1. Epiphanius's quotations of a work called Apostolical Constitutions, with remarks upon them.

II. The opinions of learned moderns concerning the Apostolical Constitutions now in being. III. An argument upon them proposed. IV. They are written in the name of the apostles of Christ : V. But are destitute of the external evidence necessary to support that claim : not being quoted by the Christian writers of the first three centuries. VI. They are also destitute of internal evidence : 1. The quotations of the books of the New Testamentınot suiting the apostles. 2. Having in them many things later than the times of the apostles : 3. Some things unworthy of the apostles. 4. Inconsistencies, and false history. 5. Expressions, betraying a later time than is pretended. VII. Consequently they are an imposture. VIII. The author's testimony to the books of the New Testament. IX. The Apostolical Canons.

1. As a work called Apostolical Constitutions is cited by Epiphanius, and he is the first Christian writer who has quoted any book with that title, I shall here put down his • several citations, and sometimes with the connection.

1. In his forty-fifth heresy, that of the Severians, who were Encratites, and condemned the use of wine; he observes : « The Lord says, “ I am the true Vine.” [John xv. 1.] If the vine • had been evil, he would not have used that expression. Moreover the apostles, in the work I called the Constitution, say, that the catholic church is the plantation and vineyard of the • Lord. Yea, and the Lord himself has again in the gospel a parable of a vineyard.' See Luke xx. and Matt. xx.

2. In his seventieth heresy, that of the Audians, who were for keeping Easter at the same time with the Jews, he says: • For this purpose they allege the Constitution of the • Apostles: which book, though it be with many of doubtful authority, is not to be rejected; for • it contains the whole order of church-government, and has nothing in it.contrary to the eccle• siastical discipline, or the canon, or the faith. But they misunderstand the direction concern

ing Easter, which they allege for the support of their practice. For the apostles in the Consti* tution appoint to this purpose : Do not you make computation of the time, say they, but keep * it together with your brethren who are of the circumcision, at the same time that they do:. And though they should be mistaken, let not that give you any concern. I put in the margin a part of Grabe's note upon this passage.

3. Epiphanius afterwards mentions several things, as sayings, or ordinances of the apostles, and some of them as contrary to the above-mentioned direction, and from the same work, as is reckoned.

4. In the seventy-fifth heresy, which is that of the Aërians, who were against set times of

• All the passages of Epiphanius, with remarks, may be τε αλανηθωσι, μηδε υμιν μελείω. Η. 70, n. 10. p. 822. Α. Β. seen in Grabe's Spicil. T. i. p. 46–55. as well as elsewhere. 823. A.

Αλλα και οι αποσολοι φασιν εν τη Διαλαξει τη καλά- Contrarium plane præcipitur in istis, quibus modo utimur μενη. Οι φυλεια θεα και αμπελων η καθολικη εκκλησια. Αλλα Constitutionibus Clementis. I. v.c. 17. -Unde Cotelerius ad και αυτος ο κυριος παλιν εν τω ευαίγελιω ποιoμενος την τε αμ- hunc locum : Recte, inquit, observârunt docti homines, Conπελωνος παρακολην. κ. λ. Epiph. H. 45. p. 390, Α. Β. Vid. stitutionem hujus capitis diversam esse a Constitutione, de quà Const. Ap. 1. i. in.

Epiphanius in hæresi Audianorum. Immo non solum diversa • Εις τελο δε οι αυλοι Αυδιανοι σαραφερεσι την των αποφολων est, sed e diametro contradicit. Grab. Sp. T. i. p. 46. Διαλαξιν, ουσαν μεν τους πολλοις εν αμφιλεκίω, αλλ' εκ αδοκι- Εξ αυτων δε των εκεισε ειρημενων ρηίων η αντιθησις οφθησείαι. μον' πασα γαρ εν αυλη κανονικη ταξις εμφερείαι, και δεν πα- Φασκεσι γαρ την αβρυπνιαν φερειν μεσαξοντων των αζυμων. Ιb. ρακεχαραμενον της πιςεως, εδε της εκκλησιαστικης διοικησεως, n. 10. p. 823. A. και κανονος, και πιςεως. -Οριζεσι γαρ εν τη αυλη Διαταξει Λελεσι γαρ οι αυλοι αποστολοι, ότι όταν εκεινοι ευωχωνται, υμεις. οι αποστολοι, ότι υμεις μη ψηφιζετε, αλλά ποιειλε, όταν οι αδελφοι νηςευονίες υπερ αυλων πενθείτε, ότι εν τη ημερα εορτης τον Χρισον υμων οί εκ περιτομης, με αυτων αμα ποιείλε-λεύονlες ότι καν εσαυρωσαν. κ. λ. Ιb. n. 11. p. 823. C. Vid. Const. 1. ν. c. 15.

Αυθις αυλων ακαογίες, εν τη Διαλαξει, ότι ο κακων εαυla την

fasting and feasting under the gospel-dispensation, Epiphanius having quoted to them 1 Cor. v. 7. and Acts xx. 16, goes on: · and · if the authority is to be fetched from the Constitution of * the apostles, it may be easily shewn, how they have there appointed a fast on the fourth, and

on the sixth day of the week for ever (or always], except in Pentecost: and that in the six • days of Easter no food ought to be taken, beside bread, and salt, and water.'

5. In the eightieth heresy, which is that of the Messalians and others : · And concerning " the beard the divine word and doctrine in the Constitutions of the Apostles says, that it should • not be corrupted, that is, that the hair of the beard should not be cut, and that men should not wear a meretricious dress, nor yet make a shew of religion.'

6. There seems also to be a reference to this book in his Exposition of the Catholic Faith. I put a part of the passage at the bottom of the page; as also a remark of Grabe d upon

it. Upon these quotations we may now observe as follows.

1. We hence perceive, that in the time of Epiphanius there was a work called Apostolical Constitutions: and the things therein contained seem to have been written, as in those we now have, in the name of the apostles. There were likewise in that work directions concerning Easter, and Pentecost, and other set days of fasting, or feasting, as in ours.

2. Nevertheless there is reason to think, that the Constitutions mentioned by Epiphanius, are not the same with those which we now have. The order concerning keeping Easter is quite different in ours from that quoted by the Audians: nor does Epiphanius say, that their quotation was false; though indeed he alleges some things, which seem contrary to the rule by which they governed themselves.

3. Epiphanius bears witness, that the Constitutions, which were in being in his time, were • doubted of by many,' and were not generally received.

4. That expression, · doubted of by many,' or of doubtful authority with many,' seems to be ambiguous. It may denote, that it was doubted, whether the book should be esteemed canonical; or else, whether it was an ecclesiastical book, and not apocryphal and heretical, and utterly to be rejected. And it may be thought, that this last is the true meaning of the expresa sion, for these two reasons: first, when Epiphanius gives an account of the canonical books of scripture, he takes no notice of this. Secondly, when he says: it is not to be rejected, for it • has nothing in it contrary to the discipline of the church, or the canon, or the faith ;' he seems only to assert, that it was a good, ecclesiastical or catholic writing. When therefore he says, that this book was doubted of by many,' he intimates, that some suspected it to be the work of some heretics: in opposition to which he says, it ought not to be rejected. For it appeared from ψυκην εν κυριακη, επικαλαραθος εςι τω θεω. Ιb. p. 223. D. in octo libros distinctæ, quæ a prioribus illis, ac nihilominus Const. 1. v. cap. 20.

dubiis, quarum meminit Epiphanius, diversæ videntur. Etenim την εορίην πασχα, τελεσι την εβδομαδα την ωρισμενην, quinque ex illis sententia hoc & sequenti numero citantur, και απ' αυτων των αποστολων εν τη Διαταξει. Ιb. n. 12. p. quæ in vulgatis nusquam reperiuntur : imo vero contraria 824. C.

quædain in iis leguntur. Nam lib. v. cap. 16. de Paschatis 2 Ει δε και χρη το της Διαταξεως των αποστολων λεξειν, πως celebritate catholicorum dogma propalam edicitur, uti post εκει ωριζονίο τείραδα και προσαββαλον νηςευειν δια σανθος, αquinoctium instauretur. Tum ne cum Judeis agatur, & alia χωρις πεντηκοσης και περι των εξ ημερων τα πασχα, πως quædam; quæ si in antiquis illis Constitutionibus legebantur, παραλγελλεσιν, μηδεν όλως λαμβανειν, η αρία, και αλος, και mirum est hoc tam præsenti ac diserto Testimonio usum non υδαίος: ποιαν τε ήμεραν απειν, πως τε απολυειν εις επιφωσκεσαν esse contra Audianos Epiphanium, qui Judæorum more celeκυριακην, φανερον εςι. κ. λ. Η. 75. n. 6. p. 910. Β. C. D. brandum Pascha jisdem ex Constitutionibus affirmabaut. Conf. Const. I. v. cap. 15. 20. 1. vii. c. 23. 1. v. c. 13. 15. Apparet igitur, aliud fuisse Constitutionum genus, quam 18, 19.

quibus hodie Clementis nomen inscribitur. Animadv. in H. • Και σερι μεν εν τ8 γενεια εν ταις Διαίαξεσι των αποφολων lxx. p. 290, 291. Φασκει ο θειος λοίος και η διδασκαλια, μη φθειρειν, τελεσι μη Grabe was of opinion, that the Constitutions quoted by JEUVENY Tomas 787El8. X. A. H. 80. n. 7. p. 1073. C. Vid. Epiphanius were not only different from ours, but that they Coust, l. i.

were the Doctrine, or Doctrines of the Apostles, mentioned Συναξεις δε επιλελεμεναι ταχθεισαι εισιν απο των αποστολων by Eusebius and Athanasius, and shorter than ours. Equidem τετραδι και προσαββαλα, και κυριακη τετραδι δε και εν προσα- id lubens concedo, Doctrinam Apostolorum, ab Eusebio & και εν νηςεια εως ωρας ενναλης. κ. λ. Εxp. Fid. n. 22. Athanasio memoratam eamdem fuisse cum Alalabei sive Con

stitutione Apostolicâ ab Epiphanio aliquoties laudata.Sed * Quod de sacris conventibus feriâ iv. & vi. nec non Do- istas, quibus modo utimur, Constitutiones Apostolicas Cleminicâ die celebrandis dicit Epiphanius, in nostris Constitu- menti adscriptas, nego easdem esse cum Ardaxais seu Aidartionibus non exstat. Hæque ideo ab antiqua Apostoloram nangis Apostolorum, licet in quibusdam capitibus conveniant. Alwaxin hoc puncto differunt. Grabe ib. p. 53.

Spic. p. 41.-contra quam hypothesin supra p. 41, & seģ9. · Petavius, in his notes upon Epiphanius, supposeth the evici, Aloxxas, sive Constitutiones. Epiphanii, diversas a Constitutions, mentioned by his author, to be different from nostris, nec adeo prolixas, vel in plures libros divisas fuisse. Ib. ours. De Constitutionibus iisce dubietatem a nonnullis præ

p. 284. fatur Epiphanius. Quo eodem tromine circumferuntur hodie

cap. 3.

p. 1104,

the contents of it to be the work of some honest, orthodox, or catholic Christian. Daillé has argued in a like manner.

5. It is not easy to say what respect Epiphanius himself had for this work. He quotes things from it, as ordinances of the apostles, and as the divine word and doctrine: but it is not mentioned in any of the passages, where he gives the catalogues of the books of scripture, exhibited in the preceding chapter. Moreover, the expressions of his just taken notice of, seem to imply no more, than that the book was an ecclesiastical or orthodox writing: farther, either his Constitutions were not the same as ours, or he had not much regard for them. For in our Constitutions divers early heretics are named, and they are condemned and confuted: of which passages nevertheless Epiphanius has made no use in his history of those heretics, or in his arguments against them: which every one must be apt to think he would have done, if the Constitutions which we have, had been then in being, and had been esteemed by him as of authority.

6. Whatever was the opinion of Epiphanius about the work quoted in the passages of his just recited, or referred to, there can be no good reason for us to suppose it was a book of sacred scripture; forasmuch as no such book is quoted as scripture by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, or any other Christian writer of the first three centuries.

If any should say that Epiphanius's Constitutions are the same with the Doctrine of the Apostles, mentioned by Eusebius and Athanasius, [which has been the opinion of Grabe and some others,] I would answer: That is not certaiņ. Supposing them to be the same, it is manifest that the book called the Doctrine of the Apostles, was no book of sacred scripture. It is never quoted by Eusebius, or Athanasius, in any of their writings: they have only once men, tioned it, each of them, as a spurious, or useful book, when they give a catalogue of the books of the New Testament: and all other Christian writers before them are quite silent about it. In the Synopsis, ascribed to Athanasius, it is mentioned; but it is ranked with contradicted,' or apocryphal books.

II. Having seen the passages of Epiphanius concerning the Apostolical Constitutions of his time, and made remarks on them, I proceed to consider a work which we now have in eight books, with a like title: and I begin with alleging the judgments of divers learned modernis upon them.

1. Cotelerius says: · It is certain, that the work of the Apostolical Constitutions in eight • books is apocryphal and pseudepigraphal, not composed by the apostles, nor by the apostolical • Clement.— Although Epiphanius and Cedrenus have quoted the Constitutions as the divine • word; nevertheless it is manifest, that a book cannot be esteemed the work of the apostles,

which the earliest times of the church were unacquainted with, which was unknown to the • fathers, or neglected by them, which has many marks of forgery and falsehood; which the • catholic church excludes from the canon of divine scripture: which, finally, has in it very many

things contrary to truth and probability, plainly of a later date than the times of the apostles, . and quite different from their true characters.

2. Tillemont's judgment is not very different from that of Cotelerius: I therefore take it next. If · the Doctrine of the Apostles, mentioned by Eusebius and Athanasius, and the • Constitutions, are different works, as Du Pin thinks, Epiphanius is the first who has mentioned • the Constitutions.—And though the last canon of the apostles ranks them with the canonical • scriptures; and though the Ethiopians respect them as sacred and divine scripture; we are • nevertheless constrained to own, that there are in them many things contrary to truth and probability, and far different from the time of the apostolical writings.'

a At non ideo fit, ut libros a Clemente vere scriptos, vere- non profectum, nec ab apostolico Clemente.. -Quamvis S. que ab Apostolis instituta dictataque, quæcumque in illis Epiphanius H. 80. 7. & Cedrenus.—Jelov Autor Diataxibus narrantur, fuisse crediderit. Multis enim libris nihil inest vel tribuant; attamen liquido constat, ad apostolus & Clementem a fide, vel a disciplinâ alienum, quos non idcirco dixeris vel non pertinere ouvlajua, quod prima ecclesiæ tempora latuit, Clementinos, vel Apostolicos. Omnino videtur Epiphanius quod a tot sanctis patribus ignoratum fuit, aut neglectum; sensisse, illas Apostolorum nomine tam vulgatas Diataxes boni quod pluribus suspicionem movit suppositionis, plurimis cer& catholici viri opus esse non inutile, iisque sincere explicatam titudinem dedit falsitatis ; quod catholica ecclesia a canone esse ecclesiæ fidem ac disciplinam: ut a Clemente scriptas, & scripturarum divinarum excludit; quod denique sexcenta ab ipsis Apostolis dictatas crediderit, nihil sanc cogit. De complectitur cum veritate, cum similitudine pugnantia, recenPseudep. Apostol. 1. i. cap. 2. p. 37.

tiora temporibus apostolicis, & apostolico charactere remotis. b Itaque verum est, Constitutionum Apostolicarum oxl26.8- sima. Cotel. Jud. de Const. Ap. ap. Patr. Ap. T. i. à uy opus esse apocryphum, & pseudepigraphum, ab apostolis · Saint Clement, de Rome, Art. vii. Mem. T. ïi.

3. For Du Pin's opinion, I refer at present to his Preliminary . Dissertation upon the Bible, and to what he writes in his account of the Canons and Constitutions ascribed to the apostles, and then of Clement of Rome.

Daillé's opinion was, that d the Constitutions were composed after the council of Nice, and before the end of the fifth century.

5. Mr. Robert Turner thought, the Constitutions made use of by Epiphanius to be different from the present Constitutions; and concludes his work, saying: · That' the eight books of • Constitutions seem to have been made out of several doctrines, constitutions, canons, travels, and traditions, ascribed to the apostles, and out of some of the ancient Liturgies, and the discipline and practice of the Greek church, oddly blended together, adulterated and changed • by some ignorant Arian in the fifth century.'

6. Pearson was of opinion, that ? the Apostolical Constitutions were formed out of several lesser works, called Doctrines or Constitutions, said to be written by Clement, Ignatius, Hippo. lytus, and others, but altered and interpolated by the author of this collection: and that the eight books of the Constitutions, as we now have them, were not composed and finished till after the time of Epiphanius. I have now placed Pearson's words somewhat at large at the bottom of the page; and I formerly spoke of this opinion of his. 7. Grabe's

opinion was exactly the same as Pearson’s. I now also put his words ' below. 8. James Basnage thought, that * Pearson had hit the time of this work very well. For on the one hand, these eight: books of the Apostolical Constitutions were not known in the time of Epiphanius: it might be added, nor of Jerom. On the other hand, the author of the Imperfect Work upon St. Matthew, who wrote after the time of Theodosius, quotes the eighth book : therefore we must place the composing of this large collection at the middle of the fifth century.

9. The opinion of Samuel Basnage may be seen in his ' Annals.

10. The late learned Dr. Waterland' has these expressions: • The Clementine Liturgy, • though it is not thought to have been ever in public use, is commonly believed to be the oldest 6

of any now extant: and, though as an entire collection, it cannot be justly set higher than the • fifth century, yet it certainly contains many things derived from earlier times.'

11. Pagi thought it sufficient to say, for shewing the Constitutions not to be Clement's, that" they are not mentioned among his works either by Eusebius or Jerom.

12. Le Clerc wrote a Dissertation, which he placed at the end of the second volume of his last edition of the Apostolical Fathers. He takes notice of some things in the Constitutions exceedingly unsuitable to the character of the apostles of Christ. He says, they ! well represent the ecclesiastical discipline of the fourth century; but not that of earlier times. He thinks, they'


* L. ii. c. 6. sect. 10.

conjecturam laudati Pearsoni-istam, qua modo utimur, Biblioth. Ec. T. i. p. 14, &c. a Amsterdam.

Kalonixny Aidaoxanlay, in octo libros digestam, ex variis c Ibid. p. 30. &c.

Aidarxahiais antiquioribus apostolorum, Clementis, Ignatii, a Si tamen, ut in re obscurâ, conjecturas & argumenta ad- conf

n, hasque maximâ ex parte in illa conservatas esse. mittere libet; illud inprimis pro certo constitui posse mihi Spic. p. 284, 285. videtur, fuisse hoc opus ante finem quinti sæculi scriptum Histoire de l'Eglise, p. 488.

1 Ann. 100. n. 8, 9. atque editum. De Pseudep. Ap. I. ii. c. 17. p. 393.

m Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, p. 341. i Discourse of the pretended Apostolical Constitutions, p. n Verum harum Constitutionum auctor non est Clemens 198. The same, p. 293.

Romanus, quia Eusebius, & Hieronymus libro de Scriptoribus ex his diversis Didascaliis atque Constitutionibus Ecclesiasticis, cum de scriptis S. Clementis agunt, unam dunlibros octo Constitutionum Apostolicarum, quos habemus, taxat illius ad Corinthios epistolam recensent. Legatur Euseconfectos atque consarcinatos fuisse, asserere non dubito- bius, l. iii. c. 15. Pagi Ann. 100. n. 8. Unde conjicio, octo libros Constitutionum post ævum Epi- • Est in iis dogma quod maxime offendit viros doctos, & phanii ex veteribus Didascaliis aique Diataxibus, immutatis quidem merito, quo Episcopus ita extollitur, ut soli Deo sub. interpolatisque, factos esse. Neque enim ille numerum jiciatur, atque Dynasta & Deus terrenus adpelletur: quod librorum indicat. Pears. Vind. Ign. P. i. c. 4. p. 282, 283. veritati atque humilitati apostolorum prorsus adversatur. Exstat. Amst. 1698.

1. ii. c. 26. Rursus, cap. 34 sic loquuntur personati apostoli See the chapter of Hippolytus, Vol. i. p. 500.

de episcopis:Hos Principes & Reges præesse existiinate, Unde certissima mihi videtur sententia doctissimi Præsulis tributaque iis offerte. &c. Diss. de Const. 8. 6. p. 494. Pearsonii: qui in Vindiciis S. Ignatii asseruit, octo libros P Cæteroquin in Constitutionibus, quales habemus, optime Constitutionum post ævum Epiphanii, sed ante Auctorem describitur sæculi quarti disciplina ecclesiastica. Ib. n. 5. 1. Operis Imperfecti in Matthæum compositos fuisse. Dictus 9 Est hic quoque tota disciplina ecclesiastica iv. sæculi, enim auctor primus Constitutiones Apostolicas, tamquam qualis ab initio non fuerat: ut jam observavit Jac. Usserius, pluribus libris constantes, citavit Hic itaque cum ali- Diss. cap. 14. 16. quem nemo confutavit, aut confutare queat. quamdiu post Theodosium imp. vixerit; - octo libri Consti- Ib. n. 10. tutionum exeunte sæculo iv. vel ineunte v. prodiisse videntur. Ego vero Constitutiones, quales nunc habemus, cum

-Caterum jam supra p. 43. admodum probabilem dixi etiamnum arderent contentiones Arianorum, ab episcopo quo

[ocr errors]

were composed by some Arian of the fourth century: and seems to think, there may be some probability in the conjecture of another learned man; that they are the work of Leontius, bishop of Tripoli in Lydia.

13. Young Barratier published a Dissertation to shew, that the Constitutions were written in the second century, and not far below the beginning of it. He supposeth, that not long after the death of the apostles some person had a like design with that of Papias: he therefore collected what he could meet with of the apostle's precepts and sayings concerning Christian manners and worship. Nor did he confine himself to oral traditions: he also made use of divers books; some of them apocryphal; for which reasons many things may be here ascribed to the apostles which are not truly theirs. In some things the author may be relied upon; other things may.be false and fictitious. So Barratier. I am unwilling to say that this is a trifling hypothesis and void of evidence: but it seems to me, that the Constitutions will be of little more use; or value, according to this opinion, than according to the opinion of those, who think them a collection made in the fourth or fifth century.

14. Mr. Whiston thinks, that the Apostolical Constitutions are the most sacred of the canonical books of the New Testament.'

III. Such are the opinions of learned men concerning this work. I now intend to offer an argument upon it under the following heads.

1. I shall observe some passages, in which the apostles are mentioned as authors.

2. We will inquire what right this work has to the names of the apostles: where will be considered both external and internal evidence.

3. If it should appear that their authority is made use of without reason, it will follow, that the work is an imposture.

IV. In the first place we are to observe some of the passages, in which the apostles are mentioned as authors.

1. And indeed these eight books of Constitutions are written, and the things contained in them are delivered, as in the name of the apostles of Jesus Christ.

2. They begin with this inscription or salutation: • The apostles and elders to all, who from among the Gentiles have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ. Grace and peace be multiplied ( unto you from God almighty, through our Lord Jesus Christ, in the acknowledgment of him.'

3. · Wherefore we the twelve apostles of the Lord, who are now together, send you these * our divine Constitutions, concerning every ecclesiastical form, there being present with us also the chosen vessel, our fellow-apostle Paul, and the rest of the elders, and the seven deacons.'.

4. That quotation is from the fourth chapter of the eighth and last book. And in the last chapter of it, again : • Now' this we all in common charge you, that every one remain in the

rank assigned him, without transgressing the appointed bounds. For they are not ours, but • God's.'

5. And still lower, in the same chapter, near the conclusion of the whole work: "As by • Moses were appointed high-priests, priests and Levites, and by our Saviour we the thirteen • were appointed: and by the apostles I James, and I Clement, and others, not to name them again: and by all in common, presbyters, deacons, sub-deacons, and readers...'


piam Ariano conscriptas fuisse clanculum, ut earum auctori- tutionum compilatorem, non ex iis quædam in opus suum tate, ad confirmandam Arianam doctrinam, uteretur, & quidem irrepere passum esse. In iis factis historicis, quæ nude reante quarti sæculi finem, existimo. Ib. n. 5.

feruntur, et non nexûs causâ adhibita sunt, aio Constitutiones qualis erat Leontius Tripolitanus, in Lydia, episco- omneni fidem mereri. - Sed alia ratio est de conventu v gr. pus, si credimus judicio viri doctissimi, Thomæ Brunonis, omnium apostolorum, qui modo ideo tictus est, ut iis tribuequod in hoc ipso volumine edidimus. Ib. n. 3.

rentur Constitutiones, tamquam commune opus. Alia ralio Itaque, apostolis defunctis, probabile est, pios quosdam iterum de Simonis Magi historiâ, quæ potuit ficta esse, quia viros conatos esse omnia eorum dicta, facta, & scripta, colli- credebatur interesse apostolorum, ut multa prodigia jis tribuegere, & posteritati servare. Sic Papias. Sic tot apocryphorum rentur, et multa hæreticis falsa affingerentur. Barrat. Disquis. auctores. Inde statim post A. C. centesimum aliquis conatus Chronol. p. 282, 293. Ultrajecti. 1740. 410. fuerit omnia colligere, quæ apostoli circa mores et ritus Chris- See the second and third volumes of Primitive Christianity tianorum reliquerint. Et sane Constitutiones ex variis collec- revived. tas esse tractatibus manifestum est. Interim nolo idcirco • Οι αποσολοι και οι πρεσβύτεροι σασι τοις εξ εθνων πιςευσαonnia et singula, quae in Constitutionibus leguntur, apostolis 01. %. Const. Procem. in. tribuere. Multa iis supposita esse nullo negotio credo. Et Αμα τοινυν υπαρχονlες ημεις οι δεκαδυο τε κυριε αποσολοι sạne illis temporibus tam ingens librorum apocryphorum, τας δε τας θειας ημων ενθελλομεθα διαλαξεις. L. viii. C. 4. .in. dubiorum, &c. numerus ortus est, ut fieri non possit, Consti- * Εκεινο δε κοινη πανίες παραλγελλομεν. L. viii. c: 40.iri. VOL. II.


« ElőzőTovább »