Mt^ASlI^; He*' v^^.^l'^^^i-'.i':i'.'■^^%'/,*U/ t^' «.<''>'' '-' 35 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY GIFT OF Alfred C. Barnes Cornell University Library BS1700 .D23 Use of the Apocrypha in the Christian ch olin 924 029 308 222 Cornell University Library The original of tliis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029308222 Cf)e ^se of tfie fpocrppfja in t{)e Christian Cfiurtf)* BY WILLIAM HEAFOED DAUBNEY, B.D., JEEEMlil PRIZEMAN, 1873, RECTOR OP LEASINGHAM, DIOCESE OP LINCOLN. LONDON: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, CAMBEIDGE UNIVEESITY PRESS WAHEHOUSB, AVE MAEIA LANE. ffilaagoto: 50, WELLINGTON STEEET. 1900 [All Bights reserved.} E.V. Cambtilige ; PRINTED BY J. AND C. P. CLAY, AT THE DNITEBSITY PBESS. DEDICATED TO The Eev. B. BLENKIRON, M.A. vicae op little coates, with gratitude, eespect and affection. Eoolus. li. XT'" (Cairo Genizah MS.). PREFACE. The following pages have been written in the hope of supporting the position taken up by the Vlth Article of Religion with regard to the Apo- cryphal books. The negative side of that position seems to have been far too much insisted upon ; the positive side far too little. The results may be perceived in the omission of these books from the great majority of English Bibles printed in the present century, and in the disproportionately small use made of the Apocrypha for the purposes the Article specifies. That such was not the practice of the Church in the early centuries, nor formerly of the Church of England, either before or after the Reformation, it is the aim of this Essay to shew. There are now distinct indications that the neglect of "the other books " is on the wane. An extremely low estimate of them can only be a passing phase of feeling. VI PREFACE. produced by temporary causes ; for there is that in the Apocrypha which may be surely trusted eventually to re-assert its power, spiritual as well as literary. My thanks are due to Dr Sinker, Librarian ot Trinity College, Cambridge, as well as to others, for many kind helps and suggestions. W. H. D. Lbasingham Rectory, March 26, 1900. CONTENTS. PART I. ANCIENT USB. Chap. I. Introduction 1 „ II. New Testament Use 12 „ III. Use by Eaely Christian Writers . . 32 „ IV. Action of Councils 41 „ V. Catalogues op Scripture by Individuals . 50 PART 11. MODERN USB. „ VI. English and Foreign Use at Reformation Period 56 ,, VII. Book of Common Prayer and Homilies . 63 „ VIII. Use by Divines, chiefly English . . 71 „ IX. Popular Use 94 „ X. Conclusion 106 Index I. Names of Persons Ill Index II. Texts referred to 115 PART I. ANCIENT USE. CHAPTEE I. Intro&uctton. The English term 'Apocrypha' is probably de- rived not directly from the Greek, but through the Latin word ' apocryphus.' This is itself borrowed by simple transliteration from the Greek adjective d-rro- Kpycpov. This word is a perfectly classical one, though not perhaps of very frequent use. Its meaning of 'hidden away,' 'recondite' does not appear to have been subject to any material variations. The phrase of Socrates " OvBev diroKpvcpov BoKei fioi elvat, " (Xen. Mem. III. V. 14) may be taken as containing a fair speci- men of its classical use. The adjective ' apocryphus ' appears to have been imported into the Latin lan- guage in post-classical times. It was in ecclesiastical writings, however, both in Greek and Latin, that the word secured its widest currency ; and it is in their use of it that its principal D. 1 2 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. interest lies. This interest far exceeds any with which classical authors invested it. The earliest appearance of d-n-oKpv^o^ in ecclesi- astical Greek is in the LXX. version. In Deut. xxvii. 15 it is there used as a translation of iDP. It occurs many other times in the later books of that version, notably in the 'Apocrypha' itself, especially in Ecclesi- asticus, where in xlii. 19 and xlviii. 25 it is used as an equivalent of the same Hebrew root. In one case, Ecclus. xxxix. 3, dTr6Kpv5)v," where "apocryphorum" appears in the Latin version. In the 2nd section of the same chapter the form 'apocryphon' appears, as if the word was not yet completely Latinized : in this case it is not applied to a book. TertuUian in his de Pudicitia c. X. uses 'apocrypha' in connection with 'scriptura'.' After this the term is of very frequent occurrence in ecclesiastical writings, in both languages, to signify more or less unauthorized books. To a considerable extent it corresponded with the neo-hebraic use of the word Dn-iaa in so far as their authority was dis- puted, but with D'JiV'n in so far as they were decisively rejected. ' The passage is quoted in Action of Councils, p. 43. INTRODUCTION. 3 'A7ro«/3u0o? is a word of fairly fixed meaning, not departing from its original sense of 'hidden away' in one form or another. Yet although it underwent but little change in its own meaning, it came to be em- ployed in a variety of applications in the Christian Church. So far as it was used with reference to religious books, Bp Lightfoot {Igrmt. i. p. 339) dis- tinguishes three stages in the process of its gradual transfer from one class of uncanonical writings to another. Firstly, it was taken to designate those books which were 'held in reserve and studied privately,' but not read in churches (Orig. Ep. ad Afric. 9). Secondly, it came to denote books affected by heretics, and carried with it the ideas of 'spurious' and 'heretical ' (Iren. i. xx. 1) ; and Thirdly, it was applied to non-canonical books whether genuine or spurious (Jer. Prol. Gal. 1). It may well be thought, however, that these three 'stages' in the application of the word frequently overlapped one another, contemporary or nearly con- temporary writers applying it differently. In evi- dence of this it is to be noted that the references given by Bp Lightfoot in support of his second stage of use are to writers, in the main, of an earlier date than those quoted in support of the first stage, which he describes as " its earliest usage." But to whatever applications the word was turned, its main acceptation of 'hidden away' continued through all. Apocryphal books were those which had something of concealment about them, either as to (1) origin, or as to (2) the manner of their perusal, 1—2 4 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. or as to their (3) exclusion from the canon of Scrip- ture, or as to the (4) secrecy of their contents. The books which, on one or other of these ac- counts, have been called 'Apocrypha' by Christian writers are very numerous. They form an immense mass of writings, and are, as might be expected, very heterogeneous in character. Some are of high re- ligious interest and of reverent tone ; others are markedly lacking in these qualities': some possess much literary value, while others have, in this respect, little beyond their antiquity to commend them: some are distinctly heretical, while others are perfectly Catholic '\ Out of this mixed collection of apocryphal writings a certain number gradually emerged. They obtained a more permanent footing and a higher standing than the rest. Probably their early embodiment in the LXX. version of the Bible had much to do with their wide and lasting acceptance, both in the Eastern and the Western Churches. With three possible exceptions, ii. (iv.) Esdras, Baruch and the Prayer of Manasses, they are probably all of pre-Christian date. Yet, in spite of this, they have secured a hold on Christian veneration ' Is it to such books that Hen. VIII. refers in his Order to Convocation in Feb. 1543? He directs "that all mass books, antiphoners and portuises...be castigated from all manner of... apocryphas, feigned legends, superstitious oraisons &c." For no serious attempt seems to have been made at that time to exclude the regular apocrypha. 2 A peculiar account of 'Apocrypha' is given in Beeves' Bible (Loud. 1802) as "something that is removed far from the Crypt, or sacred repository of the ark, where the canonical books, the authority of which was not doubted, were laid up." INTRODUCTION. 5 which has never been so continuously and persistently granted to the apocrypha written by Christians. Some of these last, such as the Shepherd of Hermas, the epistles of Barnabas and Clement of Eome, won strong local and temporary recognition ; but even the most popular or the most valuable of Christian apocryphal works never secured anything approaching to the wide diffusion and lasting esteem which, rightly or wrongly, has fallen to the lot of what, from their position in the LXX. and Vulgate, have been termed ' the deutero-canonical books.' The ail-but universal acquaintance with them, in one position or another, on the part of every branch of the historic Church, is a remarkable fact. For, d priori, it might reason- ably have been supposed, that at least as worthy a standing would have been accorded to Christian authors as to these works, which were certainly ex- cluded from the Hebrew canon, however nearly one or two of them may have risen to the standard of possible admission. But events took another course. Such Christian writings as were at certain times and places deemed near to the entry of the N. T. canon, little by little fell away into obscurity; but these Jewish additions to the 0. T. rose rather than fell as time went on, until in one large portion of the Church most of them were eventually decreed to be canonical. They were felt to have a value beyond other apocryphal writings, and their popularity has stood the test of time : while those books by Christian authors, which might once have been termed their rivals, have sunk into an obscurity into which few but students penetrate. In some cases the reason is 6 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. apparent. No one, for instance, can read a chapter of one of the spurious gospels and then a chapter out of the 0. T. apocrypha, without feeling that the former, notwithstanding their Christian profession, stand on a platform of tone and thought, as well as of literary merit, far lower than the latter. Much of what is original in them continually shocks us by its coarse- ness, absurdity or irreverence ; and this apparently without any intention to do so on the part of their authors. But with those books which form the excess or the LXX. over the Hebrew Canon, the case is differ- ent, as the Church of Christ has long discerned. These books correspond very nearly with those 14 books styled 'Apocrypha,' and printed between the 0. and N. Testaments, in complete copies of the English Authorized Version. This seems to be their best position, for they contain matter connecting the two Testaments, and, with three doubtful exceptions, noted above, were certainly composed in the interval between the latest writer of the O.T. and the earliest of the New. Three of these books, I. and IT. (III. and IV.) Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasses, are still regarded by the Roman Church as Apocrypha \ and are printed in her authorized copies of the Vulgate after the N. T. The others at the 4th session of the Council of Trent she decreed to be canonical, and inserts them amongst the books of the O.T. Why the three excluded books were not canonized 1 She occasionally uses them in her services : e.g. the Introit for Whit-Tuesday in the Roman Missal is from II. Esd. ii. INTRODUCTION. 7 with the rest is not clearly known. The reason frequently given ^ is, that the non-existence or the absence of Greek originals militated against their admission. But though the Greek of II. Esd. is wanting (except a few verses quoted in the Epistle of Barnabas, and by Clement of Alexandria), that of I. Esd. and of the Prayer of Manasses has never been lost. The former was in print in the Aldine edition fifty years before the Tridentine decree ; the latter in Stephen's Vulgate of 1540 (Paris)''. Some other in- fluence must therefore have been at work. The separation of the fourteen books, which the A. V. styles Apocrypha, from the other apocryphal writings, may not be a strictly scientific line of cleavage : but the authority of use has made it, in some respects, a very convenient term for a definite body of books. Some indeed of those excluded from this collection of Apocrypha par excellence (such as the Psalms of Solomon and the Book of Enoch) may seem to have considerable claims for admission. But the verdict of time and of the Church has, to this extent, gone against them. Without being denied a proper value, there has fallen away from them that approach to public recognition which, in varying degrees, they once obtained. In our Vlth Art. of Religion these same 14 books are expressly recognized and a list of their names is ' Bissell, Apocr. p. 70 : Lord A. Hervey, Smith's Bib. Diet. I. 576 a. ^ v. Dr E. Nestle's Septuagintastudien in. p. 8 (Stuttgard, 1899). He states that the first printed Septuagint to contain the Prayer of Manasses in Greek was Frick's of 1697. 8 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. given ^. They are spoken of as "the other books V' and are treated in paragraphs between those on the 0. and N. Testaments. But the application of the term ' apocrypha ' to these books in particular is by no means an English pecuharity. Tlie American writers, Bissell and Porter, adopt it very nearly : the former in his Apocryplia of the 0. y.', and the latter in his article ' Apocrypha ' in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. He writes " Both the collection and the use of the word Apocrypha as its title, are distinctively Protestant, though having roots in the history of the O.T. canon." And the German authors, Schiirer and Nestle, make use of the word in the same limited acceptation, the former in his History of the Jewish People * ; the latter in UrteoBt und Vbersetzungen der Bihel^, where he finds "die sogenannten Apokryphen" (p. 61), after- wards abbreviated into simply "die Apokryphen" (p. 140 et passim), a convenient title for these books ^ Dr Martensen, the Dane, uses 'Apocrypha' in the 1 DrB. C. S. Gibson {XXXIX. Arts. ed. 2, 1898, p. 277) defines Apocrypha as "the title of that collection of books which the Church of England declines to regard as canonical, but reads in the church for example &c.'' 2 It is a remarkable fact that the word 'Apocrypha' itself occurs nowhere in the Articles or Prayer-Book, although laro-e use is made of the apocryphal books. 3 Edinb. (no date) pref. 1880. * Eng. trans. (Clark) ii. iii. 10, ed. 1894. 5 Leipzig, 1897. ' So Eautzsch in his Apokryphen und Psetidepigraphen keeps the former word for oui- Apocrypha and the latter for extra-apocryphal books. INTRODUCTION. 9 same sense, v. quotation in Part II. p. 60. As such it will be used in these pages. What does our Vlth Art. say of these books? It says "The other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine." Here we have a statement that the Church agrees with St Jerome in his estimate of these books, given in the form of two assertions, an affirma- tive one and a negative one. The affirmative takes precedence: "The Church doth read" them is posi- tively stated, for pattern of conduct to Christians, and to help in the formation of their character. Then this assertion is in one particular limited by the negative one which follows in the second place, "but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine." They are more for practical than dogmatic purposes : doctrines must be established from the canon. The passage of St Jerome referred to is found in the latter part of his Prcefatio in libros Salomonis. Of Judith, Tobit and Maccabees he says " libros legit quidem Ecclesia, sed eos inter canonicas scripturas non recipit ; sic et hsec duo volumina legat^ ad sedi- ficationem plebis, non ad auctoritatem ecclesiastico- rum dogmatum confirmandam." The " duo volumina ' are Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, whose claims to Sa- lomonic authorship he has just discussed and rejected. The words therefore which St Jerome uses of two books of the Apocrypha, our Church takes as express- ing her view of them all. ' Legit, Cod. Amiat. 10 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. It is somewhat strange that the second and negative assertion of the Article has greatly over- shadowed in popular practice the first and the afiir- mative one. Many who are ready enough to wield the authority of the negative clause as a weapon wherewith to depreciate the Apocrypha, keep a dis- creet silence as to the positive one\ or even attack it as "dangerous and unprofitable'." Perhaps the oft-quoted words of Richard Cecil, one of the fathers of the evangelical school, may partially account for this : " Man is a creature of extremes. The middle path is generally the wise path ; but there are few wise enough to find it. Because Papists have made too much of some things, Protestants have made too little of them.... The Papist put his Apocrypha into the Canon : the Protestant will scarce regard it as an ancient record^" Dr Streane" suggests that "the dubious reputation which adheres to the adjective ' apocryphal ' to some extent aflects the kindred substantive V Still in the face of the constant use of the Apocrypha from the earliest Christian era to the present time — a use consistently maintained by the 1 B.g. J. P. Boultbee, Expos, of XXXIX. Articles, Lond. 1873. ' R. L. Cloquet, Expos, of XXXIX. Articles, Lond. 1885, p. 115. 3 Remains, p. 364, quoted in Bp Browne's Expos, of XXXIX. Articles, Lond. 1871, p. 185. * Age of the Maccabees, Lond. 1898, p. 96. ^ A. Coker Adams {Clergyman's Mag. Nov. 1891, p. 222), however, discovers a favourable meaning in the word : " it should set us searching for hidden treasures of sacred lore." INTRODUCTION. 11 rule, at any rate, of the English Church — these sug- gestions do not seem fully to account for the common neglect ^ '■ An astonishing instance of the suppression of the apocryphal books is afforded by a work in two volumes published in 1844 entitled "The LXX. Version of the O.T. according to the Vatican text, translated into English by Sir L. C. L. Brenton, Bart." With the exception of some of the additions to Esther, the removal of which would have caused (presumably) too great a laceration of the text, the Apocrypha is wholly omitted, sub silentio! It would appear that the translator was ignorant of the existence of such books in " the Vatican text." Yet surely this was impossible. CHAPTER II. i^efo ®£Stam£nt Wise. Let us examine the use which has been made of the Apocrypha in the past. First, in the New Testament. Here we do not find any direct quotations — as indeed we do not find any direct quotations from some books in the canon. But we find many allusions and reminiscences or the like recalling the phraseology of the apocryphal books. Such occur too often to be all of them accidental coincidences. And when we consider at how early a date' the apocryphal books were incorporated with the LXX., of which the N.T. writers indisputably made use, the improbabiUty, even from external evidence, of their being unacquainted with those books becomes very great. In both thought and language, the N.T. appears to have received an impress from the apocryphal books. Prof. E. Kautzsch in his Apokryphen u. Pseudepigraphen des A.T? ex- pressly says : " Herrscht angesichts der ausserordent- lichen Wichtigkeit dieser ganzen Litteratur fiir das Studium des Neuen Testaments langst nur eine Stimme ' : and again, " das N.T. zwar kein ausdriick- 1 See what Is said on this post pp. 28, 29. " Freiburg im Breisgau, 1S99, Vorwort p. iii., Einleitung p. xii. NEW TESTAMENT USE. 13 liches Citat aus den sogen. Apokryphen, wohl aber allerlei Anspielungen an dieselben entlialt." Our Blessed Lord Himself did not disdain to employ them. Wisdom says of herself (Ecclus. xxiv. 21), "They that eat me shall yet be hungry; and they that drink me shall yet be thirsty." It is difficult to suppose that our Lord was not thinking of these words when He said (St John vi. 35), " He that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst." The wisdom known to the Son of Sirach was so good that men would long to eat and drink of her again ; but Christ inserts the negatives, not to contradict, but to raise the thought into a higher sphere, signifying that His Wisdom was all-satisfying, and would leave no longing in the souls of those whom He fed. For a similar insertion of a negative, of. St Matt. vi. 19 with Ecclus. xxlx. 12. Again, His order to the seventy, " Bat such things as are set before you " (Luke x. 8), looks very like the direction to a guest in Ecclus. xxxi. 16, " Eat, as becometh a man, those things which are set before thee." Again, Ecclus. xxviii. 2 is unmistakably an antici- pation of a petition in the Lord's Prayer, " Forgive thy neighbour the hurt that he hath done unto thee, so shall thy sins also be forgiven when thou prayest." Edersheim {Comment, in loc.) regards this as a " Christian alteration " : but on no stronger ground than the diificulty of finding a parallel sentiment in Rabbinic writings. Ecclus. xxxii. (xxxv.) 24 (19) is in close agreement with Christ's words in St Matt. xvi. 27 — " e(B9 avraTroBw avOpcairq) Kara Ta<; Trpa^et? avTOV," and " aTToSmcret 14 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. eKaa-TO) Kara Trjv irpa^iv avTOV." Prov. xxiv. 12 and Ps. Ixii. 13, sometimes given as the passages alluded to, are somewhat less close, having epyov instead of TTpa^K. It has been suggested by Mr R. G. Moulton' that two parables of Christ are " called up " (to use Mr Moulton's own phrase) by two passages of Ecclesi- asticus. He apparently means the parables of the Unmerciful Servant and of the Rich Fool. The passage quoted in support of the first (xxviii. 2 sq.) teaches no doubt the principle of forgiving our fellows, if we would be forgiven ourselves ; yet it reqmres some straining, I think, to see in it the basis of our Lord's parable. But the other instance affords a much closer parallel. In xi. 18 sq. we find a far nearer resemblance, not only of principle but of outline and even of words. We find the same well-provided man, making the same self-satisfied, self-comforting soliloquy, proposing to himself the assurance of carnal ease ; but forgetful (as we are ' reminded in both cases) of death, which was coming to disperse his goods to others. The words used too, ayaOd, avdiravcri';, (fidyo/Jtai, ttXovtwv, all meet with their parallels in St Luke xii. 16 sq. Cf also St Luke xii. 20, with Wisdom xv. 8 (end). It is difficult to read Ecclus. xix. 21 without being reminded of our Lord's parable of the Two Sons. But the Gk MS. authority for this verse is small. Another passage in Ecclesiasticus which reminds us of our Lord's words is the concluding section of 1 Modern Reader's Bible, Ecclesiasticus, p. xxxii. NEW TESTAMENT USE. 15 the author's prayer (li. 23 sq.). There is much in this which strikes one as similar to His teaching as recorded in St Matthew xi. 28 — 30. And this re- semblance is not merely in the ideas, abridged and strengthened, but also in some of the words employed. In both passages the disciples are exhorted to come TT/Do? fj,e, and the words 'yjrvxC'l vfidov, ^vy6epei, are the words used ; and both writers in the succeeding verses proceed to speak of foods under the same title, ^pco/Mara. There is a remarkable correspondence between the Vulgate of Judith viii. 25 and I. Cor. x. 9, 10. The exact phrase, "et a serpentibus perie- runt," occurs in both passages, as well as the words "exterminator," " murmuratio," and "murmurare." The Greek is quite different. 1 In like manner the li&ikvyfia t^s iprjudaeais of Matt. xxiv. 15 and Mk xiii. 14 had already Vjoen quoted from Dan. ix. 27 in I. Mace. i. 54, which agrees with the N.T. in having eprj/ioio-eas instead of iprifuicreuiv. But the singular occurs in the LXX. of Dan. xi. 31 and xii. 11 and in Theodotion's version of the latter verse also. NEW TESTAMENT USE. 19 In Eph. vi. 14 we read evBva-dfievot tov BwpaKa r^9 hiKaioavvrjt;, and in Wisd. v. 18, ivhva-erai dmpaKa hiKaiocTvviqv (-979 in Cod. Sin.), The collocation of TriaTi^ and TrpaoTr}^ in Gal. v. 22, 23 and in Ecclus. i. 27 and xlv. 4 is noteworthy. Dean Plumptre, in Bishop Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers, writes on II. Cor. t. 4, " The whole passage is strikingly parallel to Wisd. ix. 15." In commenting on Rom. i. 20, Bishop Lightfoot' says, " All which follows in this chapter shows a re- mai'kable correspondence with Wisd. xiii. — xv., a passage which St Paul must have had in his mind." Rom. i. 21, 23 has also verbal correspondences with Wisd. xi. 15. Cornelius Jansen, Bishop of Ypres, in the intro- duction to his commentary on Wisdom (Paris, 1661), says that the Apostle Paul seems to allude to phrases of this book, " ut perspicuiun est ex Rom. xi. 34 et Heb. xi. 5 coUatis ad Sap. ix. 17 et iv. 10." The latter of these parallels seems more convincing than the former. The phrase " treasures of wisdom " in Col. ii. 3 appears to be borrowed from Ecclus. i. 25 and xli. 12 : in the latter the Heb. only contains the phrase, and has a various reading, apparently paraphrased by the Greek translator. The words Orjo-avpol a-n-oKpv^ot are common to this same N.T. passage and I. Mace. i. 23. There is a strong similarity of idea, and to some extent of phraseology, between I. Tim. vi. 19 and Tob. iv. 9 ; as also between iv. 17 (end) of the same epistle ^ Notes on Epistles of St Paul, 1895, p. 252. 20 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. and Esther xiv. 13, 14 ; between I. Thess. vi. 37 (cf. Jas. T. 8) and Ecclus. Ti. 37 {a-T7)pi^a rrjv KaphLav) ; between II. Thess. iii. 11 and Ecclus. iii. 23 ; between I. Cor. vii. 19 and Ecclus. xxxii. 23 (jrjpvo-K ivroKcav), and between I. Thess. i. 3 and I. Mace. xii. 11 (aSta- Xel,'7rTW<;.../j,i/j,v7](7K6/j,eOa v/J.ci)V.../J,vr]fj,ovev€tv dB6\a)v). In Ecclus. 1. 10 (Heb. only) we have the wild olive branches of Rom. xi. 21, 24. In Acts xvii. 23, St Paul's words " to. ae^da-fiara ifiaiv evpov," applied by him to idols at Athens, call to mind Daniel's derisive saying in Bel and the Dragon (Theod. 27), after the overthrow of the former and the explosion of the latter, "I'Sere tcl ae^acr^ara vfiayv." Compare also Acts xvii. 30, in the same speech of St Paul, with Wisd. xi. 23. A similarity has also been traced between Acts XX vi. 24 and Wisd. v. 4, the word fj,avt,a being in both passages applied to the godly, and in those passages only. MaLverat,, however, occurs in a similar connec- tion in St John x. 20. In II. Pet. ii. 13 and Ecclus. xiv. 16 there is the Same combination of the ideas of diraTrj and Tpv(j)i] ; and in iii. 9 of the same epistle and Ecclus. (Gk) xxxii. 22 (xxxv. 18 A.V.) there is strong similarity of phrases. The Epistle to the Hebrews in xii. 23 has Trvev- jxaTa BiKUicov in common with the Song of the Three, 86 (64). Once more in Heb. i. 3 and in Wisd. vii. 26^ occurs the unusual word d'Travryaa-fia, in connection 1 "The similarity here is too close to be accidental," Deane, W. J., Wisdom, Oxf. 1881, p. 36. NEW TESTAMENT USE. 21 with the divine glory. Both passages in which it occurs ("and it occurs in these alone) are among the most sublime in the Bible, treating of the manifesta- tion of God's glory to man, in the one case through a personified Wisdom, and in the other through the Incarnate Son. "When," wrote Dr Liddon {Bamp. Led.), " He is termed the Son of God, or the Son, the full sense of that term is drawn out in language adopted, as it seems, from the Book of Wisdom." This is perhaps the best known of all the New Testament references to the Apocrypha, and the translators of the Authorized Version inserted a marginal reference in Hebrews to Wisdom ; but this, with other references to the apocryphal books, has been in modern Bibles improperly expunged, as Matt, xxvii. 43, to Wisd. ii. 15, 16\ These objection- able omissions were made after the custom arose of publishing Bibles without the Apocrypha. These apparently profess to be what they are not, entire copies of the Authorized Version ; just as, recently, books have been issued by the Queen's printers, pro- fessing to be "The Book of Common Prayer," yet omitting all that follows after the Communion Service except the Psalms. Plainly, the references to the Apocrypha told an inconvenient tale of the use which the Church intended should be made of it ; so, either from dissenting influence without, or from prejudice within the Church, these references disappeared from the margin. Later on, in the Epistle to the Hebrews 1 Dr Scrivener in his Introduction to the Cambridge Para- graph Bible calls this proceeding "an unwarrantable licence" (p. Ivi.). 22 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. (xi. 35—7), there is a clear allusion to the terrible martyrdoms of Eleazar and of the seven brethren and their mother related in II. Mace. vi. and vii. The word in Heb. xi. 35, rendered "tormented," is a peculiar one {TVfji'iravi^ai), translated by Alford " broken on the wheel," and is used here in reference to the TVjjLTravov, in the account of Eleazar's martyrdom in Maccabees, which the Dean does not hesitate to assert is the case especially intended'. Also the word for " cruel mockings " in verse 36 is peculiar to this verse and 2 Mace. vii. 7. Others of the deeds and suflFerings enumerated are also based upon the Maccabean history. In this case likewise a marginal reference to II. Mace, has been illicitly suppressed''. Another passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews (xii. 12), usually deemed a quotation from Isaiah XXXV. 3, is yet more closely paralleled by Ecclus. xxv. 23, at least verbally {irapeLfievaf, Heb. and Ecclus., a.vei,fieva<; Is.). Kautzsch in loe. says the expres- sions are taken from LXX., though not verbally, and adds " wogegen Heb. xii. 12 mit der Stelle hier genau hiniibereinstimmt." The phrase tottov fiera- voiaa> and TTotfirjv in reference to the Divine Shepherd. One more instance from the New Testament of Apocryphal knowledge in its writers. St John in his first epistle (iii. 2) uses the well-remembered words "We shall see him as he is." In Ecclus. xliii. 31^ we read, "Who hath seen him that he might tell us? and who can magnify him as he is?" Here the sentence is indeed broken, and the idea of magnifying inserted, which St John omits ; but the same verb for ' seeing ' is used in a different tense ; and both verses conclude alike, word for word, with aiirov /cadai<; ecJTiv as applied to God''. There is a singular correspondence between Pilate's words iu St Matt, xxvii. 24, " 'A^cod? elfii, diro rov uLfiaTO'i Tovrov," and Susannah 46, in Theodotion's version, "'A^tuo? iyoo diro tov acfiaTo<; TavTrjf," on which the A.V. is based. But Theodotion may have been in- fluenced by the Gospel, and Pilate seems an unlikely person to quote from the apocryphal Daniel in a moment of excitement. Moreover the MSS. A and Q read Ka6ap6o'S jUCTaXXaTTft) ^vBilio p.eri'iriiTa ya/JLeo) p.iTpLUl'S yvrj(TLOs |U,-t;K€Tl yvr/a-iois j«.tp.eo/iai 8)7/*iowp-yos vo/AtX'J 26 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHBISTIAN CHURCH. vovOecria vvfTcria oorjyos oBoiTTopia ■rrapovaia ' TrepiXiLirui' irepiKJipoviOi ■7rpe(TPvTepiov piaVVVfJLL rj fTKrjvo'i (TKOTreo) TKvjiaXov cnrfipa cnrtXou) (T7rovoat(i><; (TTCLOiOS a-TpaTivjxa. poavvrj Ta.)(a TtKix-qpiov TYjXlKOVTO^ Trfp-qcTi'; viravTaiji Vin^p€T£it) viroypafjifjios VTro^wvvv/j.i VTTOKplCri^ virofjivyjcri'; i\dSe\L\av6pTriXopov'; (jivXaKL^ui y^iipoypa^ov Xprip.aTLcriJLO'i 1 Occurs in A of Neh. ii. 6. ' Occurs in A of II. Chron. xxxiv. 21. NEW TESTAMENT USE. 27 HevrriKoa-Tr], used by itself as if it were a noun in I. Cor. xvi. 8, is first found so used in II. Mace. xii. 32 : and in the same book, xiii. 4, we have the title /SaatXei)? Twv /SacriXiaiv applied to God which is borrowed in Rev.xvii. 14,xix. 16. (Cf. I. Tim. vi. 5'.) "The writers of the N.T. have adopted it and given it the highest possible consecration." (Canon Eawlinson, in loc.) So much for instances of the N.T. use of the Apocrypha. I think these ought to be enough (though a variety of others have been detected) to convince us that the N.T. writers had some acquaintance with the Apocrypha. Even if the coincidences had been with classical writings, with which, from any other information we possessed of their reading, they might or might not have been familiar, a strong presumption would be raised of their acquaintance and familiarity with such writings. But when we remember that, on grounds of religion and locality alone, the im- probability is extreme of their non-acquaintance with the Apocryphal books, the conclusion cannot, I think, be avoided that they both read them and made use of them, as good after their kind — not indeed on a level with the Hebrew Canon, but still holding beneath it their own privileged position. This view is con- firmed by the fact that though employing these books for religious purposes, they do not name them, or call them rj rypaipij'. The very early date', too, at which the 1 ^aa-iKfiis rav ^aa-tXevovTcov, the form used by St Paul in the above passage, is exactly paralleled in Enoch ix. 4 (Syncellus only). 2 Westcott, Art. 'Canon' in Smith, D. B. p. 253 note n. 3 Streaae, Age of the Maccabees, p. 239, "The L XX., as we now have it, was nearly, if not quite, complete by the middle of the 28 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Apocryphal books were incorporated with the Septua- gint increases the difficulty of supposing that they were ignored by the writers of the N. T. That they were well acquainted with the LXX. is fully proved by their frequent quotations from that version'. The idea, entertained by Prof. J. M. Fuller, in his Introduction to the 'Rest of Esther' in the Speaker's Commentary^, of the existence of a Pales- tinian Septuagint without Apocrypha seems unsup- ported by convincing evidence. He adduces none. In the same work ' it is stated by the Rev. C. J. Ball that the "Additions constitute integral portions of the LXX. text of Daniel." The fact that non-Alexandrian writers such as Josephus, Melito and, of a later age, Ruffinus, did not regard the Apocrypha as canonical Holy Scripture, by no means proves that they were unacquainted with these books, or set no value on them. Indeed, in the case of Josephus * and Ruffinus " there is conclusive 2nd cent, b.o." And (p. 98) "The Greek Bible had always included such books.'' ' Grinfield (Apol.for LXX. p. 37) estimates that out of some 350 O.T. quotations not more than 50 differ materially from the LXX. ' p. 367. 3 p. 308. ■• Antiq. x. iv. 5 sqq., xi. i.— v. "Das dritte Esrabuch von Josephus... fleissig benutzt ist." (Kautzsch, Apokr. p. 2.) Yet at the end of the work, xx. xii. 1, he says that he has given the history of the monarchy v Koi Ta<; eKXoya<; iiroiTjcrdfi'qv, el<; e^ ^i^Xia Ste\a)v." We are also indebted to Eusebius (H. E. vi. 25) for Origen's list (+ 253). This agrees with our present Canon except in so far as the usual apocryphal addi- tions may be included under canonical names. " Ta MaKKa^aiKo. " are named at the end, however, as " €^a)...TovTO}v," thus allowing them a certain posi- tion, but one distinctly inferior to that of the O.T. Scriptures preceding. The Muratorian Fragment (circ. 180) somewhat strangely inserts Wisdom in the N.T. books before Revelation. This may be accounted for by both books being regarded as dubious, and so placed to- gether at the end. On the other hand we are not aware that the Fragment dealt with the O.T. books at all. In a similar way Epiphanius in one of his lists (Hcer. 76 i. 941, ed. Dindorf) adds Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus as a kind of appendage to the N.T.* This can hardly have arisen from conceiving these books to be the products of Christian writers. In his first list in De mens, et pond. 3 he has the same two books at the end, on a lower plane than the O.T. Scriptures. In his other list in the same work (23) no apocryphal books are named. Hilary of Poitiers (f 368) speaks doubtfully as to 1 Prof. JRyle, Art. 'Apocr.' Smith's Bib. Diet., p. 170 6. 4—2 52 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Tobit and Judith. "Quibusdam autem visum est, additis Tobia et Judith, xxiv. libros connumerare" (Prol. in Ps. 15). Athanasius (f 373), in his 39th Paschal Epistle, while expressly accepting Baruch as an adjunct to Jeremiah, and the 'Epistle,' puts Wisdom, Ecclesi- asticus, Tobit and Judith (along with Esther and cer- tain extra-apocryphal books) in a distinctly lower class. We might look to the great names of Jerome and Augustine for decisive guidance in this matter. But though both those saints dealt with the subject of the Canon, their voices are far from clear. The general tendency of St Jerome was to depress the apocryphal books, of St Augustine to exalt them ; but the opinion of neither of them seems to have been positive or fixed. Often a sentiment from either of these writers which tells in one direction may be confronted by another, which seems to make for the opposite ; so that any quotation from them which is apparently in favour of one view of the matter, may often be balanced by something which it seems permissible to take in a contrary sense. Thus St Jerome speaks somewhat slightingly' of the apocryphal books in his Prologus Galeatus ; but on one plea or another he includes most of them in his translation as part of the Latin Bible. St Augustine {de doct. Christ, ii. 8) reckons ^ I. Mace, he appears to regard more favourably than the rest, because "librum Hebraicum reperi" [Prol. Gal.). He says the same, "Hebraicum reperi," of "Panaretos Jesu filii Sirach liber" in his Pref to the boolcs of Solomon. At the end of the Capitula come the words "Explicit liber Bcclesiasticum (sic) Salomonis.'' CATALOGUES OF SCRIPTURE BY INDIVIDUALS. 53 Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, I. and II. Mac- cabees as Holy Scripture ; yet elsewhere [de Civ. Dei XV, 23, 24) he speaks of the sacred books as those which were preserved in the temple of the Hebrew people, seemingly limiting them to the Jewish Canon. Origen, with similar inconsistency, quotes {Ep. ad Afric. III.) Esther xiv. as if canonical ; while else- where (ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 25) he professes to confine his catalogue Scripture to those books which are " KaO^ '^^paiov<;." While considering lists of canonical books given by those who were accustomed to use Greek and Latin versions, it is necessary to bear in mind that apocryphal portions are often included under canonical names. Thus Esther frequently embraces the Additions ; our I. Esdras is sometimes joined to Ezra-Nehemiah ; the ' Epistle ' is often joined silently to Jeremiah, as well as Baruch'; and Daniel generally includes the Song of the Three Children, Bel and the Dragon, and Susannah. The Prayer of Manasses is occasionally found at the end of II. Chronicles : but Churton's statement {JJncan. and Apocr. Script, p. 409) that " it is found in several copies of the LXX., where it is inserted in II. Chron. xxxiii.," seems to lack proofs The contents of the ancient MSS. of the Bible vary quite as much as the lists given by writers whose names are known. Thus the Codex Sinaiticus 1 Baruoh's inclusion under Jeremiah is probably more frequent than has been generally supposed, v. Art. Baruch in Hastings' Bib. Diet. 2 In Apost. Const, ii. 22 the P. of M. is curiously amalgamated with historical narrative, as we have seen. 54 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. (4th cent.) contains Tobit, Judith, I. Mace, Wisdom and Ecclus., as well as IV. Mace, Ep. Barnabas, and a large portion of the Shepherd of Hermas : Alex- andrinus (5th cent.) has Baruch, the Epistle, Tobit, Judith, Mace. I.— IV., Prayer of Manasses, the Canticles, Wisdom and Ecclus., as well as the Psalms of Solomon and II. Epp. of Clement of Rome ; Vaticanus (4th cent.) has Wisdom, Ecclus., Judith, Tobit, Baruch, and Ep. Jeremiah ; Ephraemi (5th cent.) contained Wisdom and Ecclus., at least, as the O.T. fragments shew ; Claromontanus (6th cent.) has in its Latin list of books. Wisdom, Ecclus., Mace. I., II., IV., Judith and Tobit ; as well as the Epistle of Barnabas, Pastor, the Acts of Paul, and Revelation of Peter. These were no doubt included in MSS. of the LXX. as read in Christian Churches, some generally, others only locally. The contention is sometimes made that the failure to define accurately, by authority, the precise limits of the Canon in early times, arose from little or no doubt existing on the point. But this contention can hardly be maintained as a valid one. The frequent quota- tions of our Apocryphal books as parts of the Canon by some writers, and their treatment by others as on a lower level, prove the existence of very different opinions with regard to them. Yet this difference of opinion does not seem to have been treated as a matter of grave importance, or to have given rise to any serious disquietude in the minds of Christians generally'. 1 For an attempt to explain this fact, see Action of Councils, p. 42. CATALOGUES OF SCRIPTURE BY INDIVIDUALS. 55 Bishop Beveridge (f 1708), in writing on the Vlth Article, goes so far as to make the following assertion : " Thus we see how clear and express the Fathers are, not only in determining the same number of canonical books that is in this Article determined, but also in passing their judgment upon the apocryphal books, as this Article doth '." In the face of the preceding refer- ences and quotations, it must, I think, be admitted that Beveridge here greatly overstates the case, to an extent quite surprising in a writer who is generally so trustworthy and careful. In this overstatement he has been often followed by more recent, though less learned, writers. Notwithstanding all variations and inconsistencies, the balance of evidence seems to the present writer to be clearly in favour of our existing Canon as defined in Art. VI. ; and equally in favour of admitting " the other books" of our Apocrypha to that privileged position beneath the Canon which the same Article assigns to them. This seems most in accordance with the general tenor of Christian antiquity. 1 Ed. Oxf. 1840, vol. I. p. 289. PART II. MODERN USE. CHAPTEK VI. CBnglfs]^ anti jiporctp. In continuing the subject of the use of the Apocrypha into modern times, I purposely pass over the mediaeval period. During the centuries included under the term 'middle ages,' the use of the Apocrypha was great, and probably reached its highest point. It was continually quoted and referred to by mediaeval preachers and writers for spiritual purposes. The Church employed it largely in her forms of prayer. In a 'Sarum MissaP' for example, amongst other apocry- phal Lections, those for Tuesday and Thursday in Passion Week, and St Philip and St James, are from Bel and the Dragon, and the Song of the Three Children, and Wisd. v. 1 — 5 respectively. Our English writer, Venerable Bede, composed " on the book of the blessed Father Tobias, one book 1 Church Press Co., 1868. ENGLISH AND FOREIGN. 57 of allegorical exposition, concerning Christ and the Church ^" Bede also gives an answer of Pope Gregory to St Augustine (i. 27) in which II. Mace. v. 19 seems to be adapted^ iElfric in his Homilies often quotes (in descending order of frequency) Ecclus., Wisd., Tob., Bel, and Song of the Three ^ The judgments which befell Heliodorus and Anti- ochus Epiphanes were sometimes, in common with canonical instances, called down upon violators of Church property in the curses pronounced at its consecration. An example is given by Spelman, Fate of Sacrilege, ed. 1895, p. 312. But the fiield of inquiiy as to the employment of the apocryphal books during that period is quite diiferent. We should have to look not so much for occasions on which Christian authors make a religious use of the Apocrypha, as for passages in their works in which any distinction is drawn between it and the books of the Canon. Such are not wanting ; and Bishop Westcott in his article on the Canon in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible gives a list of the more learned Western writers, beginning with Primasius, and ending with Card. Cajetan, who "maintained the distinctive au- thority of the Hebrew Canon." Others who defend the canonicity of the apocryphal books shew, by the manner in which they do so, that a contrary opinion 1 Eccl. Hist. ed. 1723, p. 477. 2 /*., p. 73. ^ A. 8. Cooke's Biblical Quotations in old English Prose- writers, Loud. 1898. 58 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. had substantial support'. Prof. Ryle also in his article on the Apocrypha gives a hst of mediaeval writers (including the EngUshman, John of Salisbury, 1172) who put these books on^ a lower level than the canonical ones. Bp R. Pecock (1460) of St Asaph, in his Repressor of overmuch witing of the Clergy, distinguishes strongly between canonical and apocry- phal scriptures, intimates that the latter are not Holy Scripture, explains their admission into Bibles by a former scarcity of devout books, and thinks them in no danger of being rated too highly. When we approach the Reformation period we find the Apocrypha still in full use amongst both the reformed and the unreformed. Wyclif 's, Luther's, Cal- vin's, Coverdale's, the Genevan ', and other translations of the Bible, all contained it as a matter of course. Indeed, Luther seems to have regarded some books of it with more veneration than canonical ones ; for while he ventured to speak of Esther as "dignior omnibus me judice, qui extra canonem habereturV' and as containing many heathenish improprieties °, of Jonah's prophecy as a ridiculous fable, of St Paul's allegory of Hagar and Sarah as "too weak to hold V' and of St James' Epistle in a particular aspect as an 1 So Jacob Pamelius on Judith, Migne vol. 91 (appendix to Rabanus Maurus). ^ Babington's ed. p. 250. 3 Coverdale's and the Genevan omitted the Prayer of Ma- nasses. « Quoted by Keil, Esther, Bng. Tr. (Clark) Bdinb. 1873, p. 315. ^ Table Talk, quoted in Hastings' Diet. Bib. art. 'Esther.' " Bissell, p. 54. ENGLISH AND FOREIGN. 59 epistle of straw', he has words of warm praise for "the excellent and saintly doings" of Tobit (Churton, p. 17) ; he deems I. Maccabees ought to be taken into the reckoning of Holy Scripture ^ ; and of Judith he writes :— "It is a good, holy and useful book, well worthy to be read by us Christians ; for the words which the characters in the story speak are to be understood as the words of a sacred poet or prophet by the aid of the Holy Ghost" (p. 166). But on these, as on other points, he did not always say the same thing, for in his Table Talk he ridicules these books. Luther published various selections from the Bible before his translation of the whole in 1534. One of these selections in 1519 consisted of the Prayer of Manasses with part of St Matthew xvi. He apparently deemed the Prayer to be a choice passage. {TJrtext und Uhersetzungen, p. 130.) Some of the reformed Germans, however, must have soon begun to think differently, for Pellican, who died only ten years after Luther, calls it " a most holy institution of the Catholic Church that those books were read in the Church," and that "if that custom had been everywhere continued, so many errors had not crept into the reformed Church ^" To this day the Lutheran Bible is printed, like that of the English Church, with the Apocrypha at the end of the Prophets ; and a portion of Scripture from Bcclesiasticus xv. is 1 Dollinger {Luther, eine Skizze, ed. Freiburg i. B. 1890, p. 60) says that he attempted to cast it out of the Canon. It stands in his Bible however. 2 Kautzsch, Apok. i. 81. 5 Quoted by Dean Donne in Sermon on Heh. xi. 35. 60 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. appointed therein as an alternative epistle for the feast of St John the Evangelist'. The fact that it is still used and valued in Germany was impressed upon me by a Mecklenburgher who had been resident for some years in England. Taking up a Bible which was lying on my table, he noticed that it contained the apocryphal books, and at once inquired if that was the Church of England Bible : on learning that it was he expressed great satisfaction, saying that it was what he had always been accustomed to, and that the English Bibles he had hitherto met with had seemed to him imperfect copies. Dr E. Nestle ^ mentions the "Ausschluss der Apokryphen" as an instance of that "Eiuseitigkeit" which prevents him from regarding the many missionary translations made in England as "lauter Siege echteu Christenthums." The German poet Klopstock (f 1803) in his Messiah introduces Raphael as St John Baptist's guardian angel (book ii.), and the Maccabean mother of the seven martyred sons (book xi.). The Danish Dr Martensen bitterly deplores the action of the British and Foreign Bible Society in refusing to circulate Bibles including the Apocrypha. He writes, " As long as it adheres to its view that the Bible must only be distributed without the Apocry- pha... so long will a great deficiency affect its work, and this work itself be an imperfect one. The Society will, consequently, not deserve in every respect the praise of that love. . .which seeketh not her own (1 Cor. 1 The Sarum Missal also contains this as a 'Lection' for the same day; also the modern Roman Missal (Venice, 1736). 2 Urtext und Vbersetzungen der Bibel (Leipzig, 1897), p. 239. ENGLISH AND FOREIGN. 61 xiii. 5), since, as far as this point is concerned, it seeks, on the contrary, to rule foreign Churches \" The naming of a town 'Bethulie' in the Orange Free State seems to indicate an appreciation of the book of Judith by the Reformed Dutch Afrikanders. It is a noteworthy fact, recently unearthed from the archives of the S.P.C.K., that that Society pub- lished no Bibles without the Apocrypha until 1743 1 Dr J. Hey, the first Norrisian Professor of Divinity, says in his Lectures ', " At the Reformation, when men had been brought up to revere them, it would have been both imprudent and cruel to set them aside." Nor did the French Protestants, in former times, at any rate, reject the Apocrypha, for a commentary in Libros Apocryphos was written by Claude Ba- duel, one of their ministers. This work was pub- lished separately in two or three editions at Lyons ; and was also incorporated in Robert Stephen's Latin Biblia Utrmsque Testamenti of 1557. In this Bible the Apocryphal are slightly distinguished from the other books of the Old Testament by a deeper indent of the margin of the Ordo librorwm. Baduel, in his tract De ratione vitce studiosce &c. ", holds up Sara, Judith and Susannah as "sanctarum feminarum exempla." Of Sara he writes "cujus pietas... omnibus piis feminis est imitanda" ; of Judith "cum singulari quadam virtute." He speaks of the accounts of them as being "in divinis Uteris." 1 Christian Ethics, E. Tr. in., p. 339. 2 Two hundred Years, A History of S.P.C.K., p. 189. 3 Ed. 1797, vol. IV. p. 490. 4 Lugd. 1544, pp. 89—91. 62 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. This appeal to the Apocrypha by a French Pro- testant Pastor is noteworthy. Even John Wyclif himself does not seem to have held very different views on this subject. In his Sermons^ he quotes Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus very freely, Tobit but rarely. In his De ente predicamen- tali he refers to Ecclus. iii. 11 as "scriptura" (p. 188) and xviii. 1 is cited with "ut dicitur" (p. 146). But perhaps his strongest assertion is in Quasstiones logicce et philosophicce, where he clinches his argument by saying, " Ista conclusio etiam patet auctoritate scrip- turse," Ecclus. xviii. 1. In his treatise De evAiharistia he guards against idolatry in the Mass by Baruch vi. 1, 66 (p. 57) ; and in his Opus evangelicum, ch. xxviii., he quotes II. Mace. v. 19, against the Pope. This practice of Wyclif's of confuting Popery from the Apocryphal books, in view of later developments on either side, is not without its humorous aspect. In his Paternoster he refers to Tobit vi. 17 with ap- parently full acceptance. He also wrote a Practical Exposition of the Song of the Three Men in the Furnace, Dan. iii. 51 sqq.^ When Miles Coverdale placed all the Apocrypha (except Baruch) at the end of the New Testament, he expressly stated that he did not wish it to be de- spised or little set by ; and that patience and study would shew that the Apocrypha and the Canon were agreed'. 1 All references are to the Wyclif Society's editions (1891 — 7). 2 P. Lorimer's trans, of Prof. Lechler's J. Wiclif, 1878, vol. ii. p. 330. 2 Smith's Dictionary Bib. in. 1671 a. CHAPTER YII. ^rager^iSoofe antr l^omtlies. The great use made of the Apocrypha in ourPrayer- Book is thoroughly in accordance with Bp Coverdale's opinion. The reformers of our public offices of devo- tion evidently thought very highly of it, when they accorded to it, or rather retained it in, the position in which we find it. In our Lectionary at the present moment there are no less than forty-four apocryphal first lessons, forty for ordinary, and four for holy days ; but as it left the hands of our reformers there were a still larger number. For in the Prayer-Book of 1549 there were 108 apocryphal daily lessons, which number was increased in the Prayer-Book of 1552 by two proper lessons, and again in 1558 by 25 further proper lessons. This reading of the Apocrypha in place of the Old Testament, advisedly continued in our Church on the model of the earliest times, marks it out as treated by them with distinguished honour, and raised above all other religious writings \ 1 In the revised Lectionary, substituted in 1561 for that in Elizabeth's Prayer-Book of 1558, Wisd. i. replaces Deut. xxiii. as the first lesson at evensong on Whitsunday, and so continued for a hundred years. During this period the use of the Apocrypha in our Lectionary reached its maximum. 64 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. The American Church, which had removed all apocryphal lessons from her Lectionary, has recently re-introduced a considerable number of them. Then there is one entire Canticle at Morning Prayer, the beautiful Benedicite, taken from the Song of the Three Holy Children'; and there are the two offertory sentences from Tobit in the Communion Service. These are all acknowledged extracts from the Apocrypha, given as such in the Prayer-Book : a considerable proportion, especially when we re- member that the whole Apocrypha in bulk is less than three-quarters of the New Testament, the former standing to the latter in the ratio of 176 : 240. But beside these obvious places in which the Prayer-Book avails itself of the devotional treasures of the Apocrypha, there are many others which are not so universally and necessarily known. The phrase in the Litany, " Spare Thy people, and be not angry with us for ever," is adapted from II. Esdras viii. 45 ; while the earlier part of the same prayer, "Remember not, Loi'd, our offences, nor the offences of our forefathers ; neither take Thou venge- 1 Even so temperate a writer as the Rev. P. Procter betrays a lurking prejudice against the devotional use of the Apocrypha, vphen he says that "Although the Benedicite may be thought suitable to the first lessons of some particular days, or as a substitute. ..during Lent, yet the general and safe practice is always to use the Te Deum, at least on Sundays.'' {History of Common Prayer, 10th ed., p. 226.) In his Elementary Intro- duction (ed. 1894), written jointly with Dr G. F. Maclear, the Benedicite is spoken of without any sign of disparagement. The word 'safe' may however only refer to strict liturgical propriety. PRAYER-BOOK AND HOMILIES. 65 ance of our sins," is borrowed word for word from the Vulgate of Tobit iii. 3, part of the prayer of Tobias : thus the whole of that suflFrage of our Litany, with the exception of one clause, is traceable to apo- cryphal sources. The greater part, too, of this suffrage from the Litany is used again at the commencement of the Visitation of the Sick, so that it was evidently deemed a worthy one. Nor is this the only sendee of the Prayer-Book which is indebted to the Book of Tobit. In the exhortation which opens the Solemnization of Matri- mony the phrase " to satisfy men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understand- ing " is based upon the Vulgate of Tobit vi. 17, being part of the advice which the angel Raphael gives to Tobias concerning his marriage to Sarah ; the ques- tion, too, about giving away the woman, and the rubrics which direct the pair to take one another's right hands, take their origin from Tobit vii. 15 (13) ; and the phrase in the first blessing, " fill you with all spiritual benediction and grace," is derived from the same quarter. In the Prayer-Book of 1549 there was an explicit mention of " Raphael, Thobie, and Sara the daughter of Raguel," in the prayer after the Versicles. The present mention of Abraham and Sarah was sub- stituted in 1552. Moreover, the Apocrypha supplies some of the excellent expressions which are embodied in our Collects. For example, the familiar words, "who hatest nothing that Thou hast made " are taken from Wisd. xi. 24. (Cf. Ecclus. xv. 11, Heb.) These words have been great favourites with the Collect-writers, D. 5 66 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. especially for Lenten use, for they occur in the invoca- tions of three distinct Collects for that season, viz. those for Ash- Wednesday, the third for Good Friday, and the last in the Commination. The two former were new compositions of the reformers in 1549 : thus they were not merely continuing apocryphal phrases which they considered harmless, but they were de- liberately introducing them where they had not occurred before. The same is the case with the ancient Collect for the Seventh Sunday after IVinity, the invocation of which Cranmer altered, when he translated it, from " God of hosts " to " Lord of all power and might," a clause which he culled from the closing words of Judith's prayer before starting for Holofernes' camp (ix. 14)'. The phrase "Who knowest our necessities," in the 5th Collect^ at the end of the Communion Service, appears to have been suggested by the words of Esther's prayer, xiv. 16, "Tu scis necessitatem meam," in the Vulgate. An expression in the Collect after a Victory at Sea, " in whose hand is power and might," appears to come from the same source ; and there are probably many others which have escaped observation from our being, to our own loss, insufficiently conversant with the terms of the Apocrypha ^- 1 The reference to Wisd. xii. 16 supposed by Canon Bright {S.P.C.K. Student's P.B. art. 'Collects') to exist in the Xlth Sun. after Trin. Collect seems very doubtful. ^ Composed in 1549. 3 E.g. the phrases in the long Commination Address "too late to cry for mercy when it is the time of justice. O terrible voice of most just judgment," may well have been suggested by II. Esd. vii. 34, 35, where for 'misery' in the A.V. (v. 33) the best Latin PRAYER-BOOK AND HOMILIES. 67 In the old service for King Charles the Martyr, four verses irom Wisd. v. were incorporated in the canticles to be sung instead of the Venite. It may have been to these, but it was more probably to the reappearance of the apocryphal lessons, that Sir Walter Scott, in Peveril of the Peak, makes Sir GeoflPrey refer immediately after the Restoration, when he takes, in the course of conversation, a simile from Judith, and thereupon expresses "his joy at hearing the holy Apocrypha once more read in churches" (chap vi. p. 79, centenary edition). The expression "crown her with immortality in the life to come," in the Ist collect of the Accession Service, is probably based upon the beautiful words of Wisd. iv. 2, " ev tavr)opovaa tto/ju- irevei." I^omtlus. When we turn from the Prayer-Book to those other authorized works of the Church, the Homilies, we find the Apocrypha most extensively employed. In the Index to Dr Corrie's edition no less than seventy-five apocryphal texts are referred to as quoted in the Homilies. High honour is certainly paid to the Apocrypha in those Reformation sermons, almost beyond what at first sight the terms of the Sixth Article would seem to warrant. In the homily against Swearing, for example, a quotation from Ecclesiasticus is introduced by the text would give 'mercy' (misericordise). So R.V. (v. 33) sub- stitutes 'compassion' for 'misery.' 5—2 68 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. words "Almighty God by the wise man saith " (p. 68)'. In the homily against Excess of Apparel, Judith and the apocryphal portions of Esther are cited as " Scrip- ture" (p. 291). Likewise, in the homily against Idolatry, the canonical and uncanonical books are indiscriminately classed together under the common title of "the Scriptures"; the doctrine of the "fool- ishness of images," it is said, is " expressed at large in the Scriptures ; viz. the Psalms, the Book of Wisdom, the Prophet Isaiah, Ezekiel and Baruch" (p. 166). Still more strongly, in the homily of Alms-deeds, do the words sound which preface a verse from Tobit, " The Holy Ghost doth also teach in . . . Scripture, saying"; and in the next sentence a text is given from Ecclesiasticus, which is introduced as " confirm- ing the same." But perhaps the strongest statement of all is that in the tenth homily, wherein we are exhorted to learn from the Book of Wisdom, as being the " infallible and undeceivable word of God." I am aware that an attempt has been made to draw a distinction between the teaching of the first and second books of the Homilies ; but with regard to the use of the Apocrypha no such distinction is main- tainable, for some of the passages I have named are from the second book ; and in the last homily of all, that against Rebellion^, we still find ourselves referred 1 This and the following references are to the Prayer-Book and Homily Society's edition, 1852. All apocryphal texts are unfortunately omitted from the index to this edition. 2 This is curiously styled in the Canons of 1571 (ed. Collins 1899, p. 64) "the holy Homelies," the plural being used, presum- ably, on account of its six parts. PKAYER-BOOK AND HOMILIES. 69 to Wisdom as Holy Scripture, and are still exhorted to hear Baruch as a prophet (pp. 516, 523). Now the Thirty-fifth Article informs us that the books of the Homilies "contain a godly and whole- some doctrine, and necessary for these times," while the Sixth Article states that the "Church doth not apply the Apocrypha to establish any doctrine " ; and to both of these the Clergy give their solemn assent, which seems to land them in a somewhat awkward dilemma. I think the way out of it will be found by interpreting the words " any doctrine " in Article VI. as meaning any doctrine contrary to that of the canonical books, in connection with which the apo- cryphal ones are there being spoken of. Unless we take the words of the Article in this sense, it seems impossible to reconcile it with the doctrinal use of the Apocrypha in the Homilies by the same authori- ties as those who put forth the Articles ; for, remark- ably enough, the preface to the first book of the Homilies is dated 1562, the very year in which the passage concerning the Apocrypha was added to the Article. (Bp H. Browne, p. 122.) But the authorities do not seem to have been conscious of any grave dis- crepancy. Presumably, therefore, they understood the words " any doctrine " of Article VI. in the sense I have suggested*. This view of the limitation set in Article VI. is also supported by the following passage in the Reformatio Legum : " Libri sacri, non tamen canonici quibus tamen non tantum authoritas tribuitur, 1 Compare what is said on Abp Seeker's doctrinal use of the Apocrypha, p. 86. 70 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. ut fidei iiostrse dogmata ex ipsis solis et separatim citra alios indubitatse Scripturse locos constitui con- stabilirique, vel possint vel debeant^ Bp Short says^ that this part of the Reformatio Legum may be deemed an authorized expression of the meaning of our Articles. 1 Quoted by Hardwick, Hist, of Articles, ed. 1859, p. 374. 2 Hist, of Church, ed. 8, 1869, par. 482 &c. CHAPTER VIII. Wam%. Leaving the authorized pronouncements of the Church, and coming to the pages of her divines since the Reformation, we do not find the Apocrypha un- used by them. Richard Hooker defends the public reading of them on principle, though not very heartily, as his private judgment would have dispensed with lessons in Church from them. He {Ec. Pol. v. 20) writes, however, of these books : "So little doth such their supposed faultiness in moderate men's judgment in- force the removal of them out of the house of God, that still they are judged to retain worthily those very titles of commendation, than which there cannot greater be given to writings, the authors whereof are men." With questionable taste, he applies Wisd. iv. 13, "that which the wise man hath said concerning Enoch," to Edward VI. {E. P. iv. 14.) Archdeacon Philpot (t 1555), one of the Marian martyrs, in a letter from prison to his sister, employs two texts from Ecclesiasticus (ii. 1, xiii. 1) as sources of comfort and exhortation. In like manner three verses 14, 15, 16 of Chap. vi. of the same book are 72 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. employed in a letter of consolation to him by his friend John Careless S Archbishop Grindal (t 1583), in his sermon on the death of the Emperor Ferdinand, dissuades from prayers for him, and anticipates an objection based on II. Mace. xii. 44—45 by urging the authority of St Jerome that these books are insufficient of them- selves to establish doctrine. But, somewhat incon- sistently perhaps, in the same sermon he places St Luke xii. 48 (our Lord's words) and Wisd. vi. 7, side by side as if of equal weight. He also uses the Apocrypha in the service he put forth for the plague in 1563, appointing a first lesson from II. Esd. ix.^, a book hardly ever used in the services of the Church, and in an Admonition of the same year he quotes Ecclus. iii. 26 in support of his directions ^. Archbishop Whitgift (f 1 604) makes some remark- ably strong statements in support of the Apocrypha, in replying to objections. " The Scripture here called Apocrypha, abusively and improperlie, are Holy Wrytings, voyd of error. Parte of the Bible, and soe accounted of in the purest tyme of the Church and by the best Writers ; ever redd in the Church of Christ, and shall never be forbidden by me, or by my con- sent." (Strype's Life of Whitgift, Lond. 1718, p. 80.) 1 J. Philpot's Writings, Park. Soc, 1842, pp. 231, 239. In the Reprints of this Society, some of the apocryphal texts quoted by the writers are omitted, accidentally or designedly, from the indices. 2 It is possible that Neh. ix. may be intended ; for Neh. and II. Bsd. are regarded as synonymous in the "Homily of the Justice of God," set forth at the same time. •'' Grindal's remains. Park. Soc. 1843, pp. 18, 23, 106, 271. DIVINES. 73 "Archbishop Whitgift said he did indeed give command for the Apocrypha to be bound up with the Bible, and meant it to be observed ; asking who ever separated the Apocrypha from the rest of the Bible, from the beginning of Christianity to that day? Or what Church in the world, reformed or other, did it at that present ? And shall we, added he, suifer this singularity in the Church of England to the advantage of the adversary, offence of the godly, and contrary of all the world besides?... therefore such giddy heads as thought to deface the Apocrypha were to be bridled. And that it was a foul shame and not to be suffered that such speeches should be uttered against those books as by some had been." {lb. Bk iii. ch. xxii. p. 590, ed. 1822.) This estimate of the Apocrypha seems high enough for the Council of Trent, and coming from one in Whitgift's position and with Whitgift's views seems very singular. Is it permissible to suppose that he was irritated by unreasonable objectors into express- ing himself a little too strongly? Bishop JewelP of Salisbury (tl571), who has, somewhat unfairly perhaps, been accused of puritanic inclinations, made more use of the Apocrypha than might have been expected. He takes I. Esd. iv. 41 "Magna est Veritas et prsevalet " as the motto for the title pages of his Defence of the Apology, and of his Reply unto M. Harding's Answer, and also quotes it in To the Reader, "and Nehemiah saith. Great is verity and prevaileth." In Part II. p. 197 he writes 1 Ed. 1611. 74 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. "Touching the book of Maccabees, we say nothing but that we find written by St Jerome, St Augustine, and other holy Fathers." Also in the same Reply (Art. XXVII. "of Ignorance ") he quotes Wisd. xiv. 22, not quite accurately, from the Vulgate, as ap- plicable to the ignorance of Papists. This same text he again quotes in his sermon on Ps. Ixix. 9. This time in English, with "the wise man saith." This same formula of quotation he uses in his Treatise of the Sacraments to introduce two texts coupled to- gether, Eccles. i. 14 and Ecclus. xl. 1, thus seeming to attribute both books to the same author. In his Commentary on I. Thess. i. 12 he explicitly attributes Ecclus. XXX. 9 to Solomon, ending his quotation with the words "saith Solomon^" In his sermon on Lk x. 23, 24, he cites "Baruch the Prophet," iv. "blessed art thou, Israel, how happy &c.," probably from memory of V. 4. Dean Nowell (f 1602) was strongly opposed to anything savouring of Popery, yet he admits references to Apocryphal texts in support of his doctrines ; as, for instance, in his Middle Catechism (1570) where on the 3rd Commandment, Ecclus. xxiii. 9 (twice), xxxix. 33, and Wisd. i. 1 and xiv. 30 are referred to, also in Part V., Baruch iv. 1 is joined with some references to the Psalms. (Latin ed. 1852.) Henry Bull, in his collection of Christian Prayers 1 The idea of attributing Ecclesiasticus to Solomon is even now not quite dead; for in Homely Words to Young Servants by M. Couchman, S.P.C.K. 1899, p. 33, chap. xix. v. 30 is prefaced by "Solomon tells us in the Book of Ecclesiasticus.'' DIVINES. 75 and Holy Meditations (1566), gives many i-eferences to the Apocrypha. Pp. 126, 152, 163^ Dr John Boys (f 1625), Dean of Canterbury, often culls from the Apocrypha in his Exposition of the Festival Epistles and Gospels, 1615, a work full of force and point, having the ample matter of the Puritan writers, without the tedious lengthiness and laboured style which many of them affected. Dr Donne (f 1631), Dean of St Paul's, occasionally quotes apocryphal texts in his sermons ^ In Serm. XIX. for instance he cites Ecclus. xxxviii. 1 as having authority, "as we are hid to honour a physician." In Serm. XXII. he defends at some length the use of the apocryphal books as sacred, though at a [proper distance below the canonical. He also says "In many Churches of the Reformation their preachers never forbear to preach upon texts taken out of the apocryphal books." None of his own published sermons, however, are on apocryphal texts. In his Bm^ai'aTo?, written when a young man, first published in 1644, he discusses several apocryphal passages ; e.g. Ecclus. xx. 16 ; Tob. xiii. 2 ; Wisd. i. 12, apparently without observing that they are apocry- phal, even expressly reckoning the last as a "place cited from the books of the O.T." (p. 168). Eleazar and Razis too in II. Mace, have their semi-suicidal acts included under the titles "Examples in Scripture." Even Elnathan Parr (11632?), the puritanically inclined Minister of Palgrave, Suffolk, embodies Wisd. i. 4 in what he calls a "Use" in his Grmmds of 1 Parker Society's ed. 1842. 2 Ed. 1640. 76 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Divinity (ed. 1632, p. 20). And in his exposition of Romans ix. 27 (ed. 1633) he cites in the marg. II. Esd. viii. 2 (3) ; on xiii. 3 he brings in Wisd. ii. ult. ("through envy of the Devil" &c., p. 41); and on xiii. 8 he has a reference of St Ambrose de Tohia, c. 21. These references to the Apocrypha, without censure, in an author of E. Parr's views, are very unusual. Bishop Andrewes (f 1626), though preaching from no apocryphal texts, makes use of the Apocrypha from time to time in his sermons. As Bishop Jewell uses it rather more, so I think Bishop Andrewes uses it rather less, than we might have expected. In his Concio of. Aug. 5th, 1606 he quotes Ecclus. xlvii. 2. In both Sermons X. and XV. of the Nativity, he quotes Wisd. i. 12; in Serm. I. of the Holy Ghost, Judith vii. 30; in Sermon IV. of Fasting, Ecclus. xiii. 1; in Sermon V. he speaks of "Tobie's fast"; and in several other sermons apocryphal phrases are introduced, but usually without any explicit quotation formula. He gives some account too of his view of the Apocrypha in his curious Sermon on Acts ii. 42 Of the Worshipping of Imaginations, preached at St Giles', Cripplegate. He condemns the disuse of the Apocrypha as subservience to an unfounded imagination, as follows : "Nor none of Apocrypha cited. Another imagination : for St Jude in his Epistle hath not feared to allege out of the book of Enoch, which book hath ever been reckoned apocry- phal. And by his example all the ancient writers are full of allegations from them, ever to these writings yielding the next place after the Canon of the Scriptures ; and preferring them before all foreign DIVINES. 77 writers whatsoeTer'." In his famous devotions, Bishop Andrewes incorporates much of the Prayer of Ma- nasses in the Confession for use on Saturday, and Wisd. V. 14 seems to be referred to in that for Wednesday. Dr Joseph Mede ^ (t 1638) in an appendix to his Clavis Apocalyptica has some two pages on Tobit xiv. under the title of Prophetioe Tobice morihundi (pp. 719, 720). He occasionally, but not very frequently, cites apocryphal texts in his Discourses. Thos. Jackson (f 1640), Dean of Peterborough, countenances these books. " Nor doth our Church so disclaim all which the Romans above these two-and- twenty admit, as if it were a point of faith to hold there were no more ; it only admits no more into the same rank and order with the former, because we have no such warrant of faith, or sure experiments to do so." {Worhs, ed. 1844, vol. I., p. 312.) He points out, too, how the fulfilment of one of Zechariah's prophecies (ix. 6) is recorded for us in the first book of Maccabees, and deplores the omission of these apocryphal books from some editions of the Bible. Of the Second of Maccabees he speaks in singu- larly high terms : " Unto matters related by the author, if not for his own esteem yet for St Paul's, or whoever were the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, we owe such an historical belief as may ground matters of sacred or canonical use or applica- 1 Ed. 1635. 2 Ed. Lond. 1664. 78 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHBISTIAN CHUECH. tion, because that sacred author hath given him credit or countenance in his relations of the persecu- tions of God's people, living before his own time, which are not registered by any ancient author now extant besides." (VIII. p. 14, VI. p. 122.) Archbishop Ussher' (f 1656) makes much use of the two books of Maccabees in his Annales veteris Testamenti. In his Answer to the Challenge of a Jesuit he curiously joins together in one sentence references to II. Kings ii. and II. Mace. ii. 68. " The Scripture assureth us that Elias went up into heaven," and of this Mattathias put his sons in mind upon his deathbed : " Elias being zealous and fervent for the law was taken up into heaven." (Vol. iii. p. 280.) Bishop Hall (f 1656)^ while objecting to the Roman canonization of the Apocrypha in his Serious Dissuasive from Popery, not unfrequently quotes it in his writings. Thus in his Balm of Oilead, chap. xv. Pars 1, 13, he quotes Wisd. ii. 24, iii. 1, 3, with the formula " the Wise Man saith " ; and in chap, xviii. he quotes Ecclus. xxxviii. 9 with " Take the counsel of the Wise Man." In his Gases of Conscience, Decade III., he says of Ecclesiasticus, " This man how obscure soever his authority." Bishop Patrick (f 1707) made large use of the Apocrypha in his Sermons, and in the exquisite medi- tations of his Christian Sacrifice. In his Answer to the Touchstone to the Reformed Gospel he speaks, 1 Ed. Dublin, 1847. 2 Bd. Oxf. 1838, in which unhappily all apocryphal texts are omitted from the index. DIVINES. 79 however, of II. Mace, and Baruch as " of no conse- quence, unless proved by places of canonical writ'." That very popular anonymous work. The Whole Duty of Man, published just before the Restoration, contains several quotations from Ecclesiasticus, each time attributing the words to " the Wise Man." The book ends with the verse Ecclus. v. 7 as a final counsel. This appreciation of the Son of Sirach's Wisdom does not extend to the other apocryphal writers, none of whom appear to be cited. Archbishop Bramhall (f 1663), in his Oastigations of Mr Hobbes' Animadversions, quotes Wisd. i. 13 in conjunction with Is. xxviii. 21 as "the Scriptures," but adds " if this place seem to him apocryphal, he may have twenty that are canonical." He also couples together I. Sam. xxiii. 11 and Wisd. iv. 11 as if on a par with each other ^ Wisd. xvii. 12 seems to have commended itself very strongly to him, for he quotes it no less than four times. Archdeacon Mark Frank^ (f 1664) in his vigorous and lively sermons has frequent citations from the Apocrypha. In Serm. xxi., referring to Ecclus. xlix., he speaks of the catalogue made by the Son of Sirach, and " long since added near to the very book of God's own remembrance." Though none of Frank's pub- lished sermons are on apocryphal texts, he shews how readily these books lend themselves to homiletic refer- ence and illustration. Bishop Jeremy Taylor* (f 1667) makes fairly fre- 1 Ed. Oxf. 1858, VII. 281. 2 Ed. Oxf. 1844, vol. IV. pp. 354, 478. 3 Ed. Oxf. 1849. ■* Ed. Lond. 1839. 80 THE APOCRYPHA IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. quent quotations from the Apocrypha, but there is nothing specially remarkable in his manner of intro- ducing its words. In his Holy Dying, Par. in. 2, he fully accepts two statements which have been often objected to by the Apocrypha's opponents. "'Alms deliver from death,' said old Tobias, and ' alms make an atonement for sins,' said the Son of Sirach ; and so said Daniel, and so say all the wise men in the world." (Tob. iv. 10, xii. 9 ; Ecclus. iii. 30 ; Dan. iv. 27.) This last statement of Taylor's seems rather too comprehensive. Dr H. Hammond (f 1669), in his commentary on St Matt, xxvii. 5, refers to Tobit as " the Bible," and in his note to Heb. ix. 7 calls the apocryphal authors " the Greek writers of the Old Testament." Herbert Thorndike' (f 1672) uses the Apocrypha as freely as anyone. He " mightily commends the wisdom and judgment of the ancient Church in pro- posing the books which we call Apocrypha for the instruction of the catechumeni or learners of Christi- anity." (Vol. IV., p. 635.) Bishop Cosin" (f 1672) was not a great user of the Apocrypha, but in his second sermon, "as Ecclesi- asticus speaks," brings in xliv. 7 of that book. In his Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture (vol. in., p. 62) he writes with regard to Athanasius' quotation from the Apocrypha : " Some of them are taken from such writings as be none of his, but confessed to be supposititious ; and other 1 Ed. Oxf. 1852. 2 Ed. Oxf. 1849. DIVINES. 81 some are express passages of the Holy Scriptures themselves, which need not these foreign books to authorize them : the rest are only such general terms of speech that they may be applied to other ecclesi- astical writings as well as these and make nothing against us." These explanations, however, do not seem to dis- pose satisfactorily of Athanasius' apocryphal quota- tions for distinctly dogmatic purposes, such e.g. as those in his Ep. I. to Serapion, or as that from Wisd. xiv. 12 — 21 in his Oratio contra gentes, introduced as rj ypa