B.

(See § 24, p. 83.)

Comp. Stuart, & MEANING OF THE WORDS CANON AND APOCRYPHA.“ 1.72419.

I. The word canon (xavov) had long been in general use among the old ecclesiastical writers, before it was applied to a collection of sacred writings."

1. With them it often meant, in general, nothing but a book, and a catalogue; or,

2. In particular, a catalogue of things which belonged to the church; or, in general, a book which served for the use of the church. Therefore, a list of odes which were to be sung on a feast day, as well as the roll in which were entered the names of all persons belonging to the church, was called a canon.*

3. The word was used in a much narrower sense, and applied to a public and approved catalogue of all the books which were to be read in the public assemblies of Christians, for instruction and edification.

4. Finally, in times much later, it meant a collection of divine and inspired writings; and in this latter sense almost all modern scholars have taken the word. They, therefore, use canonical and inspired as perfectly synonymous; though, by the term canon of the Old Testament, some understand "the collection of holy and inspired writings which Christ and the apostles have declared holy and inspired."

II. The apocryphal are opposed to the canonical books.

1. At first, books written in an obscure style were called apoc

and enlarged, 1833, 8vo. Hoffmann, Das Buch Henoch, &c.; Jena, 18331838, 2 vols. 8vo. For a full account of the various opinions respecting the lost books, see Wolf, Bib. Heb. vol. ii. p. 211-216.

"This article is from Eichhorn, § 16—18.

See Suidas, sub voce Kavov and Kavóviov. F. F. Drük, Diss. de Ratione Hist. Can. scribenda; Tub. 1778, 4to.

Synod. Laod. can. 42.

d Suicer, Thesaurus eccles. vol. ii. p. 40, sqq., and the authorities he cites. Socrates, Hist. Eccles. lib. i. ch. 17.

• Du Fresne, Glossarium Med. et infimæ Græcitatis, p. 579.

1 Suicer, 1. c. Cotta, Apud Gerhard, Locos Theol. vol. ii. p. 244.

a

ryphal. These writings were considered above the comprehension of the common man; and the overseers of the church forbade that they should be read in the public assemblies of Christians, though they were not only not forbidden to the teachers, but it was their duty to study them diligently.

2. Therefore, under the name apocryphal, in opposition to canonical, such books were designated as were laid aside, and from which nothing was to be read in public.

3. Even spurious writings (pseudepigrapha) were sometimes called apocryphal, for similar reasons, because no public use could be made of such miserable productions as the Book of Adam, Methuselah, Enoch, and others like them."

4. Finally, as canonical and inspired were deemed synonymous, so a book not inspired was called apocryphal. But the use of the word in this sense began very late, and, perhaps, not before the time of Jerome.

Under the term canon of the Old Testament, if we understand the collection of divine and inspired writings of the Jews from times before the birth of Christ, then we give it a meaning which most Christian writers never thought of; and numerous difficulties oppose the inquirer, who consults the Fathers respecting the canon of the Old Testament. The book of Tobit and Judith, the two books of Maccabees, and the five books of Solomon, and others, are found included among the canonical Scriptures. Frightened at this appearance, he either gives up the investigation, or, if he is earnest enough to continue it, comes to the conclusion that our canon of the Old Testament is of recent origin, and was not determined in ancient times, in all its great and little parts."

If we understand, by the canon of the Old Testament, the books of the Jews from times before Christ, which might be read in public,

• Suidas, sub voce Dege×údns. Epiphanius, Hæres. lib. i. Drük, 1. c. p. 8. — Semler (Untersuch des Kanons, vol. i. p. 10) says that sometimes a book was called apocryphal which was allowed only to the practised Christian.

Ruffinus, Expos. Symb. in Opp. Cypriani, p. 26. Cyril, Catechet. iv. p. 68, ed. Toutt. Here apocryphal agrees with the rabbinical word. See Hottinger, Thes. Phil. p. 521. Castelli's and Buxtorf's Lexicons, sub voce. Athanasius, Synops. vol. ii. p. 154. Fabricius, Codex Pseudepigraphus V. T. vol. ii. p. 308.

this meaning will not apply to the Old Testament, and is not admissible. By whom should the reading of these works be permitted? By Jews, or Christians? By the Jews? Nothing was more uncertain than the number of books to be held canonical; for they did not consider the canonical books synonymous with those to be read. The Song of Solomon was to them a sacred national writing; and yet they were forbidden to make a public use of it in their synagogues." In general, with this meaning of the term, we could only include in the canon the five books of Moses, the Prophets, and the book of Esther, - which was read, with many solemnities, at the feast of Purim. The Psalms, the Proverbs, Job, and the historical books, would be excluded! Shall we take those read by Christians? Then the canon of the Old Testament would be still more uncertain. The canon was determined at a time when it was not known what books were to be held canonical, for that was not settled till after the first century from the birth of Christ; by a party, from whom no certain determination of the canon of the Old Testament was to be expected; and without any established principles by which the value of the book could be tried, for the New Testament gave no decision of that question. The selection depended merely on caprice, and was, perhaps, determined by pious considerations,— which were often very doubtful,—or by authorities wholly inadequate. Finally, if we compare the catalogues, still extant, of the books of the Old Testament, which it is permitted to read publicly among Christians, Judith, Tobit, and other books, are introduced, which, for various reasons, can have no canonical value. So unstable is the ground on which the important subject of inquiry, the canon of the Old Testament, is commonly based!

NOTES ON THE PRECEDING TABLE.

$ 1.

THE ALEXANDRIAN VERSION.

The Prayer, or Song, of the Three Children is added to the third chapter of the book of Daniel; the History of Susannah, and that of Bel and the Dragon, form the thirteenth and fourteenth of the same book. A third book of Maccabees is added in the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts; and a fourth book of the Maccabees is also contained in some old manuscripts. Neither of these two last has found a place among the apocryphal books of the English Bible."

Philo flourished about the time of Christ and the apostles. It is only through him that we can learn what books composed the canon of the Alexandrian Jews. He does not give a detailed catalogue of the books of the Old Testament in any part of his works; but, here and there, in his writings, sentences occur, from which we may gather his opinions respecting them, and, perhaps, those of his countrymen at Alexandria. He was acquainted with the apocryphal writings, and sometimes borrows an expression from them, but never quotes them for arguments to substantiate a doctrine. Horneman divides the books of the Old Testament into three classes, according to the rank Philo seems to have assigned them, namely:

b

1. Books referred to, with the express declaration that they are of divine origin. They are marked with an asterisk in the preceding table.

2. Books which he barely cites, marked 1 in table.

3. Books which he does not mention, marked in the table. Philo calls writings of the first class, "works of the prophets,"

For further particulars respecting the apocryphal additions to Daniel in the LXX., see below, vol. ii. § 259.

Observationes ad illust. Doctrinæ de Canone V. T. ex Philone, cited in Eichhorn, § 26.