most of his contemporaries. However, we are but imperfectly acquainted with his tenets, for only fragments of his writings have reached us. Leontius informs us that he rejected the Epistle of James, the books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Solomon's Song, and counted the book of Job a fiction based upon facts. But his opinions seem to have found little support among his contemporaries."

The opinion of several Fathers upon the Apocalypse has already been given; but some others may be noticed. Gregory of Nyssa places it among the apocryphal books; Chrysostom and Theodoret never mention it; Jerome acknowledges it was not received by the Greek church in his time; while, on the contrary, the Egyptian church received it, if we may judge from the opinion of Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria." But only a part of the Oriental churches gave it a place in their canon, though Leontius admits it, and Ephraim the Syrian, as well as the Pseudo-Dionysius, has a high esteem for it.]

At the end of this century, the meaning of canonicity remained the same as before; only the word canon was more commonly used, and perhaps included the collateral idea of an ecclesiastical decision. Forged and

[See Leontius, 1. c. in Canisiï, Lect. Antiq. vol. i. p. 577, cited in Münscher, 1. c. Lardner, vol. iv. p. 392, sqq.]

[Opp. ii. p. 61. But see, upon this point, Schmidt, Hist. Antiq. Canonis V. et N. T. p. 398, cited in Münscher.]

[Ephraim, Opp. ii. p. 332, and Dionysius, Opp. i. p. 288. See Münscher, 1. c. vol. iii. p. 61-76.]

Since the time of Semler, (see his Abhandlung von freier Unters. d. K. vol. i. p. 11, sqq.) false notions of canonicity have prevailed; e. g., in Eichhorn, 1. c. § 16, p. 102, sqq.; in Schmidt, Einleit. vol. i. p. 7, sqq.; Hänlein, l. c. vol. i.

heretical writings were still referred to by the term apocryphal, and between the two classes were the books that might be read.

§ 27.

CANON OF THE LATIN CHURCH IN THE FOURTH CENTURY.

In the West, we find the canon of the New Testament was enlarged in the same manner, by the admission of all the catholic Epistles, and the addition of the Apocalypse, which was not doubted in the West. The canon, thus enlarged, was established by law. However, at the same time, looser principles were followed in determining the canon of the Old Testament, which led to the admission of several apocryphal writings.

1. Canon of the council of Hippo, A. C. 393. Canon 36. "Besides the canonical Scriptures, let nothing be

p. 334, sqq.; Bertholdt, p. 55, sqq. See, on the other hand, a review in the Jena Allg. lit. Zeitung for 1815, No. 2, p. 10, sqq.; Hug, l. c. § 18; Eichhorn, in N. T. vol. iv. p. 40. [Hug, in reference to the N. T., uses the word canon as synonymous with the "rule of faith, and that is said to be canonical which is authorized to declare this rule." In reference to the O. T., Eichhorn applies the term canonical to those writings that were included in the collection which he supposes was made before Christ.

Whiston says the books of the O. and N. T. were called canonical, because inserted in the apostolical canon. See his Essay on the Apost. const. ch. i. § 6. But this canon is well known to be spurious. See Jones's Method of settling the canonical Authority, &c.; Lond. 1726, 8vo. vol. i. p. 25.]

See Isidorus, Pelus. epist. 144: "Since these things are so, let us examine the canon of truth; I mean the sacred Scriptures." [The word canon, xavóv, originally meant the tongue of a balance. See the Scholiast on Aristophanes' Ranæ, v. 809.] Augustinus, De Bapt. ii. 6: Afferamus non stateras dolosas, ubi appendamus, quod volumus et quomodo volumus pro arbitrio nostro dicentes: hoc grave, hoc leve est. Sed afferamus divinam stateram de Scripturis sacris, tamquam de thesauris dominicis, et in illa, quid sit gravius, appendamus, imo non appendamus, sed a Domino appensa cogSee the quotations from Jerome and Rufin, in the next section.

noscamus.

read in the church under the title of the divine Scriptures. The canonical Scriptures are,

To confirm this canon, let the church on the other side of the water be consulted."a

* See Mansi, 1. c. vol. iii. p. 924: Ut præter Scripturas canonicas nihil in ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum Scripturarum. Sunt autem canon. Scripturæ: Gen., Exod., Levit., Num., Deuteron., Jesus Nave, Judicum, Ruth, Regnorum libri quatuor, Paralipom. libri duo, Job, Psalterium David., Salomonis libri quinque, duodecim libri Prophetarum, Esaias, Jerem., Dan., Ezech., Tobias, Judith, Hesther, Esdræ libri duo, Maccab. libri duo. Novi autem Test. Evangeliorum libro quatuor, Act. Apostol. liber unus, Pauli Apost. Epistolæ tredecim, ejusdem ad Hebræos una, Petri duæ, Joannis tres, Jacobi una, Judæ una, Apocalypsis Joannis. Ita ut de confirmando isto canone transmarina ecclesia consulatur. Compare Concil. Carthag. iii. can. 47, in Mansi, l. c. vol. iii. p. 891; also, Innocent I. Epist. ad Exuperium, ibid. p. 1091, sq.; Concil. Rom. i. under Gelasius I. in the year A. C. 491, ibid. vol. viii. p. 146, sqq. [Lardner, vol. iv. p. 486.]

The principles which led to this decision may be understood from Augustine. "Those two books," he says, "the one which is called Wisdom, the other Ecclesiasticus, are said [erroneously] to be Solomon's, on account of a certain similarity [of style and design.] Now, it has always been maintained that Jesus Sirach wrote. them; nevertheless they deserve to be received as authority, and to be numbered among the prophetic books.”a

Again, he says, "The Jews have not that Scripture which is called the book of the Maccabees, as they have the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, to which the Lord gives his testimony, as to those who are his witnesses. (Luke xxiv. 44.) But it is received by the church, and not without profit, if it be read or heard soberly."

He says in another place, "In respect to the canonical Scriptures, we must follow the authority of the greatest number of catholic churches, among which are certainly those that retain the chairs of the apostles, and were found worthy to receive epistles [from an apostle.] The church follows this rule in respect to the canonical Scriptures. It prefers those which have been received by all the catholic churches, to those which some do not receive; and respecting those which are not received by all, it prefers those received by the greatest number of churches, and those of the greatest authority, to those ad

a

Augustinus, De Doct. Christ. ii. 8: Illi duo libri, unus, qui Sapientia, et alius, qui Ecclesiasticus inscribitur, de quadam similitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur: nam Jesus Sirach eos conscripsisse constantissime perhibetur, qui tamen, quoniam in auctoritatem recipi meruerunt, inter propheticos numerandi sunt.

¿Cont. Gaudent. i. 31: Hanc quidem Scripturam, quæ appellatur Maccabæorum, non habent Judæi, sicut legem et Prophetas et Psalmos, quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet, tanquam testibus suis Luc. xxiv. 44, sed recepta est ab ecclesia non inutiliter, si sobrie legatur vel audiatur.

mitted by fewer churches, and of less authority. But if it finds some admitted by more churches, and others by those of greater authority, though this case cannot easily be determined, I think the latter are to be held of equal authority."

a

Still further, he adds, "We will omit the fanies contained in those writings called apocryphal, because their origin was hidden, and not known to the Fathers." "The Manichees read the apocryphal writings, written in the name of the apostles, by some cobblers of fables, I know not who."

Jerome writes to the same effect: "It must be said that this Epistle, which is inscribed to the Hebrews, is not only received by the church of the West, but hitherto by all the ecclesiastical writers in the Greek language, as the work of Paul the apostle. Many think it may be the work of Barnabas, or Clement; but it is of no importance whose it is, for it is the production of an ecclesiastical man, and it is daily distinguished by being read in the churches. But though the custom of the Latin church has not admitted it among the canonical

De Doct. Christ. 1. c.: In canonicis Scripturis ecclesiarum catholicarum quamplurium auctoritatem sequatur, inter quas sane illæ sint, quæ apostolicas sedes habere et epistolas accipere meruerunt. Tenebit igitur hunc modum in Scripturis canonicis, ut eas, quæ ab omnibus accipiuntur ecclesiis catholicis, præponat eis, quas quidam non accipiunt: in eis vero, quæ non accipiuntur ab omnibus, præponat eas, quas plures gravioresque accipiunt, eis, quas pauciores minorisque auctoritatis ecclesiæ tenent. Si autem alias invenerit a pluribus, alias a gravioribus haberi, quamquam hoc facile invenire non possit, æqualis tamen auctoritatis eas habendas puto.

De Civit. Dei, xv. 23: Omittamus earum scripturarum fabulas, que apocrypha nuncupantur, eo, quod earum occulta origo non claruit patribus. Cont. Faustum, xxii. 79: Legunt scripturas apocryphas Manichæi, nescio a quibus sutoribus fabularum sub nomine apostolorum scriptas. Compare Marheinecke, Syst. d. Katholicismus, vol. i. 2, p. 231.