« PrécédentContinuer »
was* an Homoiisian. If he had had in his copies, " the church of God," or had had1 any knowledge of that reading, he would not have failed to insist upon it.
1. Junilius was an African Bishop, but of what place is not certainly known. Cave speaks of him, as.k flourishing about the year 550; Hody about e 560. He is in Trithemius; and I transcribe his chapter d below. Moreover c Du Pin, and f Fabricius have accounts of this bishop, which deserve to be taken notice of.
2. The only remaining work of Junilius, and the only work of his, which Trithemius, in the fifteenth century, had met with, intitled, Ofs the Parts of the Divine Law, in two books, is written by way of question and answer.
3. He has several ways of dividing the books of scripture. Some h are of perfect, others of middle authority, others of none at all: and ' some are historical, some prophetical, some proverbial, some teach simply. So that to transcribe him at length requires more room than I can afford: I shall, however, take briefly what he says relating to the books of the New Testament.
4. « The k historical books of the New Testament, of perfect and canonical authority, are ' the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the Acts of the apostles.'
5. « Those ' books,' he says, ' teach simply, wherein we are plainly instructed concerning « faith and manners v and which do not relate history, nor prophecy, nor speak proverbially, ' but only teach plainly. The books that teach simply, are the epistles of the apostle Paul: ' to the Romans one; to the Corinthians two; to the Galatians one; to the Ephesians one; ' to the Philippians one; to the Colossians one; to the Thessalonians two; to Timothy two; ' to Titus one ; to Philemon one; to the Hebrews one ; one of the blessed Peter to the Gen* tiles ; and the first epistle of- the blessed John. To these many add five more; one epistle of ' James; the second of Peter; one of Jude; and two of John.' He also says, ' that m the ' Revelation of John was doubted of, generally, by the Christians in the east.' Which may imply, that it was generally received in Africa, as indeed it was.
6. It may be here asked by some : How could Junilius, an African, know the sentiment of Christians in the east, concerning the book of the Revelation ? And how comes it to pass, that he speaks as he does of the catholic epistles ? I answer, that in the preface or dedication of his
work to Primasius, he says, he * had been acquainted with Paul, a Persian, a learned man, who had been educated in the school of the Syrians at Nisibis. From him, it is likely, he received, this information, as indeed he there intimates.
7. And in what he says of the Catholic epistles there are two things somewhat remarkable. First, that he supposeth the first epistle of Peter to have been written to Gentiles; and consequently the second also, if it be Peter's: for, very probably, the two epistles were sent to the same people. Secondly, of the seven catholic epistles he reckons two only of perfect canonical authority: the other five are only of middle authority, rejected by some, and received by others. If Junilius has here given a true account of what he heard from the above named Persian, it may be argued, that there were some in the east, who rejected or doubted of the epistle of James, as well as the other four: which indeed appears to me very probable.
8. In another place b he mentions the books of the New Testament in this order: the four gospels, the apostolical epistles, and the Acts.
9. He puts the question ; ' How c do we know the authors of the books of scripture ? The ' answer is: Some are known by the titles, and introductions, as the books of the prophets, in ' the Old Testament, and the epistles of the apostles, in the New. Some are known by their ' titles, only, as the gospels; some by tradition from the ancients, as the five books of Moses. ' Of some books the authors are unknown, as those of Ruth, the Judges, and the Kings.'
10. He likewise puts the question : How d do we know the books of our religion to be written by divine inspiration ? I transcribe his answer below, though it be somewhat long; where he also says, ' that miracles were wrought till the scripture (or the Christian religion) was ' received by the Gentiles : ' but now it is sufficient, that it is universally received; which may * be considered as a standing miracle.'
11. Before I conclude this chapter I should refer to c James Basnage, who has observations upon this writer's catalogue of the books of scripture, that part especially, which concerns the books of the Old Testament.
MAGNUS AURELIUS CASSIODORIUS SENATOR.
I. His time. II. Three catalogues of the books of the Old and New Testament inserted by him in his Institution; Jerom's, Augustine's, and that of the old Latin version. III. General Remarks upon those catalogues, as here re/iearsed. IV. An account of his Complexiones, or short commentaries, and extracts from tJiem.
I. .magnus f Aurelius Cassiodouius Senator s is placed by Cave as flourishing in the year 514, when he was consul: but as I am to quote his works, written"after his retirement from,
the world, particularly Tiis ' Institutions of sacred Letters,' or Theology, written in 556, or thereabouts, I place him at that year. He lived to a great age : but the time * of his death is not certainly known. I beg leave to refer to b some places in this work, where this writer has been already mentioned.
II. Cassiodorius, in that work, has put down three Catalogues of the books of the Old and New Testament.
1. The first he calls c Jerom's: what was St. Jerom's catalogue or canon of the books of the Old Testament, is well known from his Prologus Galeatus, still extant, and transcribed d formerly: his canon was jthe same with that of the Jews; and there can be no mistake about it. But the catalogue, as published in Cassiodorius's work, is not exact: for the book of the Kings, which should follow after Samuel, is wanting: and instead c of Ecclesiastes, is put Ecclesiasticus. Upon this part of the Catalogue, as published by Garetius, Martianay made some free and just remarks, which I place below f for the sake of curious readers. The remainder of the catalogue, consisting of the books of the New Testament, is thus: ' Theg evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, * John. After them follow the epistles of the apostles ; two of Peter ; fourteen of Paid ; three ' of John ; one of James ; one of Jude; one book of'the Acts of the apostles by Luke; one book ' of the Revelation of John.'
2. The next is called the Division of the Divine Scripture according to Augustine. We have already considered very largely Augustine's testimony to the scriptures: nevertheless I shall here'transcribe the titles of the books of the New Testament, as enumerated by Cassiodorius. ' The h New Testament consists of one-and-twenty epistles of apostles, that is, one epistle of ' the apostle Paul to the Romans: to the Corinthians, two; to the Galatians one; to the « Ephesians one; to the Philippians one; to the Thessalonians two; to the Colossians one; to ' Timothy two; to Titus one; to Philemon one; to the Hebrews one; two epistles of Peter, ' three of John, one of Jude, one of James; the four gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, ' John; one book of the Acts of the apostles; one book of the Revelation.' And having put down this .catalogue, Cassiodorius refers to Augustine's second book of the Christian doctrine : nevertheless he does not transcribe exactly. And the books of the New Testament are here rehearsed in a different order from that in Augustine, as any one may perceive by comparing ' them.
3. The third catalogue is called the Division of Sacred Scripture, according to the ancient translation: meaning, 1 suppose, the ancient Latin translation of the Old Testament from the Greek of the Seventy, which was in use before Jerom made a translation from the Hebrew. And for the New Testament, meaning the old Latin translation from the original Greek, which had been in use before Jerom corrected it. I intend to transcribe this catalogue at length. « The k holy scripture, according to the ancient translation, is divided into two Testaments, the
' Old, and the New. In the Old are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, 1 Joshua the son of Nun, the Judges, Ruth, four books of the Kings, two books of the ' Chronicles, one book of the Psalter, five books of Solomon, that is, the Proverbs, Wisdom, ' Ecclesiasticus, Ecclesiastes, the Canticles: The prophets, that is, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, ' Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, ' Zechariah, Malachi, who is also called the Angel, Job, Tobit,. Esther, Judith, two books of ' Ezra, two books of the Maccabees. After these follow the four evangelists, Matthew, Mark, ' Luke, John, the. Acts of the apostles, the epistles of Peter to the Gentiles, the epistle of Jude, ' of James to the twelve tribes, of John to'the Parthians, the epistles of Paul; to the Romans ' one; to the Corinthians two ; to the Galatians one5 [to * the Ephesians one ;] to the Philip' pians one; to the Colossians one ; to the Hebrews one; to the Thessalonians two; to
* Timothy two ; to Titus, one ; to Philemon one ; the Revelation of John.'
This catalogue, so far as relates to the Old Testament, should be compared with the canon of the third council of Carthage, formerly * transcribed, with which it mightily agrees. Here, as well as there, arc reckoned five books of Solomon : in both catalogues are placed Tobit, Judith, and the -two books of the Maccabees: in both are reckoned two books of Ezra, meaning our Ezra and Nehemiah, without any notice of other books ascribed to Ezra. But withi'egard to the New Testament, there are several differences in the two catalogues, and particularly in the~ order of the books, as may be observed by any one.
III. Upon these catalogues, so far as relates to the New Testament, I would make two remarks.
In the first place, it seems hence to appear, that the number of books to be received as canonical scripture, had not then been determined by any authority, universally acknowledged, and submitted to by Christians : for Cassiodorius does not say so. And his manner of delivering these several catalogues seems to shew, that he had no knowledge of any such determination.
Secondly, Nevertheless there was a very general agreement among Christians concerning the books of the New Testament, which ought to be received as canonical, or the rule of faith. There is no remarkable difference in any of these catalogues: the first two have all the books of the New Testament, which are now generally received by us. And if St. John's first epistle only be mentioned in the third and last, possibly, the omission of the other two epistles is only a fault of the transcriber. However, it is well known, and allowed, that the second and third epistle of John were not universally received in the first ages. Once more, for shewing the harmony of these three catalogues, it ought to be observed, that here is no mention made of any books of the New Testament as canonical, which are not received as such by us. There are not iftserted, in any of these catalogues, Barnabas, or Clement, or Ignatius, or any other Christian writers whatever: which affords a cogent argument, that there were not any other Christian writings, which were placed by the churches upon a level with those in these catalogues.
IV. In 1721, Signor Scipio Maffei published a work of Cassiodorius, which had been long missing: and in the following year the same wcjrk was published at London by my learned friend, Mr. Samuel Chandler, with the addition of a judicious preface. It is entitled, « Com
* plexions c or short Commentaries upon the Epistles, the Acts of the apostles, and the Revela« tion.' To be more particular: These notes or complexions are upon the epistles of Paul in the following order: the epistle to the Romans, first and second to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, the Ephesians, the Philippians, first and second to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, the first and second to Timothy, to Titus, Philemon, the Hebrews. And the seven catholic epistles in this order: the first and second of Peter, the three epistles of John, the. epistles of James, and Jude: the Acts of the apostles, and the Revelation.
. 1. By which it is manifest, that Cassiodorius received all the books of the New Testament which we do: for about the four gospels there can be no question. The order of the books here, and in the catalogues before transcribed, I leave to be observed by the reader: I shall, however, take notice of a few other things.
2. Cassiodorius expressly ascribes * the Acts of the apostles to Luke the evangelist.
3. He seems to have had a clause in Acts viii. 39, thatb the Holy Ghost descended upon the Eunuch after he had been baptized by Philip.
4. At Acts xiv. 19, he seems to have read a word or two wanting in our copies: « And c ' whilst they tarried, and taught, there came from Antioch certain Jews.' Those expressions are of use to abate the surprize at the sudden change in the people at Lystra.
5. In the title prefixed to the first epistle of Peter, it is said d to be written ad Gentes to [Gentiles]: bute in the explication Cassiodorius speaks of Peter's writing to believing Jews in Pontus, Galatia, and Cappadocia.
6. Signer Maffei thinks, thatf our author had the heavenly witnesses in the fifth chapter of the first epistle of John : but that does not appear certain to me. I place the passage B below : and would refer to Mr. Wetstein's h observations upon it.
7. Casjsiodorius says, that' John had his revelation in the isle of PatmoSi where he had been banished by the emperor Domitian. .
C PI A P. CLIV.
THE IMPERFECT WORK UPON ST. MATTHEW.
I. The author*s time. II. He was an Arian, and a bishop. His censures of the Homousians, and of all heresies in general. III. Books of the Old Testament received by him. IV. Books of the New Testament received by him. V. Books quoted which are not in our canon. VI. Select passages.
I. ± He Imperfect Work upon Matthew, so called, because it has not come down to us entire, has been mentioned k already. It is usually joined with ' St. Chrysostom's works, because it was. formerly ascribed to himj though now it is generally, or universally allowed not to be a work of that eminent man.
The time of the work cannot be exactly determined : but it was written after the reigns of Constantino and Theodosius the first, of both whom m the author complains, as having gone into measures, by which " the interests of the true principles of Christianity had been opposed and discouraged from that time to his own. In " one place he speaks, as if the space of time,