to us, we find nearly all the books of our New Testament quoted or alluded to:-not indeed, generally, so as to determine the authors; but so as to show that the books were in existence, and were known and read and appreciated by contemporaneous writers, and those to whom they wrote. Conversant as these writers were with the Apostles, they could not thus have received and used these books, unless they had believed that they were truly from them. Neither would it seem that they thus recognized any other books that are not in our Canon.

2. We descend a little later into the second century, and passing by others whose testimony would help us, we examine the writings of Justin Martyr, A.D. 140; of Irenæus, A.D. 178; of Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 194; and of Tertullian, A.D. 200. The first of these was a native of Palestine, a man of learning and a traveller. The second was a native of Asia, acquainted with Polycarp, and Bishop of Lyons in Gaul. The third was a learned president of the celebrated catechetical school at Alexandria, in Egypt. The fourth was a presbyter of Carthage, and a man of liberal learning.

Like the Apostolical Fathers who preceded them, none of these have given us catalogues of the Sacred Books. But they make so many statements respecting them and their authors, and so freely quote them and allude to them as sacred and authoritative Scriptures, that we might, with goodly satisfaction, make out the Canon of the New Testament from them alone. I am sorry that I have not time to quote them at length: but I am compelled to content myself with the statement of the substance and the most important points of their testimony. Justin tells us that the Memoirs or Records of the Apostles and their companions,plainly meaning our four Gospels, which only he received, were read and expounded in the assemblies of Christians for divine worship on the Sabbath day. Irenæus says expressly, that there were but four Gospels, the very ones that we now have. In divers passages they both quote these, and many other of the Sacred Books. Clement, likewise testifies to the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John: refers Acts to Luke; thirteen Epistles to Paul, omitting only Philemon : quotes of the Catholic Epistles all but James, 2 Peter, and 3 John: and ascribes Revelation to John, the Apostle. Tertullian, also, received but the four Gospels, of Matthew and John who, he says, were Apostles, and of Mark and Luke, who were apostolical men: refers Acts

to Luke; thirteen Epistles to Paul, including Philemon, but ascribing Hebrews to Barnabas: and quotes 1 Peter, 1 John, Jude, and Revelation, ascribing the last expressly to the Apostle John. "Visit," says he to those who would exercise a commendable curiosity in matters of their salvation,-"visit the apostolical churches, in which the very chairs of the Apostles still preside; in which their very authentic letters are recited, sounding forth the voice and representing the face of each one. Is Achaia near you? you have Corinth. If you are not far from Macedonia, you have Philippi and Thessalonica. If you can go to Asia, you have Ephesus, &c." Putting together their statements, and the statements of others coëval with them, we learn that the books of the New Testament were at this period current in two volumes, called the Gospels and Apostles; that there were four Gospels universally received, two of them from the Apostles Matthew and John, and two from Mark and Luke, who wrote respectively with the authority of Peter and Paul; that the Acts were written by Luke, and fourteen Epistles by Paul, though Hebrews was doubted by some; that of the seven Catholic Epistles all were known and quoted, excepting that we find no mention of James and 3 John; and that Revelation was received as the work of the Apostle John. I wish you particularly to note, that amongst the books thus early received as genuine, are several of those which we shall presently see were afterwards doubted. Thus Justin Martyr quotes 2 Peter; Irenæus quotes and Clement received 2 John; Justin, Irenæus, Clement and Tertullian, all received Revelation as John's. There were other books now in circulation, some of them written by good men, others falsely ascribed to Apostles: but whilst these were read and sometimes quoted, it does not appear that they were ever received as genuine works of the Apostles or apostolical men, without which they could not have been deemed sacred and canonical. I wish you further to note, that as none of the writers of this period furnish catalogues of the Sacred Books, but only quote them or allude to them as they had occasion to do so, it is manifest, that the omission to quote them or refer to them by no means proves that they did not know and receive them. The wonder rather is, that within one hundred years after the last of the Apostles, though no writer, as far as we know, saw fit to prepare a formal catalogue of the Sacred Books, a fact which argues a very general * Ipsæ authenticæ literæ.

consent in regard to them,—we yet have, in the remaining writings of only a few authors, the most satisfactory proof of the reception of nearly every one of them as genuine and authoritative. "In the remaining works of Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian (though some works of each of them are lost), there are perhaps," says Dr. Lardner,* "more and larger quotations of the small volume of the New Testament, than of all the works of Cicero, though of so uncommon excellence for thought and style, in the writers of all characters for several ages." He elsewheref uses nearly the same language of the quotations in Tertullian alone.

For reasons which I have already suggested, it was natural that by this time doubts should be felt and expressed in regard to some of these books. The fact, too, that in some cases, books, which were admitted to be the works of uninspired men, were read in the churches as profitable books, while some, as Revelation, which were admitted to be the genuine works of inspired men, were not read on account of their obscurity or for other reasons, would help to induce doubts where before there had been none, and make it necessary for those who had the learning and the opportunity, to investigate the grounds on which the various books had been received into the churches, and the authority to which they were entitled. This was accordingly done: and there have descended to us some thirteen well-authenticated catalogues of the genuine and canonical books, prepared by leading men in the two following centuries.

3. To the substance of these ancient Catalogues‡ I now invite your attention.

The first is that of an anonymous author, discovered by Muratori, the famous Italian antiquarian, and by him referred to Caius, a Roman presbyter about A.D. 200. Of this we have only an obscure and barbarous Latin translation. It contains all the books except Hebrews, James, and probably 2d Peter and 3d John.

The second is that of Origen, a presbyter of Alexandria, who flourished A.D. 230, little more than one hundred years after the

* Works, vol. iii. pp. 106, 7. London Edn.

+ Ib. vol. i. p. 435.

For most of these Catalogues, besides the works of Lardner, see Kirchhofer's Quellensammlung z. Geschichte d. Neutest. Canons bis auf Hieronymus, where they, as well as the other testimony adduced in this Lecture, are given in the original.

Apostle John. He was, by general consent, the most learned man of his age; thoroughly studied in Pagan and Christian philosophy and literature; a most voluminous writer, courted by the great, and honored and feared by his enemies. He devoted himself especially to the study of the Sacred Scriptures; and in two passages which Eusebius has preserved," he has particularly enumerated the books which had been handed down, and were then received, as genuine works of the Apostles and their attendants. He mentions that some doubted the genuineness of 2d Peter, and 2d and 3d John; thinks that Paul dictated Hebrews to some unknown amanuensis, who wrote down the Apostle's thoughts in his own words; and omits James and Jude altogether. But he refers elsewhere in his works to these two Epistles as well known in the churches, though not universally received as genuine and he would seem himself to have received them all, as he certainly did the remaining books of our Canon.

The third catalogue is that of Eusebius, Bishop of Cæsarea, early in the 4th century (A.D. 315). He was a diligent student and a voluminous writer, and is especially famous for a valuable Church History which has descended to us, and to which probably we are more indebted than to any other uninspired book of ancient times. He made it a special subject of inquiry, what books had been received from the times of the Apostles as written by them or with their sanction, and frequently refers to it in his History. For greater distinctness he divides the books, which were in circulation, and more or less read by Christians and churches, into three classes:-1. Those which were universally received as genuine (suoloyovuéra). 2. Those of which some doubted, though the greater part admitted them (artikeɣouéva). 3. Those which were spurious, i. e. certainly not from the Apostles (vóða). Of these last, some were good books, others absurd and impious. In the first class he enumerates all the books of our Canon, excepting James, 2d Peter, 2d and 3d John, Jude, and Revelation, all which he puts in the second class, excepting Revelation, which he first places in the first class, and afterwards states that some rejected it.†

The fourth catalogue is that of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, who flourished about the same time with Eusebius. He is distinguished in ecclesiastical history for the part which he took in the great Arian controversy. In a fragment of what is called

* Ecc. Hist. vi. 25.

Ecc. Hist. iii. 25. comp. iii. 3.

his Festal or Paschal Epistle, which the great majority of the learned world admit to be genuine, he gives a catalogue of the books which had been handed down and believed to be inspired, for the especial and expressed purpose of guarding his readers from being imposed upon by spurious writings. His catalogue coincides, as to the books and authors, entirely with our own.

The fifth catalogue is that of Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem about the middle of the 4th century (A.D. 340); and the sixth is that of the Council of Laodicea, where some thirty or forty bishops of Lydia assembled, likewise in the fourth century, though the exact year cannot be determined. These catalogues agree with our own, except that they omit Revelation.

The seventh is that of Epiphanius, Bishop of Cyprus (A.D. 368), who, Jerome says, was a man of five languages. His catalogue is the same as ours.

The eighth is that of Gregory Nazianzen, Bishop of Constantinople, in the latter half of the 4th century; and the ninth that of Philastrius, Bishop of Brescia, in Italy, about the same time. Gregory mentions Revelation as doubted; Philastrius omits it, and mentions only thirteen Epistles of Paul, omitting most probably that to the Hebrews, which had been questioned in the Western Church.

The tenth catalogue is that of Jerome, who flourished in the latter part of the 4th century, and was the most learned of the Latin Fathers. His life was especially devoted to literary labors on the Sacred Scriptures. Many of his works have descended to us. Amongst these, the most noted is the Roman Vulgate, or Latin translation of the Bible in common use in the Roman Catholic Church. No man in the ancient Church was better qualified to say what books had been received from the hands and times of the apostles. His catalogue agrees exactly with our present Canon. He mentions, indeed, that some disputed the authority of Hebrews, as others did that of Revelation; but says that he himself, after the custom of the ancient writers, received both. He also composed a catalogue of illustrious ecclesiastical writers who had preceded him, in which he gives short notices of the several writers of the New Testament, and ascribes to them the several books, as they are now ascribed in our Canon.

The eleventh catalogue is that of Ruffinus, a presbyter of

* About A.D. 364.