« PreviousContinue »
tice: "This (says he) we do, when the scriptures are read in the church, and when the discourse for explication is delivered to the people*." And, what is a still more ample testimony, many homilies of his upon the scriptures of the New Testament, delivered by him in the assemblies of the church, are still extant.
IV. Cyprian, whose age was not twenty years lower than that of Origen, gives his people an account of having ordained two persons, who were before confessors, to be readers; and what they were to read, appears by the reason which he gives for his choice :-" Nothing (says Cyprian) can be more fit, than that he, who has made a glorious confession of the Lord, should read publickly in the church; that he who has shewn himself willing to die a martyr, should read the gospel of Christ, by which martyrs are madet."
V. Intimations of the same custom may be traced in a great number of writers in the beginning and throughout the whole of the fourth century. Of these testimonies I will only use one, as being, of itself, express and full. Augustine, who appeared near the conclusion of the century, displays the benefit of the Christian religion on this very account, the publick reading of the scriptures in the churches, "where (says he) is a confluence of all sorts of people of both sexes; and where they hear how they ought to live well in this world, that they may deserve to live happily and eternally in another." And this custom he declares to be universal: "The canonical books of scripture being read every where, the miracles therein recorded are well known to all people‡."
It does not appear, that any books, other than our present scriptures, were thus publickly read, except that the
* Lard. Cred. vol. iii. p. 302. † Ib. vol. iv. p. 842.
epistle of Clement was read in the church of Corinth, to which it had been addressed, and in some others: and that the Shepherd of Hermas was read in many churches. Nor does it subtract much from the value of the argument, that these two writings partly come within it, because we allow them to be the genuine writings of apostolical men. There is not the least evidence, that any other gospel, than the four which we receive, was ever admitted to this distinction.
Commentaries were anciently written upon the scriptures; harmonies formed out of them; different copies carefully collated; and versions made of them into different languages.
No o greater proof can be given of the esteem in which these books were holden by the ancient Christians, or of the sense then entertained of their value and importance, than the industry bestowed upon them. And it ought to be observed, that the value and importance of these books consisted entirely in their genuineness and truth. There was nothing in them, as works of taste, or as compositions, which could have induced any one to have written a note upon them. Moreover it shews that they were even then considered as ancient books. Men do not write comments upon publications of their own times: therefore the testimonies cited under this head, afford an evidence which carries up the evangelick writings much beyond the age of the testimonies themselves, and to that of their reputed authors.
I. Tatian, a follower of Justin Martyr, and who flourished about the year 170, composed a harmony, or colla
tion, of the gospels, which he called Diatessaron, Of the four*. The title, as well as the work, is remarkable; because it shews that then, as now, there were four, and only four, gospels in general use with Christians. And this was little more than a hundred years after the publication of some of them.
II. Pantænus, of the Alexandrian school, a man of great reputation and learning, who came twenty years after Tatian, wrote many commentaries upon the holy scriptures, which, as Jerome testifies, were extant in his timef.
III. Clement of Alexandria wrote short explications of many books of the Old and New Testament‡.
IV. Tertullian appeals from the authority of a later version, then in use, to the authentick Greek§.
V. An anonymous author, quoted by Eusebius, and who appears to have written about the year 212, appeals to the ancient copies of the scriptures, in refutation of some corrupt readings alleged by the followers of Artemon¶.
VI. The same Eusebius, mentioning by name several writers of the Church who lived at this time, and concerning whom he says, "There still remain divers monuments of the laudable industry of those ancient and ecclesiastical men," (i. e. of Christian writers, who were considered as ancient in the year 300) adds, "There are besides treatises of many others, whose names we have not been able to learn, orthodox and ecclesiastical men, as the interpretations of the divine scriptures given by each of them shew**."
VII. The five last testimonies may be referred to the year 200; immediately after which, a period of thirty years gives us
*Lard. Cred. vol. i. p. 307,
Ib. vol. ii. p. 462. **Ib. vol. ii. p. 551.
§ Ib. p. 638.
Ibid. vol. i. p. 455.
¶ lb. vol. iii. p. 46.
Julius Africanus, who wrote an epistle upon the apparent difference in the genealogies in Matthew and Luke, which he endeavours to reconcile by the distinction of natural and legal descent, and conducts his hypothesis with great industry through the whole series of generations*.
Ammonius, a learned Alexandrian, who composed, as Tatian had done, a harmony of the four Gospels; which proves, as Tatian's work did, that there were four Gospels, and no more, at this time in use in the Church. It affords also an instance of the zeal of Christians for those writings, and of their solicitude about them.
And, above both these, Origen, who wrote commentaries, or homilies, upon most of the books included in the New Testament, and upon no other books but these. In particular, he wrote upon St. John's Gospel, very largely upon St. Matthew's, and commentaries, or homilies, upon the Acts of the Apostles‡.
VIII. In addition to these, the third century likewise contains:
Dionysius of Alexandria, a very learned man, who compared, with great accuracy, the accounts in the four Gospels of the time of Christ's resurrection, adding a reflection which shewed his opinion of their authority: "Let us not think that the Evangelists disagree, or contradict each other, although there be some small difference but let us honestly and faithfully endeavour to reconcile what we read§."
Victorin, bishop of Pettaw, in Germany, who wrote comments upon St. Matthew's gospel¶.
Lucian, a Presbyter of Antioch; and Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, who put forth editions of the New Tes
Lard. Cred. vol. iii. p. 170.
† Ib. vol. iii. p. 122.
IX. The fourth century supplies* a catalogue of fifteen writers, who expended their labours upon the books of the New Testament, and whose works or names are come down to our times; amongst which number it may be sufficient, for the purpose of showing the sentiments and studies of learned Christians of that age, to notice the following:
Eusebius, in the very beginning of the century, wrote expressly upon the discrepancies observable in the Gospels, and likewise a treatise, in which he pointed out what things are related by four, what by three, what by two, and what by one evangelistt. This author also testifies, what is certainly a material piece of evidence, " that the writings of the apostles had obtained such an esteem, as to be translated into every language both of Greeks and Barbarians, and to be diligently studied by all nations‡.” This testimony was given about the year 300; how long before that date these translations were made, does not appear.
Damasus, bishop of Rome, corresponded with St. Jerome upon the exposition of difficult texts of scripture; and, in a letter still remaining, desires Jerome to give him a clear explanation of the word Hosanna, found in the New Testament; "he (Damasus) having met with very different interpretations of it in the Greek and Latin commentaries of Catholick writers which he had read§." This