"plainly delivered to all the things which they had learned from the "Lord. So likewife Luke, envying no man, has delivered to us what "he learned from them, as he fays: Even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and minifters of the word." By all which it seems, that Irenæus reckoned Luke to have been a difciple of the Apoftles, not a hearer of Jefus Chrift himself.

Clement of Alexandria has bore a large teftimonie to this Gospel, and the Acts, as well as to the other books of the New Testament. And as we learn from Eufebe, "in (f) his Inftitutions, he mentions a tradi❝tion concerning the order of the Gospels, which he had received from "Prefbyters of more ancient times, and which is to this purpose. He "fays, that the Gofpels containing the genealogies were writ firft:" According to that tradition therefore St. Matthew's and St. Luke's Gofpels were writ before St. Mark's. Which, according to the fame Cle ment, and the tradition received by him, was writ at Rome, at the requeft of St. Peter's hearers, or the Chriftians in that city.

Tertullian (g) fpeaks of Matthew and John, as difciples of Chrift, of Mark and Luke, as difciples of Apoftles. Therefore, I think, he did not reckon these to have been of the feventy, or hearers of Chrift. However, he ascribes a like authority to these, and fays: "that (b) the Gofpel, which Mark publifhed, may be faid to be Peter's, whofe inter(6 preter Mark was. For Luke's Digeft alfo is often afcribed to Paul. "And indeed it is eafie to take that for the mafters, which the difciples 66 published." Again: "moreover (i) Luke was not an Apoftle, but "apoftolical: not a master, but a difciple: certainly lefs than his master, "but a difciple: certainly lefs than his mafter, certainly fo much later, "as he is a follower of Paul, the laft of the Apoftles." This likewife fhews Tertullian's notion of St. Luke's character.

Origen mentions the Gospels in the order now generally received. "The (k) third, fays he, is that according to Luke, the Gofpel com"mended by Paul, published for the fake of the Gentil converts." In his Commentarie upon the epiftle to the Romans, which we now have in a Latin verfion only, he fays, upon ch. xvi. 21. "Some (1) fay, Lu"cius is Lucas the Evangelift, as indeed it is not uncommon to write names fometimes according to the original form, fometimes according to the Greek or Roman termination." Lucius, mentioned in that text of the epiftle to the Romans, must have been a Jew. Nevertheless, as Origen affures us, fome thought him to be Luke the Evangelift. The fame obfervation we faw in (m) Sedulius, who wrote a Commentarie upon St. Paul's epiftles, collected out of Origen, and others.

(g) Vol. ii. p. 587.588.

(i) P. 587.

(k) Vol. iii. p. 235.

Eufebius

ab eis didicerat, tradidit nobis, ficut ipfe teftatur dicens: Quemadmodum tradiderunt nobis qui ab initio contemplatores et miniftri fuerunt verbi. Adv. H. l. 3. cap. 14. n. 2. (f)Vol. ii. p. 475. (b) P. 581. (1) Sed et Lucium quidam perhibent effe Lucam Evangelistam, qui Evangelium fcripfit, pro eo quod foleant nomina interdum fecundum patriam declinationem, interdum Græcam Romanamque proferri. In Rom. T. 2. p. 632. Bafil. 1.571.

(m) Vol. xi. p. 182. VOL. II.

F

Eufebius of Cefarea, as tranfcribed formerly, fpeaking of St. Paul's fellow-laborers, fays: "And (n) Luke, who was of Antioch, and by pro"feffion a Physician, for the most part a companion of Paul, who had "likewife more than a flight acquaintance with the reft of the Apoftles, "has left us in two books, divinely inspired, evidences of the art of hea"ling fouls, which he had learned from them. One of thefe is the Gofpel, which he profeffeth to have writ, as they delivered it to him, who "from the beginning were eye-witnesses and minifters of the word: with all "whom, he fays likewife, he had been perfectly acquainted from the very "firft. The other is the Acts of the Apostles, which he composed now, "not from what he had received by the report of others, but from what « he had seen with his own eyes."

And in another place, cited (o) alfo formerly, he observes, "that (p) "Luke had delivered in his Gospel a certain account of fuch things, as "he had been well affured of by his intimate acquaintance and familiarity with Paul, and his conversation with the other Apostles."

From all which, I think, it appears, that Eufebe did not take Luke for a difciple of Chrift, but of Apostles only.

In the Synopfis afcribed to Athanafius it is faid, " that (9) the Gospel "of Luke was dictated by the Apostle Paul, and writ and published by "the bleffed Apoftle and Phyfician Luke."

"that

The author of the Dialogue against the Marcionites fays, (r) Mark and Luke were difciples of Chrift, and of the number of the Seventy."

Epiphanius (s) fpeaks to the like purpose.

Gregorie Nazianzen says, "that (t) Luke wrote for the Greeks." or in Achaia.

Gregorie Nyffen fays, "that (u) Luke was as much a Phyfician for the foul, as for the body:" taking him to be the fame, that is mentioned Col. iv. 14.

In the catalogue of Ebedjeft it is faid, "that (x) Luke taught and "wrote at Alexandria, in the Greek language."

The Author of the Commentarie upon St. Paul's thirteen epiftles feems to have doubted, whether (y) the Evangelift Luke be the perfon intended Col. iv. 14.

Jerome agrees very much with Eufebe, already transcribed. Never. thelefs I fhall put down here fomewhat largely what he fays. "Luke (z) "a Phyfician of Antioch, not unfkilfull in the Greek language, a difciple "of the Apostle Paul, and the conftant companion of his travels, wrote a Gofpel, and another excellent volume, entitled the Acts of the "Apostles.... It is fuppofed, that Luke did not learn his Gospel from "the Apoftle Paul only, who had not converfed with the Lord in the "Alefh, but alfo from other Apoftles. Which likewife he owns at the "begining

(0) P. 95.

(n) Vol. viii. p. 103. 104. (β) ... Τὸν ἀσφαλῆ λόγον ὧν αυτὸς ἱκανῶς τὴν ἀλήθειαν κατειλήφει, ἐκ τῆς ἅμα παύλῳ συνουσίας τε καὶ διατριβῆς, καὶ τῆς τῶν λοιπῶν ἀποτόλων ὁμιλίας ὠφε Λήμενος, διὰ τὸ ἰδίο παρέδωκεν ἐυαγγελίε. Η. Ε. Ι. 3. c. 24. p. 96. σε

(s) P. 306. (x) P. 217. (x) Vol. x. p. 94... 96.

(9) Vol. viii. p. 250, (t) Vol. ix. p. 133.

(+) P. 255.

(u) P. 156.

(3) Vol. ix. p. 367. 368.

"begining of his volume, faying: Even as they delivered them unto us, "who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and minifters of the word. "Therefore he wrote the Gofpel from the information of others. But "the Acts he composed from his own knowledge.'

So writes Jerome in his book of Illuftrious Men.

In the prologue to his Commentarie upon St. Matthew he fays: "The (a) third Evangelift is Luke, the Physician, a Syrian of Antioch, who was a difciple of the Apoftle Paul, and published his Gospel in the "countreys of Achaia and Baotia."

He obferves elsewhere, "that (b) some said, Luke had been a profelyte to Judaism, before his converfion to Christianity." He speaks of St. Luke in many other places, which I need not now take notice of.

Auguftin fays, "that (c) two of the Evangelifts, Matthew and John, were Apostles. Mark and Luke difciples of Apoftles.'

Chryfoftom in the Synopfis, probably his, fays: "Two (d) of the Gospels "were writ by John and Matthew, Chrift's difciples, the other two by "Luke and Mark, of whom one was disciple of Peter, the other of Paul. "The former converfed with Chrift, and were eye-witneffes, of what "they wrote. The other two wrote what they had received from eye"witneffes." And to the like purpose in (e) his first homilie upon St. Matthew. Again he fays: "Luke (f) had the fluence of Paul, Mark "concifeneffe of Peter, both learning of their mafters." And upon Col. iv. 14. he fays: This (g) is the Evangelift.

Upon Col. iv. 14. Theodoret fays, "that (b) perfon wrote the divine Gofpel, and the hiftorie of the Acts." He fays the fame upon (1) 2 Tim. iv. II.

Paulinus (m) celebrates Luke, as having been first a Physician of the body, then of the foul.

Here I would refer to the Author of Quæftiones et Refponfiones, probably writ in the fifth centurie, who (n) reckons both the Evangelifts, writers of the genealogies, that is, Matthew and Luke, to have been Hebrews.

According to Euthalius (0) Luke was a disciple of Paul, and a Physician of Antioch.

Ifidore of Seville, fays: "of (p) the four Evangelifts, the first and last "relate what they had heard Christ say, or had seen him perform. The "other two, placed between them, relate those things, which they had "learned from Apoftles. Matthew wrote his Gospel first in Judea. “Then_Mark in Italie, Luke, the third, in Achaia, John the last, in Afia." In another place he fays: "Of (q) all the Evangelifts Luke, "the third in order, is reckoned to have been the most skilful in the "Greek tongue. For he was a Physician, and wrote his Gospel in "Greece."

(a) P. 83. 84.

(d) P. 312.

(ƒ) P. 322,

(e) P. 314... 316. And See p. 325.

(g) Οὗτός ἐσιν ὁ εὐαγγελισής. In. Col. hom. 12. Τ. xi. p. 412.

(1) In 2. Tim. T. 3. p. 505.
(n) See Vol. i. p. 263.

·(p)· P. 367.

(9) P. 372.

In

In Theophylact are these things. In his preface to St. Matthew's Gofpel he fays, "that (r) there are four Evangelifts, two of which, Mat"thew and John, were of the choir of the twelve Apoftles: the other "two, Mark and Luke, were of the number of the Seventy. Mark was "a difciple and companion of Peter, Luke of Paul. ... Luke wrote fif"teen years after Chrift's afcenfion." In the preface to his Commentarie upon St. Luke he fays, "that (s) from that introduction it appears, "Luke was not from the begining a difciple, but only afterwards. For "others were difciples from the begining as Peter, and the fons of Zecc bedee, who delivered to him the things which they had seen or heard." Upon which fome remarks were made by us in the place referred to. In his comment upon the hiftorie of the two difciples, whom Jefus met in the way to Emmaus, one of whom is faid to be Cleophas. Luke xxiv. 18. Theophylact says: "Some (t) have thought the other to be Luke the Evangelift, who out of modeftie declined to mention himself." In his preface to the Acts Theophylact fays: "The (u) writer is Luke, native of "Antioch, by profeffion a Phyfician."

Euthymius fays: "Luke (x) was a native of Antioch, and a Phyfician. He was a hearer of Chrift, and, as some say, one of his seventy disciples, as well as Mark. He was afterwards very intimate with Paul. He "wrote his Gospel, with Paul's permiffion, fifteen years after our Lord's "afcenfion."

So Euthymius. But I fhould think, that very few, who fuppofed Luke to have been a native of Antioch, could likewise reckon him a hearer of Jefus Chrift. But Euthymius, as it feems, puts together every thing he had heard or read, without judgement or difcrimination.

What Nicephorus Callifti fays, is, briefly, to this purpose. "Two (y) only of the Twelve, Matthew and John left memoirs of our Lord's life on earth: and two of the Seventy, Mark and Luke.. Matthew wrote "about fifteen years after our Saviour's afcenfion. Long after that Mark "and Luke published their Gospels by the direction of Peter and Paul. "The fame Luke compofed alfo the book of the Acts of the Apo"ftles."

σε

To thefe authors I now add Eutychius, Patriarch of Alexandria, in the tenth centurie, who fays: "In (2) the time of the fame Emperour, (that is, Nero,) Luke wrote his Gospel in Greek to a noble and wife man of the Romans, whose name was Theophilus: to whom alfo he "wrote the Acts, or the hiftorie of the Difciples. The Evangelist Luke "was a companion of the Apoftle Paul, going with him where-ever he For which reason the Apostle Paul in one of his epiftles says: "Luke, the Phyfician, falutes you.”

"went.

(x) P. 437

III. Having

(t) P. 423.

(y) P. 442.

(u) P. 426. (*) Etiam tempore hujus Imperatoris fcripfit Lucas Evangelium fuum Græce, ad virum nobilem ex fapientibus Romanis, cui nomen Theophilus, ad quem item fcripfit Acta feu Difcipulorum hiftoriam. Erat autem Lucas Evangelifta comes Pauli Apoftoli, quocumque per aliquod tempus manfit. Unde eft, quod Paulus Apoftolus in quadam epiftola fua dicit, Lucas Medicus vos falutat. Eutych. Annal. p. 335, 336.

III. Having thus recited the teftimonies of all these writers concerning the Evangelift Luke, I fhall now make some remarks.

Remarks.

1. We hence perceive, that the notion, that St. Luke was a Painter, is without foundation, no notice having been taken of it in these ancient writers. Indeed this is faid by one of our (a) authors, Nicephorus Callifti, in the fourteenth centurie, from whom a paffage was quoted in the way of a fummarie conclufion. But we do not relye upon him for any thing not confirmed by other writers, more ancient, and of better credit. Nor is this account received by (b) Tillemont, or (c) Du Pin, but rejected by them, as altogether fabulous, efpecially the later: though our Dr. Cave (d) was fomewhat inclined to admit one teftimonie to this affair, whilft he rejected the reft. For a farther account of St. Luke's pretended pictures of the Virgin Marie I refer to (e) Mr. Bower.

2. We learn alfo, what judgement ought to be formed of the account given of St. Luke by (f) Hugo Grotius, and (g) J. J. Wetstein: which is, that he was a Syrian, and a flave, either at Rome, or in Greece: and that having obtained his freedom, he returned to his native place, Antioch: where he became a Jewish Profelyte, and then a Christian. Which thofe

F 3

· (α) . . ἄκρως δὲ τὴν ζωγράφην τέχνην ἐξεπισάμενος. Νiceph. 1. 2. cap. 43. Το i. p. 210.

(b) Saint Luc. Mem. Ec. T. 2.

(c) Nicephore et les nouveaux Grecs le font Peintre. Et il y a en differens endroits des images de la Vierge, qu'on donne pour l'ouvrage de S. Luc. Ce font des fictions, qui n'ont ni verité ni apparence. Du Pin Diff. 1. 2. cb. 2. §. 5.

(d) of more authority with me would be an ancient infcription, found in a vault near the church of S. Mary in via lata at Rome, fuppofed to be the place, where S. Paul dwelt: wherein mention is made of a picture of the B. Virgin. Una ex vii. a B. Lûca depictis: One of the seven painted by St. Luke. Cave's Lives of the Apostles, in English, p. 222.

(e) See his Lives of the Popes. Vol. 3. p. 205. 206.

(f) Noftro autem nomen quidem Romanum fuiffe arbitror, fed aliquanto longius. . . . Quare et Lucas, fi quid video, contractum est ex Romane nomine, quod fufpicor fuiffe Lucillium. Nam ea gens tum Romæ florebat.. Erat nofter hic Syrus, ut veteres confentiunt, et medicinam fecit. . . Syria autem multos Romanis fervos exhibebat. Et medicina, ut ex Plinio atque aliis difcimus, munus erat fervile. Manumiffi autem nomen patroni induebant, ut Comœdiarum fcriptor, Afer cum effet, dictus eft a patrono Terentio Terentius. . . . Ita hic a Lucillio Lucillius, et contracte Lucas. Credibile eft, cum Romæ medicinam factitaffet aliquamdiu, acceptâ libertate, rediiffe in patriam. &c. Grot. Pr. in S. Lucam.

(g) Exercuiffe medicinam Paulus ad Coloffenfes teftatur. Eufebius autem et Hieronymus addunt fuiffe natione Syrum Antiochenum. . . . Interpretes porro conjectura probabili, tum ex nomine, tum ex arte quam profitebatur, colligunt, fuiffe fervum manumiffum. Obfervant enim primo, nomen ejus in compendium fuiffe redactum, ut pro Lucillio vel Lucano vocaretur Lucas... Obfervant fecundo, fervos et præcipue Syros medicinam factitaffe.... Quod vero quidam exiftimant, eum Romæ ferviiffe, et a domino, qui ipfum manumiferit, nomine Lucam appellatum fuiffe, non fatis certum videtur. Nam præter familiam Lucilliam, quæ Romana fuit, etiam Græcis illud nomen fuit impofitum, ut ex Anthologia conftat. Wetst. Pr. ad Luc. T. is p:643. '