author of _Supernatural
Religion_ himself. Speaking of this extract from Irenaeus, he says,
'Nothing could be further from the desire or intention of Eusebius than
to represent any discordance between the Gospels [209:2].' I do not
indeed join in the vulgar outcry against the dishonesty of Eusebius.
Wherever I have been able to investigate the charge, I have found it
baseless. We have ample evidence that Eusebius was prepared to face the
difficulties in harmonizing the Gospels, when the subject came properly
before him. But here he might fairly excuse himself from entering upon a
topic which had no bearing on his immediate purpose, and which once
started would require a lengthy discussion to do justice to it. Moreover
it is obvious that he is very impatient with Papias. He tells us twice
over that he has confined his extracts to the very narrowest limits
which bare justice to his subject would allow [209:3]; he warns his
readers that there are a great many traditions in Papias which he has
passed over; and he refers them to the book itself for further
information. Though exceptionally long in itself compared with his
notices of other early Christian writers, his account of Papias is, we
may infer, exceptionally brief in proportion to the amount of material
which this father afforded for such extracts.

6. I have said nothing yet about the direct testimony of a late
anonymous writer, which (if it could be accepted as trustworthy) would
be decisive on the point at issue.

In an argument prefixed to this Gospel in a Vatican MS, which is
assigned to the ninth century, we read as follows:--

The Gospel of John was made known (manifestatum), and given to the
Churches by John while he yet remained in the body (adhuc in
corpore constituto); as (one) Papias by name, of Hierapolis, a
beloved disciple of John, has related in his exoteric, that is, in
his last five books (in exotericis, id est, in extremis quinque
libris); but he wrote down the Gospel at the dictation of John,
correctly (descripsit vero evangelium dictante Johanne recte). But
Marcion the heretic, when he had been censured (improbatus) by him,
because he held heretical opinions (eo quod contraria sentiebat),
was cast off by John. Now he had brought writings or letters to him
from the brethren that were in Pontus [210:1].

No stress can be laid on testimony derived from a passage which contains
such obvious a