elaborately dealt with in the Books of Judith, 4 Maccabees, and 2 [4] Esdras.

*

(iii.) The doctrine of a future state may with some confidence be said to be wholly absent from those books of the Apocrypha which are of Palestinian origin. On the other hand, in the Book of Wisdom the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is insisted on with frequency. The thought of the release of the soul from the body, regarded as a prison, was in harmony with current philosophical speculation. The resurrection of the body to life, however, is plainly accepted in 2 Maccabees (7. 9 and elsewhere), and hence prayers and offerings are presented for those who have departed from life, "a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin" (12. 45).

(h) Stories told with a moral purpose, and to illustrate religious or moral duties (in Jewish phraseology, Haggadah). As time went on, the imagination allowed itself unfettered licence on the subject of the unseen world, angels, demons, and the future glories of Israel, and doubtless the Jewish mind in the period we are now considering, as well as in later days, amid the suffering which belonged to their actual surroundings, found pleasure and relief in weaving speculations of this sort.†

(i) Lastly, in the Palestinian portion of the literature, legalism, the emphasizing of such duties as would be insisted on by the scribe,‡ is a prominent feature. It would appear from many passages that the careful observance of the code of external duties laid down by the religious teachers of the day was all that was requisite. As strict conformity in all respects to the requirements of the Law with regard to worship and

* See Ryle, op. cit., p. 1946.

+ See Morrison, op. cit., pp. 268 ff., for illustrations of the nature of Haggadah. + See p. 22.

sacrifice was difficult or impossible for many Jews, owing to their geographical remoteness from the central Sanctuary at Jerusalem, the more stress was laid on the fact that prayer, fasting, and almsgiving, as duties which could be carried out irrespective of dwelling-place, were acceptable to and demanded by the Creator. This is illustrated by the stories of Tobit and of Judith, while at the same time these narratives teach the duty of presenting one's self at Jerusalem at festivals, as well as that of avoiding ceremonial defilement. Again, the restoration of the Temple is the main subject of the 1st [3rd] Book of Esdras. Both the 1st and 2nd Books of the Maccabees deal with the importance of the services of the Sanctuary, as well as with the obligatory character of the Levitical worship. We have already noticed, moreover, the stringency of the views held by the followers of Judas Maccabeus as to circumcision and the observance of the Sabbath.

The Books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, on the other hand, deal with the matter in a less distinctively Jewish spirit. The fear of God and general uprightness of life are the points on which they dwell. Passing for a moment beyond the Apocrypha, the Psalms of Solomon occupy in this respect somewhat of an intermediate position. "They are pervaded by an earnest moral tone and a sincere piety. But the righteousness which they preach, and the dearth of which they deplore, is, all through, the righteousness that consists in complying with all the Pharisaic prescriptions."

In general, it may safely be said that the literature of the period shews us that "legalism had invaded every relation of life." t

* Schürer, op. cit., II. iii. 21.

+ Ryle, in Smith's Dict. of Bible, as above cited, p. 192a. See the same Article for further illustrations of the points here dealt with.

W

CHAPTER XI.

THE APOCRYPHA.

HILE commenting in the last chapter upon the main features to be observed in the religious literature of the age which we are considering, the books commonly called the Apocrypha were mainly, though, as the references there given will have shewn, not exclusively in our thoughts. Their importance is clear indeed, when we remember that they form, substantially, the oldest portion of the literature which followed the close of the Canon of the Old Testament. We now come to deal with these books more particularly, to examine the position to be assigned to them, the value which they can justly claim, and at the same time the broad line of distinction which is fitly drawn between them and the Canonical Books of the Old Testament Scriptures.

There is, after all, in spite of Juliet's frequently-quoted remark,* much in a name, and doubtless the neglect with which these books have often been treated may be in part due to the dubious reputation which adheres to the adjective apocryphal, and so to some extent affects the kindred substantive.

The Greek adjective, of which our word represents the neuter plural, has for its earliest meaning hidden,† and then obscure, recondite. In Dan. 2. 22 (Theodotion's version), as well as in

*Romeo and Juliet, Act II. Sc. 2.

+ So in classical Greek, as well as in the LXX., e.g. Isa. 45. 8; 1 Macc. 1. 23. Compare Col. 2. 3.

various passages in Ecclesiasticus,* the word is applied to things which are hidden from man's understanding; and hence arose the sense in which it came to be used by certain heretics to indicate those writings, real or pretended, which were to be kept from the knowledge of all outside their own body, as containing secret or esoteric teaching.† Gnostics in this way brought the word into disrepute among the orthodox, inasmuch as it expressed views opposed to the plain teaching of our Lord (Luke 8. 17). Clement of Alexandria (circ. 200 A.D.), says that the followers of Prodicus claimed the possession of the apocryphal books of Zoroaster. § 2nd [4th] Esdras (14. 44-47) || contrasts the first 24 books (by which he evidently means our Canonical Old Testament) which are to be published" openly, and let the worthy and unworthy read it," with "the seventy last, that thou mayest deliver them to such as be wise among thy people; for in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge."

The tinge of heresy, which in this manner had attached itself to those books, passed away with the teaching which had thus induced it. The name now began to have reference not so much to the heterodoxy of the contents of the books, as to the dubious character of their claim from the point of view of authorship or origin. "Apocrypha" thus came to signify books excluded from the Canon. Thereupon, so long as there was no distinct agreement among leaders in the early Church

*14. 21; 39. 3, 7; 42. 19; 48. 25.

te.g., the secret books of Basilides.

It is noteworthy that Athanasius, on the other hand (Epist. Pasch. 39, Migne, Patrol. xxvi. 1438), speaks of certain books of the Apocrypha as used for the instruction of Catechumens.

§ Strom. i. 15 (Migne, ibid. viii. 775). In Strom. iii. 4 (ibid. 1134) he calls a Gnostic book which he quotes apocryphal.

Read in v. 44 with R.V., "fourscore and fourteen."

¶i.e. writings which, as claiming an authorship which does not belong to them. have never been considered to be in any sense Canonical by the Eastern or Western Church.

S 7551.

G

66

as to the exact limits of the Canon of the Old Testament, there necessarily existed a difference as to the comprehensiveness of the word "Apocrypha." While Athanasius* calls such works the arbitrary inventions of heretics," Cyril of Jerusalem (ob. 386 A.D.) describes them as books that are questioned, as contrasted with "the two and twenty books of the Old Testament." The Jews, as we shall see below, had always rigidly excluded these books from the Canon. But few of the Fathers were acquainted with Hebrew, and the Greek Bible, for reasons which will presently appear, had always included such books. Thus it came to pass that even Origen, with his great learning, which included a knowledge of Hebrew, shewed a strange inconsistency in this respect, conforming in spite of his acquaintance with what constituted the Hebrew Canon, to the popular use of Alexandria, and appealing, in a certain controversy of the day, to the History of Susanna as part of the Book of Daniel.

6

"Both Jerome and Augustine-the one accepting the shorter Palestinian, the other the longer Alexandrine Canon of the Old Testament-assigned to anóκpupa the same meaning of non-canonical writings.' Unfortunately, their difference of starting-point contributed to great confusion of thought among Western divines, who were accustomed to base opinion and phraseology upon the utterances of the two great doctors."§

We may the more clearly realise the differences of position assigned in early times to the Apocrypha, if we review briefly the attitude assumed towards these books by (a) the Palestinian Jews, (b) the Alexandrian Jews, (c) the Greek and Latin Churches.

*Ep. ad. Amun. Mon., Migne, xxvi. 1179.

+ In his 4th Catechesis (Migne, xxxiii. 496).

See Salmon, op. cit. p. xxiii. f., for account of Origen's correspondence with Africanus in this connexion (edited by Wetstein, Basle, 1674).

§ Ryle, Smith's Dict. of Bible, as above cited, p. 164a.