TheBook of Baruch is adeuterocanonical book of theBible, used in manyChristian traditions, such as Catholic and Orthodox churches. InJudaism andProtestant Christianity, it is considered not to be part of thecanon, with theProtestant Bibles categorizing it as part of theBiblical apocrypha.[1] The book is named afterBaruch ben Neriah, the prophetJeremiah's scribe who is mentioned at Baruch 1:1, and has been presumed to be the author of the whole work.[2] The book is a reflection of a late Jewish writer on the circumstances of Jewish exiles fromBabylon, with meditations on the theology and history ofIsrael, discussions of wisdom, and a direct address to residents ofJerusalem and theDiaspora. Some scholars propose that it was written during or shortly after the period of theMaccabees.[3]
The Book of Baruch is sometimes referred to as1 Baruch[4] to distinguish it from2 Baruch,3 Baruch and4 Baruch.
Although the earliest known manuscripts of Baruch are in Greek, linguistic features of the first parts of Baruch (1:1–3:8) have been proposed as indicating a translation from aSemitic language.[5]
Baruch 1:1–14 gives a narrative account of an occasion when Baruch ben Neriah reads the book of 'these words' before the Israelites in Babylon, and then sends that book (together with collected funds) to be read in Jerusalem. Where the Book of Baruch is considered to be a distinct work of scripture, it is commonly identified as the book that Baruch reads; and hence Baruch himself has traditionally been credited as the author of the whole work. However, the syntactical form of Baruch chapter 1 has been held rather to imply that 'these words' correspond to a preceding text – which might then be identified with Lamentations or with the Book of Jeremiah; in which case comparison may be made with a corresponding notice of Baruch writing down reading the prophecies of Jeremiah, recorded at Jeremiah chapter 36.[7] These considerations underlie an alternative tradition (found for instance inAugustine) in which all four works (Book of Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, Letter of Jeremiah) are credited to Jeremiah himself as author.
Critical scholarship is, however, united in rejecting either Baruch or Jeremiah as author of the Book of Baruch, or in dating the work in the period of its purported context; theBabylonian Exile. Rather they have seen clear thematic and linguistic parallels with later works; theBook of Daniel and theBook of Sirach. Many scholars have noted that the restoration of worship in theJerusalem Temple following its pollution byAntiochus Epiphanes could provide a counterpart historical context in which the narrative of Baruch may equally be considered to apply; and consequently a date in the period 200–100 BCE has been proposed.[8]
1:1–14 Introduction: "And these are the words...which Baruch...wrote in Babylonia.... And when they heard it they wept, and fasted, and prayed before the Lord."
1:15–2:10 Confession of sins: "[T]he Lord hath watched over us for evil, and hath brought it upon us: for the Lord is just in all his works.... And we have not hearkened to his voice"....
2:11–3:8 Prayer for mercy: "[F]or the dead that are in hell, whose spirit is taken away from their bowels, shall not give glory and justice to the Lord..." (cf.Psalms6:6/5)
3:9–4:14 Apaean for Wisdom: "Where are the princes of the nations,... that hoard up silver and gold, wherein men trust? ... They are cut off, and are gone down to hell,..."
4:5–5:9 Baruch's Poem ofConsolation:[9] messages for those in captivity, for the "neighbours of Zion", and forJerusalem: "You have been sold to the Gentiles, not for your destruction: but because you provoked God to wrath.... [F]or the sins of my children, he [the Eternal] hath brought a nation upon them from afar...who have neither reverenced the ancient, nor pitied children..." "Let no one gloat over me [Jerusalem], a widow, bereft of many, for the sins of my children I am left desolate, for they turned from the law of God". "Look toward the east, O Jerusalem, and see the joy that is coming to you from God".[10]
No reference to the Book of Baruch is found inRabbinic literature, nor is its text cited.[5][11] A fragment of theLetter of Jeremiah in Greek has been excavated amongst theDead Sea Scrolls, but no counterpart fragments survive of the Book of Baruch.[12] It is generally argued that there are no references to, quotations from, or allusions to the Book of Baruch in theNew Testament,[5][13] although Adams proposes a general similarity between themes in the later parts of the book and some in thePauline Epistles, particularlyGalatians and1 Corinthians.[14] The earliest evidence for the text of the Book of Baruch is in quotations in the works of early ChristianChurch Fathers; the earliest citation being in theLegatio pro Christianis: 9 ofAthenagoras of Athens, dated 177.[5] Much the most extensive use of the Book of Baruch in patristic literature is in theAdversus Haereses: 5.35.1 (c. 180) ofIrenaeus of Lyons, which draws extensively on Baruch 4:36 to 5:9.[14] Both Athenagorus and Irenaeus cite these readings as being from theBook of Jeremiah. A brief quotation appears also in thePaedagogus byClement of Alexandria.[15] Increasingly from the 4th century onwards, however, Greek Fathers tend to cite such readings as from a 'Book of Baruch', although Latin Fathers consistently maintain the former practice of citing these texts as from Jeremiah, and where they do refer to a 'Book of Baruch' are to be understood as denoting the apocalyptic work,2 Baruch.[16]
Both the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah are separate books in the greatpandect Greek Bibles,Codex Vaticanus (4th century) andCodex Alexandrinus (5th century), where they are found in the order Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, Letter of Jeremiah.[17] In theCodex Sinaiticus (4th century) Lamentations follows directly after Jeremiah and Baruch is not found; but alacuna after Lamentations prevents a definitive assessment of whether Baruch may have been included elsewhere in this manuscript. Neither of the two surviving early Latin pandect Bibles (Codex Amiatinus (7th century) andLeon palimpsest (7th century) includes either the Book of Baruch or the Letter of Jeremiah;[16] the earliest Latin witnesses to the text being theCodex Cavensis (9th century) and theTheodulfian Bibles (9th century). Baruch is also witnessed in some early Coptic (Bohairic and Sahidic) and Syriac manuscripts, but is not found in Coptic or Syriac lectionaries.[18]
The Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Arabic, Bohairic and Ethiopic versions of Baruch are all translated directly from the Greek;[5] the text of which survives in Vaticanus and Alexandrinus, and is highly consistent.[19] Jerome (5th century) states that no Hebrew text was in existence,[20] and Origen (3rd century) appears to know of no Hebrew text in the preparation of the text of Baruch in theHexapla Old Testament. Nevertheless, there are a number of readings in the earlier sections of Baruch (1:1 to 3:8) where an anomalous reading in the Greek appears to imply a mistranslation of a Hebrew or Aramaic source; as at chapter 3:4, where 'hear now the prayers of thedead of Israel' (מֵתֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל) is assumed to be a mistranslation of, 'hear now the prayers of themen of Israel'[5] (מְתֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, from the plural word מְתִים 'men' as in biblical expressions like מְתֵי אָהֳלִי 'men of my tent',[21] מְתֵי שָׁוְא 'men of vanity'[22] or מְתֵי מִסְפָּר 'men of few [numbers]'[23]). Since the 19th century, critical scholars have assumed a Semitic original for these earlier parts of the book, and a number of studies, such as that of Tov,[24][25] have sought to retrovert from the Greek to a plausible Hebrew source text. Whereas in theRevised Standard Version (1957) of Bible, the English text of Baruch consistently follows the Greek in these readings; in theNew Revised Standard Version (1989) these readings are adjusted to conform with a conjectural reconstruction of a supposed Hebrew original.
Nevertheless, some more recent studies of Baruch, such as those by Adams and Bogaert, take the Greek text to be the original.[26][16] Adams maintains that most of the text of Baruch depends on that of other books of the Bible; and indeed it has been characterised by Tov as a "mosaic of Biblical passages" especially in these early sections.[25] Consequently, variations from the literal Hebrew text could have found their way directly into a dependent Greek version, without having to presume a Semitic intermediary stage. Moreover, Adams takes issue with the presupposition behind conjectural retroversions to conform to a supposed Hebrew text; that the author of Baruch understood the principle of literal translation, and aspired to follow that principle; and yet lamentably failed to do so.[27]
Baruch is mentioned by theSynod of Laodicea (c. 364); where a list of canonical books is variously appended to canon 59, in whichJeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle are stated as canonical.[31] This list is found in compendiums of the decrees of Laodicea circulating in the Ethiopic church, and in all later Greek compendiums; but is absent from counterpart compendiums of Laodicea circulating in the Latin, Coptic and Syriac churches; as too from some earlier Greek compendiums. In the decrees of theCouncil of Florence (1442)[32] and theCouncil of Trent (1546),[33] "Jeremias with Baruch" is stated as canonical.
PopeInnocent I (405 AD),[34] theCouncil of Rome (382 AD),[35] theSynod of Hippo (in 393),[36] followed by theCouncil of Carthage (397) and theCouncil of Carthage (419)[37] mention Jeremiah as a canonical book without mentioning Baruch, but it is commonly accepted that the absence of specific mention of Baruch in canon lists circulating in the West cannot be interpreted as an assertion that the Book of Baruch was non-canonical only that it is being assumed within Jeremiah. Most of the Church Fathers considered Jeremiah as a single book, along with Baruch, Lamentations and the Epistle.
Augustine of Hippo (c. 397 AD) in his workThe City of God 18:33 he discusses the text of Baruch 3: 36–38, noting that this is variously cited to Baruch and to Jeremiah; his preference being for the latter.[38] Jerome did not consider the Book of Baruch as a canonical book, but he included it in hisVulgate.[5]
The evident variation among early Christian divines as to whether a particular reading is to be cited from 'Baruch' or 'Jeremiah' is generally regarded as relating to the very different texts of theBook of Jeremiah that are found respectively in manuscripts of the Greek and Hebrew Bibles.[5] The version of Jeremiah in the GreekSeptuagint texts (Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) is a seventh shorter than that in the HebrewMasoretic Text or the Latin Vulgate; and the ordering of the chapters is very different, with sections from the middle of the book in the Septuagint version (the Oracles against the Nations) found at the end of the book in the Masoretic text and Vulgate. As Hebrew fragments have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls corresponding to both the Septuagint and Masoretic orders, it is commonly accepted that the two versions derive from two distinct Hebrew traditions, and that the Septuagint form of the text is likely the older.[5]Benedictine scholar Pierre-Maurice Bogaert suggests that, if the Book of Baruch is appended to the Septuagint version of Jeremiah, it follows on as a plausible continuation of the Septuagint narrative (Chapter 51: 31–35 in the Septuagint, corresponding to the truncated Chapter 45 in the Masoretic text).[16] A similar conclusion is proposed byEmanuel Tov, who notes characteristics of a consistent redactional revision of the Septuagint text of Jeremiah from Chapter 29 onwards (correcting readings towards the Hebrew), a revision that is then carried over into the Greek text of Baruch 1:1 to 3:8, suggesting that these once formed a continuous text.[39] Bogaert consequently proposes that the gathering of sections from the end of Septuagint Jeremiah into a distinct book of 'Baruch' was an innovation of Christian biblical practice in the Greek church from around the 3rd century onwards; but that the version of Jeremiah in theOld Latin Bible preceded this practice, and hence did not designate the Book of Baruch as a distinct work of scripture, but included its text within the Book of Jeremiah.[16] The text of Old Latin Jeremiah nowhere survives in sufficient form for this speculation to be confirmed, but Bogaert proposes that its characteristics may be recognised in the texts of Baruch in the early Theodulfian Vulgate Bibles; noting that Baruch in these manuscripts is continuous with Jeremiah, and that the end at Chapter 5:9 is marked by anexplicit in Old Latin form, stating "Explicit hieremiae prophetae".[16]
Baruch 1:14 – 2:5; 3:1–8 is a liturgical reading within the revised Roman CatholicBreviary[41] for the 29th Week inOrdinary Time, FridayOffice of Readings. The subject isthe prayer and confession ofsin of a penitent people:
Justice is with the Lord, ourGod; and we today are flushed with shame, we men ofJudah and citizens of Jerusalem, that we, with our kings and rulers andpriests and prophets, and with our fathers, have sinned in the Lord's sight and disobeyed him. ... And the Lord fulfilled the warning he had uttered against us.... Lord Almighty, ... Hear... and have mercy on us, who have sinned against you... (Baruch 1:15–18; 2:1; 3:1–2)
Augustine of Hippo's reflection, which is paired with this reading, on this occasion speaks ofprayer: "[S]ince this [that we pray for] is that peace that surpasses all understanding, even when we ask for it in prayer we do not know how to pray for what is right..."; from there he explains what it means that theHoly Spirit pleads for the saints.
Baruch 3:9–15, 24–4:4 is a liturgical reading for the Saturday of the same week. The theme is thatthe salvation of Israel is founded on wisdom: "Learn where prudence is, ... that you may know also where are length of days, and life, where light of the eyes, and peace. Who has found the place of wisdom, who has entered into her treasuries? ... She is the book of the precepts of God, ... All who cling to her will live... Turn, OJacob, and receive her: ... Give not your glory to another, your privileges to an alien race." Paired with this on the same day is a reading fromPeter Chrysologus,[42] died AD 450, who quotesPaul the Apostle: "let us also wear the likeness of the man of heaven".[43]
In the American 1928Book of Common Prayer,the Daily Office lectionary includes the Book of Baruch for the First Lesson on several occasions: Baruch 4:21–30 on the Second Sunday after Easter; Baruch 3:14–15, 29–37 for the 21st Sunday after Trinity; and Baruch 5 for the 22nd Sunday after Trinity.[49] In the American Book of Common Prayer (1979) Baruch 5:1–9 is the Old Testament reading for Advent II (Year C); and in the Daily Office (Year 2) Baruch 4:21–29 is prescribed for Advent IV, and Baruch 4:36–5:9 for Dec. 24.[50]
InSumma TheologiaeIII 4 4,Doctor of the ChurchThomas Aquinas quotes Baruch3:37 (3:38 in Vulgate) to affirm that "the Son of God assumed human nature in order to show Himself in men's sight, according to Baruch 3:38:Afterwards He was seen upon earth, and conversed with men. This statement, more properly rendered asAfterward he appeared on earth and lived with humankind. is part of his discussion of "the mode of union on the part of the human nature"III 4. He quotes the same passage of Baruch inIII 40 1 to help answer "whether Christ should have associated with men, or led a solitary life"III 40. By switching the gender of the pronoun, this reading, which properly is discussingDivine Wisdom was widely re-interpreted in Christian discourse as a prophecy of theincarnation of Jesus Christ.
Church FatherClement of Alexandria,[51] d. AD 217, quoted Baruch3:16–19, referring to the passage thus: "Divine Scripture, addressing itself to those who love themselves and to the boastful, somewhere says most excellently: 'Where are the princes of the nations...'" (see "Paean for Wisdom" exampleinfra) (Jurgens §410a).
Hilary of Poitiers,[52] d. AD 368, also aChurch Father, quoted the same passage as Thomas,supra, (3:36–38), citing "Jeremias", about which Jurgens states: "Baruch was secretary to Jeremias, and is cited by the Fathers mostly under the name of Jeremias" (§864n). Hilary states: "BesidesMoses andIsaias, listen now a third time, and to Jeremias, who teaches the same thing, when He says:..." (Jurgens §864).
The Letter of Jeremiah (Baruch 6) is quoted in theCatechism of the Catholic Church[54] as part of an exposition againstidolatry. During theDiaspora theJews lamented their lapse into idolatry, and their repentance is captured in the Book of Baruch.
^Reginald C. Fuller, ed. (1975) [1953].A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. Thomas Nelson., §504h. Also, "late Babylonian"; "alluded to, seemingly, in2 Mac2:1–3" inThe Jerusalem Bible, 1966, p. 1128.
^Bible Society,Baruch, Bible Book Club, accessed 22 July 2019
^"Baruch" by P. P. Saydon, revised by T. Hanlon, inA New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, ed.Reginald C. Fuller, Thomas Nelson, Inc. Publishers, 1953, 1975, §504j. The same source states that "[t]here is also evidence that Baruch was read in Jewish synagogues on certain festivals during the early centuries of the Christian era (Thackeray, 107-11)", i.e. Henry St. John Thackeray,The Septuagint and Jewish Worship, 1923.
^Bogaert, Pierre-Maurice (2005). "Le livre de Baruch dans les manuscrits de la Bible latine. Disparition et réintégration".Revue Bénédictine.115 (2):286–342.doi:10.1484/J.RB.5.100598.
^abcdefBogaert, Pierre-Maurice (2005). "Le livre de Baruch dans les manuscrits de la Bible latine. Disparition et réintégration".Revue Bénédictine.115 (2):286–342.doi:10.1484/J.RB.5.100598.
^Adams, Sean A. (2014).Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah. Brill. p. 1.
^Adams, Sean A. (2014).Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah. Brill. p. 3.
^Adams, Sean.A. (2014).Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah. Brill. p. 12.
^Adams, Sean.A. (2014).Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah. Brill. p. 2.
^Westcott, Brooke Foss (2005).A general survey of the history of the canon of the New Testament Page 570 (6th ed.). Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock.ISBN1597522392.
^Tov, Emmanuel (1976).The Septuagint Translation of Jeremiah and Baruch: A Discussion of an Early Revision of Jeremiah 29–52 and Baruch 1:1–3:8. Scholars Press.
^Luther, Martin; Füssel, Stephan (1534).Bible de Luther de 1534, Réimpression Intégral. Taschen. p. 41.ISBN978-3-8228-2470-2.{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
^Readings from the Apocrypha. Forward Movement Publications. 1981. p. 5.
^Prayer Book and Hymnal, Containing The Book of Common Prayer and The Hymnal 1982, According to the use of The Episcopal Church, The Church Hymnal Corporation New York, 1986.
