and has hundreds of Expressions more barbarous and improper then this and a complete Body of the Scripture preserv'd without either Forgery or Falsification without either Addition or Substraction c. Which Words are an express assertion that the Doctrine and Discipline and Scriptures which they then had were the same which the Apostles deliver'd and were then receiv'd in all Churches of the World with which Ireneus and the Gauls had any Communication Tertullian (u) l. 4. against Marcion c. 5. appeals to all the Apostolick Churches to the Galatians to the Thessalonians to the Romans to the Colossians to the Ephesians c. and in a word to all the Churches which joyn'd in Communion with them to prove the Copy of St. Luke which the Catholicks had and not that of Marcion to be Genuine and Sincere He adds too that the same Authority will justify the other three Gospels likewise since they were receiv'd (x) Per illas secundum illas from and according to the Copies of those Churches (y) Of Prescript c. 33 34. He produces in another place Testimonies from several Epistles of St. Paul from St. Peter and St. John and then for further confirmation of the Truth of what he urges (z) c. 36. exhorts those who had a mind to exercise their Curiosity in the business of their Salvation to run over the Churches planted by these and the other Apostles where they might find * Rigaltius and after him F. Simon will have no more meant here by Authentick Letters or Writings then that what the Apostles Wrote was still preserv'd in the Original Language in those Places But I would fain know what great matter there was in that The Epistles were first Wrote in Greek and were without question still Extant in Greek not only in the Apostolick but in all those Churches to which that Language remain'd still familiar if not in others too Tertullian certainly design'd something Singular and Peculiar to the Churches planted by the Apostles when he say'd their Authentick Letters or Writings were kept there and consequently must intend the very Originals of them And why these two Learned Men should judge otherwise since this is the most natural though not the only Sense of the Word I cannot guess For 't is certain Manuscripts have been preserv'd many hundred years longer then the time was which pass'd between the Apostles and the days of Tertullian their Authentick Writings or Letters still remaining (a) Authenticae literae expressing the Doctrine and representing the Piety of each of them A little after he brings in the Catholick Church thus arguing with the Hereticks concerning the Scripture (b) c. 37. p. 215. Who are you When and whence came you hither What do you in my ground since you belong not to me By what Right O Marcion do you cut down my Woods What Authority have you Valentinus to turn the Course of my Fountains Who gave you Power Apelles to overthrow my Fences What do you Sowing and Feeding here at your Pleasures The Possession is mine I have enjoy'd it for a long time I first enjoy'd it I derive a certain Original from the Authors themselves whose it was I am the Heir of the Apostles c. Thus Writ Ireneus and Tertullian concerning the Scriptures of the New Testament and what they thus Writ certainly concerns all those Pooks which they held for Genuine and Pure in opposition to the Hereticks of their Times These they tell us were deriv'd from the Apostles by the hands of those Churches which they founded all over the World them they produce for their Vouchers in the present case and appeal likewise to the Doctrine embrac'd in every one of them which was very consonant to the Books of the Catholicks but not to those of the Hereticks Thus much we may easily learn from Ireneus He tells us (c) l. 1. c. 17. That the several sorts of Hereticks with which he had to do had forg'd a great number of Apocryphal and Spurious Pieces These without question contain'd the Principles of their Doctrine and were sent abroad into the World as the chief Grounds and Foundations of what they taught But all was Cheat and Cousenage and the Fictions of their own Brains What they vented was Heretical and Erroneous as this father proves at large from hence (d) l. 3. c. 3 4. that it was contrary to the Faith which the Apostles had planted in all places and which had been larnt and might be learnt every day from the Churches founded by them And again in another Place l. 3. c. 11. p. 259. he rejects some Gospels of the Valentinians because they contain'd Blasphemies and Doctrines contrary to those which had been Publish'd by the Apostles So likewise Tertullian speaks of some of the same Hereticks (e) Of Prescript c. 32. p. 213. Let their Doctrine be compar'd with the Apostles and we shall quickly see by the contrariety thereof that it proceeds neither from any of them nor their Disciples The Apostles did not contradict one another neither did their Disciples contradict them The Churches which they founded agree in the same Doctrines and so do those too which being of a later Original deriv'd their Instruction from them which were planted before them and therefore may be call'd Apostolical as well as they because owning and embracing the same Faith Let the Hereticks show that they deserve that Title upon either of these accounts that these Churches acknowledge the same Doctrine which they do and receive them to Peace and Communion as Brethren But this they cannot do (f) c. 38. p. 216. They are Forreigners they are Enemies to the Apostles because they teach a different Faith And since their Faith is so different we may be sure they have adulterated the Scriptures For they who were resolv'd to teach perversly were under a necessity of corrupting those Books upon which their Doctrine was to be grounded Whereas we who preserve the Doctrine entire have preserv'd the Books so too without changing or adding or taking away We teach nothing but what was to be found in the Scriptures from the beginning before they were corrupted and interpolated Before Marcion had lay'd violent hands upon them employing a Knife and not a Style and cutting away whatever he thought convenient and was contrary to his Errors and Heresies (g) c. 19. †Vbi apparuerit esse veritatem disciplinae fidei Christianae illic erit veritas Scripturarum For where the Truth of the Christian Faith and Doctrine appears there the Genuine and true Copies of the Scripture are certainly to be found Having thus given a large account of the Testimony which these two very Ancient Writers of the Christian Church give to the Books of the New Testament I shall now pass on to remark before I conclude what Opinion an Eminent Heathen even Julian the Apostate that bitter and inveterate Enemy of
THE CANON OF THE New Testament VINDICATED In Answer to the Objections of J. T. in his AMYNTOR By John Richardson B. D formerly Fellow of Emmanuel College in Cambridge Nulla est omnino ratio cur de eâ Traditione dubitemus quae nobis Novi Testamenti Canonem transmisit Hen. Dodwelli disertat 1. in Irenaeum Sect. 36. LONDON Printed for RICHARD SARE at Grays-Inn-Gate in Holborn 1700. To the HONOURABLE SUSANNA NOEL Relict of the Honourable Baptist Noel And Mother of the RIGHT HONOURABLE The Earl of Gainsborough Madam AFter I had determin'd to let the following Discourse go abroad into the World I never deliberated about the choice of a Patron nor spent any time in considering to whom it should be Dedicated What I have there Wrote belongs to your Ladyship upon divers Accounts and especially upon these that it was drawn up at first in obedience to your Commands for under that notion I do and ought to receive the least Intimations of your Pleasure was originally design'd only for your Service and has already been admitted in Manuscript to the honour of a place in your Closet for several Months I hope therefore Madam you 'll not be displeas'd if I present you the same again from the Press a little enlarg'd For it 's obvious to apprehend that these Papers being now expos'd to the View of the Publick may easily fall into the hands of many Readers who have not that Candour of Temper that Quickness of Parts and Apprehension which every one admires in your Ladyship and therefore it was advisable that I should make what convenient Provision I could by a few Alterations and Additions against Cavilling and misunderstanding And if notwithstanding all the care I have taken the Work still fall under Censure and strange indeed it must be if it does not with some the severest Criticks I doubt not will however be so just as to acknowledge that the Design which is all your Ladyship is concern'd in is good and fit for a Person of Honour and Integrity to own since it aim's at the vindicating the most Venerable Records of our Religion from the Objections that are urg'd against their being Genuine And whatever faults or defects there may be in the conduct thereof for want of due Learning or Judgment in the undertaker I don't in the least desire your Ladyship should justify or defend but leave them all to be charg'd on the account of Madam Your Ladyships most humble and obliged Servant J. Richardson THE PREFACE WHen I first drew up the Reflections upon Amyntor that are here presented to the Reader which was done above half a year ago I though some Alterations and Additions have been made since they were design'd only for the Closet of the Honourable Lady to whom they are Dedicated For whose ease the Quotations and References too when the matter would bear it were made in English These I have continued in the same Language still partly because I suppose it will make them of more general use and partly because I think that though the Discourse be now Publish'd yet the chief Right to it remains still in the first Proprietor The Reader may perhaps enquire why these Papers come out so late and it may be too why they come out at all since another has already Wrote upon the same Argument To the First I reply that they were not originally intended for the Press and therefore it is no wonder if it prov'd so long before they got thither To the Second all I have to say is That what I have here Written being seen by some Friends for whom I have a great deference they judg'd that it would have its use too as well as the other Piece before-mention'd To whose Judgment I submitted calling to mind that known Passage of a Learned Father (a) St. August of the Trinity l. 1. c. 3. Every thing that is Written does not fall into the hands of all Persons Perhaps some may meet with my Books who may hear nothing of others which have treated better of the same Subject It is useful therefore that the same Questions should be handled by several Persons after a different Method though according to the Principles of the same Faith that so the Explication of Difficulties and the Arguments for the Truth may come to the knowledge of every one either one way or other And here I should have taken my leave of the Reader for the present and dismiss'd him to the Perusal of the following Treatise if he be so dispos'd but that I think my self oblig'd to take notice of two or three Passages in the History of the Works of the Learned for the Month of May which contradict some Particulars that I have asserted in the following Treatise They are in the Account of the Ecclesiastical History of Mr. Basnage but to whom they are to be ascrib'd I cannot affirm Perhaps they may proceed from that Author and perhaps they may be the mistakes of those who transmitted the account of his Work from Holland to our English Publishers I charge them therefore directly upon no body but finding them in the Book above-mention'd shall give my Reasons why I look upon them as Erroneous I begin with p. 283 where we are told in the 2d Paragraph how Mr. B. demonstrates that for three Ages after Christ there was no certain Canon when both Private Persons and also Whole Churches partly admitted Supposititious Books for Sacred and partly despis'd the Genuine as Prophane How far this assertion is design'd to extend and what Mr. B. has done to confirm it is no other ways Evident to me at present then by the Argument which is immediately subjoyn'd to satisfy us of the Strength of the Demonstration This is intended to affect the Whole Bible but I think a much lower Word then Demonstration might have serv'd the turn unless there be stronger Reasons in reserve For it follows †How far the Ancients had any differences about the Canon of the New Testament I have explain'd in its due place my business here is to prove that Hermas was never esteem'd part of it or Canonical And also to examine the Testimony of Theodorus concerning some Books of the Old So Origen believ'd that Hermas his Pastor was a Book Divinely inspir'd On the contrary Theodorus of Mopsuestia calls the Book of Job a Fable borrowed from Paganism the Books of Chronicles and Esdras a vain Rhapsody the Song of Solomon a Love Song c. We have here two Arguments alledg'd one to prove there was no certain Canon of the New Testament and the other to evince as much for the Old And yet it is Evident at first sight that neither of these Instances give us the least information of the Judgment of Whole Churches unless Origen and Theodorus can be prov'd to speak in the Names of more People then themselves which I am confident can never be made out Origen I am sure delivers his own
Opinion only and yet never design'd to advance Hermas into the Number of Canonical Books as I have observ'd in the following Discourse in Answer to the Second Objection p. 25 26 and 29 30. This I think I have there sufficiently shown but shall however add a Testimony or two more to the same purpose Thus then he speaks in his Eighth Homily on Numbers (b) F. 103. That one day of Sin is recompenc'd with a years Punishment we Read not only in this Book wherein there is nothing whose Truth can be in the least doubted but the same things also are taught in the Book of the Pastor if any one think good to admit the Testimony of that Scripture By which Words it is Evident that Origen puts a great difference between the Pastor of Hermas and the Book of Numbers which was one of the Christian as well as Jewish Canon In this he affirms every thing deliver'd was undoubtedly true but plainly intimates he did not judge so of the former by distinguishing it from and placing it in opposition to this and leaving it to the Readers Discretion whether he 'll be concluded by the Authority of it or no. He calls it indeed Scripture but that was a Title frequently given to any Books whose Subject was Religious of which I have produc'd several Instances in the following Treatise and shall only add here that the Author of whom we are now speaking even Origen in the Preface to his Books of Principles (c) F. 112. calls the Doctrine of Peter twice by that Name in the compass of a few Lines though he there expresly tells us That it was neither Wrote by St. Peter nor by any other Inspir'd Person Again we Read in his Fourteenth Homily on Genesis (d) F. 21. Isaac therefore dug Wells and the Followers of Isaac dug too The Followers of Isaac are Matthew Mark Luke John The Followers of Isaac are Peter James and Jude The Apostle Paul is a Follower of Isaac For all these dig the Wells of the New Testament Here we have all the Writers of the New Testament reckon'd up but not a Word of Hermas and his Pastor From these two Passages and those which I have alledg'd in the following Discourse it is apparent that * Perhaps it may be urged that these Passages are taken out of these Works of Origen which are extant only in Latine I grant it but then add that so is the Objection too and certainly a Translation ought to be admitted for an Answer when it is alledged for an Objection For according to our English Proverb Every Man ought to Buy and Sell by the same Measure But I Reply 2dly That I have shewn in the following Discourse p. 29 30. that Origen speaks after the same manner in those Works of his which are still extant in the Greek And therefore we have a great deal of Reason to suppose that the Translators have altered nothing in their Versions as to this matter since what is found in them is consonant to those Pieces of his which are preserved in the same Language wherein they were first Written Origen is every where consistent with himself in this matter and always rejects the Book of Hermas from being a part of the Canon It is probable he might have done the same too in his Explanations on the Epistle to the Romans from whence the present Objection is fetch'd and have told us in what Sense he judg'd this Piece to have been Divinely Inspir'd if the Translator of that Work had not contracted it so far (e) See the Preface to the Translation f. 132. as to leave out above half of what was Publish'd by Origen Perhaps we might have there Read that he thought Hermas to have been no otherwise Inspir'd then his Master (f) See Answer to the 2d Objection p. 29. Clemens and (g) l. 4. against Celsus p. 181. l. 6. p. 276. himself judg'd the Heathen Philosophers to have been when they taught things agreeable to the Truth and Sound Doctrine which both these Fathers thought were manifested and discover'd to them by God And so perhaps Origen judg'd this Book of Hermas inspir'd because he look'd upon it as containing useful Truths and suppos'd nothing of that nature could be Wrote without the Divine Assistance But be that as it will and let him mean by it what he can it is Evident he never admitted it into the Canon nor esteem'd it 〈◊〉 Equal Authority with the Books of the New Testament I proceed now to the Second Part of the Argument in the Passage above alledg'd which is urg'd against some Books of the Old Testament and is in these Words On the contrary Theodorus of Mopsuestia calls the Book of Job a Fable borrowed from Paganism the Books of Chronicles and Esdras a vain Rhapsody the Song of Solomon a Love Song c. This is produc'd to show the Church had no certain Canon of the Old Testament for three Hundred years but with what Ground or Reason will quickly appear I must confess this does not properly belong to the Province I have undertaken at present which is only to justify the Canon of the New Testament But because such as are little vers'd in Controversies of this Nature may possibly be stumbled at these Expressions and perhaps think them unanswerable if I say nothing to them when they ly thus directly in my way I hope I shall be excus'd if I spend a few lines in laying open the Weakness of this Objection First then that the Jews had a certain Canon which comprehended all the Books that we reckon as parts of the Old Testament and no more is evident and notorious These as we learn from (h) l. 1. against Apion p. 103 1036. Josephus and (i) l. 3. c. 10. Eusebius who transcribes his Testimony they reduc'd in their way of computation to the Number of Twenty Two After what manner they reckon'd them up (k) See it done by Origen in Eusebius l. 6. c. 25. does not belong to my present business to set down but only to remark that their Canon was receiv'd by our Saviour and his Apostles For certainly our Blessed Lord recommended the Books of the Jewish Canon and none others when he exhorted his Hearers (l) John 5.39 to Search the Scriptures He argued too we may be sure from them when he expounded to the two Disciples (m) Luke 24.27 in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself Of them without doubt St. Paul spoke (n) 2 Tim. 3.15 when he tells Timothy That he had from a Child known the Scriptures which were able to make him Wise unto Salvation And again when he adds (o) v. 16. All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God c. These Passages and several others of the same Nature must be understood of those Books which pass'd for Authentick among the Jews they can be understood of no other except he be supposed
the least notice of the answer which is to be found in the same place from whence he drew his Objection For this Objection is quoted by our Author from the Second Book of Origen against Celsus p. 77. and there he might have found this answer too that they were the Hereticks the Marcionites the Valentinians and the Lucianists some of whom also (t) L. 1. c. 29. Jreneus and (u) Against Marcion l. 4. c. 5. Tertullian positively accuse of the same tricks who were guilty of these Prevarications For which the Catholicks were no more answerable then the Church of England was for the Murther of Charles the First VII To Celsus in the same Page our Author joyns the Manicheans fitly enough I confess who shew'd other Scriptures and deny'd the Genuineness of the whole New Testament Whether will not Men go or what will they not do to serve a design He knows or at least might know that the Manicheans were as Extravagant and Whimsical a sort of Hereticks as any that troubled the Christian Church They held as (x) Heres 66. Epiphanius informs us That there were two Supreme Gods the one a good the other a bad one that they were always at War with one another that Manes was the Holy Ghost that the Souls of Men after their decease should pass into the Bodies of such Beasts as they had Eaten when they were alive or be united to those Trees which they had planted that the Sun and Moon were Ships which convey'd the faithful of their Sect to Heaven and that the Light of the Moon depended on the number of the Souls in it which when she was full she emptied into the Sun by degrees and so grew dark again These things they believ'd or at least maintain'd with Twenty more of as absurd a Nature And now I pray what does the Opinion which such as these had of the Canon signify They could find nothing in the Books of the Catholicks wherewith to justify their Notions and therefore (w) S. Aug. Treatise of Heresys n. 46. rejected their Authority and made use of others for their peculiar Doctrins But our Author might as well have set up the Alchoran in opposition to the New Testament and for so doing have alledg'd the Judgment and Testimony of the Turks For laying aside the Name they seem to be every jot as good Christians as the Manicheans Here our Author brings in two Passages from Faustus the Manichee to show that He and those of his Sect rejected the whole New Testament That they did so in effect is evident and undoubted for they made it of no Authority by refusing to be concluded by Arguments drawn from thence pretending that it contain'd many Errors which had been foisted into the several Books thereof by the Tricks and Cheats of succeeding Ages long after the Deaths of the Apostles They maintain'd it was full of Corruptions and Falsifications And therefore Faustus boasts (y) St. August against Fausius l. 18. c. 3. that the Manichean Faith alone secur'd the Professors thereof from all danger of Heresy by instructing them not to believe every thing which was written in the Name of our Saviour but to try whether what they Read to have been taught by him was really true sound and uncorrupted For as he goes on there are many Tares mingled with the Wheat which an Enemy during the times of Night and Darkness has Sown and Scattered in almost all the Scriptures for the infecting and poisoning the good seed And again (z) L. 32. c. 1. he asks the Catholicks What reason they had to think it strange if he selecting those Passages out of the New Testament that were most pure and conduc'd to his Salvation should fling away all the rest which had been fraudulently convey'd into it by their Predecessors and sullied the Native Beauty and Majesty of the Truth This was their constant Practice when they were press'd with any Texts which they could not reconcile to their fond Opinions they without more ado slighted their Authority affirming the Testimonies produc'd against them were forg'd and no part of the Doctrin deliver'd by our Blessed Lord and his Apostles And therefore St. Augustine (a) L. 13. c. 5. l. 22. c. 15. l. 32. c. 19. accuses them as receiving the Scriptures only for fashion's sake while by asserting them to be falsified and corrupted they perfectly detracted from their Authority that is if I understood him aright they pretended upon occasion to have a deference for the New Testament whereas really they had none For they charg'd it with Corruption and acknowledg'd nothing as an Article of Faith purely because contain'd in the Books and upon the warrant thereof but because they judg'd it true upon other accounts and for this Reason were willing to own that it (b) L. 33. c. 3. might possibly have been deliver'd by Christ or his Disciples And therefore I readily joyn with our Author and acknowledgd that the Manichees really rejected the whole New Testament not only because there are several passages of Faustus which plainly intimate as much but also because St. Augustine himself seems clearly to have understood them in that Sense For thus we learn from him (c) L. 32. c. 16. that these Hereticks affirm'd their Paraclet Manicheus had taught them that the Scriptures even (d) See the beginning of that Chapter the Scriptures of the New Testament receiv'd for Canonical by the Catholicks were not the Works of the Apostles but wrote by others in their Names And we Read again how the same worthy Teacher had inform'd them (e) L. 32. c. 18. towards the end that the Evangelical Writings part of which they refus'd to admit were not the Apostles And accordingly we shall observe by and by that this Father was so sensible how far these miserable Hereticks had been seduc'd in this matter that he thought himself concern'd directly to answer this Objection and prove against his Adversary Faustus that whatever he and his Party pretended the Gospels and Epistles admitted by the Catholick Church were Genuine and Authentick That therefore we may allow our Author and his Objection against the Canon of the New Testament drawn from the Manicheans all the fair play that can be desir'd I shall state the full Sense thereof in the two following Propositions 1. The Books of the New Testament were not wrote by the Apostles or Apostolical Men (f) See S. Aug. against Faustus l. 33. c. 3. but drawn up several years after them out of reports Traditions and Historical Memoirs 2. Whoever they were that drew them up they falsified and corrupted the pure Doctrins of Christianity by inserting several Errors and contradictions among the Truth And therefore the Manichees admitted the Books just so far and in such particulars as they judg'd them true and rejected the rest as of no value This is the utmost force which can be put into the Objection and we 'll now