A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

Of the Epistle of St. Barnabas.

JOSEPH, Sirnamed by the Apostles 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that is to say, the Son of Consolation a 1.1, who was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Levite, and a Native of the Isle of Cyprus b 1.2, laboured even as much as the Apostles * 1.3 themselves in establishing the Foundation of the Christian Religion. Some of the ancient Wri∣t••••s c 1.4 affirm, that he was one of the 72 Disciples of Jesus Christ; but St. Luke makes menti∣on of him after such a manner, as induceth us rather to believe, that he was not admitted into the Fellowship of the Apostles until after our Saviour's Death. However it be, it is evident, that ever since that time he hath been reputed as one of the principal Preachers of the Gospel, and was deser∣vedly reckoned in the number of the Apostles. We have no certain account of his Life, but only what we find set down by St. Luke in the Acts.

He hath written (says St. Jerom,) an Epistle, which is full of Edification for the Church, although it be not Canonical: This Epistle is often cited by St. Clemens Alexandrinus d 1.5 and Origen e 1.6, who do not in the least doubt, but that it belongs to him whose Name it bears. It is true indeed that Eu∣sebius and St. Jerom place it in the Rank of Apocryphal Books f 1.7, nevertheless they do not deny that it was written by St. Barnabas; on the contrary they attribute it to him, declaring only, that it ought not to be esteemed of the same Authority as the Canonical Books, because although it really belongs to St. Barnabas, yet it is not generally received by the whole Catholick Church.

And it is upon this account that this Epistle is not amongst the Canonical Writings, because to cause a Book to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this Rank, it is not only sufficient that it was composed by an Apo∣stle, or a Disciple of the Apostles, but it is likewise requisite that it should be received as Canonical throughout all the Churches of Christ; otherwise the Treatise of Hermas, and the Epistle of St. Cle∣ment, ought also to be inserted in the Catalogue of Canonical Books. Therefore it is a very weak Argument to affirm, that the Epistle of St. Barnabas doth not appertain to this Apostle, because that if it were certainly his, it would have been reckoned in the number of the Canonical Writings; since before a Book can be owned as Canonical, it is necessary, whosoever is the Author thereof, that it should be acknowledged by the whole Church; because there are Books written by the Apostles, or their Disciples, that were not heretofore, and are not as yet placed in the Rank of Canonical Wri∣tings;

and on the contrary there are others, the Writers whereof are not certainly known, that have been formerly, and are now, inserted in the Canon of Holy Scripture, as in the New Testament, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Revelation; and several Books in the Old, the true Authors of which cannot be positively shewn. Besides, though it were true, that all Books are Canonical, which we know to have been written by Men who had Authority to make them so, yet who hath assured us, that St. Barnabas ought to be included in this number, rather than St. Clement, or Hermas? The Catholick Church hath a Right to declare it, and since she has not done it, this is a sufficient war∣rant to reckon his Epistle amongst the Apocryphal Writings, though it be really his.

Furthermore it hath been objected, that this Epistle is unworthy of St. Barnabas, and that it is not credible that so great an Apostle who was full of the Holy Ghost, and the Colleague of St. Paul, should be the Author of the most part of those things that are therein contained; such are the for∣ced Allegories, the extravagant and incongruous Explications of Holy Scripture, the various Fables concerning Animals, and several other Conceits of the like nature that are comprised in the first Part of this Epistle. To this I answer, That notwithstanding these Defects, St. Clement, Origen, Eusebius, and St. Jerom, attributed it unto him; and I am of the opinion, that it is a very great piece of Im∣pudence for any one to imagine himself to be more clear-sighted in this matter, than those exqui∣site Criticks of Antiquity: They lived much nearer the time of the Apostles than we do: They had a great number of Books composed by their Disciples which are now lost; and consequently, they were more capable than we are of judging of the Style and manner of Writing of the Apostles, and their Companions and Disciples. If then they have found that the Allegories, Mystical Explicati∣ons and Fables, that are found in the Epistle of St. Barnabas might be his, with what right can we positively assert, that they cannot be his? Certainly they must needs have but a very little know∣ledge of the Genius of the Jewish Nation, and of the Primitive Christians that were Educated in the Synagogue, who obstinately believe that these sort of Notions could not proceed from them; on the contrary, this was their Character: They had learned of the Jews to turn the whole Scripture into Allegory, and to make Remarks on the peculiar Properties of those Living Creatures that were prohibited to be eaten; therefore it is not to be admired that St. Barnabas, being by Nation a Jew, and writing to his own Countrymen, hath allegorically explained divers Passages of the Old Testa∣ment, in applying them to the New, and found out several Moral Reflections upon the Proprieties of those Creatures that were not permitted to be eaten by the Jews. The Epistle of St. Clemens Ro∣manus, and the Stromata of St. Clemens Alexandrinus, are full of this kind of Allegories and Figura∣tive Expressions. The History of the Phoenix, related by St. Clement in his Epistle to the Corinthi∣ans, so much celebrated among the Primitive Christians, seems to be more Fabulous than that which is alledged by St. Barnabas in this Epistle concerning the Properties of certain Animals; and the Allegory of the Blood of Jesus Christ typified by the Scarlet Thread of the Harlot Rahab, in the Epi∣stle of St. Clemens Romanus, is as far fetch'd as the greatest part of those of St. Barnabas. But what necessity is there to produce farther Proofs of a Matter of Fact that is so evident, since it is suffici∣ently known to all Men, that the Writings of the Primitive Christians are generally full of such Fa∣bles and Allegories?

Lastly, the Author of this Epistle is accused for representing the Apostles as the most flagitious Per∣sons in the World before their Conversion; but his Words have been taken in too strict and literal a sense; for he intended not to say, that they were the wickedest Men in the World, but only that they were great Sinners g 1.8.

It is not known to whom the Epistle of St. Barnabas is directed, because we want the Title; it appears from the Body of this Letter, that it was written to some converted Jews that adhered too much to the Law of Moses: It is divided into two Parts, in the first of which he shews the unprofi∣tableness of the Old Law, and the necessity of the Incarnation and Death of Jesus Christ, producing divers passages of Scripture relating to the Ceremonies and Precepts of the Old Law, which he ex∣plains Allegorically when he applies them to our Saviour and the New Law: The second Part com∣prehends particular Moral Instructions, containing several Rules and Directions concerning what ought to be done, and what ought to be avoided.

This Epistle was first published h 1.9 in Greek, together with the ancient Version by Menardus, and this Edition was printed at Paris by Piget in the Year 1645.

Afterwards the famous Dr. Isaac Vossius caused it to be reprinted with the Epistles of St. Ignatius revised and corrected from three Manuscripts, Anno Dom. 1646.

Lastly, Cotelerius published it, adding a new Translation è Regione, together with the old Version, entire, and certain Critical Remarks at the end. It is prefixed at the beginning of his Collection of the Works of the ancient Fathers, printed at Paris by Petit, Anno 1672.

The Greek Text of the four or five first Chapters is wanting in all these Editions, but they are ex∣tant in Latin in the ancient Version, which, although barbarous and defective, hath nevertheless ser∣ved to correct the Greek Original in some places.

Notes

• a 1.1

  THat is to say, the Son of Consolation.] In Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Son of Conso∣lation, or of Exhortation. Oecumenius on the Acts, chap. 36. and Notkerus in his Martyrology follow the first Interpretation; but St. Jerom seems to embrace the later.
• b 1.2

  A Native of the Isle of Cyprus.] This Island of Cyprus was full of Jews, and a very great number of them were massacred therein under the Reign of the Emperor Trajan, according to the Testimony of Di••, Eusebius, and Or••sius.
• * 1.3

  The Epistle of St. Bar∣nabas.
• c 1.4

  Some of the ancient Writers.] Those are St. Clemens Alex Stromat. lib. 2. Euseb. Hist. lib. 1. chap. 12. and lib. 2. chap. 1. St. Epiphan. Tom. 1. contra Haeres. & Dorothaeus. But venerable Bede rejects their opinion, because St. Luke in the 4th Chapter of the Acts de∣clares, That Barnabas was one of those that laid the Price of the Lands, and other Possessions that were then sold, at the Apostle's Feet; for though this doth not absolutely hinder, but that he might have been one of the Disciples of Jesus Christ; yet St. Luke seems thereby to infinuate, that this was the beginning of his Conversion to Christianity.
• d 1.5

  By St. Clemens Alexandrinus.] Stromat. lib. 2. p. 373, 375, 389, 396, and 410. Lib. 5. p. 571, 572. 577, and 578.
• e 1.6

  Origen.] Lib. 1. Con. Celsum; and Lib. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and Eusebius, lib. 3. Hist. c. 25. Lib. 6. c. 13. and c. 14. Tertullian in his Book De Pudicitiâ tells us, That St. Barnabas's Epistle was more generally recei∣ved by the Catholick Church than the Pastor. But he takes St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews to have been written by St. Barnabas.
• f 1.7

  In the Rank of Apocryphal Books.] Eusebius divides the Apocryphal Books into three Ranks, the first contain those that come nearest to the Canonical Writings, that is to say, those that are rejected by some, and received by others as Canonical, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the second are comprehended those Books that are not allowed as Canonical by any; but such as were not forged by Hereticks, as those are that belong to the third Rank. The Epistle of St. Barnabas ought to be reckoned a∣mong the first of these sorts, at least among the se∣cond; which, although Apocryphal, may neverthe∣less belong to those to whom they are attributed, as the Book of the Pastor, and others. And although St. Jerom declares in his Epistle to Laeta, that those Books are Apocryphal, that do not belong to the Au∣thors whose Name they bear, yet he too often makes use of this Term in another signification. Now that Eu∣sebius and St. Jerom believed that the Epistle of St. Barnabas was written by him, appears from hence that they constantly impute it to him; Euseb. lib. 6. chap. 13. Item ex Barnabae, Clementis, & Judae Epi∣stolis. It is certain, that he judged that the Epistles of St. Clement and St. Jude were really composed by those whose Names they bear; and in another place, Judae Epistolam intelligo, item Barnabae Epistolam, & Revelationem quae dicitur Petri. Where he makes a particular Mark on this last Book, viz. That it is a∣scribed to St. Peter, but he doth not declare the same thing with respect to the Epistle of St. Barnabas; on the contrary, he barely affirms, that it is his, as the Epistle of St. Jude belongs to St. Jude. St. Jerom likewise speaks expresly to the same effect; Barnabas unam aedificationem Ecclesiae continentem Epistolam com∣posuit, quae inter Apocryphas numeratur. Which plain∣ly shews, that he did not believe it to be Apocryphal, because of its being falsly attributed to St. Barnabas, since on the contrary he himself imputes it to him, in affirming that it is Apocryphal.
• g 1.8

  That they were great Sinners.] Thus the fol∣lowing Words ought to be interpreted. Super omne peccatum peccatores. Many very devout Persons have often used this Phrase, I am the greatest Sinner that ever lived in the World, and other Expressions of the like nature, which are not to be understood Literally.
• h 1.9

  Was first published in Greek, &c.] It is said, that there was an older Edition than Menardus's prin∣ted in England by the order of the Learned Usher, but that the whole Impression was burnt. We may add to these, another Edition of this Epistle published by Maderus in Germany at Helmstadt. [There have been two other Editions of this Epistle, one at Oxon 1685. in Duodecimo, wherein all that is in the old Latin Ver∣sion that is not in the Greek, as also all that is in the Greek that is not in the old Version, is printed with Red Letters: Lastly, Mr. Le Moyne has set it out in his Vari•• Sacra with large Comments at Leyden, in Quarto, 1685.]