SOME REFLECTIONS On that part of a Book called AMYNTOR OR THE Defence of Milton 's Life Which relates to the WRITINGS of the Primitive Fathers And the CANON of the New Testament In a Letter to a Friend LONDON Printed for James Knapton at the Crown in St. Paul's Church-yard 1699. SIR THE Design which the Author of the defence of Milton's Life professes that he had in writing that part of his Book which relates to the Writings of the Primitive Fathers and the Canon of the New Testament was only to vindicate himself from the Charge of denying the Scripture and declaring his doubt that several pieces under the name of Christ and his Apostles recieved now by the whole Christian Church are supposititious by shewing that what he had said in the Life of Milton concerning the spuriousness of several pieces under the name of Christ and his Apostles was meant not of those Writings which are now received by the whole Christian Church but of those Apocryphal Pieces which were in many places received and approved in the Primitive Times This is what the Author professes to be the only design of this part of his Book And though for his own sake I cannot but heartily wish it were really no other yet because there are several Passages wherein he either so expresses the very slight esteem that he has for the Primitive Fathers as seems to reflect upon our Religion it self or raises such doubts about the authority of the Canon of the New Testament as Hereticks to use his own words may draw mischievous inferences from and by which Scruples may be put into the minds of Sincere Christians I have therefore sent you such short remarks as upon reading the Book have occurred to me and as I hope may be of some use to others on this Occasion The Principal Propositions which our Author maintains and which I thought most to deserve consideration are these three First Pag. 38 39. That the Books ascribed to the Disciples and Companions of the Apostles which are still extant and at this time thought genuine and of great Authority such as the Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians the Epistles of Ignatius the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians the Pastor of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas for about the rest which he mentions there is no great Controversie are all very easily proved to be spurious and fraudulently imposed upon the credulous Secondly pag. 38. That 't is the easiest task in the world to shew the ignorance and superstition of the Writers of these Books pag. 45. That Barnabas has many ridioulous passages and by saying that the Apostles before their Conversion were the greatest sinners in nature robs us of an argument we draw from their integrity and simplicity against Infidels That the Pastor of Hermas is the silliest Book in the World And that Ignatius says pag. 46. the Virginity of Mary was a secret to the Devil which I suppose he cites as a ridiculous saying Thirdly That they who think these Books genuine ought to receive them into the Canon of Scripture since the reputed Authors of them were the Companions and fellow-labourers of the Apostles as well as St. Mark or St. Luke which is the only reason he ever heard of why these two Evangelists are thought Inspired pag. 48. For to say that these Books ought not to be received now into the Canon because the Ancients did not think fit to approve them is but a mere evasion since many Books now received as Canonical were not approved by the Ancients pag. 57. and some received by the Ancients are now rejected b◠the Moderns and Mr. Dodael owns pag. 73. that anciently no difference was put by the Church between the Apocryphal and Canonical Books of the New Testament and besides no stress can be laid on the Testimony of the Fathers pag. 80. since they not only contradict one another but are often inconsistent with themselves in their relations of the very same facts were divided into various Sects pag. 56. who in those early days did like us condemn one another for damnable Hereticks used to reason precariously p. 50 51. as Irenaeus the famous Successor of the Apostles argues from the four Regions of the World and the four Winds that there cannot be more nor fewer than four Gospels and give hard names to those who contemn such precarious reasoning These are the principal Assertions of our Author which because they seem to me not only to be salse but also to be proposed with too bold a liberty of passing censures upon the judgment both of the ancient and modern Church I shall therefore in answer to them and for a Vindication of the Primitive Fathers and Modern Doctors of the Christian Church with submission advance these three Propositions First that though we are not infallibly certain that the Epistles of Clemens Ignatius Polyearp and Barnabas with the Pastor of Hermas are Genuine yet that they are generally believed to be so upon very great Authority and with very good Reason Secondly That therefore though they are not received as of the same Anthority with the Canonical Books of the New Testament yet they ought to have a proportionable Veneration paid to them both with respect to the Authors and to the Writings themselves Thirdly That neither the Belief of the Genuiness of these Books nor the Respect paid to them as such does in the least diminish from the Authority of the New Testament or tend to make the number of the Canonical Books Vncertain or Precarious I. First That though we are not infallibly certain that the Epistles of Clemens Ignatius Polycarp and Barnabas with the Pastor of Hermas are Genuine yet that they are generally believed to be so upon very great Authority and with very good Reason 1. The Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians a * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 3. c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. l. 3. c. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. l. 5. c. 6. ex Irenaeo l. 3.3 c. 3. great and wonderful Epistle saith Eusebius was unanimously and without any controversie received by the antient Church and †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. l. 3. l. 16. read publickly in most Churches both antiently and in his time And that the Epistle now extant is the same with that which was so commended by the Antients has not been questioned by any Learned Man these many years and has been lately proved at large by the Learned Doctor Wake in his Genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers and by Grabius in his Spicilegium p. 261. whom I shall not now transcribe 2. That Ignatius wrote several Epistles * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 3. c. 36. one to the Ephesians one to the Magnesians one to the Trallians one to the Romans one to the Philadelphians one to the Smyrnaeans and one to Polycarp Eusebius expresly testifies quoting
ridiculous And as to his saying that the Apostles before their Conversion were the greatest sinners in nature this does not at all rob us of the Argument we use to draw from their Integrity and Simplicity against Infidels For supposing them to have been never so wicked were they the less Simple and Illiterate for that Or is their Wickedness before their Conversion any way inconsistent with their Integrity after it But besides these Words might be spoken with relation to such sins as though very great in themselves yet sincere and well-meaning Men might be guilty of in their Ignorance as St. Paul says of himself that before his Conversion he was the chief of sinners in respect of his blaspheming Christ and persecuting Christians even to Death for Christ's sake In short though it must after all be confest that the Authors of these Writings used a plain popular and unpolite Stile that they were guilty of some Mistakes in things wherein the whole world at that time erred with them for which Mr. T. is pleased to stile them Ignorant and that they delivered divers things which tho' very agreeable to the strictness of their Discipline in the Primitive Church yet the present times will not so well bear for which Mr. T. calls them Superstitious Tho' I say all this must be granted yet since in general the Matter of these Writings is such that not only the Ancients thought fit to cite them in their Books and read them in their Churches but also the Learnedst and most Judicious Criticks of our own times as well Laicks as those of the Clergy have received them as genuine and recommended them as containing the true and pure Faith of Christ I cannot but think that the very great scorn and contempt wherewith Mr. T. hath thought fit to treat them is a very bold assuming to himself and undervaluing the Judgment of the greatest Men both of the Ancient and Modern Church and consequently a Reflection upon our Religion its self and that after all we have very good Reason as well as very great Authority though not to receive these Writings as of the same Authority with the Canonical Books of the New Testament yet to pay them a proportionable Veneration both with respect to the Authors and to the Writings themselves III. Thirdly Neither the Belief of the Genuineness of these Writings nor the respect paid to them as such does in the least diminish from the Authority of the New Testament or tend to make the number of the Canonical Books uneertain or precarious This is the difficulty on which Mr. T. seems particularly to insist as if it were impossible for those who believe the Genuineness of these Writings to give any tolerable reason why they do not admit them into the Canon of the New Testament as well as several others which are now receiv'd And therefore I shall indeavour to be somewhat more exact and particular in giving an Answer to it 1. First then tho' we have great Reason to believe these Books to be Genuine yet have we not the same certainty of it as we have of the Genuineness of the Books receiv'd into the Canon of the N. Testament The Books of the New Testament as it might be proved of every one of them particularly were received at their first coming forth as being written by Divine Inspiration and were quoted as such by Irenaeus and others of the Ancientest Fathers And though upon occasion of some Disputes that arose afterwards among Christians the Authority of some few of those Books came to be called in Question not to speak at present of those Hereticks the Cerinthians Marcionites Manichees and others who rejected whatsoever made against their absurd Opinions yet those few Questioned Books were so far from being as Mr. T. salsely asserts rejected a long time by all Christians almost with universal consent that even those Books were not only kept entire from the beginning but as Eusebius expresly testifies were * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist l. 3. c. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 3. c. 3. owned by most Doctors of the Church and were all along read together with the other Scriptures and at last upon the full and exact examination of all Circumstances the matter being put out of Question they were unanimously received as well by those Churches where they were doubted before as by all other Christian Churches into the Canon of Scripture and so have been continued ever since by universal consent and by the uninterrupted Succession of Christians in all Ages Whereas of those Writings which we are now speaking of that which is the least controverted viz. the Epistle of Clemens was for many Ages thought to be utterly lost and though upon its appearing again the best Criticks in the World thought they had good reason to pronounce it Genuine yet they could not be so sure that it was free from corruption and interpolation as we are of those Writings which were never lost And now this Argument is of peculiar force against Mr. T. For if he thinks as he says that he can with all the ease in the World prove these Writings spurious which notwithstanding his vain boast he will never be able to perform he may at least allow those who do not doubt but they are Genuine yet not to advance them above their own rank and place them among those which by the Universal Church have been received into the Canon of the New Testament 2. Secondly Though the matter of these Writings be such as that they do therefore deserve very great veneration and respect yet is there plainly something humane something of infirmity something of fallibility in them for which they are with all reason thought inferior to the Writings of the Apostles And this Argument is also peculiarly strong against Mr. T. For if he thinks as he says that he can with all the ease in the World show the Ignorance and Superstition of the Authors of these Writings well may he allow those who so far differ from him in this as to think they deserve the high Character of Primitive Holy and Apostolical Men yet not to presume to equal them with the Apostles themselves 3. Thirdly When we have made the best judgment of things that we can possibly at this distance of time we cannot after all but pay some deference to the judgment of the Ancients especially when assembled in a Council and allow them to judge somewhat better in the Ages next after our Saviour what Writings were of Authority to be made the Standard and Rule of Faith than we can after 1700 hundred years Especially since of the doubted Books which were sometime read promiscuously with the uncontroverted 't is plain they received such only into the Canon whose stile and matter and agreement with the rest of the Apostolical Writings do sufficiently prove them to have judged wisely and upon good Grounds But this Argument is of no
force with Mr. T. 4. Fourthly Therefore and which is a direct decision of this Question I add that the true reason why such a certain and determinate number of Writings are received as the Canon of Scripture that is as an Authoritative Rule of Faith and Manners is because they were written by the Apostles themselves who are acknowledged to have been guided by an infallible Spirit or which is all one were dictated reviewed and approved by them or some of them All the Books of the New Testament except the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are therefore received as Canonical because the Church upon undoubted Grounds believes them to be written immediately by the Apostles themselves and these three Books are therefore received as Canonical likewise because we believe them to have been dictated reviewed and approved by some of the Apostles And this is a plain and direct reason though Mr. T. is so modest to say he never heard of it pag. 48. why the Writings of St. Mark and St. Luke who were only Companions of the Apostles are received among the Canonical Writings of the Apostles and yet the Epistles of Clemens and Barnabas who were Fellow-labourers with the Apostles are not And that this is indeed the true reason why some Books are received as of infallible Authority and others not may be sufficiently proved to any unprejudiced person from what we find in the Ancients concerning this matter That all Books acknowledged to be written by the Apostles were always received as of unquestionable Authority is evident The Question concerning any doubted Book being not whether the Writing of an Apostle should be received as of good Authority or not but whether that Writing said to be an Apostle's were indeed the Writing of him whose name it bore That the reason why the Writings of St. Mark and St. Luke were always received as of certain Authority was not because they were Contemporaries with the Apostles for so were Clemens and Hermas and Barnabas but because their Writings were particularly approved and authorized by the Apostles is plain from Eusebius who tells us expresly that St. Peter received and approved the Gospel of St. Mark and that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 2. c. 15. it was this approbation that authorized it to be received by the Churches In like manner †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 2â— That St. John reviewed all the Gospels and confirmed the truth of them Irenaeus likewise tells us * Marcus discipulâ—s interpres Peâ—ri quae à Petâ—â— annunciata eraâ—t edidit lib. 3. cap. 1. that what St. Mark wrote was dictated by St. Peter and that †Luâ—as sâ—ctaâ—or Pauli quod ab illo prâ—â—licabatur Evangeliâ—â—n in â—â—bro condidit Ibid. the Gospel of St. Luke was only a Transcript of St. Paul 's Preaching St. Paul himself plainly refers to it 1 Cor. 15.5 where declaring unto the Corinthians the Gospel which he had before Preached he puts them in mind how that Christ rose from the dead according to the Scriptures and that he was seen of Cephas c. which appearance of our Saviour to Peter is no vvhere mentioned but in Saint Luke's Gospel Luke 24.34 And in the first Epistle to Timothy 5.18 he quotes it with the express Title of Scripture The Scripture saith The Labourer is worthy of his Hire which words are no where found in Scripture but in St. Luke's Gospel Luke 10. v. 7. So that 't is without great reason that Learned Men have judged it to be St. Luke's Gospel which the Apostle calls his own Gospel 2 Tim. 2.8 and elsewhere And then for the Acts of the Apostles 't is plain they are an Account of St. Paul's Travels * Baron ad ann 61. written before his Death so that they are with all reason believed to have been approved by him and if they were not yet * Sunt enim Acta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ejus operis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cuius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipse suum agnoscit Evangelium Acta postea ab Evangelio divulserunt quibus commodius visum ob locorum saciliorem expeditioremque invicem comparationem Evangelistas separato codice complecti ab Actis secernere Dodwell Dissertat 1. in Irenaeum being anciently the same Book vvith the Gospel of St. Luke they vvere undoubtedly revievved by St. John together vvith it and their Authority vvas hardly ever that I knovv of called in question by any but †Vid. Tertull. adversus Marcion lib. 5. sub initio Marcion the Heretick Lastly That no other Books however written by the Contemporaries of the Apostles were received by the Ancients as of infallible and decisive Authority in matters of Dispute is evident Eusebius tells us expresly that the Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews vvas questioned by some not because they doubted whether it was written in the Age of the Apostles for that they could not not but * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 3. cap. 3. because the Church of Rome thought it not to be written by St. Paul The Pastor of Hermas also as †Idem ibidem the same Author tells us was esteemed so much as to be read publickly in Churches and yet never received as of infallible Authority Nay Origen goes farther thinks it to be not only a useful Book but written * Quae scriptura valde mihi 〈◊〉 videtur ut puto divinitus inspirata Origen in Rom. 16 14. even with some degree of Inspiration and yet †Si cui tamen â—criptura illa recipienda videtur Origen Hom. 8. in Nuâ—â— imposes it not upon any one to be received as Scripture In like manner the Epistle of Clemens though the most unquestionable Piece in all Antiquity and as Eusebius Stiles it * Lib. 3. c. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet it is by the same Author †Lib. 6. c. 13. elsewhere reckoned up among the Apocryphal Pieces that is as Cotelerius well observes not that any one doubted of its Genuineness or Excellency but only that they would not reckon it among the Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which Eusebius there opposes it The Truth is the unquestioned Works of the Apostles were not anciently as Mr. Dodwel confesses kept in a distinct Book from the Apocryphal but read and cited promiscously with the Works of their immediate Successors But then 't is also certain that as unquestioned Works of the Apostles whenever they were cited were looked upon by all as infallible and decisive so the other Pieces whilst they were quoted and urged by some might as freely be denied or not yielded to by others Vainly therefore doth Mr. T. object That they who believe the Epistle of Clemens and the rest to be genuine cannot give any reason why they do not admit it into the Canon of Scripture And as falsly does he insinuate that the Establishment of that Canon is uncertain and precarious Could it be proved That the Epistles of James and of Peter and of Jude or any of them were not written by those whose Names they bear we should indeed be obliged to reject them And could the Preaching and Revelation of Peter be proved to be genuine we should be obliged to receive them into the Canon of the New Testament But so far is it from being true That the Preaching and Revelation of Peter were so receiv'd by the Ancients as by more than a parity of Reason to claim admission into the Canon with his second Epistle and the rest of the some time questioned Books that on the contrary these Pieces besides the arguments that may be drawn from the Writings themselves were received by so few of the Ancients as to make * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hist l. 3. c. 3. Eusebius think though in that indeed he was mistaken that they vvere never quoted by any of the Ancients at all What Mr. T. has invidiously urged about the Divisions among the Fathers and their want of exactness in their Reasonings I suppose will not move those who know that Truth is never the less such for being surrounded with a multitude of Errors and that Men did not then write in a Nice and Scholastick way but in a plain and unpolite Stile mixing Arguments Similitudes and Illustrations promiscously which is the way of representing things popularly and to mean Capacities Thus I have indeavoured to give a short Answer to the Difficulties which Mr. T. has with great freedom proposed Hoping that what I have here very briefly and with Submission hinted may give occasion to some abler and more learned Pen to treat of this Matter with that largeness and clearness with which so great a Point well deserves to be handled I am Sir Yours FINIS BOOKS sold by James Knapton at the Crown in St. Paul 's Church-Yard CApt. William Dampier's New Voyage round the World Describing particularly the Isthmus of America several Coasts and Islands in the West Indies the Isles of Cape Verd the Passage by Terra del Fuego the South-Sea Coasts of Chili Peru c. the Isle of Guam one of the Ladrones Mindanao and other Philippine and East-India Islands near Cambodia China c. New Holland Sumatra Nicobar Isles the Cape of Good Hope and Santa Hellena Their Soil Rivers Harbours Plants Animals c. Their Customs Religion Government Trade c. Vol. I. Illustrated with particular Maps and Draughts The 4th Edition Corrected His Voyages and Descriptions Vol. II. In Three Parts viz. 1. A Supplement of the Voyage round the Word describing the Countries of Tonquin Achin Malacca c. their Product Inhabitants Manners Trade Policy c. 2. Two Voyages to Campeachy with a Description of the Coasts Product Inhabitants Logwood-cutting Trade c. of Jucatan Campeachy New-Spain c. 3. A Discourse of Trade-Winds Breezes Storms Seasons of the Year Tides and Currents of the Torrid Zone throughout the World With an Account of Natal in Africk its Product Negroes c. Illustrated with particular Maps and Draughts To which is added A General INDEX to both Volumes
a large passage out of his Epistle to the Romans which passage is now extant word for word in that Epistle being published with the rest above-mentioned And that all the Epistles now extant under these Titles are the same with those mentioned by the Antients is sufficiently proved by the very Learned Bishop Pierson in his Vindiciae Cotelerius and others 3. The Epistle of Polycarp to to the Philippians is mentioned by †Lib. 3. c. 3. Irenaeus that knew him living and by * Hist l. 3. c. 36. Eusebius †In Catalogo c. Hierom and others whose Testimonies set down at large by Cotelerius I need not transcribe And that the Epistle now extant under his Name at least the greatest part of it is the Genuine one is acknowledged by * See Dr. Wakes Genuine Epistles and Coteler not 1. in Epistolas Ignatii all Writers eminent for Judgment and Learning 4. The Pastor of Hermas is incontestably a most antient work being cited by almost all the Primitive Fathers extant that lived in or near the second Century viz. by †L. 2. 4. 6. Irenaeus by * De Orat. c. 12. de Pudic. Tertullian by †Hom. 8. num lib. 1 2. 3. de Princip Comment in Mat. Hom. 37. in Luc. multisque aliis in locis Origen by Clem. Alexand. c. whose Testimonies are set down at large by Nicol. de Nourry at the end of his Apparatus ad Bibliothecam maximam veterum Patrum and praefixed to the Oxford Edition of Hermas and to that of Cotelerius Whether the Author of this book be the same Hermas that is mentioned by St. Paul though it is affirmed by many of the best and most judicious writers yet is it not so certain nor of such consequence that we should be obliged to defend it 5. The Epistle of Barnabas is also without controversie antient a work of the Apostolick Age being quoted by almost all the * Clem. Alex. Strom. 2. Strom. 5. Origen contra Cels lib. 6 c. Primitive Fathers as you may see by the Testimonies set down at large in all the same Authors with the Testimonies concerning Hermas Upon these great Authorities then though we cannot be absolutely sure that these Writings are Genuine yet we may well conclude and believe them to be so notwithstanding the suspitions which some have raised to the contrary There are also sundry other Arguments which may be drawn from the simplicity of the stile and way of arguing used in these Writings agreeable to the custom of the Age in which they are supposed to be written from the conformity of the matters contained in them to the Doctrine and Discipline of those times and from the exact Agreement of all the Quotations of the most antient Authors to the Copies extant at this day All which taken together afford so good Reason to believe these Books to be genuine that whosoever considers them may very well wonder at the confidence of Mr. T. who is pleased to affirm that 't is the easiest Task in the World to prove all these Writings spurious and fraudulently imposed upon the credulous II. Secondly Though these Writings are not received as of the same Authority with the Canonical Books of the New Testament yet ought they to have a proportionable Veneration paid to them both with respect to the Authors and to the Writings themselves Clemens was a Companion of the Apostles and Ignatius and Polycarp their immediate Successors and if the Authors of the Epistle of Barnabas and of the Pastor of Hermas were not the same with the Fellow-Labourers and Contemporaries of the Apostles known by those Names yet are they so undeniably antient being certainly of the first Age as to challenge all the respect that can possibly be due to any Writers upon the account of Antiquity And as to the Writings themselves though Mr. T. will not be persuaded to grant with the Learned Dr. †In his Discourse of the Authority of the genuine Epistles p. 175. Wake that they contain the true and pure Faith of Christ without the least Errour intermixt with it yet this we may be bold to affirm that in general they are so far from betraying either the Ignorance or Superstition of their Authors which Mr. T so confidently charges them with that they contain a very good account of that Doctrine and Dicipline of the purest ages of the Church which all learned and good Christians heartily wish could be restored at this day 1. The Epistle of Clemens is stiled by Eusebius as I have already observed a great and admirable Epistle and was publickly read in the Christian Churches both before and in his time And indeed it does not at all come short of the highest Praises which the Ancients have given to it being a Piece composed with such an admirable spirit of Love and Charity of Zeal towards God and of concern for the Church of the most excellent exhortations delivered with the greatest plainness and simplicity of speech and yet pressed many times with such moving eloquence too that I cannot imagin what could have been desired in such an spistle more proper for the end for which it was composed what could have been written more becoming an Apostolical age and the Pen of one of the most eminent Bishops of it Thus the Learned Dr. Wake His making the Scarlet thread hung out by Rahab to the Spies a Type of the Blood of Christ however it may possibly seem strange to such as Mr. T. was yet in the Opinion of the Ancients very agreeable to the Tenour of the Scripture and particularly to that Type of the Scarlet Wool wherewith the Blood of the Sacrifice was sprinkled on the People under the Law Heb. 9.19 The History of the Phaenix mentioned in this Epistle is confessedly a Fable But he that considers that it was a Story at that time generally told and believed as Tacitus largely relates and that the best of Men never had any assurance of being preserved from vulgar and innocent Errors will not be hasty in censuring an excellent Man and an excellent Book for making such a vulgar error the Topick of a Popular Argument 2. The Epistles of Ignatius are written indeed in a plain simple and unaffected stile as are most of the Books of the Holy Scripture it self but whatever Mr. T. says there is nothing in them either of ignorance or Superstition unless a Firm belief of Divine Revelation must be esteemed Ignorance and a strict Observance of the Laws of Christ is to be called Superstition One Passage indeed there is in his Epistle to the Ephesians which Mr. T. cannot but smile at viz. that the Virginity of Mary and her delivery was kept in secret from the Prince of this World But he that considers the manner of our Saviour's temptation and how the Ancients constantly and in the judgment of the very Learned * Sanè Diabolum
majus aliquid homine in Câ—râ—sto agnovisse hoc quidem tempore constanter nec sine magnis argumentis negant Scriptores antiqui Grot. in Mat. 4.3 Grotius not without good Grounds denied the Devil to have known any thing at first of the great Mystery of the Incarnation will not for this passage condemn Ignati us of Ignorance 3. The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippiaus is a very valuable Monument of Antiquity containing nothing in it unworthy the Character of so great a Father * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l 4. c. 14. ex Irenaeo Irenaeus calls it a most compleat Epistle out of which they that are careful of their own Salvation may learn what was the Belief of that Apostolical Man and what the form of sound Doctrine which he delivered in his Preaching 4. The Pastor of Hermas is a Book full of very excellent Moral Instructions delivered for the the most part in easie and natural Similitudes and these also explained at large to the apprehension of the meanest capacities For which reason though it was not received into the Canon of Scripture yet as Eusebius testifies it * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 4. c. 3. was judged by the Ancients a most necessary Book especially for those who were to be instructed in the first Principles of Religion and was therefore accordingly read in Churches And Origen who was far from being an ignorant Man judges it to be a * In Rom. 16 14. most useful Book But Mr. T. saith it is the silliest Book in the World Why he should think so I cannot apprehend unless it be because there are here and there some few odd Passages scattered in it very different from our modern way of Writing which perhaps he can single out and expose And so there is hardly any Book extant in the World which a witty Man may not turn into ridicule All the Objections which I think have been hitherto made to this Book are these That * Libri fabulosi sunt in quibus contra Apostolicum consensum adstruitur Liberum Arbitrium una Paenitentia Solitudo Monastica quod memoratu dignum purgatorium ab anu quâdam in visione tertiâ prosertui Scultetus de Script Apoch it contains fabulous Visions That it makes too much for Free-will That it assigns to every Man two Angels That it favours the Novations in allowing but one Repentance That it favours Monkish Solitude and that it speaks of Purgatory The three first of these Objections we shall consider immediately But the three latter are so directly false that one would wonder how prejudice could possibly be so strong as to make Men see in any Author those things of which there is not the least syllable or hint in the whole Book That the Visions contained in it are fabulous we ought not to say unless we be sure either that God never afforded any Visions to the first Christians or that these Visions have some particular Circumstances which prove that they could not come from God But if it were so yet taking that which is used in this Book to be no other than a Parabolical way of Writing wherein the Church is introduced as representing its own Doctrine and Discipline to a Person in a Vision it ought not to be stiled fabulous any more than * Parable of the Pilgrim of the Prodigal c. other Books of that kind which are written in our Age. That maintaining the freedom of Mans Will in the sense that Hermas asserts it is a good Objection against a Book I suppose neither Mr. T. nor any Man else at this time of day will contend That Hermas assigns to every particular Man two Angels if the Titles of the Chapters were of any Authority could not indeed be questioned But in the Book it self there is no such thing expresly affirmed All that the Author there says is only in general That * Duo sunt nuntii cum homine unus aequitatis unus iniquitatis Mandat 6. there are two Angels with Man one of Righteousness the other of Iniquity and that when good thoughts arise in a Mans heart then the Angel of Righteousness that is some good spirit is with him and when evil thoughts arise in his heart then the Angel of Iniquity that is some evil spirit tempts him Which perhaps is no more than what all Christians believe So that Cotelâ—rius in his Notes upon the place might have spared the pains of proving other Fathers to have been of the same opinion with Hermas till he had shown that these words do necessarily signifie that Hermas himself was of that Opinion That Hermas by allowing but One Repentance for great and scandalous Crimes favours the Novatians whose Heresie consisted in allowing no other Repentance at all than that of Baptism is so far from being true that he in express words opposes his One Repentance to Baptism and says more for the validity and efficacy of that after-Repentance for Crimes committed by Baptized Christians in this one little Book than perhaps is to be found in all the other Wrirers of the three first Centuries put together insomuch that Tertullian after he turned Montanist and had embraced the Opinion of the Novatians * Cederem tibi si scriptvra Pastoris quae sola maechos amat non ab omni concilio Ecclesiarum inter Apocrypha falsa judicaretur adultera ipsa inde patrona sociorum De Pudicitia exclaims with all imaginable bitterness against this Book for that very reason because it was more favourable than any other Book then extant in allowing Repentance to Adulterers after Baptism which the Novatians denied That this Book favours Monkish Solitude is also so far from being true that on the contrary it even expresly allows †Mandat 4. Second Marriages which was more than most Writers of that Age were willing to do Lastly So far is this Writer from establishing the Doctrine of Purgatory that there is not one syllable about it in the whole Book All the places where he speaks of Mens undertaking many hardships and so purging themselves from their sins being as plainly meant of the Penances to be gone through according to the then established Discipline of the Church as 't is possible for any thing to be expressed by words 5. The Epistle of Barnabas was very much esteemed among the Antients And though it must indeed be confessed that it contains some very strange and allegorical Interpretations of Scrigture yet he that considers how much that manner of Interpretation was antiently in use among the Jews in their Targums and how many important truths were that way conveyed so that the Apostles themselves in their arguing with the Jews did often make use of it as we see in their uncontroverted Writings I say whosoever considers these things will rather chuse modestly to suspend his Judgment than rashly to upbraid this Author with the Terms of foolish and