Melito of Sardis, who lived in the second century AD, gives the following account (as recorded from Eusebius) concerning the canonical books of the Scriptures:
“Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and sent them to you as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also [this can also be translated as “....Proverbs of Solomon, which is also called Wisdom.” See next page for more argumentation on this point of contention], Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book ; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books. Such are the words of Melito.” (Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, Book IV, Chapter 26)
A few things are important to consider here:
[1]. This value of this particular testimony is increased when he notes that Melito claims he “learned accurately the books of the Old Testament”, indicating that this was his own view, and not merely of the Jews in the East, as Michuta has wrongly claimed. Furthermore, earlier in this passage, Eusebius says the following concerning Melito’s account: “But in the Extracts made by him the same writer gives at the beginning of the introduction a catalogue of the acknowledged books of the Old Testament, which it is necessary to quote at this point.” Thus, this list of Melito contains the books acknowledged by the churches (with exceptions, of course) during the time of Eusebius and Melito (who lived two centuries apart). Gallagher says “Some scholars have pointed out that had Melito wanted to ask Jews about their canon, he could have done so in his native Sardis, where a large Jewish community flourished. Moreover, it seems likely that Melito would have sought out a Christian source to inform him of the books of the Old Testament, rather than a Jewish source.” (The Biblical Canon Lists from Early Christianity: Texts and Analysis, pg. 79)
[2]. Some of our divines (such as John Cosin) have perhaps correctly argued that the “Wisdom of Solomon” to which Melito makes reference is simply another name for the book of Proverbs. The blessed William Whitaker, however, rejects this view, saying: “no cause can be given why the same book should be twice named.” (A Disputation on Holy Scripture, pg. 56, cf. pg. 56n2). Nonetheless, as Cosin notes, this interpretation very well might be plausible considering how Rufinus, the student of Origen, translated this clause from Eusebius - “the Proverbs of Solomon, also called Wisdom” (The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 133 [trans. Philip R. Amidon, S.J.], pg. 180) . Thus Rufinus agrees with us that these two titles refer to the same book, though he himself (not Melito) viewed Wisdom of Solomon as a separate book. The phrase used is Σολομῶνος Παροιμίαι ἡ καὶ Σοφία. However, some manuscripts have ἤ (“or; also”, so that the phrase would read “...also called Wisdom”), while others have ἡ (“and”, so that the phrase would render Wisdom of Solomon as a separate and distinct book from Proverbs). Rufinus reads quae et here, which means “which is”, thus confirming the Greek reading ἤ. The footnote in Patrologiae Graecae 20:397 reads “We restore this passage from the faith of the old codices, Regius, Maz. , Med. , Fuk. and Saviliani, to whom Nicephorus also subscribes Σoλoμῶνος Παροιμίαι, ἢ καὶ Σοφία. But Rufinus also confirms this reading, rendering it thus: For the words of Solomon, which are wisdom. Certainly the ancients called almost all the Proverbs of Solomon Wisdom; between while and the wisdom of Panareton. See what we did not say above in chap. 22. Dionysius Alexandrinus: "ότι Κύριος δίδωσι σοφίαν , καὶ ἀπὸ προσόσειο αὐτοῦ γνώσης καὶ σύνεσις, ὡς ἡ Σοφή βίβλος ἐμήνυσε. Which words of Dionysius are referred to in the 28th chapter of Catenæ in Job. The author of the Itinerary of Jerusalem: ‘There also stands the chamber in which Solomon sat down and wrote the book of Wisdom [Proverbs].” (translated from Latin online: https://en.eprevodilac.com/prevodilac-latinski-engleski).
The Apostolic Constitutions also cites Proverbs 31 as being from the “Wisdom of Solomon” (Apost. Const., 1.3).
[3]. As for Melito’s omission of the book of Esther, some scholars maintain that this was an accident on Melito’s part, such as Moses Stuart (Critical History and Defense of the Old Testament Canon, pg. 260); H.E. Ryle (The Canon of the Old Testament, pg. 215); E. Ellis (The Old Testament in Early Christianity, pg. 11); Claudine Cavalier (Esther [La Bible d'Alexandrie 12, Paris 2012], pg. 117). This is similar to how Origen omitted the Minor Prophets (as we will see below), but it is still true that he no doubt believed them to be inspired canon (as Stuart notes). Some may object against me as follows - “if Melito could have omitted Esther while still believing it to be truly canonical, why could he not have done the same thing with the books of Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, etc?”. I respond by saying that it is one thing to omit one book accidentally; it is quite another to omit seven books altogether. Plus, Melito never cites these books anywhere else in his writings, particularly De Pascha.
No comments:
Post a Comment