صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

wards) received all the fame books, which are now received by us, and no other. Which has also been the prevailing fentiment ever fince.

This canon was not determined by the authority of Councils. But the books, of which it confifts, were known to be the genuine writings of the Apoftles and Evangelifts, in the fame way and manner that we know the works of Cefar, Cicero, Virgil, Horace, Tacitus, to be theirs. And the canon has been formed upon the ground of an unanimous, or generally concurring teftimonie and tradition.

In the course of this long work we have had frequent occafion to obferve, that the canon of the New Teftament had not been fettled by any authority univerfally acknowledged, particularly, not in time of (6) Eufebius, nor of (c) Augustin, nor of (d) Caffiodorius: but that nevertheless there was a general agreement among Christians upon this head.

That the number of books to be received as facred and canonical had not been determined by the authority of any Council, or Councils, univerfally acknowledged, is apparent from the different judgements among Chriftians, in feveral parts of the world, concerning divers books, particularly, the epiftle to the Hebrews, and the Revelation: which were received by fome, rejected, or doubted of by others. Not now to mention any of the Catholic Epiftles. There was no catalogue of the books of fcripture in any canon of the Council of Nice. Auguftin (e) giving directions to inquifitive perfons, how they might determine, what books are canonical, and what not, refers not to the decifions of any Councils. Caffiodorius, in the fixth centurie, has (f) three catalogues, one called Jerome's, another Auguftin's, another that of the ancient verfion. But he refers not to the decree of any Council, as decifive. And it seems to me, that in all times Chriftian people and churches have had a liberty to judge for themselves, according to evidence. And the evidence of the genuinneffe of most of the books of the New Teftament has been fo clear and manifeft, that they have been univerfally received.

The genuinneffe of thefe books, as before faid, is known in the fame way with others, by teftimonie or tradition. The firft teftimonie is that of those who were contemporarie with the writers of them. Which testimonie has been handed down to others.

That in this way the primitive Chriftians formed their judgement concerning the books propofed to be received as facred fcriptures, appears from their remaining works. Says Clement of Alexandria: "This "(g) we have not in the four Gofpels, which have been delivered to us, "but in that according to the Egyptians." Tertullian may be seen largely to this purpose. Vol. ii. 576... 581. I pafs on to Origen, who fays: "As (b) I have learned by tradition concerning the four Gospels, "which alone are received without difpute by the whole Church of God "under heaven." So Eufebe, in his Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, often obferves, what books of the New Teftament had been quoted by the ancients, and what not. And having rehearfed a catalogue of books uni

(b) Vol. vui. p. 1c

verfally

(c) Vel. x. 207... 211. (d) Vol. xi. 279.
(ƒ) Vol. xi. p. 303... 306.-
(k) Vel. iii. p. 235.

(e) Vol. x. p.. 207. :
() Vol. ii. p. 496, and 529.

verfally received, and of others controverted, he fays: "It (i) was need"ful to put down these alfo: diftinguishing the fcriptures, which ac"cording to ecclefiaftical tradition are true, genuine, and univerfally ac"knowledged, from those which are controverted, and yet appear to have "been known to many: that by this means we may know them from "fuch as have been published by heretics, under the names of Apoftles. "Which books none of the ecclefiaftical writers in the fucceffion from "the times of the Apostles have vouchfafed to mention in their writ→ "ings." I may not tranfcribe, but only refer to (k) Athanafius in his Feftal Epiftle, to (1) Cyril of Jerufalem, (m) Rufin, and (n) Augustin.

However, befide obferving the teftimonie of writers in former times, they criticifed the books, which were propofed to them: examining their ftile and contents, and comparing them with those books, which had been already received as genuine upon the ground of an unanimous teftimonie, and undoubted tradition. Says honeft Serapion, Bishop of Antioch, in an epiftle to fome, who had too much refpect for a writing, entitled the Gospel of Peter: "We (a) brethren, receive Peter, and the other Apoftles, as Chrift: but as skilful men, we reject those writings, which are falfly afcribed to them: well knowing, that we have received no "fuch." And he adds, that upon perusing that work, he had found the main part of it agreeable to the right doctrine of our Saviour: but there were fome other things of a different kind. And Eufebe adds in the place tranfcribed above: "The (p) ftile alfo of these books is en"tirely different from that of the Apoftles. Moreover the fentiments "and doctrine of these writings differ from the true orthodox Chriftianity. "All which things plainly fhew, that they are the forgeries of heretics." It has been sometimes faid, that the Council of Laodicea firft fettled the canon of the New Teftament. But it may be justly said to have been fettled before. At left there had been long before a general agreement among Christians, what books were canonical, and what not: what were the genuine writings of Apoftles and Evangelists, and what not. From the decree of the Council itself it appears, that there were writings already known by the title of canonical. That Council does nothing in their last canon, but declare, "That (9) private pfalms ought not to be "read in the church, nor any books not canonical, but only the cano"nical books of the Old and New Teftament." After which follows a catalogue or enumeration of fuch books. The fame may be faid of the third Council of Carthage, whofe 47. canon is to this purpose: "More"over (r) it is ordained, that nothing befide the Canonical Scriptures be "read in the church, under the name of Divine Scriptures."

I fhall now transcribe below a long and fine paffage of Mr. Le Clerc, wherein he fays: "We (s) no where read of a Council of the Apoftles,

[blocks in formation]

(9) Vol. viii. p. 291. 292.

.. 102.

(1) P. 268.

(n) P. 207. 208.

(p) Vol. viii. p. 98.

(r) Vol. x. p. 193.

" or

() Nufquam quidem legimus, Collegium Apoftolicum, aut cœtum ullum Rectorum Ecclefiarum Chriftianarum coactum effe, qui pro auctoritate defi

[blocks in formation]

*or of any aflemblie of the Governours of Chriftian churches, conven"ed, to determine by their authority, that fuch a number of Gofpels, « neither more nor fewer, fhould be received. Nor was there any need "of it, fince it is well known to all from the concurring teftimonie of " contemporaries, that these four Gofpels are the genuine writings of "those whose names they bear: and fince it is alfo manifeft, that there ❝is in them nothing unworthie of those, to whom they are ascribed, nor "any thing at all contrarie to the revelation of the Old Testament, nor "to right reason. There was no need of a fynod of Grammarians, to "declare magifterially what are the works of Cicero, or Virgil... In "like manner the authority of the Gospels has been established by gene"ral and perpetual confent, without any decree of the Governours of "the Church. We may fay the fame of the Apoftolical Epiftles, which "owe all their authority, not to the decifions of any ecclefiaftical affem"blie, but to the concurring teftimonie of all Chriftians, and the things "themselves, which are contained in them."

Mr. James Bafnage (t) has feveral chapters, fhewing how the canon of the New Teftament was formed, without the authoritative decisions of Councils. I likewife refer to (u) Mr. Jones upon this fubject. I muft alfo remind my readers of (x) Auguftin's excellent obfervations, in his arguments with the Manicheans, concerning the genuinnefle and integrity of the books of the New Teftament. I fhall transcribe from him here a few lines only, which are very much to the present purpose. "We (y) know the writings of the Apostles, fays he, as we know the "works of Plato, Ariftotle, Cicero, Varro, and others. And as we know the writings of divers ecclefiaftical authors: forafmuch as they have "the teftimonie of contemporaries, and of those who have lived in fuc"ceeding ages."

Upon the whole, the writings of the Apostles and Evangelifts are received, as the works of other eminent men of antiquity are, upon the ground

nierint hunc numerom Evangeliorum effe admittendum, non majorem, nec minorem. Sed nec opus fuit, cum omnibus constaret, ex teftimonio et confenfu æqualium, quatuor hæc Evangelia eorum vere fuiffe, quorum nominą præferunt: cumque nihil in iis legatur quod fcriptoribus dignum non fit, vel revelationi Veteris Teftamenti, rečtæve rationi, vel minimum adverfetur: aut quod inferius ævum, recentiorumque manus ullo modo recipiat. Non opus fuit fynodo Grammaticorum, qui, pro imperio, pronunciarent ea fcripta, verbi cauffa, Ciceronis et Virgilii, quæ eorum effe non dubitamus, re verâ tantorum ingeniorum foetus fuiffe, et pofteritati ea in re confulerent. Omnium confenfus, non quæfitus, non rogatus, fed fponte fignificatus, prout occafio tulit, refque ipfæ omnibus, qui poftea vixere, dubitationem omnem anteverterunt,.. Sic et Evangeliorum auctoritas merito conftituta eft, et invaluit, perpetuo confenfu, fine ullo Rectorum Ecclefiæ decreto.

Idem dixerimus de Epiftolis Apoftolicis, quæ nullius ecclefiaftici conventus judicio, fed conftanti omnium chriftianorum teftimonio, rebufque ipfis, quas complectuntur, auctoritatem omnem fuam debent. Clerie. H. E. ann. 100, uam. iii. iv. Vid. et ann. 29. num. xcii.

(t) Hf. de l'Eglife. 1. 8. ch. q. vi. vii.

(u) New and full Method. Part į, ch. v. vi. vii, (x) See Vol. vi. p. 375... 381.

(v) P. 379.

ground of general confent and teftimonie. Nor does the canon of the fcriptures of the New Teftament owe it's eftablishment to the decifions of Councils: but it is the judgement of Christian people in general. And so far as we are able to perceive, after a long and careful examination, it is a right and reasonable judgement. And it may induce us to believe, that if men were encouraged to think freely, in other matters alfo, and to judge for themselves, according to evidence, and proper affiftances were afforded them, it would not be at all detrimental to the interests either of truth or virtue.

XXX

CHAP. IV.

Of the Time of writing the Gospels, especially the first three.

SECT. I.

That the Gospels are not mentioned, nor referred to, in the Epiftles of the New Teftament.

USEBE intimates, that (a) many before him fuppofed, that E when Paul in his epiftle speaks of his own gospel, he intended the **** Gospel according to Luke. We will therefore confider those texts, and fome other of a like kind.

I. St. Paul fays Rom. ii. 16... in the day, when God fhall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel. The fame phrafe occurs again ch. xvi. 25. and 2 Tim. ii. 8. Remember, that Jefus Chrift, of the feed of David, was raifed from the dead, according to my gospel.

In all which places, I apprehend, it must be reasonable to understand, not any written Gofpel, or hiftorie of Jefus Chrift: but the doctrine of the gospel of Jefus Chrift, which had been preached by Paul. Which is also the opinion of learned modern interpreters in general.

II. 2 Cor. viii. 18. And we have fent with him the brother, whose praise is in the gospel, throughout all the churches.

Many have been of opinion, that St. Luke is the brother, here intend ed, and that St. Paul refers to Luke's written Gofpel. This (b) is faid to be Origen's interpretation. But I do not clearly perceive it. Origen (c) fpeaking of the four Gofpels, fays: "The (d) third is that according

to

(α) Φασὶ δὲ, ὡς ἄρα τὰ καὶ αὐτὸν ἐυαγγελία μνημονεύειν ὁ Παῦλος εἴωθεν, ὁπης νίκα ὡς περὶ ἰδίω τινὸς ἐυαγγελία γράφω ἔλεγε, κατὰ τὸ ἐυα[γέλιόν με. Euf.H. E. b. 3. c. 4. p. 73. D.

(6) Who this brother was, is much contefted. Antiquity has carried it "for St. Luke, worthy of praise in all the churches for the Gospel, which he wrote, "The authority of this affertion feems to rest upon the words of Origen, the "interpolated Ignatius, and St, Jerome." So Whitby upon the Place..

(ε) Καὶ τρίτον τὸ κατὰ λυκᾶν, τὸ ὑπὸ παύλα ἐπαινόμενον ευαγγέλιον. Αρ. Εuf 1.6. cap. 25. p. 226. C.

(d) Sea Vol, iii. p. 235.

to Luke, commended by Paul." I fay, I do not perceive it to be clear, that Origen had an eye to 2 Cor. viii. 18. He might intend Rom. ii. 16. or xvi. 25. or 2 Tim. ii. 8. However, whether it be Origen's interpretation of that text, or not, it is Jerome's: who writing the hiftorie of St. Luke in his book of illuftrious Men, fays: "He (e) wrote a Gofpel, of which Paul makes mention, faying: And we have sent with him the brother, whofe praise is in the Gospel." To the fame purpose (ƒ) also in the prologue to his Commentarie upon St. Matthew: and likewife in (g) his Commentarie upon the epistle to Philemon.

Chryfoftom upon the place fpeaks after this manner. "And (b) who "is this brother? Some fay, Luke: and think, that the Apoftle refers to "the hiftorie, writ by him. Others fay, Barnabas, For by gospel he "intends unwritten preaching." Theophylact (i) speaks to the like purpofe. Theodoret (k) by the brother understood Barnabas. And therefore could not think of any written Gofpel, no fuch work having been afcribed to him by the ancients. Qecumenius's note is to this purpose. "Many (1) fay, this brother is Luke, mentioned upon account of the "Gofpel compofed by him. Many others fuppofe him to be Barnabas. "For, as they fay, unwritten preaching is here called gospel. Which is "the more likely. For what follows is more fuitable to Barnabas: whofe praife is in the gospel. As much as to fay: he not only preaches, "but. commendably.". And afterwards. "The meaning is, he not "only evangelizeth, and preacheth the gospel admirably, and commendably, but he has been chofen to travel with us, with this grace alfo." Such are the fentiments of the ancients upon this text.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Let us now obferve the interpretations of fome judicious moderns. Grotius fays: "he (m) does not diflike the opinion of those, who think Luke to be here intended. But he does not think, that St. Paul refers to his book of the Gofpel, which was not then published: but to the office of an Evangelift, which Luke had discharged in feveral places, or to his preaching the gospel. And he fays, that in the gospel, may be the fame as by the gospel. So in ch. x. 14. of the fame epiftle.

Eftius likewife fays, that (n) by gojpel is to be understood preaching: not St. Luke's Gofpel, which we are not certain was then published.

(e) See Vol. x. p. 94.

(f) The fame p. 83.

Le

Mifi, inquit, cum illo fratrem, cujus laus &c. In Philem. T. 4. P. i. p. 454.

(g) De quo [Luca et in alio loco: eft in evangelio per omnes ecclefias.

(4) Καὶ τὶς ἔτος ἐσιν ὁ ἀδέλφο; τινὲς μὲν τὸν λυκᾶν.

Καί φασι, διὰ τὴν ἰσου

ρίαν ἔνπερ ἔγραψε. Τινὲς δὲ τὸν βαρνάβαν. Καὶ γὰρ τὸ ἄγραφον κήρυ[μα ἐναρJéhov xakit. In 2. ep. ad Corinth. hom. 18. Tom. x.

(i) In loc. p. 389.

(4) Τὸν τρισμακάριον Βαρνάβαν τὰ εἴξημένα χαρακτηρίζει. Theod. in loc. Τ. 3. p. 243.

(1) Oecum. in loc. Tom. i. p. 663.

(m) Mihi non difplicet fententia illorum, qui hic Lucam defignari putant: ita tamen ut per evangelium non intelligatur liber, qui tunc editus nondum erat, fed ipfum munus evangeliftæ, quod Lucas Pauli vice multis in locis fideliter obierat, five ipfa evangelii prædicatio, ut infra x. 14. iv in pro dia per. Grot, ad 2. Cor. viii. 18.

() Neque enim Paulus de Evangelio fcripto loquitur, fed quo modo paffim alibi,

1

« السابقةمتابعة »