such a different Genealogy of our Saviour from that by St. Matthew without the reason of so wide a dissent nor would there be found in the other Evangelists so many apparent contradictions as have harassed the Wits of Learned Men almost since the first constitution of the Canon St. Luke plainly intimates that the Evangelists and Gospels he had seen were not furnisht with the relations they make by Eye-witnesses as himself was We have at this day says Mr. Dodwel some writings of Ignatius Polycarp Hermas Barnabas Clemens Romanus these were later than the other Writers of the New Testament except Jude and John and yet Hermas cites nothing out of the New Testament nor in all the rest are any of the Evangelists named If they cite any passages like to those we read in our present Gospels they are withal so unlike that it cannot be known whether they are alledged out of ours or some Apocryphal Gospels they cite also Passages which are not in the present Gospels Nay we cannot say from those Canonical Books that were last written that the Church knew any thing of the Gospels or that the Clergy made a common use of them We can't tell whence St. Paul had that moral Aphorism of our Saviour which he quotes Acts 20.35 In those early times the true Writings of the Apostles used to be bound up together with those now called Apocryphal and Spurious that it was not manifest by any mark or public Censure of the Church Which of them should be preferred to the other Upon this judgment made by Mr. Dodwel Amyntor says he agrees with Mr. Dodwel as to matter of Fact And he shuts up all with adding that whosoever has an inclination to write on this Subject is now furnisht with a great many curious Disquisitions whereon to show his Penetration and Judgment As how the immediate Successors and Disciples of the Apostles could so grosly confound the genuine Writings of their Masters with such as are falsly attributed to them And if they were in the dark about these matters in those early times How came the following Ages by a better Light Why all those Books which are cited by Clemens Alexandrinus and the rest should not be accounted equally authentic And lastly What stress can we lay on the Writings of those Fathers who not only contradict one another but are also inconsistent with themselves in their relations of the very same Facts The whole amounts to thus much The Books we now own as Canonical were never seen till about 130 years after Christ and when they appeared 't was not possible to distinguish them but by some Revelation from Apocryphal Gospels and Epistles which bore the names as these do of the Apostles and their Synergists From the earliest times contrary Copies of them were shown and not one of them but was rejected by considerable and potent Parties of Christians the very Parties that received them have changed 'em three or four or more times that they might be at liberty to affirm or deny as present Exigence should require The Figments of Hermas the Trash of Barnabas and others such like have an equal right to a place in the Canon of Scripture with the Gospels of Mark and Luke The Authority and Credit of both and of all the other Canonical and Extra-canonical Writings depending on the Quotations made from them by St. Ireneus Clemens Alexandrinus Origen and one or two more of the Antients and on their having been Contemporaries and Coadjutors to the Apostles And so in few words Friends bonas noctes to the Christian Religion Our Author however that we may not forget to do him that right is a compleat Gentleman tho he has us and our Canon at these Advantages he saith He will determine nothing but suspend his Judgment P. 58. On the CATALOGUE in general THE Catalogue by Amyntor is considerable on divers accounts As it is pretty Perfect He has omitted but few of those Antient Pieces and not so often mistaken as some others the several and like Titles of the same Book for several and distinct Books And as it naturally gives one a great Idea of the Christian Religion By informing us of so many Persons that wrote Gospels Acts Revelations Liturgies Itineraries Martyrdoms either on their own knowledg or on credible report made to them and which have not been lost on any other accounts but such as are common to things Valuable and Great in their kind Such as the Deluge of an immense time almost 1700 years the absolute Certainty and apparent Sufficiency of the Gospels Acts Epistles c. which on those accounts the Church has preserved and contents her self with them And lastly As nothing can be objected to it or inferred from it but what in such a case a man of any Experience or Prudence would certainly expect Namely that in so important and various a Subject there would be some more Writers and Writings than the extreme Caution of the Catholic Church would intirely approve and even that some Triflers and Impostors would intermix and intrude themselves among the approved and well-meaning It will be requisite to enlarge a little on these general Reflections That the Catalogue is indifferent perfect I grant However some Books and other Writings are omitted and others never really extant or pretended to be extant are added For instance under the first Head or of Books ascribed to our Saviour or that particularly concern him these are overlookt A Book by St. Matthew distinct from that by Thomas concerning the Infancy of our Saviour being the History of his younger Years 'T is very antient for it hath some Passages that are also mentioned by St. Ireneus and which he saith were in the Books shown by the Valentinians A Letter of our Saviour that fell down from Heaven it being indeed an Epistle forged by a certain notable Enthusiast a French Bishop who for this and some other such-like Facts was deprived and put to penance by a Council assembled at Rome An. 745. The Letter however was kept in the Library of the Roman Church by order of Pope Zechary A Liturgy of our Saviour received as his by the Ethiopians it was brought out of the Orient by Father J. Vanslebius who promises also to publish it at Paris together with other rare Ethiopic Pieces But Ludolphus in his Ethiopic History and Commentary gives the true account of this Liturgy As to Books added under the same Head Amyntor mistakes when as from Eusebius he attributes to our Saviour a Book of Parables and Sermons For on the contrary these Proverbs and Doctrines as Eusebius calls them were all of them only Traditional they were Doctrines and Proverbs that Papias Bishop of Hierapolis had heard from some Persons that they were spoke and taught by Jesus Christ but they never were committed to writing as a particular Book by any body The Millennium or thousand-years Reign was one of these Traditional Doctrines I observe also that Amyntor
notorious Falsities in Doctrine and in Matters of Fact and those also as ridiculous as they are erroneous Here sure we have wherewith to answer to all the bold Suggestions of the Book under consideration If the Author pretends he has the same Testimony of some Antients for the Books of the Catalogue as there is for the Canon Eusebius replies none of the Doctors have quoted those Pieces as Divine Scripture If he demands what other Exceptions we can advance against them or what we can say farther for the Books of the Canon Eusebius again answers the Books of the Canon and of the Catalogue differ as Pious and Impious as True and False as Credible and Ridiculous and that these are the Churches Reasons why she venerates the latter and no less disesteems to use no harder word the other In short besides the unanimous Testimony of the Antients which was Amyntor's only Reason Eusebius insists on the so different Spirit and Morality of these two sorts of Books and on the known Verity in Matters of Fact and self-evident soundness in Doctrine so remarkably appearing in one and wanting in the other When Amyntor fairly satisfies these Answers of this Learned Father Phillida solus habeto Farther Continuation of the Defence of the Canon IT seems however by all this we have gained nothing at all for Amyntor says again If some of the Antients made these Exceptions to the Books of the Catalogue they were not so thought of by some whole Parties who made use of ' em And there is not a single Book of the New Testament which was not refused by some of the Antients as unjustly fathered on the Apostles and really forged by their Enemies And lastly he has Witnesses for it that were the Books of the Canon never so certainly written by the Apostles they have been however so changed and that too divers times that perhaps not a single Rib or Plank of the old Argos is left To this effect he speaks at p. 19 56 60 64. But who told him or how will he prove it that whereas some of the Ancients made Exceptions to the Books of the Catalogue they were otherwise thought of by some whole Parties of Christians It is not true nor will he be able to bring any proof for it from Antiquity that the Gospels Acts Epistles Revelations of the Catalogue were espoused by whole Parties or Sects On the contrary they were read indifferently by some of all Parties they had a little while some Credit with some Persons in all the Denominations of Christians till for the Reasons but now alledged from Eusebius they grew first into disuse and then were lost Or if some few of 'em were the Compositions of professed Heretics in order to countenance the Opinions of a small Party as the Gospel of Judas Iscariot said by Epiphanius to be devised by the Cainits a Gnostic Sect their manifest Disagreement to the Doctrine and History of the Gospels known by all to be Authentic would and actually did immediately detect and justly discredit them Some whole Parties says Amyntor espoused some Books of the Catalogue Yes the Cainits a Sect of two days continuance and consisting it may be of twenty or thirty Persons Libertines boasted of the Gospel of Judas How does this weaken the Judgment made of that Gospel by all the Churches and reported by Eusebius and Epiphanius that this and some such Pieces were foolish and false even to ridiculousness We don't deny there were such Books as these in the Catalogue or that they were sometime in such credit and even favoured by particular Persons of some Churches and Sects but we say the reasons alledged against them by the body and generality of the Churches and that hereupon they soon became universally slighted and shortly quite perished are just such Presumptions against them as it will be in after-Ages against the spurious Metasthenes Berosus and Philo of Annius that they had appeared but a very little while e're they were wholly discredited by the concurrent Judgment and clear Arguments of Learned Men. As no body hereafter will appear for Annius his Philo Berosus or Metasthenes 't is an attempt not less worthy to be laught at that the Gospel of Judas has now any Fautors or that any are found who with great confidence do mind us that it was esteemed some time by a Party When the Judgment that Learned Men and the Catholic Church made of this Gospel and other such like Pieces has been confirmed by the immediate disappearing of the Books and Parties that maintained them what can we reasonably think of the matter but that as the Roman Orator has worded it for us Opinionum portenta delet dies Follies and Errors that are too extravagant and monstrous soon like the Monsters of Nature perish If there were any thing indeed that we could lay in the contrary Scale had we any thing to alledg in favor of these condemned and lost Books it were a necessary Caution and Justice not to condemn 'em merely on the account that the Fathers and first Churches censur'd and rejected 'em but their Judgment and Reasons against them so approved by all that the Books thereupon were all immediately put to nccessary uses ought to satisfy us concerning them To that There is not a single Book of the New Testament which was not refused by some of the Antients as unjustly father'd on the Apostles and really forged by their Enemies P. 56 64. Thought I when I read it has this Gentleman found some of the first lost Historians of the Church pack'd up in a close Chest or Hogshead and buried so many Ages under ground Has he recovered Hegesippus or other Antient Writers that are so much praised by Eusebius St. Jerom Photius and other Fathers who were curious of Antiquities and have left some small account of those lost Treasures But Amyntor quickly delivered me from my doubt and my surprize for the proof he offers is from very vulgar Books either mistaken or misreported by him He says The Manichees rejected the whole New Testament the Ebionits or Nuzarens who were the first Christians had a different Copy of St. Matthew's Gospel from ours and the Marcionits of St. Luke's John's Gospel was attributed to Cerinthus all the Epistles of St. Paul were denyed by some and a different Copy of 'em shown by others and the seven Pieces we mentioned before he means the Epistles of St. James St. Jude the second of Peter the second and third of John the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Revelation were refused a long time by all Christians with almost Vniversal Consent P. 64 65. By all Christians with almost Vniversal Consent is a Contradiction for if by all Christians then with Universal Consent and if only with almost Universal Consent then not by all Christians But it matters not for we shall see neither of 'em is True When his hand was in why did he not also from as good Authority as he has
were rejected by the Ebionits namely that in those Epistles he denies that the Gentaic Christians were obliged by the Law of Moses being condemned at the Council of Jerusalem mentioned Acts 15.24 and these Epistles being warranted by ex press Authority of Sr. Peter above quoted methinks the Ebionits are here objected with as little color of Reason as Marcion in the foregoing Paragraph 'T is another Exception that Johns Gospel was ascribed by some to Cerinthus a great Heretick By the Alogians but so that this Party embraced in a little time the common Opinion that St. John was indeed the Writer of this Gospel Paul of Samosatum Patriarch of Antioch and Photinus Archbishop of Sirmium Heads of the Alogian party even alledged for their Opinion the first Verses of Sr. John's Gospel and made not the least doubt either of the Author or Authority of this Gospel Epiphan Haeres Samosat Photin He still proceeds The Epistles of James and Jude the 2d of Peter the 2d and 3d of John that to the Hebrews and the Revelation were refused a long time by Christians with almost universal Consent The least we can make of this is that the Majority of Christians rejected these Writings and that too a long time But Eusebius from whom our Author had his intelligence says otherwise he saith those pieces are of the number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but withal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Gainsaid indeed by we know not who but received by the Generality Euseb H. E. l. 3. c. 25. It seems however they were rejected by some and that also a long time I answer they were all received as soon as the Churches had full communication with one another by the Convention of Councils which for small Books containing nothing that if singular was soon enough They were received in the Council of Laodicea by observation of our Author himself Those seven pieces having nothing as I said that is singular nothing that is wont to be alledged by the contending Parties against one another that Council was at perfect Liberty whether they would receive or reject them they might do either without diminution of Interest or of Reputation I believe therefore seeing the Scripture Canon was so sufficient in the Opinion of all Parties without those Books they were not owned by the Fathers of that Council but on most convincing reasons Such as that they had certain Information that these Books were read as Writings of the Apostles in all Churches of antient Foundation that themselves found 'em quoted as Apostolick Compositions in and from the times of the Apostles also that there is in them a likeness of the Thoughts and Expression and whatever else recommends to us the other Books of Scripture to the Expression and Thoughts of the other Divine Books or more briefly they are written with the same kind of Spirit that the undoubted portions of Scripture are There might even be Testimony from some of the Churches that they had still the first published Copies of these Books and Epistles with their Dates corresponding to the Age and Time of the Writers of them Can any thing like to this be said for the rejected Books of the Catalogue Were they ever approved in any Council Are any of them quoted or pretended to be quoted by Writers of the Apostolick Age Is it not said by those Antients who had read 'em and could belt judg of 'em they are composed with an Address and Air quite different from that of the Inspired Books and are not only false in the Doctrine and Facts but very foolish also If some of 'em were read in some Churches was it nor only till the Catholick Church began to fill with learned and able Persons who could make a Judgment And when by these they were discharged was there any Contention for 'em as there would certainly have been if the same or like reasons could have been urged for 'em as for the Books truly Canonical Of the Philosopher Celsus and Faustus the Manichee I Come therefore to the last Refuge of the Anti-Christian party Admitting that the Books of the Canon were for the main of 'em written by the Apostles and their Synergists they have been however so changed and that divers times that now there is little perhaps nothing left of 'em in those Books that stand for them in our present Canon The witness for this is the Philosopher Celjus to whom great Origen immediatly answered This Philosopher says Amyntor informs us that the Christians as if they were drunk had changed the Writing of the Gospel three or four or more times to the end they might deny whatsoever is urged against them as before retracted The Philosopher however doth not say the Christians have changed or altered their Gospel he says only τίνες πισÎυοντων some of those called Believers have altered the writing of the Gospel Origen makes us to understand the meaning of this in his Answer to it which is thus Indeed Marcion and Valentinus and Lucanus have presumed to corrupt the Sacred Books But what is that to Christianity He intended hereby does the Church follow the vitiated Copies of Marcion or of the two Gnostics Valentinus and Lucanus are theirs the Books we show as our Rule of Faith and Manners are these the Books read in the Churches of Christians In short they would prove the Books of our present Canon are corrupted and greatly altered from what they were and how is it proved Why Marcion and Valentinus and Lucanus published some depraved Copies that were rejected so soon as they appeared by all the Churches Why do they not say the Bibles of the English Church were corrupted in the Reign of K. Charles the Martyr when the King's Printers published an Edition in which the words of the Psalmist were thus printed The Fool hath said in his Heart there is a God for which the Printers were fined 3000 l. and all the Copies supprest by the King's Order Has Amyntor any Evidence that the Copies of Valentinus Lucanus and Marcion or any of them is the Copy now used by the Catholick Church or doth not he himself certainly know the contrary He hath no such Evidence and he knows the contrary with certainty therefore he affectedly abused his Reader and too much forgot that a deceitful Management of such Subjects as this obliges his Reader to distrust all he says and more especially his Quotations We shall be troubled but with one Opposer more 't is Faustus the Manichee let us take the matter in our Author 's own words Nay as low as St. Austin's time was there not a very considerable Sect of the Christians themselves I mean the Manichaeans who shewed other Scriptures and denyed the genuinness of the whole New Testament one of these called Faustus c. In these few Lines are more Falsities than Periods For the Manichees were never accounted a Sect of Christians and whether to be called Christians or not they were far from
AN HISTORICAL ACCOUNT AND DEFENCE OF THE CANON OF THE New Testament In Answer to AMYNTOR The weaker-sighted ever look too nigh But their Disputes the Sacred Page make good As doubted Tenures which long Pleadings try Authentick grow by being much withstood By Sir William Davenant in Gondib. LONDON Printed by J. Darby for Andrew Bell at the Cross-Keys and Bible in Cornhil M.DCC. AN HISTORICAL ACCOUNT AND DEFENCE OF THE Canon of the New Testament SIR AT the Suggestion of a Learned Friend I am about to answer to a Book Amyntor dedicated to very formidable Patrons For in his Title Page the Author makes this address Dî quibus imperium Animarum est Vmbraeque silentes Et Chaos Phlegethon loca nocte tacentia latè Sit mihi fas audita loqui sit Numine vestro Pandere res altâ terrâ caligine mersis We may English it thus Ye Gods and Ghosts of Hell to Human sight Not yet reveal'd and thou whole Realm of Night Protect me that I safely may relate The blacker Secrets of our Church and State There will not want those who will say hereupon From praying to the Holy Virgin and the Saints Amyntor is improved into invoking the Devil and his Angels They will say he is the first that ever publicly put himself under such a Protection That however a Book directed against the Sacred Canon would not easily find other Patrons So that this Extravagance of the Author was as much the Effect of Necessity as of Inclination In short I wish he had not given occasion to his Adversaries to jest upon him for what I believe was not design but obreption and oversight In the first place he presents us with a Catalogue of Antient Books and other Writings concerning which he is of a different and contrary mind in divers parts of his Book Sometimes he seems to complain that we do not receive 'em into the Canon of the New Testament there being according to him the same Reasons to admit or to exclude them as for the Gospels Epistles and other Writings of our Canon Namely that so many of 'em were Cited by the Fathers as Scripture and the rest by very considerable Parties of Christians which he saith again is as much as can be alledged for any of the Books of our Canon and more than can be truly said for divers of them But otherwhile he speaks to this Effect That they are the Forgeries partly of zealous Bigots who were sollicitous to provide these Crutches for lame Christianity and partly of some Heathens that were tickl'd with the pleasure of imposing on the known simplicity and credulity of the first Christians who were wont to swallow any Book as Divine Revelation if it had but a great many Miracles sprinkled with a few good Morals He hath disposed these Books under the following Titles and Distinctions I. Books reported to be written by Christ himself or that particularly concern him His Letter in answer to that of Abgarus King of Edessa A Letter to Peter and Paul His Parables and Sermons A Hymn which he secretly taught to his Apostles and Discipiles A Book of the Magic of Christ if it be not the same with the Epistle to Peter and Paul A Book of the Nativity of our Saviour of the Holy Virgin his Mother and her Midwife But he believes this last is the same with the Gospel of James II. By the Virgin Mary or concerning her Her Epistle to Ignatius Her Letter to the Inhabitants of Messina Her Book concerning the Miracles of Christ and the Ring of King Solomon A Book of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary and another of her Death III. By St. Peter Peter's Gospel Acts Revelation Doctrine Judgment Preaching Liturgy Itinerary being so many several Books but the last he things is the same with the Recognitions of St. Clement wherein we have a very particular account of Peter's Voyages and Performances An Epistle of Peter to Clement IV. By St. Andrew His Gospel and Acts. V. By St. James A Liturgy and Gospel His Book concerning the Death of the Virgin Mary but there are Reasons he saith to believe John was author of it not James VI. By St. John His Acts Liturgy Itinerary and Traditions Another Gospel different from ours His Book of the Death of the Virgin Mary mentioned twice already VII By St. Philip. The Gospel of Philip the Acts of Philip. VIII By St. Bartholomew A Gospel IX By St. Thomas A Gospel Acts Revelation and Itinerary as also a Book of the Infancy of Christ X. By St. Matthew A Liturgy There is also another by Mark. XI By St. Thaddaeus A Gospel XII By St. Matthias A Gospel and Traditions XIII By St. Paul Paul's Revelation and Preaching his Anabaticon and Narrative concerning the charming of Vipers His Epistle to the Laodiceans his Second Epistle to the Ephesians his Third to the Thessalonians and again to the Corinthians his Gospel His Epistles to Seneca his Acts. The Acts also of Paul and Thecla XIV Other Gospels and Remarkable Books The prophetical Gospel of Eve the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles the Gospels of the Hebrews and the Egyptians the Gospel of Judas Iscariot The Books of Adam the Prophecy of Enoch the Revelation and Astrology of Abraham The Testament of the twelve Patriarchs the Assumption of Moses the Book of Eldad and Medad the Psalms of King Solomon the Vision of Isaiah the Revelation of Zechary XV. Some other general Pieces The Apostles Creed The Doctrine of the Apostles there are besides Doctrines attributed to every one of the Apostles singly and also to their Companions and immediate Successors The Doctrines of the twelve Apostles composed by them with the assistance of St. Paul The Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles The Acts of the Apostles written by themselves The Gospel of Perfection the Precepts of Peter and Paul The Itinerary of all the Apostles as well as of every one of them singly was formerly extant XVI Writings of the Companions and Disciples of the Apostles The Epistles of Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians his Recognitions Decretals and other Pieces bearing his Name The Epistles of Ignatius An Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians with his other Writings the Acts of the Martyrdom of Ignatius and of Polycarp The Pastor of Hermas an Epistle of Barnabas the works of Dionysins Areopagita an Epistle of Marcellus Disciple of Peter to Nereus and Achilleus his Treatise of the conflict of Peter and Simon Magus The Life of St. John by Prochorus the Petition of Veronica to Herod on behalf of Christ the Passion of Timothy by Polycrates the Passion of Peter and Paul in two Books by Linus Two Epistles of Martial of Limosin his Life by Aurelianus the Gospel of Nicodemus the History of the Apostolical Conflict by Abdias the Passion of St. Andrew by the Presbyters of Achaia The Epistle of Evodius entituled the Light the Altercation of Jason and Papiscus the Acts of Titus composed by Zena companion
very often confirms the Books of his Catalogue by witness of Authors who never mention any such Book or Books but only are thought by some and that not very probably to allude to them or to have made use of them When he gives us that non-such History of the Scripture-Canon I hope he will oftner himself consult the Authors he cites and less trust to the References of others else it will be far from meriting the praises he has before-hand given to it I incline to think the Books wrote by the Apostles their Contemporaries and Synergists are vastly more than Amyntor or any other now can give us the Titles or other Traces of them St. Ireneus calls them Lib. 1. c. 17. In-enarrabilem multitudinem Apocryphorum an innumerable multitude of Apocryphal Books For we are not to consider all Authors and Books as Apocryphal that are censur'd under those names by Ireneus I am of opinion we may apply to St. Ireneus arguing against the Gnostics Valentinians and other Antient Sects and Books that platonized too much what C. Rhodiginus Lect Antiq. § 1. c. 12. says of Lactantius and the Platonists Ea quae obvelatis traduntur figuris a Platonicis nec nisi Allegoricis enarrationibus intelligenda iste ut simpliciter dicta accepit Oblitus nunquam futurum Platonicum qui non putet Platonem allegoricè intelligendum What the Platonists have delivered in dark and figurative expressions and must not be interpreted but only in the Allegorical way that he has understood as spoken directly and absolutely forgetting or not knowing that a man shall never be a Platonist who imagines Plato is to be taken not allegorically but literally But this great number of Acts Gospels Itineraries Revelations c. as I said be sure they give Authority and Lustre to the Christian Religion As we came hereby to understand it was an extraordinary Figure that Christianity made in the World at its very first appearance It should seem men thought they had never wrote enough concerning it its admirable Morals the Miracles of its Author and other first Preachers of it its Revelations and Prophecies verified by almost an immediate completion did so convince and affect 'em that they even filled the world with their accounts of these things under the names of Acts Revelations Itineraries Epistles Gospels Martyrdoms Liturgies Precepts Recognitions Institutions Oracles and some more 'T is of some of these that St. Luke speaks in the first Verses of his Gospel He meant not the Gospel of John for 't is agreed on all hands John wrote his Gospel long after the other Evangelists and to supply some of their Omissions That he did not intend only Matthew and Mark who indeed wrote before him may be inferred from his own words when he says Not τινὲς some one or two but πολλὸι MANY have taken in hand to set forth a Declaration of those things that are most surely believed among us even as they delivered them unto us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the WORD Amyntor and M. Dodwel believe St. Luke doth not speak of the Gospels of John Matthew and Mark they suppose he had not so much as seen any of those Gospels But what is in their mind to tell us that Luke plainly intimates the Authors of the Gospels which he had seen had consulted neither any Persons that had been Eye-witnesses nor so much as those who had seen or spoke with any such and that on these Accounts the Credit of those Gospels is suspected and dubious For St. Luke as before quoted expresly says the Authors by him intended had wrote concerning our Saviour his Miracles and Doctrine just in the manner as they deliver'd them to us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses He could not possibly have given a more ample Testimony either to their Fidelity or their Accuracy In accounting for the Reasons why these Books are lost too many People have learned to speak with intolerable Effrontry and Profanity I will first give the true Reasons of so great a loss and then examine the scurrilous Conjectures of some who glory in their shame In general I could never wonder we have lost so many of the Apostolic Writings and other Antient important Monuments of the Christian Religion since I took notice we have lost also the very best Books of the Antients in all parts of Learning and Science In Philosophy to the times of our Saviour we have almost nothing left to us but the Works of Plato and Aristotle the least valuable it may be of all the Antients The Philosophy of Aristotle being little else but some dry Definitions that give no light to the Natures of things and that of Plato such a futility in Philosophy as Behmenism in Religion and Christianity even a Rapsody of some Mystical or Nonsensical Terms sprinkled here and there with a bright Thought or lively Expression Of all the Philosophical Writers since our Saviour there remain in my present remembrance only two or three Platonists and Stoics that were Greecs by the Latins there are only I think some Natural Questions by Seneca and a few moral Pieces by the same Seneca and by M. Cicero Philosophy was cultivated above 700 years in ASIA as also in Egypt Greece Italy and most other Provinces of EVROPE in AFRICA from Cyrene to the Pillars of Hercules and the Ocean being one of the longest tracts of Ground in the World It grew into such reputation that there were very many Academies and an incredible number of Professors and Teachers divers of them in high esteem But few Persons of the better sort that did not cause their Children to be educated in some of these Academies even the principal Nobility whether Greecs or Latins after having bore the Chief Offices of the Common-wealth did not disdain to learn Philosophy in their years if they had missed it in their youth nay a Nobleman was not esteemed if he were not a competent Orator and Philosopher We may be assured therefore we have lost a prodigious multitude of Philosophical Books in the several parts of Philosophy wrote by the most Eminent Masters among the several Sects undoubtedly it was then as now a customary thing that famous Professors wrote something more or less either led by their own Inclination or by occasion of some Provocation or perswaded by their Scholars and Admirers Who as I said but now were all the Nobility and all Persons of Distinction whether for Wealth or Wit The like may be said of Authors and Books concerning Astronomy Astrology Divination Magic Geometry Mechanics Medicine Anatomy Botanics Poetry Painting Architecture Statuary the Origin and Rites of the Paganic Religions History both Natural and Civil Amyntor himself somewhere puts us in mind what is the Damage in the Historical part of Learning The loss says he of so many Decads of the Roman Historiographer T. Livius is alone as much to be regretted as if all the Fathers had miscarried 'T is
79 he has a Quotation out of M. Dodwel to this sense The Books of the present Canon lay concealed in the Coffers of particular Churches or of private Men the Churches and Men to whom they were written till the latter times of Trajan or rather of Adrian that is till about 130 years after Christ We are not to think that the Writers of the New Testament knew any thing of the Gospels or other Books of the Canon that were not wrote by themselves or that the Clergy made a Common use either of the one or other We have still some Ecclesiastical Writers of those early times Clemens Romanus Barnabas Hermas Ignatius and Polycarp but in Hermas there is not one passage out of the New Testament in the rest not any of the Evangelist is called by his Name of is particularly named Nor can we know whether the Passages they cite are alledged out of the Gospels or other Books of our present Canon or from other Gospels and Books namely the Books of the Catalogue for the Citations are very different from the Words in our present Gospels and other Canonical Books and for the most part have something added to them Amyntor declares he assents to all this and farther to recommend it he complements M. Dodwel after a very extraordinary manner He affirms M. Dodwel tho a Lay-man knows as much of these matters as the Divines of all Churches put together What an advantage is it sometimes to a man not to be a thing in Holy Orders how much more knowing and Learned shall he be than himself was aware for I take it for granted this Bounce of a Complement was wholly intended to M. Dodwel's Lay-quality I am content for my part M. Dodwel be the next HERO to M. Milton I hope however 't will be granted that how much soever M. Dodwel knows he does not know that to be true which is false and in confidence of this I intend to discuss what he hath said Or rather to speak with due reserve of a Person and Matter that I my self do not know what Amyntor hath imputed to him He says The Writers of the New Testament were unknown to one another and to the Churches and Clergy till 130 years after Christ How do I fear lest he that is said to know as much of these Matters as the Clergy of all Churches put together should be found to know less of 'em than any of us Country-Curats For first as to the Writers of the four Gospels all the Church-Historians agree St. Matthew wrote first so it will not be expected we should prove that he had seen the rest but 't is apparent the next Evangelist Mark had seen and read the Gospel by St. Matthew because Mark 's Gospel is indeed nothing else but an abridgment of St. Matthew's as the Critics and Interpreters have many of them observed They are the words of H. Grotius on Mark 1.1 Vsum esse Marcum Matthaei Evangelio apertum facit collatio i. e. If we compare their Gospels it will be evident that St. Mark made great use of the Gospel by Matthew St. Austin de Cons Eccl. c. 2. says Marcus Matthaeum subsecutus tanquam pedissequus breviator ejus videtur i. e. As St. Mark wrote in time after St. Matthew so he follows him as it were at the very heels in respect of the things related only abridging what St. Matthew had more largely said After Matthew and Mark came St. Luke he is very reasonably and probably thought to intend besides we know not who else Matthew and Mark in those first words of his Gospel For as much as MANY have taken in hand to set forth in order a Declaration of those things which are surely believed among us even as they delivered them to us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word it seemed good to me also c. Those Characters of Eye-witnesses and from the beginning and Ministers of the Word agree to the Person of St. Matthew and the two last to St. Mark that to say the whole Period was intended of them at least with others is what has been reasonably believed hitherto and is not made less reasonable by the two Exceptions by Amyntor taken as he saith out of M. Dodwel They alledg that St. Luke has given a different Genealogy of our Saviour from that by St. Matthew without giving any reason for it and that there are many apparent Contradictions between these and other Writers of Scripture But if these Gentlemen please to look into Matth. 1.6 and Luke 3.31 they will see a reason of the difference of the Genealogies namely that St. Matthew deduces the Genealogy from Solomon St. Luke from Nathan both of them Sons of David and Ancestors to our Saviour in the sense that David was his Ancestor As for the apparent Contradictions between these Evangelists if it were true it would rather prove that St. Luke had seen and read those other two Evangelists because by writing any thing contrary to them he intended without doubt to correct their Mistake and rightly inform their common Readers But 't is certain he was not in the least aware that those former Evangelists needed any correction for himself we have seen before bears 'em witness that they had written all things as those Persons have also deliver'd them to us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the WORD that is as the other Apostles and first Preachers have also dediver'd them by word of mouth The last Evangelist was St. John how he came to be an Evangelist or on what occasion he wrote Eusebius the first and learnedest Historian of the Church will tell us in these words The Gospels of Matthew Mark and Luke being in all mens hands came also to the knowledg of the Apostle John who approved them as faithfully written But he observed they were deficient in this respect that they had omitted that part of our Saviour's Actions and Preaching which preceded the Imprisonment of John the Baptist for they all begin their Narratives with the Imprisonment of John Hereupon St. John being thereto requested added in a Gospel by him the Time and Transactions that had been omitted by the other Evangelists Euseb H. E. l. 3. c. 24. The Epistles of St. Paul are another considerable part of the Canon of the New Testament our Opposers say They lay hid in the coffers of the Churches and Persons to whom they were written till 130 years after Christ I ask How then came St. Peter to say 2 Pet. 3.15 As our beloved Brother Paul according to the Wisdom given to him hath written to you as also in all his Epistles speaking to them of these things in which Epistles are some things hard to be understood which they that are unlearned and unstable do wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own Damnation This Testimony proves not only that St. Peter had seen the Epistles of Paul but
be always exact in repeating Scripture-Texts as to the words tho they keep well enough to the sense And for this reason also they do not always name the Scripture-Author whom they alledg even to avoid the possible Mistake of one Writer for another I make but this one remark more on the Citations of Scripture by these Fathers It is reckned they all wrote before the whole Canon of the New Testament was compleated M. Dodwel says expresly before Jude or the two Johns had written And they wrote from places very distant from Judea and from one another Hermas and Clemens from Rome Barnabas from Cyprus Polycarp Smyrna in Asia Ignatius from Syria This serves to assure us that the Gospels and Apostolic Writings were immediately communicated either by particular care of the Churches or more probably a publication to the most remote Bishops and Churches that there can be nothing more contrary to Truth and to the zeal and Diligence of the first Christians and Churches than this Affirmation of M. Dodwel and his Second that the Apostolic Writings were lockt up in Coffers of the Churches and Persons to whom they were written till 130 years after Christ Which is so far we have seen from being true that all the Writers of those times tho living in places some Thousands of miles distant from one another and from Judea adorn even their familiar Letters with Flowers from the four Gospels and Epistles of the present Canon nor do they cite that we know of a single Sentence from the Books of the Catalogue Amyntor however tho he assents to M. Dodwel in saying that our present Scripture-Canon and the Books that compose it were unknown to the Churches and Clergy till 130 years after Christ yet he doth not think Barnabas Hermas Clemens Polycarp or Ignatius were the real Authors of those Epistles that go under their Names but that these Epistles were forged about such time as so many other Impostures appeared in the Catholic Church namely a good while after the year 130. But hereby he hath entirely given up the Cause he was maintaining M. Dodwel speaks consistently to himself tho not truly when he says the Scripture-Canon was not known to the Churches or Clergy till about the year 130 because Clemens and the other Writers of those times cite nothing out of the said Canon But Amyntor forgets to be consistent to his Cause when he says the Canonical Books were not known till the year 130 and at the same time denies we have any Monuments left of those antient times Clemens and the rest being of much later date and also Impostures Besides granting to him that these Epistles are Impostures deviled more than 130 years after Christ as 150 or 180 after our Saviour yet having quoted abundance of Paragraphs out of our present Canon and none out of the Books of the Catalogue as we are hereby assured that the former were then known and approved as Books of received and allowed Authority so the other either were not known or not consider'd as Books whose Authority could oblige or so much as persuade There were divers other Writers of those early times besides Clemens and the rest mentioned by M. Dodwel and tho their Works are lost yet we have certain assurance that they quoted the Books of the New Testament Papias Bishop of Hierapolis was Scholar of St. John and Companion of Polycarp Eusebius had read his Works and takes occasional notice that he quotes the Epistles of St. John and St. Peter Euseb H. E. l. 3. Cap. ult Contemporaries to Papias and Polycarp and much within the term of 130 after Christ was Quadratus Agrippa sirnamed Castor and Basilides Of these Basilides wrote 24 Books of Commentaries or Explanations on the Gospels Concerning the other two Eusebius saith They with many more made it their business to preach in places whereas yet Churches were not gathered and τῶν θείων Ἐυανγελίων παÏαδιδόναι γÏαφὴν to bestow and disperse Copies of the Inspired Gospels H. E. Lib. 3. c. 37. Lib. 4. c. 7. Justin Martyr in his Second Apology but 140 years after Christ as Dr. Cave hath proved makes us to know that there was then a particular Officer in the Churches called the Reader distinct from the Preacher whose business it was saith he to read the Prophetical and Apostolical Books to the Congregation until it is sufficient Amyntor must suppose with great liberty if he supposes that in the year 130 the Books of the New Testament were unknown to the Churches and Clergy and that but ten years after they were so known and in such credit that the Churches entertained an Officer on purpose to read them in their Assemblies But why do we protract a Dispute and seek to old Authors known to few People to determine it when it may be ended by one demonstrative Argument and of which all Persons are capable The four Gospels Acts general Epistles and Revelation were not written to particular Persons or particular Churches but written and published to all the World Let me hear Amyntor or M. Dodwel say they were not written to be published or were not published so soon as written if they dare not say so why do they say they were kept in private Coffers till 130 years after Christ I don't think any body will believe that the Churches or Clergy were ignorant of the publishst Books of their Religion A Continuation of the Defence of the Canon ANother Detraction of our Author from the Credibility and just Authority of the Canon is that The principal Fathers of the three first Ages Ireneus Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen did quote divers Books of the Catalogue particularly Barnabas Hermas Ignatius Polycarp and Clemens Romanus as Scripture And why should not all the Books that are cited by these Learned Fathers as Scripture be accounted equally Authentic and Canonical Or if these Disciples and Successors of the Apostles could so grosly confound the genuin Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles with such as are spurious and falsly attributed to them how came others the following Fathers and the Councils who have undertaken to declare which Books are Canonical and which not to be better or more certainly informed In short he saith Clemens Romanus Barnabas Ignatius Hermas and Polycarp were esteemed by the Antients to be as good as any part of the New Testament and seeing herein they were so grosly mistaken what stress can be laid on their Testimony concerning the Books of the New Testament itself which Testimony however both formerly and at present is alledged as the principal reason sometimes he maketh it to be the only-reason why the Books of the New Testament are received as Canonical Amynt p. 44 45 46 52 79 80. He adds at p. 57 58. The Council of Laodicea An. 360 after Christ is the first Assembly wherein the Canon of Scripture was determined In so great a variety of Books those of the Catalogue he means and those of the Canon how could that
Council determine which were the true Writings of the Apostles and which not but by Revelation or the written Testimony of their Predecessors Revelation in the case there was none and for Testimony I have the same Testimony for the Books I defend which is usually urged in behalf of the Canon We may abridg and distinguish this Judgment into these Propositions 1. The best of the Antients esteemed the Writings that now go under the names of Clemens Romanus Hermas Barnabas Ignatius and Polycarp to be as good Scripture as any part of the New Testament was then or is now accounted 2. The true Canon can be ascertained only by Revelation or the Testimony of the Fathers Revelation there was none and the Testimony of the Fathers is as home and full for Clemens Ignatius and the rest not to mention many other Books of the Catalogue as for our Canonical Books 3. 'T is even certain that the Fathers were mistaken in the Opinion they had concerning the pretended Clemens Hermas Barnabas Polycarp and Ignatius therefore neither is their Testimony valuable concerning the Books of the New Testament or present Scripture Canon We shall answer sufficiently if we prove clearly and indubitably these two things That the Antients had not the same or like regard for Clemens Romanus Barnabas or any other Books of the Catalogue as for the Books of the Canon and that they had other and stronger reasons besides the Testimony of their Predecessors why they establish'd the present Canon or in other words why they received the Books of the Canon and not those of the Catalogue When Amyntor says the best of the Fathers and Antients quote the Writings of Barnabas Hermas Clemens Romanus Ignatius and Polycarp as Canonical and Scripture and that they esteemed them as good as any part of the New Testament For this latter he will never be able to produce one Testimony of any of the Antients and I shall abundantly prove the contrary from those Fathers to whom he appeals and whose sense he hath so much mistaken for the other were it true yet 't is not to the purpose For 't is certain and granted by all Learned Men that those Fathers called all the Antient Ecclesiastical Books if they were Orthodox Scripture and Canonical the terms Canonical and Scripture were not then appropriated to Books written by Inspiration but were common to all Ecclesiastical Writers and Books if Orthodox Origen for instance often cites the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament as Scripture and Canonical in his Homilies and sometimes when he is disputing but when he discourses professedly what Books are Divine Scripture and what are not he admits only those Books of the Old Testament that are received by Protestants rejecting the Apocryphal Books see concerning this Euseb H. E. l. 6. c. 25. Clemens Romanus Hermas and divers more are cited as Scripture by the Antients and Fathers says Amyntor By which of ' em He answers by Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen and he refers us to places in their Writings But in some of those places nothing at all is said by those Fathers concerning the Books of which we are inquiring in other places the Authors are named but nothing is quoted out of them elsewhere are Citations out of them but not under the names of Scripture or Canonical and where they are so called 't is only in the sense that the same and many later Fathers call the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament Canonical or Scripture and yet deny them to be of Divine Authority or to be received by the Churches as a Rule of their Faith Yet more particularly It is not true that Irenaeus in the alledged place or elsewhere calls the Epistle of Clemens Romanus Scripture He cites it only to prove that Apostolical Tradition is contrary to the Heresy which teaches there is a God above the Creator of the World because saith he the said Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians which is older than that detestable and foolish Heresy teaches but one God All-mighty Maker of Heaven and Earth In the same Book and Chapter l. 3. c. 3. he commends the Epistle of Polycarp but cites nothing out of or calls it Scripture and Canonical That Hermas is mentioned by Irenaeus I don't remember Amyntor refers to Lib. 4. cap. 3. but nothing is there said of him As to Ignatius Irenaeus only calls him Quendam ex Nostris adjudicatum ad Bestias propter Deum One of us Christians condemned to the Beasts for the cause of God He doth not so much as name him but 't is guessed he means Ignatius because the words he quotes are found in an Epistle of Ignatius 'T is no wonder that Clemens Alexandrinus may call the Epistle of Barnabas and the Pastor of Hermas Scripture in the sense before mentioned as a term of distinction or to distinguish them from the Writings of the Gentile Moralists and Philosophers whom also he often cites and explains their Opinions Eusebius H. E. l. 6. c. 13. observes that Clemens of Alexandria quotes the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Jesus Son of Syrac and with them the Epistles of Barnabas Clemens Romanus and others not universally received among Christians Now as the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus were never reckoned by the Catholic Church and therefore undoubtedly neither by Clemens as parts of the Old Testament but only as laudable Appendices to it so when we find him quoting also Hermas Barnabas or Clemens Romanus under the same names and Epithets that he gives to Ecclesiasticus and the false Solomon he intended no more thereby to make them parts of the New Testament than he or the Catholick Church accounted the other to be parts of the Old Testament What I say is yet more plain from Origen the last of Amyntor's Fathers All the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament are frequently alledged by Origen in company with his Citations out of the genuine Books of the New and Old Testaments he has caused us however to know the vast difference he put between them and that the Catholick Church received only the present Protestant Canon as Divine Scripture the other Books whether the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament or those of the Catalogue only as useful and commendable Writings He tells us as to the Canon of the New Testament There are only four Gospels the first by Matthew written for the use of the Jews the next by Mark who had his Information by St. Peter the Gospel by Luke intended for the Gentiles lastly John's Gospel Concerning the Writings of St. Paul he mentions only his Epistles they are short saith he and not to all the Churches which he had planted or where he had taught Peter so he goes on wrote an Epistle that is received and esteemed by all we may grant he wrote a second Epistle but it is doubted of John wrote a Gospel and Revelation a short Epistle and if you will a second
they were perfect and fully instructed We pass over and neglect what the Apostles said while they were Novices and Ignorant and what was objected to 'em and not said really by 'em as also what has been falsly imputed to 'em by the Writers namely that Jesus was foully born of a Woman was circumcised like the Jews offer'd Sacrifice like the Gentiles was baptized in a sordid manner was carried about and miserably tempted by the Devil These few things excepted together with all their Quotations out of the old Testament we receive the Writers he means the four Evangelists and all they have recorded or taught in their Books more especially we receive the Mystical Crucifixion with the Precepts Parables and whole Divine Word of Christ If Amyntor had attended to these Passages he would have perceived how the words of this Manichee which he cites are to be Pointed and Translated into the English Let us first see how Amyntor reads and renders ' em Solius Filii putatis Testamentum non potuisse corrumpi solum non habere aliquid quod in se debeat improbari praesertim quod nec ab ipso scriptum constat nec ab ejus Apostolis sed longo post tempore a quibusdam incerti nominis viris qui ne sibi non haberetur sides scribentibus quae nescirent partim Apostolorum nomina parting corum qui Apostolos secuti viderentur scriptorum suorum frontibus indiderunt asseverantes secuncdumeos se scripsisse quae scripserint He englishes it thus You think that of all the Books in the world the Testament of the Son only could not be corrupted that it alone contains nothing which ought to be disallowed especially when it appears that it was neither written by himself nor his Apostles but a long time after by certain obscure Persons who lest no credit should be given to the Stories they told of what they could not know did prefix to their Writings partly the names of the Apostles and partly of those who succeeded the Apostles affirming that what they wrote themselves was written by these We shall see presently Light and Darkness are not more contrary than this account of the Books that make the present Canon of the New Testament is to the real Opinion of Faustus and the intention of his words in the Latin but now I will only take notice that this Translation is a pure piece of Jargon it offers to prove a certain point by a Consideration quite contrary to it It represents the Manichee as saying you Catholies think the Testament of the Son contains nothing that may be disallowed because it appears that neither himself nor his Apostles wrote it but certain obscure Fellows who to make themselves believed in matters of which they knew nothing put the Names of the Apostles to their own Flams and Forgeries I demand now of Amyntor was this a Reason fit to prove that the Testament of the Son has nothing in it that can be disallowed even this 't was written by obscure Fellows who having feigned these Matters set to 'em the Names of the Apostles and their Successors 'T is a Reason that most plainly overthrows the Proposition which it was to confirm in short 't is a Bull a Contradiction and Nonsense 'T is as if I should say the King of Spain is like to live this three seven years for he is very infirm and dying in a manner every day Well let us again set down the Latin of the Manichee and Pointing it right see what sense it will make Solius Filii putatis Testamentum non potuisse corrunipi solum non habere aliquid quod in se debeat improbari Praesertim quod nec ab ipso scriptum constat nec ab ejus Apostolis sed longo post tempore a quibusdam incerti nominis viris qui ne sibi non haberetur Fides seribentibus quae nescirent partim Apostolorum nomina partim corum qui Apostolos secuti viderentur scriptorum suorum frontibus indiderunt asseverantes secundum eos se scripsisse quae scripserunt To be Englished thus Do ye think that of all Books in the World only the Testament of the Son could not be depraved and that it alone contains nothing that can be gainsaid Especially that of it or that part of it which not only was not written by himself but not by his Apostles but a long time after by certain obscure Fellows Who lest no Credit should be given to what they wrote concerning matters which they could not know put the names of Apostles and their Successors in the front of their Books affirming that what they wrote themselves was written by those Apostles He speaks here of the Acts Revelations Epistles Gospels of the Catalogue he says the genuine Testament of the Son is much depraved by these spurious Books which were contrived and published long after the decease of the Evangelists and Apostles that wrote the Books truly Canonical by obscure Wretches that put to their feigned Gospels and Acts the names of Andrew Thomas Philip Bartholomew and other Apostles and their Successors Briefly Faustus meant not in the least to say the Books of the Canon are falsly intitled to the Apostles and Evangelists whose names they bear but that the Testament of the Son has been vitiated and disgraced by divers other Gospels Acts Epistles meaning those of the Catalogue which never were the Works of true Apostles but of certain Botchers who stitching together some flying Reports exposed their wares to sale under the names of some of the Apostles and of their immediate Successors His other Citation out of Faustus is no better nor upon the main better understood by him it is this Multa à Majoribus vestris eloquiis Domini nostri inserta sunt verba quae nomine signata ipsius cum ejus fide non congruunt praesertim quia ut jam saepe probatum à Nobis est nec ab ipso haec sunt nec ab ejus Apostolis scripta sed multa post eorum assumptionem à nescio quibus ipsis inter se non concordantibus Semi-judaeis per famas opinionesque comperta sunt He renders it in these words Many things were foisted by your Ancestors into the Scripture of our Lord which tho marked with his Name agree not with his Faith And no wonder since as those of our Party have already frequently proved these things were neither written by himself nor his Apostles but several matters after their decease were pick'd up from Stories and flying Reports by I know not what set of Half-Jews and these also not agreeing among themselves Reach me the Ferula for they are School-boys Mistakes In this place Jam is not already or saepe frequently much less is à Nobis those of our Party which it never signifies and had Faustus intended to say by those of our Party he would have said a Nostris His words Jam saepe probatum est a Nobis were thus meant As I have but
of Paul with a multitude of other Acts and Passions The Gospel of Barnabas the Passion of Barnabas the Epistles of Joseph of Arimathea to the Britains XVII Pieces alledged in favor of Christianity which were forged under the names of Heathens The works of Trismegistus and Asclepius the Books of Zoroaster and Histaspes Kings in the Orient the Sibyllin Oracles A Letter of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius the speech of Tiberius to the Senate the Epistle of Lentulus giving a Description of the Person of Christ The Epistles or Orders of Adrian Antoninus Pius and M. Aurelius in favor of the Christians extant in Justin Martyr Upon this Catalogue and from it Amyntor makes divers marvellous Remarks and Inferences to this effect The Antients reckned the Pastor of Hermas the Epistles of Barnabas of Polycarp and Clemens Romanus to be as good as any part of the New Testament And if saith He again these pieces are not Impostures but were really theirs whose name they bear why are they not received into the Canon of Scripture the Authors of them having been the Companions and Fellow-laborers of the Apostles as well as St. Mark and St. Luke If this quality was sufficient to intitle the two latter to Inspiration why should it not do as much for the two first And if this be not all the reason pray let us know the true one for I never heard of any other The second Epistle of Peter the Epistles of James and Jude the second and third of John the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Revelation were not approved as Canonical till after the time of Eusebius therefore why may not we also establish the Epistles of Clemens and of Barnabas if indeed they be theirs It may be saith our Author all the Books particularly all the Gospels in the foregoing Catalogue were not spurious or forged but rather Genuine and of right belonging to the Canon of Scripture as in the dark Ages of Popery divers Books were added to the Bible so in the no less ignorant first Ages of Christianity other Books might be taken from it because they did not sute with all the Opinions of the strongest side How many true or false Gospels were extant in Luke's time God knows but that there were several may be inferred from his own words Many have taken in hand to set forth a declaration of those things which are believed among us as they delivered 'em to us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the WORD Luke 1.1 2 3 Several Books particularly Gospels of the before-recited Catalogue were quoted by the most celebrated Fathers says Amyntor to prove important Points of the Christian Religion and this Testimony of those Fathers was the principal Reason of our putting the Gospels and Epistles that are now approved and received into the present Canon Eusebius rejects the Acts Gospels Preaching and Revelation of Peter because no Antient nor Modern Writer says he has quoted proofs out of them on the same account he rejects also the Gospels of Thomas Matthias and such like as also the Acts of Andrew John and other Apostles as spurious But herein Eusebius was mistaken as appears says our Author still by the Testimonies I have cited Had Eusebius found any of These Pieces alledged by precedent Orthodox Writers he would have owned them as part of the Scripture-Canon but I have shown proofs were quoted out of some of them so that they may still belong to the Canon for all Eusebius It is certain so he goes on the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistles of James and Jude the second and third of John the second of Peter and the Revelation were doubted by the soundest of the Antients and yet are received by the Moderns I say therfore by more than a parity of reason the Preaching and Revelation of Peter were received by the Antients and ought not to be rejected by the Moderns if the approbation of the Antients or Fathers be a proper recommendation of Books The Council of Laodicea convened about the year 360 is the first Assembly in which the Canon of Scripture was establisht In such a variety of Books they could not determine which were the true Monuments of the Apostles but either by a particular Revelation of which we hear not a word or by the Testimony of their Predecessors I have the same Testimony for the Books I defend He means for the Preaching and Revelation of Peter the Pastor of Hermas the Epistle of Barnabas and divers Gospels He wishes some qualified Person would endeavor to extricate the erroneous out of these and such like difficulties that we may discover by some infallible marks in such an extraordinary number of Books all of them equally pretending to Divine Origin which of them are the proper Rule lest we unhappily mistake a false one for the true He tells us again the Philosopher Celsus exclaims against the liberty which Christians had taken of changing the first Writing of the Gospel three or four or more times that so they might deny whatsoever was urged against them as retracted before The Manichees a very considerable Sect shewed other Scriptures and denied the Genuinness of the whole New Testament particularly Faustus a Manichee complains the Testament of the Son is corrupted by obscure Persons who have put the Names of the Apostles and their Successors to false Gospels that are full of Mistakes and of contradictory Relations and Opinions After the decease of Christ and the Apostles says the Manichee a sett of Half-Jews picked up from Fame and flying Reports a great many Lies and Errors which they also published under the names of the Apostles and of those that succeeded them Add to all this that the Ebionites or Nazarens who were the oldest Christians had a different Copy from ours of St. Matthew's Gospel The Marcionites read the Gospel of St. Luke very diversly from us the Gospel of St. John was attributed to Cerinthus all the Epistles of Paul were denied by some a different Copy shown of them by others It would be commendably done he says to prevent the Mischievous Inferences which Hereticks may draw from all this and to remove the Scruples of doubting but sincere Christians as for his own part if he is in any fault about these matters it is not too much Incredulity but that it may be he believes more Scripture than his Adversaries He gives hopes he will write a History of the Canon of Scripture the fairest nay the only one of the kind that ever was penned He concludes with an extract as he saith out of Mr. Dodwel to this purpose The Books of the New Testament lay hid in the Archives of Churches and Desks of private Persons to whom they were written till the latter end of the Reign of the Emperor Trajan or rather of Adrian that is till about the year after Christ 130. Even the latter Evangelists had not seen the Gospels of the former else St. Luke would never have given
easy to guess the Reason He was a Heathen and they were Christians But we see however by all this that the mere force or edacity of time bears away or devours the most excellent Instances of Human Industry and Wit that we ought not to marvel if we have not still all or even had not the principal Labors of the Apostles and Apostolical men If Amyntor's Catalogue of Books some of them once reveâ—enced by the Church and now lost were much larger than it is it would by no means prove they were all Trivial Spurious or Erroneous Books 't would be no imputation on Christianity as abounding only with Fables and Impostures There being we have seen no part of Learning tho never so useful and necessary or so curious and diverting but has suffered extremely by the loss of some excellent Books and Authors nay of most such Authors and Books I believe also The unquestionable Orthodoxy the yielded certainty or genuinness and apparent sufficiency of the present Scripture-Canon were great Occations that the Books in the Catalogue fell gradually into dis-use and were afterwards lost As to the sufficiency of the Books of the Canon I mean of all them taken together it is self-evident For they contain a repeated Abrogation of the Mosaic Law so far as 't is Ritual and Judicial a compleat System of Morals the History of the Parentage Conception Birth Miracles Doctrine Death Resurrection and Ascension of our Saviour the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles their Divine Inspiration and Miraculous Powers their Epistles to private Persons to Churches and Nations in which they often professedly repeat the Substance of the Christian Religion as well in what respects Faith as Manners In short a man cannot read these Books without most plainly perceiving that they are such an Account of the Religion they teach as needs no Supplement Their Genuinness and Orthodoxy or that they are the very Books of the Authors whose names they bear and are true Representations of the Doctrines of Christianity as delivered to the Churches by the first Miraculous Preachers this is inferred with absolute certainty from their reception by all those Churches as such and that these rather than the Books of the Catalogue tho divers of them also were highly valued have been preserved If it be urged that supposing as this Answer does the Books in the Catalogue most of them or some of them were Orthodox and Genuine and owned to be such by the Churches 't is much they should be lost and only the Books of the present Canon preserved Which have been preserved it seems for no other Reasons but what are common also to the Books of the Catalogue namely because they are undoubtedly Orthodox and certainly Genuine I answer that the Books of the Catalogue that are lost or rejected were not so certainly Cenuin to all the Churches as those that are preserved and made parts of the Canon And as to the Orthodoxy tho that as to many of them was not questioned yet the Books not being so certain as to their Genuinness in all parts of the Christian World and therefore not allowed as unexceptionable Evidences in the numerous Controversies that arose in the Catholic Church and the un-suspected Books being abundantly sufficient to serve the ends of Religion in respect both of Controversy and Institution in manners the former hereupon almost unavoidably began to be neglected and in time were lost and only the latter were kept We have now the advantages of Printing and of a ready Communication by the increase of Trade and Improvement of Navigation between Nation and Nation the Antients wanted these helps therefore with them a Book concerning the Christian Religion if it were not published in Judea or at Rome or in some part of Greece or some considerable City of Asia it might not come to be known of a long time not vulgarly and generally known in the Churches till the Evidences that it was Genuine were all wholly lost or become of but little Authority The Books of our present Canon were immediately communicated by the Churches or Persons to whom they were written unto all the Famous Churches Like Industry was not used on behalf of the Books of the Catalogue therefore these last were read only or chiefly in the places of their Publication and in the Churches to which they were addressed and thus being long unknown to the Churches and Illustrious Writers of other places tho many of them were approved as to their Doctrine and Usefulness on which accounts they are often quoted by those two the most Learned of the Antenicen Fathers Clemens of Alexandria and Origen yet they did not obtain to be adopted into the Scripture-Canon as not so certainly the Works of Apostles and Apostolical men as those that were received for such every where and from the beginning Farther it may be divers Books of the Catalogue titled with the name of an Apostle or Synergist of the Apostles were rejected and in process of time lost for that very reason It was supposed that the Book having to it a name of one of the Apostle or some Apostolical Person therefore the Author claims to be that Person or that Apostle it might appear however by some things in the Book it self or by some Circumstances commonly known that the Author was not the Apostle or other Person vulgarly thought to be designed in the Title and hereupon the Book was consider'd as a Forgery and Imposture and as wrote probably with some dishonest Intention and Aim But as now so then and then much more than now abundance of People had the same names with the Apostles and other first Preachers it may be most Christians took those Names either at their Conversion or Baptism A Book therefore suppose a Gospel Epistles Acts might really be the Work of the Author in the Title-page or elswhere in the Book and yet in short time be rejected neglected and finally lost as an Imposture and Forgery on that false supposition that the Author affected to seem the Person that he was not and that in truth he never pretended to be This very thing hath certainly hapned in divers Works of the Fathers as well those of the fourth and fifth Ages and later as those of the second and third and it might happen I say in divers Writings of the Catalogue that we are considering I take these to be some of the Causes that so many Books of the Catalogue are lost Time the Sufficiency of the Books preserved and that some of them came not to general knowledg till the Evidences that they were Genuine were not so certain These are such Reasons and Occasions of it that we cannot much wonder at the misfortune of this invaluable Damage And after this 't is but little to the credit of their Judgment and less of their Morals that some affect to guess at the Causes of this Mishap in a sort that reflects on the Christian Religion as
if it had no manner of certainty and that we cannot now nor ever could distinguish Fables and Impostures from Authentic Monuments If a man is disposed to employ his Wit in scurrilous Conjectures he may say many things on such a Subject as this that shall be loudly applauded by the Partisans of Scepticism and Profanity and that will surprise the Superficial tho they be Serious and well-disposed But I maintain that after we have discovered such Reasons of the loss of these Books as every body must allow that some of them are certain and others of them are probable and all of them consistent with the reverence due to Religion those other Sportive or Malevolent Conjectures will be insisted on only by such as affect to be Infidels or that love to be vain tho in a serious and weighty Subject And tho to convince such People is it may be an impossible Task it being so much in the power of the Mind whether it will admit a light to which it has prejudices yet it will not be hard to satisfy the Indifferent that those Guesses are not the results of Judgment but only of a sceptical abuseful prejudicate and interessed Partiality and Vanity They tell us these Books were not lost they were supprest because they contained some things contrary to the Persuasions of the strongest side which always calls it self the Church Or they were gross and leud Forgeries composed by the Enemies of Christians with design only to make sport with a Crew of Blockheads that were always ready to swallow any thing never so silly and ridiculous provided it were but miraculous and had a few good Morals Or we owe them to a certain pious fraud to which the Antients were much given that sought to magnify Christianity by these pompous Tales and Additions to it the true Apostolic Writings being too imperfect to raise in mens Minds any great apprehensions of the Christian Religion Yet lest we should not by all this fully understand them they are mindful and careful to add that these Writings and Books however were quoted and reverenced by many of the Antients or Fathers and that no more than this can be said on behalf of the Books of our Canon that are preserved and not so much for divers of them Or more in short the latter are not a rush better or wiser than the former saving only that they have had the good luck to be preserved by Knaves and magnified by Fools Let us call over and discuss these things The Books of the Catalogue were once in reputation in some Places and with divers Learned Persons but they are now partly lost partly very much suspected as not Genuin We answer Seventeen hundred years the undeniable sufficiency of the Books which are preserved and that the Books of the Catalogue were not timely communicated to the principal Churches are obvious and probable Reasons that so many of 'em have miscarried and the rest are of doubtful Credit Some People are pleased to laugh at this and choose rather to guess that the Books we talk of have been either supprest or slighted because they were not to the tooth of the strongest side or were the Mock compositions of Enemies or the Holy Cheats of Persons that sought to aggrandize Christianity That is without ever having seen these Books without having heard of most of them under any other Character by the Antients than that they were known but to few they pronounce over them indefinitly or without distinguishing them that they were lend Cheats or pious Fraeuds or told some dangerous Tales that the political and prevailing Party thought fit to suppress Who sees not these are Suppositions that a man may make at will concerning any Books that are lost or any such Books that the Evidences of their being Genuin and sound have miscarried but they are mere Conjectures and such as neither Charity nor Prudence suffers us to make when we have others that are extremely probable and some of them certain I gave some Instances before of Mathematical Historical and Philosophical Books that are lost there is no learned Man that would approve of such a Judgment as this concerning them they have perisht because they were Trifles or Impostures or shot some such Bolts as the generality of wiser men could not away with I leave the matter with the indifferent to judg of it as their Wit and Honesty shall dispose ' em I added at our entrance into this Dissertation Nothing can be objected to the Catalogue but what one would look for that in so various a Subject some more Books are written than the severe serutiny of the Catholic Church would absolutely approve and that some Triflers and Impostors would perhaps be exercising their shameful Talents among the honest and well-qualified I meant hereby if we grant that most or almost all or if you will all the Books of the Catalogue were Spurious that they were pious Frauds or impious Cheats or have been supprest by the Jealousy of the prevailing side it will not in the least affect the Scripture-Canon or Christian Religion which are not the less true or less certain because there have been some false Evangelists and false Pretenders to Revelation Infidelity and Profanity are hard put to it when their whole strength is reduced to this there have been some false Evangelists feigned Acts Epistles Revelations therefore we have no certainty of any true Gospels Revelations Epistles or Acts. As if they had said Lucius Ambrose and Arthur were fabulous Kings of Britain and Jeffry of Monmouth has contrived a British Chronicle consisting chiefly of Tales of his own devising therefore neither can we prove Cassibelan Caractacus and Arviragus were sometimes Kings in this Island Or if you will thus Isidore Mercator published a Volume of Spurious Epistles of Popes and Bishops and Decrees of Councils Annius of Viterbium somewhile deceived every body with a Counterfeit Metasthenes a Berosus Manetho and Philo. Therefore we ought not to think there were at all any such Councils Bishops and Popes or a real Metasthenes a Berosus Philo and Manetho who were Learned and celebrated Writers and Historians Why don't they alledg the Alchoran too as an Exception and Objection to the Scripture Canon and say because one was an Imposture so must the other Our Author seems to be aware of some such Exceptions as these and therefore makes short work with us by intimating in a great many places that The reasons are the same why we should reject or receive the Catalogue and present Scripture-Canon as much may be said for or against one as the other We will examine this and the Pretences with which 't is supported very carefully Of the Verity and Certainty of the Scripture-Canon I Shall reduce into the best Method and most natural Order that I can what is any way considerable in our Author's Book concerning the Scripture-Canon discussing every particular as I recite or mention it From P. 69 to P.
that they were commonly read and a very bad Use made of 'em by some The remaining part of the Canon even the Catholic or General Epistles by St. James St. Peter St. John St. Jude and the Revelation because they were written some of them to whole Nations and the rest to all Christians not to particular Persons or Churches we must needs understand they were published by those Apostles themselves They could be no otherwise written and addressed to Nations and to all Christians but by such a general Publication as when we now give a Copy of a Letter or Book to a Bookseller to be by him made common It appears I suppose by all this to indifferent Persons that 't is utterly untrue that the Writers of the New Testament were strangers to the Writings of one another is it any better what follows next namely that Neither did the Clergy or Churches know of the Gospels and other Books of our present Canon We have still say these Gentlemen some Ecclesiastical Writers of those early times Clemens Romanus Barnabas Hermas Ignatius and Polycarp Of these Hermas has not one passage out of all the New Testament and for the places that are cited by the rest one cannot tell whether they are taken out of the Books of the present Canon or out of the Spurious Books even those of the Catalogue or some such Hermas has not one passage out of the New Testament Therefore what Why therefore as we were saying and are now proving Hermas had not read the Books of the New Testament which were all still and long after even to the year 130 in the Coffers of Persons and Churches to whom they were writen And I say Hermas has not cited a word out of the whole Old Testament Had he not therefore read any of the Books of that Testament had not a profest Christian and a Writer think they read any Book of the Old or New Testament It is apparent he had read both by the Doctrine of his Book by his Discourses on Baptism Repentance and all Christian Virtues by his Visions Similitudes and Commands of all which he had his Hints from the Books of Holy Scripture especially the Prophetical He even sometimes expresses himself in the very words of the New Testament as when he says Com. 4. Sect. 1. He that putteth away his wife and marrieth another committeth Adultery Which he took no doubt from Sr. Luke who uses those very words Luke 16.18 Clemens Romanus manifestly alludes to divers Expressions and Passages of the New Testament and some he expresly repeats as Charity covereth a multitude of Sins 1 Pet. 4.8 We are Members one of another Rom. 12.5 He Christ is so much greater than Angels as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they Heb. 1.2 4. Forgive and ye shall be forgiven with what measure ye meet it shall be measured to you again Luke 6.37 Wo unto him by whom Offences come It were better for him that a Milstone were hanged about his neck and that he were cast into the Sea than that he should offend one of my little ones Luke 17.1 2. St. Polycarp takes notice of the Epistle written by Sr. Paul to the Philippians and saith that Apostle mentions the Philippians with much Honor in the beginning of his Epistle to them So indeed he dos calling them the Saints at Philippi and professing that upon every remembrance of them by giveth thanks to God Phil. 1.1 2. He cites also the words of St. Paul to other Churches as Do ye not know that the Saints shall judg the World 1 Cor. 6.2 Neither Fornicators nor Effeminate nor abusers of themselves with mankind shall inherit the Kingdom of God 1 Cor. 6.9 10. We brought nothing into this World and we can carry nothing out of it 1 Tim. 6.7 He often repeats the Words and Expressions of St. Peter Whom not having seen ye love in whom tho now ye see him not ye rejoice with joy unspeakable end full of Glory â— Pet. 1.8 Who his own self hare our Sins in his own Body on the Tree who did no Sin nor was Guile found in his Mouth 1 Pet. 2.22 24. Having your Conversation honest among the Gentiles Out of St. John he hath Whosoever doth not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh this is Anti-Christ 1 John 4.3 From the Evangelists Matthew and Luke he gives us these Passages Blessed are they that are persecuted for Righteousness sake for theirs is the Kingdom of God Matth. 5.10 Blessed are the Poor for theirs is the Kingdom of God Luke 6.10 The Spirit truly is willing but the Flesh is weak Matth. 26.41 Clemens and Polycarp affect to speak whatsoever they have to say in the words of Scripture especially of the New Testament St. Ignatius rather uses his own way of Expression but he saith from St. Matthew He that is able to receive this let him receive it Matth. 19.12 The Tree is known by his Fruit. Matth. 12.33 From St. Paul he borrows who hath given himself for us an Offering and Sacrifice to God Eph. 5.2 Be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment and all speak the same things 1 Cor. 1.10 Where is the Wise where is the Disputer 1 Cor. 1.23 They have but one Witness more to call St. Barnabas who also is against them not much less than the former for he alledges from St. Matthew Many are called but few are chosen Matth. 20.16 and 22.14 He came not to call the Righteous but Sinners to repentance Matth. 9.13 In his 19th Section he giveth an Abstract or Summary of the Moral and Practical Duties of Christianity or the way of Life as he speaks it appears both by the matter and manner of speaking He meant to abridg the morality of the Old and New Testaments If we now consider that these Pieces are only Epistles or Letters and some of them so brief that they may be written on a sheet of Paper we may rather wonder that these Fathers have quoted so much Scripture than that we meet so little in their Letters And when M. Dodwel and Amyntor say They cannot tell whether these Citations are from the Books of our Canon or from some of the Apocryphal Books of the Catalogue they put me hard to it to imagine what they can tell for they are the very words neither more nor fewer of the Canonical Books and are extant in no other Writers that I or that they know unless they should be in the invaluable lost Decads of Titus Livius As to other Quotations out of these Fathers that might also have been observed in which in repeating the words of Scripture they sometimes substitute an equivalent word or words for the word in the Scripture-Text it was not because they were quoting some Apocryphal Gospel Epistle or Acts but because they cited by memory Wanting Concordances and our other Modern Helps they could not without much trouble to themselves
and third Epistle but the two last are also questioned by some He thinks those Churches are to be commended that receive the Epistle to the Hebrews for our Ancestors reckon it to St. Paul and had doubtless good reasons why they did so Origen Expos in Joan. l. 5. in Matth. l. 1. Euseb H. E. l. 6. c. 25. We see then in reckoning up the genuin Works of the Apostles and Books that they thought to be Divine Scripture Origen does not vouchsafe so much as to mention any of the Books of the Catalogue he knows nothing of other Gospels Acts Revelations or Epistles besides those of our present Canon Not that indeed he did not well know them and also esteem some of them for he frequently quotes them both in Preaching and Arguing but when he professes to declare the true Ecclesiastical Canon and genuin Works of the Evangelists and Apostles he forgets all the Books of the Catalogue Amyntor is very earnest for the Doctrine and the Revelation of St. Peter on the Account that they were approved he saith by the Antients in particular by Origen he saith they may be preferred on that account before Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews and other Books of our present Canon which were doubted of by the Antients We have just now heard Origen say the direct contrary we have seen he and those other Fathers make some doubt of the Epistle to the Hebrews the 2d of Peter the 2d and 3d of John but they speak very favorably and very respectfully of them and so as plainly to intimate that they incline to them but the Revelation and Doctrine of Peter and other Books of the Catalogue they never once name 'em in recounting the Books of the Canon or of the Evangelists and Apostles The testimony of Origen in the case is so much the more considerable because he was undoubtedly the most learned of all the Antients the first Divine the Church ever had some doubt not to add and the last Our Antagonist has not yet done with us he says The Council of Laodicea about 360 Years after Christ is the first Assembly wherein the present Canon of Scripture was establish'd In so great a variety of Books those of the Catalogue and those of the Canon how could that Council determine which were the true Writings of the Apostles and which not but by Revelation or the written Testimony of their Predecessors Revelation in the Case there was none and for Testimony I have the same Testimony for many Books of the Catalogue Elsewhere p. 48. he adds Divers Books of the Catalogue were verily supposed by the Antients to be written by the Evangelists Apostles and their Synergists whose name they bear why then do we not receive 'em into the Canon since the Authors of 'em were at least Companions and Fellow-laborers of the Apostles as well as St. Mark and St. Luke Why are they excluded from the Canon and those Evangelists not excluded If this quality to have been a Companion and Synergist of the Apostles was sufficient to entitle Mark and Luke to Inspiration why should it not do as much for Barnabas and Clemens Romanus And if this be not all the reason pray let us know the true one for I never heard of any other He is entred I confess on the merits of the Cause He saith the Council of Laodicea that establish'd our present Canon could no other ways distinguish the genuin Writings of the Apostles from those falsly imputed to 'em but by the Testimony of their Predecessors he hath the same Testimony for the Books of the Catalogue He knows no other reason why Mark and Luke are believed to write by Inspiration but that they were Synergists and Companions of the Apostles I answer That he hath the same Testimony for some Books of the Catalogue as we for the Books of the Canon he attempted to prove from Irenaeus Clemens of Alexandria and Origen his only Witnesses But Irenaeus I have shown barely names some of those Books and for others he cites them only as good Witnesses of the true Ecclesiastical Tradition not as Divine Scripture Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen may sometimes call them Scripture in the sense that they so call the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament which they with the Protestants deny to be parts of that Testament and in reciting the Books of the Canon and Works of the Apostles they wholly omit and sometimes expresly censure these Books of the Catalogue The Council of Laodicea nor any other ever pretended to establish the Canon of Scripture which is precedaneous to all Councils and receives no Authority from them but they from it Amyntor should have said the Council of Laodicea is the first Assembly that on occasion of some spurious and many doubtful Books declared which were the Books that had been certainly left to the Church by the Apostles and other Miraculous first Preachers 'T is no more true that Mark and Luke are supposed to write by Inspiration only because they were Companions and Synergists of the Apostles and that the Council of Laodicea declared the Scripture-Canon from only the Testimony of their Ancestors or Predecessors that is of the preceding Fathers such as Irenaeus Clemens of Alexandria and Origen Eusebius a long time before the Council of Laodicea informed every body of the sound Reasons why the Catholic Church receives some Books as Divine Scripture and others not his words are these Many Books have been published by Heretics under the names of the Apostles as the Gospels of Peter Thomas Matthias and others the Acts of Andrew John and divers more But first they are not cited he means not as Divine Scripture for that they are indeed quoted by Clemens of Alexandria and Origen the learnedst of the Antenicens he tells us before and after by the Doctors of the Church Secondly their way of writing is wholly different from the Spirit Genius and Manner of the Apostles Lastly the Doctrine Opinions and other Matters advanced in those Books are so contrary to Truth and to Orthodoxy that we must not barely call them Spurious but Absurd and Impious Euseb H. E. l. 3. c. 25. I must a little enlarge on this important Testimony which overthrows all Amyntor's and M. Dodwel's Pretences either for the Books of the Catalogue or against those of the Canon These Books saith Eusebius are never cited as Divine Scripture by the Doctors of the Church directly contrary to Amyntor's I have the same Testimony of the Antients the very best and soundest of them for these Books that is alledged or can be by others for the Canon These Writings says Eusebius again have nothing of the Apostolical Way and Spirit They want that honest Plainness in their Style that Integrity of manners that Elevation of Piety that Salt of Virtue that exemption from Partialities and Passions which so effectually recommend and even point out to us the Inspired Writings Above all they are stuffed with abundance of
being a very considerable Sect nor did they show other Scriptures as written by Christ or his Apostles nor deny the genuinness of the whole New Testament or so much as of any Book of it All the business is Amyntor knew not how to point the words of Faustus nor how to render them into English his Translation of 'em is not only false but 't is non-sense By the same figure of Speech that he calls the Manichees Christians he must also call the Mahometans Christians nay there is incomparably more reason so to call the latter than the former but the latter were never so called by any therefore neither may the former Manchaeus and Mahomet equally pretended that he was the Paraclet or Comforter promised to his Disciples by our Saviour in those words recorded by St. John If I go not the Comforter or Paraclet will not come unto you but if I depart I will send him to you When he the Spirit of Truth is come He will guide you into all Truth John 16.7 13. Mahomet innovated but little comparatively in the Articles of Religion Manichaeus subverted all things He taught and his few Followers believed 1. There are two Co-eternal Principles God and Hyle the former the Author of all Good the other of all Evil. 2. God very hardly defends his Frontiers from the encroachments of Hyle even some part of his Divine Substance is captivated by Hyle nor shall it ever be wholly released 3. God is not the Creator of Mankind but Nature 4. The God of the Old Testament is a lying and impotent Spirit false and harsh to his Servants and who was neither able nor willing to protect or do good to the Synagogue or Church of the Jews which served him as an Hand-maid her Mistress 5. Jesus Christ was neither born nor died but is the off-spring of the Holy Spirit generated in the Earth and subsisting in all living Creatures as also in all Fruits and Vegetables the visible Jesus was only a Phantom 6. The Patriarchs and Prophets of the Old Testament were the most flagitious of all men and ought not to be named without some particular and remarkable Detestation 7. Souls are a part of the Substance of God and when the Body dies they enter into other Bodies of men or of Beasts or Fish or of some Tree Herb or Flower as their desert in the present Life hath been except however some few thorowly purified Souls which re-ascend into Heaven where they live and row in Boats of Light 8. The Sun and Moon are to be adored It is evident by these Articles of the Manichaean Creed that our Author might as well or better have said There is a very considerable Sect of Christians themselves I mean the Mahometans who shew other Scriptures and deny the Books of our present Canon If this would be ridiculous the other a considerable Sect of Christians I mean the Manichees is much more so Well let 'em be a Sect of Christians yet they were not as he saith a very considerable Sect. St. Austin who for nine years was of their Number says in tam exiguo pene nullo Numero vestro i. e. you are a very few and almost none at all And again I confess good Christians are but few but those of our Denomination who are really good are vastly more than all you Manichees whether good or bad Contr. Fausium l. 20. c. 23. They shall be Christians and a very considerable Sect. What then Why they shewed other Scriptures different from those that are read and used by the Church If he means they shew some Writings of Minichaeus which among them were valued as the Scriptures of the Evangelists and Apostles are esteemed among Christians 't is true indeed but not to the purpose No more than if he had said the Mahometans show an Alchoran as Christians do a Bible therefore the Bible is a spurious supposititious Book never wrote by the pretended Authors of it The question is whether the Books of the New Testament are genuine were indeed written by the Persons whose names they bear Amyntor answers No for the Manichees a very considerable Sect of Christians themselves shew other Scriptures Plainly if he means they also shew Books written by the Patriarch of their Sect 't is a random Bolt the enquiry not being Whether the Manichees had certain Books which they followed but whether they pretended to prove that the Christian Bible is not genuin by shewing other different Copies of it And this without doubt Amyntor intended therefore I answer they never pretended to shew other Copies of the Christian Bible than those in the Catholic Church Faustus their Advocate never says such a Text is not in our Copies he says only I believe 't is foisted into the Scripture-context because it is a manifest Falshood The two Paraclets Manichaeus and Mahomet were altogether unlearned they both pretended that the Christian Bible was in many places greatly corrupted but this they proved only by arguing against the particular Passages which they disliked not by producing other Copies different from those of the Church In short the way they took might prove the Scriptures of Christians to be erroneous but by no means to be spurious interpolated or not genuin How this madness of the Paraclets is to be answered we shall consider by and by we must now examine what Amyntor has here added he saith The Manichees not only shewed other Scriptures but denied also the genuinness of the whole New Testament He hath no witness of it Faustus whom he alledges says the contrary I don't deny he has truly recited those places of Faustus which he hath put into his Margin but as I intimated before he hath neither seen how to rightly point them nor truly translate them and the reason of both I imagine was he overlookt the Explanations that Faustus gives in other Sections of his meaning and intention First As to the Epistles of St. Paul and of the other Apostles both Faustus and St. Austin own expresly they were allowed by the Manichees Their words are these Apostolum Paulum Accipis Maxime Do you receive Paul 's Epistles Most readily and especially Lib. 11. c. 1. Again Lib. 12. c. 24. Epistolas Apostolorum Legitis Tenetis Praedicatis You read believe and even extol the Epistles of the Apostles As to the Gospels Faustus even disdains that it should be questioned whether they are received by the Manichees If saith he by receiving the Gospel you mean obeying it it is the Rule of my Life and Conversation You Catholics pretend to receive the Gospel without giving any signs of it in your manners and you ask me whether I receive it who do all things that it requireth even all things that might prevent such a Question Lib. 5. c. 1 2. Elswhere he deals more explicitly and clearly Lib. 32. c. 7. We receive as Sacred Truth all that the Son hath said and even all that was said by his Apostles after
's Gospel is but an Abridgment of the Gospel by Matthew that St. Luke in the first Verses of his Gospel commends the Gospels of Matthew and Mark that St. John approved the Gospels of these three former Evangelists and wrote his Gospel only by way of Supplement to theirs that St. Peter commends the Epistles of Paul and signifie at the same time that they were commonly read and a bad Use made of them by some that the Catholick Epistles by James Peter Jude and John the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Revelation being written either to whole Nations or to all Christians were certainly publish'd as soon as written 2. At least the Clergy and Churches were unacquainted with the Books of the New Testament till 130 years after Christ I have shown they were quoted by all the extant Writers of those Times by Barnabas Herinas Ignatius Polycarp Clemens Romanus and by some not Extant as Papias of Hierapolis in the year 110. Farther that the four Gospels the Acts Revelation Catholick Epistles and Epistle to the Hebrews being written for general Information or to whole Churches or Nations they were written to be publish'd and publish'd as soon as written and that 't is a very precarious and withal an unreasonable supposition that the Clergy and Churches were ignorant of the publish'd Books of their Religion That the contrary in truth is evident for as early as Justin Martyr's time the Churches entertained a Reader besides the Deacons Presbyters and Bishop who read the Old and New Testaments to the Assembly 3. It was impossible when the Books of the Canon first appeared to distinguish them from spurious Gospel Acts Epistles and Revelations which were also entitled to the Apostles I have replyed there was nothing more obvious or easy to the then Churches than to distinguish them with absolute certainty by their Agreement or Disagreement with the Doctrine and History of our Saviour which those Churches had but just before received by word of Mouth from the Apostles and other first miraculous Preachers 4. Different Copies were shown of all the Canonical Books from the very first the Nazarens and Ebionits had a Gospel of St. Matthew different from ours the Marcionits of St. Luke and of the Epistles of Paul I have answer'd Marcion was so ingenuous as to retract his vitiated Copies of St. Paul's Epistles and of St. Luke's Gospel the Copy of Matthew used by the Nazarens was say the Antients πληÏÎςατον most perfect the Ebionite Copy being probably St. Matthew's first or Hebrew Edition of his Gospel did indeed want the two first Chapters and in time they had added some Traditional Memoirs from the Witness of some Disciples that had seen the Facts and knew the Persons it were to be wish'd we had still this Copy 5. The Books of the Canon were imputed by some very considerable Sects of Christians not to the Apostles whose names they bear but either to Hereticks or to a set of Half-Jews and Half-Christians who had written them only from hearsay and flying Reports I have evinced that only the Gospel of John was ever mislayed and that the Alogians soon saw their Error in the Case not only receiving that Gospel but receiving it also with all other Sects and Churches as St. John ' s. That the Manichees the other considerable Sect of Christians intended in the Objection owned our four Gospels the Epistles of Paul all the Catholick Epistles and all other Books of our Canon in short that Amyntor certainly and inadvertently enough mistook the meaning of the Author Faustus the Manichee whom he alledged 6. The Philosopher Celsus complains that the Christians had alter'd their Gospel three or four or more times Celsus I have said meant this of the Copies of Marcion and of Valentinus and Lucanus which never were used in the Churches but at their first appearance were detected and rejected by all Churches Of the Books of the Catalogue he saith 1. MANY of 'em have rather been supprest by the strongest side in the Church than lost and that probably they were the genuin Works of the Apostles I have granted divers of 'em might be the real Works of those whose names they bore and that our loss of them is to be regretted but the whole body of Learning has suffer'd extremely by the loss of some of the best Books in every Science and Art Notwithstanding the Reasons alledged by the Antients against many of them are sufficient to convince us that there was just cause to slight and even to suppress them 2. The Epistles of Barnabas Ignatius Polycarp Clemens Romanus and the Pastor of Hermas were esteemed by the Antients to be a good Scripture as any part of the New Testament they were received by the soundest of the Antients who at the same time rejected divers Books of our present Canon namely the Revelation the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of Jude the second of Peter and the second and third of John But I have produced unquestionable Testimony of the Antients that these lesser pieces of the Canon were always received by the generality of Churches and Christians and that when they were owned in the Council of Laodicea 't was on very good grounds on the same Reasons which convinced 'em of the genuinness of the other Books of the New Testament As to Barnabas Ignatius Polycarp Hermas and Clemens Romanus they were considered indeed as pious and well-minded Compositions but were read no otherwise but as we now read in our Churches the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament which for all that we directly deny to be Divine Scripture and many think them not very Edifying or Profitable especially some of them 3. The principal Ante-nicen Fathers quoted divers Gospels Epistles and Acts of the Catalogue as Scripture and Canonical and this is all that can be said for the Books of the Canon and more than can be truly said for some of them I have alledged the very words of those Fathers it appears they never cite the Books of the Catalogue as Divine Scripture and in reciting the Books of the true Scripture-Canon and of the Apostles they always omit all the Gospels and other Books of the Catalogue I grant however that the mere Terms Scripture and Canonical were at first applied to all Ecclesiastical Books that were judged Orthodox as also to the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament to distinguish them from the Moral pieces of the Heathen Philosophers but the alledged Fathers have made us know the great difference they put between mere Scripture and Divine Scripture between Canonical and Inspired Nam pudet haec opprobria Nobis Et dici potuisse non potuisse Refelli FINIS Advertisement ALL the Works of the late Reverend and Learned William Bates D. D. and some Account of him in a Funeral Sermon by Mr. John How with an Alphabetical Table to the whole are proposed to be printed in a large Folio on an extraordinary Paper and Character at