gives a selection from the most ancient patristic MSS. and from various interpreters. No various reading of critical value is omitted. An edition of Bruder with readings of Samuel Prideaux Tregelles was published in 1888 under the editorship of Westcott and Hort. The Englishman’s Greek Concordance of the New Testament, and the Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance, are books intended to put the results of the above-mentioned works at the service of those who know little Hebrew or Greek. Every word in the Bible is given in Hebrew or Greek, the word is transliterated, and then every passage in which it occurs is given—the word, however it may be translated, being italicized. They are the work of George V. Wigram assisted by W. Burgh and superintended by S. P. Tregelles, B. Davidson and W. Chalk (1843; 2nd ed. 1860). Another book which deserves mention is, A Concordance to the Greek Testament with the English version to each word; the principal Hebrew roots corresponding to the Greek words of the Septuagint, with short critical notes and an index, by John Williams, LL.D., Lond. 1767.
In 1884 Robert Young, author of an analytical concordance mentioned below, brought out a Concordance to the Greek New Testament with a dictionary of Bible Words and Synonyms: this contains a concise concordance to eight thousand changes made in the Revised Testament. Another important work of modern scholarship is the Concordance to the Greek Testament, edited by the Rev. W. F. Moulton and A. E. Geden, according to the texts adopted by Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf, and the English revisers.
The first concordance to the English version of the New Testament was published in London, 1535, by Thomas Gybson. It is a black-letter volume entitled The Concordance of the New Testament most necessary to be had in the hands of all soche as delyte in the communicacion of any place contayned in ye New Testament.
The first English concordance of the entire Bible was John Marbeck’s, A Concordance, that is to saie, a worke wherein by the order of the letters of the A.B.C. ye maie redely find any worde conteigned in the whole Bible, so often as it is there expressed or mentioned, Lond. 1550. Although Robert Stephens had divided the Bible into verses in 1545, Marbeck does not seem to have known this and refers to the chapters only. In 1550 also appeared Walter Lynne’s translation of the concordance issued by Bullinger, Jude, Pellican and others of the Reformers. Other English concordances were published by Cotton, Newman, and in abbreviated forms by John Downham or Downame (cd. 1652), Vavasor Powell (1617-1670), Jackson and Samuel Clarke (1626-1701). In 1737 Alexander Cruden (q.v.), a London bookseller, born and educated in Aberdeen, published his Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, to which is added a concordance to the books called Apocrypha. This book embodied, was based upon and superseded all its predecessors. Though the first edition was not remunerative, three editions were published during Cruden’s life, and many since his death. Cruden’s work is accurate and full, and later concordances only supersede his by combining an English with a Greek and Hebrew concordance. This is done by the Critical Greek and English Concordance prepared by C. F. Hudson, H. A. Hastings and Ezra Abbot, LL.D., published in Boston, Mass., and by the Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament, by E. L. Bullinger, 1892. The Interpreting Concordance to the New Testament, edited by James Gall, shows the Greek original of every word, with a glossary explaining the Greek words of the New Testament, and showing their varied renderings in the Authorized Version. The most convenient of these is Young’s Analytical Concordance, published in Edinburgh in 1879, and since revised and reissued. It shows (1) the original Hebrew or Greek of any word in the English Bible; (2) the literal and primitive meaning of every such original word; (3) thoroughly reliable parallel passages. There is a Students’ Concordance to the Revised Version of the New Testament showing the changes embodied in the revision, published under licence of the universities; and a concordance to the Revised Version by J. A. Thoms for the Christian Knowledge Society.
Biblical concordances having familiarized students with the value and use of such books for the systematic study of an author, the practice of making concordances has now become common. There are concordances to the works of Shakespeare, Browning and many other writers.
CONCORDAT (Lat. concordatum, agreed upon, from con-, together, and cor, heart), a term originally denoting an agreement between ecclesiastical persons or secular persons, but later applied to a pact concluded between the ecclesiastical authority and the secular authority on ecclesiastical matters which concern both, and, more specially, to a pact concluded between the pope, as head of the Catholic Church, and a temporal sovereign for the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs in the territory of such sovereign. It is to concordats in this later sense that this article refers.
No one now questions the profound distinction that exists between the two powers, spiritual and temporal, between the church and the state. Yet these two societies are none the less in inevitable relation. The same men go to compose both; and the church, albeit pursuing a spiritual end, cannot dispense with the aid of temporal property, which in its nature depends on the organization of secular society. It follows of necessity that there are some matters which may be called “mixed,” and which are the legitimate concern of the two powers, such as church property, places of worship, the appointment and the emoluments of ecclesiastical dignitaries, the temporal rights and privileges of the secular and regular clergy, the regulation of public worship, and the like. The existence of such mixed matters gives rise to inevitable conflicts of jurisdiction, which may lead, and sometimes have led, to civil war. It is, therefore, to the general interest that all these matters should be settled pacifically, by a common accord; and hence originated those conventions between the two powers which are known by the significant name of concordat, the official name being pactum concordatum or solemnis conventio. In theory these agreements may result from the spontaneous and pacific initiative of the contracting parties, but in reality their object has almost always been to terminate more or less acute conflicts and remedy more or less disturbed situations. It is for this reason that concordats always present a clearly marked character of mutual concession, each of the two powers renouncing certain of its claims in the interests of peace.
For the purposes of a concordat the state recognizes the official status of the church and of its ministers and tribunals; guarantees it certain privileges; and sometimes binds itself to secure for it subsidies representing compensation for past spoliations. The pope on his side grants the temporal sovereign certain rights, such as that of making or controlling the appointment of dignitaries; engages to proceed in harmony with the government in the creation of dioceses or parishes; and regularizes the situation produced by the usurpation of church property &c. The great advantage of concordats—indeed their principal utility—consists in transforming necessarily unequal unilateral claims into contractual obligations analogous to those which result from an international convention. Whatever the obligations of the state towards the ecclesiastical society may be in pure theory, in practice they become more precise and stable when they assume the nature of a bilateral convention by which the state engages itself with regard to a third party. And reciprocally, whatever may be the absolute rights of the ecclesiastical society over the appointment of its dignitaries, the administration of its property, and the government of its adherents, the exercise of these rights is limited and restricted by the stable engagements and concessions of the concordatory pact, which bind the head of the church with regard to the nations.
A concordat may assume divers forms,—historically, three. The most common in modern times is that of a diplomatic convention debated between the authorized mandatories of the high contracting parties and subsequently ratified by the latter; as, for example, the French concordat of 1801. Or, secondly, the concordat may result from two identical separate