Epifile to the HEBaEVVs. Apoftk, properly' and firiEtlyfo called, nor hadApoftolical Miflionor Authority, but ra- Epcphan. asr therkerns to have beenone of the LXX. Difciples, asEpiphanius affirms. And Eufebius lib. z. to. a Perfon leis credulous than he, acknowledging that a juft and true Catalogue of them Eufeb. Erdlef. couldnot begiven, yet placeth Barnabas asthe firft of themconcerning whom all agreed. H`ß' l'r' °' I . Much weight indeed I (hall not layhereon, feeing it is evident that the Cataloguesgiven us by theAntients of thole Difciples , are nothing but a rude Coll'lionof Melt names asthey found in theBooks oftheNewTeftament, appliedwithout Reafon or Tellimony ; butApoftle he was none. . Many circumftances alfo conture to the removal of this conjecture. The Epifile was written in Italy, Chap. 13. 24. where itdoth not appear that Barnabas ever was. The fabulousAuthor, I confefi, of theRhapfedy called the RecognitionsofClemens, tells us that Barnabat went to Rome, taking along Clemens with him, and returning into Judea,' foundSt. Peter at Csfarea. But St. Luke. in the AP's gives us another account , both where Barnabar was, and how he was employed, at the time intimated by him who knew nothing of thofe things. For whiff} St. Peter was at Csfarea, Ads to. t. Barna- bat was atHierufalem, Ads 9.27. being a little while after tent to Antioch by the Apo- files ; chap. a a. za. Again Timothy was theCompanion ofthe Writer of this Epi¡fle. chap. s3.23. a Perfon as farasappears unknown unto Barnabas, being taken into St. Paul: Society after theirdifference and feparation,Ails 15. 39. chap. r.6. t . He had alfo been in bonds or imprifonment, chap. so. 34. whereof we cannot at that time learn any thing concerning Barnabas, thofe of St. Paul beingknown untoall. And laftly, not long be- fore' the Writingofthis Epifile,Barnabas was fo far from that Light into, and Appre- henfion of the nature ufe and expiration ofJudaical Ritesherein expreffed, that he was eafily mil-lead intoa prattieal mifcarriage in theobfervationofthem,Gabz.t 3.whereinal- Hier. Èpi/f: though fome ( after Hierom:fancy, that thedifference between St. Peter and St. Paulwas as Aupft. da only in pretence ) have laboured to free St. Peter and his Companions onother grounds coo. in cap.s. from any lìnful failing , as it fhould feem in a direct oppofition'unto the Teftimony of áro ai. St. Paul affirming that tialsysaisiii& ifs in that particular he was to be blamed or con- Edel. demned, v:r. t z. ( not unlike himwhobath written a juftification ofAaron in his ma= to 39,4s,41. king the Golden Calf) yet that Barnabas was not come up unto any conftancy in his Menceins de practice about Mofaical Inftitutions, is evident from theText. And fhallwe fuppole that vital. ssar. He who but a little before upon the coming of fome few Brethren of the Church of f eruJalem from St. Tames, durlt not avouch and abide by his own perfonal Liberty, but dcferted theufe of it not withoutfome blameable diJimulation, Gal. z. t3. fhouldnow with fo muchAuthority write an Epiftle unto that Church with St. lames, and all the Hebrewsin the world concurringwith them in Judgementand Pradice, about that ve- ry thing, wherein himfelf out of refped unto them had particularly mifcarried ? This certainly was rather the workofSt. Paul, whole Light andConftancy in the Doiïrine delivered in this Epiitk, with his engagements in the defenceof it, above all the ref' of the. Apo(tles, is knownfrom the (dory ofthe Alls, and his own other Writings. A oflos bath been thought by fome to be the Penman of this Epiftle; and that be- s . 6. caufe it anfwers theCharaller given ofhim. For it is Paid, that he was anEloquent'man, Lather in Gen:. mighty in the Scripture, fervent in Spirit, and one thatmightily convinced the Jews out tap48.v.ao of the Scripture it felt, Airs 18. 24, 28. all which things appear throughout this whole Difcourfe. But this Conjellarebath no Countenancefrom Antiquity, no mention be- ing made of anyEpiftle written by Apollo :, or of any thing elfe, fo that he. is not rec- koned by Hieromamong(' the Eccleiajtical Writers, nor by thofe who interpolated that work withConte Fragments out ofSophroniur. Nor ishe reported by Clemens, Origen, orEufebius, tohave beenby any efteemed the Author of this Epiftle.. However I con- fefs fomewhat ofmoment might have.been apprehended in the Obfervation mentioned, if the Excellencies afcribed unto Apollo:, had been peculiar unto.him s yea, had theynot all-of them been found in St. Patti, and that in a manner and. degree, more eminent than in theother.. But this being fo, the groundof this Conjel'ture is taken from under it. Origen,Eufebius, andHierom in theplaces forecited, mention areport concerningCome f¡. who afcribed this Epiftle untoClemens Romantic. None of them, give any Countenance unto it, or intimate any Grounds of that fuppofition; only Hierom affirms that there is fome Similitudebetween the Style ofthis Epiftle,and that of Clemens, which occafio- ned the fufpition of his Tranflating of it, whereofafterwards. Erafmas hath fence taken up that Report, and feems togive 'credit unto it, but hath not contributed any thing Erofsi, An, in ofReafonor Teftimony unto itsConfirmation. A WorthyHoly Man was this Clemens nO cap. 13. E2 doubt,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=