was preserved in the Church of Ephesus Peter Bishop of Alexandria maintained that it ought to be read in the xix Chap. of S. John ver 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was about the third hour (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chron. Alex. edit Monachii p. 521. because saith he this reading is found in the correct Copies and in that which had been written with St. John the Evangelist's own hand which Copy is kept at present by the Grace of God in the most holy Church of Ephesus and is there adored by the Faithful It is no difficult matter to judge that all that was said in that time at Ephesus concerning the Original Writing of St. John who had been Bishop of that City was only grounded on a popular Error several like instances whereof it were easie to produce Can we see any thing more ridiculous than the Tradition of the Venetians with respect to the Gospel of St. Mark the Original of which written with his own hand they pretend yet to keep even to this very day Baronius could not forbear rejecting this Tradition as having no foundation in Antiquity Fertur traditione magis saith this learned Annalist quà m antiquorum certo testimonio ipsum Marcum Evangelium suum quod Romae Latine scripserat cum Aqualejae moraretur missus illuc à Petro ad eam erigendam Ecclesiam in Graecum transtulisse ipsumque Originale diutius asservatum Venetias demum esse translatum Fabiano Justiniani a Priest of the Oratory of Rome who hath believed with Lucas Brugensis that the Latin Gospel of St. Mark which we have hath been translated from the Greek doth not stick to declare (f) Marcus cùm in Aquilejam Venetae Provinciae civitatem à Sancto Petro missus venisset ibi idem Evangelium iterum Graeco eloquio exaravit quod usque hodie in Aquilejensi Ecclesiâ cum eburneâ sede in quâ illud scripserat ostenditur congruâ devotione reservari dicitur Fabian Justin Comm. de Sacr. Script lib. 1. part 2. c. 48. edit Romae ann 1614. to us the common belief of the People of the State of Venice who shew the very Original of St. Mark written in Greek and even the Ivory Chair wherein he had written it It is not necessary to confute this sort of vulgar Traditions that are grounded on no Acts as Baronius himself hath acknowledged The same thing may be said concerning the Tradition of those of Ephesus related by Peter Bishop of Alexandria we might demand of him who are the ancient Ecclesiastical Writers that have made mention before him of this Gospel written with St. John's hand It is requisite that they should explain to us after what manner and through what Channel this original Piece is conveyed down to this time without having any knowledge thereof in the preceding Ages If St. Epiphanius had heard any News of this Original he would not have failed to refer the Alogians to it who generally rejected all the Books of St. John which they ascribed to the Heretick Cerinthus on the contrary he only opposeth to them good Reasons and being very far from disputing with them on a vain Tradition that had no grounds but the simplicity of the People (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 51. n. 3. he saith if they had only disallowed the Apocalypse it might be thought that a certain too curious criticizing Humor had obliged them to embrace this Opinion not to receive an Apocryphal Book because there are some things in this Book profound and obscure Lastly they oppose that which happened under the Emperor Zeno in the Isle of Cyprus where Anthimius Bishop and Metropolitan of this Island was advertised in a dream of the ground-plot where the Body of St. Barnabas had been enterred which was found accordingly in the place that had been revealed to him having on his Breast the Gospel of St. Matthew written with his own hand This Copy was immediately sent to the Emperor who received it with a profound respect and kept it as a precious Relick in a Church that was in his Palace The Church of Constantinople read the Gospel once every Year in this venerable and august Copy of St. Barnabas To render this Story more probable they add the Testimony of Cardinal Baronius who averreth that we cannot doubt thereof it being generally received of all the World besides that it hath been written by an Orthodox Monk named Alexander who lived in that time It cannot be denied indeed but that a great number of Greek Historians one after another have related the matter of fact as is above said Theodorus Lector (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. Lect. Collect. lib. 2. doth even specifie the name of the Tree under which the Body of St. Barnabas was found who had on his Breast the Gospel of St. Matthew Nicephorus Cedrenus Joel Nilus Doxapatrius and some other Greek Writers have also made mention of this Gospel of St. Matthew written with the hand of St. Barnabas but they do not tell us whether it were Hebrew or Greek which is the thing that deserves to be most enquired into in all this Affair and whereon entirely depends the Discovery of the Vision of Anthimius to whom St. Barnabas appeared this is observed by all the Greek Historians with the Monk Alexander that they of the Isle of Cyprus took occasion from thence to shake off the Yoke of the Patriarch of Antioch who pretended that they were of his dependence This was an old Quarrel between this Patriarch and the Bishops of this Island who refused to take Ordination of him because their Church having been founded by the Apostle St. Barnabas ought to be as they thought independent This Affair had been decided in the Council of Ephesus in favour of the Bishops of this Isle who had represented that they had enjoyed this Privilege time out of mind Notwithstanding the Patriarchs of Antioch continued to molest the Bishops of Cyprus and justified their Proceedings with the Canon of the Council of Nice that was favourable to them It is also very probable that they of Cyprus did not withdraw themselves from the Jurisdiction of Antioch till this Patriarchal Church fell into Schism Anthimius Metropolitan of Constance took an occasion at that time in regard that Petrus Fullo who was then Patriarch of Antioch had declared himself Protector of the Eutychians But since the whole matter was of necessity to be referred to the Emperour the Metropolitan of Constance who was not in his favour thought fit to feign the Vision above mentioned Which being come to the knowledge of Zeno he forthwith forbad the Patriarch of Antioch for the future to disturb the Bishops of Cyprus Anthimio Constantiensi Episcopo saith Father Morin who epitomized the History of Monk Alexander eò quòd apud Imperatorem minimè gratiosus esset fluctuanti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dormitanti apparet S. Barnabas qui corporis sui reliquias
to repeat here what we said in another place concerning the word Critick which is a term of Art which in some sense is bestowed on all Works whose designs are to examin the various readings and establish the true The aim of those which practise that Art it not to destroy but establish As the Holy Books are not exempt from faults which either by the tract of Time or negligence of the Transcribers have slipt into 'em some Learned Persons in all Ages have taken care to render them correct The most barbarous Ages have produced Books which they call Correctoria Bibliae or Corrections of the Bible The Emperor Constantine spared nothing to procure for the Oriental Churches correct Copies of all the Bibles Charlemagne and his Successors have done the same for the Latine Bibles of the VVestern Churches Besides those which were formerly imployed in the Monasteries about Transcribing of Books There were some Criticks who reviewed and corrected them This is the Reason why in some Manuscript ancient Bibles there are some Corrections found of equal Antiquity with the Books themselves But without ascending so far to have a Precedent for the Vse of Critical Reflections on the Sacred Books we need only consider the Transactions of the Latter Age relating to the Latine Editions of our Bibles VVhat prodigious pains was Robert Stephens at according to the Relation of Hentenius a Divine of Louvain to give us an exact and correct Edition of the Bible This Divine which laboured after Stephens in the same matter admires the diligence and excessive expence of that Printer to whom he ingeniously acknowledges himself indebted ‖ Joann Henten Praef. in Bibl. Lovan ann 1547. Nemo est qui nesciat ut unum pro multis in medium adferam quantam diligentiam quantasque impensas tulerit Robertus Stephanus Regius apud Lutetiam Typographus quem honoris causâ nomino ut accuratissima castigatissima nobis Biblia traderet propter quod plurimum etiam illi debent quotquot Sacrarum Literarum lectioni sunt addicti quem ob id etiam in multis secuti sumus The Doctors of the Faculty of Divinity of Louvain perfected afterwards the Edition of their Brother with a greater Collection of Manuscripts and re-altered some places according to the Rules of Criticism which they thought not corrected with exactness enough Nicolas Zegers a Religious Man of the Order of St. Francis apply'd himself entirely to the Correction of the Books of the New Testament He dedicated his Critique to Julian III. under the Title of * Castigationes in Novum Testamentum in quibus depravata restituuntur adjecta resecantur sublata adjiciuntur Autore Tac. Nicolao Zeger Colon. ann 1555. Corrections on the New Testament wherein it re-established what was corrupted expunged what was added and added what was before expunged He assures that Pope in his Epistle Dedicatory (b) Haec est genuina germana emendata veteris nostri Interpretis versio seu translatio quâ hactenùs semper à tempore ferè Apostolorum aut non ita diù pòst usa cognoscitur Romana Ecclesia quam ab innumeris tum mendis tum adulterinis adjectiunculis non sine magnis multis molestiis repurgavimus Zeger Epist ad Jul. III. That he had freed from an infinite number of Faults and false Glosses the ancient Latine Version which bad been in Vse among the VVestern Churches from the very Times of the Apostles There is nothing more exactly †Notaticnes in Sacra Biblia quibus variantia discrepantibus exemplaribus loca summo studio discutiuntur Antverp ann 1580. performed than the Critical Remarks of Lucas Brugensis in his Edition of the Latine Bible of the Divines of Louvain Among the multitude of his Copies he mentions one which was corrected by some Dominicans on the Bibles of Charlemagne He sets some marks of Esteem on another Manuscript entitled The Correction of the Bible Praeter alia id quod maximi facimus Manuscriptum Bibliorum correctorium ab incerto auctore magnâ diligentiâ ac fide contextum ‡ Luc. Brug Notat in Gen. c. 8. v. 7. And he assures us (c) Quae à nostri seculi scriptoribus ex manuscriptis codicibus collectae sunt variae lectiones omnes propemodùm in eo comperimus ad fontes fideliter examinatos deprehendimus Luc. Brug Notat in Gen. c. 8. v. 7. that the different Readings which have been observed by the Criticks of the latter Times are all found in this Book where they are examined according to the Hebrew Text. I have elsewhere mentioned another Manuscript of like nature which is in the ancient Library of the Colledge of Sorbon I have likewise given Extracts out of it which manifestly prove that the Latins have not neglected the Critical Study of the Sacred Books in those very Ages when Barbarism reigned in Europe It is a Vanity in the admirers of the Hebrew Text of the Jews to bestow such great praises on the Massoreth a good part of which consists in Trifles or superstitious Observations The Christians of both the Eastern and Western Churches with more Judgment have taken care in the Correction of the Bibles as manifestly will appear by this Work. We ought to prefer to the Massoreth those learned * Romani Correctores Criticks of Rome which by the order of Pope Sixtus V. and Clement VIII corrected the Latine Bibles which Correction serves instead of an exact Massoreth to the Western Church There are none but Protestants of ill minds such as Thomas James Author of the Bellum Papale who cavil at the differences of the Editions of the Bible published by those two Popes There may indeed be a more perfect work but that ought to be reserved for particular Notes which no ways diminish the Authority of those Books received into publick Vse I must only add two words concerning those Acts which are made use of in this Work. For the Manuscripts I mark the Libraries where they are found I have cited none without reading them the Extracts being all done by my self except that of Cambridge which contains the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles I had procured out of England a faithful Copy of this last Manuscript in what relates to the Greek which I have exactly followed As for the Printed Books of which there are numerous Quotations for the most part I have contented my self to relate the Passages in short following the sense only in the Body of the work For long Citations of Passages where there are but five or six words perhaps pertinent to the Occasion must needs prove very tiresom This is the very same Method which I have followed in the Critical History of the Old Testament But some Persons desiring such Passages at length to avoid searching them in the Books to comply with their Desires and keep to our Method we judged it convenient to put them at large at the bottom of the Page
Doctrine There was no talk in those days of reading the Holy Scriptures in the Originals any Copy whatsoever provided it were used in the Orthodox Churches might be relied on as if it had been the first Original written with the hand of the Apostles We ought to give the same credit to Copies that have been made of the Apostolical Writings as to the very Originals because these Copies have been taken from thence even from the times of the Apostles and have been afterwards dispersed almost throughout the whole Earth they have been preserved in all the Churches of the World having been translated into divers Languages insomuch that there is no Book the Copies whereof are more authentick than those of the New Testament and in this we ought chiefly to acknowledge the peculiar Providence of God in the preservation of these Books that he hath given to his Church by the Ministry of the Apostles or of their Disciples Some pretend nevertheless to make it appear by actual Proofs taken out of the ancient Ecclesiastical Writers that the original Writings of the Apostles have been preserved in the Church during several Ages and this must be examined in particular though I have already discoursed thereof elsewhere In the first place they produce a Passage of Tertullian in his Book of Prescription against Heresies where he saith in speaking of the Churches that had been founded by the Apostles (b) Apud quos ipsae Authenticae Literae eorum recitantur Tertull. de Praescr cap. 36. that they yet kept in his time their Authentick Writings Pamel Annot. in lib. Tertul. de Praescr c. 36. Pamelius in his Notes on this Passage affirms after another Author that the Word Authentick cannot be taken but for the Originals that had been written with the very hand of the Apostles themselves after the same manner as Lawyers call a Testament Authentick that hath been written with the hand of the Testator to distinguish it from a Copy This is also the Sense that Grotius Grot. de Verit. Relig Christ lib. 3. Walton Huetius and many others have given of these Words of Tertullian Tertullianus saith Grotius aliquot librorum ipsa Archetypa suo adhuc tempore ait extitisse He avoucheth from this place of Tertullian (c) Archetypa nonnulla ad annum usque ducentesimum servata sunt Grot. de Verit. Relig. Christ lib. 3. that some Originals of the New Testament have been preserved till the beginning of the third Century But if we carefully examine the different Passages wherein Tertullian makes use of the Word Authentick in his Works we shall find that he hath meant nothing else by this Expression than Books written in their Original Languages This is what Rigaltius hath very well observed on this Sentence of Tertullian where explaining the Word Authenticae he saith Rigalt Annot. in lib. Tertul. de Praescr c. 36. Lingua scilicet eadem qua fuerant ab Apostolis conscriptae sonantes vocem uniuscujusque Sic ipse lib. de Monogamia ad Graecum authenticum Pauli provocat Whereas the Latin Version of the New Testament was only read in the Churches of Africa he gives the Name of Authentick to the Greek Text and in this Sense it is that quoting this Text in his Book of Monogamy he saith Sciamus planè non esse sic in Graeco authentico St. Jerom also useth the like Expression with respect to the Old Testament when he opposeth the Hebrew Text to the Greek and Latin Versions for he calls the former Veritatem Hebraicam the Hebrew Verity designing thereby to denote the Originals of the Scriptures which he likewise denominates as Tertullian doth Authenticos libros Tertul. lib. de Monog c. 11. in his Commentary on chap. 64. of the Prophet Isaiah nevertheless he did not believe that these were the first Originals written with the hand of the Prophets We express our selves also at this day after the same manner when we say that a Version of the Scriptures is not conformable to the Original Tertullian therefore doth not speak of any other Originals in his Book of Prescription than those that we have just now remarked As to the Authority of Lawyers that Pamelius opposeth it is easie to remonstrate by the Testimony even of the most learned Lawyers that the Word Authentick is often taken in a less strict sense Every Act that proves and procures credit of it self whether it be an Original or not is accounted Authentick An Author that publisheth some Manuscript Piece assures us that it is taken ex codice authentico from an authentick Copy Doth he mean by this that he hath the Original of the Book that he sets forth in his own hands In the second place they offer an actual Proof taken from Eusebius Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 10. This Historian speaking of the Zeal and of the Charity of the ancient Christians who went to preach the Gospel to the most remote Nations after the Example of the Apostles saith that Pantenus quitted the City of Alexandria where he was the Principal of a School or Colledge of Christians to promulge the Religion of Jesus Christ to the Indians This faithful Evangelist being among the Indians or Ethiopians found there a Copy of S. Matthew's Gospel written in Hebrew that S. Bartholomew the Apostle of these People had left and was believed to be preserved there to that time But besides that Eusebius doth not confirm this History by any Ecclesiastical Writer being content only to say that it was a common Report 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not see that it can be unquestionably proved from these Words that the Hebrew Copy that Pantenus found at his Arrival in that Country was the Original that St. Bartholomew had left there He only intended to say That the Ethiopians who had been converted to the Faith of Jesus Christ by this Apostle did not make use of the Greek Gospel of S. Matthew but of the Hebrew or Chaldaick that had been written for the first Christians of Jerusalem If this History were true the Primitive Christians of Ethiopia were descended from the Jews and spake the same Language as those that inhabited Judea This is all that can be concluded from the Discourse of Eusebius which hath been amplified in process of time St. Hierom doth not seem to have understood the sense of this Historian when he saith in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers that Pantenus (d) Quod Hebraicis literis scriptum revertens Alexandriam secum detulit Hier. de Scriptor Eccles in Panteno returning to Alexandria carried back with him the Gospel of St. Matthew written in Hebrew Characters Eusebius saith only that the Christians of Ethiopia had preserved this Hebrew Gospel until the Arrival of Pantenus The third material proof that is brought is taken from the Chronicle of Alexandria wherein it is observed that a correct Book of the Gospel of St. John that had been written with that Evangelist's own hand
A CRITICAL HISTORY Of the TEXT of the New Testament WHEREIN Is firmly Establish'd the Truth of those Acts on which the Foundation of CHRISTIAN RELIGION is laid By Richard Simon Priest LONDON Printed for R. Taylor MDCLXXXIX THE PREFACE THe Church from the first and most early Ages of Christianity has been constantly furnished with some Learned Men by whose diligent care the Sacred Writings have been purged from those Faults which by the tract of Time have insensibly crept into them This kind of Labour which requires an exact knowledg of Books joyned with a strict enquiring into the Manuscripts is termed Critical in as much as it Judges and Determines the most Authentick Readings which ought to be inserted into the Text. By this means Origen acquired his Reputation not only in Greece but universally over the Eastern part of the World where the Bibles of his Correction are by the general consent preferred to all others St Jerom who may justly be stiled the Latin Origen has done very great Service to the Western Church by his Critical Correction of the Latin Bibles in Vse in those Churches Pope Damasus very sensible of his profound Learning obliged him to review the ancient Latin Version of the Gospels which was then in a very miserable Condition This look'd like too bold an Attempt and seemed above the force of any private Person who could never hope to escape the Hatred of a multitude of Persons in the free exercising his Censure of Books which had long stood in the peaceable Possession of an universal Reputation In short though it might perhaps be for the benefit of the Church it was yet a dangerous matter to attempt a Reformation of those ancient Errors which derive their Authority from their Age. Pius Labor Hieron Praef. in Evang. ad Dam. sed periculosa praesumptio judicare de caeteris ipsum ab omnibus judicandum senis mutare linguam caneseentem jam mundum ad initia retranere parvulorum 'T is a pious Work says that ancient Father but very hazardous that he exposes himself to the universal Censure who teaches old Men to change their Language and reduce the decaying World to a State of Infancy But considering on the one Hand the powerful Protection and Patronage of so great a Pope and being on the other abundantly convinc'd of the manifest defect of that Translation which had prevailed universally in the West he resolved rather to expose himself to the Malice of an infinite number of ignorant Persons than fail in the discharge of his (a) Quis enim doctus pariter vel indoctus cùm in manus volumen assumpserit à salivâ quam semel imbibit viderit discrepare quod latitat non statim erumpat in vocem me falfarium me clamitans elle sacrilegum qui audeam aliquid in veteribus libris addere mutare corrigere Hieron Praef. in Evang. ad Dam. Duty He knew very well the charge of Innovation and Forgery that would be drawn up against him for endeavouring to alter those ancient Books which till his time had remained perfectly inviolable But here he encouraged himself by the Precedents of Origen Pierius and some other able Criticks who had performed the very same thing in the Greek Original which he then attempted in the Latin Copies of the Gospel For which reason he stoutly deposed all those which after his Reformation remained Bigots to the ancient Latine Version Revertimur ad nostros bipedes asellos Hieron Epist ad Marcell illorum in aure buccinâ magis quà m citharâ concrepamus Illi legant spe gaudentes tempori servientes nos legamus spe gaudentes Domino servientes But time did Justice to that Father And 't is a very difficult matter at present to find any Copies of that Latine Version which was then in Vse in the Western Church Yet enough there are extant to be read as a Memorial to convince those who defend Errors meerly out of Veneration for their Antiquity that St. Jerome has done the Church no small Service in Correcting and Reviewing the ancient Latine Copies according to the strictest Rules of Criticism This we endeavour to demonstrate in this work and that the most ancient Greek Exemplars of the New Testament are not the best since they are suited to those Latine Copies which St. Jerome found so degenerous as to need an Alteration Father Morin and after him Father Amelot who take such pride in those Noble and Venerable Manuscripts on account of their great Antiquity never mind that a thousand or twelve hundred years can never warrant them correct since there is evident proof of their Corruption before that time It was necessary that I should examine to the bottom the Circumstances of these Greek Texts which have been produced to this Time. It is not sufficient to consult those Manuscripts with design only to mark their Antiquity and quote the different Readings There is required a great deal of Discretion and Judgment otherwise we shall mistake those Books which are altered for Primitive and Apostolical Exemplars which is the Case of the two Authors we are about to name Erasmus who was well enough furnished with those sorts of Manuscripts is nevertheless guilty of very gross Errors He accuses the Greeks without reason for correcting in some places their Copies by those of the Latin after their Re-union with the Roman Church This groundless Accusation can proceed from nothing but the want of knowledge of the Criticisms of those Copies which he consulted Beza who was Master of a greater Collection of Manuscripts of the New Testament than Erasmus though assisted too by both Robert and Henry Stephens has not well distinguished the worth of his Manuscript Copies whence I found my self in some places obliged to correct his Errors This Man was so prejudiced by his Religion as to accuse the Italians of Corrupting the old Text and forcing it to a Compliance with their Opinions This Critical History contains divers other Remarks of the like Nature upon the Manuscript Copies of the New Testament both in Greek and Latine My principal aim is to write a Supplement to the Defects of those who compile the different Readings out of the Manuscripts without distinguishing the Good from the Bad. To which intent it is necessary to read a great quantity and nearly examine them in a Critical manner This Art whose difficulty appears formidable to some Divines in this Age made part of their Occupation of some Ladies in St. Jerome's time Who not content to read the Scripture in the Vulgar Tongue dispersed among the People they diligently enquired after the correctest Copies learning those very Tongues in which they were writ I assert nothing which cannot be maintained by the Letters of those Pious Ladies and the answers of that Learned Father who has had oftentimes a difficult Task to satisfie those Questions they propose on matters purely Critical St. Jerome had advanced that the Apostles had never
cited any Passage in the Old Testament which did not perfectly agree with the Hebrew Text. Eustochium Hieron Prooem in lib. 16. Comm. in Isai who perfectly understood the Greek and Hebrew Languages opposed him with such powerful Arguments that he was forced to own himself almost overcome with the strength of her Objections Quod cùm audissem quasi à fortissimo pugile percussus essem coepi tacitus aestuare It is no strange thing to find those Ages when Barbarism reigned over all Europe neglect Critical Studies Then they wanted abundance of those helps which they now enjoy to pursue those Studies which are absolutely necessary to a perfect Knowledg of Divinity But that which amazes me is that in this very Age this Art should still remain in contempt and those Men be thought no more than Grammarians who apply themselves to it Besides we cannot but see the manifest Errors of some Divines in this Age who know not the true Laws of Criticism It is worth observing that the ancient Hereticks have been perpetually accused of having corrupted the Books of the New Testament and perverted them to their own sence That has often been thought a wilful and designed Corruption which proceeded only from the fault of the Transcribers or difference of Copies The Ecclesiastical Writers of the first Ages have not done that strict Justice to the Hereticks of their times in relation to the New Testament that they have given the Jews in the Disputes about the different manners of explaining the Old Testament Those pretended Corruptions presently vanish upon Examination of the ancient Manuscripts and the Original of the various Readings Wherefore in this Piece I have justified the Arrians Nestorians and the rest of the Sectaries from that Imputation of having falsified the Originals of the Evangelists and Apostles to maintain their Innovations We have also plainly evinc'd by some considerable Examples that the most Learned Criticks of our Age are not exempted from those Prejudices in their declaring too freely those Hereticks falsifiers of the Text. The case of some other Sectaries is not the same who declared themselves openly against the Writings of Christ's Disciples which they have corrected and altered according to their own Idea's of the Christian Religion Some daring to forge Supposititious Gospels and Acts the better to give authority to their Fopperies It would be very pertinent for the better Distinction of all the Genuine Pieces of the New Testament to make a Collection of those ancient Acts and diligently examine them Wherefore we have not concealed any of those Arguments which those Hereticks or the other Enemies of Christianity have brought to destroy the Truth of those Books which were received by all the Catholick Churches But as it would be a pernicious thing to expose these ill things without administring Remedies too proper for the cure we have also produced the strongest Reasons which the Ecclesiastical Writers have brought against them We intreat the Protestants to make Reflection on these matters and observe those methods of the first Ages of the Church for establishing the Authority of the Sacred Writings They will find nothing impertinent in the Conduct Irenaeus Tertullian and the rest of the Defenders of those Writings did not object to the Enemies of the Christian Religion their private Spirit which perswaded them of the Divinity of the Holy Scripture but very substantial Reasons void of all such Fanaticism Tho they were sufficiently perswaded of the Divinity of the Holy Scripture they never objected to the Adversaries that it had imprest upon it such lively Characters of its Original that it was a very difficult matter not to acknowledg it when read with a Spirit of Submission and Humility Their Adversaries being Philosophers who consulted their natural Reason they opposed them from sure and indisputable Principles Again I thought in a Work of this nature not convenient to suppress the principal Objections of the Jews against the Books of the New Testament For although this miserable Nation is an Object of the contempt of the whole World yet has there appeared among them Men of great Address and Subtilty in the Disputes against the Christians which I have often found true in my own Experience when I have endeavoured to convince them by their own Principles Since their Plea for Prescription is better and their Pretensions are that the Disciples of Jesus the Son of Mary had no reason to change their Religion which was delivered them by the Fathers It is but necessary to examin what they object against the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles In this Critical History I have treated divers other important Questions And where I deviate from the Methods of the Divines of the School it is because I have found a more secure way I have employed all my strength to avoid the advancing any thing that is not grounded on authentic Records instead of which the School-Divinity teaches us to doubt of the most certain Our Religion consisting principally in Matters of Fact the Subtilties of Divines who are not acquainted with Antiquity can never discover certainty of such matters of Fact They rather serve to confound the Vnderstanding and form pernicious Difficulties against the Mysteries of our Religion Let it not seem strange to any Person that I recede from the Opinions which are generally received in the Schools and prefer to the Sentiments of whole Vniversities the new Opinions of some modern Divines which can hardly be taxed as novel when they are found conformable to the Ancient Doctors of the Church This I speak in reference to that Passage where I handle the Dispute which was formerly between the Divines of Louvain and Doway and the Jesuits of that Country concerning the inspiration of the sacred Books The Doctors of both Faculties censured the Propositions of the Jesuites of Louvain in a manner very injurious to the whole Society But after a due examination of the Reasons on which their grave Gentlemen founded their Censure I could hardly believe their Authority alone a sufficient Rule to oblige me to assent I propose Truth alone to my self in this Work without any Deference to any Master in particular A true Christian who professes to believe the Catholick Faith ought not to stile himself a Disciple of S. Austin S. Jerome or any other particular Father since his Faith is founded on the word of Jesus Christ contained in the Writings of the Apostles and constant Tradition of the Catholick Churches I wish to God the Divines of the Age were all of that opinion we then should not have seen so many useless Disputes which only prove the causes of Disorders in Church and State. I have no private Interest which obliges me to any Party the very name of Party is odious to me I solemnly protest I have no other intentions in composing this Work than the benefit of the Church and the establishing the most sacred and divine thing in the World. It is useless
of arguing of the Manicheans folly insaniam dementiam who not being able to accommodate the Writings of the Apostles to the Idea that they had formed to themselves of the Christian Religion or under colour of certain contradictions in the Scriptures which they could not resolve (ſ) Non à Christi Apostolis sed longo pòst tempore à quibusdam incerti nominis viris qui ne sibi non haboretur fides scribentibus quae nescirent partim Apostolorum nomina partim eorum qui Apostolos secuti viderentur scriptorum suorum frontibus indiderunt asseverantes secundùm eos se scripsisse quae scripserint Apud Aug. lib. 32. cont Faust c. 2. would needs have it believed that these Books were composed after the Apostles themselves by uncertain Authors who had made bold to borrow the Names of these Apostles to gain Credit and Authority to their Works To convince them the more easily of their folly he sets before their eyes the Books (t) Platonis Aristotelis Ciceronis Varronis aliorumque ejusmodi autorum libros unde noverunt homines quôd ipsorum sint nisi temporum fibimet succedentium contestatione continuâ August cont Faust lib. 33. c. 6. of Hippocrates Plato Aristotle Varto and Cicero and of several other Writers that are believed to be the Authors of those Works that we have under their Names because they have been attributed to them in the time wherein they lived and they have been always so attributed successively from Age to Age. Now there is nothing more contrary to reason than not to grant the same privilege to the Church and not to acknowledge that she hath faithfully kept the Writings of the Apostles whose Doctrine she hath always preserved by the means of the Succession of Bishops We have enlarged a little on these Reflections of S. Augustin and of the other Fathers that preceded him because they have mightily evinced the Truth of the Books of the New Testament without having recourse to I know not what particular Spirit which is an invention of these later times We cannot imagine any thing more opposite to good reason than these Words of the Confession of Faith of those that formerly took the Name of the Reformed of the Churches of France Confess Art. 4. We acknowledge these Books in speaking of the whole Scriptures to be Canonical not so much by the common agreement and consent of the Church as by the testimony and inward persuasion of the Holy Ghost The Fathers nevertheless have always confuted the ancient Hereticks who refused to acknowledge these Books as Canonical by the common agreement and consent of the Church It would have been a pleasant way of reasoning if every one in these primitive times of Christianity would not have acknowledged for divine Books only those that his private Spirit should dictate to him to be such This hath appeared to be so great an extravagance to those of that Persuasion who in the Low Countries are called Remonstrants that they look upon the Calvinists that follow this Principle as People that have renounced common sense Simon Episcopius who hath been one of the Champions of this Party after having handled this question with a great deal of subtilty concludes that it is a very ill sort of argumentation to admit besides the testimony of the Church another inward testimony of the Holy Ghost to know whether certain Books have a divine Authority stampt upon them Hinc patet saith this Protestant ineptos esse eos qui vel praeter vel citra testimonium Ecclesiae requiri aiunt internum Spiritus Sancti testimonium ad hoc ut libros hos divinos esse authoritatem divinam habere intelligamus Remonst Confess c. 1. de scrip n. 8. It is sufficient according to the Remonstrants that we have there upon the testimony of (v) Ecclesia primitiva quae temporibus Apostolorum fuit certissimè resciscere potuit indubiè etiam rescivit libros istos ab Apostolis scriptos esse vel saltem approbatos nobisque istius rei scientiam quasi per manus tradidit ac veluti depositum quoddam reliquit Remonst Confess cap. 1. de Script n. 8. the primitive Church that certainly knew that these Books were written by the Apostles or approved by them and that this testimony is come down to us by a constant Tradition This Spirit that is diffused through the whole Church ought without doubt to be preferred to a private Spirit that can only serve to make a division therein Grot. Animad in Anim. Riv. This is what Grotius hath judiciously observed Spiritus ille privatus saith this Critick Spiritus Ecclesiae divisor It would be to no purpose for the Calvinists to object to the Remonstrants that their Opinion is taken out of the Writings of Socinus because an evident truth ought not to be rejected under pretence that it may be found in the Books of Socinus This Heretick hath proved in his Treatise Of the Authority of the Holy Scriptures and in another Work intituled Sacred Lectures the Truth of the Sacred Books and principally of those of the New Testament by the very same reasons and after the same manner that S. Irenaeus Tertullian and S. Augustin have done Socin lib. de Auctor Script sac (x) Legantur ea quae hac de re Eusebius scribit pluribus in locis Historiae Ecclesiasticae invenietur usque ad illius Eusebit aetatem hoc est per 250. circiter annorum perpetuum spatium postquam scripta illa conscripta atque edita fuerunt nunquam fuisse in Ecclesia qui dubitaret quin quatuor quae habemus Evangelia liber Actorum Apostolorum Epistolae omnes quae Pauli Apostoli esse dicuntur praeter eam quae ad Hebraeos est scripta prior Apostoli Petri prima Joannis Apostoli haec inquam omnia ab iis scripta fuissent quibus attribuuntur Socin lib. de Auctor Script Sac. Let them read saith Socinus that which Eusebius hath written on this matter in his Ecclesiastical History and they will find therein a perpetual consent of all the Churches of the World since these Books were written to the time of this Author He insists very much in these two Treatises on the Testimonies of the ancient Fathers Will any one say for this that this is a Socinian Method because Socinus hath made use of it after the most Learned Ecclesiastical Writers Would to God that this Enemy of the Traditions of the Catholick Church had always followed this Principle he would not have introduced so many Innovations into Religion Neither can he avoid an Objection that may be made even by those of his own Party that according to his Principles he ought necessarily to acknowledge a Tradition after the same manner as it is maintained in the Church of Rome We cannot might they say to him receive the Gospel of S. Matthew and reject that which hath been published under the Name
correspond in this that they do not make Jesus the Son of David for S. John calls him God and S. Mark the Son of God from whence he concludes that Jesus Christ was not born as S. Matthew and S. Luke have written S. Augustin answers Faustus that he is not the first that hath taken notice of this seeming Contradiction of the two Evangelists that an infinite number of learned Men especially in the Greek Church have spared no pains to reconcile them which he endeavours to do in this place and by this he condemns the rash Judgment of the Manicheans who rejected as false all that was contrary to their Prejudices Indeed those People were so obstinate in their Opinions that the same Faustus reviled the Orthodox who received the Genealogy that is at the beginning of S. Matthew as not being Catholicks but Followers of Matthew and he maintained also Apud Aug. l. 23. cont Faust c. 2. that it was contrary to their Creed Quod si tu credas saith this Heretick ita ut scriptum est eris jam quidem Matthaeanus sic enim mihi dicendum est Catholicus vero nequaquam (h) De duobus vos unum fateri oportet aut hunc non esse Matthaeum qui haec videtur asserere aut vos non tenere Apostolicam fidem Apud Aug. lib. 23. cont Faust c. 22. You must either acknowledge added he that St. Matthew hath not written this Genealogy which he called in derision Genesidium or that you do not hold the Apostolical Faith. But it were an easie matter without arguing at large on all the Difficulties that Faustus propounded to represent to him that this Genealogy had been always read in the Churches ever since the Apostles besides that (i) Fides Catholica eademque Apostolica est Dominum nostrum Salvatorem Jesum Christum filium Dei esse secundùm Divinitatem filium David secundùm carnem quod ita probamus ex Evangelicis Apostolicis literis ut nemo possit contradicere nisi qui ipsis literis contradicit Aug. lib. 23. cont Faust c. 5. it was the Belief of the Catholick and Apostolick Church as S. Augustin saith that Jesus Christ is the Son of God according to his Divinity and the Son of David according to the Flesh that this Truth was so clearly proved by the Writings of the Apostles that they could not contradict it at least if they did not reject them altogether By this same Principle the Arguments of certain Anabaptists of whom Sixtus Senensis and Baronius makes mention might be confuted but since their Objections are almost the same as those of the Manicheans it would be to no purpose to insist on them They have accounted as false that which S. Matthew hath related concerning the Wise Men that came to worship Jesus in the Cradle as also the History of the Children whom Herod caused to be put to death against the credit of these two Relations they have opposed the silence of the other Evangelists and of Josephus an Historian of that time Sixtus Senensis replies judiciously Sixt. Sen. Bibl. S.l. 7. that by the same reason they ought not to believe the Resurrection of Lazarus because none but S. John has spoken of it neither doth the silence of Josephus prove any thing for he hath not mentioned divers other Actions which nevertheless do not cease to be true They that make such Objections as these ought to alledge positive Proofs as for example from the diversity of ancient Copies some of which they should produce wherein these Histories are not to be found then they might infer with some probability that they had been added afterwards but on the contrary they are to be seen in all our most ancient Records and the greatest Enemies of the Christian Religion have cited them ever since the first Ages Apud Orig. l. 1. cont Cels Celsus hath read them in the Gospel after the same manner as we do at present Porphyrius and Julian have also made some Objections against the Gospel of S. Matthew or rather against all the Books of the New Testament but we shall have occasion to examine them in the sequel of this Work. CHAP. X. Of the Time and Order of every Gospel Some Greek Manuscript Copies are produced thereupon Of S. Mark and his Gospel which is commonly believed to be the second Of his Office of Interpreter to S. Peter ALthough some Ecclesiastical Writers have carefully set down the time in which they have believed that every Evangelist hath published his Gospel we cannot nevertheless determine any thing thereupon Because we have no ancient and certain Acts on which we might relye I shall only relate what I have read on this Subject at the end of some Manuscript Copies The most ancient of these Manuscripts that I have seen is at most but 700 Years old as may be judged by the Character it is written in great Letters with the Accents and Points and may be seen in Mr. Colbert's Library having been brought from Cyprus There are also many in the King's Library wherein the time in which every Evangelist hath written his Gospel is specified but as I have just now said these Manuscripts are not ancient Indeed there are no such Remarks as these in the most ancient the custom of those Primitive times being only to put at the end of every Book of the New Testament The End of such a Book the beginning of this other Book To return to the Manuscripts that contain the Dates of the Gospels see that which is found in the Copy of Cyprus which is in Mr. Colbert's Library (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 MS. Colb n. 5149. The Gospel according to Matthew hath been published by himself at Jerusalem eight years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ This Word at Jerusalem is of a later Writing than the rest (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id MS. The Gospel according to Mark hath been published ten years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. MS. The Gospel according to Luke hath been published fifteen years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ In another Copy that is in the King's Library and contains all the New Testament the Date of every Gospel is therein expressed after this manner in the beginning of them (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 MS. Reg. n 2871. The Holy Gospel according to Matthew written in the Hebrew Tongue hath been published at Jerusalem and interpreted by John eight years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. MS. The Gospel according to Mark hath been published ten years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ and preached by Peter at Rome (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. MS. The Gospel according to Luke hath been published fifteen years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ and preached by Paul at Rome (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. MS. The Gospel according
was the Gospel of S. John from the time of Tatian the Disciple of S. Justin Martyr Selden nevertheless who hath been cited by Walaeus on this place of S. John insists very much upon these two ancient Writers to shew that this History was ever since the Primitive Ages in the Copies of the Eastern Church this he confirms by the Canons that Eusebius hath added to the Harmony of Ammonius and he concludes from thence that Eusebius also read it in his Copy of the New Testament because it is marked in these Canons but it doth not appear that Selden hath very carefully examined the Canons of Eusebius for there is no number or mark of a Section that answers in particular to the History of the adulterous Woman the twelve Verses of which it is composed are comained in the preceding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 86. Section as may be seen in these Sections or Numbers that are printed in the Greek New Testament of Robert Stephen and in some other Editions the Greek Manuscript Copies do agree in this Point with the printed and that which clearly proves that there is no number or Section of the Canons of Eusebius that refers in particular to the aforesaid twelve Verses is that this same number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 86. is also marked in the Manuscript Copies wherein they are not found therefore it cannot be inferred from the distribution or order of the Canons that Eusebius hath read the History of the Adultress in that Book to which he hath annexed them however it is not to be denied that Selden and Walaeus have had reason (c) Mirum non est in seculis primitivis exemplaria fuisse hodiéque manere quibus hae aliaeve periochae sacrae deessent cùm scilicet audacium nimis exscriptorum complurium mos tum esset aliter atque aliter pro multiplici judiciorum discrimine Evangelia variatim emendare augere minuere Quod monet Hieronymus c. Seld. apud Wal. Comm. in Joann to accuse the Grecians in general of assuming to themselves too much liberty in correcting their Copies Seld. apud Wal. Com. in Joan. adding to or diminishing from them sometimes according to their own humour and perhaps they have exercised this critical Faculty too liberally on this place of S. John as well as on many others This same History of the adulterous Woman is not found neither in the Syriack Version that Widmanstadius hath published from good Manuscript Copies of which there hath been since several other Editions nevertheless it is in some Syriack Copies from whence it hath been taken and inserted into the Polyglott Bible of England it is read also in the Arabick Translations that have been printed at Rome and in Holland from whence we may conclude that it is read at present as well in all the Eastern as in the Western Churches However Beza after he hath affirmed (d) Ex vetustis nostris codicibus 17. unus duntaxat illam non habebat In reliquis scripta quidem est sed ita ut mira sit lectionis varietas Bez Annot. in Joan. c. 7. v. 53. that of seventeen ancient Manuscripts which he had read this History was wanting but in one of them doth not forbear to suspect it because the ancient Ecclesiastical Writers as he saith have either unanimously rejected it or have been silent therein he saith moreover that it is not probable that Jesus Christ should have remained alone in the Temple with a Woman that this Relation doth not cohere with what follows and that that which is said of Jesus Christ that he wrote with his finger on the ground is a very extraordinary thing and difficult to be explained Lastly the great diversity of Readings that is found in the Greek Copies in that place causeth him to doubt of the Verity of this History Calvin discourseth with a great deal more moderation and seems also to be more reasonable than his Disciple in his Commentary on this Passage Calv. Com. sur S. Jean c. 8. v. 1. It is well known saith he that the ancient Grecians knew nothing of this present History and therefore some have conjectured that it hath been taken from some other place and added here but forasmuch as it hath been always received in the Latin Churches and is found in many Copies and ancient Books of the Grecians and contains nothing that is unworthy of an Apostolical Spirit there is no cause why we should refuse to make a good use of it Besides that which we have just now observed concerning the History of the Woman taken in Adultery which is not found in many Greek Copies some Criticks have also believed that the last Chapter of the Gospel of S. John was not written by this Evangelist Indeed it seems as if he designed to finish his History with these words Chap. 20.30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this Book c. Grotius who is of this Opinion (e) Sicut caput ultimum Pentateuchi caput ultimum Josuae post Mosis Josuae mortem additum est à Synedrio Hebraeorum ita caput quod sequitur post mortem Joannis additum ab Ecclesiâ Ephesinà Grot. Annot. ad cap. 20. Joan. vers 30. affirms that the rest of this Gospel hath been added after the Death of S. John by the Church of Ephesus after the same manner as the last Chapter of the Pentateuch and the last Chapter of the History of Joshua have been annexed to these Books of the Sanhedrim of the Jews but he alledgeth no solid proof of what he so freely avoucheth something indeed might have been added to the History of Moses and Joshua after their decease because as I have elsewhere observed they whose Office it was amongst the Hebrews to write the Annals of this Republick have continued their Histories and therefore these two Chapters cannot be properly called Additions but rather a Continuation of the Chronicle of this Commonwealth This case is not the same as that of the Gospel of S. John for the Church of Ephesus was not charged to continue it It may be said that the last Chapter of this Gospel hath not been put in its proper place and that there hath happened some change with respect to the order and sequence of the Words but if we reflect on the Still of S. John and the little regard to a Method or Coherence that appears throughout his whole Book we shall rather impute to himself these small Defects which alter not the Verity of this History CHAP. XIV Of the Acts of the Apostles that have been received in the Church Other Acts of the Apostles that have been forged ALthough there have been several different Acts that bear the Name of the Apostles yet the Church hath received none as true but those that we now read at this day under this Title and which all Antiquity attributes to S. Luke
this is the reason that in some Manuscript Greek Copies we find the name of this Evangelist at the beginning of this Work he declares himself in his Preface that he is the Author of it presenting it to his Friend Theophilus to whom he had already dedicated his Gospel S. Jerom affirmeth (a) Cujus historia usque ad biennium Romae commorantis Pauli pervenit id est usque ad quartum Neronis annum Ex quo intelligimus in eadem urbe librum esse compositum Hieron de Script Eccl. in Lucâ that this History was written at Rome and that it extends to the fourth Year of Nero which was according to his Opinion the second of S. Paul's abode in that great City The Author of the Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures thought (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. in Synops that the Acts of the Apostles had been preached by S. Peter and that S. Luke had afterwards committed them to Writing but S. Luke hath recorded almost nothing else but matters of fact of which he himself had been a witness Hieron ibid. And this is the difference that S. Jerom makes between the Gospel of this Disciple of the Apostles and the Acts in regard that not having seen Jesus Christ he could not write his Gospel but on that which he had learned from others sicut audierat scripsit whereas having followed S. Paul in the most part of his Travels he was an eye-witness of his Actions and therefore he hath published nothing but what he had seen himself sicut viderat ipse composuit Although the Title indeed of this History bears the name of all the Apostles in general nevertheless it informs us of very few things concerning them only conducting them to the time when they dispersed themselves into divers Provinces to preach the Gospel S. Luke comes after this to S. Paul's Travels who was accompanied with S. Barnabas without describing the Itineraries of the other Apostles neither doth he finish even those of S. Paul. If it be demanded why S. Luke hath not perfected his History and why he hath not left us in Writing the rest of those Actions of which he was a Witness I have no other Answer to make but that which S. John Chrysostom hath already made to those that in his time asked the same Question This learned Bishop saith Joann Chrys Hom. 1. in Act. Apos That what S. Luke hath written in this matter is sufficient for those that will apply themselves to it that the Apostles moreover and their Disciples who preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joann Chrysost Hom. 1. in Act. Apost have always insisted on that which was most necessary that they did not study to write Histories because they have left many things to the Churches by Tradition only And this ought to be considered for it is certain that the principal business and care of the Apostles was to preach the Gospel and that they would have written nothing of their Preachings if they had not been earnestly sollicited by the People whom they had instructed The Christian Religion might be preserved without any Writings by Tradition alone S. Chrysostom complains in the same place Chrys ib. that that little we have of the History of the Apostles was so neglected in his time that many were not only ignorant of the Author but they did not know whether it had been written It seems that the Gospels and the Epistles of S. Paul were then only accounted to belong to the New Testament perhaps none but these two Works were read in the Churches in these Primitive Ages We see also that the Books that are consecrated for the use of the Greek Churches do only bear these two Titles viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gospel and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostle nevertheless afterwards this last Book hath been named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it contains besides the Epistles of S. Paul the best part of the Acts of the Apostles and even the other Books of the New Testament Whereas this History that comprehends the principal Actions of S. Paul is short a certain Priest of Asia since the Primitive times of Christianity thought fit to add to it in form of a Supplement another Book intituled The Travels of Paul and Thecla We are informed by Tertullian (d) Quòd si quae Pauli perperà m scripta legunt exemplum Theclae ad licentiam mulierum docendi tingendique defendunt sciant in Asiâ presbyterum qui eam scripturam construxit quasi titulo Pauli de suo cumulans convictum atque confessum id se amore Pauli fecisse loco decessisse Tertull. lib. de Bapt. c. 17. that some Women made use of these Acts to prove by the Authority of this Holy Apostle that it was lawful for them to preach in the Churches and to baptize This Father answers those that alledged the Testimony of S. Paul taken from these Acts that the Priest of Asia the Author of them had been convicted that he had forged them and that he himself had avouched that he was induced to compose them by the love that he had for this Apostle He solidly confutes them by making it appear that these Acts contained a Doctrine altogether contrary to that of S. Paul. (e) Quà m enim fidei proximum videretur ut is docendi tingendi daret feminae potestatem qui ne discere quidem constanter mulieri permisit Tertull. ibid. What probability is there saith he that S. Paul should grant to Women a power to teach and to baptize who hath not so much as permitted them to learn in the Church forbidding them absolutely to speak therein S. Jerom who hath made mention of these Acts published under the Title of the Travels of Paul and Thecla Hieron de script Eccles in Luca. adds that it was S. John that caused the Priest that composed them to be convicted of Forgery Tertullian nevertheless whom he cites in this Passage doth not speak of S. John he saith only that this Priest was of Asia Pope Gelasius hath put this Book in the number of Apocryphal Works Baronius distinguisheth these false Acts of Thecla from others that give an account of the Life and Martyrdom of this Saint Gelas Decr. 1. part dist 15. c. 3. he supports the Authority of these last by the Testimony of several Fathers who have quoted them Baron an c. 47. n. 3 4 5. Epiph. Haer. 78. n. 16. and among others by that of S. Epiphanius who relying on the credit of these Acts relates that Thecla having espoused a very rich and noble man broke off her Marriage after she had heard S. Paul This Cardinal adds that Faustus a famous Manichean hath produced this same History of Thecla and that he hath taken occasion from thence to condemn the Doctrine of S. Paul as abominable because he had compelled by his Discourses a married Woman to continue
in perpetual Continency S. Augustin adds Baronius farther who rehearseth these Words of Faustus and exactly answers his Objections doth not reject as Apocryphal these last Acts that are intituled the Martyrdom of Thecla But it is probable that these last Acts have been taken from the former and it is no wonder that the Fathers have made use of an Apocryphal Book that was composed by an Impostor because there were many true things in these Travels of Paul and Thecla However it be I think it is more convenient to reject them altogether than to approve of one part and to condemn the other because it would be very difficult to distinguish that which was true from the false If we may judge by the Fragments that remain this Work was filled with Fables for we find therein that Thecla being the Companion of S. Paul in his Travels had in some measure a share in his Apostleship it is declared in these Acts that she preached and baptized and S. Jerom who without doubt had read them Hieron ib. makes mention of the Baptism of a Lion which is the cause that he esteems them as false and Apocryphal Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pauli Theclae saith this Father totam baptizati leonis fabulam inter apocryphas scripturas computamus Whereas the Apostles and their Disciples have left us no relations of their Travels in Writing but that which we have concerning those of S. Paul and S. Barnabas this gave occasion to the counterfeiting of some under their Names Some false Acts have been published under these Titles The Travels of Peter the Travels of John the Travels of Thomas and many others of this sort there was one also called in general The Itinerary or Travels of the Apostles Thus have they endeavoured ever since the Primitive Ages of the Christian Religion by this means to supply that which seemed to be wanting in the History of the Apostles as if it were necessary that the Church should have all their Actions in Writing but these Books were rejected with the common consent of all the Catholick Churches as Supposititious and Apocryphal insomuch that of all the Acts of the Apostles that have been published none have been preserved but those that were composed by S. Luke Nevertheless there were some Sectaries from the very first beginning of Christianity who being Enemies to S. Paul absolutely condemned this History written by S. Luke his faithful Companion in his Travels The Ebionites who treated this Apostle as an Apostate seeing that the Acts that had been received in the Church contradicted their Doctrine (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 30. n. 16. composed new ones which they filled with Impieties and Calumnies against S. Paul that no credit might be given to the History of S Luke they invented I know not what Fables to render this holy Apostle odious and they gave them out as the true Reasons that had obliged him (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. ibid. to write against the Circumcision the Sabbath and the Old Law. (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. ibid. They made use of these new Acts of the Apostles saith Epiphanius to invalidate the Truth The Encratites or Severians (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 4. cap. 29. who acknowledged with the Orthodox the Law the Prophets and the Gospels loaded S. Paul also with bitter Invectives and Reproaches and entirely rejected his Epistles with the Acts of the Apostles Lastly the Manicheans who esteemed their Patriarch Manichee not only as an Apostle but as the Paraclet or Comforter that was promised did not allow the Acts of the Apostles because the descent of the Holy Ghost is therein declared (k) Si illos Actus Apostolorum acciperent in quibus evidenter adventus Spiritûs Sancti praedicatur non invenirent quomodo id immissum esse dicerent Aug. de utilit cred cap. 3. If they should receive these Acts saith S. Augustin in which express mention is made of the coming of the Holy Ghost they could not say that he had been sent to them in the Person of Manichee But let us leave these Enthusiasts who had no other reason to refuse the Books that were approved by the whole Church than this because they did not suit with the Idea that they had formed of the Christian Religion This was the cause according to Tertullian that the Marcionites did not regard the Acts of the Apostle Tertul. lib. 5. adv Mare c. 2. I shall say nothing here concerning the Acts of Barnabas that have been published under the Name of John surnamed Mark (l) Quaedam Barnabae Acta ab aliquo ut apparet nebulone scripta circumferuntur ab imperitis magno applausu accipiuntur Baron Annal. Chap. 51. numer 51. which are very displeasing to Baronius and have been manifestly forged being also contrary in some things to the true Acts of the Apostles as this Cardinal hath observed CHAP. XV. Of the Epistles of St. Paul in general Of Marcion and of his Copy of these Epistles False Letters attributed to St. Paul. THE Name of S. Paul that is prefixed at the head of all his Epistles except that which is written to the Hebrews doth plainly discover the Author and since they are for the most part directed to particular Churches who read them publickly in their Assemblies they have been afterwards communicated to other neighbouring Churches and at last by the same means to all the Faithful I shall not here make it my business too critically to enquire into their order nor the time when they were written because in whatsoever manner they are placed as to their distribution or circumstances of time this will cause no alteration in the Text which will always remain the same nevertheless thus much may be observed with S. Chrysostom who hath diligently examined this matter that though the Epistle to the Romans stands in the first rank Joann Chrys Praef. Hom. in Epist ad Rom. yet it was not written first there are clear proofs that the two Epistles inscribed to the Corinthians were written before it this learned Bishop believes also that S. Paul had written to the Thessalonians before he wrote to those of Corinth this may be seen more at large in the Preface before his Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans wherein he gives an Example of the Prophets who have not been ranked according to the order of the time of their respective Prophecies Theodoret who hath treated on this Subject after S. Chrysostom whom he often epitomizeth alledgeth as an instance of the same order as that of S. Paul's Epistles the distribution of the Psalms of David (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. Praef. in Epist Paul. As David saith he being inspired by God hath written the Psalms and others afterwards have put them into what method they thought fit without having regard to the time when they were composed so in
in the ancient Latin Bibles written about seven or eight hundred years ago St. Jerom also hath followed this method in his great Prologue called Galeatus The Syrians have preserved this same Order in their Version as appears from the Edition of Widmanstadius nevertheless they have not in their ancient Copies according to which this Edition of Widmanstadius was regulated the second Epistle of St. Peter nor the second and third of St. John nor that of St. Jude These Epistles were not apparently in the Greek Copies which the Syrians have Translated into their Language However it seems as if there were nothing very certain concerning the Order of these Epistles for in the last of the Canons that bear the name of the Apostles those of St. Peter are set down first and afterwards those of St. John and that of St. James stands in the third rank the Bishops assembled at Trent have also named them after this same manner conformably to the Council of Florence Calvin himself hath set the Epistle of St. Peter at the head of all in his Commentaries on the Canonical Epistles But we ought to prefer the Order that is observed in the Greek and Latin Copies and also in the Oriental Versions As for what concerns the Authority of these Epistles very great difficulties arise from thence for as we have already seen the Syrians have not inserted some of them in their Version of the New Testament which they would have done if they had been read in the Eastern Churches when they Interpreted them out of the Greek into Syriack nevertheless they have since Translated them and they have been likewise Printed therefore they are also found in the Arabick Versions of the New Testament I shall have occasion to examin this matter more exactly in the second Book of this Work wherein I shall Treat of Versions in particular but since my design at present is only to speak of the Text let us see what the Ancients have thought thereupon Eusebius who avoucheth (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 23. that the Epistle of St. James the Brother of our Saviour with the other Canonical Epistles was publickly read in his time in the most part of the Churches observes nevertheless that not many of the ancient Writers have made mention of it as neither of that of St. Jude he would say without doubt that there are few of the ancient Doctors of the Church that have cited it as Canonical therefore in another part of his History where he produceth a Catalogue of the Books of the New Testament (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 25. he reckons the same Epistle of St. James that of St. Jude the second of St. Peter and the second and third of St. John among the Scriptures that were not generally received as Canonical by all the Churches though several ancient Fathers had spoken of them St. Jerom who usually transcribes Eusebius in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers expresseth himself almost after the same manner as this Historian doth on the Epistle of St. James for after he hath said (e) Jacobus qui appellatur frater Domini-unam tantùm scripsit Epistolam quae de septem Catholicis est quae ipsa ab alio quodam sub nomine ejus edita asseritur licet paulatim tempore procedente obtinuerit auctoritatem Hieron de Script Eccl. in Jac. that St. James the first Bishop of Jerusalem hath written but one Letter which is in the number of the seven Canonical Epistles he adds to shew that all People were not agreed that it was certainly his that it was said that it hath been written by another in his name though it hath obtained Authority in process of time Cardinal Cajetan makes use of this same Passage of S. Jerom Cajet Comm. in c. 1. Epist Jac. to prove that it is not absolutely certain that this Epistle was composed by S. James the Brother of our Lord Non usquequaque certum an Epistola haec sit Jacobi fratris Domini He hath also entituled his Annotations on this Epistle Commentaries on the Epistle that bears the Name of S. James In eam quae Divo Jacobo inscribitur Commentarii in which point he is more scrupulous than S. Jerom who hath made no difficulty to quote it under this Title Indeed this Father simply relates in this place the various Opinions of several Persons concerning the Author of this Epistle but forasmuch as it was read in the Churches under the Name of S. James and it hath been read therein ever since that time this Cardinal discovers too nice a curiosity as well as when he adds in this very place that the manner of saluting that is at the beginning of this (f) Salutatio hîc posita tam pura est ut nulli salutationi cujuscunque alterius Apostolicae Epistolae conformis sit nam nihil Dei nihil Jesu Christi nihil gratiae nihilve pacis sonat sed profano more salutem nec ipse seipsum nominat Apostolum sed tantùm servum Jesu Christi Cajet Comm. in c. 1. Epist Jac. Epistle contains nothing Apostolical on the contrary that it is altogether profane no mention being therein made of Jesus Christ nor of Grace nor Peace and he doth not call himself saith he an Apostle but a Servant of Jesus Christ Sixtus Senensis hath rehearsed these Words amongst the Objections that Luther hath made against this Epistle and perhaps Cajetan hath taken the best part of these Expressions from him but this Objection is so weak and even so irrational that the Lutherans have had no regard to it no more than to divers other Reasons that their Master hath alledged against the Epistle of S. James for they receive it at this day after the same manner as the Catholicks nevertheless they are not to be excused in this respect because they still retain in some Editions of their German Bible the Prefaces of Luther that are at the beginning of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of that of S. James after they have admitted them as Canonical for they disown by these Prefaces what they authorize in the body of their Bible I could have wished that Melchior Canus Melch. Can. de loc Theol. l. 2. c. 11. and some other learned Divines had not made use of the Authority of certain Decretal Epistles falsly attributed to the first Popes to shew that ever since the Primitive Times of Christianity it hath been believed that this Epistle did certainly belong to S. James there is no need of this sort of Proofs for though the Ancients have been divided as to this Point it is enough that the succeeding Ages after a due reflection on this matter have found in Antiquity certain Acts sufficient to justifie the placing this Epistle of S. James in the rank of the Canonical Books of the New Testament and that all the Churches of the World do at
seen in his time at Ephesus two Tombs of John. S. Jerom Hieron de Script Eccl. in Joann who often translates the words of Eusebius out of Greek into Latin hath also made this same Remark Reliquae autem duae saith he speaking of these two Epistles of S. John Joannis Presbyteri asseruntur cujus hodie alterum sepulchrum apud Ephesum ostenditur He adds nevertheless that some thought that these two Monuments were of S. John the Evangelist Nonnulli putant duas memorias ejusdem Joannis Evangelistae esse He repeats this same History when he makes mention of Papias and saith (ſ) Hoc autem diximus propter superiorem opinionem quam à plerisque retulimus traditam duas posteriores Epistolas Joannis non Apostoli esse sed Presbyteri Hieron de Script Eccles in Papiâ that he relates it for the sake of a a great number of persons that believed that this second John to whom the simple name of Priest is given was the Author of these two Epistles and not the Apostle However Athan. in Synops the Author of the Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures attributes these two last Epistles no less to the Apostle S. John than the first And it seems that the Latin Church that reads it in her Offices under the same Name hath authorised this Opinion which is likewise conformable to the Testimony of the most ancient Writers of this Church Therefore the Name of this Apostle Beati Joannis Apostoli is retained in the Latin Title of these three Epistles in the vulgar Edition In the Syriack Copy of these two last Epistles that have been Printed in the Polyglott Bible of England the simple Name of John is put whereas in the first it is read of John the Apostle This seems to have been done on purpose to distinguish the Authors of these Epistles In the Arabick Copy published by Erpenius these three Epistles are ascribed to the Apostle S. John who is named in the Title of the two first John the son of Zebedee and in the Title of the third John the Apostle Lastly Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 3. c. 25. there have been raised no lest doubts in the Primitive Ages of the Church concerning the Epistle of S. Jude than of the preceding Letters for this reason Eusebius hath reckoned it in the number of those Books of the New Testament that were not generally received by all the Churches S. Jerom who hath made the same observation (t) Judas frater Jacobi parvam quae de septem Catholicis est epistolam reliquit quia de libro Enoch qui apocryphus est in ea assumit testimonium à plerisque rejicitur Tamen auctoritatem vetustate jam usu meruit inter Scripturas Sacras computatur Hieron de Script Eccles in Judâ adds that that which gave occasion to reject it was the Apocryphal Book of Enoch which is cited therein And that this nevertheless hath not hindered it from being placed in the rank of the Sacred Books its Antiquity and Use having given it this Authority In like manner it hath been generally received by all the Churches as well Eastern as Western The Unitarians and Protestants also have put it amongst the other Canonical Books of the New Testament Luther hath nevertheless doubted of it as well as of the Epistle of St. James but they that follow his Opinion are so far from rejecting it at present that they use their utmost endeavours to put a fair Construction on their Masters words Calvin after he hath acknowledged that the Ancients have differed very much amongst themselves touching this Epistle Calv. argum de ses Comm. sur l'ep de Sainte Jude expresseth himself thus However because the reading of it is very profitable and it contains nothing but what is agreeable to the purity of the Apostolical Doctrine and in regard also that it hath been accounted Authentick for a long time amongst all good People for my part I willingly place it in the number of the other Epistles Cajetan hath inserred from the above cited words of St. Jerom (u) Ex quibus apparet minoris esse aucloritatis hanc Epistolam iis quae sunt certae Scripturae Sacrae Cajet Comm. in Epist Jud. that this Epistle is of less Authority than these Writings of the Apostles of the verity of which we have been certainly assured but this might have been properly said in those ancient times when it was not approved by all the Churches whereas when this Cardinal wrote there were none that did not receive it as Divine and Canonical and therefore it hath no less Authority than the other Sacred Books that are comprehended in the Canon of the Church Grot. Annot in Epist Jud. Grotius did not believe that this Epistle was written by St. Jude the Apostle because the Author hath taken upon him only the quality of a Servant of Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith moreover that (x) Si Apostolica fuisset habita haec Epistola versa fuisset in linguas omnes recepta per omnes Ecclesias Grot. Annot. in Epist Jud. if it were certainly esteemed Apostolical it would have been Translated into all Languages and received by all the Churches therefore he judgeth that it belongs to Jude Bishop of Jerusalem who lived under the Emperor Adrian But the first words of this Epistle do declare to us that it can come from no other hand than that of the Apostle St. Jude since he calls himself Jude the servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James For to say with Grotius that these words Brother of James have been afterwards added by the Transcribers that it might be believed that this Jude was certainly an Apostle is to beg the question they that would prove that this hath been inserted by the Transcribers ought to produce good Copies of this Epistle or certain ancient Acts on which we might rely Any Man that should have a mind absolutely to reject the Epistle of St. Jude might easily say with as much reason as Grotius that he that hath forged it hath put therein the name of Jude the Brother of James Therefore Arguments that are purely Critical ought never to be opposed against Acts that are ancient and generally received by all the World. It is true that the Epistle of St. Jude is less quoted by the ancient Doctors of the Church than the most part of the other Books of the New Testament and that it is not found in the ancient Copies of the Syriack Version But it can be only concluded from thence that it was not at first received in all the Churches it might however have been published ever since the Primitive times of the Christian Religion under the name of St. Jude the Brother of James and yet not be Translated into all the Languages of the Churches because it was then doubted in the most part of these Churches whether it was his whose name it bore
with Greek Manuscripts agreeable to the Latin he does judge that the former were corrected by the latter He thinks for example that the English Greek Copy where we read Epist I. of S. John chap. 5. vers 7. of the Testimony of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (b) Ad Latinorum codices fuisse castigatum Posteaquam enim Graeci concordiam interunt cum Ecclesià Romanâ studuerunt hac in parte cum Romanis consentire Erasm Apol. adv Jac. Lop. Stun was reformed by the Greeks themselves according to the Latin Edition since the Reconciliation of those two Churches But he will never be able to prove this Besides the places which he alledges to have been corrected have no relation to the Disputes that were betwixt the Greeks and the Latins To which we may add that the Greeks were never greater enemies to the Latins than since their Reconciliation in the Council of Florence The most part of those who had subscribed to that Council were hardly well returned home when they assembled at Constantinople where they protested against all that they had done at Florence The Record of that Protestation is yet extant with the Names of those who subscribed it We cannot enough admire In 1550. Robert Stephen's Fair Edition of the New Testament in Greek in Folio wherein he gives us proofs of his Learning and of his Judgment The Cardinal Ximenes In 1515. to whom we are obliged for his first Edition of the New Testament had made a search into good Manuscript Copies but he has not marked in the Margin of his Edition the various renditions of those Copies having only kept in the Text that which he judged to be the best Stephen has wisely redressed this fault For he has placed the various Readings of six Manuscript Copies in the Margin of his Edition and thus though he commonly follows the Edition of Ximenes in his Text he is not obliged to adhere to it unless he were persuaded that the renditions of the Cardinal's Copy are the best in those places It is no great matter for a Reading to be inserted in the Body of a Book or to be placed in the Margin provided that it be known that those which are in the Margin are taken from good Manuscript Copies as well as those which are in the Text. It were also much to be desired for observing a greater uniformity that those who have published new Editions of the New Testament in Greek had all of them exactly followed the Alcala or the Complutum Edition which is the first and that they had contented themselves to refer to the Margin the various Readings of their Manuscripts Yet Beza has produced a greater number of different Readings in several Copies of the N. T. than Robert Stephen has done But he has only observed them in his Notes which are full of things that serve to no purpose whereas he ought to have placed them after Stephen's example in the Margin of the Greek Text. Neither has he marked all of them that he might not give offence to those who were weak amongst his Party who would not have had so great a Veneration for the Word of God if they had observed so great a number of various Readings He declares that (c) Ad haec omnia accessit exemplar ex Stephani nostri Bibliothecâ cum viginti quinque plus minùs manuscriptis codicibus omnibus penè impressis ab Henrico Stephano ejus filio paternae sedulitatis haerede quam diligentissimè collatum Bez. in Epist de lic ad Elizab. Angl. Reg. he was indebted for the greatest part of those Manuscripts to Henry Stephen from whom he had a Copy that had been compared with twenty five Manuscripts and with the most part of those that were Printed He had besides that a very ancient Copy whereof he makes mention in his Notes the first part of which is yet extant containing the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles reserved in Cambridge and the second part in which the Epistles of St. Paul are comprehended in the King's Library We shall examin in the following Chapter that ancient Manuscript with which Beza was not well enough acquainted The English have inserted in the sixteenth Tome of their Polyglott Bible a larger Collection taken from the different Manuscript Copies of the New Testament than any had been before that time They likewise joyned thereto the observations of some Learned Criticks upon this matter and amongst others that of Luke of Bruges Which cleared the thing very much For a single Catalogue of divers renditions is not sufficient They are also all in a considerable error who have published the different Readings of the Manuscript Copies which they consulted They have not been at the pains to examin those Manuscripts particularly and to observe the good and the evil qualities thereof Which frequently happens because they who produce those Collections have not themselves read those Manuscripts Seeing they commonly depend upon the Credit of those whom they employed in that Work which is very troublesom their Collections are not always exact The New Testament Printed at Oxford in octavo In 1675. ought to be preferred to all other Editions because it contains a greater variety than any we have as yet seen upon it There is moreover this advantage that these various renditions are at once joyned to the Text. But seeing they have hardly done any thing else in that Collection but Compiled that which had been Printed before that time they have not Corrected the faults that were in other Collections with that care that was requisite but on the contrary have encreased them to a far greater number It would be to no purpose to give examples in this place of those errors because I am informed that they intend to publish a new Greek Edition of the New Testament which will be more ample than the former which must needs be very useful if it chance to be well done Stephen Courcel caused to Print the New Testament in Greek In 1658. with a considerable Collection of various Readings which had formerly been in the Possession of Elzevir He has only marked the Varieties without mentioning of the Manuscript Copies whence they are taken Which renders his Work the less perfect seeing he did content himself to point at them in his Preface He had an intention to put forth a larger Edition (d) In quâ si Deus dederit ut eam aliquando adornare vacet Vulgatam Versionem Latinam unà cum variantibus ejus lectionibus aliaque ejus generis plara adjungere meditamur Curc Praef. N. T. to which he promised to joyn the Latin Text of the Vulgar to the various Readings of the different Latin Copies but it did not appear that he was so good as his Word In 1675. For there was published a new Edition of that Greek New Testament which differed in nothing from the former unless
Chrysostom's and several other Fathers of that Church had the Reading in their Copies in the same manner as these have it whom at this day we call Schismaticks This most unjust accusation is nevertheless very Ancient So soon as ever there is a difference perceived in Copies if this difference do favour the Opinions of some Party they will be sure to accuse that Party of corrupting the Sacred Writings although that difference does for the most part come from the Transcribers Hilary the Deacon has made a general Rule in that place formerly mentioned He assures us (m) Quod fecit studium contentionis Quia enim propriâ quis auctoritate uti non potest ad victoriam verba legis adulterat ut sensum suum quasi verba legis asserat ut non ratio sed auctoritas praescribere videatur Ambros ibid. that the Spirit of dispute that is betwixt different Parties is the cause of different Renditions Every one saith he seeing he cannot on such occasions justifie himself by his own Authority does corrupt the Words of the Law that he may make his own Opinions pass for the Words of the Law. Although that has happened sometimes especially to those ancient Hereticks of whom we spake in the beginning of this Work I am perswaded that they have frequently attributed to different Parties such various Renditions in the Copies of the New Testament as had no other cause Originally but what those have which are found in all other Books How many Divines are there for example who believe at this day that they have taken away from the Ancient Greek Copies the Testimony of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost of which mention is made in the first Epistle of St. John Chap. 5. v. 7. to favour the Arian Heresie Others on the contrary do alledge that it was the Arrians who added these Words expresly to the Greek Text to shew the Unity of the Persons of the Trinity is not an Unity of Essence but of Consent Grotius is of this latter Opinion He thinks (n) Neque verò Arianis ablatas esse voces quasdam sed potiùs additas unde colligerent Patrem Filium Spiritum Sanctum non esse unum nisi consensu quomodo spiritus aqua sanguis in unum testimonium consentiunt Quod cum viderent Catholici abstulisse quidem illud quod de Patre Filio Spiritu Sancto insertum fuerat sed reliquisse illud tres unum esse quia id ita positum nocere non poterat Grot. Annot. in 1. Epist Joann c. 5. v. 7. that the Arians for this reason were so far from retrenching some Words from the Text that they added some thereunto that on the contrary the Catholicks had taken away that which is said of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Spirit leaving only these Words These three are the same which can do them no hurt and which as he thinks were likewise added by the Arians But all this is only founded on Conjectures and seeing every one does reason according to his Prejudices some will have the Arians to be the Authors of that Addition and others do attribute the same to the Catholicks This diversity of Opinions proceeds from nothing else but a neglect of examining with sufficient care the ancient Manuscript Copies and other Records which were necessary for the discovery of the Original of those Variations It would be to no purpose for me to repeat here the Critical Reflections which I have formerly made on that Passage of the first Epistle of St. John it having been made evident in what manner it came to pass that those Words that were neither in the Greek Copies nor in the Latin were inserted in the Text. No credit therefore is easily to be given to all those Accusations of the ancient Ecclesiastical Writers against the Hereticks upon the point of the Alterations that have happened to the Sacred Writings We have already seen in the Critical History of the Old Testament that the most part of the Fathers did cast the same reproach on the Jews without any ground Seeing the most part of Heresies sprung up in the Greek Church those who maintain the preference of the Latin Copies of the New Testament do not fail to bring this Reason to shew that the Books of the Latins are more ancient than those of the Greeks But before this Accusation is brought it ought to be examined if these Objections have a good foundation for if the thing be considered in general the Original must needs be more perfect than the Versions unless it be in some places where it may be demonstrated that the Version is instead of the Original which has been altered The Sect of the Macedonians were at another time accused as being the Authors of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chap. vii of St. John v. 39. where we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Ghost was not as yet whereas it is in the Vulgar For the Holy Ghost was not yet given The ancient Latin Interpreter did not read the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Greek Copy which is likewise wanting in some Greek Manuscripts and in others belonging to Mr. Colbert's most ancient Library Cod. MSS. Bibl. Colb n. 5149. Neither is it extant in the Syriack Version which makes me believe that it was added and that it was not in the first Original Greek But it must not be inferred from hence that those who favoured the Party of Macedonius were the Authors of that Addition there being the like Examples in other places with which they cannot be charged It is much more probable that it was occasion'd by the Greek Scholiasts who placed the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Margin to shew that that place spake of the Holy Spirit and it passed into the Text afterwards There is also in the same Passage the Latin Word datus which is not read in the Greek unless it be in the ancient Copy of the Vatican where there is according to Lewis of Bruges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is very likely that this Word was added by the Latin Interpreter who had in his view the sense of that Passage where the Gifts of the Holy Ghost are spoken of It would be likewise added after the same manner in the Margin of some Greek Copy We also read in the Syriack Version was not yet given which does wholly agree with the Latin and in the three Arabick Versions which have been published it is in the same sense was not yet come Grotius believed that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as it is in the Latin datus was added for the avoiding the reproach of the Followers of Macedonius In nonnullis datus ad vitandam calumniam Macedoniorum Grot. Annot in hunc loc But it is not at all necessary that they should have had any regard to those Sectaries to induce them to add
had slipp'd Yet he dares not be positive because he knows not the reasons of that great diversity And therefore he adds (r) Fieri potuit ut antiquitùs in quaedam exemplaria Lucae nonnulla ex iis Evangeliis quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 existimata sunt irrepserint quae postea Sanctorum Patrum diligentiâ resecta fuerint Mor. ibid. that possibly they might have inserted in some Copies of St. Luke that which was found in other supposed Gospels and that the Fathers had afterwards been at the pains to retrench those Additions If that Critick had narrowly weighed St. Jerome's Preface dedicated to Pope Damasus he would there have found all his doubts cleared Seeing the Cambridge Copy observes the same Order with all the other Greek Copies of the New Testament as to the thread of the History it does manifestly prove that it has not been on purpose altered by the Hereticks Moreover seeing the alterations that are therein do not introduce any Paradox Opinion but consist for the most part in some words which have been placed instead of others and in some Additions that have been taken from other Evangelists or in bare Illustrations we may infer from thence that all the change proceeded from the liberty that was taken by some at that time for rendring the Books of the New Testament the more intelligible without putting themselves to the trouble of adhering to the words of the Original so long as nothing of the sense was altered The Criticks especially St. Jerome in reforming the ancient Vulgar did at the same time amend those ancient Greek Copies with which he agreed entirely He used for that purpose other Greek Copies which were more exact and especially those to which he had added the Ten Canons of Eusebius These latter Copies which were amongst the Greeks before St. Jerome's time always remained with them which is easily proved by the same Canons of Eusebius One of the most surprising varieties of that Copy is that which is found in the Genealogy of Jesus Christ Chap. 3. of St. Luke for this Genealogy is the same with that in St. Matthew unless it be that it goes up to Solomon in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest that this Genealogy has been designedly amended by that of St. Matthew yet with an Addition of those Persons which he had omitted Beza who has also made mention of this diversity in his Notes upon this Chapter of St. Luke declares (ſ) Quînam autem id sit factum nescio cùm recepta lectio tum Syri ipsius interpretis auctoritate tum Scriptorum omnium Sacrorum proptereà de Matthaeo cum Lucâ conciliando laborantium consensu planè confirmetur cui sanè praejudicium ullum afferre nec velim nec ausim Tantùm dico fieri potuisse ut ipsis Evangelistarum temporibus Judaei genealogiam istam quantum in ipsis fuit depravarint quasi fidem caeteris de Christo narrationibus abrogaturi quae fraus à plerisque non animadversa facilè obtinuerit Bez. Annot. in c. 3. Luc. v. 23. that he cannot imagine how that can be because the Syriack Interpreter and all the Ancient Ecclesiastical Writers are altogether against that Copy from whom he neither intends nay nor dares to recede That might as he conjectures have happened from the very time of the Evangelists the Jews having corrupted that Genealogy that they might not believe the other Histories which are recorded in the Gospels There is nothing more ridiculous than this conjecture of Beza who does charge the Jews with a crime which they never thought of besides that it was of no advantage to them because they could not corrupt all the Copies which they kept by them There are none to be blamed for that alteration of the Ancient Copies of the New Testament but the Christians and even the Orthodox as it has been frequently observed after St. Jerome who in his Letter to Pope Damasus has taken notice of the change of which we now speak He says that in those days they took the liberty to amend the Gospels by that Gospel which they had read first Ille qui unum è quatuor primum legerat ad ejus exemplum caeteros quoque existimaverat emendandos It is evident that the Genealogy in St. Luke was reformed in the Cambridge Copy according to this Method and that what was supposed to be wanting therein was supplied from the Old Testament And the accusation supposed to have been brought against the Jews was so far from admitting a sufficient ground of reason that there was nothing at that time so common as Copies as well Greek as Latin of that kind especially in the Churches of the West before St. Jerome had revised the Ancient Latin Edition It would be easie to prove that the Gospel of St. Mark has been likewise amended in some places by that of St. Matthew and further that there have been some words changed for others that were synonymous which appeared to be more intelligible but that labour would be to no purpose because every one may consult the divers Readings of that ancient Copy in the sixth Tome of the Polyglott Bible of England and in the Greek Edition of the New Testament Printed at Oxford It is enough that I have observed the true reason of those numerous variations concerning which the Criticks have given us very wide and even false conjectures Those who revised those ancient Copies intending nothing but to make them clear without being at the pains to confine themselves to the true Reading of the Evangelists and the Apostles have given Paraphrases on them whensoever they believed that they were not sufficiently understood They have also abridged them in those places that they thought intricate by reason of superfluous words which they have also transposed in innumerable places for the same reason Which is enough to be observed once for all in general without a particular rehearsal of the Passages which have been altered in the Cambridge Copy as well in the Gospels as in the Acts of the Apostles This does appear yet more in the Acts because there was a very great liberty taken of reforming that History in the first Ages of the Church Nevertheless whatever change those Books have undergone in the ancient time and that the very words of the Evangelists and the Apostles were not observed yet it will not be found that the sense has suffered any alteration They only endeavoured to make them the more intelligible to the People and for that end it was necessary to refine them seeing they were full of Hebraisms and very concise Phrases which they were obliged to illustrate according to that Method Nevertheless in the Cambridge Copy there are certain Additions whereof the same thing cannot be said because they are plain Matters of Fact that have been added For example Chapter 6. of St. Luke verse 5. after the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we read in that Copy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is to say On the same day seeing a Man travel on the Sabbath day he said unto him my friend if thou knowest what thou art doing thou art happy but if thou doest not know it thou art cursed and a transgressour of the Law. This History might possibly have been taken from some Ancient Apocryphal Book where it was common in the first Ages of Christianity and it may be it was then believed that it came from the Apostles or their Disciples And therefore those who presumed to reform the first Copies of the New Testament in so many places upon the bare prospect of rendring them intelligible to all the World would not scruple to add thereto Histories of that sort which they believed to be true We have formerly taken notice of examples of the like nature in the Gospel of the Nazarens If we had at this day a sufficient number of Copies of this nature that were before St. Jerome's time especially in the Western Churches we might discover some other Additions in them which are not known to us at present because we have little or nothing remaining of the Books of those first Ages Although it does not appear to us that the Christians have had Massorets or Criticks like to those of the Jews who have given to the Books of the New Testament that uniformity which is found to have been from many Ages in the Greek Copies and also in the Latin since St. Jerom it is probable that the Greeks followed certain Copies which they judged to be more exact than others and that they were Corrected by learned Criticks These Copies were used afterwards as a Massore or Rule By these St. Jerom Corrected the ancient Latin Edition by the Order of Pope Damasus Let us now examin the second Part of the ancient Cambridge Copy which does contain the Epistles of St. Paul. CHAP. XXXI Of the second part of the Cambridge Copy which contains St. Paul's Epistles Examples of the various Readings that are in that second Part. Critical Reflections upon the whole matter THere is nothing can more contribute to the knowledge of the state of the Greek Copies of the New Testament in the most ancient times of the Church than those Books that were so common before St. Jerom and which are not extant but in very few places at this day It will be in vain to look for them in the Churches of the East because they having been written in Greek and in Latin and with the same Hand it is easie to judge that they could be only extant in the West We are indebted to the Monks for having preserved some of those Copies for us That of Cambridge as has been said was found in a Monastery of Lyons The Benedictine Monks of the Abbey of St. Germain have in their Library the second part of the like Copy in which the Epistles of St. Paul are contained Peter Pithou (a) Vidimus nos aliquando vetustissimum exemplar Evangeliorum literis illis majoribus exaratum adjectis è regione Graecis quòd olim fuisse dicebatur Ecclesiae Lugdunensis Vidimus aliud Epistolarum exemplar ejusdem formae aetatis ex Corbejae majoris Galliae Monasterio quae tanquam sanctioris antiquitatis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non sine religione suspicimus veneramur Petr. Pith. de SS Bibl. Interpr had seen those two ancient Copies which he esteemed for their great antiquity He does testifie that it was believed that the former was brought from the Church of Lyons and the latter from the famous Abbey of Corby in France Christian Druthmar an ancient Benedictine Monk who had been for some time in that Abbey has pointed to us the first part of this latter Copy when he makes mention of a Greek Copy which he believed to have belonged to St. Hilary where the Gospel of St. John did immediately follow that of St. Matthew Christ Druthm Expos in Matth. c. 1. Vidi saith that Monk Librum Evangelii Graecè scriptum qui dicebatur Sancti Hilarii fuisse in quo primi erant Matthaeus Joannes In the Royal Library there is another Greek and Latin Copy of St. Paul's Epistles which differs almost in nothing from that of the Benedictines unless it be that the Letters are not so great nor so majestick although they be the same as to their figure and duration The King's Copy is also more disfigured by reason of innumerable corrections than that of the Abbey of St. Germain For although this latter has likewise been amended in many places the corrections thereof are not so gross Further we may call those two Copies the second part of that of Cambridge because they contain that ancient Greek and that ancient Latin Version which was used in the Churches of the West before St. Jerom had reformed it It is true that that Father in his Letter to Damasus does only make mention of four Gospels which he had revised and we are not clearly informed by another Hand that he had corrected the rest of the N. T. after the same manner But however it be the thing is it is certain that the whole ancient Latin Version was amended and that the same method was observed in that Reformation which St. Jerom does testifie to have been followed in his own practice when in complyance to the Order of Pope Damasus he reformed the ancient Latin Translation Beza in his Notes upon St. Paul does frequently cite that ancient Copy of the King's Library under the name of * Codex Claromontanus The Copy of Clermont He also believed that it was the second Part of that which belongs to Cambridge In which he is not mistaken For it is the Greek and the Latin of those ancient Greek and Latin Copies that were commonly read before St. Jerom's time It is not necessary for all that that both of them should have been written with the same Hand It is sufficient that they are of the same Age. And so it may be said that that of the Benedictines as well as the King 's is the second Part of the Cambridge Copy because both the one and the other do represent the ancient Vulgar to us to which they have added the Greek with which it did agree F. Morin who had borrowed that ancient Manuscript of the Du Puis that he might extract the various Readings that confirmed our Vulgar does in his Exercitations insist at some length on the Bible (b) Existimo versionem vetustissimi illius codicis Graeco textui adversam eam esse quâ Ecclesia Latina ut plurimùm ante Sanctum Hieronymum utebatur quam sanctus ille vir jubente Damaso Pontifice ad fidem Graecorum exemplarium postmodùm recensuit emendavit Jo. Mor. Exercit. Bibl. Exerc. 2. c. 4. He is persuaded that the Latin Version that is joyned to the Greek is the ancient Translation which was read in the West before St. Jerom had reformed it by the Command
of Pope Damasus according to the ancient Greek Copies He (c) Consideratis figurâ magnitudine splendore characteris tam Graeci quà m Latini illius ob vetustatem per seipsum multis in locis dimidiatâ obliteratione passimque subobsâ—urâ delineatione versionis insuper cum Vulgatâ textuque Patrum comparatione S. Hieronymi aetatem istius codicis scripto videtur omninò praecedere Mor. ibid. does also judge by the figure and bulk of the Greek and Latin Characters which are almost worn out in some places by reason of their antiquity and by the Latin Version which he compared with our Vulgar and with the Citations of the ancient Fathers that that Copy was written before St. Jerom. He further adds to prove the antiquity of the same Manuscript a Catalogue of the Books of the Scripture which had been inserted at the end in which the twelve small Prophets are noted with the four great Prophets and the Gospel of St. John before that of St. Mark and St. Luke Moreover the Book of the Pastor the Epistle of Barnabas and some others are there placed in the number of the Books of Scripture It is hard saith F. Morin that all this should be since St. Jerom. Quae omnia Sancti Hieronymi aevum vix subsequi possunt multa minus ipsa codicis scriptio It is true that the Greek and Latin Copies of that kind are more ancient than St. Jerom if we consider the ancient Latin Version which was used in the West before it was Revised by that Father But F. Morin's Reasons do not prove that they were written from that time For it is possible that the Monks who Copied the ancient Books writ out those Copies by those that were more ancient and I believe that this did happen on that occasion As for the Character it cannot be denied but that it is most ancient but those who have skill to judg of them do not allow them to be above a thousand years standing at least it is certain that there are Books of the same Character which do not exceed that time Neither do I seé what can be concluded from Letters that are almost defaced for the antiquity of a Manuscript This only does prove that the Ink is not good The truth is the Copy of the Benedictines which is of the same antiquity and has likewise a greater Letter is still so fair that one would believe by looking upon some of its Pages if judgment were to be given by the Ink and Parchment that it had been but just now written Those who have a desire to preserve those ancient Manuscripts ought to put leaves of Paper betwixt the leaves of the Parchment upon which the Writing is to the end that the Ink may not wear off They might at last have added to the end of those Copies a very ancient Catalogue of the Books of the Bible The strongest proof in my Opinion for evincing the great antiquity of that Copy is that the Epistle to the Hebrews is not reckoned with the rest in the number of St. Paul's Epistles as I have formerly observed but by it self and out of the Body of those Letters that were read in the Church F. Morin did not sufficiently consider that Manuscript when he says speaking of the Catalogue which is put at the end (d) Catalogus ille insertus est codici ante Epistolam ad Hebraeos in paginis quibusdam fortuito vacuis Mor. ibid. that they placed it before the Epistle to the Hebrews in some Pages where there was nothing written as it happened For that was done on purpose the Epistle to Philemon being the last of the Copies of that sort which the Latins had writ out for their use Seeing they did not believe that the Epistle to the Hebrews had been written by that Apostle nor that it was Canonical they did not joyn it to the other Epistles And therefore they inserted that Catalogue of the Books of Scripture immediately after the Epistle of St. Paul to Philemon If Beza had considered the corrections that had been made in that Copy which he named of Clermont he would easily have acknowledged that Books of that sort were never in use amongst the Greeks and that so it was not brought out of Greece as he alledged There are so many faults therein especially in the Greek that it is manifestly seen that it could not have been written but by a person who was altogether ignorant of that Language A good part of those faults were amended and these were not only faults of the Orthography but sometimes of Words They further reformed that ancient Version in many places by other Greek Copies which came nearer to these at this day Which without doubt was done by some Latins who corrected at the same time the ancient Vulgar by St. Jerom's new Edition We will not then with Beza charge the Observations that are placed in the Margins of that sort of Copies on the Greek Priests but on those of the Western Church who had some knowledg of the Greek Language As those Books passed through several Hands so they have received amendments some of which are more ancient than others But after all we still see the ancient Readings as well in the Greek as in the Latin especially in the Copy of the Library of St. Germain which has been revised in so curious a manner that the amendment does often consist in nothing else but in small stroaks of the Pen in the Letters Seeing those two Copies do differ in very few things I shall in the following part of my Discourse make use rather of the latter than that of the King's Library which is more disfigured F. Morin has observed in general (e) Variarum istarum lectionum nulla adeò enormis est atque ut ita dicam varia ut cum iis quas ex priori volumine observavimus comparari possit Paulinarum Epistolarum codex ille vulgato textui priore longè conformior est licet illi antiquitate non cedat Mor. ibid. that the Clermont Copy upon St. Paul's Epistles does not so much vary from the ordinary Copies of the New Testament as that of Cambridge does and that it is also more agreeable to our Vulgar though it is no less ancient than the other The same thing is to be said of that of the Benedictines of the Abbey of St. Germain because they are so much alike that one would believe that the one had been copied from the other The reason of this great conformity of St. Paul's Epistles in the Clermont Copy with the ordinary Greek and the Latin of the Vulgar is evident because he had no occasion to amend those Epistles by one another as the Gospels and they were not so much neglected in the first Ages of the Church as the Acts of the Apostles which had been revised with a great deal of liberty in many places Yet if we carefully examin the places where those ancient Copies of