APOCRYPHA, a name given to certain books to dis tinguish them from the Canonical Scriptures. The word means, concealed or obscure ; and was used to denote the uncertain origin, and doubtful authority, of the books to which it was applied. They are 14 in number, viz. 1 Esdras. 2 Esdras. Tobit. Judith. The rest of Esther. Wisdom of Solomon. Ecclesiasticus. Baruth, with the Epistle of Jeremiah. The Song of the three Children. The Story of Susanna. The Idol Bell and the Dragon. The Prayer of Manasses. 1 Maccabees. 2 Mac cabees.—The scrupulous care with which the Jews preserved the sacred writings is well known : and it might be a sufficient reason for rejecting the apocryphal books as inspired compositions, that they never were received by the Jews into the canon of scripture. There is scarcely any book in the Old Testament scriptures, which is not either quoted or alluded to by our Lord or his Apostles : but we do not find the most distant re ference either to the facts or sentiments contained in the Apocrypha. Nor were the apocryphal books ever con founded in the early ages of the Christian church with those which were universally acknowledged to be in spired. Origen admits some of the apocryphal writings to be ecclesiastical, or such as might be read in churches; but denies that any of them are of equal authority with those in the received canon. Athanasius, A. D. 340, published a book entitled, a Perfect View of the Scrip tures, in which he enumerates the books of the Old and New Testament as we now have them; and declares that these alone are to be received as the authentic and canonical scriptures. But of all the fathers, Jerome, who lived in the end of the 4th, and the beginning of the 5th century, is the most explicit in delivering his opinion respecting the books in question. He made an excellent translation, or rather an improvement on a former translation, of the holy scriptures, which is now known by the name of the Vulgate, and is universally used in the church of Rome. He also translated the books of the Apocrypha, from the Chaldaic and Greek originals. But at the same time he administers some wholesome cautions as to the use of them, declaring, that though they might be very proper to be read in churches, for edification in life and good morals, yet they were never to be employed for deciding any con troversy, nor for establishing any doctrine. The divines of the church of England received them with this limi tation, 6th Article of Religion, 1562. The church of Scotland, however, treats them with less ceremony, though probably with as much as their merit entitles them to. For in the Westminster Confession, chap. 1.
it is said, " the books commonly called Apocrypha; not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings."
But though we must utterly discard the apocryphal hooks from the list of inspired writing, yet they are deserving of a serious perusal. Some of them contain most excellent moral maxims, beautifully ex• pressed; others of them afford useful illustrations of ancient manners; and others again, such as the first book of AIaceabees, when taken in conjunction with Josephus, form a most important link in ecclesiastical and civil history. In these points of view they may be read with pleasure and advantage ; and there is little danger of their being mistaken for the dictates of inspi ration. For there occur in most of them, such extra vagant fictions, and such palpable contradictions, that the weakest understanding may detect them. The council of Trent, however, in its 4th session, A. D. 1546, decreed, in the plenitude of its wisdom, that the apocryphal books were to be admitted as of equal au thority with the received canon of scripture ; and de nounced divine wrath against all who should despise or reject them. But, if the holy fathers will allow us to bring history, reason, and common sense, in opposition to their decision, we shall undertake to prove, that it is founded in ignorance, or in selfish policy. The latter is the most probable supposition; for they must have been convinced, that if they could get the people to swallow the silly fictions contained in several of the books in this collection, their conscience would startle at no absur dity, however monstrous. Besides, there are two verses in 2 Mac. ch. 12. for the sake of which it was well worth while to preserve the whole collection. It is there said, that Judas Maccabeus and his soldiers hav ing found upon the persons of some Jews that had been slain, things consecrated to idols, betook themselves to prayer, that the wrath of God might not fall upon them, as it did in the case of Achan. Upon which, the writer of that book, whoever he was, makes this sage reflec tion : " Therein he did well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection. For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly (it was a holy and good thought). Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin." This is the only thing like scripture, that the papists can adduce in support of purgatory, with all its appara tus of masses for the dead, Sze.; a doctrine which stood too much in need of support to reject a passage so fa vourable to its claims.