Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-12-04

constituency and when only ffty-three
representatives were present; that this
biunder of imperious haste and provincial
prejudice on account Of the dogma OF in
! fallibility can never be revoked.
That the formal introduction of the
| apocrypha into the canon OF scripture was
| a blunder of an ignorant and tyrannical
Italian nmaiority at the council of Trent,
may be clearly shown by tracing the
history of the vulgate. Let US then
address ourselves to this inquiry,
whence came that ''old vulgate"
of which the Roman church has SAID
| ''if any one receive not as sacred and canon
| ical this venerable edition, and knowingly
and deliberately condemn the traditions
concerning it, let him be anathema.'
For the canon or correct catalogue OF the
| books of the Old Testament the Christian
church must defer to the Jews, for unto
them were committed the oracles of God.
Now the Jews were accustomed to divide
the canonical scriptures into three parts.
The first they called s'the law by which
they meant the five books of Moses. ct
stood first because it was the original foun-
tain head of revelation.) The second they
called ssthe prophets" which included not
only what we call the Prophets but also
the historical books from Joshua to Kings.
The third they called scriptures or sacred
writings.'' This last class given in the
Talmudic order includes Ruth, Psalms,
Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles,
Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra and
Chronicles. Ezra who was only priest
and scribe and not a prophet in the sense
of Haggai (see Ezra v. H. and Daniel who
had not an abiding spirit of prophecy"
resting upon him were not included in tho
second class as we would suppose, but in
the third.
Beside these three classes of canonical
writings there was still fourth class such
as the Wisdom of Solomon and the two Mac
cabees which were entitled books "to be
read" It included all those writings to
whom Saint Jerome gave the name
Apccrypha.
These books, as written after the gift of
prophecy had been removedfrom Israel the
Jews never considered inspired. Josephus
gives the tradition of his countrymen
when he says 'sthe canon was closed in the
reign of Artaxerxes because then the sue
cession Of prophets was closed" and to the
same effect he says again, ''from Artaxerxes
down to our own times events have been
recorded but they have not been accounted
worthy of the same credit as these before
them, because the exact succession of
prophets existed no longer"
The first confusion in this uniform ira
dition between books canonical and books
''to be read" or as we would say between
the Old Testament and the Apocrypha may
be historically traced to that trans
lation of the Hebrew Bible commonly
known as the Septuagint. The Septuagint
was tho first Greek version of the ancient
scriptures. The early and popular fable
that it was the work of seventy rabbits
brought from Jerusalem who, shut up in
sells apart from each other made trans
lations exactly alike by inspiration of the
Holy Ghost, was exploded by Jerome and
since his time has not found credence ex-
cspt among those who delight in the su-
pernatural tales of the nursery. In regard
to tho origin of the Septuagint only these
facts are certainly known. First, the YER
sion was made at Alexandria. Second, it
was begun in the time of the elder Ptolo-
mics about 2SO before Christ. Third, it
was not all translated by the same men or
at the same time, there being unmistakable
evidence that the Pentateuch was first
translated, then the Prophets, then the
''sacred writings" and finally the Apocry-
pha. Fourth, it was not translated by Pal
estine Jews, but by the Hellenic or Greek
speaking Jews of Alexandria, as the i'm
perfect knowledge Of Hebrew abundantly
testifies.
Now this famous version of the Hebrew
Bible, of whose origin SO little is certainly
known, has utterly destroyed the distinc-
ton which the Palestine Jews had always
made between books s'canonical" and books
Ecclesiastical" Why the Alexandrian
translators did this we cannot tell. The
best explanation have met is the follow
ing. In speaking of the Apecrypha Prof.
Davidson says: @Its introduction into tho
Alexandrian canon may be accounted for
in the fact that the Jews of Alexandria
held different theory of inspiration from
that of the Palestinian Jews. Influenced
by the philosophical speculations of their
adopted city they had come to think that
divine wisdom is all pervading and subject
to no interruption in the constancy of its
influence"
The Palestinian Jew believed that in
SEPARATION ceased with the withdrawal of the
prophetic gift. while the Alexandrian Jew
believed that inspiration was not special
illumination belonging to special period,
Dub oil IuuuuIuaUlOu ds SSuerdI iAu as uul-
versal as wisdom itself.
Now whether this or some other may
have been the cause of this Alexandrian
blunder, one thing is certain that the mis-
take has been perpetuated in the Roman
vulgate. The connection between the two
is evident when we remember that the
vulgate originated in Alexandria. Strange
as it may seem it was the city of the Greek
Alexander and not the city of the Latin
Caesars which gave US the first Latin father
and the first Latin version of the holy
scriptures. This version is called 'the Old
ITALIA" 1t was made as early as A. D., ITO,
for Tertullian who lived in the second CEN
fury quotes from il as well known in his
day. In age it vies with the Syriac version
or Peshito, the oldest version of the Orient.
Up to the council of Carthage the Pesh-
ito was the Bible of the East as the 'Old
Itala'' was the Bible of the West.
These two Bibles differ from each other
in several particulars. In so far as the
New Testament was concerned they repre-
sented partial traditions, the one Of
Palestine and the Other of Alexandria. It
was natural, for instance, to find the epis-
tie to tho Hebrews in the Pedestrian Bible
and omitted in the Alexandrian for the
reason that it was addressed to the Hebrews
of Palestine who alone could Judge of its
;o;{ c. 6,