EVIDENCE FROM CATALOGUES.

Having discussed in Part First the history and present condition of the text of the New Testament, we now inquire whether its books can be severally traced back to the writers whose names they bear. In order to begin, as in Part First, with admitted facts, we make the date of the oldest existing copy of the Greek New Testament the starting-point of the present inquiry. It is an axiomatic proposition that every book is as old as its oldest existing copy; but the acknowledged date, as we have before stated (page 30), of the Sinaitic Manuscript, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament now in existence, is the first half of the fourth century; and consequently all of the books in question were certainly in existence at that date. This conclusion is universally admitted, and the task before us is to trace these books back through the two and a half centuries which lie between that date and the age of their reputed authors.

Our first evidence is that of catalogues. If the inquiry had reference to Shakespeare's plays, and we should find in a document written A. D. 1600, a list of them as existing works, we would know from this that they were written at least that early. Now it so happens that writings of ancient authors have come down to us which contain lists or catalogues of such books both of the Old and the New Testament as were known and used in their day. These catalogues furnish demonstrative proof that the books which they mention were already in existence.

Some of these catalogues are found in the acts of various ecclesiastical assemblies, which, like the assemblies that drew up the creeds of the several Protestant churches, set forth the books of the Old Testament and the New which they regarded as the true word of God. The earliest of these assemblies in whose acts such a catalogue is found, is the Council of Carthage, which met A. D. 397.1 It was composed of the Bishops of Africa, representing all the churches in the Roman province of that name. The rule adopted on the subject begins with these words: "It was also determined, that beside the canonical2 Scriptures nothing be read in the churches under the title of divine Scriptures." It names all the canonical books of the Old Testament, including all in our present Bible and some of those in the Apocrypha, and then gives the New Testament books in the following order: "Four books of the Gospels, one book of Acts of Apostles, thirteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, one of the same to the Hebrews, two Epistles of the Apostle Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Judas, one book of the Apocalypse of John." It concludes: "We have received from our fathers that these are to be read in the churches."3

This document shows not only that all of the books of our present New Testament were in existence and in use as "divine Scriptures" at the close of the fourth century, but that they had been held in the same esteem by the "fathers" of the venerable men who composed this assembly. These "fathers " must have lived in the earlier part of the fourth century, and the books had then been in use so long as to be regarded by them as having proceeded from the Apostles. This testimony pushes the history of the books back to at least the beginning of the fourth century--farther back than the date of the oldest existing copy of them.

The next catalogue which we cite is from the pen of Athanasius, who was Bishop of Alexandria from 326 to 373 A. D., and one of the most noted Greek writers of the fourth century. In an epistle addressed to the disciples under his oversight, he gives, for the purpose of guarding "some few of the weaker sort" from being deceived by apocryphal books, a list of the true books of the whole Bible, those of the New Testament being the same that we now receive. He declares that these books had been "delivered to the fathers" by those who were "eye witnesses and ministers of the word," and that he had learned this "from the beginning." He appends to his list this warning: "These are the fountains of salvation, that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the oracles contained in them in these alone the doctrine of religion is taught: let no one add to them or take anything from them." 4 This testimony sets forth both the personal knowledge of Athanasius as far back as he "could remember, and that of his early instructors. As he was made Bishop in 326, we may fairly presume that he remembered the books in use as far back as A. D. 300, and that his early teachers remembered far into the thin! century. All remembered them as books believed to have been delivered to the first generation of "the fathers "by the "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word." They must have existed long before, in order to acquire this reputation.

Our next catalogue is that of Cyril, who was Bishop of Jerusalem a part of the time in which Athanasius was Bishop of Alexandria. He lived from 315 to 386 A. D. Jerome, who wrote his life, says that while yet a youth he composed catechetical lectures for the instruction of candidates for baptism.5 In one of these he gives a list of the books which were to be read as the inspired Scriptures, and it agrees precisely with ours except that he omits Revelation. He says to his pupil: "The Apostles and ancient Bishops, governors of the church, who have delivered these to us were wiser and holier than thou. As a son of the church, therefore, transgress not these bounds."6 This shows that alt the books of the New Testament except the Apocalypse were in use in Palestine, the birth-place of Christianity, at the beginning of the fourth century, and that they had been in use a sufficient length of time to be regarded as having come down from the Apostles through the ancient overseers of the church.

Eusebius, called the Father of Ecclesiastical History, because he wrote the first church history that has come down to our day, is our next witness. He lived from 270 to 340 A. D., and was Bishop of the Church of Caesarea in Palestine. He was 45 years old when Cyril was born, and 56 when Athanasius was made Bishop of Alexandria; his testimony, therefore, reaches back about half a century earlier than that of our last two witnesses. He lived through the persecution under the Emperor Diocletian, which continued from A. D. 303 to 311, and Books viii. and ix. of his history are devoted to an account of this persecution. The edict under which it was inaugurated required that all the churches be razed to their foundations, and that all copies of the Scriptures be burned.7 The edict was universal, and it was executed with especial zeal in Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, Italy and Spain.8 Its promulgation shows that at this period the Christian Scriptures were in use throughout the Roman Empire, and that they were well known to the heathen authorities as the foundation and support of the Christian faith.9

Eusebius leaves us in no doubt as to the books which made up the Scriptures whose wide-spread use and influence are thus indicated. He mentions every one contained in our New Testament. He says, however, of seven, that though they were well known and recognized by most persons, they were controverted by some. These were Hebrews, the Epistles of James and Jude, II. Peter, II. and III. John and the Apocalypse.10 He says of the same books in another passage, that "though they are not canonical but controverted, they are nevertheless constantly recognized by most of our ecclesiastical authorities."11

The force of this evidence depends not merely on the personal knowledge of Eusebius, which reached back into the last quarter of the third century, but still more upon the fact that he had gleaned all the Christian literature which had come down to his age. He constantly refers to "the ancients," and "the ancient writers" for what he says of these books.12 If we suppose that by "ancient writers" he meant those who lived as far back as 200 years before his own time, he included among them the cotemporaries of the Apostles. His testimony, therefore, traces at least the uncontroverted books to the apostolic age, and he gives no hint that the others had originated at a later date.

Eusebius lived to see the Christian religion established by law throughout the Roman Empire. He was commissioned by Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, to have transcribed fifty copies of the Bible for the use of the Churches in Constantinople, and he wrote a Life of Constantine whom he survived but a few years.13

We now go back to Origen, who was born at Alexandria, A. D. 185, and died in 254. He was the most voluminous and one of the most eminent of the Greek writers of the early church. He wrote commentaries and homilies on the principal books of both Testaments, besides volumes on various other subjects; and his defense of Christianity against Celsus, the first infidel writer, is one of the most noted works of antiquity.14 In his exposition of the first Psalm he incidentally names the books of the Old Testament, and in a homily on the book of Joshua he names those of the New Testament as we now have them.15 The original of this homily has perished, and we are dependent for this evidence on a Latin version of it, but there is no reason to doubt the substantial correctness of the version.

In other passages also he mentions all of our books. In his Commentary on Matthew he says that the four Gospels alone [as Gospels] are uncontroverted in the Church, and that they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, in the order here given to their names.16

In his commentary on the gospel of John, after speaking in general terms of Paul's epistles, he says: "But Peter, upon whom the church of Christ is built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, has left one epistle undisputed. Suppose, also, the second was left by him, for on this there is some doubt."17 But although he thus declares that there was some doubt about II. Peter, preventing him from styling it like I. Peter, "undisputed," he shows his own judgment of it not only by the passages cited above from one of his homilies on Joshua, but also by quoting IT. Peter i. 4, with the formula, "Peter said"; and II. Peter ii. 16, with the words, "As the Scripture says in a certain place"; and by citing what Peter said in his "first" epistle, implying a second.18

Eusebius quotes him as saying in the same commentary, that John wrote the Apocalypse, that he left one epistle and perhaps a second and a third, "for all do not allow that they are genuine." 19

Concerning the epistle to the Hebrews he expresses the opinion that the thoughts are Paul's, but that the diction and phraseology are those of another. He says that some ascribed the writing to Clement, and others to Luke; but he shows that he had himself formed no opinion on this point by saying, "Who it was that really wrote the epistle, God only knows."20

We now see that Origen's catalogue contained all the books of the New Testament; and that although he says of II. Peter, and II. and III. John, that they were held in doubt by some, he expresses no such doubt as existing in his own mind. It should also be carefully noted, that he does not intimate as the ground of the doubt which he mentions a supposed recent origin of any of these epistles. As respects Hebrews, the only doubt he expresses has reference to its composition; he had none as to its apostolic origin.

The value of this testimony is enhanced by a consideration of Origen's opportunities for correct information. His father, Leonides, suffered martyrdom at Alexandria in the persecution under Septiraius Severus, who reigned 193-211, and not long after his father's death Origen was made teacher of the Catechumens in Alexandria. This was in the year 203, when he was but eighteen years of age. The intimate knowledge of the Scriptures which this appointment implies, shows that his personal acquaintance with the sacred books reached back into the second century; and the information that he derived from his martyred father reached back to a still earlier date. It was only by the stern command of his father that he was dissuaded from joining the latter in martyrdom. Later in life he visited Palestine, Syria and Greece; and he made his home at Caesarea during the last twenty-four years of his life, though he died in Tyre after suffering extreme torture at the hands of persecutors. His life was full of trial and self-denial, and he acquired a world-wide fame while he yet lived. His testimony to the New Testament books is therefore that of a competent and unimpeachable witness.21

Clement of Alexandria, so called to distinguish him from an earlier Clement, of Rome, is the next writer whose testimony we cite. He lived from about 165 A. D. to 220.22 In early life he was a student of pagan philosophy, but on becoming a Christian he visited eminent teachers of Christianity in Greece, Syria, Egypt, Palestine and other countries, to receive their oral instruction.23 Such was his proficiency in these studies that he was made catechetical teacher in Alexandria in 189, and continued to hold the position till 202, when he left Alexandria, and was succeeded by his pupil Origen.24 is extant writings fill two of the octavo volumes of the Ante-Nicene Library, but one of his most important works, which bore the Greek title Hypotuposes (Outlines) has perished. Eusebius, who had this work before him, says that in it Clement gave concise explanations of all the canonical scriptures, "not omitting the disputed books."25 This statement is confirmed so far as the epistles are concerned by Photius, a Latin writer of the ninth century, who also had read the lost work, and who says that it contained interpretations of Paul's epistles and the Catholic epistles, the "disputed epistles" being included in the latter expression.26 According to these statements, while Clement made no formal catalogue of the books in question, he did what was equivalent, he gave explanations more or less elaborate of them all.27

Eusebius quotes Clement as saying concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews, that it was written by Paul in the Hebrew tongue, and translated into Greek by Luke. In this way he accounts for its similarity in style and phraseology to Acts, and he supposes that Paul left it anonymous lest the prejudices of the Jews against him might prevent them from reading it.28

But in addition to this second-hand testimony, we find in his extant writings that he names and quotes from every book in the New Testament except Philemon, James, II. Peter and III. John.29

This evidence is furnished by a man who was born within sixty-five years of the death of the apostle John, and had received instruction from eminent teachers who, to use his own words, "Preserving the tradition of the blessed doctrine derived directly from the holy apostles, Peter, James, John and Paul, the son receiving it from the father (but few were like the fathers) came by God's will to us also to deposit those ancestral and apostolic seeds."30 How few generations of transmission are here alluded to can be realized, if we remember that a man eighty-five years of age could have lived ten years with the apostle John and ten years with Clement. The interval was too brief for books originating within it to be transmitted as having been known since the days of the apostles.

Tertullian, a famous Latin writer of Africa, was born in Carthage about A. D. 160, and died about A. D. 240.31 He was, therefore, a cotemporary of Origen and Clement, and his personal knowledge of the New Testament books extended through the last quarter of the second century. He left no formal catalogue, but his extant writings contain statements concerning the gospels and Paul's epistles that are equivalent to a catalogue, and he mentions all the other books except II. Peter, James, and the two shorter epistles of John. He names our four gospels, and says that Matthew and John32 were written by apostles, and Mark and Luke by "apostolic men." In the last book of his work against Marcion, he names all of Paul's epistles to churches in regular order, drawing an argument from each one separately, thus refuting Marcion out of the very books on which he relied to support his heresy. He does the same with Philemon, and twits Marcion for accepting, as he did, this personal epistle, yet rejecting the two to Timothy and the one to Titus.33 Thus he arrays the thirteen epistles of Paul as authorities in debate. He was also acquainted with Hebrews, but he represents it as having been written by Barnabas.34 He frequently quotes Acts of the Apostles by its title, ascribing it to Luke, and asserting that those who do not receive it have no means of showing when, or with what beginnings the church was formed.35 He quotes by name I. Peter and Jude.36 He also quotes frequently from I. John and the Apocalypse, ascribing the latter to John.37

In addition to the testimony given in this indirect way, Tertullian, in opposition to Marcion who rejected all the Gospels except Luke's, and was charged with mutilating this, insists that the Gospels came down "from the very beginning," "from the apostles," and that they had been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches planted by the personal labors of the Apostles, as well as in others.38 He furthermore refers such persons as would indulge their curiosity, to the churches to which letters were written by Apostles, and affirms that in these "their own authentic letters are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them separately." 39 There has been much dispute over the word "authentic" as used in this passage. If Tertullian meant by it only to affirm that well authenticated copies of the Epistles were in those churches, the remark could scarcely have been worth making; for the same was equally true of other churches. He must have meant that the autographs themselves were still preserved. In this he may have been mistaken, or have indulged in rhetorical exaggeration; yet it is not at all incredible that the autographs had been preserved until that time. But the value of the testimony depends not so much upon the accuracy of this statement, as upon the fact which it makes manifest that the churches referred to believed themselves to have received such letters from Apostles, and in this belief they can not have been mistaken.

The earliest formal catalogue of the New Testament books now extant, is that of a document called the Muratorian Canon. The manuscript of this document was found in 1740 in an old library in Milan, by an Italian named Muratori, whence the title Muratorian. The MS. belongs to the seventh or the eighth century, and is a Latin translation from a Greek original. It claims to have been composed by a cotemporary of Pius, Bishop of Rome, who died in the year 157, and it is not therefore of later date than A. D. 170.40 The existing MS. is fragmentary, having lost some lines from both the beginning and the end. It begins with the last words of a sentence of which there is not enough left to make complete sense, and continues thus: "In the third place is the book of the Gospel according to Luke."41 After a brief account of Luke, it states that John's Gospel is the fourth. This enumeration makes it quite certain that the part torn away spoke of Matthew and Mark. It contains all the other books except the two Epistles of Peter, I. John, James and Hebrews. As these important Epistles are absent, while II. and III. John, and Philemon, far less important, are present, it is more probable that the former have been lost from it than that they were originally omitted.42

The author of this catalogue wrote when Tertullian, our last witness, was but ten years of age. His personal knowledge of the books, if he was a middle-aged man when he wrote, reached back into the first half of the second century, and be may have conversed with men who had lived in the midst of the Apostles, and his information concerning the origin of our books may have been derived to some extent from original witnesses.

The earliest writer who set forth a formal list of the books which he accepted as authoritative, was Marcion, who came from Pontus to Rome about the year 140,43 and was then a teacher of great notoriety. Pie was the founder of a heretical party called Marcionites after his own name. While the Ebionites, an intensely Jewish-Christian sect, the theological offspring of the Judaizers against whom Paul waged so constant a warfare, rejected all of Paul's writings, and also the writings of Luke, because he was under Paul's influence, Marcion took the opposite extreme, and claiming that Paul was the only Apostle who understood the gospel correctly, he rejected all the New Testament writings except ten of Paul's Epistles, and Luke's Gospel. The two Epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus he rejected for reasons that are not known, and also Hebrews. His teaching demonstrates the previous general recognition of this Gospel and these ten Epistles, while his antagonism to the other Gospels and to the writings in general of the other Apostles, demonstrates the existence of those. Moreover, the ground on which he rejected the latter was not their want of genuineness, but, admitting their genuineness, he denied the apostolic authority of their authors.44 Thus the direct and indirect evidence from this source combine to show that at least the greater part of our books were known to Marcion, and his knowledge reached back into the first quarter of the second century.

The five writers last quoted, Marcion, the author of the Muratorian Canon, Tertullian, Clement and Origen, unitedly mention by name all the books of the New Testament. They are the earliest group of writers who do so, and they all lived within the second century, spanning with their personal knowledge the whole of this century from the beginning of its second quarter to its close. They declare that these books had been handed down "from the fathers," "from the ancients," "from the Apostles;" and they speak from Rome, from Africa, from Egypt, from Palestine. The age of a single man may have overlapped the early days of the latest of the five and the latter part of the life of John. We have therefore traced the existence of these books by unquestionable evidence to the second generation after that of the Apostles, and we find them at that time widely circulated over the world as apostolic writings. Can they have gained this circulation and this reputation if they had originated by forgery within the intervening generation? We find also these unimpeached witnesses asserting that they had received these books from their fathers, who had received them from the cotemporaries of the Apostles. Is it credible that all of these were deceived, or that they all, in widely separated parts of the world, conspired together to impose upon their fellow-men as apostolic, books which their fellow-men must have known to be of recent origin? If it is not, then the evidence from catalogues alone is credible proof that all of the New Testament books originated in the days of the Apostles.

1 The Council of Laodicea, which met A. D. 363, is commonly quoted as having made a catalogue, but there are good grounds for believing that the catalogue appended to the report of its proceedings was added at a later date. The evidence is given by Westcott, Canon of New Testament, 428-432.

2 The word canon is the Greek word κανών anglicized, and means a rule. Paul employs the original term in Gal. vi. 16. and it continued in use among the Greek writers of the early church. Applied to the Scriptures, it represents them as the rule of faith and practice. The Canon is the whole Bible, and a book is said to be canonical when it is entitled to a place in this Canon. The term was also applied to the various rules adopted by councils. For a full account of its use, see Appendix A to Westcott's Canon of New Testament.

3 For the original Latin text of this catalogue, see Westcott on the Canon, 533, or Charteris, Canonicity, 18; and for an English translation of it, see Lardner's Credibility, v. 78.

4 The Greek text of the extract is given by Westcott (Canon, 546) and by Charteris, 13, and the following is Lardner's translation of it: "But since we have spoken of heretics as dead persons, and of ourselves as having the divine Scriptures for salvation; and I fear lest, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians, some few of the weaker sort should be seduced from their simplicity and purity by the cunning and craftiness of some men, and at length be induced to make use of other books called apocryphal, being deceived by the similitude of their names resembling the true books; I therefore entreat you to bear with me if I by writing remind you of things which you know already, as what may be of use for the church. And for the vindication of my attempt, I adopt the form of the Evangelist Luke, who himself says: Forasmuch as some have taken in hand to set forth writings called apocryphal, and to join them with the divinely inspired Scriptures of which we are fully assured, as they delivered them to the fathers who were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word: it has seemed good to me also, with the advice of some true brethren, and having learned it from the beginning, to set forth in order these canonical books which have been delivered down to us, and are believed to be divine Scripture: that every one who has been deceived may condemn those who have deceived him, and that he who remains uncorrupted may have the satisfaction to be reminded of what he is persuaded of." Here follows the list of the Old Testament books, and the writer proceeds: "Nor do I think it too much pains to declare those of the New. They are these: The four Gospels, according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke, according to John. Then after them the Acts of the Apostles, and the seven Epistles of the Apostles called catholic: of James one, of Peter two, of John three, and after them of Jude one. Besides these, there are fourteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, the order of which is thus: the first to the Romans, then two to the Corinthians, after them that to the Galatians, the next to the Ephesians, then to the Philippians, to the Colossians, after them two to the Thessalonians, and the Epistle to the Hebrews, then two to Timothy, to Titus one, the last to Philemon; and again the Revelation of John. These are the fountains of salvation, that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the oracles contained in them. In these alone the doctrine of salvation is taught; let no man add to them or take from them." (Lardner's Credibility, iv., 282-284.)

5 Quoted by Lardner, iv., 299, note a. His catechetical lectures which he wrote in his youth are extant.

6 Quoted in the original by Westcott, Canon of New Testament, 541,542. I translate the part concerning the New Testament as follows: "Of the New Testament, receive the four Gospels. But the others are falsely written and injurious. The Manicheans have also written a gospel according to Thomas, which, as by the fragrance of its evangelical title, corrupts the souls of the simple-minded. And receive also the Acts of the twelve Apostles; in addition to these, also, the seven Catholic Epistles of James and Peter, John and Jude, and the seal of all, the last work of the disciples, the fourteen Epistles of Paul."

7 "It was the nineteenth year of the reign of Diocletian, and the month Dystrus, called by the Romans March, in which the festival of our Saviour's passion was at hand, when the imperial edicts were everywhere published, to tear down the churches to their foundations, and to destroy the sacred Scriptures by fire, and which commanded also that those who were in honorable stations should be degraded, but those who were freedmen should be deprived of their liberty, if they persevered in their adherence to Christianity." "All this has been fulfilled in our own day, when we saw with our own eyes our houses of worship thrown down from their elevation, the sacred Scriptures of inspiration committed to flames in the markets, the shepherds of the people basely concealed here and there, some of them ignominiously captured and the sport of their enemies." (Eccles. Hist., vii. 1, 2.)

8 The extent of the persecution, and the varying degrees of severity with which it was conducted, are traced by Gibbon in the celebrated Sixteenth Chapter of his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

9 "The philosophers, who now assumed the unworthy office of directing the blind zeal of persecution, had diligently studied the nature and genius of the Christian religion; and as they were not ignorant that the speculative doctrines of the faith were supposed to be contained in the writings of the prophets, of the evangelists, and of the apostles, they most probably suggested the order that the bishops and presbyters should deliver all their sacred books into the hands of the magistrates, who were commanded under the severest penalties to burn them in a public and solemn manner." (Gibbon, Decline and Fall, ii., 64.)

10 "Among the controverted books, which are nevertheless well known and recognized by most (τοίς πολλοίς), we class the Epistle circulated under the name of James, and that of Jude, as well as the second of Peter, and the socalled second and third of John, whether they really belong to the evangelist, or possibly to another of the same name. . . . And moreover, as I said the Apocalypse of John, if such an opinion seem correct, which some, as I said, reject, while others reckon it among the books generally received." Translated by Westcott (Canon, 415) from Eccles. Hist., iii., 25. Of Hebrews he deposes as follows: "Of Paul the fourteen Epistles commonly received are at once manifest and clear. It is not right, however, to ignore the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, asserting that it is gainsaid by the Church of Rome as not being Paul's." (Canon of New Testament, 412. Eccles. Hist., iii. 3.)

11 Eccles. Hist., iii., 25.

12 "But as I proceed in my history, I shall carefully show, with the succession of the apostles, what ecclesiastical writers in their times made use of any of the disputed writings." (iii. 3). "At a more proper time we shall endeavor also to state, by a reference to some of the ancient writers, what others have said respecting the sacred books. But, besides the Gospel of John, his first Epistle is acknowledged without dispute, both by those of the present day and also by the ancients. The other two Epistles, however, are disputed. The opinions respecting the Revelation are still greatly divided. But we shall, in due time, give a judgment on this point also, from the testimony of the ancients"(iii. 24).

13 Book X. of Ecclesiastical History gives an account of the final triumph; and for the facts concerning the fifty Bibles, see Life of Constantine, 34, 35.

14 A brief sketch of his life and a list of his works is appended to the second volume of his extant writings in the Ante-Nicene Christian Library.

15 After describing the fall of Jericho, when the trumpets were blown by the priests, he says: "So, too, our Lord, whose advent was typified by the son of Nun, when he came, sent his apostles, bearing well-wrought trumpets. Matthew first sounded the priestly trumpet in his Gospel. Mark also, Luke and John, each gave forth a strain on their priestly trumpets. Peter, moreover, sounded loudly on the two-fold trumpet of his Epistles; and so also James and Jude. Still the number is incomplete, and John gives forth the trumpet-sound in his Epistles and Apocalypse; and Luke, while describing the Acts of the Apostles. Lastly, however, came he who said, ' I think that God hath set forth us Apostles last of all,' and, thundering on the fourteen trumpets of his Epistles, threw down even to the ground the walls of Jericho, that is to say, all the instruments of idolatry and the doctrines of philosophers." (Homily on Joshua vii. 1, quoted and translated by Westcott, Canon of New Testament, 358.)

16 His words, as quoted by Eusebius, are as follows: "I have understood from tradition respecting the four Gospels, which are the only undisputed ones in the whole Church of God throughout the world, that the first is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who, having published it for the Jewish converts, wrote it in Hebrew. The second is according to Mark, who composed it as Peter explained to him, whom he also acknowledges as his son in his general Epistle, saying, 'The elect church in Babylon salutes you, as also Mark, my son.' And the third according to Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul, which was written for the converts from the Gentiles; and last of all, the Gospel according to John." (Eccles. Hist., VI., xxv., p. 245.)

17 Ib. VI., xxv., p. 246.

18 Quoted by Westcott, Canon of New Testament, 359, n. 7; from Homily on Leviticus iv. 4; Commentary on Romans iv. 9; Homily on Numbers xiii. 8; and De Principiis Viris, II., n., 3.

19 "What shall we say of him who reclined upon the breast of Jesus? I mean John, who has left one Gospel, in which he confesses that he could write so many that the whole world could not contain them. He also wrote the Apocalypse, commanded as he was to conceal and not to write the voices of the seven thunders. He also left an Epistle consisting of a very few lines; suppose also that a second and third are from him, for not all agree that they are genuine; but both together do not contain a hundred lines." (Quoted by Eusebius, Eccles. Hist., VI., xxv., p. 246.)

20 "I would say, that the thoughts are the Apostle's, but that the diction and phraseology belong to some one who has recorded what the Apostle said, and one who noted down at his leisure what his master dictated. If, then, any church considers this Epistle as coming from Paul, let it be commended for this; for neither did those ancient men deliver it as such without cause. But who it was that actually wrote the Epistle, God only knows. The account, however, that has been current before us is, according to some, that Clement, who was Bishop of Rome, wrote the Epistle; according to others, that it was written by Luke, who wrote the Gospel and Acts" (Eccles. Hist. vi. 25, pp. 246, 247).

21 Eusebius gives a disconnected account of his career in Ecclesiastical History, Book vi.; Lardner gives a connected account in Vol. II. of his Credibility; and a brief account is given in the volume of the Ante-Nicene Christian Library containing his extant writings.

22 Neither the place nor the exact date of either his birth or death is certainly known (see Lardner, Vol. n. c. 22), but the above are the dates accepted by the best scholars as the most probable. See Westcott on the Canon, 350.

23 That he was proficient in pagan philosophy is apparent throughout his works from his frequent references to it. Of his Christian teachers, he speaks as follows: "My memoranda are stored up against old age, as a remedy against forgetfulness; truly an image and outline of those vigorous and animated discourses which I was privileged to hear, and of blessed and truly remarkable men. Of these the one in Greece, an Ionic, and the other in Magna Grecia: the first of these from Coele-Syria, the second from Egypt, and others in the East. The one was born in the land of Assyria, and the other a Hebrew in Palestine" (Stromata, B. I., c. i., Ante-Nicene Library, iv. 355).

24 Eccles. Hist., vi. 6; Ante-Nicene Library, iv. 9, and references there given.

25 "In the work called Hypotuposes, to sum up the matter briefly, he has given us abridged accounts of all the canonical Scriptures, not even omitting those that are disputed. I mean the book of Jude and the other general Epistles. Also the Epistle of Barnabas and that called the Revelation of Peter" (Eccles. Hist. vi. 14).

26 "Now the whole scope of the book consists in giving, as it were, interpretations of Genesis, of Exodus, of the Psalms, of the Epistles of St. Paul, and of the Catholic Epistles, and of Ecclesiasticus" (Quoted by Westcott, Canon, 352).

This statement differs from that just quoted from Eusebius (Note 25) as to the number of books treated in the work, but the two statements are alike in regard to the Catholic Epistles.

27 Lardner (II. 228, 229), followed by Westcott (Canon of New Testament, 352-4), expresses doubt as to the strict correctness of Eusebius and Photius (Notes 25, 26) concerning the Catholic Epistles, basing the doubt on a statement of Cas8iodorus, a writer of the sixth century, who says that Clement made some comments on the Canonical Epistles, "that is to say, on the First Epistle of St. Peter, the First and Second of St. John, and the Epistle of St. James." He says further that he had been solicitous concerning the other Canonical Epistles, when he met with a book of one Didymus giving an exposition of the seven. This shows that Cassiodorus knew of comments by Clement on only four of the seven Catholic Epistles. This can be accounted for by supposing either that those on the other three were absent from his manuscript of Clement, or that Eusebius and Photius were both mistaken. It seems to us that the former of these alternatives is more probable than the latter, and that the positive statement of the two writers is to be accepted.

28 "But the Epistle to the Hebrews he [Clement] asserts, was written by Paul to the Hebrews in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully translated by Luke and published among the Greeks. Whence one also finds the same character of style and of phraseology in the Epistle as in Acts. But it is probable that the title, Paul the Apostle, was not prefixed to it. For as he wrote to the Hebrews who had imbibed prejudices against him, and suspected him, he wisely guards against diverting them from the perusal by giving his name'" (Eccles. Hist., vi. 14).

29 The citations are too numerous for our space, but they may be found in Lardner's Credibility, II. 210-230, and in the two volumes of Clement belonging to the Ante-Nicene Christian Library.

30 Stromata, l. i. (Ante-Nicene Lib. Vol. iv. 355).

31 See the evidences and opinions adduced by Lardner, n. 253, and also Westcott, Canon, 341.

32 "Of the Apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instill faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it afterward" (Tertullian against Marcion, iv. ii. 280).

33 "To this Epistle alone did its brevity avail to protect it against the falsifying hands of Marcion. I wonder, however, when he received this letter which was written to but one man, that he rejected the two Epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus, which all treat of ecclesiastical discipline. His aim was, I suppose, to carry out his interpolating process even to the number of Epistles" (Tertullian against Marcion, v. xxi. 478).

34 He says: "For there is an Epistle of Barnabas, inscribed to the Hebrews, written by a man of such authority, that Paul has placed him with himself in the same course of abstinence: 'Or I only and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working?'" Then follows a quotation from Heb. vi. 4-8. See the passage cited from De Pudicitia, by Lardner, Credibility, II. 270.

35 "Accordingly, in the Acts of the Apostles we find that men who had John's baptism had not received the Holy Spirit, whom they knew not even by hearing" (De Baptismo, x. 243). "Moreover, since in the same Commentary of Luke, both the third hour of prayer is pointed out, at which, when entered by the Holy Spirit, they were held to be drunk, and the sixth, at which Peter went up on the house-top," etc. (De Jejuniis, c. 10). "And assuredly He fulfilled His promise, since it is proved in the Acts of the Apostles that the Holy Spirit did come down. Now they who reject that Scripture can neither belong to the Holy Spirit, seeing they can not acknowledge that the Holy Spirit, has been sent as yet to the disciples, nor can they pretend to claim to be a church themselves who positively have no means of proving when and with what infant nursing this body was established" (Prescription against Heretics, xxii. 26).

36 "Peter says to the people of Pontus, How great glory it is, if, when ye are punished for your faults yet take it patiently," etc. (I. Peter ii. 20, 21). Lardner, II. 274 n. f. In arguing for the genuineness of the Book of Enoch, he says: "To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude "(Jude 14, 15). On Female Dress, iii. 708.

37 "John exhorts us to lay down our lives for our brethren, denying that there is any fear in love for perfect love casteth out fear" (I. John iii. 16 iv. 18). Lardner, 275: "John in his Apocalypse is commanded to chastise those who eat things sacrificed to idols and commit fornication" (Rev. ii. 14). Prescription against Heresies, xxxiii. 40.  

38 "On the whole, then, if that is evidently more true which is earlier, if that is earlier which is from the beginning, if that is from the beginning which has the Apostles for its authors, then it will certainly be quite as evident that that comes down from the Apostles which has been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches of the Apostles." He then refers to the writings of Paul, Peter and John, and to Luke's Gospel, and with reference to the latter he adds: "The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means and according to their usage--I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew--whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was. For even Luke's form of the Gospel men usually ascribe to Paul, and it may well seem that the works which disciples publish belong to their masters." (Against Marcion, v. 186, 187).  

39 "Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, run over the Apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the Apostles are preeminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally. Achaia is very near you, you find Corinth. Since you are not far from Macedonia, you have Philippi, you have the Thessalonians. Since you are able to cross to Asia, you get Ephesus. Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome" (Prescription against Heresies, xxxvi. 42).

40 "Hermas wrote The Shepherd very recently in our own time in the City of Rome, while his brother Pius was occupying the Bishop's chair in the church at Rome." See the Canon quoted by Westcott, Canon of New Testament, 200. n. 1.

41 "Quibus tamen intermit et ita posuit. Tertio Euangelii, librum secundo Lucan."

42 Westcott gives the whole Latin text of this document, and discusses it exhaustively (Canon of New Testament, 208-218, and Appendix C).  

43 Westcott (Canon of New Testament, 309), fixes the date between 139 and 142; Davidson (Canon of the Bible, 85), at 140.  

44 This is implied in the following extract from Tertullian's reply: "But Marcion, finding the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, wherein he rebukes even Apostles for not walking uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel, as well as accuses certain false apostles of perverting the Gospel of Christ, labors very hard to destroy the standing of these Gospels which are published as genuine and under the name of Apostles, in order, forsooth, to secure for his own gospel the credit which he takes away from them" (Against Marcion, iv. 3). A brief account of the career of Marcion and of his teaching is given by Westcott (Canon of New Testament, 308-315).