tiality enough to enquire throughly into their Antiquity and Authority hitherto, as they ought to have done: Which therefore I fhall attempt at prefent.

But before I come to Particulars, I must make this Declaration in general, that under the Larger Genuine Epiftles, I include Ten. I mean besides the Seven known Epiftles contain'd in the Polycarpian Collection, of which Eufebius gives us a particular Account, and Jerom from him, I efteem thofe Three to Tarfus, to Antioch, and to Hero, to be genuine alfo; tho' the Silence of Eufebius and Ferom concerning them makes it not reasonable to pretend to the fame Degree of Evidence for thofe Three, that we have for the other Seven. However, fince there is Reafon to believe, that Ignatius did write more Epiftles than those Seven commonly afcribed to him; Grab Spi- fince the Stile, Genius, Doctrines, and Nature cileg. of thefe Three, are fo very much the fame with Tom. II thofe of the other Seven; fince the Notes of P. 24, 25, Chronology, with the Ancient Quotations and References agree to them, as well as to the other; fince Eufebius's Silence only fhews, that he had met with no other than thofe Seven which Polycarp collected, and fent to Philippi; (whereas the other Three were written from Philippi;) as was the Cafe in the Epiftles of PeHift.Eccl. lycarp himself: [ For tho' Eufebius, from Irenæus,

Vid.

26.

L. V.

C 20. P. 188,

Vind. Ig leg. C.VI.

nat. Pro

P. 257.

affures us they were Seven; yet does not he appear ever to have seen any other of them than this to the Philippians, which accompanied thofe of Ignatius before-mentioned; ] and fince all the MSS.. that are known, both Greek and Latin, excepting that fingle Copy mention'd by Bishop Pearfon, and now in the Bodleian Library, of the Seven Large ones, appear to have all thefe Three,as well as the reft; even when feveral of them omit the

Spurious

Spurious Epistle to the Philippians at the fame time: All which will hereafter be proved: We have no fufficient Reafon to reject thefe Epiftles; efpecially when they are infcrib'd to fuch Places, and to fuch a Perfon, as Ignatius was more unlikely to forget, than most of thofe to which he wrote his other Epiftles. This being Premis'd, I come to my main Design; and fhall comprehend what I have to fay upon this Subject, under the following Heads.

I. I fhall offer fome General Arguments to prove, that 'tis highly improbable that the Smaller Epiftles fhould be the Genuine ones: Which Arguments will alfo infer the great Probability that the Larger are fo.

- II. I fhall fhew, that Eufebius's Defcription of the Epiftles which he faw, do better agree to the Larger, than they do to the Smaller Epiftles; nay, that One of his Defcriptions entirely agrees with the Larger, and as entirely difa grees with the Smaller Epiftles.

III. I fhall fhew by Internal Arguments and Characters, that the Smaller Epiftles cannot be the Genuine ones,nor fo early as the Days of Ignatius.

IV. I fhall fhew by the like Internal Arguments and Characters, that the Larger Epiftles are the Genuine ones, and agree exactly to the Days and Circumftances of Ignatius.

V. I fhall fhew, that the Ancient Exprefs Citations out of these, Epiftles, that are not equally in both Editions, for the First Six Centuries at the leaft, do, in general, much better agree to the Larger Epiftles than to the Smaller.

VI. I fhall fhew, that the Ancient Obscurer References and Allufions to thefe Epiftles, are generally taken out of the fameLarger Epiftles only. VII. I fhall fhew in Particular, that the Smal

ler Epistle to Philadelphia is certainly Spurious, and the Larger alone Genuine.

VIII. I fhall confider the Nature of the Smaller Epiftles; fhall fhew, that they are Extracts or Abridgments of the Larger; that they are Orthodox Extracts, or made for the Ufes of Orthodoxy, after the fatal Alteration of the Faith was begun in the Fourth Century; and fhall enquire more exactly at what time, and by whom they were made.

IX. I fhall give my Reasons more diftinctly, why I efteem the Three Epiftles to Tarfus, to Antioch, and to Hero, to be Genuine alfo, as well as the other Seven.

I. I fhall offer fome General Arguments to prove, that 'tis highly improbable that the Smaller Epiftles fhould be the Genuine ones; which Arguments will also infer the great Probability that the Larger are fo. For,

(1.) The Larger Epiftles were generally own'd for the True ones, by thofe who believ'd any of his Epiftles to be fuch, till the Middle of the very laft Age; both the Greek and Latin MSS. generally containing no other; and no other being commonly known, or heard of, at the time when fuch old Books were firft printed, but those. Nay, what is very remarkable, all thofe Three MSS. which had the Smaller, as to Six or Seven, had yet all the reft of these according to the Larger or Vulgar Copies: [For the Want of the End of the Epiftle to Tarfus, and the Want of the entire Epiftles to Antioch, and to Hero in the Medicean Copy, feems rather owing to the prefent known Deficiency of feveral Leaves at the End of it, than to any Original Defect;] there appearing indeed no other Edi tion of those Additional ones ever in the Church, than the Vulgar or Large one. So

that

that these Larger Epiftles have plainly this Advantage from general Confent, till very lately, as well as from the greater Number of the MSS. both Greek and Latin; as indeed they ftill have in this last Respect even at this very Day. Only we must note, that none of thofe Three MSS. contained the Epiftle to the Philippians; which feems to be Ancient, but has few or no Internal Characters, little or no External Evidence to fupport its Pretences to be really Genuine: Nay indeed, whofe very different Stile, and Genius, and Difagreement with Chronology, plainly betray its Spurious Original. Which is also ftill more notorious in thofe Two others from and to Maria Caffobolita. Now I defire to know, how these Facts could poffibly be fo, in Cafe thefe Larger Epiftles were only Spurious and Interpolated? Would the zealous Athanafians, during whofe Management and Authority all our MSS. were written, encourage forg'd or corrupted Epiftles, fo very favourable to the Arians? and difcourage thofe which they knew to be the Genuine ones,fo much more favourable to themfelves? Would they ftill join Interpolated and Heretical Epistles with the Genuine and Orthodox ones, had they had ground to believe that to have been the Truth of the Cafe? I cannot easily believe this.

(2.) The Nature of thefe Larger Epiftles is fuch, as will not admit of the Suppofition, that they are only the Smaller Interpolated. Several Infertions and Interpolations have been on Purpofe made in old Books, either from the Margin into the Text, for Illuftration and Explicarion; or from the Orthodox Opinions of the Corrupters or Tranfcribers, for Caution, or the like. But then those Infertions and Interpolations, especially till very late Ages, were generally

B 3

nerally Small, and inconfiderable, in Comparifon of the entire Contents of thofe Books whereinto they were inferted: Nay, and even they are frequently fo little of a Piece or Coherence with, if not contrary to the Original Text it felf, as to be readily diftinguish'd from the fame by Critical Readers. Which indeed is very much the Cafe in thofe miferable Infertions of this Nature in the Smaller Epiftles, which are wanting in the Larger.] Whereas this is not at all the Cafe in the prefent Larger Epiftles. They are fometimes more than twice as Large as the Smaller. The fuppos'd Additio nal Paffages are entire, and of a Piece one with another, and with the Context. They are indeed the very Marrow, and nobleft Parts of the fame; and commonly the moft undoubtedly Original Language of Chriftianity, and the moft peculiarly fuitable to Ignatius of all the Coherence: Nay, are cited, alluded, and referr'd to by all, but a few Athanafians, in all the first Ages; as will hereafter appear. And truly, I think there is no Parallel Inftance of fuch a thing in all the firft Times of the Church; that fuch Writings as the Smaller Epiftles are have been fill'd up in fuch a Manner as to become like the Larger : Unless we except that equally ungrounded Fancy of one Learned Man, who fhall be nameless, as to the Conftitutions of the Apoftles themfelves, from which thefe Larger Epifles are in great Measure deriv'd. When once fo ftrange an Hypothefis can be fully prov'd of the One of these Books, it will be time enough to think of vindicating the Other. But till that is done, a wife Man will be unwilling to believe, that Clement's Conftitutions, and Ignatius's Epiftles, or either of them, have had a quite different Fate from that of all other Books of the firft Ages of Chriftiani

ty;