AUTOCEPHALI
142
AUTOCEPHALI
Of these the most famous were TjTidale's Bible
(1525); Coverdale's Bible (1535); Matthews' Bible
(1537); Cromwell's, or the "Great Bible" (1539),
the second and subsequent editions of which were
known as Cranmer's Bible; the Geneva Bible (1557-
60); and the Bishops' Bible (1568). The art of
printing being by this time known, copies of all these
circulated freely among the people. That there was
much good and patient work in them, none will deny;
but they were marred by the perversion of many
passages, due to the theological bias of the trans-
lators; and they were used on all sides to serve the
cause of Protestantism.
In order to counteract the evil effects of these versions, the Catholics determined to produce one of their own. Many of them were then living at various centres on the Continent, ha\'ing been forced to leave England on account of the Penal Laws, and the work was undertaken by the members of Allen's College, at Douai, in Flanders, which was for a time transferred to Reims. The result was the Reims New Testament (1582) and the Douay Bible (1609- 10). The translation was made from the Vulgate, and although accurate, was sadly deficient in literary form, and so full of Latinisms as to be in places hardly intelligible. Indeed, a few years later. Dr. William Fulke, a well-known Puritan controversialist, brouglit out a book in which th; cext of the Bishops' Bible and the Reims Testament were printed in parallel columns, with the sole purpose of discrediting the latter. In this he did not altogether succeed, and it is now generall}' conceded that the Douay Bible contained much excellent and scholarly work, its very faults being due to over-anxiety not to sacrifice accu- racy. In the meantime the Protestants were becom- ing dissatisfied with their own versions, and soon after his accession King James I appointed a commission of revision — the only practical outcome of the celebrated Hampton Court Conference. The commissioners, who numbered f orty-se\en , were divided into six companies, two of which sat at Oxford, Cambridge, and Westminster, respectively; each company under- took a definite portion of the Bible, and its work was afterwards revised by a select committee chosen from the whole body. The instructions for their pro- cedure were, to take the Bishops' Bible, which was in use in the churches, as their basis, correcting it by a comparison \^•ith the Hebrew and Greek texts. They were also given a list of other English versions which they were to consult. The commissioners set to work in 1607, and completed their labours in the short period of two years and nine months, the result being what is now known as the "Authorized Ver- sion ". Although at first somewhat slow in gaining general acceptance, the Authorized Version has since become famous as a masterpiece of English literature. The first edition appeared in 1611, soon after the Douay Bible, and nearly thirty years after the Reims Testament; and although this latter was not one of the versions named in the instructions to the revisers, it is understood that it had con- siderable influence on them (see Preface to Revised Version, i, 2. Also, J. G. Caleton, "Rheims and the Eriglish Bible").
The Authorized Version was printed in the usual form of chapters and verses, and before each chapter a summarj' of its contents was prefixed. No other extraneous matter was permitted, except some marginal explanations of the meaning of cer- tain Greek or Hebrew words, and a number of cross- references to other parts of the Scripture. At the beginning was placed a dedication to King James and a short "Address to the Reader". Books such as Ecclesiasticus, and Machabees, and Tobias, which are considered by Protestants to be apocryphal, were of course omitted. Although it was stated on the title-page that the Authorized \'ersion was "ap-
pointed to be read in the Churches ", in fact it came
into use only gradually. For the Epistles and
Gospels, it did not displace the Bishops' \'ei-sion
until the revision of the Liturgj' in 1661; and for the
Psalms, that version has been retained to the present
day; for it was fomid that the people were so ac-
customed to singing it that any change was inad-
visable, if not impossible. Considerable changes
were made, from time to time, in the successive
editions of the Authorized Version, in the notes and
references, and some even in the text. A system of
chronology based chiefly on the calculations of Arch-
bishop Ussher was first inserted in 1701; but in
many later editions both the dates and many, or
e^en all, of the references or verbal notes have been
omitted.
It is generally admitted that the Authorized Ver- sion was in almost every respect a great improve- ment on anj' of its predecessors. So much was this the case that when Bishop Challoner made his revision of the Douay Bible (1749-52), which is now commonly in use among English-speaking Catholics, he did not scruple to borrow largely from it. Indeed, Cardinal Newman gives it as his opinion (Tracts Theol. and Eccles., 373) that Challoner's revision was even nearer to the Authorized ^'ersion than to the original Douay, "not in grammatical structure, but in phraseology and diction ". Ne\'ertheless, there remained in the Authorized Version here and there traces of controversial prejudice, as for example, in the angel's salutation to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the words "highly favoured" being a very imperfect rendering of the original. In such cases, needless to say, Challoner adliered to the Douay. Moreover, while in the Authorized Version the names of persons and places were usually given in an anglicized form already in use, derived from the Hebrew spelling, Challoner nearly always kept the Vulgate names, which come originally from the Septuagint. It is partly due to this that the Authorized Version has an unfamiliar sound to Catholic ears. The Au- thorized N'ersion remained in undisputed possession for the greater part of three centuries, and became part of the life of the people. In the latter half of the nineteenth centurj', however, it began to be con- sidered that the progress of science called for a new version which should embrace the results of modern research. The work was set on foot by Convocation in 1870, and a Committee was formed, in which the Americans co-operated, resulting in the issue of the Revised Version (1881-84). The Revised Version has ne\'er received any definite ecclesiastical sanction, nor has it been officially introduced into church use. It has made its way simply on its merits. But al- though at the present day it is much used by students, for the general public (non-Catholic) the Authorized Vereion still holds its ground, and shows no sign of losing its popularity.
ScRrvENER, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1884); Preface to the Rcrised Version; English Hexapla, In- troduction (s. v.); MiLLiGAN, in H.\st.. Diet, of the Bible, s. V. Versions; G.^squet, The Old English Bible (London, 1897); C-4RLETON, Rheims and the English Bible (Oxford, 1902). Bern.^bd Ward.
Autocephali (Gr., avroK^tpaXoi, independent), a designation in early Christian times of certain bishops who were subject to no patriarch or metro- politan, but depended directly on the triennial pro- vincial synod or on the Apostolic See. In case of heresy, e. g., or other grave offences, they coukl only be judged by these tribunals. Such were the bishops of Cj'prus (cf. Coimcil of Ephesus. Act. VII; TruUan Council, can. 39), the Bishops of Iberia and Armenia as late as the time of Photius, those of Britain before the coming of St. Augustine, and for a while those of Ravenna. The extension of the patriarchal authority diminished their mnnber. Quite similar were certain Oriental bishops in the Patriarchates
