Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-01-29

defines, and the Deutero-canonica books
were not those which had been re-
ceived into the canon later, but those
about which there had been grave ques-
TONS" OF course the Proto-canonical ones
had always been acknowledged, and they
were for that very reason first in the canon
in order of time, and the Deutero- canonical
books are those concerning which doubt
had for some centuries existed, and which,
consequently, were placed in the canon at
a later date. Where Mr.. Thomas sees con-
tradiction there is absolute agreement.
The church, as Catholics assert, is the
sole Judge whether books are inspired or
canon or list of inspired books. Until she
has taken action, not only grave doubts
may exist concerning the inspiration of
books, but moreover without action on her
part the question could never be settled,
whether they ought to be placed in the
canon or not. This is the argument to
which l have been for years
calling the attention of my Protest
ant friends. that without the teach
ing of an infallible church they can
have no Bible, and consequently no authen-
tic record whatsoever of revelation. For
nearly four centuries Christians were I'M
settled as to the inspiration of many books
both of the Old and the New Testaments,
which books were not then in the canon
or public list of the church. Hence the
present name applied to them-deutero-
canonical, i. O., books placed in the canon
at a later date than others, and about
which, until they were so placed in the can
on, grave question had been raised. But
once placed in the canon, the question is
decided; they are officially declared to be
inspired, and they enjoy the same degree
of authority, intrinsic and extrinsic, as
proto- canonical books.
Mr.. Thomas will not admit that paral-
lei meaning to that given it in connection
with the canon may be seen in the word
deuteros as used in connection with one of
the books of the Pentateuch. "Deuterono-
N.Y." he says, "means the repeated law"
If he reads carefully Deuteronomy, he
will find in it great many new things
not repeated from previous books. Are
not these new things, in his eyes, of equal
authority with things said in Exodus and
Numbers?
THE CATHOLIC ARGUMENT FOB THE CANONI-
CITY OF THE D. G. BOOKS.
There should be no difficulty for Prot
estants to understand the status of the
Deutero- books of the Old Tesla
ment, as they are exactly in the same po-
sition as several books of the New Tesla
ment. Indeed this similarity of position
and the necessity of church decision for
even books of the New Testament was one
of Card. Newman's arguments in favor OF
the church, when he was preparing to be-
como Catholic. In his Development
page 124, he says: "For instance, as to the
Epistle of James. It is true, it is con-
tanned in the old Syriac version in the seco1ld
century; but 0rigen, in the third century,
is the first writer who distinctly mentions
it among the Greeks, and it is not quoted
by name by any Latin till the fourth. st.
Jerome speaks of its gaining credit "by
degrees in process of time" Eusebius
says no more than that it had been, up
to his time, acknowledged by the ma
jority, and he classes it with the
Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of
st. Barnabas. Again, the epistle to the
Hebrews, though received in the East, was
not received in the Latin church until st.
Jerome's time, st. Ireneus either does
not affirm, or denies that 1t Is
st. PauIs. Tertullian ascribes it to st.
Barnabas. Caius excludes it from his list
st. Hippolytus does not receive it. st. Cy-
prian is silent about it. 1t is doubtful
whether st. Optatus received it. st. Jer-
ONE tells us that in his day, A. D. 400, the
Greek church rejected the Apocalypse, but
the Latin received it. The New Tesla
ment consists of twenty -seven books in all,
of these fourteen are not mentioned at all
till from eighty to one hundred years after
st. Johns death, in which number are the
Acts, the second to the Corinthians, the
two to the Thessalonians, the Galatians,
and st. James. Of the other thirteen,
five, viz: st. Johns Gospel, the Philip
plans, the first to Timothy, the Hebrews,
and the first of st. John, are quoted but by
one writer during the same period. On
what ground, then, do we receive the canon
as it comes to us, but on the authority of
the church of the fourth and fifth centur-
ies?"
The Deutero-cononical books of the Old
Testament have Jared exactly alike in the
Christian church. All questions raised
about their canonicity cea sed early IN the
fifth century. From that time the consent
of the church in their favor was general.
Two councils of Carthage A. D. 1913, and
397, testify for them in the name of the
church of Africa. Innocent I. A. D. 405,
Gelasius A. D. 1876 include them in their
Roman conons. TIE Greek bishops as
sembled in Trullo, A. D. 692, and, later.
Photius, patriarch of Constantinople show
the Greeks united on this point with the
Latins. The old manuscripts, the Vatican,
the Alexandrian and the Siraitic, mingle
the Deutero- canonical with the Proto-can-
onicl books. After the Oriental schisms,
Greek, Syrian and Armenian schismatics,
as we'll as Greek, Syrian and Armenian
Catholics, maintained them in the canon.
When Professionalism in the 18th cent ury
put them aside, it contradicted the COM
mon consent of the church for ages, de-
prived itself of all right to appeal to that
consent for it's belief in the canonicity of
books of the New Testament, and left it
self logically without Bible,
mere theory of religion
without foundation in reason or fact.
The teaching of the church is my argu-
ment for the admission of the deutero-
canonical books of the old Testament into
the canon. When Mr.. Thomas says: "What
argument does the bishop advance to
overcome the testimony of Israel, and the
Judgment of the sanhedrim?" and having
reviewed my remarks in answer to one
of his previous lectures, adds: 1.-THE
above are all the arguments which he has
~ l.