[Doctrina foederum, sive systema theologica didacticae et elencticae (Amstelodami , 1691)]

Johannes Braunius (1628–1708), a venerable divine of the Dutch Reformed tradition, was born at Kaiserslautern in the year of our Lord 1628, and was trained in sacred learning at the illustrious University of Leiden, where he sat under the eminent Johannes Coccejus. Nurtured in the federal and covenantal theology of the Reformation, Braunius gave himself to the laborious study of the Hebrew tongue and the Levitical institutions of the Old Testament, wherein he discerned types and shadows of gospel mysteries. He ministered as a faithful pastor and was later appointed to the chair of theology at the University of Groningen in 1681, a post he held unto his death nearly three decades thereafter. His life was adorned not only with erudition, but with devotion, uniting the careful exposition of Scripture with reverence for the covenant mercies of God. Among his chief works stands Vestitus Sacerdotum Hebraeorum, a deep and learned commentary upon the vestments and ordinances of the Aaronic priesthood, drawn from the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapters of Exodus and the sixteenth of Leviticus, showing forth the typological beauty of the ceremonial law as fulfilled in Christ. Likewise, his Doctrina Foedorum offered a comprehensive system of didactic and elenctic theology, built upon the foundation of federal theology, expounding the covenant of works and grace with scholastic clarity. In all his writings, Braunius exhibited that rare balance of penetrating intellect and humble piety, ever seeking the edification of the church and the glory of the Redeemer, whose garments of righteousness he found prefigured in those of the ancient priesthood. He fell asleep in the Lord in the year 1708, full of days and full of faith.

Johannes Braunius (1628–1708), a venerable divine of the Dutch Reformed tradition, was born at Kaiserslautern in the year of our Lord 1628, and was trained in sacred learning at the illustrious University of Leiden, where he sat under the eminent Johannes Coccejus. Nurtured in the federal and covenantal theology of the Reformation, Braunius gave himself to the laborious study of the Hebrew tongue and the Levitical institutions of the Old Testament, wherein he discerned types and shadows of gospel mysteries. He ministered as a faithful pastor and was later appointed to the chair of theology at the University of Groningen in 1681, a post he held unto his death nearly three decades thereafter. His life was adorned not only with erudition, but with devotion, uniting the careful exposition of Scripture with reverence for the covenant mercies of God. Among his chief works stands Vestitus Sacerdotum Hebraeorum, a deep and learned commentary upon the vestments and ordinances of the Aaronic priesthood, drawn from the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapters of Exodus and the sixteenth of Leviticus, showing forth the typological beauty of the ceremonial law as fulfilled in Christ. Likewise, his Doctrina Foedorum offered a comprehensive system of didactic and elenctic theology, built upon the foundation of federal theology, expounding the covenant of works and grace with scholastic clarity. In all his writings, Braunius exhibited that rare balance of penetrating intellect and humble piety, ever seeking the edification of the church and the glory of the Redeemer, whose garments of righteousness he found prefigured in those of the ancient priesthood. He fell asleep in the Lord in the year 1708, full of days and full of faith.

Table of Contents:

<aside>

Chapter III: Of the Canon, Apocryphal Books, Traditions, & the Enthusiastic Spirit

</aside>

I. The Canonical Books as the Rule of Faith

The books of Holy Scripture are not unfitly called Canonical, for they are the Canon and rule of faith and godliness; for the faithful walk kata ton kanona tes pisteos (according to the rule of faith, Galatians 6:16). See also Philippians 3:16; 2 Corinthians 10:13, 15-16. By the ancients, they were called athikographoi (testamentary writings), for they are the instrument of the covenant of God; and they are the books of both the Old and New Testaments. The books of the Old Testament, according to Josephus, are numbered twenty-two, after the letters of the alphabet. By others, they are called esrim ve-arba’ah (twenty-four), also by reason of the alphabet, namely by adding those which make up the name Yahweh according to the ancient Chaldean script. But they are wont to be distinguished by the Jews into Torah, Nevi’im, u-Ketuvim (Law, Prophets, and Hagiographa). By the Law, they understand the five books of Moses. The Prophets they further distinguish into Rishonim (Former) and Acharonim (Latter): the Former, from Moses until the death of Solomon and the schism of Jeroboam and Rehoboam; and the Latter, which are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve Minor Prophets. The Hagiographa are Chronicles, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, and Lamentations. They are also called in the New Testament the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 22:40). Christ also divideth the books of the Old Testament into the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:25), as doth also Josephus against Apion, Book 1, into five books of Moses, thirteen of the Prophets, and four of Hymns.

II. The Books of the New Testament

The books of the New Testament are either Historical, such as the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles; or Dogmatic, such as the Epistles of Paul, James, Peter, John, and Jude; or Prophetic, namely the Apocalypse and certain others; for even the Gospels and Epistles contain in parables and sundry places certain prophetic things.

III. The Authenticity & Perpetuity of the Canon

All these books are authentic, both as to history, for whatsoever they contain agreeth with the truth of history; and as to norm, for they contain the perfect rule of faith and manners. And they are all a perpetual Canon in the Christian Church, nor is any book, nor any part, whether of the New or Old Testament, to be cast out or called unprofitable:

  1. For Christ came not to destroy, but to fulfill the Law (Matthew 5:17).
  2. For Christ Himself sendeth men unto Moses and the Prophets (John 5:39; Luke 16:29; 24:27).
  3. For they are of the same authority and utility, not only for proving history, but also that they might teach doctrines: so that the Anabaptists, Socinians, Remonstrants, and others do not rightly teach the contrary, and they have the same God as their author, because pasa graphe (all Scripture), no less the Old than the New Testament, is theopneustos (God-breathed, 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21).

Impious therefore is the dogma of the Manichees and Marcionites, who ascribe the Old Testament unto an evil God, but the New unto a good God. Nor shall the Anabaptists ever prove that the Old Testament is to be cast out of the Christian Church:

  1. That in the New Testament the covenant of grace is sufficiently clearly revealed. For the New Testament must be proved from the Old, and the Old from the New, and so the Old and New Testaments are to be joined, as two witnesses (Revelation 11:3), and as the song of Moses and the Lamb (Revelation 15:3).
  2. If the Law and the Prophets prophesied until John (Matthew 11:13), yet the Old Testament is not abrogated: but by this expression it is indicated that John was the forerunner of Christ.
  3. Christ is called the end of the Law (Romans 10:4): first, because He is the scope of the Law; second, because Christ put an end to the servitude of the ceremonial Law. In the same sense:
  4. The Old Testament is said to be abolished (Hebrews 8:13), because by the coming of Christ the economy of the Old Testament ceaseth, that is, the ceremonies, sacrifices, and such shadows of the Messiah to come have vanished.

IV. Rejection of Apocryphal Books

We therefore reject from the Canon those books which are commonly called Apocryphal, such as the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, Baruch, the Additions to Daniel and Esther, the Prayer of Manasseh, the Appendices to Job, Psalm 151, the Preface to Jeremiah, Third and Fourth Ezra:

  1. Because the oracles of God were delivered unto the Jews (Romans 3:2; Psalm 147), yet they never acknowledged these books: for Josephus testifieth that after Artaxerxes, no books were added to the sacred code (Against Apion, Book 2).
  2. Because they were not written for the edification of the Church, since most of them were composed in Greek and Latin, which languages the Jews could not understand.
  3. Because Christ and the Apostles make no mention of them.
  4. Because they are not recorded as Canonical by the Councils of Nicaea and Laodicea.
  5. Because they are rejected by Jerome, Rufinus, Cyprian, Athanasius, and others.
  6. Because they abound with manifest errors and lies.
  7. Because they have not the marks of divinity.

Evilly therefore do the Papists, especially the Council of Trent in the year 1546, canonize the greatest part of them and receive them into the Canon. Nor doth it avail them that the Council of Carthage calleth them Canonical in the fourth century: for that Council was provincial, and the Papists themselves reject it beyond that, because it admitteth not transmarine appeals. Finally, it is to be noted that the ancients established a twofold Canon: one Divine, which contained the books given by God; another Ecclesiastical, which comprehended certain of the Apocrypha, and were admitted by the Church to be read publicly as useful. In this sense only are the Apocryphal books called Canonical, not in the Divine Canon, but in the Ecclesiastical. Finally, if even the Apocrypha were cited by Christ, the Apostles, and the Fathers, yet it followeth not that they are of divine authority; for the Apostles also cite poets: Epimenides (Acts 17:28), Aratus (1 Corinthians 15:33), and Callimachus (Titus 1:12). We also reject as spurious the books of Enoch, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistles of Barnabas, Clement, and to the Laodiceans, the Sibylline books, and other pseudepigrapha.

V. Rejection of Papal Traditions

Also to be rejected are all the authoritative traditions, as they are called, of the Papists, drawn from the dregs of the Pharisees, Donatists, and other ancient heretics, such as decrees and decrees of the Pope in matters of faith and doctrine. Foolishly do the Papists distinguish between Traditions Divine, which Christ Himself instituted; and Apostolic, which have the Apostles as authors, and are of equal divine authority with the former, outside the Word of God; and finally Ecclesiastical, which were introduced by prelates or the people, and gradually acquired the force of law. But that such traditions ought not to be received by the Christian Church is evident:

  1. Because the Holy Scripture alone is perfect and apt to make the man of God perfect and wise unto salvation (2 Timothy 3:15-17).
  2. Because Christ Himself sendeth us unto it alone (John 5:39; Luke 16:29): “They have Moses and the Prophets.”
  3. Because it is expressly forbidden that anything be added or taken away from Holy Scripture (Deuteronomy 4:2). “If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues” (Revelation 22:19).
  4. Because under the New Testament we are theodidaktoi (taught of God, John 6:45; Jeremiah 31:31), and we have no teacher but Christ speaking in His Word (Matthew 23:8, 10; 1 Corinthians 8:6).
  5. Because the origin of traditions is doubtful, their authority uncertain, their sense perplexed, their bulk immense.
  6. Because they are oft contrary to themselves.
  7. Because they are the mark of the beast in the hand and forehead of the wicked (Revelation 13:16; 20:4), whereas we ought to have only the Word of God in our forehead and in our hands (Deuteronomy 6:8).

VI. The True Meaning of Apostolic Traditions