28 PROLOGUE 1 



As I have already said, whoso defines the canon 

 defines the creed. 



Now it is quite certain with respect to some of 

 these books, such as the Apocalypse and the 

 Epistle to the Hebrews, that the Eastern and the 

 Western Church differed in opinion for centuries ; 

 and yet neither the one branch nor the other can 

 have considered its judgment infallible, since they 

 eventually agreed to a transaction by which each 

 gave up its objection to the book patronised by 

 the other. Moreover, the " fathers " argue (in a 

 more or less rational manner) about the canonicity 

 of this or that book, and are by no means above 

 producing evidence, internal and external, in 

 favour of the opinions they advocate. In fact, 

 imperfect as their conceptions of scientific method 

 may be, they not unfrequently used it to the best 

 of their ability. Thus it would appear that 

 though science, like Nature, may be driven out 

 with a fork, ecclesiastical or other, yet she surely 

 comes back again. The appeal to " antiquity " is, 

 in fact, an appeal to science, first to define what 

 antiquity is ; secondly, to determine what " anti- 

 quity," so defined, says about canonicity; thirdly, 

 to prove that canonicity means infallibility. And 

 when science, largely in the shape of the abhorred 

 " criticism," has answered this appeal, and has 

 shown that "antiquity" used her own methods, 

 however clumsily and imperfectly, she naturally 

 turns round upon the appellants, and demands 



