Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

cannot be accurately ascertained, as they have no dates accompanying them which can be depended on; but, as it is pretty well known at what period Greek accents were introduced, and also when the large and uncial letter, as it is called, was exchanged for the small letter now in common use, if a MS. is found written in the old fashion, in large letters, without intervals between the words, and without accents, it is known that it must be more ancient than the period when the mode of writing was changed. Now it is manifest, that when these MSS. were penned, the Canon was settled by common consent; for they all contain the same books, as far as they go.

I will sum up my observations on the Canon of the New Testament, by quoting a sensible and very appropriate passage from the late learned Mr Rennel. It is found in his Remarks on Hone's Collection of the Apocryphal writings of the Apos tolic age.

"When was the Canon of Scripture determined? It was determined immediately after the death of St John, the last survivor of the Apostolic order. The Canon of the Gospels was indeed determined before his death, for we read in Eusebius, that he gave his sanction to the three other Gospels, and completed this part of the new Testament with his own. By the death of St John, the catalogue of Scripture was completed and closed. We have seen, both from the testimony of themselves, and of their immediate successors, that the inspiration of writing was confined strictly to the Apostles; and accordingly we find, that no similar pretensions were ever made by any true Christian to a similar authority.

"By whom was the Canon of Scripture determined? It was determined not by the decision of any individual, nor by the decree of any council, but by the general consent of the whole and every part of the Christian Church. It is, indeed, a remarkable circumstance, that among the various disputes which so early agitated the church, the Canon of Scripture was never a subject of controversy. If any question might be said to have arisen, it was in reference to one or two of those books which are included in the present Canon; but with respect to those which are out of the Canon, no difference of opinion ever existed.

"The reason of this agreement is a very satisfactory one. Every one who is at all versed in Ecclesiastical History, is aware of the continual intercourse which took place in the apostolical age, between the various branches of the church universal. This communication, as Mr Nolan has well ob

[ocr errors]

served, arose out of the Jewish polity, under which various synagogues of the Jews, which were dispersed throughout the Gentile world, were all subjected to the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem, and maintained a constant correspondence with it. Whenever, then, an Epistle arrived at any particular church, it was first authenticated; it was then read to all the holy brethren, and was subsequently transmitted to some other neighbouring church. Thus we find that the authentication of the Epistles of Paul was, The salutation with his own hand,'* by which the church, to which the Epistle was first addressed, might be assured that it was not a forgery. We find also a solemn adjuration of the same Apostle, that his Epistle should be read to all the holy brethren.'† • When this Epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the Epistle from Laodicea.' From this latter passage we infer, that the system of transmission was a very general one, as the Epistle which St Paul directs the Colossians to receive from the Laodiceans, was not originally directed to the latter, but was sent to them from some other church. To prevent any mistake or fraud, this transmission was made by the highest authority, namely, by that of the bishop. Through him, official communications were sent from one church to another, even in the remotest countries. Clement, the bishop of Rome, communicated with the church at Corinth; Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, wrote an Epistle to the Philippians; Ignatius, the bishop of Antioch, corresponded with the churches at Rome, of Magnesia, of Ephesus, and others. These three bishops were the companions and immediate successors of the Apostles, and followed the system of correspondence and intercourse which their masters had begun. Considering all these circumstances, we shall be convinced how utterly improbable it was that any authentic work of an Apostle should have existed in one church, without being communicated to another. It is a very mistaken notion of Dodwell, that the books of the New Testament lay concealed in the coffers of particular churches, and were not known to the rest of the world until the late days of Trajan. This might have been perfectly true with respect to the originals, which were, doubtless, guarded with peculiar care in the custody of the particular churches to which they were respectively addressed. But, copies of these originals, attested by the authority of the bishop, were transmitted from one church to another with the utmost freedom, * 2 Thess. iii, 17. 1. Thess. v, 27. + Col. iv, 6.

[ocr errors]

and were thus rapidly dispersed throughout the Christian world. As a proof of this, St Peter, in an Epistle addressed generally to the churches in Asia, speaks of All the Epistles of Paul,' as a body of Scripture universally circulated and known.

"The number of the Apostles, including Paul and Barnabas, was but fourteen-to these, and these alone, in the opinion of the early church, was the inspiration of writing confined; out of these, six only deemed it necessary to write; what they did write, was authenticated with the greatest caution, and circulated with the utmost rapidity; what was received in any church as the writing of an Apostle was publicly read; no church was left to itself, or to its own direction; but was frequently visited by the Apostles, and corresponded with by their successors. All the distant members of the church universal, in the Apostles' age, being united by frequent intercourse and communication, became one body in Christ. Taking all these things into consideration, we shall see with what ease and rapidity the Canon of Scripture would be formed, there being no room either for fraudulent fabrication on the one hand, or for arbitrary rejection on the other. The case was too clear to require any formal discussion, nor does it appear that there was any material forgery that could render it

necessary.

"The writings of the Apostles, and of the Apostles alone, were received as the word of God, and were separated from all others by that most decisive species of authority, the authority of a general, an immediate, and an undisputed con

sent.

"This will appear the more satisfactory to our minds, if we take an example from the age in which we live. The letters of Junius, for instance, were published at intervals within a certain period. Since the publication of the last authentic letter, many under that signature have appeared, purporting to have been written by the same author. But this circumstance throws no obsurity over the matter, nor is the Canon of Junius, if I may transfer the term from sacred to secular writing, involved in any difficulty or doubt. If it should be hereafter inquired, at what time, or by what authority, the authentic letters were separated from the spurious, the answer will be that such a separation never took place; but that the Canon of Junius was immediately determined after the last letter. To us who live so near the time of publication, the line of distinction between the genuine and spurious is so strongly marked,

and the evidence of authenticity on the one side, and of forgery on the other, is so clear and convincing, that a formal rejection of the latter is unnecessary. The case has long since been determined by the tacit consent of the whole British nation, and no man in his senses would attempt to dispute it. "Yet how much stronger is the Scriptural Canon. The author of Junius was known to none, he could not therefore of himself bear any testimony to the authenticity of his work; the authors of the New Testament were known to all, and were especially careful to mark, to authenticate, and to distinguish their writings. The author of Junius had no personal character which could stamp his writing with any high or special authority; whatever proceeded from the Apostles of Christ, was immediately regarded as the offspring of an exclusive inspiration. For the Canon of Junius we have no external evidence, but that of a single publisher; for the Canon of Scripture we have the testimony of churches which were visited, bishops who were appointed, and converts innumerable, who were instructed by the Apostles themselves. It was neither the duty nor the interest of any one, excepting the publisher, to preserve the volume of Junius from spurious editions; to guard the integrity of the sacred volume was the bounden duty of every Christian who believed that its words were the words of eternal life.

"If then, notwithstanding these and other difficulties, which might be adduced, the Canon of Junius is established beyond controversy or dispute, by the tacit consent of all who live in the age in which it was written; there can be no reason why the Canon of Scripture, under circumstances infinitely stronger, should not have been determined in a manner precisely the same; especially when we remember, that in both cases, the forgeries made their appearance subsequently to the determination of the Canon. There is not a single book in the spurious department of the Apocryphal volume which was even known, when the Canon of Scripture was determined. This is a fact which considerably strengthens the case. There was no difficulty or dispute in framing the Canon of Scripture, because there were no competitors, whose claims it was expedient to examine; no forgeries, whose impostures it was necessary to detect. The first age of the church was an age of too much vigilance, of too much communication, of too much authority, for any fabrication of Scripture to hope for success. If any attempt was made it was instantly crushed. When the authority of the Apostles and apostolic men had lost its influence,

and heresies and disputes had arisen, then it was that forgeries began to appear. . . Nothing, indeed, but the general and long determined consent of the whole Christian world, could have preserved the sacred volume in its integrity, unimpaired by the mutilation of one set of heretics, and unencumbered by the forgeries of another."

SECTION XIII.

NO CANONICAL BOOK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT HAS BEEN LOST.

THIS was a subject of warm dispute between the Romanists and Protestants, at the time of the Reformation. The former, to make room for their farrago of unwritten traditions, maintained the affirmative; and such men as Bellarmine and Pineda asserted roundly, that some of the most valuable parts of the Canonical Scriptures were lost. The Protestants, on the other hand, to support the sufficiency and perfection of the Holy Scriptures the corner-stone of the Reformation-strenuously and successfully contended, that no part of the Canonical volume had been lost.

But the opinion that some inspired books, which once belonged to the Canon, have been lost, has been maintained by some more respectable writers than those Romanists just mentioned. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Calvin, and Whitaker, have all, in some degree, countenanced the same opinion, in order to avoid some difficulty, or to answer some particular purpose. The subject, so far as the Old Testament is concerned, has already been considered; it shall now be our endeavour to show, that no Canonical book of the New Testament has been lost.

And here, I am ready to concede, as was before done, that there may have been books written by inspired men that have been lost: for inspiration was occasional, not constant; and confined to matters of faith, and not afforded on the affairs of this life, or in matters of mere science. If Paul, or Peter, or any other Apostle, had occasion to write private letters to their friends, on subjects not connected with religion, there is no reason to think that these were inspired; and if such writings

« ÖncekiDevam »