Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 3.djvu/315

 CANON

267

CANON

christl. .lahrhunderten (Tubingen, 18701; Idem. Liturair ties 71 Jahrhun.lerts und lieren Reform (Miinsfer. 1893 I; ll.EM. Die ahendl. Mess.- i-mn 1". his :„m VIII. .lahrhdl. (Minister. IS'.lf, ;

Duchesne, Origines (Paris, 1898 1; lli,;ra, l.'antiea Uiur.na (3 vols., Milan, 1897); Cabrol, Origin.-* lituraiques (Paris, I'.ioti); Idem, Le Kitre de 2a prtere antique (Paris, 1900). introduction; Ebner. Quellen und Forschungen zur Gesch. and \I, .-,il. Rnm-mum im MMelalter (Freiburg im Br., 1896); Eisenring, />>; Saiter, Das heiliae Messopfer I Taderhorn, 1S94); Walter. Die hcilioe Messe (Brixen. 1881); Weickum, Das heilige Messopfer (Schaffhausen. lSfi.Yi; Lamprecht, De SS. Missir Sacrifuko (Louvain, 1875); Lebrun, Explication ■ ■ ■ des )>' i ins el des ceremonies dela Messe i Lyons, I860); Cochbh, Etkl&rung des heUigen Messopfers (Cologne. 1870); Giiir. Das

heitiqe Messopfer, duitmatiseli litur,j, !< uu-i o < -)>•< h erklort (6th

ed., Freiburg im Br., 1897); Kossing hit •- Erklarung

der heiliqen Messe- (Ratisl.on, 1MV.I, Vis hit P.. n... Ilnris dueidatio tolius Misses (Tournai, 1860); lls/i, Di sen it cosri- moniarum Missa; breeis expositio (Brussels, 18691; BnuRRON, Introduction aiix ceremonies Romaines (Lucon, 1864); Noel, Instructions sur la Liturqie (5 vols., Paris. 1861); PatronI, /. ioni -li s. Liturgia (Naples, lssi); Flick. Katholisehe I ■ (Ratisbon. 1853); De Herdt, Sacra Liturgia Praxis

(7th ed., 3 vols., Louvain. 1S83); Drews. Zur Entstehungs- -■■s Kanons in der rumisrhen Messe (Tubingen and Leip- zig, 1902); Dni'Rl. Elevation in the Eueharist: its History and Rationale (Cambridge. 1907), of no great value; Bernard, Cours de liturgie romaine (Paris, 18S4).

Adrian Fortescue.

Canon of the Holy Scriptures. — The word canon

as applied to the Scriptures has long had a Bpecial and consecrated meaning. In its fullest comprehen- sion it signifies the authoritative list or closed number of the writings composed under Divine inspiration, and destine, 1 for the well-being of the Church, using the latter word in the wide sense of the theocratic society which began with God's revelation of Himself to the people of Israel, and which finds its ripe development and completion in the Catholic organism. The whole Biblical Canon therefore consists of the canons of the Old and Xew Testaments. The Greek xavtbv means primarily a reed, or measuring-rod; by a natural figure it was employed by ancient writers both pro- fane and religious to denote a rule or standard. We find the substantive first applied to the Sacred Scriptures in the fourth century, by St. Athanasius; for its derivatives, the Council of Laodicea of the same period speaks of the mtvowicA jSi/3X(a and Athanasius of the 0i/3Va Kavov^bueva. The latter phrase proves that the passive sense of canon, viz.. that of a regulated and defined collection, was already in use. and this has remained the prevailing connota- tion of the word in ecclesiastical literature.

The terms protocanonical and deitterocanonical. of frequent usage among Catholic theologians and ex- egetes, require a word of caution. They are not felicitous, and it would be wrong to infer from them that the Church successively possessed two distinct Biblical Canons. Only in a partial and restricted way may we speak of a first and second Canon. Proto- canonical (irpwros, "first") is a conventional word denoting those sacred writings which have been al- ways received by Christendom without dispute. The protocanonical books of the Old Testament corre- spond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews and the O. T. as received by Protestants. The deutcro- canonical (Se&repos, "second") are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters, but which long ago gained a secure footing in the Bible of the Catholic Church, though those of the O. T. are classed by Protestants as the "Apocrypha". Tie s. consist of seven books: Tobias, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom. First and Second Machabees; also certain additions to Esther and Daniel. Some portions of the Xew Testament whose canonicity was formerly contested are sometimes styled the deutcro- canonicals of £he X. T. These are the Epistle to the Hebrews, those of St. .lames and Jude. the Second of St. Peter, the Second and Third of John, that of St. Jude, and the Apocalypse; also a few portions of books. The origin and history of the doubts concern- ing these writings will be considered in their place.

Protocanonical and deuterocanonical are modern terms, not having been used before the sixteenth century. As they are of cumbersome length, the latter (being frequently used in this article) will be often found in the abbreviated form deulero.

The scope of an article on the sacred Canon may now be seen to be properly limited to an examination of (1) what may be ascertained regarding the process of the collection of the sacred writings into bodies or groups which from their very inception were the ob- jects of a greater or less degree of veneration ; (2) the circumstances and manner in which these collections were definitely canonized, or adjudged to have a uniquely Divine and authoritative quality; (3) the vicissitudes which certain compositions underwent in the opinions of individuals and localities before their Scriptural character was universally established. It is thus seen that canonicity is a correlative of inspira- tion, being the extrinsic dignity belonging to writings which have been officially declared as of sacred origin and authority. It is antecedently very probable that according as a book was written early or late it entered into a sacred collection and attained a canon- ical standing. Hence the views of traditionalist and critic (not implying that the tradionalist may not also be critical) on the Canon parallel, and are largely influenced by, their respective hypotheses on the origin of its component members.

I. — The Canon of the Old Testament among the Jews. — It has already been intimated that there is a smaller, or incomplete, and a larger, or complete, Old Testament. Both of these were handed down by the Jews; the former by the Palestinian, the latter by the Alexandrian, or Hellenist, Jews; in conse- quence, this large topic must be subdivided: —

(1) The Canon among the Palestinian Jews (Proto- canonical Books). — The Jewish Bible of to-day is composed of three divisions, whose titles combined form the current Hebrew name for the complete Scriptures of Judaism: Hat-Torah, Xcbiini, taa-KithUr him, i. e, Tin- Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. This triplication is ancient; it is supposed as long- established in the Mishnah, the Jewish code of un- written sacred laws, reduced to writing c. A. D. 200. A grouping closely akin to it occurs in the X". T. in Christ's own words, Luke, xxiv, 44: "All things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms con- cerning me." Going back to the prologue of Eccle- siasticus, prefixed to it about 132 b. c, we find mentioned "the Law, and the Prophets, and others that have followed them". The Torah, or Law, con- sists of the five Mosaic books, Genesis, Exodus, Levi- ticus, XTimbers. Deuteronomy. The Prophets were subdivided by the Jews into the Former Prophets [i. e. the prophet ico-historieal books: Josue, Judges, Sam- uel (I and II Kings), and Kings (III and IV Kings)] and the Latter Prophets (Isaias, Jeremias, Ezechiel, and the twelve minor Prophets, counted by the He- brews as one book). The Writings, more generally known by a title borrowed from the Greek Fathers, Hagiographa (holy writings), embrace all the remain- ing books of the Hebrew Bible. Named in the order in which they stand in the current Hebrew text, these are: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Canticle of Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Esdras, Nehemias. or II Esdras, Paralipom- enon.

(a) Traditional view of the Canon of the Palestinian Jews, or Proto-Canon. — In opposition to scholars of more recent views, conservatives do not admit that the Prophets and the Hagiographa represent two suc- cessive stages in the formation of the Palestinian Canon. According to this older school, the principle which dictated the separation between the Prophets and the Hagiographa was not of a chronological kind, but one found in the very nature of the respective