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
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
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