to Gentiles; for very probably they were both written to the same people. A. D. 550.

Ch. CLIII. M. A. Cassiodorius in his Institutions has three catalogues of the Old and New Testament; one called by him Jeroin's, the second Augustine's, the third that of the ancient translation: and it is very observable, that in none of these catalogues mention is made of any books of the New Testament as canonical which are not received as such by us. There are not inserted in any of these catalogues Barnabas, or Clement, or Ignatius, or any other christian writers whatever; which affords a cogent argument, that there never were any other christian writings, which were placed by the churches upon a level with those now received by us as canonical. A. D. 556.

Cassiodorius published likewise a work called Complexions, or Short Commentaries upon the epistles, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Revelation; they are upon St. Paul's fourteen epistles, the seven catholic epistles, the Acts, and the Revelation: by which it is manifest, that he received all the books of the New Testament which are now received by us, and no other.

Ch. CLIV. The author of the imperfect work upon St. Matthew was a bishop and an Arian, who wrote in Latin in the sixth century. From his quotations it appears, that he received all the books of the New Testament that we do. He has likewise quoted divers apocryphal books; but, as it seems, not as books of authority. He has some remarkable passages concerning the time and occasion of writing the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John.

Ch. CLV. Victor Tununensis an African bishop, who wrote a Chronicle ending at the year 566, says, that when Messala was consul, that is, in the year of Christ 506, at "Constantinople, by order of the emperor Anastasius, the holy gospels, being written by illiterate evangelists, were 'censured and corrected.'

Some have hence argued, that the copies of the New Testament, of the gospels at least, have not come down to us pure and uncorrupted, as they were originally written, but were altered at the time above mentioned.

In answer to which it has been observed by us, agreeably to what had been already said by divers learned men, first, that it was impossible in the sixth century to effect an alteration in the sense or words of the gospels, or any other books of the New Testament; forasmuch as there were at that time in every part of the known world, in Europe, Asia,

and Africa, numerous copies of the books of the New Testament, in the original Greek, and in the Syriac, Latin, and other languages, into which they had been translated. Secondly, that no alteration was made in the gospels or other sacred books is hence apparent; that our present copies agree with the quotations of ancient Greek and Latin authors, and with the translations made before the time of Anastasius. Thirdly, the story of Victor deserves no regard, because he is singular. No other writer has mentioned it beside Isidore of Seville, who transcribed him; whereas, if such an attempt had been made by Anastasius, and any books had been published with alterations, it would have made a great noise in the world, and would have occasioned a general outcry. The emperor Anastasius was far from being popular in his government. There are extant writings of contemporaries, as well as of others, in which he is freely and grievously reproached; nevertheless there is no notice taken of this affair, which would have given greater and more general offence to christians than any other.

6

Ch. CLVI. Gregory the first, bishop of Rome, received all the books of the New Testament, as of authority, which we do, and no other. Some in his time doubted of the genuineness of the second epistle of St. Peter; but he shows their doubts to be unreasonable. His general titles and divisions of the sacred scriptures are these: The Old and New Testament, consisting of the law and the prophets, the gospels and Acts, and words of apostles; the law and the prophets, gospel and apostles.' He says, 'Whoever was writer of the scriptures, the Holy Ghost was the author. And, the doctrine of the scripture surpasseth be'yond comparison all other learning and instruction what6 ever. In the scriptures,' he says, there are obscure and difficult things to exercise the more knowing, plain things 'to nourish weak minds;' and he assures his hearers, that the more the scriptures are read and meditated upon, the more easy and delightful they will be.' A. D. 590.

Ch. CLVII. Isidore, bishop of Seville in Spain, has several catalogues of the books of the Old and New Testament. He says, that Matthew wrote his gospel the first, in Judea; then Mark in Italy; Luke the third evangelist, in Achaia; and John the last, in Ephesus. The first and last relate what they had heard Christ speak, or seen him perform; the other two, placed between them, relate what they had heard from apostles: the Acts of the Apostles contain the

6

history of the infancy of the church; the writer is the evangelist Luke; which, he says, is well known. Divers other things deserving notice may be seen in his chapter. A. D. 596.

Ch. CLVIII. Leontius, who for some time was an advocate at Constantinople, afterwards retired and lived a monk in Palestine. He has a catalogue of the scriptures, wherein the books of the Old and New Testament are recited distinctly and agreeably. His catalogue of the books of the Old Testament is much the same with that of the Jews: his catalogue of the books of the New Testament contains all which are now received by us, and no other. Here is no notice taken of the Constitutions, or Recognitions, or Clementines, or any other christian writings as of authority. The scriptures of the New Testament are divided by him into six books: the first book contains Matthew and Mark; the second Luke and John; the third is the Acts of the Apostles; the fourth the catholic epistles, being seven in number; the fifth book is the fourteen epistles of the apostle Paul; the sixth is the Revelation of John. These,' says he, are the ancient and the new books, which are received in the church as canonical.' And soon after he says, 'the period next after Christ's ascension, is treated of in the Acts of the Apostles. The following period reaches from the death of the apostles to the reign of Constantine; the 'affairs of which have been related by several ecclesiastical historians, as Eusebius and Theodoret, whom we are not 'obliged to receive: for beside the Acts of the Apostles, no such writings are appointed to be received by us.' A. D. 610.

Ch. CLIX. Venerable Bede, beside many other works, wrote Commentaries upon all the books of the New Testament now received. His prologue to the seven catholic epistles may be seen at large in his chapter. A. D. 701.

Ch. CLX. John Damascenus, monk and presbyter, though a native of Damascus, wrote in Greek, and is supposed to represent the sentiment of the Greek christians of his time. He has catalogues of the Old and New Testament, which are recited by us in his chapter, with remarks. His general titles and divisions of the books of scripture, and his respect for them, appear in such expressions as these: All things which are delivered to us by the law and the prophets, the apostles and evangelists, we receive, acknowledge, and venerate, seeking not any thing beyond what has been taught by them.' Again: We cannot think, or

say any thing of God, besides what is divinely taught and ' revealed to us by the divine oracles of the Old and New 'Testament.' A. D. 730.

Ch. CLXI. Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, received the same scriptures of the Old and New Testament which are now generally received by us. Beside other works he wrote Commentaries upon the Psalms, the prophets, and St. Paul's epistles. This great critic, and fine writer, was a great admirer of the apostle Paul, and has celebrated his manly and unaffected eloquence.

6

Ch. CLXII. Ecumenius, bishop of Tricca in Thessaly, received the same books of the New Testament that we do. He wrote Commentaries upon the Acts, St. Paul's fourteen epistles, and the seven catholic epistles. Upon Acts xiii. 13, he says, this John, who is also called Mark, nephew to Barnabas, wrote the gospel according to him, and was also disciple of Peter, of whom he says in his epistle, "Mark, my son, saluteth you." And upon Acts xv. 13, he says, this James, appointed bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord, was son of Joseph, [meaning by a former wife,] and 'brother of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the flesh.' For other things the reader is referred to the chapter itself. A. D. 950.

6

Ch. CLXIII. Theophylact, archbishop of the chief city in Bulgaria, received all the books of the New Testament that we do, excepting the book of the Revelation; concerning which his judgment does not now appear to us. He wrote Commentaries upon the four gospels, the Acts, and St. Paul's fourteen epistles. He says, There are four 'evangelists, two of whom, Matthew and John, were apos'tles of Christ; the other two, Mark and Luke, were of the 'number of Christ's seventy disciples: Mark was a com'panion and disciple of Peter, Luke of Paul. Matthew 'first wrote a gospel in the Hebrew language, for the use ' of the Hebrew believers, eight years after Christ's ascen'sion; Mark wrote ten years after our Lord's ascension, having been instructed by Peter; Luke fifteen, and John two and thirty years after our Saviour's ascension.'

6

Af

terwards, Mark wrote at Rome, ten years after Christ's 'ascension, at the request of the believers there, being the disciple of Peter, whom he calls his son spiritually: bis name was John; he was nephew to Barnabas, and for a while was also companion of Paul.' He likewise says, that Mark's gospel was said to be Peter's: he says, that Luke, who wrote the gospel and the Acts, was a native of Antioch, and by profession a physician. In his preface to

6

St. Matthew's gospel he writes to this purpose: And was not one evangelist sufficient? Yes. Nevertheless, for making the truth more manifest, four were permitted to write for when you see these four, not conferring toge'ther, nor meeting in the same place, but separate from each other, writing the same things as with one mouth, are you not led to admire the truth of the gospel, and to say, that they spake by the Holy Ghost? Do not say to me, that they do not agree in every thing.-For they agree in the necessary and principal things; and if they agree in such things, why should you wonder that they vary in lesser ' matters? They are the more credible for not agreeing in all things; for then it would have been thought, that they had met and consulted together: but now one has written 'what another has omitted; and therefore they seem to dif'fer in some things.' A. D. 1070.

Ch. CLXIV. Euthymius, a monk at Constantinople, besides other works, wrote Commentaries upon the Psalms, and the four gospels; collected chiefly out of Chrysostom, and other ancient writers. According to him Matthew wrote eight, Mark ten, Luke fifteen years after Christ's ascension; but the evangelist John did not write his gospel till many years after the destruction of Jerusalem.

Here ends this part of my design; for my intention was to write at large the history of all, or almost all, the christian writers of the first four centuries, with their testimony to the books of the New Testament: forasmuch as it is universally allowed, that witnesses near the time of any events are the most credible and material: that has filled ten volumes. Afterward I intended to write briefly, the history of the principal writers, from the end of the fourth century, as low as Theophylact and Euthymius, to the end of the eleventh, or the beginning of the twelfth century, with their testimony likewise to the scriptures of the New Testament; which has been performed in the eleventh volume alone of the former edition.

Ch. CLXV. The chapter of Nicephorus Callisti, who lived not before the fourteenth century, more than two hundred years after the writers last mentioned, (without taking notice of any of the authors in that space) was added only by way of conclusion, as containing the sum of our argument, and of what was to be proved by us. For that learned monk, in his Ecclesiastical History, referring to what had been said by Eusebius concerning the books of the New Testament, and having mentioned those which had been all along universally acknowledged, and then the epistle to the