Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

of Christians in general, that the scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the only rule of faith. For other things I refer to the chapter itself. A. D. 440.

Ch. CXLI. Salvian presbyter of Marseilles, a very agreeable writer, seems to have received all the books of the New Testament; for beside the gospels and the book of the Acts, often and largely quoted by him, he quotes the epistle to the Hebrews, the epistle of James, the second of Peter, and the Revelation. His general divisions of the sacred scriptures are such as these: First the Law, then the Prophets, thirdly the Gospel, fourthly the Apostles; the Old and New Testament; the Prophets, the Apostles, the Gospels:' and the like: and he bears witness, that they who were called heretics received the same scriptures that other Christians did, the same prophets, the same apostles and evangelists. A. D. 440.

Ch. CXLII. Euthalius, at first deacon at Alexandria, afterwards bishop of Sulca in Egypt, published an edition of St. Paul's epistles, and afterwards an edition of the Acts of the apostles, and the seven Catholic epistles, having first compared them with the exact copies in the library of Cæsarea in Palestine. All the books of the New Testament were at first written by the apostles and evangelists in one continued tenor, without any sections or chapters. In the year 396, some learned Christian, whose name is not known, divided St. Paul's epistles into chapters or lessons: these Euthalius made use of in his own edition of the same epistles, adding some other lesser sections or subdivisions. This he is supposed to have done about the year 458. Afterwards, in the year 490, he published an edition of the Acts of the apostles, and the seven Catholic epistles; now dividing these also into lessons, chapters, and verses, which had never been done before; and to the several parts of this work he prefixed a prologue. As Euthalius confined his labours to those parts of the New Testament, it may be argued that the Revelation was not publicly read in the churches at Alexandria; though it might be received as sacred scripture. There are divers other things observable in that chapter, but they cannot be repeated here.

Ch. CXLIII. Dionysius, falsely called the Areopagite, author of divers works, has a cata logue of the books of the Old and New Testament, very agreeable to what is the present canon. He received the Revelation: and it is probable, that he thought St. John's gospel to be the last written book of the New Testament; it being mentioned last, and next after the Revelation. A. D. 490.

Ch. CXLIV. Gennadius presbyter of Marseilles, beside the other scriptures, received the Revelation as a writing of John the apostle and evangelist. A. D. 494.

[ocr errors]

Ch. CXLV. Gelasius bishop of Rome has a catalogue of the books of the Old and New Testament: that of the New is exactly the same as ours. Having recited these catalogues, it is added, that upon the prophetical, evangelical, and apostolical scriptures, the catholic church is built by the grace of God.' Afterwards follows an enumeration of many ecclesiastical writings, which are allowed to be read as conducive to edification; and then a long catalogue of apocryphal books, which are rejected. All which is of use to shew, that the books now received by us as canonical, are of a superior character to all others; and that none beside them ever were esteemed to be of authority, or decisive in things of religion. A. D. 540.

Ch. CXLVI. Andrew bishop of Cæsarea, in Cappadocia, wrote a Commentary upon the Revelation. He plainly received all the books of the New Testament which are now received by us. A. D. 500.

Ch. CXLVII. In this chapter is an account of the Alexandrian manuscript, and divers stichometries.

The Alexandrian manuscript, written as is supposed before the end of the fifth century, consists of four volumes in folio, or large quarto: three of which contain the scriptures of the Old Testament in the Greek version of the Seventy, and the fourth the scriptures of the New Testament, but not quite complete. For more particulars I must refer to the chapter itself.

Afterwards follows the Stichometry of Nicephorus patriarch of Constantinople. A. D. 806, A stichometry is a catalogue of books of scripture, to which is added the number of verses in each book. In the stichometry of Nicephorus is a catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, very agreeable to the Jewish canon; and then a catalogue of the books of the New Testament, exactly the same with our present canon, except that the Revelation is wanting, at least in some copies. Afterwards follow catalogues of contradicted and apocryphal books: which afford evidence, that there never were any Christian writings, which were esteemed to

[ocr errors]

be of authority, beside those which are now reckoned by us sacred and canonical. The same observation is confirmed by the stichometries from Cotelerius, which are subjoined in the same chapter.

Ch. CXLVIII. Cosmas of Alexandria, called Indicopleustes on account of a voyage which he made to the Indies, was at first a merchant, afterwards monk, and author. Matthew, he says, is the first evangelist; and he supposeth him to have written his gospel in Judea soon after the martyrdom of St. Stephen: Mark, the second evangelist, wrote his gospel at Rome, by the direction of Peter: Luke is the third evangelist, who likewise wrote the Acts: John, the fourth and chief of the evangelists, as he is here called, wrote his gospel at Ephesus after that the faithful writings of the other evangelists had been brought to him. The books of the New Testament received by Cosmas, are the four gospels, the Acts, St. Paul's fourteen epistles, and three Catholic epistles, as it seems, that of James, the first of Peter, and the first of John, agreeably to the sentiment of the Syrian Christians. And he says, that no perfect or well instructed Christian should endeavour to prove any thing but by the canonical books of scrip⚫ture acknowledged by all: which books have sufficiently declared what is needful to be known • concerning the doctrines of religion.' A. D. 535.

[ocr errors]

Ch. CXLIX. Facundus, a learned African bishop, appears to have received all the books of the New Testament which we receive, and no other. His general division of the scriptures of the New Testament is that of gospels and apostles:' for which he has the greatest regard. A. D. 540.

Ch. CL. Arethas, generally supposed to have been bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, wrote a Commentary upon the book of the Revelation, extracted out of the Commentary of his predecessor Andrew, and the works of Irenæus, Hippolytus, Gregory Nazianzen, Cyril of Alexandria, and others. It appears by his quotations, that he received the same books of the New Testament that we do. A. D. 550.

Ch. CLI. Arator, sub-deacon in the Church of Rome, published a work, entitled the Apostolical History in verse, in two books, composed out of the Acts of the apostles, which he ascribes to St. Luke. A. D. 544.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Ch. CLII. Junilius was an African bishop, but of what place is uncertain. He is very particular in his manner of dividing the books of scripture: Some,' he says, are of perfect, others of middle authority, others of none at all; and some are historical, some prophetical, • some proverbial, and some teach simply. The historical books of the New Testament, of perfect and canonical authority, are the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the • Acts of the Apostles: the books that teach simply, or plainly, are the epistles of the apostle Paul to the Romans, the Corinthians, the Galatians, the Ephesians, the Philippians, the Colossians, • the Thessalonians, to Timothy, Titus, Philemon, the Hebrews; one of the blessed Peter to the • Gentiles, and the first epistle of the blessed John. To these many add five more, one epistle of • James, a second of Peter, one of Jude, and two of John.' He likewise says, that the Revelation of John was doubted of generally by the Christians in the east, which may imply, that it was generally received in Africa, as indeed it was. The books last mentioned which were not received by all, seem to be reckoned by him of middle authority' only; the rest were of perfect and canonical authority. And it is observable, that he says St. Peter's first epistle was written to Gentiles; it will follow that the second also was written to Gentiles; for very probably they were both written to the same people. A. D. 550.

Ch. CLIII. M. A. Cassiodorius in his Institutions has three catalogues of the Old and New Testament; one called by him Jerom's, the second Augustine's, the third that of the ancient translation: and it is very observable, that in none of these catalogues mention is made of any books of the New Testament as canonical which are not received as such by us. There are not inserted in any of these catalogues Barnabas, or Clement, or Ignatius, or any other Christian writers whatever; which affords a cogent argument, that there never were any other Christian writings, which were placed by the churches upon a level with those now received by us as canonical. A. D. 556.

Cassiodorius published likewise a work called Complexions, or Short Commentaries upon the epistles, the Acts of the apostles, and the Revelation; they are upon St. Paul's fourteen epistles, the seven catholic epistles, the Acts, and the Revelation: by which it is manifest, that he received all the books of the New Testament which are now received by us, and no other.

Ch. CLIV. The author of the imperfect work upon St. Matthew was a bishop and an Arian, who wrote in Latin in the sixth century. From his quotations it appears, that he received all the books of the New Testament that we do. He has likewise quoted divers apocryphal books; but, as it seems, not as books of authority. He has some remarkable passages concerning the time and occasion of writing the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John.

Ch. CLV. Victor Tununensis an African bishop, who wrote a Chronicle ending at the year 566, says, that when Messala was consul, that is, in the year of Christ 506, at Constantinople, by order of the emperor Anastasius, the holy gospels being written by illiterate evangelists, were censured and corrected.'

[ocr errors]

Some have hence argued, that the copies of the New Testament, of the gospels at least, have not come down to us pure and uncorrupted, as they were originally written, but were altered at the time above mentioned.

In answer to which it has been observed by us, agreeably to what had been already said by divers learned men, first, that it was impossible in the sixth century to effect an alteration in the sense or words of the gospels, or any books of the New Testament; forasmuch as there were at that time in every part of the known world, in Europe, Asia, and Africa, numerous copies of the books of the New Testament, in the original Greek, and in the Syriac, Latin, and other languages, into which they had been translated. Secondly, that no alteration was made in the gospels or other sacred books is hence apparent; that our present copies agree with the quotations of ancient Greek and Latin authors, and with the translations made before the time of Anastasius. Thirdly, the story of Victor deserves no regard, because he is singular. No -other writer has mentioned it beside Isidore of Seville, who transcribed him; whereas, if such an attempt had been made by Anastasius, and any books had been published with alterations, it would have made a great noise in the world, and would have occasioned a general outcry. The emperor Anastasius was far from being popular in his government. There are extant writings of contemporaries, as well as of others, in which he is freely and grievously reproached; nevertheless there is no notice taken of this affair, which would have given greater and more general offence to Christians than any other.

Ch. CLVI. Gregory the first, bishop of Rome, received all the books of the New Testament, as of authority, which we do, and no other. Some in his time doubted of the genuineness of the second epistle of St. Peter; but he shews their doubts to be unreasonable. His general titles and divisions of the sacred scriptures are these: The Old and New Testament, consisting of the Law and the Prophets, the Gospels and Acts, and Words of Apostles; the Law and the Prophets, Gospel and Apostles.' He says, Whoever was writer of the scriptures, the Holy Ghost was the author.'... And, the doctrine of the scripture surpasseth beyond comparison all other learning and instruction whatever. In the scriptures,' he says there are obscure and difficult things to exercise the more knowing, plain things to nourish 'weak minds;' and he assures his hearers, that the more the scriptures are read and meditated upon, the more easy and delightful they will be.' A. D. 590.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Ch. CLVII. Isidore bishop of Seville in Spain has several catalogues of the books of the Old and New Testament. He says, that Matthew wrote his gospel the first, in Judea ; then Mark in Italy; Luke the third evangelist, in Achaia; and John the last, in Ephesus. The first and last relate what they had heard Christ speak, or seen him perform; the other two, placed between them, relate what they had heard from apostles: the Acts of the apostles contain the history of the infancy of the church; the writer is the evangelist Luke; which, he says, is well known, Divers other things deserving notice may be seen in his chapter. A. D. 596.

Ch. CLVIII. Leontius, who for some time was an advocate at Constantinople, afterwards retired and lived a monk in Palestine. He has a catalogue of the scriptures, wherein the books of the Old and New Testament are recited distinctly and agreeably. His catalogue of the books of the Old Testament is much the same with that of the Jews: his catalogues of the books of the New Testament contains all which are now received by us, and no other. Here is no notice taken of the Constitutions, or Recognitions, or Clementines, or any other Christian writings as of authority. The scriptures of the New Testament are divided by him into six books: the first book contains Matthew and Mark; the second Luke and John; the third is the Acts of the apostles; the fourth the Catholic epistles, being seven in number; the fifth book is the fourteen epistles of the apostle Paul; the sixth is the Revelation of John. These,'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

says he, are the ancient and the new books, which are received in the church as canonical.' And soon after he says, the period next after Christ's ascension, is treated of in the Acts of the apostles. The following period reaches from the death of the apostles to the reign of • Constantine; the affairs of which have been related by several ecclesiastical historians, as Eusebius and Theodoret, whom we are not obliged to receive: for beside the Acts of the 'apostles, no such writings are appointed to be received by us.' A. D. 610.

Ch. CLIX. Venerable Bede, besides many other works, wrote commentaries upon all the books of the New Testament now received. His prologue to the seven catholic epistles may be seen at large in his chapter. A. D. 701.

Ch. CLX. John Damascenus monk and presbyter, though a native of Damascus wrote in Greek, and is supposed to represent the sentiment of the Greek Christians of his time. He has catalogues of the Old and New Testament, which are recited by us in his chapter, with remarks. His general titles and divisions of the books of scripture, and his respect for them, appear in such expressions as these: All things which are delivered to us by the law and the prophets, the apostles and evangelists, we receive, acknowledge, and venerate, seeking not any thing beyond what has been taught by them.' Again: We cannot think, or say any thing of God, besides what is divinely taught and revealed to us by the divine oracles of the Old • and New Testament.' A. D. 730.

[ocr errors]

Ch. CLXI. Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, received the same scriptures of the Old and New Testament which are now generally received by us. Beside other works, he wrote Commentaries upon the Psalms, the Prophets, and St. Paul's epistles. This great critic, and fine writer, was a great admirer of the apostle Paul, and has celebrated his manly and unaffected eloquence.

[ocr errors]

Ch. CLXII. Oecumenius bishop of Tricca in Thessaly received the same books of the New Testament that we do. He wrote Commentaries upon the Acts, St. Paul's fourteen epistles, and the seven Catholic epistles. Upon Acts xiii. 13, he says, this John, who is also called Mark, nephew to Barnabas, wrote the gospel according to him, and was also disciple of Peter, of whom he says in his epistle, "Mark, my son, saluteth you." And upon Acts xv. 13, he says, this James, appointed bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord, was son of Joseph, [meaning by a former wife] and brother of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.' For other things the reader is referred to the chapter itself. A. D. 950.

[ocr errors]

Ch. CLXIII. Theophylact, archbishop of the chief city in Bulgaria, received all the books of the New Testament that we do, excepting the book of the Revelation; concerning which his judgment does not now appear to us. He wrote Commentaries upon the four gospels, the Acts, and St. Paul's fourteen epistles. He says, There are four evangelists, two of whom, • Matthew and John, were apostles of Christ; the other two, Mark and Luke, were of the • number of Christ's seventy disciples: Mark was a companion and disciple of Peter, Luke of • Paul. Matthew first wrote a gospel in the Hebrew language, for the use of the Hebrew ‹ believers, eight years after Christ's ascension; Mark wrote ten years after our Lord's ascension, having been instructed by Peter; Luke fifteen, and John two and thirty years after our 'Saviour's ascension.' Afterwards, Mark wrote at Rome, ten years after Christ's ascension, • at the request of the believers there, being the disciple of Peter, whom he calls his son spiri⚫tually: his name was John; he was nephew to Barnabas, and for a while was also companion ' of Paul.' He likewise says, that Mark's gospel was said to be Peter's: he says, that Luke, who wrote the gospel and the Acts, was a native of Antioch, and by profession a physician. In his preface to St. Matthew's gospel he writes to this purpose: And was not one evangelist • sufficient? Yes. Nevertheless, for making the truth more manifest, four were permitted to write: for when you see these four, not conferring together, nor meeting in the same place, but separate from each other, writing the same things as with one mouth, are you not led to • admire the truth of the gospel, and to say, that they spake by the Holy Ghost? Do not say to me, that they do not agree in every thing...For they agree in the necessary and principal things; and if they agree in such things, why should you wonder that they vary in lesser matters? They are the more credible for not agreeing in all things; for then it would have • been thought, that they had met and consulted together: but now one has written what ⚫ another has omitted; and therefore they seem to differ in some things.' A. D. 1070. Ch. CLXIV. Euthymius, a monk at Constantinople, besides other works, wrote Commen

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

taries upon the Psalms, and the four gospels; collected chiefly out of Chrysostom, and other ancient writers. According to him Matthew wrote eight, Mark ten, Luke fifteen years after Christ's ascension; but the evangelist John did not write his gospel till many years after the destruction of Jerusalem.

Here ends this part of my design; for my intention was to write at large the history of all, or almost all, the Christian writers of the first four centuries, with their testimony to the books of the New Testament: forasmuch as it is universally allowed, that witnesses near the time of any events are the most credible and material: that has filled ten volumes. Afterward I intended to write briefly, the history of the principal writers, from the end of the fourth century, as low as Theophylact and Euthymius, to the end of the eleventh, or the beginning of the twelfth century, with their testimony likewise to the scriptures of the New Testament; which has been performed in the eleventh volume alone of the former edition.

Ch. CLXV. The chapter of Nicephorus Callisti, who lived not before the fourteenth century, more than two hundred years after the writers last mentioned, (without taking notice of any of the authors in that space) was added only by way of conclusion, as containing the sum of our argument, and of what was to be proved by us. For that learned monk, in his Ecclesiastical History, referring to what had been said by Eusebius concerning the books of the New Testament, and having mentioned those which had been all along universally acknowledged, and then the epistle to the Hebrews, and those of the Catholic epistles, which had been doubted of by some, and the Revelation, adds, But though there were for a while doubts about these, we know that ⚫ at length they have been received by all the churches under heaven with a firm assent.' And he says, that all others were rejected from being part of sacred scripture. By which we are assured, that all the books of the New Testament which are now received by us were generally received in those times; and that there were not then, nor ever had been, any books of authority among Christians beside them.

And now I hope that there needs not any long harangue to shew the force of our argument. In the first part of this work it was shewn, that there is not any thing in the books of the New Testament, however strictly canvassed, inconsistent with their supposed time and authors; which alone (as was formerly shewn at large) affords good reason to believe, that they were written by persons who lived before the destruction of Jerusalem, which happened in the seventieth year of our Lord's nativity, according to the common computation.

In this second part we have had express and positive evidence, that these books were written by those whose names they bear, even the apostles of Jesus Christ, who was crucified at Jerusalem in the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, when Pontius Pilate was governor in Judea, and their well known companions and fellow labourers. It is the concurring testimony of early and later ages, and of writers of all countries in the several parts of the known world, Europe, Asia, and Africa, and of men of different sentiments in divers respects; for we have had before us the testimony of those called heretics, especially in the third and fourth centuries, as well as catholics. These books were received from the beginning with the greatest respect, and have been publicly and solemnly read in the assemblies of Christians throughout the world in every age from that time to this. They were early translated into the languages of divers countries and people they were quoted by way of proof in all arguments of a religious nature, and were appealed to on both sides in all points of controversy that arose among Christians themselves; they were likewise recommended to the perusal of others as containing the authentic account of the Christian doctrine; and many commentaries have been written upon them, to explain and illustrate them; all which affords full assurance of their genuineness and integrity. If these books had not been written by those to whom they are ascribed, and if the things related in them had not been true, they could not have been received from the beginning: if they contain a true account of things, the Christian religion is from God, and cannot but be embraced by serious and attentive men, who impartially examine, and are willing to be determined by evidence. Much has been said by some in late times about spurious and apocryphal books, composed in the early days of Christianity. I hope, that all objections of that sort have been answered or obviated in the preceding volumes; nevertheless I shall put together some observations, concerning them, in this conclusion.

See particularly, besides other places, the history of the Manichees, Vol. ii. p. 228-232. and the chapter of Eusebius of Cæsarea, Vol. ii. p. 385-388.

« AnteriorContinuar »