3. When they say that " some writings of the prophets and apos- tles themselves are not canonical, — and therefore not so, because not acknowledged by the church to be so, — I answer, that some things the prophets and apostles might write as private men, and not by the inspiration and special direction of the Holy Ghost; and such never w^ere to be received into the canon of the Scripture, nor were written with any' intent that they should. But those things which they wrote as prophets and as apostles, by the immediate inspiration and special direction of the Spirit, and for this end, that they might be the rule of the saints' faith, were all received into the canon. If they deny this, let them produce any such writing of prophets or apostles not yet received as canonical. For what they say, out of 1 Chron. xxix. 29, of the %viitings of Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, how will they ever make it evident that they were other than the books of Samuel, written partly by himself while he lived, and partly by Gad and Nathan after his death? And so, likewise, 2 Chron. ix. 29, the writing of Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo; and 2 Chron. xiii. 22, Iddo again; 2 Chron. xx. 34, Jehu : how will they ever prove them to be other than what we have in the books of Kings? It is true, too, that mention is made of some writings of Solomon which are not in the canon ; but how will it ap- pear that they ever ought to be there, or were ever written for that purpose? As for any writings of the apostles which are not in the Scripture, the chief insisted on is the Epistle (as they would have it) of Paul to the Laodiceans, mentioned Col. iv. 16; which we deny to have been written by Paul, nor will the words enforce any such thing : " the epistle //'om Laodicea" is one thing, and " to Laodicea" another.*" It is most likely to have been some letter written by the Laodiceans to Paul, in which there being some things that concerned the Colos- sians, the apostle adviseth them to read that epistle. Jerome saith
'"O^sy ouh' iv vo^oi; avra K(x.rxxr'iov, aXX' ai; aToira. 'Kairii aai dvcrin^n rrapairnriov. — Lib. iii. cap. 2.').
' It is in the Greek, Iz Aaolisuxi, not ■rpof Aao^ixiUv.
532 AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURE.
of this epistle, that " some do read it as one of Paul's; hut it is gene- rally/ rejected} And for other books which they mention, they have been, as generally, diso-\vned by the church as fictitious, and not written by the authors whose names they bear. The same father cashiers several of them together that went under the name of Peter, " as being all apocryj^hal."^
Object. IV. " We cannot confute heretics who deny the Scrip- ture, or part of it, but by tlie authority of the Catholic Church, which receives it."
Ans. Those heretics that will acknowledge the church, may be confuted by its authority, but not have faith wi'ought in them : they may have their mouths stopped, but not their muids enlightened, by it. And though we may make use of the authority of the church with such, yet not as the chief, and much less only, argTiment to per- suade them of the divinity of the Scripture. But even by the same way whereby believers are persuaded of it, may heretics be persuaded too. And if we meet with such heretics as pay no more reverence to the church than to the Scripture, we are in a fine case if we have no other way of dealing with them but by urging the authority of the church : siu-ely they that deny the divinity of the one will not stick to deride the testimony of the other.
Object. V. To pass by other testimonies [which] they cite out of the ancients, one they mainly triumph in, — that saying of Austin, that he had not believed the gospel had not the authority of the church moved him to it.^
Ans. Austin speaks, when converted and orthodox, of himself as formerly a Manichee; and shows that he had then been moved by the authority of the church to receive the gospel. When he was a Manichee he was a "heretic, not a heathen, and so might have some esteem for the church ; or if he had no respect for the church as the church, yet he might — even by the confession of Papists themselves, so far as he saw the consent of so many nations, and the prescri]ition of so long time, and other like arguments in the church, to induce him — reverence it.
V. A2:)plication: —
Use I. From what hath been spoken, we may conclude, —
1. The mischief and danger of Popery as to this particular doc- trine. How dishonourable and injurious to God is this doctrine of the Papists, and how destructive to religion !
' \ltt.l>a, irairut IxSaXXirai. — De Script. Eccles.
' '!!; aTOKfuipa ovra a.'r(iloKi[/,a.Z,irai. — IblU.
' " K>^o lion croderem evangelio, nisi nie ecclcsia; catliolica» oomniovorct autho- rltas." " Crederem (>t commoveret," for "crodidisselii, et ooniniovissct," as is a frequent way of s^jeaking with that father. — See Chamiori Panstr., lib. ii. cap. 11, at large.