Publisher's Synopsis
Excerpt from Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
There may have been cases where the possibility of mistaking a non-apostolical for an apostolical writing is less incredible than in the case mentioned, but there were none, it is believed, where such a mistake can be regarded as probable.
And, in spite of modern doubts and denials, it is evident from a variety of circumstances that the early Christians were reasonably cautious about the sources of their knowledge. It is evident, for example, from the four great Epistles of Paul (viz. Romans, First and Second Corinthians, and Galatians), which are accepted as genuine by the boldest criticism, that special and, indeed, absolute confidence was reposed in the teaching of those admitted to be apostles(1 Cor. 12: 28, 29; 2 Cor. 11: 5; 12: 11, 12; Gal. 2: 7-9; Eph. 2: 20; 4: 11).They were looked upon as entitled to speak with authority on all matters relating to the person and work of Christ or the duty of his followers. Naturally, therefore, their writings would be preserved and consulted with the greatest respect. It is also evident from hints in the New Testament, and from the language of the Christian Fathers, that along with the teaching of the apostles was placed the teaching of their companions, such as Mark and Luke, either because their doctrine was supposed to be received directly from apostles, and to be fully endorsed by them, or because, in addition to their intimacy with apostles, they were believed to have a special gift of inspiration to qualify them for their work.
If, now, as history appears to show, the formation of the New Testament Canon was left to the prudence and piety of the early churches, several things which may be said to characterize the actual process of formation are seen to be natural, if not inevitable.
A few of these may be named in this place.
1. The Principal Reason for admitting a Book to the Canon was found in its Authorship. - If the sacred books of the New Covenant had been selected by the apostle John, the names and relations of their writers might have been a matter of no vital importance to any one. Enlightened by the Spirit, this apostle might have discerned the pure gold of truth with no admixture of error in anonymous productions, and these productions, stamped with his approval, might have been welcomed by the churches without much desire or effort to ascertain who were their authors. The great name and authority of John would have proved sufficient for a time to satisfy reason and blunt the edge of curiosity. But if books were to be pronounced authoritative and assigned a place in the Canon by the common judgment of churches composed of uninspired men, it could only be done on the ground of confidence in their authors as men who were commissioned by the Lord to declare his truth, and assisted to do this by the Holy Spirit. And this appears to have been the principal, if not the sole, ground on which the books of the New Testament were accepted by the churches, in preference to all others, as authentic statements of fact, of doctrine, and of duty.
2. The Formation of the Canon was a Slow but Safe Process. - To understand this, the reader must picture to himself the condition of the churches when the last of the apostles died in Ephesus. For that condition was not such as to suggest the necessity of collecting at once the standard documents of Christianity into a single volume.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
