صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

"teacher, but as one of you, fhall lay before you a few things, that you "may be joyful."

And fomewhat lower: "Again, (e) I entreat you, as one of you."

He writes as a man, who had gifts of the Spirit, but not that full measure which was a prerogative of Apoftles. "He (f) who put the "s engraffed gift of his doctrine in us, knows, that no man has received [or learned] from me a truer word. But I know, that you are "worthie."

I fhall add a few more very modeft expreffions, not suitable to an Apoftle.

"Thus (g) as much as in me lies, I have writ to you with great plainneffe. And I hope, that according to my ability, I have omit"ted nothing conducive to your falvation in the prefent circum❝ftance."

In the last chapter: "I (b) befeech you: I afk it as a favour of you, "whilft you are in this beautiful veffel of the body, be wanting in none of these things."

And still nearer the conclufion. "Wherefore (i) I have endeavoured "to write to you, according to my ability, that you might rejoice."

Upon the whole, this epiftle well answers the character given of Barnabas in the Acts, particularly, ch. xi. 24. He was full of the Holy Ghost. The writer of this Epiftle had the gift of the Spirit, though not that measure, which was peculiar to Apoftles. He was full of faith. The writer of this epiftle had an earnest zeal for the truth and fimplicity of the gospel. He was alfo a good man. In this epiftle we obferve the mildneffe and gentleneffe, by which Barnabas feems to have been diftinguished. But we do not difcern here the dignity and authotity of an Apoftle.

Confequently, this epiftle may afford edification, and may be read with that view. But it ought not to be efteemed by us, as it was not by the ancients, a part of the rule of faith.

(e) Adhuc & hoc rogo vos, tamquam unus ex vobis. Ib. cap. 4.

Ο οἶδεν ὁ τὴν ἔμφυτον δωρεάν τῆς διδαχῆς αυτό θέμεν©· ἐν ἡμεῖν ἐδεὶς γνησί ωτε ον ἔμαθεν απ' ἐμὲ λόγον. Αλλά διδα, ὅτι ἄξιον ἐσὲ ὑμεῖς. Cap. 9.

(8) Εφ' ὅσαν ἦν ἐν δυνατῷ καὶ ἁπλότητι δηλῶσαι ὑμῖν ἐλπίζει με ἡ ψχνη τῇ επιθυμία με μὴ παραλελοιπέναι μέ τι τῶν ἀνηκόλων ὑμῖν εἰς σωτηρίαν, ἐεσωτων. Cap. 17.

(1) Ερωτῶ ὑμᾶς, χάριν αιτέμενος. κ. λ. Cap. 21. (1) Διὸ μᾶλλον ἐσπέδασαν γράψαι, ἀφ ̓ Ibid.

ὧν ἐδυνήθην, εἰς τὸ εὐφᾶναι ὑματο

СНАР.

CHA P. III.

Of the Method, in which the Canon of the New Teftament has been formed.

TH

HE canon of the New Teftament is a collection of books, writ by feveral perfons, in feveral places, and at different times. It is therefore reasonable to think, that it was formed gradually. At the rife of the Chriftian Religion there were no written fyftems or records of it. It was first taught and confirmed by Chrift himself in his most glorious miniftrie: and was still farther confirmed by his willing death, and his refurrection from the dead, and afcenfion to heaven. Afterwards it was taught by word of mouth, and propagated by the preaching of his Apostles and their companions. Nor was it fit, that any books fhould be writ about it, till there were converts to receive and keep them, and deliver them to others.

If St. Paul's two epiftles to the Theffalonians were the firft written books of the New Teftament, and not writ till the year 51. or 52. about twenty years after our Saviour's afcenfion, they would be for a while the only facred books of the new dispensation.

As the Chriftians at Theffalonica had received the doctrine taught by Paul, not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God. I Theff. ii. 13. they would receive his epiftles, as the written word of God. And himself taught them fo to do, requiring, that they fhould be: folemnly read unto all the holy brethren. 1 Theff. v. 27. He gives a like direction, but more extenfive, at the end of his epiftle to the Caloffians. iv. 16. requiring them, after they had read it amongst themselves, to caufe it to be read alfo in the church of the Laodiceans: and that they likewife read the epiftle, that would come to them from Laodicea.

All the Apostle Paul's epiftles, whether to churches or particular perfons, would be received with the like refpect by thofe to whom they were fent, even as the written word of God, or facred fcriptures. And in like manner the writings of all the Apostles and Evangelists.

They who first received them would, as there were opportunities, con-> vey them to others. They who received them, were fully affured of their genuinneffe by those who delivered them. And before the end of the first centurie, yea not very long after the middle of it, it is likely, there were collections made of the four Gofpels, and moft of the other books of the New Teftament, which were in the hands of a good number of churches and perfons.

From the quotations of Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and other writers of the fecond centurie, of Origen in the third, and of Eufebius in the fourth centurie, it appears, that the greateft part of the books, which are now received by us, and are called canonical, were univerfally acknowledged in their times, and had been fo acknowledged by the elders and churches of former times. And the reft, now received by us, though they were then doubted of, or controverted by fome, were (a) well known, and approved by many. And Athanafius, who lived not long after Eufebius, (having flourished from the year 326. and afterwards)

(a) See Eufebius, Vol. viii. p. 96. 97.

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

[ocr errors]

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 Apostles 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 observe, that the canon of the New Testament had not been fettled by any authority univerfally acknowledged, particularly, not in the time of (b) Eu febius, nor of (c) Augustin, nor of (d) Caffiodorius: but that nevertheless there was a general agreement among Chriftians 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 Christians, 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 cononical, 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 themfelves, according to evidence. And the evidence of the genuinneffe of moft 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 teftimonie has been handed down to others.

That in this way the primitive Chriftians formed their judgement concerning the books proposed 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 pass on to Origen, who fays: "As (b) I have learned by tradition concerning the four Gofpels, "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 Testament had been quoted by the ancients, and what not. And having rehearfed a catalogue of books univerfally

(d) Vol. xi. 279.

(c) Vol. x. 207... 211.
(ƒ) Vol. xi. p. 303. · · 306.
(b) Vol. iii. p. 235.

(b) Vol. viii. p. 105.
(e) Vol. x. p. 207.
(g) 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 Apoftles 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) Auguftin.

However, befide obferving the teftimonie of writers in former times, they criticifed the books, which were proposed 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 epistle to fome, who had too much respect for a writing, entitled the Gospel of Peter: "We (0) brethren, receive Peter, and the other "Apoftles, as Chrift: but as fkilful men, we reject those writings, which "are falfly afcribed to them: well knowing, that we have received no "fuch." And he adds, that upon perufing 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 transcribed above: "The (p) ftile alfo of these books is en"tirely different from that of the Apostles. Moreover the sentiments " 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 fometimes faid, that the Council of Laodicea firft fettled the canon of the New Teftament. But it may be justly faid to have been fettled before. At left there had been long before a general agreement among Chriftians, what books were canonical, and what not: what were the genuine writings of Apoftles and Evangelifts, 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 laft canon, but declare, "That (q) 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 says: "We (s) no where read of a Council of the Apostles,

[blocks in formation]

(q) Vol. viii. p. 291.292.

(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

в 3

nierint

<< or of any affemblie of the Governours of Chriftian churches, conven"ed, to determine by their authority, that fuch a number of Gospels, "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 whofe names they bear: and fince it is also manifeft, that there "is in them nothing unworthie of those, to whom they are afcribed, nor any thing at all contrarie to the revelation of the Old Teftament, 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 Gofpels has been established by gene"ral and perpetual confent, without any decree of the Governours of "the Church. We may say the fame of the Apoftolical Epiftles, which

[ocr errors]

owe all their authority, not to the decifions of any ecclefiaftical affem"blie, but to the concurring teftimonie of all Chriftians, and the things "themfelves, 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 decifions of Councils. I likewife refer to (a) Mr. Jones upon this fubject. I muft alfo remind my readers of (x) Augustin's excellent obfervations, in his arguments with the Manicheans, concerning the genuinnesse 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 prefent 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 numerum Evangeliorum effe admittendum, non majorem, nec minorem. Sed nec opus fuit, cum omnibus conftaret, ex teftimonio et confenfu æqualium, quatuor hæc Evangelia corum vere fuiffe, quorum nomina præferunt: cumque nihil in iis legatur quod fcriptoribus dignum non fit, vel revelationi Veteris Teftamenti, rectæve 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 fœtus 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. Cleric. H. E. ann. 100. num. iii. iv. Vid. et. ann. 29. num. xcii.

(ty Hift. de l'Eglife. 1. 8. ch. v. vi. vii.

(4) New and full Method. Part. i, ch, v. vi. vii. (x) See Vol. vi. p. 375. · · 381.

(y) P. 379.

« السابقةمتابعة »