Page images
PDF
EPUB

"furance of many good things. For it proclaims peace with God, the "overthrow of Satan, the remiffion of fins, the abolishing of death, the "refurrection of the dead, eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven."

Says St. Matthew iv. 23. And Jefus went about all Galilee, teaching in their fynagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom. Kai xngúσown to ευαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας Mark xiii. 10. And the gopel [ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ] muft first be preached to all nations. Ch. xvi. 15. Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Κηρύξατε τὸ εὐαγγέλιον. It is called the word of truth, the gospel of our falvation. Epi. i. 13. And in like manner, in other places.

But by gofpel, when ufed by us concerning the writings of the Evangelifts, we mean the hiftorie of Chrift's preaching, and miracles. The word feems alfo to be fo used by St. Mark, i. 1. The beginning of the gofpel of Jefus Chrift. Which may be understood, and paraphrafed thus: "Here (A) begins the Hiftorie of the life and doctrine of Jesus Christ, "the Son of God, and Saviour of mankind.”

St. Luke, referring to the book of his Gofpel, fays: Acts i. 1. 2. The former treatife have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jefus began to do and teach, until the day in the which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghoft had given commandments unto the Apostles, whom he had chofen. But St. Luke, as it feems, there puts the principal part for the whole. For he has therein writ alfo the hiftorie of our Lord's miraculous birth, and divers extraordinarie events attending it: and likewife the hiftorie of the birth of John the Baptift, and divers circumstances of it, and his preaching and death.

In this fenfe the word Gofpel is frequently understood by us. A Gofpel is the hiftorie of Jesus Christ, his doctrine, miracles, refurrection, and afcenfion: not excluding the hiftorie. of his fore-runner, who (B) alfo is faid to have preached the gospel, that is, the doctrine of the gospel, or the kingdom of God.

The Gofpel according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, is the hiftorie of Jefus Chrift, as writ by thofe feveral Evangelifts.

(A) That is Dr. Clarke's Paraphrafe. But I am fenfible it will not be allowed by all. Oecumenius fays, that by Gospel Mark does not intend his own writing, but Chrift's preaching. Mágnos, dex, Onoi, të ivayyínie inoš χρισῦ ἀλλὰ ἐ τὴν ἑαυτῷ συγγραφὴν καλεῖ ἐυαγγέλιον, ἀλλὰ τὸ τῇ χεις κήρυγ μα Oecum. in A&. Ap. He proceeds to fay, that the faithful afterwards called the writings of the Evangelifts Gospels, as truly containing the gospel, that is, the doctrine of Christ. See Vol. xi. p. 413.

(s) Matt. iii. 1. 2. In those days came John the Baptift, preaching in the wilderneffe of Judea, and faying: Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Compare Mark i. 4. Luke iii. 1. 2. And fays St. Luke iii. 18. And many other things in his exhortation preached be unto the people. Πολλὰ μὲν ἐν καὶ ἕτερα παρακαλῶν, ευηγγελίζετο τον λαόν. Which may be literally rendered thus : And exhorting many other like things, he evangelized [or preached the gospel to] the people.

CHAP.

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

General Obfervations upon the Canon of the New Teftament.

HE canonical books of the New Teftament received by Chriftians in this part of the world, are the Four Gofpels, the Acts of the Apostles, Fourteen Epiftles of St. Paul, Seven Catholic Epiftles, and the Revelation.

II. There may be different canons of the New Testament among Christians.

Indeed, there have been in former times, and ftill are, different fentiments among Chriftians, concerning the number of books to be received as canonical. The (a) canon of the Syrian churches is not the fame as ours. Jerome tells us, that (b) in his time fome of the Latins rejected the epiftle to the Hebrews, and fome of the Greeks the book of the Revelation. From Chryfoftom's works we perceive, that (c) he did not receive the second epiftle of St. Peter, nor the fecond and third of St. John, nor the epiftle of St. Jude, nor the Revelation. And there is reafon to think, that (d) Theodoret's canon likewife was much the fame with Chryfoftom's, and that of the churches in Syria. Nevertheless, we have obferved in the course of this work, that about the fame time the Egyptians, and the Chriftians in divers other parts of the world, had the fame number of canonical books, that we have.

But to come nearer our own time. Calvin (e), Grotius (ƒ), Le Clerc (g), Philip Limborch (b), and fome other learned moderns, have not admitted the epiftle to the Hebrews to have been writ by St. Paul: though (i) they were willing to allow it to be the work of an apoftolical man, and a valuable part of facred fcripture. But I cannot fay, that they were in the right in fo doing. For it appears to me to have been a maxim of the ancient Chriftians, not to receive any doctrinal or preceptive writing, as of authority, unless it were known to be the work of

(a) See Vol. ix. p. 221.
(b) Vol. x. p. 122. 123.
(d) Vol. xi. p. 88. 89. 91.

Vol. xi. p. 270... 275.

(c) The fame. p. 341.

an

(e) Ego ut Paulum agnofcam auctorem, adduci nequeo. Calvin. argum. ep. ad Hebr.

Facillima refutatu eft poftrema hæc opinio, ideo quod Paulina epifto læ inter fe fint germanæ, pari charactere ac dicendi modo: hæc vero manifete ab iis difcrepet, felectiores habens voces Græcas, leniufque fluens, non autem fracta brevibus incifis, ac falebrofa.... Grot. Provem. in ep. ad Hebr.

(g) Hift. Ecc. Ann. 69. p. 455 (b) Prolegom. in ep. ad Hebr.

[blocks in formation]

Hifce argumentis utrinque attente expenfis dicendum videtur, Paulum piftole hujus fcriptorem non videri. . . Quis vero illius fcriptor fit, incertum eft. Alii eam Lucæ, alii Barnabæ, alii Clementi adfcribunt... Interim divinam hujus epiftolæ autoritatem agnofcimus, multifque aliis, quas ab Apoftolis effe fcriptas, conftat, ob argumenti quod tractat prædantiam præferendam judicamus. Limb, ibid. Vid, et Calvin, ubi fupra.

an Apoftle. Confequently, the epiftle to the Hebrews, if writ by an apoftolical man only, fhould not be efteemed canonical.

Grotius (k) likewise supposed the second epiftle afcribed to Peter, not to have been writ by the Apoftle Simon Peter, but by Simeon, chosen Bishop of Jerufalem after the death of James the Juft, whofe epiftle we have. Which Simeon lived to the time of Trajan, when he was crucified for the name of Chrift. Upon which I only obferve at present, that if this Simeon be the writer of this epiftle, it fhould not be a part of canonical fcripture.

The fame learned man fuppofeth (7) the second and third epiftles, called St. John's, not to have been writ by John the apostle, but by another John, an Elder or Prefbyter who lived about the fame time, and after him, at Ephefus.

And the epiftle called St. Jude's, he thought (m) to have been written by one of that name, who was Bishop of Jerufalem in the time of the Emperour Adrian, and not till after there had been several other Bishops of that church, fince the death of the forementioned Simeon. If so, I believe all men may be of opinion, that this epiftle ought not to be placed in the canon of the New Teftament.

It may not be thought right, if I fhould here entirely omit Mr. Whifton, whofe canon confifted of the (n) Apoftolical Conftitutions, and divers other books, as facred, befide those generally received: and (0) the Conftitutions,

(k) Jam olim veterum multi credidêre, non effe apoftoli Petri, argumento tum dictionis ab epiftola priore multum diverfæ, quod agnofcunt Eufebius & Hieronymus, tum quod multæ olim ecclefiæ hanc non receperint.. Scriptorem autem hujus epiftolæ arbitror effe Simeonem, five Simonem, epifcopum poft Jacobi mortem Hierofolymis, ejufdemque Jacobi, cujus epiftolam habemus, fuccefforem & imitatorem . Unde etiam conftat, vixiffe hunc poft excidium Hierofolymitanum ad Trajani tempora, & tunc pro nomine Chrifti crucifixum. Annot, in Ep. Petri fecund.

(1) Hanc epiftolam, & eam quæ fequitur, non effe Johannis Apoftoli, veterum multi jam olim crediderunt, a quibus non diffentiunt Eufebius & Hieronymus. Et magna funt in id argumenta. Nam duos fuiffe Johannes Ephefi, Apoftolum, ac Prefbyterum, ejus difcipulum, femper conftitit ex fepulchris, alio hujus, alio illius: quæ fepulchra vidit Hieronymus. Grot. Annat, in ep. Joan. fecund.

(m) Quare omnino adducor, ut credam effe hanc epiftolam Judæ Epifcopi Hierofolymitani, qui fuit Adriani temporibus, paullo ante Barchochebam. Id. in Annot. ad ep. Juda.

(2) "The facred books of the New Teftament ftill extant, both thofe in the 85. canon, and those written afterwards, are the fame which we now receive: together with the eight books of Apoftolical Conftitutions, and their epitome, the Doctrine of the Apoftles, the two epiftles of Clement, the epiftle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas; and perhaps the fecond book of apocryphal Efdras, with the epiftles of Ignatius and Polycarp." Effay on the Apoflokcal Conflitutions. ch.i. p. 70. 71.

(0) "If any one has a mind to fort the feveral books of the New Teflament, he may in the firft place fet the Apoftolical Conftitutions, with it's extract, or Doctrine of the Apoftles, as derived from the body, or College of the Apostles, met in Councils. In the next place he may put the four Gof pels, with their appendix, the Acts of the Apoftles. The Apocalypfe of

[ocr errors]

Conftitutions, in particular, as the most facred of all the canonical books of the New Testament.

Concerning which I beg leave to observe, first, that the receiving the Conftitutions as a facred book, and part of the rule of faith, would make a great alteration in the Chriftian fcheme. Some might be induced to think it no great bleffing to mankind, and scarcely deferving an apologie. Secondly, Mr. Whifton's canon is not the canon of the Chriftian churches in former times: as is manifeft from the large collections, made by us in the preceding volumes, from ecclefiaftical writers of every age, to the beginning of the twelfth centurie. Thirdly, Mr. Whifton, notwithstanding all his labours, made few converts to this opinion. Which I impute to the knowledge and learning of our times. And as the Chriftian Religion is built upon facts, the ftudie of Ecclefiaftical Antiquity will be always needful, and may be of ufe, to defeat various attempts of ingenious, but mistaken and prejudiced men.

III. A fhort canon of Scripture is moft eligible.

Religion is the concern of all men. A few short hiftories and epiftles are better fitted for general ufe, than numerous, and prolix writings. Besides, if any writings are to be received as the rule of faith and manners, it is of the utmost importance, that they be justly entitled to that diftinction. Otherwife men may be led into errours of very bad confequence. If any books pretend to deliver the doctrine of infallible and divinely inspired teachers, fuch as Jefus Chrift and his Apoftles are efteemed by Christians: great care should be taken to be well fatisfied, that their accounts are authentic, and that they are the genuine writings of the men, whofe names they bear. The pretentions of writings, placed in high authority, to which great credit is given, ought to be well attefted.

Dr. Fortin, fpeaking of the work called Apoftolical Conftitutions, fays: The (p) authors of them are, it is pretended, the twelve "Apoftles and St. Paul gathered together, with Clement their ama"nuenfis.

"If their authority fhould appear only ambiguous, it would be our "duty to reject them, left we fhould adopt as divine doctrines the com"mandments of men. For fince each Gofpel contains the main parts "of Chriftianity, and might be fufficient to make men wife to falva"tion; there is lefs danger in diminishing, than in enlarging the number "of canonical books and lefs evil would have enfued from the lofs of "one of the four Gofpels, than from the addition of a fifth and fpurious " one."

In

John alfo cannot be reckoned at all inferior to them, though it be quite of another nature from them. In the third rank may ftand the Epiftles of the Apoftles, Paul, Peter and John. In the fourth rank may ftand the Epiftles of the brethren of our Lord, James and Jude. In the fifth and laft rank may ftand the epiftles and writings of the companions and attendants of the Apofiles, Barnabas, Clement, Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp. All which, with the addition perhaps of apocryphal Efdras, and of the Apocalypfe of Peter, and the Ads of Paul, were they now extant, I look upon, though in different degrees, as the facred books of the New Teilament." Ibid. p. 72. 73.

(f) Dr. Fortin's Remarks on Ecclefiaftical Hiflory. Vol. i. p. 229.

In my opinion, that is a very fine and valuable obfervation.

And I fhall tranfcribe again an obfervation of Auguftin, formerly (p) taken notice of. "Our canonical books of fcripture, which are of the "higheft Authority with us, have been fettled with great care. They "ought to be few, left their value fhould be diminished. And

66 yet they are so many that their agreement throughout is wonder«ful."

IV. I have been fometimes apt to think, that the best canon of the New Testament would be that, which may be collected from (r) Eufebe of Cæfarea, and seems to have been the canon of fome in his time.

The canon fhould confift of two claffes. In the first should be those books, which he affures us were then universally acknowledged, and had been all along received by all catholic Chriftians. Thefe are the four Gofpels, the Acts of the Apoftles, thirteen epiftles of St. Paul, one epiftle of St. Peter, and one epiftle of St. John. These only should be of the highest authority, from which doctrines of religion may be proved.

In the other clafs fhould be placed thofe books, of which Eufebe fpeaks, as contradicted in his time, though well known: concerning which there were doubts, whether they were writ by the perfons, whose names they bear, or whether the writers were apostles of Christ. These are the epiftle to the Hebrews, the epiftle of James, the fecond of Peter, the fecond and third of John, the epiftle of Jude, and the Revelation. Thefe fhould be reckoned doubtful, and contradicted: though many might be of opinion, that there is a good deal of reason to believe them genuine. And they should be allowed to be publicly read in Christian affemblies for the edification of the people: but not be alleged, as affording, alone, fufficient proof of any doctrine.

That I may not be misunderstood, I must add, that there should be no third clafs of facred books: forafmuch as there appears not any reason from Chriftian antiquity to allow of that character and denomination to any Christian writings, beside those above-mentioned,

In this canon the preceding rule is regarded. It is a fhort canon. And it seems to have been thought of by fome (A) about the time of the Reformation.

V. Nevertheless that, which is now generally received, is a good

canon.

(r) Vol viii. p. 90. 105.

For

(p) See Vol. x. p. 289. (A) We learn from Paul Sarpi's Hiftory of the Council of Trent, that one of the doctrinal articles concerning facred scripture, extracted, or pretended to be extracted out of Luther's works, was this; "that no books should be "reckoned a part of the Old Teftament, befide thofe received by the Jews: "and that out of the New Teftament fhould be excluded the epistle to the "Hebrews, the epiftle of James, the fecond of Peter, the fecond and third of "John, the epiftle of Jude, and the Revelation." And there were fome Bifhops in that Council, who would have had the books of the New Tefta"ment divided into two claffes in one of which should be put those books "only which had been always received without contradiction: and in the "other thofe, which had been rejected by fome, or about which at least "there had been doubts." And Dr Courayer, in his notes, feems to favour this propofal. See his French tranflation of The Hiftorie of the Council of Trent Liv. 2. ch. 43. Tom, i, p. 235. and cb. 47. p. 240. and note (i).

« PreviousContinue »