or diminish from, the written word of God (g)." "Whence," says Cyprian, "is that tradition? Is it derived from the authority of our Lord and the Gospels, or does it come from the commands of the Apostles and the Epistles? For God himself witnesses that these things are to be done which are written (h)." Chrysostom declares, that he who does not make use of the Holy Scriptures, but goes aside into another road, leaving the common way, is a thief (i);" and Basil maintains, that "every thing which is done or said, ought to be confirmed by the testimony of Holy Scripture (k).”

The written word of God being the sole rule of our faith and practice, it follows that WHATSOEVER IS NOT READ THEREIN, NOR MAY BE PROVED THEREBY, IS NOT TO BE REQUIRED OF ANY MAN THAT IT SHOULD BE BELIEVED AS AN ARTICLE OF THE FAITH, OR BE THOUGHT REQUISITE OR NECESSARY TO

SALVATION.

IN THE NAME OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURE, WE DO UNDERSTAND THOSE CANONICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW

TESTAMENT,

DOUBT IN THE CHURCH. As I have already treated of the canon both of the Old and New Testament, it is unnecessary for me to say any thing upon that subject in this place, except that in the enumeration of the books of the Old Testament contained in this article, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah are called the first and second books of Esdras, Esdras being the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew word Ezra. Ezra and Nehemiah, as was observed in the beginning of this work, were formerly joined in one book, and when they were separated, the book of Nehemiah being considered as a continuation of the book of Ezra, was called by his

name.

There is no authority, internal or external, for admitting the books, commonly called apocryphal (1), into the sacred canon; they contain no prophecy

(1) "Apocrypha from ȧroxgurτw to hide. The word seems to have been first applied only to books of doubtful authority, or, as it is used by Origen, to imply works out of the canon; it was afterwards employed to characterize spurious and pernicious books. It has been thought that books of doubtful character were first termed apocryphal by the Jews, because they were removed å τns guns, from the ark of the covenant, where the canonical books were placed. Eus. Lib. de Pond. et Mensur. p. 534; or because shut up

from

prophecy or other authentic mark of inspiration; they were all written subsequent to the cessation of the prophetic spirit, but before the promulgation of the Gospel; they were not included in the Jewish canon, and therefore received no sanction from our Saviour; they are not cited or alluded to in any part of the New Testament; nor are they mentioned as inspired writings by any ecclesiastical writer of the first three centuries; and they are expressly rejected by Athanasius and Jerome in the fourth century. Though these two fathers, and several subsequent authors, speak of these books with respect, yet the same authority was never ascribed to them as to the Old and New Testament, till the council of Trent, at its fourth session, admitted them all, except the prayer of Manasseh, and the third and fourth books of Esdras (m), into their canon; and this still continues one of the many points of difference between the church of Rome and that of England. There is therefore no ground for

applying

from the generality of readers, and concealed, as some assert, in a chest of the temple. In the primitive church some of these books, especially those of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, were imparted to catechumens, and all of them were allowed to be read under certain restrictions. Vid. Canon. Apost. Athan. Synops."-Gray.

(m) These three books are not mentioned in the acts of the council.

applying the books of Apocrypha TO ESTABLISH ANY DOCTRINE, but they are highly valuable as antient writings, which throw considerable light upon the phraseology of Scripture, and upon the history and manners of the East; and as they contain many noble sentiments and useful precepts, our church, in imitation of the primitive church of Christ, DOTH READ THEM FOR

EXAMPLE OF LIFE AND INSTRUCTION OF

MANNERS: "Sicut ergo Judith, et Tobiæ, et Maccabæorum libros legit quidem ecclesia, șed eos inter canonicas Scripturas non recipit, sic et hæc duo volumina (n) legat ad ædificationem plebis, non ad auctoritatem ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam (o)." Our church does not read all the books of the Apocrypha; it reads no part of either books of Esdras, or of the Maccabees, or of the book of Esther; nor does it read the Song of the Three Children, nor the Prayer of Manasseh.

(n) Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom.

(0) Jerome, Pref. to the Transl. of the Books of Solomon.

ARTICLE THE SEVENTH.

Of the Old Testament.

THE OLD TESTAMENT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE NEW; FOR BOTH IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT, EVERLASTING LIFE IS OF

FERED TO MANKIND BY CHRIST, WHO IS THE ONLY MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MAN, BEING BOTH GOD AND MAN: WHEREFORE THEY ARE NOT TO BE HEARD WHICH FEIGN THAT THE OLD FATHERS DID LOOK ONLY FOR TRANSITORY PROMISES.

ALTHOUGH THE LAW GIVEN FROM GOD BY MOSES, AS TOUCHING CEREMONIES AND RITES, DO NOT BIND CHRISTIAN MEN, NOR THE CIVIL FRECEFTS THEREOF OUGHT OF

NECESSITY ΤΟ BE

RECEIVED IN ANY

COMMONWEALTH, YET NOTWITHSTANDING NO CHRISTIAN MAN WHATSOEVER IS FREE FROM THE OBEDIENCE OF THE COMMANDMENTS WHICH ARE CALLED MORAL.

THIS Article was directed against the opinion of certain persons, who thought that the Old Testament, after the promulgation of the New, was no longer of any use; and also against the Anabaptists and other enthusiasts, who, mis