Exercitations on the Epistle to the Hebrews

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.

Now by the Title which is wanting, either the meer Titular superscription, the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews, is intended; or the Inscription of his name, with an Apostolical Salutation conjoyned, 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 antient 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.

§ 16 Various Answers have been given to this Objection, some of them of no more validity, than its self. Hierom replies, it hath no mans name prefixed, therefore we may by as good Reason, Say it was written by no man, as not by Paul; which Instance though it be approved by Beza with other learned men, and not sufficiently answered by Erasmus with a contrary instance, yet indeed it is of no value; for being written, it must be written by some body, though not perhaps by St. Paul. Some have thought, that it may be, the Inscription inquired after was at first prefixed, but by some means or other hath been lost. But as there are very many Arguments and Evidences to evince the weakness of this imagination, so the beginning and entrance of the Epistle is such, as is uncapable of any contexture with such a Salutation, as that used in other Epistles, as is also that of St. John, so that this Conjecture can here have no place.