who were so exceedingly dear to him? Knowing their prejudices concerning the Levitical law, what subject could he select more appropriate for their instruction and edification, than the abrogation of the Levitical priesthood, and the surpassing excellence of Christ's person and office, especially of his true, spiritual, and eternal priesthood, of which the Levitical priesthood was but a shadow, and of which the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews has treated so largely ?

together with his manner of reasoning, is a sure mark by which [ii.] Secondly, If an author's method of treating his subjects, he may be ascertained (as all good judges of composition allow) we shall without hesitation pronounce Paul to be the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

(1.) The general arrangement or method pursued in this Epistle corresponds with that of Paul in his other Epistles.

by Optatus of Milevi in Africa, about 370, is doubtful. It was received as Paul's by Ambrose, bishop of Milan, about 374; by the Priscillianists about 378. About the year 380 was published a commentary upon thirteen Epistles of Paul only, ascribed to Hilary, deacon of Rome. It was received as Paul's by Philaster, bishop of Brescia in Italy, about 380; but he takes notice that it was not then received by all. His successor Gaudentius, about 387, quotes this Epistle as Paul's; it is also readily received as Paul's by Jerome about 392; and he says it was generally received by the Greeks, and the Christians in the East, but not by all the Latins. It was received as Paul's by Ruffinus in 397; it is also in the catalogue of the third council of Carthage in 397. It is frequently quoted by Augustine as Paul's. In one place he says, "It is of doubtful authority with some, but he was inclined to follow the opinion of the churches in the East, who received it among the canonical Scriptures." It was received as Paul's by Chromatius, bishop of Aquileia in Italy, about 401; by Innocent, bishop of Rome, about 402; by Paulinus, bishop of Nola in Italy, about 403. Pelagius about 405 wrote a commentary upon thirteen Epistles of Paul, omitting that to the Hebrews; nevertheless it was received by his followers. It was received by Cassian about 424; by Prosper of Aquitaine about 434, and by the authors of the works ascribed to him; by Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, in 434; by Sedulius about 818; by Leo, bishop of Rome, in 440; by Salvian, presbyter of Marseilles, about 440; by Gelasius, bishop of Rome, about 496; by Facundus, an African bishop, about 540; by Junilius, an African bishop, about 566; by Cassiodorus in 556; by the author of the imperfect work upon Matthew, about 560; by Gregory, bishop of Rome, about 590; by Isidore of Se-style, and conclusion, appear, at the close of the Epistle to the Hebrews. ville about 596; and by Bede about 701, or the beginning of the eighth century.2

From the preceding testimonies it is evident, that within about thirty years at most after this Epistle was written (for its date, see p. 356. infra) “it had acquired such currency and credit, that the church at Rome, the metropolitan of the world, in a letter addressed by Clement their bishop to the church at Corinth, made repeated appeals to it as a book of divine authority, and in such a way as to imply a knowledge and acknowledgment of it by the Corinthian church, similar to their own. Further, Justin Martyr has evidently appealed to its contents as sacred, A. D. 140; about which time, or not long after, it was inserted among the canonical books of the New Testament by the churches of the East and West: and consequently it must have had, a period very little after the apostolic age, a currency and a credit not at all or at most very little inferior to that of other acknowledged books of the New Testament."3

2. INTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS IS THE GENUINE PRODUCTION OF SAINT PAUL. [.] In the first place, Paul cherished an ardent zeal and affection towards his kinsmen according to the flesh. (Rom.ix. 1-4., &c.)

And can we think it likely that he should never write to those

1 The non-recognising of this epistle as St. Paul's production "by all the Latins," according to Jerome, and the circumstance of its being "of doubtful authority with some" in the Latin church, according to Augustine, are thus accounted for by Hug. The Western church was kept actively employed by the Montanists. In vindication of their tenet, that those guilty of grievous transgressions should be irrevocably cut off from the church, they relied especially on Hebrews vi. 4, 5, as we learn from Tertullian (de Pudicitia, c. 20.) and Jerome (adv. Jovinian, 1. ii. c. 3.); on which accouut the ministers of the Latin church made cautious and sparing use of this epistle. Not long probably after the death of Irenæus, the presbyter Caius assumed the tone of clamorous opposition against this epistle, in a work which he published against the Montanists and from that time this opinion was adopted by the greater part of the Latin church. Even the Montanists themselves receded from their original position on this subject, and in their polemical works received this epistle only as far as its authority was acknowledged by their opponents, namely, as a production of an apostolical teacher, Barnabas, or Clement, &c. About forty years after Caius's attack, arose the Novatians; who, as we learn from Jerome, Augustine, Epiphanius, Theodoret, and others, also used the passage Heb. vi. 4, 5. as the principal defence of their tenets. While the Greeks were calm spectators of the contest, and evaded the argument from Heb. vi. by their interpretations, the Latin churches were led by the pressure of circumstances to deny the authority of the book, whose contents they were unable to refute. But the Latin to which they could appeal: the whole controversy proceeded on the ground of internal evidence. It was for this reason that Jerome and Augustine could not adopt the opinion of the church to which they belonged; because they were convinced of the contrary by the testimony of the ancients and their influence tended to give, at a subsequent day, a different turn to the opinion of the Latin church. Schmucker's Biblical Theology, vol. i. pp. 115, 116. Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 516-525.

churches had no ecclesiastical tradition, no authority of earlier churches

2 Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 391-395.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 329–331. In his notes there are references to the various parts of the preceding volumes, in which the extracts from the above named fathers are to be found.

• Stuart's Commentary, vol. i. p. 109.

His method of procedure is the same with that of his other Epistles, which was also peculiar to him. He first lays down the doctrinal myste ries of the Gospel, vindicating them from oppositions and exceptions; and then he descends to exhortations to obedience, deduced from them, with an enumeration of those moral duties of which it was necessary to remind those Christians to whom he wrote. In this respect the Epistle to the Hebrews bears the greatest resemblance to the Epistle to the Galatians, and especially that addressed to the Romans. Like thein, the former half of exhortations intermixed, which the strength of the writer's feelings plainly this Epistle (ch. i.-x. 19.) is principally doctrinal, but with occasional appears to have forced from him. From ch. x. 20. to the end, the Epistle salutatory part begins, the writer earnestly asks for a special interest in is hortatory and practical. "In the Epistle to the Romans, just before the the prayers of those whom he addressed, in order that he may be delivered from the power of persecution, and he follows this request with a petition, that the God of Peace-ons TAS Bus-might be with them, and con cludes with an Amen. (Rom. xv. 30-33.) The very same order, petition, (xii. 18-21.) The writer begs an interest in their prayers, that he may be restored to them the sooner; commends them to the God of Peace (an expression used no where else but in Saint Paul's writings and in the Epistle to the Hebrews); and concludes with an Amen." Similar coinci (Professor Stuart adds, to the Philippians and Thessalonians also); which dences as to method occur in the epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians conclude with an Amen before the salutation.

(2.) In this letter, we find that overflowing of sentiment briefly expressed, which distinguishes Paul from every other sacred writer.

"Therein also are abrupt transitions from the subject in hand to some

thing subordinate, but at the same time connected with it; which, having pursued for a little while, the writer returns to his subject, and illustrates it by arguments of great force, couched sometimes in a short expression, and sometimes in a single word,-all which are peculiar to Paul. In this Epistle, likewise, contrary to the practice of other writers, but in Paul's manner, we meet with many elliptical expressions, which are to be supplied either from the foregoing or from the following clauses. In it also, as in Paul's acknowledged Epistles, we find reasonings addressed to the thoughts of the reader, and answers to objections not proposed; because, being obvious, the writer knew they would naturally occur, and therefore needed to be removed. Lastly, after Paul's manner, the author of the epistle to the Hebrews has subjoined to his reasonings many exhortations to piety and virtue; all which, to persons who are judges of writing, plainly point out the apostle Paul as the author of this Epistle."

(3.) Many things in this Epistle (too numerous and indeed too obvious to require any enumeration) evidently manifest that its author was not only mighty in the Scriptures, but also exceedingly well skilled in the customs, practices, opinions, traditions, expositions, and applications of Scripture, then received in the Jewish church.

"In the Epistle to the Hebrews, we find such enlarged views of the divine dispensations respecting religion; such an extensive knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures, according to their ancient and true interpretation, which Paul, no doubt, learned from the celebrated doctors under whose tuition he studied in his younger years at Jerusalem; such a deep insight also into the most recondite meanings of these Scriptures, and such admirable reasonings founded thereon for the confirmation of the Gospel revelation, as, without disparagement to the other apostles, seen to have exceeded, not their natural abilities and education only, but even that degree of inspira tion with which they were endowed. None of them but Paul, who was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, and who profited in the Jewish religion and learning above many of his fellow-students, and who in his riper years, was intimately acquainted with the learned men of his own nation (Acts ix. 1, 2. 14. xxvi. 4, 5.), and who was called to the apostleship by Christ himself, when for that purpose he appeared to him from heaven,-nay, who was caught up by Christ into the third heaven,-was equal to the subjects treated of in this most admirable Epistle."

[iii.] In the third place, Not only does the general scope of this Epistle tend to the same point, on which Saint Paul lays so much stress in his other Epistles, namely, that we are justified and obtain salvation only through Jesus Christ, and that the Mosaic institutions cannot effect this object; but there are

Stuart's Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, vol. i. pp. 152, 153.; or pp. 185-187. of the London edition. Schmidii Hist. et Vindicatio Canonis, pp. 665, 666. Owen on the Hebrews, vol. i. Exercitation 2.

Of these parenthesis see an example in Heb. i. 2-4., in which the truth of the Gospel is argued from the dignity of Christ's person; in verse 5. the discourse is continued from the first verse. See other instances in Heb. iii. 7-11. 14. and iv. 2, &c.

• Macknight's Preface to the Epistle to the Hebrews, Sect. I. § iii. 1 Ibid.

various DOCTRINAL PROPOSITIONS in this Epistle, which are | Christ was offered to bear the sins of many. (Heb. ix. 28.) He tasted found in the other acknowledged Epistles of Paul.

That the apostle should more abound with testimonies and quotations "This Epistle commences with the declaration, that God, who in times out of the Old Testament in this than his other epistles, is nothing more past spake to the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken to than the subject of which he treats, and the persons to whom he wrote, us by his Son. (Heb. i. 1. ii. 1.) Judaism was revealed only by the media- necessarily required. Thus, Psal. ii. 7. "Thou art my Son: to day I have tion of angels (ii. 2.), while Christianity was revealed by the Son of God, begotten thee;" is quoted and applied to Jesus (Heb. i. 5.) just as Paul, in and abundantly confirmed by miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. (ii. 3, 4.) his discourse to the Jews in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, cited and The ancient covenant was imperfect with respect to the means which it applied the same passage of Scripture to him. (Acts xiii. 33.) In like furnished for the diffusion of knowledge; but the new covenant provides manner, the quotation and explanation of Psal. viii. 4. and of Psal. cx. l., that all shall know the Lord from the least to the greatest. (viii. 9-11.) given by Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 25. 27. are found in Heb. ii. 7, 8. So also the exThe law was only a sketch or imperfect representation of religious bless-planation of the covenant with Abraham (Heb. vi. 14. 18.) is nowhere found ings; while the Gospel proffers the blessings themselves. (x. 1.) The but in Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. (iii. 8. 9. 14. 18.)a worthies of ancient times had only imperfect views of spiritual blessings, while Christians enjoy them in full measure. (xi. 39, 40.)"

close of this Epistle, which evidently prove that it was written | should lead to the conclusion that it was not written by Paul." by Paul. Thus,

(1.) Heb. xiii. 23. The departure of Timothy is mentioned; and we know from the commencement of the Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon, that he was with Paul during his imprisonment at Rome. (2.) Heb. xiii 24. They of Italy salute you: the writer, therefore, was then in Italy, whither Paul was sent a prisoner, and where he resided two years (Acts xxviii. 30.); where also he wrote several Epistles which are still extant.

(3.) Heb. x. 34. The apostle makes mention of his bonds, and of the compassion which the Hebrew Christians showed him in his sufferings, and during his imprisonment. Now it is scarcely credible, that any other person in Italy, where Paul

Those who have thought differently have mentioned Barnabas, Luke, and Clement, as authors or translators of this Epistle. The opinion of Jerome was, that "the sentiments are the apostle's, but the language and composition of some one else, who committed to writing the apostle's sense, and, as it were, reduced into commentaries the things spoken by his master." Dr. Lardner conjectures that Paul dictated the Epistle in Hebrew, and that another, who was a great master of the Greek language, immediately wrote down the apostle's sentiments in his own elegant Greek; but who this assistant of the apostle was, is altogether unknown. But surely the writings of Paul, like those of other authors, may not all have the same precise degree of merit; and if, upon a careful perusal and comparison, it should be thought that the Epistle to the Hebrews is written with greater elegance than the acknowledged compositions of this apostle, it should also be remembered that the apparent design and contents of this Epis tle suggest the idea of more studied composition, and yet that there is nothing in it which amounts to a marked difference of style."4 Besides the sublime subject of this Epistle, the grand ideas which the apostle developes with equal method and warmth, did not permit him to employ the negligent style of a familiar the same construction of sentences, and the same style of exOn the other hand, as we have already seen, there are pression, in this Epistle, which occur in no part of the Scriptures except in Saint Paul's Epistles.6

letter.

Upon the whole, we conclude with Braunius, Langius, Carpzov, Pritius, Whitby, Lardner, Macknight, Hales, Rosenmaller, Bengel, Bishop Tomline, Janssens, De Groot, Professor Stuart, and almost every other modern commentator and biblical critic, that the weight of evidence, both external and internal, preponderates so greatly in favour of Paul, that we cannot but consider the Epistle to the Hebrews as written by that apostle; and that, instead of containing "far-fetched analogies and inaccurate reasonings" (as the opponents of our Saviour's divinity and atonement affirm), its composition is more highly wrought, and its language more finished, than any of Paul's other Epistles, and that it affords a finished model of didactic writing.

then was, should write to the Hebrew Christians, and therein make mention of his own bonds, and of Timothy being with him, who was a man unknown to them except through Paul, and not once intimate any thing concerning his condition. Besides, the constant sign and token of Paul's Epistles, which himself had publicly signified to be so (2 Thess. iii. 17, 18.), is subjoined to this:-Grace be with you all. (Heb. xiii. 25.) That this was originally written with his own hand, there is no ground to question; but rather appears to be so because it was written: for he affirmis, that it was his custom to subjoin that salutation with his own hand. Now this was an evidence to the persons to whom the original of the Epistle first came, but not to those who had only transcribed copies of it. The salutation itself was their token, being peculiar to Paul; and all these circumstances will yet receive some additional force froin the consideration of the time when this Epistle was written. (See par. iv. in the next column.) Is it possible that all these coincidences (which are comparatively a small selection) can be the effect of mere accident? The arrangement and method of treatment, the topics discussed, and the peculiarity of sentiments, words, and phrases, are all so exclusively Pauline, that no other person could have been its author, except the great apostle of the Gentiles. Yet, notwithstanding this strong chain of proof for the authenticity of this Epistle, doubts have still been entertained, whether it is a genuine production of Saint Paul. These doubts rest principally on the omission of the writer's name, and the superior elegance of the style in which it is written. 1. It is indeed certain that all the acknowledged Epistles of Paul begin with a salutation in his own name, and that most of them were directed from some particular place, and sent by some special messengers; whereas the Epistle to the Hebrews is anonymous, and is not directed from any place, nor is the name of the messenger introduced by whom it was sent to Judæa. These omissions, however, can scarcely be considered as conclusive against the positive testimony already adduced. And they are IV. With regard to the time when this Epistle was written, satisfactorily accounted for by Clement of Alexandria, and by Je- critics and commentators are not agreed, some referring it to rome, who intimate, that as Jesus Christ himself was the pecu-A. D. 58, but the greater part placing it between A. D. 61 and liar apostle to the Hebrews (as acknowledged in this epistle, iii. 1.), 61. If (as we believe) Paul was its author, the time when Paul declined, through humility, to assume the title of an apostle. it was written may easily be determined; for the salutations To which Theodoret adds, that Paul being peculiarly the apos- from the saints in Italy (Heb. xiii. 24.), together with the tle of the uncircumcision, as the rest were of the circumcision apostle's promise to see the Hebrews shortly (23.), plainly (Gal. ii. 9. Rom. xi. 13.), he scrupled to assume any public cha-intimates that his imprisonment was then either terminated. racter when writing to the people of their charge. He did not or on the point of being so. It was therefore written from mention his name, messenger, or the particular persons to whom Italy, perhaps from Rome, soon after the Epistles to the it was sent, because (as Dr. Lardner judiciously remarks) such Colossians, Ephesians, and Philemon, and not long before a long letter might give umbrage to the ruling powers at this Paul left Italy, viz. at the end of A. D. 62, or early in 63. It crisis, when the Jews were most turbulent, and might endanger is evident from several passages, as Lardner and Macknight himself, the messenger, and those to whom it was directed. But have observed, that it was written before the destruction of they might easily know the author by the style, and also from Jerusalem, and probably, Professor Stuart thinks, but a short the messenger, without any formal notice or superscription. But time before that event; for in Heb. viii. 4. ix. 25. x. 11. and the absence of the apostle's name is no proof that the Epistle to xiii. 10. the temple is mentioned as then standing, and the the Hebrews was not written by Paul, or, that it is a treatise or Levitical sacrifices are noticed as being then offered. To homily, as some critics have imagined; for, in our canon of the which we may add, that in x. 32-37. the apostle comforts New Testament, there are Epistles universally acknowledged to the believing Hebrews under the persecution which their be the production of an inspired apostle, notwithstanding his unbelieving brethren were carrying on against them, by the name is nowhere inserted in them. The three Epistles of John prospect of Christ's speedy advent to destroy Jerusalem and are here intended, in all of which, that apostle has omitted his the whole Mosaic economy. name, for some reasons not now known. The first Epistle begins in the same manner as the Epistle to the Hebrews; and in the other two, he calls himself simply the elder or presbyter. That Paul, however, did not mean to conceal himself, we learn from the Epistle itself:-"Know ye," says he, "that our brother Timothy has been sent abroad, with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you." (Heb. xiii. 23.) The objection, therefore, from the omission of the apostle's name, necessarily falls to the ground. 2. With regard to the objection, that this Epistle is superior in point of style to Paul's other writings, and therefore is not the production of that apostle, it is to be observed, that "there does not appear to be such a superiority in the style of this Epistle as

Schmidii Hist. Canonis. p. 665. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 402, 403.; 4to. vol. iii. p. 335. Owen on the Hebrews, part i. exercitation 2. The hypothesis of Berger, that the Epistle to the Hebrews was originally an homily, is examined and refuted by Prof. Stuart. Commentary, vol. i. pp. 4-7, or pp. 4-9. of the London edition.

Michaelis thinks it highly improbable that Paul would visit Jerusalem again, and expose his life to zealots there. But surely, Dr. Hales remarks, he night revisit Judæa without incurring that danger. Analysis of Chronology vol ii book ii p. 1130.

V. The occasion of writing this Epistle will be sufficiently
The Jews
apparent from an attentive review of its contents.
did every thing in their power to withdraw their brethren,
who had been converted, from the Christian faith. To perse-
cutions and threats, they added arguments derived from the
excellency of the Jewish religion. They observed, we may
infer, that the law of Moses was given by the ministration
of angels; that Moses was far superior to Jesus of Nazareth,
of God, instituted by their great legislator and prophet, was
who suffered an ignominous death; that the public worship
truly splendid and worthy of Jehovah while the Christians,
on the contrary, had no established priesthood, no temple, no
altars, no victims, &c. In opposition to such arguments, the
at Jerusalem strongly denied; viz. that Jesus of Nazareth,
apostle shows, what the learned doctors, scribes, and elders
whom they had lately put to death, was the Messiah, the

Bishop Tomline's Elements of Christian Theology, vol. i. pp. 455, 456.
See pp. 354, 355, supra.

The objections of Bertholdt and others, taken from the style of the
Epistle to the Hebrews, are examined in detail, and refuted by Professor
Stuart, vol. i. p. 180. et seq.

The Epistle to the Hebrews, Dr. Hales observes, is a mas(ii. terly supplement to the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, and also a luminous commentary on them; showing The superiority of Christ over angels asserted, notwithstand- that all the legal dispensation was originally designed to be ing his temporary humiliation in our nature (ii. 5-9.); with- superseded by the new and better covenant of the Christian. out which he could not have accomplished the work of man's dispensation, in a connected chain of argument, evincing the The internal excellence redemption (ii. 10—15); and for this purpose he took not upon of this Epistle, as connecting the Old Testament and the profoundest knowledge of both. him the nature of angels, but that of Abraham. (ii. 16-18.) New in the most convincing and instructive manner, and eluSECT. 2. His superiority to Moses, who was only a servant, cidating both more fully than any other Epistle, or perhaps whereas Christ is Lord. (iii. 1-6.) Application of this argument to the believing Hebrews, who than all of them, places its divine inspiration beyond all are solemnly warned not to copy the example of their un-in other parts of the New Testament, stated, proved, and doubt. We here find the great doctrines, which are set forth believing ancestors who perished in the wilderness. (iii. 7—

applied to practical purposes, in the most impressive manner.

1 Heidegger, Enchiridion Biblicum, pp. 600-611. Dr. Owen's Exercitations on the Epistle to the Hebrews, pp. 1-44. fol. edit. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 381-415.; 4to, vol. iii. pp. 324-341. Macknight's Preface to the Hebrews, vol. iii. pp. 321-341. 4to. edit. or vol. v. pp. 1-27. 8vo. edit. Brannii Comment. in Epist. ad Hebræos, pp. 1-36. Carpzovii Exercitationes in Epist. ad Hebræos, pp. xii.-evi. Schmidii Hist. et Vindicatio Canonis, pp. 655-673. Langii Commentatio de Vita et Epistolis Apostoli Pauli, pp. 153-160. J. A. Ernesti Lectiones Academicæ in Epist. ad He. bræos, pp. 1-8. 1173-1185. 8vo. Lipsia, 1815. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 192 -269. Dr Hales's Analysis of Chronology, vol. ii. pp. 1128-1137. Pritii Introd. ad Lectionem Nov. Test. pp. 38-61. 312-318. Rosenmüller, Scholia

SECT. 4. The typical nature of the tabernacle and its furniture, and of the ordinances there observed. (ix. 1-10.) SECT. 5. The sacrifice of Christ is that true and only sacrifice by which all the Levitical sacrifices are abolished. (ix. 11-cos Vet. et Nov. Test. pp. 332-310. Alber, Institutiones Hermeneutic 28. x. 1—18.)

in Nov. Test. vol. v. pp. 142-148. Moldenhawer, Introd. ad Libros Canoni Nov. Test. toin. i. pp. 211-250. Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 488-53. Janssens, Hermeneutique Sacrée, tom. ii. pp. 61-68. Whitby's and Scott's

PART II. The Application of the preceding Arguments and Commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews.

CHAPTER IV.

ON THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.

SECTION I.

ON THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.

I. Origin of the Appellation Catholic Epistles.-II. Its Antiquity.-Observations on their Authenticity.—III. On the Order in which they are usually placed.

I. THE Epistles of Paul are followed in the canon of the II. The denomination of Catholic Epistles is of very conNew Testament by seven Epistles, bearing the names of the siderable antiquity, for Eusebius uses it as a common appelapostles James, Peter, Jude, and John. For many centu-lation in the fourth century, and it is probably earlier; for ries, these Epistles have been generally termed Catholic Epistles,—an appellation for which several conjectures have been assigned.

3. A third opinion is that of Dr. Hammond, adopted by Dr. Macknight and others, which we think is the most proDable. It is this:-The first Epistle of Peter and the first Epistle of John, having from the beginning been received as authentic, obtained the name of catholic or universally acknowledged (and therefore canonical) Epistles, in order to distinguish them from the Epistle of James, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the Epistle of Jude, concerning which doubts were at first entertained, and they were considered by many as not being a rule of faith. But their authenticity being at length acknowledged by the generality of the churches, they also obtained the name of catholic or universally received Epistles, and were esteemed of equal authority with the rest. These Epistles were also termed canonical by Cassiodorus in the middle of the sixth century, and by the writer of the prologue to these Epistles, which is erroneously ascribed to Jerome. The propriety of I. this latter appellation is not satisfactorily ascertained. Du Pin says that some Latin writers have called these Epistles canonical, either confounding the name with catholic, or to denote that they are a part of the canon of the books of the New Testament.