Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A57229
|
The canon of the New Testament vindicated in answer to the objections of J.T. in his Amyntor / by John Richardson.
|
Richardson, John, 1647-1725?
|
1700
(1700)
|
Wing R1384; ESTC R26990
|
87,759
|
146
|
Luke is ascrib'd to Paul And we learn from (c) Ecel Hist l. 2. c. 15. Eusebius that both Papias and Clemens of Alexandria attested that the Romans having prevail'd with St. Mark to Write his Gospel what he had done was reveal'd to St. Peter by the Holy Ghost who thereupon Authoriz'd the Work and appointed it to be Read Publickly in the Church And the same (d) L. 6. c. 25. Historian informs us from Origen that St. Paul approv'd and recommended the Gospel of St. Luke †St. Jerom in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers in Luke tells us that many suppos'd that when St. Paul spoke of his own Gospel Bom. 2.16 2 Tim. 2.8 he meant that of St. Luke And he informs us also before in Simon Peter that the Gospel according to St. Mark was say'd to be St. Peters That is I suppose Wrote by his Instruction and with his Approbation being drawn up principally for the use of the Gentiles To which may be added what he tells us in (e) L. 3. c. 24. another Place that the three other Gospels being brought to St. John he Read them over and Perus'd them carefully and when he had so done justified what they had wrote and confirm'd the Truth thereof with his own Testimony Though for Reasons there set down he thought fit to make another Relation of his own and add thereto such Parriculars as had been omitted by the others The Acts of the Apostles as Mr. Dodwell observes Sect. 39. were probably wrote by St. Luke at the same time with the Gospel or History of our Saviour and therefore fall under the same Consideration They were the Second Volum Part or Treatise of the same Book as appears from Acts 1.1 and therefore though St. Luke's Name was not put to them yet it was never doubted in the Church who was the Author His Name was prefix'd to learnt from and preserv'd in the first part the Gospel from which the Acts seem afterwards to have been separated though at first they went together for the convenience of the Readers that so the Gospels all making up one Book by themselves as was usual formerly under the Name of the Book of the Gospels might be the more easily compar'd together Now this makes a great difference between the Writings of these two Evangelists and those of St. Clemens and St. Barnabas though suppos'd Genuine These latter were never recommended or attested by any of the Apostles and therefore could never expect that Reception and Authority in the VVorld which the others found nor to have the same place in the Canon IV. We Read p. 56. in so many words that there is not one single Book of the New Testament which was not refus'd by some of the Ancients as unjustly Father'd upon the Apostles and really forg'd by their Adversaries To which I answer That either our Author Equivocates in this Place or asserts that which he can never prove to be true For as I show'd above p. 10 c. the four Gospels the Acts thirteen Epistles of St. Paul the first of St. Peter and the first of St. John were all along admitted by the Catholick Church and never that appears after a sufficient Promulgation oppos'd by any who held her Communion The Hereticks indeed rejected some one some other parts of the New Testament but to understand them only by the Word Ancients exclusively of the Catholicks was certainly design'd to impose upon the unwary Reader and can never be excus'd from foul dealing since that Expression is commonly taken in another Sense But perhaps it may be here ask'd why the Testimony of Hereticks in a matter of Fact should not be as good as that of Catholicks and why they may not be admitted as Witnesses of what Books were or ought to be esteem'd Canonical as well as others To this I answer 1. That the Catholicks gave clear and evident proof of the Truth of what they asserted when the Hereticks could give none that was of any value For as we learn from (f) L. 4. c. 63. Jreneus (g) I. 4. against Marcion c. 4. Of Presciption c. 36. See these places insisted on hereafter Sect. XXXIV Tertullian and others All the Churches which had been planted by the Apostles and those who held Communion with them were on their side These all agreed in the Books these all agreed in the same Gospels and Epistles which they affirm'd they had receiv'd in a certain succession from the first Age. The Tradition was every where the same as to the Books mention'd p. 10. and might well be esteem'd undoubted since they were no further remov'd from the Disciples of our Saviour in the days of Jreneus then we are now from our Grandfathers The Bishops and Churches of his time convey'd the Canon by Written as well as Oral Testimony to the next Ages and so enabled them to run down the Forgeries of Hereticks as they had done before them who could not give that Proof and Evidence for their Suppositions which the Catholicks did for their True and Genuine Writings They could not deduce them from the Apostles since (h) Jreneus l. 3. c. 4. l. 5. c. 20. Tertul. of Prescript c. 29 30. Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 7. p. 764. the Founders of the several Sects the Authors of these Heresies Forgeries and Corruptions as Valentinus Basilides Apelles Marcion c. were much latter then they And when application was made to the most Ancient Churches in the World which the immediate Disciples of our Lord had taught in their own Persons or to those which joyn'd in Communion with them they all gave in their Testimonies both against the Books and Doctrin And this brings me to a Second Argument 2. (i) Jren. l. 1. c. 17. Coll. cum l. 3. c. 2 c. Tertull. of Prescript c. 32 38. See also Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 25. at the end See these places out of Jreneus and Tertullian insisted on more fully hereafter Sect. XXXIV The Books which the Hereticks forg'd contradicted that Doctrin which the Apostles had taught in the Churches they planted This was sufficiently known in those Ages which were at so little a distance from our Saviour by the general Tradition of all the Churches in the World And therefore those * Eusebius l. 3. c. 25. tells us that several Books Publish'd under the Venerable Names of St. Peter St. Thomas St. Matthias c. were and ought to be rejected as Spurious for this Reason among others that they contain'd Doctrins contrary to those which had been Taught and Publish'd by the Apostles whence it was Evident that they were the Forgeries and Contrivances of Wicked Men. Books were justly concluded Authentick that besides good Testimony agreed with and those Supposititious which were repugnant to the Doctrin of the Apostles 3. These Arguments have been judg'd so convincing that the whole Christian World has given a Verdict on their side For the Doctrin of
as their Warrant for so doing We have seen likewise that it was own'd by Epiphanius and acknowledg'd as Canonical by a Synod at Carthage It was admitted also for such by (x) L. 3. of Virgins p. 98. St. Ambrose (y) Of Heres c. 30. St. Augustin and many others of that and succeding Ages But whether the diffusive Body of the Church was so far satisfy'd of its being Authentick as to receive it every where for such till it was Establish'd by the Sanction of the Sixth General (z) A. C. 680. Council I shall not take upon me to determine However then the Controversy seems to have been brought to an end if not before For the Fathers of that Assembly having receiv'd not only the Decrees of the Council of Carthage but also which is more express in the case (a) Can. 2. the Epistle of Athanasius above-mention'd did thereby own the Revelation to be properly Canonical and the whole Church of that Age †That the Syrians Read none of the Controverted Pieces in their Churches besides the Epistle to the Hebrews and that of St. James is Evident from the New Testament which Ignatius Patriarch of Antioch sent to be Printed in Europe the last Century and was actually Printed by Widmansiadius at Vienna in the Year 1555. But why they do so may be a question It does not seem to be because they look upon the rest as not Canonical for they have them too in the Syriack Tongue as we may learn from Ep. Walton and F. Simon If I may have leave to interpose my Conjecture I should think it proceeds from hence That this Translation is very Ancient and was Certainly made before the controverted Books were Vniversally receiv'd and their Lectionaries or Rubricks adapted to it And having no other Version made till many years after of the rest of the Catholick Epistles and the Revelation they would not alter the old Lectionaries when they had one as they must have done if they had taken in the other Pieces This may be judg'd a fond thing and so it is but not half so fond and contrary to common Sense as what is practis'd by the Romanists these very Syrians and some others of the Eastern Churches For the Scriptures having been of old Translated into the Languages of Particular Countries that they might be understood by the Common People as well in the Publick Service as in their Private Reading they still continue so Superstitious are they in observing an old Custom to Read them and Celebrate their Liturgies in Latine and the Ancient Tongues of the Places specified though they are now grown quite out of use and the Unlearned understand not one word of them especially the Orientals among whom this Book had been most question'd submitting to their Authority back'd with so good Evidence This as well as the other controverted Pieces had been was afterwards reckon'd as a Genuine part of the New Testament That these Books were not every where admitted upon their first appearing shows that the Church did not proceed rashly and carelesly in the case And that they were every-where admitted afterward shows that there was clear Proof and Evidence on their behalf and therefore they have been ever since joyn'd to the rest of the Books which we esteem Canonical The case of those Spurious Pieces which were thrust into the World under venerable Names was clear contrary They flourish'd a little and made a show when they first came abroad but after a while not being able to stand a strict Examination vanish'd and fell to nothing so that little has been left of most of them besides their Names for many Ages 3. There have been always in the Church besides these other Writings that were call'd Ecclesiastical Such under the New Testament are the Works of the Ancient Fathers which have ever been look'd upon as useful and of good Authority though not infallible as the Canonical Scripture is being generally compos'd not only by Pious and Learned Men but also by those who liv'd in or near the Primitive Ages of Christianity and consequently had better opportunities of being acquainted with the Doctrin and Practice of the first Preachers thereof then we have And among these they have always been esteem'd of the greatest Authority if their Character was answerable upon other accounts who flourish'd and wrote nearest the times of the Apostles Of this sort is that which is call'd the first Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians which though Eusebius tells us was of so great Estimation (b) Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 16. as to be Read Publickly in several Churches yet he (c) L. 3. c. 25. excludes it from the Canon And so he does the Pastor of (d) Ibid. Hermas which both he and (e) In the places above cited n. 1. of this Section Athanasius and Rufinus acknowledge to have been Read too openly in some places yet they all joyn in raising it no higher then an Ecclesiastical Piece Which I therefore remark here because we shall find our Author hereafter making a great stir with these two Treatises 4. Several * Those Writings which were Publish'd under false Names were certainly Spurious But it is not necessary to suppose that all which the Fathers call'd Apocryphal were of that sort For the Title of Apocryphal is often apply'd to such Ancient Books as were no part of the Canon many of which were certainly no Forgeries See hereafter Sect. XXIII Spurious Writings were also Publish'd very early in the Church under the Names of the Apostles and other great Men of which our Author has given a large Catalogue These were for the most part compos'd by (f) Jren. l. 1. c. 17. Gnostick and other Hereticks to maintain and propagate their False and Wicked Opinions and some too were the Works of Zealous but Simple Catholicks As for instance the Travels of Paul and Thecla the Author of which as (g) Treatise of Bapt. c. 17. Tertullian and (h) Treat of Eccles Writ in Luke St. Jerom inform us wrote it out of Love to St. Paul He was discover'd in the Life time of St. John and by him Censur'd Many of these were found out to be Cheats assoon as they came abroad and others not till after some years However they were generally discover'd sooner or later so that of the Forgeries of the first Ages there is little remaining to our Times except the bare Titles Having premis'd thus much I shall now proceed to consider the Objections of our Author I. Then he affirms p. 52. that several Spurious Books were quoted by the Fathers as of equal Authority with those which we now receive even by those Fathers upon whose Testimony the present Canon is Establish'd From whence it is Evident he would and must infer that those Spurious and our Canonical Books ought to go together and either be equally admitted or be equally rejected since they are founded upon the same Testimony