Original Rule it felf, as it was in the Audians and his own Copies; which is quite contrary to this: And yet he and they cite it from the fame Apoftolical Conftitutions, without the leaft Hint that the Apostles themselves made any other. (2) The Apoftles Practice and Settlements where-ever they came, even here in Britain it self, were ever not according to the Rule in our present Copies, but according to that contrary one in the genuine and uncorrupt one of Epiphanius. (3) The Rule in the prefent Copies has Two plain References to the other, as an Antienter Rule, when it tells us we must nén no longer observe this Festival with the Jews; but vu now have no more to do with them; as it seems had been the Practice before the making of this Rule. (4) We know very well the Origin of this later Practice, that it began with Pope Xytus, foon after the beginning of the Second Century, and spread from Rome fo faft, that long before the End of that Century Jerufalem, Cafarea, and the greatest part of the Chriftian World held Councils about it, fubmitted to it, and probably then fix'd this very Rule we now have; nay and inferted it, either as additional, or in the room of the Apoftolical Rule it felf in the Constitutions. Which will appear more probable. (5) By a notable Aftronomical Character ftill in this Rule; viz. that the

Equinox

Equinox was there on the Twenty Second of Dyftrus, or March, which from the Calculations of Antient Times agrees exactly to the Conclufion of the Second Century, and the time of the meeting of thefe Synods about this Matter. Nay farther (6) both Epiphanius and Eufebius fpeak of both these Rules; only Epiphanius fpeaks of the Antienteft as alone Apoftolical, as being alone in his Copy of the Conftitutions, and of the later as only obtaining in the Church in his Days, and Eufebius fpeaks of both as Apcftolical; but of the one as Antienter than the other. As if the later Rule ftood in the Cæfarean Copy of the Conftitutions in his days, either instead of, or together with that more Antient one, which was really Apoftolical. And this is the more probable, becaufe Cafarea was the very place, where fome of the Councils were held in the Second Century about this matter; and where that later Rule was agreed on. Accordingly, we find that Rule long obtaining in Alexandria and moft other Churches, while Antioch, and the Afiaticks retain'd their Original Rule and Practice till the very Council of Nice it felf; which finally and universally establish'd the later Rule. A very bad Sign of Infallibility; to oblige Chriftians to observe a Rule most plainly contrary not only to the Practice, but to the Appointment of the Holy Apo

ftles

Rome;

ftles of our Lord, and that when acting in his Name, and delivering unchangeable Laws by his Authority. This Alteration we fee came originally from the Church of and feems to me the firft fmaller Inftance of Antichriftianifm, that he was guilty of, and which the ventur'd upon,probably because the look'd upon her felf on the Decay or Deftruction of the real Mother Church of the Jewish Chriftians at Jerufalem, as now in effect the Mother Church of the Gentile Chriftians, to which all others ought to pay the greateft Regard and Submiffion in thefe Matters, efpecially where the pretence of Oppofition to the odious Jews, on one fide, and of the Convenience of Eafter Day's falling on the Lord's Day" on the other, made this Change so easy and plaufible among Chriftians. The next Interpolations which I fhall obferve fhall be thofe in the Thirteenth Chapter of the Fifth Book, which appoint the Observation of Christmas Day, or the Feast of the Nativity December 25, and of the Epiphany Jan. 6. Now that these are both Interpolations is plain. For (1) Anaftafius in citing this Paffage, omits the naming of any par ticular Days, as not being probably in his Copy. (2) The Epiphany Jan. 6. which is the more Antient and Authentick of thefe Festivals, and by fome at first kept in Memory of the Birth of Chrift, as well

as

P. 312

Strom. I,

249,

as of his Baptifin by others; nay by fome I think, in Memory of them both; this Feftival I fay, is plainly deriv'd from fome of the old Bafilidian Hereticks; as an unquestionable Author, Clemens of Alexandria affures us. His Words are these : Oi 5 åm βασιλείδες καὶ τὸ βαπίσματος αὐτῷ ἢ ἡμέραν ἑορ τάζεσι, προδιανυκτερεύοντες αναγνώσεσι φασὶ, ἢ ἐν Τὸ πεντεκαιδέκατον ἔτις τιβερία καίσαρος, πεντεκαιδεκάτίω το τυβὶ μηνός. [Fan. 10.] τινὲς ἢ αὐτοῦ ἐνδεκάτω τὸ αυτὸ μηνός. [Jan. 6.] Heref. L., (3) Tho' we know from Epiphanius that $29 P.455 this Day was Festival in his time, yet was §. 16, it not for the Baptifm of Chrift, as in our

439

1

Copies of the Conftitutions, but for his Nativity. Nor does Epiphanius plead any Rule from the Conftitutions. Nay himself thought our Saviour's Baptifm to have been not fan. 6. but Novemb. 8. (4) The first Three Centuries afford no Sign of any Feftival Decemb. 25. for the Nativity excepting Rome and the Weft, which had it earlier; and whence it by degrees obtain'd over the reft of the Church. (5) Clemens Alexandrinus plainly implies that the Chriftians of his Age knew nothing of this day, as of the Day of our Saviour's Nativity. His Words ubi priùs. are thefe, ea joi weeponeer Ty Wornod To CWτῆρος ἡμῶν & μόνον τὸ ἔτος ἀλλὰ καὶ ἢ ἡμέραν προς હૈ ςιθέντες, ω φασὶν ἔτες κή αυγέςε, ἐν πέμπτη πάχων καὶ εἰκάδι. ναι μω τινες ἀνθρς φασὶ φαρμadi gegerrñas, nd', un. Obferve also that

--

one

one of these Days which the over-curious, especially among the Hereticks, fix'd the Nativity to, was the 25th Day of Pachon; which was the 25th Day of the Ninth Month in the Alexandrian Year. This agrees with the Words of the prefent Rule, which appoints it είχε δι πέμπτη τε ἐννάτε μηνός; on the 25th Day of the Ninth Month, which is underftood in the Julian Year, from April. This Exactness of Coincidence makes it very probable that this Interpolation came originally from these over-curious Enquirers, or Hereticks, mentioned by Clement. (6) 'Tis unquestionable that this Festival for the Nativity Decemb. 25. came not to Antioch or Conftantinople and the Eastern Parts thereto belonging, till the Conclufion of the Fourth Century it felf, in the Days of Chryfoftom; and that then it came to them from Rome Chryfoft: and the Weft only; not from any Appoint- Natal. Op. ment in their own Copies of the Apofto- Edit. lical Conftitutions. The next probable In-, p.512, terpolations which I fhall mention, fhall Vid. Ephr. be the Rule for a Festival Week after Pen-Syr. Op. tecoft, in the laft Chapter of the fame Fifth Book; which feems contrary to Epiphanius's See p.169, Copy, and contrary to the Practice of the pris Church of Alexandria in the Days of Atha- Athanaf nafius; fince he obferves, that in this very Apolog. De Week the ufual Fafting was there obferv'd, Fug. S. 64 3 P. 323, yet was this Feaft in Anaftafius's Copy, 'tis Chron. attefted to by the Chronicon Pafchal. So Pachal.

Homil. in

Savil.Tom.

Tom. 1,p15

Ad A. D.

that 630.