both Great Men in former Times, and fome of the first Proteftant Reformers have doubted, as the Revelation, the Epiftle to the Hebrews, that of St. Jude, that of St. James: which Luther anno 1522, in his German Tranflation, caft out of the Canon. And others, of which the Ancients had doubted, had afterwards the fame Fate in other Proteftant Churches, as the fecond Epiftle of St. Peter; and the fecond and third Epiftle of St.. John. Which Salomon Gefnerus a Lutheran, Loco Primo pag.331,& feq. reckons amongst the Apocryphal Books. But he is for afferting the Authority of the Revelation, and of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Tho he fays they are commonly esteemed Apocryphal, to wit, by the Lutherans in Germany, vulgò folent inter Apocrypha affignari. All thefe Doubts may be easily removed, by the A-` greement or Definition of the Catholick Church, if the be in all Ages the Pillar and Ground of Truth, upon which we may fecurely rely.

4. BUT Mr. L. hath another Expedient. He And the tells us, p. 53, The true Scriptures were found New. out, by comparing them with Originals, carefully kept in the Churches to which they were writ. As he gathers from Eufebius, lib.5. cap.28. Thus, fays he, the Canon of the New Teftament was fettled in thofe Ages, when thefe Evidences were fresh and notorious; and hath been received fince that Time, by all the Chriftian Churches in the World [were the firft Proteftants then no Chriftians? fo unanimously, that there is no Difpute betwixt any Churches, concerning the Canon of the New Testament. But how much Implicit Faith muft a Man have, for the comparing of these Originals? And yet he accounts it Evidence, plainly and wholly Evinence. Ift, In what Churches were the Originals of those

Parts

Parts kept,which were not directed to any partticular Church; as the Epiftle of St. Jude, the Epistle of St. James, and the Revelation? Secondly, Who knew the Apostle's Hands in the Fourth or Fifth Century, fo many hundred Years after their Decease, fo well, that they could not be mistaken in them, nor deceived with Counterfeits? Will Mr. L's Hand-writing be known in this manner, after half a Century? Thirdly, To what Number of Priests or Bishops, in the Fourth or Fifth Age, were the Apostles Hands thus known, and the Originals Exhibited? Fourthly, How do we know, that all the Originals were kept fo long? Did Eufebins ever fee them? Fifthly, If he did, how came he to doubt himfelf of fome of the Books of the New Teftament,as of St. James's Epiftle, lib. 2. cap. 23. Edit. Val. p. 66. C? Is not Settling the Conveyance of Scripture to us upon fuch falfe Evidence, a manifeft Expofing of it both to Atheists and Deifts?

IN his Treatife of Private Judgment, p. 205. he tells us from Eufebius, lib. 5. Hift. cap. 28. That falfe Gofpels and falfe Epistles, infcribed to the Apostles by Hereticks in the first Age, were detected in that fame Age, whilst the Originals of what the Apoftles wrote, were still in being. I do not find that EuJebius fays this, or any thing like it. So that it is a groundless Fiction, to answer an unanfwerable Argument of Ghurch-Authority. First, The Hereticks (1) Eufebius mentions, who had Copies difagreeing with one another, of which they could not produce any Originals elder than

?

(') Lib!s. Hift, cap. 28.Edit. Valef, Paris, anno 1659, Pig 197, 198,

them

themfelves, were Afclepiades, or Afclepiodorus, Theodotus the Banquier, Hermophilus, and ApolLonius, all Hereticks of the Third Century; and Followers of Theodotus of Byzantium, and his Errors, condemn'd by Pope Victor in the End of the Second Century, and by Pope Zephyrin in the Beginning of the Third. Secondly, The dif agreeing Copies of thefe Hereticks, were not the Falle Gofpels or Falle Epiftles, attributed to the Apostles in the First Century; but Falfe Editions and Corruptions of the true Scripture Tho theWritings counterfeited in the First Age, under the Apostles Names, might have been detected by the Apostles themfelves. As doubtlefs they were in fome meafure. For St. John Evangelift according to St. Irenans, lib. 2, cap. 39.) liv'd till Trajan was Emperor, that is, till the End or very near the End of the First Age. But if Eufebius had faid (as indeed he does not) that Writings, Forged by Hereticks their Contemporaries, had been Difcover'd by ASK the Apoftles what would thefe ferve towards the Clearing of thofe Books, which were doubted of long after the Apoftles time, and even by Eufebius himself? Now let us hear Mr. L's Ac

count.

Ibid. p. 206. THE Canon of Scripture, fays Mr. L. was fettled at the Time when it could be done by full Evidence, and the Notoreity of the thing was known to all. This is another great for Mistake, it is undeniably Evident by () Eufebius, that the Revelation, the Epiftle to the Hebrews, the Second

(') Lib. 2. Hift. Eccl. cap. 23, p. 66. Lib. 3. cap. 3. P. 72, Cap. 24, 25. P. 96, 97. Lib. 6. cap. 20, p. 222, 223, Cap. 25. p. 227. Lib. 7. cap. 25. p. 272, 273.

Epiftle

count.

Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third of St. John, the Epistle of St. Jude, and St. James, were doubted of, long after the Apoftles Time. But of this more hereafter. In the mean time let us hear the Account, which a Proteftant Doctor gives us, fomewhat more vers'd in AntiDr. Wal-quity perhaps than Mr. L. I mean Dr. Walton in ton's Ac. his Prolegomena. () Laftly, St. John writ his Revelation, which, nevertheless, was not prefently Accounted Canonical by the whole Church. For this, and fome other Parts of the New Testament, were doubted of for fome Ages: Till at length, rather by a Tacit Confent of the Church, than any exprefs Decree, all the Books, as they are read at prefent, were receiv'd and approv'd. And by the by, these Few words of Dr. Walton, are a full Anfwer to Dr. Cofin's Scholaftical Hiftory of the Canon of Scripture, anno 1672, of 224 Pages,

THEY alfo difcover a Remarkable Secret, by Infincerity betraying the Infincerity of the thirty-nine Aret the 39 ticles. The Sixth of which runs thus: Holy Scripture, containeth all things neceffary to Salvation.

Articles.

In the Name of the Holy Scripture, we do underftand thofe Canonical Books of the Old and New Teftament, of whofe Authority was never any doubt in the Church. By this Rule (which was only fet up to exclude the Macchabees, and fome Deutero-Canonical Books of the Jews) no lefs than feven Books of the New Teftament, are mani

(') Cap. 4 §.6. p. 31. Ultimus S. Joannes Apocalypfim fuam confcripfit, quæ tamen non ftatim apud omnes Ecclefias in Canonem recepta eft. Sed de hâc aliifque quibufdam partibus Novi Teftamenti per quædam fæcula dubitatum erat. Donec tandem tacito totius Ecclefiæ Confenfu, potius quam expreffo aliquo Decreto, omneş Libri, prout hodie leguntur, recepti & approbati funt.

1

feftly

feftly difcarded; viz. The Epiftle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of St. James, the Second of St Peter, the Second and Third of St. John, that of St. Jude, and the Revelation. Yet thefe, tho' formerly doubted of in the Church, are allow'd to be Scripture in the very fame Article: All the Books of the New Teftament, as they are commonly receiv'd, we do receive, and Account them Canonical. An everlasting Instance of palpable Infincerity.

"I

§. III.

Of the Belief of Scripture.

ture, on Evidence a

1.Tis Evidence, fays Mr. L. p. 50, and not Authority, upon which my Belief of the Scripture is founded. I believe the Scriptures, and the Facts therein related, from the Nature of the Evi dence, which makes it Impoffible for Mankind to Concert fuch a Lye, or to carry it on, without being Detected. This, if I mistake not, gives the Scrip- Grounding tures, both of the Old and New Teftament, the Belief another Mortal Wound. of ScripFOR, First, Which of ours, or of our Forefathers Senfes ever was it, which faw that the Author of the Book of Mofes, Jofuah, Judges, gives it a Ruth, &c. of the Gofpels, Acts, Epiftles or Reve- Mortal lation, was Infpired to write thofe Books, which Wound. we call Scripture? For, if Truth be enough to make a Book Scripture; Epictetus, and fome Part of Senica's Works, may pretend to that Title. Why fhould not the Five Decisive Books quoted by Mr. L, (which never had, because they never deferv'd an Answer) or his own, if fairly writ, put in for the Plate? ChriBianity, fays Mr. is grounded upon (1) Falts