follows, as being proved from the New Testament. Our Lord and His Apostles quote it, and refer to it continually, as the one absolute authority in all controversy, and they treat it as wholly inspired. This will be found borne out by an examination of their modes of quotation and reference, and the names and epithets which they apply to the Old Testament. No portion is excepted or subordinated. The whole of what was then held by the Jews as Scripture is endorsed; indeed, all the books, except six, are expressly quoted or referred to.

To know, therefore, what are the Canonical books of the Old Testament thus received by our Lord, the simple historical enquiry is needed-What books were at that time included in the Jewish Canon? The evidence is most clearly presented in an ascending order :

1. The Hebrew Canon of the Modern Jews is the same

as ours.

2. The Talmud, which was in process of compilation from about A.D. 150 to A.D. 600, recognises the same. There are also Targums belonging to those and earlier times, of our Canonical books, and of no others.

3. In the fourth century Jerome enumerates the same books as belonging to the Hebrew Canon.

4. In the third century Origen does the same.

5. In the second century Melito, Bishop of Sardis, gives the same testimony.

6. Josephus, in the first century, speaks of the books as Jerome did. He, moreover, says (evidently alluding to the Apocrypha) that 'books written since Artaxerxes Longimanus had not the same credit as those before that time, because the succession of prophets had failed.'

7. Philo's testimony is similar, but not so precise in detail. Hence it is concluded that what our Lord and the Apostles sanctioned as Holy Scripture was the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, as its books are enumerated in this Article.

But the version in almost universal use in the Early Church was that of the LXX.

This contained the Apocryphal books inserted by Alexandrian Jews.

There was scarcely any knowledge of Hebrew among Christians after the first century, and the whole of the LXX. was almost indiscriminately quoted by many early Christian writers. Yet it has been shown by many passages quoted in works on this subject that the Church in general, and her leading divines in particular, never lost sight of the distinction between the Canonical and Apocryphal books.

We may now thus sum up our reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha :

1. We receive the Jewish Scriptures on the authority of Christ and His Apostles.

2. We have seen what books the Jewish Scriptures of that age included.

3. Therefore the Apocrypha stands excluded, as being outside that catalogue, and, therefore, destitute of that authority.

4. Also (though not without some confusion), it stands excluded by the testimony of the Early Church; and in particular by that of Melito, Origen, Athanasius, Hilary, Jerome, the Council of Laodicea, &c.

Finally, if in the face of such a weight of primitive testimony the Council of Trent presumed to decree the reception of a large portion of the Apocrypha, it must be deemed the very arrogance of authority.

ARTICLE VII.

NOTES ON THE TEXT.

1. The Latin is very closely followed in the English version. In the Article of 1552, non sunt audiendi was read instead of male sentiunt, and the former is still to be seen in the English version, 'they are not to be heard.'

2. The Article obviously consists of two principal sections :I. What was the condition upon which salvation was obtained under the Law.

II. How far the Mosaic Law is binding upon Christians. This question involves the distinction between moral commandments, and precepts ceremonial, ritual, or civil.

3. This Article combines with some modifications the Sixth and Nineteenth of 1552. As it will throw some light on the subsequent discussion of the doctrines involved, and the errors which our Reformers had in view, those Articles are subjoined.

ARTICLE VI. (1552).

The Old Testament not to be refused.

The Old Testament is not to be put away as though it were contrary to the New, but to be kept still; for both in the Old and New Testaments, everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, Who is the only Mediator between God and Man, being both God and Man. Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory promises.

ARTICLE XIX. (1552).

All men are bound to keep the Moral Commandments of the Law. The Law which was given of God by Moses, although it bind not Christian men as concerning the Ceremonies and Rites of the same: Neither is it required that the Civil Precepts and Orders of it should of necessity be received in any common weal: Yet no man (be he never so perfect a Christian) is exempt and loose from the obedience of those Commandments which are called Moral. Wherefore they are not to be hearkened unto, who affirm that Holy Scripture is given only to the weak, and do boast themselves continually of the Spirit, of Whom (they say) they have learned such things as they teach, although the same be most evidently repugnant to the Holy Scripture.

THE PROOF FROM SCRIPTURE.

For the first section of the Article :

1. Such passages may be alleged from the Old Testament

as show that the old Fathers' had a hope reaching beyond the grave (e.g. Ps. xvi. 8-11).

2. Positive declarations made by our Lord about the hope of the Patriarchs (e.g. John viii. 56).

3. The demonstration of the doctrine of justification by faith drawn by St. Paul from the Old Testament (e.g. Rom. iv.; Gal. iii).

4. The eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

5. The frequent declarations of Christ and the Apostles as to the true bearing of the (Old Testament) Scriptures on gospel times and promises.

The second section of the Article may be dealt with scripturally under such an arrangement as follows:

1. A consideration of the relation of the civil law to the theocracy of the Old Testament. It relates to a limited country, and to a past condition of a peculiar race. It is not possible for any nation at will to set up a similar theocracy. Therefore, the civil law which depends upon it cannot be re-enacted and enforced.

2. St. Paul teaches obedience to magistrates generally; and to laws, irrespective of any revealed origin. The declaration of our Lord is express—' My kingdom is not of this world.'

3. St. Paul argues urgently not only that the Christian is free from the ceremonial law, but that he may not place himself under it. The Epistles to the Romans and Galatians may be freely quoted on this head. Gal. v. 3 is, in fact, a demonstration. The obligation of the Law is bound up with the rite of circumcision, and absolutely ceases with it.

4. The Epistle to the Hebrews asserts and argues in many places the transitory nature and the abolition of the sacrificial system (e.g. Heb. viii. 13).

5. To the moral law the above considerations will not apply, because it was antecedent to the peculiarities of the Jewish Law. It was adopted in the law, but was itself older than the law, and remains when the Mosaical super-addition has passed away.

Hence Christ and His Apostles recognise the Ten Com