Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 15.djvu/811

 ZACHARIAS

743

ZACHARY

same scope; it is permoated throughout, with the very same Messianic forecasting. The kingdom and priesthood of the Messias are obscurely depicted in the visions of the first part ; vividly in the two burdens of the second part. Both sections insist upon the vengeance to be wrought against foes of Juda (cf. i, 14, and vi, S, with ix, 1 sq.) ; the priesthood and king- ship united in the Christ (cf . iii, 8, and vi, 12, with ix, !)-17); the conversion of the gentiles (cf. ii, 11; vi, 15, and viii, 22, with xiv, 16, 17) ; the return of Israel from captivity (cf. viii, 7, 8, with ix, 11-16; x, 8 sq.) ; the hohness of the new kingdom (cf. iii, 1, and v, 1 sq., with xiii, 1); its prosperity (cf. i, 17: iii, 10; viii, 3 sq., with xi, 16; xiv, 7 sq.).

B. Unity of style. — Whatever slight differences there are in the style of the two sections can be readily enough explained by the fact that the visions are in pro.ie and the burdens in poetry. We can understand that one and the same -nTiter may show differences in form and mode of ex])ression, if, after a period of thirty-five years, he works out in exultant and exuber- ant poetic form the theme which, long before and under very different circumstances, he had set forth in calmer language and prosaic mould. To counter- balance these slight styUstic differences, we have indubitable evidence of unity of style. Modes of ex]ires.sion occur in both parts which are distinctive of Zacharias. Such are, for instance: the very preg nant clause " and after them the land was left desolate of any that crossed over and of any that returned into it", — Heb. tneober Umiashdlj (vii, 14, and ix, S) ; the use of the Hiphil of 'ahar in the sense of "taking away iniquity " (iii, 4, and xiii, 2) ; the metaphor of " the eye of God" for His Providence (iii, 9; i, 10; and ix, 1); the designations of the chosen people, "house of Juda and house of Israel", "Juda, Israel, Jerusalem", "Juda and Ephraim", "Juda and Joseph" (cf. i, 12, 19; viii, 15 etc., and ix, 13; x, 6; xi, 14 etc.). Moreover, verses and portions of verses of the first part are identical with versos and portions of verses of the second part (cf. ii, 10, and ix, 9; ii, 6, and ix, 12, 13: vii, 14, and ix, 8; viii, 14, and xiv, 5).

C. Divisive criticism. — It is generally allowed that Zacharias is the author of the first part of the i)roph- ecy (chapters i-viii). The second part (ix-xiv) is attributed by the critics to one or many other writers. Joseph Mede, an Englishman, started the issue, in his "Fragment a sacra" (London, 1653), 9. Wishing to save from error Matt., xxvii, 9, 10, he attributed the latter portion of Zacharias to Jeremias. In this exe- gesis, he was seconded by Kidder, "The demonstra- tion of the Me.ssias" (London, 1700), 199, and Whis- ton, "An e.ssav towards restoring the true text of the Old Testament" (London, 1722), 92. In this way was the Deutero-Zacharias idea begotten. The idea waxed strong and was prolific. Divisive criticism in due time found many different authors for ix-xiv. By the end of the eighteenth century, Fliiggc, "Die Wei-s.^agimgen, welche den ,Schriften des Zacharia.s beigebogen sind" (Hamburg, 1788), had discovered nine disjiarale prophecies in these six chapters. A single or a manifiild Deutero-Zacharias is defended also by Hau'T, Augusti, Bertholdt, Eichorn (4th cd.), De Wcttc (though not after 3d ed.), Hitzig, Ewald, Maurer, Knobrl, Hlcek, Stade, Xowack, Wellhausen, Driver etc. The critics are not agreed, however, as to whether the disjiuled chapters are pre-exilic or post-exilic. Catholic Biblical scholars are almost unanimous against this view. The arguments in its favour are given by Van Hoonacker (op. cit., pp. 657 SCK) and answered convincingly.

The prophocy of Zarhariaa lias been interpreted by St. Eph- RAIU and .St. Jeromf.: cf. the commentaries on the Minor Proph- eta by Ribera (Antwerp, 1.571, etc.): Montancs (Antwerp, 1.571, 1.582): DE Palacio (ColoKne, 15.S.S); Meskan (Antwerp. 1.597). SAXmc» (Lyons, 1R21); de Castro (I,von». lfil.5. etc.); DB Calaso (Palermo, 1644); MArcoRPS (Paris. 1614); Scholz (Frankfurt. 1S.33); Scheoo (Ralisbon, I8.>4 and 1862); Trochon (Paris, ISS.!); Knabenbaueb (Paris, 1886); Griesbach (Lille,

inni): Leimbach in BM. Volkshfirher. IV (Fulda, 1908). Pa- trizi (Rome, 18.52) treated the Messianic prophecies of Zachar- ias. The Protestant commentaries have been mentioned in the course of the article. The Cat holic writers of general introductions are of service in regard to the authorship of Zacharias; cf. CoR- nilt; Kaulen: Haneberg; Gioot.

Walter Drum.

Zacharias Cbrysopolitanus, a famous exegete of the Premonstratensian Order; b. at Chrysopolis (Besanoon); d. about 1155. He was first headmaster of the Cathedral School at Besangon; then joined the Order of the Premonstratensians at the Abbey of Saint Martin in Laon, where he gave himself up to literary pursuits. He pubhshed a Gospel-Harmony with a grammatical and etymological explanation of the Greek, Hebrew, and some Latin words found in the text, under the title, "Unum ex Quattuor, sive De Concordia Evangelist arum" (cf. P. L., CLXXXVI, 11-620). The work is introduced by three prefaces, the first of which shows the relation of the Gospel to the Jewish Law, to philosophy, and to the symbols of the Evangehsts; the second describes the Evangelists and their view of the mission of Christ; the third enumerates the authorities which he uses. The Gos- pel-Harmony is divided into one hundred and eighty- one chapters. As to the original Harmony, Zacharias attributes it to Ammonius of Alexandria. For his main sources he rehes on the Latin Fathers for the most part. Among the teachers of the Middle Ages, he employs mostly Alcuin and Remigius of Auxerre. From the commentaries on the sacraments the work is shown to be the product of the early days of Scholasti- cism. In his explanations he tries to give as literal a sense as possible to the Biblical text. He differs in one notable exception from Ammonius, where he as- sumes that Christ made another journey to Samaria after His triumphant journey into Jerusalem. Zacha- rias's work is to be commended for his taste in select- ing passages from the Fathers, and his endeavours to keep to the literal sense of the Scriptures. His work compares very favourably with the "Catena Aurea" of Saint Thomas.

HnRTEB, NomencUUor Literariut; P. L.. CLXXXVI. 11-620; De Mas Latrie, Tt^sot de Chronotogie, 2119; Schmid. Zacharias Chrys. und sein Kommentar rur Evangelienhartnonie, LXVIII. 531.

Leo T. Butler. Zacharias of Gaza. See Euttchianism; Monoph-

YSITES AND MoNOPHTSlTISM.

Zachary (Zacharhs), Saint, Pope (741-52), year of birth imknown; d. in March, 752. Zacharj' sprang from a Greek family living in Calabria; his father, according to the "Liber Pontificahs", was called Polichronius. Most probably he was a deacon of the Roman Church and as such signed the decrees of the Roman council of 7.32. After the burial of his prede- cessor Gregory III on 29 November, 741, he was immediately and unanimously elected pope and con- secrated and enthroned on 5 December. His biog- rapher in the "Liber Pontificalis" describes him as a man of gentle and conciliatory character who was charitable towards the clergy and people. As a fact the new pope always showed himself to be shrewd and conciliatory in his actions and thus his under- takings were very successful. Soon after his eleva- tion he notified Constantinople of his election; it is noticeable that his nynodica (letter) was not afldressed to the iconoclastic Patriarch Anasta.sius but to the Church of Const ant inoi)le. The envoys of the pope also brought a letter for the em|)cror. After the death of Leo III (IS June, 741) his successor was his son Constantino V, Copronymus. However, in 742 Con- stantino's brother-in-law Artaba-sdiis raised a revolt against the new emperor and established himself in Constantinople; thus when the papal envoys reached Const ant inojjlo thoy found .^rtaba-^dus the ruler there. As late as 743 the papal letters were dated from the year of the reign of Constantino V; in 744, however, they are dated from the year of the reign of Artabas-