I come now to a most curious and important discovery. Eusebius, (A. D. $15,) speaking of the writings of the "ancient ecclesiastical men," says: "There is also come to our hands a dialogue, a disputation of Caius, held at Rome in the time of Zephyrinus, (A. D. 195-214,) with Proclus, a patron of the Cataphrygian heresy, in which he reproves the rashness and audacity of his adversary, in composing new writings or scriptures, and makes mention of only thirteen Epistles of the holy Apostle, not reckoning that of the Hebrews." St. Jerome, in his book of illustrious men, refers to the same work, and says, it was a very celebrated disputation.

After citing this passage of Eusebius, Dr. Lardner expresses his deep regret that Eusebius had not given us the catalogue itself; our first complete one being that of Athanasius, 120 or 130 years later.

Now it is remarkable, that in the year 1740, more than fifteen centuries after the time of Caius, a fragment, which is most probably a part of the lost dialogue, and if not, is confessedly of the same age, was discovered by Muratori, in a MS. volume in the Ambrosian library at Milan, written in the eighth century. The present learned President of Magdalen College, Oxford, published a critical edition of the fragment a few years since. It was probably written

(0) Dr. Martin Routh, in his Reliquiæ Sacræ, Oxon. 1814, vol. ii. 1-32. & vol. iv. 1-37. He has completed what Muratori, Gallandius, Stoschius, Keilius, Mosheim, and Freindaller had begun. As the fragment is exquisite, and has never, I believe, appeared in our language, I shall be excused if I attempt a translation, so far as the imperfect state of the reading will allow. It begins of course abruptly.

————————“At which, however, he was present, and thus he described things. In the third place, the book of the gospel according to St. Luke. Luke the physician wrote it in due order, in his own name, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him, as one also studious of truth. Yet neither did he see the Lord in the flesh: but as he had a perfect knowledge of every thing, he begins to speak from the birth of John. In the fourth place, the gospel of John, one of the disciples. He upon being urged to write it by the fellow-disciples and bishops, said to those around him, Fast with me now for three days, and what shall be revealed to each, let us communicate, that we may know whether the gospel shall be written or not. The same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should write every thing in his own name, all the rest giving it their authority. And, therefore, although various points are taught in the several gospels, yet the faith of those who believe does not differ; since by one guiding and over-ruling Spirit, the same things are declared in all the books concerning the nativity, the passion, the resur

towards the close of the second century, if not earlier. It contains not merely a distinct reference to certain books of the New Testament by name, but a formal catalogue of those sacred writings, with observations on the circumstances connected with them. It makes a marked distinction also between them and Ecclesiastical and Apocryphal books. His language is striking, "It is not fit that gall rection, the conversation of the Lord with his disciples, and his two-fold advent; the first when he was despised in his humiliation, as it was foretold; the second which is yet future, when he shall be glorious in royal power. What wonder, therefore, if John so confidently declares every thing in his epistles also, saying of himself, Those things which we have seen with our eyes and heard with our ears and our hands have handled, have we written. For thus he professes himself, not only a beholder and hearer, but also a writer in due order, of all the wonderful things of the Lord.

"But the Acts of all the Apostles are written in one book. Luke comprehends them in the work addressed to the excellent Theophilus, because every thing took place in his presence: as other accounts clearly declare the sufferings of Peter and the journey of Paul from Rome to Spain.

"But the Epistles of Paul, what they are, from what place they were sent, or from what cause, he himself declares to those who are willing to inquire; first of all forbidding heresy and schism to the Corinthians, and circumcision to the Galatians. He wrote, however, more at length to the Romans, according to the order of the scriptures, teaching that Christ was the chief end of them. Each of which things we must of necessity discuss, since the blessed apostle Paul himself, following the order of his senior John, writes only to seven churches by name, in such order as this; first to the Corinthians; secondly to the Ephesians; thirdly to the Philippians; fourthly to the Colossians; fifthly to the Galatians; sixthly to the Thessalonians; seventhly to the Romans. But although he wrote a second time to the Corinthians and Thessalonians for reproof, yet but one church is acknowledged, scattered over the whole world. And John also in the Apocalypse, although he writes to seven churches, yet speaks to all. Further, one Epistle to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy, from affection and love; yet are they sanctified and counted sacred, in the honor of the Catholic church, and in the direction of ecclesiastical discipline. There is circulated also another to the Laodiceans, and another to the Alexandrians forged in the name of Paul, to support the heresy of Marcion; and many more which cannot be received into the Catholic church. For it is not fit that gall should be mixed with honey. But an Epistle of Jude and two of the above-written John, are accounted genuine in the Catholic church. And the Book of Wisdom written by the friends of Solomon in honor of him. The apocalypses of John and Peter are the only ones we receive, which last some Christians do not allow to be read in the church. Fur ther, the Shepherd was written by Hermas, very lately, in our time, in the city of Rome, Bishop Pius his brother filling the See of the city of Rome. And therefore it ought indeed to be read; but it cannot be published in the church to the people to the end of time, either amongst the prophets whose number is complete, or amongst the apostles.

"But we receive nothing whatever of Arsinoes, or Valentinus, or Mitiades, who also have written a new Book of Psalms for Marcion; the supporters, together with Basilides of the Asiatic Cataphryges."*

* I refer the learned reader to the dissertation of Dr. Routh for an explanation of several obscurities in this precious relic.

should be mingled with honey." In a fragment it is impossible to determine what books might be enumerated in the lost parts; but it actually contains a list of twenty-two books of our Canon. When we consider that this statement was made in a public and celebrated disputation at Rome, and in the face of heretics, for the very purpose of distinguishing authentic from pretended books of scripture, and scarcely a century after the death of St. John; and that it was referred to by Eusebius in the beginning of the fourth, and again by Jerome in the beginning of the fifth century, as of acknowledged authority, it must be allowed to afford. a striking confirmation of our argument.

A manuscript fragment of the second century, discovered in the eighteenth, is a proof as extraordinary as it is conclusive. It checks the whole account of the authenticity.

I ought here to stop and notice another unlooked for confirmation to our argument, which the discovery of ancient. medals is continually affording; and by all of which, some slight circumstance or other, some name given to a governor, some title of a province, is proved to be minutely accurate. But I confine myself to one example. St. Luke terms Philippi, a colony, using a word which implies that it was a latin colony; P but as this betokens a favor which such a city had little reason to expect, critics were embarrassed to account for the title, till some coins were brought to light, which expressly mention, that Julius Cæsar himself had bestowed the dignity on it. Thus, though no author extant, but St. Luke, has mentioned it under that character, these coins corroborate the fidelity of the sacred writer. But this subject belongs more to the credibility.

I observe only, that it is thus, that for eighteen hundred years, the evidences of authenticity have been increasing, by the discovery of external testimonies; whilst the more the internal style and structure of the sacred books have been studied during the same length of time, the stronger has been the conviction of their genuineness on every candid mind.

(p) Acts xvi. 11, 12. "We came to Philippi—a colony”—xoxwvz, originally a latin word, colonia. See Calmet, Frag. i. p. 536.

I add as a last confirmation of all the above proofsIX. That our sacred volume is UNIQUE AND UNPARALLELED in the history of the world.

There has never been any work like it, or pretending to be like it. No books were ever written, or professed to be written, by the founders of a religion, and exposed from the first to the view of mankind, but the records (I include the Old Testament) of the Christian faith.

Heathenism had no sacred books, no exposition of truth, no authentic writings submitted by its founders to the view of mankind. Heathenism crept into the world from the remains of the original revelation to our first parents, aided by the light of natural conscience, the policy of human governments, and the scattered rays of the light of Judaism. But there was no promulgation, there were no sacred books, there were no expositions of doctrine and duty, published by the founders and authors of the system. The Koran of Mahomet is only a corruption of our Christian books, and taken from them. The Shasters of the Hindoos were never pretended to be the writings of the first founders of the religion, were never promulgated, never submitted to the popular eye, and make no profession of teaching the body of mankind the knowledge of their duties.

The sacred volume remains alone, without a rival, the genuine production of the first founders of Christianity, offered to the examination of all, and standing, like the works of the Almighty, in the wonders of creation, the monument of its own divine original-a book, occupied in the popular instruction of mankind, and level to the capacity, and adapted to the necessities of all-a book, which standing in less need of external evidence than any other ancient work, is surrounded by every species of it in unequalled accumulation and force.

Such then is the summary of the arguments for the authenticity of the New Testament. Such are the proofs which sustain the observations of the last Lecture.

It had been shown generally, that the genuineness of our books is supported by the same kind of arguments as men constantly employ on all similar occasions-that not one

mark of spuriousness appears in our divine books-that it was morally impossible, from the circumstances of the case, that they could be forged-that men are continually admitting ancient books on the slightest external evidence-and that every external and internal proof unites to satisfy a reasonable and candid inquirer of the truth of the New Testament.

These general observations have been now established by actually tracing out the transmission of our books-by noticing the progress of the settlement of the Canon-by observing in all the specimens of the testimonies of Christian writers, the utmost sincerity-by weighing the admission of heathen adversaries and heretics-by running up our numerous ancient manuscripts now extant, to the manuscripts of Jerome and to the autographs, or immediate copies of autographs, in the hands of Tertullian-by considering that the Apocryphal books want every one of these marks of authenticity, and are branded with every criterion of spuriousness -by adverting to the style and manner of the sacred penmen; and to the unexpected confirmations which are continually arising from the most extraordinary quarters-and by observing, finally, that our sacred volume stands unparalleled in the history of the world.

Let me for one instant observe, in conclusion, that it was THE LOVE OF CHRISTIANS TO THE BIBLE, which has furnished us with the accumulated testimony which we have been reviewing. Can we fail, then, to admire that care of Divine Providence, which made the spontaneous dictate of the Christian's gratitude for redemption, the means of pouring down upon us a stream of proofs of the record by which it was conveyed? Had the cold and theoretical Christianity which now prevails, been all that the first converts knew, our religion would have expired at its birth. It was the holy ardor of love-it was the emotion of gratitude for the discoveries made in the authentic scriptures-it was the astonishment excited by the mysteries of redemption; by the agony of the cross, the glory of the resurrection, the consolation of the divine Comforter-it was the light and grace shed upon the miseries of mankind by the Sun of righteousness,