The Books of the New Testament | Page 4

more slowly. It consists of
what are called the "Catholic Epistles," viz. those of St. James, St. Peter,
St. John, and St. Jude, together with the Revelation or Apocalypse of St.

John.
A crowd of works circulated among the Christians of the {4} and
century, including some forged Gospels and Apocalypses, the Epistle
of St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, written about A.D. 95, and the
allegory known as the Shepherd of Hermas, written about A.D. 140.
Several of these works appear to have enjoyed a popularity in excess of
that which attached to some of the books now included in the canon.
Nevertheless they were rejected when they were examined. It was not
merely a wonderful intellectual feat on the part of the Church to have
sifted out this mass of literature; it was an action in which the Christian
cannot fail to see the hand of God.
One question remains to be asked after drawing this small sketch of the
history of the canon. Why is it that for several generations the canon of
the New Testament varied in different countries, containing fewer
books in one place than in another? Two reasons may be given: (i.)
Certain books at first enjoyed only a local popularity; thus "Hebrews
was saved by the value set upon it by the scholars of Alexandria, and
the Epistle of St. James by the attachment of certain Churches in the
East." (ii.) The books of the New Testament, when translated into other
languages, were not all translated together. The Gospels were naturally
translated first, as containing the words of our Lord. The other books
followed gradually. Interesting information is given us with regard to
the latter fact by the Doctrine of Addai, a Syriac book of which the
present form dates from about A.D. 400, but which appears to describe
the condition of the Syrian Church in the 3rd century. The writings of
Aphraates, a Syrian writer, A.D. 338, supplement this information. We
find from these books that about A.D. 160 the Syrian Christians
possessed a translation of the Gospels. Early in the 3rd century they
used a harmony of the Gospels with Acts and the Epistles of St. Paul.
In the 4th century they used also the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is fairly
evident, from the Doctrine of Addai, that only the Old Testament and
the Gospels were at first used by the Syrian Christians, and that St.
Paul's Epistles and Acts arrived later. And as late as {5} A.D. 338 they
knew nothing of the Catholic Epistles and Revelation, though these
books were well known by the Christians who spoke Greek and Latin.

[Sidenote: Ancient Versions.]
The most ancient versions or translations of the New Testament were in
those three great languages spoken by people who touched the borders
of the districts where Greek was spoken. These were Latin, Syriac, and
the Coptic language spoken by the Egyptians. It seems probable that a
large part of the New Testament was translated into these languages
within about a hundred years after the time of the apostles. The oldest
version in any language closely akin to English was that made by
Ulphilas, the celebrated bishop of the Goths, who translated the Bible
from Greek into Gothic about A.D. 350. There is a most beautiful
manuscript of this version preserved at Upsala, in Sweden. The Goths
were then settled in the country between the Danube and the Dnieper.
As late as the 17th century their language was still spoken in part of the
south of Russia. A carefully revised translation of the Latin Bible was
made by St. Jerome between A.D. 382 and 404, and this version came
to be used by the Church throughout the west of Europe.
[Sidenote: English Versions.]
The Gospel of St. John and perhaps the other Gospels were translated
by the patient historian and monk, the Venerable Bede, who was buried
at Durham in A.D. 731. Parts of the Bible, especially the Psalms, were
soon fairly well known through translations. King Alfred was
translating the Psalms when he died, in A.D. 901; and soon after A.D.
1000, Archbishop Aelfric translated large portions of the Bible. As the
language of England gradually changed, new versions of the Psalms
were made, and most of the Bible was known in a version made before
1360. But perhaps there was no complete version of the Bible in
English until the time of John Wyclif (1380). Wyclif translated most of
the New Testament of this version, and a priest named Hereford
translated the Old Testament. Wyclif held various {6} opinions which
the Church of England at that time condemned, and some of which she
still rightly condemns. The result was that in 1412 Archbishop Arundel
denounced Wyclif's version, but it seems to have been revised and to