Tihevlogical Seminary, PRINCETON, N. J. BR 45 ᾿ . 7 ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ ἊΣ 7 ᾿ 4] ἢ ᾿ ΟΝ --» ΝΙΝ ᾿ ΙΝ ᾿ ΕΞ ᾿ Ψ " ᾿ i. 7 os SOME Bat Pei) : ἢ ἊΣ us oo in (ἢ, ; aa _ — ᾿ " ᾿ ΞΕ aa 7 = 7 > ae -_ Ὗ ι- ο Ἢ Sait 7 13 am < a 7 -ν. ᾿ a ἮΝ ‘ νυ ᾿ a Hath ce dee ΕΣ " ie (hs nya ὮΣ ᾿ 7 δὰ ἢ! ᾿ ᾿ ie ᾿ avon ιν to ἢ P| ᾿ ᾿ 7 7 t "1 ᾿ Ad δ, ᾿ ηὦ- ᾿ ᾿ ad 7 i i - ᾿ : OE Ole ee " om 7 ᾿ ᾿ = ᾿ — ἽΝ ᾿ ' ᾿ a ie 7 a” ae ’ «6 = " 1] a . +4 1) rig “ls Pat ᾿ ts. ΒΕ ΥΥ _ ΜΕΝ rh Uta mae ; nits | : 7” 7 a 7 i ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ Ν ; ; 7 ΠΝ ἂν ONG asa ee be itis Sian ᾿ A ᾿ ᾿ ΠΥ rh we ᾿ at ἃ ᾿ ar’ ; — | ᾿ 7 7 7 a i " ΝΝ δι ’ : ᾿" ΝΟ ᾿ is 7 i> w= Var, 2 uli ᾽ at at: καὶ ΤΠ ἢ ᾿ "Ὕ a - Π 7 5 ἐν κι 7% _ Ἢ» — ᾿ ἊΣ Ν a : - ah f 73° ; δ. γ᾽) " ᾿ i ᾿ 7 ἫΝ ᾿ in ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ = De a> γι a wai ᾿ Ϊ a 7 ᾿ ᾿ Ν οἷ ᾿ a . : τὰς ΠΣ κ 7s rays τ αὐ - τ, ἜΝΙ ὯΝ π᾿ y Π te - a Π vo, te = ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ ‘ ‘ : t. ie | = ῷ “ay a "" } Βο ᾿ ᾿ Φ ! -" a ἊΝ ; Bie a ΝΗ ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ — ΝΣ a ᾿ , ' . ᾿ - ᾿ 13 7 i po) : ΓΗ π᾿ Δ ἂν 3 ; ΙΝ 4 7 ae | ¥ DP "τ bal ἘΠῚ νῷ (ey οὖ os ane balay . YS , 7 i Am ᾿ [te ay ie 2. at belt ὦ Sens a ε- ] 4? ἊΝ ᾿ ᾿ v6 " ᾿ ; _ ᾿ ΝΣ ; re Ὁ ᾿ ΝΕ ΓΕ » ‘ . ᾿ a “7 ᾿ 7 f τ 7 5 i . " πε => 7 ᾿ } ’ 2 i | TO THE QUEEN’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY. Most Gracious SOVEREIGN, Wuen the Rulers of God’s own People were enthroned, the Book of the Law was by His command delivered to them, in order that they might transcribe its precepts and promises with their hands, and treasure them in their hearts. In like manner, the SacreD VoLumE of the OLD and New TrsTaMENT, brought from His altar, is presented to the Sovereigns of the British Empire, at their enthronement and Coronation in His House. The Writer, therefore, of a work which demon- strates the Inspiration of the Hoty Scriprures, may be pardoned in having aspired for permission to inscribe his labours to Your Majesty. Considerations also of a less public nature sug- gested that desire to the Author of this Volume. You were graciously pleased to appoint him to a Canonry in that Royal Chureh in which Your vi DEDICATION. Majesty was crowned ; and You thus afforded him the necessary leisure for this work, which he has been enabled, through Your condescension, to offer to Your Majesty, as a hearty though unworthy tribute of his gratitude. He may, perhaps, be allowed to say, that he was likewise led to pray for this indulgence for another reason. The Lectures in this Volume were de- livered before an University which, to its general joy, was recently honoured by Your Majesty with Your gracious presence and distinguished favour. And as one of its Members, the Author is very thankful for the privilege of expressing those feelings of dutiful and affectionate loyalty for Your Royal Person and Office, which spring forth as the natural fruits of that time-honoured system of “sound Learning and religious Education,” characterizing, and may it ever characterize !—the Universities of England. He might also, Mosr Gractous SovEREIGN, pro- ceed to speak, not only of the Universities, but of the entire Church of England and Ireland. She receives the Holy Scriptures, not as the word of man, but as “given by Inspiration of God* ;’ she knows that they are His “/ively Oracles +” to be obeyed * Ὁ Tim. iii. 16, + Rom. ii. 2. Acts vil. 38. DEDICATION. Vii by all, and that all will be “judged by them*.” She proclaims, in the sight and ear of all men, that in them it is written, that Sovereigns are “ God's Ministers +;” and that “whosoever resisteth” them, in any lawful ᾿ command, “resisteth the ordinance of Godt.” And believing these to be the words of the Kine of Kinas, she acts, and has ever acted, accordingly. She inculeates loyalty as a sacred duty not only to man but to God, and as service which He will repay hereafter, as done to Himsenr; and she has ever, therefore, been ready, not only to pray and to preach, but, when need required, to suffer also, for those who, like Your Gracious Majesty, have been entrusted by the Providence of God with the charge of the people of this land. It is, Madam, a subject for devout congratulation to the whole British Empire, that, among other aus- picious influences, through the fostering care of some of Your own Princely Predecessors, especially those whose names are commemorated in the Preface and Dedication of that noblest Work of English Literature, our AuTHORIZED ΝΈΚΒΙΟΝ of the BIBLE, there has long existed in the heart of the British Nation a deeply rooted belief in the Inspiration of Hoty Scripture. That this belief may be cherished, confirmed, * John xii. 48. { Rom. xiii. 6. te Rom, xi. 2 Vili DEDICATION. propagated, and established in all parts of the Com- munity; and that its results may be seen in dutiful love for the Sovereign, in the stability of the Throne, in the maintenance of Law, and in the increase of Peace and Prosperity; and that He, “by Whom Kings reign, and Princes decree justice*,” may keep Your Royal Person safe under His Divine protection, and may bestow His richest blessings, temporal and eternal, on Your Majesty, Your Illustrious Consort, and Your Royal Offspring, is, and ever will be, the hearty prayer of, Mosr Gracious SOVEREIGN, Your Majesty's devoted Subject and Servant, CHR. WORDSWORTH. * Prov. vill. 15. Cloisters, Westminster, April 19, 1848. PREFACKE. THE following Discourses, delivered before the Uni- versity of Cambridge in the months of April and October, 1847, are published in accordance with the will of the pious and learned Founder of the Hulsean Lectureship. The design of the present Volume is described in the Introductory Lecture; and the Author has now only to invite the reader’s attention to one general observation. Theological Writers in this country, especially in the last and present century, have laboured with great diligence and zeal in demonstrating the Inspi- ration of Scripture from eternal evidence. Their researches are entitled to the highest praise, and have been productive of most beneficial results. Something, however, of great importance has still remained to be done, for the same end, though in another manner. It is a most solemn and momentous truth, that x PREFACE. Almighty God has always had, and will never cease to have, a Visible Church in the World: and that, ever since His Word to man has been zritten, He has employed the ministry of His Church to pro- claim that Word, and to guard it, and to assure the World of its Inspiration. It is, also, no less true, that wheresoever men have forgotten or despised this office of the Church in keeping, promulgating, and authenticating His Word, there they have been prone to call in ques- tion its Inspiration, or to reject certain parts of it, according to the capricious suggestions of their own imaginations; and thus, in their cases at least, the Word of God has vanished away, and its in- estimable blessings have been withdrawn. It is sufficient to refer, in proof of this statement, to the melancholy examples of some Biblical Crities on the Continent, and even in our own Country: which prove unquestionably, that whosoever sepa- rates Scripture from the Church, is in imminent peril of losing both. Be it also remembered, that the Head of the Church is Curist; and that the testimony of the Church to Scripture, both of the Old and New Testament (as the Writer has endeavoured to show in the following Lectures), is no other than the testimony of Curist; and that ¢nternal evidence, however cogent, cannot be complete, without Hs testimony, which is delivered to us through the Church. PREFACE. ΧΙ In illustration of his meaning, the Author refers to the important fact, in evidence of the Inspiration of the Old Testament. that the Ancient Church of God received the Books of the Old Testament as Inspired, and that this reception of them as such was sanctioned and confirmed by the Divine Authority of our BLEssEp Lorp. The Author’s endeavour in these Lectures, has been to apply in a popular manner this argument, from the evternal evidence of the Church and of its Divine Head, to Both Testaments, and thus to supply a deficiency which has probably been felt by younger Students of Theology, and by ordinary readers, for which classes the present Lectures are mainly designed. It will be seen that nothing is said in this Volume concerning the Canonical Authority of the Apocalypse; on which, if health and strength are spared him, he hopes to be able to treat in another work. Ἰ ΝΣ ᾿ ; iP ; ᾿ - ᾿ ΟΞ Ν ᾿ - Π fas ᾿ aire ie. 4 a ’ _ ᾿ " ὧν ᾿ ΝΕ ᾿ rs ἢ ἂν, 7 ᾿ rw i _ ᾿ΕΝ i a Birth ὦ eee ll i? i ΩΝ ΡΥ He, ΠΝ: ne or ‘iy - π YE tse ἮΝ hy τ ie vy! ΤΩΝ hy ᾿ ΩΣ i yas ae 13s ᾿ (ti. te A iol? it i; ΝΥ ᾿ ἢ ᾿ 7 ye ᾿ a " my ty ἐξ ας ΕΣ, ae i a ΠΗ “i Rite = 7 : 7 ᾿ ᾿ π᾿ ς ,! ae (one ᾿ rie ἮΝ =e.” ᾿ πε 6 ee ᾿ ale c τ on - ~~ ee τν- ΤΙΝ Μ ΡΥ Fri: dav id ἢ ὦ ἮΝ ἔπ} 7 7 "i 7 Je aa Γ ᾿ i nN ᾿ ΕΝ ἡ ἢ ΝΙΝ i ᾿ ᾿ 7 ἈΝ tc ; iif 7 i} » ὙΠ ; 16 . τὰ i 7 ’ 7 a ᾿ ᾿ 7 = ᾿ ᾿ς ᾿ : ᾿ ᾿ Fee OPA’! lt 19 ae PP Ay eps Fee es ᾿ ᾿ ee ΟΝ Ι ᾿ Υ a " ᾿ ab pat ΣΡ Lana μ ) "ἢ a Ta, — ᾿ 2 . af ΝΣ ¢ ᾿ δι ἐπι. ΠΡ TEL i ἱ ites ; ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ τ " . of i | Yh) nisdion? sahil i δὰ δ δὶ, St Sy 7 a) Ψ Η 7 ΝΣ a ; " γῆ ὰ ἃ yon tvs 7 We . ® ΘΒ a - 7s - ᾿ ς ᾿ a ᾿ ᾿ iv : ᾿ ΠΝ ἧς ᾿ 7 2 an ἊΝ ᾿ Ἢ ᾿ ΠΠ᾿ ΩΝ me it = “ _ *~ " ᾿ > i ; ι ΜΝ " ᾿ εἰ νι. " ΝΟΥ͂Σ ε _ . δὲ Odi Lee baal $ 4 iy > ΠῚ ᾿ € ‘fn | 5 _ ᾿ i: ‘or r et tu ᾿ ἵ ἧς it! aaa) ts ΠΣ 7 ia 7 Π ᾿ Η ᾿ 2 i * εἰναι: on αὶ ΤΑΥ͂] ΜΝ rer NG © > 7 : ᾿ ᾿ ᾿ Π ! 3) ΝΕ a \? , a ᾿ > ᾿ cL 7 sein a _ 7 ‘4 re , 8 - va io ᾿ ; , ᾿ a ; - _ _ ἱ ᾿ = it vA. " 7 ἔν ᾿ — ᾿ ; ᾿ - . = 7 ΕΞ " “ ᾿ υ ᾿ ~— ὦ - π f ees v a | 7 | δ. 7 = ν» 8 me 4) = ~ a az fl a 7 =. ο ; 7 na i ᾿ _ 7 ᾿ i 7 7 ΕΝ ᾿ ᾿ -" Ve aes ν᾿ vin ‘ ᾿ : - ᾿ = a 7 7 a a S ᾿ 7 = " = =D, , αν ο Ψ- Ψ Se , Ν᾿ - _ . i a) ᾿ Π eo ie? * ; ¥ μ»»} ἐδ φ 4 > ne lip ΞΡ ἴῃ LECTURE I. PAGE What the foundation is on which the Canon of the. Scriptures rests : : : : : : : AO nA LECTURE II. What the foundation is of the Canon of the Old Testament + Ὁ LECTURE III. The testimony of the Early Church on the Canon of the Old Testament : : : : : : - 56 LECTURE IV. - On the true Character and Position of the Apocrypha. a9 LECTURE V. What is the foundation of the Canon of the New Testament . 118 LECTURE VI. On the Canonical Authority of the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles : : ἥν iui: : . 144 LECTURE VII. On the Canonical Authority of St. Paul’s Epistles : . 167 LECTURE VIII. On the Canonical Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews . 200 XIV CONTENTS. LECTURE IX. PAGE On the Canonical Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews . 217 LECTURE X. On the Canonical Authority of the Catholic Epistles . . 247 LECTURE XI. On the Canonical Authority of the Catholic Epistles . ΣΦ] APPENDIX A. Or ΑΝΟΙΕΝῚ AUTHORITIES, ARRANGED IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, CONCERNING THE CANON OF THE OLD anp New TESTAMENT. No. PAGE I. Prologue to Ecclesiasticus : : - oo fl II. Philo Judeus . : . - A 12 III. Flavius Josephus : - A : > 10: IV. 5. Justin Martyr : . - - -\ V. Melito : : : : : . [4 VI. Fragmentum Canonis N.T. . - : - Ὁ. VII. Tertullianus . 4 : : : 7 [ὃ VIII. Origenes Η - : : : 5 ihe) IX. Eusebius ᾿ : : : Ἵ τς 9 X. 5. Athanasius . : : ‘ : 5 (ph XI. 8. Cyrillus : : Ν Ξ : au ft 2. XII. S. Hilarius : ; : 5 ; - [15 XIII. 5. Epiphanius . : : : 5 - [16 XIV. Concilium Laodicenum : : : -) {1 XV. Ruffinus ἢ : : : : 19 XVI. Philastrius : : ‘ : : . [20 XVII. S. Amphilochius : : : : 5° |i XVIII. S. Gregorius Nazianzenus : Ξ : . [29 XIX. 5. Hieronymus ‘ ; A δ . (24 XX. Concilium Hipponense : : . [33 XXI. Concilium Carthaginense . > : eID: CONTENTS. XV No. PAGE XXII. S. Augustinus : . : . [84 XXIII. Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita . : τ [85 XXIV. Canones Apostolici . . : : . [36 XXV. Constitutiones Apostolice : 3 : - ἮΣ XXVI. Innocentius : - ς : « [37 XXVII. Talmud Babylonicum . : 2 : . [42 XXVIII. Junilius : : : : ‘ = ib; XXIX. Primasius P ‘ : : ᾿ . [44 XXX. Cassiodorus, Magnus Aurelius . : EDs XXXI. Gregorius Primus : : : ; . [45 XXXII. Beda Venerabilis : : 3 : . [46 XXXIII. Joannes Damascenus_ . é : : . [47 APPENDIX B. I. The Canon of Scripture set forth by the Church of Rome in the Council of Trent, A. Ὁ. 1546 . [48 II. Bulla Pii Pape IV., A.D. 1564 5 . [49 III. The Canon of Scripture set forth by the Church of England in the VIth of her XXXIX Articles of Religion : E : : : . {50 IV. The Canon of Scripture according to the Eastern Church . 5 : : : : bol APPENDIX C. On the Opinions of the Jews concerning the Apocrypha . [56 APPENDIX D. Vincenzi, Sessio Quarta Concilii Tridentini Vindieata ; Rome, 1842. : : : : : - (G7 APPENDIX E. ON THE TRUE CHARACTER AND PosITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. Hooker : d é Ξ : τς" ¢ [70 APPENDIX F. St. AUGUSTINE’s LANGUAGE CONCERNING THE APOCRYPHA ; AND CONCERNING THE JEWISH CHURCH AS THE GUARDIAN OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT . - . [8] XV1 CONTENTS. APPENDIX G. PAGE On rue CoNSEQUENCES WHICH WOULD FOLLOW FROM THE ENTIRE REJECTION OF THE APOCRYPHA. . - cD APPENDIX H. On tHe EpisrLe vo THE HEBREWS. Primasius Uticensis 5 - : - [87 Joun iv. 39—42. “ And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on Him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did. So when the Samaritans were come unto Him, they besought Him that he would tarry with them: and He abode there two days. And many more believed because of His own word ; and said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.” Great is our reason for gratitude to Almighty God that His Holy Word is disseminated in almost every climate under heaven, and that our own Country has been permitted to take an active part in the blessed work of its diffusion. Much cause also have we for thankfulness that, in our own Authorized Version of Holy Scripture, we possess the privilege of a Translation combining simplicity and dignity of language with perspicuity and fidelity of interpreta- tion. Precious, however, as these two privileges are, yet perhaps it may be justly affirmed that the paramount blessing which we enjoy, as a Church, is B 2 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS | LECT. this—that HoLy Scrirrure, pure and entire, is our Rute of Farr; and that nothing is to be preached by the Ministers of the Church of England, as of necessity to salvation, which is not read in the Word of God, or may not reasonably be concluded from the same. But, my beloved brethren, the office which, by God’s providence, the Church of England has been called to discharge in the guardianship and dissemi- nation of Holy Scripture, and the inestimable gift which He has vouchsafed to her in her Authorized Version, and the privilege He has conferred upon her in enabling her to assert the supremacy and sufficiency of Holy Scripture in matters of faith, these are not only just reasons for thankfulness to Him, but they are also solemn calls to calm investi- gation and clear demonstration of the grounds upon which certain books are believed by us to be Serip- ture; that is, to be the authentic word of the One, All-wise, All-holy, and Almighty Creator and Governor of the world. Suppose we receive into our hands an English Bible. Suppose we offer it to the illiterate or unbe- lieving. Suppose we bear it with us into distant lands, and appeal to it as containing an infallible standard of faith and practice. Suppose also that the question were then put to us, How do you show that these writings, and these alone, are indeed the Word of God? Should we, let me ask, be prepared with such an answer to this most important ques- I.] ΟΝ WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 3 tion as would carry conviction to the mind of the inquirer 7 Again, we have not only the simple and in- eredulous to deal with; many also there are of our fellow-Christians in this and other lands, who acknowledge with us that God has spoken to the world, and has revealed His will in writing; but they do not agree with us in the names and number of the books of which that writing consists. Some receive more than we do; some less. Are we, then, able and ready to show that the Books, neither more nor less, which we receive as inspired, are indeed those in which the Revelation of God to man is contained ? Further still: during a period of now three hun- dred years, and especially in our own days, great efforts have been made by learned Theologians of the Romish communion, to prove the two following propositions :— Ist, That the Books which in our Bibles are commonly called Apocrypha are of equal authority with the other Books of the Sacred Volume, which we call Canonical, for the proof of articles of faith ; and, 2ndly, That the Books of the New Testament were not generally received, as inspired, by the Christian Church till the fourth century after Christ*. * Dr. Milner, End of Controversy, Letter xi., ‘The Canon of Scripture was fixed at the end of the fourth century.”—Mr. Newman’s Essay on Development, p. 142. ‘On what ground do B2 4 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. Now, if the former of these two propositions be true, then it would follow that the Canonical Serip- tures, as we receive them, are not a sufficient rule of faith, but require the addition of the Apocrypha. And if the latter assertion be proved, then the written Word, even with the addition of the Apo- crypha, cannot be, what we maintain 7 is, a suffi- cient rule of faith ; for, according to that hypothesis, the first three centuries immediately succeeding the Apostles passed away without a distinct knowledge of what was Scripture and what was not; which we cannot imagine would have been the case, if Holy Scripture were the all-sufficient rule of the Christian faith. If also the Seriptures were not recognized as the Word of God till the fourth century after Christ, then we have here a remarkable instance of a new law of faith and practice emerging, as it were, long after the Apostolic age; and it will be impossible for us to assign any limit to the process of Development, both dogmatical and practical, of which, if we may so speak, the dévinization of books, more than three hundred years after their composition, is so striking an example. The pious Founder of the Hulsean Lectureship in this University intended thereby to serve the cause we receive the Canon (of the New Testament), but on the authority of the Church of the fourth and fifth centuries? The Church at that era decided that certain Books were of authority.” See below, Lecture V. tical ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 5 of Revealed Religion and of the Christian Church ; and since it is essential to the maintenance of Christianity that the grounds should be clearly understood on which it is affirmed that the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, as received by the Church of England, constitute the complete Word of Inspiration (for “the main principle where- upon our belief of all things therein contained de- pendeth, is, that the Scriptures are the oracles of God Himself*”), I propose, with the Divine bless- ing, to examine the reasons which persuade us to recognize these writings as divine, and these alone. May the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, Who spake by the Prophets and Apostles, endue us with wisdom to perceive and with power to speak the truth, and give you willing and understanding hearts to receive and retain the same ! Before we proceed further, it must be defined, what we mean by Canonical Books, and by the Canon of SCRIPTURE. The term Canon properly signifies a linet or rule ; * Hooker, III. viii. 13. + The words MP, κάννα, κανὼν, and Latin canna are of the same stock, and signify a measuring reed, κάλαμος ὁμοῖος ῥάβδῳ, Revel. x1. 1, hence, ‘ arundo et mensura fidei,’ Victor. Petav. ad loc. cf. Ezech. xl. passim, and Origen. de Principiis, i. 2; “ certa linea perfectaque regula.” The word Κανὼν was used in a critical sense by the Alexandrine grammarians to designate those Authors who were received (ἐγκρινόμενοι) as models (Auctores Classici) in their respective departments of Literature. See Ruhnken. Hist. Crit. Orat. Gr. xciv. Thus the word was made ready to the hands of Theological Writers, for the use in which 6 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS feemert and is sometimes applied to the tongue of a balance, which indicates by its position whether the scales are in equilibrium. Hence, Canonical Books are those which form the Divine Rule, by which men ascertain whether they are walking orderly in the straight path of God’s Law, and by which they examine themselves, whether they are in the Faith *, and weigh their lives, as it were, in the Balance of the Sanctuary. In a word, the Canon of Scripture is the divinely inspired Code of Belief and Practice. Such is the sense in which we shall use the words Canon and Canonical. This statement is very neces- sary to be borne in mind; for, as we shall see here- after, the word Canonical is not unfrequently used in a far wider sense by some early Christian Writers ; and is sometimes extended by them, so as to embrace those Books which in our Authorized Version are termed Apocrypha, and which would be more pro- perly called Heclesiastical Books, as having been read from time immemorial in the Christian Heclesia or Church; which, certain other Books, properly called Apocryphal, never were 7. It being thus premised, that in these Discourses we shall employ the word Canonical in its strict sense of appertaining to the Divine Rule or Canon of Faith and Practice, we now proceed to en- quire,— How do we prove that certain Books are Canoni- it is employed by them. See Credner’s Geschichte des Kanons, pp. 7—59. Halle, 1847. © 2 Cor. xii. δ. + Compare Hooker, V. xx. 7. 1.1] ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 7 cal, and that they, and they alone, constitute the Canon of Scripture ζ To this important question, very different replies are given by different parties. First, Some affirm that they have an znéwztive per- ception of the Divine nature of Scripture, and that they at once recognize the Bible to be distinct from, and superior to, all other compositions. The Spirit of God within us, they say, witnesses to the Spirit in the Scriptures, that the Scriptures are the Word of God*. To this we reply, it is perfectly true that Scrip- ture is admirably adapted to produce in every mind really influenced by the Holy Spirit, an intimate persuasion that it is the Word of God. But, the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God Ὁ; and the question is, How do we know that we our- selves have the Spirit? We are forbidden in Scrip- ture to believe every spirit; we are there com- manded to try the spirits, whether they be of God}; and we have no way of trying them, except by the * Confessio Belgica, Art. v. Augusti Libri Symbol. p. 172. Confessio Gallica, ibid. p. iii. The language of the XXXIX Articles, (viz. ‘‘Sacree Scripture nomine eos canonicos libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti intelligimus, de quorum auctoritate in Ecclesid nunquam dubitatum est,”) as compared with that of these Confessions, capable though these Confessions are of Hooker’s charitable construction, (III. viii. 15,) is very remark- able, and the more so because the Augsburgh Confession does not enter into the question of the grounds of the Canon at all. jeluGon wis tL. ἘΠῚ ον 23. 8 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. Word of God. We must, therefore, first be sure that we have the Word, before we can ascertain whether we possess the Spzv7t of God. And, there- fore, we cannot prove the Word by the spirit within us, which must itself wait to be proved by the Word; but, when we have proved that we have the Word of God, and from that Word have assured ourselves that we have the Spirit, then, and not till then, we may rely on the witness of the Spirit within us to the Divine Spirit in the Word. Let us also observe, that if owr own persuasion, antecedent to, and independent of, external evidence were to be regarded as an adequate proof of the Inspiration of Scripture, then the consequence would be, that there would be a multitude of Books differing greatly from each other, all possessing an equal claim to inspiration. There is scarcely any Re- ligion in the whole world which has not its own sacred Books, which its votaries receive as inspired. And if the testimony of men’s minds were to be accepted as a sufficient proof of inspiration, then what claims would the Bible have above those of the Koran? And to speak only of Christians: some continental Reformers of great celebrity were betrayed by an arbitrary abuse of private judgment * into irreverent * See Seckendorf, Hist. Lutheranismi, Schol. iv. ad Indicem Primum, Luther’s Vorrede zur Uebersetzung, &c., 1524. See Dewar on German Protest. pp. 117. 212. There is scarcely a single book in the whole Bible, which has not been treated as spurious by some one or other of the Neologists of Germany 1 ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 9 expressions concerning certain books of the New Testament, for instance, the Epistle of St. James and the Apocalypse. Were they justified herein, and shall these books be rejected by us? God forbid! We do not, and will not, so deal with them. Again, the Church of Rome would require us to receive the books of Tobit and of Judith, and sundry others, as of equal authority with the Penta- teuch and the Gospel. Are those books therefore the Word of God? By no means. Again, some of our own writers* would have brought the rest of the world to their own per- suasion, that the spurious work called Apostolic Constitutions, and some others of similar stamp, have an equal claim to be regarded as inspired with the Books of the New Testament. Was this reasonable or excusable? Far from it. Do we not, therefore, see clearly, that by making our own private persuasions the standard of Scrip- tural Canonicity, we should soon be in great danger of losing the whole Canon of Scripture ? Secondly, there have been others who would rest content with the following proof that Seripture is the Word of God. and Switzerland, who have thus given a great triumph to Romish Theologians, who would thence conclude that the World can have no Bible, without a Pope. See Perrone, Loci Theol. p- 1077. (pt. ii. cap. i. prop. 2.) Malou, Lecture de la Sainte Bible, ii. p. 17. (Louvain, 1846.) * e. g. Whiston, Tentamen de Const. Apost. Lond. 1711, and even Richard Montague, ad Orig. Eccles. 394. 10 WHAT THE FOUNDATION 15 | LECT. The condition of the world without Revelation, they justly observe, shows that a Revelation was neces- sary. A Revelation being needed, we have it, they add, in Scripture. For the Books of Scripture treat of a period of time co-extensive with the world’s existence; they deal with the most lofty and abstruse subjects; many of them were written by unlettered men, and, yet, in dignity and sublimity they far transcend all human compositions; and all the learning of this world has never been able to dis- cover any error in them; but, on the contrary, the more minutely they are examined, the more striking is their beauty, and the more evident is their truth. Observe also the wonderful harmony of all the parts of the sacred Volume, although from the time of the writing of Genesis to that of the Apocalypse, there intervened more than fifteen hundred years: surely, therefore, the Bible came from Him with Whom a thousand years are but as one day*. See also how accurately the prophecies of the Old Testa- ment are fulfilled in the history of the New. Who could predict such distant events with such minute circumstantiality, but He alone who beholds and sees all things at a glance, and governs all things by His word ? Consider, also, what a series of wonderful inter- ferences, all tending to preserve, protect, and diffuse the sacred Volume, are presented to us in the records of its history, extending over more than *°2 Petrill 8. I.] ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 11 three thousand years. Certainly, it will be con- fessed, that the object of such special providences was something more than human. Nay, more, if the Bible is not God’s Word, it cannot be regarded with favour by God; for it professes to be from Him: and if this profession is false, it must be most offensive to Him; and it cannot be supposed that He has been working for so many hundreds of years to protect a fraud, and to disseminate a falsehood against Himself. Again, it is a matter of history, that the most wonderful beneficial effects have been produced by the Scriptures. Nations have been reclaimed from barbarism, and rescued from vice, and emancipated from idolatry by their means; we ourselves are wit- nesses of their divine power. Our moral, social, and political life, liberty, and happiness, are results of the doctrines preached by Christ and His Apostles. We know, also, from testimony independent of Scripture, and even opposed to it, that the writers of these books died for the faith which they there taught ; we see that they affirm their own inspiration, and we are assured by contemporary witnesses, that they gave evidence of it by working miracles, and by speaking in languages which they had never learnt. [5 it in any degree credible that they, and the thousands who heard and saw them, and were converted by them, and suffered for the faith which they received from them, should have been deluded in this great matter ? Ts it possible that God should have allowed mankind to be so deceived by persons speaking in His name 4 12 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [LECT. Is it not impiety to imagine that, by enabling them to foretel future events, and to speak with tongues, and to work miracles, and to preach doctrines con- sonant with, though far transcending, the dictates of nature, reason, and conscience, He should have au- thenticated their message to the world, if they had not been sent by Him? These are most important considerations; and are very necessary to be borne in mind in their due order and degree. They are essential for the proof of the inspiration of Scripture; dat they are not of themselves sufficient for that purpose. They suppose a knowledge of Scripture and of History, and are not adapted to arrest the attention of the careless, the ignorant, and the unbeliever, who require some living voice, awakening their mind, directing them to Scripture, and informing them concerning it. Besides, even supposing a person to be excited and guided to the study of Scripture, these evidences, of which I have just spoken, are not sufficient to produce a conviction of its inspiration in all its parts; they do, indeed, prove that God has spoken in Scripture, but they do not show that a// the Scripture—that is, every part of the Bible—is, as St. Paul says, “given by the inspiration of God +.” We require something more* to demonstrate that ; and this need has been recognized by the writers of * See Hooker II. iv. 3, and ILL. viii. 13. Laud against Fisher, sect. 16 and 18. + πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος, 2 Tim. il. 16. 11} ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 5) Scripture, and by the Holy Spirit Who inspired them. If Scripture sufficiently proved itself by its own quali- ties, or by the history of its authors, or by its results, the Holy Spirit (with reverence be it spoken,) would not have taken so much care to provide other vészble evidence of its divine character. The Pentateuch would not have been laid up in the Holy of Holies, near the Ark of God*. St. Paul would not have deemed it necessary to warn his hearers against being deluded by letters “as from him+,” nor to affix visible tokens to al/ his epistles. Again: supposing that the authors of certain Books of Scripture were proved to be inspired, it does not follow, necessarily, that all that they wrote was inspired. St. Barnabas, as we know from Scripture, was “a good man full of the Holy Ghost,” yet his epistle is no part of Canonical Scripture. Besides, there are many Books of Scripture,—such as the Book of Judges, Ruth, the Chronicles, Job, and others,—of which the authors are unknown; so that it is clear that the proof of the inspiration of the Books of Scripture must rest upon some other grounds besides those of our knowledge of their authors, or even of the fact of their authors being inspired. We are now brought to consider a third assertion concerning the grounds of the Canon of Scripture,— the assertion of the Church of Rome. She affirms * Deut. xxx. 26. Ai 2 Thess. ul. 2. 7 Acts x1. 24. 14 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. that we can have no certainty upon this subject, except by resolving our faith into the teaching of the Church. She would have us believe, that whatever the Church—by which she a/ways means the Roman branch of the Churech—delivers to us as Scripture is to be received by us as such, because she delivers it*. In support of this allegation, she maintains that the Church is more visible and apparent than Scripture, and is also more ancient than Scripture; for the Church was in existence before a word of Scripture was written ; and Scripture was committed to the keeping of the Church, and whatever she propounds as in- spired is to be accepted as the word of God; or, in other words, according to her teaching, the Canon of Scripture rests entirely on the authority of the Church of Rome. These affirmations contain three fallacies. /7rst: * This has been the assertion of the Church of Rome from the eleventh century to our own day. It is one of the dictates of Pope Gregory VII., that “‘ No Book or Chapter is to be re- garded as. Canonical without the Pope’s authority ;’’ see Cardinal Baron. Annal. Eccl. xi. p. 632, ad a.p. 1076. Pighius says, “The Church (of Rome) can give Canonical authority to books which have no such authority from themselves or their Author.” See his Hierarch. ii. 3. Stapleton asserts the same, Relect. Contr. 5. qu. 2. art. 4. Controv. 5. lib. 9. c. 14; he says, that the Shepherd of Hermas and Apostolical Constitutions may be added to the Canon, if the Church of Rome pleases. And the Roman Professor Perrone thus writes in his Theological Lectures (Gi. p. 1051, 1052. ed. Paris, 1842), ‘‘ The Roman Church, being the Mother and Mistress of Churches, had power to constitute the true Canon of Scripture.” 1.1 ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 15 they confound the present Church of Rome, which is only a part, and a very corrupt part, of the Church, with the primitive Church Catholic. We can prove —and shall hereafter do so—that the decrees of the existing Church of tome concerning the Canon of Scripture are inconsistent with, and destructive of, the teaching of the ancient universal Church of Christ respecting that subject. Yes, and it is because we revere the testimony of the primitive Catholic Church, and the testimony of a greater than the Church, namely, that of Christ Himself, that we cannot accept the Canon of the present Church of Rome. Secondly: Let it be granted that the Church is more visible than Scripture, yet it in no way follows therefrom that the Scripture derives its authority from the Church; or that what the Church (and much less what a part of the Church) delivers to us as Scripture, is therefore, and for no other reason, to be received by us as such. To use a familiar illustration,—a sign upon a road shows the traveller the way to a city; the sign is more visible than the city, but it does not make the city; and, if it were destroyed, the city would still remain; and when the traveller arrives at the city, the city proves itself to be the place which the sign indicated, and so proves the credibility of the sign. Thus, the Christian Church, it is true, directs us to Scripture, but she does not make Scripture, nor give authority to it; but, on the contrary, Scripture gives authority to the 16 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. Church, and proves the truth of her testimony con- cerning Scripture. Thirdly: Τῦ 15 said that the Church is more ancient than Scripture; that there was a Church of God on earth before the Old Testament; and that the Christian Church existed before any of the New Testament was written; and therefore, it is said, Scripture depends upon the Church. But this pro- ceeds on the false assumption that the authority of Scripture is grounded on the fact of its being wretten ; whereas it is wholly derived from its being the Word of God. Scripture is God’s Word, written; the writing of the word is no necessary condition of its existence, though it is a quality very useful for the preservation and diffusion of the Word. The Church is, indeed, called by St. Paul, “the Pullar and Ground of the truth * ;’—It is the P2//ar of truth, as being a visible witness; and it is the Ground of truth, as upholding the same; but the Church is itself based upon the Word of God, spoken by Christ. “Other foundation can no man lay,” says the same Apostle, “ than that is laid, Jesus Christ t.” And again, “ Ye are built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets); that is, on the Word of God preached by Christ’s ministers both before and after His coming, “Jesus Christ himself being the head * 1 Tim. iii. 16. Στῦλος καὶ Ἑδραίωμα. + Hence St. Irenzeus (iii. 2.) calls the Gospel the Pillar and Foundation of the Church (στῦλον καὶ στήριγμα τῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας τὸ εὐαγγέλιον). ἘΠ Con ΠΗ: § Ephes. ii, 20. 1.7 ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 17 corner-stone.” Weare “born again, not of corrup- tible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God*.” “Of His own will begat He us with the Word of truth +.” The Church, then, is a divinely instituted society of believers, who are born by Water and the Word; the Church is cleansed and sanctified by the Word, for “ Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for tt, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of Water by the Word t.” She therefore owes all her being and her beauty to the Word; and she is, therefore, posterior to the Word, though not to the writing of the Word. This Word, by God’s will, for our salvation, was consigned to writing, and it has been committed by God to the custody of the Church, who is commanded to preach the same; but it is as preposterous to affirm that it owes its au- thority to the Church, as it would be to say, that a Royal Writ depends for its validity on the Keeper of the Great Seal; or that the power of the Monarch is derived from the Herald who proclaims his acces- sion to the throne. It is to be observed, also, that, by resolving our belief in the Canon of Scripture into the tradition of the Church, as the sufficient and final cause of our assent to the same, we should, in fact, be undermining the foundations of the Church her- self, and leave ourselves without any ground for * 1 Peter i. 23. + James 1. 18. + Ephes. v. 25, 26. 4 24] C 18 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. belief in her teaching; for this belief rests on the Word of God. But if the Word of God is to depend entirely for its authority on the witness of the Church, then we shall have, zm fine, the Church bearing testimony to herself,—a kind of evidence which no one can be bound to receive. And this objection is much stronger against the Romish theory, when we remember that it would require us to resolve our faith in the Canon of Scripture, not into the tradition of the primitive universal Church, but into that of the eaisting Roman branch of it, which is at variance with that of the Catholic Church ; so that, in fact, it would leave us without any sure ground for belief, either in Scripture or the Church. What, then, it may now be enquired, are the grounds on which we affirm that the Books called Canonical by the Church of England were dictated by the Holy Ghost ? First of all, we reply, it is an indubitable fact that a religious society, known by the name of the Church, exists, and has existed in this country since the time of the Apostles: and that this society exercises a visible authority, and discharges public offices of prayer, and preaching, and the ministry of the sacra- ments, in certain public buildings called churches, throughout the Realm. This society appeals to the eye and to the ear of all; and from its extent, numbers, and antiquity, is entitled to be heard with respect. The Church presents us with a Volume%*, * See Hooker III. viii. 14, and II. vii. 3. 1.1] ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS. 19 called the Holy Bible, containing writings which she affirms to be inspired by God. But, observe, she does not require us to receive them on her sole authority ; she does not found the claims of the English Bible on the sanction of the evisting English Church. No: she appeals to the testimony of the Church wnversal, in and from the time of Christ and [Tis Apostles to this hour. “In the name of the Holy Scriptures,” she says, in her sixth Article, “we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.” Thus the Church of England takes us as it were by the hand, and leads us upward by an ascending scale of past generations, and places us on the elevated platform of primitive Christianity ; she lands us, as it were, on a mountain of transfigu- ration, in the company of Moses, and Hlias, and the Apostles, and of Christ Himself. We find, and we shall hereafter endeavour to prove, that Jesus Christ and His Apostles recognized the Scriptures of the Old Testament in the hands of the Jews; that He stamped the Jewish Canon of Scripture with His own Divine seal. We have re- ceived that Canon, and are authorized and obliged to do so by our belief in Christ; and we know that the Old Testament in our hands agrees precisely with that in the hands of the Jews at the time of our Lord’s ministry, and in the hands of Christ Himself. This, I say, we can prove from the concurrent wit- ness of a countless number of Copies and of Versions Gra 20 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. of the Old Testament preserved both by Jews and Christians in every quarter of the globe. With respect to the New Testament, the primitive Church of Christ exercised a fourfold office: first, that of a contemporary Witness to its genuineness and authenticity; next, that of a Guardian of its integrity; next, that of a Herald, by public reading and interpretation of it in her religious assemblies, and by diffusion of copies of it into all parts of the world; and, finally, that of a Judge, by vindicating its divine character, and by distinguishing it from all supposititious writings claiming to be inspired, and by visiting their authors with severe spiritual penalties. Now, we confidently affirm, that the Apostles of Christ would never have asserted their own writings to be inspired, unless they had been persuaded of the truth of that assertion; they would never, as they did, have commanded the Church to receive their word “not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God*,” and to read it + in religious assemblies, as such; nor would the primitive Church have ever received and read it, if she had not been convinced by miracles that it was what it professed to be. Nor, be it said with reverence, would Christ have signally distinguished those who claimed to be His ministers and chosen followers, if they were not what they professed to be; nor would He have Pal hes cats 15. + Col. iv. 16; 1 Thes. v. 27. I.] ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE REsTs. 21 guaranteed their claims to inspiration, by enabling them to work miracles in His name, the performance of which is proved by the record of them in the New Testament received as divine by the Church contemporary with it. Thus, my brethren, we see that the testimony of the Church of England to the inspiration of these Books rests on the witness of the primitive Church ; and ¢hat is founded on the authority of Christ. Again: having had our attention arrested by the Church, and being guided by her to certain Books which are propounded to us by the Apostles and by Christ Himself; and finding that we have the testi- mony of the Church, from the time of the Apostles to our own, to their inspiration, we then, as reason- able men, are irresistibly moved to devote ourselves to the study of these writings. And among other facts stated in Scripture, we find this, that Christ, Whose Divine character is proved by His works*, which are authenticated by the contemporaneous reception of the original document which records them, does in the New Testament promise to be “ever with His Church, and to guide His Apostles into all truth} ;” that is, our belief in her initial testimony concerning the Canon of Scripture is confirmed and assured to us by Christ Himself. Nor is this all. Having been led by the Church * John v. 96: x; 25: xiv. 11. ΜΠ τὶ 2—6. + Matt. xxviii. 20. John xvi. 19. 22 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. to the Scriptures, we find by experience that the more we bestow our time in hearing and reading them, the more they answer our received opinions concerning them; and then those other important considerations come in, to which we have already adverted *. The more, I say, we examine them, the greater reason we perceive,—in their beauty, simpli- city, majesty, and sublimity, in the divine purity of their doctrine, the wonderful harmony of all their parts, the benefits they have conferred upon the world, the completion of their prophecies, the miracles wrought by Christ and His Apostles,—to be more and more convinced of the divine origin of the Scriptures; and finally, the Holy Spirit Him- self, Whose word they are, witnesses to our spirit in this persuasion, and confirms, settles, and stablishes us immovably in the faith that the Scriptures re- ceived by us through the ministry of the Church are indeed the Word of God. This proof, my brethren, is one of wniversal appli- cation; it comprises all the parts of Scripture,—tfor the Church delivers to us the whole Canon as sealed by Christ and His Apostles——and it proves the whole to be divine; it addresses itself audibly, visibly, and intelligibly to all men,—to the careless, to the illiterate, to the unbeliever; it speaks to the poor and to the simple, to the noble and the wise ; and it demonstrates to every man that he is without * Aboye, p. 10—12. I.] ON WHICH THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE RESTS, 23 excuse, if he receive not the Books of the Old and New Testament as the Worp of Gop. It will be my endeavour, in the following Dis- courses, to exhibit more particularly what has now been presented to you in a concise and summary manner; and I would now only observe, in conclu- sion, that the text consists of four verses from the history of the Samaritan woman in the fourth chap- ter of the Gospel of St. John; and that I have chosen them as affording an apt illustration of the present argument, and as fixing it in the memory of the hearer. The Samaritan woman, we read, “went her way into the city and said to the men, Come see a man which told me all things that ever I did ; is not this the Christ? Then they went out of the city and came unto Him, and many of them believed on Him for the saying of the woman which testified, He told me all that ever I did.” So it is with the Church. She has received the Word of God; she is the divinely-appointed witness, keeper, herald, and interpreter of the Divine Law ; but God alone is the Legislator from Whom its au- thority flows. She exercises a manuductory and ministerial office, but not a final and magisterial juris- diction. By experience we all know that her authority propounding Scripture to us as divine, is the first out- ward motive which induces us to esteem it such*. The * Hooker, III. vin. 14. 24 WHAT THE FOUNDATION Is, &c. Church brings us to Christ ; Christ authorizes the tes- timony which she has given, and confirms it by words and works of His own, and thus proves the credibility of the Church. The Samaritans, being brought to Christ by the woman, besought Him that He would tarry with them. He complied with their request. “ He abode with them two days.” So, when we are brought to Christ by the Church, we beseech Him to abide with us. He graciously remains with ws 7m His Holy Word, and, by His grace given to our continued prayer and meditation upon it, He con- firms us more and more in our belief of its inspira- tion. He remains with us not two days only, but all days *. He shows us by infallible proofs that He Himself is the great Prophet of the Old Testament, and the great Apostle of the New; that He is indeed, Himself, as the blessed Evangelist calls Him, the Worp of God, Who was in the beginning with God, and Who is God+. Thus, being instructed and assured by the Incarnate Word of the divine authority of the Written Word, we now say to the Church as the Samaritans said to the woman, “ Vow we believe, not any longer 1 because of thy saying ; for we have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.” * Matth. xxviii. 20, ᾿Εγὼ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰμε πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας. + Jom 1... { οὐκέτι. LECTURE IL. Rom. iil. 1, 2. “ What advantage then hath the Jew ? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way. Chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.” Ir was my endeavour, in the preceding Discourse, to state in general terms the nature of the evidence on which we receive as Canonical—that is, as the divinely appointed Rule of our faith and practice, those Books which are propounded to us as such by the Church of England, and those alone. It was then observed, that as soon as we are capable of perceiving any thing by our intellectual faculties, we find a religious Society in existence, dating from the time of the Apostles, and pervading all parts of our country. This Society, called the Church of England, presents to us certain Books as inspired, and grounds her assertion of their inspira- tion not on her own authority, but on the testimony of the Universal Church in and from the age of Jesus Christ and His Apostles; that is, ultimately 26 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. on the witness of Christ Himself. Having re- ceived this warrant for the Inspiration of the Serip- tures, we are moved to search them diligently ; and the more time and study we bestow on them, the stronger our belief in their inspiration becomes; and by the influence of the Holy Spirit, Whose Word Scripture is, and Whom our [Heavenly Father* gives to all who ask Him faithfully, we are settled and stablished in the belief that Scripture is the Word of God. Such is the outline of the proof of the Divine authority of the Books of the Old and New Testa- ment. My present purpose is, with the Divine blessing, to demonstrate more specifically what was then stated in a comprehensive manner ; and first of all to treat of the OLp TEesTaMENT. In this portion of the argument it is my design to show why we receive as Canonical those Books, and those alone, which we designate as such; next, to examine the arguments of those who would oblige us to receive certain other Books, which we call A pocryphal, and who will not communicate with us or with any one who does not and cannot receive these additional books as inspired, and of equal authority with the others; and lastly, to examine the history and position of the Apocryphal books, and to invite your attention to the wisdom and felicity of that middle course which the Chureh of * Luke xi. 13. Π.7] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 27 England, following the steps of the Church Catholic, has pursued with respect to them. These are the topics, my brethren, which I pro- pose to handle in the present and two following Discourses *; and my intention is, if health and strength are granted me, to extend the inquiry fur- ther, in the Lectures of the ensuing October, and in them to examine the grounds on which we receive as Canonical the Books of the New ΤΈΒΤΑΜΕΝΤ. Our present concern is with the Old Testament ; and I would now proceed to show that its Books, as soon as they were written, were delivered by Almighty God to the keeping of His own people, the Jews; by whom they were received as inspired, and preserved pure and entire till the coming of Christ; that they, and they alone, were acknow- ledged by Hi as the sincere Word of God; that, being so authenticated by Christ, they passed through the hands of the Apostles into those of the Christian Church; and thus have been preserved unadulterated and unmutilated, and conveyed by an uninterrupted succession even to ourselves at this day. Let us commence our inquiries with the ΡΕΝΤΑ- TEUCH, or Five Books of Moses. The injunctions of Almighty God concerning it afford the clearest proofs of His providential care for the declaration of its sanctity and for the mainte- nance of its inviolability. * Delivered at St. Mary’s on Sundays in April, 1847. 28 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. To Moses God Himself gives this testimony: “My servant Moses is faithful in all Mine house* ;” and when Moses had written the Book of the Law, “he delivered it unto the priests, the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant, and unto all the elders of Israel, and he commanded the Levites to take the book and to put it by { the side of the ark of the covenant, to be there for a witness against the people of Israel t.” Let us remember that the Ark of the covenant was within the Holy of Holies; that upon it the Divine Presence rested in awful majesty; that it was permitted to the High Priest alone to enter the Holy of Holies once a year; and that God, on two signal occasions, vindicated the holiness of the Ars, by punishing with death the men of Bethshemesh who looked into it§, and Uzzah who touched it with his hand ||; and we shall acknowledge that the integrity and sanctity of the Sacred Volume could not have been guaranteed and declared in a more striking and effectual manner than by this its juxta- position with the Ark, enshrined in the Holy of Holies 4]. * Numb. xii. 7; Heb. iii. 2. + Not in, but by; see Bp. Patrick on the passage. { Deut. xxxi. 9. 24—26. § 1 Sam. vi. 19. || 2 Sam. vi. 6. 1 Chron. xiii. 9. 4 Juvenal says, xiv. 102. ‘Tradidit arcano quodecunque Volumine Moyses.” The word Arcanum, as Cicero explains it, is derived ‘ab arcd, in qua que clausa sunt tuta manent ;” (Οἷς. de Fin. 11. 26,) I may be allowed to refer, on the religious v > Π.] ΟΕ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 29 Let us observe also the other means prescribed by God for its public recognition as His Word, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release ἢ, in the Feast of Tabernacles, when all Israel were assembled before the Lord, first in the Tabernacle and afterwards in the Temple, the Law of the Lord was to be read before 811. the people. And accordingly we find 7 that “ there was , snot a word of all that Moses commanded which | | Joshua read not before all the congregation.” And, τῷ for its greater honour and security, it was com- they were enthroned, should write, with their own hands, a_copy of the Law from the sacred autograph preserved in the sanctuary and guarded by the priests and Levites}. Accordingly we find that, as late as the times of Jehoash, one of the ceremonies of the coronation of the Jewish kings was the de- livery to him of the Testimony by the priest 9. It is asserted by Christian writers of unimpeach- able veracity ||, whose testimony appears to be cor- uses of arce and κίσται, to the authorities cited in my note on Theocritus xxi. 56, and xxvi. 6. The expression of Juvenal, arcanum Volumen, is remarkably appropriate to the Five Books of Moses, and may, perhaps, have been derived (even though Juvenal might not know the fact) from the connexion of the Pen- tateuch with the 4rk, ᾽ * Deut. xxxi. 10. + Joshua vili. 35. £ Deut. xvii. 18. Joshua i. 8. § 2 Kings xi. 12, and 2 Chron. xxiii. 11. || Tertullian de Cult. Foem. i. ὃ. Appendix A. No. VII. S$. Epiphanius, Appendix A. No. XIII. (6) S. Augustine, de Civ. at Ws 30 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. roborated by that of the Jewish historian Josephus *, that not only the Pentateuch, but that αἰ the Books which the Jews received as inspired, were deposited in the sanctuary of God {; that is, as St. Paul says, “the oracles of God were committed to themt,” and were kept by them in His House. Concerning the Prophetical Books of Holy Serip- ture, it is certain that they profess to be dictated by God, and that they were received as such by the Jews, who were under God’s special guidance and protection, and who were not only warned by Him against false prophets ᾧ, but were enjoined by Him to put them to death. The parents themselves of the false prophet were commanded to execute judgment upon him ||. Thus the reception of the Prophetical Books by God’s people is a strong proof of their inspiration. Dei, xv. 23. Canon Scripturarum qui servabatur in Templo Hebrei populi. * Who speaks (Antiq. ill. 3, and v. 1) of the ἡ ἐν ἱερῷ ἀνα- κειμένη γραφή and τὰ ἐν ἱερῷ ἀνακείμενα γράμματα. See also De Vita sua, c. 75, where he speaks of his having saved the ἱερὰ γράμματα, at the taking of Jerusalem, χαρισαμένου Τίτου. These appear to have been the copies belonging to the Temple. In his History of the Jewish Wars, vii. c. v., he relates that the Law was borne in the Triumph of Titus, at Rome, and afterwards deposited in the Imperial Palace. + Comp. 1 Sam. x. 25. ‘ Samuel told the people the manner of the kingdom, and wrote it in a Book, and laid it up before the Lord ;” which shows that the Tabernacle was a depository of sacred Archives. { Rom. iii. 2. § Deut. xiii. 5; xviii. 20. Jer. xiv. 15. || Zech. xiii. 3. 1. OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 31 Here it is to be observed, that the word Prophet * among the Jews, as indeed the corresponding word in the New Testament, is applied not only to one who predicts future events, but also generally to any one sent by God; and thus it is that “the Law and the Prophets” comprehend, αὐ the Books of their Scripture; and when it is asserted by Jewish writers that their Prophets were inspired, this affirmation is meant by them to apply to the writers of the His- torical as well as the Prophetical Books contained in the Old Testament. It may be also observed here, that the Book of Psalms was further secured and promulgated by its liturgical use. Thus, we see, the Providence of God exerted Itself in a most signal manner for the preservation and publication of the Sacred Books; and no less remarkable were the interferences of the same Almighty and Merciful Power to rescue them from destruction at several times. For some centuries before their captivity, the churches of Israel and Judah were corrupted with idolatry and superstition. There was a famine of hearing the word of the Lord{. In the reign of King Asa, the Prophet Azariah said, “ Now for a long season Israel hath been without the true God, and without a teaching Priest, and without law).” In the = Nl), προφήτης. + This was the popular classification. ‘The Law, Prophets, and Kethubim,” or Hagiographa, the more scientific one. Both are | used, Luke xxiv. 27. 44. $ Amos vii. 11. § 2 Chr. xv. 3. | 92 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. next reign, that of Jehoshaphat, when the Levites were sent about to teach in the cities of Judah, they had, we read, the Book of the law with them*; a cir- cumstance which shows that though the Law existed, copies of it were very scarce. In the times just preceding those of King Hezekiah, the Temple had been shut up, and was almost fallen into ruins, and no offerings were made upon the altar+. But that pious King restored the Liturgy, and renewed the reading of the Law}. Again; in the two following reigns of Manasseh and Amon, the Nation relapsed into idolatry, so that the good King Josiah, the successor of Amon, remained a stranger to the Law, even till the eighteenth year of his reign, when the Sacred Volume was found by Hilkiah, the Priest ᾧ, in some obscure nook of the Temple, where, pro- bably, it had been secreted by some of the Levites, to preserve it from the idolatrous rage of King Manasseh, who had set up an idol in the House of the Lord, and built altars for all the Host of Heaven in the Courts of the Temple ||. It is evident, from these historical details, that the Word of God was often in imminent danger of extinction. Yet one single fact, to which we must now advert, suffices to prove that the Scriptures were preserved pure and entire through all these cor- rupt and idolatrous times. From the ages of Samuel * 2 Chron. xvii. 9. + 2 Chron. xxix. 7. + 2 Chron. xxxi. 4. 21. § 2 Chron, xxxiv. 15. || 2 Chron. xxxiii. 5. 1.1 OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 99 downwards there was an uninterrupted succession of Prophets *, who were raised up by God, to be Watchmen of the House of Israel, to “sound the trumpet in Sion, to cry aloud, and shew the people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sin} .” The Prophets, we are sure, did rebuke the people for their iniquities; it is certain, from their writings and their sufferings, and from Christ’s testimony to them, that they executed their office faithfully ; and, from the fact of their never letting (a sin far too heinous to have been connived at by them had it been committed,) we conclude that no such matilation or adulteration ever took place. We should be guilty of great ingratitude to God, if we did not confess, with thankful heart and voice, that it was of His Almighty goodness that the written Word was preserved, when it seemed on so many occasions to be, as it were, on the brink of destruction. Nor, ought we to be less thankful for His mercy in giving us unquestionable proofs of its preservation, which otherwise, under the circum- stances of the case, might have been liable to be questioned by anxious doubts, and to be controverted by sceptical surmisings. We recognize additional reason for devout mag- * What Josephus calls τὴν τῶν προφητῶν ἀκριβῆ διαδοχήν. See Appendix A. No. III. + Isa. lviii. 1. 94 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. nificats to Him on these two grounds, when we pursue our historical enquiries further. In the seventy years’ captivity the Jews almost forgot their vernacular tongue; still, God raised up chosen instruments among them, to preserve and expound the Law, even at Babylon : and He has vouchsafed us evidence of this in the Book of the Prophet Daniel, who is described as a man, skilful in all wisdom *, and who cites the Law of Moses, and the Prophets+, and studies the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah ¢, and is referred by an Angel to the Scripture of Truth). Further: it is clear, from what is recorded of Ezra, after the return of the Jews to Jerusalem, that the Scriptures had been preserved entire through the captivity. Ezra is styled in Scripture ἃ Priest, a Scribe of the Law of the God of Heaven ||; and, in obedi- ence to that Law, he ordered the Feast of Tabernacles to be kept in the seventh month; and he brought forth the Law of Moses, and read it for seven days in the ears of all the people. It appears to be unquestionable 4, that Ezra, assisted (as it would seem) by the Prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, all of them inspired persons, and recognized * Dan. i. 4. + ‘Dat. ix. 6:11. 18: 1) Dan, ix. 2. § Dan. x. 21. || Ezra vii. 12, margin. 4] See the authorities cited by Bp. Cosin, on the Canon, and Carpzov. Introd. in V. T., cap. xviii. p. 307. ed. Lips. 1721. and Havernick, Einleitung in V. T. p. 24—34, 44. 63. 1.7 OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 90 as such by Christ Himself,—(for it is certain that the Books written by them were a part of the Jewish Canon of Scripture which Christ received,)—it is - indubitable, I say, that Ezra* revised the copies then extant of the Jewish Scriptures, and collected them in one volume, and completed the Canon of the Old Testament. The Jewish historian, Josephus, ex- / pressly states that no Book written after this period | was regarded by the Jews as inspired 17. It was a very providential circumstance, as we shall see, that the Canon of the Old Testament was then closed. But to return. God, in His infinite mercy, con- verted even the calamities of the Jews into means and occasions of securing and diffusing His Holy Word. The captivity had been a grievous affliction ; the loss of their language, and the dispersion of their brethren, were sore trials: but God elicited good from all these evils. This appears as follows. Although the Temple was rebuilt, it had not the visible sign of God’s presence. But now Synagogues arose { in every part of the land ; in them, copies of the Scriptures, made with the * See S. Iren. iii. 25. (with note of Feuard.) Euseb. H. E. Ν..8. + Appendix A. No. III. t A Synagogue, say the Rabbis, is to be erected, wherever there are ten persons of full age and leisure to attend its service, see Lightfoot in Matth. iv. 23. In our Saviour’s time, no town in Judea was without a Synagogue; Tiberias had twelve, and Jerusalem four hundred and eighty. Prideaux, Connection, i. book vi. vol. ii, p. 166. Oxford, 1820. DZ 90 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. most scrupulous fidelity, were kept in a sacred * chest, as the original volume had been guarded in a chest, near the Ark, in the Holy of Holies, in the Temple and Tabernacle ; in these Synagogues the Law of God was read three times a week; and thus His presence was diffused over the land, and Palestine became a Temple. And when the Syrian King, Antiochus Epiphanes, the ferocious persecutor, the type of Antichrist, prohibited the public reading of the Law, then, analogous lessons from the Prophets were sub- stituted in its place; till at length, when he was removed by death, doth the Law and the Prophets were read in the Synagogues, and continued to be read through, year by year, until the Advent of Him Who came to fulfil them all. Besides: this diffusion of Scripture was not confined to Palestine. The loss of the original Hebrew as a vernacular tongue, necessitated the production of Cha/daic paraphrases, for the use of the people, after their return. This, again, produced a class of regularly trained Expositors, or Scribes, learned in the Law and in the Prophets. They first appear to us ranged by the side of Ezra, the Priest, standing on the pulpit of wood, at the Feast of Tabernacles, as recorded in the Book of Nehemiah, and interpreting into Chaldee what Ezra read in the original Hebrew +. * They are still so kept to this day. See Buxtorf, Synagoga, ς. 14, + Neh. viii. 3—10. 1.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 37 In the Chaldee Paraphrases, thus framed, happily for Christianity, was deposited the sense in which most learned Jews of that and the succeeding age understood the prophecies of Scripture; and from them it is clearly proved that many predictions were applied to the Messiah by the best instructed Jews from Ezra to the Christian era, which the later Jews, apostatizing from the faith of their forefathers, would alienate from Christ. Thus the loss of the vernacular tongue served not only to preserve Scripture by a Translation, but to interpret it by an Evposition*. Another instrument providentially supplied by the learning of Ezra’s age was the Masorat, in which, with wonderful scrupulousness and _ fidelity, not only the number of paragraphs, but even of letters of the Sacred Text was registered, and the whole was carefully guarded from either curtailment or addition. Let us now turn our eyes to the west of Judea. By the conquests of Alexander of Macedon and his generals, the Greek language was widely diffused, and had become the familiar tongue of the principal cities of Western Asia, Syria, and Egypt. Partly by force, and partly by choice, Jews were dispersed { * See particularly Bp. Pearson on the Creed, Article ii. p. 82 and p. 117, Notes, ed. Lond. 1715. + Prideaux, ii. p. 135. Hottinger, Thesaurus, p. 131—138. t Concerning these dispersions, see Bp. Pearson, Op. Post. ii. p- 31; and what is said below, Lecture X. 98 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS Eaves in large numbers in these cities: hence arose the necessity of a Greek version of the Scriptures for them and their proselytes. Accordingly, about two hundred and eighty years before the birth of Christ, a translation, commonly called the Translation of the Septuagint, or Seventy,—whether from the number of the translators, or of the elders of the Jewish Sanhedrim,—was made at Alexandria in Egypt; and thus, by God’s providence, a Greek Translation, made dy Jews and for Jews, and publicly read in the synagogues of the Jews,—one, therefore, against which the Jews could not make any exception, and one in the universal language of the Gentile world,— was prepared for the use of the Evangelists and Apostles of Christ writing the New Testament in Greek. From this Septuagint version, and not from the original Hebrew, the Latin Translations were made which were used in the Western Church even to the time of St. Jerome, that is, to the end of the fourth century *. Thus we see that additional provision was made for the preservation, diffusion, and exposition of the Old Testament. By the dispersion of the Jews, by the erection of synagogues in which the Sacred Books were read, and by the multiplication of copies of the Original Text and of Translations of it through- out the whole civilized world, the Old Testament was safely guarded against addition or mutilation. This * See the authorities in Hottinger, p. 338—343. Π.7 ΟΕ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 99 was God’s work. If we mayso speak, the soil of the whole world was thus ploughed into deep furrows, ready to receive the Sacred Seed of the Gospel from the hands of the Divine Sower. Of this prospective adaptation we have beauti- ful evidence in the New Testament. We behold our Blessed Lord entering the synagogue*, “as His custom was,” on the Sabbath day; we see the Book of Isaiah given Him, and we hear Him ex- pounding the proper lesson of the day; and applying it to Himself. At Jerusalem, after the Ascension, St. James says that “ AZoses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogue every Sabbath day} .” We hear St. Paul pleading at Caesarea before the Preetorian judgment-seat, and boldly asking, “Aing Agrippa, believest thou the Prophets? I know that thou believestt.” At Ephe- sus he went “ ἐμέο the synagogue and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.” At Antioch in Pisidia, “after the reading of the Law and of the Prophets,’ in the synagogue, Paul preaches Christ to the men of Israel from their own Scriptures j). At Lystra we see the child Timothy reading his Bible ||. If we pass into Greece, we be- hold Paul at Thessalonica, as his manner was, going into the synagogue of the Jews, and “three Sabbath * Luke iv. 16. + Acts xv. 21. { Acts xxvi. 27. § Acts xi. 15. |. Acts xvi. Ds 22 fim: 17-15. 40 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. days reasoning with them out of the Scriptures ;” we see the Berrhaeans “ searching the Scriptures daily *.” Even in the luxurious Corinth, we find Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, joining himself as a fellow-labourer to Paul of Tarsus +, who reasoned there in the synagogue every Sabbath. Crossing the Mediterranean to Alexandria, we see “ Apollos, an eloquent man, mighty in the Scriptures t,” and ready to become a Christian missionary in Achaia, and “mightily convincing the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus is Christ §.” And if we now bend our steps along the desert road leading from Gaza to Ethiopia, we meet the States- man of Candace sitting in his chariot, “and reading Lsaiah the Prophet \\.” Such is an outline of the evidence in the New Testament, concerning the diffusion of the Old and the consequent preparation for the New, at the coming of Christ. Two questions must now be asked, and most im- portant they are. (1) Did all these differerent indivi- duals and congregations, dispersed so widely, receive the same Scriptures? We reply, they did. And (2) were those Scriptures of the Old Testament the same as we receive? We answer, they are. Most providentially for the cause of true Religion, the Almighty Author of Seripture has so ordered it * Acts xvii. 11. + Cora. a + Acts xviii. 24. § Acts xviii. 28, || Acts vill. 28. 1.7] ΟΕ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 41 that we have two witnesses of unexceptionable authority on this subject : one from the great metro- polis of the eastern part of the Jewish Church, Jeru- salem; the other from the capital of the western, Alewandria: both Jews, both contemporary with the Apostles; the one Josephus, the other Philo. Josephus was a Priest,a Pharisee, of the family of the Asmonean princes, deeply versed in the litera- ture of his own country and in that of Greece, and obliged, by his peculiar studies as a controversialist, and as a historian of his own nation, to examine the documents connected with it, and to cultivate the literature of Greece, in the language of which he wrote. One of his latest productions was a polemical treatise against Apion, concerning the antiquity of Jewish annals. In this work he enumerates and describes the Books which his countrymen, the Jews, received as inspired. He testifies, that *, “al- though many years had then elapsed since their composition, yet no one had ever dared to add anything to them, or to take aught from them, or to make any change in them ; and that it is a principle engrafted in all Jews, even from their birth, to regard them as the Oracles of God, and to cleave to them, yea, and gladly to die for them, if necessary.” Such is the testimony of Josephus concerning the Old Testament. * See the original passage in the Appendix A. to this Volume, Now 11]. 42 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. These Books, which, he says, are Twenty-two * in number, embrace a period from the Creation to Moses, and from Moses to Artaverves (that is, to the time of Hzra); and he distinguishes between these Books, and those which relate to the period after Artaxerxes, (that is, our Apocrypha,) by saying that these latter were not regarded as of like credit with the former, because the previous exact succession of Prophets} was not continued after that epoch 1. The Books, therefore, which all the Jews received as inspired, in the time of Christ, are precisely the same as are received by ourselves. * For the specification of these Twenty-two, see Appendix C. (c.) (n.) + Compare 1 Mace. ix. 27, (circ. B.c. 161), speaking of the cessation of Prophets at that time, ‘‘ There was great affliction in Israel, the like whereof was not since the time that a Prophet was not seen among them ;’’ so iv. 46, ‘ They laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, (Β. 6. 165), until there should come a Prophet to show what should be done with them.” Cf. 1 Mace. xiv. 41. + See Appendix A. No. III. note. The Jews called Malachi, the “Seal of the Prophets,’ because he closed the prophetic writings (see Appendix C.e.); ana St. Jerome writing in Pales- tine says (ad Isa. xlix. 21), “ Post Haggzeum et Zachariam et Malachiam nullos alios Prophetas usque ad Joannem Baptistam videram ;”’ a most important testimony; and S. Augustine in his de Civ. Dei, xvii. c. ult. one of his last works, completed only two years before his death, (and therefore of higher credit than his earlier declarations in his work On Christian Teaching, and at the Councils of Hippo and Carthage,) says, ‘‘ Post Malachiam, Hagegzeum et Zachariam et Esdram non habuerunt Prophetas usque ad Salvatoris adventum. Hos Judzi in auctoritatem Canonicam receptos novissimos habent.” Π.7 OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 49 It has been alleged by some persons, that this testimony of Josephus comes from Jerusalem alone, and that the western or Alexandrine Jews had a different Canon of Scripture. To this we reply: First of all, be it observed, Josephus expressly says that the Canon which he is setting down was received by αὐ the Jews, and that they would all contend for it even to the death; and next, be it remarked, Josephus is, it is true, a Jew of Jerusalem, but then he is writing, yes, writing in a controversial treatise, to a Grammarian of Alexandria —that is, he is writing from the Kast to West; and even if we could bring ourselves to believe that Jose- phus had any intention to deceive in this solemn public matter, it is preposterous to imagine that he would have ventured upon the assertion which he has made concerning all Jews, without exception, if the Jews of that very city in which his antagonist resided, namely, Alexandria, had themselves been an open example, by which his statement might have been refuted. But, we have another Jewish witness, to whom we have already referred; one from this very city of Alexandria, and also contemporary with the Apostles, Philo. He, too, was a Pharisee, and of a priestly family, and went, on a public mission as is supposed, from the Jews of Alexandria, to Jerusalem, te offer prayers and sacrifice in the Temple there, which he ealls the “ Temple of his fathers 2? . * See the conclusive evidence collected by Bp. Pearson in Acta Apost. Lect. i. 9, and Opera Posthuma, ed. Churton, 44 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ΠΕΟΤ᾿ When we consider the scrupulous reverence of the Jews for their Sacred Books, to which, using almost the same terms as Josephus, Philo * himself bears witness, saying, that they would rather die ten thousand deaths than allow a single syllable in them to be altered, it is absolutely incredible, on the one hand, that an Alexandrine Jew should have gone up from Egypt to Jerusalem, to worship in the Temple there; or, on the other hand, that he should have been permitted by the Jews of Jerusalem to do so, if the Scriptural Canon of the one had differed from that of the other,—yes, and differed so widely as it would have done, 0 the Apocryphal Books, being equal to a sixth part of the Canonical Scripture, had been received as inspired by the one, and not so received by the other 1. Again: we know, from the first chapter of the Cone. III. vol. 11. p. 31, to show that Jerusalem with its Temple, was regarded as the Metropolis of all the Jews in the Apostolic age, wheresoever dispersed. * Ap. Euseb. Preep. Ev. vill. 6. μὴ ῥῆμα αὐτοὺς μόνον τῶν γεγραμμένων κινῆσαι, ἀλλὰ κἂν μυριάκις αὐτοὺς ἀποθανεῖν ὑπομεῖναι θᾶττον ἢἣ τοῖς ἐκείνου νόμοις καὶ ἔθεσιν ἐναντία πεισθῆναι. He is speaking specially of the Pentateuch. + It is very worthy of observation, that Philo, who lived in the city which appears to have produced a great part of the Apocrypha, never cites the Apocrypha, (see Hornemann de Canone V. T. ex Philone, p. 28,) which he certainly would have done if they had been accounted Canonical at Alexandria in the Apostolic age. Josephus, as we have seen, does refer to the Apocrypha, and distinguishes between it and the Canonical Books. Appendix A. No. III. Π.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 45 second Book of Maccabees, that the most cordial amity prevailed between the eastern and western Jews. The Alexandrine Temple* at Leontopolis, in Heliopolitan Egypt, was built after the model of that at Jerusalem ; and its religious rites corresponded with that of the Sanctuary on Mount Zion; and Philo’s journey to Jerusalem, for the sake of religious worship, is doubtless an example of a practice com- mon to all the Jews of the dispersion at that period. Indeed, not to mention the Greeks, (1.6. the Helle- nistic Jews,) who, as we read in the Gospel of St. John +, came to the Feast of the Passover—the concourse of Jews from Egypt, and from the parts of Libya about Cyrene 1. and from all other quarters of the habitable globe, on the day of Pentecost, that is, on the solemn anniversary of the Giving of the Law from Mount Sinai—the flocking together, I say, at Jerusalem for that Festival, of Jews, devout men out of every nation under Heaven, may, I think, be regarded as an incontestable proof that they a//agreed in receiving the same Books as the Word of God. On the whole, then, we find that certain Books were composed in the interval of time between Moses and Ezra, a period of a thousand years; and that these Books were preserved in the Holy of Holies, and read in the Synagogues as Divine Writings. We find, also, that these Books profess * See Josephus Antiq. xii. 3, and the authorities cited in Havernick’s Einleitung, p. 70—72. + John xii. 20. fv Acts 11. 10. 46 WUAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. to be inspired by God; that they were received and guarded as such by God’s People, Priests, and Princes ; and that the necessity of this reception, and the faith- fulness of this custody, is proved to us by His Prophets. We also find, that, by multiplication and diffusion of copies, and translations of them, and by perpetual public recitation and exposition of them, their sanctity was declared, and their integrity secured. We have now arrived at the momentous question, How were these Books received by Hm of Whom all the Law and the Prophets did write* ; the Author and Finisher of our Faith +; the Alpha and Omegat of all God’s revelations? How were they received by JESUS CHRIST 4 Our Blessed Lord was a constant attendant at the worship of the Synagogue, and He took part in the public reading and exposition of the Sacred Books of the Jews: thus, He gave a practical testimony, and a personal sanction, to the tenets of the Jews concerning those Books. He, the Son of God, received as Scripture, what the Jews received and delivered to him as Scripture. He frequently called those Books, “ The Scriptures ; He said to the Jews, “Search your Scriptures) 3? He said, “ 7ὲ is easier for heaven and earth to pass than one tittle of the Law to fail heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle (that is, one |;” and again, “ Verily I say unto you, Till 3 * John i. 45. + Heb. xii. 2. ἘΠΕῚ 21. § John v. 39. rae γραφάς. || Luke xvi. 17. ll.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 47 yod, the smallest letter, and one point of a letter,) “shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be ful- filled ἢ; “ They have Moses and the Prophets: let them hear them +.” St. Luke narrates, that, in His walk with the two Disciples to Emmaus, “ beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself ¢.” He said to His Apostles, “These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that al! things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning Me ἡ. So spake the Lord of Life. And, therefore, the writings of Moses and all the Prophets, and the Psalms,—that is, all the Books received by the Jews under these names, were αὐ the Scriptures to Christ. Clear, therefore, we say, it is, that our BiesseD Lorp Himself recognized the Jewish Canon of Scripture. He recognized that Canon as complete. If; now, the Apocryphal Books, which amount to as much as a sixth part of the Old Testament, are inspired, how is it that our Blessed Lord, Who is so full and frequent in His exhortations to search the Scriptures, and in His quotations from them, should never, as far as we know, have cited so much as a single sentence from them || all?” How also it is, that He, Who showed = Matt..v. 18. + Luke xvi. 29. t Luke xxiv. 27. § Luke xxiv. 44. || Citation, it is obvious, would not prove Canonicity ; for Aratus, Menander, and Epimenides, are cited by St. Paul. But 48 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LET, Himself so zealous for the honour of the House of God *, and Who censured the Scribes and Pharisees in the severest terms, for making the Word of God of none effect by their traditions}, should never have breathed a single sentence of reproof against them for any mutilation 1 of the Sacred Volume, a most heinous sin, of which they were guilty in the highest degree, if the Apocryphal Books are inspired ? On the contrary, Christ himself, as we have seen, publicly communicated with them in the reception of the Scriptures which they received as the Word of God; and, by consequence, He communicated with them in the non-reception of those which they did not receive as such. What Christ did, His Apostles, taught by Him and inspired by the Holy Ghost, did likewise: they never quote any of the Apocryphal Books as the Word of Godj. They recognize the Scriptures as non-citation is a very strong proof of wneanonicity ; and in the case under consideration, it seems to be something very like a providential protest against the canonization of the Apocrypha. * John ii. 17. + Markevii- 13: + S. Jerome says, very justly, in Isai. cap. vi. (tom. ili. p. 63. ed. Bened.) Si aliquis dixerit Hebreos libros a Judzis esse falsatos, audiat Origenem . . . quod nunquam Dominus et Apostoli, qui ceetera crimina arguunt in Scribis, de hoc crimine, quod erat maximum, reticuissent. § The few passages in the New Testament which are alleged to be cited from the Apocrypha, are, in fact, not from the Apocrypha, but from Canonical Books of the Old Testament. This has been shown by Bp. Cosin, pp. 23—27, and by Mr. Hart- well Horne, Introduction, &c., Appendix, p. 464*, Lond. 1846. 1.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 49 in the hands of the Jews, “ The great advantage of the Jews,” says the Apostle, is that “to them were committed the oracles of God*.’ He does speak of their disbelieving, but he says nothing of their being faithless to their trust. What, therefore, was not committed to the Jews, was, in St. Paul’s judgment, no oracle of God. Again, to the /sraelites, he says, “nertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the cove- nants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises 1. What, therefore, did not pertain to them was no part of the sacred deposit of Divine Truth. Again, to Timothy, the son of a Jewess, St. Paul writes t: “Of a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation ;” and “all Scripture,” that is, every part of Scripture §, “72s given by inspiration of God.” What, therefore, can be more evident than that all that the Jews received as Scripture is inspired, and that what they did not so receive is not Scripture ? Thus, then, my brethren, we have a most blessed assurance from Christ Himself, that the Books which the Jews received, and which we have received from them, are the pure and entire Word of God. The New Testament canonizes the Old; the Incar- NATE Worp sets His seal on the Writren Worn. The Incarnate Word is God; therefore the inspira- ἘΞ Rom. tn; 2; + Rom. ix. 4. Ἢ 2 Bim: iti, 15: § πᾶσα γραφή. 2 Tim. iii, 16. τ 50 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. tion of the Old Testament is as sure, as God is true. It is not possible to reflect on this all-important subject without emotions of the bitterest sorrow that our Roman Catholic brethren should have fallen into the dangerous error, of which the Jews were never guilty, I mean that of adding certain books to the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament, and of anathematizing all who do not receive these Books as inspired. This was done by the Church of Rome at the / Council of Trent, in the year 1546, and by the de- \ eree then passed, and still enforced by her, she makes the reception of the Apocrypha as inspired—and by consequence the non-reception of the Canonical Books as the complete Word of Inspiration—a term of com- munion with herself. I turn for the present from contemplating this sad breach of Christian charity and peace, in order to remind you specially, my younger hearers, that this question concerning the Canon of Scripture is one in which, from the ambiguity of language, you may easily be entrapped into error, unless you are care- fully on your guard. You will be in great danger of being deceived in this matter, if you are betrayed into entering on what is called the Patristical part of the controversy without adequate study and re- flection. I propose to treat on that portion of the argument in the next discourse; but I would earnestly exhort you to keep your minds steadily 1.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 651 fixed on the following points; and then you cannot easily be perplexed by any subtleties in dealing with this subject. Our Roman Catholic brethren* are accustomed to call our Canon the “Canon of the Seribes and Phari- sees,” and to taunt us with preferring the Canon of the Synagogue to that of the Church. True, you will reply, our Canon zs the Canon of the Scribes and the Pharisees; for the Canon of the Scribes and Pharisees is the Canon of Christ ;—true, you will add, it is the Canon of the Synagogue; for the Canon of the Synagogue is the Canon of the Church. But, you will proceed to say, the Canon of Rome, alas! is netther the Canon of the Scribes nor of Christ; it is nezther the Canon of the Synagogue nor of the Church: itis only the Canon of Rome ; and by enforcing it she is guilty of a sin which the Jews, with all their offences, never committed, that of requiring the word of man to be received as the word of God. The Church of Rome will not deny that the Apocryphal Books ewisted in the time of Christ and His Apostles. If she does deny it, and affirms that they were written after the Christian era, then, since it is certain that they were not written by Christians, she must allow that she has canonized books written by persons who did not receive the teaching of Christ. This, I suppose, she will not * See δ. g. Perrone 11, 1059. E2 52 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LEC. admit. But it is certain, and she does not deny, that these Books, with scarcely any exception, were written before the coming of Christ. And, if these Books, as she affirms, ave inspired now, assuredly they must have been inspired when they were first written. The lapse of eighteen hundred years may impair a book, but it can never raise an uninspired book into an inspired one. Eternity itself cannot change the word of man into the word of God. And, if these Books were inspired when they were first written, our Blessed Lord, who knew all things, must have known, and would certainly have acknowledged, them to be inspired. But Christ did not receive them as such. He communicated with the Jews who did not so receive them; He recognized the Books which they received as “ the Scriptures ;” and His Disciples, sent by Him, and taught by the Holy Ghost Who spake by the Prophets and led the Apostles “nto all truth,” never received them as inspired. Therefore these books are not inspired ; and to affirm that they ave inspired is no less a sin than to accuse the Apostles of unfaithfulness, and irreverently and profanely to arraign Christ Himself of ignorance, and to charge the Holy Spirit of Truth with falsehood! What words, therefore, can de- seribe the guilt which makes the reception of these Books as inspired, a term of Church communion, and denounces imprecations upon all who do not and cannot receive the word of man as the Word of God ? Π.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 593 These anathemas of yours,—we must therefore now reply to the Church of Rome,—these anathemas of yours fall not only upon us, but upon the Apostles of Christ, yea, and even upon those Divine Persons the Ever Blessed Trinity to Whom we owe all truth and grace. But let us, my beloved brethren, practise what we have been taught. We have learnt not to render* railing for railing, but to pray for them who despitefully use ust; therefore let us implore Him who prayed for His murderers that our brethren of the Church of Rome may be delivered from the “gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity Τ᾿ in which Satan has bound them now for these three hundred years; lest upon them should come the heavy woe spoken of by the prophet David: “His delight was in cursing, and τέ shall happen unto him; he loved not blessing, therefore shall it be far from him §.” One general observation of great importance must not be suppressed here. Infallibility is claimed by Rome, and on this foundation she erects the proud structure of her towering pretensions. Where this Infallibility resides, whether in the Pope or in a Coun- cil, she has not decided; but when a Council makes a decree, and the Pope confirms it, then she affirms that it is to be received as of divine authority. This claim of Infallibility has been often encoun- tered by arguments from abstract propositions. But = Pet..11.-9. + Matt. v. 44. t Acts viii. 23. & Ps, cx Ὁ. v4 WHAT THE FOUNDATION IS [ LECT. perhaps there is no better way of meeting it than by reducing the question to one of fact. If the Chureli of Rome has erred, she cannot be infallible; and if she has erred when speaking in a Council authorized by the Pope, then it is clear that αὐ the Roman theories of Infallibility are false; and, the founda- tion gone, the fabric falls. Now the fact is, as we have said, that the Church of Rome at the Council of Trent * affirmed with an anathema, that the Apocryphal Books are inspired ; and the Pope f ratified this decree, which there- fore, according to all Romish theories, must be in- fallibly true. But we have shown, from the testi- mony of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, that the Apo- cryphal books are not inspired. If, then, the Church of Rome were infallible, then Christ would not be Omniscient, and the Holy Spirit would not have led the Apostles into all Truth. But the Apostles were taught of God; the Holy Ghost is “the Lord and Giver of Life ;” Christ “Anows all things 1." Therefore the Church of Rome has erred, and still errs, in a most important article of faith, viz. con- cerning the Books of Scripture: and in setting up a claim to Infallibility she does err most pre- sumptuously ; and her system, therefore, founded on this claim, is a house built on the sand; and they who rely on her authority resist the Spirit of Truth, * See the original Words of the Decree in Appendix B. to this volume. + See Appendix Β, No. IT. { John xvi. 30, I1.] OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 55 and God hath sent them a “ strong delusion that they should believe a lie*.” Lastly, my brethren, let us all bless God without ceasing, that in His infinite goodness He has given us the light of His Holy Scripture to cheer and guide us in our way through this vale of tears, and to comfort us in our last passage through the valley of the shadow of death; and that He has vouchsafed us the fullest assurance of the inspiration and inte- grity of the Scriptures, by the testimony of His Ever Blessed Son, “that we may be filled with all joy and peace in believing, and may ever abound in hope through the power of the Holy Ghost +.” ἘΠ. ‘Thess: 11. 11: + Rom. xv. 13. 00 LECTURE TL 1 Cor. xiv. 36. “What, came the Word of God out from you, or came it unto ἃς au you only To the Jews, says St. Paul, were committed the Oracles of God+. The Jewish Church, as was shown in our last Lecture, was the divinely appointed de- pository and guardian of all the written Revelations made by God to man, before the coming of Christ. It was recognized as such by Jesus Christ Himself. From the testimony of Jews, contemporary with Christ and His Apostles, we ascertain the number and names of the Books received by them as inspired ; and those Books, which they received, we receive also; and those alone. Our Canon of the Old Testament is precisely the same as that of the Church of the Jews; that is, it is precisely the same as the Canon of Jesus Curis. Here, as has been already said, we are at issue * Or, unto you alone, εἰς ὑμᾶς μόνους. yr Rom. im. 2. THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH, &e. 57 with our brethren of the Church of Rome. At the Council of Trent, in the year of our Lord 1546, she affirmed that certain other Books,—namely, those of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the first and second Books of Maccabees, and certain additions to the Book of Esther, and to that of Daniel, namely, the Song of the Three Children, the story of Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon, are to be regarded as inspired by Almighty God; and as of equal authority with the writings of Moses, and of the Prophets, and with the Epistles and Gospels of the Apostles of Christ. In a solemn decree*, promulgated at that Council, the Church of Rome proceeded so far as even tot anathematize all who did not receive these other Books as inspired; and, at this day, she requires all her Clergy, and all her Academic teachers, to affirm, by oath, that they who do not receive this decree “cannot be saved 1." On the other hand, the Church of England, in her Sixth Article 1, declares that “the Church, as Hierome saith, doth read” such other Books as those just enumerated, “for example of life, and instruction of manners; but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine.” The practice, also, of the Church of England is to read certain chapters from some of these Books in * See Appendix B. A brief history of this Session is given in the Author’s Letters to M. Gondon, Letter iv. + See Appendix B. t See Appendix B. No, II. 58 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. the public congregation, on some festivals and week days; but none of the Proper Lessons for the Lord’s Day are taken from any of them; and while the Church of Rome blends them in her Bible indis- criminately with the other Books of Scripture, the Church of England, in her Bible, places them in a separate compartment by themselves. It will be perceived, therefore, that she follows a middle course with regard to these Books; she con- cedes to them a place in her Bibles, and in her Churches; but she does not allow them the same place, or read them at the same time with the Cano- nical Books. She receives and reads them with Scripture, but not as Scripture ; whereas, the Church of Rome not only receives them as Scripture, but emposes them, under anathema, as such. We have entered on this solemn subject with no other design than that of manifesting God’s goodness, in giving and preserving to us His Holy Word; and with humble desires of quickening in our hearts and yours a spirit of devout thankfulness for this inestimable gift; and with a sober but steadfast hope of promoting the sacred cause of Truth and Love. Therefore, let us earnestly pray to the Divine Majesty, Who dictated the Scriptures, and Who is the Author of Truth and Peace, that He may illuminate our hearts and minds with His Holy Spirit, while we examine the reasons which are adduced by our brethren of the Church of Rome, to persuade us I.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 59 that the Books, which we call Apocrypha, ought to be received universally as the Word of God. In support of that assertion, the divines of Rome plead with us as follows: To the Jews were committed the Oracles of God. Be it so. Behold, then, we show you, they say, the Apoeryphal Books in the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament,—a Version, as you allow, made by Jews, for the use of Jews, and read in their Syna- gogues during almost three centuries before the coming of Christ; therefore, the Apocryphal Books are part of the Divine Oracles. If they are not, surely Christ would have reproved the Jews for mixing them up with the Divine Word. You must, therefore, receive these Books as Holy Scripture. Again: the Septuagint Version, they observe, was employed in the New Testament by the Apostles and Evangelists citing from the Old, and it was regarded with the greatest veneration by the Fathers of the Eastern Church; by some of them it was looked upon as znspired equally with the Hebrew original; and it is the scriptural standard of the Greek Church at this day. Besides this, it was the original of all the Latin Versions of Scripture used in the Western Church, till the time of St. Jerome,—that is, till the end of the fourth century. The Septuagint, therefore, is avouched by the Holy Spirit employing it in the New Testament; it was sanctioned by the authority of the Christian Church, as well as by that of the 60 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. Jews. It cannot be pretended that the Universal Church was in error on this vital question,—what Books are Scripture, and what are not. What, then, would have become of Christ’s promise that He would be ever present with this Church? See you not, therefore, they ask, that, by rejecting the Apocryphal Books, you charge the whole Church with error, and assert that the Word of Christ has become of none effect Such, my Brethren, are the allegations* of the Divines of Rome; what is to be said to them ? First: we readily allow that the Apocryphal Books are contained in the Manuscripts and Editions of the Septuagint Version, as 7¢ now stands. We find there the Books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, and the rest; but this proves too much, for we see also there the third Book of Esdras, and the third and fourth of Maccabees, and the prayer of Manasseh ; none of which the Church of Rome admits into her list of sacred Books; so that, 7f the Manuscripts and Editions of the Septuagint are to be regarded as standards of Scripture, then the Church of Rome has rejected part of the Word of God. But the truth is, that, at the time when the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament was made, few, if any, of the Apocryphal Books were even in evistence. That Version dates from about two hun- * See Vincenzi, Sessio iv. Concil. Trid. Vindicata: Pars 1]. Propp. li—iv. Rome 1844, 11.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. ΟἹ dred and eighty years before Christ. Now the events narrated in some of the Apocryphal Books,—those of the Maccabees for instance,—did not take place till a hundred years after that epoch. The Book of Keclesiasticus, as we learn from its preface, could not have been composed before the year 200, and did not appear in its present Greek form till about one hundred and thirty years before Christ. The Book of Wisdom is still more recent. The dates of the other Apocryphal Books cannot be exactly deter- mined; but this signifies little, for it is certain that none of them were ever received as inspired by any of the Jews who used the Septuagint Version ; and it is equally certain that they have never been received as inspired by any of the Hebrew nation to this day *. The Jews have always affirmed that the prophetic Spirit ceased soon after the times of Ezrat. They call Malachi, who lived at that period, the “Seal of the Prophets.” Be it observed, also, that the Apo- cryphal Books do not profess to be inspired, as the Canonical Books do; indeed, they expressly désclaim all pretension to inspiration; they speak of the non- continuance of the Prophetical Spirit to the time at which they were written {; they claim indulgence 4 from the reader for their own imperfections; and in this acknowledgment of their own failings and * See Appendix A. No. iti. No. xix. xxvii. and C. and com- pare Allen’s Modern Judaism, Chapter i. Lond. 1830. + See above, p. 42. t See above, p. 42. § Prolog. Ecclesiastici, Appendix A, No. I., and 2 Mace. xv. 38. 62 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. deficiencies, they either speak the truth or they do not; take either supposition, and it is clear they cannot be inspired. It is very true that the Jews, who were acquainted with the Apocryphal Books, treated them with respect, especially the Books of Wisdom and Ecele- siasticus *, as they well deserve to be treated ; and as they ever have been treated by the Christian Church. But, so far from regarding them as ¢uspired, the Jews, as is well known, impute to Christians, as a great sin, that they receive + them as inspired; and they say that by so doing, the Nazarenes, as they eall us Christians, have been guilty of adding to the Word of God. Two things there are, my brethren, which now operate very powerfully against the conversion of the Jews to Christianity. One is the notion, with which they are possessed, that we worship other beings 1 besides God, and that by embracing Christianity they would fall into 7¢dolatry. The other is, that we receive the Apocrypha as inspired, and that they would be conspiring with the corrupters of their own Scriptures, and exposing themselves to the punish- ment of those, who, in defiance of its commands, are guilty of adding to them or taking from them §, if they were to become Christians. It cannot, I think, be denied that in doth these * See Appendix C. + See Appendix C. Τ᾽ See Sandys, Europe Speculum, p. 244, 245. Lond. 1673. § Deut. iv. 2; xii. 3: Ππ|.}] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 63 imputations the Jews mistake the Church of Rome for the Church of Christ. To speak only of the latter particular. Here it is plain that the Church of Rome by her Trent Canon of Scripture, has not only separated herself from the Apostles and from the rest of the Church, but has raised a barrier against those of the Jews who would otherwise enter into it. That the Jews of the Apostolic age received as inspired those books of the Old Testament, and those alone, which we so receive, and that they carefully distinguished the Apocryphal books from the Canonical, have been shown in the last discourse, from the testimony of Josephus and Philo, two learned Jews, one from the eastern portion of the Jewish Church, the other from the western; both of them contemporary with the Apostles. That Christ and His Apostles received the Jewish Canon of the Old Testament, and delivered it into the hands of the Christian Church to be guarded by her as a sacred deposit, together with the New Testament, has also been proved; that the Scrip- tures of the Old Testament so delivered were re- ceived by the Christian Church, and have been read in her public congregations, together with the Gospels and Epistles from the Apostolic age to the present hour, is abundantly evident from Christian Fathers and Church Historians; and that a book which was in existence in the Apostolic age, and was not inspired then, could not decome inspired in any subsequent age, is a proposition, which all who 64 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. exercise their reason, must, I think, admit to be true. Having stated the fact that the Jews of the pre- sent day ground one of their strongest objections to Christianity on the erroneous supposition that the Christian Church receives the Apocryphal books as inspired, an allegation which would be true, 7f the Roman Branch of the Church were the Catholic Church of Christ, I would here submit to your consideration an argument which appears to me sufficient of itself to prove incontestably, that the Primitive Church of Christ never received any of the Apocryphal Books as inspired. The early Church was collected in a great measure from the seed of Abraham. All the Apostles were Jews; the first fifteen Bishops* of Jerusalem, were all of Hebrew extraction; and it is certain that the Jews never did admit, and never have admitted the Apocrypha into their Canon. Now, what I would observe here is, that ἐγ the early Church had received the Apocrypha as inspired, an obstacle would thus have been presented to the Jews which would have impeded their entrance into the Church; whereas, we know, on the contrary, that to the best instructed among them, such as Symeon, and Natha- nael, and Apollos, the passage from Judaism to Christianity was easy and natural. The Synagogue was, as it were, the Porch of the Church. Jf the * Euseb. H. E. iv. 5. 11.7] | ON THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 65 Primitive Church of Christ had required the Jews, as the Church of Rome requires all men, to receive the Apocrypha as of equal authority with the Law and the Prophets, such a proposition would have been rejected with indignation and abhorrence by the Jews. Now, let it be remembered, that we have abundant records of the various points at issue between the Jews and the early Christians, in the writings of the ancient Fathers, for instance, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Cyprian, and some of these relate to the text of Scripture; but nothing can be adduced from any of them, or from any quarter whatever, to show that there ever was any con- troversy or difference between the Jews and Chris- tians concerning the Canon of the Old Testament. And no one can imagine that the Jews, who, as Philo and Josephus testify, would sooner die a thousand deaths than suffer @ word in their Bibles to be altered, would allow Christians to add twelve books to their Old Testament, and never breathe a single word of remonstrance. On the contrary, many of them readily and eagerly embraced the Gospel, and became its most illustrious preachers. [5 it not therefore clear that the primitive Church never attempted to do so, and that the Church of Rome, by canonizing the Apocrypha, has inflicted a great injury on the people of Israel as well as on the Church of Christ? Has she not put herself in a very false position with respect to both? As long F 66 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [ LECT. as she maintains her Trent Canon she cannot hope to convert the Jews; and therefore she cannot be a faithful witness of Christ, until she rescinds it. How, then, it may be asked, have our Roman Catholic brethren been able to persuade themselves, and would fain persuade others, that the Apocryphal Books are to be received as the Word of God? To speak the truth, I am convinced that not one in a thousand among them has ever examined this vital question. Alas! they have allowed them- selves to be taken captive by one of the wiliest devices which the Evil Spirit has ever framed to ensnare the souls of men, the doctrine—speciously called—of the Infallibility of the Church of Christ ; whereas it is the Church of tome all the while whose decrees they obtrude, in direct opposition to those of the Church of Christ and of Christ Himself. But having been once inveigled by the Tempter to wrap up the talent of their Reason in the napkin of Papal Infallibility, they think that they have no more occasion for thinking. And therefore, my brethren, it is more incumbent upon ws to offer up our earnest supplications to the Throne of Grace in their behalf, that God would be pleased to awaken them from the slumber in which they are entranced, that they may be saved from the doom of the un- profitable servant at the great day. But do we then affirm that zone of our Romanist brethren have investigated this question? No; far from it. We bear a ready testimony to the labour Ill.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. O7 and learning which some of the most eminent among them, even in our own day *, have devoted to this inquiry. But we do not hesitate to assert that they have endeavoured rather to defend the decrees of Trent than to promote the cause of Truth. They speak as men bound by a secret spell. Having given themselves up to a system founded on the assertion of Infallibility, they are no longer free ; they write in chains. They know full well, that if they once allow the Church of Rome to have erred in so solemn a matter as the Canon of Scripture, the whole fabric of their faith falls to the ground. Therefore the decrees of Trent are to be maintained at any cost. Hence, their main doctrine, that the Church of Rome never has erred and never can err, has involved them in a necessity of erring; and until they renounce Infallibility they can never possess the Truth. The question, therefore, with them is not so much concerning the Canon of Scripture as concerning the Canon of Trent ; it isnot concerning the Word of God, but concerning the dictates of Rome. And till God gives them grace to love the Truth, and * e. g. Perrone, Professor of Theology in the Roman College of the Jesuits, Loci Theologi 1047—1107, ed. Paris, 1842. Vincenzi, Professor of Hebrew in the Roman Archigymnasium. Sessio iv. Concilii Tridentini Vindicata Rome, Typis S. C. de Propaganda Fide, 2 vols. Rome, 1842—4. Malou, Professor of Theology in the University of Louvain. Lecture de Ja Sainte Bible, 2 vols. Louvain, 1846. BQ 68 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. wisdom to embrace it, and courage to profess it, instead of tenaciously hugging the chains of error in which the Arch-Enemy enthrals them, it is almost fruitless to attempt to show them the real character of the Trent decree respecting the Old Testament. But, my younger hearers in this English Univer- sity, it may be a profitable and blessed work to guard you against the subtleties by which that Decree has been advocated; and I feel a strong persuasion that, if you will carefully examine this one question concerning the Canon of Scrip- TURE, you will not only be secure against the reason- ings of Romish controversialists in this important matter, but you will be convinced of the hollowness of the Romish system in general; and you will be filled with gratitude to God for His merey towards you, in assuring you of the Inspiration and Integrity of His Holy Word, and in making you members of a Church which, in this and other all-im- portant matters, has been endued by Him with wisdom to tread in the steps of Christ and His Apostles, and of the Holy Catholic Church. To you, therefore, I now speak concerning the reasonings by which Romanist Divines would prop up the Trent Canon of Scripture. I have already examined the argument founded on the existence of the Apocryphal Books in the present editions of the Septuagint Version. Let me now proceed to observe, that it is pleaded by Romish Theologians on behalf of these Books, that some ΠΙ.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 69 early Christian Writers appear to distinguish between the Jewish and Christian Canon of the Old Testa- ment, and to allow that, though these Books were not received into the Canon of the Jews, yet they were admitted in the first ages of Christianity into that of the Church. It is alleged also in their behalf, that these Books are not properly called A pocryphal, but Kcclestastical*, as being read in the Christian ecclesia, or Church ; that they are often cited with great reverence by the early Fathers of the Church; that they were sometimes even styled by them Scripture and the Word of G'od ; that by some of the Fathers, and by a Council of the Church at the close of the Fourth Century 1, that of Carthage, they are even termed Canonical, and that they appear to be there placed on a level with the znspired Books of the Old Testament. It was from a consideration of these allegations that I took occasion to exhort you, in the last Dis- course, to be on your guard how you enter, without due circumspection, on the Patristic portion of this subject. It requires a careful attention to the meaning of terms, which may be _ perplexing, unless viewed in relation to their context and to the general teaching of the Church. But, if you engage in the inquiry and prosecute it with this * See Appendix A. No. XV. + See Appendix A. No. XXI. for the Decree of this Council. 710 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. caution, it will amply repay you for your pains; it will then afford you the greatest delight and the most solid satisfaction. Let me endeavour to show this. It is, then, perfectly true, that the Apocryphal Books are rightly called ecclesiastical, as being vead in the Church, and as distinguished from writings properly called Apocryphal, or concealed, and not thus publicly read. But this does not show them to be inspired, or to have been so regarded by the Church. Be it remembered that, as the fact of a book not being read by the Church by no means necessarily proves that it is not Scrip- ture, so the reading of a book is no conclusive proof that it zs Seripture. The Book of Canticles and the Apocalypse, on account of their mysterious character, were not usually read in the ancient Church, nor are they in ours, with the exception of a few portions of the Apocalypse; but they are Canonical Scriptures. On the other hand, the Kpistles of Clement and of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Acts and Sufferings of Martyrs, were, we know, read in some ancient Churches ; but they are not therefore inspired. Again, it is also true that some Christian Fathers say that the Church receives the Apocryphal Books which the Jews did not receive. And why? Be- cause the Church reads them in her public congre- gations, which the Jews do not in theirs. In this sense it is truly said that the Canon of the Church differs from the Canon of the Jews. But then the ΠΙ.Ϊ ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 71 Church does not receive these Keclesiastical Books as of equal authority with the Books of the Prophets and Apostles; that is, she does not receive them as inspired. But you show us passages in the Christian Fathers, we now say to our Romanist brethren, in which these Books are quoted. True: but this does not prove them to be inspired. We show you, in return, that the Apostle St. Paul cites verses even from heathen poets,—Menander *, Aratus, and Epi- menides ;—and assuredly they were not inspired. On the other hand, as we would have you observe, neither the Apostle, nor any of his Brethren, nor their Divine Master, ever quoted a single sentence from any + one of the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament,—a fact wholly unaccountable if the Apocrypha is inspired ; and one which seems to bea providential and prophetical protest on the part of Our Lord and His Apostles, against the canonization of these Books. [015 quite true that the citation of them would not prove them to be inspired; for heathen poems, as we have seen, and some of the lost Apocryphal Books are cited in the New Testament ; but the non-cetation of them does prove them to be not inspired. You say, indeed, that some of the Canonical Books of the O/d are not cited in the New Testament. Be it so,—but what then? The = Cor αν doe. Acts xvii 285 ity rete + See above, p. 48, and note. 72 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. entire Canon of the Old Testament, as we have shown, was authorized by Jesus Christ *, whereas, πὸ part of the Apocrypha, much less the whole, was received by Him. But, you rejoin that some of the Fathers quote some of these Books as Scripture, and call them Canonical. Yes; and you know well, or, at least, you ought to know, that the terms Scripture and Canonical are often used by some of the Fathers in a very wide and general sense; and it is the part and duty of Christian wisdom and charity so to interpret those particular words and phrases, as to render them consistent with the general teaching of Christ and the Church; and not to assign to them a meaning which sets that teaching at defiance. The word Seripture means Writing; and, in a large sense, the Apocryphal Books may well be called Scripture, as being a part of the writings which the Church distinguishes from profane compositions, treating them with peculiar honour, and reading them in her public congregations, for instruction in virtuous living. You know that even the works of the Fathers + themselves are sometimes called Scrzptures, by Keclesiastical Authors, and by certain of your own Popes; but you do not pretend that, by so styling them they ever meant to intimate that those writings are inspired 1. * See above, p. 46. + See the examples collected by Bp. Cosin, lili. Ixxvii. Ixxxi. XClil. c. t See Note, p. 73. 11.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 73 Again; the word Canonical means regular, or, belonging to a Rule; and the Apocryphal Books may well be called Canonical in a certain sense, that is, as giving salutary moral rules; though not Canonical for Articles of Fazth ; and (as St. Jerome * expresses it,) read in the Church, “ for example of life and instruction of manners, but not applied by it to establish any doctrine.” In fact, these Books occupy a middle + position between the Books strictly called Canonical and those strictly called Apocryphal ; and hence it has come to pass that they themselves have sometimes been called Canonical, and sometimes Apocryphal. They are Canonical, as distinguished from those Books which are properly termed Apocryphal; and they are Apocryphal, as not rising to the dignity of those which are Canonical. These statements may be well illustrated by the language and practice of the Church of England, with respect to the Apocrypha: First, as to the plea founded on the reading of the Apocrypha in the Church. The two Books of Homittizs, made in the reigns of King Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth, are said in our Thirty-fifth Article, “to contain a godly and * See Appendix A. No XIX. (c.), for St. Jerome’s words and Ruffinus, ibid. No. XV. + Whence they are called ἔμμεσοι, καὶ γείτονες, we ἄν τις εἴποι, τῶν ἀληθείας λόγων by S. Amphilochius. See Appendix A. No. XVII. v. 12. 74 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. wholesome doctrine, and therefore,” says the Article, “we judge them to be read in Churches.” The Homilies contain a godly doctrine, and are, therefore, read in the Church. But no one, I suppose, imagines them to be inspired. In like manner, the Apocry- phal Books were not regarded by the Christian Fathers as the work of the Holy Ghost because they were read in the public assemblies of the Church. Again; concerning the term Scripture, as applied to the Apocryphal Books. The First and Second Books of Homilies were published about the years 1547 and 1562, respectively; and, in the year 1562, our Sixth Article, as it now stands, was first pub- lished. It distinguishes the Apocryphal Books from the Canonical, and declares that the Apocryphal are not to be applied to establish any doctrine. The Homilies, therefore, and the Sixth Article are almost contemporaneous expressions of the judgment of the English Church. Now, if we refer to the Homilies, we find the Apocryphal Books often cited there, and termed * “ Scripture,” and even “ the Word of God 4,” as being comprised in the Sacred Volume of that Word. And what I would now observe is, that it would not be a greater perversion of judgment on our part, on * The Book of Wisdom is so called, pp. 226. 232. Tobit is so called, p. 361. The author of Baruch is called a prophet, pp. 173. 513, ed. Oxf. 1822. + Wisdom is so called, Ρ- 106, ibid. = Π|.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 75 the strength of these citations in the Homilies, to affirm, in defiance of the Sixth Article, that the Church of England receives the Apocrypha as i- spired, than it is in the Romish Controversialist, on the ground of similar citations of the Apocrypha, in the works of the early Fathers, to assert, in direct opposition to the explicit language of the Catholic Church, that she regards the Apocryphal Books as of equal authority with Canonical Scripture. For my own part, I cannot forbear saying, that, when we remember the difficulties under which the primi- tive and medizval Church laboured,—difficulties of which we, in this age of printed Bibles and Prayer Books, can scarcely form an idea,—when we consider that the Apocryphal Books were not only read in the Church, but were commonly joined together with the Canonical in manuscript copies of the Bible, we ought not to be so much surprised that they should have been sometimes honoured with the appellation of Scripture, as to be filled with astonished thankfulness to God that there is such a strong consistent voice of testimony from almost every part of the Church Catholic, from the age of the Apostles to the time of the Council of Trent, concerning the Divine authority of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament. ᾿ We have here a cloud of witnesses. At the head of them, as has before been said, stands Our Blessed Lord Himself; then follow the Holy Apostles. In the next century, we see Melito, Bishop of the 76 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. Apostolic Church of Sardis, requested to make a book of extracts from the Old Testament, for the use of his own Church; and going to Palestine for full assurance concerning the number and names of the Books of the Old Testament, received by the Church of the country where the Gospel of Christ was first preached. We see him, when he had obtained authentic information on that subject, setting down the catalogue of these Books, which coincides precisely with our own Canon *. But, (say the Romanist Divines,) the catalogue of Melito comes from Palestine; it was, therefore, the Canon of the Jews, and not of the Church. What a strange assertion is this! The catalogue of the Jews! Melito was a Christian Bishop; he went to Palestine on a Christian embassy: with a view of framing a Book for the use of a Christian Church. What, then, had he to do with the Jewish Canon as such? True, he sets down the Jewish catalogue; but he does so, not because it was Jewish; not because it differed from that of the Church of Palestine; but because it agreed with it : because the Canon of the Jews was the Canon of the Church ; because, in a word, it had been sanctioned by Christ Himself. The testimony of Melito is confirmed by Saint Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem +, who, in his Lectures to his Christian Catechumens, delivers precisely the * See Appendix A. No. V., for the original words of Melito. + See St. Cyril’s words, Appendix A. No, XI. 1.| ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 77 same catalogue of Scriptures of the Old Testament ; and warns them against confounding the Apocrypha with inspired writings. Surely it will not be con- tended here, that a Christian Bishop was delivering a Jewish Canon to candidates for Christian Baptism *. If now we pass from Palestine to Alexandria, the birth-place of the Apocryphal Books, we hear the learned Origen + and the great Athanasius { distin- guishing clearly between the Apocryphal and in- spired writings, and declaring that nothing is to be added to the latter. From his island in the Medi- terranean, St. Epiphaniusj, a native of Palestine and Bishop of Salamis in Cyprus, testifies that the Apocryphal Books were never admitted into the Sanctuary of the Jewish Temple; and that though useful and salutary, they are not received into the order of Divine Scriptures. If we proceed westward, and penetrate to the northern extremity of the Adriatic Sea, we receive a similar witness from the Roman Presbyter Ruffi- * I have not appealed to the testimony of the Council of Laodicea in its sixtieth Canon, see Appendix A. No. XIV., because its genuineness is denied, not without some show of reason, by Romanist writers. See Vincenzi, i. c. i. p. 187. 599. The reason why this Council might have thought fit, as in that age, when so many counterfeit and heretical books were eurrent under the name of Scripture, to limit the public readings in the Church to Canonical Books, strictly so called, is excellently stated by Hooker ; see Appendix E to this volume. + Appendix A. No. VIII. t Appendix A. No. X. § Appendix A. No. XIII. 75 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [ LECT. nus* at Aquileia, who, after reciting the Canonical Books precisely as we receive them, declares, “ These are the Books which our Fathers enclosed within the Canon; they judged that on these the articles of our faith must stand.” He then proceeds to state that there are certain other Books, not called Canon- ical, but Heclesiastical,—that is, our Apocrypha, as appears from his specification,—* which Books,” says he, “our forefathers have thought fit to be read in the Church, but not to be applied to establish any article of faith.” But, my brethren, while we adduce this testimony we do not intend to affirm that there is nothing in the writings of the Christian Fathers which may be alleged to give some countenance to the opposite side of the question. No: I have already stated that certain expressions are used by some of the ancient Fathers, which, if taken by themselves, might seem to afford some ground for that position. For example, you might be perplexed at first by the language of the Council of Carthage +, held at the close of the fourth century, at which St. Augustine was present. One of the decrees of this Council seems to place the Apoeryphal Books in the same rank with Moses and the Prophets. It enjoins that nothing but Canonical Writings should be read in the Church under the name of Holy Scripture, and it proceeds * Appendix A. No. XV. where, for inter read intra Canonem. + Appendix A. No. XXI. I1.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 79 to annex a Catalogue of Canonical Books, among which it enumerates the A pocryphal. What is more clear, it might be asked, than that the Apocrypha is here regarded as inspired, and that St. Augustine was of that opinion? What, then, is to be said to this Decree ? First of all, we reply, that no Council of the Church,—no, nor a hundred Councils,—can make a book to be inspired which was not inspired Jefore ; and that 7f the Apocrypha was inspired in the fourth century, it must have been inspired in the first; and that zf it had been inspired in the first, then Christ and His Apostles would have received it as such: and that they did not so receive it; and that there- fore it is not inspired. If, then, the Council of Carthage intended to affirm that the Apocrypha is inspired, it evved in so doing; as it certainly ded err, when it ascribed the Books of Wisdom and LEcclesiasticus to King Solomon, whereas they were not written till seven hundred years after Solomon’s death. We also observe that this Decree purports only to to be a declaration * to be communicated to other Churches beyond the seas, for their approval and * De confirmando isto canone transmarina Ecclesia con- sulatur. Hoc etiam fratri et consacerdoti nostro Bonifacio vel aliis earum partium Episcopis pro confirmando isto canone innotescat quia a patribus ista accepimus in Ecclesia legenda. Liceat etiam legi passiones martyrum cum anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur. 80 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. confirmation ; next it must be noted that the Council of Carthage was only a provincial, and not a general one; and, therefore, is not binding on the whole Church. Besides, the Council having decreed that only Canonical Books should be read, proceeds to say, that its members had received such and such books to be read in the Church. Therefore, it did not intend to use the term Canonical in its strict sense of inspired, but in the sense of read in the Church; and to affirm that nothing was to be read as Scripture, but those Books which the Bishops of that Council had received from their fathers as Canonical in ¢hzs sense,—that is, as to be so read,—and which they enumerate as such. St. Augustine, who was present at this Council, is the best interpreter of its words; and he shows that this is the true meaning of the Decree. He says, in his work on Christian Doctrine*, that “of the Scriptures called Canonical, those are to be preferred which are received by all Churches, and that those are to be placed in the neat rank which are acknow- ledged by the major and graver part of Christendom.” Now, let me enquire, can any reasonable man speak of preference of one Canonical Scripture, pro- perly so called, to another? There cannot be degrees in Inspiration. There cannot be more or less in what is Divine. It is therefore clear that the word Canonical is used by Augustine in a large and * See Appendix A. No. XXII. Compare Appendix F. I11.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 81 popular sense, so as not only to designate writings strictly speaking, znspired, but also to embrace those which were held in reverence and read by the Church. And there can, I think, be no doubt that the word Canonical was employed in this large sense by the Council of that Church of Carthage, of which Augustine was so illustrious a member *. Waiving other considerations which might be ad- duced here, if it were worth while+, we readily allow that, from the influence of the Septuagint Version, into which the Apocryphal Books were introduced one by one, and from the almost exclusive use of this Version, and of Latin translations from it, instead of the Hebrew original, the African Church, in the fourth century, was in danger of confounding the Apoeryphal Scripture with the inspired Word of God; and it is by no means improbable, but that for a providential interposition, such a confusion as this might have been propagated widely in the West. In tracing the history of the Church, we see a continuous series of attempts, on the part of the Devil, to turn the good things of God into evil,—not only by open hostility, but also by an insidious pretence of great veneration for the good. Scripture, being one of the best of God’s gifts, has ever been * S. Augustine in Joann. Tract. cxxiv., uses the expression “Scripturis quamvis apocryphis.” + See them in Bp. Cosin, p. 96—118. See also Appendix F. which will suggest them to the reader. G 82 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH ([LECT. the special object both of his open and _ secret attacks. Indeed, to a reflecting mind, one of the strongest arguments for the Divine origin of the Bible arises from the perpetual assaults of the Evil Spirit upon it; and from the no less constant inter- ferences of Almighty God in its behalf. The existence of the Septuagint Version was, as we have seen, a great blessing to the Church, by diffusing and preserving Scripture ; but the Tempter laboured to turn this blessing into a bane. He en- deavoured to do so by using the Septuagint as an instrument for drawing men’s eyes from the Divine original to the human translation ; and by tempting them to substitute Greek and Latin Versions, which were blemished by imperfections, in matter and manner, for the authentic Hebrew; and it cannot, I think, be denied, that one of the main causes of the neglect of the Hebrew in the Western, and, indeed, in the Eastern Church, was a popular notion, that the Septuagint was inspired. Hence, in the fourth century, the danger existed, of which we have spoken; but here, at this critical juncture, almost at the time when the Council of Carthage was sitting, the mercy of God, ever watch- ful over His own Word, graciously interfered. He was now pleased to raise up a person, eminently qualified, by his extraction, position, and intellectual endowments, to vindicate and maintain the unique inspiration of those Books, which had been received by the Church of the Jews, and by Christ Himself. 11.] ON THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 83 This person was St. Jerome. Born in Dalmatia, trained in the learning of Greece and Rome, he traversed in his youth the greater part of Kuropean and Asiatic Christendom, and became intimate with the most eminent Doctors of the Church. He was welcomed at Rome, and chosen to be Secretary of its Bishop, Damasus, and seemed marked out to succeed to the Episcopal throne of the Imperial City. But God had other, and, we may add, greater work for St. Jerome to do. He sent him far away from the splendours of Rome, to a quiet hermitage at Bethlehem. There, from his silent retreat, he instructed the world; there, he gave himself up, during twenty years, to the study of God’s Holy Word in its original language; and bestowed the first Latin Version of the Hebrew Text on the Western Church. This was his great service to Christendom ; for which be his memory ever blessed! What a beautiful subject for contempla- tion,—especially to you, my brethren, who are blessed with holy hours of religious and lettered leisure in these Academic shades,—is the learned Jerome, in his college at Bethlehem! How beneficial may be the fruits of your labours to mankind at large, in distant lands, and for all generations ! But I pass on. In this Latin Version, St. Jerome gave distinct testimony concerning the Books of Scripture, which were found in the original Hebrew, and were received as inspired by the Jews, to whom were committed the Oracles of God; and thus G 2 84 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. Almighty God might seem to have raised him up to prevent for ever any confusion between the Apo- eryphal Books and those which Christ acknowledged as written by the Holy Ghost. Behold, my brethren, another cause here for thank- fulness to God, for His care of Scripture and of the Church. Behold St. Jerome, a Doctor of the West, —yes, from Rome itself,—dwelling at Bethlehem, the birth-place of the Incarnate Word, there devoting many years to the study of the Divine Oracles in the Hebrew tongue; and thence proclaiming to the West, in the Latin Prefaces which he prefixed to his Translation of the Canonical Books, the all-important Truth concerning the zzspzration of those Writings, and of those alone. Yes, assuredly, my brethren, we have great reason to adore God’s goodness in sending him to the East, and in employing him in the vindication of the Divine Honour of the Holy Scriptures, at the very time when such a service was most needed. And we may reflect, with devout satisfaction, on the delightful circumstance, that our own Church has shown her gratitude to God for this providential interposition, by commemorating St. HiErRomME by name in her Sixth Article, and by adopting his very words, concerning the authority of Canonical Scrip- ture, as distinguished from that of the Apocrypha. On the other hand, it must ever be a matter for sorrow and surprise, that the Church of Rome, in opposition to the Teaching of Christ and His Apostles, 1Π.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 85 and to the testimony of the Christian Church, and in contradiction to St. Jerome, whom, strange to say, she herself commemorates in her Breviary, as specially raised up by God, to be a _ principal Teacher * of the Church in the exposition of Scrip- ture, and in defiance of those Prefaces of St. Jerome, of which I have spoken, and which, wonderful to say, she had habitually prefixed to her own Editions of the Bible even up to the time of the Council of Trent, should ¢hen, in that late age,—the middle of the sixteenth century,—have surrendered herself up to be so blinded by the Evil One, as no longer to be willing to behold the Truth which St. Jerome asserted, and which his Prefaces teach; and that she should have done an act which neither she, nor any Church in Christendom, had ever done before ; that is, should not only have affirmed that the Apocryphal Books are equal in authority to the Apostolical and Prophetical, but should have dared to anathematize, as heretics, and to attempt to cut off from all hope of salvation, all who do not receive them as such ! What does she say to this? She alleges that Jerome’s testimony relates only to the Canon of the Jews, and that he prudently} recommends, yes, pru- dently, that, in arguing with them, the Christian should * Breviar. Roman. Sept. 30, p. 822. ed. Paris, 1842. Deus, Qui Ecclesiz Tuze in exponendis Sacris Scripturis beatum Hie- ronymum, Doctorem maximum, providere dignatus es. + See Vincenzi’s argument, Appendix D. (d.) 86 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. treat no Book as Canonical but what they received as such! As if Jerome was writing to the Jews, or with a view to them, and not for the use of the Church, yea, for the whole Western World! As if he does not say expressly, that the Apocryphal Books are read by the Church, but are not received by it as Canonical Scripture * ! So explicit, indeed, is St. Jerome’s evidence on this subject, that the Benedictine Editor of his works, Father Martianay, felt himself obliged to make the following remarkable acknowledgment : “1 cannot disguise the truth,” he sayst, “ that they who assert that Jerome is setting down the Jewish Canon, and not the Canon of the Church, do err very far from the truth, and impose on their readers their awn opinion, instead of that of St. Jerome.” How, then, it may be asked, does he defend the Romish Canon? By means of the unhappy theory, lately propounded among us,—the true and only theory of Romanism,—the theory of Development. “We know},” he says, “ that now, after the Decree of the Council of Trent, a// these Books,” (that. is, all the Apocryphal,) “are to be received with the same veneration as the other Scriptures; but in the time of St. Jerome, as appears from St. Jerome himself, these Books were read by the Church, * Vol. i. p. 9389. Appendix A. No. XIX. (c.) t Ed. Paris, 1693. vol. i. p. 322. Γ Ed. Paris, 1693. vol. i. p. 322. 11.] ΟΝ THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 87 for instruction in life and manners, but were not received by her among the Canonical Scriptures *.” According to this doctrine, which is indeed the doctrine of Rome, a Book may be inspired in the stateenth century, which was not inspired in the fourth; so that the word of man may, after a lapse of more than a thousand years, become the Word of God! And the Church of Rome claims the power of working this change! I propose to say more, in the next Discourse, on the motives by which the Church of Rome was actuated in framing the Trent Decree concerning the Canon of Scripture, and to speak more at large on the true character and position of the Apocryphal Books. In conclusion, I will now offer two observations, which do not appear to have been always borne in mind by those who have discussed the question between the Churches of England and Rome, with respect to the Canon of the Old Testament. * Ed. Paris, vol. i. p. 322. See also vol. i. p. 939, and especially vol. i. p. 1170. So Cardinal Bellarmine, de Verbo Dei, i. 10, admits that the Apocrypha was noé received by the Church in St. Jerome’s time, quia nondum generale Concilium de his libris statuerat. See also M. Canus, Loc. Theol. ii. c. 11, and a remarkable passage of Professor Vincenzi in Appendix D. (a) ii. to this Volume. So also Perrone, ii. p. 1053. Ecclesia Romanz omnium Ecclesiarum Mater et Magistra sua potuit auctoritate constituere verum Scripturarum Canonem. In p. 1062, he says, that the Canon of the Old Testament had not been completed (Canonem nondum confectum ab Ecclesia) in the fourth century, when, says he, the Apocryphal Books ‘ Canonici nequaquam erant.” 88 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH [LECT. First, then, we would address ourselves to our Romanist Brethren, and speak to them thus: You bring us passages from early Christian writers, in which the Apoecryphal Books are called Scripture, Canonical Scripture; you show us that they were read in the Church; and that a Council of the Church, at which St. Augustine was present, classes them with Canonical Books. But all this, (we say it respectfully,) is nothing to the purpose. We read page after page, volume after volume, of your works on this subject; and we find ourselves compelled to close the book, and exclaim, What is all this but multiplying words without know- ledge? We will not say it is deception for deception’s sake; but we do say that it is a complete mis- statement of the whole question between us. That question is, πο whether the Apocryphal Books were treated, and are to be treated, with reverence,—for the Church of England so treats them,—but whether they are of equal authority for establishing Articles of Faith with the words of Christ and His Apostles. This you assert, and this we deny. We deny it on the authority of Christ Himself. If they are inspired, they must have been inspired at the time of Christ’s ministry, and must have been received by Christ as such. They were not so received by Him; therefore they are not inspired. And shall you, or shall any man, or all the men that ever lived, presume to know more than Christ concerning Elis own Word ? Shall you aseribe to the Holy Spirit what He Who ΠΙ.] ON THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 89 was conceived by the Holy Ghost, as Man, and Who sent the Holy Spirit, as God, never received as His? Forbear,—we entreat, we warn you,—to persist in this dreadful sin, of claiming to know more concern- ing the things of God than the Son of God. Lastly, to the Church of Rome, we say: You not only do this, but you anathematize all who do not receive the Apocryphal Books as inspired; you make their reception a condition of Communion with yourself. What! we say, Are you the author of Scripture? “Came the Word of God out from you*? Or, came it to you alone?” Can you make and unmake it as you please? Will you dare to impre- cate curses on those who do not receive what Christ never received ? Nay, by so doing, you pour out your anathemas, not only upon us, but upon the holiest men of Christendom; you say anathema to Jerome, anathema to Ruffinus, to Athanasius, to Cyril, to Melito; and in them, you say anathema to the ancient Churches of Palestine and Asia, and ana- thema to the ancient Church of Rome, and even to the Apostles themselves,—we dare not proceed further. Rather let us remind you, with earnest prayers for your salvation, as well as our own, and for the union of us all in one and the same faith, that, by imposing this term of Communion, you excommunicate yourself. And yet, Gracious God ! 8, 1 Coraxivco: 90 THE TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH, &c. the Spirit of Evil has such awful power over you, that, when you are thus blinded by him, you fondly imagine that you alone can see ! May it please God to take the veil from your eyes! and let us all, my brethren,—seeing this fearful instance of the malice and power of Satan,—be ever on our guard; let us watch diligently, and pray fervently to God, that He would “not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil *.” * Matt. vi. 13. LECTURE IV. 1 Cor. ᾿ς 22° “Tam made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” Mucu as we have to deplore the prevalence of party strife in religion among us,—greatly as we have to lament our own lack of zeal in the cause of Christ, deeply as we have to mourn the tyranny of worldliness and the ravages of schism, by which Church Discipline has been weakened, and the profes- sion of strange doctrines been made familiar to our ears,—yet, amid these causes for dismay, we have great reason to admire and bless the goodness of Almighty God to the Church of England, in enabling her to maintain Scriptural and Catholic Orthodoxy in her public formularies of Faith. He has been graciously pleased to endue her with a prudent, patient, and charitable spirit, and with grace to preserve it in trying circumstances of great difficulty; and it may safely be affirmed, that, by means of her Christian quietness, which some would censure as weakness, and even through the operation of those restraints, which have modified and controlled 92 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. her agency, she has been providentially preserved from perilous innovations, so that she now finds herself in a most favourable position for promoting God’s glory by the maintenance of His Truth. It may, indeed, appear presumptuous to affirm, that, at the present critical epoch of the world’s history, the hopes of Christianity rest mainly, under God, on the safety of the Church of England; but it may, I think, be shown, from the characteristics which distinguish her among the Churches of Chris- tendom in this generation, that to her specially belongs the solemn duty and the high privilege of maintaining and propagating the Gospel; and that if she be true to herself, in holding fast that which she has received, and in working out her own system without fear and without compromise, she will enjoy the favour of the Most High, and be a glory and blessing to the world *. The felicity of her present position is mainly due to her forbearance and self-possession, in not allowing herself to be betrayed, by impatient irritation against error, into the abandonment of ancient truth. Because some other Churches, especially that of Rome, have elevated certain objects to a dignity far above their real deserts, and have thus swerved from the practice of the ancient Church, and marred the “proportion of Faitht,” the Church of England has * It is scarcely necessary to add, that the Author here includes the American and other Churches communicating with the Anglican. + Rom. xii. 6. Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 93 not, therefore, thought good to run into the opposite extreme, and to strip these objects of their due honour and prescriptive rights. She has not thus put herself out of communion with Antiquity by irreverence, because others have done so by super- stition. But, while she has removed the abuse, she has wisely retained the good things which were abused, and has restored them to their true and ancient use; and, by keeping her eye steadily fixed upon the past, she is enabled to walk more surely in the present, and to look forward more hopefully to the future. Thus she is truly Catholic. She communicates with the One Holy and Universal Church of Christ, of all times and of all places. Thus, also, she is truly a Missionary Church ; for she is enabled to hold intercourse with Jew and Gentile, and to bring them both unto Christ. Thus, like the great Apostle, she may say, “J am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” Such reflections, my brethren, as these arise in the mind, when we come to consider the topic to which we are now advanced in our argument; the course pursued by the Church of England with respect to the APOCRYPHA. In her Sixth Article, after reciting the names of the twenty-four Books of the Old Testament, which she receives as Canonical,—using that word in its strict sense of constituting the Divine Rule of Faith, —she proceeds to say, “ The other Books, as Hierome 94 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. saith, the Church doth read, for example of life and instruction of manners, but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these following: the third Book of Esdras,”—and the rest, as we have them, under the name of Apocrypha, in our English Bibles. A certain honour, it will be observed, is here conceded to the Apocrypha; and a certain authority is denied them. They are recognized by the Church of England as having a didactic use for virtuous life and godly conversation; but they are declared to possess no validity for establishing Articles of Faith. This declaration of the Church of England is illustrated by her practice. She places them (the Apocrypha) by themselves in her Bible; she orders certain portions of some of them to be read at certain times in her public congregations. It is clear, then, that she regards them with respect, but not as inspired. If she did not revere them, she would not require them to be read with Scripture: and if she believed them to be znspzred, she would read them as Scripture, and prove from them Articles of Faith. It will be remarked, also, that, in this Article, the words, “The Church doth read, but doth not apply,” are spoken of the Church Universal. That is, the Church of England appeals here to the Church Catholic; and by appealing to it, she implies, that she respects its judgment, and that she conforms to its practice. And it is evident that she believes Iv.| AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 95 herself to be following its example, when she gives to these Books a place in her Bibles, and cites certain of them in terms of the highest esteem in her Homilies, and reads some of them in her public assemblies, at the same time that she distinguishes them from the inspired Word in her Bibles, and never reads any of them in her Churches upon the Lord’s Day. The wisdom of this mzddle course of proceeding, with regard to these mzddle Books,—for so the Apocrypha are called by the ancient Church *,— cannot be more clearly evinced than by a comparison of its results with those of the two extremes on either side of it. First: some Protestant Communions, on the one hand, would banish the Apocryphal Books altogether from the Bible and the Church. Secondly: the Church of Rome, on the other hand, makes a belief in their inspiration a term of Com- munion with herself, and declares such a belief to be necessary to salvation. Words, my brethren, cannot adequately express how much it would be to be deplored, if the Church ‘of England had ever followed, or ever should follow, either the one or the other of these two courses. It may be most solemnly atfirmed that, if she were ever to take either of these two steps, she would weaken her connexion with the past; she would * See Appendix A. No. XVII. v. 16. 96 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. grievously impair her Catholicity; and England would be disqualified at once from discharging the duty of a faithful witness of ancient Truth, and from prosecuting her glorious career, as the great Mission- ary Nation of the World. In order to show this, first let us consider the former of these two courses. Some persons, even in our own Communion, in defiance of the teaching and practice of our own Church, have allowed themselves to speak of the Apocrypha in very disparaging terms. In the words of the judicious * Hooker, they have bestowed much pains in “raking together whatsoever might prejudice or in any way hinder the credit of Apocryphal Books.” And we may add, that, without any regard to the general drift of these Books, they have involved them αἱ in a sweeping condemnation, on the strength of certain insulated words and sentences occurring in some of them. Far be it from us to arraign the motives by which they have been actuated. The feelings which have animated them, for the most part, have been, doubt- less, those of holy zeal for God’s Word, and of anxious desire that no human compositions should usurp the place of the Divine Oracles. Conceding, then, as we do most willingly, all credit due to such sentiments as these, yet we must still be permitted to ask,—and we must not shrink from asking,—whether they * Hooker, V. xx. whose words are commended to the reader’s careful consideration. See Appendix E. to this volume, p. 77, 78. Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 97 have not allowed themselves to be carried away from the firm footing of reason and charity, by their zeal against the Church of Rome, which treats the Apo- erypha as inspired? Have they not visited hes sins upon the Books which she has too highly extolled ? Have they not suffered themselves to forget the wise and beautiful instructions contained in many of these Books? Have they duly remembered, how they serve to fill a chasm in the history of God’s Church, and to show His goodness to-her in the interval of time between the two Testaments, and exhibit the holy and heroic graces which He was pleased to bestow upon her in that season of trial, when she had no prophetic voice to cheer her? Have they duly remembered, that they give expression to her sorrow for her widowhood, and to her hope and longing for the coming of the Desire of all Nations*? Have they not been tempted to forget the reverence paid to these Books, from the Apostolic times, by the Church Catholic, and by our own Branch of it ? Have they not set up their own private opinion against the public consent of Antiquity, and been betrayed into a spirit of irritation, as if, because these Books have been raised too high by Rome, therefore, we must needs pull them down from their proper place, and trample on them with contumely and scorn @ But, my brethren, our private wills are our worst counsellors; and they who listen to them will gene- * Haggai i. 7. H 98 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. rally find, that by so doing they have effected nothing so completely as their own injury and disgrace. So it is here. Two allegations are made by some against the Apocrypha; and under colour of them it is said we ought to banish them from our Bibles and our Churches. First, it is urged, that they authorize Romish Tenets, such as the doctrine of Merit, Prayers for the Dead, Worship of Angels: and it is further alleged that, because they seem to counte- nance such errors as these, they were canonized by the Church of Rome at the Council of Trent. Secondly, it is averred that some of these Books contain fabulous legends and immoral teaching; that they recommend, by precept and example, cer- tain actions at variance with the Law of God. These, my brethren, are very serious charges. But supposing that they who make them with so much eagerness could really substantiate what they affirm, what would they gain thereby? Plainly this; —while aiming a blow at the Church of Rome, they would wound the Church of Christ, which has ever treated these Books with reverence; and they would wound the Church of England, which cites these Books in her Homilies, enumerates them with honourable mention in her Articles, gives them a place in her Bible, and reads them for example of life and instruction of manners to her People. It is therefore evident that, if we who are Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 99 Ministers of the Church of England are disposed to make an assault upon the Apocrypha, we must begin with retracting our own subscriptions to our Articles. We must make for ourselves new Ho- milies, a new Prayer-book, and a new Bible. And if we succeed in our adventure,—which Heaven forbid !—we shall greatly weaken the cause of our Church, and advance that of Rome. Again: if the Apocryphal Books do indeed au- thorize Romish doctrine, and were therefore canon- ized at the Council of Trent, then, it is clear, that the ancient Fathers, who treated these Books with respect, and the ancient Church, which read them for instruction of manners, could not have disap- proved those Romish doctrines. Then, too, it would follow that the Church of England herself teaches Romish doctrines; for she reads these Books. And therefore, either these Romish doctrines are not false doctrines ; or, the ancient Church Catholie and the Church of England are involved in the same errors as the Church of Rome. But, my brethren, Is it true that the Apocrypha was eanonized at Trent because it authorizes, or even seemed to authorize, Romish doctrine? Far from it. The Church of Rome was in no want of the Apocrypha to authorize any articles of faith. She was in no need of any written authority for that. She affirmed at that very Council* that her own * Concil. Trid. Sess. iv. Appendix B. No. I. Perrone ii. p- 1217. H 2 100 ON .THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. unwritten Traditions are sufficient of themselves to prove any article of faith. Her own practice is her Bible. As her practice varies, so does her Bible. She conforms herself to nothing, and would have every thing conform to herself. She had, therefore, I repeat, no need of the Apocrypha. But it was her practice to read it; and she supposed that it had been canonized by two of her infallible Popes *, and that therefore it was inspired. Her own practice, 1 repeat, was her law; and this was proved remarkably in the canonization of the Apocryphal Book of Baruch at the Council of Trent. That Book had not been mentioned by name by any previous Council, or in the lists of the two Popes just mentioned. But it was read by the Church of Rome+, and had been canonized by a third Pope, Kugenius the Fourth. Therefore at the Council of Trent the Book of Baruch was set down as inspired; a fact which proves that it was the practice of the existing Church of Rome, and not any opinion that the Apocryphal Books au- thorize Romish doctrine, which produced their canonization at Trent; for there is no Book in the whole Bible which condemns more strongly such superstitious and idolatrous practices as have cor- rupted the faith and worship of Rome than this Book of Baruch, which was then declared to be inspired. * Pope Innocent and Gelasius. See Appendix A. No. XXVI. | Sarpi’s History of Council of Trent, (ad a.p. 1546,) Brent's Translation, p. 144. Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 101 Again: the canonization of the Apocrypha at Trent is to be ascribed, in no inconsiderable degree, to the incompetency of the members of that Council. That session of the Council in which the Apocrypha was canonized, under sentence of anathema on all who denied its inspiration, consisted of fifty-three Bishops, very few of whom were skilled in theologi- cal learning; and these fifty-three *, it is known, were divided in opinion on this matter+t. Rely- ing on the practice of Rome as their guide, they gave no due consideration to the subject; and, as if driven on by a spirit of infatuation, they came to a hasty conclusion, and bound themselves and others, or rather surrendered themselves to be bound by the Enemy of mankind, in the chains of error. And how much soever learned and reflecting Romanists may now desire—and we cannot doubt that many of them do desire—to be rid of this decree, yet they cannot free themselves from it, unless they are prepared to renounce the doctrine of Infallibility upon which the Papal system is based. May God of His mercy grant that they may have grace to reject error, disguised under the mask of Inerrancy, and by allowing them- selves to be fallible, be enabled to recover the truth! But to return. We do not scruple to affirm that, whatever may seem to be the tendency of certain * See the names of these fifty-three in Labbe, Concilia XIV. Ρ. 745. Streitwolf, Libri Symbol. Eccl. Cath. II. p. 21. + Sarpi’s History of the Council of Trent, ad ann. 1546. See also Cardinal Pallavicini’s History, lib. vi. cap. ΧΙ. 102 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. expressions in some of the Apocryphal Books taken by themselves, yet the teaching of the Apocrypha, fairly construed, is condemnatory of Romish error, and in harmony with Catholic Truth. We are now brought to consider the second alle- gation. While we thus speak, do we intend to say that no flaws may be found in the Apocrypha? By no means. We do not believe them to be inspired ; we are sure that they are human compositions, and that, as such, they partake of the imperfections of humanity. We do not, therefore, read the Apo- crypha as Canonical Scripture; and we believe that the blemishes, which are referred to, will be found only in those Apocryphal Books, or in those portions of the Apocryphal Books, which we never read. And we proceed to say that, even from these im- perfections themselves, every thoughtful person will derive lessons of great practical utility. The case of reading the Apocrypha is very similar to that of the commemoration of the Saints of God by anniversary festivals and religious services. What the Saints are to the Divine Author of all Sanctity, that the Apocryphal Books are to Inspired Scripture. The Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in the eleventh chapter, ushers in a long train of Patriarchs, Prophets, Saints, and Martyrs, of whom the world was not worthy ; and yet not one of these who are there canonized by the Holy Ghost, was exempt from mortal frailty. So the Church of Christ imserts in her calendar the names of those whose Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 103 memories live in the heart of Christendom. All these were men of like infirmities with ourselves ; and by celebrating their festivals we glorify Him from Whom all their graces were derived; and the purity and brightness of the One Only perfect example, Jesus Curist, shows Itself in more radiant lustre when compared with these lesser lights, albeit they are confessed to be what human nature has produced most excellent. And by dwelling reve- rently on the memories of the Saints, departed in God’s Holy Faith and Fear, we hold spiritual com- munion with the mystical Body of Christ in every age. So in reading and revering the Apocryphal Books, we maintain our sacred fellowship with the Church Catholic, which has so long read and re- ceived them; we love, and live in, the past; we do what is so beautifully taught us in the Lesson of that Apocryphal Book of EKcclesiasticus *, which is, or ought to be, read in the annual commemorations of Founders and Benefactors in every ancient college of England; we praise famous men and our fathers that begat us. So, even by the ¢emperfections of these Books, thus read and revered, we feel ourselves admonished and incited to admire the unattainable perfection, and to adore the Divine beauty, of the Lnspired Scriptures, from which the wisdom of the Apocry- * Chap. xliv. See Celebratio Coene, ἅς. in Commenda- tionibus Benefactorum, Lond. 1560. Anno 2do. Eliz. where the reading of this lesson is enjoined by authority. 104 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. phal Books has been derived, like rays streaming from one glorious orb of inexhaustible light, and to which they bear a willing testimony of lowly homage and of devout veneration *. But further. “The end of the commandment is charity ¢;” and we are forbidden to “ put a stumbling- block Τ᾿ in any one’s way, or to “give offence” to any ; we are commanded by God to do all things for “ mutual edification,” and for “ His glory §.” But by banishing the Apocrypha from our Bibles and our Churches, we should violate these sacred precepts; we should destroy one of our means of communion with other Churches, and should produce discord, where Christ intended that there should be only love. If you carry a Bible, without the Apocryphal Books, into Greece, Asia, and Palestine,—that is, into those very countries whence the Gospel derived its origin and its language, you would be told that you have not the Bible, but only a mutilated copy of it. The Greek Church, which agrees with our own|| * See Ecclus. Prolog. ‘‘ My grandfather Jesus, when he had much given himself to the reading of the Law and the Prophets, and the other Books of our Fathers (τὰ ἄλλα βιβλία) was drawn on also himself to write something pertaining to learning and wisdom.” See also Ecclus. xlv. 5, concerning Moses ; Ecclus. xlvil. 8, concerning David ; xlvii. 15, concerning Solomon ; xlix. 6—10, on Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve Prophets. +l Aim aro. ft Rom. xiv. 13. 1 Cor. x. 32. 2 Cor. vi. 3. § 2 Cor. xii. 19.° Eph. iv.29,. 1 Cor. x. 31. || See Appendix B. No. LV. (a) and (ὁ). Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 105 and with the ancient Church Catholic in venerating the Apocrypha, which is contained in its authorized Septuagint, but does not regard it as inspired, would renounce youas guilty of neoteric and sectarian error, if you presented her with a Bible not containing the Apocryphal Books. If you pass over to Italy and France, or to Spain and Portugal, and endeavour to circulate such Bibles among persons, who, as we all assert, are in great need of the Scriptures—I mean our Roman Catholic Brethren in those countries,—they will immediately say to you, “This may be an English Bible; but it is not the Bible of Christendom. It excludes Books which the Eastern and Western Churches have never ceased to read, from the earliest times to this hour.” You may, perhaps, reply, that the Apocrypha contains unsound doctrine, and questionable history. But to this they will oppose the authority and practice of the Church. They will ask you, “ Whom shall we believe? You, or Highteen Centuries? Nay, which of the two shall we believe, you, or your own Church? You vilify the Apocrypha: your Church reads it; she lauds it in her Articles, which you, perhaps, have signed; she cites it in her Homilies, which you would have us receive. Hither, therefore, you or your Church are in error? Either your Bible or your Prayer Book is wrong. Choose which alternative you will; it is indifferent to us. Go then to your homes. First reconcile yourselves to 106 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. your Church; make your Prayer Book tally with your Bible; and then, and not till then, come and evangelize us!” Such, my beloved brethren, would be the language which, under the circumstances supposed, we must be prepared to hear from every well-instructed person in those countries *. Let me also observe, as a most important point, that by rejecting the Apocrypha, which has now been read in our own Church, and in the Universal Church, for so many hundred years, we should, in fact, be guilty of the very same sin with which we charge the Church of Rome. What is that ? It is the imposition of new terms of Communion, unknown to the Catholic Church. Jf, indeed, the reading of the Apocrypha can be shown to be sinful, then let it be rejected by all means; for we are no advocates for peace without truth. But this has never been proved; and the fact of its being read by the Church for so many centuries will satisfy most persons, to say the least, that it may be read without offence. And if so, then comes in the obligation upon us,—and a most solemn obligation it is,—not to impose any new term of Communion, by which the peace of the Church may be disturbed, and a rent made in the body of Christ. It matters little whether the new term consists in addition or subtrac- * See Appendix G. IV. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 107 tion. The new term of Communion which Home imposes is the reception of the Apocrypha as znspired ; the new term which we should impose would be the rejection of the Apocrypha altogether. Both of these two courses are schismatical. I do not intend to say that the rejection of the Apocrypha is, in itself, abstractedly speaking, in any degree to be compared with the canonization of it; but what I mean is, that there is a breach of Church unity in both cases: and nothing profiteth without charity* ; and wilful schism is a great sin. It is clear, then, that by banishing the Apocrypha, we should imitate Rome ; we should impose a new Bible as a term of Commu- nion; and instead of doing all in our power, that the Religion of Christ may have free course, and be glorified +, we should make the Bible itself a stum- blingblock in its way. At three different epochs in the History of the Church of England, namely, in the Hampton Court Conference at the commencement of the reign of King James the First; again, in the Savoy Confe- rence at the Restoration of King Charles the Second ; and again, when an attempt was made for a religious comprehension, as it was called, at the era of the Revolution of 1688, the Apocryphal Books were the object of violent attacks from parties who pre- ferred their own private opinions to the judgment and practice of the Church. They strove to eject * 1 Cor. xiii. 1—3. + 2 Thess. iii. 1. 108 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. these Books from the Churches and Bibles of Eng- land. But happily their attempts were frustrated : and thus it is that, by the wonderful Providence of God overruling our own devices against ourselves, the Church of England at the present day occupies a glorious position, from which she looks back upon the Past with thankfulness, and on the Future with hope. We have thus, as in duty bound, dwelt on the evils which would have arisen from the rejection of the Apocrypha; and we now pass on to consider those which result from the reception and obtrusion of it as znspired. To impute to God what does not belong to Him is an offence no less than to deny Him His honour due; and no Church can hope for His blessing if it is wilfully guilty of this sin. Such an act must bring with it its own chastisement. Again: the Great Head of the Church desires and commands that all the members of His mystical Body should be joined together in unity. Violations of Church-unity are sins against Christ. The adop- tion and imposition of any new term of Church Communion, especially in so solemn a matter as the Word of God, is a grievous breach of Unity, and consequently is a heinous offence against Christ. And a Church which is guilty of this sin must, in this respect, be the object of His displeasure, and wast look to be visited with His wrath. Further: it is evident that the canonization of Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 109 the Apocrypha greatly impairs the efficacy of a Church in her misstonary character. No Church which isolates herself by imposing new terms of communion can do the work of the Church Catholic. She may, perhaps, make prose- lytes to herself; but she cannot engraft men as sound members on that Church which is and ever will, be one and the same in faith. Now, the recep- tion of the Apocrypha as inspired, which was never received as such by Christ and His Apostles or by the Church after them, and the making such a reception an article of Faith, and a term of Com- munion, is virtually, as far as it goes, an act of self- excommunication, and by consequence an abdication of Apostleship. Let us consider how the reception of the Apo- crypha as inspired affects the relations of a Church so receiving it, not only to Christians and_ to Heathens, but also to Jews. Here we shall see another embarrassment. Our Blessed Lord says that “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled*.” The Conversion of the Jews may therefore be regarded as the consummation of the work of the Church on earth. It will be her last labour of love on the eve of the Sabbath of Eternity. The capacity, therefore, of a Church for the per- formance of this glorious work is one of the best criterions of her faithfulness.’ A Church which has * Tuke xxi. 24. 110 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [Emer disqualified herself for this office, and disfranchised herself from this privilege, cannot be a sound Church; for she cannot aid in realizing God’s gra- cious designs, and so far cannot be approved by Him. Now, you will bear in mind, my brethren, that the ancient Christian Apologists,—for instance, Justin Martyr and St. Augustine j,—relied much on such arguments as the following in their discussions with the Jews. We prove our cause, they said, from the Old Testament, that is, from Books which you Jews cannot allege that we have fabricated or tampered with; for we have received these Books from your hands. Yes; we Christians show the truth of Christianity from those very writings which we de- rive from you, our bitterest enemies; and which you, we allow, have guarded with scrupulous fidelity. We acknowledge, in the words of that noble “ Hebrew of the Hebrews*,’ our great Apostle St. Paul, that “to you were committed the oracles of God + ;” and that you * have received the lively oracles to give unto ust.” Yes, you bear in your hands the divine title-deeds of Him Whom you have crucified ; and from them we prove his Messiahship. We re- quire no other evidence than what your Scriptures afford. You, therefore, have done the work of Clerks and Notaries, of Roll-keepers and Registrars for us). Nay more; by a just act of Divine retri- © Phil.’m. 5. + Rom. iii. 2. + Acts vii. 38. δ Judzei sunt Notarii, Librarii, Capsarii, Scriniarii, Bajuli Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 111 bution, you, by your dispersion into all lands, and by your public reading of the Old Testament in your synagogues every Sabbath day in all the world, have been the Heralds—yea, without your knowledge and against your will, have been and still are in a certain sense the Apostles and Evangelists—of Him Whom you have “taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain*.” And now, like a wandering Cain of many centuries, you, by your vagabond condition and miserable aspect, and by the mark set upon you by God, preach the innocence of your brother Abel, that Good Shepherd, Whose blood you have shed ; and you prove to all the world that the offering which He made for the sins of all men on the altar of the Cross, has been graciously accepted by God. You may ask, perhaps, How is it, if you bear in your hands the Old Testament, and if the Old Testa- ment preaches Christ, and if Jesus be the Christ, that you did not receive Him? Here, we reply, is another proof of the truth of those Scriptures, and of His Messiahship; for your unbelief, and the re- jection of your Messiah by you to whom He came, is plainly predicted in those very Books of the Old Testament which you bear in your hands. “ 7hose things which G'od before hath showed by the mouth of all His prophets, that Christ should suffer, He hath so fulfilled +.” Christianorum. See Justin Martyr, in Appendix A. No. IV. and St. Augustine in Appendix F. (g) (Δ) (2) (4) (ἢ). © Acts 1223: + Acts iii. 18. Luke xxiv. 25-97. 112 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. But, thanks be to God, it is prophesied also in the same Books, that the blessed time is approaching when the veil will be taken off your hearts. As the Prophet says, “ The children of Israel shall abide many days without a King, without a Prince, without a Sacrifice, without an image, without an Ephod, and without Teraphim ; afterward shall the children of Israel return and seek the Lord their God, and shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days*.” “They shall look on Him Whom they pierced +.” And the divine Apostle of Christ takes up the joyful strain, and thus proclaims the gracious promise of God: “1 would not, brethren, that ye should be igno- rant of this mystery, that blindness in part is hap- pened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in; and so all Israel shall be saved 1." Therefore, in accordance with these prophecies, we call upon you to awake, and to turn to the Lord your God; we implore you to join with us in ful- filling God’s designs proclaimed in His own Word, so that, by your reception into the Church purchased by the blood of His dear Son, the mercy of the Lord may appear to all the world, and the earth be “filled with His knowledge as the waters cover the sea ).” Of such a kind, my brethren, was the language of the Fathers of the Christian Church to the people of Israel. * Hosea iii. 4, 5. + Zech. xii. 10. { Rom. xi, 25; 26. § Is. sc. 9: 4 Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 113 But observe how this strength of glorious appeal in behalf of Christianity is paralyzed, how the holy melody of its music is untuned, by the obtrusion of the Apoeryphal Books as inspired. Once receive and impose the Apocryphal Books as inspired, and you can no longer say, with the ancient Fathers of the Church, that you prove Christianity against the Jews from the Books which the Jews receive as inspired. For they do not receive the Apocrypha. Indeed, as was before said, the Jews, mistaking the language of Rome for that of the Catholic Church, urge it as an oljection against Christianity, that it has added to the Word of God other books of human composition, and that it affirms these books to be of equal authority with it. Nor is this all. If we impose the Apocrypha as inspired, then, so far from listening to our appeal, the Jews would turn round upon ws, and_ savy, Your own Scriptures recognize ws as the divinely- appointed depositories of the Word of God. Your Apostle Paul says that “to us were committed the oracles of God*.’ Your Messiah says that we have “ Moses and the Prophets}.” We worshipped and preached in our synagogues. He acknowledged our Canon of Scripture. But your Apocryphal Books were no part of our sacred deposit. They were never admitted into our Holy of Holies. So far, then, from proving your Gospel from our Seriptures, * Rom. iii. 2. + Luke xvi. 29. I 114 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. you stand convicted by your own Gospel of corrupt- ing our Scriptures. You are condemned of this crime by your own Prophet. We leave you to Him. First agree with Him, and then come and preach your Gospel to us. Thus, my brethren, we perceive that, by the canonization of the Apocryphal Books, the Church of Rome, instead of promoting God’s glory by aid- ing in the fulfilment of His gracious design for the restoration of the Jews, has done much to embarrass and impede that glorious work by making the Christian Church appear to be in contradiction with its ancient self and with its Divine Founder. She has thrown a stumbling-block in the way of God’s ancient people, and has made their darkness more thick and their hearts more hard. She has incapa- citated herself from taking any part in their conver- sion. The veil must be.taken from her own eyes before she can take the veil from those of the Jews. She must allow herself to have been in error, before she can teach the truth. She must rescind the decrees of Trent, before she can preach the Gospel of Christ. The destruction or reformation of Rome will, in all human probability, precede the conversion of the Jews. Therefore, in fine, my beloved brethren, looking upon the work which the Church of Christ has yet to perform in the propagation of the Gospel both among Jews and Gentiles, we have infinite reason for thankfulness to Almighty God for watching over Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 115 the Church of England with the eyes of His mercy, and for guiding her by His wisdom in the right way, neither swerving to the right hand nor to the left ; so that she is now in a condition to preach the glad tidings of the Gospel to the whole world, and to fulfil the merciful designs of the great Bishop of our souls, for the fetching home of the people of the earth who are still scattered like sheep upon the mountains of ignorance and unbelief, and of bring- ing them together into one fold, under one Shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord. Thanks be to Almighty God that He has given us visible tokens of His Divine Favour, and of His gracious Will that the Church of England should go on and prosper in this blessed enterprise. He has endued her with increased power for discharging this great work, to which she has been called by the natural position, the commercial activity, and the colonial possessions of our country. We have already seen twelve Bishoprics founded in our colonies within the last twelve years; and the erection of four additional Sees in our foreign dependencies at the commencement of the present year, is another eventful circumstance, which we hail with joy as a happy augury that the Schechinah of the Divine Presence and Glory is with us. Yet, some there are, who, instead of looking with gladness and gratitude on these blessed signs of God’s goodness, would turn with yearning hearts in other directions, and would speak coldly and timidly ΤἊΝ 116 ON THE TRUE CHARACTER [ LECT. of the graces and hopes of their spiritual Mother ; as if they even thought it a merit not to despair of the Church of England. What! Despair of the Chureh of England? We must, then, despair of Christianity. The Church of England has the Word of God to preach, and, thanks be to God, she has never disquali- fied herself from preaching it. She holds the Bible in her hands pure and unadulterated. She opens it wide to the eyes of the world. She has not thrown herself out of the Communion, of the ancient people of God, by adding to the ancient Scriptures ; nor, has she set herself against the authority, and cut herself off from the Communion of the Universal Church of Christ, by withdrawing the due and accus- tomed reverence from those other Books which have ever been publicly held in esteem by the great body of Christians, as fraught with wise precepts and holy examples, and completing the history of God’s pro- vidential dealings with His Church, in her interval of patient hope and trial between the Old Testament and the New. Thus, like the great Missionary Apostle, while she makes no compromise of the Truth, she treads in the paths of peace; “She is made all things to all men, that she may by all means save some.” Let me specially exhort you, my younger brethren, to imitate her spirit. Pray to God that you may be like-minded with her. Be thankful to Him, that you have here the privilege of being trained in one Iv. | AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA. 117 of the great schools of her Prophets; use aright the blessings which you here enjoy. Then, if you are true to her, and to yourselves,—if, like her, you unite Evangelical Faith with Apostolic Order and Catholic Love, then, you will have the glorious privilege of advancing her work on earth, and of sharing her bliss in Heaven. LECTURE V. Is. viii. 16. ‘‘ Bind up the testimony, seal the law among My disciples.” THe New Testament is hidden in the Old, and the Old is displayed in the New; each is in harmony with the other, and the same God is Author of them both. Tn the preceding Discourses, it has been my purpose to state the reasons for which we receive the Books of the Old Testament as the Word of God; and my design, in the present and following Lectures, is to treat of the Canon of the New Testament, and to show the grounds on which we acknowledge those Books, which are contained in the volume bearing that name, to bea part of the divinely appointed Rule of Faith and Practice, and, therefore, to be of equal authority with the Canonical Books of the Old Testament. The Canon of the Old Testament, as we have seen, is authorized by Christ Himself, Who acknow- ledged all the Books, of which it consists, to be the Word of God, and referred His hearers to them as WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION, &e. 119 such; and it will be our endeavour to prove that we have the same Divine sanction for the Canon of the New. Cunrist is the great “ Householder who bringeth forth out of His divine Treasure things New and Old*.” Both Testaments bear the impress of His signet ; He says of both alike, “ Bind up the Testimony, seal the Law among My Disciples.” Let us join in prayer to Him, that He would give us a portion of that Spirit which illumined His Prophets and Apostles, and enable us to see His presence in His Word, and to believe firmly in our hearts, and acknowledge boldly with our lips, that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works +.” Such being our aim, let us first consider the diffi- culties which have been thrown in the way of this belief; and next, let us examine in detail the evidence by which a sound faith in the inspiration of the con- stituent parts of the New Testament, is shown to be reasonable, and necessary to salvation. On the present occasion, we will confine ourselves to the former part of this enquiry. The objections which have been made to the Canonical authority of the New Testament proceed from two quarters. First, from the open enemies of * Matt. xili. 52. +) 2 πὶ: 1π 10. 10: 120 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LEC Revelation; and secondly, from those who would make Scripture to depend on the authority of their own Church. The form taken by these objections is as follows : Jesus Christ, they observe, committed nothing to writing; and none of the Books of the New Testa- ment were written while He was on earth ; nor, were they all composed till from ten to sixty years after His Ascension into Heaven. There is no passage in the New Testament which specifies the names and number of the Books which compose the Christian Scriptures, and assures us of their Inspiration; and, even if there were, such passage would require some independent guarantee of its own veracity. Again; it is said, we possess writings of eminent Christian Teachers, who were either companions or scholars of the Apostles, namely, the Apostolic Fathers, as they are called, Barnabas, and Clement, and Hermas, the friends and fellow-labourers of St. Paul, and of Ignatius and Polycarp, the Disciples of St. John. One of these, Barnabas*, is called an Apostle} in Scripture; three of the other four were Christian Bishops. Now, in their writings, it is alleged 1, we have little notice taken of the New Testament; the names of the Evangelists are not * For argument’s sake the Epistle extant under the name of St. Barnabas is here supposed to be genuine: it is certainly of the primitive times. + Acts xiv. 14. } Bolingbroke’s Works, Letter V. vol. i. p. 177. v.] OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 121 once mentioned in them; whereas, it might surely lave been expected, that, if the New Testament had been received as inspired, in the age of the Apostolic Fathers, they would have made copious citations from it. Still, further; though it was of the greatest impor- tance that the Church should possess full assurance concerning the momentous question, what Books are inspired, and what are not? yet, we find, that, even in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries, certain Churches entertained doubts concerning the inspira- tion of some Books of the New Testament; and we do not find, that any Catalogue of all the inspired Books was made by any Council of the Church, till late in the fourth century, when such lists were published by the Synods of Laodicea and Carthage * ; and then, it is said, but not tell then, the Canon of the New Testament was finally fixed and established. From these allegations, certain very dangerous conclusions are derived. On the one hand, they who do not wish well to Christianity, would thence infer that the doctrines of the Gospel are questionable, since the inspiration of the documents, in which they are contained, was so long a matter of doubt. On the other hand, they who elevate their own Church toa dignity higher than the Bible, having * Hobbes’ Leviathan, pt. ii. ce. 33. Toland’s Amyntor, pp. 47. 56. 64. See the citations in Leland’s View, i. p. 36, ed. 1798. i. p. 50. Hickes’ Treatises, i. p. 73, Oxf. 1847. 122 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION ΕΠ first persuaded themselves that their own Church is the Mother and Mistress of a// Churches *, would fain persuade us that Scripture derives its authority entirely from their Church; and that, therefore, Holy Scripture cannot be a sufficient Rule of Faith. The Church, they say, did not know what Scripture was for three centuries after it was written, which could not have been the case, if Scripture were the Rule of Faith. Nor is this all. They newt proceed to say, that, if the Church,—by which they mean the Church of ome,—was able to give divine authority in the fourth century to Books, which had existed from the first, there can be no (mit to her knowledge and power; and, therefore, if we wish to believe in the inspiration of the New Testament, we must a/so believe, implicitly, whatsoever the Church of Rome has hitherto propounded, or may hereafter propound, as necessary to everlasting salvation. Such difficulties as these, my brethren, have been thrown by different persons in the way of a sound belief in the Inspiration of the New Testament; and the fact that some of these objections have been confidently repeated + in our own days, and have led * Perrone de Locis Theol. p. ii. ο. 1. Scripture Canon non ab una Ecclesia constitui debet, si Ecclesia illa non esset omnium Jeclesiarum Mater et Magistra. Porro Ecclesia Romana, cum privilegio fruatur primatis in universam Ecclesiam, sua potuit auctoritate constituere verum Scripturarum Canonem. + Dr. Milner’s End of Controversy, Letter xi. ‘ Was this abrogation of the First Rule of Christianity deferred till the Canon of Scripture was fixed at the end of the fourth century ?”?— v.] ΟΕ THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 123 to the most disastrous results, would of itself be a sufficient reason to us for a careful examination of this subject: even if it were not essential that αὐ Christians, of every age, should fully understand the grounds on which the Scriptures of the New Testa- ment, together with the Old, are to be received as the entire and unerring Word of Almighty God. Let us now examine these difficulties. First, we allow that no Catalogue of the books of the New Testament is found in the extant decrees of any Council of the Church more ancient than those of Laodicea and Carthage *, toward the close of the fourth century, But, waiving the argument that the decrees of many earlier Councils have been lost, and that such catalogues may have existed in them +, we affirm, and shall proceed to prove, that Newman’s Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Ρ. 160. ‘On what ground do we receive the Canon as it comes to us but on the authority of the Church of the fourth and fifth centuries ? The Church of that era decided—not merely bore testimony, but passed a judgment on former testimony—decided that certain books were of authority. We receive that decision as true; that is, we virtually apply to a particular case the doc- trine of her infallibility.” See also p. 167. ‘If (in the first three centuries) the Imperial Power checked the development of Councils, it availed also for keeping back the power of the Papacy. The Creed, the Canon, in like manner remained un- defined. ‘The Creed, the Canon, the Papacy, the Gicumenical Councils all began to form, as soon as the Empire relaxed its tyrannous oppression of the Church.” * See Appendix A. to this volume, Nos. XIV., XXI. + See Bp. Kaye’s Tertullian, p. 314, ed. 1826. i 124 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ΠΕ ΟῚ: the books of the New Testament had been received as inspired not only long before that age, but in and from the time in which they were written; and that those two Councils, in publishing these lists, did not imagine, that they were making, or could make, any Book to be Canonical which was not Canonical before. They did not intend to enact anything new, but only to declare what was old ; just as the Church of England, in the sixteenth century, when she published a list of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament in her Sixth Article, did not pretend to give any new authority to those Books, but only affirmed what the Church had believed concerning them, from the beginning. The Inspiration of the New Testament was recog- nized by the first General Councils of Christendom. In proof of this it may be observed, that, in the public Council Chambers, in which those venerable Synods met, a Royal Throne * was set in the midst, and the Sacred Volume of the Four Gospels was placed upon it, as a visible image of Christ’s presence, and as a divine rule, by which all their decrees were to be directed. It is expressly recorded of the most illustrious Council of the Church, that of Niczea, * §. Cyril, in his Apologetic Discourse to Theodosius, describing the Council of Ephesus, says (Labbe, Concil. iii. p. 1044), ‘ The Sacred Synod being assembled in Mary’s Church, had Christ Himself for their Head; for the Holy Gospel was on a solemn Throne, preaching, as it were, to the venerable Prelates, ‘ Judge ye right judgment.’ ἢ γ.7 OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 125 which was held forty years defore that of Laodicea, that it had before its eyes the Books of the ELvange- lists, Apostles, and Prophets; and that its decisions were founded on the written Word of Inspiration *. The insertion of the words, “ according to the Serip- 3 tures,” in the Nicene Creed, is very significant of this fact. It is therefore clear, that, at that period, the Books of the New Testament were distinctly known by the Church, and were recognized by it as the Oracles of God. Again; although it is allowed that no Synodical Catalogues, earlier than the fourth century, are now extant, of the writings of the New Testament, yet, we must remember, that many such Catalogues are found in the works of eminent Fathers, both of the Eastern and Western Church, anterior to that time. Besides, it must also be remembered, that these writers set down these lists, not as new documents, * Constantine, in his Speech to the Nicene Fathers (Theodoret, 1. 7.), says, that they “have the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit in writing (ἀνάγραπτον), for (he adds) the Books of the Evangelists and Apostles, and the oracles of the ancient Prophets teach us clearly and thoroughly (σαφῶς ἐκπαιδεύουσι) what we ought to believe concerning God. Wherefore (he continues) let us lay aside all hostile contention, and let us decide our controversies from the Divinely Inspired Books.” In his letter to Eusebius, Bishop of Czesarea (Socrat. i. 7), the Emperor announces his decree for the erection of Additional Churches at Constantinople, and for the writing out of Fifty Copies of the Divine Scriptures (θείων γραφῶν) for the use of the Church.” He thus endeavours to repair the injury inflicted by Diocletian in the destruction of Churches and Bibles, 126 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. but as received by them, through uninterrupted transmission, from the times of the Apostles*. These Catalogues, therefore, embody the belief, not only of the Church of the third and second centuries, but of the first; they contain the testimony of the Apostolic Churches to the Inspiration of the New Testament. Yet further. Even the bitterest foes of Christi- anity have been converted by God into witnesses of this Truth. The fiercest persecution which the Chureh has yet been called to endure, was that which raged throughout the Roman world at the beginning of the fourth century, under the Emperor Diocletian, who strained every nerve to exterminate Christianity. He imagined that the best means for effecting his im- pious purpose would be to destroy the House and the Word of God. Therefore, he levelled the Churches to the dust, and ordered diligent search to be made in all parts of the Empire for copies of the Christian Scriptures. These, when found, were committed to the flames}. It is evident, therefore, that it was a * Origen, ap. Euseb. vi. 25, refers to “the ancients” (oi ἀρχαῖοι); and Eusebius says he sets down his own Canon according “ to ecclesiastical tradition” (i1.25); and S. Athanasius ascribes his “τὸ the eye-witnesses and ministers of the word from the be- ginning” (Epist. Festal.) ; so S. Cyril (Cateches. iv. 35.) attributes his Canon to ‘the Apostles and ancient Bishops ;” and Ruffinus, in Symbol. p. 26, says, “ These are the Books of the Old and New Testament, which according to the tradition of our fathers are believed to be inspired by the Holy Ghost.”” See the original words of these Fathers in Appendix A. to this volume, Nos. VIII. EX, ΣΧ eT XK; + Euseb. viii. 2. v.] OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 127 fact well known, even to Pagans, that certain Books were revered by Christians, and that in them the religion of Christians was contained. The New Testament, we say, was known even to Diocletian. Nor is this all; it is also certain that those Christians who were then guilty of surrendering copies of the sacred or Divine Books *, as they were called, to the imperial emissaries, were regarded by their brethren as Apostates ; they were called 7'raditores, or traitors, for this act of surrender, and were visited with the heaviest penalties by the Church +. From these facts, it is clear that the Sacred Writings of the New Testament must have been then well-known, as distinct from all other composi- tions, and have constituted a definite | collection, which was no other than the New Testament received by Christians, from the time of the Apostles even to this day. Thus, the fierceness of man has been turned to the praise of Godt; and the endeavours of Satan to subvert Christianity have served more fully to authenticate the Scriptures on which Christianity rests, Still more. The Arch-enemy of mankind has ever laboured to destroy the Gospel, not only by open * Libri Deifici. See the Passio of 5. Felix in Baluzii Miseell. ii. p. 77. S. Aug. Brevic. Collat. cum Donatistis, Gap Veale : + Concil. Arelat. (a.p. 314.) can. 18. Credner, Geschichte des Canons: Halle, 1847, p. 63. The controversy of the Church with the Donatists turned on the question whether Cecilianus had been ordained by a Traditor or not. pants. ᾿ἰχ τυ 1: 128 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. assault, but by secret plots, by foes within the Church as well as without, by heresy as well as by persecution. He has not only gone about roaring as the Lon, but he lurks in crafty ambush as the Dragon *. But heretics, as well as persecutors, have been made by God to advance the cause of the Church. Christ, the Divine Conqueror, has “gone both upon the Lion and the Adder; the young Lion and the Dragon He treadeth under His feett.” We has converted the insidious malice, as well as the cruel rage, of the Evil One into occasions and instruments for the promotion of His Glory, and the establishment of His Truth. Even in primitive times, “there were false teachers, who privily brought in damnable heresies ἢ >” they could not propagate their false doctrines except they stifled the true. What, therefore, did they do ? They mutilated or rejected the Christian Scriptures. Some of them endeavoured to combine Christianity with Judaism, and to make a mongrel religion of the two §; some would have separated Jesus of Nazareth from Christ the Son of God ||. They, therefore. cut away those parts of the New Testament, which were hostile to their heresies. Others received the * S. Aug. in Joan. x. Non cessat Inimicus persequi. Inde dictus Leo et Draco. Leo propter apertam iram, Draco propter occultas insidias. Sed quid dicitur Christo ? Conculeabis Leo- nem et Draconem, Ps. xci. 13. + Ps. xci. 13. 152 sPet. ai. 1. § The Ebionites and Nazarenes. || The Cerinthians, Alogi, and others. v.] ΟΕ THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 129 New Testament, but refused the Old*; others recognized both Testaments, but perverted them by false interpretations +. Others composed Apocryphal Writings, in support of their erroneous doctrines {, and circulated them, as of equal authority with the Books of the New Testament. But what was the result of all these pernicious devices ? They aroused the Church, and made her lift up her “voice as a trumpet },” yea, made her “blow the silver trumpet of her holy Convocations ||,” to con- demn their authors in her Synods, and to excommu- nicate them, as enemies of God, and of His truth 4. Thus, the rejection or mutilation of Scripture by heretics gave occasion for its vindication, assertion, and manifestation by the Church; and has been among the means employed by Divine Providence for assuring successive generations, that the New Testament, as handed down to them, was received by the primitive Church as the Word of God. * The Carpocratians, Marcionites, and Manichzans, Hieron. adv. Pelag. 1. 2. The former, however, received only part of the New Test. Iren. i. 27; iii. 12. Tertullian. de Carne Christi, c. 2, 3. adv. Marcion. iv. 1—6. + The Valentinians, Tertullian. Praescr. Heeret. c. 38, and others. Iren. iil. c. 12.—Priscillianists, August. de Heres. c. 70. { Bardesanes, Epiphan. Heer. 66; and the Gnostics generally. Iren. i. 17. § Isa. lvii. 1. || Num. x. 2. 4 Tertullian. de Baptism. c. 17. The case of the author of the Acts of Paul and Thecla. Hieron. Vir. Illust. in Luca says, that he was convicted by St. John. See also Can. Apost. ]xii. K 130 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. But, it may be said, these statements afford strong evidence that certain Books, corresponding in name with those received by us, were recognized as divine in the first ages of Christianity; but they do not prove that the Books which we now receive are identical in substance with those which were then received; and that οὐ" New Testament was recog- nized by the Primitive Church. We, therefore, proceed to observe, that we possess an uninterrupted series of writings, from the Apostolic times to the present day; and that these contain quotations from the Books of the New Testament; and that we have Commentaries upon it, reaching downward to us, in unbroken succession, from the third and fourth centuries ; and that many of these Commentaries exhibit the tert of these Books; and that we have hundreds of ancient Manuscripts of these Books, from all parts of the world; that we have ancient Versions of them in numerous languages; and that these various and independent witnesses coincide with each other, and concur in testifying the fact, that the Scriptures of the New Testament existed in primitive times as they exist now, and have been transmitted, pure and entire, from the hands of the Apostles to our own. Nor is this all. The Books of the New Testament were addressed, for the most part, not to private individuals, but to Public Societies; to particular Churches, and to the Church at large. The Authors of these Books enjoined that they should be publicly v.]| OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 131 read*. In the annals of the early Church we often meet with mention of Ecclesiastical Officers, called Anagnoste, or Readers+, whose duty it was to rehearse the Sacred Scriptures in the ears of the people in the Church. We find, also, from early Christian writers 1, that the reading of the Gospels and Epistles of the New Testament, as well as of the Books of the Old, was an essential part of the Public Worship of God in the Christian Church, just as the reading of the Law and the Prophets was a part of the Worship of the Synagogue. By this public reading, the Books of the New Testament were canonized as soon as they were written; thus they were everywhere proclaimed to be divine, and thus they were preserved entire. * Col. iv. 16. 1 Thess. v. 27. Their communication to all is implied by 2 Thess. iii. 14. + For instance, Cyprian, Epist. xxiv. xxxill. xxxiv., and before him Tertullian, Preeser. 41, “ Hodie diaconus qui cras Lector.”—Apol. 39. Coimus ad Literarum Divinarum comme- morationem. { Justin Martyr, Apol. i. c. 66, 67. p. 83. ed. Bened. Ter- tullian, Apol. 39. de Anima, 9. Preescr. Heret. c. 36. Percurre ecclesias apostolicas apud quas ipse adhuc cathedrz Apostolo- rum suis locis president, apud quas authentice litere eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem, repreesentantes faciem wniuscujusque. And speaking of the primitive Church of Rome, he adds, “Legem et Prophetas cum Evangelicis et Apostolicis Literis miscet.” See also adv. Marcion. iv. 5. Videamus quid legant Philippenses, Thessalonicenses, Ephesit; quid etiam Romani de proximo sonent. In the ancient Frag. Can., ap. Muratori, (see Appendix A. VI) occur the expressions, “‘legi in Ecclesia,” and ‘‘ publicari ε concerning books οἵ the New Testament. Kee, in Ecclesia populo,’ 132 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [LEcr. Their publicity, and dissemination into all parts of the world, and the veneration in which they were held, rendered it impossible that they should be altered, either by addition or curtailment; and when any partial alteration was ever attempted, as we have seen it was by heretics, it was condemned as a flagrant crime. Thus, also, we have the fullest assurance that such as the Scriptures of the New Testament were at the time in which they were written, such they remained in every succeeding age, and such they now are, in our own day. I do not now enter into the question, whether there are not some Books in the New Testament, concerning the inspiration of which doubts were entertained in some portions of the Church in early times. This inquiry is reserved to a more suitable place in our argument. Let us now pass on to consider the remaining objection stated at the com- mencement of this Discourse. Christ, it is said, wrote nothing. No Book of the New Testament was composed while He was on earth; and in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, friends and scholars of the Apostles, little notice is taken of the Books of the New Testament; which, it was alleged, could not have been the case, if they had been received as inspired in the Apostolic age. What is to be said here ? It is quite true, my brethren, that as far as we know, nothing was committed * to writing by our * The correspondence mentioned by Eusebius (i. 13), does V.] OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 133 Blessed Lord Himself. No Book of the New Tes- tament was written till some years after His Ascen- sion; and the Books of the New Testament were not all written till near the close of the first century. Yes; and we add, here is another proof of its Inspiration. For, suppose the Founder of a religion to give an account in his own person of the miracles he pro- fesses to have wrought; or, suppose him to publish a report of the moral and spiritual doctrines which he delivered: it is plain, that the strength of the historical evidence would rest on his own credibility; nor would it be wonderful, if his own exposition of his doctrines were found coherent and clear. Thus, for example, the authenticity of the Koran depends on the veracity of Mahomet; and it can found no pre- tence to be a supernatural revelation on any ground of internal consistency. But how different is the case of the New Testa- ment! Here we have writings, not composed by the Founder of Christianity, nor during His sojourn in the world, nor in the vernacular tongue of the Writers; but written in Greek by unlettered Gali- leans, many years after their Master had been removed from them; and giving independent ac- counts of supernatural works, and spiritual discourses not come under consideration here. See Jones on the Canon, vol. ii. p. 1. ed. Oxf. 1827. 134 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. on the most abstruse and mysterious subjects! Yet these are found to be all consistent with each other. They are received as the Word of God by innume- rable congregations of men contemporary with the Authors themselves. They are preserved entire in a marvellous manner. They have produced wonder- ful effects—ever generating fresh benefits to the world; every day softening barbarous tribes, and cheering benighted Nations, with heavenly love and light. How, my brethren, can we explain this wonderful phenomenon? Its solution is to be found only in the fulfilment of our Lord’s promise to His Apostles ; “ These things have I spoken unto you being yet pre- sent with you; but the Comforter, Which is the Holy Ghost, Whom the Father will send in My Name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you*.” “ When He, the Spirit of Truth is come, He will guide you into all truth, and He will show you things to come+:” for which cause they were ordered not to premeditate, when brought before Rulers and Kings, for “it 7s not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.” And again: “These signs shall follow them that believe, they shall speak with new Tongues ἡ." Scepties may give, and have given, other accounts of * John xiv. 25, 26. + John xvi. 13. 7 Mark ἘΠῚ 1. § Mark xvi. 17. v.] OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 135 the matter, but we confidently affirm, that the form and substance of the New Testament can be account- ed for by its /nspiration, and by ἐξ alone ἢ. In further illustration of this statement, let us consider briefly the case of that Apostle, who was employed to contribute more than any other to the writing of the New Testament—St. Paul. He never saw Christ on earth; he was a bitter perse- cutor of Christianity; humanly speaking, he was of all men the least qualified to preach the Gospel. For some time after his conversion he was suspected and feared by the Christians, and never ceased to be hated by the Jews. Yet he was chosen to be the special messenger of the Gospel to the most en- lightened nations of the world. The solitudes of Arabia were his school for the Apostleship. He con- ferred not with flesh and blood; and the persecut- ing Pharisee emerged into the Christian Saint with- out any teaching of mant. What cause, my brethren, except that of Truth and of God, would have chosen, or could have employed with success, such an In- strument as this? How could St. Paul have effected * Hence, Eusebius, H. Εἰ. iii. 24, says, “The Apostles were rude in speech; but by the demonstration of the Holy Spirit working with them, and by the miraculous power alone of Christ consummated through them, they announced the knowledge of the Kingdom of Heaven to all the world. This they did by the assistance of supernatural strength.”” Compare S. Chrys. Homil. in Matth. i. Origen. de Princ. i. Preef.c. 8. 5. Hieron. Preef. in Matt. Evang. for ancient assertions of the Inspiration of the New Testament, Appendix A. No. XIX. (i.) { Gal. i. 11—24. 136 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. what he did for the conversion of the world, if he had not been filled with the Holy Ghost, and in- structed by “wvzszons and revelations of the Lord* ?” Surely the choice of the instrument, and the mar- vellous effects which it produced, must rivet our belief that the “ ewvcellency of the power of the Gospel” which St. Paul preached, is “of God, and not of mant.” Let us now consider the objection, that little notice is taken by the Apostolic Fathers of the Books of the New Testament. The preaching of the Apostles and Evangelists, for some years after the Ascension, was only by word of mouth. Catechizing, or oral teaching, was _ first necessary in order to prepare the world for the reception and profitable use of Scripture {; and catechizing, as we see from St. Luke’s preface to his Gospel, was first employed, before the Gospel was written. But we also learn from the same preface, that it was necessary that the Gospel should be written, in order that they who had been catechized should be more fully instructed in those things which they had heard by word of mouth). The committal of the Word to writing arose too as a necessary consequence from the foresight the writers had of * 2 Cor. καὶ 1, Eph. mi. 3. Τ 2 Cor. iv. 7. + Luke i. 4, and 1 Johbnii. 14. “I have written unto you . because the Word of God abideth in you.” § Luke i. 4. Υ.] ΟΕ THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 137 their approaching death *, or from their departure to distant lands, or from their imprisonment, or from the _ circulation of heretical writings; all which circum- stances were providentially converted, by Almighty God, into means of permanent blessing to the Church. The Apostolic Fathers wrote at that very time when the oral teaching of the Apostles was still ringing in the ears of Christendom. Hence their great value. They represent to us the feelings of the primitive Church as an audience. They are an echo of the voice of Christ. They are contemporary and inde- pendent witnesses to Scripture; they show that what is there taught, neither more nor less, was be- lieved in the Apostolic Church. They give us the general effect of Christ’s teaching; and, in proof of their authenticity, they preserve to us some sayings of our Blessed Lord, which are not contained in the written Gospel, but are in full harmony with it f. And, even the flaws and blemishes which occur in their works are not without their use; for they remind us, what the Apostles would have been, if they had not been znspired ; and what we ourselves should be, if we had not the Written Word 1. * 2 Pet. i. 14. Euseb. ii. 15; ui. 24. Epiphan. Heres. Ixix. c. 23. + See Bp. Pearson, Vind. Ignat. 1. 43; 1. p. 99, and Lardner, Credibility, i. p. 288. 294; Jones on the Canon, i. 353. sqq. t{ The inconveniences to which oral tradition is liable, showed. themselves even in the Apostolic age; e.g. in the popular 158 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. But is it really true that these Apostolic Fathers were unacquainted with the books of the New Testament, or that they did not regard them as inspired? Far from it. It is indeed true that their own hearts were full of what they had heard *, and that they spake mainly from that. And no wonder. Every one is more vividly affected by what he hears than by what he reads. But in all their own writings, if we may so speak, they take the New Testament for granted + ; they suppose their readers to be familiar with it; they imitate the Apostolic Epistles in their introductions and _ salutations, and in their whole tone and treatment of their subject. opinion that St. John should not die, and in the belief of the proximity of the Second Advent: these were corrected by Scrip- ture, John xxi. 23. 2 Thess. 11. 2; and suggest many reflections concerning the precariousness of tradition at this late age, and concerning the necessity of a written Canon. * See the account of Papias, in Euseb. iii. 39, on the relation of oral to written teaching in primitive times. We have in Papias, an example of excess of devotion to oral tradition, to which Chiliasm and other errors held by some in our own days, even zealous opponents of written tradition, are attri- butable. + The scantiness of direct Scripture citations in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, is justly regarded as a proof of the genuineness of those writings. The larger Greek edition of St. Ignatius abounds with Scripture quotations; and if the passages, in which the smaller and fewer Greek Epistles differ from the Syriac, were interpolations, and were introduced in the third or fourth century, (as some have imagined,) they also would doubt- less have been interspersed with Scripture texts. v.] OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 139 To descend to particulars. St. Barnabas * quotes a passage from St. Matthew as Scripture; St. Clement, writing to the Corinthians, refers them to St. Paul’s Epistle; St. Ignatius { places the Evangelists and Apostles on a par with the Prophets, and speaks of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians j; St, Polycarp ||, the latest of the Apostolic Fathers, refers the Philip- pians to the Epistle of St. Paul, and confesses that neither he himself, nor any one like him, can come up to the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Apostle. He expresses his confidence that they are well versed in the Scriptures 4 ; he declares that whosoever per- verts them to their own lusts is of the devil **; and he makes numerous citations from the Gospels and Epistles, which he adduces as of equal authority with the Old Testament; and, finally, his whole teaching was in harmony with the Scriptures ΤΊ. * C. 4. compare Matt. xx. 16; xxii. 14. + I. 47. “Take into your hands the Epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle. What wrote he to you in the beginning of his teaching?” (τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, comp. Rom. 1. 10: συ: oe 1 Cor. xv. 1. Gal. 1. 11; π..2.) ‘Verily, he enjoined you spiritually concerning himself, and Cephas and Apollos, because even then, you had made parties among you.” (1 Cor. 1. 12.) t Ad Philad. c. 5. ad Smyr. c. 7. § Ignat. Epist. ad Ephes. 6. xii. ~ || Ad Phil. c. 8, and c. 11. I do not find these passages noted by Lardner. q Ad Phil. c. 12. *# Ad Phil. c. 7. ὃς dv μεθοδεύῃ τὰ λόγια τοῦ Κυρίου. ++ See Jacobson, Patres Apost. p. 599; Lardner’s Credi- bility, i. 327—533. ed. 4to. Lond. 1815. 140 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. Of this we are assured by his disciple St. Irenzeus, Bishop of Lyons, who thus writes*: “ I remember,” says he, “the things which took place when I was young, better than those which occurred lately. 1 recollect well the place in which the holy Polycarp used to sit and speak. JI remember his going out and his coming in, his person, and manner of life, and the discourses he made to the people, and how he described his intercourse with the Apostle St. John, and with the rest who had seen the Lord; and how he recited their sayings concerning Christ, His miracles, and His doctrine; and how, having re- ceived records from eye-witnesses of the Word of Life, he recounted them, agreeing in every thing with the Scriptures}. These things, through the mercy of God then given me, I used eagerly to hear and write, not on paper, but in my heart; and by God’s grace I shall ever ponder them in my mind.” Such is the account which St. Irenzeus, the eloquent and learned champion of Christianity, the holy martyr of Christ, has given of his master Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, also a martyr of Christ, and scholar of the blessed Disciple whom Jesus loved. St. Polycarp, as we have said, is the latest of the Apostolic Fathers 1. His Epistle to the Philippians, of which we have spoken, was written about fifteen * Ap. Euseb. v. 20. See also Iren. iii. 3. + πάντα ξύμφωνα ταῖς γραφαῖς. { He suftered martyrdom, a.p. 147, according to the caleula- v.| OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 141 years after the death of St. John*. He connects, as it were, the Apostolic age with the one succeeding it; he introduces us to the period when the sound of the oral teaching of those who had seen the Lord became fainter and fainter, till at last it dies away. In proportion as the voice of the Apostles fails, the words of the Scriptures become more and more distinct ; they are more and more frequently quoted, as may be seen in the writings of the succeeding Fathers,—Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Irenzeus,— till at length they become all in all. Thenceforth, the Disciples of Christ fixed their eyes, and dwelt with their hearts, on the written Testament of their dear Lord and Master, as children look upon the last will of a beloved Parent; for it was the Testament of their Heavenly Inheritance, written by the Spirit of Christ, and sealed with His precious Blood. Thus, we perceive that the reception of the New Testament, by the primitive Church, as the unerring Word of God, is guaranteed by irrefragable proofs. It is evinced by Catalogues; it is proclaimed by Councils; it is shown by the fury of Persecutors, and by the fraud of Heretics; by the courage of Martyrs, tions of Bp. Pearson; others place his death later, see Jacobson, Patr. Apost. liu. ᾿ * From. cap. xii. p. 489, ed. Jacobson, it is clear that it was written before the martyrdom of St. Ignatius, 7. 6. before a.p. 116, or a.p. 107, according to some chronologers. St. John survived to the time of Trajan, (Iren. il. 1; ii. 22,) who reigned from A.D. 98 to a.p. 117, 142 WHAT IS THE FOUNDATION [ LECT. and by the zeal of the Church. It is declared by a continued succession of writers, from the age of the Apostles to our own. This reception of the New Testament by the primitive Church must, 1 think, be allowed by all candid minds, to be a very strong proof of its Inspi- ration. The Books of the New Testament contain accounts of miracles, stated to have been wrought by the Apostles, and of their speaking with new tongues, and of their predicting future events,—in a word, of their performing those very acts by which Divine Inspiration is proved. “Gop bare them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost*.” Now, the Books in which these accounts are given profess to be inspired +; and they were received as such by large congregations of persons, living at that very time, and in those very places, in which these proofs of Inspiration are affirmed in these Books to have been given. This reception, then, this public reading, this canonization of these Books, this divinization of them, is a contemporaneous and cecumenical testimony to the fact, that these proofs of inspiration were really exhibited by the authors of these Writings, and, by consequence, that their own assertion of their inspiration is true. To this testimony, therefore, of the primitive * Hebr. ii. 4. + 1 Cor..tis4, 5—18 ; vii. 40: “xiv. 86,387.07 1Dhesse 1: 5: 2 Tim. iii. 16, compared with Gal. i. 11, 12. Eph. 1]. 3. 1. Pet. 1. 12; iv. 11, 2. Pet. i102. 1.10. Revs. 6. v.] OF THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 143 Church, we appeal with confidence; for it is the testimony of Christ Himself. But we do not stop here. Having received this witness of the Church to the Inspiration and In- tegrity of the New Testament, we pass from external to internal evidence; we examine the Books them- selves ; and the more time and study we bestow upon them, the more our faith in their Inspiration grows ; the more we are convinced, by the harmony of their parts with each other and with the Old Testament, by the beauty and dignity of their composition, by the nobleness and loveliness of their morality, and by the mysterious sublimity of their doctrines, that the Scriptures are not the words of man, but of God; and that they are the full and sufficient Deposit of that Divine Revelation and Supernatural Truth to which the Church, “built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone*,” owes her existence, and on which she depends for her preservation; and, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, Who led their writers into all truth +, we are firmly settled in the belief that they are indeed the Bread of Life, and are able, by God’s mercy, “to make us wise unto salvation, through faith in Jesus Christ 1." * Eph. ii. 20. 1 Cor. πὶ. 9. 11. + John xvi.-13. Ρ - Ἢ 2 Τ πη. 15: LECTURE V1. JOHN xxl, 99; 24. * Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die, but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.” Ir was my endeavour in the last Discourse to state the grounds generally, on which the Books of the New Testament are to be received, as forming, together with those of the Old, the complete divinely-appointed Rule of Christian Faith and Practice; and I now proceed to examine those of the New Testament, 22 detaz/, and to confirm more specifically, and to develop more fully, what was then asserted with respect to them in their collective character. On the present occasion my purpose is to speak of the Historical Books—that is, of the Four Gospels, and of the Acts of the Apostles: and the question to be considered is—Why are they to be received as the Word of God ? The foundation of Christianity is laid in the belief CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF THE GOSPELS, &e. 145 that the Scriptures, as we possess them, are given by Divine inspiration ; and in order that this foundation may stand securely, it must rest on the basis of sound reason. This is the foundation which we would now endeavour, by God’s help, to establish, and build up your belief in the authority of the Gospel. This work, important at all times, is the more urgent at the present day, when all the great questions concerning the relative authority of Scripture and the Church, and their dependent controversies, are opening upon us. If we desire “to be ready to give” to ourselves and “to every man that asketh us, a reason of the hope that is in us*,”? we must diligently ex- amine the grounds upon which the Scriptures are to be believed and asserted to be God’s Word; and we must be carefully on our guard, not only against the attacks of those who would impugn this truth, but also against the dangerous teaching which places it on a false foundation. Many there are who teach—indeed all the divines of the Church of Rome who have treated on this subject agree in the doctrine—that belief in the inspiration of Scripture depends on the authority of the present Church, by which they mean their own branch of it. And they would inquire of you, my brethren,—On what principle do you receive the Gospels of St. Luke and of St Mark, who were not Apostles, and yet do not receive the Epistle of St. Barnabas, who is called an Apostle in Scripture, and ἘΠῚ Pet. mi. 15. 1410 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. is there said to have been a devout man, full of the Holy Ghost*? On what ground, again, they would ask you, do you receive the Epistle to the Hebrews, whose author is uncertain, and yet not receive the Epistle of Clement, whose name, as St. Paul says, is written in the book of life +? And they would have you reply to these questions—that you receive the one, and do not receive the other, on the testimony of the Church; by which, as 1 have said, they mean the Church of ome. This step being gained, they would then proceed to say,— You owe, then, the Scriptures to the Church; you would not possess them, if she had not given them to you; and therefore if you will not be inconsistent you must listen to all she says; you must not receive her testimony in one point, and reject it in another ; you must believe, unreservedly, whatever she delivers to you, and follow unhesitatingly wheresoever she leads you. But, my beloved brethren, we would build on a very different foundation from this. We do not hesitate to confess that we have received the Scrip- tures from God through the Ministry of the Church. But the Scriptures are not the Word of the Church, but the Word of God. They owe their authority not to her, but to Him: and He has appointed ber to guard the Scriptures which He has delivered to her, and to proclaim to us that they are from Him. Again, we do not scruple to allow that we know * Acts xi. 24. 7 Phil. iy. 8. VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 147 no higher earthly authority than the universal Church of Christ. We believe one Catholic and Apostolic Church. We believe her to be the Spouse and Body of Christ*. We know that Christ has said that “the gates of hell shall never prevail against” her, and that “fe will be ever with her, even to the end of the world 1." Nay, further, even for the present Church of Rome herself, as far as she still agrees with the universal Church of Christ,—as, for example, in retaining the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, a Three-fold Ministry, the three Creeds, the Christian Scriptures and Sacraments, though grievously marred and mu- tilated in her hands,—we entertain such feelings as are due to the truth of Curist, wherever found ; and we shall never cease to pray that her fine gold may be purged from its dross, and restored to its original brightness. Still more, decauwse we reverence the teaching of the Universal Church, that is, of the Church of all times, and especially of the Apostolic times, therefore, we cannot receive those doctrines which the Church of tome has added to the faith of the Apostles, lest we should incur the Apostolic ana- thema: “/f any man, or even an angel from heaven, preach to you any thing beside what we have preached to you, let him be accursed t.” : * Eph. v. 23—33. Rom. xii. 5. + Matt. xvi. 18; xxviii. 20. Τ Gal. i. 8,9. εἴ τις εὐαγγελίζεται παρ᾽ ὃ mapedapPere . . ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίζηται, παρ᾽ ὃ εὐηγγε- λισάμεθα. ty 2 148 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Holding firmly these principles, we believe that the external testimony on which the Scriptures are to be received, is not that of any present portion of the Church, but on that of the Universal Church; that is, on the authority of the Holy Apostles and of Jesus Christ Himself. We shall now proceed to show that the Historical Books of the New Testament are sanctioned, and delivered, and guaranteed to us as the Word of God by this testimony. And here let me first say a few words on the form in which these Books are presented to us at this day. They come before us as a part of a Volume. We see them combined, like the writings of one and the same Author, published at the same time. Perhaps some of us may not have had an opportunity of con- sidering at what periods, and under what circum- stances, these Books were published, and by what means they have been preserved to us. Perhaps even our very familiarity with them, as we com- monly see them, may have occasioned very inade- quate conceptions with respect to them. Let me, therefore, exhort you to divest yourselves of such notions as a view of these Books, presented to us merely as they exist in our own day, in out- ward form and fashion like other books, may have produced in your minds. Think not of the Gospels as parts of one printed Book, but think of them as separate compositions, written by different authors, and published at different times and in different VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 149 countries. Think of them as they were seen in the earlier ages of the Church, not as they appear now. Think of them, for example, as they were beheld in that Great Council of the Church in the fourth century, to which we owe the Creed that bears its name, the Council of Niczea*. Think, I say, of the Holy Gospels, then and there placed on a Royal Throne, venerated as a visible representation of Christ’s august presence, and the wunerring Rule of the Catholic Faith; and appealed to as a Divine Oracle by the Fathers of that Council, sum- moned from all parts of Christendom, in an age while the divine field of the Church was still, as it were, moist and sparkling with the spiritual dews which had fallen upon it in gracious abundance on the day of Pentecost. The venerable Bishops who composed that Council had just escaped from the fiery trial of persecution ; and the main endeavour of the Persecutor, who wielded the sword of the Empire of the World, had been to wrest the Gospels from their hands, and to commit the Christian Scriptures to the flames f. But these Fathers of the Church were fully per- suaded that these Books were written by the finger of God; and they were willing to seal this belief with their blood, rather than to betray them to the Destroyer 1. * A.D. 325. See above, p. 124. + See above, p. 126. t See above, p. 127. 150 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Again: in order to elevate our notions concerning the Gospel to a proper level, it is of great import- ance to examine the works of the Christian Writers of that and the preceding centuries. There we see clearly with what a reverential spirit the Church of Christ then treated them. To the minds of some in our own days, their notions may appear fanciful, and their expressions may sound hyperbolical; but the fault, be assured, is not theirs, but ours. Let us remember that their language declares the judgment of the holiest men of Christendom, who, from their circumstances, were most capable of pronouncing on this solemn subject; and that they who thus speak, proved their sincerity by their fervent zeal for the Gospel, and by their readiness to die in its behalf. If, then, we would cherish a devout spirit of vene- ration for these Divine Books, we may profitably remember, that the Christians of that period, looking at the holy source and blessed effects of the Four Gospels, spake of them as the Four spiritual Rivers of Paradise, issuing from one Divine holy fount, and watering the Garden of Eden*; irrigating, that is, the Christian world by their refreshing and fertilizing streams, and making it to blossom as the rose, and to bring forth rich fruits, and to wave with golden harvests, to be stored in the garner of heaven. * S. Cyprian, Ep. 73. See 5. Hieron. Procem. in Matth. in Appendix A. No. XIX. (2.) to this Volume. The words deserve a careful perusal. VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 151 Again: looking at the origin of the Gospels, and at the Divine attributes of Unity, Omniscience, Omnipotence, and Eternity, which God has in rich measure been pleased to bestow upon them by His Holy Spirit, the Christian Church found a prophetic picture of them in the four living Cherubim, named from heavenly knowledge, seen by Ezekiel at the river of Chebar*. Like them they are four in number; like them they are the chariot of God, ““ Who sitteth between the Cherubim 1: like them they bear Him on a winged throne into all lands: like them they move wherever the Spirit guides them: like them they are marvellously joined together, intertwined with coincidences and differences ; wing interwoven with wing, and wheel inwound with wheel: like them they are full of eyes, and sparkle with heavenly light: like them they sweep from heaven to earth, and from earth to heaven, and fly with the light- ning’s speed, and with the noise of many waters. “Their sound is gone out into all lands, and their words unto the end of the world t.” Such, my beloved brethren, were the terms in which the early Church of Christ spoke of the four Gospels ; and from them we may catch some portion of the sacred flame of love and awe which warmed her breast. Nor are these expressions without their * Ezek. i. 5—26. S. Iren. ii. 11. ὃ 8. S. Athanas. Synops. Script. p.55. S. Hieron. in Matth. Prom. Ep. 1. ad Paulinum. See the words in Appendix A. No. X. (6), and No. XIX. (A) (7). + Psalm sucix? 1; xxx. 1 5; xvi, 10. 1 Psamime 4 152 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [EEor: use, in assuring us of the important fact, that although, as we have seen, other writings were then extant, pretending to evangelical authority, yet it is clear from her language *, as now cited, that the Church of Christ rejected those writings, and recognized four Gospels, and four alone; and these four Gospels, as we shall show, are identical in name, in form, and in matter, with those received by ourselves at this day. In further evidence of their fourfold character, we may observe that one of the earlier Christian writers employed himself in making a Harmony of the Gospels, and, from the name + which he gave to his work, it is certain, that four Gospels, and four only, were then received by the Church. But I pass on to remark that, if we trace the four Evangelic streams back toward their source, we shall find that they are all derived, through Apostolic channels, from Curist HIMSELF. The author of the first Gospel, St. Matthew, was himself an Apostle {. He wrote about ten years after the Ascension, for the special use of his own countrymen, and of the Christian Church of Jerusa- lem, the mother of all Christian Churches, which was first governed by St. James, the Lord’s brother, * See also Origen ap. Euseb. vi. 25. μόνα τέσσαρα. Homil. in Luc. p. 932. Euseb. iii. 25. ἁγία rerpaxric. Appendix A. Nos: ΜΠ Tx: + Tatian, scholar of Justin Martyr. See Euseb. iv. 29, on his Diatessaron. On the Harmony of Theophilus Antiochenus, see Hieron. Algas. iv. p. 197. { Euseb. iii, 24. S. Hieron. Prooem. in 8S. Matth. VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 153 and continued to flourish during the earlier part of the second century*. The first written Gospel, then, be it remembered, was composed for the use of that very country in which our Lord’s life was passed. This is a striking proof of the confidence of the Apostles in the truth of Christianity; and the reception and public reading of St. Matthew’s Gospel, as not only true, but divine, by the Church of Jerusalem at that period, is one of the strongest human evidences that could be given of its Inspiration. St. Mark wrote his Gospel under the dictation of the Apostle St. Peter +, who calls him Azs sont in the faith : and it is observable, as in full accordance with this account of the authorship of these two Gospels respectively, that from St. Matthew’s Gospel ᾧ alone we learn that the Evangelist belonged to the despised class of Publicans, while it is not he, but another Evangelist (St. Luke ||), who tells us the honourable fact that Levi /eft all, rose up, and fol- lowed Christ. And in like manner the ¢nfirmities of St. Peter are recorded with the most circumstantial fulness in the Gospel of A/arcus his son; but we are * Till Hadrian’s time. Euseb. Dem. Evang. ii. 5. + [ren. ii. 10.6. Euseb. i. 39. Hieron. Script. Eccl. 8. Ξ Tertullian. adv. Marcion. iv. ὅ. Euthym. Zygab. i p. 15 Os Ephiphan. Heeres. li. 4. 1 1 Pet, volt § Matt. ix. 9, compared with Mark ii. 14. Luke v. 27; and Matth. x. 3, compared with Mark i. 18. Luke vi. 15. || Luke v. 28. 154 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF _ [LECT. left to gather our knowledge of his virtues and of the praises with which he was honoured by his Divine Master, from the other Gospels. St. Luke’s Gospel, as all Christian antiquity wit- nesseth *, is due to the Apostle St. Paul, who was made an able minister of the New Testament t+, by knowledge given him above measure, in visions and revelations of the Lord ΤΣ and to St. Luke’s fidelity St. Paul bears testimony, when he speaks of him as the beloved physician ), who alone ts with him ||, and probably, as the Jérother, whose praise is in the Gospel 4. St. Paul was the Apostle, St. Luke the Evangelist, of the Gentiles **. The same spirit was in them both. Hence, in St. Luke’s Gospel especially, there is a rich storehouse of comfort and hope for all who s7¢ in darkness and the shadow of death. Were the good Samaritan, Christ Himself, pours oil and wine into the wounds of the broken-hearted. Here he calls them home in the parable of the Prodigal. Here He accepts them in the Publican. Here he visits them in Zacchzeus. Here He pardons them in the penitent thief. The fourth and last Gospel, which was written at or soon after the close of the first century, is also from an Apostle—St. John. Thus all the four Gospels are - * Tren. iii. 1. Tertullian. adv. Marcion. iv. 2; iv. 5. + Ὁ Cor. {ϊ. 6: 1 2) Core sas 7. § Col. iv. 14. {| 2 τως av. 112 §] 2 Cor. viii. 18. Chrysos. Homil. in Act. 1. Hieron. Vir. Iilust. 7. Euseb. vi. 25. ** Origen. ap. Euseb. vi. 25. VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 155 due to Christ's Apostles, who received special pro- mises from Him that He “would send them the Holy Ghost to teach them all things,” to bring “all things to their remembrance, and guide them into all truth *,” and Who, “when He had ascended up on high, gave some Apostles, and some Evangelists, for the edifying of His Church+.” Thus, if we may so speak, the four Evangelic streams, when traced upward, are seen to proceed from the Apostolic wells which spring up from the one Divine Fountain of living waters, Who said, “ Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst ; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up unto everlasting life 1." But further. The last Gospel, as we have said, was written by St. John. He was the disciple “whom Jesus loved); he was the disciple who leaned on His breast at supper, when He instituted the Feast of Love, in which the Church will show forth her Lord’s death “ ti// He come||;” he was the disciple to whom Jesus said on the Cross, “ Behold thy Mother,” 32 and who thenceforth “took her to his own home 4. Nor must it be forgotten, that the other Apostles were taken away, one after the other, by violent deaths,—by the cross, by the sword, by wild beasts, and by the stake. St. John survived them all. He * John xiv. 26; xvi. 13. + Eph.iv.11. { John iv. 14. § John xi. 23. \| 1 Cor. xi. 26. 4 John xix. 27. 156 » ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF Barve was miraculously rescued from the furnace *, and at length died a natural death, at the age of above a hundred years +. The other Apostles were sent to Christ by force; St John tarried till Christ came for him, and gently took him to Himself. Theirs was the martyrdom of death, his the martyrdom of life. The beloved Disciple of the Incarnate Word was providentially preserved to a great old age, not only to refute the heretics, who denied the Lord that bought them, and to convince us of the Divinity of the Uncreated Word Who was in the beginning with God, but also to complete the witness of the Written Word, and to vindicate its Inspiration from the forgeries of false teachers, and to assure us of its fulness and divine character. In confirmation of this assertion, let us now refer to a fact, attested by ancient and unexceptionable witnesses {. Towards the close of his long life, copies of the three Gospels, of St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke, which at that time, we are informed, had been universally diffused throughout Christendom, * From the cauldron of boiling oil, under Domitian. Tertullian. Prescr. Her. 36. + Eusebii Chronicon. Hieron. Vir. Illust. IX. Comment in Matth. xx. 22; he died anno etat. 120, according to Auct. Ine. cited in next note. { Canon. Muratorianus, Appendix A. No. VI. Euseb. iii. 24. S. Hieron. in Matth. Procem. Victorin. in Apocalyps. Bibl. Patrum Max. iii, 418. Auct. Incert. apud Chrysost. Montfaucon. vili. 132. Appendix, and the next note. vi. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 157 were brought to St. John, in the city of Ephesus, of which he was the Metropolitan, by some of the Bishops of the Asiatic Churches; and in their presence St. John publicly * acknowledged these three Gospels as inspired, and, at their request, composed his own Gospel, in order. to complete the Evangelical Record of the Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ. Let it be remembered, that the three earlier Gospels were at that time received by the Church as inspired ; and if St. John had not been fully per- suaded of their Inspiration,—he, who writes to others, “ Beloved, believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they are of God +,’—would not have approved and recognized them as inspired, as he did. Nor, again, acknowledging them as divine, would he have ventured to add his own Gospel to be the consummation of theirs, unless he had been also sure that what he himself wrote was dictated by the same Divine Spirit Who had inspired the other three. It is also clear, that, by composing his own Gospel * Theodor. Mopsuest. (who flourished in the end of the fourth century,) says, (in Catena in Joann. Corderii, Mill. N. T. p. 198, ed. 1723.) ἐπήνεσεν (Ἰωάννης) τῆς ἀληθείας τοὺς γε- γραφότας, ἔφησε δὲ βραχέα παραλελεῖφθαι (τοῖς τρισὶν εὐαγγε- λισταῖς) ἐπὶ τούτοις παράκλησις ἀδελφῶν (ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ) ἐγένετο ταῦτα ἃ μάλιστα ἀναγκαῖα κρίνει πρὸς διδασκαλίαν,- παραλε- λειμμένα δὲ ὁρᾷ τοῖς λοιποῖς (εὐαγγελισταῖς) γράψαι μετὰ σπουδῆς" ὃ καὶ πεποίηκεν. + See the passages collected by Archbp. Ussher, Original of Bishops and Metropolitans, p. 63. Oxf. 1641. ἘΠῚ John iv. 1. 158 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF _ [LECT. as the complement of the three preceding ones, he has given an infallible assurance to ws, that we, who have the four Gospels, possess a complete, divinely mmspired, History of our Lord’s Ministry. Tn the closing words of the twentieth chapter of his Gospel, St. John may be regarded as setting his Apostolic Seal on the whole Evangelic Volume ; “ Many other signs truly did Sesus in the presence of [fis Disciples, which are not written in this Book ; but these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ; and that believing ye might have life through His Name *.” Thus, my bretbren, we find that the four Gospels are, if I may so speak, brought together into One. They all come to us through the hands of St. John, and are canonized by him. Thus, in a spiritual sense, is fulfilled our Lord’s prophecy to him, “ /f 7 will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee + ?” St. John ever tarries with us in the Gospel, which, as our Lord declares, must “first be published to all nations, and then shall the end come 1. Thus he tarries till Christ comes. What better human witness, let us now inquire, could we have had of the oneness, the fulness, the integrity, and the Inspiration of the Gospels, than the Beloved Disciple, who was specially qualified to understand divine things by the unsullied purity of his life, even from his youth, who leaned on our * John xx. 31. + Τρ. xxix 227 + Matt. xxiv. 14. VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 159 Lord’s breast at supper, and drank in heavenly truth from His Divine lips; and to whom Jesus Christ gave the most endearing pledge of His confidence and love, by commending to him His Mother from the Cross ? Who, again, a more faithful and competent Authority in this solemn matter, than that Apostle, whose life appears to have been prolonged by Christ beyond that of all his Apostolic brethren, for this very purpose, that he might comfort Christ’s widowed spouse, the Church; that he might take her also, if we may so speak, to his own home; and vindicate against false teachers the vine honour of her Lord ? May we not, therefore, safely say, that by the hands of St. John, Christ Himself has set His seal on the Gospels; and that in receiving them through the hands of him who leaned on our Lord’s breast at supper, we do in fact receive them from the mouth of Jesus Curist ? We turn now to the remaining historical Book of the New Testament, the Gospel of the Holy Spirit*, (as it has been called, from its describing His Descent,) the Acts of the Apostles. We shall find that zs Inspiration also 15 guaranteed to us by precisely the same authority as that of the Holy Gospels. The Acts of the Apostles, which the author, St. * S. Chrysost. in Acta Apost. 1. 5. 160 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. Luke, connects in his preface with his Gospel, of which it forms the sequel, was written, as well as his Gospel, in the company and under the direction of St. Paul *; and it may be regarded as a practical exhibition of the truth, taught by St. Luke’s Gospel, that the glad tidings of salvation were to be preached to the Gentile World. Some heretics of very early times were charged by contemporary Christian writers with rejecting the Acts of the Apostles; a charge which proves that this book was then received as Scripture by the Church+. Indeed, this fact is uncontrovertible; and, omitting other evidence of it, I pass on to state the important fact that the Book of the Acts of the Apostles was publicly acknowledged as Scripture by St. John, in the same manner as the Gospels, and in the same city, Ephesus, of which he was the Chief Spiritual Pastor. It is recorded by Tertullian and St. Jerome, that when a certain presbyter of Ephesus had published a book in St. Paul’s name, entitled the Acts of Paul, with the intention, as he alleged, of doing honour to the memory of that Apostle, St. John convicted the Author, and condemned the Book ¢. Now we know that St. Luke’s work, the Acts of * Tren. ili. 14, 15. Tertullian. adv. Marcion. iv. 2. Euseb. ii. 4, Hieron. Cat. Script. 7. + Tertullian. Preeser. Har. 22. Adv. Marcion. v. 2. { Tertullian. de Baptism. 17. Hieron. in Catal. Vir. Hlust. in Luca 7. vi. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 161 the Apostles, was then received; and 7f it had not been what it professes to be, and what it was be- lieved to be, an ispired record of the Acts of St. Paul, we may reasonably conclude that St. John would have condemned it also. His rejection of the one book of Acts was tantamount to a canoniza- tion of the other. Let us bear in mind the peculiar situation in which St. John, the Apostolic Metropolitan of Ephesus, the capital of the Asia of the New Testa- ment, in which city he died and was buried *, is thus seen to stand to the Gospels, which he there authorized in the presence of the Asiatic Bishops, and to the Acts of the Apostles, which he also sanctioned by proscribing the Apocryphal Acts of Paul, written by the Ephesian Presbyter. We shall thus see a new light thrown on the address in the Apocalypse to St. John’s own Church of Ephesus, “ Unto the angel of the Church of Ephesus write .. . 7 know thy works and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil ; and thou hast tried them, which say they are Apostles, and are not}; a passage it may be observed by the way, which confirms the belief that the Apocalypse is the work of St. John; and which is remarkably appro- priate and significant, when we remember the part which the Church of Ephesus took, in the person of St. John, in vindicating the genuine Scriptures from * S. Hieron. de Vir. Illust. 9. Evuseb. iii. 20. +: Reveis. 15.2. M 1062 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. the supposititious, and in assuring the Universal Church of their Inspiration. Considering also that the Apocalyptic address is from the mouth of Christ Himself, we may add, that it appears to contain a ratification from Him of St. John’s act in canonizing the Gospels and the Acts. Thus, my brethren, we see, that as by the hands of Moses, who was faithful in all His house *, God placed the first five books of the Old Testament in the Holy of Holies, by the 5146 1 of the Ark of the Covenant, and thus avouched them as divine, so Jesus, the Mediator of the New Testament, has committed the CHRISTIAN PENTATEUCH, as a sacred deposit, to the keeping of the Ark of His Church, by the hands of His beloved Apostle St. John. Moses died, but the Holy of Holies remained: so St. John expired, but the Church of Christ lives. The Holy of Holies, to which the Pentateuch was consigned, was a standing witness of the divine cha- racter of the Books committed to its trust. So the Church, the Christian sanctuary, not confined, like the Levitical oracle, to one place, but diffused throughout the World, is a visible and audible Wit- ness of the inspired Gospel. And therefore St. John appeals to her testimony. “ 715 is the disciple,” he says, “ which testifieth of these things ;” and the Church echoes the response, “ We know that his testimony is true 7. Such, we say, is the voice of the Church, which received and read these books as inspired * Heb. ii: 5. + See above, p. 28. t John xxi. 24. vi. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 163 writings, as soon as they were penned; and_ has guarded them entire to this day. Such is her voice to the whole World. Her voice, be it remembered, is the voice of Christ; for “ ye have an unction from the Holy One*,” writes St. John, and ye “know all things ;’ and the Church is the pillar and ground + of the truth, the mystical body of Christ {; He loves her as Himself), and has promised to be ever with her ||. Thus her witness is not her own: it is the witness of the Son of God. It does not fall within the scope of our present design, to show, how the belief produced by this outward testimony to the Inspiration of the Evan- gelical history is confirmed by the ¢néernal evidence supplied by the Gospels themselves. This cxéernal evidence is indeed most important and necessary, in order to rivet our faith; and it has been elaborately drawn out by many writers with the most profound research and with the most felicitous results. But the demonstration in which we, my brethren, are now engaged, is of a different kind, and possesses special advantages, commending itself by its compre- hensive character, and not only declaring the truth of particular passages, and the inspiration of particular portions of the Sacred Volume, but bringing whole Books together under the hand of Curist, in order to receive the superscription of His Divine signa- ture, and the authentication of His Divine seal. * 1 John ii. 20. Ἷ τ πὴ 15: { Eph. i. 23: § Eph. v. 25. 29. \| Matt. xxvii. 20. mM 2 164 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. In conclusion, let me offer two practical exhorta- tions on this momentous subject. The Books of which we have been now speaking are the words, not of man, but of God Himself. This is the assertion of the Church of England, which reads them daily, as such. And the Realm of England professes the same faith in their Inspiration, when, on the most solemn public occasions, civil and judicial, she delivers them to her Citizens, in order to bind them by the obliga- tion of an Oath, and places them in the hands of her august Sovereigns, when they are crowned and enthroned in the temple of God. This belief, as we have shown, is authorized by Christ Himself. But, my brethren, it must, alas! be owned that our practice, both public and private, is greatly at variance with this profession. Ido not say that we deny the Divine authority of the Gospel; but when we look at our present condition, domestic, social, and national, it must assuredly be confessed that we are very far indeed from /iving and acting under a sense that the Gospel is the Word of God, Too many among us, like the Heretics of old, have composed other Gospels —Apocryphal Gospels—for ourselves ; and have thus set aside the Gospel of Christ. Some have written for themselves a Gospel of Mammon; some a Gospel of Ambition; some a Gospel of godless Expediency ; some a Gospel of Intellectual Pride; some a Gospel of Fashion, or of Honour, as it is most falsely called,—Gospels no less opposed to the Gospel of VI. | THE FOUR GOSPELS AND THE ACTS. 165 Christ than those heretical Gospels of the ancient Gnostics which were condemned by the Apostle St. John. Do we suppose that these our Gospels can be otherwise than hateful to Christ? Do we remember that, /f any*, even an Angel from Heaven, preach to us any other Gospel than what the Apostles preached, he is to be anathema? Do we remember what care our Divine Lord has taken to give and to preserve to us His own Gospel? Do we recollect that the Gospel of Christ is our only safe Guide of public and private practice,—that ἐξ and it alone is the code by which we shall all be judged? He Who has given us the Gospel; He Who has inscribed His signature upon it; He Who has stamped it with His seal; He has warned us of this—“ Zhe Word which I have spoken to you, the same shall judge you at the last day +.” Let me therefore earnestly exhort you, my younger hearers, to make the Gospel of Christ your only Rule of Life. Whatever it may cost you, fling away all false Gospels. Cast them into the flames, as the Ephesians { did their magical books. Remember, Christ has said: “ Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My Words shall not pass away §.” One caution, and I have done. We possess an inestimable privilege in our ready access to the Gospel. We are familiar with it from our infancy. We have it in our Churches, our Houses, our Lecture- Rooms, our Schools,—almost everywhere. But this * Gall 1.8, 9. + John xii. 48. i Acts ax, 19. § Matt. xxiv. 25. 166 CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF THE GOSPELS, &c. great benefit may become a snare to us, if we are not on our guard. Unless we keep a watch over our- selves, our very familiarity with the Gospel may dege- nerate into irreverence, irreverence into profaneness, and profaneness into unbelief. Holy things, if not treated holily, will recoil upon us for our unholiness. They will avenge their own righteous cause, by becoming occasions and instruments of punishment. Let us therefore earnestly pray, that, in reading and hearing the Gospel, we may have grace to remember always that we are hearing the Voice of God. Then custom will only beget greater reverence. Familiarity with the Divine Word will increase our awe for it. The beloved Disciple, St. John, who was admitted into the nearest intimacy with the Incarnate Word, was chosen by Him to write concerning His Divinity. He who leaned on His breast * at supper speaks most clearly of the Godhead of Christ. So let us dwell on the written Word. So, if I may thus speak, let us lean, as it were, upon it, and imbibe heavenly wisdom from it. With St. John, let us handle and adore. Then, with the same Apostle, the more we know, the more we shall love. Then we shall be like him who says, “ That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of the Life +,” and who says also, “Ln the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with G'od, and the Worp was Gop 1." * John xiii. 23. + 1 Johni. 1. t John i. 1. LECTURE VIL. 2 Per. iu. 15, 16. ** As our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; as also in all his Epistles, speaking in them of these things ; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” In the preceding discourse, it was my purpose to show that the Inspiration of the Historical Books of the New Testament, that is of the Four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, is avouched to us by the Apostolic Churches, and by the Apostles them- selves, and especially by that Apostle, who from his circumstances was eminently qualified to bear wit- ness on this subject; I mean the beloved Disciple St. John. Our conclusion then was, that, if we bear in mind the relations of the Church, and of the Apostles, and of St. John, to Our BLessep Lorp, we cannot hesitate to acknowledge, that their testi- mony on this solemn matter, is, in fact, no other than the testimony of Jesus Curist. We now proceed to consider the remaining Books 168 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. of the New Testament; and on the present occa- sion it will be my endeavour to state the grounds on which the Epistles of the Apostle St. Paut are to be received as a part of Canonical Scripture, or of that Written Rule which has been given us by Almighty God, for our direction in those things which we must believe and do, in order to our ever- lasting salvation. Their claim to Inspiration, as we shall see, rests on the same foundation as that of the Historical Books, namely, on the authority of Curist; and we shall, I think, find on inquiry, that there exists a beautiful analogy between the nature of the means which Christ has been pleased to employ, in order to assure us of the Inspiration of the Evangelical History, and of that of the Apostolic Epistles. Let me premise that our present concern is only with those thirteen Epistles which bear St. Paut’s name; that is, with a// the Epistles commonly re- ceived as his, except that to the Hebrews, which is reserved for future consideration. By way of introduction to our argument, let me first state briefly the evidence on which we affirm that these thirteen Epistles were written by St. Paul; and that we possess them at the present day in precisely the same form and substance as that in which they first came from the hands of the Apostle. It is remarkable, that St. Luke, the author of the Acts of the Apostles, and the companion of St. Paul on his journeys, does not inform us of the num- VIL. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 169 ber and names of St. Paul’s Epistles; nay more, that he does not say a single word of his having written any Epistles at all. Zhat very fact, which, perhaps, more than any other in the great Apostle’s life has served to promote God’s glory, and the good of His Church,—I mean the writing of these Epistles, and the sending of them to seven different Churches, (and, be it observed, these Epistles to those Churches were all written and sent in the time embraced by the history of the Acts of the Apostles,) is not even alluded to in that Book. Now, if the Acts had been written under mere human direction, this omission, I think, would have been morally impossible. How then is it to be accounted for? It is due, I believe, to the fact, that St. Luke was enabled to foresee that the number and names of St. Paul’s Epistles, their authen- ticity and inspiration, of which it was essential that the Church should be assured, would be guaranteed by other means: and it deserves to be considered whether this very sz/ence of St. Luke concerning so important a matter in the life of St. Paul, does not come in as a confirmation, the more powerful because wholly unobtrusive, of the great truth, that the Apostolic Historian was guided by supernatural direction, not only in what he has sazd, but (which is an effect of Inspiration, not so often observed, but not less important,) in what he has left wnsazd. But to proceed. How then do we show that the Epistles ascribed to St. Paul were written by him? 170 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. and that they have been preserved safe and entire to this day? First, they all bear his name. “ Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ:” this, or something like it, is the style in which they commence. Again, in the beginning of some of them, the writer associates other persons with himself. “Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, to the Church of the Thessalonians *.” Thus, he cites two witnesses to their genuineness. Again, at their close, he delivers particular messages from various individuals to other parties. These persons, also, are thus brought in as witnesses. Next, he did not write his Epistles with Azs own hand. One exception alone there was to this prac- tice, the Epistle to the Galatians}; im which he expressly mentions the fact of his writing that Epistle with his own hand, in order to obviate any doubts as to the genuineness of the others of so written. But his usual habit was to employ an amanuensis. “1, Vertis, who wrote this Epistle, salute you in the Lord}.” This amanuensis also was a witness. Again, though, (as was usual for authors in those days,) St. Paul dictated his Epistles to a secretary, yet he invariably subscribed them with his own hand. “ The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every Epistle, so I write)” “ The ἘΠῚ Thess. 1. 27Rhesss as; +1 Galvi. tt; + Rom. xvi. 22. § 2 Thess. ii. 17. Colviv. 18. 1 Cor. xvi. 21. vil. | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES. 171 salutation by the hand of me Paul; remember my bonds.” “ The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand. If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.” Again, we must bear in mind that he did not send his Epistles by any pudlic channel, but by private, special, messengers. Thus Timothy and Titus were the bearers of the two Epistles to the Corin- thians. Phebe, it seems, conveyed that to the Romans ; Tychicus, that to the Colossians and Ephesians * ; Epaphroditus, that to the Philippians. These mes- sengers, whoever they were, bore testimony to the hand from which the Epistles came. Further, still, which is most important to be observed, Nine of these Thirteen Epistles are addressed, not to private individuals, but to public communities ; to seven Christian Churches, and in- deed to the Church at large. Their language is, “Paul and all the brethren which are with me unto the Churches of Galatiat.” “Paul unto the Church of God, which is at Corinth, with all the Saints that are in all Achaia,” “with all that in every place call upon the name of Sesus Christ our Lord ft.” Nor is this all. The Author commands these Churches to read his Kpistles in their public re- ligious assemblies. At the close of the very first * See Bp. Pearson in Jacobson’s Patres Apostolici, Ignat. ad Ephes. ὁ. 12. +? Galion 1572: 752) Cops te ls Comes ϑὸ 172 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Epistle which he wrote, the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, St. Paul thus solemnly speaks; “7 adjure* you by the Lord, that this Eyistle be read 3 unto all the holy brethren.” And that this order was obeyed we may reasonably conclude from the Second Epistle to the same Church, in which heft prazses the Thessalonians for their faith; which he never would have done, had they disobeyed his command to read his former Epistle. And he takes for granted, that the Second Epistle will be made known to all persons in the same manner. “ Bre- thren, stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught by word, or by our Epistle;? . . . and, “If any man obey not our word by this Epistle, note that man, and have no company with him t.” Besides, it is clear that this order thus given in the first Epistle which he wrote, and reinforced in the second to the same Church, was obeyed, as a matter of course, by all the Churches to which his Epistles were sent. This may be inferred from the fact, that to the Corinthians he says, “ We write none other things unto you than what ye read or § acknowledge || ;” and, in one of the last Epistles which he wrote, that to the Colossians, he assumes that this Epistle w2// be read by that Church; and he gives direction for its communication to another Church. “Salute the brethren which are in Lao- * ὁρκίζω. 1 Thess. v. 27. + 2 Thess. i. 3, 4. t 2 Thess. 11: 155) m./6% am.) 14: § And (cai) is in some MSS.; not or. || 2 Cor. i. 13. VIL. | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES.. 173 dicea, and when this Epistle is read among you, cause that it be also read in the Church of the Laodiceans *.” Finally, it is evident, that St. Paul’s Epistles were so received, and were read as divinely inspired Scripture, together with the Old Testament and the Gospels of the New, from the testimony of Igna- tius+ and Polycarp{, the disciples of St. John, and from Clement), the fellow-labourer of St. Paul; and, as we shall show, from his brother Apostle, St. Peter. Thus, in the peculiar circumstances of the com- position, of the transcription, and of the transmission of these Epistles, we possess a large amount of contem- porary testimony that they are the writings of St. Paul; and in the reception of them, and in the public reading of them in religious assemblies for Divine worship, by the Christian Churches, to which they were sent as soon as they were written, we have a solemn attestation from large contemporary communities of men to the same important fact. Since, also, from the day of their promulgation to the present hour, there never has been a time in * Col. iv. 16. The Epistle from Laodicea was probably the Epistle to the Ephesians, communicated to Colosse through Laodicea. See Bp. Pearson on Ignat. ad Ephes. ο. 12. + Ignat. ad Ephes. c. 12. : t Polycarp. ad Phil. c. 3. 11, 12. The Epistle to the Ephe- sians is here classed with the Psalms, as Scripture. § Clement ad Cor. i. 6. 47. The Epistle to the Corinthians is here called εὐαγγέλιον ; and it is said that verily Paul wrote it in the Spirit, ἐπ᾿ ἀληθείας πνευματικῶς, 174 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. which these Epistles, so written, and so received, and so read, have ceased to be read in the public as- semblies of Christendom, either in their original Language, or in the Translations which have been made of them into almost every tongue under heaven, therefore it may be confidently affirmed, that there are no ancient writings in existence, whose genuineness and integrity are established on stronger evidence than the Episries of Sr. Paut. Secondly: we must now inquire—what is the proof of their Lnspiration ? First, we reply, the Author claims to be inspired. In the first Epistle from his pen St. Paul thus writes: “ When ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but (as it is in truth) the word of God*.” “ He that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, Who hath also given unto us His Holy Spiritt.” “ We speak not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teachetht.” He declares to the Galatians, that he “zs an Apostle not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ) ; and that he received what he preached “ot from man, neither was he taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” He praises them for receiving him as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. ΤῸ the Thessalonians he says: “Our Gospel came not unto you in word ἘΠῚ Thess. τ Us: + 1 Thess. iv. 8. 3 1 Cor πἴ 19. § Gala. 1. 12. vil. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 175 only, but... im the Holy Ghost*.” We recounts to the Corinthians his “ Visions and Revelations of the Lord}.” He distinguishes between what he says as a man speaking from himself, and what he declares as an inspired Apostle. In the one case, he says, “ that which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord ; in the other, “not J, but the Lord.” And again: “7 think { that I have the Spirit of God §.” This, then, is clear, that the writer of these Epis- tles lays claim to Inspiration. But—Yes, it may be replied, and so have many persons who have been deluded by vain imagina- tions. Every enthusiast who has deceived himself or others has boasted of supernatural revelations. But what is the proof that, in the case of the Writer of these Epistles, the assertion is ¢rue ? First, then, let us look at the person who wrote them. He was the object of bitter antipathy to the Jews, who stigmatized him as an apostate; and for some time after his conversion he was regarded with jealous suspicions by the Christians, whom he had persecuted with furious zeal. No one had more powerful prejudices to encounter on all sides than St. Paul. No one’s claims, even to honesty and sincerity, much more to supernatural gifts, were sure, on all accounts, and in all places, to be more strictly scrutinized and sifted than his. ἘΠῚ πεῖ τ Ὁ. + 2 Cor. xii. 1. t δοκῶ. 1 trow. § 1 Cor. vii. 6. 10. 12. 40. 176 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Consider, next, the places he selected, to address to them his Epistles. Cast your eyes upon the habitable globe, as it existed in the age of St. Paul. He did nof choose his own native Tarsus; he did not select obscure villages and illiterate munici- palities. No; St. Paul indited his Epistles to the most illustrious Cities of the world. Sea-ports crowded with ships, Marts thronged with merchants, Schools echoing with Eloquence, Citadels crowned with Temples,—Streets and Squares adorned with Museums, Baths, and Theatres, all that could minis- ter to the physical enjoyment and intellectual pride of man,—these, my brethren, were the characteristics of those Cities which St. Paul chose to address. IIe encountered heathenism there. There he planted the Cross. Behold the first city which he accosted—Thes- salonica. Seated on a noble bay, plying a rich trade with the East and West by sea, and placed on the great High-road from Italy to Asia, and from the North of Greece to the South, it collected within its walls a vast and active population of heathens and of Jews, Paul’s inveterate foes. Here was that Apostle’s first Auditory. To them he writes with the authority of a man speaking from Heaven. What confidence in himself and in his cause does this selection prove! Whom did he next address? Corinth. The Seat of the Proconsular Government of Achaia; the centre of the commerce and literature, and of the luxury Vit. | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES. 177 and vice of Greece. Here he had many enemies, even among professing Christians. Some were of Cephas ; others, of A pollos* ; many had been beguiled by the heretical wiles of a false Teacher, who denied St. Paul’s authority, and earned a wretched popu- larity by preaching a hollow religion, with no solid morality or fixed articles of faith. Many, also, there were, whose fastidious ears had been charmed by the soft and melodious accents of practised rhetori- cians; and whose tastes were too effeminate to relish the stern and healthy eloquence of the bold, free- spoken Apostle. Yet St. Paul was not daunted. The Divine Spirit moved within him. He felt it there. He would not, therefore, stoop to gain favour by flattery. He calls the wise Corinthians babes; he tells them that they have need of milk, and cannot bear strong food f. He rebukes some of them sharply for disbelieving the Resurrection of the body 7. He orders them to excommunicate the incestuous member of their Church ᾧ. He reproves even the spiritual among them, for an ostentatious display of spiritual gifts |]. He censures others for irreverence at public worship, and at the celebration of the Lord’s Supper J. He shows, in a word, that God has “not given him the spirit of fear, but of power, and of a sound mind **,” ἘΠῚ Cora te 19: + Ibid. ii. 1, 2. Ἢ ΠΡ αν 19. § Ibid. v. 19. \| Ibid. xiv. 12. {| Ibid: xi; 17. ee) OVE imi 2.72 N 178 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. He next writes to Galatia, the stronghold of Juda- ism. He will not bribe them by praise. Rather, “O foolish Galatians,” he exclaims, “who hath be- witched you, that ye should not obey the truth? How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage * ?” From Corinth he sends a letter to the great Capital of the World—Rome. He had not yet visited it; yet he assumes that his name is well known to the Church there. He speaks to it “ith all authority.” He promises to “dmpart to tt spiritual gifts.” “I am debtor both to the Greeks and to the Barbarians, both to the Wise and to the Unwise: so, as much as in me is, 1 am ready to preach the Gospel to you that are at Rome also +.” What a powerful conviction does he show of the truth of his own mission, in that he,a Jew of Tarsus, ventures to write in such terms as these to the impe- rial City, whose armies were marching in every land, and whose fleets were floating on every sea, and who dictated laws to the world. To Rome he went, having appealed to Czesar; and from his lowly dwell- ing there, Paul, “the prisoner of the Lord t,” wrote to Philippi, a Roman Colony in Macedonia. He addressed that Church in terms of approval, such as he had not extended to more splendid cities. He wrote also to Colosse, a magnificent town of Phrygia, * Gal: ancili> ἵν 9. Ἵ Rom. 1. 00, 12. 56] { Eph. iii. 1; iv. 1. Philem. 9. VI. | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES. 179 and condemned the vain Philosophy * of some who were eminent there. He wrote, also, to Ephesus, the flourishing emporium of Ioniat; the resort of the votaries of the “great goddess Diana, whom Asia and the world worshipped.” Such, my beloved brethren, were the Cities which St. Paul chose to address in the Epistles, written by him at intervals during a period of about ten years; beginning in the fifteenth year after his conversion, and ending in the fifth before his martyrdom 1. We pause here to observe, as a most remarkable fact, that, as we have now seen, the Apostle St. Paul, who was the special object of prejudice in various quarters, who was pursued with unrelenting hatred by the Jews, and who had many difficulties to en- counter, even among Christians; who was forsaken by Demas) and by others; who had no one like-minded || ; who on one occasion was /eft alone 4 with St. Luke, and on another of great trial had no one to stand by him ** ; whose claims, therefore, to Inspiration had no human power to back them, did address letters to the Christians in the greatest cities of the world, in which he had numerous adversaries; and that in these letters he often speaks in terms of severe censure of those whom he addressed, and that he orders them to read these his letters publicly; and that in these * Col. ii. 8. + sActsixix. 27. 9.5.5 ἡ: { Bp. Pearson, Annales Paulini, 11. 12—20. ὃ ΠΣ ἵν. 60: || Phil. τ 20. q 2: Dim ivat i > im. ive 10.11.10; 180 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. letters he lays claim to /nuspiration, and commands them to be read in their religious assemblies, as sacred Books, precisely in the same manner as the Books of Moses and the Prophets were read in the Synagogues; and that this command is obeyed, with- out any exception. This is a most striking fact. The question now arises, How came it to pass that this order was invariably executed? There can be but one reply. They, to whom the letters were sent, were convinced of their INsprraTION. Otherwise they would have rejected them. And by what means were they so convinced ? There was but one way—by Visible Proofs. They could never have been persuaded, except by mira- cles wrought by the Writer in their presence, or in that of credible witnesses. True, indeed, if St. Paul had wrought miracles, and if his doctrine had not been in accordance with God’s Law, natural and revealed, then, we allow that no amount of miracles would have been of any value towards establishing his claim to Inspiration *. But, since the teaching of St. Paul zs in perfect accordance with Divine Truth as impressed on the face of Creation, and as declared by Moses and by Christ, then Miracles, if really wrought by St. Paul, were attestations from Heaven itself that what St. Paul said was true, and that therefore his claim to be inspired is authorized by ALMicuty Gop. * Deut. xii. 1—5. Vit | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 181 Did, then, Paul really give these proofs of Inspira- tion ? His companion, St. Luke, replies to this question : “ Gop wrought special miracles at Ephesus by the hand of Paul, so that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them*.” Again: “Long time abode he in Iconium, speaking boldly in the Lord, WHO gave testimony to the word of His grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by his hands +.” These, be it observed, are assertions that miracles were wrought by St. Paul in populous cities ; and the Acts of the Apostles, the Book in which these assertions were made, was publicly read as the Word of God in the Church, yes, doubt- less, was read in those very cities where it affirms the miracles to have been wrought. Thus these Cities are witnesses to the truth of those Miracles: therefore, these Miracles were wrought, and St. Paul’s Inspiration is proved. Turn also to the Epistles themselves. In them St. Paul frequently appeals to miracles, which he asserts that he wrought in the presence of those very persons and societies to whom these Epistles are addressed, and by whom they were to be openly read. “Truly,” says he to the Corinthians 1; “the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all * Acts xixs 11:19. + Ibid. xiv. 3. i 2 Gor. xi. 12. See 1 Cor τς. 9: 9. Cor. iva; (vi. ἜΣ Compare Hebr. 11. 4. 182 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.” He refers the Romans to the witness of all Europe. “TL will not dare to speak of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power and Spirit of God ; so that from Seru- salem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ *.” Now, be it remembered, these asseverations are made in Epistles addressed by St. Paul to large communities, in cities where he had many adver- saries. These affirmations too concern things which are averred by him to have been done in their presence, or in that of other trustworthy persons. And on the strength of these acts, the Author of these writings claims to be acknowledged as inspired by God Himself, and commands his Epistles, (in which this claim to Inspiration is made,) to be read as the Word of God. And these Epistles, containing this claim, are read, in all cases without exception, by these communities. Thus, these communities be- came witnesses to the truth of his assertions; and this reading of them is a public, practical, contempo- rary proof that these miraculous acts were really wrought, and that, therefore, St. Paul’s claim to Inspiration is avouched by Almighty God. Thus, we see, my brethren, that the greatest Cities of the World then in existence, bear testi- * Rom. xv. 18, 19. VIL. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 189 mony to St. Paul’s divine mission. From Thessa- lonica to Corinth, from the shores of the EKuxine to those of the Adriatic, from the banks of the Ilissus to those of the Tiber, his claims, as soon as made, were echoed by a responsive voice of harmonious assent, which has never died away from that hour to this, but has gone on widening itself to the furthest regions of the globe. Again, these communities had a peculiar cha- racter. They were Churches, and, as such, they possessed special graces and special authority. The early Churches had the power of discerning spirits *, as we know from St. Paul; they are commanded to try the spiritst by St. John; therefore they had supernatural helps for pronouncing a true judgment on inspired writings. And when, as is the case with respect to the inspiration of St. Paul’s Kpistles, the suffrages of all the Churches, which compose the Universal Church, agree with one voice, and have agreed for eighteen centuries, their witness cannot be false. If it were, then Christ’s promise to be alway with His Church {, and to send His Spirit to teach her all things, and to quide her into all truth §, would have failed of its effect. No. We do not hesitate to affirm, that the testimony of all Chris- tendom for eighteen hundred years is no other than the verdict of Curist. So far, then, we perceive that the Inspiration of **1 Cor! xi. 10. + 1 John iv. 1. { Matt. xxvii. 20. § John xiv. 26. 184 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Sr. Paut’s Epistles rests on the same ground as that of the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. But we may trace the analogy further. The Inspiration of the Gospels and the Acts is, as was shown in the last discourse, specially authen- ticated by Curist through the beloved disciple Sr. JoHN. That of the Epistles of St. Paul, as we shall now briefly show, is attested by Curist through Sr. PETER. In the passage which I have chosen for my text, St. Peter calls all Paul’s Epistles by the name Scrip- ture. St. Peter, I say, so calls them; for, whatever may be alleged concerning the canonical authority of the Epistle from which the text is taken, it was doubtless written by St. Peter. St. Jude, in his Epistle, exhorts his hearers to remember the words spoken before by the Apostles, “that there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own lusts*.” The sentence here quoted by St. Jude is found in this Second Epistle +. This Epistle, therefore, according to St. Jude, was written by an Apostle. Besides, its writer calls him- self an Apostle, and identifies himself with St. Péter. “Simon Peter, a servant and an Apostle of Jesus Christ}.” These are its first words. Its Author, also, refers to a former Epistle written by himself to the same parties); and we possess such an Epistle written by St. Peter. * Jude 18. 7 2 Pet. m1. 9. { Ibid. 1.1. § 2 Pet. iii. 1. vil. | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES. 185 Lastly, the writer describes himself as having been a witness of the Transfiguration of Christ on the Holy Mount*, at which none of the Apostles were present but James, and John, and Peter. The Writer, then, of this Epistle being the A pos- tle St. Peter, let us observe, that he wrote it in anticipation of his own immediate death. “7 think it meet t,” says he, “as long as Tam in this tabernacle to stir you up by putting you in remembrance, know- ing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ showed met. Moreover, I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance.” Now St. Peter suffered martyrdom by crucifixion, according to our Lord’s prophecy §, recorded in the last chapter of St. John’s Gospel; and this event took place at Rome, in the year of our Lord LX VIIL., the same year as that in which St. Paul was be- headed as a Martyr, in the same city |]. Therefore, when St. Peter wrote his Second Epistle, all St. Paul’s Epistles, at least all those addressed to Christian Churches, had been written ; and, therefore, all these Epistles of Paul are called Scripture by St. Peter. Now, the word here translated Scripture 4, which properly means simply a Writing, occurs fifty times ἈΠΟ Pet. 1.18: + Ibid. i. 13. t ἐδήλωσε. 2 Pet. 1. 14. Compare John xxi. 18. § John xxi. 18. || See Bp. Pearson, Annales Paulini, p. 25. 4 Γραφή. 186 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. in the New Testament; and in all these fifty places, it is applied to the writings of the OLp and New TESTAMENT, and to no other*. Therefore, St. Peter by calling St. Paul’s Epistles Serzpiwre, places them on the same level with the books of Moses and the Prophets, that is, with those books which had been received and quoted by Curisr Himself as the Word of God. Thus, we find, that St. Paul’s Epistles are canon- ized by Christ, through St. Peter. Let us observe, that, humanly speaking, no better witness could have been employed for this purpose, than St. Peter. First, his impartiality in this matter is unques- tionable. Some persons had endeavoured to set him up as a rival to St. Paul. “7 am of Cephas +,” were the words of a powerful party. Many looked upon Peter, and John, and James, as the three main pillars of the Church {. St. Peter’s sympathies were with the Jews, to whom he had a special mission, and among them were St. Paul’s bitterest foes. On one occasion, St. Peter, through mistaken partiality for them, was betrayed into a weak concession at Antioch; through fear of alienating them, he ab- stained from eating with the Gentiles ᾧ. * This is a remarkable fact, and this exclusive reservation of the word γραφή shows the design of the Holy Spirit to put the New Testament on a par with the Old, and to distinguish them both from all other writings whatsoever. Teel Coren, 19: ThGalaiad: § Ibid. 11. 11—16. VI. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 187 Bearing all these things in mind, let us remember that St. Paul, in one of his Epistles, calls him- self “not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles * ;” that in another, he says, that he “laboured more abun- dantly than they all+ : that in another, he declares that he has the care of all the Churches +, and says, “So ordain I in all the Churches § ;? and in another, that to the Galatians, he recounts the circumstances of St. Peter's infirmity and compromise at Antioch, to which 1 have just referred. In admiring, therefore, St. Peter’s frank gene- rosity and beautiful disinterestedness in referring to the Epistles of hes beloved brother Paul, in which all these things are contained, we must also affirm that those Epistles could not have had a better, because a more impartial, witness than St. Peter. One word here on another important subject. How could St. Paul have dared to use such expres- sions as these concerning himself in his Epistles, 7f St. Peter had been Supreme Visible Head of the Church? and if such had been the case, How could St. Peter himself have received these Kpistles as Scripture ? Let our Romanist brethren consider these two questions. ι But to return. St. Peter was more than an ordi- nary man: he was an inspired Apostle. He was a * 9 Cor, xi. 5G xu, UP: + 1 Cor: xve 10: 1 Thids xi 28: § Ibid. vii. 17. 188 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. highly favoured Disciple of Christ. He had re- ceived the spiritual Keys from Christ. Christ taught from his ship. He converted three thousand souls at once. He gathered the first fruits of the Gentiles into the Church. When he wrote his Second Epistle, from which our text is taken, he was old, and he knew that the time was at hand when he must obey Christ’s words to him, “ /ollow thou Me*.” He was now preparing to follow Christ, to stretch forth his hands, and to be girded to the Cross. What a solemn tone of seriousness, therefore, is there in this his testimony, his farewell testimony, concerning the Epistles of St. Paul! Surely the Holy Spirit was then with him. Surely his dear Lord and Master was with the aged Apostle, St. Peter, when he thus wrote: and in the words of the dying Martyr, acknowledging and commending St. Paul’s Epistles as Scripture, we have, we may venture to say, the declaration of Christ Himself. It deserves carefully to be remarked, that the great Apostle St. Paul, of whose Epistles we have been now speaking, and who was St. Peter’s companion in dying for Christ, when, like him, he takes leave of the Church, aims also, like Peter, to rivet her atten- tion, and fix her whole mind upon Seripture. In his second Epistle to Timothy,—the last which he wrote,—St. Paul says, “JZ am now ready to be * John xxi. 22. VIL. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 189 offered, and the time of my departure is at hand; I have fought a good fight, I have kept the faith ; hence- forth is laid up for me a crown of righteousness *.” And that no one might ever doubt ow this crown is to be won, he says to his beloved son in the faith, “Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned, and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them, and that from a child thou hast known the Hoty Scriptures, which are able+ to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” “ All Scripture, he adds, (that is, all writing called Seripture, and therefore the Apostle’s own Kpistles, called Scripture by St. Peter,)—“ All Scrip- ture is given by Inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works ἡ. Such were among the last words of St. Paul. To sum up what has been now said. In the last discourse it was shown, that it was reserved for the old age of Sr. Joun to bear testimony to the Inspi- ration of the Gospels, and of the Acts of the Apostles. We have now endeavoured to show that it was reserved for the old age of Sr. Perer to attest that the Epistles of St. Paul are the Word of God. Among the twelve chosen Apostles, St. John was Por Tim: iv. ὃς + TA δυνάμενα. ‘THE writings which are able,” as contrasted with all other writings. ἜΠΟΣ Tim, iv. 17: 190 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. specially deloved of Christ, and St. Peter was eminent for his love to Christ,—“ Lord, Thou knowest all things, Thou knowest that I love Thee*” St.John and St. Peter were joined together by love to their Lord, and to one another. They were attendant on Him in His most private retirements; on the mountain of Transfiguration, and in the garden of Gethsemane. Together they prepared the room for the Institution of the Lord’s Supper; together they visited the tomb of the risen Saviour; together they went up to the Temple to pray ; and together they healed the cripple at the Beautiful gate of the Temple; together they were sent by the Apostles to Samaria, to administer the rite of Confirmation; and now, having been lovely and pleasant in their lives, in their death they are not divided +. Peter and John, the loving and loved Apostles, are chosen by Curisr Himself to be witnesses for ever to His Church of the Inspiration of His Written Word. Let me now offer two practical observations. From what has been said now and in the last discourse, we see clearly that no one who loves the truth, and is duly sensible of what Christ has done for us to assure us of the Inspiration of Scripture, can venture to assert,—as has, alas! been asserted by some in our own day,—that the Canon of the New Testament was not settled till the fourth century, and * John xxi. 15. + 2 Sam. i. 28. VIL. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 191 that, if we will believe the New Testament to be inspired, we must receive many strange doctrines which the Church never heard of in the times of the Apostles ! The fact is, my Brethren, as we have seen, the Canon of the Gospels and of the Acts of the Apostles and of St. Paul’s Epistles was settled as soon as they were written; and it was fixed, through the agency of the Apostles, by Curist Himself. So far, then, all the arguments drawn from the alleged lateness of the Canon, in order to impugn the sufficiency of Scripture as the Rule of Faith, fall at once to the ground. Lastly, by means of the three Apostles, St. John, St. Peter, and St. Paul, we, who live now, have received from Christ Himself a divine witness to the sufficiency of Holy Scripture as our Rule of Faith. Christ, dyzng on the cross, gave a special token of love to St. John, “ Behold thy Mother.” Christ, risen from the dead, gave a special charge to St. Peter, “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me?” “ Feed My sheep.” Christ, ascended into Heaven, gave a special commission to St. Paul, “ / have appeared unto thee to make thee a Witness and a Minister, both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee, delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles, unto whom now 7 send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that 192 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified through faith which is in Me*.” These three great Apostles, thus beloved, charged, and sent by Christ, spent many years in faithfully preaching the Gospel ; and when they were about to quit the world, and to go to Christ, they all left one and the same parting admonition to the Church. And what was that ? St. John, at the close of his Gospel {, St. Peter and St. Paul, in the last Epistles which they wrote, when they were “ready to be offered up, and the time of their departure” was at hand, all agree in referring the Church to ScriprureE. This, they tell us, is the sacred deposit, in which their teaching is stored; this, when they were about to leave the world, they bequeathed to it as a perfect Rule of Faith, and an unerring Guide to Heaven. Thanks be to Christ, this Rule, this Guide, we have. Therefore, in their farewell words to the Church, we hear Him. In those of St. John, we hear Jesus Christ speaking to us from the Cross; in those of St. Peter, Jesus Christ risen from the dead; and, finally, in those of St. Paul, Jesus Christ ascended into Heaven. * Acts xxvi. 16—18. + John xx ΟἹ. vit. | | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES. 193 PRELIMINARY NOTE TO THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPHS. To account for the following paragraphs, it may be premised, that, after the foregoing Lecture had been prepared, the Author was apprized by Authority that he would be expected to advert to the special Service of Prayer and ‘Thanksgiving appointed for the Sunday (Oct. 17, 1847), on which this Sermon was to be preached at St. Mary’s, when a collection would be made in aid of the distressed In1sH. What follows was, therefore, added at the close of the above Discourse :— In conclusion, let us observe that in the religious service, appointed by authority on this Day, of “PRraYER and THANKSGIVING to ALMIGHTY Gop for the late Abundant Harvest,” we see a practical re- cognition of the truths of Christianity as preached by St. Paul. “Jn every thing give thanks*,” is his Di- vine lesson. By his mouth, Christ has taught us to in- terpret aright the language of the natural world; and to read, as it were, a Gospel from heaven in the rich harvests of a Year crowned with blessings. By him Christ has led us to acknowledge, that it is no other than the Divine Author of all spzrztual grace, Who also does good to our bodies, and “ gives us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness +.” Thus, by St. Paul’s teaching, Christ has invested all our secular blessings with a holy dignity, and engages us to recognize in them not only temporal bounties, but earnests and pledges of benefits to our sowls from the same heavenly source; and He * 1 Thess. v. 18. + Acts xiv. 17. 0 194 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. thus renders us more and more thankful for them, and inspires us with a reasonable hope, that, if we use them aright, they will be the means to us of everlasting joy. How, then, are they to be used? Christ has also taught us this by the same divine Apostle: “ We being many are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another *:” and “if one member rejoice, the other members rejoice with it; and if one member suffer, the others suffer with 11. By reason of our baptismal incorporation in Christ, we are bound to use our abundance to supply the need of our fellow members, that “there may be an equality ; as it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over, and he that had gathered little had no lack +.” Hence, therefore, it follows, that so far from there being any impropriety in blending together the exercise of the two duties of Thanksgiving and Almsgiving, —the former necessarily produces the latter, and cannot be said to be sincere without it. Nor can it be justly alleged, on the present occa- sion, that while by our Thanksgiving we acknowledge that our chastisement is withdrawn, it is implied, bythe call made upon us for Almsgiving, that it still exists. No: we are giving thanks to God, first, for our abundant Harvest; and secondly, because, when the destroying Angel of Famine and Pestilence appeared as it were to be standing, with his hand outstretched * Rom. xii. 5. Eph. iv. 25. + 1 Cor. xi, 26: + 2 Cor. viii. 14, 15. VII. | ST. PAUL’S EPISTLES. 195 and his sword drawn, over owr own Jerusalem, God mercifully interfered, and said: “Jt 7s enough ; stay now thine hand*.” It is for these mercies, my bre- thren, that we now, according to the Apostle’s direc- tion, lift up our voices “in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in our hearts to the Lord +.” For these blessings we are bound to thank God. But we are not implying, by this eucharistic service, that the miseries of our fellow-subjects and fellow- Christians in the sister-kingdom of Ireland have ceased. No; this, unhappily, is not the fact; they have not ceased. The facts of the case are best known to our Civil Rulers, who have ordered the present appeal to be made, as by virtue of their authority they have a right to do, and as in their compassion they have been moved to do; and by this public order they declare to us that the misery still exists. And further, we may rest assured, in this as in other similar matters, that we shall obtain a bless- ing for ourselves, by cheerful obedience to a lawful command. For such obedience is a very large part of charity; and charity is the bond of perfectness 1. You will not, therefore, expect that I should here discuss the objections of those, who, allowing the general truth of what has been now deduced from the teaching of St. Paul, would remind us that the same Apostle, while he lays down rules for charity, has also said, that “7f any would not work * 2 Sam. xxiv. 16. + Eph. v. 19. + Col. iii. 14. ο 2 196 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. neither should he eat* ; and that he exhorteth all “that with quietness they work and eat their own bread + :” and who would then proceed to allege, that the national bounty expended in Ireland has been in too many cases received, not, as it was designed to be, as an encouragement to industry, but has been perverted, in many instances, into a plea for sloth, improvidence, and recklessness ; and that there is no precept in the Bible which enjoins any one to squander his substance, where there is great proba- bility that it may be so abused, and where it may even minister occasion for abuse. These are, I allow, important considerations; but they mainly concern not so much ws as our Rulers : it is their province to deliberate upon them; and to their wisdom they must be left. But for ourselves, as subjects, citizens, and Chris- tians, it is a very safe rule, not to be too ingenious in devising excuses for not giving, when we are lawfully called upon to give. And it is our duty to examine ourselves honestly, whether, if we did not give to the special object now prescribed by Au- thority, we should have shown our gratitude by giving to any other suggested by ourselves. We ought also to remember, above all things, that true Charity and Loyalty are not so prone to raise doubts and to ask questions, as readily to distribute and cheerfully to obey. * 2 Thess, ii. 10. 7 Ibid. ii. 12. vit. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 197 There is one motive for Thankfulness on the pre- sent occasion which, especially in this place, and in the presence of this congregation, it would seem almost culpable to omit. When we look at the Dearth and Pestilence which have desolated the Kingdom of Ireland, and still afflict certain parts of it, we cannot, I think, fail to make one reflection, which ought to make us wiser for the future, and more grateful for a great National Blessing which, thanks be to God ! is still preserved to that unhappy country and to the United Kingdom. What, my brethren, I ask, would have become of that country in its recent affliction of Plague and Famine, if it had not been for the Bishops and Parochial Clergy of its Established Church? What would the Voluntary System, as it is called, with its loose and incoherent agency, have been able to effect in such circumstances as these? And what in such emergencies would any Clergy at all be able to per- form, except one trained in Scriptural truth, and endued with affections exercised by the endearing influence of social and domestic relations * ? * “ Who (said the present Archbishop of Dublin in the House of Lords) had administered to the wants of Ireland in the present famine? He said it without fear of contradiction,— The Clergy of the Established Church. And they would suffer the most under the new Poor Law ; and this, too, after that, by the recent Tithe Commutation Act, twenty-five per cent. of their incomes had been taken away from them, and given to the landlords.” 198 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. And yet, alas! it is but too true, that England, as if she were desirous of destroying the sacred tie which binds Ireland to her,—has now for many years, must we not confess it with tears, been acting, as it were, almost systematically on the policy of crippling the energies of the Church of Ireland! Many of the ancient Sees of Ireland have been suppressed : her Clergy have been impoverished: the union of vast parishes has been necessitated by the abolition of the tithe of agistment *. Thus, thousands and tens of thousands in Ireland have been cut off from the ministrations of pure religion. Her schools have not been encouraged ; but places of instruction have been set up, either without religion, or with a neutral religion, which is little better than no religion, or, must we not add, witha corrupt religion. We have then sent forth, alas! and counted how few the members of the Church of Ireland are! And instead of cherishing those few, even because they are few— (and must we not say that it is mainly owr fault that they are few?)—and instead of making them more, by augmenting the efficiency of the Church, we have done our best to render them fewer, by reducing the Church to their level, as if its final extinction were * See Primate Boulter’s Letters (Aug. 9, 1787), vol. ii. p. 182. By the alienation of this tithe, “a great part of the Churches are neglected ; in many cases, five, six, or seven Pa- rishes are bestowed on one Incumbent, who, perhaps, with all scarce gets a hundred pounds a year.” ‘The tithe of agistment was finally sequestrated in 1800. VII. | ST. PAUL'S EPISTLES. 199 to be the aim of our desires, and the consummation of our labours! And yet, gracious Heavens! we seem not yet satisfied with the work of infatuated sacrilege against God and man, which we have already perform- ed; and some have even been found among us, who are not ashamed to harbour desires, and to broach designs, of further spoliation ! But, my beloved brethren, the Church of Ireland, —the Evangelical, Apostolical, Catholic, Church of Ireland—is, by God’s goodness to us, most undeserv- ing and unthankful as we are, still preserved, to be the School, the Asylum, and the Hospital (as has been lately proved), and, I might add, to be the pacific and loyal Garrison, of that Country. And if England has learnt, as she surely must have learnt from the experience of the three last years, that this is really the case, then she will have also learnt that true Justice to Ireland cannot be done without main- taining, extending, and reinvigorating her Church. Thus, and not otherwise, may we look for a respite from the bloodshed which now defiles the land, and calls with a trumpet’s tongue to God for vengeance upon us. ‘Thus we may hope to stem the swelling tide of Democracy, Superstition, and Infi- delity, which now threatens to break like a deluge upon us. If we have learnt this lesson from our late judgments, God, indeed, be thanked ! but if not, we may have to deplore, before long, a still heavier Visitation. LECTURE VIII. 2 Per: 111: 15. 16: “ Even as our beloved brother Paul according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things ; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” In the Discourse of last Sunday, upon these words of St. Peter, it was my endeavour to state the grounds upon which the Thirteen Epistles, which exhibit the name of St. Paul at their commence- ment, are to be received as the Word of God; and the Epistle to the Hebrews, which does not bear his name in any part of it, was then reserved for future consideration. I would now request your attention to that Epistle ; and I propose to examine, in this and the fol- lowing discourse, how its claims to Inspiration are established. } This is a very important subject. The contents of this Epistle are of a most solemn character. The THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 201 Eternal Existence and Divine Nature of our Blessed Lord; His operations in creating and governing all things; His Humanity; His Priestly Office; the Plenitude of the Atonement made by Him upon the Cross; His heavenly Intercession for us; the true nature of the Mosaic Law; its harmony with the Gospel, to which it was subservient and introductory, and in which it was fulfilled and abrogated; the yearning of the Patriarchs for Christ; the finality of the Gospel, which He preached; the sin of despising it; the heinousness of falling from the faith and of wavering in it; the certainty of Judgment, of Heaven and of Hell; these are the sublime and momentous topics of this glorious Epistle. Again; the occasion on which it was written gives greater solemnity to it. It was addressed primarily to Hebrew Christians at Jerusalem *, and in the Kast; and secondarily, to all converted and unconverted Jews; and finally, to all Christians and to all men of all ages in the world. It appears, that some to whom it was first directed had been induced by Jewish teachers, or by fear of persecution, or by the frustration οἵ ἃ mistaken hope of soon seeing Christ’s second Coming, to forsake public worship, as if Christ would never come atall; others had sunk into apathy ; others had given themselves up to worldly cares and sinful lusts; others had * See S. Chrysostom’s Introduction to this Epistle, iv. p. 428. ed. Savil. 202 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF ([LECT. denied their baptism, had apostatized from Christi- anity, and fallen back into Judaism. Their cireum- stances, therefore, were such as to eall for a clear announcement of the terrors of the Gospel. They were to learn from the fearful judgments which fell upon the Israelites in the Wilderness for despising Moses, that, much more, no one can escape who rejects Curist; and that though He is infinite in mercy to those who fear Him, yet, to all who receive not His Word, and obey not His precepts, “ Our God 7s @ consuming fire *.” Let it also be observed, that, from the peculiar nature of its contents, we may justly regard the Epistle to the Hebrews as one of the most suitable means under God for bringing about the great work which sti// remains to be performed by the Church of Christ,—the Conversion of the Jews. We are now led to inquire,—Is this Epistle inspired ? To this question we reply, first, that the Church of which we are members, following the judgment of the Church Universal, ascribes it to the Apostle St. Paul +, and although, if it be proved not to be * Heb. xii. 29. + The Church of England, in her Authorized Version, entitles it ‘The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews ;” and in her Book of Common Prayer, in the ‘‘ Order for the Visitation of the Sick,” she says, “St. Paul saith in the twelfth chapter to ’ the Hebrews,”’ and in her ‘ Form of Solemnization of Matri- mony,” it is said “ Marriage is commended of St. Paul to be honourable of all men;” 7. e. in Hebrews xiii. 4. VIII. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 203 his, its claims to Inspiration would not therefore be annulled: yet, if it de the work of that Apostle, then the arguments employed in our last Discourse, with respect to the Thirteen Epistles which bear his name, must be applied to thzs Epistle also; and St. Peter, in acknowledging a// St. Paul’s Epistles to be Scripture, as he does in the words of the Text, will have avouched its Inspiration by his Apostolic authority. Is, then, this Epistle St. Paul's ? Some persons, as you are aware, and 1 believe we must say a majority of Biblical Critics in Germany at this day, answer the question in the negative *. St. Paul, they observe, was the Apostle of the Gentiles. He calls himself by that title. Could he, then, write to the Hebrews? Since, also, St. Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision, as St. Paul himself acknowledges 7, would not St. Paul, by writing to the Hebrews, have invaded St. Peter's office? And does not St. Paul, as well as St. Peter, condemn those who are busy bodies and intrude where they ought not{? Would he not thus have done what is censured not only by St. Peter but by himself? . Besides. Look, they say, at the Epistle itself. St. Paul’s Thirteen Epistles bear his name at their commencement; but this to the Hebrews is anony- * See Credner, Einleitung in N. T. § 108—208. + Gal. un. 8. + 2 Thess. iii, 11. 1 Pet. iv. 15, ἀλλοτριοεπίσκοποι. 204 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. mous. Would St. Paul, they inquire, have omztted here, what he took care to insert there? Why this inconsistency ; especially when so important a point as the authorship of the Epistle was concerned ? Further, the tone and style of the Epistle, it is alleged, are not St. Paul’s. In his genuine Epistles he speaks with authority, and rebukes with stern- ness, But, here, for the most part, the language is mild and subdued. Again, in his undisputed Epis- tles, he writes with impassioned fervour and ener- getic vigour, and his style is vehement and abrupt. As he himself says, he came “not with excellency of speech *, not with enticing words of men’s wisdom,” and he says, he “7s rude in speech, yet not in know- ledget.” But the diction of the Epistle to the He- brews is remarkable for its polished elegance. Its periods flow in soft and melodious cadences; its arguments are arranged with systematic exactness ; and the whole composition is like a laboured master- piece of a practised Rhetorician. Again, at the close of the Epistle we read, “J beseech you, brethren, suffer the word of exhortation ; for I have written to you a letter in few words 1." The Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, there- fore, describes that Epistle as a short one. But 81 Paul, in his Epistle to the Galatians, says, “ Ye see how large a letter I have written to you with mine * 1 Cott av os: + του: xi: 6. + Heb. xiii. 22. vill. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 205 own hand*.” St. Paul, then, calls that Epistle a long one. But the Epistle to the Hebrews is twice as long as that to the Galatians. How could the same person have called that to the Hebrews short, and that to the Galatians long? and since St. Paul wrote that to the Galatians, can the Author of that to the Hebrews be St. Paul ? Further, still, it is said, the Eastern and Western Churches now receive the Epistle to the Hebrews as inspired, and as the work of St. Paul. But this was not always the case. In the second, third, and fourth centuries, (for we speak not now of the first century,) the Church of Romet did not acknow- ledge this Epistle as Canonical Scripture; indeed, it was not till the fifth century that the /talian Church finally received it as an inspired Book, and as the work of that Apostle. Nor is this all. On this ground of the non-recep- tion of this book by the Church of ome, the Divines of that Church would persuade us that the Canon of the New Testament was not settled till the end of the fourth century or the beginning of Ἐπ σα νἹ ll. + It is omitted in the Canon Muratorianus (See Appendix A. No. VI.); rejected by Caius the Roman Presbyter, Euseb. vi. 20. See also Hieron. Cat. Script. v., and ad Dardan. p. 608. (See Appendix A. No. XIX. (#).) ad Esaiam iii. 6. tom. ii. p. 60; and the authorities in Routh, Reliquiz, iv. p. 26. Tertullian, however, though ascribing it to Barnabas, says that it is “ recep- tior apud Ecclesias” than the Pastor of Hermas. (de Pudic. c. 20.) 206 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. the fifth—that is, three hundred years after it was written. Therefore, they allege that Scripture can- not be the Rule of Faith; and that it depends on the Church, (by which they mean the Church of fome,) to decide what 7s Scripture and what is not, and that their present Church might even now de- clare a Book to be Scripture which has not hitherto been received as such. Hence, we perceive more clearly the importance of the question—Is the Epistle to the Hebrews the work of St. Paul? First, we reply, This letter was certainly written very early. It is quoted by Polycarp*, the disciple of St. John, and is imitated (as early Christian writers observed, and as examination proves) by St. Clement of Rome, the fellow-labourer of St. Paul 7, in the Epistle which Clement wrote in the name of the Church of Rome, of which he was Bishop, to that of Corinth; and which is still extant. Further, the Epistle to the Hebrews was written in St. Paul’s lifetime. It speaks of the temple of Jerusalem as still standing; and of the temple worship as still going ont. And, though it warns the * Routh, Eccl. Opuse. p. 23. + Euseb. iii. 88. Hieron. Script. Eccl. xv. The references to the parallel passages are placed side by side in Mr. Jacobson’s edition of the Patres Apostolici, p. xi. ; and by Professor Stuart, i. 77. 94.; and by Mr. Forster in his work on the Apostolical Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Sect. xiii. + Theophyl. Arg. Epist. ad Hebr. ὁ ναὸς ἔτι συνειστήκει. VII. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 207 Church of the doom hanging over Jerusalem, “ye see the Day approaching *,” yet it is clear from it that the war waged against Jerusalem by Vespasian and Titus had not yet commenced. Now, this war began in the reign of Nero, and St. Paul was martyred in the /ast year of that emperor}; therefore, St. Paul was alive when the Epistle was written. Since, also, the writer pro- mises to visit the Hebrews, in company with Timothy, “Anow ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty, with whom, tf he come shortly, I will see yous;” it would seem that it was written defore St. Paul had placed Timothy as Bishop, at Ephesus, which was in the year of our Lord LXIV., two years after his own liberation from his first imprison- ment at Rome, with which the history of the Acts of the Apostles ends; and four years before his second imprisonment and martyrdom, in the same city. This mention of “ Timothy our brother, with whom I will see you,” has been thought by some, among whom it is enough to mention the learned Bp. Pearson ᾧ, to be sufficient to identify the author * Heb. x. 25. + See the authorities quoted by Bp. Pearson, Annales Paulini, A.D. LXt.—Lxvi., and Mr. Clinton’s Fasti Romani, pp. 44—48. { Heb. xiii. 23. § Opuscula Posthuma, |. ¢. vill. p. 59.‘ Vel ille unicus ver- siculus, Cognoscite fratrem nostrum Timotheum dimissum, &c. satis mihi probat eam Epistolam a Paulo scriptam esse. Neque enim 208 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. with St. Paul. For St. Paul often joins Timothy with himself in the addresses of his Epistles*. St. Paul called Timothy his work-fellow +, and three times his brother t; and St. Timothy is not so styled by any other writer of Holy Scripture. Besides, there was something very appropriate in his being called “ow brother, or the brother”, by Θ᾽. Paul, writing to the Hebrews. For Timothy was the son of a Jewess; and St. Paul had shown his charitable condescension to the Hebrew Christians in his particular case. “ Him”—that is, Timothy, we read in the Acts of the Apostles—“ would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him (not from any opinion of the necessity of cir- cumcision at that time, but from charity ᾧ) because of the Jews which were in those quarters ; for they knew all that his father was a G'reek ||.” At the same time, by now calling him his own brother and theirs, he may be supposed to remind the Hebrews, that in Christ Jesus “there is no dif- Barnabee, neque Clementi, neque Lucz ea verba tribui possunt, tanquam ab eorum aliquo de Timotheo scripta. Cui si adjunxeris testimonium ex secunda Petri Epistola (2 Pet. iii. 16) a nobis jam allatum, non video quomodo quisquam negare possit eam Episto- lam esse Pauli, nisi putet de ed re semper dubitandum esse de qua quispiam aliquando dubitaverit.” * ‘Phil. 1.1. 1 7655. 19 Ὁ Dhess. τ 1. + Rom. xvi. 21. £°2:Cor. 1.1. (Ο15 1 1 ¢Pivlem=4.- § See S. Augustine’s Correspondence with S. Jerome on this subject. Epist. xxviii. xl. Ixxii, Ixxv. Ixxxi. Ixxxii. ed. Bened. || Acts xvi. 3. vir. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 209 ference between the Jew and the Greek* ;” but that they are all brethren. > The expression “ T%mothy our brother,” to say the least, saggests St. Paul as the author of the Kpistle. Let us be allowed, for argument’s sake, to suppose that it was written by St. Paul; and let us see whether on this hypothesis the phenomena of the Epistle, if we may so call them, may be accounted for, and the difficulties of which we have spoken, as raised against this supposition, may be solved. First, then, as to the alleged impropriety of St. Paul writing to the Hebrews. St. Peter, it is true, was the Apostle of the Circumcision; and St. Paul, of the Gentiles. But this did not exclude the one or the other from the care of any part of the Church. Christ’s commission to the Apostles was: “Go ye into all the World ; preach the Gospel to every Crea- ture +.” Hence, as St. Peter, the Apostle of the Jews, was the first to win Gentiles { to the Church, so St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, never ceased to labour for the salvation of the Jews. St. Paul, we say, was the Apostle of all men. He had the care of all the Churches. “ He made himself the Servant of all, that he might gain the more; to the Jews, he became as a Jew; to them that are without the law, he made himself as without the law ; * Rom--x. 19. + Mark xvi. 15. + Acts x. 44, 45. 210 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. he made himself all things to all men, that he might by all means save some *.” Specially was he anxious for the good of the seed of Abraham, for they were his own Kinsmen accord- ing to the flesh. “J am a Hebrew of the Hebrews +.” “ Are they Hebrews?” he exclaims, “so am I. Are they Israelites? soam I. Are they the Seed of Abraham? so am It.” Therefore he says; “Brethren, my hearts desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they may be saved).” “I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart... for my brethren, my Kinsmen according to the flesh\|.” And, if such was his affection for αὐ the seed of Abraham, how much more for those among them who were endeared to him by fellow-membership in the body of Christ ? He had made collections in all parts of Europe for the relief of the dodily wants of “ the Saints at Seru- salem 4 ; how much more would he take care to provide for their souls ? Besides: as no one was more zed/ous than St. Paul to promote the salvation of his own Kindred, so no one was more capable of doing so. He was “a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee** ;? lad been brought up at Jerusalem, “at the feet of Gamatiel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers ΤΊ ; and “after the straitest sect of their reli- ἘΠῚ Cor: ix. 19—292: 7 Phils τι Ὁ: Ἐπ του. ἘΠῚ 22. § Rom. x. 1. || Rom. ix. 2. q Ibid. xv..25. Acts mxiv. 17. ** “Acts Ἐξῖπ, ὃ. tt Acts xxii. 3. ν VII. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 211 gion he had lived a Pharisee*.” He was, therefore, eminently qualified to reason with those of his own nation on the true nature and end of the Mosaic Law; in a word, to handle all those subjects, which are treated with so much learning, eloquence, and wisdom, in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Upon the whole, so far is it from being the fact that there is any real ground for surprise that St. Paul should have written to the Hebrews, that we should, on the contrary, rather be disposed to expect that he would have written to them, and to feel astonishment 7f he had not done so. Let us now open the Epistlet. The thirteen other Epistles commence with St. Paul’s name; which occurs nowhere in this. But what then? Is it not therefore St. Paul’s. St. Paul had good reasons for prefixing his name to them; might there not be equally good reasons for his name being withheld here? He prefixed it where τέ zs prefixed, in order to assure those who received the Epistles, that they came from him; and to call their attention to what he, an Apostle of Christ, had to say. Besides; these Epistles, be it observed, were * Acts xxw1.5, ‘ + S. Chrysostom has discussed this part of the question in a very successful manner in his Introduction to the Epistle to the Hebrews, iv. pp. 427—430. ed. Savile. See also the prefaces of Theodoret, 111. p. 541-—3. ed. Hal. 1771, and Theophylact, ii. 647. ed. Bened., who take the same view. Bis 212 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. written to Gentiles ; and forasmuch as he was the Apostle of the Gentiles, he magnified his office*, and claimed to be heard by them in virtue of it. But let us consider whether his circumstances, in address- ing the Hebrews, were not very different from those under which he wrote to the Gentiles. It is true, indeed, that it was necessary that the person from whom the Epistle came should not be unknown, in order that its reception might be ensured. And they whom the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews desired to assure of the fact, knew well the hand from which that Epistle came. This is quite clear from the words in the Epistle, “Pray for us, that I may be restored to you + ;” “ Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty, with whom, if he comes shortly, I will see yout These expressions, I say, prove that they to whom the Epistle was sent in the first instance, knew from whom it came; and, doubtless, the bearer of the Epistle informed them by whom he was sent. We shall see in the sequel that there was another, and, as I think, sure criterion in the letter itself, by which they might know whose it was. Besides; it is quite certain that this Epistle would never have been read as Scripture in the Church of Jerusalem, and in all the Eastern Churches, as we know it was from the days ᾧ of St. Paul, unless the * Rom. τὶ 19: + Heb. xiii. 18, 19. t Ibid. 23. § Theodoret. Arg. in Epist. ad Hebr. speaks of its being read in the churches from the Apostolic times. ἐξ οὗ τῶν ἀποστολι- Vill. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 213 Bishops and Presbyters of these Churches had known, not only who its author was, but that he was aspired by God. It is clear, therefore, that the name of the writer was withheld, not from any view of entire secrecy, much less for any clandestine or surreptitious purpose ; and that the author was well-known to his frends, and could be known by all who might enquire of them. But this Epistle, be it observed, was intended, not only for friends, but for lukewarm waverers, for Judaizing Christians, and for unchristianized Jews,— that is, for false brethren and for inveterate foes * . To Judaizing Christians δέ. Pauls name was especially odious, on account of the bold and un- compromising manner in which, (as is recorded in the second chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians,) he had acted at Antioch, when he rebuked St. Peter openly to his face, for abstaining from eating with the Gentile converts, for fear of those of the Cireum- cision, who came down from Jerusalem; many of whom desired to be both Jews and Christians, but were in fact neither Jews nor Christians. By the unconverted Jews St. Paul was abhorred κῶν γραμμάτων αἱ τοῦ Θεοῦ peredaxor ἐκκλησίαι. He ‘quotes Eusebius, saying, that ‘all the ancients acknowledged it to be St. Paul’s:” and says that the Arians had then begun to ques- tion its genuineness, on account of the testimony it gives to the Divinity of our Blessed Lord. * See Gal. v. 11. Rom. xv. 31. Acts xxi. 27. 214 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. as arenegade. The last time we hear of his being at Jerusalem, more than forty of them had banded themselves together under an oath, that they would “neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul*” “Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save onet.” Now what feelings, my brethren, would have been excited in their breasts by the name of St. Paul! They would have recoiled from it with scorn and execration. The sight or the sound of it would at once have deterred them from reading or hearing the Epistle to which it was prefixed. Thus, in their case, the prefixing of the name to the Epistle would have frustrated the very purpose for which the Epistle was written. St. Paul had been taught by Christ that the time would come when “men would hate His Disciples, and cast out their name as ουϊ 1. He had learnt also from Christ not to cast his pearls before swine ; and to unite the wisdom of the serpent with the harm- lessness of the dove. Christ displayed by His own example what He taught by precept; He witnessed a good confession before Poutius Pilate }. But when, on one occasion, the men of His own city, Nazareth, had sought to throw Him down from the brow of the hill on which their city was built, Jesus, passing “through the midst of them, went His way ||.” And = Acts xin: 12. + 2 Cor. xi. 24. + Luke vi. 22. § 1 Tim. vi. 18. || Luke iv. 29, 30. vill. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 215 “when, at another time, the Jews took up stones to cast at Him, He hid Himself, and went out of the T emple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by*.” On many occasions, He charged the spectators of his merciful and mighty works not to make Him known +, lest they might prematurely provoke the jealousy and malice of His enemies. He would not throw any stumblingblock in their way ; He would deliver them, as far as He was concerned, from all temptations to sin. So St. Paul; he shrunk from no necessary avowal of the truth, but he would not gratuitously excite the least prejudice ; he courted no unnecessary perils ; and, in a spirit of holy prudence and divine charity, did all in his power to make Truth acceptable and attractive, even to its worst foes. His language was, “Let no man put a stumbling block in anothers way 1. “ Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God ἡ. “Give no offence in anything, that the Ministry be not blamed ||.” On the one hand, he would make no compromise with error; on the other, he would sacrifice himself for the erring. He knew that the Cross “was a stumblingblock to the Jews, and foolishness to the Greeks 4 ;” but yet * John viii. 59. + Matt. ix. 30. xii. 16. Mark v. 43; xu. 36. t+ Rom. xiv. 18. § 1 Corax4 32: || 2 Cor. vi. 3. 1 Conny 23: 216 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY, &ce. he would glory in the Cross alone, and would know nothing but Christ, and Him crucified* ; he would affirm that the offence of the Cross should never cease + ; And why? Because men could not be saved without it. But he would be content “never to eat flesh as long as the world stood, if his meat made his brother to offend +.” He would not, therefore, withhold his Name where his Name was necessary. Nay, he would seal his testimony to the truth, not only with his Name, but with his blood. But he would not obtrude his Name where it was likely to provoke hatred and other sinful passions, and to repel any from those saving truths which he had been commanded by Christ to preach. On the whole, then, there were very good reasons why St. Paul, supposing /zm to have been the author of this Epistle, should not have prefixed his name to it. And, since these reasons do not apply with anything like the same force to any one else that they do to St. Paul, therefore, the very non-appear- ance of the Author’s name in the Epistle to the Hebrews, instead of diminishing, does in fact ncrease the probability, that its author is Sr. Paut 9. Let us pause here for the present, and let me reserve the further observations which are to be made on this subject to the next Discourse. * Cor τι: } Galette tol, Con. yuliits. § See this argument very well stated by the African Bishop, Primasius, in the Appendix H to this Volume. LECTURE IX. 2 Per. iil. 15, 16. “ Even as our beloved brother Paul according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things ; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” WE pass now to another point,—the tone and style of the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is true that the writer does not speak in the same authoritative language as is employed by St. Paul in his Epistles. He exhorts and implores, rather than rebukes and commands. But is not this precisely what might have been expected from Ὁ. Paul addressing the Jews? They required to be treated with the greatest delicacy and circumspection, especially by him. Some of the Jewish Christians, too, might resent the interference of any other teacher than St. Peter or St. James, on the ground that they were committed to their charge. In order, as it seems, to obviate this objection, the 218 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews does not write to the Rulers of the Jewish Church; and he ineul- cates very strongly on the Hebrews, more than once, the duty of obedience to their Rulers*; thus inti- mating that he wrote with their sanction, perhaps at their request. Others, who might be aware that the Epistle was from St. Paul, might scorn the exhortations of one who had been notorious at Jerusalem as a persecutor + and iyurious, and had been instrumental in shedding the blood of the first Christian Martyr, St. Stephen, among those to whom he now addressed an Hpistle, in behalf of the faith which he had caused others to blaspheme. Can it be wondered at, that St. Paul, writing under such circumstances, should speak in a tone of mild- ness? The remembrance of his own past life in Jerusalem must have inspired him with a spirit of forbearance and gentleness. Perhaps, no more diffi- cult task can be imagined,—none requiring more delicacy and tenderness,—than that which was to be performed by a person in the situation of St. Paul writing to the Hebrews. Next, as to the alleged discrepancy in the ex- pressions to the Galatians and to the Hebrews. In the last chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians, St. Paul says, “ Ye see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand.” At the close * Heb. xiii. 7.17. See also 24. Ἔα 1.8. ΤΧ.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 219 of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Author says, “Suffer the Word of exhortation, for I have written to you a letter in few words *.” Can, then, it is asked, the Author to the Hebrews be St. Paul ? To this we reply, This discrepancy is imaginary. As was observed ina previous Discourse +, the Epistle to the Galatians is the only one which St. Paul wrote with his own hand 1. The rest were dictated by him to an amanuensis; and sabscribed with a salutation at the endin his own hand. “ The saluta- tion by the hand of me Paul; which is the token in every Epistle. So I write §.” The Epistle, then, to the Galatians, though com- paratively a short one, was a long one for St. Paul to write with his own hand; and the Epistle to the Hebrews, though comparatively a long one, was a short one for him to dictate to another. Let us now consider the objection from alleged discrepancy of style between the Epistle to the Hebrews and the acknowledged Epistles of St. Paul. It cannot be denied that the Epistle to the Hebrews 7s eminently distinguished among a// the books of the New Testament for the purity and elegance of its language, the graceful flow of its periods, the skilful disposition of its parts, and the oratorical treatment of the subject. This did not escape the notice of ancient Chris- * Heb. xii, 22, + Lecture VIL. p. 170. ~ 2 Galeayet: § 2 Thess. m. 17. 220 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. tian Critics, especially, as we shall see in the sequel, that of the learned Origen, who, maintaining that the Epistle is due to St. Paul, conjectured that, while the substance of the Epistle to the Hebrews is St. Paul’s, the diction might, perhaps, be the work of some other person, whom the Apostle employed to clothe his sentiments in words. This hypothesis is ingenious, and, if admitted, -would not affect the Canonical authority of the Kpistle. We know from Scripture, that the Holy Spirit has been pleased to operate in Interpretation * of tongues, as well as in original dictation; and to show His power not only in inspiring the heart and guiding the hand of one and the same man, but also, if we may so speak, in making one man’s mouth the organ of another’s heart; and it would be enough for us to know that δή. Paul had approved the Kpistle to the Hebrews as expressing his own mind, and that it had been delivered by him to the Church, and from him received by her as his. It may here be remarked, that there is a very great discrepancy of style between the first and second Epistles of St. Peter; and that the Origen of the Western Church, I mean St. Jerome, led perhaps by Origen’s hypothesis concerning the Kpistle to the Hebrews, endeavoured to account for this discrepancy, by saying that St. Peter had em- ployed two different Interpreters or Secretaries for the composition of his two Epistles. ἘΠῚ Cor. xn. 1/0. 1X. THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 221 Let me, also, observe, that there is a very marked difference of style between the Apocalypse and St. John’s Gospel and Epistles. This, too, attracted attention in ancient times; it was the subject of a special dissertation from the pen of one of the most celebrated of Origen’s scholars, Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria*, who, while he asserted in strong terms the /nspiration of the Apocalypse, expressed some doubt as to its being the work of St. John 1. Thus, we see, that in the New Testament there are three different writings, commonly ascribed by us to three Apostles, St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. John, respectively, on the ground of a great deal of external and also of internal testimony, and yet differing in style from their acknowledged writings, and on the strength of that difference, certain critics of eminence, as I have said, have been inclined to withdraw, either partially or entirely, these writings from these three Apostles. In two of these three cases, the genuineness of the words alone, and in the third case, the genuineness of the words and substance has been questioned. If, now, it can be shown that, notwithstanding this discrepancy of style, one of these three writings does really belong wholly and solely to the Apostle whose claim to its authorship is questioned, not only * Euseb. vii. 25. + See Lardner, Credibility, i. 684. sqq. 222 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. would that claim be established, but we should also have advanced far towards getting rid of the argu- ment from discrepancy of style against the substan- tial and verbal genuineness of the other two. Now, this may be shown, as it appears to me, both with respect to the Epistle of St. Peter, and the Kpistle to the Hebrews. The language of the Author of the second Epistle, generally ascribed to St. Peter, seems alto- gether to forbid the supposition, that the words of that Epistle did ot come from the same person as the ideas. He says expressly, “ This Second Epistle, beloved, I now write unto you*,” just as it said in the first Epistle, “ By Sctlvanus, a faithful brother, as L suppose, I have written + ;” in both cases this word implies, | apprehend verbal authorship. If this be so, 1 would go on to observe, that the case of dis- crepancy of style between St. Peter's two Epistles, is much more striking than that of discrepancy between the Epistle to the Hebrews and St. Paul's acknowledged Epistles. For both St. Peter’s Epistles (as appears from the first verse of the third chapter of the second Epistle) were addressed to the same persons at nearly the same time; whereas, St. Paul’s acknowledged Epis- tles are all written to one class of persons, and the Epistle to the Hebrews, to another class; and the parallel between his case and St. Peter’s would only * ταύτην ἤδη δευτέραν ὑμῖν γράφω ἐπιστολήν. 2 Pet. iil. 1. + ἔγραψα. 1 Pet. v. 12. ΙΧ] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 223 hold, ¢f we had an undoubted Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews; and even then, supposing that dif- fered from our Epistle, the discrepancy between St. Peter’s two Epistles, written at the same time to the same parties, would make us hesitate before we questioned the genuineness of our Epistle, on the ground of style alone. We will not dwell longer on the argument from St. Peter’s Epistle; for the case of the Kpistle to the Hebrews may well stand by itself: and we now proceed to observe, that so far from being surprised at discrepancy between an Epistle written to Hebrew Christians, and Epistles written to Gentile Christians, we ought rather to ewpect a discrepancy; and it may also be affirmed, that there is not a greater difference of style between the Epistle to the Hebrews, and some of the acknowledged Epistles of St. Paul, for example, those to the Ephesians and Colossians, than there is between these two Epistles and other acknowledged Epistles of St. Paul; for instance, that to the Galatians. For this and for other reasons, considering St. Paul merely as an ordinary writer, we would main- tain, that the objection on the ground of style to the genuineness of the Epistle to the Hebrews, is of little value. Authors wninspired can write, and do write, in different styles on different occasions, just as great Masters paint in different manners. Not to multi- ply instances, let me refer only to the writings of a 224 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. celebrated Christian Father, St. Cyprian. The Epistle to Donatus, which is found in his works, is written in a florid and exuberant style, totally dif- ferent from that of his other writings, so that a critic who would decide from style, would immediately pronounce, that it is not his. Yet his fellow-countryman, St. Augustine, assures us of its genuineness; and speaks thus of it, “St. Cyprian, by writing once in this style, showed us that he could write thus if he chose to do so; but by not writing in this style more than once, he also proved that he did not choose to do, what he had shown that he could do*.” Now, we are speaking, be it observed, not of bad- ness or goodness of style, but simply of difference of style. St. Cyprian, we see, wrote very differently in one work from what he did in αὐ his other works; and who will say that what St. Cyprian could, St. Paul could not do? What, now, is the peculiarity in style of the Epistle to the Hebrews? It is, as Origen expresses it, its Grecian composi- tion +. But St. Paul was born and bred in a learned Grecian Colony, and, in his Epistles, he shows his familiarity { with Greek Poets, and by certain parts of certain of his Epistles, he has proved that it was by choice and deszgn that he did no¢ write in the polished language of his Greek and Asiatic con- * S. Aug. de Doct. Christ. iv. 31. 7 Euseb. vi. 25. Τ Tits 1. 125 Acts να (28.2 dori xv. 55. - Px. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 225 temporaries, and that he could have written, as they did, 7f he had thought fit to do so. That the Apostle St. Paul would think fit to do what was most conducive to the end in view, may be reasonably assumed. And the style in which the Epistle to the Hebrews is written, was the best suited for the purpose of the Epistle. This may be inferred from the excellence of the work, proving the wisdom of its author, whoever the writer may be. The need of the style used is proved by the fact of its use. And, therefore, we may conclude that St. Paul would have used it as being the best suited for the purpose. But you may say, why did he not therefore write in this style in his other Epistles ? We reply,—To the Corinthians and to the Greeks generally, it is true, who idolized human eloquence, his preaching was “not with excellency of speech nor with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demon- stration of the Spirit and of power,” in order, as he himself says, that their faith “should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God*.” No one should say that he had ministered excitement to their itching ears, and had fascinated them by Rhetoric. No one should say that, like a Greek retailer +, he had adulterated the pure Gospel to suit their corrupt taste. The Apostle, therefore, abstained ~ from > ΟΣ τῇ 1 Ὁ: + κάπηλος. ov γὰρ ἐσμὲν ὡς οἱ πολλοί, καπηλεύοντες, κ. τ΄ Δ. See Bentley's admirable Sermon on this text, 2 Cor. il, 17. Q 226 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. writing to them in a polished style. He would win them to the faith by solecisms. But the Hebrews were a very different audience. Their Septuagint Version was full of exotic words and barbarous idioms. They could not be spoilt by the graces of a polished style. There was no danger of it being said of them that they had been charmed into Christianity by eloquence. And by writing to them in the style in which the Epistle to the Hebrews is written, St. Paul would prove to the world that he had noé written in a similar style to his Greek and Asiatic Gentile converts, not because he was unable, but because he was wnwilling to do so. The Greeks, then, in reading, as they would do, the Epistle to the Hebrews, would learn the reasons for which St. Paul wrote to Greeks, for the most part, as he did; they would thence derive a higher opinion of St. Paul’s character, and of the truths which he taught; and the Hebrews, in turning to St. Paul’s Epistles to the Gentiles, would rejoice to find in them the fervour and the force of their own Prophets, and they would thence learn to value the more what St. Paul wrote to themselves. Thus, we say, St. Paul, in being as it were a Hebrew to the Greeks, and a Greek to the Hebrews, would have served the cause of both. The question, therefore, returns: Could he have written in the style, in which the Epistle to the Hebrews is written? We have already stated his Ix. | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 227 natural qualifications for doing so, and have endea- voured to show that the Hebrew tone, if we may so call it, of his Epistles to Greek and Asiatic Churches, by no means diminishes the probability that he could or would write in a Greek tone to the Hebrews. There were many reasons, as we have shown, why St. Paul should write to the Hebrews; and such being the case, it may well be supposed, that what- ever he required, beyond his natural qualifications, to enable him to write in the style in which the Kpistle to the Hebrews is written, would be supplied to the Apostle by the Divine Spirit, Who with the gift of Tongues gave also the power of using them in divers manners, according to the exigencies of the case. “or all these worketh that one and self- same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will *.” On the whole, then, it does not appear to be so reasonable to infer a difference of authorship,— either in words or ideas, from a discrepancy of style between the Epistle to the Hebrews and some of St. Paul’s Epistles, as to conclude from the discrepancy of style, that there was an adequate reason in the circumstances of the case for such discrepancy, and to recognize the wisdom of the Apostle and of the Divine Spirit, by which He was guided in the choice of means best suited to the nature of the ends. ol Cor. (x) 11 ra aa 228 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. The principle of this observation, may, I think, be applied to the Second Epistle of St. Peter and the Apocalypse; but on these, more may be said on another occasion, and we return to the Epistle to the Hebrews and say, that though the discrepancy of style which subsists between it and St. Paul’s acknowledged Epistles, does not affect its genuine- ness, yet, that if it be genuine, we may well expect to find a certain similarity of mind and manner between it and his undoubted Epistles. And this similarity we do find in fact. A very marked resemblance there is in the use of particular words and phrases, of which there are very many which are found in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in the acknowledged writings of St. Paul, and in no other books of the New Testament. Of this fact abundant evidence has been given by Mr. Forster in his elaborate work on the Apos- tolical Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews ἢ. It may be mentioned, by way of illustration here, that the insignificant particle τε affords a remarkable specimen of this verbal coincidence. This con- venient conjunction is, I believe, never or scarcely ever used by St. Peter, nor by his disciple St. Mark ; it is not used more than ten times by all the other writers in the New Testament, except St. Luke and his companion and master St. Paul, by whom toge- ther it is used about 180 times; and 76 7s very often used in the Epistle to the Hebrews. * London, 1888. Sections i.—iv. Tee] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 229 The verbal and idiomatic coincidences between St. Paul’s Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews have been fully displayed in the admirable work to which I have just referred; and I proceed to add a few words on the similarity of mind and manner in the one and the other. A former Master of one of our Colleges, one of our greatest Divines, Dr. Barrow, has the following just remark at the commencement of one of his Sermons *: “It is,” he says, “ the manner of St. Paul in his Epistles, after that he hath discussed some main points of doctrine or discipline, to propose several good advices and rules, in the observance whereof the //fe of Christian practice doth consist. So that he thereby hath furnished us with so rich a variety of moral and spiritual precepts concerning special matters, subordinate to the general Rules of Piety and Virtue, that out of them might well be compiled a body of Ethics, or system of precepts, de officiis, in truth and completeness far excelling those which any philosophy hath been able to devise or deliver. These he rangeth not in any formal method, nor linketh together with strict connexion, but freely scattereth them so as from his mind (as out of a fertile soil impregnated with all seeds of wisdom and goodness) they did haply spring up, or as they were suggested by that Holy Spirit, Which continually guided and governed him.” * Serm. vi. On the duty of Prayer, 1. p. 69, ed. 1683. 230 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Such are the words of Dr. Barrow. For an example of this truth, it may suffice to refer to the ethical conclusion of St. Paul’s great dogmatic Epistle, the Epistle to the Romans. At the close of its eleventh chapter, he passes from the region of spiritual doctrine, and (to adopt Dr. Barrow’s figure) begins to sow the precepts of moral practice. He scatters the seed thickly, and, as some would say, almost at random. Now, if we turn to the close of the Epistle to the Hebrews, we find precisely the same thing. At the close of the twelfth chapter, the author passes from doctrine to practice; the seed sown here is very much the same as in the Epistle to the Romans, and the manner of sowing is the same. The latter parts of these two Epistles are like two gardens cultivated by one hand. That hand, I believe, was St. Paul’s. Let me notice a peculiar characteristic in them both. You remember, in the Epistle to the Romans, the verse, “Let love be without dissimulation, abhor that which 15. evil, cleave to that which is good*.”” As these words stand in English, there is nothing remark- able in their construction. But the construction of the original is very remarkable: ἡ ἀγάπη ἀνυπόκριτος" ἀποστυγοῦντες τὸ πονηρὸν, κολλώμενοι τῷ ἀγαθῷ. Here we have two nominative absolutes, and what is still more remarkable, a noun feminine nominative absolute, (ἡ ἀγάπη ἀνυπόκριτος) branching out suddenly into a - participle masculine nominative absolute (κολλώμενοι * Enelish Version, xii. 9. oD 3 155] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 29] τῷ ἀγαθῳ). If I mistake not, another instance of this construction cannot be found in the New Testa- ment, except in one place. And that place is the parallel practical portion to which we have just ad- verted, at the close of the Epistle to the Hebrews *. There we read, “ Let your conversation be without covetousness, and be ye content with such things as ye have.” The original here is, ἀφιλάργυρος ὁ τρόπος, ἀρκούμενοι τοῖς παροῦσιν. This remarkable construction, let it also be ob- served, has this peculiar value, that it seems to point to the Apostle St. Paul as the Author of the language of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in which it is found, while the whole Chapter identifies him with the sawd- stance. Nor is this all. If we turn back to the Romans, we find that the precept, being joined on as it were by stalks and branches with other similar pre- cepts, has its 7oot, if I may so say, in a teat of Holy Scripture,—* For it is written, Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord}.” So the precept in the Hebrews. “Be content with such things as ye have, for He hath said, I will never leave thee nor forsake thee.” Not only, therefore, is the seed sown, and the manner of sowing, in the Epistle to the Hebrews very like that of St. Paul, in his known Epistles; but there is a mode,—an wnique mode, may I call it,—of grafting, also, in the one and the other; whence we infer, that, of the Hebrews also the Apostle St. Paul * Heb. xiii. ὃ: + Rom. xii. 19. 232 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [ LECT. might have said, “ Ye are God’s husbandry ; we are labourers together with him: I have planted, I have watered, and G'od hath given the increase *.” Before we quit the argument from znternal evidence let me invite your attention to certain other points in the Epistle which seem to identify the author with St. Paul. The writer says, at the commencement, “God, Who spake in times past to our fathers+ ;” and he cites numberless passages from the Old Testament; but in no one case does he cite them as written, but always as spoken. 'This, as is known, is the way in which Jews writing to Jews quote Scripture 1. The author, therefore, was of Jewish extraction, as St. Paul was. I have already spoken of his reference to his brother Timothy. The author speaks of his bonds 9. St. Paul was in prisons frequently, in deaths oft |]. The author says that he will shortly visit them. St. Paul, we know, was just set at liberty when this Epistle appears to have been written. The author says, “ They of Italy salute youY.” St. Paul was in * 1 Cor. iii. 9. 6. +. Heb.a. ἢ ἘΞ St. Matthew, for instance, always introduces his quotations as said. See Townson’s works, i. 101. § Heb. x. 34. If δεσμοῖς is the true reading, which is most probable. || 2 Cor. xi. 23. 4 This, after all that has been said to the contrary, seems to be the true translation of οἱ ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ιταλίας; like ‘‘ Pastor ab Am- phryso.” The other version (“'They who are come from Italy,”’) gives no very intelligible idea: γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἀπὸ ‘Ira- Aiac, says Theophylact. ΤᾺ} THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 233 Italy at the time this letter appears to have been sent; and he wrote several Epistles there. The writer promises to visit those to whom he writes, and desires their prayers, that he may be restored to them. This St. Paul does frequently. The author declares that he “trusts he has a good conscience*;” this is St. Paul’s usual language also 7. But what I would here specially observe is this. St. Paul, it is true, has prefived his name to thirteen of his Epistles; and thus he has given us one criterion whereby we may be assured of their genuineness ; and this znztial guarantee does not appear in the Epistle to the Hebrews ; and we have endeavoured to account for its absence. But let me now remind you, that there was another token by which St. Paul avouched his own Epistles ; not an initial but a final one; I mean his Apostolic salutation at the close of his Epistles. The salutation of Paul with mine own hand; which is the token in every Epistle, so I write 1. Now, it may be asked, in what did this salutation consist? If we examine the thirteen Epistles, to which the name of St. Paul is prefixed, we find that, near or at their conclusion, they all contain the words, “ The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you,” or some equivalent expression ; and St. Paul himself indicates that thzs is what he means by the salutation Heb. xiii. 18. f Acts xxi 1: πσχῖν. 16.4 2-Cor. 12) 2hom wee a2 Thess: nt, 17. 1 Cor, xvi. 21. -Golbivets: ἜἘ--» κ 234 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. of me Paul;” for, in the passage which I have just quoted, he says, “ The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every Epistle: so 7 write ;” and then he adds immediately, “ The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.” These words, then, “the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,” were St. Paul’s salutation, written by his own hand. This, I conceive, was the token by which all his Epistles were to be known. What I would further remark here is, that this salutation, found at the close of every one of St. Paul’s Epistles, is xo¢ found in any one of the Epistles of any other Apostle, written in St. Paul’s lifetime. But it zs used in the last book of the New Testament, the Apoealypse, and also, we may add, by St. Clement of Rome: so that it was not only adopted by St. Paul as his own peculiar badge and cognizance, but, being known by others to be so, it was reserved to him by his brethren, and, as far as we know, was not used by any other Apostle in any letter during St. Paul’s life; although it was used by others very soon after his death, and has now become the ordinary conclusion of sermons and liturgies, in all parts of Christendom. And this salutation, employed by St. Paul as his criterion in each of his thirteen Epistles, and not used by any other Apostle, except in the Apocalypse, 7s found in the Hpistle to the He- brews, which thus concludes: “ They of Italy salute you: * Grace,’—or rather, as the original expresses, * The original has more precisely ἡ χάρις. «. the grace, 7. 6. of our Lord Jesus Christ. ΤΡ ἢ THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 235 the Grace, ὁ. ὁ. of our Lord Jesus Christ,—‘“‘ be with you all, Amen*.” Therefore, we conclude, the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by St. Paul. Let me now crave your indulgence while we test this hypothesis by external evidence; without which the argument would be incomplete. The Epistle to the Hebrews was sent to the Church of Jerusalem, the mother of all Churches, and was diffused from Jerusalem, which was the centre of the Jewish, and the source of the Christian, Religion. To the testimony, therefore, of the Church of Jeru- salem, and of the greatest Churches of the Hast, we must appeal for the most authentic information concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews. Now it is unquestionable that it was read in all the Churches of the East from the time in which it was written, and it was received by them all as a genuine and inspired writing of the Apostle St. Paul. Who a better witness on this subject than the Bishop of Jerusalem, St. Cyril? He, in his cateche- tical Lectures, gives the names of the Books of the Old and New Testaments, and among them he recites the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, and affirms that the Books which he enumerates were delivered down as he describes them, in an uninterrupted succession, by the primitive Bishops, and by the Apostles themselves +. * Heb: xin, 24, 25. 7 See Appendix A. No. ΧΙ. 236 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Who, again, a more competent witness than St. Jerome, living in Palestine, at Bethlehem, in the same century, whose opinion is of the greater value, not only on account of his vast erudition, but because he came from /tome, and brought with him from the West the prejudices of the Latin Church of his age, against the Epistle to the Hebrews; prejudices no doubt occasioned by the fact that the heretical doc- trines of the Montanistic and Novatian * teachers in the West, concerning the impossibility of renewing unto repentance a second time after the commission of heinous sins, were grounded on their interpreta- tion of the earlier verses of the sixth Chapter of this Epistle. St. Jerome, then, bears witness that the Epistle to the Hebrews was received as St. Paul’s by all the Churches of the East, and by all G'reek Christian writers from primitive times, and he himself receives it as sucht; and it cannot be doubted that the testimony and authority of the great western Doctor, St. Jerome, was mainly instrumental in correcting the judgment and practice of the Roman Church, and in restoring to her the Epistle to the Hebrews. To the witness of the Church at Jerusalem may be added, as we have said, that of all the Churches of the East, not only individually, but assembled in * See Kirchhofer, Geschichte des Canons, 240. 243. 247. 425. and Appendix A. to this Volume, No. XVI. + Epist. ad Dardan. xi. p. 608. See here Appendix A. No. XIX. (k.) Toei THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 237 Synods, at Antioch, Nicaea, and Laodicea ; and when we bear in mind that these Churches were for the most part planted by St. Paul, and governed in the first instance by persons appointed by him, as Timothy, Titus, and others, their testimony amounts almost to an assurance from St. Paul himself. But there is one Church, not founded by St. Paul, whose evidence is of peculiar value,—the Church of Alexandria. This Church was eminent for the great learning and critical acumen of its earlier teachers, and there- fore its judgment is of greater weight. St. Athana- sius, Bishop of Alexandria, in the fourth century, unhesitatingly received this Epistle to the Hebrews as St. Paul’s*. Before him, two of the most learned writers of that Church, Origen, and his teacher, Clement of Alexandria, did the same. Their evi- dence is more interesting, because it is clear that they had carefully considered the subject, and were eminently qualified to judge of compositions in their own language. “The style,” says Origen +, “of the Epistle to the Hebrews has not that plainness which was character- istic of the Apostle Paul, who confessed himself to be rude in speech; and any one who is capable of judging concerning style, must allow that it has more of a Grecian air in its composition 1 than his other Epistles; but, on the other hand, every one who is * Epist. Festal. xxxix. See Appendix A. No. X. + Ap. Euseb. vi. 25. See below, Appendix A. No. VIII. t ‘EAAnvecwrépa τῇ συνθέσει. 238 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. conversant with the Apostle’s writings must also confess that the sentiments of this Epistle are mag- nificent, and the conceptions not inferior to those of any of the received works of St. Paul.” “ My own opinion,” he adds, “is this; the diction and texture of the expressions are the work of some one who committed to paper what was delivered orally by his Master, the Apostle St. Paul. Whatever Church, therefore, receives this Epistle as St. Paul’s, let it be honoured for so doing, for it was not with- out good reason, that the primitive writers * delivered it to us as his: but who committed it to writing is known to God; the history that has come down to us is that this was done either by Clement, the Bishop of Rome, or by St. Luke, who wrote the Acts and the Gospel.” Such is the testimony of Origen. His master, Clement of Alexandria, thus speaks +: “The Epistle to the Hebrews is the work of St. Paul; it was com- posed by him in Hebrew, and translated by St. Luke into Greek 1: hence the resemblance between its style and that of the Acts of the Apostles. St. Paul did not prefix his name and title, ‘Paul an Apostle,’ to it: with good reason,—for he was addressing those who were prejudiced against him; and there- fore he prudently withheld his name, lest he should * Ol ἀρχαῖοι ἄνδρες. + Euseb. vi. 14. 1 This is disproved by numerous paronomasias : πολυμερῶς πολυτρύπως, ἀπάτωρ ἀμήτωρ κ. τ. r., bearing evidence of an original. se | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 239 deter them from reading it. Besides, as a holy presbyter used to say to me*, since our Blessed Lord was specially sent as the Apostle} of the people of Israel, therefore, through a spirit of reve- rence, St. Paul did not assume this title in writing to them; and because also he was specially the Apostle of the Gentiles.” These testimonies of Clement and Origen appear to be more valuable even on account of the private theories—in the ease of Clement, of a Hebrew original, and in that of Origen, of a distinct Author of the language—by which these testimonies are accompanied. It is clear that these theories were suggested by what we have already considered, I mean the discrepancy of style between the Epistle to the Hebrews and the undisputed Epistles of St. Paul. And this discrepancy which generated these theories would doubtless have tempted them to assign the Epistle to some other person than St. Paul, if they had been able, in conscience, to do so. The evidence of the Pauline origin of the Epistle must have been very strong to force them upon these theories. Let us observe, also, that these theories are only private opinions, and are propounded as such, and do not now require further notice, except as * Supposed to be Pantenus. See Appendix H. + It is observable that the author of the Epistle so calls Him, Heb. 1. 1; and He is not called so by any other writer in the New Testament. 240 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. they are convertible into important testimonies to the genuineness of the Epistle. These testimonies are from persons born only a little more than a century after the Epistle was written; and as they ground what they say on the testimony of the ancients, and as their ancients must have been contemporary with the Apostles, we are brought back by their testimony to the times of St. Paul himself. Now, be it remembered that the Church of Alex- andria was founded by St. Mark *, whom St. Peter calls his son +, and who was with St. Paul at Rome 1 in his first imprisonment, and for whom he sent in his second imprisonment § just before his death, because he was profitable to him for the ministry ; and we know that St. Mark was present at Rome at St. Paul’s and St. Peter’s martyrdom [. The testi- mony, therefore, of the Church of Alexandria may be regarded as the testimony of St. Mark; and the testimony of St. Mark as that of St. Peter and St. Paul. This, I say, is a probable supposition; and it is confirmed by the language of our text, which is from the Second Epistle of Peter, the teacher of St. Mark, and the brother Apostle and fellow-martyr * §. Hieron. de Viris [llust. xxxvi. Alexandriz a Marco Evangelista semper Ecclesiastici fuere doctores. Euseb. v. 10. + 1 Pets vy. 19: t Col. iv. 10. $2 Tims ἵν 11 || Iren. 3. 1. Te THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 241 of St. Paul. This Second Epistle was written by St. Peter a very short time before his death, and, like his First Epistle*, was addressed by him, the Apostle of the Circumcision, to the Hebrew converts in the East 7. In our text St. Peter says, “As our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given unto him, has ‘written unto yout ;” therefore St. Paul had written to those persons whom St. Peter addressed. And who were they? The Hebrews). Therefore there was some Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. There- fore that inscribed to the Hebrews, and received as his by the Church of Jerusalem and by the Eastern Churches, was written by St. Paul. But further: St. Peter, in the text, divides St. Paul’s Epistles, as it were, into two classes: “as our beloved brother Paul has written unto youw,—as also in all his Epistles ;’—that is, he distinguishes the Epistle to the Hebrews from the rest, and thus makes his testimony ¢o 7¢ more significant: and he goes on to vouch for them all as Scripture, that is, as divinely inspired ; and therefore we have a special testimony from the Apostle St. Peter, that the Epistle to the Hebrews is St. Paul’s, and that it is the Word of God. * See 2 Pet. iii. 1. + See Bp. Pearson, Opera Posthuma, Diss. I. viii. p. 59 = p- 358, ed. Churton. Pi Pet. τι 15, § Euseb. ili. 4. τοῖς ἐξ “EBpaiwy οὖσιν ἐν διασπορᾷ. R 242 ΟΝ THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. This testimony is of more importance, when we remember that St. Peter was the Apostle of the Hebrews, and that he had been openly rebuked by St. Paul for his temporary weakness in abstaining from eating with the Gentiles at Antioch, out of partiality to the Jewish converts. Nothing could be more honourable to St. Peter, nothing more chari- table and edifying to Jew and Gentile, than that he, the Apostle of the Hebrews, now about to die, together with the Apostle of the Gentiles, for the faith in Christ, should bear witness to St. Paul's wisdom in his dealings with the Hebrews; and that St. Peter should show that, though he had been openly reproved by St. Paul, St. Paul was his beloved brother; and that he should set his authoritative Apostolic seal on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews, and recognize it as Holy Scripture, and thus declare to Jew and Greek, and to Christians and men in all ages and countries of the world, that there was no difference between his own teaching and that of St. Paul,—that he fully adopted what St. Paul had written,—that the Gospel of the Apostle of the Gentiles and of the Apostle of the Circumcision was one and the same,—that they both had one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism. And as if Christ Himself, in His mercy, was desirous of adding His Own Divine sanction to this testimony of oneness, He was pleased to call these two great Apostles together to Himself by a glorious Ix. ] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 245 martyrdom for that one faith, in the same city, and in the same year, and, as is generally believed, upon the same day ἢ. I will now only offer, very briefly, some practical conclusions. First, let us admire and bless God’s goodness for the assurance He has given us of the Inspiration of this Epistle, which contains so much instruction on the sublimest points of Christian Doctrine, and on the cardinal articles of Christian Duty; and which, though, as St. Peter predicted, it has been wrested by the unlearned and unstable to their own destruc- tion, has ever served, and will ever serve, to refute all the strange and dangerous doctrines of those “who deny the Lord Who bought them +,” whether by word or deed. Next, let us bless God for the special mode by which we are assured of the genuineness of this Epistle,—I mean the instrumentality of St. PETER ; and let us thank God for the lessons of holy wis- dom, gentleness, and charity towards our dissentient brethren, which we are taught by the tone and manner in which this letter was written by St. Paul. But what most concerns us in connexion with our present argument on the Canon of the New Testa- ment, is this. We find that the Epistle to the * §. Hieron. de Viris Ill. v. “ xiv™° Neronis anno, eodem die quo Petrus, Romz pro Christo capite truncatus est, anno post passionem Domini xxxv.’’ Bp. Pearson, Annales Paulini, p. 25. 2 Pet... 1, R 2 244 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Hebrews was received as Scripture by St. Peter, whe is claimed by the Church of Rome as the divinely- appointed channel of a pretended infallibility, and that it was imitated by St. Clement, who was Bishop of Home in the first century. Thus we see it was, originally, received by the Church of Rome. We find also that it was received in every other part of Christendom, and has never ceased to be so received from the time of the Holy Apostles. But there was a period of time in which, while received in all the Eastern Churches, it ceased to be received by the Church of Rome; and its reception was 7nter- mitted in that Church during the second, third, and fourth centuries, and then it began to be again received by the Church of Rome, and has ever since continued to be so. What are the conclusions from these facts ? We infer,— First, That the Canonical Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews was established as soon as it was written; and that, therefore, all the arguments de- rived from the partial and temporary non-reception of this Epistle to prove the alleged lateness of the Canon, and all the inferences from that allegation, are futile and groundless. Secondly, That the Church of Rome has erred, with regard to the Canonical Authority of this Kpistle. If she is right in receiving it now, as we are sure she is, she erred in not receiving it formerly during three centuries. Exe! THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 245 Thirdly, That the Church of Rome has erred, and does err most perniciously and most presumptuously, in affirming that the whole Church of Christ owes the Canon of Scripture to her; or in the language of one of her Popes*, Gregory the Seventh, that “no Chapter or Book of the Bible is to be regarded as Canonical, without the Pope’s authority.” Fourthly, That the Church of Rome cannot be trusted for any thing which she delivers by her own authority alone, on the ground of any supposed in- fallibility derived by her from Christ through St. Peter. For she was not a faithful guardian of the truth taught by St. Peter, and acknowledged by St. Clement, concerning this Epistle of St. Paul, that it is indeed a part of Holy Scripture, that is, of the written Oracles of God. And this truth, be it observed, was taught by St. Peter concerning an Lpistle written from Italy, and probably from Rome itself. Fifthly, That the Church of Rome, so far from having authorized the Canon of the New Testament, as she alleges, does in fact owe her own Canon, as far as this Epistle is concerned, to the testimony of St. Peter faithfully preserved by the Eastern Church, which she now denounces as heretical and schismatical ; and that, as far as the Church of Rome was concerned, the Epistle to the Hebrews was not only lost for three centuries, but in all probability never would have been recovered at all; and that it * Greg. VII. ap. Card. Baron. Ann. ad a.p. 1076. 246 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY, &ce. is therefore a very happy thing for the Church of Rome, and for all Christendom, that the Chureh of Rome is not the Catholic Church. Lastly, We see here, my beloved brethren, by a practical example, what the true grounds of the Canon of the New Testament are. It does not rest, as our Romanist brethren fondly dream, on the testimony of their own present private Church; nor on that of any particular Church in the world; for the Church of Rome has erred, by her own showing, in this matter; and any particular Church may likewise err, as our Nineteenth Article teaches. The Seven- branched candlestick of the Universal Church will, it is true, never be removed, and will never be with- out the light of truth, for, as St. John says, Christ Himself walketh “72 the midst of the seven-branched candlestick* ;’ bat any one of its branches may burn dimly or go out, and another branch may be planted in its socket. Our appeal, therefore, con- cerning the Inspiration of Scripture, as concerning all other matters, is not to any particular Church, but to the Church Universal, and to her Divine Head ; it is not to the Present only, but to the Past; not to Popes, but to St. Peter; not to men, but to CuristT. * Rev. 1. 13. Compare S. Iren. v. 20, “Ecclesia est ἑπτάμυξος Lucerna, Christi bajulans lumen.” Conf. Exod. αν. ΟἹ, 32. LECTURE X. JUDE 17. * But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of [i. e. by| the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.” From the Epistle to the Hebrews we pass to the seven Catholic or General Epistles, as they are called, which, in the oldest existing copies of the New Testament, are commonly placed éefore the Epistles of St. Paul, but, in our English Bibles, stand after them. In ancient and modern Bibles they are found in the following order: first, the Epistle of St. James, secondly and thirdly, two Epistles of St. Peter; fourthly, fifthly, and sixthly, three Epistles of St. John; seventhly and lastly, the Epistle of St. Jude, from which our text is taken. It has been commonly supposed * that this order is founded on considerations of the time of their * Mill. Prolegomena in N. T. ὃ 236. 248 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. composition, as well as of the ecclesiastical dignity of those by whom the Epistles were written. St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Galatians, speaks of « James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars * ;” and in this order their Epistles stand. Immediately after the Ascension St. James was Bishop of Jerusalem. His Epistle is addressed to the Jewish Church, as was the Gospel of St. Matthew. It is well known, that the lost sheep of the House of Israel were the first who engaged the care of the Apostles, in accordance with the command of Christ ; and it is highly probable that, as St. Matthew’s was the first of the Gospels, so the Epistle of St. James was the first written of the Apostolic Epistles. St. James suffered martyrdom at Jerusalem in the year of our Lord 61, and St. Peter was martyred at Rome in the year 68. The name + Catholic, or Universal, which has been applied to these Seven Epistles since the fourth century, was given them, it is commonly supposed, because, with the exception of the two smaller Epistles of St. John, they are not addressed to par- ticular persons or Churches, but to all. And it has also been supposed that they were so designated to distinguish them from /eretical and spurious writings, which began to be disseminated even in the times of the Apostles; and in this sense, Catholic Hpistles * Gal. ii. 9. See Bede Prolog. Appendix A. No. xxxii. + Euseb. vi. 14. Concil. Laod. lix. Cyril. Catech. iv. Athanas. Epist. Festal. x | THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 249 would signify orthodow and canonical* Epistles, Epistles received as such by the Catholic Church. The case of these Epistles demands special conside- ration. The Books of the New Testament, which have hitherto engaged our attention——I mean the Four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and St. Paul’s Epistles,—were, as we have seen, received as divine Scripture by αὐ Christian Churches, as soon as they were written. But this was not so with all the Catholic Epistles. Indeed only two of them, namely, the First of St. Peter and the First of St. John, were wnanimously acknowledged as Scripture in the first century. At that time there were some Churches which were acquainted with the other five, and yet were in doubt as to their divine authority; and even so late as the beginning of the fourth century, though these five Epistles were then received as Scripture by the maority of Churchest, yet some Churches there were * They were, indeed, sometimes called E'pistole Canonice in early times, as by Junilius Afer, by Cassiodorus, and St. Jerome, Appendix A. No. XIX. (m.) if this Prologue be genuine. Ἵ Origen. ap. Euseb. vi. 25, says οὐ πάντες receive the 2nd and 3rd of St.John, and that the 2nd of St. Peter ἀμφιβάλ- Aerac; Euseb. ii. 25, says that the Epistles of James and Jude, the 2nd of Peter, and the 2nd and 3rd of John were ἀντιλε- γόμεναι, γνώριμαι δ᾽ ὅμως τοῖς πολλοῖς ; and again, ἀντιλεγόμεναι, ὅμως δὲ παρὰ πλείστοις τῶν ᾿Εκκλησιαστικῶν γιγνωσκόμεναι, and he expressly testifies of the Epistles of James and Jude, ἴσμεν καὶ ταύτας μετὰ τῶν λοιπῶν ἐν πλείσταις δεδημοσιευμένας ᾿Εκκλησίαις. Euseb. 11. 23. St. Athanasius received all the Catholic Epistles (Epist. Festal. ii. p. 38), and they are all 250 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. which were still in suspense with regard to them; and it was not till the end of that century that they were recognized as Divine Writings, wherever they were known. From these acknowledged facts the following inferences have been drawn. It has been argued by some that, since these five Epistles were not received by a// Churches for three centuries after they were written, therefore the Canon of Scripture (by which we mean the divinely inspired written Rule of Christian faith and practice) was not completed till the end of the fourth cen- tury; and therefore that Scripture cannot be the Rule of Faith. For it cannot be supposed, they say, that the Chureh was without a Rule of Faith three hundred years, and all parts of Scripture were not universally known as Scripture till the end of the fourth century. Further, it is alleged that, since these five Epistles of which we are now speaking, were not universally received as Scripture till the end of the fourth cen- tury, and since they are now recognized by all as inspired, therefore no valid argument against the Inspiration of the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament can be raised from the fact that they received by the Councils of Carthage and Laodicea, before the end of the fourth century, and by St. Jerome, ad Paulin. iv. p- 574. See Appendix A. No. XIX. (h.) 5 THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 251 were not received in the first ages of Chris- tianity. For if it could, it is argued, we must, by the same reasoning, reject Five of the Seven Catholic Epistles. The fact also is, that the Church of Rome places these Hive Epistles in precisely the same relation to the New Testament as she does the Apocryphal Books to the Old. She calls these Epistles and the Apocrypha by the name Deutero-Canonical, or Books of the Second Canon; not meaning thereby that any of them are, in her opinion, in any degree different in value from those of the first Canon; but thereby affirming with an anathema on all who hold the con- trary, that, though they are indeed subsequent in authorization, they are not at all inferior in authority. One of the most celebrated writers of her com- munion in the present day, a Theological Professor in a celebrated College at Rome, thus writes :— “Of the Books of the Old and New Testament, some are called Proto-canonical, others Deutero- canonical. The Proto-canonical are those which were first received into the Canon; the Deutero- canonical are those which were afterwards admitted into it. “The Proto-canonical Books of the Old Testament are those which were received by the Jews. Those of the Second Canon are Baruch, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Lcclesiasticus, and the two Books of the Maccabees, which were afterwards received into the Canon of the Church (the writer means the Canon 252 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. of the Church of Rome, which so received them at the Council of Trent, in the middle of the sixteenth century). “The Proto-canonical Books (he adds) of the New Testament are, the Four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of St. Paul, one of St. Peter, one of St. John. Those of the Second Canon are, the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third of St. John, that of St. James, and St. Jude, and the Apocalypse. “ Both these classes of Books, the Pvoto- and the Deutero-Canonical,” he says, “ have the same autho- rity in the Catholic Church” (the writer means the Church of Rome), “which acknowledges xo distinc- tion between them*.” According to these allegations, it would follow that belief in the inspiration of Scripture must re- solve itself in the end into belief in the inspiration of Rome. No regard would be paid, or would be due, to the qualifications of the authors of the Books in ques- tion, or to the contents of those Books, or to the testimony of the primitive Church of Christ concern- ing them, or to that, either of the Apostles, or even of Christ Himself. I offer no apology, my brethren, for entering into these details. Our religious faith can have no secure * Perrone, de Locis Theologicis, p. 1048. ed. 1842. = =| THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES. 259 foundation unless we are convinced that all that we receive as “ Scripture is given by Inspiration of God,” and that nothing which we do not receive as Scripture as given by His Inspiration. And the circumstances of our own times are such as to render it absolutely necessary that we should all be able to render a sound reason to ourselves and to others, why we receive what we receive, and why we do not receive what we reject. If we cannot do this, the very foundations of our religion will be in great danger of being shaken, before we are aware, by assailants who would either compel us to receive a Religion without Scripture, or would leave us no Religion nor Scripture. Hence, my Christian brethren, and especially you, my beloved younger friends, for whose use these Lectures are specially designed, you see how impor- tant it is that the true character and position of these five Catholic Epistles should be carefully examined and clearly understood. To speak first of the Epistle of St. James. This Epistle, which stands first in order, and has always so stood *, appears, as I have said, to have been written first in time. St. James, as we are informed by a Disciple + of St. John, was the son of Cleopas or Alphzeus and of Mary, the sister of the Blessed Virgin. “This * Euseb. 11. 23. ἡ πρώτη τῶν ὀνομαζομένων καθολικῶν. ‘+ Papias. See Routh, Reliquiz, i. p. 8. 10. 198, 208. 254 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Mary was one of the women who stood before the cross at the Crucifixion and carried spices to the tomb of our Lord, and was one of the first to whom He showed Himself alive after His Resurrection ; and Cleopas, the father of St. James, was one of the two Disciples who walked with Him to Emmaus. St. James, then, was our Lord’s Cousin according to the flesh, and, in the Jewish manner of speaking, is termed in Scripture “the Lord’s Brother®.” He was one of the Twelve, and, as St. Paul informs us, was honoured by our Lord with a special manifesta- tion after the Resurrection 7. As an Apostle, he was one of those on whom our Lord breathed, and said; “Receive ye the Holy Ghost.” He was one of the assembled Twelve upon whom the Spirit descended in the likeness of fiery Tongues on the day of Pentecost. After the Ascension of Christ, he was appointed by the Apostles Bishop of Jerusalem, where he re- mained for near thirty years—till his death. His position there was one of great difficulty,and called for the supernatural gifts, with which he was endued. After the Crucifixion, that ill-fated City was the scene of the worst crimes. It was torn with intestine factions, it was defiled with riot, profaned by blas- phemy, maddened by fanaticism, and deluged with blood. Here St. James dwelt—lke Lot in Sodom. Let us remember, also, that it was a task demand- *- Gali 3; 19. +) 1-Cor.cew ἢ: x: | THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES. 255 ing Divine wisdom so to preach the Gospel as not to disparage the Law, and so to build up the Church as not to pull down the Temple; and to show to Priest and Scribe that it was the greatest glory of Moses, whom they read, but did not understand, to have been a faithful witness of Christ, Whom they with wicked hands had crucified and slain. Yet, though he was beset with all these difficulties, such was the courage and gentleness of St. James, that he commanded the respect not only of Christians but of Jews, and was called by all, James the Just. His Epistle is addressed to the Twelve Tribes, to Jewish Christians and to unconverted Jews, Let us pause here for a moment to remark, as a providential circumstance, that the Temple and City of Jerusalem were not destroyed zmmediately after the Crucifixion. It would have been very difficult for Christian teachers to preach the Gospel to the Twelve tribes of the dispersion, if these Christian teachers had been obliged to go in quest of these scattered tribes. But, happily, these tribes came up to Jeru- salem at the three great yearly festivals. Thus these great Jewish festivals became occasions and means for the diffusion of the Gospel of Christ. This fact is clearly brought out in the history of the first Day of Pentecost after the Passover at which our Lord suffered. The events of that day— the Descent of the Holy Spirit, the Gift of tongues, the miracles wrought by the Apostles, their preaching 256 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. in the Name of Jesus, newly risen from the dead— were, doubtless, immediately conveyed by the ebbing streams of the homeward-going Tribes into all the regions of the earth. It cannot be doubted that the Epistle of St. James, addressed to the twelve Tribes was diffused in this manner. Thus, the dispersion of the Jews, and their con- nexion with Jerusalem as a centre of religion, was, in the hands of Divine Providence, one of the most effective means for propagating Christianity. The pilgrim-troops of the Law became Caravans for the Gospel. But to return to St. James. He exclaims to the Jews: “ Ye have condemned and killed the Just One (that is, Jesus Christ), and He doth not resist you*.” Hence this Epistle has no Apostolic benediction. Further ; to the Christians he commends patience, hu- mility, prayer. He writes asa Bishop both to Clergy and Laity, and gives directions concerning their respective duties +. To the Jews, again, he addresses tremendous warnings called for by their sins, above all, by the rejection and crucifixion of Christ, which was soon to be avenged by God’s fierce wrath and retri- bution; “ Cleanse your hands, ye sinners, and purify your hearts.” Soon was their own curse to fall upon their heads; “ fis blood be upon us and upon our children!” ΤῸ them St. James says: “ Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep.” “ Gio to now, ye rich men, weep * James v. 6. } Ibid. v. 14. x. | THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES. 257 and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.” And then the Apostle turns to the Christians and says: “Be patient until the coming of the Lord ;” “ Be ye patient, stablish your hearts; for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.” “Grudge not one against another, lest ye be condemned: Behold, the Φ 06 Ε standeth before the door.” Such is the language of Sr. JAmMEs—the Christian Jeremiah. Is this Epistle inspired ? Consider first the Author. “ The Lord’s Brother ;” called by Him to be an Apostle, and breathed upon by Him; filled with the Holy Ghost; chosen by the Apostles to preside over the Mother Church of Christendom; framing * a decree, at the Council of Jerusalem, which contained the solemn words: “ /¢ hath seemed good to the Hoty Guost and to us ;” treated with special deference by St. Peter and St. Paul, and by all the Apostles}; reverenced for his holiness by Christians and Jews; and sealing with his blood as a Martyr the faith which he had preached as an Apostle. Surely an Epistle, which came from such a man as this, might well claim to be inspired 1. But, how, then, it may be asked, is it to be ex- * Acts xv. 13. 7 Acts κι lg xxi 18: Galli 10: $ It is well shown by Whitby (on James v.), from Josephus, how accurately the predictions of St. James concerning Jerusalem were fulfilled ; and this is a strong proof of inspiration. 8 258 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. plained that this Epistle was not received as inspired in all Churches in the first and second centuries ? Doubts, it is true, we reply, weve entertained at that time in some quarters concerning its inspiration. But, first of all, be it observed, it is one thing for the authority of a book to be doubted, and another thing for it to be rejected. No doubt was entertained any where in the first century concerning the Apocryphal Books of the O/d Testament; they were known not to be inspired. But, concerning the Kpistle of St. James, and the other four Catholic Epistles, which have been before mentioned, doubts were entertained by some; and the very fact of the doubt proves that they who doubted might have their doubts cleared up, and receive these books as inspired. And, next, we know, that these doubts were cleared up. A// these five Epistles were received in course of time by all who had once doubted con- cerning them. Next, it is to be remembered, that though some doubted, others did not doubt, but received all these Five Epistles from the beginning; and the very doubts of those who did doubt are presumptive proofs that they who did not doubt had good reason for not doubting, and that they acted rightly in receiving these Epistles from the very first. Be it remembered, also, that the question at issue was not concerning a light matter, but respecting one of unspeakable importance. It was not cons x7 THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 259 cerning the genuineness of a classical Poem, or the authenticity of a History. No. It was nothing short of this,—Is this Writing from Man, or from God ? Therefore, Christians were Jound to pause, till they had conclusive evidence whereon to decide; lest, haply, they should ascribe what was divine to man, or impute what was human to God. Let me, also, observe, that, in those early times, innumerable writings bearing the names of Apostles and Evangelists, were disseminated by heretics. Thus, for instance, spurious and heterodox composi- tions were diffused under the name of the Authors of these very Five Catholic Epistles. We read of forge- ries then current, such as the following: “'The Book of James,” “The Gospel of Peter,” “The Preach- ing and Revelation of Peter,” “The Acts of John,” “The Gospel of Jude *.” Therefore, in their genuine writings, the Apostles charged the primitive Churches to be upon their guard against heretical and supposititious Books. “Be not shakent{,” says St. Paul, “by word or by letter as from us as that the day of Christ is at hand.” “ Beloved,” says St. John, “believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God; because many false Prophets are gone out into the world 1." The primitive Churches, therefore, were obliged to exercise a sage caution. It was their duty to doubt. * See the copious list given by Jones on the Canon, pp. 28—31. ; + 2 Thess. i. 2. ἘΠῚ John iva a9 260 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. They would, I say, have been very culpable, if they had not suspended their judgment concerning the authority of Epistles, brought to them with the name of Apostles of Christ, till the inspiration of such books was avouched to them by indisputable evidence. They were under a most solemn obliga- tion to wait, till such evidence could be procured, and not to receive books even of the highest intrinsic value on insufficient grounds. For, be it observed, it was certain, that, 7f these books were really in- spired, authentic proof of their inspiration could and would be given in course of time; whereas, if any uninspired book were once received as Scripture, then, it was very probable that false doctrine would come in with it; and it was certain, that the con- fidence of the people in the authority of the books which were really cnspired, and had been received as such, would be shaken, and so the foundations of Christianity would be weakened and undermined. While, therefore, we see good reason in the cir- cumstances of the case, why some should have doubted concerning the inspiration of these Epistles, we derive a firm assurance from these same circum- stances that those Churches which did not doubt concerning their inspiration, but received them as Scripture from the first, had convincing reasons for doing so. We have spoken of the demurs of some Churches concerning these Epistles; and of the wise caution exercised by the Church generally in the reception ΧΑ] THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 261 of Books into the Canon of Scripture. And we pro- ceed to say, that to this wise caution, or rather, we would say, to the Hoty Spririr suggesting it, we now owe it, that no Book, which has been once received by the Catholic Church, has ever been proved to have been received without adequate reason. Thus, our trust in the judgment of the Church, as a whole, is strengthened by our knowledge of the discreet manner in which that judgment was exercised. Yes, my brethren, it is very satisfactory to know that no book was admitted into the Canon of Scrip- ture, before its credentials were rigidly examined. It is a most blessed thing to be sure that every book which we receive as Scripture has passed through the most searching and scrutinizing ordeal. And our belief in the inspiration of the Books of Scripture now universally received, is thus confirmed by the very doubts which deferred the reception of some small portions of Scripture in certain parts of the Church. It must also be remembered, with respect to these five Catholic Epistles, that there were points in them (and we know what those points were) which might and did in the first instance suggest doubt; but which, when afterwards examined, did really rivet conviction. For instance, St. James in the commencement of his Epistle does not call himself an Apostle, but a Servant of Jesus Christ. The same is the case with St. Jude. Till the reason of this was explained, it might be doubted whether these Epistles were really 262 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. written by Apostles. Just as it was doubted whether the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by St. Paul, because it had not his name prefixed to it. Again, St. Jude in his Epistle refers to the conten- tion of Michael* the Archangel with the Devil, for the body of Moses, of which we read nothing in the Old Testament; and St. Jude, also, was thought to refer to an Apocryphal Book, the Book of Enoch. Hence + demurs arose concerning this Epistle. But, when these matters were cleared up, then, what had caused a scruple produced greater as- surance 1. So again, the style of the Second Epistle of St. Peter ( is different from that of the first; and in the second and third Epistles of St. John, the author calls himself a Presbyter or Elder, and not * Jude 9. + Jude 14. Jerome, Catal. Script. iv. { It is evident that a person counterfeiting an Apostle would have called himself an Apostle, and have endeavoured to imitate his style, and would have abstained from using suspicious writings. Eusebius well remarks (Dem. Evang. iii. 5.) that it was quite in character with St. John’s humility to call himself ὁ πρεσβύτερος. The same may be said of St. James and St. Jude, calling themselves δοῦλοι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. See Clem. Alex. Adumbratio in Ep. Jude, p. 1007, ed. Oxon. “ Judas, extans valdé religiosus, non dixit seipsum fratrem Domini. Sed quid dixit? Judas servus J. C. frater autem Jacobi.” § Jerome, Catal. Scrip. i. St. Jerome, in his Epist. 120. ὁ. 11. says, “The two Epistles of Peter differ in style ; whence we perceive, that according to the exigency of circumstances, he used different interpreters.”” Whatever may be thought of this solution, it shows the difficulty, and explains the delay in the reception of the Epistle in certain churches. x THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES. 263 an Apostle. 'These points excited surmise. Time was required to explain them; the judgment of certain Churches was held for a while in suspense ; but, finally, and without exception, the suffrages of all inclined in their favour. They were all received, by all Churches, in all places; and so all doubts concerning them were, or ought to have been, at an end. But to return to the Epistle of St. James. Was it received as Scripture in some parts of the Church, as soon as it was written ? Let us examine this question. Abundant evidence might be adduced to show that it was generally known and received in Jerusalem, and by The Twelve Tribes of the dispersion, to whom it is addressed. In proof of this, 1 would observe, that St. James was martyred at Jerusalem, at the Passover of the * year 62; and the circumstances of his martyrdom are narrated as follows, by a person who lived in the age next to the Apostles, the Church Historian Hege- sippus 7. After describing the sanctity of St. James’s life, the writer thus speaks. “The religious sects, then prevalent at Jerusalem, were wont to address this question to St. James, ‘Which is the Door of Jesus? These sects,” adds the writer, “ did not be- lieve in the Resurrection, nor that Christ would come * See Bp. Pearson, Annales Paulini, p. 19. + Ap. Euseb. ii. 23. 264 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. to reward every one according to his works. But when many Jews of high station were converted by St. James, an uproar was made by the Scribes and Pharisees, exclaiming, that all the people was ex- pecting the coming of Jesus as the Christ. They, therefore, came to St. James, and said, ‘ We entreat thee, restrain the people, for they are all gone mad after Jesus, as if he were the Christ. We implore thee, therefore, to instruct all, who have come up to the Passover, concerning the truth. For we all venerate thee; we all bear testimony to thee, that thou art Just, and no respecter of persons. Stand, therefore, on a lofty place of the Temple, that thou mayest. be seen and heard by all; for all the Tribes with the Gentiles have come up to the Passover.’ .... They placed him, therefore, on a pinnacle of the Temple, and cried aloud, ‘O thou Just man, whom we all ought to believe, tell us, since the People is going out after that Jesus who has been crucified, tell us, Which is the Door of Jesus ? “Such was their question. To which St. James replied with a loud voice, ‘ Why ask ye me concern- ing Jesus the Son of Man? He sitteth in heaven on the Right Hand of power, and will come again on the clouds of heaven” . . Upon this many of the people exclaimed, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David! But St. James was cast down headlong by the Scribes and Pharisees; and falling upon his knees and praying, ‘ Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do, he was stoned and beaten to death.” al THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 265 Such is the narrative of Hegesippus concerning the martyrdom of St. James. Much perplexity has been occasioned by the words which occur twice in this history, “ Which is the Door of Jesus?” As they appear to bear upon our present subject, and as no satisfactory explana- tion*, as far as 1 am aware, has as yet been offered of them, perhaps the following endeavour to account for them may be viewed with more indulgence. The Jews, we know from the Acts of the Apostles, were exasperated at the rescue of St. Paul from their hands; and we learn + from early Church history, that they therefore determined to wreak vengeance upon St. James. It has been justly observed 1, that the publication of St. James’s Epistle, addressed to the Jews at Jerusalem, as well as to the Tribes of the dispersion and to the Jewish converts,—to whom doubtless copies were carried by those who came up to the periodical Jewish feasts, and so the Epistle was dispersed throughout the world,—was very obnoxious to some of the Jews, especially to the higher classes, because it announced the Woes that would soon fall upon them and upon their infatuated Country. The Tribes, to whom it was addressed, came up * The various opinions may be seen in the Variorum Notes to Eusebius, 11. 23; and in Lardner’s Life of St. James, ch. xvi. + Euseb. ii. 23. t By Lardner. See Macknight, Preface to St. James, sect. ill. 266 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY oF [LECT. to the Passover; and the Rulers hoped, by means of flattery or menace, to obtain from St. James some recantation of what he had written. It is certain, from the narrative we have quoted, that the ex- pression, “ Which is the Door of Jesus?” was a taunting question commonly addressed to the Apostle. What did it mean? “The people is gone wild after Jesus: they expect that He will imme- diately appear. Which, then, is the way? What the road by which He will come? Which the Door by which He will enter ?” Such seems to be the meaning of the question. And further: it contains, I believe, a reference to one of the most striking passages in St. James the Just’s own Epistle-——“* The coming of the Lord draweth nigh, behold the JupGE standeth before the Door *.” This supposition is confirmed by the reply of St. James, “ He will come on the clouds of Heaven ;” that is, Jesus, the King of Glory, has entered the Doors of Heaven; through the “everlasting Doors” of Heaven He will come to judge the World. If this supposition be true, then it would appear * James v. 8, 9. Compare Matt. xxiv. 33. ‘It is near, even at the Door.” In the words also, “Ποῖ art no respecter of persons,” there may, perhaps, be a reference to James 11. 1. 9. The words in his Epistle ἐφονεύσατε τὸν Δίκαιον, οὐκ ἀντιτάσ- σεται ὑμῖν (ν. 6.) 3 and πολὺ ἰσχύει δέησις Δικαίου ἐνεργουμένη (v. 16), have a special interest considered in connexion with the prayer and martyrdom of ‘the Just” follower of tHe Just. ν᾿ Κ᾿ x. | THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 67 probable from this reference to the Epistle, that it was generally known at Jerusalem, and to the Twelve Tribes of the Dispersion, and was received by the Churches* of Palestine. Let me observe, further, that this Epistle is con- tained in the early primitive version of the Syrian Church, which, from its neighbourhood to Palestine, where the Epistle was written, had the best means of ascertaining its authority. It was received also by the Roman Church} in the second century, and is frequently cited by St. Clement 1, Bishop of Rome, the fellow-labourer of St. Paul. But fur- ther: St. Jude, in his Epistle, introduces himself as the “brother of James ;” by which he seems to inti- mate that James was well known to those whom he himself addresses. This could hardly have been, except by an Epistle; for James, as far as we know, never left Jerusalem. Besides, some early ᾧ inter- preters affirm that St. Paul himself refers to St. James, when he says, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, “ Remember your spiritual guides, who have spoken unto you the word of the Lord, whose faith follow, * The words in St. James, Ep. ii. 2, prove the existence of public religious assemblies among those to whom he wrote ; and his directions concerning religious assemblies seem to intimate that the letter wherein these directions were given, would be read in them. + It is cited by Tertullian de Orat. c. 8. adv. Jud. 2. { Capp. x. xxill, XXxXviil. § Theodoret ad loc. 268 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. considering the end of their conversation* ;” that is, meditating on the close of their labours. Here, it has been thought with much reason, St. Paul refers the Hebrews to the glorious martyr- dom of the Bishop of Jerusalem, and to the Word of the Lord spoken by him in his Epistle. And further still. There are more than ten dif- ferent passages of a moral and doctrinal character in St. Peter’s First Epistle (an Epistle, be it remem- bered, universally received as inspired, from the first, and written after + that of St. James), which coincide literally more or less with passages in the Epistle of St. James{; and so St. Peter, or rather the Holy Spirit speaking by St. Peter, bears a strong, though silent, witness to the Inspiration of this Epistle. * Heb. xii. 7: + For it was written a short time only before St. Peter’s own death, (see below p. 272,) which took place A.D. 68. And St. James was martyred A.D. 62. +t Compare Jamies 0.) i ΞΞΙ ΡΟ James 1. 2. = 1 Pet 1. 6. ΞΞ ‘Pet.ty.. 12: James 1. 11..=.1 Pet. 1. 24. James i. 18. ==i1 Pet: 1. 9. = fl Pet. 1.22: James 11. 7. = 1 Pet.av. 14. James 1Πι 19. ΞΞ᾿Ὶ ῬΈΕΙ 19. James iv. 1. = 1 Pet. τι. Ll, James iv. 6. ΞΞ Ὶ Bet. τα. Ὁ. James iv. 7. = 1 Pet. v. 9. James iv. 10. = 1 Pet;-v. ὃ: James v. 20. = 1 Pet. iv. 8. | THE- CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 269 He could not give a clearer testimony to it, than by thus adopting parts of it and incorporating it in an inspired Kpistle. We therefore arrive at the conclusion, first, that the sacred functions, divine endowments, and saintly life and death of St. James, the Lord’s Brother, the First Bishop of Jerusalem, render it probable, a priori, that an Epistle, addressed by him to the converted and unconverted Jews 15 divinely inspired ; and that, secondly, in fact, the Epistle of St. James was received as Scripture in the age of the writer, by persons whose verdict is conclusive concerning its Inspiration; and we add, that the Epistle itself, especially when considered with respect to the cir- cumstances under which it was written, confirms this belief. Let me add, lastly,—and this remark, be it ob- served, applies to all the Five Epistles,—that the subsequent suffrage of the whole Church in favour of these Epistles proves that those particular Churches judged aright, who received these Epistles from the beginning. Christ never promised Omniscience or Infallibility to any one branch of His Church. But He did promise to be alway with His Church, and to guide her into all truth ; and this promise would not have been fulfilled, if either the whole Church were now in error concerning the Inspiration of these Epistles, or if, these Epistles being inspired, their Inspiration 270 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY, &c. had not been known to any portion of the Church in the age in which they were written. But we must pause here for the present, and reserve to another occasion what still remains to be said on the other Catholic Epistles. LECTURE’ XI: JuDE 17. “ But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.” WE pass now to the Seconp EpistLe of St. ΡΕΤΕΝ. Its genuineness being acknowledged, of which proof has been given on a former occasion *, no one, I think, can doubt} its Inspiration. Its author is St. Peter; St. Peter about to die for Christ, and delivering a farewell charge to the Chureh. “J know that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me; moreover, I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in re- 39 membrance 1. We, therefore, anticipates that this, his last letter, will be generally received, and read. This expectation has been fulfilled. He also utters a prophecy. “There shall be false teachers among = Lect. vin. p. 151. i + I have not, therefore, thought it worth while to dwell on its reception by Justin Martyr, ce. Trypho, p. 308. See Mede’s Works, p. 611. TIrenzeus, v. 23; v. 28. ite?) Det. te ΤΊ 10. 272 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. you,” he says, “who shall privily bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them.” This, also, we shall see, has been fulfilled. And prophecy is a work, and a fu/filled prophecy is a proof, of Inspiration. Again, he couples the Second Epistle with the First, and puts it on @ par with τέ; and the First Epistle has ever been received as Inspired. This Second Epistle, (he says,) in the first verse of the third chapter, J write to you already *, that is, sooner perhaps than you may have expected after the first, in “both which Epistles} I now stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance.” The Author, there- fore, presents the Epistle as inspired. And, surely, if there ever was a time in the life of the Blessed Apostle, to whom Jesus Christ gave many excellent gifts, and commanded him earnestly to feed His flock; if there ever was a period of his ministry in which a double effusion of divine grace might have been expected by him, both for his own sake and for that of the Church of Christ, it was when he was uttering his last words, and was girding up his loins to follow Christ, by dying on the cross. But this is not all. The Apostle St. Jude, the brother of St. James, has authenticated St. Peter’s Second Epistle by adopting much of it into his own. * ἤδη γράφω: whence it appears that the First Epistle also was written only a short time before his death, which took place A. Ὁ. 68. + 2 Pet. ili, 1. ἐν αἷς ξιεγείρω. XI. ] THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER. 273 St. Jude’s Kpistle consists of only twenty-five verses, and it is very remarkable that in these there are eleven passages from St. Peter’s Second Epistle *. St. Jude bears witness to the fulfilment of St. Peter’s prophecy, to which I have just referred : “There are certain men who have crept in privily, (says St. Jude,) who were forewritten (that is, an- nounced by the Apostolic prophecy) to this con- demnation ; ungodly men . . . denying the only God, and our Lord Jesus Christ >.” This passage, be it observed by the way, clearly teaches our Lord’s Divinity ; for the words, “denying God and our Lord Jesus Christ” of St. Jude are parallel to, and identical in sense with, the words “denying the Lord that bought them” of St. Peter. But, to return; St. Jude quotes St. Peter’s Epistle as already known and received, as an Apostolic Epistle, by those whom he, St. Jude, addresses. Thus, he says, “ Beloved, remember the words spoken before by the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, how ἘΞ} 0ΠῸ} DSS Ὁ Pen 1. Ὁ. ΠΠΠΕ ΞΘ ΤΕ ΠΝ Jiuder6— 2) Pennie Judewie—= 2) Peru: Jude 8: —.2)Petsirselo0: Jude: Oe — Or Retenice tele Jude 11: = 2-Petsiu5 15: Jude: 9. =: & Pets misty; Jude: 6a ΞΞΞ 2 Petony 18: Jude-18., = 2 Βα πε 1. JudeitS. = 2 Pets: 115-3: + Jude 4. 274 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. they told you that there should be scoffers in the last time walking after their own ungodly lusts.” This is verbatim from St. Peter's Second Epistle. “ fe- member the commandment of us the Apostles .. . Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts*.” Thus St. Jude bears witness to the Inspiration of St. Peter’s Second Epistle, by appealing to its pro- phetical veracity, and by adopting its words, and by referring to it as received by the Churches to which he, St. Jude, wrote. St. JUDE’s own EpistLe, which appears to have been written after the death of all the Apostles except St. John, was received both in the Eastern and the Western Church in the second and third centuries 7. Again. If the genuineness of this Epistle be established, there cannot, I apprehend, be any doubt of its inspiration. And its genuineness may, [ think, be proved as follows. The Author of the Epistle describes himself as Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James. St. Jude, we * 2 Pet. iii. 8, Concerning the pernicious doctrines and licentious practices of these false Teachers and their followers, see particularly Hammond’s Dissertationes, Diss. 1. capp. iii— vill. tom. iv. p. 725. ed. 1684. + Canon Muratorianus ; Epistola sané Judz in Catholica habe- tur.—Clemens Alex. Peed. ii. p. 239. iii. p. 431. Adumbratio in Ep. Jud. p. 1007. Tertullian, de Cultu Foem. 1. 3. Origen (Huet. i. p. 223) well calls it “an Epistle of few lines, but full of powerful words of divine grace.” x1] THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE. 275 know, died before St John, that is. before the beginning of the second century. Now. we learn from early Church History*, that St. James was succeeded in the Bishopric of Jerusalem by Symeon his brother; and also, that Symeon sate im that see till the year of our Lord 107, when he suf fered martyrdom by crucifixion, in the 120th year of his age. We find that the Epistle of St. Jude was known in the East and the West in the second century; it therefore appears to have been circulated in Symeon’s lifetime; indeed, an Epistle. bearing the Apostle’s name, and first appearing after the beginning of the second century, would never have received any currency, such as the Epistle of St. Jude has re- ceived; and Symeon would never have permitied a letter bearing the name of an Apostle, his own brother, Jude, brother of his own Apostolical prede- cessor, St. James, to have been circulated, if it had not been really written by St. Jude. The Epistle, therefore, of St. Jude, is genuine; it is the work of an Apostle, and the Epistles of the other Apostles being proved to be inspired, its Apostolic origin is a proof of its Inspiration. For Christ gave egual gifts to all His Apostles; Christ made the same promise to them all. “γε shall sit upon twelve thrones judg- ing the twelve tribes of Israelt” “And when Matthias came into the place of Judas, and was * Euseb. m. 32. + Matt. xix. 28. T2 276 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. -" “numbered with the eleven Apostles*,” the Holy Ghost fell upon them all; the tongues of fire sate upon each of them. And in the Apocalypse, it is said, “ that the wall of the Holy City has twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb} ;” and thus in the last book of the New Testament, to all of the Apostles is ascribed equal honour; and so all have equal inspiration. Of the two short Epistles ascribed to Sr. JoHn I would observe, that, whatever is of a doctrinal character in them is contained in his longer Epistle, which has ever been received as inspired. If they were written defore that Epistle, then he has autho- rized them by adopting their teaching and language ; if after, then he has given a no less weighty sanction by anticipating it. They certainly were not written by any false teacher, for they contain only true doctrine,—the doctrine of St. John; and whoever committed them to paper, (and all testimony { is in * Acts τ: 26. 7 Rev. xxi. 14. t See Origen’s testimony in Appendix A. No. VIII. (a), and that of Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, in the third century, ap. Euseb. vil. 25. οὐδὲ ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ φερομένῃ ᾿Ιωάννου καὶ τρίτῃ, καίτοι βραχείαις οὔσαις ἐπιστολαῖς ὁ ᾿Ιωάννης ὀνομαστὶ πρό- κειται ἀλλὰ ἀνωνύμως ὁ πρεσβύτερος γέγραπται. Irenzus, whose testimony—on account of his connexion with St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John—is of the greatest weight, unhesitatingly ascribes the Second Epistle to St. John (Adv. Her. i. 16. § 3; and again, ill. 16. § 8): and if the Second is his, so is the Third ; for the word ὁ πρεσ[βύτερος identifies the author of the one with that of the other. The Roman Canon, also, of the second cen- tury says, ‘‘ Johannis due in Catholica habentur.”’ App. A. No. vi. XI] THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN AND ST. PETER. 277 favour of their genuineness,) their essence is his; and so in substance they are inspired. Let me here desire your attention to a very remarkable connexion between the /7rst Epistle of Sr. Perer and the Second of Sr. Joun. The First Epistle of St. Peter, as appears from its commencement, is addressed to the “ H/ect, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia;” that is, to the Jews dispersed in Asia Minor; and at its close we read, “The Church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you, and so doth A/arcus my son.” The Second Epistle of St. John begins thus: “The Elder to the Elect Lady and her Children whom I love in the truth :” and it ends with the words, “ The Children of thine Elect Sister greet thee.” You are aware that it is much doubted what place the Babylon was, from which St. Peter wrote; and also, whether the Elect Lady, to whom St. John wrote, was a Person .or a Church. If I may venture to offer an opinion on these long controverted points, I would say, that both these questions may, I think, be determined at once; and that, by the solution of them, we shall gain an important result with respect to the Canon of the New Testament. In some ancient Latin manuscripts, St. John’s first Epistle is inscribed Ad Parthos*,—to the * See Note below p. 282; and Lardner, ii. 587. ii. 428. 278 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Parthians; and, as is probable from earlier authori- ties, as well as from internal evidence, this inscription belongs to St. John’s Second Epistle, as well as the First, if not to the exclusion of the First. The Latin Translator of a work of Clement of Alexandria *, (the Greek original of which is not now extant), says, “Secunda Johannis Epistola, quae ad Virgines inscripta est, simplicissima est.” It has been well conjectured that St. Clement wrote πρὸς Πάρθους, which was corrupted into πρὸς Παρθένους, whence the Latin Translator wrote ad Virgines; and this is almost certain, from the fact that there is nothing at all in St. John’s Second Epistle concerning Virgins; and St. Clement himself says that this Second Epistle was written to a certain Babylonian, and that the word Electa, the Elect Lady, intimates the Election of the Church. St. Jerome gives the same meaning of the word Electat; he applies it to a Church; and this is still further confirmed by the word Kuoia, or Lady, which is very appropriate to a Church (Κυριακή) as connected with Κύριος, the Lord. But what is to be said of the word Babylonia, to whom, Clement affirms, St. John wrote his Second Kpistle ὁ and how is it to be connected with the in- scription “Ad Parthos,’—to the Parthians,—which St. Clement appears to say belongs to that Epistle ? We would suggest the following reply : * Adumbrat. p. 1011. St. Clement flourished A.D. 192. + See Hammond on 1 Pet. v. 13. 2 John ii. 1. XI.] THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN AND ST. PETER. 279 St. Peter was the Apostle of the Jews, and he was the beloved fellow Apostle of St. John; he addresses his First Epistle to the Jews of the Asiatic dispersion*; that is, to those of St. John’s peculiar province; and he closes his Epistle with the salutation, “ Your co-elect Sister Church at Babylon saluteth you, and so doth Marcus my son.” And St. John, the brother Apostle of St. Peter, e/ect together with him,—St. John, spe- cially beloved by Christ, as Christ was specially beloved by St. Peter, —St. John, the Metropolitan + of the lect of Asia, whom St. Peter had addressed, writes to the Hl/ect Lady and her children, whom he, St. John, loves in the truth; and he closes his Epistle with the salutation, “The Children of thine Elect Sister greet thee.” “The Elect Lady,” I believe, was the Church of Babylon, and her “Elect Sister” was the Asiatic Church. Tence, as I suppose, St. Clement says that St. John writes to a Babylonian Electa, signifying an Elect Church; and also, according to the conjecture already mentioned, to the Parthians, of whose empire, as it then existed, Babylon, it must be remembered, was the most celebrated city, as far as the Jews and their history are concerned. Hence, Milton, in the third book of the Paradise Regained {, well writes, © tReet: 1.42. + See the authorities collected by Archbishop Ussher, “Original of Metropolitans,” pp. 65—95. Oxf. 1641. t Ver. 280. 280 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. “There Babylon, the wonder of all tongues. All these the Parthian holds.” Babylon was the city to which the 7 wo tribes were carried away captive, and from which those of the Asiatic dispersion, to whom St. Peter writes, were de- rived; and we know, from Philo and Josepbus*, that Babylon contained a great many Jews in the Apostolic age. In fact, the Second (and, perhaps, also the First) Epistle of St. John, who is said to have preached the Gospel in Parthia}, appears to have been written to the elect Church of the Parthian Assyria, of which Babylon was the head; and to be of the nature of a reply to St. Peter’s First Epistle “to the Elect of Asia,” written from the same babylon, and bearing the salutation of the co-elect Church of that city. But what, it may now be asked, had St. Peter to do with the Assyrzan Babylon ? Let me offer a reply to this enquiry. It has been well observed by the learned Joseph Mede 1, that there is something very significant in the arrangement of the names of the countries spe- cified by the inspired Writer of the Acts of the Apostles, in his enumeration of the Jews of the dispersion who had flocked to Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and were witnesses of the eftects of * Philo Legat. ad Caium, ὃ 36. Josephus, Antiq. xxiii. 12. + See the authority in Cave, Life of the Apostles, p. 364. { Book i. Discourse xx. ΧΙ. THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN AND ST. PETER. 281 the Descent of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles *, and listened to S¢. Peter's sermon on that day, by which three thousand souls were added to the Church. “ How hear we every man in our own tongue wherein we were born?” Now, let us observe the Historian’s order. First, « Parthians, Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia and Judea.” These were the Jews of the dispersion+ of the Two tribes and of the Ten tribes, and these Jews of the dispersion of the two tribes and of the ten tribes were now subject to the Parthians, whence the Parthians are named first ; and of these the metropolis was Babylon. Next in order come those of the Asiatic disper- sion, who were derived from Babylon, and are called in the Acts, “the dwellers in Cappadocia, in Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia.” Hence we see why St. Peter, the Apostle of the Circumcision, went to Babylon—the Parthian Baby- lon. It was the head-quarters of those whom he himself had addressed with such wonderful success at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and who are named first in order by the inspired Historian of the Acts. Hence, also, we see, why, being at Babylon, St. Peter addressed an Epistle to the “strangers scat- * Actsil..5. + Concerning these several dispersions, see Mede, |. c. and particularly Bp. Pearson, Opera Posthuma, 11. p. 31, and Light- foot, vol. il. p. 1144, ed. Lond. 1684. 282 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. tered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.” They were derived from Babylon ; they were co-elect with the Church there. He had preached to them also at Jerusalem; and they are placed second in order by the inspired Writer of the Acts. Hence, also, the Apostle St. John, who was sta- tioned in As¢a, among these strangers of the disper- sion there, and who had been St. Peter’s inseparable companion at Jerusalem *, and is particularly noticed as such in the Acts of the Apostles, takes up St. Peter’s language, and responds from Asia to Parthia, from Ephesus to Babylon, from the “ elect sister” of the one} to the “elect lady” of the other 1. Hence, also, we shall see the appropriateness of * See above Lect. vii. p. 190. Acts iii. 1; iv. 19; vil, 14. + 2 John, 13. + 2 John 1. After the above passage had been written, I met with the following words of Estius (in Ep. I. Joh. Pref. p. 1201. ed. Rothomag. 1709): ‘* Veterum traditio est ad Parthos scriptam esse Joannis Epistolam: Hunc titulum ei tribuunt Hyginus Papa, Epist. i. Possidius in Indic. Op. Augustini, et ipse Au- gustinus, Quest. Evang. ii. c. 39. Denique et Joannes Secun- dus Papa in Epist. ad Valerium Episcopum: Scripsit autem ad Parthos, que gens sita erat juxta Medos, quod in ea regione plu- rimi essent Judeei ex antiqua dispersione decem tribuum; unde et Act. cap. 2, primo loco referuntur Parthi. Igitur quemad- modum Petrus Epistolam dedit ad Judzos dispersionis Ponti, &e., quos Lucas enumeravit posteriori loco, sicet Joannes scripsit ad Judzeos in Oriente, id est, in Parthia cum locis adjacentibus, non ita tamen quin uterque Apostolus suam Epistolam communi- catam voluerit etiam gentilibus earundem regionum qui in Christo crediderant utpote membris ejusdem Ecclesiz.” XI.] THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN AND ST. PETER. 283 the mention of S¢. M/ark in St. Peter’s salutation, “Thy co-elect sister greeteth thee; and so doth Marcus my son.” For, if we turn back to the enumeration in the Acts, we find, first, as we have said, the Parthian or Assyrian dispersion; secondly, the Asiatic, derived from the Parthian ; thirdly and /astly, the A’gqyptian, who were carried from Judea into Mgypt by Ptolemy Lagus, or, as they are called by the sacred Historian of the Acts, “those of A’qypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, Jews and Proselytes, Cretes and Arabians; we do hear them speak in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” These three Dispersions were, if we may so speak, St. Peter’s audience at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost; and they were the spiritual Province of that Apostle,—the Apostle of the Circumcision. Now observe, how did St. Peter provide for all these three Dispersions which made up his Province ? He provided for the first, that of Babylon*, by visiting them in person. He provided for the second, the Asiatic, by writing to it from Babylon. He provided for the third, the dAvgyptian, by sending to them “ Marcus his son,” who was the first Bishop of Alexandria 7. * If any one is still disposed to doubt whether the Babylon of St. Peter is the Babylon of Assyria, let me refer him to Light- foot’s Sermon on 1 Pet. v. 13. vol. ii. p. 1144. + See S. Jerome’s Cat. Script. Ecel. vin. 284 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. Thus, St. Peter, writing from Babylon to Asia, and sending the salutation of Mark, connects all the three dispersions together. And thus he took care of them all. Time and the occasion do not allow that I should say any thing here on the reply, derived from these results, to the Romish identification of the Babylon of St. Peter’s Epistle with the See of Rome; and on the consequent claim to universal spiritual supre- macy set up for St. Peter, and through him for the Bishop of Rome: neither of which allegations is compatible with what has been now submitted to your consideration. But I pass on to observe that St. Peter, in his first Kpistle, incorporates parts of the Epistle of St. James. St. Jude, also, refers to St. James, and adopts the language of the Second of St. Peter, which, be it remembered, recognizes as Scripture all the Epistles of St. Paul. St. John, in his Epistle, responds to the First of St. Peter, and interweaves the same thoughts and words in all his three Epistles. Thus, all these seven Apostolic and Catholic Epistles cohere together, and confirm each other. This mutual intertexture, if I may so call it, is a re- markable characteristic of the Books of Scripture *. The second and third Evangelists, St. Mark and St. Luke, pursued a wise and sure method of warrant- ing the truth and genuineness of each former Gospel with all the authority of the latter. This they did * See above p. 151, line 14. XI. | THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 285 by quoting its words, and thereby recommending each other’s histories. Thus they became joint vouchers for the truth of these genuine Gospels, and, at the same time, joint opposers* of the spurious ones, which were impiously obtruded on the world. St. John pursued a different course for doing the same thing; he authenticated the foregoing Gospels, not by adopting, but, for the most part, by omztting, what they had related, and by sapplying what they had omitted. The same is true of the Apostolic Hpistles ; they are, as it were, entwined one with another in a loving embrace of words and sentiments. And the Inspiration of one proves the Inspiration of its pre- decessors. Further; as the beloved disciple, the blessed Evangelist and Apostle δή. John, whose life was pro- longed far beyond that of any other writer of the New Testament, authenticates the Gospels by omit- ting much that they contain, so he also canonizes the Epistles likewise by his s?/ence. If what had been taught in them had been erroneous, he would have raised his voice against it. But, by abstaining from entering on those great and sublime doctrines handled by St. Paul and St. Peter, by St. James and St. Jude, and by confining him- self to the Doctrine of Christian Love, St: John showed his approval of what they had taught, and * Compare Townson’s Works, p. 229; and Dr. Owen’s Observations on the Four Gospels, p. 109. 286 ON THE CANONICAL AUTHORITY OF [LECT. that it was all-sufficient, without any Additions or Developments, provided it was crowned with Charity. Thus, we see, the Unity of plan on which the Gos- pels and Epistles are written bears witness to their derivation from One and the Same Spirit. And the testimony to their Inspiration from the same beloved Disciple, St. John, is a guarantee to us of the Divine sanction of Him, on Whose breast that Disciple leaned, and drank in Wisdom from His mouth. We return, for a short time longer, to the five above-mentioned Catholic Epistles. We find that these Epistles, bearing the names of Apostles of Christ, were received as Scripture in primitive times, by persons who were admirably qualified to judge of their authority. It is true, they were not received at once by all. Scripture, like all instruments in which God is pleased to use man’s agency, is subject to the laws of Time and Space. The Books of Scripture could not be known at once ἐο all; and it was very necessary, as we have observed, that they, to whom these writings were brought, should carefully examine their claims before they received them as divine. This examina- tion required time. Some Churches had_ better opportunities of ascertaining their Inspiration than others, and received them at once; while others, whose means of deciding were less, suspended their judgment. If we may so speak, there was no con- spiracy in their favour. One Church after another tried them; one Church after another approved XI. | THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. 287 them; till at length they were received by all; and this final Universal reception is an irrefragable proof that those Churches were right, which received them at the very first. Further. Let us here remark that the doubts which were entertained concerning these Epistles in some parts of the Church, in early times, are strong confirmations of the Inspiration of those other main portions of Scripture,—I mean the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and St. Paul’s Epistles, and the first Kpistle of St. Peter and St. John,—concerning which zo doubts were ever entertained in any part of the Church. These doubts concerning the one show that the authority of the other was indubitable. Thus, these doubts are of a twofold use; by their ev- istence, as to these five Epistles, they prove that there was no room for doubting as to the other Books of Scripture; and by being overcome, in the case of these Epistles, they show that these Epistles are of equal authority with those which were never doubted of at all. Now, therefore, we turn to the allegations men- tioned at the beginning of our Discourse; and we ask,—lIs it true that the Canon of the New Testament was not settled till the fourth century 4 Certainly not, is our reply. The Canon of Scripture was settled as soon as it was written; and it was not in the power of the whole world to unsettle it. The Books of Scripture did not 4ecome inspired by time. Eternity cannot raise the word of man into 288 ON THE RULE OF FAITH. [ LECT. the word of God, nor reduce the word of God into the word of man. They were inspired from the beginning; and by those, who had the best means of judging, they were received as inspired from the first. Others doubted, and were convinced. But it is no less preposterous to allege that the Canon of Scripture was not settled till the fourth century, than it would be to say that the Resurrection of our Lord was not believed by the Apostles, till St. Thomas exclaimed, “ My Lord and my God*.” Next, it has been asked by Divines of Rome, Since the Rule of Faith must be known, and since some portions of Scripture were not universally received till the fourth century, can Scripture be our Rule of Faith ? To this, we answer, Scripture,—that is, the Word of God written,—is not the Rule of Faith to those to whom it is not given, or to those who cannot know it to be Scripture. But it 7s the Rule of Faith to αὐ to whom it zs given. Is, then, Scripture given to ws ? Has it been avouched to ws by God, as His Word ἢ This, my brethren, be assured, is the question, the only question for ws. And we must answer it. And if it is to be answered in the affirma- tive, then, let us be assured, Serzpture is the RuLE oF Farru to ws. And let us not be deceived by the miserable sophistry which would endeavour to per- suade us, that, because all parts of Scripture were not equally known as Scripture to all Christians in * John xx. 28. xy ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 289 the world for some centuries, and, we might add, are not known even now,—especially where the reading of Scripture ¢s prohibited,—that therefore Scripture is not the Rute of Farru to these who have had the Scripture in their possession for nearly two thousand years. Rather let us fear lest we incur the doom pronounced upon those who “err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God *.” Next, you must be carefully warned against that other dangerous error of the Church of Rome, in placing these five Catholic Epistles in the same category with the Apocrypha of the Old Testament. Of the Authors of the Apocrypha let us ever speak with respect. But it is no mark of veneration to them, to place them on a level with those who were inspired by the Holy Ghost, any more than it is real reverence for the blessed Saints of God, to worship them in the place of Gop. If the Authors of the Apocrypha were now alive, they would be the first to say, “See thou do it πο 1. They themselves, doubtless, would be the first to declare the immense difference between their own writings and the Catholic Epistles, and to protest with sorrow and indignation against that sin which has put them both in the same class, and called them by the same name. We, (these holy men would say,) wrote when the Prophetical Spirit had been removed from Israel. Christ’s hands were never laid on our heads. We never felt His divine breath. But it was vouchsafed * Matt. xxii. 29. 4 Rev. xix, 10: παῖ 9. U 290 ON THE RULE OF FAITH. [ LECT. to the Apostles, the Authors of these Epistles, to be blessed by the Son of God. They were baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire. They wrote, not as we, when the Spirit was withdrawn, but when it was given. We confess our own failings; they claim to be inspired. We will not break within the veil into the Holy of Holies, where the Ark is enshrined, and the Books of the Law deposited by its side, by God’s own command ; we will not, with sacrilegious hands, place our own writings there ; we will not be guilty of profanely obtruding our books into the hands of Christ Himself, and of telling Him, Who knoweth all things, that they are as divine as those Scriptures which were given by God to His people, and which Christ, the Son of God, received as the Oracles of God. Nor will we thrust our own writings into the hands of Christ’s Church, and bid her receive them as of the same authority with those which Christ, by Himself and His Apostles, has delivered to her as the Word of God. O that the voice of St. John could reach the Roman Diotrephes, who Jbringeth im and casteth out of the Church * according to his will; who muti- lates the New Testament that he may add to the Old, and disturbs the fabric which is built on the foundation of Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the head cornerstone, that he may erect a throne for himself on the ruins. * $3 John 10. >| ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 291 Lastly. The Seven Catholic Epistles are the Voice of Christ to the World, and they ought to be heard and read with special reference to two great events ; the one past, the destruction of Jerusalem,—the other future,—of which that one was the type,—the Last Judgment. In the Epistle of St. James, and the First Epistle of St. Peter, we hear, as it were, the dirge of Jerusalem; and in the others, the funeral knell of the World. In the former, the Judge standeth at the door, to execute vengeance on the guilty city. “ Weep and howl, ye rich men, for your miseries that shall come upon you; ye have lived in pleasure, and been wanton ; ye have nourished your hearts as in a day of slaughter *.” “ All flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of the field ; the grass withereth and the flower thereof fadeth away, but the Word of the Lord: endureth for ever+.” “ The time ts come that judgment must begin at the house of Godt.” “The end of all things is at hand; a fiery trial is to try you \.” Thus a warning was given of those miseries which were endured by the City which rejected and con- demned the Just One. Before that generation had passed away, in which that dreadful deed was done, it became the prey of Famine, Pestilence, and War, by which more than a million of persons were destroyed, and woes were endured, such as the * James ν 1. 5: ἢ 1} 0195. 1 Pet. ἵν 17: δ "1 Pet. τν.. 7. 12. τ 2 292 ON THE LATTER DAYS. [ LECT. world had never seen; and at last, Jerusalem was burnt, and trodden under foot by the Gentiles, The last days of Jerusalem are prophetic of the last age of the World. And the warnings addressed to the Jews intimately concern ws who live in the last times. In the Epistles, therefore, which relate to Jerusalem, we see much to excite serious re- flection and sober awe in ourselves. And the other Catholic Epistles, which prophesy of the Great Day, speak still more forcibly to us. It may be, my beloved brethren, that the Great Day is still distant. But Death cannot be far off from any of us; and such as we are at our death, such shall be at the Tribunal of Christ. Besides, though men are naturally most strongly impressed with what happens before their own eyes, yet, all allowance being made for this fact, it cannot, I think, be denied that our own condition is one to awaken the most earnest thoughts. Let us remember that it was the folly and sin of the Jews to see nothing alarming in their own state. “ Ye hypocrites, (says our Lord,) how is 1 that ye @Q? 2 cannot discern the signs of the times * We may see too little, as well as too much, in our own day. Their blindness, we know, led to their ruin. And assuredly there is much, very much, in the world about us, to remind us of the latter days of Jerusalem, and of the final consummation of all things. * Matt. xvi. 3. ΧΙ. ON THE LATTER DAYS. 293 Physical and civil calamities, Discord political and religious, the heaving and rocking of the foundations of society, as if they were moved beneath us by some unquiet, invisible spirit, the open renunciation of Christianity by some of the most powerful Nations of the world (God grant that we ourselves be not of that number!); the appalling avowal on their part that the Gospel shall no more be their Charter, and Christ no longer their King ; the public encouragement of Error as if it were Truth, and the persecution of Truth as if it were Error; the connivance at, and even the patronage of, unchristian principles and practices by Powers professing to be spiritual; their attempts to dignify Lawlessness by the title of Liberty, and to sanctify Rebellion by the name of Religion; the letting loose of wild licentiousness; in a word, the preference of Barabbas to Curisr; these and other circumstances which are doubtless present to your minds, and on which I will not dilate, will be enough to direct your thoughts to that awful Hour “in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat *;” and the Lord “shall come with ten thousands of His saints to execute gudgment 1." These things, my beloved brethren, will inspire you with godly fear, lest you yourselves be overtaken bya doom like that of Jerusalem. They will teach you fo possess your souls in patience ¢; to make the Law of ἘΠ eet. τ 10: 7 Jude 15. 1 Luke xx: 15. 294 ΟΝ THE RULE OF FAITH AND PRACTICE. Gop the Rule of all your actions; to meditate, watch, and pray. They will excite you to stand firm, to “quit you like men, and be strong* ;” for “he that endureth to the end shall be saved+,” and “nothing can harm you if ye be followers of that which is good t ;” they will constrain you to perform all the duties of your respective callings with faithfulness and love. As Rulers and Subjects, as Parents and Children, as Masters and Servants, you will do all with a full sense of the solemn importance of the words of the Apostle, “ Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of ) God? * 1 Cor. xvi. 13, + Matt. x. 22. ἘΠ θοῦ πὶ, 19. § 2 Pet. iii. 11. APPENDIX. APPENDIX A. ΟἹ THE CANON NO. PAGE 1. Prologue to Eeclesiasticus . [1 2. Philo Judeus . 5 [2 3. Flavius Josephus ib. 4, S. Justin Martyr [3 5. Melito ᾿ . 3 [4 6. Fragmentum Canonis N. τι, attributed to Caius ib. 7. Tertullianus : : Ὁ {IG 8. Origenes . . 5 + ie. 9. Eusebius . 5 : - [9 10. 5. Athanasius . 5 ὉΠ 11. 5. Cyrillus . : : . [14 12. 5. Hilarius : 5 . [15 13. 5. Epiphanius . 3 . [16 14. Concilium Laodicenum . [18 15. Ruffinus . 3 Ξ - [lg 16. Philastrius ς - [20 17. S. Amphilochius : [2] . The Canon of Seripture set fF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES, ARRANGED IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, CONCERNING OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT. NO. PAGE 18. 5. Gregorius Nazianzenus . [23 19. S. Hieronymus . - . [24 20. Concilium Hipponense . [33 21. Concilium Carthaginense ib. 22. 5. Augustinus . δ . [34 23. Pseudo-Dionysius Areopa- gita : : . [35 24, Canones Apostolici : . [96 25. Constitutiones Apostolicze . ib. 26. Innocentius [37 27. Talmud Babylonicum | . [42 28. Junilius. - ib. 29, Primasius . 2 [44 30. Cassiodorus, Magnus Aure- lius : ib. 31. Gregorius Primus. [45 32. Beda Venerabilis [46 33. Joannes Damascenus [47 APPENDIX B. . The Canon of Seripture set forth by the Church of Rome in the Couneil of Trent, a.p. 1546 . [48 . Bulla Pii Pape IV., a.p. 1564 lee . [49 forth by the Church of England in the VIth of her XXXIX Articles of Religion 4. The Canon of Scripture ac- cording to the Eastern Chureh . - : APPENDIX C. ON THE OPINIONS OF THE JEWS CONCERNING THE APOCRYPHA . APPENDIX D. Vincenzi, Sessio Quarta Concilii Tridentini Vindicata ; Rome, 1842, APPENDIX E. ON Hooker THE TRUE CHARACTER AND POSITION OF THE APOCRYPHA, . [70 APPENDIX F. ST. AUGUSTINE’S LANGUAGE CONCERNING THE APOCRYPHA 35 AS THE GUARDIAN CERNING THE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT . JEWISH CHURCH AND CON- OF THE CANON . [8] APPENDIX G. ON THE CONSEQUENCES WHICH REJECTION OF THE APOCRYPHA WOULD FOLLOW FROM THE ENTIRE . [85 APPENDIX H. ON ST. Primasius U ticensis PAUL’S EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS, . (87 APPENDIX. A. OF ANCIENT AUTHORITIES, ARRANGED IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, CONCERNING THE CANON OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT. No. I. Protocur to Ecctestasticus. About 8.6. 130. (Ed. Breit. iv. 295.) Πολλῶν καὶ μεγάλων ἡμῖν διὰ τοῦ νόμου Kai τῶν προφη- τῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς ἠκολουθηκότων δεδομένων, eon - , ᾿ \ ’ ~ ΜΈΣ 9 \ ΄ \ , ὲ Nake ὑπὲρ ὧν δέον ἐστὶν ἐπαινεῖν τὸν ᾿Ισραὴλ παιδείας καὶ σοφίας" Kai we ‘\ ov μόνον αὐτοὺς τοὺς ἀναγινώσκοντας δέον ἐστὶν ἐπιστήμονας ‘ ~ Ν - γίνεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἐκτὸς δύνασθαι τοὺς φιλομαθοῦντας χρησί- μους εἶναι καὶ λέγοντας καὶ γράφοντας" ὁ πάππος μου Inaovc ἐπὶ πλεῖον ἑαυτὸν δοὺς εἴς τε τὴν τοῦ νόμον καὶ τῶν προφητῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πατρίων βιβλίων ἀνάγνωσιν, καὶ ἐν τούτοις ἱκανὴν ἕξιν περιποιησάμενος, προήχθη καὶ αὐτὸς συγγράψαι τι τῶν 3 Wa Ν , > , ef e ~ Ων / εἰς παιδείαν καὶ σοφίαν ἀνηκόντων, ὅπως ot φιλομαθεῖς, καὶ τούτων 5, , oo ~ > ~ ‘ ~ > ΄ ἔνηχοι γενόμενοι, πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐπιπροσθῶσι διὰ τῆς ἐννόμου βιώσεως. Παρακέκλησθε οὖν μετ᾽ εὐνοίας καὶ προσοχῆς τὴν ἀνά- - ” fel * ~ γνωσιν ποιεῖσθαι, καὶ συγγνώμην ἔχειν ἐφ᾽ οἷς dy δοκῶμεν τῶν κατὰ τὴν ἑρμηνείαν πεφιλοπονημένον τισὶ τῶν λέξεων ἀδυνα- - > ‘ 9 ὃ - Ὧν ἃς ᾽ € ~ EG “" \ λ , ΞΟ μεῖν, ov γὰρ ἰσοδυναμεῖ αὐτὰ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ᾿Εβραϊστὶ λεγόμενα, καὶ - ~ \ ~ \ ὅταν μεταχθῇ εἰς ἑτέραν γλῶσσαν. Οὐ μόνον δὲ ταῦτα, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ νόμος, καὶ αἱ προφητεῖαι, καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν " δὰ ς - ͵ βιβλίων οὐ μικρὰν ἔχει τὴν διαφορὰν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς λεγόμενα. ᾿Εν γὰρ τῷ ὀγδόῳ καὶ τριακοστῷ ἔτει ἐπὶ τοῦ Εὐεργέτου βασιλέως παραγενηθεὶς εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ συγχρονίσας, εὑρὼν οὐ μικρᾶς παιδείας eee”, ἀναγκαιότατον ἐθέμην αὐτὸς προσενέγκασθαι τινὰ σπουδὴν καὶ φιλοπονίαν τοῦ μεθερμηνεῦσαι τήνδε τὴν βίβλον" πολλὴν γὰρ ἀγρυπνίαν καὶ ἐπιστήμην προσενεγκάμενος ἐν τῷ διαστήματι τοῦ χρόνου πρὸς τὸ ἐπὶ πέρας ἄγοντα τὸ βιβλίον ,’ ‘ A ~ ᾿ - ΕἾ“ ey Ty . =< ἐκδόσθαι, καὶ τοῖς ἐν TH παροικίᾳ βουλομένοις φιλομαθεῖν, προκατα ᾿ , 9 ’ ’ σκεναζομένοις Ta ἤθη ἐννόμως βιοτεύειν. [4] 2] APPENDIX A. No. II. Puitro Jupmus of Alexandria in Egypt, flor. a. p. 20. (Fabric. Bibl. Greec. iv. p. 722. ed. Harles, Hamburg, 1795.) De Vita Contemplativd, vol. ii. p. 475. ed. Mangey. (de Essenis. ) Ἔν ἑκάστῃ δὲ οἰκίᾳ ἐστὶν ἱερὸν, ὃ καλεῖται σεμνεῖον καὶ μοναστή- ριον, ἐν ᾧ μονούμενοι τὰ τοῦ σεμνοῦ βίου μυστήρια τελοῦνται, μηδὲν εἰσκομίζοντες, μὴ ποτόν, μὴ σίτον, μηδέν τι τῶν ἄλλων ὅσα πρὸς τὰς τοῦ σώματος χρείας ἀναγκαῖα, ἀλλὰ νόμους, καὶ λόγια θεσπισθέντα διὰ προφητῶν, καὶ ὕμνους καὶ τὰ ἄλλα οἷς ἐπιστήμη καὶ εὐσέβια συναύξονται καὶ τελειοῦνται... . .. Ἐντυγ- χάνοντες γὰρ τοῖς ἱεροῖς γράμμασι, φιλοσοφοῦσι τὴν πάτριον φιλοσοφίαν ἀλληγοροῦντες, ἐπειδὴ σύμβολα τὰ τῆς ῥητῆς ἑρμηνείας νομίζουσι φύσεως ἀποκεκρυμμένης, ἐν ὑπονοίαις δηλουμένης. Ἔστι δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ συγγράμματα παλαιῶν ἀνδρῶν, οἱ τῆς αἱρέσεως ἀρχηγέται γενόμενοι πόλλα μνημεῖα τῆς ἀλληγορουμένης ἰδέας ἀπέλιπον. No. III. Friavius Joseruus, born at Jerusalem a.p. 87. (Fabric. Bibl. Gree. v. p. 1.) Contra Apionem i. ὃ 8. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. ii. 10 *. Ov yap μυριάδες βιβλίων εἰσὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν, ἀσυμφώνων καὶ μαχο- , ' ν ~ 4 ᾿ - μένων" δύο δὲ μόνα προς τοῖς εἴκοσι Βιβλέία, τοῦ παν- * Dr. Malou, Professor at Louvain, and Canon of Bruges, in his recent elaborate work, “ La Lecture de la Sainte Bible,’ Louvain, 1846, in which he treats at great length on the Canon of Scripture, cites the words of Josephus: πίστεως οὐχ ὁμοίας ἠξίωται τοῖς πρὸ αὐτῶν διὰ τὸ μὴ γενέσθαι τὴν τῶν προ- φητῶν ἀκριβὴ διαδοχήν, which be thus translates, (vol. ii. p. 25. See also p. 33,) “ Les livres qui les con- tiennent ne méritent pas une foi égale a celle que nous accordons aux premiers, parceque la succession des prophetes a été moins exacte ;? thus taking for granted that there was ἅν succession, though less exact, of Prophets after Artaxerxes: con- trary to the plain meaning of Jose- phus, which is, that the accurate or exact succession of Prophets which was continued up to the time of Artaxerxes, was not continued after that period ; and, indeed, that the prophetic spirit did not then exist, wherefore the books written after that period were not held in equal estimation with those which were composed before it. It is lamentable to see a book, of so much research as that of M. Ma- Jou, disfigured by such grammatical blemishes, which much _ invalidate its reasoning, and greatly impair its authority. APPENDIX A. [3 τὸς ἔχοντα χρόνου τὴν ἀναγραφήν, Ta δικαίως Θεῖα πεπισ- τευμένα. Καὶ τούτων πέντε μέν ἐστι τὰ Μωσέως, ἃ τούς τε νόμους περιέχει, καὶ τὴν τῆς ἀνθρωπογονίας παράδοσιν μέχρι τῆς αὐτοῦ τελευτῆς. Οὗτος ὁ χρόνος ἀπολείπει τρισχιλίων ὀλίγον ἐτῶν. ᾿Απὸ δὲ τῆς Μωῦσέως τελευτῆς μέχρι τῆς ᾿Αρτα- ξέρξου τοῦ μετὰ Ξέρξην Περσῶν βασιλέως ἀρχῆς [ἀρχῆς non legitur ap. Euseb.], οἱ μετὰ Μωῦσῆν προφῆται τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς πραχ- θέντα συνέγραψαν ἐν τρισὶ καὶ δέκα βιβλίοις. Αἱ δὲ λοιπαὶ τέσσαρες ὕμνους εἰς τὸν θεὸν καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ὑπο- θήκας τοῦ βίου περιέχουσιν. ᾿Απὸ δὲ ᾿Αρταξέρξου μέχρι τοῦ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς χρόνου, γέγραπται μὲν ἕκαστα᾽ πίστεως δὲ οὐχ ὁμοίας ἠξίωται τοῖς πρὸ αὐτῶν, διὰ τὸ μὴ γενέσθαι τὴν τῶν προφητῶν ἀκριβῆ διαδοχήν. Δῆλον δ᾽ ἔστιν ἔργῳ πῶς ἡμεῖς τοῖς ἰδίοις γράμμασι πεπιστεύκαμεν᾽" τοσούτον γὰρ αἰῶνος ἤδη παρῳχηκότος, οὔτε προσθεῖναί τις οὐδὲν, οὔτε ἀφελεῖν αὐτῶν, οὔτε μεταθεῖναι τετόλμηκεν. Πᾶσι δὲ συμφυτόν ἐστιν εὐθὺς ἐκ τῆς πρώτης γενέσεως Ἰουδαίοις, τὸ νομίζειν αὐτὰ θεοῦ δόγματα, καὶ t ’ ΄ . ε \ ᾽ ~ ΩΣ ΄ Lr 9dr TOUTOLC ἐμμένειν, και UTEP AUTWY, ει δέοι, θνήσκειν NOEWC. No. IV. Justin Martyr, born at Neapolis, formerly Sichem, near Sa- maria, from a Platonist became a Christian about a.p. 133, beheaded at Rome a. p. 165. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 61.) Cohor- tatio ad Grecos, cap. 13. Ei Ne Ἶ ΤΣ Ὁ , ae ix is ἢ i0 oh ok Ἢ i δέ τις φάσκοι τῶν προχείρως ἀντιλέγειν εἰθισμένων μὴ = . , a > x ἡμῖν τὰς βίβλους ταύτας ἀλλὰ ᾿Ιουδαίοις προσήκειν, διὰ τὸ ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν σώζεσθαι, καὶ ΄ « - ᾽ , lf \ ‘7 ie μάτην ἡμᾶς ἐκ τούτων φάσκειν τὴν θεοσέβειαν μεμαθηκέναι ΄ ’ > ~ - - WA” Ω λέγοι, γνώτω ἀπ’ αὐτῶν τῶν ἐν ταῖς βίβλοις γεγραμμένων, ὅτι οὐκ αὐτοῖς ἀλλὰ ἡμῖν ἡ ἐκ τούτων διαφέρει διδασκαλία. Τὸ ΄ ’ ~ . ~ Olea δὲ παρ᾽ ᾿Ιουδαίοις ἔτι καὶ νῦν τὰς τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ θεοσεβείᾳ διαφε- ͵ 7 Ν - ρούσας σώζεσθαι βίβλους, θείας προνοίας ἔργον ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν γέγονεν" ἵνα γὰρ μὴ ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας προκομίζοντες πρόφασιν ἂν - lal , a) ~ ~ - ‘ ῥᾳδιουργίας τοῖς βουλομένοις βλασφημεῖν ἡμᾶς παράσχωμεν, απὸ ~ ~ . in ΄ - ~ , τῆς τῶν “lovdaiwy συναγωγῆς ταύτας ἀξιοῦμεν προκομίζεσθαι, ἵνα " - - " ’ ~ ” , Al , ~ . am αὐτῶν τῶν ἔτι παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς σωζομένων βιβλίων, ὡς ἡμῖν τὰ Ν iN , « \ ~ ε ΄, ’ ~ , o: ~ πρὸς διδασκαλίαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἁγίων ἀνδρῶν γραφέντα δίκαια σαφῶς καὶ φανερῶς προσήκει, φανῇ. [a 2] 4| APPENDIX A. No. V. Me ito, Bishop of Sardis, in Lydia, flor. a. ν. 160. (Euseb. H. E. iv. c. 26. Hieron. De Viris Illust. c. 24. Fabric. B. 6. vii. p. 149. Routh, Reliquize Sacre, i. p. 107.) Μελίτων ’Ornoipy τῷ ἀδελφῷ χαίρειν" ἐπειδὴ πολλάκις ἠξίωσας σπουδῇ τῇ πρὸς τὸν λόγον χρώμενος γενέσθαι σοι ἐκλογάς, ἔκ τε τοῦ νύμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν περὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος καὶ πάσης τῆς πίστεως ἡ μῶν" ἔτι δὲ καὶ μαθεῖν τὴν τῶν πα- λαιῶν βιβλίων ἐβουλήθης ἀκρίβειαν, πόσα τὸν ἀριθμὸν καὶ ὑποῖα τὴν τάξιν εἶεν, ἐσπούδασα τὸ τοιοῦτο πρᾶξαι, ἐπιστά- μενός σου τὸ σπουδαον περὶ τὴν πίστιν, καὶ φιλομαθὲς περὶ τὸν λόγον᾽ ὅτι τε μάλιστα πάντων πόθῳ τῷ πρὸς Θεὸν ταῦτα προ- κρίνεις, περὶ τῆς αἰωνίου σωτηρίας ἀγωνιζόμενος" ἀνελθὼν οὖν εἰς τὴν ἀνατολὴν, καὶ ἕως τοῦ τόπου γενόμενος ἔνθα ἐκηρύχθη καὶ ἐπράχθη, καὶ ἀκριβῶς μαθὼν τὰ τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης βιβλία, ὑποτάξας ἔπεμψά σοι ὧν ἔστι τὰ ὀνόματα Mwicéwe πέντε" Τένεσις, Ebodoc, Δευϊτικὸν, ᾿Αριθμοὶ, Δευτερονό- μιον. ᾿Ιησοῦς Νανῆ, Κριταὶ, Ῥοὺθ, Βασιλειῶν τέσσαρα, Παραλειπομένων δύο. Ψαλμῶν Δαβὶδ, Σολομῶνος Παρ- οιμίαι ἣ καὶ Σοφία, ᾿Εκκλησιαστὴς, *Aopa ᾷσμάτων, Ἰώβ' Προφητῶν, Ἠσαΐου, Ἱερεμίου, τῶν δώδεκα ἐν μο- νοβίβλῳ, Δανιὴλ, Ἰεζεκιὴλ, Ἔσδρας Ἐ" ἐξ ὧν καὶ τὰς ἐκλο- « . , “ a) ’ , > γὰς ἐποιησάμην, εἰς ἕξ βιβλία διελών. No. VI. Fracmentum Canonts N. T., attributed to Carus, a Presbyter of Rome, who flourished about a.p. 196. (First published by Muratori, Antiq. Ital. ii, p. 854. Routh, ἢ. S. iv. p. 2. Kirchhofer, Geschichte d. Canons, p. 1. The text is very corrupt ; some corrections have been admitted.) ..+. Quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit. Tertio Evangelii Librum secundo + Lucam. Lucas iste Medicus post ascensum Christi cumt eo Paulus quasi ut juris studiosum secundum adsumsisset numeni suo ex opinione concriset. Dominum tamen nec ipse vidit in carne; et idem, prout assequi potuit, ita et a nativitate Joannis * h.e. Esther, item Esdras cum + f. secundum. Neemia: vide Routh ad loc. Cosin t f.eum P. q. ut j.s.secum a. no- on the Canon, p. 50. mine 5. ex ordine conscripsit. APPENDIX A. [5 incipit dicere. Quarti* Evangeliorum Joannis ex discipulis. Cohortantibus condiscipulis et Episcopis suis dixit : Conjejanate mihi hodie triduo, et quid cuique fuerit revelatum, alterutrum nobis enarremus. Eadem nocte revelatum Andree ex Apostolis, ut recognoscentibus cunctis Joannes suo nomine cuncta describeret. Et ideo licet varia singulis Evangeliorum Libris Principia doce- antur, nihil tamen differt credentium Fides, cum uno ac principali spiritu declarata sint in omnibus omnia de Nativitate, de Passi- one, de Resurrectione, de conversatione cum discipulis suis, et de gemino ejus Adventu, primo in humilitate despectus, quod ro... .. secundo potestate Regali preeclaro, quod futurum est. Quid ergo mirum, si Joannes tam constanter singula etiam in Epistolis suis proferat dicens in semetipso? Que vidimus oculis nostris, et auribus audivimus, et manus nostre palpaverunt, hee scripsimus. Sic enim non solum visorem, sed auditorem, sed et scriptorem omnium mirabilium Domini per ordinem pro- fitetur. Acta autem omnium Apostolorum sub uno libro scripta suntt Lucas optime Theophilo comprehendit, quia sub praesentia ejus singula gerebantur, sicut et semote { Passionem Petri evi- denter declarat, sed profectionem Pauli ab urbe ad Spaniam pro- ficiscentis. ΕἸ βίο! autem Pauli, qua, a quo loco, vel qua ex causa directz sint, volentibus intelligere, ipsee declarant. Pri- mum omnium Corinthiis schisma heeresis interdicens, deinceps Galatis circumcisionem. Romanis autem ὃ ordine Scripturarum sed et principium earum esse Christum intimans, prolixius scrip- sit, de quibus singulis necesse est a nobis disputari, cum ipse Beatus Apostolus Paulus sequens preedecessoris sui Joannis ordi- nem, nonnisi nominatim septem Ecclesiis scribat ordine tali; ad Corinthios prima, ad Ephesios secunda, ad Philippenses tertia, ad Colossenses quarta, ad Galatas quinta, ad Thessalonicenses sexta, ad Romanos septima. Verum Corinthiis, et 'Thessalonicensibus licet pro correctione iteretur, una tamen per omnem orbem terre Ecclesia diffusa esse denoscitur. Et Joannes enim in Apoca- lypsi licet septem Ecclesiis scribat, tamen omnibus dicit. .Verum ad Philemonem una, et ad Titum una, et ad Timotheum due pro affectu et dilectione, in honore tamen Ecclesiae Catholic, in ordinatione Ecclesiasticee disciplinze sanctificatee sunt. Fertur enim ad Laodicenses, alia ad Alexandrinos Pauli nomine fictz * f. Quartum. + f. Sanctus. tf. semota passione P. 6. d. sed et profectione P. ἅς. § ἢ autorem. 6] APPENDIX A. ad heresim Marcionis; et alia plura, quee in Catholicam Eccle- siam recipi non potest. Fel enim cum melle miscere non congruit. Epistola sane Jude, et superscripti Joannis due in Catholica habentur. Et Sapientia* ab amicis Salomonis in ho- norem ipsius scripta. Apocalypsin etiam Joannis, et Petri, tantum [unam?] recipimus, quam quidam ex nostris legi in Ecclesia no- lunt. Pastorem vero nuperrime temporibus nostris in Urbe Roma Herma} conscripsit, sedente Cathedra Urbis Rome Ecclesize Pio Episcopo fratre ejus. Et ideo legi eum quidem oportet, sed pub- licari vero in Ecclesia Populo, neque inter Prophetas completum numero, neque inter Apostolos in finem temporum potest. Arsinoi autem, seu Valentini, vel Miltiadis nihil in totum reci- pimus, qui etiam Novum Psalmorum Librum Marcioni conscrip- serunt una cum Basilide Asianorum Cataphrygum constitutore. No. VII. Terrutuian, Presbyter, of Carthage, a.p. 192. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 91.) De Cultu Foem. i. 3. Scio Scripturam Henoch non recipi a quibusdam quia nec in armarium Judaicum admittitur. No. VIII. OricEnEs, Catechist and Presbyter, of Alexandria and Czsarea, died at Tyre a.p. 253, aged about 70 years. (Fabric. B. G. vil. p. 201.) (a) Apud Euseb. H. EB. vi. 25. Ὅπως τῶν ἐνδιαθήκων γρα- φῶν ἐμνημόνευσεν. Tov μέν γε πρῶτον ἐξηγούμενος ψαλμὸν, ἔκθεσιν πεποίηται τοῦ τῶν ἱερῶν γραφῶν τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης καταλόγου, ὧδέ πως γράφων κατὰ λέξιν" “Οὐκ ἀγνοητέον δ᾽ εἶναι τὰς ἐνδιαθήκους βίβλους, ὡς Ἑ)Ἥβραῖοι παραδι- δόασιν, δύο καὶ εἴκοσι ὅσος ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς στοι- χείων ἐστίν." Eira μετά τινα ἐπιφέρει λέγων" “Εἰσὶ δὲ αἱ εἴκοσι δύο βίβλοι καθ᾽ Ἑβραίους aide’ ἡ παρ’ ἡμῖν Τένεσις ἐπιγε- γραμμένη, map’ Ἑβραίοις δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τῆς βίβλου, Βρησὶθ, ὅπερ ἐστὶν, ἐν ἀρχῇ" Ἐξοδος, Οὐελεσμὼθ, ὕπερ ἐστὶ, ταῦτα τὰ ὀὁνό- para’ Λευιτικὸν, Οὐϊκρὰ, καὶ ἐκάλεσεν. ᾿Αριθμοὶ, ᾿Αμμεσφε- κωδείμ. Δευτερονόμιον, ᾿Ελεαδδεβαρεὶμ, οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι" Ἰησοῦς υἱὸς Navi, Ἰωσοῦε βὲν νοῦν. Κριταὶ, ‘Pov, παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἐν ἑνὶ, Σαφατείμ. Βασιλειῶν πρώτη, δευτέρα, παρ᾽ * An eadem que Proverbia? Vide sup. No. V. + Vide inf. No, LX. ad fin. APPENDIX A. (7 αὐτοῖς ἕν, Σαμουὴλ, ὁ θεόκλητος᾽ Βασιλειῶν, τρίτη, τετάρτη, Ω Ω Q ᾿ ἐν ἑνὶ, Οὐαμμελὲχ Δαβὶδ, ὅπερ ἐστὶ βασιλεία Δαβίδ. Παραλει- ͵ ΄, , ᾽ ea a) . \ ef > \ , πομένων, πρώτη, δευτέρα, ἐν ἑνὶ Δαβρηϊαμεὶν, ὅπερ ἐστὶ λόγοι e ~ ~ IN , € ~ ¢ ἡμερῶν" "Εσδρας, πρῶτος, δεύτερος, ἐν Evi, Ἐζρᾶ, ὃ ἐστι > , ~ ~ βοηθός. Βίβλος Ψαλμῶν, Σφαρθελλείμ. Σολομῶντος παρ- οιμίαι, Μελώθ. Ἐκκλησιαστὴς, Κωλέθ.ς ἾΑσμα ᾿Ασμά- , ν ε φ vs ‘ wv 3 , ἫΝ των, οὐ γὰρ ὡς ὑπολαμβάνουσί τινες, "Aopara Ασμάτων, Zio ᾿Ασσιρίμ. Ἡσαΐας, ᾿Ιεσσιάκ. Ἱερεμίας σὺν Θρήνοις καὶ - - € τῇ ἐπιστολῇ, ἐν ἑνὶ, ᾿Ιερεμία. Δανιὴλ, Δανιήλ. Ἰεζεκιὴλ, A) 2 ‘ \ ᾿Ιεζεκιήηλ. ᾿ἸΙὼβ, ᾿ἸΙώβ. ᾿Ἐσθὴρ, ᾿Εσθήρ. "Ew δὲ τούτων ἐστὶ τὰ Μακκαβαϊκὰ, ἅπερ ἐπιγέγραπται Σαρβὴθ Yafsavaced.” "Ὁ “ \ Fz ᾿ - , Γαῦτα μὲν οὖν ἐν τῷ προειρημένῳ τίθησι συγγράμματι. Ἔν ‘ ~ ~ \ = δὲ τῷ πρώτῳ τῶν εἰς τὸ κατὰ Ματθαῖον, τὸν ἐκκλη- σιαστικὸν φυλάττων κανόνα, μόνα τέσσαρα εἶναι εὐαγγέλια μαρτύρεται, ὧδέ πως γράφων" “Ὥς ἐν παρα- δόσει μαθὼν περὶ τῶν τεσσάρων εὐαγγελίων, ἃ καὶ μόνα ἀναντίρρητά ἐστιν ἐν τῇ ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ ΡΞ δι = , ᾿ \ Θεοῦ" ὅτι πρῶτον μὲν γέγραπται τὸ κατὰ τὸν ποτὲ τελώνην, ὕστερον δὲ ἀπόστολον ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, Ματθαῖον, ἐκδεδωκότα αὐτὸ ~ “ = ͵ fa) See τοῖς ἀπὸ ᾿Ιουδαϊσμοῦ πιστεύσασι, γράμμασιν “Efpaixotc συντε- ΄ SF \ Ν ‘ ΄ « ΄ e / ταγμένον" δεύτερον δὲ τὸ κατὰ Μάρκον, ὡς Πέτρος ὑφηγήσατο :λ ~ {2 “ A εἶν ᾽ ~ Lend ᾽ ~ ‘ αὐτῷ, ποιήσαντα" ὃν καὶ υἱὸν ἐν τῇ καθολικῇ ἐπιστολῇ διὰ τούτων ὡμολόγησε φάσκων, ᾿Ασπάζεται ὑμᾶς ἡ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι \ \ , e er \ , ‘ ν᾿ ia συνεκλεκτὴ, Kat Μάρκος ὁ νιός μον. Kat τρίτον τὸ kara Λουκᾶν, Se Ta, Ὁ Νὰ , ? , ? , ~ > ‘ ~ , ~ τὸ ὑπὸ Παύλου ἐπαινούμενον εὐαγγέλιον, τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν πεποιηκότα" ἐπὶ πᾶσι τὸ κατὰ Ἰωάννην." Καὶ ἐν τῷ πέμπτῳ δὲ τῶν εἰς τὸ κατὰ ᾿Ιωάννην ἐξηγητικῶν, ὁ αὐτὸς ταῦτα περὶ - - - , \ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων φησίν. “Ὁ δὲ ἱκανωθεὶς ὃ ΠΡ ΄ θ - Ξ: ~ ὃ θη Ἄ 3; , ἀλλὸ διάκονος γενέσθαι τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, οὐ γράμματος, ἀλλὰ ΄ - ε \ δ ᾽ ΄ ᾽ Δ, πνεύματος, Παῦλος, ὃ πεπληρωκὼς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἀπὸ “Ιερου- ‘ A , la ~ 9 - φ4λ , wv σαλὴμ καὶ κύκλῳ μέχρι τοῦ ᾿ΪΙλλυρικοῦ, οὐδὲ πάσαις ἔγρα- - , ‘ ‘ ce ” Wev, αἷς ἐδίδαξεν, ἐκκλησίαις" ἀλλὰ Kai αἷς ἔγραψεν, ὀλίγους \ = ~ γ΄ ~ στίχους ἐπέστειλε. Πέτρος δὲ, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ οἰκοδομεῖται ἡ Χριστοῦ ᾽ ΄ GX / ef > ΄ , ? \ e ἐκκλησία, ἧς πύλαι ἅδου ov κατισχύσουσι, μίαν ἐπιστολὴν ὃ μο- λογουμένην καταλέλοιπεν. “Eotw δὲ καὶ δευτέρα ν"- ἀμφι- [)άλλεται γάρ. Ti δεῖ περὶ τοῦ ἀναπεσόντος ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος λέγειν “54 ~ > , “ > , a ΄ Ω τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ᾿Ιωᾶάννου, ὃς εὐαγγέλιον ἕν καταλέλοιπεν, ὁμο- - Ὁ] - ,ὔ e BENNY): \€ , ~ γ»ο, λογῶν δύνασθαι τοσαῦτα ποιήσειν ἃ οὐδὲ ὁ κόσμος χωρῆσαι ἐδύ- νατο ; "Εγραψε δὲ καὶ τὴν ᾿Αποκάλυψιν, κελευσθεὶς σιωπῆσαι ν . = © ‘ ’ ~ , r , καὶ μὴ γράψαι τὰς τῶν ἑπτὰ βροντῶν dwvac. Καταλέλοιπε καὶ 8] APPENDIX A. ἐπιστολὴν πάνυ ὀλίγων στίχων. "Eorw δὲ καὶ δευτέραν καὶ τρίτην" ἐπεὶ οὐ πάντες φασὶ γνησίους εἶναι ταύτας" πλὴν οὐκ εἰσὶ στίχων ἀμφότεραι ἑκατόν.᾽᾽ "Ere πρὸς τούτοις περὶ τῆς πρὸς ‘EBpalove ἐπιστολῆς ἐν ταῖς εὶς αὐτὴν ὁμιλίαις ταῦτα διαλαμ- βάνει: “““Ὅτι ὁ χαρακτὴρ τῆς λέξεως τῆς πρὸς Ἑ βραίους ἐπι- γεγραμμένης ἐπιστολῆς οὐκ ἔχει τὸ ἐν λόγῳ ἰδιωτικὸν τοῦ ἀπο- στόλου, ὁμολογήσαντος ἑαυτὸν ἰδιώτην εἶναι τῷ λόγῳ, τουτέστι τῇ φράσει, ἀλλὰ ἐστὶν ἣ ἐπιστολὴ συνθέσει τῆς λέξεως ᾿Ελληνι- κωτέρα, πᾶς 6 ἐπιστώμενος κρίνειν φράσεων διαφορὰς ὁμολογήσαι ἄν. Πάλιν τε αὖ ὅτι τὰ νοήματα τῆς ἐπιστολῆς θαυμασιαά ἐστι, καὶ οὐ δεύτερα τῶν ἀποστολικῶν ὁμολογουμένων γραμμάτων, καὶ τοῦτο ἂν συμφήσαι εἶναι ἀληθὲς πᾶς ὁ προσέχων τῇ ἀναγνώσει τῇ ἀποστολικῇ.᾽᾽ Τούτοις μεθ᾽ ἕτερα ἐπιφέρει λέγων “᾿Εγὼ δὲ ἀποφαινόμενος εἴποιμ᾽ ἂν, ὅτι τὰ μὲν νοήματα τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἐστὶν, ἡ δὲ φράσις καὶ ἡ σύνθεσις ἀπομνημονεύσαντός τινος τὰ ἀποστολικὰ, καὶ ὡσπερεὶ σχολιογραφήσαντός τινος τὰ εἰρημένα ὑπὸ τοῦ διδασκάλου. Et τις οὖν ἐκκλησία ἔχει ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ὡς Παύλου, αὕτη εὐδοκιμείτω καὶ ἐπὶ τούτῳ. Οὐ γὰρ εἰκῆ οἱ ἀρχαῖοι ἄνδρες we Παύλου αὐτὴν παραδεδώ- κασι. Τίς δὲ ὁ γράψας τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, τὸ μὲν ἀληθὲς Θεὸς οἶδεν. Ἢ δὲ εἰς ἡμᾶς φθάσασα ἱστορία, ὑπό τινων μὲν λεγόν- των, ὅτι Κλήμης ὁ γενόμενος ἐπίσκοπος Ῥωμαίων ἔγραψε τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, ὑπό τινων δὲ, ὅτι Λουκᾶς ὁ γράψας τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καὶ τὰς IIpaéec.” ᾿Αλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ὧδε ἐχέτω. (b) Ipem ΟΚΙΘΈΝΕΒ, Inlibr. Jesu Nave Hom.8.(Opp. 12, p.412.) —Veniens vero Dominus noster Jesus Christus, cujus ille prior filius Nave designabat adventum, misit sacerdotes Apostolos suos portantes tubas ductiles, praedicationis magnificam coelestemque doctrinam. Sacerdotali tuba primus in Evangelio suo Mattheus increpuit, Marcus quoque, Lucas et Joannes, suis singulis tubis sacerdotalibus cecinerunt. Petrus etiam duabus epistolarum suarum personat tubis. Jacobus quoque et Judas. Addit nihilo- minus atque et Joannes tuba canere per epistolas suas et apoca- lypsim, et Lucas Apostolorum gesta describens. Novissime autem ille * veniens, qui dixit : puto autem nos Deus novissimos Apos- tolos ostendit, et in quatuordecim epistolarum suarum fulminans tubis, muros Jericho et omnes idololatrize machinas et philoso- phorum dogmata usque ad fundamenta dejecit. * Paulus, sc. 1 Cor. iv. 9. APPENDIX A. [9 No. IX. Evusesius, Bishop of Czsarea (ol. Turris Stratonis) in Palestine, from a.p. 315 to a.p. 340, where he died, ‘‘ major septuage- nario.” (Fabric. B. G. vii. p. 336.) (a) Hist. Eccl. ii. c. 25. Περὶ τῶν ὁμολυγουμένων θείων on \ = \ , ΕῚ 5.» ΒΞ , γραφῶν Kat τῶν μὴ τοιούτων"--Εὔλογον δ᾽ ἐνταῦθα γενομένους ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι τὰς δηλωθείσας τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης γραφάς. A Ἂν ᾿Ξ ͵ > / ον « , ~ ° , = Kai δὴ τακτέον ἐν πρώτοις τὴν ἁγίαν τῶν εὐαγγελίων τετρακ- ‘ - “ ς - ΄ ~ ’ , ΄, ‘ TUY, οἷς ἕπεται ἣ τῶν πράξεων τῶν ἀποστόλων γραφή. Mera δὲ , . , , ᾽ = = tr~ κ᾿ ε ταύτην, τὰς Παύλον καταλεκτέον ἐπιστολὰς, αἷς ἑξῆς τὴν φερομένην Ἰωάννου προτέραν, καὶ ὁμοίως τὴν Πέτρου κυρω- , > 3. ‘ , “ ‘ ,ὕ τέον ἐπιστολήν. “Ent τούτοις τακτέον, εἴγε φανείη, τὴν ᾿Αποκά- / oH . Nie ν᾿ λυψιν ᾿Ιωάννου, περὶ ἧς τὰ δόξαντα κατὰ καιρὸν ἐκθησόμεθα. - \ ~ Kat ταῦτα μὲν ἐν ὁμολογουμένοις. Τῶν δ᾽ ἀντιλεγομένων, ͵ > ΞΟ ΡῚ , a) γνωρίμων δ᾽ οὖν ὅμως τοῖς πολλοῖς, ἡ λεγομένη Ἰακώβου φέρεται καὶ ἣ Ἰούδα, ἥ τε Πέτρου δευτέρα ἐπιστολὴ, καὶ ἡ ὀνομαζομένη δευτέρα καὶ τρίτη Ἰωάννου, εἴτε τοῦ εὐαγγε- - > ΄ ͵ , - λιστοῦ τυγχάνουσαι, εἴτε καὶ ἑτέρου ὁμωνύμου ἐκείνῳ. Ἔν τοῖς νόθοις κατατετάχθω καὶ τῶν Παύλου πράξεων ἣ γραφὴ, ὅ τε ‘ ΄ > , λεγόμενος Ποιμὴν, καὶ ἣ ἀποκάλυψις Πέτρον. Kai πρὸς τούτοις, ἣ φερομένη Βαρνάβα ἐπιστολὴ, καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων ai λεγό- μεναι διδαχαί" ἔτι τε ὡς ἔφην, ἡ ᾿Ιωάννου ᾿Αποκάλυψις, εἰ φανείη, ἥν τινες, ὡς ἔφην, ἀθετοῦσιν, ἕτεροι δὲ ἐγκρίνουσι τοῖς ’ὔ \ ‘ μεν e ΄, ὁμολογουμένοις. “Hon δ᾽ ἐν τούτοις τινὲς καὶ τὸ καθ᾽ ᾿Εβραί- ΄ ΄ δε Al ΄ \ ove εὐαγγέλιον κατέλεξαν, ᾧ μάλιστα Ἑβραίων οἱ τὸν Χριστὸν - Ν ~ ΄ παραδεξάμενοι χαίρουσι. Ταῦτα μὲν πάντα τῶν ἀντιλεγομένων a wv ᾿ ΄ \ \ / ef ‘ , ΄ ἂν εἴη. ᾿Αναγκαίως δὲ καὶ τούτων ὅμως τὸν κατάλογον πεποιή- , ‘ ‘ ἃς μεθα, διακρίναντες τάς τε κατὰ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν παράδοσιν ἀληθεῖς καὶ ἀπλάστους καὶ ἀνωμολογημένας γραφὰς, καὶ τὰς ἄλλας ‘ , ᾿ ’ ΄ ΑΙ > Ων Ὡς ,.5 ΄ ΩΣ παρὰ ταύτας, οὐκ ἐνδιαθήκους μὲν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀντιλεγομένας, ὅμως δὲ παρὰ πλείστοις τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν γιγνωσκομένας, . » ΄ A ~ iv’ εἰδέναι ἔχοιμεν αὐτάς τε ταύτας, καὶ τὰς ὀνόματι τῶν ἀπο- στόλων πρὸς τῶν αἱρετικῶν προφερομένας, ἤτοι ὡς Πέτρου καὶ ~ , / Θωμᾶ καὶ MarOia, ἢ καί τινων παρὰ τούτους ἄλλων εὐαγγέλια , « ΕἸ , Cae ‘ ‘ ~ 3 > , περιεχούσας, ὡς Ανδρέου καὶ Iwavvov καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀποστόλων πράξεις, ὧν οὐδὲν οὐδαμῶς ἐν συγγράμματι τῶν κατὰ τὰς διαδοχεὶς ἐκκλησιαστικῶν τις ἀνὴρ εἰς μνήμην ἀγαγεῖν ἠξίωσεν. ἸΠόρρω δέ 10] APPENDIX A. odacewe Tapa τὸ ἦθος τὸ ἀποστολικὸν ἐναλλάττει ᾿ ; που καὶ ὁ τῆς χαρακτὴρ, i} τε γνώμη καὶ ἡἣἡ τῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς φερομένων προαίρεσις, πλεῖστον ὕσον τῆς ἀληθοῦς ὀρθοδοξίας ἀπᾷδουσα, ὅτι δὴ αἱρετικῶν ἀνδρῶν ἀναπλάσματα τυγχάνει, σαφῶς παρίστησιν" ὅθεν οὐδ᾽ ἐν , Ω Ν , 3 4: Je ᾿ , 1 § I~ νόθοις αὑτὰ κατατακτέον, αλλ᾽ ὡς ἄτοπα παντὴ Kal δυσσε[ῆ Tapat- , ” On Ν PAT οι ις A ςξ- ε ΄ τητέον. ἤϊωμεν δὴ λοιπὸν καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ἑξῆς ἱστορίαν. (Ὁ) Τρὲμ Evsesius, Hist. Eccl. iii. c. 8. Περὶ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν Ἂς ᾽ ͵ 5 , \ z ᾿ τ - ε , τῶν azoorokwy'—lIlér pov μὲν οὖν ἐπιστολὴ μία ἡ λεγομένη ᾽ - ἐν ᾿ , 5 ͵ ὯΝ" \ e ‘ 72 αὐτοῦ προτέρα ἀνωμολόγηται" ταύτῃ δὲ καὶ οἱ πάλαι πρεσβύτεροι ΄ ~ ~ ~ ΄ ͵ ὡς ἀναμφιλέκτῳ ἐν τοῖς σφῶν αὐτῶν κατακέχρηνται συγγράμμασι. tT A ΄ ᾽ - \ rE Τὴν δὲ φερομένην αὐτοῦ δευτέραν οὐκ ἐνδιάθηκον μὲν εἶναι παρειλήφαμεν. “Ὅμως δὲ πολλοῖς χρήσιμος φανεῖσα, μετὰ τῶν » , ~ , πο ᾽ ‘ ἄλλων ἐσπουδάσθη γραφῶν. To ye μὴν τῶν ἐπικεκλημένων > = ’ \ 5 > Sy XY 3 ΄ ᾿ ͵ αὐτοῦ Πράξεων, καὶ τὸ Kar αὐτὸν ὠνομασμένον Εὐαγγέλιον, τό TE λεγύμενον αὐτοῦ Κήρυγμα, καὶ τὴν καλουμένην ᾿Αποκαλυ- dev, οὐδ᾽ ὅλως ἐν καθολικοῖς ἴσμεν παραδεδομένα, ὅτι μήτε , ~ ~ ‘ 4 ἀρχαίων μήτε τῶν καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς τις ἐκκλησιαστικὸς συγγραφεὺς ᾿ s Ἔ Qs a ταῖς ἐξ αὐτῶν συνεχρήσατο μαρτυρίαις. Προϊούσης δὲ τῆς ἱστορίας, ᾿ς - ~ ~ προὔργου ποιήσομαι σὺν ταῖς διαδοχαῖς ὑποσημήνασθαι, τίνες TOY κατὰ χρόνους ἐκκλησιαστικῶν συγγραφέων ὑποίαις κέχρηνται τῶν εἰντιλεγομένων, τίνα τε περὶ τῶν ἐνδιαθήκων καὶ ὁμολογουμένων γραφῶν, καὶ ὅσα περὶ τῶν μὴ τοιούτων αὐτοῖς εἴρηται. ᾿Αλλὰ τὰ μὲν ὀνομαζόμενα Πέτρου, ὧν μόνην μίαν γνησίαν ἔγνων ἐπιστολὴν, - ΄ 4 ~ ~ καὶ παρὰ τοῖς πάλαι πρεσβυτέροις ὁμολογουμένην, τοσαῦτα. Τοῦ , ~ [2 ΄ δὲ Παύλου πρόδηλοι καὶ σαφεῖς αἱ δεκατέσσαρες. Ὅτι γε μὴν \ - » 5 \ e a) , ν = e , τινες ἠθετήκασι THY πρὸς “Efppatiove, πρὸς τῆς Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησίας ὡς μὴ Παύλου οὖσαν αὐτὴν αντιλέγεσθαι φήσαντες, , ΄ - ‘ ‘ \ ~ ~ ΄ ov δίκαιον ἀγνοεῖν. Καὶ τὰ περὶ ταύτης δὲ τοῖς πρὸ ἡμῶν εἰρημένα Ἂς \ ΄ὔ Ψ.: \ \ , 5 = ΄ κατὰ καιρὸν παραθήσομαι. Οὐδὲ μὴν τὰς λεγομένας αὐτοῦ Πρά- ἕξεις ἐν ἀναμφιλέκτοις παρείληφα. “Emel δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς ἀπόστολος, ἐν ταῖς ἐπὶ τέλει προσρήσεσι τῆς πρὸς Ρωμαίους, μνήμην πεποίη- \ As / \e ~ - \ ε ͵ ‘ = , ται pera τῶν ἄλλων Kat Eppa, ov φασὶν ὑπάρχειν τὸ τοῦ Ποιμένος ἝΝ ἢ Ω ΄ « Ν - ἣν \ ~ ’ ΄ > a βιβλίων, ἰστέον ὡς Kai τοῦτο πρὸς μὲν τινῶν ἀντιλέλεκται, OL OVC ᾿᾽ ΕΝ , € ΄ ΄ « ,",“ ¢ , \ . , > οὐκ ἂν ἐν ὁμολογουμένοις τεθείη, ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων δὲ ἀναγκαιότατον οἷς μάλιστα δεῖ στοιχειώσεως εἰσαγωγικῆς, κέκριται. “Ὅθεν ἤδη καὶ ᾽ , , ‘ S$ ~ / ἐν ἐκκλησίαις ἴσμεν αὐτὸ δεδημοσιευμένον, καὶ τῶν παλαιοτάτων δὲ συγγραφέων κεχρημένους τινεὶς αὐτῷ κατείληφα. Ταῦτα εἰς παρά- ordow τῶν τε ἀναντιρρήτων καὶ τῶν μὴ παρὰ πᾶσιν ὁμολογουμένων θείων γραμμάτων εἰρήσθω. APPENDIX A. [11 No. X. S. Aruanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, a.p. 826; died a.p. 373. (Fabricius, B. G. vili. p. 171.) (a) Ex Festali Epistola xxxix. tom. ii. p. 961, ed. Benedict.— ANN ἐπειδὴ περὶ μὲν τῶν αἱρετικῶν ἐμνήσθημεν, ὡς νεκρῶν, περὶ δὲ ἡμῶν ὡς ἐχόντων πρὸς σωτηρίαν τὰς θείας γραφάς" καὶ φοβοῦμαι μήπως, ὡς ἔγραψεν Κορινθίοις Παῦλος, ὀλίγοι τῶν ἀκεραίων ἀπὸ τῆς ἁπλότητος καὶ τῆς ἁγιότητος πλανη- θῶσιν, ἀπὸ τῆς πανουργίας τινῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ λοιπὸν ἐντυγχά- νειν ἑτέρους ἄρξωνται, τοῖς λεγομένοις ἀποκρύφοις, ἀπατώμενοι τῇ ὁμωνυμίᾳ τῶν ἀληθῶν βιβλίων" παρακαλῶ ἀνέχεσθαι εἰ περὶ ὧν ἐπίστασθε, περὶ τούτων κἀγὼ μνημονεύων γράφω, διάτε τὴν ἀνάγ- = ν᾽ , , \ Knv καὶ τὸ χρήσιμον τῆς ἐκκλησίας" μέλλων δὲ τούτων μνημονεύειν, χρήσομαι πρὸς σύστασιν τῆς ἐμαυτοῦ τόλμης τῷ τόπῳ τοῦ ἐναγγε- ἘΞ ~~ ͵ , \ 5 λιστοῦ Λουκᾶ" λέγων καὶ αὐτός" ἐπειδήπερ τινὲς ἐπεχείρησαν > ,7 = c ~ 8 , > , Ν > ἀνατάξασθαι εαυτοῖς τὰ λεγόμενα ἀπόκρυφα, και επι- μίξαι ταῦτα τῇ θεοπνεύστῳ γραφῇ, περὶ ἧς ἐπληφορήθημεν, καθὼς παρέδοσαν τοῖς πατράσιν οἱ AT ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται καὶ ὑπηρέται γενόμενοι τοῦ λόγου" ἔδοξεν κἀμοὶ προ- ΄ . ΄ 10 ~ BEN , 3 cr~ τραπέντι Tapa γνησίων ἀδελφῶν, Kat μαθόντι, ἄνωθεν ἑξῆς ἐκθέσθαι τὰ κανονιζόμενα καὶ παραδοθέντα πιστευ- ΄ - Ψ at Al ΠΑΝ uy oy > \ θέντα τε θεῖα εἶναι PtPrALa* ἵνα ἕκαστος εἰ μὲν ἠπατήθη, - ~ , e ᾿ Ἁ 2 Ν ͵ , καταγνῷ τῶν πλανησάντων᾽ ὁ δὲ καθαρὸς διαμείνας χαίρῃ ᾽ , ~ \ ~ πάλιν ὑπομιμνησκόμενος. ἔτι τοίνυν τῆς μὲν παλαιᾶς δια- ͵ ae ἃ - ᾽ - ᾿ ΄ “, gar -- θήκης βιβλία τῷ ἀριθμῷ τὰ πάντα εἰκοσιδύο" τοσαῦτα Ἁ ᾿ 5 2 : OS) Δ) , Ξ γὰρ, ὡς ἤκουσα, καὶ τὰ στοιχεῖα τὰ map Ἑ), βραίοις εἶναι ΝΩ ~ δὲ te PN ~ " ,ὔ ’, ᾽ 5“ παραδέδοται. τῇ δὲ τάξει καὶ τῷ ὀνόματί ἐστιν ἕκαστον, e MS > we > ὩΣ ἕ οὕτως" πρῶτον Τένεσις, εἶτα "Εξοδος, εἶτα Λευϊτικὸν, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ᾿Αριθμοὶ, καὶ λοιπὸν τὸ Δευτερονόμιον. ἑξῆς δὲ , > \ 3 ~ ε ~ nT \ \ ΄ \ . = ε τούτοις ἐστὶν Ἰησοῦς ὁ τοῦ Ναυὴ, καὶ Κριταί. καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ἣ - ἔσω - i , ‘Pov. καὶ πάλιν ἑξῆς Βασιλειῶν τέσσαρα βιβλία" καὶ τούτων ‘ \ ~ ν᾿ AN > a (dys ᾽ - A . §\ , TO μὲν πρῶτον καὶ δεύτερον εἰς ἕν βιβλίον ἀριθμεῖται" τὸ δὲ τρίτον καὶ τέταρτον ὁμοίως εἰς ἕν᾽ μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα Παραλειπόμενα a’ , . rr 7 καὶ β΄, ὁμοίως εἰς ἕν βιβλίον ἀριθμούμενα, εἶτα "Εσδρας a’ καὶ , 5 \ -- ao aS vie [3', ὁμοίως εἰς ἕν, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα βίβλος Ψαλμ ὦν, καὶ ἑξῆς Παροι- ΄ τ ᾽ \ Nasi, ᾽ fe \ , μίαι. εἶτα Ἐκκλησιαστὴς, καὶ Atopa ἀσμάτων. πρὸς rov- " \ νιν δ} ΕΝ ν = "ἢ e \ “ν᾿ 9 a τοις ἔστι καὶ Τὼ», καὶ λοιπὸν προφῆται" οἱ μὲν δώδεκα εἰς ἕν 12] APPENDIX A. a er ak as ’ ‘ τ 3 oh ε , wen" ‘ 7 . - βιρλίον ἀριθμούμενοι. εἶτα “Hoatac, Ἱερεμίας, καὶ σὺν αὑτῷ = \ \ \ Βαροὺχ, Θρῆνοι καὶ Ἐπιστολὴ, καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτὸν Ἔ ζεκιὴλ καὶ Δανιήλ. ἄχρι τούτων τὰ τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης ἵσταται. . \ ~ ~ ~ wv . ~ τὰ δὲ τῆς καινῆς πάλιν οὐκ ὀκνητέον εἰπεῖν" ἔστι γὰρ ταῦτα. εὐαγγέλια τέσσαρα κατὰ ατθαῖον, κατὰ Μάρκον, κατὰ Aov- κᾶν, κατὰ Ἰωάννην. εἶτα μετὰ ταῦτα Πράξεις ἀποστόλων, καὶ Ω ‘ ‘ ΄ - > , «ς le ef " ἐπιστολαὶ καθολικαὶ καλούμεναι τῶν ἀποστόλων ἑπτά" οὕτως μὲν . , z δ Ιακώβου a’, Πέτρου δὲ β΄. εἶτα Ἰωάννου γ΄. καὶ μετὰ ταύτας Ἰούδα α΄. πρὸς τούτοις Παύλου ἀποστόλου εἰσὶν ἐπιστολαὶ δεκα- ΄ - , f ΄ τέσσαρες, τῇ τάξει γραφόμεναι οὕτως" πρώτη πρὸς Ῥωμαίους. τ΄ ΄ . = εἶτα πρὸς Κορινθίους δύο. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα πρὸς Ταλάτας. ‘ crn Ἂν > , Ἢ Ν ΄, \ ‘ καὶ ἑξῆς πρὸς ᾿Εφεσίους. εἶτα πρὸς Φιλιππησίους καὶ πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς. καὶ μετὰ ταύτας πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς δύο" καὶ , ‘ ‘ S ἣ πρὸς Ἑβραίους" καὶ εὐθὺς πρὸς μὲν Τιμόθεον δύο" πρὸς δὲ Τίτον μία" καὶ τελευταία ἡ πρὸς Φιλήμονα. καὶ πάλιν ᾿Ιωάννου ᾿Αποκάλυψις" ταῦτα πηγαὶ τοῦ σωτηρίου, ὥστετὸν ~ ~ ~ fe , διψῶντα ἐμφορεῖσθαι τῶν ἐν τούτοις λογίων" ἐν τού- , ‘ ~ ’ ΄ . - > , τοις μόνοις TO THE εὐσεβείας διδασκαλεῖον ἐναγγελί- παῖς ἢ ΄ > σ᾽ ΄ Ξ \ \ ΄ ᾿ ζεται. μηδεὶς τούτοις ἐπιβαλλέτω" μὴ δὲ τούτων ἀφαι- ΄ a ’ , ρείσθω τι. περὶ δὲ τούτων ὁ Κύριος Σαδδουκαίους μὲν ἐδυσώπει, = 907 x = --» λέγων" πλανᾶσθε μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφάς. τοῖς δὲ Ἰουδαίοις παρ- ͵ ~ . , , e - ‘ ἥνει" ἐρευνᾶτε τὰς γραφάς" ὅτι αὑταί εἰσι ai μαρτυροῦσαι περὶ ἐμοῦ. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἕνεκά γε πλείονος ἀκριβείας προστίθημι καὶ τοῦτο 4 ’ ΄ e e ef ὕ A . of ‘ , γράφων ἀναγκαίως" we ὅτι ἐστὶν καὶ ἕτερα βιβλία τούτων wv ΄ . ~ ΄ ἔξωθεν" ov κανονιζόμενα μὲν, τετυπωμένα δὲ παρὰ τῶν πατέ- - » Q ρων ἀναγινώσκεσθαι τοῖς ἄρτι προσερχομένοις καὶ βουλομένοις - ‘ ~ 9 , , ~ κατηχεῖσθαι τὸν τῆς εὐσεβείας λόγον: Σοφία Σολομῶντος, καὶ ΄ . ‘ ‘ vr Σοφία Σιρὰχ, καὶ "EoOyp, καὶ Ἰουδὶθ, καὶ ToBiac, καὶ διδαχὴ καλουμένη τῶν ἀποστόλων, καὶ ὁ Ποιμήν. Καὶ ὅμως, ἀγαπητοὶ, κἀκείνων κανονιζομένων καὶ τούτων ἀναγινωσκο- μένων, οὐδαμοῦ τῶν ἀποκρύφων μνήμη" ἀλλὰ αἱρετικῶν ἐστιν ἐπί- νοια, γραφόντων μὲν ὅτε θέλουσιν αὐτὰ, χαριζομένων δὲ καὶ , > ~ , 5 an) ε 5 ΄ ᾿ , προστιθέντων αὐτοῖς χρόνους" tv’ ὡς παλαιὰ προφέροντες, πρό- φασιν ἔχωσιν ἀπατᾷν ἐκ τούτου τοὺς ἀκεραίους. (0) Ipem 5. Arwanasius, vel, uti nonnulli putant, alius quis zetate suppar Athanasio, Synopsis Sacre Scripture. (“ Eximia sané est hae synopsis, cujuscunque tandem sit auctoris, et tanta cura, sagacitate, eruditione elaborata ut nihil supra,’”’—ed. Bened. ii. p. 125. Paris, 1698.) APPENDIX A. [13 Πᾶσα γραφὴ ἡμῶν Χριστιανῶν θεύπνευστός ἐστιν, οὐκ ἀόριστα δὲ ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ὡρισμένα καὶ κεκανονισμένα ἔχει τὰ βιβλία καὶ ἐστὶ τῆς μὲν παλαιᾶς διαθήκης ταῦτα. Téveric*... Εξοδος.... Δευϊτικὸν, ᾿Αριθμοὶ, Δευτερονόμιον" ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ τοῦ Νανῆ, Κριταὶ, Ῥοὺθ, Βασιλειῶν πρώτη καὶ δευτέρα, Βασιλειῶν τρίτη καὶ τετάρτη, Παραλειπομένων πρῶτον καὶ δεύτερον, "Εσδρας πρῶτος ἡ καὶ δεύτερος ἣν Ψαλτήριον Δαβι- τικὸν, Παροιμίαι Σαλομῶντος, Ἐκκλησιαστὴς τοῦ αὐτοῦ, ἾΑισμα ἀσμάτων τοῦ αὐτοῦ, Ἰὼβ, Προφῆται δώδεκα, ὮσηΣὲ, ᾿Αμὼς, Μιχαίας, Ἰωὴλ, ᾿Αβδίας, Ἰωνᾶς, Naovp, ᾽Αμβα- κοὺμ, Σοφωνίας, ᾿Αγγαῖος, Zaxapiac, Μαλαχίας. Οὗτοι μὲν οἱ δώδεκα εἰς ἕν βιβλίον" ἑξῆς δὲ ἕτεροι τέσσαρες πρὸς ἕν ἕκαστος βιβλίον, οὗτοι Ἢ σαΐας, Ἱερεμίας, Ἐζεκιὴλ, Δανιήλ. Ὁμοῦ τὰ κανονιζόμενα τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης βιβλία εἴκοσι δύο, ἰσάριθμα τοῖς στοιχείοις τῶν Ἑ, βραίων. Ἐκτὸς δὲ τούτων εἰσὶ πάλιν ἕτερα βιβλία τῆς αὐτῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης, οὐ κα νο- γιζόμενα μὲν, ἀναγιγνωσκόμενα δὲ μόνον τοῖς κατηχουμένοις Σιρὰχ; ᾿Εσθὴρξϑ; Ἰουδὴθ, Τωβίτ. Τοσαῦτα καὶ τὰ μὴ κανονιζόμενα, ταῦτα᾽ Σοφία Σαλομῶντος, Σοφία Ἰησοῦ υἱοῦ τινὲς μέντοι τῶν παλαιῶν εἰρήκασι κανονίζεσθαι παρ᾽ Ἕ βραίοις καὶ τὴν Ἐσθὴρ, καὶ τὴν μὲν Ῥοὺθ μετὰ τῶν Κριτῶν ἑνουμένην εἰς ἕν βιβλίον ἀριθμεῖσθαι, τὴν δὲ ᾿Εσθὴρ εἰς ἕτερον ἕν, καὶ οὕτω πάλιν εἰς εἴκοσι δύο συμπληροῦσθαι τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν κανονιζομένων παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς βιβλίων. Καὶ τὰ μὲν τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης βιβλία τά τε κανονιζόμενα καὶ τὰ μὴ κανονιζόμενα τοιαῦτα καὶ τοσαῦτα. Τὰ δὲ τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης πάλιν ὡρισμένα τε καὶ κεκα- γονισμένα βιβλία ταῦτα. Κατὰ Ματθαΐῖον, κατὰ Μάρκον, κατὰ Λουκᾶν, κατὰ Ἰωαν- νήν᾽ Πράξεις τῶν ᾿Αποστόλων, Καθολικαὶ ἐπιστολαὶ δια- φόρων ᾿Αποστόλων αἱ πᾶσαι ἑπτὰ εἰς ἕν ἀριθμούμεναι βι- βλίον, Ἰακώβου μία, Πέτρου δύο, Ἰωάννου τρεῖς, Ἰούδα μία, Παύλου ἐπιστολαὶ ιδ΄ εἰς ἕν ἀριθμούμεναι βιβλίον, ἡ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους, πρὸς Κορινθίους δύο, πρὸς Γαλάτας, πρὸς Ἐφεσίους, πρὸς Φιλιππησίους, πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς, πρὸς * The author gives the initial words of each book of the Old and New Testament. + 2 Chronicles xxxv.; or else 1 Esdras (Apocryph.); vide Atha- nas. p. 127, and p. 149. 1 Ezra and Nehemiah; vide Atha- nas. p. 149, 150. Cosin on the Canon, Ρ. 50. § Cap. xi. 2. in the Apocrypha. 14] APPENDIX A. Θεσσαλονικεῖς Ovo, πρὸς ‘EBpatouc, mpoc Τιμόθεον δύο, πρὸς Τίτον, πρὸς Φιλήμονα. "Ext τούτοις ἐστὶ καὶ ἡ ᾿Αποκά- λυψις Ἰωώννου τοῦ Θεολόγου, ἃδεχθεῖσα ὡς ἐκείνου καὶ ἐγκριθεῖσα ὑπὸ πάλιν ἁγίων καὶ πνευματοφόρων πατέρων. Τοσαῦτα καὶ τὰ τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης βιβλία, τά γε κανονι- ζόμενα, καὶ τῆς πίστεως ἡμῶν oiovet ἀκροθίνια, καὶ ἄγκυραι καὶ ἐρείσματα, ὥσπερ ὡς παρ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων τοῦ Χριστοῦ τῶν καὶ συγγενομένων ἐκείνῳ, καὶ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ μαθητευ- θέντων γραφέντα καὶ ἐκτεθέντα. Ibid. p. 201. Τὰ μὲν οὖν ἀντιλεγόμενα τῆς παλαιᾶς προ- εἰπομεν καὶ πρότερον, ὥς ἐστι Σοφία Σολομῶντος καὶ Σοφία Ἰησοῦ υἱοῦ Σιρὰχ, καὶ ᾿Ἐσθὴρ, καὶ Ἰουδὶθ, καὶ Τωβίτ' σὺν ἐκείνοις δὲ καὶ ταῦτα ἠρίθμηνται, Μακκαβαϊκὰ βιβλία oO. Πτολεμαϊκὰ, Wadpor*, καὶ Ὠιδὴ Σολομῶντος, Σωσάννα, ταῦτα τὰ ἀντιλεγόμενα τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης. Νο. ΧΙ. S. Cyrittus, Bishop of Jerusalem a.p. 349; died Α. ν. 386. (Fabric. B. G. vii. p. 438.) Cateches. iv. c. 33, sqq. p. 68. ed. Bened. Venet. 1763. ‘ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ΤΑ - e Περὶ τῶν θειῶν γραφῶ v'—Taira δὲ διδάσκουσιν ἡμᾶς αἑ ~ ~ ~ Ly vz ΄ θεόπνευστοι γραφαὶ τῆς παλαιᾶς τε καὶ καινῆς διαθήκης. εὶς γάρ > e ~ ar Pe ‘ e \ > ~ = , = \ ἐστιν ὁ τῶν δύο διαθηκῶν Θεὸς, ὁ TOY ἐν TH καινῇ φανέντα Χριστὸν, > ~ ~ , . ~ ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ προκαταγγείλας, 6 διὰ νόμου καὶ προφητῶν εἰς 7 \ δν ΄ Ν . ~ ’ ~ ' ‘ Χριστὸν παιδαγωγήσας" πρὸ γὰρ τοῦ ἐλθεῖν THY πίστιν, ὑπὸ [, > ἊΨ ‘ ~ , νόμου ἐφρουρούμεθα" Kal ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς ba Ἂν \ ~ e -~ , Ν - Χριστὸν, Kay ποτὲ τῶν αἱρετικῶν ἀκούσης τινὸς βλασφημοῦντος ΄ “Δ ua > ’ ξ \ ΄ \ , . vopov ἢ προφήτας ἀγτίφθεγξαι τὴν σωτήριον φωνὴν λέγων οὐκ ἦλθον ᾿Ιησοῦς καταλῦσαι τὸν νόμον, ἀλλὰ πληρῶσαι. καὶ φι- - ᾿ ΄ . ~ > / ~ L4 λομαθῶς ἐπίγνωθι παρὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας, ποῖαι μέν > - ~ a - ΄γ 42 = \ = εἰσιν αἱ τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης βίβλοι, ποῖαι δὲ τῆς ~ , \ ~ , , . - 5 . καινῆς, καί μοι μηδὲν τῶν ἀποκρύφων ἀναγίνωσκε" ὃ γὰρ τὰ . ~ . r , ‘ sv Paty ‘ ‘ > 3 Ar , ; παρὰ πᾶσιν ὁμολογούμενα μὴ εἰδὼς, τί περὶ τὰ ἀμφιβαλλόμενα ταλαιπωρεῖς μάτην; ἀναγίνωσκε τὰς θείας γραφὰς, Tag εἴκοσι 7 aaa) =) τω - , , ε Ν - ¢;)> ’ ovo βίβλους τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης, ταύτας τὰς ὑπὸ τῶν ε[οομή- > ε - € r , \ ” oy κοντα δύο ἑρμηνευτῶν ἑρμηνευθείσας" . .. τούτων Tag εἴκοσι δύο eval ᾽ , ν \ ’ , ᾿ -" ” ‘ βίβλους dvaylyvwoKe’ πρὸς δὲ Ta ἀπόκρυφα μηδὲν EXE κοινὸν, Not to be confounded with the τήριον : see the Septuagint Version Psalms of David, called above Ψαλ- iv. p. 123. sqq. ed. Breitinger. APPENDIX A. [15 ταύτας μόνας μελέτα σπουδαίως ἃς ἐν καὶ ἐκκλησίᾳ μετὰ παρρησίας ἀναγιγν᾽ώσκομεν. πολὺ σοῦ φρονιμώτεροι καὶ εὐλαβέστεροι ἦσαν οἱ ἀπόστολοι, καὶ οἱ ἀρχαῖοι ἐπίσκοποι, οἱ τῆς ἐκκλησίας προ- στάται οἱ ταύτας παραδόντες" σὺ οὖν, τέκνον τῆς Ἐκκλησίας ὧν, μὴ παραχάραττε τοὺς θεσμούς. Καὶ τῆς μὲν παλαιᾶς διαθήκης, ὡς εἴρηται, τὼς εἴκοσι δύο μελέτα βίβλους, ἃς, εἰ φιλομαθὴς τυγ- χάνεις, ἐμοῦ λέγοντος ὀνομαστὶ μεμνῆσθαι σπούδασον. Τοῦ Νόμου μὲν γὰρ εἰσὶν αἱ Μωσέως πρῶται πέντε βίβλοι, Γένεσις, "Ἑξοδος, Λευϊτικὸν, ᾿Αριθμοὶ, Δευτερονόμιον" ἑζῆς δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς υἱὸς Navi, καὶ τὸ τῶν Κριτῶν μετὰ τῆς ‘Povd, βιβλίον ἕβδομον ἀριθμούμενον. Τῶν δὲ λοιπῶν ἱστορικῶν βιβλίων ἡ πρώτη καὶ ἣ δευτέρα τῶν Βασιλειῶν, μία παρ᾽ Ἑβραίοις ἐστὶ βίβλος, μία δὲ καὶ ἡ τρίτη καὶ τετάρτη, ὁμοίως δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς καὶ τῶν Παραλειπομένων ἡ πρώτη καὶ ἣ δευτέρα μία τυγχάνει βίβλος, καὶ τὸν "Ἔσδρα ἣ πρώτη καὶ ἡ δευτέρα μία λελόγισται: δωδεκάτη βίβλος ἡ Ἐσθήρ. καὶ τὰ μὲν ἱστορικὰ ταῦτα" τὰ δὲ στιχηρὰ τυγχάνει πέντε, Ἰὼβ, καὶ Βίβλος Ψαλ- μῶν, καὶ Παροιμίαι, καὶ Ἐκκλησιαστὴ ς, καὶ ἾΑισμα ἀσμά- των, ἑπτακαιδέκατον βιβλίον. ἐπὶ τούτοις δὲ προφητικὰ πέντε" τῶν δώδεκα προφητῶν μία βίβλος, καὶ Ἢ σαΐου μία, καὶ Ἵερε- μίου μία, μετὰ Βαροὺχ, καὶ Θρήνων καὶ Ἐπιστολῆς, εἶτα Ἰεζεκιὴλ, καὶ ἡ τοῦ Δανιὴλ, εἰκοσιδευτέρα βίβλος τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης. τῆς δὲ καινῆς διαθήκης, τὰ τέσσαρα εὐαγγέλια" τὰ δὲ λοιπὰ ψευδεπίγραφα καὶ βλαβερὰ τυγχάνει. ἔγραψαν καὶ Μανιχαῖοι κατὰ Θωμᾶν εὐαγγέλιον, ὅπερ ὥσπερ εὐωδίᾳ τῆς εὐαγγελικῆς προσωνυμίας διαφθείρει τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν ἁπλουσ- τέρων. δέχου δὲ καὶ τὰς Πράξεις τῶν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων" πρὸς τούτοις δὲ καὶ τὰς ἑπτὰ ᾿Ιακώβου καὶ Πέτρου, Ἰωάννου, καὶ Ἰούδα καθολικὰς ἐπιστολάς ἐπισφράγισμα δὲ τῶν πάντων καὶ μαθητῶν τὸ τελευταῖον, τὰς Παύλου δεκατέσσαρες ἐπιστολάς" τα δὲ λοιπὰ πάντα ξξω κείσθω ἐν δευτέρῳ. καὶ ὅσα μὲν ἐν ἐκκλησίαις μὴ ἀναγινώσκεται, ταῦτα μηδὲ Kara σαυτὸν ἀναγίνωσκε, καθὼς ἤκουσας, καὶ περὶ μὲν τούτων, ταῦτα. No. XII. S. Hirartius, Bishop of Poictiers; died about a.p. 370. Pro- logus in Librum Psalmorum, 15. (Ed. Wirceburgi, 1785. vol. ii. p-. 145.) Et ea causa est, ut in viginti duos libros lex Testamenti veteris 16] APPENDIX A. deputetur, ut cum litterarum numero convenirent. Qui ita secun- dum traditiones veterum deputantur, ut Moysi sint libri quinque, Jesu Nave sextus, Judicum et Ruth septimus, primus et secundus Regnorum in octavum, tertius et quartus in nonum, Paralipomenon duo in decimum sint, sermones dierum Esdre in undecimum, liber Psalmorum in duodecimum, Salomonis Proverbia, Eccle- siastes, Canticum Canticorum in tertium decimum et quartum decimum et quintum decimum, duodecim autem Prophete in sextum decimum, F’saias deinde et Jeremias cum lamentatione et epistola, sed et Daniel, et Hzechiel, et Job, et Hester, viginti et duum librorum numerum consumment. Quibusdam autem visum est, additis Tobia et Judith, viginti quatuor libros secun- dum numerum Grecarum litterarum connumerare, Romana quoque lingua media inter Hebreeos Greecosque collecta. No. XIII. S. Eprpnanius, Bishop of Constantia, (ol. Salamis,) in Cyprus, A.D. 367 ; died “proximus vel etiam major centenario,”’ a.p. 403. (Fabric. B. G. viii. p. 255.) (a) Adv. Hereses, v. p. 19. ed. Petav. Colon. 1682. — "Eoyov δὲ οὗτοι ot Ἰουδαῖοι ἄχρι τῆς ἀπὸ Βαβυλῶνος αἰχμα- λωσίας ἐπανόδου βίβλους τε καὶ προφήτας τούτους, καὶ προφητῶν βίβλους ταύτας. Πρώτην μὲν Γένεσιν, δευτέραν δὲ "Ἑ ξοδον, τρίτην Aevi- τικὸν, τετάρτην ᾿Αριθμοὺς, πέμπτην Δευτερονόμιον, ἕκ- την βίβλον Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Navy, ἑβδόμην τῶν Κριτῶν, ὀγδόην τῆς Ῥοὺθ, ἐννάτην τοῦ Ἰὼβ, δεκάτην τὸ Ψαλτήριον, ἕνδε- κάτην Παροιμίας Σαλομῶντος, δυοδεκαιδεκάτην ᾿Εκκλήσιασ- τὴν, τρισκαιδεκάτην τὸ Αισμα τῶν ἀσμάτων, τεσσαρεσκαι- δεκάτην πρώτην Βασιλειῶν, πεντεκαιδεκάτην δευτέραν Βασι- λειῶν, ἑκκαιδεκάτην τρίτην Βασιλειῶν, ἑπτακαιδεκάτην τε- τάρτην ἘΒασιλειῶν, ὀκτωκαιδεκάτην πρώτην Παραλειπο- μένων, ἐννεακαιδεκάτην δευτέραν Παραλειπομένων, εἶκοσ- τὴν τὸ Δωδεκαπρόφητον, εἰκοστὴν πρώτην σαΐαν τὸν Προφήτην, εἰκοστὴν δευτέραν τὸν Προφήτην Ἱερεμίαν, μετὰ τῶν Θρήνων καὶ Ἐπιστολῶν -αὑτοῦ τε καὶ τοῦ Βαροὺχ, εἰκοστὴν τρίτην ᾿Ιεζεκιὴλ τὸν Προφήτην, εἰκοστὴν τετάρτην Δανιὴλ τὸν Προφήτην, εἰκοστὴν πέμπτην τὸ πρῶτον βιβλίον τοῦ Ἐ σδρὰ, APPENDIX A. [17 εἰκοστὴν ἕκτην τὸ δεύτερον βιβλίον, εἰκοστὴν ἑβδόμην TO βι- βλίον Ἔσθήρ. Καὶ αὗταί εἰσιν αἱ εἰκοσιεπτὰ βίβλοι αἱ ἐκ Θεοῦ δοθεῖσαι τοῖς Ιουδαίοις" εἰκοσιδύο δὲ ὡς τὰ Tap’ av- τοῖς στοιχεῖα τῶν Ἑβραϊκῶν γραμμάτων ἀριθμούμεναι διὰ τὸ διπλοῦσθαι δέκα βίβλους εἰς πέντε λεγομένας" περὶ τούτου δὲ ἄλλῃ που σαφῶς εἰρήκαμεν. εἰσὶ δὲ καὶ ἄλλαι δύο βίβλοι παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἐν ἀμφιλέκτῳ, ἡ Σοφία τοῦ Σιρὰχ, καὶ ἡ τοῦ Σαλο- μῶντος, χωρὶς ἄλλων τινῶν βιβλίων ἐναποκρύφων. (Ὁ) Ipem S. Εριρηανιῦβ, adv. Hereses, Ιχχυϊ. p. 941, ed. Petav.—Ei γὰρ ἧς ἐξ ἁγίον Πνεύματος yeyevynuévoc, καὶ Προφήταις καὶ ᾿Αποστόλοις μεμαθητευμένος, ἔδει σε διελθόντα ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς γενέσεως κόσμου ἄχρι τῶν τῆς ᾿Εσθὴρ χρόνων ἐν εἴκοσι καὶ ἑπτὰ βίβλοις παλαιᾶς διαθήκης εἴκοσι δύο ἀριθμου- μένοις, τέτταρσι δὲ ἁγίοις Ἐὐαγγελίοις καὶ ἐν τεσσαρσι- καίδεκα ᾿Ἐπιστολαῖς τοῦ ἁγίου ᾿Αποστόλον Παύλου καὶ ἐν ταῖς πρὸ τούτων, καὶ σὺν ταῖς ἐν τοῖς αὐτῶν χρόνοις Πράξεσι τῶν ᾿Αποστόλων, Καθολικαῖς Ἐπιστολαῖς Ἰακώβου καὶ Πέτρου καὶ Ἰωάννου καὶ Τούδα, καὶ ἐν τῇ τοῦ Ἰωάννου ᾽Απο- καλύψει, ἔν τε ταῖς Σοφίαις, Σολομωντός τε φημὶ καὶ υἱοῦ Σιρὰχ; καὶ πάσαις ἁπλῶς γραφαῖς θείαις, καὶ ἑαυτοῦ κατα- γνῶναι, ὅτι ὄνομα ὅπερ οὐδαμοῦ ἐντέτακται ἦλθες ἡμῖν φέρων. (c) Ipem 8. Εριρηάκιῦβ, de Mensuris, p. 162.----Σύγκεινται αἱ βίβλοι ἐν πεντατεύχοις τέτταρσι Kal μένουσιν ἄλλαι δύο ὕστε- ροῦσαι ὡς εἶναι τὰς ἐνδιαθέτους βίβλους οὕτως, πέντε μὲν νομικὰς, Γένεσιν, "Εξοδον, Δευϊτικὸν, ᾿Αριθμοὺς, Δευτερονόμιον" αὕτη ἡ Πεντάτευχος καὶ ἡ Νομοθεσία" πέντε γεὶρ στιχήρεις, ἡ τοῦ Ἰὼβ βίβλος, εἶτα τὸ Ψαλτήριον, Παροιμίαι Σαλομῶντος, Ἐκκλησιαστὴς, A σμα ἀσμάτων'" εἶτα ἄλλη Πεντάτευχος, ra καλούμενα γραφεῖα, παρά τισι δὲ ᾿Αγιόγραφα λεγόμενα, ἅτινά ἐστιν οὕτως, Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Navy βίβλος, Κριτῶν μετὰ τῆς Ῥοὺθ, Παραλειπομένων πρώτη μετὰ τῆς δευτέρας, Βασι- λειῶν πρώτη μετὰ τῆς τετάρτης, αὕτη τρίτη πεντάτευχος" ἄλλη πεντάτευχος τὸ δωδεκαπρόφητον, Ἡσαΐας, Ἱερεμίας, ἴεζε- κιὴλ, Δανιὴλ, καὶ αὕτη ἡ Προφητικὴ Πεντάτευχος. ἔμειναν δὲ ἄλλαι δύο αἵτινές εἰσι τοῦ "Ἐσδρα pia καὶ αὕτη λογιζομένη, καὶ ἄλλη βίβλος ἣ τῆς Ἔ σθὴρ καλεῖται. ἐπληρώθησαν οὖν αἱ εἰκοσιδύο βίβλοι κατὰ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν εἰκοσιδύο στοιχείων Tap’ Ἑβραίοις" αἱ γὰρ στιχήρεις δύο βίβλοι ἥ τε τοῦ Σαλομῶντος ἣ Πανάρετος λεγομένη, καὶ ἡ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ Σιρὰχ ἐκγόνου [5] 18] APPENDIX A. δὲ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ καὶ τὴν Σοφίαν ‘Epaiort γράψαντος, ἣν ὁ ἔκγονος αὐτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἑρμηνεύσας ᾿Βλληνιστὶ ἔγραψεν, καὶ αὗται χρήσι- ‘ ’ \ ιᾺ N ᾽ ΄ > 3 οἱ > \ e ~ 9 ᾿Ξ ᾽ μοι μὲν εἰσὶ καὶ ὠφέλιμοι, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς ἀριθμὸν ῥητῶν οὐκ ἀνα- φέρονται, διὸ δὲ (lege διὸ οὐδὲ) ἐν τῷ ᾿Αρὼν ἀνετέθησαν, τοῦτ ἐστὶν, ἐν τῇ τῆς διαθήκης κιβωτῷ. (d) Ipem 5. ΕΡιρΡηα κιῦ5,.71)6 Mensuris, p. 180.—Ilpw7n Βρισὴθ, ἢ καλεῖται Τένεσις κόσμου" ἐλησιμὼθ, ἢ "᾿Εξοδος τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἐξ Αἰγύπτου: οὐδωϊεκρὰ, ἣ € /EVE Λευϊτικόν'" iove- oan Ύ oa, ἣ ἑρμηνεύεται Δενυϊτικόν" i fy εἰ , Ε] ᾽ὔ ᾽ / A , δαβὴρ, ἥ ἐστιν ᾿Αριθμοί' ἐλλεδεϊαρεὶμ, τὸ Δευτερονόμιον, Διησοῦ, 4 τοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναυῆ" Cw, ἡ τοῦ Tw διασωφθεὶμ, ἡ τῶν Κριτῶν᾽ διαροὺθ, ἡ τοῦ ῬῬούθ' σφερτελεὶμ, τὸ Ψαλτήριον" δεβριϊαμεὶμ, ἡ πρώτη τῶν Παραλειπομένων᾽" δεβριϊαμεὶμ, Παραλειπομένων δευτέρα" δεμουὲλ, Βασιλειῶν πρώτη; ρ ρ B ’ ρ ) δαδουδεμουνελ, Βασιλειῶν δευτέρα ὃμαλαχεὶ, Βασιλειῶν τρίτη" ὃδμαλαχεὶ, Βασιλειῶν τετάρτη" δμεαλὼθ, ἡ Παρ- οιμιῶν" δεκωέλεθ, ᾿Εκκλησιαστή ς" σιρασισεὶμ, τὸ ἾΑισμα - > t 5 δ 5 \ Ν , A ἐν fh τῶν ᾿Αισμάτων" δαθαριασαρὰ, τὸ Δωδεκαπρόφητον" δησαΐου, τοῦ προφήτου Ἡσαΐον᾽ διερεμίου, ἡ τοῦ ἹἹερεμίον" διεζεκιὴλ, ἡ τοῦ Ἐξεζεκιήλ' διδανιὴλ, ἡ τοῦ Δανιήλ᾽ διδέσδρα, ἡ τοῦ "Εσδρα πρώτη" διδέσδρα, ἡ τοῦ "Εσδρα δευτέρα" δεσθὴρ, ἡ τῆς Ἐσθήρ... «.- ἐστι δὲ καὶ ἄλλη μικρὰ βίβλος, ἣ καλεῖται Κινὼθ, ἥτις ἑρμηνεύεται θρῆνος ἱἹερεμίου. Νο. ΧΙΝ. Concitium Laopicenum*, met at Laodicea, on the river Lycus, in Phrygia, about a.p. 367. (See Cave, Histor. Liter. p. 362.) Canones lix. 1x.—"Ore ov δεῖ ἰδιωτικοὺς ψαλμοὺς λέγεσθαι ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ οὐδὲ ἀκανόνιστα βιβλία, ἀλλὰ μόνα τὰ κανονικὰ τῆς καινῆς καὶ παλαιᾶς διαθήκης. ---Ὅσα δεῖ βιβλία ἀνα- γινώσκεσθαι τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης" α΄. Τένεσις κόσμου, β΄. "Ἐξοδος ἐξ Αἰγύπτου, γ΄. Λευϊτικὸν, 0. ᾿Αριθμοὶ, εἰ. Δευτερονόμιον, ς΄. Ἰησοῦς Ναυῆ, ζ΄. Κριταὶ, ‘Povd, η΄. Ἐσθὴρ, θ΄. Βασιλειῶν πρώτη καὶ δευτέρα, (. Βασι- λειῶν τρίτη καὶ τετάρτη, ια΄, Παραλειπόμενα, πρῶτον καὶ δεύτερον, ιβ. “Ἔσδρας πρῶτον καὶ δεύτερον, ty. Βίβλος Ψαλμῶν ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα, Ww. Παροιμίαι * The Canons of thisCouncil were Quini-Sextum, in Trullo, a.p. 692. approved by name in the Concilium (Bruns, Concil. p. 36.) APPENDIX A. [19 Σολομῶντος, ιε΄. Ἐκκλησιαστὴς, iw. "Atopa goparwr, ιζ΄. Ἰὼβ, ιη΄. Δώδεκα προφῆται, ιθ΄. Ἡσαΐας, κ΄. ‘Tepe- μίας καὶ Βαροὺχ, Θρῆνοι καὶ ἐπιστολαὶ, xa’, Ἰξζεκιὴλ, κβ΄. Δανιήλ. --- Τὰ δὲ τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης ταῦτα Ἐῤ- αγγέλια τέσσαρα, κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μάρκον, κατὰ Λουκᾶν, κατὰ Ἰωάννην, Πράξεις ἀποστόλων, ἐπιστολαὶ καθολικαὶ ἑπτὰ, οὕτως" Ἰακώβου μία, Πέτρου δύο, Ἰωάννου τρεῖς, Ἰούδα μία. ἐπιστολαὶ Παύλον δεκατέσσαρες. πρὸς Ῥωμαίους μία, πρὸς Κορινθίους δύο, πρὸς Ταλάτας μία, πρὸς Ἐ )Πφεσίους μία, mo0c Φιλιππησίους μία, πρὸς Κολοσσαεῖς μία, πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς δύο, πρὸς «Εβραίους μία, πρὸς Τιμόθεον δύο, πρὸς Τίτον μία, πρὸς Φιλήμονα μία. No. XV. Rurrinus, Presbyter, of Aquileia, where he studied with S. Jerome about a.p. 340, went into the East about a.p. 371, returned to Italy about a.p. 397, died in Sicily about a.p. 410 (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 286.) Expositio in Symbolum Apostolorum, p. 26; apud 5, Cyprian. ed. Amstelodami, 1691.—Ergo Spiritus Sanctus est, Qui in Vetere Testamento Legem et Prophetas, in Novo vero Evan- gelia et Apostolos inspiravit. Unde et Apostolus dicit : Omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata utilis est ad docendum. Et ideo que sunt Novi ac Veteris Instrumenti volumina, que secundum majorum traditionem per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum inspirata cre- duntur, et Ecclesiis Christi tradita, competens videtur in hoc loco evidenti numero, sicut ex patrum monumentis accepimus, designare. Itaque Veteris Instrumenti primo omnium Moysi quinque libri sunt traditi, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium. Post hos Jesu Nave, et Judicum simul cum Ruth: quatuor post hee Regnorum libri, quos Hebrzei duos numerant ; Paralipome- non, qui dierum dicitur liber ; et Esdre@ libri duo, qui apud illos singuli computantur, et Hester : Prophetarum vero, E'saias, Hiere- mias, Ezechiel, et Daniel: preeterea duodecim Prophetarum liber unus: Job quoque et Psalmi David singuli sunt libri: Solomonis vero tres Ecclesiis tradidit, Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, Cantica Can- ticorum. In his concluserunt librorum numerum Veteris Testa- [B 2] 20] APPENDIX A. menti.—Novi vero quatuor Evangelia, Matthei, Marci, Luce, Joannis ; Actus Apostolorum, quos descripsit Lucas: Pauli Apo- stoli Epistole quatuordecim. Petri Apostoli Epistole due. Jacobi fratris Domini et Apostoli una: Jude una: Joannis tres. Apocalypsis Joannis. Hee sunt que Patres inter Canonem con- cluserunt ; ex quibus fidei nostre assertiones constare voluerunt. Sciendum tamen est, quod et alii libri sunt qui non canonici, sed ecclesiastici, ἃ majoribus appellati sunt: ut est Sapientia Solomonis, et alia Sapientia que dicitur filii Syrach, qui liber apud Latinos hoe ipso generali vocabulo Ecclesiasticus appel- latur; quo vocabulo non auctor libelli, sed Scripturee qualitas cognominata est. Ejusdem ordinis est libellus Tobie, et Judith, et Maccabeorum libri. In Novo vero Testamento libellus, qui dicitur Pastoris sive Hermatis, qui appellatur duz viz, vel judi- cium Petri; quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesiis voluerunt, non tamen proferri ad auctoritatem ex his fidei confirmandam. Ceteras vero Scripturas apocryphas nominarunt, quas in Ecclesiis legi noluerunt. Hee nobis a Patribus, ut dixi, tradita opportunum visum est hoe in loco designare, ad instructionem eorum qui prima sibi Ecclesize ac fidei elementa suscipiunt, ut sciant ex quibus sibi fontibus Verbi Dei haurienda sint pocula. No. XVI. Puivastrivus, Bishop of Brescia; an intimate friend of S. Am- brose ; flourished a.p. 380. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 276. Bibl. P. Max. v.up. gli.) De Heresibus, § 40.—Statutum est ab Apostolis et eorum successoribus, non aliud legi in ecclesia debere in Catholica, nisi Legem et Prophetas, et Evangelia et Actus Apostolorum, et Pauli tredecim Epistolas, et septem alias, Petri duas, Joannis tres, Jude unam, et unam Jacobi, que septem Actibus Apostolorum con- Juncte sunt. Scripturae autem abscondite, id est Apocrypha, etsi legi debent morum causa a perfectis, non ab omnibus legi debent, quia non intelligentes multa addiderunt et tulerunt, que voluerunt heeretici——41. Heresis quorundam de epistola Pauli ad Hebreos. Sunt alii quoque, qui epistolam Pauli ad Hebrzos non adserunt esse ipsius, sed dicunt aut Barnabe esse Apostoli aut Clementis de urbe Roma episcopi. Alii autem Luce evan- gelistee aiunt epistolam etiam ad Laodicenses scriptam. Et APPENDIX A. [21 quia addiderunt in ea quedam non bene sentientes, inde non legitur in ecclesia; et, si legitur a quibusdam, non tamen in ecclesia legitur populo, nisi tredecim epistole ipsius et ad He- breos interdum. Kt in ea quia rhetorice scripsit, sermone plau- sibili, inde non putant ejusdem Apostoli. Et quia et factum Christum dicit in ea (iil. 2.), inde non legitur; de penitentia autem (vi. 4. ss.) propter Novatianos aque. No. XVII. S. Ampuitocuius, Bishop of Iconium in Lycaonia; flourished A.D. 380. (Fabric. B. G. vill. 373.) Jambi ad Seleucum, ap. 5. Greg. Nazianz. tom. ii. p. 193. Colon. 1680. Kai τὴν μάθησιν τῶν παρ᾽ “Ἕλλησιν λόγων ὥσπερ δικαστὴς ἔννομον ψῆφον φέρων ὑπηρετεῖσθαι τάξον, ὡς ἐστὶν πρέπον, τῇ τῶν ἀληθῶν δογμάτων παρρησίᾳ, τῇ πανσόφῳ τε τῶν γραφῶν θεωρίᾳ. 5 Kai yao δίκαιον τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος, ἄνωθεν οὖσαν, ἐκ Θεοῦ τ᾽ ἀφιγμένην, Δέσποιναν εἶναι τῆς κάτω παιδεύσεως, ὥσπερ θεραπαίνης, μὴ μάτην φυσωμένης, ὑπηρετεῖν τε κοσμίως εἰθισμένης" 10 τῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ γὰρ ἣ κάτω δουλευέτω. Πλὴν ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνο προσμαθεῖν μάλιστά σοι προσῆκον᾽ οὐχ ἅπασα βίβλος ἀσφαλὴς, ἡ σεμνὸν ὄνομα τῆς γραφῆς κεκτημένη. Εἰσὶν γὰρ, εἰσὶν ἐσθ᾽ ὅτε ψευδώνυμοι 15 βίβλοι, τινὲς μὲν Eppecor™, καὶ γείτονες, ὡς ἄν τις εἴποι, τῶν ἀληθείας λόγων. αἱ δ᾽ αὖ νόθοι τε, καὶ λίαν ἐπισφαλεῖς" ὥσπερ Ἷ παράσημα καὶ vol’ αὖ νομίσματα, ἃ βασίλεως μὲν τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν φέρει 20 κίβδηλα δ᾽ ἐστι καϊσύλως f δολούμενα" - τούτων χάριν σοι τῶν θεοπνεύστων ἐρῶ * Apocrypha nostra, sive Eccle- 1 Vulgo ταῖς ὕλαις insulse, et con- siastica. tra metrum., + Νυϊρὸ ὡς .. νόθα, contrametrum. * Vulgo ἄγγελον. Alia nonnulla, in his Senariis non inficetis, ut in leviter refinxi. APPENDIX A. βίβλων ἑκάστην, ὡς δ᾽ ἂν εὐκρινῶς μάθης, τὰς τῆς Παλαιᾶς πρῶτα Διαθήκης ἐρῶ. Ἢ Πεντάτευχος τὴν Κτίσιν, «dr "Εξοδον Λευϊτικόν τε τὴν μέσην ἔχει βίβλον. Μεθ’ ἣν ᾿Αριθμοὺς, εἶτα Δευτερονόμιον, Ἔπειτα τὴν Ῥοὺθ, Βασιλειῶν τε τέτταρας βίβλους, Παραλειπομένων δέ γε ξυνωρίδα. "Εσδρας ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς πρῶτος, εἶθ᾽ ὁ δεύτερος. ‘Edie στιχηρὰς πέντε σοι βίβλους ἐρῶ, Στεφθέντος ἄθλοις ποικίλων παθῶν Ἰὼβ, Ψαλμῶν τε βίβλον, ἐμμελὲς ψυχῆς ἄκος. Τρεῖς δ᾽ αὖ Σολομῶντος τοῦ σοφοῦ, Παροιμίας, 5 ΓΞ νὰ Ἐκκλησιαστὴν, Atopa τ᾽ αὖ τῶν ᾿Αισμάτων. Τὴ Ν Ταύταις Ἰροφήτας προστίθει τοὺς δώδεκα, ~ τ \ - Ὡσηὲ πρῶτον, εἶτ᾽ ᾿Αμὼς τὸν δεύτερον, ; 9 ΄ 4 Μιχέαν, Ἰωὴλ, ᾿Αβδίαν, καὶ τὸν τύπον ἸΙῶναν αὐτοῦ τοῦ τριημέρου πάθους. Ν SY » Naovp per αὐτοὺς, ‘ABBakovp, εἶτ᾽ ἔννατον Σοφώνιαν, ‘Ayyatoy τε καὶ Ζαχαρίαν, Διώνυμον τ᾽ εὐάγγελον * Μαλαχίαν, \ , Μεθ᾿ οὺς Προφήτας μανθάνειν τοὺς τέσσαρας, Παρρησιαστὴν τὸν μέγαν Ἢ σαΐαν Ἰερεμίαν τε συμπαθῆ καὶ μυστικὸν Ἰεζεκιὴλ, ἔσχατόν τε Δανιὴλ, τὸν αὐτὸν ἔργοις καὶ λόγοις σοφώτατον. Τούτοις προσεγκρίνουσι τὴν ᾿Εἰσθήρ τινες. ~ - fQ ΄ Καινῆς Διαθήκης wpa μοι βίβλους λέγειν" Εὐαγγελιστὰς τεσσώρας δέχου μόνους, Ματθαῖον, εἶτα Μάρκον, ᾧ Λουκᾶν τρίτον Προσθεὶς ἀρίθμει τόνδ᾽ ᾿Ιωάννην χρόνῳ ‘ ~ f > Τέταρτον, ἀλλὰ πρῶτον ὕψει δογμάτων" Βροντῆς μὲν υἱὸν τοῦτον εἰκότως καλῶ Μέγιστον ἠχήσαντα τῷ Θεοῦ λόγῳ. Δέχου δὲ Λουκᾶ καὶ βίβλον τὴν δευτέραν, τὴν τῶν Καθολικῶν Πράξεων ἀποστόλων. Τὸ Σκεῦος ἑξῆς προστίθει τῆς ἐκλογῆς, τὸν τῶν ἐθνῶν Κήρυκα τόνδ᾽ ᾿Απόστολον 25 30 40 50 55 sequentibus S. Gregorii, metri causa APPENDIX A. [23 Παῦλον, σοφῶς γράψαντα ταῖς ExxAnaotatc 600 ᾿Ἐπιστολὰς δὶς ἑπτὰ, Ῥωμαίων μίαν, ἣ χρὴ ξυνάπτειν πρὸς Κορινθίους δύο, Τὴν πρὸς Γαλάτας τε καὶ ἢ πρὸς ᾿Εφεσίους, μεθ᾽ ἣν Τοῖς ἐν Φιλίπποις, εἶτα τὴν γεγραμμένην (o>) or Κολοσσαεῦσι, Θεσσαλονικεῦσιν δύο ᾽ 3 Δύο Τιμοθέῳ, Τίτῳ τε καὶ Φιλήμονι Μίαν γ᾽ ἑκατέρῳ, καὶ πρὸς ‘EBpaiove μίαν. Τινὲς δὲ φασὶ τὴν πρὸς Ἑβραίους νόθον, οὐκ εὖ λέγοντες" γνησία γὰρ ἡ χάρις. Εἶεν" τί λοιπόν; Καθολικῶν ἐπιστολῶν 70 Τινὲς μὲν ἑπτά φασιν, οἱ δὲ τρεῖς μόνας cP ’ ρ μ - , \ 3 , , χρῆναι δέχεσθαι, τὴν Ἰακώβου μίαν, Μίαν τε Πέτρου, τήν τ᾽ Ἰωάννου μίαν, ᾿ μ Τινὲς δὲ τὰς τρεῖς, καὶ πρὸς αὐταῖς τὰς δύο Πέτρου δέχονται, τὴν Ἰουδᾶᾷ δ᾽ ἑβδόμην" 75 p χοόνται, τὴ η Τὴν δ᾽ ᾿Αποκάλυψιν τὴν Ἰωάννου πάλιν \ ‘\ > , e , Ss Τινὲς μὲν ἐγκρίνουσιν, οἱ πλείους OE γε Νόθον λέγουσιν. Οὗτος ἀψευδέστατος Κανὼν ἂν εἴη τῶν θεοπνεύστων Γραφῶν. No. XVIII. S. Grecorius Naztanzenus, Bishop of Nazianzum, then of Sasimi in Cappadocia, then of Constantinople, from which he retired a.p. 881; died a.p. 391, ann. etat. 91. (Fabric. B. 6. viii. 384.) Carm. xxxiil. tom. 11. p. 439. Περὶ τῶν γνησίων βιβλίων τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς. “ἹΙστορικαὶ μὲν ἔασι βίβλοι δνοκαίδεκα πᾶσαι, Τῆς ἀρχαιοτέρας “Ἑβραϊκῆς σοφίης. Πρώτιστα Τένεσις, "Eéodoc, Δευϊτικὸν, "Emer ᾿Αριθμοί, κάτα δεύτερος Νόμος. "Brew Ἰησοῦς, καὶ Κριταί" Ῥοὺθ ὀγδόη" 5 Ἢ δ᾽ ἐνάτη δεκάτη τε βίβλοι, πράξεις Βασιλήων, Καὶ τὰ Παραλειπόμεν᾽" ἔσχατον δ᾽ "Εσδραν ἔχεις. Αἱ δὲ στιχηραὶ πέντε, πρῶτος ὧν Ἰώβ, Ἔπειτα Δαυίδ, εἶτα τρεῖς Σολομώντιαι, ἜἜκκλησιαστῆς, ἾΑισμα καὶ Παροιμίαι. 10 * Vulgo καὶ τὴν. 24] APPENDIX A. Kat πένθ᾽ ὁμοίως πνεύματος προφητικοῦ" Ε pee Μίαν μέν εἰσιν ἐς γραφὴν οἱ δώδεκα, ‘Qoné, κ᾿ ᾿Αμώς, καὶ Μιχαίας ὁ τρίτος, "Ἐπειτ᾽ Ἰωήλ, εἶτ᾽ Ἰωνᾶς, ᾿Αβὲίας, Ναούμ τε, κ᾿ ᾿Αββακούμ τε, xo Σοφωνίας, 15 ᾿Αγγαῖος, εἶτα Ζαχαρίας, Μαλαχίας" Μίαν μὲν οἵδε. Δευτέρα 0 Ἠσαΐας, "Ἔπειθ᾽ ὁ κληθεὶς ‘Lepepiac ἐκ βρέφους, Εἶτ᾽ ᾿Ιεζεκιήλ, καὶ Δανιήλου χάρις. ᾿Αρχαίας μὲν ἔθηκα δύω καὶ ἐεΐκοσι βίβλους, 20 Τοῖς τῶν Ἑβραίων γράμμασιν ἀντιθέτους. Ματθαῖος μὲν ἔγραψεν Ἑβραίοις θαύματα Χριστοῦ, Μάρκος δ᾽ ᾿Ιταλίῃ, Λοῦκας ᾿Αχαιϊάδι. Πᾶσι δ᾽ Ἰωάννης κήρυξ μέγας, οὐρανοφοίτης. "Ἔπειτα Πράξεις τῶν σοφῶν ἀποστόλων. 25 Δεκὰς δὲ Παύλου, τέσσαρες τ᾽ ἐπιστολαί. ‘Exra δὲ τὰ καθολίχ᾽, ὧν ᾿Ιακώβου μία, Δύω δὲ Πέτρου, τρεῖς δ᾽ ᾿Ιωάννου πάλιν. Ἰούδα δ᾽ ἐστὶν ἑβδόμη. Πάσας ἔχεις, ov \ Ei ree δὲ τούτων ἐκτὸς, οὐκ ἐν γνησίοις. 90 No. XIX. S. Hizronymus, Presbyter, born at Stridon in Dalmatia, A.D. 829; educated at Rome, left it for the East a.p. 385; scholar of S. Gregory Nazianzen; died at Bethlehem a.p. 420, in the 91st year of his age. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 267.) (a) Prologus Galeatus, tom. i. p- 318, ed. Benedict. Paris, 1693. * Viginti et duas litteras esse apud Hebrzeos, Syrorum quoque * Recent Romanist writers on the Canon affirm that St. Jerome re- tracted what he has said in the pas- sages here alleged. Thus Malou (Lecture de la Sainte Bible, Lou- vain, 1846, vol. ii. 97). “ Ilest mani- feste que l’autorité de St. Jérome mest pas d’un grand poids dans cette controverse, Il a émis d’abord une opinion contraire ἃ la croyance de V Eglise, et des quwil fut aceusé Wabandonner la tradition des Apétres il désavoua la doctrine qu’on Jui at- tribuait .... Il ne désapprouvait jamais les Eglises qui recevaient les livres deutéro-canoniques dans le Canon. 1] répudia le Canon des Juifs.’ The author refers to St. Jerome’s Second Apology against Ruffinus in support of these most unwarrantable assertions, to which, after a careful perusal of it, I con- fidently reply, that St. Jerome there retracts nothing. APPENDIX A. [25 lingua et Chaldzorum testatur, quae Hebraeze magna ex parte confinis est. Nam et ipsi viginti duo elementa habent, eodem sono et diversis characteribus.—Porro quinque litteree duplices apud Hebrzos sunt, Caph, Mem, Nun, Pe, Sade. Unde et quin- que a plerisque libri duplices existimantur, Samuel, Melachim, Dibre hajammim, Esdras, Jeremias cum Cinoth, id est Lamenta- tionibus suis. Quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt, per que scribimus Hebraice omne quod loquimur, et eorum initiis vox humana comprehenditur, ita vigints duo volumina supputan- tur, quibus quasi litteris et exordiis in Dei doctrina tenera adhuc et Jactens viri justi eruditur infantia. Primus apud eos liber vocatur Beresith, quem nos Genesin dicimus. Secundus Veelle Semoth. ‘Tertius Vajicra, id est, Leviticus. Quartus Vajedabber, quem Numeros vocamus. Quintus Elle haddebarim, qui Deuteronomium prenotatur. Hi sunt quinque libri Mosis, quos proprie Thora, id est, Legem, appellant. Secundum Prophetarum ordinem faciunt, et incipiunt ab Jesu filio Nave, qui apud eos Josue Ben Nun dicitur. Deinde sub- texunt Sophetim, id est Judicum librum, et in eundem compin- gunt Ruth, quia in diebus Judicum facta ejus narratur historia. Tertius sequitur Samuel, quem nos Regum primum et secundum dicimus. Quartus Melachim, id est Regum, qui tertio et quarto Regum volumine continetur. Meliusque multo est Melachim, id est Regum, quam Melachoth, id est Regnorum, dicere: non enim multarum gentium describit regna, sed unius Israelitici populi, qui tribubus duodecim continetur. Quintus est Fsaias. Sextus Jeremias. Septimus Ezechiel. Octavus liber duodecim Prophetarum, qui apud illos vocatur Thereasar. Tertius ordo Hagiographa possidet. Et primus liber incipit a Job. Secundus a David, quem quinque incisionibus et uno Psal- morum volumine comprehendunt. Tertius est Solomon, tres li- bros habens, Proverbia, que illi Mise, id est Parabolas, appel- lant: Quartus Ecclesiastes, id est Coheleth. Quintus Canticum Canticorum, quem titulo Sir hassirim prenotant. Sextus est Daniel. Septimus Dibre hajammim, id est Verba dierum, quod significantius Chronicon totius divine historia possumus ap- pellare, qui liber apud nos Paralipomenon primus et secundus 26 | APPENDIX A. inseribitur. Octavus #'sdras : qui et ipse similiter apud Greecos et Latinos in duos libros divisus est. Nonus Esther. Atque ita fiunt pariter Veteris Legis libri viginti duo, id est, Mosis quinque, et Prophetarum octo, Hagiographorum novem. Quanquam nonnulli Ruth et Cinoth inter Hagiographa scrip- titent, et hos libros in suo putent numero supputandos, ac per hoc esse priscee Legis libros viginti quatuor, quos sub numero ' viginti quatuor seniorum Apocalypsis Joannis inducit adorantes Agnum et coronas suas prostratis vultibus offerentes, stantibus coram quatuor animalibus oculatis et retrd et ante, id est in preeteritum et in futurum respicientibus, et indefessa voce cla- mantibus Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Omnipotens, Qui erat et Qui est et Qui venturus est. Hic prologus scripturarum quasi galeatum principium omni- bus hbris, quos de Hebreeo vertimus in Latinum, convenire po- test: ut scire valeamus, quicquid extra hos est, inter apocrypha esse ponendum. Igitur Sapientia, quee vulgo Salomonis inscri- bitur, et Jesu filii Sirach liber, et Judith, et Tobias, et Pastor, non sunt in Canone. Macchabeorum primum librum Hebraicum reperi. Secundus Greecus est, quod ex ipsa quoque phrasi pro- bari potest. (b) Ipem 5. Hirronymus, Prolog. in Hieremiam, vol. i. p. 554. ed. Paris, 1693.—Librum autem Baruch notarii ejus, qui apud Hebrzos nec legitur nec habetur, preetermisimus. (c) Ipem S. Hieronymus, in Libros Salomonis, Chromatio et Heliodoro, vol. i. p. 938.—Itaque longa exgrotatione fractus, ne penitus hoc anno reticerem et apud vos mutus essem, tridui opus nomini vestro consecravi, interpretationem videlicet trium Salomonis voluminum, Mastoru, quas Hebrei Parabolas, vul- gata autem editio Proverbia vocat: Coleth, quem Greece Eccle- siasten, Latine concionatorem possumus dicere: Sir Assirim, quod in nostra lingua vertitur Cantica Canticorum. Fertur et Πανάρετος Jesu filii Sirach liber, et alius Wevderiypagoc, qui Sapientia Salomonis inscribitur. Quorum priorem, Hebraicum reperi; non Lcclesiasticum, ut apud Latinos, sed Parabolas preenotatum, cui juncti erant Ecclesiastes et Canticum Canticorum : ut s¢militudinem Salomonis non solum librorum numero, sed etiam materiarum genere cozequaret. Secundus apud Hebreos nusquam APPENDIX A. [27 est, quin et ipse stylus Greecam eloquentiam redolet: et non- nulli seriptorum veterum hunc esse Judei Philonis affirmant. Sicut ergo Judith, et Tobit, et Machabcorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia, sed inter canonicas scripturas non recipit, sic et hee duo volumina legat ad edificationem plebis, non ad auctoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam. (4) Ipem S. Hrzronymus, in Danielem Prophet. vol. i. p. 990. —Heec idcirco, ut difficultatem vobis Danielis ostenderem, qui apud Hebreos nec Susanne habet historiam, nec hymnum trium puerorum, nec Belis Draconisque fabulas : quas nos, quia in toto orbe dispersee sunt, veru — anteposito, easque jugulante, sub- jecimus ; ne videremur apud imperitos magnam partem voluminis detruncasse. (e) Ipem S. Hieronymus, in Ezram, vol. i. p. 1106.—Nec quemquam moveat quod unus a nobis editus liber est: nec apo- eryphorum tertii et quarti somniis delectetur: quia et apud Hebreos, Ezra Neemieque sermones in unum volumen coare- tantur: et que non habentur apud illos, nec de vigintiquattuor senibus sunt, procul abjicienda. (f) Ipem 5. Hieronymus, in Librum Tobia, vol. i. p. 1158. —Mirari non desino exactionis vestre instantiam: exigitis enim ut librum Chaldzo sermone conscriptum ad Latinum stylum traham ; librum utique Zobie, quem Hebrei de Catalogo divi- narum Scripturarum secantes, his, que Apocrypha memorant, manciparunt. Feci satis desiderio vestro, non tamen meo studio. (g) Ippm 5. Hieronymus, in Librum Judith, vol. i. p. 1170. —Apud Hebreos liber Judith inter Apocrypha legitur : cujus auctoritas ad roboranda illa quee in contentionem veniunt minus idonea judicatur. Chaldao tamen sermone conscriptus, inter historias computatur. Sed quia hunc librum Synodus Niczena in numero Sanctarum Scripturarum legitur computasse, acquievi postulationi vestrze, immo exactioni: et sepositis occupationibus, quibus vehementer arctabar, huic unam lucubratiunculam dedi, magis sensum ἃ sensu, quam ex verbo verbum transferens. (h) Ipem S. Hreronymus, Epist. τι. ad Paulinum (Opp. t. iv. p- 574).—Tangam et Novum breviter Testamentum. Mattheus, Marcus, Lucas, et Joannes, quadriga Domini et verum Cherubim, quod interpretatur scientie multitudo, per totum corpus oculati 987 APPENDIX A. sunt, scintillae emicant, discurrunt fulgura, pedes habent rectos et in sublime tendentes, terga pennata et ubique volitantia. Tenent se mutuo, sibique perplexi sunt, et quasi rota in rota volvuntur, et pergunt quocunque eos flatus Sancti Spiritus perduxerit. Paulus Apostolus ad septem ecclesias scribit (octava enim ad Hebreos a plerisque extra numerum ponitur). Timothewm instruit ac Titum, Philemonem pro fugitivo famulo deprecatur. Super quo tacere melius puto, quam pauca scribere. Actus Apostolorum nudam quidem sonare videntur historiam, et nascentis ecclesia infantiam texere : sed si noverimus scriptorem eorum “‘ Lucam esse medicum, cujus laus est in evangelio,” animadvertemus pariter omnia verba illius, anime languentis esse medicinam. Jacobus, Petrus, Joannes, Judas apostoli septem epistolas edide- runt tam mysticas quam succinctas et breves pariter et longas ; breves in verbis, longas in sententiis, ut rarus sit qui non in earum lectione cecutiat. Apocalypsis Joannis tot habet sacramenta quot verba. Parum dixi pro merito voluminis. Laus omnis inferior est: in verbis singulis multiplices latent intelligentiz. (ἢ) Inem S. Hreronymus*, Comment. in Matth. procem. (t. iv. p- 2 ss.)—Plures fuisse, qui evangelia scripserunt, et Lucas evangelista testatur, dicens: ‘‘ Quoniam quidem multi conati sunt ordinare narrationem rerum, que in nobis complete sunt: sicut tradiderunt nobis, qui ab initio ipsi viderunt sermonem, et minis- traverunt ei : et perseverantia usque in praesens tempus monu- menta declarant: que a diversis autoribus edita, diversarum hereseon fuere principia: ut est illud juxta Agyptios et Tho- mam, et Matthiam et Bartholomzeum, duodecinique apostolorum, et Basilidis atque Apellis, ac reliquorum, quos enumerare lon- gissimum est: cum tantum in presentiarum hoc necesse sit dicere: extitisse quosdam qui sine Spiritu et gratia Dei conati sunt magis ordinare narrationem quam historiz texere veritatem. Quibus jure potest illud propheticum coaptari: “ V@ qui pro- phetant de corde suo: qui ambulant post spiritum swum: qui dicunt, Dicit Dominus : et Dominus non misit eos.” De quibus et Salvator in evangelio Joannis loquitur: ‘“ Omnes qui ante me venerunt, fures et latrones fuerunt.” Qui venerunt, non qui * With this passage compare 5S. S8.Cyprian, Epist. 73, Origen in Lue, Iren, iii. c. 1, and iii. c. 2. § 7, 8,9. init. Euseb. iii. 24. APPENDIX A. [29 missi sunt. Ipse enim ait: “ Veniebant, et ego non mittebam eos.” In venientibus enim preesumptio temeritatis, in missis obsequium servitutis est. Ecclesia autem, quae supra petram Domini voce fundata est: quam introduxit rex in cubiculum suum: et ad quam per foramen descensionis occultae misit manum suam, similis damulze hinnuloque cervorum: quatuor flumina paradisi instar eructans: quatuor angulos et annulos habet, per quos quasi arca testamenti et custos legis Domini lignis immobilibus vehitur. Primus omnium est Mattheus publicanus, cognomento Levi ; qui evangelium in Judza Hebrzeo sermone edidit: ob eorum vel maxime causam, qui in Jesum crediderant ex Judzeis ; et nequa- quam legis umbram, succedente evangelii veritate, servabant. Secundus Marcus, interpres apostoli Petri, et Alexandrine eccle- 5126. primus episcopus: qui Dominum quidem Salvatorem ipse non vidit, sed ea, quze magistrum audierat praedicantem, juxta fidem magis gestorum narravit quam ordinem. Tertius Lucas medicus, natione Syrus Antiochensis, cujus laus in evangelio: qui et ipse discipulus apostoli Pauli, in Achaize Boeotizeque partibus volumen condidit, queedam altius repetens: et ut ipse in procemio confitetur, audita magis quam visa describens. Ultimus Joannes apostolus et evangelista, quem Jesus amavit plurimum: qui supra pectus Domini recumbens, purissima doctrinarum fluenta potavit: et qui solus de cruce meruit audire, ‘‘ Hece mater tua.” Is cum esset in Asia, et jam (τὴς hereticorum semina_pullularent Cerinthi, Hebionis, et ceterorum qui negant Christum in carne venisse : quos et ipse in epistola sua antichristos vocat ; et apos- tolus Paulus frequenter percutit, coactus est ab omnibus pene tunc Asiz episcopis et multarum ecclesiarum legationibus, de divinitate Salvatoris altius scribere, et ad ipsum (ut ita dicam) Dei verbum, non tam audaci quam felici temeritate prorumpere. Unde et ecclesiastica narrat historia, cum a fratribus cogeretur ut scriberet, ita facturum se respondisse, si indicto jejunio in com- mune omnes Deum deprecarentur, quo expleto, revelatione saturatus, illud procemium e ccelo veniens eructavit: “Jn prin- cipio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat 33 Verbum; hoc erat in principio apud Deum.” Hec igitur qua- tuor evangelia multo ante preedicta Ezechielis quoque volumen probat, in quo prima visio ita contexitur: ‘‘ Ht in medio sicut similitudo quatuor animalium, et vultus eorum facies hominis, et 30] APPENDIX A. facies leonis, et facies vituli, et facies aquile.” Prima hominis facies Mattheum significat, qui quasi de homine exorsus est scribere, “ Liber generationis Jesu Christi, filii David, filii Abraham.” Secunda Marcum, in qua vox leonis in eremo rugientis auditur, “‘ Vox clamantis in deserto, Parate viam Domini, rectas facite semitas Ejus.” ‘Tertia vituli, quee evange- listam Lucam a Zacharia sacerdote sumpsisse initium preefigurat. Quarta Joannem evangelistam, qui assumptis pennis aquile, et ad altiora festinans, de verbo Dei disputat. Cetera que se- quuntur, in eundem sensum proficiunt. Crura eorum recta, et pennati pedes: et quocunque ibat spiritus, ibant et non reverte- bantur: et dorsa eorum plena oculis: et scintille ac lampades in medio discurrentes, et rota in rota, et in singulis quatuor facies. Unde et Apocalypsis Joannis, post expositionem viginta quatuor seniorum, qui tenentes citharas ac phialas adorant Agnum Dei, introducit fulgura et tonitrua et septem spiritus discurrentes, et mare vitreum, et quatuor animalia plena oculis, dicens, “ 4ni- mal primum simile leoni: et secundum simile vitulo: et tertium simile homini: et quartum simile aquile volanti.” Et post paululum : ‘ Plena erant,” inquit, ‘‘ oculis, et requiem non habe- bant die ac nocte, dicentia : Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus, Dominus Deus Omnipotens, qui erat, et qui est, et qui venturus est.” Qui- bus cunctis perspicue ostenditur, quatuor tantum debere evangelia suscipi: et omnes apocryphorum neenias mortuis magis hereticis quam ecclesiasticis vivis canendas. (j) Ipem 5. Hizronymus, de Viris Illust. ο. 5.—Quia in Actibus apostolorum plenissime de ejus conversatione scriptum est, hoc tantum dicam, quod post passionem Domini vicesimo quinto anno, i.e. secundo Neronis, eo tempore quo Festus pro- curator Judeez successit Felici, Romam vinctus mittitur, et biennium in libera manens custodia, adversus Judaeos de adventu Christi quotidie disputavit. Sciendum autem in prima satis- factione, necdum Neronis imperio roborato, nec in tanta erum- pente scelera, quanta de eo narrant historiz, Paulum a Nerone dimissum, ut Evangelium Christi in occidentis quoque partibus preedicaretur, sicut ipse scribit in secunda epistola ad Timotheum, eo tempore quo et passus est, de vinculis dictans epistolam : ‘‘ Jn prima mea satisfactione nemo mihi affuit, sed omnes me derelique- runt : non eis imputetur. Dominus autem mihi affuit, et confor- APPENDIX A. [31 tavit me, ut per me predicatio compleretur, et audirent omnes gentes : et liberatus sum de ore leonis.’’ Manifestissime leonem propter crudelitatem Neronem significans. Et in sequentibus: “ [iberatus sum de ore leonis.” Et statim: ‘ Liberavit me Dominus ab omni opere malo, et salvavit me in regnum suum celeste,” quod scilicet praesens sibi sentiret imminere martyrium. Nam et in eadem epistola preemiserat : “‘ Ego enim jam immolor, et tempus resolutionis mee instat.” Hic ergo quarto decimo Neronis anno, eodem die quo Petrus, Rome pro Christo capite truncatur ; sepultusque est in via Ostiensi, anno post passionem Domini tricesimo septimo. Scripsit autem novem ad septem ecclesias epistolas: ad Romanos unam; ad Corinthios duas; ad Galatas unam; ad Ephesios unam; ad Philippenses unam; ad Colossenses unam; ad Thessalonicenses duas ; preeterea ad dis- cipulos suos, Zimotheo duas, Tito unam, Philemoni unam. Epistola autem que fertur ad Hebreos, non ejus creditur, propter styli sermonisque dissonantiam ; sed vel Barnabe, juxta Ter- tullianum ; vel Luce evangelist, juxta quosdam ; vel Clementis Romane postea ecclesiz episcopi, quem ajunt ipsi adjunctum sententias Pauli proprio ordinasse et ornasse sermone. Vel certe quia Paulus scribebat ad Hebreos, et propter invidiam sui apud eos nominis, titulum in principio salutationis amputaverit. Scripserat ut Hebreus Hebreis Hebraice, id est, suo eloquio disertissime, ut ea quze eloquenter scripta fuerant in Hebreo, eloquentius verterentur in Graecum: et hance causam esse, quod a ceteris Pauli epistolis discrepare videatur. Legunt quidam et ad Laodicenses, sed ab omnibus exploditur. (k) Ipem 5. Hreronymus, Epist. ad Dardanum, ii. p.608. (ed. Paris. )—Illud nostris dicendum est, hanc epistolam que inscri- bitur ad Hebréos, non solum ab ecclesiis orientis, sed ab omnibus retro ecclesiasticis Greeci sermonis scriptoribus, quasi Pauli apostoli suscipi, licet plerique eam vel Barnabee, vel Clementis arbitrentur: et nihil interesse, cujus sit, quum ecclesiastici viri sit, et quotidie ecclesiarum lectione celebretur. Quod si eam Latinorum consuetudo non recipit inter scripturas canonicas, nec Greecorum quidem ecclesize Apocalypsin Joannis eadem libertate suscipiunt, et tamen nos utrumque suscipimus : nequaquam hujus temporis consuetudinem, sed veterum scriptorum auctoritatem sequentes, qui plerumque utriusque abutuntur testimoniis, non ut 32] APPENDIX A. interdum de apocryphis facere solent (quippe qui et gentilium literarum raro utantur exemplis) sed quasi canonicis et eccle- siasticis. Comment. in Isaie Proph. 3, 6. (Opp. t. ii. p. 60.)—Unde et Paulus apostolus in epistola ad Hebrzos, quam Latina consue- tudo non recipit: ‘* Nonne omnes,” inquit, ‘‘ministri sunt spiritus ?”” (ἢ) Inem S. Hieronymus, de Vir. Illust. ec. 59.—Cajus sub Zephyrino Romane urbis episcopo, i. 6. sub Antonio, Severi filio, disputationem adversus Proculum Montani sectatorem valde insignem habuit ; arguens eum temeritatis, super nova prophetia defendenda: et in eodem volumine epistolas quoque Pauli tre- decim tantum enumerans decimam quartam, que fertur ad Hebreos, dicit ejus non esse: sed et apud Romanos usque hodie quasi Pauli apostoli non habetur. (m) Ipem S. Hirronymus (?) Prolog. 7. in Epist. Canon. (tom. i. p. 1667.)—Non idem ordo est apud Greecos, qui integre sapiunt et fidem rectam sectantur epistolarum, septem, que Canonice nuncupantur, qui in Latinis codicibus invenitur. Quod quia Petrus primus est in numero apostolorum, prime sint etiam ejus epistolz in ordine ceterarum. Sed sicut evangelistas dudum ad veritatis lineam correximus ; ita has proprio ordini, Deo nos juvante, reddidimus. Est enim prima earum una Jacobi: Petri due, Johannis tres: et Jude una. Que si ut ab eis digestee sunt ; ita quoque ab interpretibus fideliter in Latinum eloquium verterentur nec ambiguitatem legentibus facerent nec sermonum sese varietas impugnaret; illo praecipue loco ubi de unitate Trinitatis in prima Johannis epistola positum legimus. In qua etiam ab infidelibus translatoribus multum erratum esse fidei veritate comperimus: trium tantum vocabula, hoe est, aque, sanguinis et spiritus, in sua editione ponentes ; et Patris, Verbique ac Spiritus testimonium omittentes; in quo maxime et fides Catholica roboratur ; et Patris et Filii ac Spiritus Sancti una divi- nitatis substantia comprobatur. In czeteris vero Epistolis quan- tum a nostra aliorum distet editio lectoris prudentize derelinquo. Sed tu virgo Christi Eustochium dum a me impensius scripture veritatem inquiris, meam quodam modo senectutem invidorum dentibus corrodendam exponis, qui me falsarium corruptoremque sanctarum pronuntiant scripturarum. Sed ego in tali opere nec APPENDIX A. [33 zmulorum meorum invidentiam pertimesco ; nec sanctz scrip- turee veritatem poscentibus denegabo.—dd Paulin. de stud. script. (rn) Ipem 5. Hreronymyus, in Isai. xlix. 21.—Post Aggzeum, Zachariam, et Malachiam, nullos alios Prophetas usque ad Joannem Baptistam videram. No. XX. Concit1um Hipponenss, in Africa, a.p. 393. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 368.) Canon xxxvut. Mansi 1. p. 924.— Ut preter Scripturas canonicas mihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum Scrip- turarum. Sunt autem canonice Scripture, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium, Jesus Nave, Judicum, Ruth, Regnorum libri quatuor, Paralipomenon libri duo, Job, Psalterium Davidicum, Salomonis libri quinque, duodecim libri Prophetarum, Esaias, Jeremias, Daniel, Ezechiel, Tobias, Judith, Hester, Hesdre libri duo, Macchabeorum libri duo. No. XXI. Concitium CARTHAGINENSE, A.D. 397. (Cave, p. 368.) Canon xivu. Mansi iii. p. 891.—Item placuit, ut preeter Seripturas canonicas nihil in ecclesia legatur sub nomine divina- rum Scripturarum. Sunt autem canonice scripture, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomium, Jesus Nave, Judi- cum, Ruth, Regnorum libri iv., Paralipomenon libri duo, Job, Psalterium Davidicum, Salomonis libri quinque, libri duodecim Prophetarum, Jesaias, Jeremias, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Esdre libri duo, Machabeorum libri duo. Novi autem Testamenti Evangeliorum libri quatuor, Actuum apostolorum liber unus. Pauli apostoli Epistole tredecim, ejusdem ad Hebreos una, Petri apostoli due, Joannis ap. tres, Jude ap. una, Apo- calypsis Joannis liber unus*. Hoc etiam fratri et sacerdoti nostro Bonifacio vel aliis earum partium episcopis, pro confirmando isto * Vetustus Codex sic habet: “De rina Ecclesia consulatur.’ Labbe confirmando isto Canone transma- Concil. ii. p. 1177. [c] 34| APPENDIX A. canone, innotescat *, quia a patribus ista accepimus in ecclesia legenda. Liceat enim legi passiones martyrum, cum anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur. No. XXII. S. Aucustinus, Bishop of Hippo, in Africa; born a.p. 355; present at the two Councils above mentioned, of Hippo and Carthage; died a.p. 430, anno etatis 76, the 35th of his Episcopate. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 290.) De Doctrina Christiana +, lib. ii. vol. iii. part 1. p. 47. ed. Paris, 1836.—12. [vi] Sed nos ad tertium illum gradum con- siderationem referamus, de quo disserere quod Dominus sugges- serit atque tractare instituimus. LErit igitur divinarum Scrip- turarum solertissimus indagator, qui primo totas legerit, notasque habuerit, et si nondum intellectu, jam tamen lectione, duntaxat eas que appellantur canoniceet. Nam czteras securius leget fide veritatis instructus, ne preeoccupent imbecillem animum, et peri- culosis mendaciis atque phantasmatis eludentes przejudicent ali- quid contra sanam intelligentiam. In canonicis autem Scripturis, Ecclesiarum Catholicarum quam plurium auctoritatem sequatur ; inter quas sane ill sint, quae apostolicas sedes habere et Epi- stolas accipere meruerunt. Tenebit igitur hunc modum in Scrip- turis canonicis, ut eas que ab omnibus accipiuntur Ecclesiis Ca- tholicis, preponat eis quas queedam non accipiunt: in eis vero quze non accipiuntur ab omnibus, pr@ponat eas quas plures gra- vioresque accipiunt, eis quas pauciores minorisque auctoritatis Ecclesize tenent. Si autem alias invenerit a pluribus, alias a gravioribus haberi, quanquam hoe facile invenire non possit, zequalis tamen auctoritatis eas habendas puto. 13. Totus autem canon Scripturarum, in quo istam considera- tionem versandam dicimus, his libris continetur: Quinque Moyseos, id est Genesi, Exodo, Levitico, Numeris, Deuteronomio ; et uno libro Jesu Nave, uno Judicum, uno libello qui appellatur Ruth, qui magis ad Regnorum principium videtur pertinere, deinde quatuor Regnorum, et duobus Paralipomenon, non con- * Innotescat quia &e. Angl. “let and completed a, p. 426. it be known that” ἅς. γνώριμον + S. Augustine here distinguishes ἔστω OTL κιτιλ. between the terms Divine Scripture + This book was begun a.p. 397, and Canonice. APPENDIX A. [35 sequentibus, sed quasi a latere adjunctis simulque pergentibus. Hee est Historia, quee sibimet annexa tempora continet, atque ordinem rerum: sunt alize tanquam ex diverso ordine, qu neque huic ordini, neque inter se connectuntur, sicut est Job, et Tobias, et Esther, et Judith, et Machabeorum libri duo, et Esdre duo, qui magis subsequi videntur ordinatam illam histo- riam usque ad Regnorum vel Paralipomenon terminatam : deinde Prophetze, in quibus David unus liber Psalmorum ; et Salomonis tres, Proverbiorum, Cantica canticorum, et Ecclesiastes. Nam illi duo Libri, unus qui Sapientia, et alrus qui Ecclesiasticus inseri- bitur, de quadam similitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur: nam Jesus Sirach eos conscripsisse constantissime perhibetur, qui tamen quoniam in auctoritatem recipi meruerunt, inter prophe- ticos numerandi sunt. Reliqui sunt eorum libri qui proprie Pro- phetz appellantur, duodecim Prophetarum libri singuli, qui con- nexi sibimet, quoniam nunquam sejuncti sunt, pro uno habentur ; quorum Prophetarum nomina sunt hee, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias : deinde quatuor Prophetz sunt majorum voluminum, Tsaias, Jeremias, Daniel, Ezechiel. His quadraginta quatuor libris Testamenti Veteris terminatur auctoritas: Novi autem, quatuor libris Evangelii, secundum Mattheum, secundum Mar- cum, secundum Lucam, secundum Joannem ; quatuordecim Epi- stolis Pauli apostoli, ad Romanos, ad Corinthios duabus, ad Gala- tas, ad Ephesios, ad Philippenses, ad Thessalonicenses duabus, ad Colossenses, ad Timotheum duabus, ad Titum, ad Philemonem, ad Hebreos ; Petri duabus ; tribus Joannis; una Jude, et una Jacobi ; Actibus Apostolorum libro uno, et Apocalypsi Joannis libro uno. No. XXIII. Psevpo-Dionystus Areopacira, of Alexandria; age uncertain, probably late in the fourth century. (Cave, Hist. Lit, i. p. 225.) De Eccl. Hierarch. ¢. iu. p. 92. ed. Paris, 1615.—Ilaca γὰρ e . \ ε , οὕ Dt \ ᾽ - = ” ΞΞ \ ἱερὰ καὶ ἁγιόγραφος δέλτος ἢ THY ἐκ Θεοῦ τῶν ὄντων γεννητὴν ὑπαρξίν τε καὶ διακόσμησιν, ἢ τὴν νομικὴν ἱεραρχίαν καὶ πολιτείαν “Ὁ Ἀ - ͵ - - ἂν , \ ΄ ἢ τὴν τοῦ θείου λαοῦ κληροδοσιῶν διανεμήσεις καὶ κατασχέσεις, “ὌΝ - e ~ “Ν ‘ ~ nan ε , , “Ν ἢ κριτῶν ἱερῶν, ἢ βασιλέων σοφῶν ἢ ἱερέων σύνεσιν, ἢ πα- ~ > an ᾽ ΄ \ , a ᾽ , > , λαιῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐν ποικιλίᾳ καὶ πλήθει τῶν ἐνιόντων ἀκατάσειστον [c 2] 36] APPENDIX A. , , , \ ἘΞ ΄ x ͵ ἐν καρτερίᾳ φιλοσοφίαν, ἢ τῶν πρακτέων σοφὰς ὑποθήκας, ἢ θείων ᾽, > ‘ s , ~ . ἐρώτων ἄσματα καὶ ἐνθέους εἰκόνας" ἢ τῶν ἐσομένων τὰς ὑπο- . \ . . ~ , Ν φητικὰς προσαναρρήσεις" ἢ τὰς ἀνδρικὰς Γησοῦ θεουργίας, ἣ τὰς τῶν Αὐτοῦ μαθητῶν θεοπαραδύότους καὶ θεομιμήτους πολιτείας, αἱ ἱερὰς διδ «αλί λῶν ἐᾶν Γ΄ ΄ aN BA eee ~ καὶ ἱερὰς διδασκαλίας, ἢ τὴν κρυφίαν καὶ μυστικὴν ἐποψίαν τοῦ τῶν μαθητῶν ἀγαπητοῦ καὶ θεσπεσίου, ἢ τὴν ὑπερκόσμιον Ἰησοῦ θεολογίαν τοῖς πρὸς θέωσιν ἐπιτηδείοις, ὑφηγήσατο. No. XXIV. Canones Aposrotict, Patr. Apost. Coteler. 1. p. 453. 480, ed. Amst. 1724. (Age uncertain.) Canon 85.”Eorw δὲ ὑμῖν πᾶσι κληρικοῖς Kat λαϊκοῖς, βιβλία μ 1) ᾽ - = \ a ey, , σεβάσμια καὶ ἅγια τῆς μὲν παλαιᾶς διαθήκης, Mwicéwe πέντε, Γένεσις, Ἐξοδος, Δευϊτικὸν, ᾿Αριθμοὶ, καὶ Δευτερονόμιον" - - ᾿' - ΄ - ω ~ Ν ᾿' Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναυὴ, ἕν" τῶν Κριτῶν, ἕν᾽ τῆς Ῥοὺθ, ἕν" Βασι- λειῶν τέσσαρα" Παραλειπομένων τῆς βιβλίου τῶν ἡμε- ρῶν, δύο "Ἔσδρα, δύο" ᾽᾿Εσθὴρ, ἕν᾽ Ἰουδεὶθ, ἕν: Μακκαβαί- ων Ἐ τρία Ἰὼβ, ἕν: Ψαλμοὶ ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα" Ladopa- eve, , , , =~ voc βιβλία τρία, Παροιμίαι, Ἐκκλησιαστὴς,᾽ Δισμα dopa- - , ” ξ ) ~ twv' Προφῆται δεκαέξ. “Elwiev ce ὑμῖν προσιστορείσθω μαν- θάνειν ὑμῖν τοὺς νέους τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ πολυμαθοῦς Σιράχ᾽ ἡμέτερα ἐν , ~ ~ - ΄ δὲ, τουτέστι τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, Ἐῤαγγέλια τέσσαρα, Ματθαίου, Μάρκου, Λουκᾶ, Ἰωάννου" Παύλου ᾿Βπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες" Πέτρου ᾿Επιστολαὶ δύο; ᾿Ιωάννου, τρεῖς" Ἰακώβου, μία' ᾿Ιούδα, pia’ Κλήμεντος ἐπιστολαὶ δύο" \ e 9g Nee ~ ~ ? , ὌΦΙΣ - Σ Ζ 3 καὶ αἱ διαταγαὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς ἐπισκόποις δι’ ἐμοῦ Κλήμεντος ἐν 3 \ )λί a ᾽ \ ὲ ΄ SN ὀκτὼ βιβλίοις προσπεφωνημέναι, ἃς οὐ χρὴ δημοσιεύειν ἐπὶ . . > ~ 5 Ω le τὸ a πάντων, διὰ Ta ἐν αὐταῖς μυστικά" καὶ at Πράξεις ἡμῶν τῶν > aN an ~ δὲ ‘ Ξ ppt - ὃ , θ e ~ 3᾽. 6 rei ἀποστόλων. avra δὲ περὶ κανόνων διατετάχθη ὑμῖν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, ΓΕ ἢ) W ETLOKOTOL, No. XXV. Constirutiones Apostrorica, lib. 11. c. 57. (tom. 1. p. 264. ed. Coteler. Amst. 1724.) ͵ eens: , eng tal ~ \ ’ \ > . 2 ᾿ Μέσος ο αναγγνωστῆς Ep ὑψηλοῦ τινὸς ἕστως AVAYLYVWOKETW τα Μώσεως, καὶ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Navi, τὰ τῶν Κριτῶν, καὶ τῶν Βασι- * Omittit Joh. Antioch. v. Bevereg. p. 480. APPENDIX A. [37 λειῶν, τὰ τῶν Παραλειπομένων, καὶ τὰ τῆς ἐπανόδου" πρὸς ‘ ~ \ ~ ~ . ~ e , τούτοις τὰ τοῦ Ἰὼβ, καὶ τοῦ Σολομῶνος καὶ τὰ τῶν ἑκκαίδεκα ~ ν ua ~ Προφητῶν, ava δύο δὲ γενομένων ἀναγνωσμάτων ἕτερός τις TOU ᾿ Uy e \ ‘ , ΄ Δαβὶδ ψαλλέτω ὕμνους, καὶ 6 λαὸς τὰ ἀκροστίχια ὑποψαλλέτω. Μετὰ τοῦτο αἱ Πράξεις αἱ ἡμέτεραι ἀναγινωσκέσθωσαν καὶ Ἔπι- στολαὶ Παύλου τοῦ συνεργοῦ ἡμῶν ἃς ἐπέστειλε ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις καθ᾽ ἀφήγησιν τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος" καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα διάκονος ἢ (3. ’ ΄ x ’ ΄ CWE Pesan ~ πρεσίϑυτερος ἀναγιγνωσκέτω τὰ εὐαγγέλια a ἐγὼ Ματθαῖος Ν 5 ’, ᾽ ἐ e ~ \ a e Ἀ 4 καὶ ᾿Ιωάννης παρεδώκαμεν ὑμῖν, καὶ ἃ οἱ συνεργοὶ Παύλου παρει- ληφότες κατέλειψαν ὑμῖν Λουκᾶς καὶ Μάρκος. nD μ ρ No. XXVI. Innocentivus, Bishop of Rome, a.p. 402. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p- 379.) It is doubtful whether this Decretal is genuine. See Cosin on the Canon, p. 118—121. 130. Epist. πὶ. ad Exuperium, Episcopum Tolosanum, ed. Paris, 1671. (tom. 11. p. 1256.) Consulenti tibi, frater carissime, quid de proposita specie una- quaque sentirem, pro captu intelligentia meze que sunt visa ΤΟΞΡΟΠΟΙ - - 6 = « vii. Qui vero libri recipiantur in canone sanctarum Scriptura- rum, brevis adnexus ostendit. Heec sunt ergo que desiderata moneri voce voluisti. Moysis jibri 5. id est Genesis, Exodi, Levitici, Numeri, Deuteronomii ; et Jesu Nave unus, Judicum unus. Regnorum libri 4. simul et Ruth. Prophetarum libri 16. Salomonis libri 5. Psalterium, Historiarum, Job liber unus, Tobie unus, Esther unus, Judith unus, Machabeorum duo, Esdre duo, Paralipomenon duo. Item Novi Testamenti, Evan- geliorum libri 4. Apostoli Pauli Epistole 14. Epistole Joan- nis 3. FEpistole Petri due. Epistola Jude, Epistola Jacobi, Actus Apostolorum, Apocalypsis Joannis. Cetera autem, quee vel sub nomine Matthiz sive Jacobi minoris, vel sub nomine Petri et Joannis, que a quodam Leucio scripta sunt vel sub nomine Andrez, que a Xenocharide et Leonida Philosophis ; vel sub nomine Thome, et si qua sunt alia, non solum repu- dianda, verum etiam noveris esse damnanda. Datum 10 Kalen- 38 | APPENDEX “A: das Martias, Stilicone II. et Anthemio viris clarissimis consu- libus. (A.p. 405.) The followmg Decretats are ascribed by some writers to Popes Damasus, (A.D. 866—384.) GeLastus, (a.p. 492—6.) and HormispAs, (A.D. 514-—523.) respectively. See Gratian. Pars 1. Dist. xv. 8. Labbé Concil. iv. p. 1260. Mansi Concil. viii. p- 497. On the other side see Bp. Cosin on the Canon, 123, 130, and Bp. Pearson, Vind. Ignat. i. ¢. iv. pp. 45—47, who affirm that the decree ascribed to Gelasius is spurious. I. Damast. (See Credner, Geschichte des Kanons, iv. p. 187—196.) Incipit concilium urbis Rome sub Damaso papa celebratum. De explanatione fidei. Dictum est, prius agendum de spiritu septiformi, qui in Christo requiescit. Spiritus sapientiae * * * * * intelligitur Spiritus, qui a Patre procedit, et: 716 de meo accipiet et annun- ciabit vobis. Nunc vero de scripturis divinis agendum est, quid universalis catholica ecclesia teneat et quid vitari debeat*. Cap. I. § 1. Lncipit ordo veteris Testamenti. Genesis liber 1. Paralipomenon libri 2. Exodus liber 1. Psalterium liber 1. Leviticus liber 1. Salomonis libri 3. Numeri liber 1. Proverbiorum liber 1. Deuteronomium liber 1. Ecclesiastes liber 1. Jesu Nave liber 1. Cantica canticorum liber 1. Judicum liber 1. Item Sapientiz liber 1. Ruth liber 1. Ecclesiasticus liber 1. Reeum libri 4. * These Catalogues therefore were to be avoided. Therefore, whether made, not for distinguishing inspired these Catalogues are genuine or no, from uninspired Books, but for sepa- they do not affect the question of rating those which were received by _ inspiration. the Church from those which ought APPENDIX A. [39 ᾿ § 2. Incipit ordo prophetarum. Esaize lib. 1. Amos lib. 1. Hieremiz lib. 1. cum uno Micheas lib. 1. Baruch item cum lamen- Jone lib. 1. tationibus suis. Nahum lib. 1. Ezechielis lib. 1. Abbacuc lib. 1. Danielis lib. 1. Sophonie lib. 1. Joel lib. 1. Aggeei lib. 1. Abdiz lib. 1. Zachariz lib. 1. Osez lib. 1. Malachiz lib. 1. § 3. ltem ordo historiarum. Job liber 1. Hester liber 1. Tobiz liber 1. Esdrz liber 1. Judith liber 1. Machabzorum libri 2. § 4. tem ordo scripturarum Novi Testamenti, quas sancta et Catholica suscipit ecclesia. Evangelium. secundum Matthzeum lib. 1. secundum Lucam lib. 1. secundum Marcum lib. 1. secundum Joannem lib. 1. § 5. Epistole Pauli numero XIV. Ad Romanos 1. Ad Colossenses 1. Ad Corinthios 2. Ad Timotheum 2. Ad Ephesios 1. Ad Titum 1. Ad Thessalonicenses 2. Ad Philemonem 1. Ad Galatas 1. Ad Hebreeos 1. Ad Philippenses 1. § 6. Item Apocalypsis Joannis Apostoli lib. 1. Actus Apostolorum liber 1. Item Epistole Canonice numero VII. Petri Apostoli epistole 2. Alterius Joannis. — Presbyteri Jacobi Apostoli epistola 1. epistole 2. Joannis Apostoli epistola 1. Jude Zelotis epistola 1. 40] APPENDIX A. II. GeELAsit. Cap. I. Incipit confirmatio Domini Gelasit Pape de libris Veteris ας Novi Testamenti. § 1. In principio videlicet quinque libri Moysis. Genesis liber 1. Exodus liber 1. Leviticus liber 1. Numeri liber 1. Deuteronomium liber 1. Jesu Nave liber 1. Judicum liber 1. Ruth liber 1. Regum libri 4. Paralipomenon libri 2. Psalmorum 150 liber 1. Salomonis libri 3. Proverbiorum liber 1. Ecclesiastes liber 1. Cantica canticorum liber 1. Sapientiz liber 1. Ecclesiasticus liber 1. 11. Hormisp&. Incipit decretale in urbe Roma ab Hormisda Papa editum. Cap. I. De scripluris divinis quid uni- versaliter Catholica recipiat ec- clesia, vel post hec quid vitare debeat. § 1. Ordo de Veteri Testa- mento, quem sancta et Catholica Romana suscipit et honorat eccle- sid, iste est : Geneseos liber 1. Exodi liber 1. Levitici liber 1 Numer! liber 1. Deuteronomii liber 1. Jesu Nave liber 1. Judicum liber 1. Ruth liber 1. Regum libri 4, Paralipomenon libri 2. Psalmorum 150 liber 1. Salomonis libri 3. Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, et Can- tica Canticorum. § 2. Item Prophete numero XVI. — Liem ordo Prophetarum. Esaiz liber 1. Hieremiz liber 1. Ezechielis Danielis liber 1. Osee liber 1. Amos liber 1. Esaiz liber 1. Hieremiz liber 1. cum Cinnoth ac lamentationibus suis. {zechielis liber 1. Danielis liber 1. Osee liber 1. Amos liber 1. APPENDIX A. Π. Michzee liber 1. Joel liber 1. Abdiz liber 1. Jonze liber 1. Naum liber 1. Abbacum liber 1. Sophoniz liber 1. Agee liber 1. Zacharie liber 1. Malachie liber 1. § 3. Item Storiarum. Job liber 1. Tobias liber 1. Ester liber 1. Judith liber 1. Esdra libri 2. Machabeorum libri 2. § 4. Item ordo scripturarum Novi Testamenti, quem sancta Catholica Romana suscipit et veneratur ecclesia. Evangeliorum libri 4, id est secundum Matthzeum liber 1. secundum Marcum liber 1. secundum Lucam liber 1. secundum Joannem liber 1. Item Actuum Apostolorum liber 1. ὃ 5. Epistole Pauli Apo- stoli num. XIII. [41 ΠΙ. Michee liber 1. Johel liber 1. Abdiz liber 1. Jone liber 1. Naum liber 1. Abacuc liber 1. Sophoniz liber 1. Aggei liber 1. Zachariez liber 1. Malachiz liber 1. Item ordo Historiarum. Job liber 1. Tobie liber 1. Esdre libri 2. Esther liber 1. Judith liber 1. Machabeorum libri 2. Item ordo scripturarum Novi et eternt Testamenti. Evangeliorum libri 4. secundum Matthzeum liber 1. secundum Marcum liber 1. secundum Lucam liber 1. secundum Johannem liber 1. Item Actuum A postolorum liber 1. Epistole Pauli Apostoli numero XIV. Ad Romanos Epistola 1. Ad Corinthios Epistole 2. Ad Ephesios Epistola 1. Ad Thessalonicenses Epistt. 2. Ad Galatas Epistola 1. Ad Philippenses Epistola 1. 42] APPENDIX A. Il. IIT. Ad Colossenses Epistola 1. Ad Timotheum Epistole 2. Ad Titum Epistola 1. Ad Philemonem Epistola 1. Ad Hebrzeos Epistola 1. § 6. Apocalypsis liber 1. Item Apocalypsis Joannis liber 1. Apostolice Epistole Item Canonice Epistole numero VII. numero VII. Petri Apostoli numero 2. Petri Apostoli Epistole 2. Jacobi Apostoli numero 1. Jacobi Apostoli Epistola 1. Joannis Apostoli 3. Johannis Apostoli Epistole 3. Jude Zelotis. Judz Zelotis Apostoli Epistola. No: XX VIL. Tautmup Basytonicum, about a.p. 550. (Baba Bathra, fol. 14. col. 2.) The order of the Prophets is this: Joshua and Judges, Samuel and Kings, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Isaiah and the Twelve [minor prophets]... The order of the Kethubim is thus: Ruth, Psalms and Job, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs and Lamentations, Daniel, Esther and the Chronicles. The order of the Pentateuch is every where and always one and the same. No. XXVIII. Junitius, Bishop, in Africa; flourished about a.p. 550. (Cave, Hist. Lit. i. 526.) (a) De Partibus Divine Legis, ad Primasium co-Episcopum* . (ap. De la Bigne, Sacra Biblioth. Patrum, Paris, 1589, i. p. 3, et ap. Bibl. Patr. Max. x. 340.) Discipulus. Historia quid est ? Magister. Preeteritarum rerum presentiumve narratio. * It appears from the Preface of tion of a Greek Catechism, by Pau- Junilius that this work is a transla- lus, of the Syrian school of Nisibis. APPENDIX A. [43 D. In qubus libris divina continetur Historia ? M. In XVII.—Gen., Exod., Levit., Num., Deuter., Jesu Naue, Judicum, Ruth, Regum secundum nos IV., sec. Hebreos II,—Evangeliorum IV.: 8. Matth., δ. Marc., 8. Luc., 8. Joann. ; Actuum Apost. D. Nulli alii libri ad divinam pertinent historiam ? M. Adjungunt plures Paralipomenon II., Job, Esdre I1., Ju- dith, Hester, Maccab. I. D. Quare hi libri non inter Canonicas Scripturas currunt ? M. Quoniam apud Hebreos quoque super hac differentia recipiebantur, sicut Hieronymus czeterique testantur. (b) IpEm i. cap. 7. De auctoritate Scripture. D. Quomodo divinorum Librorum consideratur auctoritas ? M. Quia quidam perfecte auctoritatis sunt, quidam medie, quidam nullius. D. Qui sunt perfecte auctoritatis ? M. Quos Canonicos in singulis speciebus absolute enume- ravimus. D. Qui medie ? M. Quos adjungi a pluribus diximus. D. Qui nullius auctoritatis ? M. Reliqui omnes. In prophetia, medie auctoritatis libri non preter Apocalypsim reperiuntur. (c) Ipem Junttivs, cap. 4. D. In quibus Libris Prophetia suscipitur ? M. InXVII. Psalm. 150, Osee, Esaie, Johel, Amos, Ab- die, Jone, Michee, Naum, Sophonie, Abacuc, Hieremia, Ezechiel, Daniel, Aqgei, Zacharie, Malachie. Ceterum de Joannis Apocalypsi apud Orientales admodum dubitatur. (d) Ive, cap. 6. D. Qui libri ad simplicem doctrinam pertinent ? Μ. Canonici XVI. Ecclesiaste, Epistole Pauli ad Rom., Cor. I., Galat., Ephes., Philipp., Coloss., Thessal. II., Timoth. IT, Tit., Philem., Hebreos, B. Petri ad Gentes 1., B. Joann. prima. D. Nulli alii ad simplicem doctrinam pertinent ? ; M. Adjungunt quam plurimi V. alias, que Apostolorum Canonice nuncupantur; 1. 6. Jacobi, Petri secundam, Joannis duas. 44] APPENDIX A. No. XXIX. Primasius, Bishop of Adrumetum in Africa; flourished about a.p. 550. (Cave, H.L. i. 525.) In Apocalyps. c. 4.—S. Joannes Veteris Testamenti Libros insinuat, quos ejusdem numeri Canonicd auctoritate suscipimus tanquam xxiv. seniores super Tribunalia preesidentes. No. XXX. Casstoporus, Macnus AvrRELIvs, a native of Lucania, Chan- cellor of Theodoric, Senator of Ravenna, Consul of Rome, A.D. 514; retired to a monastery in Calabria, a.p. 537; died about a.p. 570. (Cave, H. L. p. 501.) De Institutione Divinarum Litterarum, cap. xii. ed. Rot. 1679. t. 11. p. 545. Bibl. P. M. xi. p. 1277. Divisio Scripturee divine secundum Hieronymum.—Auctoritas divina secundum Sanctum Hieronymum* in Testamenta duo ita dividitur, id est, in Vetus et Novum. In Legem, id est Genesim, Exodum, Leviticum, Nume- rorum, Deuteronomium. In Prophetas, qui sunt Jesu Nave, Judi- cum, Ruth, Samuel, Isaias, Jeremias, Ezechiel, Daniel, libri duodecim Prophetarum. In Hagiographos, qui sunt Job, David, Salomon, Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Canticorum. Verba dierum, id est, Paralipomenon, Esdras, Esther. In Evangelistas, qui sunt Mattheus, Marcus, Lucas, Joannes. Post hos sequuntur Epistole Apostolorum: Petri due, Pauli quatuordecim, Joannis tres, Jacobi una, Jude una, Actuum Apostolorum Luce liber unus, et Apocalypsis Joannis liber unus. Sciendum est plane Sanctum Hieronymum ideo diversorum translationes legisse, atque correxisse, eO quod auctoritate He- braicze nequaquam eas perspiceret consonare. Unde factum est, ut omnes libros Veteris Testamenti diligenti cura in Latinum sermonem de Hebrzo fonte transfunderet, et ad viginti duarum litterarum modum, qui apud Hebrzeos manet, competenter addu- ceret; per quas omnis sapientia dicitur, et memoria dictorum in zevum scripta servatur. Huic etiam adjecti sunt Novi Testa- menti libri viginti septem, qui colliguntur simul quadraginta novem. * For some reason or other, the following Catalogue of Books is not given in the Bibl. P. Max. 1. e. APPENDIX A. [45 No. XXXI. Grecorivus Primus, Papa Romanus, a.p. 590. Moralium lib. xix. m cap. 29 Job. (tom. i. p. 622, ed. Bene- dict. Paris, 1705.)—De qua re non inordinate agimus si ex Libris, licet non canonicis, sed tamen ad cedificationem Ecclesie editis, testimonium proferamus. He then quotes 1 Maccabees vi. 46. On these words of Gregory, the Benedictine editors (Paris, 1705, 4 vols. folio, Pref. p. xi.) comment as follows :— 1. c. Obs, 1. Libros illos longé ante δ. Gregorii tempora in Ecclesia Latina saltem pro canonicis fuisse habitos. Nam hoe nomine recipiuntur a Concil. Carthag. ili. 47; ab Innocentto I. in Epistol. ad Exuper. Tolosanum; ab Avcustino, lib. 2 de Doctr. Christ. c. 8, lib. de Cura pro Mortuis 6. i., and lib. 18 de Ira Dei, c. 31; Casstoporo, |. 2 de Instit. ὁ. 6, qui libris illis locum dat inter hagiographa; et aliis. De Gertasiano decreto illos recipiente tacemus, quod illud rejiciunt, ex heterodoxis, Pearsonius, Gulielmus Cave, et alii. Obs. 2. Duplicem esse librorum sacrorum canonem, unum Judeorum, alterum Christiane Ecclesie. Prior nullos alios quam qui Hebraicé scripti sunt recipit, alter longé amplior est, admittitque preter Novum Testamentum plurimos ad Vetus Testamentum pertinentes qui Greecé tantum extant. Distincti- onem hance agnoscit Augustinus, dum de his Libris loquens addit, “In quibus sunt Machabeorum Libri quos non Jude@i, sed Eccle- sia, pro canonicis habet.” Itaque vix dubitare licet S. Gregorium, S. Augustini doctrine adhzrentem, aliasque memorem Catalo- gorum* Librorum Sacrze Scripturee a suis majoribus conditorum, negdsse Machabzorum Libros esse tantum in canone Jud@orum, non vero Christianorum. Qua in re secutus est Origenem et S. Hieronymum, qui cum ad Doctorum Hebraorum mentem de iis loquuntur libros eos expungunt ex canone. Alibi tamen tanquam sacros laudant non semel, Ecclesi@ non vero δ᾽ ynagoge Canonem secuti. * No doubt, if these Catalogues that these Decretals were not then were then in existence; but this extant; i. 6. that they are spuri- passage of Gregory, like others ous. And, as I have said before, cited by Bishop Pearson, Vind. Ignat. (p. (38, note.) these Decretals do Ρ. 46, and Bishop Cosin, on the πού touch the question of Inspira- Canon, 123. 130. appears to prove _ tion. 46] APPENDIX A. No. XXXII. Bepa Venerasitis, Presbyter, born near the mouth of the Tyne, in the county of Durham, a.p. 672; educated at Wearmouth ; died on Ascension Day, a.p. 735; his bones were first carried to Durham, afterwards to York. (Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 612.) Prologus super septem E'pistolas Canonicas *.—Jacobus, Petrus, Joannes, Judas septem epistolas ediderunt, quas ecclesiastica consuetudo Catholicas, hoc est, universales cognominat. In quibus ideo prima epistola Jacobi ponitur, quamvis in catalogo apostolorum priores solent nominari Petrus et Joannes, quia ipse Hierosolymorum regendam suscepit ecclesiam. Inde fons et origo evangelicze przedicationis incipiens per orbem diffusa est universum. Cujus cathedrze dignitatem etiam Paulus apostolus in eo nominando venerans ait, Jacobus, Cephas, et Joannes, qui videbantur columne ecclesia: vel certe quia ipse duodecim tri- bubus Israelis, quee prime crediderunt, suam epistolam misit, merito hae prima poni debuit; merito Petri secunda, quia ipse electis advenis, qui Grecé dicuntur Proselyti, hoc est, eis scripsit, qui de Gentilitate ad Judaismum, de Judaismo ad electionis evangelicze gratiam, conversi sunt. Merito Joannis Epistolze tertio loco sunt posite, quia his scripsit ipse, qui de Gentibus crediderunt, cum nec natura nec professione Judzi extitissent. Denique multi scriptorum ecclesiasticorum, in qui- bus est Sanctus Athanasius Alexandrine presul ecclesiz, primam ejus epistolam scriptam ad Parthos esse testantur. Merito Jude posita est ultima, quia quamvis et ipse magnus, tribus tamen precedentibus apostolis minor est; vel quia prima Jacobi scripta est epistola, deinde Petri, post eas Joannis; ideo nune usque ordinem quo scriptee sunt retinent. Constat enim quia beatus Jacobus tricesimo post passionem Domini anno suum consummavit martyrium. Petrus tricesimo octavo, hoc est, ultimo anno Neronis, passus est, et ipse in secunda sua scripsit epistola, ‘‘ Certus sum quia velox sit depositio tabernaculi mei secundum quod et Dominus noster Jesus Christus significavit mihi per revelationem.” Unde patet, quia imminente passione hance scripsit epistolam, cum multo ante Jacobus migraverit ad * Concerning this remarkable Dr. Giles in his edition of Bede, Prologue, omitted by some editors, — vol. xii. p. xii—xiv; ibid. p. 157. see the remarks of Cave, p. 614, and ᾿ APPENDIX A. [47 Christum. Neque vero conveniebat ejus epistolas ab invicem separari, quas iisdem scripsit ecclesiis. Porro Joannes multo post tempore suas epistolas simul et evangelium scripsit, quando post occisionem Domitianicam * reversus de exilio turbatam se absente per hzereticos reperit ecclesiam, quos in suis epistolis percutiens seepe cognominat Anti-christos. No. XXXIII. S. Joannes Damascenvs, born at Damascus in Syria; flourished A.D. 730; died about a.p. 750. (Cave, i. p. 624.) De fide Orthodowa iv. c. 17.—ioréov ὅτι εἵκοσι καὶ δύο βίβλοι εἰσὶ τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης. . - He then recites the Canon as received by the Hebrew Nation; and adds, ἡ δὲ Πανάρετος, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν ἣ Σοφία τοῦ Σολομῶντος, kai ἣ Σοφία τοῦ Ἰησοῦ... ᾽ ’ \ ‘ ἣν > 4 9. > - 4φΦ ἊΝ ᾽ , ~ ἐνάρετοι μὲν Kat καλοὶ, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἀριθμοῦνται, οὐδὲ ἔκειντο ἐν TH a) ~ κιβρωτῳ. Τῆς δὲ νέας διαθήκης εὐαγγέλια τέσσαρα, καθολικαὶ ἐπιστολαὶ ἑπτὰ, Ἰακώβου μία, Πέτρου δύο, ᾿Ιωάννου τρεῖς, Ἰούδα μία, Παύλου ἀποστόλου ἐπιστολαὶ δεκατέσσαρες, ᾿Αποκάλυψις ᾿Ιωάννου εὐαγγε- λιστοῦ. » . κανόνες τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων διὰ Κλήμεντος. * Ita correxi pro Dominicam. Vide 5. Hieron. Seript. Eccles. ix. tatem a senatu rescissis, sub Nerva Principe redit Ephesum, ibique Quarto decimo anno secundam post Neronem persecutionem movente Domitiano, in Patmon insulam rele- gatus scripsit Apocalypsim quam interpretatur Justinus Martyr et Ire- neeus. Interfecto autem Domitiano, et actis ejus ob nimiam crudeli- usque ad Trajanum Principem per- severans totas Asize fundavit rexit- que Ecclesias, et confectus senio, sexagesimo octavo post passionem Dominianno mortuus juxta eamdem urbem sepultus est. [48 | APPEND X.B: No. I. The Canon of Scripture set forth by the Church of Rome in the Counciz of Trent, Session IV. April vir. a.p. 1546. (Labbé Concilia, tom. xiv. p. 746.) Decretum de Canonicis Scripturis.—Sacrosancta CEcumenica, et generalis Tridentina Synodus, in Spiritu Sancto legitimé con- gregata, preesidentibus in ea eisdem tribus Apostolicee Sedis Legatis, hoc sibi perpetuo ante oculos proponens, ut, sublatis erroribus, puritas ipsa Evangelii in Ecclesia conservetur : quod promissum anté per Prophetas in Scripturis sanctis, Dominus noster Jesus Christus, Dei filius, proprio ore primum promul- gavit; deinde per suos Apostolos tamquam fontem omnis et salutaris veritatis, et morum disciplinze, omni creature predi- cari jussit : perspiciensque hance veritatem, et disciplinam con- tineri in libris scriptis, et sine scripto traditionibus, quee ipsius Christi ore ab apostolis accepte, aut ab ipsis apostolis, Spiritu Sancto dictante, quasi per manus traditee, ad nos usque pervene- runt, orthodoxorum Patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tam Veteris, quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, necnon traditiones ipsas, tum ad fidem, tum ad mores pertinentes, tamquam vel oretenus a Christo, vel a Spiritu Sancto dictatas, et continua successione in ecclesia catholica conservatas, pari pietatis affectu, ac reverentia suscipit, et veneratur. Sacro- rum vero librorum indicem huic decreto adscribendum censuit ; ne cui dubitatio suboriri possit, quinam sint, qui ab ipsa Synodo suscipiuntur. Sunt vero infrascripti, T’estamenti Veteris, quinque Moysi, id est, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuterono- mium, Josue, Judicum, Ruth, quatuor Regum, duo Paralipomenon, Esdre primus et secundus, qui dicitur Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, Psalterium Davidicum centum quinquaginta Psal- APPENDIX B. [49 morum, Parabole, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Canticorum, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias cum Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, duodecim Prophete minores, id est, Osea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias, duo Machabeorum, primus et secundus. ‘Testament Novi, quattuor Evangelia, secundum Mattheum, Marcum, Lucam, et Joannem; Actus Apostolorum a Luca Evangelista conscript ; quattuordecim Epistole Pauli Apostoli, ad Romanos, due ad Corinthios, ad Galatas, ad Ephesios, ad Philippenses, ad Colos- senses, duze ad Thessalonicenses, duee ad Timotheum, ad Titum, ad Philemonem, ad Hebreos; Petri Apostoli due, Joannis Apostoli tres, Jacobi Apostoli una, Jude Apostoli wma, et Apoca- lypsis Joannis Apostoli. Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ecclesia catholica legi consueve- runt, et in veteri vulgata Latina editione habentur, pro sacris, et canonicis non susceperit, et traditiones preedictas sciens et pru- dens contempserit, ANATHEMA sit. Omnes itaque intelligant, quo ordine, et via ipsa Synodus, post jactum fidei confessionis fundamentum, sit progressura, et quibus potissimum testimoniis, ac preesidiis in confirmandis dogmatibus, et instaurandis in Ecclesia moribus, sit usura. No. IT. Butta Pru Para lV. α. ν. 1564. (Labbé Concilia, xiv. p. 944 *.) Super Forma Juramenti Professionis Fidei. Pius Episcopus, Servus Servorum Dei ad perpetuam rei memoriam.—} Sanctam Catholicam et Apostolicam Romanam Ecclesiam, omnium eccle- siarum matrem et magistram agnosco, Romanoque Pontifici, beati Petri, Apostolorum Principis, successori, ac Jesu Christi Vicario veram obedientiam spondeo, ac juro. Cetera item omnia a * See also Streitwolf, Libri Sym- any Academic degree or Scholastic bol. Eccl. Cathol. i. p. 98. ii. p. 316 office. -- 321, whence it appears that the + This Oath commences with a Church of Rome imposes this Oath, recital of the Decrees of Trent ; not only on all Ecclesiasties, but — then follows what is here printed. also on all who are admitted to [>] 50 | APPENDIX B. sacris canonibus, et cecumenicis conciliis, ac preecipue ἃ sacro- sancta T'ridentina Synodo tradita, definita et declarata indubi- tanter recipio atque profiteor, simulque contraria omnia, atque hzereses quascumque ab Ecclesia damnatas, et rejectas, et anathe- matizatas, ego pariter damno, rejicio, et anathematizo. Hanc veram catholicam fidem, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest, quam in preesenti sponte profiteor, et veraciter teneo, eamdem integram et inviolatam, usque ad extremum vite spiritum, constantissime (Deo adjuvante) retinere, et confiteri, atque a meis subditis, vel illis quorum cura ad me in munere meo spectabit, teneri, doceri, et preedicari, quantum in me erit, curaturum. Ego idem N. spondeo, voveo, ac juro. Sic me Deus adjuvet, et hee sancta Dei Evangelia. Volumus autem quod presentes litterae, in Cancellaria nostra Apostolica de more legantur: et ut omnibus facilius pateant, in ejus Quinterno describantur, ac etiam im- primantur. Nulli ergo omnino hominum liceat hance paginam nostrz vo- luntatis et mandati infringere, vel ei ausu temerario contraire. Si quis autem hoe attentare preesumpserit, indignationem omni- potentis Dei, ac beatorum Petri et Pauli apostolorum ejus, se noverit incursurum. Dat. Rome, apud Sanctum Petrum, anno incarnationis Dominic millesimo quingentesimo sexagesimo- quarto, idibus Novembris, Pontificatus nostri anno quinto. No. III. The Canon of Scrierure set forth by the Cuurcn of Enerianp in the VIth of her XXXIX Articles of Reli- gion.—A. ἢ. 1562. Hory Scriprure containeth all things necessary to salvation ; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. By the name of Hoty Scripture we do understand those Canontcat Books of the Otp and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. APPENDIX B. [51 The names and number of the Canonrcat Books are: Genesis Il. of Samuel The Psalms Exodus I. of Kings The Proverbs Leviticus Il. of Kings The Book of Eccle- Numbers I. of Chronicles siastes Deuteronomy II. of Chronicles Cantica, or Songs of Joshua I. of Esdras Solomon Judges Il. of Esdras* IV Greater Prophets Ruth The Book of Esther X11 Lesser Prophets I. of Samuel The Book of Job And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these following : The Third Book of Esdras Baruch the Prophet The Fourth Book of Esdras The Song of the Three Children The Book of Tobias The Story of Susanna The Book of Judith Of Bel and the Dragon The rest of Esther The Prayer of Manasses The Book of Wisdom The First Book of Maccabees Jesus the Son of Sirach The Second Book of Maccabees. All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them Canonical. No. IV. The Canon of Scriprure according to the Eastern Cuurcn. (a) Platonis Archiepiscopi ᾿Ορθόδοξος Διδασκαλία, Athenis, 1836, p. 59.—Ta κανονικὰ τῆς παλ. Διαθήκης βιβλία εἶναι ταῦτα" Γένεσις, "Εξοδος, Λευϊτικὸν, ᾿Αριθμοὶ, Δευτερονόμιον (τὰ ὁποῖα καὶ Πεντάτευχος ὀνομάζονται), ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῦ Ναυῆ, Κριταὶ, Ῥοὺθ, τέσσαρα βιβλία τῶν Βασιλειῶν, (τῶν ὁποίων τὰ δύο πρῶτα Σαμουὴλ ὀνομάζουσιν οἱ Ἕβραῖοι,) δύο τῶν Παραλειπομένων, "Εσδρας, Νεεμίας, ᾽᾿Ἐσθὴρ, ᾿Ιὼβ, Ψαλτήριον, Παροιμίαι Σολομῶντος, Ἐκκλησιαστὴς τοῦ αὐτοῦ, ἾΑ σμα τοῦ αὐτοῦ, Ἡσαΐας, Ἱερεμίας (συμπεριεχομένων τῶν Θρήνων), ᾿Ιεζεκιὴλ, Δανιὴλ, οἱ λοιποὶ δώ- * i, 6, Nehemiah. [p 2] 52] APPENDIX B. eka Προφῆται ὁμοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿ῶσηὲ μέχρι τοῦ Μαλαχίου, οἱ ὁποῖοι καὶ δωδεκαπρόφητον ὀνομάζονται. Ὅσα δὲ εἶναι ἔξω ἀπὸ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τοῦτον, ἀγκαλὰ περιέχουσι πολλὰ ἠθικὰ ἀξιέ- παινα, δὲν ἐζέχθησαν ὅμως ποτὲ ὡς κανονικὰ ὑπὸ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας. 16. Tonydo. Θεολόγ. ἐν τοῖς στιχ. περὶ τῶν κανονικ. βιβλ. παλ. καὶ νέας, καὶ Μητρυφάνην τὸν Ἀριτόπουλον ἐν τῇ ‘Opodoy. τῆς ᾽Ἄγατολ, Ἔκκλησ. κεφ. ζ΄. (b) The Longer Catechism of the Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church ; examined and approved by the most holy Governing Synod, and published for the use of Schools, and of all orthodox Christians, by order of his Imperial Majesty *. Moscow, at the Synodal Press, 18397. @. How many are the books of the Otp Testament ? A. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Athanasius the Great, and St. John Damascene reckon them at twenty-two, agreeing therein with the Jews, who so reckon them in the original Hebrew tongue. ΟῚ: Athanas. Ep. Fest. xxxix., J. Damasc. Theol. ]. iv. Q. Why should we attend to the reckoning of the Hebrews ? * Translated and reprinted by the Rev. W. Blackmore, B.A. Aber- deen, 1845. + Mr. Blackmore says in his Pre- face, pp. vi. and ix. “The Shorter and Longer Catechisms are printed and published by the Synodal Press not only in the Slavonic. but also in the modern-Russian character and idiom. Both of them in that form, in which they now stand, and in which alone they are enjoined to be used, were drawn up by Philaret, the pre- sent illustrious Metropolitan of Mos- cow, and after careful revision were not merely approved and licensed, but adopted and promulgated by the Most Holy Synod as the Catechisms of the Church Herself, a.p. 1839. The Longer Catechism, in particu- lar, having been translated into Greek, and sent to all the Eastern Patriarchs and other Churches of the same Rite and Communion, and having been received on all sides with unanimous approbation, has a just claim to that title which it bears in the original, and which literally translated would stand thus: A Full Catechism of the Orthodox Catholic Church of the Hast: though the word ‘ Full’ having reference also to the ‘Short Catechism’? of the Russian Church, it was found difficult to give this title with exactness in the trans- lation—The Longer Russian Cate- chism, though identical of course in the substance of doctrine with all documents approved by the Eastern Church, is yet in many points of detail, in method and language, and even in some minor doctrinal re- spects, of greater weight and value, not only than the WHighteen Articles of the Synod of Bethlehem, but even than the Orthodox Confession itself.” APPENDIX B. [53 A. Because, as the Apostle Paul says, unto them were com- mitted the oracles of God: and the sacred books of the Old Testament have been received from the Hebrew Church of that Testament by the Christian Church of the New. Rom. i. 2. Q. How do St. Cyril and St. Athanasius enumerate the books of the Old Testament ? A. As follows: 1. The book of Genesis ; 2. Exodus ; 3. Levi- ticus; 4. The book of Numbers; 5. Deuteronomy; 6. The book of Jesus the son of Nun; 7. The book of Judges, and with it, as an appendix, the book of Ruth; 8. The first and second books of Kings, as two parts of one book ; 9. The third and fourth books of Kings ; 10. The first and second books of Paralipomena; 11. The first book of Esdras and the second, or, as it is entitled in Greek, the book of Nehemiah ; 12. The book of Esther ; 13. The book of Job ; 14. The Psalms ; 15. The Proverbs of Solomon ; 16. Ecclesiastes, also by Solo- mon; 17. The Song of Songs, also by Solomon; 18. The book of the Prophet Isaiah ; 19. Of Jeremiah ; 20. Of Ezekiel ; 21. Of Daniel; 22. Of the Twelve Prophets. Q. Why is there no notice taken, in this enumeration of the books of the Old Testament, of the Book of the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, and of certain others ? A. Because they do not exist in the Hebrew. Q. How are we to regard these last-named books ? A. Athanasius the Great says, that they have been appointed of the Fathers to be read by proselytes, who are preparing for admission into the Church. Q. Is there any division of the books of the Old Testament, by which you can give a more distinct account of their contents ? A. They may be divided into the four following classes : 1. Books of the Law, which form the basis of the Old Testa- ment. 2. Historical books, which contain principally the history of religion. 3. Doctrinal, which contain the doctrine of religion. 4. Prophetical, which contain prophecies, or predictions of things future, and especially of Jesus Christ. Q. Which are the books of the Law ? 54] APPENDIX B. A. The five books written by Moses; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Jesus Christ Himself gives to these books the general name of the Law of Moses. Luke xxiv. 44. Q. What in particular is contained in the book of Genesis 7 A. The account of the creation of the world and of man, and afterwards the history and ordinances of religion in the first ages of mankind. Q. What is contained in the other four books of Moses ? A. The history of religion in the time of the prophet Moses, and the Law given through him from God. Q. Which are the historical books of the Old Testament ? A. The books of Jesus the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, Kings, Paralipomena, the book of Esdras, and the books of Nehemiah and Esther. Q. Which are the doctrinal ? A. The book of Job, the Psalms, and the books of Solomon. ῳ. What should we remark in particular of the book of Psalms ? A. This book, together with the doctrine of religion, contains also allusions to its history, and many prophecies of our Saviour Christ. It is a perfect manual of prayer and praise, and on this account 15 in continual use in the Divine service of the Church. @. Which books are prophetical ἢ A. Those of the Prophets; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the twelve others. Q. How many are the books of the New Testament ? A, Twenty-seven. @. Are there among these any which answer to the books of the Law, or form the basis of the New Testament ? A. Yes. The Gospel, which consists of the four books of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. @. What means the word Gospel ? A. It is the same as the Greek word Evangely, and means good or joyful tidings. Q. Of what have we good tidings in the books called the Gospel ? A. Of the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, of His advent APPENDIX B. [55 and life on earth, of His miracles and saving doctrine, and finally, of His death upon the cross, His glorious resurrection, and ascension into heaven. Q. Why are these books called the Gospel ? A. Because man can have no better nor more joyful tidings than these of a Divine Saviour and everlasting salvation. For the same cause, whenever the Gospel is read in the Church, it is prefaced and accompanied by the joyful exclamation, Glory be to Thee, O Lord, glory be to Thee. Q. Are any of the books of the New Testament historical ? A. Yes. One; the book of the Acts of the holy Apostles. Q. Of what does it give an account ? A. Of the descent of the Holy Ghost on the apostles, and of the extension through them of Christ’s Church. Q. What is an Apostle ? A. The word means a messenger. It is the name given to those disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, whom He sent to preach the Gospel. Q. Which books of the New Testament are doctrinal ? A. The seven General Epistles ; namely, one of the Apostle James, two of Peter, three of John, and one of Jude : and fourteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul ; namely, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, one to Philemon, and one to the Hebrews. Q. Are there also among the books of the New Testament any prophetical ? A, Such is the book of the Apocalypse. Q. What means this word Apocalypse ? A. It is Greek, and means revelation. 9. What are the contents of this book ? A. A mystical representation of the future destinies of the Christian Church, and of the whole world. AEP LEAN Dal XS: ON THE OPINIONS OF THE JEWS CONCERNING THE APOCRYPHA. Notwithstanding the explicit testimony of Josephus, Melito, St. Jerome, and others, (see Appendix A. Nos. im. v. xIx.) great efforts have been made by recent Romish Divines, (e. g. Per- rone, Loci Theol. Pars ii. ὃ 1.cap.i. p. 1059, whose authorities only prove that these books were sometimes cited by the Talmudists ; and Malou, La Lecture de la Sainte Bible, 11. p. 34—44.) to show that some of the Apocryphal books were received as Canonical by the Jews in the time of the Apostles; although the Apostles have never cited them; and, if they were canoni- cal among the Jews then, how is it that they are not so now? The excellent observations of St. Jerome and St. Augustine may be applied here :— (a) Hieronymus in cap. vi. lesaize.—‘* Quod si aliquis dixerit,” inquit, ‘‘ Hebrzeos libros a Judzis esse falsatos, audiat Origenem, quid in octavo volumine explanationum Iesaiz huic respondeat queestiuncule : quod nunquam Dominus et Apostoli, qui cetera crimina arguunt in Scribis et Phariseeis, de hoc crimine, quod erat maximum, reticuissent. Sin autem dixerint post adventum Domini Salvatoris et preedicationem Apostolorum, libros He- breeos fuisse falsatos, cachinnum tenere non potero: ut Salvator, et Evangelistee et Apostoli ita testimonia protulerint, ut Judzi postea falsaturi erant.”—So also Augustin. lib. xv. de Civit. Dei c. 18. ‘‘Incredibile esse Judzorum gentem, tam longé latéque diffusam, uno consilio conspirare potuisse in conscri- bendo mendacio, et dum aliis invideant authoritatem, 5101 abstu- lisse veritatem.” And he concludes, *‘ Absit ut prudens quispiam vel Judzeos cujuslibet perversitatis atque malitiz, tantum po- tuisse credat in codicibus tam multis, et tam longé latéque dis- persis.” APPENDIX C. [57 This question concerning the opmions of the Jews respecting the Apocrypha, has been so ably treated by Horrineer, in his “Thesaurus Philologicus,” Tiguri, 1659, that I cannot do better than cite his words : (6) P. 101. The Old Testament, he observes, is some- times called by the Jews The T' wenty-four, —TYA IR) Dp Wwy Vigintt quatuor. ‘Tot enim V. T. sunt libri Canonici ; Galat. de Arcan. Cathol. Ver. lib. i. c. 1. Praefigitur hoc nomen, ut pluri- mum, fronti Bibliorum Hebraicorum et impressorum, et manu- scriptorum. Observa autem I. libros Canonicos Veteris T. ab ipso Synedrio magno in 24. Volumina distributos. Buxt. Comm. Masor. c. xi. Hl. Lev. Prefat. iii. in lib. Mas. hammas. Riv. Isag. S. Scr. p. 501. Atque hine praesens nomen Bibliis Sacris impositum. Obtinuit autem hic Veteris T. librorum numerus tempore etiam Hieronymi. (c) Compendii tamen, et juvandee memoriz gratia, inde ab ultima antiquitate, totum Veteris T. Codicem, secundtm nume- rum literarum Hebraicarum, in libros xxii. distinctum. Vide Joseph. contr. Apionem lib. i. et Huseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. c. 10. Hieron. prolog. Galeato. Isidor. Originum lib. vi. ο. 1. Alting. Theol. probl. loc. ii. probl. 16. Chamier. Panstrat. tom. i. lib. v. c. 9. et ex Pontificiis Middendorp. Academ. lib. ii. p. 234. Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. Sanct. lib. 1. p. 2. Cujus verba, cm cedro digna sint, hoc loco inseremus. ‘“ Primi ordinis volumina” (intelligit divinas sive Canonicas Scripturas, quas Greci δια- θηκόγραφα, id est, Testamentaria scripta vocant) “ quae sola apud Hebreeos in authoritate habentur, Judzi triplici numerorum varietate supputare solent. Quidam, inter quos Josephus et Philo, supputant sacros libros juxta numerum Hebraicarum lite- rarum: ut quemadmodum apud Hebreos due et viginti litere, quibus omnia, quz dici scribique possunt, comprehenduntur ; ita Viginti Duo volumina sint, quibus continentur omnia, que de divinis rebus scribi et enunciari queant, quam enumerationem sequuti sunt inter Christianos Origenes, Epiphanius, Gregorius Theologus, Hieronymus, et Rufinus. Alii ex Judzis, de quorum numero sunt Aben Ezra et David Kimchi, Viginti Quatuor libros veteris Testamenti recensent, juxta eundem literarum numerum, ter tamen repetita litera Jod, in honorem divini nominis. Solent 58] APPENDIX C. enim Judzi nomen illud Dei quadriliterum, quod apud ipsos, propter Dei reverentiam, lingua et voce proferre nefas est, tripli- cata litera Jod Chaldaico more conscribere hoc modo”. Hane partitionem nonnulli veterum Grzecorum, qudd aptissimé con- veniret numero Viginti Quatuor Greecarum literarum, susceperunt, et Latinorum plerique, tam prisci, quam recentiores, pari studio complexi sunt, respicientes ad mysticum illum numerum Viginii Quatuor seniorum, quos Joannes in Apocalypsi induxit, adorantes Agnum aperientem librum obsignatum septem sigillis, quem nemo aperire potuit, neque in ccelo, neque in terra, et excla- mantes, Dignus es, Domine, aperire librum et solvere signacula ejus. Rursus Hebreeorum nonnulli Viginti Septem libros nume- rare consueverunt, juxta numerum viginti septem characterum Judaicorum, resultantem ex viginti duobus simplicibus elementis, quibus constat totum Hebraicum Alphabetum, et ex quinque finalibus repetitis, seu duplicibus literis. Quinque enim sunt apud Hebrzeos geminate, sive biformes literee, que in fine dictionum aliter scribuntur, quam in principio et in medio, videlicet 5 caph, > mem, J nun, 5 phe, ἃ Zaddi: que in fine dictionum his figuris notantur Ἵ caph, D mem, } nun, Ὦ phe, ¥ Zaddi.” Placuit autem totum hoe, prolixius licét, subjicere testimonium doctoris Pon- tificii, ut una fidelid duos dealbaremus parietes, indicaremus nempe, quam veteres Judzei iniissent numerandi Veteris Test. libros rationem, simtlque ostenderemus, Concilium Tridentinum, Canoni Veteris Test. laciniam ex scriptis Apocryphis, atque in Ecclesia Judaica vix de nomine notis, attexuisse. Certwm enim, et extra omnem dubii aleam positum est, ὃ numero sive 22, sive 24, sive 27 Vet. Test. librorum, non esse vel Tobiam, vel Baruchum, vel quemcunque alium Scriptorem Apocryphum. Ipsum hoe Genebrardus, cui alias curee fuit geminam ementiri Canonis Veteris Test. constitutionem, haud obscure innuit. ‘“‘ Prater’? (sic loquitur in Chronographia V.'T.) “ viginti libros duos sacros, alii septuaginta duo Apocryphi in Agyptum delati sunt, auctore Epiphanio in libro de Mensuris et Ponderibus Scrip- ture. Unde fortassis libri Tobiz, Baruch, Judith, et similes, qui in nostris Bibliis Greecis et Latinis hodie reperiuntur, ad nos pervenerunt. Alioqui enim apud recentes Hebraos aut non extant, aut certe non sunt Authentici. Quoniam eorum Canon jam erat conditus ab illa magna Synodo, cujus Seriba erat Ezras.”’ APPENDIX C. [59 (d) Ρ. 454. ΝΡ Ow VID, Ordo Bibliorum ; series, secun- dum quam libri Vet. Test. sunt dispositi, de qua generatim audire placet Hliam Levit. preefat. in. p. 19. ‘ Non fuerunt xxiv. libri una colligati, sed illi eos conjunxerunt, ac fecerunt ex ipsis tres partes, Legem, Prophetas, et Hagiographa, contra ordinem, quem instituerunt Rabbini nostri, Ὁ. τη. in bava batra. Est autem ordo iste talis: Josua, Judices, Samuel, Regum, Jeremias, Esaias, Ezechiel, duodecim Prophete. Wagiographorum vero ordo hic est: Ruth, Psalmi, Job, Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Canticorum, Threni, Esther, Chronica. Afterunt etiam rationes et argumenta solida hujus ordinis, de quibus hic dicendi locus non est. _Eodem ordine Masorethz collocant Pro- phetas ; quod nisi Iesaiam preeponant Jeremie et Ezechieli, ut- pote qui tempore illos preecesserit. Atque hic eorum ordo repe- ritur in omnibus libris Hispanicis correctioribus. In libris verd Germanorum et Gallorum servatus est ordo Rabbinorum. Porrd in Hagiographis Masorethey Rabbinorum ordinem hoc modo mutarunt, ut sit talis; Chronica, Psalmi, Job, Proverbia, Ruth, Canticum canticorum, Ecclesiastes, Threni, Esther, Daniel, Esra ; qui ordo in Hispanorum quoque libris servatur. Sed in libris Germanorum talis est ordo: Psalmi, Proverbia, Job, quinque hibelli, Daniel, Esra, Chronica. Quinque Megilloth seu libellos eo ordine (ubique illud fieri scribit Morin. Exercit. p. 722.) scribunt, quo eos suis temporibus in suis Synagogis legunt, nempe Canticum, Ruth, Threni, Ecclesiastes, Esther.’’ Hzec de librorum Vet. Test. serie in genere. Ubi notandum, distinc- tionem Canonis Vet. Test. in MN, νομοθεσίαν, ON, προ- φήτας, et DIDI, γραφεῖα (prout, retento Hebraismo non minus eleganter, quam proprié hoc vocabulum ab Epiphanio in Pan. p- 58. redditur) ultimz esse antiquitatis, ab ipso Christo Luc. 24. approbatam. Vide Galat. p. 11. et comm. Masor. Bust. p. 105. In quatuor partes, ait Szxt. Senens. Bib. S. p. 6. recentiores Judzeos Biblia dispescere in Legem, Prophetas priores, Pro- phetas posteriores, et Hagiographa. Sed errat, aliique cum eo, seribit Drus. Comment. diffic. loc. Pentat. p. 4. peccatum eorum qui subdivisionem ponunt utentes ea pro divisione; nam Pro- phetee subdividuntur (non dividuntur) in priores et posteriores. 60] APPENDIX C. Alias Vet. Test. divisiones non re, sed verbis tantum ab hac diversas, vide apud Sixt. Senens. p. 4. et deinceps. (e) P. 483. NOD, Malachias, quem nonnulli cum Mardo- cheo Judei (quod non usque adeo improbat Calvin. in Comm.) cum Esra faciunt eundem, vide Zemach. Dav. p. 25. Vocatur alias ONIIT ONIN, Sigillum Prophetarum. Vide sup. p. 326. Lib. Nizz. p- 200. quia videlicet post Malachiam ordo ac series Prophetarum Vet. Test. abrupta, et scriptio αὐτόπιστος seu θεόπνευστος in Prophetarum libris defecit. Etsi enim Deus dein- ceps viros, pro misericordia sua, excitarit, dotibus insignibus illustres, ad vindicandam doctrinam, et restituendam Ecclesiam, nullus tamen vocatione Prophetica praeditus fuit, id quod ex sacris et Ecclesiasticis monumentis haud difficulter probari potest. Vide Genebrar. Chronol. p. 189. Numerus capitum totius δωδεκαπροφήτου est 68. ver. 1050. Medius est Mich. 3. ver. 12. (f) P. 516. Sed que apud Judzeos Apocryphorum librorum anthoritas? 1) ΝΟ DIT? DoDD, recepti sunt (Apocryphi) ab iis (Christianis) et non ἃ nobis, ait R. dzar. p. 175. Et R. Gedal. in Schalsch. hakk. p.68. Ὁ. Cum ordine Vet. Test. libros, authoresque eorum recensuisset, tandem ait: %) YTNW WN WIPM PD Ὑ21}3 OMNN ODD ANI? 297 OYA NN JT DYN WR; id est, “" Opere pretium est te scire, quod gentes seculi multiplicarunt scribere alios libros in systemate librorum sanctorum, qui in manibus nostris non sunt.” Additque, DWN) aay wD pwha DASP IND 3, i.e. “dicunt, quos- dam se reperisse lingua Chaldea, alios Arabica, alios Greeca,” quos deinceps omnes in medium affert. Sed ex ipso singulorum examine, melits quo Apocryphi apud Judzos sint loco, patebit. (9) ΠΟ NADI, Sapientia Solomonis. De hac R. Azar. in Meor. En. p. 175. b. “De libro Sapientiz magne Solo- monis, hoc enim libro nomen est; dicit R. Moses bar Nachman in preefatione in explicationem legis: ‘ Vidi librum. transla- tum’ &c. que verba ejus omnia reperies in capite ejus (Sap. Solomonis Greece.) septimo. Mihi autem verisimile videtur illum, si translatus non sit, ita compositum esse a Solomone rege lingua Syriacad, ut mitteret eum ad aliquem regem APPENDIX C. [61 ad fines Orientis habitantem. Verim Ezra manum suam ad- movit libris tantim 115, qui editi sunt ἃ Prophetis, per Spi- ritum Sanctum, lingua” (vides cur Judei scripta apocrypha rejiciant?) ‘“‘sancta. Proinde etiam sapientes nostri prudenter et preemeditate eos tantttm confirmarunt qui stabiliti et confir- mati fuerant ab eo.” R. Gedal. in Schalschel. hakkab. p. 104. b. de Philone loquens ait: MANW x) TEINDD> ‘PIT ΞΟ AMT mean 5539 morn mo waw wn Joon πο», « Com- posuit librum,” (ita etiam cum aliis sentit Galat. de Arc. Relig. Christ. p. 15. quos refutare conatur Szxt. Senens. p. 21.) “ qui Sapientia dicitur. Alii tamen dicunt authorem ejus esse ipsum Solomonem : estque ipse ille, quem gentes (Christiani) adjece- runt Bibliis sacris.” V. Weltw. in Itin. p. 49. 112) NVDSIN ON, “Etiam librum Sapientize Apocryphum pronunciarunt.” Buz. in Bib. Rabb. p. 342. putat translationem esse recentiorem, quod Dialectus sit pure Syriaca. Quod apud Ecclesiasticos Scrip- tores Canonicus nonnunquam appellatur, hine feré fit, quod cum Proverbiis confundatur, ade6dque unus liber sumatur pro alio. (A) NYD 13, Filius Sira, Siracides, qui et EKcclesiasticus dicitur. De quo observa, I. Librum hunc, expressis verbis, ἃ Judzis, Scriptis Apo- eryphis annumerari. Ex veteribus audire placet ipsos Talmu- dicos Cod. Sanhed. cap. ii. in Gemar. IDX NVD TDDI ἘΝ, mp Etiam in libro Siracidis legere vetitum est. Urgent hoe interdictum ἢ. Dav. Gans in Zem. Dav. p. 28. ο. b. et R. Azar. in Meor En. p. 29, b. init. Weltw. Itiner. Desert. p. 48. Sed cum durum nimis hoc &. Josephi videretur effatum, ab Abhzo nonnihil fuit castigatum, non ut in Canonem vellet librum rela- tum librorum θεοπνεύστων, sed ut usum ejus, ob insignes, que ibi habentur, παροιμίας καὶ νουθεσίας, vindicaret. Vide Edit. Coce. p. 896. Et cum primis R. Azar. in Meor En. p. 29. a. Ex recentioribus Menasse ben Israél de creat. Probl. x. p. 45. ait, ‘Que in contrarium a nonnullis allegantur ex versiculo Ecclesiaste, ea nihil faciunt ad rem, quia est liber Apocryphus.” Et author lib. Juchas. p. 138. f. b. refert duos Siracidis libros τ, DIN ID ὮΝ OTDM, conjunctos esse cum XXIV. id est, Bibliis sacris, a Romanis. De Christianis hoe dicit, non Judzis. Atque hine etiam Siracides accensetur DSN DDD, Libris 62] APPENDIX C. extraneis, id est, profanis, quos omnino Judzei quidam legere vetant. Vide supra p. 50. et R. Azar. in Meor En. p. 29. et R. Sol. Jarchi, qui ad verba Talmudis ΝΣ WN NRAPY Ἢ, DISTT WDA NNT RK. Akiba ait: Is quoque, qui scripta externorum legit, &c. ita commentatur DMT OADOI NWP NVD 122 13 WT, Legens m libris externorum, cujusmodi est Siracides. Viderit igitur Bailius Jesuita et alii, unde habeant, Judaeos non multo ante Josephum tempore Ecclesiasticum Canoni V. T. adjecisse. II. Rectitis tamen facere illos, qui, cogitantes, nao Ὁ WA DYN, multa cb esse utilia, ut habet Textus Talmud. in hujus etiam libri lectione bonas horas consumunt, non ad firmandam fidem, sed ad formandos mores. Unde ne ipsos quidem ei va- care puduit Talmudistas. Aliquoties enim Siracidis verba apud eos citata reperias, ut in Lex. Talm. Bust. p. 1730. Meor En. p. cit. Sanhed. Coce. p. 395. Et ut ne videantur in Doctorum suorum incurrere offensam, ita nonnulli R. Josephi limitant dic- tum, ut existiment, licere Siracidem legere yd nd) wT), ad meditationem, non vero ad laborem, id est, obiter, quemadmo- dum quis legit Epistolam quam libet, non vero eo studio, quo tractantur libri veré sacri. dlii obtendunt, ipsos quoque Rab- binos, suo exemplo, docuisse, non peccare, qui lectionem Sira- cidis ad usum suum revocent. Non inepte R. Lusitanus in Colloq. Middelburg. f. 129. judicat, medium, Libris Apocryphis, inter Canonica et profana scripta locum esse assignandum. £c- clesiasticos scriptores, tu, cum Christianis Theologis, vocaveris Siracidem et cateros hujuscemodi librorum authores. .. . ... + Quemadmodum igitur Veteres Baruchum, Tobiam, Susannam, &c. appellarunt Scripturam sacram, divinam, Pro- pheticam, non absolute, quasi pari authoritatis gradu ambularent cum scriptis Mosis et Prophetarum, sed relate, tanttm, respectu librorum profanorum, vel nimis manifesté ὑποβολιμαέων, ita etiam Judi isti, qui Siracidis lectioni ultimum vale dicere nole- bant, honorifico ἁγιογράφου titulo eum insignierunt. Nam certé si quis obstinatior cum Bailio et Genebrardo ann. M.3860. Eccle- siasticum Judzeis obtrudere conaretur pro canonico, nz is valde historiarum Judaicarum ignarum se proderet. Ei unam R. Azarie Meor En. p. 29. hae de re disputationem opponimus. Ubi inter alia Majmon. authori libri hujus tribuit FID IY pon APPENDIX C. [63 FIND, ludificationes in negotio, προσωποληψίας. Idem habetur in Dem. Zav. p. 28. ubi prolixé etiam de hoc Ben Sira disputa- tur. Et quamvis Dav. Gans non diffiteatur, multa in eo con- tineri κρατίστου κόμματος, nihilominus P. II. p. 10. a. tum de reliquis libris Apocryphis, tum de Siracide expressé pronunciat : > ΝΟῚ ond DAA ONW, quod recepti sint ab iis (Christianis nempe) in Canonem, non vero ἃ nobis, Judeis. Vide Epipha- nium de Mensuris et Ponderibus p. 534. fatentem, Siracidem in arca foederis non fuisse asservatum, nec proinde Canonicis ad- scriptum. (k) FINA, Baruch: De quo in Meor En. p. 169. b. FW wx Sapp wba inn oy ons Sapoan, Baruch, qui re- ceptus est ἃ Christianis, Papistis videlicet : (quod notandum,) non recipitur ἃ nobis. Tribuunt quidem Baruci Prophetiam, filio Neriz, Jeremize discipulo, quem tamen ipsum Judzi a Pro- phetarum ordine excludunt, ut videre est in More Nevoch. P. 11. ὁ. xxxil. sed ψευδεπίγραφον esse scriptum, a Greculo vel Hel- lenista consarcinatum, docet Cl. Alting. Theol. Elench. 1. 2. q. 2. de materia scripture: confer. Panstrat. Cham. p. 113. Unde et, fatente Christophoro ἃ Castro, Gregorius Nazianzenus, Hiero- nymus, Damascenus, Isidorus hunc librum in serie sacrorum librorum non recensuerunt. (ἢ) MAW, Tobias; de hoe in Zemach Dav. P. II. p. 10. DAN ὉΠ WR DMSDDT 73 TON NWT MAO WOW YT :DINDS ONIW Scito, librum Tobie unum esse ex libris, quos associant Christiant hagiographis. Post ait; a Judeeis rejici, concluditque tandem, “Scito etiam Tobiam, qui in manibus nostris lingua reperitur Hebrzea, translatum esse ex lingua Latina in linguam Hebreeam per Sebastianum Munsterum”’ (falsum hoe est, nam editus primo Constantinopoli, deinde demum a Mun- stero cum versione: interim, quod tamen ante fieri debuit, ex Latino in Hebrzeum ἃ Christiano aliquo esse translatum non infi- ciamur: vide Humf. contr. Jes. t. ii. p. 234. nam et ego omnes habeo libros Apocryphos MS. ex Vulgata Latina traductos) ‘‘ Basileze ante annos circiter centum, id quod facile intelliges ex styli libro, in balbutie labiorum ejus, ita ut quilibet sapiens primo statim intuitu observare possit, authorem ejus non fuisse ex Israélitis. Sed et rei geste narratio, quantum ego judico, cor- 64 | APPENDIX C. rupta est, propterea quod plena sit ludificationum et rerum inso- Vide etiam Schalsch. hakk. p. 99. Ὁ. et Galat. Are. p- 11. R. D. Gans. et author lib. Juch. p. 136. tempore Ezechize regis Jude vixisse eum tradit. lentium.” Alii tempore captivitatis Baby- lonicze, Schalsch. loc. cit. (m) MIVA, Susanna: De hac in Schalsch. hakkab. p. 99. Ὁ. et 68. b. ubi et Susanne historiam, et czeterorum Apocryphorum librorum argumenta describit. Et author Zem. Dav. P. II. p. 10. > xd) ond Sapo MIwWw TDD, ‘Susanne historia recepta apud Christianos, sed non apud nos.” Vide etiam Hieronym. prefat. in Daniel. ‘‘ Audivi ego quendam de Preceptoribus Judzorum, cum Susanne derideret historiam: et a Greco, nescio quo, eam diceret esse confictam, illud opponere, quod Origeni quoque Africanus opposuit: Etymologias has ἀπὸ τοῦ oxivov σχίσαι, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πρίνου πρίσαι, de Greco sermone de- scendere.” Vide etiam prefat. in Comment. Daniel. (n) These observations of Horrincer may be completed by the following statement of Bishop Cosrn, on the Canon of the Old Testament as received by the Jews :— Bp. Cosrn on the Canon of Scripture. London, 1672. p. 11.— The Books committed to the Jews were divided into three several classes ; whereof the first comprehended the Five Books of Moses ; the second, all the Prophets ; and the third, those writings which they called the Chethubim*, or Books that were written by the holy men of God who were not so properly to be ranked among the Prophets. In this division, as they reckoned jive Books in the first class, so in the second they counted eight, and in the third nine; Two- and- Twenty + in all; in number equal to the letters of their alphabet, and as fully comprehending all that was then needful to be known and believed, as the number of their letters { did all * The Greeks called them ‘Ay.6- γραφα. + S. Hieronym. in Prologo Ga- leato. Fiunt pariter veteris Legis libri xx11. ; Mosis Quinque, et Pro- phetarum Octo, Hagiographorum Novem. t Siat. Senensis i. p. 2. Ut quem- admodum apud MHebrevs xxu. Literze, quibus omnia que dici scri- bique possunt, comprehenduntur, ita xx. Volumina sint, quibus continen- tur omnia que de Divinis Rebus sciri et enuntiari queant. APPENDIX C. [65 that was requisite to be said or written. And hereof after this manner they made their enumeration : Genesis Exodus ais The Books of J{eyiticus. . . Moses. Numbers . με ἐπε Deuteronomy . . Four Books of ΠΝ τ ἂν ; Judges and Ruth * ᾿ the former Prophets. Samuel I. and II.+ . Kings I. and 11... Esay . Four Books of | Jeremy and his Tees the later Pro- 4 Ezechiel . phets. The Book of as Twelve Lesser Prophets . -King David’s Psalter . King Solomon’s Proverbs His Book of the Preacher And the rest | His Song of Songs . of the Holy