This question may be brought to a speedy issue, with all unprejudiced judges. These books were either written by divine inspiration for the guidance of the church in matters of faith and practice, or they were not; if the former, they always had a right to a place in the Canon; if the latter, no act of a Pope or Council could render that divine, which was not so before. It would be to change the nature of a fact, than which nothing is more impossible.

It is alleged, with much cónfidence, that the Greek Bibles, used by the Fathers, contained these books; and, therefore, whenever they give their testimony to the Sacred Scriptures, these are included. This argument proves too much, for the third book of Esdras and the prayer of Manasses were contained in these volumes, but these are rejected by the Romanists. The truth, however, is, that these books were not originally connected with the Septuagint; they were probably introduced into some of the later Greek versions, which were made by heretics. These versions, particularly that of Theodotion, came to be used promiscuously with that of the LXX; and to this day, the common copies contain the version of the book of Daniel by Theodotion, instead of that by the LXX.

By some such means, these Apocryphal books crept into the Greek Bible; but the early Fathers were careful to distinguish between them and the Canonical Scriptures, as we have already seen.

That they were read in the churches is also true; but not as Scripture; not for the eonfirmaation of doctrine; but for the edification of the common people.

Some of the Fathers, it is true, cited them as authority, but very seldom, and the reason which rendered it difficult for them to distinguish accurately between Ecclesiastical and Canonical books has already been given, These pious men were generally unacquainted with Hebrew literature, and finding all these books in Greek, and frequently bound up in the same volume, as the Canonical Scriptures; and observing that they contained excellent rules for the direction of life and the regulation of morals, they sometimes referred to them, and cited passages from them, and permitted them to be read in the church, for the instruction and edification of the people.

But the more learned of the Fathers, who examined into the authority of the sacred books with unceasing diligence, clearly marked the distinction between such books as were Canonical, and such as were merely human compositions. And some of them even disapproved of the reading of these Apocryphal books by the people; and some councils warned the churches against them. It was with this single view that so many catalogues of the Canonical books were prepared, and published.

Notwithstanding that we have taken so much pains to shew that the books called, Apocrypha, are no

Canonical, we wish to avoid the opposite extreme of regarding them as useless, or injurious. Some of these books are important for the historical information which they contain; and, especially, as the facts recorded in them are, in some instances, the fulfilment of remarkable prophecies.

Others of them are replete with sacred, moral, and prudential maxims, very useful to aid, in the regulation of life and manners ; but even with these, are interspersed sentiments, which are not perfectly accordant with the word of God. In short, these books are of very different value, but in the best of them there is so much error and imperfection, as to convince us, that they are human productions, and should be used as such: not as an infallible rule, but as useful helps in the attainment of knowledge, and in the practice of virtue. Therefore, when we would exclude them from a place in the Bible, we would not proscribe them as unfit to be read ; but we would have them published in a separate Volume, and studied much more carefully, than they commonly have been.

And while we would dissent from the practice of reading lessons from these books, as Scriptural Lessons are read in the church, we would cordially recommend the frequent perusal, in private, of the first of Maccabees, the Wisdom of Solomon, and above all, Ecclesiasticus.

It is a dishonour to God, and a disparagement of his word, to place other books, in any respect, on a le

I

vel with THE DIVINE ORACLES; but it is a privilege to be permitted, to have access to the writings of men, eminent for their wisdom and piety. And it is also a matter of curious instruction to learn, what were the opinions of men, in ages long past, and in countries far remote.

SECTION VI.

NO CANONICAL BOOK OF THE OLD TESTAMENT HAS BEEN LOST.

On this subject, there has existed some diversity of opinion. Chrysostom is cited by Bellarmine, as saying, "That many of the writings of the prophets had perished, which may readily be proved, from the history in Chronicles. For the Jews were negligent; and not only negligent but impious, so that some books were lost through carelessness, and others were burned, or otherwise destroyed." In confirmation of this opinion, an appeal is made to 1 Kings iv. 32, 33, where it is said of Solomon, That he spake three thousand proverbs, and his songs were a thousand and five. And he spake of trees, from the cedar in Lebanon, even unto the hyssop, that springeth out of the wall: he spake also of beasts, and of fowl, and of creeping things, and of fishes. All these productions, it is acknowledged, have perished.

Again it is said in 1 Chron. xxix. 29, 30. Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer. With all his reign, and his might, and the times that went