This decree (which seems to have reflected the general mind of the Church, and which has been prac- tically acquiesced in ever since,* notwithstanding occasional controversies regarding individual books, and amid conflicting theories as to the authority of Scripture) had the effect of excluding from the Canon not only the three writings already referred to, and one or two other productions of the post- apostolic ee which were highly esteemed in the
nurch although they made no claim to apostolic authority, but also another and less worthy class of writings, dating from the 2nd to the end of the 4th cent., which played an important part in the life of the Church, and throw a valuable light on the history of the NT. These are what are known as Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and pa Reel se apparently numerous, but of which only a small part have come down to us, a few in their entirety, some in a fragmen form, and others only in name. They varied greatly in their form and contents, but, apart from the early com- positions referred to in St. Luke’s Gospel (113), which soon disappeared (unless our Second Gospel was one of them) in the survival of the fittest, they were either supplementary to the Canonical Scrip- tures, ishing information or doctrine on sub- 1855 but little dealt with in the NT, or, more requently, they were composed for the purpose of bolstering up heretical opinions or practices which were seen to have little or no canonical support. Many of the ‘Gospels’ were mainly derived from those in the NT (the recently recovered ‘Gospel of Peter’ borrows from all the four), with more or less modification of the original in the interest of some Gnostic or other heresy. The modification was liable to alteration from time to time (as may be seen from the wide variations in the different MSS of the same work) to meet the exigencies of suc- cessive teachers, who issued their several recensions under great names—generally those of apostles— after Bie manner of the pseudonymous Jewish writers already referred to. Very often the same work was known under a variety of names. For example, the ‘Gospel of the Hebrews,’ which may have been a Judaic recension of the Heb. original of our St. Matthew, has been identified with the ‘Gospel of the Nazarenes’ and the still more here- tical ‘Gospel of the Ebionites,’ as well as with the Gospels of Bartholomew, Cerinthus, and the Twelve Apostles. In this ‘Gosp. of the Hebrews’ and some other primitive documents, such as the ‘Gosp. of Peter’ (c. A.D. 125, or, ace. to some, 165) and the
* The Vulgate had a good deal to do with this result in the
West, just as earlier translations affected the form and extent of the Canon in their several spheres of influence.
NEW TESTAMENT 525
‘Gosp. of the Egyptians’ (also dating from the 2nd cent.), it may well be that a certain amount of oral tradition was incorporated, which had been pre- served by the Jews who resided near the scene of the evangelic history. It in no degree weakens the authority of the NT to find a few grains of such extra-canonical matter appearing in the works of an early Patristic writer, such as Justin Martyr, or even to find an apocr. Gospel quoted by a writer of an eclective turn, like Clement of Alexandria. So far from impairing the credit of the NT writings, these apocr. ἘΣΒΟΒύνιΟδΗ of a later age bear witness to the authority which the written word had already acquired in the Church, and show the necessity under which heretical teachers lay either to manipulate the text of the received books or to adduce other and equally high testimony in favour of their peculiar views. In general, the literature in question is manifestly counterfeit. Much of it is of a character degrading to Christianity, the ex- travagance and absurdity of its miracles, especially in its pictures of the Saviour’s childhood, presenting a sad contrast to the chaste dignity of the canoni
records; and there is none of hich, either in re-
it W spect of outward attestation or intrinsic excellence, can be held to have been unjustly dealt with in being denied admission to the NT. The writings of the Church Fathers show how little influence it exerted in the early Church compared with the NT writings, which formed the general standard of faith and practice, and sometimes even contributed the only element that redeemed Patristic literature from inanity and unprofitableness. The lapse of time, while it exalted the NT Scriptures to honour, brought the apocr. literature into general disrepute.* Within a century or two after it had reached the height of its popularity (4th cent.), it lost its place in public esteem and gradually passed out of the notice of the Church, leaving its traces indeed on the productions of Christian art, and influencing by its legends the festivals and preaching of the
urch, but deemed of no account by thinkers and theologians, until the rise of modern criticism in- vested it with a new and scientific interest, when a fresh sense of its immeasurable inferiority to the Canonical Scriptures has impressed itself upon the mind of the Church.
The following are notable features in the history of the NT, from a literary point of view as well as in the interests of criticism. (1) The age and num- ber of its MSS. Some of these date from the 4th or 5th cent.,+ and the whole number of them exceeds 2000, forming an immense array of witnesses, com. pared with the few MSS of classical works, which can frequently be counted on the fingers, and in some cases do not reach back to within a thousand years of the age in which the work was produced. (2) The number of its VSS. It has been trans- lated into almost all languages, beginning with the Old Lat. and Syr. VSS, which may have origin ated in the first half of the 2nd cent., followed a little later by the Egyptian (in three different forms)—the Gothic in the 4th cent., the Ethiopic in the 4th or 5th cent., and the Armenian in the middle οἱ the 5th century. (3) The extent to which it has been reproduced in subsequent writings. It is quoted, echoed, or commented on by the great eee of early Christian writers. The sym pe 1y of the Apostolic Fathers with its contents 188 been already mentioned. The extant writings of the next half century are mainly defences of Christianity addressed to unbelievers, admitting of