Maclear and Williams on Article VI: Of the Sufficiency of the holy Scriptures for salvation

Holye Scripture conteyneth all thinges necessarie to saluation: so that whatsoeuer is not read therein, nor may be proued therby, is not to be required of anye man, that it shoulde be beleued as an article of the fayth, or be thought requisite [as] necessarie to salvation.

In the name of holy Scripture, we do vnderstande those Canonicall bookes of the olde and newe Testa- ment, of whose aucthoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche.

Of the names and number of the Canonicall Bookes.

Genesis.

Exodus.

Leuiticus.

Numeric

Deuteronomium.

Iosue.

Iudges.

Ruth.

The .1. boke of Samuel. The .2. boke of Samuel. The .1. booke of Kinges. The .2. booke of Kinges. The .1. booke of Chroni. The .2. booke of Chroni. The . 1 . booke of Esdras. The .2. booke of Esdras. The booke of Hester. The booke of lob. The Psalmes. The Prouerbes. Ecclesia. or preacher. Cantica, or songes of Sa. 4. Prophetes the greater. 12. Prophetes the lesse.

Alios autem Libros (ut ait Hier- onymus) legit quidem Ecclesia ad exempla uitae et formandos mores, illos tamen ad dogmata confirmanda non adliibet: ut sunt

Tertius et quartus Esdrce.

Sapientia.

Iesus filius Syrach.

Tobias. Iudith.

Libri Michaba?orum. %.

[•

Noui Testamenti Libros omnes (ut uulgo recepti sunt) recipimus et habe- mus pro Canonicis.

And the other bookes, (as Hierome sayth) the Churche doth reade for example of lyfe and instruction of maners: but yet doth it not applie them to establishe any doctrine. Such are these followyng : The third boke of Esdras. The fourth boke of Esdras. The booke of Tobias. The booke of Iudith. The rest of the booke of Hester. The booke of Wisdome. Iesus the sonne of Sirach. Baruch, the prophet. Song of the .3. Children. The storie of Susanna. Of Bel and the Dragon. The prayer of Manasses. The .1. boke of Machab. The .2. Booke of Macha.

All the bookes of the newe Testa- ment, as they are commonly receaued, we do receaue and accompt them for Canonicall.

i. Connection. Having thus treated of the Revela- tion of Himself, which God has been pleased to make to us, the Articles proceed to deal with the Rule of Faith1. To this subject three Articles relate, the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth. The first two treat of Holy Scripture, the third of the three Creeds.

ii. History and Language. The present Sixth Ar- tide differs considerably from the original draft in 1553. In the first Clause, which was apparently modelled on the Fifth of the old Forty-two Articles of 1552, after the words ” nor may be proved thereby,” a sentence is omitted which ran thus, ” although it be sometime receiued of the faithful, as Godlie, and profitable for an ordre and comelinesse.” The second Clause, which relates to the testimony of the

1 This is the logical order. ” For after settling that there is a Revela- tion, the question follows, How is that Revelation to be made known

to us? What are the Books that record it ? In other words, What is the Canon of Scripture?” Salmon’s Introduction to the New Testament, p. 1 .

M.

Church in determining what Books are Canonical, as also the actual list of the Canonical Books, was lacking in the first draft. These clauses were introduced in 1563 from the Wiirtemberg Confession1.

iii. Object. The object of the Article is a twofold

one. It was designed

(1) To assert the necessity of proving from Scrip- ture the doctrines of the Church in opposition to the extreme Scholastic and Tridentine teaching respecting “the Word unwritten2”;

(2) To condemn the error of those ultra-spiritual- ists, who denied the necessity of the Written Word altogether, and looked with suspicion on all ” Book-Religion ” as they termed it, attribu- ting all light and knowledge to the internal illumination of the Holy Spirit3.

iv. Analysis. The Article consists of three parts : — (a) It asserts the plenary authority of Holy

Scripture, as the ultimate standard of Christian

Faith and Doctrine ; (/3) It defines the extent and limits of such Holy

Scripture, as comprising the Canonical Books

of the Old and New Testaments ; (7) It lays down what is the position of the Church

of England as regards the Apocrypha.

1 ” Sacram Scripturam vocamus eos Canonicos libros veteris et novi Testa- menli, de quorum authoritate in Ec- clesia nunquam dubitatum est.” Wiirt. Conf. de Sacra Scriplitra.

3 ” Inquo genere teterrimi illi sunt … qui Sacras Scripturas ad infirmorura

tantum hominum debilitatem ablegant et detrudunt, sibi sic ipsi interim prae- fidentes, ut earum auctoritate se teneri non putent, sed pcculiarem quendam spiritum jactant, a quo sibi omnia suppeditari aiunt, quKCunque docent et faciunt.” Reform. Leg. Eccl. de Haeresibus, c 3.

i. The Plenary Authority of Holy Scripture.

v. The Sufficiency of Scripture. All communities of Christians agree in this, that the Divine Rule is con- tamed in Holy Scripture1, but they differ as to the question whether it is to be regarded as complete, or whether any- thing else is needed for knowledge essential to Salvation. While the Churches, which in the sixteenth century broke off from the Roman centre, regard Holy Scripture as sufficient, the Roman Church places Tradition on the level of an authority parallel and coordinate, and represents it as necessary to supplement what is lacking in the Written Word2.

vi. Testimony of our Lord and His Apostles. Our

Lord and His Apostles nowhere refer for the establishment of doctrine to any authority but Holy Scripture:

(i) Our Lord Himself constantly appealed to the Old Testament, and there is hardly a Book contained in it from which He did not quote. Again and again He appealed to the Jewish Scriptures as testifying of Himself, and after His Resurrection He expounded them to His disciples, shewing that from first to last they pointed to Himself (Luke xxiv. 27) ;

(ii) The Apostles likewise bear the same testimony to the Jewish Scriptures. Thus

(a) S. Luke praises the Berceans because they examined t/ie Scriptures daily to see whether

2 The Greek Church also acknow- ledges a so-called tradition as a co- ordinate source of Christian know- ledge, but this relates chiefly to eccle- siastical points, such as the veneration

of saints and relics, the forty days’ fast, the institution of Monachism, prayers for the dead, &c. Aiaiprfrai rb dtiov prj/xd re els to ■ypa.irTbv Kai dypa- (pov. nal &-ypa.<pov fikv eitc av ai {kkXti- aiacTiKal TrapaS6aas. See Winer, Confessions of Christendom, p. 38.

they agreed with the statements which S. Paul made to them (Acts xvii. u)1; (/3) That Apostle, writing to the Romans, says, Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learni?ig, that through patience and comfort of the Scriptures we might have hope’2 (Rom. xv. 4); (7) Again he writes to Timothy, From a babe thou hast known the sacred writings*, which are able to make thee wise ten to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus, and he adds, Every Scripture* inspired of God 5 is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in right- eousness : that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work (2 Tim. iii. 15 — 17). Thus the Old Testament was received and appealed to as Scripture alike by our Lord and His Apostles, and while He ascribes error to ignorance of the Scriptures (Matt. xxii. 29)6, He nowhere ascribes it to ignorance of any unwritten word, and He nowhere requires a knowledge of tradition as essential to salvation7.

[…]

2 “The Scriptures have not merely, nor primarily, an historical and archae- ological purpose, but a moral one.” Cp. Liddon in loc.

3 ‘lepa ypa.ixna.Ta = sacras litems, ” libros Mosis et prophetarum. Nam hi exstabant cum Timotheus esset parvulus.” Bengel. The expression iepa ypafip-ara is a anal; \ey6pi. in the New Testament.

4 […] omnis Scriplura, not tota Scriptura. ” Scriptura sacra,

[…]

IOI

vii. The New Testament was gradually added to the Old, but it was some considerable period after our Lord’s Ascension before any of the Books contained in it were actually written. The first work of the Apostles, and that out of which all their other functions grew, was to proclaim as heralds the Glad Tidings of the Great Hope, which had arisen for mankind, and to deliver a personal testimony to the chief facts of the Gospel History respecting the life, death, and resurrection of their Lord (Mark xvi. 15 ; Acts i. 21, 22)1. Thus the teaching of the Apostles was in the first instance oral and not written2, and out of the multitude of things that Jesus did (John xxi. 25), a cycle of representative facts was gradually selected, which formed the common groundwork of their message3. But in the course of time another step was taken. Many, as S. Luke expressly tells us, endeavoured to commit to writing this oral Gospel, and to form in a connected shape written collections of the words and actions of our Lord (Luke i. 1 — 4). As long as the Twelve Apostles were

ject Tradition, but He assigned to it its proper place as compared with Scrip- ture, much in the same way as He asserted His own proper authority as the Interpreter of Scripture. The due relations had become inverted. It was His Divine Mission to readjust them, and to declare that Scripture was not to be exclusively dominated by the stereotyped phraseology of Tradition.

1 Bp Westcott, Bible in the Chunk, P- 57-

3 ” The Founder of the Christian Church did not write Himself, nor did

He give His disciples a commission to write. They were to go from place to place bearing witness everywhere personally by word of mouth, and claiming to be heard, and so to carry His message and form communities. When He promised them the assist- ance of the Holy Ghost, He was not thinking of authorship, but of the cases where they would have to speak. And even in that last solemn moment of departure, when He gave His last charges including all their Apostolic duties, there was no men- tion made of writing books. So, again, was it when S. Paul was called to the Apostolate. And among the charismata he reckons a prophetic gift, but no special gift of writing.” Dollinger, First Age of the Church, vol. i., pp. 201. 202.

living, they were themselves abiding witnesses to the facts which they preached. But when the time came for them to be scattered throughout the world, or to depart from this earthly scene, it became a matter of the highest importance that authoritative records should be put forth by those who had exceptional knowledge of the events they described1, to supply the place of the oral teaching pre- viously in use2. Thus the five historical Books of the New Testament came to be written, and twenty-one Epistles, and one Book of Prophecy, were put forth from time to time as the special circumstances and requirements of different Churches called for them*.

viii. Claim of the Apostles. But though the writings of the New Testament came into existence under these circumstances, the writers, instead of appealing to any other independent and coordinate authority, make the same claim for what they wrote, as they do for the Scriptures of the Old Testament. This we say to you by the word of the Lord, S. Paul writes to the Thessalonians (i Thess. iv. 15). Which things also we speak, he says to

2 We find the basis of our Gospels in the “Memoirs of the Apostles,” which Justin Martyr describes as read in the Christian assemblies co-ordi- nately with the Prophetical Scrip- tures. Ta airo/j.i’riiji.oiieiiJ.a.Ta tCiv airo-

[…]

I03

the Corinthians, not in words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth (1 Cor. ii. 13). The things which I write unto you, he says again, they are the command- ment of the Lord1 (1 Cor. xiv. 37). Once more, writing to the Galatians, he says, / make known unto yon, brethren, as touching tlie Gospel, which was preached by vie, that it is not after man. For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it 2, but it came to me through revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. i. 11, 12), The Apostle nowhere appeals to any oral teaching besides his own as of coordinate authority with his. He speaks as one conscious that he is under the guidance and suggestion of the Holy Spirit, as much as the writers of the Old Testament3.

ix. Tradition. Thus without laying down any theory of Inspiration, the Church of England declares that ” Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation.” The Roman Church, on the other hand, holds that there is an unwritten word of God, or tradition*, which is of equal

1 E? Tit Soku wpo(pT]T-qt eTvat 17 […] ypd(pu v/mv, oTi Kvplov iarlv e’xToXi}. ” In- dicet atque agnoscat ea, quae scribe vobis, esse prrecepta Christi Domini.” Est. The Kvpiov, as its position in- dicates, is emphatic. ” The Apostle here speaks with the full spiritual knowledge that the rules given in this Chapter are no mere expressions of his own judgment, but are verily a collective t’croX^ of the personal Lord, speaking as it were by His Apostle as His interpreter.” Bp Ellicott in he.

2 “‘EdiS&xSr]” is added to explain and enforce irapa. avdpwirov irapiXa- f}ov, and thus to bring out the con- trast with Si’ iiroKa\v\pews : ’ I received it not by instruction from man but by revelation from Christ.’” Bp Lighttoot in toe.

3 ’ ’ Each Apostle possessed in

solidarity not a divided or partial, but a complete right of superintend- ence over the Christian communi- ties”; in such exercise of his Aposto- late each Apostle was under the direct influence of the Holy Ghost, and of such exercise important parts were the delivery of oral teaching, the compilation of personal memoirs, and the issue of special and encyclical epistles ; the Apostolate ceased when the vocation and bestowal ceased from God. Comp. John xiv. 26 ; 2 Cor. xi. 28; Dollinger, First Age of the Church, ii. 113 sqq.

4 Comp. Card. Bellarmine, De Verba Dei, iv. 3; ” Nos asserimus, in Scripturis non contineri expresse totam doctrinam necessariam sive de fide sive demoribus, et proinde praeter Verbum Dei scriptum requiri etiam Verbum Dei non scriptum, i.e. divinas et Apostolicas traditiories.”

value and authority with the written Word. The Council of Trent declares that ” the truth of the Christian Revela- tion is contained in the written Word and in the unwritten Tradition, and that the Council receives and venerates with an equal feeling of piety and reverence all the Books of the Old and New Testaments… and also the traditions relating as well to faith as to morals, as having been, either from the word of Christ Himself, or the dictation of the Holy Ghost, preserved by continuous succession in the Catholic Church1.” This teaching makes tradition an authority independent of Holy Scripture, so that Scripture is not the sole source of Catholic truth, and it holds that an Article of the Faith may rest on Church teaching alone, as a sufficient basis in itself 2. But this is a departure from the primitive conception of the authority of Scripture. For on turning to

x. The Testimony of the Fathers, we find

(a) Irenaeus saying, ” We know the Scriptures are perfect as being spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit3” ;

(b) Tertullian writes, ” I adore the perfection of Scripture, which declares to me the Creator and His works4 ” ;

1 See Cone. Trid. Sess. iv. Deer, de Canonic. Scripturis. “Ortho- doxoram patrum exempla secuta [Ec- clesia], omnes libros tarn Veteris quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, necnon traditiones ipsas, turn ad (idem, turn ad mores perlinentes, tanquam vel oretenus a Chiisto vel a Spiritu Sancto dictatas, et continua successione in Ecclesia Catholica conservatas, pari pie/a/is affeclit ac rruerentia suscipit el vene- rator.” The Cat. Rom. Quasi. 12 says, “Omnis doctrine ratio, quae

fidelibus tradenda sit, Verbo Dei con- tinetur, quod in Scripturam traditiones- que distributum est.”

(c) Origen says, ” In the two Testaments every

word that appertains to God may be sought out and discussed, and out of them all knowledge of things may be understood. And if anything remains, which Holy Scripture does not deter- mine, no third Scripture ought to be received to authorise any knowledge1.”

(d) Again S. Chrysostom writes, ” Look for no other teacher, thou hast the oracles of God ; none teaches thee like these2.”

(e) Once more S. Augustine says, ” In those things which are plainly laid down in Scripture, all things are found, which embrace faith and morals3.”

Such quotations might be greatly multiplied*. Those given are sufficient to shew that the Fathers of the Primi- tive Church found the Rule of Faith (a) in the Bible as its sole source, and {b) in the Creeds as interpreting the Bible. They did not appeal to some independent tradition6,

1 “In hoc biduo puto duo Testa- menta posse intelligi, in quibus liceat omne verbum quod ad Deum pertinet requiri et discuti, atque ex ipsis omnem rerum scientiam capi. Si quid autem superfuerit, quod non divina Scriptura decernat, nullam aliam tertiam Scrip- turam debet ad auctoritatem sciential suscipi.” Orig. Bom. v. in Levit.

5 The English Church is by her consistent appeal to history pledged to respect Catholic Tradition ; she deals with it by the golden rule of

St Vincent of Lerins, the “quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omni- bus.” The statement that ” dogma has triumphed over history ” is as alien from her spirit, as is that doctrine of private judgment of which it is but a correct expression. Yet the English Church is, by her freedom from fore- closure, equally respectful of the mani- fold qualitative progress of the race. “The Faith, in which Christianity is embodied, and through which it acts, grows as humanity grows,” commend- ing itself to the rrye/xoviKoi Kai irai5ev- tikoI of each successive generation, while its facts remain unchanged and its principles are final. Westcott, The Incarnation and Common Life, p. 44, ed. 1893, Lilly, On Shibboleths, p. 47, ed. 1892. “Revelation was, and must be, progressive” since “Christ

io6

teaching doctrines not to be found in Scripture, but to the Creeds taught to Christians, and confessed by them at their Baptism1. This ancient idea of the Rule of Faith teaches us to decline with emphatic decision doctrines which lack any Scripture warrant, and which came to prevail, and then only partially, in a later age of the Church2.

ii. The Canonical Scriptures.

xi. The Canon. Having laid down the plenary authority of Holy Scripture in matters of doctrine, the Article proceeds to deal with the vexed question of the Canon, and to define the extent and limits of Holy Scrip- ture. The Holy Scriptures, it states, are comprised in those Canonical Books, both of the Old and New Testa- ments, of whose authority, that is, in matters of faith, was never any doubt in the Church. The word ” Canon,” having passed through various meanings3, was used in the

came to be the Object of a revelation, not merely to make one.” Liddon, Life of Pusey, i. pp. 125, 126, quoting E. B. Pusey.

2 ” Where an opinion has been held commonly in Christendom for a while

and then abandoned, without being explicitly condemned, as being out of harmony with Scripture and reason, like the notion of Christ’s offering His death as a ransom to the Devil, then we shall not scruple to reject whatlacks permanent Church authority and Scriptural basis. Where finally doctrines, lacking any Scriptural war- rant, come to prevail only in a later age of the Church, and only partially then, like the doctrine of the Im- maculate Conception, or of Indul- gences on the basis of the Treasury of Merits, doctrines ignored or rejected explicitly in the earlier ages, then, even without condemning them as positively heretical, we shall have no hesitation in declining them with em- phatic decision.” Gore’s Roman Catholic Claims, p. 66.

fourth century to denote the Books admitted and ac- cepted by ” the rule ” of the Church’s judgment, as regu- lating, to the exclusion of all other books, Christian belief and teaching.

xii. The Canon of the Old Testament was inherited by the Christian from the Jewish Church, but it has come down to us in a twofold form : —

(a) We have the Hebrew Canon, containing only the Books which this Article admits to be Canonical. These are the Books which (1) were received by the Jews of Palestine, (2) were quoted by our Lord and His Apostles, and (3) are accepted by modern Jews1. (/3) We have the Septuagint or Greek Version, which contains, besides the generally accepted Scriptures, certain other Books, which were incorporated with the Books of the Hebrew Canon, and so claimed to be equally inspired. Up to the date of the Council of Trent the question of the Canon was open, and the single great exception to the opinion of the early Fathers, who accepted the Hebrew Canon, was that of S. Augustine2. This Father includes in the Canon of Scripture those additional Books found in the Septuagint Version, and his enlarged Canon was adopted at the Council of Carthage A.D. 397. While the Reformed Communities accepted only the Hebrew Canon as having any real weight in establishing matters of faith, the Council of Trent, though not without opposition,

The word was first used to designate which is distinctly recognised, and it

the Holy Scriptures by S. Athanasius, is supported by the combined au-

who speaks of “this definite body of thority of those Fathers, whose critical

writings as canonized, that is, ac- judgment is entitled to the greatest

cepted.” weight.

1 During the first four centuries 2 See the famous passage in his

this Hebrew Canon is the only one De Doctrin. Chris!, ii. 8.

io8

pronounced the enlarged Greek Canon, including the Apocryphal Books, to be deserving in all its parts of equal veneration, and added a list of Books to prevent ” the possibility of doubt.”

xiii. The Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament corresponds with our present English Bible, and that it was the one quoted by our Lord and His Apostles may be thus proved, (i) Our present English Old Testament corresponds with the Hebrew Old Testament of the modern Jews ; (2) that corresponds with the List given in the Babylonian1 Talmud of A.D. 550; (3) that with Jerome’s Version A.D. 400; (4) that with Origen’s Hexapla A.D. 200; (5) that with the Catalogue given by Melito, Bishop of Sardis, A.D. 160 ; (6) and that with the List of Books supplied by Josephus A.D. 70, who tells us that a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures was preserved in the Temple, and was there till the hour of its destruction, when he was 33 years of age. To the Temple the Jewish historian had ready access, and his testimony as to the contents of this copy is very valuable, for it shows that the Scriptures2 we now possess are the same as those accepted by the Jews of our Lord’s time, and we know on the authority of Philo and of Josephus himself that the Jews “would rather die ten thousand deaths3” than suffer any alteration to be introduced into their sacred Books.

Chronicles. This was the Canon of the Jewish Church about A.D. 550.”

3 In the short space which elapsed between our Lord’s earthly Ministry and Josephus, no alteration can have taken place in the Canon.

[…]

xiv. The Canon of the New Testament. As re- gards the Books of the New Testament there is no dif- ference between the Church of England and any other branch of the Church in respect to the number of Books that are to be admitted into the Canon. “All the Books of the New Testament,” the Article declares, ” as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them Canonical,” and this statement is not followed by any list of Books, as in the case of the Old Testament and the Apocrypha. The consentient testimony of the Church from the earliest days is thus taken as the ground on which we accept the writings of the New Testament, and recognise their claim to form part of Holy Scripture. The early Church was specially qualified to give security for and to pronounce on the authenticity of the various Books. For

(i) In the first Age of the Church the Apostles were actually alive while the Sacred Books were in process of writing ;

(ii) Instead of being hidden away, these Books were publicly used1, and copies of them were multiplied everywhere ;

(iii) Owing to the constant intercourse between the various Churches, it was easy for each Church to know which were the authentic writings and which were not ;

(iv) The very schisms and divisions, which took place, made each Church a check upon the others, and thus increased the number of inde- pendent witnesses ;

1 Thus Justin Martyr, about A.D. 146, tells us that the Gospels, the “Memorabilia,” composed by the A- postles and their companions, were

publicly read on the Lord’s Day in the assemblies both in town and country. Just. Mart. Apol. i. 67.

I [O

(v) In the course of time Collections1 began to be drawn up of Books acknowledged as Apostolic and authoritative, and ” Versions ” or Transla- tions began to be made into many languages2.

xv. Early Versions. The oldest example, perhaps, of these Versions is the Peshitto or Syriac Version of the New Testament. It was probably made for the Syrian Church of Edessa and the neighbourhood about the middle of the second century. In its earliest form it seems to have contained all the Books of our New Testament Canon, with the exception of 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse3. This version has an especial interest because its language represents the vernacular spoken in Palestine at the time of the Apostles. Almost contemporary with this ancient Syriac Version was the old Latin Version, the Vetus Itala*. It was the Bible of the early African Churches, in the north of which country Christianity had been planted very early and had greatly flourished. It contained all the Books of our present Canon, except the Epistle to the Hebrews, James, and 2 Peter. The testimony of these Versions has a special value; because (a) they

1 Of such collections we have a remarkable specimen in the famous Muratorian Fragment on the Canon, so called as being first published by Muratori, A.D. 1740, from a MS. in the Ambrosian Library of Milan, which had belonged originally to the great Irish monastery of Bobbio. The date of the original, of which it is a copy, was between A.D. 160 — 170, and it probably represents the Canon in use among Western Churches at the time of its composition. It contains in its catalogue S. Luke and S. John’s Gospels, the Acts, thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, 1 and 2 John, Jude and the Apocalypse. It omits the Epistles of James, 3 John, 1 and 2 Peter, and

the Epistle to the Hebrews, which is due probably to the fragmentary and corrupt state of the MS., beginning, as it does, in the middle of a sentence referring to S. Mark’s Gospel. See Salmon’s Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 47 — 53; Westcott’s Bible in the Church, pp. 115,1 16.

represent the official and public approbation of Churches ; (b) they introduce no Apocryphal Book; (c) taken together they exclude no Book found in our present Canon except the second Epistle of S. Peter; (d) they show how early the need was felt and satisfied of extending to foreign Churches a knowledge of those Greek Apostolic writings, which were regarded as sacred and authoritative1.

xvi. The Testimony of Eusebius. We have not space to do more than allude to the quotations from the New Testament in the writings of the great Fathers of the Church in the East and the West, or to the results of the persecution of Diocletian in A.D. 3032, which, in spite of the surrender of the Sacred Books in many instances, ” left the African Churches in possession of a complete and pure New Testament.” We pass on to the important testimony of Eusebius, the historian of the early centuries of the Church. In a celebrated passage of his History (iii. 25) he arranges the sacred writings of the New Testament in three classes; (1) the Homologoumena3, or “Acknowledged Books”; (2) the Antilegomena*, or “Disputed Books”; (3) the Notha, or ” Spurious Books6.” This language illus- trates the great care and caution exercised in the matter of admitting Books into the Canon. Everyone, who dealt with the question, appealed to usage, tradition, and antiquity,

2 See Euseb. Hist. Ecd. viii. 1. first Epistle of S. Peter and of S. The decree for the confiscation of the John; (4) And with a query, the sacred Christian writings, which con- Apocalypse.

stituted an ingenious part of the perse- 4 The “Antilegomena” included the

cutor’s policy, defeated its own pur- Epistle of S. James, the second of

pose; it advertised to the whole S. Peter, S. Jude, and the second and

world the influence of the acknow- third Epistles of S. John,

ledged Christian Scriptures, and forced 6 These included (1) the Acts of

upon the attention of the Church Paul; (2) the Shepherd of Hernias;

their infinite superiority as compared (3) the Apocalypse of Peter; (4) the

with all other ecclesiastical writings. Epistle of Barnabas. See Westcott’s

but not to any definite decree. At length at the Synod of Laodicea A.D. 363, and at the still more important Council of Carthage A.D. 397, a decree was issued respecting the Books of the New Testament, and the question of the Canon, being now taken out of the domain of criticism, was settled by the authority of the Christian Church, and the contents of the New Testament, as we now have them, were formally accepted.

iii. The Apocrypha^.

xvii. The Apocryphal Books form part, as we have seen, of the sacred literature of the Alexandrian Jews and are found mingled with the Hebrew Scriptures in the ancient copies of the Septuagint. They are the product of the age subsequent to the Captivity, and had their origin partly in Babylonia, partly in Palestine and Egypt, and possibly in other countries. They belong to the last three centuries before Christ, when prophecy and direct Biblical Revelation had ceased. The New Testament writers, who frequently quote the Alexandrine Version, never make dogmatic use of these writings as Scripture, although they may be supposed to have been not unacquainted with the contents of some of them. The writers of the early

1 The word Apocrypha is derived from d?nS/cpu0os = hidden, or concealed. It is really a neuter adjective of the plural number, agreeing with Pifi\la., books, understood. The word awbicpv </>os occurs three times in the New Testament, Mark iv. ii; Luke viii. 17; Col. ii. 3. As applied to |3i/3\ia it denotes (i) the Hidden Books, (2) the Spurious or Forged Books, (3) the Unrecognised Books. “The Books that were at first hidden and so unrecog- nised, were regarded as undeserving to form part of the Sacred Canon. The ‘Apocrypha’ is popularly sup- posed to consist of Apocryphal ma-

terial, and ‘Apocryphal’ being com- monly identified with ‘supposititious’ or ‘fictitious,’ it is commonly ima- gined that the ‘Apocrypha’ litera- ture is unworthy of thoughtful study. The word ’ Apocrypha ’ originally de- noted writings of ‘secret character’ or ‘unknown authorship,’ but, from Jerome’s day, grew to be the mere label applied to the miscellaneous group of ‘ecclesiastical books’ that were read in the Churches, but were not included in the strict limits of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture.” From a paper of the Rev. Professor Ryle at the Exeter Church Congress, 1894.

H3

Church1 did not generally follow their example, and the influence of the Greek and Latin Versions, in which no difference was discernible between the Hebrew Books and the Alexandrine additions, naturally predisposed the Church in favour of their use.

xviii. The Latin Vulgate naturally did much to extend this use, and still more the conciliar recognition they first received at the third Synod of Carthage, a.d. 397. The Council of Trent established the acceptance as in- spired of all Books contained in the Vulgate Version, and declared them to be also of dogmatic authority. The Protestant communities unanimously agreed in accepting only the Hebrew Canon, as having real weight in esta- blishing matters of faith. The judgment, however, which they pronounced, was expressed in varied terms in the different Confessions. In the Lutheran symbols there is found no decided negative, though they do in fact declare the Canonical Books to be alone dogmatically binding2.

xix. The English Church, besides giving a list of the Apocryphal Books, appeals directly to the opinion of S. Jerome3, and concedes to them a ” use for example of life and instruction of manners,” but not for the establish- ment of doctrine. Hence while she has removed them

1 Even writers like Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Athanasius, who expressly declared their preference for the Hebrew Canon, quote the Books of the Apocrypha as Canonical or Ecclesiastical Scripture. The Homi- lies make frequent quotations from the Apocrypha. Old Hugh Latimer appeals to the examples of life pre- sented by the “Lady Judith” and the “Lady Susanna.”

2 “Libri Apocryphi, quos quidem ecclesia legere et ex iis documenta de rebus cum lihris Canonicis consentien-

tibus desumere potest ; at nequaquam ea ipsorum vis et auctoritas est, ut ex ullo testimonio ipsorum aliquod dogma …certo constitui possit.” Con/. Gall. iii. 4; Con/. Be/g. vi.

3 Hieron. in Libros Salomonis. “Sicut ergo Judith et Tobit et Mac- cabrcorum Libros legit quidem Ec- clesia, sed inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit, sic et hrcc duo volumina (i.e. Libros Sapientix et Ecclesiastici) legit ad aedificationem plebis, non ad auctoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogma- turn confirmandam.”

M.

from the Sunday Services1, and forbidden them to be quoted as of dogmatic authority, yet she regards them as of high value2 for the information they contain3, for the respect they have received from the earliest ages, for the important links which they supply between the Old and New Testaments, and for the light they throw upon several customs and circumstances alluded to in the Gospels and Epistles*.

1 On the question of reading the Apocrypha in Church see Hooker Eccl. Pol. v. 70, 7, and the quotation he gives from Rufinns in Symb. A post. 38. Passages from Tobit and Wis- dom are quoted as Scripture in the Homilies, and sentences from Tobit are still retained in our Communion Office. According to the New Lec- tionary though passages in Ecclesias- ticus, Wisdom, and Baruch are ap- pointed to be read between Oct. 27 and Nov. 18 and on certain Saints’ Days, The Story of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon, and other parts have been eliminated. It is to be noticed that the English Church includes among the Apocrypha 1, 2 Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasses, which are not reckoned in the Canon by the Council of Trent.

2 It is to be noticed that the Article assumes the Apocrypha to be amongst the “Biblia” or Scriptures by refer- ring to them as “the other Books,” only carefully distinguishing them as the Non-Canonical or Ecclesiastical Scriptures from the Canonical Scrip- tures, and explaining the proper au-

thority of each kind of Sacred Writ- ing.

4 The Swiss war of Liberty and the Rise of the Dutch Republic are alone comparable for pure patriotism and religious fervour, with the great struggle of the Maccaboean War. Without some knowledge of that struggle, that triumph of Judaism and repulse of Hellenism, the literature, the thought, the history of the Jews in the following century are unin- telligible. See Article ” Maccabees ” in Smith’s Diet, of the Bible.

Notes

• Hard wick, History of the Articles, p. 99, ed. 1859.
• Winer’s Confessions of Christen- dom, p. 37.
• So Origen expressly renders the clause : iratsa ypa<pr\ Btbirveuaros otaa, tlxpeXifios iara>, Horn, in Josue xx. So Wiclif ” every (all ?) Scripture, onspirid of God, is,” &c.
• Bp Browne on the Articles, pp. 132 — 134. Our Lord did not absolutely re-
• Of the way in which the Apostles taught we have two examples (i) in the preaching of S. Peter before Cor- nelius (Acts x. 37—43). and (ii) in that of S. Paul in the Synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts xiii. 23 — 39). See Westcott’s Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, pp. 163 — 165.
• The insistence upon eyewitness- ship of the Resurrection as a condition of Apostolate and the recognition of its value as a quality of evidence are most marked in the New Testament, and it is noteworthy how much of the Apostles’ Creed, a developed form of the original Norma Pmdicationis, is expressive of belief in facts the reality of which can be assured by the testimony of eyewitnesses. Comp. Acts i. 21, 22 ; xxvi. 26 ; 1 Cor. ix. 1 ; 1 John i. 1 — 4. See Lumby’s History of the Creeds, pp. 6, 7, ed. 1887.
• ” There was no such thing with the Apostles as a previous arrange- ment and distribution of labour in their writings. Every one wrote as the particular occasion required, to supply the want of personal inter- course, to confirm what had been taught already by word of mouth, to answer questions, resolve doubts, de- nounce errors and evil customs, in short to do the very thing which %vas best and oftenest done by word of mouth. Paul attached greater weight to his oral teaching, to sight and speech, than to his writings.” Comp. Rom. i. II 1 1 Thess. iii. 10. Dollinger, First Age of the Church, i. pp. 202, 203.
• See Gore’s Roman Catholic Claims, pp. 58, 59.
• ” Scripturae quidem perfects sunt, quippe a Verbo Dei et Spiritu Ejus dictae,” Lib. ii. c. 47.
• “Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem, quae mihi et Factorem manifestat et facta.. ..Si non est scriptum, timeat Vos illud, adjicientibus aut detrahen- tibus destinatum.” Adv. Hermo- genem, c. 22.
• Horn. ix. in Ep. ad Coloss.
• “In eis enim quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt, inveniuntur ilia omnia qua; continent fidem, moresque vivendi.” De Doctrina Christ. Lib. ii. c. 9.
• See Palmer on the Church, ii. pp. 10 ff.
• Bp Browne on the Articles, pp. 143, 144; Dr Pusey On the Rule of Faith, University Sermons. While the Anglican Church accepts a Herme- neutical and Ecclesiastical Tradition “she seeks to protect the faithful against the enforcement on them, as requisite to salvation, of individual opinions, which being without the authentication of Church authority, have consequently no Scriptural au- thority. Any accretive development, that would add to the substance of the faith, would be condemned by this Article, but it would not condemn the enunciation by legitimate authority of any doctrine deduced from the ori- ginal deposit.” Bp Forbes, pp. 98, 99.
• For the word Canon see Intro- duction to the Creeds, p. 10, «.; West- cott’s Bible in the Church, p. 1 10, ».
• See Bp Browne on the Articles, p. 148. “The Babylonian Talmud recounts the same Books that we have now; viz. in the Law the Five Books of Moses; among the Pro- phets, Joshua and Judges, Samuel and Kings, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Isaiah and the twelve minor Prophets ; in the Chethubim Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther,
• See Bp Browne on the Articles, p. 165.
• See Salmon’s Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 515, 528; Pro- fessor Fisher, Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief, p. 184.
• It was the Peshitto or “Simple Version” of the West, habitually used by Tertullian. Westcott’s Bible in the Church, p. 128.
• See The Cambridge Companion to (i) The Four Gospels and Acts; (2) the Bible, p. 30. Fourteen Epistles of S. Paul; (3) The
• The “Homologoumena” include Bible in the Church, p. 131.
• The Apocryphal Books “set be- fore the Church in vivid pictures the working of the old Dispensation throughout the Jewish world at times when there was ‘no prophet more.’ They witness alike to what Judaism could do and to w hat it could not do. They prove by contrast that the Books of the Hebrew Canon, as a whole, are generically distinct from the or- dinary religious literature of the Jews ; and establish more clearly than any- thing else the absolute originality of the Gospel.” Westcott’s Bible in the Church, p. 291.