"1. That there is no evidence that any spurious or apocryphal books whatever existed in the first century of the Christian era, in which century all our historical books are proved to have been extant. • There are no quotations of any such books in the apostolical fathers, by whom I mean Barnabaş, Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, whose writings reach from the year of our Lord 70, to the year 108,' (and some of whom have quoted each and every one of our historical Scriptures): I say this,' adds Dr. Lardner, because I think it has been proved.'

"2. These apocryphal writings were not read in the churches of Christians;

"3. Were not admitted into their volume; "4. Do not appear in their catalogues;

"5. Were not noticed by their adversaries;

"6. Were not alleged by different parties as of authority, in their controversies;

"7. Were not the subjects amongst them of commentaries, versions, collations, expositions.

Finally: besides the silence of three centuries, or evidence within that time of their rejection, they were, with a consent nearly universal, reprobated by Christian writers of succeeding ages."-Evidences, Part I. Sect. I. ch. ix. sect. 11.

Maria. Admitting that these assertions are borne out by the quotations in the works you have referred to, I do not see how it is possible to place Christianity upon any other foundation than that of the New Testament alone; and, as its integrity has been already established, upon the examination of its contents the whole of the remainder of the argument seems to depend.

Edward. Before we finally quit this part of the subject, permit me to ask a few questions, for I have always understood that the great strength of Christianity lay in the New Testament itself, and would, therefore,

28 What is the first qualification which he adds?-29 What are the seven further qualifications added by him?-30 On the admission of the assertions in the foregoing argument, what suggestion does Maria make? -31 What is the first one of a series of questions here introduced by Edward?

be the more careful not to pass too hastily to it. To whose writings, or to what kind of writings, was the canon of the church confined?

Mr. B. It appears to have been limited to the writings of certain persons peculiarly chosen by the Founder of this religion to disseminate it, or to writings which received their sanction, or, in the language of the fathers, "the writings of the apostles and of apostolical men."

Edward. But is it certain that no other writings by these persons existed, except those which are contained in this volume?

Mr. B. On this subject there is a difference of opinion among the learned; some maintaining, for example, that St. Paul wrote more epistles than what are preserved in the New Testament; whilst others think that none of the writings of any of the apostles are lost.

Maria. Upon what grounds is this last opinion founded?

Mr. B. Partly upon the uncertainty that any more ever was written by them; but principally from the idea that, their writings being inspired, no part would be permitted to be lost.

Edward. Such a reason as this, however, could never be given to an unbeliever, who is supposed, in the first instance, to have no regard to arguments of this nature; and might it not be supposed that some documents actually have been suppressed, from the Christians of the succeeding age perceiving that they would injure rather than benefit their cause, or that they were opposed to their own wishes and views?

Mr. B. You have no evidence to support such an idea.

Edward. But may it not be allowed, for argument's sake, for a moment? and if it may, is it not also conceivable, that from the suppressed documents, Christian

32 What is the answer to it of Mr. B.?-33 What is the second asked by Edward?-34 Maria asks, on what the opinion is founded, that none of the writings of any of the apostles are lost-what is the answer to this question?-36 What is the third question of Edward-and what is the answer to it?-37 Edward makes a supposition, in order to carry on the argument-what is it?

ity could actually have been proved to be founded in imposture?

Mr. B. That a religion originally false could, by the addition of some documents, or suppression of others, be made apparently true, is, in itself, one of the most unlikely things to happen that could possibly be conceived; for by whom would the change be made, and for what purpose? Suppose, now, that Clement of Alexandria, in the course of his travels through Greece, had found some manuscripts by St. Paul; or that Origen, in passing through Palestine, had found some additional gospels, by which it was evident that the whole of the received canonical books were cunningly devised fables, founded upon some obscure transactions in Judea, and owing all their success to the abilities of the writers, and a number of favourable contingent circumstances. Do you think that such men as Clement and Origen would have suppressed these important facts? that the former, who had been bred a Grecian philosopher, would have been disposed to acquiesce in the fraud which had deceived him, to embrace which he had renounced so much, and which he would be aware could offer nothing in return? or would Origen forget the martyrdom of his father, and pursue a course likely to lead himself to the same fate? Certainly no learned Jew or Gentile would ever, after such a discovery, have concealed it, and continued among the followers of the crucified Jesus, whom he knew could not be a Saviour, nor found hopes upon the narrative of a resurrection which he knew to be false.

Edward. But might not a document of this kind have existed which would not so immediately lay Christianity open to exposure, but only by implication?

Mr. B. In that case, who would suppress that of which he did not perceive the tendency? The eagerness of the Christians to preserve memorials of the first planting of the Gospel and of the life of their Founder, would inev

38 In reply to this supposition, what does Mr. B. say is very unlikely? -39 What supposition does Mr. B. then offer respecting Clement and Origen?-40 And what questions does he predicate upon the hypothesis, to convince Edward of the absurdity of his question?-41 But might not uch a document have existed, impeaching Christianity only by implication?

itably have induced any one, who did not see of what use the document might be made against his faith, to publish it. The reverence paid by the Christians to the apostolic writings could hardly fail to produce its publication, and we know that the first Christians were by no means men of that character who would be likely to calculate before hand what objections might, in after ages, be drawn from the documents they handed down to posterity. When you are acquainted with the writings of the fathers, you will by no means suspect any of them of the ability to turn a false religion into one which should deceive the world for a succession of ages; and you can hardly imagine such a train of chances, as that a religion, the falsity of which might originally be proved from its own documents, should yet have the singular good fortune to lose every particle by which its false pretensions could be exposed, and retain all best calculated to further its success. To all these chances you must also add the total silence of history, the silence of enemies, the silence of contending heresies, cach eager to grasp at the shadow of apostolical authority for their errors, or at any thing by which they could discredit the received doctrines of the church.

Edward. But is it so certain that the heretics were wrong, and the Catholic church right, as to the true doctrine of Christ?

Mr. B. The probabilities are nearly equivalent to certainty; the great difference between the two, as far as we can ascertain, seemed to be, in that the church at large adhered steadily to the New Testament, where the others were making all sorts of experiments with the religion, uniting it to oriental fables, or to Jewish prejudices, or to Grecian philosophy, according to their several tastes, and straining the sacred books as far as they

42 What is said of the estimation in which the first Christians held the apostolic writings, and also of the character of these men?-43 On a thorough acquaintance with the writings of the fathers, how will our feelings towards these men be affected?-44 What is to be added to the foregoing chances?-45 What reply is made by Mr. B. to the question, whether it is certain that the heretics were wrong, and the church right, as to the doctrine of Christ?

could to suit their purpose; and some, more daring than the rest, claiming new revelations, or cutting out those already made.

Maria. Then some of the heretics did not receive the books we receive?

Mr. B. Jones mentions some who rejected particular books, but it was on the supposition of their not being genuine; an objection which belongs to a future part of the subject. It is, however, well known, that they were very few in number; that they did so from evidently interested motives, and supported their assertions by most absurd reasons; so that their authority is of no weight.

Maria. The great reason for their being accounted canonical, appears to have been their being esteemed genuine; and where the latter was doubtful, the former was uncertain.

Mr. B. Such undoubtedly was the case. The Epistle to the Hebrews had no name attached to it, as in the other Epistles of St. Paul, which occasioned the doubt respecting it. In the book of Revelation, the author does not call himself an apostle. In the Second and Third Epistles, he simply calls himself "the elder.' Now these circumstances, though apparently trifling, might occasion some to doubt who did not live sufficiently near the places where these books were first published, and the doubt might be transmitted when the reason was forgotton, and thus an importance given to it which it originally had not. The conduct of the church at large, in this matter, clearly shows that the true ground of their being received as of authority, was their being believed to be written by persons possessed of authority, viz. the apostles; for wherever the latter was established, there was no longer any question as to their being canonical.

Edward. But is it certain that the Greek text is altogether the original text, so that upon it Christianity may

rest?

46 What reply is made to the question-if some of the heretics did not receive the books we receive?-47 What peculiarity is there in the epistle to the Hebrews, and in the book of Revelation?-48 What, is it supposed, that these peculiarities might occasion?-49 What does the church in this matter clearly show?