Exercitations on the Epistle to the Hebrews

Secondly, It is excepted, that the Epistle is [Greek or Hebrew], the name of Paul being not § 15 prefixed unto it, as it is say some, unto all the Epistles written by him. And this indeed is the Womb, wherein all other Objections have been conceived. For this being once taken notice of, and admitted as an Objection, the rest were but fruits of mens needless diligence, to give countenance unto it. And this exception is Ancient, and that which alone some of old took any notice of; for it is considered by Clemens, Origen, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius, and generally all that have spoken any thing about the Writer of this Epistle. Nor doth the strength that it hath, lye merely in this, that it is without Inscription; for so is the Epistle of St. John, concerning which, it was never doubted but that he was the Author of it; but in the constant usage of Paul, prefixing his name unto all his other Epistles; so that unless a just Reason can be given, why he should divert from that custom in the Writing of this, it may be well supposed to be none of his.

Secondly, It is excepted, that the Epistle is 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, the name of Paul being not § 15 prefixed unto it, as it is say some, unto all the Epistles written by him. And this indeed is the Womb, wherein all other Objections have been conceived. For this being once taken notice of, and admitted as an Objection, the rest were but fruits of mens needless diligence, to give countenance unto it. And this exception is Antient, and that which alone some of old took any notice of; for it is considered by Clemens, Origen, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius, and generally all that have spoken any thing about the Writer of this Epistle. Nor doth the strength that it hath, lye meerly in this, that it is without Inscription; for so is the Epistle of St. John, concerning which, it was never doubted but that he was the Author of it; but in the constant usage of Paul, prefixing his name unto all his other Epistles; so that unless a just Reason can be given, why he should divert from that custome in the Writing of this, it may be well supposed to be none of his.

Now by the Title which is wanting, either the mere Titular superscription, the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews, is intended; or the Inscription of his name, with an Apostolical Salutation conjoined, in the Epistle it self. For the First, it is uncertain of what Antiquity the Titular Superscriptions of any of the Epistles are: but most certain, that they did not Originally belong unto them, and are therefore destitute of all Authority. They are things, the Transcribers it may be have at pleasure made bold withal, as with the Subscription also of some of them, as to the place from whence they were sent, and the persons by whom. Though this therefore should be wanting unto this Epistle, as there is some variety both in ancient Copies of the Original, and Translations about it, the most owning and retaining of it; yet it would be of no moment, seeing we know not, whence, or from whom, any of them are. The Objection then is taken from the want of the wonted Apostolical Salutation; which should be in, and a part of the Epistle. And this is the substance of what on this account is excepted against our Assertion.