ページの画像
PDF
ePub

Alii autem Lucæ Evangeliftæ aiunt Epistolam etiam ad Laodicenfes fcriptam. Et quia addiderunt in eâ quædam non bene fentientes, inde non legitur in Ecclefiâ; etfi legitur a quibufdam, non tamen in Ecclefiâ legitur populo, nifi tredecim Epiftolæ ipfius, et ad Hebræos interdum.

Others fay, the Epiftle to the
Laodiceans was wrote by the
Evangelift Luke.
Evangelift Luke. But be-
caufe the Hereticks have in-
ferted fome (falfe) things, it
is for that reafon not read in
the Church. Though it be
read by fome, yet there are
no more than thirteen Epiftles
of Paul read to the people in
the Church, and fometimes
that to the Hebrews.

To the fame purpose is the account of Jerome ".
Legunt quidam et ad Laodi-
cenfes, fed ab omnibus explo-
ditur.

There are some who read (an
Epiftle under the name of
Paul) to the Laodiceans; but
it is rejected by all.

IV. The Epiftle under the name of Paul to the Laodiceans, is fpurious and Apocryphal. As to the antient one it is evident, because it is rejected by all the primitive Chriftians who have mentioned it, as appears by Philaftrius and Jerome. To which add, that Epiphanius, blaming Marcion for making use of it, calls it, rãs μù äons iv 'Amosów, i. e. an Epiftle which was not wrote by the Apostle. But my concern is with that which is now extant; and that this is fpurious and Apocryphal, is evident; because

τῆς

I. I have above shewn, that it was a groundless opinion that St. Paul wrote any Epistle to the Laodiceans.

2. This Epiftle is not cited in any of the primitive records of Christianity, nor known to any of the primitive Chriftians; not placed in their catalogue of facred books; not read in their Churches, &c. Apocryphal therefore by Prop. IV, V, VI.

3. That which most notoriously and demonstratively proves it Apocryphal is, that it is for the most part tranfcribed or

. Catal. Vir. Illuftr. in Paulo.

b Hæref. 42. p. 375. Stolen

fiolen out of another book, or books. (Prop. XIV.) This is obferved by Erafmus, Fabritius ", &c. the former of whom fays, it was ftòle out of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Coloffians, but the latter more truly, that it was ftolen out of the Epiftle of that Apoftle to the Philippians. This will be moft apparently manifest by a bare cafting the eye upon the Epiftle itself, and those references and places of Scripture, which I have for the easier proof placed in a parallel column by the fide of it.

4. Sixtus Senenfis (Biblioth. Sanct. 1. 2. p. 88.) attempts to prove it fpurious by an argument fomewhat like the former, viz. because, as he fays, there is nothing in it but what is more largely in the Epistle to the Coloffians, and therefore Paul would not command that it fhould be read among the Coloffians. Which indeed were a very undeniable argument, if the fact were true, and the contents of the Epiftle to the Laodiceans were the same with that to the Coloffians; but that the fact is not fo, will be alfo evident by the parallel column which I have placed by the fide of the Epiftle above.

5. It is Apocryphal, because it is not in the Syriack Verfion. (Prop. XV.)

The acute Erafmus (on Col. iv. 16.) attempts to prove this Epiftle fpurious by the difference of its ftile from that of St. Paul; Nihil vereor affeverare eam, quam Stapulenfis edidit, Pauli non effe. Non eft cujufvis hominis Paulinum pectus effingere; tonat, fulgurat, meras flammas loquitur Paulus: at hæc, præterquam quod breviffima eft, quam jacet, quam friget! Legat qui volet Epiftolam; extat enim in Jacobi Fabri Stapulenfis Commentariis, nullum argumentum efficacius perfuaferit eam non effe Pauli, quam ipfa Epiftola. "I am not "afraid to affert, that the Epiftle to the Laodiceans, which "Stapulenfis published, is not St. Paul's. It is not every "scribbler that can imitate the genius and stile of Paul; Paul "thunders, lightens, fpeaks forth mere flames and fire: but "this Epiftle, befides its fhortnefs, how languid and cold is "it! Let any one read the Epiftle (it is extant in Jacobus

Cod. Apocr. Nov. Teftam. t.

* Annot. in Col. iv. 16.

ii. p. 873, &c.

"Faber

"Faber Stapulenfis's Commentaries), and nothing will more "effectually convince him, that it is not P ul's, than the "Epistle itself.” This judgment of the learned Erasmus, so elegantly expressed, seems to me very far from being right; for though the Epiftle be certainly fpurious, yet its file will not prove it to be fo, because (as I have obferved) it is for the moft part taken out of one of St. Paul's genuine Epiftles, and confequently muft needs be in his ftile. It is furprifing therefore, that Erafmus fhould make ufe of this argument, feeing he himself had made the fame obfervation, though he miftook the Epiftle to the Coloffians for that to the Philippians; as did alfo Sixtus Senenfis in the fame matter. In the next words that writer proposes a conjecture concerning the author of this forgery, viz. that it was made by the fame perfon who corrupted the works of Jerome and the other Fathers. I wifh he had given us the reafons of his opinion, and told us who this person was. If I were to guess concerning the time of its production, I would suppose that which we have now to be of a very late original, and the compofure of fome idle monk, not long before the Reformation; although I am not ignorant that Timotheus of Conftantinople, a writer of the feventh century, according to Dr. Cave, reckons the Epistle to the Laodiceans among the more antient forgeries of the Manichees c.

[blocks in formation]

CHA P. IX.

Six Epiftles of St. Paul to Seneca, and Eight of Seneca to

THE

Paul.

HE high opinion that several very learned writers have entertained of these Epiftles, their undoubted antiquity, and their not being (as far as I know) yet tranflated into English, influences me to infert them here. The Jefuit Salmeron cites them to prove, that Seneca was one of Cæfar's houshold, referred to by Paul, Philip. iv. 22. as faluting the brethren at Philippi; and would perfuade us, that these Epiftles of Paul to Seneca are not unlike the Epiftles which are now received into the Canon, and directed to particular perfons, viz. that of St. Paul to Philemon, St. John's Second Epiftle, which is to the elect Lady, and his Third, which is to Caius. Sixtus Senenfis has published them in his Bibliotheque, p. 89, 90; from whom I have here transcribed them.

Numb. IV. St. PAUL'S EPISTLES to SENECA, with SENECA's to PAUL.

PAULO ANNEUS SENECA

Salutem.
Epift. I.

CREDO tibi, Paule, nunciatum quod heri cum Lucilio noftro de hypocrifi et aliis rebus habuimus. Erant enim quidam difciplinarum tuarum comites mecum ; nam in hortos Salluftianos fecefferamus,

ANNEUS SENECA to PAUL
Greeting.
Epist. I.

I SUPPOSE, Paul, that you have been informed of that converfation, which paffed yesterday between me and my Lucilius, concerning hypocrify and other subjects; for there were fome of your Difciples in company with us;

for when we were retired into the Salluftian gardens, through

which

quo in loco occafione noftra alio tendentes hi, de quibus dixi, nobis adjuncti funt. Certè quod tui præfentiam optamus, et hoc fcias volo: libello tuo lecto, id eft de plurimis literis aliquas Epiftolas, quas ad aliquam civitatem feu caput provinciæ direxifti, mira exhortatione vitam moralem continentes, ufque refecti fumus. Quos fenfus non puto ex te dictos, fed per te, certe aliquando ex te, et per te; tanta enim majeftas earum est rerum, tantaque generofitate clarent, ut vix fuffecturas putem ætates hominum, quibus inftitui perficique poffint. Bene te valere, frater, cupio. Vale.

which they were also paffing, and would have gone another way, by our perfuafion they joined company with us. I defire you to believe, that we much with for your converfation: we were much delighted with your book of many Epiftles, which you have wrote to fome cities and chief towns of provinces, and contain wonderful inftructions for moral conduct: fuch fentiments, as I fuppofe you were not the author of, but only the inftrument of conveying, though fometimes both the author and the inftrument; for fuch is the fublimenefs of thofe doctrines, and their grandeur, that I fuppofe the age of a man is

scarce fufficient to be inftructed and perfected in the knowledge of them. I wish your welfare, my brother, Farewell.

[blocks in formation]
« 前へ次へ »