3. The _Epistolæ canonicæ_ of distinguished bishops, especially
those of the _Sedes apostolicæ_, § 34, preeminently of Rome
and Alexandria, pertaining to questions which have had a
determining influence on church practice, which were at a
later time called at Rome _Epistt. decretales_.
4. The canonical laws of the emperors, νόμοι (Codex
Theodosianus in A.D. 440, Codex Justinianæus in A.D. 534,
Novellæ Justiniani).
The first systematically arranged collection of the Greek church
known to us was made by Johannes Scholasticus, then presbyter
at Antioch, afterwards Patriarch at Constantinople († 578). A
second collection, also ascribed to him, to which were added
the canonical νόμοι of Justinian, received the name of the
_Nomocanon_. In the West all earlier collections were put out
of sight by the _Codex canonum_ of the Roman abbot Dionysius the
Little (§ 47, 23), to which were also added the extant _Decretal
Epistles_ about A.D. 520.
§ 43.4. =Pseudepigraphic Church Ordinances.=--Even so early
as the 2nd and 3rd centuries there sprang up no inconsiderable
number of writings upon church law, with directions about ethical,
liturgical and constitutional matters for the instruction of the
church members as well as the clergy, the moral precepts of which
are of importance in church procedure as affording a standard
for discipline. The oldest probably of these has lately been
made again accessible to us in the Teaching of the XII. Apostles,
the Didache (§ 30, 7). It designates its contents, even where
these are taken not from the Old Testament or the “Gospel,” but
from the so-called church practice, as apostolic, with the honest
conviction that by means of oral apostolic tradition it may be
traced back to the immediate appointment of the Lord, without,
however, pseudepigraphically claiming to have been written by
the Apostles. Many treatises of the immediately following period,
no longer known to us or known only by fragments, occupied the
same standpoint. But even so early as the end of the 3rd century
pseudepigraphic apostolic fiction makes its appearance in
the so-called _Apostolic Didascalia_, and some sixty years
later, it reached its climax in the eight bks. of the so-called
=Constitutiones Apostolicæ=, Διαταγαὶ τῶν ἀπ. διὰ Κλήμεντος. The
first six bks. correspond to the previously named _Didascalia_
expanded and variously altered.[119] It assumes the form of a
prolix epistolary discourse of the Apostle, communicated through
Clement of Rome, about everything pertaining to the Christian
life, the Catholic system of doctrine, liturgical practice and
hierarchical constitution which may be necessary and useful for
the laity as well as the clergy to know, with the exclusion,
however, of everything which belonged to the department of what
was then regarded as the _Disciplina arcani_ (§ 36, 4). Of older
writings, so far as known, those principally used are the seven
Ignatian Epistles (§ 30, 5). It is post-Novatianist (§ 41, 3)
and belongs to a time pre-Constantine but free from persecution
(§ 22, 6), and may therefore be placed somewhere between A.D. 260
and A.D. 302. It was written probably in Syria.--While the first
six bks. of the Apostolic Constitutions may be compared to the
Syrian recension as a contemporary rendition of the Didascalia,
the =seventh book= from an examination of the Didache seems
a rendition of that little work, in which the assumption of
apostolic authorship is made, and from which everything offensive
to the forger and his age is cut out, the old text being
otherwise literally reproduced, while into it is cleverly
smuggled from his own resources whatever would contribute to
the support of his own peculiar views as well as the prevailing
practice of the church. The Eusebian symbol, which is given in
the 41st chap., is an anti-Nicene, anti-Marcellianist, Arianizing
formula, fixing the date of the forgery at the period of the
Arian controversy, somewhere between A.D. 340 and A.D. 350
(§ 50, 2).--The =eighth book= is in great part an unmistakeable
forgery compiled from older sources belonging to the 3rd century,
some of which are still to be found, and forms a handbook for
the discharge of clerical, especially episcopal, duties in
the conducting of worship and other clerical functions, _e.g._
ordination, baptism, etc., together with the relative liturgical
formularies, drawn up in a thoroughly legal-like style, in
which the Apostles one by one give their contribution with the
formula Διατάσσομαι. The composition is probably ante-Nicene,
but the date of its incorporation with the other seven books
is uncertain.--In most, though not in all, MSS. the =Canones
Apostolorum=, sometimes 50, sometimes 85, in number, are appended
to the eighth book as its last chapter. Their standpoint is that
common to the canons of the early councils from which they are
chiefly borrowed. In respect of contents they treat mainly of
the moral behaviour and official functions of the clergy. The
85th contains a Scripture canon of the Old and New Testaments,
including the two Epp. of the Roman Clement (§ 30, 3), as well
as the Apost. Constitutions, but omitting the Apocalypse of John
(comp. § 33, 9). The collection of the apostolic canon cannot
have been made before the beginning of the 5th century, and most
likely in Syria. Dionysius the Little admitted only the first 50
as _Canones qui dicuntur Apostolorum_, but Johannes Scholasticus
quite unhesitatingly ascribes all the 85 to Clement of Rome. The
Second Trullan Council in A.D. 692 (§ 63, 2) acknowledged the
genuineness of the 85, but rejected the Apostolic Constitutions
as a heretical forgery which had found no general acceptance in
the West.--While hitherto it has been surmised that the 7th bk.
of the Apost. Constit., as an independent and original work,
should be assigned to another and a much later author than the
first six bks., Harnack, founding upon his study of the Didache,
has come to a clear understanding of their mutual relations. He
shows that the original documents lying at the basis respectively
of the Didache and the Didascalia are fundamentally distinct in
respect of composition and character, but the two in the form in
which they lie before us in the Apost. Constit. are undoubtedly
the work of one and the same interpolator. We further obtain
the equally convincing and surprising result that the author of
this forgery is also identical with the author of the =thirteen
Pseudo-Ignatian Epistles= (§ 30, 5), and had in the one case and
in the other the same object in view. Finally, he characterizes
him as a Syrian cleric well versed in Scripture, especially
the Old Testament, but also a shrewd worldly politician,
opposed to all strict asceticism, who sought by his forgeries
to win apostolic sanction and justification not only for the
constitutional and liturgical institutions of the church, as well
as the milder practice of his age, but also for his own semi-Arian
doctrinal views.
§ 43.5. =The Apostolic Church Ordinances=[120] are, according
to Harnack’s careful analysis, a compilation executed in a most
scholarly fashion of extracts from four old writings: the Didache,
the Ep. of Barnabas, from which the moral precepts are taken,
a κατάστασις τοῦ κλήρου from the beginning of the 3rd century,
and a κατάστασις τῆς ἐκκλησίας from the end of the 2nd century,
with many clumsy alterations and excursuses after the style of
the church tradition of its own period, the beginning of the
4th century. Its introduction consists of a formula of greeting
modelled upon the Ep. of Barnabas from the twelve Apostles who
are designated by name. The list, which begins with the name of
John, wants one of the two Jameses and the late chosen Matthias,
and the number of twelve is made up by the addition of the name
of Nathanael and that of Cephas in addition to that of Peter.
Then the Apostles tell that Christ had commanded them to divide
among them by lot the Eparchies, Episcopates, Presbyterates,
Diaconates, etc., of all lands, and to send forth οἱ λόγοι into
the whole οἰκουμένη; then follow these λόγοι, first the moral
rules, then the constitutional enactments, both being divided
among the several Apostles (Ἰωάννης εἶπεν, Ματθαίος εἶπεν,
etc.). The compilation had its origin in Egypt, not, however,
at Alexandria, where Athanasius was still unacquainted with it,
or at least did not think it worthy of being mentioned among the
church manuals (§ 59, 1), while at a later period it was held in
the highest esteem by the Copts, Ethiopians, Arabians, etc., and
took the first rank among their books on ecclesiastical procedure.