e found in our Gospels, the source of which,
however, is not mentioned, nor is any author's name indicated, _the
similarity or even identity cannot by any means be admitted as proof
that the quotation is necessarily from our Gospels, and not from
some other similar work now no longer extant_, and more especially
not when, in the same writings, there are other quotations from
sources different from our Gospels.... But whilst similarity to our
Gospels in passages quoted by early writers from unnamed sources
cannot _prove_ the use of our Gospels, variation from them would
suggest or prove a different origin, _and at least it is obvious
that anonymous quotations which do not agree with our Gospels cannot
in any case necessarily indicate their existence_ ... It is
unnecessary to add that, in proportion as we remove from Apostolic
times without positive evidence of the existence and authenticity of
our Gospels, so does the value of their testimony dwindle away.
Indeed, requiring, as we do, clear, direct and irrefragable evidence
of the integrity, authenticity, and historical character of these
Gospels, doubt or obscurity on these points must inevitably be fatal
to them as sufficient testimony--if they could, under any
circumstances, be considered sufficient testimony--for miracles and
a direct Divine Revelation like ecclesiastical Christianity."
[132:1]

Dr. Lightfoot must have been aware of these statements, since he has
made the paragraph on the silence of ancient writers the basis of his
essay on the silence of Eusebius, and has been so particular in calling
attention to any alteration I have made in my text; and it might have
been better if, instead of cheap sneers on every occasion in which these
canons have been applied, he had once for all stated any reasons which
he can bring forward against the canons themselves. The course he has
adopted, I can well understand, is more convenient for him and, after
all, with many it is quite as effective.

It may be well that I should here again illustrate the necessity for
such canons of criticism as I have indicated above, and which can be
done very simply from our own Gospels:

"Not only the language but the order of a quotation must have its
due weight, and we have no right to dismember a passage and,
discovering fragmentary parallels in various parts of the Gospels,
to assert