in the Eucharift, and thereupon condemn the Catholicks, who would not communicate with them. But I shall not fpend any time in this Enquiry, nor write a large Comment on a Text, which perhaps is of too little Authority to deferve it. I fuppofe it will eafily be granted, that the Fourth Century was nearer the firft Preludes to the Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation, which thefe Words feem to hint at, than the Beginning of the Second; and that therefore the Fourth is the more proper Age for our Enquiries concerning thefe Hereticks before us than either the Firft or Second. Yet was it proper to fet down this Paffage here, to put Men upon the farther Enquiry after thefe hitherto unknown Hereticks; that fo, if they can be any where found, fome more Light may thereby be afforded to the Origin and Author of thefe -Epiftles before us.

(7.) Thefe Smaller Epiftles cannot belong to Ignatius, becaufe of thofe many later Expreffions, abfurd Reasonings, diforderly Periods, and that perplexed way of Writing, which is quite difagreeable to his own Stile, Character, and Time; and to the Stile, Language, and Genius of the Apoftles, and of the other Apoftolical Men in thofe early Ages. For notwithstanding the prefent Difpute about the Genuine Writings of Iguatius, we have two fure ways of judging, by the Stile and Contents of the feveral Copies, whether they belong really to this Father, or no: The one is from the Stile, Language, and Genius of his Contemporaries and Fellow Bifhops, fuch as Clement and Polycarp; with thofe of all the Sacred Books of our Religion befide; whence the first Chriftians fram'd their Notions and Expreffions about Sacred Things. The o ther is from fuch Parts as are common both to

C 2

the

AdSmyrn

Se&t. 1.

the Larger and Smaller Editions, especially the
Epiftles to the Romans, and to Polycarp, which,
as we shall note hereafter, are almoft the fame
in both, and fo afford us a true Tafte of his
Stile and Language, and help us to a plain Me-
thod of Examination, whether the Parts pecu-
liar to the Larger, or thofe peculiar to the Smal-
ler Copies, do beft agree to the Stile and Geni-
us of Ignatius. To which Tryals I do now ap-
peal, and am willing to be determin'd by them
in the present Argument: And do not fear to
affirm, that, if these be allow'd fair Rules of
Arbitration, the Smaller Epiftles must be cer-
tainly condemn'd, and the Larger alone must be
own'd for Genuine. This I fhall prove by a
large Induction of particular Examples or Paf
fages, taken out of those Parts of the Smaller
Epiftles, which are peculiar to the fame; and
fhall be so fair as neither to infift on all that
might be produc'd, for then I must have fet
down almost every Expreffion that is peculiar to
them; they being generally of a piece, awk-
ward, confufed, and abfurd: Nor to fet down
any Paffages from the Medicean Copy alone,
where the Old Verfion of the fame gives any
room for Excuse and Apology, as if they were
not in the Greek Copy which that Tranflator
made ufe of. Which Equity I am also willing
to allow in this Cafe; fince 'tis plain that the
Medicean Copy it felf is the worft in the World,
and has great need of all the Advantages poffible.
(1.) In the Epiftle to Smyrna, we have this Ex
preffion in the Larger Copy concerning Chrift
crucify'd, 'Aq'ues: Which is very
છે
clear Šenfe. But in the Smaller 'tis 'Ap' açrë
ñuêïs a cujus fructu nos: The Meaning of which
Words are to me fomewhat obfcure.

(2.) Soon

(2.) Soon after we have these Words in the Sect. 2: Smaller concerning the δοκηταί. Και καθώς φρονίαν και συμβήσε αυτοῖς, ἔσιν ἀσωμάτοις καὶ δαιμονικοῖς. Ἐ quemadmodum fapiunt & accidet ipfis, exiftentibus incorporeis & damoniacis. Which I own I do not underftand; unless they imply that thefe Hereticks, when once unbodied, should never rife again in their Bodies; contrary to the undoubted Chriftian Doctrine in that Matter,

"

(3.) Prefently after follow thefe Words, Madee πλανάπω καὶ τὰ ἐπερόνια, καὶ ἡ δόξα ἢ ἀγγέλων, κ οι ἄρχον. Set. 6. τες ὁρατοὶ καὶ ἀόρατοι ἐὰν μὴ τις βωμού [τιςδύσωσιν] εἰς τὸ ἅιμα Xetsk κακείνοις κρίσις ὅτιν. ὁ χωρῶν χωρεί τω τόπος μηδένα quor. Nullus erret: & fupercæleftia, & gloria angelorum, & principes vifibiles & invifibiles fi non credant in fanguinem Chrifti & illis judicium eft. Qui capit capiat; qualiter nullus infletur. Whether this Doctrine explain'd in this Manner be true, will it felf admit of great Difpute. However, I observe the Coherence is here very poor, in Comparison of that in the Larger Copy; and that the Words run here, as if the invifible World were principally concern'd in the Death of Chrift: And yet the Conclufion is wholly turn'd to this visible World. So that the Larger Copy does certainly reafon beft, as its Doctrine is certainly true; Whereas the Reafoning of the Smaller is very obfcure; and its Doctrine not a little queftionable also.

(4.) A little lower we have this Paffage, concerning probably thofe Hereticks which this Author fays abfented from the Chriftian Affemblies already mention d; Σιέφερεν ἢ αὐτοῖς ἀγαπᾶν, Selt. 7. iva xavasw. Conferens autem effet ipfis diligere, ut refurgant. The Meaning of which Words I do not well understand, unless they intimate the fame Opinion which seems to be fuppos'd above, viz. That thefe Hereticks were to expect no Refur

C 3

S.13.

Refurrection at all. If fo, Ignatius could not write a Doctrine fo entirely contrary to the first Principles of Chriftianity.

τ

(5.) In the fame Epiftle we have these Words, Kai Ta's mag Jéves, Ta's ego as jugas. Et Virgines vo catas viduas. How Virgins fhould be called Widows in the Days of Ignatius, tho' when they were ancient they might be fuftain'd in common with them, I do not well understand. Efpecially when the Larger Copy here, and all the like Parallel Places of Antiquity elsewhere, fpeak diftinctly of thefe two Orders in the Church.

X

(6.) In the Smaller Epiftle to Polycarp we have Ad Poly- this Claufe; Ἵνα τα φαινόμενα σε εἰς πρόσωπον κολα carp. §.2.dns. Ut manifefta in tuam faciem blandiaris. The Larger I easily understand, where the Verb is navos ons. But what Senfe to make of nonand's I cannot tell: Nor can I imagine how fo improper a Word came into this place.

5.5.

§. I.

Ad

(7.) In the fame Epiftle we have thefe Words, της κακοτεχνίας φαγε μᾶλλον ἢ πεί τέτων ὁμιλίων ποιν Malas artes fuge: magis autem de his homeliam faci This is directly contrary to the Coherence, to leave out the negative Particle in the laft Claufe; and equally contrary to the Larger Copy alfo.

N

(8.) In the very Beginning of the Smaller Epiftle to the Ephefians, we have thefe Words, 'AvaAdEphef. ζωπυρήσαντες ἐν διματι Θεῖ. Reaccendentes in fangui ne Chrifti Dei. If thefe Words, as is univerfally fuppos'd, relate to the Famous Text in the Acts of the Apostles, where we now read 'Ennanoiar Θεό, ἣν πειεποιήσατο διὰ τὰ ἰδις αιματος, they are plainly of the Fourth Century: It appearing from Dr. Mills, that no Copy, Verfion, or Citation, had that Verse so till Athanafius. Nay, fince the Latin here has both Chrifti, Dei; juft as fome Copies in the Acts have weite, one wou'd

A&s xx.

28.

think

think the feveral Interpolations arofe from the fame Original, or had fome near Relation one to another. But whether that be fo or not, this Paffage is a fhrewd Sign, that the Smaller Epiftles were not written before the Fourth Century. And this is indeed fo notable a Character of the late Date of thefe Copies, that it might have made a diftinct Argument by it felf, and deferves the cautious Readers particular Obfer

vation.

4

(9.) In the fame Epiftle, the Ufe of the Sect. 3. Word-osaari, efpecially as fpoken of Ignatius and the Ephefians jointly, is no good Sign of Genuine Antiquity: There appearing no juft Occafion for that Word here; and the Word it felf, either Simple or Compound, as Bishop Pearfon obferves, is not elfewhere found in the Greek Language, The Larger Epiftle has a better Word, g, without all Difpute or Ambiguity.il

(10.) Nor do the Criticks well know what to Ibid. do with the Claufe iramediately following, 'Eu κι ἔδει ὑφ ̓ ὑμῶν υπολειφθῆναι, πίσει κ. τ. λ. - Me enim oportet à vobis fufcipi, fide, &c. The Larger Epiftle has here ourou, as the Senfe requires. (11.) A little lower we have this Period in Ibid. the fame Smaller Epiftle, Kainous gesos, ἀδιάκριτον ἡμῶν ζῆν, τὸ πατρὸς ἢ γνώμη και οι ὀπίσκοποι, οι G και τα πέρατα ὁριθέντες, ίησε χειν γνώμη εἰσιν. Etenim Jefus Chriftus, incomparabile noftrum vivere, Parris fententia; ut & ipfi fecundum terræ fines determinati Jefu Chrifti fententia funt. This obfcure Language is not at all like that of Ignatius; but muft belong to fome difficult and confus'd Writer afterward. (12) Nor is this, which foon follows, at all better ; Ἵνα ὑμῶν καὶ εκέση, καὶ ἐπιγινώσκων δι' ὧν δε πρά αετε μέλη ὄντας τὸ ὑν αυτό. Ut & vos audiat, & cogC 41205

~

nofcat

Sect.

4.