I. The arrangement of the various parts comprising the New Testament was
fluctuating in the second century; less so in the third. In the fourth
century the order which the books had commonly assumed in Greek MSS. and
writers was; the Gospels, the Acts, the Catholic Epistles, the Pauline,
and the Apocalypse. This sequence appears in the Vatican, Sinaitic,
Alexandrian and Ephrem (C) MSS.; Cyril of Jerusalem, in the 60th Canon of
the Laodicean Council, Athanasius, Leontius of Byzantium, &c.
II. Another order prevailed in the Latin Church, viz., the Gospels, the
Acts, the Epistles of Paul, the Catholic Epistles, and the Apocalypse.
This appears in Melito, Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Augustine,
Jerome, the Vulgate, the Councils of Carthage, held in A.D. 397 and 419;
and is now the usual arrangement.
Within the limits of the two general arrangements just mentioned, there
were many variations. Thus we find in relation to _the gospels_.
III. (_a_) Matthew, John, Luke, Mark; in the MSS. of the old Italic marked
_a_, _b_, _d_, _e_, _ff_, and in the cod. argenteus of Ulfila’s Gothic
version.
(_b_) Matthew, John, Mark, Luke; in the council of Ephesus A.D. 431, Cyril
of Alexandria, Theodoret, the stichometry of the Clermont MS. Such was the
usual order in the Greek Church of the fifth century.
(_c_) Mark is put first, followed by Matthew; in the fragment of a Bobbian
MS. of the Itala at Turin marked _k_.
(_d_) Matthew, Mark, John, Luke; in the Curetonian Syriac gospels. They
are mentioned in the same order in Origen’s I. Homily on Luke.
The reason of the order in, (_a_) and (_b_) lies in apostleship. The works
of apostles precede those of evangelists. The established sequence, which
is already sanctioned by Irenæus and Origen, has respect to the supposed
dates of the gospels. Clement of Alexandria says that ancient tradition
supposed those gospels having the genealogies to have been written before
the others.
IV. As to the _Acts of the Apostles_, not only is this work put
immediately after the gospels, which is the order in the Muratorian canon,
but we find it in other positions.
(_a_) Gospels, Pauline Epistles, Acts; in the Sinaitic MS., the
Peshito,(368) Jerome,(369) and Epiphanius.
(_b_) Gospels, Pauline Epistles, Catholic Epistles, Acts; in Augustine,
the third council of Toledo, Isidore, Innocent I., Eugenius IV., and the
Spanish Church generally.
(_c_) Gospels, Pauline, Catholic Epistles, Apocalypse, Acts; in the
stichometry of the Clermont MS.
V. As to _the Epistles of Paul_, besides the place they now occupy in our
Bibles, they sometimes follow the gospels immediately.
(_a_) Gospels, Pauline Epistles; the Sinaitic MS., Jerome, Epiphanius,
Augustine, the third council of Toledo, Isidore, Innocent I., Eugenius
IV., the stichometry of the Clermont MS.
(_b_) The usual order of the Greek Church is, Gospels, Acts, Catholic
Epistles, Pauline, &c., as in Cyril of Jerusalem, the Laodicean Council
(60), Athanasius, Leontius of Byzantium, the MSS. A. B., but not א. The
critical Greek Testaments of Lachmann and Tischendorf adopt this order.
(_c_) They are placed last of all in a homily attributed to Origen, but
this does not necessarily show that father’s opinion.(370)
(_d_) They stand first of all in a Gallican _Sacramentarium_ cited by
Hody.(371)
VI. With respect to the order of the individual epistles, the current one
has been thought as old as Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria. But the
proof of this is precarious. It appears in the fourth century, and may
have been prior to that. It is in Epiphanius, who supposes that the
arrangement was the apostle’s own. Not only was it the prevalent one in
the Greek Church, but also in the Latin as we see from the codex
Amiatinus, and the Vulgate MSS. generally. It rests upon the extent of the
epistles and the relative importance of the localities in which the
believers addressed resided.
(_a_) Marcion had but ten Pauline epistles in the following order:
Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, the
Laodiceans, (Ephesians), Colossians, Philemon, Philippians.
(_b_) 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Galatians,
1 and 2 Thessalonians, Romans, Philemon, Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy, to the
Laodiceans, the Alexandrians (the Epistle to the Hebrews); in the
Muratorian canon.
(_c_) Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians,
Thessalonians, Colossians, Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews; in
Augustine, and several MSS. of the Vulgate in England.(372)
(_d_) Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Thessalonians, Ephesians,
Philippians, Colossians, Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews; in the
so-called decree of Gelasius in the name of Hormisdas, in Labbe’s text.
But here different MSS. vary in regard to the position of the Thessalonian
epistles.
VII. The Laodicean letter was inserted either before the pastoral
epistles, as in several MSS. of the Vulgate in England; or before the
Thessalonian epistles preceding them; or at the end of the Epistle to the
Hebrews, as in a MS. of the Latin Bible at Lembeth. Its insertion in
copies of the Vulgate was owing to the authority of Gregory the Great, who
looked upon it as authentic.
VIII. The position of the Epistle to the Hebrews usually was either before
the pastoral epistles, _i.e._, immediately after those to the
Thessalonians; or after the pastoral ones and Philemon. The former method
was generally adopted in the Greek Church from the fourth century. The
latter prevailed in the Latin Church from Augustine onward.
(_a_) Pauline epistles to churches (the last being the second to the
Thessalonians), Hebrews, Timothy, Titus, Philemon; in the MSS. א, A. B. C.
H., Athanasius, Epiphanius; Euthalius,(373) Theodoret. Jerome mentions it
after the epistles of Paul to the seven churches as an eighth excluded by
the majority, and proceeds to specify the pastoral ones. But Amphilochius
and Ebedjesu the Syrian have the western order, viz., the following—
(_b_) Pauline Epistles, Hebrews (following immediately that to Philemon);
in Augustine and the Vulgate version generally. It is so in the canons of
the councils at Hippo and Carthage (A.D. 393 and 397), and in the MSS. D.
and G., in Isidore of Spain, and the council of Trent.
IX. With respect to the order of the _Catholic Epistles_, which were not
_all_ adopted into the canon till the end of the fourth century; Eusebius
putting all except 1 John and 1 Peter among the _antilegomena_; while
Jerome, and the council of Carthage (A.D. 397) admit them unreservedly;
the usual order, viz., James, 1 and 2 Peter, John, Jude, prevailed in the
Eastern Church. It is in the Peshito or old Syriac version, Eusebius,
Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, the 60th of the Laodicean canons,
Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Amphilochius, the stichometry of
Nicephorus, the MSS. א. A. B. C., and most Greek MS. But the 76th of the
Apostolic canons has Peter, John, James and Jude. The canon, however, is
comparatively late.
(_a_) Peter, John, Jude, James; in Philastrius of Brescia. If we may rely
on Cassiodorus’s account of Augustine, the African father followed the
same arrangement.
(_b_) Peter, James, Jude, John; in Rufinus.
(_c_) Peter, John, James, Jude; in the councils of Carthage, A.D. 397,
419, Cassiodorus, and a Gallican Sacramentarium. The Vulgate and council
of Trent follow this arrangement.
(_d_) John, Peter, Jude, James; in the list given by Innocent I., and the
third council of Toledo.
The Eastern church naturally set the Epistle of James, who was Bishop of
Jerusalem, at the head of the others; while the Western put Peter, the
Bishop of Rome, in the same place.
X. The Revelation varied little in position.
(_a_) In the decree of Galasius, according to its three recensions, the
Revelation follows Paul’s epistles, preceding those of John and the other
Catholic ones.
(_b_) In D or the Clermont MS. it follows the _Catholic_ epistles, and
precedes the Acts; which last is thrown to the end of all the books, as if
it were an appendix to the writings of the apostles.(374)