A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO
THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
B
A GENERAL
INTRODUCTION
TO THK STUDY OF
Holy Scripture
BY
A. E. BREEN, Ph. D., D. D.
Waaa ypa(f)7j deoirvevaro^ /cal axpeXifxos 7T/3ov hihao-Kaklav^
7Tjo6<? eXey^ov, 777369 eTTai>6p6(0(Tiv, 7T/30? nraihelav rrjv ev
Sitcaioavvr). "Iva aprios y 6 tov 6eov avOpwiros
mrpos irav epyov ayadov ii;r)pTi<rp,evo<;.
\ J^ \ SECOND EDITION
\p . ^ REYJSED AND ENLARGED
)/ &
J
ROCHESTER, N. Y.
JOHN P. SMITH PK1NTING COMPANY
1908
iy£>
JfytJ/Vli./)+1-fc
<l77^
Rochester, N. Y., February i, 1908.
27 1954
;
Preface to the Second Edition.
We live in an age of great activity. It is also an age
wherein material progress and the love of worldly pleasure tend
to enfeeble man's hold on the supernatural world. It is most
evident that there is a general movement away from the
spiritual world . In non-Catholic thought the idea of a reduced
Christianity is dominant . A mere natural religion recommends
itself to many. "The natural man receiveth not the things of
the Spirit of God : for they are foolishness unto him ; and he
cannot know them because they are spiritually examined."
[I. Cor. II. 14.] Instead of accepting religion as a mysterious
message from Heaven, men make a religion that is not religious.
A religion is sought that will not interfere with man's worldly
tastes and pleasures. Human reason is made the judge of all
the works of God. A nanism is recrudescent under another
name and formula. The mystery of Christ's Divinity, the
miracles of the Bible, the extraordinary action of God in the
Revelation and Inspiration of the Scriptures are made the
special objects of attack in this modern fashion of thought.
That which is most deplorable is that this tendency has
in some degree invaded the minds of some Catholic scholars.
Clear calls of warning come from Christ's Vicar ; the danger is
grave. The demon of unbelief finds strong allies in the pride
and rebellion of fallen human nature.
During the last twenty-five years the Church lias w
fierce battle in defense of the Holy Scriptures. In this light
her worst enemies are those of her own children, who, making
dishonorable compromises with the Rationalists, the "true
children and inheritors of the older heretics," make a breach
in the walls which they have sw< >rn t< 1 def( rid .
General Introduction teaches the art of studying Holy
Scripture :
"Vie piu che indarno da riva si parte,
Perche non torna tal qual ei si muove,
Chi pesca per lo vero e non ha l'arte."
The study of Holy Scripture is proposed in that remarkable
encyclical, "Providentissimus Deus," as the chief remedy
against the evil doctrinal tendencies of our time. This study
cannot be pursued without a competent knowledge of the
questions which an Introduction to Holy Scripture treats.
The very key to the present situation is a right idea of the
Inspiration of Holy Scripture. Hence in this Second Edition
of my work, I have devoted about one third of the volume to
this great theme. I have endeavored in all things to be con-
servative. I have endeavored to present a fair examination of
the different theories, and in judging of them, the authority of
the Church has been the norm. ' My treatise on the Canon of
the Old Testament may be judged excessivelylong, but I have
contemplated this as a work of reference, in which completeness
of treatment is required . My hope is that I may have, in some
small degree, helped the Cause of Christ,
A. E. BREEN.
Rochester, N. Y.,
Feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord, 1908.
(
CONTENTS
ii.
in.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
CHAPTER
I. Revelation and lis Criterion- -
Extent ok Inspiration
The Canon - ......
The Canon of the Old Testament
Ezra and His [nfluence -
The Alexandrian Canon ...
The Canon of the Church
The Canon of the Old Testament ok the Foi rth
Century -------
IX. The Canon of the Old Testament from the End
of the Fifth Century to the Beginning of
the Twelfth Century
The Canon of the Old Testament from the
Beginning of the Thirteenth Century to
the Council of Trent -
The Council of Trent
XII. The Canon of the New Testament -
XI The New Testament of the Sects
The Apocryphal Books of Both Testaments
The Lost Books oi Both Testaments
The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament
Tin; Greek Text .....
The Uncial Codices ------
The Septuac.int and Other Greek Versions
Versions Derived from the Septuac.int -
The Targums - ....
The Ancient Versions -
The Vulgate
The Authorization of the Latin Vulgate
The Correction of the Vulgate
The English Versions ....
The Interpretation of Scripturi
XXVIII. Jewish Interpretation-
Index ----- . .
X
XI.
XIV.
XV.
XVI
XVII.
XVIII
XIX
XX
XXI.
XXII.
XXIII.
XXIV
XXV.
XXVI
XXVII
PACK
1
IDs
239
2 10
24fi
263
360
466
502
516
529
605
606
623
625
642
cm;
705
707
729
754
766
77.'
795
805
A General Introduction to
Holy Scripture.
Chapter I.
Revelation and its Criteriox.
The science of Introduction to Holy Scripture has for
its object to treat of the Books of Inspired Scripture, their
Number, the Nature of Inspiration, the Authenticity of
the several books, the Canon, the ancient Codices, the Ver-
sions of Holy Scripture, the History of the Text, the Decrees
of the Church regarding the Holy Books and the Laws of
Expounding Holy Scripture.
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 'sub-
limity of the writings, the verification of prophecies, and the
universal belief of civilized mankind are alone n;
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 tin's super-
natural revelation, according to the faith of the universal Church,
declared in Hie Holy Tridentine Synod, is contained in the writ-
ten books ana' unwritten traditions, which have come down to
us." [Vat. Council, Cap. II. De Revelatione.]
The existence of divinely inspired Scripture is so essen-
tially bound up with the existen.ee < >f religi< n itself that tl
stand or fall together. Ancient hist nd modern history
make the existence of an authentic written m<
(l)'H.S.
2 REVELATION AND ITS CRITERION
God to man a necessity. The writers of the Old Law abtind -
antly proved by miracles the divine commission to deliver
in writing the message of God. The great revelation of
God through Christ added certainty to certainty ; and Christ-
ianity continues through the ages to present the proofs of
the divinity of the Holy Books. No man will deny that
the Christian religion is a fact ; and were there no divinely
inspired Scriptures, that fact would not have a sufficient
cause. The Christian Church draws her life from two
fountains, the Holy Scriptures and the living voice of the
Holy Ghost within her. Had it so pleased God he could
have founded, and could have conserved religion without
any written message. However, considering the nature of
man, it seems more conformable to the wisdom of God to
deliver to man a written deposit which should be an ever-
lasting memorial of God's teachings. Moreover, religion
claims to possess divine Scriptures ; the Jews received their
Scriptures from Moses and the Prophets, and handed them
down to the Christian Church. Jesus Christ appealed to
these Scriptures as the infallible message of God; all the
writers of the -New Testament corroborate the doctrine of
the existence of divinely inspired Scriptures. Hence to
deny the existence of inspired Books is tantamount to deny
that religion exists.
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 authorship of God.
Inspiration, in its formal concept, is a supernatural psycho-
logical effect, wrought in the mind of the inspired agent by the
First Cause. We might define it, using the conciseness and
precision of the Latin idiom: Illustratio mentis et motus
icax voluntatis a Deo, ad exprimendum infdllibiliter sensum
Dei, sen ad exprimenda ca omnia et sola quae Deus vult. Now
it is plainly evident that a fact of such nature can be im-
mediately known but to two beings, God and the person
inspired.
(
REVELATION' AND ITS CRITERION 3
It must be con I that many of the inspired wri1
were conscious of their inspiration. plicitly declare
that they had received a commission to write: such arc-
Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Habakkuk and others. David
declares: "And the man who was raised on high saith, the
Anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet Psalmist of
Israel: The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word
was upon my tongue." — II. Sam. XXIII. i, 2.
But in other inspired books we find no evidence that t he-
author was conscious that he wrote under divine inspiration.
The writer of the Second Book of Maccabees declares thus
of his work :
"And all -such things as have been comprised in five
books by Jason of Cyrene, we have attempted to abridge in
one book.
"For considering the multitude of books, and the diffi-
culty that they find that desire to undertake the narrations
of histories, because of the multitude of the matter,
"We have taken care for those indeed that are willing
to read, that it might be a pleasure of mind: and for the
studious, that they may more easily commit to memory:
and that all that read might receive profit.
"And as to ourselves indeed, in undertaking this work
< if abridging, we have taken in hand no easy task, yea rather
a business full of watching and sweat.
"But as they that prepare a feast, and seek to satisfy
the will of others : for the sake of many, we willingly undergo
the labour.
"Leaving to the authors the exact hand! of ev<
particular, and as for ourselves, according to the plan pr
posed, studying to be I ri
"!:'>r as the master build< i ew house must
re of the whole building: but he that taket] :nt
it. must seek out lit thii 13 it: so must it
beju for us.
"For to collect all that is to be known, to put 1
urse in order, usly t uss every particul
point, is the duty ry;
4 REVELATION AND ITS CRITERION
"But to pursue brevity of speech, and to avoid nice
declarations of things, is to be granted to him that maketh
an abridgement." (II. Maccab. II. 24-32.)
The same writer draws his work to a conclusion m the
following words :
"So these things being done with relation to Nicanoi,
and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews,
I also will here make an end of my narration.
"Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the
history, it is what I desired: but if not'so perfectly, it must
be pardoned me."— Chap. 15, Ver. 39.
There is strong evidence here that the writer was uncon-
scious of his inspiration.
In the preamble of St. Luke's Gospel we find certain
indications that he was not conscious of being an inspired
writer In such books as these therefore there is no intrinsic
note to compel us to accept them as divine. It is a generally
accepted truth by Catholic theologians that the author s
consciousness of his inspiration enters not into the essential
constituents of inspiration; but is of the nature of an acces-
sory Card. Franzelin declares: "As in the prophetic im-
pulse to speak which St. Thomas, 2. 2. 173- a. 4, and
other theologians distinguish from complete prophecy,
(Cfr Aug. Genes, ad litt. Lib. III. n. 37-), thus also m the
inspiration to write it seems not essential that a man be
conscious of his inspiration; nevertheless it should not be
readily admitted that de facto any of our inspired writers
was ignorant of his inspiration" (De Div. Trad, et Script,
p 358 ) In a note in the same place he declares that it is
not proven that any of our inspired writers was ignorant of
his inspiration. Crets (De Div. Bib. Insp. Lovann, 1886) and
Pesch (De Insp. Script., 1906) are of the same opinion.
It seems far more probable to us to hold that some were
not conscious of their inspiration. The case of the writer
of the Second Book of Maccabees is perhaps the clearest
instance. Since all admit that this consciousness in no way
pertains to the essence of inspiration it seems that it should
not be asserted of a book unless there be some evidences ot
its existence. No such evidences are 'found there. But
REVELATION' AXD ITS CRITERION 5
waiving this question of fact, our main position is established
that divine revelation has not in itself the power of making
itself authentically known to man. Even if the inspired
agent were conscious of his inspiration, an examinatii <n of the
issue will convince us that the testimony 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
Muhammad 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 credibility was not divine but human, the faith,
its effect, would be no more than human faith. Now it is
exacted that we believe 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 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 leading us to investi-
gate and establish it. The Prophets and Apostles merited
divine faith for what they taught, because they, by miracl
established their divine commission to teach. In such ca
this faith was rendered divine by the corroborative attesta-
tion of God through these miracles. But how shall man
always and in every case be able to discriminate betw<
the divine writings and books of purely human origin ? T
Prophets are gone, the Apostles are gone; their writings
have undergone great vicissitudes. "We live amid th<
of systems and of creeds." In this remote age. is there any
6 REVELATION AND ITS CRITERION
adequate 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.
We do not deny that internal evidences are a partial
criterion ; but it is not a universal criterion for all the books.
For instance there are many places in the New Testament
where the books of the Old Testament are cited as Holy
Scripture. These explicit quotations are in number about
three hundred, and there are many more allusions of less
proving force. The citation of a book of the Old Testament
by Christ or any inspired writer of the New Testament as
Holy Scripture is a subsidiary criterion of inspiration ; but it
is not an adequate and sufficient criterion, since it does not
establish a complete list of the books. Not to mention the
deuterocanonical books, there is no mention in the New
Testament of Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, the Canticle
of Canticles, Obadiah, Nahum, Zephaniah, and Ecclesiastes :
Ezekiel is only faintly alluded to. Therefore the testimony
of the New Testament is neither complete nor exclusive;
but only a positive proof of some books.
A text often used to prove the internal evidences of in-
spiration in the Scriptures themselves is taken from Second
Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy III. 16. The passage, accord-
ing to the Greek is as follows: " II acra ypa(f>r) deoTrvevo-ros koX
uxfieXifios 7T/30? 8t8aafca\iav, Trpbs eXey^ov^ 777309 krcavopQwcnv^
7rpo9 iraiheCav rrjv iv hiKaiocrvvri"
The Vulgate renders the passage: "Omnis scriptura
divinitus inspirata utilis est ad docendum, ad arguendum,
ad corripiendum, ad erudiendum in justitia." The Roman
Catholic version is in accord with the Vulgate: "All Scrip-
ture inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to
correct, to instruct in justice." It is evident from a scrutiny
oi the Greek text that the Vulgate does not adequately repro-
duce it. No account is taken in such version of the /cat,
which however appears in all the best codices. The Vulgate
REVELATION' AXD ITS CRITERION' ,
expunging /cat', would virtually insert the elliptical cot*,
after &>0e'Xt/io5, thus making deoirvevcrTos a qualifying ch
acteristic, warranting the predication of w^eXi/uo?, of irdtra
ypa<f>V. By the expunging of the important particle icai,
sense can be gleaned from this passage; but, retaining such
conjunction, whose presence rests upon the best data, I am
at a loss to understand how they gather the meaning. More-
over, the context and parallel passages demand the se:
which results from the retaining of the particle.
Of all the versions, the Ethiopic comes closest to the
original. According to the Latin translation of the Ethiopic
text by Walton, it is as follows: "Et tota scriptural per
Spiritum Dei est, et prodest in omni doctrina et eruditione
ad corrigendum et instruendum in veritate." Althou
this ancient and valued text departs somewhat from I
verbally literal translation, it reproduces the full sense.
We could perhaps literally translate the Greek: "All Scrip-
ture is divinely inspired and useful to teach, to reprove, to
correct, to instruct in righteousness." Thus it is in con-
formity with the Greek reading, with the Ethiopic, with
the context, with other parallel passages, and with some
of the best of the Fathers. We may instance one parallel
passage: II. Pet. I. 20 — 21.
We think then that this sense is sufficiently evidenced so
as to become practically certain. The passage thus be-
comes a direct testimony for the influence of God on Holy
Scripture. Indeed, Paul's motive is to induce Timothy to
entertain a divine regard for the Holy Writ; and for this
reason he brings forward as a proof the divine element in all
Scripture. It is not then a discriminative, conditi 1
proposition, but a plain assertion of the authorship of G< d
in the Holy Scripture. But this clear text may not be
adduced with any profit as a criterion; because, first of all,
it is, as Perrone says, begging the question to pr< >ve the divin-
ity of the Holy Books from their own testimony. It is tl
circulus vitiosus. Again, even to those who grant the divine
authority o\ the Epistle to Timothy, it only avails to prove
the impress of the hand of God on Hob' Scripture in a general
;\ but does not distinguish book from book, or form any
8 LUTHER ON INSPIRATION
judgment concerning an official catalogue. We grant then
that the text, as well as others of a similar nature, operates
to prove the divine impulse of the Holy Ghost on Scripture
in general, provided we once have received as granted that
these books are of God; but we deny to all such texts any
value to discern canonical from uncanonical books.
It is not conformable to the scope of this book to follow
the progress of protestantism through all its changes and
vagaries. We see in it a constant* tendency to limit the
divine element in the Holy Scriptures. All the protestant
sects began with an exaggerated notion of the nature of the
Scriptures. In the beginning Luther seems not to have
formulated any theory of inspiration. He accepted the
general principles then held by the Church from which he
seceded, that God is the author of Holy Scripture, that the
inspired writers are God's instruments, that the inspired
writers had received an impulse from the Holy Ghost to
write the words and the truths, and that the Holy Scriptures
are the infallible word of God, not only in matters of faith and
morals, but also in other things, and are free from error, etc.
But having once thrown off subjection to authority, with his
characteristic genius of audacity, he formulated new theories
to meet every emergency in his inconsistent heresy. Luther's
opinions present many contradictions, and his defenders are
divided against themselves. Speaking of his audacious at-
titude toward Holy Scripture, Kier (Bedarf es einer beson-
dern Inspirationslehre ? 1891, 8) cites Luther as a proof that
there is no need of any fixed theory of inspiration, and de-
clares of him : "Of Luther the greatest scriptural theologian,
well known is his remarkably free judgment, not alone con-
cerning St. James, but also concerning the Epistle to the
Hebrews, some of the Prophets, and St. Paul. He read the
Bible as a free blessed child of God." This freedom moved
him to reject according to his caprice whatever did not
please his humor. When the Holy Scriptures pleased him,
he extolled them above all other things : " But I, against the
sayings of the fathers, of men, of angels, of demons, set up
not ancient usage, not a multitude of men, but the word of
the one eternal Majesty, which they are forced to approve.
LUTHER ON INSPIRATION 9
"This is the work of God, not of us. Here I stand ; here I
sit; here I remain ; here I glory; here I triumph ; here I insult
papists, Thomists, Henricists, sophists, and all tl
Hell, and also the sayings of men even though holy, and
erring custom. God's word is above all; God's power so
strengthens me that I should not care if a thousand Augus-
tines, a thousand Cyprians, a thousand Henrician Churches
were opposed to me." (Contra Henricum regem, Opera Lat.
E 1. Franc. VI. 437.)
But when the papists urged against him the Scriptures,
he repudiates the Scriptures: "Thou urgest forward the
slave, that is the Scriptures, and not the entire Scriptures,
nor their better part, but certain places concerning works.
I leave this slave to you; I urge forward the Lord, who is
the King of the Scriptures, who became to me my merit, and
the price of my justification and salvation. Him I hold; to
him I cleave, and leave to thee works, which however thou
never hast done," (Comment, in Galat. III. 10.)
" I care nothing for these. Do thou ever urge on the
slave; I am bold in the Lord, who is Lord and King over the
Scriptures. I ask not concerning all the sayings of Scripture,
even though thou bringest more against me, for I have on
my side the Master and Lord of the Scriptures."
The arch deceiver sets at variance with the Lord I
message of God himself, and with marvelous arrogance begs
the question. To the candid student of history, Luther
must ever appear as a clever sophist, who, having thrown
off all real belief in religion, played upon the ignoi
superficiality and credulity of the people.
Against the Sacramentarians Luther declared that one
tittle of the Scriptures was greater than the heavens and the
earth; but in another mood he rejected Scriptures which
pleased not his caprice: "Finally St. John's Gospel, and
First Epistle, St. Paul's Epistles, especially the Romai
to the Galatians, and that to the Ephesians, and St. Pel
First Epistle are the books which present to thee Chri
all things which are necessary and saving, even though
thou never see or hear another book or doctrine. Thei -
fore James' Epistle compared. t<> these is verily a le1
/
10 LUTHER ON INSPIRATION
straw, because it has not in itself the Gospel spirit. ' ' (Welches
die rechtenund edlisten Biicher des N. T. sind; LXIII. 115.)
Of the Apocalypse of St. John, Luther declared: "In
this book I leave every one to his own opinion, and I ask
no one to accept my opinion or judgment. I speak what I
feel. Many things are wanting in this book, which move me
to hold it as neither apostolic nor prophetic. My spirit is
not drawn to the book, and a sufficient cause why I esteem
the book no higher is that in it Christ is neither taught nor
acknowledged, a thing which first of all an apostle should
do." (Vorrede zur Offenbarung St. Johannis, LXIII. 169 et
seqq.)
According to Luther, "Ecclesiastes should be more com-
plete; much has been excised from it; it has neither boots
nor spurs, but rides in socks, as I was wont to do when still
in the cloister." (Tischreden 2261, 2262; Ed. Erlang. LXII.
127— 131.)
The genius of Luther pervades all protestantism, a false -
freedom, a subjectivism, and illogical sentimentalism.
Well does Rabaud declare of Luther: "His principle of
critique was purely subjective: from the intensity with
which Christ is preached he determined the inspiration and
canonicity of a book. Is not this to abolish the authority of
the Bible, and to substitute in its stead the individual con-
science? Who shall determine the degree of faithfulness of
the inspired writer? Who shall judge the purety of his
doctrine? Who shall say if Christ is preached as it be-
hooveth? This principle, in appearance more practical, but
in reality equally as subjective as the principles of the other
leaders of the Reformation led to the same result, the author-
ity of the individual conscience, a theology read out of the
Bible. Luther furnished the first and most remarkable ex-
ample. By his audacious critique and his independence in
regard to the exterior Scriptures, he placed the germs of the
subsequent objections which were to shatter and ruin the
doctrine of inspiration, which in common with his con-
temporaries Luther held, but which he admitted only in
the passages in harmony with his theology, or his religious
RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 11
sense." (Histoire de la doctrine de i'inspiration des S.
Ecritures dans les pays de langue franchise, Paris, 1883, 3
The seed of rationalism which Luther sowed has pro-
duced dreadful fruit. All protestantism has became ra1
alistic. In our own country no protestant theologian ac-
cepts the Bible as the infallible word of God. In the protest-
ant church in America as soon as a man propounds some
audacious heresy he is made a hero. Protestant Germany
is thoroughly -rationalistic. Cardinal Manning had to de-
plore the drift of non-Catholic thought in England :
"It is therefore, no new thing in the history of the Church,
nor, indeed, in the history of England since the Reformation.
From the Deistical writers down to Thomas Paine, there has
never wanted a succession of critics and objectors who have
assailed the extrinsic or intrinsic authority of Holy Scrip-
ture.
"So far it is no new thing. But in one aspect, indeed, it is
altogether new. It is new to find this form of scepticism
put forth by writers of eminence for dignity and personal
excellence, and mental cultivation, in the Church of England ;
by men, too, who still profess not only a faith in Christianity,
but fidelity to the Anglican Church. Hitherto these forms
of sceptical unbelief have worked outside the Church of
England, and in hostility against it. Now they are within.
and professing to be of it, and to serve it. Unpalatable as
the truth may be, it is certain that a Rationalistic school
imported from Germany has established itself within the
Church of England ; that its writers are highly respectable
and cultivated men, and that though they may be few, y I
the influence of their opinions is already widely spread, and
that a very general sympathy with them already ex1
itself among the laity -1' the Anglican Church. This is
certainly a phenomenon a ; her new.
"Before entering upon the subject of this chapter, it
would seem, therefore, to be seasonable to examine briefly
the present state of the subject of Inspiration in the Church
of England, and contrast with it 1' ching of the Catholic
Church upon this point.
12 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES
"And first, as to the doctrine of the Church of England
on Inspiration, it is to be remembered that though the Canon
of Scripture was altered by the Anglican Reformation, the
subject of inspiration was hardly discussed. The traditional
teaching of the Catholic Theology, with its various opinions,
were therefore passively retained. The earlier writers, such
as Hooker, repeat the traditional formulas respecting the in-
spiration and veracity of Holy Scripture. Hooker's words
are, 'He (that is, God) so employed them (the Prophets) in
this heavenly work, that they neither spake nor wrote a
word of their own, but uttered syllable by syllable as the
Spirit put it into their mouths.'* Such was more or less the
tone of the chief Anglican writers for a century after the
Reformation.
"Perhaps the best example of the Anglican teaching on
the subject will be found in Whitby's general Preface to his
'Paraphrase of the Gospels.' His opinion is as follows. He
begins by adopting the distinction of the Jewish Church
between the 'Prophets' and the 'Chetubin,' or holy writers,
and therefore between the 'inspiration of suggestion' and the
'inspiration of direction.'
"He then lays down —
"i. First, that where there was no antecedent knowl-
edge of the matter to be written, an inspiration of suggestion
was vouchsafed to the Apostles ; but that where such knowl-
edge did antecedently exist, there was only an inspiration
exciting them to write such matters, and directing them
in the writing so as to preclude all error.
"2. Secondly, that in writing those things which were
not antecedently known to them, either by natural reason
including education, or previous revelation — e.g. the Incarn-
ation, the vocation of the Gentiles, the apostasy of the
latter times, the prophecies of the Apocalypse — they had an
immediate suggestion of the Holy Spirit.
"3. Thirdly, that in all other matters they were directed
so as to preclude error, and to confirm the truth whether
by illumination in the meaning of the previous revelation,
or by reasoning.
* Works, Vol. III. p. 62. Ed. Keble.
RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 13
"4. Fourthly, that in the historical parts of the New-
Testament they were directed in all that is necessary to the
truth of the facts related, but not as to the order or accesso-
ries of such events, unless these things affected the truth of
the facts.
"5. Fifthly, that in relating the words or discourses of
our Lord and of others, they were directed so as to preclude
all error as to the substance, but not so as to reproduce the
words.
"6. Lastly, that the inspiration or divine assistance of
the sacred writers was such as 'will assure us of the truth of
what they wrrite, whether by inspiration of suggestion, or
direction only, but not such as wrould imply that their very
words were dictated, or their phrases suggested to them,
by the Holy Ghost.*
"In Bishop Burnet may be seen a somewhat less ex-
plicit tone. He says, 'The laying dowTn a scheme that asserts
an immediate inspiration, which goes to the style, and to
every tittle, and that denies any error to have crept into any
of the copies, as it seems on the one hand to raise the honor
of Scripture very highly, so it lies open on the other hand
to great difficulties, which seem insuperable on that hypo-
thesis, 'f.
"Such was the current teaching of the most respectable
class of Anglican divines, men of true learning and of sound
judgment, in the best century of the Church of England.
But I need quote no more. Let us nowr examine one or two
of the modern opinions on the same subject.
"A member of the University of Oxford wrrites as follows :
— 'The Bible is none other than the voice of Him that sitteth
upon the throne. Every book of it, every chapter of it,
every verse of it, every word of it, every syllable of it, every
letter of it, is the direct utterance of the Most High. 'J A
member of Trinity College, Dublin, writes as follows: — 'The
* Whitby's Paraphrase, Gen. Pref. p. 5-7. Ed. London, 1844.
f Burnet. Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, p. 117. Ed. Oxford.
X Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation of Holy Scripture, p. So.
by Dr. Colenso, Part I. p. 6.
14 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES
opinion that the subject-matter alone of the Bible proceeded
from the Holy Spirit, while its language was left to the
unaided choice of the various writers, amounts to that fan-
tastic notion which is the grand fallacy of many theories of
Inspiration; namely, that two different spiritual agencies
were in operation, one of which produced the phraseology
in its outward form, while the other created within the soul
the conceptions and thoughts of^ which such phraseology
was the expression. The Holy Spirit, on the contrary, as
the productive principle, embraces the entire activity of
those whom He inspires, rendering their language the word
of God. The entire substance. and form of Scripture, whether
resulting from revelation or natural knowledge, are thus
blended together into one harmonious whole.'* Once more.
Dr. Arnold writes as follows : 'An inspired work is supposed
to mean a work to which God has communicated His own
perfections ; so that the slightest error or defect of any kind
in it is inconceivable, and that which is other than perfect in
all points cannot be inspired. This is the unwarrantable
interpretation of the word Inspiration. . . . Surely
many of our words and many of our actions are spoken and
done by the inspiration of God's Spirit. . . . Yet does
the Holy Spirit so inspire us as to communicate to us His
own perfections? Are our best works or words utterly free
from error or from sin?'t Mr. Jowett, in his well-known
Essay on the 'Interpretation of Scripture,' after reciting the
commonly-received theories of inspiration, proceeds as fol-
lows : — 'Nor for any of the higher or supernatural views of
Inspiration is there any foundation in the Gospels or Epistles.
There is no appearance in their writings that the Evangelists
or Apostles had any inward gift, or were subject to any
power external to them different from that of preaching or
teaching which they daily exercised ; nor do they anywhere
lead us to suppose that they were free from error or infirmity.
. . . The nature of Inspiration can only be known from
* Lee on the Inspiration of the Holy Scripture, pp. 32, 33.
t Arnold's Sermons, quoted by Stanley, The Bible, its Form, and its Sub-
stance, Preface, VII. VIII. IX.
RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 15
the examination of Scripture. There is no other source to
which we can turn for information; and we have no right to
assume some imaginary doctrine of [nspiration like the in-
fallibility of the Roman Catholic Church. To the question,
What is Inspiration? the first answer therefore is, That id
of Scripture which we gather from the knowledge of it. '* Dr.
Williams says, 'In the Bible, as an expression of devout rea-
son, and therefore to be read with reason in freedom, he
[Bunsen] finds a record of the spiritual giants whose ex-
perience generated the religious atmosphere we breathe.'
"I do not undertake to do more than recite these opinions
of clergymen of the Church of England. It is not for us to
say what is the authoritative doctrine of that body; but it
has been recently declared by the highest Ecclesiastical
tribunal, that the views of Inspiration last given are not
inconsistent with the Anglican formularies. Dr. Lushing-
ton expressed himself as follows : — 'As to the liberty of the
Anglican clergy to examine and determine the text of Scrip-
ture, I exceedingly . . . doubt if this liberty can be
extended beyond the limits I have mentioned, namely,
certain verses or parts of Scripture. I think it could not be
permitted to a clergyman to reject the whole of one of the
books of Scripture. 'f
"It is evident fr< >m the above quotations that the theory
of Inspiration among many prominent men in the Anglican
Church has been moving in the direction of the German
Neology:" (Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost pp. L38
115.)
The tendency deplored by Manning lias continued until
now in protestant thought the Bible is a very secondary
thing.
"Dr. Driver, canon of Christchurch, Oxford, in his \\
on the 'Literature of the Old Testament,' quotes with
approval the followinj rds of Profess r Sand y, in reg
nspiration:
* Essays and R* oit ws, p] . 345, 347.
t Judgment — Bishop oi Salisbury
16 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES
" 'In all that relates to the revelation of God and of His
Will, the writers of the Bible assert for themselves a definite
inspiration ; they claim to speak with an authority higher than
their own. But with regard to the narration of events, and
to processes of literary composition, there is nothing so
exceptional about them as to exempt them from the con-
ditions to which other works would be exposed at the same
time and place.' " Dub. Review, -1893, p. 533.
Driver himself declares that, "applied to the Bible, as a
whole, the expression 'Word of God' seems to savour of the
old theory of inspiration, which no one now cares to maintain."
(Driver's Sermons on the Old Test. p. 158.)
"But it may be said: 'These are the opinions of individ-
ual Anglicans ; men of influence and learning no doubt, but
still only individuals; they do not necessarily represent the
formal teaching of the Church. What is the attitude of the
bishops on this important question ? What is the view of the
ecclesia docens on inspiration ?'
"One thing may safely be said: a remarkable harmony
pervades their lordships' words on the subject. Whether
their teaching is likely to throw much light on the matter,
we leave our readers to decide from the few specimens we
adduce. 'We heartily concur with the majority of our
opponents,' says the Bishop of Gloucester, in 'Aids to
Faith,' p. 404, 'in rejecting all theories of inspiration.'
'Our Church,' says Bishop Thirl wall, charge for 1863, 'has
never attempted to determine the nature of the inspiration
of sacred Scriptures.' 'If you ask me,' writes Dr. Cotton,
Bishop of Calcutta, 'for a precise theory of Inspiration, I
confess I can only urge you to repudiate all theories; to
apply to theology the maxim which guided Newton in
philosophy, hypotheses non jingo.'' Finally, to take one
more instance, the Bishop of Winchester writes: 'It seems
pretty generally agreed, that definite theories of inspiration
are doubtful and dangerous." (Manning, op. cit.)
When Dr. Frederick Temple was appointed Anglican
Archbishop of Canterbury many took the appointment as a
total surrender by the Anglican Church to the spirit of
rationalism.
RATIONALISTIC THEORIES 17
Mr. Jesse Locke thus speaks of Mr. Temple's theol |
"What sort of theology has been entl ; at Canter-
bury? What idea of religion does he hold and teach who
now occupies what Anglicans like to call 'the chair of St.
Augustine' ? Fortunately for our inquiry Dr Temple's views
on religion are easily accessible. He was the first essayist
in a volume published in 1861, and entitled 'Essays and Re-
views.' This book was the signal for a blaze of controversy.
Its authors were clergymen of the Church of England, and
its teaching was the frankest, boldest rationalism, which
emasculated religion of the supernatural, and reduced it to a
purely humanitarian basis. Orthodox, evangelical protest-
ants — pious but illogical — were deeply shocked. A few
quotations will give an idea of what the essayist taught on
some important subjects.
"Dr. Temple, in his opening essay, 'The Education of the
W< >rld,' plants himself squarely on that fundamental protest-
ant principle of which rationalism is the necessary and legiti-
mate fruit. The ulitmate basis for religion, he claims, is to
be found only in that 'inner voice' which should guide every
man. There is nothing external which can be an auth< rit v .
neither is the church . 'The Bible, ' he says, 'in fact is hindered
by its form from exercising a despotism over the human
spirit. . . . The inner voice by the principle of private
judgment puts conscience between us and the Bible,
making conscience the supreme interpreter, whom it may be
a duty to enlighten, but whom it can never be a duty to dis-
obey ('Essays and Reviews,' p. 53). Again: 'When con-
science and the Bible appear to differ, the pious Christian
immediately concludes that he has not really understood the
Bible.' That is, his private judgment is certainly right, and
the Bible must be made to conform to it! This reduces re-
ligion to the purest individualism; makes as many different
religions as there are individuals to hold them. And all are
equally right! Suppose this principle applied to the law I
the land, each man assuming that the law had no other in-
terpreter than his own 'inner voice' !"
Mr. Locke then gives us a number of quo: rom
the essays of other writers in the same volume of "I"
(2) H. s.
18 RATIONALISTIC THEORIES
and Reviews," and though the "usual statement" was found
in the preface, to the effect that each essayist was responsible
for his own essay alone, Dr. Temple has, in the writer's
judgment, made himself responsible for the views of these
other writers by his failure to repudiate them. Some of
these other essayists spoke of the doctrine of inspiration as
"absurd," explained away the Messianic prophecies, char-
acterizing as "distortion" the application of Isaiah's prophe-
cies to the Messiah, and upheld the idea of a true national
church as one that should include all the people of the nation,
who should be born into membership in the church as they
are born into civil rights. Refering to Mr. Temple's Bamp-
ton lectures, 1884, Mr. Locke writes:
"As to miracles, those of the Old Testament, he tells us,
could never be proved. 'The times are remote; the date
and authorship of the books are not established with cer-
tainty ; the mixture of poetry with history is no longer cap-
able of any sure separation into its parts' (p. 206). In the
New Testament, he adds, we must admit that some unusual
occurrences took place which struck the disciples and other
observers as miracles, though they need not necessarily have
been miracles 'in the scientific sense.' 'For instance, the
miraculous healing of the sick may be no miracle in the
strictest sense at all. It may be but an instance of the
power of mind over body, a power which is undeniably not
yet brought within the range of science, and which neverthe-
less may be really within its domain' (p. 195). Our Lord's
miracles of healing may have been simply the result of this
power and 'due to a superiority of this mental power to the
similar power possessed by other men. Men seem to possess
this power over their own bodies and over the bodies of
others in different degrees' (p. 201). Even our Lord's resur-
rection from the dead is reached by this destructive criticism.
'Thus, for instance, it is quite possible that our Lord's resur-
rection may be found hereafter to be no miracle at all in the
scientific sense. It foreshadows and begins the general resur-
rection ; when that general resurrection comes we may find
that it is, after all, the natural issue of physical laws always
at work' (p. 196).
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION' 19
"If we ask, What, then, can be the object of miracL
Dr. Temple has his answer ready. If these events, though
not really miraculous, have 'served their purpose, if they
have arrested attention which would not otherwise have
been arrested, if they have compelled belief,' then they have
accomplished their true end. In other words, they were
'pious frauds' impressing a people naturally credulous and
easily deceived, as the best way of conveying ethical truth to
them. The protestant tradition persists in giving to the
Society of Jesus the possession of The end justifies the
means' as a principle of conduct; but Dr. Temple goes farther
still, and carries the charge back from His faithful servants to
the great Master Himself!"
For these views of the new archbishop, says Mr. Locke,
the Anglican Church must be held responsible, since it has
twice passed in review of them and refused to condemn either
him or them, and has now received him as its head.
In May, 1904, Professor Marcus Dods of New College,
Edinburgh, delivered a course of lectures before Lake Forest
College, 111. on "The Bible: Its Origin and Nature."
In his lecture on the Canon of Scripture he candidly
declares :
"If you ask a Romanist why he accepts certain books as
canonical, he has a perfectly intelligible answer ready. He
accepts these books because the Church bids him do so.
The Church has determined what books are canonical, and
he accepts the decision of the Church. If you ask a protest-
ant why he believes that just these books bound up together
in his Bible are canonical, and neither more nor fewer, I
fear that ninety-nine protestants out of a hundred could
give you no answer that would satisfy a reasonable man.
The protestant scorns the Romanist because he relies on the
authority of the Church, but he cannot tell you on what
authority he himself relies. The protestant watchword is,
"The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible,"
but how many protestants are there who could make it
quite clear that within the boards of their Bible they have
the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible? If vou asked
them to show you that no canonical writing has been omitted
20 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
and that no uncanonical writing has been received, how will
they proceed to do so? If you ask the average protestant
to say why he receives the second Epistle of Peter, which a
large part of the early Church declined to receive, or why he
accepts the Epistle of James, regarding which Luther him-
self was more than doubtful,— what can he say but that the
Church to which he belongs receives them? In other words,
what is the difference between the protestant and the Ro-
manist on this cardinal point of canonicity ? Do not protest-
ants and Romanists alike accept their canonical books at the
hands of the Church?"
After reviewing the Catholic position superficially he
endeavors to establish a protestant criterion by appealing
to the direct influence of God upon the individual. Luther
is his hero :
"There were two questions which Luther found himself
driven to answer: What assures me that Scripture is the
Word of God, and therefore authoritative ? and, What books
are Scripture? Prior to the question, What is the Canon of
inspired Scripture? comes the question, Is there an inspired
Scripture? Prior to the question, What writings contain the
Word of God? comes the question, Is there a Word of God?
We cannot understand Luther's answer to the one question
unless we recognize his attitude toward the other.
"Now, according to Luther, the prior question, Is there a
Word of God ? or, Has God spoken ? is answered in the affirm-
ative, and with certainty, by every man in whom the Word
of God attests its own Divine origin and authority, and it
can be answered with an assured affirmative by none beside.
Luther's explicit and constant teaching is that this word is
self-evidencing, and needs no authority at its back, but car-
ries in it its own authentication. Let us hear some of his
strong statements to this effect. Showing that the question
between himself and Rome was not whether God was to be
obeyed when he spoke, — for they were agreed as to that, —
he goes on: 'The Romanists say, Yes, but how can we
know what is God's word, and what is true or false? We
must learn it from the Pope and the Councils. Very well,
let them decree and say what they will, still say I, Thou
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 21
can'st not rest thy confidence thereon, nor satisfy thy con-
science : thou must thyself decide, thy neck is at stake, thy
life is at stake. Therefore must God say to thee in thine
heart, This is God's Word, else it is still undecided. ' Again :
'Thou must be as certain that it is the Word of God as thou
art certain that thou livest, and even more certain, for on
this alone must thy conscience rest. And even if all men
came, even the angels and all the world, and determined
something, if thou can'st not form nor conclude the decision,
thou art lost. For thou must not place thy decision on the
Pope or any other, thou must thyself be so skilful that thou
can'st say, God says this, not that; this is right, that is
wrong; else it is not possible to endure. Dost thou stand
upon Pope or Concilia ? Then the Devil may at once knock
a hole in thee and insinuate, 'How if it were false? how if
they have erred?' Then thou art laid low at once. There-
fore thou must bring conscience into play, that thou may'st
boldly and defiantly say, That is God's word; on that will
I risk body and life, and a hundred thousand necks if I had
them. Therefore no one shall turn me from the word
which God teaches me, and that must I know as certainly
as that two and three make five, that an ell is longer than a
half. That is certain, and though all the world speak to the
contrary, still I know that it is not otherwise. Who decides
me there? No man, but only the truth which is so perfectly
certain that nobody can deny it.'
"Why is Luther so urgent on this point!* He is urgent
because he sees that the whole difference between himself
and Rome hinges here. If he cannot make good this posi-
tion, that the truth or the Word of God has power to verify
itself as such to the conscience it awakens, he has no s1
ing at all. The principle which made him a protest ant. and
which constitutes men protestants always, is simply
that the soul needs not the intervention of any authority
bring it into contact with God and the truth, but t
and His truth have power to verify themselves t i the indi-
vidual. Luther did not accept the Gospel because it was
written in a book he believed to be inspired, or canonical, or
the word of God; but he accepted it because it brought new
22 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
life to his spirit and proved itself to be from God. He did
not accept Christ because he had first of all accepted the
Scriptures, but he accepted the Scriptures because they
testified of a Christ he felt constrained to accept. In short,
it is the truth which the Scriptures contain which certify
him that they are the word of God ; it is not his belief that
thev are the word of God which certifies him of the truth
they contain. The proclamation of God's grace quickening
a new life within him convinced him this proclamation was
from God.
"The difference between the Romanist and the protest-
ant is not what it is so often said to be, that the Romanist
accepts the Church as his infallible authority, while the
protestant accepts the Scriptures as his infallible authority.
The Romanist equally with the protestant accepts the au-
thority of Scripture. The difference lies deeper. The
difference lies here : that the Romanist accepts Scripture as
the word of God because the Church tells him so, the protest-
ant accepts it as the word of God because God tells him so.
The protestant believes it to be God's word because through
it God has spoken to him in such sort as to convince him
that it is God who here speaks. This is the one sure founda-
tion-stone of protestantism, — the response of the individual
conscience to the self -evidencing voice of God in Scripture.
He does not need to go to the Church to ask if this be God's
word; his conscience tells him it is. Deeper than that for a
foundation of faith you cannot get, and any faith that is not
so deeply founded is insecure — it may last, and it may bring
a man to all needed benefit, but it is not reasonably defensible,
and therefore it is liable to be upset.
"This, then, was Luther's first position regarding Scrip-
ture ; this was the fundamental position on which protestant-
ism is reared; viz. that through Scripture God Himself so
speaks to the soul that the man is convinced without the
intervention of any other proof or authority that this is the
word of God. The individual does not need the Church to
tell him that this is the word of God. God tells him so, and
makes all other authority superfluous.
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION- 23
"But next comes the question, What writings contain
this word? Are we to carry through this fundamental
principle, and maintain that only such writings can be ac-
counted Scripture as approve themselves to be God's word
by renewing or building up the fundamental faith in God
which has already been quickened within us? This funda-
mental principle of protestantism — that God's word is self-
evidencing — can we carry it over to the subject of canonicity
and make it the sole, absolute test of canonicity? Or can
we at any rate say that whatever agrees with the word of
God, which at first begot faith in us, and presents to us the
same Gospel and the same Christ is canonical? This Luther
does, subject to the limitation that it springs from the Apos-
tolic Circle. Or can we only use this fundamental faith of
our own as a negative test, rejecting whatever does not
harmonize with that faith in Christ which has given us
spiritual life, or at any rate whatever contradicts it? In
other words, can I say that all those writings are canonical
which awaken faith in me ? or can I say that all those writings
are canonical which present that same Christ, whose presen-
tation at first awakened faith in me; or can I only say that
those are certainly not canonical which do not harmonize
with faith in Christ ?
"Now we shall find Luther's answer to these questions
in the judgments he pronounced on the books actually form-
ing our Canon. Taking up his translation of the New Testa-
ment, we find that the four writings — Hebrews, James, Jude,
and Revelation — which he considered to be non-apostolic,
are relegated to the end by themselves, and introduced with
these significant words: 'Up to this point we have been
dealing with the quite certain (rechten gewissen) chief books
{Hauptbuccher) of the New Testament. But these four fol-
lowing have in times past had a different position.' He
then goes on to prove briefly but convincingly that Hebrews
is not by Paul nor by any Apostle, and after extolling its
ability, and pointing out what he considered faulty, he re-
marks that 'although the writer does not lay the foundation
of faith, which is the apostolic function, he yet builds upon
it gold, silver, precious stones, and if, in accordance with
24 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
Paul's words, he mingles some wood, hay, stubble, this is not
to hinder us from accepting with all reverence his teaching —
although it cannot in all respects be compared to the Apos-
tolic Epistles.' His criticisms on the Apocalypse are also
very outspoken: 'My spirit,' he says, 'can't accommodate
itself to this book: the reason being that I do not think Christ
is taught therein.'* His judgment of this book, however,
underwent considerable modification ; and although, in con-
tradistinction to the body of modern critics, he seems never
to have been convinced that it was written by the Apostle
John, it is not probable that in his later years he would have
spoken of it so slightingly. But in his introductory remarks
to the Epistle of James he shows more explicitly his criterion
or test of canonicity. He refuses to admit this epistle among
the Hauptbuecher of the New Testament, or to allow its apos-
tolic authorship, and he defends his judgment in these words :
'Herein agree all the genuine {rechtschaffene) holy books, that
they all preach and exhibit Christ. This, indeed, is the
right touchstone (der rechte Prue] stein) to test all Ihe books,
— if one sees whether or not they present Christ, for all Scrip-
ture witnesses to Christ (Rom. hi. 21); and St. Paul will
know nothing but Christ. That which does not teach Christ
is not apostolic, though St. Peter or St. Paul teaches it.
That which preaches Christ is apostolic, though Judas,
Annas, Pilate, or Herod teaches it.'
"Luther's direct test of canonicity, then, is, Does the
book in question occupy itself with Christ or does it not?
So says Dorner:f 'The deciding principle as to whether a
wTriting is to pass for canonical lies, in a dogmatic aspect,
according to Luther, as well known, in this, whether it is
occupied with Christ.' Luther, in short, recognizes that
God has an end to secure in making a revelation, and this
end is to bring clear before men His will for our salvation ;
or, in one word, Christ. The books that promote this end
he accepts as canonical.
*Luther's "Prefaces" are to be found in old editions of his translations
of' the Bible. See also Reuss's "History of the Canon," p. 347.
fHistory of Protestant Theology, E. Tr. I., p. 252.
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 25
"But while this was Luther's final and determining test
of canonicity, it is obvious that he at the same time employed
some preliminary test. He applied his final test, not to all
books he knew, but only to a number already selected and
already passing for canonical. He never thought of carrying
his principle through all literature and accepting as canonical
every book that was occupied with Christ. He did not
accept Augustine and Tauler as canonical, though to them
he in great part owed his salvation, his peace, his light, his
strength. And it may, on the other hand, be questioned
whether, with all his boldness, he would have dared to reject
any writing which was proved to be of apostolic authorship
In point of fact he does not reject any such writing. His
test of canonicity is, in short, only a supplemental principle
which can be applied only in a field already defined by the
application of some other principle, or by some universal
usage such as the Church-collection of Scriptures had sprung
from. Luther's method is really this : he first accepts at the
hand of Jerome certain candidates for admission into the
Canon, and to these selected candidates he applies this test.
He was aware that up to Jerome's time the Church had
always been in doubt regarding certain of these writings,
and to these he freely applies the testing question, Are they
occupied with Christ ?
"Theoretically, therefore, Reuss is right in saying that
Luther did not look upon the Canon as a collection, more or
less complete, of all the writings of a certain period or of a
certain class of men, but as a body of writings destined by
God to teach a certain truth; and accordingly the test of the
individual writings must at bottom lie in the teaching itself.*
But practically what Luther did was to apply this test only
to writings which already had some claim to be considered
apostolical. The course of his thought was briefly this:
he arrived at faith in Christ before he reached anv clear view
of the inspiration or canonicity of certain writers ; he reached
faith in Christ apart from any doctrine regarding Scripture.
But having believed in Christ, he found that certain men
♦"History of Protestant Theology." E. Tr., I., page 544.
26 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
had been appointed by Christ to witness to the great facts
of His life, death, resurrection, and gift of the Spirit. The
same faith which accepts Christ as supreme, the same faith
which produces self -verifying results in his soul compels him
also to believe that the commission of Christ to His Apostles
was actually effectual, and that they are the appointed,
normative witnesses to Him and His salvation. The writ-
ings of these Apostles he accepts, though holding himself
free to reject them if they contradict the fundamental faith
in Christ which gave him his new life. The other books,
whose authorship is doubtful, but which from the first have
claimed admittance to the New Testament Canon, he judges
purely on their merits, rejecting or admitting as he finds
they do not or do fit into the apostolic teaching.
"This, it will be said, leaves a ragged edge on the Canon.
It leaves much to be decided by the individual. A man
may say to Luther, 'I do not find in the gospel of John agree-
ment with the three synoptic gospels, and as you throw over
James because he does not agree with Paul, so I throw over
John because he does not agree with the synoptists.' And
Luther could have made no satisfactory reply. Better, he
would think, let a man accept Scripture from his own feeling
of its truth than compel him to do so by some external com-
pulsion. Indeed, his boldness in pronouncing his own opinion
is quite equalled by his explicit and repeated allowance of
liberty to every other man. Thus, though he himself did not
accept the Apocalypse as the work of John, he hastens to
add, 'No man ought to be hindered from holding it to be a
work of St. John or otherwise as he will.' Similarly, after
giving his opinion of the Epistle of James, he concludes, T
cannot then place it among the chief books, but I will forbid
no one to place and elevate it as he pleases.' So that if we
find ourselves in disagreement with Luther regarding the
judgments he pronounces on some of the books of Scripture,
this is only what he himself anticipated. Neither does the
fact that his principle can never be applied without such dis-
cordant results emerging, reflect any discredit on the prin-
ciple itself. As Reuss says, 'To begin to speak to-day of the
infatuation of Luther's method of procedure, because in the
THE PROTESTAXT CRITERION" 27
details of its application one cannot always share in his
opinion, this only proves that with the modern champions of
a pretended, privileged orthodoxy, ignorance and fatuity
go hand and hand in the van.'
"The same vagueness which marred the Lutheran d< ci-
trine of canonicity affected the Calvinistic position. The
inward witness cannot reasonably be expected to be sufficient
for the task of certifying every word that God has uttered
to man. It cannot, in other words, be expected to form of
itself a sufficient test of canonicity.
"The truth is there seems to have been some confusion
of thought in Calvinistic writers, arising from the fact that
in speaking of the authority of Scripture they viewed Scripture
as a whole. Challenged by the Romanists to say how
they knew the Bible to be from God, they said, We know it
to be from God because God's Spirit within us recognizes it
as His. But this inward witness could only become a test
of canonicity if the Bible were an indissoluble whole, part
hanging with part, so that each part stands or falls with
every other part.
"If, in order to prove the canonicity of all the writings in
the Bible, it were enough to say, the Spirit within me recog-
nizes God's voice in the Bible as a whole, then this were a
sufficient test. If, in order to prove the canonicity of the
Epistle of James, it were enough to say, I recognize the voice
of God in the Epistle of John, then the 'inward witness of the
Spirit' would be a sufficient test. But the very thing we are
seeking for is that which brought the parts together, the principle
on which the Church proceeded when it took one writing here
and another there and brought them into one whole. What
is it which is characteristic of each part, so that even when
the parts were lying separate, they could be and were recog-
nized as properly belonging to the Canonical Scriptures?
The question seeking solution is, why do we receive this or
that book into the Canon? There is no question here as to
whether we have a word of God, nor as to the general collec-
tion of writings in which we find that word : the question is,
how do we know that the Epistle to the Hebrews or the
Epistle of ]ude, or any other individual writing, is the w< >rd
of God?
28 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
"The Westminster Confession makes 'inspiration' the test
of canonicity, although it does not in express terms say so.
After naming the books of the Old and New Testament, it
proceeds, 'all which are given by inspiration of God;' and
then in section three it goes on, 'The books commonly called
Apocrypha, not being of Divine inspiration, are no part of the
Canon of Scripture.' That is "to say, writings which are
inspired are canonical, writings not inspired are not canoni-
cal. But how are we to discover what writings are inspired ?
The Confession, singularly enough, says nothing of prophetic
and apostolic authorship, but refers us to the various
marks of divinity in the writings themselves, and concludes
in the well-known words, 'Our full persuasion and assurance
of the infallible truth and Divine authority thereof, is from
the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and
with the word in our hearts.'
"There are two processes by which we can arrive at the
conclusion that a writing is inspired. First, as in reading
any book we form an opinion of it, and either pronounce it
stupid or feel in it the touch of genius, so in reading the work
of an inspired man we may arrive at the conclusion that it
has been written with Divine aid. There may be that in it
which makes us feel that we have to do with a Divine as
well as a human author. Second, we mav believe in the in-
spiration of a book, because we first of all believe in Christ,
and find that He authorized certain persons to speak in His
name and with His authority and spirit. When the well-
authenticated writings of such persons come into our hands,
we accept them, if we are already Christian.
"But there are books in the Bible whose inspiration can-
not be ascertained by either of these methods. There are
books of which we cannot say that they are written by
prophet or apostle or otherwise commissioned person ; Chron-
icles, Esther, Job, Ecclesiastes, — no one knows who wrote
these books. One of the methods of ascertaining inspira-
tion is therefore closed to us. And as to the other method,
the inward witness, I am not persuaded that John Owen
himself could have detected the book of Esther as an inspired
book, had it been found lying outside the Canon. How, then,
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 29
can we justify the admission of such a book as Esther — a
book of which the authorship is unknown, and to which the
inward witness bears at the best a somewhat doubtful testi-
mony so far as regards its inspiration ?
"To say that we accept it because the Jews accepted it,
is simply to fall back to the Romanist position and take our
Canon at the hands and by the authority of the Church.
To affirm that the men who settled the Canon were inspired,
is to assume what cannot be proved, and even to affirm what
we know to be false, because discussion was still going on
among the Jews regarding their Canon as late as the year
96 A. D. We can only justify the admission of these books
on some such general ground as that of Luther — their con-
gruity to the main end of revelation. If by 'canonical
writings' we mean the writings through which God conveys
to us the knowledge of the revelation He has made, if this
be the prominent idea, and if their being the rule of faith
and life be an inference from this, then we get a broader
basis for the Canon and can admit into it all writings which
have a direct connection with God's revelation of Himself
in Christ. If the book in question gives us a link in the his-
tory of that revelation, or if it represents a stage of God's
dealings and of the growth His people had made under these
dealings, and if it contains nothing which is quite inconsist-
ent with the idea of its being inspired, then its claim to be
admitted seems valid. Therefore I would be disposed to
say that the two attributes which give canonicity are con-
gruity with the main end of revelation and direct historical
connection with the revelation of God in historv.*
"It may indeed be said that if such a book as Esther were
lost, nothing that is essential to the history would be lost, or
that if several of the Psalms were lost nothing essential would
be lost. But this is really to say no more than that a man who
has lost a joint of a finger or a toe has lost nothing essentia! .
No doubt he can live on and do his work, but he is not a
complete man. And there are parts of the body of which it
is very difficult to say why they are there, or why they .
*A similar, if not indentical, conclusion was reached by the Lite A.
B. Bruce, but I have lost the reference.
30 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
of the particular form they are ; but there they are, and the
want of them would seem a deformity. So of the Bible, we
may not be able to say of every part that it its exact relation
to the whole ; nor yet may we be able in honesty to say that
we think anything essential would be lost were certain por-
tions of Scripture to be removed ; and yet he would be a rash
man who would dare to aver that he could improve upon the
Canon, or who should think it needful to excise from it such
parts as to himself may seem unimportant.
"From all this, then, we must gather (i) that churches
should be cautious in speaking of the Canon as an absolutely
defined collection of writings, thoroughly and to a nicety
ascertained, based on distinct principles and precisely sepa-
rated at every point from all extracanonical literature.
There is no reasonable doubt that the bulk of the books of
the New Testament come to us so accredited that to reject
them is equivalent to rejecting the authority of Christ ; but
a few are not so accredited, and it is a question whether our
creeds ought not to reflect the fact that in the early Church
some books were universally admitted into the Canon, while
regarding seven of the books of our New Testament grave
doubts were entertained. The position taken by one of the
greatest champions of protestantism, Chillingworth, is one
that commends itself: T may believe even those questioned
books to have been written by the Apostles and to be canon-
ical ; but I cannot in reason believe this of them so undoubt-
edly as of those books which were never questioned : at least
I have no warrant to damn any man that shall doubt of them
or deny them now, having the example of saints in heaven,
either to justify or excuse such their doubting or denial.'
This was the position of Luther and of the Reformers gener-
ally, and for my part I think it a pity it was ever abandoned.
It is not a calamity over which one need make great moan,
but unquestionably the combining of less authenticated
books with those that are thoroughly authenticated has
rather tended to bring the latter class under suspicion with
persons ignorant of their history.
"We also gather (2) what ought to be the attitude of the
ordinary lay protestant toward this subject of the Canon.
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 31
Sometimes Romanists have taunted us with the absurditv
of inviting each protestant, educated or uneducated, to settle
the Canon for himself. The taunt is based on a misconcep-
tion. It is the right of every protestant to inquire into the
evidence on which certain books are received as canonical,
and the more that right is exercised, the better. But even
when the right is not used, it is not thereby resigned. Protest-
ants receive the Canon as they receive historical facts, on
the testimony of those who have pursued this line of inquiry.
We may never have individually looked into the evidence for
Alexander's invasion of India, but we take it on the word of
those best informed regarding historical matters, reserving
of course the right to examine it ourselves if need arises.
So on this subject of the Canon, the lay protestant accepts
the judgment of the Reformed Churches, feeling tolerably
confident that after all the research and discussion which
learned men have spent upon this subject, the result cannot
be seriously misleading. But he of course reserves the right
to inquire for himself if opportunity should arise, and does
not dream that the decision of the Church binds him to
accept certain books as Divine. The protestant accepts
the decision of the Church precisely as he accepts the decision
of engineers or medical men or experts of any kind in their
respective departments — he accepts it as the result arrived
at after deliberation by competent men. The Romanist
accepts the decision of the Church as a decree of law issued
because the Church wills it so, and not as the mere finding
of learned men ; and the Romanist has no right to revise the
Church's decision. The Romanist holds that the Church
has power to make books canonical; the protestant holds
that irrespective of any ecclesiastical decision there is that
in the books themselves which makes them canonical. To
confound the two positions is ignorant or malicious.
"(3) Again, protestants are taunted with the diversity
of opinion consequent on leaving such questions to individual
research and private judgment. I reply that it is a vast
advantage so to leave such questions, for it is to invite in-
vestigation, and to invite investigation is to secure that one
day the truth will shine in the eye of the world. What
32 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
value attaches to the unanimity that is secured by closing
every one's eyes, and shutting every one's mouth? That
unanimity alone is valuable which the truth itself commands.
And this unanimity can only be attained by diligent, rever-
ent, truth-seeking investigation. For my part, I think
Luther was right in holding that regarding some of the books
there must be difference of opinion always ; but of the great
bulk of the New Testament, — the four Gospels, the Acts,
the Epistles of Paul, the First of Peter, and the First of John,
— as there was no difference of opinion in the early Church,
so eventually there will be an entire agreement. Men do not
differ regarding the authorship of 'Hamlet,' nor the esteem
in which that writing should be held, neither will private
judgment and liberty of criticism cause men to differ regard-
ing the canonical books, but will rather bring them to the
only agreement that is worth having.
"Lastly, let us remember that the true protestant order
is, first, faith in Christ; second, faith in Scripture. Our
faith in Christ does not hang upon our faith in Scripture, but
our faith in Scripture hangs upon our faith in Christ. Our
faith in Christ may depend on Scripture as a true history;
but not as an inspired canonical book. It is Christ as pre-
sented in Scripture or by other means, by preaching as in
the first age, and often now, that evokes faith. He and he
only is the true protestant who knows that God has spoken
to him in Christ, and who knows this irrespective of any
infallible authority separable from Christ himself, whether
that authority be the authority of the Church or the author-
ity of Scripture. We must not shift the ultimate authority
form Christ to Scripture."
We have presented this long quotation as it sums up the
position of what might be considered the most conservative
protestantism. The very principle on which protestantism
was founded must lead to rationalism and it has led to it.
Outside the Catholic Church dogma is decried as narrow and
bigoted, and the Scriptures are only stray records of man's
striving after God. According to them the Scriptures are
the product of the thought of successive ages, and reflect the
evolution of Alan's conceptions of the Deity, and of his state
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 33
of culture. Much therefore in them is to be attributed, to
the erroneous ideas of that cruder age, and therefore now
must be discarded, as not in harmony with our finer ideas.
When Dods wrote his statement he had not read Tolstoi's
criticism of Hamlet.
The force with which these liberal ideas are propounded
and the popularity which they acquire have led astray some
of the members of the Catholic Church. The progress of the
movement evoked from the venerable Head of the Church a
powerful denunciation in his address to the newly created
cardinals on April 18, of the present year. We quote the
following short passage:
"For these modern heretics, the Holy Scripture is not a
sure source of all the truths concerning faith, but an ordin-
ary book. For them inspiration reduces itself to dogmatic
doctrines understood in their own fashion, and differs but
little from the poetic inspiration of ^Esehylus and of Homer.
According to them the legitimate interpreter of the Bible is
the Church, but the Church subject to the rules of so called
critical science which dominates and enslaves theology. As
for tradition, everything is relative and subject to muta-
tions, consequently the authority of the holy Fathers is
reduced to a nullity. All these numerous errors are propa-
gated by means of pamphlets, reviews, books on asceticism,
and even novels. These errors are wrapt up in certain
ambiguous terms and in vague forms in order that there may
be always an opening for defense, so as not to incur a formal
condemnation while at the same time the unwary may be
taken in the toils."
The protestant subjectivism crude and indefinite in Luther,
was more definitely formulated by Zwinglius, Calvin, and
their followers. Thus Zwinglius declares: "I know that I
am taught of God because I feel him. Let no one raise the
objection : How knowest thou that thou art taught of God ?
When I was a youth I had not progressed more in human
knowledge than my equals. But when seven or eight years
ago I began to devote myself entirely to the Scriptures, the
philosophy and theology of cavilers continually aimed at me
objections. Wherefore relying on the Scriptures and the
(3) H. S.
34 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
word of God I came to this conclusion : Thou must leave all,
and learn the pure teaching of God from his own plain word.
Then I began to ask God for light, and the Scriptures, though
I read only them, they began to be much clearer than if
I read many commentaries and commentators." (Huldreich
Zwinglis Werke, I. 79).
Relying on this same spirit Zwinglius declares of Luther :
"Clearly and dispassionately I shall show that in the doc-
trine of this sacrament (the Eucharist) the almighty God has
not revealed the secrets of his counsels to Martin Luther."
(Ibid.)
For his criterion Calvin appeals to the secret testimony
of the Spirit, area num testimonium Spiritus : "It remains there-
fore firmly established that the Scripture is avro-rriaTov:
neither is it right to subject the Scriptures to the logical
demonstration ; and the Spirit establishes a certitude by his
testimony. . . . Illumined therefore by his power we
conclude with certainty, no less than if we saw in them the
divinity of God himself, that by the ministry of men they
have come down to us from the mouth of God." (Instit.
Christ. Rel. 6).
Calvin admitted as subsidiary helps the harmony, dignity,
truth, simplicity, power, and sublimity of the Scriptures.
In the year 1675 Henry Heidegger drew up a Helvetian
Formula in which this declaration occurs: "The Hebrew
text of the Old Testament which we have received from the
Jewish church, to which of old the oracles of God were com-
mitted, we receive and hold fast, both the consonants and
the vowel points, or at least their value, and we hold both
the truths and the words to be inspired. " (Niemeyer Collect.
Conf.)
This extreme formula was abrogated in 1725. All the
Calvinist formulas, the Gallican, Scotch, Belgian, Anglican,
and Bohemian, set up the testimony of the Spirit as the
criterion of inspiration.
The Westminister Conf . I. 5 reads thus: "We may be
moved and influenced by the testimony of the Church to a
high and reverent esteem of the holy scripture, and the
heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 35
majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope
of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full dis-
covery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the
many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire per-
fection thereof are arguments whereby it doth abundantly
evidence itself to be the word of God ; yet notwithstanding,
our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and
divine authoritv thereof is from the inward work of the
Holy Ghost bearing witness by and with the word in our
hearts."
We see a general tendency in protestantism to appeal
to the tradition of the Jews as a criterion of the Old Testa-
ment. Thus John Gerhard (De Locis Theol.) declares:
"That a book of the Old Testament should be canonical, it
is necessary that it should be written in the prophetic, that
is, the Hebrew tongue."
Hence those protestants who saw the futility of the sub-
jective criterion were more anxious to find a criterion for the
New Testament. John David Michselis of Gottingen
(t 1 791) rejected all subjective criterions, and established
for the New Testament one criterion, to wit, that a book of
the New Testament is canonical if written bv one who has
received the Apostolic commission. He therefore rejected
the Gospels of Mark and Luke and the Acts of the Apostles.
(Einleitung in die Gottlichen Schriften des Neuen
Bundes.)
Concerning the affirmative sense of this statement
Catholic theologians differ. Perrone and Franzelin, and
more recently Crets (De Div. Insp.) Schmid, Chauvin,
Zanecchia, Scheeben, Heinrich, Hurter, and Pesch (De Insp.
Sac. Script. Friburgi 1906) deny it; Ubaldi (Introd. in S.
Script. 1878) and Schanz (Apologie) defend it. However it
seems certain that if an apostle wrote as a teacher of the
faithful, on a theme connected with religion, his writings ipso
facto would be inspired. In other words whenever an
apostle exercised his apostolic office of teaching he was
inspired, whether he spoke or wrote.
But Michselis' criterion is inadequate, because the apos-
tolic commission is not an exclusive condition of an inspired
36 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
writer. No one now would accept a criterion that excludes
Mark, Luke and Acts. Again a criterion must tell me not
only that, if a book be written under certain conditions, it is in-
spired, but it must tell me that certain definite books uncon-
ditionally are inspired. What avails it, if a man tell me that,
if the Second Epistle of Peter be written by him, it is in-
spired? What I must know is that it is the word of God.
It is evident that the subsidiary criteria appealed to by
Calvin are not sufficient to form a criterion. The Imitation
of Christ, and certain sermons of the Fathers are more sub-
lime than Chronicles and Ezra. The "inner voice" is re-
pudiated by candid protestants.
John David Michaelis, the learned professor of Gottingen,
speaks thus of this means: "This interior sensation of the
effects of the Holy Ghost, and the conviction of the utility
of these writings to better the heart and purify us are en-
tirely uncertain criterions. As regards this interior sensa-
tion, I avow that I have never experienced it, and those who
have felt it are not to be envied. It cannot evince the divine
character of the book, since the Muhammadans feel it as
well as Christians, and pious sentiments can be aroused by
documents purely human, by the writings of philosophers,
and even by doctrine founded in error." (Einleitung in die
Gottlichen Schriften des Neuen Bundes.) Burnett also, in
his Exposition of the XXXIX Articles, speaks thus of this
subjective criterion : "This is only an argument to him that
feels it, if it is one at all; and, therefore, it proves nothing
to another person." No subjective criterion could ever be
apt for such use, since it would depend on the subjective
dispositions of individuals, and one and the same individual
would, at different times, be differently affected by the same
book. Moreover, this pious movement can come from other
than inspired books. A man will feel more religious emotion
from the reading of the Imitation of Christ than from the
Book of Judges. But experience itself disproves this system.
Honest men attest that they do not feel this pious movement,
and the opinion may now be said to be obsolete.
The Calvinists' particular inspiration of the Holy Ghost
in the individual's soul is cognate to the Calvinistic theory of
THE PROTESTANT CRITERION 37
the invisible church, and they both fall together. Once
establish a visible authoritative Magisterium, and such
means of interpreting Holy Scripture becomes incompatible
with it. It is evident that such a system of private inspir-
ation can never be proven. There never can be any avail-
able data to establish such secret action. It must ever
remain a gratuitous, groundless assumption. It is exactly
opposite to the economy of God. When He would teach the
world, He did it by means of divinely commissioned men,
directly establishing that such mode of teaching truth would
last always. This were absurd, were the evangelization of
mankind to be effected by the sole direct inspiration of the
Holy Ghost in the heart. To be sure, no man can be brought
to Christ without that working of the Holy Ghost in his
heart. "Nemo potest venire ad me, nisi Pater traxerit eum."
But the error of protestants is to believe that this energy of
the Spirit in man's soul excludes the external authoritative
Magisterium. The power of the Spirit and the Magisterium
are two causes co-operating to produce one effect. All the
texts of Scripture alleged by the protestants, in support of
this system, simply prove that the Holy Ghost moves man
to Christian belief and to Christian action; and the same
power energizing in the Church vitalizes it, and renders it
capable of its great mission to teach all mankind. We will
leave the prosecution of this train of argument to the tract
De Locis Theologicis, and content ourselves here with a few
a posteriori arguments. In the first place, did the Holy
Ghost exert such action, he would, doubtless, move to a
unanimity of faith ; but the exact contrary is in fact verified.
The sect of Presbyterians are split on some of the basic
truths of Christianity. Can the Spirit of truth inspire them
with doctrines directly opposed? The recent Briggs contr< -
versy has shown the lack of any religious harmony in the
Presbyterian church.
I will here excerpt from Milner's End of Controversy a
few examples of men who claimed this inspiration of the
Holy Ghost. The instances are based upon incontrovertible
historical data. Montanus and his sect first claimed this
private inspiration ; we may see what spirit led him on, since
38 THE PROTESTANT CRITERION
he and others of his sect hanged themselves. After the
great Apostasy, commonly called the Reformation, had been
inaugurated by Luther, there arose the sect of the Ana-
baptists, who professed that it had been commanded them
by direct communication from God to kill all the wicked
ones, and establish a kingdom of the just.* Bockhold, a
tailor of Leyden, was moved by the private inspiration of the
Spirit to proclaim himself King of Sion. He married by the
same impulse eleven wives, all of whom he put to death. He
declared that God had given him Amsterdam, through whose
streets his followers ran naked crying out ; "Woe to Babylon!
Woe to the wicked!" Hermann, the Anabaptist, was moved
to proclaim himself the Messiah, and to order: "Kill the
priests ; kill all the magistrates in the world ! Repent ; your
redemption is at hand." f
All these excesses were done upon the principle and
under a full conviction of an individual inspiration. In
England, Venner was inspired to rush from the meeting-
house in Coleman St., proclaiming "that he would acknowl-
edge no sovereign but King Jesus, and that he would not
sheathe his sword, till he had made Babylon [which emblem-
ized monarchy] a hissing and a curse, not only in England,
but also in foreign countries; having assurance that one of
them would put to flight a thousand, and two of them, ten
thousand." On the scaffold, he protested that he was led
by Jesus. The records of George Fox, the founder of Quaker-
ism, furnish abundant evidence of the abominable absurd-
ities into which this supposed inspiration led the Friends.
One woman rushed naked into Whitehall Chapel, when
Cromwell was there. Another came into the parliament
house with a trencher, which she there broke in pieces, say-
ing: "Thus shall he be broken in pieces." Swedenborg de-
clared that he had received, at an eating house in London,
the commission from Christ: "I am the Lord Jesus Christ,
your Creator and Redeemer. I have chosen you to explain
to men the interior and spiritual sense of the Scriptures. I
* Sleidan De Stat, et Reip.
t Hist. Abrege, de la Reforme par Brandt.
THE CATHOLIC CRITERION 39
will dictate to you what you are to write." Here, in the
very position of the system, he contradicts himself; for, if
Christ gave him a command to teach men, they must needs
pay heed to him. Muhammad, and the founder of the foul
sect of Mormons, claimed private inspiration. Guiteau
claimed the moving of the Spirit in the slaying of President
Garfield. Wherefore, we maintain that the system of private
inspiration, which logically leads to such absurdities, is in
itself absurd and untenable.
No man makes a better argument against the insuf-
ficiency of protestant criteria than Marcus Dods in his
article which we have quoted. If any man will weigh this
able presentation of the necessity wdiich confronts a pro-
testant with the vague answer which Dods renders he
must be convinced that protestants are at sea without
compass or star.
We have in series weighed these several criterions and
found them wanting, we now turn to the Catholic
Criterion.
This criterion is no other than the Catholic Church, into
whose custody the Holy 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 Scrip-
tures themselves. Such rejection must logically follow
from disbelief in the Church. Augustine was never truer
than when he said: "WTere it not that the Authority of the
Church moves me, I would not believe the Gospels." Re-
jecting the authority of the Church, the protestants have
passed through a wondrous transition. Beginning by ador-
40 THE CATHOLIC CRITERION
ing even the Masoretic points, they have gradually lapsed to
such a point where those who believe in the Bible as the in-
fallible Word of God are the exceptions.
There remains then one means, and one means only, to
teach man not only the truths of Scripture, but also the Scrip-
ture of truths. This means is" the voice of God through the
Church.
The mighty mind of St. Augustine clearly saw and pro-
claimed the necessity of the Church as the criterion of Scrip-
ture. Arguing with a Manichaean he declares: "I ask:
Who is this Manichaeus ? Ye will answer : The Apostle of
Jesus Christ ; I believe it not ; and now thou art not able to
do or say anything. Thou didst promise me a knowledge of
truth, and now thou obligest me to believe what I know not.
Perhaps thou wilt read me the Gospel, and thence endeavor
to establish the existence of Manichaeus. But if thou findest
one who not yet believes the Gospel what wilt thou say to
one who declares to thee : I do not believe ? And I would
not believe the Gospel were it not that the authority of the
Catholic Church moved me."
In placing the Church as the supreme judge of the Canon
we do not assert that the Church has power to make an in-
spired book. In the words of Melchior Canus: "This is to
be demonstrated that the Church of the faithful still on
earth can not write a canonical book ; but that it can define
whether or not a disputed book be canonical, because the
solution of doubts regarding matters of faith belongs to the
present Church. For it is necessary that there should be a
visible judge in the Church to decide controversies, for the
reason that God fails not the Church in necessary things.
And whether or not a book be canonical vitally concerns
faith. Therefore to the Church on earth pertains this judg-
ment. ... I firmly believe therefore that the Church
is inspired not to give truth and authority to the canonical
books, but to teach that these and not others are canonical"
(De Locis Theol. 7,8).
The Church must teach us two things ; what books are of
God; and wdiat influence God had in such books. We shall
treat first of God's influence upon the Holy Books; and,
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 41
secondly, of the official list of those books. As it is well to
know the nature of the thing sought, before going in quest
of it, so we believe that we shall be aided in constructing the
list of books of Holy Scripture by a knowledge of the dis-
tinguishing element required in them, before admitting them
to such list. Our treatise will deal first, therefore, with the
Nature and Extent of Inspiration, and secondly with
The Canon.
At this point we shall submit a document which, though
not a dogmatic pronouncement, is still an authoritative di-
recting voice from the Head of the Church. This document
is the encyclical letter "Providentissimus Deus" of Pope Leo
XIII. on the study of Holy Scriptures, which appeared on
Nov. 1 8, 1893. The immediate occasion of the encyclical
letter was a defense of Lenormant by d'Hulst entitled "La
Question Biblique" which was published at Paris in 1893.
We give the following translation of the papal document
"Providentissimus Deus:"— "The God of all Providence,
Who in the adorable designs of His love at first elevated
the human race to the participation of the Divine nature, and
afterwards delivered it from universal guilt and ruin, restoring
it to its primitive dignity, has., in consequence, bestowed upon
man a splendid gift and safeguard — making known to him,
by supernatural means, the hidden mysteries of His Divinity,
His wisdom and His mercy. For although in Divine revela-
tion there are contained some things which are not beyond
the reach of unassisted reason, and which are made the ob-
jects of such revelation in order 'that all may come to know
them with facility, certainty, and safety from error, yet not on
this account can supernatural Revelation be said to be abso-
lutely necessary; it is only necessary because God has or-
dained man to a supernatural end.' [Cone. Vat. Sess. III. cap.
ii. dc revel.] This supernatural revelation, according to the
belief of the universal Church is contained betli in unwritten
Tradition, and in written books, which are therefore, called
sacred and canonical because, 'being written under the in-
spiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author,
and as such have been delivered to the Church.' [Ibid.]
This belief has been perpetually held and professed by the
42 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
Church in regard to the Books of both Testaments ; and there
are well-known documents of the gravest kind, coming down
to us from the earliest times, which proclaim that God, Who
spoke first by the Prophets, then by His own mouth, and
lastly by the Apostles, composed also the Canonical Scrip-
tures, [S. Aug. de civ. Dei. XL, 3.] and that these are His own
oracles and words — [S. Clem. Rom. 1 ad. Cor. 45 ; S. Polycarp.
ad Phil. 7 ; S. Iren c. haer. II., 28, 2] — a Letter written by our
Heavenly Father and transmitted by the sacred writers to
the human race in its pilgrimage so far from its heavenly
country. [S. Chrys. in Gen. horn. 2, 2 ; S. Aug. in Ps. XXX.,
serm., 2, 1 ; S. Greg. M. ad Theo. ep. IV., 31.] If, then, such
and so great is the excellence and dignity of the Scriptures,
that God Himself has composed them, and that they treat
of God's marvellous mysteries, counsels, and works, it fol-
lows that the branch of sacred Theology, which is con-
cerned with the defence and elucidation of these Divine
Books, must be excellent and useful in the highest degree.
"Now We, who by the help of God, and not without
fruit, have by frequent Letters and exhortation endeavored
to promote other branches of study which seem capable of
advancing the glory of God, and contributing to the salva-
tion of souls, have for a long time cherished the desire to
give an impulse to the noble science of Holy Scripture, and
to impart to Scripture study a direction suitable to the
needs of the present day. The solicitude of the Apostolic
office naturally urges, and even compels us, not only to
desire that this grand source of Catholic revelation should
be made safely and abundantly accessible to the flock of
Jesus Christ, but also not to suffer any attempt to defile or
corrupt it, either on the part of those who impiously or
openly assail the Scriptures, or of those who are led astray
into fallacious and imprudent novelties. We are not ignor-
ant, indeed, Venerable Brethren, that there are not a few
Catholics, men of talent and learning, who do devote them-
selves with ardor to the defence of the Sacred Writings and
to making them known and better understood. But whilst
giving to these the commendation they deserve, We cannot
but earnestly exhort others also, from whose skill and piety
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 43
and learning we have a right to expect good results, to give
themselves to the same most praiseworthy work. It is Our
wish and fervent desire to see an increase in the number of
the approved and persevering laborers in the cause of Holy-
Scripture; and more especially that those whom Divine
Grace has called to Holy Orders, should, day by day, as
their state demands, display greater diligence and industry
in reading, meditating and explaining it.
HOLY SCRIPTURE MOST PROFITABLE TO DOCTRINE
AND MORALITY.
"Among the reasons for which the Holy Scripture is so
worthy of commendation — in addition to its own excellence
and to the homage which we owe to God's Word — the chief
of all is, the innumerable benefits of which it is the source;
according to the infallible testimony of the Holy Ghost Him-
self, who says: 'All Scripture, inspired by God is profitable
to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, that
the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good
work.' [Tim. III., 16 — 17. J That such was the purpose of
God in giving the Scripture to men is shown by the example
of Christ our Lord and of His Apostles. For He Himself
who 'obtained authority by miracles, merited belief by
authority, and by belief drew to himself the multitude' [S.
Aug. de util. cred. XIV. 32.] was accustomed in the exercise
of His Divine Mission, to appeal to the Scriptures. He uses
them at times to prove that He is sent by God, and is God
Himself. From them He cites instructions for His disciples
and confirmation of His doctrine. He vindicates them from
the calumnies of objectors; He quotes them against Sad-
ducees and Pharisees, and retorts from them upon Satan
himself when he dares to tempt Him. At the close of His
life His utterances are from the Holy Scripture, and it is the
Scripture that He expounds to His disciples after His resur-
rection, until He ascends to the glory of His Father. Faith-
ful to His precepts, the Apostles, although He Himself
granted 'signs and wonders to be done by their hands,'
[Act. XIV., 3.] nevertheless used with the greatest effect the
Sacred Writings, in order to persuade the nations every-
44 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
where of the wisdom of Christianity, to conquer the obsti-
nacy of the Jews, and to suppress the outbreak of heresy.
This is plainly seen in their discourses, especially in those of
St. Peter; these were often a little less than a series of cita-
tions from the Old Testament making in the strongest man-
ner for the new dispensation. We find the same thing in the
Gospels of St. Matthew and St. John and in the Catholic
Epistles ; and most remarkably of all in the words of him,
who 'boasts that he learned the law at the feet of Gamaliel,
in order that, being armed with spiritual weapons, he might
afterwards say with confidence, 'the arms of our warfare are
not carnal but mighty unto God.' ' [St. Hieron. de stud.
Script, ad Paulin. ep. LIII., 3.] Let all, therefore especially
the novices of the ecclesiastical army, understand how
deeply the Sacred Books should be esteemed, and with what
eagerness and reverence they should approach this great
arsenal of heavenly arms. For those whose duty it is to
handle Catholic doctrine before the learned or the unlearned
will nowhere find more ample matter or more abundant ex-
hortation, whether on the subject of God, the supreme
Good and the all-perfect Being, or the works which display
His glory and His love. Nowhere is there anything more
full or more express on the subject of the Saviour of the
world than is to be found in the whole range of the Bible.
As St. Jerome says, 'to be ignorant of the Scripture is not to
know Christ.' [in Isaiam Prol.] In its pages His Image
stands out, living and breathing; diffusing everywhere
around consolation in trouble, encouragement to virtue and
attraction to the love of God. And as to the Church, her
institutions, her nature, her office and her gifts, we find in
Holy Scripture so many references and so many ready and
convincing arguments, that as St. Jerome again most truly
says. 'A man who is well grounded in the testimonies of
the Scripture is the bulwark of the Church. ' [in Isaiam LIV.
12.] And if we come to morality and discipline, an apos-
tolic man finds in the Sacred Writings abundant and excel-
lent assistance; most holy precepts, gentle and strong ex-
hortation, splendid examples of every virtue, and finally the
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 45
promise of eternal reward and the threat of eternal punish-
ment, uttered in terms of solemn import, in God's name and
in God's own words.
"And it is this peculiar and singular power of Holy Scrip-
ture, arising from the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, which
gives authority to the sacred orator, fills him with apostolic
liberty of speech, and communicates force and power to
his eloquence. For those who infuse into their efforts the
spirit and strength of the Word of God, speak 'not in word
only, but in power also, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much
fulness.' [I Thess. I., 5]. Hence, those preachers are foolish
and improvident who, in speaking of religion and proclaim-
ing the things of God, use no words but those of human
science and human prudence, trusting to their own reasonings
rather than to those of God. Their discourses may be
brilliant and fine, but they must be feeble and they must be
cold, for they are without the fire of the utterance of God
[Jerem. XXIII., 29] and they must fall far short of that mighty
power which the speech of God possesses : 'for the Word of
God is living and effectual, and more piercing than any two-
edged sword ; and reaching unto the division of the soul and
the spirit.' [Hebr. IV., 12]. But, indeed those who have a
right to speak are agreed that there is in the Holy Scripture
an eloquence that is wonderfully varied and rich and worthy
of great themes. This St. Augustine thoroughly understood
and has abundantly set forth. [De doctr. Chr. IV., 6, 7.]
This, also, is confirmed by the best preachers of all ages.
who have gratefully acknowledged that they owed their re-
pute chiefly to the assiduous use of the Bible, and to de-
vout meditation on its pages.
"The Holy Fathers well knew all this by practical experi-
ence, and they never cease to extol the Sacred Scripture and
its fruits. In innumerable passages of their writings we
find them applying to it such phrases as 'an inexhaustible
treasury 1 >f heavenly d< tctrine,' [S. Chrys. in Gen. Horn. XXL,
2 ; Horn. IX.. 3 ; S. Aug. dc Disc. Christ. II.] or 'an 1 >verfl< wing
fountain of salvation,' [S. Athan. ep. fest. XXXIX.] or put-
ting it before us as fertile pastures and beautiful gardens in
which the flock of the Lord is marvellously refreshed and
46 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
delighted. [S. Aug. serm. XXVI., 24; S. Ambr. in Ps.
CXVIIL, serm. XIX., 2] Let us listen to the words of St.
Jerome, in his Epistle to Nepotian: 'Often read the divine
Scriptures; yea, let holy reading be always in thy hand;
study that which thou thy self must preach. . . . Let
the speech of the priest be ever seasoned with Scriptural
reading.' [S. Hier. de vita cleric, ad Nepot.] St Gregory
the Great, than whom no one has more admirably described
the pastoral office, writes in the same sense : 'Those,' he says,
'who are zealous in the work of preaching must never cease
the study of the Written Word of God.' [S. Greg. M., Regul.
past. II., 11. (al. 22) ; Moral. XVII., 26 (al. 14). St. Augustine,
however, warns us that 'vainly does the preacher utter the
Word of God exteriorly unless he listens to it interiorly;'
[S. Aug. serm. CLXXIX., 1.] and St. Gregory instructs sacred
orators 'first to find in Holy Scripture the knowledge of
themselves, and then carry it to others, lest in reproving
others they forget themselves.' [S. Greg. M. Regul. past.,
III., 24 (al. 14).] Admonitions such as these had, indeed,
been uttered long before by the Apostolic voice which had
learnt its lesson from Christ Himself, Who 'began to do and
teach.' It was not to Timothv alone, but to the whole order
of the clergy, that the command was addressed : 'Take heed
to thyself and to doctrine ; be earnest in them. For in doing
this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee.'
[I. Tim. IV., 16.] For the saving and for the perfection of
ourselves and of others there is at hand the very best of
help in the Holy Scriptures, as the Book of Psalms, among
others, so constantly insists ; but those only will find it who
bring to this divine reading not only docility and attention,
but also piety and an innocent life. For the sacred Scrip-
ture is not like other books. Dictated by the Holy Ghost, it
contains things of the deepest importance, which, in many
instances are most difficult and obscure. To understand
and explain such things there is always required the 'coming'
[S. Hier. in Mic. I., 10.] of the same Holy Spirit ; that is to say,
His light and His grace, and these, as the Royal Psalmist
so frequently insists, are to be sought by humble prayer and
guarded by holiness of life.
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 47
WHAT THE BIBLE OWES TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
"It is in this that the watchful eye of the Church shines
forth conspicuously. By admirable laws and regulations,
she has shown herself solicitous that 'the celestial treasure
of the Sacred Books, so bountifully bestowed upon man by
the Holy Spirit, should not lie neglected.' [Cone. Trid. sess.
V. decret. de reform. I.] She has prescribed that a consider-
able portion of them shall be read and piously reflected upon
by all her ministers in the daily office of the sacred psalmody.
She has ordered that in cathedral churches, in monasteries,
and in other convents in which study can conveniently be
pursued, they shall be expounded and interpreted by capable
men ; and she has strictly commanded that her children shall
be fed with the saving words of the Gospel at least on Sun-
days and solemn feasts. [Ibid, i — 2.] Moreover, it is owing
to the wisdom and exertions of the Church that there has
always been continued, from century to century that cultiva-
tion of Holy Scripture which has been so remarkable and has
borne such ample fruit.
"And here, in order to strengthen Our teaching and Our
exhortations, it is well to recall how, from the beginning of
Christianity, all who have been renowned for holiness of life
and sacred learning, have given their deep and constant atten-
tion to Holy Scripture. If we consider the immediate disciples
of the Apostles, St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch,
St. Polycarp — or the apologists, such as St. Justin and St.
Irenasus, we find that in their letters and books, whether in
defence of the Catholic Faith or in its commendation, they
drew faith, strength, and unction from the Word of God.
When there arose, in various Sees, catechetical and theologi-
cal schools, of which the most celebrated were those of Alex-
andria and of Antioch, there was little taught in those schools
but what was contained in the reading, the interpretation
and the defence of the divine written word. From them
came forth numbers of Fathers and writers whose laborious
studies and admirable writings have justly merited for the
three following centuries the appellation of the golden age
of biblical exegesis. In the Eastern Church the greatest
48 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
name of all is Origen — a man remarkable alike for penetra-
tion of genius and persevering labor ; from whose numerous
works and his great Hexapla almost all have drawn who
came after him. Others who have widened the field of this
science may also be named, as especially eminent; thus,
Alexandria could boast of St. Clement and St. Cyril; Pales-
tine, of Eusebius and the other St. Cyril ; Cappadocia, of St.
Basil the Great and the two Gregories, of Nazianzus and
Nyssa ; Antioch, of St. John Chrysostom, in whom the science
of Scripture was rivalled by the splendor of his eloquence.
In the Western Church there are as many names as great :
Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Hilary, St. Ambrose, St. Leo the
Great, St. Gregory the Great ; most famous of all, St. Augus-
tine and St. Jerome, of whom the former was so marvellously
acute in penetrating the sense of God's Word and so fertile
in the use that he made of it for the promotion of the Catho-
lic truth, and the latter has received from the Church, by
reason of his pre-eminent knowledge of Scripture and his
labors in promoting its use, the name of the 'great Doctor.'
[See the Collect on his feast, September 30.] From this
period down to the eleventh century, although biblical
studies did not flourish with the same vigor and the same
fruitfulness as before, yet they did flourish, and principally
by the instrumentality of the clergy. It was their care and
solicitude that selected the best and most useful things that
the ancients had left, arranged them in order, and published
them with additions of their own — as did S. Isidore of
Seville, Venerable Bede, and Alcuin, among the most prom-
inent; it was they who illustrated the sacred pages with
'glosses' or short commentaries, as we see in Walafrid Strabo
and St. Anselm of Laon, or expended fresh labor in securing
their integrity, as did St. Peter Damian and Blessed Lanfranc.
In the twentieth century many took up, with great success,
the allegorical exposition of Scripture. In this kind, St.
Bernard is preeminent ; and his writings, it may be said, are
Scripture all through. With the age of the scholastics came
fresh and welcome progress in the study of the Bible. That
the scholastics were solicitous about the genuineness of the
Latin version is evident from the Correctoria Biblica, or list
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 49
of emendations, which they have left. But they expended
their labors and industry chiefly on interpretation and ex-
planation. To them we owe the accurate and clear distinc-
tion, such as had not been given before, of the various senses
of the sacred words; the assignment of the value of each
'sense' in theology; the division of books into parts, and the
summaries of the various parts; the investigation of the
objects of the writers ; the demonstration of the connection
of sentence with sentence, and clause with clause ; all of which
is calculated to throw much light on the more obscure pas-
sages of the Sacred Volume. The valuable work of the
scholastics in Holy Scripture is seen in their theological
treatises and in their Scripture commentaries; and in this
respect the greatest name among them all is St. Thomas
Aquinas.
"When our predecessor, Clement V., established chairs
of Oriental literature in the Roman College and in the princi-
pal Universities of Europe, Catholics began to make more
accurate investigation on the original text of the Bible as
well as on the Latin version. The revival amongst us of
Greek learning, and, much more, the happy invention of the
art of printing, gave a strong impetus to biblical studies. In
a brief space of time, innumerable editions, especially of the
Vulgate, poured from the press and were diffused through-
out the Catholic world; so honored and loved was Holy
Scripture during that very period against which the enemies
of the Church direct their calumnies. Nor must we forget
how many learned men there were, chiefly among the re-
ligious orders, who did excellent work for the Bible between
the Council of Vienna and that of Trent; men who, by the
employment of modern means and appliances, and by the
tribute of their own genius and learning, not only added to
the rich store of ancient times, but prepared the way for the
succeeding century, the century which followed the Council
of Trent, when it almost seemed that the great age of the
Fathers had returned. For it is well-known, and We recall
it with pleasure, that Our predecessors from Pius IV. to
Clement VIII. caused to be prepared the celebrated editions
of the Vulgate and the Septuagint, which, having been pub-
t
(4) H. S.
50 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
lished by the command and authority of Sixtus V. and of the
same Clement, are now in common use. At this time, more-
over, were carefully brought out various other ancient ver-
sions of the Bible, and the Rolyglots of Antwerp and of Paris,
most important for the investigation of the true meaning of
the text ; nor is there any one book of either Testament which
did not find more than one expositor, nor any grave question
which did not profitably exercise the ability of many in-
quirers, among whom there are not a few — more especially
of those who made most use of the Fathers — who have ac-
quired great reputation. From that time downwards the
labor and solicitude of Catholics have never been wanting ;
for, as time went on, eminent scholars have carried on bibli-
cal study with success, and have defended Holy Scripture
against rationalism with the same weapons of philology and
kindred sciences with which it had been attacked. The
calm and fair consideration of what has been said will clearly
show that the Church has never failed in taking due meas-
ures to bring the Scriptures within reach of her children, and
that she has ever held fast and exercised profitably that
guardianship conferred upon her by Almighty God for the
protection and glory of His Holy Word ; so that she has never
required, nor does she now require any stimulation from
without.
HOW TO STUDY HOLY SCRIPTURE.
"We must now, Venerable Brethren, as our purpose de-
mands, impart to you such counsels as seem best suited for
carrying on successfully the study of biblical science.
"But first it must be clearly understood whom we have to
oppose and contend against, and what are their tactics and
their arms. In earlier times the contest was chiefly with
those who, relying on private judgment and repudiating the
divine traditions and teaching office of the Church, held the
Scriptures to be the one source of revelation and the final
appeal in matters of faith. Now we have to meet the Ration-
alists, true children and inheritors of the older heretics, who,
trusting in their turn to their own way of thinking, have re-
jected even the scraps and remnants of Christian belief which
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 51
had been handed down to them. They deny that there is
any such thing as revelation or inspiration, or Holy Scrip-
ture at all ; they see, instead, only the forgeries and falsehoods
of men; they set down the Scripture narratives as stupid
fables and lying stories: the prophecies and oracles of God
are to them either predictions made up after the event or
forecasts formed by the light of nature; the miracles and
wonders of God's power are not what they are said to be, but
the startling effects of natural law, or else mere tricks and
myths; and the Apostolic Gospels and writings are not the
work of the apostles at all. These detestable errors, whereby
they think they destroy the truth of the divine books, are
obtruded on the world as the peremptory pronouncements
of a newly invented 'free science ;' a science, however, which
is so far from final that they are perpetually modifying and
supplementing it. And there are some of them, who, not-
withstanding their impious opinions and utterances about
God, and Christ, the Gospels and the rest of Holy Scripture,
would fain be considered both theologians and Christians and
men of the Gospel, and who attempt to disguise by such hon-
orable names their rashness and their pride. To them we
must add not a few professors of other sciences who approve
their views and give them assistance, and are urged to attack
the Bible by similar intolerance of revelation. And it is de-
plorable to see these attacks growing every day more numer-
ous and more severe. It is sometimes men of learning and
judgment who are assailed; but these have little difficulty in
defending themselves from evil consequences. The efforts
and arts of the enemy are chiefly directed against the more
ignorant masses of the people. They diffuse their deadly
poison by means of books, pamphlets, and newspapers ; they
spread it by addresses and by conversation; they are found
everywhere] and they are in possession of numerous schools,
taken by violence from the Church, in which, by ridicule and
scurrilous jesting, they pervert the credulous and unformed
minds of the young to the contempt of Holy Scripture.
Should not these things, Venerable Brethren, stir up and set
on fire the heart of every pastor, so that to this 'knowledge,
falsely so called,' [i. Tim. IV., 20.] may be opposed the
52 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
ancient and true science which the Church, through the
Apostles has received from Christ, and that Holy Scripture
may find the champions that are needed in so momentous
a battle?
"Let our first care, then, be to see that in seminaries and
academical institutions the study of Holy Scripture be placed
on such a footing as its own importance and the circum-
stances of the time demand. With this view, the first thing
which requires attention is the wise choice of professors.
Teachers of Sacred Scripture are not to be appointed at
haphazard out of the crowd ; but they must be men whose
character and fitness are proved by their love of the Bible
and their long familiarity with it and by suitable learning
and study.
"It is a matter of equal importance to provide in time for
a continuous succession of such teachers ; and it will be well
wherever this can be done, to select young men of good
promise who have successfully accomplished their theologi-
cal course, and to set them apart exclusive for Holy Scripture,
affording them facilities for full and complete studies. Pro-
fessors, thus chosen and thus prepared, may enter, with con-
fidence, on the task that is appointed for them ; and that they
may carry out their work well and profitably, let them take
heed to the instructions we now proceed to give.
"At the commencement of a course of Holy Scripture,
let the professor strive earnestly to form the judgment of
the young beginners so as to train them equally to defend
the Sacred Writings and to penetrate their meaning. This
is the object of the treatise which is called 'Introduction.'
Here the student is taught how to prove the integrity and
authority of the Bible, how to investigate and ascertain its
true sense, and how to meet and refute objections. It is
needless to insist upon the importance of making these pre-
liminary studies in an orderly and thorough fashion, with
the accompaniment and assistance of Theology ; for the whole
subsequent course must rest on the foundation thus laid
and make use of the light thus acquired. Next, the teacher
will turn his attention to that more fruitful division of Scrip-
ture science which has to do with interpretation, wherein is
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 53
imparted the method of using the Word of God for the ad-
vantage of religion and piety. We recognize, without hesi-
tation, that neither the extent of the matter nor the time
at disposal allows each single Book of the Bible to be sepa-
rately gone through. But the teaching should result in a
definite and ascertained method of interpretation — and,
therefore, the professor should equally avoid the mistake of
giving a mere taste of every Book, and of dwelling at too
great a length on a part of one Book. If most schools cannot
do what is done in large institutions — take the students
through the whole of one or two Books continuously and
with a certain development — yet at least those parts which
are selected should be treated with suitable fulness ; in such
a way that the students may learn from the sample that is
put before them to love and use the remainder of the Sacred
Book during the whole of their lives. The professor, follow-
ing the tradition of antiquity, will make use of the Vulgate
as his text ; for the Council of Trent decreed that 'in public
lectures, disputations, preaching, and exposition,' [Sess. IV.,
deer, de edit, et usu sacr. libror.] the Vulgate is the 'authentic'
version; and this is the existing custom of the Church. At
the same time, the other versions, which Christian antiquity
has approved, should not be neglected, more especially the
more ancient MSS. For, although the meaning of the He-
brew and Greek is substantially rendered by the Vulgate,
nevertheless, wherever there may be ambiguity or want of
clearness, the 'examination of older tongues,' [De doctr. clir.
III., 4.] to quote St. Augustine, will be useful and advantage-
ous. But in this matter we need hardly say that the great-
est prudence is required, for the 'office of a commentator,' as
St. Jerome says, 'is to set forth not what he himself would
prefer, but what his author says.' [Ad Pammachium.] The
question of 'reading' having been, when necessary, carefully
discussed, the next thing is to investigate and expound the
meaning. And the first counsel to be given is this: that
the more our adversaries contend to the contrary, so much
the more solicitously should we adhere to the received and
approved canons of interpretation. Hence, whilst weighing
the meaning of words, the connection of ideas, the parallel-
54 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
ism of passages, and the like, we should by all means make
use of such illustrations as can be drawn from opposite erudi-
tion of an external sort ; but this should be done with caution
so as not to bestow on questions of this kind more labor and
time than are spent on the Sacred Books themselves, and not
to overload the minds of the students with a mass of infor-
mation that will be rather a hindrance than a help.
HOLY SCRIPTURE AND THEOLOGY; INTERPRETATION;
THE FATHERS.
"The professor may now safely pass on to the use of
Scripture in matters of theology. On this head it must be
observed that, in addition to the usual reasons which make
ancient writings more or less difficult to understand, there
are some which are peculiar to the Bible. For the language
of the Bible is employed to express, under the inspiration of
the Holy Ghost, many things which are beyond the power
and scope of the reason of man — that is to say, Divine mys-
teries and all that is related to them. There is sometimes in
such passages a fulness and a hidden depth of meaning which
the letter hardly expresses and which the laws of interpre-
tation hardly warrant. Moreover, the literal sense itself fre-
quently admits other senses, adapted to illustrate dogma or
to confirm morality. Wherefore, it must be recognized that
the Sacred Writings are wrapped in a certain religious obscur-
ity, and that no one can enter into their interior without
a guide; [S. Hier. ad. Paulin. de studio Script, ep. LIIL, 4.]
God so disposing, as the holy Fathers commonly teach, in
order that men may investigate them with greater ardor
and earnestness, and that what is attained with difficulty
may sink more deeply into the mind and heart, and, most
of ail, that they may understand that God has delivered
the Holy Scripture to the Church, and that in reading and
making use of His Word, they must follow the Church as
their guide and their teacher. St. Irenasus long since laid
down, that where the charismata of God were, there the truth
was to be learnt, and the Holy Scripture was safely inter-
preted by those who had the Apostolic succession. [C. haer.
IV. 26, 5.] His teaching and that of other holy Fathers, is
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 55
taken up by the Council of the Vatican, which, in renewing
the decree of Trent declared its 'mind ' to be this — that 'in
things of faith and morals, belonging to the building up of
Christian doctrine, that is to be considered the true sense
of Holy Scripture, which has been held and is held by our
Holy Mother the Church, whose place it is to judge of the
true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures; and, there-
fore, that it is permitted to no one to interpret Holy Scrip-
ture against such sense or also against the unanimous agree-
ment of the Fathers.' [Sess. III., cap. II., de revel. ; cf. Cone.
Trid. sess. IV. decret. de edit, et usu sacr. libror.] By this most
wise decree the Church by no means prevents or restrains
the pursuit of Biblical science, but rather protects it from
error, and largely assists its real progress. A wide field is
still left open to the private student, in which his hermeneut-
ical skill may display itself with signal effect and to the ad-
vantage of the Church. On the one hand, in those passages
of Holy Scripture, which have not as yet received a certain
and definite interpretation, such labors may, in the benig-
nant providence of God, prepare for and bring to maturity
the judgment of the Church; on the other, in passages al-
ready defined, the private student may do work equally
valuable, either by setting them forth more clearly to the
flock or more skillfully to the scholars, or by defending them
more powerfully from hostile attack. Wherefore the first
and dearest object of the Catholic commentator should be to
interpret those passages which have received an authentic
interpretation either from the Sacred writers themselves,
under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost fas in many places
of the New Testament), or from the Church, under the assist-
ance of the same Holy Spirit, whether by her solemn
judgment or her ordinary and universal magisterium [Cone.
Vat. sess. III., cap. II., de fide] — to interpret these passages
in that identical sense, and to prove by all the resources of
science, that sound hermeneutieal laws admit of no other
interpretation. In the other passages the analogy of faith
should be followed, and Catholic doctrine, as authoritatively
proposed by the Church, should be held as the supreme law ;
for, seeing that the same God is the author both of the
56 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
Sacred Books and of the doctrine committed to the Church,
it is clearly impossible that any teaching can, by legitimate
means, be extracted from the former, which shall, in any
respect, be at variance with the latter. Hence it follows
that all interpretation is foolish or false which either makes
the Sacred writers disagree one with another, or is opposed
to the doctrine of the Church. The professor of Holy Scrip-
ture, therefore, amongst other recommendations, must be
well acquainted with the whole circle of Theology and deeply
read in the commentaries of the Holy Fathers and doctors,
and in other interpreters of mark. [Ibid.] This is incul-
cated by St. Jerome, and still more frequently by St. Augus-
tine, who thus justly complains, 'If there is no branch of
teaching, however humble and easy to learn, which does not
require a master, what can be a greater sign of rashness and
pride than to refuse to study the Books of the Divine myster-
ies by the help of those who have interpreted them?' [Ad
Honorat. dentil, cred. XVII., 35.] The other Fathers have
said the same, and have confirmed it by their example, for
they 'endeavored to acqure the understanding of the Holy
Scriptures not by their own lights and ideas, but from the
writing and authority of the ancients, who, in their turn, as
we know, received the rule of interpretation in direct line
from the Apostles.' [Rufinus Hist. eccl. LI., 9.] The holy
Fathers 'to whom, after the Apostles, the Church owes its
growth — who have planted, watered, built, governed, and
cherished it,' [S. Aug. C, Julian. II., 10. 37.] the holy Fathers,
We say, are of supreme authority, whenever they all interpret
in one and the same manner any text of the Bible, as pertain-
ing to the doctrine of faith and morals ; for their unanimity
clearly evinces that such interpretation has come down from
the Apostles as a matter of Catholic faith. The opinion of
the Fathers is also of very great weight when they treat of
these matters in their capacity of doctors unofficially; not
only because they excel in their knowledge of revealed doc-
trine and in their acquaintance with many things which are
useful in understanding the Apostolic Books, but because
they are men of eminent sanctity and of ardent zeal for the
truth, on whom God has bestowed a more ample measure of
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 57
His light. YYheref< >rc the expositor should make it his duty
to follow their footsteps with all reverence, and to use their
labors with intelligent appreciation.
"But he must not on that account consider that it is for-
bidden, when just cause exists, to push inquiry and exposi-
tion beyond what the Fathers have done ; provided he care-
fully observes the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine
— not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except
only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires ;
[Dc Gen. ad litt. LVIII. CC, 7. 13.] a rule to which it is the
more necessary to adhere strictly in these times, when the
thirst for novelty and the unrestrained freedom of thought
make the danger of error most real and proximate. Neither
should those passages be neglected which the Fathers have
understood in an allegorical or figurative sense, more especi-
ally when such interpretation is justified by the literal, and
when it rests on the authority of many. For this method
of interpretation has been received by the Church from the
Apostles, and has been approved by her own practice, as the
h< >ly Liturgy attests ; although it is true that the holy Fathers
did not thereby pretend directly to demonstrate dogmas of
faith, but used it as a means of promoting virtue and piety,
such as, by their own experience, they knew to be most
valuable. The authority of other Church interpreters is not
so great ; but the study of Scripture has always continued to
advance in the Church, and, therefore, these commentaries
also have their own honorable place, and are serviceable in
many ways for the refutation of assailants and the explana-
tion of difficulties. But it is most unbecoming to pass by,
in ignorance or contempt, the excellent work which Catholics
have left in abundance, and to have recourse to the work of
non-Catholics — and to seek in them, to the detriment of
sound doctrine and often to the peril of faith, the explanati< >n
of passages on which Catholics long ago have successfully
employed their talent and their labor. For although the
studies of non-Catholics, used with prudence, may some-
times be of use to the Catholic student, he should, neverthe-
less, bear well in mind — as the Fathers also teach in numer-
ous passages [Cfr. Clem. Alex. Strom. VII.. 16; ( >r princ.
58 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
IV., 8; in Levit. horn. 4. 8; Tertull. de praescr. 15, seqq. ; S.
Hilar. Pict. in Matth. 13. 1.] — that the sense of Holy Scrip-
ture can nowhere be found incorrupt outside the Church,
and cannot be expected to >be found in writers who, being
without the true faith, only gnaw the bark of Sacred Scrip-
ture, and never attain its pith.
"Most desirable is it, and most essential, that the whole
teaching of Theology should be pervaded and animated by
the use of the Divine Word of God. This is what the Fathers
and the greatest theologians of all ages have desired and re-
duced to practice. It is chiefly out of the Sacred Writings
that they endeavored to proclaim and establish the Articles
of Faith and the truths therewith connected, and it was in
them, together with Divine Tradition, that they found the
refutation of heretical error, and the reasonableness, the
true meaning, and the mutual relation of the truths of
Catholicism. Nor will any one wonder at this who considers
that the Sacred Books hold such an eminent position among
the sources of revelation that without their assiduous study
and use, Theology cannot be placed on a true footing, or
treated as its dignity demands. For although it is right
and proper that students in academies and schools should be
chiefly exercised in acquiring a scientific knowledge of dogma
by means of reasoning from the Articles of Faith to their
consequences, according to the rules of approved and sound
philosophy — nevertheless the judicious and instructed theo-
logians will by no means pass by that method of doctrinal
demonstration which draws its proof from the authority of
the Bible ; 'for (Theology) does not receive her first principles
from any other science, but immediately from God by revel-
ation. And, therefore, she does not receive of other sciences
as from a superior, but uses them as her inferiors or hand
maids.' [S., Greg. M. Moral. XX., 9 (al. 11).] It is this view
of doctrinal teaching which is laid down and recommended
by the prince of theologians, St. Thomas of Aquin; [Summ.
tlieol. p. I., q. I., a. 5 ad 2.] who moreover shows — such
being the essential character of Christian Theology — how
she can defend her own principles against attack : 'If the ad-
versary,' he says, 'do but grant any portion of the Divine
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 59
revelation, we have an argument against him; thus, against
a heretic we can employ Scripture authority, and against
those who deny one article, we can use another. But if our
opponent reject Divine revelation entirely, there is no way
left to prove the Articles of Faith by reasoning ; we can only
solve the difficulties which are raised against them.' [Ibid a.
8.] Care must be taken, then, that beginners approach the
study of the Bible well prepared and furnished; otherwise,
just hopes will be frustrated, or, perchance, what is worse,
they will unthinkingly risk the danger of error, falling an
easy prey to the sophisms and labored erudition of the
Rationalists. The best preparation will be a conscientious
application to philosophy and theology under the guidance
of St. Thomas of Aquin, and a thorough training therein — as
We ourselves have elsewhere pointed out and directed. By
this means, both in Biblical studies and in that part of
Theology which is called positive, they will pursue the right
path and make satisfactory progress.
the authority of holy scripture; modern
criticism; physical science.
;'To prove, to expound, to illustrate Catholic doctrine by
the legitimate and skillful interpretation of the Bible is
much; but there is a second part of the subject of equal im-
portance and equal difficulty— the maintenance in the strong-
est possible way of its full authority. This cannot be done
c< >mpletely or satisfactorily except by means of the living
and proper magisterium of the Church. The Church by
reason of her wonderful propagation, her distinguished sanct-
ity, and inexhaustible fecundity in good, her Catholic unity,
and her unshaken stability, is herself a great and perpetual
motive of credibility, and an unassailable testimony to her
own Divine mission.' [Cone. Vat. sess. III. c. II. le.]
But since the divine and infallible magisterium of the Church
rests also on Holy Scripture ; the first thing to be done is to
vindicate the trustworthiness of Sacred records, at least as
human documents, from which can be clearly proved, as
from primitive and authentic testimony, the Divinity anil
the mission of Christ our Lord, the institution of a hierarchi-
I
60 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
cal Church and the primacy of Peter and of his successors.
It is most desirable, therefore, that there should be numer-
ous members of the clergy well prepared to enter on a con-
test of this nature, and to repulse hostile assaults, chiefly
trusting in the armor of God recommended by the Apostle,
[Eph. VI., 13, seqq.] but also not unaccustomed to modern
methods of attack. This is beautifully alluded to by St.
John Chrysostom, when describing the duties of priests:
'We must use every endeavor that the 'Word of God may
dwell in us abundantly' [Cfr., Coloss. III., 16.] not merely for
one kind of a fight must we be prepared — for the contest is
many-sided and the enemy is of every sort ; and they do not
all use the same weapons nor make their onset in the same
way. Wherefore it is needful that the man who has to con-
tend against all should be acquainted with the engines and
the arts of all — that he should be at once archer and slinger,
commandant and officer, general and private soldier, foot-
soldier and horseman, skilled in sea-fight and in siege; for
unless he knows every trick and turn of war, the devil is
well able, if only a single door be left open, to get in his
fierce bands and carry off the sheep.' [De Sacerdotio IV., 4.]
The sophisms of the enemy and his manifold arts of attack
we have already touched upon. Let us now say a word of
advice on the means of defence. The first means is the
study of the Oriental languages and of the art of criticism.
These two acquirements are in these days held in high estim-
ation, and, therefore, the clergy, by making themselves fully
acquainted with them as time and place may demand, will
the better be able to discharge their office with becoming
credit; for they must make themselves 'all to all,' [I. Cor.
IX., 22.] always 'ready to satisfy every one that asketh them
a reason for the hope that is in them.' [I. Peter III., 25.]
Hence it is most proper that professors of Sacred Scripture
and theologians should master those tongues in which the
Sacred Books were originally written ; and it would be well
that Church students also should cultivate them, more
"especially those who aspire to academic degrees. And en-
deavors should be made to establish in all academic institu-
tions— as has already been laudably done in many — chairs
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 61
of the other ancient languages, especially the Semitic, and
of subjects connected therewith, for the benefit, principally,
of those who are intended to profess Sacred literature.
These latter, with a similar object in view, should make
themselves well and thoroughly acquainted with the art of
true criticism. There has arisen, to the great detriment of
religion, an inept method, dignified by the name of the
'higher criticism,' which pretends to judge the origin, in-
tegrity and authority of each Book from internal indications
alone. It is clear on the other hand, that in historical ques-
tions, such as the origin and handing down of writings, the
witness of history is of primary importance, and that histori-
cal investigation should be made with the utmost care ; and
that in this matter internal evidence is seldom of great value,
except as confirmation. To look upon it in any other light
will be to open the door to many evil consequences. It will
make the enemies of religion much more bold and confident
in attacking and mangling the Sacred Books; and this
vaunted 'higher criticism' will resolve itself into the reflection
of the bias and the prejudice of the critics. It will not
throw on the Scripture the light which is sought, or prove of
any advantage to doctrine ; it will only give rise to disagree-
ment and dissension, those sure notes of error, which the
critics in question so plentifully exhibit in their own per-
sons; and seeing that most of them are tainted with false
philosophy and rationalism, it must lead to the elimination
from the Sacred Writings of all prophecy and miracle, and of
everything else that is outside the natural order.
"In the second place, we have to contend against those
who, making an evil use of physical science, minutely scruti-
nize the Sacred Books in order to detect the writers in a mis-
take, and to take occasion to vilify its contents. Attacks
of this kind, bearing as they do on matters of sensible ex-
perience, are peculiarly dangerous to the masses, and als<
the young who are beginning their literary studies; for the
young, if they lose their reverence for the 1 Inly Scripture • n
one or more points, are easily led to give up believing in it
altogether. It need not be pointed out how the nature of
science, just as it is s<> admirably adapted to show forth I
!■
62 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
glory of the Great Creator, provided it is taught as it should
be, so, if it be perversely imparted to the youthful intelligence,
it may prove most fatal in destroying the principles of true
philosophy and in the corruption of morality. Hence, to
the professor of Sacred Scripture a knowledge of natural
science will be of very great assistance in detecting such
attacks on the Sacred Books, and in refuting them. There
Hcan never, indeed, be any real discrepancy between the
theologian and the physicist, as long as each confines him-
self within his own lines, and both are careful, as St. Augus-
tine warns us, 'not to make rash assertions, or to assert what
is not known as known.' [In. Gen. op. imperj. IX., 30.] If
dissension should arise between them, here is the rule also
laid down by St. Augustine, for the theologian: 'whatever
they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature,
\ we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scrip-
tures ; and whatever they assert in their treatises, which is
contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith,
we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false,
or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation,
believe it to be so.' [De.Gen, ad litt., I., 21 — 41.] To under-
stand how just is the rule here formulated we must remem-
ber, first, that the Sacred writers, or to speak more accu-
rately, the Holy Ghost 'Who spoke by them, did not intend
to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature
of the things of the visible universe) , things is no way profit-
able unto salvation.' [S. Aug. ib. II., 9 — 20.] Hence they
did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather
described and dealt with things in more or less figurative
language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time,
and which in many instances are in daily use at this day,
even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech
primarily and properly describes what comes under the
senses ; and somewhat in the same way the Sacred writers —
as 'the Angelic Doctor also reminds us — 'went by what
• sensibly appeared,' [Summa theol. p. i. q. LXXX., a. 1. ad 3.]
or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the
way men could understand and were accustomed to.
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL G3
"The unshrinking defence of the Holy Scripture, how-
ever, does not require that we should equally uphold all the
opinions which each of the Fathers or the more recent in-
terpreters have put forth in explaining it ; for it may be that,
in commenting on passages where physical matters occur,
they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times,
and thus made statements which in these days have been
abandoned as incorrect. Hence, in their interpretations,
we must carefully note what they lay down as belonging to
faith, or as intimately connected with faith — what they are
unanimous in. For ' in those things which do not come
under the obligation of faith, the saints were at liberty to
hold divergent opinions, just as we ourselves are, '[In Sent.ll.,
Dist.II.,q.I.,a.3.] according to the saying of St. Thomas. And
in another place he says most admirably : 'when philosophers
are agreed upon a point, and it is not contrary to our faith,
it is safer, in my opinion, neither to lay down such a point
as a dogma of faith, even though it is perhaps so presented
by the philosophers, nor to reject it as against faith, lest we
thus give to the wise of this world an occasion of despising
our faith.' [Opusc. X.] The Catholic interpreter, although
he should show that those facts of natural science which in-
vestigators affirm to be now quite certain are not contrarv
to the Scripture rightly explained, must, nevertheless, alwavs
bear in mind, that much which has been held and proved as
certain has afterwards been called in question and rejected.
And if writers on physics travel outside the boundaries of
their own branch, and carry their erroneous teaching into
the domain of philosophy, let them be handed over to phil- .
osophers for refutation. v — i
INSPIRATION INCOMPATIBLE WITH ERROR.
"The principles here laid down will apply to cognate
sciences and especially to history. It is a lamentable fact
that there are many who with great labor carry out and
publish investigations on the monuments of antiquity, t
manners and institutions of nations and other illustrative
subjects, and whose chief purpose in all this is to find mis-
takes in the Sacred Writings and so to shake and weaken
64 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
their authority. Some of these writers display not only
extreme hostility, but the greatest unfairness ; in their eyes
a profane book or ancient document is accepted without
hesitation, whilst the Scripture, if they only find in it a
suspicion of error, is set down with the slightest possible
discussion as quite untrustworthy. It is true, no doubt,
that copyists have made mistakes in the text of the Bible ;
this question, when it arises, should be carefully considered
on its merits, and the fact not too easily admitted, but only
in those passages where the proof is clear. It may also hap-
pen that the sense of a passage remains ambiguous, and in
this case good hermeneutical methods will greatly assist in
clearing up the obscurity. But it is absolutely wrong and
forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only
of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the Sacred Writer has
erred. For the system of those who, in order to rid them-
selves of those difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that
Divine inspiration regards the things of faith and morals,
and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think), in a
question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should
consider not so' much what God has said as the reason and
purpose which He had in mind when saying it — this system
cannot be tolerated. For all the Books which the Church
receives as sacred and canonical are written wholly and
entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy
Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error
can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is
essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and re-
jects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that
God Himself, the Supreme Truth, can utter that which is not
true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church
solemnly defined in the councils of Florence and of Trent,
and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the
Council of the Vatican. These are the words of the last:
The Books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire,
with all their parts, as enumerated by the decree of the
same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are
to be received as Sacred and Canonical. And the Church
holds them as Sacred and Canonical, not because having
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL . 65
been composed by human industry, they were afterwards
approved by her authority; nor only because they contain
revelation without error; but because, having been written
under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for
their Author.' [Sess. III. C. II., de Rev.] I [ence, because the
Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot,
therefore, say that it was these inspired instruments wl .
perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary Au-
thor. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and im-
pelled them to write — He was so present to them — that the
things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly
understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally
expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Other-
wise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the
entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of
the Fathers. 'Therefore,' says St. Augustine, 'since they i
wrote the things which He showed and uttered to them, it
cannot be pretended that He is not the Writer; for His mem-
bers executed what their Head dictates.' [De consensu
Evangel. L. i, C. 35.] And St. Gregory the Great thus pro-
nounces : 'most superfluous it is to inquire who wrote these
things — we loyally believe the Holy Ghost to be the
author of the Book. He wrote it Who dictated it for writ-
ing ; He wrote it Who inspired its execution.' [Praef. in 7ob,
11.2.]
"It follows that those who maintain that an error is pos-
sible in any genuine passage of the Sacred Writings, either
pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration, or make God the
author of such error. And so emphatically were all the
Fathers and Doctors agreed that the Divine Writings, as
left by the hagiographers, are free from all error, that they
labored earnestly, with no less skill than reverence, to recon-
cile with each other those numerous passages which seem at
variance — the very passages which in a great measure have
been taken up by the 'higher criticism'; for they were unan-
imous in laying it down, that those writings, in their entirety
and in all their parts were equally from the afflatus of Al-
mighty God, and that God, speaking by the Sacred Writers,
could not set down anything that was not true. The w< >r<]s
(5) H.S.
66 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
of St. Augustine to St. Jerome may sum up what they taught :
'On my own part I confess to your charity that it is only to
those books of Scripture which are now called canonical that
I have learned to pay such honor and reverence as to be-
lieve most firmly that none of their writers has fallen into
any error. And if in these Books I meet anything which
seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude
either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not
expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do
not understand.' [Ep. LXXVIL, i, et crebrins alibi.}
"But to undertake fully and perfectly, and with all the
weapons of the best science, the defence of the Holy Bible
is far more than can be looked for from the exertion of
commentators and theologians alone. It is an enterprise
in which we have a right to expect the co-operation of all
those Catholics who have acquired reputation in any branch
of learning whatever. As in the past, so at the present
time, the Church is never without the graceful support of
her accomplished children; may their service to the Faith
grow and increase ! For there is nothing which We believe
to be more heedful than that truth should find defenders
more powerful and more numerous than the enemies it has
to face ; nor is there anything which is better calculated to
impress the masses with respect for truth than to see it
boldly proclaimed by learned and distinguished men. More-
over, the bitter tongues of objectors will be silenced, or at
least they will not dare to insist so shamelessly that faith
is the enemy of science, when they see that scientific men
of eminence in their profession show towards faith the most
marked honor and respect. Seeing, then, that those can
do so much for the advantage of religion on whom the good-
ness of Almighty God has bestowed, together with the
grace of the faith, great natural talent, let such men, in this
bitter conflict of which the Holy Scripture is the object,
select each of them the branch of study most suitable to
his circumstances, and endeavor to excel therein, and thus
'be prepared to repulse with credit and distinction the as-
saults on the Word of God. And it is Our pleasing duty
to give deserved praise to a work which certain Catholics
THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL 67
have taken up — that is to say, the formation of societies
and the contribution of considerable sums of money, for
the purpose of supplying studious and learned men with
every kind of help and assistance in carrying out complete
studies. Truly an excellent fashion of investing monev,
and well suited to :the times in which we live ! The less
hope of public patronage there is for Catholic study, the
more ready and the more abundant should be the liberalitv
of private persons — those to whom God has given riches
thus willingly making use of their means to safeguard the
treasure of His revealed doctrine.
SUMMARY.
"In order that all these endeavors and exertions may
really prove advantageous to the cause of the Bible, let
scholars keep steadfastly to the principles which We have
in this Letter laid down: Let them loyally hold that God,
the Creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the
Scriptures — and that, therefore, nothing can be proved
cither by physical science or archaeology which can reallv
contradict the Scriptures. If, then, apparent contradic-
tion be met with, every effort should be made to remove
it. Judicious theologians and commentators should be con-
sulted as to what is the true or most probable meaning of
the passage in discussion, and hostile arguments should be
carefully weighed. Even if the difficulty is after all n< >t
cleared up, and the discrepancy seems to remain, the con-
test must not be abandoned; truth cannot contradict truth,
and we may be sure that some mistake has been made either
in the interpretation of the Sacred Words, or in the polem-
ical discussion itself; and if no such mistake can be de-
tected, we must then suspend judgment for the time 1
There have been objections without number perseveringly
directed against the Scripture for many a long year, which
have been proved to be futile and are now never heard of;
and not infrequently interpretations have been placed ■
certain passages of Scripture (not belonging to the rule of
faith or morals) which have been rei tifi 1 by mm-' r ful
investigations. As time goes on, mistake]
68 THE PAPAL ENCYCLICAL
disappear; but 'truth remaineth and groweth stronger for-
ever and ever.' [3 Esdr. IV., 38.] Wherefore, as no one
should be so presumptuous as to think that he understands
the whole of the Scripture", in which St. Augustine himself
confessed there was more that he did not know, than that he
knew, [Ad Ianuar. ep. LV., 21] so, if he should come on any-
thing that seems incapable of solution, he must take to
heart the cautious rule of the same holy Doctor: 'It is
better even to be oppressed by unknown but useful signs,
than to interpret them uselessly and thus to throw off the
yoke only to be caught in the trap of error.' [De doctr. chr.
III., Q, 18].
"As to those who pursue the subsidiary studies of which
We have spoken, if they honestly and modestly follow the
counsel we have given — if by their pen and their voice they
make their studies profitable against the enemies of truth,
and useful in saving the young from the loss of their faith —
they may justly congratulate themselves on their worthy
service to the Sacred Writings, and on affording to Catholic-
ism that assistance which the Church has a right to expect
from the piety and learning of her children.
"Such, Venerable Brethren, are the admonitions and the
instructions which, by the help of God, We have thought it
well, at the present moment to offer to you on the study of
Holy Scripture. It will now be your province to see that
what We have said be observed and put in practice with all
due reverence and exactness; that so, We may prove our
gratitude to God for the communication to man of the Words
of His Wisdom, and that all the good results so much to be
desired may be realized, especially as they affect the train-
ing of the students of the Church, which is our own great
solicitude and the Church's hope. Exert yourself with
willing alacrity, and use your authority and your persuasion
in order that these studies may be held in just regard and
may flourish in Seminaries and in educational institutions
which are under your jurisdiction. Let them flourish in
completeness and in happy success, under the direction of
the Church, in accordance with the salutary teaching and
example of the Holy Fathers, and the laudable traditions
REVELATION AXD INSPIRATION iV.i
of antiquity; and, as time goes on, let them be widened and
extended as the interests and glory of truth may require—
the interests of that Catholic Truth, which comes from above,
the never-failing source of man's salvation. Finally, We
admonish with paternal love, all students and ministers of
the Church always to approach the Sacred Writings with
reverence and piety ; for it is impossible to attain to the profit-
able understanding thereof unless the arrogance of 'earthly'
science be laid aside, and there be excited in the heart the
holy desire for that wisdom 'which is from above.' In this
way the intelligence, which is once admitted to these Sacred
studies, and thereby illuminated and strengthened, will
acquire a marvellous facility in detecting and avoiding the
fallacies of human science, and in gathering and using for
eternal salvation all that is valuable and precious; whilst,
at the same time, the heart will grow warm, and will strive,
with ardent longing, to advance in virtue and in Divine
love. 'Blessed are they who examine His testimonies;
they shall seek Him with their whole heart.' [Ps. XVIII. ,2].
"And now, filled with hope in the Divine assistance, and
trusting to your pastoral solicitude — as a pledge of heavenly
grace, and a sign of Our special good will — to you all, and
to the Clergy, and to the whole flock entrusted to you. We
lovingly impart in Our Lord the Apostolic Benediction.
"Given at St. Peter's, at Rome, the 18th day of Novem-
ber, 1893, the eighteenth year of Our Pontificate."
POPE LEO XIII.
In common parlance, revelation and inspiration are con-
vertible terms, but, in reality, they differ greatly. Revela-
tii m, from revelare, means to uncover, unveil, disclose to tl
view something hidden, and, in the present instance, I
make known to the mind a concept not before kn< >wn. Tl
took place with the Prophets, and in every portion of tl
Holy Writings where the truths enunciated were impervi'
to the human understanding, or depended on the free will
God; in fact, wherever the idea portrayed was not acqur
by the industry and labor of the writer. When, therefore,
the writer expresses truths which he had acquired by the
70 REVELATION AND INSPIRATION
ordinary method of human research and observation, there
is no revelation from God requisite or given. Thus St. Luke
tells us that, " it had seemed good to him, who had followed
studiously all things from the beginning, to write in order
these things. " Thus the author of the II. Book of Macca-
bees testifies, Cap. II. 24 — 27: "And thus the things that
were comprised by Jason the Cyrenean in five volumes, we
have attempted to compendiate in one volume. We who
have undertaken to compendiate this work, have taken
upon ourselves a task abounding in vigils and sweat. " This
book then is not, properly speaking, revealed. But usage
has prevailed and prevails to speak of the whole body of the
Scriptures as revealed writings, and we do not wish to cor-
rect this usage, but only to define and fix our terms for the
greater facility of our treatise. Inspiration then pervades
the whole structure of Scripture: it is its formal principle,
its soul ; revelation is only called in, as we have said, where
the writer could not, or, de facto, did not acquire his know-
ledge in the ordinary manner.
This distinction is of great moment, as many difficulties
are solved by the same. The neglect of this distinction gave
rise to a censure of one of the propositions of the famous
Leon Lessius, which, had it been couched in precise terms,
would have challenged contradiction. The Holy Ghost,
then, is the directing and impelling agent in all the Scripture,
but not in the same manner. He discloses the truths un-
known before in revelation ; he impels to write infallibly the
things which God would communicate to man in inspiration.
We have defined above the concept of inspiration ; we shall
now scrutinize more closely its object and extent. The
Vatican Council has given us a definition which will serve
as our guide in dealing with the present subject, for, as we
have proven above, the Church can be the only guide in such
a question.
In Cap. II. De Revel, we find :
" Qui quidem veteris et novi Testamenti libri integri cum
omnibus suis partibus, prout in ejusdem Concilii decreto
recensentur, et in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur,
pro sacris et canonicis suscipiendi sunt. Eos vero Ecclesia
REVELATION AND INSPIRATION 71
pro sacris et canonicis habet, non ideo quod sola humana
industria concinnati, sua deinde auctoritate sint approbati;
nee ideo dumtaxat, quod revelationem sine errore contineant,
sed propterea quod Spiritu Sancto inspirante conscript i
Deum habent auctorem, atque ut tales ipsi Ecclesiae traditi
sunt." And in Canon IV. De Revelatione:
" Si quis sacra? Scripturas libros integros cum omnibus
suis partibus, prout illos sancta Tridentina Synodus recen-
suit, pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitus
inspiratos esse negaverit ; anathema sit. "
Hence it is of faith that God is the Author of the Sacred
Scriptures, and of the integral books with all their parts. It
is not here asserted that God with his own hand wrote the
books materially, but that he is the Auctor principalis per
conscriptores suos. Now, we shall bear in mind the relation
of the author to his work, in weighing and judging of the
correctness or falseness of opinions which deal with this
subject.
Inspirare is the Latin equivalent for the Greek deoirveveiv,
which word S. Paul uses in his II. Epist. to Tim. III., 16.,
"iraaa ypacprj deoirvevaro';". It signifies that one is im-
pelled 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
in the instrumental cause.
In every action wrought by a creature, there is a concur-
sus of two causes, the causa prima, and the causa sccunda;
the Creator and the Creature. We exist by reflected exis-
tence, as the moon shines by reflected light. The same act,
which brought us into being at our creation, preserves us in
that being, and this is what is called the conservatio in esse:
and the conservative act is all that prevents us from relaps-
ing into the primal absolute chaos. God must then co-
operate 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.
But there are certain acts where this concursus is more
marked and potent on the part of the Creator, and Inspira-
tion is one of these acts.
72 CARD. MANNING
On this theme Cardinal Manning (Temporal Mission of
the Holy Ghost, pp. 158 — 161) writes as follows:
In order to appreciate more exactly the reach of these
opinions, it will be well to examine them somewhat more
intimately, and to fix the sense of the terms used in the
discussion of the subject.
(1.) First, then, comes the word Inspiration, which is
often confounded with Revelation.
Inspiration, in its first intention, signifies the action of the
Divine Spirit upon the human, that is, upon the intelligence
and upon the will. It is an intelligent and vital action of
God upon the soul of man; and "inspired" is to be predi-
cated, not of books or truths, but of living agents.
In its second intention, it signifies the action of the Spirit
of God upon the intelligence and will of man, whereby any
one is impelled and enabled to act, or to speak, or to write,
in some special way designed by the Spirit of God.
In its still more special and technical intention, it signifies
an action of the Spirit upon men, impelling them to write
what God reveals, suggests, or wills that they should write.
But inspiration does not necessarily signify revelation, or
suggestion of the matter to be written.
(2.) Secondly, Revelation signifies the unfolding to the
intelligence of man truths which are contained in the intelli-
gence of God, the knowledge of which without such revela-
tion would be impossible. Men may be the subjects of
revelation, and not of inspiration ; and they might be the
subjects of inspiration, and not of revelation.
(3.) Thirdly, Suggestion, in the theory of inspiration,
signifies the bringing to mind such things as God wills the
writer to put in writing. All revelation is suggestion, but
not all suggestion revelation ; because much that is suggested
may be of the natural order, needing no revelation, being
already known by natural reason, or by historical tradition
and the like.
(4.) Fourthly, by Assistance is understood the presence
and help of the Holy Spirit, by which the human agent, in
full use of his own liberty and powers — such as natural gifts,
genius, acquired cultivation, and the like — executes the work
which the Divine Inspiration impels him to write.
CARD. MANNING
There are three kinds of assistance.
(i.) First, there is the assistance afforded by the Holy
Spirit to all the faithful, by which their intelligence is illumin-
ated and their will strengthened, without exempting them
from the liability to error.
(2.) Secondly, there is the assistance vouchsafed to the
Church diffused throughout the world or congregated in
council, or to the person of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, speaking
ex cathedra, which excludes all liability to error within the
sphere of faith and morals, and such facts and truths as
attach to them (of which relations the Church is the ultimate
judge), but does not extend to the other orders of purely
natural science and knowledge.
(3.) Lastly, there is the assistance granted as a 'gratia
gratis data' to the inspired writers of the Holy Scripture
which excludes all liability to error in the act of writing not
only in matters of faith and morals, but in all matter, of
whatsoever kind, which by the inspiration of God they are
impelled to write.
The Jesuits, in the ' Theologia Wirceburgensis, ' sum up
the subject in the following way: — The authorship of God
'may be conceived in three ways. First, by special assist-
ance, which preserves the writer from all error and falsehood.
Secondly, by inspiration, which impels the writer to the act
of writing, without, however, destroying his liberty, Third-
ly, by revelation, by which truths hitherto unknown are
manifested. ' They then affirm, ' that God specially in-
spired the sacred writers with the truths and matter ex-
pressed in the sacred books. "
Perhaps it may be more in accordance with the facts of
the case to invert the order, and to say that what we call
Inspiration, in the special and technical sense, includes the
three following operations of the Holy Ghost upon the mind
of the sacred writers: —
(1.) First, the impulse to put into writing the matter
which God wills they should record.
(2.) Secondly, the suggestion of the matter to be writto
whether by revelation of truths not previously known.
7-4 GOD THE AUTHOR
only by prompting of those things which were already with-
in the writer's knowledge.
(3.) Thirdly, the assistance which excludes liability to
error in writing all things, whatsoever may be suggested
to them by the Spirit of God to be written.
From this follow two corollaries : —
1. That in the Holy Scripture there can be no falsehood
or error.
2. That God is the author of all inspired books."
It is declared in the definition of the Vatican Council that
God is the Author of the books of the Old and New Testa-
ments with all their parts. We also assert that the various
inspired writers were authors of the respective books which
historv and tradition attribute to them. Therefore, there
is a concursus of two causes here, of two authors. A book
may be denned to be a " Contextus sententiarum seu sen-
suum scripto consignatus. " We here denominate book,
every complete component factor of the Old or New Testa-
ment, even though it consist of but a few sentences, as for
instance the Epistle to Philemon, consisting of but 25 verses,
comprised in one chapter. In every book or writing, there are
two elements, the material and the formal element. The
formal element comprises the "Complexus" of ideas and
judgments signified by the words and propositions in the
book. These by some are called the "res et sentential";
by others, the "sensa"; by Franzelin, the " Veritates. "
The material element of the book, "in fieri," is the con-
signing 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 denominate
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
GOD THE AUTHOR 75
the " veritates. " Now the relation of an author to his w< >rk
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, " 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 is to convey truth to the mind, and naught else,
the style or the selection of the words would not necessarily
need be the effect of the principal author. 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 for-
mal element of the book. God is the Author of all the books
of Scripture, and, therefore, he produced all the " veritates, "
or "res et sentential" therein contained. These are true
and inspired; the other part may be defective. God pro-
duced these "res et sentential" either by revelation or by
inspiration; by revelation, if the truths were impervious
to human reason, such as futura 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 communicate 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 the mixture of error.
We see thus that there is always a greater concursus than
the concursus generalis in inspiration. God does for the
inspired writer more than "conservare in esse." He is the
impelling 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. Though the inspired
writer is always viro Uvevfx,aTo<; 'Ayiov fyepo iievos , borne on,
76 CHAUVIN
impelled by the Holy Ghost, not always is this impelling
force active in the same way. It is different in prophecy
than it is in the inspiration which guided the Evangelists in
infallibly committing to "writing things to which they had
been eye-witnesses. Inspiration does not preclude the
examining of existing documents, the patient toil and re-
search which always accompany the natural acquisition of
knowledge. Moses may have made use of existing docu-
ments, when giving an account of Creation. But the cer-
tainty of inspiration is not measured by the certainty of
these existing documents, nor by the certainty of fallible
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.
It may not be amiss here to indicate some of the principal
writers on this theme in our times : Franzelin (De Divina
Traditione et Scriptura, Romae 1882): Ubaldi (Introductio
in Sac. Script. Romae 1888): Schmid (De Inspirat. Bibl.
Vi et Ratione, Brixinae 1885); Crets (De Divina Bibliorum
Inspiratione Lovanii 1886); Holzhey (Die Inspiration der
Heil. Schrift, Munchen 1895); Zanecchia (Divina Inspirat.
etc. Romae 1899, Revised 1903); Chauvin (L' Inspiration
des Divines Ecritures, Paris 1896); Billot (De Inspirat. Sac.
Script. Romae 1903); Pesch (De Inspirat. Sacrae Script.
Friburgi 1906).
Of the Abbe's Chauvin's work, the Dublin Review (1897
pp. 215 — 218) has the following favorable review:
"Although inspiration is very frequently spoken of, yet,
like progress, civilisation and liberty, it is rarely undersood.
The vast majority of those who refer to it do, no doubt, in-
tend to suggest some kind of mysterious influence from on
high; but their ideas are vague and indefinite. They think
of it as of a dark figure, veiled and hooded, that moves in
silence and never reveals its features.
CHAUVIX
"All will readily admit that inspiration necessarily im-
plies a divine influence. But divine influences are many;
and it is a task of unusual delicacy to define that specific in-
fluence which constitutes inspiration. There is a divine in-
fluence which actively pervades all creation and rules mighty
from end to end; but it is not inspiration. We call it
law and providence. Another kind of influence enriches man
with virtue, and blossoms out into holiness of life; but we
name it grace, not inspiration. Even when inspirations of
grace are mentioned by theologians, the word has not the
same meaning that it bears when we speak of the inspiration
of Scripture; for when a man has been inspired to write, we
say : 'God speaks thus,' but when a man under the influence
of grace makes an act of faith in the Creed, we do not say :
'God believes thus.' God is personally identified with in-\
spiration in a manner very different from that by which He'-,
is identified with the works of grace in general. Lastly, it'
is only by a divine influence that the Church is preserved
from error in all her solemn definitions of faith and morals.
But here again, this influence is not termed inspiration, but
merely assistance. Ecclesiastical definitions, although in-
fallible, are not inspired.
"What, then, is inspiration? What are our means for
detecting its presence in this or that particular instance?
Before we can venture to answer these questions we must
first determine what are the reliable sources of information
on the subject; but it is precisely in this preliminary work
of determination that discordant voices are making them-
selves most loudly heard. One company of explorers is con-
tent to accept, on the general consent of Christians, the
abridged Bible of protestant tradition as being truly inspired.
Starting with this assured fact, the discovery of what is
meant by inspiration is merely a matter of induction from
Biblical phenomena. The chief merit claimed for the system
is that it makes the doctrine of Biblical inspiration abso-
lutely secure against every form of literary and scientific
analysis. He who believes in the inspiration of Scripture
may, with unruffled serenity, admit the presence in the Bible
of flagrant contradictions, or gross historical errors, and of
78 CHAUVIN
a low moral tone ; for, since the Bible is inspired, the more
clearly we understand what the Bible actually is, the deeper
will be our insight into the nature of inspiration itself. So
far removed, then, are the results of analysis from being
opposed to the doctrine of inspiration, that they are an
essential factor in its due apprehension.
"Another company of searchers after inspiration have
been endowed by a merciful heaven with, or have created
for themselves, an a priori and quite subjective idea of the
true nature of inspiration. This idea they employ as a sort
of search-light which they steadily flash around, and are
then able to inform us of the varying degrees of purity in
which inspiration may be found, not only in the several
books of Scripture, but also in the literature of the world at
large. Unfortunately, the initial idea of inspiration is not
uniform, and the results of its application are consequently
divergent. In general, however, it seems to be taken for
something freshly informing, deeply suggestive, and highly
stimulating. The inspired writer is the man with a special
message to the world. Hence those solemn disquisitions on
the inspiration' of our modern prophets, Browning, Tennyson
Ruskin, and Carlyle.
"To readers desirous either of refreshing their memory,
or of acquiring clear ideas on this subject, we heartily recom-
mend the Abbe Chauvin's little book. Judged for what it
professes to be — an 'essai theclogique et critique' — it de-
serves all praise. Brief as it is, it leaves nothing to be
desired on the score of clearness ; in dealing with the central
points of the doctrine it is fuller, and certainly more able,
than many volumes far more pretentious. With acute mind
and independent judgment the author has availed himself
of the previous labors of Schmid, Crets, d'Hulst, Loisy,
Didiot, Brucker, Brandi, Holzhey, and others. He has thus
laid under contribution the most recent commentaries and
magazine articles on the encyclical Providentissimus Deus.
"The essay is divided into eight chapters, as follows:
The idea of inspiration ; its psychology ; false theories bearing
upon it; true and false tests of inspiration; the proof of
Scriptural inspiration ; the subject matter of inspiration ; the
CHAUVIN 79
controversy on verbal inspiration; the consequences of ple-
nary inspiration. Of these chapters, that on the psychoid
of inspiration is undoubtedly the most important and the
best. We are so interested in the essay that, even at the
risk of spoiling what the author has done so well, we shall
venture on a brief account of this main position.
"Inspiration implies a divine breath or movement by
which a man is stirred to write what God wishes to be written.
That movement plays along man's intellect, imagination,
memory, and will, till man becomes the responsive instru-
ment of the divine purpose. But man is a living instrument ,
and is moved by God in accordance with his free and living
nature, freely and deliberately — often with much painful
effort — to the desired goal. Hence the mental gifts, the
literary talents and characteristic qualities of each inspir
writer are employed, not destroyed, by God. St. Thomas's
principle here also stands good : 'Motus primi moventis non
recipitur uniformiter in omnibus . . . sed in unoquoque
secundum proprium modum.' We have not space to follow
the author in his patient analysis of the divine action on
man's several faculties, but he leads us to the clear conclu-
sion that, when God inspired the Scriptures He supernatu-
rally, and as a principal cause, employed the faculties of the
inspired writer, as His instruments in the psychological labor
which man would have undergone if he had been writing in
his own name instead of writing in the name of God. If
writing for himself, the man would have had the same labor,
but he would not have had the same divine impulse and
guidance, the same divine assistance, the same divine illum-
ination in the doing of his task. The whole result be!
not partly to God and partly to man, but in its entirety to
God and in its entirety to man. The effect, as a whole, pro-
ceeds from both God and man ; from God as the chief cau.
from man as the free and living instrument;;! cause. 'Ei
totus attribuitur instrumento, et principal! agenti etii
totus . . . sed totus ab utroque secundum, alium
dum.'
"On the principles of sound psychology m a only doesf.
mechanical speaking-tube theory, introduced by the Reform
SO METHOD OF INQUIRY
Churches, appear in all its grotesqueness and its inconsist-
ency with the plainest facts, but also does the theory of
some Catholic theologians who distinguish between 'verba'
and 'res et sententias' show itself to be most unnatural.
Inspiration covers everything the inspired writer writes —
thoughts, opinions, judgments, surmises, the collection and
arrangement of materials, method of treatment, style and
language. An inspired book is a living whole ; and the whole
is inspired."
Pesch's work merits still more approbation.
It has been said by eminent scholars that the Catholic
doctrine on inspiration is summed up in the one sentence,
authoritively defined by the Church: "God is the author of
the Holy Scriptures." Certain it is that all that is deter-
mined by the Church on this theme is drawn from that sure
principle. The Church has made a few applications of the
principle, but has left a very large field open. In entering
this field every writer must recognize that however much
he may differ from advocates of views differing from his own,
he is bound to refrain from branding with any note of in-
famy opinions which the Church has not yet condemned.
In all ages of the Church good men have been material here-
tics : and on the other hand the odium theologicum of those
who had a " zeal for God, but not according to knowledge"
(Rom. X. 2) has injured the very cause which they wished
to defend. It is only by toleration and patient examina-
tion of the views of all that we can advance our knowledge
of these deep problems. No right-minded, candid seeker
after truth will object to arguments against his opinions,
but personalities wound the opponent, without promoting
their author's side. If passion could be set aside, it would
be greatly beneficial to scriptural science if, of the sincere
scholars of the Church, there were a conference regarding
the different views on Inspiration, that all the argu-
ments pro and con might be weighed dispassionately, and
the best adopted.
• Of course that which we here state only applies to candid,
sincere seekers after truth. There are in the Church certain
sycophants who angle for popularity by copying the German
PROTESTANT THEORY Si
and English and French rationalists. They have no princi-
ples, but are like sponges filled with dirty water. These
merit only contempt.
Prof. Dods in his lecture on Inspiration declares as
follows :
' It is, then, only from the Bible itself we can learn what
an inspired book is. We may find many unexpected pecu-
liarities in the Bible, but these will not dismay us, if we have
not gone to it with a preconceived theory of what it ought
to be and of what inspiration must accomplish. The Bible
must not be forced into conformity with our Procrustean
theory of inspiration ; but we must allow our theory to be
f< »rmed by the Bible. If we should find on examination that-
much of what is human enters into the Bible, we must expand
our theory to include this. If we should find discrepancies
or inaccuracies, these must help us to our true theory.
" In Professor Bowne's small but excellent book on the
' Christian Revelation, ' he very truly says : ' The presence of
inspiration is discernible in the product, but the meaning and
measure of inspiration cannot be decided by abstract re-
flection, but only by the outcome. What inspiration is,
must be learned from what it does. We must not determine
the character of the books from the inspiration, but must
rather determine the nature of the inspiration from the
books' (pp. 44—45)-
"The problem in regard to inspiration is, to adjust truly
the Divine and the human factors. The various theories
which have been framed and held differ from one another
regarding the proportion which the human element in the
process and in the result bears to the Divine. "
No other view is consistent with the protestant principle
of the rejection of the obedience of faith to the Church's
teaching. It is true that the Bible is the only inspired book
in the world ; it is true that it is impossible a priori to estab-
lish a perfect system which will embrace every propositi' m :
but it is not true that we must come to the Bible with no
preconception of what it is. The Church of God, to whom
Christ promised infallibility and indefectibility, in the
exercise of her mission teaches us with authority that the
(6) H.S.
82 THE FATHERS
Bible is a book of God's authorship, that it is the word of
God, and every theory based upon an examination of the
Bible itself must be forced into conformity with this infallible
definition.
We see therefore that the field in which Catholic theolo-
gians may differ is in applying the principles which the
Church has defined to the specific statements of the Bible;
and here it must be granted that the divergency of opinion
is very great.
Many of the difficulties which science and the investiga-
tions of criticism have brought up were unknown to the
Fathers, and we find in them an unquestioning acceptance
of the Scriptures as the word of God. Clement of Rome
declares : ' Ye have searched the Scriptures, which are true,
which were given through the Holy Ghost; and Ye know
that nothing unrighteous or counterfeit is written in them ' '
(I. Cor. 45).
Justin the Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, Chap.
VII. clearly asserts the inspiration of the Holy Books :
' There existed, long before this time, certain men more
ancient than all those who are esteemed philosophers, both
righteous and beloved by God, who spoke by the Divine
Spirit, and foretold events which would take place, and
which are now taking place. They are called prophets.
These alone both saw and announced the truth to men, neither
reverencing nor fearing any man, not influenced by a desire
for glory, but speaking those things alone which they saw
and which they heard, being filled with the Holy Spirit.
Their writings are still extant, and he who has read them is
very much helped in his knowledge of the beginning and end
of things, and of those matters which the philosopher ought
to know, provided he has believed them. For they did not
use demonstration in their treatises, seeing that they were
witnesses to the truth above all demonstration, and worthy
of belief; and those events which have happened, and those
which are happening, compel you to assent to the utterances
made by them, although, indeed, they were entitled to credit
on account of the miracles which they performed, since they
both glorified the Creator, the God and Father of all things,
THE FATHERS 83
and proclaimed His Son, the Christ [sent] by Him: which,
indeed, the false prophets, who are filled with the lying un-
clean spirit, neither have done nor do, but venture to work
certain wonderful deeds for the purpose of astonishing men,
and glorify the spirits and demons of error."
Again in the same treatise he answers Trypho :
"If you spoke these words, Trypho, and then kept silence
in simplicity and with no ill intent, neither repeating what
goes before nor adding what comes after, you must be for-
given ; but if [you have done so] because you imagined that
you could throw doubt on the passage, in order that I might
say the Scriptures contradicted each other, you have erred.
But I shall not venture to suppose or to say such a thing;
and if a Scripture which appears to be of such a kind be
brought forward, and if there be a pretext [for saying] that it
is contrary [to some other], since I am entirely convinced
that no Scripture contradicts another, I shall admit rather
that I do not understand what is recorded, and shall strive
to persuade those who imagine that the Scriptures are con-
tradictory, to be rather of the same opinion as myself."
Athenagoras applying to every inspired agent the name
of prophet describes their inspiration thus :
"But we have for witnesses of the things we apprehend
and believe, prophets, men who have pronounced concerning
God and the things of God, guided by the Spirit of God. And
you too will admit, excelling all others as you do in intel-
ligence and in piety towards the true God that it would be
irrational for us to cease to believe in the Spirit from God,
who moved the mouths of the prophets like musical instru-
ments, and to give heed'to mere human opinions." (A Plea
for Christians).
Irenaeus makes the Holy Ghost the Author of the Scrip-
tures. In II. Against Heresies, XXVIII. 2, he thus de-
clares :
"If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all
those things in Scripture which are made the subject of in-
vestigation, yet let us not on that account seek after any
other God besides Him who really exists. For this is the
very greatest impiety. We should leave things of that nature
S4 THE FATHERS
to God who created us, being most properly assured that
the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by
the Word of God and His 'Spirit ; but we, inasmuch as we are
inferior to, and later in existence than, the Word of God and
His Spirit, are on that very account* destitute of the knowl-
edge of His mysteries. And there is no cause for wonder if
this is the case with us as respects things spiritual and heav-
enly, and such as require to be made known to us by revela-
tion, since many even of those things which lie at our very
feet (I mean such as belong to this world, which we handle,
and see, and are in close contact with) transcend our knowl-
edge, so that even these we must leave to God."
Again ibid. Bk. IV. II. 3 Irenoeus enunciates the Catholic
doctrine :
"But since the writings (literce) of Moses are the words of
Christ, He does Himself declare to the Jews, as John has re-
corded in the Gospel: 'If ye had believed Moses, ye would
have believed Me : for he wrote of Me. But if ye believe not
his writings, neither will ye believe My words. 'f He thus
indicates in the clearest manner that the writings of Moses
are His words. If, then, [this be the case with regard] to
Moses, so also, beyond a doubt, the words of the other
prophets are His [words], as I have pointed out. And again,
the Lord Himself exhibits Abraham as having said to the
rich man, with reference to all those who were still alive :
'If they do not obey Moses and the prophets, neither, if any
one were to rise from the dead and go to them, will they
believe him' "J
And again ibid. XI. 1 : "And how do the Scriptures
testify of Him, unless all things had ever been revealed and
shown to believers by one and the same God through the
Word ; He at one time conferring with His creature, and at
another propounding His law ; at one time, again reproving,
at another exhorting, and then setting free His servant, and
adopting him as a son (in filium) ; and, at the proper time,
bestowing an incorruptible inheritance, for the purpose of
bringing man to perfection ? For He formed him for growth
* Or, that degree, f John V. 46, 47. % Luke XVI. 31.
THE FATHERS 85
and increase, as the Scripture says: 'Increase and mul-
tiply.'"*
Origen is very explicit: "Since, in our investigation of
matters of such importance, not satisfied with the common
opinions, and with the clear evidence of visible things,
we take in addition, for the proof of our statements, testi-
monies from what are believed by us to be divine writings,
viz., from that which is called the Old Testament, and that
which is styled the New, and endeavor by reason to con-
firm our faith ; and as we have not yet spoken of the Scrip-
tures as divine, come and let us, as if by way of an epi-
tome, treat of a few points respecting them, laying down
those reasons which lead us to regard them as divine writ-
ings." (De Principiis. Bk. IV. i.)
The same doctrine is consistently propounded by St.
Theophilus of Antioch, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Cyprian,
Lactantius, Marinus Victorinus, Hilary of Poitiers, and
others.
Clement of Alexandria believes in a full inspiration of the
Holy Scriptures: "I could adduce ten thousand Scriptures
of which not 'one tittle shall pass away' f without being
fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord the Holy Spirit hath
spoken these things." (Exhortation to the Heathen, IX. I
Again in the Stromata, VII. 16, Clement declares: "Ac-
cordingly, those fall from this eminence who follow not God
whither he leads. And he leads us in the inspired Scrip-
tures." All his writings are full of reverences to the Holy
Scriptures as the infallible word of God.
Space is not afforded for the numerous passages from the
works of St. Basil in which he declares the Scriptures to be
divine. Let one short passage serve as an illustration of his
views. In his letter (XLII.) to Chilo he declares: "Never
neglect reading, especially of the New Testament, because
verv frequently mischief comes of reading the Old ; not be-
cause what is written is harmful, but because the minds of
the injured are weak. All bread is nutritious, but it may
be injurious to the sick. Just so all Scripture is God inspiiv
* Gen. I. 2S. f Matt. V. iS.
gg THE FATHERS
and profitable * and there is nothing in it unclean: only to
him who thinks it is unclean, to him it is unclean.
St Athanasius to Marcellinus (Migne 27. 11) speaks thus
of Holy Scripture: "All Scripture, 0 Son, both oi the
Old and of the New Testament is divinely inspired and useful
for teaching, as it is written."
In his Thirty-ninth Letter St. Athanasius appeals to the
constant tradition regarding the divinely inspired Scripture :
"In proceeding to make mention of these things I shall
adopt, to commend my undertaking, the pattern of Luke the
Evangelist, saving on my own account: 'Forasmuch as
some have taken in hand,' t to reduce into order for them-
selves the books termed apocryphal, and to mix them up with
the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which we have
been fully persuaded, as they who from the beginning were
eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, delivered to the
fathers ■ it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto
bv true brethren, and having learned from the beginning
to set before you the books included m the Canon, and
handed down, and accredited as Divine."
One passage will illustrate the belief of Gregory of Nyssa :
"The Scripture, 'given by inspiration of God,' as the Apostle
call, it is the Scripture of the Holy Spirit, and its intention
is the profit of men. For 'every scripture,' he says, 'is given
by inspiration of God and is profitable;' and the profit is
varied and multiform, as the Apostle says-'for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. T
(Against Eunomius Bk. VII. 1.)
It is superfluous to review the enormous bulk of writings
of the Latin Fathers. No one will deny that they unani-
mously taught the doctrine on inspiration which the Councils
of the Church has now defined. St. Ambrose (On the Holy
Spirit Bk III. XVI. 112) clearly enunciates the doctrine:
" How then, does He not possess all that pertains to God,
Who is named by priests in baptism with the Father and the
Son and is invoked in the oblations, is proclaimed by the
Seraphim in heaven with the Father and the Son, dwells
* Cf. 2 Tim. III. 16. t 4a i.e. Ezra and Nehemiah. J 2 Tim. III. 15.
THE FATHERS s7
in the Saints with the Father and the Son, is poured upon
the just, is given as the source of inspiration to the prophel
And for this reason in the divine Scripture all is called
deoirvevcTTo*; , because God inspires what the Spirit has spoken."
St. Jerome fills his works with declarations like these:
' I am not, I repeat, so ignorant as to suppose that any of
the Lord's words is either in need of correction, or is not
divinely inspired." (To Marcella Letter XXVII.); "the
Scriptures were written and promulgated by the Holy
Ghost." (On Ephesians I. io); "all the Scriptures were
written by the one Holy Spirit, and therefore are called
one book." (On Isaiah XXIX. 9.)
We shall close these few representative quotations with
these declarations of St. Augustine: "For it seems to me
that most disastrous consequences must follow upon our
believing that anything false is found in the sacred books :
that is to say, that the men by whom the Scripture has been
given to us, and committed to writing, did put down in these
books anything false. It is one question whether it may
be at any time the duty of a good man to deceive ; but it is
another question whether it can have been the duty of a
writer of Holy Scripture to deceive : nay, it is not another
question — it is no question at all. For if you once admit
into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement
as made in the way of duty,* there will not be left a single
sentence of those books which, if appearing to any one diffi-
cult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal
rule be explained away, as a statement in which, inten-
tionally, and under a sense of duty, the author declared what
was not true. " (Letter XXVIII. 3) : " For I confess to your
Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour
only to the canonical books of Scripture : of these alone do
I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free
from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by
anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not
hesitate to suppose that either the MS. is faulty, or the trans-
lator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I
* Officiosum mcndacium.
88 THE FATHERS
myself have failed to understand it. As to all other writings,
in reading them, however great the superiority of the authors
to myself in sanctity a~nd learning, I do not accept their
teaching as true on the mere ground of the opinion being
held by them; but only because they have succeeded in con-
vincing my judgment of its truth either by means of these
canonical writings themselves, or by arguments addressed to
my reason."
With the Fathers there was not much thought of the
analysis of the concept of inspiration ; they were content to
affirm the canonical books to be the word of God, without
analysing the question which in our day is the first question
in divine science.
In the formulary of faith called " The Ancient Statutes of
the Church" which is falsely attributed to the Fourth Council
of Carthage (Mansi) it is demanded of the bishop to make
profession of faith that God is the author of both the Old and
the New Testaments. This formula has been accepted as the
Catholic doctrine. The Council of Trent reaffirmed it; and
the Vatican Council explained and promulgated it.
The older theologians generally ascribe to the divine
element in Scripture an excessive part. The Faculties of
Louvain and Douai declared : "It is an intolerable and
great blasphemy, if any shall affirm that any otiose word can
be found in Scripture. All the words of Scripture are so
many sacraments (or mysteries). Every phrase, syllable,
tittle, and point is full of a divine sense, as Christ says in St.
Matthew, ' a jot or a tittle shall not pass from the law. "
Melchior Canus tempers the doctrine somewhat.
"In his second book De Locis Theol., after stating and
refuting the opinions ' of those who thought that the sacred
writers in the canonical books did not always speak by the
Divine Spirit, ' he establishes the following proposition :
that ' every particle of the canonical books was written by
the assistance of the Holy Spirit.' He says, 'I admit that
the sacred writers had no need of a proper and express reve-
lation in writing every particle of the Scripture ; but that
every part of the Scripture was written by a peculiar in-
stinct and impulse of the Holy Ghost, I truly and rightly
MKLCHIOR CAXUS AND BANNEZ 89
contend.' After saying that some things were known to
them by supernatural revelation, and others by natural
knowledge, he adds, 'that they did not need a supernatural
light and express revelation to write these latter truths,
but they needed the presence and peculiar help of the Holy
Ghost, that these things, though they were human truths
and known by natural reason, should nevertheless be written
divinely and without any error.'" (De Loc. Theol. II. 16).
Dominicus Banez is deeper and more explicit : " For the
establishment of truth we must know that when it is said
that a Scripture is inspired of God, it can be understood in
three ways. The first manner (of inspiration) has place
when the things to be written were unknown to the writer,
and were made known by the inspiration of God.
The second way is when the thing which is written was
indeed known to the writer, but the impulse to write it came
from a special moving and inspiration of God ; and there-
fore the writer is protected by a special assistance of the Holy
Ghost lest by malice or forgetfulness he should be deceived
in anything.
In the third way Scripture is said to be inspired, for the
reason that God not onlv revealed hidden things to the
writer, or moved him to write things known to him, and up-
held him lest he should err, but also suggested and, as it wen ,
dictated the very words which he should write.
Therefore let this be the first conclusion : The Holv
Scripture of which we speak proceeds from divine revela-
tion sometimes in the first manner and sometimes in the
second. This should be the firm belief of all Catholics.
And it is proven ; because (the Scripture) in some parts
contains many things which transcend every created mind
such as the Mystery of the Trinity and the Incarnation and
many other things; in other parts it contains things which
fall within the compass of natural reason and experience.
But in all these things even the most diligent and attentive
writer may at times be deceived <>r may forgel . Therefore,
in all these things partly by revelation, partly by impelling
and assisting, the Holy Ghost was with the writer lest he
should deviate from the truth.
90 BANNEZ
The second conclusion : The Holy Ghost inspired not
only the matter of the Scriptures but also suggested and
dictated every word by which they should be written. "For
if it were left to the free will of the sacred writer to choose
the words by which he should express or write the thoughts,
he might err in expressing what was revealed to him ; and
thus in the Scriptures there might be found falsehood. "
But the great Dominican felt obliged to temper this
doctrine in his third conclusion: "If anyone should affirm
that the composition of the words is often left to the know-
ledge and diligence of the sacred writer in such a manner
however, that such a one affirms the necessary assistance of
the Holy Ghost lest the writer err in the words or in their
composition, he says nothing so contrary to faith, that the
assertion should be gravely censured ; although to me the
opinion seems not true or altogether safe on account of the
argument adduced to prove the preceding conclusion. This
conclusion (that verbal inspiration is not of faith) is proven
by the fact that when the sacred writer writes the things
which he sees, in order that the Scripture be called inspired
it is enough that the Holy Ghost move his mind to write
these things, and that he be guided by the Holy Ghost lest
he forget what he is commanded to write. Therefore the
same cooperation of the Holy Ghost will suffice for the
composition of words which the writer of himself may effect.
"Nevertheless it is safer and freer from blame to say
that as the Holy Ghost moves the mind of the writer to
write, so also he inspires the words and composition. And
this is proven, for, unless we say thus, we shall be scarcely
able to assign a difference between the Holy Scriptures and
the definitions of Councils. For in both cases the Holy
Ghost assists lest there should be error. And if in both
cases the words and their composition be left to human in-
dustry, it follows that there is no difference, for also the
definitions of Councils by the assistance of the Holy Ghost
contain infallible truth," (Schol. Comment, in D. Thorn.
Q.I.)
The Thomistic theologians quite generally defended
verbal inspiration. Most recently Zanecchia (Div. In-spir.
LESSIUS AND HA.MEL 91
ad Mentem S. Thomae, Romae, 1899, 1903, p. 175) declares:
' The action of the Holy Ghost in inspiration is not restricted
to the conception of the ideas and to the communicating of
them to the inspired writer ; but extends itself to the very
writing, that is to the words, the expressions, the style ; in a
word, to all that which is written by the inspired writers,
and to the manner in which they expressed these things in
writing. "
Against this rigid system of inspiration a reaction was
inaugurated by Lessius and Hamel. In 1586, Lessius and
Hamel, in their lectures at Louvain, taught the following
propositions : —
1. ''Ut aliquid sit Scriptura Sacra, non est necessarium
singula ejus verba inspirata esse a Spiritu Sancto." "That a
book be Holy Scripture, it is not necessary that every word
of it be inspired by the Holy Ghost. "
2. ''Non est necessarium ut singular veritates et sen-
tential sint immediate a Spiritu Sancto ipsi Scriptori inspira-
tae. " "It is not necessary that every truth or sentence be
immediately inspired into the writer by the Holy Ghost."
3. '' Liber aliquis (qualis forte est secundus Machabae-
orum) humana industria sine assistentia Spiritus Sancti
scriptus, (si Spiritus Sanctus postea testetur nihil ibi esse
falsum, efficitur Scriptura Sacra."* "A book (such as per-
haps the 2nd of Maccabees), written by human industry,
without the assistance of the Holy Ghost — if the Holy Spirit
afterwards testify that nothing false is contained in it —
becomes Holy Scripture. ' '
These propositions were at once assailed. The arch-
bishops of Cambrai and Mechlin sent them to the Faculties
of Douai and Lou vain, j They were condemed by both.
The third was especially centured. Estius, who drew up
the censure, in his "Commentary on the Epistles " gives his
<>wn opinion as follows: " From this passage it is rightly and
truly established, that all the sacred and canonical Scripture
is written by the dictation of the Holy Ghost ; so that not
only the sense, but every word, and the order of the words,
* See Theol. Wirceburg. torn. i. p. 23. f Ibid.
92 LESSIUS AND HAMEL
and the whole arrangement is from God, as if He were
speaking or writing in person. For this is the meaning of
the Scripture being divinely inspired."*
Lessius and Hamel appealed to the Sorbonne. The
Faculty of Paris did not approve either of the Jesuit propo-
sitions, nor of the censures of Lou vain and Douai. The
Faculties of Mayence, Treves, Ingoldstadt, and Rome
disapproved the censures ; but Sixtus V. imposed silence
until the Holy See should pronounce. The subject has
never been decided. The censures are given by D'Argentre,
in his " Collectio Judiciorum de novis Erroribus, ' ' and the
Jesuit propositions are defended by P. Simon, in his"His-
toire Critique du Texte du Nouveau Testament."
Lessius defended himself in a special treatise entitled,
"Responsio ad Censuram Assertionum de Scriptura." In
this he states : "In these propositions there can be no diffi-
culty if they be understood as they have otherwise been ex-
plained by us. As regards the two first we do not deny that
the sacred writers wrote by a peculiar inspiration, and direc-
tion, and assistance of the Holy Ghost. But this we say
that for every sentence and every word it was not necessary
that they should receive a new and positive inspiration from
the Holy Spirit, that is a new illumination by which in a
new manner they should know the truths which they wrote,
and should see the words which the Holy Ghost wished them
to use ; but that it was sufficient that the Holy Ghost should
in a special way induce them and move them to write the
things which they had heard or seen, or in any other way
known, and that he should assist them in regard to the
expressions and the words, and where need was, direct them.
"This opinion seems to me the more probable one. First,
because the Evangelists and other sacred writers seem not
to have needed a new revelation to write the things they
saw or heard from faithful witnesses, as Paul learned in a
brief time, not from men but from Jesus Christ, the Gospel.
And John wrote that which he saw, as is evident I.Jo. I., and
in the same way Matthew wrote. But Mark wrote what he
* Estii Comment, in Ep. 2 ad Timoth. cap. III. 16.
LESSIUS AXD HAMEL 93
heard from Peter. . . . And Luke what he received
from those who had seen, as he testifies in the beginning of
his Gospel. In the same way I should believe that by the
sacred historians were written many things which they had
seen or heard without a new revelation. Secondly, it is
proved from reason. For the Holy Ghost employs fitting
instruments, as he finds them ; and as he is not wanting in
necessary things neither is he redundant in sufficient things.
And men who know a thing with certainty and have the art
of expressing thought are capable of writing it. Therefore
if the Holy Ghost wishes to use them as instruments and
amanuenses it is not necessary that he reveal to them these
things anew, but is enough that he select them for his aman-
uenses and move them by a special impulse to write what they
already know, and that he assist them in a special way in all
words and sentences, that they commit not the least error.
"For the better explaining of this we must know that a
thing may be written through inspiration of the Holy Ghost
in two ways. First, that the Holy Ghost by a new super-
natural inspiration make manifest all the things to be writ-
ten and all the words, and thus the Prophets wrote their
prophecies, as is evident in Jeremiah XXXYL, who dictated
his prophecies with such facility that he seemed to read them.
Secondly, that the Holy Ghost by a special impulse should
excite and move the one whom he appoints to write the
things which he already has seen, heard, or in any other way
known, and that the Holy Ghost assist him in every word
and sentence. And I hold it to be probable that many
Evangelists and sacred historians wrote thus, so that they
needed not a new and positive inspiration and illumination
about every thing. And I am the more inclined to this
opinion for the reason that by a contrary principle, to wit,
that they believe every word to be dictated by the Holy
Spirit by a new inspiration, many heretics of our day try to
prove that the boo] Maccabees are not canonical Scrip-
ture. ... If it were thus St. Luke would not say tl
he wrote the things which he received from the Apostles wh< »
had seen them, but he would say (that he wrote) the things
which he received from the Holy Ghost who specially die-
94 LESSIUS AND HAMEL
tated them. . . . Now it is enough for the sacred his-
torians that God by a special impulse move them to write the
things which they already know, and infallibly assist them
in all things. By this is not removed the labor of calling to
mind things heard, seen, and read, and of coordinating them,
and, as one judges most fitting, of expressing them in proper
words. Wherefore it comes to pass that the more eloquent
speak more eloquently, and the less eloquent less ornately."
It is evident here that the difficulty lies in the ambiguous
use of the term inspiration. Lessius did not distinguish
between revelation and inspiration. In his explanation he
makes his meaning clear, that he extends inspiration to all
the Scriptures, and in a proper degree to the words them-
selves ; while he restricts revelation to those things which the
writers did not know by natural means. If this distinction
be inserted we believe that no one has written on the theme
more clearly or correctly.
In treating the third proposition Lessius is no less fortu-
nate: 'The third opinion, leaving out the clause in paren-
theses, seems to me wholly certain, unless there be question
about terms. Let us suppose that by a pious man well
furnished with the knowledge, a pious history be written by
the impulse of the Holy Ghost, and that the writer without
the special assistance of inspiration write the truth, and com-
mit no error. If the Holy Ghost, by some prophet or other-
wise, attest that what is there written be true and saving, I
see no reason why that book should not have the authority
of Holy Scripture, since it has the same motive of credibility
that any other prophecy has, namely, divine authority.
And I say this not that I assert that such was the method of
inspiration of any part of Holy Scripture ; nay, more, I believe
that in fact nothing of this kind is found in Holy Scripture,
but I speak only of possibility. Hence the proposition is
conditional. If God willed he could have acted in this
manner in the Scriptures, for it does not imply a contradic-
tion, and such Scripture would be equal to the other parts
in divine authority."
We see here that Lessius has retracted somewhat. By
cutting out the parenthetical clause he removes the question
LESSIUS AXD HA.MI-I. 95
to the region of speculations on the possible, and no man can
object to his reasoning.
The Faculties of Louvain and Douai had charged Lessius
with the error of the Anomcei, an obscure sect described, by
S. Epiphanius. Their capital error was to divide the Scrip-
tures into the divine and human parts, and to deny authority
to the things which the writers wrote as men. Lessius in
his defense shows how absurd it was to accuse him of their
error, and adds: "We say, therefore, that all parts of the
Scripture are of infallible truth, and are of the Holy Ghost
who inspires by a new revelation, or moves by a special im-
pulse, and assists in every word and sentence ; and as we have
elsewhere abundantly demonstrated, we hold that there is
not in them the least error, for it would redound upon the
Holy Ghost, and the authority of the whole Scripture would
t otter ; although it is not necessary that the Holy Ghost
inspire everything,in a special manner illumining the writer. "
(In Schneeman Controv. de div. grat. Friburgi, 1881, 467
seqq.)
We see here the same confusion between inspiration and
revelation.
The Faculty of Louvain answered Lessius in a treatise
called " Antapologia, " and Lessius again delivered a defence
in which he makes the issues still clearer. Among other
things he says that even when God did not give to the sacred
writers new revelations, "he directed them in everything, lest
they should write other things, or in a manner different from
his good-pleasure ; but this took place without a new revela-
tion, or new mode of understanding. Thus it is plain in
what sense the writer of II. Maccab. could declare his tongue
to be the pen of a ready scribe, because he was moved and
directed by the Holy Ghost; and also (it is plain) in what
sense he could not so declare, for the Holy Ghost did not
beforehand form all the words in his mind, as one does who
in the proper sense dictates For the concept
oi Holy Scripture does not essentially include that all the
material words be dictated by the Holy Gh<>st. but this
an accessory and ornament (of inspiration). Otherwise if
the Hebrew and Greek exemplars were lost the Church
96 LESSIUS AND HAMEL
would be without the Holy Scriptures. Nay, more, the
Latin Church would not have the Scriptures, for the Latin
edition would not be Scripture. . . . But if we look
closely we shall see that the essence of Holy Scripture con-
sists in this that the proposition be the word of God in
whatever tongue expressed. . . . Concerning the third
proposition .... that conjecture in which is said
that perhaps the book of Maccabees was written by human
industry, I said not as my opinion, but as the opinion of
those whom I have before cited but not approved, who think
the author to have been a pagan, and the book to have ac-
quired authority from the Apostles and from the Church.
Which opinion Sixtus of Sienna expresses with sufficient
clearness (Bib. Sacr. L. 8, haer. 12 resp. ad 7) where he says:
'It matters not what is the opinion of the Jews concerning
these books, since the Catholic Church receives them into
her canon ; and it derogates nothing from their authority
if they be written by a pagan, since the authority of a book
depends not on the author but on the authority of the
Church ; and that which she receives must be true and in-
fallible, whoever he said to be the author, whom I should not,
dare pronounce to be either pagan writer or sacred writer.
This is his opinion. We did not approve this opinion ;
but we said the author (of Maccabees) was a faithful man,
as it is fitting that a sacred writer should be. . . . As
regards that third opinion, I believe and have always be-
lieved that there exists no such book which was written
without the assistance, impulse and direction of the Holy
Ghost." (Ibid. 387 sqq.)
Estius, one of the chief opponents of Lessius, thus formu-
lates the opinion of the faculty of Louvain : "Rightly and
truly it is established that all holy and canonical Scripture
is written by the dictation of the Holy Ghost, in a manner
so that not only the matter, but also every word, and the
order of the words and the whole structure is of Gdd, as
though himself speaking and writing." (Estius on II. Tim.
HI. 16.)
In the heat of the controversy that was waged about
divine grace, Lessius was misunderstood and misrepresented.
LESSIUS AND HAMEL \)~
His statements were torn from their context, and often
garbled into a distorted meaning. It is true he used an
ambiguous term in his first two propositions ; but his explan
ation does honor to his knowledge and his faith. His third
proposition is not well enunciated. His own expunging of
the parenthesis is a retractation ; but dealing with a possi-
bility he utters nothing contrary to faith. As Bishop
Gasser rightly argued in the Vatican Council, that Council's
condemnation of the theory of a subsequent inspiration does
not apply to Lessius. He spoke of a possibility ; the Council
spoke of the existing books. Moreover, Lessius admits into
his hypothetical book the element of present inspiration ;
because the Holy Ghost must approve the book "through
a prophet, or in some other manner." Therefore Lessius
makes the authority of the book the effect of the Holy
Ghost. For instance let us suppose, as every one is free
to do, that Jason who wrote the original of II. Maccab.
was not inspired. Let us suppose that the writer who
abridged these books into the one book of II. Maccab.
wrote no word of his own, but only selected from the
five books. Still the element of inspiration would be
there, not disclosing new truths; but moving the writer
to make the abridgment, and positively aiding him to ar-
range these things into an infallible book. Of course we are
speaking of a mere hypothesis ; for it seems evident that the
writer of Maccabees did not servilely copy passages from
Jason ; but compendiously wrote for a religious end certain
things, in an epoch which had been more extensively de-
scribed by the historian Jason.
Of Lessius' three propositions Bellarmine speaks thus :
'The three propositions on Scripture, enunciated without
explanation, sound bad, and are liable to calumny. But
Father Lessius has rightly explained the two first. For the
third he has recently written an apology, and although he
has not satisfied me fully, yet the opinion as modified and
tempered by him seems tolerable." (Apud Schneeman, op.
cit.)
The system of inspiration taught by Bellarmine in the
main agrees with the two first propositions of Lessius. Thus
(7) H. S.
98 SUAREZ
he declares: "The first is that the Scripture is the word of
God immediately revealed, and written as it were by the
dictation of God. . . . But this is not to be understood
as though the sacred writers always had new revelations, and
wrote what they beforehand were ignorant of ; for it is cer-
tain that the Evangelists Matthew and John wrote what they
saw; but Mark and Luke, what they heard, as Luke declares
in the beginning of his Gospel. The sacred writers are said
therefore to have an immediate revelation, and to have writ-
ten the words of God himself, either because certain new
things, before unknown, were revealed to them ... or
because God immediately inspired and moved the writers
to write the things which they had seen and heard, and di-
rected them lest they should err in any matter." (De Cone.
I. 2. 12.)
Suarez defines Holy Scripture to be "a writing by the
impulse of the Holy Ghost, who dictated not only the sense
but also the words." After describing the necessity of
verbal inspiration, he tempers the doctrine as follows: ''In
two ways the words of Holy Scripture may be understood to
be of the Holy Ghost, either by a special antecedent motion
or only by an assistance, and as it were, safeguarding. The
first way is when the Holy Ghost either imprints the mental
word by infused ideas, or specially moves and calls up pre-
existing ideas, and this mode is the most proper to (the Holy
Ghost), and the most perfect, and most probably was fol-
lowed when the mysteries to be written were supernatural,
and surpassed human reason.
But it seems not necessary, although recent learned men
so teach, that always the words be dictated in this special
way. For when a sacred writer writes something which
is of natural reason and within the compass of the senses, it
seems sufficient that the Holy Spirit specially assist him and
save him from all error and untruth and from all words
which are not profitable or becoming to Holy Scripture, re-
moving everything which might suggest such (unfitting)
•words, and for the rest permitting the writer to use his mem-
ory, and his ideas, and diligence in writing as Luke acknowl-
edges in the beginning of his Gospel. It is enough there-
MARCHINI 99
fore that either in one way or in the other according to the
exigency of the matter, the words be of the Holy Ghost."
To the question: Whether there be anything in the
Holy Scriptures which was not written by the action of the
Holy Ghost, and consequently is not Holy Scripture, Suarez
replies: "The Holy Writer writes nothing purelv of him-
self, but everything and each thing is by the direction of the
Holy Ghost." (De Fide V. 3.)
A classic writer on this theme is Marchini (t1 7 73) - In
his work De Divinitate et Canonicitate Sacrorum Bibliorum,
Art. V., he defines the concept of inspiration: "The first
question which demands solution is whether the Holy Ghost
placed every word in the sacred writer's mind and mouth.
This truth is evident to those who study the question that
not to leave to the writer's natural faculties the selection of
the words and the diction is needless and superfluous for
our defence of the truth, dignity, and infallibility of Holy
Scripture. It is enough for this defence that as regards the
things written, God infuse them into the writer's mind, or
call them up in his mind, and that he assist him that he
employ apt words, and leave aside unfitting ones. Win-
therefore should the Holy Ghost inspire every word, who is
neither wanting in the necessary, nor redundant in the
superfluous?" Marchini confirms this from the sacred write
diversity of style, from the fact that the same thing is de-
scribed in different words by different writers, from the
literary imperfections of Scripture, and from the authority of
the versions. He promulgates more accurately Lessius'
principle that revelation does not extend to all parts of
.Scripture. He defines inspiration to be "a special impulse
of the Holv Ghost to write, and a directing and assistance
governing the mind and soul of the writer which permits
him not to err, and causes him to write what God wills."
Marchini strongly condemns "the error of those who
vii date the Scriptures by teaching that in certain minor things
as they say, not necessary to salvation, the Prophets and
Apostles wrote merely as men without that special acti 1
of God, without which a book can not be divine."
alleges as proof II. Tim. III. 16; II. Peter. I. 21. and the
100 FRANZ ELIN
authority of the Fathers. He declares that the whole
authority of the Scriptures would totter if in minor things,
errors be admitted, since certain limits between great and
small can not be admitted." Marchini differentiates the
Hofy Scriptures from other infallible documents by the fact
that a positive divine action pervades the whole Scripture.
And, he says, "this divine afflatus or inspiration can be
present, even though God does not by a special action fur-
nish the words nor the sentences. . . That is, if the Holy
Ghost assists the writer whom he beforehand moved to
write; if he aptly suggests that which he wishes written, if
perchance the writer's memory fail him ; if he enlightens the
mind with that light which expels all pernicious ignorance,
and removes rashness; if he strengthens with such power
that things are written faithfully, plainly, and consistently;
if he brings to the mind things hidden, sublime and unknown;
if he leaves no part of Scripture deprived of his protection,
surely the books will be written by God's inspiration, al-
though the manner of speech, and the sentences often pro-
ceed from man's mind, memory, study, thought, and dili-
gence. "
Among the great theologians of the XIX. Century,
Cardinal Franzelin holds an eminent place. His system of
inspiration has been made the subject of a special attack by
that reaction which in our day has set in towards a more
liberal view of inspiration. In his work "Tractatus de
Divina Traditione et Scriptura" (Ed. 3, Romae, 1882) he
treats the question of inspiration at length. Among other
things he declares that the books of Scripture are of divine
authority "for the reason that they are the books of God,
and God is their author by his supernatural action on the
human co-writers, which action by ecclesiastical usage
drawn from the Scriptures themselves is called inspiration. "
" A book is divine in the strict sense for the reason that it
is written by God through the instrumentality of a man
whom God so moves to write, and in whom God so operates
in writing, that God himself in the strict sense should be
considered the principal Author. This supernatural and ex-
traordinary action of God is called inspiration" (Thesis II.)
FRAXZEL1X 101
From intrinsic and extrinsic evidence Franzelin places
the essence of inspiration in a charisma gratis datum enlight-
ening so that the minds of inspired men understand in
order to write the truths which by Scripture God wishes to
give to his Church, and the wills are moved to consign these
only to writing; and thus assisted man under the action of
God, the principal cause, infallibly executes the divine
counsel. Hence distinguishing between inspiration and
assistance, inspiration must be said to embrace the truths,
and the formal word ; while assistance is extended to the
material words." (Thesis III.)
The teaching of Lessius that revelation is not essential
to inspired Scripture has now become the universal teaching.
Franzelin distinguishes the formal part of a book which
he calls the veritates from the material part, that is the words.
He demands inspiration as he has described it for the formal
element ; but for the words he requires only an assistance to
guarantee that they aptly express the thoughts : " Regarding
the words it is clear that the truths, that is the thoughts of
the principal Author, can not be expressed in writing unless
terms be chosen fitting to express the sense. If therefore,
God by his inspiration of the things and thoughts thus acts
on the inspired man to the intent that he write, so that the
writing, infallibly in virtue of the divine operation, truly
and sincerely contains the thoughts of God, there must ac-
company the divine inspiration or be included in it such a
divine operation that the man writing, not only actually elect,
but also infallibly elect terms apt truthfully and sincerely
to express the inspired substance and sentences, and that he
be thus made infallible in choosing words and other things
which pertain to the material part (of the inspired writings).
A man inspired in mind and will to write the thoughts
God, but left to himself in the election of the terms would
remain fallible in expressing the inspired thoughts ; and by
this therefore it would not follow infallibly that a book
written by such inspiration would be in the full sense in-
spired Scripture and the word of God . ' '
"From what has been said it is evident what is this divine
operation which we declare to accompany inspiration. Tl
102 FRANZELIN
aim of most, at least, of the Holy books is such that the for-
mal object of the book is not affected if the same things and
sentences he expressed by different words or different
style, provided that words apt and befitting the subject be
chosen. . . . 'For we do not believe that the Gospel
consists in the words of Scripture but in the sense ; not on
the surface, but in the marrow; non in sermonum joliis
sed in radice rationis. ' (S. Jerome on Gal. I. II. 12.)
"Therefore, from the definition of inspiration and from
the fact that God is the Author of the Scriptures by means
of human co-writers, so that through the very action of God
upon inspired men it is infallibly certain that the Scriptures
are the books of God as their Author ; in most cases, that is
where the choosing of certain words instead of other equiva-
lents pertains merely to the material part, there is no reason
to affirm that God by an antecedent supernatural action
furnished the words and the style of writing, and individually
determined them. But there is a reason of affirming God's
assistance by which he so aided the writers in choosing apt
terms, that in expressing inspired thoughts, they were fully
infallible."
Franzelin adduces three classes of arguments to refute
the mechanical idea of verbal inspiration. One proof for the
thesis under consideration is found in the variety of style
prevailing among the different authors. Isaiah is polished
and cultured in his diction; Jeremiah, on the contrary, and
Amos are less polished and coarser in their style. Isaiah
was in high social rank, while Jeremiah was a burgher from
Anathoth, and Amos, a cowherd. And differences of style
exist among all the inspired writers, due to their different
characteristics.
Secondly in the Scriptures, sometimes the same fact is
related by different writers in different ways. For instance,
the consecration of the chalice is related in four different
ways by St. Math., XXVI. 28 ; St. Mark. XIV. 24; St. Luke,
XXII. 20, and St. Paul, I. Cor. XL, 25. These speak of the
same words of Christ, as he used them once for all at the Last
Supper. If the Holy Ghost had inspired the words, how
could we account for these divergencies? Here applies
BONFRERE L03
aptly what St. Augustine said, of the inspired writers: "Ut
quisque meminerat eos explicasse manifestum est."
The writers of the New Testament rarely or never quote
the old Testament literally, but only the sense. In the
words of St. Jerome: "Hoc in omnibus pene testimoniis
quae de veteribus libris in novo assumpta sunt Testamento
observare debemus, quod memorise crediderint Evangelistae
vel Apostoli, et tantum, sensu explicato, saepe ordinem
commutaverint, nonnunquam vel detraxerint verba vel
addiderint." (Comment, in Epist. ad Galatas.)
Thirdly, the inspired writers themselves disclaim verbal
inspiration, asserting that their compositions had been the
result of toil, observation and research. The text of II.
Maccab. already quoted is an example of this. Also the
preface of the Gospel of St. Luke, and various other passages.
Now, if the inspiration had been verbal this labor and re-
search would be inconceivable. Again, the writer of the
second book of Maccab. XV. 39, in closing his work, speaks
thus of his work: "I also with these things, will draw my
discourse to an end. And if (I have written) well, and as is
befitting history, this I should wish; if only weakly and com-
monly, tierpLoy;, mediocriter, (not above the average) this
is all I could achieve," etc. No such apology for shortcom-
ings were necessary, had the Holy Ghost inspired the words.
Bonfrere,the disciple of Lessius, had taught a doctrine in
some points identical with that taught by Lessius. He de-
fended a three-fold relation of the Holy Ghost to the in-
spired writings; antecedent, concomitant, and consequent.
According to Bonfrere, the antecedent relation had actuated
the Prophets, who committed to writing the things revealed,
without any part in their conception except a passive action,
simply as an amanuensis writes down the dictated ideas,
always, of course, in their own terms, as we have just seen.
The concomitant relation directed the writer as ( >ne w< >uld
direct another in writing a human document, not permitt
him to fall into error. Bonfrere even admitted in this m< de
a vague general impulse of the Holy Spirit to write such a
history. He also admitted a sort of prompting influence, in
ease the writer's memory failed him, according to that pas-
104 BONFRERE
sage in St. Matthew: "He (the Holy Ghost) will suggest all
things to you, whatever I shall have said to you."
Bonfrere asserted this mode of inspiration to have had
place in historical books, and in things known by natural
means. He therefore applied it to the Gospels, Acts of the
Apostles, Books of Maccabees, and the other historical books,
except the parts of Genesis which treat of the origin of the
World.
The consequent relation of the Holy Ghost to Scripture
Bonfrere describes thus: "The Holy Ghost has a con-
sequent relation to Holy Scripture if something be written
by merely human agency without the help, direction or assist-
ance of the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost afterward give
testimony that all that is there written is true. For it is
certain that then the whole writing would be the word of
God and would have the same infallible authority as other
things which were written by the direction or inspiration
of the Holy Ghost, as it is the King's word when some secre-
tary or notary by his own authority draws up a royal decree
or public document which the King afterwards ratifies and to
which he affixes his seal, and it is of equal authority as that
which the King himself, conceives, writes or dictates."
Bonfrere believes that in this manner the Holy Ghost
accepted the sayings of Aratus and Epimenides, Acts XVII.
2 8 ; Titus 1 . 1 2 . "In the same way the Holy Ghost may make
Holy Scripture, by testifying that all is true in it, a whole
history or a book treating of morals or of anything else
which was written by a uninspired author." (Praeloquia in
Script. Sac.)
Bonfrere expressly denied that such had been the origin
of any of the books now possessed by the Church, but as-
serted the non-repugnance of such action, and the possibil-
ity that such might have been the origin of some of the in-
spired works which the Church has lost.
Of Bonfrere's consequent inspiration it must be said, that
to assert it of any of the existing books of the Holy Scripture,
is 'condemned in express terms in the definition of the Vatican
Council ; if it only deals with a possibility, then it is false and
absurd ; for a subsequent inspiration is a contradiction in
JAHN 105
terms. As Comely rightly says: "repugnat in adiecto."
For to constitute inspiration, we must have this supernatural
] >svchological action in the mind of the writer, and if this be
not verified, no subsequent action can supply it. "Factum
infectum fieri non potest." But one might say, God is free
to approve a book in such way, and if he were to do so, would
not the book be made inspired Scripture? It would be an
infallibly true writing, rendered infallible by its subsequent
approbation, but not inspired Scripture; for the essential
element required for inspiration never was there. Where-
fore, that such was the origin of any of oxvc Holy Books is
denied by the Council of the Vatican ; the possibility of such
origin is disproved by a consideration of the essential elements
of inspiration.
Nevertheless sentences, parts of books, and in fact, any
document whatever, passing through the hands of an in-
spired writer, and used by him in writing a book, under the
influence of inspiration, would become inspired Scripture.
This is not consequent inspiration, but the employment of
an inspired writer's natural faculties in collecting material.
It is not probable that any great part of any inspired book
was produced in this way; but some data most certainly
were thus employed.
Jahn departed farther from the truth than Bonfrere had
gone: asserting inspiration to be, in general, only a negative
assistance protecting from error, he defended that such
was the general origin of our books. Logical in his opinion,
and recognizing that inspiration imported something positive,
he boldly proclaimed that inspiration was a misapplied term ;
but, consecrated by usage, it was difficult to change.
The concomitant relation of the Holy Ghost to Scripture
is also erroneous. This mode is a merely negative influence.
The Holy Ghost, as it were, watches the inspired writer to
protect him from error, and actually does save him when he
would otherwise err. This is not sufficient to make God the
Author of the Holy Books..
Inspiration is an active, positive influence in every part oj
the Holy Scripture. No other relation can constitute God
the author of the Holy Writ. If, indeed, we were to defend
106 SCHMID
that God only preserved from error, as Calmet asserted, it
would follow, that if the writer were exempt from error of
himself, unaided by any other cause, God would not be the
author of the book so written ; and, as this would doubtless
have happened in many passages and whole chapters, there
would thus be parts of which God could not be said to be
the author, as He would have had no part except a general
supervision in their production. This the definition of the
Vatican Council forbids to assert.
Again, there would be no difference, in such case, between
the definitions of oecumenical councils and of the Pope's
"ex cathedra", and the Holy Scriptures ; for in these defin-
itions there is the negative assistance of the Holy Ghost.
But we know that the dignity and rank of such documents
are far below that of the Holy Writ ; for these are human
documents, infallible in their truth, but they can not be
said to have God for their author.
In 1885 Dr. Franciscus Schmid, complaining that no-
where could he find a fitting treatise on inspiration, published
at Brixen his work entitled: " De Inspirationis Bibliorumvi
et ratione, " a volume of 422 pages in octavo. It is divided
into seven books.
In the first book Dr. Schmid expounds the common
Catholic doctrine, that there can be no error in the Scrip-
tures ; that all the statements of Scripture rest on the testi-
mony of God and are of divine authority. The reason is
that the Scriptures being written by the inspiration of the
Holy Ghost have God for their principal Author, who em-
ploys human writers as instruments. God is not the only
Author, because he did not immediately produce the books
by miracle ; but he wrote them by means of men. That God
writing through men, be the true Author, an assistance
saving from error is not enough, neither a subsequent appro-
bation, for neither can give to a book the prerogative of a
divine origin. There is necessary therefore a positive action
of God on the man, by which the things which God has in
mind and will to write, the (inspired) man also conceives in
his mind, and adequately accomplishes. Then the book is
to be given to men as divine. The intrinsic and principal
SCHMID 107
argument is drawn from this that God is the Author of the
sacred books. To write a book, or to be a book's author,
in the last analysis, means nought else than by writings to
speak to the readers ; that is, to express in writing that which
one thinks in the mind, that they who read may know from
his writings the writer's thoughts. But if God did not by
his action determine all things that were to be written he
himself would not have spoken these things; therefore he
would not be the Author of the whole book. This applies
to the action of God upon the understanding of the inspired
writer. But since the inspired writer is an instrument of
God, it is required that he write not merely by his own good
pleasure, but in the name of God ; consequently there is
necessary that there should be a divine action on the will of
the man and through the will upon his executive faculties. "
'There is a great difference between an inspired book
and the definitions of the Church ; for an inspired book is
infallible in all that it affirms ; it is a basic fount of revelation ;
besides divine assistance it requires an extraordinary posi-
tive action of God ; that it should be written in the name of
God, and as God's book delivered to the Church ; and even
for the words, it requires a special assistance. All these
qualities are not found in the definitions of the Church.
Nevertheless the labor and vigils of the author do not con-
flict with the inspiration of a book. "
Regarding verbal inspiration Schmid speaks as follows:
' It is asked : What is truly required that a book be formally
called the word of God ? And, to particularize, Is it required
that the individual words, just as they are, be of God? We
answer, No. But it is not the same to deny that God ante-
cedently determined and inspired in the writer the individual
words, as to say that God left to the inspired writer an unre-
stricted liberty concerning the words and forms of expression.
Rather another mode of inspiration which is a mean between
the two extremes seems possible. In other words, one can
grant that in our books the words and the style are not
determined by God for every individual part, and yet main-
tain that the whole manner of speech which is found in the
Scripture, is in a certain manner antecedently determined
108 CRETS
by God, and by God's providence, in a manner known to
God, brought out in the inspired books by the act of the
inspired writers. "
"We understand that God brought forth the Scriptures
that men in matters of faith and morals might have a book
which they might readily and safely believe." "Therefore
all things whether they pertain to faith or morals or not,
if found in the Scriptures, should have divine authority.
Otherwise confusion and doubt will shake the foundations
of faith. Therefore, there is no limiting the inspiration of
the things affirmed in the Bible, and the words of Scripture
must be such that they adequately express God's thought
and will. " "And God assists the words as far as is necessary
for this end."
In 1886, G. J. Crets of the order of the Premonstratensians
published at Louvain "De divina Bibliorum inspiratione."
After a review of the various opinions, he institutes an
analysis of the dogmatic formula, "God is the Author of the
Holy Scripture;" for the reason that nothing conduces more
to the knowledge of the true concept of inspiration than to
ascertain what is required on the part of God, in order that
God writing by means of men be called in the common use
of the term the Author of the Scriptures. Having made a
distinction between the material and formal element of the
book, he places as necessary in inspiration that, as regards the
formal element of the book, the writer receive a divine af-
flatus by which he may conceive in his mind and be in-
fallibly moved in his will to write all those things, and only
those things, which the Holy Ghost has decreed should be
written by him. Moreover there is required a certain assist-
ance or some direction from the Holy Ghost that the writer
be saved from error and defect in executing the work to
which he is divinely moved. By this assistance Crets
understands a divine action by which the human writer
chooses words apt to express the thoughts of the principal
Author. Crets refutes the theory which made inspiration a
mere assistance, and he also rejects the theory of subsequent
approbation. In the things which the inspired writer ac-
quires by his own faculties Crets teaches that God moves
CRETS 109
his will by a special action to write, and to choose the things
which God wishes written, and supernaturally enlightens
him to know what to write. He believes that it is prob-
able that all the inspired writers were conscious of their in-
spiration.
Regarding verbal inspiration Crets declares: "We con-
clude that besides the inspiration in the strict sense of the
words and sentences, by which indeterminately and remotely
the words and form of expression are furnished, there is not
in the main to be admitted a special action of the Holy
Ghost in the mode of expression, except the special direction
and assistance by which the mind of the writer, in choosing
forms of expression characteristic of his temperament and
education, is so led that leaving aside incongruous and less
exact expressions, he employs words and expressions be-
fitting the inspired thoughts, by which the divine truths may
be truthfully and fully expressed in a manner befitting the
destination of the books to all the generations of men . ' '
Crets extends inspiration "to all the statements of the
Bible, whether they be of faith and morals, or of profane
things; whether they be great or small; for if any error be
admitted in the Scripture its whole authority is shaken ; and
also because God is the Author of the whole Scripture with
all its parts."
Those who argue against this, base their argument on the
purpose of Scripture, which they assert to be not profane
but religious.
Crets answers: "The adequate and the ultimate end
intended by God in giving us the Holy Scriptures was not
that all the truth pertaining to faith and morals should be
systematically condensed into certain books, and thus deliv-
ered to us; or that in books partly written by purely human
agency, portions written by their authors while under divine
inspiration should be interspersed; but (the end was) that
in things pertaining to faith and morals, for our present
life and our eternal life in Heaven, we should be taught 1 >y
means of books having divine authority for each and every
statement ; in which books the truths at times are presented
in a familiar form; as, for instance, in the form of historical
110 ZANECCHIA
accounts, narrations and letters ; all which not only contain
things strictly religious, but also profane matter, which
however either from the nature of the thing or from the in-
tention of God, has a proximate or remote relation to the
religious truths. Therefore the things essentially religious
by the primary intention of God are for their own sake
inspired ; the other matter is the word of God, written by the
divine influx, though accessorily, and for their relation to the
things of faith and morals."
Crets affirms that in things of the physical order the sacred
writers spoke according to the popular conception of these
things, based on the appearances of things. Also in indicat-
ing numbers or time the writers at times expressed a certain
indetermination as the matter demanded. By this most
excellent theory all that is in the Scripture is inspired, but
must be properly interpreted according to the principles
approved by the Church.
In 1899 at Rome, Zanecchia O. P. published his work
on inspiration. This contains little that is new, and its chief
feature was an unreasonable attack on Card. Franzelin's
theory of inspiration. Zanecchia was ably answered by Fr. J.
P. van Kasteren, S. J., of Utrecht in the periodical "Studien."
Utrecht 1902. Zanecchia answered in a work entitled
"Scriptor sacer sub divina inspiratione juxta sententiam
Card. Franzelin", published at Rome in 1903.
The main point urged against Franzelin is that he made
the formula "God is the Author of the Scriptures" the
fundamental first principle in investigating the nature of
inspiration. Zanecchia, Prat and Lagrange argue that the
term author is ambiguous and can not be made the basis of
the clear concept of inspiration. It appears that there is
much sophistry in the opposition to Franzelin. The word
author has, it is true, several meanings as guarantee, cause,
writer, etc. ; but as used by the Councils of the Church, the
sense in which it is employed in the conciliar formula is
made clear by the setting, and it is evident that it means to
predicate of God the divine Authorship of the Holy Books.
They say that the term "author" does not contain the
term "inspirer" no more than the term "animal" contains
ZANECCHIA 111
of necessity the concept "man". Therefore, they say that
it is not logical to prove God's inspiration from his author-
ship. But here again there is sophistry. The term "author"
generically considered does not contain the concept of inspira-
tion; but the concept "author" as used by the councils and
as used by Franzelin clearly contains the concept " inspirer. "
While the concept "inspirer" is ontologically prior to the
concept "author", in the order of our cognition the concept
of authorship is the clearer ; and we understand the essential
elements of inspiration from authorship. Therefore, we
believe that Billot's remark is a propos: "The new critics
seem to themselves to have brought forth a great apparatus
of learning (against Franzelin) ; but in vain, for it would seem
that it is their own logic, and not the logic of Card. Franzelin
that is defective." (De inspiratione, 25.)
At this point it is well to insert the eminent author
Christian Pesch's note on the controversy: "Although it is
scarcely necessary, I acknowledge that I have never con-
sidered Card. Franzelin's theory definitive; nay more, there
are many things in it which I do not approve. The under-
standing of the dogma of inspiration, not less than that of
the other dogmas, continually develops in the Church ; nor
can any man in this life formulate an immutable theory,
beyond which progress will not be possible. God's
providence so governs human affairs that there is never
closed the way to the knowledge of truth and the love of
good. But that Zanecchia never wearies of repeating that
the theory of Franzelin is absurd, obscure, unreasonable,
arbitrary: that (Franzelin's) method is unreasonable, false.
illogical, and such like, serves indeed to show us the charac-
ter of the mind of the one who writes such things, but will
avail nothing with wise men to overthrow Franzelin's
doctrine." (De insp. sac. script, p. 313, note.)
Holden, the English professor at the Sorbonne (f i6(>
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 par
which he held to be written without any special influenci
the Holv Ghost. Thus in his Analysis of Faith, V. : ' The
112 LIBERAL OPINIONS
special divine assistance given to the author of whatever
book the Church receives as the word of God, extends only
to those things which are doctrinal, or have a proximate or
necessary bearing on doctrine ; but, in these things which
are not of the primary intent of the writer, or are relating
to other things, we believe him to have received from God
only that assistance which is common to other pious
writers" ; and, II. 3: "Although it is not licit to impeach as
false aught contained in the Holy Code, nevertheless, the
things which do not relate to religion do not constitute
articles of Catholic faith." Holden's doctrine was examined
by the Sorbonne and condemned.
Richard Simon in his " Histoire Critique du Nouveau
Testament" (Rotterdam, 1689) declares that he dares not
condemn the opinion of Holden ; and dares not approve it
in all its parts. Simon himself delivers his opinion obscurely,
but seems content with a negative assistance preserving
from error. Thus in his Reponse aux Sentiments de quel-
ques Theologiens de Hollande, he asserts : "Therefore when
the Gospels are said to be inspired, this is not to be under-
stood in the rigor that all things in these books came im-
mediately from the Holy Ghost ; but the sense is that God
so controlled their writers that they fell not into error.
Men wrote, and the Holy Ghost directed them, and did not
deprive them of reason or memory, that he might inspire
things which they already knew; but in general he deter-
mined them to write certain things rather than other things
which they knew equally well. "
Chrismann,in his "Rule of Faith" went farther. He de-
clares that while all things in Scripture are true, only the
truths of faith and morals are to be believed with divine
faith: "Those things which neither antecedently or in the
actual writing were revealed are not to be believed with
divine faith, . . as for instance that Pilate was prefect
of Judsea when Christ was crucified; or that statement of
Paul, II. Tim. IV. : ' Only Luke is with me, ' and many other
things which merit not divine faith but only Catholic faith.
In these things that inspiration suffices by which the Holy
Ghost assisted the writers that they might not err. "
THE VATICAN COUNCIL 113
Some other obscure theologians both before and after
Chrismann held these opinions. It was therefore to eradicate
these errors that the Vatican Council promulgated its decree :
"Qui quidem veteris et novi Testamenti libri integri cum
omnibus suis partibus, prout in ejusdem Concilii decreto
recensentur, et in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur,
pro sacris et canonicis suscipiendi sunt. Eos vero Ecclesia
pro sacris et canonicis habet, non ideo quod sola humana
industria concinnati, sua deinde auctoritate sint approbate ;
nee ideo dumtaxat, quod revelationem sine errore contin-
eant ; sed propterea quod Spiritu Sancto inspirante conscripti
Deum habent auctorem, atque ut tales ipsi Ecclesias traditi
sunt. "(Cap. II. De Revel.) And in Canon IV. De Revela-
tione :
"Si quis sacrae Scriptural libros integros cum omnibus
suis partibus, prout illos sancta Tridentina Synodus recensuit,
pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitus
inspiratos esse negaverit ; anathema sit. "
One of the bishops in the Council proposed an emendation
to the decree for the reason that it is not the same to declare
a book sacred as to declare it canonical. A book is sacred
by inspiration; it is canonical by the approbation of the
Church. Bishop Gasser ably answered that though the two
terms, etymologically differed, in the concrete they were
identical, for the books of the canon were both sacred and
canonical. Canonicity does not pertain to the essence of in-
spiration but to its manifestation. The Council first de-
clared the intrinsic character of inspiration, and then the
external condition, that it be delivered to the Church as a
'ir/ine book. Soon after the Vatican Council August Roh-
ling published in Germany a treatise "De Bibliorum inspira-
tione ejusque valore ac vi pro libera scientia." Rohling
distinguished between things of faith and morals, and pro-
fane things. In things of faith and morals the human
writer was preserved from error by inspiration. In all
things profane the writer was left to his own resources, and
hence what he wrote was to be treated as the work of any
uninspired historian. To distinguish between inspired and
uninspired accessory matter, Rohling gave the criterion that
(S) H. S.
114 F. LENORMANT
such matter was inspired only when it bore a necessary re-
lation to religious truth, as for instance that Israel came to
Mt. Sinai. This theory was ably refuted by Franzelin, "De
Trad, et Script." pag. 564 sqq. Rohling's theory rests on
a false principle that God inspires only a part of the Scrip-
tures, whereas the Councils of the Church declare that they
are all inspired with all their parts. The profane matter is
inspired per accidens, that men might have a deposit of writ-
ings of infallible truth.
A far greater impetus was given to the tendency to limit
inspiration by the work of the French orientalist, F. Lenor-
mant. In his work, "Les Origines de l'histoire," 1880, he
declares that all the Scripture is inspired, but all that is in-
spired is not infallibly true. In faith and morals the Scrip-
ture is an infallible guide, but this infallibility is not to be
extended to other matters. The first eleven chapters of
Genesis are myths serving to present religious ideas, but
in the history the fabulous is inseparably intermingled.
Lenormant speaks with great clearness. Of inspiration he
says : "In regard to biblical questions one of which is here
treated, I firmly believe the divine inspiration of the sacred
books, and with perfect submission I accept the doctrinal
decisions of the Church pertaining to inspiration, but I
know that in these decisions inspiration is not extended
beyond the things which relate to religion and the things of
faith and morals, that is the supernatural teaching contained
in the Scriptures. In other things the human faculties of
the biblical writers is supreme. Everyone impressed his
character on the style of his book. Regarding physical
sciences, the writers had no special light ; they followed the
common opinions and prejudices of their times. 'The end of
Scripture is,' says Cardinal Baronius, 'to teach us how to go
to Heaven ; not how the heavens move' ; much less is it the
end of Scripture to reveal how earthly things move through
their changes. The Holy Ghost did not reveal scientific
truths nor universal history." Applying his theory to
Genesis he believes that in its first chapters it is a collection
of myths and traditions common to all the peoples inhabiting
about the Euphrates and Tigris. Under the influence of the
CARD. NEWMAN 115
religion of Israel the polytheistic element has been elimi-
nated from these traditions, and they became the instrument
of conveying the high truths of the monotheistic religion of
Israel. Lenormant differs from other non-Catholic orient-
alists. These assign an evolution of human conscience as the
cause of a transition from the crude beliefs of polytheism to
the more elevated character of monotheism in Israel. Le-
normant invokes a special intervention of divine Providence
inspiring the Law and the Prophets. Lenormant's work
was placed on the Index by a decree of Dec. 19, 1887.
The theory of Lenormant was plainly contrary to the
Catholic idea of the total inspiration of the Bible. It would
no longer be a book of inspired truths, but a book in which
inspired truths were intermingled with myth and fable.
Many Catholic writers took up the defence of the Bible
against Lenormant. Notable among these were Lefebre
(Revue Catholique de Louvain, 1880) Desjacques, Lamy, and
Brucker (La Controverse 1881, 1882). Franz von Hum-
melauer (Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, 1881) pointed out the
danger of Lenormant's theories, declaring: "Er riickt sich
mit Sack und Pack in die Linie der rationalistischen Er-
klarer ein. "
Tentatively and cautiously Card. Newman advanced
some views on inspiration in an article "On The Inspira-
tion of Scripture" published in the Nineteenth Century.
LXXXIV. Feb. 1884. In this article, inspiration and allied
topics are studied. Card. Newman wrote his article to
put the Church in a true light against the calumnies of
Renan. The latter argued that the Catholic Church in-
sisted on certain things which criticism and history proved
to be impossible. Newman takes up to consider whether
the Church does insist on matters in defiance of criticism
and history. Hence, rather than the formulation of a theory
of inspiration the great cardinal presents his view of what
the Church insists on. Of inspiration he says:
" Now then, the main question before us being what it is
that a Catholic is free to hold about Scripture in general, or
about its separate portions or its statements, without com-
promising his firm inward assent to the dogmas of the Church,
HQ CARD. NEWMAN
that is, to the de fide enunciations of Pope and Councils, we
have first of all to inquire how many and what those dogmas
are.
" I answer that there are two dogmas; one relates to the
authority of Scripture, the other to its interpretation.
As to the authority of Scripture, we hold it to be, in all
matters of faith and morals, divinely inspired throughout;
as to its interpretation, we hold that the Church is, in faith
and morals, the one infallible expounder of that inspired
text.
" I begin with the question of its inspiration.
"The books which constitute the canon of Scripture, or
the Canonical books, are enumerated by the Tridentine
Council, as we find them in the first page of our Catholic
Bibles, and are in that Ecumenical Council's decree spoken
of by implication as the work of inspired men. The Vatican
Council speaks more distinctly, saying that the entire books
with all their parts, are divinely inspired, and adding an
anathema upon impugners of this definition.
" There is another dogmatic phrase used by the Councils
of Florence and Trent to denote the inspiration of Scripture,
viz., 'Deus units et idem utriusque Testamenti Auctor. '
Since this left room for holding that by the word ' Testa-
mentum' was meant 'Dispensation,' as it seems to have
meant in former Councils from the date of Irenaeus, and
as St. Paul uses the word, in his Epistle to the Hebrews,
the Vatican Council has expressly defined that the concrete
libri themselves of the Old and New Testament 'Deum
habent Auctorem. '
"There is a further question, which is still left in some
ambiguity, the meaning of the word 'Auctor.' 'Auctor'
is not identical with the English word ' Author. ' Allowing
that there are instances to be found in classical Latin in
which 'auctores' may be translated 'authors,' instances in
which it even seems to mean ' writers, ' it more naturally
.means 'authorities.' Its proper sense is 'originator,'
'inventor,' 'founder,' 'primary cause;' (thus St. Paul
speaks of our Lord as 'Auctor salutis,' 'Auctor fidei;') on
the other hand, that it was inspired penmen who were the
CARD. NEWMAN 117
'writers' of their works seems asserted by St. John and St.
Luke and, I may say, in every paragraph of St. Paul's
Epistles. In St. John we read, 'This is the disciple who
testifies of these things, and has written these things, ' and
St. Luke says, ' I have thought it good to write to thee'&c.
However, if any one prefers to construe 'auctor' as 'author '
or writer, let it be so — only, then there will be two writers of
the Scriptures, the divine and the human.
"And now comes the important question, in what re-
spect are the Canonical books inspired? It cannot be in
in every respect, unless we are bound de fide to believe that
'terra in aeternum stat', and that heaven is above us, and
that there are no antipodes. And it seems unworthy of
Divine Greatness, that the Almighty should in His revela-
tion of Himself to us undertake mere secular duties, and
assume the office of a narrator, as such, or an historian, or
geographer, except so far as the secular matters bear directly
upon the revealed truth. The Councils of Trent and the
Vatican fulfil this anticipation ; they tell us distinctly the
object and the promise of Scripture inspiration. Tl,
specify 'faith and moral conduct' as the drift of that teach-
ing which has the guarantee of inspiration. What we need
and what is given us is not how to educate ourselves for this
life; we have abundant natural gifts for human society, and
for the advantages which it secures ; but our great want is
how to demean ourselves in thought and deed towards our
Maker, and how to gain reliable information on this urgent
necessity.
"Accordingly four times does the Tridentine Council
insist upon 'faith and morality.' as the scope of inspired
teaching. It declares that the 'Gospel ' is ' the Fount of all
saving truth and all instruction in morals, ' that in the written
books and in the unwritten traditions, the Holy Spirit
dictating, this truth and instruction are contained. Then it
speaks of the books and traditions, 'relating whether to
faith or to morals,' and afterwards of 'the confirmation of
■ nas and establishment of morals.' Lastly, it warns tl
Christian people, 'in matters of faith and morals,' against
distorting Scripture into a sense of their own.
118 CARD. NEWMAN
"In like manner the Vatican Council pronounces that
Supernatural Revelation consists 'in rebus divinis,' and is
contained 'in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus ; '
and it also speaks of ' petulantia ingenia ' advancing wrong
interpretations of Scripture 'in rebus fidei et morum ad
asdincationem doctrina Christianas pertinentium. '
"But while the Councils, as have been shown, lays down
so emphatically the inspiration of Scripture in respect to faith
and morals, it is remarkable that they do not say a word
directly as to inspiration in matters of fact. Yet are we
therefore to conclude that the record of facts in Scripture
does not come under the guarantee of its inspiration? We
are not so to conclude, and for this plain reason : — the sacred
narrative carried on through so many ages, what is it but the
very matter for our faith and rule of our obedience ? What
but that narrative itself is the supernatural teaching, in order
to which inspiration is given? What is the whole history,
traced out in Scripture from Genesis to Esdras and thence on
to the end of the Acts of the Apostles, but a manifestation of
Divine Providence, on the one hand interpretative, on a
large scale and with analogical applications, of universal
history, and on the other preparatory, typical and predictive,
of the Evangelical Dispensation? Its pages breathe of
providence and grace, of our Lord, and of His work and
teaching, from beginning to end. It views facts in those
relations in which neither ancients, such as the Greek and
Latin classical historians, nor moderns, such as Niebuhr,
Grote, Ewald, or Michelet, can view them. In this point
of view it has God for its author, even though the finger of
God traced no words but the Decalogue. Such is the claim
of Bible history in its substantial fulness to be accepted
de fide as true. In this point of view, Scripture is inspired,
not only in faith and morals, but in all its parts which bear
on faith, including matters of fact.
"But what has been said leads to another serious question.
It is easy to imagine a Code of Laws inspired, or a formal
prophecy, or a Hymn, or a Creed, or a collection of proverbs.
Such works may be short, precise, and homogeneous ; but
inspiration on the one hand, and on the other a document,
CARD. NEWMAN ll'J
multiform and copious in its contents, as the Bible is, arc at
first sight incompatible ideas, and destructive of each other.
How are we practically to combine the indubital ile fad - if a
divine superintendence with the indubitable fact of a col-
lection of such various writings.
" Surely, then, if the revelations and lessons in Scripture-
are addressed to us personally and practically, the presei
among us of a formal judge and standing expositor of its
words is imperative. It is antecedently unreasonable to
suppose that a book so complex, so systematic, in parts so
obscure, the outcome of so many minds, times, and places
should be given us from God without the safeguard of some
authority ; as if it could possibly, from the nature of the case,
interpret itself. Its inspiration does but guarantee its truth,
not its interpretation. How are private readers satisfactorily
to distinguish what is didactic and what is historical, what
is fact and what is vision, what is allegorical and what is
literal, what is idiomatic and what is grammatical, what is
enunciated formally and what occurs obiter, what is only of
temporary and what is of lasting obligation? Such is our
natural anticipation, and it is only too exactly justified in
the events of the last three centuries, in the many countries
where private judgment on the text of Scripture has pre-
vailed. The gift of inspiration requires as its complement
the gift of infallibility.
"Where then is this gift lodged, which is so necessary for
the due use of the written word of God ? Thus we are intro-
duced to the second dogma in respect to Holy Scripture
taught by the Catholic religion. The first is that Scripture
is inspired, the second that the Church is the infallible
interpreter of that inspiration."
" Such then is the answer which I make to the main
question which has led to my writing, I asked what obliga-
tion of duty lay upon the Cath< >lic scholar or man of science
as regards his critical treatment of the text and the matter
of Holy Scripture. And now I say that it is his duty, first,
never to forget that what he is handling is the Word of God,
which, by reason of the difficulty of always drawing the line
between what is human and what is divine, cannot be put i n
120 CARD. NEWMAN
the level of other books, as it is now the fashion to do, but
has the nature of a Sacrament, which is outward and inward
and a channel of supernatural grace; and secondly, that
in what he writes upon it or its separate books, he is bound
to submit himself internally, and to profess to submit him-
self, in all that relates to faith and morals, to the definite
teachings of Holy Church.
"This being laid down, let me go on to consider some of'
the critical distinctions and conclusions which are consistent
with a faithful observance of these obligations.
"Are the books or are the writers inspired? I answer,
Both. The Council of Trent says the writers ('ab ipsis
Apostolis, Spiritu Sancto dictante') ; the Vatican says the
books ('si quis libros integros &c. divinitus inspiratos esse
negaverit, anathema sit'). Of course the Vatican decision
is de fide, but it cannot annul the Tridentine. Both decrees
are dogmatic truths. The Tridentine teaches us that the
Divine Inspirer, inasmuch as he acted on the writer, acted,
not immediately on the books themselves, but through the
men who wrote them. The books are inspired, because
the writers were inspired to write them. They are not
inspired books, unless they came from inspired men.
"There is one instance in Scripture of Divine Inspiration
without a human medium; the Decalogue was written by
the very finger of God. He wrote the law upon the stone
tables Himself. It has been thought the Urim and Thum-
mim was another instance of the immediate inspiration of a
material substance; but anyhow such instances are excep-
tional; certainly, as regards Scripture, which alone concerns
us here, there always have been two minds in the process of
inspiration, a Divine Auctor, and a human Scriptorjand
various important consequences follow from this appoint-
ment.
" If there be at once a divine and a human mind co-
operating in the formation of the sacred text, it is not sur-
prising if there often be a double sense in that text, and,
with obvious exceptions, never certain that there is not.
'Thus Sara had her human and literal meaning in her
words, ' Cast out the bondwoman and her son, ' &c. ; but we
CARD. XE W.MAX 1'Jl
know from St. Paul that those words were inspired by the
Holy Ghost to convey a spiritual meaning. Abraham, too,
on the Mount, when his son asked him whence was to co:
the victim for the sacrifice which his father was about to
offer, answered 'God will provide;' and he showed his own
sense of his words afterwards, when he took the ram which
was caught in the briers, and offered it as a holocaust. Yi i
those words were a solemn prophecy.
"And is it extravagant to say, that, even in the case of
men who have no pretension to be prophets or servants of
God, He may by their means give us great maxims and les-
sons, which the speakers little thought they were delivering?
as in the case of the Architriclinus in the marriage feast, who
spoke of the bridegroom as having 'kept the good wine until
now;' words which it was needless for St. John to record,
unless they had a mystical meaning.
" Such instances raise the question whether the Scripture
saints and prophets always understood the higher and divine
sense of their words. As to Abraham, this will be answered
in the affirmative ; but I do not see reason for thinking that
Sara was equally favoured. Nor is her case solitary ; Caiphas
as high priest, spoke a divine truth by virtue of his office,
little thinking of it, when he said that ' one man must die for
the people;' and St. Peter at Joppa at first did not see
beyond a literal sense in his vision, though he knew that
there was a higher sense, which in God's good time would
be revealed to him.
"And hence there is no difficulty in supposing that the
Prophet Osee, though inspired, only knew his own literal
sense of the words which he transmitted to posterity, 'I have
called my Son out of Egypt, ' the further prophetic meaning
of them being declared by St. Matthew in his gospel. And
such a divine sense would be both concurrent with and con-
firmed by that antecedent belief which prevailed among tl
Jews in St. Matthew's time, that their sacred books w
in great measure typical, with an evangelical bearing, tl
as yet they might not know what those books contained in
prospect .
122 CARD. NEWMAN
" Nor is it de fide (for that alone with a view to Catholic
Biblicists I am considering) that inspired men, at the time
when they speak from inspiration, should always know that
the Divine Spirit is visiting them.
"The Psalms are inspired; but, when David, in the out-
pouring of his deep contrition, disburdened himself before
his God in the wrords of the Miserere, could he, possibly,
while uttering them, have been directly conscious that every
word he uttered was not simply his, but another's? Did he
not think that he was personally asking forgiveness and
spiritual help?
" Doubt again seems incompatible with a consciousness
of being inspired. But Father Patrizi, while reconciling
two Evangelists in a passage of their narratives, says, if I
understand him rightly (ii. p. 405), that though we admit
that there were some things about which inspired writers
doubted, this does not imply that inspiration allowed them
to state what is doubtful as certain, but only it did not
hinder them from stating things with a doubt in their minds
about them ; but how can the All -knowing Spirit doubt ?
or how can an inspired man doubt, if he is conscious of his
inspiration ?
" And again, how can a man whose hand is guided by the
Holy Spirit, and who knows it, make apologies for his style
of writing, as if deficient in literary exactness and finish?
If then the writer of Ecclesiasticus, at the very time that he
wrote his Prologue, was not only inspired but conscious of
his inspiration, how could he have entreated his readers to
'come with benevolence,' and to make excuse for his 'com-
ing short in the composition of words'? Surely, if at the
very time he wrote he had known it, he would, like other
inspired men, have said, 'Thus saith the Lord, ' or what was
equivalent to it.
'The same remark applies to the writer of the second
book of Machabees, who ends his narrative by saying, ' If I
have done well, it is what I desired, but if not so perfectly,
it' must be pardoned me. ' What a contrast to St. Paul,
who, speaking of his inspiration (I Cor. VII. 40) and of his
'weakness and fear' (ibid. II. 4), does so in order to boast that
CARD. NEWMAN 12:
his 'speech was, not in the persuasive words of human wis-
dom, but in the showing of the Spirit and of power. ' The
historian of the Machabees, would have surely adopted a
like tone of 'glorying,' had he had at the time a like con-
sciousness of his divine gift.
"Again, it follows from there being two agencies, divine
grace and human intelligence, co-operating in the production
of the Scriptures, that, whereas, if they were written, as in
the Decalogue, by the immediate finger of God, every word
of them must be His and His only; on the contrary, if they
are man's writing, informed and quickened by the presence
of the Holy Ghost, they admit, should it so happen, of being
composed of outlying materials, which have passed through
the minds and from the fingers of inspired penmen, and are
known to be inspired on the ground that those who were the
immediate editors, as they may be called, were inspired.
" For an example of this we are supplied by the writer of
the second book of Machabees, to which reference has already
been made. 'All such things, ' says the writer, ' as have been
comprised in five books by Jason of Cyrene, we have attempt-
ed to abridge in one book. ' Here we have the human
aspect of an inspired work. Jason need not, the writer of
the second book of Machabees must, have been inspired.
"Again; St. Luke's gospel is inspired, as having gone
through and come forth from an inspired mind ; but the
extrinsic sources of his narrative were not necessarily all
inspired any more than was Jason of Cyrene ; yet such
sources there were, for, in contrast with the testimony of the
actual eye-witnesses of the events which he records, he says
of himself that he wrote after a careful inquiry, ' according as
they delivered them to us, who from the beginning were
eye-witnesses and ministers of the word;' as to himself, he
had but 'diligently attained to all things from the beginning. '
Here it was not the original statements, but his edition of
them, which needed to be inspired.
" Hence we have no reason to be surprised, nor is it
against the faith to hold, that a canonical book may be com-
posed, not only from, but even of, pre-existing documents,
it being always borne in mind, as a necessary condition, that
124 CARD. NEWMAN
an inspired mind has exercised a supreme and an ultimate
judgment on the work, determining what was to be selected
and embodied in it, in order to its truth in all 'matters
of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian
doctrine/ and its unadulterated truth.
"Thus Moses may have incorporated in his manuscript
as much from foreign documents as is commonly maintained
by the critical school ; yet the existing Pentateuch, with the
miracles which it contains, may still (from that personal
inspiration which belongs to a prophet) have flowed from
his mind and hand on to his composition. He new-made
and authenticated what till then was no matter of faith.
"This being considered, it follows that a book may be,
and may be accepted as, inspired, though not a word of it
is an original document. Such is almost the case with the
first book of Esdras. A learned writer in a publication of the
day* says: Tt consists of the contemporary historical jour-
nals, kept from time to time by the prophets or other author-
ized persons who were eye-witnesses for the most part of
what they record, and whose several narratives were after-
wards strung together, and either abridged or added to, as
the case required, by a later hand, of course an inspired
hand.'
" And in like manner the Chaldee and Greek portions of
the book of Daniel, even though not written by Daniel, may
be, and we believe are, written by penmen inspired in matters
of faith and morals ; and so much, and nothing beyond, does
the Church 'oblige' us to believe.
" I have said that the Chaldee, as well as the Hebrew
portion of Daniel requires, in order to its inspiration, not that
it should be Daniel's writing, but that its writer, whoever he
was, should be inspired. This leads me to the question
whether inspiration requires and implies that the book
inspired should in its form and matter be homogeneous, and
all its parts belong to each other. Certainly not. The book
of Psalms is the obvious instance destructive of any such
* Smith's Dictionary.
CARD. NEWMAN
idea. What it really requires is an inspired Editor;* that is,
an inspired mind, authoritative in faith and morals, from
whose fingers the sacred text passed. I believe it is allowed
generally, that at the date of the captivity and under the per-
secution of Antiochus, the books of Scripture and the sacred
text suffered much loss and injury. Originally the Psalms
seem to have consisted of five books; of which only a portion,
perhaps the first and second, were David's. That arrange-
ment is now broken up, and the Council of Trent was so im-
pressed with the difficulty of their authorship, that, in its
formal decree respecting the Canon, instead of calling the
collection ' David's Psalms, ' as wras usual, they called it the
'Psalterium Davidicum, ' thereby meaning to imply, that
although canonical and inspired and in spiritual fellowship
and relationship with those of 'the choice Psalmist of Israel, '
the whole collection is not therefore necessarily the writing of
David.
" And as the name of David, though not really applicable
to every Psalm, nevertheless protected and sanctioned
them all, so the appendices which conclude the book of
Daniel, Susanna and Bel, though not belonging to the main
history, come under the shadowr of the Divine Presence
which primarily rests on what goes before.
" And so again, whether or not the last verses of St.
Mark's, and two portions of St.John's Gospel, belong to those
Evangelists respectively, matters not as regards their inspira-
tion ; for the Church has recognised them as portions of that
sacred narrative which precedes or embraces them.
"Nor does it matter whether one or two Isaiahs wrote
the book which bears that Prophet's name; the Church,
without settling this point, pronounces it inspired in res]
of faith and morals, both Isaiahs being inspired; and, if
* This representation must not be confused with either of the two
views of Canonicity which are pronounced insufficient by the Vatican
Council — viz. i, that in order to be sacred and canonical, it is enough for
a book to be a work of mere human industry, provided it be afterwards
approved by the authorities of the Church, and 2, that it is enough if it
contains revealed teaching without error. Neither of these views sup-
poses the presence of inspiration, whether in the writer or the writing;
what is contemplated above is an inspired writer in the exercise of his
inspiration, and a work inspired from first to last under the action of
that inspiration.
126 CARD. NEWMAN
this be assured to us, all other questions are irrelevant and
unnecessary. "
"Nor do the Councils forbid our holding that there are
interpolations or additions in the sacred text, say, the last
chapter of the Pentateuch, provided they are held to come
from an inspired penman, such as Esdras, and are thereby
authoritative in faith and morals.
" From what has been last said it follows, that the titles
of the Canonical books, and their ascription to different
authors, either do not come under their inspiration, or need
not be accepted literally.
"For instance: the Epistle to the Hebrews is said in our
Bibles to be the writing of St. Paul, and so virtually it is,
and to deny that it is so in any sense might be temerarious ;
but its authorship is not a matter of faith as its inspiration
is, but an acceptance of received opinion, and because to no
other writer can it be so well assigned.
"Again, the 89th Psalm has for its title 'A Prayer of
Moses, ' yet that has not hindered a succession of Catholic
writers, from Athanasius to Bellarmine, from denying it to
be his.
"Again, the Book of Wisdom professes (e. g., chs. vii.
and ix.) to be written by Solomon; yet our Bibles say, 'It is
written in the person of Solomon, ' and 'it is uncertain who
was the writer;' and St. Augustine, whose authority had so
much influence in the settlement of the Canon, speaking of
Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, says : 'The two books by reason
of a certain similarity of style are usually called Solomon's
though the more learned have no doubt they do not belong
to him.' (Martin. Pre], to Wisdom and Eccl.; Aug. Opp. t.
iii- P- 733-)
"If these instances hold, they are precedents for saying
that it is no sin against the faith (for of such I have all along
been speaking), nor indeed, if done conscientiously and on
reasonable grounds, any sin, to hold that Ecclesiastes is not
the writing of Solomon, in spite of its opening with a pro-
fession of being his ; and that first, because that profession
is a heading, not a portion of the book; secondly, because,
even though it be part of the book, a like profession is made
CARD. NEWMAN 1-7
in tlic Hook of Wisdom, without its being a proof that
'Wisdom' is Solomon's; and thirdly, because such a pro-
fession may well be considered a prosopopoeia not so difficult
to understand as that of the Angel Raphael, when he called
himself 'the Son of the great Ananias. '
" On this subject Melchior Canus says: 'It does not much
matter to the Catholic Faith, that a book was written by this
or that writer, so long as the Spirit of God is believed to be
the author of it; which Gregory delivers and explains, in his
Preface to Job, ' It matters not with what pen the King has
written his letter, if it be true that He has written it.'
(Loc. Th. p. 44.)
"I say then of the Book of Ecclesiastes, its authorship is
one of those questions which still lie in the hands of the
Church. If the Church formally declared that it was written
by Solomon, I consider that, in accordance with its heading
(and, as implied in what follows, as in 'Wisdom, ') we should
be bound, recollecting that she has the gift of judging 'de
vero sensu et interpretatione Scripturarum Sanctarum, ' to
accept such a decree as a matter of faith ; and in like manner,
in spite of its heading, we should be bound to accept a
contrary decree, if made to the effect that the book was not
Solomon's. At present as the Church (or Pope) has not
pronounced on one side or on the other, I conceive that, till
a decision comes from Rome, either opinion is open to the
Catholic without any impeachment of his faith.
"And here I am led on to inquire whether obiter dicta
are conceivable in an inspired document. We know that
they are held to exist and even required in treating of the
dogmatic utterances of Popes, but are they compatible with
inspiration? The common opinion is that they arc 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 t< 1 human feebleness and the natural
necessities of life, and by no means require inspiration,
since they can otherwise be perfectly well known, and seem
scarcely worthy of the Holy Spirit, as for instance what is
said of the dog of Tobias, St. Paul's penula, and the sale/
tions at the end of the Epistles. ' Neither he nor Fr. Patrizi
128 BISHOP HEALY
allow of these exceptions ; but Fr. Patrizi, as Lamy quotes
him, 'damnare non audet eos qui haec tenerent, ' viz., ex-
ceptions, and he himself, by keeping silence, seems unable
to condemn them either.
" By obiter dicta in Scripture I also mean such statements
as we find in the Book of Judith, that Nabuchodonosor was
king of Nineve. Now it is in favour of there being such
unauthoritative obiter dicta, that unlike those which occur
in dogmatic utterances of Popes and Councils, they are, in
Scripture, not doctrinal, but mere unimportant statements
of fact ; whereas those of Popes and Councils may relate
to faith and morals, and are said to be uttered obiter, because
they are net contained within the scope of the formal defini-
tion, and imply no intention of binding the consciences of the
faithful. There does not then seem any serious difficulty in
admitting their existence in Scripture. Let it be observed,
its miracles are doctrinal facts, and in no sense of the phrase
can be considered obiter dicta.
" It may be questioned, too, whether the absence of
chronological sequence might not be represented as an in-
fringement of plenary inspiration, more serious than the
obiter dicta of which I have been speaking. Yet St. Matthew
is admitted by approved commentators to be unsolicitous as
to order of time. So says Fr. Patrizi (De Evang. lib.ii. p. i),
viz., 'Matthasum de observando temporis ordine minime
sollicitum esse.' He gives instances, and then repeats,
'Matthew did not observe order of time. ' If such absence
of order is compatible with inspiration in St. Matthew, as it
is, it might be consistent with inspiration in parts of the Old
Testament, supposing they are open to re -arrangement in
chronology. Does not this teach us to fall back upon the
decision of the Councils that 'faith and morals pertaining to
the edification of Christian doctrine' are the scope, the true
scope, of inspiration? And is not the Holy See the judge
given us for determining what is for edification and what is
not?"
In the Irish Ecclesiastical Record of March, 1884, Rev.
John Healy (afterward Bishop Healy) published an article
in which he dissented from Card. Newman. As Healy's
BISHOP HEALY 129
article seems to us to express a clear statement of the Cath< die
doctrine we reproduce it here nearly in full: "With regard
to the Cardinal's views on the interpretation of Scripture,
we have nothing to say; he merely expresses the common
teaching of theologians on this point. We shall, therefore,
confine ourselves to the first question which he discusses—
the authority or inspiration of Sacred Scripture.
"In answer to his own question on this point — What is
de fide with regard to the inspiration of Scripture? his reply
is : — 'As to the authority of Scripture, we hold it to be, in all
matters of faith and morals, divinely inspired throughout.'
In No. 1 1 he tells us that the Councils of Trent and the Vati-
can 'specify "faith and moral conduct" as the 'drift' of that
teaching (in Scripture) which has the guarantee of inspira-
tion.' In No. 12 he says that the Vatican Council pro-
nounces that supernatural Revelation consists 'in rebus
divinis,' and is contained — the italics are not ours — 'in libris
scriptis et sine scriptis traditionibus.' And finally, in No.
13, he asserts that while the Councils, as has been shown,
lay down so emphatically the inspiration of Scripture in
respect to 'faith and morals,' it is remarkable that they do
not say a word directly as to its inspiration in 'matters of
fact ;' and hence he raises the question — but does not answer
it — whether there may not be in Scripture, as there are in
the dogmatic utterances of Popes and Councils, obiter dicta,
'unimportant "statements of fact," not inspired, and there-
fore unauthoritative' (No. 26), and, we may add, not even
necessarily true.
"The merest tyro in the schools of Catholic theology will
at once perceive the startling character of these statements,
and the pregnant consequences which they involve. Hence
we propose to examine them very briefly, in order to
ascertain if the de fide utterances of the Church on this mat-
ter of the inspiration of the sacred volume are exactly of the
character described by Card. Newman ; and we shall for the
most part confine ourselves to an analysis of these dogmatic
utterances themselves.
"Of course, when the Cardinal says it is de fide that
Scripture, in all matters of faith and morals, is divinely in-
(9) ii.s.
130 BISHOP HEALY
spired throughout, he says what is true; but he certainly
seems to imply that it is not de fide that Scripture is inspired
in those things (if there be any such) which are not 'matters
of faith and morals.' Now, here precisely we join issue, and
we say that, in our opinion, the Catholic dogma, as defined
both in the Council of Trent and the Vatican, admits of no
such restricting clause ; that it is adequately and accurately
expressed only by eliminating that clause ; or, in other words,
the Catholic dogma is, to borrow some of the Cardinal's own
words, that Sacred Scripture is divinely inspired throughout.
"The Council of Trent first enumerates the books that
constitute the canon of Scripture, and then, in the strictest
language, formulates its decree in the following words: — 'Si
quis autem libros ipsos integros cum omnibus suis partibus,
prout in ecclesia Catholica legi consueverunt, et in veteri
vulgata latina editione habentur, pro sacris et canonicis non
susceperit, et traditiones praedictas sciens et prudens con-
tempserit, anathema sit.'* There is here no restriction of
inspiration or canonicity to matters of faith and morals;
the entire books, with all their parts, are declared to be sacred
and canonical, that is, inspired Scripture, recognised as such
by the Church ; for, as we shall see, that is the meaning of
sacred and canonical, as applied by the Council of Trent and
of the Vatican to the books of Scripture. If we take the
expression 'entire books, with all their parts,' to be equiva-
lent to the Cardinal's word throughout, we have a right to
conclude that the Catholic dogma, as enunciated in that
canon, proclaims that these canonical books are inspired
throughout, and therefore not merely in questions of faith and
morals.
"Lest there might be any doubt of the meaning of the
expression 'pro sacris et canonicis,' we beg to append the
analogous canon in the Vatican Council, which, in our opinion,
leaves no doubt about the matter. Here it is: — 'Si quis
sacrae Scrip turae libros integros cum omnibus suis partibus,
prout illos Sancta Tridentina Sy nodus recensuit, pro sacris
et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitus inspiratos esse
* Quarta Sessio, Deer, de Canonicis Scripturis.
BISHOP HEALY l.'Il
negaverit, anathema sit.' (Can. 4, De Revelatione.) 11
impossible to enunciate in clearer language the great Catholic
truth, that the entire books of Sacred Scripture, with all their
parts, are divinely inspired ; or in other words, that the books
of Sacred Scripture are inspired throughout. If -any one
should urge that perhaps 'eos,' in the last clause of this canon
is not necessarily the exact equivalent of the subject of the
preceding clause, our answer is, that both grammatically
and logically 'eos' and 'illos' stand for the subject of the
preceding clause, and are therefore exactly co-extensive
with it. At any rate, the Council pronounces the entire
books — eos, scil, libros iutegros — to be inspired, without
makine anv distinction between 'matters of fact' and 'matters
of faith and morals,' and that is quite enough for our argu-
ment.
"Every orue trained in theological discipline knows that
it is not always easy to ascertain, from the wording in the
body of a dogmatic chapter of a General Council, what is
strictly and exactly de fide. But when a Council wishes to
express Catholic dogma with the utmost accuracy and ex-
actness, it formulates it as a canon, and pronounces anathema
against the gainsayers. I have a right, therefore, to infer
from this canon, as a Catholic dogma, that Sacred Scripture .
without exception or restriction, is inspired throughout.
"Cardinal Newman says that the dogmatic phrase used 1 >y
the Councils of Florence and Trent to denote the inspiration
of Scripture, viz., that one and the same God was the autl
of both Testaments — Deus uiius et idem utriusque Tcsta-
menti Auctor — left some room for holding that the word
'Testament' might mean 'Dispensation, rather than the
Books of the Testaments, although he admits that the Vati-
can Council has settled the question by inserting the v.
•"books."
"It appears to us that the Council of Florence left no
doubt about the matter, for it has explained the meaning of
the word 'Testament' in its decree, as may be seen in so
common a book as Franzelin (De Inspir. S. Scrip. Thesis. II.,
No. 1.) Here are the words: —
!32 BISHOP HEALY
" 'Firmissime credit, profitetur et praedicat (Sacrosancta
Rom Ecclesia) unum verum Deum Patrem et Filium et
Spiritum Sanctum creatorem. . . Unum atque eundem
Deum Veteris et Novi Testament!, hoc est, Legis et Pro-
phetarum atque Evangelii profitetur Auctorem, quomam eodem^
Spiritu Sancto inspirante utriusque Testamenti sancti locuti
sunt, quorum libros suscipit et veneratur, qui titulis sequent-
ibus continentur.'
"Surely the expression 'Old and New Testament,' when
explained to mean 'the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel,'
can mean nothing else but the Sacred Books that commonly
go under these names.
"But if there could be any doubt about the matter it
would be removed by the reason that is subjoined— God is
the author of the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel, because
it was under the inspiration of His Holy Spirit that the saints
of both Testaments spoke, whose books, therefore, the Coun-
cil receives and venerates. The word 'locuti' evidently re-
fers to the written word, as in 2 Peter I., 21, and, in conjunc-
tion with libros, clearly shows that by Testament the Coun-
cil meant the books of the Old and New Testament— that is,
as it explains, the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospels.
"It is difficult to see how this explanation given by the
Council itself can be reconciled with the statement that the
Councils of Florence and Trent left the meaning of the word
Testament in the phrase referred to somewhat doubtful.
The Council of Florence certainly did not; and, Pallavicmi
tells us, the Council of Trent, in framing its decree, was
careful 'to follow the very words of the Council of Flor-
ence.*
Tt is defined both by the Councils of Trent and of Flor-
ence, that God is the auctor utriusque Testamenti, and as we
have just seen, that is the same as to say he is the author of
all the books of the Old and New Testament; and so it has
been expressly defined by the Vatican Council, as the Card-
inal himself admits. But, he says, the Latin word auctor
still leaves some ambiguity, for it is not equivalent to the
* Hist. Concil. Trid. Lib. VI. c. n, n. 11-14-
BISHOP HEALY L33
English word author. That may be very true, when there
is question of the words auctor and author in their generic
sense; it is too delicate a point for us to discuss, and it is
quite unnecessary to discuss it. For there is no question
now of the generic meaning, which as Cardinal Franzelin
clearly points out (Thesis III., No. i.) is determined by the
context, that is, by the special efficiency of which there is
question. Generically, both in English and Latin, 'author'
means the person who gives origin or authority to anything,
but in its specific sense the meaning will very much depc
on the kind of origin or authority of wiiich there is question.
The same may be the author of a law, the author of a book,
and the author of a crime, but in very different senses. Now
it is de fide that God is the author of the Books of the Old and
New Testament, and will the Cardinal undertake to say,
that when thus used in regard to books, auctor in classical
Latin is not equivalent to 'author' when said in reference to
books in English? We do not pretend to the Cardinal's
knowledge of classical Latin, but we know something of
ecclesiastical Latin, as used by the Councils of Trent and
Florence, and we are quite sure that auctor libri in ecclesiasti-
cal Latin is pretty much the same as the 'author of a book'
in English.
"It is de fide, therefore, that God is the author of all the
Books of the Old and New Testament; and we have s«.
that it is de fide that they are inspired throughout, whole and
entire, without any distinction between 'matters of fact'
and 'matters of faith and morals.' Well, now, in No. n,
the Cardinal asks, in what respect are the Canonical Books
inspired? 'It cannot be in every respect,' he savs, 'except
we are bound de fide to oelieve that 'terra in aeternum stat,'
that heaven is above us, and that there are no antipodes.'
If by 'respect' is meant every signification which a word of
phrase might have, scientific or popular, literal or meta-
phorical, he is evidently right ; but then it is hardly necess;
to tell us so. Surely the phrases 'terra in aeternum stat.'
'and heaven is above us,' "the sun rises,' and the like, have a
popular meaning which is perfectly true, and which might
134 BISHOP HEALY
be revealed by God, and which if revealed by God, in-
cidentally or otherwise, in that popular sense, we should
be bound to believe it de fide.
"But apparently this is not what Cardinal Newman means,
for in the next sentence he says : 'And it seems unworthy
of Divine greatness that the Almighty should , in His revela-
tion of Himself to us, undertake mere secular duties, and
assume the office of a narrator as such, of a historian, or
geographer, except so far as the secular matters bear di-
rectly on the revealed truth.' Does any one assert that God
in His Revelation undertakes the office of narrator, as such,
or historian, or geographer? We thought it was a well-
known distinction made by Catholic theologians of every
school between the things revealed propter se, or, as the
Cardinal calls them, matters of faith and morals, and things
revealed per accidens, including every other statement made
in Sacred Scripture, whether in narration, history, geography,
or anything else. God reveals none of these things propter
se. He does not undertake the work of annalist, historian,
geographer, as such. They are revealed on account of their
connection, necessary, useful, or accidental as the case may
be, with the main purposes of Divine Revelation. But as
Benedict XII. in his Dogmatic Catalogue of the Errors of
the Armenians very clearly signifies, they must be all believed
even those which have been revealed per accidens, because
they are all equally the word of God, and all serve a useful
purpose in the Divine economy of our salvation.* 'For
whatsoever things were written, were written for our learning ;
that through patience and the comfort of the Scriptures we
might have hope.' Rom. XV. 4.
' 'And what is man that he should undertake to pronounce
what is worthy, or what is unworthy of Divine Majesty?
If we were to attempt to do so, especially in God's revelation,
where should we stop? Does not the Socinian think it un-
worthy of God to reveal mysteries? The Rationalist, for a
somewhat similar reason, denies miracles. The ordinary
* See Franzelin note, Thesis iii. p. 352. The 114th error in the
Catalogue seems to consist in the fact that the Armenians assumed a
historical statement in Genesis to be false.
BISHOP HEALY L35
protestant contends that the Catholic teaching about the
Blessed Eucharist is utterly unworthy of God, and so he
gives up the literal, and adopts a metaphorical sense. It is
the old story — Durus est hie sermo, et quis potest eum
audire? Our reply is — Quis cognovit sensum domini, qui
instruat eum? Human wisdom left to itself would say that
of all unworthy things the most unworthy of God was to re-
deem the word by the 'folly' of the cross ; and it did say it by
the mouth both of Jew and Gentile.
"We have no objection to the statement that faith and
moral conduct is the 'drift' of the teaching that has the
guarantee of inspiration, or that the Council of Trent insists
on faith and morality as the 'scope' of inspired teaching,
provided always it is not thereby implied that Scripture is
not also inspired throughout, even in those things which
to us seem to have least connection with faith and morals.
It is in this sense and in no other sense the Council of Trent
speaks. In the preamble of the chapter it states, as Cardinal
Newman says, that faith and morality is the 'scope' of in-
spired teaching, and that the Gospel is the 'fount' of all sav-
ing truth and all instruction in morals ; and this is perfectly
true, but the main proposition to which everything else is
incidental is contained in the following words, which neces-
sarily imply the inspiration of every single statement made
by sacred writers. 'Sacrosancta. . . . Sy nodus . . .
orthodoxorum patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tarn
Veteris quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus
sit auctor, necnon traditiones ipsas, turn ad fidem, turn ad
mores pertinentes, tanquam vel oretenus a Christo, vel a
Spiritu Sancto dictatas &c continua successione in ecclesia
Catholica conservatas pari pietatis affectu et reverent ia
suscipit et veneratur.' From the beginning of the chapter
to the word veneratur is one single sentence ; the last part, as
written by us, contains the main assertion, the purport of
which is perfectly clear: that as God is the author of all the
books of the Old and New Testament, and, as the d
traditions regarding faith and morals were either sp< ken by
Christ himself or dictated by His Holy Spirit, therefore the
Council accepts and venerates both with equal affect kn of
136 BISHOP HEALY
piety and reverence — and why? because they are both
equally the Word of God. It must be carefully observed
that the words 'turn ad fidem, turn ad mores pertinentes' —
refer only to the traditions, and have nothing at all to do
with the preceding words. And they were inserted, as Pal-
la vicini tells us, in order to distinguish the divine traditions,
of which God is the author, and which concern faith and
morals, from purely apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions,
which are of their own nature disciplinary and mutable. So
far, therefore, is the Council of Trent from lending any count-
enance to the idea that all Scripture is not inspired, that it
distinctly affirms the divine authorship of all the books of
Sacred Scripture, and we have seen, pronounces anathema
against those who would dare to assert that they are not
'sacred and canonical,' and inspired Scripture throughout.
"There is one point to be carefully kept in mind in any
discussion on this important question, if we wish to avoid
grave errors — the difference between inspiration and revela-
tion. Inspiration, as we shall see further on, in its plenary
sense, implies three things, the Divine afflatus moving , en-
lightening, and guiding the writer — inspiratio active sumpta :
the state of the human agent under this Divine influence —
inspiratio passive sumpta; and, lastly, the product of the
combined action of God and man, that is , the book written
by the Holy Spirit through man's agency — which is inspir-
atio terminative sumpta. Inspiration therefore, in reference
to Sacred Scripture, essentially regards the writing — the
writing in fieri, and the writing in jacto esse. Not so in the
case of revelation. It need have no connection with in-
spired writing at all. In its active sense it is simply the Di-
vine manifestation of hidden things, and sometimes of things
not previously hidden ; in its objective sense it merely means
the things so made known by God. Inspiration, therefore,
necessarily implies revelation in the wide sense given above ;
but revelation, as in the case of Divine traditions not con-
tained in Scripture, may have nothing at all to do with in-
spiration. Let our readers bear this in mind, for the Card-
inal goes on to say that 'the Vatican Council pronounces that
supernatural revelation consists in rebus Divinis, and is con-
BISHOP HEALY 137
tained in libris scriptis, et sine scriptis traditionibus,' italicis-
ing as above, and implying thereby, it seems to us, ti I all
Sacred Scripture is not necessarily Divine truth or a Divine
revelation, and that revelation and inspiration are : al.
"What the Council says on the first point is cor. I in
the following sentence, and certainly will nc: h it the
meaning given above by implication : — 'Huic Divinae revc
tioni tribuendum quidem est, ut ea, quae in rebus I
humanae rationi per se impervia non sunt, in presenti quo<
generis humani conditione ab omnibus expedite, firma cer-
titudine, et nullo admixto errore cognosci possir. I do not
think the Council declares in that sentence that revelation
consists 'in things Divine.' but even if it dees, then all we can
say is, that every statement in Scripture is Divi: r, what
comes to the same, is the Word of God — as St. Paul himself
asserts, at least by implication, regarding the Scriptur -
certainly of the Old Testament, if not also of some of tl
Xew. iraaa ypa<pt] Oeoirvevcr-o^ . If everv scripture is Oeoirvevcr-
to? it may well be called Divine.
"As regards the second point, the Council does say that
the supernatural revelation is contained in the written be
and unwritten Divine traditions ; but concerning these same
books it says in the very next sentence, that the church does
not regard them as sacred and canonical, merely because they
contain this revelation without error, but because, having
been written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, t'
have God for their author, and as such have been handed
down to the church. 'Eos vero (libros) ecclesia pro sacris et
canonicis habet, non ideo quod sola humana industria con-
cinnati, sua deinde auctoritate sint approbati. nee ideo
dumtaxat, quod revelationem sine errore contineant ; sed
propterea quod Spiritu Sancto inspirante conscripti. Deum
habent auctorem, atque ut tales ipsi ecclesia? traditi - i
To say, therefore, that the Divine books contain the rew
tion of God, and even without any error, is declared by the
Council itself to be an inadequate description of their sacred
and canonical character.* The reason is manifest. A
* See Franz, page 575 The?:? IV.
138
BISHOP HEALY
might contain the whole revelation of God, and contain it
without error, and yet not be at all an inspired book, because
inspiration essentially regards the writing or authorship of
the book. If it is an inspired book, God is its author; it
must have been written in all its parts under the guidance and
inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God, so much so, that God
becomes responsible for every single statement it contains,
and therefore quite as much responsible for its statements
'in matters of fact/ as for its statements in reference to
'faith and morals.' All these truths will not have the same
intrinsic importance in relation to each other, or to the
economy of man's redemption ; but they are all divine as re-
gards their origin and their authority.
"And now this leads us to give, in conclusion, a very
brief explanation of the nature of inspiration as taught m
all Catholic schools, and it is as contained in the writings of
the Fathers, and of all our eminent theologians, since the
Council of Trent. Catholic teaching on this point has be-
come still more definite and dogmatic since the definitions of
the Council of the Vatican already referred to.
"The points of Catholic dogma clearly defined are, (a)
that God is the author of all the canonical books of the Old
and New Testament, (b) that these books have been written
under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God, {c) and hence
the entire books are inspired. The second of these points
more clearly and accurately defines the meaning of the first ;
and the third expresses the abiding consequence of the other
two, that is, the inspiration of the sacred books terminative,
as the theologians call it.
"God, then, is defined to be the author of all the Sacred
Scriptures, because they were written under the inspiration
of His Holy Spirit. Now, what is meant by being the author
of a book in this sense? It must mean here, as it means
everywhere else, either that He Himself wrote it, as He wrote
the Tables of the Law, with his own finger, which, of course,
is out of the question ; or that he dictated the sacred books
word for word to the inspired penmen, an opinion which has
been held by few, but is now justly and generally rejected;
or finally, as a minimum, it must mean according to the use
BISHOP HEALY L39
of language, that He directed or procured the writing of all
these sacred hooks ; that He suggested to the sacred writers
all the matter to be written — res et sententias — even that
known before, and finally gave them such constant, ever
watchful assistance in the composition of all these books as
to insure that everything which He wished should be said,
and that nothing should be said except what He wished, and
hence that there should be no trace of falsehood or error, for
which He, the principal and infallible Author of the book,
would, in that absurd hypothesis, be held responsible. The
very nature of Divine authorship requires this at least ; if the
instrumental author begin to write motu proprio, it is in no
special sense God's work; if he write anything which he is
not directed to write, it is not God's work so far; and if there
could be errors or mistakes in any book written by Divine
authority, God could never claim that book whole and entire,
with all its parts, as purely and simply His own — as written
in its entirety under the inspiration of His Holy Spirit.
Therefore, the Divine authorship of the Sacred Books, in
the sense defined by the Church, imperatively requires that
as a minimum, the impulse to write should come from God,
that He should suggest at least the matter, and that He
should preserve the sacred writers from all error, which, if it
were possible, would not be the error of man, but of God.
It is as absurd to say that a man could commit sin under the
impulse of the Holy Ghost, as to say that the sacred writer
could write error under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.
Therefore, as it is de fide that the Sacred Books, whole and
entire, wTere written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost,
it follows, at least as a conclusion theologically certain, that
everything written by the sacred writers is, what is called
in Scripture, and by the Church, and by the Fathers, and by
the people, verily and indeed the Word of God, unmixed with
any false, or erroneous, or merely human element.
"This doctrine, regarding the nature of inspiration, does
not imply that God did not, in most cases, leave the choice of
the words to the sacred writer. It does not even imply that
the w< >rds chosen were the most elegant, or most appropriate,
for expressing the Divine ideas in the writer's mind. It does
140 CANON DI BARTOLO
not imply the adoption of the graces of style, nor the niceties
of grammar, nor the exactness in scientific or rhetorical
arrangement. But it does imply that the words must be
suitable to express the writer's Divine thoughts, that his
language must be intelligible, and that the arrangement must
notbe such as will necessarily lead the readers astray.
"Again, inspiration does not exclude antecedent knowl-
edge of much of the matter to be written, nor labor in its
acquisition, provided always it is written by the human
author of the sacred Book, not motu propria, but in virtue
of the Divine impulse, consciously or unconsciously followed,
and written also under the Divine guidance, lest any error
might creep in, of which, as it could not originate from God,
He&could not accept the authorship or responsibility.
"Neither does our doctrine on inspiration imply that it is
confined to the autograph of the sacred writer. Inspira-
tion does not, terminative sumpta, consist in the material
book as such— in the handwriting, the ink, and the vellum;
but it consists in the book as a series of signs, with a definite
objective significance for the mind of man: and hence the
inspired books remain, although the autographs have all
perished."
Others who opposed the views of Newman were Brucker
(La Controverse et le Contemporain) , and Corluy in the same
periodical. Later Brucker published his views in a work
entitled "Questions Actuelles d'Ecriture Sainte." In Ger-
many Franz Schmid vigorously opposed Newman's theory.
In 1889 Salvatore di Bartolo published his "I Criten
Teologici." This was placed on the Index of prohibited
books by the decree of May 14, 1891- A corrected edition
which appeared at Rome in 1904 is permitted to be read.
The most widely circulated form of this work is a French
edition with certain additions by the translator. This was
made from the proscribed edition. Di Bartolo aimed to bring
about a union between the Catholic Church and all those
who dissent from it by keeping in abeyance everything non
essential on which there is difference of view, and insisting
only on the things that are dearly revealed, and on the things
of common belief of all Christians. Applying this theory to
CANON DI BARTOLO 141
inspiration he says: "Inspiration is a supernatural assist-
ance acting on the intelligence and will of the sacred wril
and causing him to write the true doctrine in things of faith
and morals, and true facts which are essentially connected
with things of faith and morals; and to write other things
with a sincere purpose and divine commission to save man-
kind."
Kxplaining his meaning he declares inspiration to be such
a co-operation of the Holy Ghost that the whole Scripture
should lie attributed to the Holy Ghost as its author."
Conceding that the Church has defined the divine author-
ship, di Bartolo affirms "that the Church has never deter-
mined the constituent elements of inspiration, and that
theologians are not agreed as to its nature." Hence this
author gives a very wide stretch to the free ground in this
great question. The substance of his own views may be
summed up as follows: Inspiration has three degrees. In
the things of faith and morals and facts essentially therewith
connected the highest degree of inspiration takes place, even
at times extending to the very wrords. Whenever there is a
doubt of the degree of inspiration the presumption is in
favor of the biblical expression until the clearest arguments
force us to admit the evidence of the human element. In-
spiration is not present in all sentences, neither always in the
forms of expression.
The least degree of inspiration is present in the acces-
sories to the things narrated in Scripture, and here inspira-
tion does not guarantee infallibility. Here therefore not all
doubt, equivocation, and^error are excluded. These things
are not to be said to the common people who are unable to
make the necessary distinctions; but di Bartolo believes it
not irreverent to speak of an error in the material part i if
Scripture. Such opinion, he says, offends not God, for the
error is not attributed to God, but to his secretary. If the
Son of God in his incarnation had natural imperfections ; if
God permitted errors gradually to creep into the text of the
Scriptures as they were preserved by men, why could not
God permit his secretary the inspired writer to commit cer-
tain defects in the narrati* >n i >f accessory things, when they
142 OTHER LIBERAL VIEWS
could not be imputed to God, but to the writer whom God
employed? It conflicts not with inspiration when the
writer uses old documents, therefore, why should it be ex-
cluded by inspiration that a writer in secondary things should
commit equivocations ? that he should follow popular beliefs ?
that he should fall into error? God, permitting that human
weakness should be manifested, saved intact the entire
divine message. The least degree of inspiration is present in
things non-religious in character, and here the human ele-
ment is not guaranteed infallibility. There is a certain in-
spiration here ; for the writer had a special commission to write
for the salvation of men, and his end in writing was good.
Inspiration extends itself to all the sacred writers have writ-
ten ; but in these accessory and non-religious things it is the
least degree of inspiration, which leaves more to the human
factor. Therefore the writer being by nature limited and
fallible, he may in these secondary things err and doubt.
To the non-religious order of Scripture pertain geography,
chronology, natural history, physics, defective philosophy
perhaps, and defects in literary style.
Though di Bartolo's views are in some things extreme,
and rightly condemned, there is every evidence that he wrote
in good faith, and with the sole purpose of seeking the truth.
At Turin in 1892, Canon Berta published his "Dei cinque
libri mosaici," wherein he defended the views similar to
those of Lenormant.
The Barnabite Semeria (Revue Biblique 1893, p. 434)
went further, and declared that it would be a most useful
thing for the Church if some one of sufficient ability would
separate the inspired portions from the uninspired portions
of Holy Writ.
The same views were advocated by the Barnabite Paolo
Savi in the "Science Catholique," 1892 — 93. Canon Jules
Didiot, professor at Lille in "La logique surnaturelle sub-
jective," 1 89 1, rejected the absolute infallibility of the Scrip-
tures, but after the appearance of the Bull "Providentis-
simus Deus" he retracted his opinions in favor of the more
conservative opinion in his, "Traite de la Sainte Ecriture
d'apres S.S. Leon, XIII., (Paris, 1894).
MSGR. D'HULST
In the year 1S93 a little before the appearance of the
Bull of Leo XIII. Msgr. D'Hulst, Rector of the !
theological faculty of Paris, published in the " Correspond-
ant" an article entitled "La Question biblique. " In this
article d'Hulst takes up the defense of Lenormant on the
ground that the placing of a work on the Index is not of
necessity a condemnation of its doctrine. After enumerat-
ing some of the reasons which may move the Congregation
to prohibit a book, he declares that the ideas of Lenormant
may have been prohibited for the reason that the world was
not ready for them. He declares that 'The hypothesis
by which inspiration is extended to the things narrated of
the origin of the human race, in such wise that the inspira-
tion confers not infallibility on these narrations, but only
joins doctrinal and moral truth to them, is adopted by a
certain number of learned and orthodox men
Such men admit that there may be in the Bible propositions
not strictly true. God is not responsible for these, although
he is the Inspirer of the whole work. The reason is that to
reveal is one thing; to inspire, another. Revelation is
divine teaching which must be true. Inspiration is an
impulse which determines the sacred writer to write, directs
him, moves him, watches over him. In the hypothesis
which I am explaining this moving (motto) renders him
immune from error in faith and morals ; they believe that
this preservation does not go further; they ber.eve that it
has the same limits as has the infallibility of the Church.
The promise of inerrancy was made to the Church for the
sole end that it might with certitude promulgate the rule of
faith and morals. It is true that the Scriptures are not
alone infallible, but also inspired. Yet although inspiration
extends to everything, perhaps it confers not infallibility on
all the statements of the inspired writer; perhaps this
privilege is restricted to the things of faith and morals.
Perhaps the other statements which are not by inspiration
rendered infallible, are only employed as the vehicle of the
teaching concerning faith and morals. It may be that God,
the Inspirer, who could have corrected the material errors
of the sacred writer judged it not useful to do this. These
arc the opinions oi the liberal school (ecole large).
144 msgr. d'hulst
"The adherents of this school assert : First, that the best
way to determine the effect of inspiration is to inquire into
its motive. . . . But the end which God proposed in
dictating the Holy Books is to teach man what he should
believe, hope, and do, that he may bring him to his super-
natural end. Therefore all the statements of Scripture
which conduce to this end must be divine affirmations, but
as to other things there seems to be doubt.
"Secondly, the Council of Trent declared the Vulgate
authentic, but only in things of faith and morals. Therefore
if the divine authority of the Vulgate is not denned except
as regards the things of faith, the authority of the Holy
Scripture is practically restricted within the same limits.
Why should it not be theoretically ?
" Moreover, the Vatican Council renewing the decree of
the Council of Trent declares the true sense of Scripture to be
that which holy Church holds. . . . But it adds that
the interpretation of which it speaks, and to which the rules
apply, is the interpretation in things of faith and morals."
Speaking of Cardinal Newman d'Hulst says: "Cardinal
Newman restricts the liberty afforded by this theory to the
obiter dicta. This timidity may readily be understood if we
reflect that the eminent author located the question in a
very dangerous point ; for he treats of the object or extent
of inspiration. Now if inspiration is of limited extent, there
are uninspired portions of Holy Scripture. This is a new and
dangerous formula, which it is difficult to bring into accord
with the decrees of councils and the teaching of tradition.
Hence it is evident why the prudent theologian restricted the
application to fragments merely accessory. This difficulty
is greatly lessened, and almost vanishes if we hold the total
inspiration of Scripture, but in such a sense that in certain
things not pertaining to faith the infallibility be restricted,
which, however is the proper effect of inspiration. To ex-
empt from infallible inspiration obiter dicta would be of little
use to solve the great exegetical difficulties.
Wherefore other writers diligently considering not the ex-
tent of inspiration, but the effect of inspiration, apply the
principle in a wide range not to merely accessory things, but
MSGR. D'HULST 1 15
to considerable portions of Scripture ; in the first place to the
portions which treat of, or seem to treat of scientific ques-
tions, then to other texts of greater moment and extent
which have, or seem to have, a historical character."
Msgr. d'Hulst affirms the sound doctrine concerning the
relation of the Scriptures to the natural sciences : ' The
Scriptures do not convey scientific instruction, and therefore
there can be no conflict. The Scriptures speak of these
matters in accordance with the opinions then in vogue ;
such matters are not written for their own sake, but for a
setting of religious ideas."
And now Msgr. d'Hulst comes to the most difficult
question of all ; the question which Pere Lagrange has
worked into his famous Methode Historique ; the question
which divides the greatest minds in the Catholic Church,
namely: May we apply to the portions of Scripture which
are historical the same theory which without detriment to
the faith we apply to the scientific statements of the Bible?
Msgr. d'Hulst declares this to be the axis about which all
future Biblical questions will revolve. Indeed were it not
for it there would not be a biblical question. The doctrinal
and moral parts of the Bible give us no difficulty. All the
w< >rld accepts the principles enunciated above concerning the
matters of natural science in the Bible ; but the history in
the Bible is the source of the greatest difficulties.
With admirable acumen, Msgr. d'Hulst declares that if
the question were to be submitted whether the historical
parts of the Bible should be treated in the same manner as
the scientific parts a negative answer must be given. "For
although we may deny that cosmology is taught in the Bil ile
no man may in any way imagine that history is not taught.
. At least a part of history is divinely taught, for
revelation itself is a dogmatic fact, and the whole series of
human events is bound up with revelation. The creation,
the primitive state of man, the fall, the promise of a Saviour,
the various divine covenants and the signs attesting them,
the events which prepared the way for the Messiah, the life
itself of the Saviour, his preaching, his death, his resurrec-
tion, the foundation of the Church, these are historical facts.
(10) U.S.
146 LAGRANGE
If these are false all religion is false. If they are not inspired
nothing is inspired. If the inspired writers who deliver
them are not by inspiration preserved immune from error,
inspiration is of no avail. Therefore the question is not
whether there is history in the Bible, but whether all the
historical facts which are found in this divine collection are
revealed, or at least attested by inspiration."
It seems to us that the principles here enunciated prove
the historical method of Lagrange to be impossible. And
yet Lagrange himself admits these principles. Thus we
read in the opening paragraphs of Lecture VI. in the
"Methode Historique:"
"When, in the previous Lecture on the authority of the
Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, I applied to history the
same principles as to science, the thought must have occurred
to you, that for every point of similarity there might be be-
tween science and history, viewed as matter for biblical
criticism, there were many more points of difference. Every
kind of knowledge has its own rules and methods. In the
first place, granted that we may hold that there is no science
in the Bible, it would be more than paradoxical to maintain
that the Bible contained no history, seeing that the Bible is
the history of salvation. Science, moreover, based as it is
upon experiment and calculation, is naturally outside the
sphere of the greater number of men as soon as it goes beyond
the mere observation of natural phenomena, while history,
in itself, is nothing but the record of the doings of men as
established by testimony. If in late years it has seemed to
move in a somewhat mysterious region, it is simply because
of the attention given to the study of sources which calls for
specialized knowledge and a critically trained mind ; but, in
itself, history is but the record of what eye-witnesses have
seen. So that while scientific theories like our own could not
possibly have found a place in the Bible without an abso-
lutely unnecessary revelation, and without doing violence
to men's minds, on the other hand, no supernatural help was
needed to write sound history.
"Hence there is no science in the Bible, although through-
out, an elementary knowledge of arithmetic is supposed, for
LAGRANG 1 17
that is well within the range of man; there are no meta-
physics in the Bible, although the normal use of the intellect
is always assumed; there is much history in the Bible, be-
cause the writing of history is familiar to all people who h;
reached the same stage as the Israelites. Now, if God did
not reveal to His chosen people any scientific or metaphysical
proposition, at that time beyond the range of their mind,
because it was not profitable for their salvation, we have
good ground for holding that neither did He reveal to them
any history that was beyond the range of what could be seen
or known except in so far as it was necessary for salvation.
Hence, and this is a further difference, we have no hesitation
in placing history, that is to say, the record of men's dee<ls.
in a different category from the sciences and from meta-
physics, because a man's salvation is inseparably connected
with his actions. Thus it is quite possible that God may
have made a revelation of history, and hence it is, that I
wish to exclude from the conclusions which follow, all that
concerns the Fall of man."
It is evident to all that there is an illogical sentence in
this statement. After declaring that history is not in the
category of science, Lagrange by inference places it in the
same category by declaring: "Now if God did not reveal to
his chosen people any scientific or metaphysical proposition,
at that time beyond the range of their mind, because it was
not profitable for their salvation, we have good ground for
holding that neither did he reveal to them any history that
was beyond the range of what could be seen or known, ex-
cept in so far as it was necessary for salvation."
The exact opposite should be the logical influence : from
the fact that history enters more intimately into the very
essence of revelation, God might well be supposed to safe-
guard it more especially, lest an error in one statement
might cast doubt on others more essential.
Msgr. d'Hulst rightly affirms that it is indifferent whether
we consider certain books such as Ruth, Job and others to 1 >e
historical, or doctrinal and moral treatises presented urn
the form of history. The thing is uncertain and in n< i v,
pertains to faith. "A more difficult question is presented 1 »y
148 msgr. d'hulst
the first eleven chapters of Genesis. Certainly they should
be held as historical were it not that grave reasons persuade
us that we have to deal here with a mythological tradition
of the most ancient oriental people, as F. Lenormant shows.
His theories indeed seem new and bold in the Church. That
they are new is not strange, since the documents of which he
treats were only lately found; but they are not more bold
than, for instance, the theory of St. Augustine concerning
the six days of creation. But they say: 'Errors are in-
troduced into the Scripture. Error excludes inspiration.'
We answer: This is rashly said. Error excludes inspira-
tion as far as it is imputed to God, not in as far as it is com-
mitted by the sacred writer. God could make himself
sponsor of all that goes into the Scriptures; but also God
could have limited inspiring action to these effects : to move
the writer to write ; to reveal to him certain truths ; to direct
him, and preserve him from all error in things of faith and
morals; and yet, when the writer employs documents, not
enter to correct their imperfections and less accurate state-
ments, except where they were contrary to the doctrinal and
moral end of inspiration. . . . There has always been
admitted the human element subordinate to the divine ele-
ment in the composition of the sacred books. All the com-
mentators and all the Fathers of the Church have pointed
out the differences of style, of genius, and of intellectual
equipment of the different sacred writers. If the Holy
Ghost could permit such defects, why not defects, in his-
torical narratives which pertain not to faith? If the infalli-
bility which is founded on inspiration be restricted to re-
ligious truths, there will be removed the gravest difficulties
which are moved against the Scriptures."
With true Catholic spirit Msgr. d'Hulst proclaimed that
he submitted his opinions to the infallible authority of the
Church, whose voice he was ready to obey. After the con-
demnation of Lenormant 's book many other treatises had
■been published which advocated analogous views. Rome
had kept silent; and Msgr. d'Hulst interpreted this silence
as a liberty to speak his views, always in subjection to the
Church.
LEO XIII. 149
The silence of which this writer spoke was soon broken.
In the same year Pope Leo XIII. published his Bull, " Pro-
videntissimus Deus, " in which the principles of Msgr.
d'Hulst are tacitly condemned.
True to his profession Msgr. d'Hulst and his associate
faculty signified their obedience to the Soverign Pontiff.
They begin their letter thus; "The Rector and professors of
the canonical theological Faculty of the University of Paris,
after carefully reading and meditating on the encyclical
letter ' Prov. Deus, ' declare themselves prepared with a
willing mind to accept and obey all that Your Holiness
therein teaches, commands, and advises, especially con-
cerning the effect of inspiration which extends itself to all
the parts of all the canonical books so that it excludes all
error."
Against Msgr. d'Hulst's article Jaugey wrote in "La
Science Catholique, " 1892-93, and Brucker in the " Etudes, "
1893. Jacquier, recognizing that the historical difficulties
had brought about the new concept of inspiration, suggested
that the adherents of the "new exegesis" should collect
all the scientific, chronological, and historical difficulties.
The conservative theologians should then attempt their
solution ; and perhaps thus concessions might be made on
both sides, and the points of difference lessened. This is
the wisest advice, but it is a great undertaking, and still
awaits men capable of accomplishing it.
In a letter to the Archbishops, Bishops and Clergy of
France under date of Sept. 8, 1899, Pope Leo XIII. reitera-
ted with great earnestness his condemnation of the liberal
theories of inspiration: "Venerable Brethren, regarding the
study of the Holy Scriptures we again call your attention to
the instructions which we have given in our encyclical
'Providentissimus Deus" which we desire that professors
should make known to their pupils, and add the necessary
explanations. Let them warn (their pupils) against the
alarming tendencies which seek to thrust themselves into
the interpretation of the Bible, and which if they prevail
will soon ruin inspiration and the supernatural order.
Under the specious pretext of removing from the adver-
150 LAGRANGE
saries of revelation arguments which seems irrefutable
against the authenticity and veracity of the Holy Books
certain Catholic writers have thought well to accept their
arguments on their side. Pursuant to these strange and
dangerous tactics they have labored with their own hands
to make breaches in the walls of the city which they have a
mission to defend. In our aforesaid encyclical and in
another document (Letter to The General of the Friars
Minor) we have justly dealt with the dangerous temerities.
While encouraging our exegetes to keep abreast of progress
and criticism, we have firmly maintained the principles
sanctioned by the traditional authority of Fathers and
Councils and renewed in our days by the Council of the
Vatican. "
It is clear to all that the Supreme Pontiff in these utter-
ances has in mind the theories taught by Lenormant, Loisy,
and Lagrange, and thought possible by Msgr. d'Hulst.
In the Revue Biblique of 1896-97 Pere Lagrange publish-
ed a series of articles entitled "The Inspiration of the Holy
Books." His theory is spread out over a great mass of
words, and often obscurely enunciated, but we may gather
from it the following principles. " God teaches all that is
taught in the Bible ; but he teaches nothing except what is
taught by the inspired writer, and the inspired writer teaches
nothing except what he intends (by his writing) to teach. "
Lagrange calls this a very simple theory, declaring that thus
inspiration does not change the sense of terms, nor the
character of propositions, nor the species of literature to
which the books belong. It is only by studying these that
we may come at the idea and intention of the author. The
illustrations given to prove this principle seem to us puerile
and illogical. Lagrange cites the sentence from the Psalms:
' There is no God, " as an evidence of a statement which the
author did not wish to teach, and as therefore a proof that
the author teaches only what he wishes to teach. Issues
are confused here. No man believes that every sentence in
the Bible, without regard to whose utterance it be, or its con-
text, is true. In such absurd supposition Christ would be
a malefactor, a blasphemer, and God the Father would give
LAGRANGE l.'.l
place to Baal. But there is no logical connection between
these simple self-evident facts and a system that is pro-
pounded in order to allow its author later to say that the
primitive history of the Bible is closely allied to myths.
Thus he continues:
"On the other hand, no one will deny that not all that
appears to be historical is really historical ; and so I need not
insist upon the now generally accepted and perfectly simple
theory — so simple indeed that I can hardly claim as my own
the words which express it — to the effect that the value of
statements seemingly affirmative or negative depends en-
tirely upon the style of literary production in which such
apparently categorical statements appear. The first thing
to be done is to determine the various literary styles found
in the Bible and presenting the appearance of history.
Catholic sentiment rightly shrinks from the use of the word
'myth,' but between myth and history there lies a very wide
field. Let us examine, then, the different forms of literary
production known to the ancients, so as to find out how
many of them the Bible contains, in order to be able to
estimate the true character of the expression used.
"Can it be said that there are myths in the Bible? The
very idea jars on the ordinary mind, and it will not allow
the word to be uttered. A few Catholic writers, daily grow-
ing more numerous, prefer to draw a distinction.
"Naturally they are not anxious to retain the word if it
gives pain. But they find its use convenient to express the
likeness — at least the external likeness — there is between
myths and primitive history; only, they carefully add that
the mythological elements found in the Bible have been
carefully 'stripped of any polytheistic tinge, and are only
used to express lofty religious ideas.' The phrase is that of
Dom Hildebrand Hopfl, a Benedictine, used in a pamphlet
directed against the rationalistic methods of the higher
critics.*
"No one, as far as I know, has attempted to analyze this
statement or any equivalent one, so that the popular mind,
* HSpfl, Die hoehere Bibelkntik, Paderborn, 1902, p. 63. Cf. Revue
Bibhque, 1902, p. 603.
152 LAGRANGE
is uneasy and not favorably disposed. Speaking for myself,
I think it would be well definitely to put the word aside, on
the ground that words — which in themselves are of little
importance — should only be used in the sense assigned to
them by general use. We are accustomed to associate the
word 'myth' with the idea of a false or even childish religion.
Let us leave the word alone, and try and reach the root of the
matter.
"We may take as an example the story of Lot's wife,
changed into a pillar of salt, in circumstances with which
you are familiar. The passage is quite definite: 'and his
wife looking behind her, was turned into a pillar of salt.'
(Gen. XIX. 26) To understand its full meaning you should
have seen the locality. To the south of the Dead Sea, on the
western side, there lies a long hill, resembling a whale cast
ashore. It is an inexhaustible salt mine, and supplies all the
homes of Jerusalem. On the side of the sea, by erosion or
by some other geological phenomena, blocks have been
formed which look like statues. There has always been at
least one for the tradition, which now no longer speaks of the
wife of Lot, but of bint Lout — the daughter of Lot. Now,
ask those who are interested in folklore or mythology — ask
yourselves, ask your own common-sense and your conscience.
There can be no doubt what the answer will be. Were we to
find this phrase elsewhere than in the Bible, we should simply
say that popular imagination had personified a thing, and
having found in some block of salt a human likeness, con-
nected it with the memory of a woman who disappeared in
some great catastrophe. To be changed into stone is gener-
ally a punishment, as in the case of Niobe." (Methode
Historique, VI.)
The falsity of Lagrange's principle must be evident to all,
We may concede that God is responsible for all that is
taught in the Bible, without committing God to a solid firma-
ment, a geocentric system, etc. ; for these things are not
taught in the Bible. The language of a people was accepted
to express truth without affirming or denying their ideas on
scientific phenomena. But when Lagrange affirms that the
inspired writer teaches nothing except what he wishes
LAGRANG L53
to teach, the statement is evidently false. Many propl:
uttered prophecies which were sealed for ages after they
wrote. In many cases the inspired writers did not com-
prehend the full sense of what they wrote. The typical
sense of Holy Scripture is a legitimate sense, and yet I
human writers did not know it . Will any man say that
Moses knew that the brazen serpent in the desert was a type
of the Crucified Saviour ?
Lagrange next declares that scientific criticism was satis-
fied the moment the principle was conceded that the Scrip-
tures spoke according to appearances. He then asks : "May
we apply the same principle to the historical books?" All
his subsequent argument, all his illustrations are in defense of
an affirmative answer to this question. As we have before
stated, he makes some restrictions of his theory. There are
some strictly revealed historical facts, as for instance the
fall of man. Thus he declares in his VI. Lecture of the
Methode Historique :
"But it is quite evident that the first chapters of the Bible
are not a history of mankind, nor even of one of its branches,
for the simple reason that we could with difficulty find one
fact for every thousand years, and even then we should not
know where to place it.
"You may object that you are anxious to retain those
first chapters as so many landmarks in the history of the con-
tinuity of religion. Very good; but we must bear in mind
that that is what they are, for their only importance is tl
of fingerposts along this wide waste. But let us take care to
recognize their true character. You will agree with me when
I say that among those persons there are perhaps some names
of peoples: if I go so far as to suggest names of towns, you
will recall Sidon to mind. That being so, why not allow
that among these fragments there are also names which
merely stand for an impersonal progress of mankind,
lost memories, the source of which no one kn< >ws, occupying
in history the same relative position as the ether with which
we fill space, without fully realizing what it does, simplv
because we must put something between the starry
spheres ?
154 LAGRANGE
"The very fact that nothing so restrained is found any-
where else, that mythology proper is excluded, itself suffices
to guard from error anyone who seeks to see things as they
really are. These characteristics, taken by themselves,
would suffice to show forth the influence of monotheism, and
that all is in keeping with the dignity of the dogma of in-
spiration.
"When I began, I said that I placed the history of Orig-
inal Sin on one side. Not that I desire to affirm the his-
toricity of all the details of the account; on that subject I
have elsewhere clearly expressed my mind.* But some
might perhaps be tempted to conclude, from the ideas I
have been developing, that the essential fact itself cannot
have been handed down by tradition. I do not think that
follows from the premises. I have endeavored to draw a
distinction between the details and the core of stories which
may be handed down most faithfully for centuries in the
most varied surroundings, everywhere undergoing some
transformation because it is everywhere tinged with bor-
rowed colors, yet remaining everywhere recognizable.
"The study of religious histories, and particularly of
primitive histories, has familiarized folklorists with this
fact. There seems to me, therefore, no impossibility what-
ever in the transmission of the account of the Fall from
generation to generation for thousands of years.
"But even supposing such transmission to be impossible,
dato, no n concesso, we have only to see whether Original Sin,
which evades any strict historical proof, is or is not part of
the divine revelation. It is quite certain that it is included
in revelation. The conclusion therefore is that it has been
revealed. And its revelation seems quite what might be
expected, considering its capital importance, and its neces-
sary connection with Redemption. If the dogma involves
as a necessary consequence the unity of the human race,
our reasoning will be the same. And really I fail to see that
in this matter we are all awkwardly placed. History is
silent; so there can be no objection from that quarter.
* Revue Bibiique, 1897, p. 341 seq.
LAGRANGE 155
Natural science brings against it the difference of races. It
was perhaps somewhat of a difficulty, and is perhaps a
difficulty even now, for those who maintain the immutability
of species. But if moderate evolution tends to predominate
science, I should be much surprised if it were not able to
explain this phenomenon by its own principles.
"On account of the Church's definition, I believe in
Original Sin according to the Church's meaning; but ab-
stracting from this dogmatic point, based upon the unshake-
able foundation of revelation, there can be no objection to
assigning primitive history its true character, even though
it may not have been sufficiently understood by the men of
bygone days."
Lagrange divides historical books into three classes:
The romance, history proper, and primitive history. The
romance is a creation of the imagination, and may be the
means of inculcating truth or falsehood. Strict history has
a certain fallible latitude in details without ceasing to be true.
Primitive history holds a middle place between romance and
real history: " No ancient people has solved the mystery
of its origin. There are certain annals which are the
foundation of history, and there are legends. In the latter
case if a historian reproduces the narrations current in his
day, to preserve them to future generations, he gives them
for what they are worth. Everyone is familiar with this
kind of history. For example, it is well known that to indi-
cate the origin of different peoples men derive them from
an eponymic hero. The Dorians have as ancestor Dorus;
the Phoenicians, Phoenix. The method deceives no one,
there is therein no properly called affirmation. Men have
only wished to reduce the confused questions of origins
to a certain order."
Lagrange believes that an imaginative historical narra-
tive, provided it teach a true lesson, may have place in the
Scripture. lie eites the Book of Tobias. Whatever we may
say of the example chosen, certain it is that the principle is
applicable. Even though we hold thai Job is a historical
personage, no one will deny that the substance of the book
is the creation of an inspired imagination to inculcate a gr<.
moral lesson.
156 LAGRANGE
Of course the chief place in the historical books of the
Bible is held by history properly so called. But even here
Lagrange declares that the inspired writers did not affirm
the precision of facts and words "avec la derniere acribie. "
Absolute exactness in all details is not in the nature of his-
tory ; the inspired writers reproduced the substantial truths
of words and facts.
This part of Lagrange's theory pleases every right-
minded scholar. Certain modal differences in the Evan-
gelists are well explained by this theory. But venerium
in cauda.
Lagrange comes to the third application with a certain
timid hesitation: "But the history of origins, this strange
history where the narration of facts and the uncertain
legend jostle each other (se coudoient) in close contact, if
(such history) enters into the Bible, how shall we recognize
it there ? How discern the true from the false ? The imagi-
native narration and the parable teach no fact ; real history
teaches all facts ; but (in primitive history) where lies the
truth? How may we arrive at certitude? And most of
all in this mixture what becomes of the divine illumina-
tion? the infallible judgment, judicium infallibile de acceptis?
"Indeed it is a most delicate question, but we can not
draw back. A difficulty encompasses us on all sides. Let
us endeavor to solve it after having implored light.
"In the first place I ask: In what consists this infallible
judgment when there is question of a work of the imagina-
tion or a parable? The facts related have no objective
reality ; they have no purpose except to present a lesson ; to
present a truth under the convenient form, as the parable
of Lazarus, or the Canticle of Canticles. The same holds
in our hypothesis; (primitive history) aims to present a
truth, nothing but a truth in the most apt manner, whether
it be a simple affirmation or the adapting of an ancient
legend to national forms. But how shall we discern ? Is it
proven that we must effect this discernment so quickly and
ea'sily? Is the Scripture so clear as some protestants pre-
tend? On the contrary is it not of faith that it is obscure?
We know that a parable declares the existence of no object-
LAGRANGE L57
ive entity. Do we always know when we are dealing with
a parable? Some speak of the parable of Lazarus; others
believe it to be real history. . . . The same is true of
Tobias, Judith, Jonas. If therefore God leaves us uncertain
whether Judith be true history, why could he not leave us
in the same incertitude when there is question of distin-
guishing the various elements which compose a book ? Who
shall decide the question ? The Church as a final resort ;
exegetes in the first attempt, as humble servants of the
Church."
After attempting to find proof for his system in the fact
that Fathers and theologians have admitted allegories and
metaphors in the first chapter of Genesis, Lagrange continues :
" Having established these preliminaries we definitivelv ask:
Is primitive history found in the Bible with the same literary
characteristics as among other peoples, save only that it is
the medium of an infallible teaching?" It is equivalent to
say : Is the history of Noah and his sons to be placed on the
same plane as the legend of Romulus and Remus?
Lagrange answers his question: " Here is our conclusion:
There exists in the Bible a primitive history, the basis of
which is guaranteed by divine truth ; but certain circum-
stances may be considered either as metaphors and alle-
gories ; or a Hebrew accommodation of the oral tradition.
These circumstances are more the clothing of the truth than
the truths contemplated in the teaching, and in interpret-
ing one may occupy himself less with their material object
than with their relation to the principal truth taught. But
when the sacred writer employes documents or uncertain
oral traditions he has the guidance of the infallible judg-
ment. The judgment preserves him from all formal error in
his statements, and assures the fitness of what may be called
national or popular metaphors to render correctly his proper
teaching. I distinguish between the foundatii >n and certain
circumstances which have place in all primitive history;
and I say that the foundation of primitive biblical hist- irj
always true. But if even the foundation of the primitive
history of other peoples may be false, why make an ex-
ception in favor of the Bible? It is simply on account
158 LAGRANGE
the divine truth, because the Bible is inspired. ... It
is most reasonable to ascribe such action to God, and to hold
that he teaches us a true history, whatever be the means
chosen by him to deliver it to us. He could have taught
us all the circumstances with the same certitude, and we are
disposed always to believe them true, except when an
examination of the text shows us that the writer did not
intend them as true history. . . . For example, if it be
proven, as M. Oppert alleges, on whom I leave the responsi-
bility, that the ages of the patriarchs are artificial reductions
of Chaldean epochs, it is evident that the man who made
this mathematical operation has not pretended to write
history, and does not give us as history the result of his cal-
culations. He has only wished to supply the defect of
positive chronology. Our rule shall be to accept as true
all that the author delivers as such, substance and circum-
stances. We shall always consider the foundation to be
true history ; and we shall never cast doubt on the circum-
stances except when we are persuaded thereto by what we
believe to have been the intention of the author. " Revue
Biblique 1896 pp. 510 et seqq.
Lagrange has made many applications of his theory:
"Berosus tells how the fish-god Oannes, by a series of
apparitions, led men on to civilization ; then he enumerates
kings with very long and empty reigns. The Bible is more
serious, is closer to truth, and, I venture to say, closer to
history. On going back in thought to the beginnings of the
race, the historical deeds of individuals entirely escape us,
though we do possess the elements at least of the history of
civilization ; in other words, the progress it has made, and the
great discoveries which have led it on to the point reached.
When the Bible tells us that the arts developed little by
little, that nomadic life gradually assumed its own general
characteristics, different from those of town life, that men
did not always play the kinnor and flute, nor work brass and
iro'n. ... I suppose anthropology recognizes it to be
quite correct, and that it is impossible otherwise to conceive
the beginning and progress of civilization.
LAGRAXGE 159
"But can that be said to constitute history, duly noted
and handed down? I do not think so, the reason being
that history, or rather what we mean by real history, de-
mands some knowledge of the circumstances, or at least of
the time and place. The Bible, of course, cites proper
names. But, as I pointed out at the beginning, that is not
enough, because those proper names are given in a Hebrew
form which is not their own ; and besides, what is the value
of a proper name, of which the form has undergone change,
in the midst of such a vast expanse of time? And if the
syllables do not correspond to syllables, nor yet, doubtless,
the sense to the original sense, what is there left of the his-
torical setting of the fact? Can anyone see therein an his-
torical reality which involves the truthfulness of the sacred
writer? To what extent is it of faith that Jobal invented
music ?
"And yet, those proper names are a most interesting
study. They often seem to me to be the very name of the
object invented, thus perhaps witnessing to a marked de-
gree the admirable wisdom of the biblical writer. Could
anything, in fact, be more restrained, prudent, and sound
than the statement that this or that art, known in our own
day, had a beginning, that music was invented 1 >y a musician?
It is a great virtue to be able to say nothing when you kn< >w
nothing. It called for much more than that, to put an
obstacle in the way of the Greeks; though they, too, were
well acquainted with this elementary method.
"Let me give you some examples found in Pliny.* Klos-
ter invented the distaff (icXcocrTtjp, distaff) ; Staphylos (<na-
4>v\rj bunch of grapes) mingled water and wine. The oar
was discovered in two places — the handle at Kopae
(icarm) handle) and the blade at Plataea (irXarT] flat). Or it
may even take the form of a genealogy : thus, according to
Philo of Byblos, fire is descended from three brothers named
Light, Fire, and Flame. It is all true enough, and deceives
no one. Turn to the first story we have in the Bible. I
pass over the name of Abel, which probably means shep-
* Hist. Nat., vii. 57 Cf. Etudes sur lea religions semitiques.
160 LAGRANGE
herd. The first town is called Henoch, derived from a
word meaning dedication. All have heard of the trumpet
of Jubilee, jobel: jobel in Phoenician means ram: the connec-
tion between the two is very natural; the ram's horn was
used as a musical instrument . Can we wonder that Jabal was
the father of shepherds, and Jobal the father of musicians?
The name Cain means blacksmith in Arabic; and it was
Tubal-Cain who was the first maker of musical instruments.
I do not seek to lower the Bible by making this analysis ;
on the contrary, I think it works out to its honour.
"It was quite out of the question to write real history,
and yet is was of importance to show by a continuous chain
of evidence the unity of the history of salvation. The Bible
avoids absurd or obscene accounts; there is no pretence of
ignoring sin, but sin receives its due punishment, and is not
glorified, as though it changed its character by becoming the
privilege of heroes. The Bible avoids even unfounded
stories. It is taken up with tangible things, with discoveries
which are still known; it relates their origin and progress,
and leaves them in a hazy light, which has no outward sem-
blance of actual history. If the personality of Lamech seems
to stand out against this background it is only in an elegy.
Could the author have told us more clearly that there exists
no history of these periods ?
"I find a similar regard for reality, in so far as it can be
reached and set forth, in the story of the Deluge and the
Tower of Babel.
"There is a modern school, represented by Canon Cheyne,
which considers the Deluge mythical — mythical, that is, in
that it is the translation of an astronomical phenomenon into
history. But the great majority of anthropologists con-
sider that the Deluge, of which accounts are everywhere
found, is the memory, more or less modified, of real floods.*
M. Suess, professor of geology at Vienna, and M. Raymond
de Girard, professor of geology at Freiburg, have even con-
sidered they could indicate the physical causes of the Baby-
* M. Loisy does not seem to have definitely made up his mind about
these two systems, nor does he point out in his work on Babylonian
myths how fundamentally different they are.
LAGRANGE 1(51
Ionian deluge. | Be that as it may, the general character i 1
the biblical story points to a real flood, the religious interpre-
tation of which has far surpassed its historical importance.
Nor is the Tower of Babel a mere product of the imagina-
tion. The biblical writer had certainly seen the gigantic
unfinished temple of Borsippa, which Nabuchodonosor find-
ing in ruins in consequence of the bad state of its gutters,
made a boast of achieving. It was no mere flight of the
imagination to look upon Babylon as a proud city where all
languages were to be heard. And after M. Blanckenkorn s
careful investigation, the results of which were accepted as
satisfactory by M. de Lapparent, we are entitled to hold that
the sinking of the south part of the Dead Sea may have
taken place at a time when there were men on the earth,
and that the account of the destruction of Sodom and Gom-
orrah cannot be simply set aside as purely mythical — as the
picturesque expression of the horror inspired by scenery
unique in the world for its sublime desolateness. Undoubt-
edly the biblical story goes far beyond the mere fact, other-
wise it would not faithfully express what it wishes to ex-
press ; but it is always careful to have as the background of
its picture some striking reality which fills the horizon,
whether it be in the depths of the desert or of the past."
(Methode Historique, VI.)
Withal Pere Lagrange believes in an unrestricted inspira-
tion extending even to the words. In his third conference
before the Catholic Institute of Toulouse, which conferences
were afterward published under the name of "La Methode
Historique," he speaks of inspiration thus : "We must have
recourse to the principles of faith and to psychology if we
would understand what the grace of inspiration really is,
what special light it communicates to the intellect, and how
the will is moved. From the Church's definitions we may
conclude that God's help is antecedent and not consequent,
that it is an impulse, and so necessarily a light bestowed upon
him, for man is no mere machine, and his will does not de-
termine anything without a corresponding light in the in-
tellect. Now since this help is antecedent to the wh
X Cj. M. de Girard's article in the Revue Thomiate.
(11) U.S.
162 LAGRANGE
operation, it must extend to the whole work, and conse-
quently even to the very words ; but since the sacred writer
used his ordinary faculties, it impressed nothing ready-
made upon the mind — not even the thoughts. On this
particular point I have nothing new to say, and nothing
clearer to propound.
"So far reason has been working within its proper limits ;
it is but fitting, however, that it should show more reserve
in dealing with the divine historical fact. Our guiding prin-
ciple in this matter must be clear to all. It is no business of
ours to decide what God must have done, or what it was
fitting that He should have done ; all we have to do is humbly
to note whatever forms part of His work. Such questions
are not to be solved by each man according to his taste ; we
must be content to be guided by facts.
"The demands of reason are to be taken into account as
long as the question merely concerns what God may or may
not inspire, and to whom it is fitting that He should betake
Himself to do so. We may never affirm that God could
teach error — that would be blasphemous — but we ought to
be very careful about confidently concluding that a thing is
fitting or unfitting. Let casuists, by all means, use probable
reasons, in obscure cases, but, as straightforward critics, we
will confine our attention to facts. What we want more
especially is that vigorous care in reasoning characteristic of
true theologians: the opinion of such men is far less to be
feared than the routine of those who make theology a mere
matter of professional knowledge, who are unable to bring
the light of reason to bear upon what they dislike, except
through prejudices begotten of the necessarily narrow out-
look they allow themselves.
"If a French priest were to celebrate Holy Mass with
covered head, he would be guilty of an act of grave irrever-
ence, which could only be paralleled by celebrating in China
with head uncovered. We have not the same ideas as had
the ancients concerning history, morality, literary property,
use of pseudonyms, borrowing — in more or less disguised
form — from other books, the revision and re -editing of works.
Your respect for inspired authors may make you wonder
LAGRANGE L63
whether you are to attribute to them what to you seems im-
proper. Do you not see that you are condemning the ac-
1 1 »ns of the missionary in China?
"But we must subject the historical idea of inspiration to
a more searching analysis, and as we have dealt with the
person inspired, let us now turn to the aim of inspiration. If
we only knew the exact relation in which inspiration stood
to divine teaching a great result would be achieved. No one
hesitates to say that inspiration goes far beyond the limits of
religious teaching, since it extends to everything, even to the
words themselves, while religious teaching is not everywhere
found. It would be a mistaken application of St. Augustine's
principle that God does not teach in the Bible what is not of
use for salvation, to suppose that God ceases to inspire when
not actually teaching a religious truth.
"The consequence would be that all that is non -religious
in the Bible would not be inspired. Now it is difficult to see,
for instance, where lies the religious teaching of the Book of
Ruth. In controversy with protestants it has often been
maintained that all dogma is not contained in Scripture, for
the simple reason that the sacred writers had no intention of
always teaching it ; they wrote as particular circumstances
demanded, sometimes to teach, but also to encourage, con-
sole, or recommend, as in the letter to Philemon ; and we may
add that throughout, the wrhole Psalter, rich as it is in the
loftiest religious truths, it is never the Psalmist's direct object
to inculcate religious truths, since he addresses himself to
God, whom he has no intention of instructing when he con-
fesses his iniquities and asks for assistance from Him. Still
less does the Psalmist teach God historical or natural truths.
So that one may quite fairly ask whether the aim of inspira-
tion really is instruction. That it is not its direct aim seems
clearly to follow from the distinction between revelation and
aspiration. The Bible contains God's teaching: the religious
truths He taught were communicated by revelation, and it
is not essential that revelation should coincide in point
time with inspiration. On the other hand, if, in that teach-
ing, we take the facts not directly bearing upon our salvation,
we may say that generally speaking, in their natural
164 LAGRANGE
historical aspect, there was no absolute need of God's teach-
ing them, since man's memory would have sufficed to retain
them.
"Inspiration leads to writing; and the aim of writing is to
fix and record previously-acquired knowledge, so that the
grace of inspiration has as its primary object not to teach,
but to preserve the memory of revealed truths, and of the
historical facts which enable the order and sequence of reve-
lation to be understood, and that, although the aim of the
sacred writer himself be to teach : the notion of inspiration
is wider in range.
"It follows from this first point, that the doctrine con-
tained in an inspired book is not necessarily perfect in its
literal and historical meaning. God, in wishing to preserve
the memory of facts of importance in the history of man's
salvation — occasionally merely of secondary importance,
as in the case of the Book of Ruth — determined, perhaps, to
preserve the memory of the imperfect ideas men had of the
Godhead at a given stage of revelation. You remember we
admitted the idea of essential progress in the Old Testament.
He does not teach those imperfect ideas to us in the form in
which they are expressed, nor does He desire that we should
confine ourselves to them. Were .we to do so, we should be
making a mistake, for through His Son we have a higher
knowledge of His infinite perfection ; it was His wish that we
should have knowledge of those ideas, the better to appreciate
the need in which we stand of His light and grace. And so it
is quite possible that we may find in the Bible inferior senti-
ments expressed, not only by the impious, but even by such
as lived in the hope of a clearer light ; thus the tone of the
Books of Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus is no doubt practical
enough, yet often wanting in moral elevation, and lacking
that exquisite delicacy which constitutes the glory of Chris-
tian virtue. The meaning has to be spiritualized in order to
raise it to the Christian standard, and through its spiritual
'meaning the Holy Scriptures regain in our eyes their full
value. And hence the Church, full of reverence as she is for
the Word of God, obliges no one to read it, and all instinct-
LAGRANGE 166
ively feel that they derive more profit for their souls from
one chapter of the Imitation than from the whole Book of
Leviticus.
'If we consider the Spirit of God which inspired it, the
Bible is the noblest of books; but its aim and object is not so
lofty. God inspired the preservation of this teaching, but
it is far inferior to the teaching we find throughout the
Church. They are egena elementa, the words spoken to them
of old: for us our Lord reserved more saving words. The
facts speak for themselves.
' Yet we must not go too far. Let us remember what we
said before — reason itself, as well as faith, will bar the way
when it needs must be barred. It is impossible that God
should teach error. It is therefore impossible, not that the
Bible, recording the words of all kinds of men, should con-
tain no error, but that an intelligent study of the Bible
should lead us to conclude that God taught errnr
" But what do the sacred writers teach ? They teach, we
are told, what they categorically affirm. Now it has long
since been pointed out that the Bible is not a mere collection
of theses or categorical affirmations. There are certain
forms of literary composition in which no absolute state-
ment is made as to the reality of the facts related : they aro-
used merely as the groundwork of a moral lesson— of this
the parable is an example. Now inspiration does not change
i lie forms of composition : each must be interpreted according
to its own particular rules. It is not necessary that I should
insist on this point; it has been fully accepted in the Etudes
by Pere Prat, and to me it seems the very best means of
meeting current objections to the truthfulness of the Bible.
To-day, however, 1 wish to look at the question from
another standpoint, and consider the method of divine
teaching as shown by the Bible itself.
"As our starting-point we shall take the facts we have
just noted.
'We all agree that everything God teaches must be re-
ceived with reverence, but it is quite clear that in the Bible
this teaching is not to be found in ready-made statements
standing in a state of Splendid isolation. It is mingled with
166 LAGRANGE
numberless stories, discussions, poetical effusions, anecdotes,
prayers, and metaphors. We all willingly admit that the
inspired writer has not always the intention of giving instruc-
tion in the name of God, as is quite clear, for instance, when
he prays to God for pardon of his sins ; though it is none the
less true that few prayers of the Bible contain such valuable
teaching as does the Miserere. And so it is possible that
there may be divine teaching, even when the sacred writer
seems to make no mention of it. On the other hand, we
must not be in too .great a hurry to receive as a statement
made by God what the writer is merely relating, without
taking the trouble to indicate it as his own. If religious
teaching itself is frequently a resultant whose formula the
Church alone is competent to state, with still greater force
does this apply to those secondary elements which only
figure in Scripture to clothe the truth, or, if you prefer St.
Augustine's figure, to serve as the sounding-board of the
lyre. All this goes to prove that God's teaching is infinitely
beyond our own, even in the method of which He makes use,
and that, consequently it is not to be judged by our
standards.
" Some few years ago one of my brethren Pere Lacome, in
a little book, entitled Quelques considerations exegctiques sur
le premier chapitre de la Genese, which was published with the
fullest approval of Pere Monsabre, drew the exact distinction
that is here needed. His theory had not the success it
would have to-day, because less attention was then paid to
such problems. I shall take the liberty of quoting a few ex-
tracts : 'This small nation (Israel) owed to its Prophets, and
to them alone, its rise above all others. Thanks to them,
their ideas were purified from errors concerning the Godhead.
But apart from and outside this one point, the
Prophet had no call to rectify the ideas of his people, and he
left them as they were : he took them as he found them, as
inconsistent as are the ideas of a child, false figures of the
true, radically incomplete ideas, as the ideas of men will ever
be. Yet the Spirit of God gave himself full play in the
maze of our illusions, without ever adopting, to the extent
of identifying Himself therewith, an erroneous opinion; He
LAGRANGE 167
may be said to have leaned upon it, or better, to have glided
over it, even as do the rays of sunshine over a faulty mirror,
or a pool of muddy water, without thereby contracting any
stain.'
"How are such faulty statements to be reconciled with
the dignity of the Holy Ghost? After all, we are concerned
with a book whose author is God, who can neither deceive
nor be deceived. It is the standing difficulty. 'Even grant-
ing,' P. Lacome proceeds, 'that the sky spoken of in Genesis
is a solid vault, which in reality it is not : can the Holy Spirit
be said to have fallen into error? Our own common -sense
can give the answer. When a teacher wishes to teach a
child science — astronomy, for example — he proceeds step by
step, not being able to convey at once the whole of his knowl-
edge to the mind of his pupil. Before he can go forward he
must have a starting-point, and so the ideas already in the
mind of the child will have to serve as the foundation of all
his teaching. Those ideas are the only material to hand,
the only forces wherewith to work to set the mind in motion
and cause it to go forward.
"When a master has to enter into the mind of his pupil,
he endeavors to discover the weird and foolish ideas it has ;
and when he has found them, he makes use of them to insinu-
ate some particles of truth ; and then to help him to digest the
first lessons of astronomy, he goes back to the myths and
gropings of old, he personifies the sun, speaks of its going
forth on its daily course from its rise to its setting ; but can
it be fairly said that in so doing the master approved of all
the illusions that fill that youthful mind? Now in the
Bible the Holy Spirit is such a master, such a preacher.
"He is a teacher in the midst of the other teachers of
this world; He teaches as they do, and in their own way ; He
has a teaching of His own knowledge, of His own super-
natural knowledge, and He wishes to impart it to man. ..."
Speaking of the Wisdom of God rejecting the knowledge of
man, he says: 'With the sole qualification of Teacher of
Divine Science she came, and established her chair by the
side of other chairs, in the public places and cross-roads she
gathered together all the passers-by without any distinction,
168 LAGRANGE
and to them set forth her teaching ; she marked out her own
definite position, and outside that position she spoke the
language of the people, as all great teachers of the human
race have done. And if to man, who is all his life but a
little child, she spoke in childish terms, and spelled out to
him the mysteries of Heaven, we really cannot blame her for
our own stammering and inconsequence, she whose teaching
is so justly pure and lofty. Our own ignorance alone should
be blamed.'
"This theory, I said, created no sensation. Yet there
was a watchman on the alert. Pere Brucker, in the Etudes,
denounced the views as dangerous, and concluded that,
'Pleasing as Pere Lacome's hypothesis may at first sight
appear, it seems to me fraught with ruinous consequences.
. No wise and conscientious human teacher would
act in such a way; nor would he bolster himself up on the
wrong ideas of his pupil even to begin his work, and run the
risk of their being mistaken for truth, or of discrediting his
own lessons in advance. Still less, therefore, could the divine
master, Truth itself, make use of error, in any degree what-
ever, to open human intellects to His supernatural doctrine.
He could only exploit (if I may be allowed the word) what
is good and true in our ideas.'*
"The theory is perhaps painted in rather dark colors.
Pere Lacome had said, to lean upon, or better, to glide over;
Pere Brucker interprets him to mean, 'to bolster himself
up.'
"Pere Lac6me was particularly careful to draw a dis-
tinction between two essentially different forms of teaching,
where his critic would appear to see only one form. It
would be foolish for a teacher of geometry to tolerate in his
pupils wrong ideas about a straight line: how could he
'bolster himself up' with that? But need the teacher of
grammar trouble himself about the truth of the examples
cited to prove the rule, and when he is teaching them how
to spell the name of King Pharamond, may he not pass
lightly over the obscurity of the early history of France ?
* Etudes, p. 504. 1895.
LAGRANGE 169
"Now if it be the case that St. Paul and our divine Savi< ur
have argued from Holy Scripture according to the mental
habits of the Jews, without seeking the exact text and with-
out binding themselves down to its precise meaning, and
that the Apostles set forth as the fulfilment of a prophecy
what is merely an application based upon the similarity of
the incidents, with how much more reason may they not
have made use of current Jewish ideas in matters literary
and scientific without seeking to rectify them? And if this
course of action is not unworthy of the Author of our faith,
why may we not presume that a similar course may have
been adopted by other sacred writers in their exposition of
divine teaching ? The theological statement of the fact is not
of recent origin: as is so frequently the case, the idea was
stated by St. Augustine, St. Thomas moulded it, and, in his
Encyclical, Providentissimns Dens, Leo XIII. has con-
secrated it anew. The rule is so excellent as to need no
apology for its repetition .
'We have first to consider,' says Leo XIII., 'that the
sacred writers, or, to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost
who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things
(that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the
visible universe), things in no way profitable to salvation.'*
Hence they do not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but
rather described and dealt with things in more or less figur-
ative language, or in terms which were commonly used at
the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at
this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordi-
nary speech primarily and properly describes what comes
under the senses ; and somewhat in the same way the sacred
writers — as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us — 'went by
what sensibly appeared,'! or put down what God, speaking
to men, signified, in the way men could understand and
wore accustomed to' (Providentissimiis Dens, § 28).
"Then after a section working out the same idea, the
Pope concludes that, 'The principles here laid down will
apply to cognate sciences, and especially to history jo).
* Etudes, p. 502. 1895. f St Augustine, De Genesi ad litt., 0, 20.
170 LAGRANGE
"F. Brucker accepts St. Thomas' formula, but takes it to
mean that the Bible, 'in relating, for instance, the formation
of the firmament, the standing still of the sun, etc., speaks
according to outward appearances, and consequently speaks
truly, though its language is not properly scientific. '*
"It would be more correct to say that in such cases the
Bible is neither right nor wrong. It is quite clear that the
ancient writers knew no more than they appear to know.
When I use similar statements, I know, like everyone else,
that it is wrong, so much so that the error has become a mere
figure of speech. Now, can an author who looks upon the
sky as a solid vault, and who definitely states his opinion in
that sense (for otherwise we should never have guessed it),
be really said to express himself in a manner at once exact
and true, though not strictly scientific? Is it possible in
such a case to make a distinction between science and truth ?
"It may be objected that if the statement is not true it
must be false, and then what becomes of the truthfulness of
the Bible? The objection admits of a simple answer. A
statement must be either true or false: but here, there is no
question of a statement. Remember what St. Thomas says :
the sacred writer 'went by what sensibly appeared.' If you
confine yourself to mere appearances, you do not judge the
thing in itself; and where there is no such judgment there is
neither affirmation nor negation. Now it is an elementary
logical fact that truth and error are only to be found in a
formal act of judgment.
"The Holy Father very briefly states that the same cri-
terion should be applied to history."
Lagrange cites the following passage from Comely:
"The interpreter ought to pay great attention to the
manner in which the sacred writers give their historical
accounts. For, as St. Jerome points out, 'it is customary in
Scripture for the historian to give the common opinion as
generally received in his own day ;' and again ; 'many things
are related in the Scriptures according to the opinion of the
day in which the facts occurred, and not according to what in
* St. Thomas, Summa Theol., p. 1. q. lxx., a i. ad 3.
LAGRANGE 1 , 1
reality took place (et Hon juxta quod rei Veritas continebat) .'
This observation of the holy doctor is most important, i [e
thus warns us not to press the words of Scripture to make
them meet the present state of scientific knowledge, but to
explain them in accordance with the ideas and intentions of
the sacred writer. What a number of difficulties would
never have been raised had all interpreters always kept St.
Jerome's word of warning before them?" Lagrange con-
cludes :
" It means to say that historical accounts, and even those
which bear the fullest token of their historical character,
must not be understood in the light of the knowledge of God
who knows all things, but in the light of man's limited out-
look, and, that it is quite conceivable that God should not
communicate further information to the sacred writer, who
knows no more than other men on a particular point, even
though, in consequence, he should make use of a materially
wrong expression.
"Use all the arguments ex convenientia you like these
are facts, clear biblical facts, and easy to check. From
this it follows that the sacred writers speak according to
what appears to them. The theory is a traditional one. It
has merely to be applied to particular cases as the nerds of
criticism call for it, making due allowance for the distinction
between history and natural science. And it is precisely in
that application of traditional principles to the results of
human industry that consists the progress of theological
science," (Methode Historique, pp. 91- 116.)
The defect in the system of Lagrange is its excess: jahis
vera involvit. Though he disclaims to place history on the
same plane as natural science, in some of his applications
he does so. Nay more, as we have seen in his own words, he
makes Leo XIII. in his encyclical " Providentissimus Deus"
sponsor for this new theory. As we have given the papal
encyclical complete in our present treatise, we refer to that to
show the falsity of Lagrange's appeal. The P< >pe gives rules
for dealing with the objections drawn fr< »m science ; and then
declares that men are to deal with kindred sciences and with
history in the same manner. That is by showing that our
172 LAGRANGE
adversaries often demand more for their hypotheses than
they are worth ; by showing that many things formerly held
by them are now abandoned; and by showing that what
is clearly proven does not conflict with Scripture. These
are the principles which the Pope advises to apply to history.
Fr. Delattre, S. J., has shown this conclusively in his
"Autour de la Question Biblique" wherein he ably exposes
the excesses of the system of Lagrange. It seems also that
a recent decision of the Biblical Commission sanctioned by
the Pope, forbids some of the applications of Lagrange's
theory.
This is the wording of the question proposed to the
Commission: "Is it lawful for the Catholic exegetist to
solve the difficulties occurring in certain texts of Sacred
Scripture, which appear to relate historical facts, by assert-
ing that in these we have to deal with a tacit or implicit
quotation of a document written by an uninspired author,
and that the inspired author did not at all intend to approve
or adopt all of these assertions, which cannot, therefore, be
held to be free from error?"
The answer reads: " In the negative, except in the case
when, due regard being paid to the sense and judgment of
the Church, it is proved by solid arguments; (i) that the
sacred writer has really quoted the sayings or documents
of another ; and (2) that he has neither approved nor adopted
them, so that he may be properly considered not to be speak-
ing in his own name." This answer was submitted to the
Holy Father, and signed and sanctioned by His Holiness on
February 13, 1905.
In a private audience granted me in June of 1905, the
Holy Father Pius X. spoke sadly of the tendencies of some
Catholic scholars, who have been led away by the labored
erudition of the Rationalists ; and who have accepted some
of the false principles of "higher criticism."
When Pere Lagrange defends the theory that in scientific
facts the inspired writers spoke according to appearances,
he says nothing new ; the principle has been handed down
from the Fathers. When he admits the presence of allegory,
parable, and metaphor in the Holy Books, especially
LAGRANGE 173
in the early chapters of Genesis, we agree fully with him.
But when he applies his theory of appearances to real his-
torical personages there is an excess. For instance, when
the Scriptures declare that Joshua arrested the course of the
sun it affirms a truth, a truth that could not have been
better enunciated by the most accomplished astronomer of
our day. It affirms that a day was miraculously lengthened.
The same is true when it is asserted that God created a
firmament. It assigns to God the creation of the universe
which is spoken of as the ancients saw it. But when the
Scriptures assert that Sarah went down into Egypt, and was
taken into Pharaoh's house, if the account be not true as
history, nothing is true. Every circumstance proclaims
that the writer wished to be understood as writing genuine
history. And yet, Lagrange disposes of the event as fol-
lows :
"Can that whole story which God willed to be preserved
be said to be above the imperfections of the religious truth
of those days ? Did it come more directly from God to our
souls than does the religious truth on which we look to the
Church for a final decision?"
Lagrange asserts that he preserves the groundwork of
the history, and applies the theory of folk-lore only to the
details ; but one may see by his own application of his system
that he treats as details substantial records of events such
as the incest of Lot, the destruction of Sodom, the rape of
Sarah, etc. Now these events are recorded as history ; they
have no purpose if they be legendary ; and it seems incom-
patible with the Church's definitions to declare such narra-
tives to be merely folk-lore.
The phrase folk-lore is a favorite expression of Lagrange.
In his theory, primitive history ceases to be history. It is
simply a collection of folk-lore ; and its relation to religion
lies only in this, that no false ideas of faith or morals are
found therein. Thus monotheism purifies primitive history
from the errors of the folk-lore of the idolatrous nations.
We believe that this theory is false for the reason that it does
not leave to the Bible the character attributed to it by the
Church. The error is in an excessive application of a
174' LIBERAL THEORIES
principle which has a substratum of truth. It may well be
admitted that in the mere details of facts of history abso-
lute precision is not demanded in order that it be true his-
tory ; but no theory may lawfully be applied to the history
of the Bible which makes any part of it anything but true
history. It must be true history ; and its facts must be true,
even though they have no immediate relation to doctrine or
morals. We can not reason here a priori ; it is not for us to
determine how God should have delivered his message :
the definition of the Church, though it leaves a free ground
for discussion, allows no man a theory which makes any
part of the Bible other than true history. Allegories, par-
ables and metaphors presented in their proper setting are
not inconsistent with the truthful character of a book; but
the myths, fables, and legends of folk-lore presented as
history are formally false, and can not be a part of a book
of which God is the Author.
In 1904, the Rev. Ferd. Prat, S. J., published a small
brochure entitled La Bible et l'Histoire. The work is a
synthesis of the opinions of Lagrange, and adds little that is
new. He also invokes the Encyclical Providentissimus
Deus in support of the historical method. Others who have
in a more or less degree favored the new exegesis are Alfred
Durand (Revue du Clerge francais), F. Girerd (Annales de
philosophic chretienne), P. Batiffol (Bulletin de litterature
ecclesiastique), G. Bonaccorsi (Studi religiosi), Vincent
Zapletal, and Vincent Rose.
As before stated, we believe the evil of the new theory to
lie in its excess, and hence care must be taken to distinguish
what sound dogma may admit in the new exegesis. This is
an exegetical question and can not be treated here.
It is however not in accordance with truth to invoke the
encyclical of Leo XIII. in support of these theories. The
words of the encyclical itself and many other utterances of
the pontiff manifest that he condemned the ultra views of
the very men who cite the "Providentissimus Deus" in
support of their theories. It is also ridiculous to allege
St. Jerome as authority for the historical method. The be-
fore mentioned work of Fr. Delattre has clearly demon-
strated the falsity of this claim.
LOISY 1 7.")
The able presentation of the new theories has proven
the truth of the Latin proverb: "Nihil est tarn improbable
quod probando not fiat probabile."
The Belgian Benedictin Dom. Sanders published in 1903,
a treatise under the title "Etudes sur St. Jerome" in which
he attempted to base the liberal exegesis on the authority of
St. Jerome. The Literar. Rundschau, XXXI., 1905, has
ably shown the defective critique of Dom. Sanders' work.
It is a mangling of history to compel it to support a theory
already determined.
Alfred Loisy has drifted so far from orthodoxy that it is
scarcely worth our while to examine his views on inspira-
tion. In his Etudes Bibliques (Paris, 1901) he discusses the
new science of criticism as applied to the Bible. He de-
clares that "Scripture contains a divine and a human ele-
ment; but these two elements so compenetrate each other
that they form a divine -human work in which the divine
action and the human action cannot be separated. These
two operations act per modum unius, as the Scholastics say.
An inspired book is wholly the work of God, and wholly the
work of man. To distinguish the inspiration of the matter
from the non-inspired words; or to assign the dogmatic and
moral texts to God, and assign other things to the human
author is to operate the vivisection of the books."
M. Loisy next proceeds to admit a "relative element" in
the scriptures. This relative element comes from the fact
that the books express the beliefs of the times in science
and in certain parts of history. The Scriptures were adapted
to the conditions of the times, and hence with the progress
of science an imperfection is revealed, and this must always
be verified in human progress. That which men call errors
in the Scripture is nothing more than its relative part, which
marks the stage of human progress at the date of the origin
of the book. There will thus be an ever changing element in
exegesis as human progress goes on; and there will be a
fixed element, for the church safeguards the truths which
never change. In a word the inspired book is a product of
the times, and reflects the state of learning, of customs, and
in a way, of the moral code of the times. Hence the f.
176 ZANECCHIA
eleven chapters of Genesis are not historical ; but a presenta-
tion of the philosophy of creation in the form of the Chaldean
traditions.
In consequence of these views M. Loisy was compelled
to leave the Catholic Institute of Paris, where he had taught
for twelve years. Five of his works are on the Index of
prohibited books. It seems quite evident that Pius X. had
the opinions of M. Loisy in mind when in his allocution to
the newly created cardinals on April i8, 1907, he declared:
"As for tradition, everything is relative and subject to
mutations ; consequently the authority of the holy Fathers
is reduced to a nullity."
Zanecchia is a pronounced advocate of the new exegesis.
He follows closely the teaching of Lagrange, but is bolder
in applying them. We reproduce here a few passages in
the original Latin from his most recent work, "Scriptor
sacer sub div. Insp. juxta sent. Card. Franzelin, Romae
1903:" "In sacris ergo libris qui historici appellantur,
sub forma historica qua conscripti fuerunt, non semper vera
historia factorum eorumque chronologicus ordo reperitur,
quia scopus hagiographorum non erat ubique veram his-
toriam humanarum rerum tradere, sed communiter utebantur
historicis notionibus, et prout in vulgo erant, ad religiosas
vel morales veritates docendas. Qui proinde in ea quae
sacra historia vocatur accuratam veramque historiam ubique
reperire praesumit, se exponit certo periculo inveniendi
non historicam veritatem sed historicos errores, qui tamen
neque Deo inspiranti neque hagiographo scribenti imputari
possunt, sed unice inquirenti historicam veritatem ubi nee
Deus nee hagiographus earn docuerunt [docuit]."
"Demum nihil prohibet scriptorem sacrum ad ostenden-
dam processionem omnium creaturarum a Deo, uti docu-
ments ac traditionibus in quibus rerum eventus plus vel
minus poetica descriptione narrantur. Sic in primis Genesis
capitibus introductio dierum in instantanea creatione, ordo
quo res a Deo processerunt, descriptio formationis proto-
parentum, eorum felicitas ante lapsum, descriptio paradisi
voluptatis, arboris vitae et arboris scientiae boni ac mali in
medio paradisi, fluvii qui inde egrediens in quattuor partes
HOLZHEY 177
dividebatur, relatio colloquii Dei cum lapsis protoparentibus,
tunicarum pellicearum quibus Deus eos vestivit etc., sunt
narrationes veridicae quantum ad radicem eventuum, sedin
earum forma descriptiva orientalis poetica extranea non
fuit. Hagiographus autem narrationes illas accepit prout
in usu erant apud populos, et in sacro Libro retulit, non
quidem ut auctoritate propria illas approbaret, praesertim
in earum forma, sed quatenus lumine inspirativo iudicavit
conscribendas esse, ut populi cognoscerent cuncta mundi
bona non alium praeter Deum auctorem habuisse, qui
specialem providentiam erga hominem manifestavit, singu-
laremque misericordiam una cum iustitia in eum
ostendit." . . .
"Ut igitur concludamus, narrationes biblicae neque
omnes historicam veritatem habent, neque omnes historica
veritate destitutae sunt, et quamplures ex eis inveniuntur
in quibus fundamentum designat veridicum atque histori-
cum factum, forma vero et circumstantiae quibus traditur
ex poetica arte proveniunt. Similiter omnes biblicae asser-
tiones veritatem continent, haec tamen neque semper abso-
luta est, neque ubique relativa manet, sed in aliquibus
absoluta est et in aliis relativa. Vera itaque intelligentia
Script urae maximam eruditionem requirit, ubi vero haec non
sufficit, exspectandum est iudicium Ecclesiae, cuius est
iudicare de vero sensu ac interpretatione Scripturarum . "
For more than twenty years the new exegesis was being
propagated with great activity in France, England, and in
other lands before Catholic scholars in Germany entered
into the movement. In 1903, the Bulletin de Litterature
Ecclesiastique reproached the German theologians (Bard-
enhewer, Hoberg, etc.) with being stationary, and with
not realizing that there wTas a biblical question. In 1902,
Prof. Karl Holzhey published his work "Schoepfung, Bibel
und Inspiration," (Vienna and Stuttgart). Though more
temperate than the French "£cole large," Holzhey admits
an imperfect side of the Scriptures. The inspired writer
has his own individuality, and impresses it on his work. He
is also the child of his times, and impresses on his work the
beliefs of his age. Divine inspiration is consistent with
(12) H.S.
17S VON HUMMELAUER
these imperfections. The inspired writer never utters a
formal lie ; but is not necessarily ahead of his age except in
the case of direct revelation. Holzhey then asks the ques-
tion: Whether inspiration so strengthens the writer's
human judgment that he commits no substantial error. In
his answer he distinguishes between the main truth which
the writer wished to express and the mode of expression.
The mode of expression is not necessarily determined by
divine power. Again as the very nature of a human work
is to be human and therefore imperfect, without a series
of miracles the work of the inspired writer cannot be totally
preserved from imperfections. In these there is no formal
falsehood : the writer has made use of his data honestly
and truthfully; but yet as the work bears the impress of a
human author, it will also have human imperfections.
Holzhey condemns the theory restricting inspiration to things
of faith and morals, and will not exempt "obiter dicta"
from inspiration. He extends inspiration to all the Scrip-
ture ; but the cooperation of the divine and human elements
leaves a certain human imperfection in the work, not of a
nature to defeat God's purpose.
In 1904, Fr. Franz von Hummelauer, S. J., published in
the series of "Biblische Studien" a brochure entitled "Exe-
getisches zur Inspirationsfrage." This work caused much
amazement to those who had known the learned exegete's
work in the "Cursus Scripturae Sacrae." Fr. von Hum-
melauer is a pronounced advocate of the new Exegesis.
The ground principle of his whole system is the greater role
given to the human side of inspiration. He confesses in the
foreword that he has made large study of French works on
the subject, which admission prepares us to find in his work
the influence of the "ecole large". He declares that the
time is not yet come to formulate definitive theories on in-
spiration; but yet he puts forth his hypothesis in a very
positive manner. Von Hummelauer groups his views under
three heads: "(1) the form of literature in which the nar-
rative portions of the Old Testament have come down to us ;
(2) the human side of Biblical inspiration; (3) the human
authors of the inspired books."
VON HUMMELAL'ER 17!»
Von Hummelauer acknowledges that he is more a col-
lector of what others have written than an original creat< r
of his treatise. And true enough on the first page we find
the principle of Lagrange : Every word in the Bible is true
in the sense that God and the inspired writer understood it
and wrote it. The sense of the human author is determined
by what von Hummelauer calls the remote context, that
is the literary form of the inspired work.
Father von Hummelauer draws the attention of his
readers not merely to the historical novel, but also to the
fable, the parable, the epic; again, to the form of religious
history, of antique history, of national tradition or folk-lore,
of the Midrash, and of the prophetic or apocalyptic narrative.
The author believes that God can move the inspired writer
to make use of one and all of these various literary forms in
his naratives. And what becomes of Biblical inerrancy in
this case? An inspired parable, or epic, or historical novel
is truthful in the same way in which profane works of the
respective literary form are considered truthful. The reader
well knows that the religious historian makes the material
and the form of his narrative subservient to edification ; he
knows that the antique historian represents his facts in an
artistically free form; that in folk-lore, fiction is not limited
to form, but extends to the contents of the narrative, though
some, and perhaps a great many, of its statements, may be
historically true; that the Midrash resembles our passion-
play in representing a Biblical narrative in such a way as to
inculcate a religious or moral lesson; finally, that the apo-
calyptic narrative contains a great many symbolic repre-
sentations.
According to Fr. von Hummelauer, several of the Old
Testament narratives actually present some of the fore-
going literary forms. Scholz had suggested that the Book
of Judith might be a parable, but Fr. Prat mentions the
Book in connection with the Midrash.1 The epic is repre-
sented in the psalms on creation, c. g., Ps. 135, and on
Pharaoh's death in the Red Sea. The historical novel is
1 Etudes, 1902, i\\, 635.
ISO VON HUMMELAUER
mentioned in connection with the Books of Ruth, Judith,
Esther, and Tobias by such writers as Fr. Prat,2 Fr. Brucker3
Scholz,4 Schanz,5 Vigouroux,6 E. Cosquin,7 L. Fonck,8 A.
Durand,9 Lagrange,10 and Gayraud.u Finally, von Hum-
melauer is of opinion that the Book of Genesis presents the
form of national tradition or folk-lore, while the Book of
Ruth may be considered as a form of family tradition. He
gives three reasons for his view as to the Book of Genesis:
(i) The formula 'these are the generations' or 'this is the
book of the generation' occurs some ten times in Genesis,
and replaces the Hebrew expression 'elle toledoth; it appears
to be agreed that the rendering is not exact, but the Rev.
author belives that the rendering 'this is the national tra-
dition concerning heaven and earth,' or 'this is the folk-
lore concerning Adam,' would be correct. The author of
Genesis claims, therefore, to write a series of national tra-
ditions. (2) The primeval records of all other nations have
passed into national tradition or folk-lore ; now, there is no
evidence to prove a special divine intervention in favor of
the earliest Hebrew records. (3) The first eleven chapters
of Genesis present a remarkable affinity to the national tra-
ditions of other nations, so that we naturally consider them
as their Hebrew parallels.
Fr. Von Hummelauer considers in the second part of
his pamphlet the historian of the Old Testament rather
than any other inspired author. The author supposes the
wellknown principle that by merely quoting a source we
do not become responsible for the objective truthfulness of
the same. A quotation is true if it faithfully reproduces
2 Etudes, 1902, iv., 624 8.
3 Etudes, 1903, ;., 231.
4 Kommentar iiber d. B. Judith u. liber Bel u Drache; Leipzig, 1898-
5 Apologie, 576, 582.
6 Revue Biblique, 1899, 50.
7 Ibid., pp. 50 8.
8 Civilta Catt., 1903, x., 580.
9 Revue du Clerge franc., 1902, xxxiii., 8.
10 La methode historique, Paris, 1903, 83 8.; Revue Biblique, 1896, 511.
11 Revue du Clerge franc., 1903, xxxiv., 118.
VON HUMMELAUER 1 Si
the original text. In the same way, a history of Rome ac-
cording to Livy, e. g., does not vouch for the objective
truthfulness of the narrative; such a history is true, if it
faithfully represents the history of Rome according to the
record of Livy. It cannot be called in question that the
Bible contains quotations, and at times these quotations
are said to be colorless so that they cannot be distinguished
from their context except by critical means.*
Rev. Fr. von Hummelauer maintains that the Books
of Samuel, of Kings, and of Paralipomenon are a history of
Israel according to the Annals quoted in these books and
corrected according to the prophetic source utilized by the
writers; that II. Mach., III. — XV. professes to be a history
according to the writings of Jason, that the Books of
Joshua, Judges, and of I. Mach. must be considered historical
in the same way in which the foregoing books are historical ;
that most of the Old Testament quotations found in the
New Testament are citations according to the Septuagint
translation ; that several typical applications of Old Testa-
ment passages on the part of New Testament writers may
have been made according to the current interpretation of
Judaism; that finally the names of the Old Testament
authors are given by New Testament writers according
to the current Jewish tradition. In none of these cases,
therefore, can we hold the inspired writer responsible
for the objective truthfulness of his course, unless he freelv
vouches for the same. This does not impair the historical
character of the inspired books ; for they are as truthful as
historical documents usually are. In fact, they are more
reliable than other historical documents, seeing that gross
errors are incompatible with the dignity of an inspired work.
Nor does this explanation conflict with the Fathers, seeing
that they explained away their historical difficulties by hav-
ing recourse to a spiritual meaning of Sacred Scripture.
Yon Hummelauer cites Pope Leo's encyclical as author-
ity for his views, and repeats the formula of Lagrange, that
the inspired writer is the child of his times, that he stands
* Cf. Prat, Etudes, 1901, i. 4S5; Durand, Revtu du Clergt jrane., 1902,
xxxiii.. 20 ff. ; Lagrange, Revue Biblique, 1896, 50S.
182 LIBERAL OPINIONS
on the scientific plane of his age, and his knowledge is limited
by the horizon of his age. Therefore we must not read our
opinions into the books, but draw the author's opinions out
of them. He concludes that the question within proper lim-
its belongs not to dogma, but to literary criticism.
Fr. von Hummelauer quotes the following sentence from
Durand (Revue du Clerge francais XXXIII., 1902) : "Men
have compared the inspired word of God with the Incarnate
Word of God. The Apostle says that the Incarnate Word
was made like to us in all save sin : we may say that the in-
spired word becomes a human utterance in all save error."
Von Hummelauer evidently accepts this as a most apt
simile. He develops it still further: ;'Yes, that (error) is
the bound which is reached but not passed. The Son of
God was sinless, but he was tempted : he was not to see cor-
ruption ; but he died and was buried. Man's word having
become God's word is free of error, but it comes to the
bound of error. Not to it is stranger the argumentum ad
hominem which uses error, though it does not affirm error."
It seems that this example is most unfitting and irrever-
ent. It proves nothing for the new exegesis. In the cate-
gory of sin there was no weakness in the Son of God : he was
not tempted from within. He did not come to the bound of
sin, and there stop. So likewise we may logically argue
that in the category of error there is no weakness in the
Scriptures ; they do not stop at the boundary of error. They
have human elements corresponding to the human in Christ ;
they are not always written in the finest style ; the expres-
sion may not always be the most apt ; they employ the scien-
tific notions of their time ; but their enunciations are always
true. Though they treated history without the critical
method, they were upheld by the power of God to write
true history.
In our review of the liberal opinions on inspiration we
have not contemplated to give all the authors. We have
given the ablest exponents, and we believe that those omit-
ted add nothing new to the principles here reviewed. Fr.
Hildebrand Hopfl (das Buch der Biicher, Freiburg, 1904),
closely follows Zanecchia; Engelkemper (die Paradieses
ST. JEROME L83
fliisse, 1901) and Norberi P ■ grundsatzliche Stellung
der Katholischen Kirche zur Bil »elforschung, Paderborn,
1905). add nothing to the theories of Holzhey and von
Hummelauer.
Before closing this review of the liberal opinions we sub-
mit a brief notice of the manner in which the adherents of
the New Exegesis present what they choose to call St.
Jerome's "law of history."
In the XXVII. chapter of Jeremiah is narrated that
Jeremiah prophesied the Babylonian captivity. In the
XXVIII. chapter, Hananiah, the son of Azzur, contradicts
Jeremiah, and declares that within two years the God of
Israel shall break the yoke of the King of Babylon. The
Lord reveals to Jeremiah that Hananiah had spoken a lying
prophecy. Jeremiah charges the false prophet with the
lie, and announces to him that he should die that same year,
which duly came to pass.
The Hebrew mentions Hananiah as "Hananiah the son
of Azzur the prophet who was of Gabaon." The Septuagint
departs from the Hebrew, and calls him a pseudo-prophet.
"In his comment, on Jer. XXVIII. 10-11. Jerome writes:
' 'The Seventy do not translate the clause 'two years. ' Neither
do they speak of Ananias as a prophet, lest they should seem
to call him a prophet who was not a prophet: as ij many
tilings were not spoken of in the Sacred Scriptures according
to the opinion of that age, in which the events arc related, and
not according to the intrinsic truth of the tiling itself (quasi non
multa in Scripturis Sanctis dicantur juxta opinionem illius
temporis quo gesta referuntur, et non juxta quod rei Veritas
continebat). Even Joseph is called in the Gospel the father
of the Lord." A little further in his commentary on Jer.
XXIX, 5 ff., St. Jerome repeats: "How could Holy Scrip-
ture thus call him a prophet, although it is denied in H< ly
Scripture itself that he had been sent by the Lord? But
truth and the law of history is observed, as we said before, not
according to what was, but according to what was believed at
that time (Sed historian Veritas et ordo servatur, sicut praedix-
imus, non juxta quod erat, sed juxta id quod illo tempore
putabatur."
184 ST. JEROME
In the first place it is a strange process to appeal to
Jerome as supreme judge to decide a matter of criticism.
Jerome was of impulsive temperament, often expressed his
opinions hastily, and often contradicts himself. No Catholic
accepts his theoretical views on the deuterocanonical books.
Hence we might set aside this testimony by a mere transeat.
But it seems to us that the ecole large have stretched its
application far beyond what Jerome intended. In the
Scriptural passage itself there is no difficulty. Everyone
knows that in the Scripture false prophets are often called
prophets. The interpreters of the Septuagitnt were hyper-
critical in substituting pseudo-prophets, since there was no
danger of error in the original text. Now if Jerome's re-
mark has any point at all, it must mean that the Scriptures
call these men prophets for the reason that they were com-
monly so termed, and not for the reason that the people
believed them to be true prophets. In his Commentary on
Ezekiel (M. t. XXV., Col. 108) Jerome makes clearer his
meaning. He there treats of the same case, false prophets
(Ezek. XIII. i), and Jerome justifies their being called
prophets in the Scripture : "Let it not disturb anyone that
they are called prophets; for the Holy Scripture usually
calls a prophet any one prophesying; thus are called the
prophets of Baal, the prophets of idols, and the prophets of
confusion. And also Paul the Apostle calls the Greek poet a
prophet (Titus I. 12): 'One of themselves, a prophet of
their own, said: Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle
bellies.' It is evident in Paul's quotation that he uses
that word prophet in a loose sense, meaning that the verse
of Epimenides was prophetically true of the Cretans.
Jerome's meaning is simply to justify the Scriptural use of
the word prophet. We do not assert that his statement is
clear or cogent, but it can not have the wide application
that the liberal school give it
Let us hear how St. Jerome explains the fact that in
Holy Scripture, St. Joseph is called the father of Christ; and
the Virgin Mary the wife of St. Joseph. ["Adversus Helvi-
dium," n. 4.]
ST. JEROME 1 85
" Excepting Joseph and Elizabeth and Mary herself,
and some few others who, we may suppose, heard the truth
from them, all considered Jesus to be the Son of Joseph. And
so far was this the case that even the Evangelists, expressing
the opinion of the people, which is the true law of history (quae
vera historian lex est), called him the father of the Saviour:
as, for instance, 'And he (that is, Simeon) came in the Spirit
into the temple ; and when the parents brought in the child
Jesus;' and elsewhere, 'And his parents went every year to
Jerusalem.' And afterwards, 'The boy Jesus tarried behind
in Jerusalem and his parents knew not of it.' Observe also
that Mary herself, who had replied to Gabriel with the words :
'How shall this be, since I know not man?" says concerning
Joseph: 'Son why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold,
thy father and I sought thee sorrowing.' We have not here,
as many maintain, the utterance of Jews or mockers. The
Evangelists call Joseph father ; Mary says he was father. Not,
as I said before, that Joseph was really the father of the
Saviour: but that, to preserve the reputation of Mary, he
was regarded by all as his father. . . . But we have said
enough, more with the aim of imparting instruct:
than of answering an opponent, to show why Joseph is called
the father of our Lord, and why Mary is called Joseph's
wife.'
In his commentary on St. Matthew XIV., 9, St. Jerome
applies the same principle, which he calls''the lawof history,"
to the statement read in the Gospel that King Herod "was
struck- sad," because the daughter of Herodias said: "Give
me here in a dish the head of John the Baptist."
St. Jerome does not believe that Herod was sorry. '7/
is the manner of Scripture," he says, "that the historian relates
the opinion of the multitude, as it was commonly viewed at
that time. (Consuetudinis Scripturarum est opinionem mul-
torum sic narret historicus quomodo eo tempore ab omnibus
credebatur). As Joseph was called, even by Mary herself,
the father of Jesus, so here Herod is said to have been struck
sad. because the banqueters thought he was. The hypocrite
indeed and the homicide simulated sadness in his counte-
nance, although he was really joyful in his heart."
186 MURILLO
The best answer to these two testimonies is to admit
that Jerome erred in both cases, and consequently his
opinion is based on error, and is worthless. The Scriptures
call Jesus the son of Joseph, not to accommodate themselves
to a popular error, but because he was born in a lawful wed-
lock, and not of fornication ; and because Joseph was the real
husband of the Mother of God. Secondly, it is clear that
Jerome errs in believing that Herod was not at heart sad.
There is not the slightest warrant for such supposition.
Jerome's supposition makes the Gospel ridiculous. In fact
one of the ardent disciples of the ecole large admits that
Jerome is in error: "As a matter of fact, we believe that,
not the Evangelist, but St. Jerome was mistaken. King
Herod was indeed 'struck sad' because he feared the people.
But his mistake does not , of course, touch our question
about the exegetic principle of St. Jerome." (H. Poels in
Catholic University Bulletin, Jan., 1905). How may
Catholic writers ever expect to harmonize their views, when
such arguments are used? In order to add authority to
their theory, they cite Jerome's weaknesses, of which he had
many, as the supreme law in this crisis of Catholic faith.
It is not our intention to mention all those who have
arisen to defend the Church on the question of inspiration.
Two however, deserve special mention.
Fr. Murillo [El Movimiento Reformista y la Exegesis;
Razon y Fe, December, 1904; January, etc., 1905,,] has
published a series of articles against Fr. von Hummelauer's
views and all kindred theories of exegesis. Among those
reasons which he urges against the view of Oriental or
ancient history assumed by our recent Catholic apologists,
he appeals to Cicero's canon of history: ne quid falsi dicer e
audeat, ne quid veri non audeat : ne qua suspicio gratiae sit in
scribendo ne qua simultas. [De Orat. 11 15.] Murillo denies
that historical fiction or romance is as effective as historical
truth for inculcating moral principles ; he does not see why
it cannot be said that the Evangelists too related the life of
Christ according to the Oriental historical method, if the
latter be compatible with the character of an inspired book.
BILLOT 187
A still more important work in defense of a safe and sane
theory of inspiration is the work "De Inspiratione Sacrae
Scripturae, Romae, 1903," by Fr. L. Billot, S. J.
After reviewing the various forms under which the new-
doctrines present themselves, Billot declares them to be
contrary to the attributes of God and to the veracity of the
Scriptures. He takes up their principles as follows : 'Their
first principle is that the inspired writers were neither more
nor less than profane writers. This is false; for an instru-
mental cause is not in the same category of causality as a
principal cause. Profane writers are the principal cause of
their works ; while the inspired writers are only the instru-
mental cause of their works : therefore there is no parity.
''Their second principle is that it pertains to the inspired
writers to determine the literary form of their books. This
is false, for the reason that it pertains to the principal author
to determine the species of truth which is to be presented in a
book, and sought therein. For our literary critics have in
mind that literary form on which the whole sense of the book
depends, and which is the directive principle of the entire
interpretation. Therefore it is the literary form which de-
termines the character of the book. Now if that by which
a book receives its specific character be not from God, but
from man, how is God the principal Author?
"Their third principle is that there is no literary form re-
ceived among men which the inspiration of the Holy Ghost
rejects. This is false, if it be understood of the literary
forms which they imagine, especially that unspeakable
genius of Oriental history. ... It is false for the reason
that divine inspiration can not accept our defects, our ignor-
ance, our vices, our rashness, our vanity. For the genus of
literature, which they imagine, more properly should be
called a genus of vanity, wherein there is no excuse; or if
there be an excuse, ignorance must excuse the error, and
rashness the ignorance. Now God corrects our defects but
does not accept them. And if we appeal to the simile which
the new biblicists employ, the Word made flesh did not
assume any of the defects which springing from sin take
away something of the plenitude of knowledge and grace;
188 BILLOT
but he dwelt among us full of grace and truth. Much less
therefore in that operation (inspiration) which is proper
not to his assumed nature, but to his divine nature can he
participate in our defects by inspiring books of primitive
myths and Oriental history.'1 Here Billot especially aims
to overthrow the theory of Loisy:
"La verite divine, pour se manifester aux hommes, s'est
incarnee comme le Verbe eternel. Le Fils de Dieu nous est
devenu semblable en tout, sauf le peche. Et la Bible
aussi resemble en toutes choses a un livre de l'antiquite
qui aurait ete redige dans les memes conditions historiques,
a l'exception d'un seul defaut qui la rendrait impropre a
sa destination providentielle, et ce defaut serait l'enseigne-
mentformeld'une . . erreur quelconque presentee comme
verite divine. Mais. ... les interpretes de la revelation
divine . . . se sont conformes aux procedes litteraires
employes de leur temps, et ils ont moule en quelque sorte
la verite revelee dans le cadre des opinions communes et
des traditions de leur race, sauf a rectifier dans ces donnees
. . . ce qui pouvait contredire les principes essentiels de
la verite religieuse." Loisy, Etudes bibliques, p. 34.
Billot severely handles the theory of implicit quotations :
"Let us now come to the implicit quotations which are a
great part of the new invention. . . . LTnder the name
of an implicit quotation is understood the tacit employment
of a document which the author inserts in his narration on
its own authority, and for whose truth the author does not
vouch. . . . Whatever literary form be supposed, what-
ever customs and conventions prevailing in different times
and places, we must always believe in our hearts and confess
that the holy books were written at the dictation of the
Holy Ghost, and indeed the entire books and all their parts,
and therefore all and every one of the so called implicit
quotations. For if a properly so called explicit quotation
is a true part of a book which proceeds from the author as
any other part . . . how much the more an implicit quota-
tion which is incorporated into the body of the narration
without any reference? It must be conceded therefore
that the implicit quotations were inserted by the inspired
INSPIRATION 189
writers not of their own motive and industry, but under the
direction of God. . . The human writer finds a docu-
ment of whose value he is ignorant; nevertheless he copies
it, and inserts it into his narration, taking a certain risk,
judging that in any case he may be excused, partly on ac-
count of a presumptive probability of the veracity of the
document, partly on account of the considerations which
our critics have ingeniously invented; let this pass. But
what shall we judge of him to whom the falsity of the docu-
ment is known, and who notwithstanding this certain con-
science, should insert this document into his narration?
Shall we forsooth distinguish historical honesty into western
and Eastern? into ancient and modern? In this case even
Oriental honesty would hardly be preserved. Wherefore
since God is neither western nor eastern, neither ancient
nor modern ; since moreover those things which are false he
does not apprehend as probably possibly true, but cer-
tainly knows them to be false ; since finally with him avail
nothing those usages and conventions which the ignorance
or vanity of men has introduced, we understand how from
his dictation there can not come forth an implicit quota-
tion of a false document. And therefore from first to last,
the doctrine of implicit quotations, understood in the sense
and to the end that the new exegetes understand it, most
evidently is to be rejected.
"Let the final conclusion be that in treating of literary
forms they would argue more wisely if instead of seeking a
genus of literature in which to place the Holy Books they
would acknowledge that the Holy Scriptures form a genus
apart, transcendent, unlike all other books. . . . It is
fitting that the books of which God is the principal Author
should have a manner of speech proper to themselves."
The examination of the various theories of inspiration
has brought us now to a point where we must adopt certain
principles as our working theory of inspiration. Most of
the adherents of the new exegesis in investigating the nature
of inspiration make their point of departure not the action
of God in inspiration, but the books themselves. In this
there is excess. Inspiration is a supernatural effect, and is
190 SPECIES OF LITERATURE
not revealed to us by the books themselves, but comes to us
from God through the founts of revelation. Therefore we
can not build up a theory of inspiration a posteriori from an
examination of the books themselves. The process is legiti-
mate to study the books to see what effects the action of
God works in them ; but there must always be the directive
principle in our minds that these books were written under
the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and have God for their
Author.
In seeking the nature of inspiration we must separate it
from extraneous questions. The Church does not admit as
inspired, any writing of later origin than the Apostles.
This has been a consistent teaching of the Church. But if
this principle be accepted, the question of inspiration does
not occupy itself with the question: Who are the authors
of the inspired books? Neither does it concern inspiration
to discern whether a book be of one human author or of
many. To treat of the human authors is a separate question.
Inspiration is sure of one divine Author ; but it is not essen-
tial to it to define its human authors. At times it has done it,
but only per accidens. Certain books, as many of St. Paul's
epistles, declare their human authorship under the guarantee
of divine inspiration ; of other books the authors will ever
remain unknown; of some, the authorship is merely prob-
able.
Fr. Christian Pesch believes that no genus of literature
is per se excluded from inspiration. It seems to us that
this principle needs some restrictions. By the fact of in-
spiration the Holy Books are unlike all other books. They
are a transcendent genus of literature. Their modes of
presenting truth may have affinities with the various forms
of literature; but there is not an identity. And moreover
there are certain species of literature whose end seems to be
incompatible with the end of Scripture. For instance the
epic poem is based on mythical heroes, and we can find no
place in the plan and purpose of the Holy Scripture for the
epic poem.
The novel is a fictitious prose narrative or tale, involving
some plot of more or less intricacy, and aiming to present a
SPECIES OF LITERATURE 101
picture of real life in the historical period and society to
which the persons, manners, and modes of speech, as well as
the scenery and surroundings are supposed to belong. We
look in vain in this definition for anything which could have
been the aim of any of the Holy Books.
The fable is a story or history untrue in fact or sub-
stance, invented or developed by popular or poetic fancy or
superstition, and to some extent or at one time current in
popular belief as true and real. Now rigorously speaking
perhaps we may apply the term to some portions of Holy
Writ. Lexicographers tell us that the parable is a species of
fable. But certainly the fable as popularly understood
finds no place in Scripture.
There are two species of literature which we believe must
absolutely be excluded from Scripture. The legend is an
unauthentic and improbable or non-historical narrative
handed down from early times. It is the product of a
people's imagination, a mere creation of fancy. Some
legends teach moral truth, but not as we expect it to be
taught in Holy Scripture. Once admit the presence of
legends in the Scriptures and the basis of the Holy Scriptures
is shaken. Parables and allegories are also fictitious history,
but of another kind. The parable openly bears evidence
that it is a .species of similitude : in the allegory, one thing
true and real is described under the image of another. In
parables and allegories the symbolical character of the nar-
rative is distinctly recognized.
Still more do we exclude from Holy Scripture the myth,
wrhich is false history believed to be true. It is imaginary
history having no existence in fact. It is not aimed to point
a moral; it only expresses a people's superstitious concep-
tions of primitive history. We believe that the divine ele-
ment of inspiration excludes from Holy Scriptures the novel,
the fable in its popular sense, the epic poem, the legend, and
the myth. And the reason is that they are not true, and
the Scriptures are true.
These forms of literature being excluded, there remain
many ether forms of literature which Holy Writ employs,
and consequently the divine influence manifests itself in
192 PROPHECY
Holy Scripture in different modes. We find in Jeremiah a
good description of the manner in which the Holy Ghost
delivers a written prophecy. We do not say that all proph-
ecy in the strict sense was delivered in this way ; but it is a
representative specimen :
' 'And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the
son of Josiah, king of Judah, that this word came unto Jere-
miah from the Lord, saying, Take thee a roll of a book, and
write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee
against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations,
from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah,
even unto this day. It may be that the house of Judah
will hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them ; that
they may return every man from his evil way ; that I may
forgive their iniquity and their sin. Then Jeremiah called
Baruch the son of Neriah ; and Baruch wrote from the mouth
of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord, which he had spoken
unto him, upon a roll of a book." [Jer. XXXVI., 1-4.]
Jeremiah executes the command, and Baruch reads the
message. Then the princes ask the manner of the com-
munication from Heaven: "And they asked Baruch, say-
ing, Tell us now, How didst thou write all these words at
his mouth? Then Baruch answered them, He pronounced
all these words unto me with his mouth." [J#er. XXXVI.
17-18.]
King Jehoiakim burns the scroll, and God commands that
another be written :
"Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after that
the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch
wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying, Take thee again
another roll, and write in it all the former words that were
in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath
burned. And concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah thou
shalt say, Thus saith the Lord : Thou hast burned this roll,
saying, Why hast thou written therein, saying, The king of
Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land, and
shall cause to cease from thence man and beast? There-
fore thus saith the Lord concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah :
He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David : and his
GOD THE AUtfTHOR OF SCRIPTURE
dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in
the night to the frost. And I will punish him and his seed
and his servants for their iniquity; and I will bring upon
them, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and upon the
men of Judah, all the evil that I have pronounced against
them, but they hearkened not. Then took Jeremiah another
roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah;
who wrote therein fom the mouth of Jeremiah all the words
of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in
the fire : and there were added besides unto them many like
words." [Jer. XXXVI. 27—32.]
While the direct influence of God here is most potent, it
does not justify a mechanical theory of verbal inspiration.
God's message came to the Prophet in mental words ; as it
came forth from Jeremiah's lips the impress of God was upon
thoughts and words ; but still it is not necessary to make the
mind of Jeremiah act as a mere phonograph. Intellect and
memory exercised their proper functions in receiving and
delivering the words of God. It is evident from the account
that the consigning of it to writing did not take place at the
very moment that God spoke to the prophet. Jeremiah
received the message, and his memory preserved it. In re-
producing it for writing, his memory was supernaturally
aided by God ; but there is no warrant for multiplying mir-
acles to the extent that every word be placed ready made in
Jeremiah's mind. In dealing with this subtle action of God
it is difficult to describe in words the mental processes with
which God co-operates. We may illustrate by an example.
Let us suppose that the same identical message came to
Jeremiah and to another prophet; and that both executed
the command to write it. In the two accounts we should
expect to find the same modal differences that are found
in the several accounts of the words of institution of the
Blessed Sacrament at the Last Supper.
In investigating the nature of inspiration we have the
certain principle that God is the principal Author of Holy
Scripture, and that the human authors are the instrumental
causes. It follows also that they are living rational in-
struments, and in conformity with the certain theolog:
(13) H. S
194 REVELATION
principle, God employed the faculties of these instruments
to write the Holy Books. Inasmuch as these created facul-
ties were incapable of effecting the Holy Books, God elevated
and strengthened them, and thus used them to deliver his
message, so that one effect the Holy Books, comes forth
from a double causality. This action of God thus enabling
a man to accomplish a writing above his natural powers is
aptly called charismatic. The Church has done more than
tell us that God has inspired the writers of Scripture; St.
Thomas, St. Gregory the Great, the author of the Imitation
of Christ, and many others have been given of the grace of
God which might truly be called inspiration; but the in-
spiration which moved the human authors of the Bible was
of that nature that it made God the Author of the Scriptures :
they are the word of God. By this definition of inspiration
the negative theory of inspiration of Chrismann and Jahn
is excluded. Neither could a subsequent approbation by the
Church give to any book the character which the Church
infallibly declares to belong to her canonical books. As
Franzelin rightly declared in the Vatican Council: "Be-
cause the Church is infallible she can define nothing as
revealed truth which is not revealed by God; and in like
manner through the same charisma of infallibility she can
not put any book in the Canon of Holy Scripture which was
not divinely inspired." (Coll. Lac. VII. 1621). It can not be
argued against this theory that St. Paul thus approved the
sayings of Aratus and Epimenides (Acts XVII. 28; Titus
I. 12). St. Paul not only approves these sayings, but by
incorporating them into his book makes them a part of his
book. God is not the Author of those sayings as existing in
the works of the two poets ; but he is the Author of the cita-
tion of them and the approbation of them by which they
became an integral part of an inspired book.
In every question there are two extremes. So here in
defending full inspiration for the Holy Books, we must not
run into the other extreme.
We have said before that revelation does not enter into
the essence of inspiration. We mean here revelation in
the strict sense. This takes place when God directly in-
REVELATION1 195
fuses the ideas into a created mind, as in the Prophets and
the Apocalypse of St. John. But there is an influence of
God wherein he enlightens the mind better to receive and
use naturally acquired knowledge. This is sometimes called
revelation in a wide sense. It is clear that this is always
present in inspiration. Sometimes this distinction is not
adverted to, and the divine influence in Holy Scripture is
spoken of as revelation. It is clearly evident that revelation,
strictly speaking, does not extend to all the Scriptures.
Often the writers indicate their human sources. The annals
of the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel are in large part the
indicated sources of the Books of Kings. In the Books of
Chronicles we find sixteen different documents cited as
sources. The writer of II. Maccabees certainly employed
existing documents ; and St. Luke asserts that he had gath-
ered his materials from others.
St. Thomas clearly explains this doctrine of the Church
as follows: "If into the mind of a man light be infused by
God, not for the purpose of knowing certain supernatural
things, but that he may know with the certitude of divine
truth things which can be known by human reason, that
species of prophecy is inferior to that which by mental
visions imparts the knowledge of supernatural truth, which
(later) prophecy all they had who are placed in the order of
Prophets, for they fulfilled the prophetic office. Where-
fore, they spoke in the person of God, saying to the people :
'Thus saith the Lord;' but the hagio graphs spoke not so, for
most of them spoke in most part of those things which can
be known by human reason, and (they spoke) not in the
person of God, but as men, but with the help of divine
light." (2. 2. q. 173, a. 4.) From the fact that this divine
light is omnipresent in the Holy Scriptures the whole Scrip-
ture is divinely revealed, and is the object of divine faith.
But in this regard, we must bear in mind the principle of St.
Thomas: "A thing pertains to the precept of faith in two
ways: (1) it pertains to faith directly as the articles of
faith which are promulgated to be believed for their own
sake. . . . (2) Other things pertain to faith indirectly,
inasmuch as they are not proposed to be believed for their
196 THE DIVINE AFFLATUS
own sake, but for the reason that from the negation of
these, something would follow contrary to faith, as for in-
stance if one should deny that Isaac was Abraham's son,
there would follow something contrary to faith, viz., that
the Scripture contains falsehood." (I. Cor. XI. 4).
This teaching is of value against those who would re-
strict inspiration to things of faith and morals. It is true
that our act of faith more immediately finds its object in
the things of faith and morals; but it embraces this other
equally immediate truth : We believe all that God has re-
vealed (in the broad sense). Therefore the things revealed
per accidens are included in our act of faith. Of course our
act of faith presupposes the application of true hermeneu-
tics to determine what is the true sense of the things not yet
defined by the Church.
To produce a book the author must conceive the ideas in
his mind and consign them to writing either in person or by
another. Therefore in employing man as an instrument to
execute a writing, God must illumine his mind in the very
act of conceiving the thoughts. This illumination will be
a strict revelation in certain cases, as before explained ; in
things of natural reason or even mysteries learned through
natural means it will be revelation in the larger sense, and
both degrees of God's action are inspiration.
God also moves the will of the author to write, and assists
him so that he properly executes the writing in a manner
worthy of the word of God. Not alone by an internal
moving of the will does God bring about the writing — he
uses external circumstances and agents. Thus the things
impelling to write may be friendship, or a special request,
or a special need of a particular church, etc. But with the
natural knowledge of the things to be written and with the
natural motives impelling to write, God co-operates, strength-
ening the intelligence, and moving the free will so that there
is inevitably produced a book which God wills to be his word,
inspired and free from error.
It is not difficult to understand why God should illumine
the created intelligence even in the act of writing things
naturally known. Without the help of God, man could not
THE DIVINE AFFLATUS 1!',
impress upon his writings the stamp of absolute infallible
truth, even in the things which he knows by his own industry
We know that at times we experience a greater intellectual
vigor, and that we can then judge better, and write better.
In dealing with natural phenomena, or with the events of
history, one writer is more accurate than another ; one writer
is better able to judge of the nature of things and events and
of their relations. In inspiration God's action gives the
strength necessary to deliver adequately God's message.
God's action on the will of the inspired writer is both
physical and moral. Inasmuch as God as the principal
Author wills to deliver to men a certain definite message
through the instrumentality of the inspired writer, there
corresponds to this will of God a charismatic physical mo-
tion of the will of the inspired writer which does not de-
prive it of liberty. The human will — thus moved by God
still retains the absolute power to resist. The moral in-
fluence of God at times may be a direct command to write
as was given to some of the writers. In more instances it
will consist in a supernatural illumination of the mind by
which it conceives ideas and judgments which impel a man
to write.
The delivering of the books to the Church is not an
essential of inspiration, but supposes it. We cannot say
that God ordained the delivery of the books to the Church
as an absolute end in giving inspiration ; for some inspired
books have been lost. The purpose of inspiration was to
deliver a message of salvation to the world, and the ordi-
nary custodian of that message is the Church.
We may distinguish three elements in God's action in in-
spiration, God supernaturally illumines the intellect to
conceive rightly the truths; He moves the will to write
faithfully these truths; and he assists the inspired writer to i
give written expression to these truths without admixture
of error.
It is indifferent to inspiration whether the inspired man
himself do the material writing or execute it by means of
an amanuensis; but in the latter case the assistance of God
protects against errors which would affect the sense of the
propositions.
198 EXTENT OF INSPIRATION
The curious question is raised by some: Does inspira-
tion admit of different degrees? as for instance: Is Isaiah
more inspired than the writer of the Books of Maccabees?
This question must be answered with a distinction. As re-
gards the essence of biblical inspiration all the books are
equal, and are received by the Church pari pietatis affectu
ac reverentia. (Cone. Trid. Sess. 4.) Therefore one book
can not be said to be more inspired than another. But
since the illumination of the mind and the motion of the
will are finite entities they may admit of various degrees of
intensity. Of what degree was given we know nothing,
since it is not revealed to us. But it is perfectly compatible
with the right idea of inspiration that God may have given
to one a deeper insight into divine truth, a greater feeling
in expressing it, a poetic power in presenting it. These are
not of the essence of the inspiration.
CHAPTER II.
EXTENT OF INSPIRATION.
In all these questions we seek first if there be any author-
itative teaching on the subject. In the present instance we
find that in his universal proposition, "all Scripture is in-
spired," St. Paul extends inspiration to all Scripture. The
same persuasion is in Christ in his use of Scripture. He
cites it as a thing of absolute authority : he bases the great
proofs of his character and mission on the statement: "It
is written." The very fact that a thing is written in
Holy Scripture was an absolute proof. The Apostles and
other inspired writers did the same. The Fathers are unan-
imous in asserting that all Scripture is inspired. The coun-
cils of the Church have defined this by asserting that all the
books with all their parts are inspired.
But now we must see in what sense all Scripture is in-
spired.
The question of the inspiration of Obiter Dicta is a cele-
brated one in Biblical Criticism. Obiter Dicta may be called
those details of minor moment related in Holy Writ, which
are inserted en passant, not seemingly comprised in the
main scope and intention of the writer. The passage in
OBITER DICTA ]'.)'. I
Tobias XI. 9. relating to the wagging of the tail of Tobias'
dog: "blandimento suae caudae gaudebat," and the pas-
sage in St. Paul's letter to Timothy, II. Tim. IV. 13. relat-
ing to the cloak left at Troas: "Penulam, quam reliqui
Troade apud Carpum, veniens affer tecum," are usually
quoted as examples of obiter dicta. Concerning these,
two questions may be raised: 1. Are the Obiter Dicta in-
spired ? 2 . Is it of faith that these are inspired ? Catholic
theologians generally answer the first question in the affirm-
ative. And, in truth, such must be defended, for the same
danger would menace us as before mentioned, were we to
reject the inspiration of these passages, namely, that of
gradually widening the circle of these, and inducing un-
certainty into the Scripture, by the freedom with which
men might reject these details.
Card. Newman asserted that, in his opinion, these were
not of faith. Patrizi, quoted by Lamy, and by him fol-
lowed, does not dare condemn the opinion of those who
deny that the Obiter Dicta are of faith. Schmid says:
"Credimus doctrinam quam proposuimus quoad illam specia-
lem assertionem, quae immunitatem ab errore, divinam auc-
toritatem, et inspirationem ipsam ad res indifferentes etiam
minimas extendit, non esse de fide, et contrariam non esse
haeresim. Nihilominus, persuasum nobis est doctrinam
nostram omnino certam esse, nee contrariam ullo modo proba-
bilem ant tolerabilem judicamns."
Newman, in the 19th Century for 1884, excludes from the
fide divina credenda "obiter dicta"; such as, for instance,
that Nabuchadnezzar was king of Niniveh, Judith I. 7 ; or
that Paul left his cloak at Troas ; or that Tobias' dog wagged
his tail. Tob. XI. 9: "And here I am led on to inquire
whether obiter dicta are conceivable in an inspired docu-
ment. We know that they are held to exist and even re-
quired in treating of the dogmatic utterances of Popes, but
are they compatible with inspiration ? The common opinion
is that they are not. Professor Lamy thus writes about
them, in the form of an objection: 'Many minute matters
occur in the sacred writers which have regard only to human
feebleness and the natural necessities of life, and by no
200 OBITER DICTA
means require inspiration, since they can otherwise be per-
fectly well known, and seem scarcely worthy of the Holy
Spirit, as for instance, what is said of the dog of Tobias, St.
Paul's penula, and the salutations at the end of the Epistles.'
Neither he nor Fr. Patrizi allow of these exceptions; but
Fr. Patrizi, as Lamy quotes him, 'damnare non audet eos
qui hasc tenerent', viz., exceptions, and he himself, by keep-
ing silence, seems unable to condemn them either.
By obiter dicta in Scripture I also mean such statements
as we find in the Book of Judith, that Nabuchodonosor was
king of Nineveh. Now it is in favor of there being such
unauthoritative obiter dicta, that unlike those which occur
in dogmatic utterances of Pope and Councils, they are, in
Scripture, not doctrinal, but mere unimportant statements
of fact ; whereas those of Popes and Councils may relate to
faith and morals, and are said to be uttered obiter, because
they are not contained within the scope of the formal defin-
ition, and imply no intention of binding the consciences of
the faithful. There does not then seem any serious diffi-
culty in admitting their existence in Scripture. Let it be
observed, its miracles are doctrinal facts, and in no sense of
the phrase can be considered obiter dicta."
The Fathers were concurrent in extending inspiration to
everything contained in Holy Scripture. "I believe," says
St. Augustine, "that no Sacred writer has been deceived in
anything." (Epist. 72. ad Hieron.) St. J. Chrys., Horn.
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. 1. 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 co-
signed to us ; as for instance, that God is triune. Things per-
tain indirectly to faith, from whose contrary would follow
something pernicious to faith ; as, for instance, if one were
to say that Samuel were not the son of Helcana ; for from
this it would follow that the Scriptures were false."
OBITER DICTA 201
The encyclical "Providentissimus Deus" in express
terms condems the theory that exempts the obiter dicta from,
inspiration: "But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden
either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy
Scripture, or to admit that the Sacred Writer has erred.
For the system of those who, in order to rid themselves of
those difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that Divine in-
spiration regards the things of faith and morals, and nothing
beyond, because (as they wrongly think), in a question of
the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not
so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which
He had in mind when saying it — this system cannot be
tolerated. For all the Books which the Church receives as
sacred and canonical are written wholly and entirely, with
all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost ; and so far
is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with
inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incom-
patible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely
and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the
Supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is
the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church solemnly
denned in the councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally
confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of
the Vatican. These are the words of the last: 'The Books
of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all
their parts, as enumerated by the decree of the same Council
(Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are to be received
as Sacred and Canonical. And the Church holds them as
Sacred and Canonical, not because having been composed
by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her
authority ; nor only because they contain revelation without
error; but because, having been written under the inspira-
tion of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their Author.'
[Scss. III. C. II. de Rev.] Hence, because the Holy
Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot, there-
fore, say that it was these inspired instruments who, per-
chance, have fallen into error, and not the primary Author.
For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them
to write — He was so present to them — that the things which
202 OBITER DICTA
He ordered, and those only, they first rightly understood,
then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in
apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise, it could
not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture.
Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers. 'There-
fore,' says St. Augustine, 'since they wrote the things which
He showed and uttered to them, it cannot be pretended
that He is not the Writer; for His members executed what
their Head dictates.' [De consensu Evangel. L. i, C. 35.]
And St. Gregory the Great thus pronounces: 'most super-
flous it is to inquire who wrote these things — we loyally be-
lieve the Holy Ghost to be the author of the Book. He
wrote it who dictated it for writing; He wrote it who in-
spired its execution.' [Praef. in Job, n, 2.]
"It follows that those who maintain that an error is
possible in any genuine passage of the Sacred Writings,
either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration, or make
God the author of such error."
The error of those who have excluded the obiter dicta
from inspiration seems to be to regard these details in them-
selves, without considering their relations to the general
text. Considered apart from the other portions of the book,
they are unimportant : they could have been omitted without
substantial loss to the book. They are not written for
their own sake ; they are a part of the setting of more im-
portant truth. The inspired writer under the influence of
inspiration conceives his book in his human mind. It is
written in a human manner of expression. These details
are not irrelevant; they fit in naturally into the account.
The motive moving us to extend inspiration to them is not
their own importance; but the fact that if they be denied
inspiration the integrity of the Holy Books is assailed. Who
shall fix the limits of the obiter dicta? Hence they claim
inspiration not on account of their own importance but
because they are parts of an inspired book. Their claim to
inspiration rests on the basic truth that there can not be
error in any part of the Bible. The positive teaching of the
Church condemns the opinion which asserts that some parts
of the Bible are inspired and others are not. The obiter
DICTA ALIORUM _;l 13
dicta can not be said to be so few as not to form a part as
here contemplated. The greater part of the XVI. Chapter
of Romans is made up of salutations which are set down as
obiter dicta.
It seems therefore to follow from the definitions of the
Church that inspiration must be extended to all the parts
of Holy Scripture.
In answer to the second question, Is it of faith that the
obiter dicta are inspired? we believe that a negative
answer must be returned. Bellarmine, however, holds that
it is of faith: "It is heresy, to believe that in St. Paul's
Epistles and in other sacred books not all things are written
at the dictation of the Holy Ghost ; but that some things
proceeded solely from human reason and judgment." (De
Verbo Dei, Lib. i.) Melchior Canus (De Locis Theol. Lib.
2, 16) calls the theory an impious error : "How impious
is the error to assert that in the canonical books the writers
at times wrote as mere men without the divine and super-
natural revelation (inspiration), I demonstrate first by the
argument that in this opinion the authority of the Holy
Scriptures is in great part shaken." He proceeds then to
show how easy it were to widen the field of the obiter dicta ;
and then concludes: "Let us therefore confess that every-
thing whether great or small was written by the sacred
writers under the dictation of the Holy Ghost."
But the Church has not defined the issue with sufficient
clearness to warrant a theological censure of the opposite
opinion.
In relation to the inspiration of "dicta aliorum," no
definite rule can be given. The character of the person, the
circumstances in which such saying is uttered, the mode of
quoting, and the nature of the proposition must be weighed.
For instance, the sayings which the inspired writers make
their own by their approbation are inspired. St. Peter was
inspired, when he confessed the divinity of Christ, not when
he denied Christ. The words of impious men sometir
are quoted, but " in persona illorum," not intending them
to be as truths. In regard to these, although no fixed rule
can be laid down, still there is no difficulty in distinguishing
the true from the false.
204 DICTA ALIORUM
Sometimes the statements are formulated as the sayings
of others, but are in reality the creations of the author him-
self. He sometimes expresses the ideas of impious men in
order to condemn them. Thus in the book of Wisdom,
speeches are placed in the mouths of Epicureans in order to
illustrate and condemn these errors.
Again, the inspired writer may reproduce the words of
good men and approve them, without thereby extending the
prerogative of absolute infallibility to them. Thus in Acts
St. Luke relates St. Stephen's great discourse before the San-
hedrim. He declares also that Stephen was filled with the
Holy Ghost in his discourse. And yet St. Luke does not
become responsible for the lapse of memory whereby Stephen
declares that Abraham bought the tomb "for a price in
silver of the sons of Hamor in Shechem" (Acts VII. 16).
Genesis (XXXIII. 18-19) states that Jacob bought this
tomb, and the context warrants the statement of Genesis.
The divine inspiration of Luke aided him faithfully to
report Stephen's words. Stephen, though filled with the
Holy Ghost, was not inspired as an inspired writer. The
main truth of his words is not affected by the accidental
error. St. Luke approves the substantial truth of Stephen's
words.
Again, it may happen that a writer may present his
teaching in a species of drama. Care must be taken then
to discern when the actors in the drama convey the ideas
of the writer of the book. Thus in Job there are various
speakers who discuss the great questions of human life and
destiny. With consummate art the writer has so con-
ceived the discourses that, though there is an error of fact
in Job's friends, inasmuch as they believe him guilty of grave
sin, nevertheless they discourse rightly upon the great issues
of human life.
If the inspired writer relates the words of others without
either implicit or explicit approbation, the words thus re-
lated do not become a part of divinely inspired Scripture,
but have only their own intrinsic authority. This principle
will apply to the letters written to the Jews by the Spartans,
and by the Romans, and according to some to the letters
DICTA ALIORUM 205
(II. Maccab. I. 15, seqq. ; IX. 1 seqq.) written by the
Jews to their compatriots in Egypt. In a word therefore,
the sayings of others related in Holy Scripture are inspired
if they become the sense of the inspired writer.
Sometimes the writers express an indetermination of
mind, or a state of doubt; or they express an estimate of
certain things. St. Luke seems to have been uncertain
whether it were eight or ten days that Festus tarried at
Jerusalem (Acts XXV. 6) ; St. John describes the water pots
as holding two or three firkins (John II. 6) ; the number fed
by the multiplication of the loaves was not with mathe-
matical precision known to St. Matthew ; but it was a num-
ber which the correct judgment of men would estimate at
five thousand. The truth of history demands nothing more
for such a statement. The state of indetermination is not
to be ascribed to the Holy Ghost. He uses human instru-
ments to deliver all truth as required by the nature of the
things written. It is an inspired fact that Festus tarried at
Jerusalem a period of time of which an adequate idea was
conveyed by declaring that it was eight or ten days ; and so
in all other cases. This principle is very useful in its appli-
cation to such biblical facts as the size of armies, the number
of the slain, etc. We must distinguish between these num-
bers as they came from the inspired writers and the present
numbers of the text. Many accidental errors have crept
into the present numbers.
It is clear also that opposed to the very nature of in-
spiration is the theory that the inspired writer may de-
clare a thing which is false in the sense which the human
writer intended to convey; but true in the sense that the
Holy Ghost delivered thereby. God's action as the prin-
cipal cause of the writing excludes such a condition in the
instrument; for an essential element of inspiration is the
illumination of the mind of the inspired writer that he may
rightly conceive what he is to write.
It would be the opposite extreme to hold that inspira-
tion banished all ignorance and false persuasion from the
mind of the inspired writer. As far as regards the things
which they were not called to write as inspired agents
206 VERBAL INSPIRATION
God left them to their own resources; not, of course, ex-
cluding that illumining influence that grace works in all the
saints. Thus for instance it is clearly proclaimed in revela-
tion that the day of general judgment is hidden from all
creatures. This all the inspired writers accepted as a funda-
mental truth. Yet from their own human reasoning some
of them at least seem to have believed that such event was
near at hand. This is not in anyway prejudicial to inspira-
tion. They do not proclaim that it is near at hand. Per-
haps some of their arguments relating to human conduct
in a certain sense imply that they believed that the con-
summation were not far off ; but the arguments do not assert
it, nor do they become false from the fact that ages have
elapsed since they wrote. The uncertainty of that great
day is a true incentive to a right order of life ; and thus they
used it.
A most important and most difficult question is to de-
termine what influence the Holy Ghost has on the words of
Holy Scripture. This question is usually treated of under
the heading of Verbal inspiration. The term verbal in this
connection is badly chosen; for it admits of such meanings
that to the question, Are the Holy Scriptures verbally in-
spired? we may return an affirmative and negative answer,
both true. Hence we have need to present the question in
clearer terms.
The words of Holy Scripture may be divided into formal
words and material words. The formal words are the men-
tal conceptions of the writer, and corresponds to the ideas
expressed in the books. In this sense all the words of Holy
Scripture are the words of God; they are all inspired; and
are free from error.
The external signs by which these ideas are expressed are
conveniently called material words; and the question
is now to be discussed : Are these inspired ? Here again we
must distinguish. All must admit a certain influence of the
Holy Ghost on the words. The question therefore
narrows itself down to this. In what sense are the material
words of Holy Scripture inspired ?
VERBAL INSPIRATION 20*3
We can readily understand that the mental word con-
ceived in the mind in one sense compels and determines the
material word; and in another sense leaves it free. For
example: the inspired writer under the influence of divine
inspiration conceives the idea : The Son of God became
man. The nature of human speech limits him to a certain
range of words and expressions to convey that idea. But
still within that range there is a latitude of freedom. If
the writer knows more than one language he may choose
one or the other. Thus Matthew had a choice between
Hebrew and Greek for his Gospel. We do not deny that
God may determine the tongue to be used, but such de-
termination would not be of the essence of inspiration.
Again, the writer may express the Second Person of the
Blessed Trinity as the Son of God, or the Word of God, and
the same freedom of choice is applicable to the predicate.
Let us take as another example the truth : Jesus Christ
died for us. A man may express that truth in different
material words, viz., The Son of God gave his life for us;
The Redeemer suffered death for all mankind, etc.
Now the question to answer is, Did God in inspiration
determine the Holy Writers to use one form of expression
instead of another, when both were equally apt? Some
of the early protestants answered this question in the affirm-
ative. It was a part of that exaggerated sentimentalism
which endeavored to set aside the Magisterium of the
Church, and set up the Scriptures as the sole rule of faith.
We have seen that this error died amid its worshippers.
In Catholic thought there have been certain changes of
thought and certain differences of opinion in those things
in which the Church has not defined.
The Fathers at times, speaking oratorically, in their de-
sire to demand for the Scriptures fitting reverence, speak
in such terms that without due caution one might be led to
believe that they held the theory of absolute inspiration of
the material words. But a deeper insight into the con-
sistent principles of the Fathers, and a comparative stud)
the system of their faith will persuade that what they de-
manded for the Holy Scriptures was reverence for every
208 VERBAL INSPIRATION
truth of Holy Scripture as it exists clothed in fitting words
for us. Though we believe that the inspired writer had
a certain liberty in choosing words and expressions, provid-
ing they be fitting, when he has made this choice and clothed
an inspired idea in words, these words become sacred as
signs of a divinely inspired idea, and they will merit the
veneration which the Fathers paid them. Moreover, since
the writer's intellectual faculties are supernaturally enlight-
ened by the action of inspiration, this illumination will in-
fluence the choice of words ; the inspired writer will be aided
by God to convey his inspired concepts in a manner that
befits the infallible message of God ; hence our purpose here
is not to deny a certain verbal inspiration, but to prevent its
exaggeration.
The Fathers used synonymously the two expressions, The
Holy Scriptures are inspired by God, and, The Holy Scrip-
tures are dictated by God. Their clear statements demon-
strate that they did not use the term dictation to signify
the mechanical theory of inspiration. All will consider
Origen a capable witness of tradition, the greatest mind of
his age. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. VI. 25) transmits to us the
following testimony of Origen on the Epistle to the Hebrews :
"That the verbal style of the epistle entitled 'To the
Hebrews,' is not rude like the language of the apostle, who
acknowledged himself 'rude in speech,' [II. Cor. XI. 6] that
is, in expression ; but that its diction is purer Greek, any one
who has the power to discern differences of phraseology will
acknowledge. Moreover, that the thoughts of the epistle
are admirable, and not inferior to the acknowledged
apostolic writings, any one who carefully examines the
apostolic text will admit.
"If I gave my opinion, I should say that the thoughts
are those of the apostle, but the diction and phraseology are
those of some one who remembered the apostolic teachings,
and wrote down at his leisure what had been said by his
teacher. Therefore if any church holds that this epistle is
by Paul, let it be commended for this. For not without
reason have the ancients handed it down as Paul's. But
who wrote the epistle, in truth, God knows. The statement
VERBAL INSPIRATION
of some who have gone before us is that Clement, bishop of
the Romans, wrote the epistle, and of others that Luke, the
author of the Gospel and the Acts, wrote it."
We may logically argue that if Origen considered it not
inconsistent with inspiration that another should write
wn the inspired writer's thoughts at his leisure as he re-
membered them, he was far from holding the absolute
inspiration of the material words. At times we find that
under the prepossession of his excessive mysticism, Origen
extended inspiration to the very material letters of Holy
Writ, (Horn, in Ps. I. 4) but he tempered this extreme view
by statements such as we have adduced.
St. Ambrose in many things followed the excessive mys-
ticism of Origen. Touching our present theme he says:
"Though sometimes, according to the letter, the Evangelists
seem at variance, the truths they utter are not discordant,
for the mystery is the same." (On Luke X. 171) Again he
says (On Luke VIII. 63) : "In the Holy Scriptures it is not
the order of words but the substance of the things which we
should consider."
St. John Chrysostom is sometimes cited as an advocate
of inspiration of the material words of Holy Scripture. In
his Homily on Genesis, II. 2, he writes thus: 'Ye have
heard just now the Scripture declaring: 'But for Adam
there was not found a help meet for him.' What is the
meaning of the brief clause: 'But for Adam?' Why does
(the Scripture) place there the conjunction (Se)? Did it
not suffice to say : 'For Adam ?' It is not from vain curi. >s-
ity that we discuss these things, but that by interpreting all
things we may teach you not to pass over any brief saying,
or even syllable of Holy Scripture. For they are not mere
words, but the words of the Holy Ghost, and therefore a
great value may be found in one syllable." Again in the
same work, XXI. 1, he continues: "In the H< lv Scriptures
there is nothing written which has not a great wealth of
meaning; for since the prophets spoke by the inspiration of
the Holy Ghost , therefore the writings proceeding from the
Holy Ghost contain in themselves a gr I treasure. There
is not a syllable or tittle in Holy Scripture in whose depths
(14) II. s.
210 VERBAL INSPIRATION
there is not a great treasure." In his Homily on "Salute
Priscilla and Aquila," Chrysostom declares the purpose
of his homily to be " that ye may know that in the Holy
Scriptures there is nothing superfluous, even though it be
an iota or a tittle. And even a simple salutation opens up
to us a vast sea of meaning. And why do I say, a simple
salutation? often even the addition of one letter adds the
value of sentences. This may be seen in the name of
Abraham. A man who receives a letter from a friend, not
only reads the body of the letter, but also the salutation at
the end, and concludes from it the writer's affection; and
since Paul, or rather not Paul, but the grace of the Holy
Ghost, dictates a letter to a whole city, and a numerous
people and through them to the whole world, is it not most
unbecoming to judge that any thing therein is superfluous
and pass it by, not realizing that thus everything is per-
verted?"
This is a strong patristic argument for the inspiration of
the obiter dicta, but it does not maintain the absolute in-
spiration of the material words. In the first place if we
press the testimony too much it becomes absurd, and we are
unwilling to believe that the mighty mind of Chrysostom
should have so betrayed him. He well knew that the
material words of the Old Testament were not the material
words of the inspired writer, but the words of an interpreter,
and as Ambrose rightly says: "We must always seek the
sense, which the frequent translations from Hebrew into
Greek, and from Greek into Latin attenuates." (On Ps.
XXXVII. 49).
Chrysostom himself admits the same principle: "We
have not the Old Testament writ in our mother tongue : it
was composed in one tongue ; we read it in another. It was
first written in Hebrew ; we have received it in Greek. By
its translation into another tongue it becomes difficult. All
who are versed in many tongues know that it is impossible
with equal clearness to translate everything from its own
language into another. This is a cause of difficulty in the
Old Testament." (On The Obscurity of Proph. II. 2.)
Therefore the letters and tittles of the Greek text could not
VERBAL INSPIRATION 21 1
have been considered by Chrysostom as dictated by the
Holy Ghost. St. Chrvsostom's meaning is therefore that
the deep sense of Holy Scripture is to be sought in every
word of Holy Scripture. Acting within that range of liberty
that we have explained the writers chose certain words and
expressions as the sensible signs to convey their inspired
ideas. Therefore the ideas which might have been ex-
pressed in other ideas, de facto lie in these words. We may
therefore call these words inspired; for by them as sensible
signs the conceptions of inspired minds are delivered to
us. The words therefore merit all reverence, and we can
not come at the deep sense of Holy Scripture without weigh-
ing every word. The conjunction in Genesis specified by
Chrysostom has a value, for it makes more forcible the con-
trast between the completeness of the other orders of crea-
tion, and the incompleteness of the human race as existing
in Adam. We must also know that Chrysostom spoke
oratorically, and used the arts of oratory. In other works
he distinguishes between the inspired sense and the material
word. In his work Contra Judasos 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, <\>a>vq, only recognize to be that of
Paul, but the sense and the dogma recognize to be of Christ
by whom he was interiorly taught."
St. Jerome is most reverent to the "syllables, tittles,
points, etc." of Holy Scripture, since they "are of divine
origin and full of meaning," (On Eph. V. 6). Again he
declares: "For I myself not only admit but freely pro-
claim that in translating from the Greek, except in the case
of Holy Scriptures, where even the order of the words is a mys-
tery, I render sense for sense, and not word for word "
(Epist. LVII. 4.)
A superficial observation of such passages might move
one to believe that Jerome asserted the mechanical theory
of verbal inspiration; but deeper study of his works dem<
Strates that he allowed to the human writers the
range of liberty in the use o\ words and express
which we are pleading. In his commentary on the v.
212 VERBAL INSPIRATION
known hyperbaton of Ephesians, III. i, Jerome declares:
"I believe that the expression here is defective." Jerome
could not attribute a defective expression to the Holy Ghost.
Again St. Jerome in his CXX. Epistle, 1 1 , has this testimony :
"Though he (Paul) had knowledge of all the Scriptures, and
knew many tongues, he was unable to render the august
sense of the Holy Scriptures fittingly in Greek. He had
therefore Titus as an interpreter, as Peter had Mark, whose
Gospel was composed by Peter's dictation and Mark's writ-
ing. Moreover the two epistles which are called Peter's
differ in style, character, and composition of words. From
which we know that by the necessity of the case, Peter used
different amanuenses." Jerome will not be said to have
held that God inspired thoughts to Paul and Peter, and
words to different interpreters who wrote their thoughts.
Jerome traces a man's origin and education in his in-
spired writings: "We must know that Isaiah is eloquent
in speech, being a man of noble birth and of cultured elo-
quence, and free from everything uncouth." (Prof, on Is.)
"Jeremiah the prophet is held by the Hebrew to be ruder
in speech than Isaiah and Hosea and other prophets, but he
equals them in sense, for he prophesied in the same spirit.
The plainness of his language comes from the place of his
birth. He was of Anathoth, a village to this day, three
miles distant from Jerusalem." (Prol. On Jer.) "Amos the
prophet was of the shepherds, unskilled in speech, but not
in knowledge; for the same Spirit who spoke by all the
prophets spoke by him." (Prol. On Amos.) This is a clear
argument that the Holy Ghost delivered the sense of the
Holy Scriptures through men, leaving to them to employ
words and expressions in conformity with their education.
A strong argument against the theory of the inspiration
of the material words is the fact that the inspired writers of
the New Testament, when quoting from the Old Testament
do not quote the exact words, but only the sense. Now
if the material words were inspired by the Holy Ghost,
they would have taken care to reproduce them. Jerome
develops this argument at great length: "In Matthew
[XXVII. 9, 10.] when the thirty pieces of silver are returned
V
ISh
i -
i i
r
•^
<_
4 4JL
ii
l
^
d
~$ii<
1
>y
i.
S^A^^M^ I C-^> U^fe< ~^-
VERBAL INSPIRATION 213
by the traitor Judas, and the potter's field is purchased with
them, it is written: — "Then was fulfilled that which was
spoken of by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, 'and they took
the thirty pieces of silver the price of him that was valued
which they of the children of Israel did value, and
gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed
me.' This passage is not found in Jeremiah at all
but in Zechariah, in quite different words and an altogether
different order. In fact the Vulgate renders it as follows : —
'And I will say unto them, If it is good in your sight, give ye
me a price or refuse it. So they weighed for my price thirty
pieces of silver. And the Lord said unto me, Put them into
the melting furnace and consider if it is tried as I have been
tried by them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and
cast them into the house of the Lord.' [Zech. XI. 12, 13,
Vulg.] It is evident that the rendering of the Septuagint
differs widely from the quotation of the evangelist. In the
Hebrew also, though the sense is the same, the words are
quite different and differently arranged. It says: 'And I
said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and,
if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces
of silver. And the Lord said unto me, Cast it unto the
potter; [statuarius.] a goodly price that I was priced at of
them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them
to the potter in the house of the Lord.' [Zech. XI. 12, 13.]
They may accuse the apostle- of falsifying his version
seeing that it agrees neither with the Hebrew nor with the
translators of the Septuagint : and worse than this, they
may say that he has mistaken the author's name putting
down Jeremiah when it should be Zechariah. Far be it
from us to speak thus of a follower [pedissequus.] of Christ,
who made it his care to formulate dogmas rather than to
hunt for words and syllables. To take another instance
from Zechariah, the evangelist John quotes from the He-
brew, 'They shall look on him whom they pierced,' Qoh.
XIX. 37: Zech. XII. 10] for which we read in the Septuagint
'And they shall look upon me because they have mocked
me,' and in the Latin version, 'And they shall 1< n >k upon me
for the things which they have mocked or insulted.' Here
214 VERBAL INSPIRATION
the evangelist, the Septuagint, and our own version [i. e.
the Italic, for the Vulgate, which was not then published,
accurately represents the Hebrew.] all differ ; yet the diverg-
ence of language is atoned by oneness of spirit. In Matthew
again we read of the Lord preaching flight to the apostles
and confirming His counsel with a passage from Zechariah.
'It is written,' he says, 'I will smite the shepherd, and the
sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.' [Matt. XXVI,
31 ; Zech. XIII. 7.] But in the Septuagint and in the He-
brew it reads differently, for it is not God who speaks, as the
evangelist makes out, but the prophet who appeals to God
the Father saying: — 'Smite the shepherd, and the sheep
shall be scattered.' In this instance according to my judg-
ment— and I have some careful critics with me — the evan-
gelist is guilty of a fault in presuming to ascribe to God what
are the words of the prophet. Again the same evangelist
writes that at the warning of an angel Joseph took the young
child and his mother and went into Egypt and remained
there till the death of Herod; ' that it might be fulfilled
which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, Out of
Egypt have I called my son.' [Matt. II. 13-15.] The Latin
manuscripts do not so give the passage, but in Hosea [Hos.
XI. 1.] the true Hebrew text has the following: — 'When
Israel was a child then I loved him, and called my son out of
Egypt.' Which the Septuagint renders thus: — 'When
Israel was a child then I loved him, and called his sons out of
Egypt. 'Are they [i. e., the Septuagint and Vulgate versions]
altogether to be rejected because they have given
another turn to a passage which refers primarily to the mys-
tery of Christ? . . . Once more it is written in the
pages of the same evangelist, 'And he came and dwelt in a
city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was
spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.'
[Matt. II. 23.] Let those word fanciers and nice critics of
all composition tell us where they have read the words ; and
if they cannot, let me tell them that they are in Isaiah.
[Isa. XI. 1.] For in the place where we read and translate,
'There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and
a branch shall grow out of his roots,' [So AV. ; the Vulg.
VERBAL INSPIRATION 215
varies slightly.] in the Hebrew idiom it is written thus,
"There shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and
a Nazarene shall grow from his root.' How can the Septua-
gint leave out the word 'Nazarene,' if it is unlawful to
substitute one word for another? It is sacrilege either to
conceal or to set at naught a mystery.
"Let us pass on to other passages, for the brief limits of
a letter do not suffer us to dwell too long on any one point.
The same Matthew says: — 'Now all this was done that it
might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the
prophet saying, Behold a virgin shall be with child and shall
bring forth a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel.'
[Matt. I. 22, 23; Isa. VII. 14.] The rendering of the Sep-
tuagint is, 'Behold a virgin shall receive seed and shall bring
forth a son, and ye shall call his name Emmanuel.' If peo-
ple cavil at words, obviously 'to receive seed' is not the exact
equivalent of 'to be with child,' and 'ye shall call' differs
from 'they shall call.' Moreover in the Hebrew we read
thus, 'Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and
shall call his name Immanuel.' [AV.] Ahaz shall not call
him so, for he was convicted of want of faith, nor the Jews,
for they were destined to deny him, but she who is to con-
ceive him, and bear him, the virgin herself. In the same
evangelist we read that Herod was troubled at the coming
of the Magi, and that gathering together the scribes and the
priests he demanded of them where Christ should be born,
and that they answered him, 'In Bethlehem of Judah : for
thus it is written by the prophet; and thou Bethlehem in
the land of Judah art not the least among the princes of
Judah, for out of thee shall come a governor that shall rule
my people Israel.' [Matt. II. 5., 6.] In the Vulgate [/. e.
the Versio Itala which was vulgata or 'commonly used at
this time, as Jerome's Version was afterwards] this pass.
appears as follows: — 'And thou Bethlehem, the house of
Ephratah, art small to be among the thousands of Judah,
yet one shall come out of thee for me to be a prince in Israel.'
You will be more surprised still at the difference in words
and order between Matthew and the Septuagint if you look
the Hebrew which runs thus: — 'But thou Bethlehem
216 VERBAL INSPIRATION
Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of
Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to
be ruler in Israel.' [Mic. V. 2.] Consider one by one the
words of the evangelist : — 'And thou Bethlehem in the land
of Judah.' For the land of Judah the Hebrew has 'Eph-
ratah' while the Septuagint gives 'the house of Ephratah.'
The evangelist writes, 'art not the least among the princes of
Judah.' In the Septuagint this is, 'art small to be among
the thousands of Judah,' while the Hebrew gives, 'though
thou be little among the thousands of Judah.' There is a
contradiction here — and that not merely verbal — between
the evangelist and the prophet ; for in this place at any rate
both Septuagint and Hebrew agree. The evangelist says
that he is not little among the princes of Judah, while the
passage from which he quotes says exactly the opposite of
this, 'Thou are small indeed and little; but yet out of thee,
small and little as thou art, there shall come forth for me a
leader in Israel,' a sentiment in harmony with that of the
apostle, 'God hath chosen the weak things of the world to
confound the things that are mighty.' [I. Cor. I. 27.] More-
over the last clause 'to rule' or 'to feed my people Israel'
clearly runs differently in the original.
"I refer to these passages, not to convict the evangelists
of falsification — a charge worthy only of impious men like
Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian — but to bring home to my
critics their own want of knowledge, and to gain from them
such consideration that they may concede to me in the case
of a simple letter what, whether they like it or not, they will
have to concede to the Apostles in the Holy Scriptures.
Mark, the disciple of Peter, begins his gospel thus: — 'The
beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in
the prophet Isaiah: Behold I send my messenger before
thy face who shall prepare thy way before thee. The
voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of
the Lord, make his paths straight.' [Mark I. 1-3.]
This quotation is made up from two prophets, Malachi, that
is to say, and Isaiah. For the first part : 'Behold I send my
messenger before thy face who shall prepare thy way be-
fore thee,' occurs at the close of Malachi. [Mai. III. 1]
VERBAL INSPIRATION 217
But the second part: 'The voice of one crying, etc.,' we read
in Isaiah. [Isa. XL. 3.] On what grounds then has Mark
in the very beginning of his book set the words: 'As it is
written in the prophet Isaiah, Behold I send my messenger,'
when, as we have said, it is not written in Isaiah at all, but
in Malachi the last of the twelve prophets? Let ignorant
presumption solve this nice question if it can, and I will ask
pardon for being in the wrong. The same Mark brings be-
fore us the Saviour thus addressing the Pharisees: 'Have
ye never read what David did when he had need and was
hungry, he and they that were with him, how he went into
the house of God in the days of Abiathar the highpriest,
and did eat the shewbread which is not lawful to eat but
for the priests?' [Mark II. 25, 26.] Now let us turn to the
books of Samuel, or, as they are commonly called, of Kings,
and we shall find there that the highpriest 's name was not
Abiathar but Ahimelech, [I. Sam. XXI. 1.] the same that
was afterwards put to death with the rest of the priests
by Doeg at the command of Saul. [I. Sam. XXII. 16-18.]
Let us pass on now to the apostle Paul who writes thus to
the Corinthians: 'For had they known it, they would not
have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written,
Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into
the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for
them that love Him.' [I. Cor. II. 8, 9.] Some writers on this
passage betake themselves to the ravings of the apocryphal
books, and assert that the quotation comes from the Revela-
tion of Eliah ; [This book is no longer extant. It belonged
to the same class as the Book of Enoch.] whereas the truth
is that it is found in Isaiah according to the Hebrew text :
'Since the beginning of the world men have not heard nor
perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, be-
side thee what thou hast prepared for them that wait for
thee.' [Isa. LXIV. 4, LXX. AY. has 'what he hath pre-
pared for him that waiteth for him.'] The Septuagint has
rendered the words quite differently: 'Since the beginning
of the world we have not heard, neither have our eyes seen
any God beside thee and thy true works, and thou wilt shew
mercy to them that wait for thee.' We see then from what
218 VERBAL INSPIRATION
place the quotation is taken and yet the apostle has not
rendered his original word for word, but, using a paraphrase,
he has given the sense in different terms. In his epistle to
the Romans the same apostle quotes these words from
Isaiah: 'Behold I lay in Sion a stumbling stone and rock
of offence,' [Rom. IX. 33.] a rendering which is at variance
with the Greek version [Lit. with the old version.] yet
agrees with the original Hebrew. The Septuagint gives an
opposite meaning, 'that you fall not on a stumblingstone
nor on a rock of offence.' The apostle Peter agrees with
Paul and the Hebrew, writing: 'but to them that do not
believe, a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence.' [I Pet.
II. 8 ; AV. is different.] From all these passages it is clear
that the apostles and evangelists in translating the old testa-
ment scriptures have sought to give the meaning rather than
the words, and that they have not greatly cared to preserve
forms or constructions, so long as thy could make clear the
subject to the understanding.
"Luke the evangelist and companion of apostles describes
Christ's first martyr Stephen as relating what follows in a
Jewish assembly. 'With threescore and fifteen souls Jacob
went down into Egypt, and died himself, and our fathers
were carried over [So the Vulg. : AV. punctuates differently.]
into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought
for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor [i. e. Hamor]
the father of Sychem.' [Acts VII. 15, 16.] In Genesis
this passage is quite differently given, for it is Abraham
that buys of Ephron the Hittite, the son of Zohar, near
Hebron, for four hundred shekels [Drachmae.] of silver, a
double cave, [Spelunca duplex.] and the field that is about
it, and that buries in it Sarah his wife. And in the same
book we read that, after his return from Mesopotamia with
his wives and his sons, Jacob pitched his tent before Salem
a city of Shechem which is in the land of Canaan, and that
he dwelt there and 'bought a parcel of a field where he had
spread his tent at the hand of Hamor, the father of Sychem,
for an hundred lambs' [AV. marg.], and that 'he erected
there an altar and called there upon the God of Israel.'
[Gen. XXXIII. 18-20; AV. varies slightly.] Abraham does
VERBAL INSPIRATION 219
not buy the cave from Hamor the father of Sychem, but
from Ephron the son of Zohar, and he is not buried in Sychem
but in Hebron which is corruptly called Arboch. Whereas
the twelve patriarchs are not buried in Arboch but in Sychem
in the field purchased not by Abraham but by Jacob. I
postpone the solution of this delicate problem to enable
those who cavil at me to search and see that in dealing with
the scriptures it is the sense we have to look to and not the
words."
None of the Fathers treated the question of verbal in-
spiration with the clearness and depth of Augustine. He
distinguishes between sense and material word, and de-
clares that in employing the material word, the writers
use that liberty that we here demand for them. A good
specimen of St. Augustine's principles concerning this ques-
tion is found in his "Harmony of the Evangelists," Bk. II.,
27-29:
"If now the question is asked, as to which of the words
we are to suppose the most likely to have been the precise
words used by John the Baptist, whether those recorded as
spoken by him in Matthew's Gospel, or those in Luke's, or
those which Mark has introduced, among the few sentences
which he mentions to have been uttered by him, while he
omits notice of all the rest, it will not be deemed worth while
creating any difficulty for oneself in a matter of that kind,
by any one who wisely understands that the real requisite in
order to get at the knowledge of the truth is just to make
sure of the things really meant, whatever may be the pre-
cise words in which they happen to be expressed. For
although one writer may retain a certain order in the words,
and another present a different one, there is surely no real
contradiction in that. Nor, again, need there be any an-
tagonism between the two, although one may state what
another omits. For it is evident that the evangelists have
set forth these matters just in accordance with the recollec-
tion each retained of them, and just according as their
several predilections prompted them to employ greater brev-
ity or richer detail on certain points, while giving, never-
theless, the same account of the subjects themselves.
220 VERBAL INSPIRATION
"Thus, too, in what more pertinently concerns the mat-
ter in hand, it is sufficiently obvious that, since the truth of
the Gospel, conveyed in that word of God which abides
eternal and unchangeable above all that is created, but
which at the same time has been disseminated through-
out the world by the instrumentality of temporal symbols,
and by the tongues of men, has possessed itself of the most
exalted height of authority, we ought not to suppose that
any one of the writers is giving an unreliable account, if,
when several persons are recalling some matter either heard
or seen by them, they fail to follow the very same plan, or to
use the very same words, while describing, nevertheless, the
self -same fact. Neither should we indulge such a supposi-
tion, although the order of the words may be varied; or
although some words may be substituted in place of others,
which nevertheless have the same meaning; or although
something may be left unsaid, either because it has not
occurred to the mind of the recorder, or because it becomes
readily intelligible from other statements which are given;
or although, among other matters which (may not bear
directly on his immediate purpose, but which) he decides
on mentioning rather for the sake of the narrative, and in
order to preserve the proper order of time, one of them may
introduce something which he does not feel called upon to
expound as a whole at length, but only to touch upon in
part ; or although, with the view of illustrating his meaning,
and making it thoroughly clear, the person to whom author-
ity is given to compose the narrative makes some additions
of his own, not indeed in the subject-matter itself, but in
the words by which it is expressed; or although, while re-
taining a perfectly reliable comprehension of the fact itself,
he may not be entirely successful, however he may make
that his aim, in calling to mind and reciting anew with the
most literal accuracy the very words which he heard on the
occasion. Moreover, if any one affirms that the evangelists
ought certainly to have had that kind of capacity imparted
to them by the power of the Holy Spirit, which would secure
them against all variation the one from the other, either in
the kind of words, or in their order, or in their number, that
VERBAL INSPIRATION' 22]
person fails to perceive, that just in pr< >] m irtion as the auth
ity of the evangelists [under their existing conditions] is
made pre-eminent, the credit of all other men who offer true
statements of events ought to have been established on a
stronger basis by their instrumentality : so that when several
parties happen to narrate the same circumstance, none of
them can by any means be rightly charged with untruth-
fulness if he differs from the other only in such a way as can
be defended on the ground of the antecedent example of the
evangelists themselves. For as we are not at liberty either
to suppose or to say that any one of the evangelists has
stated what is false, so it will be apparent that any other
writer is as little chargeable with untruth, with whom, in the
process of recalling anything for narration, it has fared only
in a way similar to that in which it is shown to have fared
with those evangelists. And thus as it belongs to the high-
est morality to guard against all that is false, so ought we all
the more to be ruled by an authority so eminent, to the
effect that we should not suppose ourselves to come upon
what must be false, when we find the narratives of any writ-
ers differ from each other in the manner in which the records
of the evangelists are proved to contain variations. At the
same time, in what most seriously concerns the faithfulness
of doctrinal teaching, we should also understand that it is
n< <t so much truth in mere words as rather truth in the facts
themselves, that is to be sought and embraced; for as to
writers who do not employ precisely the same modes of
statement, if they only do not present discrepancies with
respect to the facts and the sentiments themselves, we ac-
cept them as holding the same position in veracity.
"With respect, then, to those comparisons which I have
instituted between the several narratives of the evangelists,
what do these present that must be considered to be of a
contradictory order? Are we to regard in this light the
circumstance that one of them has given us the words,
whose shoes I am not worthy to bear, whereas the others speak
of the unloosing of the latchet of the shoe! For here, indeed,
the difference seems to be neither in the mere words, n< >r in
the order of the words, nor in any matter of simple phrase-
222 VERBAL INSPIRATION
ology, but in the actual matter of fact, when in one case
the bearing of the shoe is mentioned and in the other the
unloosing of the shoes latchet. Quite fairly, therefore, may
the question be put, as to what it was that John declared
himself unworthy to do — whether to bear the shoes, or to
unloose the shoe's latchet. For if only the one of these two
sentences was uttered by him, then that evangelist will
appear to have given the correct narrative who was in a
position to record what was said ; while the writer who has
given the saying in another form, although he may not
indeed have offered an [intentionally] false account of it,
may at any rate be taken to have made a slip of memory,
and will be reckoned thus to have stated one thing instead
of another. It is only seemly, however, that no charge of
absolute un veracity should be laid against the evangelists,
and that, too, not only with regard to that kind of un ver-
acity which comes by the positive telling of what is false, but
also with regard to that which arises through forgetfulness.
Therefore, if it is pertinent to the matter to deduce one sense
from the words to bear the shoes, and another sense from the
words to unloose the shoe's latchet, what should one suppose
the correct interpretation to be put on the facts, but that
John did give utterance to both these sentences, either on
two different occasions or in one and the same connection?
For he might very well have expressed himself thus, whose
shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose, and whose shoes I
am not worthy to bear: and then one of the evangelists may
have reproduced the one portion of the saying, and the rest
of them the other ; while, notwithstanding this, all of them
have really given a veracious narrative. But further, if,
when he spoke of the shoes of the Lord, John meant nothing
more than to convey the idea of His supremacy and his own
lowliness, then, whichever of the two sayings may have
actually been uttered by him, whether that regarding the
unloosing of the latchet of the shoes, or that respecting the
bearing of the shoes, the self -same sense is still correctly
preserved by any writer who, while making mention of the
shoes in words of his own, has expressed at the same time
the same idea of lowliness, and thus has not made any de-
VERBAL IXSPIRATIOX 223
parture from the real mind [of the person of whom he writes].
It is therefore a useful principle, and one particularly worthy
of being borne in mind, when we are speaking of the con-
cord of the evangelists, that there is no divergence [to be
supposed] from truth, even when they introduce some say-
ing different from what was actually uttered by the person
concerning whom the narrative is given, provided that,
notwithstanding this, they set forth as his mind precisely
what is also so conveyed by that one among them who re-
produces the words as they wrere literally spoken. For thus
we learn the salutary lesson, that our aim should be nothing
else than to ascertain what is the mind and intention of the
person who speaks."
In view of this clear testimony, it is strange that Pere
Lagrange hesitates not to say: "That we maintain, with
the Fathers, that inspiration extends itself to everything,
even to the words, is precisely to the end to establish that
the term inspiration is not synonymous with the dictation"
(Revue Biblique, 1904, p. 293). While such reckless disre-
gard of historical facts and such party spirit prevail in
those who demand a more liberal exegesis, there is no hope
of effecting a harmony among Catholic scholars. Far more
truthful is the doctrine which Venerable Bede drew from
the Fathers, that the prophets "secretly were taught the
mysteries by clear mental visions, that they might make
these things known to their hearers by whatever words
they pleased". (On II. Peter 1.)
Most of the older scholastic writers did not expressly
treat the question of verbal inspiration. St. Thomas leaves
men in doubt as to his view. However, in his prologue to
Hebrews, he declares that in this epistle Paul "is more
elegant in style, because although he knew all tongues (I. Cor.
XI Y. 18) nevertheless, he knew better the Hebrew as his
mother tongue in which he wrote this epistle. And there-
fore he could speak more eloquently in that tongue than in
another. . . . Luke, a most excellent interpreter, trans-
red that eloquence from Hebrew into Greek." This
certainly admits the human element in the words of Scrip-
ture for which we are contending.
224 VERBAL INSPIRATION
Henry of Ghent, a disciple of Albertus Magnus, asserted
verbal inspiration, but no other writer of authority is
found of that opinion among the older scholastics.
After the Council of Trent opinion was divided on the
question. Towards the end of the XVIII. Century, the
opinion denying verbal inspiration in the material sense
became the common opinion. Marchini (t ! 773) expresses
the common opinion of his day as follows: "The divine
afflatus and inspiration can have place even though God by
special action furnishes neither words nor sentences. Truly
if the Holy Ghost is present to the writer whom he has moved
to write ; if , in case memory should fail the writer, (the Holy
Ghost) opportunely suggests what he wishes written ; if he
enlightens the mind with a light that dispels all ignorance
and lack of judgment ; if he strengthens the mind with such
power that all things are written faithfully, plainly and
consistently; if he brings to the mind hidden, sublime, and
unknown things ; if he leaves no part of Scripture devoid of
his care, verily the books will be written by the inspiration
of God, although the speech, and the expressions proceed
for the most part from the genius, memory, study, medita-
tion, and diligence of man." (De Div. et Can. Sac. Lib.)
The sense and the words are the effect of a man writing
under the influence of divine inspiration, and in that sense
the words are influenced by divine inspiration; but this
influence leaves to the writer more of the human element in
the words than in the sense ; for the sense is the direct object
of God's action : the words are intended only as a means of
conveying the sense. God as the principal author can not
be indifferent as to the sense of any part of Holy Scripture,
for the sense of every part is attributable to Him. He may
and does permit a liberty of choice of words to convey this
sense, provided they be an apt medium to express his mind.
God inspired writers in order that they should write deter-
minate truths, not determinate words ; he inspired them to
write his message in fitting words which their faculties
furnished.
There are times when the Holy Ghost determines the
material words, but this pertains not to the essence of
VERBAL INSPIRATION 225
inspiration, and more rarely is verified. Again when God
gives command to "speak the words" of God, or to "write
the words of God " it is evident that the meaning is to deliver
to men the formal words of God, not the material words.
A legitimate argument against the inspiration of the
material words of Scripture may be drawn from the follow-
ing consideration. In God's plan entities are not to be
multiplied without necessity. God employs the ordinary
course of created agents where their causality is adequate
to attain the end. Now there is no reason why God should
have exercised a special action in determining words and
expressions for the inspired writers. That God could have
thus acted on the inspired writers, all admit. It may be
that he did determine the very material words in some
instances; but the evidence is against admitting that such
determination pertains to the essence of inspiration. Many
of the arguments against verbal inspiration have already
been adduced. An additional argument may be drawn
from the manner in which the inspired writers record facts.
In the Scriptures, sometimes the same fact is related by
different writers in different ways. For instance, the con-
secration of the chalice is related in four different ways by
St. Matt., XXVI.. 28; St. Mark, XIV., 24; St. Luke, XXII.,
20, and St. Paul, I. Cor. XL, 25. These speak of the same
words of Christ, as Ik' used them once for all at the Lasl
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 cos explicasse manifestum est."
We may add that certainly the determination of the
material words can not enter into the essence 1 if the message
of God, for such message was destined for the whole world,
which it did not reach, and could not reach in the original
words in which it was first delivered.
It may be said that the same argument evinces the same
latitude for the things of Scripture that pertain not to faith
and morals. In the versions accidental errors have crept
into these in more or less degree; therefore, why demand a
more absolute standard of inerrancy in the original5 To
226 VERBAL INSPIRATION
answer this difficulty we must know that the conditions of
the sense of Holy Scripture differ from the conditions of the
words. It is defined by the Church that God is the Author
of the entire Scriptures with all their parts, for the reason
that they were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost.
This definition extends inspiration to every enunciation of
Holy Scripture, and the definition goes farther, and declares
that the whole Scriptures thus inspired contain no error.
Now if we exempt certain passages of Holy 'Writ from
this infallible inspiration, we sever the vital unity of the
Scriptures, we practise vivisection in the strict sense. A
proposition may be enunciated in different words, and
still preserve its identity of sense; but a sentence can not
be true and false at the same time. When we say that
inspired writers wrote the message of God with infallible
truth, but with words which they themselves determined
within the range of fitting words, we leave to God his right-
ful character as Inspirer and Author of the Scriptures ; but
when we say that the inspired writers wrote partly true
things and partly false, we can not make God the Author of
such a medley of truth and falsehood. The divine action of
inspiration enlightens the mind of the writer to conceive
ideas of the truths he is to deliver. These concepts must be
true. Truth is one. But without detriment to their truth
these concepts may in general be expressed by different
words. They demand apt words, but not determinate
forms of expression; and here we place the liberty of the
inspired writer. When Abraham goes down with his wife
Sarah into Egypt, and she is taken from him into the house
of Pharaoh, there is but one concept that corresponds to it.
It may be expressed in different words, but the event has
an individual unity, and there can be but one true idea of it.
Therefore when the writer records that event, he must
reproduce that determinate fact. Therefore when we find
such historical statements in the Bible we must conclude
that they are historically true. They cannot be allegories,
or parables: all the characteristics of allegory and parable
are absent. They form a part of a real history; their
context shows that the writers meant them as real history.
VERBAL INSPIRATION 227
If we characterize them as myth and folk-lore, we impeach
the veracity of the word of God.
The reasonableness of the doctrine just enunciated can
be seen from a commonplace example. A professor de-
livers his lecture to his hearers, and they commit the sense
of his discourse to writing, each in a different manner. Pro-
vided they relate faithfully the sense of what he says they
may all be said to have his lecture ; though the words differ,
the sense remains the same, and the sense is the proper
result of inspiration.
In the latter part of the last century a new theory was
proposed regarding verbal inspiration. The advocates of
the new theory refuse to admit that God's inspiring act
affected the ideas differently from the words. They extend
the act of inspiration to the sense and the words. They
depart from the cruder mechanical theory of verbal inspira-
tion, and raise the question more into the psychological
order. But among the advocates of this new view of verbal
inspiration there is not a consensus. Some of them in sub-
stance are in accord with the views which we here defend.
It is in many cases merely a question of terms. We admit
an influence of God on the words ; and the words of Scripture
are inspired words, because they are the signs of inspired
ideas. We do not say that God is the Author of the ideas,
and man is the author of the words ; because the inspired
writer was under the influence of inspiration when he wrote
the words, and the action of God upon his faculties is re-
flected in the words he employed ; but we believe that God's
action left to man to use his faculites in expressing the con-
ceptions of his mind, even while he remained under the
influence of inspiration. Hence, as Jerome says, Paul may
have used a defective expression in Ephesians, though the
expression can at no time be so defective as not to convey
God's meaning..
Lagrange, though an advocate of verbal inspiration, is
obliged to admit that the action of God does not affect the
words in the same manner as the sense: "Without doubt
ween the thought and the word there exists an intrins
difference ; therefore inspiration does not affect them in the
228 VERBAL INSPIRATION
same manner. The thought should be true, the word
should be apt; therefore under the influence of the divine
light the judgment will be true, the terms and other ac-
cessories will be fittingly chosen. If this is what certain
modern writers mean in distinguishing between inspiration
for the thoughts and assistance for the words we are sub-
stantially in accord with them." (Revue Biblique, 1896,
P- 215.)
It would seem at first sight that there were no substantial
difference of opinion between the advocates of the new exe-
gesis and us on the subject of inspiration, but in reality one
of the fundamental tenets of their system lies here. While
they grant to the inspired author the same liberty that we
grant him, they insist that his material words be still termed
inspired. They do this for the purpose of demanding the
same liberty of the human element in the thoughts them-
selves. Thus Lagrange proposes the system: "It would
be unreasonable to say that God in the same manner wills
the thoughts and the words, that he attaches the same im-
portance to the words as to the thoughts, or inspires both in
the same manner. We do not wish to be narrower than
Franzelin, but broader. He abandoned the theory that
the words were the (material) words of God, because he
found it difficult to find in them the perfection of things
immediately revealed. We demand the same liberty for
the thoughts, and it is scarcely exact to call them (the
thoughts) sensa Dei, an expression which easily might be-
come exclusive" (Revue Biblique, 1904, p. 294). The argu-
ment here is most illogical and inconsistent. If, by his own
admission, the thoughts are more important than the words ;
if inspiration affects them differently, how can he demand
the same liberty for the thoughts as Franzelin demands for
the words ?
In his work, (Die Schriftinspiration, 1891), Dr. Dausch
declared : "To separate inspired elements from non-inspired
elements of Holy Writ is like the distinction between
verbal inspiration and sense inspiration, more or less a
vivisection of the living efficacy of the Spirit." This phrase
has been adopted by many to support the theory of verbal
I
VERBAL INSPIRATION' 229
inspiration. Without doubt to remove the influence of God
entirely from the actual words of Holy Scripture might be
called vivisection ; but that term can not apply to the theory
which we have defended. We believe therefore that in-
spired thoughts influence the words by which, with God's
assistance, they are expressed ; we believe that the super-
natural enlightenment of the mind favorably reacts upon the
power of expression ; we believe that God assisted the writers
so that infallible truth was competently expressed ; but we
believe at the same time that the writers exercised a certain
liberty in the choice of words and expressions; that they
reveal their genius and education in these ; that certain liter-
ary defects are found in the words ; and that certain things
might have been better expressed. We believe also that
the action of God is directed, as to its more immediate ob-
ject, to the sense of Holy Scripture; and consequently the
human element is greater in the words than in the thoughts.
The authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church pro-
claims the Scriptures to be God's infallible word, and con-
sequently free from error. It is clear that it is the mind of
the Church to make the inerrancy of the Scriptures the effect
of its inspired character, to derive it from God's authorship.
If a man denies the infallibility of Holy Scripture in things
of faith and morals he is a heretic : if he limits the inerrancy
of Holy Scripture to things of faith and morals only he is not
far from being a heretic. Of course this applies to the Scrip-
tures as they came from the inspired writers; and to the
versions in the measure that they are authentic. The defin-
ition of the Council of Trent guarantees that the Vulgate is
authentic in things of faith and morals.
While all Scripture is true, all Scripture is not true in the
same way. The sense that the Scriptures affirm is always
true. The parable and allegory are not true as history,
because they are not written as history. They are true as
moral illustrations, because their sense is a moral illustra-
tion. That which is written as parable is true as parable;
that which is written as poetry is true as poetry ; that which
is written as allegory is true as allegory; that which is writ-
ten as history is true as history; and that which is writl
•■
230 INSPIRATION AND HISTORY
as doctrinal or moral teaching is a true law of belief and
conduct. For this cause the historical method of Lagrange
is rejected, because it makes a congeries of folk-lore, legends,
and myths that which is written as history.
There may be times when it is difficult to discern that
which is strictly historical from that which is fictitious his-
tory. Such difficulty will never obscure the way of belief
or conduct. Some believe that Tobias or Judith or Ruth is
a fictitious history. The Church has not defined the ques-
tion. To deal with it, one must examine the evidence, and
see whether the object of the writer be to write real or fictitious
history. The object of the writer is always to write the
truth; his fictitious history is not less true than his real
history : it is true in the sense proper to its nature as a genus
of literature which the Holy Scripture can use. It incul-
cates principles of truth and duty by concrete examples.
While conservative opinion holds that Job is a historical
personage, the great drama of the Book of Job is largely a
creation of the poet's inspired mind to illustrate infallibly
true principles. Hence in judging of an inspired book, we
must have regard to its character to determine in what
sense it is true. Prophecy has its peculiar character, its
visions and its symbols; poetry has its poetic flights of im-
agination ; parable and allegory make fictitious entities act
and speak their message; while real history declares its
message by relating facts. There is no place in Scripture
for folk-lore or myth, for these relate the legends of a people
as real history.
We must realize also that inspiration is only a partial
participation of the divine light. God does not speak to
us in the Scriptures more divino, but in a human manner.
He condescends to us as we condescend to address a child.
The books therefore of Holy Scripture contain the evidences
of imperfection due to their human origin ; but God's in-
spiration moves the writers to write nothing but the truth*
The writers were not critical historians ; but the Spirit of God
supplied where human knowledge failed.
Another important hermeneutical principle is that the
sense of an inspired writer may have a wider range than he
DEVELOPMENT 23]
comprehends. That which he means to utter is the sense of
God, but that very sense may be greater than he compre-
hends. This principle was clearly admitted by the Fathers:
"Perhaps not even St. John spoke (of the Word) as it is, but
as he, being a man, was able; because he, a man, spoke of
God, he was verily inspired but still a man. . . . There-
fore being a man inspired, he uttered not all; but what he
could, being a man." (Aug. On John I., i.) St. Jerome
(On Eph. III., 5) admits that the mystery of the incarnation
"was not known to the patriarchs and prophets as it is now
known to the apostles and saints: it is one thing to know
future things in a vision ; it is another thing to contemplate
them now fulfilled." St. Thomas sums up the question in
his usual clear way: "We must know that since the mind
of the prophet is an imperfect instrument, even the true
prophets did not know all that the Holy Ghost intended in
their visions, words, and deeds." (2. 2. 173. 4.) This
principle is also promulgated in the bull "Providentissimus
Deus.
It results therefore that the Church, by the aid of the
Holy Spirit, may grow in the understanding of certain truths
whose full import not even the original writers grasped. We
see also a certain growth in the clearness of the revelation
of Christ in the Old Testament, and those closer to the ful-
fillment of the prophecies saw with clearer view than those
of old. Similarly in the Church there is a lawful growth in
the understanding of doctrine. The Church has always
taught the infallible truth; has always been adequately
equipped to teach men ; and must always preserve an identitv
of doctrine. But she is a living Church; and the Holy
Ghost abides with her all days to teach. It follows from her
life, and from the abiding of the Spirit that she grows in
knowledge of the truths which were delivered to her in the
beginning. Thus her unity and identity of teaching stand
with her growth in knowledge.
We have before spoken of the manner in which the in-
spired Scriptures deal with natural sciences. St. Augustine
rightly declares: "It is not read in the Gospel that the
Lord said: T send you the Paraclete who shall teach von
232 INSPIRATION AND SCIENCE
trie course of the sun and the moon.' He wished to make
them Christians, not mathematicians. " (De actis cum Felice
Manichaeo, I., 10.)
It does not follow from this that when the Scriptures
speak of the stars, plants, animals, etc., that they are not
veracious, for "no one except an impious man or infidel
doubts of the veracity of Scripture." (Aug. On Gen. VII.,
28.)
The truths of salvation are directly inspired; the other
truths are indirectly inspired, on account of their relation
to the direct object of inspiration. But in speaking of things
of natural science, the Holy Scriptures have not treated them
to the end to teach the people science ; they have not treated
such matters from the scientist's viewpoint : "Moses con-
descending to a rude people, spoke of things as they sensibly
appeared." (St. Thomas, Summa, I., q. 70.) The sacred
writers make use of the common parlance of the people:
"secundum opinionem populi loquitur Scriptura." (S. Th.
1. 2. 198.) A question of vital importance, in our days, is
the relation of Scripture to science. Men's minds have
been active ever since the writing of Scripture itself, and
have found many things unknown at the time of the writing
of the Holy Books. They have delved down deep into the
mysterious storehouse of nature, have discovered her treas-
ures, have imprisoned her mighty forces to do their will and
serve them in the affairs of their civil and domestic life.
They have penetrated the heavens, and investigated the
secrets of the vast expanse which men call the firmament.
Many truths, and many more or less reasonable hypotheses
have been thus found out. But science, proud of her achieve-
ments, and restless under restraint, too oft turns her powers
against the God-given truths of the Sacred Text, and here
the warfare waxes bitter indeed, and many there are who
incline too much to the side of science, even of those of the
household of faith. Since the time of Galileo, men have
conceded that the Scriptures spoke according to the com-
mon opinions of the people, and attributed significations to
words, which the vulgar speech of the day warranted. For
God made use of a human medium to convey his message to
INSPIRATION AND SCIENCE 233
man, and he did not startle the people by strange expres-
sions, which would have been unintelligible to all people
at that stage of human development. Men speak thus to-
day, and are not accused of inexactness or with combating
science. Hence, with this in mind, we can reconcile the
assertions of true science with the inspired Word of God, for
there can be no combat between truth and truth; for the
Author of both human and divine science is the Essential
and Infinite Truth. "For although faith is above reason,
no real discussion, no real conflict can be found between
them since both arise from one and the same fount of im-
mutable and eternal truth, the great and good God." (Pius
IX., Encyc. of Nov. 9, 1846.) Some hypotheses broached
by the incredulous and shallow dabbler in science may con-
flict with the truths of Scripture, but this imports nothing.
The Church blesses scientific research, and fears nothing
therefrom. She invites investigation into every field of
human thought, and only good to herself can come there-
from. The greatest scientists and historians are her faith-
ful children. The Vatican Council approved of scientific
research explicitly, even when all the resources of science
were brought to bear to oppose the Church. It leaves
science free to use its own methods. "Neither does the
Church forbid that these sciences should, in their own do-
main, use their own principles and methods." (Cone. Vat.
De Fide, IV.)
Hence we should guard against attributing to a passage
of Scripture a signification, which in se it has not, but which
may have been given to it by some interpreter. When we
find by incontestable evidence that science has demon-
strated a truth, which is in seeming opposition to what has
by some been held to be the opinion gleaned from the Holy
Scriptures, we should seek some other interpretation, which
the text must bear, as truth and truth can not conflict, and
wo can thus reconcile these two truths coming from different
sources. In this manner, we may reconcile Gen. I. 14 : "And
God said let there be luminaries in the firmament of heaven.
. . . And God made two great luminaries, a greater lumin-
ary to rule the day and a lesser luminary to rule the ni^ht.
234 INSPIRATION AND SCIENCE
and the stars." Now it would seem from this that the stars
were less in magnitude than the moon. As science has in-
disputably proven the contrary, what must we admit?
That the inspired writer spoke according to the appearance
of things, and for us the moon is a greater luminary than the
stars. Hence, even the sun is not necessarily asserted to be
a greater luminary in fact than the stars, but only in appear-
ance.
Two obstacles obstruct the way of harmony between
Scripture and science; videlicet, the narrowness of view of
many who essay to defend the Scriptures, and the pride and
presumption of orientalists and scientists who fail to recog-
nize that there is:
"A deep below the deep,
And a height beyond the height ;
Our hearing is not hearing,
And our seeing is not sight."
Shallow draughts of science intoxicate the brain ; drink-
ing deeply sobers us. The man of large mind will be con-
scious of his own limitations; conscious that much that
passes as science is a congeries of hypotheses, many of which
change with the course of time. The exegete must also
realize that where the Church has not denned the question
"one should not so tenaciously adhere to any exposition
formerly believed to be true, that he would not abandon it
when clearly proven to be false, lest the Scriptures be de-
rided by the unbelieving, and a way to belief be cut off from
them" (St. Th. 2. Sent. 12.)
At no time in the history of the world have men's ideas
of natural science been absolutely correct. In time they
never will be absolutely correct. We may know some
things better than the ancients; but there are many more
which we shall never know. God decreed to use men at
certain epochs of history to deliver a body of truths to men.
Incidentally they spoke of certain natural phenomena. They
used the language of their time, as men have done in every
age of the world. They spoke of the material universe as
it appeared to men. The language which they employed
was scientifically imperfect; but they uttered no falsehood.
INSPIRATION AND HISTORY 235
They used an imperfect medium to convey to man the in-
fallible message of God. The inspired writer's conceptions
of nature were imperfect, and God did not by a necessary
miracle remove this imperfection before making him an in-
strument to utter a message in which scientific facts are only
indirectly contemplated. In these enunciations concern-
ing natural phenomena there is a direct sense and an in-
direct sense. When it is said that at the voice of Joshua the
sun stood still, the direct sense is that the light of day was
miraculously prolonged; and that fact is affirmed in the
language of the writer's time.
A question of paramount importance is now to determine
whether we shall apply to history that same latitude that
we give to things of natural science ; that is whether we shall
concede that the inspired historians wrote history according
to popular belief. Lagrange and his school affirm this, and
make that the cardinal principle of the so-called "historical
method." Not content with asserting the theory, some of
them, with amazing audacity, appeal to the encyclical "Prov-
identissimus Deus" in support of their hypothesis. It is to
set a low value on human intelligence to ascribe such a view
to the encyclical. The Holy Father wishes "his principles
applied to cognate sciences and especially to history;" but
it is clear that what he means is that we must defend Scrip-
ture not only against scientists, but against orientalists and
historians, whose methods the Holy Father exposes in the
very same paragraph. There is not a word in the whole
encyclical favorable to the "historical method." The con-
text clearly establishes the pontiff's meaning to be that, as
we are to refute scientists when they teach falsely, and as we
are to show that what they have proven is not contrary to
the Scriptures, so we are to deal with history and other
cognate sciences. And the pontiff immediately proceeds
to state the errors of historians who wage war on the Holy
Scriptures.
It is clear that there is a vast difference between the
scientific statements and the historical statcmcntsof the Bible.
The very essence of history is to narrate facts. We have
given a fit place to allegory and parable, lyric poem and
236 INSPIRATION AND HISTORY
drama. Here we speak of history which the writer wrote
as history. Every genus of literature which the Bible
employs must be true in the mode competent to its nature.
Therefore that which is written as history must be true as
history. When the Scriptures say : "God made the firma-
ment, and divided the waters which were under the firma-
ment from the waters which were above the firmament,"
the purpose of the proposition is not to teach men the nature
of the heavens, but to assert that God created the heavens,
and gave to nature her laws. The truths of Scripture are
conceived in a human manner. Nature is spoken of as
men contemplated it : in this regard the inspired writer is a
child of his time, and his scientific knowledge is not in ad-
vance of his epoch. There is truth in his statement, the
truth he intended to convey: there is imperfection in the
accessory.
But when the Scriptures say that Cain rose against Abel
and slew him, or that God rained fire and brimstone upon
Sodom, if these events be the creation of folk-lorists, there
is no truth in them ; they are false beliefs narrated as his-
tory. The nature of the narration of such facts and their
context take them out of the category of allegory and para-
ble ; they are narrated as history, and must be true as his-
tory. The object of the writer is to teach men this very
history, and to move men to believe it. It may be called
primitive history; but it still remains true history. The
fact that many myths and fables mingle in the primitive
history of other peoples does not necessitate that the history
of the origin of the universe as related in the Bible must also
have its myths and legends. By the fact of divine inspira-
tion the history narrated in the Bible transcends all other
history, for the reason that it is infallibly true. The his-
torical parts of Holy Scripture, and in fact all its parts, are
subject to proper hermeneutical laws to determine their
sense ; but in the last analysis every sentence of the Bible,
as it came from the inspired writer, must be true in its proper
sense. History according to popular beliefs is false history,
and can not be a part of the word of God.
INSPIRATION AND HISTORY 237
Moreover the historical parts of the Bible are in gri
part the foundation of our faith. The history of the fall i >f
our first parents bears an essential relation to the doctrine
of original sin. The Redemption, the Resurrection of
Christ, the foundation of the Church, the descent of the
Holy Ghost are historical facts. It is needless to declare
how vital these are to faith.
One of the common phrases of the "new exegesis" is to
declare the historical parts of Scripture relatively true. If
thev wish to assert that the Scriptures are not God, that the
Scriptures are not God's own infinitely perfect utterance, it
is well. The Scriptures are God's message through human
utterance by the power of God. They have the impress of
their human origin upon them ; but they also bear the stamp
of their principal Author, and by His power they are true
in every part. Wherefore if by the phrase relatively true
they mean to say that the Scriptures contain anything that
is not objectively true, the statement conflicts with Catholic
belief.
It is evident therefore that while we admit fictitious
history which has its proper sense of truth, we exclude myth,
legend and folk-lore ; for these are false narrations in the
guise of history. It is an abuse of the relative sense theory
to assert that "all the wonders related during the forty
years in the desert make no necessary claim to be miracles
as we define them, i. £., strictly supernatural occurrences."
(The Tradition of Scripture, Barry, p. 254) The writer of
"The Tradition of Scripture" falls in with the tendency to
pare down the supernatural, and exalt the natural. It is the
trend of the age ever since protestants invented a religion
that is not religious. If the miracles of the Exodus are in
reality only natural phenomena believed by a credulous age
to be miracles, the Bible has spoken falsely, for not in one
place only does it proclaim these to be true miracles. The
tendency that endeavors to eliminate miracles from the
Old Testament will not stop there. It will invade the Xew
Testament even to a "clever cut" at Christ himself. In I
Syllabus of Pius IX. this proposition was condemned : "The
prophecies and miracles set forth in narration in the Sac:-
238 INSPIRATION AND HISTORY
Scriptures are the creations of poets, and the mysteries of
Christian faith are a synthesis of philosophic investigations :
myths are found in both testaments, and Jesus Christ is
himself a myth." The "Providentissimus Deus" most ex-
plicitly deplores and condemns the myth and legend theories
of the "historical method."
We have before explained that when the inspired writer
cites a testimony without either explicit or implicit approb-
ation, inspiration does not vouch for the truth of the testi-
mony. In such case it is only inspiredly true that the writer
has made such a citation ; the matter of the testimony stands
on its own merit. But when the writer uses a historical
source, and embodies it into his history without sufficient
indication that he is relating the words of another without
endorsing them, then, by every law of history, the inspired
writer confers his own authority to what he writes, and
makes it his own. If it were not so, history would become
a jugglery of words, and no man could know what to be-
lieve.
It can not be denied that many of the sources whence
Moses drew his knowledge of the first chapters of Genesis
were popular tradition. The form in which facts are handed
down by popular tradition differs from the style of written
history. In the course down from age to age as a general
thing many legends, myths, and superstitions mix in with
the stream of truth. The divine agency of inspiration
saved the inspired writer from handing down to us any
thing false ; it allowed him to preserve the popular mode in
which the truths were expressed. Abstract principles are
expressed as concrete facts. The true historical fact that
man was created immediately by God in a state of happiness,
was tempted by the devil, and fell through ambitious pride,
is expressed in the form of the allegory of the garden scene at
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God becomes
anthropomorphic, walks in the garden, communes with Him-
self, descends to see the tower of Babel, etc. The truth of
history only demands that there shall be always an objec-
tive reality of fact in all these narrations. The fact is his-
torical; the mode in which it reached us through popular
tradition is sometimes allegorical.
THE CANON 239
CHAPTER III.
The Canon.
(/anon, from Greek teavd>v, originally meant any straight
rod or bar. From this basal signification were formed the
cognate meanings of the amussis or carpenter's rule, the
beam or tongue of the balance, and then, like "norma," any
rule or standard, whether in the physical or moral order.
Hence it came to be generally applied as a rule or measure
of anything. It is much controverted, and quite uncertain,
just 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 applying the term to the Holy Books,
the early writers passed from the active signification of the
term to its effect, and used the measure for the thing meas-
ured ; thus the canon would be the list officially ruled and
measured by the Church. Others hold that the said writers
had in mind that the Holy Books formed a rule of faith and
morals. We are of the persuasion that the term was applied
t< i the collection of Scriptures 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 bonks which satisfied its
requirements, by being incorporated in it, were of divine
authority. At all events, the signification of an official list
< if tilings < >r pers< >ns dates back to a great antiquity. Thus,
in the Councils of Xice and Antioch, the catalogue of the
sacred persons attached to any particular Church was called
the canon. Thus, to-day, those who constitute the chapter
arc called Canons. The appositeness of the term all must
concede, for such sanctioned catalogue forms a measure
inspiration, and we receive only as inspired that which con-
forms to its measurement.
The canon of Holy Scripture then is the official catalogue
of the Books that the Church authoritatively promulgates as :
product of the Authorship of God.
This official list is found in the Council of Trent, Sess.
4. De Can. Script.: "The Synod has thought good to sub-
240 THE CANON
join to the decree an index of the Holy Books, lest to any
man there should arise a doubt as to which are the books
that are received by the said Synod. These are the follow-
ing: Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, to wit:
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue,
Judges, Ruth, the four Books of Kings, the two Books of
Paralipomenon, the First Book of Esdras and the Second
which is called that of Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther,
Job, the Davidic Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesi-
astes, The Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus,
Isaias, Jeremias with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, The Twelve
Minor Prophets, to wit: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas,
Michaeas, Nahum, Habakuk, 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 Corinthians, the Epistle to
the Galatians, the Epistle to the Ephesians, the Epistle to
the Philippians, the Epistle to the Colossians, the two
Epistles to the Thessalonians, the two Epistles to Timothy,
the Epistle to Titus, the Epistle to Philemon, the Epistle to
the Hebrews ; the two Epistles of St. Peter, the three Epistles
of the Apostle John, one Epistle of the Apostle James, one
Epistle of the Apostle Jude, and the Apocalypse of the Apos-
tle John. " In this catalogue, there are recorded forty-five
books of the Old Testament, and twenty -seven of the New.
As the Holy Books are divided into two great classes, the
Old and New Testament, so we must treat separately of the
canons of these two Testaments.
Chapter IV.
The Canon of the Old Testament.
The books containing God's covenant to man are desig-
nated by three equivalent terms in the three great Scriptural
tongues. In Hebrew it is rV*)3, in Greek, Aiad^xij and
in Latin, Testamentum. Although the etymological con-
struction of these terms is not exactly identical, still, in fact,
their accepted sense in this predication is the same, that of a
THE CANON 2 ! 1
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 Kaivr] Ata^/e^, in contradis-
tinction to the UaXaia ±iadrjfC7] ; hence in Latin, which
later preponderated as the vehicle of religious thought, the
terms were rendered by Vetus and Novum Testamentum,
whence come our equivalent English terms.
The books of the Old Testament can, from their very
nature, be easily divided into three great classes: the Law,
the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. Such division, in fact,
existed among the JewTs from the very earliest times, but
their arbitrary, ill-founded ranging of the different books
under each particular class renders their data worthless.
Bv their division, we must include Daniel among the Hagio-
grapha, while Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are enrolled
among the Prophets. Of course the Law remained ever and
with all a unique element, admitting no other book to be
classified with itself. There was also in vogue among
the Jews a well-known liturgical section of Holy Scriptv.
the ni^3i2 C't^n or five volumes: The Canticle of Can-
ticles, Ruth, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes
and Esther. These formed a collection which was wont to
be read on certain festal days of the year.
Our Saviour and the Apostles oft divided the Old Testa-
ment in tw< > great divisions, the Lawr 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 in1
liturgical divisions which they call n£*1E)from root &*"1B,
T T T ~ ~
to expound. These were first arranged so that every third
year the Pentateuch was totally read in the synagogues.
Now, however, the Babylonian mode prevails in all the
synagogues, which divides the Pentateuch in fifty-four para-
shas, so arranged that, by reading them on every Saturdi
(16) h . s.
242 THE CANON
they finish the Pentateuch within the course of the year.
To this usage St. James alludes, Acts XV. 21 : "For Moses
of old time hath in every city them that preach him in the
synagogues, where he is read every Sabbath." These para-
shas are designated in the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch
by three £♦ or three D4 They are designated by £♦ if the
section begins on the beginning of the line ; by D* if it begins
in the middle of the line. The £♦ is initial for nimHS
open, to signify that the section is an open one, as it begins
with the line; while £' is initial for ni^HD closed, im-
plying that the section is shut up, as it were, beginning in the
middle of the line. Thus, for instance, the first parasha,
Gen. I. 1 — VI. 8 inclusively, is open; so also the second, ex-
tending from VI. 9 — XI. inclusively, is open and designated
by three £)♦ The parasha, enclosed from Gen. XXVIII. 11
— XXXII. 3, inclusive, is closed, and designated by three
0' The parashas were subdivided into minor sections,
designated in the Hebrew text by single £♦ or D* as they
respectively began either in the beginning or middle of a
line. Later, they conjoined the reading of select portions of
the Prophets to the sections of the Law. They called these
rHCDiDn from root ICOC to dismiss; because, after they
t t : - - T
were read, the people were dismissed. It was in accord-
ance with this usage, that Jesus Christ at Nazareth read in
the synagogue the passage from Isaiah, Luke IV. 16-19.
This haftara is not now found among those assigned for
synagogical readings. The antimessianic tendency of the
Jews has probably expunged it.
Setting aside, therefore, rabbinical opinions, we can
easily arrange all the books under the three great heads.
First, the Law, comprising the five books of Moses ; second,
the Prophets, comprising the four great Prophets and the
twelve minor Prophets, and lastly, the Hagiographa, com-
posed of all the remaining books. However, modern writers
find it convenient to divide the books in still another way,
to facilitate their treatment. In this modern division, the
motive of classification is the nature of the theme of the
book. They thus divide them into Historical, Sapiential,
THE CANON 243
Poetic, and Prophetic 1 >< »< >ks. We shall employ this divisi
in our special introduction to the different books.
The well known division of both Testaments into the
protocanonical and deuterocanonical books seems to have
first been employed by Sixtus Sennensis (1520 — 1569). In
his Bibliotheca Sancta, Book 1. Sec. i, he writes thus: "Thus
Canonical books of the first order we may call protocanonical ;
the Canonical books of the second order were formerly called
ecclesiastical, but are now by us termed deuterocanonical^
Although retaining and making use of this nomenclature, we
in no wise attribute an inferior degree of dignity to the books
of the second canon ; they are in such respect equal, as God
is the Author of all of them. We designate by the name of
protocanonical, the books concerning whose divine origin
no doubts ever existed; while the deuterocanonical books
are those concerning which greater or less doubts were en-
tertained for a time by some, till finally the genuineness of the
books was acknowledged, and they were solemnly approved
by the Church.
The deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament are
seven; Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch and
the two books of Maccabees. Together with these, there
are deuterocanonical fragments of Esther, (from the 4th verse
of 1 oth chapter to 24th verse of 1 6th chapter, and Daniel III.
24-90 ; XIII, XIV.) The deuterocanonical books of the New
Testament are also seven in number : The Epistle to the He-
brews, the Epistle of St. James, the, Second Epistle of St.
Peter, the Second and Third Epistle/of St. John, the Epistle
of St. Jude, and the Apocalypse of St. John. There are also
deuterocanonical fragments of Mark, XVI. 9-20 ; Luke XXII.
43-44; and John VII. $$ — VIII. 11. Many of the protest-
ants reject all the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testa-
ment, and apply to them the term Apocryphal. It shall be a
part of our labors to defend the equal authority of these
books.
The Jewish mode of enumeration of their Holy Books
was as arbitrary and as worthless as was their system of
division. Taking twenty-two, the number of the letters
their alphabet, as a number of mystic signification, tl
244 THE CANON
violently made the number of the Books of Holy Scripture
conform thereto. Josephus makes use of this mode of
enumeration. In his defense against Apion, he says : "For
we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us
(as the Greeks have), disagreeing from and contradicting
one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the
records of all past times; which are justly believed to be
divine." [Contra Apion I. 8.] St. Jerome also, in his
famous Prologus Galeatus to the Books of Kings, testifies
of the existence of such number, and explains its mystic
foundation: "As there are twenty-two elements, by which
we write in Hebrew all that which we speak, so twenty-two
volumes are computed, by which, as by letters and rudiments,
the tender and suckling infancy of the just man is trained in
the doctrine of God." "And thus there are of the Old Law
twenty-two books ; five of Moses, eight of the Prophets, and
nine of the Hagiographa. Some, however, reckon Ruth and
the Lamentations among the Hagiographa, and consider
that these are to be numbered in their individual number,
and thus they think to be of the Old Law twenty-four books,
which John personifies in the number of the twenty-four
Ancients who adore the Lamb." We see then that there
were two modes of enumeration, and the Fathers confused
these modes in trying to adjust their enumeration to the
Jewish tradition. We can not tell who was the first to find
a mystic relation between the Greek alphabet of twenty-
four letters and the twenty-four books, but it must have
been done after the preponderance of the Hellenistic in-
fluence. The appended schema will more vividly illustrate
the Jewish mode of enumeration of the Holy Books :
1. N- W^TO _____-- Genesis
2. 2* ni2£ i"l>W —- — — — — - Exodus
3. y &np*l — — — — — — — — Leviticus
t I: • -
4. T "13T.I — — — — — — — — Numbers
5. n* E^*QTn H ?N — — — — — Deuteronomy
6. V yri.T — — — — — — — — — Joshua
EZRA 245
7. V nn] D^ppW - - - - Judges and Ruth
g pj. kkAannH _ j Samuel I and 1 1 , commonly
" '• ( called I and II Kings.
q fQ, p«-^n _ J Kings I and II, commonly
" r V- I called III and IV Kings. '
10. * in;^7 Isaiah
11. D4 nirpl in^DT — — — I Jeremiah and The
'": T: :' ( Lamentations.
L2. b* b*$JVs Ezekiei
" Hosea, Joel, Amos
ObadiahJona.Micah
13. D* ~\Wy "HA DW3J — 4 Nahum- Habakuk
-: " : j Zephaniah. Haggai
Literally the twelve Prophets, whom we I 7anuar.:Qu Molo
designate as the twelve minor Prophets. I ^a^cuicui, ividld.-
These, by the Jews, were computed one book. ^ chia
14. ^D^npIDD - Liber Laudum, or The Psalms
15. D* *bp$ — — — The Proverbs of Solomon
16. y n1\\% Job
17. D' bwiH Daniel
18. X- t/qSZ - — Ezra I and II
19. p#D,Bjnn5'1 — — - —Chronicles land II
20. "y "inpN Esther
21. W rhn)p — — — — — — — Ecclesiastes
23! n* D^TBfQ Tp — — 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 Tal-
mudic number. Against this is the authority of Josephus,
246 EZRA
who speaks of the number twenty-two as the sole traditional
one. A question of so little importance may well be left in
its uncertainty.
Chapter V.
Ezra and his Influence.
The history of the canon of the Old Testament is ob-
scure and difficult, through default of reliable documents.
In tracing it through its remote antiquity, we shall endeavor
to bring forth in their clearest light the certain data, filling
up the lacunae by the best warranted conjectures.
The nucleus of the Old Law was the Pentateuch, or five
books of Moses. Around this centre of development were
aggregated all the sacred writings of the Jews. It wras the
("HinV tne Law, par excellence, the divine book. The
T
subsequent books, even though by them considered divine,
were never held equal in dignity to ' 'the Law by the hand of
Moses." They were but adjuncts, participating in the great
fount. As less reverence was entertained for these later
works, so less care was taken in their preservation.
The Pentateuch was kept in the temple ; it was the war-
rant of Israel's preeminence over all the nations of the earth.
It needed no authority to canonize it ; the character of its
author, and the nature of its contents were all sufficient.
No other book in Israel was equal to it.
The other books came into being by degrees. Most of
them were first written as detached chronicles, annals, or
diaries and subsequently compiled into their respective
volumes. The Jews revered them, and acknowledged their
divinity, but there was not, at least before Ezra's time, any
central authority charged with the office of fixing the canon.
Neither was there, before his time, any official list of the
books of Holy Scripture. This is clearly proven by many
proofs. The Samaritan Codex contains only the Penta-
teuch.* Had the other books been placed in a canon with
the Pentateuch, the existence here of the isolated Pentateuch
would be inexplicable. Comely, in his Introductio in
*The Samaritan Codex contains a spurious text of the Book of Joshua,
but it is evident that it is a later interpolation.
EZRA 247
Libros Veteris Testamenti, maintains that, even before
the time of Ezra, there existed a collection of sacred books,
conjoined to the books of Moses. His argument to prove
this is that there is evidence that the subsequent books were
known and revered by the Jews, and that the preceding
prophets influenced the later ones. Loisy, in refuting this,
rightly says that it is quite another thing to assert that an
official collection had been constituted, and to say that divers
books existed, were known, and were revered. We hold
that these books as they came into being were received by
the Jews, but that no list was made of them, and the sole
motive of their inspired character was the nature of the
writing, and the authority of their authors. There is no
convincing data that the prophets were commissioned by '
God to determine the canon of Scripture. There seems to
be sufficient evidence to conclude that, previous to the time
of Ezra, the five books of Moses occupied a unique place in
the literature of the Jews. It was the written constitution
of Israel's Yahvistic polity. At times of great defection in
religion, even the Thorah fell into disuse and oblivion.
Thus the passage in II. Kings, XXII. 8: "And Hilkiah the
high priest said to Shaphan the scribe: 'I have found the
book of the Law in the house of the Lord' ; and Hilkiah gave
the book to Shaphan, and he read it," implies a pre-existing
period of neglect and disuse of the Thorah. In those fierce
idolatrous upheavals in Israel, a stiff necked people, led by
an impious king, soon reduced all to religious anarchy. In
the restoration of the divine worship by Josiah, no mention
is made of any other book than the Law. Had the other
books formed a collection with the Pentateuch, they could
hardly be passed over in such complete silence.
The Pentateuch then from the beginning was always the
basis and directing principle of the religious and national
life of the Jewish people. It suffered some vicissitudes in
the various religious defections of that people, but on their
return to Yahveh's Law, the Pentateuch was the centre of
their reorganization.
The other books came into being by gradual growth.
M^st of these contained data that by living tradition was
i
248 EZRA
well known to the people. The books formed a scattered
sacred literature. The writings of the Prophets gradually
were collected by their disciples and by the learned in Israel.
Thus copies of the books subsequent to the Pentateuch
existed in many places through the nation but they were
not united with the Thorah, nor considered of equal dignity
with it.
We come now to deal with Ezra and his influence on
Scripture, The Babylonian Captivity, wrought by Nebu-
chadnezzar, had overthrown all the institutions of Israel.
The temple was destroyed ; the priests dispersed and led into
captivity ; the Holy Books in a state of disorder, and Yahveh's
altars demolished. To bring Israel out of her religious dis-
order, Ezra was sent with full power from Artaxerxes. His
fitness for his commission may be inferred from I. Ezra
VII. 6: " — and he was a ready scribe in the Law of
Moses." Of Ezra's work as the restorer of Yahveh's worship
and the reorganizer of Israel's polity, we have certain data.
Concerning, however, the nature and extent of his labors on
the divine books, we can only form, at most, probable judg-
ments, and, full oft, but conjectural opinions.
Up to our days, the belief has been almost general that
Ezra revised the sacred books, and fixed the Canon. That
he wrought some important effects on the sacred books,
we may not reasonably doubt. But to determine the exact
nature and extent of his influence is impossible, through de-
fect of documents. In all questions of this nature, the judg-
ments of men will be divergent. And so in this question
men have thought differently. The preponderance of Catho-
lic thought has been that Ezra compiled and fixed the Canon.
Prominent among those who have held this opinion are
Serarius, Bellarmine, Bonfrere, Huet, Frassen; and more
recently Welte, Herbst, Glaire, Scholz, Himpel, Ubaldi and
Comely. The most eminent Catholic writers who reject,
in whole or part, the old theory of the constitution of the
Canon by Ezra are, Richard Simon, Movers, Nickes, Malou,
Danko, Kaulen and Loisy.
As rationalistic principles have thoroughly pervaded
protestant Scriptural thought it will not aid our investi-
EZRA 249
gation to bring forth and classify the protestant opinion
concerning the influence of Ezra on the Jewish Canon.
The Talmud furnishes us some curious data on the Canon.
The treatise of the Mischna, called IVQN "'DIS, (the Chap-
ters of the Fathers) opens with a testimony concerning
Holy Scripture: "Moses received the Law on Sinai and
delivered it to Jehoshua. Jehoshua delivered it to the
Elders. The Elders delivered it to the Prophets. The
Prophets delivered it to the men of the Great Synagogue.''
The Talmudic treatise N"irG 503. (The Last Gate) of
t : - T T
the Babylonic Gemara is more explicit. In folios 146 and
15 a, it is written: "Who wrote the Holy Books? Moses
wrote his book, the section concerning Bileam and Job.
Jehoshua wrote his book and eight verses in the Law. Sam-
uel wrote his book, the book of Judges and Ruth. David
wrote the Book of Psalms by means of ten Ancients, Adam
the first, Melchisedech, Abraham, Moses, Heman, Iduthun,
Asaph and the three sons of Kore. Jeremiah wrote his books
the Book of Kings and the Lamentations. Hezekiah and his
colleagues wrote Isaiah, Proverbs, the Canticle of Canticles,
and Ecclesiastes. The men of the Great Synagogue wrote
Ezechiel, the twelve Prophets, Daniel, and the volume of
Esther. Ezra wrote his book, and continued the genealogies
of the Chronicles up to his time."
We now join with these testimonies that of the apocry-
phal fourth book of Ezra, IV. Ezra XIV. 22-26: "For if I
have found favor in thee, send in me the Holy Spirit, and I
will write all that which was done in time since the beginning,
the things that were written in thy law, that men might find
the path; and that they who will live in the last days may
live. And he made answer to me and said : 'Go and summon
the people, and say to them that they shall not seek thee for
forty days, and do thou prepare for thyself many writing
tablets, and take with thee Sarea, Dabrea, Salemia, Echan
and Asiel, those five, who are able to write quickly, and
come hither, and I will enkindle in thy heart the light of
intellect, which shall not be extinguished until thou shah
* The commentatorial treatises of the Gemara were called gates, since
they opened the icay for the intelligence of the different truths.
250 EZRA
have finished the things thou shalt have begun to write.
And then, a part thou shalt openly manifest to the perfect,
and a part thou shalt deliver secretly to the wise ; on the
morrow, at this hour, thou shalt begin to write."
"And I was brought to the morrow; and, behold,
a voice called me saying : 'Ezra, open thy mouth and drink
that which I will give thee to drink.' And I opened my
mouth, and behold a full cup was held out to me. This
was filled with water, and the color thereof as of fire, and
I took and drank ; and when I had drunk, my heart was ex-
ceedingly filled with knowledge, and in my bosom wisdom
grew. For the memory of my spirit was strengthened. And
my mouth was opened, and was no more closed. The Most
High gave understanding to the five men, and they wrote
the visions of the night which were told them, and which they
knew not. And at night they ate bread. But I spoke
through the day, and through the night I was not silent.
And there were written, during forty days, 204 books. And
it came to pass, after forty days, the Most High spoke say-
ing : 'The first things thou hast written make openly mani-
fest, and let the worthy and the unworthy read ; but the lat-
ter seventy preserve, that thou mayest give them to the
wise men of thy people. For in these is the vein of under-
standing, and the fount of wisdom, and the stream of knowl-
edge.' And I did so." (Ibid. 38-47.)
Up to the eighteenth century, the Latin of the Vulgate
was the only text preserved to us of IV. Ezra. Since then
there have been discovered the Arabic, /Ethiopian, Syriac,
and Armenian versions. In these the whole number of
books is placed at ninety-four instead of 204; whence, if we
subtract the seventy which were to remain hidden for the
sole use of the wise men, we shall have the traditional num-
ber twenty-four of the Jewish Canon.
Comely makes much of this testimony as being built
upon the true basis of Jewish tradition. We confess, though
admitting some basis of truth, we can not find anything in
it that would convince the intellect that Ezra fixed the
Canon. The role of Ezra as a second promulgator of the
Law would be sufficient basis for the rabbinical fable.
EZRA 251
We have not adduced these testimonies as peremptory
proofs of anything. They are all more or less imbued with
rabbinic fable. But perhaps, there may be some slight truth
in these which has been distorted by the vagaries of the
Rabbis, till it is hard to glean it from the composite mass.
We believe that the tradition of the Christian Fathers
will give us small help in this investigation. As it was
merely a critical question, and in nowise connected with
faith, the authority of the Fathers could only be considered
in its critical character. Now it is evident to the tyro of
patrology that the Fathers are least valuable as critics. As
simple witnesses of the faith, they are beacon lights; but
when we turn to their critical character, we find little of
value. Most of those who have delivered to us that Ezra
fixed the canon, based their assertions on the Fourth Book of
Ezra, a book filled with rabbinic fable, impossible supersti-
tion, and erroneous dogma. St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of
Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Basil, Theodoret, St. Optatus, and
others have relied implicitly on the testimony of the Fourth
Book of Ezra. Some, as St. Chrysostom, St. Isidore of Seville,
St. Bede, have tried to make the passage of the Fourth Book
of Ezra credible by restricting the character of Ezra within
somewhat narrower bounds. (See Loisy, Hist, du Canon de
1' Ancient Testament.)
Having brought forth these preliminary testimonies, we
now proceed to more closely examine the question of Ezra's
influence on the Scripture. Ezra restored the Yahvistic
worship, and promulgated the Law. This rests on the clear
testimony of an inspired book. The 8th and 9th Chapters
of the II. Book of Ezra firmly establish the character of Ezra
as reorganizer of Israel and promulgator of the Law; but
when we would extend his influence on the Scripture further
than this, we are unsustained by certain data. In view of
these facts, it is well to first set forth what Ezra did not do,
and, secondly, proceed to establish the most reasonable
probable judgments concerning what he did. We place,
therefore, as a thesis, that there are no adequate da1
establish that Ezra promulgated an official list of the h
252 EZRA
books of the Jews; but, on the contrary, probable data
seem to warrant that no such official list was ever promul-
gated among the Jews by any authority.
To prove this thesis, we find one convincing proof in the
fact that there is not a testimony in the patrimony of Scrip-
tural science which asserts any such fact. Men, it is true,
have asserted such fact ; but they lacked one requisite ele-
* ment of a faithful witness, knowledge of the fact. The
Fathers followed the pseudo Ezra ; hence their authority is
no greater than his, which is nothing. The Babba Bathra
of the Talmud, quoted above, speaks of the Scripture as
though reduced to definite list, but its authority, even though
believed implicitly, would prove nothing for the supposed
character of Ezra. The Baba Bathra does not antedate
the second century of the Christian era, and, at that time,
the list of the Jewish Canon was complete, not by definite
authority, but by the common consent of the Jewish people
and its teachers. The Baba Bathra does not attribute
the fixing of the Canon to Ezra, and no other document
worthy of faith does so. We think that a fact of such im-
\ portance would not be passed over in silence, while so many
others of much less importance are detailed to us in the
books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and the Maccabees.
The Talmud records many disputes concerning the can-
onicity of some of the books of the Old Testament. Behold
an example: "Rabbi Juda has said that the Canticle of
Canticles defiles the hands; but Ecclesiastes is contested.*
Rabbi Joseph said : 'Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands.'
Rabbi Simon said : 'The disciples of Schammai judged more
unfavorably of Ecclesiastes than the disciples of Hillel.'
Rabbi Simeon, son of Azai, said: T have learned from
every one of the mouths of the seventy ancients that this
question was settled when Rabbi Eleazar, son of Azarias,
was installed in office.' Rabbi Akiba said: 'May it please
God, no Israelite has ever doubted that the Canticle of Can-
ticles defiles the hands. The world has nothing more precious
*To render the hands impure was the rabbinic expression to express
that a book was inspired, as they must needs wash their hands after
touching an inspired book.
EZRA 253
than the day on which the Canticle of Canticles was given to
Israel. All the Hagiographa are holy, but the Canticle i if
Canticles is most holy. If discussion has existed, it was con-
cerning Ecclesiastes.' Rabbi Jochanan, son of Joshua, son i if
the father-in-law of Rabbi Akiba, said: 'It was discussed
and decided as has said the son of Azai.' " (Tr. Jadaim III. 5.)
Again: "The doctors wished to place in obscurity the Book of
Ecclesiastes, for the reason that its discourses were contrary to
the Law. Why did they not place it apart? Because it be-
gins and ends 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 con-
tinuator of Chronicles.
The Book of Ecclesiasticus, written very probably about
the year 180, B. C, in Chapters XLIV. to XLIX. speaks of
Israel's heroes and sages, and, although it exhorts that
Nehemiah be a long time remembered, it has no word of
Ezra. This would seem incomprehensible had Ezra collected
and authoritatively promulgated the Canon. Moreover,
Daniel and Esther are not mentioned among the illustrious
ones of Israel, and there seems to be no other credible reason
than that these books had not, at that date, entered the Jew-
ish Canon, and, consequently, were unknown to the author
- if Ecclesiasticus.
The Jews of Palestine, in their second letter to their con-
freres of Alexandria, make offer to send them the books that
Nehemiah and Judas had collected : "And these same things
were set down in the memoirs and commentaries of Nehemiah ,
and how he made a library', and gathered the writings con-
cerning the kings, and the Prophets and the (writings) of
David, ra tov AaviS, and the letters of the kings treating
of the oblations. And in like manner Judas also gathered
ether all such things as were lost by the war we had. and
254 EZRA
they are in our possession." We see in this testimony a de-
scription of a collection of books of national importance to
Israel, partly sacred and partly profane. It is quite probable
that the sacred books therein included were the first and later
Prophets, according to the Jewish mode of enumeration, and
the Psalms of David. The other works were, doubtless,
epistles of the Persian kings, of importance in the govern-
ment of a country now a vassalage of Persia. It is plainly
evident that Nehemiah did not collect the Canon of Scripture
but a collection of important books sacred and profane, which,
joined to the later collection of Judas Maccabseus, formed a
sort of national library, to a participation of which the Jews
of Palestine invited their brothers of Alexandria. This testi-
mony also is a factor to refute the generally received opinion
that Ezra closed the Canon. Most probably, he co-operated
with Nehemiah in this enterprise ; but the very fact of a
collection of certain sacred books into the national library
presupposes that no complete authentic list of the Scriptures
was in possession of Israel. Had it been made subsequently,
some trace of it would have been left in the records of the
Jews. We believe, therefore, that the opinion which attri-
butes to Ezra the collection and closing of the Canon to be
devoid of historical basis and 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
promulgated the Law to the returned exiles. What revision
he wrought on the Thorah, it is impossible to say, but we are
ready to believe that he revised in some respects Israel's great
code. He also evidently explained this law to the people,
and put into execution its enactments. This is Ezra's dis-
tinguishing function in history. As reorganizer of Israel's
polity, we are ready to believe that he did collect and revise
Israel's sacred literature, and that many books came under
his influence. How many, we can not say. We must here
simply rely on conjecture. But, from the fact of the collec-
tion by Nehemiah, one may see that the reconstructive spirit
of Nehemiah and Ezra tended to bring together Israel's sacred
EZRA 255
deposit of writings. They did this without any ex professo
declaration of promulgating a canon; and it is highly prob-
able that not all the Holy Books of the first Canon were col-
lected into a body of writings at their epoch. Gradually the
sacred collection was made up, and, at the time of Christ, the .
Jews considered the list of Holy Books as complete and fixed. )
The nucleus of the collection was the Thorah. Around this
centre, the Holy Books formed themselves into a recognized
collection by the concurrence of various causes, and their
warranty for entrance into the sacred collection was not any
decree or order of canonization by any authority but the
fact that their contents were comformable to the living tra-
ditions of the people, and reflected the things which a tena-
cious Eastern memory had learned from law and prophet.
Concerning Daniel the Abbe Glaire declares thus: "It
seems to me, admitting, as I also do, the perfect canon-
icity of Daniel, that the book being collected at Babylon,
possibly after the death of its author, it was later brought to
Jerusalem, and found place only at the end of the works
already in the Canon." (Introduction I. 1868.)
Ezra may have revised 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
official promulgation of an incomplete canon of Scripture, at
the very time when other books of divine origin were in actual
existence, although not in his possession. In the Talmudic
testimonies adduced above, mention is made of a great syna-
gogue, H^il-in Hpjp, organized by Ezra. Much that
is fabulous has been written concerning this great synagogue.
Many reject it in toto as a rabbinic fable. Here again his-
torical data are wanting. Besides the Talmudic authority
already quoted, the Jews of the middle age, Abarl >anel. A1 >ra- '
ham ben David, and Maimonides recount that the Great
Synagogue was composed of 120 members. Ezra was presi-
dent, and the Prophets Haggai, Zachary and Malachi were
among its members. It endured from the year 444, B.C.,
down to the time of Simon the Just, about the year 200 of
the Christian era. The writings of the middle age are char-
256 EZRA
acterized by the same spirit of extravagant fable which robs
the Talmud of all historic worth, hence we can not treat these
assertions as historic data. At most, there may be in them
a basic thread of true tradition, which is well nigh lost amid
a web of fable. Even those who have credulously accepted
the legend of Ezra's Canon have rejected the story of the
Great Synagogue. No convincing data are at hand to estab-
lish the existence of such a body organized by Ezra, and yet
such an organization, though not of such proportions as the
Rabbis assert, may have been created by him. That a body
of men called the Synedrion or Sanhedrim existed at the
opening of the Christian era is not doubted. It is quite
certain that Christ referred to this body in Math. V., 22:
"But I say to you, that whosoever is angry with his brother,
shall be in danger of the judgment, and whosoever shall say
to his brother, Kp""V (cerebro vacuus), shall be in danger of
ITT
the 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. Noth-
ing certain is available. Without admitting the fables of the
Rabbis, might it not be the evolution of a legislative body
organized by Ezra to aid in administering the civil and
religious affairs of re-organized Israel? The question, like
many others of a like nature, only admits of a conjectural
answer.
It is certain that the Providence of God entered as chief
factor in preserving the Holy Books through so many vicissi-
tudes. He, as ever, did this suaviter et fortiter. As he was
back of the collection, they were safe, and there is no need
of bringing the unsubstantial legend of Ezra's Canon to pro-
tect a collection of books which the Providence of God pro-
tected in his own way. But in the accessions to the central
nucleus of the Jewish Canon, after the fourth century, a
distinction was made, whence has sprung a leading question
in the history of the Canon. Malachi closes the series of the
Hebrew prophets. Nothing certain is known of the identity
of this prophet. Some have believed the Hebrew name
"OfcOO (angelus meus) to be an appellative of Ezra, or of
EZRA 257
another Jew of that period, designating the particular func-
tion of the last of the Prophets. Comely sustains by prob-
able arguments, that Malachi is the proper name of an in-
dividual. The Jews recognized in him the last of the i
phets, and termed him CfliH O^fcOjil (sigillum Prophet-
arum). Whatever view we adopt, Malachi's period must
have been about four hundred years B.C. The accessions
to the Palestinian Canon subsequent to Malachi were ac-
corded a secondary rank. They were by no means con-
sidered as mere profane creations, but from the fact that the
series of the Prophets was closed, the effusion of the Holy
Ghost was not believed to be so directly reflected in these
books as in the others. This secondary influence of the
Holy Ghost they denominated the ?ip P2 (filia vocis). We
find in no place an explicit enumeration of the several books
whose writers were supposed to be actuated by the bath kol,
but all indications seem to evince that they were the deu-
terocanonical works of the Old Testament.
From the first, these books existed in the Alexandrian
Canon, which was totally derived from the sacred books of
the Jews of Palestine, and the celebrated testimony of Flav-
ins Joseph us, now to be adduced, clearly asserts the exist-
ence and preservation of certain semi-divine books, which
had been collected after the close of prophecy in the reign
of Artaxerxes. Now these books can be naught else than
the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament. The
testimony of Josephus exists in his "Defense Against Apion,''
Bk. I., Parag. 8: "For we have not an innumerable multi-
tude of books disagreeing from and contradicting one another,
as the Greeks have, but only twenty-two books, which con-
tain the records of all the past times, which are justly be-
lieved to be divine. And of them, five belong to Moses,
which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of
mankind till his death. This interval of time embraces
nearly three thousand years. From the death of Moses to
the reign of Artaxerxes, who reigned after Xerxes, the
Prophets who were after Moses wrote down what was done
in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four books
contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of
(17) H. S.
258 EZRA
human life. It is true, our history hath been writtten since
Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the
like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there
hath not been an exact succession of Prophets since that time:
and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our
own nation, is evident by what we do ; for during so many
ages as have already passed, no one hath been so bold as
either to add anything to them, or take anything from
them, or make any change in them; but it is become natural
to all Jews, immediately and from their very birth, to esteem
these books to contain divine doctrines, and to persist in
them and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them."
Although some of the deuterocanonical books contain his-
tory that must have antedated Artaxerxes, nevertheless, as
the date of their accession to the Hebrew Canon was subse-
quent to Artaxerxes, Josephus confounds the date of their
accession with the date of their origin. These books, then,
existed in the Palestinian collection as secondarily divine
books. The Talmuds of Jerusalem and Babylon contain
quotations from Ecclesiasticus. Josephus, who was an apt
expounder of Pharisaic traditions, makes use of the deu-
terocanonical fragments of Esther and the second book of
Maccabees.
Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. VI. 25) gives us the Canon
of Scriptures according to Origen. After enumerating
the protocanonical works, he says: 'There are also
the Maccabees which are inscribed Sarbeth Sarbaneeiy
St. Hilary in Prol. in Psalter, testifies that Tobias was read
among the Hagiographa of the Jews. St. Epiphanius, Haer.
VIII. No. 6, testifies that Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus were in
honor among the* Jews, and distinguished from the apoc-
ryphal works. St. Isidore says of Wisdom : "As a certain
one of those who know has recorded, the Hebrews received
this work (Wisdom) among the Canonical Scriptures. But
after they had seized and killed the Christ, remembering the
most evident testimonies concerning Christ in that same
book, in which it is written: 'The impious said among
themselves, 'let us seize the just,' etc., taking counsel, lest
we might lay upon them such an evident sacrilege, they cut
THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON 259
it off from the prophetic volumes, and prohibited its reading
to their people." The Apostolical Constitutions testify
that Baruch was read in the Jewish synagogues.* St.
Jerome testifies in his preface to the book of Judith that
among the Hebrews Judith is read "among the Hagio-
grapha." "Its authority," he continues, "is considered less
apt to decide things about which there is dispute. It is
written in Chaldaic, and reckoned among the historical
books." We think it to be a position admitting of no rea-
sonable doubt that the deuterocanonical works of the Old
Testament primarily existed in the collection of the Jews of
Palestine. The narrow, nugatory, reactionary spirit of
the latter day Jews, exemplified in the Pharisees, denied to
these books canonicity, as we understand the term; but we
can find no evidence that they denied them a divine origin.
They are not found in the Hebrewr collection of books to-day,
but this can be readily explained. The same spirit which
moved the Jews of Palestine to deny these books equal rank
with the others, impelled them later to entirely exclude
them. It would be hard to fix the date of this exclusion.
It is probable that they gradually died out of the different
codices, till, at last, all trace of them disappeared in the
Palestinian Canon.
Chapter VI.
The Alexandrian Canon.
Opposite causes effected the preservation of these books
in the Alexandrian Canon. The Jews of Egypt depended
in matters of religion on the Jews of Palestine. Abundant
data prove that they received their collection of Holy Books
from Palestine. This was not accomplished all at once. It
began with the translation of the Law, made under Ptolemy
Philadelphus in the third century B.C., and continued
down to the first century B.C. The influence of Greek
*The Constitutions of The Holy Apostles are a composite work, some
of which may be as early as the second century of the Christian era. It
seems quite probable that they originated in Syria. The only rela
that they bear to the Apostles is that they reflect the Apostolic
ditions of the times. They were declared apocryphal by the decree of
Gelasius, but still are of value inasmuch as they preserve for us the tra-
ditions of the first ages of Christianity.
260 THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON
thought and customs on the Hellenistic Jews modified the
narrow national spirit of that nation. Later, in the time
of the Maccabees, the pagan Greek customs were readily
adopted by the Jewish youth. This liberal trend of religious
thought effected that the deuterocanonical books were re-
ceived and intermingled promiscuously with the other books.
It is quite probable that there was always a certain degree
of uncertainty and indecision in the synagogues of Alexan-
dria. The minute, sharply drawn, Pharisaic distinctions
did not obtain there. They had left home and home tradi-
tions, and, blending with a highly cultivated nation, even
those who clung to the substance of the Mosaic covenant
lost much of their conservative spirit. As they read the
Scriptures in Greek, the deuterocanonical books were not
distinguishable by difference of tongue from the books of the
first Canon. On the contrary, in Palestine the Scriptures
were inseparably cast in the mould of the Hebrew mother
tongue. The strong love of the Hebrews for their mother
tongue would naturally incline the Jews of Palestine to
look with less favor on a sacred book not written in the
Hebrew language. Now some of the deuterocanonical
books, such as Wisdom and 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 distinction between the
protocanonical and the deuterocanonical books. Had such
distinction been made, the books of secondary importance
would have been relegated to the end of the collection.
Now the direct opposite is found to have prevailed. Pro-
tocanonical and deuterocanonical works are indiscrimin-
ately intermingled in the Alexandrian Canon. This indis-
criminate adoption of the deuterocanonical books was not
the canonizing of these by the Alexandrians. It was a mere
fact, which its authors had never taken thought to explain.
Had they formally rendered equal these various books by an
explicit declaration, it would have led to controversy between
THE ALEXANDRIAN' CANON 201
the Hellenists and the Jews of Palestine. No trace of any
such controversy 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 enu-
merated, refused to accord them equal rank with the others.
The Jews of Alexandria, without deciding the issue, received
and revered them all, and intermingled them in the sacred
collection.
There is plainly evident in this fact the workings of the
Providence of God. The Almighty had decreed to effect the
transition from the old to the new covenant through the
medium of Greek language and culture. Israel was to re-
ceive the Christ in fulfillment of Yahveh's promises, but the
great Gentile world was to be the chosen people of the New
Covenant. Under the Providence of God, Alexander the
Great brought the known world under Greek influence, and
gave it the Greek language as the medium of thought. The
Romans reduced this vast extent of territory to peace with-
out changing the language. Thus two conditions favor-
able for the evangelization of the world were accomplished,
peace and a uniform adequate vehicle of thought. It is
easy to see how these two factors aided in the spread of the
Gospel. Now, it was also expedient that the existing Scrip-
tures should be in the universal tongue of the civilized world.
We can see how the teachers of the New Covenant availed
themselves of this element, since, with a few exceptions, they
always make use of the Greek text of Scripture when quoting
the Old Testament. Hence, the Providence of God brought
it about that in the Greek there should exist a complete body
of Scriptures. God was less solicitous about the Palestinian
collection, because that was not to be the medium of graft-
ing the new scion on the old stock. Thus the Alexandrians
were instruments in the hands of God in collecting a com-
plete body of Scriptures, which that same Providence has
ever protected as the great basic element in the deposit of
faith. The first virtual canonization of the deuterocanonical
■ks was the approbation of the Alexandrian collection of
books by the teachers of the New Law.
262 THE ALEXANDRIAN CANON
We have hitherto assumed that the deuterocanonical
books were indiscriminately intermingled with the other
books in the Alexandrian collection. That we may not be
thought to assume unproven things, we shall adduce a few
proofs of this well warranted fact. In the first place, we
may remark that the only ones who would be likely to deny
this would be the protestants. Now Davidson, a protestant,
in his Canon of the Bible admits this as an obvious fact.
'The very way," he says, "in which apocryphal (deutero-
canonical) are inserted among canonical books in the Alex-
andrian Canon shows the equal rank assigned to both."
We may consider a first proof, the presence of these books in
the Christian Canon of the first ages. Now certainly they
received their collection of the Old Testament from the
Greek Canon. Though the codices whence they took their
Canon have perished, yet the exemplars now existing were
faithful] y reproduced from them. The translation known as
the Vetus Itala, which dates back to the 2nd century of the
Christian era, had all the deuterocanonical works, and this
was certainly made from the Alexandrian collection. The
great codices of the Vatican and Mt. Sinai, going back prob-
ably to the fourth century, contain these works. The early
Fathers were as conversant with the deuterocanonical
works as with the rest of Holy Scripture. The subjects of
the art of the Catacombs are largely taken from the deu-
terocanonical works. Such early and universal approba-
tion could not be effected, had not these books been delivered
to the Christian Church by the Old Covenant through the
medium of the Greek.
It should not appear strange that all our attention is
now centering upon the deuterocanonical books. This is
the great issue between the protestants and us. The pro-
tocanonical works need no defense, except against the
rationalists. Our defense against them will appear later in
our work. Those who reject the protocanonical works
attack the whole basis of religious belief. But those who
reject the deuterocanonical works profess still to accept
God's word to man. With them, is the first issue. We shall
first endeavor to prove that the writers of the New Law, by
Till-: CANON OF THE CHURCH 263
accepting and employing the Alexandrian text of Holy
Scripture, in which were ti iterocanonical books, virtu-
ally canonized that collection of Scriptures.
Chapter VII.
The Canon of the Church.
There is no trace in writing or tradition of any formal
decision rendered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles concerning
the Canon of the Old Testament. However, their use of the
Alexandrian text of Scripture is equivalent to an express
decree. It were incompatible with the character of the
teachers of mankind and organizers of the Church, to make
use of a collection of Scripture in which profane and inspired
books were commingled. That they formulated no de-
cree concerning the Canon of Scripture, proves that the Scrip-
tures are subordinate to the Church. They, in virtue of
the power given by the Master, were to found a living
teaching body. The institutions of men exist by force
of the fixed decrees and constitutions upon which their
stability is based. The institution of Christ exists by
virtue of the perpetual living vigor that energizes within
her. She may pay small heed to human enactments,
even though of infallible agents, for her warranty is in
her living constitution, which is the almighty power
of the Holy Ghost, her vital principle. Hence the Scrip-
tures are only an instrument in the hands of the Church.
Christ and his Apostles founded the teaching body, which
should guard the Scriptures, and at the proper time fix the
Canon. In all our investigations concerning the Canon, it is
the authority of the Church in the background which forms
the great complement of the motive of credibilitv. 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 we believe that the deu-
terocanonical works have God for their author. We receive
them on the authority of the Church, and then trace the
conformity between the books' history and the dogma of
the Church. A man would defeat his own purpose, should
he attempt to convert one to Catholicity by pr< >ving that the
264 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
deuterocanonical works had equal title to canonicity. Prove
first that there is a God; then that there is a Christ; then
that there is a Church ; and lastly exhort him to humbly ask
Christ's teacher what to believe.
St. Jerome after much hedging was forced to admit that
the Alexandrian collection was approved by the Apostles.
He would, indeed, have us believe that, where the Septua-
gint differed from the Hebrew, the Apostles made use of the
Hebrew. This is contradicted by the other Fathers, and is
disproven by an examination and comparison of the two
texts. St. Irenasus' authority is explicit in favor of our
thesis. "The Apostles, being older than all these, (Aquila
and the other Greek interpreters) are in accord with the
aforesaid (Septuagint) translation, and the translation cor-
responds with the tradition of the Apostles. For Peter and
John and Matthew and Paul and the others and their fol-
lowers announced the prophetic things according to the
Septuagint.'" [Contra Haer. III. 21, 3.] Origin testifies that
Paul, in Epist. to Romans, follows the Septuagint in every-
thing, except, perchance, things of minor moment. [Orig.
in Rom. VIII. 6.] The Syrian Jacobites, by the testimony
of their primate Barhebrasus preferred the Syrian version
of Scripture, that had been made from the Septuagint to
the earlier one made from the Hebrew, because the one
made from the Septuagint was more in consonance with the
discourses of Our Lord and his Apostles.
From the sixteenth century down, critical collation has
been made of the passages of the Old Testament, quoted in
the New. From the labors of Serarius, Morini, Capelli,
Kautzsch, and others, it results that, of three hundred and
fifty passages of the Old Testament quoted in the New, more
than three hundred so agree with the Septuagint that it is
evident that the writer was using that text as a source. Sts.
Peter, James, Mark, Luke, and the writer of the Epistle to
the Hebrews always quote from the Septuagint; St. Paul,
almost always; and Sts. Matthew and John very often quote
from it. The reason for such course of action is evident.
They were to convert a Greek world . By the Providence of
God, a version of Scripture existed in Greek. They were
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 265
but, following out the great plan of Salvation, by employing
the resources of this existing text of Scripture in the evan-
gelization of the world. Had such text been interspersed
with spurious books and fragments such line of action
would ill fit the teachers of the world. Our adversaries en-
deavor to enfeeble the force of this argument by alleging
that no deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament is
expressly quoted in the New. This fact we admit ; but we
deny that it weakens our position. Davidson, in Canon of
the Bible, though not in the least friendly to Catholic opin-
ions rejects this argument against the deuterocanonical
books. On page 77 : "When Bishop Cosius says that in all
the New Testament we find no passage of apocryphal (deu-
terocanonical) books to have been alleged either by Christ
or his Apostles for the confirmation of His doctrine, the argu-
ment, though based on a fact, is scarcely conclusive; else,
Esther, Canticles, and other works might be equally dis-
credited." In the New Testament Obadiah, Nahum, the
Canticle of Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Ezra and Nehe-
miah are neither quoted from nor alluded to. It needs not an
explicit quotation to approve a book. The approbation of
the version which recognized these books was a sufficient
warranty for their inspiration. Express quotations in the
New Testament are generally taken from the Law or the
Prophets ; the other books are more oft implicitly cited, and
it is only by the general similarity between the passages that
we may detect that the writer of the New Testament had
in mind any particular book of the Old Testament. Now
there are many passages in the New Testament, which,
when closely examined, bear evidence that the writer had in
mind some book of the deuterocanonical collection. As this
identity of thought appears to better advantage from the
Greek, we collate a few texts in that tongue.
Sofia Seipax- xeq>. E. 11 'Iax(o6ou 'ExtoroX^ •/.;:. A'.
Tivoj tx/j? ev axpodcaet rou, 19. — So-cw *k r.i; SvBpcoxoc -.z-
xa: sv jJLaxpo8u(JL{a cOiyyoj i-o- 7-^ ^ TO OXOUffCK, s~zilz z\; to
xptariv. XaXfjaai, '^zxil; z:.z iy;r^.
266
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Ecclesiasticus V. n. Jas. I. 19.
Esto velox in auscultatione Sit omnis homo velox ad au-
tua, et in longanimitate profer diendum, tardus ad loquendum
responsum. tardus ad iram.
So^fa Setpor/ xs?. KH'. 2. 'Euay. xa-ca MaxG. VI. 14.
"Acpsq ao!.y.f]\ia. too xXrjaiov con, 'Edv yap g^tjts to!? avSptoxoiq
xal tots 0£Y]6svto<; cou al djj.apTEai toc xapaxTto[xaTa auTwv, dcpiQast xal
sou XuO^uovTat. u^Tv 6 xaTr;p u^uov d oupdvtoq.
Eccli. XXVIII. 2.
Remitte injuriam proximo
tuo, et tunc deprecanti tibi pec-
cata solventur.
SccpEa EaXw^wv xecp. V. 5, 6.
Kal o^fya xatBeuOlvTsq {AsydXa
suspysTTjOr^ovTat, otc 6 Qebq
Ixsfpacev auTouq xal eupsv d^fou?
saiiTOu, wq xpuabv sv ^wvsuT^pEw
scoxi^aaev auTOuq, xal coq oXoxdp-
XG)ij.a 0ua(a<; xpocsolijaTO auTOuq.
Wisdom III. 5-6.
Et in paucis vexati, in multis
bene disponentur. Quoniam
Deus tentavit eos, et invenit
eos dignos se. Tamquam au-
rum in fornace probavit eos;
quasi holocausti hostiam ac-
cepit illos.
Math. VI. 14.
Nam si dimiseritis hominibus
delicta sua, dimittet et vobis
pater vester coelestis,
IIlTpou A. x£?. A. 6 — 7.
'Ev d) dyaXXcacOs oXfyov apTt
Et oeov Xuxtq6£vt£<; iv xotxfXot?
xetpa<jfjt.oi<;, Yva to ooxf[j.tov u\x€>v
TYJS XtCJT£(i)<; XoXlJ Tl[JUa>TSpOV XpU-
ffou tou dxoXXu^evou otd xupb?
Be ooxt^a^o^evou £upe6j) eiq exat-
vov xal oo^av xal ti^y]v Iv dxoxa-
Xi5<}>ei 'Irjcxou XpiaTOU.
I Pet. I. 6-7.
In quo exultatis, nunc ad
breve tempus afflicti variis ten-
tationibus, si opus sit: ut pro-
batio fidei vestras multo pre-
tiosior auro quod perditur, et
tamen per ignem probatur, re-
periatur in laudem et gloriam
et honorem in revelatione Jesu
Christi.
Ks?. Z\ 26.
'Axauyacpia yap eati qoiihq
dci'Siou xal I'tjoxTpov dxYjXt cwtov
Tfj<; tou ©sou svspys!a<; xal eixwv
tyj<; dyaOoTY]Toq auTOu.
IIpb<; 'ESpaiouq xe<p. A'. 3.
"0? tov dxauyaa[xa ir\q oo^yjc
xal yapaxrrjp rrjq uxoaTaaeax;
auTO'j, xtX.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 267
Ibidem VII. 26. Epist. ad Hebraeos I. 3.
Etcnim lucis aeternae splen- Qui quum sit splendor gloriae
dor est, atque speculum virtutis et impressa imago substantias
Dei nulla macula aspersum, illius, etc.
ejusque imago bonitatis.
Many more texts of this character may be collected from
a comparison of the deuterocanonical books with the New
Testament. 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 deutero-
canonical works, of such mode of quotation that it is evident
that they recognized 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 Ecclesiasticus. 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 :
Sap. IV. 24. Clem. I. ad Cor. III.
"Invidia autem diaboli mors "Sed secundum pravas ipsius
introivit in orbem terrarum." concupiscentias incedit, ini-
quam et impiam invidiam re-
sumendo per quam et mors in
mundum intravit."
Sap. XI. 22. Clem. I. Cor. XXVII.
"Virtuti brachii tui quis re- "Quis resistet virtuti fortitu-
sistet?" dinis ejus?"
*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 mentioued by
St. Paul in the Epist. to the Philippians. His death is placed about the
year 100. Although some have controverted his martrydom, he is placed
among the martyrs in the Canon of the Mass.
26S
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. XII. 12. Ibid.
"Quis enim dicet tibi: Quid "Quis dicet ei: Quid fecisti?"
fecisti?"
Judith VIII. 30, et seqq.
Esther V., XIV., XV. et seqq?
Clem. I. Cor. LV.
"Beata Judith, cum urbs ob-
sideretur, rogavit seniores ut
sibi liceret in alienigenarum
castra transire, ac seipsam peri-
culo tradens propter caritatem
patriae populique obsessi e-
gressa est; et Dominus tradidit
Olophernem in manu feminae.
Nee minus perfecta secun-
dum fidem Esther periculo se
objecit."
Among the genuine works of Clement of Rome are, by
some, reckoned the two Epistolse ad Virgines.*
Ecclesiasticus V. 14. Clem. I. ad Virg. XI.
"Si est tibi intellectus, re- "Si est tibi intellectus, re-
sponde proximo; sin autem, sit sponde proximo; sin autem, sit
manus tua super os tuum.
Ecclesiasticus IX. 8
"Averte faciem tuam a mul-
iere compta, et ne circumspicias
speciem alienam. Propter spec-
iem mulieris multi perierunt,
et ex hac concupiscentia quasi
ignis exardescit"
Ibid 12.
"Cum aliena muliere ne sedas
omnino, nee accumbas cum ea,
super cubitum
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 sed-
eas omnino."
*Funk in his Patr. Apost. rejects the genuinity of these two Epis-
tles, 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
ha.ve 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.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Ibid. IX. 4. Clement Ibid.
"Cum saltatrice ne assiduus "Cum saltatrice ne assiduus
sis, nee audias illam, ne forte sis, nee audias illam, ne pereas
pereas in efficacia illius." in efficacia illius."
Dan. XIII. 8. Ibid. XIII.
"Et videbant earn senes quo- "Nonne ex iisdem Scripturis
tidie ingredientem, et deambu- notum tibi est quid, ad tempora
lantern: et exarserunt in con- Susannae, narretur de senibus
cupiscentiam ejus." illis qui, cum frequenter starent
Ibid. 42 — 44. inter mulieres, contemplati
"Exclamavit autem voce pulchritudinem alienam, in
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus concupiscentiae barathrum
aeterne, qui absconditorum es praecipites sese dederunt. Cas-
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante- titatis quidem pretium nover-
quam fiant, tu scis quoniam fal- unt, sed ipsius jugum fregerunt.
sum testimonium tulerunt con- Hinc appetitui perverso ven-
tra me: et ecce morior, cum umdati, in beatam Susannam
nihil horum fecerim, quae isti conspirarunt ut earn constupra-
malitiose composuerunt ad- rent. At ilia turpe ipsorum
versum me. Exaudivit autem desiderium frustrata est. In-
Dominus vocem ejus." nocentiae suae testem invoca-
vit Deum, qui de manibus im-
piorum senum earn liberavit."
The document of the first century, commonly known as
the Epistle of St. Barnabas, also employs the deuterocanoni-
cal books*
Ecclesiasticus IV. 36. Epist. S. Barnabas XIX. 19.
"Non sit porrecta manus "Xoli porrigere manus tuas
tua ad accipiendum et ad dan- ad accipiendum, ad dandum
dum collecta. " 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 the Pastor.
Some believed him to be the Hermas mentioned by Paul to
*St. Barnabas was a Cyprian Jew of the tribe of Levi. Having em-
braced 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 genuine-
ness of this Epistle. It is not our intention here to defend such gen-
uineness. It is of value to us in making known to us the use of Scripture
of the first century.
270 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
the Romans XVI. 14: "Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Her-
nias," hence the book was regarded by some as canonical
Scripture. It is joined to the other Scriptures in Codex ^
of Mt. Sinai. Irenasus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen
reputed 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 iden-
tity 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 shep-
herd, speaks. Its trend is chiefly parenetic.
Ecclesiasticus XXVIII. 3. Pastor, Similitudo IX. 23.
"Homo homini reservat "Deus et Dominus noster,
iram, et a Deo quaerit mede- qui dominatur omnium rentm,
lam. " et creaturae suae universae habet
potestatem, offensas memi-
nisse non vult, sed ab his qui
peccata sua confitentur facile
placatur. Homo vero, cum
et languidus, mortalis, infir-
mus sit repletus peccatis, ho-
mini perseveranter irascitur. "
The works attributed to St. Dionysius, the Areopagite,
employ 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 "A/3eto<? 7ra70?,
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 Paris. The falsity of this opinion has been proven by the
labors of the Bollandists and others, We find the first statement of the
identity of the Areopagite 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
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 271
The works, De Ccelesti Hierarchia, De Ecclesiastica Hier-
archia, De Divinis Nominibus, De Mystica Theologia, and
some Epistles, have been accredited to Dionysius. The
Bollandists maintain as the more probable opinion that
these works are not the genuine productions of the Areo-
pagite. 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. Norn. IV. 12.
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi "Et in iis quae aditum ad
a juventute mea, et quaesivi Scripturam prseparant quem-
sponsam mihi earn assumere, dam invenies de divina Sa-
et amator factus sum formes pientia ajentem: Amator fac-
illius." tus sum formes illius."
Sap. VIII. 1. De Div. Norn. VII. 4.
" Attingit ergo a fine usque "Et quia (Deus) per omnia
ad fincm fortiter, et disponit meat pervadens, ut ait Scrip-
omnia suaviter. " tura, usque ad finem omnium. "
middle of the eighth century. The Bollandists 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 ad-
duced by the Bollandists that from the earliest times, the Greeks recog-
nized that the Bishop of Paris and the Areopagite were different ]
sons, and such opinion seems to have obtained with the Latins prior to
the eighth century. One positive proof that Dionysius did not become the
Bishop of Paris is in a canon of the Synod of Sardis, held in the J
347, which affirms as follows: ''Nullus in hac re inventus est episcopus
qui de majori civitate ad minorem transiret. " This plainly establishes
that, up to the year 347, no bishop had ever been transferred from a
greater to a less see. Therefore, Dionysius was not transferred from
Athens to Paris at that time, which was so small as to be called by Julian
tlie Apostate TroXij^vq^ "oppidum," and by his historian Ammonius
M arccllinus "Castellum Parisianim.'' Finally, the identity is clearly dis-
proven by the fact that Dionysius, the bishop of Paris, came with Rus-
tieus and Eleutherius to Paris, in the reign of Decius, about the year J50
A. D., as is clearly proven by the Bollandists. This is centuries after the
perioil of Dionysius, the contemporary of St. Paul. We conclude, there-
fore, that the distinction between these two persons is a clearly proven
fact.
272 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
In the Epistle of St. Dionysius to Demophilus, it is evi-
dent that he alludes to the angel in Tobias, when he speaks
in the first chapter of the "beneficis angelis de quibus theo-
logia quasdam tradit."
St. Polycarp, the martyr bishop of Smyrna, in his Epistle
to the Philippians incorporates a clear quotation from Tobias.
Polycarp Epist. ad Philip-
Tobias XII. 9. penses X.
"Quoniam eleemosyna a "Cum potestis benefacere,
morte liber at, et ipsa est quae nolite differre, quia eleemosyna
purgat peccata, et facit in- a morte liberat."
venire misericordiam et vitam
aeternam. "
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 implies a
liberal knowledge of Scripture, for the Fathers quoted from
memory ; such knowledge of Tobias could scarcely result from
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 ap-
probation 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
*Of the early history of Polycarp, we know nothing. His disciple, St.
Irenaeus, 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 fin-
ished 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.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 273
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 testimonies,
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 Scrip-
tures in the same manner as the protocanonical ones. We
shall now pass down through the ages, and adduce some
representative testimonies of every age.
Athenagoras, a Greek writer who presented the famous
Legatio pro Christianis to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus
A. D. 177, quotes Baruch in that work.
Athenag. Legatio pro Chris-
tianis, (secundum Gesner,
Baruch III. 36. 10).
"Hie est Deus noster; neque "Dominus Deus noster; non
est alius qui cum ipso compare- comparabitur alius ad Mum.
tur. "
St. Hippolyte wrote commentaries on the deuterocanoni-
cal fragments of Daniel, and, in his exegetical treatises,
makes frequent use of the deuterocanonical works.*
*From the testimony of Photius, we know that St. Hippolyte was the
disciple of Irenaeus, who died about the year 202, A. D. The comn
opinion of the old writers makes him a bishop, but there is a great difl
ence of opinion concerning his see. Eusebius and Jerome confess thai
they can establish nothing certain concerning it. Anastasius, Rom.
Ecclesiae apocrisiarius, Georgius Synccllus, Zonaras, Nicephorus Call:
and the author of The Paschal Chronicle make him bishop of Porto in
Italy, one of the suburban bishops of Rome. He is also con
designated in the works of Greek and Latin writers asa "Roman bishop,"
which is confirmatory of the preceding testimonies. The greal er-
sity of opinion exists among modern writers concerning his see.
Bollandists [Aug. Tom. IV., p. 510] conjecture that he was a '
bia, who was martyred at Porto on his v. me; that thus
lually the error arose to confound the unknown bishop with the £
of Porto, where he was martyred. His see is uncertain, but his martyr-
dom may safely be placed under Alexander S, His
authorship of the Commentaries and other works from which wi
quote is undoubted.
(18) II. s.
274
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
I. Maccab. II. 33 — 38.
"Exite et facite secundum
verbum regis Antiochi et vi-
vetis. Et dixerunt: 'Non ex-
ibimus, neque faciemus ver-
bum regis dicentes:
Moriamur omnes in simplici-
tate nostra ' . . . et mortui sunt
usque ad mille animas homi-
num. "
Tob. III. 24.
"In illo tempore exauditae
sunt preces amborum in con-
spectu gloria? Summi Dei, et
missus est Angelus ut curaret
eos ambos, quorum uno tem-
pore sunt orationes in con-
spectu Domini recitatas. "
II. Maccab. VI. 7.
"Ad agitandum colendum-
que Bacchanaliorum solenne
cogebantur Judaei hedera re-
dimiti Baccho pompam ducere.
Quod si qui minus in Grascor-
um ritus ac mores transire
voluissent, interficerentur. "
S. Hip. Frag, in Dan.XXXL,
XXXII.
"Exite et facite praecep-
tum regis et vivetis. Illi autem
dixerunt: 'Neque exibimus,
neque faciemus praeceptum re-
gis: moriemur in simplicitate
nostra; 'et interfecit ex eis
mille animas hominum. "
S. Hip. In Susannam V. 55.
"Porro ostendit, quo tem-
pore Susanna ad Deum oravit,
fuitque exaudita, missum ei
fuisse angelum qui eum ad-
juvaret haud secus ac se res
in Tobia et Sara habuit; am-
bobus enim eadem die eadem-
que hora orantibus, exaudita
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 cir-
cuituros. Qui nolint parere,
hos cruciatibus atque tormen-
tis exagitatos neci tradendos
esse. Ac si quis haec sigillatim
legere velit singulaque lustrare,
in libro Machabaeorum prae-
scripta inveniet. "
Sap. II. 12—20. S. Hip. Adv. Judasos, IX.
" Circumveniamus igitur jus- "Producam in medio etiam
turn, quoniam inutilis est no- prophetiam Salomonis de
bis, et contrarius est operibus Christo, quae aperto et per-
nostris, et improperat nobis spicue quae Judaeos spectant
peccata legis, et diffamat in edisserit. Ait enim Propheta:
THE CAN'ON OF THE CHURCH
275
nos peccata disciplinae nostrae.
Promittit se scientiam Dei
habere, et filium Dei se nomi-
nat. Factus est nobis in tra-
ductionem cogitationum nos-
trarum. Gravis est nobis etiam
ad videndum, quoniam dis-
similis est aliis vita illius, et
immutatae sunt viae ejus. Tam-
quam nugaces aestimati sumus
ab illo, et abstinet se a viis
nostris tamquam ab immun-
ditiis; et praefert novissima
justorum, et gloriatur patrem
se habere Deum. Videamus
ergo si sermones illius veri sint,
et tentemus quae ventura sunt
illi, et seiemus quae erunt no-
vissima illius. Si enim est
verus Alius Dei, suscipiet ilium,
et liberabit eum de manibus
contrariorum. Contumelia et
tormento interrogemus eum,
ut probemus patientiam illius.
sciamus reverentiam ejus, et
probemus patientiam illius.
Morte turpissima condemne-
mus eum: erit enim ei respect-
tus ex. sermonibus illius. "
Sap. V. i.
"Tunc stabunt justi in
magna constantia adversus eos
qui se angustiaverunt et qui
abstulerunt labores eorum.
Videntes turbabuntur timore
horribili, et mirabuntur in su-
bitatione insperatae salutis,
dicentes intra se, poenitudine
affecti et prae augustia spiritus
Non rcctc cogitaverunt impii de
Christo, dicentes: Circum-
veniamus justum, quoniam in-
utilis 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 vi-
dendum, quoniam dissimilis est
aliis vita illius, et immutatae
sunt viae ejus. Tamquam nu-
gaces aestimati sumus ab illo
et abstinet se a viis nostris
tamquam ab immunditiis, et
praefert novissima justorum.
. . . Ait igitur iterum Salomon
in persona Judaeorum de hoc
justo qui est Christus: Factus
est nobis in traductionem cogi-
tationum nostrarum, et gloria-
tur Patrem se habere Deum.
Videamus ergo si sermones il-
lius veri sint, et tentemus quae
erunt novissima illius. Si enim
est Justus Dei films, suscipiet
ilium, liberabit ilium de mani-
bus contrariorum. Morte tur-
pissima condemnemus eum:
erit enim respectus ejus ex
sermonibus illius."
S. Hip. Adv. Judaeos, X.
"Et iterum Solomon de
Christo et Judaeis dicit quod,
quando stabit Justus in magna
constantia ante faciem eorum
qui eum afrlixerunt et sermones
ejus repudiarunt: Videntes
turbabuntur timore horribili,
et mirabuntur in subitatione
insperatae salutis, et dicent
276
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
gementes: Hi sunt quos ha-
buimus aliquando in derisum
et in similitudinem improperii.
Nos insensati vitam illorum
aestimabamus insaniam et fi-
nem illorum 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
iniquitatis et perditionis, et
ambulavimus vias difficiles,
viam autum Domini ignora-
vimus. Quid nobis profuit
superbia? aut divitiarum jac-
tantia quid contulit nobis?
Transierunt omnia ilia tam-
quam umbra, et tamquam nun-
tius percurrens. "
Baruch III. 36—38.
"Hie est Deus noster, neque
est alius qui cum ipso com-
paretur. Hie adinvenit om-
nem viam disciplinae, et tra-
didit illam Jacob puero suo
et Israel dilecto suo. Post
haec, in terris visus est, et cum
hominibus conversatus est.''
intra se, pcenitudine affecti,
et prae angustia spiritus ge-
mentes: Hie est quern habui-
mus aliquando in derisum et
in similitudinem improperii.
Nos insensati vitam illius ex-
istimabamus 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 iniqui-
tatis et perditionis. Ambula-
vimus vias difficiles; viam au-
tem Domini ignoravimus. Quid
nobis profuit superbia nostra?
Transierunt omnia ilia tam-
quam umbra. "
S. Hip. Contra Noet.
"Dicit Scriptura in alio loco;
Hie est Deus; non reputabitur
alius ad eum . . . Invenit om-
nem viam scientiae, et dedit
illam Jacob puero suo et Israel
dilecto suo . . . Post base in
terra visus est, et cum homini-
bus conversatus est."
In the Constitutiones Apostolicag, we find the following
quotations or equivalent allusions: Ecclesiasticus, eight
times ; Judith, four times ; Wisdom, four times ; Tobias, once ;
I. Maccab., once.
Irenasus, 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
century of the Christian era. He was a disciple of Polycarp, and was
sent to Gaul in 157 A. D. He was, at first, priest at the church at Lyon,
and, afterwards, bishop of that see. He made of that city the most
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
277
Dan. XIV. 3—4.
"Porro Daniel adorabat
Deum suum. Dixitque ei rex:
quare non adoras Bel? Qui
respondens ait ei: Quia non
colo idola manufacta, sed vi-
ventem Deum qui creavit C02I-
um et terram, et habet potes-
tatem 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 au-
tem non est Deus vivens."
Dan. XIII. 20.
"Ecce ostia pomarii clausa
sunt, et nemo nos videt. "
Contra Haereses, Lib. IV. 5.
"Quern (Deum) et Daniel
Propheta, cum dixisset ei Cy-
rus rex Persarum: 'Quare non
adoras Bel?' annuntiavit di-
cens; quoniam non colo idola
manufacta, sed vivum Deum,
qui constituit Ccelum et ter-
ram, et habet omnis carnis
dominationem. Iterum dixit:
Dominum Deum meum ado-
rabo, quoniam hie e'st Deus
vivus. "
Dan. XIII. 52—53.
"Inveterate dierum malo-
rum, nunc venerunt peccata
tua quae operabaris prius ; judi-
cans judicia injusta, innocen-
tes opprimens, et dimittens
noxios, dicente Domino: in-
Iren. Contra Haereses, Lib.
IV. XXVI. 3.
"Qui vero crediti quidem
sunt a multis esse presbyteri,
serviunt autem suis voluptati-
bus . . . . et dicunti nemo nos
videt. "
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
dierum malorum, nunc ad-
flourishing center of Catholicity in all Gaul. His erudition was vast and
precise. He advocated moderation iu the schism of the Asiatic bishops
under Pope Victor I. The influence of Papias drew him into the error
of the mitigated Millenarianism. His chief work is his Treatise against
Heresies, in five books. He was martyred in the fifth general persecu-
tion in 202. By the 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 Hasreses,
we find scriptural use of the deuterocanonical fragments of Daniel.
278
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
nocentem et justum non m-
terficies.
Ibid. 56.
"Semen Chanaan et non
Juda, species decepit te,et con-
cupiscentia subvertit cor
tuum."
Sap. VI. 19 — 20.
"Custoditio autem legum
consummatio incorruptionis
est, incbrruptio autem facit
esse proximum Deo."
Baruch IV. 36— V.
"Circumspice, Jerusalem, ad
orientem et vide jucunditatem
a Deo tibi venientem. Ecce
enim veniunt filii tui quos di-
misisti dispersos; veniunt col-
lecti ab oriente usque ad oc-
cidentem, in verbo Sancti gau-
dentes in honorem Dei."
Cap. V. Exue te, Jerusalem,
stola luctus et vexationis tuae,
et indue te decore et honore
ejus quae a Deo tibi est sem-
piternae glorias. Circumdabit
te Deus diploide justitiae, et
imponet mitram capiti honoris
aeterni. Deus enim ostendet
splendorem suum in te, omni
qui sub ccelo est. Nomina-
bitur enim tibi nomen tuum a
Deo in sempiternum; pax jus-
titiae et honor pietatis. Ex-
surge, Jerusalem, et sta in ex-
celso, et circumspice ad orien-
tem, et vide collectos filios
tuos ab oriente sole usque ad
venerunt peccata tua quae
faciebas antea, judicans ju-
diciainjusta; et innocentes qui-
dem damnabas ; dimittebas ve-
ro nocentes, dicente Domino:
Innocentem et justum non
occides. "
Ibid. XXXVIII. 3-
"Visio autem Dei efficax in-
corruptionis est ; incorruptio
autem proximum facit esse
Deo."
Iren. Contra Haereses Lib. V.
XXXV. 1.
"Hoc significavit Jeremias
propheta:* Circumspice, di-
cens, ad orientem, Jerusalem
et vide laetitiam quae adven-
tat tibi ab ipso Deo. Ecce
venient filii tui quos emisisti,
venient collecti ab oriente us-
que ad occidentem verbo illius
sancti, gaudentes ea quae a
Deo tuo est claritate. Exuere
Jerusalem, habitum luctus et
afflictionis tuae, et induere
decorem ejus quae a Deo tuo
est claritatis in aeternum. Cir-
cumdare amictum duplicem
ejus quae a Deo tuo est jus-
titiae, impone mitram super
caput tuum glorias aeternae.
Deus enim demonstrabit ei
quae sub ccelo est universae
tuum fulgorem. Vocabitur
namque nomen tuum ab ipso
Deo in aeternum, pax justi-
tiae et gloriae colenti Deo.
Surge, Jerusalem, et sta in ex-
*Baruch was by many considered an integral part of Jeremias.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 279
occidentem, in vcrbo sancti celso, et circumspice ad orien-
gaudentes Dei memoria. Exier- tern, et vide collectos filios
unt enim abs te pedibus ducti tuos a solis ortu usque ad oc-
ab inimicis: adducet autem cid( atem, verbo illius sancti
illos Dominus ad te portatos gaudentes, ipsam Dei recorda-
in honore sicut filios regni. tionem.
Constituit enim Deus humil- "Profecti sunt enim a te
iare omnem montem excelsum pedites dum adducerentur ab
et rupes perennes et convalles inimicis. Introducet illos Deus
replere in aequalitatem terrae ad te portatos cum gloria tam-
ut ambulet Israel diligenter quam thronum regni. Decrevit
in honorem Dei. Obumbra- enim Deus ut humilietur om-
verunt autem et silvae et omne nis mons excelsus et congeries
lignum suavitatis Israel ex aeternae, et ut valles implean-
mandato Dei. Adducet enim tur ad redigendam planitiem
Deus Israel cum jucunditate terras, ut ambulet Israel tuti
in lumine majestatis suae, cum Dei gloria. Umbracula autem
misericordia et justitia quae intexuerunt silvae, et omne
est ex ipso. " lignum boni odoris ipsi Israel,
praecepto Dei. Praeibit enim
Deus cum laetitia, lumine cla-
ritatis 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. Clem. Paed. VIII.
"Qui odit correptionem, ves- "Scripturam perperam intel-
tigium est peccatoris; et qui ligentes quae sic dicit: Et qui
timet Deum, convertetur ad timet Dominum convertetur ad
cor suum." cor suum."
♦Clement of Alexandria was a Platonic philosopher of Alexandria.
He was converted by Si. Pantenus, who was at the head of the Alexan-
drian school in the latter half of the second century. After the death of
Pantenus, Clement became chief of this famous school in igo, A. D.
Origen was one of his pupils. He died about the year 217, A. D. His
chief works are Cohortatio ad Gentes, Paedagogus, ^.Tpcc/jLaTa or Mis-
cellanea, Quis Dives Salvetur, and Fragments. Among all these, the
Stromata are the most famous. Clement is the great representative of
Alexandrian tradition.
2S0
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. XI. 25.
"Nihil odisti eorum quae
fecisti: nee enim odiens aliquid
constituisti aut fecisti."
Eccli. XXII. 6-8.
"Flagella et doctrina in orn-
ni tempore sapientia. Qui docet
fatuum, quasi qui conglutinat
testam. Qui narrat verbum
non audienti, quasi qui ex-
citat dormientem de gravi
somno. "
Eccli. XXXIV. 14, 15.
"Spiritus timentium Deum
quasritur, et in respectu illius
benedicetur. Spes enim illo-
rum in salvantem illos et oculi
Dei in diligentes se. "
Eccli. I. 27, 28.
"Timor Domini expellit pec-
catum, nam qui sine timore
est non potest justificari. "
Ibid. 22.
"Corona sapientiae, timor
Domini, replens pacem et salu-
tis fructum. "
Eccli. XVI. 13.
' ' Secundum misericordiam
suam, sic correptio illius hom-
nem secundum opera sua jud-
icat. "
Ibid. 12.
" Misericordia enim et ira
est cum illo; potens exoratio
et effundens iram. "
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. . . .
Propterea aperte subjunxit:
Excitans dormientem e pro-
fun do somno, qui est ex aliis
omnibus maxime morti similis. ' '
Clem. Ibid.
"Quoniam spiritus timens
Dominum vivet. Spes enim est
in eum qui ipsos salvos facit."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. VIII.
''Timor enim Domini peccata
extrudit : Qui est autem sine tim-
ore non poterit justificari, inquit
Scriptura."
Ibid.
"Corona itaque sapientice, 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
*Ecclesiasticus was frequently
Sirach.
termed by the Fathers Sapientia
THE CANON OF THE CH.L'RCH
281
Eccli. VII. 25, 26.
"Filii tibi sunt? erudi illos,
et curva illos a pueritia il-
lorum. Filiae tibi sunt? serva
corpus illarum, et non ostend-
as hilarem faciem tuam ad
illas."
Eccli. XXXII. 21.
"Peccator homo vitabit cor-
reptionem, et secundum vo-
luntatem suam inveniet com-
parationem. "
Eccli. XVIII. 13, 14; XVI.
12.
Baruch IV. 4.
"Beati sumus, Israel, quia
qua? Deo placent manifesta
sunt nobis."
Baruch III. 9.
' ' Audi, Israel, mandata vitae :
auribus percipe ut scias pru-
dentiam. "
Baruch III. 13.
"Nam si in via Dei ambu-
lasses, habitasses utique in
pace sempiterna. "
Eccli. XXXIII. 6.
"Equus emissarius, sic et
amicus subsannator, sub omni
suprasedente hinnit. "
effundens ad propitiationem ex
gna sua miserieordia. 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
vultum 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."
Ibid.
"Audi, Israel, mandata vitae,
ausculta ut cognoscas pruden-
tiam."
Ibid.
"Quinetiam . . . per Jere-
miam hortatur (paedagogus) di-
cens: Via Dei si ambulasses,
habitasses in pace in saecu-
lum."
Clem. Paed. Lib. I. XI 11.
"Hinc etiam dicit Sapientia:
Equus ad coitum libidinosus. et
adulter irrational] jumento as-
similatus; et ideo subjungit:
Quocumque su] ate
hinnit."
282
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. VI. 19.
"Cura ergo disciplinae di-
lectio est, et dilectio custodia
legum illius est; custoditio au-
tem legum consummatio in-
corruptionis est."
Sap. XVI. 26.
" — ut scirent filii tui quos
dilexisti, Domine, quoniam non
nativitatis fructus pascunt
homines, sed sermo tuus, hos
qui in te crediderint con-
servat. "
Eccli. XVIII. 32. (juxta
Gr;ecum.)
"Ne delecteris multis de-
liciis."
Eccli. XXXI. 36-38.
"Exultatio animae et cor-
dis, vinum moderate potatum.
"38. Vinum multum pota-
tum irritationem et iram et
ruinas multas facit. "
Eccli. XXXI. si.
' ' Ignis probat f emim durum ;
sic vinum corda superborum
arguet in ebrietate potatum."
Ibid. 30. (juxta Graecum.)
"In vino virum ne te ex-
hibeas: vinum enim multos
perdidit. "
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. I.
"Cura autem disciplinae est
caritas, quam dicit Sapientia,
caritas vero observatio legum
est."
Ibid.
"Discant, inquit, filii tui
quos dilexisti, Domine, quod
non generationes fructuum nu-
triant hominem, sed verbum
tuum eos qui tibi credunt con-
servat."
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 vi-
num 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
tingendum probare ferri aciem,
vinum autem cor superborum. "
Clem. Ibid.
"In vino, inquit, ne te virum
fortem praebeas; multos enim
vinum reddidit inutiles."
THE CAXOX OF THE CHURCH
in;
Eccli. XXVI. ii.
"Mulier ebriosa ira magna,
et contumelia et turpitudo il-
lius non tegetur. "
Eccli. XXXI. 23.
"Vigilia, cholera et tortura
viro infrunito. "
Baruch III. 16-19.
"Ubi sunt principes gen-
tium? et qui dominatur super
bestias quae sunt super terram?
qui in avibus cceli ludunt? qui
argentum thesaurizat et au-
rum in qua confidunt homines,
et non est finis acquisitionis
eorum? qui argentum fabri-
cant et solliciti sunt, nee est
inventio operum illorum? Ex-
terminati sunt, et ad inferos
descenderunt et alii loco eorum
surrexerunt. "
Eccli. XXI. 23.
"Fatuus in risu exaltat vo-
cem suam; vir autem sapiens
vix tacite ridebit. "
Eccli. XX. 5.
"Est tacens qui invenitur
sapiens, et est odibilis, qui
procax est ad loquendum."
Ibid. 8.
"Qui multis utitur verbis
laedet animam suam; et qui
potestatem sibi sumit injuste,
odietur. "
Ibid.
"Ira autem, inquit, magna
est mulier ebria. . . . quoniam
suam non celat turpitudinem."
Ibid.
"Labor autem vigiliae, inquit,
et bilis et tormentum est cum
homine insatiabili."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. III.
"Pulcherrime itaque alicubi
dicit divina Scriptura, ad eos
qui sunt sui amantes et arro-
gantes verba dirigens : Ubi sunt
qui gentibus imperabant et qui
dominabantur feris quae sunt
super terram? qui in cceli avi-
bus illudebant: qui argenti et
auri thesauros congregabant in
quibus homines habebant fidu-
ciam, et non est finis acquisi-
tionis eorum? qui aurum et
argentum fabricabantur et er-
ant solliciti? non est inventio
operum illorum. Evanuerunt,
et ad inferos descenderunt."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. V.
"Stultus autem in risu ex-
tollit vocem suam, inquit Scrip-
tura: vir autem astutus vix sen-
sim 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, odit animam suam. ' '
284
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Ibid. XXXI. 41.
"In convivio vini non ar-
guas proximum, et non de-
spicias eum in jucunditate il-
lius."
Eccli. XIV. 1.
"Beatus vir qui non est
lapsus verbo ex ore suo, et
non est stimulatus in tristitia
delicti."
Eccli. IX. 12.
"Cum aliena muliere ne sed-
eas omnino, nee accumbas cum
ea super cubitum. "
Ibid 13.
" — et non altercens cum
ilia in vino, ne forte declinet
cor tuum in illam, et san-
guine tuo labaris in perditio-
nem. "
Eccli. XXXI. 19-20.
' ' Utere quasi homo frugi his
quae tibi apponuntur, ne, cum
manducas, multum odio ha-
bearis. Cessa prior causa dis-
ciplinae, et noli nimius esse,
ne forte offendas. "
Eccli. XXXII. 15.
"Et hora surgendi non te
trices: prsecurre autem prior
in domum tuam. "
Eccli. XXXII. 4, 10, 11.
"Loquere, major natu; decet
enim te. Adolescens, loquere
in causa tua vix. Si bis inter-
rogatus fueris, habeat caput
responsum tuum."
Ibid. Cap. VII.
"In convivio autem, inquit,
ne argueris proximum, et ei op-
probrii sermonem ne dixeris."
Ibid.
"Beatus revera vir ille est qui
non est lapsus in ore suo, vel
non compunctus est in moles-
tia peccati."
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 ccngrediaris, 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 pluriurn sederis ne
ante ipsos manum porrigas."
Ibid.
"Cum est, inquit, tempus
surgendi, ne sis postremus, et
revertere 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; ser-
monem autem tuum paucis in
summam redige."
THE CANON OF THIi CHURCH
285
Eccli. IX. 25
"Terribilis est in civitate
sua vir linguosus."
Ibid.
"Terribilis est in interitu suo
\'ir linguosus.
Eccli. VII. 15.
"Xoli verbosus esse in mul-
titudine presbyterorum, et non
iteres verbum in oratione
tua."
Eccli. XXXIII. 1, 2, 7.
"Honora medicum propter
necessitatem ; etenim ilium
creavit Altissimus. A Deo est
enim omnis medela, et a rege
accipiet donationem. In his
curans mitigabit dolorem, et
unguentarius faciet pigmenta
suavitatis et unctiones conficiet
sanitatis."
Ibid.
"Ne nugeris in multitudine
seniorum .... Sermonem
ne iteraveris 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 sub-
jungit: Et unguentarius faciet
mistionem. "
Eccli. XXXIX. 17-19.
"In voce elicit : Obaudite
me, divini fructus, et quasi rosa
plantata super rivos aquarum
fructificate. Quasi Libanus
odorem suavitatis habete. Flo-
rete flores, quasi lilium, et date
odorem et frondete in gra-
tiam, et collaudate canticum,
et benedicite Dominum in
operibus suis."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap.
VIII.
"Exaudite me, inquit, et
tamquam rosa plantata in
fluentis aquarum germinate ;
tamquam Libanus, suavem
odorem emittite, et benedicite
Dominem super opera ejus."
Ibid. 31. Ibid.
"Inirium necessariae rei vitas "Dicit itaque Scriptura;
hominum : aqua, ignis et fer- Aqua, et ignis, et ferrum.
rum, sal, lac, et panis simila- lac, simila frumenti, et mel,
pneus, et mel et botrus uvae sanguis uvae et oleum :is;
et oleum et vestimentum." haec omnia piis ad bona sunt.' '
286
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. XXIII. 6. Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. X.
"Aufer a me ventris con- "Quocirca amove a servis
cupiscentias, et concubitus con- tuis spes inanes et indecoras,
cupiscentiae ne apprehendant inquit, cupiditates averte a
me, et animae irreverenti et me. Ventris appetitio et coitus
infrunitae ne tradas me." ne me apprehendant. "
Eccli. XXIII. 25.
"Omnis homo qui trans-
greditur lectum suum contem-
nens in animam suam et dicens :
quis me videt? Tenebrae cir-
cumdant me, etparietes coope-
riunt me, et nemo circum-
spicit me; quern vereor? De-
lictorum meorum non memor-
abitur Altissimus. 28 . — et non
cognovit quoniam oculi Domini
multo plus lucidiores sunt su-
per solem, circumspicientes
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
avertere."
Eccli. XIX. 2-3.
"Vinum et mulieres aposta-
tare faciunt sapientes, et ar-
guent sensatos, et qui se jungit
fornicariis erit nequam; putre-
do et vermes haereditabunt il-
ium."
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. X.
"Homo qui ascendit super
lectum suum, qui dicit in ani-
mo: Quis me videt? circa me
sunt tenebrse, et parietes sunt
tegumenta mea,etnemo aspicit
peccata mea. Quid vereor,
ne meminerit Altissimus ? . . . .
Nescit enim, Scriptura dicit,
oculi Domini Altissimi quanto
sint soli splendidiores qui re-
spiciunt omnes vias hominum,
et partes occultas intelligunt. "
Clem. Paed. Lib. II. Cap. X.
"Post tua desideria ne am-
bules et acearis a tuis appe-
tionibus. Vinum enim et mu-
lieres faciunt sapientes defi-
cere, et qui adhaeret meretri-
cibus evadet audacior. Putre-
do et vermis erunt ejus hasredes
et efferetur in majori ludi-
brio."
Eccli. XI. 4. Ibid.
"In vestitu ne glorieris un- "In amictu vestis ne glorie-
quam, nee in die honoris tui ris, neque in omni gloria quae
est praster leges efferaris. "
extollaris."
THE CANON' OF THE CHURCH
2S7
Eccli. XXV. 8.
"Corona senum multa per-
itia; et gloria illorum, timor
Dei."
Eccli. IX. 7.
"Xoli circumspicere in vicis
civitatis, nee oberraveris in
plateis illius."
Eccli. XL 31.
"Non omnem hominem in-
ducas in domum tuam, multae
enim sunt insidias 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 bra-
chiale in brachio dextro."
Eccli. XXVI. 12.
"Fornicatio mulieris in ex-
tollentia oculorum, et in pal-
pebris illius agnoscetur."
Eccli. IX. 8, 9.
"Averte faciem tuam a mu-
liere compta, et ne cireum-
spicias speciem alienam. Prop-
ter speciem mulieris multi pe-
rierunt, et ex hoc concupiscen-
tia quasi ignis exardescit."
Clem. Paed. Lib. III. Cap.
III.
"Senum autem corona, in-
quit Scriptura, est multa ex-
perientia. "
Clem. Paed. Lib. III. Cap.
IV.
"Ne circumspicias autem,
inquit, in vicis civitatis, nee
erres in ejus solitudinibus. "
Ibid.
"Unde Scriptura constan-
tissime admonet: Ne intro-
ducas quemvis hominem in
domum tuam; dolosi enim ho-
minis multa? sunt insidiae. "
Alibi autem: "Viri justi,
inquit, sint tui convivae, et
in timore Domini tua per-
manebit gloriatio. "
Clem. Paed. Lib. III. Cap.
XL
"Ut vult enim Scriptura;
Aureus prudenti mundus est
disciplina. "
Ibid.
"Fornicatio autem mulieris
in elevatione oculorum."
Ibid.
"Averte autem oculum a
muliere gfatiosa, et ne discas
alienam pulchritudinem, inquit
Scriptura; et si causam roges,
ipsa tibi enarrabit: In pul-
chritudine enim mulieris multi
seducti sunt, et ex im-
quam ignis accenditur ami-
citia. "
288
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. I. I.
"Omnis sapientia a Domino
Deo est, et cum illo fuit sem-
per, et est ante aevum."
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum."
Sap. VII. 17.
"Ipse enim dedit mihi ho-
rum quae sunt scientiam
veram, ut sciam disposi-
tionem orbis terrarum, et
virtutes elementorum . . . dif-
ferentias virgultorum et vir-
tutes radicum, et quaecumque
sunt absconsa et improvisa di-
dici; omnium enim artifex do-
cuit me Sapientia."
Eccli. XV. 10.
"Quoniam a Deo profecta
est sapientia: sapientia? 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. 1.
"Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis."
Ibid.
"Visi sunt oculis insipien-
tium mori, et aestimata est
afflictio exitus eorum, et quod
a nobis est iter, exterminium ;
illi autem sunt in pace. Etsi
coram hominibus \ tormenta
Clem. Strom. Lib. I. Cap.
IV.
"Quoniam omnis sapientia
a Domino, et cum ipso est in
saecula, ut dicit Jesu Sapien-
tia."
Clem. Strom. Lib. I. C p. II.
"Dicit itaque in Sapientia:
Ipse mihi dedit non falsam
eorum qua? sunt cognitionem,
ut cognoscam mundi consti-
tutionem . . . . et vires radicum
. . . . et quaecumque sunt oc-
culta et operta cognovi; quce
est enim omnium artifex me
docuit Sapientia.1'
Clem. Strom. Lib. II. Cap. V.
"Merito ergo dictum est
apud Salomonem: Sapientia
est in ore fidelium. "
Ibid. Cap. XXIII.
' ' Hoc breviter Scriptura sig-
nificavit dicens: Quod odio
habes, alii ne feceris. "
Clem. Strom. Lib. IV. Cap.
XI.
"Justorum enim animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
eas tormentum. "
Ibid. Cap. XVI.
"Divina Scriptura dicit de
martyribus: 'Visi sunt oculis
insipientium mori, et reputata
est vexatio eorum exitus, et a
nobis discessus contritio; illi
vero sunt in pace. Etenim si
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
289
passi sunt, spes illorum im-
mortalitate plena est. In pau-
cis vexati, in multis bene dis-
ponentur quoniam Deus ten-
tavit eos, et invenit illos dignos
se. Tamquam aurum in for-
nace probavit illos, et quasi
holocausti hostiam accepit illos
et in tempore erit respectus
illorum. Fulgebunt justi, et
tamquam scintillas in arundi-
neto discurrent. Judicabunt
nationes et dominabuntur pop-
ulis, et regnabit Dominus il-
lorum in perpetuum."
in oculis hominum suppliciis
affecti fuerint spes eorum plena
est immortalitatis. . . . Et in
paucis castigati, magnis affi-
cientur beneficiis, quoniam
Deus tentavit eos . . . . et in-
venit eos se dignos, ut scilicet
vocentur filii. Tamquam au-
rum in fornace probavit eos, et
tamquam solidam sacrificii
oblationem excepit eos, et in
tempore inspectionis eorum
fulgebunt, et tamquam scin-
tillas in stipula percurrent.
Judicabunt gentes, et domina-
buntur populis, et rex eorum
erit Dominus in saecula. ' "
Eccli. XXVII. 13. Clem. Strom. Lib. V. 3.
"In medio insensatorum, " In medio insipientium, ob-
serva verbum tempori; in me- serva occasionem; in medio
dio autem cogitantium, assi- autem cogitantium, versare
duus esto." perpetuo. "
Clem. Strom. Lib. V. Cap.
Sap. VII. 24. XIV.
"Omnibus enim mobilibus "Quibus illud Sapientiae im-
mobilior est sapientia; attingit posuit: Pervadit autem ac
autem ubique propter suam subit per omnia propter suam
munditiam." munditiam. "
Sap. VI. 8.
"Xon enim subtrahet per-
sonam cujusquam Deus, nee
verebitur magnitudinem cu-
jusquam; quoniam pusillum et
magnum ipse fecit, et aequaliter
cura est illi de omnibus."
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
VI.
"Xon enim personam res-
picit et reveretur qui est om-
nium Dominus: neque curabit
magnitudinem, quoniam ipse
fecit magnum et parvum, et
similitur omnibus provide
omnium curam gerit. "
(19) H. S.
290
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. IX. 17, 18.
"Consilium enini tuum quis
sciet , nisi tu dederis sapien-
tiam, et miseris spiritum sanc-
tum tuum de Altissimis? et sic
correctse sint semitae eorum
qui sunt in terris et quae tibi
placent didicerint homines."
Sap. VI. ii.
"Qui enim custodierint jus-
ta juste justificabuntur, et qui
didicerint ista invenient quid
respondeant."
Sap. VII. 16.
"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 sapien-
tia inhabitat."
Sap. XIV. 2, 3.
"Illud enim cupiditas acqui-
rendi excogitavit, et artifex
fabricavit sapientia sua. Tua
autem, Pater, providentia gu-
bernat — ."
Sap. VIII. 9.
"Et si justitiam quis diligit,
labores hujus magnas habent
virtutes, sobrietatem enim et
prudentiam docet et justitiam
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
XI.
"Veritas autem per Domin-
um: 'Consilium enim tuum,
inquit, quis novit, si non tu
dederis sapientiam, et miseris
sanctum tuum Spiritum ab
altissimis, et ita correctae fu-
erint viae eorum qui sunt in
terra, et didicerint homines ea
quae tibi placent, et salvi fue-
rint sapientia. ' "
Ibid.
"Qui enim sancta, inquit,
sancte servant sanctificabun-
tur, et qui ea didicerent inveni-
unt responsionem. "
Ibid.
"Et rursus licet audire: 'In
manu enim ejus, hoc est, vir-
tute et sapientia, et nos et
verba nostra, et omnis pru-
dentia et operum scientia. Ni-
hil enim diligit Deus nisi eum
qui cohabitat cum sapientia.
Praeterea autem non legerunt
quod dictum est a Salomone.
Nam cum de templi construc-
tione tractasset, aperte dicit:
Artifex autem construxit sa-
pientia; tua autem, Pater, gub-
ernat providentia. ' "
Ibid.
"Et si quis diligit justitiam,
labores ejus sunt virtutes ; tern-
perantia enim et prudentia
docet justitiam et fortitudinem
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
291
ct virtutem, quibus utilius
nihil est in vita hominibus, et
nescierunt sacramenta Dei. . .
quoniam Deus creavit homi-
nem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fe-
cit ilium."
Tob. XII. 8.
"Bona est oratio cum je-
junio, et eleemosyna magis
quam thesauros auri recon-
dere."
Sap. IV. 17.
"Videbunt enim finem sapi-
entis, et non intelligent quid
cogitaverit de illo Deus, et
quare munierit ilium Domi-
nus. "
Ibid. Cap. V. 3.
" — dicentes intra se, pceni-
tudine acti et prae augustia
spiritus gementes: hi sunt quos
habuimus aliquando in deri-
sum, et in similitudinem impro-
perii; nos insensati vitam il-
lorum aestimabamus insaniam,
et finem illorum 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 aquas maris deputati sunt ,
et sicut calculus arenae, sic exi-
gui anni in die aevi."
quibus nihil est in vita homini-
bus utilius. "
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
XII.
"Sed, ut videtur, Dei non
novere mysteria, quod, scilicet,
Deus creavit hominem ob im-
mortalitatem, et fecit eum
imaginem suae proprietatis."
Ibid.
"Exaudiens Scripturam quae
dicit: ' Bonum est jejunium
cum oratione. '
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
XIV.
"Videbunt enim mortem sa-
pientis, et non intelligent quid
de eo decreverit, et ad quid
eum stabilierit Dominus, et
dicent de ejus gloria: 'Is est
quern aliquando habuimus in
derisum et in parabolam op-
probrii insipientes. Vitam ejus
existimavimus insaniam, et
mortem ejus ignominiosam.
Quomodo est enumeratus inter
filios Dei, et in Sanctis est sors
ejus."'
Ibid.
"Reputati sunt, inquit, ut
pulvis terrae, et ut gutta ex
cado. "
292
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. III. 9.
"Qui confidunt in illo, intelli-
gent veritatem, et fideles in
dilectione acquiescent illi."
Sap. III. 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 earn,
et invenietur ab his qui quaer-
runt illam. Praeoccupat qui se
concupiscunt ut illis se prior
ostendat. Qui de luce vigilav-
erit ad illam non laborabit, as-
sidentem enim ilium foribus
suis inveniet. Cogitare ergo de
ilia sensus est consummatus, et
qui vigilaverit propter ilium
cito securus erit. Quoniam dig-
nos se ipsa circuit quaerens, et
in viis ostendit se illis hilariter,
et in omni providentia occurrit
illis. Initium enim illius veris-
sima est disciplinae concupiscen-
tia. Cura ergo disciplinae dilec-
tio est, et dilectio custodia
legum illius est; custoditio au-
tem legum consummatio in-
corruptionis est ; incorruptio
autem f acit esse proximum Deo .
•Concupiscentia itaque sapien-
tias deducit ad regnum perpe-
tuum."
Ibid.
"Merito ergo dictum est:
'Et qui in ipso confidunt, in-
telligent veritatem, et fideles
in dilectione in ipso permane-
bunt.'"
Ibid.
"Ecce enim Salomon: Dabi-
tur enim ei, inquit, fidei gratia
electa, et sors in templo Do-
mini jucundior. "
Clem. Strom. Lib. VI. Cap.
XV.
"Salomon hasc dicit: 'Clara
est et non marcescit sapientia,
et facile cernitur ab iis qui
ipsam diligunt: eos qui cupiunt
praevenit, ut prascognoscatur.
Qui mane surrexerit ad ipsam
non laborabit; de ipso enim
cogitare est perfectio pruden-
tiae. Et qui propter ipsam
vigilaverit cito erit cura va-
cuus; quoniam eos qui ipsa
digni sunt, ipsa quaerens cir-
cuit, et in semitis ab ipsis bene-
vole visione apprehenditur. '
Mox subjungit: 'Et in omni
cogitatione occurrit ipsis ....
ejus enim principium veris-
simum est desiderium disci-
plinae, hoc est, cognitionis;
cura autem disciplinae est di-
lectio; dilectio autem est ob-
servatio legum ejus; atten-
tio autem legum est incorrup-
tibilitatis confirmatio ; incor-
ruptibilitas autem facit ut
ad Deum prope accedatur.
Sapientias ergo desiderium
attollit ad regnum. ' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 293
Clement of Alexandria weaves the woof of his fabric from
Scripture. His Paxlogogus could be properly called a
commentary on Ecclesiasticus. He uses the deuterocanoni-
cal works as divine Scripture ; plainly terms them so ; and was
evidently very familiar with them. As he was the cory-
phaeus 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 deu-
terocanonical 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 eighteen, was given the charge of the in-
struction of the faithful at Alexandria. To preclude the taint which cal-
umny strove to attach to his name, he, by means of a drug, destroyed the en-
ergyof his generative organs. He was led to this move by a false literal in-
terpretation of the praise of eunuchs by Christ, in the Gospels. Origen
visited Rome, Palestine, Greece, Arabia and other lands. While in Pales-
tine, 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 after-
wards ordained priest by Theoctistus, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine.
Demetrius then deposed Origin 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, to escape from prison, Origen offered incense to Serapis. The data
are wanting to establish either the truth or falsity of this imputation. He
died at Tyre in 254. To Origen, have been imputed many pernicious
errors. He was condemned 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 definitcness, which the natural development of doctrir.i.
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 theo-
ries 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 considered as a malicious
294 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
It is impossible to give a detailed mention of his many
works. Later in our book we shall treat of his great Hex-
apla. Other of his chief works are: Eight Books against
Celsus, De Principiis libri quattuor, and Homilies and Com-
mentaries 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*, he defends the deuterocanonical
fragments of Daniel, and implies 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, which, in its Greek exemplar, circulates through
the whole Church of Christ, although it does not exist with the
Hebrews; and not 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
intent to infect the teachings of the Church but an evidence of the defecti-
bility of human reason. Origen has done the Church invaluable 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.
*Julius Africanus was a Christian historian, who flourished in the third
century, under Heliogabalus. He was of Nicopolis, in Palestine. He is
the 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
genuineness of the history of Susanna, concerning which he wrote to Origen.
One of his most celebrated contributions to the patrimony of science is
his reconciliation of the diverse genealogies of Jesus Christ in Matthew
and Luke.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 295
with our own text, we found in many places." Soon he
breaks forth into irony: "Forsooth, the time is at han<l,
if we have discovered these things, to abrogate the exem-
plars of Holy Scripture of our churches, and impose the law
upon the brethren that, rejecting 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, consider 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,
indeed, 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 Septua-
gint, that we might not bring anything spurious into the
Churches, which are beneath the whole heavens. . . . We
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 writh them, to use
only the curtailed canon which the Jews recognized. Thus
Jerome [Praef. on 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 t he
lists drawn up by some of the Fathers, in which the deutero-
canonical books were excluded. Even Origen himself has
made such list, but he openly declares that it is the canon
according to the Hebrews. The Jews by their ridicule of the
deuterocanonical books may have led some individual Fa-
thers to doubt of the equality of inspiration of the books of
the second canon. As the rationalists of to-dav sometimes
296 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
obtain from Catholics unwarranted concessions, lest they
should seem to be ignorant, so those other earlier enemies of
truth may have diminished in the minds of some the author-
ity of the deuterocanonical works. This they certainly
effected in the mind of Jerome. We see that Africanus re-
jected the deuterocanonical fragments 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 He-
brews acknowledge 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, Vajikra, that is,
"And he called." The fourth, Numbers, with the Hebrews
Hammisphecodim.* The fifth, Deuteronomy, with the He-
*The appellation Hammisphecodim for the book of Numbers is only
found in Origen. Its signification is unknown to us. The common
designation of the book in Hebrew was ""O^T 1> "et locutus est."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH L'(.)7
brews 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 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 com-
prised in one volume, which they call Dibre Hajjamim, 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 Hebrew
Koheleth. The fifteenth is the Canticle of Canticles, with
the Hebrew's Sir Hassirim. The sixteenth is Isaias, with
the Hebrews Jesaia. The seventeenth is Jeremias with the
Lamentation and Epistle, by them comprised in one volume,
which they call Jirmia. The eighteenth is Daniel, with the
Hebrews Daniel. The nineteenth is Ezekiel, with the He-
brew's Jeezhel. The twentieth is Job, by the Hebrews, desig-
nated by the same name. The twenty-first is Esther, which
is also thus designated by the Hebrews. Outside this enum-
eration are the books of Maccabees which are inscribed
"Sarbet Sarbaneel."
In this list, the twelve minor Prophets, by the Hebrews
comprised in one book, are 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 common grounds. This was necessary in that
age, when the chief intellectual attacks on Christianity came
from the Jews. The following collated pass will illus-
trate Origen's attitude towards the deuterocanonical works:
298
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Tob. I. 13-22.
(Already quoted.)
Judith XI. Passim.
Dan. XIII.
"Et erat vir habitans in
Babylone, et nomen ejus Joa-
kim," etc.
Orig. De Hist. Sus. 13.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Frag. Ex Lib. VI.
Strom.
"Homo autem, cui incumbit
necessitas mentiendi, diligenter
attendat ut sic utatur inter-
dum mendacio quomodo con-
dimento atque medicamine, ut
servet mensuram ejus, ne ex-
cedat terminos quibus usa est
Judith contra Holophernem, et
vicit prudenti simulatione ver-
borum."
Orig. Ex Lib. Stromatum.
"Et erat vir habitans in
Babylone, et nomen ejus Joa-
cim, et accepit uxorem nomine
Susannam, filiam Helciae, pul-
chram nimis et timentem Dom-
inum. Et parentes ejus justi
edocuerunt filiam suam juxta
legem Moysi.
Hoc utendum est testimonio
ad exhortationem parentum,
ut doceant juxta legem Dei
sermonemque divinum, non so-
lum filios, sed et filias suas ....
Quia Hebraei re- .
probant historiam Susannae,
dicentes earn in Danielis volu-
mine non haberi, debemus in-
quirere nomina tr/jvou, xal icpivou
quae Latini ilicem et lentiscum
interpretantur, si sint apud
Hebraeos, et quam habeant
etymologiam, ut a ayjvw,, scis-
sio, et a Tipfvw, sectio sive ser-
ratio dicatur lingua eorum.
Quod si non fuerit inventum,
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
299
Sap. VII. 25.
"Vapor est enim virtutis Dei,
et emanatio quaedam est clar-
itatis omnipotentis Dei sin-
cera — "
Ibid. VII. 25, 26.
Sap. XVIII. 24.
"In veste enim poderis, quam
habebat, totus erat orbis terra-
rum—."
Eccl. XLIII. 22.
"Frigidus ventus aquilo fla-
vit— ."
Eccli. VI. 4.
"Anima enim nequam dis-
perdet, qui se habet."
Sap. XI. 21.
" — sed omnia in mensura et
numero et pondere disposuisti . ' '
necesitate cogemur et nos
eorum acquiescere sententiae,
qui Graeci tantum sermonis
hanc volunt esse xepixoxiqv, quae
Graecam habeat tantum ety-
mologiam, et Hebraicam non
habeat. Quod si quis ostende-
rit duarum scissionis et sec-
tionis in Hebraeo stare ety-
mologiam, tunc poterimus
etiam hanc Scripturam reci-
pere."
Orig. De Principiis, Lib. I.
Cap. II.
"Invenimus nihilominus in
Sapientia, quae dicitur Salom-
onis, descriptionem quamdam
de Dei Sapientia hoc modo
scriptam: 'Vapor est enim, in-
quit, virtutis Dei et &x<5ppoia
gloriae omnipotentis puris-
sima.' "
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
Sapientia: 'Frigidus ventus
Boreas.' "
Ibid.
"Anima mala perdit eum qui
possidet earn."
Ibid. Cap. IX. 1.
"Porro autem, sicut Scriptura
dicit: 'In numero et mensura,
universa condidit Deus. — ' '
300
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. VII. 16.
" — in manu enim illius et
nos, et sermones nostri, et om-
nis Sapientia et operum scien-
tia, et disciplina."
Eccli. XVI. 22.
"Nam plurima illius opera
sunt is absconsis — ."
Sap. XI. 18.
"Non enim impossibilis erat
omnipotens manus tua, quae
creavit orbem terrarum ex
materia invisa, immittere illis
multitudinem ursorum, aut au-
daces leones — ."
Orig. De Prin, Lib. III. 14.
" 'In manu enim Dei, et nos,
et sermones nostri, et omnis
prudentia atque operum dis-
ciplina est' sicut Scriptura (Li-
cit."
Orig. De Prin. Lib. IV. 26.
"Quia scriptum est: 'Quam-
plurima ex operibus Dei in sec-
retis sunt.' "
Ibid. z?>-
"In Sapientia quae dicitur
Salomonis, qui utique liber non
ab omnibus in auctoritate
habetur. Ibi tamen scriptum
invenimus hoc modo: 'Non
enim,' inquit, 'deerat omnipo-
tent! manu tuae, quae creaverat
mundum ex informi materia,
immittere eis multitudinem ur-
sorum 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.
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 Testa-
ment, 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 ex-
cept Jerome and Origen knew Hebrew, their lists of the Old
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
301
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 historically transmitted." [Davidson, Canon of the
Bible, p. j 3 2.]
This last clause is not well said. It is not the private
opinions of the Fathers that constitute 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 curtailed canon of the Jews was historically trans-
mitted. 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 Chris-
tians were such Canon. Impartial historians, such as Euse-
bius, record the doubts of isolated churches concerning sev-
eral books, but these doubts never could be said to have per-
vaded 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:
302
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. IX. 13-16.
"Quis enim hominum 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
sensum multa cogitantem, et
difficile aestimamus quae in
terra sunt, et quae in prospectu
sunt invenimus cum labore.
Quae autem in ccelis sunt, quis
investigabit?"
Orig. Lib. De Oratione, I.
"Quis enim hominum poterit
scire consilium Dei? Aut quis
poterit cogitare quid Deus
velit? Cogitationes enim mor-
talium timidae ; et incertae pro-
videntiae nostrae, corpus enim
quod corrumpitur aggravat ani-
mam, et terrena inhabitatio
deprimit sensum multa cogit-
antem; et difficile aestimamus
quae in terra sunt. Quae aut-
em in coelis sunt, quis investi-
gavit?"
Sap. XI. 25.
Ibid. 5.
" — diligitque omnia quae
sunt, et nihil odisti eorum quae sunt, et nihil odit eorum quae
fecisti— ." fecit."
"Diligis enim omnia quae
Sap. I.
Ibid. 10.
"Quoniam Spiritus Domini "Magis idoneus fit commis-
replevit orbem terrarum." ceri 'Spiritui Domini qui re-
plevit orbem terrarum.' "
Tob. III. 24, 25.
"In illo tempore exauditae
sunt preces amborum in con-
spectu gloriae summi Dei, et
missus est angelus Domini,
Sanctus Raphael, ut curaret
eos ambos."
Tob. XII. 12 (juxta Grae-
cum).
• "Ac modo cum tu, et Sara
nurus tua orastis, memoriam
precum vestrarum coram Sanc-
to retuli."
Ibid. 11.
"Quae inde patent, quod Ra-
phael obtulerit Deo rationabile
obsequium Tobiae et Sarae.
'Nam postutriusqueorationem,
exaudita est, inquit Scriptura,
deprecatio utrorumque coram
gloria magni Raphael, et mis-
sus 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
;;u:;
Ibid. 15 (juxta Graecum).
"Ego sum Raphael, unus ex
septem Sanctis Angelis qui
preces sanctorum ad Deum of-
ferunt, atque ambulant ante
majestatem Sancti."
Ibid. 8 (juxta Graecum).
"Bonae sunt preces quae
cum jejunio et beneficentia jus-
titiaque conjunctae sunt."
II. Maccab. XV. 13-16.
"Post hoc apparuisse et al-
ium virum aetate et gloria mir-
abilem, et magni decoris habit-
udine circa ilium; responden-
tem vero Oniam dixisse: Hie est
fratrum amator, et populi Is-
rael: hie est qui multum orat
pro populo et universa sancta
civitate, Jeremiaspropheta Dei.
Extendisse autem Jeremiam
dexteram, et dedisse Judae gla-
dium aureum dicentem: accipe
sanctum gladium, munus a Deo
in quo dejicies adversarios
populi mei Israel. ' '
Judith XIII. 9-10.
"Cumque evaginasset ilium,
apprehendit comam capitis ejus,
et ait: Confirma me, Dom-
ine Deus, in hac hora; et per-
cussit bis in cervicem ejus, et
abscidit caput ejus, et abstulit
conopeum ejus a columnis, et
evolvit corpus ejus truncum."
Judith VIII. 22. (juxta
Graecum) .
"Mementote qua? cum Abra-
ham egerit, quibusque rebus
Isaac probarit, quae item Jacob
'Ego sum Raphael, unus ex sep-
tem Angelis qui offerunt ora-
tiones sanctorum, et ingredi-
untur in conspectu gloriae
Sancti.' Itaque juxta Ra-
phaelis sermonem: 'Bonum or-
atio cum jejunio et eleemosyna
et justitia.' Item quod Jere-
mias, ut in Machabaeorum lib-
ris habetur; 'apparuerit canitie
et gloria eximius, ita ut mira-
bilis quaedam et maximi de-
coris fuerit praestantia circa
ilium: extenderitque dexteram,
et dederit Judae gladium au-
reum, de quo testatus est alius
sanctus qui ante obierat: Hie
est qui multum orat pro populo
et sancta civitate, Jeremias,
propheta Dei.' "
Orig. De Oratione, 13.
"Judith. Sanctis oblatis pre-
cibus, Holophernem, Deo adju-
vante, superavit, et una He-
braeorum femina labem domui
Xabuchodonosoris inussit."
Orig. De Orat. 29.
"Recordamini enim." ait Ju-
dith, "quaecumque fecit cum
Abraham, et quaecumque tent-
304
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
in Mesopotamia Syria? pascenti
oves Laban avunculi ipsius ac-
ciderint. Etenim sicut illos ex-
periundi cordis ipsorum gratia,
ita nos probat, et non ulcisci-
tur; sed commonitionis causa
Dominus castigat eos qui ei ap-
propinquant."
Sap. XVI. 28.
" — ut notum omnibus esset
quoniam oportet praevenire so-
lem 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
complectens, voluntarie praei-
bat ad supplicium. Intuens
autem, quemadmodum oporte-
ret accedere, patienter sustin-
ens, destinavit non admittere
illicita propter vitas amorem.
Hi autem, qui astabant, iniqua
miseratione commoti, propter
antiquam viri amicitiam, tol-
lentes eum secreto rogabant
afferi carnes, quibus vesci ei
licebat, ut simularetur mandu-
casse, sicut rex imperaverat de
sacrificii carnibus: ut, hoc facto
a morte liberaretur: et propter
veterem viri amicitiam, hanc in
eo faciebant humanitatem. At
ille cogitare ccepit aetatis ac
avit Isaac, et quaecumque even-
erunt Jacob in Mesopotamia
Syriae pascenti pecora Laban
fratris matris suae, quoniam
sicut illos examinavit in certa-
men cordis eorum, etiam nos
ulciscitur, quia ad emenda-
tionem flagellat Dominus ap-
propinquantes sibi."
Ibid. 31.
" — et de parte mundi, in Sa-
pientia Solomonis, dicitur: 'Ut
notum esset, quoniam oportet
praevenire solem ad benedic-
tionem tuam, et ante ortum
lucis te adorare.' "
Ibid.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Exhortatio ad Martyr-
ium, 22.
"Quam autem aequius est
mortuum laudari quam qui
mortem sponte ac libere pro re-
ligione oppetiit? Qualis fuit
Eleazar, qui 'gloriosissimam
mortem magis quam odibil-
em vitam complectens, volun-
tarie praeibat ad supplicium,'
quique 'strenuam assumens
ratiocinationem dignam aetate
sua nonagenaria, et senectutis
suae eminentia, illustrique can-
itie, atque optima a pueritia
educatione, maxime vero sanc-
ta, et a Deo condita lege dixit:
non est aetate hac nostra dignum
fingere, ut multi adolescentes,
arbitrantes Eleazarum nona-
genta annorum transisse ad vi-
tam alienigenarum, et ipsi prop-
THE CANON OF THE CHl/RCH
305
senectutis suae eminentiam dig-
nam, et ingenitae nobilitatis
canitiem, atque a puero opti-
ma? conversationis actus: et se-
cundum sanctae et a Deo con-
ditae legis constituta, respondit
cito, dicens: Praemitti se velle
in infernum. Non enim aetati
nostras dignum est, inquit; fin-
gere; ut multi adolescentium,
arbitrantes Eleazarum nonag-
inta annorum transisse ad vi-
tam alienigenarum: et ipsi
propter meam simulationem, et
propter modicum corruptibilis
vitas tempus decipiantur, et per
hoc maculam atque execra-
tionem meae senectuti conqui-
ram. Nam, etsi in praesenti
tempore suppliciis hominum
eripiar, sed manum Omnipo-
tentis nee vivus, nee defunctus
effugiam. Quamobrem fortiter
vita excedendo senectute qui-
dem dignus apparebo; adoles-
centibus autem exemplum forte
relinquam, si prompto animo,
ac fortiter pro gravissimis ac
sanctissimis legibus honesta
morte perfungar. His dictis,
confestim ad supplicium trahe-
batur. Hi autem, qui eum du-
cebant, et paulo ante fuerant
mitiores, in iram conversi sunt
propter sermones ab eo dictos,
quos illi per arrogantiam pro-
latos arbitrabantur. Sed, cum
plagis perimeretur, ingemuit, et
dixit: Domine, qui habes sanc-
tam scientiam, manifeste tu
scis, quia, cum a morte possem
liberari, duros corporis sustineo
ter meam simulationem, et
propter modicum corruptibilis
vitae tempus decipiantur prop-
ter me, et execrationem atque
maculam senectuti acquiram;
nam etsi in praesenti tempore
suppliciis hominum eripiar, sed
manus Omnipotentis nee vivus
nee defunctus effugiam. Quam-
obrem fortiter excedendo se-
nectute quidem dignus appar-
ebo, adolescentibus autem ex-
emplum forte relinquam, ut
prompto animo ac fortiter pro
gravissimis ac sanctissimis legi-
bus honesta morte perfungan-
tur.'
Oro autem vos cum ad por-
tas mortis imo libertatis con-
stituti eritis, maxime si tor-
menta objicientur, dicere Dom-
ino, qui sanctam habet scien-
tiam: 'Manifestum est quia cum
a morte possem liberari, duros
corporis sustineo dolores, secun-
dum animam vero propter ti-
morem ejus libenter haec pa-
tior.'
Talis ergo fuit Eleazari mors,
'qui non solum juvenibus, sed
et plerisque suae gentis mortem
suam exemplum fortitudinis et
memoriale virtutis ieliquit.'
(20) H. S.
306
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
dolores: secundum animam
vero propter timorem tuum
libenter haec patior. Et iste
quidem hoc modo vita de-
cessit, non solum juvenibus, sed
et universal genti memoriam
mortis suae ad exemplum virtu-
tis et fortitudinis derelinquens.
The 23d, 24th, 25th, 26th, and 27th numbers of the Ex-
hortatio 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 bitterest tortures and heaviest torments,
pity and the love of 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.
Orig. Exhort, ad Martyr. 32.
" — idque postquam cognovi-
mus 'cinerem esse cor idolis
servientium, vitamque luto tur-
piorem.'
Sap. XV. 10.
"Cinis est enim cor ejus, et
terra supervacua spes illius,
et luto vilior vita ejus."
Sap. III. 6. Ibid- 35-
"Tamquam aurum in for- "Quodsi probatus est et ille,
nace probavit illos, et quasi et qui similes illi sunt; quos
holocaust! hostiamaccepitillos, 'tamquam aurum in fornace
et in tempore erit respectus tormentis et qusestiombus 'pro-
illorum " bavit Dominus, et quasi holo-
causti hostiam accepit.'
Sap. I. 4-
" Quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore sub-
dito peccatis. "
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. Ill-
60.
"Quoniam vero docemus 'sa-
pientiam in malevolam ani-
mam non introituram, nee hab-
itaturam in corpore subdito
peccatis.'
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
307
Sap. VII. 25 — 26.
"Vapor est enini virtutis
Dei, et emanatio quaedam est
claritatis omnipotentis Dei sin-
cera: et ideo nihil inquinatum
in earn incurrit; candor est
enim lucis aeternae, et specu-
lum sina macula Dei majestatis
et imago bonitatis illius. "
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum: et
hoc, quod continet omnia,
scientiam habet vocis. "
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. III.
72.
" — aut quomodo ilium di-
vina Scriptura definit: 'vapor
divinae potestatis, limpida om-
nipotentis ejus gloriae effluen-
tia, splendor lucis aeternae,
speculum sine macula Dei ma-
jestatis, et imago bonitatis il-
lius.' "
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. IV.
5-
" — nescit: 'Spiritum Do-
mini replere orbem terrarum, et
hoc quod continet omnia scien-
tiam habere vocis.'
Sap. XI. 2;
Ibid. 18.
"Leeimus
"Diligis enim omnia quae "Legimus ac novimus:
sunt, et nihil odisti eorum 'Deum diligere omnia quae
quae fecisti: nee enim odiens sunt, et nihil odisse eorum quae
aliquid constituisti, aut fe- fecit; nihil enim constiturum
cisti." fuisse quod odisset.'
Eccli. XVIII. 12.
" — misericordia autem Dei
super omnem carnem. "
Ibid.
" — et misericordiam Domini
esse super omnem carnem."
Sap. XII. 1. Ibid. 37.
"0 quam bonus, et suavis " — -de quo dictum est: 'In-
est, Domine, spiritus tuus in corruptibilis autem tuus Spir-
omnibus. " itus est in omnibus.'
Eccli. XXXIX. 26.
"Non est dicere: Quid est
hoc, aut quid est istud? omnia
enim in tempore suo quaeren-
tur. "
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."
308
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Tob. XII. 7.
"Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est: opera
autem Dei revelare et confiteri
honorificum est."
Sap. X. 5.
"Haec et in consensu ne-
quitiae justum, et conservavit
sine querela Deo, et in filii
misericordia forteni custo-
divit. "
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib. V.
19.
" 'Quemadmodum, et apud
Tobiam legitur: 'Sacramentum
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 mis-
ericordia fortem custodivit.'
Tob. XII. 7.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapien-
tia, nee habitabit in corpore
subdito peccatis. "
Eccli. XXI. 21.
"Tamquam domus extermi-
nata, sic fatuo sapientia: et
scientia insensati inenarrabilia
verba. "
Sap. IX. 6.
"Nam et si quis erit consum-
mates inter filios hominum, si
ab illo abfuerit sapientia tua,
in nihilum computabitur. "
Ibid.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid.
" — de qua pulchre scriptum
est: 'In malevolam animam
non introibit sapientia, nee hab-
itabit in corpore subdito pec-
catis.' "
Orig.
Contra Celsum, Lib.
VI. 7.
"Modo Jesu Sirach films, qui
librum, Sapientiam (Sirach)
inscriptum, conscripsit: 'Scien-
tia stulti, sermones inextrica-
blies.' "
Ibid. 13.
"Nam et si quis erit consum-
mates inter filios hominum, si
ab illo abfuerit sapientia, quae
a te est, in nihilum computa-
bitur."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 63.
(Already quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
309
Sap. XVII. i.
"Magna sunt enim judicia
tua Domine, et inenarrabilia
verba tua: propter hoc indis-
ciplinatae animae erraverunt. "
Sap. I. 5.
"Spiritus enim sanctus dis-
ciplinae eflfugiet fictum, et au-
feret se a cogitationibus, quae
sunt sine intellectu, et corri-
pietur a superveniente iniqui-
tate. "
Eccli. XXI. 21.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. XII. 1 — 2.
"O quam bonus, et suavis
est, Domine, spiritus tuus in
omnibus! Ideoque eos, qui
exerrant, partibus corripis: et
de quibus peccant, admones et
alloqueris: ut relicta malitia,
credant in te, Domine."
Sap. VII. 25 — 26.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. XVII. 1.
I. Maccab. IX. 55; II. Mac-
cab. III. 24; IX. 5.
Eccli. X. 23.
"Semen hominum honora-
bitur hoc, quod timet Deum:
semen autem hoc exhonorabi-
tur. quod praeterit mandata
Domini. "
[bid. 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 au-
feret se a cogitationibus quae
sunt sine intellectu."
[bid. 12.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 51.
"Incorruptibilis spiritus tuus
est in omnibus, quapropter de-
linquentes paulatim arguit
Deus."
Orig. Contra Celsum, Lib.
VIII. 14.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 32.
Ibid. 46.
" — et alii qui, Judacorum
cultum violare in templo ausi
fuerint, referunt Machabaeorum
libri."
Ibid. 50.
"Hoc docet divina Scrip tura:
'Ecquod semen in honore? se-
men hominis; ecquod semen in
contemptu? semen hominis.'"
310
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. X. 4.
"In manu Dei potestas ter-
rae: et utilem rectorem sus-
citabit 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
sponsam mihi earn assumere,
et amator factus sum formae
illius."
Sap. VIII. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXII. 24.
"Pungens oculum deducit
lacrymas: et qui pungit cor,
profert sensum. "
Sap. II. 20.
"Morte turpissima condem-
nemus eum: erit enim ei res-
pectus ex sermonibus illius."
Baruch III. 9.
"Audi, Israel, mandata vitae
auribus percipe, ut scias pru-
dentiam. "
Eccli. VII. 40.
"In omnibus operibus tuis
memorare novissima tua, et
in aeternum non peccabis. "
Ibid. 68.
" — quique utilem rectorem
suscitat in tempus super ter-
rain."
Orig. Selecta in Genesim.
"Deus enim mortem non
fecit, nee delectatur in perdi-
tione vivorum."
Orig. Homilia VI. in Gene-
sim.
" — sicut et ille sapiens qui
dicebat de sapientia: 'Hanc
quaesivi adducere mihi spon-
sam.' "
Homilia XI. in Genesim, 1.
"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, 1.
"De quo etiam Propheta
praedixerat: 'Morte turpissima
condemnemus eum.'
Horn. VII. in Exod. 2.
"Sicut et alibi (Scriptura)
dicit; 'Audi, Israel, mandata
vitae.'
Horn. IX. in Exod. 4.
"Memor esto novissimorum
tuorum, et non peccabis."
THE CANON OF THE CHUR( II
311
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
replevit orbem terrarum: et
hoc, quod continet omnia,
scientiam habet vocis. "
Sap. VIII. 20.
"Et cum essem magis bonus
veni ad corpus incoinquina-
tum."
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 cogitationes hominum, et
virtutes radicum."
Horn. I. in Leviticum, 1.
"But it behooves us to use
against the impious presbyters
the words of the blessed Suscui-
na, which they indi iidiat-
ing, have cut off from the cata-
logue of divine Scripture the his-
tory of Susanna. But we re-
ceive 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.'
Horn. V. in Leviticum, 2.
"Et iterum alibi: 'Spiritus
enim Domini replevit orbem
terrarum.' "
Horn. XII. in Levit. 4.
"Ipse (Jesus) enim erat qui
et dudum per Salomonem dixe-
rat: 'Magis autem cum essem
bonus, veni ad corpus incoin-
quinatum."
Orig. Horn. VIII. in Xume-
ros, 1.
"Non legisti? 'Dicunt quia
vulnerant gladii sed non ita ut
lingua?' "
Horn. XII. in Numeros, 1.
" — de quorum scientia dice-
bat ille qui repletus est sapien-
tia Dei: 'Ipse enim mihi dedit
eorum quae sunt scientiam ve-
ram, ut scirem substantiam
312
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. VII. IO.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 22 — 23.
" — est enim in ilia spiritus
intelligentiae, sanctus, unicus,
multiplex, subtilis, disertus,
mobilis, incoinquinatus, certus,
suavis, amans bonum, acutus,
quem nihil vetat, benefaciens,
humanus, benignus, stabilis,
certus, securus, omnem habens
virtutem, omnia prospiciens,
et qui capiat omnes spiritus,
intelligibilis, mundus, subtilis. "
Eccli. I. 1.
"Omnis sapientia a Domino
Deo est, et cum illo fuit sem-
per, et est ante aevum. "
mundi et elementorum virtu-
tem, initium et finem et medie-
tatem temporum, vicissitudi-
nem, permutationes et commu-
tationes temporum, anni circu-
los, et astrorum positiones, na-
turas animalium, et iras bestia-
rum, spirituum violentias et
cogitationes hominum, difler-
entias virgultorum, et virtutes
radicum.' "
Ibid.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Horn, in Numeros,
XVII. 6.
" — quia et spiritus sapien-
tiae, qui intelligibilis et sanctus
et unicus et multiplex dicitur,
similiter et subtilis esse perhi-
betur."
Horn. XVIII. in Numeros, 3.
"In libro, qui apud nos qui-
dem inter Salomonis volumina
haberi solet, et Ecclesiasticus
dici, apud Graecos vero Sapien-
tia Jesu filii Sirach appellatur,
scriptum est: 'Omnis sapientia
a Deo est.' "
Eccli. XIX. 19
"Et non est sapientia ne-
quitiae disciplina: et non est
cogitatus peccatorum pruden-
tia."
Ibid.
"Non est enim
malitiae disciplina."
sapientia
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
313
Sap. III. 16.
"Filii autem adulterorum in
inconsummatione erunt, et ab
iniquo thoro semen extermina-
bitur."
Eccli. XVI. 5.
"Ab uno sensato inhabitabi-
tur patria, tribus impiorum
deseretur. "
Sap. IX. 15.
"Corpus enim, quod corrum-
pitur, aggravat animam, et ter-
rena inhabitatio deprimit sen-
sum 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 consistcns —
Horn, in Numeros XX. 2.
" — de quibus scriptum est:
'Filii autem adulterorum imper-
fecti erunt, et ex iniquo concu-
bitu semen exterminabitur. '
Horn. XXI. in Num. 2.
"Denique et scriptum est:
Per unum sapientem inhabita-
bitur ci vitas; tribus autem ini-
quorum desolabitur.' '
Horn. XXIII. in Num. 11.
" 'Corpus enim corruptible,'
ut ait ille sapientissimus, 'ag-
gravat animam, et deprimit
sensum multa cogitantem.'
Horn. XXVIII, in Num. 1.
"Sed et ego qui lego de sapi-
entia scriptum: 'Exi post earn
sicut investigator — .'
Eccli. II. 1.
"Fili, accedens ad servitu-
tem Dei, sta in justitia, et
timore, et praepara animam
tuam ad tentationem. "
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha-
naan, et non Juda, species
decepit te, et concupiscentia
subvertit cor tuum — . "
Eccli. III. 20.
"Ouanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo
invenies gratiam — . "
Orig. Horn. XI. in Joshua, 2.
"Sed et Salomon similia di-
cit: 'Fili,' inquit, 'accedens ad
servitutem Domini, prsepara
animam tuam ad tenta-
tionem.' "
Horn. XXII. in Joshua, 6.
" — Cui dicitur a Prophi
'Semen Chanaan et non Jud
species seduxit te.'
1 [om. XXIV. in Joshua, a
" — quod dicitur: 'Quanto
mis es tanto magis humilia
te, et ante Dominum invenies
314
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Ibid. XXXII. I.
Rectorem te posuerunt ?
noli extolli: esto in illis quasi
unus ex ipsis. "
Eccli. X. 15.
' — quoniam ab eo, qui
fecit ilium, recessit cor ejus;
quoniam initium omnis peccati
est superbia — . "
Eccli. XXV. 3, 4.
"Tres species odivit anima
mea, et aggravor valde animae
illorum: pauperem superbum:
divitem mendacem: senem
fatuum et insensatum. "
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 qua? praecepit tibi
D'eus, ilia cogita semper, et
in pluribus operibus ejus ne
fueris curiosus. "
gratiam,' et iterum quod script-
um est: 'Si te ducem ordina-
verint, ne extollaris, sed esto
inter eos quasi unus ex ipsis.' "
Orig. Horn. III. in Judic. 1.
" — quia sicut Scriptura dicit:
'Initium discedendi a Domino,
superbia — .' "
Ibid.
"Nihil invenies tarn foedum
neque execrabile, sicut Scrip-
tura dicit, quam 'pauperem su-
perbum et divitem menda-
cem.' "
Horn. IX. in Judic. 1.
"Quid ego illam magnificam
et omnium feminarum nobilis-
simam memorem, Judith, quae
jam perditis pene rebus, non
dubitavit sola succurrere, sese-
que suumque caput immanis-
simi Holophernis neci sola sub-
jicere, et processit ad bellum
non in armis, neque in equis
bellicis aut in subsidiis militari-
bus freta, sed in virtute animi ;
et confidentia fidei, consilio si-
mul et audacia hostem peri-
mit."
Orig. Horn. I. in Reg. 4.
" — quia et secundum Scrip-
turas: 'insipiens sicut luna mu-
tatur.' "
Horn. II. in Reg. 4.
"Nam et Salomon dicit: 'Al-
tiora te ne quaesieris, et for-
tiora te ne scrutere, sed de qui-
bus tibi praeceptum est, haec
intellige.' "
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
315
Eccli. I. n.
'Timor Domini gloria, et
gloriatio, et laetitia, et corona
exultationis. "
Sap. V. 18 — 21.
"Accipiet armaturam zelus
illius, et armabit creaturam
ad ultionem inimicorum. In-
duet pro thorace justitiam, et
accipiet pro galea judicium cer-
tum ; sumet scutum inexpugn-
able aequitatem, acuet au-
tem duram iram in lanceam,
et pugnabit cum illo orbis ter-
rarum contra insensatos. "
Dan. XIII. 25 et seqq.
"Cumque duceretur ad mor-
tem, suscitavit Dominus spiri-
tum sanctum pueri junioris,
cujus nomen Daniel."
Orig. Selecta in Ps. XXI. 32.
"Generatio autem Sapientiae
est secundum Salomoncm: 'ti-
mor Domini, divitiae, gloria ac
vita.' "
Selecta in Ps. XXXIV. 2.
"Accipiet armaturam zelum
illius, et armabit creaturam ad
ultionem inimicorum. Induet
pro thorace justitiam, et acci-
piet pro galea judicium certum,
sumet scutum inexpugnabile
a?quitatem, acuet autem du-
ram iram in lanceam."
Horn. IV. in Ps. XXXVI. 2.
"Respice beatum Danielem,
qui a puero et prophetias gra-
tiam meruit, et iniquos arguens
presbyteros, puer coronam jus-
titiam et castitatis obtinuit."
Sap. V. 4.
"Nos insensati vitam illo-
rum aestimabamus insaniam,
et finem illorum sine honore. "
Esther XIV. 11.
"Ne tradas, Domine, scep-
trum tuum his, qui non sunt,
ne rideant ad ruinam nostram:
sed converte consilium eorum
super eos, et eum, qui in nos
coepit saevire, disperde. "
Eccli. VIII. 6.
' ' Ne despicias hominem aver-
tentem se a peccato, neque
Horn. 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, scep-
trum tuum his qui non
sunt.' "
Horn. II. in Ps. XXXVII. 1.
" — nee memores Scripturae
sunt divinas dicentis: 'Noli im-
31G
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
improperes ei; memento quo-
niam 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 timm et argentum
tuum confla, et verbis tuis
facito stateram, et frenos ori
tuo rectos — .
Eccli. XXIII. 2.
"Quis superponet in cogi-
tatu meo flagella, et in corde
meo doctrinam sapientiae, ut
ignorationibus eorum non par-
cant mini, et non appareant
delicta eorum?"
Eccli. XXI. 29.
"In ore fatuorum cor illo-
rum: et in corde sapientium
os illorum. "
Eccli. XV. 9.
"Non est speciosa laus in
ore peccatoris —
Sap. I. 4.
' ' — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapien-
tia, nee habitabit in corpore
subdito peccatis. "
properare homini convertenti
se a peccato, sed memor esto
quoniam omnes sumus in cul-
pis.' "
Horn. 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.'
Horn. II. in Ps. XXXV. III. 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 eo-
rum est."
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
peccatis.'
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
317
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. 9.
(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 quassivi
sponsam mihi earn assumere,
et ' amator factus sum forma?
illius."
Eccli. I. 33.
"Fili, concupiscens sapien-
tiam, conserva justitiam? et
Dcus praebebit illam tibi."
Sap. XI. 27. 27 — XII. 1.
"Parcis autem omnibus:
quoniam tua sunt, Domine, qui
amas animas. 0 quam bonus,
iectain Ps. CXVIII. Vers.
r55-
(Already quoted).
Selecta in Ps. CXX. Vers. 6.
" — Stultus ut luna mutatur."
Selecta in Ps. CXXV. Vers.
2.
"Post haec enim in terra vi-
sus est, et cum hominibus con-
versatus est."
Selecta in CXLIX. Vers. 1.
(Already quoted.)
Orig. Fragmenta in Prow I.
2.
(Already many times quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. XXX.
" — siquidem 'in brevi con-
summatus, explevit tempora
multa.' "
Orig. Prologus in Canticum
Cantic.
"Sed et in eo libello qui dici-
tur Sapientia Salomonis ita
scriptum est de ipsa sapientia:
'Amator factus sum decoris
ejus.' "
Ibid.
" — et intelligere illud quod
scriptum est: 'Concupisti sa-
pientiam? serva mandata, et
Dominus dabit earn tibi.'
Orig. in Cant. Cantic. Lib.
III. Vers. 4.
" — quam vis verum sit ut di-
citur ad eum: 'Parcis autem
omnibus, quia omnia tua sunt
318
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
et suavis 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 rectos — ."
Eccli. IV. 33.
"Pro justitia agonizare pro
anima tua, et usque ad mortem
certa pro justitia, et Deus ex-
pugnabit pro te iminicos tuos. "
Sap. VII. 22.
" — est enim in ilia spiritus
intelligentiae, sanctus, unicus,
multiplex, subtilis, disertus,
mobilis — . "
Sap. I. 13, 14, et II. 24.
' ' Quoniam Deus mortem non
fecit, nee laetatur in perditione
vivorum. Creavit enim, ut
essent omnia: et sanabiles
fecit nationes orbis terrarum:
et non est in illis medicamen-
tum exterminii, nee inferorum
regnum in terra. Invidia au-
tem diaboli mors introivit in
orbem terrarum — . ' '
Eccli. XXI. 18.
"Verbum sapiens quodcum-
que audierit scius laudabit,
et'ad se adjiciet — . "
Eccli. XXVIII. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Domine, amator animarum.
Spiritus 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."
Horn. VI. in Isaiam, 5.
"Dicitur enim de S. Spiritu,
qui est secundum sapientiam,
quia sit multifarius, tenuis, mo-
bilis."
Horn. II. in Jeremiam I.
" 'Deus mortem non fecit,
neque delectatur in perditione
viventium. Creavit enim ut es-
sent omnia, et salutares gene-
rationes mundi, nee est in eis
venenum mortis, neque inferni
regnum super terram.' Deinde
paululum ultra procedens in-
venio unde sit mors: 'Invidia
autem diaboli, mors intra vit
in orbem terrarum.' '
Horn. VI. in Jerem. 1.
"Quoniam vero: 'Verbum
sapiens si audierit scius, lauda-
bit, et ad illud adjiciet.'
Ibid. 2.
(Already quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
319
Baruch III. 9 — 13.
"Audi, Israel, mandata
vitae: aurilms percipe, ut scias
prudentiam. Quid est, Israel,
quod in terra in micorum es?
inveterasti in terra aliena, coin-
quinatus es cum mortuis; de-
putatus es cum descendentibus
in infernum. Dereliquisti fon-
tem sapientiae; nam si in via
Dei ambulasses, habitasses
utique in pace sempiterna. "
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 ;
dereliquisti fontem vitae, Dom-
inum: in via Dei si ambulasses,
habitasses utique in pace in
saeculum.' "
Sap. III. 11.
"Sapientiam enim, et dis-
ciplinam 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
aeterna: qui potuit transgredi,
et non est transgressus: facere
mala, et non fecit —
Horn. VIII. in Jerem. 1.
" '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
Salomonis."
Selecta in Jerem. Cap. II. 32.
"Gloria enim aeterna super
caput justorum."
Baruch III. 10, 11.
"Quid est, Israel, quod in
Ibid. Cap. XXXI. 16.
"Scriptum est in Baruch:
terra inimicorum es invetera- 'Quid est <luod in terra inimi"
sti in terra aliena, coinquinatus corum es, et^ coinquinatus es
es cum mortuis: deputatus es cum mortuis.
cum descendentibus in infer-
num. "
Sap. III. 1. Ibid. Cap. XLV. 5.
"Justorum autem animae in "—Nam 'justorum animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget manu Dei sunt.'
illos tormentum mortis. "
320
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. I. 2.
"Arenam maris, et pluviae
guttas, et dies saeculi quis
dinumeravit ? Altitudinem
coeli, et latitudinem terras,
et profundum abyssi quis di-
mensus est? "
Eccli. VII. 6.
"Noli quasrere fieri judex,
nisi valeas virtu te irrumpere ini-
quitates: ne forte extimescas
faciem potentis, et ponas scan-
daluni in aequitate tua."
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. X. 9, 10.
"Avaro autem nihil est sce-
lestius. Quid superbit terra et
cinis Nihil est iniquius quam
amare pecuniam; hie enim et
animam suam venalem habet:
quoniam in vita sua projecit
intima sua."
Eccli. III. 20.
"Quanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo in-
venies gratiam. — "
Sap. VI. 7.
"Exiguo enim conceditur
misericordia: potentes autem
potenter tormenta patientur."
Orig. Horn. IV. in Ezechiel, 2.
"Arenam maris et pluvise
stillas et dies saeculi, quis dinu-
merabit? Altitudinem cceli et
latitudinem terras et profun-
dum Sapientiae, quis investi-
gabit?"
Horn. V. in Ezech. 4.
" — et ante oculos mihi pro-
ponens ilium judicii ordinem
qui in Scripturis continetur,
recordor dicti illius: 'Pondus
ultra te ne leves.' Sed et illud:
'Noli quaerere fieri judex, ne
non valeas auferre iniqui-
tates.' "
Horn. VI. in Ezech. 3.
"Saspe miratus sum id quod
dictum est a Daniel ad presby-
terum peccatorem, cui pro pec-
cato nomen imponens: 'Se-
men,' inquit 'Chanaan et non
Juda.' "
Horn. 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.' "
Horn. X. in Ezech. 2.
"Justum est quippe judicium
Dei, et 'potentes potenter tor-
menta patiuntur.' "
THE CAXON OF THE CHURCH
32]
Eccli. XVIII. 30.
"Post concupiscentias tuas
non eas, et a voluntate tua
avertere."
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
"Homo sanctus in sapientia
manet sicut sol: nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur."
Esther XIV. 2.
"Cumque deposuisset vestes
regias, fletibus et luctui apta
indumenta suscepit — ."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Already quoted).
Eccli. XXVII. 28.
"Qui in altummittitlapidem,
super caput ejus cadet: et plaga
dolosa dolosi dividet vulnera."
Sap. II. 21, 22.
"Haec cogitaverunt, et erra-
verunt: excsecavit enim illos
malitia eorum. Et nescierunt
sacramenta Dei — ."
Sap. VIII. 1.
"Attingit ergo a fine usque
ad finem fortiter, et disponit
omnia suaviter."
Eccli. IV. 33.
"Pro justitia agonizare pro
anima tua, et usque ad mortem
certa pro justitia, et Deus ex-
pugnabit pro te inimicos tuos."
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
aequabilitate et constantia ait:
'Narratio pii semper est sapien-
tia .. . stultus autem sicut luna
mutatur.' "
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 mit-
tit.' "
Ibid.
" — quoniam 'excaeeavit illos
malitia eorum, et nescierunt sa-
cramenta Dei.' "
Ibid.
" — cum, 'attingit a fine ter-
rae usque ad finem fortiter, et
disponit' ecclesias 'suaviter.' '
Ibid. Tom. XVII. 25.
" — illudque dogma obser-
vantes: 'Usque ad mortem
certa pro veritate, et Deus
pugnabit pro te.' '
(21) H. S.
322
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. VIII. 2.
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi
sponsam mihi earn assumere, et
amator factus sum formas
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."
Eccli. IX. 4.
"Cum saltatrice ne assiduus
sis: nee audias illam, ne forte
pereas in efficacia illius."
Eccli. XXI 2.
(Already quoted.)
Dan. XIII. 55.
"Dixit autem Daniel; Recte
mentitus es in caput tuum:
Ecce enim Angelus Dei, accepta
sententia ab eo, scindet te me-
dium."
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.)
Ibid. 32.
"Mulier quidem dicta est
Sapientia propter illud: 'Quae-
sivi sponsam mihi earn assu-
mere.' "
Orig. in Math, Comment. Se-
ries, 12.
" — cum deberent recordari
Sapientiae verbum dicentis:
'Quantum magnus es, tantum
humilia te, et coram Deo inve-
nies gratiam.' " (Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 42.
" — et quod ait Sapientia:
'Quasi a facie serpentis, fuge
peccatum.' "
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
medium."
Ibid. 69.
" — quod ait Salomon: 'Et si
fuerit quis perfectus inter filios
hominum, si abfuerit ab illo
Sapientia tua in nihilum repu-
tabitur.'
Orig. Horn. XXI. in Lucam.
(Already quoted.)
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
:-;•_':*
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 glad-
ium in defensionem alienigena-
rum— ."
Baruch III. 38.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XVIII. 6.
"Cum consummaverit homo,
tunc incipiet: et cum quieverit,
aporiabitur."
Sap. XVII. 1.
"Magna sunt enim judicia
tua, Domine, et inenarrabilia
verba tua: propter hoc indisci-
plinatae animae erraverunt."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Oft quoted.)
I. Maccab. I. 22, 23.
" — et ascendit Jerosolymam
in multitudine gravi. Et intra-
vit in sanctificationem cum su-
perbia, et accepit altare aureum
et candelabrum luminis,
et universa vasa ejus, et men-
sam propositionis, et libatoria,
et phialas, et mortariola aurea,
Orig. Comment, in Joannem,
Tom. I. 18.
"Secus vero apud nos est, qui
credimus ex non entibus Deum
entia fecisse, ut mater ilia sep-
tem Martyrum in Machabaeo-
rum gestis, et pcenitentiae an-
gelus 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.)
Ibid. 19.
" 'Quoniam cum absolvent
homo, tunc incipit; et quum
quieverit, tunc incertus erit.'
juxta Jesu filii Sirach Sapien-
tiam."
Ibid. 36.
'Magna enim judicia Dei,'
eaque aegre nee facile narran-
tur, atque 'ob hanc causam
rudes animae erraverunt.' "
Ibid. 37.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid, Tom. X. 22.
"Apparet etiam apud Mac-
chabaica, multam inconstan-
tiam et confusionem fuis
circa templum et circa popu-
lum— ."
324
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
et velum, et coronas, et orna-
mentum aureum, quod in facie
templi erat: et comminuit om-
ma.
Eccli. III. 22.
"Altiora te ne quaesieris, et
fortiora te ne scrutatus fue-
ns. —
Sap. 25, 26.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXI. 18.
"Verbum sapiens quodcum-
que audierit scius laudabit, et
ad se adjiciet — ."
II. Maccab. XV. 14.
"Respondentem vero Oniam
dixisse: Hie est fratrum ama-
tor, et populi Israel: hie est,
qui multum orat pro populo, et
universa sancta civitate Jere-
mias, propheta Dei."
Dan. XIII. 42.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam riant — ."
Sap. VII. 9.
" — nee comparavi illi lapi-
dam pretiosum ; quoniam omne
aurum in comparatione illius,
arena est exigua, et tamquam
lutum aestimabitur argentum
in conspectu illius."
Sap. X. 3,4.
"Ab hac ut recessit injustus
in ira sua. per iram homicidii
fraterni deperiit. Propter quern
Ibid. Tom. XIII. 5.
"Te difficiliora ne quaeras, et
te fortiora ne vestiga."
Ibid. 27.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 46.
" — quoniam autem 'si ser-
monem sapientem audierit sa-
piens, laudabit eum, et ad ipsum
addet— .' "
Ibid. 57.
" — quemadmodum in Mach-
abaeorum gestis scriptum est,
post plurimos annos ab obitu
Jeremiae: 'Hie est Jeremias,
Dei Propheta, qui multum orat
pro populo.' "
Ibid. 58.
"Quomodo etiam servat il-
lud: 'Qui videt omnia ante or-
tum ipsorum.' "
Ibid. Tom. XIX. 2.
"Sapientia siquidem erat
qui vis ejus sermo, de qua dici-
tur: 'Omne aurum coram sa-
pientia est pauca arena ; et ceu
ccenum reputabitur argentum
coram ea.' "
Ibid. Tom. XX. 4.
"Sapientiae liber, Salomoni
inscriptus, his verbis docet:
'Recedens autem ab ipsa, in-
THE CAXON OF THE CHURCH
325
cum aqua deleret terram, sana-
vit iterum sapientia, per con-
temptibile lignum justum gu-
bernans."
Sap. X. 7.
" — quibus in testimonium
nequitiae fumigabunda constat
deserta terra, et incerto tem-
pore fructus habentes arbores,
et incredibilis animae memoria
stans figmentum salis."
Dan. XIII. 56.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. XII. 11.
"Semen enim erat maledic-
tum ab initio: nee timens ali-
quem, veniam dabas peccatis
illorum."
Sap. II. 24.
"Invidia autem diaboli, mors
introivit in orbem terrarum."
Sap. VIII. 2.
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi
sponsam mihi earn assumere,
et amator factus sum formae
illius."
Eccli. V. 8.
"Non tardes converti 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 coelum,
neque recordarentur judicio-
rum justorum.
Justus in ira sua periit cum ani-
mis fratricidis, per quern in-
undatam terram rursus serva-
vit Sapientia, vili ligno justum
gubernans.' . . . ' — quorum eti-
amnum malitias testimonio fu-
mosum restat solum, et plantae
intempestivum fructum fer-
entes.' "
Ibid. 5.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
" — dicente Sapientia: 'Se-
men execratione devotum ab
initio.'
Ibid. 21.
"Sic 'Invidia mors introivit
in mundum.' "
Ibid. 33.
" — qui dicit: 'Amator factus
sum pulchritudinis illius.'
Ibid. Tom. XXVIII. 3.
"Quocirca memores simus
necesse est illius dicti ; 'Ne per-
cuncteris reverti ad Dominum
neque differas de die in diem.'
Ibid.
" 'Et averterunt mentem
suam, et declinarunt oculos
suos, ne in ccelum suspicerent.
neque memores essent judicio-
rum justorum.' Adducemus
326
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Quae flens suspexit ad cae-
lum: erat enim cor ejus fidu-
ciam habens in Domino."
etiam in medium quae de Su-
sanna scribuntur hoc modo
dicta: 'At ilia flens suspexit in
ccelum, quoniam cor ejus fide-
bat Domino.' "
Sap. I. 5.
"Spiritus enim sanctus dis-
ciplinae effugiet fictum, et au-
feret se a cogitationibus, quae
sunt sine intellectu, et corri-
pietur a superveniente iniqui-
tate."
Ibid. 13.
"Spiritus sanctus disciplinae
effugiet dolosum, et recedet a
pravis consiliis."
Sap. II. 24.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXXI. 17.
"Ne comprimaris in convi-
vi o.
Ibid. Tom. XXXII. 3.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 14.
"Scriptum est enim et hoc
quoque: 'Ne comprimaris cum
eo in catino.' "
Dan. XIII. 42.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. VII. 25, 26.
(Oft quoted.)
Orig. Comment, in Epist. ad
Rom. Lib. I. 3.
(Already quoted).
Ibid. 5.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XV. 17, 18. Ibid. 18.
"Apposuit tibi aquam et ig- " — sicut scriptum est: 'Ecce
nem: ad quod volueris, porrige posui ante faciem tuam vitam
manum tuam. Ante hominem et mortem, ignem et aquam.' "
vita et mors, bonum et ma-
lum: quod placuerit ei, dabitur
illi— ."
. Sap. XI. 21. Ibid. Lib. II. 3.
" — sed omnia in mensura, et "Sed sicut omnia in men-
numero, et pondere, disposu- sura facit Deus, et pondere et
isti." numero — ."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
327
Tob. XII. 7.
"Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est: opera
autem Dei revelare et confiteri
honorificum est."
Ibid. 4.
" 'Mysterium' vero 'regis ab-
scondere bonum est.'
Baruch IV. 4. Ibid. 7.
"Beati sumus, Israel: quia " — et ipsi dicunt: 'Beati su-
quae Deo placent, manifesta mus, Israel, quia quae placent
sunt nobis."
Eccli. XXVIII. 28.
"Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guani nequam noli audire, et
ori tuo facito ostia, et seras."
Eccli. XI. 30.
"Ante mortem ne laudes
hominem quemquam, quoniam
in filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Sap. IX. 15.
"Corpus enim, quod corrum-
pitur, aggravat animam, et ter-
rena inhabitatio deprimit sen-
sum multa cogitantem."
Sap. I. 1.
"Diligite justitiam, qui judi-
catis terram."
Tob. IV. 16.
"Quod ab alio oderis fieri
tibi, vide ne tu aliquando alteri
facias."
Deo nobis nota sunt.' "
Ibid. 13.
" — et dicet circumcidi aurcs,
cum secundum Salomonis mon-
ita non recipiunt vanam audi-
tionem, et cum oppilantur, ne
audiant judicium sanguinis, et
cum sepinntur spinis ne rc-
cipiant obtrectationem . ' '
Ibid. Lib. III. 2.
" — sicut et Scriptura die it:
'Ne beatificaveris hominem
ante mortem, quia nescis quae
erunt ejus novissima.' "
Ibid.
" — nunc vero, ut ait Scrip-
tura, 'Corruptible corpus ag-
gravat animam, et demergit
terrena habitatio sensum multa
cogitantem.' "
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."
328
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. XV. 9.
"Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris — ."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Oft quoted )
II. Maccab. VII. 1, et seqq.
"Contigit autem et septem
fratres una cum matre sua ap-
prehensos compelli a rege edere
contra fas carnes porcinas, fla-
gris, et taureis cruciatos."
Baruch III. 36-38.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. X. 1.
"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-
mate 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: lau-
date et superexaltate eum in
saecula."
Eccli. I. 16.
"Initium sapiential, timor
Domini — ."
Ibid.
"Et iterum alia Scriptura
die-it: 'Non est speciosa laus Dei
in ore peccatoris.' '
Ibid. Lib. IV. 8.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 10.
"Legant Machabaeorum lib-
ros, ubi cum omni instantia
mater cum septem filiis martyr-
ium suscipit, quique non solum
martyrium patienter excipiunt,
verum et contumelias ingerunt
in tyrannum — ."
Ibid.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. V. 2.
" — sicut de Sapientia dici-
tur: 'Haec,' inquit, 'ilium qui
primus factus est patrem
mundi, cum solus esset creatus,
custodivit, et libera vit eum de
peccato suo.' "
Ibid. 3.
" — quia et si perfectus sit
quis in filiis hominum, si non
adsit ei justitia a Deo, in nihi-
lum reputabitur."
Ibid. Lib. VI. 3.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. VII. 1.
" Et Daniel nihilominus testa-
tur et dicit: 'Benedicite, spir-
itus et animae justorum, Dom-
inum."
Ibid.
" — quia 'initium sapientiae
timor Domini.' "
THE CAN' OX OF THE CHURCH
:;_".)
Sap. IX. 15.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 4.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. VII. 40. Ibid. 10.
"In omnibus operibus tuis ".Mementote novissimorum
memorare novissima tua, et in tuorum, et in aeternum non
aeternum non peccabis." peccabis."
Sap. VII. 25.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. I. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 13.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXVII. 6. Ibid. 17.
"Vas figuli probat fornax ; et "Et Sapientia dicit : 'vasa
homines justos, tentatio tribu- figuli probat fornax; et hom-
ines justos, tentatio.' "
lationis."
Sap. VII. 26.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. VIII. 4.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. I. 2. Ibid. 5.
" — quoniam invenitur ab his "Sed audi quid etiam in Sa-
qui non tentant ilium; apparet pientia Salomonis dicatur quia:
autem eis, qui fidem habent in 'non invenietur ab his qui ten-
ilium — ." tant earn: apparebit vero his
qui non sunt increduli ad
eum.
Tob. XII. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. IX. 6.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. VIII. 6.
"Ne despicias hominem
avertentem se a peccato, neque
improperes ei; memento quon-
iam omnes in correptione su-
mus."
11.
Ibid.
" 'Mysterium enim regis,' ait
Scriptura, 'celare bonum est.'
Ibid. Lib. IX. 3.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. X. 31.
" — didicerat enim a Scrip-
tura non improperare homini
convertenti sc a peccato."
330 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
From these numerous quotations, taken from the frag-
ments which remain of Origen's vast writings, we may infer
what was his use of the deuterocanonical books. His au-
thority 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 Scripture he makes no discrimination between the
books of the first and second canons, and unreservedly as-
serts that the deuterocanonical works are divine Scripture.
Hence we claim the authority of Origen in support of the
Catholic Canon of Scripture.
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. "Archelaus dixit: Nequa-
" — quoniam Deus mortem quam: absit! 'Deus enim mor-
non fecit, nee laetatur in perdi- tern non fecit, nee laetatur in
tione vivorum." perdi tione vivorum.' "
We shall here subjoin some quotations found in the ex-
tant works of St. Methodius, surnamed Eubulius, Bishop of
Tyre, the bitter adversary of Origen. f
*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.
tThe Roman martyrology honors St. Methodius on the eighteenth of
September. He was of Olympius, in Lycia, and afterwards bishop of
Tyre. He suffered martyrdom in Chalcis in Greece; according to some,
under Diocletian ; 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.
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
:;:;i
Eccli. XVIII, 30, et XIX. 2.
"Post concupiscentias tuas
non eas, et a voluntate tua
avertere. Vinum et mulieres
"Post concupiscentias tuas
ne eas, et ab appetitibus tuis
prohibe te. Vinum enim et
apostatare faciunt sapientes, et mulieres apostatare faciunt sa-
arguent sensatos — ." pientes."
Sap. IV. 3.
"Multigena autem impiorum
multitude) non eritutilis,et spu-
ria vitulamina non dabunt radi-
ces altas — ."
Ibid.
" — de quo et alibi: 'Multi-
gena impiorum multitudo non
erit utilis, et spuria vitulamina
non dabunt radices altas.'
Eccli. XXIII. i,ets,6.
"Domine, pater et domina-
tor vitae meae, ne derelinquas
me in consilio eorum nee sinas
me cadere in illis. Extollen-
tiam oculorum meorum ne de-
deris mini, et omne desiderium
averte a me. Aufer a me ven-
tris concupiscentias, et concu-
bitus concupiscentias, ne ap-
prehendant me — ."
Ibid.
' 'Domine,' dicens 'Pater et
Deus vitas meae, ne derelin-
quas me in cogitatu illorum.
Extollentiam oculorum amove
a me. Cordis concupiscentia et
concubitus ne apprehendant
me.' "
Sap. IV. 1, 2.
"O, quam pulchra est casta
generatio cum claritate! im-
mortalis est enim memoria il-
lius, quoniam et apud Deum
nota est, et apud homines.
Cum praesens est, imitantur
illam, et desrderant earn, cum
se eduxerit, et in perpetuum
coronatatriumphat incoinquin-
atorum certaminum praemium
vincens."
Ibid.
"In libro vero Sapientiae pa-
lam jam, et sine ambagibus
auditores ad continentiam, et
castitatem attrahens Spiritus
sanctus talia modulatur . . . da-
mans: 'Immortalis enim est in
memoria illius: quoniam et
apud Deum nota est et apud
homines. Cum praesens est
honorant illam et desiderant
earn, cum se abduxerit, et in per-
petuum coronata triumphat in-
coinquinatorum certaminum
agone superato.' "
332
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. III. 16.
"Filii autem adulterorum in
inconsummatione erunt, et ab
iniquo thoro semen extermina-
bitur."
In the second discourse, that
of Theophila:
"Et ne confugias velut in
arcem securam, prolato testi-
monio Scripturae dicentis: 'Fili
adulterorum in inconsumma-
tione erunt.' "
These two writers, though antagonistic in doctrine, both
aid in building up our thesis, since both recognize the ac-
cepted divine Scripture of the third century. In the first
discourse, that of Marcella, in the symposium, we find the
following :
Sap. IV. 6. Ibid.
"Ex iniquis enim somnis filii, "'Ex iniquis enim,' inquit,
qui nascuntur, testes sunt ne- 'somnis, filii qui nascuntur, tes-
quitias adversus parentes in in- tes sunt nequitiae adversus pa-
terrogatione sua." rentes in interrogatione per-
suasibilium sermonum.' "
Sap. XV. 10, ii. Ibid.
"Cinis est enim cor ejus, et "— in libro Sapientiae ait:
terra supervacua spes illius, et 'Cinis est cor eorum, et terra
luto vilior vita ejus, quoniam supervacua spes illorum.et luto
ignoravit, qui se finxit, et qui vilior vita eorum, quoniam
inspiravit illi animam quae op- ignorarunt qui se finxit, et qui
eratur, et qui insufflavit ei
spiritum vitalem."
Baruch III. 14.
"Disce, ubi sit prudentia, ubi
sit virtus, ubi sit intellectus, ut
scias simul, ubi sit longiturni-
tas vitae et victus, ubi sit lu-
men oculorum et pax."
Sap. VII. 9.
" — nee comparavi illi lapi-
inspiravit illis animam quae
operatur, et qui insufflavit eis
spiritum vitalem.' "
In the eighth discourse, that
of Thecla:
"Discite ubi sit prudentia,
ubi sit virtus, ubi sit intellectus
ut scias simul ubi sit long-
iturnitas vitae et victus, ubi
sit lumen oculorum et pax.
Quis invenit locum ejus? et quis
intra vit in thesauros eorum?"
In the eleventh discourse,
that of Arete:
"Neque si quis pecuniarum
dem pretiosum, quoniam omne cupiditate capitur, virginita-
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
:«:■;
aurum in comparatione illius tern vere studet colere: spernit
arena est exigua, et tamquam enim illam, verius lucrum exi-
lutum aestimabitur argentum guum ipsi prseferens; cui ta-
in conspectu illius." -men nulla est comparabilis re-
rum in vita pretiosarum."
Judith XIII. Passim.
Ibid.
"Peregrinum ductorem nu-
merosissimorum exercituum
fortiter aggrediens, ardua feli-
citer exequens destinata, Ju-
dith dolose decollavit pulchri-
tudinis suae delinitum specie
priusquam ullam membris cor-
poris obtulisset maculam — ."
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
commiscere nobiscum."
Ibid.
"Videntes speciem decoram
nudi Susannas corporis, duo ju-
dices amore furentes dixerunt:
'O mulier, hie adsumus te clam
potiri cupientes.' "
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."
St. Method. De Resurrec-
tione (Fragmentary).
" — sapientiaadstruithis ver-
bis: 'Creavit enim Deus ut es-
sent omnia, et salutares sunt
mundi generationes, et non est
in illis medicamentum exter-
minii.' "
Sap. II. 23.
"Quoniam Deus creavit
hominem inexterminabilem, et
ad imaginem similitudinis suae
fecit ilium."
Ibid.
"Atqui homo est immortalis:
'Creavit enim,' inquit Sapien-
tia, 'hominem inexterminabi-
lem, et imaginem aeternitatis
suae fecit ilium.' "
334
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. VII. 21. Ibid, in fine.
" — et quaecumque sunt "Quamobrem etiam Salo-
absconsa et improvisa, didici: mon 'artificem omnium' apella-
omnium enim artifex docuit me vit — . ' '
sapientia."
Eccli. XV. 18. Ibid- ex fragmentis.
"Ante hominem vita et mors, "Posui enim,' inquit, 'ante
bonum et malum ; quod placu- f aciem tuam vitam et mor-
erit ei, dabitur illi — — ."
tern.
Eccli. I. 2.
"Arenam maris, et pluviae
guttas, et dies saeculi quis di-
numeravit?"
Sap. XV. 3.
"Nosse enim te, consummata
justitia est; et scire justitiam
et virtutem tuam, radix est im-
mortalitatis."
St. Method. DeCreatis. (frag-
mentary) .
" — quomodo Sapientia in
Jesu Sirach dicit: 'Arenam
maris, et pluvias 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."
Baruch III. 24.
"0 Israel, quam magna est
domus Dei, et ingens locus pos-
sessions ejus!"
Ibid.
" — ut quodam loco inclytus
Propheta ait: 'Quam magna
domus Dei, et ingens locus pos-
sessions ejus! Magnus, et non
habet finem.' "
Eccli. XVI. 7. Ibid.
"In synagoga peccantium "Item alio loco: 'In gente
exardebit ignis, et in gente in- incredibili exardescit ignis.'
credibili exardescet ira."
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha-
naan et non Juda, species
S. Methodius, in Ramos Pal-
marum.
"O Chanaan impudentis se-
men, non pii ac timentis Deum,
Juda!"
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 335
decepit te, et concupiscentia
subvertit cor tuum — ."
Method, quoted by Olym-
piodorus in Catena Nice-
Sap. XII. i. tae.
"O quam bonus et suavis est, "Methodius autem, Spiritum
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni- divinum qui a Deo omnibus
bus!" concessus est, et de quo Salo-
mon dixit: 'Incorruptus tuus
Spiritus in omnibus,' pro con-
scientia accipit, quae et ani-
mam peccatricem condemnet."
There are several quotations from deuterocanonical
Scripture in the works of St. Gregory of Neocaesarea, which
we omit here, since they are found in works which Migne
judged dubious.
There are a few certain citations from the deuterocanoni-
cal books in the fragments which have been collected of the
works of Dionysius the Great.*
*Thc 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 seventeen years, till his death
in 265. He was forced to flee in the Dccian 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 Libya. Having stren-
uously opposed the Sabellian Heresy, he was denounced to Dionysius,
the Roman Pontiff, that his tenets were not sound concerning the con-
substantiality of the Son and the Father. As Sabellius had denied that
there was 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 persecution under Gallienus,
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 feeble:
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 Letter>.
The few quotations which we shall adduce will place Dionysius in the
rank of those who considered the deuterocanonical books as divine
Scripture.
336
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. XVI. 26, 27.
"In judicio Dei opera ejus ab
initio, et ab institutione ipso-
rum distinxit partes illorum, et
initia eorum in gentibus suis.
Ornavit in aeternum opera illo-
rum, nee esurierunt, nee labo-
raverunt, et non destiterunt ab
operibus suis."
Eccli. XVI. 30, 31.
"Post haec Deus in terram
respexit, et implevit illam bo-
nis suis. Anima omnis vitalis
denuntiavit ante faciem ipsius,
et in ipsam iterum reversio
illorum."
Tob. XII. 7.
"Etenim sacr amentum regis
abscondere bonum est: opera
autem Dei revelare et confiteri,
honorificum est."
Dionysius, De Natura III. B.
"Audite vero divinorum or-
aculorum vocem: 'In judicio
Domini opera ejus. Ab initio et
a creatione ipsorum distinxit
partes illorum. Ornavit in
aeternum opera sua, et principia
eorum in generationes eorum. ' ' '
Ibid. V. A.
" — et illud: 'post haec enim
Dominus in terram respexit, et
implevit illam bonis suis. An-
ima omnis animantis operuit
faciem ejus.' "
Idem. Epist. X. (Adversus
Germanum) IV.
"Sed quoniam arcanum qui-
dem regis occultare, utaitScrip-
tura, laudandum est; Dei au-
tem opera praedicare, glorio-
sum; adversus Germani im-
petum cominus decertabo."
The Constitutiones Apostolicae also manifest that the
Church, in the third century, recognized the deuterocanon-
ical books as divine Scripture.*
*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 suffered later interpolations. The
work consisted of eight books, o/CTa/3t/3\oi>, containing practical precepts
of Christian life, and principles of church polity. Though of uncertain
authorship, and often erroneous in its present state in dogma, it is val-
uable to illustrate the traditions of the Church in that early age. Opin-
ions 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 CAXON OF THE CHURCH
:;:;:
Eccli. XXVIII. 16.
"Lingua tertia multos com-
movit, et dispcrsit 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-
rum est cognoscentes, condem-
nastis filiam Israel? Reverti-
mini ad judicium, quia falsum
testimonium locuti sunt ad-
versus earn."
Judith XII. 8.
"Et ut ascendebat, orabat
Dominum Deum Israel, ut
dirigeret viam ejus ad libera-
tionem populi sui."
Eccli. XXVI. 28.
"Duae species difficiles et per-
iculosae mihi apparuerunt: dif-
ficile exuitur negotians a neg-
ligentia: et non justificabitur
caupo a peccatis labiorum."
Eccli. XXX. 12.
"Curva cervicem ejus in ju-
vcntute, et tunde latera ejus,
dum infans est, ne forte indu-
ret, et non credat tibi: et erit
tibi dolor animas."
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. 1.
"Quoniam Susannam qui-
dem Dominus per Danielem
eripuit e manibus iniquorum;
reos autem sanguinis feminae
senes ad ignem damnavit: vobis
vero per Danielem exprobravit
dicens: 'Sic fatui filii Israel,
non dijudicantes, neque quod
manifestum est cognoscentes,
condemnastis filiam Israel ?
Revertimini ergo ad judicium,
quia falsum testimonium isti
locuti sunt adversus earn.'
Lib. III. 6.
"Quemadmodum ergo sapi-
entissima Juditha, pudicitiae
testimonio Celebris, nocte ac die
Deum pro Israel deprecabatur"
Lib. IV. 6.
" — quia non justificabitur
caupo de peccato — ."
Lib. IV. 11.
"Etadhuc: Tunde latera ejus,
dum infans est, ne forte indura-
tus non credat tibi."
(22) H. S.
338
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Esther IV. 16.
"Vade et congrega omnes
Judasos, quos in Susan repere-
ris, et orate pro me. Non come-
datis, et non bibatis tribus die-
bus et tribus noctibus, et ego
cum ancillis meis similiter je-
junabo: et tunc ingrediar ad re-
gem contra legem faciens, non
vocata, tradensque me morti
et periculo."
Judith, VIII. 6.
" — et habens super lumbos
suos cilicium, jejunabat omni-
bus diebus vitas suae, praeter
sabbata, et neomenias, et festa
domus Israel."
Eccli. XXIV. 35.
" — qui implet quasi Phison
sapientiam, et sicut Tigris in
diebus novorum — ."
Eccli. XXV. 36.
"A carnibus tuis abscinde il-
lam, 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. 1.
"Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis."
Lib. V. 20.
"Item Esthera et Mardoch-
seus, et Juditha insultationem
impiorum Holophernis et Am-
anis jejunando declinarunt."
Lib. VI. 5.
" — detrac toque eis Sprritu
sancto ac imbre prophetico, im-
plevit ecclesiam suam gratia
spirituali, velut fluvium ^gypti
in diebus novorum."
Ibid. 14.
"Abscinde enim earn," in-
quit, "a carnibus tuis."
Ibid. 15.
"Ne differas enim converti
ad Dominum."
Ibid. 23.
"Beati sumus, Israel, quia
quae placita sunt Deo manifesta
sunt nobis."
Ibid. 30.
"Justorum animae in manu
Dei."
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
:w>
Sap. II. 23, 24.
"Quoniam Deus creavit hom-
inem inexterminabilcm, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fe-
cit ilium. Invidia autem dia-
boli mors introivit in orbem
terrarum: — ."
Tob. IV. 16.
"Quod ab alio oderis fieri tibi
vide, ne tu aliquando alteri fa-
cias."
Esther XIV. 12.
"Memento, Domine, et os-
tende te nobis in tempore tri-
bulationis nostras, et da mihi
fiduciam, Domine, rex deorum
et universae potestatis — ."
I. Mac. II.
Judith VIII.
Dan. XIII. 42.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante-
quam fiant — ."
Judith VIII.
Lib. VII. 1.
" — naturale quidem est vitae
iter, adscitum autem iter mor-
tis; non illius quae ex voluntate
Dei exstitit, verum illius quae
ex insidiis diaboli."
Ibid. 2.
"Omne quod non vis tibi
fieri, et tu hoc alteri ne facias."
Ibid. S3-
"/Eterne Salvator noster, rex
deorum."
Ibid. 37.
"Tu, Domine Deus, nunc
quoque suscipe preces labiis
prolatis populi tui congregati
ex gentibus . . . sicut suscepisti
munera justorum in eorum
saeculis . . . Mathathiae et filio-
rum ejus in zelo tuo — ."
Lib. VIII. 2.
"Sed et mulieres prophetave-
runt . . . Holda et Juditha."
Ibid. 5.
"Qui es vere, 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
domesticorum optime curam
gessit ut Juditha — ."
340 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. III. i. Ibid. 41.
(Already quoted.) " — quia cunctorum animae
apud te vivent, et spiritus just-
orum in manu tua sunt, quos
non tanget cruciatus."
Eccli. XXXI. 35. Ibid. 44.
"Vinum in jucunditatem ere- "Hoc autem dicimus non ut
atum est, et non in ebrietatem, vinum nequaquam bibant: eo
ab initio." enim modo contumelia afficer-
ent id quod a Deo factum est ad
Icetitiam."
For the tradition of the African Church, we turn to the
two great lights of that Church Tertullian and Cyprian.*
*Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus 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 con-
stancy 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 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 God, 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 salva-
tion 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 persecu-
tion 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 appar-
ent 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 Tertullian'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. Tertullian'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, DeTestimonio Animae, adMartyres, De
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
341
Dan. XIII. 32.
"At iniqui illi jusserunt ut
discooperiretur (erat enim coo-
perta) ut vel sic satiarentur de-
core ejus."
II. Mac. VII. 28.
"Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad
caelum et terram, et ad omnia
Tertull. De Corona IV. A.
"Si et Susanna in judicio re-
velata argumentum velandi
praestat — ."
Ad versus Hcrmogenem XXI.
"Ita si ex nihilo Deus cuncta
fecisse non potuit, Script ura
quae in eis sunt: et intelligas, non adjecisset ilium ex nihilo
quia ex nihilo fecit ilia Deus, et fecisse — ."
hominum genus — ."
An evident allusion to the
Benedictus of Dan. III.
24-90.
Judith passim.
Eccli. XI. 14.
"Bona et mala, vita et mors,
paupertas et honestas a Deo
sunt."
Dan. III. 24 -90.
Ibid. XLIV.
" — cui etiam inanimalia et
incorporalia laudes canunt
apud Danielem."
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-
formen eum capiunt, visibilium
solummodo et vitam et mortem
et mala et pacem."
Adversus Marcionem, Lib.V.
1 1.
"Quod non alius quam Cre-
ator intelligetur qui et universa
benedixit, habes Genesim; et
Spectaculis, De Idololatria, Ad Scapulam, De Oratione, De Baptismo, De
Poenitentia, De Patientia, Ad Uxorem, libri duo, De Cultu Feminum. lib
II. In the second class are De Corona Militis, De Fuga in Persecution .
Adversus Gnosticos, Adversus Praxeam, Adversus Hermogenen. Adversus
Marcionem, lib. V., Adversus Valentinianos, Adversus Juda>os. De Anima,
De Carne Christi, De Resurrectione Carnis, De Velandis Virginfbus, De I
hortatione Castitatis, Dc Monogamia, De Jejuniis, De Pudicitia 1 >
Pallio.
It is uncertain whether the work Dc Pra?seriptionibus was wr:
before or after his defection.
342
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Sap. I. I.
Diligite justitiam, qui judi-
catis terram. Sentite de Dom-
ino in bonitate, et in simplici-
tate cordis quaerite ilium.
Eccli. XLIV. 17.
"Noe inventus est perfectus,
Justus, et in tempore iracun-
dias 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."
Eccli. XV. 18.
"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 arg-
enteos, et lapideos, et ligneos in
humeris portari, ostentantes
metum Gentibus. Videte ergo
ne et vos similes emciamini
factis alienis, et metuatis, et
metus vos capiat in ipsis. Visa
itaque turba de retro, et ab
ab universis benedicitur, habes
Danielem."
Adversus Valentinianos II.
"Porro facies Dei spectat in
simplicitate quaerentes, ut do-
cet ipsa Sophia, non quidem
Valentini sed Salomonis."
Adversus Judaeos II.
"Nam unde Noe Justus in-
ventus— ?"
Ibid. IV.
"Nam et temporibus Mac-
cabaeorum, Sabbatis pugnando,
fortiter fecerunt, et hostes allo-
phylos expugnaverunt, legem -
que paternam ad pristinum
vitas statum, pugnando Sab-
batis, revocaverunt."
De Anima XV.
"Si enim scrutatorem et dis-
pectorem cordis Deum legi-
mus — ."
De Monogamia XIV.
"Ecce, in quit, posui ante te
bonum et malum: elige quod
bonum est."
Adversus Gnosticos VIII.
"Meminerant enim et Jere-
miae scribentis ad eos quibus
ilia capti vitas imminebat: 'Et
nunc videbitis deos Babyloni-
orum aureos et argenteos et
ligneos portari super humeros,
ostentantes nationibus timo-
rem. Cavete igitur ne et vos
consimiles sitis allophylis, et
THE CANON OF THE CHURI II
343
ante, adorantes, dicite in cordi-
bus vestris: Te oportet ador-
ari, Domine."
Dan. XIV. 3-24.
"Rex quoque colebat cum, 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. 1.
(Already quoted.)
timore capiamini, dum aspicitis
turbas adorantes retro eos et
ante: sed dicite in animo ves-
tro: te, Domine, adorare de-
bemus.' "
De Idololatria XVIII.
" — statimque apparuisset
Danielem idolis non deservisse,
nee Bel nee draconem* colere
quod nutlto posted apparuit."
Eecli. XL 30.
"Ante mortem ne laudes
hominem quemquam, quoniam
in filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
De Prsescriptionibus VII.
"Nostra institutio de porticu
Salomonis est, qui et ipse tra-
diderat, Dominum in simplici-
tate cordis esse quaerendum."
*Cyprian. Epist. V. 2.
" — cum scriptum sit: 'Ante
mortem ne laudes hominem
quemquam.' "
♦Closely allied with Tertullian, is St. Cyprian. He declares himself that
Tertullian had been his master. The style of Tertullian is rough, and
tinged with certain African barbarisms. In the words of Balzac: "Ter-
tullian'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 Lactantius 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 Caecilius 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 Script •
for that of the profane authors. His great talents placed him in the
Episcopal see of Carthage in 248 His labors in the see of Carthage were
immense. He was the father of the poor, the light of the clergy and tin-
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 uncompromising. When he was ace
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
344
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Dan XIII.
Sap. III. ii.
"Sapientiam enim et discip-
linam qui abjicit, infelix est:
et vacua est spes illorum, et
labores sine fructu, et inutilia
opera eorum."
Ecc. 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.
"Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guam nequam noli audire, et
ori tuo facito ostia et seras."
Eccli. XXXIV. 30.
"Qui baptizatur a mortuo, et
iterum tangit eum; quid pro-
ficit lavatio illius?"
Idem. Epist. XL. 4.
"Nee aetas vos eorum, nee
auctoritas fallat, qui ad duo-
rum presbyterorum veterem
nequitiam respondentes, sicut
illi Susannam pudicam corrum-
pere et violare conati sunt, sic
et hi," etc.
Idem. Epist. LXII. r.
" — 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.'
Idem. LXIX. 7.
" — nee recordaris scriptum
esse: 'Sepi aures tuas spinis, et
noli audire linguam nequam.' '
Idem. Epist. LXXI. 1.
" — - non considerantes scrip-
tum esse: 'Qui baptizatur a
mortuo, quid proficit lavatio
ejus?' "
among the Bishops that a crime should be examined where it was com-
mitted. 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 contention 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 Ecclesis, Ad Demetrianum, De Idolorum Vanitate
De Mortalitate, De Opere et Eleemosynis, De Bono Patientia?, De Zelo et
Livore, Ad Fortunatum, Ad Quirinum.
THE CANON* OF THE CHURCH
345
Sap. III. 4-8.
"Etsi coram hominibus tor-
menta passi sunt, spes illorum
immortalitate plena est. In
paucis vexati in multis bene
disponentur, quoniam Deus
tentavit eos, et invenit illos dig-
nos se. Tamquam aurum in
fornace probavit illos, et quasi
holocausti hostiam accepit
illos, et in tempore erit respec-
tus illorum."
Sap. III. ii.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. V. 8, 9.
"Quid nobis profuit super-
bia? aut divitiarum jactantia
quid contulit nobis? Transie-
runt omnia ilia tamquam um-
bra, et tamquam nuntius per-
eurrens — ."
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 mag-
na constantia adversus eos,
qui se angustiaverunt, et qui ab-
stulerunt labores eorum," etc.
Idem. Epist. LXXXI. 2.
Et iterum ubi loquitur Scrip-
tura divina de tormentis quae
Martyres Dei consecrant, et in
ipsa possessionis probatione
sanctificant: 'Et si coram hom-
inibus 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.'
Ibid. X.
" — cum dicat Scriphira di-
vina: 'Quid nobis profuit su-
perbia? aut quid divitiarum
jactatio contulit nobis? Transi-
erunt omnia ilia tamquam um-
bra.' "
De Oratione Dominica XXI.
"Sic Danieli in leonum lacu
jussu regis incluso prandium
divinitus procuratur, et inter
feras esurientes et parcentes
homo Dei pascitur."
Ibid. XXXIII.
"Sic et Raphael angelus To-
bias oranti semper, et semper
operanti testis fuit dicens:
'Opera Dei revelare et confiteri,
honorificum est — .'
De Idolorum Y. nutate,
XXIV.
"Et iterum (dicit Sancta
Scriptura) : 'Tunc stabunt justi
in magna constantia adversus
eosqui se angustiaverunt.' "( I
346
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. II. 1-4, 5.
"Fili, accedens ad servitu-
tem Dei, sta in justitia et tim-
ore, et praepara animam tuam
ad tentationem. Omne quod
tibi applicitum fuerit, accipe,
et in dolore sustine, et in humil-
itate tua patientiam habe: quo-
niam in igne probatur aurum
et argentum, homines vero re-
ceptibiles, in camino humilia-
tionis."
Tob. II. 16.
"Ubi est spes tua, pro qua
eleemosynas, et sepulturas faci-
ebas?" '
Tob. XII. 1.1-15.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. Ill, 33.
"Ignem ardentem extinguit
aqua, et eleemosyna resistit
peccatis — ."
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 proba-
tur aurum et argentum, hom-
ines vero receptibiles, in cam-
ino humiliationis.' "
Ibid. X.
"Et Tobias post opera mag-
nifica . . . quem 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 elee-
mosyna extinguit peccatum.'
Tob. XII. 8.
"Bona est oratio cum jeju-
nio, et eleemosyna magis quam
thesauros auri recondere — ."
Tob. XIV. 10, 11.
"Audite ergo, filii mei, pa-
trem vestrum: Servite Domino
in veritate, et inquirite ut faci-
atis quae placita sunt illi: et
filiis vestris mandate ut faciant
Ibid. V.
"Raphael quoque Angelus. . .
hortatur dicens: 'Bona est ora-
tio cum jejunio et eleemosyna,
quia eleemosyna a morte libe-
rat 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 mem-
THE CAXOX OF THE CHURCH
:;i7
justitias et eleemosynas, ut sint
memores Dei, et benedicant
eum in omni tempore in veri-
tate, et in tota virtute sua."
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."
Eccli. II. 4-
"Omne, quod tibi applicitum
fuerit, accipe: et in dolore sus-
tine, et in humilitate tua pa-
tientiam habe — ."
Tob. Passim.
Sap. XV. 15-17.
" — quoniam omnia idola na-
tionum deos aestimaverunt,"
etc.
Sap. XIII. 1-4.
"Vani autem sunt omnes
homines, in quibus non subest
scientia Dei: et de his, quae
videntur bona, non potuerunt
intclligere eum, qui est, neque
operibus attendentes agnover-
unt quis esset artifex: sed aut
ores Dei, et benedicant nomen
ejus omni tempore.'
Ibid.
"Et iterum: 'Omnibus diebus
vitas tuae, fili dilectissime, in
mente habeto Deum: et cave
ne aliquando peccato consen-
tias, et praecepta Domini Dei
nostri,' " etc.
De Dono Patientiae XVII.
" — sicut scriptum est: 'In
dolore sustine, et in humilitate
tua patientiam habe, quoniam
in igne probatur aurum et ar-
gentum.' "
Ibid. XVIII.
"Tobias quoque post justitiae
et misericordiae suae opera mag-
nifica, luminum amissione ten-
tatus, in quantum patienter
caecitatem pertulit, intantum
granditer Deum patientiae
laude promeruit."
De Exhortatione Martyrii I.
"In Sapientia Salomonis:
'Omnia idola nationum aestima-
verunt deos — ."
Ibid.
"Item apud Salomonem de
elementis: 'Xeque opera attend-
entes agnoverunt, quis esset
artifex: sed aut ignem, aut
spiritum, aut citatum aerem,
ant gyrum stellarum, aut nim-
iam aquam, aut solem et lu-
348
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
ignem, ant spiritum, aut cita-
tum aerem, aut gyrum stella-
rum, aut nimiam aquam, aut
solem et lunam, rectores orbis
terrarum deos putaverunt.
Quorum si specie delectati,
deos putavenmt: sciant quanto
his dominator eorum speciosior
est ; speciei enim generator haec
omnia constituit. Aut si virtu-
tem, et opera eorum mirati
sunt, intelligant ab illis, quo-
niam qui haec fecit, fortior est
illis—."
Eccli. II. 5.
" — quoniam in igne probatur
aurum et argentum, homines
vero receptibiles, in camino hu-
miliationis."
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."
nam, rectores orbis terrarum
deos putaverunt. Quorum si
specie delectati deos putaver-
unt, sciant, quanto his domi-
nator eorum speciosior est: spe-
ciei enim generator haec omnia
constituit. Aut, si virtutem et
opera eorum mirati sunt, in-
telligant ab illis, quoniam qui
haec fecit, fortior est illis.' "
Ad Fortunatum IX.
"Et iterum apud Salom-
onem: 'Vasa figuli probat
fornax homines justos, tenta-
tio tribulationis.' "
Ibid. XI.
"Et Daniel, Deo devotus et
Sancto Spiritu plenus, excla-
mat et dicit: 'Nihil colo ego nisi
Dominum Deum meum, qui
condidit ccelum et terram.' "
Tob. XIII. 6. Ibid.
"Aspicite ergo quae fecit no- "Tobias quoque . . . praedicat
biscum, et cum timore et tre- dicens: 'Ego in terra captivit-
more confitemini illi: regemque atis meae confiteor illi, et osten-
saeculorum exaltate in operibus do virtutem ejus in natione pec-
vestris." catrice.' "
II. Mac. VII. 9.
" — et in ultimo spiritu con-
stitutes, sic ait: Tu quidem sce-
lestissime, in praesenti vita nos
perdis: sed Rex mundi defunc-
tos nos pro suis legibus in
aeternae vitae resurrectione sus-
citabit."
Ibid.
"At ille (Martyr Maccabai-
cus) in martyrio suo fidens, et
resurrectionis sibi praemium de
Dei remuneratione promittens,
exclamavit et dixit: 'Tu qui-
dem impotens, ex hac presenti
vita nos perdis, sed mundi rex
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
349
II. Mac. VII. 1-41.
il. Mac. VI. 30.
"Seel, cum plagis perimere-
tur, ingemuit, et dixit: Dom-
ine, qui habes sanctam scien-
tiam, manifeste tu scis, quia,
cum a morte possem liberari,
duros corporis sustineo dolores:
secundum animam vero prop-
ter timorem tuum libenter haec
patior."
Sap. III. 4-8.
"Etsi coram hominibus," etc.
Sap. V. 1-9.
"Tunc stabunt justi in mag-
na constantia adversus eos, qui
se angustiaverunt," etc.
Tob. XII. 15.
"Ego enim sum Raphael An-
gelus, unus ex septem, qui ad-
stamus ante Dominum."
Eccli. XXIV. 5-20.
"Ego ex ore Altissimi pro-
divi primogenita ante omnem
defunctos nos pro suis legibus
in aeternam vitae resurrectione
suscitabit." '
Prosequitur et refert mortem
septem Fratrum et matris eor-
um.
Ibid.
"Atille (Eleazar) ingemiscens
ait: 'Domine, qui sanctam
habes scientiam, manifestum
est quia cum possem a morte
liberari, durissimos dolores
corporis tolero, flagellis vapu-
lans; animo autem propter tui
ipsius metum libenter haec pa-
tior.' "
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 angus-
tiaverunt,' ' etc.
Ad Quirinum (Vocantur quo-
que hi tres libri, Testi-
monia adversus Judaeos)
Lib. I. XX.
" — ut angeli septem qui as-
sistunt et conversantur ante
faciem Dei, sicut Raphael an-
gelus in Tobia dicit."
Ibid. Lib. II. I.
"Item apud eundum Salom-
onem in Ecclesiastico: 'Ego ex
350
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
creaturam: ego feci in ccelis," ore Altissimi prodivi, primo
etc. genita ante omnem creaturam
Ego in ccelis feci,' " 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
nobiscum."
Ibid. Lib. II. XIV.
"In Sapientia Salomonis:
'Circumveniamus justum," etc.
Ibid. Lib. III. I.
"De hoc ipso apud Tobiam:
'Et dixit Tobias filio suo: Vade
et adduc quemcumque pau-
perem inveneris ex fratribus
nostris, qui tamen in mente ha-
beat Deum ex toto corde suo.
Hunc adduc, et manducabit
pariter meum prandium hoc.
Ecce sustineo te, fili, donee ve-
nias.' "
Tob. IV. 5-1 1.
"Cum autem et ipsa comple-
verit tempus vita? suae, sepelias
earn circa me. Omnibus autem
diebus vitas tuae, in mente ha-
beto," etc.
II. Mac. XI. 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
stercus et vermis est . Hodie ex-
tollitur, et eras non invenietur:
quia conversus est in terram
suam, et cogitatio ejus periit."
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
conversus est in terram suam,
et cogitatio ejus periit.'
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
35 1
Eccli. XXVII. 6.
"Vasa figuli probat fornax;
et homines justos, tentatio trib-
ulationis."
Tob. II. 22.
"Ad haec uxor ejus irata re-
spondit: Manifeste vana facta
est spes tua, et eleemosynae
tuas modo apparuerunt."
Eccli. XXIII. ii.
"Sicut enim servus interrog-
atus assidue, a livore non
minuitur, sic omnis jurans, et
nominans, in toto a peccato non
purgabitur."
Sap. III. 4.
(Oft quoted.)
I. Mac. II. 52.
"Abraham, nonne in tenta-
tione 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
Domini; et cum ridelibus in
vulva concreatus est, cum elec-
tis feminis graditur, et cum
justis et fidelibus agnoscitur."
Ibid. VI.
"Apud Salomonem: 'Vasa ,
figuli probat fornax; et hom-
ines justos, tentatio tribula-
tionis.' "
Ibid.
"De hoc ipso in Tobia: 'Ubi
sunt justitiae tuae? Ecce quae
pateris.' "
Ibid. XII.
"Apud Salomonem: 'Vir
multum jurans replebitur in-
iquitate, et non discedet a
domo ejus plaga; et si vane ju-
ra verit, non justificabitur.' "
Ibid. XV.
"De hoc ipso in Sapientia Sa-
lomonis: 'Et si coram homini-
bus,' "etc. (Oft quoted.)
Ibid.
"De hoc ipso in Maccabaeis:
'Abraham, nonne in tentatione
inventus est fidelis, et deputa-
tum est ei ad justitiam?'
Ibid. XVI.
"Item (Salomon) illic: 'Tunc
stabunt justi in magna,' " etc.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. XX.
"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 Deum.' "
352
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Dan. XIII. 1-3.
Eccli. X. 29.
"Noli extollere te in faciendo
opere tuo, et noli cunctari in
tempore angustiae."
Sap. I. 1.
"Diligite justitiam, qui judi-
catis terrain. Sentite de Dom-
ino in bonitate, et in simplici-
tate cordis quaerite ilium — ."
I. Mac. II. 60.
"Daniel in sua simplicitate
liberatus est de ore leonum."
Ibid.
"Item in Danieli: 'Fuit vir
habitans in Babylonia cui no-
men erat Joachim, et accepit
uxorem nomine Susannam, fil-
iam Helciae, formosam valde ac
timentem Deum, et erant pa-
rentes 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
Sapientia: 'Et in simplicitate
cordis quaerite ilium.'
Ibid.
"Item in Maccabaeis: 'Daniel
in sua simplicitate liberatus est
de ore leonum.' "
Sap. IV. 11-14.
" — raptus est ne malitia mu-
taret 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.)
Ibid. LVIII.
"Item in Sapientia Salo-
monis: 'Raptus est ne malitia
mutaret intellectum ejus. Pla-
cita enim erat Deo anima illi-
us.' "
Ibid. LIX.
"In Sapientia
Salomonis:
'Omnia idola nationum,'
(Oft quoted.)
etc.
Ibid.
"De hoc ipso: 'Neque opera
attendentescognoverunt,' " etc.
(Already quoted.)
THE CAXOX OF THE CHURCH
:;:,:;
Tob. IV. 12 (juxta Graecum.)
"Uxorem accipe ex semine
parentum tuorum, et noli sum-
ere 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."
Eccli. VI. 16.
"Amicus fidelis, medicamen-
tum vitae et immortalitatis: et
qui metuunt Dominum, inveni-
ent ilium."
Eccli. IX. 18.
"Longe abesto ab homine
potestatem habente occidendi,
et non suspicaberis timorem."
Eccli. XXV. 12.
"Beatus, qui invenit amicum
verum, et qui enarrat justitiam
auri audienti."
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."
Ibid. LXII.
"A pud Tobiam: 'Uxorem ac-
cipe ex semine parentum tuo-
rum, et noli sumere alienam
mulierem quae non est ex tribu
parentum tuorum.' "
Ibid. LXVI.
"Item in Sapientia Salo-
monis: 'Disciplinam qui abjicit,
infelix est.' "
Ibid. XCV.
"Item apud eundem in Ec-
clesiastico: 'Viri justi sint tibi
convivae.' "
Ibid.
"Et iterum: 'Amicus fidelis,
medicamentum vitae et immor-
talitatis.' "
Ibid.
"Item illic: 'Longe abesto ab
homine potestatem habente oc-
cidendi, et non suspicaberis
timorem.' "
Ibid.
"Item illic: 'Beatus qui in-
venit amicum verum, et qui
enarrat justitiam auri au-
dienti—.' "
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 remis-
sus in operibus tuis.'
(23) H. S.
354
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
Eccli. V. 8, 9.
"Non tardes converti ad Do-
minum, et ne differas de die in
diem; subito enim veniet ira
illius, et in tempore vindictae
disperdet te."
Eccli. VII. 39.
"Non te pigeat visitare in-
firmum: ex his enim in dilec-
tione firmaberis."
Eccli. XXVIII. 15.
"Susurro et bilinguis male-
dictus: multos enim turbabit
pacem habentes."
Eccli. XXXIV. 23.
"Dona iniquorum non pro-
bat Altissimus," etc.
Sap. VI. 6, 7.
"Horrende et cito apparebit
vobis: quoniam judicium duris-
simum his, qui prassunt, fiet.
Exiguo enim conceditur miseri-
cordia; potentes autem poten-
ter tormenta patientur."
Eccli. IV. 10, 11.
"Esto pupillis misericors ut
pater; et pro viro matri illo-
rum, et eris velut filius Altis-
simi, si obedieris."
Eccli. II. 1.
"Fili, accedens ad servitutem
Dei, sta in justitia, et timore,
et praepara animam tuam ad
tentationem."
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. CX.
"In Ecclesiastico apud Salo-
monem: 'Susurro et bilinguis
maledictus. Multos enim tur-
babit pacem habentes.' "
Ibid. CXI.
"Apud eumdem: 'Dona ini-
quorum non probat Altissi-
mus.' "
Ibid. CXII.
"Apud Salomonem: 'Judi-
cium durissimum in his qui
praesunt fiet. Exiguo enim con-
ceditur misericordia ; potentes
autem potenter tormenta pa-
tientur.' "
Ibid. CXIII.
"Apud Salomonem: 'Esto
pupillis misericors ut pater; et
pro viro matri illorum; et
eris velut filius Altissimi si
obedieris.' "
De Laude Martyrii XIV.
"Fili, inquit Dominus, ac-
cedens ad servitutem Dei, sta
in justitia et timore, et praepara
animam tuam ad tentationem. ' '
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 355
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.etinhumilitatetuapatien- tua habe patientiam, quoniam
tiam habe — ." per ignem probatur aurum et
argentum.' "
Sap. III. 4. Ibid.
(Oft quoted.) "— sicut per Prophetam su-
ura dixit: 'Et si coram hom-
inibus,' ' 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 as-
similated from the spiritual food of the Church; and, hence,
in these quotations, they are exponents not of their own
opinions, but of the unanimous belief of a Church daily
baptized in the blood of her martyrs.
Against this harmonious array of evidence from tradi-
tion, 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 'Etc\oya>v, is as
follows: "Meliton sends greeting to his brother Onesimus.
As you have frequently desired, in your zeal for the Scrip-
tures, 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
♦St. Meliton was bishop of Sardis in Lydia in the second half of the
second century, under Marcus Aurelius lie presented to this prince in
171 an Apology for the Christians, remarkable for candor and truth. Of
his numerous writings but small fragments have come down to us.
356 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
in what order the 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 accurately 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 Paralipomena, 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 necessary to
go to their country to ascertain the true canon of the Old
Testament. His exclusion, however, of the deuterocanoni-
cal books is not equivalent to their condemnation. In his
Clavis in S. Scripturam, he employs Wisdom and a deutero-
canonical fragment of Esther.
lto*
Sap. VIII. i. Ibid.
"Attingit ergo a fine usque "_ et in Salomone: 'Sapien-
ad finem fortiter,' " etc. tia Domini attingit a fine usque
ad finem fortiter.' "
Esther X. 12. Ibid.
'— et recordatus est Dom- " — et alibi: Recordatus est
inus populi sui, " etc. Dominus populi sui. ' ' '
There seems to have been in vogue at that time a distinc-
tion of the Sacred Writings of the Old Testament, founded
more on their origin than on any internal difference. The
THE CANON OF THE CHURCH 357
books which the Church had received from the Jews, and
which were recognized by all, were termed 6fio\oyovfxevot.
The others were those that the Church had received from
the Septuagint, and which the Jews rejected ; these were the
'anfafiaWo/xevoi. Now there is no voice in tradition, with
the sole exception of St. Jerome, that ever rejected these
books. As witnesses of tradition, they make no discrimina-
tion between these two classes ; but as critics, in which capac-
ity 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 al-
ways been verified, that certain truths were less clearly con-
spicuous in the deposit of faith in the beginning, which after-
wards 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 strenuously denied the Immaculate Conception, and
yet that truth triumphed, and finally entered among the
defined dogmas. In tradition, we must lose sight of the in-
dividual, 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 pro-
mulgation, inasmuch as they were transmitted by the old
custodians of Yahveh'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 canoni-
cal to the first class. All Catholics receive and honor all of
Mary's prerogatives, 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
358 THE CANON OF THE CHURCH
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 could not endure after such universal abolition of all
things. If that is their plea, let them remember that the
great grandson of Henoch survived the cataclysm of Noah ;
and he, forsooth, had heard and memorized in the domestic
tradition his ancient progenitor's favor with God, and all
his noted deeds; since Henoch commended naught 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 captivity. Wherefore,
since Henoch in that same Scripture announces concerning
the Lord, in our judgment, nothing is to be rejected. And
we read [II. Tim. III. 16.]: '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
THE CAXON OF THE CHURCH 359
of the Apocryphal book of Henoch. The Epistle of Barna-
bas [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.]
vSt. Athanasius, Apolog. Ad
III. Ezra IV. 41. Imp. 11.
"Et desiit loquendo. Et om- "Hanc cum Zorobabel sap-
nes populi clamaverunt, et iens ille vir ceteris anteferret,
dixerunt: Magna est Veritas, et alios superavit, universusque
praevalet." populus in hanc vocem proru-
pit: 'Magna est Veritas et
prasvalet.' "
Idem Sermo Major de Fide,
Ibid. IV. 37-41-47. 35-
"Et omnes populi clamave- "QuemadmodumetEzra pro-
runt, et dixerunt: Magna est phetico spiritu dicit ex persona
Veritas, et praevalet." Zorobabelis, idque de Filio Dei;
'Vivit Veritas, et vincit, et ro-
boratur, manetque in saecula
saeculorum.' "
Origen quotes from the same book :
Orig. Comment, in Josue, VI.
Ex praefatione.
"Quia Ezrae tempore cum vi-
num et inimicum, regem ac de-
nique mulieres vincit Veritas,
reaedificatur templum Dei."
Orig. In Lib. Josue, Horn.
III. Ezra IV. 59, 60. IX. 10.
" — ct dixit: Abs te est vie- " — ita ut et nos dicamus,
toria, et abs te est sapientia et sicut in Ezra scriptum est:
claritas. Et ego servus tuus 'Quia a te, Domine, est victoria,
sum. Benedictus es, qui dedisti et ego servus tuus: bencdictus
mihi sapientiam, et tibi confite- es, Deus veritatis.' "
bor, Domine Deus patrum nos-
trorum."
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
360 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
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 witness that the writers of these early ages
bear to the approbation 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 inspira-
tion, 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 VIII.
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
deuterocanonical books prevailed more especially in the
East. We find, however, that not one of the Fathers of this
epoch, excepting Jerome, rejected the deuterocanonical
books. Their opposition to them never passed beyond a
mere doubt concerning 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 practical 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 every particular writer's views and use of Holy Scrip-
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 361
ture. Neither is such now necessary. No one will deny-
that in this period Jerome is the only positive opponent of
the deuterocanonical books. All likewise recognize that
the most and the greatest of the Fathers of this epoch re-
ceived 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.*
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
*Cornely defends the genuineness of the canon of Scripture of the Coun-
cil of Nice. Among hi? 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 Scrip-
tures. The proving force of this testimony is not very great, for any ap-
probation of the book in the deliberations of the Council, would justify
Jerome's statement. We believe that the Nicene fathers recognized the
deuterocanonical books as divine Scripture, but we hold that it is not
sufficiently substantiated 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 de-
cisions 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 legaUir sub nomine divinarum Scrip turarum. Sunt autem Can-
onical Scripturas," etc. The books of both canons arc 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
362 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
divine Scripture. The Canonical Scriptures are: Genesis,
Exodus, 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 Testa-
ment, Genesis, . . . Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon,
the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, (Ezekiel 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 con-
firmation; 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 the fact that Catho-
lic thought had been disturbed in those days by Jerome, who
in his Prologus Galeatus 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
deuterocanonical 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 repeatedly in his works he declares himself clearly for
the deuterocanonical books. It would be a long and need-
less task to set forth Augustine's use of deuterocanonical
Scripture. It will not be contradicted by any patristic
scholar that Augustine held in equal veneration the proto-
canonical and deuterocanonical books. He gives his views
THE CAXON OF THE IV. CENTURY 363
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 we 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 prejudices 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 Scrip-
tures he will judge according to the following standards: 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 author-
ity, 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 judg-
ment is to be exercised is contained in the following books :
— Five books of Moses, that is : Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
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,
364 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
which contains a connected narrative of the times, and fol-
lows 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
books of Maccabees and the two of Ezra, which last look
more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which
terminates 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 Proph-
ets: twelve separate books of the Prophets which are con-
nected 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, Micha, Na-
hum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi;
then there are the four greater Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Daniel, Ezekiel. 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 follow-
ing:— Four books of the Gospel, according to Matthew, ac-
cording 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 Galatians, to the Ephe-
sians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, 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 quotations from Wisdom, fourteen from Ecclesi-
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY Wo
asticus, two from Baruch, Judith, and Tobias respectively,
and one from the " Benedicite" of Daniel. In his work against
the Manicheans he has twenty-three quotations from Wis-
dom, six from Ecclesiasticus, two from Tobias, one from
Baruch and one from the Maccabees. In his work Contra
Faustum XXXIII. 9, he promulgates 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 Scripture which is to be pre-
ferred to all others, that ye follow that Scripture which
from the time of Christ, through the dispensations of the
Apostles, and of the Bishops, who succeeded them 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 author-
ity 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 con-
cerning me' (Luke XXIV. 44) ; but it (Maccabees) is re-
ceived by the Church not u 11 profitably, 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 sanctioned 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 judg-
ment 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.
366 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
The same words might have been applied by him to the
Gospel of Matthew.
There are sometimes alleged against us the words of
Augustine 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. g,
since they are not written in the book of one whom we cer-
tainly 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 hagiographers. 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 Wis-
dom, 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 (tarn longa annositate),
and which has merited to be listened to with the veneration
of divine authority 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 (Tractatorum) must needs prefer the book of
Wisdom to all the Fathers ; for the celebrated Fathers near-
est 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.*
*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. 492 — A. D. 496); and by others to Hormisdas" (A. D. 514 — A. D.
523) Comely believes that it was originally a decree of Damasus which
was afterwards enlarged by Gelasius All agree that it was an authentic
promulgation from the Roman see in that period. [Hefele Conciliengesch.
II. 620.]
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 367
"Nunc vero de Scripturis divinis agendum est quid uni-
versalis 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 Can-
ticorum liber I. Item Sapientics 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. Michaeas liber I.
Joel liber I. Abdiae liber I. Jonas liber I. Nahum liber I. Ab-
bacuc liber I. Aggaei liber I. Zachariae liber I. Malachi liber I.
Item ordo historiarum: Job liber I. ab aliis omissus. Tobi-z
liber I. Hesdrae libri II. Hesther liber I. Judith liber I. Mach-
abasorum libri II."
In the year 405, St. Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse
(t-117) wrote to Pope Innocent I. asking among other things
"what books should be received in the Canon of Holy Scrip-
ture." 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 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, six-
teen 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 Paralipomenon." In all these canons Baruch is con-
sidered an integral part of Jeremiah. The canons of Gelasius
and Innocent are not ex cathedra definitions, but plain state-
ments 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 deuterocanonical 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.
36S THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
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), as 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
frequent 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 sub-
terranean Rome have 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 corrobo-
rated in the fourth and fifth century by the express declara-
tions 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 which the deuterocanonical books find no place.
Preeminent for age and authority among these is St. Ath-
anasius, the decus orthodoxiae.*
We reproduce here the entire quotation from which the
opposition of Athanasius is inferred: "Since many have
*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.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 369
indeed tried to place in order those books which are called
Apocrypha, and mix them with the divinely inspired Scrip-
ture 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, Deuteron-
omy, Joshua son of Nun, Judges and Ruth follow; then the
four books of Kings, of which the first and second are con-
sidered as one, and, in like manner, the third and fourth.
Following these the two books of Paralipomenon are also con-
sidered as one, as also the first and second of Ezra. Then
come the book of Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Can-
ticle of Canticles and Job ; then the Prophets, of whom twelve
are considered as one book. Then Isaiah, Jeremiah and
with him Baruch, 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 rilled 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 in the
Canon, but which the Fathers decreed should be read to those
who have lately come 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 (Ecclesias-
ticus), Esther, Judith, Tobias, the so-called Doctrine of the
Apostles, and Pastor. Therefore, while the former are in
(24") H. S.
370 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
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 dis-
tinction 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 deuterocanon-
ical 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
writings that he venerated these same books as divine, al-
though 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 — ."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
371
Sap. XIV. 12-21.
"Initium fornicationis," etc.
Sap. XIV. 21.
"Et haec fuit vitae humanae
deceptio: quoniam aut affectui,
aut regibus deservientes hom-
ines, incommunicabile nomen
lapidibus et lignis imposuer-
unt."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei, et creaturas cognoscibiliter
potent 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 hom-
inem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae
fecit ilium. Invidia autem
diaboli mors introivit in
orbem terrarum — ."
Ibid.
"Hasc . . . jam olim Scriptura
his verbis complexa est: 'In-
itium fornicationis,' " etc. Per-
git usque ad Vers. 21.
Ibid. 17.
" — sed cum incommunicab-
ile, 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 con-
venienter 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 hom-
inem ut incorruptus esset, et
imaginem propriae aeternitatis;
invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit in mundum.'
Ath. Apolog. et Contra Aria-
Sap. I. 11. nos, 3.
"Custodite ergo vos a mur- " — nee timeant illud quod in
muratione, quae nihil prodest, Sacris Litteris scriptum est . . .
et a detractione parcite linguae, 'Os quod mentitur occidit ani-
quoniam sermo obscurus in va- mam.' "
cuum non ibit: os autem, quod
mentitur, occidit animam."
372
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Tob. XII. 7. Ibid. 11.
"Sacramentum regis abscon- " — cum oporteat, ut scrip-
dere," etc. turn est: 'Sacramentum regis
abscondere.' "
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, Libya
and Pentapolis. It is thus the testimony of the East to the
divinity of the deuterocanonical works.
In the letter of St. Alexander of Alexandria to his co-
laborer we find the following :
Eccli. XXX. 4.
"Mortuus est pater ejus, et
quasi non est mortuus: similem
enim reliquit sibi post se."
Baruch III. 12.
"Dereliquisti fontem sapien-
tial—."
Ibid.
Sap. VIII. 25.
"Vapor est enim
Dei," etc.
virtutis
Eccli. XV. 9.
"Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris."
1 1.
Sap. I.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 66.
"Mortuus est enim, ait quo-
dam in loco S. Scriptura, pater
ejus et quasi non est mortuus."
St. Ath. De Decretis Synod.
Nicenae, 12.
"Verbum item Israelem ob-
jurgans ait: 'Dereliquisti fon-
tem sapientiae.' "
Ibid. 15.
"Hujus porro sapientiae fon-
tem esse Deum nos docet Ba-
ruch, ubi videlicet redarguitur
Israel fontem sapientiae dereli-
quisse."
S. Ath. De Sententia Diony-
sii, 15.
" — congruenterrursum Chris-
tus vapor dictus est: 'Est
enim,' inquit, 'vapor virtutis
Dei.' "
Idem, Epist. ad Episcopos
yEgypti et Libyae, 3.
"Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris."
Idem Apolog. ad Const. Imp.
5-
"Nam os quod mentitur occi-
dit animam.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
:;;;;
Tob. IV. 19.
"Consilium semper a sap-
iente perquire."
Sap. III. 5.
"In paucis vexati, in multis
bene disponentur, quoniam
Deus tentavit eos, et invenit
illos dignos se."
Sap. II. 21.
"Haec cogitaverunt, et errav-
erunt: excascavit enim illos ma-
litia eorum."
Eccl. XIX. 26.
"Ex visu cognoscitur vir, et
ab occurso faciei cognoscitur
sensatus."
Baruch IV. 20-22.
"Exui me stola pacis, indui
autem me sacco obsecrationis,
et clamabo ad Altissimum in
diebus meis. Ego enim speravi
in aeternum, salutem vestram
et venit mihi gaudium a sanc-
to," etc.
Dan. XIII. 42.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus
seterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam riant."
Baruch III. 12.
"Dereliquisti fontem sapien-
tise— ."
Ibid. 17.
"Scriptum est: 'Ab omni sa-
piente consilium accipe." '
Idem, Apolog. De Fuga Sua.
19.
"Nam sicut aurum in fornace
probatos, ut ait Sapientia, 'in-
venit illos Dominus dignos se."
Ibid. 71.
"In his itaque eorum men-
tem excascavit malitia."
Idem, Contra Arianos Orat.
I- 4-
" — sapientia ait: 'Ex verbis
suis cognoscitur vir.' "
Ibid. 12.
"Susanna quoque aiebat:
'Deus sempiterne.' Baruch
item scripsit: 'Clamabo ad
Deum sempiternum in diebus
meis.' Et paulo post: 'Ego enim
speravi in sempiternum sa-
lutem vestram et venit mihi
gaudium a sancto.' "
Ibid. 13.
"Et apud Dan.: 'Exclama-
vit voce magna Susanna et
dixit: Deus aeterne, qui abscon-
ditorum es cognitor, qui nosti
omnia antequam fiant.' "
Ibid. 19.
" — item apud Baruch scrip-
tum est: 'Dereliquistis fontem
sapientia?.' "
374
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Eccli. XXIV. 12.
"Tunc praecepit, et dixit
mihi Creator omnium: et qui
creavit me, requievit in taber-
naculo 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 si-
cut films hominis ad iracun-
diam inflammabitur."
Baruch III. 12.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. IX. 2.
"- — et sapientia tua consti-
tuisti hominem, ut dominare-
tur creaturae, quae a te facta
est—."
Baruch III. 36.
"Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus
eum."
Sap. VI. 26.
"Multitudo autem sapien-
tum sanitas est orbis terrarum:
et rex sapiens stabilimentum
populi est."
Eccli. I. 10.
"Et effudit illam super om-
nia opera sua, et super omnem
carnem secundum datum suum
et praebuit illam diligentibus
se."
Idem Contra Arianos, Orat.
II. 4.
" — vel si ipse de seipso ait:
'Dominus creavit me.' "
Ibid. 32.
"Siquidem ex magnitudine
et pulchritudine rerum creat-
arum, illarum Creator conveni-
enter conspicitur."
Ibid. 35.
" 'Deus autem non ut homo
est, quemadmodum testatur
Scriptura.' "
Ibid. 42.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. 45.
"Etin libroSapientiaelegitur:
'Et sapientia tua constituisti
hominem ut dominaretur cre-
aturis 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 multitudo sapientum in
Scriptura memoratur?"
Ibid.
" — ut hisce verbis testatur
filius Sirach: 'Effudit illam in
omnia opera sua cum omni
carne, secundum donationem
suam, et praebuit illam
diligentibus se.' "
THE CAXOX OF THE IV. CEXTURY
375
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."
Dan. XIII. 45.
"Cumque duceretur ad mor-
tem, suscitavit Dominus spir-
itum sanctum pueri junioris,
cujus nomen Daniel — ."
Baruch III. 1.
"Et nunc, Domine omnipo-
tens, Deus Israel, anima in an-
gustiis, et spiritus anxius cla-
mat ad te."
Dan. III. 86.
"Benedicite spiritus, et an-
imas justorum, Domino; lau-
date et superexaltate eum in
saecula."
Baruch III. 10, 12.
"Quid est, Israel, quod in
terra inimicorum es? Dereli-
quisti fontem sapientiae."
Idem Contra Arianos, Orat.
III. 30.
"Item Daniel Astyagi dixit:
'Ego idola manufacta non colo,
sed Deum viventem qui ccelum
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 juni-
oris cujus nomen Daniel, et ex-
clamavit voce magna: Mundus
ego sum a sanguine hujus.' "
Ibid. 7.
"Baruch item his verbis pre-
catur: 'Anima in angustiis et
spiritus anxius clamat ad te,' et
in Hymno trium Puerorum. 'Be-
nedicte spiritus et animae justo-
rum Domino.' "
Ibid. 19. '
"Et iterum apud Baruch:
'Quid est Israel, quod in terra
inimicorum es? dereliquisti fon-
tem sapientiae.' "
Sap. I. 5. Ibid. 26.
"Spiritus enim sanctus dis- " 'Spiritus sanctus,' inquit.
ciplinas effugiet fictum, et au- 'disciplinae fugiet dolum, et au-
feret se a cogitationibus, quae feret se a cogitationibus quae
sunt sine intellectu." sunt sine intellectu.'
Sap. XII. 1.
"O quam bonus et sua vis est,
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni-
bus!"
Ibid. 25.
" — iterum in Sapientia legi-
tur: 'Tuus enim incorruptus
spiritus est in omnibus."
376
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Dan. III. 57.
"Benedicite omnia opera Do-
mini Domino," etc.
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum," etc.
Dan. XIV. 4.
"Qui respondens, ait ei: 'Quia
non colo idola manufacta, sed
viventem Deum, qui creavit
ccelum, et terram et habet po-
testatem omnis carnis."
Eccli. I. 32.
" — exsecratio autem pecca-
tori, cultura Dei."
Dan. XIII. 42.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: 'Deus
seterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam nant.'
Baruch III. 36-38-
"Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus
eum. Hie adinvenit omnem
viam disciplinae, et tradidit
illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel
dilecto suo. Post haec in terris
visus est, et cum hominibus
conversatus est."
Sap. II. 24.
"Invidia autem diaboli
mors introivit in orbem terra-
rum — ."
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
terrarum.' "
Idem, Epist. IV. ad Serap. 21.
"Ita quoque Daniel libere
Darium affatus est: 'Non vene-
ror idola manufacta, sed viven-
tem Deum qui creavit ccelum
et terram, et habet potestatem
omnis carnis.' "
S. Ath. Vita S. Antonii, 28.
" — nam 'exsecratio peccatori
est pietas erga Deum."
Ibid. 31.
"— solusque Deus novit om-
nia antequam nant."
St. Athan. De Incarnat. et
contra Arianos (In fine).
" — quemadmodum et Jere-
mias dicit: 'Hie est Deus noster,
et non aestimabitur alius adver-
sus eum. Hie adinvenit om-
nem viam scientiae, et tradidit
illam Jacob puero suo et Israel
dilecto suo. Post haec in terris
visus est et cum hominibus con-
versatus est.' "
St. Athanas. Contra Apollina-
rium, Lib. I. 7.
"Invidia autem diaboli mors
intra vit in mundum."
Ibid. 15.
Repetit idem.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
3
1 1
Dan. III. 57-62; 88.
Baruch III. 12.
(Already quoted.)
St. Ath. De Trinitate et S.
Spiritu, 2.
"Tres quoque sancti marty-
res, Ananias, Azarias, et Missel,
in fornace ignis positi in terra
Chaldaeorum, cum admirabili-
ter Deus calorem ignis ad tem-
peratum refrigerium convertis-
set, universam creaturam ad-
hortantes secum laudare Deum
sicincipiuntr'Benedicite,' "etc.
Citat majorem partem Cantici
Trium Puerorum.
Ibid. 19.
(Already quoted.)
Baruch III. 12, 13.
"Derelinquisti fontem sap-
ientiae; nam si in via Dei am-
bulasses, habitasses utique
in pace sempiterna."
Sap. V. 3.
" — dicentes intra se, pceni-
tentiam agentes, et prae an-
gustia spiritus gementes: Hi
sunt quos habuimus aliquando
in derisum, et in similitudi-
nemimproperii."
Eccli. XXXVIII. 9.
"Fili, in tua infirmitate ne
despicias te ipsum, sed ora Do-
minum, et ipse curabit te."
Eccli. XV. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Dan. III. 50.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. 20.
— "dicit: 'Dereliquisti fon-
tem sapientiae; viam Domini si
fuisses ingressus, utique habi-
tares in pace in aeternum tern-
pus."
St. Ath. Sermo Major De
Fide, 28.
"Hie est quern habuimus ali-
quando in derisionem — ."
St. Ath. Fragment De Amu-
letis.
" — ccelesti sapientiae obse-
quens dicenti: 'Fili, in tempore
infirmitatis tuae ne despicias,
sed ora Dominum, et ipse cura-
bit te."
Idem, Epist. VII. 4.
(Already quoted.)
Idem, Epist. X. 3.
Already quoted.)
378
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Sap. VII. 27. Ibid. 4.
"Et cum sit una, omnia po- " — prout de Sapientia test-
test: et in se permanens omnia atur Salomon 'quae cum una sit,
innovat, et per nationes in ani- omnia potest, et in se manens
mas sanctas se transfert, ami- omnia renovat, et cum ad sane-
cos Dei et prophetas consti- tas animas accedet, tunc Dei
tuit. ' ' amatores et prophetas efficit. ' ' '
Sap. II. 12. Idem. Epist. XI. 5.
"Circumveniamus ergo jus- "Circumveniamus justum,
turn, quoniam inutilis est quia nobis minime placet."
nobis," etc.
Eccli. XXVII. 29. Ibidem.
"Et qui foveam fodit, inci- "Qui foveam proximo suo
det in earn," etc. fodit in eamdemincidet."
Sap. II. 12.
(Already quoted.)
Dan. XII.
Eccli. XV. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Idem, Epist. XIX.
(Already quoted.)
Idem, Epist. ad Marcellinum,
9-
"Spiritu edoctus quisque ser-
monem administrat ita ut . . .
aliquando historias praescribant
ut Daniel Susannas — ."
Ibid. 29.
(Already quoted.)
S. Ath. Expositio in Ps.
Baruch II. 35. LXXVII. 10.
"Et statuam illis testamen- "Novam Evangelii tradi-
tum alterum sempiternum, ut tionem dicit atque illud: 'Ecce
sim illis in Deum, et ipsi erunt dies venit, et disponam cum eis
mihi in populum," etc. testamentum novum.'
Eccli. II. 1. Idem, in Ps. CXVII.
"Fili, accedens ad servitu- " — juxta illud: "Accedis^ad
tern' Dei, sta in justitia, et ti- serviendum Domino, praepara
more, et praspara animam tuam animam tuam ad tenta-
ad tentationem." tionem.' "
THE CAXON OF THE IV. CENTURY
379
Eccli. XVIII. 6.
"Cum consummaverit homo,
tunc incipiet," etc.
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.
Idem, Ps. CXVIII. 60.
Repetit idem.
Ibidem 96.
— "juxta illuri: 'Cum con-
summatur homo, tunc incipit."
St. Ath. De Titulis Psalm-
orum, De Ps. LXXVII.
137-
"Et in terra visus est, et cum
hominibus conversatus est."
(Repetit idem in Ps. XCIII.)
St. Athan, Fragmenta in
Math.
"Eodem quoque modo senes
duo cum Susannas dixissent:
'Ecce in concupiscentia tui su-
mus—.' "
Eccli. XXIII. 22. Ibid.
"Anima calida quasi ignis " — juxta Sapiential verbum:
ardens non extinguetur, donee 'Anima calida est ut ignis ac-
aliquid glutiat." census.' "
Dan. XIII. Ibid.
"Daniel vero lascivos senes
sycophantiae causa a se damna-
tos juxta legem Movsis ultus
est."
Ibid. De Falsis Prophetis.
"Si videris sapientem ali-
quem, ex consilio Sapientiae,
mane vigila ad ilium, stationes
portarum ejus terat pes tuus,
ut ab eo ediscas legis umbras et
gratiarum dona."
Ibid. De Lunaticis.
" — Sapientia ita loquente:
etc. 'A luna. sisrnum diei festi.'
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,"
380 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Maccab. Passim. Expositio in Ps. LXXVIII.
"Carnes sanctorum tuorutn
bestiis terra. Quomodo enim
sancti non fuerant quorum san-
guis efifusus est pro legis obser-
vantia, ex quorum erant nu-
mero Maccabsei?"
No man can say that St. Athanasius simply considered
these books as pious productions, somewhat like to our Imi-
tation of Christ. Quoting a text from Judith, as we have
seen above, Contra Arianos II. 38, he explicitly adds "ut
t estatur 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-
icity and divinity were not in the mind of Athanasius con-
vertible terms. There had been no official promulgation of a
canon, and hence he applied the term to the list of books
which of old had received the sanction of the Synagogue.
We feel warranted, then, in saying that as a witness of tra-
dition in his practical use of Scripture the weight of Athana-
sius' authority is with us, while, in his capacity of critic, he
accords to the deuterocanonical books in general a venera-
tion which the Church never gave to any but divine books.
We omit the Synopsis Scripturae, formerly falsely
ascribed to Athanasius, since it covers the same ground as
the testimony already quoted.
Another Father whose authority is invoked against us is
St. Cyril of Jerusalem.*
*St. Cyril of Jerusalem was 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
episcopate was troubled by the opposition of the Arians, then powerful in
the East. He was often exiled by the intrigues of these, and was marked
for death by Julian the Apostate; but the death of Julian prevented the
execution of his project. Cyril died in his see in 386. In one of his letters
to Constans he testifies of a marvelous luminous apparition of a cross
which extended from Mt. Calvary to Mt. Olivet which was witnessed by
many for several hours. His chief works are his Catecheses to the Cate-
chumens and Neophytes. Although some of Cyril 's opinions are strange,
he was a staunch defender of the faith, and he merits to be considered
a coryphaeus in patristic theology.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY MM
The testimony upon which his authority is invoked
against us is found in his fourth Cathechesis, 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
nothing of the Apocrypha. For thou, who art ignorant of
those books which are recognized and received by all, why
dost thou wretchedly lose thy labor about those which are
doubtful and controverted? Read the divine Scriptures,
the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, which the
seventy-two interpreters translated . . . Read these
twenty-two books, and have naught to do with the Apocrypha.
These alone studiously meditate and handle, which we also
read in the Church with certain confidence. Much more
prudent and more pious were the Apostles and the ancient
bishops, the rectors of the Church, who handed them down.
Thou, therefore, being a child of the Church, overstep not the
established laws." Continuing, he gives the same canon as
that of Athanasius, except that he conjoins Ruth with
Judges, and includes Esther, thus preserving the number
twenty-two. And he adds: "But let all the other (books)
he held outside (the canon) in a second (inferior order) . And
whatever are not read in the churches, do thou not read these
even privately."
In truthfully weighing this testimony, we find in the first
sentence the adoption of our criterion of inspiration : "Studi-
ously also learn from the Church what are the books of the Old
Testament, and what of the New." In the enunciation of this
eternal verity, Cyril spoke in the name of the whole Church.
It was always believed, and always will be believed by those
of the faith of Christ, that it was the province of the Church
to regulate the code of Scripture. This every Father be-
lieved and taught. Neither does Cyril characterize as apo-
cryphal the deuterocanonical books. He considered them
doubtful and of an inferior rank, and hence, exhorts the
catechumens to make use of those concerning which there
was no doubt. In forbidding the converts to read privately
the books which were not read in the Church, he tacitly
allows such private reading of the deuterocanonical books.
382 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
The spirit of the Church at Jerusalem was extremely con-
servative, tinged with Judaism. Naturally for such the
books which the Synagogue did not recognize would be re-
garded with some disfavor. Cyril was influenced by the
trend of religious thought reigning at Jerusalem. He sacri-
ficed nothing by his strict views on the canon. The pro-
tocanonical books are the most useful ; the Church had not
defined the Canon ; and Cyril safeguarded the rights of the
Church by bidding everyone go to her for the Canon. The
protocanonical and deuterocanonical books were not made
absolutely equal 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 venera-
tion than that given the protocanonical books. The slight
doubt that reigned in some churches regarding their divine
origin induced Cyril to place them in an inferior rank. In
the uncertainty of religious thought of his time, he judged
it better that the neophytes should devote their study to
the absolutely certain sources of divine truth. Were Cyril
alive to-day, he would learn from the Church to receive the
complete Canon.
In his practical use of Scripture, Cyril follows the usage
of the Church, and often quotes the deuterocanonical books,
as the following examples will show ■
Dan. III. 27, 29. Catech. II. XVI.
" — quia Justus es in omnibus " — illicque pro malorum re-
quas fecisti nobis, et universa medio dicebant: 'Justus es, Do-
opera tua vera, et viae tuae rec- mine, in omnibus quae fecisti
tae, et omnia judicia tua vera, nobis: peccavimus enim et
Peccavimus, et inique egimus," inique egimus.' "
etc.
Eccli. III. 22. Catech. VI. 4.
"Altiora te ne quassieris, et "Profundiora tene quaesieris,
fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris: et f ortiora te ne investiges : quae
sed quae praecepit tibi Deus, ilia tibi praecepta sunt, ea mente
cogita semper, et in pluribus agita."
operibus ejus ne fueris curio-
sus."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
383
Sap. XIII. 2.
" — sed aut ignem, aut spiri-
tum, aut citatum aerem, aut
gyrum stellarum, aut nimiam
aquam, aut solem et lunam,
rectores orbis terrarum deos
putaverunt."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter
poterit creator horum videri."-
Ibid. 8.
"Deum nonnulli ignem esse
senserunt."
Catech. IX. 2.
"juxta Salomonem qui ait:
'nam ex magnitudine et pul-
chritudine creaturarum, pro-
portione servata, Procreator
earum conspicitur.' "
Eccli. XLIII. 2. Ibid. 6.
"Sol in aspectu annuntians " — nonne admirari oportet
in exitu, vas admirabile opus eum qui in solis fabricam in-
excelsi." spexerit? nam modici vasis ap-
parens vim ingentem complect-
itur; ab oriente apparens et in
occidentem usque lumen emit-
tens."
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — magnitudine enim spe-
ciei et creaturas, cognoscibiliter
poterit Creator horum videri."
Baruch III. 36-38.
"Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus
eum. Hie adinvenit omnem
viam disciplinae, et tradidit
illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel
dilecto suo. Post hasc in terris
visus est, et cum hominibus
conversatus est."
Ibid. 16.
" — et ex his quae dicta lec-
taque sunt, quaeque ipse re-
perire aut cogitare poteris, ex
magnitudine et pulchritudine
creaturarum, proportione ser-
vata, Auctorem earum con-
spicias."
Catech. XI. 15.
" — audi Prophetam diccn-
tem: 'Hie est Deus noster, non
reputabitur alius adversus eum.
Invenit omnem viam scieir
et dedit earn Jacob puero suo,
et Israel dilecto a se. Post
haec in terra visus es1 cum
hominibus conversatus est."
384 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Eccli. II. 22. Ibid. 19.
"Ne extollas te ipsum, ne ca-
das. Quae tibi mandata sunt ea
sola meditare."
Catech. XII. 5.
"At maximum hoc opificio-
rum Dei in paradiso choros ag-
ens inde diaboli ejecit invidia."
Catech. XIII. 8.
"Nee enim ad accipiendum
ad accipiendum, et ad dandum tantum porrecta, verum etiam
collecta." ad operandum prompta tibi sit
manus."
(Already quoted.)
Sap. II. 24.
' ' Invidia autem diaboli mors
introivit in orbem terrarum — . ' '
Eccli. IV. 36.
"Non sit porrecta manus tua
Dan. XIV. 35.
"Et apprehendit eum Ange-
lus Domini in vertice ejus, et
portavit eum capillo capitis
sui."
' Sap. VI. 17.
"Quoniam dignos se ipsa cir-
cuit quserens, et in viis ostendit
se illis hilariter, et in omni pro-
videntia occurrit illis."
Dan. XIII. 42-45.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante-
quam fiant, tu scis, quoniam
falsum testimonium tulerunt
contra me, et ecce, morior, cum
nihil horum fecerim, quae isti
malitiose composuerunt adver-
sum me. Exaudivit autem Do-
minus vocem ejus. Cumque
duceretur ad mortem, suscita-
vit Dominus spiritum sanctum
pueri junioris, cujus nomen
Daniel--- "
Catech. XIV. 25.
"Si enim Habacuc ab angelo
translatus est, per comam sui
capitis portatus," etc.
Catech. XVI. 19.
" — tantum illi ostia aperia-
mus ; circumit enim qucerens dig-
nos."
Ibid. 31.
"Idem (Spiritus Sanctus) sa-
pientem effecit Danielis ani-
marn ut seniorum judex esset
adolescens. Damnata fuerat
casta Susanna tamquam impu-
dica; vindex nullus; quis enim
earn a principibus eripuisset?
Ad mortem ducebatur, in man-
ibus lictorum jam erat. . . scrip-
turn est enim: 'Suscitavit Deus
Spiritum sanctum in puero
juvenculo.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 385
Catech. XXIII. Mystago-
Eccli. XXXIV. 9. gia, V. 17.
"Qui non est tentatus, quid " — et quomodo alicubi dic-
scit?" turn est: 'Vir non tentatus, non
est probatus.' "
We must admit that Cyril's use of deuterocanonical
Scripture is more restricted than that of other writers, but it
is sufficient to show how the general belief and usage of the
Church overcame the critical views of the individual. The
force of such general acceptance of the Church may easily be
judged from this alone, that in the very catecheses in
which he recommends to the catechumens the use of only
the protocanonical books, he himself employs the deutero-
canonical books as divine Scripture.
There is also alleged against us the authority of
Epiphanius.*
The passage upon which his opposition to the deutero-
canonical works is founded, occurs in the fourth chapter of
the treatise on Weights and Measures. In this chapter he
endeavors to make the number of canonical books of the
Old Testament accord with the twenty-two letters of the He-
brew alphabet. Of course, he only enumerates the books of
the Jewish Canon. The closing words of the chapter are:
♦St. Epiphanius was 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
reading is apparent in his works. In 366 he was made Bishop of Salamina
the metropolis of Cyprus, in the capacity of bishop, he was a sturdy bul-
wark against the teeming heresies of that age. He bitterly opposed the
theories of Origcn, and, in his zeal to anathematize him, was discourteous
to John Chrysostom. His imprudent zeal often led him to encroach on the
jurisdiction of other bishops. He died on a return voyage by sea from
Constantinople to Cyprus in 403. The works of Epiphanius exhibit a vast
erudition, marred by a lack of criticism and by the insertion of many
fables. He was a compiler more than an original thinker. His style is
harsh, negligent, obscure and often without logical sequence. He lacked
the power and discerning mind to master and order the vast amount that
he had read. His chief works are his Panarium or Treatise againsl the
Heresies, the Anchorage, the Treatise of the Weights and Measures of the
Jews, and a treatise concerning the twelve precious stones of the rational
of the High Priest of the Jews
(25) U.S.
386 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
"Regarding the two books that are written in verse, that is,
the Wisdom of Solomon, which is called Panaretus, and the
book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, the grandson of Jesus, who
wrote this book of Wisdom in Hebrew, which his grandson
Jesus translated into Greek, although they are useful and
profitable, they are by no means placed in the Canon of
Scripture. Hence, they were not placed in the Ark of the
testament." The obscurity and lack of critical acumen of
the writer appear in this short extract. It is evident that
he supposes that the divine books of the Jews were placed
in the Ark of the covenant, whereas only the Decalogue
was therein placed. The term canonical with Epiphanius,
signified the official approbation by the Synagogue. Being
a native of Palestine, his mind was in a measure tinged by
Judaizing theories. In his day, the deuterocanonical books
were not officially canonized by any universal authority.
They had the sanction of usage and the veneration of the
Church, but this did not make them equal in extrinsic author-
ity to the books that Jew and Christian had always con-
sidered divine. Although Epiphanius speaks only of Wis-
dom and Ecclesiasticus his words equally apply to the other
deuterocanonical books, since their history has always been
the same. The reason that Tobias, Judith and Maccabees
receive no recognition from Cyril and Epiphanius is most
probably that they are not so useful to impart dogmatic
truths. Comely and others think that Epiphanius, in giv-
ing in this place the restricted Jewish Canon, tacitly infers
the existence of an enlarged Christian Canon. We fail to
find this opinion credible. Everything seems to demon-
strate that the canonization spoken of in those days was
simply the official sanction of the Synagogue. This was the
one and only Canon that these Fathers recognized, but in
excluding the other books from it they did not deny them
divinity, although many accorded them an inferior dignity.
All the books were read ; all were venerated by the faithful ;
but the books of the first Canon had the external sanction of
the Synagogue, which raised them theoretically above the
others. It was only in the Council of Trent, that the official
declaration of the Church made the two classes perfectly
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY MS?
equal. Now, such official declaration being wanting, it is
not strange that these Fathers, theoretically treating the
question should not place these books in the Canon. Neither
is it strange that individuals should have doubted concern-
ing the divinity of these books. It shows the need of the
Magisterium of the Church, which entered at the appropri-
ate time, and took away all doubt by her authoritative voice.
That Epiphanius, at least, considered Wisdom and Ec-
clesiasticus as divine Scripture appears from the following
passage from 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-seven books of the Old Testament, and are enu-
merated as twenty-two; then the four Holy Gospels. . . the
Books of Wisdom, that of Solomon, and of the Son of Sirach,
and in fine all the books of Scripture." Hence, Epiphanius,
as it were, made two classes of the Old Testament Scrip-
tures ; the books canonized by the Jews, and those adopted
and used by the Church as Holy Writ. In favor of the
former was the authority of the Synagogue ; while all used
and venerated the latter, as, individuals, they did not feel
warranted in according them a prerogative that the Church
had not yet given. a
Epiphanius' use of the deuterocanonical books will ap-
pear from the following passages:
Adversus Haereses, Lib. I.
Eccli. VII. 1. Haeres. XXIV. 6.
"Noli facere mala, et non te "— quemadmodum Scriptura
apprehendent." testatur: 'Qui quaerunt mala,
mala eos apprehendent.' "
Sap. III. 14. Ibid- Haeres. XXVI. 15.
" — et spado, qui non opera- "Ad haec alio in loco Spiritus
tus est per manus suas iniqui- Sanctus ... hoc modo vaticina-
tatem " etc. *us es^: 'Beata sterilis incoin-
quinata, quae nescivit torum in
delicto, et spado, qui non oper-
atus est manibus suis iniqur
torn.' "
:;ss
THE CAXOX OF THE IV. CEXTURY
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 caro ad similem sibi
conjungetur, et omnis homo si-
mili sui sociabitur."
Eceli. XLIII. 26.
"Qui navigant mare, enar-
rent pericula ejus; et audientes
auribus nostris admirabimur."
Eccli. XIV. 5.
"Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii
bonus erit''"
Sap. VII. 2.
"Decern mensium tempore
coagulatus sum in sanguine,"
etc.
Baruch III. 36-38.
"Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversus eum.
Hie adinvenit omnem viam dis-
ciplines et tradidit illam Jacob
puero suo et Israel dilecto suo.
Ibid. Haeres. XXX. 25.
"Quae causa est cur in Mac-
cabaeorum libris scriptum sit:
' — e Cittiensium terra genus
quodam esse propagatum.' "
Ibid. 31.
"Novit enim omnia Deus an-
tequam fiant, 'ut est Scrip-
turn: "
Ibid. Haeres. XXXII. 8.
"Quoniam avis omnis secun-
dum genus suum congregatur,
et omnis homo simili sui sociab-
itur 'ait Scriptura.' "
Ibid. Haeres. XLII. 9.
" — ut haec in nobis vera sit
Scripturae sententia: 'Qui navi-
gant mare.virtutes Domini nar-
rant." '
Ibid. Haeres. XLII. Refut.
70.
"Quis seipsum in praeceps
impellit, impletque quod scrip-
tum est: 'Qui sibi nequam est,
cui bonus erit?' "
Ibid. Lib. II. Haeres. II. 29.
"In quo ad Salomonis dic-
tum illud allusisse videntur:
'Decern mensium spatio con-
cretus in sanguine."
Ibid. Haeres. LVII. 2.
" — ut Scriptura declarat:
'Hie est Deus tuus: non reputa-
bitur alius ad ipsum. Invenit
omnem viam scientiae et dedit
illam Jacob puero suo, et Israel
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
389
Post hasc in terris visus est, et
cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Baruch III. 36.
(Already quoted.)
dilecto suo. Post hasc in terra
visus est, et cum hominibus
conversatus est.' "
Ibid. 9.
"Scriptum est, inquit: 'Iste
Deus est noster, et non aestima-
bitur alius.' "
Eccli. XX. 2.
"Concupiscentia spadonis de-
virginabit juvenculam — ."
Eccli. XXVII 2.
"Sicut in medio compaginis
lapidum palus figitur sic et in-
ter medium venditionis et
emptionis angustiabitur pecca-
tum."
Sap. I. 13.
"Quoniam Deus mortem non
fecit, nee laetatur in perditione
vivorum."
Ibid. Hceres. LVIII. 4.
" — a Sapiente dicitur: 'Con-
cupiscentia spadonis devirgina-
bit juvenculam."
Ibid. Haeres. LIX. 7.
"Atque 'ut palus,' inquit, in-
ter duos lapides conteritur, sic
peccatum in medio ejus qui
emit et vendit.' "
Ibid. Hseres. LXIV. 19.
"Deus enim mortem non fe-
cit, nee delectatur in perditione
viventium. Invidia vero dia-
boli mors introivit in mundum,
ut per Salomonem Sapientia
testatur."
Sap. I. 14.
"Creavit enim, ut essent om-
nia: et sanabiles fecit nationes
orbis terrarum: et non est in
illis medicamentum exterminii,
nee inferorum regnum in terra. ' '
Ibid. Haeres.. LXIV. 31.
' ' — id quod Sapientia confirm -
at his verbis: 'Creavit enim
ut essent omnia Deus; et salu-
tares sunt mundi generationes.
Nee est in illis medicamentum
exitii.' "
Sap. II. 23. Ibid. 34.
"Quoniam Deus creavit ho- "Creavit enim, ait Sapientia,
minem inexterminabilem, et ad hominem in incorruptione ; ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fe- imaginem aeternitatis suae fecit
cit ilium."
ilium."
390
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Sap. III. 1-4.
"Justorum autem animae in
manu Dei sunt, et non tanget
illos tormentum mortis. Visi
sunt oculis insipientium mori:
et asstimata est afflictio exitus
illorum: et quod a nobis est iter,
exterminium: illi autem sunt
in pace. Et si coram hominibus
tormenta passi sunt, spes illo-
rum immortalitate plena est."
Sap. VII. 2.
"—decern mensium tempore
coagulatus sum in sanguine, ex
semine hominis, et delecta-
mento somni conveniente."
Eccli. X. 13.
"Cum enim morietur homo,
haereditabit serpentes, et bes-
tias, et vermes."
Sap. III. 4-6.
"Et si coram hominibus tor-
menta passi sunt, spes illorum
immortalitate plena est. In
paucis vexati, in multis bene
disponentur: quoniam Deus
tentavit eos, et invenit illos
dignos se. Tamquam aurum in
fornace probavit illos, et quasi
holocausti hostiam accepit illos,
et in tempore erit respectus il-
lorum."
Ibid. 36.
"Idem vero per Salomonem
in eo libro qui Sapientia inscri-
bitur ostendit ubi: 'Justorum,'
inquit, 'animae in manu Dei
sunt, et non tanget illos tor-
mentum. Visi sunt oculis insi-
pientum mori, et aestimata est
afflictio exitus illorum, et quod
a nobis est iter, exterminium.
Illi autem sunt in pace, et spes
illorum immortalitate plena
est.' "
Ibid. 39.
" — Christi corpus non ex vol-
untate viri, ac voluptate som-
nique congressione in iniquit-
atibus esse susceptum."
Ibid.
' ' Quam ob causam sapiens ille
Sirach ita pronuntiat: 'Cum
enim morietur homo, haeredit-
abit serpentes, et bestias, et
vermes.' "
Ibid. 48.
"Quam vero consentanea iis
de martyribus a Salomone pro-
nuntiata sint, attendite. Neque
enim aliarum Scripturarum testi-
monio caremus. 'Deus,' inquit,
'tentavit eos, et invenit eos dig-
nosse. Tamquam aurum in for-
nace probavit illos; et sicut ho-
locaustum suavitatis accepit
illos; et in tempore visitationis
illorum,' etc. Cum antea dixis-
set: 'Et si coram hominibus
tormenta passi sunt, spes illo-
rum immortalitate plena est.
In paucis correpti magna bene-
ficia consequentur.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
391
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore sub-
dito peccatis."
Sap. IV. 12.
"Fascinatio enim nugacitatis
obscurat bona, et inconstantia
concupiscentiae transvertit sen-
sum sine malitia."
Sap. IV. 8-12.
"Senectus enim venerabilis
est non diuturna 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
intelligentes, nee ponentes in
praecordiis talia. — "
Baruch III. 36.
"Hie est Deus noster, et non
sestimabitur alius adversus
cum."
Ibid. 37.
"Hie adinvenit omnem viam
disciplinae, et tradidit illam Ja-
cob puero suo, et Israel dilecto
suo."
Ibid. 38.
"Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Ibid. 54.
"Praeterea Salomon: 'In ma-
levolam,' inquit, 'animam non
introibit sapientia, nee habita-
bit in corpore obnoxio pec-
cato.' "
Ibid. Haeres. LXV. 1.
"Nam in illo Scriptures dic-
tum illud impletur: 'Fascinatio
enim nugacitatis obscurat bo-
na, et inconstantia concupi-
scentiae transvertit mentem
sine malitia."
Ibid. Haeres. LXVII. 4.
"Hie igitur: 'Senectus,' in-
quit, 'venerabilis non longae-
va,' " etc.
Ibid.
"Ut autem de pueris loqui
ilium appareat statim adjicit:
'Consummatus in brevi (quasi
dicat: mortuus juvenis) imple-
vit tempora multa. Placita e-
nim erat Domino anima illius:
propterea festinavit eum edu-
cere de medio malitiae."
Ibid. Haeres. LXIX. 31.
"Alter cum ipso minime
comparabitur."
Ibid.
"Quid porro? Ut de Filio ser-
monem esse cognoscas, dein-
ceps ista subjecit: 'Invenit om-
nem viam scientiae et dedit
illam.' "
Ibid.
"Turn postea: 'In terra visus
est, et cum hominibus conver-
satus est.' "
392
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Ibid. 37, 38.
Ibid. 38.
Esther XIII. 9.
" — et dixit: Domine, Do-
mine, rex omnipotens, in di-
tione enim tua cuncta sunt pos-
ita, et non est, qui possit tuae
resistere voluntati, si decreveris
salvare Israel."
Baruch III. 37, 38.
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum: et
hoc, quod continet omnia, sci-
entiam habet vocis."
Eccli. XIV. 5.
"Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii
bonus erit ? et non jucundabitur
in bonis suis."
Sap. IX. 14.
"Cogitationes enim morta-
lium timidae, et incertae provi-
dentias nostras — ."
Ibid. 53.
Ibid. 55.
Ibid. Lib. III. Heeres. LXX.
7-
"Sed et illud proinde certum,
posse ilium quae velit efficere:
'Nullus est enim qui ejus volun-
tati resistat.' "
Ibid. Hceres. LXXI. 3.
"Qui in venit omnem viam sci-
ential. Exstitisse vero divina
Scriptura non dubitat. Nam
quae sequuntur ante ilium ex-
stitisse declarant. Velut quod
omnem viam scientiae reper-
isse dicatur, deinde in terris
visus esse."
Ibid. Haeres. LXXIV.
"Spiritus enim Domini re-
plevit orbem terrarum."
Ibid. Hasres. LXXVI. Con-
fut. VIII.
"Ecquis igitur illius misere-
bitur, qui sibi ipsi malus, nem-
ini alteri bonus est?"
Ibid. LXXVI. Confut.
XXXI.
" — siquidem divina majes-
tas, Patris inquam et Filii et
Spiritus Sancti, angelorum
mentes omnes longo intervallo
superat, nedum hominum quo-
rum timid® cogitationes."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
393
Baruch, III. 38.
"Post haec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
The frequency with which
Fathers manifests that they
prove the Incarnation.
Sap. XIV. 20.
"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 curio-
sus."
Dan. III. 57.
"Benedicite omnia opera Do-
mini Domino — ."
He repeats this passage
Canticle in the twenty-fourth
Sap X. 21
" — quoniam sapientia aper-
uit os mutorum, et linguas in-
fantum fecit disertas."
Sap. VIII. 2
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
St. Epiph. Expositio Fidei
XVI.
" — ac denique verus ut ap-
pareret Filius, et illud Propheta
vat iii >iium expleret: 'Et post
haec enim in terra visus est, et
cum hominibus conversatus
est. "
this passage is quoted by the
considered it a classic text to
St. Epiph. Ancoratus II.
" 'Initium quippe fornica-
tionis est exquisitio idolorum,'
ut ait Scriptural
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.' "
and other portions of the
and twenty-fifth Chapters.
Ibid. XXXI.
" — quique balbutientium
linguam disertam praestitit,"
etc.
Ibid. XLII.
"Ad haec Salomon alia in
quamdam sapientiam appell;
394
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
sam mihi earn assumere, et
amator f actus sum formae il-
lius."
Baruch III. 38.
"Post hasc in terns visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Esther XIII. 9.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. II. 23.
"Quoniam Deus creavit ho-
minem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis sua? fe-
cit ilium."
'Amavi,' inquit, 'pulchritudi-
nem ejus et earn mihi sponsam
duxi.' "
Ibid. LXXVIII.
"Christus autem Deus e
ccelo, verbum e Maria caro fac-
tum est hominemque suscepit,
et nobiscum, ut ait Scriptura,
versatus est."
Ibid. XCVI.
(Already quoted.)
St. Epiph. Epist. ad Joan.
Episcopum Hieros. Cap.
VI.
"Dicit enim (Salomon) in Sa-
pientia quae titulo ejus inscribi-
tur: 'Creavit Deus incorrup-
tum hominem, et imaginem
suae proprietatis dedit ei.'
Here, in the clearest terms, Epiphanius makes known
that his exclusion of a book from the list of those called ca-
nonical, was not equivalent to denying it the authority of
divine Scripture. He certainly believed that he was quot-
ing the revealed word, when he introduces these passages in
the solemn formulae, "ut ait Scriptura," "Scriptum est," etc.
Neither did he quote these passages at random, not advert-
ing to the fact that they were not in the Canon. He often
specifies the bock, and speaks of the authors. We believe that
had the other deuterocanonical books been equally service-
able for dogmatic argument, he would have drawn also from
them as from Scriptural sources. At least, our adversaries
must admit that Epiphanius is a staunch supporter of the
divinity of at least three deuterocanonical books, and also
of the deuterocanonical fragments of Daniel, and that his
exclusion of the deuterocanonical books from the list then
termed canonical, cannot be construed to signify non-
inspiration of the same.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY IJ!).")
Among the adversaries of the deuterocanonical books is
placed Gregory Nazianzenus.*
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 historici libri omnes duodecim,
Antiquioris Hcbraica? sapientias:
Primus Genesis, deinde Exodus et Leviticus;
Postea Numeri, turn Deuteronomium,
Deinde Josue et Judices: Ruth octavus est.
Nonus decimusque liber, res gestae Regum,
Et Paralipomcna ; Esdram habes ultimo loco.
Quinque versibus scripti sunt, quorum primus Job,
Postea David, turn Salomonis tres,
Ecclesiastes, Canticum, et Proverbia.
Similiter quinque Spiritus prophetici;
Ac uno quidem continentur libri duodecim :
Osee, et Amos, et Micheas tertius;
Deinde Joel, postea Jonas, Abdias.
Nahum, Habacuc et Sophonias,
Aggaeus, deinde Zacharias, Malachias,
Uno hi continentur libro: secundo Isaias,
Tertio qui vocatus est Jeremias ab infantia,
Quarto Ezechiel, quinto Danielis gratia.
Veteres quidem numeravi duos et viginti libros
Hebraeorum elementorum numero respondentes."
*Gregory Nazianzenus, takes his distinctive title from Nazianzus, a
small town in the south-west of Cappadocia, which is not known to the
early geographers, and owes its chief importance to its connection with our
author. It is impossible to fix with exactness the date of his birth ; accord-
ing to the Bollandists it should be placed before the year 300. His father,
at first an infidel, was converted by his wife Nonna, and afterwards was
Bishop of Nazianzus; his mother St. Nonna, considered the infant Gregory
as given her in answer to her prayers.
Gregory studied at Caesarea, Alexandria and Athens, and became pro-
ficient in Greek oratory and poetry. He contracted in youth a friend-
ship for St. Basil which lasted through life. The two 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 or-
ordained priest by his father, and then bishop, by St. Basil. Gregory,
however, soon after abandoned his see for the solitude, but emerged thence
again at the instance of his decrepit father, and executed the episcopal
functions in Nazianzus without assuming the name of bishop. After the
death of his parent, he again sought the desert, but was brought thence
by his friends, and placed in the see of Constantinople. He was favored
by Theodosius the Great, and resisted the swarming heresies of the time,
chief among which was the heresy of Arius.
396 THE CAXOX OF THE IV. CENTURY
After enumerating in succession all the books of the New
Testament, excepting the Apocalypse, he concludes:
"Si quid est extra hunc numerum non est ex germanis Scrip-
turis."
In the celebrated Carmen ad Seleucum. a Canon occurs
differing from the foregoing only in this, that he admits in it
Esther, which did not appear in the first Carmen, and also
the Apocalypse with the qualification :
"Apocalypsim autem Johannis
Quidam vero admittunt, pars vero major
Spuriam asserunt."
Basing their judgment on this difference in the Canons,
and on the testimony of some codices, some have denied to
Gregory the authorship of the Carmen ad Seleucum, and
have attributed it to Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium
(344 — 394), the friend of Gregory, called by him the "irre-
proachable pontiff, " the ' 'angel, ' ' and ' 'hero of truth. ' ' The
opinion rests principally on the authority of Combefis, the
editor of Amphilochius' works, and in my judgment has
little 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 con-
sidered divine.
Gregory concludes his canon in the Carmen ad Seleucum
. these words:
— "His certissimus
Canon tibi sit divinarum Scripturarurn."
It would seem, at first sight, that these testimonies mani-
fest a certain opposition to the deuterocanonical books.
However, in the Carmen ad Seleucum, 252-257, Gregory
The perfidy and envy of his enemies induced him to resign again the
see of Constantinople, and he finally sought the solitude of the desert
again, where he died in 389 A. D.
Gregory was by nature severe and inclined to the life of an ascetic. His
vast erudition caused Jerome to journey to Constantinople to hear him.
His writings are at times excessively ornate, and sometimes uncritical.
His chief works are fifty-five orations, a great number of letters, and many
poems.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 397
declares that he allows to the deuterocanonical books a sort
of middle place between uninspired and inspired Scripture :
"Non omnis liber pro certo habendus
Qui venerandum Scripturae nomen praefc rt
Sunt cnim, sunt (ut nonnunquam fit) inscripti falsi nominis
Libri : nonnulli quidem intermedii sunt ac vicini,
Ut ita dixerim, veritatis doctrines;
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 "Filia vocis." This was an erroneous ex-
planation of a fact. The fact was that these books bore
the name of divine Scripture ; they entered into the deposit
of faith of the Church ; the faithful learned them by memory :
Gregory himself, as we shall see by numerous passages from
his writings, had drunk deeply from these fountains.
On the other hand, they were not in the official list of the
Synagogue. This alone was sufficient to cast such doubt
upon them with the extremely conservative Cappadocian
school, of which Gregory is a representative exponent, that
they stopped short of inserting them in the Canon; at the
same time they honored them as sources of divine truth.
The other Cappadocian Fathers, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa
and Caesarius, frequently cite Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as
they are the books most fitted for dogmatic argument.
Basil quotes Judiih :
Lib. De Spiritu Sancto VIII.
Judith IX. 4. 19.
"Tu enim fecisti priora, et ilia "Sicuti Judith: 'Cogitasti,'
post ilia cogitasti, et hoc fac- inquit, 'et praesto fuerunt om-
tum est quod ipse voluisti." nia quas cogitasti.'
Epist. VI. ad Xectarii uxo-
II. Maccab. VII. 1. rem, 1.
"Contigit autem et septem "Maccabaeorum mater sep-
fratres una cum matre sua ap- tern filiorum mortem conspexit.
prehensos compelli a rege edere nee ingemuit, nee ignobiles lac-
contra fas carnes poreinas, rla- rymas effudit, sed gratias ag-
gris, et taureis cruciatos." ens Deo quod videret eos igi
et ferro et acerbissimis v<
bus e vinculis carnis exsolvi.
398
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Deo quidem probata fuit, Cele-
bris vero habita est apud hom-
ines."
How deeply Gregory had been influenced by the practical
usage of the Church can be learned from the following
collated passages :
Dan. XIII. s. St. Greg. Naz. Orat. II. 64.
"Et constituti sunt de popu- " — -nempe quod egressa est
lo duo senes judices in illo anno : iniquitas ex Babylone a seniori-
de quibus locutus est Dominus: bus judicibus qui populum re-
Quia egressa est iniquitas de
Babylone, a senioribus judici-
bus, qui videbantur regere
populum."
Eccli. III. 11.
"Benedictio patris firmat do-
mos filiorum — ."
Sap. V. 15.
gere videbantur.
Ibid. 96.
"Benedictio enim Patris fir-
mat domos filiorum."
Orat. V. 28.
" — tamquam lanugo quae a
— quoniam spes impii tam-
quam lanugo est, qua? a vento vento disjicitur — ."
tollitur," etc.
Sap. XVI. 13. Ibid. 29.
"Tu es enim, Domine, qui "Ecquis novit num Deus qui
vitas et mortis habes potesta- solvit compeditos, gravemque
tern, et deducis ad portas mor- et lhumis vergentem a portis
tis, et reducis. — "
Eccli. XXXVIII. 16.
"Fili, in mortuum produc
lacrymas, et quasi dira passus,
incipe plorare," etc.
Sap. III. 15.
"Bonorum enim laborum
gloriosus est fructus," etc.
Sap. V. 10, 11.
" — et tamquam navis, quas
pertransit fluctuantem aquam:
cujus, cum praeterierit, non est
vestigium in venire, neque semi-
tam carinae illius in fluctibus:
mortis in altum subvehit — . ' ' '
Orat. VII. 1.
"Super mortuum plora, et
quasi dira passus, incipe plor-
are."
Ibid. 14.
"Bonorum enim laborum
gloriosus est fructus."
Ibid. 19.
"Insomnium sumus, minime
consistens, spectrum quoddam,
quod teneri non potest, avis
prastereuntis volatus, navis in
mari vestigium non habens,
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
399
aut tamquam avis, quae trans- pulvis, vapor, ros matutinus,
volat in aere, cujus nullum in- flos momento nascens et mo-
venitur argumentum itineris," men to marcescens."
etc.
Sap. I. 4.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapien-
tia, nee habitabit in corpore
subdito peccatis."
Eccli. VI. 14, 15.
"Amicus fidelis, protectio
fortis: qui autem invenit ilium,
invenit thesaurum. Amico
fideli nulla est comparatio, et
non est digna ponderatio auri
et argenti contra bonitatem
fidei illius."
Eccli. I. 2.
"Arenam maris, et pluviae
guttas, et dies saeculi quis dinu-
meravit? Altitudinem cceli, et
latitudinem terras, et profun-
dum abyssi quis dimensus est?"
Orat. IX. 2.
"In malignam enim animam
non ingressuram sapientiam
recte dictum est."
Orat. XI. 1.
"Amico fideli nulla est com-
paratio; nee ulla est digna pon-
deratio contra bonitatem illius.
Amicus fidelis, protectio for-
tis."
Orat. XIV. 30.
"Sed quis arenam maris et
pluviae guttas et abyssi pro-
fun ditatem metiri . . . queat?"
The fifteenth oration of St. Gregory is in praise of the
Maccabees, whose feast the Church celebrated in his daw
Frequently in the course of the oration he adverts to data
taken from the first and second Books of Maccabees. The
very fact that he composed such an oration shows clearl y
that he recognized the books. Comely 's animadversion
here that Gregory has in mind only the fourth book, is erron-
eous. [Comely, Introduc. Gen. p. 98, note 18.] Gregory
in the second paragraph speaks of a book, qui rat ion cm /vr-
tiirbationibus animi imperare docet, which evidently refers t< 1
the apocryphal fourth book of Maccabees, but this w< add
only show that he united the fourth with the others in col-
lecting his argument. Most of the data of the oration are
taken from the first and second Books of Maccabees.
400
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Eccli. XL 30.
"Ante mortem ne laudes ho-
minem quemquam, quoniam in
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Baruch II. 12.
" — peccavimus, impie egi-
mus, inique gessimus, Domine
Deus noster, in omnibus jus-
titiis tuis."
Dan. XIV. 33.
"Dixitque angelus Domini
ad Habacuc: Fer prandium,
quod habes, in Babylonem
Danieli, qui est in lacu leo-
num."
Sap. XI. 21.
"Sed et sine his uno spiritu
poterant occidi persecutionem
passi ab ipsis factis suis, et dis-
persi per spiritum virtutis tuas :
sed omnia in mensura, et nu-
mero et pondere disposuisti."
Dan. XIII.
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum, et
hoc, quod continet omnia,
scientiam habet vocis."
Orat. XVI. 3.
"Nam si, ut ego cum Salo-
mone sentio, hominem ante
mortem beatum praedicare non
oportet."
Ibid. 12.
" — adjungam: Peccavimus,
inique egimus, impietatem feci-
mus."
Orat. XVIII. 30.
' ' — aut per prophetam in sub-
lime raptum satians, ut Daniel-
em, an tea cum fame in lacu
premeretur."
Orat. XXIV. 1.
" — atque ut hinc initium du-
camus, quam commode, pul-
chrisque Dei mensuris, qui om-
nia cum pondere et mensura
constituit ac moderatur," etc.
Ibid. 10.
"(Deus) qui et Susannam
mortis periculo liberavit, et
Theclam servavit ; illam a saevis
senioribus, hanc a tyranno
ipsius proco et a matri adhuc
crudeliori."
Orat. XXVIII. 8.
"—ait Scriptura . . . 'Spiri-
tus Domini replevit orbem ter-
rarum.'
' Orat. XXIX. 17. He calls the Son of God "Imago
bonitatis," evidently assuming the phrase from Wisdom,
VII. 26.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
401
Baruch III. 36-38.
"Hie est Deus noster, et non
aestimabitur alius adversuseum.
Post haec in terns visus est,
et cum he-minibus conversatus
est."
Orat. XXX. 13.
" 'Hie Deus tuus, et non
aestimabitur alius praetereum.'
Et paucis interjectis: 'Post haec
in terra visus est, et cum hom-
inibus conversatus est.'
Sap. VII. 22.
"Est enim in ilia spiritus in-
telligentiae, sanctus, unicus,
multiplex, subtilis, disertus,
mobilis," etc.
Sap. I. 4.
"Quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore sub-
dito peccatis."
Sap. III. 11.
"Sapientiam enim, et disci-
plinam qui abjicit, infelix est:
et vacua est spes illorum, et la-
bores sine fructu, et inutilia
opera eorum."
Eccli. V. 14.
"Si est tibi intellectus, re-
sponde proximo: sin autem,
sit manus tua super os tuum,
ne capiaris in verbo indisci-
plinato, et confundaris."
Eccli. VII. 15.
"Noli verbosus esse in multi-
tudine presbyterorum."
Eccli. XI. 27.
"In die bonorum ne imme-
mor sis malorum. et in die mal-
orum ne immemor sis bono-
rum.—"
Orat. XXXI. 29.
"Spiritus intelligens, multi-
plex, apertus, clarus, incon-
taminatus, minimeque imped-
itus," etc.
Orat. XXXII. 12.
" — quoniam in malevolam
animam non introibit sapien-
tia."
Ibid. 20.
" — ac Deus faxit ne quid un-
quam huic occupationi praever-
tendum ducam, ne alioqui ab
ipsa Sapientia miser appeller,
ut sapientiam 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."'
(26) H. S.
402
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Dan. XIII. 5.
"Et constitute sunt de popu-
lo duo senes judices in illo
anno, de quibus locutus est
Dominus: Quia egressa est in-
iquitas de Babylone a senior-
ibus judicibus, qui videbantur
regere populum."
Dan. XIII. 42.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia ante-
quam fiant."
Eccli. III. 11.
"Benedictio patris firmat do-
mos filiorum: maledictio au-
tem matris eradicat funda-
menta."
Eccli. III. 12.
"Ne glorieris in contumelia
patris," etc.
Eccli. I. 16.
"Initium sapientiae, timor
Domini, et cum fidelibus in
vulva concreatus est, cum elec-
tis feminis graditur, et cum
justis et fidelibus agnoscitur."
Sap. III. 7.
"Fulgebunt justi, et tam-
quam scintillas in arundineto
discurrent."
Eccli. XXXII. 3.
" — ut laeteris propter illos, et
ornamentum gratias accipias
•coronam, et dignationem con-
sequaris corrogationis."
Orat. XXXVI. 3.
" — juxta Danielem egressa
est iniquitas a senioribus Baby-
lonicis, qui Israelem regere ex-
istimabantur."
Ibid. 7.
" — imo non videor, sed per-
spicuus atque manifestus sum
ei qui omnia priusquam orian-
tur novit."
Orat. XXXVII. 6.
"Item alio loco: 'Benedictio
patris firmat domos filiorum;
maledictio autem matris erad-
icat fundamental "
Ibid. 18.
"Quod si hoc etiam probas:
'Fili, ne glorieris de ignominia
patris.' "
Orat. XXXIX. 8.
"Unde Salomon nobis legem
statuit: 'Principium sapientias,'
inquit, 'posside sapientiam.'
Quidnam vocat hoc principium
sapientias? Timorem.' "
Orat. XL. 6.
" — quo tempore nimirum
justi fulgebunt sicut sol."
Ibid. 18.
"Honore eum complectere ut
te ornet, capitique tuo gratia-
rum coronam nectat."
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTUKV
•II i::
Sap. IV. 8.
"Senectus enim venerabilis
ist non diuturna, neque anno-
■um numero computata: cani
lutem sunt sensus hominis."
II. Maccab. VII. I.
"Contigit autem et septem
ratres una cum matre sua ap-
)rehensos compelli a rege edere
:ontra fas carnes porcinas, fla-
jris, et taureis cruciatos."
Sap. II. 24.
"Invidia autem diaboli mors
ntroivit," etc.
Orat. XLIII. 23.
"Quis prudentia perinde ca-
nus erat, etiam ante canitiem?
Quandoquidem hac re senectu-
tem Salomon quoque defini-
vit."
Ibid. 74.
"Mitto septem Maccabaeo-
rum dimicationem qui cum
sacerdote et matre in sanguine
atque omnis generis tormentis
consummati sunt."
Orat. XLIV. 4.
"Quoniam autem invidia
diaboli mors in mundum
introivit," etc.
The reference to Judith V. 6, in Orat. XLV. 15: "quod
st semen Chaldaicum sublatum atque oppressum Scriptura
focat," is somewhat uncertain.
Sccli. III. 11. St. Greg. Epist. LXI.
"Benedictio patris firmat do- "Ita fiet ut ab ea non modo
nos filiorum: maledictio autem pecunias habeatis, sed mater-
natris eradicat fundamenta."
Baruch III. 38.
"Post hsec in terris visus est,
;t cum hominibus conversatus
jst."
Eccli. IV. 32.
"Noli resistere contra faciem
)otentis, nee coneris contra ic-
;um fluvii."
Ecclli. XXXI. 32.
"yEqua vita hominibus vi-
nim in sobrietate: si bibas
llud moderate, eris sobrius."
nam etiam benedictionem, fili-
orum domos fulcientem, conse-
quamini."
Epist. CII.
" — atque ad hsec verba con-
fugientes: 'Post haec in terra
visus est, et cum hominibus
conversatus est.'
Epist. CLXXVIII.
"Porro non esse vi cohiben-
dum fluminis cursum, parcemia
quoque ipsa docet."
Epist. CLXXXI.
"Sin autem tibi praestantiore
monitore opus est, illud quidem
monet Salomon ut cum consilio
vinum bibas, ne mundi hujus
temulentia et vertigine agaris."
404 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
These references leave no doubt that Gregory believed
that he was there quoting divine Scripture. The whole
Church used them, committed them to memory, proved
and illustrated their dogmas by them. This influence was
so powerful that even the most conservative came under it,
and as we shall see, even those who wished to turn the tide of
this tradition were inconsistent. Another Oriental authority
of this period that is objected against us is the sixtieth canon
of the Council of Laodicea. This canon explicitly defines
that the books to be read in the Church are those which we
now comprehend in the protocanonical class. The date of
the Council of Laodicea is uncertain, but it is generally be-
lieved to have been celebrated about the middle of the fourth
century. Some have doubted the genuineness of the sixtieth
canon [Herbst, Vincenzi, Malou, Danko], but as it is recog-
nized by Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. p. 749-751, we shall not
base our treatment of it upon its doubtful character. Ad-
mitting all its claims, it simply establishes that some bishops
of Phrygia in a particular council refused to allow to be read
publicly in the Church any book excepting those that were
absolutely certain. We are not endeavoring to prove that
the position of protocanonical and deuterocanonical books
were equal in the early ages of the Church. Their equality
was wrought by the Council of Trent. What we wish to
show is that these books were known to the early Christians,
venerated by them, committed to memory by them, and
considered by them as the inspired word of God.
The Council in Trullo, which the Greeks hold to be ecu-
menical, received the Canons of the Council of Laodicea,
but, as they also received the Canons of the Council of Carth-
age, they evidently intended that the decree concerning the
canonical Scriptures should be modified in accordance with
the complete Canon of the Council of Carthage.
The Greeks also in the Council in Trullo received various
Apocryphal documents of the fifth century called the Canons
of the Apostles. The eighty-fifth canon of this collection is
sometimes cited against us, as it does not contain any of the
deuterocanonical books, save the books of Maccabees. This
canon can have no weight, since it embraces three books of
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 405
tfaccabees, two epistles of St. Clement of Rome, and the
>ight books of the Constitutiones Apostolorum.
The Council in Trullo in receiving this Canon could not
lave excluded the Canon of the Council of Carthage, whose
lecrees and canons it ratified. In fact, the Council in Trullo
expressly stated that the Constitutiones Apost. were adul-
;erated, and hence not to be read. It seems, however, due
,o 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
jhost in the members who composed the Council in Trullo.
One who candidly examines the data here presented
nust admit that the Oriental Church during the fourth and
ifth centuries recognized and used the deuterocanonical
Dooks as divine Scripture.
Turning now from the East to the West, we meet the first
objection taken from the writings of St. Hilary.* The
rejection is found in the fifteenth paragraph of his Prologue
)n the Book of Psalms. After seeking mystic reasons for the
lumber eight in the Scriptures, he proceeds as follows:
"And this is the cause that the law of the Old Testament
s divided into twenty-two books, that they might agree with
:he number of letters. These books are arranged according
;o the traditions of the ancients, so that five are of Moses,
*St. Hilary was born in Poitiers in France in the opening years of the
ourth century. His parents were pagans of noble rank. They procured
or their son every educational advantage, and the youth, applying him-
elf with diligence, soon came to be regarded as the most learned man of
lis age. His reading of the Holy Scriptures brought him to recognize the
ruth of the Christian faith, which he, his wife, and child Abra embraced,
le was consecrated Bishop of Poitiers in 350 or 355 and became the
taunch defender of the Church against Arianism. The Arian Saturninus of
\xles banished Hilary to Phrygia. He was called from his exile to be
>resent at the Council of Seleucia; in which council he made such head
igainst the Arians that to rid themselves of such a powerful antagonist
hey sent him back to France. The people received him as a hero from
he arena, victorious over the heretics. He set in order his diocese, and
here passed the remaining years of his holy life. He died in 367 or 368.
rlis most celebrated work is his Twelve Books on the Trinity, composed
luring his exile in Phrygia. This treatise is a classic work on the Trinity.
HLe has left also Commentaries on the Psalms and Gospels, a treatise Pe
Fide Orientalium. and numerous other shorter works.
406 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
the sixth is of Jesus Nave, the seventh is Judges and Ruth,
the first and second of Kings form the eighth ; the third and
fourth (of Kings) form the ninth ; the two books of Paralipo-
menon form the tenth ; the discourses of the days of Ezra
form the eleventh; the book of Psalms, the twelfth; Solo-
mon's proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticle of Canticles
form the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth; the twelve
Prophets form the sixteenth ; while Isaiah, then Jeremiah,
the Lamentations and the Epistle, Daniel, Ezechiel, Job, and
Esther complete the 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 twenty-four books according to the
Greek alphabet," etc.
We see here an excessive mysticism impelling a man to
reject or admit a book for the sole purpose of completing a
mystic number. This tendency had been brought into
patristic thought by Origen and the Alexandrian school.
Hilary does not reject the deuterocanonical books, but con-
siders the protocanonical as forming a class by themselves.
Hilary's weak, unsubstantial arguments are attributable to
the man impressed by the spirit of his age. The great cur-
rent of tradition was greater than any one man, and drew
Hilary with it, so that we find him ranking the deuterocan-
onical books on an equal footing with the others, as the fol-
lowing quotations will show :
Eccli. I. 33. St. Hilary Prol. in Ps. 20.
"Fili, concupiscens sapien- " — secundum id quod dic-
tiam, conserva justitiam, et turn est: 'Desiderasti sapien-
Deus prsebebit illam tibi." tiam? Serva mandata, et Dom-
inus prasstabit tibi eandem.'
Eccli. XI. 30. Tract, in XIV. Ps. 14.
"Ante mortem ne laudes ho- "Idcirco apud Salomonem
minem quemquam, quoniam in omnis laus in exitu canitur."
filiis suis agnoscitur vir."
Dan. XIII. 56. Tract, in LII. Ps. 19.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire "Sed et Daniel presbyteros
alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha- condemnans ita dicit: 'Non se-
naan, et non Juda," etc. men Abraham, sed semen Cha-
naan, et non Juda.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
407
Eccli. I. 16.
"Initium sapientiae, timor
Domini," etc.
Baruch III. 38.
"Post hsec in terris visus est,
et cum hominibus conversatus
est."
Sap. XVII. 1.
"Magna sunt enim judicia
tua, Domine, et inenarrabilia,"
etc."
Sap. VII. 27.
"Et cum sit una, omnia po-
test: et in se permanens, omnia
innovat, et per nationes in ani-
mas sanctas se transfert: ami-
cos Dei et prophetas con-
stituit."
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum," etc.
II. Maccab. VI. 18 VII. 1. et
seqq.
Judith XVI. 3.
"Dominus conterens
Dominus nomen est illi.'
bella,
Tract, in Ps. LXVI. 9.
"Et per Salomonem: '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 rursum propheta: 'Mag-
na enim sunt judicia tua, et
inenarrabilia.' "
Ibid. Littera V. 9.
"Si Apostoli docent, prior ille
docuit: 'Constituit enim Sap-
ientia amicos Dei et pro-
phetas.' "
Ibid. Littera XIX. 8.
"Et Spiritus Dei, secundum
Prophetam, replevit orbem ter-
rarum."
Tract, in Ps. CXXV. 4.
"Testes sunt mihi tres pueri
inter flammas cantantes (Dan.
III. 24 et seqq.), testis Daniel
in fame leonum prophetas pran-
dio saturatus (Dan. XIV. 35);
testis Eleazar inter jura dom-
inorum patriis suis legibus li-
ber; testes cum matre sua
martyres septem, Deo gratias
inter nova mortis tormenta
referentes."
Tract, in Ps. CXXV. 6.
" — et cantantes ex Lege: 'Do-
minus conterens bella, Dom-
inus nomen est illi."'
Certainly Hilary denied not inspiration to a book which
he honored by the august name of the "Law."
408
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Sap. VIII. 2.
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi
a juventute mea, et quaesivi
sponsam mihi earn assumere, et
amator factus sum formae il-
lius."
Ibid. 3.
"Generositatem illius glorifi-
cat contubernium habens Dei:
sed et omnium Dominus dilexit
illam— ."
Ibid. 8.
"Et si multitudinem scien-
tial, desiderat quis, scit praete-
rita, et de futuris aestimat," etc.
Ibid. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Tob. XII. 12.
' ' Quando orabas cum lacry mis
et sepeliebas mortuos, et dere-
linquebas prandium tuum, et
mortuos abscondebas per diem
in domo tua, et nocte sepeliebas
eos, ego obtuli orationem tuam
Domino."
II. Maccab. VI. 21.
"Hi autem, qui astabant, ini-
quamiserationecommoti, prop-
ter antiquam viri amicitiam,
tollentes eum secreto, rogabant
afferri carnes, quibus vesci ei
licebat, ut simularetur mandu-
casse, sicut rex imperaverat de
sacrificii carnibus — ."
Tract, in Ps. CXXVIII. 9.
"Salomon itaque ait: 'Quae-
sivi sapientiam sponsam ad-
ducere mihi ipsi.' "
Ibid.
" — hujus sponsae suae opes
memorat dicens: 'Honestatem
glorificat convictum Dei ha-
bens, et omnium Dominus di-
lexit earn.' "
Ibid.
" — et si multam quis cog-
nitionem desiderat, novit et
quae a principio sunt, et quae
futura sunt conspicit."
Ibid.
" — de qua et rursum ait: ' Ju-
dicavi igitur hanc adducere ad
convivendum mecum, et ama-
tor factus sum pulchritudinis
ejus.' "
Tract, in Ps. CXXIX. 7.
"Sunt, secundum Raphael ad
Tobiam loquentem, angeli as-
sistentes ante claritatem Dei,
et orationes deprecantium ad
Deum deferentes."
Tract, in Ps. CXXXIV. 25.
"Sanctus etiam Eleazar, cum
a principibus populi sui degus-
tare ementitUm sacrificium co-
geretur, gloriam martyrii sub
hac eadem voce consummat,
sciens," etc.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
409
Sap. I. 7. Tract, in Ps. CXXXV. 11.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini " — docet propheta dicens:
replevit orbem terrarum," etc. 'Spiritus Dei replevit orbem
terrarum.' "
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 fa-
cito stateram, et frenos ori tuo
rectos — ."
Tract, in Ps. CXL. 5.
" — ita monemur: 'Ecce cir-
cumvalla possessionem tuam
spinis; argentum et aurum
tuum constitue, et ori tuo fac
ostium, et seram, et verbis
tuis jugum et mensuram.' "
Sap. II. 12, 13. Tract, de Ps. XLI. 12.
"Circumveniamus ergo jus- "Vox cataractas fuit: 'Oppri-
tum, quoniam inutilis est no- mamusjustum, quia inutilis est
bis, et contrarius est operibus nobis, et contrarius est operibus
nostris, . . . et filium Dei se nostris, et filium Dei se nomi-
nominat." nat.' "
Sap. XIII. 5.
" — a magnitudine enim spe-
ciei et creaturae, cognoscibiliter
poterit Creator horum videri."
Dan. XIII. 42.
"Exclamavit autem voce
magna Susanna, et dixit: Deus
aeterne, qui absconditorum es
cognitor, qui nosti omnia, ante-
quam fiant — ."
II. Maccab. VII. 28.
"Peto, nate, ut aspicias ad
ccelum et terrain, et ad omnia
quae in eis sunt, et intelligas,
quia ex nihilo fecit ilia Deus, et
hominum genus — -."
De Trinitate Lib. I. 7.
" — hunc de Deo pulcherri-
mas sententiae modum pro-
pheticis vocibus apprehendit:
'De magnitudine enim operum
et pulchritudine creaturarum
consequenter generationum
Conditor conspicitur.' "
Ibid. Lib. IV. 8.
" — sicut beata Susanna dicit:
'Deus aeterne, absconditorum
cognitor, sciens omnia ante
generationem eorum.' "
Ibid. 16.
"Omnia enim secundum Pro-
phetam facta ex nihilo sunt."
410
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
II. Maccab. VII. 9.
" — et in ultimo spiritu con-
stitutus, sic ait: Tu quidem,
scelestissime, in praesenti vita
nos perdis: sed Rex mundi de-
functos nos pro suis legibus in
aeternae vitas resurrectione sus-
citabit."
Eccli. XXI. 1.
"Fili, peccasti? non adjicias
iterum: sed et de pristinis de-
precare, ut tibi dimittentur."
Sap. II. 23.
"Quoniam Deus creavit ho-
minem inexterminabilem," etc.
Lib. Contra Const. Imp. 6.
" — sciat a martyre esse dic-
tum regi Antiocho: 'Tu quidem,
iniquus, de presenti vita nos
perdis, sed Rex mundi defunc-
tos nos pro suis legibus in aeter-
nam vitam in resurrectione
suscitabit.' "
Ex Operibus Historicis Frag.
III. 24.
"Nee Dominum audiunt di_
centem: 'Peccasti? quiesce.'
Epistola VIII.
"Salomon clamat dicens:
'Deus condidit hominem ad im-
mortalitatem.' "
Ibid. IX.
"Clamat Propheta dicens:
'Et pauperem et divitem ego
feci, et pro omnibus asqualis
cura est mihi.' "
Sap. VI. 8.
"Non enim subtrahet perso-
nam cujusquam Deus, nee vere-
bitur magnitudinem cujus-
quam; quoniam pusillum et
magnum ipse fecit, et aequaliter
cura est illi de omnibus."
Hilary has here explicitly canonized every deutero canonical
book. Pie 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 ex-
isted down to the time of the Council of Trent.
The next objection which is urged against us is taken from
the fragmentary writing of Rufinus.* The objection is
*Rufinus was born at Concordia, a small village of Italy, towards the
middle of the fourth century. He early devoted himself to the acquisition
of knowledge, for which cause he took up his abode at Aquileja, whose
renown as a seat of learning had merited for it the name of the second
Rome. A desire for sanctity drew him into a monastery in this city wherein
St. Jerome first met him. There was formed between Jerome and Rufinus
the closest friendship, so that when Jerome left Aquileja to journey through
France and Germany, Rufinus, inconsolable by the separation, went in
search of him.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 411
taken from the Commentarius in Symbolum Apostolorum
36-38: "And therefore it seems apposite to clearly enu-
merate, as we have received from the testimonies of the Fa-
thers, the books of the Old and New Testaments, which, ac-
cording to the tradition of the ancients, are believed to be
inspired by the Holy Ghost, and delivered to the Church."
Then follows a list of only the protocanonical works. Con-
tinuing, he says: "It is to be known, however, that there
are other books which have been called by the Fathers not
canonical but ecclesiastical. Such are the Wisdom which
is called of Solomon, and the other Wisdom which is called
of the Son of Sirach, which book in the Latin tongue is called
by the general term of Ecclesiasticus, by which term not
the author but the quality of the Scripture is designated.
Of the same order are the books of Tobias and Judith and
the books of Maccabees, and in the New Testament the book
which is called the Pastor of Hermas, and the Two Ways or
Rufinus visited Egypt, and there formed a lasting friendship with the
celebrated St. Melania. He suffered many persecutions from the Arians.
He was sent into exile, from which Melania ransomed him, and both re-
tired to Palestine.
The esteem in which Jerome at this time held Rufinus may be known
from the following, written to a friend in Jerusalem: "You will see shine
in Rufinus the character of sanctity, while I am but dust. My feeble eyes
can scarce bear the effulgence of his virtues. He comes even now from the
cleansing crucible of persecution, and is now whiter than snow, while I am
stained by all sorts of sins."
Rufinus built a monastery on Mt. Olivet, and there labored zealously
and fruitfully in apostolic work. Having become conversant with Greek
while in Alexandria, he translated into Latin various works of the Greek
tongue. Among others, he translated the Principles of Origen. This led
to a rupture with St. Jerome, and there is nothing so bitter in patristic
literature as Jerome's subsequent invective against Rufinus. This divis-
ion was a cause of much scandal in the Church. That Rufinus led a
saintly life can not be doubted, but it seems quite certain that he became
in his later years infected with the errors of Origen. Rufinus declared
that he had acted as a mere translator of the works of Origen, and Pope
Anastasius, before whom he was cited, declared that he would leave to God
to judge of his intention. We must do the same, but in justification to
St. Jerome, it must be said that his zeal for orthodoxy caused him to re-
pudiate the man whom he had once called friend.
The most important of Rufinus' works are : De Benedictionibus Patri-
archarum, Commentarius in Symbolum Apostolorum, Historia Monacho-
rum, Historia Ecclesiastica, Apologia contra Hieronymum and an Apologia
ad Anastasium Papam. He died in Sicily in 410.
412 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Choice of Peter. All these books, they (the Fathers) wished
to be read in the churches, but not to be used for the con-
firmation of dogma."
The testimony of Rufinus well illustrates the position of
the deuterocanonical books in that age. The Church, as
the divine institution of Christ, used them, and the faith-
ful drew their spiritual teaching from them. At the same
time, some of the Fathers induced a scientific distinction
between them and the books of the first canon. This scien-
tific distinction was purely a critical judgment of the Fathers,
and was not aimed at denying to these books divine inspira-
tion. There had been no decree of the Church, and these
books had not as much extrinsically in their favor as the
others. The extremely conservative spirit of the Fathers
was content to use them as divine Scripture in their practical
use of Scripture ; while, in drawing up official lists of Scrip-
tures, they hesitated to make them equal with the books
which the Church had received from the Synagogue. In
the growth and development of doctrine, this hesitancy has
been excluded by the vital power in the Church. In the few
writings of Rufinus which remain to us, we find the following
quotations of deuterocanonical Scripture :
Eccli XXXIV. 9. Benedictio Gad 3.
"Qui non est tentatus, quid " — ita enim Scriptura dicit:
scit? Vir in multis expertus, co- 'Qui non est tentatus, non est
gitabit multa ; et qui multa didi- probabilis. ' ' '
cit, enarrabit intellectum."
Eccli. XL 30. Benedictio Joseph 3.
"Ante mortem ne laudes ho- " — sed et sanctee Scriptures
minem quemquam, quoniam in sententia est: 'Ne laudaveris
filiis suis agnoscitur vir." quemquam ante obitum.' "
Comment. inSymbolum Apost.
Baruch III. 36-38. 5.
"Hie est Deus noster, et non "Quod et Propheta prsedixe-
asstimabitur alius ad versus eum. rat ubi ait: 'Hie Deus noster,
Hie adinvenit omnem viam dis- non reputabitur alter ad eum.
ciplinae, et tradidit illam Jacob In venit omnem viam disciplinae,
puero suo, et Israel dilectosuo. et dedit earn Jacob puero suo et
Post haec in terris visus est, et Israel dilecto suo; post haec in
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 413
cum hominibus conversatus terris visus est et inter homines
est." conversatus est."
Sap. III. 7. Ibid. 46.
"Fulgebuntjusti,ettamquam " — non erit difficile credere
scintillae in arundineto discur- etiam ilia quae Prophetce prce-
rent." dixerant: 'Quod justi scilicet
fulgebunt sicut sol, et sicut
splendor firmamenti in regno
Dei."
Certainly the man who quoted these lines believed that he
was employing Holy Scripture.
In his Apologia Contra Hieronymum, Lib. II. from the
thirty-second to the thirty-seventh paragraph, Rufinus bit-
terly inveighs against St. Jerome for having dared to cut off
the deuterocanonical books.* Hence in justice and right,
Rufinus must be considered in every way favorable to the
deuterocanonical works. We now come to the Achilles of
our adversaries, St. Jerome, a man more versed in the Scrip-
tures than any other of the Fathers up to his day. He has
in many places, in no dubious terms, expressed his opposi-
tion to the deuterocanonical books. As Jerome is insepar-
ably linked with the Latin Vulgate, we deem it not amiss to
insert here an abstract of his life.
Jerome was born about the year 342 at Stridon, on the
borders of Dalmatia and Pannonia, in the midst of a semi-
barbaric population [De viris illustribus, cap. CXXXY.]
*An ut divinarum Scripturarum libros, quos ad plenissimum fidei
Instrumentum Ecclesiis Christi Apostoli tradiderunt, nova nunc et a
Judaeis mutata interpretatione mutares? . . . Quis praesumserit sacras
Sancti Spiritus voces et divina Volumina temerare ? Quis praeter te divino
muneri et Apostolorum haereditati manus intulerit.
Et quidcm cum ingens copia fuisse ex initio in Ecclesiis Dei, et preci-
pue Jerosolymis eorum, qui ex circumcisione crediderant, referatur, in
quibus utique lingua? utriusque perfectam fuisse scientiam, et legis per-
itiam probabilem, administrati pontificatus testatur officium. Quis ergo
in ista eruditorum virorum copia ausus est Instrumentum divinum, quod
Apostoli Ecclesiis tradiderunt, et depositum Sancti Spiritus compilan. i
An non est compilare cum quaedam quidcm immutantur. et error dicitur
corrigi? Nam omnis ilia historia de Susanna, qua? castitatis exemplum
pra?bebat Ecclesiis Dei. ab isto abscissa est et abjecta at que posthabita.
Trium puerorum hymnus, qui maxime diebus solemnibus in Ecclesia Dei
canitur, ab isto e loco suo penitus erasus est. Et quid per singula com-
414 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
His parents, however, were wealthy Christians, and in a
letter to Theophilus, the Patriarch of Alexandria, he testified
to the pious care which from his earliest childhood had
nourished him with the milk of the Catholic doctrine . [Epist.
LXXII. ad Theophilum, 2.] He was called Eusebius after
his father, for Hieronymus or Heirome was merely a sur-
name, or what in Latin is termed cognomen. His mother's
name we do not know. Besides an aunt, Castorina, who
seems to have shown him small affection, [Epist. XIII. ad
Castorinam Materteram] Jerome had a sister, a cause of
many anxieties, and one brother, Paulinian, whom he later
took with him to Palestine from Rome.
The young Dalmatian began his studies at Stridon, and
at the age of eighteen he went with Bonosus, a friend of his
childhood, to continue them at Rome, where he attended
the lessons of Donatus, the grammarian, and possibly those
of Victorinus, whose humble and courageous conversion has
been immortalized in the Confessions of St. Augustine.
[Confession, lib. VIII., cap. 11.]
Reading, in which his eager soul found its outlet (he tells
us himself that he studied Prophyry's Introduction, Alex-
ander of Aphrodisias' Commentaries upon Aristotle, and
Plato's Dialogues), completed his masters' teaching; and his
passion for books, which he confesses were indispensable to
him, enabled him to acquire, at the cost of the most arduous
memoro de his, quorum comprehendere numerum nequeo? De quo ut
omittam illud dicere, quod Septuaginta duorum virorum per cellulas in-
terpretantium unam et consonam vocem, dubitandum non est, Spiritus
Sancti inspiratione prolatam, et majoris id debere esse auctoritatis, quam
id quod ab uno homine, sibi Barraba aspirante, translatum est. Ut ergo
hoc omittam, vide quid dicimus, verbi causa. Petrus Romanas Ecclesiag
per viginti et quatuor annos pra?fuit: dubitandum non est, quin sicut cas-
tera, quas ad instructionem pertinent, etiam librorum Instrumenta Eccles-
iag ipse tradiderit, qua; utique jam tunc, ipso sedente et docente, recita-
bantur? Quid ergo? Decepit Petrus Apostolus Christi Ecclesiam, et
libros ei falsos et nihil veritatis continentes tradidit, et cum sciret, quod
verum est haberi apud Judaeos, apud Christianos volebat haberi quod
falsum est? Sed fortasse dicit, quia sine Uteris erat Petrus, et sciebat
quidem Judasorum libros magis esse veros, quam istos, qui erant in Eccle-
sia : sed interpretari non poterat propter sermonis imperitiam ? Et quid ?
Nihil in isto agebat ignea lingua per Spiritum Sanctum caslitus data ?
Non ergo omnibus linguis loquebantur Apostoli ? . . .
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 11.")
labor, that is by copying them with his own hand, an exten-
sive library. Epist. XXII ad Eustochium, 30.] Thus was
Jerome unconsciously preparing himself for the great works
which were to fill his life.
He was as yet only a catechumen, for in those early
centuries they frequently waited until the perilous ways of
youth had been safely traversed before conferring baptism,
and the Christian initiation was sometimes deferred from
reasons of prudence. To know, however, that this prudence
was liable to terrible mistakes one has only to recall the
anguish of Gregory Nazianzen and of Satirus, St. Ambrose's
brother, who both, when overtaken by a tempest at sea, were*
terrified at the thought of dying unbaptized. It was especi-
ally the fear of the restraints imposed by the Christian life
which deferred for years the baptism of many, and we are
told by St. Augustine that the deviations of the unbaptized
were freely excused by a spirit of general tolerance. [Con-
fession, lib. I., cap. XL]
More fortunate in this respect than the son of Monica,
Jerome, as he wrote to Theophilus of Alexandria, never fell
into error. He used often to interrupt his studies in order
to visit the basilicas of the saints or to descend into the cata-
combs, and when an old man he thus described these pilgrim-
ages in his "Commentaries upon Ezekiel." "In my youth,
when I was studying literature in Rome, it was my custom
to visit on Sundays, with some companions of my own age
and tastes, the tombs of the martyrs and apostles. I often
wandered into those subterranean galleries whose walls on
either side preserve the relics of the dead, and where the
darkness is so intense that one might almost believe that
the words of the prophet had been fulfilled : 'Let them go
down alive into hell.' A gleam of light shining through a
narrow aperture, rather than a window, scarcely affected the
awful obscurity, and the little band, shrouded in darkness
and able only to proceed one step at a time, would recall this
verse of Virgil's 'Everywhere horror and even the very silence
appal me.' " [Comment, in Ezech., lib. XIL, CXL.]
In his youth Jerome witnessed the attempts made by
Julian to restore paganism, and he saw also the utter failure
416 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
in which they resulted. "While I was attending the schools
of the grammarians," he wrote, "when every town was
stained with the blood of idolatrous sacrifices, suddenly at the
very height of the persecution Julian's death was announced
to us. 'How,' exclaimed a pagan, and not unreasonably,
'do the Christians say that theirs is a patient and a merciful
God? There is nothing more terrible, nothing more swift
than His wrath. He could not even for an instant defer His
vengeance.' " [Comment in Habacuc. Lib. II. cap. III.]
The faith which had so early been instilled into Jerome
and which was so precious to him, did not, however, shield
him from the seductions of Rome, but unlike Augustine,
who wrote the humble confession of his protracted sins, he
only alludes to his in passing. "You know," he wrote Chro-
matins, "how slippery are those pathways of youth where I
succumbed." In a letter to Heliodorus, whom he wished
to take with him into the desert, and whom he rebuked for
his delay, he was more explicit: "Why linger in the world,
thou who hast already chosen solitude? If I give thee this
advice it is not as if my ship and my cargo were undamaged,
not as if I were ignorant of the deep, but rather as one ship-
wrecked and just cast up upon the shore, in feeble tones I
warn the navigators of their peril." [Epist. XIV. ad Helio-
dorum, 6.]
There is another difference between Augustine and
Jerome worthy of notice. It is evident that after the supreme
struggles of which Augustine has given us a dramatic account
he experienced no further aggression of the vanquished foe.
The luring voices which made one final effort to woo him to
excess were silenced, and no doubt remained so forever, for
after his conversion Augustine seems to have inhabited
serene heights inaccessible to any disturbing memories of
the past ; but Jerome, who was by nature more ardent and
perhaps less gentle than the son of Monica, could not forget
so quickly. Beguiling visions followed him to the desert of
Chalcis, and he succeeded in exorcising them only through
ceaseless work and penances.
From Rome the young Dalmatian, with Bonosus, passed
into Gaul and repaired to Treves, where Valentinian I. then
THE CANON OF THE [V. CENTURY \\ t
■esided, and it was in Gaul that Jerome determined to re-
lounce the world which had so wounded him and devote
limself to the service of Jesus Christ. He accordingly
•eturned to Rome and was baptized there by Liberius. This
Dope having died on the twenty-fourth of September 366,
[erome's baptism could not have taken place at a later date,
weaving Rome he started for Aquileia, where religious studies
md monastic discipline flourished, and which was at that
ime an important town and the capital of its native province.
His stay at Aquileia was only the first halt in a life of
;ravel. From that time forth trials beset him. "He was
dready beginning," says Tillemont, "to make enemies whose
persecutions were sufficiently violent to oblige him to move
'rom place to place, and serious enough to reach the ears of
;he Pope Damasus." [Memoirs, etc., St. Jerome. Article
[V.] One of his adversaries was the Bishop Lupicinus.
finally he determined to go to the East and, following Bar-
mius1 example, before leaving the Western Hemisphere he
Daid a visit to his native town and there bade farewell to his
3wn people forever. He did not attempt to conceal the
gainful effort the breaking of these family ties cost him.
'Whenever the impress of your familiar hands recalls your
lear faces to me, then am I no longer where I am, or rather
^ou are there with me." [Epist. VII. ad Chromatium Jov-
inum et Eusebium.] The man who sent such a message, a
message perhaps more touching than well expressed, to those
:rom whom he was separated, the man who appreciated so
keenly the bonds of friendship, was certainly not insensible
to those of blood. "Full do I know," he wrote to Helio-
iorus, "wrhat fetters hold thee back. My heart is not of
5tone nor my bowels of iron, I was not begotten by rocks
nor suckled by the tigresses of Hyrcania ; I also have gone
through the anguish which thou dreadest." [Epist. XIV.
ad Heliodorum, 3.] Jerome probably had as travelling
companions this same Heliodorus, and also Innocentius and
Hylas, whom we again meet at his side in the East when,
as Tillemont, who translated the works of the Saints, tells:
"He set out carrying with him the library he had collected
in Rome, travelled ever many provinces, passed through
(27) U.S.
418 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Thrace, Pontus and Bithynia, crossed the whole of Galatia
and Cappadocia, suffered the intolerable heat of Cilicia . . .
and finally in Syria found the peace which he sought as a
safe harbor after shipwreck."
Before retiring into the desert, however, he spent a few
days at Antioch with Evagrius, a priest of that city, whom
Jerome had known in Italy, whither he had gone to lay the
discords in his Church before the Western bishops, and who
on his return became the guide and sponsor of Jerome and
his companions in Antioch.
Jerome, inflamed with an ardor for study which never
cooled, wished to hear the men most learned in the Scrip-
tures, and especially Apollinaris, Bishop of Laodicea, who at
that period had not yet fallen into his later notorious heresy.
It was probably about this time that Jerome knew the her-
mit Malchus, but it was not until long after that he related
his wonderful history, which Lafontaine has translated into
graceful verse.
Jerome, however, had left Aquileia, not for Antioch, but
bound for the wilderness. He plunged into the heart of the
desert of Chalcis, where, under burning skies and amid vast
tracts of sand out of which sprang here and there a few
scattered convents, he had gone to seek repentance, and where
he found fresh sorrows awaiting him. Heliodorus returned
to the West, and Jerome's friendship for Innocent and Hylas
was ruthlessly severed by their death. But the memories of
his libertine youth, which troubled the peace of his soul and
threatened to sully a chastity so dearly bought, caused him a
still keener grief than the loss of his friends, and he has left us a
description of his anguish, of his almost desperate but finally
victorious struggles, in pages of striking eloquence and immor-
tal beauty. "How often," he wrote, "buried in this vast
wilderness, scorched by the rays of the sun, have I imagined
myself in the midst of the pleasures of Rome. I sat alone
because my heart was filled with exceeding bitterness. My
limbs were covered with unsightly sackcloth, and my black-
ened skin gave me the appearance of an Ethiopian. I
wept and groaned daily, and if in spite of my struggles sleep
overcame me, the bones in my emaciated body, which sank
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY IT.)
to the naked earth, barely clave together. I do not men-
tion my nourishment or drink, for in this desert even the
sick monks scarcely dare touch fresh water, and to eat cooked
food would be considered an excess. And I, who, through
the fear of hell, had condemned myself to this prison inhab-
ited by scorpions and serpents, imagined myself transported
into the midst of the dances of the young Roman maidens.
My face was pallid with fasting, my body cold as ice, yet
my soul burned with sensual emotion and in flesh already dead
only the fire of the passions was still capable of kindling.
Debarred from all help I threw myself at the feet of Jesus,
watered them with my tears, wiped them with my hair, and
strove to subdue my rebellious flesh by weeks of abstinence.
I do not blush to own to my misery, rather do I weep that I
am no longer as I once was. I remember having often spent
the entire day and night in crying aloud and in beating my
breast, until, at the command of God, who rules the tempest,
peace crept back into my soul. I even dreaded my cell as if
it had been an accomplice to my thoughts. Angry with
myself I penetrated alone further into the desert, and if I
discovered any dark valley, any rugged mountain, any rock
of difficult access, it was the spot I fixed upon to pray in, and
to make into a prison for my wretched body. God is witness
that sometimes, after having long fixed my eyes upon heaven
and after copious weeping, I believed myself transported
among the choir of angels. Then in a trusting and joyful
ecstasy6I sang unto the Lord : 'We pursue Thee by the scent
of Thy perfumes.' " [Epist. XXII. ad Eustochium, 7.]
In order to subdue his flesh and curb his imagination,
Jerome had recourse to other means besides corporal punish-
ment. "When I was young," he wrote, ' 'although buried
in the desert, I could not conquer my burning passions and
ardent nature, and in spite of my body being exhausted by
perpetual fasts my brain was on fire with evil thoughts.
Finally, as a last resource, I put myself under the tutelage
of a certain monk, a Jew who had become a Christian, and,
forsaking the ingenious precepts of Ouintilian, the floods
eloquence poured forth by Cicero, the grave utterances of
Fronto. and the tender words of Pliny, I began to learn the
420 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Hebrew alphabet, and to study this language of hissing and
harsh-sounding words. I who have suffered so much, and
with me those who at that time shared my life, can alone
testify to the efforts I wasted, the difficulties I went through,
and how often I despairingly interrupted my studies, which a
dogged determination to learn made me afterwards resume ;
and I give thanks unto God that from such a bitter sowing I
am now able to gather such sweet fruit." [Epist. CXXV. ad
Rusticum monachum, 12.]
It was probably at this period, that is in 374, that the
mysterious dream of which Jerome has left us a dramatic
account came to him. Imbued with the works of classic
antiquity, he cherished a love for them. "Miserable wretch, "
he wrote, "I fasted before reading Cicero; after nights spent
in vigil, after tears wrung from me by the memory of my
sins, I would take up Plautus, and when, on coming to my
senses, I read the Prophets, their speech seemed to me
uncouth and unfinished. Blind, I blamed the light instead
of condemning my own eyes." A vision cured him, for a
while at least, of this passion. "Towards the middle of Lent
(probably the Lent of 375), while Satan was thus mocking
me, I was seized with a fever which, finding my body ex-
hausted by want of rest, consumed it to such an extent that
my bones barely clave together. My body was becoming
cold, a faint remnant of warmth however still enabled my
heart to beat. They were preparing my funeral obsequies,
when suddenly my soul was caught up from me and carried
before the Tribunal of the Supreme Judge. The light was so
dazzling, those who surrounded Him shed such a blaze of
splendor, that, falling back upon the ground, I dared not
gaze aloft. They asked me who I was and I answered a
Christian. 'Thou liest,' said the Judge, 'thou are a Ciceronian
and not a Christian, for where thy treasure is, there is thy
heart also.' I was silent ; and whilst the blows rained down
upon me, for the Judge had commanded that I should be
scourged, suffering even more from the torment of my bitter
remorse, I repeated to myself this verse on the Psalms:
'Who will render thee glory in hell ?' Then I cried out weep-
ing: 'Have pity on me, Lord, have pity.' This cry rang
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 121
out in the midst of the blows, and at last those who were
present, throwing themselves at the feet of the Judge, en-
treated Him to have mercy upon my youth, to grant me time-
to work out my repentance, and to punish me severely if I
should again peruse a pagan book. I, who, to escape from
the terrible straits in which I found myself would have
promised far more, swore to Him and said, calling His name
to witness: 'Lord, if hereafter I harbor or read any secular
books, may I be treated as if I had renounced Thee.' After
this oath I was released and I returned to earth. Those
present were astonished to see me reopen my eyes, which
were bathed in such a flood of tears that my grief convinced
the most sceptical. That it was not one of those vain dreams
by which we are deceived, I attest the Tribunal before which
I lay prostrate and the sentence which so appalled me.
Please God that I may never again be submitted to such an
ordeal. When I awoke my shoulders were bruised and I
could still feel the blows. From that moment I studied
religious books with far more ardor than I had ever read pro-
fane ones." [Epist. XXII. ad Eustochium, 30.]
Did Jerome abide by this oath throughout his life?
Although making allowances for the saint's vigorous mem-
ory, to which reminiscences of Terence, Lucretius, Cicero,
Virgil and Seneca were continually recurring (Augustine,
at Hippo, preserved the memory of his classical education in
the same tenacious manner), we have reason to believe that
Jerome more than once opened the works of these pagan
authors whom he had renounced. To Rufinus, whose insid-
ious hatred accused him of the crime of perjury, he replied
that the keeping of a promise made in a dream could not be
exacted of him. However, even if Jerome did not deem
himself irrevocably bound by his pledge, he applied himself
more and more to the study of the Bible, and his classical
reading and recollections were exclusively devoted to defend-
ing and embellishing the truth. This is what he pointed out
in a celebrated letter to Magnus, the orator, in which, with
skilful and weighty arguments he cited the example of all his
predecessors, reminding him that according to Deuteronomy
the Israelite must needs cut the nails and hair of his slave
422 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
before marrying her. "Is it astonishing that profane liter-
ature should have seduced me by the grace of its language
and by the beauty of its form, or that I should wish to con-
vert a slave and a captive into a daughter of Israel? If I
come across anything dead, any passage breathing idolatry,
sensuality, error, or evil passions, I suppress it, and from my
alliance with a stainless spouse are born servants of the true
God ; thus do I increase the family of Christ." [Epist. LXX.
ad Magnum, oratorem urbis Romas, 2.]
The questions of discipline and dogma which were agitat-
ing the Church of Antioch, disturbed Jerome afresh in his
retreat. Four bishops were contending for the Patriarchal
See of the East. In 361, after the death of Eustathius, the
intrepid champion of the Nicene faith, the Arians and many
Catholics had agreed to elect Meletius of Sebaste, whose
orthodoxy, already attested at the time of Constant ine's
persecution, asserted itself at Antioch from the very first,
with the result of alienating the Arians, who chose Euzoius
as their leader. Those Catholics, however, who were most
devoted to Eustathius' glorious memory, refused to give
their support to a bishop who had counted Arians among
his electors. Towards the end of 379 Lucifer of Cagliari, on
his return from the exile to which he had been banished by
the son of Constantine, appointed the priest Paulinus, who
was recognized by Alexandria and the West, as Bishop to the
Eust-athians . At the beginning of 376, to support his heresy
in introducing the Bishop of Laodicea into Antioch, Apollin-
aris had the audacity to assign the government of this great
Church to his disciple Vitalis, whom he had consecrated.
Quite outside of all this, the inhabitants of Antioch and of
the monasteries at Chalcis were discussing whether they
should recognize in God three hypostases or three persons.
In the theological language of to-day the two terms are
synonymous, but in the fourth century they were not con-
sidered so by all. At Antioch the Meletians preferred the
term hypostasis to that of person, as being more explicit
against the heresy of Sabellius ; the partisans of Paulinus, on
the other hand, conforming themselves to the Latin custom
which understood hypostasis and substance to be synonym-
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 423
ous, considered it an Arian impiety to say that in ( rod there
were three hypostases. Urged by the monks amongst
whom he lived to pronounce upon the legitimate vicar and
the orthodox expression, Jerome addressed himself in two
famous letters to Pope Damasus. Certainly these letters
are sufficient proof that he disliked the word hypostasis,
which seemed to him equivocal or erroneous. Meletius
too, the champion of this word, was especially displeasing
to him, and his sympathies were entirely drawn towards
Paulinus, the patriarch favored by Latin Christianity. Upon
these points he asked the judgment of the Roman Pontiff,
which he valued above everything, and to which he was will-
ing to submit. "I thought," he wrote, Damasus, "that I
ought to consult the Apostolic See and the Roman Faith
which St. Paul the Apostle extolled. I crave spiritual
nourishment from the Church where I received the baptis-
mal robe. . . . You are the light of the world, the salt of the
earth, in your possession are the vessels of silver and gold,
elsewhere are the vessels of clay and of wood destined for the
iron rod which shall shatter them, and for the eternal fires
which shall consume them."
In terms which succeeding centuries have freely quoted
Jerome proclaimed the Roman pre-eminence and the obliga-
tion imposed upon all to conform to it. "I know that on
that stone the Church was built ; he who eats of the Paschal
Lamb outside of its walls is an impious man. He who has
not sought refuge in the Ark of Noah will be overtaken by the
deluge." He then asked Damasus to inform him which
vicar he was to follow and which term he was to employ.
"I do not know Vitalis, I repudiate Meletius, I ignore Pau-
linus. Whoever reaps not with thee, scatters; whoever
belongs not to Christ belongs to Antichrist." It is evident
that Jerome could not accept the term hypostasis with
enthusiasm; he declares as much in bitter, almost haughty
tone ; nevertheless he was willing to accept it should Dam-
asus pronounce its usage to be legitimate. "I pray you
decide this matter for me, and I will not shrink from saying
that there are three hypostases in God. ... I implore your
Holiness by the crucified Lord, by the consubstantial Trinity,
424 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
to write and authorize me either to suppress or use this
word." [Epist. XV. ad Damasum papam.]
Jerome left Chalcis, probably driven from the desert by
some foolish persecution, and joined Evagrius in Antioch,
where Paulinus compelled him to enter the priesthood ; but
so strong was his love of solitude, so jealous was he of his
liberty that he stipulated that his ordination should not
bind him to any one particular church. By a peculiarity
which the Jansenists willingly proposed as a model, Jerome
never ascended to the altar. In virtue of this liberty which
was justly dear to him, he contended, in a dialogue written
at Antioch, against the heterodox rigorism of Lucifer of
Cagliari, the bishop who had consecrated his friend Paulinus.
Towards 380 we meet the indefatigable traveller at Con-
stantinople, where St. Gregory of Nazianzus, placed against
his will upon the episcopal throne of that town, was re-
establishing the true faith in the hearts of a people who for
forty years had been given over to Arianism, and with poetic
and touching eloquence was distributing the treasures of his
irreproachable doctrine among them. It was to the tuition
of such a master that Jerome submitted himself, and in
after years he took pleasure in evoking his reminiscences of
him, and in repeating his lessons.
In 381, Jerome left Constantinople and passing through
Greece came to Rome.
Jerome arrived in Rome accompanied by two Eastern
bishops, Paulinus to whom he adhered, and Epiphanius of
Salamis. Important work, illustrious friendships, struggles,
and also bitter trials, awaited him in the capital of the Chris-
tian world. At the Council which Damasus convoked
Jerome gave evidence of his erudition and of the soundness
of his doctrine in defending, with the authority of St. Anthan-
asius a name ascribed to Christ (homo dominicus), the
orthodoxy of which was contested by the Apollinarists.
The Pope, impressed by the talent he was well fitted to
appreciate, made Jerome his secretary, empowered him to
reply in his name to the inquiries of the Synods, and often
referred to the wisdom of the learned exegete on his own
account. Further, Damasus forcibly influenced the whole
THE CANONT OF THE. IV. CENTURY 425
ife of his collaborator. Pope Damasus had seen Jeron
endency to omnivorous reading, and he roused him from
his beguiling torpor by urging him to useful work. At
lis request Jerome translated two of Origen's Homilies
>n the Song of Solomon, and began to translate the treatise
ipon the Holy Ghost by Didymus, the blind sage of Alex-
mdria. Was it St. Ambrose's work on the same subject
vhich Jerome criticized in such severe terms in his Preface?
"Nihil ibi dialecticum, nihil virile atque districtum . . . sed
otum flaccidum, molle. . . .") Rufinus in his Invecti
pretended that it was, but the Benedictines who edited the
bishop of Milan's work , disputed this assertion, which Tille-
nont, however, seems inclined to believe. [Memoirs, etc.,
5t. Ambrose, note XL] From the pen of such a censor as
[erome the harshest criticisms are by no means surprising,
md this was especially a criticism of a literary order.
Damasus exacted a task of still greater importance from
Cerome. The Gospel had at an early date been translated
nto Latin for the benefit of Western Christianity, but the
primitive version, the ancient Itala, had suffered in the
nanuscripts in circulation corrections and also innumerable
dterations and additions. Moreover, through the need of
i concordance, in order to make the copy already owned as
complete as possible, the various narratives of the Evangel-
sts were frequently united in a single text. Alarmed at the
langer introduced by these divergencies, Damasus entreated
[erome to revise the New Testament according to the orig-
nal Greek. Jerome, who was by nature intolerant of con-
;radiction, had no illusions as to the criticism to which this
;ask would expose him. He was about to disturb old ways of
thought, and possibly startle timid consciences; neverthe-
ess, strong in the support afforded him by the Pope, he
Degan and successfully terminated the work demanded of
lim, suppressed the interpolations, re-established the invert-
ed sequence of the sacred text, and presented this meritor-
ous achievement to Damasus, having added to it the ten
canons or tables of concordance translated from Greek into
Latin, in which Eusebius of Caesarea, and also Ammonius
}f Alexandria, had shown what was special to each Evange-
list and what was common to all four.
426 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Jerome undertook another revision, that of the Psalter.
The translation current in the Latin Church had been made
from the Greek text of the Septuagint, but owing to the
numerous alterations which had crept into the manuscript
copies, it was incorrect in many places. From the Hieronym-
ian revision sprang the Psalterium Romanum, which was
in use in Rome up to the reign of St. Pius V., and to which
the Venite Exultemus in the Invitatory and the passages
of the Psalms cited in the missal still belong. "This first
work was in its turn soon altered by the copyists, and at the
urgent desire of St. Paula, Jerome decided to make a second
revision, which this time he based upon Origen's Hexapla.
This was the Psalterium Gallicanum (anno 389), so called
because it was first adopted in Gaul. . . . The Gallican
Psalter is the one inserted in our Vulgate and used in our
Breviary." Somewhat later, about 392, he translated the
Psalms from the Hebrew.
These works, and the austerity of Jerome's life while
accomplishing them, drew much attention upon the secre-
tary of Pope Damasus, and won him many illustrious and
priceless friendships.
In a palace on the Aventine, some noble-hearted women
of earnest faith, gathered together and confronted the pag-
anism which was still general, and the immorality of an all
too large number of Christians, with the humble and cour-
ageous exhibition of their virtue. The mistress of this
noble dwelling was Marcella, who had consecrated her
premature and irrevocable widowhood to God, to the poor,
and to the study of holy works. With her were also her
mother, Albina, Asella, whose meekness was extolled by
Palladius the historian of St. John Chrysostom; Furia, the
heiress of the Camilli, Fabiola, who, although less strong in
righteousness than her pious comrades, eventually atoned
for the sins of her youth by penance and charity, Lea, the
widow and Principia.
We must especially mention three women who were more
cherished by Jerome than all the others, and whose names
are closely linked with his in history, namely Paula and two
of her daughters, Blesilla and Eustochium.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 427
It is unnecessary here to give an account of Paula's early
history. By her mother she was authentically connected
with the Scipios and the Gracchi, and her father, Rogatus, a
wealthy proprietor of Nicopolis, claimed descent from Aga-
memnon, the king of kings. At the age of thirty-five, after
the death of her husband, Julius Toxotius, a reputed descen-
dant of ^Eneas, for in the genealogy of patrician Rome legend
blends easily with history, Paula was inspired by Marcella's
example to adopt the ascetic life, in which she soon equalled
her heroic friend. Her eldest daughter, Blesilla, left a widow
after seven months of marriage, re-entered the narrow path
from which the world had momentarily tempted her, and
died in the flower of her youth, lamented in pathetic accents
by Jerome.
Eustochium, another of Paula's daughters, was reserved
for a longer career than Blesilla, the tenderly-mourned. She
followed her mother to the East, where she succeeded her in
the direction of the convents in Palestine, and, always calm,
always invincible to temptation, she retained Jerome as
consoler and guide until the end.
The love of the Scriptures glowed in the hearts of these
Christian women who, in order to acquire a deeper knowl-
edge of the holy books, resolutely began the study of Greek
and Hebrew. In these researches, where the knowledge of
truth and not the elusive joys of vainglory were sought, they
were directed by Jerome; and Marcella, whose guest he had
become, outstripped all her companions in this arduous pur-
suit. Later on, the recluse of Bethlehem, in his "Commen-
tary on the Epistle to the Ephesians," wrote of her: "When-
ever I picture to myself her ardor for study, her vivacity
of mind and her application, I blame my idleness, I who,
retreated in this wilderness, with the manger whither the
shepherds came in haste to adore the wailing Christ-child
constantly before mine eyes, am unable to accomplish what
a noble woman accomplishes in the hour she snatches from
the cares of a large circle and the government of her house-
hold."
Jerome was reproached for teaching only women. He
answered what too often, alas, the priest of the present day
428 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
would have the right to reply : "If men questioned me more
about the Scriptures I would speak less to women." He
added: "I rejoice, I am rilled with enthusiasm, when in
Babylon I meet Daniel, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael."
[Epist. LXV. ad Principiam virginem, 2.] He found Daniel,
Ananias, Azarias, and Misael in a few chosen friends who
frequented the Aventine and attended the religious school.
They were Pammachius, Marcella's cousin, who was to marry
Paulina, Paula's second daughter; Oceanus, a learned man
who later visited Jerome at Bethlehem ; Marcellinus, who in
Africa, in the time of Augustine, was the most conscientious
of magistrates; and Domnion, a priest advanced in years,
the praises of whose charity were sung by all.
In spite of the austere sweetness of these friendships, in
spite of the substantial support which the protection of
Damasus secured for him, Jerome did not taste peace in
Rome. Was peace, however, what he sought? Jerome
surely did not shrink from contention. He had defended
the incomparable benefits of perfect chastity against Helvid-
ius, a contemner of the dogma of the perpetual virginity
of Mary, and, without denying the legitimacy of marriage,
he pointed out its drawbacks, I was about to say its evils.
He encouraged young girls, for whom honorable or brilliant
marriages were in contemplation, in their desire to lead a
monastic life, and at the sight of the Roman virgins who,
through his advice, thus renounced their families, there were
many who would readily have accused him of murder, more
especially after the death of Blesilla, whom he was reported
to have killed by dint of the fasts he imposed upon her.
That was not the only grudge harbored against him. He
denounced with eloquent indignation and inexhaustible fer-
vor the licentiousness, avarice, intemperance and hypocrisy
which had crept in among the priests and the monks at Rome
and it may easily be imagined that those stung by his power-
ful satire, and those who recognized themselves or were
recognized by others in his portraits, became incensed, and
that anger and resentment broke out against him on every
side. Calumny soon came to the aid of spite, and at the
expense of all justice as well as truth the relations between
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 429
>aula and her spiritual director were incriminated. The
Leath of Damasus, which took place on the nth of Decem-
>er 384, deprived Jerome of his protector, excluded him
rom the Apostolic Chancery, and completed his severance
rom Rome. His thoughts turned once more to the desert,
tut this time it was the Biblical desert in which he wished
>ermanently to establish himself, and he left Rome forever,
aking with him his brother Paulinian, the priest Vincent,
nd a few monks. From Ostia, on the point of embarking,
ie wrote a letter to Asella, in which his affectionate and
addened soul reveals itself. "If I believed myself capable
f thanking thee worthily," he wrote, "I should be incensed.
Jut God can reward thy saintly soul for me for the good
hou has done me. As to me, I am unworthy of it, and I
ever had any right to hope or even to wish that thou would -
st grant me in Jesus Christ so great an affection. And even
: certain persons believe me to be a vile wretch overwhelmed
y the weight of my sins — in comparison to my sins that is
ut little — yet thou art right in letting thy heart distinguish
3r thee between the righteous and the unrighteous. ..."
erome then proceeded to exonerate himself from the calum-
ies which had assailed him and invoked the memory and
sstimony of Asella and of all those who lived on the Aven-
ine. "Many a time have I been surrounded by a flock of
irgins, and to the best of my ability expounded the divine
ooks to several of them. Study creates assiduity, assiduity
imiliarity, and familiarity a mutual understanding. Call
pon those virgins to answer if they have ever had any
nought from me other than those one should receive from a
christian. Have I ever taken money from any of them?
lave I not ahvays repulsed every gift large or small? Has
ly neighbor's lucre ever soiled my hand? Have I ever
ttered a dubious word or cast too bold a glance?"
Jerome journeyed to Rhcgium thence to Cyprus, and
hence to Antioch; St. Paula leaving Rome forever joined
im here. She brought with her her daughter Eustochium
nd a band of Roman virgins who had consecrated them-
slves to God. In the middle of winter St. Jerome and S1 ,
'aula and her companions set out for the Holy Land.
430 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
In praef. 2 ad Paralip. he describes the finis of this jour-
ney: "As those who have seen Athens better understand
Grecian history; and as he, who has traveled from Troas
through Leucadia and the Acroceraunian mountains to
Sicily, and thence to the mouth of the Tiber, will better
understand the third book of Virgil, thus a man will more
clearly understand the Scriptures, if he shall have seen Judasa
with his own eyes, and shall have examined the memorials
of the old cities, and the names of places whether unchanged
or changed. Hence we took the pains to undergo this labor
with most learned Hebrews, that we might journey through
the country of which all the churches of Christ speak. Com-
ing to 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 Alex-
andria, I heard Didymus, and for many things, am thankful
to him."
Jerome now returned to Palestine and established himself
at Bethlehem, where, out of the wreck of his inheritance, con-
sisting of farms partially destroyed by the barbarians, which
Paulinian was commissioned to sell, and with the aid of
Paula's bounty, he erected a monastery which he fortified with
a tower of refuge. He selected for his cell a cave close to the
one where our Lord was born. Paula, meanwhile, after
having built some temporary cells, was engaged in construct-
ing convents, and her indefatigable charity endowed as a
hospice for pilgrims the hamlet where, as Jerome observed,
Mary and Joseph had been without shelter.
In Palestine Jerome was once more thrown with Rufinus,
a friend of his youth, who had left Rome in 371 and after
six years spent in Egypt had settled at Jerusalem not far
from the widow Melania, celebrated for her austere sacrifices
and her continual journeys. The intimacy which absence
had interrupted without destroying, was renewed between
the two friends. Jerome used even to have the manuscripts
of secular literature needed for his disciples copied by monks
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 1.'5 1
belonging to the convent of the Olive Trees, which Rufinus
lirected.
The early days of Jerome's sojourn in Bethlehem were
nost serene; everything charmed and satisfied him, and a
xemor of joyous admiration, a breath of spring, one might
dmost say, seems to vibrate through the pages which he
vrote or inspired during that period. "The most illustrious
jauls congregate here, and no sooner has the Briton, so
•emote from our world, made any progress in piety, than he
ibandons his early setting sun to seek a land which he knows
)nly by reputation, and through the Scriptures. And what
)f the Armenians, the Persians, the nations of India and
Ethiopia; of Egypt herself, so rich in monks, of Pontus,
^appadocia, Ccelesyria and Mesopotamia? All these East-
ern countries send us hordes of monks . . . they throng
lere and set us the example of every virtue. The languages
liffer, but the religion is the same, and one can count as
nany different choirs singing the psalms as there are nations.
Vet in all this — and this is the triumph of Christianity —
:here is no vainglory, none prides himself upon his chastity ;
if they quarrel it is as to who shall be the humblest, for the
iast is here counted first. . . They do not judge one another,
[or fear of being judged by the Saviour, and slander, so prev-
alent in many districts where they malign each other out-
rageously, is here completely unknown. Here is no luxury,
no sensuality. ..." Either Jerome or Paula closes this
description with a few lines of idyllic grace. "In this land
Df Christ's all is simplicity, and except when the Psalms are
being sung all is silence. Wherever you may go you hear
the laborer, with his hand upon the plough, murmuring
Alleluia. The reaper, with the sweat pouring from his brow,
finds relaxation in singing the Psalms, and the vintager
recites some passage from David while pruning his vines.
They are, so to speak, the love songs of the country; the
shepherds' lilt, the laborers' accompaniment." [Epist.
XLVI. — Paula? et Eustochii ad Marcellam, 9, 10, 1 t .]
These peaceful years were also years of toil for Jerome.
The direction of the convents which had sprung up about
the cave of Bethlehem, the active correspondence he main-
432 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
tained with his friends in the outer world, even the gram-
matical instruction he gave to the young men, which brought
back to him those secular works of antiquity he had vainly
striven to hate or to forget, would have been sufficient in
themselves to fill his life. They were, however, but a minor
portion of his work. He had undertaken the study of the
Scriptures at the advice of Damasus, but the Providential
attraction which also drew him to them, was continually
stronger and surer. Everything seemed to lead him to the
Bible.
Sulpicius Severus, who spent six months with him at
Bethlehem, thus describes his life: "He is wholly absorbed
in reading, he takes no rest by day or by night ; he is ever
reading or writing something. ' ' Jerome was a man of great
physical endurance. His literary activity at Bethlehem
may be compared to that of Origen. He translated the
book of Tobias in a single night, and even, when ill, he dic-
tated from his couch to an amanuensis.
To perfect his knowledge of Hebrew, he employed a Jew
to teach him, and, as this preceptor feared the fanaticism of
his race, the lessons were given by night. Jerome speaks of
these things in his Epist. ad Pammachius, 84, 3: "With
most great labor, and great price did I have Baranina by
night as preceptor. He feared the Jews, and was to me
another Nicodemus." Coupled with this, he assiduously
studied the Fathers and writers of the Church. Villarsi
declares that no one, Greek or Latin, read more authors
than Jerome. In the year 389 Jerome began the great work
of his life, a translation of the protocanonical books of the
Old Testament from the original Hebrew. He was not
able to devote all his time to the great work, but it was the
chief object of his labors for fifteen years. He also trans-
lated the deuterocanonical books of Tobias and Judith from
Chaldean exemplars. This translation of Jerome forms our
Vulgate, concerning which we shall speak later. His trans-
lation of the Psalter from the Hebrew was not received into
the Vulgate ; its place was occupied by the Psalter which he
revised from the Hexaplar text of Origen at Cassarea.
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 433
A long and painful ordeal was about to disturb what St.
Augustine called "the peaceful joy" which Jerome tasted in
is work. It arose from the most unexpected quarter, his
dversary being no other than Rufinus, with whom he en-
aged in a fratricidal conflict over the writings of Origen.
Jerome had first met Rufinus at Aquileia, and they had
ontracted one of those friendships which seem eternal. It
ras to this friend of his youth, who had left him to visit the
Egyptian Thebaides, that Jerome, isolated in the desert of
)halcis, wrote from a bed of sickness: "Oh! if the Lord
esus Christ would grant that I might suddenly be trans-
ited to thy side as was Philip to the minister of Candacia,
nd Habakkuk to Daniel, how tenderly would I clasp thee
ti my arms!" He closed this letter with the following
words, which subsequent events so cruelly belied: "I
>eseech thee, let not thy heart lose sight, as have thine eyes,
if a friend so long sought, with such difficulty found, and so
Lard to retain ! Let others gloat over their gold ! Friend-
hip is an incomparable possession, a priceless treasure, but
he friendship which can perish has never been a true one."
Epist. III. ad Rufinum monachum.]
This last is a somewhat bold assertion, and one which
ails to take into account the inconstancy of the human heart
which is liable to take back what it once gave in all sincerity.
It. Augustine, who was the most devoted and faithful of
riends, the mere mention of whose name recalls those of so
riany beings dear to him whose lives were inseparably inter-
woven with his own, in speaking of this rupture between
Rufinus and Jerome has deplored in touching accents the
railty which undermines or menaces our affections. ' ' What
Learts will hereafter dare open themselves to one another: is
here any friend to whom one may freely unbosom oneself;
where is the friend one does not fear some day to count an
nemy, if this rupture which we deplore could have taken
)lace between Jerome and Rufinus? Oh! watched plight
if mankind, and worthy of pity! How can we put faith
n what we see in our friend's souls when we cannot foresee
what may change them? Yet why lament thus over others
when we do not know what we may be ourselves? Man
28) H. S.
434 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
barely and imperfectly knows what he is to-day; he has no
conception of what he may be to-morrow." [Epist. CX.
inter Epist. Hieronymi, 6.]
A famous writing of Origen's gave rise to a stormy quarrel
and an irrevocable rupture between the two friends. It
was curious that the timid writer, who took exception to the
most legitimate of Jerome's innovations and behind whose
watchful orthodoxy lurked a conservative and moody spirit
of distrust, should have been the champion of the brilliant
and audacious Alexandrian , who seems to us one of the most
dazzling and in certain respects one of the most sympathetic
personalities of the Christian school of Alexandria.
Jerome had proclaimed Origen the master of the Churches
after the apostles. But he tells us that he praised Origen as an
interpreter, not as a dogmatist. [Epist. LXXXIV ad Pam.]
This is an awkward apology. A false dogmatist can not be
a good interpreter The fact of the matter seems to be that
Jerome himself was deceived by the views of Origen. The
vehemence and intolerance of Jerome's nature can be
gleaned from the following passage, Epist. XXXIII. 4. It
was written concerning the condemnation of Origen : ' 'Rome
consents to his condemnation; it brings together its senate
against him, not because of the novelty of his doctrines, not
because of heresy, as the dogs who are mad against him now
pretend, but because they could not bear the glory of his
eloquence and his knowledge, and because when he spoke
they were made to appear as mutes."
A few years later he abused Rufinus in a similar manner
because he sustained the defense of Origen. Like violent
changes of opinion characterize his whole life. His judg-
ments are not uniform and consistent, and this is to be taken
into account when adducing him as an authority.
Rufinus died in Sicily in 410, and Jerome thus speaks of
his death in the opening chapter of his Commentary on
Ezechiel: "The scorpion lies underground between Encel-
adus and Porphyrion, and the hydra of many heads has at
last ceased to hiss against me." "Tantasne animis coelesti-
bus iras? "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY J.*!.")
Rufinus also was a bitter foe. Anyone who has read his
Apology, his "Invectives against Jerome," for such is the
name which has clung to this work, will be fully persuaded
of this. "He devoted three years to this work," says
Amedee Thierry, "which appeared fragment by fragment ;
he divided it into two books to which he later added a supple-
ment. He had a double aim, first to exonerate himself from
the crime of heresy by casting upon Jerome the accusation
directed towards himself, and then to dishonor Jerome and
to throw odium on his name by personal imputations, lament-
ing the while being forced to such measures." [St. Jerome,
Lib. IV.] Indeed no pamphlet has ever been composed with
more cunning hatred, nor has ever struck the adversary more
surely. According to him, Jerome was the enemy of man-
kind; a traducer of the faithful, whose customs he had
calumniated in his book upon Virginity, at the risk of justify-
ing and even magnifying the calumnies of the pagans; a
traducer of the works of Ambrose the great bishop ; a
traducer of Rome, the capital of the Christian world; and a
traducer of all authors, either Greek or Latin, who had pre-
ceded him. One grievance which Rufinus put forward with
malignant insistence, was the important part the pagan
authors played in Jerome's works and in his thoughts. In
vain had Jerome after a famous vision sworn never to reopen
any secular book. "Peruse his writings and see if there is a
single page which does not point to his having again become
a Ciceronian, and in which he does not speak of 'Our Cicero,'
'Our Homer,' 'Our Virgil' ; he even boasts of having read the
works of Pythagoras, which according to the erudite are no
longer in existence. In almost all his works quotations
from secular authors are far more numerous and lengthy
than those from the Prophets and Apostles. Even when
writing to women or maidens, who in our holy books seek
>nly subjects for edification, he intersperses his letters with
quotations from Horace, Cicero or Virgil." [Rufinus Apol.
Lib. sec. 7.]
A controversy arose between St. Jerome and St. Augus-
tine between the years 395 and 405. ~ The origin of the con-
troversy was St. Jerome's commentary of Galatians II-
1 1 — 14.
436 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
"I have read," Augustine wrote Jerome, "a commentary
upon the Epistles of St. Paul which is ascribed to you, and I
came across the passage in the Epistle to the Galatians,
where the Apostle Peter is reproved for the deception into
which he had been drawn. I confess with no small sorrow
that in it you, even you, or the author of this writing who-
soever he may be, have defended the cause of untruth. I
consider it a fatal error to believe it possible to find any-
thing in the Scriptures which is untrue, in other words, to
believe that the men to whom we are indebted for the sacred
works could have inserted therein any falsehood. Once
admit any officious untruth in the Holy books, then, in
accordance with this pernicious principle, in order to escape
from a moral which imposes too much restraint upon us, or
from dogmas which are beyond our comprehension, we may
attribute any part of these works to the artifice of an author
who has not told the truth." Having pursued his urgent
argument pointed by illustrations from the Bible, Augustine,
scarcely hoping that his request would be acceded to, de-
manded an explanation which would dispel his doubts. In
conclusion he claimed a fraternally severe criticism of which
he had just given an example, for those of his works which
Profuturus was to offer to Jerome.
Meanwhile Profuturus, who had been made Bishop of
Cirta in Numidia, instead of starting for Palestine took
possession of his see, where he very shortly died. The
letter, therefore, which had been given to him never reached
its destination, but unfortunately fell into indiscreet hands,
and the copies of it which were circulated in Dalmatia and
Italy, encouraged Jerome's enemies in their criticisms.
Augustine had also been raised to the episcopacy in 395,
and amid new cares and duties had no doubt forgotten not
only his letter, but the commentary which had provoked it,
when a note which the deacon Presidius brought him from
Jerome, recalled them to his mind. As Jerome's missive
did not in any way answer the questions Augustine had put
to him, the latter thinking that his letter had gone astray
wrote another, which was longer but not less peremptory and
no less aggressive. After having again tried to demonstrate
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 437
the dangers of the Hieronymian explanation, Augustine
exhorted the aged historian to a courageous retraction of it,
reminding him of the fable of Stesichorus who, struck with
blindness by the demi-gods Castor and Pollux for having
decried the chastity and beauty of Helen in a satire, did not
recover his sight until he had sung the praises of the grace
and virtue he had outraged, upon his lyre.
"I implore you," he wrote Jerome, "gird yourself with a
sincere and Christian severity, correct and amend your work,
and so to speak sing its recantation. The truth of Chris-
tians is incomparably more beautiful than the Helen of the
Greeks, for it indeed, have our martyrs fought more bravely
against the Sodom of their century, than did the Greek
heroes against Troy. I do not urge you to this disavowal,
so that you may recover your mental sight, for God forbid
that I should think that you had lost it, yet suffer me to tell
you that through I know not what inadvertency you have
turned aside your eyes, sound and far-sighted though they
may be, and have failed to see the disastrous consequences
of a system which would admit that one of the authors of
our sacred books, could once, in some part of his work, have
conscientiously and piously lied." [Epist. LXVII. Augus-
tini ad Hieronymum, inter Epistolas Hieronymi, 7.]
The man, by name Paul, to whom this letter had been
confided, overcome by his terror of the sea, did not embark
for Palestine, and another messenger chosen by Augustine
also failed to deliver the missive to Jerome. The letter,
however, spread abroad, and with it a report that Augustine
had composed and sent to Rome a book against Jerome.
The deacon Sisinius, a friend of the hermit, found Augus-
tine's letter, together with some other writings by the same
doctor, on an island in the Adriatic, and lost no time in
sending it to its destination.
This certainly was enough to rouse a soul less ardent, and a
writer less harassed by envy, or less surrounded by admirers
quick to take alarm and even to be angered at all criticisms
directed against their master ; yet Jerome controlled himself
and refrained from answering. He explained his silence in
the letters which later he wrote to the Bishop of Hippo. It
438 THE CAXOX OF THE IV. CENTURY
seems that, although he unmistakably recognized Augus-
tine's familiar style and manner of argument, the material
evidences of authenticity were wanting. Besides which, the
veteran soldier of orthodoxy shrank from opening hostilities
with a bishop of his own communion whom he had loved
before even knowing him, and who had sought him in friend-
ship; one, who already illustrious, was to continue his Scrip-
tural works, and one in whom he gladly welcomed a legiti-
mate heir.
When at last Augustine heard of the pain his letters,
divulged in such an unaccountable manner, had caused in
the solitude of Bethlehem, he wrote to Jerome: "A rumor
has reached me which I have difficulty in believing, yet why
should I not mention it to you ? It has been reported to me
that some brothers, I know not whom, have given you to
understand that I have written a book against you, and that
I have sent it to Rome. Rest assured that this is false ; God
is witness that I have written no book against you" (the
book in question was the letter, or letters, of which Jerome's
enemies had taken a perfidious advantage). "If there be
anything in my works contrary to your views, know or believe
that it was written not to antagonize you, but to explain
what seemed to me the truth. Point out to me anything in
my writings which could offend you; I will receive your
counsels as from one brother to another, glad to make any
corrections, glad also of such a token of your affection. I ask
and entreat this of you." Then followed one of those effu-
sions in which Augustine's soul so often found its outlet.
"Oh, why, if I may not live with you, may I not at least live
in your vicinity, and hold sweet and frequent intercourse
with you. But since that has not been granted me, consent
at least to uphold and draw closer the ties which render us
present to one another in the Lord; disdain not the letters
which I will sometimes write you." [Ep. ci. Augustini ad
Hieronymum, 2,3.]
Sincere and touching as were the tones of this letter, it
failed to disarm Jerome, who did not think it sufficiently
explicit. Moreover the advice, and even the appeals, which
it contained offended the somewhat proud susceptibility of
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 439
;he aged Biblical student. After evincing his doubts, which
we have already mentioned, upon the authenticity of Augus-
tine's letter, he proceeded to add these words: "God forbid
that I should dare to censure the works of your Beatitude ;
let it suffice me to defend my own, without criticising those
Df others. Your wisdom knows full well that every man is
wedded to his own opinion, and that it were childish boasting
to imitate the youths of old who, by slandering famous men,
sought to become famous themselves. Neither am I foolish
snough to be offended by the divergences which exist
between your explanation and mine. You yourself are not
hurt at my holding different opinions. But where our
friends have really the right to reprove us is when not per-
ceiving our own wallet, as Persius says, we look at that of
another.
"I have still one thing to ask of you, which is that you
should love one who loves you, and that being young, you
challenge not an aged man upon the battlefield of the Scrip-
tures. We too have had our day, and we have run our race
to the best of our abilities, and now that it has come to be
your turn to do likewise, and that you are making great
strides, we have a right to rest. To follow your example in
quoting the poets, remember Dares and Entellus, think also
of the proverb which says, 'As the ox grows weary he plants
his foot more firmly.' I dictate these lines with sadness;
would to God I might embrace you, and that in brotherly
intercourse we might have instructed one another. . . .
Think of me, saintly and venerable pontiff! See how much
I love you, I who, although challenged, have been unwilling
to reply, and who do not yet resign myself to ascribe to
you what in another I should blame."
To this letter, which was brought him by the subdeacon
Asterius, Augustine made a modest and touching answer.
He vindicated himself of having, so to speak, defied the aged
athlete upon the field of the Scriptures, and merely asked to
be enlightened. "Far be it from me that I should take
offence, if by sound reasons you wTill and can prove to me that
you understand the Epistle to the Galatians or any other like
part of the Scriptures better than I. Far from resenting it, I
440 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
should deem it a privilege to be instructed or corrected by
you. But, beloved brother, you would not think that your
answer could have hurt me had you not thought that I had
been the first to wound you. My best course is to acknowl-
edge my fault, and to confess that I offended you in writing
that letter which I cannot disown. If I offended you, I con-
jure you by the meekness of Jesus Christ do not render me
evil for evil by offending me in your turn. Now, to dissimu-
late what you find to alter or correct in my writings or my
discourses would be to offend me. . . . Reprove me with
charity if you deem me in the wrong, innocent though I may
be, or treat me with the tenderness of a father if you think
me worthy of your affection. . . . Innocent, I will receive
your reproaches in a spirit of gratitude ; guilty, I will acknowl-
edge both your "benevolence and my own error."
The unbiased judge of this controversy must feel that St.
Augustine was entirely right in his criticism and that Augus-
tine's magnanimity and meekness prevented a bitter contro-
versy. St. Jerome manifests here that sensitiveness to
crticism which was a prominent characteristic in him . Jerome
died at Bethlehem, according to the Chronicle of Prosper,
in the year 420, and was interred close to the Grotto of the
Nativity of Our Saviour. His body was afterwards brought
to the Church of St. Maria Maggiore in Rome.
His sanctity and austerity is of the kind that awes rather
than attracts, and is provocative of admiration rather than
of imitation. For this reason he has been looked at with
cool, temperate eyes; and since, moreover, he has so fully
written himself down for us, there is little difficulty in dis-
cerning the broad outlines of his personality.
A strange, strong man, strenuous and intense even to the
verge of ferocity, as was the fashion of his day with the
the champions of orthodoxy. In him is exemplified the sort
of antagonism that exists between delicacy of perception and
strength of execution, and renders their equal development
so rare in one and the same character. With great capacity
in both directions, St. Jerome seems alternately to sacrifice
one of these interests to the other. In his zealous self -hatred
it never occurred to him apparently that the difficulties he
THE CAXON OF THE IV. CENTURY 441
tvas contending with were more probably the effect of mental
strain and nervous exhaustion than of an overplus of animal
energy, and therefore were rather augmented than alleviated
by his violent methods. In the feverish vision of his judg-
ment before Christ's tribunal — embodying no doubt the
state of his conscience at the time — the whole apparatus of
secular learning by which he himself was subsequently
enabled to become so acute an exponent and defender of the
faith, and which the later Church blessed, sanctified, and
consecrated to the service of religion, was condemned with-
out qualification as repugnant to Christianity; even as the
body and all natural affections were indiscriminately con-
demned as inimical to virtue and sanctity.
It is mainly to the gigantic force of his intellect, to his
stupenduous power of work, to his prodigious scholarship —
as scholarship went in those days — that he owes his prom-
inence in the history of Christianity. When we think of
what he did, and did single-handed, for Scriptural criticism
and exegesis: how he created order and coherence where
previously there had been wild chaos and confusion, how he
expanded and applied the critical principles then in vogue as
far as the material to hand wrould permit we cannot help
wondering what he would do, what he would be allowed to
do, were he among us now, and were he master — as doubtless
he would be — of the rich harvest of learning and information
that has been accumulating during the intervening centuries.
Jerome's attitude towards the deuterocanonical books
was not consistent. At times he bitterly attacks them, as in
the following passages.
In his celebrated Prologus Galeatus, after the enumera-
tion of the protocanonical books, he continues : "Whatever
is outside of these is to be placed among the Apocrypha.
Therefore the Wisdom which is commonly ascribed to Solo-
mon, and the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobias,
and Pastor are not in the Canon. The first Book of Macca-
bees I found in Hebrew, the second is originally Greek,
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
442 THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
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 Ecclesias-
ticus, as with the Latins, but Parables: the second is
nowhere with the Hebrews, and the very style savors of
Greek eloquence, and some of the old writers have ascribed
it to Philo the Jew. As, therefore, the Church reads Judith,
Tobias, and the books of Maccabees, but does not hold them
canonical, thus let her read these two volumes for the edifi-
cation of the people, not for the confirmation of ecclesiasti-
cal dogmas."
In his Praef. in Esther: "To this book the received
Latin version has added various ragged patches of words,
adding the things which might be suggested by the theme."
Here is an evident condemnation of the deuterocanonical
fragments of Esther.
Writing to Laeta, Epist. 107, 12, on the mode of instruct-
ing her daughter, he says: "Let her shun all Apocrypha
(the deuterocanonical books), and if ever she should read
them, not for confirmation of dogmas, but out of reverence
for the words, let her know that they are not of those who
appear in the titles, and that there are many false things inter-
mingled in them, and that one has need of great prudence to
seek the gold in the slime." In his Commentary on Daniel,
although he comments the deuterocanonical fragments, he
is inclined to think that they are fables of Greek origin. It
does not increase our esteem of Jerome's critique to find that
one cause of his doubt of the fragments is that in the four-
teenth chapter, first verse, the King of Babylon is said to
cry out with a loud voice ; whereas Jerome had maintained
that only the saints are said in Scripture to cry out with a
loud voice.
In his prologue to Daniel, he justifies himself for having
fixed an obelus to the fragments of Daniel, alleging that
"Origen, and Eusebius, and Apollinaris and other church-
writers and doctors of Greece declare that these visions have
THE CANO\T OF THE IV. CENTURY 443
10 place with the Hebrews, and that they needed not to
espond to Porphyrius in defense of those things to which
he Holy Scriptures gave no authority."
In his prologue to Jeremiah he declares that he has
mitted the book of Baruch, and the pseudepigraphic Epistle
f Jeremiah, "setting at naught the rage of his calumnia-
ors." We have no wish to minimize Jerome's opposition to
he deuterocanonical books. At times it was pronounced
nd violent. But he could, at most, only be termed a vio-
jnt doubter. He never was calm and constant in his re-
action of those books. The fact that, in such strange oppo-
ition, he was at variance with all his contemporaries, made
im waver, and we find more quotations from deuterocanonical
cripture in Jerome, than in any other writer yet quoted. Oft
rhen opposed by his adversaries for his Scriptural views he
ented his resentment upon the books themselves. Then,
men asked by a friend, he would calmly discuss the merits
f these same writings. He translated Tobias from the
haldaic at the instance of Chromatius and Heliodorus, the
ishops, "judging it better to displease the Pharisees, in order
j grant the requests of the bishops." Praef. in Lib. Tob.
In Jerome's mind there was ever a conflict between two
rinciples. By conviction and education he was a Chris-
:an, moulded by Christian tradition. His higher studies
ad made him in a certain sense a Jew. The weird quaint
eauty of the Hebrew tongue, the deeper insight into the
ubstance of the Old Law which only Hebraists can have, the
Miviction that of all the Christian writers of his time, he
lone knew Hebrew, made him look with disfavor upon the
ooks which the Jews rejected. It is an evidence in favor
f the deuterocanonical books that they retained their place
1 the list of Scripture after the many tests to which they
rere subjected. The genius of Jerome was not able to draw
vren one Father to entertain his views on the deuterocanoni-
al works. He fluctuated between his reverence for the
hristian tradition, and his respect for the Synagogue till his
eath, and contradicted himself many times in his views oil
ne books in question.
444
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Dan. XIII. 61
"Et consurrexerunt adver-
sus duos presbyteros (convi-
ceratenim eos Daniel ex ore suo
falsum dixisse testimonium)
feceruntque eis sicut male ege-
rant adversus proximum. ' '
Dan. XIV. 35
" Et apprehendit eum Angel-
us Domini in vertice ejus, et
portavit eum capillo capitis
sui, posuitque eum in Babylone
supra lacum in impetu spiritus
sui. ' '
Sap. I. 11.
"Custodite ergo vos a mur-
muratione, que nihil prodest,
et a detractione parcite linguae,
quoniam sermo obscurus in va-
cuum non ibit: os autem, quod
mentitur, occidit animam. '
Sap. VI. 7.
' ' Exiguo enim conceditur mi-
sericordia; potentes autem po-
tenter tormenta patientur. ' :
Dan. XIII. 51.
"Et dixit ad eos Daniel; Se-
parate illos ab invicem procul,
et dijudicabo eos. ' '
Judith XII. 10.
"— et percussit bis in cervi-
cem, et abscidit caput ejus, et
a'bstulit conopeum ejus a co-
lumnis, evolvit corpus ejus
truncum etc.
St. Jerome, Epist. I. 9.
"Nunc Susanna nobilis fide
omnium subeat mentibus, qua?
iniquo damnata judicio, Spiri-
tu Sancto puerum replente, sal-
vata est. Ecce non dispar in
utraque misericordia Domini.
Ilia liberata per judicem, ne
iret ad gladium; haec a judice
damnata, absoluta per gladium
est. ' '
Epist. III. 1.
"O si nunc mihi Dominus
Jesus Christus .... Habacuc ad
Danielem translationem conce-
deret!"
Epist.XIV. 6.
"Os autem quod mentitur
occidit animam. ' '
Ibid. 9
"Potenter potentes tormen-
ta patientur. ' '
Ibid.
"Presbyteros puer Daniel ju-
dicat. ' '
Epist. XXII. 21.
"Tunc Holofernis caput Ju-
dith continens amputavit. ' '
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
I 15
Esther XIV. n.
"Ne tradas, Domine, scep-
trum tuum his, qui non sunt,
etc.
Sap. II. 23.
"Quoniam Deus creavit ho-
minem inexterminabilem, et ad
imaginem similitudinis suae fe-
cit ilium. ' '
Judith VIII. 6, et XIII. 9,10
Eccli. XXV. 12.
"Beatus, qui invenit ami-
cum verum, et qui enarrat jus-
titiam auri audienti."
Certainly Jerome does not
mitted to memory Apocryphal
Eccli. III. 33.
"Ignem ardentem extinguit
aqua, et eleemosyna resistit
peccatis — . ' '
Eccli. IV. 25.
"Est enim confusio adduc-
ens peccatum, et est confusio
adducens gloriam et gratiam. ' '
Eccli. XI. 27.
"In die bonorum ne imme-
mor sis malorum: et in die mal-
Epist. XLVIII. 14
"Ne tradas, inquit Esther,
hereditatem his qui non sunt,
idolis scilicet et daemonibus. '
Epist. LI. 6
" Dicit enim (Salomon) in Sa-
pientia quae titulo ejus inscribi-
tur: 'Creavit Deus incorruptum
hominem, et imaginem suae pro-
prietatis dedit ei. ' '
Epist. LIV. 16.
"Legimus in Judith (si cui
tamen placet volumen recip-
pere) viduam confectam jeju-
niis et habitu lugubri sordida-
tam, quae non lugebat mortu-
um virum sed squalore corpo-
ris, Sponsi quaerebat adventum.
Video armatam gladio manum
cruentam dexteram. Recog-
nosco caput Holophernis de me-
diis hostibus reportatum. '
Epist. LVII. 1.
' ' Legerat enim (Paulus)
illud Jesu : ' Beatus qui in
aures loquitur audientis. '
wish to say that Paul corn-
Scripture.
Epist. LXVI. 5.
" — sciens scriptum; 'Sicut
aqua extinguit ignem; ita elee-
mosyna peccatum.'
Ibid. 5.
"Est confusio quae ducit ad
mortem, et est confusio quae
ducit ad vitam. "
Epist. LXXVII. 6.
" — scilicet in die bona malo-
rum non oblita est. '
446
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
orum ne immemor sis bono-
rum..— ."
Sap. IV. ii.
" — raptus est ne malitia mu-
taret intellectum ejus, aut ne
fictio deciperet animam illius. '
Sap. IV. 8.
"Senectus enim venerabilis
est non diuturna, neque annor-
um numero computata: cani
autem sunt sensus hominis. '
Sap. I. 7.
"Quoniam spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum, ' ' etc.
Epist. LXXIX. 2.
"Raptus est ne malitia mu-
taret mentem ejus, quia plac-
ita erat Deo anima illius. ' '
Ibid. 6.
"Cani enim hominis sapien-
tia ejus. ' '
Epist. XCVIII. 13.
"Et alibi legimus: 'Spiritus
Domini replevit orbem terra-
rum. ' Quod nunquam Scrip-
tura memoraret nisi irrationa-
bilia quaeque et inanima illius
nomine complerentur. ' '
Ibid. 19.
" — et in illius perseverantes
amore cantabimus,' Amator fui
pulchritudinis ejus. '
Sap. VIII. 2.
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea et qusesivi
sponsam mini earn assumere,
et amator factus sum formse
illius. ' '
A testimony that can be joined with those of Jerome is
that of Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, which was trans-
lated by Jerome. It is designated as Epist. C. in Migne's
Works of Jerome. In the ninth paragraph Theophilus
speaks of the Maccabees as follows :
II. Maccab. Passim.
"Quid memorem insignes
Maccabaeorum victorias ? qui,
ne illicitis carnibus vescerentur
et communes tangerent cibos,
corpora obtulere cruciatibus:
totiusque orbis in ecclesiis Chris-
ti laudibus pradicantur, forti-
ores poenis, ardentiores quibus
comburebantur ignibus. ' '
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
117
Could the universal ( Church give such honor to Ap cryphal
martyrs ?
Sap. IX. 15.
' — corpus enim, quod cor-
rumpitur, aggravat animam.el
terrena inhabitatio deprimit
sensum multa cogitantem.'
Eccli. XXII. 6.
"Musica in luctu importuna
narratio. ' '
Epist. CVIII. 22.
"Si non crit sublata diversi-
tate sexus eadem corpora non
resurgent : ' Aggrava etnim ter-
rena inhabitatio sensum multa
cogitantem. ' ' '
Epist. CXVIII. i.
"Divina Scripiura loquitur:
'Musica in luctu, intempestiva
narratio. ' ' '
If words can express thoughts, the man who penned these
lines believed that he was quoting the inspired word of God.
Eccli. XXVII. 28
"Qui in altum mittit lapid-
em, super caput ejus cadet; et
plaga dolosa dolosi dividet vul-
nera. ' ' '
Esther XIV. 16.
"Tu scis necessitatem meam,
quod abominer signum super-
biae et gloriae meae, quod est su-
per caput meum in diebus os-
tentationis meas, et detester
illud quasi pannum menstrua-
tae, ' ' etc.
Eccli. IV. 28.
" — nee retineas verbum
tempore salutis. ' '
in
Eccli. XXVIII. 28.
"Sepi aures tuas spinis, lin-
guam nequam noli audire, et
ori tuo facito ostia ct seras. '
Epist.CXXV. 19.
"Et alibi: 'Qui mittit in al-
tum lapidem, recidet in caput
ejus.' "
Epist. CXXX. 4.
"Oderat ornatum suum et
cum Esther loquebatur ad Do-
minum: 'Tu nosti quod ode-
rim insigne capitis mei, et tan-
tae ducam immunditiae velut
pannum menstruatas. '
Epist. CXLVIII. 2.
" — illud mecum Scripture?
reputans: 'Tempus tacendi, et
tempus loquendi. ' Et iterum:
'Ne retineas verbum in tem-
pore salutis.' ' '
Ibid. 16.
"Noli." inquit Script:
'consentaneus esse, etc' Et
alibi: 'Sepi aures tuas spinis, et
noli audire linguam nequam.'
448
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Eccli. XXVIII. 29-30.
"Aurum tuum et argentum
tuum confla, et verbis tuis faci-
to stateram, et frenos ori tuo
rectos : et attende, ne forte
labaris in lingua — -. ' '
Eccli. III. 20.
"Quanto magnus es, humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo
invenies gratiam — . ' '
Eccli. X. 10.
"Quoniam a Deo profecta
est sapientia, ' ' etc.
Sap. VI. 26.
"Multitudo autem sapienti-
um sanitas est orbis terrarum;
et rex sapiens stabilimentum
populi est. ' '
Tob. IV. 16.
"Quod ab alio oderis fieri ti-
bi," etc.
Sap. XI. 27.
" Parcis autem omnibus,
quoniam tua sunt, Domine,
qui amas animas. ' '
Dan. XIII. Passim.
Ibid. 18.
"Unde Scriptura dicit: 'Ar-
gentum et aurum tuum confla,
et verbis tuis facito stateram et
frenos ori tuo rectos: et attende
ne forte labaris lingua. ' ' '
Ibid. 20.
"Unde Scriptura dicit :
'Quanto magnus es; humilia
te in omnibus, et coram Deo
invenies gratiam.' "
St. Jerome Interpretatio
Lib. Didymi, 10.
" ' Dominus, ' in quit, 'dabit
'sapientiam.et a facie ejus sap-
ientia et intellectus procedit.'
Ibid. 21.
"Multitudo quippe sapien-
tium, salus mundi. ' '
Ibid. 39.
' ' Ouod tibi non vis fieri, ' ' etc..
Ibid. 46.
" — juxta illud quod alibi
scribitur: 'Parces autem omni-
bus, Domine amator anima-
rum, quia tuae sunt, neque en-
im odies quos fecisti.'
Adversus Jovinian, 25.
"Erat igitur Daniel adhuc
puer, et notus populo vel prop-
ter interpretationem somnio-
rum regis vel propter Susannae
liberationem et occisionem
presbyterorum. '
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
449
Sap. VI. 7.
"Exiguo enim conceditur
misericordia ; potentes autem
potenter tormenta paticntur. '
Sap. I. 4-5-
"Quoniam inmalevolamani-
mam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore sub-
dito peccatis. Spiritus enim
sanctus discipline effugiet fic-
tum, et auferet se a cogitationi-
bus, quae sunt sine intellectu,
et corripietur a superveniente
iniquitate. "
Sap. I. 11.
"Custodite ergo vos a mur-
muratione, quae nihil prodest,
et a detractione parcite linguae,
quoniam sermo obscurus in va-
cuum non ibit: os autem, quod
mentitur occidit animam.
Eccli. III. 22.
"Altiora te ne quaesieris, et
fortioratene scrutatusfueris, '
etc.
Adversus Jov. Lib. II. 25.
" — quanto majoris criminis,
tan to majoris et poena*. 'Po-
tentes enim potenter tormenta
patientur.'
Apologia Adversus Rufinum
17-
' ' Loquitur et Sapientia quam
sub nomine Salomonis legimus:
'In malevolam animam nun-
quam intrabit sapientia, nee
habitabit in corpore subdito
peccatis. Spiritus enim Sanc-
tus eruditionis fugiet dolum et
recedet a cogitationibus stul-
tis.
Adversus Rufinum Lib. III.
26.
"Os quod mentitur occidit
animam.
Advcjsus Pelagianos Lib. I.
33-
"Respondct stultag interro-
gationituae liber Sapientiae: 'Al-
tiora te ne quaesieris, et forti-
ora te ne scrutatus fueris.'
II. Maccab. V. Passim.
Adversus Pelagianos Lib. II.
30.
"Antiochus Epiphanius rex
crudclissimus subvertit altare,
ipsamque justitiam fecit concul-
cari, quia concessum erat a Do-
mino, causasque reddit prop-
ter peccata plurima. '
(29) H. S.
450
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Tob. XII. 7.
" Etenim sacramentum regis
abscondere bonum est, ' ' etc.
Eccli. I. 33.
"Fili, concupiscens sapien-
tiam, conserva justitiam, et
Deus praebebit illam tibi. ' '
Eccli. XXVII. 29.
"Et qui foveam fodit, incidet
in earn: et qui statuit lapidem
proximo, oflendet in eo: et qui
laqueum alii ponit, peribit in
illo. ' '
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. II. 12.
" Circumveniamus ergo jus-
tum, quoniam inutilis est nobis"
etc.
Dan. XIII. Passim.
Sap. IV. 8.
"Senectus enim venerabilis
est non diuturna, neque anno-
rum numero computata: cani
autem sunt sensus homrnis. ' '
Comment, in Eccles. Cap.
VIII.
" Et hoc est quod in libro To-
biae scribitur: 'Mvsterium regis
abscondere bonum est.' "
Ibid. Cap. IX.
Dato nobis itaque praecepto
quod dicit: 'Desiderasti sapi-
entiam, serva mandata, et Do-
minus ministrabit tibi earn.' "
Ibid. Cap. X.
"Siquidem et alibi ipse Salo-
mon ait: 'Qui statuit laqueum,
capietur in illo.' ' '
Comment, in Isaiam, Cap. I.
Vers. 24.
" — de quibus scriptum est:
'potentes potenter tormenta
patientur.' "(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. III. Vers.
1.
— cogitastis consilium pes-
simum dicentes: 'Alligemus jus-
tum, quia inutilis est nobis. ' '
Ibid. Vers. 2.
' ' Et inveteratos dierum mal-
orum duos presbyteros juxta
Theodotionem in Danielis prin-
cipio legimus. ' '
Ibid.
" — de qua scriptum est: 'Ca-
nities hominum, prudentiaest."
Ibid. Vers. 3.
; ' Unde et illud in nostris lib-
ris legimus: 'Amici tibi sint plu-
rimi, consiliarius autem unus
demille.' "
THE CANON* OF THE IV. CENTURY
451
Eccli. VII. 6.
"Noli quaerere fieri judex,
nisi valeas virtute irrumpere
iniquitates, ' ' etc.
Eccli. XI. 30.
"Ante mortem ne laudes ho-
mincm quemquam, quoniam
in filiis suis agnoscitur vir. '
Eccli. XIII. 1.
"Qui tetigerit picem, inquin-
abitur ab ea, " etc.
Esther. Passim.
Dan. XIII. 56.
■'Et amoto eo, jussit venire
alium et dixit ei: Semen Cha-
naan, et non Juda, species de-
cepit te," etc.
Sap. IV. 8.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. I.
jj-
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. VI. 7.
(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
sancta: 'Ne beatum dicas quem-
quam hominem ante mortem. '
Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. VI.
Ver. 5.
"Ex quo ostenditur noxium
esse vivere cum peccatoribus:
'Qui enim tangit picem, inquin -
abitur ab ea.' "
Ibid. Lib. V. Cap. XIV.
Vers. 2.
' ' Potest et in Assueri tempo-
ribus intelligi, quando, occiso
Holopherne, hostilis ab Israel
est caesus exercitus. '
Ibid. Lib. VII. Cap. XXIII.
Vers. 12.
" Unde et ad senem adulte-
rum dicitur: 'Semen Chanaan
et non Juda, species decepit te."
Ibid. Lib. VIII. Cap. XXIV.
Vers. 21.
(Oft quoted.
Ibid. Cap. XXVI. Wis. 4.
"Unde et in alio loco scribi-
tur: 'Desiderasti sapientiam,
serva mandata, et Dominus
tribuet tibi earn."
Ibid. Lib. IX. Cap XVIII.
Vers. 23. et. seqq.
(Oft quoted.)
452
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Sap. IX. 6.
"Nam et si quis erit consum-
matus inter filios hominum, si
ab illo abfuerit sapientia tua,
in nihilum computabitur.
Eccli. X. 9.
' ' Avaro autem nihil est sce-
lestius. Quid superbit terra et
cinis ? ' '
Sap. III. 13, 14.
"Maledicta creatura eorum,
quoniam felix est sterilis, et in-
eoinquinata, qua? nescivit tho-
rum in delicto, habebit fruc-
tum in respectione animarum
sanctarum: et spado, qui non
opera tus est per manus suas in-
iquitatem, nee cogitavit adver-
sus Deum nequissima: dabitur
enim illi fidei donum electum,
et sors in templo Dei acceptis-
sima.
vSap I. 1.
"Diligite justitiam, qui judi-
catis terram. Sentite de Dom-
ino in bonitate, ' ' etc.
Eccli. XXV. 12.
" — beatus, qui invenit ami-
cum verum, et qui enarrat jus-
titiam auri audienti — . ' '
Sap. I. 4.
■ ' Quoniam in malevolam ani-
mam non introibit sapientia,
nee habitabit in corpore sub-
dito peccatis. ' '
Ibid. Cap. XXIX. Vers. 15,
16.
"—cum scriptum sit de Dei
Sapientia: 'Si enim quis perfec-
tus fuerit 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
inscribitur: 'Beata sterilis im-
maculata quae, non cognovit
stratum in delicto ; habebit fruc-
tum in visitatione animarum.
Et eunuchus qui non est opera -
tus manu iniquitatem, neque
cogitavit contra Dominum
mala. Dabitur enim fidei ejus
electa gratia et pars in templo
Domini delectabilis.' ' '
Ibid. Cap. LVI. Vers. 10-12.
" — et audiamus Scripturam
monentem: 'Sapite de Domino
in bonitate.' "
Ibid. Lib. XVI. Praef.
"Ac ne a profanis tan turn
sumere videor exemplum, nim-
irum hoc illud est aliis verbis
Propheta demonstrat: 'Bea-
tus qui in aures loquitur audi-
entium. ' '
Ibid. Vers. 15.
"Et quomodo in perversam
animam non ingreditur sapi-
entia, neque habitabit in cor-
pore subdito peccatis.' ' '
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
45.3
Sap .1. 5.
"Spiritus enim Sanctus dis-
cipline effugiet fictum, et au-
feret se a cogitationibus, ' ' etc.
Eccli. XVI. 18.
"Ecceccelum, et cceli ccelo-
rum, abyssus, et universa terra,
quae in eis sunt, in conspectu
illius commovebuntur. '
Esther. XIV. 16.
' ' Tu scis necessitatem mcam,
quod abominer signum super-
biae et gloriae meae, quod est su-
per caput meum in diebus os-
tentationis meae, et detester il-
lud quasi pannum menstruatae,
et non portcm in diebus silen-
tii mei — . ' '
Esther XIV. 11.
"Ne tradas, Domine, scep-
trum tuum his, qui non sunt, '
etc.
Eccli. XI. 27, 29.
' ' In die bonorum ne imme-
mor sis matorum, et in die mal-
orum ne immemor sis bonorum .
Malitia hone oblivionem facit
luxurise magnae, et in tine ho-
minisdenudatiooperum illius."
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Lib. XVII. Cap. LXIII.
Vers. 10.
"De quo et in Sapientia re-
perimus quae nomine Salomo-
nis scribitur: 'Sanctus enim
Spiritus disciplinae fugiet do-
lum, et recedet a cogitationi-
bus stultis.'
Ibid. Vers. 15.
"Denique Salomon qui aedi-
ficavit domum Dei, ad eum pre-
cans loquitur: 'Cceli ccelorum
et terra non sufheiunt tibi.'
Ibid. Lib. XVII. Cap. LXIV.
Vers. 6.
" — cui et Esther diadema
suum quod erat regiae potesta-
tis insigne comparat quod ne-
quaquam voluntate sed necessi-
tate portabat: 'Tu scis necessi-
tatem meam: quoniam detestor
signum superbiae meae, quod est
super caput meum in diebus os-
tensionis meae: abominor illud
sicut pannum menstruum: nee
porto in diebus quietis.'
Ibid. Lib. XVIII. Cap. LXV.
Vers. 3.
" Unde et Esther loquitur ad
Dominum: 'Ne tradas haeredi-
tatem tuam his qui non sunt."
Ibid. Vers. 17, 18.
" — juxta illud quod scrip-
turn est: 'In die bona, oblivio
malorum, et alibi: Afflictio ho-
rae oblivionem facit deli<
rum.
Ibid. Vers. 20.
(Oft quoted.)
454
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Ibid. Comment, in Jerem. Lib.
III. Cap. XII. Vers. 13.
Ibid. Lib. IV. Cap. XVIII.
Vers. 18.
" — dicente Scriptura: 'In
perversam animam non intra-
bit Sapientia.' ' '
Ibid. Cap. XXI. Vers. 14.
" — juxta illud quod scrip-
turn est: Mors viro requies cui
clausit Deus viam suam. ' '
The same quotation appears in the twent}M:hird Chap-
ter, fifth and following verses.
Sap. I. 4.
(Already quoted).
Eccli. XXII. n.
"Modicum plora supra mor-
tuum, quoniam requievit. '
Sap. VIII. 2.
Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a
juventute mea, et quaesivi spon-
sam mihi earn assumere, et am-
ator factus sum formae illius. '
Ibid. Lib. V. Cap. XXIX. Vers.
1 et seqq.
"Et in alio loco (scribit Salo-
mon): 'Hanc exquisivi spon-
sam accipere mihi, et amator
t actus sum decoris ejus. '
Ibid. Cap. XXIX. Vers. 21
et seqq.
—quorum uni loquitur
Daniel: 'Inveterate dierum
malorum. Et alteri: Semen
Chanaan et non Juda, species
decepit te, et concupiscentia
subvertit cor tuum. Sic facie-
batis filiabus Israel et illas me-
tuentes loquebantur vobiscum,
sed non filia Juda sustinuit ini-
quitatem vestram. ' ' '
Comment, in Ezechiel, Prasf.
" — 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-
discooperiretur (erat enim co- iele duo presbyteri praeceperunt
Dan. XIII. 56, 57.
"Et amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha-
naan, et non Juda, species de-
cepit te, et concupiscentia sub-
vertit cor tuum: sic faciebatis
.filiabus Israel, et illse timentes
loquebantur vobis, sed filia Ju-
da non sustinuit iniquitatem
vestram. ' '
Eccli. XXII. 6.
"Musica in luctu importuna
narratio," etc.
Sap. VI. 7.
Dan. XIII. 32.
"At iniqui illi jusserunt ut
THE CANON' OF THE IV. CENTURY
l.M
operta) ut vel sic satiarentur
decore ejus.
Dan. XIII. 56.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. VII. 22.
" — est enim in ilia spiritus
intelligentiae, sanctus, unicus,
multiplex, subtilis, disertus,
mobilis, incoinquinatus, certus,
suavis, amans bonum, acutus,
quem nihil vetat, benef aciens — .
In the fifth book Jerome quotes frequently the sentence
of Wis; lorn VI. 7 : "Potentes potenter tormenta patientur."
Lib. V. Cap. XVI. Vers. 59,
revelari Susannam ut nudati
corporis decore fruerentur. '
Ibid. Lib. IV. Cap. XVI.
Vers. 3.
"Mirabilis Daniel qui ad pres-
byterum delinquentem, et adul-
terio jungentem homicidium
puer ausus est dicere: Semen
Chanaan et non Juda, species
decepit te.' ' '
id. Vers. 10.
" Xam et in libro Sapientiae
qui a quibusdam Salomonis in-
scribitur, spiritus sapientiae
unigenitus et multiplex tenuis
et mutabilis appellatur.. '
Eccli. XV. 9.
"Non est speciosa laus in ore
peccatoris.
Eccli. III. 22.
"Altiora te ne quaesieris, et
fortiora te ne scrutatus fueris:
sed quae prascepit tibi Deus, ilia
cogita semper, et in pluribus
operibus ejus ne fueris curio-
sus. ' '
Eccli. XXXII. 1.
"Rectorem te posuerunt?
noli extolli: esto in illis quasi
unus ex ipsis. ' '
Eccli. X. 9.
Avaro autem nihil est sce-
lestius. Quid superbit terra
et cinis"-' '
et seqq.
" Xon est pulchra laudatio
in ore peccatoris. ' '
Ibid. Lib. VI. Cap. XVIII
rs. 6. et seqq.
"Sed et illud quod alibi
dicitur: 'Majoratenonrequiras,
et fortiora te non scruteris.' "
Ibid.
"Dc quibus scriptum est;
'Principem te constituerunt?
ne eleveris: c sto inter eos quasi
unus ex ipsis.'
Ibid.
" — cui illud convenit: 'Quid
gloriatur terra et cinis'- "
456
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Esther XIV. n.
"Ne tradas, Domine, scep-
trum tuum his, qui non sunt, ' '
etc.
Ibid. Lib. VIII. Cap. XXVII.
Vers. 19.
Unde et Esther contra idola
loquens: 'Ne tradas,' inquit,
'sceptrum tuum his qui non
sunt.' "
The same quotation occurs again in the thirty-third
verse of the same chapter of the commentary.
Ibid. Lib. IX. Cap. XXIX.
Sap. VI. 7.
"Exiguo enim conceditur
misericordia: potentes autem
potenter tormenta patientur. ' '
Eccli. I. 2.
"Arenam maris, et pluviae
guttas, et dies saeculi quis dinu-
meravit? Altitudinem caeli, et
latitudinem terrae, et profun-
dum abyssi quis dimensus est ?"
Eccli. XXVII. 29.
"Et qui foveam fodit, inci-
det in earn," etc.
Eccli. XX. 32.
"Sapientia absconsa et the-
saurus invisus: quae utilitas in
utrisque ? ' '
Eccli, VII. 6.
"Noli quaerere fieri judex,
nisi valeas virtute irrumpere
iniquitates: ne forte extimes-
Vers. 8. et seqq,
Ibid. Cap. XXX. Vers. 20 et
seqq.
"Et in alio loco: 'Abyssum
et sapientiam quis investiga-
bit?' "
Ibid. Lib. X. Cap. XXXII.
Vers. 17. et seqq.
' ' Qui enim fodit foveam inci-
det in earn. ' '
Ibid. Cap. XXXIII. Vers. 1
et seqq.
"De magistris negligentibus
Salomon loquitur: 'Sapientia
abscondita, et thesaurus occul-
tus, qu.se utilitas in utrisque?'
Ibid. Lib. XI. Cap. XXXIV
1.
' ' Unde magnopere caven-
dum est et observanda ilia prae-
cepta: 'Ne quaeras judex fieri,
cas faciem potentis, et ponas ne forte non possis auferre ini-
scandalum in aequitate tua. ' quitates, et iterum: quanto
Eccli. III. 29. major es, tanto magis te hu-
"Cor nequam gravabitur in milia, et in conspectu Domini
doloribus, et peccator adjiciet invenies gratiam. ' Et rursum
ad peccandum. ' ' ' Ducem te constituerunt, ne
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
457
Ecch. XXXII. i. elevens: sedesto inter eos quasi
"Rectorem te posuerunt? unusex illis.' "
noli extolli: esto in illis quasi
unusexipsis.
Ibid. Lib. XIII. Cap. XLIII.
Eccli. I. 2. Vers. 13. et seqq.
(Already quoted.) "Scriptum est: 'Abyssum et
sapientiam quis investigabit?' "
Eccli. XXXII. 1.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXVIII. 29.
" — et verbis tuis facito sta-
teram, et frenos ori tuo rectos."
Ibid. Cap. XLV. 9.
Ibid. Vers. 10 et seqq.
" — dicente Scriptura: 'Ser-
monibus tuis facies stateram et
appendiculum.' "
Sap. I. 4.
(Already quoted.)
Comment, in Daniel, Cap. II.
Vers. 2i.
"In perversam autem ani-
mam non introibit sapientia. ' '
In this same chapter he inveighs against the deutero-
canonical fragments of Daniel. In the twenty-third verse he
says : "And observe that Daniel is of the sons of Juda, not a
priest as the fable of Bel declares." Coming to the Canticle
of the youths in the fiery furnace, he prefaces his commentary
on it as follows : "Hitherto the Hebrews read : what follows
even to the end of the Canticle of the three youths is not con-
tained in Hebrew; concerning which, lest we may seem to
have passed it by, a few words are to be said." He then
proceeds to comment it in the same manner as the other
portions of the book.
Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 14.
" Legamus Maccabaeorum
libros et Josephi historiam. '
Ibid. Cap. XI. Vers. 34, 35.
" I. <•_:<' M;n 1 a ba?orum libros. '
Ibid. Cap. XII. Vers. 1
seqq.
" l'onit quoqiic historiam dc
Maccabaeis in qua dicitur mul-
I. et II. Maccab. Passim.
458
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Sap. IV. 8.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. III. 13.
"Maledicta creatura eorum,
quoniam felix est sterilis, et in-
coinquinata, qua? nescivit tho-
rum in delicto, ' ' etc.
Sap. III. 16.
"Filii autem adulterorum in
inconsummatione erunt, et ab
iniquo thoro semen extermina-
bitur. ' '
He quotes again Sap. VI. 7- in Lib- m- CaP- XI- Vers-
8 and 9.
tos Judceorum sub Mathathia
et Juda Maccabaeo ad eremum
confugisse, et latuissein spelun-
cis et in cavernis petrarum, et
post victoriam processisse. ' :
Comment, in Osee Lib. II.
Cap. VII. 8, 10.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. X. Vers. 14.
"Beata sterilis immaculata
quae non cognovit cubile in pec-
cato.
Ibid.
"Ex iniquo enim concubitu
semen peribit. ' '
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha-
naan et non Juda, species de-
cepit te, et concupiscentia sub-
vertit cor tuum — . ' '
Eccli. XVI. 19.
' — montes simul, et colles,
et fundamenta terras; cum con-
spexerit ilia Deus, tremore con-
cutientur. ' '
Ibid. Cap. XII. Vers. 7, 8.
"Semen Chanaan et non Ju-
da, species decepit te. '
Comment, in Amos, Lib. II.
Cap. IV. Vers. 12, 13.
' ' Iste est qui firmat tonit-
ruum, sive montes confirmat,
ad cujus vocem ccelorum card-
ines et terra fundamenta qua-
tiuntur. ' '
In Lib. III. Cap. VI. Vers. 7 et seqq., he quotes again
Sap. VI. 7.
Ibid. Vers. 12 he repeats Esther XIV. II.
Eccli. XV. 9. Ibid. Cap. V. Vers. 25.
"Non est speciosa laus in ore " — quia non est pulchra lau-
peccatoris. ' ' datio in ore peccatoris. ' '
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
159
Tob. XIV. 5-6 (juxta LXX.i
"Magnopere autem senuit:
et vocavit tiliuni suum et iilios
ejus, ct dixit ei: fili, accipe filios
tuos: ecce senui, et ad exeun-
dum e vita sum: abi in Mo Ham,
fili, quoniam creclidi quaecum-
que locutus est Jonas Propheta
de Ninive quia subvertetur. "
In Jonam, Prologus.
"Liber qi Tobiae, licet
non habeatur in Canone, ta-
men quia usurpatur ab Ecclcsi-
astieis viris, tale quid memorat,
dicente Tobia ad filium suum:
' Fili, ecce scnui, et in eo sum ut
revertar de vita mea: telle filios
meos, et vade in Mediam; fili,
scio enim quae locutus est Jonas
propbeta de Ninive, quoniam
subvertetur.'
When Jerome speaks of the Canon, he evidently means
the collection of the Jews. He clearly testifies here that
tradition favored Tobias, although it was not received by
the Jews, and he is disposed to give a certain reverence to the
book on account of its use by the Fathers.
Judith XVI. 3.
"Dominus conterens
Dominus nomen est illi. '
bella,
Eccli. XX. 31.
"Xenia et dona excaecant
Comment, in Michseam.Lib.
I. Cap. II. Vers. 6, 8.
' ' Recedente autem pace et
auxilio Dei, quiarestiterant Do-
mino, de quodicitur: 'Dominus
conterens bella, Dominus no-
men ei.' "
Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 1
seqq.
" Munera excaecant oculos
oculos judicum, et quasi mutus etiam Sapientium, et qua
in ore avertit correptiones eo- num in ore avertunt increpatio-
rum." nem."
Eccli. VI. 7.
"Si possibles amicum, in ten-
tatione posside cum, ' ' etc.
Ibid. Lib. II. Cap. VII. V
5. 7-
"Unde die-it ur: 'Si habes
amicum, in tentatione posside
eum.' "
Ibid. Vers. 14 et seqq .
" — et erunt in cOnfusione
Eccli. IV. 25.
"Est enim confusio addu-
cens peccatum, el es1 confusio quae ducit ad vitam
adducens gloriam et gratiam.
460
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
In Nahum, Cap. III. Vers
oft-quoted sentence from Dan.
Dan. XIV. 35.
" Et apprehendit eum Angel-
us Domini in vertice ejus, et
portavit eum capillo capitis sui,
posuitque eum in Babylone su-
pra lacum in impetu spiritus
sui.
Eccli. I. 2.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XX. 32.
"Sapientia absconsa et the-
saurus invisus: quae utilitas in
utrisque ? ' '
Dan. XIII. 56.
"Et, amoto eo, jussit venire
alium, et dixit ei: Semen Cha-
naan, et non Juda, ' ' etc.
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Eccli. XXVII. 28.
"Qui in altum mittit lapi-
dem, super caput ejus cadet: et
plaga dolosa dolosi dividet vul-
nera. ' '
Judith. Passim.
8 seqq., he quotes again the
XIII. 56.
Prologus in Habacuc.
"—Daniel docere te poterit,
ad quem in lacum leonum Ha-
bacuc cum prandio mittitur. '
Comment, in Habacuc, Lib.
I. Cap. III. Vers. 11, seqq.
"Et pulchre opinationem
phantasise altitudinem vocat
juxta Jesum filium Sirach, qui
ait: 'Abyssum et sapientiam
quis investigabit?'
Comment, in Sophoniam,
Cap. II. Vers. 3, 4.
" — hoc est, alios doceant:
' Sapientia enim abscondita
et thesaurus non comparens,
quae utilitas in ambobus? ' '
Ibid. Vers. 8 et seqq.
"Et ad presbyteros cupien-
tes sub figura Susannae Eccle-
siae corrumpere castitatem di-
cat Daniel: 'Hoc est judicium
Dei, Semen Chanaan et non
Juda.' "
Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 8, 9.
Ibid. Vers. 19, 20.
" — et de Jesu filio Sirach tes-
timonium proferamus: 'Qui
mittit lapidem in excelsum, su-
per caput suum mittit.' "
Comment, in Haggai, Cap. I.
Vers. 5, 6.
"Similiter qui penitus non
bibit, siti peribit, sicut et in Ju-
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
K'.l
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 sen-
sum multa cogitantem. ' '
Maccab. Passim.
Sap. I. 14.
"Creavit enim, ut essent om-
nia: et sanabiles fecit nationes
orbis terrarum: et non est in il-
lis medicamentum exterminii,
nee inferorum regnum in
terra.''
Sap. IX. 16-18.
"Quae autem in caslis sunt
quis investigabit ? Sensum au-
dith (si quis tamen vult librum
recipere mulieris) et parvuli
siti perierunt.
Comment, in Zachariam, Lib.
II. Cap. VII. Vers. 8 et
seqq.
"Viduam quoque et pupil-
lum de quibus nobis praecep-
tum est: ' Esto pupillis pater, et
pro viro matri eorum, judicans
pupillum et justificans vidu-
am.' "
Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. 21, 22.
" Appropinquat enim Domi-
nus his qui non tentant eum, et
ostendit faciem suam his qui
non sunt increduli. ' '
Ibid. Cap. IX. Vers. 15, 16.
" — quia aggravat terrena hab-
itatio sensum multa curan-
tem. ' '
Ibid. Cap. X. Vers. 1. et seqq.
"Ita felicitas Maccabaeorum
tempore promissa est, quando
sancti lapides elevati sunt su-
per terram, ' ' etc.
Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. XII.
Vers 9.
"Unde in Sapientia quae Sa-
lomonis inscribitur (si cui ta-
men placet librum recipere)
scriptum reperimus: 'Creavit
ut essent omnia, et salutares
generationes mundi, et non erit
eis venenum mortiferum.' "
Ibid.
"Et in supradicto volumine
continetur: 'Quae in coelo sunt
462
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
tern tuum quis sciet, nisi tu de-
deris sapientiam, et miseris
spiritum sanctum tuum de al-
tissimis: et sic correctae sint
semitae eoruni, qui sunt in
terris, et qua? tibi placent
didicerint homines?"
quis investigabit ? nisi quod tu
dedisti sapientiam, et Spiritum
Sanctum misisti de excelsis, et
sic correctas sunt semitae eo-
runi qui versantur in terra; et
quae tibi placent eruditi sunt
homines. ' ' '
Sap. IV. 8. Ibid. Cap. XIV. Vers. 9.
"Senectus enim venerabilis " — de quo scriptum est: 'Ca-
est non diuturna, neque anno- ni hominis sapientia ejus.' "
rum numero computata: cani
autem sunt sensus hominis. ' '
Sap. VI. 7.
(Already quoted.)
Eccli. XXV. 12.
"Beatus, qui invenit ami-
cum verum, et qui enarrat jus-
titiam auri audienti.
Sap. VI. 7.
(Oft quoted.)
Sap. I. 6.
' ' Benignus est enim spiritus
sapientiae, et non liberabit
maledicum a labiis suis, quon-
iam renum illius testis est
Deus, et cordis illius scrutator
est verus, et linguae ejus audi-
tor.
Judith V.
Tob. IV. 16.
"Quod ab alio oderis fieri
tibi, vide, ne tu aliquando
alteri facias. ' '
Comment, in Malach. Cap.
II. Vers. 1, 2.
Ibid. Cap. III. Vers. 7. et
seqq.
" — et consequetur illud de
quo scriptum est: 'Beatus qui
in aures loquitur audientium.' "
Comment, in Evang. Math.'
Lib. I. Cap. V .Vers. 13.
(Oft quoted.)
Ibid. Cap. VI. Vers. 7.
' ' Deus enim non verborum
sed cordis auditor est. ' '
Ibid. Cap. VIII. Vers. iS.
Ibid. Lib. III. Cap. XXI.
Vers. 28.
—hoc est: 'Quod tibi non
vis fieri, alteri ne feceris.' "
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTL'KY
463
Sap. XII. i.
"0 quam bonus et suavisest,
Domine, spiritus tuus in omni-
bus. ' '
II. Maccab. VI. et VII. Pas-
sim.
Sap. XI. 25.
"Diligis enim omnia quae
sunt, et nihil odisti eorum quae
fecisti: nee enim odiens aliquid
constituisti, aut fecisti."
Sap. IX. 15.
" — corpus enim, quod cor-
rumpitur, aggravat animam,
et terrena inhabitatio deprimit
sensum multa cogi tan tern. "
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
• "Homo sanctus in sapient ia
manet sicut sol; nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur. ' '
Sap. VI. 7.
(Already quoted.)
Sap. I. 11.
"Custodite ergo vos a mur-
muratione, quae nihil prodest,
et a detractione parcite linguae,
quoniam sermo obscurus in vac
uum non ibit: os autem. quod
mentitur, occidit animam. '
Comment, in Epist. ad. Ga-
latas Lib. I. Cap. III. 2.
-de quo (Spiritu Sancto
alibi seribitur: ' Incorruptus
Spiritus est in omnibus.' ' '
Ibid. Lib. II Cap. ill. 14.
" Eleazarus quoque nonage-
narius sub Antiocho rege Syriae,
et cum septem filiis gloriosa
mater, utrum maledictos eos
aestimaturi fuerint, an omni
laude dignissimos?"
Comment, in Epist. ad Ephe-
sios Lib. I. Cap. I. 6.
" Dicitur quippe ad Deum:
' Diligis omnia, et nihil abjicis
eorum quae fecisti. Neque
enim odio quid habens condi-
disti.' "
[bid. Lib. II. Cap. IV. 2.
Corruptibile enim corpus
aggravat animam, et terrenum
hoc tabernaculum sensum op-
primit multa curantem.'
Ibid. 4.
—neque in morem stulti
quasi luna mutetur. '
[bid. Lib. III. Cap. V. 30.
Breviarium in Psalmos, Ps.
[V.
"Os enim quod mentitur oc-
eidit animam. ' '
464
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY
Sap. VII. 27.
"Et cum sit una, omnia po-
test, et in se permanens omnia
innovat, et per nationes in ani-
mas sanctas se transfert; ami-
cos Dei et prophetas consti-
tuit.
Eccli. I. 16.
"Initium, sapientiae timor
Domini, " etc.
Maccab. Passim.
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
"Homo sanctus in sapientia
manet sicut sol; nam stultus
sicut luna mutatur. '
Eccli. XIV. 18.
"Omnis caro sicut foenum
veterascet, et sicut folium fruc-
tificans in arbore viridi. '
Eccli. X. 9.
"Avaro autem nihil est sce-
lestius. Quid superbit terra et
cmis
?'
Ibid. Ps. IX.
' ' Et alibi (ipse Deus ait) : An-
ima justi sedes sapientiae. '
Eccli. III. 17.
" — et in justitia sedificatur
tibi, et in die tribulationis com-
memorabitur tui, et sicut in
sereno glacies solventur peccata
tua.
Sap. I. 11.
(Already quoted.)
Ibid. Ps. XXXIII.
"Ut illud: 'Initium sapien-
tiae, timor Domini.'
Ibid.
' ' Filii Maccabaeorum vel
modo unusquisque sanctus
clamaverunt, et illos et modo
unumquemque ex omnibus
tribulationibus liberat.
Ibid. Ps. LXVII.
"Insipiens enim sicut luna
mutatur.
Ibid. Ps. LXXXIII.
' ' Ilia autem caro de qua dici-
tur: Omnis caro foenum, non
desiderat Dominum.
Ibid. Ps. CXII.
"Quia de terra et putredine
peccatorum nostrorum erexit
nos, ut illud: 'Quid superbis,
pulvis et terra?' — fiat nobis
illud quod scriptum est: 'Si-
cut glacies in sereno solvuntur
peccata tua. "
Ibid. Ps. CXIX.
. " — nostras interficimus ani-
mas quod mentimur: 'Os
THE CANON OF THE IV. CENTURY 465
enim quod mentitur occidit
animam. ' ' '
Liber De Expositione Psalm-
Sap. VIII. 2. orum.Ps. CXXVII.
"Hanc amavi, et exquisivi a "Dicit Salomon quia volue-
juvcntute mea.etquaesivispon- rit sapientiam ducere scilicet
sam mihi earn assumere, et am- sponsam.
ator factus sum formae illius. ' '
These are the quotations which a cursory examination of
Jerome's works reveals. We see in them that he quoted
with great frequency the deuterocanonical books as divine .
Scripture.
Three causes are usually assigned for the doubts that pre-
vailed among some Fathers concerning the deuterocanonical
books.
i. — Disputations between Jew and Christian were fre-
quent in those days. The chief intellectual adversaries of
the Church during the fourth and fifth centuries, were Jews,
and the works of the Fathers of this period are filled with
refutations of their attacks. As the Jews rejected the deu-
terocanonical books, the Fathers were obliged to draw Scrip-
tural materials from the protocanonical writings. Hence,
gradually these were preferred in authority to the deutero-
canonical books ; and, as they furnished all that was needed
from a source accepted by both sides, the deuterocanonical
works were often given a secondary place, and sometime-
left out altogether.
2. — A second cause is found in Origen's critical editi* >n i »f
the Hexapla. In this work, which we shall describe more
fully in the progress of this work, Origen compared the Sep-
tuagint text with the Hebrew and other Greek texts, tli
existing, marking the passages which were in the Septua-
gint, and not found in the Hebrew by an 6/3e\6<>. Copies
made from this text, reproducing the diacritic points, soon
filled the East. Now the Alexandrian grammarians were
wont to use the o/3e\o'?, to denote a spurious passage. Orig-
en's intention was evidently not to brand these books and
fragments as spurious, but the error arose in the East especi-
ally to distrust what was denoted by this sign.
(30) H.S.
466 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY
3.— Finally, the fourth and fifth centuries were an age
fertile in heresies, apocryphal productions, absurd fables,
and fictitious revelations, and in their caution against what
was spurious, the Fathers sometimes erred in slowness to
receive those books which have in their favor all the evidence
that is necessary, and that we have a right to expect. It
was by them judged safer to refuse the quality of canonicity
to an inspired book, than, by excessive credulity, to approve
an Apocryphal work. These causes operated principally in
the East, and thence the most of the opposition came. The
status of the deuterocanonical books might be compared
to the growth of a healthy tree. It lost now and then
a branch, in whose stead it acquired new ones, and grew
to perfection because there was in it a Divine vigor,
which came not from the branches, nor was impaired by their
occasional dropjjing off. There never was any conflict
between the Fathers on this point, for in practice, they were,
a unit. The lists they drew up were mere disciplinary
opinions, which never entered to change their practical use of
the Scripture.
We find at first the most doubt in the East. This line of
thought was brought into the West by Jerome ; and while the
doubt gradually passed away in the East, we find the in-
fluence of Jerome, in the subsequent centuries, engendering
some doubts in the minds of Fathers and theologians of the
Westen Catholic world. We shall pass in brief review the
centuries from the fifth down to the Council of Trent.
Chapter IX.
The Canon of the Old Testament from the End of
the Fifth Century to the End of the
Twelfth Century.
• The Hexaplar version of Syriac Scriptures made by
Paul of Telia, in 616, contains all the deuterocanonical
works.
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY 46*3
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 introduc
tion to the Holy Scriptures, sets forth three catalogues of
Holy Books. t
The first list is that of Prologus Galeatus, the helmeted
prologue of Jerome. The second list is the Canon of St.
Augustine from his Doctrina Christiana, which we have
already reproduced in full. The third list of Cassiodorus
is identical with the catalogue of the Vulgate, except a slight
variation in the order of the books.
Cassiodorus was more reverential than critical. He
plainly received all the deuterocanonical books, and failed
to see any repudiation of them in the celebrated Prologue of
Jerome. He certainly can be claimed as a witness of a tra-
dition in the sixth century, which accorded to the deutero-
canonical books the quality of divinity.
It is evident that, in the East, in the sixth and seventh
centuries, the deuterocanonical books were held to be can-
onical, since the schismatic churches of the Chaldean Nestor-
*Dionysius, 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 sev-
eral years. He is the author of a "Codex Canonum" and other mi
works. His death is placed about the year 540. in the reign of Justinian
♦Flavins 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 tilled high positions under Theo
doric. Cassiodorus was born about 490 or perhaps a little later. \\<
tilled important public offices under the Gothic sovereigns, Theodoric
Athalaric, Thcodahat 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 gav< 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 well ' by the
monks of Cassiodorus, and spread through the world.
468 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY
ians, the Jacobite Monophysites, Syrians, Ethiopians,
Armenians and Copts, all have the deuterocanonical Scrip-
tures in equal place with the other divine books.*
It is needless to attend to the absurd catalogue of Junil-
ius Africanus, an obscure bishop of Africa in the sixth cen-
tury. This list places Chronicles, Job, and Ezra with Tobias,
Judith, Esther, and Maccabees among the non-canonical
books, 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 Sec-
tis" of Leontius of Byzantium, a priest of Constantinople in
the sixth century. He drew up a canon of only the pro-
tocanonical books excepting Esther, and declared that,
1 'these are the books which are held canonical in the Church."
Leontius lived many years in the monastery of St. Saba,
near Jerusalem, and the ideas of the Church of Jerusalem are
reflected in his works. It can be said of him, as of Cyril,
that exclusion from canonicity was not with him exclusion
from divinity. With them the divine books of the Old
Testament were arranged in two classes canonical and non-
canonical. They used the latter as divine Scripture without
according them the pre-eminence of canonicity. Leontius
used in several places quotations from deuterocanonical
works as divine Scripture.
The opponents of our thesis cite at this juncture St.
Gregory the Great.!
*Assemanni. Bibliotheca Orientalis, III.
tjunil. Afric. De part. div. Legis I. 3-7. Migne 68, 16 et seqq.
JSt. Gregory, surnamed the Great, was born of an illustrious Roman
family, and was praetor of Rome in 573. Despising the inanity of worldly
grandeur, he retired into a monastery which he had btiilt under the patron-
age of St. Andrew. Pope Pelagius II, drew him from his retreat and made
him one of the seven deacons of Rome. He then sent him as Nuncio to
Constantinople, to implore the succour of Tiberius II. against the Lom-
bards. At his return, he was made secretary to Pelagius. After Pelagius'
death, by unanimous consent of people and clergy, he was created Pope.
He strove to avoid the papal dignity, but in vain ; he was created Pope in
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY 469
In the Moral Treatises XIX. 21, citing a passage from
Maccabees, he prefaces the citation by saying: "We shall
not act rashly, if we accept a testimony of books, which,
although not canonical, have been published for the edifica-
tion of the Church."
In the phraseology of St. Gregory canonical signified
something over and above divine. It signified those books
concerning which the whole world, with one accord, united
iii proclaiming the word of God. The other books were
divine, were used as sources of divine teaching by the Church,
but there was lacking the authoritative decree of the Church
making them equal to the former in rank. The Jews of old
made such distinction regarding the Law and the Hagio-
grapha. All came from God, but the Law was pre-eminent.
The influence of St. Jerome was strong upon St. Gregory.
The tradition of the Church drew him with it to use freely,
as divine Scripture, the deuterocanonical books; while the
doubts of Jerome moved him to hesitate in his critical
opinion to accord to these books a prerogative of which
Jerome doubted. Had the Church not settled the issue
in the Council of Trent, there would, doubtless, be many
Catholics yet who would refuse to make equal the books of
the first and second Canons. Christ established a Church
to step in and regulate Catholic thought at opportune times,
and her aid was needed in settling, once for all, the discus-
sion of the Canon of Scripture. This isolated doubt from St.
Gregory reflects merely a critical opinion, biased by Greg-
ory's esteem for St. Jerome. To show what was St.
Gregory's opinion as a witness of tradition, we need only
examine the following references :
590. His reign was characterized by great ability and holiness. He, by
divine aid, checked a pestilence that ravaged Rome, extinguished the
schism of the Three Chapters, evangelized England through means of St.
Austin, reformed the divine office, reformed the clergy, checked the am-
bition of the Patriarchs of Constantinople, and upheld the rights of tin-
Holy See. Gregory died in 604. His principal writings are his Moral
Treatises, his Dialogues, and exegctical Treatises on Holy Scripture. He
had more piety than learning, and his exegesis is excessively mystic.
470 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY
Eccli. II. 14. Com. on Job. Bk. I. 36
Eccli. II. 16. Ibid. 55.
Sap. I. 7. Ibid. Bk. II. 20.
Eccli. XXIV. 8. Ibid.
Eccli. XXXII. 26. Ibid. Bk. III. 13.
Eccli. XI. 27. Ibid. 16.
Sap. XII. 15. Ibid. 26.
Eccli. IV. 24. Comment, on Job, Bk. IV.
32.
Eccli. XXI. 1. Ibid. 39.
Eccli. II. 1. Ibid. 42.
Eccli. I. ^t,. Ibid. 61.
Sap. IX. 15. Ibid. 68.
Sap. IX. 16. Ibid. Bk. V. 12.
Sap. IV. n. Ibid. 34.
Eccli. V. 4. Ibid. 35.
Sap. IX. 15. Ibid. 58.
Sap. VII. 26. Ibid. 64.
Sap. XII. 18. Ibid. 78.
Sap. II. 24. Ibid. 85.
Sap. V. 21. Ibid. Bk. VI. 14.
Sap. XVI. 20. Ibid. 22.
Tobias IV. 16. Ibid. 54.
Eccli. XII. 8. Ibid. Bk. VII. 29.
Eccli. II. 16. Ibid. 45.
Sap. XL 24. Ibid. Bk. VIII. 31.
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY i,l
Sap. IX. 15. Ibid. 12.
Eccli. XXXIV. 7. Ibid. 42.
Sap. IX. 15. Ibid. 50.
Eccli. XL. 1. Ibid. 55.
Sap. V. 6. Ibid. 70.
Eccli. I. 13. Ibid. 88.
Sap. II. 12. Ibid. Bk. IX. 89.
Eccli. VII. 40. Ibid. 92.
Sap. VI. 7 et 9. Ibid. 98.
Tob. IV. 16. Ibid. Bk. X. 8.
Eccli. VII. 15. Ibid. 28.
Eccli. I. 13. Ibid. 35.
Eccli. XXXIV. 2. Ibid. Bk. XI. 68.
Sap. III. 2 Ibid. Bk. XII. 6
Sap. XII. 18. Ibid. 14.
Sap. XVII. 10. Ibid. 46.
Eccli. XI. 27. Ibid. Bk. XIII. 48.
Eccli. X. 15. Ibid. Bk. XIV. 19.
Eccli. XXII. 2. Ibid. Bk. XV. 5.
Sap. I. 4. Ibid. 9.
Eccli. III. 22. Ibid. Bk. XVI. 8.
Sap. IX. 15. Ibid. Bk. XVII. 39.
Eccli. XXII. 6. Ibid. Bk. XVIII. 2.
Sap. I. 11. Ibid. 5.
Sap. V. 8, 9. Ibid. 29.
Eccli. II. 5. Ibid. 40.
472 THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY
Eccli. XXXVIII. 25.
Ibid. 68.
Sap. IX. 15.
Ibid. 71.
Eccli. XV. 3
Ibid. Bk. XIX. 9.
Sap. IV. 8, 9.
Ibid. 26.
I. Maccab. VI
. 46.
Ibid. 34.
Eccli. XXX. 2
■4.
Ibid. 38.
Eccli. XIV. 5.
Ibid.
Sap. XII. 18.
Ibid. 46.
Eccli. V. 4.
Ibid.
Sap. IX. 15.
Ibid. Bk. XX. 8.
Eccli. II. 11, 12.
Ibid. 51.
Eccli. IV. 18,
19.
Ibid.
Eccli. I. 13.
Ibid. 56.
Eccli. XVIII.
15. 17.
Ibid. Bk. XXI. 29.
Eccli. XX. 32.
Ibid. Bk. XXII. 7.
Sap. VII. 15.
Ibid. Bk. XXIII. 31
Eccli. X. 15.
Ibid. 44.
Sap. III. 5.
Ibid. 52.
Eccli. II. 1.
Ibid. Bk. XXIV. 27.
Sap. III. 7.
Ibid. 49.
Eccli. XXXII.
1.
Ibid. 52.
Sap. VI. 5.
Ibid. 54.
Eccli. V. 4-
Ibid. Bk. XXV.6.
Sap. XIII. 5.
Ibid. Bk. XXVI. 17.
Sap. VI. 17.
Ibid
THE CANON OF THE VI. CENTURY
473
Eccli. III. 22.
Ibid. 27.
Sap. IX. 15.
Had. Bk.
XX VI I. 45-
Sap. XVII. 10.
Ibid. 48.
Eccli. III. 17.
Ibid. 53.
Sap. II. 24.
Ibid. Bk.
XXIX. 15
Sap. VII. 24.
Ibid. 24.
Eccli. V. 7.
Ibid. 54.
Sap. IX. 1 5.
Ibid. Bk.
XXX. 15.
Eccli. XV. 9.
Ibid. 74
Eccli. X. 15.
Ibid. Bk.
XXXI. 87
Sap. XII. 18.
Ibid. Bk.
XXXII. 9.
Eccli. X. 15.
Ibid. 11.
Eccli. XXIX. 33
Ibid. 19.
Sap. III. 7.
Ibid. Bk.
XXXIII. 7.
Eccli. V. 6, 7.
Ibid. 23.
Eccli. XXI. 10.
Ibid. 55.
Sap. V. 6.
Ibid. Bk.
XXXIV. 25.
Eccli. XXVII. 12.
Ibid.
Eccli. XXXII. 1.
Ibid. 53.
Eccli. X. 9.
Ibid.
Sap. II. 8, 9.
Ibid. 55
It is needless to go through the entire works of St. Gn
ory. These passages, taken from the books of his Exposi-
tion of Job, are a good specimen of his use of deuterocanoni-
cal Scripture. And no man can say that Gregory considered
these books as merely pious treatises. He introduces his
frequent quotations from them by the solemn formuli
"It is written." etc., and oft declares them the Scripture of
474 THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY
God. Gregory received the Scriptures, where he learned his
faith, from the Catholic Church; hence, in drawing from his
fund of Scriptural knowledge, he made no distinction in
practice between the books of the first and second Canon.
The fact that Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus are most used by
him, results from the richness of their moral teaching; they
were adapted to his scope. Quotations from all the deu-
terocanonical books except Judith and Baruch are found in
his works; but the proving force of these quotations covers
all these books, because it gives evidence that he received the
edition of Scripture, in which they all stood on equal footing.
The question of canonicity was to him more of a question of
discipline. He was willing to receive all the books since the
Church used them ; but he did not essay to decide the exact
degree of inspiration of the several books.
In the seventh century, three celebrated Fathers flour-
ished in Spain. First among these is St. Isidore of Seville.*
We find the following valuable testimony in the sixth
book of the Etymologies of St. Isidore, 3-9 : "The Hebrews,
on the authority of Ezra, receive twenty-two books of the
Old Testament, according to the number of their letters ; and
they divide them into three orders, The Law, The Prophets,
and The Hagiographa. The first order, The Law, is received
in five books, of which the first is Beresith, that is, Genesis ;
the second is Veelle Semoth, that is, Exodus; the third is
Vaicra, that is Leviticus ; the fourth is Vajedabber, that is
Numbers ; the fifth is Elle hadebarim, that is Deuteronomy.
The second order is that of The Prophets, in which is con-
tained eight books, of which the first is Josue ben Nun,
which is called in Latin, Jesus Nave; the second is Sophtim,
*The biography of Isidore of Seville is involved in obscurity. His
father was Severianus, of the province of Cathagena, in Spain. By some
he is placed as governor of that province, but this is doubted by others.
The precise year of Isidore's birth is uncertain, but we know that he was
Archbishop of Seville for nearly forty years, and that he died in 636. He
was undoubtedly the greatest man of his time in Spain. He was versed
in all the learning of his age, and was well acquainted with the classic and
sacred languages, Greek, Latin and Hebrew. The Council of Toledo in
653 called him the Doctor of his age and the Ornament of the Church.
His works are many, and embody all the science of his age.
THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY 475
that is Judges; the third is Samuel, that is the first of Kings;
the f< >urth is Melachim, that is the second of Kings ; the fifth
is Isaiah; the sixth, Jeremiah; the seventh, Ezechiel; the
eighth, Thereazar, which is called the twelve prophets, who
on account of their brevity are joined to one another, and
considered as one book. The third order is of the Hagio-
graphers, that is the writers of holy things, in which order
are nine books, of which, the first is Job; the second, the
Psalter ; the third, Misle, that is the Proverbs of Solomon ; the
fourth is Coheleth, that is Ecclesiastes ; the fifth is Sir Hassi-
rim, that is the Canticle of Canticles; the sixth is Daniel ; the
seventh, Dibre hajamim, that is the Words of the Days, that
is Paralipomenon ; the eighth is Ezra ; the ninth is Esther.
These taken together, five, eight, and nine, make twenty-
two books, as were computed above.
"Some enumerate Ruth, and Cinoth which is called in
Latin, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, with the Hagio-
grapha, and make twenty-four books, according to the
twenty-four Ancients, who assist before the Lord.
" There is a fourth order with us of those books of the Old
Testament, which arc 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. Althcm
the Jews separate these ami place them among the Apocrypha,
the Church of Christ honors them and promulgates them as
divine books." In this list Baruch is not explicitly men-
tioned, being considered a part of Jeremiah.
In his treatise De Ecclesiasticis Onficiis, Bk. I. XI. 4, 5, ;,
St. Isidore writes thus : "In the first place, the books of the
Law, that is of Moses, are five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Sixteen historical books fol-
low these, viz., Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth, four books of
Kings, two of Paralipomenon, two of Ezra, Tobias, Esther,
Judith, and the two books of Madahees. Then there are six-
teen prophetical books, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel,
and the twelve minor Prophets. After these come eight
books in verse, which are written in various kinds of metre
in Hebrew. They are Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, Eccl<
astes, the Canticle of Canticles, the Book of Wisdom, Ecclesi-
476 THE CANON OF THE VII. CENTURY
asticus, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah, and thus there
are made up forty-five books of the Old Testament
These are the seventy-two canonical books, and on this account
Moses elected the elders, who should prophesy. For this
cause, the Lord Jesus sent seventy-two disciples to preach."
The number here agrees with the number of the Council
of Trent, but there is a slight variation, in that St. Isidore
considers Baruch a part of Jeremiah, and detaches Lamenta-
tions as a separate book. Excepting this slight variation,
the testimony of Isidore well represents the belief of the
Church of his age. The first testimony quoted also explains
the writings of preceding Fathers, in constituting a two-
fold order of books of the Old Testament : those that were
in the Canon of the 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 can-
onical books of the Old Testament, and in excluding the
deuterocanonical works from this order, they left them in
the second order of Isidore.
In his prologue to the books of the Old Testament, 1-7,8,
we find the following: "Of these (the historical books), the
Hebrews do not receive Tobias, Judith, and Maccabees, but
the Church ranks them among the Canonical Scriptures.
Then follow also those two great books — books of holy
teaching, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus ; which, although they
are said to be written by Jesus the son of Sirach, neverthe-
less, on account of the similarity of diction, are called of
Solomon. And these are acknowledged to have, in the
Church, equal authority with the other Canonical Scrip-
tures."
St. Isidore does not represent tradition, when he states
that Wisdom is said to be the work of Sirach. He was there
explaining a fact, and had only the warrant of his own criti-
cal knowledge on which to rely; but the fact itself he re-
ceived from the Church, and this was that the Church of his
day made equal those books that she afterwards proclaimed
equal by solemn decree in the Council of Trent.
The second witness for the Church of Spain, in St. Ilde-
fonsus, the disciple of St. Isidore, afterward Archbishop of
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 177
Toledo, who died in 669. In his Treatise on Baptism, Chap-
ter LXXIX. he received the Canon of St. Augustine, in St.
Augustine's identical words, with perhaps the addition of one
word to strengthen the authority of the deuterocannnical
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 Daitiascene, a priest of Damascus, who nourished
about 730 A. D. He has drawn up a catalogue of the books
of the Old and New Testaments : concerning the former he
says : "It is to be observed that there are twenty-two books
of the Old Testament, according to the letters of the Hebrew
language." The only deuterocanonical works which he
mentions are Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, of which he declares
that "they are excellent and useful, but are not numbered,
nor were they placed in the Ark."
The Damascene is evidently simply stating the status of
the deuterocanonical books with the Jews, and in this he is
influenced by the extravagant ideas of St. Ephrem. His
own judgment of the books is set forth in his declaration
that they are excellent and useful, and one could legitimately
make the inference from his testimony: Therefore, the
Church receives them, because they are excellent and use-
ful, even though not in the Canon of the Jews. His
practice warrants the inference, for he quotes both Wisdom
and Ecclesiasticus as divine Scripture.
At the beginning of the ninth century Nicephorus, Patri-
arch of Constantinople, drew up (in his Stichometry) a cata-
logue of books, which contains twenty-two books. In this
*"Regula quos fidei commendat noscere libros,
Hos nostra praesens bibliotheca tenet :
Quinque priora gerit veneranda volumina Legis;
Hinc Iosues, optimaque tunc Ruth Moabitica gesta
Bisbis Regum ncctuntur in ordinc libn
Atque bis octoni eoncurrunt inde proph<
En lob, Psalterium, Solomon et Verba dierum,
Esdras consequitur Esther, Sapientia. Icsus,
Tobi et Iudith; coneludit haec Machabaeorum ;
Hie Testamenti Veteris finisque modusque."
478 THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES
list, Baruch finds place, while Esther is passed over in silence.
After the list of the canonical books of the Old and the New
Testaments, there is placed a list of avTiXeyo/xeva which
comprises 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 in Trullo, the Canon of
the Carthaginian Council was adopted by the Greek Church.
Nicephorus, like many of his time, held in great veneration
the ancient documents, which had been preserved. He most
probably reproduced here some old writing without essaying
to judge its critical value.
Photius has placed in his Syntagma Canonum, the
eighty-fifth Canon of the Apostles, the sixtieth Canon of
Laodicea, and the twenty-fourth Canon of Carthage.*
*Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, was descended from one of the
most illustrious and richest families of that city. His brother Sergius
married one of the sisters of the Emperor Photius made use of his splen-
did advantages to acquire a vast and varied education. Bardas, the
restorer of letters, was his tutor. Photius became eminent in all the
departments of human knowledge. His birth and his talents elevated
him to the highest dignities, even to become Secretary of State to the
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 Michael. By similar means, he corrupted the legates of Pope
Nicolas I., so that they assisted at the Conciliabulum in 861, and con-
firmed Photius in the See. On hearing these acts, Pope Nicolas declared
null and void the said acts, and anathematized Photius Photius in turn,
convoked a council at Constantinople in 866, and pronounced sentence of
deposition and excommunication against the Pope. When Basil, the Mac-
edonian, succeeded Michael in the empire, he deposed Photius, and restored
Ignatius. At this juncture was celebrated at Constantinople the VIII.
(Ecumenical Council, in which Photius and his partizans were anathema-
tized. Photius composed a chimerical history, in which he madeBasil de-
scend from Tiridates, the Armenian King. Basil was, in fact, low-born, and
this coup won his favor for Photius, whom he restored in 877. Pope John
VIII. deceived by Basil, and Photius, at first received him into the com-
munion of the Church of Rome, but afterwards, ascertaining the falsehood
of Photius. excommunicated him. The successive Popes, Martin, Adrian
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURI1 479
From the fact that he receives the decree of the Council
of Carthage, it is evident that he is at one with us on the qui
tion of the Canon. I [e e\ idently believed that the curtailed
canons were completed by the decree of Carthage.
Even after its defection from Rome, the Greek Church
lias always received the deuterocanonical books. To this
Zonaras and Balsamon testify.*
When, in the seventeenth century, Cyril Lucar endeav-
ored to introduce protestant ideas into the Greek Church,
he failed to expel from the Canon the deuterocanonical
books. t Against him the members of the Council of Jerusa-
lem decreed that, "following the rule of the Catholic Church,
we call Holy Scripture all those books which Cyril received
from the Council of Laodicea, and in addition those books
which Cyril, unwisely, ignorantly, or rather maliciously
called Apocryphal, viz., Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, Tobi;
the History of the Dragon (deuterocanonical fragment of
Daniel). The History of Susanna (idem), The Maccabees,
and The Wisdom of Sirach. We judge that these should be
and Stephen, anathematized him. It was at this point that Photius
brought against the Church of Rome the charge of heresy, in having joined
the "Filioque" to the Creed. This was the origin of the Greek schism.
which divided the Mast from the West, and drew from the Church of Christ
the Greek world Photius was finally imprisoned in a monastery by the
Emperor Leo the Philosopher; and he died in his retreat in 891. Fleury
gives a good resume of the character of Photius in these words: "He was
the greatest mind and most learned man of his time; but he was. at the
same time, a perfect hypocrite: while acting like a villain, he spoke like a
saint." The works of Photius are many, characterized by great erudition.
*Zonaras, and Balsamon's Explanation of the Council in Trullo, Chap.
11 See .Synod. Beveregii, Migne, 137, 524; 138, 122.
tCyril Lucar was born in the Isle of Candia in 157-'. He studied in
Venice, Padua and in Germany; and in the latter place became imbued
with Lutheran ideas. He was placed 111 the See of Alexandria, and after-
wards in that of Constantinople. As i; 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 sewn times he was deposed and restored. He was finally
strangled, while returning from exile. He had the real qualities of a hen
presumption and intrigue.
480 THE CANON OF THE GREEK CHURCH
enumerated with the other genuine books of Holy Scripture,
as genuine parts of the same Scripture."*
In the council which Parthenius, Patriarch of Constanti-
nople held in 1638 at Constantinople, in which sat two other
patriarchs and one hundred and twenty bishops, a synodical
letter was drawn up and sent to the provincial synod con-
vened at Jassy, in which the opinion of Cyril Lucar, who
expunged from Holy Scripture holy and canonical books,
and as such received by the holy synods, is declared to be
heresy, breathing forth from all parts, and utterly contrary
to the orthodox faith. f In later centuries, protestant ideas
have invaded in some part the Russian Church to the extent
that Philaretes (fi868) authorized the following catechismal
text, and this was approved by the Synod.
"Q. How many are the books of the old Testament?
A. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Athanasius the Great, and
St. John Damascene reckon them at twenty-two; agreeing
therein with the Jews, who so reckon them in the Hebrew
tongue. Athanas. Ep. XXXIX. de Test. [Fest.]; J. Damasc.
Theol. 1. IV. c. 17.
Q. Why should we attend to the reckoning of the
Hebrews ?
A. Because, as the Apostle Paul says, unto them were
committed the oracles of God: and the sacred books of the Old
Testament have been received from the Hebrew Church of
that Testament by the Christian Church of the New.
Q. How do St. Cyril and St. Athanasius enumerate the
Books of the Old Testament?
A. As follows : 1 . 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 Nehe-
* Cfr. Kimmel, Monumenta Fidei Orientalis, Jenas, 1850, I. 42.
tKimmel 1. c., page 415.
THE CANON OF ALCUIN IM
miah: 12. The book of Esther: 13. The book of Job? 14.
The book of Psalms: 15. The Proverbs of Solomon: 16
Eeclesiastes, also by Solomon: 17. The Songs of Songs, al o
by Solomon: 18. The book of the Prophet Isaiah: 19. Of
Jeremiah: 20. OfEzekiel: 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 bonk of Wisdom, of the
Son of Sirach, and certain others?
A. Because they do not exist in Hebrew.
Q. How are we to regard these last named books?
A. Athanasius the Great says, that they have been
appointed by the fathers to be read by proselytes, who are
preparing for admission into the Church."
Philaretes was a disciple of Cyril Lucar, and introduced
many protestant ideas into the Russian Church; but in the
days when the tradition of that Church was worth aught, it
was not so. All the Churches of the East were in accord in
accepting the deuterocanonical books.
Up to recent times the Codex Amiatinus, was believed
to date back to the 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 Wearm< >uth,
in Northumberland, by the monks of the Anglo-Saxon
Ceolfrid.*
It wa.s given to Pope Greg< >rv II. in 716. It is c< >nsidered
the finest Codex in all this world 1 >f the Vulgate of St. Jerome.
// contains all the protocanonical and deuterocanonical hooks,
uniting BarucJi with Jeremiah, and making explicit 'mention of
the same. This is important in proving force, since it repre-
sents the text of Scripture brought into England by the mis-
sionaries of Gregory the Great.
Jn the first years of the ninth century, Alcuin, by order
of Charlemagne, made an edition of the Scriptures, f
♦Vide infra.
fAlcuin, surnamed Flaccus, was born, towards the year 735, of a
noble Anglo-Saxon family in Northumberland. His education was placed
under the care of Egbert, Archbishop of York, anil he had for tul
(31) II. S.
482 THE CANON OF ALCUIN
The Codex Paulinus or Carolinus, preserved at the
Basilica of St. Paul outside the walls of Rome, executed in
the ninth century, contains Alcuin's recension, in which we
find all the deutero canonical books except Baruch. The Codex
Statianus or Vallicellianus in the Vallicella Library at
Rome, and other manuscripts called the Bibles of Charle-
magne, at Zurich, Bamberg, and in the British Museum,
contain the same list of Alcuin's revised books. Moreover,
Alcuin has drawn up a complete Canon of both protocanoni-
cal and deuterocanonical books in the following verses :
*"In hoc quinque libri, retinentur Codice Mosis,
Bella ducis Josue, seniorum et tempora patrum.
Ruth, Job, et Reguni bis bini namque libelli:
Atque Prophetarum sancti bis octo libelli;
Carmina prasclari Christi patris hymnica David,
Et tria pacifici Salomonis opuscula regis.
Jungitur his Sophia? Jesu simul atque libellus,
Et Paralipomenis enim duo nempe libelli.
Hinc Ezra?, Nehemias, Hester, Judith atque libelli
Et duo namque libri Machabasa bella tenentes.
bert of the ecclesiastical school of York. Aelbert took him on a pilgrimage
to Rome, and, on the return, visited with him Charlemagne. Albert was
elected to the See of York in 766, and thereupon, placed Alcuin director of
the school of the diocese. Alcuin held this post till 780. In 781, he was
sent to Rome to bear thence the pallium for Eanbald , successor of Albert
in the see of York. On his return, he again visited Charlemagne, who in-
vited him to fix his abode in his dominions. Having sought and obtained
the authorization of his archbishop and king, he arrived in France in 782,
and took the post of teacher in the royal school . Charlemagne became his
pupil, and, later on, conferred on him the abbeys of Ferrieres, St. Loup de
Troves, St. Josse in Ponthieu, and St. Martin of Tours. In 790, Alcuin
revisited England, but Charlemagne soon summoned him into France to
combat the heresy of Adoptionism. In opposing this heresy, Alcuin's
principal theological works were written. Towards 796, Alcuin retired
to St. Martin of Tours, and devoted himself there to teaching, whereby
the school became famous. By his orders, a rich library was collected,
and many manuscripts copied. Alcuin remained through life a deacon
of the Catholic Church. His last years were troubled by a dispute with
Theodulf , Bishop of Orleans, regarding a priest who had been condemned
to imprisonment by Theodulf, and who had sought refuge at Saint Martin.
In this affair, Charlemagne treated him with severity. He died in 804.
at the age of sixty years, and was interred in the Church of St. Martin.
He is the author of many works, mostly treating of scriptural subjects.
One of the most important of his works was his correction of the Bible, by
order of Charlemagne .
*P. L. Migne, 101, pag. 731-734.
THE CANON OF ALCUIN 483
Matthaci et Marci, Luc;f liber, atque Joannis
Inclyta gesta tenens salvrantis saecula Christi.
Sanctus Apostolicos Lucas conscripserat Actus;
Bis septem sancti per chartas dogmata Pauli,
Jacobi, Petri, Juda: et pia dicta Joannis:
Scribitur extremo Joannis in ordine tomus.
Hos lege, tu lector felix, felieiter omnes,
Ad laudem Christi propriamque in saecla salutem "
"Tres Salomon libros mirabilis edidit auctor.
His duo junguntur per paradigma libri;
Quorum quippe prior Sapientia dicitur alma,
Notatur Jesu nomine posterior
Hinc Paralipomcnonis adest sacer ille libellus,
Qui veteris Legis dicitur epitome
Hinc EzrcB Nehmice, Judith, Hesterque libelli;
Tunc Tobiag pietas, angelus, actus, iter.
Inclyta nam binis Machabasa bella libellis
Scribuntur, victis gentibus et populis.
Haec est sancta quidem Legis Scriptura Vetustae,
Divinis tota quae titulis redolet."
Some endeavor to shake Alcuin's authority for the deu-
terocanonical books by citing a passage from the eighteenth
paragraph of his first book against Elipandus. This Elip-
andus had cited, in support of Adoptionism, the text from
Ecclesiasticus XXXVI. 14: "Miserere, Domine, plebi tuae,
super quam invocatum es nomen tuum, et Israel quern coae-
quasti primogenito tuo." Alcuin replies : "In the book of
Jesus, the Son of Sirach, the aforesaid sentence is read, of
which book blessed Jerome and Isidore positively testify that
it is placed among the apocryphal, that is to say, the doubt-
ful books."
In relation to this testimony, we must first observe that
Alcuin errs in stating that Isidore placed Ecclesiasticus
among the Apocrypha. A close examination of his works
reveals no such statement; he is a plain advocate of Ecclesi-
asticus and all the other deuterocanonical works. We
know what was the opinion of Jerome, and what wore its
causes. The present question, therefore, is: did Alcuin
adopt the opinion of Jerome? We answer this question in
the negative, on the dearest evidence. To say nothing of the
complete lists of Scripture in the verses already quoted, to
say nothing of the recension of all the books of the Catholic
484
THE CANON OF ALCUIN
Canon, in the edition prepared by Alcuin for Charlemagne,
we have clear and express statements from Alcuin that
Ecclesiasticus is divinely inspired Scripture. We select the
following passages:
Eccli. V. 8.
"Delay not to be convert-
ed to the Lord, and defer it
not from day to day."
De Virtutibus et Vitiis, XIV.
XVIII.
"The saying is read in the
divinely inspired Scriptures,
'Son, delay not to be convert-
ed to the Lord; because thou
knowest not what the coming
day may bring forth.'
These are the words of God,
not mine."
In the fifteenth chapter of the same treatise, he quotes
Ecclesiasticus three times as authoritative Scripture. In
the eighteenth chapter this passage occurs :
"Eccli. XVIII.
-3i-
et Vitiis,
"Go not after thy lusts, but
turn away from thy own will.
If thou give to thy soul her
desires, she will make thee a
joy to thy enemies."
De Virtutibus
XVIII.
"Holy Scripture, there-
fore, admonishes us, saying."
'Go not after thy lusts, but
turn away from thy own will.
If thou give to thy soul her
desires, she will make thee a
joy to thy enemies.'"
If words mean anything, Alcuin's position was that Eccle-
siasticus was divinely inspired Scripture, and the word of
God. The Council of Trent asks no more than this for the
book. In practical usage Alcuin made no difference between
the two classes of books. The passage objected to by our
adversaries relates only to Ecclesiasticus, and we honestly
claim to have shown that Alcuin did not make his own the
opinion of St. Jerome. To reconcile the aforesaid passage
with Alcuin's real belief, we must observe that it occurs in a
controversial work directed against Elipandus, the heretical
Archbishop of Toledo. In that treatise, his aim was to
obtain victory over his opponent, and to that purpose, he
was willing to use every argument that would have any
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 485
weight, even though it did not express his personal convic-
tion. Elipandus had quoted a passage from Ecclesiasticus
that seemed to make for Adoptionism. Alcuin first endeav-
ors 1" weaken the adversary's position by throwing the
doubt of St. Jerome on the book, and then directly m&
the objection by explaining the passage. Such mode of
dealing with adversaries characterizes the writings < >f^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 receivecTdepcsit
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*
The Codex Toletanus, of Toledo in Spain, which,
according to critics, dates back to the eight century, con-
is all the deuterocanonical books except Baruch.
The Codex Cavensis, of the Abbey of La Cava near
Salerno, contains all the deuterocanonical books. This
manuscript is probably of Spanish origin, of the end of the
eighth or beginning of ninth century. It contains the text
of Jerome.
Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, contemporary with Alcuin,
made a recension of the books of Scripture, of which two
copies are in the National Museum at Paris, and another is
preserved in the Cathedral at Puy. In the Bible of Theo-
dulf all the deuterocanonical books find place.
Venerable Bede wrote an allegorical exposition of the
book of Tobias, and in his use of Scripture makes no dis-
tinction between protocanonical and deuterocanonical
books, t
*Horne's Introduction to the Study of Scripture, Vol, 1. Appendix I
484.
de was born at Jarrow, on the s of Northumberland
Scotland in 675. His parents were Anglo-Sax< 1 i \ ho had < tnbraced the
Catholic religion. Atthi age of seven years, they coi
which means in their t< 1 gue ] rayer, to the Abbot Benoit ] ■ \ was
a second father to the child. After three years passed with B< m it, Bede
486 THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES
Against the authority of Bede two objections are raised.
In his treatise, De Temporum Ratione, he writes as fol-
lows: "Thus far divine Scripture contains the series of
events. The subsequent history of the Jews is exhibited in
the book of Maccabees, and in the writings of Josephus and
Africanus, who continue the subsequent history down to the
time of the Romans."*
According to our adversaries, Bede here draws a sharp
distinction between divine Scripture and the mere profane
history of the books of Maccabees. In dealing with this
objection, we place first of all that it leaves the canonicity
of all the deuterocanonical books, except the Maccabees,
intact. This is self evident since he is speaking of historical
books alone. In the second place, 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, cus-
tomary in introducing divine Scripture. Did he therefore
reject Maccabees, he would disagree with himself, and be
absurdly inconsistent. We believe, therefore, that in dis-
tinguishing Maccabees from the other historical books of
divine Scripture, he merely wishes to point out that it does
not alone continue the series of historical events from Ezra
to the era of the Romans. Up to the time of Ezra, indeed,
not all historical events were written, but enough was writ-
ten to form a continuous chain of chief events, and no other
writings contain the events of those times except the Holy
was placed with the famous Ceolfrid, who taught him the elements of
sacred and profane literature. As disciple of Ceolfrid, Bede acquired all
the science of his times. At the age of nineteen, he became deacon and at the
age of thirty, priest. He began to write at the age of thirty, and has left
extended commentaries on nearly all the books of Holy Scripture. Except-
ing Augustine and 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 Scripture. Full oft, however, he drifts
away from the literal sense into an excessive mysticism. The whole life
of Bede was passed in the cloister. He died in 735. Bede and Isidore of
Seville were the chief sources of Christian education during the Middle
Ages.
*P. L. Migne 90, 539.
THE CANON OF THE VIII. AND IX. CENTURIES 487
Books, which follow each other in a certain historical series.
But after Ezra a great lacuna occurs in the history of the
Jews down to the time of the Romans, which is only partly
bridged over by the combined data of Maccabees, Africanus,
and Josephus. The second book of Maccabees covers a
period of only about sixteen years ; the first, of about forty.
They are partly synchronous, and combined would not cover
a period of over fifty years. Hence Bede could not say that
divine Scripture contained the series of events down to the
Roman epoch. He, therefore, drew a distinction between
Maccabees and the preceding historical books, not from the
nature of the books, but from the fact that the Scriptural
history of the Jews became broken at Ezra, and the frag-
ment of it which existed in Maccabees had to be supplemen-
ted by the two cited authors.
The second objection is taken from Bede's commentary
on the Apocalypse, Chapter IV. Therein he states: "The
six wings of the four animals, which are twenty-four, signify
so many books of the Old Testament, in which the authority
of the evangelists is confirmed, and their truth is corrobo-
rated."*
It is pitiably absurd to make Bede, who throughout his
vast works has quoted the deuterocanonical books side by
side, and in equal place with the protocanonical Scriptures,
reject them on the warrant of this one passage. It is Bede's
evident opinion here to consider the protocanonical books as
a class by themselves, without detracting from the divinity
of the deuterocanonical works. The classing of the pro-
tocanonical works in a distinct class, was warranted by
patristic literature, and this diligent student of patrology
drew therefrom a mystic argument, without throwing doubt
on the deuterocanonical books, which formed a class by
themselves. The last factor in removing this class distinc-
tion, and making the two classes perfectly equal, was the
decree of the Council of Trent .
In our review of these centuries, we can not notice every
writer who has written, relating to the books of Holy Scrip-
*P. L. Migne 93, 144.
488 THE CANON OF THE IX. CENTURY
ture. We shall content ourselves with adducing represent-
ative men as the exponents of the Church's belief through
these ages.
Rhabanus Maurus follows on the question of the Canon
St. Isidore of Seville * As Rhabanus was a faithful follower
of the Fathers of the Church, his Canon may be called the
Canon of tradition of this century. In his work, De Institu-
tione Clericorum, Chap. LI 1 1, he formulates the following
Canon: "These are, therefore, the books of the Old Testa-
ment; in love of doctrine and piety the chief men of the
Churches have handed down that these should be read and
received. The first are of the Law, that is, the five books of
Moses, viz., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deu-
teronomy. There follow these fifteen historical books, viz.,
Josue, and the books of Judges, or Ruth (as one of them is
called), the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon ,
Tobias, Esther and Judith, two of Ezra and Two of Macca-
bees. With these are sixteen prophetic books. There fol-
low eight books in verse, which are written in different kinds
of metre with the Hebrews, that is the book of Job, the book
of Psalms, and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Can-
ticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Lamentations of
Jeremiah." After giving the complete Canon of the New
Testament, he continues: "These are the seventy-two
canonical books and on this account Moses elected seventy
elders as prophets; and Jesus, Our Lord, sent seventy-two
disciples to preach." The testimony of Rhabanus is identi-
cal with that of Isidore of Seville, and is valuable inasmuch
as it evidences that the teachers of the Church found in St.
Isidore a concise statement of the Church's belief. Rhabanus
* Rhabanus Maurus was born at Fulda in 788 of one of the first noble
families of the country. At the age of six years, he was offered by his
parents to the monastery of Fulda, wherein his childhood was passed. He
was sent later on to Tours, and studied under Alcuin. On his return to
Fulda, he was elected abbot, and distinguished himself by reconciling
Louis the debonnaire, with his sons. He was elected Archbishop of May-
ence in 847, and, as such, was distinguished for learning and zeal in guard-
ing, the faith. He died in 856 at the age of sixty-eight years. His works,
printed at Cologne in 1627, form six tomes in folio, bound in three volumes
His works on Scripture are mostly extracts from the Fathers, which was
the mode of the study of theology of that time.
THE CANON OF THE IX. CENTURY
wrote commentaries on Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith and
the two books of Maccabees.
Walafrid Strabo, must also be added to the adv
of tlic Catholic Canon.*
In his Glossa Ordinaria, he has adopted the commenta-
ries of his master Rhabanus Maurus, on W n, Ecclesias-
ticus, Judith, and the Maccabees; he has adopted Bede's com-
mentary on Tobias, and reproduces the text of Baruch with-
out commentary with this preface: "The book which is
called Baruch is not found in the I Eebrew 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
contain many things relating to Christ, and the last times."
The influence of St. Jerome was strong in Walafrid.
has inserted in his Glossa the prefaces of St. Jerome concern-
ing the deuterocanonical books. That these prefaces 1
place in his work, would not prove that he adopted Jerome's
views, for the prefaces are printed in the Clementine editi< in
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 appr : 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 becau
they are to be found in a code of Canons, but because then-
exists a scute Holy Pope Innocent, concerning their ret
lion, it follows that the decretal letters of Roman Pontiffs are
* Walafrid, surnan ibo, the squint-., yed, was the d
banus Maurus. He was born in 806, and was reared in the monaster]
Pulda under Rhabanus. He joined the Benedictine order, becam< D
of St. Gall, and afterwards Abbot of Rt ichenou in th< : Const;;:
He was a man renowed for piety and profound learning. He died in I
His chief works are De Officiis, and Glossa Ordinaria
490 THE CANON OF THE X. CENTURY
to be received, even though not embodied in the code of
Canons." We have before seen that the decree of Innocent
I. is identical with the catalogue of the Council of Trent.
Nicolas here places as a truth conceded by all that the
decree of Innocent was the law of the Church on Scripture.
In the tenth century, doubts again arose in the Western
Church, founded solely on the authority of St. Jerome. On
one side stood the use of the Church and the testimony of
tradition; on the other, the declarations of Jerome, the "doc-
tor of doctors." Hence doubt arose and uncertainty in
many minds, and many were the attempts to reconcile
Jerome with the belief and usage of the Church. These
doubts endured down to the time of the Council of Trent.
It would be impossible to pass in review over all the writ-
ings of these ages. We can only signalize some representa-
tive men of both sides. We find that the great body of the
Church's teachers preserved the old belief and tradition, and
the few who, through an excessive adhesion to St. Jerome,
broke away from the common belief suffice not to break the
consensus of tradition. We find that most of those who fol-
low the opinion of Jerome try to reconcile him with the
Church, by according to the deuterocanonical books a place
among the Holy Books, just short of certain canonicity. By
this, they strove to harmonize the universal usage of the
Church with Jerome's rejection of these books from the
Canon.
Notker Balbulus opens the tenth century with an
unfavorable testimony.* In his work, De Interpretibus
Divinas Scripturas, Chap. III., he has the following obscure
statement: "Of the book which is called the Wisdom of
Solomon, I have found no author's exposition, except some
testimonies (therefrom) explained in relation to other books.
The book is totally rejected by the Hebrews, and is by Chris-
tians considered uncertain, nevertheless, since on account of
*Notker, surnamed the Stammerer, from his defective speech, was a
monk of St. Gall who died in 912. His life was passed in the retirement
of the cloister, and little of it is known to us. His chief works preserved
to us are: De Interpretibus Divinas Scripturas, Liber Sententiarum, and a
Martyrology.
THE CANON OF THE X., XI., AND XII. CENTURIES 491
the utility of its doctrine, our forefathers were accustomed to
read it, and the Jews have it not, it is called with us Ecclesi-
asticus. What thou 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 Paralipomenon? By whom, or
how shall they be explained, since their contents are not
intended for authority, but only as a memorial of wonderful
things? This thou mayest also suspect of the Books of
Maccabees." (Patrol. L. Migne, 131, 996.)
There is no precedent in the writings of Jerome, or of any
one else for the opinion of this monk. It is the sole testi-
mony of one man against the Church. Any testimony that
places Paralipomenon among the deuterocanonical books
may well be set aside without further argument. It is
simply the case of a man, admirable in other things, wh< 1
erred on this subject.
In the collections of the decrees of Councils and Popes,
collected in the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, the
Canon of Innocent I. or of Gelasius always finds place. The
collection of Canons of the Church of Spain, published by
Gonzalez from a Codex of 976 contains the decree of Pope
Innocent. Burchard of Worms (1*1025), Ives of Char-
tres (fni7), and Gratianus (fi 155) have received the
decree of Gelasius. These collections formed the basis of the
discipline of the Church, and show us plainly the place given
to the deuterocanonical books to have been, in fact, not
inferior to that accorded them in the Church to-day.
At the beginning of the twelfth century, St. Stephen
Harding, Abbot of Citeaux, made a recension of the Latin
Vulgate. In this recension of the year 1109 we find all the
books of the Catholic Canon.
Gislebert, Abbot of Westminister (fin 7), in his "Dis-
pute of A Jew with A Christian," defends the authority of
Baruch: "Although that which the book contains is not
found in the book which bears the name of Jeremiah, never-
492 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY
theless, Jeremiah has produced the data ; for he who wrote
this book wrote not otherwise than under the dictation of
Jeremiah." (P. L. Migne, 159, 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
himself thus: "Besides the aforesaid (the protocanonical
books) , there are five books which are called by the Hebrews
apocryphal, that is to say hidden and doubtful, but the Church
honors these and receives them. The first is Wisdom; the
second, Ecclesiasticus ; the third, Tobias ; the fourth, Judith ;
the fifth, Maccabees." (P. L. Migne, 213, 714.)
This is the exact Catholic position, which endured and
lived down every opposing agency.
Aegidius, deacon of Paris (fn8o?) sets forth the Catho-
lic position on the Canon in the following Latin verses :
Qui tamen cxcipit hos: Tobi, Judith, et Machabams,
Et Baruch, atque Jesum, pseud ographumque librum
Sed licet excepti, tamen hos authentieat usus
Ecclesiee, fidei regula, scripta Patrum.
Scito quod ista Dei digito digesta fuerunt.
Altus hie est putcus, 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
Antiqua? 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 amocna genis ; Tobias ; et Macchabavi ;
Scripta prophetarum sunt duodena simul ;
Nempe Neemias dedit hospitium liber Esdrse ;
Et Ruth judicibus hospita facta subest;
Scriptorisque sui Baruch librum Jeremias
Post libri recipit posteriora sui." — P. L. Migne, 212, 23..
In this testimony, Peter adopted the erroneous opinion of
some that Wisdom was written by Philo, the Jew ; but the
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 493
value of his opinion is not impaired by this error in
such opinion, he is not a witness of the Church's belief.
Peter of Bi.ois (fi2oo) adopts the following testimony
verbatim from St. Isidore of Sevili; ; ;There is a fourth
order with us of the books of the Old Testament, of the books
that are not in the Hebrew Canon, the first of these is Wis-
dom ; the second, Ecclesiasticus ; the third, T< -bias; the fourth
Judith; the fifth and sixth, Maccabees. These books, the
Jews place apart among the apocrypha ; but the Church of
Christ honors them among the divine books and promulgates
them." (P. L. Migne, 207, 1052.) This may be called tl
common opinion of the time. It is always enunciated with
the certainty and boldness of men conscious that they have
no adversary among the teachers of the Church. It is never
challenged, never denied : those who depart from it, at most,
only try to pare away a little of the equality of the books of
the second Canon, to be in line with Jerome.
Hokorius, the celebrated theologian of Autun (fii2o?)
in his Gemma Animae, Chap, cxviii, establishes the mode in
which the Holy Books are to be read in the divine office, in
which testimony, he has the following: "These books are
authentic, and these are to be read in the divine offices. . . .
From the Kalends of August up to September, let there be
read the Parables of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, The Canticle of
Canticles, and The Book of Wisdom, all of which Solomon
wrote, and Ecclesiasticus, which Jesus the Son of Sirach com-
pose!. 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 lie wr< »te. Then for a
week, let there be read the book of Judith, which she or
Achior wrote. . . . From the Kalends of October to the
Kalends of November, let there be read the books of Macca-
bees ; the first of which, Simon the p< >ntifex wr< >te, and its last
part John his son is said to have written; but the second
book, Philo, the Jew, taught by the Greeks, is known to have
written." (P. L. Migne, 172, 736, 737.)
In these testimonies Baruch is not explicitly mentioned,
because it was always considered a part of Jeremiah. It is
evident that this theologian is not advancing an individual
494 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY
opinion here, but practically ordering the reading of books
which the Church read as Holy Scripture. His opinion of the
authorship of the second book of Maccabees is worthless,
since there he is not a witness, but a critic, and a very poor
one in this case.
John Beleth, the theologian of Paris (1180), in his
Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, establishes the same order
of reading of the Scriptures.*
Peter Comestor (t 1178) has a testimony favorable to
us.f In the history of the book of Joshua, Praef., he has the
following: "Job, David, three books of Solomon, Daniel,
Paralipomenon, Ezra, Esther, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Jud-
ith, Tobias, Maccabees are called the Hagiographa (al. Apo-
crypha) , because their author is unknown ; but since there is
no doubt of their truth, they are received by the Church."
(P. L. Migne, 198, 1260.) Great confusion exists in this age
in the use of Hagiographa and Apocrypha. Many con-
founded these terms, as this author did here, if the text of
Migne is right. They seem to have wished to reconcile
Jerome with the Church by attributing to the word apocry-
phal, the sense of a book, whose message was received by the
Church, but whose author was unknown.
A peculiar testimony is found in that part of Peter's his-
tory which treats of the history of the Book of Daniel. In
the XIII. Chapter he states: "There follows the history of
Susanna, which the Hebrew (text) does not contain in the
*Novem qua? deinceps sequuntur, reputantur hagiographa, ita tamen
ut sint authentica, nimirum liber Psalmorum, liber Jobi, tres libri Salo-
monis, scilicet Parabola?, sive mavis dicere Proverbia, Ecclesiastes et Canti-
cum Canticorum, liber Paralipomenon, Judith et Esther. Quatuor tan-
dem enumerant apocrypha, librum videlicet Tobiae, Machabaeorum, Phil-
onis, cujus principium est: Diligite justitiam, et Jesu filii Sirach, qui sic
incipit: Omnis sapientia a Domino, etc., appellaturque etiam
Ecclesiasticus. Verum hos quatuor quidam non recipiunt, Ecclesia tamen
eos approbat, quod argumentum fere habeant librorum Salomonis, etiamsi
eorum auctores pro certo ac vere non sciat. (P. L. Migne, 202,66.)
fPeter, 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
memory of Scripture. His best work is his Scholastic History, from which
he merited to be called the Master of History.
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 495
Book of Daniel. It calls it a fable, not that it denies the
history, but because it is falsely stated there, that the priests
were stoned, whom Jeremiah testifies to have been burned;
and because we fable it to have been written by Daniel,
whereas it was written by a certain Greek." The loose ideas
of inspiration then prevailing, made it possible for this
uncritical mind to believe that historical falsehood could
exist in Scripture.
A testimony unfavorable to the Book of Wisdom is
found in the writings of Rupert, Abbot of Deutz.* In his
Commentary on Genesis, Chap. XXXI., he denies the can-
onicity of Wisdom : ' 'Concerning whom (Adam) , whether he
ever obtained through Christ mercy, by which we are saved
and freed, certain ones in these days discuss, for the reason
that nowhere does the canonical Scripture testify that he did
penance. Only in the book, which bears the title of Wisdom ,
it is thus written concerning him: 'She (Wisdom) pre-
served him, that was the first formed by God, the father of
the world, when he was created alone, and she brought him
out of his sin, and gave him power to govern all things.
(Sap. X. 1-2). But this Scripture is not of the canon, nor is
that sentence taken from canonical Scripture. . . . What,
therefore, is therein said: 'She brought him out of his sin,
and gave him power to govern all things,' is more readily
rejected than received." (P. L. Migne, 167, 318.)
In his Commentary on Jeremiah, Rupert mentions not
Baruch (Ibid.) ; and he omits all the deuterocanonical frag-
ments from Daniel, (Ibid.). In his work De Divinis Officiis,
he renders clear testimony that all the deuterocanonical
books were read side by side with the books of the first Canon
as divine Scripture, and then throws a doubt on Tobias and
Judith : "These tw< 1 volumes are not in the canon with the
Hebrews, but, on the authority of the Nicene Synod, they
*Rupert 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
1 135. He has left numerous works, principal of which is his Commentary
on Holy Scripture.
496 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY
are adopted for the instruction of the Church." (P. L.
Migne, 170, 332.)
In his work, De Victoria Verbi Dei, speaking of the
causes of Aman's wrath, as set forth in the deuterocanonical
Twelfth Chapter of Esther, he contrasts the data with the
protocanonical Third Chapter of the same book, saying:
"But a greater and more certain cause of this hate and great
wrath is that which the truth of Scripture asserts thus:
'Mardochai alone did not bend the knee and adore Aman.' "
(P. L. Migne, 169, 1384.)
It is evident, therefore, that the deuterocanonical data
are not ranked as the truth of Scripture. In the same work,
from the Seventh to the Twenty-sixth Chapter, Rupert dis-
courses on the books of Maccabees, which he clearly recog-
nizes as divine Scripture. (P. L. Migne, 169, 1428-1442.)
We find in Rupert a man strongly imbued with the opin-
ions of Jerome, of whose writings he had been an assiduous
reader. Jerome was the classical authority of those days on
Scripture, and it is not strange that Rupert, his disciple,
should have adopted some of his opinions. Like his master,
he is not consistent, and in his practical use of Scripture
regularly quotes the deuterocanonical books as divine Scrip-
ture. He breaks away from the common voice of tradition,
when he denies the divinity of the same. It was only the
safeguarding power of the Holy Spirit, acting through the
Church, that saved these books against the authority of
Jerome, who was the great authority on Scripture in the
middle age. This protection of God permitted an occasional
word against the divinity of the aforesaid books.
Hugh of St. Victor also adopts the opinions of the Pro-
logus Galeaius* In his prefatory remarks, De Scripturis et
Scriptoribus Sacris, after giving the list of the protocanonical
books, he continues: "All, therefore, make twenty-two.
There are besides certain other books, as the Wisdom of Solo-
mon, the Book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, The Book of Judith,
' *Hugh of St. Victor was Canon regular of St. Victor at Paris. His
origin is controverted. So great was his fame in theology in Paris that
men called him the second Augustine. He died in 1 140 at the age of forty-
four years.
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 497
Tobias, and the Maccabees, which are read, but arc not written
in the Canon."
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 c< Kitinues : "But these
writings of the Fathers are not computed in the text of the
divine Scriptures, just as we have said that there are books
which are not embodied in the Canon of the Old Testament,
and yet are read, as the Wisdom of Solomon and other b< >oks.
The text, therefore, of Holy Scripture, as one body, is princi-
pally made up of thirty books. Of these twenty-two books
are comprised in the Old Testament, and eight in the New.
(Hugh made one book of the thirteen Epistles of Paul, and
another book of all the Catholic Epistles). The other writ-
ings are, as it were, adjuncts, and deductions from the fore-
going." (P. L. Migne, 175, 15, 16.)
In his Prologue, De Sacramentis, he manifests the same
views: 'There are, besides, in the Old Testament certain
other books, which are read, indeed, but are not within the
Corpus Scripturarum, or in the authentic Canon. These are
Tobias, Judith, Maccabees, and that which is inscribed the
Wisdom of Solomon, and Ecclesiasticus."
Hugh is also a Jeromist of a pronounced type. All that
the Church had done up to his time was to place these books
before the faithful as Scripture. She had not defined the
exact degree of their inspiration. It is only concerning this
degree of inspiration that Hugh errs. He testifies to the
presence of the books in the divine deposit. The degree of
their inspiration was yet an open question; in judging of this
degree, he went with his great master Jerome, and excluded
the booksof the second Canon from an equality with the first.
The authority of Hugh of St. Victor was great in the Church ;
and, doubtless, he contributed much to keep up the uncer-
tainty which was finally removed 1 >v the ( '< nmcil of Trent. It
was not with those writers a question of the rejection of the
deuterocanonical books— these books had a place in the
deposit of the sacred literature of the Church— but it was a
question of equality with the other books; and on this point
some limited the authority of the books to something 1(
than canonicity.
(32) U.S.
498 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY
Rudolph of Flavigny (fuss), divides the books of
Scripture into four classes, historical, prophetical, books of
proverbs, and books of simple doctrine. He places Wisdom
and Ecclesiasticus with protocanonical books in the fourth
class, but declares that "Tobias, Judith and Maccabees,
although read for the instruction of the Church, have not
perfect authority."*
That the books should be read in the Church, was the
Church's work, infallible and uniform ; she preserved them
for her children, because they were divine : the fluctuation of
individual opinions regarding their exact degree of inspira-
tion was the work of man. As long as the main point, the
deliverance of the message of these books to the people, was
safeguarded, the Church could permit the conflict of individ-
ual opinions in the speculative order, till, in her own good
time, she declared authoritatively what character she had
always given to these books.
Peter of Cluny, surnamed the Venerable, is by some
quoted as an adversary of the deuterocanonical books. | In
his letter against Peter of Bruys and his sect, called the Petro-
brusiani, after enumerating the protocanonical books, he
continues: "There remain besides these authentic books of
Holy Scripture six other books which are not to be passed
over in silence, viz., Wisdom, the Book of Jesus Son of Sirach,
*Radulphi Flaviacensis in Levit. XIV. I. (Biblioth. Max. Patrum
Lugduni, 1667, Tom, VIT. 177 ) (The work is not in Migne's collection )
t Peter the Venerable, entered the order of the monks of Cluny and in
1 121 became general of the order. His great piety and learning placed
him in this post at the age of twenty-eight years. Abelard found an
asylum with him, and was moved by him to retract his errors. Peter was
indefatigable in combating the errors that arose in France at that time.
He merits to be named with St. Bernard as one of the foremost churchmen
of that age. In defense of his order, he opposed St. Bernard, who re-
proached the order for their worldliness and sumptuousness in their build-
ings and table. These vices wrought their downfall, and they shamelessly
bartered the rights of the Church to the revolutionists for secularization.
Peter died at his monastery in 11 56. There are preserved of his writings
six books of Letters, a Treatise on The Divinity of Christ, a Treatise
against the Jews, a Treatise on Infant Baptism against Peter of Bruys, a
Treatise on The Authority of the Church, Treatises on The Basilicas, The
Churches and The Altars, etc.
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 499
Tobias, Judith, and the two books of Maccabees. Although
these do not reach the sublime dignity of the preceding,
nevertheless, on account of their laudable and very necessary
doctrine, they have merited to be received by the ( 'hurch. There
is no need that I should labor in commending these to you.
For if ye value the Church in any wise, ye will receive some-
thing, at least a little, on her authority. But if (as Christ
said of Moses to the Jews) ye will not believe Christ's Church
how will ye believe my words?" (P. L. Migne, 188, 751.)
Viewed in a proper light, this text has nothing unfavor-
able to the complete Canon. Peter is arguing with men who
boasted that they received only the Gospels, and he asks
them to receive the other books on the authority of the
Church. There is a perfect accord in all these exponents of
Catholic thought in stating that the Church received the deu-
terocanouical books. The only difference of opinion that
existed regarded the rank and dignity of these books. They
received and used them ; some of these writers hesitated to
pronounce the last word regarding the canonicity of these
books, because the Church had not yet defined the question.
That Peter, the Venerable, in limiting the dignity of these
books, did not deny their divine inspiration, is evident from
his copious quotations from all of them, as divine Scripture.
Witness a few examples. In the aforesaid treatise, speaking
of the Book of Maccabees, he declares : " But of Judas Mac-
cabasus, the excellent leader of the Hebrews, the truthful
Scripture commemorates that, after the destruction of the
pagan army, he took the sword of the general Apollonius
whom he had slain, and fought with it all his days." I.
Maccab. III.
I ti the same treatise, he establishes from the II. of Macca-
bees, "that it is a holy thought to pray for the dead, that
they maybe released from their sins." II. Maccab. XII. 46.
In his Thirty-fourth Epistle, quoting the sixtli verse of
the twenty-second chapter of Ecclesiasticus, he says : "That
divine philosopher saith : 'A talc out of time is like music in
mourning.' "
In his treatise against the Jews, Chapter II., he proves
the divinity of Christ from the authority of Baruch : "And
500 THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY
although these things should suffice to prove the divinity of
Christ to even brute beasts, let the Prophet or prophetic man
come forth, Baruch the notary or colleague of Jeremiah.
Let him come forth, and, although he draws his spirit from
another, nevertheless it is from the prophetic heart of Jere-
miah, and therefore as of one spirit with the Prophet, let him
state, not in enigmas, but lucidly and openly, what he thinks
of the divinity of Christ. This man manifestly, after many
things said of God, adds: 'This is our God, and there shall
be no other be accounted of in comparison of him. He
found out all the way of knowledge, and gave it to Jacob,
his servant, and to Israel his beloved. Afterwards, he was
seen upon earth, and conversed with men.' Baruch III.
36-38.
In the same treatise, Chapter IV., he declares thus : "Who
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 Coun-
cil of Trent asks no more than is substantially declared in
these passages, and by its everlasting sanction, it has made
canonical the books that Peter considered divine.
John of Salisbury follows Jerome on the Canon.* In
Epistola CXLIII. he declares thus: "Since, therefore, con-
cerning the number of the books, I read many and different
opinions of the Fathers, following Jerome, a doctor of the
Catholic Church, whom I hold most approved in establish-
ing foundations of Scripture, I firmly believe that, as there
are twenty-two Hebrew letters, thus there are twenty-two
*John of Salisbury receives his name from his birthplace in England.
The date of his birth is about 1 1 1 o He was sent to France to study, and
was afterwards sent by the King of England to the papal court to manage
the interests of England there. Recalled to England, he was advanced
to high offices by the High Chancellor, Thomas a. Becket. John became
inseparably attached to Becket, and went with him when Becket was
made Archbishop of Canterbury. He tried to defend him against the
murderers sent by Henry II., and parried the first blow aimed at Becket's
head by receiving it on his arm. John was subsequently made Bishop of
Chartres, which charge he filled faithfully and well. He was one of the
finest spirits of his age, a man of deep piety and learning He died in
1 180. He has left many works, principal among which is Polycraticus or
the vanities of the Court.
THE CANON OF THE XII. CENTURY 501
books of the Old Testament, arranged in three orders . .
And these are found in the Prologue to the Book of Kings
which Jerome called the Galeatum Principium of all Scrip-
ture. . . . But the Bonk of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith,
Tobias, and Past* >r, as the same Father asserts, arc n< >t in the
Canon, neither is the book of Maeeabees, which is divided in
two." (P. L. 199; 125, 126.)
In the same work, he speaks again of the deuterocanoni-
cal books thus: "Concerning Tobias, Judith, and the Book
"t" 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 arc piously admitted.
Philo wrote the Book of Wisdom, and it is called Pseudo-
graphus; not that he wrote falsely, but because he falsely
entitled it ; for it is called the Wisdom of Solomon, whereas,
it was not written by Solomon, but is called of Solomon, on
account of its style and excellent moral teaching. Jesus Son
of Sirach wrote Ecclesiasticus, which, also, from the similar-
ity of its style and moral teaching, is called Solomon's."
The practice of John of Salisbury is in direct opposition to
his theory here announced. His works arc full of ((nota-
tions from the deuterocanonical Scriptures as divine Scrip-
ture. He was infected by a sort of hero worship towards St .
Jerome, somewhat similar to that which in our day set in
towards St. Thomas, which is in itself neither to the glory of
the saint, nor conformable to the truth. Without sufficient
depth or critical acumen to penetrate the question and form
a comprehensive judgment of it, John paid a blind allegiance
to his master, and, at the same time, made much use 1 if t In
very same books as Scripture. Jurare in verba magistri was
the motto of these schoolmen, and often they extolled the
opinions of the master over the voice of tradition. The
error ^i John, then, is due to defect ^l proper investigation,
and to an excessive addiction to the opinions of St. Jerome.
502 THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY
Chapter X.
The Canon of the Church from the Beginning of
Thirteenth Century to the Council of Trent.
Throughout this epoch, the Bible of the Church con-
tained the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books, with-
out anv indication of difference in them. This truth is clearlv
proven by the many manuscripts existing of this period.
Whether the work of chaptering the Bible was done by
Hugh of St. Carus or by Stephen Langton is uncertain, but
it extended to all the books of the Catholic Canon, and the
Correctoria of this period also embrace the books of both
classes.
Albertus Magnus, in his exposition of the Prologue of
St. Jerome on Baruch, manifestly defends the divinity of the
book.* Commenting the words of Jerome: "The Book of
Baruch, the secretary of Jeremiah, which is not read by the
Hebrews, nor possessed by them," etc., Albert endeavors by
scholastic subtlety to benignly interpret Jerome: "Never-
theless, the truth of the book is not thereby called in ques-
tion, because it is joined to canonical Scripture. For it
contains nothing except what was enunciated by Jeremiah,
and for this reason, it is united in the same truth with the
Prophet Jeremiah. For the Hebrews compute twenty-two
books in the Canon of Scripture, in accordance with the
twenty-two letters of their alphabet ; or twenty-four books,
corresponding to the twenty-four ancients. But the added
* Albert was born at Lauingen, in Swabia, about the close of the twelfth
century. He was descended from the Counts of Bollstaedt. He studied
at Padua, and in 1223 entered the Dominican Order at Cologne. His life
was given to teaching in the schools and to preaching. In 1254, he was
made provincial of the Dominicans of Germany; and in 1260, Bishop of
Ratisbon. He renounced the bishopric for the monk's cell, and died at
Cologne in 1280. The saying of Cicero could be applied to Albert, that he
had left writings enough to cremate his body. But his works are more
vast than solid ; they manifest indefatigable toil in reading and collating
the works of others, rather than profundity of personal thought : the pom-
pous verbiage of the schoolmen, and excessive mysticism characterize them
throughout. It was remarked of Albert by a French writer, that he was
called great, only because he lived in an age when men were little. He is
withal a good witness of the tradition of his times.
THE CANON' OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES 503
books they reckon in the same number, as Baruch is added to
Jeremiah, for the reason that he received from Jeremiah
whatever he wrote, ... .so thai the whole truth of this Scrip-
ture rests on the revelation of God made to Jeremiah."
Whatever be the defects of this data, it is evident that
Albert is an avowed advocate of the deuterocanonical books.
He quotes from all of them in his w< >rks, assigning them equal
place with the books of the first Canon.
St. Bona venture comprises all the protocanonical and
deuterocanonical books in twenty-six books. f
He evidences in many ways that he held the books in
equal esteem. In the preface to his Commentary on Wisdom
he says : "The efficient cause of the book is threefold : God
who inspired it, Solomon who produced it, and Philo who
compiled it." His works evince that he held the like opinion
of the other deuterocanonical books.
Alexander Neckam, professor at the University of Paris
at the commencement of the thirteenth centurv, wrote a
commentary on the difficult passages of Holy Scripture and
includes the books of both classes in the same categorv.
Robert Holkot (f 1340), a learned Dominican of North-
ampton in England, is bold in favor of the deuterocan< >nical
books. "St. Augustine," he says, "expressly declares in his
Christian Doctrine (II. 8) that the Book of Wisdom should be
enumerated in the Sacred Scriptures; for, enumerating the
books of the Canon and the Bible, lie says thus of Wisdom
and Ecclesiasticus: 'Wisdom and Eeelesiasticus, 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 Scriptures in
tThe secular name of St. Bonavcnturc was John Fidanza IK
born at Bagnorea, in Italy, in 1221. He entered the Franciscan Order at
the age of seventeen years He studied at the University <>f ! der
the celebrated Alexander Hales. Bonaventure rose by his merit to be
called the Seraphic Doctor, one of the greatest doctors of the Church In
1257. he was made .1 of his order, and in 1272, Gregory X
him Cardinal and Bishop of Albano. He was one of the first the*
of the Council of Lyon, but he died after the first session in 1274. He has
left voluminous works, more than twenty ui which treat of sacred Scrip-
ture. His works are characterized by a moderation and wisdom, re-
sembling that found in the works of John Chrysostom.
504 THE CANON OF THE XIII. AND XIV. CENTURIES
the Church, though the contrary is held by the Jews . . . and
therefore, although by the Jews rejected, the books are of
great authority among the faithful."*
Thomas Netter, better known as Thomas Waldensis,
from his birthplace Walden in England, a Carmelite of such
learning that he was sent by Henry IV. of England to the
Councils of Pisa and Florence, maintains stoutly in his Doc-
trinale Fidei that the canonicity of a book must be determined
by the authority of the Church. He appeals against the fol-
lowers of Wicklif to the Decree of Gelasius, to establish the
books that are to be held in full authority.
John of Ragusa (11450) a Dominican doctor of the
Sorbonne, who was president of the Council of Basle, announ-
ces in no doubtful terms, in the aforesaid council, the doc-
trine of the Church : ' 'Moreover, it is manifest that there are
many books in the Bible, which are not held in authority with
the Jews, but are by them reckoned apocryphal, which,
nevertheless, by us are held in the same veneration and
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 pertinaciously to con-
tradict, "f The voice of the Church speaks through this
man, which spoke again through the Fathers of the Council
of Trent.
St. Thomas aquinas (11274) does not treat the question
of the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books ex professo.
He is falsely, however, placed by some protestants as an
adversary of these books.
A just way to judge of a man's opinion of Scripture is by
his practical use of it. In his Summa Theologica St. Thomas
has quoted Baruch twice: I. Maccabees, more than twelve
times; II. Maccabees more than fifty-two times; Judith,
more than nineteen times ; Tobias, more than seventy times ;
Wisdom, more than one hundred and twelve times; and
Ecclesiasticus, more than one hundred and thirteen times.
*Postilla super Lib. Sapientias, Cap. I. Sect. 2.
tMansi. Coll. Concil. XXIX., p. 885
THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY 505
The protestant Hody endeavors to shake St. Thomas'
authority in favor of the deuterocanonical books by the three
following testimonies. In his seventh opusculum, Chapter
IV., commenting the work of the pseudo Areopagite, De
Divinis Nominibus, St. Thomas speaks of a quotation from
Wisdom thus : "Fr< >m which it is evident that Wisdom was
not yet held (nondum habebatur) among the canonical
Scriptures." That this testimony is not unfavorable to our
case is evident from a mere reading. But we hope to show-
that it is a direct testimony in favor of the books. If there
is any point to the declaration, in saying that at a certain time
a book was not yet, nondum, in the canonical Scriptures, the
writer supposes that at his writing it was there.
The second text objected against us is from the Summa
Thcologica, I. 0. 89, art. 8, ad 2. There, commenting on the
apparition of Samuel to Saul (I. Sam. XXYIII. 11 et seqq.
et Eccli. XLVI. 23), he answers the objection first by the
authority of Ecclesiasticus, and then subjoins: "Whence it
can be said of Samuel that he appeared by divine revelation,
as it is stated in Eccli. X LVI., 'that he slept and made known
to the King the end of his life.' Or the apparition was pro-
cured by demons, if the authority of Ecclesiasticus is not
received, for the reason that it is not among the canonical Scrip-
tures with the Jews." This proposition is of a man who him-
self receives the book but grants to his opponent the right
to doubt it. It is also of a man little interested in the ques
tion of the canonicit y of Scripture.
In saying that the book was not received by the Jews, he
d< >es not establish that it is not received by the Christians ; in
fact, he seems to imply that it was received by them, but ru rt
in such manner as to preclude all doubt. The mind of St.
Thomas was not much given to these critical questions. lie
used the Scriptures as the Church used them, and this is the
sole passage in all his works, where he allows any place for
doubt concerning them.
The third objection is urged by Hody that St. Thomas
speaks of the Fable of Bel and the Dragon, Dan. XIII. Bui
all critics now agree that this work is supposititious. The
learning of that time consisted chiefly in a command
506 THE CANON OF THE XIII. CENTURY
what the Fathers had written, and often we find conflicting
statements made by the same writer, due to the fact thai he
had drawn from different sources, without weighing the
question in se. So this unknown writer of this supposititious
work had probably read Jerome and adopted his phrase-
ology.
Among the works of St. Thomas is found a commentary
on the books of Maccabees, in the preface of which it is
stated, "that these books have no authority with the Jews,
as have the twenty-four which compose the Canon according
to Jerome, but they have authority in the Latin Church,
which approved them in a certain council, and ordered them
to be read." The authenticity of this work is rejected by
many critics, and the work is believed to belong to an English
writer named Thomas, and to date from about the close of the
fourteenth century, but it still remains a testimony of that
time to the Catholic Canon.
Hugh of St. Carus (fi26o) 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
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 called of St. Carus, 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, and was made doctor of the Sorbonne, and
afterwards Cardinal. He was a man of commanding genius, both in the
speculative and practical order. He was the first to invent a concordance
of the Bible. By his suggestion the Dominican Corrector turn, was started,
and it was finished by his own personal labors. He is also the author of
Commentaries on the Scriptures.
THE CANON OF THE XIV. CENTU1 507
Hugh was hard pressed to keep with the Church, and fol-
low in everything St. Jerome. Pie called the deuterocanoni-
cal books dnbii, not that their message was uncertain, but
because their authors were unknown, and he admitted them
into the deposit of Scriptures because, as they contained the
inspired truth, the Church received them. The most extreme
of the Jeromists are forced always to confess that the Church
received these books, and that is what we are seeking. We
wish to know what the Church held in these ages, not what
were the personal leanings of the theologians. Hugh declares
in his preface to Ecclesiasticus that the Church receives
these books, not to prove doctrine, but for moral instruction,
but this is a mere fiction borrowed from Jerome. The
Church received them as Scripture, and "all Scripture is
divinely inspired." Hugh has commented all the deutero-
canonical books.
William Occam (fi347) appeals to Jerome and Gregory
the Great in asserting that 'Judith, Tobias, Maccabees,
Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom are not to be accepted to con-
firm that which pertains to faith. . . . The Church reads
them, but does not receive them among her Canonical Scrip-
tures."*
When Occam testifies that the Church receives the deu-
terocanonical Scriptures, he testifies to the fact which we are
seeking to establish, and is in line with the whole ci >urse of
tradition; when he limits the authority which the Church
accorded these books he is advancing a mere personal criti-
cism on a faet which the Church had not decided. To In-
sure, the Church up to that time had not canonized these
*Occ;un was a native of Surrey, in England. IK' entered the Order "i
Gray Friars, and became an ardent follower of Duns Scotus. His unquiet
spirit soon revealed itself ina radical departure from Scotns. and in his
advocacy of opposite subtilties. Ho was so powerful in dialectics that
men called him the doctor invincibilis. In Occam we find an extreme
representative of that seholastic hair-splitting of dialectics which did
much to make nun distrust and despise the schoolmen. Occam stu
the part of Louis of Bavaria against Pope John XXII., who excon mi -
cated him. He was the author of many other bizarre opinions. He ■
at Munich in 1347, according to general opinion absolved of ecclesias
censures.
i)08 THE CANON OF THE XIV. CENTURY
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 can-
onicity was not the denial of inspiration. In saying that the
Church did not use these books to confirm faith, Occam
speaks against the plain evidences of fact, for we have seen
that the representative men in the Church from the begin-
ning made equal use of these books to teach doctrine and
to confute error.
Nicholas of Lyra (11340) is unfavorable to the deutero-
canonical books.*
According to him the canonical books are of such author-
ity that anything that is contained in them should be firmly
and without discussion held as true, as also that which fol-
lows directly from them . . . but the books, which according
to Jerome, are not of the canon are received by the Church, to
to be read for moral instruction, although their authority
seems less fitted to decide those questions concerning which
there might be discussion.
In his commentary on Ezra he says : "I intend, for the
present, to pass over the books of Tobias, Judith, and
Maccabees, although they are historical; because they
are not in the Canon of the Jews or Christians. Jerome
indeed, says they are reckoned among the apocrypha." He
afterwards commented all the deuterocanonical books,
except the fragments of Esther, "because they are not in the
Hebrew nor in canonical Scripture, but seem to be invented
by Josephus and other writers, and inserted in the Vulgate,
as Jerome says." In his preface to Tobias he says : "Since
by God's assistance, I have written on the canonical books of
*Nicolas, called of Lyra from his birthplace in Normandy, was by birth
a Jew. He had studied under the Rabbis, but became converted to the
faith of Christ, and entered the order of the Friars Minor in 1291. He re-
ceived the degree of doctor at Paris, where he taught Scripture for many
years with great success. He wrote commentaries on all the Scriptures,
except some of the deuterocanonical fragments. He was much versed in
Hebrew and Chaldaic, which gave to his commentaries of the Old Testa-
ment a solidity unlike that found in the other writers of his time. He
founds all on the literal sense, and thus is not marred by that excessive
mysticism, which has so much prevailed in past ages. He died in 1340.
THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY 509
Holy Scripture . . . trusting in the same assistance, I purpose
to write upon the other books, which are not in the canon,
viz., Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobias and Maccabees."
In these testimonies we find two elements, first what the
Church held, and second what Nicolas held. He bears wit-
ness that the Church receives the books, and she in her sub-
sequent councils tells us in what sense she received them.
Nicolas certainly doubted of the divinity of the deutero-
canonical books; perhaps he fully judged that the fragments
of Esther were spurious. He was a Jew, and like causes
moved him and Jerome whom he follows. It would be
unreasonable to say that the mere doubts of one man or of a
few men on a question not yet defined by the Church should
overthrow the weight of tradition.
On the 4th of February, 1441, Pope Eugene IV., by
and with the approbation of the Council of Florence pro-
mulgated the following bull respecting Holy Scripture : "The
holy Roman Church . . . professes that one only and the same
God is the author of the Old and New Testament, that is to
say, of the Law, the Prophets and the Gospels, because
under the inspiration of the same Holy Ghost, spoke the holy
men of both Testaments whose books the Church receives
and venerates, which are contained under the following
titles: The five books of Moses . . . Josue, Judges, Ruth,
four books of Kings, two books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehe-
mias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, The Psalms of David, Prov-
erbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Eccles-
iasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel,
twelve Prophets, . . . and the two Books of Maccabees."*
*Labbe Coll. Concil. XVIII . 1222. Concilio Florcntino perperam
hoc decretum attribui asserit Hodius (De text. orig. 659 col. III.) et post
cum Bleek (Einl. Ed. 2. p. 705), etc. Contra omnes hos ilia transcriberc
sufficit, qua? Card, de Monte, primus Cone. Trid. praeses, ad similem objec-
tionem repondit: "Bulla ilia Eugenii, in qua rccipiuntur libri sacri et est
super unione Iacobitarum, et cius data est Prid. Non. Febr. 1441, vere
edita est in Cone. Florentino ante eius dissolutionem. Falsuni enini est, et
ab omni veritate alicnum, quod concilium illud dissolutum fucrit an.
1439 statimpostunionem Gra"corum,hallucinanturque maximc, quiputant
finem dicti concilii fuisse unionem Gneoorum, quum longe post, per tres
sc. fere annos, pcrduraverit, usque videlicet ad an. 1442, quo anno 6. Kal.
Mai. celcbrata 10. sessione, concilium ipsum Romam translatum fucrit
51.0 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 u£e the word canonical. Now perhaps
none of those who had opposed the full authority of the deu-
terocanonical books had denied their inspiration. No one of
them had studied the exact concept of inspiration or canon-
icity, but they had made use of vague distinctions to restrict
the dignity and value of the deuterocanonical books some-
what below that of the books of the first Canon. Moreover,
the bull of Eugene IV. did not define the Catholic notion of
canonicity, neither did it define the question of the absolute
equality of all the books. It seems also that the decrees of the
Council of Florence were not diffused much through the
Western Church in the first years after its celebration. Its
legislation affected more especially the Eastern world, and
the art of printing had not yet effected the general diffusion
Praeterea.quod bulla unionis Iacobitarum data 1441, in qua ipsi libri reci-
piunttir, edita fuerit in ipso concilio, potest sciri ex originali manu pro-
pria ipsius Eugenii et Cardinalium ibi prsesentium subscripta et plumbeo
sigillo obsignata, quam ego ipse his oculis vidi Romae una cum aliis actis
concilii ab eisdem Eugenio et Cardinalibus subscriptis et plumbeo sigillo
obsignatis. quae nunc in arce molis Adriani inter alias scripturas Sedis
Apostolicas conservantur. . . . Verba autem: 'sacro approbante concilio,'
in principio bullae unionis Iacobitarum non ponuntur, quia dictum princi-
pium totum pertinet ad procemium ; ubi autem incipit dispositiva, ponun-
tur quidem, ut in aliis bullis in concilio editis. Ibi enim sic habetur:
'veram necessariamque doctrinam hodie in hac solemni sessione, sacro
approbante (Ecumenico Concilio Florentino in nomine Domini tradimus,
etc' " (Theiner Acta genuina SS. cecumen. Cone. Trident. Zagrabiac
1847 I. p. 79, sq. Cfr. etiam Pragnotata ad bullam 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
audivisse, ad eos refutandos sufficiet 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.)
THE (ANON OF THE XV. CENTURY 511
of knowledge. Hence we find writers afu-r this decree doubt-
ing of the divinity of these books.
Such a one is Tostatus,* Bishop of Avila Mi 455).
Tostatus gives evidence that he knew nothing of the
decree of Florence. He is thoroughly at sea on the question
of the Canon, and from his conflicting statements it appears
evident that he had not mastered the question, and knew
not clearly what either himself or the Church held on the
subject. Commenting the Prologus Galeatus of Jerome, he
says: "It is said that the Book of Wisdom is not in the
Canon, because the Jews expunged it thence; in the begin-
ning they received it, but after they had laid hands on Jesus
and slain him, remembering the evident testimonies concern-
ing him in the same book . . . taking counsel, lest we should
impute to them the evident sacrilege, they cut the book off
from the prophetic volumes, and interdicted its reading.
But we on the Church's 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 Jew-
ish Canon . . . and although the Jews never received it into
the Canon of Scriptures, the Church receives it and reads it."
Of the Book of Judith he speaks in a confused manner, and
concludes: "These things are true according to the Jews;
but with us it is otherwise, for the Book of Judith is rccci
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 an< 1 Maccabees.
Had he remained consistent in these views, no one could have
written better on the question than he. This was the
Church's position clearly and definitely enunciated. But in
trying to reconcile this position of the Church with Jerome,
♦Tostatus was one of the most noted of the doctors of Salamanca in
Spain He filled with credit the highest offices in Church and State. His
works reveal a vast erudition, but his critique is often defective, and his
judgment does not correspond to the vastness of his erudition. Bcllar-
mine styled him the wonder of the world. He died in 1455. This is his
epitaph:
"Hie stupor est mundi, qui scibile discutit omne."
512 THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY
he becomes oblivious of his former position and assails the
authority of the books which he here calls authentic Scrip-
ture. Commenting the first preface of Jerome on Chronicles,
he speaks thus of the deuterocanonical books : 'There is a
difference between them (deuterocanonical books) and the
canonical books that are called authentic (in his former testi-
mony he called all the deuterocanonical books authentic) ;
from the authentic books we may receive a proof of doctrine,
and validly argue against both Jew and Christian to prove
truth ; but from the apocryphal (deuterocanonical) books we
may receive doctrine, because they contain holy doctrine,
wherefore they are called at times Jiagiographa; but their
authority is not sufficient to adduce in argument against any-
one, nor to prove things which are in doubt, and in this they
are inferior to the canonical and authentic books. . . None
of these apocryphal books, even though it be included among
the other books of the Bible, and read in the Church, is of
such authority that the Church may from it prove doctrine
and in this regard the Church does not receive them, and
thus is to be understood the declaration of Jerome, that the
Church receives not the apocrypha." Again, in explaining
the prologue on the Gospels, he states : "The Church knows
not whether writers inspired by the Holy Ghost wrote these
(deuterocanonical) books . . . When, therefore, there is doubt
concerning the writers of certain books, whether they were
inspired by the Holy Ghost, their authority is taken away,
and the Church does not place them in the Canon of Scrip-
tures. Furthermore, regarding these books, the Church is
not certain whether or not heretics have not added to, or
taken from that which was written by their proper authors.
The Church, therefore, receives such books, permitting every
one of the faithful to read them ; the Church also reads them
in her offices on account of the many devout things which
are contained in them ; but she obliges no one to believe what
is contained therein, as is the case with the books of Wisdom,
Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, Judith and Tobias. For though
these books are received 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
THE CANON OF THE XV. CENTURY 513
prove those things that are in doubt against heretics and
Jews, as Jerome says in his prologue upon Judith."
We must agree with Tostatus that up to the Florentine
Council the deuterocanonical books were not of absolute
authority in doctrine, because there existed no definitive
decree, and therefore one who rejected these books could not
be branded with heresy. He errs greatly, however, in say-
ing that the Church was ignorant of the inspiration of the
books. The contradictions in Tostatus result from the fact
that he tried to keep in line with the Church and St.
Jerome. In saying that the Church received these books as
authentic Scriptures into the Canon of Scriptures, he is with
the Church: in doubting of the inspiration of the same books,
he is with Jerome against the Church. We are building our
Canon on what the Church held, and to this his testimony
serves.
The authority of Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence
(fi459) is sometimes invoked against us. He knew but
vaguely of the decree of Florence.* According to him,
"the Church receives these books as true, and venerates
them as useful, moral treatises, though, in the discussion of
those things which are of faith, not conclusive in argument.
. . . Wherefore, perhaps, they have such authority as have
the sayings of holy doctors approved by the Church."
The opinions of Antoninus are often strange and uncriti-
cal. His piety moved him to an excessive veneration of the
opinions of St. Jerome, in explaining the fact of the Church's
approval of the deuterocanonical books. His testimony is
of no avail, since against him stands the authentic decree of
Florence, making known to us, that the Church received
these books as divine Scripture. St. Antoninus quotes St.
Thomas, II. 2., as authority for his strange opinion, but a
close examination fails to disclose any such text in the
Summa.
*Chron. III. n, 2, Lugd 1586. III. p. 551: "In aliquibus vero, in
quibus a fide vera diserepabant (Jacobitae el Armenii) prohibcntur, uti
quod sacramentum confirniationis non habebant in usu conferendi illi
nationi, declarato eis, quod illud, sicut et cetera sacramenta deberent
accipere credere et conferre, et aliqua alia, quae nunc nun occummi menti"
33 (U.S.)
514 THE CANON OF THE XVI. CENTURY
Denis of Chartreux (fi47i) declares, that the Church
receives the deuterocanonical books as true, but not ca-
nonical. He does not regard the fragments of Esther as
divine Scripture.
Cardinal Ximenes (11517), in the preface of his Com-
plutensian Polyglott Bible, says: "The books, indeed,
without the Canon, which the Church receives rather for the
edification of the people than as an authoritative confirma-
tion of the doctrines of the Church, are only found in the
Greek."
We see that the old theory of Jerome endured in some
minds, who, while they received the books with the Church,
in defect of any absolute decree of the Church, inclined much
to the great Scriptural doctor of the Church. The decree of
Florence, though it defined the issue in se, failed to establish
the absolute equality of the books, first because it was not
widely disseminated in those obscure times, and secondly
because it did not employ the term canonical.
Erasmus (11536) finds "that it is not unreasonable to
establish different degrees of authority among the Holy
Books, as St. Augustine has done. The books of the first
rank are those concerning which there has never existed a
doubt with the ancients. Certainly Isaiah has more weight
than Judith."*
The great humanist evidently considered the books as
divine Scripture, though of less importance in doctrine.
We close the list of the antetridentine writers with Cajetan
(11524). At the close of his commentary on Esther he con-
cludes: "The Church receives such books, permitting the
faithful to read them; the Church also reads them in her
offices, on account of the many devout things whcih they
contain. But the Church obliges no one necessarily to believe
what is contained therein, which is the case with the books of
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, Judith, and Tobit. For
though these books are received by Christians, and proof
derived from them may, in some way or other, have weight,
because the Church retains those books; yet they are not
*Apud Malou. II. 10S.
THE CANON OF THE XVI. CENTURY 515
effectual for proving those things which are in doubt, against
heretics or Jews. We here terminate our commentaries on
the historical books of the Old Testament : f< >r tl t ( viz.,
the books of Judith, Tobit, and the .Maccabees) are reckoned
by Jerome without the canonical books, and arc 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 any-
where find those books reckoned among the canonical books,
either in the holy councils, or in the holy doctors. For the
words of the councils, as well as of the doctors, are to be
submitted to the correction of Jerome ; and according to his
judgment [expressed] to the bishops Chromatius and Helio-
dorus, those books (and if there be any similar ones in the
Canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, they are not
those which are given as a rule for the confirmation of the
faith. They may, however, be called canonical (that is,
given as a rule) for the edification of the faithful ; since [they
are] received and authorized in the Canon of the Bible for
this purpose."
Cajetan was not a strong independent thinker. He gave
himself up to study in two great departments of the Church's
science, dogma and Scripture. In both, he simply followed
the master. In dogma he followed St. Thomas, absolutelv ;
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 nam >wed
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 corrects >n of Jerome, the
statement is false. It was placing Jerome above the Church.
And yet this extreme Jefomist had to confess that the deu-
terocanonical books were received and authorized in the Canon
of the Bible.
516 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
Chapter XI.
Decree of the Council of Trent.
The necessity for the decree of Trent arose from two
quarters. Within the fold of the Church there was some
uncertainty produced by the opinion of Cajetan; and the
sect of protestants which arose at this time rejected the deu-
terocanonical books. To make head, therefore, against the
great apostasy and to make known to Catholics the abso-
lute position of the Church, the Council of Trent, was opened
on the 15th of December, 1545. The first deliberations of
the Council were concerned with the question of Holy Scrip-
ture. An evidence of the views of the protestants on the
Scripture may be learned from the following statement of
Luther : "That which does not teach Christ is not apostolic,
even if Peter or Paul said it; on the contrary, that which
announces Christ is apostolic, even though uttered by Judas,
Annas, Herod or Pilate."
In the famous dispute of Leipsic in 15 19, when John Eck
invoked the authority of Maccabees to defend the doctrine
of Purgatory, Luther made answer: "There is no proof of
Purgatory in any portion of sacred Scripture, which can
enter into the argument, and serve as a proof ; for the book
of Maccabees not being in the Canon, is of weight with the
faithful, but avails nothing with the obstinate." In the
spread of these extreme ideas, men looked to the Church for
a definition, and she responded to the need.
A Council held at Sens, in 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
inventor 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
11th of February, 1546, the members of the Council, who
had been divided into three particular congregations,
assembled. The subject oij deliberation respecting the
Canon was :
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OP TRENT 517
I.- — Whether the Council should receive the books of
Scripture simply, or after a previous examination by the
theologians.
2. — Whether two classes of books should be constituted,
so that some should be declared authoritative to prove
doctrine ; others useful for instruction. (Acta Genuina,
Theiner.)
Cardinal Cervini, president of the Council, afterwards
Pope Marcellus II., proposed the questions in all their bear-
ings to the Fathers.* Certain Fathers were of the mind that
it would be well to examine, at least summarily, the objec-
tions of the adversaries against the deuterocanonical books,
but the majority decided "to receive the books simply and
entirely as the Church had done in other councils, and espe-
cially in the Council of Florence." (Theiner 1. c.)
We see here that there was no new legislation in this
regard in the Council of Trent. The Council simply re-
iterated and confirmed what had been believed and pro-
mulgated in the Church from the earliest times.
The question was then submitted by the general of the
Augustinians, and Seripando, legate of Paul IV., "that a
distinction should be made between those books which are
authentic and canonical, and upon which our faith rests, and
those which are merely canonical, and useful to be read for
instruction in the Church, as St. Jerome places in the Pro-
logus Galeatus." (Theiner 1. c.) This proposition found
no favor and was straightway abandoned.
In the Council of Trent, we find often a lack of precision
in the views of individual members; but the conclusions
arrived at are always clear and profound.
*Duo ego subiiciam, quae in mea particulari congregatione tractata
lucrum ; unum est, utrum simpliciter facienda sit ajiprobatio Scripture,
prout factum fuit per Cone. Florent.et iuxta etiam antiquiora concilia, an
potius distinguendum ; qui sint libri sacri ex quibus fundamenta nostra
ridei et doctrinae eruantur, et qui sint quidem canonici, scd non eiusdem
auctoritatis, ut priores illi, sed ideo ab Ecclesia recepti, \\X ex his multitudo
instrui possit, quales sunt libri Sapientice, Proverbiorum, et alii similes;
idque forsan non abs re esset, quoniam videtur ambiguum ab Ecclesia
determinatum, quamvis et August inus et Hieronymus et alii veteres de
iis nonnulla tradiderint. Alteram est. utrum sicco pede approbatio ista
518 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
So here, it is not evident just what distinction this man
wished to induce. But in every case, his proposition was
useless. If he wished merely to say that the import of
some divine books is more important in Christian doctrine
than others, the truth is understood by all Christians, and
needs no definition. The Council was not about to define
that Maccabees was as valuable to use as Matthew. But if
he wished to say that the relation which God bore to any
book was less than inspiration as we have defined it, the
proposition is false. The Council simply extended proper
inspiration to all the books, and left the question of their
respective dogmatic and moral values intact.
On the 1 2th of February, 1546, Cardinal Cervini moved
on the part of his particular congregation that the Council
' set forth in brief the motives why it receives the books con-
tested by the protestants; but it was decided by common
accord "that the Holy Books should be simply approved
according to the decree of the Council of Florence." (Thei-
ner, I. 52.)
The next question was whether the books of both classes
should be received with the same reverence, (pari pietatis
affectu). This was for a long time discussed, the majority
being in favor of the affirmative, but no conclusion was then
reached. The following meetings, both particular and gen-
eral, were given up to various questions regarding Scripture
and tradition. On the 2 2d of March the secretary of the
Council, Angelo Massarelli, proposed to reject the decree of
the Council of Florence as of doubtful authenticity, but he
was refuted by the president of the Council. Cardinal Del
Monte, legate of the Pope, had, on the 26th of February,
refuted the same objection.
facienda sit, an vero additis rationibus et solutis argumentis, quibus adver-
sarii maxime innituntur ad eorum nonnullos impugnandos et confring-
endos. Ab ipsis enim, ut omnes vos scitis, infringitur imprimis liber
Machabceorum, quern penitus reiiciunt, item Epistola Pauli ad Hebr., una
Iacobi 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 Sapientice libri." (Comely, op. cit.)
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT f)19
A detailed list of fourteen propositions was at this junc-
ture 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 deuter >ni-
cal books should be appn >ved as sacred and canonical. This
was resolved in the affirmative by forty-four votes, against
three negative votes and five doubtful ones. (Theiner, I.
77-)
The thirteenth proposition submitted the question,
whether to make a distinction between the two classes of
books, or enumerate them according to the Council of Fl< »r-
ence. It was decided to receive the deuterocanonical books
without examination or discussion by forty-one votes, against
four in opposition and eight doubtful ones. The Council
also unanimously decided that the things carried by a major-
ity vote should not be subject to further discussion.
On the 3rd of April, the corrected Schema was placed
before the Fathers. The Cardinal of Trent moved that the
deuterocanonical books be placed after the protocanonical
ones, "because Tobias, which Jerome held to be apocryphal,
is placed in the decree ahead of other books whose authority
no one has ever questioned." The motion was lost, since it
was against the former vote that they should approve the
decree of the Council of Florence.
The Bishop of Castellamare remarked that the words
sacred and canonical were objectionable on account of Judith,
and some others which are not in the Hebrew Canon. He
moved to substitute: "in the Canon of the Church." Car-
dinal Cervini, the president, responded: "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 I 11a-
mare responded: "Placet."
On the 8th of April, 1546, two months after the question
of the Scriptures had been submitted to the Council, after
mature deliberate n and discussion, the Council promulgated
its famous decree:
"The thrice holy, oecumenical, general Council of Trent
. . . following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives
520 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
and venerates with equal piety and respect all the books of
the Old and New Testament, because one and the same God
is the author of both. . . . The Council judges good to join
to this decree a list of books, so that no one may doubt con-
cerning the books received by the same Synod. These are
the books: Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses,
that is to say : Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deu-
teronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two
of Chronicles, the first of Ezra; and second which is called
Nehemiah, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter
of one hundred and fifty Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jere-
miah with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Proph-
ets, viz., Hosea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micha, Nahum,
Habacuc, Sophonias, Haggai, Zachary, Malachi, the two
books of Maccabees, first and second. ... If anyone shall
not receive these same books as sacred and Canonical with
all their parts, as they are read in the Catholic Church, and
contained in the Latin Vulgate ; and shall knowingly and wil-
fully reject the aforesaid traditions, let him be anathema."*
The clause, with all their parts, was inserted primarily to
include certain passages of the Gospels, concerning which
doubt had existed. In the general congregation on the 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 Coun-
cil by Pallavicini might induce one into error. He states
that the question was submitted, whether all the books of
both Testaments should be approved. This would imply
that the Council felt itself not bound by the Council of Flor-
*Conc. Trid. Sess. IV. De Can. Script.
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 521
ence. The authentic acts by Theiner give an entirely differ-
ent sense to the 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 authorship, or it is not. The Council
accepted the deuterocanonical books as having God for their
author. The old distinction of greater and less degrees of
inspiration had some ardent supporters in the Council. The
ground of their opinion seems to have been an imperfect
understanding of the nature of inspiration. The vast major-
ity of the Council announced to them : "All the books of our
Bible, whatever be their contents, and the profit one may
draw from them, have been regarded as inspired by Chris-
tian tradition, and for us, they are canonical." The oppo-
nents finished by adding their placet. The absolute equality
of all the books in their inspiration is assured by the Council ;
for if a book be sacred and canonical, and have God for its
author, it cannot be inferior to the others of which the same
is asserted. Some theologians still confuse the issue by
declaring that the question of equality was not explicitly
defined on account of its difficulty; and the question was left as
the Holy Fathers left it. (Loisy, l.c). This is nothing. The
Council did not deem it necessary to promulgate an explicit
decree, making the book equal in inspiration, because such
was equivalently contained in the main decree; the Council
did not declare the books equal in value, because they are not
thus equal: God spoke in divers manners in the Scriptur
and some truths therein contained are more valuable than
others, though these latter are no less the inspired writing ^\
God.
The decree of Trent was definite, final and clear but yet it
took some time for it to take absolute hold upon all the rep-
522 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
resentatives of Catholic thought. If men's minds were
always clear and virtuous, there would be far less confusion
in the world. But often from lack of intellectual penetra-
tion, or from excessive addiction to some theory, men of note
give utterance to false opinions. Especially is this true in
the harmonizing of schools of theology, with some definitive
sentence of the Church. Those who have assimilated -ome
theory in conflict with the new decree, will retreat from their
position slowly, and will endeavor, by restricting the decree,
to cling to as much as possible of the old opinion. Thus
Cajetan tried to conform the decree of Florence to his own
opinion. With time these struggles and gasps of dying
error cease, and the authority of the rock-built Church
remains the absolute guide of the faithful of Christ.
Thus, for a few years after the Council of Trent, there
was some slight friction between its decree and certain theo-
logians. This was augmented by the fact that the precise
concepts of inspiration and canonicity were not then well
understood. The Council gave us the text, and, as men
examined the precise significance of its words, this looseness
of opinion vanished from Catholic schools of theology, so
that every Catholic holds to-day that the deuterocanonical
books are as much inspired and as canonical as the Penta-
teuch or the Gospels.
An intentional falsehood is contained in Home's Intro-
duction, Vol. II. p. 489, where he places Bellarmine (f 1621)
against the deuterocanonical books, by taking certain pas-
sages out of their proper context in the works of the great
controversialist. Bellarmine in his works clearly declares:
"That the deuterocanonical works are not only good and
holy, but they are sacred and of infallible truth. The Church
has never doubted of their canonicity in the sense that she
lacked testimonies to attest the divinity of their origin, but
simply certain persons doubted, and the Church did not
wish to define the question at that time."*
From this it appears that Bellarmine 's opinion was that
the deuterocanonical books always had the right to canon-
*De Verbo Dei. I. 1, Cap. IV.
CREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 523
icity; 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 Sienna.*
In his Bibliotheca Sancta (Tom. i. pag. 18), Sixtus dis-
tinguishes 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 comprises the books which were formerly known
as ecclesiastical, but which are now by us called deuterocan-
onical. These latter were not recognized by all since the
times of the Apostles, but long afterward, and for this reason
Catholic opinion concerning them was, at first uncertain.
The early Fathers regarded them as apocryphal and non-
canonical, and only permitted them to be read to the cate-
chumens ; then with time they permitted them to be read to
the faithful, not for proof of doctrine, but for edification of
the faithful; and since these books were read publicly in the
Church, they were called ecclesiastical. Finally, they have
been placed among the Scriptures of irrefragable authority."
Sixtus exaggerates the doubts that existed concerning
the books. He was probably more conversant with Jerome
than with the other Fathers, and takes him as a representa-
tive of the opinions of his time. Against his testimony
stands the united testimony of the Council of Trent, com-
posed of the greatest body of theologians ever .assembled,
declaring that the CJiurdi, relying on tradition, receives these
books as sacred and canonical. The Council promulgated
officially what had been always implicitly held. But Sixtus
*Sixtus was by birth a Jew. lie became converted to Christianity,
and entered the Franciscan order. He was afterwards ( •
taught heresies; and as he obstinately refused to abjure them, he was con-
demned to be burned at the stake Just as the sentence was to be
ccuted, Cardinal Ghisleri, th< Inquisitor-General, afterwards P< - V .
overcame his obstinacy, and transferred him from the Franciscans to the
Dominican order. He consecrated his life to the study of th<
and died at Genoa, in 1561. His greatest work is his Bibliotheca irancta.
Many of his opinions are exc« ll< nt, but, at times, his critique is defective
.524 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
is disposed to accord these books a place among the canonical
Scriptures on the authority of the Church. He accepts the
decree, as he understands it. But the opinions of St. Jerome
moved him still to reject the deuterocanonical fragments of
Esther. Thus, in the aforesaid reference, he discourses of
it: "The appendix of the Book of Esther, which comprises
the seven last chapters, consists of various rags and patch-
work, of which we find nothing in the Hebrew exemplars . . .
But it occurs to me here to admonish and entreat the good
reader not to accuse me of temerity, that I cut out these
seven chapters from the canonical Scriptures and place them
among the apocrypha, as though I were unmindful of the
decree of Trent, which, under pain of anathema, commands
that all the books entire should be received, as they are read
in the Church, and as they exist in the old Latin Vulgate
edition.
•'But that Canon is to be understood, of true and genuine
parts of Scripture, pertaining to the integrity of the books,
and not of certain ragged appendages, and patches rashly
and disorderly tacked on by some unknown author, such as
are these last chapters, which not only Cardinal Hugh,
Nicolas of Lyra, and Denis the Carthusian deny to be can-
onical ; but also St. Jerome cuts off from the volume of Esther
as a spurious part, to use his own words, 'made up of ragged
fragments of words, which could be said and heard in the
(several) occasions, just as it is customary for scholars to take
a theme, and excogitate what words one would use, who
received or wrought an injury. Origen, also, in his letter to
Julius Africanus, rejects these appendages.' "
Sixtus knew more of the opinions of Jerome, than of the
value of oecumenical decrees. No part of the deuterocan-
onical books is treated so severely by Jerome as the frag-
ments of Esther. As it was hopeless to make Jerome agree
on this point with the Council, as generally understood, this
avowed disciple of Jerome sought by his strange distinction
to maintain the old opinion of his master. But anyone can
see the flimsiness of the attempt. In fact, in the subsequent
centuries, there is not found one to endorse such opinion.
The words of the Council were too explicit. Every part that
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 525
was in the Vulgate and read in the Church was declared
sacred and canonical; the fragments of Esther fulfill both
these conditions. The only way to reject deuterocanonical
books and fragments is to reject the Council of Trent. In
fact it is a remarkable fact, that, in the ages following the
Council, Sixtus' is the only voice raised in opposition to the
equal canonicity of the books, and he only aims at these frag-
ments. It is an evidence of the universal obedience of faith,
among the children of the Church, to the voice of authority.
Among the authors of the seventeenth century Bossuet
has expressed the position of the Church with the most force
and precision. In a letter to Leibnitz in 1700, he resumes as
follows :
"Nous.dirons done, s'il vous plait, tous deux ensemble,
qu'une nouvelle reconnaissance de quelque livre canonique
dont quelques-uns auraient doute ne deroge point a la per-
pctuite de la tradition. . . . Pour etre constante et perpetu-
elle, la verite catholique ne laisse pas d'avoir ses progres: elle
est connue en un lieu plus qu'en un autre, en un temps plus
qu'en un autre, plus clairement, plus distinctement, plus
universellement. II sufnt, pour etablir la succession et la
perpetuite de la foi d'un livre saint, comme de toute autre
verite, qu'elle soit toujours reconnue ; qu'elle le soit dans les
plus grand nombre sans comparaison ; qu'elle le soit dans les
Eglises les plus eminentes, les plus anciennes et les plus
reverees; qu'elle s'y soutienne, qu'elle gagne et qu'elle se
rcpande d'elle-meme, jusqu'a tant que le Saint-Esprit, la
force de la tradition et le gout, non celui des particuliers,
mais l'universal de l'Eglise, la fasse enfin prevaloir comme
elle a fait au concile de Trente."
He insists on the practical usage of the Church in reading
the books, and on the constant quotations of the Fathers ;
"Ajoutons . . . que le terme de canonique n'ayant pas tou-
jours une signification uniforme, nier qu'un livre soit can-
onique en un sens, ce n'est pas nier qu'il ne le soit en un autre ;
nier qu'il soit, ce qui est tres vrai, dans le canon des Hebreux,
ou recu sans contradiction parmi les Chretiens, n'empeche
pas qu'il ne soit au fond dans le canon de l'Eglise, par l'aut-
orite que lui donne la lecture presque generate et par 1 'usage
526 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
qu'on en faisait par tout l'univers. C'est ainsi qu'il faut con-
cilier plutot que commettre ensemble les Eglises et les auteurs
ecclesiastiques, par des principes communs a tous les divers
sentiments et par le retranchement de toute ambiguite."
The abbe Dupin, a contemporary of Bossuet, had at first
held loose opinions concerning the deuterocanonical books,
but under the influence of Bossuet, he modified his position
to the following clear and just statement :
"Toutes ces raisons et ces considerations jointes ensemble
sont suffisantes pour etablir l'autorite de ces livres, dont la
definition du concile de Trente ne laisse aucun lieu de douter.
Car, quoiqu'il ne se fasse point de nouvelle revelation a l'Eg-
lise, elle peut apres bien du temps etre plus assuree de la
verite d'un ouvrage qu'elle ne l'etait auparavant, quand,
apres l'avoir bien examine, elle a trouve un legitime fonde-
ment de n'en plus douter et une tradition suffisante dans
quelques Eglises pour le juger authentique. C'est la raison
pour laquelle saint Jerome dit que la seconde epitre de Saint
Pierre avait acquis de l'autorite par l'antiquite et par l'usage,
et meritait d'etre mise au rang des livres sacres du Noveau
Testament.*
Bernard Lamy (f 1715), of the Congregation of the Ora-
tory, has a singular opinion concerning the deuterocanonical
books. In his Apparatus Biblicus, after setting forth the
opinions of Rufinus and Jerome, he concludes : "Therefore
the books which are in the second Canon, though joined to
those of the first Canon, are not of the same authority.1' He
evidently accords to these books canonicity, but believes
that the degree of inspiration is not so intense in them.
Loisy (Histoire du Canon de l'Ancien Testament, pag. 235)
favors this opinion, and cites Ubaldi in support of it.f But
*Dissert. prelim, ou Prolog, sur la Bible, i. 52, 53.
f'Verum in specie et in concreto nihil vetat quominus in quibusdam
locis intensiorem veluti gradum inspirationis admittamus, atque ita diver-
sos modus inspirationis distinguamus. Imo hoc omnino faciendum vide-
tur: siquidem diversa rerum natura, et diversa Scriptoris conditio hoc
reqiiirere videtur. Itaque, ut aliquid magis in specie dicamus, dis-
tinguere possumus loca Scriptural prophetica, moralia et historica, et in his
rursus substantiam historic a minutis quibusdam adiunctis. Ad loca
prophetica quod attinet, duo casus distinguendi sunt: vel enim vaticinium
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT 527
it is plainly evident that Ubaldi there means to distinguish
between revelation, designated by him as the more intense
mode of inspiration, and inspiration proper, which permitted
the acquisition of knowledge by natural means. There is
nothing in Ubaldi in support of this vainly imagined distinc-
tion of degrees of canonicity.
A greater departure from the decree of the Council of
Trent was made by Jahn (ti8i6) who declares: That by
the testimony of the Fathers of Trent, the difference between
protocanonical and deuterocanonical books has by no means
been removed, and the Fathers well understood that it could
not be removed, no more than the fact upon which it stood,
namely: that the deuterocanonical books had not been
received everywhere, and by all in past times." [Einleitung
in Die Gottlichen Bucher des Alten Bundes. (2 edit.) I. 140.]
There is evidence of exceeding shortsightedness here.
The Fathers did not change the external facts concerning the
Scriptures. They could not change the past. They did not
reverse the opinion of Jerome ; they did not declare that the
deuterocanonical books had never been doubted, neither did
they declare that the doctrinal import of these books was
equal to that of the first Canon. But they did declare that
they were all sacred and canonical having God for their
author. By this definition they added nothing intrinsically
to the books; but they infallibly declared that, in virtue of
their inspired character, they always had a right to canon-
icity, which they now officially recognized ; and they right-
a propheta antea editum fuit, et postca scripto consignatum, ut sunt
plcraque vaticinia S. Scriptune, vel in ipso scribendi actu vaticinium edi-
tum est: in primo casu sufiicit communis et ordinaria inspiratio ut Scrip-
tura prophetica ctiam formaliter, seu quatenus scripta est, divina et inspir-
ata dici possit; in alterovero casu non solum inspiratio. sed vereac proprie
dicta revelatio nccessaria fuit, cum futurorum cognitio nonnisi ex divina
revelatione haberi possit. Talia sunt quaedam Ieremiae vaticinia, ut
colligi videtur ex Jer. XXXVI, 17, 18, ubi Icremias dicitur dictass< Baruch
tamquam amanuensi suas prophetias. Quod pertinet ad partes didacticas
et historicas, generatim loquendo non amplius quam communis inspira-
tionis ratio rcquircbatur: siquidem turn moralis doctrina, turn historia
Agiographis nota erat sive ex naturali lumine cum revelatione coniunctc^
ut in Libris Sapientialibus, sive ex audita praedicatione, ut in Bvangeliis
et Epistolis Apostolorum, sive ex scriptis documentis, vel etiam < x propria
experientia, ut generatim fiebat in scriptoribus sacra- • utriusque
Testamenti." Ubaldi II in.
528 DECREE OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
fully based their action on the mighty preponderance of the
tradition of all times.
The opinions of Jahn have always been characterized by
error.* 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 denning: "If anyone shall not receive all the
books with all their parts, as the Tridentine Synod enumer-
ates them, as sacred and canonical; or shall deny that they
are divinely inspired, let him be anathema."!
Protestant opinion has been consistent in nothing since
its beginning ; it has varied much regarding the Canon. The
Gallican Confession of 1559, the Anglican Confession of 1562,
the Confession of Geneva of 1564, declare that the apocrypha
(deuterocanonical books) are useful for pious reading, but
not available to prove doctrine. The concilia bulum 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 born in Moravia in 1 7 50. 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
infected with rationalism. His greatest work is his Introduction to the
Old Testament. This was prohibited by the Congregation of" the Index
in 1822. Several other of his works have also been prohibited He died
in 1816.
+Constit. dogmat. de fide Cath. Can. 4, De Revel.
The New Testament
Chapter XII.
The Canon of the New Testament.
The formation and preservation of the Canon of the New
Testament is certainly due to the direct influence of divine
Providence moving second agents to execute the will of God .
Still it was not the primary design of Christ to deliver to the
world a written code of his doctrines. He inaugurated the
great work of the Kingdom of God by oral preaching. He
wrote nothing; neither did He impose any precept on those
whom He had chosen to write. He bade them preach. He
redeemed the world from sin; taught it his Gospel by
word of mouth, and founded a living, teaching agency to
carry on His work forever. These were principal. Out of
these came the divine Scriptures in the designs of Providence;
not to supersede Christ's way of teaching the world, but to be
a means, a deposit, whence the Church should draw, and give
to the people.
In fact, all the terms which Christ used in enunciating his
design of teaching the world, demonstrate that the principal
and ordinary means of teaching mankind was ever to be the
living word by preaching. No other means would be ade-
quate to accomplish that which Christ willed. The world of
that day could not be reached through the medium of lett
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 norphilo-
34 (H.S)
530 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
sophical depth to draw the Message from the written instru-
ment, and Christ established the only means capable of teach-
ing all nations — the magisterium of the Church . The children
of men were lambs who had need to be fed, and Christ gave
them an eternal succession of shepherds.
The Apostles adopted the method of their Master. "Aided
by the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and relying on the
sole power of Christ, which wrought many miracles by them,
they announced the Kingdom of Heaven throughout the
world ; neither did they take thought to write books, for they
fulfilled a far greater and sublimer office. Paul, who is pre-
eminent among all the Apostles in richness of diction and
depth of thought, wrote nothing except a few epistles,
although he could have expounded many mysteries. . . . And
the other co-laborers of the Lord, the twelve Apostles, the
seventy disciples, and many others, were by no means ignor-
ant (of these mysteries). Nevertheless, of all the disciples
of the Lord, only Matthew and John left us a written word ;
and we are told that they were moved to write by a particular
need." (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. III. 24.)
"What," says Irenaeus, "if the Apostles had not left us
the Scriptures? Would it not be necessary to follow the
traditions of those to whom they committed the Churches?
Verily this method many barbarous nations adopt, who
believe in Christ without ink and paper, having the law of
salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit, and faith-
fully holding to the old tradition, believing in one God, etc."
(Irenaeus, Migne 7, 855.) Again: "The tradition of the
Apostles, manifested in the whole world, may be learned in
every Church by those who wish to know the truth, and we
can enumerate the bishops constituted by the Apostles and
their successors even to our day." (Irenaeus, Migne, 7, 848.)
Wherefore, they err greatly who constitute the Scriptures
the sole means of teaching Christ's message; for many
churches were flourishing before any of the N. T. existed.
The dates of the Gospels can not be fixed with precision. For
the Gospel of Matthew, Catholic opinion ranges over the
period included between the years 36 and 67 of the Christian
era; the period for Mark is from the year 40 to the year 70;
THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 531
Luke's Gospel is variously placed from the year 47 to the
year 63, while the Gospel of St . John is assigned to the cl< >sing
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
beginning of 58 ; the Epistle to the Galatians preceded that to
the Romans, and ranges between the year 55 and 57. The
Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians, the Epistle to the Colos-
sians, and the Epistle to Philemon are by Loisy placed during
the captivity of Paul, from the year 61 to 64. It is more
difficult to assign the proper date of the Epistles to Timothy,
Titus, and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Modem exegetes are
of accord in placing them at a later date than the preceding.
The Epistle of St. James is later than the Epistle to the
Romans, and internal evidence is therein that St. James was
conversant with the Epistle to the Romans. Its probable
date might be placed about the year 60. The Epistles of
St. Peter are ascribed to the last years of his life. According
to Eusebius and Jerome, the prince of the Apostles was
martyred in the third year of Nero's reign, about the year 67.
The Epistle of 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 the date of St. Jude's Epistlr ,
while the advocates of the second hypothesis assign a later
date. The first Epistle of St. John may be considered as a
sort of preface to his Gospels, and written at the same time ;
the second and third Epistles are of a little later date. The
Apocalypse according to the most ancient testimonies, and
particularly that of St. Irenaeus, was written toward the
close of the reign of Domitian, about the year 95.
Though these are approximate dates, they are precise
enough to establish the fact that several years of intense
532 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
Apostolic work had elapsed before the first writing appeared.
And in that period churches had been founded in Palestine,
and other parts of the Eastern world, and probably also at
Rome. The Church and the apostolic priesthood was princi-
pal; the Scriptures were a means which the Church was to
use. But as God wished to provide adequately for the propa-
gation and preservation of the Gospel of the Kingdom of
Heaven, he also brought it about that there should be pre-
served in writing some of the most important truths of the
New Dispensation. The spirit of truth who was sent to sug-
gest all things necessary in the new economy, moved the
holy men to commit certain things to writing. But these
writings owe their origin to special occasions, and particular
circumstances. Primarily they were intended for some one
or few individuals or churches. Gradually they became
interchanged and disseminated among the churches, and
it is only in the third century that we find any church having
a complete list of the Holy Books of the New Law.
We place, therefore, as a leading proposition, that the
writers of the New Law wrote with no design to compile a
code of Scripture. They wrote to supply some particular
need that which they knew to be the Word of God ; the future
destiny of their writings to form a sacred deposit was hidden
from them. The mode of the formation of the body of Scrip-
tures of the New Law was by gradual accession. Documents
written to some individual person or Church were copied and
sent to others. Paul recognizes and makes use of this method
in his Epistle to the Colossians: "And when this Epistle is
read among you, cause that it be read also in the Church of
the Laodiceans ; and that ye likewise read the Epistle from
Laodicea." [Coloss. IV. 16.]
That it was likewise characteristic of the early Christians
to carefully preserve writings of doctrinal import may be
inferred from a passage in the writings of St. Polycarp.
"The Epistles," he says, "of Ignatius (Martyr), which were
sent us by 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
THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 533
Epistles of Ignatius Martyr, much more would be bestowed
on the writings of the Apostles and Founders of Christianity.
We see also in the testimony an evidence of the method of
communicating writings among the churches. Both agen-
cies combined brought it about that the several churches
soon had their sacred deposit of the New Law ; though many
years elapsed before we find the list complete in any church ;
and many more, before all the churches had the complete
Canon.
Even in the writings of the authors of the New Testa-
ment, we find allusions to certain collections of the Scriptures
of the New Law. In his second Epistle, Peter speaks of the
Epistles of Paul as of writings generally known to the Chris-
tians : "Wherefore, dearly beloved, waiting for these things,
be diligent ... as also our most dear brother Paul, according
to the wisdom given to him, hath written, as also in all his
Epistles, speaking in them of these things ; in which are some
things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and the
unstable, wrest, as also the other Scriptures, to their own per-
dition." (II. Peter III. 14-16.)
"In this place," says Estius, "Peter canonizes, so to
speak, Paul's Epistles. For in saying 'as also the other
Scriptures,' he, in truth, declares that he placed them among
the Holy Scriptures."
Comely adduces a proof from the First Epistle to Tim-
othy to prove that Paul was conversant with the Gospel of
Luke. Paul speaks thus: "For the Scripture saith, 'Thou
shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn' ; and,
The laborer is worthy of his hire.' " (I. Tim. V. 18). The
first sentence of Paul's quotation is taken from Deuteronomy
XXV. 4. From the context, it is plainly evident to him
who reads that the second sentence is also adduced as Holy
Scripture. The passage exists in Luke X. 7, and the illation
is just that Paul quotes here as divine Scripture a passage of
the Third Gospel. Hence we infer that, at the writing of the
Epistle to Timothy, Luke's written Gospel existed, and was
known to the Christians as Holy Scripture.
Up to our times, the universal belief of Christians held
that the disciples and first successors of the Apostles placed
534 THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
the works of the authors of the New Testament with the
books of the Old Testament, as of equal divinity and author-
ity. The rationalistic plague which infected the world in
our times, first essayed to overthrow this universally
accepted truth, claiming that the writings of the Apostles are
never quoted in the solemn formulas used of the Old Testa-
ment, and that the words of the Lord are quoted from oral
traditions.
To meet this opposition, we must first set forth some of
the characteristics of those early times.
It is true that oral communication prevailed in those
times. Not every one could have a manuscript of the writ-
ten word, but all heard the voice of those "who preached
peace." The intense activity of the first teachers of the
New Law made Christ and his Law a living reality in every
land. The Gospel was not so much a written reality as a liv-
ing reality. The events had taken place in no remote age;
the first Christians received their doctrine from those who
announced that "which they had heard, which they had
seen with their eyes— which they had looked upon, and their
hands had handled." Therefore, it is not to be expected to
find numerous explicit quotations from the written deposit
in those early days. The early teachers preached much, and
wrote little. Much of what they wrote has succumbed to the
ravages of time. They used the Gospel of Christ, not so
much as a written deposit, but as a present living reality,
and part of the life of the people. Men of those days received
the doctrine of Christ not from books, but by the living word
of preaching ; they handed it down to others in the same man-
ner in which they had received it. But yet there is evidence
that when one of the Books of the New Testament did come
into existence, it 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 between the churches.
the canon of the new testament 535
Hence, in the age immediately succeeding the Apos-
tles, WE FIND SEVERAL OF THE BOOKS OF OUR CANON RECOG-
NIZED as divine Scripture.
In the Epistle vulgarly attributed to St. Barnabas, we
find a quotation from St. Matthew in the solemn formula
"sicut scriptum est," (w? yeypa-rnai)*
In the final sentence of the IV. Chapter of this Epistle is
as follows : "Let us pay heed lest we be found as it is writ-
ten: 'Many called, few chosen.' Now, the only place
where it is thus written is the Gospel of Matthew XX. 16. ;
XXII. 14.
Some of the older rationalists considered this quotation
as an interpolation of the Latin interpreter. After the
Codex Sinaiticus had overthrown this hypothesis, Volkman,
Renan and Strauss, advanced the opinion that the quotation
came from IV. Ezra, VIII. 3: "Multi quidem creati sunt;
pauci autem salvabuntur." But a comparison of the two
texts clearly evinces Matthew as the authority. Wherefore,
Mangold attempted to destroy the force of the quotation by
showing that the pseudo Barnabas quotes Henoch in the
formula: "As it is written." But this would not prove
*The Epistle of Barnabas was first published in Paris in Greek, and
Latin by Menard and d 'Achery 1645 but not complete. The entire
Greek text was first found by Tischendorf in his famous Codex Sinaiticus
in 1859. The contents of the letter show plainly that it is not the work
of the companion of Paul. Before his conversion, the author of the Ietti r
was a pagan, for he declares, XVI. 7, that "before believing in God,
his heart was full of idolatry. " Barnabas was a Jew, and worshipped the
true God. Again, the author is not conversant with Jewish rites, and
obligations. Moreover, the letter speaks of the punishment of the Jews
in the destruction of their Temple ; whereas, critics e< include that Barnabas
did not live to see the taking of Jerusalem by Titus. But the value < »f the
letter is considerable, even though not the writing of Barnabas.
There is in it elevation of ideas, and logical presentation of truth. Who-
ever be the author, he touches the apostolic age, and cannot be placed
later than the first years of the second century. The work is marred by
excessive allegory, which makes the writer forget that Greek is not the
tongue of Abraham. He sees a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ
in the number of Abraham's servants who were 318 (Gen XIV. 14). The
numerical value of I (Greek) is 10; of H, 8; and T, ^00. IH signifies J<
and T (by its form,) his cross. Therefore, that Abraham took 318 men
with him in pursuit ^\ Chedorlahomer, was prophetic that Jesus Christ
was to be crucified!
536
THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
that he did not consider Matthew divine Scripture but that
he also placed Henoch among the Holy Books. We admire
the honesty of Hilgenfeld, who concedes that the author
quotes Matthew, and also that the Epistle is of the year o 7 .
St. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians, Chapter
XII., has this testimony: "As it is written in these Scrip-
tures: 'Be angry and sin not,' and: 'Let not the sun go
down on your wrath.' " It is evident that Polycarp here
unites two passages of written Scripture. The second passage
is from the Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, IV. 26. As the
proving force of this passage is cogent, the rationalists try to
weaken it by denying its authenticity. But its authentic
valor is sufficient to satisfy all just criticism. This short
Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, contains according to
Funk (op. cit.) sixty-eight allusions to the New Testament.
The verbal parallelism is so exact, that it is evident that they
were drawn from the written deposit. We here exhibit
some of the clearest ones :
St. Polycarp. Epist. ad
Philip 1.
" — - quern resuscitavit Deus,
solutis doloribus infenii. In
quem non videntes creditis,
credentes autem exultatis lae-
titia inenarrabili et glorificata."
Act. II. 24.
" — quem Deus suscitavit,
solutis doloribus inferni, juxta
quod impossible erat teneri
ilium ab eo."
I. Pet. I. 8.
- quem cum non videtis,
diligitis: in quem nunc quoque
non videntes creditis ; credentes
autem exultabitis laetitia ine-
narrabili et glorificata — ."
Epist. II. 8: 9.
"Gratia enim estis salvati
per fidem, et hoc non ex vobis:
Dei enim donum est, non ex
operibus, ut ne quis glorietur."
I. Pet. I. 13.
"Propter quod succincti lum-
bos mentis vestrae, sobrii per-
fecte sperate in earn, quae of-
Ibid.
" — scientes, quod
estis salvati, non ex
bus—."
gratia
operi-
Ibid. II.
"Propter quod succincti lum-
bos vestros servite Deo in
timore — ."
THE CANON OF N. T. OF POLYCARP
537
fertur vobis, gratiam, in revela-
tionem Jesus Christi—
I. Cor. VI. 14.
"Deus vero et Dominum sus-
citavit, et nos suscitabit per
virtutem suam."
I. Pet. III. 9.
" — non reddentes malum pro
malo, nee maledictum'pro mal-
edicto."
Math. VII. 1, 2.
"Nolite judicare, ut non ju-
dicemini. In quo enim judicio
judicaveritis, judicabimini: et
in qua mensura mensi fueritis,
remetietur vobis."
Luke VI. 36-38.
Estote ergo misericordes, si-
cut et Pater vester misericors
est. Nolite judicare, et non ju-
dicabimini: nolite condemnare,
et non condemnabimini. Di-
mittite, et dimittemini. Date,
et uabitur vobis: mensuram
bonam et confertam, et coagit-
atam et supereffluentem da-
bunt in sinum vestrum. Ea-
dem quippe mensura, qua
mensi fueritis, remetietur vo-
bis."
Math. V. 3.
"Beati pauperes spiritu, quo-
niam ipsorum est regnum ccelo-
rum."
Ibid. 10.
Beati, qui persecutionem pa-
tiuntur propter justitiam, quo-
niam ipsorum est regnum ccelo-
rum."
Ibid.
"Is vero, qui ipsum suscita-
vit e mortuis, et nos suscita-
bit—."
Ibid.
" — non reddentes malum
pro malo, nee maledictum pro
maledicto — ."
Ibid.
" — memores autem eorum,
quae dixit Dominus docens:
'Nolite judicare, ne judicemini ;
dimittite, et dimittetur vobis;
miseremini, ut misericordiam
consequamini ; qua mensura
mensi fueritis, remetietur vo-
bis'; et: 'Beati pauperes, et qui
persecutionem patiuntur, quo-
niam ipsorum est regnum Dei.' "
538
THE CANON OF N. T. OF POLYCARP
Gal. IV. 26.
"Ilia autem, quae sursum est
Jerusalem, libera est, quae est
mater nostra."
I. Tim. VI. 10.
"Radix enim omnium malo-
rum est cupiditas.
Ibid. III.
"Neque enim ego, neque
alius mei similis beati et glori-
osi Pauli sapientiam assequi
potest ; qui cum esset apud vos,
coram hominibus tunc viventi-
bus perfecte ac firmiter verbum
veritatis docuit; qui et absens
vobis scripsit epistolas, in quas
si intueamini, aedificari poteritis
in fide, quae vobis est data(
quasque est mater omnium nos-
trum—."
Ibid. IV.
"Principium autem omnium
malorum est habendi cupidi-
tas."
Ibid. 7. Ibid.
"Nihil enim intulimus in "Scientes ergo, quod nihil in-
hunc mundum: haud dubium, tulimus in hunc mundum, sed
quod nee auferre quid possu- nee auferre quid valemus — ."
mus."
Gal. VI. 7.
"Nolite errare: Deusnon irri-
detur."
I. Pet. II. 11.
" — carissimi, obsecro vos
tamquam advenas et peregri-
nos abstinere vos a carnalibus
desideriis, quas militant ad-
versus animam — ."
Rom. XIV. 10, 12.
"Tu autem, quid judicas fra-
trem tuum? aut tu, quare sper-
nis f ratrem tuum ? Omnes enim
stabimus ante tribunal Christi.
Itaque unusquisque nostrum
pro se rationem reddet Deo."
Ibid. V.
"Scientes ergo, quod Deus
non irridetur — ."
Ibid.
" — quia omnis cupiditas mil-
itat adversus spiritum — ."
Ibid. VI.
" — omnes ante tribunal
Christi stare, et unumquemque
pro se rationem reddere opor-
tet."
THE (AXON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
539
I. Jo. TV. 3. Ibid. VII.
" — et omnis spiritus, qui sol- "Omnis enim qui non eon-
vit Jesum, ex Deo non est; et fessus fuerit Jesum Christum
hie est Antichristus, de quo au- in carne venisse, Antichristus
distis, quoniam venit, et nunc est — ."
jam in mundo est.
Math. VI. 13.
"Et ne nos inducas in tenta-
tionem, sed libera nos a malo.
Amen."
Ibid. XXVI. 41.
"Vigilate, et orate, ut non in-
tretis in tentationem. Spiritus
quidem promptus est, caro au-
tem infirma."
I. Pet. II. 22-24.
- qui peccatum non fecit,
nee inventus est dolus in ore
ejus: qui peccata nostra ipse
pertulit in corpore suo super
lignum — ."
I. Pet. II. 12.
" — conversationem vestram
inter
nam.
gentes
habentes bo-
I. Cor. VI. 2.
"An nescitis, quoniam sancti
de hoc mundo judicabunt? Et
si in vobis judicabitur mundus,
indigni estis, qui de minimis ju-
dicetis?"
Ibid.
" — rogantes omnium con-
spectorem Deum, ne nos indu-
cat in tentationem, sicut dixit
Dominus: 'Spiritus quidem
promptus est, caro autem in-
firm a.
Ibid. VIII.
qui peccata nostra in
corpore suo super lignum per-
tulit, qui peccatum non fecit,
nee inventus est dolus in ore
ejus — ."
Ibid. X.
"Omnes vobis invicem sub-
jecti estote, conversationem
vestram irreprehensibilem hab-
entes in gentibus — ."
Ibid. XI.
"An nescimus, quia sancti
mundum judicabunt? sicut
Paulus docet. Ego autem nihil
tale sensi in vobis, vel audivi,
in quibus laboravit beatus Pau-
lus, qui estis in principio Epi-
tola? ejus."
Among the genuine works of St. Clement of Rome arc
two Epistles to the Corinthians, and two on Virginity. The
two latter were assailed by some rationalists, but they have
540
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
been defended by such an excellent critic as Wetstein. The
following schema exhibits Clement's use of the New Testa-
ment.
St. Clementis Epist. I. ad
Corinthios, XIII.
"Sic enim dixit: 'Estote
misericordes, ut misericordiam
consequamini ; dimittite, ut di-
mittatur vobis; sicut facitis, ita
vobis fiet; sicut datis, ita da-
bitur vobis; sicut judicatis, ita
judicabimini ; sicut indulgetis,
ita vobis indulgebitur ; qua men-
sura metimini, in ea mensura-
bitur vobis.' "
Luke VI. 36—38.
"Estote ergo misericordes,
sicut et Pater vester misericors
est. Nolite judicare, et non ju-
dicabimini: nolite condemnare,
et non condemnabimini. Di-
mittite, et dimittemini. Date,
et dabitur vobis: mensuram
bonam etconfertam, et cogita-
tam et supereffluentem dabunt
in sinum vestrum. Eadem
quippe mensura, qua mensi
fueritis, remetietur vobis.'
Math. XXVI. 24.
"Filius quidem hominis'lva-
dit, sicut scriptum est de illo;
vae autem homini illi, per quern
Filius hominis trade tur: bon-
um erat ei, si natus non fuisset
homo ille. ' '
Luke XVII. 2.
" Utilius est illi, si lapis mola-
ris imponatur circa collum ejus,
et projiciatur in mare, quam ut
scandalizet unum de pusillis is-
tis. ' '
Ibid. XLVI.
"Recordamini verborum Je-
su 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
demergeretur, quam ut unum
de pusillis meis scandaliza-
ret.'"
I. Paul, I. Cor. 12. Ibid. XLVII.
"Hoc autem dico, quod un- "Sumite Epistolam beati
usquisque vestrum dicit: Ego Pauli Apostoli. Quid primum
quidem sum Pauli: ego autem
xA-pollo: ego vero Cephas: ego
autem Christi. ' '
vobis in principio Evangelii
scripsit? Profecto in Spiritu ad
vos litteras dedit de seipso et
Cepha et Apollo, quia etiam
turn diversa in studia scissi era-
tis. ' '
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
o41
I. Peter IV. 8.
"Ante omnia autem, mutu-
ant in vobismetipsis earitatem
continuam habentes, quia cari-
tas operit multitudinem pecca-
torum. ' '
Math. IX. 13.
"Euntes autem discite, quid
est: Misericordiam volo, et non
sacrificium. Non enim veni
vocare justos, sed peccatores. '
Ibid. X. 32.
"Omnis ergo, qui confitebi-
tur me coram hominibus, con-
fitebor et ego eum coram Patre
meo, qui in ccelis est — . '
Ibid. VII. 21.
"Non omnis, qui dicit mihi:
Domine, Domine, intrabit in
regnum ccelorum, sed qui facit
voluntatem Patris mei, qui in
ccelis est, ipse intrabit in reg-
num ccelorum. ' '
Ibid. VII. 23.
"Et tunc confitebor illis:
Quia nunquam novi vos: disce-
dite a me, qui operamini iniqui-
tatem. "
Math X. 28.
"Et nolite timere eos, qui
occidunt corpus, animam au-
tem non possunt occidere, sed
Ibid. XLIX.
"Charitas nos Deo agglu-
tinat: charitas operit multitu-
dinem peccatorum: charitas
omnia sustinet — . ' '
St. Clemcntis Epist. II. ad
Corinthios, II.
"Alia quoque Scriptura dicit
'Non veni vocare justos, sed
peccatores — . ' '
Ibid. III.
"Ait vero etiam ipse: 'Qui
me confessus fuerit in conspec-
tu hominum, confitebor ipsum
in conspectu Patris mei.'
Ibid. IV.
"Non modo igitur ipsum vo-
cemus Dominum ; id enim non
salvabit nos; siquidem ait:
'Non omnis qui dicit mihi, Do-
mine. Domine, salvabitur; sed
qui facit justitiam. '
Ibid.
"Idcirco, nobis haec facien-
tibus, dixit Dominus: 'Si fueri-
tis mecum congregati in sinu
meo, et non feceritis mandata
mea, abjiciam vos, et dicam vo-
bis: Discedite a me; nescio vos
unde sitis, operarii inquita-
tis.' "*
Ibi.l. V.
"Ait enim Dominus: ' iri-
tis velut agni in medio lu: <•-
rum. ' Respondens autem Pe-
*Clement is wont to unite passages from the several Gospels into one
quotation. In the present instance, he has taken the fir>;t part of the
quotation from some apocryphal gospel.
542
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
potius timete eum, qui potest trus ei dicit: 'Si ergo lupi ag-
et animam et corpus perdere nos discerpserint ? ' Dixit Je-
ingehennam." sus Petro: 'Ne timeant agni
post mortem suam lupos: et vos
nolite timere eos qui occidunt
vos, et nihil vobis possunt fac-
ere; sed timete eum, qui post-
quam mortui fueritis, habet po-
testatem animae et corporis, ut
mittat in gehennam ignis, ' '|
Math. VI. 24.
"Nemo potest duobus domi-
nis servire:
Math. XVI. 26.
"Quid enim prodest homi-
ni, si mundum universum lucre -
tur, animse vero sua? detrimen-
tumpatiatur? Aut quam dabit
homo commutationem pro ani-
ma sua?' '
This passage is also quoted
by Irenaeus, Lib. II. 64, as a
saying of the Lord. Grabe be-
lieves it to be from the apoc-
ryphal gospel according to the
Hebrews.
Math. XII. 50.
' ' Quicumque enim fecerit vo-
luntatem Patris mei, qui in cce-
lis est, ipse meus frater et soror,
et mater est. ' '
Ibid. VI.
' Dicit autem Dominus: Nul-
lus servus potest duobus domi-
nis servire. ' '
Ibid.
' ' Si nos volumus et Deo ser-
vire et mammonae, inutile no-
bis est. Nam 'quae utilitas, si
quis universum mundum lu-
cretur, animam autem detri-
mento afnciat.'
Ibid. VIII.
"Ait quippe Dominus in
Evangelio: 'Si parvum non
servastis, quis magnum vobis
dabit? Dico enim vobis: Qui
fidelis est in minimo, et in ma-
jori fidelis est. ' '
Ibid. IX.
"Etenim Dominus dixit:
' Fratres mei sunt ii qui faciunt
voluntatem Patris mei.'
fMost of the passage is taken from some apocryphal gospel. The test
of time and judgment of the Chvirch 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.
THE CANON OF THE N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME 543
St. Clementis Epist. I. ad
Math. V. 1 6. Virgines, II.
"Sic luceat lux vestra coram " — sicque adimplentur Chris-
hominibus, et videant opera ti verba: 'Videant opera ves-
vestra bona, et glorificent pa- tra bona, et glorificent Patrem
trem vestrum, qui in ccelis vestrum qui in ccelis est.'
est.''
St. Paul ad Ephes. V. 6. Ibid. III.
" Nemo vos seducat inanibus "Itaque nemo vos seducat
verbis: propter haec enim venit inanibus verbis — . '
ira Dei in filios diffidentiae. ' '
II. Tim. III. 5. Ibid.
" — habentes speciem qui- -de talibus enim scriptum
dem pietatis, virtutem autem est: 'Habentes speciem quidem
ejus abnegantes. Et hos de- pietatis, virtutem autem ejus
vita." abnegantes.'
I. Cor. VII. 34.
" Et mulier innupta et virgo
cogitat, quae Domini sunt, ut
sit sancta corpore et spiritu.
Quae autem nupta est cogitat
quae sunt mundi, quomodo pla-
ceat viro.
Luke. VII. 28.
"Dico enim vobis: Major in-
ter natos mulierum propheta
Joanne Baptista nemo est: qui
autem minor est in regno Dei,
major est illo.
Ibid. V.
" Solicita sit necesse est quae
Domini sunt, quomodo placeat
Deo, ut sit sancta corpore et
spiritu.
Ibid. VI.
"Angelus fuit Joannes: ta-
lem esse decebat Domini nostri
praecursorem, quo major non
fuit inter natos mulierum.''
Phil. IV. 3.
"Etiam rogo et te, germane
compar, adjuva illas, quae me-
cura laboraverunt in Evangelio
cum Clemen te, et ceteris adju-
toribus meis, quorum nomina
sunt in libro vitae. '
Ibid.
" Eamdem viam amplexati
sunt et Paulus, et Barnabas, et
Timotheus, quorum nomina
sunt in libro vitae — . '
544
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
Heb. XIII. 7.
' ' Mementote praepositorum
vestrorum, qui vobis locuti
sunt verbum Dei, quorum in-
tuentes exitum conversationis,
imitamini fidem. ' '
Ibid.
"Scriptum est enim: 'Mem-
entote praepositorum vestro-
rum, quorum intuentes exitum
conversationis, imitamini fi-
dem.' "
I. Cor. IV. 16.
'Rogo ergo vos: Imitatores
mei estote, sicut et ego
Christi."
Ibid.
"Et alibi dictum est: Imi-
tatores mei estote, fratres, si-
cut et ego Christi.' "
In the Eighth Chapter of this First Epistle of Clement
to Virgins, ten phrases occur bearing on them clearest evi-
dence that they are taken from the Pauline Epistles, such
as for instance, "avarice which is the serving of idols."
(Ephes. V. 5.)
Jo. III. 6.
"Quod natum est ex carne,
caro est, et quod natum est ex
spiritu, spiritus est. ' '
Ibid. 31.
"Qui desursum venit, super
omnes est. Qui est de terra,
de terra est, et de terra loqui-
tur. Qui de ccelo venit, super
omnes est. ' '
Rom. VIII. 7.
— Quoniam sapientia car-
nis inimica est Deo; legi enim
Dei non est subjecta, nee enim
potest. ' '
Rom. VIII. 9.
" — Si quis autem Spiritum
Christi non habet, hie non est
ejus. ' '
I.' Cor. V. 11.
" — cum ejusmodi nee cibum
sumere. ' '
Ibid. VIII.
"Carnales sunt isti omnes
eorumque similes: 'quod enim
natum est de carne caro est;
qui est de terra, de terra est, et
de terra loquitur, et terrena
sapit:' 'quae sapientia inimica
est Deo: legi enim Dei non est
subjecta, nee enim potest — .' "
Ibid.
" — si quis autem Spiritum
Christi non habet, hie non est
ejus. ' '
Ibid. X.
"Cum ejusmodi suademus
ne cibum quidem sumere. ' '
THE CANON* OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
545
II. Thess. III. ii, 12.
"Audivimus enim, inter
quosdam ambulare inquie
nihil operantes, sed curiose
agentes. lis autem, qui ejus-
modi sunt, denuntiamus, et ob-
secramus in Domino Jesu Chris-
to, ut cum silcntio operantes,
suum pancm manducent. '
I. Tim. I. 7.
" — volentes esse legis doc-
tores, non intelligentes neque
quae loquuntur, neque quibus
affirmant. ' '
I. Cor. XII. 28.
"Et quosdam quidem posuit
Deus in ecclesia primum Apos-
tolos, secundo Prophetas, ter-
tio Doctores — . ' '
St. Jac. III. 2.
"In multis enim offendimus
omnes. Si quis in verbo non
offendit, hie perfectus est vir;
potest etiam freno circumdu-
cere totum corpus. ' '
I. Pet. IV. 11.
"Si quis loquitur quasi ser-
mones Dei — . ' '
Coloss. IV. 6.
' ' Sermo vester semper in gra-
tia sale sit conditus, ut sciatis,
quomodo oporteat vos unicui-
que respondere. ' '
Rom. XVI. 18.
"Hujuscemodi enim Chris-
to Domino nostro non serviunt.
Ibid.
"Sed rcipsa sola ducuntur
otiositate, cum sint ipsi 1
m otiosi, sed et verbosi, et
curiosi, loquentes quae non op-
ortet. Hi, per dulces sen
nes, quaestum venantur in
mine Christi. Hos sinistra
praefigit nota divinus Aposto-
lus multa mala in eis re
guens.
[bid. XL
"Sed sunt inquieti, non in-
telligentes quae loquuntur, ne-
que de quibus affirmant. '
Ibid.
"Hanc autem viam multi
sequuntur, quia non animad-
vertunt quod scriptum est:
' Xon multos in vobis, fratres,
positos esse doctores et prop-
hetas'; et iterum: 'Si quis in
verbo non offendit, hie pe-
tus est vir. Potest etiam freno
circumducere totum corpu.-.
Si quis loquitur, quasi sermo-
nes Dei — . ' '
Ibid.
" — et iterum: Sermo
ter semper in gratia sale sit con-
ditus, ut sciatis quomodo opor-
teat vos unicuique respon-
dere—."
Ibid.
"Quidam tandem beatum
populum dicunt. et per dulces
35 (11 S.)
546
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
sed suo ventri; et per dulces
sermones et benedictiones
seducunt corda innocentium. '
Math. XV. 14.
"Sinite illos: caeci sunt, et
duces caecorum: cascus autem
si caeco ducatum praestet, ambo
in foveam cadunt. ' '
This is a scriptural mosaic
made up of Galat. V. 10; Jas.
III. 15; I. Cor. II. 4; and Ephes.
II. 2:
•'■ — in quibus aliquando am-
bulastis secundum saeculum
mundi hujus, secundum princi-
pem potestatis aeris hujus,
spiritus, qui nunc operatur in
filios diffidentias. ' '
Math. XVII. 20.
"Hoc autem genus non ejici-
tur nisi per orationem et jeju-
nium. ' '
Math. X. 8.
"Infirmos curate, mortuos
suscitate, leprosos mundate,
dsemones ejicite: gratis accepis-
tis, gratis date. ' '
Math. XXV. 36.
" — nudus, et cooperuistis
me: infirmus, et visitastis me:
in carcere eram, et venistis ad
me."
sermones et benedictiones, se-
ducunt corda innocentium. '
Ibid.
"Hi sunt veluti caecus qui
caeco ducatum praestat, quique
ambo in foveam cadunt. '
Ibid.
"Hi portabunt judicium,
quia sapientiam animalem va-
numque mendacium garruli in-
anique scientia infiati praedi-
cant in persuasibilibus hu-
manae sapientiae verbis, secun-
dum saeculum mundi hujus,
secundum principem potesta-
tis aeris hujus, spiritus qui
operatur in filios diffidentias, et
non secundum doctrinam
Christi. ' '
Ibid. XII.
" — non enim agunt cum
recta fide, et juxta doctrinam
Domini qui dixit: 'Hoc genus
daemoniorum non ejicitur nisi
per orationem et jejunium.'
Ibid.
"Vos igitur quibus dictum
est: 'Gratis accepistis, gratis
date—.' "
Ibid.
"Prasclarum ac utile est ut
servi Domini morem gerant, in-
ter caetera similia, huic prae-
cepto divino: 'Infirmus eram,
et visitastis me.' "
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROM I.
547
II. Cor. XI. 29.
"Quis infirmatur, et ego non
infirmor? quis scandalizatur, et
ego non uror? ' '
Math. IX. 37, 38.
'Tunc dicit discipulis suis:
Messis quidem multa, operarii
autem pauci. Rogate ergo
Dominum messis, ut mittat
operarios in messem suam. '
Jo. VI. 27.
"Operamini non cibum, qui
perit, sed qui permanet in vi-
tam aeternam — . ' '
Luke I. 75.
" — in sanctitate et justitia
coram ipso omnibus diebus
nostris. ' '
Coloss. I. 10.
" — ut ambuletis digne Deo
per omnia placentes — ■. ' '
II. Cor. VIII. 21.
" Providemus enim bona non
solum coram Deo, sed etiam co-
ram hominibus. ' '
I. Tim. II. 3.
"Hoc enim bonum est et ac-
ceptum coram Salvatore nos-
tra Deo—. ' '
II. Cor. VI. 3.
"Nemini dantes ullam often -
sionem, ut non vituperetur
ministerium nostrum — . ' '
Ibid.
' ' — memores verborum Apos-
toli: 'Quis infirmatur, et ego
non infirmor? Quis scandali-
zatur, et non uror?'
Ibid. XIII.
"Memores enim esse debent
messem quidem esse multam,
operarios autem paucos: ideo-
que rogent Dominum messis ut
mittat operarios in messem
suam — . ' '
Ibid.
" — operarios qui operentur
non cibumqui 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 offendatur aut
scandalizetur: Nemini dan-
548
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
II. Cor. V. ii.
"Scientes ergo timorem Do-
mini hominibus suademus, Deo
autem manifesti sumus.
I. Tim. V. 10.
" — in operibus bonis testi-
monium habens, si filios edu-
cavit, si hospitio recepit, si
sanctorum pedes lavit, si tribu-
lationem patientibus submini-
stravit, si omne opus bonum
subsecuta est. ' '
I. Cor. x.
31-
" — sicut et ego per omnia
omnibus placeo, non quaerens,
quod mihi utile est, sed quod
multis, ut salvi riant. '
Rom. XIV. 15.
Si enim propter cibum frater
tuus contristatur, jam non se-
cundum caritatem ambulas.
Noli cibo tuo ilium perdere, pro
quo Christus mortuus est. '
I. Cor. VIII. 12.
"Sic autem peccantes in fra-
tres, et percutientes conscien-
tiam eorum infirmam, in Chris-
tum peccatis. ' '
Math. X. 16.
"Ecce, ego mitto vos sicut
oVes in medio luporum. Es-
tate ergo prudentes sicut ser-
pentes, et simplices sicut col-
umbas. ' '
tes ullam offensionem, ut non
vituperetur ministerium nos-
trum. ' '
Ibid.
"Scientes ergo timorem Do-
mini, hominibus suademus;
Deo autem manifesti sumus. '
Ibid. IV.
' ' Haec autem prse aliis senes-
cens mulier eligitur quae diu
probata est assiduitate medita-
tionum, hincque perspecta si
filios educavit, si hospitio re-
cepit, si sanctorum pedes
lavit."
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 con-
scientiam eorum infirmam, in
Christum peccatis.'
Ibid. VI.
" — debemus esse prudentes
sicut serpentes, et simplices
sicut columbae, non quasi insip-
ientes, sed ut sapientes — . '
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
549
Ephes. V. 15, 16.
"Videte itaque, frates, quo-
modo caute ambuletis: non
quasi insipientes, sed ut sap-
ientes. ' '
.Math. VII. 6.
"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. 11.
" Adolescentiores autem vid-
uas devita: cum enim luxuri-
atae fuerint in Christo, nubere
volunt— . ' '
Ibid.
— ne demus sanctum cani-
bus, mittamusque margaritas
ante porcos — . ' '
Ibid. XIII.
"Et iterum: Qui se existi-
mat stare, videat ne cadat. '
Ibid. XIV.
"Nullum porro sanctum ani-
madvertetis frequenter fuisse
conversatum cum virginibus
aut adolescentioribus virorum
uxoribus vel viduis, quas devi-
tandas esse divinus docet Apos-
tolus. ' '
Ibid. XV.
" De ipso Domino Jesu Chris-
Joa. IV. 27.
"Et continuo venerunt dis-
cipuli ejus et mirabantur, quia to scriptum est, quod venientes
cum muliere loquebatur," etc. discipuli, et videntes eum prope
fontem seorsim cum Samarit-
ana sermocinantem mirabantur
quia cum muliere loquebatur. '
Therefore the Fourth Gospel scriptum est, and was recog-
nized as Holy Scripture in Clement's time.
Jo. XX. 17.
" Dicit ei Jesus: Noli me tan-
gere, nondum enim ascendi ad
Patrem meum: vade autem ad
fratres meos, et die eis: Ascen-
do ad Patrem meum'et Patrem
vestrum, Deum meum et Deum
vestrum. ' '
Ibid.
'Insuper, postquam Domi-
nus a mortuis surrexit, eum
Maria ad sepulcrum properas-
set, eumquc adorans, ipsius pe-
des tenere voluisset: 'Noli, in-
quit, me tangere: nondum
enim ascendi ad Patrem
meum."
550 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ROME
Phil. III. 16. Ibid. XVI.
" Verumtamen ad quod per- "Idcirco, fratres, rogamus,
venimus, ut idem sapiamus, vos in Domino, ut idem sapia-
et in eadem permaneamus mus, et in eadem permanea-
regula. ' ' mus regula — . ' '
I. Jo. IV. 6. Ibid.
"Nos ex Deo sumus. Qui "Qui no vit Deum, audit nos:
non est ex Deo, non audit qui non est ex Deo, non audit
nos," etc. nos. "
We have only selected some of the clearest quotations
from our books. Many more allusions to New Testament
books exist in Clement's works.
Eusebius testifies that Clement, in his First Epistle to the
Corinthians, "gives many sentiments taken from the Epistle
to the Hebrews, and also literally quoting the words, he most
clearly shows that this work is by no means a late production.
Whence it is probable that this was also numbered with the
other writings of the Apostles." (Hist. Eccles. III. 38.)
More than twenty texts, some of them of considerable length,
are found in Clement's Epistle, which in the sense and order
of the words agree with the Epistle to Hebrews.
Those who would still contend that these quotations come
from oral tradition, merit to be classed with those of whom
divine Dante sings: "Non ragioniam di loro, ma 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 recog-
nized as Holy Scripture.
The testimony of Basilides, a heretic of the first part of
the second century, confirms the existence of the written
Gospels, and certain of Paul's Epistles. According to Euse-
bius, Hist. Eccles. IV. 7., Basilides edited a commentary
on the Evangelium. In the Philosophumena, VII. 20, we
find this testimony: "Basilides said that out of nothing
(ex ovk ovTcov) was made the germ of the universe, the
THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS 551
word, as it is said : 'Let there be light' ; and this is what is
said in the Gospels: 'He was the true light that enlighteneth
every man that cometh into this worl< 1 . ' Quotations from
the Pauline Epistles are often used by Basilides with the
formulas: "It is written," 'The Scripture saith." Accord-
ing to Origen, Basilides commented the Epistle to the
Romans. In Origen's Commentary on Romans, Lib. V. i,
we find the following :
"Sed haec Basilides non advertens de lege naturali debere
intelligi, ad ineptas et impias fabulas sermonem apostolicum
traxit, et in fieTev<T(o/xaT(oac(i><; dogma, id est, quod animas in
alia atque alia corpora transfundantur, ex hoc Apostoli dicto
conatur astruere. Dixit enim, inquit, Apostolus, quia 'ego
vivebam sine lege aliquando' : hoc est, antequam in istud
corpus venirem, in ea specie corporis vixi, quae sub lege non
esset ; pecudis scilicet, vel avis. Sed non respexit ad id quod
sequitur, id est : 'Sed ubi venit mandatum, peccatum revixit.'
Non enim dixit se venisse ad mandatum, sed ad se venisse
mandatum ; et peccatum non dixit non fuisse in se, sed. mor-
tuum, fuisse, et revixisse. In quo utique ostendit quod de
una eademque vita sua utrumque loqueretur. Verum Basi-
lides, et si qui cum ipso hoc sentiunt, in sua impietate relin-
quantur."
The works of Ignatius, (Martyr) reveal that he was con-
versant with a written code of the New Law. However, not
all the texts that are usually brought forward from Ignatius'
works are valid to prove that he spoke of a written Gospel.
The first text is taken from the fifth chapter of his Epistle to
those of Smyrna : "Fools deny him (Jesus Christ) . . . whom
the prophets could not convince, nor the Law of Moses, nor
the Gospel, even to this day." Although I believe that
Ignatius here speaks of a written Gospel, nevertheless, in con-
troversy it could be maintained that the words would be
apposite, even though the oral teaching of Christ alone
existed.
The next passage is from the seventh chapter of the same
Epistle: "It behooves us ... to pay heed to the Prophets,
and especially to the Gospel wherein the Passion is taught
us, and the Resurrection perfectly demonstrated." This is
552 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS
somewhat cogent, but not apodictic. It is certainly far
more probable that Ignatius, in placing together these two
sources of doctrine in the present phrase, spoke of two things
of similar nature, both being written instruments.
The next testimony of Ignatius is taken from Ignatius'
Epistle to those of Philadelphia, VIII -IX. : "I hear certain
ones saying: ' ?Eai> /lit) iv rots ap-^eloa evpa), iv tw euajje\i<p ov
7rio-Tey&)'. 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 ™ evayye\ia>, and
translate it : Unless I find evidence in the ancient writings,
I will not believe the Gospel. This version is approved by
Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, Vol. III. p. 37. This version
is rejected by Funk, (Patres Apost. 1, 230), Comely (Intro-
duction I. 159), and Loisy (Canon du Nouveau Test., 28).
They insist on the fact that the laws of the Greek language
permit no such sense. They instead place tw evayyeXlcp
in apposition to rot? ap^eiW, in which case it would
certainly refer to a written Gospel. Though the Greek con-
struction is somewhat rough, I am disposed to accept the
first opinion. The context and line of argument evince that
Ignatius was arguing against those who demanded an exces-
sive verification of prophecy for faith in the Gospel. The
to, apxe'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 sub-
stantiate New Testament teaching. For Christ and the
Cross merit faith, irrespective of prophecy. Finally, he says,
THE CANON OF N. T. OF IGNATIUS 553
as Jesus Christ is greater than the Prophets, so the Gospel is
better than the Prophecies. Although the mere textual
structure of the sentence does not necessarily imply a written
Gospel the context and sense of the testimony plainly point
to such. Not so much in any one word as in the whole pas-
sage does it become evident that Ignatius is speaking of a
written instrument which he is comparing, like with like, to
the Prophets, and extolling above them. This sense is cor-
roborated by a testimony in his Epistle to those of Philadel-
phia, Chapter V.: "Let us turn to the Gospel, as to Christ
corporally present, and to the Apostles as to the priesthood
of the Church. Let us love also the Prophets, because they
announced Christ." This testimony evidently speaks of the
Gospels, and the other writings of the New Law which per-
petuated Christ and his Apostles on earth.
In his practical use of Scripture, in his genuine Epistles,
Ignatius assimilates the truths of Scripture, and then adduces
them in his own words, so that exact quotations are not
therein found, but many places evidence that he drew largely
from the New Testament writings. Such allusions are very
frequent in the Apostolic Fathers. This the rationalists
themselves concede.*
*Reuss (Hist, du Canon Strasb. 1863, p. 23): "A la verite on no de-
couvre pas encore dans ccs epitres (Patrum apostolicorum) des citations
nominatives a de rares exceptions pres. . .et surtout les textes des apotres
ne sont nulle part invoque's expressement et literalment commedes autor-
ites (Cfr. tamen Polyc. ad Philip. 13). Mais ils sont quelquefois exploited
tacitement de facon qu'il est impossible de s')r tromper; en certains cn-
droits, les exhortations revotcnt les formules employees par ces illustres
pivdecesscurs, et Ton se convainc facilement que les icrivains de cette
seconde generation faisaient dija une itudc des mitres de la -premiere. C'est
ainsi que la lettre de Clement offre des reminiscences assez precises de
quclques passages des epitres aux Romains et aux Corinthiens et surtout
de celle aux Hebreux; celles d'Ignace, plus nombrcuses (quae tamen simul
sumtae vix priorem Clementis longitudine aequant) et en tout cas beau-
coup plus recentes, en presentent d'autres qui nous ramenent aux epitres
aux Corinthiens et aux Galates ainsi qu'al'Evangilede Jean; enfin la toute
petite epitrc de Polycarpe contient de frequentes allusions a des passages
apostoliques, notamment aux Actes, a la premiere epttre de Pierre, a celles
aux Rom., aux Cor., aux Gal., aux Ephes., et a la premiere a. Timothde.
Encore une fois, cet usage- est purement homiletique ou rhetorique; nulle
part un nom d'apotre, une formule de citation (?), tin avis quelconque
n'avertit le lecteur que les paroles, que nous reconnaissons immediate-
ment comme des eldmcntes d'emprunt, aient une valeur partieuliere et
differente de celles dc l'entouragc." (Comely, op. cit. pag. 160).
554 THE CANON OF N. T. OF PAPIAS
We may also adduce here the testimony of Papias, who,
according to Irenasus, was a disciple of St. John, and a com-
panion of Polycarp. The testimony as preserved to us by
Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. III. XXXIX.) is as follows: "That
priest (St. John) was wont to say that Mark, the interpreter
of Peter, wrote down diligently whatever he remembered, but
he followed not the order of the Lord's words and deeds.
For he had never heard the Lord, or followed him . . . Where-
fore, Mark erred in nothing, writing certain things as he
remembered them."
Of Matthew, Papias writes thus: "Matthew, he said,
wrote the discourses (of the Lord) in the Hebrew tongue ;
men translated them as every one was able." The Gospel of
Matthew is termed the Xoyta (KvpiaKci), since it contains
more of the Lord's discourses than any other Gospel. Though
it is impossible to fix the certain date of Papias' writing, we
are sure that he touches the Apostolic age, and records that
which he received from those of the Apostolic age. His
testimony is conclusive for the existence in the first century
of the written Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Eusebius
also, in the same place, declares that "the same Papias made
use of testimonies taken from the first Epistle of St. John and
the first of Peter." The Gospel of Matthew has also in its
favor the testimony of Eusebius concerning St. Pantasnus,
"who moved by divine zeal, and fired by the example of the
Apostles ... is said to have penetrated even to the Indies,
and to have found there the Gospel of Matthew, which had
preceded him, and was held by certain ones who had em-
braced Christianity. It is said that Bartholomew, one of the
twelve preached to these, and left them the Gospel of
Matthew, written in Hebrew."
We find, therefore, that at the end of the first century the
Canon of the four Gospels was in universal acceptance in all
the Christian communities. In the first quarter of the sec-
ond century we find the Epistles of St. Paul in all the great
Churches. Certainly Clement of Rome, Ignatius (Martyr)
and Polycarp had a collection of Pauline Epistles, and sup-
posed the same to exist with those to whom they wrote.
The whole fourteen Epistles may not have been equally
THE CANON OF N. T. OF II. CENTURY 555
known, but Loisy (op. cit.) who is not disposed to be too
favorable to the Catholic position, admits thirteen in the col-
lection then received.
The Acts of the Apostles are used by Ignatius, 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
evidently 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 Scrip-
tures.
Passing from the Apostolic Fathers to their immediate
successors, the testimonies increase in number and clearness.
St. Justin (fi63) testifies (Apologia I. 66): "For the
Apostles in their Memorabilia {cnroiAvrnAovevncna) which
are called Gospels, declare that Jesus thus commanded them ;
that he took bread, and, having given thanks, said: 'Do
this in rememberance of me ; this is my body' ; and also taking
the chalice, and giving thanks, he said : 'This is my blood.'
Justin's peculiar term for the Gospels is, nevertheless,
apt ; for they wrote down the principal words and deeds of
the Lord, as they remembered them.
In paragraph 67, he again speaks of .the Gospels: "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 allu-
sion to St. Luke's Gospel here, for only Luke speaks of the
sweat like drops of blood.
556 THE CANON OF N. T. OF JUSTIN
Again in the same paragraph we find: "Immediately
after Jesus ascended from the River Jordan, where the voice
came upon him : 'Thou art my son ; to-day have I begotten
thee,' it is written in the 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."
Onlv John calls Christ the Word'.
St. Justin in his Dialogue against Tryphon the Jew, 81,
has a clear testimony for the Apocalypse: "And in addi-
tion to these things, a man from among us, John by name, a
disciple of the Lord, in an Apocalypse made known to him,
prophesies that those who have believed in Christ will dwell
at Jerusalem for a thousand years, and then will be the gen-
eral, in a word, the eternal resurrection, and the future judg-
ment,"
The few works that remain of Justin are filled with pas-
sages taken from the Gospels, without acknowledgment of
source.
St. Justin, in Apologia pro Christianis, I. 63, speaking of
Christ, says: "He is called an angel and an Apostle." It
is only in the Epistle to the Hebrews, III. 1, that Christ is
called an Apostle.
In his Treatise against Tryphon, 33, he draws a com-
parison between Christ and Melchisedech, clearly revealing
knowledge of Epistle to Hebrews, V. 8-10. Traces also are
found in his works of all the other books of the New Testa-
ment, except the Epistle of St. Jude, the Second Epistle of
St. Peter, and the Second and Third of St. John.
One of the disciples of St. Justin was the famous Tatian.
According to the most probable critical data, Tatian was by
origin a Syrian. He visited Rome with Justin, and then
returned to his native country and fixed his domicile at
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CHURCH OF EDF^ 557
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 Gos-
pels in the form of the Diatessaron. It is not easy to fix
what other books entered into their collection .
In the "Doctrina Addai," which reflects the old tradition
of the Church of Edessa on the Canon of Scriptures, the
following declaration is placed in the mouth of the dying
Addai :* "The Law, the Prophets and the Gospel, which
you read daily to the people, and the Epistles of Paul, which
Simon Peter sent us from Rome, and the Acts of the Apostles
which John, the son of Zebedee, sent us from Ephesus — these
are the Scriptures that ye should read in the Church of
Christ, and ye should read naught else. " (Doctrine of Addai
ed. Phillips, 1876, p. 46).
This testimony is valuable only in its affirmative sense.
It makes known that in the Church of Edessa, the Gospels,
the Epistles of Paul, and the Acts had been canonized.
The omission of the other books is due to the strange
genius of Tatian, which moved in independent lines. The
Canon of the early Church of Edessa, was, doubtless, formed
by him, and he excluded those books which his caprice
found less acceptable.
*The name Addai seems to be a Syriac approximation to the nam
Thaddcus the Apostle. The "Doctrina Addai' ' is the apocryphal act
this Apostle. This work was published in the Syriac original by Cur*
(Ancient Syriac Documents, London, 1S64.) It has more recently I
studied by Lipsius (2)ie ebcjfeniftfje Slbgat — iaflc, Brunswick, 1SS0) and the
Abb6 Tixeront (Les Origines de l'Eglise d'Edesse, Paris, r8i
It is a work ranging between the end of the third and beginning of th(
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 apocry] ha!
it is founded on the tradition of the Edessene Church of that period.
558 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MARCION
The Epistle to Diognetus speaks of the Gospels in the
plural number as a body of writings existing side by side
with the Law and the Prophets.* 'The reverence of the
Law is chanted, and the grace of the Prophets is known, and
the faith of the Gospels is built up, and the teaching (TrapdSoai'i)
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 Apos-
tolic 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 Ephe-
sians (called by him the Epistle to those of Laodicea), the
Epistle to the Colossians, the Epistle to the Philippians and
that to Philemon.
"Et super haec, id quod est Evangelium secundum Lu-
cam circumcidens, et omnia quae sunt de generatione Domini
conscripta auferens, et de doctrina sermonum Domini multa
auferens, in quibus manifestissime conditorem hujus uni-
versitatis suum Patrem confitens Dominus conscriptus est;
Semetipsum esse veraciorem quam sunt hi qui Evangelium
*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 at 170, A. D.
tMarcion was born in Sinope, in Pontus. His father was bishop of
that city. Marcion, being cut off from the Church for having offered vio-
lence 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 creation of the evil principle, and therefore,
Christ had only an apparent body.
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA 559
tradiderunt Apostoli, suasit discipulis suis; non Evangel-
ium, sed particulam 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 prophetieis 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 plaeita.
Tertullian, Irenaeus, and others of that age, who refuted
Marcion, always fix upon him the charge of having muti-
lated 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 wTitten deposit of the New Testa-
ment 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 Scrip-
ture. This is sufficiently disproven by the data already
adduced. A certain tendency did exist, for the first two
centuries, to perpetuate the method of Christ in the mode of
speaking of Scriptural data. Christ speaks of the Old Testa-
ment 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 teach-
ings, which lived after Christ. The name Scripture seemed
to throw it too far back into antiquity. Gradually, how-
ever, 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 N<
Testament. This also is found to be false. Certain cm
560 THE CANON OF N. T. OF HIPPOLYTE
which contain no falsity, and were written with good intent,
enjoyed a certain favor in private reading, but never in the
official usage . There was lacking to them the endorsement
of those who spoke in Christ's name. They never received
the approbation of an Apostolic 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 Providence in the produc-
tion 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 quo-
tations 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 the 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 Gospels 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
(eavTov e/cevcoaev) 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.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF ST. THEOPIIILUS 561
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 Noetus, VII., he
argues as follows: "We who have the mind of the Father
believe thus; they who have not, deny the Son. If tl
say, as Philip said, questioning concerning the Father:
'Show us the Father, and it sufficeth 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. Relievest 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 contra-
dict themselves, for the Scripture confutes them and con-
victs them."
The greatest part of Hippolyte's arguments are drawn
from the New Testament; and in the IX. Chap, against
Noetus, 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, therefore, what the Holy Scriptures proclaim, and
let us study what they teach."
Hippolyte refuted Noetus 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
from 168 to 186, 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 thev 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
♦Catalogue of Ebed Jcsu, c. ;( ap. Assemani, Biblioth. orient. III., i
15) : "Sanctus Hippolytus martyr et cpiscopus compostiit . . capita adver-
sus Caium el apologiam pro Apocalypsi el Evangelio Joannis Apostoli el
Evangelist. i'. "
36 (U.S.)
562 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI
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 marrv 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 Scrip-
ture 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 per-
sons : '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
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) Theo-
philus also "composed a treatise against the heresy of Her-
mogenes, in which he makes use of testimony from the Apo-
calypse of John."
We come now to examine the famous document com-
monly known as the Canon of Muratori.*
This document was discovered by Muratori in the Ambro-
sian Library, and published by him in the "Antiquitates
* Louis Antony Muratori, was born at Vignola, in the province of
Modcna, on the 21st of October, 1672. He was highly endowed by nature,
and received a liberal education. At the age of 22, he was called to Milan,
by Charles Borromeo, and placed over the Ambrosian College, and the vast
Ambrosian Library. In 1 700 the Duke of Modena recalled him as his sub-
ject, made him his librarian, and placed him over the archives of his duke-
dom. He was undoubtedly the greatest archaeologist 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 i2mo.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI 563
Italictu," in 1740. The document is mutilated a1 the begin-
ning 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 transla-
tion from the Greek. Its author is unknown. Muratori
conjectured that it was written by Caius, a priest of Rome,
disciple of St. Iremeus; Simon de Magistris believes Papias
to be the author; Bunsen ascribes it to Hegesippus; Light -
foot 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.
The original author evidently wished to draw up a
canon of Scripture, and distinguish the genuine from the
apocryphal books. We here produce the document after
the facsimile 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 suffices 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
*It seems tome vain to conjecture what was contained in the mutilated
beginning. It is certain that it must have related to the Gospels of Mat-
thew 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 pre-
ceded, were the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. We see in the document
evidences of the transition from low Latin to Italian in the placing of
"tertio" for "tertium." "secundo" for "secundum." etc.
tNotwithstanding all the barbarisms of the next seven lines, these data
resttlt clearly from them: That Luke is the author of the third Gospel.
564 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI
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 Iohannis incipet [incipit] dicere.
Quarti Evangeliorum Iohannis ex decipolis [discipulis]*
Cohortantibus condescipulis et eps [episcopis] suis
dixit : conieiunate mihi odie [hodie] triduo [triduum], et
quid cuique fuerit revelatum, alterutrum
nobis enarremus. Eadem nocte reve-
latum andrese ex apostolis, ut recognis-
centibus [recognoscentibus] cuntis [cunctis] Iohannis [Ioan-
nes] suo nomine
cunta [cuncta] discribret [describeret] et ideo licit [licet]
variaf
sinculis [singulis] evangeliorum libris principia
doceantur, Nihil tamen differt creden-
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.
*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 testimony for the four Gospels.
■[•From the sixteenth to the twenty-sixth line inclusively, the author
explains 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 something proper to himself, but one completes the other, and
one Gospel exists in four books, the work of the Holy Spirit.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI 565
tium fidei, cum uno ac principal] spu [Spiritu] de-*
clarata sint in omnibus omnia, de nativi-
tate, de passione, de resurrectione,
de conversatione cum decipttlis [discipulis] suis,
ac de ,^emino eius advento [adventu],
Primo In humilitate dispectus [despectus], quod fo-
tu [fuit], secundum potestate regali pre-
clarum quod foturum [futurum] est. quid ergof
mirum, si Iohannes tarn constanter
sincula [singula] etia In epistulis suis proferat
dicens in semeipsu [semetipsum] : Quae vidimus oculis
nostris et auribus audivimus et manus
nostra palpaverunt, hasc 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 apostolorumi
*The designation of the Holy Ghost as "principalis" is also used in the
Li. (Vulg. L.) Psalm.
i'The passage included between the last words of the twenty-sixth
line and first half of the thirty-fourth establishes that John wrote more
than one Epistle (in Epistolis, plural number) : that he wrote from per-
sonal experience (in semetipsum): and that the first Epistle of John is
one of the epistolce, for its opening sentence is literally quoted. Later
data of the document leave no doubt that its author included the three
Epistles of John in his Canon.
JThe passage from the second half of the thirty-fourth line down to the
close of the period in the thirty-ninth, clearly establishes the canonieitv
of the Acts of the Apostles. It seems to be the mind of the author, that
excepting 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.
Comely believes that the author speaks of the journey of Paul from Rome
to Spain, which, like the martyrdom of Peter, has been omitted by him.
Comely corrects the reading as follows: Sed et profectioncm Pauli ab
urbe, Spaniam proliciscentis." Thus it would become a testimony of the
second century of the voyage of Paul to Spain. We can not receive this
conjecture of Comely. The writer of Muratori's Canon, is there describing
what Luke wrote. Now, nowhere does Luke give us the departure oi
Paxil from Rome for Spain. I would venture the correction Sed et pro-
fectioncm Pauli ad urbem (Romam) ad Spaniam pri tis "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.
566 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI
sub uno libro scribta [scripta] sunt, Lucas obtime theofi-
ie comprindit [comprehend.it], quia sub praesentia eius sing-
ula
When Paul wrote to the Romans of his contemplated visit to them he
had in mind to go from them into Spain : "When therefore I have accom-
plished this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will go on by you unto
Spain." (Rom. XV. 28.) Though Paul came to Rome not in the manner
which he had contemplated when he wrote to the Romans, but as a
prisoner, nevertheless the writer of the Muratorian fragment connects
Paul's wish to visit Spain with his coming to Rome.
There is no doubt that Paul had in mind to visit Spain, but we are
persuaded that this purpose was not fulfilled. There is no trace of Paul's
visit to Spain in any ancient document, nor in the traditions of Spain.
When Paul left Miletus for his last journey to Jerusalem, he was
moved by the Holy Spirit to declare: "And now, behold, I go bound in
the spirit unto Jerusalem not knowing the things that shall befall me
there: save that the Holy Ghost testifieth unto me in every city, saying
that bonds and afflictions abide me. But I hold not my life of any account
as dear to myself, so that I may accomplish my course, and the ministry
which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace
of God." (Acts. XX. 22-25).
Those who believe that Paul was freed from his first Roman imprison-
ment are forced to entertain the opinion that Paul here gave expression
to an erroneous impression. The context however does not permit such
view for it clearly manifests a testimony of the Holy Ghost. Paul clearly
spake the aforesaid words in a spirit of prophecy, and the faithful of
Miletus accepted them as such.
The evidence seems to warrant that Paul never left Rome again
after being brought there a prisoner. In the abrupt close of Acts, Luke
simply tells us that Paul was allowed to live in his own house at Rome,
under military surveillance, and that he taught all that came to him for
two years. The rest of his life is hidden. The date of his martyrdom
is uncertain. St. Jerome (De Vir. 111. 5) places St. Paul's death in the
fourteenth year of Nero, which is generally accepted to correspond with
the year 67 A. D.
Some endeavor to prove that Paul was freed from his first imprison-
ment, and again visited the East, from II. Philipp. II. 24, where in com-
mending his messenger Timothy to the Philippians Paul declares: "—but
I trust in the Lord that I myself also shall come shortly.' '
Of a like tenor is his declaration to Philemon, 22; "But withal
prepare me also a lodging: for I hope that through your prayers, I shall
be granted unto you.' '
These statements written in his imprisonment at Rome are not of
the positive tenor of the statement made to the Christians of Miletus.
Neither do they conflict with it; for Paul could have visited the Church
01 Philippi and Philemon at Colossa? without revisiting Miletus.
Hence Paul may have entertained a hope of freedom at this time;
which hope seems not to have been realized. To the Christians of Miletus
Paul expresses a prophecy; to the Philippians and to Philemon, he
expresses a mere human hope.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI 56*3
gerebantur, sicut et semote passione Petri
evidenter declarat, Sed et profectionem pauli ad ur-
bes [urbem] ad spania proncescentis. Epistukc autem*
Pauli, qua?, a quo loco, vel qua ex causa directe [directas]
sint, volentatibus [volentibus] intellegere Ipse [ipsae] decla-
rant.
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 [prolixius] scripsit, de quibus sincolis [singulis]
necesse est [a] nobis desputari. Cum ipse beatus
apostolus Paulus sequens prodecessoris [prasdecessoris] sui
Iohannis ordine nonnisi comenati [nominatim] sempta?
[septem] eccleses [ecclesiis] scribat, ordine tali: a[ad]coren-
thios
prima; ad efesios seconda, ad philippinses ter-
tia, ad colosensis quarta, ad calatas [Galatas] quin-
ta, ad tensaolenecinsis [Thessalonicenses] sexta, ad romam >><
*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. Galatians, Thessalonians, and Romans.
Two of these are repeated: that to the Corinthians, and that to the Thes-
salonians. From the fifty-fourth line to the middle of the fifty-ninth tin-
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 through-
out 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 Phile-
mon, that to Titus, and the two to Timothy, whose pastoral scope (in
ordinationem ecclesiastical disciplina;) 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 . Clem-
ent of Rome had used the Epistle to the i' brews as Holy Scripture.
Hut 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.
568 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI
septima, Verum corintheis et thessaolecen-
sibus, licet pro cerrebtione [correptione] Iteretur, una
tamen per omnem orbem terras ecclesia
deffusa [diffusa] esse denoscitur [dignoscitur] ; Et Iohannis
[Ioannes] 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 aflec-
to et dilectione, In honore [honorem] tamen ecclesise ca-
tholice [catholicae], in ordinationemecclesiastice [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, quee in catholicam ecclesiam recepi [recipi] non
potest : Fel enim cum melle misceri non con-
cruit [congruit]. epistola sane Iude [Iudae] et superscriptio
[suprascriptijf
*In the period extending from sixty-third to sixty-eighth line, the author
rejects the supposititious letters to the Laodiceans, and to the Alexan-
drians. In the Apocryphal letter to the Laodiceans, there is nothing favor-
able 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.
tin the sixty-eighth line the Epistle of St. Jude is canonized. The
sense of the statement concerning St. John is obscure. We advance a prob-
able explanation of it. The author may have considered the preced-
ing notice of lines 26-34 sufficient for the first Epistle, and may here re-
ceive the two remaining ones among the Catholic Epistles (in Catholica) .
This conjecture is more probable since the fate of the Second and Third
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 au-
thorship 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 Sec-
ond and Third Epistles are not of John the Evangelist, but of another John,
a priest whose sepulchre is shown at Ephesus. ' ' This seems to us errone-
ous, from the suprascripti of the document, evidently referring these
Epistles to the Evangelist The advocates of this second opinion change
THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI 569
Iohannis duas [duas] In catholica habentur. Et sapi-
entia ab amicis Salomonis in honore ipsius
scripta. apocalapse [apocalypsim vel apocalypses] etiam
Iohannis et Pe-*
tri tantum recipimus, quam quidam ex nos-
tris legi In ecclesia nolunt. Pastorem verot
nuperrim et [nuperrime] temporibus nostris In urbe
roma henna conscripsit, sedente [in] cathe-
tra [cathedra] urbis romac ecclesias Pio eps f rater [episcopo,
fratre]
eius; et ideo legi eum quidem Oportet, se pu-
plicare [publicare] vero in eclesia populo Neque inter
the "et* preceding "Sapientia" to "tit", 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 re-
stores the text thus: "Apocalypsin etiam Johannis et Petri imam tantum
recipimus epistolam : fertur etiam altera quam quidem ex nostris legi in
Ecclesia volunt. " The conjecture is ingenious, but must remain in the
realm of conjecture. I am the 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 canon icity.
fPastor 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 Hennas, while his brother Pius occupied the episcopal chair.
Now, St. Pius reigned from 142 to 151 or 156. To justify the author 's ex-
pression 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.
570 THE CANON OF N. T. OF MURATORI
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 Clem-
ent's Epistles to Virgins. References are also found in
Justin and Irenseus. It is not clear whether certain pas-
sages in the works of Clement of Alexandria were taken from
James' Epistle or from the Gospels. 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 Pe-
shitto, which dates from early times.
We here compare two passages from the Pastor of Her-
nias 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 ves- mini in divitiis, ne forte inge-
THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS 571
tras, quae fraudata est a vobis, miscant ii qui egent, et gemitus
clamat ; et clamor eorum in au- eorum ascendat ad Dom-
res Domini Sabaoth introivit. ' ' inum — . ' '
Jas. IV. 7. Pastor, Lib. II. Maud. XII. 5.
"Subditi ergo estote Deo: ;■ —Potest autem diabolus
sistite autem diabolo, et fugiet luctari, sed vincere non potest,
a vobis." Si enim rcsistitis Hit, 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 prob-
ably the Second Epistle of St. Peter.
The Canon of the Church of Gaul of the same age is
sought in the works of Irenseus.
.V 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 them-
selves 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 con-
futed 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 wh< >,
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 Valen-
tinians, who exclusively use the Gospel of John for the osten-
tation 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 (Gos-
pels), 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 arc
four principal winds; and the Church is spread over the
whole earth; and the pillar and ground of the Church (I.
572 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS
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 Ezekiel to the four Evangelists, which inter-
pretation has continued in the Church since that time. The
conclusion of Irenaeus is better than his reasoning. His
mysticism avails naught, but his conclusion is independent
of it. The conclusion 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 Irenseus. 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 per-
petuated 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. Iren-
aeus wrote, in the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth chap-
ters 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 Irenseus, 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 sua"; 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 Tim-
THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS 573
othy, I. 4. In Lib. II. XIV. i, he says: "And Paul him-
self has manifested in his Epistles, saying: Demas has left
me, and gone to Thessalonica ; Crescens, into Galatia; only
Luke is with me." (II. Tim. IV. to, ii). In op. cit. Lib.
IV. XVI. 5, he quotes the first Epistle of St. Peter: "And
for this eause, 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 allu-
sion 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 Irenasus
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."
Again in op. cit. Lib. IV. XIII. and XVI. Irenasus 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. 1, Irenaeus calls the Christians, "the first
fruits of his (God's) creatures," which peculiar expressinn is
only found in James I. 18.
No mention is found in the works of Irenasus 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. Iremeus 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.
574 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IRENAEUS
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 afore-
said Epistle, bade 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 yourselves, 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 con-
fesseth 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, quot-
ing 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-
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. 11.
These data leave no doubt that Irenaeus received and
employed as Holy Scripture, at least the First and Second
Epistles of John. But since the history of the Second and
Third 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. 1, 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.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF TERTULLIAN 575
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
Apocalypse, 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. ii ; 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 Tertullian, whose literary activity ranges from 195
to 220.
Tertullian defends against Marcion the four Gospels. Lib.
II. adversus Marcionem, Cap. II.*
Again in Chapter V. he asserts the authorship of Mat-
thew, Luke, Mark and John.f The chapter opens with a
clear testimony of the greater Pauline Epistles :
"In summa, si constant id verius quod prius, id prius
quod et ab initio, id ab initio, quod ab Apostolis; pariter
utique constabit, id esse ab Apostolis traditum. quod apud
*Constituimus in primis, evangelicum Instrumcntum Apostolos a v.
res habere, quibus hoc munus Evangelii promulgandi ab ipso Domino sit
impositum; si et Apostolicos, non tamen solos, sed cum Apostolis. et post
Apostolos. Quoniam pra'dicatio discipulorum suspecta fieri posset de
gloria^ studio, si non adsistat ill i auctoritas magistrorum, inio Christi, qui
magistros Apostolos fecit Denique, nobis fidem ex Apostolis Joannes et
Matthaeus insinuanl ; ex Apostolicis, Lucas et Marcus instaurant, <
dem auctoritas ecclesiarum apostolicarum caeteris quoque patro
cinabitur Evangeliis, qua' proinde per illas et secundum illas habcmu>
Joannis dico et Matthsei, licet et Marcus quod edidit Petri arrirmetur. cujus
interpres Marcus: nam et Lucas Digestum Paulo adscribere solent.
576 THE CANON OF N. T. OF TERTULLIAN
ecclesias Apostolorum fuerit sacrosanctum. Videamus quod
lac a Paulo Corinthii hauserint; ad quam regulam Galatse
sint recorrecti; quid legant Philippenses, Thessalonicenses,
Ephesii; quid etiam Romani de proximo sonent, quibus
Evangelium et Petrus et Paulus sanguine quoque suo signa-
tum reliquerunt. Habemus et Joannis alumnas ecclesias.
Nam etsi Apocalypsim ejus Marcion respuit, ordo tamen
episcoporum ad originem recensus, in Joannem stabit auc-
torem."
Tertullian certainly received thirteen Epistles of Paul.
In Lib. V. adv. Marcion, XXI. he speaks thus of the Epistle
to Philemon :*
"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 ecclesiastico statu compositas recu-
saverit. Adfectavit, opinor, etiam numerum Epistolarum
interpolare."
In Lib. V. adv. Marcion, Cap. I. he defends the Acts of
the Apostles: "Hasc figurarum sacramenta, si tibi displi-
cent, certa Acta Apostolorum (Act. IX.) hunc mihi ordinem
Pauli tradiderunt, a te quoque non negandum."
In Lib. de Pudicitia, Cap. XX. Tertullian cites the Epis-
tle to the Hebrews, as the work of Barnabas.
"Volo tamen ex redundantia alicujus etiam comitis
Apostolorum testimonium superducere, idoneum confirm -
andi de proximo jure disciplinam magistrorum. Exstat
enim et Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos, adeo satis auctoritatis
viri, ut quern Paulus juxta se constituent in abstinentias
tenore : 'Aut ego solus et Barnabas non habemus hoc operandi
potestatem.' Et utique receptior apud Ecclesias Epistola
Barnabas illo apocrypho Pastore mcechorum. Monens ita-
que discipulos, omissis omnibus initiis, ad perfectionem
magis tendere, nee rursus fundamenta pcenitentiae jacere ab
operibus mortuorum: Impossibile est enim, inquit, eos qui
semel illuminati sunt, et donum cceleste gustaverunt, et par-
ticipaverunt Spiritum Sanctum, et verbum Dei dulce gustav-
*We quote Tertullian in the original Latin, as his genius appears to
better effect in the original.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF TERTULLIAN 577
erunt, occidcnte jam aevo cum exciderint, rursus revocari in
pcenitentiam, refigentes cruci in semetipsos Filium Dei et
dedecorantes. Terra enim quas bibit saepius dcvenientem 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 exus-
tionem. Hoc qui ab Apostolis didicit et cum Apostolus
docuit, nunquam mcecho et fornicatori secundam pcenitent-
iam promissam ab Apostolis norat ; optime enim legem inter-
pretabatur, et figuras ejus jam in ipsa veritate servabat."
In introducing this passage, Tertullian sh( >ws clearly that,
though not personally certain of its inspiration, he consid-
ered the Epistle to the Hebrews 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 evi-
dent cause, also, why they are not expressly quoted by
Tertullian.
In Chapter III. De Cultu Feminarum, 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 < >f Africa possesse< 1
in that day the Epistle of Jude among the Holy Books.
Tertullian often quotes the First Epistle of St. Peter. I
found no quotations from the Second Epistle in his works.
This argues nothing against its reception by the Church
Africa; Tertullian may have had no occasion to quote it.
In Lib. ad versus Juda?os, II. he used the expression,
"Abraham amicus Dei deputatus," which seems to be taken
from James, II. 23.
The Second Epistle of Peter is the only book of the New
Testament which has nothing in the works of Tertullian ; the
37 (U.S.)
578 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA
First and Second of John, and the Epistle of James have but
probable approbation ; the Epistle to the Hebrews with him
stops a little 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 homologoumena, including the
Apocalypse, 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
conservative 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 considera-
tion 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
Antilegomena), I mean the book of Jude, and the other gen-
eral Epistles. Also the Epistle of Barnabas, and that called
the Revelation of Peter. But the Epistle to the Hebrews he
asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew
tongue; but that it was carefully translated by Luke, and
published 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
THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF II. CENTURY 579
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 wTho 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 subscribe himself an Apostle
of the Hebrews; both out of reverence for the Lord, and
because he wrote of his abundance to the Hebrews, as a her-
ald 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 presbyter, as follows :
He says that those which contain the genealogies were writ-
ten first ; but that the Gospel of Mark was occasioned in the
following manner: 'When Peter had proclaimed the word
publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel under the influ-
ence of the spirit ; as there was a great number present, they
requested Mark, who had followed him from afar, and remem-
bered well what he had said, to reduce these things to writ-
ing, and that after composing the Gospel he gave it to those
who requested it of him. Which, when Peter understood,
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 First Epistle of St.
Peter, and the Epistle of St. Jude have been preserved to us
by Cassiodorus in a Latin translation (Cassiod. De Inst. Div.
Lit. VIII.).
In the works of Clement that remain to us, I found no
certain 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 testi-
fies 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, '\codvves iv rij pei^on eVio-ToX?;. This shows
580 THE CAXOX OF X. T. AT CLOSE OF II. CEXTURY
show's plainlv 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, therefore, that Clement received them
both. The defect of explicit quotations would be unjustly
invoked asrainst those short books, which are of secondarv
impor' from a doctrinal standpoint.
The greater part of Clement's Hypotyposes, was devoted
to the exegesis of the New Tesl - nt. Only fragments of
the work remain in the Latin translation of Cassiodorus.
Hence, is explained that in those fragments we find not
Clement's commentary on the Epistle of St. James, on II.
Peter, and III. John. Without doubt, they had place in
the complete work according to the explicit testimony of
Eusel ius.
We find, therefore, at the close of the second century,
that all the churches concur in receiving the four written
Gospels. 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
" tempted to adulterate the sa ritings of the Lord, since
they have attempted the same in other works, that are not
to be compared 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 Iremeus, 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. Guam Scripturam
qui non recipiunt, nee Spiritus Sancti esse possunt, qui
necdum Spiritum possint agnoscere discentibus missum,
sed nee Ecclesiam defendere, qui, quando et quibus incuna-
bulis institutum 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
THE CANON OF X. T. AT CLOSE OF II. CENTURY .">\1
had a place in the Canon in all the churches, 1 >ef< ire the close
of thr second century, and no doubt has since been raised in
the Catholic Church concerning it.
Prom 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 Scripl It is
not the place here to answer the objections of F. Chr. Baur
against the Kpistles to the Thessalonians. Those objec-
tions, 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 evidence
of this, as regards thirteen Epistles of Paul, is convincing.
Even the short Epistle to Philemon finds its place in Mura-
tori's Canon : in the words of Tertullian (loc. cit), it escaped
the mutilation of Marcion. In the words of St. Jerome : "It
would never have been received by all the churches through-
out 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. 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
Peshitto, is sufficient guarantee of its reception by the
ancient Syrian Church.
In reviewing the works of Irenseus, we have pointed out
his references to this Epistle. Eusebius (loc. cit.) confirms
our belief that Irenseus received it.*
The testimony of Tertullian, while it does not place the
book beyond the possibility of doubt, recognizes the b< >ok as
widely known and respected. The status of the book grew
♦The statement of Gobar in Biblioth. of Photius. that Irenarus rej< < U d
Paul's authorship of the Epistle, may simply mean that he doubted of the
author, but not of the divine charaeter of the book. Such a view was held
bv more than one.
582 THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF II. CENTURY
constantly more favorable in the Western Church from this
time forth.
Rome seems to have been the center 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 Irenseus; quotations in the Pastor of
Hermas ; and a place among the canonical Scriptures in the
Peshitto.
The testimonies of this period in favor of the First Epis-
tle 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, Irenseus 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 alreadv
adduced in the works of Irenseus. With Origen the data
becomes 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.
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. Irenseus quotes it frequently, often naming
its author. The Canon of Muratori places it among the
canonical Scriptures. Tertullian and Clement of Alexan-
dria make it equal to the Gospel of St. John. The Peshitto
THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF II. CENTURY 583
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 endorse-
ment in these two centuries. In the testimony of Jero
(De Vir. 111. IX. 18), John's authorship of these two Epistles
was rejected by many (plerisque). Investigate >n into patris-
tic 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, lie would undoubtedly
have used, in priore. 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
received also the Third. The same can be said of Clement
of Alexandria, who in Strom. II. 15, speaks of I. John as tin-
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
K] >istles were received in the Church of Rome.
There is scarcely a book in the New Testament, which
received so many clear testimonies in the second centurv as
the Apocalypse. On the testimony of Iremeus, we kn< iw
that the book was written toward the close of the reign 1 >f
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 Sanlis, 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 here-
tics 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 myster-
ious sense perplexed the minds of these who were defending
Catholic truth against the error of the Chiliasts. St. 1 >i< >ny-
sius 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 chapt<
584 THE CANON OF N. T. OF III. CENTURY
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 sen-
sual 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 slaying 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 concep-
tion of its subject as exceeding my capacity, I consider it
also containing a certain concealed and wonderful intima-
tion 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 regard-
ing 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
collections of Scripture of the different churches, and com-
pared them. His views respecting the Gospels are manifes-
ted in his Homily on Luke: "The Church has four Gospels;
heresy has many Only four Gospels are approved,
THE CANON OF N. T. OF ORIGEN 585
out of 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 arc-
to be received."
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 w< >rl< 1 . The first is written ;
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 con-
verts 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 pre-
vail, has left one Epistle undisputed. 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 Gospel, in which he con-
fesses that he could write so many that the whole world could
not contain them. He also wrote the Apocalypse, com-
manded 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 are frt >m
him, for not all agree that they are genuine, 1 >ut both together
do not contain a hundred lines." To these remarks he also
adds the following observation on the Epistle to the Hebrews,
586 THE CANON OF N. T. OF ORIGEN
in his homilies on the same: "The style of the Epistle with
the title, 'To the Hebrews,' has not that simplicity 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 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 phrase-
ology belong to some one, who has recorded what the Apostle
said, and as one who noted down at his leisure what his
master dictated. 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; according 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
erroneous to accept this as Origen's position on the Canon.
The passage is found in the beginning of the fifth tome of his
Commentary 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 restricts 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 eru-
dition, mentions these 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 evident that it was not his inten-
tion to enumerate all the books of the New Testament.
THE CANON OF X. T. OF ORIGEN ">S(
Origen quoted II. Peter in his XII. Homily on Exodus, 4:
"I know that it is written: 'For of whom a man is over-
come, of the same is he brought in bondage.' (II. Pet. II.
iQ)-
Again in Horn. IV. on Levit. 4: "And again Peter saith:
'Ye are become partakers of the divine nature.' ' (II. Pet.
I. 14).
Horn. XIII. on Num. 8 : " — as the Scripture saith in a cer-
tain place: — the dumb ass, speaking with man's voice,
forbade 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. 1 7 : "And Jude wrote an
Epistle, of few verses, indeed, but full of efficacious words of
divine grace ; which he begins by saying : 'Jude, the servant
of Jesus Christ, brother of James.' Nevertheless, Origen
was not ignorant that some doubted of this Epistle, and he
takes account of this doubt in op. cit. Tom. XVII. : "If any
one receives 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 reserved 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 "Horn. 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.)
588 THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS
In "Horn. XIII. in Genesim" 2, Origen likens the books
of the New Testament to the wells which Isaac and his ser-
vants 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 the)'' all dug the wells of the New Testa-
ment."
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, 1, 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 trum-
pets of his two Epistles; James and Jude do likewise. John
joins in with the trumpet-blast of his Epistles and Apocalypse
and Luke 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 idolatry 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 inseparably linked together in their history.
Origen is not there formulating a new theory. He is
here 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
THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS 589
Church, and the occasional doubts of individuals only served
to bring out more clearly the doctrine which was the
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 I
Kpistle to the Hebrews as the work of Paul. He enrol*
the Epistle of James (Fragment on Luke XXII.), and r
nizes the First and Second Epistles of John. (Euseb. Hist.
Eccles. VII. 25).
Methodujs of Tyre, 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. VIII. 4).
Eusebius of Caesarea, who was a diligent searcher into
the traditions and documents of his times, has treated the
question of the Canon of the New Testament ex prof esse in his
Hist. Eccles. III. 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
acknowledged First Epistle of John, as also the First of
Peter, to be admitted 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 dispute 1
books, although they are well known and approved by many,
are reputed that called the Epistle of Tames and that of Judo.
Also the 'Second Epistle of Peter.' and those called 'The
Second and Third of John,' whether they are of the Evange-
list 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 Institutions of the Apostles.' More-
over, as I said before, if it should appear right, "The Revela-
590 THE CANON OF N. T. EUSEBIUS
tion of John,' which some, as before said, reject, but others
rank among the genuine. But there are also some who num-
ber 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 concern-
ing which there is any dispute. We have, however, neces-
sarily subjoined here a catalogue of these also, in order to
distinguish those that are true, genuine, and well authenti-
cated writings, from those others which are not only not
embodied in the Canon, but likewise disputed, notwithstand-
ing that they are recognized by most ecclesiastical writers."
Eusebius has not passed definite judgment on the ques-
tion 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 ex-
cept by the authoritative voice of the Church .
Eusebius arranges the books in three classes. First
came to 6/jLo\o>yovfjL€va, the books of which no one ever
doubted. These are the four Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles
of Paul, the I. of Peter, the I. of John, and, if one judges well,
(el fyavei-q) the Apocalypse. It is evident that Euse-
bius includes the Epistle to the Hebrews in Paul's Epistles,
since it was universally known in his day, and he places it in
no other class. Moreover, in lib. cit. III. he had declared,
"that the fourteen Epistles of Paul were manifestly known
to all."
The second class is made up of the avrLXeyo/xeva, <yvo>pipa
8e rot? 7ro\A<H9, 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, v60a, composed of the
Acts of Paul, Pastor, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of
Barnabas, the Doctrine of the Apostles, the Gospel accord-
ing to the Hebrews, and, if it seems well, the Apocalypse of
John. In an inferior place he ranges the impious books, the
inventions of heretics.
This document contains not so much the present status
of the books, as their past history ; Eusebius fills the role of a
chronicler, not a critic.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF EUSEBIUS . 591
The peculiar position of the Apocalypse is the effect of
the causes before mentioned. Up to the middle of the third
century the work had been received by all. In virtue of
this universal acceptance Eusebius gives it its place among
the books of the first Canon. The rise of the Millenarian
heresy drew opposition upon the book. Its mysterious set i s< ■
was abused by the Millenarians ; and the defenders of the
faith, being hard pressed, began by casting doubt upon the
authenticity of the book, and later, upon its divine char-
acter. Hence, some rejected the book as spurious. As
Eusebius rightly says, it was accepted by all in one period
of history ; it was rejected by some in another. He does not
decide the issue; he adduces the historical data, and allows
the reader to decide.
In op. cit. Lib. 3, Eusebius speaks thus: "As to the
writing of Peter, one of his Epistles called the First, is
acknowledged as genuine. For this was anciently used by
the ancient Fathers in their writings, as an undoubted work
of the Apostle. But that which is called the Second, we
have not, indeed, understood to be embodied with the sacred
books, iv&iad?)xdv, yet as it appeared useful to many, it was
studiously read with the other Scriptures .
Again, ibid. : "The Epistles of Paul are fourteen, all well
known and beyond doubt. It should not, however, be con-
cealed, that some have set aside the Epistle to the Hebrews,
saying, that it was disputed, as not being one of St. Paul's
Epistles; but we shall in the proper place, also subjoin what
has been said by those before our time respecting this Epis
tie."
Eusebius is inclined to magnify the importance of the
individual doubts, lest he should be thought to have been
ignorant of them. The fact that a book was not mentioned
by many ancient Fathers, though explainable from the
nature of the writing, was often taken by him as an evidence
of doubt. ,And yet, the testimony of tradition even at his
hands is most favorable to our books.
The Church of Alexandria seems to have cleared itself
from all doubt in the fourth century.
592 THE CANON OF N. T. OF ATHANASIUS
St. Athanasius, its oracle in that age, thus manifests its
faith : "The books of the New Testament are the four Gos-
pels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively; the
Acts of the Apostles ; Seven Epistles, which are one of James,
two of Peter, three of John and one of Jude. The Fourteen
Epistles of Paul follow in this order : Romans, two to the
Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians,
two to the Thessalonians, Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to
Titus and one to Philemon. Lastly comes the Apocalypse
of John.
These are the fountains of salvation, where the thirst of
those who thirst for the living words is slaked. Through
these alone the doctrine of faith is delivered. Let no one
add to them or take from them." (Epist. Fest. XXXIX)
There is an air of security in these words that indicates that
the faith of the Church of Christ was back of the speaker.
The Canon of Athanasius is the Canon of Trent, because the
faith of the Church in whose name he spoke was the same
then as when she pronounced her definitive decree.
Cyril of Jerusalem formulates the same canon with the
exclusion of the Apocalypse, (Cyril, Cat. IV. 36). In the
fourth century this book encountered severe opposition in the
East, on account of its abuse by the Chiliasts.
St. Epiphanius enumerates the books of the Canon : The
Four Gospels, the fourteen Epistles of Paul, the Acts of the
Apostles, the seven Catholic Epistles, and the Apocalypse.
(Haer. 76)
Gregory of Nazianzus has the same Canon, with the
exception of the Apocalypse, which is placed among the
books that are not authentic. (P. G. 41. 892.)
The Canon of Amphilochius is the same. He defends
the Epistle to the Hebrews against those who term it apoc-
ryphal. "It is," he says, "verily inspired."
His testimony is rather unfavorable for the Apocalypse,
which he says "is judged apocryphal by the greater num-
ber." (P. G. 37, I59S-IS98.)
The doubts of these doctors seem to have regarded more
the authorship of the Apocalypse than its divine inspiration.
It was an echo of the opinion of Dionysius the Great, who
THE CANON OF N. T. AT CLOSE OF III. CENTURY 593
called in question not the divine character of the book, but
John's authorship of it. In fact, Gregory of Nazianzus, St,
Basil, and Gregory of Nyssa have employed the Apocalypse
as divine Scripture.
The Council of Laodicea in its sixtieth Canon receives all
our books except the Apocalypse of John. (Mansi II. 573.)
No clear reference is found in the works of John Chrysos-
tom of the II. and III. of John, the II. of Peter, the Epistle
of Jude, and the Apocalypse. But this is not an indication
that he rejected them. It was due to the minor doctrinal
importance of the four Epistles that he found no occasion to
employ them, and most probably the peculiar mysterious
character of the Apocalypse moved him to seek his materials
from other sources.
His temper of mind always favored the literal interpreta-
tion of Scripture, and there is little in the Apocalypse that
appeals to such a mind. However, Suidas in his Lexicon, at
the word ,l(odwr]<; declares that St. John received the Apoc-
alypse as canonical.
In the works of St. Ephrem we find commentaries on all
the books of our Canon of the New Testament. He seems
to have paid slight heed to the doubts of some concerning
the Apocalypse. As St. Ephrem knew not Greek, his use of
all the books is an evidence that they then existed in Syriac.
The testimony of the four great Codices is favorable to
the Catholic Canon.
Codex fc$, of Mt. Sinai, contains all the books.
Codex B, of the Vatican, undoubtedly did contain all the
books, but as it is now mutilated, a portion of Hebrews, the
Pastoral Epistles, and the Apocalypse are wanting.
Codex A, Alexandrinus, contains all the books.
The palimpsest Codex C, of St. Ephrem, originally con-
tained all the books.*
The Bohairic version of Scripture contains all the books
of the Catholic Canon. The Sahidic version, also, though
existing now only in fragments, plainly shows that it con-
tained the same Canon.
*An accurate description of these Codices will be given later on in
this work
38 (H.S.)
594 THE CANON OF N. T. OF IV. CENTURY
The same Canon is found in the Ethiopian version, and in
the Armenian version. The Peshitto, as it exists now in the
Nestorian Church, contains not II. Peter, II. and III. John,
the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse, but it is certain that
St. Ephrem recognized these books, as frequent quotations
from all of them are found in his works. This gives us cause
to suspect that the Nestorians, after the time of St. Eph-
rem, expunged these books from the Canon of Scripture.
In the Western Church, as time goes on, we find con-
tinued evidences that the Catholic Canon of to-day was then
the practical Canon of the Church.
Hilary of Poitiers cites Hebrews, and attributes it to
Paul. (De Trin. IV. II.) He cites also II. Peter (De Trin. I.
17), and the Epistle of St. James (De Trin. IV. 8).
Lucifer of Cagliari, (t37i) cites the Epistle to He-
brews, and the Epistle of Jude (De non conv. cum. Haer. 10,
ed. Hart el).*
St. Ambrose (f397) 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 established 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 possessed his mind at that time. In other portions of
his works he characterizes as heretics those who do not
receive the Apocalypse and the Epistle to the Hebrews. f
*Lucifer was Bishop of Cagliari, metropolis of Sardinia, about the mid-
dle of the fourth century. He vigorously defended Athanasius in his com-
bat against Arianism, and for this was exiled by the Arian Emperor, Con-
stance. In his exile, he wrote his work against Constance, whereupon the
Emperor sent him into upper Egypt. After the death of Constance, he
was recalled by Julian in 361. He went to Antioch where the church was
rent by the dicussion between Paulinus and Meletius. He consecrated
Paulinus bishop of the see, and thus augmented the schism. The saddest
act in his whole career was his refusal to hold communion with the Pope
after his restoration of the fathers of the Council of Rimini He had many
followers who took the name of Luciferans. He died in 371 at Cagliari.
fPhilaster was Bishop of Brescia in Italy, about the year 374. He was
with Ambrose in the Council of Aquileia in 38 1 . His death is placed about
the year 387. In his work on heresy he reveals much piety, but there is
there great lack of critique.
THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME 595
Rufinus of Aquileia (Expos. Symbol. 37) has formu-
lated the complete Catholic Canon, and terminates his list
with these words : ' 'These are the books which the Fathers
have placed in the Canon, and upon which they build our
faith."
The history of the New Testament has this advantage
over that of the Old Testament, that it has not St. Jerome
as an adversary. The works of Jerome are vast, and his
references to the New Testament many. We can only
adduce here some representative passages to show forth
what was his mind on our Canon. In his Epistle to Paul-
inus (Migne, Patrol. Lat. 22, 548) he has the following testi-
mony: "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 Phile-
mon for the fugitive slave Onesimus. . . . The Acts of the
Apostles seem to contain but dry history, and to portray the
infancy of the Church, but when we know that the writer was
Luke, the physician, 'whose praise was in the Gospel,' we
will understand that all his words are medicine for a sick soul.
James, Peter, John, and Jude wrote seven Epistles, brief
but deep, in mystery: brief in words, but long in the sense,
so that many stumble in the understanding of them. The
Apocalypse contains as many mysteries as words. This is
insufficient praise; the book is above all praise."
Though made in an oratorical way, and somewhat lack-
ing in precision, this list contains Jerome's views on the
Canon. He receives all the books, but records the doubts
concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews. We shall now
examine a few special references in the works of Jerome to
the books of the New Testament, concerning which there
existed doubt.
In his treatise de Viris 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 Ephe-
sians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to the
596 THE CANON OF N. T. OF JEROME
Thessalonians two, and besides two to Timothy, one to
Titus, and one to Philemon. The Epistle which is styled,
'To the Hebrews,' is not believed to be of his authorship, on
account of the difference in style and diction. By Tertullian
it is ascribed to Barnabas; others attribute it to Luke the
Evangelist; and some believe it to be of Clement of Rome,
afterwards Pope, who, they say, was associated with Paul,
and ordered and embellished Paul's teaching in his own
language, or to speak more precisely, since Paul wrote to
the Hebrews, and on account of their hatred of his name, he
omitted it in the salutation in the beginning. He wrote as a
Hebrew in Hebrew, eloquently in his own tongue, and what
was eloquently spoken in Hebrew, was more eloquently
translated in Greek, and for this cause the Epistle differs
from the other Epistles of Paul."
Jerome estimated the thought of the Eastern world
above that of the Western. The doubts concerning Hebrews
were nearly all centered in the West, and moved him little.
Though he is ready to adopt any plausible theory to explain
the absence of the Pauline style in Hebrews, he, in no
uncertain terms, vindicates to Paul the formal creation of
the work.
In his Epistle to Dardanus (Migne, 22, 1103), he is even
more explicit in favor of the Hebrews. "The Epistle which
is entitled: To the Hebrews, is received as the Epistle of
Paul, not only by all the churches of the Orient, but also by
all the Greek writers up to the present time ; although many
claim that the words were written by Barnabas or Clement.
It matters not who the writer was, since he was an ecclesias-
tical man, and the Epistle is promulgated by the daily read-
ing of the churches. And if the Latin usage does not receive
it among the canonical Scriptures, neither do the Greek
churches receive the Apocalypse with full sanction ; but we
receive them both, following not the usage of our time, but
the authority of the old writers."
Jerome has exaggerated the doubts of the Western
Church in regard to Hebrews. It was received by that
Church, and the doubts were only scattering and individual.
No doubt had properly invaded the corporate belief of the
THE CANON OF X. T. OF JEROME 59*3
Church. Jerome rises al»>ve these doubts, and receives the
book on the warrant of tradition and the usage of the Church.
Wherever he mentions elsewhere in his works these doubts,
it is simply to historically state that which he did not per-
sonally entertain.
In his Commentary on Ezekiel, VIII. (Migne, 25, 1465),
he introduces a quotation from Hebrews, with the remark:
"If, in receiving the Epistle, the Latin people do not reject
the authority of the Greeks." I believe this to be a rhetori-
cal figure to belittle the importance of the occasional doubts
of the West. It was equivalent to saying: Against the
few doubts of the West is arrayed the authority of the whole
Greek world.
Jerome also records a doubt which regarded not the
divine character, but the authorship of II. Peter. "Peter,"
he says, "wrote two Epistles which are called Catholic. The
second of these is not believed to be his by many, on account
of its difference from the first in style." The statement of
Jerome's own views is clear enough, namely, that Peter
wrote two Epistles ; but it was inexact to say that many re-
jected the second. The doubt of Peter's authorship of the
Second Epistle only existed in some Greek 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
different scribes."
In the before -mentioned treatise, De Viris Illustribus, II.
(Migne, P. L. 23, 607), Jerome delivers the following testi-
mony concerning the Epistle of James: 'James, who is
called the brother of the Lord, wrote one Epistle which is
one of the seven Catholic Epistles. It is said that it was
published under his name by another, and that gradually,
with the course of time, it aequired authority."' The evi-
dent reason why Jerome does not deal with the opinion which
he here notices is that it left intact the divine inspiration of
the book.
598 CANON OF N. T. FROM END OF IV. TO XV. CENTURY
In op. cit. (Migne, 23, 613) he makes a similar state-
ment respecting Jude's Epistle: "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 authority by its antiquity and usage (in the
Church), and is reckoned 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 Bolland-
ists the just declaration: "II convient le peser avec la defi-
ance que doit inspirer un ecrivain qui se montre plutot pub-
liciste de talent, ecrivant au courant de la plume qu' his-
torien consciencieux."
In the same work, (Migne P. L. 23, 623, 637), Jerome
inserts 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 uncritical.
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 II. and III. 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. VI 1 I.) 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
CANON OF N. T. FROM END OF [V. TO XV. CENTURA 599
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
inspired Scripture.
The three African Councils held in 393, 397, and 419,
formulated 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 easier than others, but the energy of the divine char-
acter 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 Ver-
sion 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 receiving the complete Canon. In fact the
complete Canon enjoyed 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 Xew
Testament are also strange. "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 contend 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
600 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CAJETAN
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 of 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 P op e 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 con-
cerning Holy Scripture.
In the first edition of his Greek New Testament, which
he dedicated to Leo X., Erasmus outlined certain doubts
concerning 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 Apoc-
alypse, not by heretics, but by orthodox men, who, though
uncertain of the author, 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 cer-
tain scattering doubts arose in some churches concerning the
THE CANON OF N. T. OF CAJETAN 601
author of this book was not sufficient data to east a doubt
upon its author. The Sorbonne would have acted more
wisely in pointing out the weakness 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
response, 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. . . . 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 argu-
ments 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 belonging to their respective authors.
The most notable opposition to the antilegomena in this
period came from Cajetan.*
*Thomas de Vio is surnamed Cajetanus, from the village of Ga?ta or
Cajeta, in the old kingdom of Naples, where he was born on the 20th of
February, 1469. At the age of fifteen, he entered the Dominican order.
He 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, Pavia, and at Rome. In 1 500 he was made procurator general ;
and in 1 508, 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 excessive-
ly 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 accomplished more by his clear call to the
supernatural than the subtle dialectician.
602 THE CANON OF N. T. OF CAJETAN
We have before reviewed his position on the deuterocan-
onical books of the Old Testament. His views on the anti-
legomena are focalized in the following statement: "From
these and other words of Jerome, the prudent reader will
know that 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 can-
onical, 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 can-
In 1 5 19 Cajetan was made Bishop of Ga?ta. After several other mis-
sions 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 Scrip-
tures. There is in his works a certain display of arrogance in the way he
essays to solve every question by his understanding of those 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 conse-
crated to study till his death in 1534.
Cajetan is undoubtedly the greatest commentator of the Summa Theo-
logica of St. Thomas. This is also the greatest of his works. He com-
mented 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
propositions taken from Cajetan 's commentaries on the Gospels. After
Cajetan 's death the same Catharinus wrote a work filled with bitter criti-
cism 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
THE CANON OF X. T. OF CAJETAN 603
onical. Wherefore, from the authority 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 II. and III. John and the
Epistle of James. He says naught of the Apocalypse, but
he defends the canonicity of II. Peter. In regard to this
Epistle, there was no choice between authenticity and a liter-
ary 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 Caje-
tan 's reasoning to say, that if the author of a book be uncer-
tain, the book itself is of inferior authority. The two ques-
tions 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 defined the faith which she had
held from the beginning: "The books of the New Testa-
ment are the four Gospels, of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John :
the Acts of the Apostles, written by Luke: the fourteen
604 THE CANON OF N. T. OF COUNCIL OF TRENT
Epistles of the Apostle Paul, viz., Romans, two to the Cor-
inthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, two
to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, one to
Philemon, and one to the Hebrews ; two Epistles to 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 recog-
nized as their sole opponents.
Regarding the last verses of the Gospel of Mark; Luke's
account of the sweat of the Lord in Gethsemane ; and the
section relating to the adulteress in the Gospel of John,
some discussion was moved. Cardinal Pacheco demanded
in the general 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 passages, 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 parts."
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 1st of April, that the authors should
be received as well as the books.
THE NEW TESTAMENT OF THE SECTS 605
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.
Chapter XIII.
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, (f 1318), does not mention the four shorter Catho-
lic Epistles and Apocalypse in his catalogue of the New
Testament.
The schismatic Armenians receive all our books, and
add two letters of the Corinthians to Paul, and Paul's re-
sponse.
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 wrent
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, protest-
ants et catholiques, egalement des m ernes livres du Nouveau
Testament ; car je ne crois pas que personne volut suivre
encore les emportements de Luther contre l'Epitre de saint
Jacques. Passions done une meme canonicit6 a tous ces
livres, contestes autrefois ou non contestes; apres cela, Mon-
sieur permettez moi de vous demander si vous voulez affai-
blir l'autorite ou de l'Epitre aux Hebreux, si haute, si theo-
606 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS
logique, si divine, ou celle de l'Apocalypse, ou reluit l'esprit
prophetique avec autant de magnificence que dans Isaie et
dans Daniel?"
The Lutherans have abandoned their theory, but in
many 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 expunged, and the opinions of their founder
on this point consigned to oblivion.
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 XIV.
The Apocryphal and lost books of both
Testaments.
The radical signification of apocryphal aTrotcpvcfyos from
cnroicpv7rT€iv} is that of hidden.
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
certainly 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 produced 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 OF BOTH TESTAMENTS 607
• 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.
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 Thaddams the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Thaddseus, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Mathias, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Peter the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gospel of James the Apostle, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Barnabas, apocryphal.
The Gospel of Thomas, used by the Manichcans, 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 Nativity of 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, apocry-
phal.
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 tin-
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, apocry-
phal.
The Apocalypse which bears the name of Stephen the Apostle, apocry-
phal.
The Book called "Transitus", that is the Assumption of the Blessed
Virgin Mary, apocryphal.
The Book called the Penance of Adam, apocryphal.
608 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS
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 Canons 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.
A minor list of apocryphal books appears in the works of
Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (|828).
Psalms and Canticles of Solomon, 2,100 verses.
Apocalypse of Peter, 300 verses.
Epistle of Barnabas. 1,360 verses.
Gospel according to the Hebrews, 2,200 verses.
Henoch, 4,800 verses.
The Patriarchs, 5,100 verses.
The Prayer of Joseph, 1,100 verses.
The Testament of Moses, 1,100 verses.
The Assumption of Moses, 1,400 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, 2,750 verses.
The Itinerary of John, 2,600 verses.
The Itinerary of Thomas, 1,700 verses.
The Gospel of Thomas, 1,300 verses.
The Doctrine of the Apostles, 200 verses.
The I. and II. Epistle of Clement, 2,600 verses.
Ignatius, Polycarp, and the Pastor, of Hennas. — (Opusc. Hist. ed.
Boor.)
A list of apocryphal books published from different
manuscripts by Montfaucon, Cotelier, Hody and Pitra con-
tains 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.
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS 609
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. Gospel 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 of all these apocryphal books. We shall only speak
of those of greater importance in their 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 Vul-
gate, are found the third and fourth Books of Ezra, and the
Prayer of Manasses.
The Third Book of Ezra, sometimes called "Ezra Grae-
cus," is largely made up of passages taken literally from the
canonical 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 Nehemiah, which are comprised in one
volume. It also occupies the same place in the old versions
derived from the Septuagint.
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius,
Basil, Chrysostom, Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, and Pros-
per have quoted the third and fourth chapters, but the qu< >-
tations are scattering, and feeble in mode of enunciation.
It gradually lost credit, till after the fifth century it disap-
pears in the recorded 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 arc
internal defects 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 tradi-
39 (H.S.)
610 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS
tions. It was upon the data of this book that the role of
Ezra as promulgator 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 posses-
sion of the world.
Since then Whiston published a translation of the Arabic
text (Primitive Christianity Revived, London, 1711) ; Ewald,
in 1863, published the Arabic text; Lawrence, in 1820, pub-
lished the Ethiopian text; Ceriani published, in i860, a
Latin translation 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
prepare for it. The original work seems to have been the
work of a Jew, writing soon after the fall of Jerusalem. The
first two chapters and also the last two are, doubtless, the
interpolations of a Christian.
Aside from the influence that the book had on the tradi-
tional role of Ezra, the only certain evidence that the book
was known to the Greek Fathers, is in Strom. III. 16, of
Clement of Alexandria :
IV. Ezra. V. 35. Clem. Strom. III. 16.
"And I said: 'Why, O Lord? " 'Why was not the womb
For what was I born? or why of my mother my tomb, that I
did not the womb of my mother might not see the affliction of
become my tomb, that I might Jacob, and the tribulation of
not see the affliction of Jacob Israel?' saith Ezra, the Proph-
and the travail of my people, et. ' '
Israel?' "
Among the Latin Fathers, Ambrose often quotes it as
Scripture.
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS Gil
The Latin Church also has incorporated certain passages
from it into its Liturgy.
Introit of Feria III. after
IV. Ezra II. 37. Pentecost.
"Commen datum donum ac- "Accipite jucunditatem glo-
cipite et jucundamini, gratias riae vestrae, alleluja; gratias
agentes ei, qui vos ad ccelestia agentes Deo, alleluja; qui vos
regna vocavit. ' ' ad ccelestia 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 immorta- amici Dei, qui contemnentes,
lem sumpserunt, et confessi jussa principum meruerunt
sunt nomen Dei; Modo coron- praemia aeterna: modo, coron-
nntur, et accipiunt palmas. ' antur et accipiunt palmam. '
Responsorium IV. of Pas-
IV. Ezra II. 35. chal Office of Martyrs.
"Parati estote ad praemia " Lux perpetua lucebit sanc-
regni quia lux perpetua luce- tis tuis, Domine, et asternitas
bit vobis per aeternitatem tern- temporum. ' '
poris. ' '
These extrinsic data for the approbation of the book, in
nowise, effect an argument in its favor. It never entered
into the sacred literature of the Church. I found only this
one reference in Clement's works, and it is not strange that
he should have given some notice to the book ; for he 1 >r< >\vsed
on every pasture where he could feed his hunger for knowl-
edge. Ambrose 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
expressed, 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 af-
ter death, and contains manv Rabbinic fables.
612 THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS
We know upon the authority of II. Chronicles XXXIII.
12, 1 8, that Manasseh, son of Hezekiah, 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 Manasseh of the Latin Vulgate be that
authentic prayer. There is very little in its favor ; the work
is unimportant, and it probably will always remain one of the
unsettled points of history.
In editions of the Greek text of the Old Testament, we
find the CLI. Psalm atttributed 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 version, but it has place in the Ethio-
pian, 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 WaX/nol teal a>Sal SaAo/^win-o?. They were
unknown in the West, till de la Cerda 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 ar-
gument 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-
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-
THE APOCRYPHA OF BOTH TESTAMENTS 013
cabees. The Eighty-fifth Canon of the Apostles enumer-
ates it among the canonical books, and it finds an occasi* >nal
mention 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. Euse-
bius, Jerome, and Philostorgius attribute the work to Flav-
ius Josephus. The book obtained some slight recognition
from Gregory Nanz. and Ambrose. There is nothing either
extrinsic or intrinsic to prove its divinity. In fact, it seems
to favor the errors of the Stoics and other errors, and is
placed as apocryphal 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
revelations. 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 occasion for attributing to Henoch the apocryphal
writing which constitutes one of the principal monuments of
the apocalyptic literature of later Judaism.
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: "Etecce venit cum
decern millibus sanctorum, ut judicium exerceat de iis et
disjiciat improbos," etc.
614 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA
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 joint basis of Catholic faith in tradition does not con-
sist 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. Augustine and
Jerome forcibly repudiate 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 neces-
sarily 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 posi-
tion. But there is no sufficient evidence for the applica-
tion 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 docu-
mentary 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 frag-
ment of the Latin translation, found by Ceriani in a palimp-
sest of the Ambrosian Library, and published by him in his
Monumenta Sacra in 1861.
There is no foundation for the opinion that Jude cited
this book. Certain data respecting the death of Moses
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA 615
existed with the Jews, and these formed the common source
from which both authors drew.
The Apocalypse of Moses is a small book first pub-
lished 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 docu-
ment made of Paul's Epistle.
In 1 81 9 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.
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 Eliah. Origen
conjectured that Math. XXVII. 9, was derived from an
apocryphal book of Jeremiah. Both these works and these
opinions are unimportant, and have no influence on Chris-
tian thought, and we turn to more important things.
Chief among the apocryphal books of the New Testa-
ment are the Letter of Abgar, King of Oshroene, to Jesus
Christ, and Jesus' response. The two documents, as pre
served for us by Eusebius, are as follows:
"Copy of the Letter Written by King Abgarus to
Jesus, and Sent to Him, at Jerusalem,
by Ananias, the Courier.
"Abgarus, prince of Edessa, sends greeting to Jesus, the
excellent Saviour, who has appeared in the borders of Jeru-
salem. I have heard the reports respecting thee and thy
cures, as performed by thee without medicines and withi >ut
the use of herbs. For as it is said, thou causest the blind t< 1
see again, the lame to walk, and thou cleansest the lep«
and thou castest out impure spirits and demons, and thou
616 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA
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 things,
or else doing them, thou are the Son of God. Therefore, now
I have written and besought thee to visit me, and to heal the
disease with which I am afflicted. 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."
The Answer of Jesus to King Abgarus, by the
Courier, Ananias.
'Blessed art thou, 0 Abgarus, 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 fulfilment, 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
affliction, 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 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
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA 617
monument of Oriental literature. It is, as we have seen,
declared apocryphal in the decree of Gelasius, De Recip-
ients 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.
Fabricus, 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 Anti-
och, 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
concerning Jesus, and believed, are true. Believe them;
cleave to them, and firmly cling to the doctrine of Christian-
ity, 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 documentum ad nos misisse
constat) . Being taught the way of truth through the preach-
ing 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 protector.
618 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA
"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."
Any one that has ever read the Magnificat, or Mary's
history in the Gospel, has no need of other proof than the
mere reading to pronounce this a forgery. Critics wisely
concur in placing these letters 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
commemoration of it is celebrated, called by the people
"Festa della Sacra Lettera." Rev. Father Inchofer pub-
lished in 1 63 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 sal-
vation with God." In some texts 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 contain 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
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA G19
plain. It is probable, however, that they were written dur-
ing 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 Apostles. Concerning these, we find the following
facts.
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 fifty
canons, with this title, " Incipiunt Regulae Ecclesiastic®
sanctorum Apostolorum, prolatae per Clementem Ecclesise
Romance Pontificem." At the same time, however, Dion-
ysius says in the preface to his work, " In principio itaque
canones, qui dicuntur Apostolorum, de Graeco transtulimus
quibus quia plurimi consensum non prccbuere facilem, hoc
ipsum vestram noluimus ignorare sanctitatem, quamvis
postea quaedam constituta pontificum ex ipsis canonibus
assumpta esse videantur.
These words obviously point to a difference of opinion
prevailing in the Church, though it has been doubted by
some whether the dissentients spoken of rejected the Canons
altogether, or merely denied that they were the work of
the Apostles. And with regard to the last clause, it is
much disputed whether previous popes can be shown t<>
have known and cited these Canons. Hefele denies that
"Pontifices" means popes, and would understand it of
bishops in their sy nodical constitutions.
About fifty years after the work of Dionysius, John of
Antioch, otherwise called Johannes Sch< >lasticus, patriarch
of Constantinople, set forth a a-vvrayfia kclvovwv, which
contained not fifty but eighty-five Canons of the Apostles.
And in the year 692 these were expressly recognized in the
decrees of the Quinisextine Council, not only as binding
620 THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA
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 fifty
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 fifty translated by the
former. And an inference has also been drawn that the
thirty-five later Canons are of a later date. Indeed, accord-
ing 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 Constitution.
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
eighty-fifth canon Clement uses the first person singular of
himself :
"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, Deuter-
onomy— of Jesus the son of Nun, one; of Judges, one;
Ruth, one; of Kings, four; of Paralipomena 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
thirteen; 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 gospels, 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 regu-
THE CANON OF N. T. AND THE APOCRYPHA 623
lations addressed to you 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 Apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews is often
spoken of in early tradition. Its origin appears from the
following data. Out of the Judaizing tendencies of the
first century arose the sects of the Nazirites and the Ebion-
ites. Both these sects strove to bring the rites of the Old
Law into the Christian dispensation, and it is quite certain
that the Ebionites rejected the divinity of Jesus Christ.
Both sects used a Gospel in Hebrew, which each mutilated
and adapted to their theories.
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 Matt.
Tom. XV. 14). Hegesippus is also reported to have bor-
rowed some things from the Gospel of the Hebrews (Euseb.
H. E. IV. 22). According to Origin (Horn. I. in Luc.) and
Jerome (in Matth. pnrf; c. Pelag. III. 1.) it also bore
among the Ebionites the title of Gospel according to the
Apostles.
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 supposititious. The same judgment must be passed
on the third letter to the Corinthians, which the Armenians
retain in their bibles.
The Epistle of Barnabus, 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
622 THE CANON OF N. T AND THE APOCRYPHA
the inspiration of the book have maintained that it was
of Barnabas' authorship. But the internal evidence dis-
proves 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
circulation a book of visions and allegories, purporting to be
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 Testament, 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). That
Irenceus did not place the book on a level with the canonical
Scriptures may be inferred from his having quoted it but
once, not appealing to it in his discussion of Scripture
testimonies in his third book. The mutilated commence-
ment of the Stromateis of Clement of Alexandria, opens
in the middle of a quotation from The Shepherd, and about
ten times elsewhere he cites the book, always with a com-
plete acceptance of the reality and divine character of the
revelations made to Hermas, but without any explanation
of his opinion, who Hermas 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
THE LOST ROOKS OF BOTH TESTAMENTS 623
book were current in his time. His quotations from The
Shepherd are carefully separated from those from the canon-
ical books; he generally adds to a quotation from The Shep-
herd 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. Euse-
bius (II. 25), places the book amongthe voda with the Acts
of Paul, Revelation of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, etc.
Elsewhere (III. 3), while he is unable to place it among the
ainiXeyofieva as being rejected by some, he says 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 canonical books of the Old Testament and
with "the teaching of the Apostles," as not canonical, but
useful to be employed in catechetical instruction. The
Shepherd is found in the Sinaitic MS. following the Epistle
of Barnabas, as an appendix to the books of the New Testa-
ment. After the fourth century the book rapidly passed
out of ecclesiastical use in the East.
External evidence shows Rome to have been its place
of composition, Foremost comes the writer of the Mura-
torian Fragment on the Canon, who tells us that the book
had been written during the episcopate of Pius, by Hennas,
a brother of that bishop, in a period which the writer speaks
of as within then living memory. He concludes that t he-
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.
Chapter XV.
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, Chryso-
624 THE LOST BOOKS OF BOTH TESTAMENTS
stom, St. Thomas, Bellarmine, Serarius, Pineda, Bonfrere,
and nearly all the later theologians.*
Sahneron 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 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 happened. Franzelin, in response to Sal-
meron, 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 infallible 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 succeeding 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
*Orig. in Cant. Prol. c. fin. (M. 13, 84); S. Chfys. in 1. Cor. hom. 7, 3
(M. 61, 58); S. Thorn. Comm. in ep. S. Paul, ad 1 Cor. 5, 4 et Col. 4,16;
Bellarm. de verbo Dei IV. 4; Serar. Proleg. c. VIII. qu. 14. 15; Pineda.
Salom. praev. I. 1; Bonfrer. Prasloq. VI. 2, etc.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 625
Prophet (I. Chron. XXIX. 29); The Words of Nathan,
the Prophet (1. c); The Book of Gad, the Prophet (1. <
The Books of Ahiah (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 Oziah by Isaiah (II. Chron.
XXVI. 22); three thousand Parables of Solomon (III.
Kings IV. 22); five thousand Canticles of Solomon (1. c.) ;
the treatise of Solomon on Natural History (1. c.) ; certain
writings of Jeremiah (II. Maccab. II. 1) ; 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
production, may write another without such influence of
the Holy 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 main-
tains the possibility and the actuality of the loss of inspired
writings, rests on convincing data.
Chapter XVI.
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.*
Numerous appellations have, at different times, been
given to the Hebrew language. In the Scriptures it is
♦Of Daniel, the portion from the 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. S, to VI. i8, and from the twelfth to th
twenty-sixth verse of seventh chapter were written in Chaldaic.
40 (H.S.)
626 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
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. 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 distin-
guished, is Hebrew, as being the language of the Hebrew
nation.
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 commercial 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 between the reign of Hezekiah
and the Babylonian captivity, the purity of the language
was neglected, and so many foreign words were introduced
into it, that this period has, not inaptly, been designated
its iron age. During the seventy year's captivity, though
it does not appear that the Hebrews entirely lost their
native tongue, yet it underwent so considerable a 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 interpret them to the people in the Chaldaean language.
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. VIII. 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
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT (Y27
enabled to expound the law and the prophets to the people,
who, it it appears from the New Testament, were well ac-
quainted with their general contents and tenor; this last-
mentioned period has been called the leaden age of the lan-
guage. How long the Hebrew was retained, both in
writing and conversation; or in writing, after it ceased to
be the language of conversation, it is impossible to deter-
mine. 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 conversation. But soon after this, the dominion
of the Seleucida?, in Syria, over the Jewish nation, unit-
ing with the former influence of the Babylonian captivity in
promoting the Aramaean dialect, appears to have destroyed
the remains of proper Hebrew, as a living language, and to
have universally substituted, 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 always been the
subject of study among learned Jews. Before and at the
time of Christ, there were flourishing Jewish academies
at Jerulsaem; 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
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 Babylonia, we have received the Targums, the
Talmud, the Masora and the written vowels and accents
of the Hebrew language. The Hebrew of the Talmud and
of the Rabbis has a close affinity with the later Hebrew :
especially the first and earliest part of it, the Mishna.
Previously to the building of Solomon 's Temple, the Pen-
tateuch was deposited by the side of the Ark of the Covenant
(Deut. XXXI. 24-26.), to be consulted by the Israelites;
and after the erection of that sacred edifice, it was deposited
628 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
in the treasury, together 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 supposed to have perished: but some
learned men have conjectured that they wrere 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 carried 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 Jew-
ish 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. 1.), 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 com-
manded 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 translated into the
Greek language ; and this version, whatever errors may now
*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 nirv nn? p$ nap InlK nnpfr -Ye shaii place a
(the Law) by the side of the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord." This
interpretation is supported by the Greek and Samaritan texts.
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 629
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.
As the Jews were dispersed through various countries,
to whose inhabitants Greek was vernacular, they gradually
acquired the knowledge of this language, and even culti-
vated 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, con-
sulted 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 Scrip-
tures. Besides the Peshitto 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 versions were undertaken and completed ; one for the
Jews by 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 Paraphrase on the Prophets,
and by the Rabbis 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,
during the fifth century, is exhibited to us in the Latin ver-
sion made by Jerome from the original Hebrew, and in his
commentaries on the Scriptures. From a careful examin-
630 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
ation 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, etc.
(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 preceding.
(5.) The Hebrew MS used by Jerome for the most part
agrees with the Masoretic text, though there are a few un-
important various readings.
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 var-
ious schools, in which they taught the Scriptures. One of
the most distinguished of these academies was that estab-
lished 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 observa-
tions they could obtain, which appeared likely to contribute
towards fixing both the reading and interpretation of Scrip-
ture, into one book, which they called rHlDD (MasoRaH),
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
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 631
taught him first its true meaning, and secondly its true inter-
pretation; 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 Masorah ; the latter or
true interpretation is that of the Mishna and Gemara, of
which an account is given in a subsequent chapter of the
present volume.
The Masoretic notes and criticisms relate to the books,
verses, words, letters, vowel points and accents. The
Masorites, or Masorets, as the inventors of this system wTere
called, were the first who distinguished the books and sec-
tions 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 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 begin-
ing, middle, or end of a verse ; the different significations of
the same word; the agreement or conjunction of one word
with another; what 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 mis-
placed; supposing that some mystery has occasioned the
alteration. They have likewise reckoned which is the mid-
dle 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.
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,
632 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
being found too short, a more copious abridgment was in-
serted, which was distinguished by the appellation of the
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
synagogue, and their successors after the restoration of the
temple worship on the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. Ussh-
er 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 century;
Walton, Basnage, Jahn, and others, refer them to the Rabbis
of Tiberias in the sixth century, and suppose that they com-
menced the Masora, which was augmented and continued
at different times, by various authors ; so that it was 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 partic-
ular 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.
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 nota-
tion 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 unwearied assiduity, and as an admirable inven-
tion for delivering the sacred text from a multitude of
equivocations and perplexities to which it was liable, and
for putting a stop to the unbounded licentiousness and rash-
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 633
ness 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 oppo-
site to Christianity, whose testimonies 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 attention. 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 materials, 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 com-
mon 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
literature wras cultivated, and the Scriptures were very fre-
quently transcribed. Hence arose tw< > recensions or editions
of the Hebrewr Scriptures, which were collated in the eight
or ninth century. The differences or various readings
observed in them were noted, and have been transmitted to
634 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
our time under the appellation of the Oriental and Occiden-
tal, or Eastern and Western readings. They are variously
computed at 2 10, 216 and 220, and are printed by Walton in
the Appendix to his splendid edition of the Polyglot Bible.
It is worthy of remark that not one of these various read-
ings 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.
Shortly after the invention of the art of printing, the
Hebrew Scriptures were committed to the press; at first in
detached portions, and afterwards the entire Bible. The
principal editions are:
Psalterium Hebraicum, cum commentario Kimchii.
Anno 237 (1477). 4to.
The first printed Hebrew book. It is of extreme rarity.
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.
Biblia Hebraica, 8vo. Brixiae, 1494.
This edition was conducted by Gerson, the son of Rabbi
Moses. It is also of extreme rarity.
Another primary edition is the Biblia Hebraica Bomberg-
iana II. folio, Venice, 1525, 1526, folio.
This was edited by Rabbi Jacob Ben Chajim.
Biblia Hebraica cum utraque Masora, Targum, necnon
commentariis Rabbinorum, studio et cum praefatione R.
Jacob F. Chajim, Venetiis, 1 547-1 549, 4 tomes in 2 vols,
folio.
This is the second of Rabbi Jacob Ben Chajim 's editions.
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 tomes in 2 vols,
folio.
This great work was executed at the expense of Louis
Kcenig, an opulent bookseller at Basle. On account of the
THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 635
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.
Biblia Hebraica Magna Rabbinica. Amstelodami 1724-
27, 4 vols, folio.
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.
Biblia Hebraica, cum Latina Versione Sebastiana Mun-
steri. Basileas, 1534, 1535, 2 vols, folio.
Hebraicorum Bibliorum Veteris Testamenti Latina
Interpretatio, opera olim Xantis Pagnini, Lucensis: nunc
verd Benedicti Arias Montani, Hispalensis, Francisci Raphel-
engii, Alnetani, Guidonis et Nicolai Fabriciorum Boderiano-
rum fratrum collato studio, ad Hebraicam dictionem diligen-
tissime expensa. Christ. Plant inus Antwerpias excudebat,
1 57 1. Folio.
This is the first edition executed by Plantin, and is re-
puted to be the most correct.
Biblia Sacra Hebraea correcta, et collata cum antiquis-
simis exemplaribus manuscriptis et hactenus impressis.
Amstelodami. Typis et sumtibus Josephi Athias. 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 Prae-
fatione 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.
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,
636 THE HEBREW TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
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 Grasci, qui Deutero-
canonici vocantur, in tres Classes distributi. Autore Carolo
Francisco Houbigant. Lutetios Parisiorum, 1753, 4 vols,
folio.
This text of this edition is that of Van der Hooght, with-
out points ; and in the margin of the Pentateuch, Houbigant
has added various readings from the Samaritan Pentateuch.
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 Newr 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 III. 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 He-
brew manuscripts in Germany, but went for that purpose
into Italy and Switzerland. The business of collation con-
tinued from 1760 to 1769, inclusive, during which period
Kennicott published annually an account of the progress
which was made. More than six hundred Hebrew manu-
scripts, and sixteen manuscripts of the Samaritan Penta-
teuch, 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 SAMARITAN CODEX 637
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
transcribed into thirty folio volumes, the work was put to
press in 1773. In 1 7 76 the first volume of Kennicott's
Hebrew Bible was delivered to the public, and in 1780 the
second volume.
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 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 corresponding
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 Samari-
tan printed text.
To Kennicott's Hebrew Bible, M. de Rossi published an
important supplement at Parma (1 784-1 787), in four vol-
umes 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 insig-
nificant, consisting frequently of the omission or addition
of a single letter in a word, as a vau, etc.
Closely allied in history with the Hebrew text is the
Samaritan Codex.
When the ten tribes seceded from the central government
under Rehoboam, 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 Assy-
rians overthrew the kingdom of Israel, and took her sons
captive (72 1 B. C). To inhabit the land of Israel thus made
638 THE SAMARITAN CODEX
desolate, the Assyrian monarchs sent thither colonists from
the provinces of Babylon, from Cutha, Ava, Hamath, Se-
pharvaim. The remnants of Jews that had been left in the
land intermarried 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. Sho-
meron, was thus called because it was built on a hill pur-
chased from one Shomer. At first they brought with them
their heterodox idolatry, which ignored Yahveh. It would
be dangerous to allow such a people to entrench themselves
so close to Judah, and carry on a false worship of the Assy-
rian gods, so Yahveh 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 mon-
arch, sent to them one of Israel 's priests, that had been taken
captive, to teach them the religion of Yahveh. The poly-
theism of the Assyrians admitted of any number of gods, and
it was thought by them that the punishment had come upon
the colonists simply because 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 dei-
ties which they worshiped. The knowledge that the captive
priest gave them of Yahveh did not, in effect, exclude the
worship of their own deities. They recognized Yahveh only
as a particular god of the land, and though they built tem-
ples to him, his worship was held in an inferior rank, for they
chose as Yahveh 's priests the lowest of the people. They
neglected the supreme and exclusive character of Yahveh 's
worship, and must have considered such demands by Yahveh
as a jealous exclusiveness, which they could not sanction.
So that at the same time that they maintained a sort of wor-
ship of Yahveh every nation worshiped its own particular
deity. For the men of Babylon made Succoth Benoth, and
the Cuthites made Nerghal, and the men of Hamath made
Ashima, and the men of Ava made Nibhaz and Thartack,
and they that were of Sepharvaim burnt their children in fire
to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim
(II. Kings XVII. 30, 31). Such was the origin and religion
of the Samaritans. They have a copy of the Pentateuch, in
THE SAMARITAN CODEX 639
which the Hebrew words are inscribed in Samaritan char-
acters. 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,
Diodorus of Tarsus, Jerome, Syncellus, and other ancient
writers, 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 Ussher, who procured six copies
from the East ; and from another cop)-, 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 Polyglot. This was afterwards
reprinted in the London Polyglot by Walton, who corrected
it from three manuscripts which had formerly belonged to
Ussher.
The Samaritans refuse to marry into any other tribe of
men, and they are now reduced to less than two hundred
souls.
There are three scrolls preserved at Nabulus of the Sam-
aritan Codex. One of these is regarded with great reverence
and rarely shown to travellers. We were able to see it in
1905. It is kept behind a veil in a case of solid silver and
has marks of great antiquity.
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 following page a specimen of
the Samaritan Codex, and its Samaritan translation from
Walton's Polyglot. The passage is from Genesis, I. 1-14.
RITANUS.
-UiUIIUUU l_.JLlll£
•vta A^ ♦A^*,^rrr!3^\Avv*^w32A,A^a*AiTrmA^a * i
».$* s* A-vrr^^a^^^a^^A^AW^tfi^A^i** 2
♦A* A ^mxZA'A-^mx * ^^A'm^nt^'^rA'm^m'^m^ZA +
•Janr . a*^?A-^wa^tfr^2A^2Taar**aw,m'ir^*A^
♦:«A^ P <3w^2**^*ar^*A2*2£fara2A*Ar^PflT:? ■* ♦,ijM*^
fat* * :^ij,/Tr^nT?:vnrp^2'2yiiy,^WAyV-*^rrra^^ar^^p
m»^pa'nr^w"2#a^v*flr2[ar?-:2;i7r»*w'Vffi?^^aflr5iZ^
v'ttt* * :^*fiT^tt**^3orv^A^A:?:^A^*Pi3
23W*^^P*iynriS^:^:?Piy2^:'m^/V*3t.u,3ar2,iy/7r^2^
^A.*»nr =s2A'^3A#r* * iszvm&'mm^ZASA'sntz.
•i3mv*nr^:ytov*:v^*v^!tf*a™v*Ameyw]faA^[
'^"* vSnv^^rtra^'v^^vm^JS'a^v^^rvn^A^
:^mwm2m*»W^pav)raflr**a^vvirk/7r**''a*^
:iaw zj^wcrtv^^A-'z^A^m^nt'sm^ZA^^AmZ **
isor a*:^w^/Tra*2nT?a^2?:^A^'2v.^wA^2
«A*A
:v«
*A^i
2*
Za
•A-**
•**»/*
•A***
ate
10
u
12
VERSIO SAMARITANA.
to
stnr
3/f
pv
•ap
\nv ^/^*^em^%m^^*Jcm*^kZA*^Zf*HJ^tJ^^f^ *
0T2. A\2v'%ij^£"/7r^pr7r^*'^A™*iV*^v.^A* *
^A^^tfr^vjraA^v^a^Jtf ^2a*W^^^^A
an ttJem*x%ZA*%*&&:* •ttWtttt*e&ty%tt?lXZA.$
*«*r isma***^ Jrisfira^^A' *** 3A*:a^ 'a2^
>2f7r2'py^'^ij^^2tr:iyii;/7r^,^^^^2,^^2Vpvj,3^*k
^M5tWJ3*ii^ftr!»^3tnrA?3P '^^^a^a^**^
A-3P*Anr s^a'S^v* * 'mm^Z^ttt^ini^^z^ 7
3w» . •im,a^*?/rrA^^p2,firA-iiiy^,^/Tr^%hr7ra<>ju^3A^i:
xntA^Z'VAZA-^v^ * ;^^,^^3<7;-A3P2,2v2^t 8
%%™>mA%%^*m&.te^3Arm*ttZA'e\?i!A% ** p
^r7r*pv^,5(nriy,^:?XMisiJ^2^^v^A^,^A"i«s/7r2*5[^2A
<W'WA-^2a^£?a:s: * :a^\A2v^2A^^r
;y^avfrtr^:yi2a?A*:3*^v^:»*a£v«^A/7n
3A* * :iij^*af*^« w^A^v*^3*5v^^^iii
*:ar£*in2*3*2;a2*:j232!3 •a^v^A-nr^tv^
2A*2iv^^^t^i2,^a,^Ar;r3rrr^pes,«/rr^3,0rm,a
-<:3Att^ j^^m^z^^^'^v^r^ * :a^«A2
*^m %z ^yzZ^^nt^m^m^rrt^Z A-^yA-Z *'-
:4r2 nr2*Jim A**323*ftt*hnra*pa;3»2*43vaA*2tf '^a^a
i^m ,ij; s»sflf»*ffr2*''iwiae^2?*^^3^£2'*iJ:3:nr;
I
10
ii
C A P. I.
N Frincipw crcavit I
us ccelum & terrain. 7
ra an I em erat inank
vacua, & tcnebra en
fuper faciem abyffi :fp\
tits quo que Dei (a) ft
batur fuper aquas. J
z'uque Dews, fiat lux,
faCtu eft lux.Et. vkit ]
m luce fa qilod bona eff
Et feparavit Dens in
lueem & inter. tcnebr.
Vdcavitquc Vetis luce
di:m, &tlntbras vot
vitnoftem: Eifattum
vefpere ,, faclumque
mane,dies units. Et di.
Dens, fat firmament:
in medio aquarum :fc\
rctque aquas ab aquk.
fecit Dews firmamentuh
fcparavit que aquas qi
'trout fuller firmamc
turn ab aquis qua; era
fuper firmament um: <
ra'$umeft tta. Vocau
que Dews firmirhentu,
ccelum : Et factum eft %
fere, factumque eft m
ne, dies fecundns. Et c
xk Dews,' con%rejrcnt,
aquee,qiu fubceeh funt
tjcitm unum,& appare,
arida, : & faclum eft it
Et voca.vptp.em aridai
lerram-y & 'fynzyegatiO)
^uaruWji^cdvitjnaiii
viiitpe pe\ft [quod box
tftt. Et dixit D-ew^ge
whet teiffa hebba'w z
rentem, (b)facienUm I
men; & arborem fr
lifer am; facicntem fr
lum fecundmn fpecic
~uim, cujus femen fit
ea fuper terrain ; & f,
CtHrh eftka. Produxkqi
terra berbam virenil f<
fa dent em femen fee una
(j.>ec iemfua:&(d)arbo\
i aci:f>ti{m£iii(e)babcn\
\cincn in femctipfa^fecu,
dim (pedemfuam: Et z
dk Dais quod bonu e(]'t
Et factum eft vcfpercj't
Clumq-y eft mane, dies te
tins. Et dixit Dews, fia,
lum'mana in(f)fimaw>
to cati, ut decant jypx
ten am, & feparcnt die,
a. noCte : fintque in fign
& in. tempore, & in die.
& annos. '
VERS.SA.(Operfiansft
THE HEBREW TEXT 641
Justin (martyr), Origen, Chrysostom, the pseudo Atha-
nasius, Tertullian, Jerome and others accused the Jews of
corrupting the Scriptures.*
Martianay, Nicolas of Lyra, Paul of Burgos, Salmeron,
Melchior Canus, Morini, and others also have laid this
accusation upon them.f
Jerome, in another place, stoutly defends the integrity of
the Hebrew text. Augustine, Sixtus of Sienna, Bellarmine,
Genebrard, Mariana, Richard Simon and others have also de-
fended its integrity 4
In studying the question, we are led to the following con-
clusions : i .—They err greatly who believe that any extensive
corruption was wrought into the Hebrew text in hatred of
the Messiah. That such corruption could not have been
wrought before the time of the Christ is self-evident. There
was lacking the motive for such movement, and, moreover,
had it been done in hatred of the Messiah, he would have
charged them with this great crime. That such corruption
were wrought after the advent of Christ is disproven first
from the impossibility of the work. There were many codices
scattered abroad through the world, several of which were
in possession of those who would not conspire in such under-
taking. No system would suffice to reach them all. And,
moreover, some of the sublimest of the Messianic prophecies
never arrive, in their translations, at the grandeur that they
have in the original. We believe, also, that the Providence
*S. Iustin. c. Tryph. 71, 72, etc. (M. 6, 644) ; S. Iren.c.hscr. III. 21 ; IV.
12 (M. 7, 946, 1004) ; Origen. Ep. ad Afric. 9; in Ierem. horn. 16. 10 (M. 12,
65 sq<l-; *3i 449 sqq.); S. Chrys. in Matth. horn. 5, 2 (M. 57); Ps. Athan.
Synops. S.S. 78 (in textu latino tantum ; M. 28, 438) ; Tertull. de cultu fern.
I. 3 (M. 1, 1308) ; S. Hier. in Gal. 3, 10 (M. 26, 357).
tRaym. 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. x, a p
7 sqq. eorum et aliorum multorum testimonia recitat.
JS. Hicr. in Is. 6, 9 (M. 24, 99)18. Aug. De Civ. D. XV. 13 (M. 41, 452).
Bellarm. De verbo Dei II. 2; Sim. do Muis Triplex assertio pro veritate
hebraica. Opp. II. p. 131 sqq.; Genebrard in Ps. 21, 1 9 ; Si\t. Sen. Biblioth.
s. VIII. haer. 13; loan. Mariana Pro Vulgata C. 7: Rich Sim. Hist. crit. du
V. T. III. 18; Marchini De divin, et canonic, libr. sacr. I. 6; Lamy Inlrod.
in S. S. I. p. 83 sqq.; Rcinke Beitrsege VII. p. 292 sqq., etc. etc.
41 (H.S.)
642 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
of God would not permit that code to be essentially corrupted
in which he had first covenanted with the chosen people.
But it is not our mind to deny that an occasional corruption
has been wilfully fastened upon the Hebrew text. Hatred
of the Messiah is bound up in the heart of the Jew. Now, as
they were the chief custodians of the Hebrew text, it is quite
probable that, wherever the reading or the sense was doubt-
ful, they would incline to that reading or interpretation
which was less favorable to the Messiah. Again, some cer-
tain texts may have been deliberately corrupted in some
codices, whence the corruption spread, and gradually inva-
ded them all. This we admit, but it is in so small a part
that it does not rob the great text of its value.
The corruption of one passage, or the attempt to obscure
the sense of a passage, would have sufficed to bring upon the
Jews the accusations spoken of in the Fathers. Moreover, it
is not clear that the Fathers charged them with changing the
the Hebrew text, but rather with obscuring the sense, or that
they rejected the Septuagint. Justin, it is true (1. a),
accuses them of deliberate mutilations, but an examination
of the passages does not substantiate his charge. The rejec-
tion by the Jews of the deuterocanonical books might also
have been taken by the Fathers as a corruption of Scripture.
We believe, therefore, that the way of truth lies in a
middle course. We admit that some passages of the Hebrew
text are corrupted, but we believe that in the main it is
authentic, and of the greatest value for him who would arrive
at the deeper sense of the message of the Old Law.
Chapter XVII.
The Greek Text of the New Testament.
*
We have before spoken of the evidence of the Providence
of God in bringing about a state of peace in the civilized
world, preceding the advent of Christ. It is also attributable
to, this benign Providence that one universal tongue was the
medium of thought in this vast extent of the habitable globe.
When, therefore, the Apostles entered upon the execution of
the mandate of Christ to teach all nations, they adopted the
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 643
Greek language which was the great medium of thought
among the nations.
After the Macedonians had subjugated the whole of
Greece, and extended their dominion into Asia and Africa,
the refined and elegant Attic began to decline ; and all the
dialects being by degrees mixed together, there arose a cer-
tain peculiar language, called the Common, and also the Hel-
lenic; but more especially, since the empire of the Macedo-
nians was the chief cause of its introduction into the general
use from the time of Alexander onwards, it was called the
(later) Macedonic. This dialect was composed from almost all
the dialects of Greece, together with very many foreign words
borrowed from the Persians, Syrians, Hebrews, and other
nations who became connected with the Macedonian people
after the age of Alexander. Now, of this Macedonian
dialect, the dialect of Alexandria (which was the lan-
guage of all the inhabitants of that city, as well of
the learned as of the Jews,) was a degenerate pro-
geny far more corrupt than the common Macedo-
nian dialect. This last mentioned common dialect,
being the current Greek spoken throughout Western Asia,
was made use of by the writers of the Greek Testament.
"The materials on which writing has been impressed
at different periods and stages of civilization are the follow-
ing: Leaves, bark, especially of the lime {liber), linen, clay
and pottery, wall-spaces, metals, lead, bronze, wood, waxen
and other tablets, papyrus, skins, parchment and vellum,
and from an early date amongst the Chinese, and in the West
after the capture of Samarcand by the Arabs in a.d. 704,
paper manufactured from fibrous substances. The most
ancient manuscripts of the New Testament now existing are
composed of vellum or parchment (membrana), the term
vellum being strictly applied to the delicate skins of very
young calves, and parchment to the integuments of sheep
and goats, though the terms are as a rule employed convert -
ibly. The word parchment seems to be a corruption of
charta pergamena, a name first given to skins prepared by
some improved process for Eumenes, king of Pergamum,
about b. c. 150. In judging of the date of a manuscript on
644 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
skins, attention must be paid to the quality of the material,
the oldest being almost invariably written on the thinnest
and whitest vellum that could be procured; while manu-
scripts of later ages, being usually composed of parchment,
are thick, discolored, and coarsely grained. Thus the
Codex Sinaiticus of the fourth century is made of the finest
skins of antelopes, the leaves being so large, that a single
animal would furnish only two (Tischendorf, Cod. Frid.
August. Prol.) Paper made of cotton (charta 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 1242 a. d. ; but they
were seldom used for Biblical manuscripts sooner than the
thirteenth, and had not entirely displaced parchment at the
era of the invention of printing, about a.d. 1450.
"All manuscripts, the most ancient not excepted, have
erasures and corrections ; which, however, were not always
effected so dexterously, but that the original writing may
sometimes be seen. Where these alterations have been made
by the copyist of the manuscript, (a prima mami, as it is
termed,) they are preferable to those made by later hands,
or a secunda manu. These erasures were sometimes made
by drawing a line through the word, or what is tenfold
worse, by the penknife. But, besides these modes of obliter-
ation, the copyist frequently blotted out the old writing
with a sponge, and wrote other words in lieu of it ; nor was
this practice confined to a single letter or word, as may be
seen in the Codex Beza?. Authentic instances are on record
in which whole books have been thus obliterated, and other
writing has been substituted in place of the manuscript so
blotted out; but where the writing was already faded
through age, they preserved their transcriptions without
further erasure.
"These manuscripts are termed Codices Palimpsesti or
Rescripts. Before the invention of paper, the great scarcity
of parchment in different places induced many persons to
obliterate the works of ancient writers, in order to tran-
scribe their own, or those of some other favorite author in
their place ; hence, doubtless, the works of many eminent
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE -NEW TESTAMENT 645
writers have perished, and particularly those of the greatest
antiquity; for such as were comparatively recent were tran-
scribed to satisfy the immediate demand, while those which
were already dim with age were erased.
"In general, a Codex Rescriptus is easily known, as it
rarely happens that the former writing is so completely
erased, as not to exhibit some traces; in a few instances,
both writings are legible. The indefatigable researches of
Cardinal Angelo Mai (for some time the principal keeper of
the Vatican Library at Rome) have discovered several valu-
able remains of biblical and classical literature in the Am-
brosian Library at Milan."
The Scriptures were not formerly as now divided into
chapters and verses. The mode of designating particular
passages was by specifying the theme. Thus Jesus Christ
designates to the Sadducees the passage from Exodus treat-
ing of the resurrection of the dead, Mark XII. 26 : " And as
concerning the dead that they rise again, have you not read
in the book of Moses, how in the bush, God spoke to him say-
ing : ' I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and
the God of Jacob?' " This method presupposed those to
whom the discourse was directed to be much versed in the
Scriptures. The first attempt at fixed divisions of Scripture
seems to have been made by Ammonius of Alexandria, the
contemporary of Origen. The first attempts were rude and
imperfect.
Ammonius (A. D. 220), selected as his standard the Gos-
pel of Matthew, and arranged in parallel columns by its
side passages from the other Gospels ; thus of necessity divid-
ing the text into sections which have been called the Am-
monian sections. Eusebius was perhaps influenced by the
labors of Ammonius in dividing the Gospel text into sections
which have been called the Eusebian Canons.
In the thirteenth century Cardinal Hugh of S. Carus, the
inventor of the Concordances of Scripture, is believed to
have been the first to divide the Scriptures into chapto
Some, however, attribute this work to Stephen Langton, the
Archbishop of Canterbury, of the same century. This n
of division passed from the Vulgate to the primal texts, and
646 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
later even the Hebrew text was thus divided. The subdi-
visions of the chapters were in this system marked by the
letters of the alphabet. The distinction and enumeration
of the verses is due to Robert Etienne, the celebrated printer
of Paris, wTho 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, as also the chapter divisions.
The Scriptures were also in the beginning written with-
out any elements of punctuation or accentuation. By this
mode of writing the page presented one compact mass of
characters, and their division and construction into words
were left to the reader's judgment. See plate on page 647.
This mode of writing remained in vogue till about the
ninth century of the Christian Era. As by different group-
ings, and combinations of characters, different meanings
resulted from the text this was a fertile cause cf error,
and many of the variantia are traceable to this cause.
A system of accentuation had been invented by Aris-
tophanes of Byzantium in the second century before Christ,
which was employed by the Greek grammarians in the works
of profane argument. Its application to the Sacred Codices
was rare. St. Epiphanius testifies that certain ones have
thus written copies of the Alexandrine Codex of the Old Test-
ament, but Tischendorf affirms that no Codex anterior to the
eighth century is written with accents. It is only after the
tenth century that accentuation becomes general. This was
also a source of variantia, as the different positions of the
accents oft induced a different meaning. In some of the old
codices, as for instance the Codex Sinaiticus the spiritus
lenis and gravis are indicated, but this is judged by Tischen-
dorf to be the work of a later hand. More ancient than the
use of either accents or signs of punctuation is the use of the
lineola, — , to designate the abbreviation of certain words of
more frequent occurrence. Thus: ®C for ©eo'?, KC lor/cvpios,
THE GREEK TEXT OK THE NEW TESTAMENT 017
UNA for Trvev/xa. The iota subscript is never found in the
old Codices of Holy Writ, hence another cause of error. H
these different factors effected many divergencies in the
Sacred text may be inferred from the following examples.
The group of letters avrt) became avrij or ainy or avry];
every one of different import by modifications which can
only be based upon the fallible, varying, judgments of men.
The opening verses of St. John's Gospel form a good speci-
men of the difference in interpretation which may result
from different insertion of the sign of punctuation.
The Vulgate and its dependent versions insert the period
after ye'yovev. 'Without him was made nothing that was
made. In him was life. " etc. St. Irenaius, St. Clement of
Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasius, and others close the
period after ov&e ev\ whence would result: 'Without him
was made nothing. What was made was life in him. "
To remove this cause of error Origen in his Hexapla
divided the text into <rn'p(, and this mode of writing was
termed arixofierpia. In this stichometric arrangement of
the text, every complete phrase occupied a separate line.
St. Jerome wrote in this manner his version of the pro-
phetical books of the Old Testament. In the middle of the
fifth century Euthalius, a deacon of Alexandria, employed
this mode of writing in his successive editions of the Pauline
Epistles, of the Catholic Epistles and the Acts, and of the
Gospels. As this served well the convenience of the reader it
became quite general in those early codices, although but few
thus written are extant to-day. Principal among those that
remain are the Codex Bezc-c of Cambridge (D) of the < # ispels
and Acts; the Cod ex of Clermont (D) of the Pauline Epistles;
the Codex of St. Germain (E) of the Pauline Epistles; and
the Codex Coislinianus (H) of the Pauline Epistles.
This mode of writing, though very convenient to the
reader, required much material upon which to be written, as
large portions of the superficies remained blank.
We reproduce on the following page a specimen of
stichometry from the Codex of Beza ; Math. XXIV; 51-
XXV. 6, with English translation in same form of writing.
648 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
kAiob^y^mocycdmoaontcdn
AeKMnAjeeNoic AiTiNjecx^BoYCAi
TAc^AMTTXAAceAYTa:)N,
exHAeoNeicATi^MTHCiNToYNY^^^Y
kAithcnym<|>hc
neMT6A662AYTCDNHC^!sJMCO-T^1
K^lTr6MTe<J>JONlMOl
aioynmcdj>aiaaboY^^J*t*^c\mvittaaaca.Ytcon
oYKex^BONMeeexYTaDNjeAMOM
eiMToic ArreipicxYTCDNj AkiAe<J>j*ONiMoi
6\XB0NJ6A60?MetsJT0!CArr6J0lC
M6TATCDMAMV8TTAAa3N^YTCDNJ
xjoNi^ONiTocAeTOY^Y^^^Y
eiMYCTASAi^TT^cAiKMeKAeeY^o^
M6CHCA6NYKTOCKj,\YrHr^'"ONeN
ANDGNASHINGOFTEETH
THENSHALLTHEKINGDOMOFHEAVENBELIKENEDUNTO
TENVIRGINSWHOTOOK
THEIRLAMPS
ANDWENTFORTHTOMEETTHEBRIDEGROOM
ANDBRIDE
ANDFIVEOFTHEMWEREFOOLISH
ANDFIVEWEREWISE
THEYTHATWEREFOOLISHTOOKTHEIRLAMPS
ANDTOOKNOOILWITHTHEMINTHEIRVESSELS
BUTTHEWISE
TOOKOILINTHEIRVESSELS
WITHTHEIRLAMPS
WHILETHEBRIDEGROOMTARRIED
THEYALLSLUMBEREDANDSLEPT
ANDATMIDNIGHTTHEREWASACRYMADE
THE GREEK TEXT OP THE NEW TESTAMENT 649
Hence, it was modified so that the o-ti'xoi were separated
by points. From the seventh century the eustom began to
prevail to indicate the greater or less textual division by
different location of the point. The Ko/j-na or br
division was indicated by locating the (.) punctum at the
base of the line; the kwXov (-) or middle division, by inter-
posing it midway between the base and top; while the full
period was terminated by the punctum (*) at the top of the
line. Although this was the most ordinary mode in those
times, sometimes the point at the base designated the full
period, and vice versa. Our modern mode of punctuation
did not come into use till after the invention of printing in
the fifteenth century.
The autographs of the New Testament perished in the
first centuries of the Christian era. There is almost a com-
plete silence in tradition concerning any such original writ-
ings. Some adduce a passage from Tertullian to prove that
the autographs were preserved in his day.
' Pereurre Ecclesias Apostolicas, apud quas ipsa* adhuc
Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis president, apud quas ipsae
Authenticas Literae eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem, et
repnesentantes faciem uniuscujusque. Proximo est tibi
Achaia, habes Corinthum. Si non longe es a Macedonia,
habes Philippos, habes Thcssalonicenses. Si potes in Asiam
tendere, habes Ephesum. Si autem Italia' adjaces, habes
Romam. " (Dc Prescription- H&reticorwn, e. 36.)
Attempts have been made, indeed, and that by very
eminent writers, to reduce the term " Authentic^ Litcrcc" to
mean nothing more than "genuine, unadulterated Epistles, "
or even the authentic Greek as opposed to the Latin
translation.
Others defend that he evidently speaks of the autographs.
But the weight of evidence is clearly in favor of the former
opinion. Tertullian was ni >t ign< trant that the sacred writers
did not commit their thoughts to writing with their own
hands; and, therefore, faithful copies of the original docu-
ments, if faithfully executed, would be as authentic as the
650 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
first documents. And for this cause also, greater care was
not bestowed on the autographs, for the faithful copies were
held in equal veneration.
The dissemination of the writings of the Apostles began
immediately, 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 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 comparative criticism, many of these variants
have been brought to light. The English critic Mill esti-
mated that the discovered different readings of the New
Testament in his day amounted to thirty thousand; they
probably to-day are four times that number. But the great
mass of these variants leave intact the substantial correct-
ness of the sacred text, so that the remark of Bentley is just :
"The real text of the sacred writers does not now (since
the originals have been so long lost) lie in any MS or edition,
but is dispersed in them all. 'Tis competently exact indeed
in the worst MS now extant ; nor is one article of faith or
moral precept either perverted or lost in them; choose as
awkwardly as you will, choose the worst by design, out of the
whole lump of readings.' Or again: 'Make your 30,000
[variations] as many more, if numbers of copies can ever
reach that sum: all the better to a knowing and serious
reader, who is thereby more richly furnished to select what
he sees genuine. But even put them into the hands of a
knave or a fool, and yet with the most sinistrous and absurd
choice, he shall not extinguish the light of any one chapter,
nor so disguise Christianity, but that every feature of it will
still be the same. " Thus God's Providence preserved pure
the substance of His written word.
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 651
Perhaps the gravest variants in the New Testament are
in regard to Mark XVI. 9-16, and John VII. 53, VIII. 1 1 .
Various causes have conspired to bring the various read-
ings into the text of holy Scripture.
Sometimes spurious additions have been made in accord-
ance with the copyist's dogmatic prepossession.
Passages are interpolated from one writer into another
to bring the text into a fancied agreement.
Marginal notes have been incorporated into the text The
interpolation of the Lord 's Prayer as found in King James '
Version is an example of this.
Genuine clauses are lost by homceoteleuton (op-oioreXev-
tov), when two clauses end in the same word or words. The
transcriber 's eye wanders from one clause to the other, and
omits one, since its ending is identical with what immediately
preceded.
Such minor changes as a change in the order of the words
are often found.
One word is taken for another from the fact that it is sim-
ilar, or one letter is mistaken for another, thereby changing
the sense of words.
Sometimes the copyist has written at another's dictation,
and has mistaken the other's pronunciation. This is rare
in the better MSS.
Sometimes the copyists have changed the New Testa-
ment quotations from the Old Testament to bring them into
closer conformity with the original.
Synonyms are sometimes employed.
Readings have been altered to avoid dogmatic difficult v :
others have been omitted for the same reason.
The copyist may be tempted to forsake his proper func-
tion for that of a reviser, or critical collector. He may sim-
ply omit what he does not understand (e. g. to iiaprvpiov
I. Tim. II. 6.), or may attempt to get over a difficulty by in-
versions and other changes. Thus the fivcn/jptov spoken oi
by St. Paul I. Cor. XV. 51, which rightly stands in the best
codices irdvTe<i p.ev ou Koip.7]0r]a-6/j.€da} irdves 8e aXXayrjaop-eOa
was easily varied into Travret Koifxi]6iio-6/j.eda, ov 7raWe<? Be
a\Xaiyj]a-6fxeda} as if in mere perplexity.
652 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
It is very possible that some scattered readings cannot
be reduced to any of the above-named classes, but enough
has been said to afford the student some general notion of
the nature and extent of the subject.
As early as the third century attempts were made to
restore the text to its original purity. It was thought that
by critical collation of the best manuscripts and by selecting
the best readings, a correct exemplar might be had as a fount
for correct copies. Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, mar-
tryed under Diocletian, wrought a recension of the Greek
text of both Testaments. The text was adopted in the
churches of Egypt, and became the basis of the Alexandrine
family of codices. About the same time, Lucian, a priest of
Antioch, martyred in the same persecution, executed a recen-
sion of the text of both Testaments, which was received in
all the Eastern churches, from Constantinople to Antioch.
Of the nature of the labors of Hesychius and Lucian we can
form no secure judgment. Jerome accuses them of adding
to the Scriptures (Ad. Dam. Praef. in Evang.), and Gelasius,
in the decree, "De recip. et non recip. libris, " rejects "the
Gospels which Hesychius and Lucian falsified. '
Hug believes that Origen made a recension of the New
Testament, but proof is lacking to support the statement.
Though fragments of Greek Scriptures had been printed
by Aldus Manutius at Venice in 1497 and again in 1504 the
first complete New Testament printed in Greek was that of
the complutensian Polyglot the munificent work of Ximenes
(143 7-1 5 1 7) Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo. The New
Testament was published in 15 14. The Old Testament was
finished about six years later. The work is estimated to
have cost £23,000. The protocanonical books are printed in
Hebrew, Greek and Latin, the deuterocanonical books and
the New Testament in Greek and Latin.
While Ximenes was laboring on his great work, Erasmus,
that scholarly vagabond, hastened an edition of the New
Testament for John Froben a publisher of Basle. Froben's
object was to forestall the Spanish work, and the character
of Erasmus' work may be judged from his declaration that
the volume "precipitatum.fuit verius quam editum." He
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 653
employed no valuable MSS, and sometimes translated por-
tions from the Latin into Greek to supply lacunae.
Thus in Acts ix. 5, 6, the words from aic\r)p6v to 7r/3o<? clvtov
are interpolated from the Vulgate, partly by the help of Acts
xx vi.
The result is that the text of Erasmus' Greek Testa-
ment has no critical worth. And yet so strong is prejudice
that this corrupt text was received by the protestants as
the received text instead of the far better text of the Complu-
tensian Polyglot. This fact is regretted by Mill who
declares (Proleg. p. in. Oxford 1707) that it would have
been far better for all if the Complutensian were with some
fewr corrections accepted as the received text. Delitzsch
(Handschr. Funde I. p. 5.) also declares:
"Es wasre in der Gliick gewesen, wenn nicht der eras-
mische Text, sondern der complutensische die Grundlage
des spaetern textus receptus geworden waere. "
In 1 5 18 appeared the Grcuca Biblia at Venice, from the
celebrated press of Aldus, which professes to be grounded on
a collation of the most ancient copies.
The editions of Robert Etienne, mainly by reason of
their exquisite beauty, have exercised more influence than
those of Erasmus; and Etienne's third or folio edition of
1550 is by many regarded as the received or standard text.
In the folio or third edition of 1550 the various readings
of the Codices, obscurely referred to in the preface to that of
1546, are entered in the margin. This fine volume derives
much importance from its being the earliest ever published
with critical apparatus.
Robert Etienne in these editions first divided the New
Testament into verses.
The brothers Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir set up
a printing press at Leyden which maintained its reputation
for elegance and correctness throughout the greater part of
the seventeenth century.
Their undeservedly popular Greek New Testament of
1642 was considered the received text on the Continent. It
is based on Erasmus' corrupt text. Robert Etienne also
654 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
took Erasmus' text for the standard. His edition was
the received text in England.
In 1657 Brian Walton published his great Polyglot, in
6 vols, sometimes called the London Polyglot.
In the Old Testament it contains the Hebrew text, the
Samaritan text, the Chaldean Paraphrase, the Septuagint,
the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Latin Vulgate. The fifth
of his huge folios is devoted to the New Testament in six
languages, viz. Etienne's Greek text of 1550, the Peshitto-
Syriac, the Latin Vulgate, the Ethiopic, Arabic, and (in
the Gospels only) the Persian. None of Walton's texts are
of special critical worth.
It is evident from what has been written, that the Greek
text has not been preserved to us in all its pristine integrity,
as it came from the inspired writers' hands. But neither
has corruption so invaded it that it should be considered an
unreliable fount of Scripture. The Hebrew, Greek, and
Vulgate Latin, remain three authentic founts. At times,
one is more correct than another, and the collation of all
three is useful to the understanding of any one. But it must
always be considered that in far greater part the fulness and
richness of the sense can only be received from a perusal of
the original texts.
In the last century arose what may properly be called the
science of Textual Criticism, which may be defined as a
METHOD OF STUDY WHEREBY WE SEEK TO DETERMINE THE
CHARACTER, VALUE, AND MUTUAL RELATION OF THE AUTHOR-
ITIES UPON WHICH THE TEXT OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES IS
based. The mode of procedure is to examine first the age
of the documents, the circumstances of their origin, the
causes that may have produced certain readings and the
accord of one document with another.
Robert Etienne was the first to collect and collate MSS
with the purpose of emending the N. T. Brian Walton (1600
—61) in his great Polyglot employed the edition of N. T.
prepared by Etienne in 1550, and added an apparatus criticus
collected by Ussher. The first really great work of textual
criticism is that of Dr. John Mill of Oxford which appeared
in 1707. Mill labored through thirty years on his critical
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 655
edition of the New Testament, and died a fortnight after it
appeared. Mill's contribution to the science of Biblical
Criticism places him in the first rank.
Bentley (fi742) believing that the oldest MSS of the
Greek original agreed almost exactly with Jerome's Latin
version, contemplated a critical text wherein the Greek of
the fourth century and Jerome 's version should be critically
compared. Bentley was diverted to other work, and died
without accomplishing his Scriptural design.
Bengel (1687-1752) published a critical edition of the
New Testament in 1734, He collated sixteen codices, but
so negligently that most of them have needed examination
from those who followed him . He deserves credit for having
first contemplated the grouping of the codices into families
or recensions a theory which was subsequently skilfully de-
veloped by Griesbach.
Bengel divided all codices into two families: the Asiatic
written chiefly at Constantinople, which he inclined to dis-
parage, and the African, fewer in number, but better in
character.
The next step in advance was made by Wetstein (1693-
1754) who published a critical edition of the New Testament
with a Prolegomena prefixed. He was the first to cite the
MSS under the notation by which they are generally known.
The character of the man is revealed in his "Prole-
gomena." He was an assiduous student, audacious, rebel-
lious, full of contempt and hate for others; a man tinged
with Socinian errors, arrogantly intolerant of all men, while
demanding full liberty of thought for himself. The product
of his impetuous labors forms a chaos where men may find
much that is good amid the mass of conjectures.
Matthaei (1744-1811) is more valuable as a collector
than as a collator. While professor at Moscow he found
many Greek MSS both patristic and Biblical brought
thither from Mt. Athos. The manner in which he examined
these has been severely criticised. The justice of the sever-
ity of the criticism which Matthaei encountered may be
judged from the fact that he assigned to the Uncial Codex
656 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
50 of a Greek Lectionary a value above all the codices which
were known in Europe in his day.
Hence it results that Matthasi's text, which of course he
moulded on his own views, must be held in slight esteem:
his services as a collator comprehend his whole claim
(and that no trifling one) to our thankful regard. To him
solely we are indebted for Evan. V. 237-259; Act. 98-107;
Paul. 1 13-124; Apoc. 47-50; Evst. 47-57; Acts Apost.
13-20: nearly all at Moscow: the whole seventy, together
with the citations of Scripture in thirty -four manuscripts of
Chrysostom, being so fully and accurately collated, that the
reader need not be at a loss whether any particular copy
supports or opposes the reading in the common text.
Matthasi annexed the Latin Vulgate to his Greek text,
as this was the onlv version which he valued.
Francis Karl Alter (1 749-1804) a Jesuit, professor at
Vienna published in 1 786-87 a critical text of the New Testa-
ment. He accepted as his standard good MSS of the
Imperial library at Vienna, (Evan. 218, Acts 65, Paul 57,
Apoc. 83) and collated with these twenty-one other MSS of
the same library together with readings from the Old Latin,
Coptic, and Slavonic versions. The labors of Alter were of a
very high order, but religious prejudice has prevented him
from the recognition which is his due.
Birch, Moldenhawer, and Tychsen were sent into various
countries in 1 783-4 by Christian VII. of Denmark to examine
MSS. Moldenhawer and Tychsen visited Spain, while Birch
traveled in Germany. The first result of their combined
labors was an edition of the Four Gospels published in 1788.
As much of this edition and the rest of the New Testa-
ment prepared by the collators were destroyed by fire in 1 795 .
Birch later collected and published the fragments.
Moldenhawer and Tychsen were so filled with hatred of
Spain and its religion and so puffed up by a vain arrogance
that the "Prolegomena" contributed under the name of
Moldenhawer are worthless. Birch was more temperate,
but his examination of many authorities was superficial.
John James Griesbach (1 745-1 81 2) is the next name
in the history of Biblical textual criticism. He was intensely
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 657
hated by Matthasi who declares that though he had never
" ut credibile est," collated a MS even of the tenth century,
he yet presumes to sit in judgment on those who have col-
lated seventy.
Though Griesbach did some original collating of MSS,
his great work was to select readings from the great mass
collected by those who had gone before him.
He is famous for his theory of families or recensions of
codices. At the outset he was disposed to group all extant
materials in five or six families. He afterwards limited these
to three, the Alexandrian, the Western, and the Byzantine.
He assigned to the Alexandrian family the pre-eminence.
Of course Griesbach 's theory wrould simplify the science,
for then one would not need examine the great mass of
codices, but only some worthy representatives of the different
families. But for the lack of evidence to support this theory
it is now quite generally abandoned.
John Leonard Hug (1765-1846) merits a place among
the Biblical textual critics on account of his De Antiquitate
Cod. Yat. Commentatio published at Freiburg in 18 10.
Hug was a Catholic, a professor of Scripture at Freiburg.
He published in 1808 an Einleitung in Die Schriften Des
Nenen Testaments which has great critical value.
It was Hug who first placed the date of origin of Codex B
in the fourth century, a judgment which has been generally
accepted, although Tischendorf declares that he holds it
"non propter Hugium sed cum Hugio. "
John Martin Augustine Scholz (11852) was a pupil of
Hug, and afterwards professor at Bonn. He was a Roman
Catholic. The labors of Scholz in the cause of the Greek
text of the New Testament were stupendous. The results
of his great labors were embodied in an edition of the Greek
New Testament.
This work, which forms two volumes in quarto, has been
published at Leipsic. The first volume, containing the four
Gospels, made its appearance in 1830, and the second, con-
taining the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of St. Paul, the
Catholic Epistles, and the Apocalypse, in 1836. The prole-
gomena prefixed to the work consists of one hundred and
42 (H.S.)
65S THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
seventy-two pages. In it the learned editor gives ample
information respecting the codices, versions, Fathers, and
councils, which he used as authorities, together with a his-
tory of the text, and an exposition or defence of his peculiar
system of classification of MSS. Scholz spent twelve years
in preparing the materials for his work. He visited the
libraries of the principal cities of Europe, and in addition to
these, the libraries of the Greek monasteries of Jerusalem,
of St. Saba, and the Isle of Patmos. He collated, either
entirely or in part, six hundred and six manuscripts not
previously collated by any editor of the New Testament.
Scholz refers all the MSS to two recensions or families —
the Alexandrian or African, and the Asiatic or Constanti-
nopolitan — in other words, the Occidental (same as African),
and Oriental.
In 1831 Karl Lachmann (1 793-1851) published his
Novum Testamentum Greece at Berlin. In this work Lach-
mann enters on a new road in textual criticism. His prede-
cessors had taken as a point de depart the textus receptus of
the Greek testament. Lachmann recognized the well-nigh
critically worthless character of this text, and therefore
directed his labors to restore the ancient text from MSS and
the works of the Fathers. Lachmann founded his system
upon the principles of St. Jerome and those of Richard Bent-
ley, who acknowledged St. Jerome as a leader. In fact,
Bentley had projected a work entitled "Proposals for Print-
ing^ New Edition of the Greek Testament and St. Heirom's
Latin Version." The Anglican theologians opposed Bent-
ley's work on account of the just place it accorded St. Jerome,
and this opposition prevented the execution of Bentley 's
purpose. Lachmann entertained the same estimate of
Jerome. He declares that the "excellent' and "very
reasonable" principles of St. Jerome "should always be the
rule which one should follow in determining the reading of
the New Testament."
In 1842 Lachmann published the first volume of his
Novum Testamentum Greece et Latine at Berlin: in 1850 the
second volume appeared at Berlin. Lachmann 's apparatus
criticus is unfortunatelv restricted.
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT I'..")'.!
The Vatican Codex, Codex of St. Ephrem, the Codex
Claromontanus, the Amiatinus of the Vulgate, ;md of course
the Sinaitic were not available to him. He had the true
principles and the true temper of mind of a critic. His
work is sound and just as far as it goes. He was the first to
establish the principle that an array of codices is not an
array of authority. He rejected en masse a great number of
codices, and any unbiased competent judge who will ex-
amine these must admit that in this he has done the world a
service. The Vulgate and the Fathers he rightlv considers
as primary authorities. He was a true scholar both in
spirit and in execution.
He restored the Latin versions to their rightful place and
established the principle that to ascertain a true reading one
must consider, not the number of codices but the character
of codices.
The next great name in the science of Biblical text-
ual criticism is that of Tischendorf (i 815-1874). This
scholar declares that when he set out on his first literary
journey he could not pay for his coat.
His first labors were editions of the New Testament, for
booksellers, of no great value. He traveled extensively in
the interest of scholarship. He visited Italy twice. England
four times, and went four times into the East, where on Ml.
Sinai he discovered the great Codex of which an account
will be given later. In fact the fame of Tischendorf rests
not so much on his critical editions of the New Testament,
as on the uncial codices which he has published. His eighth
and last edition of the Greek testament is the most complete
edition existing. His death prevented him from adding the
"Prolegomena" to this edition. Speaking of his prede-
cessors Tischendorf declares that "instead of deriving: a
history of the text from documents, they had created a his-
tory of the text in their own minds." (Tischendorf X. T.
Graece, ed. 7.) It is amazing what Tischendorf accom-
plished during thirty years of unremitting toil.
In 1843 was published the New Testament; in 1845 the
Old Testament portion of "Codex Ephraemi S
(Cod. C), 2 vols. 4to, in uncial type, with elaborate Pri
660 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
gomena, notes, and facsimiles. In 1846 appeared "Monu-
menta sacra inedita," 4to, containing transcripts of Codd.
FaLNWaY@a of the Gospels, and B of the Apocalypse;
the plan and apparatus of this volume and of nearly all that
follow are the same as in the Codex Ephraemi. In 1846 he
also published the Codex Frederic-Augustanus in lithographed
facsimile throughout, containing the results of his first dis-
covery at Mount Sinai: in 1847 the Evangelium Palatinum
ineditum of the Old Latin; in 1850 and again in 1854 less
splendid but good and useful editions of the Codex Amia-
tinus of the Latin Vulgate. His edition of Codex Clar-
omontanus (D of St. Paul), 1852, was of precisely the
same nature as his editions of Cod. Ephraemi, &c, but his
book entitled "Anecdota sacra et prof ana," 1855 (second
and enlarged edition in 1861), exhibits a more miscellaneous
character, comprising (together with other matter) tran-
scripts of Oa of the Gospels, M of St. Paul ; a collation of Cod.
6 1 of the Acts being the only cursive copy he seems to have
examined; notices and facsimiles of Codd. ITA tisch. or
Evan. 478 of the Gospels, and of the lectionaries tisch.ev
(Evst. 190) and tisch.6- f- (Apost. 71). Next wras com-
menced a new series of "Monumenta sacra inedita" (pro-
jected to consist of nine volumes), on the same plan as the
book of 1846. Much of this series is devoted to codices of
the Septuagint version, to which Tischendorf paid great
attention, and whereof he published four editions (the latest
in 1869) hardly worthy of him. Vol. I. (1855) contains
transcripts of Codd. I, venev. (Evst. 175); Vol. II. (1857) of
Codd. NbR@a; Vol. III. (i860) of Codd. QWC, all of the
Gospels; Vol. IV. (1869) was given up to the Septuagint, as
Vol. VII. would have been to the Wolfenbuttel manuscript
of Chrysostom, of the sixth century; but Cod. P of the Acts,
Epistles, and Apocalypse comprises a portion of Vols. V.
(1865) and of VI. (1869) ; while Vol. VIII. was to have been
devoted to palimpsest fragments of both Testaments, such
as we have described amongst the uncials : the Appendix or
Vol. IX. (1870) contains Cod. E of the Acts, etc. An
improved edition of his system of Gospel Harmony
(Synopsis Evangelica,i864) appeared in i864,with some fresh
THE GREEK TliXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 661
critical matter, a better one in 187 1, and the fifth in 1884.
His achievements in regard to Codd. {< and I! we shall
speak of in their proper places. Republished his "Notitia
Cod. Sinaitici" in 1860, his great edition of that manuscript
in 1862, with full notes and Prolegomena; smaller editions of
the New Testament only in 1863 and 1865; "an Appendix
Codd. celeberrimorum Sinaitici, Vaticani, Alexandrini with
facsimiles" in 1867. His marvellous yet unsatisfactory edi-
tion of Cod. Vaticanus, prepared under certain unavoidable
disadvantages, appeared in 1867; its "Appendix" (includ-
ing Cod. B of the Apocalypse) in 1869; his unhappy "Re-
sponsa ad calumnias Romanas" in 1870. To this long and
varied catalogue must yet be added exact collations of Codd.
EGHKMUX Gospels, 'EGHL Acts, FHL of St. Paul, all
made for his editions of the New Testament.
He reduces all the codices to four great families. 1.
The Alexandrian, used by the Jewish Christians. 2. — The
Latin family, used by the Latin race, who, in those days,
used Greek in liturgy. 3. — The Asiatic family, used by the
Greeks, both in Asia and their own country. 4. -The By-
zantine family, used by the Churches of the Byzantine
realm. He states that there is great affinity between the
Alexandrian and Latin on one side, and between the Asiatic
and Byzantine on the other. He cautions all not to put too
much trust in the systems of recensions.
It is an evident fact that the Scriptural codices of the
world bear such relation to one another that they have in
them foundation for grouping them into certain families.
The very mode of their origin demonstrates this. But the
actual assigning of the codices to their different families,
and the determining of the number of the recensions, is an
extremely difficult \v< >rk, one that has not been ace implished.
Teschendorf groups the codices in two pairs of recensions:
the Alexandrian and Latin forming one pair, and the Asiatic
and Byzantine forming the other pair. But he wisely cau-
tions that the theory of these recensions is but a theory, and
that it would be rash to make it the supreme norm in criti-
cism.
662 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
Samuel Prideaux Tregelles (i 813-1875) merits a place
with the foremost critics. He traveled in Europe collecting
materials for several years.
In 1857 appeared, for the use of subscribers only, the
Gospels of SS. Matthew and Mark, as the first part of his
"Greek New Testament" (pp. 1-216); early in 1861 the
second part, containing SS. Luke and John (pp. 217-488),
with but a few pages of "Introductory Notice" in each. In
that year, paralysis, mercurialium pestis virorum, for a while
suspended Tregelles' too assiduous labors : but he recovered
health sufficient to publish the Acts and Catholic Epistles
in 1865, the Epistles of St. Paul down to Second Thess. in
1869. Early in 1870, while in the act of revising the conclud-
ing chapters of the Apocalypse, he was visited by a second
and very severe stroke of his fell disease. The remaining
portion of the Pauline Epistles was sent out in 1870 as he had
himself prepared it ; the Apocalypse without the Prolegomena
in 1872, as well as the state of Tregelles' papers would enable
his friends S. J. B. Bloxsidge and B. W. Newton to perform
their office. The stricken author could contribute nothing
save a message to his subscribers, full of devout thankful-
ness and calm reliance on the Divine wisdom. The text of
the Apocalypse differs from that which he arranged in 1844
in about 229 places.
Except Codd. OH, which were published in 1861 (see
under those MSS), this critic has not edited in full the text
of any document, but his renewed collations of manuscripts
are very extensive: viz. Codd. EGHKMN"RUXZrA 1, 33r
69 of the Gospels; HL 13, 31, 61 of the Acts; DFL 1, 17, 37
of St. Paul, 1, 14 of the Apocalypse, Am. of the Vulgate.
Tregelles is a most accurate collator; he followed the
excellent principles of Lachmann, and his opinions are sound
and useful. He gave no importance to the received text,
neither to the great mass of .the cursive MSS. He acted on
the principle that only the ancient authorities have a voice
in determining the text. In 1879 Dr. Hort published an
appendix to Tregelles ' New Testament in which he collected
the Prolegomena left by Tregelles.
THE UNCIAL CODICES
In 1881 Westcott and Hort published "The New Testa-
ment in the original Greek" at Cambridge and London. In
the same year Hort published an 'Introduction" and
"Appendix" to the same. The Greek Testament of West-
cott and Hort was the result of twenty-five years' labor.
They depart more from the tcxtus recepins than any previous
editor had done, and the best authority is adduced to justify
most of their different readings. As they had the labors of
all those who preceded to draw from, their Testament is the
most correct Greek Testament yet published. The excel-
lence of the Revised Edition of Oxford is due to the fact
that the revisers followed the same principles.
CHAPTER XVIII.
The Uncial Codices.
Greek characters naturally divide themselves into "maj-
uscules ' '.and " minuscules. ' ' The former class is subdivided
into capitals proper, square in form, suited for lapidary
inscriptions ; and modified capitals somewhat rounded
which we call uncials. The minuscules are employed in the
cursive MSS. The term "uncial" may be derived from
uncia an inch referring to the size of the letter. In uncial
MSS the letters are not joined, and marks of punc-
tuation are very few. In general no greater space
separates word from word than separates letter from
letter. Uncial letters prevailed up to the tenth century,
and some specimens are found in liturgical books in the
eleventh century. The cursive mode of writing began in
the ninth century, and continued until the invention of
printing.
It is conventional among scholars to designate the uncial
codices of Scripture by the Roman and Greek capital letters.
One is designated by the Hebrew. The cursives are gen-
erally designated by Arabic numbers.
According to Scholz's enumeration, the whole number
of codices of the New Testament, which had been wholly or
partially collated up to his time, amounted to six hundred
and seventy-four. The whole number known up to the
present day would exceed two thousand. Many have not
664 THE UNCIAL CODICES
yet been examined. Only a small number of these contain
all the books. Some exist only in scattered fragments ;
others contain some particular book, or class of books.
About one hundred are written in uncial characters, and are
older than the tenth century. Of these, only the Codex of
Sinai contains the complete New Testament. The others
are written in small letters, and are of date more recent than
the tenth century. About three hundred of these contain
all the books. The uncial codices receive their name either
from the place where they are preserved, or from the person
to whom they have belonged. In classifying the codices of
the New Testament the Testament is divided into the Gos-
pels, The Acts, The Pauline Epistles, The Catholic Epistles,
and The Apocalypse. Some codices originally contained
the whole Bible, some the whole New Testament, others
some section or sections of the New Testament. Thus Codex
D of the Gospels and Acts is Beza 's Codex in the University
Library of Cambridge; Codex D of the Pauline Epistles
is the Codex Claromontanus 107 of the Royal library of Paris.
In the collation of MSS the editors have indicated the
various corrections which have been written in the codex
by later hands. A correction by the original copyist is called
the reading prima manu. The corrections are sometimes,
indicated by asterisks thus C* would be the Codex of St.
Ephrem as corrected by the first hand ; C** as corrected by
the second corrector ; a third corrector is indicated by three
asterisks. Other collators use the Arabic numbers in the
same manner: Tischendorf sometimes uses the small capital
letters as exponents.
Codex Vaticanus B is perhaps the oldest and certainly
the most valuable codex of Scripture, Its early history is
not known. It seems to have been brought into the Vati-
can library by Pope Nicholas V. in the fifteenth century.
It was taken to Paris by Napoleon I., where it was partially
examined by Hug. It was afterwards restored to the Vati-
can where it has since been jealously preserved.
It is a quarto volume, arranged in quires of five sheets of
ten leaves each, like Codex Marchalianus of the Prophets
written in the sixth or seventh century and Cod. Rossan-
THE UNCIAL CODICES 665
ensis of the Gospels to be described hereafter, not < >f four or
three sheets as Cod. &$, the ancient, perhaps the original
numbering of the quires being often found in the margin.
The New Testament fills 142 out of its 759 thin and delicate
vellum leaves, said to be made of the skins of antelopes .it is
bound in red morocco, being ten and one-half inches high,
ten broad, four and one-half thick. It once contained the
whole Bible in Greek, the Old Testament of the Septuagint
version (a tolerably fair representation of which was exhibited
in the Roman edition as early as 1587), except the books of
the Maccabees and the Prayer of Manasses. The first forty-
six chapters of Genesis (the manuscript begins at iroXiv,
Gen. XLVI. 28) and Psalms CV— CXXXVII, also the books
of the Maccabees, are wanting. The New Testament is
complete down to Heb. IX. 14 Kada; the rest of the Epistle
to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse, being written in by a
later hand.
In 1533 Sepulveda writing to Erasmus declared of the
Codex Vaticanus that it is most carefully written and agrees
in great part with the Latin Vulgate against the received
Greek text, and to support his statements he furnished
Erasmus with 365 readings. In 1669 Bartolocci the Lib-
rarian of the Vatican made a collation of the MSS, but it was
never published. Scholz and Tischendorf have used his
collation. Bentley made an imperfect collation of it through
Mico. Birch examined it superficially about 1780. Hug
examined it in 18 10 and published the result of his incom-
plete examination under the title, " De Antiquitate Cod.
Vat. Commentatio, " He was the first to assign its date as
the fourth century, a judgment generally accepted. In 1843
Tischendorf obtained the privilege of examining it
for two days, three hours each day. In 1844 Edward de
Muralt examined the Codex Vat. nine hours a day for three
days. He published the result of his labors in an edition of
the New Testament in 1846. Tregelles saw the MS in
1845, Dllt was not allowed to transcribe any of its readings.
The care which the Vatican authorities bestowed on this
great codex is just and reasonable. It is one of the greatest
treasures on earth. To men having any just right to see it.
666 THE UNCIAL CODICES
the Vatican authorities accorded every just and reasonable
right. One of the tendencies of protestantism was to depre-
ciate the Latin text, and extol the Greek text ; and precisely
the so-called textus receptus which has been proven to be of
little worth. They were anxious to be the first to collate
the greatest Greek codex, and as this was not granted them,
they manifest their spleen. The Vatican authorities con-
templated publishing this codex in a worthy manner; and
they have accomplished this through the great Cardinal
Mai, and Charles Vercellone. This edition appeared in
1857 three years after Cardinal Mai's death. It is in rive
volumes; the fifth contains a preface by Vercellone. Even
the great fame of Mai did not save him from the calumny of
those who have always invoked the aid of falsehood in
attacking the Catholic Church. While no human work is
absolutely perfect, the true estimate of Cardinal Mai's
work will place it above any other codex of Scripture thus
far collated. This is to be expected. The great learning
and sound judgment of the man, the unlimited resources at
his command, the length of time expended, from 1823 to
1854, all persuade of the excellence of the work. It is urged
against him that he has taken certain liberties with the codex.
One can judge of the animus of such an objection, when we
find the great critic blamed for having supplied from other
sources portions omitted in the Vatican manuscript, although
the fact is duly notified. Again he is blamed for having
selected what in his judgment was the more probable of
the readings of the first and second hands.
The Pharisees who impugned the known truth find real
successors in these envious hypocrites whose name is legion.
In 1867 Tischendorf published an edition of the Vatican
Codex under the title: "Novum Test. Vat. post Angeli
Mai aliorumque imperfectos labores ex ipso codice edidit
Ae. F. C. Tischendorf." In his Prolegomena, p 143 he con-
fesses that he had the Codex on two occasions for six hours
in his hands. It is clear that such rapid collation could be
of but little avail. The fact is that Tischendorf has em-
ployed the labors of others, and claimed them for himself.
He was most intolerant of all rivals, and unfair in his judg-
THE UNCIAL CODICES 661
ment concerning them. And yet Tischendorf's edition is
by Scrivener preferred to the great work of Mai.
Another great edition of the Vatican Codex has tx
published by Vercellone and Cozza. The first voltu
containing the New Testament appeared in 1868. Vercel-
lone died in 1869. The work was carried on by Cozza 1
Sergius and completed in 1881. Another splendid edition
appeared in 1889- 1890 under the care of the Abbot Cozza -
Luzi in which the original text is reproduced by photography.
The envious Tischendorf continued to calumniate the labors
of these great scholars in terms so injurious and false that
even Scrivener cannot praise his pamphlet. On the con-
trary when Tischendorf published the Sinaitic Codex
Fabian who had taken Sergius' place in editing Codex !>.
hails Tischendorf's discovery with unfeigned absence of all
jealousy, "Quorum tale est demum par, ut potius liber
Vaticanus gaudere debeat quod tarn sui similem invenerit
fratrem quam expavescere quodacmulum" (Praef. p. VIII.).
All men must feel grateful to the Vatican authorities
for giving to the world such editions of the greatest Codex
of Scripture. A specimen page of the Vat. Codex is shown
on page 668.
The second in importance of the great Codices is undoubt -
edly the Codex Sinaiticus ^ of Tischendorf .
The history of this great Codex is related by its discoverer
in his preface to his great edition of 1863:.
" Through the particular favor of Frederic Augustus, the
excellent King of Saxony, I spent most of the year of 1844 in
exploring the countries of the Orient ; chiefly those in which
the old monasteries exist.
It is well known that this Oriental journey has become
famous through some Greek fragments of the Old T
ment which I sent to my native country, dedicated to my
royal and noble patron as a pledge of love and fidelity.
They were deposited in the library of Leipzig, and shortly
afterwards publishe< 1 .
I discovered these fragments of a very old Codex of the
Septuagint in the month of May, 1S44. While investigating
old books in St. Catherine's Monastery on Mt. Sinai, I
66S THE UNCIAL CODICES
X*19
o ^o.r;oc ^ k« n p 6 c to *j e~M
KWeCHMO\OroC oyTO^
n j^Ki-rif&i-^YTOYereMc
TO kx< xcl> P Yc ioy ^o Y s re'
w e to 6 y Ad ^ hi ore ro^«"
£NilyTxZ>ZaJ>HHM KTA1H ^
:ZCl>H Am.T-6<J>cIjg;k^«Xo -iw**r«f-r-*
he i KxiHCKor^yfe
g - ipy kjcttg a ^ & £>ca erewe
TO iL*J QFCUHO Cjfcrre c tj^a.
m € m oc n /v p a< ey o m o x^/*'
Ay*T*li'l vUAN HCOyTOC
»Va© e m e i c m a. p Ty p * ^
i m aim a. p xjy PHCHfiep T^y
<^u^tqc i n InxMTecnj
C.T.6yC(l> C l H A I *. y TO"
OYkr^MeVeiMOCTO<j
A.A Ai*NJ A»M ^[TYf.HCh/n(f
p ) *Tt> y<V> <-L» TO C H M *TO<J>^
TO aL/«K©C I NONOcKt-UTr
Z€inANl ^AvNJO P(J>nON
€P)( o'm CNOMeiC TOiSlK-
CMON C^TUJKOCMUJ.IHIN
^\lpKOCMpCM'-KYTOy
€ reVj ^ TO XT a. » 9 KOC M oe
Ay rro wpyKerisJ<jL>4'9'
o i a y t*o ni p y n a. p e >< x g ; ©
c Atu ^e #si +iy -rp t oe *oy
ci'xm teVma e y r-e>J ece^t
Toien rcTf'YoycrN ^*ic
Tqt6NOH^YT9Y^l?T
KG "5 A^>»*^T1CWKl6yA.€€K
eeA H N-1 ATOCCA PKTOC
THE UNCIAL CODICES 669
chanced upon a basket, containing remnants of various torn
and destroyed codices. Many of these fragments had
already found their way to the fireplace. As these fr,
ments were considered worthless and were about to be
destroyed, I easily obtained 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 Isaiah and the Books of the Maccabees were written.
I exhorted that these portions should be preserved with
greater care, hoping to afterwards 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
aforesaid 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 pub-
lished the first volume of my Monumenta Sacra, I edited
therewith the last page of the text of Isaiah (which I had
already transcribed in 1844), and I made known that this
Codex Frederico-Augustanus, and also the remaining frag-
ments of the same ancient book, wheresoever found, had
been saved by me from destruction.
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
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 Testa-
ment claimed my attention. This edition was finished at
the close of 1858, and in the beginning of 1859, I started on
670 THE UNCIAL CODICES
my journey to the East. I made my third visit to the mon-
astery 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 eco-
nome of the monastery, and conversing of the Septuagint.
I had brought to the monks several copies of mv 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 frag-
ments I perceived, still in preservation, not only many books
of the Old Testament (including those taken from the waste
basket in 1844), but also, which was by far the most valua-
ble, 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 con-
sent of the steward, I transferred 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 stew-
ard himself had taken the fragments from the cell of the
o-icevo<f>v\at;, which contained written and printed books, the
greater part liturgical with varied liturgical apparatus. He
had collected all the extant fragments 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 of Barnabas,
for to sleep at such a time seemed unlawful, " quippe dormire
nefas videbatur. " The day following I arranged with the
THE UNCIAL CODICES 61 1
monks, that if the superiors at Cairo should so order, they
should send the Codex thither to me to be transcribe' 1 .
Setting out on the appointed day with the kind letters of the
monk Cyril, the learned librarian of the monastery,
we 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 seem-
ingly incredible, a messenger traversed the deserts of Arabia
and Egypt twice, within nine days, and I received from the
hands of the Superiors 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 doc-
tor 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 orna-
ment 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
c< nsecrated. At this juncture a certain one, who arrogated
to himself authority, opposed me, but the venerable college
conceded what I greatly urged, that I might bring the C< i
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 condition the Codex was delivered to me at Cairo, on
the 28th of September, 1859. "
672 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 on this edition can scarcely be realized. In
1 86 1 the great work was accomplished, and on the nth of
September of that year the splendid edition was presented to
the Emperor. In 1863, Tischendorf published an edition of
the New Testament for popular use, in which he has repro-
duced the exact form of the ori ginal Codex in modern Greek
characters.
The Codex Sinaiticus, as we learn from Tischendorf's
Notitia, consists of 345 Y2 leaves of beautiful vellum, of which
199 contain portions of the Septuagint version. 1473^ leaves
contain the whole New Testament, Barnabas' Epistle, and
portions of Hermas' Shepherd. Each page comprises four
columns, with forty-eight lines in each column, of contin-
uous, noble, simple uncials. The poetical books of the Old
Testament however, being written in o-Tt'^ot, admit of only
two columns on a page. The order of the sacred books is re-
markable, though not unprecedented. 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 apostrophe, and
a single point for punctuation, are entirely absent for pages
together, yet occasionally are rather thickly studded.
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 Tischendorf, and
in cursive characters.
The vellum of the manuscript is very thin and smooth.
According to Tischendorf it was made of the skins of ante-
lopes 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 centurv
THE UNCIAL CODICES G73
and his judgment is acquiesced in by nearly all critics.
Tischendorf 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.
C. Codex Ephraemi, No. 9, in the Royal Library of
Paris is a most valuable palimpsest containing portions of
the Septuagint version of the Old Testament on sixty-four
leaves, and fragments of every part of the New on 145 leaves,
amounting on the whole to less than two-thirds of the vol-
ume. This manuscript seems to have been brought from
the East by Andrew John Lascar (d. 1535,) a learned Greek
patronized by Lorenzo de' Medici ; it 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 brown. 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 nota-
tion of Paris 9) in his edition of Mill's N. T., 1 710. A com-
plete collation of the New Testament was first made in 1716
by Wetstein.
Tischendorf brought out an edition of the New Testa-
ment of Cod. C in 1843, and the Old Testament in 1845. ^n
Cod. C. there are no breathings or accents by the first hand ;
the punctuation consists of a single point nearly always on a
level with the preceding letter. Correctors have occupied
43 (H.S.)
674 THE UNCIAL CODICES
themselves with Cod. C. They are designated by Tes-
chendorf as C* C**, and C***. Dr. Hort has the highest re-
gard for the first corrector who is supposed to be of the
sixth century. The Codex itself is assigned to the fifth
century, and is of great critical value.
See plate on page 676,
A. Codex Alexandrinus is in the British Museum,
where the open volume of the New Testament is publicly
shown in the Manuscript room. It was placed in that
Library on its formation in 1 753, having previously belonged
to the king's private collection from the year 1628, when
Cyril Lucar, sent this codex by the English Ambassador in
Turkey, Sir Thomas Roe, as a royal gift to Charles I. An
Arabic inscription, several centuries old, at the back of the
Table of Contents on the first leaf of the manuscript, and
translated into Latin in another hand, which Mr. W. Aldis
Wright recognizes as Bentley's (Academy, April 17, 1875),
states that it was written by the hand of Thecla the
Martyr. It is now bound in four volumes of which
three contain the Septuagint almost entire. The fourth vol-
ume contains the New Testament considerably mutilated.
This manuscript is in quarto, i2f inches high and io£
broad, and consists of 773 leaves (of which 639 contain the
Old Testament), each page being divided into two columns
of fifty or fifty-one lines each, having about twenty letters
or upwards in a line. These letters are written continuously
in uncial characters, without any space between the words.
The punctuation consists of a point at the end of sen-
tences usually but not always on a level with the top of the
preceding letter. The most favorable judgment can not
place its date earlier than the fifth century. It is careless-
ly written, and far inferior in critical value to B, N, and C.
In 1786 Woide, Assistant Librarian of the British Mus-
eum published the New Testament, in folio. In 1816-28,
Rev. Henry Baber of the British Museum published the
Old, Testament. Both editions were published in uncial
type. The New Testament was again published in i860 by
Cowper in modern type. An autotype edition of the whole
Codex has since been made by Mr. E. Maunde Thomson.
THE UNCIAL CODICES 675
We shall now enumerate some of the principal uncial
codices of the several parts of the New Testament.
Codex D of the Gospels and Acts, called Codex
Bez.e Gr^bco Latinus belongs to the University of Cam-
bridge. It was presented to the University in 1581 by
Theodore Beza. The great veneration which the aforesaid
University cherished for Beza and his master Calvin appears
in the University's letter of acceptance, in which they
declare: "Know therefore that, the Holy Scriptures alone
excepted, there are no writers in the history of mankind
whom we prefer to the renowned John Calvin and thee. "
Beza savs that he obtained it from the Monastery of
St. Irena'us at Lyons during the civil war in 1562. This
city was sacked in that year by the infamous Des
Adrets who espoused the cause of the Huguenots. It is
quite probable that the no less infamous Beza obtained this
Codex as a share of the plunder.
Beza declares in his letter that, owing to the great dis-
crepancy between this Codex and the oldest authorities, to
avoid giving offense, he judged it better to preserve the Co-
dex than to publish it.
It has been collated by Young, (1633), Ussher (1657),
Mill (1707), Wetstein (1716), Bentley (1716), Dickinson
(1732), Kipling (1793), and Scrivener (1864).
The Codex is mutilated. Of its original 534 leaves
only about 406 remain, and some of these are mutilated ;
and several are added by a later hand.
Codex Bezie and Codex D. of St. Paul are the earliest
specimens of stichometric writing.
Scrivener assigns a date to the original Latin text not
more remote than the fifth century ; 1 mt lie believes that the
present Latin text is a later correction of the original Latin.
He believes that the Greek text is a copy of an exemplar
as ancient as the third centurv.
Mr. Rendel Hams (A Study of the Codex Beza* 1891)
believes that the Greek text is a translation of a Latin Codex
of the second century. Of course in the supposition its
critical worth is small. Sub judice lis est. It seems certain
however that Scrivener has overestimated the value of the
Codex.
676
' THE UNCIAL CODICES
THE UNCIAL CODICES 677
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 er-
rors, 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 exist-
ing Greek Codex.
E. Codex Basiliensis, of the public library of Basle, is
of the eighth century. It was given to the Library by Cardi-
nal John de Ragusio. It contains the Four Gospels, except
Luke III. 4-15; XXIV. 47-53. It has been collated by
Bengel, Wetstein, Tischendorf, M idler and Tregelles.
F. Codex Boreeli, now in the puplic library at Utrecht
once belonged to John Boreel, Dutch Ambassador at
the Court of James I. It is badly mutilated. The best
collation of it was made by Prof. Heringa of Utrecht, pub-
lished in 1843. Its date is the ninth or tenth century.
Wetstein 's collation of it is sometimes cited as F.
Fa Codex Coislin I. In the Coislin Library is preserved
a Greek Codex of the Septuagint under the above title. It
was first published by Montfaucon (Biblioth. Coislin. 171 5).
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 nineteen other pas-
sages of the New Testament, which he published in his Mon-
umenta sacra inedita (1846, p. 400, &c.) with a facsimile.
The texts are Matt. v. 48 ; xii. 48 ; xxvii. 25 : Luke i. 42 ; ii 24 ;
xxviii. 21 : John v. 35 ; vi. 53, 55 : Acts iv. ^^, 34 ; ix. 24, 25 :
x. 13, 15; xxii. 22: 1 Cor. vii. 39; xi. 29: 1 Cor. iii. 13; ix.
xi. 33: Gal. iv. 21, 22 : Col. ii. 16, 17 ; Heb. x. 26.
G. Cod. Harleian, 5684 "] These two copies were
or Wolfii A. ^brought from the East by
H. Cod. Wolfii B. J Andrew Erasmus Seidel, pur-
chased by La Croze, and by him presented to J. C. Wolff, wh< 1
published loose extracts from them both in his "Anecduta
Grreca" (vol. iii. 1723), and barbarously mutilated them in
1 72 1 in order to send pieces to Bentley among whose papers
678 THE UNCIAL CODICES
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
Hamburg, 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
of the ninth century.
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 com-
pose fragments of no less than seven different manuscripts ;
the first two, of the fifth century, 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 perhaps of the sixth century. The sixth
and seventh fragments are of the seventh century.
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.
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. Wetstein collated Cod. L but loosely.
Griesbach, who set a very high value on it, studied it with
THE UNCIAL CODICES 679
peculiar care; Teschendorf published it in full in his Mouu-
menta sacra inedita, 1836.
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. Its readings are very good.
Codex Purpureus N. Only twelve leaves of this beau-
tiful copy remain, and its former possessor must have di-
vided them in order to obtain a better price from three pur-
chasers 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 fragment of Genesis in a different hand.
Cod. Nb or in Teschendorf's edition I1' is a palimpsest of
four leaves containing fragments of St. John's Gospel. A
Syriac work had been written over these, and this again had
been obliterated to write thereon the hymns of St. Severus
in Syriac. They were brought from the Nitrian desert and
are now in the British Museum. They have been deciphered
by Tischendorf and Tregelles.
Several small fragments have been designated by O.
The most important are the fragment Luke XVIII. 11-14,
examined by Wetstein, and O of Moscow the latter of the
ninth century.
P. Codex Guelpherbytanus A These are two
Q B. ) palimpsests, discov-
ered by F. A. Knittel, Archdeacon of Wolfenbi'ittel, in the
Ducal Library of that city, which (together with some frag-
ments of Ulphilas' Gothic version) lie under the more modern
writings of Isidore of Seville. They have been deciphered
and published by Tischendorf (1866-69.) He assigns P to
the fifth century, and O to the sixth.
The letter Ris employed to represent different fragments
by various editors, a very inconvenient practice. Thus R of
Griesbach and Scholz is a fragment of one leaf containing
John I. 38-50 now at Tubingen. Tischendorf repudiates
this leaf as a portion of an Evangelistary of the tenth cen-
tury; and in his New Testament of 1849 he employed R
6S0 THE UNCIAL CODICES
to designate fourteen leaves of a palimpsest of the eighth
century now in the Library at Naples. In 1859 he designa-
ted the Neapolitan fragment by Wc, and employed R to
designate the Codex Nitriensis of the British Museum, Ad-
ditional 1 7 2 1 . This latter is a palimpsest of 2 5 fragments
containing about 516 verses of St. Luke. It may be as an-
cient as the end of the sixth century. It is one of 550 MSS
brought to England in 1847 from the Syrian Convent of St.
Mary in the Desert seventy miles N. W. of Cairo.
S. Codex Vaticanus 354 contains the four Gospels
entire, and is among the earliest dated manuscripts of the
Greek Testament. This is a folio of 234 leaves, written in
large oblong or compressed uncials: It bears the date A. D.
949. In 1866 Tischendorf collated it.
Codex T, or Borgianus I, in the Propaganda at Rome
contains thirteen or more quarto leaves of SS. Luke and
John. A Sahidic version is parallel to the Greek text.
They are referred to the fourth century by Giorgi O. S. A.,
who ably edited the portion of St. John in 1879. Tischen-
dorf places them a century later. Ts or Twoi are used to indi-
cate a few leaves of Luke and John in Greek and Sahidic,
which once belonged to Woide. It has been suspected that
they are a part of T. Tb at St. Petersburg contains six
leaves of St. John. The date of its writing is judged to be
not later than the sixth century.
Tc is a fragment of about twenty-one verses between
Matt. xiv. 19 and xv. 8, also of the sixth century, and at St.
Petersburg. ' '
Td is a fragment of a Lectionary Greek and Sahidic, found
by Tischendorf in 1866 among the Borgian MSS at Rome.
It contains twenty-four verses, a few verses from every
one of the Gospels.
Te is a fragment of Matthew (III. 13-16) taken from a
Lectionary of the sixth century. It is at Cambridge.
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 written. Its date is not before
the tenth century. Tischendorf in 1843 and Tregelles in
1846 collated Cod. U. It is now mutilated.
THE UNCIAL CODU 681
Codex Mosquensis V. of the Holy Synod, is known
almost exclusively from Matthaei's Greek Testament: he
states, no doubt most truly, that he collated it "bis diligen-
tissime" and gives a facsimile of it, assigning it to the eighth
century.
Some scattered leaves are classed under W but they are
not of sufficient importance to enter hen-.
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.
Codex Barberini Y, 225 at Rome (in the Library-
founded by Cardinal Barberini in the seventeenth century)
contains on six large leaves the 137 verses John XVI.
3-XIX. 41, of about the eighth century. Tischendorf ob-
tained access to it in 1843, and published it in his first in-
stalment of Monumenta sacra incdita, 1846.
Codex Dublinensis rescriptus, Z, one of the chief
palimpsests extant, contains 290 verses of St. Matthew's
Gospel in twenty-two fragments. It was discovered in 1787
by Dr. John Barrett, Senior Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin,
under some cursive writing of the tenth century or later, con-
sisting of Chrysostom de Sacerdotio, extracts from Epiphan-
ius, etc. In the same volume are portions of Isaiah and of
Gregory Nazianzen, in erased uncial letters, but not so an-
cient as the fragment of St. Matthew. All the thirty-two
leaves of this Gospel that remain were engraved in copper-
plate facsimile at the expense of Trinity College, and pub-
lished by Barrett in 1801, furnished with Prolegomena, and
the contents of each facsimile plate in modern Greek
characters on the opposite page. He ascribes the Codex to
the sixth century.
In 1853 Tregelles, by subjecting the MS to a chemical
mixture, deciphered 200 more letters. In 1880 Abbot, of the
University of Dublin, published the Codex, with 400 more
letters which he deciphered. Abbot places its date in the
fifth century.
Codex Tischendorfiax. IV. was brought by Tischen-
dorf from an "eastern monastery, " and was bought for the
682 THE UNCIAL CODICES
Bodleian Library in 1855. It consists of 158 leaves in large
quarto, of the ninth century.
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 fac-
simile of every page, by H. Ch. M. Rettig, published at Zurich
1836, with copious and satisfactory Prolegomena. It is pre-
served and was probably transcribed in the seventh century
in the great monastery of St. Gall in the North-east of
Switzerland. It is rudely written on 197 leaves of coarse
vellum 4to, in a very peculiar hand, with an interlinear
Latin version. It contains the four Gospels complete except
John XIX. 17-25. Rettig thinks that Cod. A is part of
the same book as the Codex Boernerianus, G of St. Paul's
Epistles.
Codex © Teschendorf 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
forty verses; viz., Matth. XIII. 46-55 (in mere shreds);
and XIV. 4-14. Tischendorf conjectures it to be of the
end of the seventh century.
Other small fragments collected by Tischendorf which
death prevented him from publishing are indicated as :
©b, six leaves in large 8vo, of the sixth or seventh cen-
tury, torn piecemeal for binding and hard to decipher, con-
tains Matt. xxii. 16-xxiii. 13 ; Mark iv. 24-25 ; v. 14-23-
©c, one folio leaf, of the sixth century, much like Cod. N,
contains Matt. xxi. 19-24. Another leaf contains John
xviii. 29-35.
®d, half a leaf in two columns, of the seventh or eighth
century, with accents by a later hand, contains Luke xi. 37-
4i;42-45-
©e, containing fragments of Matt. xxvi. 2-4; 7-9: ®f, of
Matt. xxvi. 59-70; xxvii. 44-56; Mark i. 34-h. 12 (not con-
tinuously throughout) : ©g, of John vi. 13, 14; 22-24; are all
of about the sixth century.
THE UNCIAL CODICES 683
©h, consisting of three leaves, in Greek and Arabic of the
ninth or tenth centuries, contains imperfect portions of
Matt. xiv. 6-13; xxv. 9-16; 41 xxvi.
A Codex Tischendorfian. III. whose history, so far
as we know it, exactly resembles that of Cod. I\ and like it is
now in the Bodleian (Auct. T. Infra 1. 1). It contains 157
leaves, of the ninth century. It has the Gospels of St.
Luke and St. John complete, with the subscription to St.
Mark.
Codex Zacynthius E is a palimpsest in the Library of
the British and Foreign Bible Society in London, which,
under an Evangelistarium written on coarse vellum of the
thirteenth century, contains large portions of St. Luke,
down to Chap. XI. 33, in full well-formed uncials, but sur-
rounded by, and often interwoven with large extracts from
the Fathers, in a hand that cannot be earlier than the
eighth century.
II. Codex Petropolitanus consists of 350 vellum
leaves in small quarto, and contains the Gospels complete
except Matt. hi. 12 — iv. 18; xix. 12 — xx. 3; John viii. 6-39;
seventy-seven verses. A century since it belonged to Paro-
dus, a noble Greek of Smyrna, and its last possessor v.
persuaded by Teschendorf, in 1859, to present it to the
Emperor of Russia. Teschendorf, states that it is of the age
of the later uncials (meaning the ninth century), but of
higher critical importance than most of them, and much
like Cod. K in its rarer readings.
-, Cod. Rossanensis, like Cod. N described above, is a
manuscript written on thin vellum leaves stained purple,
in silver letters, the first three lines of each Gospel being in
gold. Like Cod. D it probably dates from the sixth century.
if not a little sooner, and is the earliest known copy of Scrip-
ture which is adorned with miniatures in water colors.
seventeen in number, very interesting and in good preserva-
tion.
T Codex Blenheimius, Brit. Mus. Additional 3100:.
formerly Blenheim 3. D. 13, purchased from the Sunderland
sale in 1882. Professors T. K. Abbott and J. P. Mahaffy oi
Trinity College, Dublin, discovered at Blenheim in May.
084 THE UNCIAL CODICES
1 88 1, palimpsest fragments of the Gospels of the eighth
century, being seventeen passages scattered over thirty-
three of the leaves: viz. Matt. i. 1-14; v. 3-19; xii. 27-41 ;
xxiii. 5 — xxv. 30; 43 — xxvi. 26; 50 — xxvii. 17; Mark i.
1-42 ; ii. 21 — v. 1 ; 29 — vi. 22 ; x. 50 — xi. 13 ; Luke xvi. 21 —
xvii. 3; 19-37; xix- I5~3I; Jonn ii- 18— iii. 5; iv- 23-37;
v. 35 — vi. 2 : in all 484 verses. In 1883, Dr. Gregory discov-
ered two more leaves, making thirty-six in all.
<£>. Codex Beratinus. This symbol was taken by
Herr Oscar von Gebhardt to denote the imaginary parent of
Cursives 13, 69, 124, 346, of which the similarity has been
traced by the late W. H. Ferrar and Dr. T. K. Abbott in "A
Collection of Four Important MSS. " (1877). But it is now
permanently affixed to an Uncial MS. seen by M. Pierre
Batiffol on the instigation of Prof. Duchesne in 1875 at
Berat or Belgrade in Albania. It may date back to the
end of the fifth century.
A fragment in the Monastery of Laura at Mt. Athos is
designated as W ; and another in the Monaster of St. Dionys-
ius on Mt. Athos is cited by the sign X2. ^ designates a
fragment in the Monastery of St. Andrew on Mt. Athos.
We shall only mention a few of the most valuable uncials
of Acts and Paul's Epistles.
Codex Laudianus E, 35 is one of the most precious
treasures preserved in the Bodleian at Oxford. It is a Latin-
Greek copy, with two columns on a page, the Latin version
holding the post of honor on the left. It is written in very
short o-Tt^ot, consisting of from one to three words each, the
Latin words always standing opposite to the corresponding
Greek. The character of the writing points to the end of the
sixth century as its date. The Latin is not of Jerome's or
the Vulgate version ; but is made to correspond closely with
the Greek, even in its interpolations and rarest various
readings. This manuscript contains only the Acts of the
Apostles, and exhibits a remarkable modification of the text.
This manuscript, with many others, was presented to the
University of Oxford in the year 1636, by its Chancellor,
Laud. Thomas Hearne, the celebrated antiquary, pub-
lished a full edition of it in 171 5, which is now very scarce,
and is known to be far from accurate.
THE UNCIAL CODICES
Teschendorf collated it in 1854 and 1865 and published it
in his Monumenta Sacra Inedita in 1870.
Codex Mutinensis H, 196, of the Acts, in the Grand
Ducal Library at Modena, is an uncial copy of about the
ninth century, defective in Act. I. 1 V. 28; IX. 39 — X. 19;
XIII. 36 — XIV. 3 (all supplied by a recent hand of the fif-
teenth century) ; and in XXVII. 4— XXVIII. 31 (supplied in
uncials of about the eleventh century) . The Epistles are in
cursive letters of the twelfth century, indicated in the
Catholic Epistles by h, in the Pauline by 179. Scholz first
collated it; then Teschendorf in 1843, an<l Tregelles in 1846.
P, Cod. Porphyrianus is a palimpsest containing the
Acts, all the Epistles, the Apocalypse, and a few fragments
of 4 Maccabees, of the ninth century, found by Tischendorf
in 1862 at St. Petersburg.
D, Cod. Claromontanus, No. 107 of the Royal Library
at Paris, is a Greek-Latin copy of St. Paul's Epistles, one of
the most ancient and important in existence. Like the Cod.
Ephraemi in the same Library it has been fortunate in such
an editor as Tischendorf, who published it in 1852 with
complete Prolegomena, and a facsimile traced by Tregelles.
This noble volume is in small quarto, written on 533 leaves
of the thinnest and finest vellum. See following plate.
Beza declares that he found it at Clermont near Beauvai
hence its name. It's judged to be of the second half of tht
sixth century.
Codex Sangermaxensis E. is Greek-Latin manuscript,
and takes its name from the Abbey of St. Germain d
Pres near Paris. In 1895 Mattruri found this copy, at St.
Petersburg, where it is now deposited. Wetstein thor-
oughly collated it; and not only he but Sabatier and Gries-
bach perceived that it was, at least in the Greek, nothing
better than a mere transcript of Codex Claromontanus,
made by some ignorant person about the tenth century.
Codex Augiexsis F, in the Library of Trinity Colli
Cambridge (B, 17. 1), is a Greek-Latin manuscript of tl
ninth century.
Codex Boernerianus G, so called from a former pi
sessor, now in the Royal Library at Dresden.
686 THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS VERSIONS
Herr Corssen believes that F and G are independent of
each other, and that they are translations from the Latin.
The date is uncertain.
Chapter XIX.
The Septuagint and Its Versions.
The Septuagint is the first authentic Greek version of the
Old Testament. It is called the Septuagint from the fact,
that it was supposed to be the work of seventy or seventy-
two interpreters. Of its origin we have many accounts all
of them more or less legendary in nature. Aristseus gives
us the first account of its origin. According to him, Ptolemy
Philadelphus in the third century B.C., wishing to found a
great library in Alexandria, and hearing much of the Jewish
Law sent messengers to Eleazar, the high priest, desiring a
copy of the Books of the Jewish Law for his library. The
high priest, Eleazar, choosing six interpreters from every
tribe, sent the seventy-two interpreters to translate the
books into Greek. These, after being kindly received by
the King, betook themselves to the Isle of Pharos, to a great
hall, where for nine hours each day they labored for seventy
or seventy-two days, conferring with one another in difficult
passages. The work was transcribed with care by men
employed by Ptolemy, and was pronounced authentic, and
an anathema was pronounced against all who should ques-
tion its authority. This in brief is the story of Aristseus as
related by Flavius Josephus, Antiq., Bk. XII. II. passim.
Philo, the Alexandrine Jew, has an account much similar,
giving to the interpreters divine inspiration. He does not,
however, mention Aristseus, who according to his own
story, had a great part in the translation. Nor does he
mention Demetrius Phalereus who, according to Aristseus,
was the Librarian of Ptolemy. St. Justin the Martyr (fi63
or 167 A. D.), has a different version of the origin of the
work. According to him, the interpreters were sent to the
Isle of Pharos in separate cells, so all mutual communication
was cut off. There they executed every one a translation
of the Hebrew text, which versions were afterwards found to
agree in the most minute details, even to the number of
»$*»#<> f»*~*XI
iy mvk' vm ma i*t)0i ire* ruwio m tb!
rorew cfcoAiy MAX(Vr<*f «j
UC KMt'KptbH t'F*3j>0OH'/7J
M ka p j i o d>o s> Net i) m en^jxbdc o n / 1
r mohm WA'nimAtoAfrriibbi
r ro'icM ca ea n H*«ii/
roKAff-iodfbfjiqtiKt ia^u
fw. ^ « a e kat'm pi -tmm i
lo' Toy no MoynR^?0i.AHs
K4Tes^dMe04
1 p <? n s ova* f« * j 4 -
THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS VERSIONS 68'
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, Cyril of Jerusalem, John
Chrysostom, and Augustine. St. Epiphanius, who lived in
the fourth century A. D., varies the legend somewhat. Ac-
cording to him, there were but thirty-six cells, and two in-
terpreters in every cell.
Many of the Fathers of the Church considered this ver-
sion inspired. Thus St. Augustine says, that when the seven-
ty departed from the Hebrew text, they did so at the instiga-
tion 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 Judaea under Ptol-
emy 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 providence of God, ordaining that a version of
the Holy Scriptures, a complete version of all the books,
should exist at the advent of Christ, that the universal king-
dom of Christ might be the more easily diffused far and wi
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
interpreters. St. Jerome inveighs forcibly against this
688 THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS VERSIONS
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 inspiration 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 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 sense ; and they 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 rilled and
ruled the mind of the translator." (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, admitting the inspiration, filled
that need. Many Catholic writers hold with St. Jerome that
only the Pentateuch was translated by the seventy inter-
preters, and the other books added at a later date.
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 rea-
sonable motive for its great value.
S. John Chrysostom speaks of the great authority of the
Septuagint, but never hints at its inspiration. Hence, we
conclude that the Church has never recognized the inspira-
tion of the Septuagint, and the Fathers who defended it
were deceived by the legend of Aristseus, while the most
illustrious among them do not insist on the inspiration of the
Septuagint for its great authority, but on its great antiquity.
THE SEPTUAGINT AND ITS VERSIONS 689
The different books of the Septuagint differ greatly in
excellence. The Pentateuch is pre-eminent in accuracy and
grace of diction. The version of Proverbs is also excellent.
The version of Ezekiel 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 i to m 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 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*uXa<?,
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, ei Pon I.
S§ 13-15) as of Sinope in Pontus, and as irev0epi%}<; of the
Emperor Hadrian, in whose twelfth year, and 430 ye
after the LXX., he flourished, and by whom he was com-
missioned to superintend the rebuilding of Jerusalem.
Seeing the faith and miracles of the disciples i if the Apostles,
he is led to embrace Christianity, but still clings to his faith
in the vain aarpofo/jLid, and is, in consequence, excom-
municated. Pilled with resentment, he becomes a pervert
to Judaism, and is thenceforth known as Aquila the Proselyte.
He devotes himself to the Jewish learning, 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 6 KupuoT-
44 (H.S.)
690 THE VERSION OF SYMMACHUS
aia kpixrjveveiv (fnXoTifiovfievo^ 'A/cvXas (Origen, Comment.
on Genesis, I. 16), and, on the other hand, in places
censured, as BovXevoov rrj 'Efipaifcr} Xegei (Origen ad A fricanum
§ 2). His method is, at times, the rednctio ad absurdum of a
literal rendering; and yet where he is most useless as an
exegete he may be an important witness on questions as to
the form of the Hebrew text which lay before him.
Jerome, in his Epistle to Pammachius (§11, Vol. I. 316),
comparing Aquila with the LXX, writes as follows: " Aquila
autem proselytus et contentiosus interpres, qui non solum
verba sed etymologias quoque verborum transferre conatus
est, jure projicitur a nobis. Quis enim pro frumento et vino
et oleo possit vel legere vel intelligere x^l^a, oiroopio-fiop, <ttlX-
TrvoTrjra, quod nos possumus diceve, fusionem, pomationemque,
et splendentiam? Aut quia Hebraei non solum habent apdpa
sed et irpoapOpa ille /cd/co^Xm et syllabas interpreta-
tur et litteras, dicitque crvv rbv obpavov koX avu ttjv <yrjv,
quod Graeca et Latina lingua non recipit. " But elsewhere
he compares him favorably with the LXX, describing him
as a translator who "non contentiosus, ut quidam putant,
sed studiosius verbum interpretatur ad verbum" (Ep. ad
Damasum, §12, Vol. I. 167). The former passage aptly
indicates the two leading principles of Aquila, which were
to give a Greek or quasi-Greek equivalent for every fragment
of the original, and to maintain a rigid consistency by ren-
dering each root with its real or apparent derivatives by one
and the same root in Greek ; new forms being freely coined as
the occasion demanded, and the Greek idiom being sacrificed
to the Hebrew. The peculiar etymological rendering of 1") p ,
in Ex. XXXIV. 29, which, through the Vulgate, gave rise
to the popular representation of Moses with horns on his
forehead, is found to have originated with Aquila: " Unde et
in Exodo juxta Hebraicum et Aquila^ editionem legimus,
Et Moyses nesciebat quia cornuta erat species vultus ejus,
qui vere dicere poterat, In te inimicos meos cornu ventilo. "
. Aquila has been accused by Epiphanius of changing
the Messianic testimonies. Not enough of his work remains
to examine if this charge be true. Jerome declares in an
Epistle to Marcella, that he had examined his work with
THE VERSION OF SYMMACHUS <>'»1
especial attention to this charge, and had found instead many-
things most favorable to Christian faith. I am disposed to
believe, however, that at limes he drew some passages to the
Jewish position.
The second Greek version which deserves special mentii m
is that of Symmachus.
Eusebius relates that Symmachus was an Ebionite, and
that in certain of his writings which were still extant, he
alleged arguments from St. Matthew's Gospel in support of
his heresy. Jerome likewise, in his Commentary on Habakuk
(III. 13, Vol. VI. 656), describes Symmachus and Theodo-
tion as Ebionites: "Theodotio autem, vere quasi pauper et
Ebionita, sed et Symmachus ejusdem dogmatis, pauperem
sensum secuti Judaice transtulerunt ; " and in his preface to
Job he speaks of them as "judaizantes hseretici, qui multa
mysteria Salvatoris subdola interpretatione celarunt, et
tamen in 'E^a7r\oi? habentur apud ecclesias et explan-
antur ab ecclesiasticis viris" (Vol. IX. Col. 1142). " Epiph-
anius" writes Montfaucon, "Conspecto hexaplorum or-
dine, ubi Symmachus ante Theodotionem positus secun-
dum locum in Graecis editionibus occupabat, putavit Sym-
machum prius Theodotione editionem suam concinnasse. "
He assigns the version of Symmachus, perhaps rightly, to the
reign of Severus (A. D. 193-21 1) — the Chronicon Paschale
specifies the ninth year of this reign but this account of the
author is at variance with the statements of Eusebius and
Jerome. Symmachus (he tells us) was a Samaritan, who,
from disappointed ambition, became a proselyte to Judaism,
and set to work to compose his Greek version of the Scrip-
tures with a specific anti-Samaritan bias.
The version of Symmachus was distinguished by the
purity of its Greek and its freedom from Hebraisms. Jer-
ome (following Eusebius) several times remarks: "Symma-
chus more suo apertius," or " manifestius" ; and he praises
him as an interpreter, "qui non solet wrborum KaKo^Xlav
sed intelligentiae ordinem sequi" {Comment, on Amos, III.
11, Vol. VI. 258). In his preface to Lib. II. of the ( 'hronic.
Euseb. (Vol. VIII. 223-4), he writes: "Quamobrcm Aquila
et Symmachus et Theodotio incitati diversum pame opus in
692 THE VERSION OF THEODOTION
eodem opere prodiderunt; alio nitente verbum de verbo expri-
mere, alio sensum potius sequi, tertio non multum a veteribus
discrepare." Jerome not only commends Symmachus as
above, but frequently adopts his renderings, as may be
shown by a comparison of their versions.
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 Zaioyovos preserves the word-play in
Gen. III. 20 ; but other names are less happily rendered.
The last column of Origen's Hexapla contained the ver-
sion of Theodotion. St. Epiphanius states that Theodotion
was of Pontus, of the sect of the Marcionites, which he
abandoned to embrace Judaism. St. Irenasus affirms that
he was an Ephesian, who became a proselyte to Judaism.
His epoch is very probably the second half of the second
century.
Jerome writes of Theodotion: "Qui utique post adven-
tum Christi incredulus fuit, licet eum quidam dicant Ebion-
itam, qui altero genere Judaeus est ;" but elsewhere he seems
to adopt the tradition of his Ebionism. Montfaucon argues
from his rendering of Dan. IX. 26 that he was a Jew. His
aim as a translator being (again in the words of Jerome)
"non multum a veteribus discrepare," not so much to make
a new translation as to revise the old, correcting its errors
and supplying its defects, it not unnaturally came to pass
that Origen made free use of his version in constructing the
Hexaplar recension of the LXX ; and that, in the case of the
Book of Daniel, even the recension of Origen was popularly
discarded in favor of Theodotion's version in its entirety.
His style does not present such marked peculiarities as those
of Aquila and Symmachus. Suffice it to notice that he is
more addicted to transliteration than they or the LXX ; and
that, on account of the number of the words which he thus
leaves untranslated, he has been regarded as an ignorant
interpreter. The charge, however, cannot be sustained.
THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGBN 693
Besides the aforesaid versions, three others were in exist-
ence of which but little is known. They are designated as
Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh, from the position which they
occupied in Origen's Hexapla. It is probable that they did
not contain all the books. The old writers so differ in des-
cribing where they were found, that nothing definite can be
known of them. Of the seventh no trace remains, and we
only know of its existence from the fact that Eusebius (Hist.
Eccles. VI. 16) 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 multiplicati* m
of copies, in which numerous errors became introduced, in
the course of time, from the negligence or inaccuracy of
transcribers, and from glosses or marginal notes, which had
been added for the explanation of difficult words, and
which had crept into the text. In order to remedy this
growing evil, Origen, in the early part of the third century,
undertook the laborious task of collating the Greek text,
then in use, with the original Hebrew, and with other Greek
translations then extant, and from the whole to produce a
new recension or revision. Twenty-eight years were devoted
to the preparation of this arduous work, in the course of
which he collected manuscripts from every possible quarter.
Origen commenced his labor at Caesarea, A. D. 231, and. it
appears, finished his Polyglot at Tyre, but in what year is
not precisely known.
This noble critical work is designated by various names
among ancient writers, as Tctrapla, Hexapla, Octapla, and
Enneapla.
The Tctrapla contained the four Greek versions of Aquila,
Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion, disposed in
four columns ; to these he added two columns m< >re, c< >ntain-
ing the Hebrew text in its original characters, and also in
Greek letters. These six columns, according to Bpiphanius,
formed the Hexapla. Having subsequently discovered two
other Greek versions of some parts of the Scriptures, usually
694 THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN
called the fifth and sixth, he added them to the preceding,
inserting them in their respective places, and thus composed
the Octapla ; and a separate translation of the Psalms, usually
called the seventh version, being afterwards added, the entire
work has by some been termed the Enneapla. This appella-
tion, however, was never generally adopted. But, as the
two editions made by Origen generally bore the name of
the Tetrapla, and Hexapla, Bauer, after Montfaucon, is of
opinion that Origen edited only the Tetrapla and Hexapla ;
and this appears to be the real fact.
The accompanying plates will give some concept of
Origen 's great work.
Aquila's version is placed next to the Greek translitera-
tion of the Hebrew text ; that of Symmachus occupies the
fourth column; the Septuagint, the fifth; and Theodotion's,
the sixth. The other three anonymous translations, not
containing the entire books of the Old Testament, were
placed in the three last columns of the Enneapla. Where
the same words occurred in all the other Greek versions,
without being particularly specified, Origen designated them
by A or AO, Aonrot, the rest; — Ot T, or the three, denoted
Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion; — Oi A, or the four,
signified Aquila, Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodo-
tion; and II, Uavra, all the interpreters.
Where any passages appeared in the Septuagint, that
were not found in the Hebrew, he designated them by an
obelus -f- with two bold points (:) also annexed. This mark
was also used to denote words not extant in the Hebrew,
but added by the Septuagint translators, either for the sake
of elegance, or for the purpose of illustrating the sense.
To passages wanting in the copies of the Septuagint, and
supplied by himself from the other Greek versions, he pre-
fixed an asterisk .x. with two points (:) also annexed, in order
that his additions might be immediately perceived. These
supplementary passages, we are informed by Jerome, were
for the most part taken from Theodotion's translation ; not
unfrequently from that of Aquila ; sometimes, though rarely,
from the version of Symmachus ; and sometimes from two or
three together. But, in every case, the initial letter of each
THE HEXAPLA OF ORIGEN ()!).")
translator's name was placed immediately after the asterisk,
to indicate the source whence such supplementary passage
was taken. And in lieu of the very erroneous Septuagint
version of Daniel, Theodotion's translation of that book was
inserted entire.
Further, not only the passages wanting in the Septuagint
were supplied by Origen with the asterisks, as above noticed,
but also where that version does not appear accurately to
express the Hebrew original, having noted the former read-
ing with an obelus, -^, he added the correct rendering from
one of the other translators, with an asterisk subjoined.
In the Pentateuch, Origen compared the Samaritan text
with the Hebrew as received by the Jews, and noted their
differences.
Since Origen's time, Biblical critics have distinguished
two editions or exemplars of the Septuagint — the Koun] or
common text, with all its errors and imperfections, as it
existed previously to his collation, and the Hexaplar text,
or that corrected by Origen himself. For nearly fifty years
was this great man's stupendous work buried in a 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, per-
haps, it might have perished in oblivion, if Eusebius and
Pamphilus had not discovered it, and deposited it in the
library of Pamphilus the Martyr, at Cassarea, where Jerome
saw it about the middle of the fourth century. As we have
no account whatever of Origen's autograph, after this time,
it is most probable that it perished in the year 653, on the
capture of that city by the Arabs; and a few imperfect frag-
ments, collected from manuscripts of the Septuagint and
the Catena? of the Greek fathers, are all that now remain 1 if
the work.
As the Septuagint version had been read in the Church
from the commencement of Christianity, so it continued to
be used in most of the Greek churches; and the text, as cor-
rected by Origen, was transcribed for their use, together
with his critical marks. Hence, in the progress of time,
from the negligence or inaccuracy of copyists, numerous
696 THE PRINCIPAL EDITIONS OF THE SEPTUAGINT
errors were introduced into this version, which rendered a
new revisal necessary ; and, as all the Greek churches did not
receive Origen's 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
omittted ; this omission only augmented the evil, since even
in the time of Jerome it was no longer possible to know what
belonged to the translators, or what were Origen's own cor-
rections ; and now it may almost be considered as a hopeless
task to distinguish between them. Contemporary with the
edition of Eusebius and Pamphilus, was the recension of the
Koivr], or Vulgate text of the Septuagint, conducted by
Lucian, a presbyter of the Church at Antioch, who suffered
martyrdom A. D. 311. He took the Hebrew text for the
basis of his edition, which was received in all the Eastern
churches from Constantinople to Antioch. While Lucian
was prosecuting his Biblical labors, Hesychius, an Egyptian
bishop, undertook a similar work, which was generally
received in the churches of Egypt. He is supposed to have
introduced fewer alterations than Lucian ; and his edition is
cited by Jerome as the Exemplar Alexandrinum. All the
manuscripts of the Septuagint now extant, as well as the
printed editions, are derived from the three recensions above,
mentioned, although Biblical critics are by no means agreed
what particular recension each manuscript has followed .
There are four principal printed editions of the Septua-
gint. The first in time was that of Cardinal Ximenes,
printed in his Polyglot, in 151 7.
The second rj>rincipal edition is called the Aldine
Edition, published in Venice in 15 18. It was called Aldine
from the printer Aldus Manutius, though it did not appear
till two years after his death, and was executed under the
THE VETUS 1TALA 697
care of Andreas Asulanus, the father-in-law of Aldus
Manutius.
The third principal edition in order of time, though first
in excellence, is that called the Sixtine Edition. It was
undertaken at the suggestion of Cardinal Montaltus, during
the reign of Gregory XIII., and when, at the death of Greg-
ory, Montaltus ascended the papal throne under the name
of Sixtus V., he brought the work to completion and hence
it bears his name. Its full title is 'H ilaXata AtaOrjKTi, Kara
Toy? 'E,/38o/j.j}KOVTa oY avdevTias zHvarov K. Aicpov Ap^iepeco^
e>cho6ei<Ta.. — Vetus Testamentum Graecum, juxta LXX Inter-
pretes, studio Antonii Cardinalis Caraf.e, ope virorum
doctorum adjuti, cum prefatione et scholiis Petri Morini.
Romas ex Typographia Francisci Zannetti, 1586, folio.
It is a beautiful edition, of great rarity and value. It
contains 783 pages of text, preceded by four leaves of prelim-
inary matter, which are followed by another (subsequently
added), entitled Corrigenda in notationibus Psalterii. This
last mentioned leaf is not found in the copies bearing the
date of 1586, which also want the privilege of Pope Sixtus
V. dated May 9, 1587, at whose request and under whose
auspices it was undertaken by Cardinal Antonio Carafa,
aided by Antonio Agelli, Peter Morinus, Fulvio Ursino,
Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal Sirleti, and others. The cele-
brated Codex Vaticanus 1209 was the basis of the Roman
or Sixtine edition, as it is usually termed. The first forty-
six chapters of Genesis, together with some of the Psalms,
and the book of Maccabees, being obliterated from the Vat-
ican manuscripts through extreme age, the editors are said
to have supplied this deficiency by compiling those parts of
the Septuagint from a manuscript out of Cardinal Bessa-
rion's library, and from another which was brought to them
from Calabria. So great was the agreement between the
latter and the Codex Vaticanus, that they were supposed to
have been transcribed, either the one from the other, or both
from the same copy. Various readings are given to each
chapter. This edition contains the Greek text only. In
1588, Flaminio Xobili printed at Rome in folio, Vetus Testa-
mentum secundum LXX. Latine redditum.
698 THE VETUS ITALA
The fourth of these principal editions is that published
by Grabe, at Oxford. This edition exhibits the text of the
celebrated Codex Alexandrinus, now deposited in the British
Museum. Though Grabe prepared the whole for the press,
yet he only lived to publish the Octateuch, forming the first
volume of the folio edition, in 1707, and the fourth volume
containing the metrical books, in 1709.
Chapter XX.
Versions Derived from the Septuagint.
While the Covenant of God was restricted to the Jewish
race, the Hebrew and Septuagint texts sufficed for the
world. But when the Message of Christ spread abroad
through the nations there arose a need for other versions of
Scripture.
Among these old versions, one of the most important
is the old Latin version commonly called the Vetus Itala.
The origin of this version is involved in obscurity, and
like many questions of its kind, furnishes a theme for many
different learned conjectures. We shall be content to briefly
set forth the most probable data.
The language in which the message of Christ was first
presented to the Roman world, was Greek. Sufficient
evidence warrants the conclusion that the liturgical lan-
guage of Italy for the first two centuries was Greek. De
Rossi believes that it was not till toward the close of the
third century that Greek was superseded by Latin in the
Western Church.* But in Pro-Consular Africa, though the
language of the masses was Punic, the liturgical language
must have been Latin from the earliest times. This has led
many to assign Africa as the place of origin of the "Itala."
Wiseman, Hug, Maier, Hagen, Lehir, Himpel and Comely
support such opinion. Reithmayr, Gams and Kaulen place
the origin of the version in Italy. The supporters of the
*G. B. de Rossi (Roma Sotteranea, Roma 1867, II. p. 236 sq.) : "L'uso
costante della lingua greca in quegli epitaffi (dei romani pontefici). 6 prova
manifesta, die greco fu il linguaggio ecclesiastico della chiesa romana nel
secolo terzo. . . . Circa la fine del secolo terzo, o volgendo il quarto, la
greca lingua ecclesiastica cedette in Roma il luogo alia latina. "
THE VETUS ITAI.A 699
first opinion allege that the version would originate where it
was needed, and it would be assigning too late a date to the
version, to place it in the epoch of the decline of the < rreek
language in the West. They say, moreover, that the dictit m
of the Vetus Itala, is like to that of Tertullian. Against this
it may l>c urged that Greek never was the language of the
masses in Italy, and that the low, humble diction of the
Vetus Itala shows that it was not the work of savants ; and
it bears evidence that it was especially intended for the
humbler classes, and was most probably made by men of
limited literary ability. Its Latinity is exceedingly barba-
rous, so that 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
Africanisms, but are found in all the low Latin of the first
centuries. It seems that if the edition were made in Africa,
where Latin was the liturgical language, as they contend, it
would be made by the chief men of the Church, who certainly
could write better Latin than the text of the Vetus Itala.
believe, therefore, that in this question, which does not
admit of a certain answer, the greater weight of probability
stands for Italy as the place of origin of the first Latin trans-
lation. Regarding the mode of its origin, it seems quite
certain that it was the work of many private individuals.
St. Augustine, a most competent judge in this matter.
declares the manner in which the early translations wen-
made:
" For the translations of the Scriptures from Hebrew into
Greek can be counted, but the Latin translators are out of all
number. For in the early days of the faith, every man who
happened to get his hands upon a Greek manuscript, and
who thought he had any knowledge, were it never so little.
of the two languages, ventured upon the work of transla-
tion." (Enchirid. of Christ. Doct. Bk. II. XI.) )
It is evident that the numerous translators did not trans-
late the whole Bible, but certain books, so that there were
700 THE VETUS ITALA
many different translations of the several books made by
different authors. Jerome complains bitterly of these nu-
merous translators: "With the Latins there are as many
different versions as there are codices, and every one arbi-
trarily adds or takes away what he pleases. " (Hier. Praef.
in Josue.)
In this multiplicity of versions of the different books
it soon resulted that the whole Bible existed in Latin with
considerable diversity in the different codices. It must
have been also that some of the books were more faithfully
translated than others. The next step seems to have been
that the churches collected these various translations of the
individual books into complete catalogues of Scripture.
Here, also, diversity resulted, for the different churches
collected different versions, and the works of the 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, Augus-
tine designates one as the Italian version: "Now among
the translations themselves the Italian is to be preferred to
the others, for it keeps closer to the words, without prejudice
to clearness of expression." (op. cit. 15.) It is certain,
therefore, that in Augustine's time, out of the various trans-
lations of the individual books, there had resulted several
complete versions, among which, in his judgment, the Vetus
Itala was pre-eminent. It is probable that a beginning was
made to translate the Scriptures into Latin even in the
Apostolic age. As in that age intense activity was mani-
fested in all things that pertained to religion, without doubt
several translations of the different books were soon in exist-
ence. It is quite probable that one of these complete ver-
sions, at a very early age, obtained a place of eminence in the
churches of Italy ; perhaps it was in a certain sense author-
ized by the authorities in those churches. Thus it came to
be 'termed the "Itala," and, as Jerome called it the old in
in contradistinction to his version, it thus became known as
the Old Latin Version.
REVISION'S OF JEROME <()1
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, declination-,
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 greal
measure uncertain.
To remedy this evil Pope Damasus ^384), commissioned
St. Jerome to revise the Latin text. Jerome began his
labors at Rome in 383, and first revised the Psalter " juxta
septuaginta interpretes, licet cursim, magna tamen ex
parte." This emendation is called the Roman Psalter. It
was immediately adopted in liturgical use at Rome, and
remained in use in the churches of Italy, till the time of St.
Pius V. (f 1 572). The same year he also corrected the Gos-
pels, " Evangelia ad Graecam fidem revocavit. " The norm
of Jerome in this emendation was to depart as little as
possible from the usual reading; therefore, "ita calamo
temperavit ut, his tantum qua? 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 lie revised the whole New
Testament.
When Damasus died in 384, Jerome returned to the
East, and, happening upon the Hexaplar Text of Origen, at
Cassarea, he made from that text a second emendation of the
Psalter, retaining Origen 's diacritic signs. This emendation
was immediately received into liturgical use in the churches
of Gaul ; hence, it came to be called the Gallican Psalter. It
gradually came into use in other churches, and St. Pius V.
authorized it for the text of the Roman Breviary. An
exception was made in the case of the Psalm called the
702 CODICES OF THE OLD LATIN VERSION
Invitatorium, XCIV. of the Vulgate, which was retained
from the Roman Psalter. The Vatican Basilica, the Duomo
of Milan, and the Chapel of the Doges of Venice, by special
privilege, retained in their liturgy the Roman Psalter.
The Roman Psalter is also retained in the Roman Missal.
The Psalterium Gallicanum is placed in the Vulgate. St.
Jerome next revised Job by the Hexaplar text, which revis-
ion was received with much favor by St. Augustine. We
are certain from Jerome's prefaces that he emended in the
same manner Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles
and Chronicles.
It is probable that Jerome also corrected, at this time
and in this manner, the remaining books of the Old Testa-
ment, though explicit data are wanting to prove it.
Jerome soon after entered upon the greatest work of his
life, the translation of the protocanonical books of the Old
Testament, from the original Hebrew.
Of this great version we shall treat in a later chapter.
Suffice it to say here, that forth from the sixth century, the
great translation of Jerome displaced the Vetus Itala, so that
the greater part of this old version perished. Certain por-
tions of it are preserved in the Vulgate, and in the writings
of the Fathers. The New Testament of the Vetus Itala as
emended by Jerome, the second emendation of the Psalter,
the books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I. and II.,
Maccabees, and the deuterocanonical parts of Esther and
Daniel, are retained from the Vetus Itala in the Vulgate.
Various collections have been made of the other frag-
ments of the Vetus Itala from codices and works of Fathers.
Flaminius Nobilius and Agellius were the first to collect and
publish these fragments in 1588. Since that time fragments
have been collected and published by Martianay, Thomas
Hearne, Sabatier, Blanchini; and in more recent times by
Vercellone, Ranke, Haupt, and Muenter.
The Codices of the Old Latin version are designated by
minuscule Italic and Greek letters the most important of
the New Testament are:
CODICES OF THE OLD LATIN VERSION ,()'.)
a. Codex Vercellensis, at Vercelli. A tradition
asserts that this was written by Bishop Eusebius of Vercel-
li, who died in 370. Other scholars place it much later.
b. Cod Veronensis of the IV. or V. century.
c. Cod. Colbertinus at Paris (Lat. 254) of the XII.
century.
d. Cod. Bez.-e of the VI. century, the Latin parallel of
Cod. D.
e. Cod. Palatinus of IV. or V. century at Vienna
(Pal. 1 185).
/. Cod. Brixianus of the VI. century at Brescia.
ffl. Cod. Corbeiensis I. of the VIII. or IX. century at
St. Petersburg.
ff2. Cod. Corbeiensis II. of the VI. century at Paris.
Both these formerly belonged to the monastery of Corbey,
near Amiens.
g1. Cod. Sangermanensis I. of the IX. century now at
Paris (Lat. n,553)-
g2. Cod. Sangermanensis II. of the X. century at Paris.
(Lat., 13,169).
k. Cod. Claromontanus of the IV. or V. century now
in the Vatican (Lat. 7,223).
i. Cod. Vindobonensis of the VII. century at Vienna
(Lat, 1,235).
j. Cod. Saretianus of the V. century, discovered in
1872 in the church of Sarezzano near Tortona. It is being
collated at Rome.
k. Cod. Bobbiensis of the V. or VI. century in the
National Library at Turin.
The Codex Bobbiensis is more ancient than any of
these. It belongs to the National Library of Turin ; it is
designated in the Latin Apparatus Criticus by the minuscule
letter k.
The Codex forms a quarto volume of 96 leaves of fine
parchment. The leaves measure 185 millimeters by 105.
The pages contain one column of 14 lines. The script is
uncial, without ornament. Its date is placed in the fifth
century ; and it must thus be considered as one of the most
ancient of the New Testament. Traces of two correctors
704 THE CODEX BOBBIENSIS
are recognizable in the text. One of these was contem-
porary with the original scribe; the other more modern, is
believed from the Irish characters used to be S. Columban.
The Codex in its present state only contains the following
fragments of Matthew and Mark; Math. I. i to III. 10; IV.
2 to XIV. 17; XV. 26-30; Mark VIII. 8-1 1, 14-16, and from
VIII. 19 to XVI. 9.
It is estimated that the MS. originally consisted of 415
leaves. The first 256 leaves are lost. The fragment that
remains is believed to be a portion of the 33d cahier; the
following 20 are lost. It originally contained only the
Gospels, written in the following order: John, Luke, Mark,
Matthew. This order also obtains in the Codex Monacensis
X of the Gospels.
A 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 Scriptures in leathern wallets, "sacculi pellicei, "
and the celebrated Irish Bible known as the Book of Armagh
is enclosed in its leathern case. The identification of the
Codex Bobbiensis with St. Columban is a possible hypothesis
but not an established fact. After the Renaissance, the MSS
of Bobbio were distributed in the great libraries of Europe,
and this Codex found its resting place at Turin. It was
edited by Fleck in 1837; by Tischendorf in 1847; and by
Wordsworth and Sanday in 1886.
The Latin versions before the time of Jerome can be
reduced to three groups: 1. — The African, conformable to
the citations of Scripture of St. Cyprian; 2. — The European,
which circulated in Western Europe during the fourth cen-
tury ; 3. — The Italian, whose use is represented by St. Augus-
tine. The Codex of Bobbio is a faithful exemplar of the
African text. See Codex Bobbiensis in Vigouroux, Dic-
tionnaire de la Bible.
THE TARGUMS 705
/. Cod. Rhedigeranus of the VII. century in the Rhe-
digeran Library at Breslau.
;;/. This letter indicates fragments extracted by Car-
ina! Mai from the "Liber de divinis scripturis" ascribed to
St. Augustine.
;/. Fragmenta Sangallensia of the V. or VI. century
in the Stiftsbibliothek at St. Gall.
o. Another fragment at St. Gall, perhaps of the VII.
century.
p. A fragment at St. Gall perhaps of the VIII. century.
q. Cod. Monacensis of the VII. century, at Munich
(Lat. 6,224).
r. Cod. Usserianus I. of the VII. century, formerly
belonging to Ussher, now at Trinity College, Dublin.
r. Cod. Usserianus II. of the IX. or X. cent, also at
Trinity College, Dublin.
5. Fragmenta Ambrosiana of the VI. century, in the
Ambrosian Library at Milan.
/. Fragmenta Bernensia of the V. century, palimp-
sest, at Berne.
v. Frag. Vind. of the VII. century at Vienna.
aur. Cod. Aureus of the VII. or VIII. century now
at Stockholm.
z. Cod. Sangallensis the interlinear Latin of Cod. D.
Besides these there are many fragments of the several
books of the New Testament.
Chapter XXI.
The Targums
The Chaldee word DT^np! Targum signifies, in general,
any version or explanation ; but this appellation is more par-
ticularly restricted to the versions or paraphrases of the Old
Testament, executed in the East Aramaean or Chaldee dia-
lect, as it is usually called. These Targums are termed
paraphrases or expi >sitions, because they are rather com-
ments and explications, than literal translations of the text.
They are written in the Chaldee tongue, which became
familiar to the Jews after the time of their captivity in
Babylon, and was more known to them than the Hebrew
45 (H.S.)
706 THE TARGUMS
itself; so that, when the law was "read in the Synagogue
every Sabbath day," in pure Biblical Hebrew, an explana-
tion was subjoined to it in Chaldee, in order to render it
intelligible to the people, who had but an imperfect knowl-
edge of the Hebrew language. This practice, as already
observed, originated about the epoch of the Maccabees. As
there are no traces of any written Targums prior to those of
Onkelos and Jonathan, who are supposed to have lived
about the time of our Saviour, it is highly probable that these
paraphrases were at first merely oral ; that subsequently,
the ordinary glosses on the more difficult passages were com-
mitted to writing; and that, as the Jews were bound by an
ordinance of their elders to possess a copy of the law, these
glosses were either afterwards collected together and defi-
ciencies in them supplied, or new and connected paraphrases
were formed.
There are at present extant ten paraphrases on different
parts of the Old Testament, three of which comprise the
Pentateuch, or five books of Moses: i. — The Targum of
Onkelos; 2. — That falsely ascribed to Jonathan, and usually
cited as the Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan; 3. — The
Jerusalem Targum ; 4. — The Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel
(i. e., the son of Uzziel) on the Prophets; 5. — The Targum of
Rabbi Joseph the blind, or one-eyed, on the Hagiographa;
6. — An anonymous Targum on the five Megilloth, or books of
Ruth, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and the Lamen-
tations of Jeremiah ; 7, 8, 9. — Three Targums on the book of
Esther; and, 10. — A Targum or paraphrase on the two
Books of Chronicles. These Targums taken together, form a
continued paraphrase on the Old Testament, with the excep-
tion of the Books of Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah (anciently
reputed to be part of Ezra). These books being partly
written in Chaldee, it has been conjectured that no para-
phrases were written on them, as being unnecessary.
The Targum of Onkelos.
According to the Babylonian Talmud Onkelos was a
proselyte who lived in the first Christian century ; but there
is no confirmation of this in the Jerusalem Talmud. Indeed,
THE ANCIENT VERSION'S 707
it seems probable that the name is a corruption of Aquila the
translator. The Targum seems rather a progressive work,
the w< »rk of several hands, which may have originated during
the second and third Christian centuries. It is first quoted
as the Targum of Onkelos by Gaon Sar Shalom in the ninth
Christian century. It is sometimes called the Babylonian
Targum, as it was revised at Babylon in the fourth and
fifth centuries and officially authorized.
Though at times paraphrase takes the place of transla-
tion, and there are halakha and haggada in it, the translation
has merit.
The first edition of it was published at Bologna in 1482.
The other targums are of secondary importance.
Chapter XXII.
The Ancient Versions.
The Syriac
One of the most important of the ancient versions of
Scripture is the Syriac ; some of the Syriac Bible MSS ap-
pear to be the oldest in any language. One in the British
Museum is dated in the year 464.
The Aramaean or Syriac (preserved to this day as their
sacred tongue by several Eastern Churches) is an important
branch of the great Semitic family of languages, and as early
as Jacob's age existed distinct from the Hebrew (Gen. xxxi.
47). As we now find it in books, it was spoken in the north
of Syria and in Upper Mesopotamia about Edessa, and
survives to this day in the vernacular of the plateau to the
north of Mardin and Nisibis. It is a more copious, flexible,
and elegant language than the old Hebrew (which ceased to
be vernacular at the Babylonian captivity) had ever the
means of becoming, and is so intimately akin to the Chaldee
as spoken at Babylon, and throughout Syria, that the latter
was popularly known by its name (2 Kings xviii. 26; Isa.
xxxvi. n; Dan. ii. 4). As the Gospel took firm root at
Antioch within a few years after the Lord's Ascension (Acts
xi. 19-27; xiii. 1, &c), we might deem it probable that its
tidings soon spread from the Greek capital into the native
708 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
interior, even though we utterly reject the venerable
tradition of Thaddaeus' mission to Abgarus, toparch of
Edessa, as well as the fable of that monarch's intercourse
with Christ while yet on earth (Eusebius, Eccl.Hist., i. 13;
ii. 1). At all events we are sure that Christianity flourished
in these regions at a very early period ; it is even possible that
the Syriac Scriptures were seen by Hegesippus in the second
century (Euseb., Eccl. Hist., iv. 22); they were familiarly
used and claimed as his national version by the eminent
Ephrem of Edessa in the fourth. Thus the universal belief
of later ages, and the very nature of the case, seem to render
it unquestionable that the Syrian Church was possessed of a
translation, both of the Old and New Testament, which it
used habitually, and for public worship exclusively, from
the second century of our era downwards.
The great heresies of Eutyches and Nestorius in the
middle of the fifth century rent the Syrian Church, and drew
great numbers into one or the other of these sects, but they
seem not to have induced any difference of opinion among
them regarding the Holy Scriptures.
The Peshitto.
The greatest of their versions is the Peshitto or " simple.' '
Some derive this name from the fact that it was unprovided
with the diacritical signs employed by Origen in his Hexaplar
edition of the Septuagint. Others derive it from its faithful
literal character.
The Syrians say that a part of the O. T. was translated in
the days of Solomon at the request of King Hiram Another
tradition dates it from the advent of the priest sent by the
King of Assyria into Samaria.
It seems reasonably probable that at least a part of the
Syriac Old Testament is pre-Christian. Though the twen-
ty-two books of the Hebrew Canon were the first translated,
at a very early date the deuterocanical books were embodied
in the Canon, as appears from an inspection of the most
ancient MSS. The value of this version differs in the differ-
ent books, as it is not all of a single hand.
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 709
The Peshitto was the only recognized Syriac version up
to the sixth century.
A tradition prevails among the Syrians that St. Mark the
Evangelist translated the New Testament into Syriac.
Jacob of Edessa (f 701) derived the version from King
Abgar and Thaddaeus (Addai) the Apostle. Without ac-
cepting these legends we believe that at a very early age the
New Testament existed in Syriac.
Tatian's Diatessaron, made in the middle of the second
century presupposes a very early Syriac translation.
The Philoxenian and Harkeleian Versions.
In the year 508 Aksenaya or Philoxenus, bishop of Mab-
bogh (485-519) with the help of his Chorepiscopus, Polycarp
undertook a literal translation of the Bible. Besides the
New Testament the Psalms of this version are mentioned
by Moses of Aggel (between 550-570). A portion of Isaiah
is in the British Museum (17 106 Additional), This has
been edited by Ceriani.
A hundred years later Paul of Telia in Mesopotamia
revised it in Alexandria from MSS which were derived
from Origen's Hexaplar text. Hence it is often called the
Syro-Hexaplar text. The New Testament of this version
was made by Thomas of Harkel, as the following subscrip-
tion attests: "This book of the four holy Gospels was
translated out of the Greek into Syriac with great
diligence and labour. . .first in the city of Mabug,
in the year of Alexander of Macedon 819 (a.d. 508),
in the days of the pious Mar Philoxenus, confessor,
bishop of that city. Afterwards it was collated with
much diligence by me, the poor Thomas, by the help of
two [or three] approved and accurate Greek Manuscripts in
Antonia, of the great city of Alexandria, in the holy monas-
tery of the Antonians. It was again written out and c< »Uated
in the aforesaid place in the year of the same Alexander 9 2 7
(A.D.616), Indiction iv. How much toil I spent upon it and
its companions the Lord alone knoweth . . .&c." It is plain
that by "its companions" the other parts of the N. T. .
710 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
meant, for a similar subscription (specifying but one manu-
script) is annexed to the Catholic Epistles.
This version contains all the N. T. except the Apoca-
lypse.
In 1627 L. de Dieu published at Leyden a MS of the
Apocalypse which is now proven by the labors of Gywnn to
be of the hand of Thomas of Harkel. An earlier MS of the
Apocalypse of St. John was published by Gwynn in 1897.
The perikope of the Adulteress (John VIII. 2-1 1) is
wanting in many Syriac texts; but numerous ancient MSS
of it have been found and published.
The Karkaphensian Version.
Assemani (Biblioth. Orient., torn. ii. p. 283), on the
authority of Gregory Bar-Hebraeus, mentions what has been
supposed to have been a Syriac "version" of the N. T., other
than the Peshitto and Harkeleian, which was named "Karka-
phensian" whether, as he thought, because it was used by
Syrians of the mountains, or from Carcuf, a city of Mesopo-
tamia. Adler (Vers. Syr., p. 33) was inclined to believe that
Bar-Hebraeus meant rather a revised manuscript than a
separate translation. Cardinal Wiseman, (Horae Syriacae,
Rom. 1828), discovered in the Vatican (Ms. Syr. 152) a
Syriac manuscript of readings from both testaments, with
the several portions of the New standing in the following
order; Acts, James, 1 Peter, 1 John, the fourteen Epistles of
St. Paul, and then the Gospels.
According to the subscription it is of the year A. D. 980.
Cureton's Version.
In 1842 Tattam brought from the convent of St. Mary
Deipara in the Nitrian Desert a mass of MSS. Out of these
Dr. Cureton one of the officers of the British Museum picked
eighty leaves and a half. Cureton published these in 1858
with an English translation, and a beautiful facsimile by
Mrs. Cureton. In his preface Cureton declared that he had
here a most ancient Syriac translation whose antiquity is
proved by the fact that the fragments of Matthew's Gospel
were made from Matthew's original. The MSS contain
fragments of the Four Gospels. Cureton succeeded in per-
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 711
suading few of the great age of his MSS. Scholars are divided
on the question of its age and value ; but few agree with its
discoverer regarding the same.
The Abbe Martin believes that Cureton's Syriac is a
recension of the Peshitto dating from the end of the
seventh century or beginning of the eighth, and that it
never had much vogue.
The Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest.
In 1892 Mrs. Agnes Smith Lewis discovered in the Mon-
astery of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai some palimpsest leaves
of a Syriac text of the Gospels. This was published in 1894
by Bensley Harris and Burkitt, with an introduction by
Mrs. Lewis. She has supplemented this work by a transla-
tion of the Syriac text published in 1896. This is usually
spoken of as the Sinaitic palimpsest.
The greatest divergency exists among scholars regarding
its date, and in the present unsettled state of the question it
is useless to venture a judgment.
The Palestinian Syriac
There exists in the Vatican Library a Syriac Evangelis-
tary called Evangeliariiim Hierosolymitanum. This was
first described by Assemani and Adler in 1789. P. Lagarde
published it in 1892. It is of secondary importance.
The Syriac printed editions are in a deplorable state, be-
ing all derived from the uncritical Paris Polyglot of Michael
le Jay (1645). Walton's Polyglot reproduced this text
without any important emendations. The best edition up
to date is that of the Dominicans of Mosul. (3 vols.
1887-92).
The Egyptian or Coptic Versions.
The Coptic language is derived from the old Egyptian
tongue with numerous Greek words intermingled. This
language did not cease to be spoken in Egypt, until towards
the middle of the seventeenth century. The study of the
Coptic literature is at present in a very imperfect state.
LeaYned men have been studying the language for over tw< »
centuries, but much of that study was given to the hiero-
712 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
glyphs, and the importance of studying the Coptic Bible has
only recently been realized. The great decadence of learn-
ing among the Copts, the neglect into which their sacred
books had fallen, rendered the study difficult, and its results
uncertain, and unsatisfactory. The Coptic MSS are in a
very bad condition, and we can not hope to give a full
treatise on this subject in the present condition of the
science.
The Coptic language existed in several important dia-
lects, of which the first is the Bohairic. This name is
derived from Bohairah, the Arabic name for Lower Egypt.
It was spoken principally in the Delta of the Nile, and at
Alexandria, and, for a time, was the only Egyptian language
known to Europeans, who called it simply the Coptic tongue.
Later, it was called the Memphitic, in contradistinction to
the Thebaic dialect. The term Memphitic applied to this
language, is incorrect; for it was only in later times, when
the Coptic patriarchs transferred their seat from Alexandria
to Cairo, that it spread at Memphis. The usage of the best
scholars is to call it Bohairic.
The Sahidic Dialect is derived from Es-Sahid, the
Arabic designation of Upper Egypt. It was at one time
spoken through all Upper Egypt. It has been called The-
baic from Thebes, the capital of Upper Egypt, but it is un-
certain, whether the tongue originated at Thebes, and it is
more scientific to call it Sahidic, until new discoveries may
bring forth a more correct appellation.
Much uncertainty prevails regarding the third dialect,
which current usage calls the Fayoumian. It was discov-
ered by Giorgi (Frag. Evang. Joh. Graeco-Copto-Thebaicum,
Rome, 1789). He termed it Ammonian, believing that it
had been spoken in the Oasis of Ammon. According to
Quatremere, it was spoken in the greater and minor Oasis.
Zoega calls it the Bashmuric, while Stern denies the identity
between the Fayoumian and the Bashmuric.
There was a dialect spoken in middle Egypt in the prov-
ince of Memphis, when this city had a certain importance,
to which the name of Memphitic would rightly belong, were
it not for fear of confounding it with the Bohairic. It was
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 713
first made known by the publication in 1878 in Paris, by M.
Revillout of some documents on papyrus coming from the
old monastery of St. Jeremias, near Serapeum.
The fifth dialect is made known from some fragments
found in the excavations of the cemetery of Akhmim, the
ancient Chemmis or Panopolis; M. Bouriant who first pub-
lished these fragments has termed this dialect the Bash-
muric.
By strong proper characteristics we can divide these dia-
lects into Northern and Southern. The Northern dialect is
represented by the Bohairic, the other four dialects are
grouped in the Southern family, of which the Sahidic bears
the greatest divergency from the Bohairic.
Concerning the antiquity of these dialects the data is very
uncertain.
Athanasius, Bishop of Kos, in the eleventh century testi-
fied, that the Bohairic and Sahidic alone possessed literary
importance in his age. In that epoch, the monophysite pa-
triarchs moved their seat from Alexandria to Cairo, through
which cause their tongue, the Bohairic dialect, began to
prevail over the Sahidic, which latter receded further south-
ward. The Sahidic had at that date absorbed the other
Southern dialects, but was itself in a state of decadence
owing to the ascendancy of the Arabic in all Egypt. Thus
the Bohairic became the sole sacred tongue of all Egypt.
The Arabic has now almost entirely supplanted it as the
spoken language of the people.
Ouatremere (Recherches, pp. 118) testifies that Marcel
possessed a copy of a complete version made at Cairo, by the
Patriarch of the See from old Coptic MSS. After the death
of Marcel, this copy was bought by J. Lee Hart well. This
copy was seen in Hart well's Library in 1S47 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 burn-
ing of Marcel's house at Cairo. The books bear an Arabic
714 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
translation opposite the Coptic text. These books are
somewhere in England, though, thus far, they have not all
been located.
The ruin of the Sahidic literature is greater. Only frag-
ments remain of the several books which have been dug out
of the ruins of convents, and sold by the Arabs to explorers
and tourists. These are scattered through the libraries of
Europe.
Before speaking of the date and nature of the Coptic
Scriptures, we shall first briefly notice some of the principal
publications of this version in Europe.
In 1 731 Wilkins published at London the Bohairic Pen-
tateuch. In 1837, de Lagarde published a complete edition
of the Pentateuch, but in neither of these editions was use
made of the Vatican MS, the most ancient and best of all
known Coptic MSS.
Of the other historical books we have only fragments
gathered from Coptic liturgical books. De Lagarde collected
these and published them in 1879. In 1846 Tattam pub-
lished the Book of Job. The Bohairic Psalter was published
in 1744 by Tuki from MS 5 of the Vatican. Other editions
of the Psalter have been given by Idel'er, Schwartz, de
Lagarde, and F. Rossi.
The fragment of Proverbs I. 1 - XIV. 26, were published
in 1875, in Latin characters. The same chapters were pub-
lished again by Bouriant in 1882. The last named savant
has also published fragments of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus.
In 1836, Tattam published at Oxford the Bohairic text
of the Minor Prophets.
Baruch was published in 1870 at Rome from a MS of
Cairo by Mgr. Bsciai.
In 1849, Bardelli published the Bohairic text of Daniel,
which contains all the deuterocanonical fragments. In 1852
Tattam published a second edition of the same text, with a
Latin translation.
In 1852, the Coptic text of Isaiah and Jeremiah and
Ezechiel was published by Tattam at Oxford.
This is the only edition yet published of these three
Prophets.
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 715
In 1 716, David W'ilkins published the entire Bohairic
New Testament. He made use of excellent MSS, and his
work is the editio princeps of the Bohairic Version of Scrip-
ture.
In 1846, appeared the Gospels of -Matthew and Mark in
Coptic, by Schwartz; and in 1847, the Gospels of Luke and
John, by the same editor. He had a better knowledge of
Coptic than Wilkins, though his edition does not show it.
Schwartz was prevented by death from finishing the editi >n
of the complete New Testament. P. Boetticher, better
known as Paul de Lagarde, completed it in 1852, on a more
critical plan.
The first specimens of the Sahidic version published in
Europe, were by R. Tuki in his Rudimenta Linguae Coptae,
in 1778. In 1785, Mingarelli published fragments fromSS.
Matthew and John from MSS furnished him by Cav. Nani.
Mingarelli, left the third part of the MSS unpublished at his
death.. In 1789, A. Giorgi published a fragment of St. John,
with a Greek translation. About the same time, Miinter,
the Dane, published several fragments at Copenhagen. In
1778, Woide was commissioned by the University of Oxford
to publish the Sahidic New Testament. Materials accumu-
lated, and he died in 1790, without finishing the work.
Henry Ford brought it to completion in 1 799. It is enriched
by excellent notes. In 1801 or 1802, Zoega was employed
by Cardinal Borgia to edit the Coptic Scripture from MSS
then in the Cardinal's possession. In 1804, the Cardinal
died, and left his library to the Propaganda. Zoega con-
tinued his work from the Propaganda's deposit. The work
went to press in 1805. Litigation with Cardinal Borgi
heirs delayed it so that the edition did not appear till 18 10,
nearly a year after Zoega's death. It is the best collection
of Coptic literature ever published. In the collection
there are several Sahidic fragments.
Nothing more was done in Coptic publicati< >n. till in 1875
Peyron published the Sahidic Psalter. Since that time,
important Coptic publications have been published by de
Lagarde, Agapios Bsciai, Ciasca, Hermann. Bouriant,
Amelineau. and Maspero.
716 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
Passing over some isolated and feeble testimonies of
certain ones who would make the Coptic a version derived
directly from the Hebrew, we look for the proofs of its real
date in the rapid spread of Christianity in Egypt. The first
Christians of Egypt were probably Hellenist Jews, who made
use of Greek Scriptures, but from the advent of St. Mark the
religion of Christ spread rapidly among the native people,
so that at his death in 62, or at the latest, in 68, Egypt had
many bishops.
During half a century after his death, peace reigned, and
the faith of Christ was allowed to fix its roots deeply in
Egypt. At the end of the third century, Egypt was solidly
and universally Christian; it had bishops in every place, and
monasticism, inaugurated by St. Anthony, was a strong and
growing institution. The first evangelists of Egypt, doubt-
less, made use of the Greek tongue. In fact, for centuries,
Greek remained the official liturgical and Scriptural tongue.
This is clearly proven by several Grasco-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.
Grasca, Tom. XXVI. Col. 841, 944 et seqq.) prove that the
saintly hermit knew no tongue but the native Egyptian ; and
yet he was moved to leave the world by hearing the reading
of the passage concerning the rich young man (Matth. XIX.
16). St. Athanasius informs us that Anthony was well
versed in Scripture, and, therefore, it must have been in the
Coptic Scriptures. In fact, in the writings that have come
down to us of St. 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
monasteries was Coptic. St. Pacomius (292-348) did not
learn Greek till at an advanced age (Rosweyde) ; and in the
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 711
rules of his monastery (Patr. Lat. Migne, 23, Col. 70) it was
established that the study of the Scriptures was one of the
chief employments of the monks. Postulants were required
to memorize the Psalter. Epiphanius informs us that
Hierax, the heretic, being well versed in Greek and Coptic
and in the Scriptures, seduced certain monks of Egypt by
arguments drawn from the Scriptures. Hence we place the
date of the Coptic Scriptures about the close of the second
century.
Wetstein and 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.
The Coptic versions are of great worth in textual criti-
cism. They exhibit a reproduction of the Greek text before
it had suffered the numerous modifications that came into
it, after the issue of the Hexapla of Origcn. The learned
Catholic, A. Schulte, has given us a critical edition of the
Prophets. The celebrated reference of Matthew XXVII.
9-10, is found in both the Bohairic and Sahidic texts of
Jeremiah.*
The Bohairic New Testament is purer than the Sahidic,
which gives indication of its remoter date.
Mgr. Ciasca has made a critical study of the Sahidic
version. He finds that it has felt the influence of the hex-
aplar text, and it is probable that the version as we have it.
♦Iterum dixit Jercmias Pashori: Eritis aliquando cum patribus vestris
repugnantes veritati, et filii vcslri venturi post vos, isti facient iniquita-
tem magis abominandam quam vos. Nam ipsi dabunt prctium pro eo cui
nullum est pretium. Et nocebunt ci qui sanat morbos, et in ivmissionem
peccatorum. Et accipient triginta argenteos in pretium ejus quern tra-
dent filii Israelis. Et ad dandum id, pro agro figuli, sicut mandavit
Dominus. Etdicent: Veniet su[«cr eos judicium perditionis in a-U-rnum
et super filios corum quia condemnaverunt sanguiiu-m innoccntcm.
718 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
is a later recension, made to accord with some recension of
the Greek text.
The Sahiclic New Testament, has been studied by Muen-
ter. It is inferior to the Bohairic version.
The fragments of the Akmimian version, commonly
called the Bashmuric fragments, were published by Bou-
riant. Krall has also given us a specimen of a fragment of
the Minor Prophets. But it has not been studied suffi-
ciently to judge of its critical value. The Fayoumian version
and the version of Middle Egypt, which once were identified
with the Sahidic version, must be considered as separate
groups, but our knowledge of them is very imperfect.
The Ethiopic Version of Scripture.
Concerning the evangelization of Ethiopia, Ruflnus gives
us the following data. Meropius, a philosopher of Tyre, set
out on a voyage, having in mind to visit that region which in
those days was called India. He brought with him two
youths, Edesius and Frumentius, for whose education he was
providing. Having concluded their observations, they set
sail for their own country, and while passing the coast of
Abyssinia, 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 Frumentius, whose prudence all recog-
nized. They remained, and Frumentius became regent of
the realm. As they were both Christians, Frumentius began
to make use of his great power by favoring the Christian
merchants, who came to the kingdom to trade; and by his
exhortation and active help, many churches were con-
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 71!)
structed, and many natives converted to Christianity.
When the Prince came to his majority, Edesius and Frumen-
tius set out for their own country. Edesius came to Tyre,
and was made Bishop of that See. Frumentius went to
Alexandria and laid before St. Athanasius, the Patriarch,
the condition of the land, which lie had left, and its need of a
bishop and priests.
Athanasius, in a council of priests, elected Frumentius
himself to be bishop of the strange country. He s< >< >n after
received ordination and consecration from St. Athanasius,
and returned to the scene of his first labors. The richest
fruits rewarded his apostolic labors, and an immense number
of the natives received the faith of Christ. Rufinus declares
that he received these data from Edesius himself. (P. L.
Migne, 21, 478.)
This would bring the evangelization of Abyssinia in the
beginning of the fourth century. In that time Abyssinia
formed the old kingdom of Auxuma.
When Constantius succeeded Constantine, he endeavored
to move the King of Auxuma to expel Frumentius, and
receive Arianism. This attempt failed, but in the sixth
century, through the influence of the Monophysite Patri-
archs of Alexandria, the Copts fell into the Monophysite
heresy, and there is little of orthodox Catholicity left in the
country now.
The Ethiopians call Frumentius, Abba Salama. It is
evident that he could make little progress in evangelizing the
country by means of Greek Scriptures, of which the people
knew nothing. The data seem to warrant that Frumentius
chose the Ghez dialect, which was spoken at the court and
among the upper classes, and translated into this the Holy
Scriptures. We believe, therefore, that the Ethi< »pic 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 iSioand 1820, Asselin de Cherville, the French con-
sulat Cairo, translated, by the aid of Abou-Rourni, the
Scriptures into Amharic. His version was purchased bv the
720 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
British Bible Society. J. P. Piatt revised it, and published
the Gospels in 1824. He published the whole New Testa-
ment in 1829, and the whole Bible in 1842. In 1875 the
society published a new edition, under the supervision of
Krapf and several Abyssinians.
An inspection of the Ethiopic text, clearly reveals that it
was made from the Greek. Many 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 uncor-
rupt ; but great freedom was used by later hands in interpo-
lating many passages, so that a critical edition is necessary
before the book will be of any critical worth.
No complete edition of the ancient text has ever been
published. In 15 13 John Pot ken published the Psalter and
some canticles from the New Testament. In 15 18 he
published the Canticle of Canticles. In 1548 the New Testa-
ment was published at Rome. Some other unimportant
and modern editions have been wrought, but the codices
anterior to the fifteenth century have not been examined,
and the outlook for the old text seems dark.
The Gothic Version.
The Goths were a Germanic gens who, in the second
century, spread from the Vistula to the Danube. Some of
them were converted in the third century to Christianity.
Theophilus, the Gothic bishop, sat in the Council of Nice,
and signed the decree of the Consubstantiality of the Son of
God. In the fourth century, they were expelled from their
lands by the Huns. They receded Eastward, and took up
their abode within the realm of the Byzantine Empire. As
Arianism was in the ascendancy at the court of the Emperor
Valens, and in the realm, they soon lapsed into that heresy.
■ The Gothic version is inseparably associated with Ulfilas.
According to Philostorgius his contemporary Ulfilas was born
of Christian parents in Dacia between 310 and 313. He was
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 721
consecrated bishop about the year 340. It seems probable
that it was after the retreat of the Goths into Mocsia that
Ulfilas translated the Scriptures. It is probable that at
that time he had embraced the Arian heresy.
The Goths in that age had no alphabet. Ulfilas adopted
the old Runic characters with some additions from the
Greek.
Philostorgius testifies : "that Ulfilas translated into his
mother tongue, all the books of Holy Scripture except the
books of Kings, for the reason that these contain the account
of wars, and the Goths naturally delight in warfare, and have
more need to be held back from battles than to be spurred
on to warlike deeds." (Hist. Eccles. XI. 5.) This seems
improbable, and is disproven by the discovery by Mai, in
181 7, in the Ambrosian Library, of a palimpsest fragment of
the Gothic text of Kings.
The version of ^Ulfilas was in universal use among the
Goths, while they retained their individuality as, a race but
later their language, and their version passed into oblivion.
In 1669, the Chancellor of Queen Christina of Sweden,
Gabriel de la Gardie, presented to the University of Upsal
several MSS, among which was one which is since known as
the Codex Argenteus. Investigation proved it to be a Codex
of the Gothic Gospels. It is called Argenteus, either because
its binding is of massive silver, or because its letters are of
silver.
In 181 7 Cardinal Mai discovered among some palim-
psest Codices in the Ambrosian library at Milan fragments of
Kings, Ezra, Nehemiah of the Gothic version. By the help
of Carolo Ottavio Castillionei five other fragments were
deciphered under other writings.
The portions of the Gothic version of the Old and New
Testament, printed by Signors Mai and Castillionei, are I.
Nehemiah, Chap. V. verses 13-18 ; I )hap. VI. 14-19, and VIII.
1-3; II.; a Fragment of Saint Matthew's Gospel, contain-
ing Chap. XXV. 38-46; XXVI. 1-3; 65-75. and XXVII. 1;
III.; part of St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians, Chap. II.
22--30, and III. 1-16; IV.; Saint Paul's Epistle to Titus,
46 (H.s.)
722 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
Chap. I. 1-16; II. 1.; and V. Verses n-23 of his Epistle to
Philemon.
It is to be regretted that we have no critical edition of the
Gothic Scriptures.
The Armenian Version of Scripture.
The evangelization of Armenia was wrought by Gregory
the Illuminator, in the first years of the fourth century.
Sozomen informs us that Tiridates was first converted, and
then by public edict bade Armenia receive the faith of Christ.
(Hist. Eccles. II. 8.)
For more than a century the Armenians had no proper
version of Scripture nor liturgy. They made use of the
Syriac text. At that time they had no alphabet.
When Isaac became patriarch (390-440), St. Mesrob, his
co-laborer, gave himself to invent an alphabet. He traveled
much and consulted many learned men, and finally, in 406,
he perfected an alphabet of thirty-six letters, by which all
the sounds of the Armenian language are expressed.
When Mesrob had arranged the Armenian alphabet
(406 a. d.) he undertook, under the direction of the Patri-
arch Isaac, and with the aid of his principal disciples, John
Egueghiatz and Joseph Baghin, a translation of " the twenty-
two canonical books of the* Old Testament and a translation
of the New Testament." This work was finished in 411.
Cfr. Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, in Langlois' Collection of
Ancient and Modern Histories of Armenia, 2 vols, in 4mo,
Paris, 1839, t. II. p. 10; T. Neve, Christian Armenia and its
Literature, in 8mo, Paris, 1886, p. 13, 22. Cfr. Moses of
Khorene, III. 53. This first version was made by Saint
Isaac from the Syriac, says Moses, the historian, III. 54,
because no one possessed the Greek text, and the more,
because the Syriac tongue had been, for different reasons,
the liturgical language in certain countries of Armenia, up to
the time of the invention of the Armenian alphabet by
Mesrob. Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p. 11; Lazare de
Pharbe, Histoire X. in Langlois' Collection, t. II. p. 226.
Cfr. Saint Martin, Historical and Geographical Memoirs of
Armenia, 2 in 8mo, Paris, 1819, t. I. p. 11; Tchamitchian,
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 723
History of Armenia Translated by Avdall, 2in8mo., Calcutta,
1827, t. I. p. 239; R. Simon, Critical History of the Versions
of the New Testament, in 41T10, Rotterdam, 1690, p. 196.
This first work, made in haste, from indifferent exemplars
doubtless was defective in many things. Some years later,
Isaac and Mesrob sent John Baghin with Eznik, another of
their disciples, to Edessa, that they might translate the Holy
Scriptures from the Syriac into the Armenian. [Gorioun,
Biography of Mesrob, p. 11-12.] These two young men
repaired from Edessa to Byzantium, where they were
rejoined 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 returned to Armenia, having among their literary
effects the Acts of the Council, and authentic copies of the
Holy Scriptures in Greek. [Gorioun, ibid.] Isaac and Mes-
rob immediately sought to turn these latter to good account,
and retouch the old version made from the Syriac, by exactly
comparing it with the authentic copies which had been
brought to them. But the translators who worked under
their orders did not have a sufficient knowledge of the Greek
language, and their labor was judged very imperfect. They,
therefore, sent other young men to study Greek at Alexan-
dria. Moses of Khorene was among this number. (Moses
of Khorene, III. 61) They doubtless brought back from
Egypt, other Greek exemplars of the Bible, which they used
to perfect the work of their predecessors in faithfully trans-
lating the text of the Septuagint from the Hexapla of
Origen ; because the same signs and asterisks are found in the
old Armenian manuscripts of the Bible. Cfr. P. Zohrab,
Armenia)! Bible, 4 in 8mo, Venice, 1805, Introd. p. 6, 7.
See Gorioun, Biography of Mesrob, p. 11, 12. Moses of
Khorene, III. 61 ; Tchamitchian, History of Armenia, I. 1. p.
239. Langlois, {Collection, t. II. p. 168, note), says that this
version was officially adopted by the Fathers of the Council
of Ashdishad, in 434. If the fact and the date are correct,
the approbation of the Fathers can refer only to the first
version made from the Greek. Vide P. Donat Vernier,
724 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS
Histoire du Patriarcat Armenien Catholique, in 8mo, Paris,
1891, p. 128-129.
The Armenian version follows very closely the Greek
text for the Old Testament as well as for the New. The
Greek text which it follows can not be reduced to any
known recension, which is explained, perhaps, by the fact
mentioned above, that some of the Greek manuscripts which
the translators used, came from Constantinople, or Ephesus,
while others came from Alexandria. Bertholdt, Einleitung,
t. II. p. 560, believes that the former belong to the recension
of Lucian, and the latter to that of Hesychius.
The Armenian version is very little known. The major-
ity of scholars who have occupied themselves with the criti-
cism of the Greek text of the Bible, did not know the Arme-
nian language.
In 1662, the Armenian Patriarch James IV. sent Bishop
Uscan to Europe to manage the publication of an Armenian
Bible. He came to Rome, and sojourned five months.
As the Propaganda was not certain of his orthodoxy, he
was unable to realize his project at Rome; whereupon, he
withdrew to Amsterdam, where he published a complete Old
Testament in 1666, and the New Testament complete in
1668. The edition of Uscan was not approved by Rome.
It is very imperfect.
The work of Uscan was perfected by the Armenian
religious, called the Mekhitarists at Venice.
In 1805 appeared the complete edition of the Scriptures
by Zohrab, one of the Mekhitarists. At first, the book of
Ecclesiasticus was placed in the appendix with certain apoc-
ryphal books. They discovered later a Codex of Ecclesias-
ticus of the fifth century, and in a later edition in 1859, re-
stored Ecclesiasticus to its proper place. The verse of I.
John V. 7, is omitted in this edition.
Many editions have been published since that time, of
which there is no need to speak.
The people living about Iberia and the region about Mt.
Caucasus, who are termed Georgians, or Grusians, are said to
have been converted in the fourth century by Armenians. In
the life of St. Mesrob, it is stated that he also gave an alpha-
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS 725
bet to this people. They received their Scriptures from the
Armenians, and it is uncertain whether the translation into
their proper tongue was made in the sixth or eighth century.
It is also uncertain whether it was made from the Greek or
Armenian text. The Georgian tongue is but little known,
and no scholar has given us the resources of the a foresaid
version of Scripture.
There was printed at Moscow, in 1743, an edition of
Georgian Scripture, based upon the Russian text, whence it
is evident that it is of no critical worth.
The other Eastern versions are late and unimportant.
In the ninth century, SS. Methodius and Cyril gave to the
Slavs a Slavonic translation of Scripture, most probably
made from the Greek text.
The Arabic translations, some of which appear in Wal-
ton's Polyglot, were made in the tenth and twelfth centuries
and are of no critical worth.
The Persian text of the Gospels which appears in Wal-
ton's Polyglot, was made from the Syriac Peshitto. Its
date is uncertain, but it is later than the eighth century.
Saadias Haggaon, a Jew living in Egypt in the tenth cen-
tury, translated the Pentateuch from the Masoretic text
into Arabic. In many places the work assumes the nature
of a paraphrase. Translations by Saadias also exist of
Isaiah, the Minor Prophets, the Psalter and Job.
The Arabic text of the Pentateuch by Saadias is pub-
lished in Walton's Polyglot.
In 1662, Erpenius published an Arabic translation of the
Pentateuch from a MS belonging to Joseph Scaliger. This
is called the Arabs Erpcnii. It was made from the Mas-
oretic text by a Jew in the eighth century, and is of no criti-
cal value.
We know not the date or the author of the Arabic text
of Joshua published by Walton. There are also Aral >ie frag-
ments of Kings, and of Ezra whose origin is uncertain.
There is also a version of the Pentateuch made by Abou
Said, a Samaritan, at an uncertain date ranging between the
tenth and eleventh centuries. It was made from the He-
brew text of the Samaritan Codex in Samaritan characters.
726 THE VULGATE
The Arabic text of the Prophets which appears in Wal-
ton's Polyglot, was made from the Septuagint, and Theodo-
tion's version of Daniel. The Arabic text of the other books
which appears therein was made also from the Greek at
uncertain dates, but all later than the tenth century.
The Arabic text of the New Testament was made directly
from the Greek. Its date is unknown, but the eighth cen-
tury would be the earliest possible date.
The Persian Pentateuch of Walton was made by a Jew of
the sixteenth century. It follows the Masoretic text ser-
vilely, and is of small critical worth. The Persian text of
the Gospels which was made from the Greek, is assigned to
the fourteenth century. Other versions may exist, but they
have not been studied.
Chapter XXIII.
The Vulgate.
We have sufficiently discoursed of the causes and move-
ments which led up to Jerome's great translation, which,
from its constant and universal use in the Church of God,
has been aptly called the Vulgate.
It was in his cell at Bethlehem, about the year 389, that
Jerome began his great work. His design was not favored
by the clergy of Rome, who accused him of endeavoring to
set aside the Septuagint and the Vetus Itala. He declares
that such was not his intent, but only to furnish a translation
that the Jews could not reject in controversy with the
Christians. Jerome never foresaw the great results that
were to follow from his labors. He began with the books of
Samuel and Kings. In 393 he had completed these, together
with the sixteen Prophets, the Psalter and Job. The work
was then intermitted for some time. In 395 he translated
Ezra and Chronicles. These were followed by a translation
of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Canticle of Canticles. The
work of translating the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges and
Ruth was begun in 398 and terminated in 404. Some time
in this period, Jerome translated Tobias and Judith from the
Chaldaic text.
THE VULGATE
727
Jerome's version of the Psalter was never received into
common use by the Church. The probable cause was the
danger of scandal to the common people, who committed
much of the Psalter to memory. Had Jerome's translation
been substituted for the old text, the simple people would
have been unable to reconcile the wide divergency of the two
texts with their reverence for Holy Scripture.
Jerome was guided in his method of translation by two
norms, i . —The great and principal norm was to reproduce
the sense, not binding himself to text, word for word. What
ever may be Jerome's declaration concerning his work, an
examination of the Vulgate will reveal this general design
running all through it. Thus, at times, he changes com-
pletely the order and form of the Hebrew sentence; again,
he avoids the excessive minuteness of description and fre-
quent repetitions of the same text. The following two
examples will illustrate this :
Genesis XXXIX. 19-20.
(Literal Hebrew.)
"And it came to pass, when
his master heard the words of
his wife, which she spake unto
him, saying: After this manner
did thy servant to me ; that his
wrath was kindled. And Jos-
eph's master took him, and put
him into the prison, a place
where the King's prisoners wire
hound: and he was there in tho
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
Genesis XXXIX. 19-20
(Vulgate.)
"His master hearing these
things, and giving too much
credit to his wife's words, was
very angry, and cast Joseph
into the prison, where the
King's prisoners were kept,
and he was there shut up. "
Exodus XL. 12-13. (Vul-
gate.)
' ' And thou shalt bring Aaron
and his sons to the door of the
tabernacle of the covenant, and
having washed them with
water, thou shalt put on them
the holy vestments, that they
may minister to me, and that
the unction of them may pros-
728
THE VULGATE
priest's office. And thou shalt per to an everlasting priest-
bring his sons, and clothe them hood. "
with coats: And thou shalt
anoint them, as thou didst
anoint their father, that they
may minister unto me in the
priest's office: for their anoint-
ing shall surely be an everlast-
ing priesthood throughout their
generations. "
Jerome omits two whole verses, and condenses their
import in the other two.
This is praised by some as a certain elegance in Latin
diction, but I must confess I prefer the quaint simplicity
of the old text with no abridgment.
At times Jerome has failed to apprehend the sense of the
Hebrew. The following is a notable example :
Gen. XLIX. 22. (Hebrew.)
"Joseph is a fruitful son
(bough), a fruitful son (plant-
ed) by the fountain whose
branches run over the wall. "
Gen. XLIX. 22. (Vulgate.)
"Joseph is a growing son, a
growing son and comely to
behold: the daughters run to
and fro upon the wall."
It is evident that the holy text likens Joseph to a vine
planted in well irrigated soil; and Joseph's prosperity is
likened to the healthy growth of this vine which sends forth
its shoots over the wall. It is easy to see that this is more
congruous to the grave sense of Scripture, than the picture of
maidens running about on an eminence to see the beautiful
Joseph.
Again when Jerome essays to translate proper names into
their supposed signification, he sometimes errs.
The following text will illustrate this assertion :
Joshua XIV. 15. (Hebrew.)
"And the name of Hebron
before was Kiriath-Arba (the
city of Arba) who was a great
man among the Anakim. And
the land had rest from war. "
Joshua XIV. 15. (Vulgate.)
"The name of Hebron before
was called Cariath-Arbe ;
Adam, the greatest among the
Enacim was laid there ; and the
land rested from wars. "
THE VULGATE 729
The sense is simply that Hebron was called the city of
Arba, who had been a great hero of the Anakim. How far
Jerome has departed from this sense we leave the reader to
judge. Again :
II. Ezra IX. 7. (Vulgate.) II. Ezra IX. 7. (Hebrew.;
"Thou, O Lord God, art he "Thou art the Lord God,
who choscst Abram, and who didst choose Abram, and
broughtest him forth out of the broughtest him forth out of Ur,
fire of the Chaldeans, and gav- of the Chaldeans, and gavest
est him the name of Abraham." him the name of Abraham. ' '
It is plain that the inspired text wishes to state, that
Abram was called by God out of the Chaldean city Ur.
Jerome's love for Hebrew led him to accept much from the
Rabbis, and here they have deceived him.
Sometimes, in things relating to the substantial sense,
he has failed to catch the meaning. An example of this is
the following passage :
Exodus XXIII. 13. (Literal Exodus XXIII. 13. (Yul-
Hebrew.) gate.)
"And in all things that I " Keep all things that I have
have said unto you, be circum- said to you. And by the name
spect: and make no mention of of strange gods thou shalt not
the name of other gods, neither swear, neither shall it be heard
let it be heard out of your out of your mouth. "
mouth. "
The precept is against idolatry, not against profanity.
A similar serious defect occurs in the well-known passage
of Isaiah XI. 10, wherein Jerome translates the close of the
verse: " — and his peace will be glorious," by" — and his
sepulchre will be glorious." The Prophet predicted the
glorious reign of Christ, which succeeded to his period of
suffering, and not, as the Vulgate leads some to believe, the
honor that is paid to the Holy Sepulchre.
Although these and certain other such defects occur in
the Vulgate of Jerome, it remains, in the main, the best of all
730 THE VULGATE
the versions of Scripture. This is even admitted by ration-
alists and protestants.*
A translator is not an inspired agent, and these few
defects simply show that the translation was a human work.
The world has been studying languages, studying the Scrip-
tures, thinking, and writing for a decade and a half of cen-
turies since Jerome lived, and it is not strange that in a few
cases some slight betterment could be now wrought in his
translation, but considering the time and circumstances in
which it was done, the translation of Jerome must ever
remain one of the great works of man.
The labors of Jerome met with much opposition, both
during his life and after his death. Jerome's character was
one to antagonize a certain element of mankind. He was a
man of power, high-minded, noble, intolerant of baseness
and pettiness. By his talents he had outstripped his fellows,
and then had to look down upon the envy of those of a lower
plane. His prefaces to the several books, and his letters to
friends, show that he was not of a temper of mind to concil-
iate his opponents by bland words.
These opponents decried Jerome and his work on the plea
that he was attacking the Septuagint, which had been prac-
tically adopted by the Church. But there was another
element in the opposition, composed of good men, who,
actuated by zeal for the Church, feared that the people
would be scandalized by this new presentation of the truths
of Scripture, with which, in the old form, they were now
familiar. St. Augustine was of this number, but towards
*Haevernick Einl. I. p. 444: "Seine im Ganzen sehr wahren hermen-
eutischen Principien . . . Machen seine Arbeit zu einer der ausgezeichnet-
sten Leistungen des kirchl. Alterthums." Keil Einl. p. 572: "Seine
Uebersetzung . . . ubertrifft alle alten Versionen an Genauigkeit und
Treue." Uti "orthodoxi, " ita rationalistse quoque, inter quos De Wctte-
Schrader Einl. p. 137: "Vermoege seiner Sorgfalt . . . brachte er
vieleicht das Vortrefflichste zu Stande, was in dieser Artdasganze Alterthum
aufzuweisen hat." Bleek-W ellhausen Einl. p. 598: "Die Arbeit im Gan-
zen ist von unbefangenen Richtern allezeit als sehr gelungen anerkannt."
Distel Gesch. des A. T. p. 93: "Unmittelbar aus dem Hebr. Text ge-
schoepft, meist in moeglichst gewandter Sprache, mehr auf die Wieder-
gabe des rechten Sinnes als auf sklavische Woertlichkeit gerichtet, erhielt
sie mit vollem Reeht den Rang einer Vulgata," etc. (Apud Comely, op. cit.)
THE VULGATE c'll
the end of his life, he was more favorably disposed to Jer-
ome's translation, which he commended and used.
There was no sudden transition from the old to the new
version. It was a gradual movement, sustained by the
intrinsic excellence of the Vulgate.
The earliest and most universal endorsement of Jerome's
translation came from Gaul. Cassian (1432), during Jer-
ome's life, called it the more correct edition. Soon after his
death, Eucherius of Lyon (t454), Vincent of Lerins (t45o),
Prosper (t45o), Sedulius (f45o), Avitus (t532), and Cacs-
arius of Aries (|542) adopted it as the received text of Scrip-
ture.
At Rome, during the fifth and sixth centuries, the drift
was decidedly in favor of the Vetus Itala. against the Vul-
gate. St. Leo the Great (440-461) and Pope Hilary (461-
468) made some use of the Vulgate. With John III. (560
578) the tide set in strongly towards the Vulgate, and St.
Gregory the Great (590-604), who considered the Vulgate
the truer translation, is witness that only small use was made
in his day of the Vetus Itala. From that time forth the
Vetus Itala was neglected, and Jerome's translation became,
in very deed, the Vulgate. St. Isidore of Seville (1636)
declares that Jerome's translation "is universally used, for
the reason that it is truer in its sense, and clearer in its
diction." (De Off. I. 12). Ven. Bede, (t735) made aim
exclusive use of the Vulgate. Rhabanus Maurus and Wala
frid Strabo declare, that "in the principal books the whole
Church of Rome uses the translation of Jerome." (Instil.
Cler. II. 54). The ascendancy of the Vulgate was accom-
plished, not by any official decree, but by the steady growth
of the recognition of its excellence.
The mode of diffusion of written data of those days made
them greatly liable to corruption. \\ "hen a book is printed,
it is fixed and unchangeable. But in the old days, when the
publishing of a book was by moans of manuscripts written
by men who were ever prone, either by ignorance or negli-
gence, to permit errors, or by active, arbitrary design to
insert certain judgments of their own into the text, the more
a book was copied the more it was corrupted ; for it was made
732 THE VULGATE
tcTreflect something of every one through whose hands it
had passed. This was augmented, in the case of the Vul-
gate, by the contemporaneous existence for centuries of the
two Latin versions. Passages were copied from one into
the other. There was much revision, and re -revision, remo-
deling, and sciolism, till the two texts were well mixed and
corrupted. Hugh of St. Victor, testifies of this state as
follows: "It has come about by a perverse usage, since
different ones follow different translations, that both are
now so mixed that no man knows what is proper to each
text." (Pat. Lat. Migne, 175, 17.)
Learned men arose in the Church and strove to remedy
this evil. Cassiodorus emended the text for his monks.
Alcuin, at the bidding of Charlemagne, revised the entire
Latin version, and presented the corrected copy to Charle-
magne in 801. From this text were made the Bibles of
Alcuin, or of Charlemagne, as they are sometimes called.
They were much in use up to the thirteenth century. Many
of the codices of the Vulgate are of this recension.
Other corrections were made by St. Peter Damian
(■(•1072), St. Lanfranc of Canterbury (fioSc-), and the Cister-
cian St. Stephen (tii34).
As the corruption was universal in character, these
private efforts were inadequate to remedy the evil. Hence,
in the thirteenth century, theologians formulated a design for
an Apparatus Criticus, which should serve as a norm to
correct all texts. The data of the Apparatus Criticus were
taken from the old codices, from the writings of the Fathers,
from the commentaries of Jerome, from the Glossary of
Strabo, and the interlinear Glossary of Stephen Langton.
Some collation was also made of the original texts. The
results of these labors were, in 1226, embodied in the Cor-
rectorium of Paris.
This work afterwards received the approbation of the
Archbishop of Sens, Primate of Gaul, for which cause it is
sometimes called the Correctorium Senonense. This work
of the University of Paris in nowise benefitted the text.
It was simply the multiplication of a poor text, with some
additional corruption, so that Roger Bacon said of it:
THE CORRECTORIA OF THE VULGATE 733
" Textus pro majori parte horribiliter corruptus est . . .
et ubi non habet corruptionem, habet tantam dubitationem
qua? 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 con-
tain different readings from other manuscripts. The critical
worth of these Correctoria is to us considerable.
The Dominican Chapter of France in 1256, condemned
the Correctorium of Sens, and proscribed its use in the Order.
Some efforts had been made by the Dominicans to have a
corrected and uniform text, and the first work worthy of note
was executed by Hugh de St. Cher, general of the Order.
As Hugh knew Hebrew, he essayed to remove all glosses
from the Vulgate, and restore it to its pristine state. He
made no use of old MSS, but corrected it according to the
Hebrew and Greek. It is more a second translation than a
critical recension of the Vulgate.
There were some other minor Correctoria executed by
the Dominicans, of which but little is known. Albertus Mag-
nus, St. Thomas, and other theologians employed the texts
of Scripture as found in the Correctorium of the Dominicans.
Although great erudition and labor was expended on this
work, it failed through a defective critique. They had, in a
measure, substituted their work for the work of Jerome, and
Jerome's work was the better. They had also placed in the
margin many readings judged to be erroneous, underlining
them in red, or affixing to them some other sign, that readers
might be warned against them. In time the indications
were unobserved, and the readings crept into the text.
Roger Bacon, said of this text: "Eorum corrects > est
pessima corruptio, et destruitur textus Dei; et longe minus
malum est uti exemplari Parisiensi non correcto quani
eorum correctione. " (Apud Hody, 1. c.)
734 THE CORRECTORIA OF THE VULGATE
The Correctorium of the Franciscans has been erron-
eously termed the Correctorium of the Sorbonne, from the
fact that it became known from a manuscript of the Sor-
bonne, which is at present in the National Library in Paris
(Latin 15554). Its method was similar to that of the
Dominicans, but of its value little is known. The Correct-
orium of the Vatican, so called from its MS in the Vatican,
was executed about the beginning of the fourteenth century
by William de Mara, a Franciscan of Oxford. The man was
a disciple of Bacon, and his work shows much erudition and
critique. He made use of Hebrew and Greek, not to sup-
plant the version of Jerome, but to perfect it. His Correct-
orium is the best of all. He fails sometimes, especially in
Greek, of which he knew less than of Hebrew.
Many other Correctoria existed which merit no mention
here.
We insert here some mention of a few of the principal
manuscripts of the Vulgate.
Chief among these is the Codex Amiatinus.
This manuscript, the most celebrated, if not the oldest of
the Vulgate of Jerome, belongs to the Laurentian Library at
Florence. It is registered Amiatinus I., because it is one of
the manuscripts, which were brought from the Abbey of
Mount Amiato, near Sienna, to the aforesaid monastery, at
the time of the Abbey's suppression in 1786. The script is
the uncial lettering of Italian caligraphy. The parchment
is divided in cahiers of sixteen pages each. Every page
has two columns of text, and each column forty-four lines.
The whole width of the initial letters of the verses or stichs is
displayed on the margin of the MS. There is no punctua-
tion. The text is divided into stichs. It has no adorned
initials, such as the beautiful ones we see in the manuscripts
of the Carlovingian epoch. Its height is fifty centimeters,
its width thirty-four. The manuscript forms only one
volume of one thousand and twenty-nine leaves. It con-
tains the whole text of the Vulgate, every book prefaced by
an introduction or prologue by St. Jerome.
On the back of the first page of the manuscript is read the
following inscription in verse :
CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE 735
"Ccenobium acl eximii merito venerabile Salvatoris,
Quem caput Ecclesiae dedicat alta fides,
Petrus Langobardorum extremis de finib. abbas
Devoti affectus pignora mitto mei,
Meque meos optans tanti inter gaudia patris
In coelis memorem semper habere locum. "
The Abbot Peter is unknown. The expression, head of
the Church, applied to the monastery of Mt. Amiato is very-
strange. Moreover, the words " Ccenobium, " " Salvato >i
and "Petrus Langobardorum" are words written by a
second hand upon an erasure. Evidently the dedication of
the manuscript was defaced at the time of the change of
ownership. The question has engaged many to ascertain
for whom the manuscript was originally intended. Bandini
of the last century, in drawing up a catalogue of the Lauren-
tian manuscripts, proposed to correct the first verse as fol-
lows: "Culmen ad eximii merito venerabile Petri." The
hexameter is restored at the same time, and the first verse is
made to agree with the second: "Quem caput Ecclesiae
dedicat alta fides. "
Thus it would result that the manuscript were one offered
to the Roman Church, Caput Ecclesiae. For the "Petrus
Langobardorum," Bandini proposed to substitiv " Ser-
vandus hatii." In fact, at the beginning of Leviticus, we
read the name of such copyist, who labored at the products <n
of the manuscript. 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 Amia-
tinus was thus considered a manuscript of the sixth century,
of Italian origin : it has been accepted as such by Tischendorf.
The finding of the authentic original, and the age of the
Codex Amiatinus, is one of the most brilliant dise<>veries 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 bibliotheea. unde
736 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE
(the carrier of the letter) dare nullatenus habuimus ; trans-
cribere autem non potuit, quoniam festinanter de hac civi-
tate egredi properavit. "
Bendict Biscop, the founder of the Abbeys of Wear-
mouth and Yarrow, was one of those prelates of the seventh
century, devout to the things and books of Rome. Five
times (in 653, 658, 671, 678 and in 684), he made pilgrimages
to Rome, bringing back every time, according to Bede's
testimony, "innumerabilem librorum omnis generis cop-
iam. " At his death he left to his two Abbeys "bibliothe-
cam quam de Roma nobilissimam copiosissimamque advex-
erat. "
His successor was Ceolfrid, who was the master of Bede,
of whom Bede tells us, that he took a great care of Benedict
Biscop's library, and had three manuscripts of the Holy
Scripture executed according to a copy brought from Rome,
and that he gave a copy to each of his two Abbeys, Wear-
mouth and Yarrow, and then, when he started for Rome,
he took the third copy, in order to offer it to the Holy See.
Ceolfrid died on the way, at Langres, Sept. 25, 716. But the
monks, who accompanied him, proceeded towards the Eter-
nal City, and it is to be supposed that they accomplished
their Abbot's intentions, thus expressed by Bede: "Inter
alia donaria quse afferre disposuerat misit Ecclesise sancti
Petri pandectem a Beato Hieronymo in Latinum ex Hebraeo
vel Gneco fonte translatum."
M. de Rossi based a conjecture upon those facts, that we
should read in the dedicatory of the Codex Amiatinus,
neither " Petrus Langobardorum" nor " Servandus Lain,"
but " Ceolfridus Britonum." The two words proposed by
M. de Rossi fitted exactly the place of the erasure. The
poetical quantity only was still defective. M. Samuel
Berger proposed "Ceolfridus Anglorum.'n While the Eng-
lish reviewers were theorizing for and against this conjec-
ture, which brought down to the eighth century the most
important manuscript of Jerome's Vulgate, and made of it
an Anglo-Saxon work. M. Hort pointed out in an anony-
mous Life of Ceolfrid, very likely Bede's work, published for
the first time in 1841, a passage in which it is related, in the
CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE 737
same terms as above, how Ceolfrid had made three copies of
the Roman Bible in his possession ; that he intended to offer
one of those three copies to the Church of St. Peter at Rome ;
that he died during his pilgrimage ; and that the Bible
destined for St. Peter's bore the following verses:
"Corpus ad eximii merito venerabile Petri
Dedicut Ecclesiae quern caput alta fides,
Ceolfridus, Anglorum extimis de finibus abbas,
Devoti affectus pignora mitto mei, " etc.
We could not wish for a conjecture a more perfect verifi-
cation. The Codex Amiatinus, therefore, was executed
between 690, date of Benedict Biscop's death, and 716, and
rather about 690 than towards 716, in Northumberland,
either at Yarrow, or at Wearmouth, and it is the copy of a
manuscript of Jerome's Vulgate brought from Rome.
The Codex Amiatinus is at present held to represent the
most ancient condition of Jerome's Vulgate, that is to say,
it approaches closest to the text executed by Jerome. It
played a considerable part in the history of the Vulgate in
the middle age.
" It is from Northumberland that the good texts of the
Vulgate have been spread, not only in Italy, to whom Eng-
land paid thus its debt, but moreover, in France, for Alcuin
came from York and was selected by Charles the Great
(Charlemagne), for correcting the text of the Bible." —
Samuel Berger, De 1' Histoire de la Vulgate en France,
Paris, 1887, p. 4.
Tischendorf published the text of the New Testament of
the Codex Amiatinus, C. Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum
ex Codice Amiatino, Leipzig, 1890-1894. See Bandini,
Bibliotheca Leopoldina Laurentiana, Florence, 1891. t. I.,
p. 701-732; Wordsworth, Novum Testamentum Latine, p.
XI., Oxford, 1889; De Rossi, La Biblia offerta da Ceolfrido
abbate al sepulcro di S. Pietro, Rome, 1888; J. White,
The Codex Amiatinus and its birthplace in the Studia
Biblica, Oxford, 1870, t. 11, p. 273 308. (P. Batiffol in
Dictionnaire de la Bible.)
The next great Codex of the Vulgate is the CoDEX Ful-
densis. It contains only the entire New Testament, and
47 (H.s.)
738 CHIEF MANUSCRIPTS OF THE VULGATE
can not be made equal to Codex Amiatinus. Its colophon
declares that it was made under the supervision of Victor,
Bishop of Capua. Victor ascended the episcopal throne in
541. From the Roman dates affixed to the instrument,
chronographers establish that it was finished in 546.
St. Boniface, the Apostle of Germany, is believed to have
carried the Codex into Germany, and it is not improbable
that he had the Codex with him when he was martyred in
Frisia in 755.
The Codex bears certain explanatory notes from the
hand of Boniface.
It is preserved at Fulda. It has been published and
accurately described by E. Reinke, Marbourg, 1868.
The Codex Toletanus contains all the books of both
Testaments, except Baruch. It is written in Gothic capital
characters, hence it is sometimes called the Gothic Codex.
It was used in the Sixtine and Clementine correction of the
Vulgate. Its date is placed in the eighth century. It is the
present property of the Metropolitan Church of Toledo.
The Codex Cavensis is a MS of Jerome's Vulgate, the
property of the Abbey of La Cava, near Salerno. It con-
sists of 303 leaves, in three columns of 54 and 55 lines. The
titles and prologues are in uncial characters ; the body of the
text is in minuscule Roman characters . M . Berger advances
the theory that the Codex is a production of the Visigoths of
Spain, in the ninth century, if not of the end of the eighth.
It contains all the books of both Testaments.
The Codex Foroiuliensis of the sixth century, formerly
contained the four Gospels, but now is mutilated in Mark.
The Codex Ottobonianus contains the Octateuch com-
plete.
The Codex Paulinus or Carolinus, and The Codex
Statianus or Vallicellianus of the ninth century, contain
all the books of both Testaments of the recension of Alcuin.
They were much prized by Sirleti and others in the emenda-
tion of the Vulgate.
After the invention of printing in the fifteenth century,
the first book ever printed was the Vulgate printed at Mainz,
in 1450. From that time up to the close of the century,
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 739
great activity was exercised in the printing of the Latin
Vulgate, and more than a hundred different editions were
printed in that period.
But little critical care was bestowed on these early edi-
tions, and the best MSS were not employed, so that they are
of no critical worth .
The Dominican Castellanus issued an edition at Venice in
1506, in which he printed some marginal readings, collected
principally from other printed editions. The first real criti-
cal edition of the Vulgate text was the Complutensian.
wh< >se text was excellent for that time.
After the rise of protestantism, the protestants threw off
all reverence for the Vulgate. They changed its readings at
will, and made for themselves new editions from the original
texts.
The Dominican Sanctes Pagninus (fi54i) and Cajetan
made new Latin versions. Augustine Steuchus, and Isidore
Clarius, revised the text of the Vulgate in conformity with
the original texts. Hittorp endeavored, in his edition of
Cologne in 1530, to restore the text of Jerome to its original
purity.
Robert Etienne collected at Paris a considerable number
of codices and spent upwards of twenty years, from 1528 to
1 548 and beyond, in emending the text of the Vulgate. His
labors 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 cen-
sure to this excellent text, wherein was naught of Calvinism
or other error.
Chapter XXIV.
The Authorization of the Vulgate by the Council
of Trent.
On the 17th of March, 1546, in the general session, the
Fathers who had been charged to investigate the status of
the Latin text of Scripture reported four abuses. Only the
first two are relevant to our present theme.
740 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
The first abuse was the existence of many Latin versions
of the Scriptures, which were used as authentic in public
readings, disputations, and discourses. The remedy sug-
gested was to have the old Vulgate as the sole authentic
edition which all should use as authentic in all public read-
ing, and in the exposition and preaching of Holy Scripture ;
and that no one should reject it or impugn its truth ; and not
thereby to detract aught from the genuine and true version
of the Seventy Interpreters, which the Apostles sometimes
used, nor to reject other editions which help to find the
source of the authentic Vulgate.
The second abuse was the corruption of the codices of the
Vulgate.
The remedy was to expurgate and amend the codices and
restore to the Christian world the genuine text of the Vulgate,
free from error. And the Fathers petitioned the Pope to
cause this great work to be done and also to bring it about
that the Church of God might also have a correct Greek and
Hebrew text.*
Several particular assemblies and three general sessions
discussed this proposition, and finally, the Council promul-
gated its famous decree.
" The same thrice holy Synod, believing that much bene-
fit may accrue to the Church of God, if from among all the
Latin versions of the Holy Scriptures which are in circula-
tion, an authentic one be recognized, decrees and declares
*"Primus abusus est: habere varias editiones S. Scripturas, et illis velle
uti pro authenticis in publicis lectionibus et praedicationibus. Remedium
est: habere unam tantam editionem, veterem scilicet et Vulgatam, qua
omnes utantur pro authentica in publicis lectionibus, expositionibus et
praedicationibus, et quod nemo illam reiicere audeat aut illi contradicere ;
non detrahendo tamen auctoritati puree et vera? interpretationis Septua-
ginta interpretum, qua nonnunquam usi sunt Apostoli, neque reiiciendo
alias editiones, quatenus authentica? illius Vulgatae intelligentiam iuvant .
— Secundus abusus est corruptio codicum qui circumferuntur Vulgatae
huius editionis. Remedium est, ut expurgatis et emendatis codicibus
restituatur christiano orbi pura et sincera Vulgata editio a mendis libro-
rum, qui circumferuntur. Id autem munus erit Smi. D. N., quern S. Syno-
dus humiliter exorabit, ut pro ovibus Christi Suae Beatitudini creditis hoc
onus ingentis fructus et gloriae sui ipsius animi magnitudine dignum susci-
piat; curando etiam, ut unum codicem Graecum unumque Hebraeum,
quoad fieri potest, correctum habeat Ecclesia sancta Dei. "
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE i II
that the old edition of the Vulgate, which has been approved
by the Church by the usage of so many centuries, shall be
held authentic in all public readings, disputations, and in the
public exposition and preaching of Scripture, and that no
man may reject it upon whatever pretext And
having in mind to establish also a rule for printers .
the Council decrees and establishes that, hereafter, the Holy
Scripture, especially this old Vulgate, shall be most carefully
printed. "*
Some believe that the Council of Trent established two
conditions that a book be judged canonical : i . the fact that
it had been read in the church, — "proitti in Ecclesia Cath-
olica legi consueveruut ;" 2. its presence in the Vulgate —
"et in Veteri Vulgata Editione habentur. Thus they judge
that the mere presence of a book in the Vulgate edition is
not sufficient ; but there must be present the constant
reading in the Church.
This seems to us unfounded. The Council did not con-
template a possible discrepancy between the Vulgate and
the Church's traditional use of Scripture. In fact the reason
of the Vulgate's authority is the fact that it was constantly
read in the Church. The test of Canonicity is one, that is
the constant reading of all the books in the Church's text
of Scripture. The presence of the books in the Vulgate is
not a second condition but an explanation of the first. The
Vulgate is the concrete expression of the constant use of the
Church. This is clear from the Acts of the Council wherein
we find that the clause concerning the Vulgate was added
simply to determine what was the Church's use of Scripture.
What the Council of Trent decreed for the Vulgate could
have been decreed of the Old Latin Version .
*"Eadem saerosancta Sp-nodus considerans non parum utilil
accedere posse Ecclesia? Dei, si ex omnibus latinis editionibus, quae cir-
cumferuntur, sacrorum librorum, quacnam pro authentica habenda sit
innotescat, statuit el declarat, ut hsec ipsa vetus e1 Y editio, quae
longo tot sarculorum usu in ipsa Ecclesia probata est, in publicis lection-
ibus, disputationiblis, pra?dieationibus et expositionibus, pro autluntica
habeatur et ut nemo illam reiicere quovis praetextu audeal vel praesumat.
. Sed et impressoribus modum in hac parte, ut par est, imponere
volens, . . decemit et statuit, ut posthac S. Scrip tura, potissimurn
verohaec ipsa vetus et Vulgata editio quam emendatissime imprimatur."
742 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
The decree of the Council of Trent set in motion a turbu-
lent movement 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 Inquisition, either adopted the views of
the party in power or kept a prudent silence. "I know,"
says Bannez, "what I would respond by word of mouth, if
asked by the Church ; meanwhile, I maintain a prudent and
religious silence. " (In I. S. 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 abso-
lutely authentic. Of this movement Richard Simon truly
wrote : ' There were but very few persons who accurately
comprehended the sense of the decree of Trent which pro-
nounced the Vulgate authentic. . . . The greater
number of those who agitated this question scarcely under-
stood anything of it, and they were moved more by prejudice
and passion, than by sense and judgment. " Periit judicium
postquam res transiit in affectum." (Hist. Crit. du V. T.
II. 14.)
We find an accurate and dispassionate description of
these causes and effects in the Disputation on the Vulgate of
John Mariana.* What he has written of Spain, could be
affirmed in less degree of other countries in that period.
*John Mariana, S. J. was born in the diocese of Toledo in Spain, in
1 5 3 7 • He was endowed with great mental power and uprightness of char-
acter. He studied in the Complutensian Academy, and in 1554 entered
the Society of the Jesuits. In 1561, he came to Rome and taught Scrip-
ture'for four years. In 1569, he went to Paris and expounded the Summa
of St. Thomas, in the great Academy for five years. His character was
honest and severe, and his insight into truth profound. Through failing
health he was forced to remit some of this study, and in 1574 he returned
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 743
"Opus molcstum suscipimus, multaque difticultate
imped itum, periculosam aleam, ac qua nescio an ulla dis-
putatio 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 mutuo fcedabant, ad tribunalia ven-
tum sit; atque quae pars sibi magis confidebat, adversaries
de Religione postulatos gravissime exercuit, quasi impios,
superbos, arrogantes, qui divinorum librorum auctoritatem,
atqiie ejus interpretationis fidem, qua Ecclesia utitur passim,
et qua? vulgata editio nuncupatur, audacter elevarent, novis
interpretationibus prolatis invectisque contra divinas leges
et humanas, concilii Tridentini decreta non ita pridem pro-
mulgata. Tenuit ea causa multorum animos suspensos
expectatione, quern tandem exitum habit ura esset, cum
viri eruditionis opinione praestantes, e vinculis cogerentur
causam dicere, haud levi salutis existimationisque discrim-
ine: miseranda virtutis conditio, quando pro laboribus, quos
susceperat maximos, compellebantur eorum a quibus defend i
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, quan-
tum procellas immineret libere affirmantibus qua? sentirent.
Itaque aut in aliorum castra transibant frequentes, aut
tempori cedendum judicabant. Et quid facerent, cum
frustrk niti neque fatigando (ut ille ait) aliud quam odium
quasrere, extrema? dementia? sit? Plcrique inhaerentes per-
suasion! vulgari, libenter in opinione perstabant, iis placitis
faventes, in quibus minus periculi esset, haud magna v<
tatis cura. Quidam enim editionem vulgatam sugillant,
quasi multis vitiis feed am. ad fontes identidem provocanl
to Spain, and in a studious retirement at Toledo, he lived to an extn
old age, dying in 1624. Mariana was a man of unblemished life, and intol-
erant of evil. He was no timeserver, and attacked evil wherever he found
it. Having attacked some abuses of the State, in a treatise De Mi
Mutatione, he was judged guilty of Iwsa majestatie, and in his seventy-
second year was imprisoned in a Franciscan monastery. His wri:
consist of numerous short treatises on various subjects, several being on
the Scriptures.
744 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
unde ad nos ii rivi manarunt, ac contendentes Grascorum
Hebraicorumque codicum collatione castigandam videri,
quoties ab illis discrepant, linguarum peritia tumidi, eccles-
iasticam simplicitatem ludibrio habentes; quorum profecto
audacia ac temeritas pronuntiandi merit 6 frasnanda est.
E contrario, alii majori numero adversariorum odio nefas
putant vulgatam editionem attrectare, atque in impiorum
numero habent, si quis vel levem vocem castigare tentet,
si locum aliquem aliter explicare contendat, quam vulgata
interpretatio pras se ferat (quos imitari pro feet 6 non debe-
mus) pusillo homines animo, oppleti tenebris, angusteque
sentientes de Religionis nostras majestate, qui diim opin-
ionum castella pro fidei placitis defendunt, ipsam mihi
arcem prodere videntur, fratemam charitatem turpissime
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 pro-
claimed that the Council had bound Scriptural science with
chains of iron, and condemned it to a sterile immobility.*
The labors of Catholic theologians in establishing the real
sense of this decree, have removed the cause for this calumny,
and it is only the presence of a dense veil of ignorance, that
in our days permits a repetition of this old falsehood.
The Church was not responsible for the course of thought
in Spain. The best institutions of God and man have been,
and will be abused. The Council spoke the truth, and men,
in an inconsiderate zeal, misunderstood its words. Some
misunderstand them yet, but the current of thought in this
regard is better now than then.
We place, therefore, as a thesis: That the Council of
Trent, in declaring the Vulgate the authentic text of Scrip-
*Cfr. ex. gr. Kiel ~Ein\. p. 579: "Mit diesem Decret war zwar der Grund-
text nicht ausdriicklich verworfen, aber doch fur ganz iiberfliissig erklart
nnd 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 E in gang in die offentliche Kir-
chenlehre verschlossen . " Alii alio modo eadem repetunt. (Comely op.
cit.;
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 7 15
ture, did not place the excellence of the Vulgate above the
original texts of Scripture, nor above the old versions of
Scripture which had been in use in the Church, neither did
it deny the authenticity of these texts.
A sufficient argument for this position is in the very
words of the decree, and in the nature of the abuse which it
was intended to remove. There was no mention of original
texts or versions other than the Latin. A multiplicity of
Latin versions created confusion, and the Council chose one
Latin version, which should be the official text of Latin
Scriptures for the Latin Church. The original texts and old
versions have the same merit as before, and are as authentic
as when they formed the Scriptural basis of the decisions of
councils, prior to the Council of Trent. Cardinal Pole and
others demanded that a text in Greek and Hebrew might
also be declared authentic. Although this was not done, we
have every reason to believe that it would have been done
if the need existed. In the Greek Church no great variety
of translations existed. The Greeks used their authentic
text, which had been always sanctioned by the Church's use,
even before the Latin existed. No one denied its authen-
ticity, and the Council left it in the peaceful possession of
what it always had. The Hebrew text was not in use as a
practical text of Scripture by any Christian Church, and
there was no need to declare it authentic. It is character-
istic of the Catholic Church not to indulge in superfluous
legislation. Her decisions are few, and framed to meet
actual needs.
The deliberations of the Fathers, as related to us by
Pallavicini (Storia del Cone, di Trento), show plainly that
the Fathers wished to save the credit of the original texts
and the old versions: "It was the common opinion that the
Vulgate edition should be preferred to all other (Latin)
editions; but Pacheco petitioned that these others should be
also condemned, especially those made by heretics; and he
extended this afterwards to the Septuagint. Bertram
opposed this, maintaining that there was always a diversity
of versions in use with the faithful, which usage the Fathers
had approved. Ami who would dare, he said, condemn the
746 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
translation of the Septuagint which the Church uses in her
psalmody? . . . Let one version be approved, and the
others be neither approved nor condemned. "
After the expression of these views, Card. Del Monte, one
of the presidents of the Council, closed the disputation in
these words: "The matter has been discussed and prepared.
We come now to the form. The majority holds that the
Vulgate should be received, but care must be taken lest the
others should be thought to be tacitly rejected." The
"others" are evidently the orginal texts and the old ver-
sions. Could anything be clearer? The Fathers took
thought lest their action might seem to be the tacit repudia-
tion of the other texts.
This sense is confirmed by the express declarations of
some of the principal theologians of the Council. Salmeron,
S. J., who was one of the Pope's theologians in the Council,
declares : "We shall show that the approbation of Jerome's
translation imported, in no way, the rejection of the Greek
or Hebrew texts. There was no question of Greek or
Hebrew texts. Action was only taken to determine which
was the most excellent of the many Latin versions. The
Council left every man free to consult the Greek and Hebrew
texts, that he might thereby emend its errors, or elucidate
its sense, hence, without infringement on the authority of
the Council, where the texts differ, we may make use of the
text from the Greek or Hebrew copy, and expound it as a
text of Scripture. We may use such text, not alone for
moral instruction, but also use it as a Scriptural basis for the
dogmas of the Church. "
The same testimony is rendered by the Franciscan,
Andrea Vega, whose wisdom was held in great repute by the
Fathers of Trent. In his work, De Justificatione XV. 9,
he thus addresses Calvin: " Lest thou shouldst err, O Calvin,
regarding the approbation of the Vulgate, give ear to a few
things, which I would wish Melancthon also might hear,
who also, before you, arraigned the Fathers for this. The
Synod did not approve the errors which linguists and those
moderately versed in Holy Scripture find in the Vulgate.
Neither did they ask that it be adored as though it had
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 747
descended from Heaven. The Fathers knew that the inter-
preter was not a prophet, . . . and, therefore, the
Synod did not restrain, nor wish to restrain, the labors of
linguists, who teach us that certain things might be better
translated, and that the Holy Ghost could signify many
things by one and the same word, and, at times, a sense
more apt than can be obtained from the Vulgate. But con-
sidering the Vulgate's age, and the esteem in which it was
held for centuries by Latin Councils which used it, and in
order that the faithful might know— which is most true —
that no pernicious error can be drawn therefrom, and that
the faithful can read it safely without danger to faith, and
to remove the confusion caused by a multitude of trans-
lations, and to modify the tendency to continually produce
new versions, the Council wisely enacted that we should use
the Vulgate in all public readings, disputations and exposi-
tions of Scripture. And it declared it authentic in this sense,
that it might be known to all that it was never vitiated by
any error from which any false doctrinal or moral teaching
might result; and for this reason it decreed that no one
should reject it on whatsoever pretext. And that this was
the mind of the Council, and that it wished to decree nothing
further than this, you may draw from the words of the
Council. And lest you should doubt of this, I am able to
invoke a veracious witness, his Eminence the Cardinal of
Holy Cross (Card. Cervini, afterwards Pope Marcellus II.),
who presided over all the sessions. Both before and after
the decree, more than once, he testified to me that the
Fathers wished nothing more for the Vulgate. Hence you
are not hindered neither is anyone else by the approbation
of the Vulgate from recurring, in doubt, to the original
texts, and one may bring forth out of them whatever he
may find, in order that the sense of the Latin may be cleared
and enriched, and that he may purge the Vulgate from
errors, and arrive at those things most consonant with the
sense of the Holy Ghost and the original texts. " (Mariana.
1. c.)
We come in possession of two truths in this testimony:
first, that Vega has the mind of the Council of Trent, and.
748 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
secondly, that the action of the Fathers was just and tem-
perate. While Mariana was teaching at Rome, question
arose relating to the real sense of the decree of Trent. The
General of the Jesuit order at that time was James Laynez,
a man offgreat erudition and judgment, who had himself
taken part in every session of the Council of Trent. He was
petitioned to explain to the Order the real sense of the de-
cree, and on the testimony of Mariana, his response was sub-
stantially the same as the testimony of Vega.
Didacus de Andrada deserves to rank among the first
theologians of the Council.*
He was not in the fourth session, in which the Vulgate
was approved, but as a subsequent member of the Council
he certainly knew the mind of the Fathers. He approves
the declaration of Vega and declares "that we are to so
defend the excellence and dignity of the Vulgate, that we in
no way obstruct the Hebrew founts whence the saving
streams of truth have flown forth to us. And on the other
hand we are so to venerate the old Hebrew text that we
reject not the authority and majesty of the Vulgate. "
(Andrada, Defens. Trid. Fidei IV. p. 257).
The excellence which the Fathers of Trent attested of the
Vulgate is well expressed by Sixtus of Sienna: "Although
errors are found in the Vulgate, it is certain that neither in
the old edition nor in the new was anything ever found
which is dissonant from Catholic faith, or false or contrary
*Didacus de Pavia de Andrada, was born at Coimbra in Portugal, in
1528. He entered the Church at the age of thirty, was sent by King Se-
bastian 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 au-
thority of the Councils were not authorized and confirmed by Christ, I
could easily give assent to their definitions, being moved by such an ex-
cellent method of ascertaining truth." While at Trent he wrote "An Ex-
planation of the Orthodox Faith," an excellent polemic apologetic work.
It was espeially directed against Chemnitz. The heretic responded, and
Andrada wrote against him his most celebrated work, "A Defense of
the T'ridentine 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.
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 749
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 (fi626),
the 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 negli-
gence, 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 erron-
eous 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 sys-
tem 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 Coun-
cil declared the Vulgate 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 cam tnical. This
is of faith, and an ;muthema was fulminated against any one
who should gainsay such truth. This certainly implies that
the Vulgate has preserved the substance of all these bo<
750 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
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 fixing of the Canon was a dogmatic fact — the decree
that the text of Scripture which the Church used is substan-
tially the word of God was also dogmatic ; but the selection
of the Vulgate as the official version was an act of discipline,
and though directed by the Holy Ghost only demanded that
the Vulgate contain the substance of God's word without
pernicious error. 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 con-
trary, in the clearest terms the Council maps out the disci-
pline 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 substantially defective
version of Scripture. So that this disciplinary decree rests
on the dogmatic status of the books, established in the pre-
ceding 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
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 exam-
ined such conformity. 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 con-
tain the substance of God's written message to man. The
Fathers, therefore, understood 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 AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE <~>\
The truth of our position is corroborate! 1 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
himself. 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 Vulgate, but they were warranted in declar-
ing 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 congre-
gation 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. And even in the preface to the
Clementine edition of the Vulgate, 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,
Salmeron, 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
752 THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE
understanding of the text itself, provided that such a one in
such a grave matter is prepared to submit himself to the
Church if she should decide otherwise." (Salmeron, Proleg.
III. p. 24.) This is the golden rule for all theologians. Re-
lying on this, a theologian can freely conduct any re-
search, sustained by the thought that if he speaks true
things, the Church will commend him, and she will safe-
guard 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 :
1. 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. Carafa, declares that nothing can be asserted which is
not in conformity 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 repro-
duced 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 informed him that Pius IX. had de-
clared, by word of mouth, that even if the declaration did
exist, nothing more was commanded thereby than that one
should not reject the Vulgate in matters of faith and morals.
(Franz. De Trad. p. 563.)
In a manuscript in the Vatican (Lat. 6326) there is a
commentary on the Canons of Trent by the hand of Card.
Carafa, who was first Prefect of the Council of Trent. Com-
menting the words "cum omnibus suis partibus " he declares :
"Wherefore the Sacred Congregation of the Council judges
that one incurs the censure if he changes a single sentence,
or clause, or phrase, or word, or syllable, or an iota; and
Vega (De Justific. IV. 9) is to be severely censured for having
spoken rashly in this matter. "
THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE VULGATE 753
This has no dogmatic force: it was the exaggerated
theory of a theologian, and there were many such.
And in any case , this Congregation had naught to do
with matters of faith. The decree is either a forgery, or a
disciplinary ruling of a council, and avails naught in the
present question.
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 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 wTho rejected the deutero-
canonical 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, as 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 new r
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 original, provided in
the same way that nothing contrary to faith or morals could
result therefrom. The Vulgate reproduces sufficiently the
substance of God's written message, and leaves a legitime
field to the science of textual criticism.
48 (H.S.)
754 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE
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.
3. The third argument of the adversaries hardly
deserves mention. They maintain that if we are not to
reject the Vulgate 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 truth of Scripture. The
very conception of the argument of the opposition 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 accord-
ance with the data here explained.
Chapter XXV.
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 Vul-
gate was judged by the Fathers of Trent to be so easy in
execution that a corrected copy might be sent to them while
yet assembled in council. On the 24th of April, 1546, Card.
Cervini had written to Rome : " Staremo adunque aspettando
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULC.ATE 755
die voi ci mandiate presto una bella Bibbia corretta et emen-
data 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
immense labor that was expended on this emendation.
Ungarelli and Vercellone have ably written the history of the
correction of the Vulgate.
The first movement to execute the Council's recommend-
ation was made by the University of Louvain. The Domin-
ican, John Henten (fi566) 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 Vetus-
tissima exemplaria recens castigata. Henten collated about
twenty codices in the preparation of this work, but none of
his codices go back beyond the tenth century, so that the
edition can not be considered a great critical work. The
work of Henten was very favorably received, and main-
editions of it were issued by the press at Louvain.
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 4th of December,
1563. Immediately after its close, Pius IV. commissioned
four Cardinals to restore the text of the Vulgate to its pris-
tine purity. The Cardinals were Mark Antony Colonna,
William Sirleti, Louis Madrutius, and Antony Carafa.
Sirleti was considered the greatest linguist of his age.*
*Sirleti was born in Calabria in Italy in 15 14. He studied at Naples,
and acquired such a command of Hebrew, 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.
756 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE
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 Vul-
gate, and for this reason appointed the most learned men of
Rome to co-operate in the work. Principal among the theo-
logians 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 theolo-
gians 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
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
difficult theme." (Eggs. Purpura Docta, I. 5, 11). Latinus Latinius
declared in a letter to Masius (Op. Latinii Tom. II. p. 134) that from per-
sonal knowledge he judgedf 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.
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE 751
Trent. He brought to completion the correction of the
liturgical books, and then turned his attention to the cor-
rection of the Calendar and the revision of the Corpus Juris.
His claim to immortality in history rests mainly on the c< r-
rection 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 commis-
sioned 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 the Septuagint, which was then to be used to
revise the Vulgate. 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 697. With equal energy, he next took up the
revision of the Vulgate. Pie placed at the disposition of the
*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 thus
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 consultor 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 withdrew somewhat from public affairs,
affected feeble hcalh, 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 office which they themselves ambition,
in their inability to place themselves in the coveted place, they will be
disposed to favor the candidacy of one whose condition of health and
758 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE
commission the best codices that he could obtain. He even
took active part in the collation of these codices. The num-
ber of the members of the commission was increased. Anto-
nio Agellius (fi6o8) who was very capable in Hebrew and
Greek, compared dubious readings with the Greek and
Hebrew texts. Card. Carafa 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 pris-
tine state. They did not contemplate the removal of the
errors which Jerome committed. At times, however, where
the reading of Jerome could not be determined with cer-
tainty, 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 Pope entered
to frustrate, in large part, this result, The commission had
made much use of the Codex Amiatinus which the Pope held
period of life promise 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 liberti-
nage, 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
immediate^ 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 denounce 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, re-organized the Congregation of the Holy
Office and the Congregation of Rites, and decreed that the number of
cardinals should 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 wery 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 an honor to the Papacy.
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE 759
in little esteem. Moreover, the corrected text differed
much from the Bibles of Lou vain which Sixtus prized. He,
therefore, read carefully their work, approved what he
pleased of it, and rejected a great part. Card. Carafa 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 himself read every page as it came from the press.
The work appeared in a magnificent volume in 1590.
The text is preceded by the famous bull, " .-Eternus 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 promul-
gated. But our defense of papal infallibility rests not on
this data. The bull contains doctrinal import and disciplin-
ary measures. These latter were unwise, and were pru-
dently set aside by his successor. But in matters doctrinal .
no man can find aught that is repugnant to Catholic faith
in the bull . The constitution opens with a prolix descripti* m
of the origin, and history of the Holy Scriptures. The Pope
speaks of the various readings of the codices 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 poiv
commends the Council of Trent for its remedial measure, and
760 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE
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 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 Tridentinas Synodi prasscripto
emendatissima, pristinaeque sua? puritati, qualis primum
ab ipsius interpretis manu styloque prodierat, quoad fieri
potest, restituta imprimatur." He declares that, at times,
where the Latin text was hopelessly defective, the sense had
been sought from the Hebrew and Greek text. Sixtus
testifies of his great veneration 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 Menasseh, 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 in 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 himself another
edition; and let no one during the next ten years dare to
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE 761
print this our corrected Vulgate elsewhere than in the Vat-
ican 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 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 Scriptures to become substan-
tially 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 Bidlarium, 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. It 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
cancellations in ink were apparent.
762 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE
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 mem-
bers 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
theologians to revise the Sixtine edition. Card. Mark
Antony Colonna presided over all the deliberations of the
Congregation; and principal among the theologians were
Agellius, Bellarmine, Morini, Toleti, and Rocca. The Pope
was consulted 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 necessity 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 Carafa
Sr. and William Allen.*
* 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
adherence 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 Cath-
olic College to prepare priests for England. He was ever intent in aiding
his exiled compatriots, and in laboring for the conversion of England.
His biographer, Fitzherbert, declares of him: "Homo natus ad Anglia?
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.
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE 763
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 nineteen 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 1591 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 Vul-
gate. He appointed the two Cardinals, Frederick Borromeo
and Augustus Valerius, to supervise the work, and com-
missioned Toleti, S. J., to co-operate with them. The cardi-
nals 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 cer-
tain readings which he had approved by collation of the best
MSS. On the 28th of August, 1592, Toleti's work was sub-
mitted 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 Masoretic 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 He-
brew, but to restore the pristine text of the Vulgate. The
764 THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE
divergencies were not in matters of faith or morals ; in many-
cases the Masoretic 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
Valverde'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 changes; and final] y,
had Valverde been allowed to speak his views to the public,
an ignorant cry would have been raised 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.
Clement VIII. 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 form-
ulated 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
1 641 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 belonged. 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
admits 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
THE CORRECTION OF THE VULGATE 765
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 " Bullum
Papale," London, 1600. He has been ably refuted by
Henry Bukentop, in the excellent work '"Ti^£ *l*fc\- Lux de
Luce," Brussels, 1710. The line of defense is the same as
we have pointed out in treating of Pope Sixtus' work.
In the preface to the Clementine edition it is frankly ad-
mitted that certain things which ought to be corrected were
left unchanged lest the people might take scandal on account
of too many changes, Lucas of Bruges examined and
noted over four thousand places in the Clementine Vulgate
which demanded correction. This long deferred work is now
in some measure to be done. Pope Pius X. has entrusted
to the Benedictines the first work, that of collating the MSS
of the Hieronvmian version . What the next move in the
work of correction will be one can not say. It is to be hoped
that a more thorough revision will be effected than that of
the Council of Trent. To make a competent revision is a
labor whose magnitude can scarcely be realized. Jerome's
own labors must be revised, and this necessitates the colla-
tion of the MSS of the ancient versions, and the revision of
their texts. In the New Testament the Revised Edition of
Oxford effected a very creditable revision, because the
Greek MSS had been collated by many eminent scholars ;
but the Old Testament of the same edition is merely a
servile translation of the Masoretic text, with conjectu
where the sense is defective. Such a translation of the
Masoretic text for a revision of the Vulgate would be of no
avail. The Catholic Church can command the cooperation
of many scholars; the times demand a thorough and com-
plete revision ; and the labors now auspiciously begun will
be watched with interest.
766 MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE
Chapter XXVI.
Modern English Versions of Scripture
One of the calumnies often brought against the Catholic
Church is that she withheld the Bible from the people, by
preventing its being translated into the vernacular. It is
commonly said and believed that Wyclif was the first to give
to the English people the Bible in English.*
The most hard -lived of all lies, is a controversial lie, and
the so-called Reformation has found in such its most power-
ful ally. The Church recognized that in the Scriptures " are
some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and
unsteadfast wrest, as they also do the other Scriptures, unto
their own destruction." (II. Pet. III. 16.)
The Church therefore regulates the vernacular reading of
Scriptures according to what she judged best for the people.
The wisdom of this policy is acknowledged by candid
protestants. Mr. Karl Pearson (Academy, Aug. 7. 1886)
declares : " The Catholic Church has quite enough to answer
for . . but in the fifteenth century it certainly did not hold
back the Bible from the folk, and it gave them in the ver-
nacular a long series of devotional works, which for language
and religious sentiment have never been surpassed. Indeed,
we are inclined to think it made a mistake in allowing the
masses such ready access to the Bible. It ought to have
recognized the Bible once for all as a work absolutely unintel-
ligible without a long course of historical study; and, so far
as it was supposed to be inspired, very dangerous in the
hands of the ignorant."
*John Wyclif was born in York in 1324. He studied at Oxford, and by
intrigues afterwards obtained the position of master in Balliol College from
which post the friars had been ousted. The friars appealed to the Pope,
and he restored them. Wyclif then raised his voice against Rome and the
temporal power.
The Archbishop of Canterbury summoned Wyclif to defend himself
before a Council held at London in 1377. The powerful Duke of Lancaster
defended him, and he was absolved by the Council. Wyclif was in grace
with the State because he advocated the giving of church property to the
State. He was again summoned to a Council at Lambeth, and escaped
condemnation. The bishops of England, servile to the State, winked at
heresy. Those were the days of the schism at Rome between Urban VI.
MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTU1' 767
To the same end in 1530 a royal proclamation was
in England which decrees as follows: —
"Having respect to the malignity of this pi time,
with the inclination of the people to err<>ne< .us opinions, (it is
thought) that the translation of the New Testament and the
Old into the vulgar tongue of England would rather be the
occasion of continuance or increase of errors among the said
people than any benefit or commodity towards the weal of
their souls, and that it shall be now more convenient that the
same people have the Holy Scriptures expounded to them
by preachers in their sermons as it hath been of old time
accustomed. "
For these reasons all are ordered to deliver up the copies
of the printed Testament "corruptly translated into the
English tongue," the king promising "to provide that the
Holy Scripture shall be, by great learned and Catholique
persons, translated into the English tongue, if it shall then
seem to his Grace convenient to be." (Gasquet, The Old
English Bible, footnote pp. 132 and 133.)
The Church was rightly hostile to unauthorized trans-
lations of Scripture especially as many in those days made
these the means of propagating the most dangerous errors.
This is frankly acknowledged by the protestant Dean Hook.
(Lives of Archbishops of Canterbury, III. p. 83). " It was not
from hostility to a translated Bible, considered abstractedly,
that the conduct of Wiclif in translating it, was condemned.
and the anti-pope, Clement VII. The time was apt for the theories of
Wyclif. He preached much, and his writings were spread thro\igh the
realm. In 1382 the Archbishop of Canterbury condemned, in a Council
held at London, twenty-four propositions of Wyclif, in which among other
errors he denied the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist : affirmed
that priest or bishop in state of mortal sin could not baptize, consecrat
ordain; declared that confession was useless to a contrite man . denied that
Christ instituted the Mass; declared that, if the Pope were in sin. he had no
authority over the faithful ; that it was against the Scriptures for the eccles-
iastics to have property; and declared that after Urban VI. the primacy of
Peter had failed, and the nations should be free in the government of the
national church. Wyclif died at Lutterworth in 1384.
The opinions of Wyclif invaded Bohemia and gave rise to the heresy of
John Huss. The remarkable success of these hercsiarehs is due to the
fact that they extend the power of the State-, and flatter the pride and inde-
]u ndence of the human heart
768 MODERN ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE
Long before his time there had been translators of Holy Writ.
There is no reason to suppose that any objection would have
been offered to the circulation of the Bible, if the object of
the translator had only been the edification and sanctifica-
tion of the reader. It was not till the designs of the Lollards
were discovered, that Wicliff's version was proscribed. "
Maitland (Dark Ages p. 252) a writer who will not be
suspected of being too friendly to the Catholic Church
declares that he found no evidence that the Catholic Church
" strove to prevent the reading, the multiplication, the diffu-
sion of the Word of God. "
In the British Museum alone there are eleven German
editions of the Bible ranging from 1466 to 15 18; three
Bohemian editions of between 1488 and 1506, one Dutch
edition of 1 4 7 7 . There are five French versions from 1 5 1 o to
1 53 1, and seven Italian versions of between 147 1 and 1532.
These are all Catholic versions. It has been conclusively
proven that in Germany in the Middle Ages there were
seventy-two partial versions of the Scriptures, and fifty com-
plete versions. These all emanated from Catholic sources.
Seventeen of such versions were made before the time of
Luther. And yet many still believe that Luther was the
first to give to the Germans the Bible in the vernacular
tongue. The Library of St. Gall contains many fine Bibles
in the vernacular made before Luther's time.
The explanation of the fact that no complete English
Bible existed before the time of Wyclif is thus given by
Dom Gasquet :
" We are apt to forget the fact that till past the middle of
the fourteenth century French was actually the tongue of
the Court and of the educated classes generally. Only in
1363, for the first time, was the sitting of Parliament opened
by an English speech, and in the previous year only had it
been enacted that the pleadings in the courts of law might be
in English in place of the French which had hitherto been the
legal language ; but even then the record of the proceedings
was still to be in Latin. French, however, continued for
almost a century longer to be the language of the upper
classes, and in it were written the rolls of Parliament, and
THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSIONS 760
such wills and deeds as were not in Latin. An explanation of
this retention of the French language is of course to be found
in the circumstances of the time. Before the era of Wycliff
consequently, the reading public, that is to say, the higher
classes or the clergy, found in the Latin version of the Holy
Scriptures, or in such French versions as existed in England,
what they required.
"Such, then, is the very simple explanation of the non-
existence of any English translation of the entire Bible
before the time when Wycliff came upon the scene. In the
first half of the fourteenth century probably the only entire
book of Scripture which had appeared in English prose was
the book of Psalms translated by Richard Rolle, who died
in 1349. This work he undertook at the request of Dame
Margaret Kirby, a recluse at Hampole. At the same time,
probably about 1320, another translation of the Psalms was
made by William de Schorham, a priest of Chart Sutton,
near Leeds, in the county of Kent.
" Besides these, however, there were the metrical para-
phrases of Genesis and Exodus, the Ormulum, or poetical
version of the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, the work of
an Augustinian canon called Orm, and more than one metri-
cal translation of the Psalms, approaching almost to a literal
translation, all productions of the thirteenth century. It
is, moreover, of interest to remark that after the Norman
Conquest, whilst the wants of the educated class were satis-
fied "by the Norman-French translations, the Anglo-Saxon
version of the Gospels was copied as late as the twelfth
century." (The Old English Bible, London 1897).
It is very doubtful whether the entire Scriptures haw-
ever been translated into Anglo-Saxon. We have no tradi-
tionary account of a complete version, and all the Biblical
MSS. in Anglo-Saxon now in existence contain but seleet
portions of the sacred volume. The poems on sacred sub-
jects usually attributed to Credmon, afford the first feeble
indications of an attempt being made by the Saxons to con-
vey the truths of Scripture in their vernacular tongue.
Caedmon lived in the seventh century ; he was a monk in the
monastery of Streoneshalch in Northumbria. His poems
49 (H.S.)
770 THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSIONS
have been strung together so as to form a sort of metrical
paraphrase on some of the historical books of Scripture. He
commences with the fall of the angels, the creation and fall
of man, and proceeds to the history of the deluge, carrying
on his narrative to the history of the children of Israel, and
their wanderings in the desert. He also touches on the
history of Nebuchadnezzar and of Daniel. The authen-
ticity of this work has been doubted, some writers being of
opinion that it was written by different writers at different
periods ; the striking similarity between some of the poems
and certain passages in Milton's Paradise Lost has been
repeatedly noticed. Two editions have been printed; the
first by Francis Junius at Amsterdam in 1655, and the
second, with an English translation and notes, by Mr. Thorpe
in London, in 1832.
The literal versions of such portions of the Scripture as
have been translated into Anglo-Saxon have chiefly been
transmitted to us in the form of interlineations of Latin
MSS. A Latin Psalter, said to have been sent by Pope
Gregory to Augustine, is still preserved among the Cottonian
MSS, and contains an Anglo-Saxon interlinear version, of
which the date is unknown. Aldhelm, bishop of Sherborne,
and Guthlac, the first Anglo-Saxon anchorite, translated the
Psalms soon after the commencement of the eighth century,
but their MSS are lost, and nothing is known with certainty
respecting them. The same may be said concerning the
portions of Scripture reported to have been translated by the
Venerable Bede. At the time of his death, this renowned
historian 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 translation of the Scriptures. He
translated the commandments in the twentieth chapter of
Exodus, and part of the three following chapters, which he
affixed to his code of laws. He likewise kept a "hand-boc,"
in which he daily entered extracts from various authors, but
more especially verses of Scripture translated by himself
from Latin into Anglo-Saxon.
FORMATIVE PERIOD OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE 771
There are three different versions of the Four Gospels at
present known to be in existence, The most ancient of
these is the famous Northumbrian Gloss, or Durham Book,
preserved among the Cottonian MSS. in the British Mu-
seum. This MS. is one of the finest specimens extant of
Saxon writing. The Vulgate Latin text of the Four Gospels
was written by Eadfrid, bishop of 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 Hare wood, or
Harwood, over Jerome's Latin of the Four Gospels. The
Latin text was written about the same period as that of the
Durham Book, having been made during the seventh cen-
tury. This valuable MS. is in the Bodleian Library, and is
called the Rush worth Gloss, from the name of one of its
former proprietors. The other translation of the Gospels
was made by an unknown hand, apparently not long before
the Norman conquest, and is thought to have been trans-
lated from the Latin version which was in use before Jer-
ome's time.
Two editions of the Anglo-Saxon Psalter have been
published. The first appeared in 1640; it was printed in
London under the care of Spelman, from an ancient MS. by
an unknown translator, and collated with other MSS. of
equal antiquity. This version was undoubtedly made from
the Latin Vulgate, which interlines with the Anglo-Saxon.
A splendid edition of the Psalms was published in 1835 at
Oxford: the MS. which forms the text formerly belonged to
the Due de Bern, the brother of Charles V., king of France,
and was preserved in the Royal Library at Paris. Mr.
Thorpe, the editor attributed this MS. to the eleventh
century ; and by some it is supposed to be a transcript of the
version executed by Aldhelm, bishop of Sherborne, in the
early part of the eighth century. It is, however, rather a
paraphrase than a version, and is written, partly in prose,
and partly in metre.
772 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE
A partial interlinear translation of a Latin version of
Proverbs, made in the tenth century, is preserved among the
Cottonian MSS in the British Museum. To the same century-
belong the celebrated translations of JEtfric, Archbishop
of Canterbury : they consist of the Heptateuch, or first
seven books of the Bible, and the Book of Job. An edition
of this version was published by Mr. Th waits, at Oxford, in
1699, from an unique MS. belonging to the Bodleian Library ;
the Book of Job was printed from a transcript of a MS. in the
Cottonian Library. ^Elfric in some portions of his version
adheres literally to the text ; but in some parts he appears to
aim at producing a condensation, or abridgment, rather than
a translation of the events related by the inspired historian.
Like the other Anglo-Saxon fragments, his translation was
made from the Latin version.
A few MSS. of the Psalms, written shortly before, or
about the time of the Norman eonquest are extant, and show
the gradual decline of the Anglo-Saxon language. The
history of the language may still farther be traced in three
MSS. yet in existence, which were made after the arrival of
the Normans. They are MSS. of the same translation, and
two of them are attributed to the reign of Henry the Second :
but the language in which they are written is no longer pure
Anglo-Saxon; it has merged into what is designated the
Anglo-Norman.
The exact period of the transmutation of Saxon into
English has been disputed, but it seems most reasonable to
believe that the process was gradual. A fragment of the
Saxon Chronicle, published by Lye, and concluding with the
year 1079, exhibits the language in the first stage of its transi-
tion state, no great deviation having then been made from
Anglo-Saxon. But in the continuation of the same chron-
icle, from 1 135 to 1 140 A. D., the commencement of those
changes may be distinctly traced, which subsequently
formed the distinctive peculiarities of the English language.
The principal change introduced about this period was the
gradual substitution of particles and auxiliary words for the
terminal inflections of the Anglo-Saxon. The English has
happily retained the facility of its parent language in com-
EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 773
pounding words, the only difference in this respect being,
that, in the formation of its compound terms, the Anglo-
Saxon drew only from its own resources, whereas the Kng-
lish has had recourse to the Latin, the Greek, the French,
the Italian, and other languages. It has been remarked 1 >y a
distinguished foreigner, that "everywhere the principle of
utility and application dominates in England, and consti-
tutes at once the physiognomy and the force of its civiliza-
tion." This principle is certainly legible in its language,
which although possessed of remarkable facility in the adap-
tation of foreign terms and even idioms to its own use, is at
the same time free from the trammels with which the other
languages of its class are encumbered. In the gender of
nouns, for instance, we meet with no perplexity or anomaly,
every noun being masculine, feminine or neuter, according
to the nature of the object or idea it represents ; and as the
adjectives are all indeclinable, their concordance with the
noun is at once effected without the apparently useless
trouble of altering the final letters. This perfect freedom
from useless encumbrance adds greatly to the ease and
vigor of expression.
After the gradual disappearance of the Anglo-Sax< >n and
evolution of the English language, the Anglo-Saxon versions
became useless from the alteration in the language, and until
the fourteenth century the efforts made to produce a new-
translation were few and feeble. An ecclesiastic named
Orm, or Ormin, supposed from his dialect to have been a
native of the North of England, composed a metrical para-
phrase of the Gospels and Acts, in lines of fifteen syllal
during the latter part of the twelfth century. This work is
entitled the Ormulum, from the name of its author, and is
preserved in the Bodleian Library. A more extensive
metrical paraphrase, comprising the Old and New Tes
ments, is to be found amongst other poetry of a religious
nature in a work entitled S< >\vle-hele (Soul's health), belong-
ing to the Bodleian Library: it is usually ascribed to the end
of the twelfth century. Another metrical version, probably
of the same date, is preserved in Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge: it comprises only the first two books of the Old
774 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE
Testament, and is written in the dialect then spoken in the
north of England. In the same college, a metrical version
of the Psalms, apparently written about the year 1300, has
been deposited: this version adheres to the Latin Psalter,
corrected by Jerome, as closely as the nature of the composi-
tion will admit. Several other MSS. of the old English
Psalter, preserved in the British Museum and the Bodleian
Library, are supposed to be exemplars of the same version,
with the orthography altered in conformity with the state of
the language at the periods in which they were written. A
translation of the Psalms from the same text (the corrected
Latin of Jerome), was executed by Richard Rolle, of Ham-
pole, near Doncaster, during the early part of the fourteenth
century. This version is remarkable as being the first por-
tion of the Scriptures ever translated into English prose.
Rolle, or Hampole as he is more generally called, also wrote
a paraphrase in verse of a part of Job. Two other versions
of the Psalms, belonging to the same period, are likewise
extant. In Bene't College, Cambridge, there is a version of
Mark, Luke and the Pauline Epistles, but the translator
and the date are unknown ; and in the British Museum there
is a translation of the Gospels appointed to be read on Sun-
days, written in the northern dialect.
A version has been commonly ascribed to John de Tre-
visa, vicar of Berkeley in Gloucestershire, who flourished
toward the close of the fourteenth century ; but he only trans-
lated a few detached passages, which he introduced in certain
parts of his writings. Some texts translated by him were
painted on the walls of the chapel belonging to Berkeley
Castle.
A popularly believed error is that Wyclif made a com-
plete translation of the whole Bible between the years 1378
and 1382, As Blunt {Plain Account of the English Bible
p. 1 7) says : " The name of Wyclife has been used as a peg to
hang many a work upon with which the owner of the name
had nothing whatever to do." Sir E. Maunde Thompson
(Wy cliff Exhibition British Museum p. XX) says that only
the New Testament portion can be said probably to be due
to the hand of Wyclif himself. Of the other portions of the
EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 775
version the same eminent authority declares that "Wyclif
may have commenced the work of revision but he did not
live to see it accomplished." Blunt, op. cit., declan
"There is scarcely any contemporary evidem :cept that
of his bitterest opponent, that Wyclife was really the author
of this translation, but there can be no doubt that traditi< in
is to be believed when it associates his name with it. ...
The popular idea of Wyclife sitting alone in his study at
Lutterworth, and making a complete new translation of the
whole Bible with his own hands is one of those many
popular ideals which will not stand the test of historical
inquiry. "
Dom. Gasquet believes that many of the versions popu-
larly credited to Wyclif were made by Catholics. (The
Old English Bible)
Certain it is that the role of Wyclif has been exag-
gerated. That the Bible, at least portions of it, were in use
in the vernacular tongue in England is attested by the best
evidence.
Sir Thomas More [Dyalogues (ed. 1530,) p. 138] is a most
competent witness:
"As for old translations, before Wyelitie's time (he
writes), they remain lawful and be in some folks hands.
Myself have seen and can show you, fair and old Bibles, in
English which have been known and seen by the Bishop 1 if
the Diocese and left in laymans hands and womens. "
Again, in another place he says: —
"The whole Bible was long before his (i.e., Wycliffi
days by virtuous and well learned men. translated into the
English tongue and by good and godly people with devotion,
and soberness, well and reverently read."
Cranmer himself in his prologue to the second edition of
the "Great Bible." says:
"If the matter should be tried by custom, we might als 1
allege custom for the reading of the Scripture in the vuk
tongue, and prescribe the more ancient custom. For it is
not much above one hundred years ag< >. since Scripture hath
not been accustomed to be read in the vulgar t< mgue within
this realm, and many hundred vears before that, it was trans -
776 EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE
lated and read in the Saxon's tongue, which at that time was
our mother tongue, and when this language waxed old and
out of common usage, because folk should not lack the fruit
of reading, it was again translated into the newer language
whereof yet also many copies remain and be daily found. "
Foxe the Martyrologist in his dedication to Arch-
bishop Parker of his edition of the Saxon Gospels writes :
" If histories be well examined we shall find both before
the Conquest and after, as well before John Wickliffe was
born as since, the whole body of the Scriptures was by sun-
dry men translated into our country tongue. "
Finally it is proven that the opposition to the protestant
versions was not for the reason that they translated the
Scriptures into the vernacular, but that they brought in
false opinions into doctrine.
When one alleged against Sir Thomas More that the
ecclesiastical authorities burned all the protestant versions,
More answered: "if this were done so, it were not well
done; but," he continues in reply to one who had asserted
this, "I believe that ye mistake it. " And taking up one case
objected against him in which the Bible of a Lollard prisoner
named Richard Hun, a London merchant, was said to have
been burnt in the Bishop of London's prison, he says :
"This I remember well, that besides other things framed
for the favour of divers other heresies there were in the pro-
logue of that Bible such words touching the Blessed Sacra-
ment as good Christian men did abhor to hear and that gave
the readers undoubted occasion to think that the book was
written after Wyclif 's copy, and by him translated into our
tongue, and that this Bible was destroyed consequently not
because it was in English, but because it contained gross and
manifest heresy."
" In some editions of Tyndale's New Testament, " writes
the Protestant historian Blunt, "there is what must be
regarded as a wilful omission of the gravest possible char-
acter, for it appears in several editions, and has no shadow'
of justification in the Greek or Latin of the passage (i Peter
ii. 13, 14)." (Blunt, History of the Reformation, p. 514).
EARLY ENGLISH VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE 77,
"Green in his History (vol. ii., pp. 127-8,) though by no
means unfriendly to Tyndale on this point, writes as follows:
— 'We ran only fairly judge their action by viewing it in the
light of the time. What Warham and More saw over the
sea might well have turned them from a movement which
seemed breaking down the very foundations of religion and
society. Not only was the fabric of the Church rent asun-
der, and the center of Christian unity denounced as 'Baby-
lon,' but the reform itself seemed passing into anarchy.
Luther was steadily moving onward from the denial of one
Christian dogma to that of another; and what Luther still
clung to, his followers were ready to fling away. Meanwhile
the religious excitement was kindling wild dreams of social
revolution, and men stood aghast at the horrors of a peasant
war which broke out in Germany. It was not, therefore, as
a mere translation of the Bible that Tyndale 's work reached
England. It came as part of the Lutheran movement, and
it bore the Lutheran stamp in its version of ecclesiastical
words. "Church" became "congregation"; "priest" was
changed into "elder." We can hardly wonder that More
denounced the book as heretical, or that Warham ordered
it to be given up by all who possessed it. " (Gasquet, The
Old English Bible, footnote pp. 130-131.)
In 1850 a complete edition of both testaments of the
version commonly called Wyclif 's was published at Oxf< ird
under the editorship of J. Farstall and Sir F. Madden.
In 1388 John Purney revised Wyclif s translation.
These translations were based on the Latin Vulgate.
In 1525 or 1526 Tyndale published a translation of the
New Testament at Worms. He published also p< >rti< >ns < »f a
translation of the Old Testament. Miles Coverdale con-
tinued Tyndale's work, and in 1535 the first printed English
Bible was published.
Other translations now followed rapidly, I st known
of which is Matthew's Bible. Its real author was John
Rogers, alias Thomas Matthew. From Matthew's Bible
all later revisions of the protestant Bible have been formed.
In 1539 Richard Taverner published a translation of the
Bible.
778 THE REVISED VERSION
As none of these translations pleased Cromwell, he com-
missioned Coverdale to bring out a new translation. This
is called "The Great Bible," published in 1539.
Cranmer's Bible was published in 1540, and five other
editions followed in the next eighteen months.
As Mary's accession had arrested the progress of heresy
in England, some of the protestants fled to Geneva. There
in 1557 Wm. Whittingham brought out the N. T. Prin-
cipally by his labors a translation of the whole Bible was
published at Geneva in 1560. This is called the Genevan
Bible.
This version is sometimes called the "Breeches Bible,"
because the translators rendered the Hl^lJin of Genesis
III. 7, by "breeches."
As Cromwell and Cranmer were opposed to the Calvinism
of the authors of this edition, in 1568 several protestant
bishops revised Coverdale's version. This is known as the
Bishops' Bible.
In 1604 King James of England convened a conference to
reform things amiss in the Church. In the second day's
conference Dr. Reynolds declared that the translations of
Scripture made in the days of Henry VIII. and Edward VI.
"were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the orig-
inal. " King James immediately ordered a new translation.
It was begun in 1607, and in 161 1 the work was published.
Forty-seven revisers were appointed for the work. We
know but little of the history of their work.
This edition is the authorized edition of the protestant
English Bible. None of these versions have any critical
value.
In May 1870 the work of revising this translation was
begun. The revision of the New Testament was completed
in about ten years and a half, and was published in 1881.
The revision of the Old Testament was completed in 1885.
A revised translation of the deuterocanonical books was
published in 1895. The New Testament differs from the
edition of 161 1 in 5788 places, besides numberless minor
differences.
THE RHEIMS-DOUAY VERSION 779
In the year 1582, William (afterward Cardinal) Allen,
Gregory Martin and Richard Bristow made a translation of
the New Testament at the English Cath< >lic college of Rheims
under the following title :
The New Testament of Iesvs Christ, translated faith fvlly
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: With
Argvments of bookes and chapters, Annotations, and other
necessarie helpes, for the better vnderstanding of the text,
and specially for the discouerie of the Corrvptions of diuers
late translations, and for cleering the Controversies in relig-
ion, of these daies: In the English College of Rhemes.
Printed at Rhemes by Iohn 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 schol
translated the Old Testament under the title :
The Holie Bible faithfvlly translated into English ovt of
the Avthentical Latin. Diligently conferred with the
Hebrew, Greeke, and other Editions in diuers languages.
With Argvments of the Bookes, and Chapters : Annotations :
Tables: and other helpes for better vnderstanding of the
text : for discouerie of corrvptions in some late translations :
and for clearing Controversies in Religion. By the
English College of Doway by Lavrence Kellam. 1609-10.
2 vols. 4to.
These being united form the Rheims-Douay Bible, the
"editio princeps" of all English Catholic versions. In 1750
it was revised by Dr. Challoner, and this revision is the < me
usually in use.
CHAPTER XXVII.
The Interpretation of Scripture.
In the acquisition of all knowledge, man should order all
its different branches to one grand sc< >pe : namely, to develop
the powers of the soul, and make the being of man God-like.
Now in that cultivation of the soul, the science of Holy Scrip-
ture is most immediate to the end of all study. The other
780 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
departments of human knowledge contain but the faint and
broken accents of human reason; the Holy Scriptures con-
tain the clear voice of God from Heaven. Hence there
should also be this order in the human knowable, that all the
sciences should be subservient to the study of God in the
Holy Scriptures.
Man should study the different sciences with the view of
coming closer to the Creator through the consideration of
his works. The man, then, who essays to interpret the word
of God, should bring to his task the possession of vast and
varied knowledge, that truth may beget truth, and the mes-
sage of the Creator may be received in its fulness, in the mind
made receptive by careful preparation. The student of
Scripture takes up the grandest and sublimest system of
philosophy, the truest and best system of ethics, and the
grand basis of dogmatic truth. The human mind is limited,
the compass of its cognitions is never vast, and it would be
presumption in it to undertake to find the sense of the Holy
Code without much laborious preparation. A man with
some happy faculty of expression may treat of many themes
of human knowledge without great mental application. But
if a man would draw anything more than pious generalities
out of the Scriptures, he must study.
In the words of Jerome : "Agricolae, caementarii, fabri,
metallorum lignorumve cassores, lanarii quoque et fullones,
et ceteri, qui variam supellectilem et vilia opuscula fabri -
carttur, absque doctore, esse non possunt quod cupiunt.
Quod medicorum est,
Promittunt medici; tractant fabrilia fabri.
Sola Scripturarum ars, quam sibi omnes passim vindicant:
Scribimus indocti doctique poemata passim.
Hanc garrula anus, hanc delirus senex, hanc sophista ver-
bosus, hanc universi praesumunt, lacerant, docent, antequam
discant. Alii adducto supercilio grandia verba trutinantes
inter mulierculas de sacris Uteris philosophantur. Alii dis-
cunt, proh dolor! a feminis, quod viros doceant : et ne parum
hoc. sit, quadam facilitate verborum, imo audacia edisserunt
aliis, quod ipsi non intelligunt. . . . Puerilia sunt hsec et
circulatorum ludo similia, docere quod ignores, imo, ut cum
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 781
stomacho loquar, ne hoc quidem scire, quod nescias." (St.
Hier. ad Paulin. Ep. 53, 6, 7, Migne, P. L. 22, 544.)
The student of Scripture should study natural science to
see the design of the Creator in his works, and the evidence
of his wisdom in Nature's laws ; am 1 also to defend the truths
of God against the inflated sophists, who speak in the name
of science. He should study philosophy that by the pos-
session of the truths of one order, the mind may expand and
rise by the right laws from one order of truth to another,
in its upward course towards the Infinite Truth.
He 'should study the languages, for the resources of
human thought are expressed in the different languages of
the races of man. No man can well come at the thought of
the world through the knowledge of any one tongue.
He should study the tongues in which the holy men of
God spoke, for the fulness and the clearness of the thought
remains in the original tongue in which it was first delivered.
It will not suffice to say: "Jerome translated the Hebrew
for me, and as I can not equal Jerome's knowledge of Scrip-
ture, I shall desist from fruitless toil." Neither Jerome nor
any other man, put into the translation the fulness and the
clearness of the original.
He should study dogmatic theology, that he may be
guided by the analogy of faith in all interpretations. It
may be safely stated that no man ever became an able inter-
preter of Scripture, who was not a profound dogmatic theo-
logian.
He should study archaeology, that he may know the cus-
toms and modes of life of ancient people ; for a knowledge < if
these will throw light on certain expressions of such people.
It is an evident fact that the science of archaeology 1
made remarkable progress in our times. Remarkable dis-
coveries have been made on the sites of Babylon, in Egypt,
Palestine, and Greece, and these monuments bear a most
important relation to Holy Scripture. It is a source < if
satisfaction to every believer to know that the testim< my 1 >f
the monuments has confirmed the truth of the Scriptures.
The student of Scripture should study textual criticism,
782 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
that he may be able to judge of the sense of various readings,
and, may intelligently use the different codices.
Finally, he should read and ponder much upon the Holy
Text, for it does not reveal its depths of truths to the casual
reader.
In proper degree the common laws of interpretation for
all written documents are applicable to Holy Scripture ; but
inasmuch as the Scriptures form a unique transcendent
class of literature, they have also laws proper to themselves.
The argument or occasion of the writing of a document
often determines the peculiar sense given to words by an
inspired writer. Thus a knowledge of the gnostic heresies
gives us the key to St. John's anathema against the man who
should divide Jesus Christ.
The grammatical and logical context must be weighed ;
for both the words and the ideas of a writer are connected in
a manner affecting the sense. Attention must also be paid
to the character of the writing ; for in impassioned discourse
the ideas may be somewhat disconnected.
The hermeneutical laws proper to the Holy Scriptures
are based on the fact that God is the Author of the Scrip-
tures. God must therefore guide the interpretation of his
writings.
The first great law therefore in the interpretation of
Scripture is the teaching of the Church.
It is clear that the nature of the writings demands in the
soul of the interpreter certain virtues to fit it to receive
God's message.
Prayer, an honest teachable heart, and humility are
necessary: 'When as a youth I sought the sense of the
Scriptures by the power of the intellect rather than by pious
petition, by my perverse method I closed against myself the
door leading to the Lord. When I should have knocked
that it might be opened, I caused it to be closed. I sought
in pride what only the humble can find. . . . Wretched
man! When I thought myself able to fly, I left the nest,
and I fell before I flew. " (Aug. Sermon 51, 5).
All the Fathers have recognized that there are many
things difficult to understand in the Scriptures. To deal
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 783
with these Origen counsels : "Being assiduous in the nailing
of Scripture, with a true firm faith in God seek the sense of
the Holy Scriptures, which is often hidden. " (Ep. ad ( rreg.
Neoc.)
A most useful counsel is that of St. Augustine:
" For I confess to your charity that I have learned to yield
this respect and honor only to the canonical books of
Scripture : of these alone do I most firmly believe that the
authors were completely free from error. And if in these
writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me
opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either
the MS. is faulty, or the translator has not caught the mean-
ing of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand
it."
As St. Paul says: "The natural man receiveth not the
things that are of the spirit of God : for they are foolishness
to him, and he can not understand them, because they are
spiritually examined. "
This fact underlies rationalism and modernism; men
have brought in false theories of inspiration and interpreta-
tion to reduce the supernatural character of the Scriptures
which the natural man finds it hard to understand. The
whole tendency it to make the Scriptures more acceptable to
the natural man. Many of these theories have been treated
of in our tract on Inspiration. The Encyclical "Providen-
tissimus Deus" which we have produced in full is an excel-
lent treatise on the interpretation of Scripture. Hence we
shall refrain from repeating here what has been treated of in
the first part of our work.
The Council of Trent in its famous decree of the fourth
session, "with a view to restrain the petulance of human
minds, decreed: That no one relying on his own judgment,
in the doctrinal and moral parts of Scripture, should distort
the Holy Scriptures to conform to his opinions against the
sense which our Holy Mother the Church has held and holds,
whose office it is to judge of the true sense and interpreta-
tion of Holy Scripture ; and that no one shall dare interpret
the same Holy Scriptures contrary to the unanimous con-
sensus of the Fathers.
784 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
Though this decree is formally disciplinary it presup-
poses a dogmatic truth.
The Vatican Council repromulgated the decree of the
Council of Trent, and authentically interpreted it: "Since
therefore that which the Council of Trent wisely decreed to
restrain rash minds in the interpretation of Holy Scripture,
has by some men been falsely interpreted, we renew the
aforesaid decree, and declare its meaning to be that in mat-
ters of faith and morals pertaining to Christian teaching
that is to be held as the true sense of Holy Scripture which
holy Mother the Church has held and holds; for her office
it is to judge of the sense and interpretation of the Holy
Scriptures. Therefore it is not allowed to any man to in-
terpret the Holy Scriptures against the sense (of the Church)
or against the unanimous consent of the Fathers." (Const,
de Fide. II.)
The Fathers of the Vatican have here brought into the
decree the dogmatic fact on which the disciplinary ruling
of the Council of Trent was based, and have promulgated a
dogmatic decree. A long series of discussions preceded the
definition, and it is made evident from these that the decree
does not contemplate two disparate criterions ; but held the
unanimous consent of the Fathers to be a competent witness
of what the Church held.
The sense of some texts has been directly defined by the
Church. It was defined by the Council of Trent, that Paul
spoke of original sin, Rom. V. 12. (Cone. Trid. Sess. V.
2-4.) It was defined in the same session, and again in the
seventh session, that the sense of the text, John III. 5,
establishes the necessity of baptism by natural water. In
the thirteenth session it is established, that the words of in-
institution of the Blessed Eucharist prove the real presence
of Christ in the Host. In the fourteenth session it is de-
fined that the words of Christ in John XX. 23, convey the
power of binding and loosing sin ; and that James V. 1 1 pro-
mulgates the Sacrament of Extreme Unction.
The indirect force of the Church's definitions pervades
the whole body of the Scriptures. In coiidemning heresies,
she shows us indirectly what is the sense of many passages ;
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 785
and her authentic teaching forms a general norm of inter-
pretation which we call the analogy of faith.
We may define the analogy of faith to be the constant
and perpetual harmony of Scripture in the fundamental points
of faith and practice, deduced from those passages, in which
they are discussed by the inspired writer, either directly
or expressly, and in clear, plain, and intelligible language.
Or, more briefly, the analogy of faith may be defined to be
that proportion which the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures
bear to each other, or, the close connection between the truths of
Revealed Religio 1 1 .
The analogy of faith is an expression borrowed from
Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans, (XII. 6.) where he
exhorts those who prophesy in the church (that is, those who
exercise the office of authoritatively expounding the Scrip-
tures), to prophesy according to the analogy of fa:
The clause, "in rebus fidei et morum" occasioned much
discussion in the Council, and has occasioned much since.
By this clause the Fathers did not restrict inspiration to the
doctrinal parts ; but only declared that in these parts, the
sense was vital to the religious life of the people, and
consequently in these things the Church fulfilled her com-
mission of teaching all peoples.
As Bishop Gasser of Brixen, one of the leading bishops
of the Council declared, the Church has the right of regula-
ting the interpretation of all the things in Scripture, but,
"regarding the historical parts, either the interpretati< >ns
not against the dogma of the inspiration of Holy Scripture
and of all its parts, or they are against tin's dogma. In the
first hypothesis it is a free ground of discussi mi ; in I
second hypothesis, if the interpretation of the historica]
truth violates the dogma of inspiration, certainly it be-
comes a matter of faith, and hence the Church has the right
to pass judgment on it." (Coll. lac. VII. 226.)
Hence all the parts of the Holy Scripture are inspired.
but the inspired sense of all is not so clearly known by
In the necessarv things of faith and morals, the Church
exercises a special care to help us I me at the inspired
sense. In other things, though they are equally inspir
50 (H.S.)
786 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
she leaves the interpretation free, on condition that it con-
flict not with the fundamental dogma of the inspiration of
the whole Scriptures. When the Church explicitly inter-
prets a passage, we call it an authentic interpretation.
While therefore we recognize that there is a wide range
of truths of Scripture where men may freely exercise their
scientific methods, we see at the same time that the great
fundamental truth must underlie all these interpretations,
namely that all parts of the Holy Scriptures as they came
from the inspired writers are divinely inspired. We have
already discussed in the treatise on Inspiration the false
argument of those who wished to establish non-inspired
parts in Holy Scripture.
Concerning the sense of Scripture a few principles will
suffice.
When we speak of the sense of a writing, we mean not the
mere signification of the words. The signification of a word
is the power that it has from its own nature, and the institu-
tion and use of man to convey a determinate idea. Hence
one term can have many significations. But the sense of a
word is the actual value that the term has in a particular
predication ; and the sense in a right ordered proposition can
be but one.
The first and main sense of Scripture is the literal sense.
Usage prevails to class under this head the historical sense,
and the metaphorical sense. " By the literal sense a thought
may be expressed in two ways : that is, either according to
the ordinary force of the words, as when I say, 'the man
laughs' ; or according to a simile, as when I say, 'the mead-
ow laughs.' We use both manners of expression in Scrip-
ture, as when we say according to the first mode, 'Jesus
ascended': we say, 'he sits at the right hand of God,'
according to the second mode. And therefore under the
literal sense is included the metaphorical." (St. Thomas
in Gal. 4. 7).
Now the sense of Scripture is that thought which the
Holy Ghost has expressed by written words.
The historical sense is that, which results immediately
from the ordinary force of the words, as when I say: 'The
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 787
Word was made flesh. " This is the basic sense in all Scrip-
ture, and in all the expressions of the creations of mind.
The metaphorical sense of Scripture is a deviation from
the ordinary application of words, in which we predicate
concepts of objects, not proper to them in their essential
nature, but founded in some wide general similarity. Thus
we speak of the " arm of the Lord " not to predicate the cor-
poral member of God, but to assert of him the power of
action.
We include under the heading of metaphorical sense of
Scripture, all figurative sense, whether it consist in simile,
parable, personification, allegory, synecdoche, metonymy,
apostrophe, irony, hyperbole, or other figure. The main
office of figurative speech in Scripture is to heighten the force
of the enunciation, to give clearness to abstract ideas, and to
express ideas with something of the fulness and vividness of
the objects of sense.
The state of a man perplexed by many thoughts, could
scarcely be better expressed than by saying :
"I scarcely understand my own intent;
But silkworm like, so long within have wrought,
That I am lost in my own web of thought. ' '
The allegory is a common form of Scriptural figure. \ It is
a form of expression in which the real subject is not men-
tioned but described by a consistent, intelligible statement,
and the subject is left to be inferred by the aptly suggestive
likeness. A fine allegory is in Isaiah V. 1-2 :
" My beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill ; and
he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted
it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it .
and also made a wine-press therein; and he looked that it
should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes."
The parable was much used by the Lord. This figure 1 >f
speech is properly a species of allegory, in which a religious
truth is exhibited by means 1 >f facts from nature and human
life. The statements are not historically true, but are
offered as a means of conveying a higher general truth. But
the propositions are always true to nature; the laws of the
nature of the different beings introduced, are strictly
788 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
observed, and the events are such as might have taken
place. The Prodigal Son, The Sower, The Ten Virgins,
Lazarus and Dives, are good examples of this form of
expression.
The knowledge/>f the sense of Scripture, has been much
obscured by the addition of what is called the sensus
consequens.
Such is the nature of the mind, that it evolves truth from
truth by logical process. The truths which are by logical
deduction drawn from other truths of Scripture, are by some
writers classed under the sensus consequens. Since God
endowed man with the reasoning faculty, it is natural and
right for him tojDroceed in syllogistic process from truth to
truth. And if the fundamental position be the sense of the
Holy Ghost, and the logical process be legitimate, the con-
clusion will be equally the sense of the Holy Ghost. While,
therefore, we justify the process, we see no need of multiply-
ing entia by placing this division of the sense of Scripture.
j$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 pre figuring of
future beings, actions, and events is called the typical or
spiritual sense of Scripture. It is evident that it can only be
properly Verified in inspired writings, for no other being can
thus^comprehend and describe the future.
The typicai/sense is therefore verified when some being,
action, or event which has its own proper mode of being, is
taken to ..signify some future ens. Therefore the typical
sense is founded upon the literal sense. It leaves to the sen-
tence its proper literal sense, and is formed upon it by apply-
ing the great leading concept of the present reality to future
being. It is evident that it differs from the metaphorical
sense, though it comes close to allegory. But it is distin-
guishable from allegory in this, that it imports as its basis
some real existing being, whereas allegory is the application
of an imaginary ens to signify present or future truth. Thus
the ten virgins can not be called a type of the kingdom of
Heaven, but am allegorical ^description of the different relig-
ious conditions of human life, in its journey towards eternity.
THE INTERPRETATION- OF SCRIPTURE 789
The typical sense is also different in nature from the sense
of the symbolic actions of prophetic vision. The vision of
Ezekiel, I. 4-28, for example, was not a type of the Almighty,
but a symbol of some of his attributes. Thus also the
Woman seen by John in the Apocalypse, XII., is not a type
of the Church, but the life of the militant Church there por-
trayed by symbolic vision.
The type is properly built on some ens in rerum natura;
the symbol is only a creation of the mind.
Usage has determined that the ens adumbrating the
future verity should be called the type, while the future
verity thus prefigured is called the antitype.
The old writers here again induce useless divisions, divid-
ing types into prophetic, which relate to Christ, anagogic
which regard man's supernatural destiny, and tropologic,
which contain laws of morality. These divisions serve no
useful purpose.
The existence of types in the Scripture is self-evident
from the reading of the Holy Books. Adam is called a type
of Christ, two? tov /xeWovTo*;, Rom. V. 14; the sacrifice
of Melchisedech is a type of the Eucharist ; Sara and Hagar
are types of the Old and New Testaments, Gal. IV. 24; the
Paschal Lamb was a type of the Crucifixion, Exod. XII. 46,
compared with Jo. XIX. 36 ; the Brazen Serpent was a type
of the Vicarious Atonement, Num. XXI. 9 ; the Manna was a
type of the Eucharist, Exod. XVI. 15, compared with Jo. VI.
49-50; Israel in the Exodus was a type of Christianity,
TavTa 8e rvTritccos ovvefiaivev i/cei'vois, I. Or. X. 11. Such
evident proofs render the existence of the typical sense
as well founded as the existence of inspiration.
From the express declarations of the inspired writers, and
from the nature of the truths themselves, it is evident that
the entire Old Testament with its history and its rites is a
type of the New. Thus Moses and Joshua are types of
Christ, the Ark of Noah a type of the Church, the old sacri-
fices a type of the Eucharist, etc., but it is absurd to S(
this typology in every individual proposition. This has
been done even to the extent of finding a typical significa-
tion in the snuffers used to remove the snuff from the candles
790 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
in the temple. The vanity of such position is very evident.
There is much in the first Code that has only its plain
historical sense, such as, for instance, the Decalogue.
The question has been moved by some, whether there
are types in the New Testament. This question admits of a
definite and certain answer.
There are no Messianic types in the New Dispensation
as there were in the Old, which was but the shadow of the
perfect covenant. But still, as the Church was a future ens
in the time of Christ, there were typical actions in his life;
and certain events connected with his first coming are
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 certainly a type of the dissolution of the
world.
Now of the senses of Scripture, the greatest and most
valuable is the literal sense. This should be first sought in
every passage of Scripture.
In every enunciation of Holy Scripture there is a literal
sense, whether it be historical or metaphorical. This law
of interpretation is now received by all. It was opposed by
Origen in his excessive mysticism ; but the Fathers repud-
iated his extravagant theories as "old women's fables,"
" anile s f abides." (St. Basil) The very nature of human
speech demands that words be used in their historical or
metaphorical literal sense. In no other supposition is
human speech intelligible ; and it is not to be supposed that
God violated the nature of human speech in his message to
man.
A question of more difficult solution is whether a sentence
of Holy Scripture may have more than one literal sense.
Augustine (Conf. 12, 30, 31, 32.) concedes the possibility of
a multiplex sense of Scripture. St. Thomas seems to have
contradicted himself in his treatment of this question. In
the Summa (I. q. 1. a. 10) he places the objection "that a
multiplex sense of Scripture would create confusion and
error, and destroy the certitude of the argument:" he answers
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE <'.'!
that such results can not follow, since "all the senses are
founded on the one literal sense." Nevertheless a little
farther on he writes: "Since the literal sense- is that which
the author intends, and the Author of the Holy Scriptur
God, who comprehends all things in his knowledge, it is not
unfitting, as St. Augustine says, that there may lie a multi-
plex literal sense of Scripture. " In his treatise De Potem
q. 4, he is still more explicit in defending a multiplex sense.
A multiplex literal sense is also taught by Melchior ('anus,
Catharinus, Bellarmine, Bonfrere, Serarius, Salmeron,
Molina, Valentia, and Vasquez.
The tendency of later writers has been quite generally
opposed to admitting a multiplex sense, for internal
reasons. Thus Schmid (De Insp. 248) declares that the
greater weight of authority is for it; the stronger internal
evidence is against it. He leaves the question undecided.
Those who hold the negative opinion argue that it is
nature of human speech that there be but one literal sense
in a proposition, and the inspired writers acting under I
influence of the Holy Ghost, are not to be supposed to have
changed the nature of human discourse. In fact the und
standing of the Scriptures would be much impeded, if irr
than one literal sense was contained in them, for one, a:
receiving one certain literal sense, would be ever uncertain
whether there were not others yet to be expl< ired.
Now it must be understood that the advocates of a
multiplex sense of Scripture, Augustine excepted, admil
only in rare cases, especially in prophetic utterance whi
God directly speaks. They believe that his infinite comp
hension of truth may give a comprehensive meaning
expressions, which might in a certain sense, be called a multi-
plex sense of Scripture. There is a certain relation betwec a
these senses, but it is not clear in every ease that they can
reduced to the relation of type and antitype. We have
wish to insist on the name "multiplex sense"; but thi
seem to be a few places in prophecy where two entities alike
in nature are contemplated in one proposition. In such
cases the declaration of St. Thomas seems to be applicable:
"A term is ambiguous, and furnishes an occasion
792 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
tion when it is used to signify many things of which one is
not coordinated to the other; but when it signifies many
things which by a certain order are contemplated as one,
then the term is not ambiguous but certain." Summa
Th. III. q. 60, a. 3).
A remarkable instance of the mode in which the same
proposition may have two senses is furnished in the Gospel of
St. John XI. 50: "Ye know nothing at all, nor do ye take
account that it is expedient for you that one man should
die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. "
Caiaphas gave a counsel that it was a wise political
expedient to put Jesus to death to please Rome. The Holy
Ghost made use of him as the high priest to prophesy that
, Jesus must die for the redemption of men.
Now it is true that Caiaphas was not in the real sense a
prophet, but this passage at least shows that it is compatible
with the laws of human speech, as the Holy Ghost used it,
that one proposition should have a multiplex sense. There
is only one sense here intended by the Holy Ghost ; but we
can conceive a similar case where a human writer might
express a holy and true' thought, and one inspired by the
Holy Ghost, and yet unconsciously utter a deeper prophecy.
The sublime passage of Isaiah LII., 4-6, certainly refers
to our redemption from sin; but Matthew (VIII. 16-17)
applies it also to Jesus' healing of the sick. The only just
explanation here is that the comprehensive sense of prophecy
contemplated both Jesus' redemption of the world from sin,
and his merciful healing of the sick. The two effects are
essentially related. This theory may be applied to other
prophetic places.
Care must be taken not to receive the error of Origen,
who defended that at times only the typical sense was
intended. The typical sense stands not alone, but is always
built upon the literal. The Fathers have at times extolled
the typical sense above the literal, on the assumption that it
treated of higher concepts. This is erroneous. The typical
sense 'is more sublime in those passages in which it is found
than its type, but it is not more sublime than the literal
sense in general. The typical sense of the passage relating to
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE 793
the Paschal Lamb is more sublime than its type, but it is not
more sublime than the declaration of St. John: 'The Word
was made flesh and dwelt amongst us," or the Beatitudes;
and these are to be accepted in their literal sense. Th<
fore, where there is a typical sense it is to be principally
sought, because it was in such passage principally intended
by the Holy Ghost; but the great body of the Scriptures
especially of the NewTest anient contain their truths in the
literal sense The excessive looking wide of the literal sense
in search of types is one of the great defects of pulpit use
of Holy Scripture.
Finally the typical sense of any passage can only be cer-
tainly known, by some authentic declaration of the Holy
Ghost. The ordering of one ens to signify another is the
work of God, and can only be fully known to us through
some manifestation of the mind of God. Therefore, we can
only found things which are of faith on those types, whose
typical signification has been opened up to us by some
inspired writer. When this is done, it is evident that the
sense is as certain as the literal sense.
In the liturgical offices of the Church, and in the writings
of the Fathers, often a passage of Scripture is applied to an
object, which was not in the mind of the inspired writer, nor
comprehended in the scope of the Holy Ghost in the inspired
writing. This is called tbe accommodated sense. It is
based upon some resemblance between the two themes.
To speak properly, it is not a sense of Scripture, but the
adaptation of the sense of Scripture to another theme of simi-
lar nature. This accommodation takes place in two dif-
ferent ways.
The first species occurs where the passage retains its
real signification, but is extended to another theme, which is
analogous in nature and circumstances. Thus a man who
falls in temptation may say. " Serpens decepit me. " Thus,
the Breviary applies to the Holy Pontiffs, what was said by
the Siracida of Noah: "Inventus est Justus, et in tempore
iracundias factus est reconciliatio. " In the same manner,
the Breviarv extends to Holy Pontiffs, what was said
of Moses: "Similem fecit ilium in gloria Sanctorum;" and of
Aaron : " Statuit ei testamentum aeternum. "
794 THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE
This use of Scripture is legitimate and useful, provided
always the first sense is not obscured, and the application is
justly made, but it is never to be taken as the sense of Holv
Writ ; it can never prove a dogma. Even the material words
of Holy Scripture possess a sort of divine virtue. And when
they become the vehicles of even human thoughts, they are
capable of moving the soul of man to piety.
The second species of accommodation is founded in no
real similarity in nature or circumstances of the two themes,
but in a mere ignorant distortion of Scriptural words to
express some human thought. Thus, when Yahveh showed
visible signs of his majesty in certain places, the Psalmist
cried out : :' Deus mirabilis in Sanctis suis (in Sanctuario
suo) . " " O God, thou art terrible in thy holy places. " It is
not uncommon to apply this to the mysterious ways of God
to his elect, or even to the idiosyncrasies of holy people.
Again in Psalm XVIII. 26, (Hebrew) the Psalmist declares
the action of God towards man to be fashioned by the quali-
ties of a man's own life : " Cum sancto sanctus eris, et cum
perverso perverteris. " It is lamentable to hear a man tear
this text to tatters, to prove the ill effect of evil associations.
It is related that after the Duke of Montmorency was
executed by the order of Cardinal Richelieu, the sister of the
Duke, passing the tomb of the Cardinal, directed to him an
apostrophe in the words of Martha, the sister of Lazarus:
"Domine, si fuisses hie, frater meus non fuisset mortuus. "
It was much in vogue in the sixteenth century to apply the
sacred words to profane subjects.
When St. Francis de Sales lay ill, his physician in com-
pounding some 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
Scripture should only be used of holy themes, and with pro-
found respect. ' So great was the abuse, that the Council
of Trent in its fourth session formally forbade that the
Scripture be applied to profane subjects.
JEWISH INTERPRETATION 795
Chapter XXVIII.
Jewish Inti rpretation.
Through defect of documents, we know nothing of the
exegetical systems of the- Jews before the time of Christ.
Flavius Josephus declares (War I. 5, 2.) that tl iri-
sees interpret the Law accurately. We can only come- at a
knowledge of their system through the Talmud, which
reflects the Jewish thought of tin- early agi
Tlie Talmud is a compositi i of the Mishna and the
Gemara. The Mishna, from rij£;, has the radical signifi-
T T
cation 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 t< > the
first Law." It is certain that the Mosaic origin of the Mishna
is a faMe. It is simply a collection of the opinions and legal
decisions of the ancient Rabbis. Chief among those who
collected the data of the Mishna, was Rabbi Jehuda Hak-
kadosh, or the Holy, born about the middle of the second
century. The Mishna summed up all previous rabbinical
labors, and moulded all the subsequent philosophy and
theology of Judaism. Rabbinic interpretation is called by
the generic term of ^"11^ Midrash from ^/"H, to enquire.
These Midrashim are of two kinds, the Ilaggadah, JVUH
TT"
from Hj3, to narrate, was a free exposition, inclining t"
allegory and mysticism, and generally aimed to console the
saddened spirit. This was preferred by the Jews in the
dreadful calamities which befell them. The btherspecies is
("O^n, Halakah, from -"s,-; t<> proceed. This interpre-
T t _: I- T
tat ion keeps more strictly to the traditional acceptation of
the Law.
"These traditional ordinances, as already stated, bear
the general name of the Halakali, as indicating alike the way
in which the lathers had walked, and that which their ch.il-
796 JEWISH INTERPRETATION
dren were bound to follow. These Halakoth were either
simply the laws laid down in Scripture ; or derived from it,
or traced to it by some ingenious and artificial method of
exegesis; or added to it, by way of amplification and for
safety's sake ; or finally, legalized customs. They provided
for every possible and impossible case, entered into every
detail of private, family, and public life ; and with iron logic,
unbending rigor, and most minute analysis pursued and
dominated man, turn whither he might, laying on him a yoke
which was truly unbearable. The return which they offered
was the pleasure and distinction of knowledge, the acquisi-
tion of righteousness, and the final attainment of rewards.
The Halakah indicated with the most minute and pain-
ful punctiliousness every legal ordinance as to outward
observances, and it explained every bearing of the Law of
Moses.
Altogether, the Mishna comprises six "Orders" (Sedarim),
each devoted to a special class of subjects. The first "Order"
(Zeraim, "seeds") begins with the ordinances concerning
"benedictions," or the time, mode, manner and character
of the prayers prescribed. It then goes on to detail what
may be called the religio-agrarian laws (such as tithing,
Sabbatical years, first fruits, etc.). The second "Order"
(Moed, "festive time") discusses all connected with the Sab-
bath observance and the other festivals. The third "Order"
(Nashim, "women") treats of all that concerns betrothal,
marriage and divorce, but also includes a tractate on the
Nasirate. The fourth "Order" {{Nezikim, "damages") con-
tains the civil and criminal law. Characteristically, it
includes all the ordinances concerning idol-worship (in the
tractate Abodah Zarah) and "the sayings of the Fathers"
(Aboth). The fifth "Order" (Kodashim, "holy things")
treats of the various classes of sacrifices, offerings, and things
dedicated to God, and of all questions which can be grouped
under "sacred things" (such as the redemption, exchange,
or alienation of what had been dedicated to God.) It also
includes the laws concerning the daily morning and evening
service (Tamid), and a description of the structure and
arrangements of the Temple (Mid-dot h, the "measure-
JEWISH INTERPRETATION 797
ments"). Finally, the sixth "Order" (Toharoth, "clean-
nesses") gives every ordinance connected with the questions
of "clean and unclean," alike as regards human beings,
animals, and inanimate things.
These "Orders" are divided into tractates (Massiktoth,
Masscktiyotli, "textures, welts"), of which there are sixty-
three (or else sixty -two) in all. These trad I re again
subdivided into chapters, (Perakim) — in all 525, which
severally consist of a certain number of verses, or Mishnas
(Mishnayoth, in all 4, 187). The language is Hebrew, though
of course not that of the Old Testament. The words ren-
dered necessary by the new circumstances are chiefly derived
from the Greek, the Syriac, and the Latin, with Hebrew
terminations. But all connected with social intercour
or ordinary life (such .as contracts), is written, not in Hebrew,
but in Aramaean, as the language of the people.
But the traditional law embodied other materials than
the Halakoth collected in the Mishna. Some that had 1
been recorded there, found a place in the works of certain
Rabbis, or were derived from their schools. These art-
called Boraithas — that is, traditions external to the Mishna.
Finally, there were "additions" (or Tosephtoth), dating afl
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 tra s. When
speaking of the Halakah as distinguished fr< >m the Haggadah,
we must not, however, suppose that the latter could
entirely separated from it. In point of fact, one whole
tractate in the Mishna (Aboth : The Sayings of the "'
thers") is entirely Haggadah \ a second (Middoth] I
"Measurements of the Temple") has Halakah in only four-
teen places; while in the rest of the tractates Haggadah
occurs in not fewer than two hundred and seven pla<
Only thirteen out of the sixty-three tractatesof the Mish
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, w
authoritatively collected and edited in what are knowr
798 JEWISH INTERPRETATION
the two Talmuds or Gemaras. If we imagine something
combining law reports and notes of a theological debating
club — all thoroughly Oriental, full of digressions, ancedotes,
quaint sayings, fancies, and legends, and too often of what,
from its profanity, superstition, and even obscenity, could
scarcely be quoted, we may form some general idea of what
the Talmud is. The oldest of these two Talmuds dates from
about the close of the fourth century of our era. It is the
product of the Palestinian Academies, and hence called the
Jerusalem Talmud. The second is about a century younger,
and the outcome of the Babylonian schools, hence called the
Babylon (afterwards also "our") Talmud. We do not possess
either of these works complete. The most defective is the
Jerusalem Talmud, which is also much briefer, and contains
far fewer discussions than that of Babylon. The Babylon
Talmud, which in its present form extends over thirty-six
out of the sixty-three tractates of the Mishna, is about ten or
eleven times the size of the Mishna, and more than four times
that of the Jerusalem Talmud. It occupies (in our editions) ,
with marginal commentations, 2,947 folio leaves (pages a
and b). Both Talmuds are written in Aramsean; the one
in its western the other in its eastern dialect, and in both
the Mishna is discussed seriatim., and clause by clause.
Opposed to the Talmudists were the Karaites, a sect
formed in the seventh or eighth century. They rejected the
oral traditions of the Talmud, and while seeking the literal
sense, rejected the literalism of the Talmudists.
The Essenes and the Alexandrian Jews adopted a
purely mystical interpretation of the Scripture. We may
judge of the system of the Alexandrians from their represen-
tative Philo. According to him, although at times the
literal sense must be developed for rude minds incapable of
higher wisdom, the real sense of the Scripture was the occult
understanding of the symbols which were contained in the
letter. Thus Abraham is the symbol of the learning of vir-
tue ; Isaac, of the acquisition of virtue ; Jacob, of its exercise.
Adam^ is a symbol of man in his rude state ; Cain, of selfish-
ness; Noah, of justice; Sara, of womanly virtue; Rebecca, of
wisdom; Egypt, is a symbol of the body; the dove, of the
JEWISH INTERPRETATION- 799
divine wisdom, etc. Philo compares the literal sense to the
body; the allegorical, to the soul, and in many places
rejects entirely the literal sense. His work is worthless in
exegesis.
The Cabalists surpassed Philo in mystic jugglery. The
Cabalists derive their name from ?2p, to receive, since
they fable that their system was secretly delivered to the
elders on Sinai.
Of the Cabalistic theosophy, we shall say nothing. We
shall only briefly indicate some of their artifices, by which
they find foundation for their vain theories and beliefs.
The first artifice is called Gematria, in which occult senses
are drawn from the text, by the numerical value of the
letters. For example, the first verse of Genesis and the last
verse of the Hebrew Bible, II. Chron. XXXVI. 23. contain
six ^. The letter ^ is the first letter of rpN, a thou-
sand; therefore, the world will endure six thousand years.
The first two words of Genesis N*Q rV&^02 by the nu_
t t •• :
merical value of the letters, make 1,116; the same number,
results from the numerical value of the phrase ^"0,3 rOu >*"!
t : • T T -
£''K"D, "in the beginning of the year it was created":
therefore, the world was created at the" autumnal equinox,
which is the beginning of the Jewish year.
By another artifice, they accept the several letters of a
word for signs of complete words, and thus build a sentence
from the letters of one word. For example the first word of
Genesis pf ft'SO^ *s by this method made to signify the sen-
tence: 3 = ^"12, ne created, *| = ITDI, the firmament,
TT - I- T
K = \HN, the earth, yj = Q^Qfcf, the heavens, 1 = £\ the
sea, p = Dinn the abyss: he (God) created the firmament,
the earth, the heavens, the sea and the a1 >yss.
Some Christians have resorted to Cabalistic methods to
find the mystery of the Trinity in the same term: 3 = p,
the Son, -) = nil, the Spirit, ^ = ^N, the Father. £♦" =
n&6#, three, 1 = miT unity. f| = HDH, perfect; the
800 JEWISH INTERPRETATION
Son, the Spirit, and the Father, the threefold perfect unity.
By adopting just the reverse, from the initial letters of
HD^DEmI U^-n^y ^D wno snan lead us to Heaven? They
T - t ~. t v -:- • .
formed n^ft, the rabbinic form of n^ft, circumcision.
T r 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 trans-
position may be wrought of the letters themselves of any
word, so that it may change its signification. Thus the
"O&Oft, my angel, of Exod. XXIII. 23, by the Themurah
becomes ^fcO^Q 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
E^riKr where the last letter of the alphabet is substituted
for the first letter, p for ^ ; the second last letter for the
second, ^ for ^f hence its name £Q~n$$. The second species
is called D^?^, and differs from the preceding only in that
they divide the alphabet in two equal halves, and substitute
the first letter of the second half, ">, for the first letter of the
first half, $$, and so through both halves. Some believe
that the Masoretic text has suffered an interpolation from
the Cabalists in Jer. XXV. 26, and LI. 41, where we read
No such kingdom is known in history. Jerome informs
us that we should read by Athbasch "03, and he believes
that Jeremiah with design concealed the real name, leaving
it to the Cabalists to interpret. It is far more probable, that
if ^^ should be read there, that the text has been cor-
rupted from 72!D to TjGtfCtf by tne Cabalists.
The most famous Cabalistic treatise is the Book of Sohar,
i. e. the Book of Splendor. Though the Cabalists assign its
origin to the second century, it is most probably not more
ancient than the thirteenth century.
Though purporting to explain the Law, it is simply a
Cabalistic treatise on their occult doctrines concerning God,
the Messiah, the Angels, etc. Two minor works of similar
argument are the Books Bahir and Jezira.
JEWISH INTERPRETATION 801
After the eleventh century of our era a new school of
Scriptural interpretation arose among the Jews. The d<
tors of Judaism began to discard the old fables, and to seek
the literal sense < >f 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 kn< iwledge of the- I lebn-w
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 Ins commentary on the Pentateuch. His hatred
of Christianity is evident in many places in his works. His
style is obscure, and he has received many of the fables of
the early Talmudists. He died in 1 105.
Rabbi Abraham Bex Meir ben Ezra, commonly called
Abenezra, was bom at Toledo, in Spain, in 1093. He dis-
tinguished himself in philosophy, astronomy, medicine-,
poetry, mathematics, the languages and exegesis. He trav-
eled much, visited the principal cities of Europe, Egypt,
and other parts of the East. He died in 1167, on his way
from Rhodes to Rome.
lie is one of the greatest of the Talmudists. He c An-
niented the entire Old Testament except Chronicles. In
this commentary he seeks the literal sense of the t< M. 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 ScripUuvs
is free from the fables of the Cabalists, in other works he
indulges his genius in this species of jugglery. He v
endowed with prodigious memory, which made him easy
master of the Jewish thought of his time.
Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, commonly called Maimoni-
des, and sometimes Rambam. was born at Cordova, in Spain,
in 1 135. Cordova was at that time a Mussulman strong-
hold, and the vernacular tongue ^( Maimonides was Arabic.
He is styled Rabbi Abram, the last of thi 5 as regards
-.".I ) U.S.
802 JEWISH INTERPRETATION
time, and the first in worth. His life is enveloped in a web
of fable. The few certain data attainable are, that he studied
medicine, and made such progress in it, that he was made court
physician to Saladin of Egypt. He was versed in the Arabic
philosophy, and in mathematics, but his greatest claim to
fame, is founded on his Talmudic labors. He wrote partly
in Hebrew and partly in Arabic. His greatest work is his
"Mishnah Thorah," a systematic codification of the whole
Jewish Law, as found in the Bible, the Mishnah, the Tal-
mud, and minor books. The Jews have held this book in
great esteem, and declare that by it Maimonides merits a
place next to Moses the Lawgiver. It remains a great
source of rabbinic learning, even to this day. Some Jews
have even neglected the Talmud, to concentrate their study
on Rambam. It forms a sort of tournament for all later
Talmudists, and to explain a difficult "Rambam," is a test
of learning with the Talmudists. A MS. of the work is in
the library of Cambridge. Various editions have been
printed of it ; the last and most complete is that of Leipsic
in 1862.
The most important of Maimonides' other works is the
"Dalalatu' 1-Hairin" in Arabic; in Hebrew CTl^jH i"Hlft,
"The Guide of the Perplexed." : "
This work essays to explain the difficult passages of the
Bible. Maimonides was conversant with Aristotle, and
made much use of his philosophy in this work. The work is
a curious medley of symbolism, mysticism, Greek philosophy
and rationalism. Maimonides left several other works,
which merit no special mention here. He died at Cairo in
1204.
The next great Talmudist of the Middle Ages is Rabbi
David Kimchi, sometimes called Radak. He was born at
Narbonne after 1155, and died probably in the same city
about 1235. His father Rabbi Yoseph, or his grandfather
Rabbi Isaac (Yishak) Ibn Kimchi, had immigrated into
Provence from Spain, whence Arab fanaticism had com-
pelled the Jews to flee. In Provence the family took the
Gentile surname of Petit. Rabbi David lost his father (who
JEWISH INTERPRETATION s<):;
was himself a grammarian, Bible commentator, and poet of
no mean order) very early; but his rider and only brother,
Rabbi Mosheb (a fair scholar, but famous chiefly through his
linger brother), was his principal oral teacher. • valu-
able literary treasures of his father, however, falling into
his hands, Radak grew strong by studying them, and, as we
know, eclipsed them completely, although he lacked his
father's originality. But, if Rabbi David lacked original-
ity, he had abundance of instinct for finding out the best in
the works of his predecessors, and abundanc emus for
digesting and assimilating it till it became his own in a
peculiar way. Although preceded by Hayyuj, Ibn Janah,
and others, and succeeded by Abraham de Balmes, Elias
Levita, and rs, Kimchi has maintained the position of
the greatest Jewish grammarian and lexicographer. And,
although much inferior as a Biblical scholar and Talmudist
to Rashi, and as a critic and philosopher to Abraham Ibn
Ezra, lie has outstripped both in the eyes, not only of the
Christians, but to some extent even of the Jews, and thus
reigned supreme for more than five hundred years, as a com-
mentator on the Bible. From the fact that he was master
of the Targums and Haggadoth as few before or after him,
that he had Hebrew, Arabic and (ireek philosophy at his
lingers' 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.
'nit 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 ( )ld Testament, except the
Pentateuch, and of that he commented the greater part of
Genesis. His most valuable contribution to Hebrew liter-
ature is his Grammar and Lexicon. All subsequent Hebrew
lexicographers have drawn from his Q">£^£» TIT the B
of Roots. Of course comparative philology has ami
these data, but it has by no means superseded the work of
this Rabbi. He died at Narbonne about i 235.
804 JEWISH INTERPRETATION
Isaac ben Juda Abarbanel, or Abravanel, was born
at Lisbon in 1437. His family was opulent, and he received
a liberal education. He entered the political career, and
became Minister of Finance to Alphonsus V. of Portugal,
and afterwards to Ferdinand the Catholic of Castile. A
decree of expulsion in 1492 forced him to leave Spain, and
he withdrew to Naples, where he occupied an eminent post
at the Court of Ferdinand I. and his successor Alphonsus II.
At the French invasion, he fled to Sicily, and finally fixed
his domicile at Venice, where he died in 1508.
During his wanderings, he composed numerous works
treating of Holy Scripture. The principal works are Com-
mentaries on Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Kings, on the
other four books of the Law, on Daniel, Isaiah, on the other
Prophets, and two Dissertations on the Messiah. He has
also other treatises on special passages of Holy Scripture.
Richard Simon regards him as the most useful of the Rabbis,
and makes him equal in Hebrewr to Cicero in Latin. This
is excessive praise. Like all his class, he hated the Chris-
tians, and gives evidence of this hatred in his use of Scrip-
ture. At times he is more of a rhetorician than an exegete.
Long digressions are often found in his works, made up
chiefly of dry, stupid subtilities, and attacks on Christianity.
Other Jewish doctors of minor note are R. Levi ben Ger-
son, R. Elias Levita, R. Salomon ben Melech, R. Moses
Nachmanides, called Ramban, R. Chajim, R. Jacob ben
Reuben, R. Aaron ben Joseph, R. Aaron ben Elia, R. Abra-
ham de Balmes ben Meir, R. Abraham Halevi, and Abra-
ham Usque.
The End of the General Introduction.
Index of Subjects
Abarbanel ------ 804
Abgarus' letter to Jesus 615-616
Accentuation of Scripture 646
Accommodated Sense - 793-794
/Egidius on O. T. Canon - 492
.^Elfric - - - - - - - 772
"Aeternus Ille" - - -759-761
African Councils on X. T.
Canon ------ 598
Albam ------- 800
Albertus Magnus on O. T.
Canon - - - - 502-503
Alcuin's Canon - - - 481-485
Alexander of Alex, on O. T.
Canon - - - - - - 372
Alexandrian Canon - 259-263
Alexandrian Codex A - - 674
Allen, Card. - - 762-763, 779
Alter ------- 656
Alterations in Manuscripts 644
Ambrose on Inspiration 86-87
Ambrose, St. on N.T. Canon 594
Amiatinus Codex - - 734-737
Ammonius ------645
Analogy of Faith - - - 785
Andrada on Decree of
Trent - - - - 748-749
Anglican Views on Inspira-
tion - - - - - - 16-19
Anglo-Saxon Version 768-772
Anonymus Writer n\ Twelfth
Century 492
Antilegomena 590
Antitype - 78.9
Antoninus on (). T. Canon 513
Apocalypse - - - -583-584
Apocalypse of Moses - - 615
Apocrypha and N. T. 55()_5()o
(S05
Apocrypha quoted by
Fathers - - - 358-360
Apocryphal Books - - 006-624
Apostolic Constitute >ns - 259
Apostolic Constitutions on
O. T. Canon - 276)336-340
Aquila, Version of - - 689-691
Arabic Version - - - 725-726
Archaeology ----- 781
Archelaus on Canon of O. T. 330
Argenteus Codex - - - 721
Armenian Canon - - - - 368
Armenian Version - - 722-725
Arnold on Inspiration - - 14
Assumption of Moses - 614-615
Athanasius on Inspiration - 86
Athanasius on N. T. Canon 592
Athanasius on Canon of
O. T. 368-380
Athbash ------ 800
Athenagoras on Inspiration 83
Athenagoras on O. T. Canon 273
Athia - 635
Augustine's Canon of O. T.
362-366
Augustine's Canon of Scrip-
ture 87-88
Augustine on Interpretation
of Scripture - - - - 783
Authentic Interpretation - 784
Author. Cod the, of Scrip-
ture - - - 194 , iqO. 198
Authorization of Vulgate - 739
Authorship of Holy Scrip-
ture 74-76
Autographs of Scripture
- 649—650
)
806
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Baba Bathra ----- 249
Bannez on Inspiration 89-90
Barnabas' Epistle on Canon
ofN.T. - - - - - 535
Barnabas' Epistle - - 621-622
Bartolo, di, on Inspiration
- 140-142
Bashmuric Versions - -712-718
Basilides on Canon of N. T.
------- 550-55i
Basil on Inspiration - - 85-86
Bede on O. T. Canon - 485-487
Bellarminc on Canon of
O. T - . - - 522-523
Bellarmine on Inspiration - 98
Bellarmine's Opinion of
Lessius - 97-98
Bengel - - - - - - 655
Bentley ----- 650, 655
Beza's Codex D. - - - 675-677
Beza's Codex, Specimen - 648
Billot on Inspiration - 187-189
Birch - - - - - 656
Bishops' Bible - - - - 778
Bobbio, Codex of - - 703-704
Bohairic Version - - 712, 718
Bohairic Version's Canon of
N.T. - - - - - 593
Bohemian Versions of Scrip-
ture ------ 768
Bonaventure on O. T. Canon 503
Bonfrere on Inspiration 103-105
Books of Scripture Lost 624-625
Boraithas - - - - - - 797
Bossuet on Canon of Trent
- - 525-526
Bossuet on Canon of N. T.
- 605-606
Bowne on Inspiration - - 81
"Breeches" Bible - - - 778
Bukentop ------ 765
Burnet on Inspiration - - 13
Buxtorf -___._ 635
Cabalists
799
Cajetah, Card., on N. T.
Canon - - - - 601-604
Cajetan, Card., on O. T.
Canon - . . - 514-515
Calvinist Formulas of In-
spiration ----- 34
Calvin 's Theory of Inspira-
tion ------ 34
Canon of Codex Toletanus - 485
Canon of Jews - 241 , 242-246
Canon of N. T. - 529
Canon of N.T. at Beginning
of Third Century - - 584
Canon of N. T. of Council
of Trent - 603-605
Canon of Old Testament
- 240-528
Canon of Scripture Defined - 239
Canon of Scripture of Coun-
cil of Trent - - 239-240
Canon of Syro-Hexaplar
Text ------ 466
Canons of the Apostles 619-621
Canon of the Church
(O.T.) - - 263-528
Canon of Trent - - - - 113
Canus, Melchior, on Inspira-
tion ----- 88-89
Carolinus Codex - - - - 738
Cassiodorus on Canon of
O. T. ---._ 467
Causes of Variants - - 651-652
Cavensis Codex - - - - 485
Challoner's Revision - - 779
Chapters of Bible - - - 645
Chauvin on Inspiration 76-80
Chemnitz ------365
Chrismann on Inspiration - 112
Church of Alexandria on N.
T. Canon ----- 591
Clemens Alex, on N. T.
Canon - - - - 578-580
Clement VIII. - - - 762-764
Clement of Alexandria on
Canon of O. T. - 279-293
Clement of Alexandria on
Inspiration - - - - 85
Clement of Rome on Inspira-
tion ------ g2
Clement of Rome on N. T.
Canon - - - - 539-550
Clement of Rome on Canon
of O. T. - - - - 267-269
Clementine Edition - - 762-764
Codex Alexandrinus A - - 674
INDEX OF SUBJ]
s:-7
Codex Amiatinus - -
Ci idex Amiatinus, ("anon
Codex Argenteus - - -
Codex Augiensis F -
Codex Barberini Y
Codex Basiliensis E
Codex Beratinus cj)
Codex Bezac D.
Codex Blenheimius "1*
Codex Bocrnianus G.
Codex Boreeli F. -
Codex Campianus M.
Codex Cavensis - -
Code x Claromontanus D
Codex Coislin. I. F» -
C( 'dex Cyprius K
Codex Dublinensis Z
Codex Ephraemi C. -
Codex Forojulianus - -
Codex Fuldensis
Codex Harleian. H -
Codex Laudianus E -
Codex Monacensis X
Codex Mosquensis V.
Codex Mutinensis H.
Codex Nanianus U. - -
Codex \ ' - - -
Codex of Bobbin - -
Codex Porphyrianus P. -
Codex Petrop. II
Codex Purpureus N.
Codex Regius L.
Codex R( issanensis ^
Codex Sangallensis A
Codex Sangermanensis E
Codex Sinaiticus J«*
Codex Toletanus -
Codex Vaticanus S. - -
Codex Vaticanus B
Codex Wolfii A
Codex Wolfii B
Codex Zacynthus S
Codex I. Tisch. II.
Codex (-). Tisch. -
Codex P. (Guelph. A.) -
Codex Q. (Guelph. B.) -
Codex T (Tisch. IV i
Codex *r
Codex A (Tisch. III.) -
Codices of Vetus Itala
734
of
"7 5
683
"7S
737
737
481
721
OS 5
681
677
684
-677
-684
685
677
679
738
685
677
678
681
-674
738
-738
677
684
681
681
6S0
"7"
-704
68S
683
679
"70
683
685
485
680
668
"7s
''7s
683
678
"7"
"7"
- 684
- 683
•03-705
703
678
667
664
"77
"77
68i
Codices R. .... 679-680
• 1 'dices T. - 680
Codices, Uncial - - - 663-686
Collections of Canons - - 491
Concordances of Scripture - 645
Consciousness of Inspiration 4
Consequent Inspiration 104-105
Constitutions of the
Apostles - - - 619-621
Context of Scripture - - 782
Coptic Versions - - 711-718
Correction of Vulgate - - 754
Correction of Vulgate or-
dered by Pius X. - - 765
Correctoria of Vulgate 7.;; 734
rectors - - - - 664
Cosius on Canon - - - - 265
Council in Trullo - - 404-405
Cuncil of Florence - 500-510
Council of Hippo on 0. T.
Can< m - - 361-362
Council of J assy on O. T.
Canon . - - 480
Council of Laodicea - - - 404
Council of Laodicea on X.T. 593
racil of Trent on Holy
Scripture - - - 70-71
Council 1 if Trent on 0. T.
Cam m - - - - 516- 5 22
Council of Trent on Canon
of N . T. - - - - 603-605
Council of Carthage on
O. T. Canon - - -361-362
erdale's Bible - - - 7
a's Edi 1 x B. ''(,7
Cozza-Luzi's, Edition of
lex B - - - - 667
Cyprian on 0. T. ("anon 345-355
Cranmer on the Catholic
Use of Scripture - 775 770
Cranmer's Bible - - - 77S
■.son Inspiration - 108-110
Criterion, the Catholic, of
Scripture - - - 39-41
Criterion of Inspiration 6-41
Criticism. Textual - - - 654
Cureton's Syriac - -710-711
! 1 if Jerusalem on X. T.
Mil) -----
Cyril of Jerusalem on O. T.
Canon - - - - 380-3S5
808
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Cyril Lucar on O. T. Canon
- - 479-48o
Damasus ------ 701
Dates of N. T. Books - - 531
Davidson - 265, 300-301
Decree of Trent on Interpre-
tation of Scripture - 783
Decree of Trent - - 739-754
Decree of Vatican Council
on Interpretation of
Scripture - - - - 784
Denis of Chartrcux on O. T.
Canon - - - - - 514
De Rossi ------ 635
Deuterocanonical Books 465-466
Deutcrocanonical Books - 243
Deuterocanonical Books
citedbyN.T. Writers 265-267
"Dicta Aliorum" - - 203-204
Didiot -------142
Diognetus. Epistle to - - 558
Dionysius the Areopagite on
O. T. Canon - - 270-272
Dionysius the Great on
Apocalypse - - 589-590
Dionysius the Great on
O. T. Canon - - 335-336
Dionysius the Little on
Canon of O. T. - - - 467
"Doctrina Addai" - - - 557
Doctrine of the Apostles 619-621
Dods on Inspiration 19-32, 81
Dogmatic Theology - - - 781
Driver on Inspiration - 15-16
D'Hulst, Msgr. on Inspira-
tion ----- 143-149
Dupin, Abbe on Canon of
Trent ------526
Durand - - - - - - - 182
Dutch Versions of Scripture 768
Eadfrid - - - - - - 771
Ecclesiasticus - - - - 253
Edesius ----- 718-720
Egyptian Versions - -711-718
Elzevir Editions - 653
English Versions of Scrip-
ture ----. 766-779
Enneapla - 693
Epiphanius on N. T. Canon 592
Epiphanius on O. T. Canon
------- 385-394
Epistle of Barnabas on
Canon of O. T. - - - 269
Erasmus' Greek Testament
------- 652-653
Erasmus on N. T. Canon
- 600-601
Erasmus on O. T. Canon - 514
Errors in Manuscripts - - 650
Errors of the Vulgate - 751-754
Essenes ----- 798-799
Estius on Canon of N. T. - 533
Estius on Inspiration - - q6
Ethiopian Canon - - - 368
Ethiopic Version - - 718-720
Eugene, Bishop of Toledo,
on O. T. Canon - - - 477
Eugene IV. on N. T. Canon 600
Eusebius' Canon of N. T 590-591
Eusebius gives Origen's
Views ------ 258
Extent of Inspiration -198-238
Ezra ------ 246-255
Ezra, III Book of - - 609-610
Ezra, IVBookof 249-251, 610-611
Folk-lore ----- 173-174
Families of Codices - 657-662
Fayoumian Version - 712-718
Flavius Josephus' Canon
------- 257-259
Frumentius - - 718-720
Gasser (Bishop) on Inter-
pretation - - - - - 785
Gasser on Council of Trent - 113
Gaul, Canon of Church of
------- 571-575
Gelasius' Canon of N. T. - 598
Gelasius, Decree of - 366-367
Georgian Version - - - 725
Gerhard on Inspiration - - 35
German Versions of Scrip-
ture ------ 768
Gematria ------ 799
Geneva Bible - - - - - 778
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
SI".
Gislebert ----- 491-493
Glaire (Abb6) on the Canon 255
Gothic Version - - - - 720
Greek Text - - - -64a 698
Green on Wyclif's Version - 777
Greg, of Nyssa on Inspira
tion ------ 86
Greg. Nanz. on X. T Canon 592
Greg. Nanz. on O. T. Canon
- 395-404
Gregory XIII "756-757
Gregory the ('.real on <>. T.
Canon - - - - 468-474
Griesbach - - - - 656-657
Haftara ------
Maggadah - 795
Halakah - - - - - 705
Hamel on Inspiration - 9
Hampole ------
Harkelcian Version - - 709
Healy's (Bishop) Answer to
Newman - - - 128
Hebrews, Epistle to - 581
Hebrews, Gospel of - - -
Hebrew Text -----
Hebrew Text, Editions of -
Hebrew Text not Corrupted
- 641
Henten's Revision -
Henoch, Book of 358. 613
Hernias 622
Hesyehius ------
Hexapla of Origen - - 693
Hilary on O. T. Canon 405
Hilary of Poitiers on X. T
Canon -----
Hippolytc on X. T. Canon
- 560
Hippolyte on (X T. Canon
- - - - - - - ^73
Historieal Method
Historieal Sense
History and Inspiration
Holden's Theory
Holkot, Robt. on 0,
Canon
Holzhey on Inspiration
Homoeoteleuton -
Homologoumena - -
-3°-
786-
230-
T.
5°3-
-4 -
-798
-798
1-97
774
-710
-140
582
621
625
634
6 1 2
755
-614
-623
652
■695
-4 10
594
-'"
»7<5
238
787
»38
1 1 1
5°4
178
651
S<)0
I 1' >:,< iriu ■ if Antun -
Hooker on Inspiration - 1 -'
Hopfl - 151
Home
Hort - - - - - 1
Houbigant 635-636
Hug - . . . . - 657
Hugh of St Carus - 506-507, 645
Hugh of St. Victor on <> T
'ion - 4(;(> -497
Hummclauer, von - - 178
Ignatius (Martyr), Epistles
of ------- 532
Ignatius (Martyr), on ("anon
of X. T - - 551 r
Ildephonsus of Toledo on
O. T. Canon - - - 476-477
Innocent I, Canon of - - 367
Innocent I, Canon of X T.
of ------ - 598
Inspiration, Criterion of 6-41
Inspiration Defined - 71-73
Inspiration, Definition of -
Inspiration Drawn from
Bible Alone - - - 81-82
Inspiration, Franzelin's
View of - - - - - 4
Inspiration, how Evidenced 5
Inspiration incompatible
with Error - <• 3
Inspiration, Private - 37-30
Inspiration, whether Known
to Writer ----- •
Inspir.-d Writings, Existence
of
Interpretation of Scripture
Irenaeus on Canon of X. T
Irensus on Inspiration
Irenaeus on X T. Canon
Irenaeus on < > T Canon
Isaiah. Ascension of -
Isidore of Seville on ( )
Canon
Itala, VetUS - . . 698-701
Italian Versions of Scripture 768
i
S7] -575
-'7''
- 615
T.
474 476
Jal'lonski - <>;;
Jason of Cyrene - 3
Jahn's Theory of Inspiration 10-
810
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Jaugey - - - - - - - 149
Jerome and Rufirms - 434-435
Jerome's Controversy with
Augustine - 435-440
Jerome, Life of 413-441
Jerome on Canon of O. T.
- - ----- 441-465
Jerome on Inspiration - - 87
Jerome's Canon of N. T. 595-598
Jerome's Influence - - - 490
Jerome's "Law of History"
------- 183-186
Jerome's Revision of Vetus
Itala -• - - - - - 701
Jerome's Vulgate - - 726-732
Icsus' Letter to Abgarus - 616
Jewish Canon - - - 243-246
Jewish Interpretation - 795-804
John Beleth on O. T. Canon 494
John Chrysostom's Canon
ofN.T. - 593
John Damascene on O. T.
Canon - - - - - 477
John, Epistles of - - 582-583
John of Ragusa - - - - 504
John of Trevisa - - - - 774
John of Salisbury on X. T.
Canon - - - - 599-600
John of Salisbury on O. T.
Canon - - - - 500-501
Jowett on Insprration 14-15
Jude, Epistle of - - - - 582
Jude's Use of the Apocrypha 614
Julius Africanus - - - - 468
Julius Africanus on (3. T.
Canon ----- 294
Justin on Canon of N. T. 555-556
Justin (Martyr) on Inspira-
tion ----- 82-83
Karaites ------ 7 9S
Karkaphensian Version - 710
Kennicott - - - - 636-637
Kimchi ----- 802-803
King James' Bible - - - 778
Latin Versions - - - 698-701
Lamy, Bernard, on Canon of
Trent ------526
Lenormant on Inspiration
------- 114-115
Leo XIII. ----- 149-150
Leo XIII. on Holy Scripture
- ------ 41-69
Leontius of Byzantium on
Canon of O. T. - - - 468
Lessius, Theory of, on In-
spiration - - - 91-97
Letters of Blessed Virgin
Mary - - - - 617-618
Literal Sense - - 786,790-793
Liturgy of St. Mark - 618-619
Liturgy of St. Matt. - 618-619
Liturgy of St. Peter - 618-619
Loisy on Inspiration
/ .->
-176
Lachmann
Lacome, Perc
Lagrange
- 658-659
- 166-167
146 , 150-1 72
Lost Books of Scripture 624-625
Lou vain, Univershy of, on
Inspiration - • - 88
Lucian -------652
Lucifer of Cagliari on X. T.
Canon ----- 594
Lutherans' XT. T. - 606
Luther on Inspiration - - 8-1 1
Maccabees, III Book of 612-613
Maccabees, IV Book of - - 613
Macedonian Dialect - - - 643
Mai (Card.) Edition of Co-
dex B. ----- 666
Maimonides - - 801-802
Maitland on Catholic
Church ----- 768
Malachi ----- 256-257
Manasseh, Prayer of - - 612
Manning, Card, on Inspira-
tion - - - n-15, 72-74
Marcion on X. T. Canon 558-559
Marchini on Inspiration 99-100
Mariana on Decree of
Trent ----- 742-744
Masorah ----- 630-633
Masorites ----- 630-633
Materials for Writing 643-644
Matthaei ----- 655-656
Matthew's Bible - - 777-778
[NDEX of SUBJ]
Ml
Mechanical Theory of In-
spiration - 105
Meliton on O. T. Cam m
Memphitic Version - 71-' 718
Mesrob -------
Metaphorical Sense - 787 788
Mdthode Historique 1 i'>, 150 ' 7 -'
Methodius on O. T. Canon
33°-335
Michaelis, John David, 011
Inspiration - - - 35-36
Midrash - - - - -79s 70*
Mill - - - 650, 65 I 655
Milner on Inspiration - 37-38
Mishna - - - - -795-798
Moldenhawer ----- 656
More, Sir Thomas, on Wyclif 775
Moses, Apocalypse of - - 615
Moses, Assumption of - 614 615
Muratori's Canon - -562-571
Murillo -------
Nfeckam Alex, on O. T.
Canon ------ 503
Nehemiah's Collection - 253-254
Newman, Card, on Inspira-
tion ----- 1 15-128
Xew Testament of Sects 605-606
Netter, Thos. ----- 504
Nicephorus on O. T. Canon
- - - - - -477-478
Nicholas of Lyra - - 508-509
Nicolas I, Pope, on the
0. T. Canon - - - 489 400
Nestorian Canon of O. T.
- 467
Notker, Balbulus, on 0 T.
("anon - - - - 400-401
"( )beli" of Origen - - - 69 1
"Obiter Dicta" - - - - 128
Occam. Win. - 507-508
( Vtapla - - 693
Origen's Hexapla - -693-695
Origen on Canon of 0, T. --03-330
Origen on Inspiration - - 85
Origen on N. T. Canon - t
Onkelos, Targum of - 706-707
Ormulum, The - - - 769, 773
Ottobonianus Codex
Pagninus - - - 730
Palestinian Syriac - - - 711
Palimpsests - - - <•
Pamphilus I Martyr) 695
Paper - (>4-t
Papias on ('anon of N T. - 554
Parasha - - - - 342
Pan hment - - 64;, 044
" Pastor" on < >. T. Canon
- 269-270
1 lermas - - 622
Paul's Epistle to Laodiceans 621
Caul's I.. Seneca - 618
Caul of Telia - - - 709-710
Caul's witness to Inspira-
tion ------
Paulinus Cock x - - - -
P rsian Version - - - - 725
Pearson Defends Catholic
Church ----- 766
ch 100
Pcsch on Inspiration - - 80
ch, Zanecchia - - - 1 1 1
Peshitto, Syriac - - - 70S-700
Peter, II. Epistle of - - -
Peter Comestor on 0. T.
( '. non - - - - .),,.;
Pi ter, Judgment of - 6i 9 62 1
Peter of Blois - - 493
P( ter of Cluny on O. T
Canon - -
Peter of Riga on O. V.
Canon
1 r, St . on X T Canon - 533
Philaretes on < ). T. Canon
480-481
Philastrius of Brescia 1 m X
T. Canon - 504
Philoxenian Version 700-710
tins on O. T. Canon
Pirke Al'oth
Pius V. - - - - 7
Pius X. - 172
Polycarp on X . T ('an. >n 536
Polycarp on O. T. Canon
-:- »73
Polyglot Complutt nsian (
Polyglot. Walton's - - -
cius on I '• ere. ^i Trent 740
atin - - - - - - - 635
Prophetic Inspiration - 102-105
812
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
Prat -------- 174
Protestant Canon - - - 528
Protestant Criterion of In-
spiration - - - - 7-39
' ' Providentissimus Deus
------- 41-69
Psalms of Solomon - - - 612
Psalters ----- 701-702
Punctuation of Scripture
- 646-649
Quotations from O. T. by N.
T. Writers - 264
Rabbi Solomon Ben Isaac - 801
Rationalistic Views of In-
spiration - - - 11-19
Relative Element in Scrip-
ture - - - - 175, 188
Rescripti Codices - - 644-645
Revelation - - - - 194-195
Revelation distinguished
from Inspiration 69, 70, 71,
'72, 73, 91, 92, 93, 95
Rhabanus Maurus on O. T.
Canon - 488-489
Rheims-Douay Version - 779
Richard Simon - - - - 112
Robert Etienne - 646
Rohling ----- 1 1 3-1 14
Rudolph of Flavigny on
O. T. Canon - - - - 498
Rufinus on N. T. Canon - 595
Rufinus on O. T. Canon 410-413
Rupert of Deutz on O. T.
Canon - - - - 495-496
Russian Synod on O. T.
Canon - - - - 480-481
Savi -------- 142
Schmid on Inspiration - 106-108
Scholz ----- - 657-658
Science and Inspiration 231-235
Science and Scripture - - 50
Semeria ------142
Seneca, Paul's Letters to - 618
Sense of Scripture - 786
Sepulveda ------665
Septuagint - - - - 686-689
Septuagint Editions of - 696-698
Septuagint quoted by N. T.
Writers - - - - 264-267
Sinaitic Codex - - - - 593
Sinaitic Codex ^ - - 667-673
Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest - 711
Sirleti ------ 755-756
Sixtine Edition of Vulgate
------- 757-76i
Sixtus of Sienna on O. T.
Canon - - - 523-524
Sixtus V. - - - - - 757-761
Sixtus Senensis - - - - 243
vSlavonic Version - - - - 725
Solomon, Psalms of - - - 612
Species of Literature - 190-191
Statianus Codex - - - - 738
Stephen Harding - - - 491
vStephen Langton - - - 645
Stichometry - - - - 646-649
Suarez on Inspiration - 98-99
Subjective Criterion of In-
spiration - - 26-32, 36-37
Symmachus, Version of 691-692
Synagogue, the Great - 255-256
Syriac Canon ----- 368
Syriac Versions - - - 707-711
Syro-Hexaplar Text -709-710
Sahidic Version - 712-718
Sahidic Version's Canon of
N.T. - - 593
St. Augustine's Canon of
N. T. - 598-599
Salmeron on Decree of Trent 746
Samaritan Codex - - 638-640
Sanday on Inspiration - 15-16
Sanders O.S.B. - - - - 175
Sorbonne, Censure of - Qi-95
Talmud ----- 795-798
Talmud on the Canon
- - - - 249-250, 252-253
Targums ----- 705-707
Tatian's Canon of N. T. - - 557
Temple (Archbishop) on In-
spiration - - - - 17-19
Tertullian on Canon of N.
T. - - - - -575-578
Tertullian on O. T. Canon
------- 340-343
INDEX OF SUBJ]
813
Tetrapla - 693
Textual Criticism 654
Theodotion, Version of - 692
Themurah ------ 800
Theodulf on O. T. Canon - 485
Theophilus of Antioch on
\. T. - - - - 56]
Thomas of Aquin - - 504-506
Thomas of Harkel - 709-710
Thomas. Si . on Inspiration
i9S '"''
Teschendorf - 659-662
Toletanus Codex - - 485
Toleti - - - - - 762-763
Tostatus on 0. T. Canon
. - - . - - -511-513
Tregelles - - - 662
"Two Ways" -619-'
Tychsen - - 656
Tyndale's Version - 776~777
Type ----- 780
Typical Sense - 788 79°- :<>i
Ubaldi on Inspiration - 526-527
Ulphilas - 721
Uncial Codices - - - 663-686
Usshcr - -654
Vallicellianus - - - - - 738
Valverde - - - 763-764
Van der Hooght - - 635-636
Variants, Causes of - - 651-652
Vaticanus Codex and X. T. 593
Vaticanus Codex - - - - 664
Vega on Decree of Trent 746-748
V< rbal Inspiration 101-102 ,
107-10S, ioq, 206-220
Vercellone's Edition of Co-
d( x B - 666 '
Verses in Scripture due
Roberl Etiennc - - 653
is [tala - - - - 698-701
Vulgati . Authorization of- 739
Vulgate. Correction of - - 754
Vulgate. Errors of the - 75I_7S4
Vulgate of Council of Trent
739 754
Vulgate of Jerome - -726-732
Walafrid Stral a 0 T.
ton ----- 489
Walton's Polyglol - 654
Wetstein ------ 655
Westcott - - 663
Westminster Confession on
Inspiration - - - 34-35
Whitby on Inspiration - 12-13
Williams on Inspiration - 15
Worthington Tims. - 77-1
Writing Materials - 643-644
Wyclif's Version - - 766-77;
Ximenes, Card.
Canon
on
O. T.
5M
Zannecchia on Inspiration
- - 91 , iio-iii , 176-17;
Zwinglius on Inspiration
BS 475 .B74 1908 SMC
Breen, A. E. (Andrew
Edward), 1863-1938.
A General introduction
to the study of Holy
AKD-7945 (ab)
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11