omnibus."
Idem Epist. II. ad Serap. 6.
" Benedicite omnia opera Do-
mini Domino."
Idem Epist. III. ad Serap. 4.
'* Ita enim scriptum est : ' Spi-
ritus Domini replevit orbem ter-
rarum.' "
Idem Epist. IV. ad Serap. 21.
" Ita quoque Daniel libere Da-
rium affatus est : ' Non veneror
idola manufacta, sed viventem
Deum qui creavit coelum et ter-
ram, et habet potestatem omnis
carnis.' "
S. Ath. Vita S. Antonii, 28.
" — nam * exsecratio peccatori
est pietas erga Deum."
Ibid. 31.
" — solusque Deus novit omnia
antequam fiant."
St. Athan, De Incarnat. et
contra Arianos (In fine).
" — quemadmodum et Jeremias
dicit : ' Hie est Deus noster, et
non aestimabitur alius adversus
158
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
ciplinae, et tradidit illam Jacob
puero suo, et Israel dilecto suo.
Post haec in terris visus est, et
cum hominibus conversatus est."
Sap. II. 24.
" Invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit in orbem terrarum — ."
Dan. III. 57—62 ; 88.
Baruch III. 12,
(Already quoted.)
Baruch III. 12 — 13.
" Dereliquisti fontem sapien-
tiae ; nam si in via Dei ambulas-
ses, habitasses utique in pace
sempiterna."
Sap. V. 3.
** — dicentes intra se, poeniten-
tiam agentes, et prae angustia
spiritus gementes: Hi sunt, quos
habuimus aliquando in derisum,
et in similitudinem improperii."
Eccli. XXXVIII. 9.
"Fill, in tua infirmitate ne
despicias te ipsum, sed ora Do-
minum, et ipse curabit te."
eum. Hie adinvenit omnem
viam scientiae, et tradidit illam
Jacob puero suo et Israel dilecto
suo. Post haec in terris visus
est et cum hominibus conversatus
est.* "
St. Athanas. Contra Apollina-
rium, Lib. I. 7.
*' Invidia autem diaboli mors
intravit in mundum."
Ibid. 15.
Repetit idem.
St. Ath. De Trinitate et S.
Spiritu, 2.
"Tres quoque sancti martyres,
Ananias Azarias et Misael, in
fornace ignis positi in terra
Chaldaeorum, cum admirabiliter
Deus calorem ignis ad temper-
atum refrigerium convertisset,
universam creaturam adhortantes
secum laudare Deum, sic incipi-
unt : * Benedicite, etc' " Citat
majorem partem Cantici Trium
Puerorum.
Ibid. 19.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 20.
" — dicit : * Dereliquisti fontem
sapientiae; viam Domini si fuisses
ingressus, utique habitares in pace
in aeternum tempus."
St. Ath.Sermo Major De Fide,28.
" Hie est quem habuimus ali-
quando in derisionem — -."
St. Ath. Fragment De Amu-
letis.
" — coelesti sapientiae obse-
quens dicenti : ' Fili, in tempore
infirmitatis tuae ne despicias, sed
ora Dominum, et ipse curabit
te."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
159
Eccli. XV. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Dan. III. 50.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 27.
" Et cum sit una, omnia potest:
et in se permanens omnia innovat,
et per nationes in animas sanctas
se transfert, amicos Dei et pro-
phetas constituit."
Sap. II. 12.
"Circumveniamus ergo justum,
quoniam inutilis est nobis, etc."
Eccli. XXVII. 29.
" Et qui foveam fodit, incidet
in earn, etc."
Sap. II. 12.
(Already quoted.)
Dan. XII.
Eccli. XV. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Baruch II. 35.
" Et statuam illis testamentum
alterum sempiternura, ut sim illis
in Deum, et ipsi erunt mihi in
populum, etc."
Eccli. II. I.
" Fili, accedens ad servitutem
Dei, sta in justitia, et timore, et
praepara animam tuam ad tenta-
tionem."
Eccli. XVIII. 6.
" Cum consummaverit homo,
tunc incipiet, etc."
Idem, Epist. VII. 4.
(Already quoted.)
Idem, Epist. X. 3.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 4.
" — prout de Sapientia testatur
Salomon * quae cum una sit,
omnia potest, et in se manens
omnia renovat, et cum ad sanctas
animas accedet, tunc Dei ama-
tores et prophetas efficit.' "
Idem, Epist. XI. 5.
" Circumveniamus justum, quia
nobis minime placet."
Ibidem.
** Qui foveam proximo suo
fodit in eamdem incidet."
Idem, Epist. XIX.
(Already quoted.)
Idem, Epist. ad Marcellinum, 9.
" Spiritu edoctus quisque ser-
monem administrat ita ut
aliquando historias praescribant
ut Daniel Susannae — ."
Ibid. 29.
(Already quoted.)
S. Ath. Expositio in Ps.
LXXVII. 10.
" Novam Evangelii traditionem
dicit atque illud : * Ecce dies
venit, et disponam cum eis tes-
tamentum novum.' "
Idem, in Ps. CXVII.
" — juxta illud: 'Accedis ad
serviendum Domino, praepara
animam tuam ad tentationem.' "
Idem, Ps. CXVIII. 60.
Repetit idem.
Ibidem 96,
" — iuxta illud: *Cum con-
summatur homo, tunc incipit.' "
160
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
St.Ath. De Titulis Psalmorum,
De Ps. LXXVII. 137.
'* Et in terra visus est, et cum
hominibus conversatus est. (Re-
petit idem in Ps. XCIII.)
St. Athan. Fragmenta in Math.
" Eodem quoque modo senes
duo cum Susannae dixissent :
* Ecce in concupiscentia tui su-
mus — .' "
Ibid.
" — juxta Sapientiae verbum :
' Anima calida est ut ignis accen-
sus.' "
Ibid.
" Daniel vero lascivos senes
sycophantiae causa a se damna-
tos juxta legem Moysis ultus est."
Ibid. De Falsis Prophetis.
" Si videris sapientem aliquem,
ex consilio Sapientiae, mane vi-
gila ad ilium, stationes portarum
ejus terat pes tuus, ut ab eo edis-
cas legis umbras et gratiarum
dona. "
Ibid. De Lunaticis.
" — Sapientia ita loquente : 'A
luna, signum diei festi.' "
Expositio in Ps. LXXVIII.
" Carries Sanctorum tuorutn
bestiis terrae. Quomodo enim
sancti non fuerunt quorum san-
guis effusus est pro legis obser-
vantia, ex quorum erant numero
Maccabaei ? "
Athanasius simply considered
these books as pious productions, somewhat like to our Imita-
tion of Christ. Quoting a text from Judith, as we have seen
above, Contra Arianos II. 38, he explicitly adds " ut testatur
Scriptura''
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-
Baruch III. 38.
" Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Dan. XIII. 20.
" Ecce, ostia pomarii clausa
sunt, et nemo nos videt, et nos
in concupiscentia tui sumus,
etc."
Eccli. XXIII. %2.
" Anima calida quasi ignis ar-
dens non extinguetur, donee ali-
quid glutiat."
Dan. XIII.
Eccli. VI. 36.
" Et si videris sensatum, evi-
gila ad eum, et gradus ostiorum
illius exterat pes tuus."
Eccli. XLIII 7.
" A luna signum
diei festi.
etc.
Maccab. Passim.
No man can say that S.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 161
icity and divinity were not in the mind of Athanasius convert-
ible 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 tradi-
tion in his practical use of Scripture the weight of Athanasius'
authority is with us, while, in his capacity of critic, he accords
to the deuterocanonical books in general a veneration which
the Church never gave to any but divine books.
We omit the Synopsis Scripturae, formerly falsely ascribed
to Athanasius, since it covers the same ground as the testi-
mony already quoted.
Another Father whose authority is invoked against us is
St. Cyrill of Jerusalem.*
The testimony upon which his authority is invoked against
us is found in his fourth Catechesis, Chapters 33, 35, and 36.
The following excerpts will illustrate his position :
" Studiously also learn from the Church what are the books
of the Old Testament, and what, of the New. Read to me noth-
ing 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 inter-
preters translated. * * * Read these twenty-two books, and
have naught to do with the Apocrypha. These alone studi-
ously 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." Con-
tinuing, he gives the same canon as that of Athanasius, except
that he conjoins Ruth with Judges, and includes Esther, thus
*St. Cyrill of Jerusalem was born 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 epis-
copate 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. Cyrill died in his see in 386. In one of his letters to Con-
stans he testifies to a marvelous luminous apparition of a cross which
extended from Mt. Calvary to Mt. Olivet, which was witnessed by many for
several hours. His chief works are his Catecheses to the Catechumens and
Neophytes. Although some of Cyrill's opinions are strange, he was a staunch
defender of the faith, and merits to be considered a coryphaeus in patristic
theology.
K
162 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
preserving the number twenty-two. And he adds : " But let
all the other (books) be 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, Cyrill 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 believed
and taught. Neither does Cyrill characterize as apocryphal
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. The spirit of the Church at
Jerusalem was extremely conservative, tinged with Judaism.
Naturally for such, the books which the synagogue did not
recognize would be regarded with some disfavor. Cyrill was
influenced by the trend of religious thought reigning at Jeru-
salem. He sacrificed nothing by his strict views on the canon.
The protocanonical books are the most useful ; the Church
had not defined the Canon ; and Cyrill 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 until 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 veneration than that
given the protocanonical books. The slight doubt that reigned
in some churches regarding their divine origin induced Cyrill
to place them in an inferior rank. In the uncertainty of re-
ligious thought of his time, he judged it better that the neo.
phytes should devote their study to the absolutely certain
sources of divine truth. Were Cyrill alive to-day, he would
learn from the Church to receive the complete Canon.
In his practical use of Scripture, Cyrill follows the usage of
the Church, and often quotes the deuterocanonical books, as
the following examples will show :
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
163
Dan. III. 27, 29.
" — quia Justus es in omnibus,
quae fecisti nobis, et universa
opera tua vera, et viae tuae rec-
tae, et omnia judicia tua vera.
Peccavimus enim, et inique egi-
mus, etc."
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."
Sap. XIII. 2.
" — sed aut ignem, aut spiri-
tum, aut citatum aerem, aut
gyrum stellarum, aut nimiam
aquam, aut solem et lunam, rec-
tores orbis terrarum deos puta-
verunt."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter
poterit creator horum videri — ."
Eccli. XLIII. 2.
" Sol in aspectu annuntians in
exitu, vas admirabile opus ex-
celsi."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
cie et creaturae, cognoscibiliter
poterit Creator horum videri — ."
Catech. II. XVI.
" — illicque pro malorum re-
medio dicebant : * Justus es, Do-
mine, in omnibus quae fecisti
nobis: peccavimus enim et inique
egimus.' "
Catech. VI. 4.
'* Prof undiora te ne quaesieris,
et fortiora te ne in vestiges: quae
tibi praecepta sunt, ea mente
agita."
Ibid. 8.
" Deum nonnulli ignem esse
senserunt."
Catech. IX. 2.
" — juxta Salomonem qui ait :
' nam ex magnitudine et pulchri-
tudine creaturarum, proportione
servata, procreator earum con-
spicitur.' "
Ibid. 6.
** — nonne admirari oportet
eum qui in solis fabricam inspex-
erit ? nam modici vasis apparens
vim ingentem complectitur ; ab
oriente apparens et in occiden-
tem usque lumen emittens."
Ibid. 16.
" — et ex his quae dicta lec-
taque sunt, quaeque ipse reperire
aut cogitare poteris, 'ex magni-
tudine et pulchritudine creatur-
arum, proportione servata, Auc-
torera earum conspicias."
164
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Baruch III. 36, 38.
" Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus eum.
Hie adinvenit omnem viam dis-
ciplinae, et tradidit illam Jaeob
puero suo, et Israel dileeto suo.
Post haee in terris visus est, et
cum hominibus conversatus est."
Eceli. III. 22.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. II. 24.
*' Invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit in orbem terrarum — ."
Eeeli. IV. 36.
" Non sit porreeta manus tua
ad aeeipiendum, et ad dandum
coUecta."
Dsn. XIV. 35.
" Et apprehendit eum Angelus
Domini in vertiee ejus, et por-
tavit 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 oecurrit illis."
Dan. XIII. 42 — 45.
" Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante-
quam fiant, tu scis, quoniam fal-
sum testimonium tulerunt contra
me, et ecce, morior, cum nihil
horum fecerim, quae isti mali-
tiose composuerunt adversum
me. Exaudivit autem Dominus
vocem ejus. Cumque duceretur
ad mortem, suscitavit Dominus
spiritum sanctum pueri junioris,
cujus nomen Daniel — ."
Catech. XI. 15.
" — audi Prophetam dicentem:
*Hic est Deus noster, non repu-
tabitur alius adversus eum. In-
venit omnem viam scientiae, et
dedit earn Jacob puero suo, et
Israel dileeto a se. Post haee in
terra visus est, et cum hominibus
conversatus est."
Ibid. 19.
" Ne extollas teipsum, ne cadas.
Quae tibi mandata sunt ea sola
meditare."
Catech. XII. 5.
" At maximum hoe opifieiorum
Dei in paradiso choros agens
inde diaboli ejecit invidia"
Catech. XIII. 8.
" Nee enim ad aeeipiendum
tantum porreeta, verum etiam ad
operandum prompta tibi sit ma-
nus."
Catech. XIV. 25.
" Si enim Habacue ab angelo
translatus est, per eomam sui
capitis portatus, etc."
Catech. XVI. 19.
" — tantum illi ostia aperia-
mus ; circumit enim quaerens dig-
it
nos.
Ibid. 31.
** Idem (Spiritus Sanetus)
sapientem 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 manibus
lictorum jam erat.... scriptum
est enim : ' Suscitavit Deus Spiri-
tum sanctum in puero juven-
culo. ' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 165
Catech. XXIII. Mystagogica,
Eccli. XXXIV. 9. V. 17.
"Qui non est tentatus, quid " — et quomodo alicubi dic-
scit ?" turn est : ' Vir non tentatus, non
est probatus.' "
We must admit that Cyrill'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 proto-
canonical books, he himself employs the deuterocanonical
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 en-
deavors to make the number of canonical books of the Old
Testament accord with the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew
alphabet. Of course, he only enumerates the books of the
Jewish Canon. The closing words of the chapter are : " Re-
garding 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
*St. Epiphanius was born 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 read-
ing 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 bulwark
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 jurisdic-
tion of other bishops. He died on a return voyage by sea from Constanti-
nople 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 Anchor-
age, 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.
166 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
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 Pentateuch 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 authority to the
books that Jew and Christian had always considered divine.
Although Epiphanius speaks only of Wisdom and Ecclesias-
ticus, 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 recogni-
tion from Cyrill and Epiphanius, is most probably that they
are not so useful to impart dogmatic truths. Comely and
others think that Epiphanius, in giving in this place the re-
stricted Jewish Canon, tacitly infers the existence of an
enlarged Christian Canon. We fail to find this opinion credi-
ble. Everything seems to demonstrate 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 equal. Now, such official declaration being
wanting, it is not strange that these Fathers theoretically treat-
ing the question should not place these books in the Canon.
Neither is it strange that individuals should have doubted
concerning 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 Ecclesias-
ticus as divine Scripture, appears from the following passage
from Adversus 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-
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
167
seven books of the Old Testament, and are enumerated as
twenty-two; then the four Holy Gospels. .. .the Books of
Wisdom, that of Solomon, and of the Son of Sirach, and in fine
all the books of Scripture^ Hence, Epiphanius, as it were,
made two classes of the Old Testament Scriptures; 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 appear
from the following passages :
Adversus Haereses, Lib. I.
Eccli. VII. I. Haeres. XXIV. 6.
" Noli facere mala, et non te
apprehendent."
Sap. III. 14.
■' — et spado, qui non opera-
tus est per manus suas iniquita-
tem, etc."
Maccab. I. i.
Dan. XIII. 42.
" Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant — ."
Eccli. XIII. 20.
" Omnis care ad similem sibi
conjungetur, et omnis homo si-
mili sui sociabitur."
" — quemadmodum Scriptura
testatur : * Qui quaerunt mala,
mala eos apprehendant.' "
Ibid. Haeres. XXVI. 15.
"Ad haec alio in loco Spiritus
Sanctus . . . hoc rnodo vaticina-
tus est : * Beata sterilis incoin-
quinata, quae nescivit torum in
delicto, et spado, qui non opera-
tus est manibus suis iniquita-
tem.' "
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 ante-
quam fiant, ' ut est Scriptum.' "
Ibid. Haeres. XXXII. 8.
"Quoniam avis omnis secun-
dum genus suum congregatur, et
omnis homo simili sui sociabitur
* ait Scriptura.' "
168
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Eccli. XLIII. 26.
" Qui navigant mare, enarrent
pericula ejus; et audientes auri-
bus nostris admirabimur."
Eccli. XIV. 5.
" Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii
bonus erit?"
Sap. VII. 2.
" Decern mensium tempore co-
agulatus 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.
Post haec in terris visus est, et
cum hominibus conversatus est."
Baruch III. 36.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XX. 2.
" Concupiscentia spadonis de-
virginabit juvenculam — ."
Eccli. XXVII. 2.
" Sicut in medio compaginis
lapidum palus figitur sic et inter
medium venditionis et emptionis
angustiabitur peccatum."
Sap. I. 13.
" Quoniam Deus mortem non
fecit, nee laetatur in perditione
vivorum."
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 im-
pellit, impletque quod scriptum
est : ' Qui sibi nequam est, cui
bonus erit ?' "
Ibid. Lib. II. Haeres. II. 29.
" In quo ad Salomonis dictum
illud allusisse videntur : ' Decem
mensium spatio concretus in san-
guine."
Ibid. Haeres. LVII. 2.
" — ut Scriptura declarat :
' Hie est Deus tuus ; non reputa-
bitur alius ad ipsum. Invenit
omnem viam seientiae et dedit
illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel
dilecto suo. Post haec in terra
visus est, et eum hominibus con-
versatus est.' "
Ibid. 9.
'* Scriptum est, inquit : ' Iste
Deus est noster, et non aestima-
bitur alius.' "
Ibid. Haeres. LVIII. 4.
" — a Sapiente dicitur : ' Con-
cupiscentia spadonis devirginabit
juvenculam."
Ibid. Haeres. LIX. 7.
" Atque 'ut palus,' inquit,
'inter duos lapides eonteritur,
sic peccatum in medio ejus qui
emit et vendit.' "
Ibid. Haeres. LXIV. 19.
" Deus enim mortem non fecit,
nee deleetatur in perditione vi-
ventium. Invidia vero diaboli
mors introvit in mundum,' ut per
Salomonem Sapientia testaiur."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
169
Sap. I, 14.
" Creavit enim, ut essent om-
nia : et sanabiles fecit nationes
orbis terrarum : et non est in illis
medicamentum exterminii, nee
inferorum regnum in terra."
Sap. II. 23,
'* Quoniam Deus creavit ho-
minem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginera similitudinis suae fecit
ilium."
Sap. III. 1—4.
" Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis. Visi
sunt oculis insipientium mori: et
aestimata est afflictio exitus illo-
rum : et quod a nobis est iter,
exterminium : illi autem sunt in
pace. Et si coram hominibus
tormenta passi sunt, spes illorum
immortalitate plena est."
Sap. VII. 2.
" — decem mensium tempore
coagulatus sum in sanguine, ex
semine hominis, et delectamento
somni conveniente."
Eccli. X. 13.
** Cum enim morietur homo,
hereditabit serpentes, et bestias,
et vermes."
Sap. III. 4—6.
" Et si coram hominibus tor-
menta passi sunt, spes illorum
immortalitate plena est. In pau-
cis vexati, in multis bene dispo-
nentur : quoniam Deus tentavit
eos, et invenit illos dignos se.
Tamquam aurum in fornace pro-
Ibid. Haeres. LXIV. 31.
" — id quod Sapientia con-
firmat 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 aeternitatis suae fecit
ilium."
Ibid. 36.
" Idem vero per Salomonem
in eo libro qui Sapientia inscri-
bitur ostendit ubi : ' Justorum,'
inquit, ' animae in manu Dei
sunt, et non tanget illos tormen-
tum. Visi sunt oculis insipien-
tum mori, et aestimata est afflic-
tio exitus illorum, et quod a nobis
est iter, exterminium. Illi autem
sunt in pace, et spes illorum im-
mortalitate plena est.' "
Ibid. 39.
" — Christi corpus non ex vol-
untate viri, ac voluptate somnique
congressione in iniquitatibus esse
susceptum."
Ibid.
" Quam ob causam sapiens ille
Sirachitapronuntiat: * Cum enim
morietur homo, haereditabit ser-
pentes, 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-
nos se. Tamquam aurum in for-
170
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
bavit illosj et quasi holocaust!
hostiam accepit illos, et in tem-
pore erit respectus illorum."
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore subdito
peccatis."
Sap. IV. 12.
" Fascinatio enim nugacitatis
obscurat bona, et inconstantia
concupiscentiae transvertit sen-
sum sine raalitia."
Sap. IV. 8—12.
" Senectus enim venerabilis est
non diutuma etc."
Sap. IV. 13 — 14.
"Consummatus in brevi, ex-
plevit tempora multa, placita
enim erat Deo anima illius:
propter hoc properavit educere
ilium de medio iniquitatum ;
populi autem videntes, et non in-
telligentes, nee ponentes in prae-
cordiis talia — ."
Baruch III. 36.
" Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius ad versus eum."
Ibid. 37.
" Hie adinvenit omnem viam
disciplinae, et tradidit illam
Jacob puero suo, et Israel dilecto
suo."
nace probavit illos ; et sicut
holocaustum suavitatis accepit
illos ; et in tempore visitationis
illorum, etc' Cura antea dixis-
set : ' Et si coram hominibus
tormenta passi sunt, spes illo-
rum immortalitate plena est. In
paucis correpti magna beneficia
consequentur.' "
Ibid. 54.
" Praeterea Salomon : * In ma-
levolam,' inquit, * animam non
introibit sapientia, nee habitabit
in corpore obnoxio peccato.' "
Ibid. Haeres. LXV. i.
" Nam in illo Scripturae dictum
illud impletur : 'Fascinatio enim
nugacitatis obscurat bona, et in-
constantia concupiscentiae trans-
vertit mentem sine malitia."
Ibid. Haeres. LXVII. 4.
" Hie igitur : * Senectus,' in-
quit, ' venerabilis non longaeva,
etc.'"
Ibid.
"Ut autem de pueris loqui
ilium appareat statim adjicit :
* Consummatus in brevi, (quasi
dicat : mortuus juvenis) imple-
vit tempora multa. Placita enim
erat Domino anima illius : prop-
terea festinavit eum ed4icere de
medio malitiae."
Ibid. Haeres. LXIX. 31.
" Alter cum ipso minime com-
parabitur."
Ibid.
" Quid porro ? Ut de Filio ser-
monem esse cognoscas, deinceps
ista subjecit : * Invenit omnem
viam scientiae et dedit illam.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
171
Ibid. 38.
" Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Ibid. 37—38.
Ibid 38.
Esther XIII. 9.
" — et dixit: Domine, Do-
mine, rex omnipotens, in ditione
enim tua cuncta sunt posita, et
non est, qui possit tuae resistere
voluntati, si decreveris salvare
Israel."
Baruch III. 37 — 38.
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum : et hoc,
quod continet omnia, scientiam
habet vocis."
Eccli. XIV. 5.
" Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii
bonus erit ? et non jucundabitur
in bonis suis."
Sap. IX. 14.
" Cogitationes enim mortalium
timidae, et incertae providentiae
nostrae — ."
Baruch III. 38.
" Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Ibid.
" Tum postea ; ' In terra visus
est, et cum hominibus conversa-
tus est' "
Ibid. S3'
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 invenit omnem viam
scientiae. Exstitisse vero divina
Scriptura non dubitat. Nam
quae sequuntur ante ilium exsti-
tisse declarant. Velut quod om-
nem viam scientiae reperisse di-
catur, deinde in terris visus
esse."
Ibid. Haeres. LXXIV.
" Spiritus enim Domini reple-
vit orbem terrarum."
Ibid Haeres. LXXVI. Confut.
VIII.
" Ecquis igitur illius miserebi-
tur, qui sibi ipsi malus, nemini
alteri bonus est ? "
Ibid. LXXVI. Confut. XXXI.
" — siquidem divina majestas,
Patris inquam et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti, angelorum mentes omnes
longo intervallo superat, nedum
hominum quorum timidae cogita-
tiones."
St.Epiph.Expositio Fidei XVL
" — ac denique verus ut appa-
reret Filius, et illud Propheta va-
ticinium expleret : ' Et post haec
enim in terra visus est, et cum
hominibus conversatus est.' "
172
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
The frequency with which this passage is quoted by the
Fathers manifests that they considered it a classic text to prove
the Incarnation.
St, Epiph. Ancoratus II.
" ' Initium quippe f ornicationis
est exquisitio idolorum,' ut ait
Scriptura."
Ibid. XII.
" Etenim cum nos Scriptura
reprehendit his verbis : * Quae
praecepta 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 fornace) locuti
sunt : ' Benedicite omnia opera
Domini Domino.' "
He repeats this passage and other portions of the Benedic-
tus in the twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth Chapters.
Sap. X. 21. Ibid. XXXI.
" — quoniam sapientia aperuit " — quique balbutientium lin-
os mutorum, et linguas infantium guam disertam praestitit, etc."
fecit disertas."
Sap. XIV. 12.
" Initium enim fornicationis
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 curiosus."
Dan. Ill, 57,
" Benedicite omnia opera Do-
mini Domino — ."
Sap, VIII. 2,
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi eam assumere, et ama-
tor factus sum formae illius."
Baruch III. 38.
" Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Esther XIII. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. XLII.
"Ad haec Salomon aliam quam-
dam sapientiam appellat : 'Ama-
vi,' inquit, * pulchritudinem ejus
et eam mihi sponsam duxi.' "
Ibid. LXXVIII.
" Christus autem Deus e coelo,
verbum e Maria caro factum est
hominemque suscepit, et nobis-
cum, ut ait Scriptura, versatus
est."
Ibid. XCVI.
(Already quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 173
St. Epiph. Epist. ad Joan.
Sap. II. 23. Episcopum Hieros. Cap. VI.
" Quoniam Deus creavit ho- " Dicit enim (Salomon) in Sa-
minem inexterminabilem, et ad pientia quae titulo ejus inscribi-
imaginem similitudinis suae fecit tur : ' Creavit Deus incorruptum
ilium." hominem, et imaginem suae pro-
prietatis dedit ei.' "
Here, in the clearest terms, Epiphanius makes known that
his exclusion of a book from the list of those called canonical, was
not equivalent to denying it the authority of divine Scripture.
He certainly believed that he was quoting 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 adverting to the fact that they
were not in the Canon. He often specifies the book, and speaks
of the authors. We believe that had the other deuterocanon-
ical books been equally serviceable 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 deutero-
canonical 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.
Among the adversaries of the deuterocanonical books is
placed Gregory Nazianzenus.*
*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 ; according 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 Csesarea, Alexandria and Athens, and became proficient
in Greek oratory and poetry. He contracted in youth a friendship for St.
Basil, which lasted through life. The two sought together the solitude of
the desert, whence Gregory was afterwards summoned to assist his aged
father in the cares of the Episcopate. He was soon after 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 Ai-ius.
The perfidy and envy of his enemies induced him to resign again the See
174 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
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, numerum,
Sunt quidem historic! 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 babes ultimo loco.
Quinque versibus scripti sunt, 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,
Aggseus, 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 virginti libros
Hebraeorum elementorum numero respondentes."
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 Scripturis. "
In the celebrated Carmen ad Seleucum, a Canon occurs dif-
fering 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 "irreproachable pontiff,"
the " angel," and " hero of truth," The opinion rests princi-
pally on the authority of Combefis, the editor of Amphilochius'
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 leaned 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. 175
works, and in my judgment has little foundation. 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 considered divine.
Gregory concludes his canon in the Carmen ad Seleucum
with these words :
— "His certissimus
Canon tibi sit divinarum Scripturarum."
It would seem, at first sight, that these testimonies manifest
a certain opposition to the deuterocanonical books. How-
ever, in the Carmen ad Seleucum, 252 — 257, Gregory 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 Scripturse nomen praefert.
Sunt enim, sunt (ut nonnunquam fit) inscripti falsi nominis
Libri : nonnuUi quidem intermedii sunt ac mcini,
Ut ita dixerim, veritatis doctrinm ;
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 " FiHa vocis." This was an erroneous expla-
nation 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 writ-
ings, 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 were 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 factum inquit, ' et praesto fuerunt omnia
est quod ipse voluisti." quae cogitasti.' "
176
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
II. Maccab. VII. i.
" Contigit autem et septem
fratres una cum matre sua appre-
hensos compelli a rege edere
contra fas carnes porcinas, fla-
gris, et taureis cruciatos."
How deeply Gregory had
usuage of the Church can be
lated passages :
Dan. XIII. 5.
" Et constituti sunt de populo
duo senes judices in illo anno :
de quibus locutus est Dominus :
Quia egressa est iniquitas de
Babylone a senioribus judicibus,
qui videbantur regere populum."
Eccli. III. II.
" Benedictio patris firmat do-
mos filiorum — ."
Sap. V. 15.
" — quoniara spes impii tam-
quam lanugo est, quae a vento
tollitur, etc."
Sap. XVI. 13.
"Tu es enim, Domine, qui
vitae et mortis babes potestatem,
et deducis ad portas mortis, et
reducis — ."
Eccli. XXXVIII. 16.
Epist. VI. ad Nectarii uxo-
rem, i.
" Maccabaeorum mater septem
filiorum mortem conspexit, nee
ingemuit, nee ignobiles lacrymas
effudit, sed gratias agens Deo
quod videret eos igne et ferro et
acerbissimis verberibus e vinculis
carnis exsolvi, Deo quidem pro-
bata fuit, Celebris vero habita est
apud homines."
been influenced by the practical
learned from the following col-
St. Greg. Naz. Orat. II. 64.
" — nempe quod egressa est
iniquitas ex Babylone a seniori-
bus judicibus qui populum re-
gere videbantur."
Ibid. 96.
" Benedictio enim Patris firmat
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 altutn subvehit — .' "
Orat. VII. I.
"Fill, in mortuum produc lacry- "Super mortuum plora, et
mas, et quasi dira passus, incipe quasi dirapassus, incipeplorare."
plorare, etc."
Sap. III. 15.
" Bonorum enim laborum glo-
riosus est fructus, etc."
Ibid. 14.
" Bonorum enim laborum glo-
riosus est fructus."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
177
Sap, V. 10 — II.
" — et tamquam navis, quae
pertransit fluctuantem aquam :
cujus, cum praeterierit, non est
vestigium invenire, neque semi-
tam carinae illius in fluctibus :
aut tamquam avis, quae trans-
volat in aere, cujus nullum inve-
nitur argumentum itineris, etc."
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore subdito
peccatis."
Eccli. VI. 14—15.
" Amicus fidelis, protectio for-
tis : qui autem invenit ilium, in-
venit thesaurum. Amico fideli
nulla est comparatio, et non est
digna ponderatio auri et argenti
contra bonitatem fidei illius."
Eccli. I. 2.
Ibid. 19.
" Insomnium sumus, minime
consistens, spectrum quoddam,
quod teneri non potest, avis
praetereuntis volatus, navis in
mari vestigium non habens, pul-
vis, vapor, ros matutinus, flos
momento nascens et momento
marcescens."
Orat. IX. 2.
" In malignam enim animam
non ingressuram sapientiam recte
dictum est."
Oral. XI. I.
"Amico fideli nulla est com-
paratio ; nee ulla est digna pon-
deratio contra bonitatem illius.
Amicus fidelis, protectio fortis."
Orat. XIV. 30.
" Sed quis arenam maris et
pluviae guttas et abyssi profun-
ditatem metiri... queat ?"
"Arenam maris, et pluviae
guttas, et dies saeculi quis dinu-
meravit ? Altitudinem coeli, et
latitudinem terrae, et profundum
abyssi quis dimensus est ? "
The fifteenth oration of St. Gregory is in praise of the Mac-
cabees, whose feast the Church celebrated in his day. Fre-
quently 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 re-
cognized the books. Cornely's animadversion here that
Gregory has in mind only the fourth book, is erroneous. (Cor-
nely, Introduc. Gen. p. 98, note 18.) Gregory in the second
paragraph speaks of a book : qui rationem perturbationibus
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 collecting his argument.
Most of the data of the oration are taken from the first and
second Books of Maccabees.
L
178
THE CATJON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Eccli. XI. 30.
" Ante mortem ne laudes ho-
minem quemquam, quoniam in
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Baruch II. 12.
" — peccavimus, impie egi-
mus, inique gessimus, Domine
Deus noster, in omnibus justitiis
tuis."
Dan. XIV. 33.
" Dixitque angelus Domini ad
Habacuc : Fer prandium, quod
habes, in Babylonem Danieli, qui
est in lacu leonura."
Sap. XL 21.
"Sed et sine his uno spiritu
poterant occidi persecutionem
passi ab ipsis factis suis, et dis-
persi per spiritura virtutis tuae :
sed omnia in mensura, et numero
et pondere disposuisti."
Dan. XIII.
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum, et hoc,
quod continet omnia, scientiam
habet vocis."
Orat. XXIX. 17. He calls
tatis," evidently assuming the
Baruch III. 36, 38.
" Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus eum.
Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Orat. XVI. 3.
" Nam si, ut ego cum Salo-
mone sentio, hominem ante mor-
tem beatum praedicare non opor-
tet."
Ibid. 12.
" — adjungam : Peccavimus,
inique egimus, impietatem feci-
mus."
Orat. XVIII. 30.
" — aut per prophetam in sub-
lime raptum satians, ut Danie-
lem, antea cum fame in lacu pre-
meretur."
Orat. XXIV. i.
" — atque ut hinc initium du-
camus, quam commode, pulchris-
que Dei mensuris, qui omnia cum
pondere et mensura constituit ac
moderatur, etc."
Ibid. 10.
" (Deus) qui et Susannam mor-
tis periculo liberavit, et Theclam
servavit ; illam a saevis seniori-
bus, hanc a tyranno ipsius proco
et a matri adhuc crudeliori."
Orat. XXVIII. 8.
" — ait Scriptura ' Spiri-
tus Domini replevit orbem ter-
rarum.' "
the Son of God " Imago boni-
phrase from Wisdom VII. 26.
Orat. XXX. 13.
*' * Hie Deus tuus, et non aesti-
mabitur alius praeter eum.' Et
paucis interjectis : * Post haec in
terra visus est, et cum hominibus
conversatus est.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
179
Sap. VII. 22.
"Est enim in ilia spiritus in-
telligentiae, sanctus, unicus, mul-
tiplex, subtilis, disertus, mobi-
lis, etc."
Sap. I. 4.
** Quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia, nee
habitabit in corpore subdito pec-
catis."
Sap. III. II.
** Sapientiam enim, et discipli-
nam qui abjicit, infelix est : et
vacua est spes illorum, et labores
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 indisciplinato,
et confundaris."
Eccli. VII. 15.
" Noli verbosus esse in multi-
tudine presbyterorum."
Eccli. XI. 27.
" In die bonorura ne immemor
sis malorum, et in die malorum
ne immemor sis bonorum — ."
Dan. XIII. 5.
" Et constituti sunt de populo
duo senes judices in illo anno, de
quibus locutus est Dominus :
Quia egressa est iniquitas de
Babylone a senioribus judicibus,
qui videbantur regere populum."
Dan. XIII. 42.
" Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant."
Orat. XXXI. 29.
"Spiritus intelligens, multi-
plex, apertus, clarus, incontami-
natus, minimeque impeditus,
etc."
Orat. XXXII. 12.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapientia."
Ibid. 20.
" — ac Deus faxit ne quid un-
quam huic occupationi praever-
tendum ducam, ne alioqui ab ipsa
Sapientia miser appeller, ut sapi-
entiam et eruditionem spernens
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."
Orat. XXXVI. 3.
" — juxta Danielem egressa
est iniquitas a senioribus Baby-
lonicis, qui Israelem regere existi-
mabantur."
Ibid 7.
" — imo non videor, sed per-
spicuus atque manifestus sum ei
qui omnia priusquam oriantur
novit."
180
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Eccli. III. II.
"Benedictio patris firmat do-
mes filiorum : maledictio autem
matris eradicat fundamenta."
Eccli. III. 12.
" Ne glorieris in contumelia
patris, etc."
Eccli. I. 1 6.
" Initium sapientiae, timor Do-
mini, et cum fidelibus in vulva
concreatus est, cum electis femi-
nis graditur, et cum justis et
fidelibus agnoscitur."
Sap. III. 7.
" Fulgebunt justi, et tamquam
scintillae in arundineto discur-
rent."
Eccli. XXXII. 3.
" — ut laeteris propter illos, et
omamentum gratiae accipias co-
ronam, et dignationem conse-
quaris corrogationis."
Sap. IV. 8.
" Senectus enim venerabilis est
non diuturna, neque annorum
numero computata : cani autem
sunt sensus hominis."
II. Maccab. VII. i.
" Contigit autem et septem
fratres una cum matre sua appre-
hensos compelli a rege edere
contra fas carnes porcinas, fla-
gris, et taureis cruciatos."
Sap, II. 24.
" Invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit, etc."
Orat. XXXVII. 6.
" Item alio loco : ' Benedictio
patris firmat domos filiorum ;
maledictio autem matris eradicat
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 ornet, capitique tuo gratiarum
coronam nectat."
Orat. XLIII. 23.
" Quis prudentia perinde canus
erat, etiam ante canitiem ? Quan-
doquidem hac re senectutem
Salomon quoque definivit."
Ibid. 74.
" Mitto septem Maccabaeorum
dimicationem qui cum sacerdote
et matre in sanguine atque omnis
generis tormentis consummati
sunt."
Orat. XLIV. 4.
" Quoniam autem invidia dia-
boli 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.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
181
Eccli. III. n.
" Benedictio patris firmat do-
mes filiorum : maledictio autem
matris eradicat fundamenta."
Baruch III. 38.
" Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
St. Greg. Epist. LXI.
"Ita fiet ut ab ea non modo
pecunias habeatis, sed maternam
etiam benedictionem, filiorum
domos fulcientem, consequam-
ini."
Epist. CII.
" — atque ad haec verba con-
fugientes : ' Post haec in terra
visus est, et cum hominibus con-
versatus est.' "
Eccli. IV. 32.
" Noli resistere contra faciem
potentis, nee coneris contra ic-
tum fluvii."
Eccli. XXXI. 32.
** Aequa vita hominibus vinum
in sobrietate: si bibas illud mod-
erate, eris sobrius."
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."
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 60th 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 believed to have been celebrated
about the middle of the fourth century. Some have doubted
the genuinity of the 60th canon (Herbst, Vincenzi, Malou,
Danko), but as it is recognized by Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. p.
749 — 75 1> we shall not base our treatment of it upon its doubt-
ful character. Admitting 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 deuterocanon-
ical books were equal in the early ages of the Church. Their
182 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
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 con-
sidered by them as the inspired word of God.
The Council in Trullo, which the Greeks hold to be
oecumenical, received the Canons of the Council of Laodicea,
but, as they also received the Canons of the Council of Carthage,
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 85th canon of this collection is some-
times cited against us, as it does not contain any of the deu-
terocanonical books, save the books of Maccabees. This canon
can have no weight since it embraces three books of Macca-
bees, 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 objec-
tion 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 :
*St. Hilary was born in Poitiers in France in the opening years of the
fourth century. His parents were pagans of noble rank. They procured
for their son every educational advantage ; and the youth, applying himself
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 con-
secrated Bishop of Poitiers in 350, or 355 and became the staunch defender of
the Church against Arianism. The Arian Saturninus of Aries banished
Hilary to Phrygia. He was called from his exile to be present at the Council
THE CANON OF THE" IV. CENTURY. 183
" And this is the cause that the law of the Old Testament is
divided into 22 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, 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 Paralipomenon form the tenth ; the dis-
courses of the days of Ezra form the eleventh ; the book of
Psalms, the twelfth ; Solomon'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 number 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 24 books according to the Greek alpha-
bet, 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
patristric 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 current of
tradition is greater than any one man, and drew Hilary with it,
so that we find him ranking the deuterocanonical books on an
equal footing with the others, as the following quotations will
show :
Eccli. I. 33. St. Hilary Pral. in Ps, 20.
"Fili, concupiscens sapientiam, ** — secundum id quod dictum
conserva justitiam, et Deus prae- est : ' Desiderasti sapientiam ?
bebit illam tibi." Serva mandata et Dominus
praestabit tibi eandem,' "
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.
184
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Eccli. XI. 30.
"Ante mortem ne laudes ho-
minem quemquam, quoniam in
in filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei : Semen Cha-
naan, et non Juda, etc."
EccIl I. 16.
" Initium sapientiae, timor Do-
mini, etc,"
Baruch III. 38.
" Post haec in terns visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Sap. XVII. I.
" Magna sunt enim judiciatua,
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 : amicos
Dei et prophetas constituit."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum, etc."
II. Maccab. VI. 18 et seqq.
and VII. I et seqq.
Tract, in XIV. Ps. 14.
" Idcirco apud Salomonem
omnis laus in exitu canitur."
Tract, in LII, Ps, 19,
" Sed et Daniel presbyteros
condemnans ita dicit : ' Non se-
men Abraham sed semen Cha-
naan et non Juda.' "
Tract, in Ps, LXVI. 9,
" Et per Salomonen : ' Initium
sapientiae timor Domini est.' "
Tract, in Ps. LXVIII. 19.
" — postea in terris visus sit, et
inter homines conversatus sit."
Tract, in Ps. CXVIII. 8.
" — et TUTsum _prop/iefa : 'Mag-
na enim sunt judicia tua, et ine-
narrabilia,' "
Ibid, Littera V, 9.
" Si Apostoli docent, prior ille
docuit: 'Constituit enim Sapien-
tia amicos Dei et prophetas.' "
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 cantanles (Dan.
III. 24 et seqq.), testis Daniel in
fame leonum prophetae prandio
saturatus (Dan. XIV. 35); testis
Eleazar inter jura dominorum
patriis suis legibus liber ; testes
cum matre sua martyres septem,
Deo gratias inter nova mortis tor-
menta referentes."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
185
Judith XVI. 3.
" Dominus conterens bella,
Dominus nomen est illi."
Certainly Hilary denied not
honored by the august name of
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi earn assumere, et ama-
tor f actus sum formae illius."
Ibid. 3.
" Generositatem illius glorifi-
cat contubernium habens Dei :
sed et omnium Dominus dilexit
illam — ."
Ibid. 8.
'' Et si multitudinem scientiae
desiderat quis, scit praeterita. et
de futuris aestimat, etc."
Ibid. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Tob. XII. 12.
"Quando orabas cum lacry-
mis, et sepelieb'as mortuos, et
derelinquebas prandium tuum,
et mortuos abscondebas per diem
in domo tua, et nocte sepeliebas
cos, ego obtuli orationem tuam
Domino."
II. Maccab. VI. 21.
" Hi autem, qui astabant, ini-
qua miseratione commoti, prop-
ter antiquam viri amicitiam, tol-
lentes eum secreto, rogabant
afferri carnes, quibus vesci ei
licebat, ut simularetur mandu-
casse, sicut rex imperaverat de
sacrificii carnibus — ."
Tract, in Ps. CXXV. 6.
" — et cantantes ex Lege : * Do-
minus conterens bella, Dominus
nomen est illi.' "
inspiration to a book which he
the " Law."
Tract, in Ps. CX XVIII. 9.
"Salomon itaque ait : 'Quae-
sivi sapientiam sponsam adducere
mihi ipsi.' "
Ibid.
" — hujus sponsae suae opes
memorat dicens : ' Honestatem
glorificat convictum Dei habens,
et omnium Dominus dilexit
eam.' "
Ibid.
" — et si multam quis cogniti-
onem 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 amator
f actus sum pulchritudinis ejus.* "
Tract, in Ps. CXXIX. 7.
" Sunt, secundum Raphael ad
Tobiam loquentem, angeli assis-
tentes 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 coge-
retur, gloriam martyrii sub hac
eadem voce consummat, sciens,
etc."
186
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum, etc."
Eccli. XXVIII. 28—29.
" Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guam nequam noli audire, et ori
tuo facito ostia, et seras. Aurum
tuum et argentum tuum confla,
et verbis tuis facito stateram, et
frenos ori tuo rectos — ."
Sap. II. 12 — 13.
"Circumveniamus ergo justum,
quoniam inutilis est nobis, et
contrarius est operibus nostris,
, et filium Dei se nominat."
Sap. XIII 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter
poterit Creator horum videri — ."
Dan. XIII. 42.
" Exclamavit autem voce mag-
na Susanna, et dixit : Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante-
quam fiant — ."
II. Maccab. VII. 28.
" Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad coe-
lum et tcrram, et ad omnia quae
in eis sunt, et intelligas, quia ex
nihilo fecit ilia Deus, et hominum
genus — ."
II. Maccab. VII. 9.
" — et in ultimo spiritu consti-
tutus, sic ait : Tu quidem, sceles-
tissime, in praesenti vita nos per-
dis : sed Rex mundi defunctos
nos pro suis legibus in aeternae
vitae resurrectione suscitabit."
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 spi-
nis ; argentum et aurum tuum
constitue, et ori tuo fac ostium,
et seram, et verbis tuis jugum et
mensuram.' "
Tract, de Ps. XLI. 12.
" Vox cataractae fuit : ' Op-
primamus justum, quia inutilis est
nobis, et contrarius est operibus
nostris, et filium Dei se nomi-
nat.' "
De Trinitate Lib. I. 7.
" — hunc de Deo pulcherrimae
sententiae modum propheticis
vocibus apprehendit : ' De mag-
nitudine enim operum et pulchri-
tudine creaturarum consequenter
generationum Conditor conspici-
tur.'"
Ibid. Lib. IV. 8.
" — sicut beata Susanna dicit :
' Deus aeterne, absconditorum
cognitor, sciens omnia ante gene-
rationem eorum.' "
Ibid. 16.
"Omnia enim secundum Pro-
phetam facta ex nihilo sunt."
Lib. Contra Const. Imp. 6.
" — sciat a martyre esse dic-
tum regi Antiocho : ' Tu quidem,
iniquus, de presenti vita nos per-
dis, sed Rex mundi defunctos nos
pro suis legibus in aeternam vi-
tam in resurrectione suscitabit.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 187
Ex Operibus Historicis Frag.
Eccli. XXI. I. HI. 24.
'* Fill, peccasti ? non adjicias "Nee Dominum audiunt di-
iterum : sed etde pristinis depre- centem : * Peccasti ? quiesce.' "
care, ut tibi dimittentur."
Sap. II. 23. Epistola VIII.
" Quoniam Deus creavit homi- "Salomon clamat dicens : 'Deus
nem inexterminabilem, etc." condidit hominem ad immortali-
tatem.'"
Sap. VI. 8. Ibid. IX.
" Non enim subtrahet perso- " Clamat Propheta dicens : 'Et
nam cujusquam Deus, nee vere- pauperem et divitem ego feci, et
bitur magnitudinem cujusquam ; pro omnibus aequalis cura est
quoniam pusillum et magnum mihi.'"
ipse fecit, et aeqaliter cura est illi
de omnibus."
Hilary has here explicitly canonized every deuterocanonical
hook. He sought the mystic number 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 existed
down to the time of the Council of Trent.
The next objection which is urged against us is taken from
the fragmentary writings of Rufinus.* The objection is taken
from the Commentarius in Symbolum Apostolorum 36 — 38.
" And therefore it seems apposite to clearly enumerate, as we
have received from the testimonies of the Fathers, the books
of the Old and New Testaments, which, according to the
*Rufinus was born at Concordia, a small village of Italy, towards the
middle of the 4th 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 de-
sire for sanctity drew him into a monastery in this city, wherein St. Jerome first
met him. There was formed between Jerome and Rufinus the closest friend-
ship, so that when Jerome left Aquileja to journey through France and Ger-
many, Rufinus, unconsolable by the separation, went in search of him.
Rufinus visited Egypt, and there formed a lasting friendship with the
celebrated St. Melania. He suffered many persecutions from the Arians.
He was sent into exile, from which Melania ransomed him, and both retired
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
188 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
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. Continuing, he says :
"It is to be known, however, that there are other books which
have been called by the Fathers not canonical but ecclesiasti-
cal. Such are the Wisdom which is called of Salomon, 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 Ecclesias-
ticus, 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 Her-
mas, and the Two Ways or Choice of Peter. All these books,
they (the Fathers) wished to be read in the churches, but not
to be used for the confirmation 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 faithful drew their spirit-
ual 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 scientific distinction was purely a critical
judgment of the Fathers, and was not aimed at denying to
these books divine inspiration. 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 Scriptures, they hestitated to make them equal with the
books which the Church had received from the Synagogue.
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 Ruflnus. This division was a cause
of much scandal in the Church. That Ruflnus 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. Refinus 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 repudiate the man whom he had once called
friend.
The most important of Ruflnus' works are : De Benedictionibus Patri-
archarum, Commentarius in Symbolum Apostolorum, Historia Monachorum,
Historia Ecclesiastica, Apologia contra Hieronymum and an Apologia ad
Anastasium Papam. He died in Sicily in 410.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
180
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 :
Benedictio Gad 3.
Eccli. XXXIV. 9.
" Qui non est tentatus, quid
scit? Vir in multis expertus, co-
gitabit multa ; at qui multa didi-
cit, enarrabit intellectum,"
Eccli. XI. 30.
" Ante mortem ne laudes ho-
minem quemquam, quoniam in
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
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 sue, et Israel dilecto suo.
Post haec in terris visus est, et
cum hominibus conversatus est."
" — ita enim Scriptura dicit :
* Qui non est tentatus, non est
probabilis.* "
Benedictio Joseph 3.
" — sed et sanctae Scripturae
sententia est: ' Ne laudaveris
quemquam ante obitum.' "
Comment, in Symbolum Apost.
5-
" Quod et Propheta praedixe-
rat ubi ait : ' Hie Deus noster,
non reputabitur alter ad eum.
Invenit omnem viam disciplinae,
et dedit eam Jacob puero suo et
Israel dilecto suo : post haec in
terris visus est et inter homines
conversatus est.' "
Sap. III. 7-
" Fulgebunt justi, et tamquam
scintillae in arundineto discur-
rent."
Ibid. 46.
" — non erit difficile credere
etiam ilia quae Prophetae prae-
dlxerant : 'Quod justi scilicet
fulgebunt sicut sol, et sicut splen-
dor firmamenti in regno Dei."
Certainly the man who quoted these lines believed that he
was employing Holy Scripture.
In his Apologia Contra Hieronynum, Lib. II. from the 32d
to the 37th paragraph, Rufinus bitterly inveighs against St.
Jerome for having dared to cut ofif the deuterocanonical books.*
*An ut divinarum Scripturarum libros, quos ad plenissimum fldei Instni-
mentum Ecclesiis Christi Apostoli tradiderunt, nova nunc et a Judaeis mutata
interpretatione mutares ? Quis prsesumserit sacras Sancti Spiritus voces et
divina Volumina temerare ? Quis praeter te divino muneri et Apostolorum
haereditati manus intulerit.
Et quidem cum in gens copia fuisse ex initio in Ecclesiis Dei, et praecipue
Jerosolymis eorum, qui ex circumcisione crediderant, referatur, in quibus
utique linguae utriusque perfectam fuisse scientiam, et legis peritiam proba-
bilem, administrati pontiflcatus testatur offlcium. Quis ergo in ista eru-
190 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
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 Scriptures than any other of
the Fathers up to his day. He has in many places, in no
dubious terms, expressed his opposition to the deuterocanoni-
cal books. As Jerome is inseparably linked with the Latin
Vulgate, we deem it not amiss to insert here an abstract of his
life. He was born about the year 346 in Stridon, a small
village on the confines of Pannonia and Dalmatia.
His parents were property holders, and afforded Jerome a
liberal education. Though born of Catholic parents, he was
not baptized in his infancy. Infant baptism was not then the
custom. After finishing his juvenile studies at home, he was
sent to Rome, and studied rhetoric under Aelius Donatus.
Jerome's youth could not have been exempt from error, for he
confesses in his VH. Epistle: "Ye know the difficult way of
adolescence in which I also stumbled." And in his XLVHI.
Epistle, 20 : "I extol to the heavens, virginity, not that I pos-
sess it, but that I admire that which I do not possess." He was
accustomed, with other young men of like age and mind with
himself, to visit the Catacombs. Such mode of life manifested
a serious bent, and he was finally baptized in the Catholic faith,
when about twenty years of age. After completing his studies
in Rome, he travelled through Gaul, seeking knowledge from
ditorum virorum copia ausus est Instrumentum divinum, quod Apostoli
Ecclesiis tradidenint, 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 puerorum
hymnus, qui maxime diebus solemnibus in Ecclesia Dei canitur, ab isto e loco
suo penitus erasus est. Et quid per singula commemoro de his, quorum com-
prehendere numerum nequeo ? De quo ut omittam illud dicere, quod Sep-
tuaginta duorum virorum per cellulas interpretantium unam et consonam
vocem, dubitandum non est, Spiritus Sancti inspiratione prolatam, et ma j oris
id debere esse auctoritatis, quam id quod ab uno homine, sibi Barraba aspir-
ante, translatum est. Ut ergo hoc omittam, vide quid dicimus, verbi caussa.
Petrus Romanae Ecclesiae per viginti et quatuor annos praefuit : dubitandum
non est, quin sicut caetera, quae ad instructionem pertinent, etiam librorum
Instrumenta Ecclesiae ipse tradiderit, quae utique jam tunc, ipso sedente et
docente, recitabantur ? Quid ergo ? Decepit Petrus Apostolus Christi
Ecclesiam, etlibros ei falsos et nihil veritatis continentes tradidit, et cum
sciret, quod verum 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
Ecclesia : sed interpretari non poterat propter sermonis imperitiam ? Et
quid ? Nihil in isto agebat ignea lingua per Spiritum Sanctum caelitusdata?
Non ergo omnibus Unguis loquebantur Apostoli ?
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 191
learned men and from the libraries. He settled some time at
Treves, where the first promptings to the higher life were recog-
nized by him. Having determined to leave the world, and
consecrate himself to God, he returned to his home and ad-
justed his patrimony. Thence he travelled through Greece,
Thrace, Asia Minor, into Syria, and coming to Antioch, re-
sided there for some time, where he heard ApoUinaris explain
the Scriptures, but favored not his heretical dogma. Jerome
now determined to seek solitude, and there devote his life to
Scriptural studies. For this reason, he sought the desert of
Chalcis, which was on the confines of Syria, bordering on the
land of the Saracens. He was now about 28 years old. The
desert of Chalcis was peopled by a sort of community of hermits,
who lived under the guidance of Marcus the presbyter.
Jerome speaks pathetically of his struggles to overcome his
passions while in this solitude. In his letter to Eustochium,
Ep. XXn. 7: " O, in my solitude and in that vast desert, which,
burnt by the sun's heat, afforded a wild habitation to the monks,
how oft I imagined myself in the midst of the luxuries of Rome !
I sat alone, because I was filled with bitterness. My uncomely
limbs were rough with sackcloth, and my squalid skin became
as black as an Ethiopian's. Tears every day, groans every day-
and if ever the sleep which hung on my eye-lids overcame my
resistance, I knocked against the ground my bare bones, which
scarce hung together. I say nought of food and drink, since
— quomodo non pervidebant per spiritum, quod futurum esset tempus
post quadringentos fere annos, quando Ecclesia, cognito eo quod ab Apostolis
non sibi esset tradita Veritas veteris Instrument!, legatos mitteret ad istos,
quos illi tunc Circumcisionem vocabant, obsecrans et exorans, ut sibi de veri-
tate, quae apud ipsos est, aliquid largirentur ? Per totos istos quadringentos
annos errasse se, et ignorasse quod verum est, fateretur ? Adscitam se
quidem esse ex Gentibus sponsam Christo per Apostolos : sed non ab eis veris
monilibus exornatam : putasse se lapides esse pretiosos, nunc autem depre-
hendisse, quod non sunt verae istae gemmae, quas sibi Apostoli Christi im-
posuerant : erubescere se ad publicum procedere, falsis et non veris lapidi-
bus adornatam, et ideo rogare se, ut vel Barrabam ilium quem aliquando, ut
Christo nuberet, spreverat, mittant ad se qui possit cum uno electo ex suis
viro ornamenta sibi vera, quae Apostoli non praestiterant, reparare ?. . . .
Tua verba sunt, post quadringentos annos non debere simplices Latin-
orum aures novae doctrinae voce pulsari. Modo tu dicis : Omnis qui puta-
bat Susannam nuptis et innuptis exemplum pudicitiae praestitisse, erravit.
Non est verum. Et omnis qui putabat, quod puer Daniel Spiritu Sancto
fuerit repletus, et arguerit adulteros senes, erravit : non erat verum. Et
omnis Ecclesia per orbem terrarum, sive eorum qui in corpore sunt, sive
eorum qui ad Dominum perrexerunt, sive illi sancti Confessores fuerunt, seu
etiam sancti Martyres, quicumque Hymnum trium puerorum in Ecclesia Do-
mini cecinerunt, omnes erraverunt, et falsa cecinerunt. Modo ergo nobis post
quadringentos annos Legis Veritas empta pretio de Synagoga procedit
192 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
the monks, even when ill, use only cold water, and it is thought
a sin of luxury to take anything cooked. And I, who through
fear of hell had condemned myself to such a prison, and be-
came the companion of scorpions and wild beasts, oft seemed
to be in the dances of maidens. My face was pale from fast-
ings, but my mind was tempestuous with lustful desires ; in
my cold body, the sole incentive of lust heated the man, dead
before his death, within his own yet living flesh .... I remem-
ber in my wailings to have often passed the day as well as the
night, and not to have ceased from beating my breast till, the
Lord intervening, peace came. I feared my cell as though it
were conscious of my thoughts. Angry and unmerciful towards
myself, I wandered alone through the deserts. If ever I saw
the hollow of a valley, or the rough peak of a mountain, or an
abrupt rock, there was the place of my prayer, there the prison
of my miserable flesh, and, the Lord is my witness, after many
tears, after much fixing of my eyes in heaven, sometimes I
seemed to be among the cohorts of angels, and happy and re-
joicing, I sang: ' We shall run after thee to the odour of thy
ointments.'"
To divert his mind from lustful thoughts, he took up the
study of Hebrew, as he tells us in his letter to Rusticus, Epist.
125, 12: " When I was young, and the solitude of the desert en-
compassed me, I could not endure the incentives of vice and the
ardor of my nature, which, although I had broken by frequent
fastings, my mind surged with (lustful) thoughts. To overcome
this, I gave myself into the tutelage of a certain one of the
Hebrews who had believed, in order that, after the rhetorical
niceties of Quintillian, the rivers of Cicero, the gravity of
Fronto, and soft grace of Pliny, I might learn a (mere) alpha-
bet, and, ponder on harsh and grating words. What labor I
endured, what difficulty I underwent, how oft I despaired,
how oft I ceased, and, through the desire of knowledge, again
began ; my conscience bears witness ; and not only the con-
science of me who suffered , but also of those who lived with
me. And I thank God that, from this bitter seed of my
studies, I now gather sweet fruits."
The sweet fruits were the deeper insight into God's prepara-
tory dispensation in the Old Law, which only those who
know the Hebrew tongue can attain. Some have thought
that Jerome learned Greek also in this hermitage, but it
seems more probable that he acquired that tongue in the
curriculum of his studies at Rome. He could not have
listened to the lectures of ApoUinaris at Antioch, unless
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 193
he knew Greek, his language. Jerome's impulsive char-
acter made him many enemies. A dissension arose about
the succession to the See of Antioch, Jerome was drawn
into it, and his relations became so strained with the monks,
that in the spring of 379 he left his solitude, and returned to
Antioch. While in the solitude, he had a vision in which he
seemed to stand before the throne of God, and be condemned
that he was not a Christian but a Ciceronian. This event tem-
pered his love for the profane classics, and inclined him ever
more to the Scriptures.
The party of the orthodox but unwise Paulinus had
triumphed at Antioch, and, as Jerome had favored his
cause, he found welcome in that city. He was by the said
Paulinus ordained priest. In 380 he went to Constantinople
and studied Scripture under Gregory Nazianzen. In 382
Jerome, Paulinus of Antioch, and St. Epiphanius were sum-
moned to Rome by Pope Damasus to take part in the Roman
Synod held in that year. After the close of the Synod, Jerome
remained at Rome in the capacity of oriental secretary to
Damasus. At this time he undertook, at the command of
Damasus, a revision of the Psalter, which continued in use in
the Church down to the times of Pius V. He next extended
his labors to revising the New Testament, which he " restored
according to the original Greek." Jerome's relations with
Damasus were very close. Most of Jerome's Scriptural work
at this time was done at Damasus request. The vehemence
and intolerance of Jerome's nature, can be gleaned from the
following passage, Epist. XXXIII. 4. It was written concern-
ing 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 know-
ledge, 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 judgments
are not uniform and consistent, and this is to be taken into
account when adducing him as an authority.
Jerome had made enemies among the clergy of Rome.
Rome was in a state of moral and political decline, and
Jerome longed for the quiet of the desert.
*Jerome was accustomed to call the clergy of Rome the Senate of Pharisees.
M
194 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Paulinus and Jerome were the guests at Rome of the
noble and wealthy lady Paula, the heiress of the Aemil-
ian race. She had three daughters, Blesilla who died in a
youthful widowhood, Eustochium, who took the virgin's vow,
and Paulina who married Pammachius, the friend of Jerome.
With these and certain other noble ladies, Jerome formed a sort
of circle. They withdrew from the corrupt social and political
life, and devoted their time to meditation, works of charity,
and the study of the Scriptures, which Jerome expounded.
When Damasus died, Jerome found that it would be uncon-
genial to live in Rome. Siricius, the successor of Damasus
had no sympathy with him, and the clergy were almost all
opposed to him. In 384 he set out from Rome and journeyed
through Cyprus into Syria, and remained some time at
Antioch. Thence he journeyed in company with Paula and
Eustochium down through Palestine, visiting the places made
memorable by the life of Our Lord.
In Praef. 2 ad Paralip. he describes the finis of this
journey : " As those who have seen Athens better under-
stand 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
Judea 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. Coming to Caesarea, 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 Alexandria, I heard Didymus, and, for many things, am
thankful to him."
From Alexandria Jerome went to Bethlehem, where
he spent his remaining years in an ascetical life. A mon-
astery was built of which Jerome was head, and a convent,
over which Paula presided. Both the patrimony of Paula
and Jerome were expended in this work. Jerome lived in a
cell close to the monastery, and it is in this period of his life
that his greatest works were executed. He exercised a general
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 195
supervision over the monks and was sought by learned men
from all parts of the world. 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 trans-
lated the book of Tobias in a single night, and even, when ill,
he dictated 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 precep-
tor. 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 proto-
canonical 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 translated the deuterocanonical books of Tobias and
Judith from Chaldean exemplars. This translation of Jerome
forms our Vulgate, concerning which we shall speak later.
His translation of the Psalter from the Hebrew was not re-
ceived into the Vulgate ; its place was occupied by the Psalter
which he revised from the Hexaplar text of Origen at Caesarea.
Jerome died at Bethlehem, according to the Chronicle of Pros-
per, 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. Jerome is
rightly considered as one of the greatest of the Fathers. His
character was not without defects. He was scornful and
resentful in controversy, and somewhat sensitive as to the
estimation in which he was held by his contemporaries. But
he was without avarice, great of heart, diligent in work and
nobly tenacious of the main objects to which he devoted his life.
He was a man of iron will, when he saw principle and duty
before him, a strong man, whom no motives could divert
from what he deemed just and right. The saddest event of
his whole life was his violent quarrel with Rufinus, whom he
vituperated even after his death. Rufinus died in Sicily in
410, and Jerome thus speaks of his death in the opening
196 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
chapter of his Commentary on Ezechiel: ''The scorpion Hes
underground between Enceladus and Porphyrion, and the
hydra of many heads has at last ceased to hiss against me."
" Tantaene animis coelestibus irae ? "
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 enumeration
of the protocanonical books, he continues : " Whatever is out-
side of these is to be placed among the Apocrypha. Therefore
the Wisdom which is commonly ascribed to Solomon, and the
book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobias, and Pastor are
not in the Canon. The first Book of Maccabees I found in
Hebrew, the second is originally Greek, as appears from the
diction."
Again in the Preface to Ezra : " What is not received
by them, (the Hebrews) and what is not of the twenty-four
Ancients (the protocanonical books) is to be 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 Ecclesiasticus, 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 edification of the people, not for the confir-
mation of Ecclesiastical 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 intermingled 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
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 197
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 XIV. 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 Scrip-
ture 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
no place with the Hebrews, and that they needed not to
respond to Porphyrins 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 Jere-
miah, " setting at naught the rage of his caluminators." We
have no wish to minimize Jerome's opposition to the deutero-
canonical books. At times it was pronounced and violent.
But he could, at most, only be termed a violent doubter. He
never was calm and constant in his rejection of those books.
The fact that, in such strange opposition, 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 trans-
lated Tobias from the Chaldaic at the instance of Chromatins
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 Christian,
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 en-
tertain his views on the deuterocanonical works. He fluctu-
198
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
ated between his reverence for the Christian tradition, and his
respect for the synagogue till his death, and contradicted him-
self many times in his views on the books in question.
Dan. XIII. 6i.
" Et consurrexerunt adversus
duos presbyteros (convicerat
enim eos Daniel ex ore suo fal-
sum dixisse testimonium) fece-
runtque, eis sicut male egerant
adversus proximum."
Dan. XIV. 35.
" Et apprehendit eum Angelus
Domini in vertice ejus, et porta-
vit eum capillo capitis sui, posu-
itque eum in Babylon e supra
lacum in impetu spiritus sui."
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."
Sap. VI. 7.
" Exiguo enim conceditur mi-
sericordia ; potentes autem po-
tenter tormenta patientur."
Dan. XIII. 51.
" Et dixit ad eos Daniel: Se-
parate illos ab invicem procul, et
dijudicabo eos."
Judith XIII. 10.
" — et percussit bis in cervi-
cem ejus, et abscidit caput ejus,
et abstulit conopeum ejus a co-
lumnis, et evolvit corpus ejus
truncum."
Esther XIV. 11.
" Ne tradas, Domines, ceptrum
tuum his, qui non sunt, etc,"
St. Jerome, Epist. I. 9,
** Nunc Susanna nobilis fide
omnium subeat mentibus, quae
iniquo damnata judicio, Spiritu
Sancto puerum replente, salvata
est. Ecce non dispar in utraque
misericordia Domini. Ilia libe-
rata per judicem, ne iret ad
gladium; haec a judice damnata,
absoluta per gladium est."
Epist. III. I.
"O si nunc mihi Dominus Jesus
Christus .... Habacuc ad Dani-
elem translationem concederet !"
Epist. XIV. 6.
" Os autem quod mentitur oc-
cidit animam."
Ibid. 9.
" Potentes potenter tormenta
patientur."
Ibid.
"Presbyteros puer Daniel ju-
dical."
Epist. XXII. 21.
" Tunc Holofernis caput Ju-
dith continens amputavit."
Epist. XLVIII. 14.
" Ne tradas, inquit Esther,
hereditatem his qui non sunt,
idolis scilicet et daemonibus."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
199
Sap. II. 23.
" Quoniam Deus creavit ho-
minem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fecit
ilium."
Judith VIII. 6, et XIII. 9, 10.
Eccli. XXV. 12.
" Beatus, qui invenit amicum
verum, et qui enarrat justitiam
auri audienti."
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 recipere)
viduam confectam jejuniis et
habitu lugubri sordidatam, quae
non lugebat mortuum virum sed
squalore corporis, Sponsi quaere-
bat adventum. Video armatam
gladio manum cruentam dex-
teram. Recognosco caput Holo-
phernis de mediis hostibus re-
portatum.' "
Epist. LVII. 1.
" Legerat enim (Paulus) illud
Jesu : * Beatus qui in aures loqui-
tur audientis.' "
Certainly Jerome does not wish to say that Paul committed
to memory apocryphal Scripture.
Eccli. III. 33. Epist. LXVI. 5.
" Ignem ardentem extinguit " — sciens scriptum : * Sicut
aqua, et eleemosyna resistit pec- aqua extinguit ignem ; ita elee-
mosyna, peccatum."
catis — ."
Eccli. IV. 25.
" Est enim confusio adducens
peccatum, et est confusio addu-
cens gloriam et gratiam."
Eccli. XI. 27.
" In die bonorum ne immemor
sis malorum : et in die malorum
ne immemor sis bonorum — ."
Sap. IV. II.
" — raptus est ne malitia mu-
taret intellectum ejus, aut ne
fictio deciperet animam illius."
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."
Epist. LXXIX. 2.
" Raptus est ne malitia muta-
ret mentem ejus, quia placita
erat Deo anima illius."
200
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. IV. 8.
" Senectus enim venerabilis est
non diuturna, neque annorum
numero computata : cani autem
sunt sensus hominis."
Sap. I. 7.
" Quoniam spiritus Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum, etc."
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi earn assumere, et ama-
tor f actus sum formae illius."
Ibid. 6.
" Cani enim hominis sunt sa-
pientia ejus."
Epist. XCVIII. 13.
" Et alibi legimus : * Spiritus
Domini replevit orbem terra-
rum.' Quod nunquam Scriptura
memoraret nisi irrationabilia
quaeque et inanima illius nomine
complerentur."
Ibid. 19.
" — et in illius perseverantes
amore cantabimus : ' Amator fui
pulchritudinis ejus.'"
A testimony that can be joined with those of Jerome is
that of Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, which was translated
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.
Could the universal Church
martyrs ?
Sap. IX. 15.
" — corpus enim, quod cor-
rumpitur, aggravat animam, et
terrena inhabitatio deprimit sen-
sum multa cogitantem."
Eccli. XXII. 6.
" Musica in luctu importuna
narratio."
"Quid memorem insignes Mac-
cabaeorum victorias ? qui, ne
illicitis carnibus vescerentur, et
communes tangerent cibos, cor-
pora obtulere cruciatibus: totius-
que orbis in ecclesiis Christi laud-
ibus praedicantur, fortiores poe-
nis, ardentiores quibus combure-
bantur ignibus."
give such honor to apocryphal
Epist. CVIII. 22.
"Si non erit sublata diversi-
tate sexus eadem corpora non
resurgent: 'Aggravat enim ter-
rena inhabitatio sensum multa
cogitantem.' "
Epist. CXVIII. I.
''^ Divina Scriptura loquitur:
' Musica in luctu, intempestiva
narratio. '"
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
201
If words can express thoughts, the man who penned these
lines believed that he was quoting the inspired word of God.
Eccli. XXVII. 28. Epist. CXXV. 19.
" Qui in altum mittit lapidem, " Et alibi : * Qui mittit in al-
super caput ejus cadet ; et plaga turn lapidem, recidet in caput
dolosa dolosi dividet vulnera." ejus.' "
Esther XIV. 16.
"Tu scis necessitatem meam,
quod abominer signum superbiae
et gloriae meae, quod est super
caput meum in diebus ostenta-
tionis meae, et detester illud
quasi pannum menstruatae, etc."
Eccli. IV. 28.
" — nee retineas verbum in
tempore salutis."
Eccli. XXVIII. 28.
" Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guam nequam noli audire, et ori
tuo facito ostia et seras."
Eccli. XXVIII. 29—30.
" Aurum tuum et argentum
tuura confla, et verbis tuis facito
stateram, et frenos ori tuo rec-
tos : et attende, ne forte labaris
in lingua — ."
Eccli. III. 20.
" Quanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo in-
venies gratiam — ."
Eccli. X, lo.
" Quoniam a Deo profecta est
sapientia, etc."
Epist. CXXX. 4.
" Oderat ornatum suum et cum
Esther loquebatur ad Dominum :
* Tu nosti quod oderim insigne
capitis mei, et tantae ducam im-
munditiae velut pannum men-
struatae.' "
Epist. CXLVIII. 2.
" — illud mecum Scripturae
reputans : ' Tempus tacendi, et
tempus loquendi.' Et iterum :
' Ne retineas verbum in tempore
salutis.' "
Ibid. 16.
" Noli," inquit Scriptura, 'con-
sentaneus esse, etc' Et alibi :
* Sepi aures tuas spinis, et noli
audire linguam nequam.' "
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 omni-
bus, et coram Deo invenies gra-
tiam.' "
St, Jerome, Interpretatio Lib.
Didymi, 10,
"Dominus,' inquit, 'dabit
sapientiam, et a facie ejus sapien-
tia et intellectus procedit.' "
202
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. VI. 26.
" Multitude autem sapientium
sanitas est orbis terrarum ; et
rex sapiens stabilimentum populi
est."
Tob. IV. 16.
" Quod ab alio oderis fieri tibi,
etc."
Sap. XI. 27.
"Parcis autem omnibus, quo-
niam tua sunt, Domine, qui amas
animas."
Dan. XIII. Passim.
Sap. VI. 7.
" Exiguo enim conceditur mi-
sericordia ; potentes autem po-
tenter tormenta patientur."
Sap. I. 4—5.
" Quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia, nee
habitabit in corpore subdito pec-
catis. Spiritus enim sanctus dis-
ciplinae effugiet fictum, et auferet
se a cogitationibus, quae sunt
sine intellectu, et corripietur a
superveniente iniquitate."
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."
Ibid. 21.
"Multitudo quippe sapientium,
salus mundi."
Ibid. 39.
" Quod tibi non vis fieri, etc."
Ibid. 46.
" — juxta illud quod alibi scri-
bitur : * Parces autem omnibus,
Domine amator animarum, quia
tuae sunt, neque enim odies quos
fecisti.' "
Adversus Jovinian, 25.
"Erat igitur Daniel adhuc
puer, et notus populo vel propter
interpretationem somniorum re-
gis vel propter Susannae libera-
tionem et occisionem presby-
terorum."
Adversus Jov. Lib. II. 25.
" — quanto majoris criminis,
tanto majoris et poenae. ' Poten-
tes enim potenter tormenta pa-
tientur.'"
Apologia Adversus Rufinum
17.
" Loquitur et Sapientia quam
sub nomine Salomonis legimus :
* In malevolam animam nunquam
intrabit sapientia, nee habitabit
in corpore subdito peccatis. Spi-
ritus enim Sanctus eruditionis
fugiet dolum et recedet a cogita-
tionibus stultis.' "
Adversus Rufinum Lib. III. 26.
** Os quod mentitur occidit an-
imam."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
203
Eccli. III. 22.
"Altiora te ne quaesieris, et
fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris,
etc."
II. Maccab. V. Passim.
Tob. XII. 7.
" Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est, etc."
Eccli. I. S3'
"Fili, concupiscens sapientiam,
conserva justitiam, et Deus prae-
bebit 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.
Adversus Pelagianos Lib. 1. 33.
" Respondet stultae interroga-
tioni tuae liber Sapientiae: 'Alti-
ora te ne quaesieris, et fortiora
te ne scrutatus fueris.' "
Adversus Pelagianos Lib. II.
30.
" Antiochus Epiphanius rex
crudelissimus subvertit altare,
ipsamque justitiam fecit concul-
cari, quia concessum erat a Do-
mino, causasque reddit propter
peccata plurima."
Comment, in Eccles. Cap.VIII.
"Et hoc est quod in libro
Tobiae scribitur : ' Mysterium
regis abscondere bonum est.' "
Ibid. Cap. IX.
** Dato nobis itaque praecepto
quod dicit : ' Desiderasti sapien-
tiam, serva mandata, et Dominus
ministrabit tibi eam.' "
Ibid. Cap. X.
** Siquidem et alibi ipse Salo-
mon ait : * Qui statuit laqueam,
capietur in illo.' "
Comment, in Isaiam, Cap. I.
Vers. 24.
" — de quibus scriptum est :
' potentes potenter tormenta pa-
tientur.' " (Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. IL Cap. III. Vers. i.
" — cogitastis consilium pessi-
mum dicentes : * Alligemus jus-
tum, quia inutilis est nobis.' "
Ibid. Vers. 2.
" Et inveteratos dierum malo-
rum duos presbyteros juxta
Theodotionem in Danielis prin-
cipio legimus."
204
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. IV. 8.
" Senectus enim venerabilis est
non diuturna, neque annorum
numero computata : cani autem
sunt sensus hominis,"
Ibid.
" — de qua scriptum est :
' Canities hominum, prudentia
est.'"
Ibid. Vers. 3.
*' Unde et illud in nostris libris
legimus : ' Amici tibi sint pluri-
mi, consiliarius autem unus de
mille.' "
Eccli. VII. 6.
*' Noli quaerere fieri judex,
nisi valeas virtute irrumpere ini-
quitates, etc."
Eccli. XI. 30.
" Ante mortem ne laudes ho-
minem quemquam, quoniam in
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Ecccli. XIII. I.
" Qui tetigerit picem, inquina-
bitur 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.)
Ibid. Vers. 7.
" — aliudque mandatum : * Ne
quaeras judex fieri: ne forte non
possis auferre iniquitates.' "
Ibid. Vers. 12.
" — nee praevenit sententiam
judicis sui, dicente Scriptura sanc-
ta : * Ne beatum dicas quemquam
hominem ante mortem.' "
Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. VI. Vers. 5.
"Ex quo ostenditur noxium
esse vivere cum peccatoribus :
' Qui enim tangit picem, inquin-
abitur ab ea.' "
Ibid. Lib. V. Cap. XIV. Vers. 2.
" Potest et in Assueri tempori-
busintelligi,quando, occisoHolo-
pherne, hostilis ab Israel est
caesus exercitus."
Ibid. Lib. VII. Cap. XXIIL
Vers. 12.
" Unde et ad senem adulterum
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 tri-
buet tibi eam.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
205
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
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 sceles-
tius. 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 fructum
in respectione animarum sancta-
rum : et spado, qui non operatus
est per manus suas iniquitatem,
nee cogitavit adversus Deum
nequissima : dabitur enim illi
fidei donum electum, et sors in
templo Dei acceptissima."
Sap. I. I.
" Diligite justitiam, qui judi-
catis terram. Sentite de Domino
in bonitate, etc."
Eccli. XXV. 12.
" — beatus, qui invenit ami-
cum verum, et qui enarrat justi-
tiam auri audienti — ."
Sap. I. 4.
" Quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia, nee
habitabit in corpore subdito pee-
eatis."
Ibid. Lib. IX. Cap. XVIII.
Vers. 23 et seqq.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. XXIX. Vers. 15, 16.
" — cum scriptum sit de Dei
Sapientia : ' Si enim quis perfec-
tus fuerit in 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 in-
scribitur : ' Beata sterilis imma-
culata, quae non cognovit stra-
tum in delicto ; habebit fructum
in visitatione animarum. Et
eunuchus qui non est operatus
manu iniquitatem, neque cogita-
vit contra Dominum mala. Dabi-
tur enim fidei ejus electa gratia
et pars in templo Domini delec-
tabilis."*
Ibid. Cap. LVI. Vers. 10—12.
" — et audiamus Scripturam
monentem : ' Sapite de Domino
in bonitate.' "
Ibid. Lib. XVI. Praef.
" Ac ne a profanis tantum su-
mere videor exemplum, nimirum
hoc illud est quod aliis verbis
Propheta demonstrat : 'Beatus
qui in aures loquitur audien-
tium."
Ibid. Vers. 15.
" Et quomodo in perversam
animam non ingreditur sapientia,
neque habitabit in corpore sub-
dito peecatis.' "
206
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. I. 5.
" Spiritus enim Sanctus discip-
linae effugiet fictum, et auferet se
a cogitationibus, etc."
Eccli. XVI. 18.
" Ecce coelum, et coeli coelo-
rum, abyssus, et universa terra,
quae in eis sunt, in conspectu
illius commovebuntur."
Esther XIV. 16.
*' Tu scis necessitatem meam,
quod abominer signum superbiae
et gloriae meae, quod est super
caput meum in diebus ostenta-
tionis meae, et detester illud
quasi pannum menstruatae, et
non portem in diebus silentii
mei — .
Esther XIV. 11.
" Ne tradas, Domine, sceptrum
tuum his, qui non sunt, etc."
Eccli. XI. 27, 29.
" In die bonorum ne immemor
sis malorum, et in die malorum
ne immemor sis bonorum. Ma-
litia horae oblivionem facit luxu-
riae magnae, et in fine hominis
denudatio operum illius."
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
Ibid. Lib. XVII. Cap. LXIII.
Vers. 10.
" De quo et in Sapientia reperi-
mus quae nomine Salomonis scri-
bitur ; * Sanctus enim Spiritus
disciplinae fugiet dolum, et rece-
det a cogitationibus 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
suum quod erat regiae potestatis
insigne comparat quod nequa-
quam voluntate sed necessitate
portabat : * Tu scis necessitatem
meam : quoniam detestor signum
superbiae meae, quod est super
caput meum in diebus ostensio-
nis 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 scriptum
est : * In die bona, oblivio malo-
rum, et alibi : Afflictio horae ob-
livionem facit deliciarum.' "
Ibid. Vers. 20.
(Oft quoted.)
Comment, in Jerem. Lib. III.
Cap. XII. Vers. 13.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
207
Sap. I. 4.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXII. II.
** Modicum plora supra mor-
tuum, quoniam requievit."
Ibid. Lib. IV. Cap. XVIII.
Vers. 18.
" — dicente Scriptura : * In
perversam animam non intrabit
Sapientia.' "
Ibid. Cap. XXI. Vers. 14.
" — juxta illud quod scriptum
est : Mors viro requies cui clau-
sit Deus viam suam.
The same quotation appears in the XXVIII. Chapter, fifth
and following verses.
Ibid. Lib. V. Cap. XXIX.
Vers. I et seqq.
" Et in alio loco (scribit Salo-
mon): * Hanc exquisivi sponsam
accipere mihi, et amator factus
sum decoris ejus.' "
Ibid. Cap. XXIX. Vers. 21 et
seqq.
" — quorum uni loquitur Dan-
iel: * Inveterate dierum malorum.
Et alteri: Semen Chanaan et non
Juda, species decepit te, et con-
cupiscentia subvertit cor tuum.
Sic faciebatis filiabus Israel et
illae metuentes loquebantur vo-
biscum, sed non filia Juda sus-
tinuit iniquitatem vestram.* "
Comment, in Ezechiel, Praef.
" — nee 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
revelari Susannam ut nudati cor-
poris decore fruerentur."
Ibid. Lib. IV. Cap. XVI. Vers.
3-
" Mirabilis Daniel qui ad pres-
byterum delinquentem, et adul-
Sap. VIIL 2.
Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a ju-
ventute mea, et quaesivi sponsam
mihi eam assumere, et amator
factus sum formae illius."
Dan. XIIL 56, 57.
" Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei : Semen Cha-
naan et non Juda, species decepit
te, et concupiscentia subvertit
cor tuum : sic faciebatis filiabus
Israel, et illae timentes loque-
bantur vobis, sed filia Juda non
sustinuit iniquitatem vestram."
Eccli. XXII. 6.
" Musica in luctu importuna
narratio, etc."
Sap. VI. 7.
Dan. XIII. 32.
" At iniqui illi jusserunt ut
discooperiretur (erat enim coo-
perta) ut vel sic satiarentur de-
core ejus."
Dan. XIIL 56.
(Oft quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
terio jungentem homicidium puer
ausus est dicere : ' Semen Cha-
naan et non Juda, species decepit
te.' "
Sap. VII. 22. Ibid. Vers. lo.
" — est enim in ilia spiritus in- " Nam et in libro Sapientiae
telligentiae, sanctus, unicus, mul- qui a quibusdam Salomonis in-
tiplex, subtilis, disertus, mobilis, scribitur, spiritus sapientiae uni-
incoinquinatus, certus, suavis, genitus et multiplex tenuis et
amans bonum, acutus, quem mutabilis appellatur."
nihil vetat, benefaciens — ."
In the fifth book Jerome quotes frequently the sentence of
Wisdom VI. 7 : " Potentes potenter tormenta patientur."
Lib. V. Cap. XVI. Vers. 59 et
Eccli. XV. 9. seqq.
" Non est speciosa laus in ore " Non est pulchra laudatio in
peccatoris — ." ore peccatoris."
Ibid. Lib. VI. Cap. XVIIL
Eccli. III. 22. Vers. 6 et seqq.
" Altiora te ne quaesieris, et " Sed et illud quod alibi dici-
fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris : tur : ' Majora te non requiras, et
sed quae praecepit tibi Deus, ilia fortiora te non scruteris.' "
cogita semper, et in pluribus
operibus ejus ne fueris curiosus."
Eccli. XXXII. I. Ibid.
" Rectorem te posuerunt ? noli " De quibus scriptum est :
extolli : esto in illis quasi unus ' Principem te constituerunt ? ne
ex ipsis." eleveris : esto inter eos quasi
unus ex ipsis.' "
Eccli. X. 9. Ibid.
" Avaro autem nihil est sceles- " — cui illud convenit : 'Quid
tius. Quid superbit terra et gioriatur terra et cinis ?' "
cinis ?"
Ibid. Lib. VIII. Cap. XXVIL
Esther XIV. 11. Vers. 19.
"Ne tradas, Domine, sceptrum " Unde et Esther contra idola
tuum his, qui non sunt, etc." loquens : * Ne tradas,' inquit,
* sceptrum tuum his qui non
sunt.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
209
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 mis-
ericordia: potentes autem poten-
ter tormenta patientur."
Eccli. I. 2.
" Arenam maris, at pluviae
guttas, at dies saeculi quis dinu-
meravit ? Altitudinam caali, at
latitudinam tarraa, at profundum
abyssi quis dimansus est ?"
Eccli. XXVII. 29.
" Et qui foveam fodit, incidat
in earn, etc."
Eccli. XX. 32.
" Sapientia absconsa et the-
saurus invisus : quae utilitas in
utrisque ?"
Eccli. VII. 6.
" Noli quaerere fieri judex,
nisi valaas virtute irrumpera ini-
quitates : ne forte extimescas fa-
ciem potentis, et ponas scan-
dalum in aequitate tua."
Eccli. III. 29.
" Cor nequam gravabitur in
doloribus, et peccator adjiciet ad
peccandum."
Eccli. XXXII. I.
*' Ractoram te posuerunt ? noli
axtolli : asto in illis quasi unus
ex ipsis."
Eccli. I. 2.
(Already quoted.)
N
Vers. 8 at seqq.
Ibid. Cap. XXX. Vers. 20 at
seqq.
" Et in alio loco: 'Abyssum at
sapientiam quis investigabit ?' "
Ibid. Lib. X. Cap. XXXII.
Vers, 17 et seqq.
" Qui enim fodit foveam inci-
det in earn."
Ibid. Cap. XXXIII. Vers, i et
seqq.
** De magistris negligentibus
Salomon loquitur : ' Sapientia
abscondita, et thesauros occul-
tus, quae utilitas in utrisque ? ' "
Ibid. Lib. XL Cap. XXXIV. i.
" Unde magnopera cavendum
est et observanda ilia praecepta :
' Ne quaeras judex fieri, ne forte
non possis auferre iniquitates.*
Et iterum : * Quanto major as,
tanto magis te humilia, et in con-
spectu Domini invenias gratiam.'
Et rursum : * Ducam te constitu-
erunt, ne eleveris : sed esto inter
eos quasi unus ex illis.' "
Ibid. Lib. XIIL Cap. XLIII.
Vers. 13 et seqq.
" Scriptura est : ' Abyssum et
sapientiam quis investigabit ? ' "
210
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Eccli. XXXII. I.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXVIII. 29.
" — et verbis tuis facito sta-
teram, et frenos ori tuo rectos."
Ibid. Cap. XLV. 9.
Sap. I. 4.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. Vers. 10 et seqq.
" — dicente Scriptura : * Ser-
monibus tuis facies stateram et
appendiculutn,' "
Comment, in Daniel, Cap. II.
Vers. 21.
" In perversam autem animam
non introibit sapientia."
In this same chapter he inveighs against the deuterocanoni-
cal fragments of Daniel. In the 23d 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 fol-
lows : " Hitherto the Hebrews read : what follows even to
the end of the Canticle of the three youths is not contained in
Hebrew ; concerning which, lest we may seem to have passed
it by, a few words are to be said." He then proceeds to com-
ment it in the same manner as the other portions of the book.
I. et II. Maccab. Passim.
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."
Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 14.
" Legamus Maccabaeorum lib-
ros et Josephi historiam."
Ibid. Cap. XI. Vers. 34, 35.
"Lege Maccabaeorum libros."
Ibid. Cap. XII. Vers, i et
seqq.
" Ponit quoque historiam de
Maccabaeis in qua dicitur mul-
tos Judaeorum sub Mathathia et
Juda Maccabaeo ad eremum con-
fugisse, et latuisse in speluncis et
in cavernis petrarum, et post vic-
toriam processisse.
Comment, in Osee Lib. Cap.
VII. 8, 10.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. X. Vers. 14.
*' Beata sterilis immaculata
quae non cognovit cubile in pec-
cato."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
211
" Ex iniquo enim concubitu
semen peribit."
Sap. III. i6. Ibid.
Filii autem adulterorum in in-
consummatione erunt, et ab ini-
quo thoro semen exterminabi-
tur."
He quotes again Sap. VI. 7, in Lib. III. Cap. XI. Vers.
8 et 9.
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire,
alium, et dixit ei : Semen Cha-
naan etnon Juda, species decepit
te, et concupiscentia subvertit
cor tuum — ."
Ibid. Cap. XII. Vers. 7, 8.
" Semen Chanaan et non Juda,
species decepit te."
Eccli. XVI. 19.
" — montes simul, et colles, et
fundamenta terrae ; cum con-
spexerit ilia Deus, tremore con-
cutientur."
Eccli. XV. 9.
" Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris."
In Lib. III. Cap. VI. Vers
Sap. VI. 7.
Ibid. Vers. 12, he repeats Esther XIV. 11.
Comment, in Amos, Lib. II.
Cap. IV. Vers. 12, 13.
" Iste est qui firmat tonitruum,
sive montes confirmat, ad cujus
vocem coelorum cardines et terrae
fundamenta quatiuntur"
Ibid. Cap. V. Vers. 25.
" — quia non est pulchra lau-
datio in ore peccatoris."
7 et seqq., he quotes again
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 exeundum e
vita sum : abi in Mediam, fili,
quoniam credidi quaecumque lo-
cutus est Jonas Propheta de
Ninive quia subvertetur."
In Jonam, Prologus.
"Liber quoque Tobiae, licet
non habeatur in Canone, tamen
quia usurpatur ab Ecclesiasticis
viris, tale quid memorat, dicente
Tobia ad filium suum : * Fili, ecce
senui, et in eo sum ut revertar de
vita mea : tolle filios meos, et
vade in mediam; fili, scio enim
quae locutus est Jonas propheta
de Ninive, quoniam subverte-
tur.'"
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 ac-
count of its use by the Fathers.
212
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
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 tenta-
tione posside eum, etc."
Comment, in Michaeam, Lib.
I. Cap. II. Vers. 6, 8.
"Recedente autem pace et
auxilio Dei, quia restiterant Do-
mino, de quo dicitur : * Dominus
conterens bella, Dominus nomen
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 seqq.
** — et erunt in confusione
quae ducit ad vitam."
Eccli. IV. 25.
" Est enim confusio adducens
peccatum, et est confusio addu-
cens gloriam et gratiam."
In Nahum, Cap. III. Vers. 8 seqq., he quotes again the oft-
quoted sentence from Dan. XIII. 56.
Dan. XIV. 35. Prologus in Habacuc.
" Et apprehendit eum Angelus " — Daniel docere te poterit.
Domini in vertice ejus, et porta-
vit eum capillo capitis sui, posu-
itque eum in Babylone supra
lacum in impetu spiritus sui."
Eccli. I. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XX. 32.
" Sapientia absconsa et the-
saurus invisus : quae utilitas in
utrisque ?"
ad quem in lacum leonum Haba-
cuc cum prandio mittitur."
Comment, in Habacuc, Lib. II.
Cap. III. Vers, ir, seqq.
"Et pulchre opinationem phan-
tasiae altitudinem vocat juxta
Jesuni filium Sirach, qui ait :
* Abyssum et sapientiam quis in-
vestigabit ? ' "
Comment, in Sophoniam, Cap.
II. Vers. 3, 4.
" — hoc est, alios doceant: ' Sa-
pientia enim abscondita et the-
saurus non comparens, quae util-
itas in ambobus ?"
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
213
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 lapidem,
super caput ejus cadet : et plaga
dolosa dolosi dividet vulnera."
Judith. Passim.
Eccli. IV. 10.
" 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 sensum
multa cogitantem."
Maccab. Passim.
Ibid. Vers. 8 seqq.
"Et ad presbyteros cupientes
sub figura Susannae Ecclesiae
corrumpere castitatem dicat
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 mit-
tit lapidem in excelsum, super
caput suum mittit.' "
Comment, in Haggai, Cap. I.
Vers. 5, 6.
" Similiter qui penitus noh
bibit, siti peribit, sicut et in Ju-
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 pupillum
de quibus nobis praeceptum est :
' Esto pupillis pater, et pro viro
matri eorum, judicans pupillum
et justificans viduam.' "
Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 21, 22.
" Appropinquat enim Dominus
his qui non tentant eum, et os-
tendit faciem suam his qui non
sunt increduli."
Ibid. Cap. IX. Vers. 15, 16.
" — quia aggravat terrena hab-
itatio sensum multa curantem."
Ibid. Cap. X. Vers. I. seqq.
" Ita felicitas Maccabaeorum
tempore promissa est, quando
sancti lapides elevati sunt super
terram, etc."
214
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. I. 14.
"Creavit enim, ut essent omnia:
et sanabiles fecit nationes orbis
terrarura : et non est in illis
medicamentum exterminii, nee
inferorum regnum in terra."
Sap. IX. 16—18.
" Quae autem in caelis sunt
quis investigabit ? Sensum autem
tuum quis sciet, nisi tu dederis
sapientiam, et miseris spiritum
sanctum tuum de altissimis : et
sic correctae sint semitae eorum,
qui sunt in terris, et quae tibi
placent didicerint homines ? "
Sap. IV. 8.
" Senectus enim venerabilis est
non diuturna, neque annorum
numero computata : cani autem
sunt sensus hominis."
Sap. VI. 7.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXV. 12.
"Beatus, qui invenit amicum
verum, et qui enarrat justitiam
auri audienti."
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. I. 6.
"Benignus est enim spiritus
sapientiae, et non liberabit male-
dicum a labiis suis, quoniam
renum illius testis est Deus, et
cordis illius scrutator est verus,
et linguae ejus auditor."
Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. XII. Vers. 9.
"Unde in Sapientia quae Salo-
monis inscribitur (si cui tamen
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 coelo sunt
quis investigabit ? nisi quod tu
dedisti sapientiam, et Spiritum
Sanctum misisti de excelsis, et
sic correctae sunt semitae eorum
qui versantur in terra ; et quae
tibi placent eruditi sunt homi-
nes.' "
Ibid. Cap. XIV. Vers. 9.
" — de quo scriptum est : ' Cani
hominis sapientia ejus.' "
Comment, in Malach. Cap. II.
Vers. I, 2.
Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 7 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."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
215
Judith V.
*Tob. IV. 1 6.
" Quod ab alio oderis fieri tibi,
vide, ne tu aliquando alteri fa-
cias."
Sap. XII. I.
"0 quam bonus et suavis est,
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni-
bus."
11. Maccab. VI. et VII. Pas-
sim.
Sap. XI. 25.
" Diligis enim omnia quae sunt,
et nihil odisti eorum quae f ecisti :
nee enim odiens aliquid consti-
tuisti, aut fecisti."
Sap. IX. 15.
" — corpus enim, quod cor-
rumpitur, aggravat animam, et
terrena inhabitatio deprimit sen-
sum 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 murmu-
ratione, quae nihil prodest, et a
detractione parcite linguae, quo-
niam sermo obscurus in vacuum
non ibit : os autem, quod menti-
tur, occidit animam."
Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 18.
Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. XXI.
Vers. 28.
" — hoc est : ' Quod tibi non
vis fieri, alteri ne feceris.* "
Comment, in Epist. ad Galatas
Lib. I. Cap. III. 2.
" — de quo (Spiritu Sancto)
alibi scribitur : ' Incorruptus Spi-
ritus est in omnibus.' "
Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. III. 14.
" Eleazarus quoque nonagena-
rius 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 condidisti.* "
Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. IV. 2.
" Corruptibile enim corpus ag-
gravat animam, et terrenum hoc
tabernaculum sensum opprimit
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 occi-
dit animam."
216
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY.
Sap. VII. 27.
" Et cum sit una, omnia potest,
et in se permanens omnia inno-
vat, et per nationes in animas
sanctas se transfert ; amicos Dei
et prophetas constituit."
Eccli. I. 16.
" Initium sapientiae, timor Do-
mini, etc."
Maccab. Passim.
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
" Homo sanctus in sapientia
manet sicut sol ; nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur."
Eccli. XIV. 18.
" Omnis caro sicut foenum ve-
terascet, et sicut folium fructifi-
cans in arbore viridi."
Eccli. X. 9.
" Avaro autem nihil est sceles-
tius. 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.)
Sap. VIII. 2.
" Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi eam assumere, et ama-
tor f actus sum formae illius."
Ibid. Ps. IX.
" Et alibi (ipse Deus ait): An-
ima justi sedes sapientiae."
Ibid. Ps. XXXIII.
" Ut illud : * Initium sapien-
tiae, timor Domini.*"
Ibid.
" Filii Maccabaeorum vel modo
unusquisque sanctus clamave-
runt, et illos et modo unumquem-
que 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 scriptum est : * Sicut gla-
cies in sereno solvuntur peccata
tua."
Ibid. Ps. CXIX.
" — nostras interficimus ani-
mas quod mentimur : * Os enim
quod mentitur occidit animam."
Liber De Expositione Psalmo-
rum, Ps. CXXVII.
"Dicit Salomon quia voluerit
sapientiam ducere scilicet spon-
sam."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY. 217
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 Scrip-
ture.
Three causes are usually assigned for the doubts that pre-
vailed among some Fathers concerning the deuterocanonical
books.
1st, — 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 re-
futations of their attacks. As the Jews rejected the deutero-
canonical books, the Fathers were obliged to draw Scriptural
materials from the protocanonical writings. Hence, gradually
these were preferred in authority to the deuterocanonical
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 Septuagint
text with the Hebrew and other Greek texts, then existing,
marking the passages which were in the Septuagint, and not
found in the Hebrew by an 6/3€\o<;. Copies made from this text,
reproducing the diacritic points, soon filled the East. Now the
Alexandrian grammarians were wont to use the 6/8e\o9, to
denote a spurious passage. Origen's intention was evidently
not to brand these books and fragments as spurious, but the
error arose in the East especially to distrust what was denoted
by this sign.
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 re-
ceive 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 growth of the
status of the deuterocanonical books might be compared to
that of a healthy tree. It lost now and then a branch, in
whose stead, it acquired new ones, and kept on growing till it
filled the whole world, and now enjoys a firm unshaken hold
218 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
on all those who hold to the Church of Christ. It did this be-
cause 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 influence
of Jerome, in the subsequent centuries, engendering some
doubts in the minds of Fathers and theologians of the Western
Catholic world. We shall pass in brief review the centuries
from the fifth down to the Council of Trent.
Chapter X.
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 6i6, contains all the deuterocanonical works.
DiONYSIUS, surnamed 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 introduction to
the Holy Scriptures, sets forth three catalogues of Holy Books.f
*Dionysius, surnamed 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 several
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.
fFlavius 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 Theodoric.
Cassiodorus was bom about 490 or perhaps a little later. He filled important
public olfices 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.
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY. 219
The first list is that of Prologus Galeatus, the helmeted pro-
logue of Jerome. The second list is the Canon of St. Augus-
tine from his Doctrine Christiana, which we have already re-
produced in full. This 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 tradition in the
sixth century, which accorded to the deuterocanonical 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 canoni-
ical, since the schismatic churches of the Chaldean Nesto-
rians, the Jacobite Monophysites, Syrians, Ethiopians, Ar-
menians and Copts, all have the deuterocanonical Scriptures
in equal place with the other divine books.*
It is needless to attend to the absurd catalogue of Junilius
Africanus, an obscure bishop of Africa in the sixth
century. This list places Chronicles, Job, and Ezra with
Tobias, Judith, Esther, and Maccabees among the non-canoni-
cal books.f
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 Sectis "
of Leontius of Byzantium, a priest of Constantinople in the
sixth century. He drew up a Canon of only the protocanonical
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 Cyrill 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 it the preeminence of
canonicity. Leontius used in several places quotations from
deuterocanonical works as divine Scripture.
*Assemann, Bibliotheca Orientalis, III.
f Junil. Afric. De part. div. Legis I. 3-7. Migne 68, 16 et seqq.
220 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
The opponents of our Thesis cite at this juncture St.
Gregory the Great.*
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 edification of the
Church."
In the phraseology of St. Gregory, canonical signified some-
thing over and above divine. It signified those books con-
cerning which the whole world, with one accord, united in pro-
claiming 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 dis-
tinction regarding the Law and the Hagiographa. All came
from God, but the Law was preeminent. 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, doubt-
less, 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 dis-
cussion 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
*St. Gregory, surnamed the Great, was born of an illustrious Roman
family, and was pretor 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 Con-
stantinople, to implore the succour of Tiberius II. against the Lombards. At
his return, he was made secretary to Pelagius, after Pelagius' death, by unani-
mous consent of people and clergy, he was created Pope. He strove to
avoid the papal dignity, but in vain; he was created Pope in 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 ambition 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 excess-
ively mystic.
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
221
opinion as witness of tradition, we have excerpted the follow-
ing deuterocanonical quotations from the English edition of
some of Gregory's works, published by members of the English
Church at Oxford, in 1844:
Eccli. II. 14.
"Wo to them that are of a
double heart, and to wicked lips,
and to the hands that do evil,
and to the sinner that goeth on
the earth two ways."
Eccli. II. 16.
" Wo to them, that have lost
patience, and that have forsaken
the right ways, and have gOtae
aside into crooked ways."
Sap. I. 7.
"For the Spirit of the Lord
hath filled the whole world : and
that, which containeth all things,
hath knowledge of the voice."
EccH. XXIV. 8.
" I alone have compassed the
circuit of heaven, etc."
Eccli. XXXII. 26.
" And beware of thy own chil-
dren, and take heed of them of
thy household."
Eccli. XI. 27.
" In the day of good things be
not unmindful of evils ; and in
the day of evils be not unmind-
ful of good things."
Sap. XII. 15.
" For so much then as thou
art just, thou orderest all things
justly : thinking it not agreeable
Com. on Job. Bk. I. 36.
" Hence it is well said by a
certain wise man : * Woe to the
sinner that goeth two ways.' "
Ibid. 55.
" For it is hence that it is said
of the reprobate: ' Woe unto you
that have lost patience.' "
Ibid. Bk. II. 20.
" Hence it is written concern-
ing His Spirit: ' For the Spirit of
the Lord filleth the world.' "
Ibid.
" Hence it is that His Wisdom
saith : * I alone compassed the
circuit of heaven,' "
Ibid. Bk. III. 13.
" For hence it is written : * Be-
ware of thine own children, and
take heed to thyself from thy
servants.' "
Ibid. 16.
" For it is hence written : * In
the day of prosperity be not un-
mindful of affliction, and in the
day of affliction be not unmind-
ful of prosperity.' "
Ibid. 26.
" It is hence that a Wise Man
saith to the Father : ' Forasmuch
then as Thou art righteous Thy-
222
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
to thy power, to condemn him,
who deserveth not to be pun-
ished."
Eccli. IV. 24,
" For there is a shame that
bringeth sin, and there is a shame
that bringeth glory and grace."
Eccli. XXI. I.
" My son, hast thou sinned ?
do so no more : but for thy
former sins also pray that they
may be forgiven thee."
Eccli. II. I.
"Son, when thou comest to
the service of God, stand in jus-
tice, and in fear, and prepare thy
soul for temptation."
Eccli. I. 33.
"Son, if thou desire wisdom,
keep justice, and God will give
her to thee."
Sap. IX. 15.
" For the corruptible body is
a load upon the soul, and the
earthly habitation presseth down
the mind that museth upon many
things."
Sap. IX. 16.
"And hardly do we guess
aright at things that are upon
earth : and with labour do we
find the things that are before
us. But the things that are in
heaven, who shall search out ? "
self, Thou orderest all things
righteously ; Thou condemnest
Him too that deserveth not to be
punished.' "*
Comment, on Job, Bk. IV. 32.
" Of which it is said by one :
' There is a shame which is glory
and grace.' "
Ibid. 39.
" And against this it is rightly
said by one : * My son, hast thou
sinned ? add not again thereto.' "
Ibid. 42.
" For so it is written : ' My
son, if thou come to serve the
Lord, stand in righteousness and
in fear, and prepare thy soul for
temptation.' "
Ibid. 61.
Ibid. 68.
" For it is written : ' For the
corruptible body presseth down
the soul, and the earthly taber-
nacle weigheth down the mind
that museth upon many things.' "
Ibid. Bk. V. 12.
" That wise man had seen him-
self to be encompassed with
darkness, when he said : ' And
with labour do we find the things
that are before us; but the things
that are in heaven who shall
search out ?' "
♦Gregory has here followed a reading different from that of the Vulgate,
but it is not a question of his critical handling of texts, but of his approba-
tion of Wisdom ; and this, the present reading evidences.
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
223
Sap. IV. II.
" He was taken away lest wick-
edness should alter his under-
standing, or deceit beguile his
soul."
Eccli. V. 4.
" Say not : I have sinned, and
what harm hath befallen me ?
for the most High is a patient
rewarder."
Sap, IX. 15.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 26.
" For she is the brightness of
eternal light, and the unspotted
mirror of God's Majesty, and the
image of his goodness."
Sap. XII. 18.
"But thou being master of
power, judgest with tranquility,
etc."
Sap. II. 24.
" But by the envy of the devil,
death came into the world."
Sap. V. 21.
" And he will sharpen his
severe wrath for a spear, and the
whole world shall fight with him
against the unwise."
Ibid. 34.
"If God in His providential
dealings did not carry off the
righteous. Wisdom would never
have said of the righteous man :
'Yea, speedily was he taken
away, lest that wickedness should
alter his understanding.' "
Ibid. 35.
" For because, as it is written,
' For the Lord is a long-suffering
rewarder.' "
Ibid. 58.
" And because in this life,
whatever degree of virtue a man
may have advanced to, he still
feels the sting of corruption, 'For
the corruptible body presseth
down the soul, and the earthy
tabernacle weigheth down the
mind that museth upon many
things.' "
Ibid. 64.
" And as the Wise Man, in the
setting forth of Wisdom, saith
concerning the same Son : ' For
She is the brightness of the ever-
lasting light.' "
Ibid. 78.
" — since it is written : ' But
Thou, Lord, judgest with tran-
quility.' "
Ibid. 85.
" Of whom also it is written :
* Nevertheless, through envy of
the devil came death into the
world.' "
Ibid. Bk. VL 14.
"The wise man testifies con-
cerning God : 'And the world
shall fight with Him against the
unwise.' "
2^
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
Sap. XVI. 20.
" Instead of which things thou
didst feed thy people with the
food of Angels, and gavest them
bread from heaven prepared with-
out labour, having in it all that
is delicious, and the sweetness of
every taste.
Tobias IV. 16.
** See thou never do to another
what thou wouldst hate to have
done to thee by another."
Eccli. XII. 8.
" A friend shall not be known
in prosperity, and an enemy shall
not be hidden in adversity."
Eccli. II. 16.
" Woe to them, that have lost
patience, and that have forsaken
the right ways, and have gone
aside into crooked ways.
Sap. XI. 24.
'* But thou hast mercy upon
all, because thou canst do all
things, and winkest at the sins of
men for the sake of repentance."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXXIV. 7.
" For dreams have deceived
many, and they have failed that
put their trust in them."
Ibid. 22.
" Hence it is said by the wise
man of the sweetness of manna :
'Thou didst send them from
heaven bread prepared without
their labour, having in itself all
delight, and the sweetness of
every taste.'"
Ibid. 54.
" Hence the wise man saith :
* Do not that to any which thou
wouldst not have done to thy-
self.' "
Ibid. Bk. VII. 29.
"Whence a certain wise man
saith rightly : ' A friend cannot
be known in prosperity ; and an
enemy cannot be hidden in ad-
versity.' "
Ibid. 45.
" Hence it is that it was spoken
by one that was wise: ' Woe unto
you that have lost patience.' "
Ibid. Bk. VIII. 31.
" — as it is written: 'And wink-
est at the sins of men for their
repentance.' "
Ibid. 12.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 42.
" For except dreams were very
frequently caused to come in il-
lusion by our secret enemy, the
wise man would never have
pointed this out by saying: 'For
dreams and vain illusions have
deceived many.' "
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 50.
(Oft quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
225
Eccli. XL. I.
" Great labour is created for
all men, and a heavy yoke is
upon the children of Adam, from
the day of their coming out of
their mother's womb, until the
day of their burial into the mother
of all."
Sap. V. 6.
" Therefore we have erred
from the way of truth, and the
light of justice hath not shined
unto us, and the sun of under-
standing hath not risen upon
us."
Eccli. I. 13.
"With him that feareth the
Lord it shall go well in the latter
end, and in the day of his death
he shall be blessed."
Sap. II. 12.
"Let us therefore lie in wait for
the just, because he is not for our
turn, and he is contrary to our
doings, and upbraideth us with
transgressions of the law, and di-
vulgeth against us the sins of our
way of life."
Eccli. VII. 40.
" In all thy works remember
thy last end, and thou shalt
never sin."
Sap. VI. 7 et 9.
" For to him that is little,
mercy is granted : but the mighty
shall be mightily tormented. But
a greater punishment is ready
for the more mighty."
o
Ibid. 55.
" The burthens of which state
of infirmity that wise man rightly
regarding, exclaims : ' A heavy
yoke is upon the sons of Adam,
from the day that they go out of
their mother's womb till the day
that they return to the mother of
all things.' "
Ibid. 76.
" And as the ungodly that are
cast away in the Judgment, are
described in the book of Wisdom
as saying : ' We have erred from
the way of truth, and the light
of righteousness hath not shined
unto us, and the sun rose not
upon us.' "
Ibid. 88.
" Of this it is said again :
* Whoso feareth the Lord, it shall
go well with him at the last.' "
Ibid. Bk. IX. 89.
" And the sons of perdition in
their persecutions say concern-
ing that same Redeemer : ' And
He is clean contrary to our
doings ' ; and soon afterwards :
* For His life is not like other
men s.
Ibid. 92.
" Hence again it is written :
' Whatsoever thou takest in hand,
remember thine end, and thou
shalt never do amiss.* "
Ibid. 98.
" For hence it is written: ' But
mighty men shall be mightily
tormented, and stronger torment
shall come upon the stronger
ones.' "
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
Tob. IV. 1 6.
** See thou never do to another
what thou wouldst hate to have
done to thee by another."
Eccli. VII. 15.
" Be not full of words in a mul-
tude of ancients, and repeat not
the word in thy prayer."
Eccli. I. 13.
"With him that feareth the
Lord it shall go well in the latter
end, and in the day of his death
he shall be blessed."
Eccli. XXXIV. 2.
" The man that giveth heed to
lying visions, is like him that
catcheth at a shadow and fol-
loweth after the wind."
Sap. III. 2.
"In the sight of the unwise
they seemed to die : and their
departure was taken for misery."
Sap. XII. 18.
"But thou, being master of
power, judgest with tranquility,
and with great favour disposest
of us : for thy power is at hand
when thou wilt."
Sap. XVII. 10.
" For whereas wickedness is
fearful, it beareth witness of its
condemnation : for a troubled
conscience always forecasteth
grievous things."
Ibid. Bk. X. 8.
"And the love of our neigh-
bour is carried down into two
precepts, since, on the one hand,
it is said by a certain righteous
man: ' Do that to no man which
thou hatest.' "
Ibid. 28.
" For we should call to mind
what is said : ' Do not repeat a
word in thy prayer.' "
Ibid. 35.
" Hence it is written: ' Whoso
feareth the Lord, it shall go well
with him at the last.' "
Ibid. Bk. XI. 68.
" Hence it is well written con-
cerning him, 'that he hath fol-
lowed a shadow.' "
Ibid. Bk. XII. 6.
" — that amidst the hands of
the persecutors his body is be-
reft of life ; for according to the
words of Wisdom: *In the sight
of the unwise they seemed to
die, and their departure is taken
for misery.' "
Ibid. 14.
" Whence it is said to Him :
* But Thou, Ruler of power,
judgest with tranquillity, and
orderest us with exceeding great
regard.' "
Ibid. 46.
" Whence it is written : ' For
whereas wickedness is timorous,
she gives witness to condemna-
tion.' "
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
227
Eccli. XI. 27.
"In the day of good things, be
not unmindful of evils : and in
the day of evils, be not unmind-
ful of good things."
Eccli. X. 15.
" Because his heart is departed
from him that made him ; for
pride is the beginning of all sin :
he that holdeth it, shall be filled
with maledictions, and it shall
ruin him in the end."
Eccli. XXII. 2.
" The sluggard is pelted with
the dung of oxen : and every
one that toucheth him will shake
his hands."
Sap. I. 4.
"For wisdom will not enter
into a malicious soul, nor dwell
in a body subject to sins."
Eccli. III. 22.
" Seek not the things that are
too high for thee, and search not
into things above thy ability."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXII. 6.
"A tale out of time is like
music in mourning : but the
stripes and instruction <?/ wisdom
are never out of time."
Sap. I. II.
" — and the mouth that be-
lieth, killeth the soul."
Sap. V. 8—9.
"What hath pride profited us ?
or what advantage hath the boast-
Ibid. Bk. XIII. 48.
" — as when it is written : ' In
the day of prosperity, be not for-
getful of affliction, and in the
day of affliction, be not forgetful
of prosperity.' "
Ibid. Bk. XIV. 19.
" If then sin is death, ' the first-
born of death' may not unsuitably
be taken for pride, in that it is
written : ' Pride is the beginning
of all sin.'"
Ibid. Bk. XV. 5.
"Whence it is written: 'A
slothful man is pelted with the
dung of oxen.' "
Ibid. 9.
" It is written : ' For into a
malicious soul wisdom shall not
enter.' "
Ibid. Bk. XVI. 8.
"And again: 'Seek not out
the things that are too deep for
thee ; neither search the things
that are above thy strength.' "
Ibid. Bk. XVII. 39.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. Bk. XVIII. 2.
" Since neither is it allowable
to suppose that under infliction
of chastenings he used music,
when Truth saith by His Scrip-
ture : * Music in mourning is as
a tale out of season.' "
Ibid. 5.
" But seeing that it is written :
* The mouth that belieth slayeth
the soul.' "
Ibid. 29.
" Those also are slow in * open-
ing their eyes,' who, as Wisdom
228
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
ing of riches brought us? All
those things are passed away like
a shadow, and like a post that
runneth on."
Eccli. II. 5.
" For gold and silver are tried
in the fire; but acceptable men,
in the furnace of humiliation."
Eccli. XXXVIII. 25.
" The wisdom of a scribe com-
eth by his time of leisure : and
he that is less in action, shall re-
ceive wisdom."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XV. 3.
" With the bread of life and
understanding, she shall feed
him, and give him the water of
wholesome wisdom to drink — ."
Sap. IV. 8—9.
" For venerable old age is not
that of long time, nor counted
by the number of years : but the
understanding of a man is grey
hairs, and a spotless life is old
age.
I. Maccab. VI. 46.
" And he went between the
feet of the elephant, and put
himself under it, and slew it : and
it fell to the ground upon him,
and he died there."
is witness, are described as going
in the time of their condemna-
tion to say : ' What hath pride
profited us ? or what good hath
riches with our vaunting brought
us ? All these things are passed
away like a shadow, and as a
post that hasteth by.' "
Ibid. 40.
" Whence it is written : * For
gold is tried in the fire, and ac-
ceptable men in the furnace of
adversity.'"
Ibid. 68.
" And hence it is said else-
where : * Write wisdom in the
time of leisure. And he that is
lessened in doing, even he shall
win her.' "
Ibid. 71.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Bk. XIX. 9.
"Again, by water sacred
knowledge is denoted, as it is
said : ' And give him the water
of wisdom to drink.* "
Ibid. 26.
"But Holy Scripture is used
to call those ' elders,' not who
are ripe by amount of years
alone, but by ancientness of
character. Hence it was said by
one that was wise : ' For vener-
able old age is not that of long
time, nor counted by the number
of years ; but the understanding
of a man is gray hairs, and a
spotless life is old age.' "
Ibid. 34.
" With reference to which par-
ticular we are not acting irregu-
larly, if from the books, though
not canonical, yet brought out
for the edifying of the Church,
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
229
Eccli. XXX. 24.
" Have pity on thy own soul,
pleasing God, etc."
Eccli. XIV. 5.
" He that is evil to himself, to
whom will he be good ? etc."
Sap. XII. 18.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. V. 4.
" Say not : I have sinned, and
what harm hath befallen me ?
for the most High is a patient
re warder."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. II. II — 12.
" My children, behold the gen-
erations of men : and know ye
that no one hath hoped in the
Lord, and hath been confounded.
For who hath continued in his
commandment, and hath been
forsaken? or who hath called
upon him, and he despised him ?"
Eccli. IV, 18—19.
" For she walketh with him in
in temptation, and at the first she
chooseth him. She will bring
upon him fear and dread and
trial : and she will scourge him
with the affliction of her dis-
cipline, till she try him by her
laws, and trust his soul."
we bring forward testimony.
Thus Eleazar in the battle smote
and brought down an elephant,
but fell under the very beast that
he killed."
Ibid. 38.
" Whence it is written : * Have
mercy upon thine own soul by
pleasing God.' "
Ibid.
" Whence it is also said by one
that was wise : * He that is evil
to himself, to whom will he be
good ?' "
Ibid. 46.
" — He, of whom it is written :
* But Thou, Lord, judgest with
tranquility.' "
Ibid.
" He, of whom it is written
again : ' The Lord is a patient
rewarder.' "
Ibid. Bk. XX. 8.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 51.
"And when it is written again:
* Did ever any trust in the Lord
and was confounded ? or did
any abide in His commandments,
and was forsaken ? or whom did
He ever despise, that called upon
Him?'"
Ibid.
" Whence too it is rightly said
by one of Wisdom : ' For at the
first she will walk with him by
crooked ways, and bring fear
and dread upon him, and tor-
ment him with her discipline until
she try him in his thoughts.' "
230
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
Eccli. I. 13.
"With him that feareth the
Lord it shall go well in the latter
end, etc."
Eccli. XVIII. 15—17.
" My son, in thy good deeds
make no complaint, and when
thou givest anything, add not
grief by an evil word. Shall not
the dew assuage the heat ? so
also the good word is better than
the gift. Lo, is not a word better
than a gift ? but both are with a
justified man."
Eccli. XX. 32.
" Wisdom that is hid, and trea-
sure that is not seen : what profit
is there in them both ? "
Sap. VII. 15.
" And God hath given to me
to speak as I would, and to con-
ceive thoughts worthy of those
things that are given me : be-
cause he is the guide of wisdom,
and the director of the wise."
Eccli. X. 15.
" — pride is the beginning of
all sin—."
Sap. III. 5.
"Afflicted in few things, in
many they shall be rewarded :
because God hath tried them,
and found them worthy of him-
self."
Eccli. II. I.
"Son, when thou comest to
the service of God, stand in jus-
tice, and in fear, and prepare
thy soul for temptation."
Ibid. 56.
" As it is written : ' To him
that feareth God it shall go well
at the last.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXI. 29.
" To which persons it is well
said by the Book of Ecclesias-
ticus : ' To every gift give not
the bitterness of an evil word.'
And again : ' Lo, a word is better
than a gift, and both are with a
man that is justified.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXII. 7.
" And excepting that gold had
a something of a like sort with
wisdom, that wise man would
never have said : ' Wisdom hid-
den from sight, and a treasure
that is not seen, what use is there
in either?' "
Ibid. Bk. XXIII. 31.
"Whence a certain wise man
well said : ' May God grant me
to speak these things according
to my sentence.' "
Ibid. 44.
" And it is written : * Pride is
the beginning of all sin."
Ibid. 52.
"It is hence said of them by
Wisdom: * God proved them, and
found them worthy for Him-
self.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXIV. 27.
"To keep security from gen-
erating carelessness, it is written:
' My son, in coming to the service
of God, stand injustice and fear,
and prepare thy soul for tempta-
tion.' "
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
231
Sap. III. 7.
"The just shall shine, and
shall run to and fro like sparks
among the reeds."
Eccli. XXXII. I.
" Have they made thee ruler ?
be not lifted up : be among them
as one of them.
Sap. VI. 5.
"Horribly and speedily will
he appear to you : for a most
severe judgment shall be for
them that bear rule."
Eccli. V. 4.
" Say not : I have sinned, and
what harm hath befallen me ?
etc."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" For by the greatness of the
beauty, and of the creature, the
Creator of them may be seen, so
as to be known thereby,"
Sap. VI. 17.
" For she goeth about seeking
such as are worthy of her, and
she sheweth herself to them cheer-
fully in the ways, and meeteth
them with all providence."
Eccli. III. 22.
(Before quoted.)
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 49.
" — that it is said by Wisdom :
'The righteous shall shine, and
shall run to and fro like sparks
among the reeds.' "
Ibid. 52.
"Against this pride it is said
in the Book Ecclesiasticus :
* Have they appointed thee a
ruler ? Be not lifted up, but be
among them as one of them.' "
Ibid. 54.
" But it is rightly said by the
Book of Wisdom of the coming
of the strict Judge : * Horribly
and speedily will He appear, for
a very sharp judgment shall be
to them who are in high places."
Ibid. Bk. XXV. 6.
" To whom it is said by a cer-
tain wise man : ' Say not, I have
sinned, and what harm hath hap-
pened to me?' "
Ibid. Bk. XXVI. 17.
" Whence also it is written in
the Book of Wisdom : ' For by
the greatness and beauty of the
creatures the Maker of them can
be intelligently seen.' "
Ibid.
"For hence it is written of
Wisdom : ' She sheweth herself
cheerfully unto them in the ways,
and meeteth them in all fore-
thought.' "
Ibid. 27.
(Before quoted.)
Ibid. Bk. XXVII. 45.
(Oft quoted.)
232
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
Sap. XVII. lo.
**For whereas wickedness is
fearful, it beareth witness of its
condemnation."
Eccli. III. 17.
"And in justice thou shalt be
built up, and in the day of afflic-
tion thou shalt be remembered :
and thy sins shall melt away as
the ice in the fair warm weather."
Sap. II. 24.
" But by the envy of the devil,
death came into the world."
Sap. VII. 24.
"For wisdom is more active
than all active things : and reach-
eth everywhere by reason of her
purity."
Eccli. V. 7.
** For mercy and wrath quickly
come from him, and his wrath
looketh upon sinners."
Sap. IX. 15.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XV. 9.
"Praise is not seemly in the
mouth of a sinner."
Eccli. X. 15.
" — pride is the beginning of
all sin — ."
Sap. XII. 18.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 48.
" Whence it is well said by a
certain wise man: ' When v/icked-
ness is fearful, it beareth testi-
mony to its own condemnation.' "
Ibid. S3.
" Whence it is well said by a
certain wise man: 'As ice in fair
weather, so shall thy sins be
melted away.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXIX. 15.
" Of what other is he a mem-
ber, but of him, of whom it is
written : * Through envy of the
devil came death into the
world?'"
Ibid. 24.
" Whence also the spirit of
wisdom is described as full of
motion^ that by means of that
which is nowhere absent. He
might be described as meeting
us everywhere.' "
Ibid. 54.
" For it is written : ' For mercy
and wrath come from Him.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXX. 15.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 74.
" — because, as it is written :
'Praise is not seemly in the
mouth of a sinner.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXXI. 87.
" For pride is the root of all
evil, of which it is said, as Scrip-
ture bears witness : ' Pride is the
beginning of all sin.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXXII. 9.
(Oft quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
233
Eccli. X. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXIX. 33.
" Give place to the honorable
presence of my friends : for I
want my house, my brother being
to be lodged with me."
Sap. III. 7.
" The Just shall shine, and
shall run to and fro like sparks
among the reeds."
Ibid. II.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. V. 6—7.
"And say not: The mercy of
the Lord is great, he will have
mercy on the multitude of my
sins. For mercy and wrath
quickly come from him, and his
wrath looketh upon sinners."
Eccli. XXI. 10.
" The congregation of sinners
is like tow heaped together, etc."
Sap. V. 6.
" Therefore we have erred
from the way of truth, and the
light of justice hath not shined
unto us, and the sun of under-
standing hath not risen upon us."
Ibid.
19.
" That many are hay, but yet
are protected by the favour of
sanctity, a certain wise man
well points out saying : * Pass
over, O stranger, and furnish a
table.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXXIII. 7.
" Again, by * rush ' or ' reed '
is expressed the brightness of
temporal glory, as is said of the
righteous by Wisdom : ' The
righteous shall shine, and run to
and fro like sparks in the reed-
bed.' "
Ibid. 23.
" For hence it is said by a cer-
tain wise man : ' Say not, the
mercies of the Lord are many,
He will not be mindful of my
sins.' "
Ibid.
55-
"Of this unity of the reprobate
it is said by a wise man : ' The
congregation of sinners is tow
gathered together.' "
Ibid. Bk. XXXIV. 25.
" For by the ' sun ' the Lord is
typified, as is said in the Book of
Wisdom, that all the ungodly in
the day of the last judgment, on
knowing their own condemna-
tion, are about to say: 'We have
erred from the way of truth, and
the light of righteousness hath
not shined unto us, and the sun
rose not upon us.' "
234
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY.
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
" A holy man continueth in
wisdom as the sun : but a fool is
changed as the moon."
Eccli. XXXII. I.
" Have they made thee ruler ?
Be not lifted up : be among them
as one of them."
Ibid.
" That the acuteness of wis-
dom is designated by the ' sun,'
is said also in the way of com-
parison by Solomon : ' A wise
man continueth as the sun, a
fool changeth as the moon.' "
Ibid. 53.
" — let those hear that which
is said by a certain wise man :
* Have they made thee a ruler ?
Be not lifted up, but be among
them as one of them.' "
Ibid.
" Let all hear: "Why art thou
proud, O earth and ashes ?' "
Ibid. 55.
" The one speaks by his mem-
bers, saying : ' Let there be no
meadow, which our luxury does
not pass through ; let us crown
ourselves with roses before they
be withered ; let us leave every-
where tokens of our joy.* "
Eccli. X. 9.
" But nothing is more wicked
than the covetous man. Why is
earth and ashes proud ? "
Sap. II. 8—9.
" Let us crown ourselves with
roses, before they be withered :
let no meadow escape our riot.
Let none of us go without his
part in luxury : let us every-
where leave tokens of joy : for
this is our portion, and this our
lot."
It is needless to go through the entire works of St. Gregory.
These passages taken from the books of his Exposition of Job,
are a good specimen of his use of deuterocanonical 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 God. Gregory received the
Scriptures, where he learned his faith, from the Catholic
Church ; hence, in drawing from his fund of Scriptural know-
ledge, he made no distinction in practice between the books of
the first and second Canon. The fact that Wisdom and Eccle-
siasticus are most used by him, results from the richness of
their moral teaching ; they were adapted to his scope. Quota-
tions from all the deuterocanonical books except Judith and
Baruch are found in his works ; but the proving force of these
quotations covers all the 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
THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY. 235
him more of a question ofdiscipline. 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 flourished
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 contained eight
books, of which the first is Josue ben Nun, which is called in
Latin, Jesus Nave ; the second is Sophtim, that is Judges ; the
third is Samuel, that is the first of Kings ; the fourth is Mela-
chim, 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 Hagiographers, 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 Hassirim, 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 Hagiographa, and
make twenty-four books, according to the twenty-four Ancients,
who assist before the Lord.
*The biography of Isidore of Seville, is involved in obscurity. His father
was Severianus, of the province of Carthagena, 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 undoubt-
edly 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.
236 THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY.
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-
mentioned, being considered a part of Jeremiah.
In his treatise De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, Bk. I. XI. 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 follow
these, 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 there are sixteen propheti-
cal 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, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canti-
cles, the Book of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 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 prophecy. 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 Hebrews, and those that were not, but which
by the Church were honored and promulgated as divine books.
The first were often called by the Fathers the canonical 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. Wis-
THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY. 237
dom and Ecclesiasticus ; which, although they are said to be
written by Jesus the son of Sirach, nevertheless, on account
of the similarity of diction, are called of Solomon. And these
are acknowledged to have, in the Church, equal authority with
the other canonical Scriptures."
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 own critical
knowledge on which to rely ; but the fact itself, he received
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. Ildefon-
SUS, the disciple of St. Isidore, afterward Archbishop of Toledo,
who died in 669. In his Treatise on Baptism, Chapter 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 in-
fluenced 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
*" Regula quos fldei commendat noscere libros,
Hos nostra praesens 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 prophetae ;
En lob, Psalterium, Salomon et Verba dierum,
Esdrae consequitur Esther, Sapientia, lesus,
Tobi et ludith ; concludit haec Machabaeorum ;
Hie Testament! Veteris finisque modusque."
238 THE CANON OF THE VIH. AND IX. CENTURIES.
illation from his testimony; therefore, the Church receives
them, because they are excellent and useful, even though not
in the Canon of the Jews. His practice warrants the illation,
for he quotes both Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus as divine Scrip-
ture.
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 list,
Baruch finds place, while Esther is passed over in silence. After
the list of the canonical books of the Old and the New Testa-
ments, there is placed a list of avrtXeyofieva which com-
prises The Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, The Psalms of
Solomon, Esther, Judith, Susanna and Tobias. This list has
a close affinity 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 of 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.*
From the fact that he receives the decree of the Council of
Cathage, 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.
*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 splendid 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 know-
ledge. His birth and his talents elevated him to the highest dignities, even
to become Secretary of State to the Court 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 cunning. 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 Michel. By similar means, he corrupted the legates of Pope
Nicolas I., so that they assisted at the Conciliabulum in 861, and confirmed
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 Macedonian, succeeded
Michel in the empire, he deposed Photius, and restored Ignatius. At this
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES. 239
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, Cyrill Lucar en-
deavored to introduce protestant ideas into the Greek Church,
he failed to expel from the Canon the deuterocanonical books.f
Against him the members of the Council of Jerusalem decreed
that, "following the rule of the Catholic Church, we call Holy
Scripture all those books which Cyrill received from the
Council of Laodicea, and in addition those books which Cyrill,
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 enumerated with the other
genuine books of Holy Scripture, as genuine parts of the same
Scripture.":}:
In the council which Parthenius, Patriarch of Constantinople
held in 1638 at Constantinople, in which sat two other patri-
juncture was celebrated at Constantinople the VIII. Oecumenical Council, in
which Photius and his partizans were anathematized. Photius composed a
chimerical history, in which he made Basil descend from Tiridates, the
Armenian King. Basil was, in fact, low-born, and this coup won his favor to
Photius, whom he restored in 877. Pope John VIII., deceived by Basil and
Photius, at first received him into the communion of the Church of Rome, but
afterwards, ascertaining the falsehood of Photius, excommunicated him. The
successive Popes, Martin, Adrian 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 mon-
astery by the Emperor Leo the Philosopher ; and he died in this retreat in
891. Fleury gives a good resume of the character of Photius in these words :
" He was the grandest spirit, 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.
f Cyrill Lucar was born 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 afterwards 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.
:t:Cfr. Kimmel, Monumenta Fidei Orientalis, Jenae, 1850, I. 42.
240 THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES.
archs and one hundred and twenty bishops, a synodical letter
was drawn up and sent to the provincial synod convened at
Jassy, in which the opinion of Cyrill 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."^
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 ap-
proved 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 com-
mitted 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 two parts of one book : 9. The third
and fourth books of Kings : 10. The first and second books of
Paralipomena : 11. The first book of Esdras, and the second,
or, as it is entitled in Greek, the book of Nehemiah : 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 Song 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?
*Kimmel 1. c, page 415.
THE CANON OF THE VHI. AND IX. CENTURIES. 241
A. Athanasius the Great says, that they have been ap-
pointed by the fathers to be read by proselytes, who are pre-
paring for admission into the Church."
Philaretes was a disciple of Cyrill 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 middle 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.
// contains all the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books,
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
missionaries 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.
f Alcuin, surnamed Flaccus, was born, towards the year of 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 Aelbert of the
ecclesiastical school of York. Aelbert took him on a pilgrimage to Rome,
and, on the return, visited with him Charlemagne. Aelbert 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 Aelbert in the see of York. On
his return, he again visited Charlemagne, who invited him to fix his abode in
his dominions. Having sought and obtained the authorization of his arch-
bishop 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
of 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 con-
demned 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 69 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
242 THE CAKON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES.
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 Stat-
IANUS or Vallicellianus in the Vallicella Library at Rome,
and other manuscripts called the Bibles of Charlemagne, at
Zurich, Bamberg, and in the British Museum, contain the same
list of Alcuin's revised books. Moreover, Alcuin has drawn
up a complete Canon of both protocanonical and deutero-
canonical books in the following verses :
*" In hoc quinque libri, retinentur Codice Mosis,
Bella duels Josue, senionim et tempora patrum.
Ruth, Job, et Regum bis bin! namque libelli ;
Atque Prophetarum sanctl bis octo libelli ;
Carmina prseclari Christi patris hymnica David,
Et tria pacifici Salomonis opuscula regis.
Jungitur his Sophise Jesu simul atque libellus,
Et Paralipomenis enim duo nempe libelli.
Hinc Ezrae, Nehemise, Hester, Judith atque libelli
Et duo namque libri Machabsea bella tenentes.
Matthaei et Marei, Lucse liber, atque Joannis
Inclyta gesta tenens salvantis saecula Christi.
Sanctus Apostolicos Lucas conscripserat Actus ;
Bis septem sancti per chartas dogmata Pauli,
Jacobi, Petri, Judse 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 Salamon libros mirabilis edidit auctor,
His duo junguntur per paradigma libri ;
Quorum quippe prior Sapientia dicitur alma,
Notatur Jesu nomine posterior
Hinc Paralipomenonis adest sacer illo libellus.
Qui veteris Legis dicitur epitome
Hinc Bkrm, Nehmim, Judith, Hesterque libelli ;
Tunc ToMce pietas, angelus, actus, iter.
Inclyta nam binis MacTiabaea bella libellis
Scribuntur, victis gentibus et populis.
Haec est sancta quidem Legis Scriptura Vetustse,
Divinis tota quae titulis redolet."
Some endeavor to shake Alcuin's authority for the deutero-
canonical books, by citing a passage from the eighteenth para-
graph of his first book against Elipandus. This Elipandus had
cited, in support of Adoptionism, the text from Ecclesiasticus
XXXVI. 14 : " Miserere, Domine, plebi tuae, super quam invo-
catum est nomen tuum, et Israel quem coaequasti primogenito
tuo." Alcuin replies : " In the book of Jesus, the Son of
*P. L. Migne, 101, pag. 731-734.
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES. 243
Sirach, the aforesaid sentence is read, of which book blessed
Jerome and Isidore unresevedly testify that it is placed among
the apocryphal, that is to say, the doubtful 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 Ecclesiasticus 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 evi-
dence. 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 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 three passages :
De Virtutibus at Vitiis, XIV.
Eccli.V. 8. XVIII.
" Non tardes converti ad Do- " The saying is read in the di-
minum, et ne differas de die in vinely inspired Scriptures : * Fill,
diem — ." ne tardes converti ad Deum,
quia nescis quid futura pariat
dies.'.... These are the words
of God, not mine "
In the fifteenth chapter of the same treatise, he quotes
Ecclesiasticus three times, as authoritative Scripture. In the
eighteenth chapter this passage occurs:
Eccli. XVIII. 30—31. De Virtutibus et Vitiis, XVIII.
"Post concupiscentias tuas non " Holy Scripture, therefore, ad-
eas, et a voluntate tua avertere. monishes us, saying : ' Go not
Si praestes animae tuae concu- after thy lusts, but turn away
piscentias ejus, faciet te in gau- from thy own will. If thou give
dium inimicis tuis." 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 by our adversaries
relates only to Ecclesiasticus, and we honestly claim to have
shown that Alcuin did not make his own the opinion of St.
244 THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES.
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 weight, even though it did not express
his personal conviction. Elipandus had quoted a passage from
Ecclesiasticus that seemed to make for Adoptionism. Alcuin
first endeavors 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, Alcuin
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 {deuterocanonical) books form no part of the Canon of
divinely inspired Scripture.*
Protestantism has been fed on lies from the beginning.
The Codex Toletanus, of Toledo in Spain, which, accord-
ing to critics, dates back to the eighth century, contains all the
deuterocanonical books except Baruch.
The Codex Cavensis, of the Abbey of La Cava near
Salerno, contains all the deuterocanonical books. This manu-
script 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 Theodulf,
all the deuterocanonical books find place.
Venerable Bede wrote an allegorical exposition of the
book of Tobias, and in his use of Scriptures makes no distinc-
tion between protocanonical and deuterocanonical books.f
♦Home's Introduction to the Study of Scripture, Vol. I. Appendix I.
484.
fBede was born at Jarrow, on the confines of Northumberland and Scot-
land, 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 'prayer, to the Abbot Benoit Biscop, who was a second
father to the child. After three years passed with Benoit, Bede was placed
with the famous Ceolfrid, who taught him the elements of sacred and profane
literatiire. As disciple of Ceolfrid, Bede acquired all the science of his
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES. 245
Against the authority of Bede two objections are raised.
In his treatise, De Temporum Ratione, he writes as
follows : " 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 Afri-
canus, 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 his-
torical books alone. In the second place, we 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, customary
in introducing divine Scripture. Did he therefore reject
Maccabees, he would disagree with himself, and be absurdly in-
consistent. We believe, therefore, that in distinguishing Mac-
cabees 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 written to form a continu-
ous chain of chief events, and no other writings contain the
events of those times except the Holy 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 six-
teen years ; the first, of about forty. They are partly syn-
chronous, and combined would not cover a period of over fifty
years. Hence Bede could not say that divine Scripture con-
times. At the age of 19, he became deacon ; and at the age of 30, priest. He
began to write at the age of thirty, and has left extended commentaries on
neariy all the books of Holy Scripture. Excepting Augustine and Jerome, 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 Scrip-
ture. Full oft, however, he drifts away from the literal sense into an exces-
sive 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 educa-
tion during the middle ages.
*P. L. Migne, 90, 539.
246 THE CANON OF THE IX. CENTURY.
tained the series of events down to the Roman epoch. He,
therefore, drew a distinction between Maccabees and the pre-
ceding 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 fragment of it which existed in Macca-
bees had to be supplemented 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 corroborated."*
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 deu-
terocanonical works. The classing of the protocanonical works
in a distinct class, was warranted by patristic literature, and this
diligent student of patrology drew therefrom a mystic argu-
ment, without throwing doubt on the deuterocanonical books,
which formed a class by themselves. The last factor in re-
moving this class distinction, 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 Scripture.
We shall content ourselves with adducing representative 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.f 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. 53, he formulates the following Canon:
*P. L. Migne 93, 144.
■f-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 hia
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 Mayence in
847, and, as such, was distinguished for learning and zeal in guarding the
faith. He died in 856 at the age of 68 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. AND X. CENTURIES. 247
" These are, therefore, the books of the Old Testament ; 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 Deuteronomy. 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 Maccabees. With these are sixteen
prophetic books. There follow 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, Ecclesi-
astes, the Canticle of Canticles, 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 dis-
ciples to preach." The testimony of Rhabanus is identical
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 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 commentaries
of his master Rhabanus Maurus, on Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus,
Judith, and the Maccabees ; he has adopted Bede's com-
mentary on Tobias, and reproduces the text of Baruch without
commentary with this preface : " The book which is called
Baruch is not found in the Hebrew Canon, but only in the
Vulgate edition, as also the Epistle of Jeremiah. For the
knowledge of the readers, they are written here, for they con-
tain 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 concerning 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
*Walafrid, surnamed Strabo, the squint-eyed, was the disciple of Rha-
banus Maurus. He was born 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 Richenou in the diocese of Constance. He
was a man renowned for piety and profound learning. He died in 849. His
chief works are De Offlciis, and Glossa Ordinaria in Sacram Scripturam.
248 THE CANON OF THE X. CENTURY.
edition of our own 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 reception, it
follows that the decretal letters of Roman Pontiffs are to be re-
ceived, 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 "doctor
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 representative
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 tradi-
tion. We find that most of those who follow 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 opens the tenth century with an un-
favorable testimony.* In his work, De Interpretibus Divinae
*Notker, surnamed the stammerer, from his defective speech, was a monk
of St. Q«ll, who died in 913. 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 Divinse Scripturse, Liber Sententiarum, and a Martyrology.
THE CANON OF THE X., XI., AND XII. CENTURIES. 249
Scripturae, 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 (there-
from) explained in relation to other books. The book is totally-
rejected by the Hebrews, and is by christians considered uncer-
tain, nevertheless, since on account of the utility of its doctrine^
our forefathers were accustomed to read it, and the Jews have it
not, it is called with us Ecclesiasticus. What thou believest
of this, it behooveth thee to believe 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 Para-
lipomenon ? 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 testimony
of one monk 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 blundered 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 Gelasius always finds place. The col-
lection of Canons of the Church of Spain, published by Gonzalez
from a Codex of 976 contains the decree of Pope Innocent.
BURCHARD OF WORMS (tl025), (IVES OF CHARTRES (fl 1 17),
and Gratianus (fuss) 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 deutero-
canonical books to have been, in fact, not inferior to that
accorded them in the Church of to-day.
At the beginning of the twelfth century, St. Stephan
Harding, Abbot of Citeaux, made a recension of the Latin
Vulgate. In this recension of the year 1 109, we find all the
books of the Catholic Canon.
GiSLEBERT, Abbot of Westminister (fix 17), in his " Dispute
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, nevertheless, Jeremiah
has produced the data; for he who wrote this book, wrote not
260 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY.
Otherwise than under the dictation of Jeremiah." (P. L. Migne,
159, 1026-1027.) 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 him-
self thus : " Besides the aforesaid (the protocanonical books),
there are five books which are called by the Hebrews apocry-
phal, 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 Catholic
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
Ecclesiae, 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 decern.
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 Neemise 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
value of his opinion is not impaired by this error since, in such
opinion, he is not a witness of the Church's belief.
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 Wisdom ; the
second, Ecclesiasticus; the third, Tobias ; the fourth, Judith ;
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY. 251
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 bold-
ness 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 (f 1120?) in
his Gemma Animae, Chap. 118, 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 composed. 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 oi Maccabees ; 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
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 Officiarum, establishes the same order of
reading of the Scriptures.*
*Novem quae deinceps sequuntur, reputantur hagiographa, ita tamen ut
sint authentica, nimirum liber Psalmorum, liber Jobi, tres libri Salomonis,
scilicet Parabolse, sive mavis dicere Proverbia, Ecclesiastes et Canticum Canti-
corum, liber Paralipomenon, Judith et Esther. Quatuor tandem enumerant
262 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY.
Peter Comestor (fn/S) has a testimony favorable to us.*
In the history of the book of Josue, praef., he has the follow-
ing: "Job, David, three books of Solomon, Daniel, Paralipo-
menon, Ezra, Esther, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias,
Maccabees are called the Hagiographa (al. Apocrypha), be-
cause 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 confounded 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 apocryphal, 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 history
which treats of the history of the Book of Daniel. In the
XIII. Chapter he states: "There follows the history of Sus-
anna, which the Hebrew (text) does not contain in the 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 Jeremias testifies to have been burned ; and be-
cause we fable it to have been written by Daniel, whereas it
was written by a certain Greek." The loose ideas of inspira-
tion 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.f In his Com-
mentary on Genesis, Chap. XXXI., he denies the canonicity of
apocrypha, librum videlicet Tobiae, Machabseorum, Philonis, cujus principium
est : Diligite juBtitiam, et Jesu filii Sirach, qui sic incipit : Omnia 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.]
*Peter, surnamed 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 mem-
ory of Scripture. His best work is his Scholastic History, from which he
merited to be called the Master of history.
fRupert of Deutz was born 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.
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY. 253
Wisdom : " Concerning whom (Adam), whether he ever ob-
tained 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) preserved 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. i — 2). But this Scrip-
ture 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
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 pro-
tocanonical 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. On the same
work from the Seventh to the Twenty-sixth Chapter, Rupert
discourses on the books of Maccabees, which he clearly recog-
nizes as divine Scripture. (P. L. Migne, 169, 1428 — 1442).
We find in Rupert a man strongly imbued with the opinions
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 con-
sistent, and in his practical use of Scripture regularly quotes
the deuterocanonical books as divine Scripture. He breaks
254 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY.
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 Solomon,
the Book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, The Book of Judith,
Tobias, and the Maccabees, which are read, but are not written in
the Canon y
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 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 writings
are, as it were, adjuncts, and deductions from the foregoing."
(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
Scripturarutn, 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
*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 Aiiguttine. He died in 1140 at the age of forty -four
years.
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY. 255
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 uncertainty
which was finally removed by the Council of Trent. It was
not with those writers a question of the rejection of the deu-
terocanonical 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.
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 per-
fect authority."*
That the books should be read in the Chnrch, this was the
Church's work, infallible and uniform ; she preserved them for
her children, because they were divine : the fluctuation of in-
dividual opinions regarding their exact degree of inspiration,
was the work of man. As long as the main point, the deliver-
ance of the message of these books to the people, was safe-
guarded, the Church could permit the conflict of individual
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, surnamed the Venerable, is by some
quoted as an adversary of the deuterocanonical books.f
In his letter againt Peter of Bruys and his sect, called the
Petrobrusiani, 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. Patrum,
Lugduni, 1667, Tom. VII. 177. The work is not in Migne's collection.)
f Peter, the Venerable, entered the order of the Monks of Cluny, and in
1121 became general of the order. His great piety and learning placed him
in this post at the age of 28 years. Abelard found an asylum with him, and
was moved by him to retract his errors. Peter was indefatigable in combat-
ing 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
266 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY.
Tobias, Judith, and the two books of Maccabees. Although
these do not reach the sublime dignity of the preceding,
nevertheless, on account of their laudable and very necessary
doctrine, they have merited to be 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
to Moses of 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 unfavorable
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 deuterocanoni-
cal books. The only difference of opinion that existed, re-
garded 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 quota-
tations 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 Maccabaeus, the ex-
cellent leader of the Hebrews, the truthful Scripture commem-
orates 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 released 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 philospher saith : * A tale out of time is like music in
mourning.' "
of his order, he opposed St. Bernard, who reproached the order for their
worldliness, and sumptuousness in their buildings 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 1156. 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 XH. CENTURY. 257
In his treatise against the Jews, Chapter 11. , he proves the
divinity of Christ from the authority of Baruch : "And 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 Jeremiah, 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
is it that in a certain one of your books speaks by the
wise man : * My memory is unto everlasting generations '
(Eccli. XXIV. 28)? Is it not God ? Verily it is God." The
Council 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 many and different
opinions of the Fathers, following Jerome, a doctor of the
Catholic Church, whom I hold most approved in establishing
foundations of Scripture, I firmly believe that, as there are
twenty-two Hebrew letters, thus there are twenty-two 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 Scripture * * 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.)
*Jolin of Salisbury receives his name from his birthplace in England.
The date of his birth is about 1110. 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 1180. He has left many works, principal
among which is Polycraticus or the Vanities of the Court.
Q
268 THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY.
In the same work, he speaks again of the deuterocanonical
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 Pseudographus ;
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 similarity 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 quotations
from the deuterocanonical Scriptures as divine Scripture. He
was infected by a sort of hero worship towards St. Jerome,
somewhat similar to that which in our own 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 compre-
hensive 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 opin-
ions 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.
Chapter XI.
The Canon in the Church from the Beginning of
Thirteenth Century to Council of Trent.
Throughout this epoch, the Bible of the Church contained
the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books, without any
indication of difference them. This truth is clearly proven by
the many manuscripts existing of this period. Whether the
work of chaptering the Bible were done by Hugh of St. Caro
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
THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY. 269
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 : " Neverthe-
less, the truth of the book is not thereby called in question,
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 Jere-
miah. 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 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 Scripture 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
*Albert was bom at Lauingen, in Suabia, about the close of the twelfth
century. He was descended from the Counts of BoUstaedt. He studied at
Padua, and in 1223 entered the Dominican Order at Cologne. His life was
given to teaching in the schools and preaching. In 1254, he was made pro-
vincial of the Dominicans of Germany ; and in 1260, Bishop of Ratisbonne.
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 pompous 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.
f The secular name of St. Bonaventure was John Fidanza. He was bom
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 cele-
brated 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 Scripture. His works are
characterized by a moderation and wisdom, resembling that found in the
works of John Chrysostom.
260 THE CANON OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES.
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 : Gdd who
inspired it, Solomon who produced it, and Philo who com-
piled it." His works evince that he held the like opinion of
the other deuterocanonical books.
Alexander Neckam, professor at the University of Paris
at the commencement of the thirteenth century, wrote a com-
mentary on the difficult passages of Holy Scripture, and in-
cludes the books of both classes in the same category.
Robert Holkot (fi34o), a learned Dominican of
Northampton in England, is bold in favor of the deutero-
canonical books. " St. Augustine," he says, " expressly de-
clares in his Christian Doctrine (H. 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 : * Wisdom and Ecclesias-
ticus, since they have merited to be received in authority, are
reckoned among the prophetic books.' Wherefore, it is evident
that the book ( Wisdom) is counted among the Canonical Scrip-
tures in 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 Doctrin-
ale Fidei that the canonicity of a book must be determined by
the authority of the Church. He appeals against the followers
of Wicklef to the Decree of Gelasius, to establish the books that
are to be held in full authority.
John of Ragusa (ti450) a Domenican doctor of the
Sorbonne, who was president of the Council of Basle, announces
in no doubtful terms, in the aforesaid council, the doctrine 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 authority 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 to pertinaciously contradict."f The voice of
*Postilla super lib. Sapientiae, Cap. I. Sect. 2.
fMansi. CoU. Council. XXIX., p. 885.
THE CANON OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES. 261
the Church speaks through this man, which spoke again
through the Fathers of the Council of Trent.
St. Thomas Aquinas (ti274) does not treat the question
of the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books ex professo.
He is falsely, however, placed by some protestants, as an adver-
sary 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 ; Wis-
dom, more than one hundred and twelve times ; and Ecclesias-
ticus, more than one hundred and thirteen times.
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 pseudo 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 period 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 author-
ity 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 procured by
demons, if the authority of Ecclesiasticus is not received, for the
reason that it is not among the canonical Scriptures with the
JewsT This proposition is of a man who himself receives the
book but grants to his opponent the right to doubt it. It is
also of a man little interested in the question 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.
262 THE CANON OF THE XHI. AND XIV. CENTURIES.
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 a
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 learn-
ing of that time consisted chiefly in a command of what the
Fathers had written, and often we find conflictory 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 proba-
bly read Jerome and adopted his phraseology.
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.
Hugh of St. Caro (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 Machabaeorum 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
*Hugh was called of St. Caro, because the place of his birth was close to
the church of this name in the environs of Vienne in Dauphine. He entered
the Dominican Order, was made doctor of the Sorbonne, and afterwards Car-
dinal. 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 XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES. 263
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."
Hugh was hard pressed to keep with the Church, and follow
in everything St. Jerome. He called the deuterocanonical
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 deuterocanonical books.
William Occam (ti347) appeals to Jerome and Gregory
the Great in asserting that "Judith, Tobias, Maccabees, Eccles-
iasticus and Wisdom are not to be accepted to confirm that
which pertains to faith * * The Church reads them, but does
not receive them among her Canonical Scriptures."^
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 criticism
on a fact which the Church had not decided. To be sure, the
Church up to that time had not canonized these books by
formal decree ; whereas, the first books had been received by
her, canonized by the approbation of the supreme authority of
the first covenant; so that the denial of canonicity was not the
denial of inspiration. In saying that the Church did not use
these books to confirm faith, Occam speaks against the plain
*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 invinciMlis. In Occam we find an extreme representa-
tive 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 excommunicated him. He wa?
the author of many other bizarre opinions. He died at Munich in 1347,
according to general opinion absolved of ecclesiastical censures.
264 THE CANON OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES.
evidences of fact, for we have seen that the representative men
in the Church from the beginning, made equal use of these
books to teach doctrine and confute error.
Nicolas of Lyra (1340) is unfavorable to the deuterocan-
onical books.*
According to him the canonical books are of such authority
that anything that is contained in them should be firmly and
without discussion held as true, as also that which follows
directly from them * * but the books, which according to
Jerome, are not of the canon are received by the Church, 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
purpose, 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 deuterocanonial 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 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 Mac-
cabees." In these testimonies we find two elemeuts, first
what the Church held, and second what Nicolas held. He
bears witness that the Church receives the books, and she in
her subsequent 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
♦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 received 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 Chal-
daic, which gave to his commentaries of the Old Testament a solidity unlike
that found in the other writers of his time. He founds all on the literal
sense, and thus one is not offended by that excessive mysticism, which has so
much prevailed in past ages. He died in 1340.
THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY. 265
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 fourth of February, i44i,Pope Eugene IV., by and
with the approbation of the Council of Florence promulgated
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 in-
spiration 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, Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther,
Job, The Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of
Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah with
Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, twelve Prophets, * * * and the two
Books of Maccabees y^
*Labbe Coll, Concil. XVIII. 1223. Concilio Florentino perperam hoc
decretum attribui asserit HodiiLS (De text. orig. 659 col. III.) et post eum Bleek
(Einl. Ed. 2. p. 705) etc. Contra omnes hos ilia transcribere sufflcit, quae
Card, de Monte, primus Cone. Trid. praeses, ad similem objectionem re-
pondit : "Bulla ilia Eugenii, inquarecipiuntur libri sacri et est super unione
lacobitarum, et eius data est Prid. Non. Febr. 1441, vere edita est in Cone.
Florentino ante eius dissolutionem. 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 fuissse
unionem Graecorum, quum longe post, per tres sc. fere annos, perduraverit,
usque videlicet ad an. 1442, quo anno 6. Kal. Mai. celebrata 10. sessione, con-
cilium ipsum Romam translatum fuerit Praeterea quod bulla unionis
lacobitarum data 1441, in qua ipsi libri recipiuntur, edita fuerit in ipso con-
cilio, potest etiam ex originali, manu propria ipsius Eugenii et Cardinalium
ibi praesentium subscripta et plumbeo sigillo obsignata, quam ego ipse his
oculis vidi Romae una cum aliis actis concilii ab eisdem Eugenio et Cardina-
libus subscriptis et plumbeo sigillo obsignatis, quae nunc in arce molls
Adriani inter alias scripturas Sedis Apostolicae conservantur Verba autem :
'sacro approbante concilio,' in principio bullae unionis lacobitarum non pon-
untur, quia dictum principium totum pertinet ad prooemium ; ubi autem in-
cipit dispositiva, ponuntur quidem, ut in aliis bullis in concilio editis. Ibi
enim sic habetur : 'veram necessariamque doctrinam hodie in hac solemni ses-
sione, sacro approbante Oecumenico Concilio Florentino in nomine Domini
tradimus, etc' " {Theiner Acta. genuinaSS. oecumen. Conc.Trident. Zagrabiae
1874 I. p. 79, sq. Cfr. etiam Praenotata ad bullum unionis in Labbe 1. c).
Quod si Bleek (1. c.) post Keerl (Die Apocryphen des A. T. 1852, p. 150 sq.)
asserit, ante Concilium Tridentinum neminem quidquam de decreto isto audi-
visse, ad eos refutandos sufflciet testimonium Caietani ante primam Concilii
Tridentini indictionem demortui, quod sic se habet : " Cum hac distinctione
discernere poteris et dicta Augustini et scripta in Concilio Florentino sub
Eugenio IV. etc." (Cajetani Com. in Script., Lugd. 1639.) (Comely, op. cit.)
266 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 deutero-
canonical books had denied their inspiration. No one of them
had studied the exact concept of inspiration or canonicity, but
they had made use of vague distinctions to restrict the dignity
and value of the deuterocanonical books somewhat 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 of knowledge. Hence
we find writers after this decree doubting 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 in 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. Com-
menting 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 beginning they received it,
but after they had laid hands on Jesus and slain him, remem-
bering the evident testimonies concerning him in the same
book * * taking counsel, lest we should impute to them the
evident sacrilege, they cut the book off from the prophetic
volumes, and interdicted its reading. But we, on the Church's
*Tostatu8 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 not correspond to the vastness of his erudition. Bellarmine
styled him the wonder of the world. He died in 1455. This is his epitaph :
" Hie stupor est mundi, qui scibile discutit omne."
THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY. 267
authority, receive the book 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 Jewish 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 ques-
tion than he. This was the Church's position clearly and
definitely enunciated. But in trying to reconcile this position
of the Church with Jerome, he becomes oblivious of his former
position and assails the authority of the books which he here
calls authentic Scripture. 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 testimony 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
anyone, 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 doc-
trine, 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 Scriptures.
Furthermore, regarding these books, the Church is not certain
268 THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY.
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, Ecclesiasti-
cus, Maccabees, Judith and Tobias. For though these books
are received by Christians, and proof derived from them in
some degree may have weight, because the Church retains
those books, yet they are not effectual to 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 saying
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 (f 1459)
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." (Apud Cornely.)
The opinions of Antoninus are often strange and uncritical.
His piety moved him to an excessive veneration for 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
*Chron. III. 11, 2, Lugd. 1586. III. p. 551): " In aliquibus vero, inquibus
a fide vera discrepabant (lacobitae et Armenii) prohibentur, uti quod sacra-
mentum conflrmationis non habebant in usu conferendi illi nationi, declarato
eis, quod illud, sicut et cetera sacramenta deberent accipere, credere et con-
ferre, et aUqua alia, quae nunc non occurrunt menti."
THE CANON OF THE XVI. CENTURY. 269
Florence, making known to us, that the Church received these
books as divine Scripture. St. Antoninus quotes St. Thomas,
II. 2., as authority for his strange opinion, but a close exam-
ination fails to disclose any such text in the Summa.
Denis of Chartreux (ti47i) declares, that the Church
receives the deuterocanonical books as true, but not canonical.
He does not regard the fragments of Esther as divine Scrip-
ture.
Cardinal Ximenes (fisi/), in the preface to his Complu-
tensian Polyglott Bible, says : " The books, indeed, without
the Canon, which the Church receives rather for the edification
of the people than as an authoritative confirmation of the doc-
trines 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, be-
cause it did not employ the term canonical.
Erasmus (ti536) 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
(f 1524). 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 which they con-
tain. 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 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
*Apud Malou, II. 108.
270 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
without the canonical books, and are placed among the apocrypha,
together with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as appears in his
' Prologus Galeatus' (or Helmeted Prologue). Nor should you
be disturbed, O novice, if you should anywhere find those
books reckoned among the canonical books, either in the holy
councils, or in the holy doctors. For the words of the coun-
cils, as well as of the doctors, are to be submitted to the cor-
rection of Jerome ; and according to his judgment [expressed]
to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, 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 deuterocanonical books were received
and authorized in the Canon of the Bible.
Chapter XII.
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 un-
certainty produced by the opinion of Cajetan ; and the sect of
protestants which arose at this time rejected the deutero-
canonical books. To make head, therefore, against the great
apostasy and to make known to Catholics the absolute position
of the Church, the Council of Trent, was opened on the 15th
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 271
of December, 1545. The first deliberations of the Council were
concerned with the question of Holy Scripture. 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 Pur-
gatory 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 ex-
treme ideas, men looked to the Church for a definition, and
she responded to the need.
A Council held at Sens, in 1528 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 inven-
tors of all heresies; but this 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 :
I. — Whether the Council should receive the books of Scrip-
ture simply, or after a previous examination by the theolo-
gians.
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 bearings to
the Fathers.* Certain Fathers were of the mind that it would
be well to examine, at least summarily, the objections of the
*Duo ego subiiciam, quae in mea particulari congregatione tractata fue-
ruiit ; unum est, utrum simpliciter facienda sit approbatio Scripturae, prout
factum fuit per Cone. Florent. et iuxta etiam antiquiora concilia, an potius
distinguendum; qui sint libri sacri, ex quibus f undamenta nostrae fidei et doc-
trinae 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 Sapientiae, Promrbtorum et alii similes ; idque forsan non abs
re esset, quoniam videtur ambiguum necdum ab Ecclesia determinatum,
quamvis et Augustinus et Hieronymus et alii veteres de iis nonnulla tradide-
272 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
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 especially in the
Council of Florence." (Theiner 1. c.)
We see here that there was no new legislation in this regard
in the Council of Trent. The Council simply reiterated and
confirmed what had been believed and promulgated 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 dis-
tinction 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 Prologus
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.
So here, it is not evident just what distinction this man
wished to induce. But in every case, his proposition was use-
less. 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 Mac-
cabees 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 contested
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." (Theiner, I. 52.)
rint. Alterum est, utrum sicco pede approbatio ista facienda sit, an vero
additis rationibus et solutis argumentis, quibus adversarii maxime innituntur
ad eorum nonnuUos impugnandos et confringendos. Ab ipsis enim, ut omnes
vos scitis, infringitur imprimis liber Machdbaeorum, quem penitus reilciunt,
item Epistola Pauli ad Hebr. , una lacobi et altera Petri ac etiam Apocalypsis
et alia pleraque." Acta genuina p. 52. — Quod Proverbiorum liber cum
Sapientia coniungatur, lapsum calami diceres, nisi etiam Pallavicini
(1. c. I. p. 220) haberet : " Proverbiorum et Sapientlae libri." (Comely, op. cit.)
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 273
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 general, were
given up to various questions regarding Scripture and tra-
dition. On the 22d 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.
A detailed list of fourteen propositions was at this juncture
drawn up to be 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 deuterocanonical 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. 'j']^
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 Florence. It was
decided to receive the deuterocanonical books without exam-
ination or discussion by forty-one votes, against four in opposi-
tion and eight doubtful ones. The Council also unanimously
decided that the things carried by a majority vote should not
be subject to further discussion.
On the fifth 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: " It 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."
R
274 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
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
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 concerning 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, Deuteronomy; Joshua,
Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Chronicles, the
first of Ezra; and second which is called Nehemiah, Tobias,
ludith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter of one hundred and
fifty Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles of Canticles,
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Eze.
chiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, 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 Vulgate ;
and shall knowingly and wilfully 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 27th 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 Council by
Pallavicini might induce one into error. He states that the
question was submitted, whether all the books of both Tes-
taments should be approved. This would imply that the
•Cone. Trid. Sess. IV. De Can. Script.
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 275
Council felt itself not bound by the Council of Florence. The
authentic acts by Theiner give an entirely different sense to
the deliberation. 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 author-
ship, 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 sup-
porters in the Council. The ground of their opinion seems to
have been an imperfect understanding of the nature of inspira-
tion. The vast majority 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 in-
spired by Christian tradition, and for us, they are canonical."
The opponents 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 was left as
the Holy Fathers had left it. (Loisy, 1. c). This is nothing.
The Council did not deem it necessary to promulgate an ex-
plicit 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.
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 penetration, or from
excessive addiction to some theory, men of note give utter-
ance to false opinions. Especially is this true in the harmon-
izing of schools of theology, with some definitive sentence of
376 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
the Church. Those who have assimilated some theory in con-
flict with the new decree, will retreat from their position slowly,
and will endeavor, by restricting the degree, to cling to as much
as possible of the old opinion. Thus Cajetan tried to con.
form the decree of Florence to his own opinion. With time
these struggles and gasps of dying error cease, and the author-
ity 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 loose-
ness of opinion vanished from Catholic schools of theology,
so that every Catholic holds to-day that the deuterocan-
onical books are as much inspired and as canonical as the
Pentateuch or the Gospels.
An intentional falsehood is contained in Home's Introduc-
tion, Vol. II. p. 489*, where he places Bellarmine (ti62i)
against the deuterocanonical books, by taking certain passages
out of their proper context in the works of the great controver-
sialist. 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 testi-
monies 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 canonicity ;
they came into actual enjoyment of this right by the timely
decree of Trent.
The aforesaid Home also falsely adduces the testimony of
SiXTUS OF SlENNA.f
*De Verbo Dei. I. 1, Cap. IV.
f 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 condemned to
be burned at the stake. Just as the sentence was to be executed, 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 Grenoa, in
1569. His greatest work is his Bibliotheca Sancta. Many of his opinions
are excellent, but, at times, his critique is defective.
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 277
In his Bibliotheca Sancta (Tom. i. pag. i8), Sixtus distin-
guishes two classes of books. There he invented the terms
protocanonical and deuterocanonical, 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 com-
prises the books which were formerly known as ecclesiastical,
but which are now by us called deuterocanonical. These latter
were not recognized by all since the times of the Apostles, but
long afterward, and for this reason Catholic opinion concern-
ing them was, at first, uncertain. The early Fathers regarded
them as apocryphal and non-canonical, and only permitted
them to be read to the catechumens ; then with time they per-
mitted them to be read to the faithful, not for proof of doc-
trine, but for edification of the faithful ; and since these books
were read publicly in the Church, they were called ecclesias-
tical. Finally, they have been placed among the Scriptures
of irrefragable authority T
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 representative of the
opinions of his time. Against his testimony stands the united
testimony of the Council of Trent, composed 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 im-
plicitly held. But Sixtus 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 discourses of it : " The appendix of the Book of
Esther, which comprises the seven last chapters, consists of
various rags and patchwork, 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 un-
mindful of the decree of Trent, which, under pain of anathema,
commands that all the hooks 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,
278 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
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 canonical ; 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 excogi-
tate 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 deuterocanoni-
cal books is treated so severely by Jerome, as the fragments 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 main
tain 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 was in the
Vulgate and read in the Church was declared sacred and
canonical ; the fragments of Esther fulfill both these condi-
tions. 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 fragments. 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 1700, he resumes as fol-
lows:
" Nous dirons done, s'il vous plait, tous deux ensemble,
qu'une nouvelle reconnaissance de quelque livre canonique
dont quelques-uns auraient dout6 ne d^roge point a la per-
p^tuit^ de la tradition, . . Pour etre constante et perp^tuelle, la
v^rite catholique ne laisse pas d'avoir ses progr^s : elle est con-
nue en un lieu plus qu'en un autre, en un temps plus qu'en un
autre, plus clairement, plus distinctement, plus universelle-
ment. II sufifit, pour ^tablir la succession et la perp^tuit^ de
la foi d'un livre saint, comme de toute autre v6rit6, qu'elle soit
toujours reconnue ; qu'elle le soit dans les plus grand nombre
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 279
sans comparaison ; qu'elle le soit dans les EgHses les plus 6mi-
nentes, les plus anciennes et les plus r^v^r^es ; qu'elle s'y
soutienne, qu'elle gagne et qu'elle se r^pande d'elle-meme,
jusqu'k tant que le Saint-Esprit, la force de la tradition et le
gout, non celui des particuliers, mais I'universal de I'Eglise, la
fasse enfin pr^valoir 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'ayantpas tou-
jours une signification uniforme, nier qu'un livre soit canonique
en un sens, ce n'est pas nier qu'il ne le soit en un autre ; nier
qu'il soit, ce qui est tr^s vrai, dans le canon des H^breux, ou
regu sans contradiction parmi les chr^tiens, n'empeche pas
qu'il ne soit au fond dans le canon de I'Eglise, par I'autorit^ que
lui donne la lecture presque g^n^rale et par I'usage qu'on en
faisait par tout I'univers. C'est ainsi qu'il faut concilier plutdt
que commettre ensemble les Eglises et les auteurs eccl^sias-
tiques, par des principes communs k tous les divers sentiments
et par le retranchement de toute ambiguity."
The abb^ 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 6tablir Tautorit^ 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 r6v61ation k I'Eglise,
elle peut apres bien du temps etre plus assur^e de la v^rite
d'un ouvrage qu'elle ne I'^tait auparavant, quand, apr^s I'avoir
bien examine, elle a trouv6 un legitime fondement de n'en plus
douter et une tradition sufifisante 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'antiquit^ et par I'usage, et m^ritait d'etre
mise au rang des livres sacr^s du Noveau Testament.*
Bernard Lamy (fi/is) of the congregation of the oratory,
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
♦Dissert, prelim, ou Proleg. sur la Bible, 1. 53-53.
280 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT.
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.* But is plainly evident that
Ubaldi there means to distinguish between revelation, desig-
nated by him as the more intense mode of inspiration ; and
inspiration proper, which permitted the acquisition of know-
ledge by natural means. There is nothing in Ubaldi in support
of this vainly imagined distinction of degrees of canonicity.
A greater departure from the decree of the Council of
Trent was made by Jahn (fi8i6) 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 re-
ceived everywhere, and by all in past times." ©nteitung in bit
©ottUc^en ISiic^er be6 Sllten ©uitbeS. (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 were
equal to that of the first Canon. But they did declare that
*" Venim in specie et in concrete nihil vetat quominus in quibusdam locis
intensiorem veluti gradum inspirationis admittamus, atque ita diversos modus
inspirationis distinguamus. Imo hoc omnino faciendum videtur : siquidem
diversa rerum natura, et diversa Scriptoris conditio hoc requirere videtur.
Itaque, ud aliquid magis in specie dicamus, distinguere possumus loca Scrip-
turae propTietica, moralia et historica, et in his rursus substantiam historiae a
minutis quibusdam adiunctis. Ad loca prophetica quod attinet, duo casus
distinguendi sunt : vel enim vaticinium a propheta antea editum fuit, et
postea scripto consignatum, ut sunt pleraque vaticinia S. Scripturae, vel in
ipso scribendi actu vaticinium editum est : in primo casu sufficit communis
et ordinaria inspiratio ut Scriptura prophetica etiam formaliter, seu quatenus
scripta est, divina et inspirata dici possit ; in altero vero casu non solum in-
spiratio. sed vere ac proprie dicta revelatio necessaria fuit, cum futurorum
cognitio nonnisi ex divina revelations haberi possit. Talia sunt quaedam
leremiae 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 inspirationis 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 praedicatione, ut in
Evangeliis et Epistolis Apostolorum, sive ex scriptis documentis, vel etiam
ex propria experientia, ut generatim fiebat in scriptoribus sacrae historiae
utriusque Testamenti." Ubaldi II. 111.
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT. 281
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 canonicity, which they
now officially recognized ; and they rightfully based their action
on the mighty preponderance of the tradition of all times.
The opinions of Jahn have always been characterized by
error.*
It is not to be 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 enumerates
them, as sacred and canonical ; or shall deny that they are
divinely inspired, let him be anathema."f
Protestant opinion has been consistent in nothing since its
beginning; it has varied much regarding the Canon. The
Gallican Confession of 1559, ^^ 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 1813, he was also made professor of dogma in
the same university. He was a man of much erudition, but thoroughly in-
fected 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 hia works have also been prohibited. He died in 1816.
f Constit. dogmat. de fide Oath. Can. 4, De Revel.
The New Testament.
Chapter XIII.
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 by his death ; 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 adequate
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 or philosophical
depth to draw the import from the written instrument, and
Christ established the only means capable of teaching 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.
(282)
THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 283
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 many mysteries * * * And the other co-
laborers of the Lord, the twelve Apostles, the seventy disciples,
and many others, were by no means ignorant (of these mys-
teries). 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 write by a particular need."
(Euseb. Hist. Eccles. HL 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 faithfully 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 there were any Scriptures. 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 6'j of the Christian era ; the
period for Mark is from the year 40 to the year 70 ; 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 57 or in the
284 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
beginning of 58 ; the Epistle to the Galatians preceded that to
the Romans, and ranges between the year 5 5 and 57. The Epistle
of St. Paul to the Ephesians, the Epistle to the Colossians,
and the Epistle of 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 to the Epistles to Timothy, Titus
and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Modern 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 ^"j. The Epistle of
St. 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 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 Apos-
tolic 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 principal ; the
Scriptures were a means which the Church was to use. But as
God wished to provide adequately for the propagation and
preservation of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven, he also
brought it about that there should be preserved in writing
some of the most important truths of the New Dispensation.
The spirit of truth who was sent to suggest all things
necessary in the New Oeconomy, moved the holy men
to commit certain things to writing. But these writings
owe their origin to special occasions, and particular cir-
cumstances. Primarily they were intended for some one
or few individuals or churches. Gradually they became
interchanged and disseminated among the churches, and
THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 286
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
Scriptures of the New Law was by gradual accession. Docu-
ments 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 in-
ferred from a passage in the writings of St. Polycarp. " The
Epistles," he says, " of Ignatius (martyr), which were sent us
by him, 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 Epistles of
Ignatius, Martyr, much more would be bestowed on the writ-
ings of the Apostles and Founders of Christianity. We see
also in the testimony an evidence of the method of communi-
cating writings among the churches. Both agencies 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 Testament,
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 Christians :
" Wherefore, dearly beloved, waiting for these things, be dili-
gent * * * 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.)
286 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
" 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."
Cornely adduces a proof from the First Epistle to Timothy
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 corn ' ; and, ' The laborer
is worthy of his hire.* " (I. Tim. V. i8.) 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 the
works of the authors of the New Testament with the books of
the Old Testament, as of equal divinity and authority. The
rationalistic plague which infected the world in our century,
first essayed to overthrow this universally accepted truth,
claiming that the writings of the Apostles are never quoted in
the solema formulas used of the Old Testament, and that the
words of the Lord are quoted from oral tradition.
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 written 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 living reality.
The events had taken place in no remote age ; the first Chris-
tians 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 numer-
ous 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
THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 287
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 manner 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 was 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 complete list was formed by communication be-
tween the churches.
Hence, in the age immediately succeeding the
Apostles, we find several of the books of our Canon
recognized as divine Scripture.
In the Epistle vulgarly attributed to St. Barnabas, we find
a quotation from St. Matthew in the solemn formula " sicut
script um est," (o)? YeypaTrrai).*
The final sentence of the IV. Chapter of this Epistle is as
follows : " Let us pay heed lest we be found as it is written :
* 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
*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 idol-
atry." 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 punishment of the Jews in the destruction of their Temple ;
whereas, critics conclude that Barnabas did not live to see the taking of Jeru-
salem 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 presen-
tation of truth. Whoever 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 Chodorlahomor, was prophetic that Jesus
Christ was to be crucified!
288 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
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, Man-
gold attempted to destroy the force of the quotation by show-
ing that the pseudo Barnabas quotes Henoch in the formula :
"As it is written." But this would not prove 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. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians, Chapter XII.,
has this testimony : "As it is written in these Scriptures : ' 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 deny-
ing 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.)
68 allusions to the New Testament. The verbal paral-
lelism is so exact, that it is evident they were drawn from
the written deposit. We here exhibit some of the clear-
est ones :
Act II. 24. St. Polycarp Epist. ad Philip, i.
" — quem Deus suscitavit, solu- " — quern resuscitavit Deus,
tis doloribus inferni, juxta quod solutis doloribus inferni. In
impossibile erat teneri ilium quem non videntes creditis, cre-
ab eo." dentes autem exsultatis laetitia
inenarrabili et glorificata — ."
I. Pet. I. 8.
" — quem cum non videritis,
diligitis : in quem nunc quoque
non videntes creditis ; credentes
autem exultabitis laetitia ine-
narrabili et glorificata — ."
Epis. II. 8—9. Ibid.
" Gratia enim estis salvati per " — scientes, quod gratia estis
fidem, et hoc non ex vobis: Dei salvati, non ex operibus — ."
enim donum est, non ex operi-
bus, ut ne quis glorietur."
THE CANON OF N. T. OF POLYCARP.
289
I. Pet. I. 13.
" Propter quod succincti lum-
bos mentis vestrae, sobrii per-
fecte sperate in earn, quae offer-
tur vobis, gratiam, in revela-
tionem Jesu 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 male-
dicto."
Math. VII. 1—2.
"Nolite judicare, ut non judice-
mini. In quo enim judicio judi-
caveritis, judicabimini : et in qua
mensura mensi fueritis, remetie-
tur vobis."
Luke VI. 36—38.
Estote ergo misericordes, sicut
et Pater vester misericors est.
Nolite judicare, et non judicabi-
mini : nolite condemnare, et non
condemnabimini. Dimittite, et
dimittemini. Date, et dabitur
vobis : mensuram bonam et con-
fertam, et coagitatam et super-
effluentem dabunt in sinum vest-
rum. Eadem quippe mensura,
qua mensi fueritis, remetietur
vobis."
Math. V. 3.
"Beati pauperes spiritu, quo-
niam ipsorum est regnum coelo-
rum."
Ibid. 10.
Beati, qui persecutionem patiun-
tur propter justitiam, quoniam
ipsorum est regnum coelorum."
Ibid. II.
** Propter quod succincti lum-
bos vestros servite Deo in
timore — ."
Ibid.
" Is vero, qui ipsum suscitavit
e mortuis, et nos suscitabit — ."
Ibid.
" — non reddentes malum pro
malo, nee maledictum pro male-
dicto— ."
Ibid.
" — memores autem eorum,
quae dixit Dominus doeens :
* Nolite judicare, ne judicemini ;
dimittite, et dimittetur vobis ;
miseremini, ut misericordiam
consequamini; qua mensura men-
si fueritis, remetietur vobis' ; et :
' Beati pauperes, et qui persecu-
tionem patiuntur, quoniam ip-
sorum est regnum Dei.' "
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 possumus."
Gal. VI. 7.
" Nolite errare : Deus non irri-
detur."
I. Pet. II. II.
" — carissimi, obsecro vos
tamquam advenas et peregrines
abstinere vos a camalibus desi-
deriis, quae militant adversus
animam — ."
Rom. XIV. 10, 12.
" Tu autem, quid judicas fra-
trem tuum ? aut tu, quare sper-
nis fratrem tuum ? Omnes enim
stabimus ante tribunal Christi.
Itaque unusquisque nostrum pro
se rationem reddet Deo."
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 nune
jam in mundo est.
Ibid. III.
" Neque enim ego, neque alius
mei similis beati et gloriosi Pauli
sapientiam assequi potest ; qui
eum esset apud vos, coram hom-
inibus tune viventibus perfecte
ac firmiter verbum veritatis
docuit ; qui et absens vobis serip-
sit epistolas, in quas si intuea-
mini, aedificari poteritis in fide,
quae vobis est data, quaeque est
mater omnium nostrum — ."
Ibid. IV.
" Prineipium autem omnium
malorum est habendi cupiditas."
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 mili-
tat adversus spiritum — ."
Ibid. VI.
" — omnes ante tribunal Christi
stare, et unumquemque pro se
rationem reddere oportet."
Ibid. VII.
** Omnis enim qui non con-
fessus fuerit Jesum Christum in
came venisse, Antichristus est — . "
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
291
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 autem
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 lig-
num — ."
I. Pet. II. 12.
" — conversationem vestram
inter gentes habentes bonam — ."
Ibid.
" — rogantes omnium conspec-
torem Deum, ne nos inducat in
tentationem, sicut dixit Dominus:
'Spiritus quidem promptus est,
caro autem infirma.' "
Ibid. VIII.
" — qui peccata nostra in cor-
pore suo super lignum pertulit,
qui peccatum non fecit, nee in-
ventus est dolus in ore ejus — ."
Ibid. X.
" Omnes vobis invicem sub-
jecti estote, conversationem ves-
tram irreprehensibilem habentes
in gentibus — ."
Ibid. XI.
"An nescimus, quia sancti
mundum judicabunt ? sicut Pau-
lus docet. Ego autem nihil tale
sensi in vobis, vel audivi, in qui-
bus laboravit beatus Paulus, qui
estis in principioEpistolaeejus."
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 been
defended by such an excellent critic as Wetstein. The follow-
ing schema exhibits Clement's use of the New Testament.
St. Clementis Epist. I, ad
I. Cor. VI. 2.
" An nescitis, quoniam sancti
de hoc mundo judicabunt ? Et si
in vobis judicabitur mundus, in-
digni estis, qui de minimis judi-
cetis ? "
Luke VI. 36—38.
" Estote ergo misericordes, si-
cut et Pater vester misericors est.
Nolite judicare, et non judica-
bimini : nolite condemnare, et
non condemnabimini. Dimittite,
et dimittemini. Date, et dabi-
tur vobis : mensuram bonam et
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
292
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
confertain, et coagitatam et su-
pereffluentem dabunt in sinum
vestrum. Eadem quippe men-
sura, qua mensi fueritis, remetie-
tur vobis,' "
Math. XXVI. 24.
" Filius quidem hominis vadit,
sicut scriptum est de illo : vae
autem homini illi, per quem Fi-
lius hominis tradetur : bonum
erat ei, si natus non fuisset homo
iUe."
Luke XVII. 2.
" Utilius est illi, si lapis mola-
ris imponatur circa collum ejus,
et projiciatur in mare, quam ut
scandalizet unum de pusillis
istis."
I. Paul, I. Cor. 12.
" Hoc autem dico, quod unus-
quisque vestrum dicit : Ego qui-
dem sum Pauli : ego autem
Apollo : ego vero Cephae : ego
autem Christi."
I. Peter IV. 8.
" Ante omnia autem, mutuam
in vobismetipsis caritatem con-
tinuam habentes, quia caritas
operit multitudinem peccato-
ita vobis indulgebitur ; qua men-
sura metimini, in ea mensura-
bitur vobis.' "
Ibid. XLVI.
" Recordamini verborum Jesu
Domini nostri. Dixit enim :
*Vae homini illi : bonum erat ei,
si natus non fuisset, quam ut
unum ex electis meis scandali-
zaret : melius erat, ut ei mola
circumponeretur, et in mare de-
mergeretur, quam ut unum de
pusillis meis scandalizaret.'"
Ibid. XLVII.
" Sumite Epistolam beati Pauli
Apostoli. Quid primum vobis in
principio Evangelii scripsit ?
Profecto in Spiritu ad vos litteras
dedit de seipso et Cepha et
Apollo, quia etiam tum diversa
in studia scissi eratis."
Ibid. XLIX.
" Charitas nos Deo agglutinat:
charitas operit multitudinem pec-
catorum : charitas omnia sus-
tinet — ."
Math. IX. 13.
" Euntes autem discite, quid
est : Misericordiam volo, et non
sacrificium. Non enim veni vo-
cari justos, sed peccatores."
Ibid. X. 32.
" Omnis ergo, qui confitebitur
me coram hominibus, confitebor
et ego eum coram Patre meo, qui
in coelis est — ."
St. dementis Epist. II. ad
Corinthios, II,
" Alia quoque Scriptura dicit :
* Non veni vocare justos, sed pec-
catores — .' "
Ibid. III.
*' Ait vero etiam ipse : 'Qui
me confessus fuerit in conspectu
hominum, confitebor ipsum in
conspectu Patris mei.' "
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
293
Ibid. VII. 21.
" Non omnis, qui dicit mihi :
Domine, Domine, intrabit in reg-
num coelorum, sed qui facit vo-
luntatem Patris mei, qui in coelis
est, ipse intrabit in regnum coe-
lorum."
Ibid. VII. 23.
" Et tunc confitebor illis : Quia
nunquam novi vos : discedite a
me, qui operamini iniquitatem."
Math. X. 28.
" Et nolite timere cos, qui oc-
cidunt corpus, animam aulem
non possunt occidere, sed potius
timete eum, qui potest et animam
et corpus perdere in gehennam."
Math. VI. 24.
" Nemo potest duobus dominis
servire :
Math. XVI. 26.
** Quid enim prodest homini,
si mundum universum lucretur,
Ibid. IV.
" Non modo igitur ipsum vo-
cemus Dominum ; id enim non
salvabit nos ; siquidem ait : ' Non
omnis qui dicit mihi, Domine,
Domine, salvabitur ; sed qui
facit justitiam.' "
Ibid.
" Idcirco, nobis haec facien-
tibus, dixit Dominus : *Si fueritis
mecum congregati in sinu meo,
et non feceritis mandata mea,
abjiciam vos, et dicam vobis :
Discedite a me ; nescio vos unde
sitis, operarii iniquitatis.' "*
Ibid. V.
"Ait enim Dominus: 'Eritis
velut agni in medio luporum.'
Respondens autem Petrus ei
dicit : * Si ergo lupi agnos dis-
cerpserint ? ' Dixit Jesus Petro:
* Ne timeant agni post mortem
suam lupos : et vos nolite timere
eos qui occidunt vos, et nihil
vobis possunt facere ; sed timete
eum, qui postquam mortui fuer-
itis, habet potestatem animae et
corporis, ut mittat in gehennam
ignis."f
Ibid. VI.
" Dicit autem Dominus : Nul-
lus servus potest duobus dominis
servire."
Ibid.
" Si nos volumus et Deo ser-
vire et mammonae, inutile nobis
*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 quota-
tion from some apocryphal gospel.
fMost of the passage is taken from some apocryphal gospel. The test of
time and judgment of the Church had not yet distinguished between the
genuine and the apocryphal 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.
294 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
animae vero suae detrimentum
patiatur ? Aut quam dabit homo
commutationem pro anima sua?"
This passage is also quoted by
Irenaeus, Lib. II, 64, as a saying
of the Lord. Grabe believes it
to be from the apocryphal gospel
according to the Hebrews.
Math. XII. 50.
" Quicumque enim fecerit vo-
luntatem Patris mei, qui in coelis
est, ipse meus f rater et soror, et
mater est."
Math. V. x6.
" Sic luceat lux vestra coram
hominibus, ut videant opera
vestra bona, et glorificent patrem
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."
II. Tim. III. 5.
** — habentes speciem quidem
pietatis, virtutem autem ejus ab-
negantes. Et hos devita — ."
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 placeat
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.
est. Nam ' quae utilitas, si quis
universum mundum lucretur,
animam autem detrimento affi-
ciat.'"
Ibid. VIII.
" Ait quippe Dominus in Evan-
gelio : ' Si parvum non servastis,
quis magnum vobis dabit ? Dico
enim vobis : Qui fidelis est in
minimo, et in majori fidelis est."
Ibid. IX.
" Etenim Dominus dixit :
' Fratres mei sunt ii qui faciunt
voluntatem Patris mei.' "
St. Clementis Epist. I. ad
Virgines, II.
*' — sicque adimplentur Christi
verba : * Videant opera vestra
bona, et glorificent Patrem ves-
trum qui in coelis est.' "
Ibid. III.
** Itaque nemo vos seducat
inanibus verbis — ."
Ibid.
" — de talibus enim scriptum
est : ' Habentes speciem quidem
pietatis, virtutem autem ejus
abnegantes.' "
Ibid. V.
" Solicita sit necesse est quae
Domini sunt, quomodo placeat
Deo, ut sit sancta corpore et
spiritu."
Ibid. VI.
" Angelus fuit Joannes : talem
esse decebat Domini nostri prae-
cursorem, quo major non fuit
inter natos mulierum."
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
296
Phil. IV. 3.
"Etiam rogo et te, germane
compar, adjuva illas, quae mecum
laboraverunt in Evangelic cum
Clemente, et ceteris adjutoribus
meis, quorum nomina sunt in
libro."
Heb. XIII. 7.
" Mementote praepositorum
vestrorum, qui vobis locuti sunt
verbum Dei, quorum intuentes
exitum conversationis, imitamini
fidem."
I. Cor. IV. 16.
" Rogo ergo vos : Imitatores
mei estote, sicut et ego Christi."
Ibid.
*' Eamdem viam amplexati
sunt et Paulus, et Barnabas, et
Timotheus, quorum nomina sunt
in libro vitae — ."
Ibid.
" Scriptumest enim: 'Memen-
tote praepositorum vestrorum,
quorum intuentes exitum conver-
sationis, imitamini fidem.'"
Ibid.
" Et alibi dictum est : * Imi-
tatores mei estote, fratres, sicut
et ego Christi.'"
In the Eighth Chapter of this First Epistle of Clement to
Virgins, ten phrases occur bearing on them clearest evidence
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. Ibid. VIII.
** Quod natum est ex came, " Carnales sunt isti omnes
caro est, et quod natum est ex eorumque similes : ' quod enim
spiritu, spiritus est."
Ibid. 31.
" Qui desursum venit, super
omnes est. Qui est de terra, de
terra est, et de terra loquitur.
Qui de coelo venit, super omnes
est."
Rom. VIII. 7.
" — Quoniam sapientia camis
inimica est Deo ; legi enim Dei
non est subjecta, nee enim po-
test."
Rom. VIII. 9.
" — Si quis autem Spiritum
Christi non habet, hie non est
ejus."
I. Cor. V. II.
" — cum ejusmodi nee cibum
sumere."
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."
296
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
II. Thess. III. II — 12.
"Audivimus enim, inter vos
quosdam ambulare inquiete, nihil
operantes, sed curiose agentes.
lis autem, qui ejusmodi sunt, de-
nuntiamus, et obsecramus in Do-
mino Jesu Christi, ut cum silen-
tio operantes, suum panem man-
ducent."
I. Tim. I. 7.
" — volentes esse legis doc-
tores, non intelligentes neque
quae loquuntur, neque de quibus
affirmant."
I. Cor. XII. 28.
" Et quosdam quidem posuit
Deus in ecclesia primum Aposto-
los, secundo Prophetas, tertio
Doctores — ."
St. Jac. III. 2.
"In multis enim offendimus
omnes. Si quis in verbo non
offendit, hie perfectus est vir ;
potest etiam freno circumducere
totum corpus."
I. Pet. IV. II.
" Si quis loquitur, quasi ser-
mones Dei — ."
Coloss. IV. 6.
" Sermo vester semper in gratia
sale sit conditus, ut sciatis, quo-
modo oporteat vos unicuique re-
spondere."
Rom. XVL 18.
" Hujuscemodi enim Christo
Domino nostro non serviunt, sed
suo ventri ; et per dulces sermo-
nes et benedictiones seducunt
corda innocentium."
Ibid.
" Sed reipsa sola ducuntur
otiositate, cum sint ipsi non
solum otiosi, sed et verbosi, et
curiosi, loquentes quae non opor-
tet. Hi, per dulces sermones,
quaestum venantur in nomine
Christi. Hos sinistra praefigit
nota divinus Apostolus multa
mala in eis redarguens."
Ibid. XI.
"Sed sunt inquieti, non in-
telligentes quae loquuntur, neque
de quibus affirmant."
Ibid.
" Hanc autem viam multi
sequuntur, quia non animadver-
tunt quod scriptum est : ' Non
multos in vobis, fratres, positos
esse doctores et prophetas '; et
iterum : ' Si quis in verbo non
offendit, hie perfectus est vir.
Potest etiam freno circumducere
totum corpus. Si quis loquitur,
quasi sermones Dei — .' "
Ibid.
" — et iterum : Sermo vester
semper in gratia sale sit con-
ditus, ut sciatis quomodo opor-
teat vos unicuique respondere— ."
Ibid.
" Quidam tandem beatum po-
pulum dicunt, et per dulces
sermones et benedictiones, sedu-
cunt corda innocentium."
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
297
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. 11. 4 ; and Ephes.
II. 2 :
" — in quibus aliquando am-
bulastis secundum saeculum
mundi hujus, secundum princi-
pem potestatis aeris hujus, spiri-
tus, qui nunc operatur in filios
diffidentiae."
Math. XVII. 20.
"Hoc autem genus non ejici-
tur nisi per orationem et jeju-
nium."
Math. X. 8.
" Infirmos curate, mortuos sus-
citate, leprosos mandate, daemo-
nes ejicite : gratis accepistis, gra-
tis date."
Mat. XXV. 36.
" — nudus, et cooperuistis me :
infirmus, et visitastis me : in car-
cere eram, et venistis ad me."
II. Cor. XI. 29.
*' Quis infirmatur, et ego non
infirraor ? quis scandalizatur, et
ego non uror ? "
Math. IX. 37—38.
** Tunc dicit discipulis suis :
Messis quidem multa, operarii
Ibid.
" Hi sunt veluti caecus qui
caeco ducatum praestat, quique
ambo in foveam cadunt."
Ibid.
"Hi portabunt judicium, quia
sapientiam animalem vanumque
mendacium garruli inanique
scientia infiati praedicant in per-
suasibilibus humanae sapientiae
verbis, secundum saeculum mun-
di hujus, secundum principem
potestatis aeris hujus, spiritus
qui operatur in filios diffidentiae,
et non secundum doctrinam
Christi."
Ibid. XII.
" — non enim agunt cum recta
fide, et juxta doctrinam Domini
qui dixit : ' Hoc genus daemoni-
orum non ejicitur nisi per or-
ationem et jejunium.' "
Ibid.
"Vos igitur quibus dictum
est : ' Gratis accepistis, gratis
date—.' "
Ibid.
** Praeclarum ac utile est ut
servi Domini morem gerant, in-
ter caetera similia, huic praecepto
divino : ' Infirmus eram, et visi-
tastis me.' "
Ibid.
" — memores verborum Apos-
toli : ' Quis infirmatur, et ego
non infirmor ? Quis scandali-
zatur, et ego non uror ?' "
Ibid. XIII.
"Memores enim esse debent
messem ■ quidem esse multam.
298
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
autem pauci. Rogate ergo Do-
minum messis, ut mittat opera-
rios in messem suam."
Jo. VI. 27.
"Operamini non cibum, qui
perit, sed qui permanet in vitam
aeternam — ."
Luke I. 75.
" — in sanctitate et justitia co-
ram 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 nostro
Deo — ."
II. Cor. VI. 3.
" Nemini dantes ullam offen-
sionem, ut non vituperetur mini-
sterium nostrum — "
II. Cor. V. II.
** Scientes ergo timorem Do-
mini hominibus suademus, Deo
autem manifesti sumus."
I. Tim. V. 10.
" — in operibus bonis testimo-
nium habens, si filios educavit,
si hospitio recepit, si sanctorum
pedes lavit, si tribulationem pa-
tientibus subministravit, si omne
opus bonum subsecuta est.
operarios autem paucos : ideoque
rogent Dominum messis ut mittat
operarios in messem suam — ."
Ibid.
" — operarios qui operentur
non cibum qui perit, sed qui per-
manet in vitam aeternam — ."
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 ofifendatur aut
scandalizetur : Nemini dantes
ullam offensionem, ut non vitu-
peretur ministerium nostrum."
Ibid.
" Scientes ergo timorem Domi-
ni, hominibus suademus ; Deo
autem manifesti sumus."
Ibid. IV.
" Haec autem prae aliis senes-
cens mulier eligitur quae diu pro-
bata est assiduitate medita-
tionum, hincque perspecta si
filios educavit, si hospitio re-
cepit, si sanctorum pedes lavit."
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
299
I. Cor. X. 33.
" — sicut et ego per omnia om-
nibus 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 secun-
dum caritatem ambulas. Noli
cibo tuo ilium perdere, pro quo
Christus mortuus est."
I. Cor. VIII. 12.
" Sic autem peccantes in fra-
tres, et percutientes conscientiam
eorum infirmam, in Christum pec-
catis."
Math. X. 16.
" Ecce, ego mitto vos sicut
oves in medio luporum. Estote
ergo prudentes sicut serpentes,
et simplices sicut columbae."
Ephes, V. 15 — 16.
" Videte itaque, fratres, quo-
modo caute ambuletis : non quasi
insipientes, sed ut sapientes."
Math. VII. 6.
" Nolite dare sanctum cani-
bus : neque mittatis margaritas
vestras ante porcos — ."
I. Cor. X. 12.
" Itaque, qui se existimat stare,
videat, ne cadat."
I. Tim. V. II.
"Adolescentiores autem viduas
devita : cum enim luxuriatae
fuerint in Christo, nubere vo-
lunt — ."
Joa. IV. 27.
" Et continuo venerunt dis-
cipuli ejus et mirabantur, quia
cum muliere loquebatur, etc."
Ibid. V.
" — nee 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 conscien-
tiam eorum infirmam, in Chris-
tum peccatis.* "
Ibid VI.
" — debemus esse prudentes
sicut serpentes, et simplices sicut
columbae, non quasi insipientes,
sed ut sapientes — ."
Ibid.
'* — ne demus sanctum cani-
bus, mittamusque margaritas ante
porcos — ."
Ibid. XIII.
"Et iterum : Qui se existimat
stare, videat ne cadat."
Ibid. XIV.
"Nullum porro sanctum anim-
advertetis frequenter fuisse con-
versatum cum virginibus aut
adolescentioribus virorum uxori-
bus vel viduis, quas devitandas
esse divinus docet Apostolus."
Ibid. XV.
" De ipso Domino Jesu Christo
scriptum est, quod venientes dis-
cipuli, et videntes eum prope
300 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME.
fontem seorsim cum Samaritana
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. Ibid.
" Dicit ei Jesus : Noli me tan- Insuper, postquam Dominus a
gere, nondum enim ascendi ad mortuis surrexit, cum Maria ad
Patrem meum : vade autem ad sepulcrum properasset, eumque
fratres meos, et die eis : Ascendo adorans, ipsius pedes tenere vo-
ad Patrem meum et Patrem ves- luisset: 'Noli, inquit, me tangere:
trum, Deum meum et Deum ves- nondum enim ascendi ad Patrem
trum," meum.' "
Phil. III. 16. Ibid. XVI.
" Verumtamen ad quod perve- " Idcirco, fratres, rogamus, vos
nimus, ut idem sapiamus, et in in Domino, ut idem sapiamus,
eadem permaneamus regula." et in eadem permaneamus re-
gula-."
I. Jo. IV. 6. Ibid.
" Nos ex Deo sumus. Qui " Qui novit Deum, audit nos :
non est ex Deo, non audit nos, qui non est ex Deo, non audit
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 guarda e
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 recognized as
Holy Scripture.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS. 301
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 Philosophoumena, VII. 20, we find
this testimony : * Basilides said that out of nothing (e/c ovk
ovTcov) was made the germ of the universe, the word, as it is
said : " Let there be light "; and this is what is said in t/ie
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." According to Origen,
Basilides commented the Epistle to the Romans. In Origen's
Commentary on Romans, Lib. V. i, we find the following:
" Sed haec Basilides non advertens de lege naturali debere
intelligi, ad ineptas et impias fabulas sermonem apostolicum
traxit, et in fMerevaoy/xaTMaea)'? 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 Basilides, et
si qui cum ipso hoc sentiunt, in sua impietate relinquantur."
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 some-
what cogent, but not apodictic. It is certainly far more prob-
302 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS.
able 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/ ixrj ev Tol<i ap^^eioi^ evpa, iv ra evayyeXio), ov
TTiarevco.' 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 to evayyeXitp and translate
it : Unless I find evidence in the ancient writings, I will not
believe the Gospel. This version is rejected by Funk,
(Patres Apost. i, 230), Comely (Introduction I. 159), and
Loisy (Canon du Nouveau Test., 28). They insist on the fact
that the laws of the Greek language permit not such sense.
They instead place ra evayyeXico in opposition to Totf; apxeioa
in which case, it would certainly refer to a written Gospel.
Though the Greek construction is somewhat rough, I am dis-
posed to accept the first opinion. The context and line of
argument evince that Ignatius was arguing against those who
demanded an excessive verification of prophecy for faith in
the Gospel. The ra apx^ta 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 substantiate New Testament teaching. For
Christ and the Cross merit faith, irrespective of prophecy.
Finally, he says, 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 testi-
mony plainly point to such. Not so much in any one word
as in the whole passage does it become evident, that
Ignatius is speaking of a written instrument which he is com-
THE CANON OF N. T. OF PAPIAS. 303
paring, like with like, to the Prophets, and extolling above
them. This sense is corroborated by a testimony in his
Epistle to those of Philadelphia, 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." The testimony
evidently speaks of the Gospels, and the other writings of the
New Law which perpetuated 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.^
We may also adduce here the testimony of Papjas, who, ac-
cording to Irenaeus, was a disciple of St. John, and a companion
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 ^ * * Wherefore,
Mark erred in nothing, writing certain things as he remem-
bered them."
* Reuss (Hist, du Canon Strasb. 1863, p. 33): "Ala verite on ne de-
couvre pas encore dans ces epitres (Patrum apostolicorum) des citationes
nominatives k de rares exceptiones pr&s...et surtout les textes des apotres ne
sont nuUe part invoques expressment et literalment comme des autorites
(Cfr. tamen Polyc. ad Philip. 13). Mais ils sont quelquefois exploites tacite-
ment de facon qu'il est impossible de s'y tromper ; en certains endroits, les
exhortations revetent les formules employees par ces illustres predecesseurs,
et Ton se convainc facilement que le» ecrivains de cette seconde generation
faisaient dejd une etude des autres de la premUre. C'est ainsi que la lettre de
Clement oflre des reminiscences assez precises de quelques passages des
epitres aux Remains et aux Corinthiens et surtout de celle aux Hebreux ;
celles d'Ignace, plus nombreuses (quae tamen simul sumtae vix priorem
dementis longitudine aequant) et en tout cas beaucoup plus recentes, en
present d'autres qui nous ram^nent aux epitres aux Corinthiens et aux Galates
ainsi qu'fi, I'^i^vangile de Jean ; enfln la toute petite epitre de Polycarpe con-
tient de frequentes allusions a des passages apostoliques, notamment aux
Actes, S la premiere epitre de Pierre, S celles aux Rom., aux Gal., aux lEphes.,
et ^ la Timothee. Encore une fois, cet usage est purement homiletique ou
rhetorique ; nulle part un nom d'apotre, une formule de citation (?), un avis
quelconque n'avertit le lecteur que les paroles, que nous reconnaissons im-
mediatement comme des elementes d'emprunt, aient une valeur particuliere
et differente de celles de I'entourage)." (Comely, op. cit. pag. 160.)
304 THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF I. CENTURY.
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 Mat-
thew is termed the \6yia {KvpiuKh), 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 writ-
ten Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Eusebius also, in the
same place, declares that " the same Papias, made use of testi-
monies taken from the first Epistle of St. John and the first of
Peter." The Gospel of Matthew has also in its favor, the tes-
timony 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 embraced Chistianity.
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 second
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 supposed
the same to exist with those to whom they wrote. The whole
fourteen Epistles may not have been equally known, but Loisy
(op. cit.) who is not disposed to be too favorable to the Cath-
olic position, admits thirteen in the collection then received.
The Acts of the Apostles are used by Ignatius, Polycarp,
and Clement of Rome. The Epistle of James, the First Epistle
of Peter, and First of John, have clearest testimonies. St.
Irenaeus (Contra Haereses V. 30) declares that those who saw
John face to face bear witness to the Apocalypse. He evi-
dently means by such phrase, Papias and Polycarp. 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
Scriptures.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF JUSTIN. 305
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 {aTro/jLvrjixovevfiaTo) which are
called Gospels, declare that Jesus thus commanded them ;
that he took bread, and, having given thanks, said : * Do this
in remembrance 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 6^, he again speaks of the Gospels : " On 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 by 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 allusion
to St. Luke's Gospel here, for only Luke speaks of the sweat
like drops of blood.
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 Memorabilia 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 born 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 addition
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."
T
306 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CHURCH OF EDESSA.
The few works that remain of Justin are filled with passages
taken from the Gospels, without acknowledgment of source.
St. Justin, in Apologia pro Christianis, I. 63, speaking of
Christ, says: " He is called an angel and an APOSTLE." It is
only in the Epistle to the Hebrews, HI. i, that Christ is called
an Apostle.
In his Treatise against Tryphon, 33, he draws a comparison
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 Testament, 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 re-
turned to his native country and fixed his domicile at Edessa.
He composed there his famous Diatessaron, or harmony of
the four Gospels in Syriac. This work was, in 1888, translated
into Latin by Cardinal Ciasca, from the Arabic 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 Gospels
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 follow-
ing 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 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 (2)ie ebeffenifcfte abgar— fage, Brunswick, 1880) and the
Abbfi Tixeront (Les Origines de Vkglise d'lldesse, 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 in the tradition of the Edessene Church of that period.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MARCION. 307
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 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 up, and the teaching {Kapd8o<n<;) of the
Apostles is preserved, and the grace of the Church exults."
Melito of Sardis, according to Eusebius(Hist. Eccles, IV. 26)
wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John. The
work has not been preserved for us.
Marcion rejected the Old Testament, and mutilated the
New.f He found a fundamental repugnance between the Law
and the Gospel. Since the New Testament endorses in many
places the Old Testament, Marcion expurgated it. Of the
Gospels, he took only that of Luke, mutilated to suit his
scope. Out of Paul's Epistles, he constituted the Apostolic
Book, containing the Epistle to the Galatians, the two Epistles
to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Romans, the two Epistles
to the Thessalonians, the Epistle to the Ephesians (called by
him the Epistle to those of Laodicea), the Epistle to the
Colossians, the Epistle to the Philippians, and that to Phile-
mon.
" Et super haec, id quod est Evangelium secundum Lucam
circumcidens, et omnia quae sunt de generatione Domini con-
scripta auferens, et de doctrina sermonum Domini multa au-
*The Epistle to Diognetus was formerly attributed to Justin the martyr.
Many critics reject the authorship, but a conservative opinion will place it as
early as 170, A. D.
fMarcion was born in Sinope, in Pontus. His father was bishop of that city.
Marcion, being cut off from the Church for having offered violence to a virgin,
came to Rome between the years 140 and 165. He there became attached to
the party of Cerdon, the heretic. But later he extended the system by new
errors. The system of Marcion has this in common with the Manichean
heresy, that it constitutes two principles, the one good and the other evil,
the first causes of everything. According to Marcion, the flesh was the crea-
tion of the evil principle, and therefore, Christ had only an apparent body.
308 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
ferens, in quibus manifestissime conditorem hujus universitatis
suum Patrem confitens Dominus conscriptus est ; semetipsum
esse veraciorem quam sunt hi qui Evangelium tradiderunt
Apostoli, suasit discipulis suis ; non Evangelium, sed particu-
1am Evangelii tradens eis. Similiter autem et apostoli Pauli
Epistolas abscidit, auferens quaecumque manifeste dicta sunt
ab Apostolo de eo Deo qui mundum fecit, quoniam hie
Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et quaecumque ex
propheticis memorans Apostolus docuit, praenuntiantibus
adventum Domini." (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. IV.2. (P. L.
2, 364).
Marcion did not question the authenticity of the books
which he rejected. He simply placed his theological system
above Holy Writ, and selected only those books which by his
mutilation could be made to conform to his placita. Tertullian,
Irenaeus, and others of that age, who refuted Marcion, always
fix upon him the charge of having mutilated the Scriptures,
which of old time had been received by the Church. This is
valuable to us in establishing that before the time of Marcion,
the written deposit of the New Testament included many
more books than he accepted in his list.
The opponents of the Canon of the New Testament some-
time allege, that those who received and used the books of the
New Testament, never regarded them as divine Scripture.
This is sufficiently disproven by the data already adduced. A
certain tendency did exist, for the first two centuries, to per-
petuate the method of Christ in the mode of speaking of
Scriptural data. Christ speaks of the Old Testament as the
Scriptures ; of his Gospel, as the living reality. Now, the early
Christians, while extolling the data of the New Law above
that of the Old, often reserved the name of Scripture for the
books of the Old Testament, considering the books of the New
Law as expressions of the living teachings, which lived after
Christ. The name Scripture seemed to throw it too far back
into antiquity. Gradually, however, as the realization of the
actual presence of Christ and his lieutenants on earth,
passed into a realization of a past historical fact, the name of
Scripture was universally given to the books of the New
Covenant.
Another objection is made, that many apocryphal books, at
first, enjoyed equal favor with the books of the New Testament.
This also is found to be false. Certain ones which contain no
falsity, and were written with good intent, enjoyed a certain
favor in private reading, but never in the official usage.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF HIPPOLYTE. 3 09
There was lacking to them the endorsement of those who spoke
in Christ's name. They never received the approbation of an
ApostoHc Church. Even from the first, the line of demarcation
between them and the Holy Scriptures, is fixed and clear.
Certainly the power of the Holy Spirit aided in keeping the
scriptural deposit clear of the vast mass of Apocrypha, which
came into being at that time. The causality of Divine Provi-
dence in the production and preservation of the Scriptures, is
such that no man can reason rightly of them without taking
account thereof.
In the authentic works of St. Hippolyte, are found quota-
tions from the New Testament books. His manner of quoting
leaves no doubt that he spoke of them as Holy Scripture. He
quotes Math. IV. 15, 16, in the formula, "declarat nobis
Evangelium " (Fragmenta in Genesim). Ibidem, he says :
"For the Lord, in keeping the precepts of the Law, did not
abrogate the Law and Prophets, but perfected (them), as he
says in the Gospels!' The plural number proves clearly that he
spoke of several written Gospels.
Again, he says : " And Nephthalim is taken as a type of
our affairs, as the Gospel teaches : ' Land of Zabulon and land
of Nephthalim, the way of the sea across the Jordan,' and that
which follows!' He could only call attention to that which
follows in a written text. Excepting the Epistle to Philemon,
he employs all Paul's Epistles as Holy Scripture. In loco
citato, we find the following : " For verily the only-begotten
Word of God, being God of God, emptied himself (iavrbv
eKevwaev) according to the Scriptures * * * and appeared
in the form of a slave, becoming obedient to God the Father,
even to death ; for which cause, we read that he is henceforth
highly exalted * * * and hath received a name above every
other name, according to the words of St. Paul." This is a
paraphrase on the Scripture found in Paul's Epistle to the
Philippians, II. 7-9.
St. Hippolyte defended the Apocalypse of St. John in a
special work against Caius.*
He had a certain predilection for the Apocalypse, and the
fourth Gospel. In his treatise against Noetius, VII., he argues
as follows : " We who have the mind of the Father believe
thus ; they who have not, deny the Son. If they say, as Philip
said, questioning concerning the Father : * Show us the Father,
*Catalogue of Ebed Jesu, c. 7 (ap. Assemani, Biblioth. orient. Ill, 1, 15) :
"Sanctus Hippolytus martyr et episcopus composuit. . .capita ad versus Caiura
et apologiam pro Apocalypsi et Evangelio Joannis Apostoli et Evangelistae."
310 THE CANON OF N. T. OF THEOPHILUS.
and it sufificeth us ' ; to whom the Lord replied : ' Have I been
so long time with you, and hast thou not known me, Philip ?
he that hath seen me, hath seen the Father. Believest thou
not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?' and if
they dare say that in these words their dogma is confirmed,
from the Lord's confession that he is in the Father, let them
know that they greatly contradict themselves, for the Scrip-
ture confutes them and convicts them."
The greatest part of Hippolyte's arguments are drawn from
the New Testament ; and in the IX. Chap, against Noet, he
describes his sources : " Just as one who would know the
wisdom of the world, must study the doctrines of philosophers ;
thus we, who would have the religion of God, can learn not
elsewhere than in the Holy Scriptures. Let us know, there-
fore, what the Holy Scriptures proclaim, and let us study what
they teach."
Hippolyte refuted Noet principally from the Gospel and
Apocalypse of St. John.
St. Theophilus, who, according to Jerome, was the sixth
bishop of Antioch, and who governed the Church of Antioch
about the year i86, has a clear testimony in favor of the
Gospels and Pauline Epistles: "Moreover, concerning the
justice which the Law commands the statements of the
Prophets and the Gospels are found consonant since they all
spoke in the inspiration of the same Spirit of God. * * * *
Regarding chastity, the Holy Scripture teaches us not only
not to sin in deed, but also not in thought * * * * and
the voice of the Gospels, commands more earnestly of chastity :
'Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath com-
mitted adultery with her already in his heart (Math. V. 28) ;
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth
adultery, and whosoever putteth away his wife, saving for the
cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery.' " (Ibid.
32). Ad Autolycum III. 13.
Again in opere citato, 14 : "This also doth the Holy Scripture
enjoin, that we be subject to magistrates and powers, and pray
for them, that we may lead a quiet and peaceful life (I. Tim.
II. 2.). And it teaches to render all things to all persons:
* Honor to whom honor; fear to whom fear; tribute to whom
tribute ; and to owe no man anything, but to love one
another."' (Rom. XIII. 7-8.)
In Book II. ad Autolycum 22, he canonizes the fourth
Gospel : *' These things the Holy Scriptures teach us, and
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI. 311
whosoever were inspired by the Holy Ghost, among whom is
John, saying thus : 'In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God.' "
According to Eusebius, (Hist. Eccles. IV. 24.) Theophilus
also " composed a treatise against the heresy of Hermogenes,
in which he makes use of testimony from the Apocalypse of
John."
We come now to examine the famous document commonly
known as the Canon of Muratori.*
This document was discovered by Muratori in the Ambro-
sian Library, and published by him in the Antiquitates Italicae,
in 1740. The document is mutilated at the beginning and
end. It is written in barbarous Latin. Bleek, Wieseler,
Reuss and others maintain that it was originally written in
Latin. Hilgenfeld, Volckmar, Zahn, Lightfoot, Comely,
Loisy, and Muratori himself consider it a translation from the
Greek. Its author is unknown. Muratori conjectured that it
was written by Caius, a priest of Rome, disciple of St. Iren-
aeus ; Simon de Magistris believes Papias to be the author ;
Bunsen ascribes it to Hegesippus ; Lightfoot believes it to be
the work of Hippolyte.
While we remain in uncertainty as to its author and original
tongue, we may not doubt that the document is a product of
the second half of the Second Century. This makes it of first
importance in establishing the Canon of Scripture of the
Church of Rome in that age. It is highly probable that its
original language was Greek, the liturgical tongue of Rome of
that day.
The age of the Codex found by Muratori is not more
remote than the eighth century ; and the barbarisms seem to
have originated from the ignorance and negligence of the
copyist.
*Louis Anthony Muratori, was born at Vignola, in the province of Modeua,
on the 21st of October, 1672- He was highly endowed by nature, and re-
ceived a liberal education. At the age of 23. he was called to Milan, by
Charles Borromeo, and placed over the Ambrosian College, and the vast
Ambrosian Library. In 1700 the Duke of Modena recalled him as his subject,
made him his librarian, and placed him over the archives of his dukedom.
He was undoubtedly the greatest archeologist of his age. His friendship
was sought by the most celebrated savants of Italy and France. Academies
vied with each other for his patronage. But Muratori, with that deeper
wisdom which accompanies true learning, shrank from all ostentation, so
coveted by petty minds.
His erudition was vast and varied. At times, his judgments are defective,
even in matters of faith. He died in 1750. His published works fill 46 volumes
in folio ; 34 in 4to ; 13, in 8vo, and several in 12mo.
312 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI.
The original author evidently wished to draw up a canon
of Scripture, and distinguish the genuine from the apocryphal
books. We reproduce here the document after the fac simile
published by Tregelles at Oxford, in 1867. It is not our
intention to enter into the world of conjecture which has been
created by the learned interpreters of this document. It suf-
fices us to show only its import in its relation to the New
Testament Canon.
quibus tamen Interfuit et ita posuit.*
Tertio [tertium] Evangelii librum secundo [secundum] Lucanf
Lucas Iste medicus post acensum [ascensum] XPI,
cum eo [eum] Paulus quasi ut iuris studiosum
secundum adsumsisset, numeni [nomine] suo
ex opinione concribset [conscripsit] ; dnm tamen nee Ipse
dvidit [vidit] in carne, et ide prout asequi [assequi] potuit ;
ita et ad [ab] nativitate lohannis incipet [incipit] dicere.
Quarti Evangeliorum lohannis ex decipolis [discipulis]:}:
cohortantibus condescipulis et eps [episcopis] suis
dixit : conieiunate mihi odie [hodie] triduo [triduum], et
quid cuique fuerit revelatum, a.lterutrum
nobis enarremus. Eadem nocte reve-
latum andreae ex apostolis, ut recognis-
*It seems to me vain to conjecture what was contained in the mutilated
beginning. It is certain that it must have related to the Gospels of Matthew
and Mark. The very fact that the Gospel of Luke is called the third, leaves
no room to doubt that the first and second, which must have preceded, were
the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. We see in the document evidences of the
transition from Jow Latin to Italian in the placing of " tertio " for "tertium,"
'' secundo" for " secundum," etc.
fNotwithstanding all the barbarisms of the next seven lines, these data
result clearly from them : That Luke is the author of the third Gospel ; that
the physician Luke wrote it after the ascension of Our Lord ; that Luke was
a companion and pupil (juris studiosus) of St. Paul ; that Luke wrote the
Gospel in his own name, though from Paul's data (ex opinione) ; that Luke
had not seen the Lord in the flesh, and wrote after diligent research (prout
assequi potuit) ; and that he began his Gospel with the Nativity of John the
Baptist. This is the exact history of the third Gospel.
:t:Zahn is of the opinion that the legend contained in the lines from the
tenth to fifteenth inclusively, comes from the Acta Apocrypha of St. John.
There may be a grain of truth in it, as Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, and
St. Jerome testify that John wrote his Gospel at the request of the bishops of
Asia. John certainly received by direct revelation the doctrine of the eternal
generation of the Word. But the legend was the author's explanation of a
fact, and the fact was that the Gospel of St. John was in the deposit of
the Church of Rome, at the time of his writing. Thus we have a clear testi-
mony for the four GJospels.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI. 313
centibus [recognoscentibus] cuntis [cunctis] lohannis [loannes]
suo nomine
cunta [cuncta] discribret [describeret] et ideo licit [licet] varia"^
sinculis [singulis] evangeliorum libris principia
doceantur, nihil tamen differt creden-
tium fidei, cum uno ac principali spu [Spiritu] de-f
clarata sint in omnibus omnia, de nativi-
tate, de passione, de resurrectione,
de conversatione cum decipulis [discipulis] suis,
ac de gemino eius advento [adventu],
primo in humilitate dispectus [despectus], quod fo-
tu [fuit], secundum potestate regali pre-
clarum quod foturum [futurum] est. Quid ergo;}:
mirum, si Johannes tarn constanter
sincula [singula] etia in epistulis suis proferat
dicens in semeipsu [semetipsum] : Quae vidimus oculis
nostris et auribus audivimus et manus
nostrae palpaverunt, haec scripsimus vobis ;
sic enim non solum visurem [visorem], sed et auditorem,
sed et scriptore omnium mirabiliu dni [Domini] per ordi-
nem profetetur [profitetur]. Acta aute omniu apostolorum§
sub uno libro scribta [scripta] sunt, Lucas obtime theofi-
*From the sixteenth to the twenty -sixth line inclusively, the author ex-
plains that although every Evangelist has a different point of departure (varia
principia) they all are moved by the same grand motive, and all conspire to
build up the fulness of the message. Every one has his own plan, and some-
thing proper to himself, but one completes the other, and one Gospel exists
in four books, the work of the Holy Spirit.
fThe designation of the Holy Ghost as "principalis " is also used in the
LI. (Vulg. L.) Psalm.
^The passage included between the last words of the 26th line and the first
half of the 34th establishes that John wrote more than one Epistle (in
Epistolis, plural number) : that he wrote from personal experience (in seme-
tipsum) : and that the first Epistle of John is one of the Epistolae, for its open-
ing sentence is literally quoted. Later data of the document leave no doubt
that its author included the three Epistles of John in his Canon.
§The passage from the second half of the thirty-fourth line down to the
close of the period in the thirty-ninth, clearly establishes the Canonicity of
the Acts of the Apostles. It seems to be the mind of the author, that except-
ing the martyrdom of Peter (Semota passione Petri) Luke wrote down the
acts which he had personally witnessed. The closing words of the period are
most difficult and have received many interpretations. Cornely believes that
the author speaks of the journey of Paul from Eome to Spain, which, like the
martyrdom of Peter, has been omitted by him.
Cornely corrects the reading as follows : Sed et profectionem Pauli ab
urbe, Spaniam proficiscentis." Thus it would become a testimony of the
314 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI.
le comprindit [comprehendit], quia sub praesentia eius singula
gerebantur, sicut et semote passione Petri
evidenter declarat, sed et profectionem pauli ad ur-
bes [urbem] ad spania proficescentis. Epistulae autem^
second century of the voyage of Paul to Spain. I can not receive this con-
jecture of Cornely. The writer of Muratori's Canon, is there describing what
Luke wrote. Now, nowhere does Luke give us the departure of Paul
from Rome for Spain. I would venture the correction : Sed et profectionenii
Pauli ad urbem (Romam) ad Spaniam proficiscentis. The voyage to Rome of
Paul, who had set out for Spain. Now, Luke did write the account of Paul's
journey to Rome, who had in a general way set out for Spain. The authors
who have sustained Paul's voyage seem to have been moved by Paul's own
words, Rom. XV. 28.: "When, therefore, I have performed this, and have
sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you into Spain", manifesting such a
design which they assume as prophetic. Such position seems to me vain and
unfounded. These words express simply a human wish and design, which
was not subsequently realized. There is no trace in the traditions of Spain
of Paul's visit, and I am forced to hold the opposite opinion. Cornely and
others make Paul go back from Spain to the Orient to visit his churches,
before his martyrdom at Rome, and thus contravene a clear prophecy. Acts
XX. 25 : " Et nunc ecce ego scio quia amplius non videbitis faciem meam,
vos omnes per quos transivi praedicans Regnum Dei. " Those who defend
Paul's voyage to Spain, and thence to the Orient, in order to give effect to
words clearly indicative of a human design, subject to the vicissitudes of
time, destroy the sense of words manifestly spoken in the spirit of prophecy.
I believe that Paul never left Rome after his entrance thither, till he left it for
Heaven.
*The passage from the close of the thirty-ninth line down to the close of
the period in the sixty-third, establishes the Canonicity of all the Epistles of
Paul except the Epistle to the Hebrews. According to the author's method
of computation, Paul, after the manner of John in the Apocalypse wrote
letters to seven churches, in this order: Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians,
Colossians, Gfalatians, Thessalonians, and Romans. Two of these are repeated:
that to the Corinthians, and that to the Thessalonians. From the fifty -fourth
line to the middle of the fifty -ninth, the construction is very involved, and the
text, perhaps, corrupt ; but the sense is evidently that, though Paul and John
wrote to seven different individual churches, the Catholic Church was one
and the same throughout the whole world. The thought is too plain to need
our commentary. In terming John the predecessor of Paul, the author
refers to the date of John's calling to the Apostolate, not to the date of the
writing of the Apocalypse. The list of Paul's Epistles closes with the Epistle
to Philemon, that to Titus, and the two to Timothy, whose pastoral scope
(in ordinationem ecclesiasticae disciplinae) is clearly signified. This is the first
clear testimony that we have for the Epistle to Philemon. It is not strange that
the Epistle to the Hebrews finds no place therein. St. Clement of Rome had
used the Epistle to the Hebrews as Holy Scripture. But after the rise of the
Novatian heresy, which denied forgiveness to certain sins, the Epistle to the
Hebrews, which seemed to favor that heresy, was omitted in the public use
of the Church of Rome, and was rarely employed by any writer during the
second and third century. It was not rejected, but simply passed over in a
sort of religious silence.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI. 316
PauH, quae, a quo loco, vel qua ex causa directe [directae]
sint, volentatibus [volentibus] intelligere ipse^[ipsae] declarant.
primu omnium corintheis scysmae [schisma] haeresis in-
terdicens, deinceps B callatis [Galatis] circumcisione,
Romanis autem ornidine [ordinem] scripturarum sed et
principium earum esse XPM intimans,
prolexius [proHxius] scripsit, de quibus sincoHs [singulis] neces-
se est ad [a] nobis desputari. Cum ipse beatus
apostolus Paulus sequens prodecessoris [praedecessoris] sui
lohannisordinenonnisi comenati [nominatim] semptae [septem]
eccleses [ecclesiis] scribat, ordine tali : a [ad] corenthios
prima ; ad efesios seconda, ad philippinses ter-
tia, ad colosensis quarta, ad calatas [Galatas] quin-
ta, ad tensaolenecinsis [Thessalonicenses] sexta, ad romanos
septima, verum corintheis et thessaolecen-
sibus, licet pro cerrebtione [correptione] iteretur, una
tamen per omnem orbem terrae ecclesia
deffusa [diffusa] esse denoscitur [dignoscitur] ; Et lohannis
[loannes] eni
In apocalebsy [Apocalypsi] licet septe eccleseis scribat,
tamen omnibus dicit. Veru ad filemonem una ;
et ad titu una, et ad tymotheu duas [duae] pro affec-
to et dilectione, in honore [honorem] tamen ecclesiae ca-
tholice [catholicae], in ordinationem ecclesiastice [ecclesiasticae]
descepline [disciplinae] scificate [sanctificatae] sunt. Fertur
etiam ad*
Laudecenses [Laodicenses], alia ad alexandrinos Pauli no-
mine fincte [fictae] ad heresem Marcionis, et alia plu-
ra, quae in catholicam ecclesiam recepi [recipi] non
potest : fel enim cum melle misceri non con-
cruit [congruit]. Epistola sane lude [ludae] et superscriptio
[suprascripti]f
*In the period extending from sixty -third to sixty-eighth line, the author
rejects the supposititious letters to the Laodiceans, and to the Alexandrians.
In the Apocryphal letter to the Laodiceans, there is nothing favorable to
Marcionism, hence, we believe that he spoke of that heresy only in relation
to the lost letter to the Alexandrians. Some have without reason, believed
that by the letter to the Alexandrians, Paul meant the Epistle to Hebrews.
This is plainly unfounded, as Hebrews was never known in antiquity by that
name, and a catalogue of the Church of Rome could not assign it such a place.
fin the sixty -eighth line the Epistle of St. Jude is canonized. The sense
of statement concerning St. John is obscure. We advance a probable explana-
tion of it. The author may have considered the preceding notice of lines
26-34 sufficient for first Epistle, and, therefore, here receive the two remain-
ing ones among the Catholic Epistles (in Catholica). This conjecture is more
316 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI.
lohannis duas [duae] in catholica habentur. Et sapi-
entia ab amicis Salomonis in honore ipsius
scripta. Apocalapse [apocalypsim vel apocalypses] etiam lo-
hannis et Pe-*
tri tantum recipimus, quam quidam ex nos-
tris legi in ecclesia nolunt. Pastorem verof
nuperrim et [nuperrime] temporibus nostris In urbe
roma herma conscripsit, sedente [in] cathe-
probable since the fate of the 11. and III. Epistles of John was always the same
Whoever received one received the other. It seems to have been the usage of
those times to speak of the Second and Third Epistle of St. John apart from
the first, since John's authorship of them was not by all acknowledged.
Hence the author follows the usage of his time in classing them by themselves,
while he at the same time maintains their authenticity . Another conjecture
endorsed, by many is that, the author is of the opinion mentioned by Jerome,
" that the Second and Third Epistles are not of John the Evangelist, but of
another John, a priest, whose sepulchre is shown at Ephesus." This seems
to me erroneous, from the suprascripti of the document, evidently referring
these Epistles to the Evangelist. The advocates of this second opinion change
the " et" preceding "Sapientia" to "ut ", and believe the sense to be that
the author likens these two Epistles to the Book of Wisdom,inasmuch as they
bear John's name, though not written by him. This seems to me gratuitous
and far-fetched. Loisy rightly rejects it, and maintains that the presence of
Wisdom here is due to its late origin, so that by some it was considered to
belong more properly to the New than to the Old Testament.
*The period comprised between the seventy -first and seventy -third line
contains a clear approbation of the Apocalypse of St. John, but the rest of
its import is obscure. The most obvious sense is that with the Apocalypse
of John, which all received, was an Apocalypse of Peter to which the author
was favorably inclined, although it was controverted in the Church of Rome.
Others believe the text to be corrupt, and that the genuine text contained
mention of the Epistles of St. Peter. Zahn restores the text thus : " Apoca-
lypsin etiam Johannis et Petri unam tantum recipimus epistolam ; fertur
etiam altera quam quidem ex nostris legi in Ecclesia vol unt.', The conjec-
ture is ingenious, but must remain in the realm of conjecture. I am more
inclined to hold with Comely, that the author spoke of the Epistles of Peter
in the mutilated beginning, where he treated of Mark's Gospel. In its present
state, the document can not be considered a proof for the existence of St.
Peter's Epistles, neither is their omission from the mutilated exemplar an
argument against them. We must seek other data for their canonicity.
f Pastor receives its true place, a pious book, read in the churches, but
not considered Holy Scripture. There is also in these lines an indication of
the date of the document. He says Pastor was written recently, in our
times, by Hermas. while his brother Pius occupied the episcopal chair. Now,
St. Pius reigned from 142 to 151 or 156. To justify the author's expression,
it could not have been long after this epoch that the document was written;
hence. Comely rightly infers that it should not be placed later than the year
170. The close of the document is obscure ; but, since it bears no relation to
the Canon of Scripture, we pass it over in silence.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI. 317
tra [cathedra] urbis romae ecclesiae Pio eps, frater [episcopo,
fratre]
eius ; et ideo legi eum quidem Oportet, se pu-
plicare [publicare] vero in eclesia populo Neque inter
profetas [prophetarum] completum numero [numerum] neque
Inter
apostolos In fine temporum potest.
Arsinoi autem seu valentini, vel miltiadis
nihil In totum recipemus [recipimus]. Qui etiam novu
psalmorum librum marcioni conscripse-
runt una cum basilide assianum catafry-
cum constitutorem.
The Epistle of St. James finds no place in the document.
That Epistle had been used as divine Scripture by the author
of Pastor, but doubts remained in some minds concerning it.
Thus, Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. II. 23) speaks concerning it :
" These accounts are given respecting James, who is said
to have written the first of the Epistles general, (catholic); but
it is to be observed that it is considered spurious. Not many
indeed of the ancients have mentioned it, and not even that
called the Epistle of Jude, which is also one of the seven called
catholic Epistles. Nevertheless we know, that these, with the
rest, are publicly used in most of the churches."
Funk (Patres Apost.) found eight references to St. James'
Epistle in the I. Epistle to the Corinthians of Clement of Rome.
He found five references in the II. Cor., by some attributed to
the same author; and six references in Clement's Epistles to
Virgins. References are also found in Justin and Irenaeus.
It is not clear whether certain passages in the works of Clement
of Alexandria were taken from James' Epistle or from the Gos-
pels. Origen is the first among the Fathers who quoted the work
as Holy Scripture under the name of James the Apostle.
One of the strongest proofs of its early approbation by the
Church is its presence, under its proper name, in the Peschito,
which dates from Apostolic times.
We here compare two passages from the Pastor of Hermas
with the Epistle of St. James, having in mind to prove that
he drew material from the same Epistle.
St. Jas. V. 4. Pastor, Lib. I. Vis. III. 9.
" Ecce, merces operariorum, " Videte ergo vos, qui gloria-
qui messuerunt regiones vestras, mini in divitiis, ne forte ingemis-
quae fraudata est a vobis, cla- cant ii qui agent, et gemitus eo-
mat ; et clamor eorum in auras rum ascendat ad Dominum — ."
Domini Sabaoth introivit."
318 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS.
Jas. IV. 7. Pastor, Lib. II. Mand. XII. 5.
" Subditi ergo estote Deo : re- " — Potest autem diabolus luc-
sistite autem diabolo, et fugiet a tari, sed vincere non potest. Si
vobis." enim rest's ft it's illi^ fugiet a vobis
confusus."
Toward the close, therefore, of the second century the
Canon of the New Testament in the Church of Rome con-
tained all the books of the Catholic Canon, excepting the
Epistle of St. James, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and probably
the Second Epistle of St. Peter.
The Canon of the Church of Gaul of the same age is sought
in the works of Irenaeus.
A splendid testimony for the four Gospels is found in the
Third Book of his Treatise against Heresy, XI. 7-8: "So great
is the certitude of the Gospels that the heretics themselves
render testimony to them, and every heretic that comes forth
strives to prove his doctrine from them. For the Ebionites,
who use only the Gospel of Matthew, are confuted by it, that
their presumption concerning the Lord is not well founded.
Marcion, who mutilates St. Luke, by that which he retains of
it is shown to be a blasphemer against the Lord. Those who
separate Jesus from Christ, and who, selecting the Gospel of
Mark, say that Christ remained impassible, and that Jesus
suffered, if they read it with the love of truth can be corrected
of their error. The Valentinians, who exclusively use the
Gospel of John for the ostentation of their unions, are by it
shown to be false in every thing, as we have shown in the first
book. Since, therefore, our opponents render testimony for us,
and use these (Gospels), our demonstration regarding them is
shown to be true and firm. For the Church receives neither
more in number nor fewer in number than these Gospels.
For of the world in which we live, there are four great regions ;
and there are four principal winds ; and the Church is spread
over the whole earth ; and the pillar and ground of the Church
(I. Tim. III. 15) is the Gospel, and the spirit of life ; therefore
it follows that the Church has four columns blowing forth in
all directions incorruption, and vivifying men. From which it
is manifest that the divine Architect of all things, the Word,
who is borne upon the Cherubim, and rules all things, who was
made manifest to men, gave us the fourfold Gospel, which is
actuated by one Spirit." Continuing, he applies the vision of
Ezechiel to the four Evangelists, which interpretation has
continued in the Church since that time. The conclusion of
Irenaeus is better than his reasoning. His mysticism avails
THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS. 319
naught, but his conclusion is independent of it. The conclu-
sion was the faith of the Church of his time, which he strove
to illustrate. We could add nothing to this testimony by-
adducing the numberless quotations of the Gospels in the
works of Irenaeus. It is sufficient in itself to establish the
status of the Gospels in the Church of Gaul of the second
century. Irenaeus was a disciple of the disciples of St. John.
The voice of Apostolic times is perpetuated by them to him.
He speaks in the tone of a man who was sure of his point,
knowing that he had back of him the faith of the Catholic
Church. The Church from the Apostolic times received four
Gospels, and only four. Irenaeus wrote, in the twelfth,
thirteenth, and fourteenth chapters of this same third book, a
commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. In the beginning
of the fourteenth chapter, he vindicates their authorship to St.
Luke.
No mention is found in Irenaeus of the Epistle to Phile-
mon, but this fact is not strange, considering that the nature
of the book did not bring it within the scope of his writing.
Eusebius testifies (Hist. Eccles. V. 26) that Irenaeus, in a book
of various disputes, quoted the Epistle to the Hebrews. In
Lib. II. contra Haer. XXX. 9, he uses the phrase : " Deus
omnia fecit verbo virtutis suae''; the form of expression, so
eminently Pauline, is evidently taken from Hebrews I. 3.
All the other Epistles of St. Paul are used with equal fre-
quency with the Gospels. All the works of Irenaeus are rich
in quotations from them. Paul's pastoral Epistles are received
with equal favor with the others. He begins his great work
against the heresies with a quotation from Timothy, I. 4. In
Lib. II. XIV. I, he says: " And Paul himself has manifested
in his Epistles, saying : Demas has left me, and gone to Thes-
salonica ; Crescens, into Galatia ; only Luke is with me." (II.
Tim. IV. lo-ii.) Inop. cit. Lib. IV. XVI. 5, he quotes the first
Epistle of St. Peter: "And for this cause, Peter says: That we
have not liberty for a cloak of maliciousness." I. Pet.
II. 16.
In op. cit. Lib. V. XXIII. 2, he has the following allusion
to the Second Epistle of St. Peter: "Certain ones place the
death of Adam in the thousandth year, for a day with the
Lord is as a thousand years'' Loisy believes that Irenaeus
here draws from Psalm XC. (Vulg. LXXXIX.) ; but the
phraseology and the context plainly point to II. Peter, III. 8 :
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of one thing that one day is with
the Lord as a thousand years.''
320 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS.
Again in op. cit. Lib. IV. XIII. and XVI. Irenaeus speaks
of Abraham as the friend of God. In the latter place, he
quotes the passage : " Credidit Deo, et reputatum est illi ad
justitiam, et amicus Dei vocatus est." Now, although the
first part of the expression is found in Genesis, XV. 6, and in
the Epistles of Paul, the whole expression is found only in
James II. 23.
In Lib. V, I. I, Irenaeus calls the Christians, "the first
fruits of his (God's) creatures," which peculiar expression is
only found in James I. 18.
No mention is found in the works of Irenaeus of the
Epistle of Jude. But I believe with Loisy that it was in the
collection of the Church of Gaul at the time. The Canon
of Muratori shows us that it had a secure place in the Canon
of Rome, and the Church of Gaul was in strict conformity
with Rome.
St. Irenaeus directly quotes from the First and Second
Epistles of St. John,
In op. cit. Lib. III. 5, he writes: "Wherefore, also in his
Epistle, he (John) has testified to us: "Little children, it is
the last hour : and as you have heard that antichrist cometh :
even now there are many antichrists : whereby we know that
it is the last hour." I. Jo. II. 18.
A little farther on in the same work in Paragraph 8, he has
this testimony: "And these are the ones whom the Lord
bade us avoid, and also his disciple John in the aforesaid
Epistle, hdide us fly from them saying: ' Many seducers are
entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ, is come
in the flesh. This is a seducer and is antichrist. Look to your-
selves, that ye lose not those things which ye have wrought.'
And again in his Epistle he says : " Dearly beloved, believe
not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they be of God :
because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
By this is the spirit of God known : every spirit which
confesseth Jesus Christ to have come in the flesh, is of God :
And every spirit, that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God, and
this is antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and
he is now already in the world."
The first quotation is literally quoted from John's Second
Epistle. Irenaeus was familiar with them both, and, quoting
from memory, it is due to a fault of memory that he refers the
passage to the first Epistle.
In op. cit. Lib. LXVI. 3, he again quotes the second
Epistle: " For John, the disciple of the Lord, places damna-
THE CANON OF N. T. OF TERTULLIAN. 321
tion upon them, not allowing us to bid them God speed : 'For
he that biddeth him God speed, is partaker of his evil deeds.' "
II. Jo. I. II.
These data leave no doubt that Irenaeus received and em-
ployed as Holy Scripture, at least the First and Second Epistles
of John. But since the history of the First and Second has
always been the same, it is highly probable that he received
also the Third, though he had no occasion to quote it,
Irenaeus made great use of the Apocalypse. In op. cit.
Lib. IV. XXVI. I, Irenaeus speaks thus of the Apocalypse:
" And yet more evidently, of the last age, and of the ten kings,
among whom will be divided the Empire which now exists, has
John the disciple of the Lord made known in the Apocalypse,
etc.
In the same book, Chap. XIV. 2, he testifies: "And for
this cause, John in the Apocalypse says : ' And his voice was
as the voice of many waters.' " Apoc. I. 15.
Ibidem, Chap. XVII. 6 : " Incense, saith John in the Apo-
calypse, is the prayers of the saints."
In Chapter XVIII. 6 : '' There is an altar in Heaven (for
thither our prayers and oblations are directed) and a temple,
as John says in the Apocalypse : 'And the temple of God was
opened'; and there is a tabernacle: 'For behold,' he saith,
' the tabernacle of God in which he dwells with men.' " Apoc.
XI. 19; XXI. 3.
Equally clear quotations are found in op. cit. Lib. IV. XX.
11; XXI. 4; XXX. 4; Lib. V. XXVIII. 2; XXX. 2, 4;
XXXIV. 2 ; XXXV. 2, etc.
From these researches, we are led to believe that the
church of Gaul in the second century possessed the entire
Canon.
The Canon of the church of Proconsular Africa at the close
of the second century, is made known to us from the
works of TertuUian, whose literary activity ranges from 195
to 220.
TertuUian defends against Marcion the four Gospels, Lib.
II. adversus Marcionem, Cap. II.*
*Constituimu8 in primis, evangelicum Instrumentum Apostolos auctores
habere, quibus hoc munus Evangelii promulgandi ab ipso Domino sit impo-
situm ; si et Apostolicos, non tamen solos, sed cum Apostolis, et post Apos-
tolos. Quoniam praedicatio discipulorum suspecta fieri posset de gloriae
studio, si non adsistat illi auctoritas magistrorum, imo Christi, qui magistros
Apostolos fecit. Denique, nobis fidem ex Apostolis Joannes et Matthaeus
insinuant ; ex Apostolicis, Lucas et Marcus instaurant, etc.
U
322 THE CANON OF N. T. OF TERTULLIAN.
Again in Chapter V. he asserts the authorship of Matthew,
Luke, Mark and John.* The chapter opens with a clear testi-
mony for the greater Pauline Epistles :
" In summa, si constat id verius quod prius, id prius quod
et ab initio, id ab initio, quod ab Apostolis; pariter utique con-
stabit, id esse ab Apostolis traditum, quod apud ecclesias
Apostolorum fuerit sacrosanctum. Videamus quod lac a Paulo
Corinthii hauserint ; ad quam regulam Galatae sint recorrecti ;
quid legant Philippenses, Thcssalonicenses, Ephesii ; quid etiam
Romani de proximo sonent, quibus Evangelium et Petrus et
Paulus sanguine quoque suo signatum reliquerunt. Habemus
et Joannis alumnas ecclesias. Nam etsi Apocalypsim ejus
Marcion respuit, ordo tamen episcoporum ad originem recen-
sus, in Joannem stabit auctorem."
Tertullian certainly received thirteen Epistles of Paul. In
Lib. V. adv. Marcion, XXI. he speaks thus of the Epistle to
Philemon : f
" Soli huic Epistolae brevitas sua profuit, ut falsarias manus
Marcionis evaderet. Miror tamen, cum ad unum hominem
literas factas receperit, quid ad Timotheum duas, et unam ad
Titum, de ecclesiastic© statu compositas recusaverit. Adfec-
tavit, opinor, etiam numerum Epistolarum interpolare."
In Lib. V. adv. Marcion, Cap. I. he defends the Acts of the
Apostles : " Haec figurarum sacramenta, si tibi displicent, certa
Acta Apostolorum (Act. IX.) hunc mihi ordinem Pauli tradide-
runt, a te quoque non negandum."
In Lib. de Pudicitia, Cap. XX. Tertullian cites the Epistle
to the Hebrews, as the work of Barnabas.
" Volo tamen ex redundantia alicujus etiam comitis Aposto-
lorum testimonium superducere, idoneum confirmandi de prox-
imo jure disciplinam magistrorum. Exstat enim et Barnabae
titulus ad Hebraeos, adeo satis auctoritatis viro, ut quem Pau-
lus juxta se constituerit in abstinentiae tenore : 'Aut ego solus
et Barnabas non habemus hoc operandi potestatem.' Et utique
receptior apud Ecclesias Epistola Barnabae illo apocrypho
Pastore moechorum. Monens itaque discipulos, omissis omni-
bus initiis, ad perfectionem magis tendere, nee rursus funda-
menta poenitentiae jacere ab operibus mortuorum : Impossi-
*Eadem auctoritas ecclesiarum apostolicarum caeteris quoque patrocina-
bitur Evangeliis, quae proinde per illas et secundum illas habemus, Joannis
dico et Matthaei, licet et Marcus quod edidit Petri affirmetur, cujusinterpres
Marcus : nam et Lucae Digestum Paulo adscribere solent.
fWe quote Tertullian in the original Latin, as his genius appears to
better effect in the original.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF TERTULLIAN. 323
bile est enim, inquit, eos qui semel illuminati sunt, et donum
coeleste gustaverunt, et participaverunt Spiritum Sanctum, et
verbum Dei dulce gustaverunt, occidente jam aevo cum exci-
derint, rursus revocari in poenitentiam, refigentes cruci in se-
metipsos Filium Dei et dedecorantes. Terra enim quae bibit
saepius devenientem in se humorem, et peperit herbam aptam
his propter quos et colitur, benedictionem Dei consequitur :
proferens autem spinas, reproba et maledictioni proxima, cujus
finis in exustionem. Hoc qui ab Apostolis didicit et cum
Apostolis docuit, nunquam moecho et fornicatori secundam
poenitentiam promissam ab Apostolis norat ; optime enim legem
interpretabatur, et figuras ejus jam in ipsa veritate ser-
vabat."
In introducing this passage, Tertullian shows clearly that,
though not personally certain of its inspiration, he considered
the Epistle of great authority.
He made much use of the Apocalypse, and of the First
Epistle of St. John. I found no direct references to the other
two in his works, but in Chapter XIX. De Pudicitia, he says :
" Shall we, forsooth, say that John erred, who in his first
Epistle denies that we are without sin." It was certainly in
contradistinction to other Epistles that he calls this the first.
The Second and Third of John are brief, and written to private
individuals. For this reason, they have never been quoted as
much as the first. This was the evident cause, also, why they
are not expressly quoted by Tertullian.
In Chapter III. De Cultu Foeminarum, Tertullian wishes
to obtain endorsement for the Book of Henoch : " And more-
over, Henoch has a testimony in Jude the Apostle." (Jude,
V. 14.) Though he erred in explaining the passage of Jude,
he is a competent witness that the Church of Africa
possessed in that day the Epistle of Jude among the Holy
Books.
Tertullian often quotes the I. Epistle of St. Peter. I found
no quotations from the Second Epistle in his works. This
argues nothing against its reception by the Church of Africa ;
Tertullian may have had no occasion to quote it.
In Lib. adversus Judaeos, II. he used the expression:
" Abraham amicus Dei deputatus," which seems to be taken
from James, 11. 23.
The II. Epistle of Peter is the only book of the New Tes-
tament which has nothing in the works of Tertullian ; the I,
and II. of John, and the Epistle of James have but probable
approbation ; the Epistle to the Hebrews with him stops a lit-
324 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA.
tie short of Canonicity, but all the other books, both by direct
declaration and practical use are endorsed as undoubted Holy
Scripture.
In the works of St. Cyprian, who succeeded Tertullian as
chief representative of the African Church, abundant quota-
tions are found of all the homologomena, including the Apoca-
lypse, but he is silent concerning the antilegomena. It would
be absurd to interpret this silence as a condemnation of the
books. At most, we may say that the exceedingly conserva-
tive spirit of Cyprian drew him more strongly to the books of
which no one doubted.
The tradition of the Church of Alexandria of the second
century, is made known to us by Clement. Among all the
early Fathers, Clement is the most favorable to Apocryphal
writings. There is no evidence that he made them equal to
Holy Scripture, but he was willing to treat with consideration
any work which had a claim to respectability. In Lib. III.
Stromatum, XIII. he shows that he admitted four and only
four Gospels. Replying there to an objection taken from an
apocryphal gospel, he says : " In the first place, in the four
Gospels which have been handed down to us, we have not
this saying, but in the gospel according to the Hebrews."
Clement's position regarding the books of Scripture may
be learned from Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. VI. 14.
" In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up the matter
briefly, he has given us abridged accounts of all the canonical
Scriptures, not even omitting those that are disputed, (The An-
tilegomena,) I mean the book of Jude, and the other general
Epistles. Also the Epistle of Barnabas, and that called the
Revelation of Peter. But the Epistle to the Hebrews he as-
serts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew
tongue ; but that it was carefully translated by Luke, and pub-
lished among the Greeks. Whence, also, one finds the same
character of style and of phraseology in the Epistle as in the
Acts. * But it is probable that the title, Paul the Apostle, was
not prefixed to it. For as he wrote to the Hebrews, who had
imbibed prejudices against him, and suspected him, he wisely
guards against diverting them from the perusal, by giving his
name.' A little after this he observes : * But now as the
blessed presbyter used to say, * since the Lord who was the
apostle of the Almighty, was sent to the Hebrews, Paul by
reason of his inferiority, as if sent to the Gentiles, did not sub-
scribe himself an Apostle of the Hebrews ; both out of rever-
ence for the Lord, and because he wrote of his abundance to
THE CANON OF N. T. AT CI.OSE OF II. CENTURY. 325
the Hebrews, as a herald and Apostle of the Gentiles.
Again, in the same work, Clement also gives the tradition
respecting the order of the Gospels, as derived from the oldest
presbyster, as follows : He says that those which contain the
genealogies were written first; but that the Gospel of Mark was
occasioned in the following manner : * When Peter had pro-
claimed the word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel
under the influence of the spirit ; as there was a great number
present, they requested Mark, who had followed him from afar,
and remembered well what he had said, to reduce these things
to writing, and that after composing the Gospel he gave it to
those who requested it of him. Which, when Peter under-
stood, he directly neither hindered nor encouraged it. But
John, last of all, perceiving that what had reference to the
body in the Gospel of our Saviour, was sufficiently detailed,
and being encouraged by his familiar friends, and urged by the
spirit, he wrote a spiritual Gospel.* Thus far Clement."
The commentaries of Clement on the I. Epistle of St. Peter,
and the Epistle of St. Jude have been preserved to us by Cassio-
dorus in a Latin translation (Cassiod. De Inst. Div. Lit, VHL).
In the works of Clement that remain to us, I found no cer-
tain reference to II. Peter. Some allusions to St. James'
Epistle exist (Strom. V. 14; VI. 18.); but the testimony of
Eusebius leaves no doubt that Clement received these works.
Eusebius' testimony is corroborated by Photius, who testifies
that Clement commented the Epistles of Paul and the Catholic
Epistles (Biblioth. 109. Patrol. G. 103, 384.)
In II. Strom. XV. Clement speaks of I. John, as the greater
Epistle, 'Iwdwa iv rf fjuet^ovt eVtcrToX,?'. This shows plainly that
he recognized at least one of the others, and, as we have said
before, the history of the two is the same. We believe, there-
fore, that Clement received them both. The defect of explicit
quotations would be unjustly invoked against those short
books, which are of secondary importance from a doctrinal
standpoint
The greater part of Clement's Hypotyposes, was devoted
to the exegesis of the New Testament. Only fragments of
the work remain in the Latin translation of Cassiodorus.
Hence, is explained that in those fragments we find not Clem-
ent's commentary on the Epistle of St. James, on II. Peter,
and III, John. Without doubt, they had place in the com-
plete work according to the explicit testimony of Eusebius.
We find, therefore, at the close of the Second Century, that
all the churches concur in receiving the four written Gospels.
326 THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE Of II. CENTURY.
These were sometimes called the " Writings of the Lord."
Thus Dionysius of Corinth in Epistle to Romans: " It is not,
therefore, matter of wonder if some have also attempted to
adulterate the sacred writings of the Lord, since they have
attempted the same in other works, that are not to be com-
pared with these."
The writers of this period also give evidence, that they
already of old time received these Gospels, and only these
Gospels, were received by all the churches.
Certain allusions to the Acts of the Apostles are found in
the writings of Clement of Rome, Ignatius martyr, and St.
Justin ; but the testimony of the Canon of Muratori is explicit
for their canonicity. The faith of Irenaeus, as we have seen.
was the same. Tertullian inveighs bitterly against those (the
Manicheans) who rejected the Acts :
" — et utique implevit repromissum, probantibus Actis
Apostolorum, descensum Spiritus Sancti. Quam Scripturam
qui non recipiunt, nee Spiritus Sancti esse possunt, qui nec-
dum Spiritum possint agnoscere discentibus missum, sed nee
Ecclesiam defendere, qui, quando et quibus incunabulis insti-
tutum est hoc corpus, probare non habent."
Clement of Alexandria also makes great use of this Scrip-
ture, and attributes it to Paul. All things warrant that it had
a place in the Canon in all the churches, before the close of
the second century, and no doubt has since been raised in the
Catholic Church concerning it.
From a conspectus of the preceding data, it is evident that,
excepting the Epistle to the Hebrews, all the Epistles of Paul
were universally accepted as Holy Scripture. It is not the
place here to answer the objections of F. Chr. Baur against the
Epistles to the Thessalonians. Those objections, or rather
cavils, are sought from the nature of the books themselves, and
will be answered in the exegesis of the books. We are here
dealing only with the belief of the Church regarding the books
of Scripture and the evidences of this, as regards thirteen
Epistles of Paul is convincing. Even the short Epistle to
Philemon finds its place in Muratori's Canon, and in the words
of Tertullian (loc. cit.), escaped the mutilation of Marcion. In
the words of St. Jerome : " It would never have been received
by all the churches throughout the whole world, unless it was
held to be Paul's Epistle." (Prol. in Philem.)
In this period, the Epistle to the Hebrews was received
with more favor in the East than in the West. We know from
Eusebius (loc. cit.) that Clement of Alexandria received it.
THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE O^i" II. CENTURY. 327
Clement's testimony is confirmed by that of Pantaenus (the
blessed presbyter). (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. VI. 14.) All the
Fathers of the Alexandrian Church have accepted and used
the Epistle.
Its presence, as fourteenth among Paul's Epistles, in the
Peschito, is sufficient guarantee of its reception by the ancient
Syrian Church.
In reviewing the works of Irenaeus, we have pointed out
his references to this Epistle. Eusebius (loc. cit.) confirms our
belief that Irenaeus received it.'^
The testimony of Tertullian, while it does not place the
book beyond the possibility of doubt, recognizes the book as
widely known and respected. The status of the book grew
constantly more favorable in the Western Church from this
time forth.
Rome seems to have been the centre of the doubts of that
period regarding the divine authority of the book. We have
seen that it is omitted from the Canon of Muratori, and Euse-
bius testifies also in Hist. Eccles. VI. 20, that Caius of Rome
and other Romans, did not receive the Epistle.
The testimony of the first two centuries in favor of St.
James' Epistle might be summed up as follows : Clear refer-
ences in the works of Clement of Rome ; allusions in the
works of Justin and Irenaeus; quotations in the Pastor of
Hermas ; and a place among the canonical Scriptures in the
Peschito.
The testimonies of this period in favor of the First Epistle
of Peter are clear and explicit. Eusebius testifies, Hist. Eccles.
III. 39, that Papias made use of testimonies from it. At least
eight quotations from it are found in the short Epistle of
Polycarp, that is preserved for us. The finest testimonies for
it exist in the works of Clement, Irenaeus and Tertullian. We
have already explained its omission from Muratori's Canon.
For the Second Epistle of St. Peter, we have nothing
clearer in the first two centuries, than the references already
adduced in the works of Irenaeus. With Origen the data be-
comes more convincing.
The Epistle of Jude has a secure place in the Canon of
Muratori. Tertullian (loc. cit.) uses it as an authority
acknowledged by all. Clement of Alexandria commented it.
*The statement of Gobar in Biblioth, of Photius, that Irenaeus rejected
Paul's authorship of the Epistle, may simply mean that he doubted of the
author, but not of the divine character of the book. Such view was held by
more than one.
328 THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF II. CENTURY.
St. Jerome declares that : " Jude left a short epistle, which is
one of the seven Catholic Epistles ; since he assumes a testi-
mony from the apocryphal book of Henoch, it is rejected by
several; nevertheless, it merits authority by its antiquity and
use, and is reckoned among the Holy Scriptures." (S. Hier.
De Vir. 111. M. 23, 645.)
The First Epistle of John was known and used by Papias
and Polycarp. Irenaeus quotes it frequently, often naming its
author. The Canon of Muratori places it among the Canon-
ical Scriptures. Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria make
it equal to the Gospel of St. John. The Peschito of the Syriac
places it among the canonical Scriptures, and no reasonable
doubt has ever been raised concerning it.
The other two Epistles of John have not equal indorse-
ment in these two centuries. In the testimony of Jerome
(De Vir. 111. IX. 18), John's authorship of these two Epistles
was rejected by many (plerisque). Investigation into patristic
literature, fails to make known who these many were.
The Epistles have an indirect approbation in Tertullian,
De Pudic. 19, where he speaks of the First Epistle of John as
prima. Had he admitted only two, he would undoubtedly
have used, in pHore. We have before shown that Irenaeus
received the Second Epistle of John, and as the history of the
two is intimately bound up together, we believe that he re-
ceived also the Third. The same can be said of Clement of
Alexandria, who in Strom. II. 15, speaks of I. John as the
greater Epistle. Fragments of his commentary on II. John
are preserved for us by Cassiodorus, (op. cit.). Finally Mur-
atori's Canon leaves no reasonable doubt that the three
Epistles were received in the Church of Rome.
There is scarcely a book in the New Testament, which re-
ceived so many clear testimonies in the second century as the
Apocalypse. On the testimony of Irenaeus, we know that the
book was written toward the close of the reign of Domitian,
therefore, about the year 95 A. D. Wherefore no testimonies
of the first century are to be sought. But in the following age
St. Justin, St. Hippolyte, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Papias, Melito
of Sardis, St. Theophilus of Antioch, Clement of Alexandria
and the Canon of Muratori, testify to its authenticity and
divine character. Opposition and doubt arose in the following
century concerning it. Certain heretics arose at that time
who abused its authority to acquire favor for Millenarianism.
Hence, though we find none who reject it, the Fathers made
less use of it, as its deep mysterious sense perplexed the minds
THE CANON OF N. T. OF III. CENTURY. 329
of these who were defending Catholic truth against the error
of the Chiliasts. St. Dionysius the Great, one of the leading
Fathers, in combating this heresy, thus speaks of the
book :
" Some, indeed, before us, have set aside, and have at-
tempted to refute the whole book, criticising every chapter,
and pronouncing it without sense and without reason. They
say that it has a false title, for it is not of John. Nay, that it
is not even a revelation, as it is covered with such a dense and
thick veil of ignorance, that not one of the Apostles, and not
one of the holy men, or those of the church could be its author.
But that Cerinthus, the founder of the sect of Cerinthians, so
called from him, wishing to have reputable authority for his
own fiction, prefixed the title. For this is the doctrine of
Cerinthus, that there will be an earthly reign of Christ ; and
as he was a lover of the body, and altogether sensual in those
things which he so eagerly craved, he dreamed that he would
revel in the gratification of the sensual appetite, i. e. in eating
and drinking, and marrying; and to give the things a milder
aspect and expression, in festivals and sacrifices, and the slay-
ing of victims. For my part I would not venture to set
this book aside, as there are many brethren that value it
much ; but having formed a conception of its subject as ex-
ceeding my capacity, I consider it also containing a certain con-
cealed and wonderful intimation in each particular. For,
though I do not understand, yet I suspect that some deeper
sense is enveloped in the words, and these I do not measure
and judge by my private reason ; but allowing more to faith, I
have regarded them as too lofty to be comprehended by me,
and those things which I do not understand, I do not reject,
but I wonder the more that I cannot comprehend."
At the opening of the third century, we find the Canon of
the New Testament well established not by official decree but
by traditional usage. Certain divergencies existed regarding
a few books. Muratori's Canon omits the Epistle of St.
James; while Clement of Alexandria uses it as though all the
churches recognized its divine authority.
The two great representatives of Catholic thought of the
Third Century are Origen and Eusebius.
The capacious mind of Origen examined the different col-
lections of Scripture of the different churches, and compared
them. His views respecting the Gospels are manifested in his
Homily on Luke; "The Church has four Gospels; heresy has
many. * * * Only four Gospels are approved, out of
THE CANON OF N. T. OF ORIGEN.
which as representing our Law and Saviour, dogmas are to be
proven. * * * In all these we admit naught else than is
admitted by the Church, that only four Gospels are to be re-
ceived."
Some recur to a testimony from Origen in Eusebius, Hist.
Eccles. VI. 25, to establish Origen's Canon :
" As I have understood from tradition, respecting the four
Gospels, which are the only undisputed ones in the whole
Church of God throughout the world. The first is written ac-
cording to Matthew, the same that was once a publican, but
afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, who having published it
for the Jewish converts, wrote it in the Hebrew. The second
is according to Mark, who composed it, as Peter explained to
him, whom he also acknowledges as his son in his general
Epistle, saying, ' The elect church in Babylon, salutes you, as
also Mark my son.' And the third, according to Luke, the
Gospel commended by Paul, which was written for the converts
from the Gentiles, and last of all the Gospel according to John."
And in the fifth book of his Commentaries on John, the same
author writes as follows : " But he (Paul) being well fitted to
be a minister of the New Testament, I mean a minister not of
the letter but of the spirit ; who, after spreading the Gospel
from Jerusalem and the country around as far as Illyricum, did
not even write to all the churches to which he preached, but
even to those to whom he wrote he only sent a few lines. But
Peter, upon whom the Church of Christ is built, against which
the gates of hell shall not prevail, has left one Epistle undis-
puted. Suppose, also, the second was left by him, for on this
there is some doubt. What shall we say of him who reclined
upon the breast of Jesus, I mean John ? who has left one Gos-
pel, in which he confesses that he could write so many that the
whole world could not contain them. He also wrote the Apo-
calypse, commanded as he was, to conceal, and not to write
the voices of the seven thunders. He has also left an Epistle
consisting of very few lines ; suppose, also, that a second and
third is from him, for not all agree that they are genuine, but
both together do not contain a hundred lines." To these re-
marks he also adds the following observation on the Epistle
to the Hebrews, in his homilies on the same ; " The style of
the Epistle with the title, ' To the Hebrews,' has not that sim-
plicity of diction which belongs to the Apostle, who confesses
that he is but common in speech, that is in his phraseology.
But that this Epistle is more pure Greek in the composition of
its phrases, every one will confess who is able to discern the
THE CANON OF N. T. OF ORIGEN. 331
difference of style. Again, it will be obvious that the ideas of
the Epistle are admirable, and not inferior to any of the books
acknowledged to be apostolic. Every one will confess the
truth of this, who attentively reads the Apostle's writings."
To these he afterwards again adds : " But I would say, that the
thoughts are the Apostle's, but the diction and phraseology
belong to some one, who has recorded what the Apostle said,
and as one who noted down at his leisure what his master dic-
tated. If, then, any church considers this Epistle as coming
from Paul, let it be commended for this, for neither did those
ancient men deliver it as such without cause. But who it was
that really wrote the Epistle, God only knows. The account,
however, that has been current before us is, according to some,
that Clement who was bishop of Rome wrote the Epistle ; ac-
cording to others, that it was written by Luke, who wrote the
Gospel and the Acts."
The Epistles of James and Jude are omitted; II. Peter and
II. and III. John are considered doubtful. It would be erro-
neous to accept this as Origen's position on the Canon. The
passage is found in the beginning of the fifth tome of his Com-
mentary on St. John. He is there justifying himself for not
writing more, and cites the example of some of the writers of
the New Testament. To make the argument forcible, he re-
stricts the works in the narrowest compass, and uses for this
scope the occasional doubts that existed in some churches.
In fact, Origen, through display of erudition, mentions there
doubts which he did not personally entertain. There was no
need of a complete list of the writers, and he has not drawn
up. a complete list. He took the more prominent. It is evi-
dent that it was not his intention to enumerate all the books
of the New Testament.
Origen quoted II. Peter in his XII. Homily on Exodus, 4 :
" I know that it is written : ' For of whom a man is overcome,
of the same is he brought in bondage.' " II. Pet. II. 19.
Again in Hom. IV. on Levit. 4: "And again Peter saith :
• Ye are become partakers of the divine nature.' " II. Pet. I. 4.
Hom. XIII. on Num. 8: " — as the Scripture saith in a cer-
tain place : ' — the dumb ass, speaking with man's voice, for-
bade the madness of the prophet.' " II. Pet. II. 16.
Origen reveals his personal opinion of the Epistle of Jude
in Comment, in Math. Tom. X. 17: "And Jude wrote an
Epistle, of few verses, indeed, but full of efificacious words of
divine grace ; which he begins by saying : ' Jude, the servant of
Jesus Christ, brother of James.' " Nevertheless, Origen was
332 THE CANON OF N. T. OF ORIGEN.
not ignorant that some doubted of this Epistle, and he takes
account of this doubt in op. cit. Tom, XVII. : " If any one re-
ceives also the Epistle of Jude, let him consider what follows
from this doctrine, for the reason that : ' The Angels who kept
not their first estate, but left their first habitation, he hath re-
served in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment
of the great day.' " Jude, I. 6.
In this citation Origen simply shows his comprehensive
knowledge of the thought of his day. He received the
Epistle, but in arguing therefrom, he had to take into con-
sideration that its authority would not have equal weight with
all. It required a great deal in those days to secure for a book
immunity from doubt ; a slight cause was sufficient to raise
some doubt, which "crescebat eundo," concerning some of the
minor books of the Testament.
Equally certain are Origen's views on St. James' Epistle.
In Horn. VIII. in Exod. 4, he says: "But the Apostle James
says: *A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.'"
James, I. 8.
In Hom. II. in Levit. 4: "Thus saith Holy Scripture:
* — who converteth the sinner from the error of his way, shall
save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.' "
James, V. 20.
In Hom. XIII. in Genesim, 2, Origen likens the books of
the New Testament to the wells which Isaac and his servants
dug, and he places James and Jude in the number. In this
simile, Isaac represents the Lord. The servants of Isaac
represent the other authors of the New Testament : " Isaac,
therefore, dug new wells ; the servants of Isaac dug new wells
also. The servants of Isaac are Matthew, Mark, Luke and
John. His servants are Peter, James and Jude, and also Paul,
for they all dug the wells of the New Testament."
Upon this data we believe that Origen's Canon is that
which he makes known to us in his Seventh Homily on the
Book of Joshua, i, wherein he compares the authors of the
New Testament to Joshua and the priests who besieged
Jericho : " The Lord Jesus Christ, of whom that first Joshua
was a type, coming, sends priests, his Apostles bearing trum-
pets of rams' horns, the grand and heavenly doctrine of the
Gospel. Matthew sounded first the sacerdotal trumpet in his
Gospel ; Mark follows ; then Luke and John blow their proper
trumpets. Peter sends forth blasts from the trumpets of his
two Epistles ; James a.ndjude do likewise. John joins in with
the trumpet-blast of his Epistles and Apocalypse, and Luke
THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS. 333
with the Acts of the Apostles. And lastly comes he who
said : * For I think that God hath set forth us, the Apostles,
the least of men,' and thundering through the trumpets of his
fourteen Epistles completely overthrows the engines of idola
try and the dogmas of the philosophers."
In ascribing a plurality of Epistles to John, the Second and
Third of his Epistles are virtually approved, for they are in-
separably linked together in their history.
Origen is not here formulating a new theory. He is there
the oracle of two centuries of Catholic belief and practice.
The place in the Catholic Church which the Holy Books
had acquired in Origen's time, they have retained ever since.
The sporadic doubts which in the course of the centuries
arose and fell, availed naught to shake their credit in the
Church. The books were a part of the mighty life of the
Church, and the occasional doubts of individuals only served to
bring out more clearly the doctrine which was the same from
the beginning.
The documents which we shall henceforth adduce will be
chosen out of the universal testimony of tradition, on account
of their special bearing on the deuterocanonical books.
DiONYSiUS THE GREAT, the disciple of Origen, cites the
Epistle to the Hebrews as the work of Paul. He employs the
Epistle of James (Fragment on Luke XXH.), and recognizes
the First and Second Epistles of John. (Euseb. Hist. Eccles.
vn. 25.)
Methodius of Tyr, cites the Apocalypse as inspired by
Christ, and makes the Epistle to the Hebrews equal to the
other Epistles of Paul. (Conviv. Or. I. 5 ; Or. VIH. 4.)
Eusebius of Caesarea, who was a diligent searcher into the
traditions and documents of his times, has treated the ques-
tion of the Canon of the New Testament ex professo in his
Hist. Eccles. HI. 25 :
" This appears also to be the proper place, to give a sum-
mary statement of the books of the New Testament already
mentioned. And here, among the first, must be placed the
holy Quaternion of the Gospels ; these are followed by the
book of the Acts of the Apostles; after this must be men-
tioned the Epistles of Paul, which are followed by the acknow-
ledged First Epistle of John, as also the First of Peter, to be ad-
mitted in like manner. After these, are to be placed, if proper,
the Revelation of John, concerning which we shall offer the
different opinions in due time. These, then, are acknowledged
genuine. Among the disputed books, although they are well
334 THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS.
known and approved by many, are reputed, that called the
Epistle of James and that of Jude. Also the ' Second Epistle
of Peter,' and those called " The Second and Third of John,"
whether they are of the Evangelist or of some other of the
same name. Among the spurious must be numbered, both
the books called ' The Acts of Paul,' and that called ' Pastor,'
and * The Revelation of Peter.' Beside these, the books called
* The Epistle of Barnabas,' and what are called * The Institu-
tions of the Apostles.' Moreover, as I said before, if it should
appear right, "The Revelation of John," which some, as before
said, reject, but others rank among the genuine. But there
are also some who number among these, the Gospel according
to the Hebrews, with which those of the Hebrews that have
received Christ are particularly delighted. These may be said
to be all concerning which there is any dispute. We have,
however, necessarily subjoined here a catalogue of these also,
in order to distinguish those that are true, genuine, and well
authenticated writings, from those others which are not only
not embodied in the Canon, but likewise disputed, notwith-
standing that they are recognized by most ecclesiastical
writers.
Thus we may have it in our power to know both these
books, and those that are adduced by the heretics under the
name of the Apostles, such, viz., as compose the Gospels of
Peter, Thomas, and Matthew, and others beside them, or such
as contain the Acts of the Apostles by Andrew, and John, and
others, of which no one of those writers in the ecclesiastical
succession has condescended to make any mention in his works ;
and, indeed, the character of the style itself is very dififerent
from that of the Apostles, and the sentiments, and the
purport of those things that are advanced in them,
deviating as far as possible from sound orthodoxy, evidently
proves that they are the fictions of heretical men ; whence
they are to be ranked not only among the spurious writ-
ings, but are to be rejected as altogether absurd and
impious."
Eusebius has not passed definite judgment on the question
of the Canon. As a faithful historian he records the historical
status of the books. The echo of the doubts which had their
origin in the preceding ages could not be stilled except by the
authoritative voice of the Church.
Eusebius arranges the books in three classes. First came
TO, ofioXo'yovfieva, the books of which no one ever doubted.
These are the four Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles of Paul, the I.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS. 336
of Peter, the I. of John, and, if one judges well, {el ^avdrf) the
Apocalypse. It is evident that Eusebius 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 avriXeyoixeva, yvmpcfia
Be Tot9 TToXkol^, 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, v66a, composed of the Acts
of Paul, Pastor, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barna-
bas, the Doctrine of the Apostles, the Gospel according 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 peculiar position of the Apocalypse is the effect of the
causes before mentioned. Up to the middle of the third cen-
tury, 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 character. 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 writ-
ing 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, evSiaOrj^^^ov,
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,
336 THE CANON OF N. T. OF ATHANASIUS.
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
Epistle."
Eusebius is inclined to magnify the importance of the in-
dividual doubts, lest he should be thought to have been ignor-
ant 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 favor-
able to our books.
The Church of Alexandria seems to have cleared itself
from all doubt in the fourth century.
St. Athanasius, its oracle in that age, thus manifests its
faith : " The books of the New Testament are the four
Gospels 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.
Cyrill of Jerusalem formulates the same canon with the
exclusion of the Apocalypse, (Cyrill, 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. ^e)
Gregory of Nazianzus has the same Canon, with the ex-
ception of the Apocalypse, which is placed among the books
that are not authentic. (P. G. 41, 892.)
THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF III. CENTURY. 337
The Canon of Amphilochius is the same. He defends the
Epistle to the Hebrews against those who term it apocryphal.
" It is," he says, " verily inspired."
His testimony is rather unfavorable for the Apocalypse,
which he says " is judged apocryphal by the greater number."
(P. G. 37, 1595-X598.)
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
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 im-
portance of the four Epistles that he found no occasion to
employ them, and most probably the peculiar mysterious char-
acter of the Apocalypse moved him to seek his materials from
other sources.
His temper of mind always favored the literal interpretation
of Scripture, and there is little in the Apocalypse that appeals
to such a mind. However, Suidas in his Lexicon, at the word
VcodvvT)^ declares that St. John received the Apocalypse 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 5«5> 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.^
* An accurate description of these Codices will be given later on in this
work.
V
338 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IV. CENTURY.
The Memphitic version of Scripture contains all the books
of the Catholic Canon. The Sahidic version, also, though ex-
isting now only in fragments, plainly shows that it contained
the same Canon.
The same Canon is found in the Ethiopian version, and in
the Armenian version. The Peschito, 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. Ephrem,
expunged these books from the Canon of Scripture.
In the Western Church, as time goes on, we find continued
evidences that the Catholic Canon of to-day, was then the prac-
tical 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, (fs/i) cites the Epistle to
Hebrews, 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, 88) formulates this
Canon : " It has been establised by the Apostles and their
successors, 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 pos-
sessed 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
middle of the fourth century. He vigorously defended Athanasius in his
combat 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 discussion 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.
f Philaster was Bishop of Brescia in Italy, about the year 374. He was
with Ambrose in the Council of Aquileia in 381. 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. 339
RUFINUS OF Aquileia (Expos. Symbol. 37) has formulated
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 Paulinus (Migne Patrol. Lat. 22,
548) he has the following testimony : " I 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 Philemon 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 understand-
ing of them. The Apocalypse contains as many mysteries as
words. This is insufficient praise ; the book is above all praise."
Though drawn in an oratorical way and somewhat lacking
in precision, this list contains Jerome's views on the Canon. He
receives all the books, but records the doubt 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 Viribus Illustribus (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 Ephesians one,
to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to the Thessalo-
nians 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 diffe-
rence 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 em-
bellished Paul's teaching in his own language, or to speak more
340 THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME.
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 West. The doubts concerning Hebrews were
nearly all centred in the West, and moved him little. Though
he is ready to adopt any plausible theory to explain the ab-
sence of the Pauline style in Hebrews, he, in no uncertain terms^
vindicates to Paul the formal creation of the work. We may
say in passing, that all the discussion concerning the difference
between the style of Hebrews and the other Pauline Epistles,
is chiefly a vanity. It seems to have originated in the fact,
that somebody, once upon a time, with some display of learn-
ing, claimed to have surpassed his fellow mortals in discern-
ment by discovering ^it. By the imitative instinct in man,
others followed him, till the number became so great that
men feared to go against the tide. I believe that if it differs
at all, it is by being more Pauline than the others. No writer
writes at all times in the same manner.
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 ecclesiastical
man, and the Epistle is promulgated by the daily reading 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 Church. Je-
rome 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 personally enter-
tain.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME. 341
In his Commentary on Ezechiel, VIII. (Migne, 25, 1465),
he introduces a quotation from Hebrews, with the remark :
" If, in receiving the Epistle, the Latin people does not reject
the authority of the Greeks." I believe this to be a rhetorical
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. " Peter," he says,
" wrote two Epistles which are called Catholic. The second
of these is not believed to be his by many, on occount 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 rejected the
second. The doubt of Peter's authorship of the Second Epistle
only existed in some Greek churches, 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 differ-
ent scribes." The opinion in itself is more of a myth than that
concerning Hebrews. The two Epistles are Peter's, and
Petrine.
In the before-mentioned treatise, De Viris Illustribus, II.
(Migne, P. L. 23, 607), Jerome delivers the following testimony
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 evident reason
why Jerome does not deal with the opinion which he
here notices is that it left intact the divine inspiration of
the book.
In op. cit. (Migne, 23, 613) he makes a similar statement
respecting Jude's Epistle : " Jude, the brother of James, left a
short Epistle, which is one of the Catholic Epistles. For the
reason that he employs a testimony from the Apocryphal
book of Henoch, it is rejected by many, but it has merited au-
thority by its antiquity and usage (in the Church), and is reck-
oned among the Holy Scriptures." There is a lack of precision,
a lack of critical weighing of data, in these testimonies that
has drawn from the Bollandists the just declaration : " II con-
342 CANON OF N. T. FROM END OF IV. TO XV. CENTURY.
vient le peser avec la defiance que doit inspirer un ^crivain
qui se montre plutot publiciste de talent, 6crivant au courant
de la plume qu' historien consciencieux."
In the same work, (Migne P. L. 23, 623, 637), Jerome in-
serts a loose testimony concerning the Epistle of St. John :
" John ^ * * has written one Epistle which is approved
by all the ecclesiastical writers and learned men. The two
others are attributed to John the Ancient, of whom they show
the tomb at Ephesus, distinct from that of the Apostle,
although others believe that both monuments belong to the
Evangelist." As we have said before, these theories in the
mind of Jerome left intact the divinity of the books. He
separated the authorship of the books from their inspiration.
He accepted their inspiration on the warrant of the Church ;
the other question interested him but little. He was
willing to record every legend concerning it, and suspend
judgment. Much of Jerome's erudition is crude and un-
digested.
Traces of the last mentioned opinion of Jerome are found
in the Decree of Gelasius. That decree contains all the
books of the Catholic Canon, although the H.and HI. of John
are in some manuscripts ascribed to John the Ancient. Its
evidential force is independent of this detail, for it plainly
receives all the books as divine Scripture.
The Canon of Pope Innocent sent to Exuperius is
identical with the Canon of the Council of Trent.
We have before adduced the Canon of St. Augustine
(Christian Doctrine, Chap. VIII.) which also is identical with
that of the Council of Trent. He was not ignorant of the
scattering doubts in the Western church. " The Epistle to the
Hebrews," he says " has been doubted by some; but I prefer
to follow the authority of the Eastern churches which receive
it as canonical." (Migne, P. L. 44, 137).
The authority of St. Augustine is not shaken by the least
shadow of doubt. He received all the books as divinely in-
spired Scripture.
The three African Councils held in 393, 397, and 419, for-
mulated a canon identical in substance with that of the Council
of Trent.
In the writings of representative men of the churches of
Gaul and Spain of that period, we always find evidences of the
complete Canon. Thus we see that at the end of the fourth
century, all the great churches of the world possessed complete
Canons. Some of the books had entered into their estate
CANON OF N. T. FROM END OF IV. TO XV. CENTURY. 343
easier than others, but the energy of the divine character
finally placed there those which, considered from a doctrinal
standpoint, were unimportant.
It is needless to attempt to record the data of the follow-
ing centuries in favor of these books. The whole Christian
world was unanimous in adopting them. The Syriac Version
made in the sixth century contains them all. The Council in
Trullo which is authority for the Greeks approved them all.
In the West, the Bible of Cassiodorus contains all the books.
The great doctors of the Latin Church are unanimous in re-
ceiving the complete Canon. In fact the complete Canon enjoy-
ed a period of undisturbed peace up to the fifteenth century.
We have before mentioned the peculiar views on the Canon
held by John of Salisbury. His views on the New Testament
are also bizarre. " The Epistles of Paul," he says, " are fifteen,
comprised in one volume, although the common and almost
universal opinion, is that there are only fourteen, ten to
the churches, and four to individuals, if the Epistle to
the Hebrews is to be enumerated with the Epistles of Paul,
which the doctor of doctors, Jerome, endeavors to prove in his
Preface, where he refutes the cavils of those who contended
that it was not of Paul. The fifteenth is that written to the
Church at Laodicea, and although, as Jerome says, it is rejected
by all, nevertheless it was written by the Apostle. Neither is
this judgment founded on the opinion of others, but rests on
the testimony of the Apostle who makes mention of such
Epistle, in his Epistle to the Colossians."
The uncritical mind of Salisbury failed to advert that his
argument does not conclude. Paul wrote a letter to the
Church at Laodicea, but that fact can not be alleged to prove
that the letter of which Salisbury spoke was that letter of
Paul. Salisbury had no followers, his opinion died with him.
Toward the middle of the fifteenth century POPE EUGENE
IV., in his Bull of Union with the Jacobites, enumerated the
complete Canon of all our books as the Holy Scriptures. The
definition awakened no word of discussion, for it was but pro-
mulgating in official form what the whole Christian world
believed.
In the general upheaval of the settled status of things,
which came with the great apostasy of the sixteenth century,
doubt and error also invaded the thought of the age concern-
ing Holy Scripture.
In the first edition of his Greek New Testament, which he
dedicated to Leo X., Erasmus outlined certain doubts con-
344 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CAJETAN.
cerning the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the
Epistle of St. James, II. Peter, II. and III. John, and the
Apocalypse. The faculty of the Sorbonne rose up against
him and censured him. One must confess, however, that the
arguments of the Sorbonne are not conclusive, and their action
inconsiderate.
Erasmus protested that he held to the divinity of the
books ; he only doubted of the authors. " There has always
been doubt," he says, " regarding the author of Hebrews ; and
I confess candidly that I doubt yet." The faculty responded
by affixing to the opinion the note of temerity and schism.
Erasmus appealed to history. " Doubt was entertained for a
long time," he says, " regarding the Apocalypse, not by here-
tics, but by orthodox men, who, though uncertain of the au-
thor, received the book as coming from the Holy Ghost."
Though Erasmus adduces here a fact, he does not deal justly
thereby. The mere fact that certain scattering doubts arose
in some churches concerning the author of this book, was not
sufficient data to cast a doubt upon its author. The Sor-
bonne would have acted more wisely in pointing out the weak-
ness of the great humanist's position, than in condemning him
in toto for that which was more against a sound critique than
against faith.
Erasmus at length sent to the faculty the following re-
sponse, which does honor to the man : " According to the mind
of man, I believe not that the Epistle to the Hebrews is of
Paul, or of Luke, nor that II. Peter is of the Apostle, nor the
Apocalypse of John. * -5^ ^ Only this doubt holds my
mind, whether the Church receives the titles of the books, so
that she not only bids us hold as infallible what is written in
the books, but also commands us to hold as infallible that the
books came from the authors whose names they bear. If she
has canonized the titles, I renounce my doubt. A clear judgment
of the Church moves me more than all the arguments of men."
Issues are mixed here. The Church has certainly canon-
ized some titles, and some she has not. But regarding the
books of which Erasmus spoke, the mind of the Church is now
clear, since she mentioned them in the decree of Trent as be-
longing to their respective authors.
The most notable opposition to the antilegomena in this
period came from Cajetan.*
♦Thomas de Vio is sumamed Cajetanus, from the village of Gaeta or
Cajeta, in the old kingdom of Naples where he was bom on the 20th of Feb-
ruary, 1469. At the age of fifteen, he entered the Dominican order. He
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CAJETAN. 845
We have before reviewed his position on the deuterocanon-
ical books of the Old Testament. His views on the antilego-
mena are focalized in the following statement : " From these
and other words of Jerome, the prudent reader will know that
studied theology at Bologna, and made brilliant progress in the sacred
sciences. He took the degree of doctor of theology in a general assembly of
the order held at Ferrara, in 1494. He taught theology for some years at
Brescia, Pa via, and at Rome. In 1500 he was made procurator general ; and
in 1508, General of the Order by the express recommendation of Julius II. In
1517 he was created Cardinal by Leo X. . and soon after was sent by the Pope
into Germany to move the Emperor Maximillian against the Turks, and to make
head against Luther. In the latter project, he was entirely unsuccessful. In
fact it seems unfortunate that Cajetan should have been selected for this
mission. He was but the echo of the excessively elaborate speculativism of
the scholastics. It required living thought, the comprehension by a master
mind of the peculiar causes that were influencing men's minds, to stop the
tide of that dreadful sea which broke over Europe through the breach
made by Luther's defection. A man like Philip Neri would have accom-
plished more by his clear call to the supernatural, than the subtle dialec-
tician.
In 1519 Cajetan was made Bishop of Gaeta. After several other missions
in state affairs, in 1523 he fixed his domicile at Rome, and devoted his life to the
study of theology and the Holy Scriptures. In dogmatic theology, Cajetan
was an absolute "Thomist" ; in Scripture, an absolute " Jeromist." This led
to a sort of disdain for all the resources of sacred science outside the writings
of these alone. This led him to enunciate many strange and dangerous
opinions, especially in regard to the Scriptures. There is in his works a
certain display of arrogance in the way he essays to solve every question by
his intellection of these two doctors.
In 1527 Rome was taken by the army of the Emperor, and Cajetan was
made prisoner. He regained his liberty only by a ransom of fifty thousand
Roman crowns. The remaining years of his life were consecrated to study
till his death in 1534.
Cajetan is undoubtedly the greatest commentator on the Summa Theo.
logica of St. Thomas. This is also the greatest of his works. He commented
all the Old Testament except the Canticle of Canticles and the Prophets. He
has a commentary on the first three chapters of Isaiah. He commented all
the New Testament except the Apocalypse. His method was to bring out
the literal sense, and for this cause he declared himself unable to explain the
Apocalypse. Cajetan's disregard for the Fathers, Jerome excepted, appears
in his statement that one may hold that which is not contrary to the express
doctrine of the Church, even " against a torrent of holy doctors." (Praef. in
Lib. Moysis.). It would be better to deny even the supposition of Cajetan on
this point.
The Dominican Catharinus moved the Sorbonne to censure sixteen propo-
sitions taken from Cajetan's commentaries on the Gospels. After Cajetan's
death the same Catharinus wrote a work filled with bitter criticism and severe
accusations against him.
Melchior Canus also attacks Cajetan in his celebrated work De Locis
Theologicis. He has been defended by Sixtus Sennensis, and by Richard
Simon. Though the errors of Cajetan were not formal, it must be held in
truth that his works on Scripture are defective in many places, and his
temper of mind is far from laudable.
346 THE CANON OF N. T. OF COUNCIL OF TRENT.
Jerome was not absolutely certain of the author of this Epistle,
and since we have taken Jerome for our rule, lest we should
err in the discernment of the canonical books, and those which
he delivered to be canonical, we hold canonical, and those which
he cut off from the Canon, we place outside the Canon ; therefore,
from the fact that the author of this Epistle is doubtful with
Jerome, the Epistle becomes doubtful, for if it be not of Paul,
it is not clear that it is canonical. Wherefore, from the author-
ity of this Epistle alone, questions of faith cannot be decided."
Regarding Jude's Epistle he says : " From which things
(the statements of St. Jerome) it appears that the Epistle is
inferior in authority to Holy Scripture." He repeats in effect
this statement in regard to H. and HI. John and the Epistle
of James. He says naught of the Apocalypse, but he de-
fended the canonicity of II. Peter. In regard to this Epistle,
there was no choice between authenticity and a literary
forgery, for the author claims to be Peter. (II. Peter, I. i).
Cajetan shrank from characterizing a book, which the Church
had used for centuries, as a literary fraud.
In examining the testimonies of Cajetan, we find him more
of a "Jeromist" than Jerome himself. Jerome had noted
certain doubts regarding the antilegomena, but he had never
admitted that the books were of doubtful inspiration. The
great doctor rightly separated the question of authorship from
that of divinity. He incidentally mentioned doubts regarding
the former question, the other question with him was fixed
and sure. It is a lamentable lack of logic in Cajetan's reason-
ing to say, that if the author of a book be uncertain, the book
itself is of inferior authority. The two questions were distinct
in Jerome's time, and in Cajetan's time.
The prerogative given to Jerome by Cajetan in the matter
of the Canon is absurd. The Church, and the Church alone
merits such authority. The whole testimony is like much that
Cajetan wrote, an intense expression of himself. He had a
perfect confidence in his heroes and himself, he cared little
for what other men thought.
It is generally stated that the opinion of Cajetan was one
of the disposing causes, which drew from the Church the de-
fined Canon of the Scriptures. The protestants had already
set forth similar views in Germany. The great credit of
Cajetan would tend to draw Catholics towards the new
opinions. The juncture had come for the Church to act, and
she in her Decree of Trent, spoke the faith which she had held
from the beginning : " The books of the New Testament are
THE CANON OF N. T. OF COUNCIL OF TRENT. 347
the four Gospels, of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John : the Acts
of the Apostles, written by Luke : the fourteen Epistles of the
Apostle Paul, viz., Romans, two to the Corinthians, Galatians,
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, two to the Thessalonians,
two to Timothy, one to Titus, one to Philemon, and one to
the Hebrews ; two Epistles of Peter the Apostle, three
Epistles of John the Apostle, one of James the Apostle, one
of Jude the Apostle, and the Apocalypse of John the Apostle.
If any man will not receive as sacred and canonical all these
books entire, with all their parts, as they have been wont to be
read in the Catholic Church, and as they exist in the old Latin
Edition of the Vulgate, * * * '^^ let him be anathema."
(Council of Trent, Sess. IV.)
In the Council of Trent, the discussion of the Canon of the
New Testament was less extensive and intense, than that
which had come upon the Canon of the Old Testament. Not
a voice opposed the canonicity of the antilegomena of the New
Testament ; Luther and his supporters were recognized as their
sole opponents.
Regarding the last verses of the Gospel of Mark ; Luke's
account of the sweat of the Lord in Gethsemani ; and the sec-
tion relating to the adulteress in the Gospel of John, some dis-
cussion was moved. Cardinal Pacheco demanded in the gen-
eral assembly of the Council on the 27th of March, that these
portions should be expressly indicated in the decree. Cajetan
had placed that the final verses of Mark were of less authority
in matters of faith. (Mark. XVI. 9 — 20.)
The Fathers believed that it was inopportune to even notice
the doubts concerning these passages. The question was put
to vote whether express mention should be made of these pas-
sages, and it was decided in the negative by thirty-four votes
against seventeen. Some discussion followed till finally the
point raised by Pacheco was safeguarded by the clause : " the
books with all their parish
The next point of discussion regarded the authors of the books.
The question was submitted : Whether the books should
be received together with the authors. Forty-four of the
assembly voted on the ist of April, that the authors should be
received as well as the books.
In consequence of this the schema was modified, so that
the author of every book of the New Testament is most
clearly mentioned with the respective books. Hence the
question which had been open up to that time was settled.
The Council fixed the canonicity and authorship of the books.
348 THE NEW TESTAMENT OF THE SECTS.
Chapter XIV.
The New Testament of the Sects.
The Canon of the schismatic Greek Church, is the same as
that of the Roman Catholic Church.
In Syria, the Nestorians receive only the Gospels, the Acts,
fourteen Epistles of Paul, I. Peter, I. John, and the Epistle of
James. Ebed Jesu, the Nestorian Metropolitan of Nisibe,
(ti3i8), does not mention the four shorter Catholic Epis-
tles and Apocalypse in his catalogue of the New Testa-
ment.
The schismatic Armenians receive all our books, and
add two letters of the Corinthians to Paul, and Paul's
response.
The Ethiopian Canon contains all the books, and adds the
Apostolical Constitutions.
Calvin and his sect received the full Canon.
The Anglican Church also received all the books of the
Catholic Canon.
In the Lutheran Church there was much fluctuation of
opinion. Luther had doubted of the Epistles of James, Jude,
Hebrews and the Apocalypse ; his followers went farther, and
rejected II. Peter, and II. and III. John. But the Lutherans
were not constant in this opinion. The lack of support of the
other sects, and the feebleness of their position brought it
about that Bossuet was able to write in 1700 to Leibnitz:
" Nous convenons tous ensemble, protestants et catholiques,
egalement des memes livres du Nouveau Testament ; car je ne
crois pas que personne voulut suivre encore les emportements
de Luther contre I'Epitre de saint Jacques. Passons done une
meme canonicit^ a tous ces livres, contest6s autrefois ou non
contest^s : apr^s cela. Monsieur, permettez-moi de vous de-
mander si vous voulez affaiblir I'autorit^ ou de I'Epitre
aux H^breux, si haute, si th^ologique, si divine, ou
celle de 1' Apocalypse, ou reluit I'esprit prophetique
avec autant de magnificence que dans Isaie et dans
Daniel?"
The Lutherans had abandoned their theory, but in many of
of their Bibles the preface of Luther was long after printed.
It is for this cause that Richard Simon ridicules them for such
an apparent contradiction. Finally, these prefaces were ex-
punged, and the opinions of their founder on this point con-
signed to oblivion.
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 349
The rise of rationalism has changed the estate of the books of
both Testaments in the protestant church. It is now no longer
a question of the divinity of any particular book, but belief in the
divinity of the whole collection is fast dying in all the
sects.
Chapter XV.
The Apocryphal and lost books of both
Testaments.
The radical signification of apocryphal, aTro/c/af^o? from
aTTOKpvTrreLVy is that of hidden.
Cornely believes that the application of the term to scrip-
tural writings came from the custom of the Greeks of preserv-
ing the ccTTOKpvifja ^tpkCa in the temples of the gods. These
books, they fabled, had come to them from the gods ; hence, the
later imposters, according to his opinion, feigned a mysterious
origin for their productions, which thus were styled apocryphal.
His arguments to prove this theory are very feeble.
In our judgment the first signification of the term as applied
to our books, was to denote that the origin and authorship of
the book were unknown. By its etymological force, it would
extend to all books of unknown authorship. But language is
a living growth, and can not be bound by etymology.
The books which, though of an uncertain author, were cer-
tainly of an inspired author, were thus preserved immune from
this appellation. So that the term became exclusively applied
to books, whose real character was hidden.
At all events the use of the term to-day is to signify a book
which by its title seems to lay claim to divinity, but which has
no sufficient data to substantiate this claim. Perhaps we could
not better the definition of Origen : " Books which were pro-
duced under the names of the saints (biblical personages), but
which are outside the Canon."
Not all the Apocrypha are of the same character. Some
are impious ; others are composed of legends and pious reflec-
tions intended for the edification of the faithful.
The Apocrypha are of two great classes, those of the Old
Testament, and those of the New. We know from the testi-
monies of the Fathers that a vast multitude of Apocrypha
existed in the early ages of the Church. The pious fictions of
Christians, the fictions of the Jews, and the forgeries of the
heretics conspired to augment the number.
350 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.
The first official enumeration of the Apocrypha is in the
following Canon of Gelasius, sanctioned in a council at Rome
in 495-496.
List of apocryphal books which are not received :
The Itinerary under name of Peter the Apostle, which is entitled of
Clement, eight books, apocryphal.
The Acts of Andrew the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Acts of Thomas the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Acts of Peter the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Acts of Philip the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Acts of Thaddaeus the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Grospel of Thaddaeus, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Mathias, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Peter the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gospel of James the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gtospel of Barnabas, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Thomas, used by the Manicheans, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Bartholomew the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Andrew the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gospel corrupted by Lucian, apocryphal.
The Book of the Infancy of the Saviour, apocryphal.
The Gospels corrupted by Hesychius, apocryphal.
The Book of the Navitivity af the Lord and Mary and the Wise Woman,
apocryphal.
The Book called Pastor, apocryphal.
All the books made by Lucius, the disciple of the devil, apocryphal.
The Book called The Foundation, apocryphal.
The Book called The Treasure, apocryphal.
The Book of the Daughters of Adam, or the Little Genesis, apocryphal.
The Book called the Acts of Thecla and Paul, apocryphal.
The Book called of Nepos, apocryphal.
The Book of Proverbs, written by heretics, and circulated under the
name of S. Sixtus, apocryphal.
The Apocalypse, which bears the name of Paul the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Apocalypse which bears the name of Thomas the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Apocalypse which bears the name of Stephen the Apostle, apo-
cryphal.
The Book called "Transitus", that is the Assumption of the Blessed
Virgin Mary, apocryphal.
The Book called the Penance of Adam, apocryphal.
The Book of Ogias, who is supposed by the heretics to have combated
with the dragon after the deluge, apocryphal.
The Book called the Testament of Job, apocryphal.
The Book called the Penance of Origen, apocryphal.
The Book called the Penance of St. Cyprian, apocryphal.
The Book called the Penance of Jamne and Mambre, apocryphal.
The Book called The Lots of the Holy Apostles, apocryphal.
The Book called The Praise of the Apostles, apocryphal.
The Book called The Canon of the Apostles, apocryphal.
The Letter of Jesus to King Abgar, apocryphal.
The Letter of Abgar to Jesus, apocryphal.
The Book called The Contradiction of Solomon, apocryphal. (Mansi.
Coll. Cone. Tom. VIII.
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 351
A minor list of apocryphal books appears in the works of
Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (t828).
Psalms and Canticles of Solomon, 2100 verses.
Apocalypse of Peter, 300 verses.
Epistle of Barnabas, 1360 verses.
Gospel according to the Hebrews, 2200 verses.
Henoch, 4800 verses.
The Patriarchs, 5100 verses.
The Prayer of Joseph, 1100 verses.
The Testament of Moses, 1100 verses.
The Assumption of Moses, 1400 verses.
Abraham, 300 verses.
Eldad and Modad, 400 verses.
Elias, the Prophet, 316 verses.
Sophonias, the Prophet, 600 verses.
Zachary, the father of John, 500 verses.
Baruch, Habacuc, Ezechiel, and Daniel, Pseudepigrapha.
The Itinerary of Peter, 2750 verses.
The Itinerary of John, 2600 verses.
The Itinerary of Thomas, 1700 verses.
The Gospel of Thomas, 1300 verses.
The Doctrine of the Apostles, 200 verses.
The I. and II. Epistle of Clement, 2600 verses.
Ignatius, Polycarp, and the Pastor of Hermas. — (Opusc. Hist, ed. Boor).
A list of Apocryphal books published from different manu-
scripts by Montfaucon, Cotelier, Hody and Pitra contains the
following :
Adam. Apocalypse of Ezra.
Henoch. History of James.
Lamech. Apocalypse of Peter.
Patriarchs. Voyage and Doctrine of the Apos-
Prayer of Joseph. ties.
Eldad and Modad. Epistle of Barnabas.
Testament of Moses. Acts of Paul.
Assumption of Moses. Apocalypse of Paul.
Psalms of Solomon. Doctrine of Clement.
Apocalypse of Elias. Doctrine of Ignatius.
Vision of Elias. Doctrine of Polycarp.
Vision of Isaias. Grospel of Barnabas.
Apocalypse of Sophonias. Gospel of Matthew.
Apocalypse of Zachary.
(Pitra Jur. Eccles. Graec. Hist.)
It is not within the scope of our work to give an extended
notice upon all these Apocryphal books. We shall only speak
of those of greater importance in the bearing upon the Holy
Scriptures. We shall first speak of those which the Church
permitted to be printed outside the Canon in the Vulgate.
Outside the Canonical books in the edition, of the Vulgate,
are found the third and fourth Books of Ezra, and the Prayer
of Manasses.
35^ THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.
The Third Book of Ezra, sometimes called " Ezra Graecus ",
is largely made up of passages taken literally from the Canoni-
cal I. Ezra and II. Chronicles. It has only the third, fourth,
and six first verses of the fifth chapter original. In many
codices of the Greek text, it precedes the canonical books of
Ezra and Nehemias, which are comprised in one volume. It
also occupies the same place in the old versions derived from
the Suptuagint.
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Basil,
Chrysostom, Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, and Prosper have
quoted the third and fourth chapters, but the quotations are
scattering, and feeble in mode of enunciation. It gradually
lost credit, till after the fifth century it disappears in the re-
corded use of Scripture in the Church.
The book was not absolutely rejected by the Church in the
Council of Trent, and she permits its reading. There would
be no difficulty in approving its portions wherein it accords
with the aforesaid canonical books, but there are internal de-
fects in its original chapters in point of doctrine, which will
probably forever prevent it from entering upon the estate of
canonical books.
Though less entitled to credit than the former, the FOURTH
Book of Ezra had more influence on early traditions. It was
upon the data of this book that the role of Ezra as promul-
gator of the Canon was founded.
Up to the eighteenth century, the Greek text of the book
was not known, and the Latin text alone was in the possession
of the world.
Since then Whiston published a translation of the Arabic
text (Primitive Christianity Revived, London, 171 1) ; Ewald, in
1863, published the Arabic text ; Lawrence, in 1820, published
the Ethiopian text; Ceriani published, in i860, a Latin trans-
lation of the Syriac text ; and the Armenian Bibles of Venice,
1805, contain the Armenian translation.
These show that the Latin work has suffered mutilations
and interpolations. The aforesaid versions do not contain the
two first and two last chapters of the text as found in the
Latin, and they insert a long passage between the thirty-fifth
and thirty-sixth verses of the seventh chapter. It is evident
from the context, and the references of the Fathers, that these
versions are more in accord with the original.
The original book consisted of seven visions, in which the
last judgment is said to impend, and men are exhorted to pre-
pare for it. The original work seems to have been the work
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 353
of a Jew, writing soon after the fall of Jerusalem. The first
two chapters and also the last two are, doubtless, the interpola-
tion of a Christian.
Aside from the influence that the book had in the tradi-
tional role of Ezra, the only certain evidence that the book
was known to the Greek Fathers, is in Strom. III. i6, of
Clement of Alexandria :
IV. Ezra V. 35. Clem. Strom. III. 16.
" And I said : ' Why, O Lord ? " ' Why was not the womb of
For what was I born ? or why my mother my tomb, that I might
did not the womb of my mother not see the affliction of Jacob,
become my tomb, that I might and the tribulation of Israel,'
not see the affliction of Jacob saith Ezra, the Prophet."
and the travail of my people,
Israel ?' "
Among the Latin Fathers, Ambrose often quotes it as
Scripture.
The Latin Church also has incorporated certain passages
from it into its Liturgy.
Introit of Feria III. after Pen-
IV. Ezra II. 37. tecost.
"Commendatum donum ac- ''Accipite jucunditatemgloriae
cipite et jucundamini, gratias vestrae, alleluja ; gratias agentes
agentes ei, qui vos ad coelestia Deo, alleluja ; qui vos ad coeles-
regna vocavit." tia regna vocavit."
In the Sixth Responsorium in the Office of the Apostles, we find
the following :
IV. Ezra II. 45.
" Hi sunt qui mortalem tuni- " Isti sunt triumphatores et
cam deposuerunt, et immortalem amici Dei. qui contemnentes,
sumpserunt, et confess! sunt no- jussa principum meruerunt prae-
men Dei ; Modo coronantur, et mia aeterna : modo, coronantur
accipiunt palmas." et accipiunt palmam."
Responsorium IV. of Paschal
IV. Ezra IL 35. Office of Martyrs.
" Parati estote ad praemia " Lux perpetua lucebit Sanctis
regni, quia lux perpetua lucebit tuis, Domine, et aeternitas tem-
vobis per aeternitatem temporis. " porum. "
These extrinsic data for the approbation of the book, in no
wise, effect an argument in its favor. It never entered into the
sacred literature of the Church. I found only this one refer-
ence in Clement's works, and it is not strange that he should
have given some notice to the book ; for he browsed on every
w
364 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.
pasture where he could feed his hunger for knowledge. Am-
brose is more pious than critical, and the visions of the pseudo
Ezra pleased him.
The reception of a passage into Missal or Breviary adds
but little to its historical claim to authenticity. Both Missal
and Breviary could very profitably be revised again. More-
over, the passages quoted are in themselves true, and well ex-
pressed, and appropriate to the theme for which used.
Although the book is not absolutely condemned by the
Church, it is certainly not of divine origin. In fact, it is not
free from doctrinal errors regarding the state of the souls after
death, and contains many rabbinic fables.
We know upon the authority of II. Chronicles XXXIII. 12,
18, that Menasseh, son of Ezechias, when a captive in Babylon
in punishment for his sins, was moved to penance, and prayed
to God. But we have no means of knowing whether the
prayer of Menasseh of the Latin Vulgate, be that authentic
prayer. There is very little in its favor; the work is unim-
portant, and it probably will always remain one of the unset-
tled points of history.
In editions of the Greek text of the Old Testament, we find
the CLI. Psalm attributed to David. St. Athanasius (Epist. ad
Marcell. 15) and Euthemius (In Ps. Proem.) regarded it as
authentic. The import of the Psalm is to celebrate David's
victory over Goliath. It was never received in the Latin ver-
sion, but it has place in the Ethiopian, Armenian, Syriac, and
Arabic. It is not lacking in grace of thought and diction, but
no good authority warrants its inspiration.
In some good codices of the Septuagint, Eighteen Psalms
are found entitled "^aXfiol koI u>ha\ ^a\o^a.vTO<i. They were
unknown in the West, till De laCerda in 1626, published them
from a Codex of Constantinople, which had been brought into
Germany. The burden of the Psalms is the fallen estate of
Israel, and the cry for the Messiah. It is evident that the
original was Hebrew or Aramaic. As it is natural for parents to
love their children, De la Cerda stoutly advocated the cause
of his work, claiming that these Psalms were either of Solomon
or some one who, with pious intent, wrote in Solomon's name.
But the very nature of the argument precludes the authorship
of Solomon. Under him Israel, reached the zenith of her
glory. They were probably written by some Jew, after Israel
had begun to suffer the subjugation of foreign foes.
In the Alexandrian, Sinaitic, and other good codices, there
is found a work which is known as the Third Book of Macca-
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 355
bees. It narrates a persecution of the Alexandrine Jews by
Ptolemy IV., Philopator. Other history is silent concerning
this persecution. The book is in no way connected with the
Maccabees or their history, and seems to have acquired its
name from its position immediately after the books of Mac-
cabees. The Eighty-fifth Canon of the Apostles enumerates
it among the canonical books, and it finds an occasional men-
tion from some anonymous or obscure Greek writer, but it is
but little known in the West, and never found its way into a
Latin codex. Its apocryphal character is an assured fact.
The Fourth Book of Maccabees is a sort of essay to prove
that reason should rule the movements of the soul. It
appeals to the history of Eleazar, and the seven martyr sons of
the woman mentioned in II. Maccabees. It is evident from a
marked similarity that the author used the second book of
Maccabees in the construction of his work. Eusebius, Jerome,
and Philostorgius attribute the work to Flavius Josephus.
The book obtained some slight recognition from Gregory
Nanz. and Ambrose, but there is nothing either extrinsic or
intrinsic to found its divinity. In fact, it seems to favor the
errors of the Stoics and other errors, and is placed as apocry-
phal by all.
We mention now in the second class, the apocryphal books
to which allusions are said by some to be found in the New
Testament. The most notable of these is the Book of Henoch.
In Gen. V. 24, it is said of Henoch that he walked with God.
This expression was interpreted to mean not only that he led
a godly life, but also that he had been vouchsafed the
privilege of divine intercourse, and of receiving divine revela-
tions. Jewish antiquity regarded him therefore as a prophet,
equally familiar with heavenly things and the future fortunes
of the human race. These views of his character gave occa-
sion for attributing to Henoch the apocryphal writing which
constitutes one of the principal monuments of the apocalyptic
literature of later Judaism. This Book of Henoch was much
used by Jewish and Christian writers in the following centuries,
but was subsequently almost entirely lost — a few fragments
only having been preserved in the chronography of Georgios
Synkellos — till re-discovered in the last century in an Ethiopic
translation. James Bruce, in 1773, brought back two MSS.
into Europe, to which some others have been subsequently
added. Silvestre de Sacy was the first to publish, in 1800,
some particulars concerning the contents of this writing.
{Magasin Encyclop. VI. I. 382 seqq,). Lawrence was
366 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.
the first to edit an English translation {The Book of Enoch,
an Apocryphal Production, &c., Oxford, 1821, 2d ed. 1833, 3rd
ed. 1838), followed by the original Ethiopic text from Bruce's
vci2Xi\xs>zx'v^\.s {Libri Enoch Versio Aethiopica, Oyiiord, 1838). A
German translation, with learned introduction and continuous
commentary, was published by Prof. A. G. Hoffmann in Jena
{Das Buch Henoch in vollstdndiger deutscher Uebersetzung, &c.,
2 Theile, Leipzig, 1833-1838). The first part is translated from
the English, but the second is based likewise on the Frankfort
manuscript of the Ethiopic text. The Latin version of Gfrorer,
made from the English and German translations, is of no value
{Prophetae veteres pseudepigraphi, Stuttgart, 1840). The best
edition of the Ethiopic text is that of Dillmann, who made
use of five manuscripts {Liber Henoch Aethiopice, Leipzig,
185 1). Of the improved text thus obtained, Dillmann pub-
lished another German translation with critical introduction
and copious commentary {Das Buch Henoch ubersetzt und
erkldrt, Leipzig, 1853). The Ethiopic version was not made
immediately from the Hebrew original, but from the Greek.
There is no reason to doubt its substantial fidelity, though it
not unfrequently differs from the Greek text of fragments pre-
served elsewhere, one at least of which is not to be found in
the Ethiopic text. The whole work as it now lies before us, is
divided into five books, but closer investigation makes it evi-
dent that this text has passed through various hands, and is a
composite work. It has been assumed by various critics that
we have before us a collection of several books of Enoch inde-
pendent one of another. This hypothesis, however, is unten-
able ; we must, on the contrary, assume the existence of an
original document, which at different times was enriched with
additions from various sources. The critical treatment of the
book has occupied, besides de Sacy, Lawrence, and Hoffmann,
the following scholars, whose labors deserve a special mention
here : Ernst Krieger [Liitzelberger] (in the Beitrdge zur Kritik
und Exegese, Niirnberg, 1845), Liicke {Einleitung in die Offen-
barung Johannis, 2d ed. Bonn, 1852), Dillmann (as above),
Ewald {Ueber des Aethiopischen Buches Henoch Entstchung und
Zusammensetzung), K. R. Kostlin (" Ueber die Entstehung des
Buches Henoch,'' Theologische Jahrbiicher von Baur und Zeller,
Jahrgang, 1856), and Hilgenfeld {Judische Apokalyptik, Jena,
1857; Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Theologie, i860, p. 319
seqq., 1861, p. 212 seqq., 1862, p. 216 seqq.).
Excluding first the so-called Parables (cc. 37-71), the fol-
lowing chapters — 1-19, 21-36, 72-105 — form a well-connected
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 357
whole, which professes to be a variety of revelations committed
to writing which had been vouchsafed to the prophet Henoch,
partly in ecstatic visions in the heavenly world, partly in pro-
phetic dreams. The introduction (cc. 1-5) announces first a
benediction of the prophet on the righteous, and then a
prophecy of the great day of judgment, on which the impious
will receive well-merited punishment for their disobedience to
the ordinances of God. Whereupon follows (cc. 6-16) an ac-
count of the origin of the universal corruption of the human
race, induced by the fall of the angels and their carnal inter-
course with the daughters of men. In consequence of the
abominations resulting from this fall, God is about to impose a
heavy judgment, which Henoch has to announce to the fallen
"Watchers." These are to be in future bound in subterranean
prisons for the whole period of earth's history, the duration of
which is fixed at seventy generations, until the day of final
judgment, whereon they will be cast forever into the lake of
fire. In what follows, the original text appears in a somewhat
fragmentary form in the Ethiopic version. As in the intro-
duction, a reference to the fixed divine laws which heaven
itself and the whole physical universe have to obey served to
exhibit in the strongest light the guilt of sinners in transgress-
ing the will of God, so now is made to follow (cc. 17-19, 21-36)
an account of the mysteries of heaven and earth, which have
been exhibited to Henoch by angels during an ecstatic rapture
from earth to heaven. In this miraculous journey round the
universe Henoch sees first the place of the winds and the regions
whence lightning and thunder come. After that the water of
life, and the sea of fire which is destined to receive the setting
sun, the streams of Hades, the dwelling-place of the dead, the
mountains of black winter clouds, the waters of Oceanus, the
winds which support the universe, seven fiery mountains of
precious stones, the mid-one of which, being the throne of
God, reaches to heaven, the hell of fire, and in the vacant
spaces of the universe the prison-houses of fallen star-spirits,
and the future place of punishment for the angels who had
held sinful intercourse with the daughters of men. In a sub-
sequent journey Henoch is taken a second time to the same
places. First to the place of punishment for the fallen angels ;
then into Hades and its different compartments ; to the fire at
which the stars are kindled ; to the place of future judgment ;
to the seven mountains, the middle one of which rises in the
form of a throne ; and then into the Holy Land and the vale
of Hinnom, the future place of punishment for impious men ;
358 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.
and then further eastward to the legendary home-lands of noble
spices, and on as far as Paradise. In a third journey Henoch
arrives at the gates of Heaven, and the places whence issue
stars and winds. Thereupon follows (cc. 72-82) the book con-
cerning the courses of the heavenly lights, which describes
once more in the form of a journey the movements and orders
of stars and constellations, the courses of sun and moon, and
the relation of the solar to the lunar year, to which are attached
a series of further communications regarding the various winds,
their origin and operations, concerning the seven mountains,
seven streams, and seven islands. The laws of the lights and
powers of heaven are announced to Henoch on his journeys by
the instrumentality of angels. All this he imparts to his son
Methuselah, who is to commit it in his turn to following gen-
erations. In some parts of this section the original order
seems to have been disturbed. Chapter 82 ought properly to
stand before chapter 79, while chapter 81 forms the conclusion
of this section. Henoch in this chapter contemplates the writ-
ing on the heavenly tables, wherein are recorded the actions of
men to the latest generations, and then returns from his jour-
neys to earth, in order to spend one last year in the circle of
his family.
The revelations which follow concerning the future fortunes
of mankind (cc. 83-91, 11 ; 93 ; 91, 12-19) ^^e presented in the
form of visions which Henoch, hasbeen vouchsafed at different
times of his life, but which he now, for the first time, on the
conclusion of his wondrous journey, relates to his son Methu-
selah.
The first vision, seen by him while still a boy, in the house
of his grandfather Mahalaleel, describes the flood (c. 83) ; the
second, which had been imparted to him before his marriage,
gives in apocalyptic figures a general survey of the history of
the chosen people, from the first human pair to the struggles
of the Israelites against the Syrians, in the time of John Hyr-
canus. The account of these struggles is immediately followed
by that of the approaching universal judgment (cc. 64-90). A
third description of the future, introduced by exhortations to
his children, gives once more a rapid survey of the world's his-
tory divided into ten great weeks. At the end of the seventh
week, which is the actual writer's own time, the righteous re-
ceive a sevenfold instruction concerning the whole creation ;
in the eighth week the righteous celebrate their triumph and
enter on their kingdom; in the ninth, judgment is passed on
the ungodly; to the tenth is assigned the judgment of the
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 369
fallen angels and the renewal of heaven and earth. The last
section (cc, 92 ; 94-105) contains the Doctrines of Wisdom
which Henoch the writer imparts to his children and all future
generations, warnings against sin in its various forms, admoni-
tions to righteousness, fidelity, and perseverance, comminations
against the ungodly, and promises for the righteous.
The text of this comprehensive work appears in some parts
not to belong to the original form. Apart from the lacuna be-
tween chapters 16 and 17, and some smaller interpolations of
which we shall have to speak farther on, it strikes one with
surprise to find several things seen by Henoch in his journeys
repeatedly told again in the same words. The revelations,
moreover, vouchsafed to Henoch on his first journey (cc. 17-19)
are for the most part repeated, chapters 21-36. The section
about the Winds, on the other hand, chapters ^6 and JT,
together with the addition about the Seven Mountains, &c.,
disturbs too much the connection of the book about the Lights
of Heaven. It repeats, also, in more detail, what has already
been treated of (chapters 33-36), only much more briefly.
As there is little probability that these repetitions were in-
tentional, we are warranted in supposing that there may have
been different recensions of the text, which held their ground
side by side, and were put together by some simple-minded
collector.
The book, in any case, remains a remarkable monument of
Jewish theological opinion, at the close of the first and
beginning of the second century before Christ.
The result of these observations seems to be that the Book
of Henoch must be regarded as a collective work, consisting of
various parts, about the composition of which it will be dififi.
cult to form a certain judgment until the Hebrew original, or
at any rate the Greek version from which the Ethiopic is de-
rived, shall have been recovered. — (Diet, of Christ. Biog. of
Smith & Wace.)
The Book of Henoch acquired much of its fame from a
supposed reference made to it by Jude in his Epistle, V. 14:
" Prophetavit autem et de his septimus ab Adam Henoch
dicens : * Ecce venit Dominus in Sanctis millibus suis.' " The
words of the Book of Henoch are : " Et ecce venit cum decem
millibus sanctorum, ut judicium exerceat de iis et disjiciat im-
probos, etc."
Moved especially by this passage of Jude, Tertullian was
much inclined to receive the book. His words, however, show
that he was conscious that tradition was not with him. The
360 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
joint basis of Catholic faith in tradition does not consist of the
stray voices of men, who, through the frailty of human reason,
at times lapsed into unsupported vagaries. No man representing
the Christian thought of the time, ever said that the Book of
Henoch was divine. Augustineand Jeromeforciblyrepudiate it.
It was conceded by those two Fathers and by many others
that the Apostle Jude quoted this book in his Epistle. The
Fathers argue that such use of the book did not necessarily
canonize the book. Provided the Apocryphal book did, in the
referred passage, contain a real statement by Henoch, I am not
disposed to either affirm or deny this position. But there is
no sufficient evidence for the application of such theory to the
matter in question. It is far more probable that both the
reference of Jude and the apocryphal book are based upon
some common traditional or documentary data, available in
that early age, or perhaps the apocryphal book took its passage
from the Epistle of Jude, since much moves us to ascribe to the
book a later origin than the date of the Epistle. In fact the
passage in the Ethiopian exemplar seems like an interpolation,
being not in harmony with the context.
All things considered, we must conclude that the book is
evidently a spurious product of unknown causes.
The Assumption of Moses according to Origen, Didy-
mus, and Oecumenius is cited by St. Jude, I. 9, (Orig, De
Prin. III. 2; Didym. et Oecum. in Epist. Jud.). It is men-
tioned by Clement of Alexandria and others. The original
which seems to have been Aramaic Hebrew, is lost, as also the
Greek translation. All that is preserved to us is a fragment
of the Latin translation, found by Ceriani in a Palimpsest of
the Ambrosian Library, and published by him in his Monu-
menta Sacra in 1861.
The book represents Moses, on the point of leaving his
people, conversing with Joshua, and revealing to him the
future destiny of the chosen people ; their establishment in the
promised land, the overthrow of Jerusalem and the Temple,
the Babylonian captivity, the restoration and second temple ;
the sins of the Jews in the latter times, and their chastisement
by a foreigner. The theme is weird and desolate. It seems to
be the plaint of a Jew of the time of Herod, bewailing the
decadence of his people.
There is no foundation for the opinion that Jude cited this
book. Certain data respecting the death of Moses existed
with the Jews, and these formed the common source from
which both authors drew.
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 361
The Apocalypse of Moses is a small book published for
the first by Tischendorf, in Greek, in 1866. The work is a
Jewish romance of the fifth century. It is unimportant, and
almost unknown to the older writers. Certain later Greek
writers have tried to find in it one of the sources of Paul's
Epistle to the Galatians (Gal. V. 6; VI. 15). If there be any
resemblance between the two documents, it must have resulted
from the use which the author of the spurious document made
of Paul's Epistle.
In 1 8 19 Lawrence published the Ethiopian text of the
Ascension of Isaiah. In 1828 Card. Mai discovered and
published two fragments of an ancient Latin version of the
same work. A third Latin fragment was brought out in 1878
by Gebhardt. According to Dillman, who translated into Latin
the text of Lawrence, the work is of a composite character.
I. — An account of the martyrdom of Isaiah, dating from
end of the first century and known to Justin, TertuUian,
Origen and Ambrose. 2. — The Ascension of Isaiah. This
document narrates that in the seventh year of the reign of
Ezechias, Isaiah is rapt to the heavens by an angel. He
traverses successively the six circles, and comes to the seventh
heaven to the throne of God, where the Trinity reveals itself
to him, and the mystery of the Incarnation is made known to
him. This part is of Gnostic origin, dating from about the
beginning of the second century. 3. — These two works were
joined by some later Christian, and finally the work received a
later interpolation.
St. Jerome narrates (in Is. 64, 4) that some derived what
Paul writes, I. Cor. II. 9, from this apocryphal book, while
others derive them from the APOCALYPSE OF Elias. Origen
conjectured that Math. XXVII. 9, was derived from an apocry-
phal book of Jeremias. Both these works and these opinions
are unimportant, and have no influence on Christian thought,
and we turn to more important things.
Chief among the apocryphal books of the New Testament
are the Letter of Abgar, King of Osrhoene, to Jesus Christ,
and Jesus' response. The two documents, as preserved for us
by Eusebius, are as follows :
"Copy of the Letter Written by King Agbarus to
Jesus, and Sent to Him, at Jerusalem,
BY Ananias, the Courier.
'Agbarus, prince of Edessa, sends greeting to Jesus, the
excellent Saviour, who has appeared in the borders of Jeru-
362 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
salem. I have heard the reports respecting thee and thy
cures, as performed by thee without medicines and without
the use of herbs. For as it is said, thou causest the blind to
see again, the lame to walk, and thou cleansest the lepers, and
thou castest out impure spirits and demons, and thou healest
those that are tormented by long disease, and thou raisest the
dead. And hearing all these things of thee, I concluded in my
mind one of two things : either that thou art God, and having
descended from heaven, doest these these things, or else doing
them, thou art the son of God. Therefore, now I have written
and besought thee to visit me, and to heal the disease with
which I am afHicted. I have, also, heard that the Jews
murmur against thee, and are plotting to injure thee ; I have,
however, a very small but noble state, which is sufficient for
us both.'
This epistle, he thus wrote, whilst yet somewhat enlight-
ened by the rays of divine truth. It is, also, worth the time
to learn the epistle sent to him from Jesus, by the same
bearer, which, though very brief, is yet very nervous, written
in the following style :
The Answer of Jesus to King Agbarus, by the Courier,
Ananias.
' Blessed art thou, O Agbarus, who, without seeing, hast
believed in me. For it is written concerning me, that they
who have seen me will not believe, that they who have not
seen, may believe and live. But in regard to what thou hast
written, that I should come to thee, it is necessary that I
should fulfill all things here, for which I have been sent. And
after this fulfillment, thus to be received again by Him that
sent me. And after I have been received up, I will send to
thee a certain one of my disciples, that he may heal thy afflic-
tion, and give life to thee and to those who are with thee.' "
The continuation of the account in Eusebius narrates that
after the resurrection of Jesus, Thaddeus the Apostle, went to
the king, healed him of his infirmity and converted his people.
The celebrated historian of Armenia, Moses of Khorene,
testifies to the substantial facts of Eusebius' account.
Several other accounts of the legend are in existence, some
of them containing additional data. According to Moses of
Khorene, the ambassador sent to Jesus by Abgar, brought back
a portrait of the Lord which was venerated at Edessa up to
the fifth century. The Syriac account of the correspondence
affirms that the answer of Jesus was not by writing, but by
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 363
oral declaration delivered to the ambassador of the king. The
whole legend appears in the celebrated Doctrine of Addai. It
is, of course, legendary, a curious monument of Oriental litera-
ture. It is, as we have seen, declared apocryphal in the decree
of Gelasius, De Recipiendis Libris (Migne, Patrol. Lat. 59, 164).
St. Ephrem fully believed in the authenticity of the recital,
and Baronius declared that the recital was worthy of a certain
veneration, but a critical examination of the history reveals a
certain element of the impossible and the incredible, which
plainly stamps it as fiction.
Fabricius, in his Codex Apocryphus Novi Testamenti,
Tom. I. p. 843 et seqq., exhibits three letters of the Blessed
Virgin Mary. The first is addressed to St. Ignatius of An-
tioch, and is as follows :
" The letter of the Blessed Virgin Mary to St. Ignatius of
Antioch.
The humble handmaid of Jesus Christ salutes Ignatius, the
beloved disciple. What things you have heard of John concern-
ing Jesus, and believed, are true. Believe them ; cleave to
them, and firmly cling to the doctrine of Christianity, which
thou hast received, and conform thy acts and thy life thereto.
I shall come with John to visit thee and those that are with
thee. Stand fast in faith, and work manfully. Let not the
acerbity of persecution move thee, but let thy spirit wax
strong, and exult in God, thy Saviour. Amen."
The second is to the people of Messina, the text of which
is as follows :
" The Virgin Mary, daughter of Joachim, the most humble
handmaid of God, the mother of the crucified Jesus, of the
tribe of Juda, of the line of David, sends greeting and the
blessing of the Almighty God to all of Messina.
It is attested by public document that ye in great
faith sent to us messengers and legates, (vos omnes
fide magna legatos et nuncios per publicum documen-
tum ad nos misisse constat). Being taught the way of
truth through the preaching of Paul, ye confess that our Son
is the begotten of God, God and man, and that after his
resurrection, he ascended into Heaven. Wherefore, we bless
you and your city, and profess ourselves its perpetual pro-
tector.
In the year of our Son forty-two, the Nones of July, the
seventeenth moon, the fifth day of the week, at Jerusalem,
The Virgin Mary."
364 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
Any one that has ever read the Magnificat, or Mary's his-
tory in the Gospel, has no need of other proof than the mere
reading to pronounce this a forgery. It is, in mode of expres-
sion, as bombastic as a state document in Rome, in the days
of the humanists. Critics wisely concur in placing them
as supposititious, and assign to them a quite recent
date.
In the Cathedral Church in Messina, there exists an exemplar
of this letter, and on the fifth of June, the yearly commemora-
tion of it is celebrated, called by the people ** Festa della Sacra
Lettera," Rev. Father Inchofer published in 163 1 an erudite
defense of the authenticity of the letter. It is an evidence
of the strange uses to which a man may devote talents of a high
order.
A third letter of the Blessed Virgin is directed to the
Florentines : " Florence, dear to the Lord Jesus Christ, my
son, and to me. Hold to the faith, be instant in prayer, be
strong in patience, for by these will you obtain eternal salva-
tion with God." In some text there is added : " and glory
with men."
This letter is of the same character as the former, and its
origin is similar.
The same Fabricus and Sixtus of Sienna, have preserved
for us six letters of the Apostle Paul to Seneca, and eight
letters of Seneca to Paul. They at least have the credit of
antiquity, since Jerome (De Vir. 111.) and Augustine (Epist. 54
ad Maced.) praise them. The drift of the letters is moral, and
they contain nothing contrary to doctrine, but, from internal
evidence critics agree that they are supposititious. They con-
tain nothing of Paul's vigor of thought. The opinion is well
founded, however, that relations of esteem existed between
Seneca and Paul, and some have held that there did exist
some letters of their correspondence, of which these are forged
imitations.
Liturgies exist of St. Peter, St. James, St. Matthew, and
St. Mark. That they are not of the authorship of these is
plain. It is probable, however, that they were written during
the Apostolic epoch or soon after, but have suffered later
interpolations and additions.
In the founts of tradition we find mention of the " Doc-
trine of the Apostles," " The Constitutions of the Apostles,"
" The Canons of the Apostles," and " The Two Ways or Judg-
ment of Peter." These seem to be different forms of one
composite work, composed of the Constitutions and Canons of
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 365
the Apostles. Concerning these, we excerpt the following
data from Smith's & Cheetham's Dictionary of Christian An-
tiquities :
About 500 A. D., Dionysius Exiguus, a Roman monk of
great learning, at the request of Stephen, Bishop of Salona,
made a collection of Greek Canons, translating them into Latin.
At the head of this collection he placed 50 Canons, with this
title, " Incipiunt Regulae Ecclesiasticae sanctorum Apostolo-
rum, prolatae per Clementem Ecclesiae Romanae Pontificem."
At the same time, however, Dionysius says in the preface to
his work, " In principio itaque canones, qui dicuntur Aposto-
lorum, de Graeco transtulimus quibus quia plurimi consensum
non praebuere facilem.,\\oz ipsum vestram noluimus ignorare
sanctitatem, quamvis postea quaedam constitutapontificum ex-
ipsis canonibus assumpta esse videantur."
These words obviously point to a difference of opinion pre-
vailing in the Church, though it has been doubted by some
whether the dissentients spoken of rejected the Canons alto-
gether, or merely denied that they were the work of the
Apostles. And with regard to the last clause, it is much dis-
puted whether previous popes can be shown to have known
and cited these Canons. Hefele denies that " Pontifices "
means Popes, and would understand it of bishops in their syn-
odical constitutions.
About fifty years after the work of Dionysius, John of An-
tioch, otherwise called Johannes Scholasticus, patriarch of
Constantinople, set forth a cvvra'yfJLa kuvovcov, which contained
not 50 but 85 Canons of the Apostles. And in the year 692
these were expressly recognized in the decrees of the Quinisex-
tine Council, not only as binding Canons, but (it would seem)
as of apostolic origin. They are therefore in force in the Greek
Church.
How it came to pass that Dionysius translated only 50 does
not appear. Some writers have supposed that he rejected
what was not to be reconciled with the Roman practice. But,
as Hefele observes, this could hardly be his motive, inasmuch
as he retains a canon as to the nullity of heretical baptism,
which is at variance with the view of the Western Church.
Hence it has been suggested that the MS. used by Dionysius
was of a different class from that of John of Antioch (for they
vary in some expressions, and have also a difference in the
numbering of the canons), and that it may have had only the
50 translated by the former. And an inference has also been
drawn that the 35 latter Canons are of later date. Indeed,
366 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
according to some, they are obviously of a different type, and
were possibly added to the collection at the same time that
the Canons were appended to the Constitutions.
Both in the collection of John of Antioch, and in that of
Dionysius they are alleged to have been drawn up by Clement
from the directions of the Apostles. In several places the
Apostles speak in the first person, and in the 85th canon
Clement uses the first person singular of himself.
Their subjects are briefly as follow:
"I & 2 (I. & II.). Bishop to be ordained by two or three
bishops ; presbyters and deacons, and the rest of the clerical
body, by one.
3 & 4 (III.) relate to what is proper to be offered at the
altar ; mentioning new corn, grapes, and oil, and incense at the
time of the holy oblation.
5 (IV.). First-fruits of other things are to be sent to the
clergy at their home, not brought to the altar.
6 (V.). Bishop or presbyter or deacon not to put away his
wife under pretence of piety.
7 (VI.). Clergy not to take secular cares on them.
8 (VII.). Nor to keep Easter before the vernal equinox,
according to the Jewish system.
9 (VIII.). Nor to fail to communicate without some good
reason.
10 (IX.). Laity not to be present at the reading of the
Scriptures without remaining for prayer and the Communion.
1 1 (X.). None to join in prayer, even in a house, with an
excommunicated person.
12 (XI.). Clergy not to join in prayer with a deposed man,
as if he were still a cleric.
13 (XII. & XIII.). Clergy or lay persons, being under ex-
communication or not admitted to Communion, going to
another city, not to be received without letters.
14 (XIV.). Bishop not to leave his own diocese and invade
another, even on request, except for good reasons, as in case
he can confer spiritual benefit ; nor even then except by the
judgment of many other bishops, and at pressing request.
15 (XV.). If clergy leave their own diocese, and take up
their abode in another without consent of their own bishop,
they are not to perform clerical functions there.
16 (XVI.). Bishop of such diocese not to treat them as
clergy.
17 (XVII.). One twice married after baptism, or who has
taken a concubine, not to be a cleric.
THE Canon of n. t. and the apocrypha. 367
1 8 (XVIII.). One who has married a widow or divorced
woman, or a courtesan or a slave, or an actress, not to be ad-
mitted into the clerical body.
19 (XIX.). Nor one who has married two sisters or his
niece.
20 (XX.) Clergy not to become sureties.
21 (XXI.). One who has been made a eunuch by violence,
or in a persecution, or was so born, may be a bishop.
22 (XXII.). But if made so by his own act, cannot be
a cleric.
23 (XXIII.). A cleric making himself so, to be deposed.
24 (XXIV.). A layman making himself a eunuch, to be
shut out from Communion for three years.
25 & 26 (XXV.). Clerics guilty of incontinence, perjury, or
theft, to be deposed, but not excommunicated (citing Nah. i,
9: ovK iSiKijaei Bh iirl to avro iv ^Xn^et).
27 (XXVI.). None to marry after entering the clerical
body, except readers and singers.
28 (XXVII.) Clergy not to strike offenders.
29 (XXVIII.). Clergy deposed not to presume to act, on
pain of being wholly cut off from the Church.
30 (XXIX.). Bishop, &c. obtaining ordination by money
to be deposed, and together with him who ordained him, cut
off from communion, as was Simon Magus by me, Peter,
31 (XXX.). Bishop obtaining a church by means of secular
rulers to be deposed, &c.
32 (XXXI.). Presbyters not to set up a separate congre-
gation and altar in contempt of his bishop, when the bishop is
just and godly.
33 (XXXII.). Presbyter or deacon, under sentence of his
own bishop not to be received elsewhere.
34 (XXXIII.). Clergy from a distance not to be received
without letters of commendation, nor, unless they.be preachers
of godliness, are they to have anything beyond the supply of
their wants.
35 (XXXIV.). The bishops of every nation are to know
who is chief among them, and to consider him their head, and
do nothing without his judgment, except the affairs of their
own dioceses, nor must he do anything without their judg-
ment.
36 (XXXV.). Bishop not to ordain out of his diocese.
37 (XXXVI.). Clergy not to neglect to enter on the
charge to which they are appointed, nor the people to refuse
to receive them.
368 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
38 (XXXVI L). Synod of bishops to be held twice a year
to settle controversies.
39 (XXXVIIL). Bishop to have care of all ecclesiastical
affairs, but not to appropriate anything for his own family, ex-
cept to grant them relief if in poverty.
40 (XXXIX. & XL.). Clergy to do nothing without
bishop. Bishop to keep his own affairs separate from those of
the Church, and to provide for his family out of his own prop-
erty.
41 (XLI.). Bishop to have power over all ecclesiastical
affairs, and to distribute through the presbyters and deacons,
and to have a share himself if required.
42 (XLII.). Cleric not to play dice or take to drinking.
43 (XLIII.). Same as to subdeacon, reader, singer, or lay-
man.
44 (XLiy.). Clergy not to take usury.
45 (XLV.). Clergy not to pray with heretics, still less to
allow them to act as clergy.
46 (XLVL). Clergy not to recognize heretical baptism or
sacrifice.
47 (XLVII.). Clergy not to rebaptize one truly baptized,
nor to omit to baptize one polluted by the ungodly, otherwise
he contemns the cross and death of the Lord, and does not
distinguish true priests from false.
48 (XLVIII.). Layman who has put away his wife not to
take another, nor to take a divorced woman.
49 (XLIX.). Baptism to be in name of Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost, not of three eternals, or three sons, or three para-
cletes.
50 (L.). Baptism to be performed by three immersions,
making one initiation — not one single immersion into the
Lord's death.
LI. Clergy not to hold marriage, or the use of meat and
wine, things evil in themselves, or to abstain on any other than
ascetic grounds.
LII. Bishop or presbyter to receive, not to reject peni-
tents.
LIII. Clergy not to refuse to partake of meat and wine
on feast days [as if evil, or on other than ascetic grounds].
LIV. Clerics not to eat in taverns except on a journey.
LV. Clerics not to insult bishop.
LVI. Nor presbyter or deacon.
LVII. Nor to mock the maimed, deaf, dumb, blind, or
lame, nor must a layman do so.
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 369
LVIII. Bishops and presbyters not to neglect their clergy
or people.
LIX. Nor to refuse succour to the needy clergy.
LX. Nor to publish in the Church, as sacred, works forged
by the ungodly in false names.
LXI. Those convicted of incontinence or other forbidden
practices not to be admitted into the clerical body.
LXII. Clerics, from fear of Jew or Gentile or heretic, deny-
ing Christ to be excommunicated, or if only denying that they
are clerics, to be deposed. On repentance, to be admitted as
laymen.
LXIII. Cleric eating blood, or things torn by beasts or
dying of themselves, to be deposed, on account of the prohibi-
tion in the law. Laymen doing so to be excommunicated.
LXIV. Cleric or layman entering synagoge of Jews or
heretics to pray, to be deposed and excommunicated.
LXV. Cleric, in a struggle striking a single blow that
proves mortal, to be deposed for his precipitancy. Layman to
be excommunicated.
LXVL Neither cleric nor layman to fast on Sunday or on
any Saturday but one.
LXVn. Any one doing violence to an unbetrothed virgin
to be excommunicated. He may not take another, but must
keep her, though poor.
LXVin. Clergy not to be ordained a second time, unless
when ordained by heretics, for those baptized or ordained by
heretics have not really been brought into the number of the
faithful or of the clergy.
LXIX. Bishop, presbyter, deacon, reader, or singer, not
fasting in the holy forty days, or on the fourth and sixth days,
to be deposed, unless suffering from bodily weakness. Lay-
men to be excommunicated.
LXX. None to keep fast or feast with the Jews, or receive
their feast-gifts, as unleavened bread and so forth.
LXXL No Christian to give oil for a heathen temple or
Jewish synagogue, or to light lamps at their feast times.
LXXIL Nor to purloin wax or oil from the Church.
LXXIIL Nor to convert to his own use any consecrated
gold or silver vessel or linen.
LXXIV. Bishop accused by credible men, to be sum-
moned by the bishops ; and if he appear and confess the
charge, or be proved guilty, to have appropriate sentence ; but
if he do not obey the summons, then to be summoned a second
and third time by two bishops personally ; and if he still be
370 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
contumacious, then the Synod is to make the fit decree against
him, that he may not appear to gain anything by evading
justice.
LXXV. No heretic, nor less than two witnesses, even of
the faithful, to be received against a bishop (Deut. 19, 15).
LXXVI. Bishop not to ordain relatives bishops out of
favour or affection.
LXXVII. One having an eye injured or lame may still be
a bishop, if worthy.
LXXVIII. But not one deaf, dumb, or blind, as being
practical hindrances.
LXXIX. One that has a devil not to be a cleric, nor even
to pray with the faithful, but when cleansed he may, if worthy.
LXXX. A convert from the heathen or from a vicious
life not forthwith to be made a bishop ; for it is not right that
while yet untried he should be a teacher of others, unless this
come about in some way by the grace of God.
LXXXI. We declare that a bishop or presbyter is not to
stoop to public [secular] offices, but to give himself to the
wants of the Church (Matt. 6, 24).
LXXXII. We do not allow slaves to be chosen into the
clerical body without consent of their masters, to the injury of
those who possess them, for this would subvert households.
But if a slave seem worthy of ordination, as did our Onesimus,
and the masters consent and set him free, let him be ordained.
LXXXIII. Clergy not to serve in the army, and seek to
hold both Roman command and priestly duties (Matt. 22, 21).
LXXXIV. Those who unjustly insult a king or ruler to
be punished.
LXXXV. For you, both clergy and laity, let these be, as
books to be reverenced and held holy, in the Old Testament
— five of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
Deuteronomy — of Jesus the son of Nun, one ; of Judges, one ;
Ruth, one ; of Kings, four ; of Paraleipomena the book of
days, two ; of Esdras, two ; of Esther, one ; of Maccabees,
three ; of Job, one ; of the Psalter, one ; of Solomon, three —
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs ; of the Prophets, thir-
teen ; of Isaiah, one ; of Jeremiah, one ; of Ezekiel, one ; of
Daniel, one. Over and above is to be mentioned to you that
your young men study the Wisdom of the learned Sirach. But
of ours, that is of the New Testament, let there be four gos-
pels, Matthew's, Mark's, Luke's, John's ; fourteen Epistles of
Paul ; two Epistles of Peter ; three of John ; one of Jude ; two
Epistles of Clement ; and the regulations addressed to you
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 371
bishops through me, Clement, in eight books, which it is not
right to publish before all, on account of the mysteries in
them ; and the Acts of us, the Apostles."
The above is merely the substance of the Canons in an
abridged form. It will not of course supersede the necessity
of referring to the original in order to form an exact judgment.
For the sake of brevity, the penalties have been in most cases
omitted. They are usually deposition for the clergy, excom-
munication for laymen.
The subject is too vast for us to pass any critical judgment
thereon here. We are content to state that there is no good
evidence that the works should be attributed to the Apostles.
The Apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews is often
spoken of in early tradition. Its origin appears from the fol-
lowing data. Out of the Judaizing tendencies of the first cen-
tury, arose the sects of the Nazarites and the Ebionites. Both
these sects strove to bring the rites of the Old Law into the
Christian dispensation, and it is quite certain that the Ebion-
ites rejected the divinity of Jesus Christ. Both sects used a
Gospel in Hebrew, which each mutilated and adapted to their
theories. Excellent historical data warrant that this Hebrew
text was a recension of the original Hebrew text of Matthew.
(Irenaeus, Haer. I. 26, 2 ; III. il, 7; Epiphanius, Haer.
XXVIII. 5 ; XXX. 3, 13, 24; Philaster, Haer. 36; Theodoret,
Haer. Fab. II. i ; comp. Eusebius, H. E. III. 25, 27 ; Epiphan.
Haer. XXIX. 9 ; XXX. 6, etc.) Papias is an early witness for
St. Matthew having written in Hebrew {ap. Euseb. III. 39)
and the same tradition is repeated by Irenaeus {Haer. III. i, i);
Pantaenus {ap. Euseb. H. E. v. 10) ; Origen {ap. Euseb. H. E.
VI. 25) ; Eusebius {H. E. III. 24, and elsewhere); Jerome {in
Matth. Praefat. et passim); Cyril of Jerusalem {Catech. XIV.)
The existence of this Gospel of the Hebrews as a distinct
work, differing from our canonical Gospel of St. Matthew, is
first put on record by Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. II. 9 ; p.
453 Potter) and by Origen who makes several citations from it
{in Joann. tom. II. 6 ; in Jerem. XV. 4 ; in Matth. tom. XV. 14).
Hegesippus is also reported to have borrowed some things
from the Gospel of the Hebrews (Euseb. H. E. IV. 22).
According to Origin {Horn. I. in Luc.) and Jerome {in Matth.
praef.; c. Pelag. III. i) it also bore among the Ebionites the
title of Gospel according to the Apostles. Jerome translated it
into Greek and Latin from a copy found at Beroea(F^>. illustr.
2, 3 ; «^ Mich. VII. 2; in Matth. XII. 13; contra Pelagian.
III. I).
372 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
Jerome's testimony alone on this point would be conclusive.
" Matthew," he says, " who is also called Levi, the publican
called to be an Apostle, was the first who wrote in Hebrew
words and characters the Gospel for the converted Jews. It
is uncertain who afterwards translated this into Greek. The
Hebrew Exemplar is preserved to-day in the library at Caesa,
rea, which Pamphilius, the martyr, with great zeal founded.
Permission to copy this volume was given me by the Nazarites
of Beroea, a city of Syria." (De Vir. 111. III. P. L. Migne,
23, 614.)
He testifies (in Math. XII. 13, P. L. 26, 78) that he translated
this text into Greek. Hence, we conclude that the original
text in Hebrew of Matthew, mutilated and interpolated, formed
the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews. Only fragments of it
remain, which have been collected by Hilgenfeld. (Nov. Test,
extra can. recept. IV.)
The Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans is mentioned
in Muratori's fragment, and by Jerome and Theodoret.
(Hier. De Vir. 111. V. ; Theod. in Coll. IV. 16.) Both these
Fathers repudiate it. In the Codex of Fulda, the text of
such a letter exists. From Colossians, IV. 16, it is highly
probable that Paul wrote to the Church of Laodicea, but it is
evident from an inspection of the text of Fulda that it is sup-
posititious. The same judgment must be passed on the third
letter to the Corinthians, which the Armenians retain in their
bibles.
The Epistle of Barnabas, before mentioned, was in
much favor in the early Church. Clement of Alexandria and
Origen considered it authentic. Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. III. 25,)
places it among the spurious books. It is found in the Codex
of Mt. Sinai. Some of those who have denied the inspiration
of the book have maintained that it was of Barnabas' author-
ship. But the internal evidence disproves its divinity and its
authorship. The matter is trifling and excessively allegorical,
ill fitting the " son of consolation," the co-laborer of Paul.
The writer reveals complete ignorance of the Jewish Law and
rites ; whereas Barnabas was a Levite, who had lived long in
Jerusalem. Moreover, the writer is opposed to the Jewish
Law, even to deal with it unjustly. These reasons moved
Hefele to reject the authorship of the Epistle, and we believe
them conclusive. As to date, though we may not be certain,
it is most probably a product of the first century.
In the latter half of the second century there was in circu-
lation a book of visions and allegories, purporting to be
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 373
written by one Hermas, and which was commonly known as
The Shepherd. This book was treated with respect bordering
on that paid to the canonical Scriptures of the New Testa-
ment, and it came into the public reading of different churches.
A passage from it is quoted by Irenaeus (IV. 20, p. 253) with
the words, " Well said the Scripture," a fact taken notice of by
Eusebius {H. E. v. 8). We may with probability infer that in
the time of Irenaeus the work was publicly read in the Galilean
churches, for if Irenaeus were not quoting a well-known text,
he would be likely to have named the source of his quotation ;
but that he did not place the book on a level with the canoni-
cal Scriptures may be inferred from his having quoted it but
once, not appealing to it in his discussion of Scripture testi-
monies in his third book. The mutilated commencement of
the Stromateis of Clement of Alexandria, opens in the middle
of a quotation from The Shepherd, and about ten times else-
where he cites the book, always with a complete acceptance of
the reality and divine character of the revelations made to
Hermas, but without any explanation of his opinion, who Her-
mas was or when he lived. In the next generation Origen,
who frequently cites the book, says {in Rom. XVI. 14, vol, IV.
p. 683), that it seems to him very useful, and he gives it as his
individual opinion that it was divinely inspired. He further
makes a guess, which was repeated by others after him, but
which appears to rest on no earlier authority, that it was
written by the Hermas mentioned at the end of the Epistle to
the Romans. His other quotations show that less favorable
views of the book were current in his time. His quotations
from The Shepherd are carefully separated from those from the
canonical books ; he generally adds to a quotation from The
Shepherd a saving clause, giving the reader permission to reject
it ; he speaks of it {in Matt. XIX. 7, Vol. III. p. 644) as a
writing current in the Church, but not acknowledged by all,
and {De Princ. IV. 1 1) as a book despised by some. Eusebius
(II. 25), places the book among the voQa with the Acts of
Paul, Revelation of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, etc. Else-
where (III. 3), while he is unable to place it among the
ofjioXor^ovixeva as being rejected by some, he owns that it had
been publicly used in churches, that some of the most eminent
writers had employed it, and that it was judged by some most
necessary for those who have particular need of elementary
instruction in the faith. Athanasius, too {Ep. Fest, 39, Vol. I.
pt. II. p. 963), classes The Shepherd with some of the deutero-
canonical books of the Old Testament and with " the teaching
374 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
of the Apostles," as not canonical, but useful to be employed
in catechetical instruction. The Shepherd is found in the Sinai-
tic MS. following the Epistle of Barnabas, as an appendix to
the books of the New Testament. After the fourth century
the book rapidly passed out of ecclesiastical use in the East.
The Western tradition as to the book deserves more atten-
tion, as external evidence shows Rome to have been its place of
composition. Foremost comes the writer of the MURATORIAN
Fragment on the Canon, who tells us that the book had been
written during the episcopate of Pius, by Hermas, a brother of
that bishop, in a period which the writer speaks of as within then
living memory. He concludes that the book ought to be read,
but not to be publicly used in the Church among the prophetic
writings, the number of which was complete, nor among the
apostolic. The statement that the book not only might but
ought to be read is a high recognition of the value attributed
to it by the writer, and we may gather that at least in some
places the church use of the book at that time had been such
as to cause danger of its being set on a level with the canoni-
cal Scriptures. Tertullian, in one of his earliest treatises, De
Oratione, disputes against a practice of sitting down immed-
iately after prayer, for which he knows no other reason assigned
than that, in The Shepherd, Hermas is said, on prayer ended, to
have sat upon the bed. He points out the unreasonableness
of converting a narrative statement into a rule of discipline, and
remarks that, if it were so regarded, the precept of sitting on a
bed would not be satisfied by sitting on a bench or chair. A
book which could so influence the practice of churches must
evidently have enjoyed high authority at the time, an authority
which Tertullian's argument does not dispute. It had probab-
ly been translated into Latin, and was used in church reading.
That Tertullian read it in a Latin translation, may be inferred
from his describing it by the Latin title Pastor, and not by a
Greek title, as he usually does when he refers to Greek writ-
ings. Very different is Tertullian's treatment of the book some
ten years later or more, after he had become a Montanist.
When the authority of The Shepherd is urged in behalf of re-
admitting adulterers to communion, he rejects the book as
one not counted worthy of being included in the Canon, but
placed by every council of the churches, even of the Catholic
party, among false and apocryphal writings {De Pudic. cap. lo).
Quoting the Epistle to the Hebrews, he says that this is at
least more received than that apocryphal Shepherd of the
adulterers (Cap. 20). The phrase " more received " warns us to
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA. 376
t^t cum grano salis Tertullian's assertion as to the universal rt-
jection of The Shepherd; but we may well believe that the line
of distinction between apostolic and later writings was then
being drawn more sharply than it had been before, and that in
the interval between Tertullian's two writing's, The Shepherd
was excluded from the public reading of many churches which
before had admitted it. Possibly to this result may have con-
tributed the publication by the Muratorian writer of the great-
ness of the interval which separated Hermas from apostolic
times. The statement of this writer is repeated in an entry in
the Liberian papal catalogue, that under the episcopate of
Pius, his brother Hermas wrote a book in which the commands
and precepts were contained, which the angel gave him when
he came to him in the habit of a shepherd. It has been
thought with high probability, that this entry was derived
from the catalouge of Hippolytus, which is the basis of the
Liberian catalogue [Chronicon Canisianum]. It will be
observed that, while refusing to assign the book to apostolic
times, it makes no doubt of the reality of the angelic appear-
ance to Hermas. Later biographical notices of popes, under-
take to tell what the message given to Hermas was, namely,
that Easter should always be celebrated on a Sunday. This
notice clearly is the offspring of a time when all knowledge of
the book of Hermas had been lost, and when it was attempted
to supply by invention the imperfection of the earlier entry.
This story of a revelation to Hermas about Easter celebration
is amplified a little in the forged decretal letter of Pius I.
(Mansi, Concil. I. 672). The later papal catalogues makes Pius
the brother of Pastor, and another spurious letter of Pius tells
of a contemporary presbyter Pastor. The poem of the Pseudo-
Tertullian against Marcion, had described the brother of Pius
as " angeHcus Pastor." A confusion between the name of
Hermas and that of his book would imply that the book was
not at the time in use. Jerome, when copying what Eusebius
had said about the book {De Vir. Illust. 10, Vol. II. 845), adds
that among the Latins it was almost unknown. He himself
speaks contemptuously of it {In Habac. I. 14, Vol. VI. p. 604),
for it seems to us certain that the book of Hermas is what he
here refers to, It is marked in the Gelasian decree as apocry-
phal. Notwithstanding, there are several traces that some use
of the book continued in the West, one decisive fact being that
there still exist some twenty MSS. of the Latin version. In
the African church of the fourth century we find from the list
in the Codex Claromontanus (Westcott, Canon N. T. p. 557)
376 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA.
that it was placed with the Acts of Paul, and the Revelation
of St. Peter as an appendix to the New Testament books ; and it
occupies a similar place in the Sinaitic MS., the only Greek Bible
known to have contained it. But in some of the existing Latin
MSS. it is placed with the apocryphal books of the Old Testa-
ment, a position no doubt assigned to it in conformity with
the opinion of Athanasius already quoted, which was known
through Rufinus in the West.
Turning now from the external history of the book to the
book itself, we find it divides itself into three parts. The first
part consists of visions. It opens with what reads like the
narration of a real dream. Hermas tells that he who had
brought him up, had sold him at Rome to a lady named Rhoda,
that after a considerable time he renewed his acquaintance
with her and began to love her as a sister ; that he saw her one
day bathing in the Tiber and assisted her out of the water ; that
admiring her beauty, he thought within himself how happy he
should be if he had a wife like her in person and disposition.
Further than this his thought did not go. But a little time
after he had a vision. He fell asleep, and in his dream he was
walking and struggling in ground so rugged and broken that it
was impossible to pass. At length he succeeded in crossing
the water by which his path had been washed away, and com-
ing into smooth ground knelt to confess his sins to God.
Then the heavens were opened, and he saw Rhoda salut-
ing him from the sky. On his asking her what she did there,
she told him she had been taken up to accuse him, because
God was angry with him for having sinned in thought against
her. Then Hermas was overwhelmed with horror and fear,
not knowing how he could abide the severity of God's judg-
ment, if such a thought as his was marked a sin. Rhoda now
passes out of his dream, and he sees a venerable aged lady clad
in shining garments sitting on a great white chair and holding
a book in her hand. She asks him why he, usually so cheerful,
is now so sad. On telling her, she owns what a sin any impure
thought would be in one so chaste, so singleminded and so inno-
cent as he ; but she tells him this is not why God is displeased
with him, but because of the sins of his children, whom he,
through false indulgence, had allowed to corrupt themselves,, but
to whom repentance was open if he would warn them. Then she
reads to him out of her book, but of all she reads he can remem-
ber nothing save the last sentence, save that this alone was com-
forting, and all that preceded was terrible and threatening. She
parted from him with the words, " Play the man, Hermas."
THE LOST BOOKS OF BOTH TESTAMENTS. 377
In another vision, a year after, he saw again the lady and
her book, and received the book to copy, but still it conveyed
no idea to his mind. He then set himself by fasting and
prayer to learn the meaning of it, and after a fortnight was
gratified. He learns, too, that the lady whom he had seen is
not, as he had imagined, the sibyl, but the Church, and that
she appeared as old because she was created first of all, and
for her sake the world was made.
After his first two visions, Hermas watched eagerly for new
revelations, and set himself to obtain them by fasting and
prayer. In those later visions, while the pictures presented to
his mind are such as we can without difficulty believe to have
been dream representations, the explanations given of them
have a coherence only to be found in the thoughts of a waking
man. This is still more true of the second and third parts of
the work. At the end of a first part he has the vision in which
he sees him, who gives the name, which, in strictness only be-
longs to these two latter parts of the work, a man dressed like
a Shepherd, who tells him that he is the angel of repentance,
who has come to dwell with him, being the guardian to
whose care he had been entrusted. From this Shepherd he
receives, for the instruction of himself and of the Church, the
" Commandments," which form the second, and the " Sim-
ilitudes," which form the third, part of the work. (Salmon
in Diet, of Christ. Biog.)
The compass of the present work will not permit us to
review the numerous other apocryphal writings.
Chapter XVI.
The Lost Books of Both Testaments.
It is the common opinion of theologians that an inspired
book may perish, and that some de facto have perished. As
authorities for this opinion we may cite Origen, Chrysostom,
St, Thomas, Bellarmine, Serarius, Pineda, Bonfrere, and nearly
all the later Theologians.*
Salmeron strove to set aside this opinion by the following
arguments : " The Providence of God, which gave a book to
teach men, will preserve that book. Moreover, if the Church,
even in its preparatory state in the Old Law, should allow a
*0rig. in Cant. Prol. c. fin. (M. 13, 84) ; 8. Chrys. in 1. Cor. hom. 7, 3
(M. 61, 58); 8. Thorn. Comm. in ep. S. Paul, ad 1 Cor. 5, 4 et Col. 4, 16;
Bellarm. de verbo Dei IV. 4 ; 8erar. Proleg. c. VIII. qu. 14. 15 ; Pineda
Salom. praev. I. 1 ; Bonfrer. Praeloq. VI. 2, etc.
378 THE LOST BOOKS OF BOTH TESTAMENTS.
book to perish, which had been committed to her care, she
would be unfaithful to her trust." In response we say first
that two questions are confused here. It is one thing that a
book divinely inspired, not yet canonized by the Church,
should perish ; another that a book delivered to the Church
by canonization should perish. This latter fact has never hap-
pened. Franzelin, in response to Salmeron, argues that it is
possible that even a canonical book should perish, for the
reason that such book is not the sole or absolutely necessary
means of teaching men the truth. The Church is only in-
fallible and indefectible in furnishing an adequate means to
impart truth to man, and her teaching power would not be
hampered by the loss of a book, or portion thereof, of Holy
Scripture. The argument of Salmeron that God, who gave
the book, would preserve it, is feeble, for the book may be
superseded by another, or it may not be necessary for succeed-
ing ages.
The common opinion is, therefore, that an inspired book
may perish, and that some have perished. Many proverbs
and canticles of Solomon and writings of Prophets, spoken of
in the Scriptures, have certainly perished, and some, at least,
of these were inspired.
In the Old Testament we find mention of the following
works : The Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. XXI. 14) ;
The Book of the Just (Jos. X. 13) ; The Book of the Words of
the Days of Solomon (II. Sam. XI. 41) ; The Book of the
Words of the Days of the Kings of Juda (III. Kings, XIV. 19);
The Book of the Words of the Days of the Kings of Israel
(III. Kings XIV. 20); The Book of Samuel the Prophet
(I. Chron. XXIX. 29) ; The Words of Nathan, the Prophet
(1. c.) : The Book of Gad, the Prophet (1. c.) ; The Books of
Ahias (II. Chron. IX. 29) ; The Vision of Addo, the Prophet
(1. c); The Book of Semeia the Prophet (II. Chron. XII. 15);
The Book of Jehu, the Son of Hanan (II. Chron. XX. 34) ;
The Discourse of Hosai (II. Chron. XXXIII. 19); The Deeds
of Ozias by Isaiah (II. Chron. XXVI. 22) ; three thousand
Parables of Solomon (III. Kings IV. 22) ; five thousand Can-
ticles of Solomon (1. c.) ; the treatise of Solomon on Natural
History (1. c); certain writings of Jeremiah (II. Maccab. II. i);
The Book of the Days of John Hyrcanus (I. Maccab. XVI.
24) ; The Book of Jason, the Cyrenean (II. Maccab.
II. 24).
We hold it undoubted that a person inspired, in one pro-
duction, may write another without such influence of the Holy
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 379
Spirit. We admit that some of the mentioned works were not
inspired ; but there are others whose titles clearly prove that
they were inspired works, and we no longer possess them.
Of the New Testament, nearly all admit that one of Paul's
Epistles to the Corinthians (I. Cor. V. 9), and the Epistle to
the Church of Laodicea (Coloss. IV. 16), have perished. Who
will deny that in these Paul also was inspired ?
Wherefore, we conclude that the opinion which maintains
the possibility and the actuality of the loss of inspired writings,
rests on convincing data.
Chapter XVII.
The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament.
All the protocanonical books of the Old Testament, except
some Chaldaic fragments of Ezra and Daniel, were written in
Hebrew.*
Of the deuterocanonical books, Wisdom and 11. Maccabees
were originally written in Greek ; Ecclesiasticus was written in
Hebrew, but the text has perished. Jerome saw the Hebrew
text of I. Maccabees, but this has also perished. It is not
certain whether the others were originally written in Hebrew
or Chaldaic.
Concerning the history of the Hebrew language, we have
thought good to excerpt from Home's Introduction to Holy
Scripture, Vol. II. In dealing with the criticism of the text
of the Old Testament, we shall frequently excerpt material
from this author, with the alterations which we shall judge to
be good.
The languages of Western Asia, though differing in respect
to dialect, are radically the same, and have been so, as far
back as any historical records enable us to trace them. Pales-
tine, Syria, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Arabia, and
also Ethiopia are reckoned as the countries, where the lan-
guages commonly denominated Oriental have been spoken.
Of late, many critics have rejected the appellation "■Oriental"
as being too comprehensive, and have substituted that of
"■ Shemitish" a denominative derived from Shem. Against
this appellation, however, objections of a similar nature may
be urged ; for no inconsiderable portion of those, who spoke
*0f Daniel, the portion from tlie fourth verse of second chapter, to the
twenty-eighth verse of seventh chapter, was written in Chaldaic. Of Ezra,
the portions from I. Ezra IV. 8, to VI. 18, and from the twelfth to the
twenty-sixth verse of seventh chapter were written in Chaldaic.
880 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
the languages in question, were not descendants of Shem. It
is a matter of indifference which appellation is used, if it be
first defined.
The Oriental Languages may be divided into three princi-
pal dialects, viz., the Aramaean, the Hebrew, and the Arabic.
I. — The Aramaean, spoken in Syria, Mesopotamia, and
Babylonia or Chaldaea, is subdivided into the Syriac and
Chaldee dialects ; or, as they are sometimes called, the East
and West Aramaean.
2. — The Hebrew or Canaanitish (Isa. XIX. i8.) was spoken
in Palestine, and probably with little variation in Phoenicia,
and the Phoenician colonies, as at Carthage and other places.
The names of the Phoenician and Punic dialects are too few,
and too much disfigured, to enable us to judge with certainty
how extensively these languages were the same as the dialect
of Palestine.
3. — The Arabic, to which the Ethiopic bears a special re-
semblance, has, in modern times, a great variety of dialects, as
a spoken language, and is spread over a vast extent of country.
But, so far as we are acquainted with its former state, it
appears more anciently to have been principally limited to
Arabia and Ethiopia.
The Arabic is very rich in forms and words : the Syriac, so
far as it is yet known, is comparatively limited in both ; the
Hebrew holds a middle place between them, both as to copious-
ness of words and variety of forms.
Besides the preceding dialects, there are many slighter
variations of language, sometimes distinguished from the
general names by local appellations. Thus, the Ephraimites
could not distinguish between the letters D (s) and "^ (sh), as
the Hebrews did, in speaking: hence the Ephraimites pro-
nounced S/bboleth instead of S^z'bboleth. (Judges XII. 6.)
Nehemiah was indignant, that part of his countrymen should
speak the language of Ashdod. (Neh. XIII. 23 — ^5.)
The Samaritan Dialect appears to be composed (as one
might expect, see II. Kings XVII.) of Aramaean and Hebrew :
and the slighter varieties of Arabic are as numerous as the
provinces where the language is spoken.
Numerous appellations have, at different times, been given
to the Hebrew language. In the Scriptures it is nowhere called
Hebrew. This term, as it is used in John V. 2, and in several
other passages in the New Testament, does not refer to the
biblical Hebrew, but to the Syro-Chaldaic dialect prevalent in
Palestine in the time of Jesus Christ. In II. Kings XVIII. 26.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 381
it is called the language of the Jews. In the Targums or
Chaldee Paraphrases of the Old Testament, the appellation —
holy tongue — is first applied to it : but the name, by which it is
usually distinguished, is Hebrew, as being the language of the
Hebrew nation.
Concerning the origin of this name, there has been con-
siderable difference of opinion. According to some critics, it
derived its name from Heber, one of the descendants of Shem
(Gen. X. 21. 25. XI. 14. 16, 17.): but other learned men are of
opinion that it is derived from the root *1^^ (ab^r), to pass
over, whence Abraham was denominated the Hebrew (Gen.
XIV. 13.), having passed over the river Euphrates to come into
the land of Canaan. This last opinion appears to be best
founded, from the general fact that the most ancient names of
nations were appellative. But, whatever extent of meaning
was attached to the appellation Hebrew, before the time of
Jacob, it appears afterwards to have been limited only to his
posterity, and to be synonymous with Israelite.
The origin of the Hebrew language must be dated farther
back than the period, to which we can trace the appellation
Hebrew. It is plain, from the names of persons and places in
Canaan, that, wherever Abraham sojourned, he found a
language in which he could easily converse, viz., the Hebrew
or Phoenician language. That this was originally the language
of Palestine, is evident from the names of nations being
appellative, and from other facts in respect to the formation of
this dialect. Thus, the West is, in Hebrew, Qi, which means
the sea, that is, towards the Mediterranean Sea. As the
Hebrew has no other proper word for west, so it must be
evident that the language, in its distinctive and peculiar
forms, must have been formed in Palestine.
The Jewish Rabbins, Jonathan the author of the Chaldee
Paraphrase, Solomon Jarchi, and Aben-Ezra, have affirmed that
Hebrew was the primitive language spoken in Paradise ; and
their opinion has been adopted by Origen, Jerome, Augustine,
and some other Fathers, as well as by some modern critics and
philologers. Huet, however, and the majority of modern
critics, are of opinion, that the language spoken by Adam
perished in the confusion of tongues at Babel. But it seems
highly probable, that if the original parents of mankind were
placed in Western Asia, they spoke substantially the language
which has for more than fifty centuries pervaded that country.
Wherefore, from internal evidence, and from the biblical ac-
count, we believe that Hebrew has preserved in the main the
382 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
substance of the original language of mankind. We feel war-
ranted in asserting that, in the confusion of tongues, the Hebrew
remained substantially the old radical tongue, and that the
divers tongues were formed in the dispersion, not by destroying
the original Hebrew word, but by forming other languages,
whose radical affinity with the Hebrew was not sufficient to
make the speech of the nations intelligible to each other. We
believe that some affinity with Hebrew is traceable in all the
languages of the human race. At times this will be faint, for
the reason that the change, in the dispersion, was substantial ;
and, secondly, language is a living growth, and man will exer-
cise his aptitude for speech by creating new words, and chang-
ing the old ones to correspond to his ever-changing relations
with nature. The language faculty of man continually moulds
into articulate speech some reflection of nature, and thus the
languages of men have grown away from their original affinity
with the root-language.
Various circumstances, indeed, combine to prove that
Hebrew is in the main the original language. It is of all lan-
guages that one which comes closest to nature. The words
of which it is composed are very short, and admit of
very little flection, as may be seen on reference to any
Hebrew grammar or lexicon. The names of persons and
places are descriptive of their nature, situation, accidental
circumstances, &c. The names of brutes express their
nature and properties more significantly and more accu-
rately than any other known language in the world. The
names also of various ancient nations are of Hebrew origin,
being derived from the sons or grandsons of Shem, Ham, and
Japhet : as, the Assyrians from Ashur ; the Elamites from
Elam ; the Aramaeans from Aram ; the Lydians from Lud ;
the Cimbrians or Cimmerians from Gomer ; the Medians from
Madai, the son of Japhet ; the lonians from Javan, &c.
Further the names given to the heathen deities suggest an
additional proof of the antiquity and originality of the Hebrew
language : thus, Japetus is derived from Japhet ; Jove, from
Jahve ; Vulcan, from Tubal-Cain, who first discovered the
use of iron and brass, &c., &c. Lastly, the traces of Hebrew
which are to be found in very many other languages, and which
have been noticed by several learned men, afford another argu-
ment in favor of its antiquity and priority. These vestiges are
particularly conspicuous in the Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, Persian
Phoenician, and other languages spoken by the people who dwelt
nearestto Babylon, where the firstdivision of languagestookplace.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 383
The knowledge of the Hebrew language was diffused very
widely by the Phtenician merchants, who had factories and
colonies on almost every coast of Europe and Asia : that it
was identically the same as was spoken in Canaan, or Phoeni-
cia, is evident from its being used by the inhabitants of that
country from the time of Abraham to that of Joshua, who
gave to places mentioned in the Old Testament, appellations
which are pure Hebrew; such are Kiriathsepher, or the city of
books, and Kiriath-sannah, or the city of learning. (Josh. XV.
15. 49.). Another proof of the identity of the two languages
arises from the circumstance of the Hebrews conversing with
the Canaanites, without an interpreter; as the spies sent by
Joshua, with Rahab (Josh. H.); the ambassadors sent by the
Gibeonites to Joshua (Josh. IX. 3 — 25.), &c. But a still
stronger proof of the identity of the two languages is to be
found in the fragments of the Punic tongue, which occur in the
writings of ancient authors. That the Carthaginians (Pceni)
derived their name, origin, and language from the Phoenicians,
is a well-known and authenticated fact ; and that the latter
sprang from the Canaanites might easily be shown from the
situation of their country, as well as from their manners,
customs, and ordinances. Not to cite the testimonies of pro-
fane authors on this point, which have been accumulated by
Walton, we have sufficient evidence to prove that they
were considered as the same people, in the fact of the Phoeni-
cians and Canaanites being used promiscuously to denote the
inhabitants of the same country. Compare Exod. VI. 15. with
Gen. XLVI. 10. and Exod. XVI. 35. with Josh. V. 12., in
which passages, for the Hebrew words translated Canaanitish
and land of Canaan, the Septuagint reads Phoenician, and the
country of Phoenicia.
The period from the age of Moses to that of David has
been considered the golden age of the Hebrew language, which
declined in purity from that time to the reign of Hezekiah or
Manasseh, having received several foreign words from the com-
mercial and political intercourse of the Jews and Israelites with
the Assyrians and Babylonians. This period has been termed
the silver age of the Hebrew language. In the interval be-
tween the reign of Hezekiah and the Babylonish captivity, the
purity of the language was neglected, and so many foreign
words were introduced into it, that this period has, not in-
aptly, been designated its iron age. During the seventy years'
captivity, though it does not appear that the Hebrews entirely
lost their native tongue, yet it underwent so considerable a
384 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
change from their adoption of the vernacular languages of the
countries where they had resided, that afterwards, on their
return from exile, they spoke a dialect of Chaldee mixed with
Hebrew words. On this account it was, that, when the
Hebrew Scriptures were read, it was found necessary to inter-
pret them to the people in the Chaldaean language ; as, when
Ezra, the scribe, brought the book of the law of Moses before
the congregation, the Levites are said to have caused the
people to understand the law, because they read in the book, in
the law of God, distinctly, AND GAVE THE SENSE, AND CAUSED
THEM TO UNDERSTAND THE READING. (Neh. VHI. 9.)
Some time after the return from the great captivity, Hebrew
ceased to be spoken altogether: though it continued to be
cultivated and studied, by the priests and Levites, as a learned
language that they might be enabled to expound the law and
the prophets to the people, who, it appears from the New
Testament, were well acquainted with their general contents
and tenor ; this last-mentioned period has been called the
leaden age of the language. " How long the Hebrew was re-
tained, both in writing and conversation ; or in writing, after it
ceased to be the language of conversation, it is impossible to
determine. The coins, stamped in the time of the Maccabees,
are all the oriental monuments we have, of the period that
elapsed between the latest canonical writers, and the advent
of Christ ; and the inscriptions on these are in Hebrew. At
the time of Maccabees, Hebrew was probably understood,
at least, as the language of books : perhaps, in some measure,
also, among the better informed, as the language of conver-
sation. But soon after this, the dominion of the Seleucidae,
in Syria, over the Jewish nation, uniting with the former
influence of the Babylonish captivity, in promoting the Ara-
maean dialect, appears to have destroyed the remains of proper
Hebrew, as a living language and to have universally substi-
tuted, in its stead, the Hebraeo-Aramaean, as it was spoken, in
the time of our Saviour. From the time when Hebrew ceased
to be vernacular, down to the present day, a portion of this
dialect has been preserved in the Old Testament. It has al-
ways been the subject of study among learned Jews. Before
and at the time of Christ, there were flourishing Jewish acade-
mies at Jerusalem; especially under Hillel and Shammai.
After Jerusalem was destroyed, schools were set up in various
places, but particularly they flourished at Tiberias, until the
death of R. Judah, surnamed Hakkodesh or the Holy, the
author of the Mishna ; about A. D. 230. Some of his pupils
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 386
set up Other schools in Babylonia, which became the rivals of
these. The Babylonian academies flourished until near the
tenth century." From the academies at Tiberias and in Baby-
lonia, we have received the Targums, the Talmud, the Masora
(of all which an account will be found in the course of the pre-
sent volume), and the written vowels and accents of the
Hebrew language. The Hebrew of the Talmud and of the
Rabbins has a close affinity with the later Hebrew ; especially
the first and earliest part of it, the Mishna.
The present Hebrew Characters, or Letters, are twenty-two
in number, and of a square form : but the antiquity of these
letters is a point that has been most severely contested by
many learned men. From a passage in Eusebius's Chronicle,
and another in Jerome, it was inferred by Joseph Scaliger, that
Ezra, when he reformed the Jewish church, transcribed the
ancient characters of the Hebrews into the square letters of
the Chaldaeans : and that this was done for the use of those
Jews, who, being born during the captivity, knew no other al-
phabet than that of the people among whom they had been
educated. Consequently, the old character, which we call the
Samaritan, fell into total disuse. This opinion Scaliger sup-
ported by passages from both the Talmuds, as well as from
rabbinical writers, in which it is expressly affirmed that such
characters were adopted by Ezra. But the most decisive con-
firmation of this point is to be found in the ancient Hebrew
coins, which were struck before the captivity, and even previ-
ously to the revolt of the ten tribes. The characters engraven
on all of them are manifestly the same with the modern Sama-
ritan, though with some trifling variations in their forms, occa-
sioned by the depredations of time. These coins, whether
shekels or half shekels, have all of them, on one side, the
golden manna-pot (mentioned in Exod. XVI, 32, 33.), and on
its mouth, or over the top of it, most of them have a Samaritan
Aleph, some an Aleph and Schin, or other letters, with this
inscription. The Shekel of Israel, in Samaritan characters. On
the opposite side is to be seen Aaron's rod with almonds, and
in the same letters this inscription, Jerusalem the holy. Other
coins are extant with somewhat different inscriptions, but the
same characters are engraven on them all.
The opinion originally produced by Scaliger, and thus
decisively corroborated by coins, has been adopted by Casau-
bon, Vossius, Grotius, Walton, Louis Cappel, Prideaux, and
other eminent biblical critics and philologers, and is now
generally received : it was, however, very strenuously though
386 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
unsuccessfully opposed by the younger Buxtorf, who endea-
vored to prove, by a variety of passages from rabbinical writ-
ers, that both the square and the Samaritan characters were
anciently used; the present square character being that in
which the tables of the law, and the copy deposited by the ark,
were written ; and the other characters being employed in the
copies of the law which were made for private and common
use, and in civil affairs in general ; and that, after the captiv-
ity, Ezra enjoined the former to be used by the Jews on all
occasions, leaving the latter to the Samaritans and apostates.
Independently, however, of the strong evidence against Bux-
torf's hypothesis, which is afforded by the ancient Hebrew
coins, when we consider the implacable enmity that existed
between the Jews and Samaritans, is it likely that the one
copied from the other, or that the former preferred, to the
beautiful letters used by their ancestors, the rude and inelegant
characters of their most detested rivals? And when the vast
difference between the Chaldee (or square) and the Samaritan
letters, with respect to convenience and beauty, is calmly con-
sidered, it must be acknowledged that they never could have
been used at the same time. After all, it is of no great
moment which of these, or whether either of them, were the
original characters, since it does not appear that any change of
the words has arisen from the manner of writing them, because
the Samaritan and Hebrew Pentateuchs almost always agree,
notwithstanding the lapse of so many ages. It is most prob-
able that the form of these characters has varied at different
periods: this appears from the direct testimony of Montfaucon,
and is implied in Kenicott's making the characters, in which
manuscripts are written, one test of their age. It is, how-
ever, certain that the Chaldee or square character was the
common one: as in Matt. V. i8. the yod is referred to as the
smallest letter in the alphabet. It is highly probable that it
was the common character, when the Septuagint version was
made ; because the departures in the Hebrew text from that
version, so far as they have respect to the letters, can mostly
be accounted for, on the ground, that the square characters
were then used, and that the final letters which vary from the
medial or initial form, were then wanting.
But however interesting these inquiries may be in a philo-
logical point of view, it is of far greater importance to be satis-
fied concerning the much litigated, and yet undecided, question
respecting the antiquity of the Hebrew points ; because, unless
the student has determined for himself, after a mature investi-
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 387
gation, he cannot with confidence apply to the study of this
sacred language.
Three opinions have been offered by learned men on this
subject. By some, the origin of the Hebrew vowel points is
maintained to be coeval with the Hebrew language itself :
while others assert them to have been first introduced by Ezra
after the Babylonian captivity. A third hypothesis is, that
they were invented, about five hundred years after Christ,
by the doctors of the school of Tiberias, for the purpose
of marking and establishing the genuine pronunciation, for
the convenience of those who were learning the Hebrew
tongue.
This opinion, first announced by Rabbi Elias Levita
in the beginning of the sixteenth century, has been adopt-
ed by Cappel, Casaubon, Scaliger, Masclef, Erpenius, Hou-
bigant, L'Advocat, Walton, Hare, Lowth, Kennicott, Geddes,
and other eminent critics, and is now generally received,
although some few writers of respectability continue
strenuously to advocate their antiquity. The Arcanum
Punctationis Revelatum of Cappel was opposed by Buxtorf
in a treatise De Punctorum Vocalium Antiquitate, by whom
the controversy was almost exhausted.
That the vowel points are of modern date, and of human
invention, rests upon the following considerations:
I. — ** The kindred Semitic languages anciently had no
written vowels. The most ancient Estrangelo and Kufish
characters, that is, the ancient characters of the Syrians and
Arabians, were destitute of vowels. The Palmyrene inscrip-
tions, and nearly all the Phenician ones, are destitute of them.
Some of the Maltese inscriptions, however, and a few of the
Phenician have marks, which probably were intended as
vowels. The Koran was confessedly destitute of them, at
first. The punctuation of it occasioned great dispute among
Mohammedans. In some of the older Syriac writings is found
a single point, which, by being placed in different positions in
regard to words, served as a diacritical sign. The present
vowel system of the Syrians was introduced so late as the time
of Theophilus and Jacob of Edessa. (VHI. Cent.) The Arabic
vowels were adopted soon after the Koran was written ;
but their other diacritical marks did not come into
use until they were introduced by Ibn Mokla (about A. D.
900), together with the Nishi character, now in common
_ »»
use.
388 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
2. — The Samaritan letters, which (we have already seen)
were the same with the Hebrew characters before the captivity,
have no points ; nor are there any vestiges whatever of vowel
points to be traced, either in the shekels struck by the kings
of Israel, or in the Samaritan Pentateuch. The words have
always been read by the aid of the four letters, Aleph, He,
Vau, and Jod, which are called matres lectionis, or mothers of
reading.
3. — The copies of the Scriptures used in the Jewish syna-
gogues to the present time, and which are accounted particu-
larly sacred, are constantly written without points, or any
distinctions of verses whatever: a practice that could never
have been introduced, nor would it have been so religiously
followed, if vowel points had been coeval with the language,
or of divine authority. To this fact we may add, that in many
of the oldest and best manuscripts, collated and examined by
Kennicott, either there are no points at all, or they are
evidently a late addition ; and that all the ancient various
readings marked by the Jews, regard only the letters ; not one
of them relates to the vowel points, which could not have
happened if these had been in use.
4. — Rabbi Elias Levita ascribes the invention of vowel
points to the doctors of Tiberias, and has confirmed the fact
by the authority of the most learned rabbins.
5. — The ancient Cabbalists draw all their mysteries from the
letters, but none from the vowel points, which they could not
have neglected if they had been acquainted with them. And,
hence it is concluded, that the points were not in existence
when the Cabbalistic interpretations were made.
6. — Although the Talmud contains the determinations of
the Jewish doctors concerning many passages of the law, it is
evident that the points were not affixed to the text when the
Talmud was composed ; because there are several disputes
concerning the sense of passages of the law, which could not
have been controverted if the points had then been in exist-
ence. Besides, the vowel points are never mentioned, though
the fairest opportunity for noticing them offered itself, if they
had really then been in use. The compilation of the Talmud
was not finished until the sixth century.
7. — The ancient various readings, called Keri and Ketib, or
Khetibh (which were collected a short time before the com-
pletion of the Talmud), relate entirely to consonants, and not
to vowel points ; yet, if these had existed in manuscript at
the time the Keri and Khetib were collected, it is obvious that
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 389
some reference would directly or indirectly have been made to
them. The silence, therefore, of the collectors of these various
readings is a clear proof of the non-existence of vowel points
in their time.
8. — The ancient versions — for instance, the Chaldee para-
phrases of Jonathan and Onkelos, and the Greek versions of
Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, but especially the Sep-
tuagint version — all read the text, in many passages, in senses
different from that which the points determine them to mean.
Whence, it is evident, that if the points had then been known,
pointed manuscripts would have been followed as the most
correct ; but as the authors of those versions did not use them,
it is a plain proof that the points were not then in being.
9, — The ancient Jewish writers themselves are totally silent
concerning the vowel points, which surely would not have
been the case if they had been acquainted with them. Much
stress, indeed, has been laid upon the books of Zohar and
Bahir, but these have been proved not to have been known
for a thousand years after the birth of Christ. Even Buxtorf
himself admits, that the book Zohar could not have been
written till after the tenth century ; and the rabbis, Gedaliah
and Zachet, confess that it was not mentioned before the year
1290, and that it presents internal evidence that it is of a much
later date than is intended. It is no uncommon practice of
the Jews to publish books of recent date under the names of
old writers, in order to render their authority respectable, and
even to alter and interpolate ancient writers in order to sub-
serve their own views.
10. — Equally silent are the ancient Fathers of the Christian
Church, Origen and Jerome. In some fragments still extant,
of Origen's vast biblical work, entitled the Hexapla (of which
some account is given in a subsequent page), we have a speci-
men of the manner in which Hebrew was pronounced in the
third century ; and which, it appears, was widely different from
that which results from adopting the Masoretic reading.
Jerome, also, in various parts of his works, where he notices
the different pronunciations of Hebrew words, treats only of
the letters, and nowhere mentions the points, which he surely
would have done, had they been found in the copies consulted
by him.
1 1 . — The letters ^, X^t \ ^t (Aleph, He, Vau, and Yod,) upon
the plan of the Masorites, are termed quiescent, because, ac-
cording to them, they have no sound. At other times, these
same letters indicate a variety of sounds, as the fancy of these
390 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
critics has been pleased to distinguish them by points. This
single circumstance exhibits the whole doctrine of points as
the baseless fabric of a vision. To suppress altogether, or to
render insignificant, a radical letter of any word, in order to
supply its place by an arbitrary dot or a fictitious mark, is an
invention fraught with the grossest absurdity.
12. — Lastly, as the first vestiges of the points that can be
traced are to be found in the writings of Rabbi Ben Asher,
president of the Western School, and of Rabbi Ben Naphthali,
chief of the Eastern School, who flourished about the middle
of the tenth century, we are justified in assigning that as the
epoch when the system of vowel points was established.
Such are the evidences on which the majority of the learned
rest their convictions of the modern date of the Hebrew points.
Besides the vowel points, the antiquity of which has been
considered in the preceding pages, we meet in pointed Hebrew
Bibles with other marks or signs, termed ACCENTS ; the system
of which is inseparably connected with the present state of the
vowel points, inasmuch as these points are often changed in
consequence of the accents. The latter, therefore, must have
originated contemporaneously with the written vowels, at
least, with the completion of the vowel system. Respecting
the design of the accents, there has been great dispute among
Hebrew grammarians. Professor Stuart, who has discussed
this subject most copiously in his valuable Hebrew Grammar,
is of opinion that they were designed, not to mark the tone-
syllable of a word or the interpunction, but to regulate the
cantillation of the Scriptures. It is well known that the Jews,
from time immemorial, in the public reading of the Scriptures,
have cantillated them, that is, read in a kind of half singing or
recitative way. In this manner, most probably, the Ethiopian
eunuch was reading the prophecy of Isaiah, when he was over-
heard and interrogated by Philip. (Acts VIII. 30.) In this
manner, also, Mussulmen read the Koran ; and the people of
the East generally deliver public discourses in this way. The mode
of cantillating Hebrew in different countries is at present vari-
ous, but guided in all by the accents; that is, the accents are used
as musical notes, though various powers are assigned to them.
The Aramaean language derives its name from the very
extensive region of Aram, in which it was anciently vernacular.
As that region extended from the Mediterranean sea through
Syria and Mesopotamia, beyond the river Tigris, the language
there spoken necessarily diverged into various dialects ; the
two principal of which are the Chaldee and the Syriac.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 391
The Chaldee, sometimes called by way of distinction the
East-Aramaan dialect, was formerly spoken in the province of
Babylonia, between the Euphrates and the Tigris, the original
inhabitants of which cultivated this language as a distinct dia-
lect, and communicated it to the Jews during the Babylonian
captivity. By means of the Jews it was transplanted into Pa-
lestine, where it gradually became the vernacular tongue ;
though it did not completely displace the old Hebrew until
the time of the Maccabees. Although the Aramaean, as spoken
by Jews, partook somewhat of the Hebrew character, no entire
or very important corruption of it took place ; and to this cir-
cumstance alone the Babylonians are indebted for the survival,
or at least the partial preservation, of their language, which,
even in the mother-country, has, since the spread of Moham-
medism, been totally extinct.
The principal remains of the Chaldee dialect now extant
will be found :
(i.) — In the Canonical Books, Ezra IV. 8. to VI. i8. and
VII, 12 — 16. Jer. X. 2., and Dan. II. 4. to the end of chapter
VII.; and
(2.) — In the Targums or Chaldee Paraphrases of the Books
of the Old Testament.
The Syriac or West-Aramaean was spoken both in Syria
and Mesopotamia ; and, after the captivity, it became vernacu-
lar in Galilee. Hence, though several of the sacred writers of
the New Testament expressed themselves in Greek, their
ideas were Syriac ; and they consequently used many Syraic
idioms, and a few Syriac words. The chief difference between
the Syriac and Chaldee consists in the vowel-points or mode
of pronunciation ; and, notwithstanding the forms of their
respective letters are very dissimilar, yet the correspondence
between the two dialects is so close, that if the Chaldee be
written in Syriac characters without points, it becomes Syriac,
with the exception of a single inflection in the formation of the
verbs. The earliest document still extant in the Syriac dialect
is the Peschito or old Syriac version of the Old and New
Testament.
Though more remotely allied to the Hebrew than either
of the preceding dialects, the Arabic language possesses suffi-
cient analogy to explain and illustrate the former, and is not,
perhaps, inferior in importance to the Chaldee or the Syriac ;
particularly as it is a living language, in which almost every sub-
ject has been discussed, and which has received the minutest in-
vestigation from native writers and lexicographers. The
392 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Arabic language has many roots in common with the Hebrew
tongue ; and this again contains very many words which are no
longer to be found in the Hebrew writings that are extant, but
which exist in the Arabic language. The learned Jews, who
flourished in Spain from the tenth to the twelfth century under
the dominion of the Moors, were the iirst who applied Arabic
to the illustration of the Hebrew language ; and subsequent
Christian writers, as Bochart, the elder Schultens, Olaus Cel-
sius, and others, have diligently and successfully applied the
Arabian historians, geographers, and authors on natural his-
tory, to the explanation of the Bible.
The history of the text of the Old Testament may be
divided into four epochs, viz. i. — From the writing of the
Hebrew book, to the time of Christ ; 2. — From the time of
Christ to the period of the Masorites ; 3. — From the time of
the Masorites to the invention of the art of printing; 4. — From
the invention of printing to our own time.
History of the Hebrew Text from the Writing of
THE Books of the Old Testament until the
Time of Jesus Christ.
We commence with the Pentateuch, concerning the earliest
history of which we have more minute information than we
have of the other books of the Old Testament. Previously to
the building of Solomon's Temple, the Pentateuch was de-
posited by the side of the Ark of the Covenant (Deut. XXXI.
24 — 26.), to be consulted by the Israelites ; and after the erec-
tion of that sacred edifice, it was deposited in the treasury, to-
gether with all the succeeding productions of the inspired
writers.* On the subsequent destruction of the temple by
Nebuchadnezzar, the autographs of the sacred books are sup-
posed to have perished: but some learned men have con-
jectured that they were preserved, because it does not appear
that Nebuchadnezzar evinced any particular enmity against
the Jewish religion ; and in the account of the sacred things
carried to Babylon (II. Kings XXV. II. Chron. XXXVI. Jer.
LIL), no mention is made of the sacred books. However this
may be, it is a fact, that copies of these autographs were car-
*That the Law was placed by the side of the Ark of the Covenant, and not
in it, rests on clear evidence. The Hebrew expression in Deut. XXXI. 26, is :
n1»T n''"l3 im n^P ln^^ Qnp^ "YeshallplaceltCthe
Law) by the side of the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord." This interpreta-
tion is supported by the Greek and Samaritan texts.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 393
ried to Babylon ; for we find the prophet Daniel quoting the
Law, (Dan. IX. ii. 13.) and also expressly mentioning the
prophecies of Jeremiah (IX. 2.), which he could not have done,
if he had never seen them. We are further informed that, on
the finishing of the temple in the sixth year of Darius, the
Jewish worship was fully re-established according as it is
written in the book of Moses (Ezra VI. 18.); which would have
been impracticable, if the Jews had not had copies of the Law
then among them. But what still more clearly proves that
they must have had transcripts of their sacred writings during,
as well as subsequent to, the Babylonian captivity, is the fact,
that when the people requested Ezra to produce the law of Moses
(Nehem. VIII. i.), they did not entreat him to get it dictated
anew to them; but that he would bring forth the book of the Law
of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel. Further,
long before the time of Jesus Christ, another edition of the
Pentateuch was in the hands of the Samaritans, which has been
preserved to our time ; and though it differs in some instances
from the text of the Hebrew Pentateuch, yet upon the whole
it accurately agrees with the Jewish copies. And in the year
286 or 285 before the Christian Era, the Pentateuch was trans-
lated into the Greek language; and this version, whatever
errors may now be detected in it, was so executed as to show
that the text, from which it was made, agreed with the text
which we now have.
History of the Hebrew Text from the Time of Jesus
Christ to the Age of the Masorites.
As the Jews were dispersed through various countries, to
whose inhabitants Greek was vernacular, they gradually ac-
quired the knowledge of this language, and even cultivated
Greek literature : it cannot therefore excite surprise, that the
Septuagint version should be so generally used, as to cause the
Hebrew original to be almost entirely neglected. Hence the
Septuagint was read in the synagogues : it appears to have been
exclusively followed by the Alexandrian Jew, Philo, and it was
most frequently, though not solely, consulted by Josephus,
who was well acquainted with Hebrew.
In the second century, both Jews and Christians applied
themselves sedulously to the study of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Besides the Peschito or Old Syriac version (if indeed this was
not executed at the close of the first century), which was made
from the Hebrew for the Syrian Christians, three Greek Ver-
sions were undertaken and completed ; one for the Jews by
394 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Aquila, an apostate from Christianity to Judaism, and two
by Theodotion and Symmachus. The Hebrew text,
as it existed in the East from the year 200 to the
end of the fifth century, is presented to us by Origen
in his Hexapla, by Jonathan in his Targum or Para-
phrase on the Prophets, and by the rabbins in the Gemaras or
Commentaries on the Mishna or Traditionary Expositions of the
Hebrew Scriptures. The variants are scarcely more numerous
or more important than in the versions of the second century.
But the discrepancies, which were observed in the Hebrew
manuscripts in the second or at least in the third century,
excited the attention of the Jews, who began to collate copies,
and to collect various readings ; which, being distributed into
several classes, appear in the Jerusalem Talmud about the
year 280.
The state of the Hebrew text, in the west of Europe, dur-
ing the fifth century, is exhibited to us in the Latin version
made by Jerome from the original Hebrew, and in his com-
mentaries on the Scriptures. From a careful examination of
these two sources, several important facts have been collected,
particularly that
(i.) The Old Testament contained the same books which
are at present found in our copies.
(2.) The form of the Hebrew letters was the same which we
now have, as is evident from Jerome's frequently taking
notice of the similar letters, beth and caph, resh and daleth,
mem and samech, &c.
(3.) The modern vowel-points, accents, and other diacritic
signs were utterly unknown to Jerome. Some words were of
doubtful meaning to him, because they were destitute of
vowels.
(4.) The divisions of chapters and verses did not exist in
any Hebrew MSS.; but it seems that both the Hebrew
original and the Septuagint Greek version were divided into
larger sections, which differ from those in our copies*
because Jerome, in his commentary on Amos VI. 9.,
says that what is the beginning of another chapter in
the Hebrew, is in the Septuagint the end of the pre-
ceding.
(5.) The Hebrew MS. used by Jerome for the most part
agrees with the Masoretic text, though there are a few unim-
porant various readings.
the hebrew text of the old testament. 395
History of the Hebrew Text from the Age of the
Masorites to the Invention of the
Art of Printing.
I. After the destruction of Jerusalem, and the consequent
dispersion of the Jews into various countries of the Roman
empire, some of those who were settled in the East applied
themselves to the cultivation of literature, and opened various
schools, in which they taught the Scriptures. One of the
most distinguished of these academies was that established at
Tiberias, in Palestine, which Jerome mentions as existing in
the fifth century. The doctors of this school, early in the
sixth century, agreed to revise the sacred text, and issue an
accurate edition of it ; for which purpose they collected all the
scattered critical and grammatical observations they could
obtain, which appeared likely to contribute towards fixing
both the reading and interpretation of Scripture, into one
book, which they called HIIDD {UaSORaU), that is tradition^
because it consisted of remarks which they had received from
others. Some rabbinical authors pretend that, when God gave
the law to Moses on Mount Sinai, he taught him, first, its true
meaning, and, secondly, its true interpretation ; and that both
these were handed down by oral tradition, from generation to
generation, until at length they were committed to writing.
The former of these, viz., the true reading, is the subject of
the Masora; the latter or true interpretation is that of the
Mishna and Gemara, of which an account is given in a subse-
quent chapter of the present volume.
The Masoretic notes and criticisms relate to the books,
verses, words, letters, vowel points, and accents. The Masor-
ites, or Masorets, as the inventors of this system were called,
were the first who distinguished the books and sections of
books into verses. They marked the number of all the verses
of each book and section, and placed the amount at the end
of each in numeral letters, or in some symbolical word formed
out of them ; and they also marked the middle verse of each
book. Further, they noted the verses where something was
supposed to be forgotten ; the words which they believed to
be changed ; the letters which they deemed to be superfluous ;
the repetitions of the same verses ; the different reading of the
words which are redundant or defective ; the number of times
that the same word is found at the beginning, middle, or end
of a verse ; the different significations of the same word ; the
agreement or conjunction of one word with another ; what
396
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
occurs in the
Hebrew Bible
letters are pronounced, and what are inverted, together with
such as hang perpendicular, and they took the number of each,
for the Jews cherish the sacred books with such reverence,
that they make a scruple of changing the situation of a letter
which is evidently misplaced ; supposing that some mystery
has occasioned the alteration. They have likewise reckoned
which is the middle of the Pentateuch, which is the middle
clause of each book, and how many times each letter of the
alphabet occurs in all the Hebrew Scriptures. The following
table from Walton, will give an idea of their laborious
minuteness in these researches :
Times.
41517
41696
13580
20175
22725
21882
22972
22147
32148
59343
Such is the celebrated Masorah of the Jews. At first, it
did not accompany the text ; afterwards the greatest part of
it was written in the margin. In order to bring it within the
margin, it became necessary to abridge the work itself. This
abridgement was called the little Masora, Masora parva ; but,
being found too short, a more copious abridgment was in-
serted, which was distinguished by the appellation of t\i& great
Masora, Masora magna. The omitted parts were added at
the end of the text, and called the final Masora, Masora finalis.
The age when the Masorites lived has been much con-
troverted. Some ascribe the Masoretic notes to Moses ; others
attribute them to Ezra, and the members of the great syna-
gogue, and their successors after the restoration of the
temple worship on the death of Antiochus Epiphanes.
Usher places the Masorites before the time of Jerome ; Cappel,
at the end of the fifth century ; Marsh is of opinion
that they cannot be dated higher than the fourth or fifth cen-
tury ; Walton, Basnage, Jahn, and others, refer them
to the rabbins of Tiberias in the sixth century, and suppose
that they commenced the Masora, which was augmented and
continued at different times, by various authors ; so that it was
Times.
s
^ Aleph
occurs in the
Hebrew Bible
42377
7 Lamed
^Beth
38218
"Q Mem
^ Gimel
29537
I Nun
n Daleth
32530
Samech
HHe
47554
y Ain
1 Vau
76922
D Pe
] Zain
22867
^ Tsaddi
n Cheth
23447
p Koph
JOTeth
1 1052
-) Resh
1 Yod
66420
Si^Shin
^ Caph
48253
riTau
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 397
not the work of one man, or of one age. In proof of this
opinion, which we think the most probable, we may remark
that the notes which relate to the variations in the pointing of
particular words, must have been made after the introduction
of the points, and consequently after the Talmud ; other notes
must have been made before the Talmud was finished, because
it is from these notes that it speaks of the points over the
letters, and of the variations in their size and position. Hence
it is evident, that the whole was not the work of the Masorites
of Tiberias ; further, no good reason can be assigned to prove
the Masora the work of Ezra, or his contemporaries ; much
appears to show that it was not ; for, in the first place, most
of the notes relate to the vowel points, which, we have seen,
were not introduced until upwards of fifteen hundred years
after his time, and the remarks made about the shape and
position of the letters are unworthy of an inspired writer, being
more adapted to the superstition of the rabbins, than to the
gravity of a divine teacher. Secondly^ No one can suppose
that the prophets collected various readings of their own
prophecies, though we find this has been done, and makes
part of what is called the Masora. Thirdly^ The rabbins have
never scrupled to abridge, alter or reject any part of these
notes, and to intermix their own observations, or those of
others, which is a proof that they did not believe them to be
the work of the prophets ; for in that case they would possess
equal authority with the text, and should be treated with the
same regard. Lastly^ Since all that is useful in the Masora
appears to have been written since Ezra's time, it is impossible
to ascribe to him what is useless and trifling ; and from these
different reasons it may be concluded that no part of the
Masora was written by Ezra. And even though we were to
admit that he began it, that would not lead us to receive the
present system in the manner the Jews do, because, since we
cannot now distinguish what he wrote, and since we find many
things in it plainly unworthy of an inspired writer, we may
justly refuse it the credit due to inspiration, unless his part
were actually separated from what is the work of others. On
the whole, then, it appears that what is called the Masora is
entitled to no greater reverence or attention than may be
claimed by any other human compilation.
Concerning the value of the Masoretic system of notation,
the learned are greatly divided in opinion. Some have highly
commended the undertaking, and have considered the work of
the Masorites as a monument of stupendous labor, and un-
398 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
wearied assiduity, and as an admirable invention for delivering
the sacred text from a multitude of equivocations and per-
plexities to which it was liable, and for putting a stop to the
unbounded licentiousness and rashness of transcribers and
critics, who often made alterations in the text on their own
private authority. Others, however, have altogether censured
the design, suspecting that the Masorites corrupted the purity
of the text by substituting, for the ancient and true reading
of their forefathers, another reading, more favorable to their
prejudices, and more opposite to Christianity, whose testi-
monies and proofs they were desirous of weakening as much as
possible.
Without adopting either of these extremes. Marsh
observes, that " the text itself, as regulated by the learned
Jews of Tiberias, was probably the result of a collation of
manuscripts. But as those Hebrew critics were cautious of
too many corrections into the text, they noted in the margins
of their manuscripts, or in their critical collections, such various
readings, derived from other manuscripts, either by themselves
or by their predecessors, as appeared to be worthy of atten-
tion. This is the real origin of those marginal or Masoretic
readings which we find in many editions of the Hebrew Bible
But the propensity of the later Jews to seek mystical meanings
in the plainest facts, gradually induced the belief that both
textual and marginal readings proceeded from the sacred writers
themselves ; and that the latter were transmitted to posterity
by oral tradition, as conveying some mysterious application of
the written words. They were regarded therefore as mate-
rials, not of criticism, but of interpretation^ The same
critic elsewhere remarks, that notwithstanding all the care
of the Masorites to preserve the sacred text without variations,
" if their success has not been complete, either in establishing
or preserving the Hebrew text, they have been guilty only
of the fault which is common to every human effort."
In the period between the sixth and the tenth centuries,
the Jews had two celebrated academies, one at Babylon in the
East, and another at Tiberias in the West; where their litera-
ture was cultivated, and the Scriptures were very frequently
transcribed. Hence arose two recensions or editions of the
Hebrew Scriptures, which were collated in the eighth or ninth
century. The differences or various readings observed in them
were noted, and have been transmitted to our time under the
appellation of the Oriental and Occidental, or Eastern and
Western Readings. They are variously computed at 210,
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 399
2i6, and 220, and are printed by Walton in the Appen-
dix to his splendid edition of the Polyglott Bible. It
is worthy of remark, that not one of these various readings is
found in the Septuagint : they do not relate to vowel points
or accents, nor do any of them affect the sense. Our printed
editions vary from the Eastern readings in fifty-five places.
History of the Hebrew Text from the Invention of
THE Art of Printing to Our Own Times.
Shortly after the invention of the art of printing, the
Hebrew Scriptures were committed to the press ; at first in de-
tached portions, and afterwards the entire Bible.
We excerpt here from Home (1. c.) the principal editions
of Hebrew Scriptures.
Editiones Principes.
Psalterium Hebraicum, cum commentario KiMCHll. Anno
237 (1477)- 4to.
The first printed Hebrew book. It is of extreme rarity,
and is printed (probably at Bologna) with a square Hebrew
type, approaching that of the German Jews. The text is
without points, except in the four first psalms, which are
clumsily pointed. The commentary of Rabbi Kimchi is sub-
joined to each verse of the text in the rabbinical character,
and is much more complete than in the subsequent editions,
as it contains all those passages which were afterwards omitted,
as being hostile to Christianity. Prof. Jahn states that it is
incorrectly printed, and that the matres lectionis are introduced
or omitted at the pleasure of the editors,
Biblia Hebraica, cum punctis. Soncino, 1488, folio.
The first edition of the entire Hebrew Bible ever printed.
It is at present of such extreme rarity, that only nine or ten
copies of it are known to be in existence. One of these is in
the library of Exeter College, Oxford.
Editiones Primari^, or Those Which Have Been
Adopted as the Bases of Subsequent Impressions.
Biblia Hebraica, Svo. Brixiae, 1494.
This edition was conducted by Gerson, the son of Rabbi
Moses. It is also of extreme rarity, and is printed in long
lines, except part of the Psalms, which is in two columns. The
identical copy of this edition, from which Luther made his
German translation, is said to be preserved in the Royal
Library at Berlin. This edition was the basis of: i. — The
400 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Hebrew Text of the Complutensian Polyglott ; 2. — Bomberg's
first Rabbinical Bible, Venice, 15 18, in 4 vols, folio ; 3. — Daniel,
Bomberg's 4to. Hebrew Bible, Venice, 1518; 4. — His second
Hebrew Bible, 4to. Venice, 1521 ; and, 5. — Sebastian Munster's
Hebrew Bible, Basil, 1536, in 2 vols. 4to.
Another primary edition is the Biblia Hebraica Bomberg-
iana II. folio, Venice, 1525, 1526, folio.
This was edited by Rabbi Jacob Ben Chajim, who had the
reputation of being profoundly learned in the Masora, and
other branches of Jewish erudition. He pointed the text
according to the Masoretic system. This edition is the basis
of all the modern pointed copies.
Editions of the Hebrew Bible, with Rabbinical Com-
mentaries.
Besides the Biblia Rabbinica I. et II. just mentioned, we
may notice in this class the three following editions, viz :
Biblia Hebraica cum utraque Masora, Targum, necnon
commentariis Rabbinorum, studio et cum prsefatione R. Jacob
F. Chajim, Venetiis, 1 547-1 549, 4 tomis in 2 vols, folio.
This is the second of Rabbi Jacob Ben Chajim's editions ;
and, according to M. Brunet, is preferable to the preceding, as
well as to another edition executed in 1568, also from the press
of Daniel Bomberg.
Biblia Hebraea, cum utraque Masora et Targum, item cum
commentariis Rabbinorum, studio Johannis Buxtorfii, patris ;
adjecta est ejusdem Tiberias, sive commentarius Masoreticus.
Basileae, 1618, 1619, 1620, 4 tomis in 2 vols, folio.
This great work was executed at the expense of Louis
Kcenig, an opulent bookseller at Basle. On account of the
additional matter which it contains, it is held in great esteem
by Hebrew scholars, many of whom prefer it to the Hebrew
Bibles printed by Bomberg. Buxtorf's Biblia Rabbinica con-
tains the commentaries of the celebrated Jewish Rabbins,
Jarchi, Aben Ezra, Kimchi, Levi Ben Gerson, and Saadias
Haggaon. An appendix is subjoined, containing, besides the
Jerusalem Targum, the great Masora, corrected and amended
by Buxtorf and the various lections of the Rabbis Ben Ascher
and Ben Naphtali. Buxtorf also annexed the points to the
Chaldee paraphrase. The Tiberias, published by Buxtorf in
1620, was intended to illustrate the Masora and other additions
to his great Bible.
Biblia Hebraica Magna Rabbinica. Amstelodami 1724-27,
4 vols, folio.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 401
" This is unquestionably the most copious and most valu-
able of all the Rabbinical Bibles, and was edited by Moses
Ben Simeon, of Frankfort. It is founded upon the Bomberg
editions, and contains not only their contents, but also those
of Buxtorf, with additional remarks by the editor."
Principal Editions of the Hebrew Bible, including
THOSE with Critical Notes and Apparatus.
The first edition of the Hebrew Bible, printed by Bomberg,
and edited by Felix Pratensis (Venice, 15 18), contains the
various lections of the Eastern and Western recensions, which
are also to be found in Buxtorf's Biblia Rabbinica.
Biblia Hebraica, cum Latina Versione Sebastiani MUNSTERI.
Basileae, 1534, 1535, 2 vols, folio.
The Hebrew type of this edition resembles the characters
of the German Jews. The Latin version of Munster is placed
by the side of the Hebrew text. Though the editor has not
indicated what manuscripts he used, he is supposed to have
formed his text upon the edition printed at Brescia in 1494,
or the still more early one of 1488. His prolegomena contain
much useful critical matter, and his notes are subjoined to each
chapter. This is the first edition of the Hebrew Bible printed
in Germany.
Hebraicorum Bibliorum Veteris Testament! Latina Inter-
pretatio, opera olim Xantis Pagnini, Lucensis : nunc verd
Benedicti Ariae Montani, Hispalensis, Francisci Raphelengii,
Alnetani, Guidonis et Nicolai Fabriciorum Boderianorum fca-
trum coUato studio, ad Hebraicam dictionem diligentissime
expensa. Christ. Plantinus Antwerpiae excudebat, 1571. Folio.
This is the first edition executed by Plantin, and is re-
puted to be the most correct. The Hebrew text is the same
as that printed in the Antwerp, or Spanish Polyglott ; and the
interlineary Latin version is that of Pagninus, corrected by B.
Arias Montanus. The Latin words correspond with the
Hebrew above them ; and the Hebrew roots are placed in the
margin to assist the reader. The order of the books of the
Old Testament agrees with that of the Latin Bibles, and not
with that of the Jews. The New Testament in Greek, also
with an interlineary Latin version, printed in 1572, is added to
this edition.
Biblia Hebraica: eorundem Latina Interpretatio Xantis
Pagnini, Lucensis, recenter Benedicti Ariae Montani, Hispa-
lensis et quorundam aliorum coUato studio, ad Hebraicam
dictionem diligentissime expensa. Accesserunt et huic edition!
z
402 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Libri Graec^ scripti, qui vocantur Apocryphi, cum interlineari
interpretatione Latina ex Bibliis Complutensibus petita. Ant-
werpiae, ex officina Christophori Plantini. 1584. Folio.
This is the second edition printed by Plantin ; and it has
the New Testament in Greek, also with an interlineary version
and a separate title.
Biblia Sacra Hebraea correcta, et collata cum antiquissimis
exemplaribus manuscriptis et hactenus impressis. Amstelo-
dami. Typis et sumtibus Josephi Athiae. 1661, 1667, 8vo.
An extremely rare edition of a most beautifully executed
Hebrew Bible. The impression of 1667 is said to be the most
correct.
Biblia Hebraica, cum notis Hebraicis et Lemmatibus Latinis,
ex recensione Dan. Ern. JABLONSKI, cum ejus Praefatione
Latina. Berolini, 1699, large 8vo.
De Rossi considers this to be one of the most correct and
important editions of the Hebrew Bible ever printed. It is
extremely scarce. Jablonski published another edition of the
Hebrew Bible in 1712, at Berlin, without points, in large
i2mo., and subjoined to it Leusden's Catalogue of 2294 select
verses, containing all the words occurring in the Old Testa-
ment. There is also a Berlin edition of the Hebrew Bible
without points, in 171 1, 24mo., from the press of Jablonski,
who has prefixed a short preface. It was begun under the
editorial care of S. G. Starcke, and finished, on his death, by
Jablonski.
Biblia Hebraica, edente Everardo Van der Hooght.
Amstelodami et Ultrajecti, 8vo. 2 vols. 1705.
A work of singular beauty and rarity. The Hebrew text is
printed after Athias' second edition, with marginal notes
pointing out the contents of each section. The characters,
especially the vowel points, are uncommonly clear and dis-
tinct. At the end. Van der Hooght has given the various
lections occuring in the editions of Bomberg, Plantin, Athias,
and others.
Biblia Hebraica cum notis criticis, et Versione Latina ad
notas criticas facta. Accedunt Libri Graeci, qui Deutero-
canonici vocantur, in tres Classes distribute Autore Carolo Fran-
cisco Houbigant. Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1753, 4 vols, folio.
The text of this edition is that of Van der Hooght, without
points ; and in the margin of the Pentateuch, Houbigant has
added various lections from the Samaritan Pentateuch. He
collated twelve manuscripts, of which, however, he is said not
to have made all the use he might have done. Houbigant has
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 403
also printed a new Latin version of his own, expressive of such
a text as his critical emendations appeared to justify and
recommend. The book is most beautifully printed.
Vetus Testamentum Hebraicum, cum variis Lectionibus.
Edidit Benjaminus Kennicott, S. T. P. Oxonii, 1776, 1780,
2 vols, folio.
This splendid work was preceded by two dissertations on
the state of the Hebrew text, published in 1753 and 1759, the
object of which was to show the necessity of the same exten-
sive collation of Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament as
had already been undertaken for the Greek manuscripts of the
New Testament. The utility of the proposed collation being
generally admitted, a very liberal subscription was made to
defray the expense of the collation, amounting on the whole
to nearly ten thousand pounds, and the name of his Majesty
King George HI. headed the list of subscribers. Various
persons were employed both at home and abroad ; but of the
foreign literati, the principal was Professor Bruns, of the
University of Helmstadt, who not only collated Hebrew manu-
scripts in Germany, but went for that purpose into Italy and
Switzerland. The business of collation continued from 1760
to 1769, inclusive, during which period Kennicott pub-
lished annually an account of the progress which was made.
More than six hundred Hebrew manuscripts, and sixteen
manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch, were discovered in
different libraries in England and on the Continent, many of
which were wholly collated, and others consulted in important
passages. Several years necessarily elapsed, after the collations
were finished, before the materials could be arranged and
digested for publication. The variations, contained in nearly
seven hundred bundles of papers, being at length digested
(including the collations made by Professor Bruns), and the
whole, when put together, being corrected by the original
collations, and then fairly tr,anscribed into thirty folio volumes,
the work was put to press in 1773. In 1776 the first volume
of Kennicott's Hebrew Bible was delivered to the public,
and in 1780 the second volume. It was printed at the Claren-
don Press ; and the University of Oxford has the honor of
having produced the first critical edition upon a large scale,
both of the Greek Testament and of the Hebrew Bible.
" The text of Kennicott's edition was printed from that of
Van der Hooght, with which the Hebrew manuscripts, by
Kennicott's direction, were all collated. But, as variations in
the points were disregarded in the collation, the points were
404 THE SAMARITAN CODEX.
not added in the text. The various readings, as in the critical
editions of the Greek Testament, were printed at the bottom
of the page, with references to the correspondent readings of
the text. In the Pentateuch, the deviations of the Samaritan
text were printed in a column parallel to the Hebrew ; and the
variations observable in the Samaritan manuscripts, which
differ from each other as well as the Hebrew, are likewise
noted, with references to the Samaritan printed text. To this
collation of manuscripts was added a collation of the most
distinguished editions of the Hebrew Bible, in the same manner
as Wetstein has noted the variations observable in the prin-
cipal editions of the Greek Testament. Nor did Kennicott
confine his collation to manuscripts and editions. He further
considered, that as the quotations from the Greek Testament
in the works of ecclesiastical writers afford another source of
various readings, so the quotations from the Hebrew Bible in
the works of Jewish writers are likewise subjects of critical
inquiry. For this purpose he had recourse to the most distin-
guished among the rabbinical writings, but particularly to the
Talmud, the text of which is as ancient as the third century.
In the quotation of his authorities he designates them by
numbers, from i to 692, including manuscripts, editions, and
rabbinical writings, which numbers are explained in the Dis-
sertatio Generalis, annexed to the second volume."
To Kennicott's Hebrew Bible, M. de Rossi published an
important supplement at Parma (i 784-1 787), in four volumes
4to. of Varies Lectiones Veteris Testamenti. This work and
Kennicott's edition form one complete set of collations.
Of the immense mass of various readings which the collations
of Kennicott and M. de Rossi exhibit, multitudes are in-
significant, consisting frequently of the omission or addition of
a single letter in a word, as a vau, &c.
Closely allied in history with the Hebrew text is the
Samaritan Codex.
When the ten tribes seceded from the central government
under Roboam, and set up an independent government under
Jeroboam at Samaria, they were always regarded by those who
had remained faithful to Solomon's issue in the kingdom of
Juda, as prevaricators. Many fierce and bloody wars were
waged between the two kingdoms, till the Assyrians overthrew
the kingdom of Israel, and took her sons captive (721 B. C).
To inhabit the land of Israel thus made desolate, the Assyrian
monarchs sent thither colonists from the provinces of Babylon,
from Cutha, Ava, Chamath, Sepharvaim. The remnants of
THE SAMARITAN CODEX. 406
Jews that had been left in the land blended with these foreign
colonists, and thus a mongrel race was formed that was termed
Samaritans, from the name of the chief city of their land.
Samaria, Heb. Shomeron, was thus called because it was built
on a hill purchased from one Shomer. At first they brought
with them their heterodox idolatry, which ignored Jahve. It
would be dangerous to allow such a people to entrench them-
selves so close to Juda, and carry on the false worship of the
Assyrian gods, so Jahve sent upon them lions to ravage their
land, to show that they must recognize him. Moved by this
scourge, Assarhaddon, [Assur-ah-iddin] the Assyrian monarch,
sent to them one of Israel's priests, that had been taken captive,
to teach them the religion of Jahve. The polytheism of the Assy-
rians admitted of any number of gods, and it was thought by them
that the punishment had come upon the colonists simply be-
cause they ignored the god of the land. That is, they believed
that the land had a particular deity, who was to be united in
worship to the other particular deities which they worshipped.
The knowledge that the captive priest gave them of Jahve did
not, in effect, exclude the worship of their own deities. They
recognized Jahve only as a particular god of the land, and
though they built temples to him, his worship was held in an
inferior rank, for they chose as Jahve's priests the lowest of
the people. They neglected the supreme and exclusive charac-
ter of Jahve's worship, and must have considered such de-
mands by Jahve as a jealous exclusiveness, which they could
not sanction. So that, at the same time that they maintained
a sort of worship of Jahve, every nation worshipped its own
particular deity. For the men of Babylon made Soccoth
Benoth, and the Cuthites made Nerghal, and the men of
Chamath made Asima, and the men of Ava made Nibhaz
and Thartack, and they that were of Sepharvaim burnt their
children in fire to Adramelech and Anamelech, the gods of
Sepharvaim (IV. Kings XVII. 30, 31). Such was the origin
and religion of the Samaritans. They have a copy of the
Pentateuch, in which the Hebrew words are inscribed in
Samaritan characters. The date of this is uncertain, but it
certainly must go back to the time of the captive priest, sent
thither to instruct them. He could not well do this without a
copy of the Law. It is not improbable that its date would go
back even further, to the founding of the kingdom of Israel
under Jeroboam.
Although the Samaritan Pentateuch was known to and
cited by Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, Procopius of Gaza,
406 THE SAMARITAN CODEX.
Diodorus of Tarsus, Jerome, Syncellus, and other ancient
Fathers, yet it afterwards fell into oblivion for upwards of a
thousand years, so that its very existence began to be ques-
tioned. Joseph Scaliger was the first who excited the atten-
tion of learned men to this valuable relic of antiquity ; and M.
Peiresc procured a copy from Egypt, which, together with the
ship that brought it, was unfortunately captured by pirates.
More successful was Usher, who procured six copies
from the East ; and from another copy, purchased by
Pietro della Valle for M. de Sancy (then ambassador from
France to Constantinople, and afterwards Archbishop of St.
Maloes), Father Morinus printed the Samaritan Pentateuch,
for the first time, in the Paris Polyglott. This was afterwards
reprinted in the London Polyglott by Walton, who corrected
it from three manuscripts which had formerly belonged to
Usher.
Variations of the Samaritan Pentateuch from the
Hebrew.
The celebrated critic, Le Clerc, has instituted a minute
comparison of the Samaritan Pentateuch with the Hebrew text ;
and has, with much accuracy and labor, collected those pas-
sages in which he is of opinion that the former is more or less
correct than the latter. For instance :
I. — The Samaritan text appears to be more correct than the
Hebrew, in Gen. H. 4, VH. 2, XIX. 19, XX. 2, XXHI. 16,
XXIV. 14, XLIX. 10, II, L. 26; Exod. I. 2, IV. 2.
2. — It is expressed more conformably to analogy, in Gen.
XXXI. 39, XXXV. 26, XXXVII. 17, XLI. 34, 43, XLVII. 3 ;
Deut. XXXII. 5.
3. — // has glosses and additions in Gen. XXIX. 15, XXX. 36,
XLI. 16; Exod. VII. 18, VIII. 23, IX. 5, XXL 20, XXII. 5,
XXIIL 10, XXXII. 9; Lev. L 10, XVII. 4; Deut. V. 21.
4. — It appears to have been altered by a critical hand, in Gen.
11. 2, IV. 10, IX. 5, X. 19, XI. 21, XVIII. 3, XIX. 12, XX. 16,
XXIV. 38, 55, XXXV. 7, XXXVI. 6, XLI. 50; Exod. I. 5,
XIII. 6, XV. 5 ; Numb. XXII. 32.
5. — It is more full than the Hebrew text, in Gen. V. 8, XI.
31, XIX. 9, XXVII. 34. XXXIX. 4, XLIII. 25 ; Exod. XII.
40, XL. 17 ; Numb. IV. 14 ; Deut. XX. 16.
6. — // is defective in Gen. XX. 16, and XXV. 14.
It agrees with the Septuagint version in Gen. IV. 8, XIX.
12, XX. 16, XXIII. 2, XXIV. 55, 62, XXVI. 18, XXIX. 27,
XXXV. 29, XXXIX. 8, XLI. 16, 43. XLIII. 26, XLIX. 26;
Exod. VIII. 3, and in various other passages.
THE SAMARITAN CODEX. 407
7. — // sometint'^s varies from the Septuagint, as in Gen. I. 7,
V. 29, VIII. 3, 7, XLIX. 22 ; Num. XXII. 4.
The differences between the Samaritan and Hebrew Penta-
teuchs may be accounted for by the usual sources of various
readings, viz., the negligence of copyists, introduction of
glosses from the margin into the text, the confounding of
similar letters, the transposition of letters, the addition of ex-
planatory words, &c. The Samaritan Pentateuch, however, is
of great use and authority in establishing correct readings ; in
many instances it agrees remarkably with the Greek Septua-
gint, and it contains numerous and excellent various lections,
which are in every respect preferable to the received Masoretic
readings, and are further confirmed by the agreement of other
ancient versions.
The most material variations between the Samaritan Pen-
tateuch and the Hebrew, which affect the authority of the
former, occur, first, in the prolongation of the patriarchal
generations ; and, secondly, in the alteration of Ebal into
Garizim (Deut. XXVII.), in order to support their separation
from the Jews.
With regard to the charge of altering the Pentateuch, it
has been shown by Kennicott, from a consideration of the
character of the Samaritans, their known reverence for the
Law, our Lord's silence on the subject in his memorable con-
versation with the woman of Samaria, and from various other
topics ; that what almost all biblical critics have hitherto con-
sidered as a wilful corruption by the Samaritans, is in all
probability the true reading, and that the corruption is to be
charged on the Jews themselves. In judging, therefore, of
the genuineness of a reading, we are not to declare absolutely
for one of these Pentateuchs against the other, but to prefer
the true readings in both. " One ancient copy," Kennicott
remarks, with equal truth and justice, " has been received from
the Jews, and we are truly thankful for it ; another ancient
copy is offered by the Samaritans ; let us thankfully accept
that likewise. Both have been often transcribed ; both, there-
fore, may contain errors. They differ in many instances,
therefore the errors must be many. Let the two parties be
heard without prejudice ; let their evidences be weighed with
impartiality ; and let the genuine words of Moses be ascertained
by their joint assistance. Let the variations of all the manu-
scripts on each side be carefully collected, and then critically
examined by the context and the ancient versions. If the
Samaritan copy should be found in some places to correct the
408 VERSIONS OF THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH.
Hebrew, yet will the Hebrew copy in other places correct the
Samaritan. Each copy, therefore, is invaluable; each copy,
therefore, demands our pious veneration, and attentive study.
The Pentateuch will never be understood perfectly, till we
admit the authority of both."*
Versions of the Samaritan Pentateuch.
Of the Samaritan Pentateuch two versions are extant ; one
in the proper Samaritan dialect, which is usually termed the
Samaritan Version, and another in Arabic.
We here reproduce on the opposite page a specimen of
the Samaritan Codex, and its Samaritan translation from
Walton's Polyglott. The passage is from Genesis, I. 1-14.
The Samaritan Version was made in Samaritan characters,
from the Hebraeo-Samaritan text into the Samaritan dialect,
which is intermediate between the Hebrew and the Aramaean
languages. This version is of great antiquity, having been
made at least before the time of Origen, that is, early in the
second century. The author of the Samaritan version is un-
known, but he has in general adhered very closely and faith-
fully to the original text ; so that this version is almost ex-
actly the counterpart of the original Hebrew-Samaritan Codex
with all its various readings. This shows, in a degree really
surprising, how very carefully and accurately the Hebrew
Pentateuch has been copied and preserved by the Samaritans,
from the ancient times in which their version was made.
After the rise of protestantism, the adherents of the new
sect made a fierce attack on the Latin Vulgate. They, at the
same time, greatly extolled the original languages of Holy
Scripture, and strove to maintain that the Hebrew text had
persevered unchanged from the beginning. To counteract
this movement, some Catholics depreciated the Hebrew text
far below its merits. It is undoubtedly true that both opin-
ions are extreme. The Hebrew text, like all other old docu-
ments, has suffered much from various causes, and in the text
are many uncertain readings. In fact, as it is older than the
other texts of Scripture, its vicissitudes have been greater, and
the resulting corruption greater ; but we stoutly deny that it
is so vitiated, that it is no longer an authentic text of Scrip-
ture. Justin, (martyr) Origen, Chrysostom, the pseudo Atha-
nasius, Tertullian, Jerome and others accused the Jews of
corrupting the Scriptures.f
♦Kennicott, Diss. II. pp. 20-165.
fS. Justin, c. Try ph. 71, 72, etc. (M. 6, 644); S. Iren. c. haer. III. 21; IV.
13 (M. 7, 946, 1004); Origen. Ep. ad Afric. 9; in lerem. horn. 16. 10 (M. 12, 65
GENESIS.
RITANUS.
VERSIO SAMARITANA.
1,
10
II
n
P4
'^m }ii'^^'mJch^°s'^miii''^t*^'^!dJcm'^'KZA'^ii}A^ **p
*iyV^«iW^*^^2A^*'^53^^* ja^*^2^*^3[2yV'5(>^i^ii: n
2''=S'avm'=;k2'ij2wyt^:2tya[V'^^iiy*f^^v»'=iyvm
2A^ "^ :iii5'=y*5t^?t^«5tv'=Syv2v5[a*5[v'=>i^'=y3r^iii^i2
t:^^tiii2*:i^232*:i232ja •a^v'^vV(Tr*3[v^4
2 A %li V ^ ♦ ^^t i^i2* ^a* ^ A^ :j w^ p*y */7r'^ 2* '^/tt^v
*3ti7r iii^^\V^l2^*!2im^ert^';^*[rt^m*mZ/f*'^:i^A^< "^'^ l2^ nooic:ftntque lufigm
thtl m2*^m ^^♦^iij^ar'ixnTa'p^3ii/2^*^v^A*2V3[^^liitfi "]^w.4^wi'0''^,e^i«^fXj
par f scicmaqujeCt) feminantem (0 progermmantpm gcrniea (i) jilantam (Ocajus fruftificatio in icipfj cftC/) orbc ccsli
TfiXT.ETVEll.SAM
Tianflatio Latina.
CAP. I
U Pmd>Ho crcavit De
m ccelum & terram. Ter-
ra auiem ercm. inank <S
vicua^ & tcneb/if tram
fuperfaciem abyffi :fpin
tut qiioque Del (a) fere-
batur fupc'f aquas. Du
xitque DettSj fat lux^ d?
fa^a eft liixSt viiLt Dc-
m lucefn qiiod bond effet ;
Et feparavit Deios hte
tucem & inter .tmcbras.
VdcavitqUe Vius lucem,
dhm, ^tincbras voca-
•vknoSlem: Zt folium eft
vcjpere,, faSlumquc «,?
mane^dics unm. Etdix'y
DeuSy fiat firmament ur,i
in medio aquamm :fepa-
rctque aqi{^ ab ajiiif. Et
fecit Deui fimamentum
feparavitque aquas que
irant Jtiker prmamm
'urn ah a^ qunc erant
fuper firmamenium : &
^a^umejl rta. P^ocavlt-
jue Deus firmimentum^
cesium : EtfaSium efi ve-
fm, fdSiumque eft ma-
ne^ diea fecundus. Et di-
xit DeuSj' conp-egciitur
aqitt^qux fubccdofunt i>i
hcum unumy& (tppareat
arida,: &faSitmeliita.
Ef vocavptpeiis arid'am^
icrram-^ &'ii^mregiitioni
tqiiarii^T^ayitmma :
iiit!>jtepe^.^iiod bmu
'fet. Etjmtpeusyger-
minet te^a-^pbdm vi-
rmem, (b)faciedtem fe-
men-y <^ arborem fhtt-
lifcram't facicntem fru-
^im fecundum jpeciem
fuamycujus femen fit in.
ea fuper terram : & fa-
Cmm eftita^VTodux'itqm [j
terra herbam virenie (c)
facientem femenfecundii
(jpeciem fua:&(d)arbori
Uci:rftefm6iu(e)hAbcnti
\ctKcn in femtipfayfccu/i-
diim (pedemfuam: Et zi-
dit Deus quod bonu e[J'eti
Etfaciumeftvcjpereyfa- ij
ciumq-y eft mane, dies ter-
tins. Et dixit Deusy{/a>it j.
luminana in(f)firmamn-
to cceH, ut tuceant jypc,
Id.
[X
410 VERSIONS OF THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH.
Martianay, Nicolas of Lyra, Paul of Burgos, Salmeron,
Melchior Canus, Morini and others also have laid this accusa-
tion upon them.*
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.f
In studying the question, we are led to the following con-
clusions: I. — They err greatly who believe that any extensive
corruption was wrought in 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 lack-
ing 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 impossi-
bility 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 undertaking. 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 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 cus-
todians of the Hebrew text, it is quite probable that, wherever
the reading or the sense was doubtful, they would incline to
that reading or interpretation which was less favorable to the
Messiah. Again, some certain texts may have been deliber-
ately corrupted in some codices, whence the corruption spread,
sqq.; 13, 449 sqq.); S. Chrys. in Matth. horn. 5, 2 (M. 57); Ps. Athan. Synops.
SS. 78 (in textu latino tantum; M. 28, 438); TertuU. de cultu fem. I. 3 (M. 1,
1308); S. Hier. in Gal. 3, 10 (M. 26, 357).
*Raym. 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. 1, 2 p. 7
sqq. eorum et aliorum multorum testimonia recitat.
fS. 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. 0pp. II. p. 131 sqq.; Genebrard in Ps. 21, 19; Sixt. Sen. Biblioth.
s. VIII. haer. 18; 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
SS. I. p. 83 sqq.; Reinke Beitraege VII. p. 292 sqq., etc. etc.
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 411
and gradually invaded them all. This we admit, but it is in
so small a part that it does not rob the great text of its value.
We reserve for the exegesis of the text to specify the places
where such corruption has prevailed.
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
Hebrew text, but rather with obscuring the sense, so 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 rejection 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 defend that in the main it is authen-
tic, and of the greatest value for him who would arrive at the
deeper sense of the message of the Old Law.
Chapter XVHI.
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
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 certain peculiar lan-
guage, called the Common, and also the Hellenic ; but more
especially, since the empire of the Macedonians 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
412 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Alexander. Now, of this Macedonian dialect, the dialect of
Alexandria (which was the language of all the inhabitants of
that city, as well of the learned as of the Jews,) was a degene-
rate progeny far more corrupt than the common Macedonian
dialect. This last-mentioned common dialect, being the cur-
rent Greek spoken throughout Western Asia, was made use of
by the writers of the Greek Testament. In consequence of
the peculiarities of the Hebrew phraseology being discernible,
it has by some philologers been termed Hebraic-Greek, and
(from the Jews having acquired the Greek language, rather by
practice than by grammar, among the Greeks, in whose coun-
tries they resided in large communities,) Hellenistic-Greek.
The propriety of this appellation was severely contested to-
wards the close of the seventeenth and in the early part of the
eighteenth century ; and numerous publications were written
on both sides of the question, with considerable asperity,
which, together with the controversy, are now almost forgotten.
The dispute, however interesting to the philological antiqua-
rian, is, after all, a mere " strife of words : " and as the appella-
tions of Helle?iistic or Hebraic-Greek, and of Macedonian-Greek,
are sufficiently correct for the purpose of characterizing the
language of the New Testament, one or other of them is now
generally adopted.
Of this Hebraic style, the Gospels of St. Matthew and St.
Mark exhibit strong vestiges." The Epistles of St.
James and Jude are somewhat better, but even these are
full of Hebraisms, and betray in other respects a certain
Hebrew tone. St. Luke has, in several passages, written pure
and classic Greek, of which the four first verses of his Gospel
may be given as an instance : in the sequel, where he describes
the actions of Christ, he has very harsh Hebraisms, yet the
style is more agreeable than that of St. Matthew or St. Mark.
In the Acts of the Apostles he is not free from Hebraisms,
which he seems to have never studiously avoided ; but his
periods are more classically turned, and sometimes possess
beauty devoid of art. St. John has numerous, though not un-
couth, Hebraisms both in his Gospel and Epistles; but he has
written in a smooth and flowing language, and surpasses all
the Jewish writers in the excellence of narrative. St. Paul
again is entirely different from them all ; his style is indeed
neglected and full of Hebraisms, but he has avoided the con-
cise and verse-like construction of the Hebrew language, and
has, upon the whole, a considerable share of the roundness of
Grecian composition. It is evident that he was as perfectly
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 413
acquainted with the Greek manner of expression as with the
Hebrew ; and he has introduced them alternately, as either the
one or the other suggested itself the first, or was the best ap-
proved."
This diversity of style and idiom in the sacred writers of
the New Testament affords an intrinsic and irresistible evi-
dence for the authenticity of the books which pass under their
names. If their style had been uniformly the same, there
would be good reason for suspecting that they had all com-
bined together when they wrote ; or, else, that having previ-
ously concerted what they should teach, one of them had com-
mitted to writing their system of doctrine. In ordinary cases,
when there is a difference of style in a work professing to be
the production of one author, we have reason to believe that
it was written by several persons. In like manner, and for the
very same reason, when books, which pass under the names of
several authors, are written in different styles, we are author-
ized to conclude that they were not composed by one person.
Further, if the New Testament had been written with
classic purity, if it had presented to us the language of Iso-
crates, Demosthenes, Xenophon, or Plutarch, there would have
been just grounds for suspicion of forgery ; and it might with
propriety have been objected, that it was impossible for
Hebrews, who professed to be men of no learning, to have
written in so pure and excellent a style, and, consequently,
that the books which were ascribed to them must have been
the invention of some impostor. The diversity of style, there-
fore, which is observable in them, so far from being any objec-
tion to the authenticity of the New Testament, is in reality a
strong argument for the truth and sincerity of the sacred
writers, and of the authenticity of their writings. " Very
many of the Greek words found in the New Testament, are
not such as were adopted by men of education, and the higher
and more polished ranks of life, but such as were in use with
the common people. Now this shows that the writers became
acquainted with the language, in consequence of an actual
intercourse with those who spoke it, rather than from any
study of books ; and that intercourse must have been very
much confined to the middling or even lower classes ; since
the words and phrases most frequently used by them passed
current only among the vulgar. There are undoubtedly many
plain intimations given throughout these books, that their
writers were of this lower class, and that their associates were
frequently of the same description ; but the character of the
414 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
style is the strongest confirmation possible that their condi-
tions were not higher than what they have ascribed to them-
selves." In fact, the vulgarisms, foreign idioms, and other dis-
advantages and defects, which some critics imagine that they
have discovered in the Hebraic Greek of the New Testament,
" are assigned by the inspired writers as the reasons of God's
preference of it, whose thoughts are not our thoughts, nor his
ways our ways. Paul argues, that the success of the preachers
of the Gospel, in spite of the absence of those accomplish-
ments in language, then so highly valued, was an evidence of
the divine power and energy with which their ministry was
accompanied. He did not address them, he tells us (I. Cor. I.
17.) with the wisdom of words, — with artificial periods and a
studied elocution, — lest the cross of Christ should be made of
none effect ; — lest to human eloquence that success should be
ascribed, which ought to be attributed to the divinity of the
doctrine and the agency of the spirit, in the miracles wrought
in support of it. There is hardly any sentiment which he is
at greater pains to enforce. He used none of the enticing or per-
suasive words of mans wisdom. Wherefore ? — ' That their faith
might not stand in the wisdom of man, but in the power of God.'
(I. Cor. n. 4, 5.) Should I ask what was the reason why our
Lord Jesus Christ chose for the instruments of that most
amazing revolution in the religious systems of mankind, men
perfectly illiterate and taken out of the lowest class of the
people ? Your answer to this will serve equally for an answer
to that other question, Why did the Holy Spirit choose to
deliver such important truths in the barbarous idiom of a few
obscure Galilaeans, and not in the politer and more harmonious
strains of Grecian eloquence ? I repeat it, the answer to both
questions is the same — That it might appear, beyond contra-
diction, that the excellency of the power was of God, and not
of man."
As a large proportion of the phrases and constructions of
the New Testament is pure Greek, that is to say, of the same
degree of purity as the Greek which was spoken in Macedonia,
and that in which Polybius and Appian wrote their histories ;
the language of the New Testament will derive considerable
illustration from consulting the works of classic writers, and
especially from diligently collating the Septuagint version of
the Old Testament.
In consequence of the Macedonian Greek being composed
of almost all the dialects of Greece (as well as of very many
foreign words), the New Testament contains examples of the
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 415
various DIALECTS occurring in the Greek language, and es-
pecially of the Attic. To these, some have added the poetic
dialect, chiefly, it should seem, because there are a few passages
cited by St. Paul from the ancient Greek poets, in Acts XVII.
28, I. Cor. XV. 33, and Tit. I. 12. But the sacred writers of
the New Testament, being Jews, were consequently acquainted
with the Hebrew idioms, and also with the common, as well as
with the appropriated or acquired senses of the words of that
language. Hence, when they used a Greek word, as corres-
pondent to a Hebrew one of like signification, they employed
it as the Hebrew word was used, either in a common or
appropriated sense, as occasion required. The whole arrange-
ment of their periods " is regulated according to the Hebrew
verses (not those in Hebrew poetry, but such as are found in
the historical books), which are constructed in a manner
directly opposite to the roundness of Grecian language, and
for want of variety have an endless repetition of the same par-
ticles." These particular idioms are termed HEBRAISMS, and
their nature and classes have been treated at considerable
length by various writers. — (Home, op. cit.)
Concerning the materials used in ancient writing Montfau-
con, has ably written in his Palaeographia Graeca (Paris 1708).
" Stone, wood, tablets covered with wax, the bark of trees,
the dressed skins of animals, the reed papyrus, paper made of
cotton or linen, are the chief materials on which writing has
been impressed at different periods and stages of civilization.
The most ancient manuscripts of the New Testament now
existing are composed of vellum or parchment {fnembrana),
the term vellum being strictly applied to the delicate skins of
very young calves ; and parchment (which seems to be a cor-
ruption of f^^r/^/^r^^^w^rw^, a name first given to skins pre-
pared by some improved process for Eumenes, king of Per-
gamus, about B. C. 150) to the integuments of sheep or goats.
In judging of the date of a manuscript written on skins, atten-
tion must be paid to the quality of the material, the oldest
being almost invariably described on the thinnest and whitest
vellum that could be procured ; while manuscripts of later ages,
being usually composed of parchment, are thick, discoloured,
and coarsely grained. Thus the Codex Friderico-Augustanus
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, Prolegomena, § i). Its contemporary,
the far-famed Codex Vaticanus, challenges universal admiration
for the beauty of its vellum ; every visitor at the British
416 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Museum can observe the excellence of that of the Codex
Alexandrinus of the fifth century ; that of the Codex Claro-
montanus of the sixth century is no less remarkable ; the
material of those purple-dyed fragments of the Gospels which
Tischendorf denominates N, also of the sixth century, is so subtle
and delicate that some persons have mistaken the leaves
preserved in England (Brit. Mus. Cotton, Titus) for
Egyptian papyrus. Paper made of cotton {charta bombycina,
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 the twelfth ; but they
were seldom used for Biblical manuscripts earlier than the
thirteenth, and had not entirely displaced parchment at the
era of the invention of printing, about a. d. 1450. Cotton
paper is for the most part easily distinguished from linen by
its roughness and coarse fibre, some of the early linen paper,
both glazed and unglazed, is of a very fine texture, though
perhaps a little too stout and crisp for convenient use. Lost
portions of parchment or vellum manuscripts are often sup-
plied in paper by some later hand ; and the Codex Leices-
trensis of the fourteenth century is unique in this respect, being
composed of a mixture of inferior vellum and worse paper,
regularly arranged in the proportion of two parchment to three
paper leaves, recurring alternately throughout the whole
volume."
" Although parchment was in occasional, if not familiar
use at the period when the New Testament was written
(ra /StySXia, /laXto-ra ra? /Aeft/8/3ava9, II. Tim. IV. 13), yet the
the cheaper and more perishable papyrus of Egypt was chiefly
employed for ordinary purposes, and was probably what is
ment by x^prrj^ in II. John V. 12. This vegetable production
had been long used for literary purposes in the time of Hero-
dotus (b. C. 440), and that not only in Egypt (Herod. Hist. II.
100) but elsewhere, for he expressly states that the lonians,
for lack of byblus, had been compelled to have recourse to
the skins of goats and sheep (v. 58). We find a minute, if not
a very clear description of the mode of preparing the papyrus
for the scribe in the works of the elder Pliny (Hist. Nat. I^
XIII. C. II, 12). Its frail and brittle quality has no doubt
caused us the loss of some of the choicest treasures of ancient
literature ; the papyri which yet survive in the museums of
Europe owe their preservation to the accidental circumstance
of having been buried in the tombs of Thebes, or beneath
the wreck of Herculaneum. As we before intimated, no exist-
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 417
ing manuscript of the New Testament is written on papyrus,
nor can the earliest we possess on vellum be dated higher than
the middle of the fourth century."
" We have some grounds for suspecting that papyrus was
not over plentiful even in the best time of the Roman domin-
ion ; and it may be readily imagined that vellum (especially
that fine sort by praiseworthy custom required for copies of
Holy Scripture) could never have been otherwise than scarce
and dear. Hence arose at a very early period of the Christian
era, the practice and almost the necessity of erasing ancient
writing from skins, in order to make room for works in which
the living generation felt more interest. This process of de-
struction, however, was seldom so fully carried out, but that
the strokes of the elder hand might still be traced, more or less
completely, under the more modern writing. Such manu-
scripts are called codices rescripti or palimpsests {7ra\ifji-\jrr)a-Ta),
and several of the most precious monuments of sacred learning
are of this description. The Codex Ephraemi at Paris con-
tains large fragments both of the Old and the New Testament
under the later Greek works of St. Ephraem the Syrian : and
the Codex Nitriensis, recently disinterred from a monastery in
the Egyptian desert and brought to the British Museum, com-
prises a portion of St. Luke's Gospel, nearly obliterated, and
covered over by a Syriac treatise of Severus of Antioch against
Grammaticus, comparatively of no value whatever. It will be
easily believed that the collating or transcribing of palimpsests
has cost much toil and patience to those whose loving zeal has
led them to the attempt : and after all their true readings will
be sometimes (not often) rather uncertain, even though chemi-
cal mixtures (such as prussiate of potash or the tinctura
Giobertind) have recently been applied, with much success, to
restore the faded lines and letters of these venerable records."
" We need say but little of a practice which St. Jerome
and others speak of as prevalent towards the end of the fourth
century, that of dyeing the vellum purple, and of stamping
rather than writing the letters in silver and gold. The Cotton
fragment of the Gospels, is one of the few remain-
ing copies of this kind, and it is not unlikely that the
great Dublin palimpsest of St. Matthew owes its pres-
ent wretched discoloration to some such dye. We care
for them only as they serve to indicate the reverence paid to
the Scriptures by men of old. The style, however, of the
pictures, illustrations, arabesques and initial ornaments that
prevail in later copies from the eighth century downwards,
AA
418 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
whose colors and gilding are sometimes as fresh and bright
as if laid on but yesterday, will not only interest the student
by tending to throw light on mediaeval art and habits and
modes of thought, but will often fix the date of the books
which contain them with a precision otherwise quite beyond
our reach."
" The ink used in the most ancient manuscripts has unfor-
tunately for the most part turned red or brown, very pale, or
peeled off, or eaten through the vellum ; so that in many cases
(as in the Codex Vaticanus itself) a later hand has ruthlessly
retraced the letter, and given a false semblance of coarseness
or carelessness to the original writing. In such instances a
few passages will usually remain untouched, just as the first
scribe left them, and from the study of these a right no-
tion can be formed of the primitive condition of the rest.
From the seventh century downwards it is said that the in-
gredients of ink have but little changed. The base has been
soot, or lamp black made of burnt shavings of ivory, mixed
with wine-lees or gum, and subsequently sepia or alum.
Vitriol and gall-nuts are now added, the mineral serving to fix
the vegetable ingredients. In many manuscripts of about the
twelfth century (e. g. Gonville and Caius MS., 59 of the
Gospels) we observe what seems to be, and very well may be,
the Indian ink of commerce, still preserving a beautiful jet
black on the inner and smoother side of the parchment, and
washed out rather than erased, whenever corrections were
desired. The coloured inks (red, green, blue or purple) are
often quite brilliant to this day ; the four red lines which stand
at the head of each column of the first page of the Codex
Alexandrinus are far more legible than the portions in black
ink below them, yet are undoubtedly written by the same
hand."
" While papyrus (%a/3T779) remained in common use, the
chief instrument employed was probably a reed {KdXafio<i, 3
John V. 13), such as are common in the East at present ; a few
existing manuscripts (e. g. the Codd. Leicestrensis and Lam-
beth 1350) appear to have thus been written. Yet the firmness
and regularity of the strokes, which often remain impressed on
the vellum or paper after the ink has utterly gone, prove that
in the great majority of cases a metal pen {stylus) was pre-
ferred. We must add to our list of writing materials, a bodkin
or needle {acus\ by means of which and a ruler, the blank leaf
was carefully divided into columns and lines, whose regularity
much enhances the beauty of our best copies. The vestiges
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 419
of such points and marks may yet be seen deeply indented on
the surface of nearly all manuscripts, those on one side of each
leaf being usually sufficiently visible to guide the scribe when
he came to write on the reverse."
** Little needs be said respecting the form of manuscripts,
which in this particular much resemble printed books. A few
are in large folio ; the greater part in small folio or quarto, the
prevailing shape being a quarto, whose height but little exceeds
its breadth ; some are octavo, and an inconsiderable number
smaller still. In some copies the sheets have marks in the lower
margin of their first or last pages, like the signatures of a
modern volume, the folio at intervals of four, the quarto at
intervals of eight leaves, as in the Codex Augiensis of St.
Paul's Epistles (F). Not to speak at present of those manu-
scripts which have a Latin translation in a column parallel to
the Greek, as the Codex Bezae, the Codex Laudianus of the
Acts, and the Codices Claromontanus and Augiensis of St.
Paul, many copies of every age have two Greek columns on
each page ; of these the Codex Alexandrinus is the oldest : the
Codex Vaticanus has three columns on a page, the Codex
Friderico-Augustanus four. The unique arrangement of these
last two has been urged as an argument for their higher an-
tiquity, as if they were designed to imitate rolled books, whose
several skins or leaves were fastened together lenghtwise, so
that their contents always appeared in parallel columns ; they
were kept in scrolls which were unrolled at one end for reading,
and when read rolled up at the other. This fashion prevails in
the papyrus fragments yet remaining, and in the most ven-
erated copies of the Old Testament preserved in Jewish
synagogues." (Scrivener, Introduction to the Criticism of
New Testament, Chap. II.)
The Scriptures were not formerly as now divided into chap-
ters and verses. The mode of designating particular passages
was by specifying the theme. Thus Jesus Christ designates
to the sadducees the passage from Exodus treating 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 saying : ' I am
the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob?'" This method presupposed those to whom the dis-
course 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. In the
420 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
thirteenth century Cardinal Hugh of S. Caro, the inventor of
the Concordances of Scripture, is believed to have been the
first to CHAPTER the Bible. 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 later even the Hebrew text
was thus divided. The subdivisions of the chapters were in
this system marked by the letters of the alphabet. The dis-
tinction 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 warrant a different division. In fact in
many cases it is expedient to change the divisions of Robert
Etienne. :;.
The Scriptures were also in the beginning written without
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 445.
This mode of writing remained in vogue till about the
ninth century of the Christian Era. As by different groupings
and combinations of characters, different meanings resulted
from the text, this was a fertile cause of error, and many of •
the variantia are traceable to this cause.
A system of accentuation had been invented by Aristo-
phanes of Byzantium in the second century before Christ,
which was employed by the Greek grammarians in 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 Testa-
ment, 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 Tischendorf 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 occurance. Thus: @C for 06O9, KG for KvpLo<i,
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 421
UNA for irvei/Ma. The iota subscript is never found in the
old Codices of Holy Writ, hence another cause of error. How
these diflferent factors effected many divergencies in the Sacred
text, may be inferred from the following examples.
The group of letters avrr] became avrr) or avrrj or avrrj',
every one of different import by modifications which can only
be based upon the fallible, varying judgment of man. The
opening verses of St. John's Gospel form a good specimen of
the difference in interpretation which may result from different
insertion of the sign of punctuation.
'X^coph avTOv iyevero ovSe ev o yeyovev ev avra. ^wrj rfv ktK,
The Vulgate and its dependent versions insert the period
after yeyovev. " Without him was made nothing that was
made. In him was life, etc." S. Irenaeus, St. Clement of
Alexandria, Origen, St, Athanasius and others close the period
after ovSe ev ; whence would result : " Without him was made
nothing. What was made was life in him." This construc-
tion, though in my judgment improbable, has found favor with
many Thomists. No doubt the authority of St. Augustine,
who held this mode of reading, drew the Thomists to
adopt it.
To remove this cause of error Origen in his Hexapla
divided the text into arixoi, and this mode of writing was
termed (TTLX''^tieTpia. In this stichometric arrangement of the
text, every complete phrase occupied a separate line.
St. Jerome wrote in this manner his version of the propheti-
cal books of the Old Testament. In the middle of the 5th
century Euthalius, a deacon of Alexandria, employed this
mode of writing in his successive editions of the Pauline
Epistles, the Catholic Epistles and the Acts, and lastly to 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 Beza 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 Sticho-
metry from the Codex of Beza: Math. XXIV; 51-XXV. 6,
with English translation in same form of writing.
422 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. •
K^lOBJYrMOCTCONOAOMTCON 1
CZH : TOT60MOlCU|9HCeT\lHBXCl\eiXTCUNOYJAvNCDN
A6KA.lT^jeGNlOlC ^wlTlNieCAABOYC^I
exH^eoMelC^T!^^s^THCl^JToYNY^^4^'QY
k\ithcnym4^hc
Tl6NT6A662A.Y'T^CONHCXhJMCDjM
J<^HT6MTe<j>JONJlMOl
^loY^JMCDJMA^BoY<^M•*^^cA^MT^^A^c^Y^^^^
oYKex^BOMMeee^Y'^^^^^^^'^^
eNTQic ^irr6ioic^.Y"^^^^'^'^^4*J'^^'^^"
exXBONJeAeoMeMTOic^rreioic
MeTXTCONlAXMTT^ACOM^Y'^^^^
XJOMl2;o^^ToCAeToY^^Y^4^'OY
6KSYC"T^^2M^TrACMK^l6K^e6YAO>^
IV16CHCA6MYJ<T0CJKJ^Y^'^^^'"0^^^
ANDGNASHINGOFTEETH
THENSHALLTHEKINGDOMOFHEAVENBELIKENEDUNTO
TENVIRGINSWHICHTOOK
THEIRLAMPS
ANDWENTFORTHTOMEETTHEBRIDEGROOM
ANDBRIDE
ANDFIVEOFTHEMWEREFOOLISH
ANDFIVEWEREWISE
THEYTHATWEREFOOLISHTOOKTHEIRLAMPS
ANDTOOKNOOILWITHTHEMINTHEIRVESSELS
BUTTHEWISE
TOOKOILINTHEIRVESSELS
WITHTHEIRLAMPS
WHILETHEBRIDEGROOMTARRIED
THEYALLSLUMBEREDANDSLEPT
ANDATMIDNIGHTTHEREWASACRYMADE
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 423
Hence, it was modified so that the (ttCxol 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 KOfi/xa or briefest division
was indicated by locating the (.) punctum at the base of the
line ; the k(o\ov (•) or middle division, by interposing it mid-
way between the base and top ; while the full period was
terminated by the punctum (•) at the top of the line. Al-
though this was the most ordinary mode in those times, some-
times the point at the base designated the full period, and vice
versa. Our modern mode of punctuation did not come into
use till after the invention of printing in the 15th century.
The autographs of the New Testament perished in the first
centuries of the Christian era. There is almost a complete
silence in tradition concerning any such original writings.
Some adduce a passage from TertuUian to prove that the
autographs were preserved in his day.
" Percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas, apud quas ipsae adhuc
Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesident, apud quas ipsae
Authenticae Literae eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem, et
repraesentantes faciem uniuscujusque. Proximo est tibi
Achaia, habes Corinthum. Si non long^ es a Macedonia, habes
Philippos, habes Thessalonicenses. Si potes in Asiam tendere,
habes Ephesum. Si autem Italiae adjaces, habes Romam."
(De Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 36).
Attempts have been made, indeed, and that by very eminent
writers, to reduce the term ''Authenticae Literae" 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. TertuUian 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
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, by 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
424 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
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,
were not deterred by an excessive reverence from slight
textual changes, which affected not the sense. By compara-
tive criticism, many of these variants have been brought to
light. The English critic Mill estimated 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 correctness of the sacred text, so that the
remark of Bently 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 awk-
wardly 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 Christ-
ianity, but that every feature of it will still be the same.'*
Thus hath God's Providence kept from harm the treasure of
His written word, so far as is needful for the quiet assurance
of His Church and people."
Perhaps the gravest variants in the New Testament are in
regard to Mark XVI. 9-16, and John VII. 53, VIII. 11. In
our exegesis of these passages we shall defend the authenticity
that was accorded these passages by the Council of Trent.
We here adduce several classes of errors from Scrivener
(1. c). The practical application of these heads to the text
we reserve for our treatise on Exegesis of the New Testament.
" Sometimes, a shorter passage or mere clause, whether
inserted or not in our printed books, may have appeared
originally in a form of a marginal note, and from the margin
have crept into the text, through the wrong judgment or mere
oversight of the scribe."
* ' ' Remarks upon a late Discourse of Free Thinking by Phileleutherus
Lipsiensis," Part I. section 32.
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 425
" Or a genuine clause is lost by means of what is technically
called Homceoteleuton {6/j,oiot€\€vtov), when the clause ends in
the same word as closed the preceding sentence, and the tran-
scribers's eye has wandered from the one to the other, to the
entire omission of the whole passage lying between them.
This source of error is familiar to all who are engaged in copy-
ing writing, and is far more serious than might be supposed,
prior to experience."
" Numerous variations occur in the order of words, the
sense being slightly or not at all affected ; on which account
this species of various readings was at first much neglected by
collators."
" Sometimes the scribe has mistaken one word for another,
which differs from it only in one or two letters. This happens
chiefly in cases when the uncial or capital letters in which the
oldest manuscripts are written, resemble each other, except in
some fine stroke which may have decayed through age.
Hence in Mark V. 14 we find ANHrFEIAAN or AHHr.
TEIAAN ; in Luke XVI. 20 HAKXIMENOC or EIAKHME-
NOC ; so we read AautS or Aa^lS indifferently, as in the later
or cursive character, /S and v have nearly the same shape.
Akin to these errors of the eye are such transpositions as
EAABON for EBAAON or EBAAAON, Mark XIV. 65:
omissions or insertions of the same or similar letters, as
EMACCflNTO or EMACHNTO Apoc .XVI. lo; AFAAAIA-
C0HNAI or ArAAAIA@HNAI John V. 35 ; nPOEA0ftN
or nPOCEA0flN Matth. XXVI. 39; Mark XIV. 35 : or the
dropping or repetition of the same or a similar syllable, as
EKBAAAONTAAAIMONIA or EKBAAAONTATAAAIMO-
NIA Luke IX. 49 ; OTAEAEAOHACTAI or OTAEAOHAC-
TAI II. Cor. III. 10; AHAHEHEAEXETO or AnEHEAEX-
ETO I. Peter III. 20. It is easy to see how the ancient prac-
tice of writing uncial letters without leaving a space between
the words must have increased the risk of such variations as
the foregoing."
"Another source of error is described by some critics as
proceeding ex ore dictantis, in consequence of the scribe writ-
ing from dictation, without having a copy before him. I am
not, however, very willing to believe that manuscripts of the
better class were executed on so slovenly and careless a plan.
It seems more simple to account for the itacisms, or confusion
of certain vowels and diphthongs having nearly the same sounds
which exist more or less in manuscripts of every age, by assum-
426 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
ing that a vicious pronunciation gradually led to a loose mode
of orthography adapted to it. Certain it is that itacisms are
much more plentiful in the original subscriptions and marginal
notes of the writers of mediaeval books, than in the text which
they copied from older documents. Itacisms prevailed the
most extensively from the eighth to the twelfth century, but
not by any means during that period exclusively. In the most
ancient manuscripts the principal changes are between l and et,
at and e : in later times 97 l and et, r] 01 and v, even o and m, rj
and e are used almost promiscuously. Hence it arises that a
very large proportion of the various readings brought together
by collators are of this description, and although in the vast
majority of instances they serve but to illustrate the character
of the manuscripts which exhibit them, or the fashion of the
age in which they were written, they sometimes affect the
grammatical form."
" A more extensive and perplexing species of various read-
ing arises from bringing into the text of one (chiefly of the
three earlier) Evangelist expressions or whole sentences which
of right belong not to him, but to one or both the others.
This natural tendency to assimilate the several Gospels must
have been aggravated by the laudable efforts of Biblical
scholars (beginning with Tatian's Am recradpcDv in the second
century) to construct a satisfactory Harmony of them all.
Some of these variations also may possibly have been mere
marginal notes in the first instance."
" In like manner transcribers sometimes quote passages
from the Old Testament more fully than the writers of
the New Testament had judged necessary for their pur-
pose."
" Synonymous words are often interchanged, and so
from various readings, the sense undergoes some slight
and refined modification, or else remains quite un-
altered."
•* An irregular, obscure, or incomplete construction will
be explained or supplied in the margin by words that are sub-
sequently brought into the text."
" Hence, too, arises the habit of changing ancient dialectic
forms into those in vogue in the transcriber's age."
" Trifling variations in spelling, though very proper to be
noted by a faithful collator, are obviously of little consequence."
" A large portion of our various readings arises from the
omission or insertion of such words as cause little appreciable
difference in the sense."
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 427
" Manuscripts greatly fluctuate in adding and rejecting the
Greek article, and the sense is often seriously influenced by
these variations, though they seem so minute."
" Slips of the pen, whereby words are manifestly lost or
repeated, mis-spelt or half-finished, though of no service to the
critic, must yet be noted by a faithful collator, as they will
occasionally throw light on the history of some particular copy
in connection with others, and always indicate the degree of
care or skill employed by the scribe, and consequently the
weight due to his general testimony."
" The copyist may be tempted to foresake his proper func-
tion for that of a reviser, or critical collector. He may simply
omit what he does not understand (e. g. to fiaprvpiov I. Tim.
II. 6.), or may attempt to get over a difficulty by inversions
and other changes. Thus the /jLva-r'qpcov spoken of by St. Paul I.
Cor. XV. 51, which rightly stands in the received text iravre';
fiev ov KOLfxrjOTjao/iieOa, 7rdvT€<i Se aWayqaofMeOa was easily varied
into Traz/re? /coLfjujjdrjao/Meda, ov Trdvre^ Se aWayTjaofieda, as if in
mere perplexity."
" 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, martyred
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 recension 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. Praef. in Evang.), and Gelasius, in the decree, De
Recip. et non recip. Libris, rejects " the Gospels which Hesy-
chius and Lucian falsified."
Hug believes that Origen made a recension of the
New Testament, but it is far more probable that he did
not.
428 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
In the fourth century certain causes conspired to bring
about more uniformity in the texts of the New Testament.
In the first place, critical thought had been aroused, and
transcribers were more careful.
Secondly, "copies of Scripture had been extensively destroyed
during the long and terrible period of affliction that preceded the
conversion of Constantine. In the very edict which marked the
beginning of Diocletian's persecution, it is ordered that the
holy writings should be burnt {Ta<i ypa(f)a<; a^avel'^ Trvpl
yeveaOai, Eusebius, £ccl. Hist. VIII. 2) ; and the cruel decree
was so rigidly enforced that a special name of reproach {trad-
itores) together with the heaviest censures of the Church, was
laid upon those Christians who betrayed the sacred trust. At
such a period critical revision or even the ordinary care of
devout transcribers must have disappeared before the pressure
of the times ; fresh copies of the New Testament would have
to be made in haste to supply the room of those seized by the
enemies of our Faith ; and when made, they were to circulate
by stealth among persons whose lives were in jeopardy every
hour. Hence arose the need, when the tempest was overpast,
of transcribing many new manuscripts of the New Testament,
the rather as the Church was now receiving vast accessions of
converts within her pale. Eusebius of Caesarea, the Ecclesias-
tical Historian, seems to have taken the lead in this happy
labor ; his extensive learning, which by the aid of certain other
less commendable qualities had placed him high in Constan-
tine's favor, rendered it natural that the Emperor should em-
ploy his services for furnishing with fifty copies of Scripture
the Churches of his new capital, Constantinople. Eusebius'
deep interest in Biblical studies is exhibited in several of his
surviving works, as well as in his Canons for harmonising the
Gospels ; and he would naturally betake himself for the text
of his fifty codices to the Library founded at his Episcopal
city of Caesarea by the martyr Pamphilus, the dear friend from
whom he derived his own familiar appelation Eusebius Patn-
phili. Into this Library Pamphilus had gathered manuscripts
of Origen as well as of other theologians, of which Eusebius
made an index {jov^ irivaKa'i Trapedefjbrjv : Eccles. Hist. VI. 32);
from this collection Cod. H of St. Paul and others are stated
to have been derived, nay even Cod. i<5 in its Old Testament
portion, which is expressly declared to have been corrected to
the Hexapla of Origen."
" We are thus warranted, as well from direct evidence as
from the analogy of the Old Testament, to believe that
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 429
Eusebius mainly resorted for his Constantinopolitan Church-
books to the codices of Pamphilus, which might once have be-
longed to Origen. What critical corrections (if any) he ven-
tured to make in the text on his own judgment, is not so clear."
In the last century arose what may properly be called the
science of Comparative 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 NEW TESTAMENT 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.
Among the first promoters of this new science was John
Mill, of Oxford. Mill spent thirty years on a critical edition
of the Greek Testament, and died in 1707, a fortnight after its
publication.
" A large proportion of his care and pains, as we have seen,
was bestowed on the Fathers and ancient writers of every de-
scription who have used and cited Scripture. The versions
are usually considered his weakest point ; although he first
accorded to the Vulgate — and its prototype the Old Latin — the
importance they deserve. His knowledge of Syriac was rather
slight, and for the other Eastern tongues, if he was not more
ignorant than his successors, he had not discovered how little
Latin translations of the ^thiopic &c. can be trusted."
Mill's work was truly monumental. Over thirty thousand
different readings were collected in his Apparatus Criticus.
But his judgment was at times defective, and his opinions
inaccurate.
In England, Walton and Fell also contributed to the com-
parative criticism of the New Testament.
John Albert Bengel (1687-1752), the Lutheran Abbot of
Alpirspach, gave a new impetus to the science by his system
of RECENSIONS.
" An attentive student of the discrepant readings of the
N. T., even in the limited extent they had hitherto been col-
lected, could hardly fail to discern that certain manuscripts,
versions, and ecclesiastical writers, bear a certain affinity with
each other; so that one of them shall seldom be cited in sup-
port of a variation (not being a manifest and gross error of the
copyist), unless accompanied by several of its kindred. The
inference is direct and clear, that documents which thus with-
draw themselves from the general mass of authorities, must
430 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
have sprung from some common source, distinct from those,
which in characteristic readings they but seldom resemble. It
occurred, therefore, to Bengel as a hopeful mode of making
good progress in the criticism of the N, T., to reduce all extant
testimony into " companies, families, tribes, and nations," and
thus to simplify the process of settling the sacred text by
setting class over against class, and trying to estimate the
genius of each, and the relative importance they may severally
lay claim to. He wishes to divide all extant documents into
two nations : the Asiatic, chiefly written in Constantinople and
its neighborhood, which he was inclined to disparage ; and
the African, comprising the few of a better type {Apparatus
Criticus, p. 669, 2nd edition, 1763). Various circumstances
hindered Bengel from working out his principle, among which
he condescends to set his dread of exposing his task to sense-
less ridicule ; yet no one can doubt that it comprehends the
elements of what is both reasonable and true ; however difficult
it has subsequently proved to adjust the details of any
consistent scheme. For the rest, Bengel's critical verdicts,
always considered in relation to his age and opportunities, de-
serve strong commendation. He saw the paramount worth of
Cod. A, the only great uncial then much known {N. T. Ap-
parat. Crit. pp. 390-401) ; and the high character of the Latin
version."
" The next step in advance was made by John James Wet-
stein [1693-1754], a native of Basle, whose edition of the Greek
New Testament ("cum lectionibus Variantibus Codicum MSS.,
Editionum aliarum,Versionum et Patrum, necnon Commentario
pleniore ex Scriptoribus veteribus, Hebraeis, Graecis et
Latinis, historiam et vim verborum illustrante ") appeared in
two volumes folio, Amsterdam, 175 1-2. The genius, the
character, and (it must in justice be added) the worldly fortunes
of Wetstein were widely different from those of the
Abbott of Alpirspach. His taste for Biblical studies showed
itself early. When ordained pastor at the age of twenty, he
delivered a disputation, *' De variis N. T. Lectionibus," and
zeal for this fascinating pursuit became at length with him a
pa.ssion ; the master-passion which consoled and dignified a
roving, troubled, unprosperous life. In 17 14, his eager search
for manuscripts led him to Paris. In 1715-6 and again in 1720,
he visited England, and was employed by Bentley in collect-
ing materials for his projected edition, but he seems to have
imbibed few of that great man's principles : the interval be-
tween them, both in age and station, almost forbade much sym-
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 431
pathy. On his return home he gradually became suspected of
Socinian tendencies, and it must be feared with too much
justice ; so that in the end he was deposed from the pastorate
(1730), driven into exile, and after having been compelled to
serve in a position the least favorable to the cultivation of
learning, that of a military chaplain, he obtained at length
(1733) a Professorship among the Remonstrants at Amsterdam
(in succession to the celebrated Leclerc), and there continued
till his death in 1754, having made his third visit to England
in 1746. His Prolegomena, first published in 1730, and after-
wards, in an altered form, prefixed to his N.T., present a pain-
ful image both of the man and his circumstances. His restless
energy, his undaunted industry, his violent temper, his love of
paradox, his assertion for himself of perfect freedom of thought,
his silly prejudice against Jesuits and bigots, his enmities, his
wrongs, his ill-requited labours, at once excite our respect and
our pity ; while they all help to make his writings a sort of
unconscious biography, rather interesting than agreeable.
Non sic itur ad astra, whether morally or intellectually ; yet
Wetstein's services to sacred literature were of no common
order. His Philological annotations, wherein the matter and
phraseology of the inspired writers are illustrated by copious —
too copious — quotations from all kinds of authors, classical,
Patristric or Rabbinical, have proved an inexhaustible store-
house from which later writers have drawn liberally and some-
times without due acknowledgement ; but many of the pas-
sages are of such a tenor as (to use Tregelles' very gentle
language respecting them) " only excite surprise at their being
found on the same page as the text of the New Testament."
The critical portion of his work, however, is far more valuable,
and in this department Wetstein must be placed in the very
first rank, inferior (if to any) but to one or two of the highest
names. He first cited the manuscripts under the notation by
which they are commonly known." (Scrivener op. cit.).
The next great name which appears in the history of our
science is John James Griesbach (1745-1812). He was a native of
Hesse-Darmstadt, and a disciple of Semler and Ernesti. His
first edition of the New Testament appeared in 1775, and was
an embryo of his subsequent great work. His second edition
of the Greek Testament, in two volumes, appeared between
the years 1796 and 1806.
" At the onset of his labours, indeed, this acute, and candid
enquirer was disposed to divide all extant materials into five
or six different families ; he afterwards limited them to three,
432 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
the Alexandrine, the Western, and the Byzantine recensions.
The standard of the Alexandrine text he conceived to be
Origen ; who, although his works were written in Palestine,
was assumed to have brought with him into exile copies of
Scripture, similar to those used in his native city. To this
family would belong a few manuscripts of the earliest date,
and confessedly of the highest character, Codd. A, B, C ; Cod. L
of the Gospels, the Egyptian and some lesser versions. The
Western recension would survive in Cod, D of the Gospels and
Acts, in the other ancient copies which contained a Latin
translation, in the Old Latin and Vulgate versions, and in the
Latin Fathers. The vast majority of manuscripts (comprising
perhaps nineteen-twentieths of the whole), together with the
larger proportion of versions and Patristic writings, were
grouped into the Byzantine class, as having prevailed generally
in the Patriarchate of Constantinople. To this last class
Griesbach hardly professed to accord as much weight as to
either of the others, nor if he had done so, would the result
have been materially different. The joint testimony of two
classes was, caeteris paribus, always to prevail ; and since the
very few documents which comprise the Alexandrine and
Western recensions seldom agree with the Byzantine, even
when at variance with each other, the numerous codices which
make up the third family would thus have about as much share
in fixing the text of Scripture, as the poor citizens whose host
was included in one of Servius Tullius' lower classes towards
counterbalancing the votes of the wealthy few that composed
his first or second."
The labors of Matthaei (1744-181 1) are of slight importance
in fixing the text.
John David Michaelis (1717-1719) rejected all the theories
of Griesbach with cont«ftipt. He declared that Griesbach had
never seen a codex, even of the tenth century, and he loaded
with contempt his recensions theory.
According to Michaelis, there have existed four principal
recensions, viz., i. — The Alexandrine; 2. — The Occidental ; and,
3. — The Byzantine as proposed by Griesbach ; in addition to
which, as the old Syriac version differs from them, Michaelis
has instituted a fourth, which he terms the Edessan Edi-
tion : it comprehends the special Asiatic instruments, as they
were termed by Griesbach, or those Manuscripts from which
that Version was made. Of this edition no manuscripts are
extant ; a circumstance for which Michaelis accounts, by the
early prejudice of the Syrian literati in favor of whatever was
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 433
Grecian, and also by the wars that devastated the East for
many ages subsequent to the fifth century. But, by some
accident, which is difficult to be explained, manuscripts are
found in the west of Europe, accompanied even with a Latin
translation, such as the Codex Bezse, which so eminently coin-
cide with the Old Syriac Version, that their affinity is indis-
putable. Although, according to this theory, the readings of
the Occidental, Alexandrine, and Edessan editions sometimes
differ, yet they very frequently harmonize with each other.
This coincidence, Michaelis ascribes to their high antiquity, as
the oldest manuscripts extant belong to one of these editions,
and the translations themselves are ancient. A reading con-
firmed by three of them is supposed to be of the very highest
authority ; yet the true reading may sometimes be found only
in the fourth. — (Home op. cit.)
"But a system was devised by Professor J. L. Hug of
Freyburg in 1808 {einleitung), and maintained, though with
some modifications, by J. F. Eichorn, which gave him a fore-
most place in the criticism of the N. T. Hug conceived that
the process of corruption had been going on so rapidly and
uniformly from the Apostolic age downwards, that by the
middle of the third century the state of the text in the gen-
eral mass of codices had degenerated into the form exhibited
in Codd. D. i. 13. 69. 124 of the Gospels, the Old Latin and
Thebaic (he would now have added the Curetonian Syriac)
versions, and to some extent in the Peshito and in the citations
of Clement of Alexandria, and of Origen in his early works.
To this uncorrected text he gave the name of kolvt] e/cSocrt?.)"
"This 'common edition' Hug supposes to have received
three separate emendations in the middle of the third century ;
one by Origen in Palestine, which he thinks Jerome adopted
and approved ; two others by Hesychius and Lucian (a pres-
byter of Antioch and Martyr), in Egypt and Syria respectively,
both which Jerome condemned, and Pope Gelasius (492-6) de-
clared to be apocryphal. To Origen's recension he referred
such copies as A, K, M, 42. 106. 114. 116. 253 of the Gospels,
the Philoxenian Syriac, the quotations of Chrysostom and
Theodoret ; to Hesychius the Alexandrine codices B, C, L ; to
Lucian, the Byzantine documents E, F, G, H, S, V, and the mass
of later books. The practical effect of this elaborate theory
would be to accord to Cod. A a higher place among our
authorities than some recent editors have granted it ; its cor-
respondence with Origen in many characteristic readings would
thus be admitted and accounted for."
BB
434 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
"The next and most important (as it is the most probable),
of the various systems of recensions, which have been propos-
ed, is that announced by Dr. J. Martin Augustin Scholz, one
of the professors at Bonn upon the Rhine. From the differ-
ences, which are sufficiently perceptible in the manuscripts and
editions of the Greek text of the New Testament, Dr. Scholz
concludes that these instruments naturally divide themselves
into two great classes, which are the same throughout the
books of the New Testament. To the first of these classes
belong all the editions and those numerous manuscripts, which
were written within the limits of the patriarchate of Constan-
tinople, that is, in Asia or in the eastern parts of Europe, and
which were destined for liturgical use ; the second class com-
prises certain manuscripts written in Egypt, and the western
part of Europe. Transcribed, unquestionably, from copies
which were valuable on account of their age and beauty, they
were intended only to preserve the contents of those copies ;
but, as they presented a different text from that which was
generally received, they could not be employed in divine ser-
vice : hence they were for the most part negligently written,
with an incorrect orthography, and on leaves of vellum of differ-
ent sizes and qualities. To this class, Professor Scholz gives
the appellation of Alexandrine, because its text originated at
Alexandria ; it is followed by several Latin and Coptic ver-
sions, by the Ethiopic version, and by the ecclesiastical writers
who lived in Egypt and in the west of Europe. The other
class he terms the Constantinopolitan, because its text was
written within the precincts of the patriarchate of Constanti-
nople ; to this class Dr. Scholz refers the Syriac versions
(Peschito and Philoxenian), the Gothic, Georgian, and Slavonic
versions, and the quotations from the New Testament which
occur in the works of the ecclesiastical writers, who flourished
in Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, and the eastern part of
Europe, especially Greece and Constantinople. There are,
moreover, extant other manuscripts, which belong sometimes
to one class, and sometimes to the other, and which also ex-
hibit some peculiar varieties ; but, after repeated examinations
of them, he is of opinion that they do not possess sufficient
characters to constitute them distinct classes. The conclusion
to which Dr. Scholz has arrived, is, that the Constantinopolitan
text is almost always faithful to the text now actually re-
ceived, while the Alexandrine text varies from it in
innumerable instances ; and this conclusion he founds,
not only upon the actual collation of six hundred and
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 435
seventy-four manuscripts, but also upon an induction of
historical particulars, of which the following is an abstract.
The separation of the MSS. of the New Testament into two
classes, in the manner just stated (Dr. Scholz argues), is so con-
formable to the real state of the text, that it is secure from
every attack : there would, indeed, be very little ground for
the objection, in order to combat this classification, that the
text of the greatest number of manuscripts is not yet known,
and consequently uncertain. This objection can only be
repeUed a posteriori. For this purpose, after having deter-
mined the text of a great number of manuscripts by actually
collating a few chapters. Dr. Scholz proceeded to collate them
nearly at length. When, therefore, eighty manuscripts ex-
hibited, almost constantly, the same additions, the same
omissions, and the same various readings, with the exception
of a few obvious mistakes of the transcribers and some un-
important modifications ; — when, further, after taking here and
there fifteen or twenty chapters, he uniformly found in three
or four hundred other manuscripts the same various readings
as in the first eighty ; — he considered himself authorized to
conclude, that the remainder of the uncollated manuscripts
would present the same results as in these fifteen or twenty
chapters ; and that like results would be presented by all the
manuscripts written in the same place and under the same
circumstances as these four hundred manuscripts were written ;
that is to say, that all the manuscripts which were written
within the patriarchate of Constantinople, and were destined
to be used in divine service, followed the text of the Constan-
tinopolitan class.
It is by no means surprising that this classification should
be thus clearly connected with ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The
history of the propagation of Christianity shows us with what
strictness, especially within the jurisdiction of the patriarch of
Constantinople, missionaries enjoined on their converts the
minutest rites of the principal church, and also to what warm
disputes the least deviation from them gave rise. These dis-
cussions always terminated in reducing them to the most
entire conformity with the metropolis.
Further, from the fifth to the middle of the fifteenth cen-
tury, a greater number of copies of the sacred books was made
at Constantinople than in all the rest of the patriarchate.
Transcribed and collated in the same convents under the eyes
of the superiors, then sent forth by the monks and priests
to distant churches, all these copies presented the same text,
436 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
as well as the same characters and the same menologies
(or calendars of saints for every day in the month
throughout the year), in all the provinces which were
subject to the influence of the metropolitan church, and of
of its literature.
When Islamism was diffused from India to the Atlantic
Ocean ; — when thousands of Christians were imprisoned,
driven to apostasy, or sold as slaves ; — when the flames had
devoured a prodigious number of Greek manuscripts ; when
the use of the Greek language was interdicted and the capital
of Greek literature was overthrown, — then the influence of
Constantinople extended, without a rival, over almost every-
thing that remained to the Christians who spoke Greek. The
text of the Constantinopolitan church, and the manuscripts
which contained it, were generally adopted. The text of the
other class, on the contrary, which had till then been used for
divine service within the limits of the patriarchate of Alexan-
dria, and the manuscripts belonging to that class, disappeared
almost entirely. The copyists ceased to transcribe them : the
most ancient and valuable perished ; and their text was pre-
served only in a few libraries, or, by a few lovers of literature,
as curiosities, or as venerable relics of ancient and lost docu-
ments.
Although the Alexandrine text is sometimes found in
liturgical books or in lectionaries. Dr. Scholz cannot believe
that the manuscripts, which contained it, were ever destined
for divine service ; they have, in fact, been written with so
much haste and incorrectness, that such could never have been
their destination. The manuscripts of both families ordinarily
have few corrections and no various readings in the margins :
every thing, on the contrary, indicates that they are not exact
copies of ancient exemplars.
That so few very ancient manuscripts of the Constantino-
politan text are now extant, is a circumstance which ought not
to excite surprise. They must necessarily have been worn out,
and have perished, in consequence of the daily use made of
them for divine service. In the fourth century the text may
be regarded as equally fixed with the Canon of the New Testa-
ment ; after which time the veneration of believers for the
sacred books would not allow the introduction of any change.
Before that period, therefore, the alterations must have taken
place, which gave rise to the division of manuscripts into two
classes. Since that period manuscripts have been collated and
even corrected, but never arbitrarily and always after ancient
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 437
documents : besides, the corrections so made were of little im-
portance, and had only a limited influence. Although different
manuscripts may be of the same country, it does not neces-
sarily result that their text exhibits an absolute identity, but
only a general conformity in the greatest number of cases.
What then, it may be asked, was the origin of the Constan-
tinopolitan text ? Dr. Scholz is of opinion that it was the
original text, nearly in all its purity, and derived directly from
autographs. This he regards as certain as any critical fact can
be: history leads us to admit it ; external evidence confirms it;
and it is completely demonstrated by internal proofs.
The greater part of the writings of the New Testament
were destined for the churches in Greece and in Asia Minor,
where the idea of forming a collection of them would originate,
as is evident from Saint John's approbation of the collection of
the three first Gospels. These writings were, from the
beginning, read in the religious assemblies of the Christians ;
and when the originals were worn out or lost by use, or by the
calamities which befell many of the churches, apographs or
correct transcripts from them were preserved in private
libraries as well as in the libraries attached to the churches.
These holy writings were further multiplied by numerous
copyists for the use of private individuals. In transcribing the
text, the Constantinopolitan scribes certainly did not imitate
the audacity of the grammarians of Alexandria. This would
be in the highest degree improbable, if the question related to
profane authors ; but it becomes utterly incredible as it regards
the New Testament. On the contrary, these writings were
cherished with increasing religious veneration. The long series
of venerable bishops, who presided over the numerous churches
in Asia, the Archipelago, and in Greece, transmitted to the
faithful the instructions which they had received from the
Apostles. Far from altering in any degree that sacred deposit,
they labored with pious vigilance to preserve it pure and un-
mutilated. In this state they left it to their successors and to
new churches ; and, with the exception of a few errors of the
copyists, the text remained without alterations until the
reigns of Constantine and of Constans. At that time, how-
ever, some Alexandrine MSS. were dispersed at Constanti-
nople, whence alterations were introduced into many Byzan-
tine manuscripts. This circumstance accounts for a tend-
ency in the Constantinopolitan family to approximate
nearer to the Alexandrine text than we should otherwise
expect.
438 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Among the critics of the present century, a place must be
given to Charles Lachmann (fiSsi). His critical edition of the
New Testament, in Greek and Latin, appeared between the
years 1842 and 1850.
"Lachmann had published as early as 1831 a small edition
containing only the text of the N. T., with a list of the
readings, wherein he differs from that of Elzevir, preceded by
a notice of his plan not exceeding a few lines in length, itself
so obscurely worded that even to those who happened to
understand his meaning it must have read like a riddle whose
solution they had been told beforehand ; and referring us for
fuller information to what he strangely considers ' a more con-
venient place,' a German periodical of the preceding year's
date. Authors who take so little pains to explain their funda-
mental principles of criticism, especially if (as in this case)
these are novel and unexpected, can hardly wonder when their
drift and purpose are imperfectly apprehended ; so that a little
volume, which we now learn had cost Lachmann five years of
thought and labor, was confounded, even by the learned,
with the common, hasty and superficial reprints. Nor was the
diflficulty much removed on the publication of the first volume
of his larger book. It was then seen, indeed, how clean a
sweep he had made of the great mass of Greek manuscripts
usually cited in critical editions; — in fact he rejected all in a
heap excepting Codd. A, B, C, the fragments P, Q, T, Z, (and for
some purposes D) of the Gospels; D, E, of the Acts only;
D, G, H, of St. Paul; — he treated the scheme of his work
as if it were already familiarly known, and spent his time in
discursive controversy with his opponents and reviewers,
whom he chastised with a heartiness, which, in Eng-
land, men imputed to downright malice, till Dr. Tregelles
was so good as to instruct them, that in Lachmann, it was
but *a tone of pleasantry,' the horseplay of coarse Ger-
man wit {Account of Printed Texty p. 112). The sup-
plementary Prolegomena which preface his second volume
of 1850 are certainly more explicit; both from what they
teach and from the practical examples they contain, they have
helped to gain a nearer insight into his whole design."
" It seems, then, to have been Lachmann's purpose, dis-
carding the slightest regard for the textus receptus as such, to
endeavor to bring the sacred text back to the condition in
which it existed during the fourth century, and this in the
first instance by documentary aid alone, careless for the
moment whether the sense produced be probable or improb-
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 439
able, good or bad ; but solely looking to his authorities, and
following them implicitly wheresoever the numerical majority
might carry him. For accomplishing this purpose he possessed
but one Greek copy written as early as the fourth century,
Cod. B ; and of that he not only knew less than has
since come to light, but he did not avail himsetlf of
Bartolocci's papers, to which Scholz had already drawn
attention. His other codices were not of the fourth century
at all, but varying in date from the fifth (A, C, T,) to the ninth
(G) ; and even of these few (of C more especially) his assistant
or colleague Buttmann's representation was loose, careless, and
unsatisfactory. Of the Greek Fathers, the scanty Greek re-
mains of Irenaeus, and the works of Origen are all that are em-
ployed ; but considerable weight is given to the readings of the
Latin version. The Vulgate is printed at length as revised,
after a fashion, by Lachmann himself, from the codices
Fuldensis and Amiatinus ; the Old Latin manuscripts <a:, b, c, to-
gether with the Latin versions accompanying the Greek copies
which he receives, are regarded as primary authorities ; of the
Western Fathers he quotes Cyprian, Hilary of Poitiers, Lucifer
of Cagliari, and in the Apocalypse Primasius also {h). The
Syriac and Egyptian translations he considers himself excused
from attending to, by reason of his ignorance of their respective
languages." (Scrivener op. cit.)
After this brief notice of the great labors of these eminent
scholars, we judge ourselves incompetent to properly estimate
the value of their labors. We shall, therefore, adduce the
judgment of a man who, by his genius and by his labors,
merited to be called the greatest biblical critic of his age,
Aenotheus Fridericus Constantinus Tischendorf (f 1874).
Passing over his early studies, we find him, in 1841, setting
out to travel in the cause of science, so poor " that he could
not pay for the cloak that he wore." He thrice visited
England, and thrice visited the East, and during one of these
latter journeys, his great discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus was
made. Besides his critical editions of both Old and New Tes-
taments, Tischendorf stands alone in having given to the
world the texts of the great Uncial Codices. His critical
edition of Codex ^ is the greatest work of this kind ever seen
in the history of the text.
Such a man could pass judgment on the labors of his pre-
decessors, and his judgment is that, "instead of deriving a history
of the text from documents, they had created a history of the
text in their own minds." (Tischendorf N. T. Graece, ed. 7.)
440 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
He reduces all the codices to four great families, i. — The
Alexandrine, 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 Byzantine family,
used by the Churches of the Byzantine realm. He stated 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.
Samuel Prideaux Tregelles (fiS/S) also merits a place
among biblical critics for his critical edition of the New Testa-
ment.
In our own days, Westcott and Hort have devoted over
thirty years of labor to the collating of Manuscripts, and
have merited a place of honor among biblical critics. They
also have a theory of four families of codices differing from
those noticed, but enough has been said to convince the reader
that whatever is to be done to restore the text to its pristine
purity, must be done without the aid of theories of recension.
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 yet been
examined. Only a small number of these contain all the
books. Some exist only in scattered fragments ; others con-
tain 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 be-
longed. In the Apparatus Criticus they are designated by
capital letters of the Latin and Greek alphabets, while the
codices minusculi are designated by the Arabic numerals. One
uncial codex is designated by the Hebrew ^, that of Mt. Sinai.
In applying these conventional signs, the New Testament is
divided into four parts, viz : the Gospels, the Acts and Cath-
olic Epistles, the Epistles of Paul, and the Apocalypse, so that
the same conventional note of designation may signify different
codices, as it is applied to different parts of the Testament.
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 441
For example, Codex D of Paul's Epistles, is the codex of
Clermont, while Codex D of the Gospels, is Beza's codex at
Cambridge.
" In using manuscripts of the Greek Testament, we must
carefully note whether a reading \s prima manu or by some
subsequent corrector. It will often happen that these last are
utterly valueless, having been inserted even from printed
copies by a modern owner (like some marginal variations of
the Cod. Leicestrensis), and such as these really ought not to
have been extracted by collators at all ; while others by the
second hand are almost as weighty, for age and goodness, as
the text itself. AW these points are explained by critical
editors for each document separately." (Scrivener op. cit.)
To indicate these additions a small character, like the ex-
ponent of a power in algebra, is placed at the right upper corner
of the main sign of the codex, thus Cod. B"^ would indicate
an addition to the Vatican Codex by a third hand.
To determine the age of the old codices, we must have
recourse to the criteria palaeographica, principal of which are
the material of the manuscript, the form of the letters, the
signs of punctuation, the accents, and the abbreviations em-
ployed.
These means do not lead to mathematical certitude, but
they furnish a high degree of probability of the century to
which the manuscript should be referred.
We have no codices older than the fourth century. The
destruction wrought by the decree of Diocletian and other
causes have deprived us of these. Of the uncial codices, two
are referred to the fourth century, ten to the fifth century,
twenty-two to the sixth century, nine to the seventh century,
eight to the eighth century, thirty-one to the ninth century,
and six to the tenth century. In the judgment of Westcott
and Hort, many of the codices here placed in the preceding
centuries must be brought down to the ninth and tenth
centuries.
Chapter XIX.
Some Account of the Uncial Codices.
By uncial codices we mean those manuscripts written in
large characters of nearly uniform size, resembling modern
capitals, but with greater roundness. The plate of the Codex
Claromontanus opposite page 460, furnishes a good example
of this mode of writing.
442 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
" The Greek manuscripts, which have descended to our
time, are written either on vellum or on paper ; and their
external form and condition vary, like the manuscripts of other
ancient authors. The vellum is either purple-colored or of its
natural hue, and is either thick or thin. Manuscripts on very
thin vellum were always held in the highest esteem. The
paper, also, is either made of cotton, or the common sort
manufactured from linen, and is either glazed, or laid (as it is
technically termed), that is, of the ordinary roughness. Not
more than six manuscript fragments on purple vellum are
known to be extant ; they are described in the following
sections of this chapter. The Codex Claromontanus, of which
a brief notice is also given in a subsequent page, is written on
very thin vellum. All manuscripts on paper are of a much later
date ; those on cotton paper being posterior to the ninth cen-
tury, and those on linen subsequent to the twelfth century ;
and if the paper be of very ordinary quality, Wetstein pro-
nounces them to have been written in Italy, in the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries.
" The letters are either capital (which in the time of
Jerome were called uncial, or cursive, i. e., small ; the
capital letters, again, are of two kinds, either unadorned and
simple, and made with straight, thin strokes, or thicker, uneven,
and angular. Some of them are supported on a sort of a base,
while others are decorated, or rather burdened, with various
tops. As letters of the first kind are generally seen on ancient
Greek monuments, while those of the last resemble the paint-
ings of semi-barbarous times, manuscripts written with the
former are generally supposed to be as old as the fifth century,
and those written with the latter are supposed to be posterior
the ninth century.
"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 obliteration, the
copyist frequently blotted out the old writing with a sponge^
and wrote other words in lieu of it ; nor was this practice con-
fined to a single letter or word, as may be seen in the Codex
Bezae. Authentic instances are on record in which whole
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 443
books have been thus obliterated, and other writing has been
substituted in the place of the manuscript so blotted out ; but
where the writing was already faded through age, they pre-
served 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 oblit-
erate the works of ancient writers, in order to transcribe their
own, or those of some other favorite author in their place ;
hence, doubtless, the works of many eminent writers have
perished, and particularly those of the greatest antiquity ; for
such as were comparatively recent were transcribed to satisfy
the immediate demand, while those which were already dim
with age were erased. It was for a long time thought that this
destructive practice was confined to the eleventh, twelfth,
thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, and that it chiefly pre-
vailed among the Greeks ; but this destructive operation was
likewise practised by the Latins, and is also of a more remote
date than has usually been supposed.
" 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. Many such manuscripts are preserved in the
library of the British Museum. Montfaucon found a manu-
script in the Colbert Library, which had been written about
the eighth century, and originally contained the works ascribed
to St. Dionysius ; new matter had been written over it, three
or four centuries afterwards, and both continued legible. Mu-
ratori saw in the Ambrosian Library a manuscript comprising
the works of the venerable Bede, the writing of which was from
eight to nine hundred years old, and which had been substi-
tuted for another upwards of a thousand years old. Notwith-
standing the efforts which had been made to erase the latter,
some phrases could be deciphered, which indicated it to be an
ancient pontifical. The indefatigable researches of Cardinal
Angelo Mai' (for some time the principal keeper of the Vatican
Library at Rome) have discovered several valuable remains of
biblical and classical literature in the Ambrosian Library at
Milan."
Among all the codices of the world, four stand preeminent,
and of these the CODEX Vaticanus, B (1209), is the
greatest.
"CoDEX Vaticanus B, 1209, is one of the oldest
vellum manuscripts in existence, and is the glory of the great
444 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
Vatican Library at Rome. (See plate on opposite page.)
This book seems to have been brought into the Vatican
Library shortly after its establishment by Pope Nicholas V. who
died in 1455, but nothing is known of its previous history.
" The Vatican manuscript is written on parchment or vel-
lum, in uncial or capital letters, in three columns on each page,
all of which are of the same size, except at the begining of a
book. It is without any divisions of chapters, verses, or words,
but with accents and spirits. The shape of the letters, and
color of the ink, prove that it was written throughout by one
and the same careful copyist. The abbreviations are few,
being confined chiefly to those words which are in general
abbreviated, such as @C, KC, IC, XC, for 0eo9, Kvpio<;, lr]<7ov<i,
'Kpiaro'i, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ. Originally this manuscript
contained the entire Greek Bible, including both the Old and
New Testaments ; in which respect it resembles none so much
as the Codex Alexandrinus, though no two manuscripts vary
more in their readings. The Old Testament wants the first
forty-six chapters of Genesis, and thirty-two psalms, viz. from
Psal. CV. to CXXXVIL inclusive; and the New Testament
wants the latter part of the Epistle to the Hebrews, viz. all
after Chapter IX. verse 14, and also Saint Paul's other epistles
to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, and the whole Book of
Revelation. It appears, however, that this last book, as well
as the latter part of the Epistle to the Hebrews, has been sup-
plied by a modern hand in the fifteenth century, and, it is said,
from some manuscript that had formerly belonged to Cardinal
Bessarion. In many places the faded letters have also been
retouched by a modern but careful hand ; and when the person
who made these amendments (whom Michaelis pronounces to
have been a man of learning) found various readings in other
manuscripts, he has introduced them into the Codex Vaticanus,
but has still preserved the original text ; and in some few
instances he has ventured to erase with a penknife."
All who have inspected the Codex are loud in the praises
of the fine thin vellum, the clear and elegant hand of the
first penman, the simplicity of the whole style of the work ;
capital letters, so frequent in the Codex Alexandrinus, were
totally wanting in this document for several centuries. In
several of these particulars our manuscript resembles the
Herculanean rolls, and thus asserts a just claim to high
antiquity, which the absence of the usual divisions into
K€<j)d\aia, of Ammonian sections and Canons of Eusebius, and
the substitution in their room of another scheme of chapters
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 445
+ -f "^
■r B Av6£;oc>J ht n p p c TO jM eM
p i<*.i^7: AfMOA^oroc oyToc
nro K"A.ixcD p V c A.-rp-;6 y e re '
>J e TO 6 y Ad ^ m hre ro*j«~
2:aJHA^J^^o<:}>^I^c;K^lTQ -twr**^»fv^r--».
tcD c € N T H c/ica:«-;>V<4>Ai .
M €M o^ n A:f i e y oht o hAK
Ayrua iti^x^i H c oy-roc
j^Xe'e V«4 e I c M XT nry > J^
y M>rfM X P T:y r rt <c? w n e p^j ivy
ci> ODproc I* t^J A r iXkT'^C ni
c nre y ecu c I r^ i^ i xy toy
oy kf Ah e'Ke i m oc'r6<p*^»
AA Xl M>.M ^f TV r.H C ^rn<^
p^r7^y<Ku>xpc /fisiTP<f>J»
TO A-X K © C I M O M 6 cfc> CU -p^
72;€inXNi~i ^A-taorobnOM
j^ A ro KO c M p c zs i .Ky Toy
€: r€>J € "TO KT A^ 1 9 Ko'c M oo
TX Y iw I >. hi A ©e M K X I Q 1 1 /^
o?i A y TO M p y ri ^ f e_^Ax e p
cjoo^Ae € A>< K.XN xyroN
€ Acb»<€ r^ Xy TO ipe^oy
o f AM T^e K-isfAe y re>4 e c^i
^nro I c h re Tne'y oy ci iM ^^JC
^Ke T <k^ wi ><Tco>JoyA'ee*^
^ eA hUM aTO^jC;A>p^o1c^
446 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
of its own, beyond question tend very powerfully to confirm.
Each column contains about forty-two lines, each line from
sixteen to eighteen letters, of a size somewhat less than in the
Codex Alexandrinus, with no intervals between the words, a
space of the breadth of half a letter being left at the end of a
sentence, and a little more at the conclusion of a paragraph.
It has been doubted whether any of the stops zrQ prima manu,
and (contrary to the judgment of Birch and others) the breath-
ings and accents are now generally allowed to have been added
by the second hand. This hand, apparently of about the
eighth century, retraced, with as much care as such an opera-
tion would permit, the faint lines of the original writing (the
ink whereof was perhaps never quite black), the remains of
which can even now be seen by a keen-sighted reader by the
side of the more modern strokes ; anxious at the same time to
represent a critical revision of the text, the writer left un-
touched such words or letters as he wished to reject. In these
places, where no breathings or accents and scarcely any stops
have ever been detected, we have an opportunity of seeing the
manuscript in its primitive condition ; before it had been tam-
pered with by the later scribe. There are occasional breaks in
the continuity of the writing, every descent in the genealogies
of our Lord (Matt. I., Luke III.), each of the beatitudes (Matt,
v.), and of the parables in Matt. XIII. , forming a separate
paragraph ; but such a case will oftentimes not occur for sev-
eral consecutive pages. The writer's plan was to proceed
steadily with a book until it was finished : then to break off
from the column he was writing, and to begin the next book
on the very next column. Thus only one column perfectly
blank is found in the whole volume, that which follows
i<f)ofiovvTo yap in Mark XVI. 8 ; and since Cod. B is the only
one yet known, except Cod. ^, that actually omits the last
twelve verses of that Gospel, by leaving such a space the
scribe has intimated that he was fully aware of their
existence, or even found them in the copy from which
he wrote. The capital letters at the beginning of each
book are likewise due to the corrector, who sometimes
erased, sometimes merely touched slightly, the original initial
letter, which (as in the Herculanean rolls) is no larger than
any other.
These later capitals in blue or red, three-quarters of an
inch high, and the broad green bar, surmounted with three
red crosses, which habitually stands at the head of a
book, are in paint, and by the same second hand."
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 447
" Tischendorf says truly enough that something like a his-
tory might be written of the futile attempts to collate Cod. B.
The manuscript is first distinctly heard of (for it does not
appear to have been used for the Complutensian Polyglott) by
Sepulveda, to whose correspondence with Erasmus, attention
has been seasonably recalled by Tregelles. Writing in 1534,
he says, * Est enim Graecum exemplar antiquissimum in Bib-
liotheca Vaticana, in quo diligentissime et accuratissime Uteris
majusculis conscriptum utrumque Testamentum continetur
long^ diversum a vulgatis exemplaribus : ' and after noticing
as a weighty proof of its excellence its agreement with the
Latin version (multum convenitcumvetere nostra translatione)
against the common Greek text (vulgatam Graecorum ed-
itionem), he furnishes Erasmus with 365 readings as a con-
vincing argument in support of his statements. It would
probably be from this list that in his Annotations to the Acts,
published in 1535, Erasmus cites the reading KavSa, Chap.
XXVII. 16, from a Greek Codex in the Pontificial Library,
since for this reading Cod. B is the only known Greek witness.
It seems, however, that he had obtained some account of this
manuscript from Paul Bombasius as early as 1521 (see Wet-
stein's Proleg. N. T. I. p. 23). Lucas Brugensis, who published
in his Notationes in S. Biblia in 1580, and his Commentary on
the Four Gospels (dedicated to Cardinal Bellarmine) in 1606,
made known certain extracts from Cod. B taken by Werner of
Nimuegen ; that most imperfect collection was the only source
from which Mill and even Wetstein had any knowledge of the
contents of this first-rate document." In 1868 Laurence
Alexander Zacagni, Librarian of the Vatican, in his Preface to
the Collectanea Monumentorum Veterum Eccles., describes
Cod. B, and especially its peculiar division into sections, in a
passage cited by Mill (Proleg. § 1480.) In 1669 indeed the
first real collation of the manuscript had been attempted by
Bartolocci, then librarian of the Vatican; from some accident,
however, it was never published. In 18 10, however, when
with the other best treasures of the Vatican, Codex B was at
Paris, the celebrated critic J. L. Hug sent forth his treatise
* de Antiquitate Vaticani Codicis Commentatio,' and though
even he did not perceive the need of a new and full collation
of it, he has the merit of first placing it in the paramount rank
it still holds, as one of the oldest and most valuable of extant
monuments of sacred antiquity. His conclusion respecting its
date, not later than the middle of the fourth century, has been
acquiesced in with little opposition, though Tischendorf de-
448 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
clares rather pithily that he holds this belief ' non propter
Hugium sed cum Hugio.' In 1843 Tischendorf, after long
and anxious expectation during a visit to Rome that lasted
some months, obtained a sight of it for two days of six
hours each."
The rapidity with which Tischendorf's collation of the
Vatican MS. was made, may be judged from his own words,
Prolegomena, p. 143. On two successive occasions for six
hours each, he was allowed to have the great Codex in his
hands. He declares that in that short period he prepared four
fac-similes for publication, and also ran through the whole work,
" universum librum attente percurrissem." Such rapid colla-
tion even by this extraordinary man was too rapid to be of
much critical worth.
The authorities of the Vatican rightly esteeming the great
worth of this Codex, jealously guarded it from the curiosity of
those eager to see it, and in this faithful guard may have some-
times excluded good critics from collating it.
Certain obscure bigots complain of this, as they systemati-
cally complain of everything Rome does, but the real student
of history will commend such custody, which has preserved for
us a literature through the vicissitudes of time.
We are more fortunate than our predecessors, for in our
days a splendid edition has been published, under the auspices
of Pius IX., by C. Vercellone and J. Cozza. This edition is
based almost wholly on the labors of the great critic, Cardi-
nal Mai.
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.
During the four years succeeding the autumn of 1840, by
visiting the libraries of Paris, England, Holland, Switzerland, and
Italy, I had nearly completed a design of promoting a critical
study of the Sacred Books, conceived in the preparation of
the first edition of the New Testament. I then desired noth-
ing more than to visit the East itself, whence so many monu-
ments of ancient learning have come into the libraries of
Europe. Through the particular favor of Frederic Augustus,
the excellent King of Saxony, this desire was so gratified
that I spent most of the year of 1844 in exploring the countries
of the Orient ; chiefly those in which the old monasteries
exist.
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 449
It is well known that this Oriental journey has become
famous through some Greek fragments of the Old Testament,
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 chanced
upon a basket, containing remnants of various torn and de-
stroyed codices. Many of these fragments had already found
their way to the fire-place. As these fragments were con-
sidered worthless and were about to be destroyed, I easily ob-
tained possession of them. I was refused, however, other
larger parts of the same Codex, which were rescued from the
same neglect, and in which the whole of Isaias and the Books
of the Maccabees were written. I exhorted that these por-
tions should be preserved with greater care, hoping to after-
wards agree upon the terms of their surrender to me.
Being disappointed, contrary to my expectation, in such
negotiation, I determined, in my second journey to the East
in 1853, to accurately transcribe all that remained of the afore-
said Codex, for a future edition.
But when I visited Sinai's Mount and St. Catherine's
Monastery the second time, I neither saw the treasure which
I sought, nor learned whither it had gone. I concluded from
this, that it had been carried to Europe, and that there was no
hope left of my possessing it. In 1855 when I published the
first volume of my Monumenta Sacra, I edited therewith the
last page of the text of Isaias (which I had already transcribed
in 1844), and I made known that this Codex Frederico-Augus-
tanus, and also the remaining fragments of the same ancient
book, wheresoever found, had been saved by me from de-
struction.
Having maturely thought of the project, toward the close
of 1856, with the consent of Paul of Falkenstein, one of the
chief ministers of the King of Saxony, I delivered letters to
the Russian Legate at Dresden, asking for the authority of
the Emperor Alexander II. to set out for the East to investi-
gate and acquire possession of old Codices, both Greek and
Oriental, chiefly those of the Sacred Books. The eminent men
Abraham de Noroff and E. de Kowalevsky interceded for me,
also the Illustrious Theodore de Grimm, the former tutor of
Constantine, the Emperor's brother, and actually instructor of
cc
460 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
the Crown Prince Nicolas. The Imperial Academy of St.
Petersburg endorsed my petition, and the Empress Maria, with
her characteristic greatness of soul favored me, and thus the
most renowned Emperor, a man indeed upright and good, in
the middle of September 1858, bade me execute my proposal.
But at this time my seventh edition of the New Testament
claimed my attention. This edition was finished at the close
of 1858, and in the beginning of 1859, ^ started on my journey
to the East. I made my third visit to the monastery of St.
Catherine on the last day of January, and was most kindly
welcomed by the brothers.
The venerable bishop expressed a wish that by my studies,.
I might find new proofs for the divine truths.
I had already sent one of the servants to procure camels,
intending to set out for Egypt on the 7th of February, when,
on the 4th of the same month, I was walking with the econome
of the monastery, and conversing of the Septuagint. I had
brought to the monks several copies of my edition of this, and
some copies of my New Testament.
On returning from the walk, we entered the econome's
room. Thereupon he said he had a copy of the Septuagint
and he placed it before me, wrapped in a cloth. I opened the
cloth and saw something beyond my hopes. For there before
me, I saw very numerous fragments of the Codex, which I
had long declared to be the most ancient of the Greek codices,
extant in parchment. Among these fragments I perceived,
still in preservation, not only many books of the Old Testa-
ment (including those taken from the waste basket in 1844),
but also, which was by far the most valuable, the whole New
Testament in perfect condition, and augmented by the entire
Epistle of Barnabas, to which was added the first part of
Pastor. I could not disguise the astonishment wrought by
such a discovery. With the consent of the steward, I trans-
ferred to my room the book, or rather the fragments of the
book ; for each leaf was rent into many parts and was covered
only by the cloth. The steward himself had taken the frag-
ments from the cell of the (TKevo(f>v\a^, which contained writ-
ten and printed books, the greater part liturgical with varied
liturgical apparatus. He had collected all the extant frag-
ments of the Codex shortly after my first eastern journey. I
took them all to my room and then I fully realized how great
a treasure I held in my hands, and I praised and thanked God,
the author of so great a benefit to the Church, to letters, and
to myself. I spent the first night in transcribing the Epistle
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 451
of Barnabas, for to sleep at such a time seemed unlawful,
"quippe dormire nefas videbatur." The day following I ar-
ranged with the monks, that if the superiors at Cairo should so
order, they would send the Codex thither to me to be trans-
cribed. Setting out on the appointed day with the kind letters
of the monk Cyrill, the learned librarian of the monastery, I
reached Cairo the thirteenth day of February, where, through
the favor of Agathangelus, the venerable prior of the cloister,
the enterprise so prospered, that, a thing seemingly incredible,
a messenger traversed the deserts of Arabia and Egypt twice,
within nine days, and I received from the hands of the Super-
iors the ancient parchments, on the twenty-fourth day of the
same month. As had been agreed upon, the transcription of
the whole Codex was undertaken without delay, and with the
help of two natives, one a doctor of medicine, the other a
pharmacist, it was finished within two months.
Although I revised, letter by letter the work of my asso-
ciates, and also that which I transcribed with my own hand, I
plainly perceived that the method of the old correctors was
greatly defective, and that the Codex needed a revision, in
order that I might confidently undertake an accurate edition
of it.
In the meantime, I proposed to the venerable brethren of
Sinai that they should send the Codex through me, as a pledge
of their special affection to Alexander II., the ornament and
defender of the orthodox faith. They heartily approved of
my proposition.
But now Constantius, the Archbishop, who had formerly
been patriarch, died. The administrator of the college in the
interim, an eminent man, had, by unanimous vote, been chosen
to succeed the deceased prelate, but had not yet been conse-
crated. At this juncture a certain one, who arrogated to him-
self authority, opposed me, but the venerable college con-
ceded what I greatly urged, that I might bring the Codex to
St. Petersburg to prepare from it a correct edition. It was
only loaned me for a time, till the Archbishop should ratify in
the name of the college its perpetual transfer. On this con-
dition the Codex was delivered to me at Cairo, on the 28th of
September, 1859.
Recalling the pleasant memory of this affair, I am moved
to gratitude towards the venerable brethren for their benevo-
lence, and trust in me, and I commend them for the nobility
of mind and liberality with which they promoted the cause of
Christian learning."
452 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
Tischendorf arrived in St. Petersburg in November, where
he was received with great respect by the Emperor. The
Codex was exposed to public view in the imperial library for
two weeks. By the aid of the Emperor, type was cast by
which the great Codex was faithfully reproduced. The labor
expended in this edition can scarely be realized. In i86i the
great work was accomplished, and on the nth of September
of that year the splendid edition was presented to the Empe-
ror. In 1863, Tischendorf published an edition of the New
Testament for popular use, in which he has reproduced the
exact form of the original Codex in modern Greek
characters.
" The Codex Sinaiticus, as we learn from Tischendorf's
Notitia, consists of 345^ leaves of beautiful vellum, of which
199 contain portions of the Septuagint version. 147^2 leaves
contain the whole New Testament, Barnabas' Epistle, and por-
tions of Hermas' Shepherd. Each page comprises four columns,
with 48 lines in each column, of continuous, noble, simple
uncials. The poetical books of the Old Testament, however,
being written in crrixoi^ admit of only two columns on a page.
The order of the sacred books is remarkable, though not unpre-
cedented. St. Paul's Epistles precede the Acts, and among
them, that to the Hebrews follows II. Thess., standing on the
same page with it. Breathings and accents there are none ;
the apostrophus, and a single point for punctuation, are entirely
absent for pages together, yet occasionally are rather thickly
studded, not only in places where a later hand has been unusu-
ally busy. Even the words very usually abridged (except
^cr, K(T., Lcr, x"^") "^^^ which are constant) are here written in full,
as TraTTjp, BaveiS ; the practice varies for vio<i, ovpavo<i, avdpcoiro^;.
We find lapaTjX', LcrX or njX: iepova-aXrj/x, hj/jl^ I'V^H'', or vXfi.
Tischendorf considers the two points over iota and upsilon
(which are sometimes wanting) as seldom from the first hand.
Words are divided at the end of a line as capriciously as can
be imagined : thus K in OTK is repeatedly separated without
need. Small letters, of the most perfect shape, freely occur in
all places, especially at the end of lines. Numerals are repre-
sented by letters, with a straight line placed over them (e. g.
/x Mark. I. 13). Although there are no capitals, the initial
letter of a line which begins a sentence generally stands out
from the rank of the rest. The annexed plates exhibit Heb.
XII. 27. — XIII. in original characters reproduced by Tischen-
dorf, and in cursive characters.
T H M T u> N c XKe Y
CI HCDcnenoiH
M e H CI> N 1 H X M 1 M-l
T>KM H cxKe-yoM eNK
h\ O R XC I \e I XN XCA
X€YTON nXJ'A^AKU.
EXMOKITeceXOM^
X KF » »^ ^ ^ CAXTpT
OM eN 6 YXf ecTcu*
TCU OCJ H € TKe7>x
g I KCK Kl'i^^O YC KN
rxp o e c H M cu N n-jr
KXTXNXXICKON
H <h\ XXX€ XO I XHe
M^TCUTHNTCblXO
i:€M 1XM M HeniKK
exKieceeMxnrxY
THcrxpexxeoNTi
MeC5.eMlCANT€c
xrrexoYc
Ml M NHCKeceXIT^
KeCMlCUNCOCCT
AexeMeNoiTcow
KXKOYXOY^^<^^^"
CUCKXlXYTO»ON,
Te C€ Kl COJ) M XTl '
TIMlOCOrXMOCeN
nXCI N KXI H KOIT*
XM lXNTOCnofN*7-
rxpKXiMoixoYc
KfiMioec
Kcbixxf rYpocoTPO
hocxfKOYMertoi^ exa^THcnvxHCT^i
Ymintonaoton
yo voy^^ n xm xg€
CJDpOYNTeCTHNtK
BXCIHTHCXNXaf.
dbHCM IMeiCOXlTH
hiCTIN
]cxcexeecKxicH
M ePON OAYTOCK
€1 CTOYCXICD H X*
/^ixxxxicnoiKi
XXICKXiXeNXiCMi
nxPX4^efeceeKX
XONrxpXXf ITI^e
K XI OYCe e TH n kh*
XI KN OY B f<^ •^^"•'^
en oicoYKcijd>e
XH ejH CXNOlrtcpi
nxTOYNiec
exoMeNeYCixn^H
tioNei[OY4>xrer
YKe xoyci m ex-y
CIXN OITHCKHHH
xxTfCYONTeccDN
rXfeiccbepeTxu-
OJNTOAI MXnepi
XMXfTIACeiCTXX
n XXI xTOYA^r X i €
|> e cx> cTo YT<^ M jx
CCJL>M XTXKXTXKXI
€TX|€TcUTHCnX
pen ROXHC
AlOKAIICl'NXXn
xc H A I XTO Y » X I oy
XI MXTOCTONXX**
TocrxpeiPHKeN-y
M H cexN cuoYJ^onr
MHceerKXTXxei
TAc H M xcxerki ki
K c e M o 1 R o H e o*f <
OYcbORHeHCOMAI
Tin OIHCeiMOiKH
e|>ajrTOC
M N H MONey€T€j^
HroYM€Ma3NY"^
OITI NecexAxH-x
YNexep:
o xn pocXY TOM £2*
THCnXf eM BOXH*^
TONONCIXICMOH
XYnnoY^^^f ^ '^ T^"
OYrxpexoMeH***
ACM e M OYCXH n-
A I NXAXXTH N M*X
xoycAM eniZHT"T
i^ I xYToyxM x<f>^p-
MeNoycixNArN*
cecjD CXI An XNT-*^
jco e CD Toy re ct i h
KxpnoNxeiKecuN
OM 0>vOroYNT<^»^
Tcuo N OM XTlATT^
TH CAee yno 1 1 >vci^
KOINCUNfXCMIi
€ni\KNexNecee
To I xyrxi c FiKfaYci
A^ICeYXFeCTlTAlo
e c
n € I eeceero i c hk
M6NOICyMCjDH
KAiyneiKeTeAy^'*^
Ayroirxf/^rpYnNoy
c\ NYneprcuN^y
XCUNYMCDNOJCK
TON KnOACJjCOH
T6 Ci N AM eTAXA|'^f
- TO YTO n O I CJDCI N
KAl MHCTeNA:zc5"
TecAAYciTe\ec
TAPYMINTOYTO
nroceyxeceep^
GAJnkpOTl KAAH N
CYNI AHClN€XO
M e N e N n AC I N KA.
ACUCe€AONT6CA
N AcTf ed>eceAJ
n epiCCOT6.)>CUCAe
n Af AKAACUTOyro
n O I H C AJ I N ATAX'I
ON ArTOKAXACTA
BCD Yjs^ IN
O AeecTH ceifHHi-
O KN APArCJD N €KN*
KPCUHTONnOlM*
N ATCO N n p O B AT-"
TONMerANeHAI
HATIAIAOHKH^AI
CDNIOYTONKNH
MCUN I N K ATApTI
CAlYMACeNHAN .
Ti AFA e CD e I cTOn-i
HCAITOeeAHMA
AYTo Y^^'y^ ^ O I
<X> N e N H M I NTO^T
ApecTON€NCJDni»^
AYTOYA I Ki Yxyco h
A^oiKeicrroYCAfcij
N KCTCUN AlCUNClJ
AMHN
nApKKAACDAeyMAf
AAeA'd^OIANexe
c e € TO Y AO ro YTH «^
n ApAK AH CeCJDCKAMtJf
/s^iABpAxecuNen*
CTIAAYHIN
re I N CDC KereroH
AAeAcboNHMcUN
Ti M o e e OH xnoK*
AY^^^ONNieeoy
6AMTAXlONepXHi\i,
ceeo^oHAiYMAf
AC n ACAce Ai n >nm
TACTOyC H TOY H ^
NOyCYMCUNKAJ
n ANTACTOYCATI-T
AcnxzoNTAiY'^A-
O I An OTH CI TAAIK*
H X AF I CM CTAH AH
YLU N YH CD N^»-»^^^>^
n p«c 'BpAi-Y
i TO So tn arral hrikor.
i nf|v Tov aaXsu
^ OpiSVOV {J.£ta0£ *
I' . (JIV txy TCETCOIT)
jievov ha, pitvTj
Ta jxTj aaX£U0(X£va
hio ^aaiXeiav aaa
XeuTov rapaXajji.
^avovTsa sxojjir
;^a(jtv Bt, Tfjff Xaxpsu
0|Ji£v euapecToa
"CO 00 [xsTa £uXa
^ia(T xat S£ourf xat *
•yap Ga tjijlov itup
xaxavaX'.axov-
TQ 9iXaB£Xcpia yi£
vexo TYjv 91X0 '
|£vtav yiY] cTciXftT' ■•
OaveaOE ^ta xau
'01(7 7ap eXaOov th
veer f£vL(7avT£a
a'YYsXoua
p.i[xvTfiax£(70at roT"
Se(j|j.iov ^,)(7 mT
SsSejievoi Tttv
y-axouxou{jL£vcr
<o(7 xat auToi o»
Tea &v aoitaxi-
ttpiiocp Yajtoo" ev
icacFiy xai tj xoittj
otjjtiavToa iropvouff
•^aj^ xat. jjLot/ou(J
ttcpiXap-^upOff T^o
t:o(7 apxou{j.£voi
TOtc irapouaiv au
T0(7 Yap £ipTix£v 0^
[jLTj ae avo ouS ot>
JIT] 7e eyxaTaXet
7:0 o(7Te Gappo\»**
Tacf Y][i,aa Xe^eiv
yr; ejjiot ^oiQOca- *
ov ^o^TjOriacjJiai
Tt T:0'-7]a£t {JLOttt»
|XV;f)[JlOV£U£T£ tgT
T)Y0V|JL£VOV UJJLgT
Uy.IV TOV XoYov
Toy 6t> ov avaSe
QpouvTsa TYJV ex
^a(7(.v T7)(7 avaaxpo
TC'.aTlV
ia /a e/Oea xai (nj
jxepov auxocT v;
elcr xou(7 aiovaa
Xaic7 xat, ^evai<7 jJiTfj
TCapacpepeaCe xa
Xov -yap xapixt ^e
^aio.uaOe xi^v xap
Biav ou ^pb[i,oC(7u^
evoia oux. ocpe
XifjGTfiCTav 01 Tuept
Tcaxouvxea ^
exojxev GuoriaaxTj
piov £^ 01) 9aY£r
oux e^ouaiv e^ou
ciav 01 XTj axTiviq
Xaxpeuovxea ov
Y*P eia9£p£xat. ^o
«v TO at{i.a nepi .
apLo-pTiaa eia Ta a.
ryta Sia to\> apx^e
peoa XQUT0V Ta
<7Q{4aTa xafaxat
eTat e?(.> tYjo" Tta
'peji^oXTjcj
Sio xat ia Iva ayi
affT) Sia Tou (.Btou
ai[jLaT0(7 TOV Xad"
elw TT|(7 TUuXYja TQ6 '
vuv elepx^jxe
Ga Tcpoo" auTov e|o
TY^cr TCapepL^oXYja
TOV oveiSia^ov
autOU 9£pCVT£(7
ov Y^p ^x^\t.zv o
Be p.£vou(7av tto
Xiv aXXa ttjv jxeX
Xouaav ETCt^YiTOv
jxev
St auTou ava9£po *
l^ev Guaiav aive
CEoa SiaTtavTOSJ"
TO 0G) TOUTecrxtv
xapTCOv xetXeov
QJJLOXOYOUVXOV
xo ovojxaxi auxou
TYiG S£ £U7i:ouaa y;
xotvoviaa [jly)
ETCiXavGaveaGE
TotauTttia Yap Gucjt
'iOLiG euapecTiTai
TUEiGEaGe Toia tjyou
|ji£voia iipiov
xai uTuetxexe au '
Toi Yo^P aYpuTTvou ^
civ-iJTuep Tov^l^u
J/OV UJJLOV OCX Xo
YO'' aTCoSoCTov
Tea iva pteTa xapaij
TOUTO TCOtOdlV
xat jjLYj ffTeva^o"
Te(7 aXugtTeXea
YOp OpilV TOUXO
T:poa£iJX£(7G£ tc£ •
pi "yjiJiov OTt, xaXiQ"' ^*
Ga Yap on xaXT)v ^
<7UVtST)aiV £^0
{jLev ev -aaiv xa
Xoc GeXovTea a
vaaTp£9e(7Gai
Tcepiaaoxepocr ht
TrapaxaXw touto
TcotYjaa', Iva Tax£i
ov ttTCoxaTacxa
Go iipiiv
t Be G(7 XYja eipYjviqa-
avaYaYov ex ve
xpov xov rroijie
va xov TCpo^axo"
xov jxEYav £v at
jxaxt StaGYjXTjT at
tOVtOU'TOV XV 7)
JJIOV tV XttTapTt
I7at iJjjLaa £v Trav
"tt aYaGo eia to- tuoi
7] cat TO OeXTjpia
auTou auTo Tcot "
ov ev Yj^jLtv TO eu
ap£(7T0v evoTticT
auTOu Sta tu JQ o T^
So|a et<7 TOUd' ato.,
vac; TOV atovo~
ajJLiqv-
TrapaxaXo Be u|j.a7
aS^.90t ave/e
cGe TOU XoYcu TTja.
rapaxXiqaeocr xat **
Sta ppax*6)v ei^e
(7TtXa iipitv
YetVO0'X6Te:.T0V
aBeX90v Yjpcov **
TipioGeov aitoXe
Xujjievov pi£0 ou
eav Ta^tov epx"0 '*
(jGe otj;o}xat iJ[jLacr".
acTraaaoGat 7i:av
Ta(7 Tovff T^You^e
voua iJixov xat
^avTacj T0U(7 aYto\«?.
ao"7:a^ovTat ujjiaa
ot aTCO x-qc tTaXta,5r,
Yj X*?'-'^ l^-^'^a ^av
TOV iJji.ov^*
TCpoff ' e^patouff
454 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
The vellum of the manuscript is very thin and smooth. Ac-
cording to Tischendorf it was made of the skins of antelopes
or asses. The fleshy side of the skin, being softer, has not
preserved the writing so plainly as the other side. Every skin
was folded so as to form eight pages.
Many corrections of later hands appear in the Codex.
Historical data are wanting to determine its age. From
internal evidence Tischendorf refers it to the fourth century,
and his judgment is acquiesced in by nearly all critics. Tischen-
dorf exalts its value above that of any other Codex in the
world, but perhaps the highest tribute compatible with truth
would be that it ranks next in excellence to the Vatican
Codex.
The Codex contains all the books of the New Testament ;
and adds Pastor and Barnabas' Epistle. The Old Testament
is mutilated so that nearly all the historical books are wanting.
The Codex is preserved in the Imperial Library at St.
Petersburg.
The Codex Alexandrinus, or Alexandrian manuscript,
which is noted by the letter A in Wetstein's, Griesbach's, and
Scholz's critical editions of the New Testament, consists of
four folio volumes ; the three first contain the whole of the
Old Testament, together with some apocryphal books, and the
fourth comprises the New Testament, the First Epistle of
Clement to the Corinthians, and the apocryphal Psalms
ascribed to Solomon. In the New Testament there is wanting
the beginning as far as Matt. XXV. 6. o vvfi(j)Lo<i epx^rai; like-
wise from John VI. 50. to VIII. 52, and from II. Cor. IV. 13. to
XII. 7. The Psalms are preceded by the epistle of Athanasius
to Marcellinus, and followed by a catalogue containing those
which are to be used in prayer for each hour, both of the day
and of the night ; also by fourteen hymns, partly apocryphal,
partly biblical, the eleventh of which is the hymn of the Virgin
Mary, termed the Magnificat, (Luke I. 47 — 55.) and here en-
titled 'n-poaevxv Ma/3ta? tt;? @€otokov, or, ^Ae prayer of Mary
tJie mother of God ; the arguments of Eusebius are annexed to
the Psalms, and his Canons to the Gospels. This manuscript
is now preserved in the British Museum, where it was deposited
in 1753. It was sent as a present to King Charles I. from
Cyrillus Lucaris, a native of Crete, and patriarch of Constanti-
nople, by Sir Thomas Rowe, ambassador from England to the
Grand Seignior, in the year 1628. Cyrillus brought it with
him from Alexandria, where, probably, it was written. In a
schedule annexed to it, he gives this account ; that it was
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 465
written, according to tradition, by Thecla, a noble Egyptian
lady, about thirteen hundred years ago, a little after the coun-
cil of Nice. He adds, that the name of Thecla, at the end of
the book, was erased ; but that this was the case with other
books of the Christians, after Christianity was extinguished in
Egypt by the Mohammedans ; and that recent tradition
records the fact of the laceration and erasure of Thecla's name.
The proprietor of this manuscript, before it came into the
hands of Cyrillus Lucaris, had written an Arabic subscription,
expressing that this book was said to have been written with
the pen of Thecla the Martyr.
Various disputes have arisen with regard to the place
whence it was brought, and where it was written, to its
antiquity, and of course to its real value. Some critics have
bestowed upon it the highest commendation, whilst it has been
equally depreciated by others. Of its most strenuous adver-
saries, Wetstein seems to have been the principal. The place
from which it was sent to England was, without doubt,
Alexandria, and hence it has been called the Codex Alexan-
drinus. As to the place where it was written, there is a con-
siderable difference of opinion. Matthaeus Muttis, who was a
contemporary friend, and deacon of Cyrillus, and who after-
wards instructed in the Greek language John Rudolph Wet-
stein, uncle of the celebrated editor of the Greek Testament,
bears testimony, in a letter written to Martin Bogdan, a phy-
sician in Berne, dated January 14, 1664, that it had been
brought from one of the twenty-two monasteries in Mount
Athos, which the Turks never destroyed, but allowed to con-
tinue upon the payment of tribute. Dr. Woide endeavors to
weaken the evidence of Muttis, and to render the testimony
of the elder Wetstein suspicious ; but Spohn shows that the
objections of Woide are ungrounded. Allowing their reality,
we cannot infer that Cyrillus found this manuscript in Alexan-
dria. Before he went to Alexandria, he spent some time on
Mount Athos, the repository and manufactory of manuscripts
of the New Testament, whence a great number has been
brought into the west of Europe, and a still greater number
has been sent to Moscow. It is therefore probable, indepen-
dently of the evidence of Muttis, that Cyrillus procured it
there either by purchase or by present, took it with him to
Alexandria, and brought it thence on his return to Constan-
tinople.
The antiquity of this manuscript has also been the subject
of controversy. Grabe and Schulze think that it might have
456 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
been written before the end of the fourth century, which, says
Michaelis, is the very utmost period that can be allowed, be-
cause it contains the Epistles of Athanasius. Oudin places it
in the tenth century. Wetstein refers it to the fifth, and sup-
poses that it was one of the manuscripts collected at Alex-
andria in 615, for the Syriac version. Semler refers it to the
seventh century. Montfaucon is of opinion that neither the
Codex Alexandrinus, nor any Greek manuscript, can be said
with great probability to be much prior to the sixth century.
Michaelis apprehends that this manuscript was written after
Arabic was become the native language of the Egyptians,
that is, one, or rather two centuries after Alexandria was
taken by the Saracens, which happened in the year 640, be-
cause the transcriber frequently confounds M and B, which is
often done in the Arabic ; and he concludes that it is not more
ancient than the eighth century. Woide, after a great display
of learning, with which he examines the evidence for the
antiquity of the Codex Alexandrinus, concludes that it was
written between the middle and the end of the fourth century.
It cannot be allowed a greater antiquity, because it has not
only the titXoi or Ke<f)aX.aia majora, but the K€<f>a\aia minora,
or Ammonian sections, accompanied with the references to the
Canons of Eusebius. Woide's arguments have been objected
to by Spohn. Some of the principal arguments advanced by
those who refer this manuscript to the fourth or fifth centuries,
are the following : The Epistles of Saint Paul are not divided
into chapters like the Gospels, though this division took place
so early as 396, when to each chapter was prefixed a super-
scription. The Codex Alexandrinus has the Epistles of Clement
of Rome ; but these were forbidden to be read in the churches
by the Council of Laodicea, in 364, and that of Carthage, in
419. Hence Schulze has inferred, that it was written before
the year 364 ; and he produces a new argument for its an-
tiquity, deduced from the last of the fourteen hymns found in
it after the psalms, which is superscribed vfjivo<; €co0Lvo<i, and is
called the grand doxology ; for this hymn has not the clause
ayio^ ^eo9j ayiof; La')(ypo'i^ ayto<; aOavaro^^ eXerjaov ijiJui<;, which
was used between the years 434 and 446; and therefore the
manuscript must have been written before this time. Wetstein
thinks that it must have been written before the time of
Jerome, because the Greek text of this manuscript was altered
from the old Italic.
Dietelmaier, who has more recently investigated this ques-
tion, is of opinion that this manuscript was written towards
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 457
the close of the fourth, or early in the fifth century ; and this,
which is the most probable opinion, is adopted by Baber.
The value of the Alexandrian manuscript has been differ-
ently appreciated by different writers. Wetstein is no great
admirer of it, nor does Michaelis estimate it highly, either on
account of its internal excellence or the value of its readings.
It must be conceded that it is far below the rank of Codd. B and ^.
The Alexandrian manuscript is written in uncial or capital
letters, without any accents or marks of aspiration, but with a
few abbreviations.
A fac-simile of the Codex Alexandrinus, containing the
New Testament, was published at London in 1786, in folio,
by the late Dr. Woide, assistant librarian of the British Museum,
with types cast for the purpose, line for line, without intervals
between the words, precisely as in the original.
Codex Ephraemi, C. No. 9, in the Imperial Library of
Paris, is a most valuable palimpsest containing portions of the
Septuagint version of the Old Testament on 64 leaves ; and
fragments of every part of the New on 145 leaves, amounting
on the whole to less than two-thirds of the volume.
See plates on following page.
This manuscript seems to have been brought from the East
by Andrew John Lascar [ti535], a learned Greek patronized by
Lorenzo de' Medici ; it once belonged to Cardinal Nicolas
Ridolphi of that family, was brought into France by Queen
Catherine de Medici, and so passed into the Royal Library at
Paris. The ancient writing is barely legible, having been
almost removed about the twelfth century to receive some
Greek works of St. Ephraem, the great Syrian Father [299-
378] ; a chemical preparation applied at the instance of Fleck
in 1834, though it revived much that was before illegible, has
defaced the vellum with stains of various colors, from green
and blue to black and brov/n. The older writing was first
noticed by Peter Allix nearly two centuries ago ; various
readings extracted from it were communicated by Boivin to
Kuster, who published them (under the Notation of Paris 9)
in his edition of Mill's N. T. 171 1. A complete collation of
the New Testament was first made by Wetstein in 1716, then
very young, for Bentley's projected edition, for which labor (as
he records the fact himself) he paid Wetstein ^50. This col-
lation Wetstein of course used for his own Greek Testament
of 175 1-2, and though several persons subsequently examined
the manuscript, and so became aware that more might be
gathered from it, it was not until 1843 that Tischendorf
458
THE UNCIAL CODICES.
«^
?:
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 459
brought out at Leipsic his full and noble edition of the New-
Testament portion; the Old Testament he published in 1845.
Although Tischendorf complains of the typographical errors
made in his absence in the former of these two volumes, and
has corrected them in the other, they probably comprise by far
the most masterly production of this nature up to that date
published ; it is said too that none but those who have seen
Codex C, can appreciate the difficulty of deciphering some
parts of it. In shape. Codex C is about the size of Cod. A, but
not quite so tall ; its vellum is hardly so fine as that of Cod A
and a few others, yet it is sufficiently good. In this copy there is
but one column in a page which contains from 40 to 46 lines
(usually 41), the characters being a little smaller than either A
or B, and somewhat more elaborate. The uncial writing is
continuous, the punctuation of Cod. C, like that of A and B, con-
sisting only of a single point, mostly but not always put level
with the top of the preceding letter. Wherever such a point
was employed, a space of one letter broad was usually left
vacant. These points are most common in the later books of
the N. T. Three correctors at least have been at work on Cod.
C, greatly to the perplexity of the critical collator: they are
respectively indicated by Tischendorf as C*, C**, C***. The
earliest may have been of the sixth century; the second per-
haps of the ninth, who revised such portions only as were
adapted to ecclesiastical use ; he inserted many accents, the
rough breathing, and some notes. By him, or by the third
hand (whose changes are but few), small crosses were inter-
polated as stops, agreeably to the fashion of their times."
(Scrivener op. cit.)
Critics refer Codex C. to the fifth century.
"Cod. Claromontanus, D, No. 107 of the Imperial
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. The Greek and Latin are both
written continuously, but in a stichometrical form ; the Greek
as in Cod. Bezae, stands of the left or first page of the opened
book, not on the right, as in the Cod. Laudianus. Each
page has but one column of about 21 lines, so that in this copy,
as in the Codex Bezae, the Greek and Latin are in parallel
lines, but on separate pages. The ink has much faded, or gone
460 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
off upon the opposite page ; otherwise the book is in good
condition. We reproduce on opposite page a fac-simile of
Romans VII. 4-7, from the Greek of Codex Claromontanus.
The leaves 162 and 163 of the Codex are palimpsest, and this
plate is taken from that portion. The plate furnishes a
good specimen of stichometry and palimpsest documents.
It contains all St. Paul's Epistles (the Hebrews after
Philemon), except Rom. I. 1-7; 27-30, both Greek and
Latin ; Rom. I. 24-27 in the Latin is supplied in a later but
very old hand, as also is I. Cor. XIV. 13-22 in the Greek. The
Latin of I. Cor. XIV. 8-18 ; Hebr. XIII. 21-23 is lost. The
Epistle to the Hebrews has been erroneously imputed by
some to a later scribe, although it is not included in the list of
the sacred books, and of the number of their arixot or versus,
which stands immediately before the Hebrews in this Codex ;
but the same list overlooks the Epistle to the Philippians,
which has never been doubted to be St. Paul's : in this man-
uscript, however, the Epistle to the Colossians precedes that
to the Philippians. Our earliest notice of it is derived from
the Preface to Beza's 3d edition of the N. T. (20 Feb. 1582) ;
he there describes it as of equal antiquity with his copy of the
Gospels (D), and states that it had been found ' in Claromon-
tano apud Bellovacos coenobio,' at Clermont near Beauvais.
Although Beza sometimes, through inadvertence calls his
Codex of the Gospels Claromontanus, there seems no reason
for disputing with Wetstein the correctness of his account,
though it throws no light on the manuscript's early history.
From Beza it passed into the possession of Claude du Puy ;
Councillor of Paris, probably on Beza's death [1605], thence to
his sons Jacques and Pierre du Puy. Before the death of Jacques
(who was the King's Librarian) in 1656, it had been bought by
Louis XIV. for the Royal Library at Paris. Beza made some,
but not a considerable use of this document. In Walton's Poly-
glott were inserted 2245 readings sent by the du Puys to Usher
{Mill, N.T. Proleg. § 1284). Wetstein collated it twice in early
life (1715-6); Tregelles examined it in 1849, ^"*^ compared his
results with the then unpublished transcript of Tischendorf ;
which proved on its appearance (1852) the most difficult, as
well as one of the most important, of his critical works ; so
hard it had been found at times to determine satisfactorily the
original readings of a manuscript, which had been corrected by
nine different hands, ancient and modern. The date of the
codex is doubtless the sixth century, in the middle or towards
the end of it. The Latin letters b and d are the latest
n^mit fu>Kiai
I<Aiy MeiC ft:®A MA FIDO} ITerm>MO M CD
-AlATOVca>MATOCT"dyxV'-' J ' - '!■' '■• t ; ''
e8C7;6r6Me'co4i(Y'MAC(3Ti*fC!i?. ' i
:rcuc5KMeKpcbfjert:peoHTf- -m),
- I NAKApr i.od>opHcU>i^en^ru>dcuf'j/i n
U'rerXpliMhHcM fMGAFK) < inijf/
TAr FAOHMA'rArcbMAMAprrid)Mi
rAAiAToyfiOMoyeMej'rerror)! > >i.'n ^j'
eMTOicMeAecm»m<cur/r /!!(/ij|>
e KTTO KA ^1 lod) 0|> >1cA iT^cboA HA^r€*v*^ '' '/
w yw ^i A e KATu j>r riciw Kf ew
AnoTdyNdMoyrn^y0iAMiAa\»v ^t^
CMUJKATeiXOMeOA'M » '
cu creAoyAeVfiH HM^ce*^is<?NoTsMTjf Jku
KA I oynAA^^prjri' iiiTpAi^^ A roe » ' i^ Jr.* j
'loy^Je^oVMe^i^'• n^rf
pMOMpC5MAjpTJAM^jr#>tft)K*or/ri>/f/
aaaatAmamAp TANdYi^^Pisia)-|.-^:;i jf i ! i
eiMHAiAMo'MJoy , r.;»f ^iy.n a iortr-c/
-^j
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 461
in form, and are much like those in the Cod. Bezae,
which in many points Cod. Claromontanus strongly resembles."
Codex D of the Gospels and Acts, called Codex
Bezae GraecO-Latinus, belongs to the University Library
at Cambridge. It was presented to the University in 1581 by
Theodore Beza, for whom and his master Calvin, the heads of
that learned body then cherished a veneration which already
boded ill for the peace of the English Church. Between the
Gospels and the Acts, the Catholic Epistles once stood, of
which only a few verses remain in the Latin version (IIL John
V. 11-15), followed by the words " epistulae Johanis IH. ex-
plicit, incipit actus apostolorum," as if St. Jude's Epistle were
displaced or wanting. There are not a few hiatus, both in the
Greek and Latin texts.
Beza related to the University of Cambridge in 1581, that
he obtained the volume in 1562 from the monastery of St.
Irenaeus, at Lyons (" oriente ibi civili bello "), where it had
long lain buried (" postquam ibi in pulvere diu jacuisset ").
This great city, it must be remembered, was sacked in that
very year by the infamous Des Adrets, whom it suited to
espouse for a while the cause of the Huguenots ; and we can
hardly doubt that someone who had shared in the plunder of
the abbey conveyed this portion of it to Beza, whose influence
at that juncture was paramount among the French Reformed.
Patrick Young, the librarian of Charles L, who first collated
Cod. A, and published from it the Epistles of Clement in 1633,
had also the honor of being the first to completely examine
Cod. D. An unusually full collation was made for Walton's
Polyglott by Usher, who devoted to these studies the doleful
leisure of his latter years. But a manuscript replete as this is
with variations from the sacred text,jbeyond all other example,
could be adequately represented only by being published in
full ; a design entrusted by the University of Cambridge to
Dr. Thomas Kipling, afterwards Dean of Peterborough, whose
"Codex Theodori Bezae Cantabrigiensis," 1793, 2 vol. fol. (in
type imitating the original handwriting much more closely
than in Codices A, C, and the rest), is believed to be a faithful
transcript of the text.
The Codex Bezae is a quarto volume, 10 inches high by 8
broad; of 414 leaves (whereof 11 are more or less mutilated,
and 9 by later hands), with one column on a page, the Greek
text and its Latin version being parallel, the Greek on
the left, or verso of each leaf, and the Latin on the right,
opposite to it, on the recto of the next. Notwithstanding the
462 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
Alexandrine forms that abound in it more than in any other
copy, and which have been held to prove the Egyptian origin
of Codd. A,B.C, the fact of its having a Latin version sufficiently
attests its Western origin. The vellum is not quite equal in
fineness to that of a few others. There are thirty-three lines
in every page, and these of unequal length, as this manuscript
is arranged in crrCxot, being the earliest in date that is so. The
Latin is placed in the same line, and as nearly as possible in
the same order, as the corresponding Greek.
The characters are of the same size as in C, smaller than in
A, B, but betray a later age than any of these, although the
Latin, as well as the Greek, is written continuously, excepting
that in the titles and subscriptions of the several books (as in
Codd. D, H, of St. Paul) the words are separated.
The following judgment has been passed upon the Codex
by Westcott and Hort : That it is substantially a Western
text of the second century, with certain additions of the fourth
century : That notwithstanding a vast number of errors, it is
valuable in the reconstruction of the original text: And that it
gives a more faithful representation of the manner in which
the Gospel and Acts were read in the third century, and,
probably, in the second, than any other existing Greek
Codex.
Codex Basiliensis E contains the four Gospels, excepting
Luke in. 4-15; XXIV. 47-53, and was written about the
middle of the eighth century. Three leaves, on which are
Luke I. 69— II. 4; XII. 58— XIII. 12; XV. 5-20, are in a
smaller and late hand, above the obliterated fragments of a
homily as old as the main body of the manuscript. This copy
is one of the best of the second-rate uncials, and might well
have been published at length. It was given to a religious
house in Basle by Cardinal John de Ragusio, who was sent on
a mission to the Greeks by the Council of Basle (143 1), and
probably brought it from Constantinople. Erasmus overlooked
it for later books, when preparing his Greek Testament at
Basle ; indeed, it was not brought into the Public Library
there before 1559. A collation was sent to Mill by John
Battier, Greek professor at Basle. Mill named it B. i, and
truly declared it to be "probatse fidei et bonae notae." Bengel
(who obtained a few extracts from it) calls it Basil, a, but its
first real collator was Wetstein, whose native town it adorns.
Since his time, Tischendorf in 1843, Professor Miiller of
Basle and Tregelles in 1846, have independently collated it
throughout.
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 463
Codex Boreeli F, now in the Public Library at Utrecht,
once belonged to John Boreel [d. 1629], Dutch ambassador at
the court of King James I. Wetstein obtained some readings
from it in 1730, as far as Luke XL, but stated that he knew
not where it then was. In 1830, Professor Heringa of Utrecht
discovered it in private hands at Arnheim, and procured it for
his University Library, where, in 1850, Tregelles found it,
though with some dififilculty, the leaves being torn and all
loose in a box. He made a facsimile of it. Tischendorf had
looked through it in 1841. In 1843, after Heringa's death, H. E.
Vinke published that scholar's Disputatio de Codice Boreeliano,
which includes a full and exact collation of the text. It con-
tains the Four Gospels, with many defects, some of which
have been caused since the collation was made which Wetstein
published ; hence the Codex must still sometimes be cited on
his authority as F"'. In fact, there are but 204 leaves and a
few fragments remaining, written with two columns of about
19 lines each on a page, in a tall, oblong, upright form. It is
referred by Tischendorf to the ninth, by Tregelles to the tenth
century. In St. Luke there are no less than 24 gaps. In
Wetstein's collation it began Matth. VII. 6, but now IX. i.
Other hiatus are Matth. XII. 1-44; XIII. 55— XIV. 9; XV.
20-31 ; XX. 18— XXI. 5 ; Mark I. 43— II. 8 ; II. 23— III. 5 ;
XL 6-26 ; XIV. 54— XV. 5 ; XV. 39— XVI. 19 ; John III.
5-14 ; IV. 23-38 ; V. 18-38 ; VI. 39-63 ; VII. 28— VIII. 10 ; X.
32— XI, 3 ; XL 40— XII. 3 ; XII. 14-25 ; it ends John XIII. 34.
Codex Coislin. F* i is that great copy of the Septuagint
Octateuch, the glory of the Coislin Library, first made known
by Montfaucon (Biblioth. Coislin. 171 5), and illustrated by a
facsimile in Silvestre's Pal6ogr. Univ. No. 65. It contains
227 leaves in two columns, 13 inches by 9; the fine, massive
uncials of the sixth or seventh century are much like Cod. A's
in general appearance. In the margin prima manu Wetstein
found Acts IX. 24, 25, and so inserted this as Cod. F in his
list of MSS. of the Acts. In 1842 Tischendorf observed 19
other passages of the New Testament, which he published in
his Monumenta sacra inedita (p. 400, &c.) with a facsimile.
The texts are Matth. V. 48 ; XII. 48 ; XXVII. 25 ; Luke I.
42 ; II. 24 ; XXIII. 21 ; John V. 35 ; VI. 53, 55 ; Acts IV. 33,
34; X. 13, 15; XXII. 22; I. Cor. VII. 39; XL 29; II. Cor.
III. 13; IX. 7; XI. 33; Gal. IV. 21, 22; Col. II. 16, 17; Hebr.
X. 26.
Cod. Harleian. G, 5684, or Wolfii A, and Codex H,
called Cod. Wolfii B. These two copies were brought from
464 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
the East by Andrew Erasmus Seidel. They were purchased by
La Croze,andbyhimpresented to J. C.Wolff, who published loose
extracts from them both in his Anecdola Grcsca (Vol. III. 1723),
and actually mutilated them in 172 1 in order to send pieces to
Bentley, among whose papers, in Trinity College Library
(B. XVII. 20), Tregelles found the fragments in 1845 {Account
of the Printed Text, p. 160). Subsequently Cod. G came with
the rest of the Harleian collection into the British Museum ;
Cod. H, which had long been missing, was brought to light in
the Public Library of Hamburgh, through Petersen the librarian,
in 1838. Codd. G, H, have now been thoroughly collated, both
by Tischendorf and Tregelles. Cod. G appears to be of the
tenth, Cod. H, of the ninth century. The latter is of
higher critical value. Besides the mutilated fragments at
Trinity College (Math. V. 29-31; 39-43 of Cod. G; Luke I.
3-6; 13-15 of Cod. H), many parts of both have perished, viz:
in Cod. G, 372 verses; Matth. I. i— VI. 6; VII. 25— VIII. 9;
VIII. 23— IX. 2 ; XXVIII. 18— Mark I. 13 ; XIV. 19-25 ; Luke
I. 1-13; V. 4— VII. 3 ; VIII. 46— IX. 5 ; XIL 27-51; XXIV.
41-53; John XVIII. 5-19; XIX. 4-27 (of which one later
hand supplies Matth. XXVIII. 18— Mark I. 8; John XVIII.
5-19; another Luke XII. 27-51); in Cod. H, 679 verses;
Matth. I. I— XV. 30; XXV. 33— XXVI. 3 ; Mark I. 32— II. 4;
XV. 44— XVI. 14; Luke V. 18-32 ; VI. 8-22 ; X. 2-19; John
IX. 30— X. 25; XVIII. 2-18; XX. 12-25.
Codex I, Cod. Tischendorf. II. at St. Petersburg, con-
sists of palimpsest fragments found by Tischendorf in 1853
" in the dust of an Eastern library," and published in his new
series of Monumenta sacra, Vol. I. 1855. On twenty-eight
vellum leaves (eight of them on four double leaves), Georgian
writing is above the partially obliterated Greek, which is for
the most part very hard to read. They compose fragments of
no less than seven different manuscripts ; the first two, of the
fifth century, are as old as Codd. A, C, (the first having scarcely
any capital letters, and those very slightly larger than the rest) ;
the third fragment seems of the sixth century, the fourth
scarcely less ancient. The fifth fragment, containing portions
of the Acts and St. Paul's Epistles (I. Cor. XV. 53 ; XVI. 9 ;
Tit. I. 1-13 ; Acts XXVIII. 8-17), is as old as the third, if not
as the first. The sixth and seventh fragments are of the
seventh century, viz. {Frag. 5, of two leaves) Acts II. 6-17;
XXVI. 7-t8 ; {Frag. 7, of one leaf) Acts XIII. 39-46. In all
seven are 255 verses. All except Frag. 6 are in two columns,
of from twenty-nine to eighteen lines each, and unaccentuated.
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 465
Frag. 6 has but one column on a page, with some accents.
The first five fragments, so far as they extend, must be placed
in the first rank as critical authorities. Tischendorf gives us
six facsimiles of them in the Monumenta sacra, a seventh in
Anecdota sacra et prof ana, 1855-
Cod. Cyprius K, or No. 63 of the Imperial Library at
Paris, shares only with Codd. M, S, U, the advantage of being a
complete uncial copy of the Four Gospels. It was brought
into the Colbert Library from Cyprus in 1673. Mill inserted
its readings from Simon. It was re-examined by Scholz. The
independent collations of Tischendorf and Tregelles have now
done all that can be needed for this copy. It is an oblong
4to., in compressed uncials, of about the middle of the ninth
century, having one column of about twenty-one lines on each
page, but the handwriting is irregular, and varies much in size.
Cod. Regius L, No. 62 in the Imperial Library at Paris,
is by far the most remarkable document of its age and class.
It contains the Four Gospels, except the following passages :
Matth. IV. 22— V. 14 ; XXVIII. 17-20 ; Mark X. 16-30 ; XV.
2-20; John XXI. 15-25. It was written about the eighth
century and consists of 257 leaves 4to., of thick vellum, nearly
six and a half inches square, with two columns of twenty-five
lines each on a page, regularly marked, as we so often see,
by the stylus and ruler. Wetstein collated Cod. L but loosely;
Griesbach, who set a very high value on it, studied it with
peculiar care ; Tischendorf published it in full in his Monu-
menta sacra inedita, 1S36.
Cod. Campianus M, No. 48 in the Imperial Library at
Paris, contains the Four Gospels complete in a small 4to. form,
written in very elegant and minute uncials of the end of the
ninth century, with two columns of twenty-four lines each on
a page. It has breathings, accents pretty fairly given, and a
musical notation in red, so frequent in Church manuscripts of
the age. Its readings are very good.
Codex Purpureus N. Only twelve leaves of this beau-
tiful copy remain, and its former possessor must have divided
them in order to obtain a better price from three purchasers
than from one ; four leaves being now in the British Museum
(Cotton C. XV.), six in the Vatican (No. 3785), two at Vienna
(Lambec. 2). These latter two are found at the end of a frag-
ment of Genesis in a different hand.
The London fragments (Matth. XXVI. 57-65; XXVII.
26-34; John XIV. 2-10; XV. 15-22) were collated by Wet-
stein on his first visit to England in 171 5, and marked in his
DD
466 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
Greek Testament by the letter J. Scrivener transcribed them
in 1845, ^^d announced that they contained fifty-seven various
readings, of which Wetstein had given but five. The Vienna
fragment (Luke XXIV. 13-21, 39-49) had long been known
by the descriptions of Lambeccius ; Wetstein had called it N ;
Treschow, in 1773, and Alter, in 1787, had given imperfect
collations of it. Scholz first noticed the Vatican leaves (Matth.
XIX. 6-13 ; XX. 6-22 ; XX. 29— XXI. 19), denoted them by
r, and used some readings extracted by Gaetano Marini. It
was reserved ior Tischendori {Monumenta sacra inedita, 1846)
to publish them all in full, and to determine by actual inspec-
tion that they were portions of the same manuscript, of the
date of about the end of the sixth century. This book is
written on the thinnest vellum, dyed purple, and the silver
letters (which have turned quite black) were impressed in some
way on it, but are too varied in shape and in size, to admit the
supposition of moveable type being used, as some have
thought to be the case in the Codex Argenteus of the Gothic
Gospels. The abridgements @C, XC, &c., are in gold, and
some changes have been made by an ancient second hand.
Codex P. Guelpherbytanus A and ) These are two
Codex Q B. f palimpsests, discov-
ered by F. A. Knittel, Archdeacon of Wolfenbiittel, in the
Ducal Library of that city, which (together with some frag-
ments Ulphilas' Gothic version) lie under the more modern
writings of Isidore of Seville. He published the whole in
1762, so far, at least, as he could read them, though Tregelles
believed more might be deciphered, and Tischendorf, with his
unconquerable energy, re-edited the Greek portion in Vol. III.
of his Monumenta sacra inedita (i860). Codex P contains, on
43 leaves, 3 1 fragments of 486 verses, taken from all the four
Evangelists; Codex Q, on 13 leaves, 12 fragments of 235 verses
from Luke and John ; but all can be traced only with great
difficulty. A few portions, once written in vermillion, have
quite departed, but Tischendorf has made material additions
to Knittel's labors, both in extent and accuracy. He assigns
P to the sixth, Q to the fifth century.
Codex Vaticanus S., 354, contains the four Gospels entire,
and is the earliest dated manuscript of the Greek Testament.
This is a folio of 234 leaves, written in large oblong or com-
pressed uncials. Its subscription affirms that it was written
in 949.
Codex Borgianus T. i, now in the Propaganda at Rome^
contains 13 or more 4to leaves of Luke and John, with a
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 467
Thebaic or Sahidic version at their side, but on the opposite
and left page. Each page consists of two columns ; a single
point indicates a break in the sense, but there are no other
divisions. The fragment contains Luke XXII. 20 — XXIII.
20; John VI. 28—67; VII. 6— VIII. 32. Giorgi refers it to
the fourth century ; Tischendorf, to the fifth.
Codex Nanianus U. i, so called from a former possessor,
is now in the Library of St. Mark, Venice. It contains the
four Gospels entire, carefully and luxuriously written in two
columns of 21 lines each on the 4to page. Its date is not before
the tenth century, although the "letters are in general an imita-
tion of those used before the introduction of compressed
uncials ; but they do not belong to the age when full and
round writing was customary or natural, so that the stiffness
and want of ease is manifest." Tischendorf in 1843 ^"<^ Tre-
gelles in 1846 collated Cod. U, thoroughly and independently,
and compared their work at Leipsic for the purpose of mutual
correction.
Codex Mosquensis V, of the Holy Synod, is known al-
most exclusively from Matthaei's Greek Testament : he states,
no doubt most truly, that he collated it " bis diligentissim^"
and gives a facsimile of it, assigning it to the eighth century.
Judging from Matthaei's plate, it is hard to say why others
have dated it in the ninth.
Codex Monacensis X in the University Library at
Munich is a valuable folio manuscript of the end of the ninth
or early in the tenth century, containing the Four Gospels
with serious defects, and a commentary (chiefly from Chrysos-
tom) surrounding and interspersed with the text of all but St.
Mark, in early cursive letters, not unlike (in Tischendorf 's judg-
ment) the celebrated Oxford Plato dated 895. The very ele-
gant uncials of Cod. X " are small and upright ; though some
of them are compressed, they seem as if they were partial
imitations of those used in very early copies."
Codex Barberini Y, 225 at Rome (in the Library founded
by Cardinal Barberini in the 17th century) contains on six
large leaves the 137 verses John XVI. 3 — XIX. 41, of about
the eighth century. Tischendorf obtained access to it in 1843
for a few hours, after some difficulty with the Prince Barberini,
and published it in his first instalment of Monumenta sacra
inedita, 1846.
Codex Dublinensis rescriptus, Z, one of the chief
palimpsests extant, contains 290 verses of St. Matthew's
Gospel in 22 fragments. It was discovered in 1787 by Dr.
468 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
John Barrett, Senior Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, under
some cursive writing of the loth century or later, consisting of
Chrysostom de Sacerdotio, extracts from Epiphanius, &c. In
the same volume are portions of Isaiah and of Gregory Nazian-
zen, in erased uncial letters, but not so ancient as the frag-
ment of St, Matthew, All the 32 leaves of this Gospel that
remain were engraved in copper-plate /ac-stmt/e at the expense
of Trinity College and published by Barrett in 1801,
furnished with Prolegomena, and the contents of each fac-
simile plate in modern Greek characters, on the opposite
page.
Codex r, Tischendorfian IV. was brought by Tischen-
dorf from an " eastern monastery " (he usually describes the
locality of his manuscripts in general terms), and was bought
for the Bodleian Library in 1855. It consists of 158
leaves in large quarto, with one column (of 24 not very
straight or regular lines) on a page, in uncials of the
ninth century, leaning slightly back, but otherwise much re-
sembling Cod. K. in style. St. Luke's Gospel is complete ;
the last ten leaves are hurt by damp, though still legible. In
St. Mark, only 105 verses are wanting (III. 3$ — VI. 20) ; about
531 verses of the other Gospels survive. Tischendorf, and
Tregelles by his leave, have independently collated this copy,
of which Tischendorf gives a facsimile in his Anecdota sacra
et prof ana, 1855.
Codex Sangallensis A. was first inspected by Gerbert
(1773), named by Scholz (N. T. 1830), and made fully known
to us by the admirable edition in lithographed facsimile of
every page, by H. Ch. M. Rettig, published at Zurich, 1836,
with copious and satisfactory Prolegomena. It is preserved
and was probably transcribed a thousand years since in the
great monastery of St. Gall in the North-east of Switzerland.
It is rudely written on 197 leaves of coarse vellum 4to, 10
inches by 8^ in size, with from 20 to 26 (usually 21) lines on
each page, in a very peculiar hand, with an interlinear Latin
version. It contains the four Gospels complete except John
XIX. 17 — 25. Rettig thinks he has traced several different
scribes and inks employed on it, which might happen easily
enough in the Scriptorium of a monastery ; but, if so, their
style of writing is very nearly the same, and they, doubtless,
copied from the same archetype, about the same time. He
has produced more convincing arguments to show that Cod. A
is part of the same book as the Codex Boernerianus, G of St.
Paul's Epistles. Not only do they exactly resemble each other
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 469
in theirwhole arrangement and appearance,but marginal notes by
the first hand are found in each, of precisely the same character.
Codex © Tischendorf I. was brought from the East by
Tischendorf in 1845, published by him in his Monumenta sacra
inedit. 1846, and deposited in the University Library at
Leipsic. It consists of but four leaves (all imperfect) 4to, of
very thin vellum, almost too brittle to be touched, so that each
leaf is kept separately in glass. It contains about 40 verses ;
viz., Matth. XIII. 46 — 55 (in mere shreds); and XIV. 4 — 14.
Codex Zacynthius H is a palimpsest in the Library of
the British and Foreign Bible Society in London, which, under
an Evangelistarium written on coarse vellum in or about the
1 3th century, contains large portions of St. Luke, down to Chap.
XI. 33, in full well-formed uncials, but surrounded by, and
often interwoven with large extracts from the Fathers, in a
hand so cramped and, as regards the round letters, so oblong,
that it cannot be earlier than the eighth century. This volume,
which once belonged to " II Principe Comuto, Zante," was pre-
sented to the Bible Society in 182 1 by General Macaulay, who
brought it from Zante.
Codex Laudianus E, 35 is one of the most precious trea-
sures 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 ctCxol, consisting of from one to three words each, the
Latin words always standing opposite to the corresponding
Greek. This peculiar arrangement points decisively to the
West of Europe as its country, notwithstanding the abundance
of Alexandrian forms has led some to refer it to Egypt. The
very large, bold, thick, rude uncials, without break in the words
or accents, lead us up 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 remark-
able modification of the text. That the book was once in Sar-
dinia, appears from an edict of Flavius Pancratius, crvv Oeeo
airo €7rapx<i>v 8ov^ (rapBiviwi, appended (as also is the Apostles'
Creed in Latin, and some other matter) in a later
hand. This manuscript, with many others, was presented to
the University of Oxford in the year 1636, by its Chancellor,
Laud. Thomas Hearne, the celebrated antiquary, published
a full edition of it in 171 5, which is now very scarce, and is
known to be far from accurate.
470 THE UNCIAL CODICES.
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 fifteenth cen-
tury); 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. They afterwards
compared their collations for mutual correction.
Codex Sangermanensis E, is another Greek-Latin
manuscript, and takes its name from the Abbey of St. Germain
des Pr^s near Paris. Towards the end of the last century the
Abbey (which at the Revolution had been turned into a salt-
petre manufactory) was burnt down, and many of its books
lost. In 1895 Matthaei found this copy, as might have been
anticipated, at St. Petersburg, where it is now deposited. The
volume is a large 4to, the Latin and Greek in parallel columns
on the same page, the Greek standing to the left. Its uncials
are coarse, large and thick, not unlike those in Codex E of the
Acts, but of later shape, with breathings and accents primd
tnanu, of about the tenth century. Mill obtained some ex-
tracts from it, and noted its obvious connection with Codex
Claromontanus. Wetstein thoroughly collated it; and not
only he but Sabatier and Griesbach 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 loth century.
Codex Augiensis F, in the Library of Trinity College,
Cambridge (B, 17. i), is another Greek-Latin manuscript on
136 leaves of good vellum 4to (the signatures proving that
seven more are lost), 9 inches by 7^, with the two languages
in parallel columns of 28 lines on each page, the Greek being
always inside, the Latin next the edge of the book. It is
called from the monastery of Augia Dives or Major (Reichenau,
or rich meadow), on a fertile island in the lower part of Lake
Constance, to which it long appertained, and where it may
even have been written, a thousand years since.
Codex Boernerianus G, so called from a former pos-
sessor, now in the Royal Library at Dresden. In the i6th
century it belonged to Paul Junius of Leyden : it was bought
at the book-sale of Peter Francius, Professor at Amsterdam,
in 1705, by C. F. Boerner, a Professor at Leipsic, who lent it
to Kuster to enrich his edition of Mill (171 1), and subsequently
THE UNCIAL CODICES. 471
to Bentley. The latter so earnestly wished to purchase it as a
companion to Cod. F, that though he received it in 17 19, it
could not be recovered from him for five years, during which
period he was constantly offering high sums for it. A copy, but
not in Bentley 's hand, had been already made (Trin.Coll. B. 17. 2).
Cod. G was published in full by Matthaei in 1791, in common
type, with two facsimile pages ; his edition is believed to be
very accurate; Anger, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Bottiger and
others who have examined it have only expressly indicated
two errors. Rettig has abundantly proved that, as it is exactly
of the same size, so it once formed part of the same volume
with Cod. A : they must date towards the end of the ninth
century, and may very possibly have been written in the
monastery of St. Gall (where A still remains) by some of the
Irish monks who flocked to those parts. That Cod. G has
been in such hands appears from some very curious Irish lines
at the foot of one of Matthaei's plates, which after having long
perplexed learned men, have recently been translated by
Reeves.
Codex Coislin. H., 202 is a very precious fragment of 14
leaves, 12 of which are in the Imperial Library at Paris, two
having found their way to St. Petersburg after the hasty re-
moval of the manuscripts from the Abbey of St. Germain de
Pres, when Cod. E disappeared. The leaves at Paris contain
I. Cor. X. 22—29; XI. 9—16; I. Tim. III. 7—13 ; Tit. I. i—
3;I. 15— II. 5; III. 13— 15; Hebr. II. II— 16; III. 13— 18;
IV. 12 — 15 ; those at St. Petersburg, Gal. I. 4 — 10; II. 9 — 14;
in all 56 verses. They are in 4to, with large square uncials of
about 16 lines on a page, and date from the 6th century.
Breathings and accents are added by a later hand, which re-
touched this copy. These leaves, which comprise one of our
best authorities for stichometrical writing, were used in 1218
to bind another book on Mount Athos, and thence came into
the library of Coislin, Bishop of Metz.
Codex Ruber M is peculiar for the beautifully bright red
color of the ink, the elegance of the small uncial characters,
and the excellency and critical value of the text. Two folio
leaves containing Hebr. I. i — IV. 3 ; XII. 20 — XIII. 25, once
belonged to UfTenbach, then to J. C. Wolff, who bequeathed
them to the Public Library (Johanneum) of Hamburg. To
the same manuscript belong fragments of two leaves used in
binding Cod. Harleian. 5613 in the British Museum, and seen
at once by Griesbach, who first collated them, to be portions
of the Hamburg fragment. Each page in both contains two
472 THE COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOTT.
columns. There are forty-five lines on each page in the Ham-
burg fragment ; thirty-eight in the London leaves. The latter
comprise I. Cor. XV. 52— II. Cor. I. 15 ; II. Cor. X. 13— XII.
5 ; reckoning both fragments, there are 196 verses in all.
Henke, in 1800, edited the Hamburg portion ; Tregelles collat-
ed it twice, and Tischendorf, in 1855, published the text of
both in full in his Anecdota Sacra et Prof ana.
CoDEX Vaticanus B, 2066, OF THE APOCALYPSE, is an
uncial copy of about the beginning of the eighth century, and
the volume also contains, in the same hand, homilies of Basil
the Great and Gregory of Nyssa, &c. It was first known
from a notice and facsimile in Blanchini's Evangeliarium
Quadruplex (1748), Vol. II. p. 525.
This Codex contains the whole of the Apocalypse, and is
of considerable importance, and it much confirms the readings
of the older Codices A and C.
We have only noticed the principal uncial Codices; we
have not space to review the vast number of the minuscule
Greek Codices, which are designated by critics with Arabic
numerals. They date from the tenth century, and though in-
ferior in critical value to the uncials, yet deserve study in
textual criticism.
In the fifteenth century the art of printing was invented,
and the first book printed was a Latin Bible printed in Ger-
many about the year 1452. In 1477 appeared a printed
edition of Psalms in Hebrew, with Kimchi's Commentary.
The most ancient edition of the entire Hebrew Scriptures was
printed at Soncino in 1488.
The first printed edition of the New Testament in Greek
is that contained in
The COMPLUTENSIAN Polyglott (6 Vol. folio) is the muni-
ficent design of Francis Ximenes de Cisneros [1437 — 15 17].
Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo, and Regent of Castile (1506 —
17). This truly eminent person, entered the Franciscan order
in 1482. He carried the ascetic habit of his profession to the
throne of Toledo and the palace of his sovereign. Becoming
in 1492 Confessor to Queen Isabella the Catholic, and Primate
three years later, he devoted to pure charity or to public pur-
poses the revenues of his See. He founded the Uni-
versity at Alcala de Henares in New Castile, where he had
gone to school, and defrayed the cost of an expedition which
as Regent he led to Oran against the Moors. In 1502 he con-
ceived the plan of the first Polyglott Bible, to celebrate the
birth of him who afterwards became the Emperor Charles V.
THE COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOTT. 473
He gathered in his University of Alcala {Complutum) as many
manuscripts as he could procure, with men he deemed equal
to the task, of whom James Lopez de Stunica (subsequently
known for his controversy with Erasmus) was the principal ;
others being M.. Antonio of Lebrixa, Demetrius Ducas of
Crete, and Ferdinand of Valladolid (" Pintianus "). The whole
outlay of Cardinal Ximenes on the Polyglott is stated to have
exceeded 50,000 ducats or about ;^23,ooo, a vast sum in those
days. The first volume printed, Tom. V., contained the New
Testament in two parallel columns, Greek and Latin, the latter
that modification of the Vulgate then current : the colophon
on the last page of the Apocalypse states that it was com-
pleted January 10, 15 14, the printer being Arnald William de
Brocario. Tom VL, comprising a Lexicon, indices, &c. bears
date March 17, 15 15; Tom. L — IV. of the Old Testament
complete, bear the date November 8, 15 17, in which
year the Cardinal died, full of honors and good deeds.
This event must have retarted the publication of the whole,
since Pope Leo's license was not granted until March 22, 1520,
and Erasmus did not see the book before 1522. As but six
hundred copies were printed, this Polyglott must from the
first have been scarce and dear, and is not always met with in
Public Libraries.
The deuterocanonical books, like the New Testament, are
of course given only in two languages ; in the Old Testament
the Latin Vulgate holds the chief place in the middle, between
the Hebrew and the Septuagint Greek. The Greek type in
the other volumes is of the common character, with the usual
breathings and accents ; in the fifth, or New Testament
volume, it is quite different, being modelled after the fashion
of manuscripts of about the thirteenth century, very bold and
elegant, without breathings, and accentuated according to a
system defended and explained in a bilingual preface tt/jo? tou?
ivr€v^ofjL€vov<i, but never heard of before or since : monosyllables
have no accent, in other words the tone syllable receives the
acute, the grave and circumflex being discarded.
It has long been debated among critics what manuscripts
were used by the Complutensian editors, especially in the N. T.
Ximenes is reported to have spent 4,000 ducats in the purchase
of manuscripts. In the Preface to the N. T. we are assured
that "non quaevis exemplaria impressioni huic archetypa fuisse:
sed antiquissima emendatissimaque : ac tantae preterea vetus-
tatis, ut fidem eis abrogare nefas videatur: quae sanctissimus
in Christo pater et dominus noster Leo decimus pontifex max-
474 THE NEW TESTAMENT OF ERASMUS.
imus, huic institute favere cupiens, ex apostolica bibliotheca
educta misit." * ^ ^ Yet these last expressions can hardly
refer to the N. T., inasmuch as Leo X. was not elected Pope
till March ii, 15 13, and the N. T. was completed ]2Si. 10 of the
very next year. Add to this that Vercellone has recently
brought to light the fact that only two manuscripts are known
to have been sent to the Cardinal from the Vatican in the first
year of Leo, and neither of them (Vat. 330, 346) contained any
part of the N. T. The only one of the Complutensian codices
specified by Stunica, the Cod. Rhodiensis (Act. 52, see p. 190),
has entirely disappeared, and from a catalogue of the thirty
volumes of Biblical manuscripts once in the library at Alcala,
but now at Madrid, communicated in 1846 by Don Jos6
Gutierrez, the librarian, we find that they consist exclusively
of Latin and Hebrew books, with the exception of two, which
contain portions of the Septuagint in Greek.
That it was corrupted from the parallel Latin version was
contended by Wetstein and others on very insuflficient grounds.
The charge originated in that religious bigotry which refuses
to see aught of good in anything that is done under Catholic
auspices. The edition reflects credit on the Catholic
Church.
Erasmus' New Testament was by six years the earlier
published, though it was printed two years later than the
Complutensian. Its editor, both in character and fortunes,
presents a striking contrast with Ximenes ; yet what he lacked
of the Castilian's firmness, he more than atoned for by his true
love of learning, and the cheerfulness of spirit that struggled
patiently, if not boldly, with adversity.
Desiderius Erasmus (e/3ao-/Ato9, i. e. Gerald) was born at
Rotterdam in 1465, or, perhaps, a year or two later. He
entered the priesthood in 1492. Thenceforward, his was the
hard life of a solitary and wandering man of letters, earning a
precarious subsistence from booksellers or pupils, now learning
Greek at Oxford (but avroSiBaKTo^i), now teaching it at Cam-
bridge (15 10); losing by his reckless wit the friends his vast
erudition had won ; restless and unfrugal, perhaps, yet always
laboring faithfully and with diligence. He was in England
when John Froben, a celebrated publisher at Basle, moved by
the report of the forthcoming Spanish Bible, and eager to fore-
stall it, made application to Erasmus, through a common
friend, to undertake immediately an edition of the N. T. " Se
daturum pollicetur, quantum alius quisquam,'' is the argument
employed. This proposal was sent on April 17, 15 15, before
THE NEW TESTAMENT OF ERASMUS. 475
which time Erasmus had no doubt prepared numerous annota-
tions to illustrate a revised Latin version he had long projected.
On September 1 1 it was still unsettled whether this improved
version should stand by the Greek in a parallel column (the
plan actually adopted), or be printed separately ; yet the colo-
phon at the end of Erasmus' first edition, a large folio of 675
pages, is dated February, 15 16; the end of the Anno-
tations, March i, 15 16. Erasmus dedicated his work to
LeoX.
Well might Erasmus, who had other literary engage-
ments to occupy his time, declare subsequently that the
volume " praecipitatum fuit verius quam editum ;" yet both on
the title-page, and in his dedication to the Pope, he allows
himself to employ widely different language. When we read
the assurance he addressed to Leo, " Novum ut vocant Testa-
mentum universum ad Graecae originis fidem recognovimus,
idque non temere neque levi opera, sed adhibitis in consilium
compluribus utriusque linguae codicibus, nee iis sane quibus-
libet, sed vetustissimis simul et emendatissimis," it is almost
painful to be obliged to remember that a portion of ten months
at the utmost could have been devoted by Erasmus to the
text, the Latin version and the notes ; while the only manu-
scripts he can be imagined to have used are Codd. Evan. 2,
Act. Paul. 2, with occasional reference to Evan. Act. Paul, i
and Act. Paul. 4, all still at Basle. He used Apoc. i
(now lost) alone for the Apocalypse. All these, ex-
cepting Evan. Act. Paul, i, were neither ancient nor particu-
larly valuable, and of Cod. i he made but small account. As
Apoc. I was mutilated in the last six verses, Erasmus turned
these into Greek from the Latin ; and some portions of his
version, which are found (however some editors may speak
vaguely), in no Greek manuscript whatever^ still cleave to
the received text.
When Ximenes, in the last year of his life, was shown
Erasmus' edition, which had got the start of his own, and his
editor, Stunica, sought to depreciate it, the noble old man re-
plied, " Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets !
produce better, if thou canst ; condemn not the industry of
another. His generous confidence in his own work was not
misplaced. He had many advantages over the poor scholar
and the enterprising printer of Basle, and he had not let them
pass unimproved.
The text of the Complutensian Polyglott is incomparably
more excellent than the hasty and uncritical text of Erasmus,
476 THE EDITION OF ROBERT ETIENNE.
and yet the received Greek text, which formerly protestants
so fondly worshipped, was taken from the text of Erasmus.*
Erasmus died at Basle in 1536, having lived to publish four
editions besides that of 18 16.
In 15 18 appeared the Graeca Biblia at Venice, from the
celebrated press of Aldus, which professes to be grounded on
a collation of most ancient copies. However this may be in
the Old Testament, it follows Erasmus so closely in the New
as to reproduce his very errors of the press (Mill, N. T. Proleg.
§ 1 122), though it is stated to differ from him in about 200
places, for the better or worse. If this edition was really re-
vised by means of manuscripts rather than by mere conjecture,
we know not what they were, or how far intelligently employed.
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. This celebrated
man [1503 — 59J early commenced his career as a printer at
Paris. The editions of 1546, 1549 are small i2mo. in size, most
elegantly printed with type cast at the expense of Francis I.
The opening words of the Preface common to both, " O miri-
ficam Regis nostri optimi et praestantissimi principis liberal-
itatem" . . .have given them the name Mirificae by which they
are known among connoisseurs. Erasmus and his services to
sacred learning, Etinnne does not so much as name. He
speaks of "codices ipsa vetustatis specie pene adorandos*
which he had met with in the King's Library, by which, he
boldly adds "ita hunc nostrum recensuimus, ut nullam omnino
literam secus esse pateremur quam plures, iique meliores libri,
tanquam testes, comprobarent." The Complutensian, as he
admits, assisted him greatly, and he notes its close connection
with the readings of his manuscripts. Mill assures us {Proleg.
§ 1220) that Etienne's first and second editions differ but in
67 places. 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 pub-
lished with critical apparatus.
*" Optandum omnino esset, inquit Millius (N. T. Oxonii 1707, Proleg. p.
Ill), ut editio haec magniflca (Complutensis), sicut omnium prima erat, ita
sola quidem fuisset, cuius textus demto uno et altero vitio supra memorato
* * * integer et illibatus in editiones quasque posteriores transiiset."
Atque Delitzsch Handschr. Funde I. p. 5 : " Es waere in der Gliick gewesen,
wenn nicht der erasmische Text, sondern der complutensische die Grundlage
des spsetem textus receptus geworden waere." De textu recepto cfr. Oregory
1. c, p. 216 sqq. (Apud Comely op. cit.)
THE SEPTUAGINT. 477
Robert Etienne in these editions first divided the New
Testament into verses.
The brothers Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir set up a
prrinting press at Leyden which maintained its reputation for
elegance and correctness throughout the greater part of the
seventeenth century. One of their minute editions, so much
prized by bibliomanists, was a Greek Testament, 24mo., 1642
alleging on the title-page (there is no Preface whatever) to be
ex Regiis aliisque optimis editionihis cum curd expressum. By
Regits, we presume, Etinne's editions are meant, and especi-
ally that of 1550. The supposed accuracy (for which its good
name is not quite deserved) and great neatness of the little
book procured for it much popularity. When this edition was
exhausted, a second appeared in 1633, having the verses
broken up into separate sentences, instead of their numbers
being indicated in the margin, as in 1624.
Etienne's edition of 1550, and that of the Elzevirs, have
been taken as the Standard or Received text, the former chiefly
in England ; the latter, on the continent.
The labors of the great critics which we have mentioned in
collating authorities for different readings have brought into
being what is called the apparatus CRITICUS, being a fund of
data showing the different readings and their authorities.
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 un-
reliable fount of Scripture. The Hebrew, Greek, and Vulgate
Latin, remain three authentic founts. At times, one is more
correct, then another, and the collation of all three is useful to
the understanding of any one. But it must always be con-
sidered that in far greater part the fulness and richness of the
sense can only be received from a perusal of the original of
the text.
Chapter XX.
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 we have many accounts all of
them more or less legendary in nature. Aristaeus, gives us
the first account of its origin. According to him, Ptolemy
Philadelphus in the third century B. C, wishing to found a
478 THE SEPTUAGINT.
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, be-
took 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 question its authority.
This in brief is the story of Aristaeus as related by Flavins
Josephus, Antiq. Bk. XIL IL passim. Philo, the Alexandrine
Jew, has an account much similar, giving to the interpreters
divine inspiration. He does not, however, mention Aristaeus,
who according to his own story, had a great part in the trans-
lation. Nor does he mention Demetrius Phalereus who, ac-
cording to Aristaeus, 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 letters. The King, overcome by this miracle, caused the
Jews to be treated with great honors, and sent them back
loaded with gifts to their own country.
St. Justin avows that he saw with his own eyes the cells of
these interpreters. Mention of the seventy cells occurs also
in the works of Irenaeus, Cyrill of Jerusalem, John Chrysos-
tom, and Augustine. St. Epiphanius, who lived in the 4th
century A. D., varies the legend somewhat. According to
him, there were but 36 cells, and two interpreters in every cell.
All communication between the cells was intercepted, and
amanuenses were at hand to transmit to writing the words of
the interpreters. Thus thirty-six versions were made, all in-
dependent of one another. On a fixed day, the work being com-
pleted, the King sat upon his throne ; the thirty-six versions
were produced, and a certain one of the Jews held the Hebrew
Codex in his hands ; all the versions were found to agree in
everything, and nothing was changed from the Hebrew except
what was evidently useless. Hence the interpreters were be-
lieved to be inspired, and a version was ornamented and
THE SEPTUAGINT. 479
placed in the King's library, which all should venerate. The
Talmud of Jerusalem and Babylon, has an account of the
seventy cells, adding that the King, only after enclosing the
Jews in these cells, communicated his design. The marvelous
agreement is related as in the other accounts.
Many of the Fathers of the Church considered this version
inspired. Thus St. Augustine says, that when the seventy
departed from the Hebrew text they did so at the instigation
of the Holy Ghost. St. Jerome rejecting the fable of the
seventy cells believed that only the Pentateuch was made
under Ptolemy. Hence, the origin of the Septuagint is
shrouded in obscurity.
Without doubt the interpreters from Judea under Ptolemy
translated at least the Pentateuch, and other unknown authors
at unknown dates added the others at subsequent periods.
The legend of the seventy cells is critically absurd and the
testimony of Aristaeus of no worth. The varied style of the
books of the Septuagint proves that they are not the work of
one translator. However legendary be these accounts, we
must recognize in the origin of the Septuagint the special pro-
vidence of God, ordaining that a version of the Holy Scrip-
tures, a complete version of all the books, should exist at the
advent of Christ, that the universal kingdom of Christ might
be the more easily far and wide diffused through the assistance
of the Holy Writ existing in the Greek tongue, which at that
time had become the universal medium of communication of
thought in the civilized world. The Septuagint has the highest
approbation, that of the writers of the New Testament, who
quoted the Old Testament chiefly not from the Hebrew, but
according to the Greek version of the Septuagint.
The legendary origin of the Septuagint caused many of the
old Fathers to believe in the inspiration of the seventy interpre-
ters. St. Jerome inveighs forcibly against this absurdity. When
the earlier Fathers in their controversy with the Jews alleged
passages from the Septuagint against them, the Jews responded
that these were not in the Hebrew Canon of Scripture.
Hence, the Fathers, to defend their position invoked the in-
spiration of the Septuagint. From the Septuagint was made
the first Latin translation called the Vetus Itala, and to defend
this, St. Augustine asserted the inspiration of the Septuagint.
" For the same Spirit who was in the Prophets when they
spoke these things was also in the seventy men when they
translated them, so that assuredly they could also say some-
thing else, just as if the Prophet himself had said both, because
480 THE SEPTUAGINT.
it would be the same Spirit who said both ; and they could say
the same thing differently, so that, although the words were not
the same, yet the same meaning should shine forth to those of
good understanding ; and could omit or add something, so that
even by this it might be shown that there was in that work not
human bondage, which the translator owed to the words, but
rather divine power, which filled and ruled the mind of the trans-
lator." (S. Aug. De Civit. Dei, XVIII. 43). And indeed a strong
motive which induced the Fathers to defend the inspiration
of the Septuagint was the need of some explanation of the
"variantia" in the Texts. St. Augustine's explanation, ad-
mitting the inspiration, filled that need. Many Catholic
writers hold with St. Jerome that only the Pentateuch was
translated by the seventy interpreters, and the other books
added at a later date. So Vigouroux and Montfaucon, quoted
by Vigouroux in Manuel Biblique.
S. Hilary appeals for the authority of the Septuagint to
its great antiquity, and to the fact that its translators had the
oral tradition of the synagogue. This is the only reasonable
motive for its great value.
S. John Chrysostom speaks of the great authority of the
Septuagint, but never hints at its inspiration. Hence, we con-
clude that the Church has never recognized the inspiration of
the Septuagint, and the Fathers who defended it, were de-
ceived by the legend of Aristaeus, while the most illustrious
among them do not insist on the inspiration of the Septuagint
for its great authority, but on its great antiquity, and the char-
acter of the men who made the version.
The different books of the Septuagint differ greatly in ex-
cellence. The Pentateuch is preeminent in accuracy and grace
of diction. The version of Proverbs is also excellent. The
version of Ezechiel is the best of the prophetical works. Job
is very imperfectly rendered ; many things are omitted, and
other things plainly do not reproduce the sense of the original.
The Psalms and Ecclesiastes are very defective, and so poor
was the version of Daniel, that the Church discarded it and
substituted the version of Theodotion.
The Jews of Palestine at first held in high esteem the
Septuagint, but as the Christians, in the rise of Christianity,
used it effectively against them, they conceived a great hatred
against it. In detestation of it, they compared the day on
which it was completed to the day on which the golden calf
was set up in the desert, and decreed a fast to take place yearly
on that day. (Talmud Tr. Sopher, Meg. Thaanith.) As this
THE SEPTUAGINT. 481
hatred was shared by the hellenist Jews, who were ignorant of
Hebrew, they desired other Greek versions ; hence arose other
Greek versions of the Old Testament.
Of the post-Christian versions, that of Aquila is the first
in order of time, and it is in the closest agreement with the
letter of the Hebrew text. The traditions relating to *A/«i5\a9,
in Christian and Jewish writings, are so far in agreement that
they may be assumed to refer to one and the same person.
By Epiphanius he is described {De Mens, et Pond, §§ 13-15) as
of Sinope in Pontus, and as irevOepihn]^ of the Emperor Hadrian,
in whose twelfth year, and 430 years after the LXX., he
flourished, and by whom he was commissioned to superintend
the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Seeing the faith and miracles of
the disciples of the Apostles, he is led to embrace Christianity,
but still clings to his faith in the vain aarpovoixia, and is, in
consequence, excommunicated. Filled with resentment, he
becomes a pervert to Judaism, and is thenceforth known as
Aquila the Proselyte. He devotes himself to the Jewish learn-
ing, and renders the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek.
Aquila, as a translator, aimed at an extreme literal exact-
ness, for which he is, on the whole, fairly praised as o Kvpicorara
€p/xr)V€V€Lv (f>i\oTifiovfi€vo^ 'A/cv\a9 (Origen, Comment, on Genesis,
I. 16), and, on the other hand, in places censured, as hovXevayv
Ti ''E^paiKy Xe|et (Origen ad A/ricanum, § 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 im-
portant 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 yxo frumento et vino et
oleo possit vel legere vel intelligere ij^eO/^a, oTrapiaixov, arCk-
TTvoTTjTa, quod nos possumus dicere, /usionem, pomationem,que,
et splendentiam ? Aut quia Hebraei non solum habent apdpa
sed et TrpoapOpa ille KaKo^rfKo)^ et SYLLABAS interpretatur et
litteras, dicitque avv rov ovpavov koI crvv rrjv fyfjv, 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" {£/>. ad Damasum, § 12, Vol. L 167).
The former passage aptly indicates the two leading principles
EE
482 THE VERSION OF SYMMACHUS.
of Aquila, which were to give a Greek or quasi-Greek equiva-
lent for every fragment of the original, and to maintain a rigid
consistency by rendering 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 etymo-
logical rendering of pp, 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 Aquilae
editionem legimus, Et Moyses nesciebat quia CORNUTA ERAT
species vultus ejus, qui vere dicere poterat, In te inimicos meos
cornu ventiloT
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 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 Habacuc (III. 13, Vol.
VI. 656), describes Symmachus and Theodotion as Ebonites :
" Theodotio autem, vere quasi pauper et Ebionita, sed et
Symmachus ejusdem dogmatis, pauperem sensum secuti Judaice
transtulerunt ;" and in his preface to Job he speaks of them as
*' judaizantes haeretici, qui multa mysteria Salvatoris subdola
interpretatione celarunt, et tamen in 'E|a7r\ot9 habentur apud
ecclesias et explanantur ab ecclesiasticis viris " (Vol. IX. Col.
1 142). " Epiphanius," writes Montfaucon, " conspecto Hexa-
plorum ordine, ubi Symmachus ante Theodotionem positus
secundum locum in Graecis editionibus occupabat, putavit
Symmachum 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 his account of the
author is at variance with the statements of Eusebius and
Jerome. Symmachus (he tells us) was a Samaritan, who, from
THE VERSION OF THEODOTION. 483
disappointed ambition, became a proselyte to Judaism, and
set to work to compose his Greek version of the Scriptures
with a specific anti-Samaritan bias.
The version of Symmachus was distinguished by the purity
of its Greek and its freedom from Hebraisms. Jerome (fol-
lowing Eusebius) several times remarks : " Symmachus more
suo apertius," or " manifestius "; and he praises him as an in-
terpreter, " qui non solet verborum KaKo^r/Xiav sed intelli-
gentiae 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 paene opus in eodem opere
prodiderunt ; alio nitente verbum de verbo exprimere, 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.
Symmachus 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 Zwo'yovo^
preserves the word-play in Gen. III. 20; but other names are
less happily rendered.
Another marked characteristic of Symmachus is his ten-
dency to adopt more or less paraphrastic and inaccurate
renderings under the influence of dogmatic prepossession.
This is especially discernible where he endeavors to avoid
anthropomorphisms.
The last column of Origen's Hexapla contained the ver-
sion of Theodotion. St. Epiphanius states that Theodotion
was of Pontus, of the sect of the Marcionites, which he aban-
doned to embrace Judaism. St. Irenaeus afifirms 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 adventum
Christi incredulus fuit, licet eum quidam dicant Ebionitam, 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
484 THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN.
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.
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 describ-
ing 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.
i6) 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, being suffered to creep 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 revisal. Twenty-
eight years were devoted to the preparation of this arduous
work, in the course of which he collected manuscripts from
every possible quarter, aided (it is said) by the pecuniary
liberality of Ambrose, an opulent man, whom he had converted
from the Valentinian heresy, and with the assistance of seven
copyists and several persons skilled in calligraphy, or the art of
beautiful writing. Origen commenced his labor at Csesarea,
A. D. 231, and, it appears, finished his Polyglott 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 HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN. 485
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, containing the
Hebrew text in its original characters, and also in Greek letters.
These six columns, according to Epiphanius, formed the Hex-
apla. Having subsequently discovered two other Greek ver-
sions of some parts of the Scriptures, usually 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 appellation, however, was
never generally adopted. But, as the two editions generally
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 con-
taining 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,
AoiTTot, the rest ; — Ot T, or the three, denoted Aquila, Sym-
machus, and Theodotion ; — Ot A, or the four, signified Aquila,
Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion ; and 11, Havrei,
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 a so 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 prefixed
an asterisk '^- with two bold 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 unfre-
quently from that of Aquila ; sometimes, though rarely, from
486
THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN.
SPECIMINA TETRAFLORUM, HEXAPLORUM.
'AKYAA2.
Kai fi€Ta Tai inra i0So/id8ai koi i^rJKOvTa 8vo
l^oXo0p€V$rj(T€Tai^\€lfXfiiuO9
I. TETKAPLA.
2YMMAX02.
Kai fXiTci rdts. i^SofidSas ras inr^ KalA^riKOVTa Svo
iKKCTrrjcriTai xpiarTo^
KOI ov\ {mdp^ii avTw.
II HDXAPLA,^
TO *EBPAIKON.
isj^yn n^iB> nun
pwt5rri»N. nwa niy pip:. "
03TO prv nnpW
TO 'EBPAIKON 'EAAHNIKOIS
TPAMMA2I.
'oV^ad aTjvi6 de(Tov
/3«;(t ovavaKa
fir)r)» aiSi x^tVPtod cX ofifiaPa
ovKoKed pcuTOV luiSrjxffi.
'A.
tcaV Tovto hfVTtpov cTrdieiT*
itifH^vmert boKpfVi^ T^ 6v<ria(rrrfpiov (IIIIII)
difft Tov (ifi ejvat (Ti pevaat irpbs to hapov
KcX Tiq^fh fvBoKiav diro xftpo? vfiSiP.
TO 'EBP./
•EBP. 'EAAHN. PP.
.'A.
to'ebp:.
TOVEBPl'EAAHN. PP.
p-rtpip. peo'&aap
Xa/craX u\€8(6€)(.
*A.
arrh pL'^rpcc^ i^a>p$pi<Tpii/T]s
_ '/xroi Sp6<r6t irdiSioTfiros; <rov.
IIL HEPTAPBA
2.
iy rfj cpdpayyi KiSpcdvL
IV. OCTAPItA
2.
<roi dpScoi ^ vioTTfi aov;
THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN.
487
HEPTAPLORUM ET OCTAPLORUM.
Dan. ix. 26.
01 O'.
Kal fi€Th iiTTk KOL i^Sofi-qKouta Kat i^^KovTa 8vo
diroa-TaOrjcr^Tai ^pia-fia
Kal ovK iorai.
eEOAOTIQN.
Kal ii€Tcc ra^ i^So/jidSas roci iirJKOVTa 8vo^
€io\o$p^pOrj(r€Tai XP^^I^^
Kal Kpi/ia bvK €<mv €v avT^.
Mal. ii. 13.
s.
(tot tovra btvTfpov iiroiure
iimovTts eV boKpvai t6 dvffuurnjpiou (lUIIl)
KKaiovTts Koi oifiaorarovrts
hrtp ToO fi^ tivai rrt vtvovra npbs t6 bapov
fit be^avBat rb tvBoKiJiifvov dnb xtipbs Vjiav.
0'.
fcoi Tavra & ifturow hroitiTe
cKaXwrrrre baKpvai to 6v(ria(rnjpiov levplov
Koi KKavSfia Koi (rrfvayfico
tK KonoaV rri a^iov tm^f'^ai fls Bvaiav
rj Xa^tlv 8(Kt6v (K tSdv xfipiiv v/iwv.
e.
Ka\ Tovro btvTtpov (iroifjvaTt
fKdkvnrrre.bdKpvai t6 Bvaiaarfipiov (ITini)
IcKaiOVTa Koi (TTfVOVTtS
dnb Tov (if) tiuai tn TrpooTjrytfoJ/ra to o\oKavTafia
Koi "Ka^fiv reXtiov tK xtipav vpiuv.
4 Reg. xxiii. 4.
O'.
€1/ a-aSrjiXQiO KiSpoov.
e.
€v TJi (pdpayyL K.i8pa>v.
kv rm ifjcnvpio-fi^ tov ')(^iiixdppov.
PSAL. cix. 3.
O'.
€< yaarpos npo ia>(r(f>6pov
\ 0.
1
€K firiTpa^ ano irpcot
(croi Sp6<ros) veoT'qTos crov.
E'.
e< fiTjrpas otto SpOpov
(rot Spoaos ^ veoTrjs <tov.
S'.
Ik yaa-rpos (r^Trjaovcri
o-e, Bp6(ro9 ueaviKorijTO^ aov.
488 THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN.
the version of Symmachus ; and sometimes from two or three
together. But, in every case, the initial letter of each trans-
lator's name was placed immediately after the asterisk, to indi-
cate 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 reading
with an obelus, -i-, he added the correct rendering from one
of the other translators, with an asterisk subjoined. Concern-
ing the shape and uses of the lemniscus and hypolemniscus, two
other marks used by Origen, there is so great a difference of
opinion among learned men, that it is difficult to determine
what they were.
In the Pentateuch, Origen compared the Samaritan text
with the Hebrew as received by the Jews, and noted their
differences. To each of the translations inserted in his Hexapla
was prefixed an account of the author ; each had its separate
prolegomena ; and the ample margins were filled with notes.
A few fragments of these prolegomena and marginal annota-
tions have been preserved ; but nothing remains of his history
of the Greek versions.
Since Origen's time, biblical critics have distinguished two
editions or exemplars of the Septuagint — the Kotvrj or com-
mon 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 corner 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, perhaps, it might have
perished in oblivion, if Eusebius and Pamphilus had not dis-
covered it, and deposited it in the library 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 fragments, collected from manu-
scripts of the Septuagint and the Catenae of the Greek fathers,
are all that now remain of a work, which in the present improv-
ed state of sacred literature, would most eminently have assist-
ed in the interpretation and criticism of the Old Testament.
THE PRINCIPAL EDITIONS THE SEPTUAGINT. 489
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 corrected
by Origen, was transcribed for their use, together with his crit-
ical marks. Hence, in the progress of time, from the negli-
gence or inaccuracy of copyists, numerous errors were intro-
duced into this version, which rendered a new revisal neces-
sary ; and, as all the Greek churches did not receive Origen's
biblical 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 omitted ; 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 corrections ; 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 Koti/?/, 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 Alexan-
drinum. All the manuscripts of the Septuagint now extant, as
well as the printed editions, are derived from the three recen-
sions 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 Septuagint.
The first in time and excellence was that of Cardinal Ximenes,
printed in his Polyglott, in 15 17.
Theprintingof this splendid and celebrated work, usually call-
ed the Complutensian Polyglott, was commenced in 1502. Though
completed in 15 17, it was not published until 1522, and it cost
490 THE PRINCIPAL EDITIONS OF THE SEPTUAGINT.
the munificent cardinal Ximenes 50,000 ducats. This Poly-
glott is usually divided into six volumes. The first four com-
prise the Old Testament, with the Hebrew, Latin, and Greek,
in three distinct columns, the Chaldee paraphrase being at the
bottom of a page with a Latin interpretation ; and the margin
is filled with Hebrew and Chaldee radicals. The fifth volume
contains the Greek Testament, with the Vulgate Latin version
in a parallel column ; in the margin there is a kind of concord-
ance, referring to similar passages in the Old and New Testa-
ments.
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 care of Andreas
Asulanus, the father-in-law of Aldus Manutius. This edition
was much copied by the protestants, who, therefore, endeavor
to exalt it above the Complutensian text, but foundation is
lacking for such excellence.
The third principal edition in order of time, though first in
excellence is that called the sixtine edition. It was under-
taken at the suggestion of Cardinal Montaltus, during the
reign of Gregory XIII., and when, at the death of Gregory,
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 HaXata Aia0r)Krj, Kara Tov<i 'Fi^Bofirj-
Kovra 8c av6evTia<; "Svcrrov E. ^Axpov Kp')(^tepea)<i eKSodeicra. —
Vetus Testamentum Graecum, juxta LXX Interpretes, studio
Antonii Cardinalis Carafe, ope virorum doctorum adjuti, cum
prefatione et scholiis Petri Morini. Romae ex Typographia
Francisci Zannetti, 1586, folio.
It is a beautiful edition, of great rarity and value. It con-
tains 783 pages of text, preceded by four leaves of preliminary
matter, which are followed by another (subsequently added),
entitled Corrigenda in notationibus Psalterii. This last men-
tioned leaf is not found in the copies bearing the date of 1586,
which also want the privilege of Pope Sixtus V. dated May 9th,
1587, at whose request and under whose auspices it was under-
taken by Cardinal Antonio Carafa, aided by Antonio Agelli,
Peter Morinus, Fulvio Ursino, Robert Bellarmin, Cardinal
Sirleti, and others. The celebrated 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 oblit-
erated from the Vatican manuscript through extreme age, the
THE VETUS ITALA. 491
editors are said to have supplied this deficiency, by compiling
those parts of the Septuagint from a manuscript out of Car-
dinal Bessarion'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,
FJaminio Nobili printed at Rome in folio, Veius Testamentum
secundum LXX. Latine redditunt. This Latin version was
not composed by him, but compiled out of the fragments of
the ancient Latin translations, especially the Old Italian. It is
a splendid volume, and of considerable rarity. The Roman
edition was re-printed at Paris, in 1628, in three folio volumes;
the New Testament in Greek and Latin, forms the third volume.
This reprint is in great request, not only for the neatness and
correctness of its execution, but also for the learned notes
which accompany it.
The fourth of these principal editions is that published by
Grabe, at Oxford. This edition exhibits the text of the cele-
brated 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. The second volume, comprising
the historical books, was edited by Francis Lee, M. D., in 1719 ;
and the third volume, including the prophetical books, by W.
Wigan, in 1720. This edition gives a representation of the
Alexandrian Manuscript where it was perfect ; but where it
was defective and incorrect, the passages supplied and the
corrected readings are given, partly from the Codex Vaticanus,
and partly from the Complutensian edition, in a smaller
character than that employed in the text.
Tischendorf judged unfavorably of the work since the author
gave excessive credit to Codex A, and imitated the Hexaplaof
Origen. The work has failed to obtain a lasting place as a great
work of Scripture.
Chapter XXI.
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
the nations, there arose a need for other versions of Scripture.
492 THE VETUS ITALA.
Among these old versions, the first in order of time and
excellence, 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 differ-
ent learned conjectures. We shall be content to briefly set
forth the most probable data.
The language in which the message of Christ was first pre-
sented to the Roman world, was Greek. Sufficient evidence
warrants the conclusion that the liturgical language 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 first opinion allege that the version
would originate where it was needed, and it would be assign-
ing 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
barbarous, so that Arnobius 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 Afri-
canismsy but are found in all the low Latin of the first cen-
turies. I believe that if the edition were made in Africa,
where Latin was the liturgical language, as they contend, it
*Q. B. de Rossi (Roma Sotteranea, Roma 1867, 11. p. 236 sq.): "L'uso cos-
tante della lingua greca in quegli epitaffl (del romani pontefici) 6 prova mani-
festa, che greco f u 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. 493
would be made by the chief men of the Church, who certainly
could write better Latin than the text of the Vetus Itala. I
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 translation.
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 ever so little, of
the two languages, ventured upon the work of translation."
(Enchirid. of Christ. Doct. Bk. H. XL)
It is evident that the numerous translators did not translate
the whole Bible, but certain books, so that there were many
different translations of the several books made by different
authors. Jerome complains bitterly of these numerous trans-
lators : " With the Latins there are as many different versions
as there are codices, and every one arbitrarily 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 con-
siderable 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 librarii 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, Augustine 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 translations of the individual books, there
had resulted several complete versions, among which, in his
judgment, the Vetus Itala was preeminent. It is probable
that a beginning was made to translate the Scriptures into
494 REVISIONS OF JEROME.
Latin even in the Apostolic age. As in that age intense
activity was manifested in all things that pertained to religion,
without doubt several translations of the different books were
soon in existence. It is quite probable that one of these com-
plete versions, at a very early age, obtained a place of eminence
in the churches of Italy ; perhaps it was in a certain sense
authorized by the authorities in those churches. Thus it came
to be termed the " Itala," and as Jerome called it the old,
in contradistinction to his version, it thus became known as
the Old Italian Version.
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 uncer-
tain.
To remedy this evil Pope Damasus (t384), commissioned
St. Jerome to revise the Latin text. Jerome began his labors
at Rome in 383, and first revised the Psalter "juxta septua-
ginta 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 Gospels, " Evangelia ad Grae-
cam fidem revocavit." The norm of Jerome in this emenda-
tion was to depart as little as possible from the usual reading,
therefore, " ita calamo temperavit ut, his tantum quae 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 im-
mediately received into liturgical use in the churches of Gaul ;
THE TARGUMS. 495
hence, it came to be called the GalHcan 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 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 revision
was received with much favor by St. Augustine. We are cer-
tain from Jerome's prefaces, that he emended in the same man-
ner 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 Testament,
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. Suf-
fice 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 portions 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 fragments
of the Vetus Itala from codices and works of Fathers. Flami-
nius Nobilius and Agellius were the first to collect and pub-
lish these fragments in 1588. Since that time, fragments have
been collected and published by Martianay, Thomas Hearne,
Sabatier, Blanchini ; and in more recent times by Vercellone,
Ranke, Haupt, and Muenter.
Chapter XXII.
The Targums.
The Chaldee word QI^IH T^RGUM signifies, in general,
any version or explanation ; but this appellation is more par-
ticularly restricted to the versions or paraphrases of the Old
496 THE TARGUMS.
Testament, executed in the East Aramaean or Chaldee dialect,
as it is usually called. These Targums are termed paraphrases
or expositions, because they are rather comments and explica-
tions, 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 itself ; so that, when the law
was " read in the Synagogue every Sabbath day," in pure
biblical Hebrew, an explanation was subjoined to it in Chaldee,
in order to render it intelligible to the people, who had but an
imperfect knowledge of the Hebrew language. This practice,
as already observed, originated about the epoch of the Mac-
cabees. 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 de-
ficiencies 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 ; and, 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 con-
tinued paraphrase on the Old Testament, with the exception
of the Books of Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah (anciently reputed
to be part of Ezra) ; which, being for the most part written in
Chaldee, it has been conjectured that no paraphrases were
written on them, as being unnecessary ; though Prideaux is of
opinion that Targums were composed on these books also,
which have perished in the lapse of ages.
The language in which these paraphrases are composed
varies in purity, according to the time when they were re-
THE TARGUMS. 497
spectively written. Thus, the Targums of Onkelos and the
Pseudo-Jonathan are much purer than the others, approximat-
ing very nearly to the Aramaean dialect, in which some parts
of Daniel and Ezra are written, except, indeed, that the ortho-
graphy does not always correspond ; while the language of the
later Targums, whence the rabbinical dialect derives its source,
is far more impure, and is intermixed with barbarous and
foreign words. Originally, all the Chaldee paraphrases were
written without vowel-points, like all other Oriental manu-
scripts ; but at length some persons ventured to add points to
them, though very erroneously, and this irregular punctuation
was retained in the Venetian and other early editions of the
Hebrew Bible. Some further imperfect attempts towards
regular pointing were made both in the Complutensian and in
the Antwerp Polyglotts, until at length the elder Buxtorf, in
his edition of the Hebrew Bible, published at Basil, undertook
the thankless task of improving the punctuation of the Tar-
gums, according to such rules as he had formed from the
pointing, which he had found in the Chaldee parts of the
Books of Daniel and Ezra ; and his method of punctuation is
followed in Walton's Polyglott.
The Targum of Onkelos. — It is not known, with cer-
tainty, at what time Onkelos flourished, nor of what nation he
was. Eichorn conjectures that he was a native of Babylon,
first, because he is mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud y
secondly^ because his dialect is not the Chaldee spoken in
Palestine, but much purer, and more closely resembling the
style of Daniel and Ezra ; and lastly, because he has not inter-
woven any of those fabulous narratives, to which the Jews of
Palestine were so much attached, and from which they could
with difficulty refrain. Bauer and Jahn place him in the second
century. The Targum of Onkelos comprises the Pentateuch,
or five books of Moses, and is justly preferred to all the others,
both by Jews and Christians, on account of the purity of its
style, and its general freedom from idle legends. It is rather
a version than a paraphrase, and renders the Hebrew text word
for word, with so much accuracy and exactness that, being set
to the same musical notes with the original Hebrew, it could
be read or cantillated in the same tone as the latter in the
public assemblies of the Jews. And this, we find, was the
practice of the Jews up to the time of Rabbi Elias Levita, who
flourished in the early part of the sixteenth century, and who
expressly states that the Jews read the law in their synagogues,
first in Hebrew and then in the Targum of Onkelos. This
FF
498 THE TARGUMS.
Targum has been translated into Latin by Alfonso de Zamora,
Paulus Fagius, Bernardinus Baldus, and Andrea de Leon of
Zamora.
The second Targum, which is a more liberal paraphrase of
the Pentateuch than the preceding, is usually called the
Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan, being ascribed by many
to Jonathan Ben Uzziel, who wrote the much-esteemed para-
phrase on the Prophets. But the difference in the style and
diction of this Targum, which is very impure, as well as in the
method of paraphrasing adopted in it, clearly proves that it
could not have been written by Jonathan Ben Uzziel, who,
indeed, sometimes indulges in allegories, and has introduced a
few barbarisms ; but this Targum on the law abounds with the
most idle Jewish legends that can well be conceived ; which,
together with the barbarous and foreign words it contains,
render it of very little utility. From its mentioning the six
parts of the Talmud (on Exod. XX VL 9), which compilation
was not written till two centuries after the birth of Christ ; —
Constantinople (on Numb. XXIV. 19), which city was always
called Byzantium until it received its name from Constantine
the Great, in the beginning of the fourth century ; the Lom-
bards (on Numb. XXIV. 24), whose first irruption into Italy
did not take place until the year 570; and the Turks (on Gen.
X. 2), who did not become conspicuous till the middle of the
sixth century, — learned men are unanimously of opinion that
this Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan could not have been
written before the seventh, or even the eighth century. It was
probably compiled from older interpretations. This Chaldee
paraphrase was translated into Latin by Anthony Ralph de
Chevalier, in the sixteenth century.
The Jerusalem Targum, which also paraphrases the five
Books of Moses, derives its name from the dialect in which it
is composed. It is by no means a connected paraphrase, some-
times omitting whole verses, or even chapters ; at other times
explaining only a single word of a verse, of which it sometimes
gives a twofold interpretation ; and at other times Hebrew
words are inserted without any explanation whatever. In many
respects, it corresponds with the paraphrase of the Pseudo-
Jonathan, whose legendary tales are here frequently repeated,
abridged, or expanded. From the impurity of its style, and
the number of Greek, Latin, and Persian words which it con-
tains, Walton, Carpzov, Wolfius, and many other eminent
philologers, are of opinion that it is a compilation by several
authors, and consists of extracts and collections. From these
THE TARGUMS. 499
internal evidences, the commencement of the seventh century-
has been assigned as its probable date ; but it is more likely
not to have been written before the eighth, or perhaps the
ninth century. This Targum was also translated into Latin
by Chevalier and by Francis Taylor.
The Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel. — According to
the Talmudical traditions, the author of this paraphrase was
chief of the eighty distinguished scholars of Rabbi Hillel, the
elder, and a fellow disciple of Simeon the Just, who bore the
infant Messiah in his arms ; consequently he would be nearly
contemporary with Onkelos. Wolfius, however, adopts the
opinion of Prideaux, that he flourished a short time before the
birth of Christ, and compiled the work which bears his name
from more ancient Targums, that had been preserved to his
time by oral tradition. From the silence of Origen and Jerome
concerning this Targum, of which they could not but have
availed themselves if it had really existed in their time, and
also from its being cited in the Talmud, both Bauer and Jahn
date it much later than is generally admitted ; the former, in-
deed, is of opinion that its true date cannot be ascertained ;
and the latter, from the inequalities of style and method
observable in it, considers it as a compilation from the inter-
pretations of several learned men, made about the close of the
third or fourth century. This paraphrase treats of the
Prophets, that is (according to the Jewish classification of the
sacred writings), of the Books of Joshua, Judges, I. and II.
Samuel, I. and II. Kings, who are termed the former prophets;
and of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve minor
prophets, who are designated as the latter prophets. Though
the style of this Targum is not so pure and elegant as that of
Onkelos, yet it is not disfigured by those legendary tales and
numerous foreign and barbarous words which abound in the
latter Targums. Both the language and method of interpreta-
tion, however, are irregular. In the exposition of the former
prophets, the text is more closely rendered than in that on the
latter, which is less accurate, as well as more paraphrastical,
and interspersed with some traditions and fabulous legends.
In order to attach the greater authority to the Targum of
Jonathan Ben Uzziel, the Jews, not satisfied with making him
contemporary with the prophets Malachi, Zachariah, and
Haggai, and asserting that he received it from their lips, have
related that while Jonathan was composing his paraphrase,
there was an earthquake for forty leagues around him ; and
that if any bird happened to pass over him, or a fly alighted
500 THE TARGUMS.
on his paper while writing, they were immediately con-
sumed by fire from heaven, without any injury being
sustained either by his person or his paper. The whole
of this Targum was translated into Latin by Alfonso de
Zamora, Andrea de Leon, and Conrad Pellican ; and the
paraphrase on the twelve minor prophets, by Immanuel
Tremellius.
The Targum on the Cetubim, Hagiographa, or Holy
Writings, is ascribed by some Jewish writers to Rab Jose, or
Rabbi Joseph, surnamed the one-eyed, or blind, who is said to
have been at the head of the academy at Sora, in the third
century; though others affirm that its author is unknown.
The style is barbarous, impure, and very unequal, interspersed
with numerous digressions and legendary narratives ; on which
account the younger Buxtorf, and after him Bauer and Jahn,
are of opinion that the whole is a compilation of later times ;
and this sentiment appears to be the most correct. Prideaux
characterizes its language as the most corrupt Chaldee of the
Jerusalem dialect. The translators of the preceding Targum,
together with Arias Montanus, have given a Latin version of
this Targum.
The Targum on the Megilloth, or five Books of Eccle-
siastes. Song of Songs, Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ruth, and
Esther, is evidently a compilation by several persons ; the
barbarism of its style, numerous digressions, and idle legends
which are inserted, all concur to prove it to be of late date,
and certainly not earlier than the sixth century. The para-
phrase on the Book of Ruth and the Lamentations of Jeremiah
is the best executed portion. Ecclesiastes is more freely
paraphrased, but the text of the Song of Solomon is absolutely
lost amidst the diffuse circumscription of its author, and his
dull glosses and fabulous additions.
The Three Targums on the Book of Esther. — This
book has always been held in the highest estimation by the
Jews, which circumstance induced them to translate it repeat-
edly into the Chaldee dialect. Three paraphrases on it have
been printed ; one in the Antwerp Polyglott, which is much
shorter and contains fewer digressions than the others;
another in Walton's Polyglott, which is more diiTuse, and
comprises more numerous Jewish fables and traditions; and a
third, of which a Latin version was published by Francis
Taylor, and which, according to Carpzov, is more stupid and
diffuse than any of the preceding. They are all three of very
late date.
THE TARGUMS. 601
A Targum on the Books of Chronicles, which for a
long time was unknown both to Jews and Christians, was dis-
covered in the library at Erfurt, belonging to the ministers of
the Augsburg confession, by Matthias Frederick Beck, who
published it in 1680-3-4, in two quarto volumes. Another
edition was published at Amsterdam by David Wilkins (171 5,
4to.), from a manuscript in the University Library at Cam-
bridge. It is more complete than Beck's edition, and supplies
many of its de6ciencies. This Targum, however, is of very
little value ; like all the other Chaldee paraphrases, it blends
legendary tales with the narrative.
Of all the Chaldee paraphrases above noticed, the Targums
of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel are most highly valued
by the Jews, who implicitly receive their expositions of doubt-
ful passages. Shickhard, Mayer, Helvicus, Leusden, Hottinger,
and Prideaux, have conjectured that some Chaldee Targum
was in use in the Synagogue where our Lord read Isaiah LXI.
I, 2 (Luke IV. 17-19) ; and that he quoted Psal. XXII. i, when
on the cross (Matth. XXVII. 46), not out of the Hebrew text,
but out of a Chaldee paraphrase. But there does not appear to
be sufficient ground for this hypothesis ; for as the Chaldee or
East Aramaean dialect was spoken at Jerusalem, it is at least
as probable that Jesus Christ interpreted the Hebrew into the
vernacular dialect in the first instance, as that he should have
read from a Targum ; and, when on the cross, it was perfectly
natural that he should speak in the same language, rather than
in the Biblical Hebrew, which, we have already seen, was
cultivated and studied by the priests and Levites, as a learned
language. The Targum of Rabbi Joseph the Blind, in which
the words cited by our Lord are to be found, is so long posterior
to the time of his crucifixion, that it cannot be received as
evidence. So numerous, indeed, are the variations, and so
arbitrary are the alterations occurring in the manuscripts of
the Chaldee paraphrases, that Kennicott has sought to prove
them to have been designedly altered in compliment to the
previously corrupted copies of the Hebrew text ; or, in other
words, that " alterations have been made wilfully in the
Chaldee paraphrase to render that paraphrase, in some places,
more conformable to the words of the Hebrew text, where
those Hebrew words are supposed to be right, but had them-
selves been corrupted." But notwithstanding all their de-
ficiencies and interpolations, the Targums, especially those of
Onkelos and Jonathan, are of considerable importance in the
interpretation of the Scriptures, not only as they supply the
602 THE SYRIAC VERSIONS.
meanings of words or phrases occurring but once in the Old
Testament, but also because they reflect considerable light on
the Jewish rites, ceremonies, laws, customs, usages, etc., men-
tioned or alluded to in both Testaments. But it is in estab-
lishing the genuine meaning of particular prophecies relative
to the Messiah, in opposition to the false explications of the
Jews and Anti-trinitarians, that these Targums are preemi-
nently useful.
Chapter XXIII.
The Syriac Versions.
Syria being visited at a very early period by the preachers
of the Christian faith, several translations of the sacred volume
were made into the language of that country.
The most celebrated of these, is the Peschito or Literal
(Versio Simplex), as it is usually called, on account of its
very close adherence to the Hebrew and Greek texts, from
which it was immediately made. The most extravagant as-
sertions have been advanced concerning its antiquity ; some
referring the translation of the Old Testament to the time of
Solomon and Hiram, while others ascribe it to Asa, priest
of the Samaritans ; and a third class, to the apostle Thaddeus.
This last tradition is received by the Syrian churches ; but a
more recent date is ascribed to it by modern biblical philolo-
gers. Walton, Carpzov, Leusden, Lowth, and Kennicott, fix
its date to the first century ; Bauer and some other German
critics, to the second or third century ; Jahn fixes it, at the
latest, to the second century ; De Rossi pronounces it to be
very ancient, but does not specify any precise date. The
most probable opinion is that of Michaelis, who ascribes the
Syriac version of both Testaments to the close of the first, or
to the earlier part of the second century, at which time the
Syrian churches flourished most, and the Christians at Edessa
had a temple for divine worship erected after the model of
that at Jerusalem ; and it is not to be supposed that they
would be without a version of the Old Testament, the reading
of which had been introduced by the Apostles.
The Old Testament was evidently translated from the
original Hebrew, to which it most closely and literally adheres,
with the exception of a few passages which appear to bear some
affinity to the Septuagint ; Jahn accounts for this by suppos-
ing, either that this version was consulted by the Syriac tran-
slator or translators, or that the Syrians afterwards corrected
THE SYRIAC VERSIONS. 603
their translation by the Septuagint. Credner, who has par-
ticularly investigated the minor prophets, according to this
version, is of opinion that the translator of the Old Testament
for the most part followed the Hebrew text, but at the same
time consulted the Chaldee Paraphrase and Septuagint Version,
Leusden conjectures, that the translator did not make use of the
most correct Hebrew manuscripts, and has given some examples
which appear to support his opinion. Dathe, however, speaks
most positively in favor of its antiquity and fidelity, and refers
to the Syriac version, as a certain standard by which we may
judge of the state of the Hebrew text, in the second century;
and both Dr. Kennicott and Professor De Rossi have derived
many valuable readings from this version. De Rossi, indeed,
prefers it to all the other ancient versions, and says, that it
closely follows the order of the sacred text, rendering word
for word, and is more pure than any other. As it is therefore
probable, that the Syriac version was made about the end of
the first century, it might be made from Hebrew MSS. almost
as old as those which were before transcribed into Greek, and
from MSS. which might be in some places true where the
others were corrupted And it will be no wonder at all, if a
version so very ancient should have preserved a great variety
of true readings, where the Hebrew manuscripts were corrupted
afterwards. Boothroyd considers this version to be as ancient,
and in many respects as valuable, as the Chaldee Para-
phrase ; and in the notes to his edition of the Hebrew Bible he
has shown that this version has retained numerous and im-
portant various readings. To its general fidelity almost every
critic of note bears unqualified approbation, although it is not
everywhere equal ; and it is remarkably clear and strong in
those passages which attribute characters of Deity to the Mes-
siah. Michaelis and Jahn have observed, that a different
method of interpretation is adopted in the Pentateuch, from
that which is to be found in the Book of Chronicles ; and Jahn
has remarked that there are some Chaldee words in the first
chapter of Genesis, and also in the Book of Ecclesiastes and
the Song of Solomon ; whence they infer that this version was
the work not of one, but of several authors. Further,
Michaelis has discovered traces of the religion of the translator,
which indicate a Christian, and no Jew. A Jew by religion
would have used the Chaldee Targums more copiously than
is observed in most books of the Syriac Old Testament.
This a Jew by birth would have done, if even he had been
converted to Christianity, and, as most of the books of the
604 THE SYRIAC VERSIONS.
Syriac Bible thus evince that the interpreter had no acquaint-
ance with the Targums, Michaelis (whose opinion is adopted
by Gesenius) is of the opinion that the translator was a
Christian ; and their judgment is corroborated by the fact that
the arguments prefixed to the Psalms were manifestly written
by a Christian author.
The Syriac version of the New Testament comprises only
the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles to Saint
Paul (including the Epistle to the Hebrews), the First Epistle
to Saint John, Saint Peter's First Epistle, and the Epistle of
Saint James. The celebrated passage in I. John, V. 7. and the
history of the woman taken in adultery (John VIII. 2 — 11),
are both wanting. All the Christian sects in Syria and the
East make use of this version exclusively, which they hold in
the highest estimation. It agrees with the Constantinopolitan
recension. Michaelis pronounces it to be the very best trans-
lation of the Greek Testament which he ever read, for the gen-
eral ease, elegance, and fidelity with which it has been executed.
It retains, however, many Greek words, which might have been
easily and correctly expressed in Syriac; in Matth. XXVII.
alone there are not fewer than eleven words. In like manner,
some Latin words have been retained which the authors of the
New Testament had borrowed from the Roman manners and
customs. This version also presents some mistakes, which
can only be explained by the words of the Greek text, from
which it was immediately made.
The first edition of the Syriac version of the Old Testa-
ment appeared in the Paris Polyglott ; but, being taken from
an imperfect MS., its deficiencies were supplied by Gabriel
Sionita, who translated the passages wanting from the Latin
Vulgate, and has been unjustly charged with having translated
the whole from the Vulgate. This text was reprinted in
Walton's Polyglott, with the addition of some apocryphal books.
The Peschito Syriac version of the New Testament was first
made known in Europe by Moses of Mardin, who had been sent
by Ignatius, patriarch of the Maronite Christians, in 1552, to
Pope Julius III., to acknowledge the papal supremacy in the
name of the Syrian church, and was at the same time commis-
sioned to procure a printed text of the Syriac New Testament.
This was accomplished at Vienna in 1555, under the editorial
care of Moses and Albert Widmanstad, with the assistance of
William Postell, and at the expense of the Emperor Ferdinand
I. This Editio Princeps is in quarto. The Syriac New Testa-
ment has since been printed several times.
THE SYRIAC VERSIONS. 506
There is also extant a Syriac version of the Second Epistle
of Saint Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of John, the
Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse, which are wanting in the
Peschito : these are by some writers ascribed to Mar Abba,
primate of the East between the years 535 and 552, The
translation of these books is made from the original Greek ;
but the author, whoever he was, possessed but an indifferent
knowledge of the two languages.
The Philoxenian or Syro-Philoxenian Version, derives
its name from Philoxenus, or Xenayas, Bishop of Hierapolis
in Syria, A. D. 488 — 518, who employed his rural bishop
{Chorepiscopus) Polycarp, to translate the Greek New Tes-
tament into Syriac. This version was finished in the year
508, and was afterwards revised by Thomas of Harkel, or
Heraclea, A. D. 616. Michaelis is of opinion, that there was a
third edition ; and a fourth is attributed to Dionysius Barsali-
baeus, who was bishop of Amida from 1166 to 1177. It ap-
pears, however, that there were only two editions — the original
one by Polycarp, and that revised by Thomas of Harkel ; the
single copy of the Four Gospels, with the alterations of Bar-
salibaeus, in the twelfth century, being hardly entitled to the
name of a new edition. This version agrees with the Con-
stantinopolitan recension. It was not known in Europe until
the middle of the eighteenth century; when Ridley published
a Dissertation on the Syriac Versions of the New Testatment
(in 1 761), three manuscripts of which he had received thirty
years before from Amida in Mesopotamia.
The Philoxenian version, though made immediately from
the Greek, is greatly inferior to the Peschito, both in the ac-
curacy with which it is executed, and also in its style. It is,
however, not devoid of value, " and is of real importance to a
critic, whose object is to select a variety of readings, with a
view of restoring the genuine text of the Greek original : for
he may be fully assured, that every phrase and expression is a
precise copy of the Greek text as it stood in the manuscript
from which the version was made. But, as it is not prior to
the sixth century, and the Peschito was written either at the
«nd of the first, or at the beginning of the second century, it
is of less importance to know the readings of the Greek manu-
script that was used in the former, than those of the original
employed in the latter." (Michaelis's Introd. to the New Test,
vol. II. part I. p. 68.)
The Karkaphensian Version, as it is commonly termed,
is a recension of the Peschito, or old Syriac version of the Old
506 THE SYRIAC VERSIONS.
and New Testaments, executed towards the close of the tenth
century, by David, a Jacobite monk, residing in the monastery
of St. Aaron, on mount Sigara in Mesopotamia, whence is de-
rived the appellation Karkaphensian, {Karkupho signifying the
"head," and also the "summit of a mountain.") We are in-
formed by the learned Card. Wiseman, who has most
minutely investigated the history and literary character of this
recension, that the basis of its text is the Peschito or Versio
Simplex, with the printed copies of which it bears a close
affinity ; except that proper names and Graeco-Syriac words are
accommodated to the Greek orthography, or to that adopted
by Thomas of Harkel, in his revision of the Philoxenian version.
Some eminent critics have thought that the Karkaphensian
version was made for the use of the Nestorians ; Card. Wiseman,
however, is decidedly of opinion, that it is of Monophysite or
Jacobite origin.*
The Syro-Estrangelo version, also called the SvRlAC
Hexaplar, is a translation of Origen's Hexaplar edition of the
Greek Septuagint ; it was executed in the former part of the
seventh century, and its author is unknown. The late Profes-
sor De Rossi, who published the first specimen of it at Parma,
in 1778, does not decide whether it is to be attributed to Mar-
Abba, James of Edessa, Paul Bishop of Tela, or to Thomas of
Heraclea. Assemanni ascribes it to Thomas, though other
learned men affirm that he did no more than collate the books
of Scripture. This version, however, corresponds exactly with
the text of the Septuagint, especially in those passages in
which the latter differs from the Hebrew. A MS. of this ver-
sion is in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, comprising the
Books of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solo-
mon, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Hosea, Amos, Habakkuk, Zeph-
aniah, Haggai, Zachariah, Malachi, Jeremiah, Daniel, and
Isaiah ; it also contains the obelus and other marks of Origen's
Hexapla ; and a subscription at the end states it to have been
taken from the exemplar of Eusebius and Pamphilus, after the
copy of that exemplar which they corrected from the Hexapla
of Origen, which was deposited in the library of Caesarea.
The Curetonian Syriac is so named from its editor Wil-
liam Cureton.
In 1842, Tattam brought from the an Eastern monastery
several manuscripts. Out of these MSS. Cureton picked out
eighty-two leaves and a half of a Syriac MS. containing por-
*Card. Wiseman's Horae Syriacse, torn. I. pp. 236-240, compared with pp.
162, 163.
THE COPTIC VERSIONS. 607
tions of the Gospels. " They are in quarto, with two columns
on a page, in a bold hand, and Estrangelo or old Syriac char-
acter, on vellum originally very white, the single points for
stops, some titles, &c. being in red ink ; and there are no marks
of Church-lessons by the first hand, which Cureton assigns to
the middle of the fifth century. The fragments contain Matth.
I. I— VIII. 22; X. 32— XXIII. 25 ; Mark XVI. 17—20; John
I. I— 42; III. 6— VII. 37; XIV, 10—12; 16—18; 19—23;
26—29; Luke II, 48— III. 16; VII. 33— XV. 21; XVII.
24 — XXIV. 44, or 1786 verses, so arranged that St. Mark's
Gospel is immediately followed by St. John's. The Syriac
text was printed in fine Estrangelo type in 1848, and freely
imparted to such scholars as might need its help ; it was not
till 1858 that the work was published, with a very literal trans-
lation into rather bald English, a beautiful and ^^■a.zX. facsimile
by Mrs. Cureton, and a Preface, full of interesting or startling
matter, which has been criticised in no friendly tone. Indeed,
the difficult but unavoidable investigation into the relation his
new version bears to the Peschito, has been further complicated
by Cureton 's persuasion that he had discovered in these Syriac
fragments a text of St. Matthew's Gospel that ' to a great ex-
tent, has retained the identical terms and expressions which
the Apostle himself employed ; and that we have here, in our
Lord's discourses, to a great extent the very same words as
the Divine Author of our holy religion himself uttered, in pro-
claiming the glad tidings of salvation in the Hebrew dia-
lect -5^ * * * ; that here in fact we have to a great extent the ori-
ginal of that Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew of which the
canonical Greek Gospel is but a translation. It is beside our
present purpose to examine in detail the arguments of Dr.
Cureton on this head, and it would be the less necessary in any
case, since they seem to have convinced no one save himself."
(Scrivener, op. cit.)
Chapter XXIV.
The Egyptian or Coptic Versions.
The Coptic language is derived from the old Egyptian
tongue with numerous Greek words intermingled. This lan-
guage did not cease to be spoken in Egypt, until towards the
middle of the XVII. century. The study of the Coptic litera-
ture 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 Hieroglyphs, and the impor-
508 THE COPTIC VERSIONS.
tance of studying the Coptic Bible, has only recently been
realized. The great decadence of learning 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 con-
dition of the science. We are indebted for much of the present
data to M. Hyvernat, of Washington University.
The Coptic language existed in several important dialects,
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 trans-
ferred their seat from Alexandria to Cairo, that it spread at
Memphis. The usage of the best scholars is to call it Bo-
hairic.
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 Thebaic form
Thebes, the capital of Upper Egypt, but it is uncertain,
whether the tongue originated at Thebes, and it is more scien-
tific 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 discovered
by Giorgi (Frag. Evang. Joh. Graeco-Copto-Thebaicum, Rome,
1789). He termed it Ammonian, believing that it had been
spoken in the Oasis of Ammon. According to Quatrem^re,
it was spoken in the greater and minor Oasis. Zoega calls it
the Bashmuric, while Stern denies the identity between the
Fayoumian and the Bashmuric.
There was a dialect spoken in middle Egypt in the pro-
vince 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 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 COPTIC VERSIONS. 509
the ancient Chemmis or Panopolis; M. Bouriant who first
published these fragments has termed this dialect the
Bashmuric.
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 XL century testifies,
that the Bohairic and Sahidic alone possessed literary impor-
tance in his age. In^that epoch, the monophysite patriarchs
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 southward. 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.
M. Hyvernat declares that he knows of no existing com-
plete Bohairic version of Scripture.
Quatrem^re (Recherches, pp. Ii8) testifies that Marcel pos-
sessed a copy of such 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 Hartwell. This copy was seen
in Hartwell's Library in 1847 by 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 burning of Marcel's house at Cairo.
The books bear an Arabic 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 Scrip-
tures, we shall first briefly notice some of the principal publi-
cations of this version in Europe.
610 THE COPTIC VERSIONS.
In 1 73 1 Wilkin published at London the Bohairic Penta-
teuch, In 1837, de Lagarde published a complete edition of
the Pentateuch, but in neither of these editions was use made
of the Vatican MS. i, 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. I" ^^4^ Tattam published
the Book of Job. The Bohairic Psalter was published in 1744,
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 published
again by Bouriant in 1882. The last named savant, has also
published fragments of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus.
In 1836, Tattam published as 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.
In 1716, David Wilkins published the entire Bohairic New
Testament. He made use of excellent MSS., and his work is
the editio princeps of the Bohairic version of Scripture. In the
judgment of M. Hyvernat, Wilkins has made poor use of his
excellent materials. In 1829, the British and Foreign Bible
Society published an edition of the Bohairic New Testament
with an Arab translation. The text is that of Wilkins, with
slight modifications.
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. About the same time a magnificent edition of
THE COPTIC VERSIONS. 511
the New Testament in Coptic was published for the
Society for promoting Christian knowledge, by Henry
Tattam.
M. Hyvernat declares that all the editions of Tattam have
no critical value.
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 from SS. Mat-
thew and John from MSS. furnished him by Cav. Nani. Min-
garelli, 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, pub-
lished several fragments at Copenhagen. In 1778, Woide was
commissioned by the University of Oxford to publish the
Sahidic New Testament. Materials accumulated, and he died
in 1790, without finishing the work. Henry Ford brought it
to completion in 1799. It is enriched by excellent notes. In
1801 or 1802, Zoega was emploj'ed by Card. 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 Propa-
ganda. Zoega continued his work from the Propaganda's de-
posit. The work went to press in 1805. Litigation with Card.
Borgia's heirs delayed it so, that the edition did not appear
till 1 8 10, nearly a year after Zoega's death. It is the best col-
lection of Coptic literature ever published. In the collection
there are several Sahidic fragments.
Nothing more was done in Coptic publications, till in 1875
Peyron published the Sahidic Psalter. Since that time, im-
portant Coptic publications have been published by de Lagarde,
Agapios Bsciai, Ciasca, Hermann, Bouriant, Amelineau, and
Maspero.
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
512 THE COPTIC VERSIONS.
growing institution. The first evangelists of Egypt, doubtless,
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 (251-256) (Patr,
Graeca, 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. Anthony, 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 mon-
asteries was Coptic. St. Pacomius (292-348) did not learn
Greek till at an advanced age (Rosweyde) ; and in the rules of
his monastery (Patr. Lat. Migne, 23, Col. 70) it was established
that the study of the Scriptures was one of the chief employ-
ments 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 Stern 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. As the Coptic language is devoid of particles,
the Greek particles aWd, Be, yap, ovv, fiev, ovSe, etc., are trans-
lated into Coptic.
THE ETHIOPIC VERSION. 513
The Coptic has no passive voice, nor no verb corresponding
to the e%<» of the Greek, but yet, being furnished with definite
and indefinite articles, it is judged to be superior to the Latin
or Syriac, in rendering the Greek.
The Coptic versions are of great worth in textual criticism.
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 hexaplar text, and
it is probable that the version as we have it, is a later recen-
sion, made to accord with some recension of the Greek text.
The Sahidic New Testament, has been studied by Muenter.
It is inferior to the Bohairic version.
The fragments of the Akmimian version, commonly called
the Bashmuric fragments, were published by Bouriant. Krall
has also given us a specimen of a fragment of the Minor
Prophets. But it has not been studied sufficiently 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.
Chapter XXV.
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 provid-
ing. Having concluded their observations, they set sail for
their own country, and while passing the coast of Abyssinia,
*Iterum dixit Jeremias Pashori: Eritis aliquando cum patribus vestris
repugnantes veritati, et filii vestri venturi post vos, isti facient iniquitatem
magis abominandam quam vos. Nam ipsi dabunt pretium pro eo, cui nullum
est pretium. Et nocebunt ei qui sanatmorbos, et in remissionem peccatorum.
Et accipient triginta argenteos in pretium ejus quem tradent filii Israelis.
Et ad dandum id, pro agro figuli, sicut mandavit Dominus. Et ita dicent :
Veniet super eos judicium perditionis in seternum et super Alios eorum quia
condemnaverunt sanguinem innocentem.
GG
514 THE ETHIOPIC VERSION.
they touched at a certain port for water and other necessary
articles. The natives were 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 Fru-
mentius, whose prudence all recognized. 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 constructed, 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 Alexan-
dria 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 him-
self to be bishop of the strange country. He soon after re-
ceived 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 be-
ginning 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 re-
ceive Arianism. This attempt failed, but in the sixth
centur}'-, through the influence of the Monophysite Patri-
archs of Alexandria, they 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 evi-
dent that he could make little progress in evangelizing the
THE ETHIOPIC VERSION. 616
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 18 10 and 1820, Asselin de Cherville, the French
consul at Cairo, translated, by the aid of Abou-Roumi, the
Scriptures into Amharic. His version was purchased by the
British Bible Society. J. P. Piatt revised it, and published the
Gospels in 1824. He published the whole New Testament in
1829, and the whole Bible in 1842. In 1875 the society pub-
lished 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 difficult 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 incorrupt ; but
great freedom was used by later hands in interpolating many
passages, so that a critical edition is necessary before the book
shall be of any critical worth. Many believe that there were
two editions of the New Testament. In the Old Testament,
they recognize, i. — The original version ; 2. — A recension made
from later Greek codices, which became the Ethiopic Vulgate ;
and 3. — A still later recension, made from the Hebrew text.
Some, however, deny these later recensions, and believe that
there existed only one version which has suffered interpolations
and glosses.
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 Testament 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.
616 THE GOTHIC VERSION.
Chapter XXVI.
The Gothic Version.
The Goths were a Germanic gens who, in the second cen-
tury, spread from the Vistula to the Danube. Some of them
were converted in the third century to Christianity. Theo-
philus, 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. Their bishop at
that time was Ulphilas, of whose life we have only very uncer-
tain details. Some believe that he first professed the orthodox
Catholic faith and afterwards lapsed into Arianism to gain the
favor of Valens. It is certain that he was a zealous promoter
of Arianism among the Goths, and that it was he who gave
them their version of Scriptures. This places the date of
the Gothic version about the middle of the fourth century. It
is asserted by Comely that this version was employed also by
some of the Catholic Goths, (op. cit.)
The Goths in that age had no alphabet. Ulphilas adopted
the old Runic characters with some additions from the
Greek.
Philostorgius testifies : ** that Ulphilas 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 1817, in the Am-
brosian Library, of a Palimpsest fragment of the Gothic text of
Kings.
The version of Ulphilas 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.
'the GOTHIC VERSION. 617
Some have maintained that the victorious Gustave Adolph
sent the Codex to Sweden with other booty, that he took from
the libraries of the Jesuites at Riga, Brunsberg and Oppen-
heim.
Battifol denies this. Junius, who first published the MS. in
1665, testifies, that it was in the possession of Isaac Vossius,
the celebrated librarian of Queen Christina. Toward the close
of the fifteenth century, the Codex was in the library of the
monastery of Werden, near Diisseldorf, where Morilloni saw
it, and copied from it the Gothic text of the Lord's Prayer,
which Becanus published in 1569. We next find it at Prague
in 1601, whence it was taken by the Swedes in the war of
1648. Marshal Konigsmark gave it to Queen Christina. It
originally contained the four Gospels in the order of Matthew,
John, Luke, Mark, but it has suffered serious mutilations. It
is written in uncial characters.
The Codex Argenteus, is the most important portion of
Gothic Scripture preserved to us.
Some fragments of the Gothic version of St. Paul's Epistle
to the Romans were discovered by M. Knittel, in the year
1756, in a Codex Rescriptus belonging to the library of the duke
of Brunswick at Wolfenbiittel : they were published by him in
1762, and reprinted in 1763, in 4to., at Upsal, with notes by
Ihre. The Brunswick manuscript, which is on vellum, and is
supposed to be of the sixth century, contains only the follow-
ing passages, viz. Rom. XL 33-36; XII. 1-5, 17-21; XIV. 9-
20; XV. 3-13. The version of Ulphilas is in one column, and
a Latin translation in the other. It is on Vellum, and is supposed
to be of the sixth century. In the eighth or ninth century, the
Origines hidori Hispalensis were written over the translation
of Ulphilas ; and the ink had became so exceedingly pale, as
not to admit of deciphering the original manuscript without
great difficulty.
In the year 18 17, a most important discovery was made
among the Codices Rescripti, in the Ambrosian library at Milan,
by signor Angelo Mai. While this indefatigable explorer of
ancient literature was examining two Codices Rescripti in the
Ambrosian library, he was surprised with the discovery of some
Gothic writing in one of them ; which on further investigation
proved to be fragments of the books of Kings, Ezra, and
Nehemiah. The discovery thus auspiciously made stimulated
him to further inquiries, which were rewarded with the dis-
covery of four other Codices Rescripti containing portions
of the Gothic version. He now associated in his researches
618 THE GOTHIC VERSION.
signer Carolo Ottavio Castillionei ; and to their joint labors we
are indebted for a specimen and account of these manuscripts,
from which the following particulars are abridged.
The first of these five Gothic MSS. (which is noted S. 36.)
consists of 204 quarto pages on vellum ; the later writing con-
tains the homilies of Gregory the Great on the Prophecies of
Ezekiel, which from their characters must have been executed
before the eighth century. Beneath this, in a more ancient Gothic
hand, are contained the Epistles of St. Paul to the Romans,
I. and II. Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I.
and II. of Timothy, Titus, Philemon, together with a fragment
of the Gothic Calendar. The Epistles to the Romans, Cor-
inthians, Ephesians, and to Timothy, are very nearly entire,
and form the chief part of this manuscript : of the other
Epistles considerable fragments only remain. The titles of the
Epistles may be traced at the heads of the pages where they
commence.
The second MS. also in quarto, and noted S. 45., contains
156 pages of thinner vellum, the Latin writing on which is of
the eighth or ninth century, and comprises Jerome's expos-
ition of Isaiah. Under this has been discovered (though with
some difficulty, on account of the thickness of the Latin
characters and the blackness of the ink,) the Gothic version of
Saint Paul's two Epistles to the Corinthians, the Galatians,
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, the two Epistles to the
Thessalonians, and to Titus. What is deficient in the preced-
ing manuscript is found in this, which has some various read-
ings peculiar to itself, and therefore is an independent codex.
In the third manuscript, noted G. 82., a quarto Latin
volume, containing the plays of Plautus, and part of Seneca's
Tragedies of Medea and QEdipus, signor Mai discovered frag-
ments of the Books of Kings, Ezra, and Nehemiah. This dis-
covery is peculiarly valuable, as not the smallest portion of
the Gothic version of the Old Testament was known to be in
existence.
The fourth specimen (noted I. 61.) consists of a single
sheet in small quarto, containing four pages of part of Saint
John's Gospel in Latin, under which are found the very frag-
ments of the twenty-fifth, twenty-sixth, and twenty-seventh
chapters of Matthew's Gospel, which are wanting in the cele-
brated manuscript of the Gothic Gospels preserved at Upsal,
and usually known by the appellation of the Codex Argenteus.
The yf/if/i and last manuscript, (noted G. 147.) which has
preserved some remains of Gothic literature, is a volume of the
THE ARMENIAN VERSION. 519
proceedings of the Council of Chalcedon ; under the later writ-
ing have been discovered some fragments of ancient authors,
whose names signor Mai has not specified ; and also a frag-
ment of a Gothic Homily, rich in biblical quotations, and the
style of which he thinks shows that it was translated from some
one of the fathers of the Greek Church. The characters of this
manuscript bear a close resemblance to those of the Codex
Argenteus, at Upsal, which was executed in the sixth century.
The manuscripts above described are written in broad and
thick characters, without any division of words or of chapters,
but with contractions of proper names, similar to those found
in ancient Greek MSS. Some sections, however, have been
discovered, which are indicated by numeral marks or larger
spaces, and sometimes by large letters. The Gothic writing is
referred to the sixth century.
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.
I — 3. II. A Fragment of Saint Matthew's Gospel, containing
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. I — 16. IV. Saint Paul's Epistle to Titus,
Chap. I. I — 16 ; II. I.; and V. verses 11 — 23 of his Epistle to
Philemon. The Gothic text is exhibited on the left-hand
page, and on the right-hand page the editors have given a lit-
eral Latin translation of it, together with the Greek original.
These are succeeded by fragments of a Gothic Homily and
Calendar, with Latin translations, Gothic alphabet, and a
glossary of new Gothic words, which they have discovered in
the passages which they have printed. In 1829 signor Castil-
lionei published the fragments of Ulphilas's version of the
second Epistle to the Corinthians.
The Gothic version was made from the Greek, which it
faithfully follows. One evidence of the translator's Arianism
appears in Paul's Epistle to Philippians II. 6, where Ulphilas
translates the la-o<; not by idna or samaleiks, but by galeiks,
which signifies o\xoio<i.
It is to be regretted that we have no critical edition of the
Gothic Scriptures.
Chapter XXVII.
The Armenian Version of Scripture.
The evangelization of Armenia was wrought by Gregory
the Illuminator, in the first years of the fourth century.
620 THE ARMENIAN VERSION.
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
colaborer, 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 trans-
lation of the New Testament." This work was finished in
411. Cf. Gorioun Biography of Mesrob, in Langlois' Collection
of Ancient and Modern Histories of Armenia, 2 vols, in 4 mo.,
Paris, 1839, t. II. p. 10; T. N6ve, Christian Armenia and its
Literature, in 8mo., Paris, 1886, p. 13, 22. Cf. 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. II. p. 226. Cf. Saint Martin, Historical
and Geographical Memoirs of Armenia, 2 in 8mo., Paris, 1819,
t. I. p. II ; Tchamitchian, 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 Ar-
menian. Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p. 11-12. These two
young men repaired from Edessa to Byzantium, where they were
rejoined by 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 re-
THE ARMENIAN VERSION. 521
turned to Armenia, carrying among their literary effects the
Acts of the Council, and authentic copies of the Holy Scrip-
tures in Greek. Gorioun, ibid. Isaac and Mesrob 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
sufificient knowledge of the Greek language, and their labor
was judged very imperfect. They, therefore, sent other young
men to study Greek at Alexandria. Moses of Khorene was
among this number. (Moses of Khorene, III. 6i). They
doubtless brought back from Egypt, other Greek exemplars
of the Bible, which they used to perfect the work of their
predecessors in faithfully translating the text of the Septua-
gint, from the Hexapla of Origen ; because the same signs and
asterisks are found in the old Armenian manuscripts of the
Bible. Cf. P. Zohrab, Armenian Bible, 4 in 8mo., Venice,
1805, Introd. p. 6, 7. See Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p.
Ti, 12. Moses of Khorene, III. 61 ; Tchmitichian, 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 Aschdischad, 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,
Histoire du Patriarcat ArmMian Catholique, in 8mo., Paris,
1891, p. 128-129.
Some authors, relying on a passage of Bar-Hebraeus, have
advanced the opinion that the Armenian version had been re-
touched from the Peschito. But the opinion of Bar-Hebraeus
is a pure conjecture, confirmed by no Armenian or Syriac
document. For the words of Bar-Hebraeus see Walton, Pro-
logomena, XIII. 16; Wiseman, Horce Syriacce, p. 142; Cf.
Rhode, Gregorii Bar-Hebrcsi scholia in Ps. V. et XVIII., p.
74; Bredenkamp, Ueber die Armenische Uebersetzung des
Alien Testaments, in Eichorn's Allgemeine Bibliothek, Tom. IV.,
p. 634, etc. Some have also maintained, that the Armenian ver-
sion was corrected from the Vulgate by King Haito II. at the
end of the thirteenth century. La Croze, Thesaurus Epistolicus
III. 3 ; Michaelis' Introduction to the New Testament, edit.
Marsh; The Political History (Tchamitchian) of Armenia, t.
II. p. 263, and the History of its literature (Somal, Quadro
delta Storia Litteraria di Armenia, in 8mo., Venice, 1829, p.
126), make no mention of this retouching of the Armenian
version. Both are content with saying that Haito made the
622 THE ARMENIAN VERSION.
Bible his favorite companion ; that he labored to make a very-
good copy for himself, and that, having abdicated the royalty,
he retired to a convent, where, in a spirit of humility, he took
the Franciscan habit. This has been a sufficient basis for
certain minds to accuse him of having corrupted the Armenian
version. Among the numerous manuscripts known to us,
none justify that accusation.
The Armenian version follows very closely the received
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 majority
of scholars who have occupied themselves with the criticism
of the Greek text of the Bible, did not know the Armenian
language.
In collating the Armenian text, they worked upon an in-
sufficient number of variants that they received from those
who had a smattering of Armenian. To make matters worse,
these different readings were, for the most part, taken from the
very uncritical edition of Uscan. Tregelles was more fortunate.
Mr. Charles Rieu, chief of the department of oriental manu-
scripts in the British museum, collated for him the text of the
New Testament of Uscan's and Zohrab's editions, and trans-
lated also all the different readings which the learned Mekhi-
tarist had collected. The work of Mr. Rieu has been published
i n the Greek New Testament of Tregelles. See Scrivener, A
Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, 3d
edit., Cambridge, 1883, p. 408. Kaulen has given in his Ein-
leitung in die Heilige Schrift, a certain number of passages of
the Armenian version (Old and New Testaments), which show,
I. — That the Armenian version follows the Greek faithfully,
although not servilely, ibid § 176, p. 144; 2. — That the version
agrees with the received texts, not only as regards dogma, but
also, substantially at least, as regards criticism.
In 1563, Sepher Abgar was sent to Rome by the Patriarch
Michel, as ambassador to Paul IV. While at Rome he caused
Armenian type to be cast, and with these he printed the Psalter
at Venice in 1565. This is the Editio Princeps of the Arme-
nian Literature.
THE ARMENIAN VERSION. 523
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. In many things he brought it in accord with the
Vulgate. M. Hyvernat, from whom we have taken most of
these data, believes that the passage relating to the three
heavenly witnesses, I. John V. 7, was inserted from the Vul-
gate, and that the Fourth book of Ezra, Ecclesiasticus, and the
Apocalypse were translated from the Vulgate. The edition has
been much praised by Richard Simon. Certainly the man was
to be commended for having come to the authentic Latin text
for the books that were lost in Armenian, and although such
fact diminishes the texts' critical value, it is not an evidence of
ignorance in Uscan.
The work of Uscan was perfected by the Armenian re-
ligious, 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 Eccle-
siasticus was placed in the appendix with certain apocryphal
books. They discovered later a Codex of Ecclesiasticus of the
V. century, and in a later edition in 1859, restored Ecclesiasti-
cus 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 IV. century by Armenians.
In the life of St. Mesrob, it is stated that he also gave an
alphabet 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 afore-
said 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.
624 THE ARMENIAN VERSION.
The other Eastern versions are late and unimportant. In
the ninth century, SS. Methodius and Cyrill gave to the Slavs
a Slavonic translation of Scripture, most probably made from
the Greek text.
The Arabic translations, some of which appear in Walton's
Polyglott, were made in the tenth and twelfth centuries, and
are of no critical worth.
The Persian text of the Gospels which appears in Walton's
Polyglott, was made from the Syriac Peschito. Its date is un-
certain, but it is later than the eighth century.
Saadias Haggaon, a Jew living in Egypt in the X. century,
translated the Pentateuch from the Massoretic 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 published
in Walton's Polyglott.
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 Massoretic
text by a Jew in the VIII. century, and is of no critical value.
We know not the date or the author of the Arabic text of
Joshua published by Walton. There are also Arabic fragments
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 X.
and XIII. centuries. It was made from the Hebrew text in
Samaritan characters of the Samaritan Codex.
The Arabic text of the Prophets which appears in Walton's
Polyglott, was made from the Septuagint, and Theodotion'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 X. century.
The Arabic text of the New Testament was made directly
from the Greek. Its date is unknown, but the eighth century
would be the earliest possible date.
The Persian Pentateuch of Walton was made by a Jew of
the XVI. century. It follows the Massoretic text servilely,
and is of small critical worth. The Persian text of the Gospels
which was made from the Greek, is assigned to the XIV.
century. Other versions may exist, but they have not been
studied.
THE VULGATE. 625
Chapter XXVIII.
Jerome and the Vulgate.
We have sufificiently 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 bjr
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.
This translation 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.
What we have written of Jerome's life and labors, places in
clear light his relation to our approved Vulgate.
Jerome was guided in his method of translation by two
norms. 1. — 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 ex-
amination of the Vulgate will reveal this general design running
all through it. Thus, at times, he changes completely the
order and form of the Hebrew sentence ; again, he avoids the
excessive minuteness of description and frequent repetitions of
the same text. The following two examples will illustrate
this :
626
THE VULGATE.
Genesis XXXIX. 19-20. (Vul-
gate).
"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."
Genesis XXXIX. 19—20. (Lit-
eral 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 Joseph'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).
" And 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 priest's
office. And thou shalt bring his
sons, and clothe them with coats :
And thou shalt anoint them, as
thou didst anoint their father,
that they may minister unto me
in the priests office : for their
anointing shall surely be an
everlasting priesthood through-
out their generations."
Jerome omits two whole verses, and condenses their im-
port in the other two.
This is praised by some as a certain elegance in Latin diction,
but I must confess I would 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).
Exodus XL. 12-13. (Vulgate).
" 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 prosper to an everlast-
ing priesthood."
"Joseph is a fruitful son
(bough), a fruitful son (planted)
by the fountain whose branches
run over the wall."
Gen. XLIX. 22. (Vulgate).
"Joseph is a growing son, a
growing son and comely to be-
hold : the daughters run to and
fro upon the wall."
THE VULGATE. 627
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
upon 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 also errs.
The following text will illustrate this assertion :
Joshua XIV. 15. (Hebrew.) Joshua XIV. 15. (Vulgate).
"And the name of Hebron be- " The name of Hebron before
fore was Kirjath-Arba (the city was called Cariath-Arbe ; Adam,
of Arba) who was a great man the greatest among the Enacim
among the Anakim. And the was laid there ; and the land
land had rest from war." rested from wars."
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 :
II. Ezra IX. 7. (Hebrew.) II. Ezra IX. 7. (Vulgate.)
" Thou art the Lord God, who " Thou, O Lord God, art he
didst choose Abram, and brought- who chosest Abram, and brought-
est him forth out of Ur, the Chal- est him forth out of the fire of
deans, and gavest him the name the Chaldeans, and gavest him
of Abraham." 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 fol-
lowing passage :
Exodus XXXIII. 13. (Literal
Hebrew.) Exodus XXIII. 13. (Vulgate.)
** And in all things that I have " Keep all things that I have
said unto you, be circumspect : said to you. And by the name of
and make no mention of the name strange gods thou shalt not swear,
of other gods, neither let it be neither shall it be heard out of
heard out of your mouth." your mouth."
The precept is against idolatry, not against profanity.
A similar serious defect occurs in the well known passage
of Isaiah XL 10, wherein Jerome translates the close of the
verse: " — and his peace will be glorious," by : " — and his
528 THE VULGATE.
sepulchre will be glorious." The Prophet predicted the
glorious reign of Christ, which succeeded to his period of suf-
fering, 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 the
versions of Scripture. This is even admitted by rationalists
and protestants.*
A translator is not an inspired agent, and these few de-
fects 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 centuries
since Jerome lived, and it is not strange that in a few cases
some slight betterment could be now wrought in his transla-
tion, 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 conciliate
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 scandal-
ized by this new presentation of the truths of Scripture, with
which, in the old form, they were now familiar. St. Augustine
*Haevemick ^in\. I. p. 444: " Seine im Ganzen sehr wahren hermeneu-
tischen Principien * * * Machen seine Arbeit zu einer der ausgezeichnet-
8ten Leistungen des kirchl. Alterthums." Keil Einl. p. 572: " Seine Uebersetz-
ung * * * abertrifft alle alten Versionen an Grenauigkeit und Treue.''
Uti "orthodoxi," ita rationalistae quoque, inter quos De Wette-Schrader Einl.
p. 137: "Vermoege seiner Sorgfalt * * * brachte er vieleicht das
VortrefflicTiste zu Stande, was in dieser Art das ganze Alterthum auf zuweisen
hat." Bleek-WellliaiLsen Einl. p. 598: "Die Arbeit im Ganzen ist von unbe-
fangenen Richtern allezeit b\b sehr gelungen anerkannt." Diestel Gesch. des
A. T. p. 93: "Unmittelbar aus demHebr. Text geschcepft, meist in moeglichst
gewandter Sprache, mehr auf die Wiedergabe des rechten Sinnes als auf skla-
vische Wcertlichkeit gerichtet, erhielt sie mit vollem Becht den Bang einer
Vulgata" etc. (Apud Comely, op. cit.)
THE VULGATE. 529
was of this number, but towards the end of his life, he was
more favorably disposed to Jerome'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 Jerome'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 Caesarius of Aries
(f 542) adopted it as the received text of Scripture.
At Rome, during the fifth and sixth centuries, the drift
was decidedly in favor of the Vetus Itala. against the Vulgate.
St. Leo the Great (440-461) and Pope Hilary (461-468) made
some use of the Vulgate. With John IIL (560-578) the tide
set in strongly towards the Vulgate, and St. Gregory the
Great (590-604), who considered the Vulgate the truer transla-
tion, 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 (t636) declares that Jerome's
translation " is universally used, for the reason that it is truer
in its sense, and clearer in its diction." (De. Oil. I. 12). Ven. Bede,
(t735) rnade almost exclusive use of the Vulgate. Rhabanus
Maurus and Walafrid Strabo declare, that " in the principal
books the whole Church of Rome uses the translation of
Jerome." (Instit. Cler. II. 54.) The ascendancy of the Vul-
gate was accomplished, 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 negligence,
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 to reflect
something of every one through whose hands it had passed.
This was augmented, in the case of the Vulgate, by the con-
temporaneous existence for centuries of the two Latin versions.
Passages were copied from one into the other. There was
much revision, and re-revision, remodeling, and sciolism, till
the two texts were well mixed and corrupted. Hugh of St.
HH
530 THE CORRECTORIA OF THE VULGATE.
Victor, testifies of this state as follows : "It has come about by
a perverse usage, since different ones follow different transla-
tions, 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 Charlemagne
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 (f 1072),
St. Lanfranc of Canterbury (fio89), and the Cistercian 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 with the original texts. The results of these labors
were, in 1226, embodied in the Correctorium of Paris.
This work afterwards received the approbation of the Arch-
bishop of Sens, Primate of Gaul, for which cause it is some-
times called the Correctorium Senonense. This work of the
University of Paris in no wise benefitted the text. It was simply
the multiplication of a poor text, with some additional corrup-
tion, so that Roger Bacon said of it : " Textus pro majori parte
horribiliter corruptus est * ''^ * et ubi non habet corrup-
tionem, habet tantam dubitationem quae merito 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 litera," " falsa
est litera," etc. Sometimes, also, the margins contain 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.
THE CORRECTORIA OF THE VULGATE. 531
Some efforts had been made by the Dominicans to have a
corrected and uniform text, but 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 re-
cension of the Vulgate.
There were some other minor Correctoria executed by the
Dominicans, of which but little is known. Albertus Magnus,
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, with a certain element of hatred against the Domin-
icans, said of this text : " Eorum correctio est pessima corruptio,
et destruitur textus Dei ; et longe minus malum est uti exem-
plari Parisiensi non correcto quam eorum correctione." (Apud
Hody, 1. c.)
The Correctorium of the Franciscans has been erroneously
termed the Correctorium of the Sorbonne, from the fact that
it became known from a manuscript of the Sorbonne, 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
I know nothing. The Correctorium of the Vatican, so called
from its MSS. in the Vatican, was executed about the begin-
ning of the fourteenth century by William DeMara, a Fran-
ciscan 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 supplant the version of Jerome, but
to perfect it. His Correctorium is the best of all. He fails
ometimes, 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.
532 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE.
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 calligraphy. 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 MSS, There is no punctuation. 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 centimetres, its
width thirty-four. The manuscript forms only one volume of
one thousand and twenty-nine leaves. It contains 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 :
" Coenobium ad eximii merito 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 meaning of this dedication is : " Peter, Abbot at the
boundaries of the country of the Lombards, sends this pledge
of his tender devotion to the venerable monastery of the
Saviour, which faith looks upon as the head of the Church."
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 owner-
ship. 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 Laurentian manu-
scripts, proposed to correct the first verse as follows : " Cul-
men ad eximii merito venerabile Petri." The hexameter is re-
stored at the same time, and the first verse is made to agree
with the second : " Quem caput Ecclesiae dedicat alta fides."
CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE. 533
Thus it would result that the manuscript were one offered
to the Roman Church, caput Ecclesiae. For the '' Petrus Lan-
gobardorum ", Bandini proposed to substitute " Servandus
LatUr In fact, at the beginning of Leviticus, we read the
name of such copyist, who labored at the production of the manu-
script. We know of an Abbot Servandus of the sixth century,
a friend of St. Benedict of the neighborhood of Alatri, on the
boundaries of Latium. The Codex Amiatinus was thus con-
sidered 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 (the carrier of the
letter) dare nuUatenus habuimus ; transcribere autem non
potuit, quoniam festinanter de haec civitate egredi pro-
peravit."
Benedict Biscop, the founder of the Abbeys of Wearmouth
and Yarrow, was one of those prelates of the seventh cen-
tury, 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, "in-
numerabilem librorum omnis generis copiam." At his death
he left to his two Abbeys " bibliothecam quam de Roma nobi-
lissimam copiosissimamque advexerat."
His successor was Ceolfrid, who was the master of Bede,
of whom Bede tells us, that he took a great care of Benedict
Biscops'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,
Wearmouth 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 Eternal
City, and it is to be supposed, that they accomplished their
Abbot's intentions, thus expressed by Bede : " Inter alia
donaria quae afferre disposuerat misit Ecclesiae sancti Petri
pandectem a Beato Hieronymo in Latinum ex Hebraeo vel
Graeco fonte translatum."
534 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE.
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 '■'Ceol-
fridus 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 ''Ceolfri-
dils Anglorum" . While the English reviewers were theorizing
for and against this conjecture, 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 anonymous Life of Ceolfrtd, very likely
Bede's work, published for the first time in 1841, a passage in
which it is related, in the 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 pilgrim-
age ; and that the Bible destined for St. Peter's bore the fol-
lowing verses :
" Corpus ad eximii 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 be-
tween 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.
Men have endeavored to come to still more precise judg-
ments concerning the Codex. As it has a prologue on the
divisions of the Bible in books, almost identical with that found
in " De Institutione Divinarum Litterarum " of Cassiodorus,
some believe that the Amiatinus had been taken from Cas-
siodorus' library. The problem had been proposed by M.
Corssen, Die Bibeln des Cassiodorius und der Codex Amiati-
nus, in the Jahrbiicher fiir protestantische Theologie, Leip-
zig, 1883, p. 619 — 633. The question was examined again in
England, in 1887, by Wordworth, Hort, Browne, etc.
It can be considered as certain, that the Codex Amiatinus
is absolutely independent from Cassiodorus, and also that the
prologue on the divisions of the Bible, which fills up the first
sheets of the Amiatinus is of Cassiodorian origin, but was not
made for the Amiatinus. (See the article of Mr. Corssen in
the -'Academy" of April 17, 1888.)
CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE. 635
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 England
paid thus its debt, but moreover, in France, for Alcuin came
from York and was selected by Charles the Great (Charle-
magne), for correcting the text of the Bible." — Samuel Berger,
De r Histoire de la Vulgate en France, Paris, 1887, p. 4.
Again, it is known that the Codex Amiatinus has been
made use of for the constitution of the text of the Sixtine
edition of the Vulgate.
Tischendorf published the text of the New Testament of
the Codex Amiatinus, C. Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum
ex Codice Amiatino, Leipzig, 1890 — 1894. See Bandini, Bib-
liotheca Leopoldina Laurentiana. Florence, 1891, t. I., p.
701 — 732 ; Wordsworth, Novum Testamentum Latine, p. XL,
Oxford, 1889; De Rossi, La Biblia offerta da Ceolfrido abbate
al sepulcro di S. Pietro. Rome, 1888 ; J. White, The Codex
Amiatinus and its birth-place in the Studia Biblica, Oxford,
1870, t. II, p. 273 — 308. (P. Batifol 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 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 aflfixed 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 accu-
rately described by E. Reinke, Marbourg, t868.
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.
636 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE.
The Codex Bobbiensis is more ancient than either of
these. It belongs to the National Library of Turin ; it is de-
signated in the Latin Apparatus Criticus by the minuscule
letter h.
The Codex forms a quarto volume of 96 leaves of fine
parchment. The leaves measure 185 millimetres by 165. 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 are recognizable in
the text. One of these was contemporary with the original
scribe ; the other more modern, is believed from the Irish
characters used to be St. Columban.
The Codex in its present state only contains the following
fragments of Matthew and Mark: Math. I. i to III. 10; IV.
2 to XIV. 17; XV. 26— 30; Mark VIII. 8— 11, 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 re-
mains is believed to be a portion of the 33d cahier ; the follow-
ing twenty 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 modern 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 born 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 Scrip-
tures 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 estab-
lished 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; ^^^ by Wordsworth and
Sanday in 1886.
The Latin versions before the time of Jerome can be re-
duced 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 IV. century ;
NEW TRANSLATIONS OF THE VULGATE. 537
3. — The Italian, whose use is represented by St. Augustine.
The Codex of Bobbio is a faithful exemplar of the African
text. See Codex Bobbiensis in Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la
Bible.
The Codex Cavensis is a MS. of Jerome's Vulgate, the
property of the Abbey of La Cava, near Salerno. It consists
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 IX. century, if not of the end of the VIII. It
contains all the books of both Testaments.
The Codex Foroiuliensis of the VI. century, formerly
contained the four Gospels, but now is mutilated in Mark.
The Codex Ottobonianus contains the Octateuch com-
plete, but is of slight worth.
The Codex Paulinus or Carolinus, and The Codex
Statianus or Vallicellianus of the IX. century, contain all
the books of both Testaments of the recension of Alcuin. They
were much prized by Sirleti and others in the emendation 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, 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 editions,
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 critical
edition of the Vulgate text was the Complutensian, whose text
is 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 to themselves new editions from the original
texts.
Catholics also engaged in this movement. Pagninus and
Card. Cajetan made new Latin editions from the original
texts.
The Dominican Sanctes Pagninus (fi 541) and Cajetan made
new Latin versions. Augustine Steuchus, and Isidore Clarius,
638 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE.
revised the text of the Vulgate in conformity with the original
texts. Hittorp endeavored, in his edition of Cologne in 1 530, 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
1528 and beyond, in emending the text of the Vulgate. His
labors were 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 censure to this excellent text,
wherein was naught of Calvinism or other error.
Chapter XXIX.
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.
The first abuse was the existence of many Latin versions
of the Scriptures, which were used as authentic in public read-
ings, disputations, and discourses. The remedy suggested
was to have the old Vulgate as the sole authentic edition which
all should use as authentic in all public reading, and in the ex-
position 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 In
terpreters, 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.*
*" Primus abusus est: habere varias editiones S. Scripturae, 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 praedica-
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE. 539
Several particular assemblies and three general sessions dis-
cussed this proposition, and finally, the Council promulgated
its famous decree.
" The same thrice holy Synod, believing that much benefit
may accrue to the Church of God, if from among all the Latin
versions of the Holy Scriptures which are in circulation, an
authentic one be recognized, decrees and declares 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."*
The decree of the Council of Trent set in motion a turbu-
lent movement especially 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 In-
quisition, either adopted the views of the party in power or
tionibus, et quod nemo illam reiicere audeat aut illi contradicere ; non detra-
hendo tamen auctoritati purae et verae interpretationis Septuaginta interpre-
tum, qua nonnunquam usi sunt Apostoli, neque reiiciendo alias editiones,
quatenus authenticae illius Vulgatae intelligentiam iuvant. — Secundus abustcs
est corruptio codicum qui circumferuntur Vulgatae huius editionis. Reme-
dium est, ut expurgatis et emendatis codicibus restituatur christiano orbi
pura et sincera Vulgata editio a mendis librorum. qui circumferuntur. Id
autem munus erit Smi. D. N., quern 8. Synodus" humiliter exorabit, ut pro
ovibus Christi Suae Beatitudini creditis hoc onus ingentis fructus et glorias
sui ipsius animi magnitudine dignum suscipiat ; curando etiam, ut unum
codicem Graecum unumque Hebraeum, quoad fieri potest, correctum habeat
Ecclesia sancta Dei."
*" Eadem sacrosancta Synodus considerans non parum utilitatis accedere
posse Ecclesiae Dei, si ex omnibus latinis editionibus, quae circumferuntur,
sacrorum librorum, quSenam 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 lectionibus, disputationibus,
praedicationibus et expositionibus, pro authentica habeatur et ut nemo illam
reiicere quovis praetextu audeat vel praesumat Sed et impressoribus
modum in hac parte, ut par est, imponere volens , decernit et statuit, ut
posthac S. Scriptura, potissimum vero haec ipsa vetus et Vulgata editio quam
emendatissime imprimatur."
640 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE.
kept a prudent silence. " I know," says Bannez, " what I would
respond by word of mouth, if asked by the Church ; mean-
while, I maintain a prudent and religious silence." (In I. S.
Thorn.)
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 absolutely
authentic. Of this movement Richard Simon truly wrote :
" There were but very few persons who accurately com-
prehended the sense of the decree of Trent which pronounced
the Vulgate authentic * * * The greater number of those
who agitated this question scarcely understood 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. H. 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.
"Opus molestum suscipimus, multaque difficultate impedi-
tum, periculosam aleam, ac qua nescio an ulla disputatio his
superioribus annis inter theologos, in Hispania praesertim,
majori animorum ardore et motu agitata sit, odioque partium
magis implacabili, usque eo, ut a probris et contumeliis, quibus
se mutud foedabant, ad tribunalia ventum sit ; atque quae pars
sibi magis confidebat, adversarios de Religione postulatos gra-
vissim^ exercuit, quasi impios, superbos, arrogantes, qui divi-
norum librorum auctoritatem, atque ejus interpretationis
*John Mariana, 8. J. was bom in the diocese of Toledo in Spain, in 1537.
He was endowed with great mental power and uprightness of character. He
studied in the Complutensian Academy, and in 1554 entered the Society of the
Jesuits. In 1561, he came to Rome and taught Scripture 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 in-
sight into truth profound. Through failing health he was forced to remit
some of this study, and in 1574 he returned to Spain, and in a studious re-
tirement at Toledo, he lived to an extreme old age, dying in 1624. Mariana
was a man of unblemished life, and intolerant of evil. He was no time-
server, and attacked evil wherever he found it. Having attacked some
abuses of the State, in a treatise Be Monetae Mutatione, he was judged guilty
of lae8ae majestatis, and in his 72nd year was imprisoned in a Franciscan
Monastery. His writings consist of numerous short treatises on various
subjects, several being on the Scriptures.
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE. 641
fidem, qua Ecclesia utitur passim, et quae vulgata editio nun-
cupatur, audacter elevarent, novis interpretationibus prolatis
invectisque contra divinas leges et humanes, concilii Tridentini
decreta non it^ pridem promulgata. Tenuit ea causa multo-
rum animos suspenses expectatione, quern tandem exitum
habitura esset, cum viri eruditionis opinione prasstantes, h vin-
culis cogerentur causam dicere, baud levi salutis existimationis-
que discrimine : miseranda virtutis conditio, quando pro labo-
ribus, quos susceperat maximos, compellebantur eorum a quibus
defendi par fuisset, odia, accusationes, contumelias tolerare,
quo exemplo multorum praeclaros impetus retardari, viresque
debilitari atque concidere necesse erat. Omnino fregit ea res
multorum animos alieno periculo considerantium, quantum
procellae immineret libere affirmantibus quae sentirent. Itaque
aut in aliorum castra transibant frequentes, aut tempori ceden-
dum judicabant. Et quid facerent, cum frustra niti neque
fatigando (ut ille ait) aliud quam odium quaerere, extremae de-
mentiaesit? Plerique inhaerentes persuasioni vulgari, libenter
in opinione perstabant, iis placitis faventes, in quibus minus
periculi esset baud magna veritatis cura. Quidam enim edi-
tionem vulgatam sugillant, quasi multis vitiis fcedam, ad fontes
identidem provocantes, unde ad nos ii rivi manarunt, ac con-
tendentes, Graecorum Hebraicorumque codicum collatione cas-
tigandam videri, quoties ab illis discreparit, linguarum peritia
tumidi, ecclesiasticam simplicitatem ludibrio habentes ; quorum
profecto audacia ac temeritas pronuntiandi merito 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 inter-
pretatio prae se ferat (quos imitari profecto non debemus)
pusillo homines animo, oppleti tenebris, angust^que sentientes
de Religionis nostrae majestate, qui dum opinionum castella
pro fidei placitis defendunt, ipsam mihi arcem prodere viden-
tur, fraternam charitatem turpissim^ violantes. Ergo extrema
et devia vitata, quae 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 proclaimed
that the Council had bound Scriptural science with chains of
iron, and condemned it to a sterile immobility.*
*Cfr. ex. gr. Keil Einl. p. 579: "Mit diesem Decret war zwar der
Grundtext nicht ausdriicklich verworf en, aber doch fur ganz tlberflussig er-
643 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE,
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 envelopment of a dense veil of ignorance,
that in our days permits a repetition of this old false-
hood.
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 mis-
understand 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 Scripture, 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 in-
tended to remove. There was no mention of original texts or
versions other than the Latin. A multiplicity of Latin ver-
sions 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 de-
manded 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 trans-
lations 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 authenticity, 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 Scrip-
ture by any Christian Church, and there was no need to declare
it authentic. It is characteristic of the Catholic Church not to
indulge in superfluous legislation. Her decisions are few, and
framed to meet actual needs.
klart und die Uebersetzung kanonisirt worden". De Wette- Schroder Einl.
p. 145: "Was man auch zur Milderung dieses Decretes sagen mag, immer
ist damit der exegetischen Forschung der Eingang in die Offentliche Kirchen-
lehre verschlossen". Alii alio modo eadem repetunt. (Comely op. cit.)
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE. 543
The deliberations of the Fathers, as related to us by Palla-
vicini (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 after-
wards 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 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 Vul-
gate should be received, but care must be taken lest the others
should be thought to be tacitly rejected." The " others " are
evidently the original texts and the old versions. Could any-
thing be clearer ? The Fathers took thought lest their action
might seem to be the tacit repudiation 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 excel-
lent 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 ad-
dresses 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
544 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE.
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 descended from
Heaven. The Fathers knew that the interpreter 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 considering 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 translations,
and to modify the tendency to continually produce new ver-
sions, the Council wisely enacted that we should use the
Vulgate in all public readings, disputations and expositions 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. Cer-
vini, afterwards Pope Marcellus H.), 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. Therefore, neither you nor anyone else is hin-
dered 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 con-
sonant with the sense of the Holy Ghost and the original
texts." (Mariana, 1. c.)
We come in possession of two truths in this testimony :
first, that Vega has the mind of the Council of Trent, and,
secondly, that the action of the Fathers was just and temperate.
While Mariana was teaching at Rome, question arose relating
to the real sense of the decree of Trent. The General of the
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE. 545
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 ex-
plain to the order the real sense of the decree, and on the tes-
timony of Mariana, his response was substantially 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 cer-
tainly knew the mind of the Fathers. He approves the decla-
ration of Vega and declares " that we are to so defend the ex-
cellence 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 to so vene-
rate 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 to doctrine
or morality, or interpolated, or changed to disagree with truth
or omitted to the prejudice of truth, or so corrupted that it
would furnish occasion of pernicious error, or occasion and
incite to heresy, or thus obscurely and ambiguously translated
that it would obscure the mysteries of our faith, or in which
the saving truth is not sufficiently explained." (Sixt. Sen.
Biblioth. Sancta.)
The opponents of the Catholic faith sometimes allege as
the Catholic position, the opinion of Basil Poncius (ti626), the
*Didacus de Paviade Andrada, was born at Coimbra in Portugal, in 1528.
He entered the Church at the age of thirty, was sent by King Sebastian of
Portugal to the Council of Trent. He was both profound and eloquent.
While at Trent he wrote the following edifying words: "While in the
Council of Trent, I was wont to say that even if the authority of Councils were
not authorized and confirmed by Christ, I could easily give assent to their
definitions, being moved by such an excellent method of ascertaining truth."
While at Trent, he wrote An Explanation of the Orthodox Faith, an excel-
lent polemic apologetic work. It was especially directed against Chemnitz.
The heretic responded, and Andrada wrote against him his most celebrated
work, A Defense of the Tridentine Catholic Faith. This work has now become
very rare. The work was much esteemed by the Roman theologians and by
the Pope himself. In this work he defends the Council's decree concerning
the Vulgate. He died in 1578.
ir
546 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE.
Chancellor of the University of Salamanca. He declares : " In
my judgment it must be affirmed according to the Council's
decree, that not only are all things in the Vulgate true, but
that they are also in strict conformity with the original text,
and their sense faithfully rendered by the interpreter, so that
he has, neither by ignorance nor negligence, erred in the least
thing, but that all things, even the most minute, are, as regards
the sense, faithfully translated. * * * * And this is the
common opinion of our time." Migne, Cursus S. S. I., p. 878).
From the fact that Poncius prefaced this declaration by a
long chapter wherein he gives numerous examples of errone-
ous translations of the Vulgate, we are led to suspect that he
is here defending the current opinion of Spain somewhat after
the manner that Galileo defended the Ptolemaic system in his
dialogues. It is a certain fact that the fear of the Inquisition
in Spain was unduly reactionary on theological opinion in
Spain in those days. At all events, the common opinion of
Spain could not have been what he says, for we have adduced
the testimonies of her best theologians, which are directly
opposed to his position. The only argument which he adduces
in support of his opinion is, that the Council declared the Vul-
gate authentic. Now, in the first place, we deny that the
Council promulgated a dogmatic definition that the Vulgate
was authentic. It made it of faith, that the Books of the
Catholic Canon with all their parts, as they were found in the
Vulgate, were sacred and canonical. This is of faith, and an
anathema was fulminated against any one who should gainsay
such truth. This certainly implies that the Vulgate has pre-
served the substance of all these books, so that the element
which made them sacred and inspired as they came from the
writer's hand has persevered in them. This is of faith. But the
decree concerning the use of the Holy Books is disciplinary.
The very words of the decree warrant this. When a Council
binds men's faith by dogmatic decree, the words clearly imply
such design. But here, on the contrary, in the clearest terms
the Council maps out the discipline of the Church, as regards
the reading of the Latin Scripture. Of course in this matter
dogma and discipline are correlated. The Council, acting by
the Spirit of God, could not and did not authorize a substan-
tially defective version of Scripture. So that this disciplinary
decree rests on the dogmatic status of the books, established
in the preceding decree. Now the Fathers, in making the
books authentic in the discipline of the Church, based their
action on a dogmatic authenticity, which they by former decree
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE. 547
had declared of the books. The motive of this declaration of
authenticity was not the strict conformity between the Vulgate
and the original text. The Fathers never examined such con-
formity. The motion to do so was submitted, but it was lost.
The Fathers based their action on the fact that the Church
had used for well nigh a thousand years this edition of the
Latin Scriptures. It had, for all these ages, been the great
scriptural deposit of the Church, and the Fathers infallibly
judged that it was not compatible with God's relation to the
Church, that he should allow her to thus adopt a version of
Scripture, which did not accurately contain the substance of
God's witten message to man. The Fathers, therefore, under-
stood by authenticity that the version contained the substance
of that message.
This clear and well warranted position at once does away
with the opinion of Poncius, and it establishes the real basis
upon which we may examine the actual state of the Vulgate.
The truth of our position is corroborated by the history of
the decree. When, during the existence of the Council, the
decree was sent to Rome for the Pope's approbation, the
Roman theologians protested against it, affirming that there
were many errors in it that could not be attributed to the
copyists, but which were certainly due to the translator him-
self. In fact, such a storm was raised, that there was thought
of delaying the printing of the decree till changes might be
made. When this was made known to the Papal legates in
the Council they made answer that nothing was alleged by the
Roman theologians that the Council had not maturely weighed.
The Tridentine Fathers had adverted to the errors of the Vul-
gate, but they were warranted in declaring it not substantially
erroneous. (Pallavic. Hist. Cone. Trid. VI.)
The dullest mind must see that there was no question of
absolute conformity with the original text, or of immunity from
errors which affected not doctrine and morals.
Our position is strengthened by this final consideration.
The Council approved the then existing Latin Vulgate, at the
same time that it was informed by the particular congregation
that all the Latin texts were defective, though the Vulgate was
the best of them. And the work of emending this same
approved Vulgate was taken up immediately by the authority
of the Pope himself. This shows clearly that the Council
merely declared that the truths of God had persevered in the
Latin version with all its faults, and that it was the mind of
the Church that these errors should be reduced to a minimum.
548 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE.
And even in the preface to the Clementine edition of the Vul.
gate, we are told that certain things which deserved to be
changed were left, to avoid the scandal of the people.
Even during the authorized revision of the Vulgate, Sal-
meron, who was one of the theologians of the Council, declared :
" In the meantime, while the Vulgate is being revised, nothing
prevents one from correcting the evident errors, either by-
means of the Hebrew and Greek text, or from the various
readings of the Fathers, or by a clearer understanding of the
text itself, provided such a one in such a grave matter is pre-
pared to submit himself to the Church if she should decide
otherwise." (Salmeron, Proleg. III. p. 24.) This is the golden
rule for all theologians. Relying on this, a theologian can freely
conduct any research, sustained by the thought that if he
speaks true things, the Church will commend him, and she will
safeguard him from error.
The opponents of our position are of two classes. The
protestants insist on an absolute approbation of the Vulgate,
that they may thence move an objection against the Church ;
Some Catholics interpret the Council's word in a like manner
through mistaken zeal for orthodoxy. From one or the other
of these motives they adduce the three following argu-
ments:
I. — Richard Simon (Hist. Crit. du V. Test. 7, p. 268) cites the
following decree: " On the 17th of January, 1576, the General
Congregation, through S. L. A. S. Montald. Sixt. Carafifa,
declares that nothing can be asserted which is not in con-
formity with the Vulgate, even though it be one sentence, or
a phrase or clause, or a word, or a syllable, or even an iota."
Richard Simon found this declaration reproduced by Leo
Allatius. It appears to be a plain forgery. Its original was
never found, though diligent search was made in the archives
of Rome. Franzelin declares that Father Perrone had in-
formed him that Pius IX. had declared, by word of mouth,
that even if the declaration did exist, nothing more was com-
manded thereby than that one should not reject the Vulgate in
matters of faith and morals. (Franz. De Trad. p. 563.)
And in any case, this congregation had naught to do with
matters of faith. The decree is either a forgery, or a disciplin-
ary ruling of a council, and avails naught in the present ques-
tion.
2. — They insist on the former decree, which binds us to
receive the books with all their parts. Now, they say, every
word is a part.
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE. 549
The very enunciation of this proposition shows its absurdity.
Every word is a mathematical part of the books, but it is not
a moral part in the sense that the Council spoke. They were
legislating against those who rejected the deuterocanonical
parts of the Holy Books and certain passages of the Gospels,
and, in virtue of their decree, every integral part of the books
is sacred and canonical. And they meant not by this to imply
that there was an absolute conformity between these parts and
the original inspired text, but that the inspired truths had
substantially endured in all the parts of the books. The Holy
Ghost only guided them in the truth of the proposition, and
in a general supervision of the words of their decree, so that
in clothing their thoughts with words, the Fathers spoke as
human agents, and their diction may at times come short of
absolute clearness. The history of the several decrees and the
scope of their legislation aid us in seizing the real sense of the
decrees. Hence, we hold simply the divinity and canonicity
of the parts, ^s that term was taken in the mind of the Fathers.
Hence, the decree only contemplates the substantial integrity
of all the books. This allows that even whole sentences
should be wanting from the Vulgate that are genuine in the
original, and that there may be whole sentences in the Vulgate
which never were in the original, provided no error is in them
contained. And there may be sentences in the Vulgate of
dogmatic import, whose sense is not that of the origi-
nal, provided in the same way that nothing contrary
to faith or morals could result therefrom. The Vul-
gate reproduces sufficiently the substance of God's written
message, and leaves a legitimate field to the science of textual
criticism.
Hence, we are not prevented by the decree of the Vulgate
from correcting the Latin of the Vulgate : " Omnes quidem
resurgemus, sed non omnes immutabimur," (I. Cor. XV. 5.),
in accordance with the Greek, to : " Omnes quidem non
dormiemus, sed omnes immutabimur."
The text is dogmatic, and although the Vulgate has not
brought out Paul's idea, it contains no error, for all men shall
arise, and all shall not put on the incorruption of the elect.
We maintain also that the character of the famous verse I. Jo.
V. 7. must be treated independently of the Council's decree.
That it contains no error we know from the authority that
they gave to the book. Whether it was in the genuine
Epistle of St. John or not, must be decided by means of the
data of textual criticism.
560 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE.
3, — The third argument of the adversaries hardly deserves
mention. They maintain that if we are not to reject the Vul-
gate on any pretext, it results that we can not reject any
verse or word of it.
This is mere cavil. The Council's decree here is
only disciplinary, and relates to the rejection of passages
wherein is contained some substantial truths of Scrip-
ture. The very conception of the argument of the oppo-
sition is an insult to the intelligence of the Fathers of
Trent.
We shall not speak of the many errors recognizable in the
Vulgate. We have built a basis, and in our exegesis of the
Holy Text we shall judge the several passages in accordance
with the data here explained.
Chapter XXX.
The Correction of the Vulgate.
The second abuse which the Council of Trent was to
remedy was the corruption of the Latin codices, and the remedy
was that by the, authority of the Pope, a correct edition of
the Vulgate might be submitted to the Council, and approved
by the Pope. The work of emending the Vulgate was
judged by the Fathers of Trent to be so easy in execution
that a corrected copy might be sent to them while yet assem-
bled in council. On the 24th of April, 1546, Card. Cervini had
written to Rome : " Staremo adunque aspettando che voi
ci mandiate presto una bella Bibbia corretta et emendata
per poter stamparla." (Vercellone, 1. c. p. 84.) But it took
forty years to execute the correction recommended by the
Council of Trent.
In the present work we can only treat briefly of the im-
mense labor that was expended on this emendation. Un-
garelli and Vercellone have ably written the history of the
correction of the Vulgate.
The first movement to execute the Council's recommenda-
tion was made by the University of Louvain. The Dominican^
John Henten (•|'i566) was appointed by the faculty to revise
the Vulgate. Henten brought to the task a fair knowledge of
Hebrew and Greek. The work appeared at Louvain in 1547,
under the title : Biblia Latina ad Vetustissima exemplaria
recens castigata. Henten collated about twenty codices in the
preparation of this work, but none of his codices go back be-
yond the tenth century, so that the edition can not be con-
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE. 551
sidered a great critical work. The work of Henten was very
favorably received, and many editions of it were issued by the
press at Lou vain.
After the death of Henten, the faculty of Louvain selected
Lucas of Bruges to revise the work. He was assisted by
Molanus, Hunnaeus, Reinerius and Harlem. Henten's text was
allowed to stand, but the revisers added an Apparatus Criticus
from upwards of sixty codices. The edition was printed by
Plantin. These Bibles enjoyed great authority, and were
of service to the Roman correctors of the Vulgate.
The Council of Trent closed on the fourth of December,
1563. Immediately after its close, Pius IV. commissioned four
Cardinals to restore the text of the Vulgate to its pristine
purity. The Cardinals were Mark Antony Colonna, William
Sirleti, Louis Madrutius, and Antony Caraffa. Sirleti was
considered the greatest linguist of his age.*
The first of their labors was the accurate collation of the
Codex Paulinus, which Sirleti held in high esteem.
Under Pius V. the correction of the Vulgate was hindered
for the reason that the learned men were occupied in correct-
ing the Breviary, Missal and Martyrology. Pius V. was by no
means negligent in the great work of correcting the Vulgate,
and for this reason appointed the most learned men of Rome
to cooperate in the work. Principal among the theologians
* Sirleti was born in Calabria in Italy in 1514. He studied at Naples, and
acquired such a command of H ebrew, Greek and Latin that they became as
his mother tongue. He studied mathematics, philosophy and theology in
Greek, and was considered one of the most learned men of his age. He was
held in great esteem by Pope Marcellus II. Pius IV. thought so highly of
him that he committed to his care his nephew Charles Borromeo, and at
Charles' request he created Sirleti Cardinal. After the death of Pius IV.,
there was thought of creating Sirleti Pope, but the judgment prevailed of
those who thought that the drift of his mind was too much given to letters, to
permit a strong practical administration in those stormy times. He was
chosen as one of the revisers of the Vulgate by Pius IV. and continued on
that Congregation under his successor Pius V. He assisted in revising the
Missal and Breviary under Paul V. and was also at the head of the Vatican
Library. He enriched the Library by many valuable works in the Oriental,
Greek, and Latin languages. He was beneficent in character, and greatly
assisted needy students. He died in 1583. His contemporaries, without
reserve, place him as the first scriptural scholar of his age. One of them
declared ' ' that the dreams of Sirleti were more learned than the waking
creations of many learned men ; for often in sleep he was heard to discourse
in Greek and Latin of some ditficult theme." (Eggs, Purpura Docta, I. 5, 11).
Latinus Latinius declared in a letter to Masius (Op. Latinii Tom. 11. p. 134)
that from personal knowledge he judged Sirleti alone to equal all the others
who were associated with him in correcting the Vulgate. This remarkable
man has left nothing of importance in writing.
662 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE.
were Antonio Agellius and Emmanuel Sa. The commission
proceeded slowly, and with great labor. From the 28th of
April to the 7th of December of the year 1569, they spent in
revising Genesis and Exodus. The theologians had held
twenty-six general conferences before the Cardinals to confer
on this portion of their labors. The fundamental error of the
time was to consider the work easy, and to be performed
quickly. Without doubt those men had selected the right
method, and if vexation over the delay had not obstructed
their labors, we might have had a much better text.
Card. Buoncompagno succeeded Pius V. in 1572, and took
the name of Gregory XIII. He was one of the first canonists
of his age, and as such had sat in the Council of Trent. He
brought to completion the correction of the liturgical books,
and then turned his attention to the correction of the Calen-
dar and the revision of the Corpus Juris. His claim to immor-
tality in history rests mainly on the correction of the Calendar,
a work much needed and well wrought.
At this juncture a remarkable man came into important
relations in the Church. This was Card. Peretti.*
He moved Gregory XIII. to add to the body commissioned
to revise the Vulgate, certain consulting theologians, chief
among whom were Robert Bellarmine, Peter Morini, and
Flaminius Nobilius. The design of Peretti was to correct first
*Felix Peretti was born in 1521, in a small village of the Marches of
Ancona. His father was a vine-dresser, and being unable to rear the boy,
gave him to a farmer, who set him to herd sheep and swine. While thiis
engaged, a Franciscan monk passed that way, who was at a loss to find the
road to Ascoli. Felix directed him and accompanied him to the convent.
The Franciscans, recognizing the natural endowments of the youth, instructed
him. He entered the Order, and became an able philosopher and theologian.
He was ordained priest in 1545, and soon after, was created doctor and
appointed professor at Sienna. It was at this juncture that he took the name
of Montaltus, by which he is sometimes known. He became famous as a
preacher, was made consulter of the Inquisition and procurator -general of
his Order. Pius V. made him general of his Order and then Cardinal. We
are informed by Gregory Leti that during the pontificate of Gregory XIII.
Peretti aspired to the Papal throne, and that to promote his design, he with-
drew somewhat from public affairs, affected feeble health, and seemed intent
only on preparing for death. On the death of Gregory XIII. there was a
deadlock in the conclave, and they finally agreed on Card. Peretti and
elected him Pope on the 24th of April, 1585. He took the name of Sixtus V.
As soon as he was assured of his election, he threw away his cane, stood
erect, and intoned the Te Deum in a voice that shook the chapel walls.
Whether we accept this account or not, it is certainly true that often, when
men are called to elect a man for an oflSce which they themselves ambition,
in their inability to place themselves in the coveted place, they will be dis-
posed to favor the candidacy of one whose condition of health and period of
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE. 553
the Septuagint, which was then to be used to revise the Vul-
gate. When Peretti succeeded Gregory XIII., he prosecuted
this design with his usual energy, and in the second year of his
pontificate (Oct. 8, 1856), published the best edition of the
Septuagint that we have ever received. See page 490. With
equal energy, he next took up the revision of the Vulgate.
He placed at the disposition of the commission the best
codices that he could obtain. He even took active part in the
collation of these codices. The number of the members of the
commission was increased. Antonio Agellius (f 1608) who
was very capable in Hebrew and Greek, compared dubious
readings with the Greek and Hebrew texts. Card. Caraffa
presided over the whole work, and at the end of two years of
assiduous labor, the completed correction was delivered to the
Pope. The scope of the revisers was simply to restore the
text of Jerome to its pristine state. They did not contem-
plate the removal of the errors which Jerome committed. At
times, however, where the reading of Jerome could not be
determined with certainty, they employed the original text
to establish the genuine sense of Scripture. The method
of these men, their reputation for learning and the care and
labor that they bestowed on the Vulgate, warrant that the
result of their labors was excellent. But the action of the
life foreshow a short incumbency, for the reason that they may thus again be
allowed to contend for the coveted place. It is certain that such causes have
been active in the election of more than one Pope.
The election of Sixtus V. was providential. He was a man of great
energy of character, and a man of action. The land was a prey to libertinage,
brigandage, and all sorts of violence. Sixtus met this state of things by a
terrible rigor. He caused to be erected special gallows to punish immediately
those guilty of licentiousness during the carnival. Before his time a maiden
dared not walk the streets without fear of violence. The nobles had been
unrestrained in their treatment of the daughters of the plebeians. Sixtus
made adultery punishable by death. Even a husband who refused to de-
nounce an adulterous wife was condemned to death. Brigands and robbers
of every sort were hunted down and hanged. By these measures, Sixtus
restored the sanctity of law among a people who can only be held to law by
fear. He erected the famous obelisk in the Piazza of St. Peter's, enlarged
and embellished the Vatican Palace, enriched the Vatican Library, reorgan-
ized the Congregation of the Holy Office and the Congregation of Rites, and
decreed that the number of Cardinals shoulc not exceed seventy. This
number has been observed by his successors. Excess of labor wore him out,
and he died in 1590, after a pontificate of five years. The Roman people
broke his statue in pieces in testimony of their hatred of his severity, but
this very fact entitles him to our greater commendation. By his very rigor,
he was able to disband the soldiers, and uphold the law by the force of his
own character. All things considered, Sixtus V. must be considered as a
credit to the Papacy.
664 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE.
Pope entered to frustrate, in large part, this result. The com-
mission had made much use of the Codex Amiatinus which the
Pope held in little esteem. Moreover, the corrected text
differed much from the Bibles of Louvain which Sixtus prized.
He, therefore, read carefully their work, approved what he
pleased of it, and rejected a great part. Card. Caraffa pro-
tested, but in vain.
Sixtus, to his energy of character, added a certain stub-
born, excessive trust, in his own judgment. His action here
is inexcusable, and rendered void the conscientious labors of
the best talent of Italy. After thus inducing these changes,
Sixtus committed the printing of the work to Aldo Manuzio,
who had succeeded his father as printer at the Vatican press.
The Augustinian Angelo Bocca and Francis Toleti, S. J., were
appointed to see the work through the press. The Pope him-
self read every page as it came from the press. The work ap-
peared in a magnificent volume in 1590.
The text is preceded by the famous Bull, " Aeternus ille ",
of Sixtus V. The text of the Bull is given in full in Comely,
op. cit., p. 465, et seqq.
Protestant's allege the bull as an evidence of the Pope's
fallibility in doctrine. Wherefore, we shall examine some of
its salient points. The bull bears the date of the Kalends of
March 1589, and, as Sixtus testified to the Venetian Legate
on the third of the following July that the Book of Wisdom
was then in press, and as numerous typographical errors were
corrected before the edition was given to the public, we must
infer that Sixtus wrote the bull in view of a future fact, and it is
probable that the bull never was promulgated. But our de-
fense of papal infallibility rests not on this data. The bull
contains doctrinal import and disciplinary measures. These
latter were unwise, and were prudently set aside by his successor.
But in matters doctrinal, no man can find aught that is repug-
nant to Catholic faith in the bull. The constitution opens
with a prolix description of the origin, and history of the Holy
Scriptures. The Pope speaks of the various readings of the cod-
ices and their causes. And then declares that in these many
various readings nothing was ever found which could injure
faith or morals. This position no man can shake. The
pontiff commends the Council of Trent for its remedial measure,
and regrets that its execution has been deferred. He next
speaks of the active part which he had taken in the revision, in
which he states that he had expended many hours every day
in judging of the labors of others, and selecting what seemed
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE. 555
good. He had founded a fine printing press for the express
work of printing these editions, and he had read the press-
proofs of the work. He declares, moreover, that it was not his
mind to edit a new translation of the Vulgate, " sed ut Vulgata
Vetus ex Tridentinae Synodi praescripto emendatissima,
pristinaeque suae puritati, qualis primum ab ipsius interpretis
manu styloque prodierat, quoad fieri potest, restituta imprim-
atur." He declares at times that, where the Latin data was
hopelessly defective, the sense had been sought from the
Hebrew and Greek text. Sixtus testifies of his great venera-
tion for Jerome, and insists repeatedly that care was taken not
to change that which had grown venerable in the Church. He
also declares that he had cut off the Third and Fourth book
of Ezra, the Third of Maccabees and the prayer of Manasseh,
and certain other passages which were interpolated in the
Vulgate.
At length the pontiff comes to this point : " With certain
knowledge, and in plenitude of our apostolic authority, we
establish and declare that the Latin Vulgate which was
received by the Council of Trent is without doubt or contro-
versy this very edition which we have now corrected as best
we were able and caused to be printed in the Vatican press,
and we publish it to be read in the universal Christian world,
and in all the Christian churches, declaring that this edition,
which was sanctioned by the use of the Christian people, by
the consensus of the holy Fathers, by the decree of Trent, and
which is now approved by the authority of the apostolic power
given us by the Lord, is to be received as true, lawful, authentic,
and undoubted, in all public and private disputations, and the
public reading, preaching, and exposition of Scripture. And
we strictly forbid for all future times any one to print the text
of this edition of the Vulgate without the express permission
of the Holy See ; and let no one even privately make for him-
self another edition ; and let no one during the next ten years
dare to print this our corrected Vulgate elsewhere than in the
Vatican press. And after the lapse of ten years, we order that
no one shall dare print the Holy Scriptures except in accord-
ance with the exemplar from the Vatican press, and having
the authorization of the Inquisitor, or, if there be no deputy of
the inquisition in the place, of the ordinary of the place, and
we order that there shall be no change in anything."
The pontiff then forbids all marginal readings in the text,
orders that all liturgical books be corrected in accordance with
his edition, and declares to be without authority all other Latin
666 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE.
texts. The constitution closes with the usual formula of
promulgation, with an excommunication upon those who
should dare infringe the bull, and is signed : " Rome, at S.
Maria Maggiore, A. D. 1589, the Kalends of March, the fifth
year of our pontificate."
The only affirmation that is here contained is that his
edition was the Vulgate of Trent. This is true, and could
have been made of faith. The Vulgate, even before he or any
other man corrected a word of it, was the Vulgate of Trent,
and contained the substantial word of God. God had not
permitted the Latin Scripture to become substantially corrupt.
He did not permit them to become thus corrupt in the Sixtine
edition. While we deny that the bull was ever promulgated,
and though it finds no place in the Roman Bullariutn, there is
no doctrinal falsehood in it.
As to its disciplinary enactment, all must agree that it was
unwise and excessive. It was never imposed on the faithful,
and the Providence of God brought it about that the Church
suffered not from this Pope's unwise use of power. In fact, it
seems that Pope Sixtus V. was unduly prone to exercise his
power.
Sixtus' work was done when order had been restored, and
the law upheld in Italy. In times of peace he was not equally
valuable to the Church. He died before his edition of the
Vulgate was given to the public. After his death, by universal
consent, it was judged necessary to correct the edition. The
typographical part was poorly done. Waxed paper was pasted
over certain errors, and in other places cancelations in ink were
apparent.
The immediate successor of Sixtus V., Urban VII., died
thirteen days after his election. Gregory XIV. succeeded in
1590, and immediately consulted with the Congregation as to
what action was to be taken on the Vulgate of Sixtus. The
tide of feeling ran high against Sixtus V., and the members of
the Congregation moved that the work of Sixtus be proscribed.
Bellarmine more wisely moved that the edition be corrected
with all possible haste and then published, that the credit of
the defunct Pope might be saved, and the scandal of the
people averted.
The counsel of Bellarmine prevailed and Gregory at once
instituted a congregation of seven cardinals and twelve theo-
logians to revise the sixtine edition. Card. Mark Antony
Colonna presided over all the deliberations of the congrega-
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE. 557
tion ; and principal among the theologians were Agellius,
Bellarmine, Morini, Toleti, and Rocca. The Pope was con-
sulted on the most difficult passages.
The congregation proposed as a leading canon in the work
not to make a change from the accepted reading unless neces-
sity required it.
The congregation spent forty days in the examination of
Genesis.
It became evident that, in this mode of procedure, years
would be required for the revision.
Moved by this consideration Pope Gregory dissolved the
congregation, and organized a new body. He placed at the
head of the new organization two cardinals, Antony Caraffa,
Sr., and William Allen.*
Under the direction of these two Cardinals, eight theolo-
gians worked, principal among whom were Bellarmine, Morini,
Agellius, Rocca, and Valverde. They withdrew to the palace
of the Colonna at Zagarolo, and, according to the inscription
placed in the palace in 1723, they finished their labors in nine-
teen days. The great work had been done by those who had
labored before them in the correction, and they had only to
select the best of what others had collected. In October of
1 591 they offered the corrected copy to Gregory XIV. In the
same month Gregory XIV. died. Innocent X., who succeeded
him, died on the 30th of the following December.
In January of 1592, Clement VIII. was created Pope, and
his first care was to complete the correction of the Vulgate.
He appointed the two Cardinals, Frederick Borromeo and
Augustus Valerius, to supervise the work, and commissioned
Toleti, S. J., to cooperate with them. The Cardinals confided
the whole work to Toleti. This eminent man wrote upon the
wide margins of the Sixtine edition, the corrections which had
been recommended by the Gregorian Congregation, and also,
in certain places, recommended certain readings which he had
*William Allen was born at Rossal in England in 1532. He completed a
brilliant course of study at Oxford, but was exiled from England for ad -
herence to the Catholic faith. He fled to Louvain. and thence to Malines,
where he was ordained priest in 1565. After a journey to Rome in 1567, he
fixed his abode at Douay, where he founded the English Catholic College to
prepare priests for England. He was ever intent in aiding his exiled com-
patriots, and in laboring for the conversion of England. His biographer,
Fitzherbert, declares of him : ' ' Homo natus ad Angliae salutem. "
He executed the famous Catholic translation of Scriptures, called the
Douay version. He was created Cardinal in 1587 by Sixtus V., and appointed
a member of the Sixtine Congregation to revise the Vulgate. He died at
Rome in 1594.
558 THE COJIRECTION OF THE VULGATE.
approved by collation of the best MSS. On the 28th of
August, 1592, Toleti's work was submitted to the Cardinals
and approved by them, and Rocca was commissioned to write
them on the margin of a copy of the Sixtine edition for the
printer.
At this point Valverde interposed an objection. Being an
able Hebraist, he bore it ill that the Vulgate had not in all
places been rendered conformable to the Massoretic text. He
presented to the Pope a libellus, wherein were over two
hundred passages in which the Vulgate differed from the
Hebrew. The Pope took counsel, and after mature delibera-
tion, forbade Valverde ever, in word or writing, to treat
of this difference. Such treatment of a man seems to us harsh,
and subversive of human liberty, but we must consider the
nature of the fact and the circumstances. The proposition of
Valverde was against the first design in all the corrections,
which was not to re-translate the Scriptures from the Hebrew,
but to restore the pristine text of the Vulgate. The diver-
gencies were not in matters of faith or morals ; in many cases
the Massoretic text has no more claim to purity than the
Vulgate ; the people were waiting for the Bible, and prone to
ugly rumors regarding the delay ; to put into execution Val-
verde's proposition, would have necessitated a long period of
toil, for they could not adopt his readings on his sole authority ;
scholars can always collate the two texts, so that no real
necessity existed for the change ; and finally, had Valverde
been allowed to speak his views to the public, the protestants
would have raised a great cry against the Latin text of the
Catholic Church, and faith would have suffered thereby.
There were but two ways, either to do what he advised, or
restrain him from speaking. The former was not possible at
that time ; the latter was wisely adopted.
If it be not presumption, I express here a regret, that the
authorities of the Church did not at that time, by the labors
of those great linguists and theologians, make a translation of
the entire Scriptures, as far as possible, from the original texts,
employing in the work the Vulgate only for reference, and in-
asmuch as it helped to the full meaning of the original text.
They may have thought that such a move would be interpreted
to signify that the text of the Latin Scriptures had been un-
reliable, but a comparison of the two texts would have con-
vinced all that the substantial truths of God's covenants were
safely contained in the Vulgate, and this would have repelled
the false accusation.
MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE. 559
Clement VII I. appointed Toleti to supervise the printing
of the Vulgate ; and Angelo Rocca to correct the proofs. The
edition was pushed rapidly forward, and completed before the
end of 1592. And thus, at last, the design formulated in 1546
by the Fathers of the Council of Trent, and approved by the
Pope, was put in effect, and the Church received an authentic
version of Scripture.
The edition differed not in external form from the Sixtine
edition. It was printed by Aldo Manuzio, who had printed
the edition of Sixtus. Moreover, it bore at first the name of
Sixtus in its title : " Biblia Sacra Vulgatae Editionis Sixti V.
Pont. Max. jussu recognita atque edita." It was not till 1641
that the name of Clement VIII. was placed in the title page,
and the honor of the work was given to whom it by right be-
longed. Since that time it is called the Clementine edition.
It differs from the Sixtine edition in over three thousand
texts.
The preface of the Clementine edition, which is supposed
to have been written by Bellarmine and Toleti, candidly ad-
mits that certain things " quae mutanda videbantur " were left
unchanged to avoid the scandal of the people, and because
there was some doubt whether the original texts had remained
in such passages free from corruption.
The edition, therefore, does not lay claim to absolute per-
fection, but it is, without doubt, the best translation of the
Scriptures in any language. Yet, we still think that the
Church with her immense resources, human and divine, could
prepare a better edition, and we look forward to future times
to add this glory to the works of the Catholic Church.
The difference between the Sixtine and Clementine editions
was made the subject of a fierce attack on papal infallibility
by Thomas James, in a work entitled " Bellum Papale," Lon-
don, 1600. He has been ably refuted by Henry Bukentop, in
the excellent work " *l1^D '^)^f Lux de Luce," Brussels,
1710. The line of defense is the same as we have pointed out
in treating of Pope Sixtus' work.
Chapter XXXI.
Modern English Versions of Scripture.
The calumny is often put upon the Church that she with-
held the Scriptures from the people.
We live in an age of universal shallow enlightenment.
Nothing is more subversive of faith than this smattering of
«'>60 MODERN .ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE.
knowledge. The general tendency of varied superficial know-
ledge is to make people irreligious. Broad, deep, true
knowledge would lead to God, but the great number never
attain this. The knowledge obtained by many is just sufficient
to destroy reverence, generate intellectual pride, and make the
man intolerant of all restraint. Even the man of the humblest
intellectual attainments imbibes the superficial philosophy of
those with whom he comes in contact, and loses some of his
faith and his reverence.
I am speaking especially of America, and I endorse heartily
the following description of American thought by Wendell
Phillips : " The most objectionable feature of our national
character is self-conceit, — an undue appreciation of ourselves,
an exaggerated estimate of our achievements, of our inven.
tions, of our contributions to popular comfort, and of our
place, in fact, in the great procession of the ages. We seem
to imagine that, whether knowledge will die with us or not,
it certainly began with us. We have a pitying estimate, a
tender compassion, for the narrowness, ignorance and darkness
of bygone ages. We seem to ourselves not only to monopolize,
but to have begun the era of light. In other words, we are all
running over with a fourth-day-of-July spirit of self-content.
I am often reminded of the German, whom the English poet,
Coleridge, met at Frankfort. He always took off his hat with
profound respect when he ventured to speak of himself. It
seems to me, the American people might be painted in the
chronic attitude of taking off its hat to itself."
The only thing that is valuable in human life is the service
that comes to the Creator out of it, and certainly the so-called
spread of enlightenment has not augmented this. It is not to
be said that religion thrives in ignorance, and hates the light,
but she hates that false light which travesties her real nature.
It would be better that a people should be ignorant of this
shoddy education, and well taught the truths of God and his
law, where full, deep knowledge is unattainable. " Shallow
draughts of knowledge intoxicate the brain, but drinking
largely sobers us again."
Now the Church, with a wisdom greater than man's, wisely
regulated the reading of the Bible by the masses. Many
things in the Bible are hard to understand, and the man of
little knowledge would often wrest these to his own destruc-
tion. Large use was always made in the Catholic Church of
the Scriptures of God. They were explained to the people,
and those portions which they could understand, mainly the
THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSIONS. 561
Gospels and the Psalms, were put into their hands, but the
Church never misunderstood Christ, that she should convert
the world by placing the text of the Bible in the vulgar tongue
in the hands of the people. The Church has yielded to the
exigencies of the times to prevent greater evil, and has made
more concessions in this regard than is good for man. I
believe to-day that the indiscriminate reading of the Bible in
the vernacular is not for the best interests of man. Hence we
see that in England some parts of Scripture, which were
adapted to the people's use, were translated centuries before
the whole Bible was translated.
It is very doubtful whether the entire Scriptures have ever
been translated into Anglo-Saxon. We have no traditionary
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 subjects usually
attributed to Caedmon, afford the first feeble indications of an
attempt being made by the Saxons to convey 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 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 authenticity 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 trans-
mitted 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
jj
562 THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSIONS.
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 was 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 trans-
lation of the Scriptures. He translated the commandments
in the twentieth chapter of Exodus, and part of the three fol-
lowing 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.
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 Museum. This MS.
is one of the finest specimens extant of Saxon writing. The
Vulgate Latin text of the Four Gospels was written by Ead-
frid, bishop of Lindisfarne, 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
Harewood, or Harwood, over Jerome's Latin of the Four Gos-
pels. The Latin text was written about the same period as
that of the Durham Book, having been made during the
seventh century. This valuable MS. is in the Bodleian Lib-
rary, and is called the Rushworth 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 translated from
the Latin version which was in use before Jerome's time.
Two editions of the Anglo-Saxon Psalter have been pub-
lished. The first appeared in 1640; it was printed in London
under the care of Spelman, from an ancient MS. by an un-
known translator, and collated with other MSS. of equal an-
tiquity. 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 pre-
served in the Royal Library at Paris. Mr. Thorpe, the editor
FORMATIVE PERIOD OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 663
attributed this MS. to the eleventh century ; and by some it
is supposed to be a transcript of the version executed by Aid-
helm, bishop of Sherborne, in the early part of the eighth cen-
tury. It is, however, rather a paraphrase than a version, and
is written, partly in prose, and partly in metre.
A partial interlinear translation ef a Latin version of Pro-
verbs, made in the tenth century, is preserved among the Cot-
tonian 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. Thwaits, 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 ad-
heres 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 Eng-
lish 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 transition
state, no great deviation having then been made from Anglo-
Saxon. But in the continuation of the same chronicle, from
1 135 to 1140 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 compounding words, the only diffe-
rence in this respect being, that, in the formation of its com-
564 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE.
pound terms, the Anglo-Saxon drew only from its own re-
sources, whereas the English 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 dom-
inates in England, and constitutes at once the physiognomy
and the force of its civilization." This principle is certainly
legible in its language, which although possessed of remarkable
facility in the adaptation 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, ac-
cording 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 greatly to the ease and vigor of ex-
pression.
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 trans-
lation 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 paraphrase of the
Gospels and Acts, in lines of fifteen syllables, during the latter
part of the twelfth century. This work is entitled the Ormu-
lum, from the name of its author, and is preserved in the Bod-
leian Library. A more extensive metrical paraphrase, com-
prising the Old and New Testaments, is to be found amongst
other poetry of a religious nature in a work entitled Sowle-hele
(Soul's health), belonging 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 Testament, and is written in the dialect then
spoken in the north of England. In the same College, a metri-
cal 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
composition will admit. Several other MSS. of the old Eng-
lish Psalter, preserved in the British Museum and the Bodleian
Library, are supposed to be exemplars of the same version,
wiclif's version. 565
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 Hampole,
near Doncaster, during the early part of the fourteenth century.
This version is remarkable as being the first portion of the
Scriptures ever translated into English prose. Rolle, or Ham-
pole as he is more generally called, also wrote a paraphrase in
verse of a part of Job. Two other versions of the Psalms, be-
longing 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 Sundays, written in the northern
dialect.
A version has been commonly ascribed to John de Trevisa,
vicar of Berkeley in Gloucestershire, who flourished toward the
close of the fourteenth century ; but he only translated 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.
During the years from 1378 to 1380, John Wiclif trans-
lated the entire Scripture from the Latin Vulgate.*
Although Wiclif's version of the English Bible was the
earliest in point of execution, yet, as the art of printing was
unknown during the age in which it was produced, it was
among the latest of the English versions in being committed
to the press. The first printed edition was published in 1731,
by Mr. Lewis. This edition, which was preceded by a history
of the English biblical translations, by the editor, included
only the New Testament. The same version of the New
Testament was re-edited in 18 10 by H. H. Baber, with prolego-
*John Wiclif was born in York in 1334. 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. Wiclif then raised his voice against Rome and the tem-
poral power.
The Archbishop of Canterbury summoned Wiclif to defend himself be-
fore a Council held at London in 1377. The powerful Duke of Lancaster
defended him, and he was absolved by the Council. Wiclif 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. and the antipope.
Clement VII. The time was apt for the theories of Wiclif. He preached
much, and his writings were spread through the realm. la 1383 the Arch
666 tyndale's version.
mena. It was again published with extreme accuracy in 1841,
as a portion of the English Hexapla, the best MSS. having been
most carefully collated for this purpose by George Offor, Esq.^
a MS. then in the possession of the Duke of Sussex was used
as the basis of this edition. Another edition was published
by Pickering in 1848: it is printed from a contemporary MS.
written about A. D. 1380, formerly in the monastery of Sion,
and now preserved in the collection of Lea Wilson, F. S. A.
The Old Testament of Wiclif's version remained in MS. till
within the last few years ; but a complete edition of both Testa-
ments was published at Oxford, in 1850, under the editorship
of J. Forshall and Sir F. Madden.
The first printed edition of portions of the English protestant
Bible was that of William Tyndale, an apostate priest, hanged
and burnt at Vilvoorde near Brussels in 1537.
Tyndale fled from England, and went to Hamburg, where
in 1524, he printed an English version of the Gospels of
Matthew and Mark, consisting of thirty-one leaves.
From Hamburg he proceeded to Cologne, where he arrived
in the end of April or in the beginning of May 1525, accom-
panied by his amanuensis, William Roye. Here he completed
the New Testament, which was printed in quarto by Peter
Quentel. A fragment of this, which was not discovered until
the year 1834, is in the library of the Honorable Thomas Gren-
ville, in England. It comprises " The Prologge" in part of the
Gospel of St. Matthew. From Cologne, Tyndale proceeded
to Worms, where, in the same year, he completed what has
hitherto been usually termed his first edition of the New
Testament. It was printed by P. Schoyffer in i8mo. A copy
of this New Testament, wanting only the title page, (the only
copy in this state now known) is in possession of the Baptist
Museum at Bristol. From this edition the London reprint
bishop of Canterbury condemned, in a Council held at London,24 propositions
of Wiclif , 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 baptise, 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 ecclesiastics 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. Wiclif died at Lutter-
worth in 1384.
The opinions of Wiclif 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 jQatter the pride and independence
of the human heart.
tyndale's version. 567
of 1836 was executed. In this undertaking Tyndale was as-
sisted by John Fryth, who was afterwards burnt in Smithfield,
and by John Roye, already mentioned, who suffered death in
Portugal, on a charge of heresy. Le Long calls this edition of
Tyndale's New Testament, printed in 1526, "The New Testa-
ment translated into English, from the German Version of
Luther." Many copies of this translation having found their
way into England, in order to prevent their dispersion among
the people, and the more effectually to enforce the prohibition
published in all the dioceses against reading them, Tonstal,
Bishop of London, purchased all the remaining copies of this
edition, and all which he could collect from private hands, and
committed them to the flames at St. Paul's cross. The first
impression of Tyndale's translation (as it is usually termed),
being thus disposed of, a surreptitious edition of it was printed
at Antwerp in 1526. Of this no copy has yet been identified in
any collection. A second surreptitious edition appeared also
at Antwerp in 1527, and a third in 1538-39.
In 1529 Sir Thomas More published a dialogue in which
he convicts Tyndale of having mistranslated two words of
great importance, viz., the words priests and church, calling the
first seniors, and the second congregation.
He also charges him with changing commonly the term
grace into favor, confession into knowledge, penance into re-
pentance, and a contrite heart into a troubled heart. The
Bishop of London had, indeed, in a sermon, declared, that he
had found in it no less than 2000 errors, or mistranslations ;
and Sir Thomas More discovered about 1000 texts falsely
translated. In 1530, a royal proclamation was issued, by the
advice of the prelates and priests, and of the universities, for
totally suppressing the translation of the Scripture, corrupted
by William Tyndale. The proclamation set forth, that it was
not necessary to have the Scriptures in the English tongue,
and in the hands of the common people ; that the distribution
of them, as to allowing or denying it, depended on the discre-
tion of their superiors; and that, considering the malignity of
the time, an English translation of the Bible would rather
occasion the continuance or increase of errors, than any bene-
fit to their souls. However the proclamation announced the
king's intention, if the present translation were abandoned, at
a proper season to provide that the Holy Scriptures should be
by great, learned, and Catholic persons, translated into the
English tongue, if it should then seem convenient. In the
mean time, Tyndale was busily employed. In 1530, he printed
668 coverdale's version.
at Marburg in Hesse (as it is supposed) his own second edition
of the New Testament. He was also occupied in translating
into English the five books of Moses, in which he was
assisted by Miles Coverdale. The books of Genesis and
Deuteronomy appeared also at Marburg in separate books.
In 1 53 1 he published the Pentateuch, with a general preface
and a second edition of the book of Genesis. This was
printed at various places and by various printers ; its rarity is
almost equal to that of the New Testament of 1525. The
only perfect copy of it known to exist, is now in the library
of the Right Hon. Thomas Grenville. The same yearTyndale
published his translation of the Prophet Jonah, with a long
prologue.
As Tyndale was ignorant of Hebrew, he made us of Luther's
version in his translation of the Old Testament.
This first English translation of the entire Bible was made
from the Latin and German, and dedicated to King Henry
VHL by Myles CovERDALE. It bore the following title:
" The Bible, that is, the Holy Scripture of the Olde and
New Testament faithfully and truly translated out of the
Douche and Latyn into Englishe. M. D. XXXV. folio."
Soon after this Bible was finished, in 1536, Lord Crom-
well, keeper of the privy seal, and the king's vicar-general
and vice-regent in ecclesiastical matters, published injunc-
tions to the clergy by the King's authority, the seventh
of which required that every parson, or proprietary of any
parish church within the realm, should, before the first
of August, provide a book of the whole Bible either in
Latin or English, and lay it in the choir, for every man
that would, to look and read therein ; and should discour-
age no man from reading any part of the Bible either in
Latin or English, but rather comfort, exhort, and admonish
every man to read it, as the very word of God, and the
spiritual food of a man's soul, &c.
In 1537 appeared Matthew's Bible, under the following
title :
" The Byble, which is all the Holy Scripture : In whych are
contayned the Olde and Newe Testament, truely and purely
translated into Englysh. By Thomas MATTHEW."
It was edited by Coverdale, though it bears the name of
Thomas Matthew, and it was published with the royal license,
which was granted in consequence of Cranmer's applica-
tion to Lord Cromwell. The Old Testament is Tyndalc's
to the end of the second book of Chronicles ; it then becomes
cranmer's version. 569
a mere copy of Coverdale's Bible, with a few corrections, and
continues so to the end of the Apocryphal Books, which last
are inserted from Coverdale's Bible. The New Testament is
wholly a transcript of Tyndale's version, as contained in his
last published edition of the New Testament. In the year
1538, an injunction was published by Cromwell, as vicar-gen-
eral of the kingdom, ordaining the clery to provide, before a
certain festival, one book of the whole Bible, of the largest
volume, in English, and to set it up in some convenient place
within their churches, where their parishioners might most
commodiously resort to it. A royal declaration was also pub-
lished, which the curates were to read in their several churches,
informing the people, that it had pleased the king's majesty
to permit and command the Bible, being translated into their
mother-tongue, to be sincerely taught by them, and to be
openly laid forth in every parish church.
In 1538, an edition in 4to. of the New Testament, in
English, with Erasmus's Latin translation, was printed, with
the king's license, by Redman. In this year it was resolved to
revise Matthew's Bible, and to print a correct edition of it.
With this view Grafton went to France, where the workmen
were more skilful, and the paper was both better and cheaper
than in England, and obtained permission from Francis I., at
the request of King Henry VIII., to print his Bible at Paris.
But, the Inquisition interposed, and issued an order, dated
December 17, 1538, summoning the French printers, their
English employers, and Coverdale, the corrector of the work,
and prohibiting them to proceed ; and the impression, con-
sisting of 25(X) copies, was seized, confiscated, and condemned
to the flames. Some chests, however, of these books escaped
the fire, and the English proprietors, who had fled on the first
alarm, returned to Paris as soon as it subsided, and not only
recovered some of these copies, but brought with them to
London the presses, types, and printers, and resuming the work,
finished it in the following year.
As soon as the papal power was abolished in England, and
the king's supremacy settled by parliament in 1534, Cran-
mer was very assiduous in promoting the translation of the
Holy Scripture into the vulgar tongue ; well knowing how
much the progress of the reformation depended upon this
measure. Accordingly, he moved in convocation, that a peti-
tion should be presented to the king for leave to procure a
new translation of the Bible. This motion was vigorously
opposed by Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, and his party ;
570 taverner's correction.
but Cranmer prevailed. The arguments for a new translation,
urged by Cranmer, and enforced by Queen Anne Boleyn, who
had then great interest in the king's affections, were so much
considered by him, that, notwithstanding the opposition, public
and private, on the part of Gardiner and his adherents, Henry
gave orders for setting about it immediately. In April, 1539,
Grafton and Whitchurch printed the Bible, under the follow-
ing title : " The Byble in Englyshe> that is to saye, the contents
of all the holy scripture bothe of y* olde and newe testament,
truly translated after the veryte of the Hebrue and Greke
textes by y' dylygent studye of diuerse excellent learned men,
expert in the forsayde tonges. Printed by Rychard Grafton
& Edward Whitchurch. Cum privilegio ad imprimendum
solum." From its containing a prologue or preface by
Cranmer, as well as from its size, it is commonly called
" Cranmer's Great Bible." A magnificent and probably unique
copy of it, on vellum (bound in three volumes), which formerly
belonged to Henry VHI., is preserved in the Library of the
British Museum.
In 1539 Richard Taverner endeavored to revise in some
measure the very corrupt Bible of Matthew. His correction
was a further corruption.
After the death of Cromwell, King Henry was brought to
see that in truth the English translations were erroneous and
heretical, and although the wily Cranmer strove to defeat such
project. Parliament forbade Tyndale's version, and the King
soon afterward prohibited, by royal proclamation, the having
and reading of Wiclif's, Tyndale's and Coverdale's versions, and
forbade the use of any other than that made by Parliament.
Edward VI. revoked this decree.
In November, 1539, the king, at the intercession of Cran-
mer, appointed Lord Cromwell to take special care that no
person within the realm should attempt to print any English
Bible for five years, but such as should be admitted by Lord
Cromwell ; and assigns this reason for the prohibition, that the
Bible should be considered and perused in one translation, in
order to avoid the manifold inconveniences to which human
frailty might be subject from a diversity of translations, and
the ill use that might be made of it. In the year 1540, two
privileged editions of the Bible, which had been printed in
the preceding year, issued from the press of Edward Whit-
church. Lewis mentions three other impressions of the
" Great Bible," which appeared in the course of this year ; two
printed by Whitchurch, and one by Peyt and Redman.
THE GENEVA VERSION. 571
Cranmer wrote a preface for the editions of the year 1540,
from which we learn the opinions and practice of those times.
In May of this year, the curates and parishioners of every
parish were required by royal proclamation, to provide them-
selves with the Bible of the largest volume before the feast of
All Saints, under the penalty of 40s. for every month during
which they should be without it.
During the course of this reign, that is, in less than seven
years and six months, eleven impressions of the whole English
Bible were published, and six of the English New Testament ;
besides an English translation of the whole New Testament,
paraphrased by Erasmus. The Bibles were reprinted, accord-
ing to the preceding editions, whether Tyndale's, Coverdale's,
Matthew's, Cranmer's or Taverner's ; that is, with a different
text, and different notes. But it is doubted by the writer of
the preface to King James's translation, whether there were
any translation, or correction of a translation, in the course of
this reign.
In 1557 William Whittingham published at Geneva the
New Testament under the following title :
" The Newe Testament of our Lord lesus Christ, conferred
diligently with the Greke and best approued translations.
With the arguments as well before the chapters, as for euery
Boke & Epistle, also diuersities of readings, and most profit-
able annotations of all harde places : whereunto is added a
copious Table. At Geneva. Printed by Conrad Badius.
1560. 8vo."
It is the first in the English language which contains the
distinction of verses by numerical figures. When Queen
Elizabeth passed through London from the Tower to her
coronation, a pageant was erected in Cheapside, representing
Time coming out of a cave, and leading a person clothed in
white silk, who represented Truth, his daughter. Truth had
the English Bible in her hand, on which was written " Verbum
veritatis." Truth addressed the queen, and presented her
with the book. She kissed it, held it in her hand, laid it on
her breast, greatly thanking the city for their present, and
added, that she would often and diligently read it.
We could say verily that this Bible was much like Eliza-
beth, false and unholy.
In 1560 a translation of the entire Bible appeared at Geneva
under the following title:
"The Bible: that is, the Holy Scriptures, conteyned in the
Olde and Newe Testament. Translated according to the
572 THE bishops' bible.
Ebrue and Greke, and conferred with the best translations in
divers languages, with most profitable annotations upon all
the harde places, and other things of great importance, as may
appeare in the Epistle to the Reader. At Geneva. Printed
by Rouland Hall. MDLX. 4to."
A second edition of this translation appeared in folio at
London, in 1561 ; a third in quarto, at Geneva, in 1563; a
fourth, at Geneva, in 1569. It was reprinted at London in
1575, by Thomas Vautrollier; in 1576, by Christopher Barker,
in folio, and also in quarto, and many times consequently by
him and by other printers. The translators are commonly said
to have been Miles Coverdale, pseudo bishop of Exeter,
Anthony Gilby, and William Whittingham. Besides the
translation, the editors of the Geneva Bible noted in the
margin the diversities of speech and reading, especially accord-
ing to the Hebrew ; then inserted in the text, with another
kind of letter, every word that seemed to be necessary for ex-
plaining any particular sentence ; in the division of the verses,
they followed the Hebrew examples, and added the number
to each verse ; they also noted the principal matters, and the
arguments, both for each book and each chapter ; they set over
the head of every page some remarkable word or sentence, for
helping the memory; they introduced brief annotations for
ascertaining the text, and explaining obscure words ; they set
forth with figures certain places in the books of Moses, of
Kings, and Ezekiel, which could not be made intelligible by
any other description ; they added maps of divers places and
countries mentioned in the Old and New Testament ; and they
annexed two tables, one for the interpretation of Hebrew
names, and the other containing all the chief matters of the
whole Bible. Of this translation, numerous editions were
printed in folio, 4to., or 8vo., between the years 1560 and 1616.
This version is sometimes called the " Breeches Bible," be-
cause the translators rendered the Hl^l^H o^ Genesis IIL 7,
by "breeches." '
In the year 1598, the Bible, proposed by the pseudo Arch-
bishop Parker three years before, was completed. In this edi-
tion, distinct portions of the Bible, at least fourteen in number,
were allotted to select men of learning and ability, appointed,
as Fuller says, by the Queen's commission ; but it still remains
uncertain who, and whether one or more, revised the rest of
the New Testament. Eight of the persons employed were
pseudo bishops ; whence the book was called the " Bishops'
Bible," and the " Great English Bible." In a letter addressed
KING JAMES' VERSION. 573
by Parker to Queen Elizabeth, on the publication of this
edition of the Bible, we meet with the following account of
what had been attempted in it : — " Amonge divers observations
which have bin regarded in this recognition, one was, not to
make yt vary much from that translation which was commonlye
used by publicke order, except wher eyther the verytie of the
Hebrue and Greke moved alteration ; or wher the Text was,
by sum negligence, mutilated from the originall ; so that I
trust your loving subjected shall se good cause, in your
Majesties dayes, to thanke God, and to rejoyce to see this His
Treasor of His Holy Worde so set oute, as may be proved (so
far as mortall man's knowledge can attaine to, or as far forth
as God hath hitherto revealed) to be faithfully handeled in the
vulgar Tonge." This translation was used in the churches for
forty years ; though the Geneva Bible was more read in private
houses.
The Bishops' Bible did not satisfy the bishops, and soon
after King James ascended the throne, in 1602, he was moved
to give orders for a new version.
Fifty-four learned men were appointed to this important
labor: but, before it was commenced, seven of the persons
nominated were either dead or had declined the task ; for the
list, as given us by Fuller, comprises only forty-seven names.
They were divided into six classes. Ten were to meet at
Westminister, and to translate from the Pentateuch to the end
of the second book of Kings. Eight, assembled at Cambridge,
were to finish the rest of the Historical Books and the
Hagiographa. At Oxford, seven were to undertake the four
greater prophets, with the Lamentations of Jeremiah, and the
twelve minor prophets. The four Gospels, Acts of the
Apostles, and the Apocalyse, were assigned to another com-
pany of eight, also at Oxford : and the Epistles of St. Paul,
together with the remaining Canonical Epistles, were allotted to
another company of seven, at Westminister. Lastly, another
company at Cambridge were to translate the remaining books,
including the Prayer of Manasseh.
Of this Home testifies as follows :
" Each book passed the scrutiny of all the translators suc-
cessively. In the first instance, each individual translated
every book which was allotted to his division. Secondly, the
readings to be adopted were agreed upon by the whole of that
company assembled together, at which meeting each translator
must have been solely occupied by his own version. The book,
thus finished, was sent to each of the other companies to be
574 KING JAMES' VERSION.
examined ; and at these meetings it probably was, as Selden
informs us, that " one read the translation, the rest holding in
their hands some Bible, either of the learned tongues, or
French, Spanish, Italian, &c. If they found any fault, they
spoke ; if not, he read on." Further, the translators were em-
powered to call to their assistance any learned men, whose
studies enabled them to be serviceable, when an urgent occasion
of difficulty presented itself. The translation was commenced
in the spring of 1607, and the completion of it occupied
almost three years. At the expiration of that time, three
copies of the whole Bible, thus translated and revised, were
sent to London, — one from Oxford, one from Cambridge, and
a third from Westminister. Here a committee of six, two
being deputed by the companies at Oxford, two by those at
Cambridge, and two by those at Westminister, reviewed and
polished the whole work : which was finally revised by Dr.
Smith (afterwards bishop of Gloucester), who wrote the preface,
and by Dr. Bilson, bishop of Winchester. This translation of
the Bible was first published in folio in 1611 : the expense at-
tending it was wholly defrayed by Robert Barker, patentee of
the office of King's printer.
After the publication of the present authorized translation,
all the other versions gradually fell into disuse, with the excep-
tion of the Psalms, and the Epistles and Gospels in the Book
of Common Prayer, which were still continued, the former
according to the translation of Cranmer's Bible, and the latter
according to that of the Bishops' Bible, until the final revision
of the Liturgy, in 1661 ; at which time the Epistles and
Gospels were taken from the present version, but the Psalms
are still retained according to the translation of Cranmer's
Bible."
King James' version possessed considerable literary excel-
lence, and were it purged from doctrinal incorrectness, would
be valuable for English readers. It often reproduces the sense
of the original tongues better than any other modern
version.
King James' version has very recently been revised by
British and American scholars, but it is certain that this
revision has robbed the English text of much of its excellence.
Rev. Daniel R. Goodwin, a protestant divine, has ably shown
the abortion of the revision of the New Testament. (Notes
on the Late Revision of the New Testament Version : New
York, 1883.)
THE RHEIMS-DOUAY VERSION. 575
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 religion, of
these daies : 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 trans-
lated 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 Argv-
ments of the Bookes, and Chapters : Annotations : Tables : and
other helpes for better vnderstanding of the text : for dis-
couerie of corrvptions in some late translations : and for clear-
ing 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.
The Rheims-Douay version is not of high critical worth. As
it agrees with the Vulgate in nearly everything, it enjoys, in a
certain sense, the doctrinal immunity from error of the Vul-
gate. This can not be said of any other existing English
translation. But it also largely contains the imperfections of
the Vulgate. The work of making a new translation has often
been spoken of, but owing to the vastness of the enterprise,
has never been put into effect. Catholic scholars recognize
the need, and let us hope that ere long some ripe and good
scholar may take it up and finish it. This work can not be done
as a business enterprise. To execute it well, will require the
true student, and the sustained study and labor of a lifetime.
The annexed plates exhibit specimens of the early English
translations.
ENGLISH.
SPECIMEN, FEOM St. JOHN, Chap. i. r. 1 to 12.
Wici-ip, 1380.
• IN the bigrnnyng^ was
the word and the word was
at god, and god was the word,
2 this was in the bigynnynge
at god, 3 alle thingis weren
made bi hym : and withouten
hym was made no thing,
that thing that was made * in
him was liif, and the liif was
the lijt of men, * and the lijt
schyneth in derknessist and
derknessis comprehendiden
not it.
6 A man was sente fro god
to whom the name was Ion,
' this man cam in to witnes-
synge, that he schulde here
witnessynge of the li3t, that
alle men schulden bileue bi
hym, 8 he was not the lijt,
but that he schulde here
witnessynge of the lijt, 9 ther
was a verri li3t : whiche li5t-
neth eche man that cometh in
to this world, •<• he was in
the world, and the world was
made bi him i and the world
knewe hym not.
" he cam in to his owne
thingis : S hise resceyueden
hym not: '* but hou many
euer resceiueden hym : he
3af to hem power to be made
the sones of god, to hem that
bileueden in his name.
Ttndai-e, 1534.
I IN the beginnynge was
the worde, and the worde
was with God : and the worde
was God. 2 The same was
in the beginnynge with God.
3 All thinges were made by
it, and with out it, was made
nothinge, that was made.
* In it was lyfe, and the lyfe
was the lyght of men, * and
the lyght shyneth in the
darcknes, but the darcknes
comprehended it not.
* There was a man sent
from God, whose name was
lohn. ^ The same cam as a
witnes to beare witnes of the
lyght, that all men through
him myght believe. 8 He was
not that lyght : but to beare
witnes of the lyght. 9 That
was a true lyght, which
lyghteth all men that come
into the worlde. 'O He was
in the worlde, and the worlde
was made by him: and yet
the worlde knewe him not.
II He cam iamonge his
(awne) and his awne re-
ceaved him not. i* But as
meny as receaved him, to
them he gave power to be
the sonnes of God in that
they beleved on his name.
CoVEBBiJLE, 1535.
IN the begynnynge was
the worde, and the worde
was with God, and God was
y* worde. The same was in
the begynnynge with God.
All thinges were made by
the same, and without the
same was made nothings that
was made. In him was the
life, and the life was the
light of men ; and the light
shyneth in the darknesse,
and the darkness compre-
hended it not.
There was sent from God a
man, whose name was Ihon.
The same came for a wit-
nesse, to beare wytnesse of
y* light, that thorow him
they all might beleue. He
was not that light, but that
he might beare witnesse of
y* light. That was the true
light, which lighteth all men,
that come in to this worlde.
He was in the worlde, i the
worlde was made by him,
and y* worlde knewe him
not.
He came in to his awne,
and his awne receaued him
not. But as many as re-
ceaued him, to them gaue he
power to be the children of
God : euen soch as beleue in
his name.
Matthew, 1537.
IN the beginninge was
the worde, and the worde was
with God : and the worde was
God. The same was in the
beginnynge wyth God. All
thinges were made by it, and
wythout it, was made no-
thynge that 'was made. In it
was lyfe, and the lyfe was
the lyght of men, and the
lyght shyneth in y* darck-
nes but the darcknes com-
prehended it not.
There was a man sent from
God, whose name was John.
The same cam as a witnes
to beare wytnes of the lyght,
that all men through him
myght beleue. He was not
that lyght : but to beare witnes
of the lyght. That was a true
lyght wnych lyghteth all me
that come into the worlde. Ho
was in the worlde, and the
worlde was made by hym :
and yet the worlde knewe nym
not.
He cam amonge hys awne,
and hys awne receaued hym
not. But as many as re-
ceaued hym, to them he gaue
power to be the sonnes of
God in that they beleued on
hys name :
Cbanmsb, 1539.
1 IN the begynnynge was
the worde, and the worde
was wyth God : and God
was the wordfe. 2 The same
was in the begynnyng with
God. 3 All thynges were
made by it, and without it,
was made nothynge that was
made. * In it was lyfe, and
the lyfe was the lyght of
men, * and the lyght shyn-
eth in darcknes, and the
darcknes comprehended it
not.
6 There was sent from God
a man, whose name was lohn.
7 The same cam as a wytnes
to beare wytnes of the lyght,
that all men through hym
myght beleue. 8 He was
not that lyght : but was sent
to beare wytnes of the lyght.
9 That lyght was the true
lyght, whych lyghteth euery
man that cometh into the
worlde. "> He was in the
worlde, and the worlde was
made by hym : and the
worlde knewe hym not.
" He cam amonge hys
awne, and hys awne re-
ceaued him not. >2 £ut as
many as receaued hym to
them gaue he power, to be
the sonnes of God : euen them
that beleued on hys name.
Geneva, 1557.
1 IN the beginnyng was
the word, and the worde was
with God, and that worde
was God. 2 The same was
in the begynnyng with God.
3 Althinges were made by it,
and without it was made
nothing that was made. < In
it was lyfe, and the Ivfe was
the light of men. ^ ^nd the
light shineth in darkenes, and
the darknes comprehended it
not. 6 There was a man sent
from God, whose name was
lohn. 7 The same came for
a wytnes, to bearie wytnes of
the light, that all men through
hym might beleue. 8 He was
not that light, but was sent to
beare wytnes of the light.
9 That was that true lyght,
which lyghteth all men that
come into the worlde. '0 He
was in the worlde, and the
worlde was made by hym:
and the worlde knewe him
not. ■! He came among his
owne, and his owne receaued
him not.
12 But as many as receaued
hym, to them he gaue power
to be the sonnes of God, euen
to them that beleue in his
Bishops, 1568.
I IN the begynnyng was
the worde, and the worde was
with God : and that worde
was God. 2 The same was
in the begynnyng with God.
3 All thynges were made by
it : and without it, was made
nothyng that was made. ■* In
it was lyfe, and the lyfe was
the lyght of men. ^ And the
lyght shyneth in darkenesse :
and the darkenesse compre-
hended it not.
6 There was a man sent
from God whose name was
John : 7 The same came for a
witnesse, to beare witnesse
of the lyght, that all men
through hym myght beleue.
8 He was not that lyght :
but was sent to beare wit-
nesse, of the lyght. 9 That
[lyght} was the true lyght,
which lyghteth every man
that.commeth into the worlde.
10 He was in the worlde, and
the worlde was made by hym,
and the worlde knewe hym
not.
II He came among his
ov?ne, and his owne receaued
hym not. 12 But as many
as receaued hym, to them
gave he power to be the sonnes
of God, euen them that be
leued on his name.
Rreims, 1582.
I IN the beginning was
the Word, and the Wobd
was with God, and God was
the WoBD. 2 This was in
the beginning with God.
3 Al things were made by
him : and without him was
made nothing. That which
was made, < in him was
life, and the life was the
light of men : ^ and the light
shineth in darkenesse, and
the darkenesse did not com-
prehend it. * There was a
man sent from God, whose
name was lohn. 1 This man
came for testimonie : to giue
testimonie of the light, that
al might beleeue through him.
8 He was not the light,
but to giue testimonie of the
light. 9 It was the true light,
which lighteneth euesy man
that commeth into this world.
10 He was in the world, and
the world was made by him,
and the world knew him
not.
II He came into his owne,
and his owne received him
not 12 But as many as re-
ceiued him, he gaue them
power to be made the sonnes
of God, to those that beleeue
in his name.
BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS, 577
Chapter XXXII.
Biblical Hermeneutics.
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 godlike.
Now in that cultivation of the soul, the science of Holy Scrip-
ture is most immediate to the end of all study. The other
departments of human knowledge contain but the faint and
broken accents of nature ; the Holy Scriptures contain 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 Code.
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 message of
the Creator may be received in its fulness, in the mind made re-
ceptive 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 dog-
matic 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. He may be able to spend his
time in visiting and social converse, and yet be able to treat
indifferently well the aforesaid themes ; but if a man would
draw anything more than pious generalities out of the Scrip-
tures, he must study.
In the words of Jerome : " Agricolae, caementarii, fabri,
metallorum lignorumve caesores, lanarii quoque et fullones,
et ceteri, qui variam supellectilem et vilia opuscula fabricantur,
absque doctore, esse non possunt quod cupiunt. Quod medi-
corum 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, banc sophista verbosus,
hanc universi praesumunt, lacerant, docent, antequam discant.
Alii adducto supercilio grandia verba trutinantes inter mulier-
KK
678 BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS.
culas de sacris Uteris philosophantur. Alii discunt, 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 haec et circulatorum ludo similia,
docere quod ignores, imo, ut cum 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 everything, and
order the fund of knowledge thus acquired to obtain the
greatest of all acquisitions, the science of God.
He should study natural science to see the design of the
Creator in his works, and the evidences of his wisdom in
Nature's laws ; and also to defend the truths of God against the
puny and inflated sophists, who speak in the name of science.
He should study philosophy that by the possession 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 is shut up 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 Scripture, I
shall desist from fruitless toil. Neither Jerome nor any other
man, put into the translation the fulness and the clearness of
the original. Only he who draws directly from the original
fount, can open up the full sense of the Sacred Text.
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 interpreter
of Scripture, who was not a profound dogmatic theologian.
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.
He should study textual criticism, that he may be able to
judge of the sense of various readings, and intelligently handle
the different codices.
Finally, he should read and ponder much upon the Holy
Code, for it does not reveal its depths of truths to the casual
reader.
BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS. 579
Some writers at this point formulate rules of criticism. I
believe, however, that the science is not promoted by these
rules. A mind well stored with knowledge, acting with judg-
ment and prudence, and with a teachableness of heart will
naturally move in the lines which these rules endeavor to
systematize.
The use of these data is ordered to find the Sense OF
Scripture.
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 institution
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 predica-
tion ; and the sense in a right ordered proposition can be but
one.
The old writers divided the sense of Scripture into various
species. Many of these species serve no practical purpose.
They arose out of that general drift of the ancients to seek
always something mystic in the Scriptures, and to multiply
divisions in every science. Setting aside then the systems of
the ancients, we shall found our classification of the senses of
Scripture, on the nature of the text itself.
The first and greatest of the senses of Scripture is the
Literal Sense.
The literal sense is that, which results immediately from
the ordinary force of the words, as when I say : " The Word
was made flesh." This is sometimes called the historical sense.
It is the basic sense in all Scripture, and in all the expressions
of the creations of mind. The older writers included under
one head both the literal and the metaphorical sense. We
reject this mode of division, and place as a distinct species
the Metaphorical Sense.
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 corporal 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
680 BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS.
enunciation, to give clearness to abstract ideas, and to express
ideas with something of the fulness and vividness of the ob-
jects 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."
Some of the figures of the Scripture are very bold. It is a
bold figure to represent God as walking in the Garden of Eden,
or to bid the Apostles salute no man in the way, or to bid a
man hate his father and mother, brother and sister.
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 like-
ness. A fine allegory is in Isaiah V. i — 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 pro-
positions are always true to nature ; the laws of the nature of
the different beings introduced, are strictly 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 conse-
quens.
Such is the nature of the human mind, that it evolves truth
from truth by logical process. The truths which are by logi-
cal 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 conclu-
sion will be equally the sense of the Holy Ghost, and reducible
BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS. 581
to the species of the fundamental position. While, therefore,
we justify the process, we see no need of multiplying 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 pre-
figure 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 com-
prehend 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 sentence
its proper literal sense, and is formed upon it by applying 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 distinguishable 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 allegor-
ical description of the different religious conditions of human
life, in its journey towards eternity.
The typical sense is also different in nature from the sense
of the symbolic actions of prophetic vision. The Vision of
Ezechiel, 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 portrayed
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, dividing
types into prophetic, which relate to Christ, anagogic which
regard man's supernatural destiny, and tropologic, which con-
tain 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, TUTTo? Toi /LteWovTo?, Rom. V. 14; the sacrifice of
Melchisedech is a type of the Eucharist ; Sara and Hagar are
682 BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS.
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 he TxrmKo.'i avve^aivev eK€ivoL<i^ I. Cor. X. Ii. Such evi-
dent proofs render the existence of the typical sense as well
founded as the existence of inspiration.
The sense of every proposition of Scripture must be found
in these three classes. It is evident also that the typical sense
presupposes the literal sense and is based upon it. Therefore
in the typical sentences of the Bible there will be two senses,
though not of the same order. This is the only case where
there is more than one sense in a proposition of the Holy
Text. Those old writers who defended a multiplex sense of
Scripture confused issues, so that their opinions are not con-
vincing. It is the nature of human speech that there be but
one literal sense in a proposition, and the inspired writers act-
ing under the influence of the Holy Ghost, are not to be
supposed to have changed the nature of human discourse. In
fact the understanding of the Scriptures would be much im-
peded, 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.
The comprehensive sense of prophetic utterances may
seem to us to be multiplex, but a careful examination will
show that what was thought a multiplex sense, was simply a
fuller comprehension of the literal sense. Thus, we can recon-
cile Isaiah LIII. 4, with St. Matthew, VIII. 17. Moreover, an
agent may, notwithstanding our position, unconsciously utter
an inspired prophecy, while giving utterance to a human judg-
ment with its own proper sense. Thus Caiphas gave judgment
favoring the death of Jesus, but as he was pontiff of that year,
his words contained an unconscious prophecy of the Redemp-
tion of humanity by the death of Jesus. But there is only
one inspired sense here, and moreover, Caiphas can not be
made equal to the inspired writers.
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 sacrifices, a type of
the Eucharist, etc., but it is absurd to seek this typology in
BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS. 683
every individual proposition. This has been done even to the
extent of finding a typical signification in the snuffers used to
remove the snuff from the candles 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 per-
fect 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 typical 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 cer-
tainly 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, and recourse should only be had to
the metaphorical sense, when the literal is plainly impossible.
But in every proposition of Scripture, either the literal or meta-
phorical sense will be found. Care must be taken not to re-
ceive the error of Origen, who defended that at times only the
typical sense was intended. The typical never stands 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 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. Therefore,
where there is a typical sense it is to be principally sought, be-
cause 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.
584 BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS.
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 the 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 different
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
iracundiae factus est reconciliatio". In the same manner, the
Breviary extends to Holy Pontiffs, what was said by him of
Moses : " Similem fecit ilium in gloria Sanctorum "; and of
Aaron : " Statuit ei testamentum aetemum."
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 Jahve 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 XVIII. 26,
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 585
(Hebrew) the Psalmist declares the action of God towards
man to be fashioned by the qualities of a man's own life : " Cum
sancto sanctus eris, et cum perverso perverteris." It is lam-
entable 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 ex-
ecuted 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 medicine 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 Scrip-
ture should only be used of holy themes, and with profound
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. Of course, all species of such
accommodation are not reprehensive in the same degree. In
fact there is no evil in an occasional adaptation of the Holy
Text to something refined and pure, even though it be not of
the intent of the inspired writer. Thus one who had been
rescued from a ruined coal mine, in speaking of his supplica-
tions to Heaven, could say without disrespect to the Scrip-
ture : " De profundis clamavi ad te, Domine". One can in-
veigh against sinful waste in the words of Judas Iscariot :
" Ut quid perditio haec ? "
Chapter XXXIII.
The Interpretation of Scripture.
The interpretation of Scripture may be divided into
authentic and SCIENTIFIC.
The interpretation is authentic if the sense of some writer
be enucleated for us, by some adequate authority. Thus, when
a subsequent writer explains the sense of existing Holy Scrip-
ture such interpretation is authentic. In equal degree is the
interpretation authentic when the Church authoritatively de-
clares the sense of any passage.
The interpretation is scientific when it is based on human
study and judgment. This interpretation is never independent
586 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.
of the authority of the Church, and must be conducted by the
just laws that she has enacted to regulate such province of
human thought. Only a few passages have been authentically
interpreted ; hence the great body of the Scripture lies open
to scientific interpretation, of which we shall now speak at
some length.
In regard to this theme, writers give a complex system of
rules which could be summed up in this : study the original
languages, compare the best codices, compare the old versions,
read the Scriptures intelligently, and endeavor to take the
sense from the Scripture, not to bring one into it.
Parallel passages will also aid us to find the sense of ob-
scure places.
" When, in any ordinary composition, a passage occurs of
doubtful meaning with respect to the sentiment or doctrine it
conveys, the obvious course of proceeding is, to examine what
the author himself has in other parts of his work delivered
upon the same subject ; to weigh well the force of any parti-
cular expressions he is accustomed to use; and to inquire what
there might be in the occasion or circumstances under which
he wrote, tending to throw further light upon the immediate
object he had in view. This is only to render common justice
to the writer ; it is necessary both for the discovery of his real
meaning, and to secure him against any wanton charge of error
or inconsistency. Now, if this may justly be required in any
ordinary work of uninspired composition, how much more
indispensable must it be when we sit in judgment upon the
sacred volume; in which (if we acknowledge its divine
original) it is impossible to imagine a failure either in judg-
ment or in integrity."
" God has been pleased, in sundry portions and in divers
manners, to speak unto us in his world ; but in all the books
of Scripture we may trace an admirable unity of design, an
intimate connection of parts, and a complete harmony of
doctrines. In some instances the same truths are conveyed
nearly in the same modes of expression ; in other instances,
the same sentiments are clothed with beautiful varieties of
language. While we are interested in discovering some of
the indications of mental diversity among the sacred writers,
we clearly perceive that the whole volume of revelation is
distinguished by a certain characteristic style and phraseology
altogether its own, and which, for simplicity, dignity, energy,
and fulness, must be allowed to have no parallel. Now, if
there be in the various parts of Scripture such important
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 587
coincidences of sentiment, of language, and of idiom, it is
evident that we proceed on just and rational principles, in
comparing together passages that have some degree of resem-
blance, and in applying those, the meaning of which is clear,
to the illustration of such as are involved in some degree of
obscurity."
In seeking the sense of Holy Scripture, we must be ever
mindful that the Scriptures are the word of God, that they
contain the thoughts of a being whose ways are not our ways,
and whose thoughts are not our thoughts. If we seek to
make the Holy Text agree with our notions, we shall shut up
the sense of the Scriptures of God. We should seek it with
the same temper of mind in which it was written. The voice
of God is heard through the Scriptures, and the voice of God
is only heard by docile hearts.
Hence, we can not subject the Holy Books to the laws of
hermeneutics as a mere literary production. Every interpre-
tation which presupposes the possibility of error in the inspired
writer, is to be rejected. The inability to find the sense of a
passage must not be attributed to the error of the writer, but
to the limitations of our comprehension. In the same way no
real contradiction can be admitted between the different
writers, or between the different statements of the same writer.
The seeming contradictions in doctrinal and moral parts
result from the dulness of our own minds. Some contradic-
tions have come into the non-essential parts of Scripture, but
these are not attributable to the authors, but to the defects of
the agencies through which they have been transmitted to us.
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 office it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation
of Holy Scripture ; and that no one shall dare interpret the
same Holy Scriptures contrary to the unanimous consensus of
the Fathers". This decree was again promulgated by the
Vatican Council. The last clause relating to the Fathers does
not really add any new element to the decree ; for the Fathers
when agreeing on a doctrinal or moral part of Scripture, are
always at one with the Church. This consensus needs not be
mathematical, but only moral ; and when it is such, it is an
authentic witness of what the Church held in past ages.
688 JEWISH INTERPRETATION.
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 institution of the
Blessed Eucharist prove the real presence of Christ in the
Host. In the fourteenth session it is defined that the words of
Christ in John XX. 23 convey the power of binding and loos-
ing sin ; and that James V. 11 promulgates 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 ; and
her authentic teaching forms a general norm of interpretation
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 penman, either directly or ex-
pressly, 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 Gospel bear 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 Scriptures), to prophesy
according to the analogy of faith.
If we come to the Scriptures with any pre-conceived
opinions, and are more desirous to put that sense upon the
text which coincides with our own sentiments rather than the
truth, it then becomes the analogy of our faith rather than
that of the whole system of God's truths.
Chapter XXXIV.
Jewish Interpretation.
Through defect of documents, we know nothing of the exe-
getical systems of the Jews before the time of Christ.
Flavius Josephus declares (War I. 5, 2.) that the Pharisees
interpret the Law accurately. We can only come at a know-
ledge of their system through the Talmud, which reflects the
Jewish thought of the early ages.
JEWISH INTERPRETATION. 589
The Talmud is a composite form of the Mishna and the
Gemara. The Mishna, from H^^'/ has the radical significa-
T :
tion of Deuterosis, 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 Hakkadosh, or the Holy, born
about the middle of the second century. The Mishna summed
up all previous rabbinical labors, and moulded all the sub-
sequent philosophy and theology of Judaism. Rabbinic inter-
pretation is called by the generic term of Ci^**11D, Midrash
from Ci^lH/ to enquire. These Midrashim are of two kinds,
the Haggadah, (1*12(1 from U^ to narrate, was a free exposi-
T T- -T
tion inclining to 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 JlD/fl^ Halakah, from TITTl to proceed. This in-
terpretation keeps more strictly to the traditional acceptation
of the Law.
" These traditional ordinances, as already stated, bear the
general name of the Halakahy as indicating alike the way in
which the fathers had walked, and that which their children
were bound to follow. These Halakoth were either simply
the laws laid down in Scripture ; or else derived from, 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 rigour,
and most minute analysis pursued and dominated man, turn
whither he might, laying on him a yoke which was truly
unbearable. The return which it offered was the pleasure and
distinction of knowledge, the acquisition of righteousness,
and the final attainment of rewards.
590 JEWISH INTERPRETATION.
The Halakah indicated with the most minute and painful
punctiliousness every legal ordinance as to outward obser-
vances, 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 '
{Zeraim, ' seeds ') begins with the ordinances concerning ' bene-
dictions,' 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, &c.). The second ' Order ' {Moed, * festive
time ') discusses all connected with the Sabbath 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') contains the civil and criminal law.
Characteristically, it includes all the ordinances concerning
idol- worship (in the tractate Abodah Zarah) and 'the sayings
of the Fathers' (^(^^/^). The fifth ' Order ' {Kodashim, 'holy
things ') treats of the various classes of sacrifices, oflferings, and
things dedicated to God, and of all questions which can be
grouped under 'sacred things' (such as the redemption, ex-
change, or alienation of what had been dedicated to God.) It
also includes the laws concerning the daily morning and evening
SQr\icQ {Tamid), and a description of the structure and arrange-
ments of the Temple {Middoth, ' the measurements'). Finally,
the sixth 'Order' {Toharoth, 'cleannesses') gives every ordi-
nance connected with the questions of ' clean and unclean,'
alike as regards human beings, animals, and inanimate things.
These ' Orders ' are divided into tractates {Massiktoth,
Massektiyoth, ' textures, webs '), of which there are sixty-three
(or else sixty-two) in all. These tractates are again subdivided
into chapters, ^Perakin^—m all 525, which severally consist
of a certain number of verses, or Mishnas {Mishnayoth, in all
4,187). Considering the variety and complexity of the sub-
jects treated, the Mishna is arranged with remarkable logical
perspicuity. The language is Hebrew, though of course not
that of the Old Testament. The words rendered 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.
JEWISH INTERPRETATION. 591
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 Mishna
(Aboth : The Sayings of the ' Fathers ') is entirely Haggadah;
a second {Middoth; the ' Measurements of the Temple ') has
Halakah in only fourteen places ; while in the rest of the
tractates Haggadah occurs in not fewer than 207 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 the
two Talmuds or Gemaras. If we imagine something combin-
ing law reports, a Rabbinical * Hansard,' and notes of a theo-
logical debating club — all thoroughly Oriental, full of di-
gressions, 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 Aramaean ; the
592 JEWISH INTERPRETATION.
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 under-
standing of the symbols which were contained in the letter.
Thus Abraham is the symbol of the learning of virtue ; Isaac,
of the acquisition of virtue ; Jacob, of its exercise. Adam,
is a symbol of man in his rude state; Cain, of selfishness;
Noah, of justice ; Sara, of womanly virtue ; Rebecca, of
wisdom ; Egypt, is a symbol of the body ; the dove, of the
divine wisdom, etc. He 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 p'2!0t ^^ receive, since they
••It
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, H. Chron. XXXVI. 23. contain six ^. The
letter 5»5 is the first letter of Tp^, a thousand ; therefore, the
world will endure six thousand years. The first two words of
Genesis i^l^ rT^ti^t^lD by the numerical value of the letters,
T T • •• :
make 1116; the name number, results from the numerical value
of the phrase t^*^^^ 11^^*11 Ci^'5^'12/ " »" the beginning of the
T : • TT - :
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
JEWISH INTERPRETATION. 693
from the letters of one word. For example the first word of
Genesis H'^Ci^'i^lD is by this method made to signify the sen-
tence : '2 = ^1'2f he created, "^ = ^^Olf the firmament,
T T - I 'T
^ = Y^^, the earth, ^ = U^t2^, the heavens, ^ = Qi, the
sea, ^ = Dlnn^ 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 : ^ = |2/
the Son, *) = r\)1, the Spirit, ^ = ^^, the Father, ^ =
n^b\i;, three, ^ = r\nr\\ unity, n = riDa perfect : the
T : T • : T T
Son, the Spirit, and the Father, the threefold perfect unity.
By adopting just the reverse, from the initial letters of
HD^Dti^'n IJ^Tl^i^"' ^D/ who shall lead us to Heaven ? they
formed H^'^D' the rabbinic form of H /ID' circumcision.
T • T
The third artifice, called Themurah from "^^^ to change,
is founded in a metathesis of the letters.
This may be wrought in various ways. i. — The transposi-
tion may be wrought of the letters themselves of any word, so
that it may change its signification. Thus the '']r*^7D/ "^7
• T : -
angel, of Exod. XXIII. 23, by the Themurah becomes
7^^i^, 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^f^Hi^^
where the last letter of the alphabet is substituted for the first
letter, J^ for ^; the second last letter for the second, '^ for
2, hence its name ^*12"n^^- The second species is called
D^7^/ 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, 7, for the first letter of the first
half, ^, and so through both halves. Some believe that the
Massoretic text has suffered an interpolation from the Cabal-
ists in Jer. XXV. 26, and LI. 41, where we read TjC^'li^'Tl^D-
No such kingdom is known in history. Jerome in
forms us that we should read by Athbasch 7^3, and he be-
lieves that Jeremiah with design concealed the real name,
leaving it to the Cabalists to interpret. It is far more prob-
able, that if 7^^ should be read there, that the text has been
corrupted from p;^^ to T]^'^ by the Cabalists.
LL '
694 JEWISH INTERPRETATION.
The most famous Cabalistic treatise is the Book of Sohar,
/. 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 Cabal-
istic treatise on their occult doctrines concerning God, the
Messiah, the Angels, etc. Two minor works of similar argu-
ment are the Books Bahir, and Jezira.
After the eleventh century of our era a new school of scrip-
tural interpretation arose among the Jews. The doctors 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 born 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 1105.
2. — Rabbi Abraham ben Meir ben Ezra, commonly
called Abenezra, was born at Toledo, in Spain, in 1093. He
distinguished himself in philosophy, astronomy, medicine,
poetry, mathematics, the languages, and exegesis. He travelled
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 Maimonides,
and sometimes Rambam, was born at Cordova, in Spain, in
II 35. Cordova was at that time a Mussulman stronghold,
JEWISH INTERPRETATION. 595
and the vernacular tongue of Maimonides was Arabic. He is
styled Rabbi Abram, the last of the sages as regards 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 Egypt. He was versed in the Arabic philos-
ophy, 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 Mishneh
Thorah, a systematic codification of the whole Jewish Law, as
found in the Bible, the Mishnah, the Talmud, 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 difificult
" 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-Hairin in Arabic, in Hebrew D'^DI^JH HIID^
The Guide of the Perplexed.
This work essays to explain the difTficult passages of the
Bible. Maimonides was conversant with Aristotle, and made
much use of his philosophy in this work. The work is a curi-
ous 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 born 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 compelled the Jews to flee.
In Provence the family took the Gentile surname of Petit.
Rabbi David lost his father (who 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 prin-
cipal oral teacher. The valuable literary treasures of his
father, however, falling into his hands, Radak grew strong by
studying them, and, as we know, eclipsed them completely,
596 JEWISH INTERPRETATION.
although he lacked his father's originality. But, if Rabbi
David lacked originality, 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 be-
came his own in a peculiar way. Although preceded by
Hayyuj, Ibn Janah, and others, and succeeded by Abraham
de Balmes, Elias Levita, and others, Kimchi has maintained
the position of the greatest Jewish grammarian and lexico-
grapher. 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 half a millennium, as
a commentator 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 Judaeo-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 literature
is his Grammar and Lexicon. All subsequent Hebrew lexico-
graphers have drawn from his D''Ci^'n2^ 1DD/ the Book of
• T T V ••
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.
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 after-
wards to Ferdinand the Catholic of Castile. A decree of ex-
pulsion 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 II. At the French
invasion, he fled to Sicily, and finally fixed his domicile at
Venice, where he died in 1508.
JEWISH INTERPRETATION. 597
During his wanderings, he composed numerous works treat-
ing of Holy Scripture. The principal works are Commentaries
on Deuteronomy, Josue, 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 ex-
cessive praise. Like all his class, he hated the Christians, and
gives evidence of this hatred in his use of Scripture. 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
subtilties, and attacks on Christianity.
Other Jewish doctors of minor note are R. Levi ben
Gerson, R. Elias Levita, R. Salomon ben Melech, R. Moses
Nachmanides, called Ramban, R. Chajim, R. Jacob ben
Ruben, R. Aaron ben Joseph, R. Aaron ben Elia, R. Abra-
ham de Balmes ben Meir, R. Abraham Hal^vi, and Abraham
Usque.
It is usual for writers on Scriptural Introduction to place
at the end of their works, a list of the principal exegetes of all
ages. We refrain from this, lest we should make the present
volume too bulky. Brief biographical notes have been placed at
proper places through the work, so that the reader who has
reached this point will scarcely need such a conspectus of
writers.
And thus we terminate our present work, feeling with the
Maccabean historian, that, if we have written well, we have
achieved our purpose ; but, if poorly, it must be pardoned us,
for it was the best that we could do.
The End of the General Introduction.
APPENDIX.
The Origin of Alphabetical Writing.
We designate by Alphabet the series of characters of the
different peoples, which represent the sounds and articulations
of their language.
The first representations of thought by characters were
ideographic hieroglyphics, in which the pictures of animals or
other objects of nature or of human industry were symbols of
ideas, without any of the connecting links of language. The
written language of the Indians of North America was largely
ideographic. This mode of representing thought was very
imperfect. It could represent only a limited number of ideas,
and that by great labor and much inexactness. It was limited
to the material order of things ; it could not represent an ab-
stract idea, nor could it join thought to thought in logical
sequence. The imperfection of this mode of writing gradually
moved the inventive mind of man to improve it, so that the
pictures of similar objects should stand as conventional signs
of the different sounds of the voice, and thus the ideographic
evolved into the phonetic. In the Assyrian cuneiform writing,
the conventional signs were taken to represent syllables ; they
did not carry the analysis of the voice further. But the
Egyptians analyzed the voice into its radical sounds, and in-
vented symbols for all. This mode of writing existed with
the Egyptians more than 3000 years before our era. It was of
three kinds. Hieroglyphic, Hieratic and Demotic.
The Hieroglyphic proper represented the sound by the
correct outlines of some object, in whose name the initial
sound corresponded to the sound of which it was to be a
symbol. The Eagle, whose initial letter is A in Egyptian,
was a symbol for the letter A.
The Hieratic mode of writing, employed for state papers,
differed from the Hieroglyphic only inasmuch as the outlines of
the objects were not observed with such fidelity, but were
simplified to accelerate the writing.
The Demotic is a further abbreviation and simplification of
the Hieratic, made use of by the common people. The Hiero-
glyphic proper appears on the monuments ; the other two in
papyrus MSS.
APPENDIX. 599
Together with these phonetic symbols they retained certain
ideographic signs, and others that represented syllables.
The Egyptian hieroglyphics by no means constituted a
perfect system. They were rather a confused medley of diffe-
rent kinds of signs. The Phenicians came upon this chaos of
language symbols, and catching the idea of the Egyptians,
they eliminated what was useless, and built upon the original
idea the alphabet properly so called :
' ' Phcenices primi, f amse si creditur, ausi
Mansuram rudibus vocem signare figuris."
— Lucan, Pharsalia, III. 220—221.
The remarkable genius of this people appears in the fact
that they chose only the necessary characters from the con-
fused mass of the Egyptians. They chose twenty-two con-
sonant letters, and rejected the rest as superfluous. The one
imperfection of the Phenician alphabet, was the absence of
vowel signs. We find the first invention of vowels with the
Greeks, But the Phenicians had really invented that which
was principal, and were the first among the races of men to
employ a purely phonetic mode of writing. The Cuneiform
Inscriptions of Assyria, Babylon, and Persia are not properly
alphabetical. Excepting these, all the alphabets of the globe,
of which we have knowledge, are derived from the characters
of the Phenician merchants of the world. M. de Roug6 and
M. Lenormant have demonstrated that the Phenicians based
their alphabet not on the hieroglyphic symbols, but on the
hieratic characters, as they were more adapted to cursive
writing. The date of the Phenician invention can not be fixed
with certainty, but it is placed before the period of Moses in
Egypt. The Egyptians, though a people of great culture and
wise institutions, were not a commercial people. The Phe-
nician merchants at an early date entered into commercial rela-
tions with this people, and from this came the evolution of the
rude symbols of the Egyptians into the perfect alphabet of
the Phenicians.
The annexed plates, from M. Vigouroux's Dictionnaire de
la Bible, illustrate the development of alphabetical writing
from the Hieroglyphics of the Egyptians.
The decipherment of the hieroglyphics of Egypt is the
achievement of Jean Fran9ois Champollidn the younger (1790 —
1832). This gifted scholar in his short life accomplished one
of the greatest of human discoveries, and with his dying voice
he delivered to his fellow-man the discoveries of his genius.
The importance of his discovery is very great. Egypt was a
CO
EGYPTIEN
SEMITIQUE
/ — r"^— N
PhcnicieR
Letiroa
equivalentos
Hieroglyphes
Hie'raticjue
r
Hcbreu
Grec
RoiRilill
t
rt-^^'
\
^
^
«
A
A
h
heroTi
^
^ ^
S.
D
B
B
hip
sie^e
s
Zj^ ^
7 ^
:i
r
A
C
D
t(d)
nudiv
r"^
-*^ -^
A <\
1
h
plan/ cl&
maisoTv
J
nt HI
^
n
~
E
f(v)
ceraste/
^^
^
Y 1
1
Y
F
z
jxHi^iseazL
soTisplu/nes
^
d:
/ 7
T
1
Z.
•
cribU?
@
0? ^
/^^
n
H
H
t
corde
avecnoeiids
r ^
20>-
© fc'
t^
e
y
paraHe/es^
W
/ 4^
? V
■>
w
1
k
ow rase
cLonriBazc
-z=^
^ ^
/
D
K
<.
1
lioTin£/
^^
2t^ i^
6 J.
'?
A
L
m
hiiow
^
3
y
?2
M
M
n
e/nv
VVWVN
—^ fc;:^
y
2
N
N
s
verrow
M -
•i7 *^
^\
D
-
X
c
(••••• » ••••.•
o
V
o
o
p
nattb
niui
mill
att, ;;jf
7?
&
n
p
s
•
serpent
-K
^^
A
]:
g
coin?
Z!
^
9 V
P
^
Ql
*r
IfGUcke^
<r->
*P
^
-I
P
K
S
jarduv
W^
^
\A^
^
51
5
b
bourse (?)
bras offhant
iin pJiJi .
]i4J
6 ^ y^
K -h
r
T
T
Noms
Inscriplioa
de la Stele
doMesa
irS'^'avJC.
Pheniciea
des Monnaies ei
des Inscriptions
Tnscripiion
de Siioe
(vcrsk VIR'
S-svantJC)
Ancien Hebreu
des Moniuaies
et des Gemmes
SanuaitHin.
Hebreu
des
Inscriplioas
Hebreu
Ecriture
carree
^l^fv
\^
^ Y V
:k>i
kW^y.
^f/^
^ K
^
^a5i
e^
^-9^
4
9^ y
a
t2tX
3
GkCmeL
77
1 f\ 1
-A
-^77
^
J
J)alet/o
A^
A^A
A
^7i-T
i"
1 r
T
M
^^
^11^
<^
^^TT
^
TCn
n
Var
r Y
^^-i
1
WfA
«rf
Ml
1
Zcuh
^
^Z!^/1
,?=»
2 -2^ (-2:)
'^
\f
T
letk
WW
^if^ ^
^
Mti'^B
^'^
n^
n
TbOl
y^^
6
(d^
to
lad
f^
^nsi/v
a-
^/^/
v^
1 1
>
Caph
ry
^yi7
^
J^i^
:j:i
::i:y
1^
Lcamd/
u
4441
^
/VjlL
ZZ
UK
h
Menv
yy
yy^
y
yi":)::}
y::i
>>D
dD
Niunu
V
yy)
^
43::^^
h^
J
) i
^cunec/v
^^
t^^
^^
^
vc?
Jut
o
o^ o t^
d
O^-^^iO
C^ 'c^
^;^
J?
Pe
/y
017
9
^^
:n::r
J^
jq B
Isadd
1^^
\\\
cy-i
^7^f
A)^
y
V)^
(^opfu
nf
f I7t
/?
f i^r
T?
P
?
Res(Ji>
i^
^^i
A
^^^
^1
^^
1
Schxn
WW
UJ u\^ ^
w
W>^60
Co u/
vv
2;
Thap'
K
//X><
X
f xY
v/l
5^7^
n
602 APPENDIX.
land of great culture and civilization in the remotest times. The
Lawgiver of Israel was taught by them. Their institutions were
wise, and their laws were just. Moreover, it was the nursery of
the Hebrew people, and the sojourn in Egypt stamped a cer-
tain characteristic on the religious and civil life of Israel.
But the key to Egypt's lore had been lost, and the message
of the hieroglyphs was locked in mystery. M. Brugsch Bey,
estimates the number of these hieroglyphs to be more than
three thousand.
M. Champollion, after a successful study of the Coptic
tongue, entered upon the great task of unraveling the Egyp-
tian mystery.
In 1799, the French lieutenant of artillery, M. Bouchard,
while establishing the Fort St. Julian at Rosetta in Egypt,
discovered what has since become famous as the Rosetta
stone. This stone is of Egyptian basalt, about ten feet in
height by three and a half in width. It is mutilated about
the angles. The stone is at present in the British Museum.
It was translated by Birch in Records of the Past, Vol. IV.
The Rosetta stone bears an inscription in three columns.
The first column is hieroglyphic, the second demotic, the third
Greek. The inscription contains a decree of the priests of
Egypt, in honor of Ptolemy Epiphanes, directing that a statue
be erected in his honor in the temples, and that he should re-
ceive divine honors. At the same time in the Isle of Philae,
near Assouan, in Upper Egppt, a smaller inscription in hiero-
glyphics and Greek had been found, which aided Champollion
in his decipherment. It was the usage of the Egyptians to
write the name of the royal personages on Cartouches. In
the Greek column of the bilingual monument of Philae, the
name of Cleopatra was engraven in Greek, in the Greek column
of the Rosetta stone, the name of Ptolemy existed in similar
mode of writing. Champollion also observed that correspond-
ing to these two names were two cartouches in the hiero-
glyphs, and he drew the conclusion that the signs in these
cartouches corresponded to the Greek letters. This illation
was confirmed by the fact, that there are five letters in
KAEOnATPA and HTOAEMAIOS which are identical. The
five letters corresponded to five signs which are identical in
the cartouches.
The annexed plate reproduces the cartouches of Cleopatra
and Ptolemy with Champollion's system of interpretation.
We are indebted for this plate to M. Vigouroux in La Bible et
les Decouvertes Modernes.
APPENDIX.
603
I
-KAEOHATPA
nr
a
3 k
5 6
7
i
\ .
9
. 10 II
t^ Triangle K,
tS^ Lion. L
s.D
e.
'%
|.^
Roseau A.
Corde O.
Rectangle P.
Algle A.
Main T.
Bouche R.
Aigle A.
/0,U.^2»0 Deterniinatifs des noms de
femmes.
If
{UnU
nTOA£MAIOZ
i ' s
i ni
1
!. @ Rectangle P.
2. £ZX Demi-cercle T.
l.ifl Corde , O.
i. .S^ Lion L.
5. dZZ Coudee M.
6,7 *J U Double roseau AI.
Dossier 8.
P
1. — Cartouche de la reine Cleopatre.
2. — Cartouche du roi Ftolemee.
604 APPENDIX.
Starting from this position, he compared the two car-
touches. Conjecturing that the triangle in the cartouche of
Cleopatra represented the letter K, he found that the second
figure was that of a lion which corresponded to the fourth
figure in the cartouche of Ptolemy. He thence concluded
that it was a phonetic sign for L, which also is the first letter
of the name of lion in Coptic, Tv&^&tO; By similar method
with the other signs he proceeded as far as the sixth hiero-
glyph, the Eagle. This does not occur in the other cartouche,
but as it occurs again in Cleopatra in the ninth place, the illa-
tion was plain that it represented A. Some difficulty was ex-
perienced by Champollion with the seventh hieroglyph of the
cartouche of Cleopatra. To justify his theory, it ought to
correspond to the T of the cartouche of Ptolemy. But while
the hieroglyph of Cleopatra was a hand, the corresponding
one in the cartouche of Ptolemy was a semicircle. Concerning
this he came to the conclusion, which has since been confirmed
by experience, that the letter T was represented by both, the
semicircle and the hand, there being perhaps some slight
modification in its sound in different positions.
Champollion applied his theory successfully to the car-
touche of Alexander, and then to other monuments, till he
was able to publish in 1824 his Precis du Syst^me Hiero-
glyphique. Before his death he had found the keys of 260
hieroglyphics. Others have made use of his discovery to com-
pare the hieroglyphics and the hieratic and demotic characters,
and to open up the literary resources of the valley of Nile.
Distinguished scholars have worked upon the theory of
Champollion. Lenormant, Nestor 1* Hote, Salvolini, Rosellini,
Ungarelli, Leemans, Osburn, Birch, Hincks, Lepsius, de
Rouge, de Saulcy, Mariette, Chabos, Deveria, de Horrack,
Lef^bure, Pierret, Grebaut, Brugsch, Diimichen, Louth, Eisel-
hor, Ebers, Stern, Pleyte, Lieblein, Goodwin, and Lepage-
Renouf have perfected Champollion's system so that the lan-
guage of the hieroglyphs is as open as the works of Cicero
and Livy.
A discovery of considerable importance was accomplished
in 1869 by M. Clermont-Ganneau, the dragoman of the French
Consulate at Jerusalem. It is at present in the Louvre at
Paris. It is called the Moabitic stone or the Stela of Mesa.
It was originally a Monolithic block of black basalt, dotted
with bright spots. M. de Vogue declares that the Stela of
Mesa has no equal among the antiquities of the Hebrews.
The annexed plate shows the restored stone.
APPENDIX.
605
606 APPENDIX.
On account of the hardness of the stone, the inscription on
the face of this famous stone was not deeply engraven. It
contains thirty-four lines of Moabitic writing, a form of speech
having close affinity with the Hebrew of the Bible. The
writing is in the Phenician characters used by the ancient
Samaritans and Hebrews.
The Stela is one metre in heighth and about sixty centi-
metres in breadth. Its anterior face is without writing. The
date of its writing is about nine hundred years before Christ ;
and since that time up to the time of its discovery it has lain
at the base of a little hill near Dhiban, a little east of the
Dead Sea.
When the Bedouins became aware that the stone possessed
value, and was to be taken from their countr}% they broke it
in pieces. Luckily a reproduction of the inscription had been
made by M. Ganneau, before the stone was broken. He was
able to gather about twenty of the pieces, and he has restored
the stone with these and a plaster-cast. The clearer portions
of the inscription are those parts which were engraved on the
plaster-cast. The restoration is faithful, as it was made from
the facsimile made of the stone before it was broken.
The Stela of Mesa is the most ancient known monument
of alphabetical writing.
King Mesa, the author of the inscription, according to II.
(IV.) Kings III. 4, "was a possessor of sheep, and rendered
unto the King of Israel, a hundred thousand lambs and a
hundred thousand rams, with the wool." After the death of
Achab, Mesa rebelled against the King of Israel. He made
war upon the Ammonites, Idumeans, and the Israelites, and
took several cities of Israel. These victories are the theme of
the famous inscription.
He says naught of his subsequent defeat and the destruc-
tion of his kingdom by the allied armies of Jehoram of Israel,
and Jehoshaphat of Judah. Mesa being reduced to the last
extremity, offered his eldest son as a holocaust to the god
Chamos. At this spectacle, the Israelites were filled with
horror, and returned with great booty to their own country.
The Stela recounts only the victories of Mesa.
As the stone is mutilated, a part of its data will never be
known, but in its mutilated state it is of great worth to bibli-
cal exegesis.