is time to go on to the other part of this discourse, and consider what may be fit to be observed concerning them all together, as they are now set forth in our own language, in the following collection. 2. Now the first thing that may be fit to be taken notice of is, that the following collection is truly what the title pretends it to be, a full and perfect collection of all the genuine writings that remain to us of the Apostolical Fathers; ånd carries on the antiquity of the church, from the time of the holy Scripture of the New Testament, to about one hundred and fifty years after Christ. 3. To make this the more evident, it will be necessary for me to consider, what those other writings are which some have endeavoured to raise up into the rank of Apostolical antiquity, and shew that they are indeed writings either of no credit nor authority at all, or at least not of such as they are falsely pretended to be. And to the end I may proceed the more clearly in this inquiry, I will divide the several now to be examined into the three following ranks: the first, of those which are antecedent to any I have here collected, as being pretended to have been written either by our Saviour Christ himself, or by the Virgin Mary, or by the Apostles. The second, of such other tracts as are ascribed to some of those Fathers whose genuine remains I have here put together. And the third, of such pieces as are said to have been written by some other authors who lived in the Apostolical times; and wrote, if we will believe some men, several books much more considerable than any I have here collected. 4. Of the first of these kinds is that pretended letter of our blessed Saviour to Abgarus, king of Edessa, a little city of Arabia, (h) a part of which country was subject to him. Now this may seem to be of so much the better credit, in that Eusebius(i) tells us that he had himself faithfully translated it out of the Syriac (h) Vid. Annot. Valessii in Euseb. p. 18, 19. (i) Hist. Eccles. lib. i. c. 13. language, as he found it in the archives of Edessa.. Nor was it long after, that Ephræm,(k) a deacon of that church, made mention of this communication between our Saviour and Abgarus, as the occasion of the first conversion of that place; and exhorted his people upon that account, the rather to hold fast to their holy profession, and to live worthy of it. Evagrius() who wrote about two hundred years after this, not only confirmed all that had been said by both these, but added, from Procopius, several other circumstances, unknown, for aught appears to either of them; particularly, that of the impression which our Saviour had made of his face upon a napkin, and sent to that prince; which he tells us, was of no small advantage to them in the defence of their town against Chosroes, king of Persia, who by this means was hindered from taking of it. How this circumstance came to be added to this relation, or by whom it was first invented I cannot tell. But that both the intercourse reported by Eusebius between our Saviour and this prince, and the report of this picture being brought to him, have been received as a matter of unquestionable truth in those parts, the authority of Gregorius Abulpharius(m) will not suffer us to doubt: who in his history published by our learned Dr. Pocock, both recites the letters, and records the story in terms very little different from what the Greek writers before mentioned, have done. 5. And now, since the addition of this new circumstance, to the old account of this matter; it is not to be wondered if the patrons of images among the Greeks, .from henceforth contended with all earnestness for the truth of both. Insomuch that we find they instituted a particular festival in memory of it, August the 16th. and transcribed at large the whole history of this adventure into their Menæon, and recited it upon it. (k) Testam. S. Ephrem inter. Oper. p. 788. 6. It is, I suppose, upon the same account that some of our late authors, though they do not care to assert the truth of this story, are yet unwilling to deny all credit to it. Baronius(o) reports both the relation and the Epistle from Eusebius, but will not answer for the truth of either. Spondanus(p) delivers the same from the Cardinal, that he had done from Eusebius, and passes no censure either one way or other upon it only in his margent he observes that. Gretser, the Jesuit, in his discourse of images, &c. had vindicated the authority of our Saviour's Epistle to Abgarus, from the exceptions of Casaubon in his exercitations upon Baronius against it. Gerard Vossius(q) in his scholia upon the testament of St. Ephræm, contents himself to refer us to the authority of the antients for the truth of this relation; who, he pretends, did without controversy look upon it to be authentic. And Valesius himself(r) though he plainly enough shews that he was not out of all doubt concerning the truth of this story, yet neither does he. utterly reject it; but rather endeavours to rectify those errors that seemed the most considerable in it. 7. But others, even of the Church of Rome, have not observed so much caution in this particular. They roundly stand by the censure of Pope Gelasius(s) who pronounced this Epistle of our Saviour's to be Apocryphal and not only shew by many probable arguments the falseness of it; but what is yet more, pass the same censure upon the story of the image too that Casaubon(t) had done, notwithstanding all that Gretser could say in favour of. Natalis Alexander(u) delivers this conclusion concerning it: the Epistle of Abgarus to our Saviour, and his answer to (0) Annal Eccl. ann. 31. num. 60. (1) Epitom. Annal. Baron. Annal. 31, num. 22. (g) Annot, ad Oper. Ephræm. Syr. page 796. (r) Annot. in Euseb. hist. Eccles. page 25. a. (3) Apud Gratian. Dist. 15. c. c. Simon hist. Crit. du n. t. chap. iii. page 23. (t) Exereit. in Baron. 13. § 31, page 289. (u) Sæcul. i. vol. i. page 266. it, are suppositious and apocriphal; and at large answers all that is usually urged in favour of them. And Du Pin(x) after him, yet more solidly convinces it of such manifest errors, as may serve to satisfy all considering persons, that Eusebius and Ephrem were too easy of belief in this particular; and did not suf ficiently examine into it, when they delivered that as a certain truth, which from several circumstances appears to have been evidently otherwise. 8. I shall not need to say any thing of the opinions of the learned men of the reformed religion(y) as to this matter, who generally agree in the same censure. But yet seeing both Eusebius and St. Ephrem have spoken with such confidence of this story, whose authority ought not to be lightly esteemed; I shall chuse rather the middle sort,(z) to leave it to every one to judge as he pleases, than determine any thing in this And that they may the better do it, I will subjoin at length the two Epistles, as they are rendered by Eusebius from the original Syriac into Greek; and from him translated into our own tongue. case. THE EPISTLE OF ABGARUS TO OUR BLESSED SAVIOUR. 9. "Abgarus Prince of Edessa, to Jesus the good Saviour, who has appeared in the country about Jerusalem, Health. I have received an account of thee, and thy cures, how without any medicines or herbs they are done by thee. For report says, that thou makest the blind to see, the lame to walk; that thou cleansest the lepers, and castest out unclean spirits and devils, and healest those who have laboured under long diseases, and raisest up the dead. And having heard all this concerning thee, I have concluded (x) Nouvelle Bibl. vol. i. page 1. (y) Vid apud Basnagium Exercit. hist. Crit. in Baron. ad ann. 43, num. 18, page 430. (z) Casaubon. Exerc, in Baron. 13, page 289. Montacutius Orig. Eccles. tom. i. part. 2, page 63. Cav. hist. literaria, § i. p. 1, in Jesu Christo, with myself one of these two things; either that thou art God, and that being come down from heaven, thou doest all these mighty works; or that thou art the Son of God, seeing thou art able to perform such things. Wherefore by this present letter I entreat thee to come unto me, and to cure me of the infirmity that lies upon me. For I have also heard that the Jews murmur against thee, and seek to do thee mischief. For I have a small but fair city, which may be sufficient both for thee and me." THE ANSWER OF OUR SAVIOUR TO ABGARUS. 10. Abgarus, thou art blessed, in that though thou hast not seen me, thou hast yet believed in me. For it is written concerning me, that those who have seen me should not believe in me, that so they who have not seen me, might believe and live. As for what thou hast written unto me, that I should come to thee, it is necessary that all those things for which I was sent, should be fulfilled by me in this place: and that having fulfilled them, I should be received up to him that sent me. When therefore I shall be received into Heaven, I will send unto thee some one of my disciples, who shall both heal thy distemper, and give life to thee, and to those that are with thee." 11. Having said thus much concerning this pretended intercourse between our Saviour Christ and this Prince, I should in the next place mention the letters ascribed to his mother, the blessed Virgin Mary, but that there is not the least shadow of truth to give credit to them; nor any arguments brought in favour of them, that may deserve a refutation. I shall therefore say nothing to these, but pass on without any more ado, to those pieces which have been attributed either to some particular Apostle or Evangelist; or else are pretended to have been composed by the whole college of the Apostles together. 12. Of the former kind is the Epistle of St. Paul |