The genuine epistles of the apostolical fathers, S. Barnabas, S. Ignatius, S. Clement, S. Polycarp, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the matyrdoms of St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp, written by those who were present at their sufferings : being, together with the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament, a compleat collection of the most primitive antiquity for about CL years after Christ / translated and publish'd, with a large preliminary discourse relating to the several treaties here put together by W. Wake ...

A DISCOURSE CONCERNING The several Treatises con∣tain'd in the following Collection; and the Au∣thors of them.

The INTRODUCTION.

1. HAD I designed the following Collection either for the Be∣nefit or Perusal of the learned World, I should have needed to say but very little by way of Introduction to it: The Editors of the several Treatises here put together, having already observed so much upon each of them, that it would I believe be difficult to discover, I am sure be very needless to trouble the Rea∣der with any more.

2. BUT as it would be Ridiculous for me to pretend to have design'd a Translation for those who are able with much more Profit and Satisfaction to go to the Originals; so being now to address my self to those especially who want that Ability, I suppose it may not be amiss be∣fore I lead them to the Discourses them∣selves, to give them some Account both of the Authors of the several Pieces I have here collected; and of the Tracts themselves; and of that Collection that is now the first time made of them in our own Tongue. Tho' as to the first of these, I shall say the less, by reason of that excellent Account that has been al∣ready given of the most of them by our Pious and Learned Dr. Cave: Whose Lives of the Apostles and Primitive Fa∣thers, with his other Admirable Dis∣course of Primitive Christianity, I could heartily wish were in the hands of all the more judicious part of our English Readers.

3. NOR may such an Account as I now propose to my self to give of the following Pieces be altogether useless to some even of the Learned themselves; who wanting either the Opportunity of Collecting the several Authors necessa∣ry for such a search, or leisure to exa∣min them; may not be unwilling to see that faithfully brought together under one short and general View; which

would have required some Time and La∣bour to have search'd out, as it lay dif∣fus'd in a Multitude of Writers, out of which they must otherwise have gather'd it.

CHAP. II. Of the First Epistle of S. Clement to the Corinthians.

Of the Value which the Ancients put up∣on this Epistle. Of St. Clement him∣self, who was the Author of it: That it was the same Clement of whom S. Paul speaks, Phil. iv.3. Of his Conversion to Christianity: When he became Bishop of Rome, as also whether he suffer'd Martyrdom, uncertain. Of the Occa∣sion of his Writing this Epistle, and the two main Parts of it. Of the Time when it was written. That there is no reason to doubt but that the Epistle we now have was truly written by S. Cle∣ment: The Objection of Tentzelius against it of no force. How this Epi∣stle was first published by Mr. Patrick Young; and translated by Mr. Burton into English. Of the present Edition of it.

1. THE first Tract which begins this Collection, and perhaps the most worthy too, is that Admirable, or as some of the Ancients have called it, that * 1.1 wonderful Epistle of S. Clement to the Corinthians; and which he wrote not in his own Name, but in the Name of the whole Church of Rome to them. An Epistle so highly esteem'd by the Primitive Church, that we are told it was wont to be publickly read in the † 1.2 Assemblies of it: And if we may cre∣dit one of the most ancient ‖ 1.3 Collections of the Canon of Scripture, was placed among the Sacred and Inspired Writings. Nor is it any small Evidence of the Va∣lue which in those days was put upon this Epistle, that in the only Copy, which for ought we know, at this day remains of it, we find it to have been written in the same * 1.4 Volume with the Books of the New Testament: And which seems to confirm what was before observed concerning it; that it was heretofore wont to be read in the Congregations, to∣gether with the Holy Scriptures of the Apostles and Evangelists.

2. BUT of the Epistle it self, I shall take occasion to speak more particularly by and by. It will now be more pro∣per to enquire a little into the Author of it; and consider when, and upon what occasion it was written by him.

3. AND first for what concerns the Person who wrote this Epistle; it is no small Commendation which the Holy Ghost by S. Paul has left us of him; Phil. iv.3. Where the Apostle mentions him not only as his Fellow-Labourer in the Work of the Gospel; but as one whose Name was written in the Book of Life. A Character, which if we will allow our Saviour to be the Judg, far ex∣ceeds that of the highest Power and Dig∣nity. And who therefore when his Dis∣ciples began to rejoyce upon the account of that Authority which he had bestow'd upon them, insomuch that even the De∣vils were subject unto them; Luke x.17. tho' he seem'd to allow that there was a just matter of Joy in such an extraordi∣nary Power, yet bade them not to Re∣joyce so much in this, that those Spirits were subject unto them; but rather, says he, Re∣joyce that your Names are written in the Book of Life.

4. IT is indeed insinuated by a late very * 1.5 Learned Critick, as if this were not that Clement of whom we are now discoursing, and whose Epistle to the Corinthians I have here subjoyn'd. But besides that, he himself confesses, that the Person of whom S. Paul there speaks was a Roman; both † 1.6 Eusebius and Epi∣phanius, and S. Hierome expresly tell us that the Clement there meant, was the same that was afterwards Bishop of Rome:

Nor do we read of any Other to whom either the Character there mentioned, of being the Fellow-Labourer of that Apostle, or the Elogy given of having his Name written in the Book of Life, could so pro∣perly belong as to him; and whom therefore the generality of Learned Men both of the ancient and present times, without scruple conclude to have been referr'd to in that Passage.

5. I SHALL not say any thing of what is reported by * 1.7 Some concerning his Noble Birth and Family; of his Studies at Athens; and of the occasion and manner of his Conversion to Chri∣stianity; which they tell us, was wrought by S. Peter, whom he met with Barnabas at Caesarea; And who there first declared to him the Doctrine of Christ, and in∣clined him to a good Opinion of it. All which is very uncertain, and justly doubt∣ed of by many. I shall chuse rather to observe that whatever his Condition was before he became a Christian, he was held in no small Reputation after: But merited such a Character from the An∣cient Fathers, as is hardly given to any, besides the Apostles. Nay some of them doubt not in plain terms to call him an * 1.8 Apostle; and tho S. Hierome durst not go so far as that, yet he gives him ano∣ther Title but little short of it; † 1.9 he tells us that he was an Apostolical Man, and as ‖ 1.10 Ruffinus adds almost an Apostle.

6. TO declare more particularly how he spent the first part of his Life after his Conversion is neither necessary to the Design I have now in hand, nor can any certain Account be given of it. On∣ly as we are told in the general, that he was S. Peter's Disciple, so it may not be improbable that for some time he at∣tended his Motions, and was subject to his direction.

7. BUT whatever he was, or where∣ever he laboured before, in this I think Antiquity is absolutely agreed, that he at last came to be Bishop of Rome; and was placed in that See by the express di∣rection of one, or both the Apostles, S. Peter and S. Paul: Tho' whom he suc∣ceeded, or at what time to fix his en∣trance on that great Charge, is a Point that I suppose will never be agreed up∣on among Learned Men. If any could have settled this matter beyond Dispute, it had without question been done by * 1.11 those of our own Nation, who as they have the latest searched with all possible Diligence into it, so never were there any better qualified for the determina∣tion of it. But as their mutual ‖ 1.12 Disa∣greement, after all their Endeavours to fix this Point, shews that one of them must have been mistaken; so I doubt not but it will sufficiently satisfie all such as shall consider the high Character they

have so justly obtain'd both by their Learning and Judgment in these kind of Disquisitions, that they are Points not to be determined; and that he who shall do the best upon them, may only be said to have made a good Guess, in a Subject too hard for any at this distance to de∣cide ‖ 1.13.

8. NOR is there any less Contro∣versie among Learned Men concerning the Death of S. Clement, than there has been about the Order and Time of his Succession to his Bishoprick. That he lived in expectation of Martyrdom, and was ready to have undergone it, should it have pleased God to have called him to it, the * 1.14 Epistle we are now speaking of, sufficiently shews us. But that he did glorifie God by those particular Suf∣ferings which some have pretended, is I confess to me a matter of some doubt. For, first; It must be acknowledged that † 1.15 Ruffinus is one of the first Authors we have that speaks of him as a Martyr. Nei∣ther ‖ 1.16 Eusebius, (who is usually very exact in his Observation of such things;) nor any of the Fathers yet nearer his time, as Irenaeus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertul∣lian, &c. take any notice of it. And for the Account which some others have yet more lately given us of the manner of his Death, besides that in some parts of it it is altogether fabulous; it is not im∣probable,

but that as our Learned * 1.17 Mr. Dodwell has observed the first rise of it may have been owing to their confounding Flavius Clemens the Roman Consul, with Clement Bishop of Rome: Who did indeed † 1.18 suffer Martyrdom for the Faith about the Time of which they speak; and some other parts of whose Character, such as his Relation to the Emperour, and Banishment into Pontus, they manifestly ascribe to him.

9. HOWEVER seeing * 1.19 Eusebius refers his Death to the third Year of Trajan famous for the Persecution of the Church, and may thereby seem to insi∣nuate that Clement also then suffered among the rest; and that † 1.20 Simeon Me∣taphrastes has given a long and particu∣lar Account of his Condemnation to the Mines first, and then of his Death fol∣lowing thereupon: As I shall not deter∣mine any thing against it, so they who are desirous to know what is usually said concerning the Passion of this Holy Man, may abundantly satisfie their Cu∣riosity in this particular, from the accu∣rate Collection of Dr. Cave in the Life of this Saint; and which is too long to be transcribed into the present Discourse.

10. AND this may suffice to have been observed in short concerning S. Clement himself: As for the Epistle

we are now speaking of to the Corin∣thians, I have already taken notice how great a Value was put upon it in the most Primitive Ages of the Church, and what a mighty Commendation has been left us of it, by the Writers of those Times. Nor indeed does it at all come short of the highest Praises which they have given to it; being a Piece compos∣ed with such an admirable Spirit of Love and Charity; Of Zeal towards God, and of Concern for the Church of Christ; Of the most excellent Exhortations deliver'd with the greatest Plainness and Simpli∣city of Speech, and yet pressed many times with such moving Eloquence too; that I cannot imagine what could have been desired in such an Epistle more pro∣per for the End for which it was com∣posed; What could have been written more becoming an Apostolical Age, and the Pen of one of the most eminent Bishops of it.

11. BUT that it may be the better un∣derstood by those who shall now think fit to peruse it; there are a few things which it will be necessary for me in this place to observe concerning it.

12. AND the first is, the Occasion that was given for the writing of this Epistle. For however we have no par∣ticular Account what it was, yet may we

from the Subject of it, give a very pro∣bable Guess at it. When St. Paul wrote his First Epistle to the Corinthians, the two great things that seem'd to have es∣pecially called for it were the Divisions of that Church upon the account of their Teachers, and of their vain Con∣ceit of their own Spiritual Gifts; and the great Mistake that was getting in among them concerning the Nature of the future Resurrection. But tho' the Apostle there∣fore by his Writing and Authority did for the present put a stop to the One, and set them right as to the Other; yet it seems after his Death, they began again to fall not only into the same Con∣tentions, but into the same Errour too, that had given them so much trouble be∣fore.

13. NOW this gave occasion to St. Clement to write the present Epistle to them: In which having first taken notice of the Rise of those new Sedi∣tions that were broke out among them, and exhorted them to a Christian Com∣posure of them; he in the next place goes on by many Arguments to esta∣blish the undoubted Truth and Certain∣ty of the future Resurrection; which was the other thing in which St. Paul had before observed them to have been greatly and dangerously mistaken.

15. THIS then was the Occasion, and is the main Subject and Design of the following Epistle. But now what time it was written, it is not so easie to determine. * 1.21 Junius supposes it was writ∣ten by St. Clement in the Name of the Church of Rome, about two Years before his Martyrdom; and that from the Place of his Banishment: Which also seems to have been the Opinion of our Learned † 1.22 Mr. Burton in his Notes on this Epistle. ‖ 1.23 Baronius places it some six or seven Years sooner, about the twelfth Year of Domitian: And with him * 1.24 Cotelerius agrees; only he supposes the Persecution was then drawing towards an end; it be∣ing otherwise unlikely that such an Em∣bassy could have been sent from Rome with the Epistle, as by the Close of it we find there was. But † 1.25 Mr. Dodwell with much greater probability, thinks it to have been written yet sooner; viz. immediately after the end of Nero's Persecution: And to that refers those Troubles complain'd of by St. Clement in the very † 1.26 beginning of his Epistle, and in which he ∵ 1.27 elsewhere speaks of St. Peter and St. Paul, as some of the latest Instances of any that had died for the Sake of their Religion.

16. NOW that which seems yet more to countenance this Opinion is, that St. Clement in * 1.28 another part of his E∣pistle

speaks of the Temple Service not only as still continuing, but as being in such a state as necessarily supposes all things to be yet in Peace and Quiet at Je∣rusalem. And from whence that † 1.29 Learn∣ed Man with great Reason concludes, that this Epistle must have been written somewhat before the XII. year of Nero, in which the Jewish Wars first brake out. Let us add to this, that in the Close of this Epistle we find mention made of * 1.30 Fortunatus as the Person whom the Church of Corinth had probably sent to Rome with an account of their Disasters; and by whom together with the four Delegates of their own, the Roman Church returned this Epistle to the Co∣rinthians. Now Fortunatus is expresly said by St. Paul to have been an old Disciple in his time; insomuch that he tells us he was the first Fruits of Achaia, 1 Cor. xvi.15. And therefore we must conclude that this Epistle could not have been written so late as some would have it, seeing this Man was not only still alive, but in a Condition of undertaking so great a Journey as from Corinth to Rome: For from thence it is most likely he was sent with the Letter of that Church to Rome; and so became the Bearer of this Epistle, which was written in the Name of the Church of Rome in answer to it.

17. I CONCLUDE then that this Epistle was written shortly after the End of the Persecution under Nero, * 1.31 about the LXIV. year of Christ: And that, as the learned Defender of this Period supposes, in the Vacancy of the See of Rome; before the Promotion of St. Cle∣ment to the Government of it.

18. BUT this is not yet all: There is still a difficulty remaining, and that of much greater Consequence than any I have hitherto mentioned; namely, Whe∣ther the Epistle we now have be, after all, the Genuine Epistle of St. Clement, so much applauded by the Ancients; so long look'd upon as lost to us; and so lately discover'd in the present Age? And this I mention, not that I think there is any real Occasion offer'd to in∣cline us to doubt of it; but because I find there are † 1.32 some who would seem still to make a Question of it.

19. AND here, I would in the first place ask these wary Men, what Marks they can propose whereby to distinguish the true Work of any ancient Writer, from a false and supposititious, that do's not occur in the present Piece?

20. THAT * 1.33 St. Clement wrote an Epistle to the Corinthians▪ that he wrote

it on the same Occasion that we find ex∣pressed in this we now have; that this Epistle was of great Reputation, so as to be publickly read in the Churches heretofore; All this the Authority of the Ancient Fathers will not suffer us to doubt. That the Copy we now have of this Epistle was taken from the End of a Manuscript of the New Testament, written as is supposed about the time of the first General Council of Nice, within little more than Two Hundred Years after St. Clement's Death; and at the very time that it was yet wont to be so read in the Churches; both the ‖ 1.34 Learned Editor of it assures us, and the Manuscript its self sufficiently declares. Now how can it be supposed, that an Epistle so famous in those days; so well known to every Christian at that time, when the very Copy was written, which we at this day have of it; should have been alone con∣cealed from the Transcriber of this Ma∣nuscript Bible, and a spurious piece started up to supply the place of it?

21. NOR is this yet all: For if we have not now the true Copy of this E∣pistle, it is manifest that then neither had the Ancient Fathers of those first Ages, a true Copy of it. * 1.35 For the Passages which they have quoted are the same in our Epistle; and so they too were imposed upon, no less than we are, in this Mat∣ter.

And can this be rationally supposed? Can we think that those great Men, and diligent Searchers into Antiquity, were ignorant of an Epistle, not only in every Bodies Hand, but almost in every Bodies Memory through their constant reading and hearing of it?

22. YET farther: Let me ask those who call in Question the Credit of this excellent piece; what do they find in it either unworthy of St. Clement, or disagreeable to those times in which we pretend it to have been written? Cer∣tainly, if this be a counterfeit piece, it was not only exceedingly well done; but without any design to serve any party or interest in it: There being nothing in the whole Epistle that might not have become as excellent an Age, and as Holy a Man, as that Age, and that Man were, in which we have all the Reason in the World to believe it was composed.

23▪ BUT what then is it that makes these learned Men so unwilling to own this Epistle to be the Genuine Work of that Holy Bishop to whom we ascribe it? It is in short this; * 1.36 That the Author of this Epistle, in proof of the possibility of a future Resurrection, asserts the Sto∣ry of the Phoenix's reviving out of its own Ashes; which is not only a thing false in its self, but unworthy of such a Person as St. Clement to mention.

24. NOW not to say any thing as to this Matter, (1st.) That ‖ 1.37 Photius a severe Critick of the ancient Fathers, who first started it as a fault in St. Clement that he made use of this as a true Observation, which it seems the Other look'd upon as a meer Fable, yet did not think it any Objection against the Authority of this Epistle, which he nevertheless acknow∣ledg'd to be St. Clements: To pass by, (2dly;) That the Generality of the An∣cient Fathers have made use of the very same instance, in proof of the same Point; as the † 1.38 learned Junius has parti∣cularly shewn in his Notes upon this Pas∣sage; and the Authority of whose Works no one yet ever called in question upon that account: I would only ask, (3dly;) What if St. Clement really believed the Account which he here gives us of this Matter? That there was such a Bird; and that he did revive out of the Cin∣ders of the Body before burnt? Where was the great harm either in giving Cre∣dit to such a Wonder; or believing it, to make such a use, as he here do's, of it?

25. THE Truth is, Whosoever shall consider both the general Credit which this Story had in those days; and the particular Accident which fell out not long before the time that this Epistle

was written to confirm their Belief of it, (And of which one of the most judicious of all the * 1.39 Roman Historians has given us a large Account;) I mean of the Phoe∣nix that was said to have come into E∣gypt a little after the Death of Christ, and to have given occasion, of much Discourse to the most Learned Men, both of the Greeks and Romans, concerning the very Miracle of which St. Clement here speaks; Will find it to have been no such strange thing in this Holy Man to have suffer'd himself to be led away with the Common Opinion; and to have believed what so many learned Men did among the † 1.40 Jews and ‖ 1.41 Gentiles, no less than among the Christians, viz. That God was pleased to give to the World this great Earnest and Type of a future Resurrection; and to silence thereby the Cavils of such as should pretend, what we know the generality of the wise Men of the World did, that it was impos∣sible for God to effect such a Restitu∣tion.

26. BUT I insist too long on so trifling an Objection▪ however magni∣fied by some Men; and may, I think, from what I have already said conclude; that if this be indeed, as * 1.42 they confess it is, the greatest ground they have to call in question the Credit of this Epistle; there is then nothing that ought to move

any considering Man to entertain the least Doubt or Scruple concerning it.

27. THERE are indeed two other Exceptions which * 1.43 Photius has made a∣gainst St. Clement upon the Account of the Epistle before us, which yet he look'd upon as unquestionably his; the One for that he speaks in it of the Worlds beyond the Ocean; the Other, in that he seems not to have Written so honourably as was sitting, of the Divinity of our Blessed Saviour. But as the latter of these is but a meer Cavil against this Holy Man, who in his Other Epistle expresly asserts his Divine Nature, and even in this speaks in such a manner of him, as shews him to be much more than a meer Creature: So in the former he said no∣thing but what was agreeable both to the Notions and Language of the times in which he lived; when it was common to call our British Isles another World; or as St. Clement here stiles them the Worlds beyond the Ocean.

28. AND these I think are the chief Exceptions that have been at any time raised against the following Epistle; and which however insisted upon in these lat∣ter days, yet did not hinder the first and best Ages of the Church, when Men were less curious, but much more pious, from putting a very great Value upon it.

Nor will they I suppose have any more weight with any serious and ingenuous Mind now: Or hinder him from esteem∣ing it a very great Blessing to our pre∣sent Times, that a Work so highly e∣steemed among the Ancient Fathers, but so long, and as it was justly feared, irrecoverably lost to these latter Ages, was at last so happily found out, for the Encrease and Confirmation both of our Faith and Piety.

29. NOW the manner of its Dis∣covery and Publication was this. It hap∣pen'd about the beginning of the pre∣sent Age, that Cyril Patriarch of Alex∣andria being removed from thence to Constantinople, brought along with him a great Treasure of Books to that place. Among the rest he had a very ancient Manuscript Copy both of the Septua∣gint Old, and of the New Greek Te∣stament; written but little more than three hundred years after Christ. * 1.44 This he sent, as the most valuable Present that he was Master of, to our late Royal Sovereign King Charles the First, by Sir Thomas Roe, his Majesty's Ambassadour at that time at the Port. Being thus brought into England, and placed in the Royal Library at St. James's, Mr. Patrick Young the learned Keeper of the King's Library at that time, discover'd this E∣pistle, with part of another, at the End

of the New Testament; and was there∣upon commanded by his Majesty to pub∣lish it for the benefit of the World. This he accordingly did, with a Latin Trans∣lation, and Notes at Oxford, Anno 1633: It was not † 1.45 long after that a very learned Man, and a great Master of the Greek Tongue, Mr. William Burton, translated it into English, and publish'd it very accurately, and with new Anno∣tations of his own upon it. This I had not seen till the first Sheets of the pre∣sent Edition were sent to the Press; Nor had I any other knowledge either of that or of the Author, than what I found in the Accounts given by our Re∣verend * 1.46 Dr. Cave, and the late Monsieur * 1.47 Colomesius of the One, and by our labo∣rious Antiquary † 1.48 Mr. A. Wood of the O∣ther; in his useful Collection of the Lives and Writings of our Modern Au∣thors. And though I believe whosoe∣ver shall take the pains to compare the two Translations together, will find them generally agreeing as to the Sense; yet there will otherwise appear such mani∣fest Differences between them, as may abundantly satisfie any indifferent Person, that I have tuly translated it from the O∣riginal Greek, and not Revised only Mr. Burton's Edition of it.

CHAP. III. Of the Epistle of St. Polycarp to the Philippians.

Of the Time when St. Polycarp wrote this Epistle. The Reason of its being placed before the Epistles of Ignatius. That St. Polycarp wrote several other pieces: Yet nothing of his now remain∣ing but only this Epistle. Whether this Epistle has been interpolated, as those of Ignatius were? The latter part of it vindicated against the Exceptions of Monsieur Daillé, and some Others. Of the Translation of it into our own Lan∣guage by Dr. Cave; and of the present Edition of it.

1. THE next Piece that follows in the present Collection, is the Epistle of St. Polycarp to the Philippi∣ans. In placing of which I have fol∣low'd the Example, not so much of our most Reverend * 1.49 Archbishop Vsher, as of St. Polycarp himself: Though in the Order of Time the Epistles of Ig∣natius ought to have had the precedence; St. Polycarp not writing this Letter to the Philippians till about the time that that glorious Martyr suffer'd for the

Faith of Christ; as from several Pas∣sages in the Epistle it self may plainly be made appear.

2. FOR first; Having in his ix^th Chapter exhorted the Philippians to obey the Word of Righteousness, and to exer∣cise all Patience after the Examples of those Holy Men whom they had seen a∣mong them; he particularly instances in * 1.50 Ignatius as one of them. Now the † 1.51 Acts of the Martyrdom of that Holy Martyr tell us, that the time when they beheld his Patience set forth before their Eyes was, when he passed by them in Chains to Rome in order to his being cast to the wild Beasts, according to the Sen∣tence pronounced upon him by the Em∣perour Trajan: By consequence that this Epistle must have been written some time after his Condemnation.

3. BUT St. Polycarp goes yet farther; and in the next Words supposes, that Ignatius might have been dead at the time that he wrote to them. For en∣forcing his Exhortation to them to fol∣low the Examples of Ignatius, and the rest of those excellent Men whom he there names, he subjoyns; Being confi∣dent of this, that all these have not run in vain, but in Faith and Righteousness, and are gone to the place that was due to them from the LORD, with whom also they

suffered. For they loved not this present World, but him who died, and was raised again by God for us. In which words he evidently implies that Ignatius too, as well as the rest of those whom he there mentions was by this time gone to the Place that was due to him from the LORD, upon the Account of his Sufferings; and by consequence had finished his Mar∣tyrdom.

4. IT was then about the time of Ig∣natius's Death that S. Polycarp wrote this Epistle to the Philippians. And yet that if this Holy Man had suffer'd, it was but a very little time that he had done so, is clear from another Passage of the same ‖ 1.52 Epistle: Where he desires the Philippians to send him word what they had heard with any Certainty concerning Ignatius, and those that went to Rome with him. And from whence it appears, that though he supposed that Ignatius by that time might have suffer'd, yet he had not received any certain Account of it, but was still to learn the Manner and Circumstances of his Passion.

5. NOW this will lead us to a yet more exact Conjecture of the time of St. Polycarp's writing the following E∣pistle; viz. that it must have been just about the time of St. Ignatius's Death: It being no way probable that had Igna∣tius

been any long time dead, so great a Bishop, and so dear a Friend of his as St. Polycarp was, should have been still to learn the Certainty of it.

6. AND this may serve, by the way, not only to fix the Time when this E∣pistle was written; but also to shew how groundless the Exception of those * 1.53 Men is against the Authority of it, who pretend to find out a Contradiction between the two Passages I have now mentioned: And would from thence infer either the utter Falseness of this whole Epistle; or at least conclude that this latter part of it is none of Polycarp's, but added by some latter hand to give the greater Credit to the Epistles of St. Ig∣natius, which they are resolved by all means to reject as none of his. For in∣deed were not Men willing to be con∣tentious, where is the Contradiction they so much boast of between the two Places I have before alledged? Is it that in the former of them he sets be∣fore them the Sufferings of St. Igna∣tius, and exhorts them to follow the Ex∣ample of his Patience? But 'tis evi∣dent the Sufferings he there speaks of were those which the Philippians had seen in him. The Weight of his Chains; the Hardships of his Journey; the Rude∣ness of the Souldiers that guarded him; and of which the ‖ 1.54 blessed Martyr him∣self

complains in one of his Epistles; and to add no more, the Expectation of that cruel Death he was suddainly to undergo.

7. BUT I suppose the Contradiction lies in what follows; that in * 1.55 one place he speaks of him as if he had already suffered; and yet in the other desires the Philippians to send him word what they heard of him. Now what is there in all this that does not very well agree toge∣ther? St. Polycarp, either by the Compu∣tation of the Arrival of Ignatius at Rome; or by the Consideration of the Solemn Festival that was wont at that time to be held there; and at which it was usual to exhibit such kind of Spectacles to the People; or it may be, lastly, from the Accounts which he had received of the Holy Martyr from some of those that were with him; did suppose, nay if you will, did not doubt but that Ignatius was dead when he wrote his Epistle to the Philippians. Yet having not hitherto re∣ceived any certain Account of it, and being not sure whether he had suffered or no; or if he had, how he had been treated by his Enemies, and how he had behaved himself in his last Encounter with the Beasts; desires the Philippians, who were much nearer to Rome than he was, and might therefore very probably have heard much later from thence than

he had done, to send him a certain Ac∣count of what they knew as to this matter. What is there in this, I do not say that looks like a Contradiction, but that is not very Natural: And particularly most becoming the Love and Friendship of the Blessed Polycarp towards him con∣cerning whom he so diligently enquired? I am sure * 1.56 Photius who not only had read this Epistle, but transcribed this last Passage out of it, tho' as severe a Critick as any that have ever perused it since, saw no Contradiction in it to any thing that went before. Since if he had, he was not of a Humour to have let it pass, without making some Re∣flection or other upon it.

8. LET me add yet more, that nei∣ther could those see the Contradiction here pretended, who in our present times would have been as forward as any to have made use of it to the Disadvan∣tage of this Epistle, had they had but the least Grounds so to do. I shall in∣stance only in Two; the first, the late Learned Divine of Leyden, † 1.57 Monsieur le Moyne: Who tho' he judged the Pas∣sage relating to St. Ignatius's Epistles, which was wanting in his Manuscript, to be abrupt, and would from thence ar∣gue against the Authority of it; yet has made no Reflection on the Words im∣mediately following, and in which those

Others will have the Contradiction to lie.

9. THE Other that I shall mention in Opposition to this Pretence, is a yet later Writer, * 1.58 Ernestus Tentzelius; who tho' no great Friend to this Epistle, which he supposes to have been Corrupted, no less than those of Ignatius were in the Antient Editions of them; yet utterly refuses to comply with this Objection, as not apprehending that there was the least Ground for it.

10. BUT to return from this Di∣gression, in Answer to the Exception of two of the most Learned Adversaries of this Epistle, against the Credit of it: Tho' as I have now shewn, St. Polycarp wrote not to the Philippians till after the Death of St. Ignatius, and conse∣quently this Epistle in order of time ought to have been placed after those which the other wrote immediately be∣fore it: Yet was it fit to give this the Precedency in the following Collection, both as containing a most proper Intro∣duction to the Epistles of Ignatius; and as having in all probability been first sent in the same Order, by St. Polycarp to the Philippians.

11. FOR thus we find that Holy Man speaking to them in the † 1.59 Close of his

Letter: The Epistles of Ignatius which he wrote unto us, together with what others of his have come to our Hands, we have sent unto you according to your Order; which are subjoyn'd to this Epistle. So both * 1.60 Eusebius transcribed it out of the Original Greek; and so we find it in our Antient † 1.61 Latin Version, which is all that remains of that Part of this Epistle. And from whence our Learned Arch-Bishop ∵ 1.62 Usher with great reason con∣cludes, that St. Polycarp caused the Co∣pies of St. Ignatius's Epistles to be im∣mediately added at the end of his own; and sent them to the Philippians together with it.

12. AND this perhaps may have been one great means of preserving this Epistle of St. Polycarp from the Fate that has attended all the rest of his Writings. For being wont to be transcribed toge∣ther with those of Ignatius, and com∣monly placed at the front of them; they mutually help'd to secure one ano∣ther: Whilst the rest of his Epistles, for want of being thus collected toge∣ther, have for a long time been so ut∣terly lost to the World, that neither † 1.63 Photius, nor St * 1.64 Hierome, nor ‖ 1.65 Eu∣sebius, nor even Irenaeus himself, the Dis∣ciple of St. Polycarp, seems to have had any particular Catalogue of them.

13. INDEED for what concerns the last of these, I mean * 1.66 Irenaeus; he tells us that this great Man did write several Epistles, not only to the Neighbouring Churches, to confirm them in the Faith; but even to particular Persons, for their Instruction and Admonition. But what they were, or to whom they were sent, neither does he say, nor does Eusebius, where he speaks of the Writings of St. Polycarp, mention any more, than that Epistle to the Philippians, of which we are now discoursing. And tho' a few later † 1.67 Authors pretend to give us the very Titles of some other of his Works; yet have we reason to doubt from this Silence of those who lived the nearest to his Time, that their Authority is but small; nor can we say that even the Pieces which they name, are any where to be found at this Day.

14. NOR shall I except here those Fragments lately published by * 1.68 Fevar∣dentius out of Victor Capuanus; and re∣printed by Bishop † 1.69 Usher in his Appen∣dix to Ignatius. In which as there are some things which neither Father ‖ 1.70 Hal∣loix, nor our Learned ‖ 1.71 Vsher could ap∣prove of, as written by St. Polycarp; so the Distance of * 1.72 him who was the first Collector of them from the time of that Blessed Martyr; and the manifest Proofs he has on other Occasions given

of his little Care and Judgment in di∣stinguishing the Works of the Antient Fathers who lived any long time before him; not to say any thing of the Passa∣ges themselves ascribed to St. * 1.73 Polycarp, but little agreeable to the Apostolical Age: All these Considerations have justly re∣strained Learned Men from giving any great Credit to these Fragments, or from receiving them as belonging in any wise to so antient an Author.

15. BUT whatever becomes of these Fragments, certain it is that the Epistle which I have here subjoyn'd is the Genu∣ine Work of this Holy Man; and wor∣thy of that great Character which An∣tiquity has given of it. Even Monsieur † 1.74 Daillé himself confesses that excepting only the Close of it, against which it was necessary for him to declare himself; there is nothing in it that either ought to offend any, or that may be thought unworthy of Polycarp. But * 1.75 le Moyne goes yet farther; he declares that he does not see how any one can entertain the lest Sus∣picion against it: That there is not per∣haps any Work extant, that has more certain Evidences of its being Genuine, than this: In short, that if it shall be lawful to doubt of this, there will be no Monument of Antiquity left which we may not as well call in Question, and re∣ject as spurious.

16. INDEED so general is the reception which * 1.76 Learned Men on all sides have given to this Epistle, that I might well omit any further Discourse in Confirmation of the Credit and Au∣thority of it. But yet seing there have been two things started by some of late, if not utterly to destroy, yet at least to lessen the Reputation of this Piece; I will consider in short what may fairly be replied to both their Exceptions.

17. NOW the first is that of † 1.77 Tent∣zelius, in his Exercitation upon this Epi∣stle: Who tho' he allows it to be un∣doubtedly Genuine, yet supposes it to have been corrupted by the same hand that we confess * 1.78 did corrupt the Epi∣stles of Ignatius, about DC Years after Christ. But to this I reply; 1st. That it is allow'd that there is nothing in this Epistle that may give any just Grounds for the Suspicion of any such Fraud as this: It being acknowledged even by Mons^r Daillé himself, one of the great∣est Adversaries of it, to be an Epistle in all respects worthy of St. Polycarp, excepting only in the Close of it, which I shall more particularly consider by and by. So that either we have then this E∣pistle pure and uncorrupted as it was first written; or at least we have it so little prejudiced by any Alterations that may have been made in it, that there is no∣thing

in the Epistle, as it now is, dan∣gerous in Point either of Faith or Man∣ners; or that might not have well e∣nough been written by St. Polycarp. But now this was not the Case with the E∣pistles of * 1.79 St. Ignatius; which not only laboured under many Impertinencies un∣becoming the Character of that Great Man, but was fraught with many things that were altogether fabulous: Nay if we may credit Arch-Bishop † 1.80 Usher, had some Passages in them that tend∣ed to corrupt the very Faith of Christ, in one of the most considerable Points of it.

18. BUT Secondly, That the Epistles of St. Ignatius had been corrupted, was evident from ‖ 1.81 Disagreement of the Co∣pies which we usually had of them, from the Quotations of the Ancient Fathers of the first Five Centuries out of them. Now this was a most unquestionable De∣monstration of their having been chang∣ed from what they were in those first Ages in which those Fathers lived: And accordingly proved to be so, when the old Latin Version of Bishop Vsher first, and then the Florentine Greek Edition of the Learned Isaac Vossius, came to be com∣pared with those Editions that had be∣fore been extant of them But neither does this Exception appear against the present Epistle, which agrees with what

is quoted both by * 1.82 Eusebius and Others out of it; and thereby clearly shews our present Copy to be sincere and un-cor∣rupted.

19. SEEING then there is nothing but a mere Conjecture for the Depra∣vation of this Epistle, and such just Rea∣son to conclude that there is no good Foundation for it; to be sure none that may compare with the Arguments we have against it: I think we may con∣clude, that for any thing yet appears to the contrary, we not only have the Ge∣nuine Epistle of St. Polycarp, but that Epistle free from any designed Corrup∣tions or Depravations of it.

20. NOR is there any more, that I do not say there is much less Weight, in the other Supposal of Monsieur * 1.83 Daillé, continued and abetted by his Learned De∣fender Monsieur Larroque, tho' without any more weight of Reason than what had been before fully answer'd by our most Learned and judicious Bishop Pear∣son: Namely; That this Epistle origi∣nally ended at the Doxology which we meet with Chapter the XII^th, and that what follows concerning the Epistles of St. Ignatius, has been added to it by some latter hand. But now, what proof do they offer of this? What Authority have they to support such a Supposition?

This they pretend not to: All they have to say is, that the Doxology which we find there seems to imply that the Epi∣stle originally went no farther; And that in what follows there is a flat Contra∣diction to what went before; the Close of the Epistle speaking of Ignatius as if he were still alive, whom the true Po∣polycarp had before set forth to the Phi∣lippians as having suffer'd, and been gone to the place that was prepared for him.

21. AS for what concerns the latter of these Suggestions, I have already ful∣ly shewn how vain and groundless it is. Nor can we reasonably suppose that any one who designed to serve a turn by corrupting such an Epistle as this, would have been either so negligent as not once to read over the Piece he was about to make so considerable an Addition to; or having read it, would have been so foolish, as to have, without any need, subjoyn'd a Request to the Philippians, directly contrary to what the true Poly∣carp had told them before; and which by consequence would be sure to discover the Fraud, and frustrate the Design of it.

22. SO little appearance of Reason is there in this Suggestion, which yet these Learned Men insist upon, as their main Argument against the latter part

of this Epistle. As for the other Obje∣ction which they bring against it, viz. that St. Polycarp must have concluded at the XII^th Chapter, because of the Vow which he there makes for these to whom he wrote; I reply, first: That this is at the best but a very uncertain Guess; seeing it is notorious to all that have ever read the Epistles either of the Apo∣stles, or those that followed after, that nothing is more common than to meet with such kind of Conclusions, not only in the end, but in the * 1.84 beginning, and † 1.85 middle; in short, in all the parts of their Epistles. To look no farther than the Epistle, with which we have begun this Collection, of St. Clement to the Co∣rinthians: How many of these sort of Stops may we find in the Progress of it? I am sure there are not less than seven or eight of them. But I suppose he would be thought very ridiculous who should therefore reject all that follow'd the first of these, as none of St. Cle∣ment's, but pieced on to the end of his Epistle by some other hand, merely be∣cause the Doxology seem'd to imply his having concluded there.

23. BUT to lay aside Conjectures, and proceed to that, which will put a fi∣nal end to this Difficulty; I observe, 2dly, That this Passage which these Men deny to be St. Polycarps, and suppose to

have been added to it by some latter hand, is expresly quoted by * 1.86 Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, as a part of this Epistle. If therefore it be the Ad∣dition of some other hand, 'tis evident it was made to it before Eusebius's time, that is to say, within two Hundred Years after the time of St. Polycarp's writing of it; and whether this be probable we will now more particulary enquire.

24. FOR the better clearing of which I must observe, that this Epistle of St. Polycarp, like that of St. Clement fore∣going, was for several Hundreds of Years wont to be publickly read in the Churches of Asia: So ‖ 1.87 St. Jerome expresly assures us; or as his Interpreter Sophro∣nius renders him, in the Synod or Con∣vention of Asia. By which a * 1.88 Learned Man supposes we are to understand some common Meetings of the Christians in those Parts, answerable to the like As∣semblies of the Gentiles there; And that in these this Epistle was wont to be read to them.

25. HENCE † 1.89 Irenaeus speaks of it as an Epistle that was in every Bodies hand; and obvious to be read by any, for the Benefit of their Faith and Man∣ners. Which being so, it can hardly be supposed but that so inquisitive a Sear∣cher into Antiquity as Eusebius was, must

needs have been very well acquainted with it; and doubtless have had a true and genuine Copy of it. Seeing then he produces this Passage as a part of that Epistle which was generally received as Authentick in his Days; and that the E∣pistle its self being spread into all Hands, and publickly read in the Eastern Churches immediately after the Death of its great Author, could not have been corrupted or alter'd, but the Cheat must needs have been discover'd; of which yet we have not the least intimation in all Antiquity: I think it cannot be doubted but that this, as well as the rest of that Epistle, was written by St. Polycarp himself; and not added to his Epistle by some latter Hand, as is suggested, not only without all ground, but against such plain and un-answerable Evidence to the con∣trary.

26. HAVING said thus much in Vindication of this Epistle, and to clear it from those Prejudices that have of late been raised against it; it remains only for me to observe, that though the fol∣lowing Translation was truly made from the Greek and Latin Copies of it, set out by Bishop Vsher first, and since reprinted by Cotelerius in his Collection of the Apo∣stolical Fathers; yet is not this the first time that this Epistle has appear'd in our Language. For our most diligent and

Learned Country-man ‖ 1.90 Dr. Cave, ha∣ving a just Respect to the Worth of a Piece so highly applauded among the An∣cients, and so well deserving the Esteem of all good Men; thought it would be no unuseful Digression to present to his Reader so venerable a Monument of the Primitive Church: And therefore sub∣joyn'd it intirely to his Account of the Life of St. Polycarp, in a most accurate English Translation of it.

27. IT would no doubt have been more to the Readers Satisfaction, to have met with that Translation of this Epistle here, than to find another which he may have just reason to suppose can ne∣ver equal that which was finish'd by so great a Hand. And indeed I could have been glad to have render'd the following Collection more considerable, by the Reputation of a Translation made by so eminent an Author. But however, as it now is, I hope it may not be unacceptable to the pious Peruser of it: Who, what∣ever other Defects he may find in it, may yet, I am pretty confident, depend upon the Exactness of the Translation; seeing I perceive by an after Collation of it, that it does not differ in any thing that is material, from that of the Judi∣cious and Worthy Dr. Cave.

CHAP. IV. Of the Epistles of St. Ignatius.

Of the different Editions of St. Ignatius's Epistles: Which are here translated from that of Isaac Vossius, and ac∣cording to the Enumeration made by Eusebius of them. The Authority of these Epistles vindicated, against the Objections raised of late against them. The Epistle to St. Polycarp one of those mentioned by Eusebius: The Excep∣tion against it taken from the Substance of the Epistle its self answer'd. A short Account of the following Translation of all of them.

1. BEFORE I enter upon that Ac∣count which it will be fitting for me to give of the Epistles of St. Ignatius, (the next that follow in the present Col∣lection;) it will be necessary for me to ob∣serve, that there have been considerable Differences in the Editions of the Epistles of this Holy Man, no less than in the Judgment of our latter Criticks concern∣ing them. To pass by the first, and most imperfect of them; the best that for a long time was extant, contained not only a great number of Epistles falsly ascribed to this Author, but even those that were

Genuine so alter'd and corrupted, that it was hard to find out the true Ignatius in them.

2. THE first that began to remedy this Confusion, and to restore this great Writer to his Primitive Simplicity, was our Most Reverend and Learned Arch-bishop Usher, in his Edition of Them at Oxford, Anno 1644. But still we wanted a correct Copy of the Original Greek; the Epistles set out by him, though ex∣ceedingly more sincere than any we had seen before, yet consisting only of the Old Latin Translations of them. Now this was in great measure perform'd by the Learned Isaac Vossius, in the Edition published by him at Amsterdam, Anno 1646: And presenting us from the Flo∣rentine Manuscript with six of the Epistles of this Holy Martyr mentioned by Eu∣sebius, in their ancient and pure Greek; and the seventh so happily amended, that there is but little doubt to be made of the Integrity of that too. And concerning these Epistles of St. Ignatius, enumerated by Eusebius, and set out according to their Primitive Purity by these two great Men, and from them translated into the following Collection; there are two things to be consider'd and proved by me in this place: First,* 1.91 That St. Ignatius did write such Epistles as those we have here trans∣lated: And secondly; that those Epistles

we here have, are the very Epistles that he wrote.

3. THAT Ignatius did, in general, write some Epistles to the Churches about him, however it has been de∣ny'd by Some, is yet I think now u∣niversally allow'd even by ‖ 1.92 those who are the greatest Opposers of those E∣pistles which we affirm to be his. That he wrote to those particular Chur∣ches to which the Epistles here sub∣joyn'd are addressed, we have both St. Polycarp and Eusebius to assure us. For, first; † 1.93 St. Polycarp, in the Close of his Epistle, (which I am now to look upon as sufficiently proved to be his) speaking to the Philippians of this Holy Man, tells them; that he had sent them all such Epistles of his, as Ignatius had either written to himself, or to his Church at Smyrna, or as had hitherto come to his Hands. So that here then we have a plain Account of two of those Epistles which we affirm Ignatius to have written; One to St. Polycarp himself, Another to the Church of Smyrna.

4. BUT Eusebius will enable us to carry this Testimony yet farther: Whilst assuring us, that he wrote four Epistles from Smyrna; namely to the Churches of Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralles and Rome; he gives us just grounds to conclude that

these also must have been part of St. Po∣lycarp's Collection; and have been some of those others, besides the two before mentioned, which he tells us he sent to the Philippians. Unless we should suppose that either he knew not of Ignatius's writing, though every Day, almost eve∣ry Hour, with him at the time that he wrote them: Or else that knowing of it, He took no care to preserve the Copies of his Epistles; which yet we see he put the highest Value, that can well be ima∣gined, upon. Seeing therefore we can∣not with any reason suppose, either that St. Polycarp did not know of Ignatius's writing to these Churches; nor is it pro∣bable, that being present with him at the writing of them, and acquainted with it, he should not have kept any Copies of his Letters to them: Seeing lastly; he him∣self tells us that he had Copies of more of the Epistles of this Great Saint, besides those that were sent to Smyrna, and that what he had, he sent to the Philippians; neither can we reasonably doubt but that these also were in his Hands, and sent by him to the Church at Phillipi.

5. AND thus have we I think upon very good grounds concluded that Six of the Seven Epistles, which we affirm to have been written by St. Ignatius, were collected by St. Polycarp; and sent, together with his own Epistle, to the

Philippians. Let me add yet farther, that neither can we reasonably question but that the Seventh too was at that time in the Hands of St. Polycarp; and by con∣sequence, that what we now have is no other Collection, than what he made, and by that means help'd to preserve to af∣ter Ages, of the Epistles of this Holy Martyr. Now this I conclude not only from the Nearness of the Church of Philadelphia, to which it was written, to that of Symrna in which St. Polycarp presi∣ded; and from the great Respect which all the Neighbouring Churches payd to him, as a kind of Universal Bishop of the whole Lesser Asia; but from the Con∣clusion of the Epistle its self: Which tells us that it was sent by Ignatius to the Philadelphians, not only from the same place, and at the same time, that he wrote to St. Polycarp himself, and to his Church of Smyrna; but also by the same Person that carried the other two; and that Person St. Polycarps own Deacon, whom he had sent with Ignatius to Troas, and by whom Ignatius wrote back that Epistle.

6. St. POLYCARP then certainly knew of Ignatius's writing to the Philadelphians; and very probably sent on Burrhus his Deacon from Smyrna to Philadelphia, with his Letter. And then I think we may very reasonably conclude, that he brought

back with him the Copy of it; and so that St. Polycarp had that Epistle too in his Hands, when he wrote to the Phi∣lippians.

7. SUCH good grounds have we to believe, that the Collection we now have of St. Ignatius's Epistles, was no other than what St. Polycarp himself made; and refer'd to in that passage of his own Epistle to the Philippians, which I have before shewn to be truly his, and not the Addition of any latter hand. And the same is the Account which ‖ 1.94 Eu∣sebius himself has given us of this Mat∣ter. He tells us that as Ignatius was on his way to Rome, where he was to be cast to the Wild Beasts; he not only confirm'd the Churches that were in the places through which he passed, by his Exhortations, but wrote to the Chiefest of those others that were near, such E∣pistles as these of which we are now speaking. And that, as he goes on, in this following Order. First, from Smyr∣na † 1.95, where he tarried some time with his Old Acquaintance and Fellow-Disci∣ple St. Polycarp, he wrote to the Ephe∣sians, Magnesians, Trallians and Romans: And being gone farther on his Way to Troas, he from thence wrote to the Phi∣ladelphians, and Smyrneans; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and a par∣ticular Letter to Polycarp, the Bishop of Smyrna.

8. I SAY nothing to the Testimony of ‖ 1.96 St. Hierome as to this Matter, who as he exactly agrees with Eusebius in all this, so I make no question but that he transcribed his Account out of him. It is I think sufficiently evident from what has been already observed, not only that St. Ignatius did in general write some Epistles which even Mounsieur * 1.97 Daillé himself thinks ought not to be any question; but that he wrote to those particular Churches to which the Epistles we now have, are directed; and of which I am perswaded there ought to be as little doubt.

9. AS for the other point proposed, and in which the foregoing also will be yet more fully confirmed; namely, that those Epistles we now have are the same that Ignatius wrote: Two things there are that seem to determine our Belief of it. First; that there is nothing in these Epistles, as we now have them, either un∣worthy of the Spirit of Ignatius, or the Character that Antiquity has given us of them: Nothing disagreeing to the Time in which he wrote, or that should seem to speak them to have been the Work of any latter Author; which hardly ever fails to appear in such pieces as are falsly imposed upon Ancient Au∣thors; and which not appearing in these Epistles, inclines us the more readily to

conclude that they were undoubtedly written by him whose they are said to be.

10. BUT this is only a presumptive Argument in favour of these Epistles; and which though it may serve to dispose us the more readily to receive them as true and genuine, yet is not alone suf∣ficient to prove them so to be. The other Argument I have now to offer is positive and convincing; namely, That we find these Epistles, as they now are, exactly agreeing both with the Descrip∣tions which St. * 1.98 Polycarp and † 1.99 Eusebius have left us of those which they took to be the Authentick Epistles of this Ho∣ly Man; and with the numerous Quota∣tions which the ‖ 1.100 Ancient Fathers have taken out of them; and which all occur in the same Words, in our present Co∣pies of them, that they are cited in their Writings.

11. THIS has been so fully shewn by our most Learned Bishop Pearson, and indeed was so manifest of its self to any one that had ever made any Com∣parisons of this kind; that Monsieur * 1.101 Daillé himself could not deny but that we have the same Epistles now, that Eu∣sebius, Athanasius, St. Jerome, Theodoret and Gelasius had heretofore. So that the only Question then to be consider'd by

us is; Whether those which Eusebius, &c. had, were not counterfeit, but the true Epistles of this great Martyr.

12. AND here, first, it is evident, that if those Epistles which Eusebius first, and then the rest of those great Men I before mentioned, took for the Genuine Epistles of St. Ignatius, were none of his; the true Epistles, which I have just now shewn, and which it is confes'd were writ∣ten by him, must before that time have been utterly lost, or otherwise destroyed out of the World: It being very impro∣bable that had the true Epistles been still remaining, neither so inquisitive a Search¦er into Antiquity as Eusebius should have heard of them, nor such great and learned Men as those that followed after, have had any Suspition of such a Deceit. But now whether this be probable; Whether it can be supposed that such Epistles as these, directed to so many great and emi∣nent Churches, collected by so Venerable a Man as St. Polycarp, and written by so glorious a Martyr as St. Ignatius, should within so little time be utterly lost out of the Church; I shall leave it to any one, who considers how great a Reverence the Primitive Christians had for every thing that came from the Hands of such Holy and Excellent Men, and such glo∣rious Martyrs of Christ, to determine.

13. WE read in the ‖ 1.102 Acts of the Mar∣tyrdom of this Blessed Saint, with what a mighty Care those who went with him to Rome, and were the Eye-Wit∣nesses of his Sufferings, gathered up the few hard Bones of his Body which the Lions had left; and how they brought them back in a kind of Triumph to his Church at Antioch. And we are told with what Pomp they were many Ages after taken up from the place where they were first buried, and carried by the Command of the younger Theodosius within the City: Insomuch that as our † 1.103 Historians observe, there was a Festi∣val Solemnity established upon that Oc∣casion; and Annually observed to the very time in which they wrote, in re∣membrance of it. But was the Church then so careful of a few dead Bones of such a Saint as this, and did they e∣steem them as so great a Treasure; and yet had they so little regard to his Wri∣tings, the last Testimonies of his Affe∣ction to the Churches to which he wrote, as to suffer them within Two Hundred Years to be so utterly lost, as not to be once known or heard of, by the greatest and most curious Searchers into Anti∣quity? This is, I confess, to me so very improbable, that I could almost as easi∣ly believe the Holy Scriptures them∣selves to have been upon a suddain

changed into some other Epistles than what St. Peter or St. Paul wrote; as that such Epistles as these could be so totally defaced, as some pretend, and new ones set out in the room of them, and yet no Body know any thing of the doing of it. But such Impossibilties as these must learned Men be content to please them∣selves, and impose upon others withall, who resolve to be wiser than any that went before them; and to be able to know better at fiftteen hundred years distance what Ignatius wrote, than those who lived within two Generations of him.

14. FOR to press our Argument yet more closely: Since it is allow'd that Ignatius did write some Epistles, and I think sufficiently evident that St. Poly∣carp did make a Collection of them, and send them together with his own to the Philippians; I presume it will not be question'd but that he most certainly had the Genuine Writings of that Holy Mar∣tyr, his dear Friend and Fellow-Disciple. Now St. Polycarp suffer'd not according to the earliest Computation of our ac∣curate Bishop ‖ 1.104 Pearson till the Year of our Saviour 147. And † 1.105 others suppose it to have been yet later. Hitherto there∣fore it is certain that the true Epistles of Ignatius continued in the Church: It be∣ing by no means probable that they should

have been changed whilst the Men lived to whom Ignatius wrote; whilst Polycarp was living who collected them toge∣ther; and whilst those of the Church of Philippi remained, to whom he sent them.

15. TO St. Polycarp let us add his Scholar and Admirer, Irenaeus; and as him∣self professes a most diligent Collector of whatever fell from that Holy Man. That he had the Epistles of St. Ignatius, * 1.106 Eusebius assures us; who particularly takes notice of his quoting several Pas∣sages out of them. And one of his Quo∣tations ‖ 1.107 he mentions out of the Works of Irenaeus which still remain: And of which though the Greek be lost, yet the Old † 1.108 Latine Version, as well as the Greek of Eusebius, shews us, that it was taken out of the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ro∣mans, where it still occurs in our present Copy of it. And it must be allow'd that the other Passages of which Eusebius speaks, were also to have been found the Epistles as he had them: Because o∣therwise, the Difference between what the one quoted, and the other read in his Copy of those Epistles, would present∣ly have discovered the Fraud; and shewn that his Epistles were not the same with those which Irenaeus mentioned.

16. AND this puts the Matter yet more out of doubt: For if Eusebius had the same Epistles that Irenaeus had, we must allow one of these two things; Either that he had a Genuine Copy of them, as we affirm; or that Irenaeus, the Disciple and Contemporary of St. Po∣lycarp had not; which we think it very unreasonable to suppose.

17. FOR not to say any thing as to this Matter, that Irenaeus lived too near the time both in which Ignatius wrote, and St. Polycarp collected his Epistles, to have been imposed upon in this particu∣lar: Seeing he himself tells us how care∣ful he was to gather up whatever came from the Hand of the Blessed Polycarp, and that he not only had the Epistles of Ignatius, as appears by his citing of them; but, as ‖ 1.109 himself declares, had also the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians; at the end of which the Epistles of Ig∣natius were subjoyned: What can we conclude, but that the Copy he had of both was taken from that of his Master Polycarp; which being to be sure Authen∣tick, it must remain that Irenaeus's was so too.

18. WERE it needful to add any thing yet farther to shew that Eusebius, who is confessed to have had the same Copy of St. Ignatius that we have now,

had no other than that of St. Polycarp so often mentioned; I might to the Testi∣mony of Irenaeus, before alledged, add that of † 1.110 Origen, who began to live some time before the other died. Now this Father has not only spoken of these E∣pistles, but has left us two Quotations to this day out of them; and both to be found in our Copies which we suppose to be true and Authentick. And from him to Eusebius was not above half a Century; too little a while for so great an Alteration to have been made in Writings spread up and down into so many Hands; read by all the Learned and Pious Men of those days; and up∣on all these Accounts utterly uncapable of such a Change, as is without the Au∣thority of one single Writer, only up∣on I know not what Conjectures, sup∣posed to have been made in them.

19. BUT I enlarge my self too much in so plain a Matter; and which I should hardly have thought worth the examining thus distinctly, had it not en∣gaged the Pens of so many Learned Men of the Reformed Religion, that it might have seem'd too great an Omission in such a Discourse as this, not to have given some Account of it. As for what we find a late ‖ 1.111 Learned Man advancing in Opposition to the Authority of these Epistles, that our Copies, though exceed∣ingly

more perfect than any that were ever extant before that those great Men Bishop Usher and Isaac Vossius set out the One, the old Latin Versions; the Other, the Original Greek, from the Manu∣script which he found in the Florentine Library of it; yet there may be reason still to suspect that they are not so free from all Corruptions as were to be wish'd: I reply; that if he means that the same has happen'd to these Epistles as has done to all other ancient Writings, that Letters, or Words have been mi∣staken, and perhaps even the pieces of some Sentences corrupted, either by the Carelesness or Ignorance of the Transcri∣bers; I see no Reason why we should deny that to have befallen these Epistles, which has been the Misfortune of all other Pieces of the like Antiquity. This therefore, it has been often † 1.112 declared, that neither do we contend about; nor can any one, who reads the best Copies we have of them with any Care or Judgment, make any doubt of it. But as for any larger Interpolations, such as were those of the Copies before ex∣tant; for any Changes or Mistakes that may call in question either the Credit or Authority of these Epistles as we now have them; we utterly deny that there are any such in these last Editions of them; nor has that Learned Man offer'd any thing to induce us to believe that there are.

20. AND here I should have con∣cluded these Reflections, but that there is yet one thing more to be taken notice of, and which must by no means be passed by; namely, that our most Learned Arch∣bishop * 1.113 Usher himself, though he agrees with us as to the Authority of the other Six Epistles here translated, yet doubts whether the Seventh, written to St. Po∣lycarp, be Genuine or no. Nor do's † 1.114 Isaac Vossius himself deny but that there are some things in it that may seem to ren∣der it suspicious; though more to prove it to be Authentick. For 1st, ‖ 1.115 St. Poly∣carp expresly assures us that Ignatius had written to him; so both * 1.116 Eusebius and † 1.117 S. Hierome teach us to understand his Ex∣pression; They mention the Epistle to Po∣lycarp, as distinct from that to the Church of Smyrna: And 2dly, ‖ 1.118 The Ancient Fathers quote it as Ignatius's no less than the rest: And from all which it seems to be very plain, that this also has the same Evidence of being written by Ignatius that any of the rest have; and therefore that he who allows it as sufficient for them, ought not to refuse it for this.

21. AS for that which seems to be the most difficult to account for in it, namely his writing after such a manner to so great a Bishop, and so old a Man, as he do's to Polycarp; Chap. V, VI. it is rightly observed by * 1.119 Vossius in his

Annotations on those Chapters, that he speaks in them not to St. Polycarp; but by a usual Change of Person, shews what he would have Polycarp say to his Church: And whosoever shall consider in what manner he brings in what he there delivers; Say to my Sisters, &c. And again, Exhort my Brethren, &c. will presently see, how those Instructions are to be understood.

22. AND now it remains only that I give some short Account of the fol∣lowing Translation of these Epistles. The Copies from which I did it were those of Isaac Vossius and Bishop Usher; com∣paring both as I had Occasion with the late Edition of Cotelerius. In the † 1.120 Sa∣lutation of the Epistle to the Romans I have departed from all of them, and follow'd the Correction of that Judicious Man, whose Name I mention in the Margent of it. I thought my self the more at liberty to do this, because that this Epistle was not found in the Floren∣tine Manuscript; but made up in some measure from the Latin Versions, by the Conjectures of Learned Men: Among whom I think I shall offend none, if in judging of these kind of things, and espe∣cially of this Author, I shall allow Bi∣shop Pearson the first place. For the rest I have kept as strictly to the Text of Vossius, as the Sense would permit me to

do: Only where a place was manifest∣ly imperfect I have sometimes taken the Liberty to express my own Conjectures, though differing from those of others, with whom nevertheless I pretend not to compare my self. But then I seldome do this without taking notice of it, and tel∣ling my Reader to whom he may recur for a somewhat different Opinion. If after all there shall appear some Faults in my Translation; though I may mo∣destly say I have taken what Care my little Acquaintance in these Matters would enable me to do, to avoid them; I desire it may be consider'd that I had a difficult Author, and an imperfect Co∣py to deal with; And I shall be very ready thankfully to amend any Error, that any more discerning Person shall think fit to advertise me of, if ever this Collection should be thought worthy to come to a Second Edition.

CHAP. V. Of the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius; and of the following Relation of it, written by those who were present at his Sufferings.

Of the Life of St. Ignatius; whence he was called Theophorus? That he ne∣ver saw Christ; but was converted to Christianity by the Apostles: And by them made Bishop of Antioch. How he behaved himself in that Station? Of his Death: Why he was sent from Antioch to Rome, in order to his suf∣fering there? Metaphrastes account of the Effect which his Death wrought upon the Emperour Trajan, rejected. How the Persecution of the Christians came to be mitigated about the time that he suffered? An Enquiry into the Time of his Martyrdom.

1. IN the foregoing Chapter I have given such an Account of the Epi∣stles of St. Ignatius as seem'd necessary to vindicate the Authority of them, and to remove those Prejudices which some had of late endeavour'd to raise against them. I am now to pass from the

Writings of this Holy Man, to his tru∣ly Great and Heroical Sufferings: An Account whereof is in the next place subjoyn'd, in the Relation of those who accompanied him from Antioch to Rome; and were there the Eye-Witnesses of his Martyrdom.

2. BUT before I come to the Con∣sideration of this last and noblest part of his Life, I cannot but think it will be expected from me to give some Ac∣count of the foregoing Passages of it: That so we may here have at once a full View of this Great Saint; and per∣ceive by what Steps he prepared himself for so Constant and Glorious a Death.

3. AND here it will be necessary for me in the first place to consider the Character which he gives of himself in the Beginning of all his Epistles, and which he constantly asserted before the * 1.121 Emperour at his Examination, name∣ly, that of Theophôrus. Now this ac∣cording to the different Pronunciation of it, may be expounded after a very different manner; and signifie either a Person carried by God, or else a Divine Person; One who carries God in his Breast. And in both these Significations we find this Name to have been given to this Holy Man.

4. FOR 1st. As to the former Sig∣nification, we are told by some of the Writers of his Life, that St. Ignatius was the Child whom our Blessed Sa∣viour took in his Arms, and set before his Disciples as a Pattern of Humility, when he told them, That unless they should be converted,* 1.122 and become as little Children, they should in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God: And that from thence He took the Name of Theo∣phorus; One who was Born, or Carried by God. And thus not only † 1.123 Meta∣phrastes and * 1.124 Nicephorus among the Greeks; but as our Learned ‖ 1.125 Bishop Usher tells us, some Syriac Writers more ancient than they, both interpret this Name, and give an Account of its be∣ing attributed to this Blessed Martyr.

5. BUT as Stories of this kind sel∣dom lose in the relation, so we find the † 1.126 Latines making a farther Improve∣ment of the present Fable. For having Confirm'd the Truth of what these Men had before observed, of St. Ignatius's being taken up by our Saviour into his Arms; they add, that for this Reason the Apostles, when they made him Bishop of Antioch, durst not lay their Hands upon him;

He having been before both commended by our Saviour Christ, and sanctified by his touching of him.

6. THERE is so much of Romance in all the latter part of this Story, and so little Grounds for the former, that I shall not need to spend any time in the confuting of either. It is enough that * 1.127 St. Chrysostome has assured us, that this Holy Man never saw the LORD; and that all the other Ancient Writers are silent as to this particular. Which makes me the rather wonder at the En∣deavour of a late † 1.128 Learned Writer of our own Country, to give Countenance to such a Fable; and which if not de∣stitute of all Probability, yet at least wants any good Authority to support it: And as our Learned ‖ 1.129 Bishop Pear∣son very reasonably conjectures, was first started about the time of the VIII^th Ge∣neral Council, by the Party of that Igna∣tius who was then set up in Opposition to Photius; and from thence derived both to Anastasius among the Latines, and to Metaphrastes among the Greeks.

7. TO pass then from this fabulous Account of this Title, let us come to the consideration of the true Import of it. Now for that as we cannot have any better, so neither need we desire any other Account, than what this * 1.130 Ho∣ly Man himself gave the Emperour of that Name. When being asked by him, Who was Theophorus? He replied, He who has Christ in his Breast. And in

this sense was this Name commonly used among the Ancients; as has been shewn in a multitude of Examples by Bishop * 1.131 Pearson, in his Elaborate Vindication of Ignatius's Epistles. I shall offer only one of them, that of St. Cyrill; who Anathematizes those who should call our Saviour Christ, Theophorus; Lest, says he, he should thereby be understood to have been no other than one of the Saints.

8. IT remains then that Ignatius was called Theophorus upon no other Account, than as any other Divine or Excellent Person might have been so called; name∣ly, upon the Account of his admirable Piety: Because his Soul was full of the Love of God, and sanctified with an extraordinary Portion of the Divine Grace; as both his Life shewed, and the earnest desire he had to be dissolved and to be with Christ; and his Joy when he saw himself approaching towards it; and (to mention no more,) his Constan∣cy in his last, and most terrible Conflict with the Wild Beasts, will not suffer us to doubt.

9. BUT tho' the Story then of our Saviour's taking St. Ignatius into his Arms be of no Credit; yet thus much * 1.132 St. Chrysostome tells us, that he was inti∣mately acquainted with the Holy Apo∣stles, and instructed by them in the full

Knowledg of all the Mysteries of the Gospel. What was the Country that gave Birth to this Blessed Saint, or who his Parents, we cannot tell. Indeed as to the former of these, his Country; a † 1.133 late Author has endeavoured from a Passage in Abulfaragius, set out by our Incom∣parable Dr. Pocock, to fix it at Nora in Sardinia; a place which still retains its anicent Name with very little Variation. This is certain, that growing eminent both in the Knowledg of the Doctrine of Christ, and in a Life exactly framed according to the strictest Rules of it; He was upon the Death of Evodius cho∣sen, by the Apostles that were still living, to be Bishop of Antioch, the Metropolis of Syria; and whatever Anastasius pre∣tends * 1.134, received Imposition of Hands from them.

10. HOW he behaved himself in this great Station, tho' we have no par∣ticular Account left to us, yet may we easily conclude from that short hint that is given us of it, in the Relation of his Martyrdom † 1.135.

Where we are told that he was a Man in all things like unto the Apostles; that as a good Gover∣nour, by the Helm of Prayer and Fa∣sting, by the Constancy of his Do∣ctrine and Spiritual Labour, he op∣posed himself to the Floods of the Ad∣versary: That he was like a Divine

Lamp illuminating the Hearts of the Faithful by his Exposition of the Ho∣ly Scriptures; and lastly, that to pre∣serve his Church, he doubted not free∣ly and of his own accord, to expose himself to the most bitter Death.

This is in general the Character of his Beha∣viour in his Church of Antioch; and a greater than which can hardly be given to any Man. Nor indeed can we doubt but that he who, as ‖ 1.136 Eusebius tells us, and as his Epistles still remaining abun∣dantly testifie, was so careful of all the other Churches, to confirm them in a sound Faith, and in a constant Adhe∣rence to their Holy Religion; was cer∣tainly much more vigilant to promote the Interests of Piety within his own Diocese, which was bless'd with his Government above * 1.137 Forty Years.

11. HENCE we may observe, what a tender concern he expresses in all his Epistles for his Church at Antioch: With what Affection he recommends it to the Prayers of those to whom he wrote? And especially to the Care of his dear Friend, and Fellow-Disciple St. Polycarp. And when he heard at Troas of the cea∣sing of the Persecution there, how did he rejoyce at it? And require all the neighbouring * 1.138 Churches to rejoyce with him; and to send their Messengers and Letters thither, to congratulate with them upon that account?

12. SUCH was his Affection to∣wards his own Church, and his Care of all the Others round about him: And by which he became in such an extra∣ordinary Favour with them, that they thought nothing could be sufficient to ex∣press their Respect towards him. And therefore we are told, that when he was carried from Antioch to Rome, in order to his Suffering there; all the Churches every where sent * 1.139 Messengers on the way to attend him, and to com∣municate to his Wants. And what is yet more, they were generally their Bishops themselves that came to meet him; and thought it a singular Hap∣piness to receive some Spiritual Exhor∣tations from him. And when he was Dead, they paid such an Honour to his Memory, as to account the † 1.140 few Bones that were left of him by the Wild Beasts, more precious than the richest Jewels: Insomuch that we are told they were several * 1.141 Ages after ta∣ken up from the place where they were first deposited, as not Honourable enough for them to lie in; and that being brought within the City where he once was Bishop, there was institu∣ted a Yearly Festival in Memory of him.

13. AS for what concerns the Cir∣cumstances of his Death, they are so particularly recounted in the Relation I have here subjoyn'd of it, that there need nothing further to be added, to what is there deliver'd of this matter. Yet one Remark I cannot but make on that particular of his Story which has puzzled so many * 1.142 Learned Men to ac∣count for; but may easily be resolved, and I believe most truly too, into the over-ruling Hand of the Divine Provi∣dence. And that is; of the sending of this Holy Man from Antioch as far as Rome to suffer. For whatever the Design of the † 1.143 Emperour may have been in it; Whether he intended to increase his Sufferings by a Journey so wearisom, and attended with so many bitter Cir∣cumstances as that must needs have been to a Person very probably at that time Fourscore Years of Age: Or whether he hoped by this means to have over∣come his Constancy, and have drawn him away from his Faith: Or lastly, Whether, as * 1.144 Metaphrastes tells us, upon his con∣sulting with Those of the Senate who were with him, he was advised

not to let him suffer at Antioch, least thereby he should raise his Esteem the more among the People there, and render him the more dear and desirable to them:

We cannot but doubt, that God hereby designed to present to all

the Nations through which he was to pass, a glorious Instance of the Power of his Religion, that could enable this Bles∣sed Martyr with so much Constancy to despise all the Violence of his Enemies; and to be impatient after those Tryals which they hoped should have affrighted him into a base and degenerous Com∣plyance with their Desires.

14. THIS was indeed a Triumph worthy of the Christian Religion: Nor was it any small Advantage to the Churches at such a critical Time, to have their Zeal awaken'd, and their Courage confirm'd, both by the Example and Ex∣hortations of this great Man, from An∣tioch even to Rome it self. And we are accordingly told with what mighty Com∣fort and Satisfaction they received his In∣structions; and as the * 1.145 Authors of his Acts express it, Rejoyced to partake in his Spiritual Gift.

15. NAY but if we may believe Me∣taphrastes as to the Effect which the Suf∣ferings of this Holy Man had upon the Mind of the Emperour, the Church re∣ceived yet greater Benefit by his Death.

For Trajan† 1.146, says he, hearing of what had been done to Ignatius, and how undauntedly he had undergone the Sen∣tence that was pronounced against him; and being inform'd that the Christians

were a sort of Men that did nothing contrary to the Laws, nor were guilty of any Impieties; but worshipped Christ as the Son of God, and exercis∣ed all Temperance both in Meat and Drink, nor medled with any thing that was forbidden: He began to repent of what he had done, and command∣ed that the Christians should indeed be searched out, but that being discover'd they should not be put to Death; On∣ly they should not be admitted into any Offices, nor be suffer'd to meddle with any Publick Employs. Thus was not only the Life of Ignatius of great Use to the Church; but his very Death the means of procuring much Good to it.

And what Metaphrastes here tells us, we find in effect deliver'd by ano∣ther * 1.147 Author of his Acts not yet set forth; and from whom he seems to have taken his Story, only with the Addi∣tion of some farther Circumstances of his own, to make it the more complete.

16. BUT tho' I should be far from envying any thing that might make for the Honour of this Blessed Martyr; yet are there many Circumstances in the Story which Metaphrastes has here put together, that make me justly call in question the Truth of it. For first, it is evident beyond all doubt, that the Persecution was abated at Antioch before

Ignatius suffer'd, nay before he was yet gone out of the Lesser Asia. Insomuch that in his three last Epistles which he wrote from Troas, to the Philadelphians, the Smyrnaeans, and to Polycarp himself; he particularly takes notice of the Peace of the Church of Antioch, and exhorts them to send Congratulatory Messages thither upon the account of it.

17. NOR was this Suspension of the Persecution granted upon Ignatius's ac∣count, but upon the Remonstances which his own Officers made to him both of the Numbers of those that died for the Christian Faith, and of the Innocency of their Lives; and lastly of the Readiness with which they not only suffer'd when taken, but voluntarily came and presented themselves before them. Two of these Epistles relating to this very Persecution we have still remaining; the One writ∣ten by * 1.148 Tiberianus President of Palaestina Prima, the Other of † 1.149 Pliny the Younger Pro-Praetor of Bythinia. And the An∣swer of ‖ 1.150 Trajan to the latter of which we find to have been in the same Words that Jo. Malela tells us he replied to the Other; viz.

That the Christians should not be sought after; but if they were brought before them and convicted, should be punish'd, unless they abjured.

18. AND the same is the Account which not only * 1.151 Eusebius from † 1.152 Tertul∣lian gives us of the Emperour's Order, as to this matter; but which ‖ 1.153 Suidas after Both, has left us of it. Which makes it the more strange to find such a different Relation both in Bishop Ushers Manuscript Author, and in Metaphrastes's Acts of Ignatius before mentioned. It is true that notwithstanding these Re∣scripts of the Emperour, the Persecution still continued; nor was it so soon over in other Places as it was at Antioch. This is plain not only from the History of this time left us by * 1.154 Eusebius, but may in general be concluded from the ‖ 1.155 Prayer which this Holy Saint made at his Martyrdom: Where, say our Acts,

He intreated the Son of God in be∣half of the Churches, that he would put a stop to the Persecution; and re∣store Peace and Quiet to them.

But these were only Local Persecutions, as † 1.156 Eusebius calls them, and proceeded ra∣ther from the Fury of the People, and the Perverseness of some particular Go∣vernours, than from the Design or Command of the Emperour.

19. AS for the Time of Ignatius's Suffering, we are only told in his Acts that it was when Syria and Synecius were Consuls; nor are Learned Men yet a∣greed in what Year to fix it. Eusebius

in his Chronicle places it in the Year of Christ CX. Marianus Scotus CXII. * 1.157 Bishop Usher yet sooner in the Year CVII. And lastly to name no more, our most exact † 1.158 Bishop Lloyd, follow'd therein by the late Critick upon Baronius Antonius Pagi, yet later than any; to wit, in the Year that the great Earth∣quake fell out at Antioch, and from which Trajan himself hardly escaped: Which as ‖ 1.159 Jo. Malela accounts it, and is follow'd therein by Bishop Usher in his Computation, was in the Year CXVI.

20. AND this may suffice to have been observed concerning the most emi∣nent Passages that occur in the Acts of the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius. I shall need say nothing of the Authority of the Relation its self; which as it is writ∣ten with all Sincerity, and void of those Additions which latter Writers have made to these kind of Histories, so we are told in the Close of it, that it was compiled by Those who went with him from Antioch, and were the Eye-Witnes∣ses of his Encounters. This Account was first publish'd from two very anci∣ent Manuscripts by our most Reverend Arch-Bishop Usher, in the Appendix to his Edition of Ignatius, A ^o 1647. and is now I suppose the first time translated into our own Language. I cannot tell

whether it be worth the observing, that in the Collection made by the late Learn∣ed Cotelerius of the Writings of the A∣postolical Fathers, there is instead of these Genuine Acts, inserted the Account which Metaphrastes put together of his Sufferings, several Ages after. It would perhaps have made a more agreeable Hi∣story to the Vulgar Reader, had I tran∣slated that Relation, rather than this, which is much shorter, and wants many notable Passages that are to be found in that Other. But as I should then have departed from my Design of setting out nothing but what I thought to be of an Apostolical Antiquity; so to those who love the naked Truth, these plain Acts will be much more satisfactory, than a Relation filled up with the uncertain, and too often fabulous Circumstances of latter Ages.

CHAP. VI. Of the Martyrdom of St. Poly∣carp, and of the Epistle writ∣ten by the Church of Smyrna concerning it.

That there were heretofore several called by the Name of Polycarp: Both the Country, and Parentage of St. Po∣lycarp uncertain. What he was be∣fore his Conversion; and by whom Converted? He is made Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles. How he be∣haved himself in that Office? The great Veneration which the Christians had for him. Of his Journey to Rome, and what he did there? The Testi∣mony of St. John concerning him, Rev. ii.8. Of the Time of St. Poly∣carp's Martyrdom: What Persecu∣tions the Church then labour'd under? Of the Epistle of the Church of Smyr∣na concerning his Sufferings; and the Value which the Antients put upon it. Of the Miracles that hapned at his Death. What his Age was when he suffered? What the Day of his Suf∣fering? In what Place he was put to

Death? Of the Authority of the pre∣sent Epistle; and its Translation into our own Language.

1. THE Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, the next Piece that follows in the present Collection; how∣ever it makes mention of some Others that suffered, at the same time with St. Polycarp, for the Faith of Christ; yet insisting chiefly upon the particu∣lars of his Passion, and being design'd by that Church to communicate to all the World the Glorious End of their beloved Bishop, and most worthy and constant Martyr of Christ: I shall ob∣serve the same Method in treating of this, that I did in discoursing of the Acts of St. Ignatius before; and speak some∣what of the Life of St. Polycarp first, before I come to consider the Account that is here given us of his Death.

2. THAT there were several of the Name of Polycarp heretofore, and who must therefore carefully be distinguish'd from him of whom we are now to dis∣course, has been evidently shewn, by the late Learned * 1.160 Editor of his Epistle. As for our Polycarp the Disciple of St. John, and the great Subject of the present Martyrologie; we have little account, either what was his Country, or who his Parents? In general we are

told that he was born somewhere in the East; as * 1.161 le Moyne thinks not far from Antioch; and perhaps in Smyrna its self, says our Learned Dr. † 1.162 Cave. Being sold in his Childhood, he was bought by a certain Noble Matron whose Name was Calisto; and bred up by her, and at her Death made Heir to all her Estate; which tho' very consi∣derable, he soon spent in Works of Charity and Mercy ‖ 1.163.

3. HIS Christianity he received in his younger Years from Bucolus Bishop of Smyrna; by whom being made * 1.164 Dea∣con and Catechist of that Church, and discharging those Offices with great Ap∣probation; he was upon the Death of Bucolus made Bishop of Smyrna by the † 1.165 Apostles, and particularly by St. ‖ 1.166 John, whose Disciple, together with Ignatius, he had before been.

4. HOW considerable a Reputation he gain'd by his wise Administration of this great Office, we may in some mea∣sure conclude from that Character which his very Enemies gave of him at his Death: When crying out that he should be thrown to the Lyons, they laid this to him as his Crime, but which was in∣deed his chiefest Honour ∴ 1.167; This, say they, is the Doctor of Asia, the Father of the Christians, and the Over-turner of

our Gods; And when he was burnt, they persuaded the Governour not to suffer his Friends to carry away any of his Remains, * 1.168 Least, say they, the Chri∣stians forsaking him that was crucified, should begin to worship Polycarp.

5. NOR was it any small Testimo∣ny of the Respect that was paid to him, that (as we are told in this † 1.169 Epistle) the Christians would not suffer him to pull off his own Cloaths, but strove who should be the most forward to do him Service; thinking themselves happy if they could but come to touch his Flesh. For, says the Epistle, even before he had grey Hairs, he was adorn'd with such a good Conversation, as made all Men pay a more than ordinary Respect to him.

6. HENCE St. * 1.170 Hierome calls him the Prince of all Asia, Sophronius the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉· or Chief Ruler; perhaps, says a † 1.171 Learned Man in opposition to the Asiarchae of the Heathens spoken of in this Epistle: Signifying thereby, that as they were among the Gentiles, the Heads of their sacred Rites, and presided in the common Assemblies and Spectacles of Asia; So was Polycarp among the Chri∣stians a kind of Universal Bishop; the Prince and Head of the Churches in those Parts.

7. NOR was his Care of the Church confined within the Bounds of the Lesser Asia, but extended even unto Rome its self: * 1.172 Whither we are told he went upon the Occasion of the Quarto-deci∣man Controversie then on foot between the Eastern and Western Churches, and which he hoped to have put a stop to, by his timely interposition with those of Rome. But tho' Anicetus and he could not agree upon that Point, each pretending Apostolical Tradition to war∣rant them in their Practice: Yet that did not hinder but that he was received with all possible Respect there; and † 1.173 officiated in their Churches in presence of the Bishop, and * 1.174 communicated with him in the most sacred Mysteries of Re∣ligion.

8. WHILE he was at Rome he re∣mitted nothing of his Concern for the Interests of the Church; but employed his time partly in confirming those who were sound in the Faith, but especially in drawing over those who were not, from their Errours. In which Work how successful he was, his own Scholar † 1.175 Irenaeus particularly recounts to us.

9. WHAT he did after his return, and how he discharged his pastoral Of∣fice to the time of his Martyrdom we

have little farther Account: Nor shall I trouble my self with the Stories which * 1.176 Pionius without any good Grounds has recorded of the Life of this Holy Man. But that he still continued with all diligence to watch over the Flock of Christ, we have all the reason in the World to believe: And that not only from what has been already observed, but from one particular more which ought not to be omitted; namely, that when Ignatius was hurried away from his Church of Antioch to his Martyrdom, he knew none so proper to commend the Care of it to, as to this Excellent Man; or to supply by his own Letters, what the Other had not time to write, to all the Other Churches round about.

10. BUT I shall close up this part of the Life of this Holy Saint, with the Testimony which St. John has given to him, Revel. ii.8. And which as it af∣fords us a sufficient Evidence of the Ex∣cellency of his Life, so do's it open the way to what we are next to consider, viz. his Death and Passion; Unto the Angel of the Church in Smyrna, write: These things saith the First and the Last, which was dead and is alive. I know thy Works, and Tribulation, and Poverty (but thou art Rich;) and I know the Blasphe∣my of Them that say they are Jews, and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan.

Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: Behold the Devil shall cast some of you into Prison, that ye may be tried, and ye shall have Tribulation ten Days: Be thou faithful unto Death, and I will give thee a Crown of Life.

11. AND this brings me to that which I am chiefly to insist upon, name∣ly the Death of this Blessed Martyr; the Subject of that Epistle which is here sub∣joyn'd from the Church of Smyrna con∣cerning it. And here I shall in the first place take for granted what our Learn∣ed Bishop * 1.177 Pearson seems to have prov∣ed beyond Contradiction; that St. Poly∣carp suffer'd, not as is † 1.178 commonly sup∣posed, about the Year of Christ CLXVII. or as Bishop ‖ 1.179 Usher has stated it yet later CLXIX. much less as ∴ 1.180 Petit still later CLXXV. but under the Emperour An∣toninus Pius, in the Year of our LORD CXLVII. Now that the Christians a∣bout that time, and especially those of Asia, lay under some severe Prosecutions is evident from the Apology which Justin Martyr about this very time presented to the Emperour in order to a Mitiga∣tion of it. And which however * 1.181 Ba∣ronius, and after him † 1.182 Valesius places two or three Years later; yet is their Opinion much more probable who put it about the beginning of that Empe∣rour's Reign: As both ‖ 1.183 Eusebius among

the Ancients; and his Learned Editor * 1.184 Scaliger, not to mention any † 1.185 Others, of latter Times, have done.

12. WHAT the Effect of this Apo∣logy was we cannot certainly tell; but that the Persecution was not presently put to an end, not only the Second Apo∣logy of the same Father; but that which ‖ 1.186 Eusebius tells us was afterwards present∣ed to his Successor Marcus Aurelius, by ‖ 1.187 Melito Bishop of Sardis, plainly makes appear. In which he complains,

that the Christians were still informed a∣gainst by wicked Men, greedy of what they had; and prosecuted notwith∣standing the several Orders that his Father had given, and the Letters he had written to the contrary.

It is true, Eusebius tells us that the Empe∣rour † 1.188 Antoninus Pius had set out an Ef∣fectual Edict in favour of the Christians; and that particularly addressed to the Common Council of Asia, not long before the time in which we affirm St. Polycarp to have suffered. And this seems to leave it under some doubt how a Perse∣cution could have been again revived a∣gainst the Church, within so short a time, and after such a vigourous Edict of an Emperour still living to the contrary. But it is evident Eusebius must have mistook the Emperour, and have set down that for the Rescript of Antoninus Pius,

which was indeed set out by Marcus Au∣relius immediately after his Death; as both the Inscription shews, and * 1.189 Vale∣sius and Others have evidently made it appear to be.

13. IT was then in One of these † 1.190 Topical Persecutions, so frequent in the Lesser Asia; that the Storm happening to fall in a particular manner upon the Church of Smyrna, carried off this Holy Martyr among the rest. What the par∣ticular Circumstances of his Passion were it would be impertinent for me to relate in this place, seeing they are so fully and exactly described in the Epistle of which we are now discoursing. A Piece so ex∣cellently composed, that Eusebius thought it worthy to be almost intirely transcrib∣ed into his Ecclesiastical History. And of which a very * 1.191 great Man of the present Age profess'd,

That he knew not any thing in all Ecclesiastical Antiquity, that was more wont to affect his Mind; insomuch that he seem'd to be no lon∣ger himself when he read it: And be∣lieved that no good Christian could be satisfied with reading often enough this, and the like Accounts, of the Sufferings of those Blessed Martyrs, who in the Primitive times laid down their Lives for the Faith.

14. NOR did the Ancients put any less Value upon this Piece, which as * 1.192 Gregory of Tours tells us was even to his time read publickly in the Gallican Churches; and no doubt made a part of that Annual Remembrance, which the Churches of Asia kept of his Martyr∣dome.

15. BUT tho' I think it needless to mention here any thing of what the following Epistle relates concerning the Passion of this Holy Man; yet one Cir∣cumstance there is which both † 1.193 Euse∣bius and † 1.194 Ruffinus having omitted, is al∣so pass'd by in the following Translation, tho' found in the Acts as set out from the Barrochian Manuscript by Arch-Bishop Usher. And that is this; That the Souldier or Officer having struck his Launce into the Side of the Saint, there came forth a Pigeon, together with a great quantity of Blood, as is express'd in the following * 1.195 Epistle. Now tho' there may seem to have been something of a Foundation for such a Miracle in the Railery of ‖ 1.196 Lucian, upon the Death of Peregrinus the Philosopher; who burnt himself about the same time that St. Po∣lycarp suffered, and from whose Funeral Pile he makes a Vulture to ascend, in Opposition, it may be, to St. Polycarp's Pigeon; if indeed he design'd (as a

* 1.197 Learned Man has conjectured) under the Story of that Philosopher, to ridicule the Life and Sufferings of Polycarp: Yet I confess I am so little a Friend to such kind of Miracles, that I thought it better with Eusebius to omit that Circumstance, than to mention it from Bishop Usher's Manuscript. And indeed besides the strangeness of such an Adventure, I cannot think, had any such thing truly happen'd at his Death; that not only Eusebius should have been ignorant of it, but that neither St. Hierome, nor Ruffi∣nus, nor the Menaea of the Greek Church, should have made the least mention of it. Either therefore there must have been some Interpolation in the Manu∣script set forth by that Learned Man; Or because that does not appear, per∣haps it may be better accounted for by the Mistake of a † 1.198 single Letter in the Original; and which will bring it to no more than what Eusebius has in effect said, that there came out of his Left Side a great quantity of Blood.

16. AS for what concerns the Time of his Martyrdome, I have before shewn the different Computations which Learn∣ed Men have made of it. Nor are they less at Variance about the * 1.199 Age of this Holy Martyr when he suffered, than a∣bout the Year of his Suffering. For tho' St. Polycarp expresly told the Pro-Consul,

as we read in the following * 1.200 E∣pistle, that he had served Christ Eighty and Six Years; Yet † 1.201 some interpret this of the Number of Years since his Conversion; ‖ 1.202 Others of those of his whole Life. But however thus much is evident, that which soever of the two be in the right, they will either of them make good what * 1.203 Irenaeus has told us of him, that he was very old when he died; and from which therefore nothing can be concluded either for the former of these Opinions, or against the latter.

17. BUT the following Acts of his Martyrdome go yet farther: They tell us that He not only suffer'd at so great an Age; but upon the Great Sabbath, the Second Day of the Month Xanticus, before the Seventh Kalend of May, about VIII. a Clock. What is meant by this Great Sabbath is another Point much debated, but never like to be agreed among Learned Men: Whose Opinions are ex∣amined at large by † 1.204 Bishop Usher, * 1.205 Va∣lesius, ‖ 1.206 Le Moyne, ∴ 1.207 Bishop Pearson, and ** 1.208 Others upon this Occasion. But if we were right before in assigning the Year of his Suffering, as I think we were; then we must conclude the Great Sab∣bath to have been the same here, that is

usually called by that Name among Ec∣clesiastical Writers, namely, the Saturday in the Holy Week; and to which all the Other Characters here assigned are exact∣ly Correspondent. And then according to this Computation, St. Polycarp will have suffer'd in the Year of Christ CXLVII. being March 26. the Satur∣day before Easter, about VIII. a Clock.

18. THE place in which he suffer'd was a large Amphitheatre in which the Common Assemblies of Asia were wont to be kept: And as we are told by * 1.209 those who have travelled into those Parts, is in some measure still remaining; and shewn as the Place of St. Polycarp's Mar∣tyrdom. I say nothing, to that which some have observed upon this Occasion of the Calamities which not long after fell upon the City of Smyrna; and which may seem to have been the Effect of the Divine Vengeance, punishing them for their Cruelty towards this Excellent Man, and the rest of his Companions that suffered together with him. But this is without the Bounds of my pre∣sent Design; which leads me only to consider what concerns the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, and to which that which follow'd the Death of Polycarp has no relation.

19. AND now having pass'd through the chief Parts of the following Rela∣tion, and which seem'd most to require our Animadversion; it is time for me to observe concerning the Epistle it self, which is here subjoyn'd, that it is a piece of most unquestionable Credit and Antiquity. As for the main Body of it, we find it preserved in the Ecclesiastical History of * 1.210 Eusebius; who lived not above an Age and a half after the writ∣ing of it. And even the Manuscript it self, made use of by Bishop Vsher, is so well attested; that we need not any far∣ther Assurance of the Truth of it. The Sum of the Account which we have given us of it is this; † 1.211

That Gaius an Acquaintance of St. Irenaeus the Disciple of Polycarp, transcribed it from the Copy of that Father: And Socrates, the Corinthian from Gaius; and from Socrates's Copy was transcribed that Manuscript which we still have of it.

20. TWICE has this Epistle been been put into our own Language, as far as the History of Eusebius has given oc∣casion for the Translation of it. What those Editions are I cannot tell, having never perused either of them. But I suppose it is now the first time joyn'd in an intire Piece together, and so com∣municated to the English Reader. In

my Translation of it I have strictly fol∣low'd the Edition of our most Reverend Primate, from which Cotelerius's is but a Copy: Nor have I, that I know of, de∣parted in the least Circumstance from it, except in that One for which I have before accounted. So that I may ven∣ture to say, I have here truly set forth the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna; as near as our Language would serve to express the Sense, if not to come up to the Beauty and Vigour of the Original.

CHAP. VII. Of the Catholick Epistle of St. Barnabas.

Why the Pieces that follow, are put in a Second Part, separate from the forego∣ing? The History of St. Barnabas, chiefly from the Acts of the Apostles. Of his Name, Education, and Tra∣vels; especially with St. Paul. How he came to be separated from that A∣postle. What he did afterwards? Of his Death: And the Invention of his Relicks; and of the Cyprian Privi∣ledges establish'd on that account. Of the present Epistle; and that it was

truly written by St. Barnabas. The principal Objections against it an∣swer'd. An Apology for its Allegori∣cal Interpretations of Scripture. The latter part of it, originally belonging to this Epistle. That it was written af∣ter the Destruction of Jerusalem. The Design and Usefulness of it.

1. WHEN I first enter'd upon the Design of publishing the following Collection, I intended to have here put an End to it: The following Pieces under the Names of Barnabas and Hermas, together with the Second Epistle of St. Clement; however un∣doubtedly very Ancient, and confess'd by all to come but little, if any thing, short of the Apostolical Times; having yet been neither so highly esteem'd a∣mong the Ancients, nor so generally re∣ceiv'd by many of the present Times, as those I have already mention'd. But when I consider'd the Deference which Others among the Primitive Fathers have paid to them, and the Value which is still put upon them by many, not inferior either in Learning or Pie∣ty to those who speak against them; I thought I could not better satisfie All, than by adding them in a Second Part to the fore-going Epistles: That so both they who have a just Esteem for them, might not complain of being defrauded

of any part of what remains of the A∣postolical Writings; and those who are otherwise minded might look upon them as standing in a second Rank, and not taking place, (which otherwise they must have done,) of those undoubtedly Ge∣nuine and Admirable Discourses, that make up the former part of this Work.

2. AND here the first Piece that oc∣curs, is the Catholick Eplistle of St. Bar∣nabas, the Companion of St. Paul, and Disciple of our Saviour Christ: Being generally esteem'd to have been one of the * 1.212 LXX. that were chose by him; However our Country-Man † 1.213 Bede, up∣on I know not what grounds, calls the Verdict of Antiquity in question as to this Matter; And of whom the Holy Spirit of God, has left us by St. Luke this Character, Acts xi.24. That he was a good Man, full of Faith, and of the Holy Ghost.

3. IT is not my design to enter on any long Account of the Life of a Per∣son so largely spoken of in the Holy Scriptures; and of whom little certain can be written, besides what is there re∣corded. His Country was Cyprus, a fa∣mous Island in the Mediterranean Sea; where there inhabited in those days so great a Number of Jews, that in the Time of * 1.214 Trajan they conspired against

the Gentiles there, and slew of them * 1.215 two Hundred and Forty Thousand Men. Upon which being cast out of the Isle, they were never suffer'd upon any account to set foot again in it, up∣on pain of Death.

4. HIS Name was at first Joses, but by the Apostles changed into Barnabas; which being interpreted, says St. Luke, is the Son of Consolation: And as we may conjecture from the † 1.216 place where it is first mentioned, was given him by the Apostles as an Honourable Acknow∣ledgment of his Charity, in selling his whole Estate for the Relief of the poor Christians; and upon the account of that Consolation which they received thereby.

5. HIS first Education, says ‖ 1.217 Meta∣phrastes, was at the Feet of Gamaliel; by whom he was instructed, together with St. Paul: Which perhaps moved that great Apostle upon his Conversion to apply himself to him, as the proper∣est Person to introduce him into the Acquaintance of the other Apostles; and afterwards to embrace him as his chief Friend and Fellow-Labourer in the Work of the Gospel.

6. HOW they travell'd together, and what they did in the Discharge of their Ministry, is at large set down

both by * 1.218 St. Luke in the Acts of the A∣postles, and by † 1.219 St. Paul himself in his Epistle to the Galatians: And in which we have the History of Men truly concern∣ed for the Propagation of the Gospel; and despising not only their own Ease, but their very Lives themselves in com∣parison of it. Many a weary Journey did they take, and danger did they run: They preach'd in the Day, and when they had so done, with their own Hands they wrought in the Night for their Sub∣sistence; that so they might not be bur∣thensom to any, nor seem to seek their own Advantage, but the Profit of those to whom they tender'd the Gospel.

7. AMONG other Countries to which they went, we are told that One of the first was Cyprus, the Native I∣sland of St. Barnabas: And that not of their own Motion, but by the express Order and Appointment of the Holy Ghost. How they prevail'd there, and by what Miracles they made way for the Conversion of it, first at Salamis, and then at Paphos, we are at large in∣form'd by St. Luke, Acts xiii. From thence they fetch'd a pretty large com∣pass through the Lesser Asia: And having with various Success preached to seve∣ral Cities of it, after ‖ 1.220 about Three Years Travel they again return'd to Antioch in Syria, the place from which they first set out.

8. HERE they tarried a considera∣ble space, in a sedulous Discharge of their Ministry: Till some Controver∣sies arising between the Jewish and the Gentile Converts, they were obliged for the better composing of them, to go up to Jerusalem; where a final End was put to them by * 1.221 a Synodical Decree of the Apostles and Elders assembled toge∣ther for that purpose.

9. WITH Joy they return'd to their Disciples at Antioch, and brought the Determination of that Divine Sy∣nod unto them. But it was not long 'ere St. Peter coming down after them, a little abated their Satisfaction: † 1.222 Whilst to please the Jewish Converts he dissem∣bled his Christian Liberty; and as St. Paul complains, led Barnabas also in∣to the same Dissimulation with him.

10. AND here St. Paul had occasion first of all to reprove St. Barnabas; which he did with great freedom, for his unseasonable Complyance. But it was not very long before he had ano∣ther Occasion offer'd for a yet worser Contention with him. For the next Year these two * 1.223 Holy Men having a∣greed to take a new Progress together, and to visit the Churches which they had planted in Asia some Years before; Bar∣nabas

was for taking his Cousin Mark again with them, but St. Paul would not consent to it; because that in their former Travels he had consulted too much his own Ease and safety, and * 1.224 left them at Pamphilia in the midst of their Journey.

11. BEING both resolute in their Opinions, the One to take his Kinsman with him, the Other not to yield to it; They not only came to some sharp Words with one another about it, but went their several ways † 1.225, Barnabas with Mark to Cyprus; and Paul with Silas, into Syria and Cilicia. Thus after a joynt Labour in their Ministry for al∣most Fourteen Years, were these two excellent Men, by a small Punctilio, sepa∣rated from one another: The Holy Spi∣rit of God intending hereby to shew us, that the Best Christians are still subject to the same Infirmities with other Men; and therefore ought not to be either too much exalted in their own Piety, or to despise others whom they suppose to be less perfect than themselves,

12. NOR was it a small Benefit which from hence accrued not only to the Church, which thereby enjoyed the Bene∣fit of these two great Men much more in their separate Labours, than if they had continued still together; but par∣ticularly

to St. Mark: Who being by the Severity of St. Paul brought to a deep Sense of his former Indifference in the Work of the Gospel, and yet not left by St. Barnabas to give way to any desperate Resolutions thereupon; be∣came afterwards a most useful Minister of Christ, and deserved not only to be made again the * 1.226 Companion of St. Paul, but to receive a very high Testimony of his † 1.227 Zeal from him. So well does the Wisdom of God know how to turn the Infirmities of Men to his own Glory, and to the Good of those who serve him with an honest and upright Heart.

13. WHAT became of St. Barnabas after this, and whither he went, is very uncertain. * 1.228 Some tell us, that from Cyprus he went on to Rome, and preach∣ed the Gospel there, even before St. Peter came thither. But tho' Baronius can by no means allow this, yet is he content that Barnabas should be thought to have come thither after him. At least this he ‖ 1.229 pretends to be without Dispute, that St. Barnabas came into Italy, and preach'd the Gospel in Liguria; where he founded the ancient Church of Milan, as from many ancient Monuments and Writers, says he, might be made appear; tho' at the same time he produces not one Testi∣mony in proof of it. I shall therefore conclude, till I am better inform'd, that

St. Barnabas spent the Remains of his Life in converting his own Country∣men the Jews; of which as I have be∣fore observed, there were such vast Numbers in that Island, and for whom we cannot but think he must have had a very tender regard. Or if we shall suppose him to have gone any farther, I presume it was only into the neighbour∣ing parts of the Lesser Asia, and Judaea, where he had before preach'd; or at farthest into * 1.230 Aegypt, where some tell us he went, and consecrated his Ne∣phew St. Mark the first Bishop of the Christian Church at Alexandria.

14. AND in this Opinion I am the rather confirm'd from the consideration of his Epistle which I have here sub∣joyn'd: Which seems manifestly to have been design'd for the Benefit of the Jews; and to shew how all the parts of it had a farther Spiritual Meaning than what at first sight appear'd, and were de∣sign'd to lead them to the Faith and Pie∣ty of the Gospel.

15. IN this Exercise therefore he most likely spent his Life; and if we may credit the Relation of the † 1.231 Monk in Surius, who writes the Acts of this Holy Evangelist, at last suffer'd Martyr∣dom in the Prosecution of it: Being at the Instigation of certain Jews that came

from Syria to Salamis, shut up in a Sy∣nagogue where he was disputing with them, and at Night stoned by them. What Truth there is in this Story I cannot tell; but this I must observe, which even * 1.232 Baronius himself is forced to acknowledg, that there is nothing of this kind to be met with in any ancient Author; nor does either Eusebius or ‖ 1.233 St. Jerome, where they treat expresly of this Holy Man, so much as once give the Title of Martyr to him.

16. BUT whatever were the man∣ner of St. Barnabas's Death, yet fa∣mous is the Story of the Invention of his Reliques, deliver'd by the same Monk; and who, as † 1.234 Baronius tells us, lived at the same time under Zeno the Empe∣rour; and confirm'd by the concurrent * 1.235 Testimonies of Theodorus, Nicephorus, Cedrenus, Sigebert, Marianus Scotus, and others. With what Ceremony this was perform'd, and how this Blessed Saint appear'd twice to Anthemius, then Bishop of Salamis, in order to the Discovery of his own Reliques; and how the Empe∣rour commanded a stately Church to be built over the Place of his Burial; I shall leave it to those who are fond of such Stories, to read at large in ‖ 1.236 Baro∣nius, and the * 1.237 Monk whom I before mentioned. It will be of more concern to take notice that † 1.238 Nilus Doxapater

tells us, that this very thing was the Ground of the Cyprian Privileges: Where speaking of certain Provinces that de∣pended not upon any of the Greater Pa∣triarchats, he instances first of all in Cyprus; Which, says he, continues free, and is subject to none of the Patriarchs, because of the Apostle Barnabas being found in it. And the same is the Account which * 1.239 Nice∣phorus also gives us of it; and which was assign'd before both in the † 1.240 No∣titia ascrib'd to Leo, as I find it quoted by Monsieur le Moyne, in his Preface to his late Collection of several ancient Pie∣ces relating to Ecclesiastical Antiquity.

17. TOGETHER with his Body, was found, says ‖ 1.241 Alexander, the Gospel of St. Matthew written in the Hebrew Tongue, lying upon his Breast; but * 1.242 Nilus says, that of his Kinsman S. Mark. Which of the two it was, or whether any thing of all this were more than a mere Story, contriv'd by Anthemius to get the better of Peter Patriarch of An∣tioch, I shall not undertake to determine. It is enough that we are assured that by this means ‖ 1.243 he not only preserved his Priviledges against Peter, but got his See confirm'd by the Emperour, as an Inde∣pendent See; which was also afterwards again done by Justinian, at the Instiga∣tion of the Empress Theodora, who was her self a Cyprian.

18. BUT to return to that which is more properly the Business of these Reflections. It do's not appear that St. Barnabas left any more in Writing than the Epistle I have here subjoyn'd. Indeed there were some heretofore who thought that the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by him. * 1.244 Tertullian con∣fidently quotes it as his: Nor do's ‖ 1.245 St. Hierome censure him for it, but leaves it as a doubt whether it should be ascribed to him, or to St. Luke, St. Clement, or St. Paul; tho' he seems rather to incline to St. Paul. As for the present Epistle, I do not know that it is deny'd by any of the Ancients to have been written by St. Barnabas. † 1.246 Clemens Alexandrinus both mentions and commends it as his. * 1.247 Origen calls it, The Catholick Epistle of Barna∣bas. ∴ 1.248 Eusebius, and St. ‖ 1.249 Jerome, tho' they place it among the Apochryphal Books, that is to say among such as were of doubtful Authority, and not admitted into the Canon of the Church; for so † 1.250 Valesius shews we are there to under∣stand them; yet make no question but that Barnabas was the Author of it, any more than that the Epistles of St. James, St. Jude, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, and the Second and Third of St. John, together with his Revelations; which * 1.251 Eusebius places in the same rank; were

written by those whose Names they bear.

19. WHICH being so, I cannot but wonder at some in our own Times, who upon such weak Grounds peremptorily pronounce it to be none of St. Barna∣bas's; which, says our Learned Bishop * 1.252 Pearson, none of all the Ancients pre∣tended to doubt of. And of this † 1.253 Co∣telerius seems to have been sensible; Who tho' he did not care to ascribe it to the Blessed Evangelist of whom we are now discoursing, yet was forced to sup∣pose that some other Barnabas wrote it, and without which he saw there could be no way of answering the concurrent Verdict of all Antiquity, which has uni∣versally agreed in Barnabas as the Au∣thor of it. But now who this Other Barnabas was, or that in those Times there was any such Person, he pretends not to tell us; and they who ascribe it to Barnabas, expresly speak of him as the same of whom I have hitherto been discoursing * 1.254.

20. BUT of all Others, most un∣accountable is the Fancy of Monsieur ‖ 1.255 le Moyne concerning the Author of this Epistle. He had observed that in seve∣ral Manuscripts it was immediately con∣tinued on with that of St. Polycarp: And from this Ignorance or Negligence of a

few Transcribers has this Learned Man concluded the two Epistles to have been both written by St. Polycarp; in which as he had none to go before him, so I believe he will scarcely meet with any to follow him † 1.256.

21. NOR are the Arguments which they bring against the Authority of it, of such Moment as to overthrow the constant Testimonies of the Ancients on its behalf. They tell us ‖ 1.257 first; that it is evident from the XVI^th Chapter of this Epistle, that it was written after the Destruction of Jerusalem. But why may not Barnabas have been then living, as well as we are sure St. John, and seve∣ral others of the Companions of the Apo∣stles were? And if he may have been living after it; why shall not we suppose that he was, as well as they, that he was not? Seeing it does not appear from the Testimony of any Antient Writers when he died.

22. BUT 2dly, * 1.258 They argue yet farther against it: For if this, say they, be the Genuine Epistle of St. Barnabas, how comes it to pass that it is not re∣ceived as Canonical? Certainly had the Primitive Christians believed it to have been written by such a Man, they would without Controversie have plac'd it a∣mong the sacred Writings; and not have

censured it as of doubtful Authority. This is indeed a very specious Pretence, but which being a little examined will be found to have no strength in it: It be∣ing certain that the * 1.259 Primitive Fathers did own this for St. Barnabas's Epistle, and yet not receive it into their Canon; and therefore that it do's not follow, that had they believed it to have been his, they must have esteem'd it Canonical.

23. WHAT Rules they had, or by what Measure they proceeded in those First Times in judging of the Canonical Scriptures of the New Testament, it is not necessary for me here to enquire. It is enough that we know what Books the Church did at last agree in as com∣ing under that Character: And for the rest, as we cannot doubt but that there was a due care taken in examining into a matter of such Importance, and that those Primitive Fathers did not without very good reason distinguish what were written by Divine Inspiration, from what were not; So we are very sure that all was not admitted by them into the rank of Canonical Scripture that was written by any Apostolical Man; and therefore that it can be no good Argument, that Barnabas was not the Author of this E∣pistle, because it is not placed among the Sacred Writings of the New Testa∣ment.

24. BUT there is yet one Objection more, and that much insisted upon by those who are Enemies to this Epistle. * 1.260 They tell us it is full of a strange sort of Allegorical Interpretations of Holy Scri∣pture; and therefore unworthy to be fa∣ther'd upon so Evangelical an Author. And yet notwithstanding this, we find Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen, Eu∣sebius and St. Jerome, some of the great∣est and most learned Criticks of those Ages that were the nearest to the time in which it was written, not doubt∣ing to ascribe it to St. Barnabas, and to think it worthy too of such an Author.

25. I NEED not say how general a way this was of interpreting Scripture, in the time that St. Barnabas lived. To omit Origen, who has generally been noted as excessive in it; and for whom yet a † 1.261 Learned Man has very lately made a reasonable Apology: Who has ever shewn a more diffusive Knowledg, than Clemens Alexandrinus has done in all his Composures? And yet in his Works we find the very same Method taken of Interpreting the Holy Scriptures, and that without any Reproach either to his Learning, or to his Judgment. What Author has there been more ge∣nerally applauded for his admirable Pie∣ty than the other Clement, whose Epi∣stle

to the Corinthians I have here in∣serted? And yet even in that plain piece ‖ 1.262, we meet with more than one Instance of the same kind of Interpretation; which was never the less admired by the best and most Primitive Christians.

26. EVEN * 1.263 St. Paul himself in his Epistles received by us as Canonical, affords us not a few Instances of this which is so much found fault with in St. Barnabas: As I might easily make appear from a multitude of Passages out of them, were it needful for me to en∣large my self on a Point, which every one who has read the Scriptures with any care, cannot chuse but have ob∣served.

27. NOW that which makes it the less to be wonder'd at in St. Barnabas is, that the * 1.264 Jews, of which Number he was himself originally one, and to whom he wrote, had of a long time been wholly addicted to this way of Inter∣preting the Law; and taught Men to search out a Spiritual Meaning for almost all the Ritual Commands and Ceremonies of it. This is plain from the Account which † 1.265 Aristeas has left us of the Rules which Eleazar the High Priest, to whom Ptolomy sent for a Copy of the Mosaical Law, gave him for the understanding of it. When it being

objected to him,

That their Legislator seem'd to have been too curious in little Matters; such as the Prohibi∣tions of Meats and Drinks, and the like, for which there appeared no just reason: He shew'd him at large, that there was a farther, hidden De∣sign, in it than what at first sight ap∣pear'd; and that these Outward Ordi∣nances were but as so many Cautions to them against such Vices, as were principally meant to be forbidden by them.

And then goes on to explain this part of the Law, after the same manner that Barnabas has done, in the following Epistle.

28. BUT this is not all; * 1.266 Eusebius gives us yet another Instance to con∣firm this to us; viz. of Aristobulus, who lived at the same time, and gave the same Account of the Spiritual Meaning of the Law, that Eleazar had done be∣fore. And that this was still continued among the Hellenistical Jews, is evi∣dent from the Account that is left us by one of them, who was con-tempo∣rary with St. Barnabas, and than whom none has been more famous for this way of Writing, I mean, † 1.267 Philo in his Description of the Theraputae: Whe∣ther the same whom in the beginning of his ‖ 1.268 Book he calls by the Name of Essenes, as ∴ 1.269 Scaliger supposes; Or a

particular Sect of Jews, as * 1.270 Valesius will have it; Or lastly, a kind of Monkish Converts from Judaism to Christianity, as ‖ 1.271 Eusebius heretofore described them, and as some ∴ 1.272 other Learned Men, seem rather to conjecture. But what∣ever becomes of this, herein they all agree, that they were originally Jews; and therefore we may be sure they follow'd the same Method of Interpreting Scri∣pture, that the Alexandrian Jews were wont to do.

29. NOW the Account which * 1.273 Eu∣sebius, from Philo, gives us of them, is this.

Their Leaders, says he, left them many ancient Writings of their No∣tions, clothed in Allegories.

And a∣gain;

* 1.274 They interpret the Holy Scri∣ptures, viz. of the Old Testament, Al∣legorically. For you must know, con∣tinues he, that they liken the Law to an Animal; the Words of which make up the Body, but the hidden Sense which lies under them, and is not seen, that they think to be the Soul of it.

And this was that which a late Learned ‖ 1.275 Author supposes render'd their Conversion to Christianity the more easie. For be∣ing wont to seek out the Spiritual Mean∣ing of the Law, they more readily em∣braced the Gospel, than those who look∣ed no farther than the outward Letter; and were therefore the harder to be per∣suaded

to come over to so Spiritual an Institution.

30. AND, I suppose, it was from hence that the most early Hereticks were so wedded to their Mystical Interpreta∣tions of Scripture, and so much valued themselves upon the account of them. And against whose false and impure Do∣ctrines, our late great Critick, * 1.276 Dr. Ham∣mond, supposes St▪ Barnabas to have prin∣cipally design'd his Epistle: And there∣fore that being to deal with Men who va∣lu'd nothing but such kind of Expositions, he was forced to confute them in their own way; both as most suitable to their Manners, and as most proper either to convince them of their Errors, or at least to prevent others, especially the Jewish Converts, from falling into them.

31. BUT whether this were so or no, thus much is evident from what has been said; that the Hellenistical Jews, to whom it is most probable St. Barnabas address'd his Epistle, were altogether used to this way of Interpreting the Holy Scriptures: And therefore that howsoe∣ver it may appear to others, who are so utterly unaccustomed to it, yet we ought not to wonder that St. Barnabas, who was himself a Jew, should at such a Time, and upon such an Occasion as this, make use of it; or suppose it at all unworthy of him so to do.

32. NOR indeed were they the Jews only that led the Holy Men in those days into these Mystical Expositions of the Sa∣cred Scriptures. Even the Gentile Philoso∣phers too conduced towards it: Whilst the better to cover over the fabulous Sto∣ries of their Gods, and which they saw were too ridiculous to be maintain'd; they explain'd the whole System of their Idolatry by Allegorical Analogies, and shew'd all the Poetical Accounts of them to be only the out-side Shadows of a sort of Natural Theology included under those Fictions. Thus * 1.277 Heraclides of Pontus wrote a whole Book of the Allegories of Homer: And * 1.278 Metrodorus of Lampsacus is fallen foul upon by Tatian, in his Ora∣tion against the Greeks, for pretending that neither Juno, nor Minerva, nor Jupiter were what those imagin'd who built Temples and Altars to them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Nay so far went this last Author in his Allegories, as to turn all the Trojan and Graecian He∣ro's into mere Fictions: And to make Hector, and Achilles, and Agamemnon, and even Helena her self, nothing less than what one would think they were, and what the common People ignorantly imagin'd them to be.

33. AND for the Influence which this had upon the † 1.279 Ancient Fathers who

from Philosophers became Christians; the Writings both of Justin Martyr and Cle∣mens Alexandrinus sufficiently shew. And if we may believe * 1.280 Porphery, an Ene∣my, in the Case of Origen; he tells us in the same place in which he complains of him,

For turning those things that were clearly deliver'd by Moses into Mystical Significations,

not only that he did this in Imitation of the Graecians; but that it was his frequent † 1.281 Conver∣sation with Numenius and Cronius, Mo∣deratus, Nichomachus, and Others among the Pythagoreans; and with Chaeremon and Cornutus among the Stoics; that he had learnt his Allegorical way of Ex∣pounding the Holy Scriptures, and ap∣plied that to his Religion, which they were wont to do to their Superstition.

34. FROM all which it appears, that this way of Writing in Matters of Re∣ligion, was in those days generally used not only among the Jews, but among the Wiser and more Philosophical of the Gentiles too: And from both came to be almost universally practised among the Primitive Christians. Which being so, we ought to be far from censuring of St. Barnabas for his mystical Application of what God prescribed to the Jews in the Old Testament, to the Spiritual Ac∣complishment of it in the New. Much less should we ever the more call in

question either the Truth, or Credit, of his Epistle upon this account.

35. HAVING said thus much either in Vindication of the Allegorical Exposi∣tions of this Epistle, or at least by way of Apology for them; I shall add but little more concerning the Epistle it self. I have before observed as to the Time of its Writing, that it was somewhat after the Destruction of Jerusalem; and as we may conjecture from the Subject of it, (for Title at present it has none, nor do's it appear that ever it had any) was ad∣dress'd to the Jews, to draw them off from the Letter of the Law, to a Spi∣ritual Understanding of it; and by that means dispose them to embrace the Gos∣pel. Whether he had besides this a far∣ther Design in it, as * 1.282 Dr. Hammond supposes, to confute the Errours of the Gnostick Hereticks, and to prevent the Jewish Converts from falling into them, it is not certain; but may from the chief Points insisted upon by him be probably enough supposed. If any one shall think it strange, that disputing against the Jews for the Truth of the Gospel, he should not have urged any of those Passages re∣lating to the Messiah, which seem to us the most apposite to such a purpose; Such as the Oracle of Jacob concerning the Time that Shiloh was to come; the LXX Weeks of Daniel; the Prophecies

of Haggai and Malachi, of his coming while the Second Temple stood; and which was now destroyed when he wrote this Epistle, and the like: * 1.283 Monsieur le Moyne will give him a ready Answer; viz. that these Passages relate chiefly to the Time of Christ's appearing, and that this was no Controversie in those days; the Jews not only confessing it, but being ready at every turn through this Persuasion to set up some or other for their Messiah, to their Shame and Confusion. It was therefore then but little necessary to use those Arguments against them, which now appear to be the most proper and convincing; since the State of the Que∣stion is alter'd, and the Jews either deny that their Messiah is come; or that it was necessary for him to have come a∣bout that time, that our Saviour Christ appeared in the Flesh.

36. BUT tho' the chief Design of this Epistle was to convince the Jews of the Truth of our Religion, yet are there not wanting in the latter part of it, ma∣ny excellent Rules, to render it still ve∣ry useful to the Pious Reader. * 1.284 Indeed some have doubted whether this did ori∣ginally belong to this Epistle; or whe∣ther it has not since been added to it. But seeing we find this part quoted by the Fathers, as belonging to St. Barna∣bas, no less than the other; and that the

Measure assign'd to it in the ancient Sti∣chometries, can hardly be well accounted for without it: I do not see but that we ought to conclude, that our Author did di∣vide his Epistle into the two Parts, in which we now have it; and that this lat∣ter, aswell as the former, was written by him.

37. AS for the Translation which I have here given of it; I have made it up out of what remains of the Original Greek, and of the Old Latin Version; and of each of which, tho' a Part be lost, yet it has so fallen out, that between them we not only have the whole Epi∣stle, but that too free of those Interpo∣lations which * 1.285 Vossius tells us some had endeavour'd to make in this, as well as in Ignatius's Epistles. In both I have en∣deavour'd to attain to the Sense of my Author, and to make him as plain and easie as I was able. If in any thing I shall have chanced to mistake him, I have only this to say for my self; that he must be better acquainted with the Road, than I pretend to be, who will undertake to travel so long a Journey in the dark, and never to miss his way.

CHAP. VIII. Of the Shepherd of St. Hermas; and of the Second Epistle of St. Clement to the Corinthians.

That the Hermas mention'd by St. Paul, Rom. xvi.14. was the Author of that Book which is here subjoyn'd under his Name. There is little remaining of his Life, more than what is taken out of his own Book. Of his Death; Uncertain whether he died a Martyr. The An∣cient Fathers divided in their Opi∣nions of this Book: Nor are our later Criticks less. That there are many use∣ful things in it. Of the Second Epi∣stle of St. Clement: That it is not of equal Reputation with the Former. By some deny'd to be St. Clements. It is most probable that it was written by St. Clement; and has many excellent things, and worthy of that Holy Man, in it. These two Pieces now the first time translated into our own Language.

1. THERE is not a greater Dif∣ference between the Learned Men of the present Times concerning the Epistle of St. Barnabas, than there

was among the Ancient Fathers here∣tofore, concerning the Authority of that Book, which next follows, under the Name of Hermas. Who this Hermas was, what he did, and what he suffer'd for the Faiths sake, is in great measure unknown to us. That there was one of that Name at Rome when St. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Church there, his Remembrance of him Rom. xvi.14. will not suffer us to doubt. Nor is it improbable but that it was the same * 1.286 Hermas who afterwards wrote this Book: And who appears not only still to have continued his Relation to the Church of Rome, but to have written at such a time as may well agree to one of St. Paul's Acquaintance. The former of these may be collected from his † 1.287 Second Vision, which he seems to have had at the same time that Clement was Bishop of Rome, and to whom therefore he is commanded to carry a Copy of it. And for the latter, if the Conjectures of two of our * 1.288 Greatest Cri∣ticks may be allow'd, in applying the Great Affliction of which he speaks in ano∣ther of his ‖ 1.289 Visions, to the Destruction of Jerusalem then at hand; it is evident that this Book must have been written with∣in XL. Years after the Death of Christ, and by consequence by some Author who lived at the very time, that the Hermas of whom St. Paul speaks, most certainly did.

2. HENCE * 1.290 Origen in his Homily upon that place of St. Paul before men∣tioned, delivers it as his Opinion, that it was the Hermas there spoken of who wrote this Book. But † 1.291 Eusebius do's more; He tells us that it was the receiv∣ed Opinion in those days, that it was composed by him. And that it continued to be so in the Age after, ‖ 1.292 St. Hierome witnesses; who speaks yet more posi∣tively than Eusebius to that purpose. And from all which we may conclude what is to be judg'd of that Mistake which our latter Writers have fallen into, by their too credulous following * 1.293 the Author of the Poem against Mar∣cion under the Name of Tertullian, viz. that it was written by Hermes Brother to Pope Pius; and in which not only the † 1.294 Authors of the Pontifical ascribed to Pope Damascus, and of the pretended ‖ 1.295 Decretal Epistles of the ancient Bishops of Rome, but the Martyrologists of the Middle Ages, Bede, Ado, &c. have ge∣nerally been involved.

3. IT is true, Cardinal Baronius has endeavour'd to make up this Difference, by supposing that the Hermes spoken of by St. Paul, was Brother to Pope Pius, and so all Parties may be in the right. But besides, that this Book was written by Hermas, not the Hermes of whom

St. Paul there speaks; the difference of the * 1.296 Time renders it altogether incre∣dible, that a Person of some consider∣able Age at St. Paul's writing his Epi∣stle, should have lived so long as that Pope's Brother is said to have done: Whom the † 1.297 Cardinal himself observes to have been living CLXIV. Years af∣ter Christ; that is to say, CVII. Years after the writing of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans. And this his Epitomator † 1.298 Spondanus was aware of: And there∣fore tho' he seems to have allow'd of the Conjecture, yet could not chuse but add this Reflection of his own upon it; that according to this reckoning, Her∣mas must have been CXXX Years old when he died, and in all probability a great deal more.

4. WHAT the Condition of this Hermas was before his Conversion, we cannot tell; but that he was a Man of some Consideration, we may conclude from what we read of him in his Third * 1.299 Vision: Where he is said to have been formerly unprofitable to the LORD up∣on the account of those Riches, which after he became a Christian, he seems to have dispensed in Works of Charity and Beneficence.

5. NOR have we any more know∣ledg how he was converted, than what

his Condition was before: It is probable from several Passages in his * 1.300 Book, that he was brought over to Christianity him∣self, before his Family; who continued yet in the practice of many and great Impieties. During this while, Hermas was not only very kind to them, but seems to have been so indulgent to∣wards them, as to permit them rather to go on in their Sins, than he would take any rough Measures with them, to draw them off from them.

6. BUT this was not all; he not only patiently bore with them, but was himself disturb'd with many anxious † 1.301 Cares, to supply them in their Extra∣vagances, and often times did not be∣have himself so well as he ought upon that account. But however, being of an honest and upright Disposition, and having a great Sincerity in his Religion; it pleased God at last not only to con∣vince him of his Faults, in thus negle∣cting his Family, but to give them Grace to hearken to his Admonitions, and to embrace at once both the Chri∣stian Faith, and a Practice also suitable thereunto.

7. WHAT he did after this we have no account; but that he lived a very strict Life, we may reasonably con∣jecture, in that it pleased God to vouch∣safe

such extraordinary Revelations to him; and to employ him in several Mes∣sages to his Church, both to correct their Manners, and to warn them of the Try∣als that were about to come upon them.

8. THIS was so singular a Grace, even in those Times of Miracles, that we find some other Christians, not so humble as they ought to be, became Enemies to him upon the account of them. However this did not hinder, but that God still continu'd to make use of his Ministry in admonishing Sinners; and he as readily and faith∣fully went on, both in warning them of their danger, and in exhorting them to repent and save their Souls.

9. THIS then was the Business of this Holy Man, in which he spent his Life; and if we may believe the Ro∣man Martyrologie, his Death was not un∣suitable to it: Where we read, that being illustrious for his Miracles, he at last offer'd himself a worthy Sacrifice unto God. But upon what Grounds this is establish'd * 1.302 Baronius himself could not tell us: Insomuch that in his Annals he durst not once mention the manner of his Death, but is content to say † 1.303,

That having undergone many Labours and Troubles in the time of the Persecu∣tion under Aurelius, (and that too

without any Authority) he at last rested in the LORD, July XXVI. and which is therefore observed in Com∣memoration of him.

And here is in∣deed a pleasant Mistake, and worthy the Roman Martyrologie. For this Author, from the Book of which we are now discoursing, being sometimes called by the Title of Pastor, or Shepherd, the Martyrologist has very gravely divided the good Man into two Saints: And they observe the Memorial of Hermas * 1.304, May IX^th, and of Pastor, July XXVI^th. Unless we shall rather say that this was indeed the Cardinal's Blunder, and the Martyrologie in the right, to make two distinct Persons of St. Hermas rembem∣bred by St. Paul, and the Brother of Pope Pius, to whom the * 1.305 Passages men∣tion'd July XXVI. do manifestly belong: And erred only in applying the Chara∣cter of † 1.306 Pastor to the latter, which, with the Treatise of which we are now discoursing, ought, as the ∴ 1.307 Cardinal has truly observed, to have been ascribed to the former.

10. BUT not to insist any longer on the Author of this Book: As for the Work it self, we find both the Ancient Fathers, and the Learned Men of our own Times, not a little divided in their Judgments concerning it. Some there are, and those the nearest to the time

when this Book was written, that treat it almost with the same Respect that they would do the Canonical Scriptures. * 1.308 Irenaeus quotes it under the very Name of the Scripture. † 1.309 Origen, tho' he sometimes moderates his Opinion of it, upon the account of some who did not, it seems, pay the same Respect with him∣self to it; yet speaking of Hermas be∣ing the Author of this Book in his Com∣ments on the Epistle to the Romans, gives us this Character of it, That He thought it to be a most useful Writing; and was, as he believed, Divinely Inspired. ‖ 1.310 Eusebius tells us, that tho' being doubted of by Some, it was not esteem'd Canonical, yet was it by Others judged a most neces∣sary Book, and as such read publickly in the Churches. And St. * 1.311 Hierom having in like manner observed that it was read in some Churches, makes this Remark up∣on it, That it was indeed a very profi∣table Book; and whose Testimony was often quoted by the Greek Fathers. † 1.312 A∣thanasius places it in the same rank with the Books of Scripture, and calls it a most useful Treatise: And in ‖ 1.313 another place tells us, That tho' it was not strictly Ca∣nonical; yet was it reckon'd among those Books which the Fathers appointed to be read to such as were to be instructed in the Faith, and desired to be directed in the Way of Piety.

11. HENCE we may observe, as a farther Evidence of that Respect which was paid to this Book hereto∣fore, that it was not only openly read in the Churches, but in some of the most ancient Manuscripts of the New Testa∣ment, is joyned together with the o∣ther Books of the Holy Scriptures. An Instance of this * 1.314 Cotelerius offers us in that of the Monastry of St. Germans in France, in which it is continued on at the End of St. Paul's Epistles. And in several of the Old Stichometries, it is put in the same Catalogue with the In∣spired Writings. As may be seen in that which the same ‖ 1.315 Author has published out of a Manuscript in the King's Li∣brary, in his Observations upon St. Bar∣nabas; and in which St. Barnabas's Epi∣stle is placed immediately before the Re∣velations, as the Acts of the Apostles, and Hermas's Shepherd are immediately after it.

12. AND yet after all this, we find this same Book not only doubted of by Others among the Ancient Fathers, but slighted even by some of those, who upon other Occasions have spoken thus highly in its Favour. Thus * 1.316 St. Jerome in his Comments Exposes the Folly of that Apochryphal Book, as he calls it, which in his Catalogue of Writers he had

so highly applauded. * 1.317 Tertullian, who spake if not honourably yet calmly of it whilst a Catholick, being become † 1.318 Montanist, rejected it, even with Scorn. And most of the other ‖ 1.319 Fathers who have spoken the highest of it them∣selves, yet plainly enough insinuate, that there were those who did not put the same Value upon it. Thus * 1.320 Origen mentions some who not only deny'd, but despis'd its Authority. And † 1.321 Cassian having made use of it in the Point of Free-Will, ‖ 1.322 Prosper without more ado rejected it as a Testimony of no Value. And what the Judgment of the Latter Ages was as to this matter, especially after ∴ 1.323 Pope Gelasius had rank∣ed it among the Apochryphal Books, may be seen at large in the Observations of * 1.324 Antonius Augustinus upon that Decree.

13. HOW far this has influenced the Learned Men of our present Times in their Censures upon this Work, is evident from what many on all sides have freely spoken concerning it: Who not only * 1.325 deny it to have been written by Hermas the Companion of St. Paul, but utterly cast it off, as a Piece of no Worth, but rather full of Error and Folly. Thus † 1.326 Baronius himself, tho' he delivers not his own Judgment con∣cerning it, yet plainly enough shews that he ran in with the severest Censures of

the Ancients against it: And in effect charges it with favouring the Arrians, tho' upon a mistaken Authority of * 1.327 St. Athanasius, and which by no means proves any such Errour to be in it. But † 1.328 Cardinal Bellarmine is more free: He tells us that it has many hurtful things in it, and particularly that it favours the Novatian Heresie; which yet I think a very little Equity in interpreting of some Passages that look that way, by others that are directly contrary thereunto, would serve to acquit it of. Others are yet more severe ‖ 1.329: They censure it as full of Heresies and Fables: Tho' this * 1.330 Labbe would be thought to excuse, by telling us that they have been foisted into it by some later Interpolations, and ought not to be imputed to Hermas, the Author of this Book.

14. NOR have many † 1.331 of those of the Reform'd Churches been any whit more favourable in their Censures of the present Treatise. But then as the Chiefest of the most Ancient Fathers heretofore, tho' they admitted it not in∣to the Canon of Holy Scripture, yet o∣therwise paid a very great Deference to it; so the more moderate part of the Learned Men of our present Times, e∣steem it as a Piece worthy of all Re∣spect, and clear of those Faults which are too lightly charged by some Persons

upon it. Thus * 1.332 Petavius, none of the most favourable Critics upon the An∣cient Fathers, yet acknowledges, as to the present Book, that it was never cen∣sured by any of the Ancients as guilty of any false Doctrine or Heresie; and especially as to the Point of the Holy Trinity. † 1.333 Cotelerius, one of the latest Editors of it, esteems it as an Ecclesia∣stical Work of good note, and a great Defence of the Catholick Faith against the Errors of Montanism: Whose Judg∣ment is not only follow'd by their late Historian * 1.334 Natalis Alexander, but is made good too in the Defence of it a∣gainst those Objections, which some have brought to lessen its Reputation. And for those of our own Communion, I shall mention only two, but They such as will serve instead of many to all ju∣dicious Persons, who have at large ju∣stified it against the chief of those Ex∣ceptions that have been taken at it; the One, the most Excellent Bishop * 1.335 Pearson in his Vindication of St. Ignatius; the Other the Learned Dr. † 1.336 Bull, in his Defence of the Nicene Faith, in the Point of our Blessed Saviour's Divini∣ty; and which he largely shews our pre∣sent Author to have been far from do∣ing any Prejudice unto.

15. SUCH then have been the dif∣ferent Judgments of Learned Men, both

heretofore, and in our present Times, concerning this Book. It would be too great a Presumption for me to pretend to determine any thing as to this mat∣ter; and having subjoyn'd the Work it self in our common Language, every one may be able to satisfie himself what Value he ought to put upon it. That there are many useful things to be found in it, but especially in the Second, and I think, the best part of it, cannot be de∣ny'd. And for the other Two, it must be considered, that tho' such Visions as we there read of, being no longer con∣tinu'd to these latter Ages, may war∣rantably be despised in the Pretenders of the present days; yet we cannot doubt but that at the time when this Book was written, the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost were very fre∣quent; And we need not question but that such Revelations too among the rest, were communicated to Holy Men for the Benefit of the Church.

16. BUT I shall not pursue this Sub∣ject any farther: Nor will I add very much to what I have before said with relation to St. Clement and his First Epi∣stle, concerning that Part which still re∣mains of a Second under his Name, and which concludes the following Collection.

17. THAT this Second Epistle was not of so great a Reputation among the Primitive Fathers, as the foregoing, * 1.337 Eusebius not only plainly tells us, but gives us this Testimony of it, That he could not find it quoted, as the Other was, by any of them. But St. * 1.338 Jerome is more severe; he represents it to us as rejected by them: And † 1.339 Photius af∣ter him, calls it a Spurious Piece. And not to mention any more; our most Reve∣rend Bishop * 1.340 Usher not only concurs in the same Censure, but offers several Arguments too in proof of it.

18. AND yet, when all is done, it do's not appear but that St. Clement was indeed the Author of this, as well as of the other Epistle, before spoken of; tho' it was not so much esteem'd, nor by consequence so generally known to the Ancients as that. In the * 1.341 Manuscript of St. Thecla we find this set forth under the same Title with the other. And in all the other Catalogues of the Ancients, wherever One is spoken of, the Other is for the most part set together with it: As may particularly be observed in the Apostolical † 1.342 Canons, one of the most early Collections of this kind.

19. NOR does * 1.343 Eusebius deny this Epistle to be St. Clement's, but only says

that it was not so celebrated as the Other. And true it is, we do not find it either so often, or so expresly men∣tion'd, as that. But yet if the Conje∣cture of * 1.344 Wendeline, approved by a ve∣ry, Learned † 1.345 Man of our own Coun∣try may be admitted; ‖ 1.346 Eusebius him∣self will afford us an Instance of one who not only spake of it, but spake of it as wont to be publickly read in the Church of Corinth. For discoursing of the Epistles of Dionysius, Bishop of that See; he tells us, that in One of them which he wrote to the Romans, he took notice of St. Clement's Epistle in these Words: Today have we kept the LORD's Day with all Holiness; in which we have read your Epistle, as we shall always con∣tinue to read it for our Instruction, toge∣ther with the former written to us by Clement. What that Epistle was, that Dionysius here speaks of, as written by the Church of Rome to that of Corinth, and publickly read in the Congregation there, it do's not appear; nor can we give any account of it, unless it was that which St. Clement wrote to them in the Name of the Church of Rome, and which Eusebius tells us was publickly read in that Church in those days. But then if this be so, as I think it most likely that it is; we must conclude that the Epistle of which we are now speaking, was indeed the first written to them, however called

his Second Epistle; and wont to be read, together with that other which he sent in the Name of the Roman Church to them, in their Assemblies.

20. NOW that which yet more fa∣vours this Opinion is, that it seems by many Arguments to appear, that this Letter which he wrote in his own Name (tho' as being sent from a particular Per∣son, and not in it self so considerable as the Other, it was usually set after that which he wrote by the Order of the Church, and in their Name, to the Co∣rinthians) was yet indeed the * 1.347 first written. And for being read in the Churches, † 1.348 Epiphanius expresly tells us, that this Epistle, no less than the fore∣going, was in his time wont to be pub∣lickly read in the Congregation. And tho' St. Jerome and Photius indeed speak but meanly of it in those places where they seem to deliver the Judgment of Eusebius rather than their own Opinion; yet upon other ‖ 1.349 Occasions, they make no exception against the Authority of it, but equally ascribe it to St. Clement with the Other, of which there is no doubt.

21. IT were an easie matter to shew that the same was the Opinion of the o∣ther Ecclesiastical Writers of those Times: But this having been done at large by

† 1.350 Wendeline first, and since by ‖ 1.351 Cotele∣rius, and his perpetual Transcriber ∵ 1.352 Na∣talis Alexander, I shall forbear; and con∣clude with this, That it is an Epistle, tho' not of equal Value with the O∣ther, yet of good use, and which if it were not written by St. Clement, as I make no doubt but it was, has yet nothing in it that is in the least unwor∣thy of him.

22. AND now having said thus much concerning these two last Pieces, and with which the present Collection is concluded; I have but this to add, That they are Both of them now first of all put into our own Language; and presented to the perusal of the English Reader: The Former from the Old La∣tin Version, which is by † 1.353 some much complained of, tho' by ‖ 1.354 others as stifly defended: The Latter from the Original Greek, as it was publish'd by Mr. Patrick Young from the Alexandrian Manuscript, the only Copy that, for ought appears, do's at this day remain of it.

23. IF any one shall ask how it came to pass that our Learned Country-Man Mr. Burton, when he set out the former Epistle of St. Clement in English, did not subjoyn this to it; the Answer which † 1.355 himself warrants us to return is this: That taking what has been said by the

Antients before mentioned, in the strict∣est Sense, he looked upon this Epistle as a Spurious Piece: And which tho' it carried the Name of St. Clement, was yet truly no more his, than those Con∣stitutions and Recognitions, which are al∣so publish'd under the same Name; but are generally acknowledged to be none of his, as in the prosecution of this Dis∣course I shall take occasion more particu∣larly to shew.

24. AS for the Epistle it self, I have concluded it somewhat sooner, than the Greek, which yet remains of it, do's. But that which I have omitted being only an imperfect Piece of a Sentence, and which would have made the Conclusion much more abrupt than it is now; I chose rather to add what follow'd here, than to continue it there. And to make the Rea∣der the better amends for this Liberty, I have not only subjoyn'd what remains of St. Clement, but have endeavour'd to make out the Sense of what is wanting in our Copy from the Other Clement, who seems to have follow'd this Original.

† 1.356

FOR the LORD himself be∣ing asked by a certain Person, when his Kingdom should come; answer'd, When Two shall be One, and that which is without as that which is with∣in; and the Male with the Female,

neither Male nor Female. Now Two are One, when we speak the Truth to each other; and there is, (without Hy∣pocrisie,) one Soul in two Bodies. And that which is without, as that which is within; He means this; he calls the Soul that which is within, and the Body that which is without. As there∣fore thy Body appears, so let thy Soul be seen by its good Works. And the Male with the Female, neither Male nor Female; — * 1.357 He means this; He calls our Anger the Male, our Concupiscence the Female. When therefore a Man is come to such a pass, that he is subject neither to the One or Other of these; both of which through the prevalence of Custom, and an evil Education, cloud and dar∣ken the Reason; but rather having dispell'd the Mist arising from them, and being full of Shame, shall by Re∣pentance have united both his Soul and Spirit in the Obedience of Reason; then as Paul, says, there is in us nei∣ther Male nor Female.

CHAP. IX. That the Pieces here put toge∣ther are All that remain of the most Primitive and Apo∣stolical Antiquity.

That there are several Other Treatises pretended to have been written within the compass of this Period; But none such as truly come up to it. Of the Epistle of our Saviour Christ to Ab∣garus, and the Occasion of it: That it is not probable that any such Letter was written by him. The Epistles a∣scribed to the Virgin Mary, spurious. So is the Epistle pretended to have been written by St. Paul to the Laodi∣ceans. Of the Acts, the Gospel, the Preaching and Revelations of St. Pe∣ter. Of the Liturgy attributed to St. Matthew: And the Discourse said to have been written by him con∣cerning the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin. Of the Liturgies ascribed to St. Peter, St. Mark, and St. James. Of the Gospels attributed to several of the Apostles. Of the Apostles Creed; and the Canons called Apostolical. Of the other Pieces under the Names

of St. Clement and St. Ignatius: And particularly of the Recognitions and E∣pitome of Clement. Of the History of the Life, Miracles, and Assum∣ption of St. John, pretended to have been written by Prochorus, One of the Seven Deacons. Of the Histories of St. Peter and St. Paul, ascribed to Linus Bishop of Rome. Of the Lives of the Apostles attributed to Abdias Bishop of Babylon. Of the Epistles of St. Martial. Of the Passion of St. Andrew, written by the Presby∣ters of Achaja. Of the Works ascrib∣ed to Dionysius the Areopagite. That, upon the whole, the Pieces here put to∣gether, are all that remain of the Apo∣stolical Times, after the Books of the Holy Scripture.

1. AND now having said thus much concerning the several Pieces here put together, and the Authors of them; it is time to go on to the Other Part of this Discourse, and consider what may be fit to be observed concerning them All together, and as they are now first of all set forth, in our own Lan∣guage, in the following Collection.

2. NOW the first thing that may be fit to be here taken notice of is, That the following Collection is truly what the Title pretends it to be, A full

and perfect Collection of all the Genuine Writings that remain to us of the Apo∣stolical Fathers: And carries on the Anti∣quity of the Church from the time of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament, to about an Hundred and Fifty Years af∣ter Christ.

3. TO make this the more evident, it will be necessary for me to consider, what those other Writings are which some have endeavoured to raise up into the Rank of Apostolical Antiquity; and shew, that they are indeed Writings ei∣ther of no Credit nor Authority at all, or at least, not of such as they are falsly pretended to be. And to the end I may proceed the more clearly in this Enqui∣ry, I will divide the several Pieces now to be examined into the Three following Ranks: The, First, of Those which are Antecedent to any I have here collected; as being pretended to have been written either by our Saviour Christ himself, or by the Virgin Mary, or by the Apostles. The, Second, of such Other Tracts as are ascribed to some of those Fathers, whose Genuine Remains I have here put toge∣ther. And the, Third, of such Pieces as are said to have been written by some Other Authors who lived in the Aposto∣lical Times; and wrote, if we will be∣lieve some Men, several Books much more considerable than any I have here collected.

4. OF the first of these kinds is that pretended Letter of our Blessed Saviour to Abgarus King of Edessa, a little City of Arabia * 1.358, a part of which Country was subject to him. Now this may seem to be of so much the better Credit, in that † 1.359 Eusebius tells us he had himself faithfully translated it out of the Syriac Language, as he found it in the Archives of Edessa. Nor was it very long after, that ‖ 1.360 Ephraem, a Deacon of that Church, made mention of this Communication between our Saviour and Abgarus, as the Occasion of the first Conversion of that Place; and exhorted his People upon that Account, the rather to hold fast to their Holy Profession, and to live worthy of it. * 1.361 Evagrius who wrote about Two Hundred Years after this, not only confirmed all that had been said by Both these, but added, from Proco∣pius, several other Circumstances, un∣known, for ought appears, to either of them. And particularly, that of the Im∣pression which our Saviour had made of his Face upon a Napkin, and sent to that Prince; and which, he tells us, was of no small Advantage to them in the de∣fence of their Town against Chosdroes King of Persia, who by this means was hindred from taking of it.

5. AND now, since the Addition of this new Story, to the old account of this Matter; it is not to be wondred if the Patrons of Images among the Greeks, from henceforth contended with all Ear∣nestness for the Truth of both. Inso∣much that we find they instituted a par∣ticular Festival in Memory of it, August the XVI^th; and transcribed at large the whole History of this Adventure into their Menaeon, and recited it upon it.

6. AND upon the same account I suppose it is, that some of our late Au∣thors, tho' they do not care to assert the Truth of this Story, are yet unwilling to deny all Credit to it. * 1.362 Baronius re∣ports both the Relation and the Epistle from Eusebius, but will not answer for the Truth of either. † 1.363 Spondanus de∣livers the same from the Cardinal, that he had done from Eusebius; and passes no Censure either One way or Other upon it: Only in his Margent he ob∣serves that Gretser the Jesuit in his Dis∣course of Images, &c. had vindicated the Authority of our Saviour's Epistle to Ab∣garus, from the Exceptions of Casaubon in his Exercitations upon Baronius against it. ‖ 1.364 Gerard Vossius in his Scholia upon the Testament of St. Ephraem, contents himself to refer us to the Authority of the Ancients for the Truth of this Re∣lation;

who, he pretends, did without Controversie look upon it to be authen∣tick. And * 1.365 Valesius himself, tho' he do's not go about to confute this Story, but rather endeavours to rectifie those Errors that seem'd the most considera∣ble in it; yet plainly enough shews that he was not out of all doubt con∣cerning the Truth of it.

7. BUT Others, even of the Church of Rome, have not observed so much Caution in this particular. They round∣ly stand by the Censure of Pope † 1.366 Ge∣lasius who pronounced this Epistle of our Saviours to be Apochryphal: And not only shew by many probable Arguments the Falseness of it; but what is yet more, pass the same Censure upon the Story of the Image too that ‖ 1.367 Casaubon had done, not∣withstanding all that Gretser could say in Favour of it. * 1.368 Natalis Alexander delivers this Conclusion concerning it: The Epistle of Abgarus to our Saviour, and his Answer to it, are Supposititious and Apochryphal; And at large answers all that is usually urged in Favour of them. And † 1.369 Du Pin after him, yet more so∣lidly convinces it of such manifest Er∣rors, as may serve to satisfie all consi∣dering Persons, that Eusebius and Ephraem were too easie of Belief in this particu∣lar: And did not sufficiently examin in∣to it, when they deliver'd that as a cer∣tain

Truth, which in several Circum∣stances shews it self to be evidently o∣therwise.

8. I SHALL not need to say a∣ny thing of the Opinions of the Learn∣ed Men of the * 1.370 Reformed Religion as to this Matter; which generally agree in the same Censure. But yet seeing both Eusebius and St. Ephraem have spoken with such Confidence of this Story, and whose Authority ought not to be light∣ly esteemed; I shall chuse rather with the † 1.371 middle sort, to leave it to every one to judg as he pleases, than determine any thing in this Case. And that they may the better do it, I will subjoyn at length the Two Epistles, as they are rendered by Eusebius from the Original Syriac into Greek; and from him tran∣slated into our own Tongue.

The EPISTLE of Abgarus to our Blessed Saviour.

9. ABgarus Prince of Edessa, to Je∣sus the Good Saviour, who has appeared in the Country about Jerusalem, Health. I have received an account of Thee, and Thy Cures; how without any Medicines or Herbs they are done by Thee. For Report

says, that thou makest the Blind to see, the Lame to walk; that thou cleansest the Lepers, and castest out unclean Spirits and Devils, and healest Those who have laboured under long Diseases, and raisest up the Dead. And having heard all this concerning Thee, I have concluded with my self one of these two things; either that Thou art God, and that being come down from Heaven, thou doest all these mighty Works; Or that Thou art the Son of God, seeing thou art a∣ble to perform such things. Where∣fore by this present Letter I intreat Thee to come unto me, and to cure me of the Infirmity that lies upon me. For I have also heard that the Jews murmure against Thee, and seek to do Thee Mischief. But I have tho' but a small, yet a very pretty City which may be sufficient both for Thee and me.

The ANSWER of our Saviour to Abgarus.

10. ABgarus, thou art blessed, in that tho' Thou hast not seen me, thou hast yet believed in me. For it is written concerning me, That those who have seen me should not

believe in me; that so they who have not seen me, might believe and live. As for what thou hast written unto me, that I should come to thee; It is ne∣cessary that all those things for which I was sent, should be fulfilled by me in this place: And that having ful∣filled them, I should be received up to him that sent me. When there∣fore I shall be received into Heaven, I will send unto thee some One of my Disciples, who shall both heal thy Distemper, and give Life to thee, and to those that are with thee.

11. HAVING said thus much con∣cerning this pretended Entercourse be∣tween our Saviour Christ and this Prince; I should in the next place mention the Letters ascribed to his Mother, the Bles∣sed Virgin Mary, but that there is not the least shadow of Truth to give Cre∣dit to them; nor any Arguments brought in favour of them, that may deserve a Refutation. I shall therefore say no∣thing to these, but pass on without any more ado, to those Pieces which have been attributed either to some particu∣lar Apostle or Evangelist; or else are pre∣tended to have been composed by the whole Colledge of the Apostles together.

12. OF the former kind is the Epi∣stle of St. Paul to the Laodiceans, set out

by Hutter in his Polyglott New Testament, and inserted by * 3.1 Sixtus Senensis into his Bibliotheque, together with the Other Epistles that are in the like manner pre∣tended, tho' without any just ground, to have pass'd between the same Apostle, and Seneca the Philosopher. Now that which gave occasion to the forging of such an Epistle, was; that St. Paul him∣self seems to speak, Coloss. iv.16. as if he had written an Epistle to that Church. For having commanded the Colossians when they should have read the Epi∣stle which he wrote to them, To cause it to be read in the Church of the Laodi∣ceans; He adds, That they likewise should read the Epistle from Laodicea. But whoever shall examin the true Import of those Words, will find that St. Paul do's not there speak of an Epistle sent to the Laodiceans; but either of some Epistle that had been written * 3.2 from thence, (as † 3.3 Theophylact thinks his First Epistle to Timothy;) Or of some Epistle which the Apostle had written to some Other Church, but order'd to be sent on to them: As the Epistle to the Corinthians was directed not only to that One place, but to all the Churches of Achaja, 2 Cor. I.1. And as in the very Passage under debate, the Epistle to the Colossians is order'd to be communicated to the Church of the Laodiceans, and to be read in it. And then taking this to have been the mean∣ing

of that Expression, it will not be improbable but that by the Epistle from Laodicea he may have meant his Epistle to the Ephesians; and which * 3.4 Tertullian tells us was wont in those days to be sometimes called by that Name.

13. NOW that which favours this Conjecture is, that Ephesus was in those days looked upon, even in the Civil Account of the Empire, as the Chief City and Metropolis of the Lesser Asia. Here it was that the ‖ 3.5 Emperours order'd their Edicts relating to that Province to be publish'd; (in like manner, as we find in several † 3.6 Laws of the Theodo∣sian Code, that they were wont to be proposed at Rome for Italy, and at Car∣thage for Africa.) Here the Common-Councils of Asia assembled: And to name no more, Here the Publick Sports and Sacred Rites, &c. that concerned the whole Community of that Province, were usually transacted.

14. AND much greater was the re∣spect which it had with relation to Ec∣clesiastical Matters; both as it was a Church founded by St. Paul, and as it was the Seat of the Beloved Disciple St. John, who continued there to the very time of Trajan, above 100 Years after Christ. Hence * 3.7 Tertullian dire∣cting those who were desirous to know

what the true Faith of Christ was, to enquire among the Chiefest Churches in every part, what had been deliver'd to them, and was the Faith received and taught amongst them; bids them if they were in Italy go to Rome, if in A∣chaja to Corinth; if in Macedonia, to Philippi; if in Asia, to Ephesus: In∣somuch that, as * 3.8 Evagrius tells us, the Bishop of Ephesus had a Patriarchal Power within the Diocese of Asia till the Time of the Fourth General Council. And long after that, Theodorus Bishop of this See, sub∣scribing to the Acts of the Sixth General Council, calls himself Bishop of Ephesus, the Metroplis of the Province of Asia. And even in the Times of which we are now discoursing, St. John writing to the Seven Churches of Asia, (of which Laodicea was One,) places ‖ 3.9 Ephesus at the head of them, as that which had the Precedence of all the rest in those Parts.

15. SEEING then such was the Pre∣rogative, which the Church of Ephesus had, from the beginning, over all the o∣ther Churches of the Asian Diocese; and that St. Paul himself had first planted Christianity there: And seeing it appears from the Command which he gave to the Colossians, Chap. iv.16. to cause the Epistle which he had written to them, to be read in the Church of the Laodi∣ceans, that he was wont to order the

Epistles which he wrote to One Church to be sent to, and be read in the Others that we renear unto it: Seeing, lastly, we are told both by * 3.10 Tertullian and Epipha∣nius, that the Epistle to the Ephesians, was anciently called by some the Epistle to the Laodiceans; I think it may not be improbable, but that by the Epistle from Laodicea, he may have meant the Epistle which he wrote to † 3.11 the Ephesians, at the same time, and by the same Person, that he wrote to the Colossians; and which being from them communicated to the Laodiceans, might be ordered by St. Paul to be sent on to the Colossians, who were a Neighbour Church to Lao∣dicea, and afterwards subject to it as their Metropolitane.

16. BUT whatever becomes of this Conjecture: Whether by the Epistle from Laodicea we are to understand some Epistle written from that place, and that either by St. Paul to some other Church or Person, or by the Laodiceans * 3.12 to him; Or whether we are to understand by it some Epistle that was to be communi∣cated from thence to the Colossians, which seems to me the more probable, and par∣ticularly that which he wrote by Tychi∣cus to the Ephesians, at the same time that he wrote by him to the Colossians: Cer∣tain it is that the Epistle now extant un∣der that Title is none of St. Paul's; nor

do's his Expression in that place to the Colossians, before mentioned, any more prove there was ever any such, than that Other in 1 Cor. v.9. proves a Third Epi∣stle to the Corinthians, which some also have pretended, as * 3.13 Sixtus Sinensis, and Others observe.

17. IT would be endless to insist up∣on all the other Spurious Pieces of the like kind that have been attributed to this great Apostle. It is sufficient to ob∣serve, that neither † 3.14 Eusebius, nor St. ‖ 3.15 Je∣rome, knew any thing more of his Writ∣ing than what we have in those Epistles that are still extant in our Bibles under his Name; except it were the Epistle to the Hebrews, and which tho' doubted of by some in the Primitive Church, is yet ascribed to him by Eusebius, who expres∣ly accounts XIV. of his Epistles, and speaks of that to the Hebrews as his; tho' he adds, that being not received by the Church of Rome, it was by some suspe∣cted whether it were indeed the true E∣pistle of St. Paul.

18. BUT much greater is the Autho∣rity of those Supposititious Pieces which the same * 3.16 Eusebius tells us were, even in those days, attributed to that other great Apostle St. Peter, viz. The Acts, the Gos∣ple, the Preaching, and the Revelations of St. Peter. Nevertheless, seeing he at

the same time declares that they were never look'd upon as Catholick, but ra∣ther as set out by some Hereticks of those Times, (as many other Pieces of the like kind were,) under the venerable Name of that Apostle, the better to gain thereby Credit to their Doctrine; How ancient soever they may otherwise be, yet they will not fall within the compass of the present Collection: Nor indeed is there any thing of them remaining to us, except the Names; and perhaps a few Fragments, scatter'd up and down in the Quotations that have been made by Ecclesiastical Writers out of them.

19. TO these let me add in the third place, the Discourses attributed to * 3.17 St. Matthew, the first Writer of the New Testament. Two Books there are still remaining under his Name; A Li∣turgy pretended to have been composed be him, and a Discourse concerning the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin: But both rejected by Learned Men, as the Works of some Impostor, many Ages af∣ter the Death of that Holy Apostle.

20. AND the same must be said of the * 3.18 Liturgies ascribed in like manner to St. Peter, St. Mark, St. James, and Others; and of the Falsity of which all the Learned World seems now to be universally agreed. Which makes it

the more to be admir'd that such Great Men as * 3.19 Cardinal Bona and † 3.20 Leo Al∣latius were, should be so far prejudiced in their Favour, as to think at least the Liturgy of St. James to have been truly composed by that Apostle; and only cor∣rupted and interpolated by some other hand in the following Ages.

21. NOR may we judg any other∣wise of the Gospels set out under the Names of several of the Apostles, and Others who were contemporary with them: And of which however some were very ancient; yet is it generally a∣greed among the most judicious of all sides, that they were not only not writ∣ten by those whose Names they carry, but were for the most part set out by suspected Persons, and for ill Ends, after their Deaths.

22. AS for the Writings of the whole Colledge of Apostles; Two Pieces there are, besides the Synodical Letter spoken of by St. Luke, Acts xv.23. which not only go under their Names, but have been by some ascribed to them, as the Authors of them. And those are, first the Creed, and secondly the Canons of the Apostles.

23. FOR the former of these, the A∣postles Creed, it has been thought by many

that it was so called, not only as being a Summary of the Apostles Doctrine, but because it was really composed by them. And that either in their first Assembly after our LORD's Resurrection, Acts i. or else immediately before their Disper∣sion, upon the breaking out of Herod's Persecution, Acts xii. which Baronius and others esteem the more probable. It is not my intention to enter on any parti∣cular Examination of this Matter, which has been so fully handled, not only by the late Criticks of the Church of Rome, * 3.21 Natalis Alexander, † 3.22 Du Pin, &c. but yet more especially by ‖ 3.23 Arch-Bishop Usher, ∴ 3.24 Gerard Vossius, * 3.25 Suicer, † 3.26 Span∣hemius, ‖ 3.27 Tentzelius, and ** 3.28 Sam. Basnage, among the Protestants. It shall suffice to say, that as it is not likely, that had a∣ny such thing as this been done by the Apostles, St. Luke would have pass'd it by, without taking the least notice of it: So the Diversity of Creeds in the Ancient Church; and that not only in Expression, but in some whole Articles too, suffici∣ently shew's; that the Creed which we call by that Name, was not compos'd by the Apostles; nor probably reduced into that form in which it now is, for some Hundreds of Years after their Deaths.

26. NOR is it any more probable that the Canons now extant under their Name were truly compiled by them; but rather as our Pious and Learned * 3.29 Dr. Beverege has shewn, were a Col∣lection of the Canons made by the Coun∣cils of the first Ages, put together at se∣veral times; and finished, as we now see them, within CCC Years after Christ, before the assembling of the first Gene∣ral Council of Nice. This is the earliest date that is now ascribed to them by the most † 3.30 Judicious Writers of the Ro∣man Communion, as well as of the Re∣formed Religion; and ‖ 3.31 some there are who will by no means allow them to be so ancient, as even this Opinion supposes them to be.

27. IT is evident then, that except the Holy Scriptures, there is nothing re∣maining of the truly Genuine Christian Antiquity, more early than what is here put together. Nor have the Authors, whose Tracts I have now set forth, any Other Pieces yet remaining, besides those that appear in the following Collection. Indeed for what concerns two of the Fa∣thers here mentioned, St. Clement, and St. Ignatius; several Treatises there are,

and some that may seem much more con∣siderable than any I have subjoyn'd, that have been sent abroad under the Autho∣rity of their Names; but which are at present universally exploded by all Learn∣ed Men. Such are the Constitutions, and Recognitions of St. Clement. The Colle∣ction called from the same Father, The Clementines. The Epitome of Clement, and the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius, be∣sides the VII. here set out; and which a∣lone were either mention'd by Eusebius, or known to the Church for some Ages after * 3.32.

28. I SHALL not here enter upon any particular Enquiry when these seve∣ral Pieces were first sent abroad into the World; or how it came to pass that Some even among the † 3.33 Ancients them∣selves receiv'd them for the Genuine Writings of these Holy Men; only cor∣rupted, as many others were, by the Hereticks of those first Times, the bet∣ter to give some Colour to their Errours. I will only observe, that the Recog∣nitions of St. Clement; not only the most Learned, but the most Ancient too of any of these, as near as we can guess, were not set forth till about the mid∣dle of the Second Century; and are re∣jected by ‖ 3.34 Eusebius as none of his, but as One of those many Impostures which

were even then publish'd under his Name. And for the rest, tho' some of them have been Ancient too, yet it is evident that none of them come up to the Period of which I am now speaking; nor even to the Age of the Recognitions before mentioned * 3.35.

29. AS for the Epitomé of St. Clement, * 3.36 Cotelerius esteems it to have been yet later than any of the rest. Per∣haps it was collected by Metaphrastes, whom I take to have been the Author of the Martyrdom of that Holy Man, set out by † 3.37 Surius and ‖ 3.38 Allatius, and re∣printed by Cotelerius at the end of the Works ascribed to St. Clement. This is certain, that it was composed in some of the latter Ages; As was also the Account of the Miracle pretended to have been wrought at his Martyrdom, which goe's under the Name of Ephraem, Archbishop of Cherson, and where (as * 3.39 Du Pin well observes) there never was any. And this Cotelerius seems to have been aware of; and therefore in his An∣notations upon this Relation, calls him Archbishop or Bishop of Cherson. Now that there was such a Bishop appears both from the Ancient † 3.40 Notitiae of the

Province of Europe under the Patriarch of Constantinople; and from the Subscri∣ption which * 3.41 Peter Bishop of this place made to the Council of Chalcedon, for Cyriacus Archbishop of Heraclea, in whose Province that See lay.

30. THERE is then nothing in any of those Pieces which make up the rest of Cotelerius's Collection, and are indeed All that still remain under the Names of those Fathers of which we are now speak∣ing, that can with any good Grounds be relied upon as the Genuine Products of those Holy Men. Let us see, in the last place; Whether any of those Discourses which have been sent abroad under the Names of some others of the Apostolical Fathers, may deserve to be received by us, as coming truly from them.

31. AND here I shall in the first place take it for granted, that what those who are usually the most fond of such Spurious Pieces; I mean, the Wri∣ters of the Church of Rome, have yet al∣most unanimously rejected as false and counterfeit, may securely be laid aside by us, without any further enquiry into the Condition of them. Such are, The History of the Life, Miracles, and As∣sumption of St. John; pretended to have been written by Prochorus his Disciple, and one of the seven Deacons, chosen

by the Church of Jerusalem, Acts vi. The Histories of St. Peter and St. Paul, said to have been written by Linus one of the first Bishops of Rome. The Lives of the Apostles, ascribed to Abdias Bishop of Babylon, and supposed to have been writ∣ten by him in the Hebrew Tongue. The Epistles of St. Martial; who is said to have been one of the LXX Disciples appointed by our Saviour, and one of the first Preachers of the Gospel in France. These are all so evidently Spurious, that even * 3.42 Natalis Alexander himself was ashamed to undertake the Defence of them: And not only he, but all the other Writers of the same Church, Baronius, Bellarmine, Sixtus Senensis, Possevine, Espencaeus, Bisciola, Labbe, &c. have freely acknowledged the little Credit that is to be given to them.

32. BUT two Pieces there are which Alexander is still unwilling to part with; tho' he cannot deny but that the most Learned Men, even of his own Commu∣nion, have at last agreed in the rejecting of them. And those are, the Passion of St. Andrew, written, (as is pretended,) by the Presbyters of Achaja; and the Works set out under the Name of Dio∣nysius the Areopagite.

33. AS for the former of these, I confess there have not been wanting

many from the VIII^th Century down∣wards, who have undertaken the De∣fence of it. * 3.43 Etherius mention'd it a∣bout the Year DCC.LXXX.VIII. Re∣migius after: Peter Damian, Lanfranc, and St. Bernard, still later. And in this last Age Baronius, Bellarmine, Labbe, and a few Others, have yet more en∣deavour'd to establish it's Authority. But then as † 3.44 Du Pin well observes, it is certain that the Ancients knew no∣thing of it; nor are the Acts we now have quoted by any before the time of Etherius before-mentioned. And yet how they could have escaped the Search of the Primitive Fathers, had they been extant in their days, it is hard to imagin.

34. BUT much less is the Credit that ought to be given to the pretend∣ed Works of Dionysius the Areopagite: Which as ‖ 3.45 Alexander confesses, two ve∣ry great * 3.46 Criticks of his own Commu∣nion, to have deny'd to have been writ∣ten by that Holy Man; so has a † 3.47 third very lately given such Reasons to shew that the Writings, now extant under his Name, could not have been composed by him, as ought to satisfie every consi∣dering Man of their Imposture. For not to say any thing of what occurs every where in those Discourses, utterly disa∣greeable to the State of the Church in the time that that Dionysius lived: Can

it be imagin'd, that had such consider∣able Books as these been written by him, none of the Ancients of the first IV Cen∣turies should have heard any thing of them. Or shall we say that they did know of them; as well as the Fathers that lived after, and yet made no men∣tion of them, tho' they had so often oc∣casion to have done it, as Eusebius, and St. Jerome, not to name any Others, had?

35. IN short, one of the first times that we hear of them, is in the Dispute between the Severians and Catholicks a∣bout the Year D.XXX.II. When the Former produced them in favour of their Errours, and the Latter rejected them as Books utterly unknown to all Antiqui∣ty, and therefore not worthy to be re∣ceived by them.

36. IT is therefore much to be won∣dered, that after so many Arguments as have been brought to prove how little Right these Treatises have to such a Pri∣mitive Antiquity; nevertheless, not on∣ly Natalis Alexander, but a Man of much better Judgment, I mean * 3.48 Emanuel Schelstrat, the late Learned Keeper of the Vatican Library, should still under∣take the Defence of them. When they were written, or by what Author, is very uncertain: But as † 3.49 Bishop Pearson supposes them to have been first

set forth about the latter end of Euse∣bius's Life; so † 3.50 Dr. Cave conjectures, that the Elder Apollinarius may very probably have been the Author of them. * 3.51 Others there are who place them yet later, and suspect Pope Gregory the Great to have had a hand in the For∣gery. And indeed the Arguments which our very Learned ‖ 3.52 Mr. Dodwell brings to prove that they were originally writ∣ten by one of the Roman Church, are not without their just Weight. But what∣ever becomes of this, thus much is cer∣tain, that these Books were not written before the middle of the IV^th Century, and therefore are without the Compass of the present Undertaking.

37. AND now having taken such a View as was necessary for the present Design, of all those other Pieces which have been obtruded upon the World for Apostolical Writings, besides what is ei∣ther here collected, or has been before publish'd in the Sacred Books of the New Testament; I suppose I may with good Grounds conclude, that the little I have now put together is all that can with any Certainty be depended upon, of the most Primitive Fathers: And therefore that from these, next to the Holy Scriptures, we must be content to draw the best Account we can of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church,

for the first Hundred Years after the Death of Christ.

CHAP. X. Of the Authority of the fol∣lowing Treatises, and the Deference that ought to be paid to them upon the ac∣count of it.

This is shewn from the following Consi∣derations: 1st, That the Authors of them were Contemporary with the Apostles, and instructed by them. 2dly, They were Men of an eminent Cha∣racter in the Church; and therefore to be sure such as could not be ignorant of what was taught in it. 3dly, They were very careful to preserve the Do∣ctrine of Christ in its Purity, and to oppose such as went about to corrupt it. 4thly, They were Men not only of a per∣fect Piety, but of great Courage and Constancy; and therefore such as cannot be suspected to have had any Design to prevaricate in this Matter. 5thly, They were endued with a large Portion of the Holy Spirit, and as such, could

hardly err in what they deliver'd as the Gospel of Christ. And 6thly, Their Writings were approved by the Church in those days, which could not be mista∣ken in its Approbation of them.

BUT, Secondly, and to proceed yet farther: The following Collection pretends to a just Esteem, not only up∣on the account of its Perfection, as it is an Entire Collection of what remains to us of the Apostolical Fathers; but yet much more, from the Respect that is due to the Authors themselves, whose Writings are here put together.

2. IF, First, we consider them as the Contemporaries of the Holy Apostles; Some of them bred up under our Sa∣viour Christ himself, and the rest instru∣cted by those Great Men whom he commissioned * 3.53 to go forth and preach to all the World, and † 3.54 endued with an ex∣traordinary Assistance of his Blessed Spi∣rit for the doing of it: We cannot doubt but that what they deliver to us, must be, without Controversie, the pure Do∣ctrine of the Gospel; What Christ and his Apostles taught, and what they had themselves received from their own Mouths. This is the least Deference we can pay to them, to look upon them as faithful Deliverers of the Doctrine and Practice of the Church in those most

early Times: When Heresies were not as yet so openly broke out in it, Nor the true Faith so dangerously corrupt∣ed with the Mixture of those erro∣neous Opinions, which afterwards more fatally infected the Minds of Men, and divided the Church into so many Parties and Factions. So that here then we may read with Security, and, let me add, with Respect too: And not doubt but what these Holy Men deliver to us, is as cer∣tainly the true Doctrine of Christ, as if we had received it, like them, from our Saviour and his Apostles.

3. BUT, Secondly, The Authors of the following Pieces had not only the Ad∣vantage of living in the Apostolical Times, and of hearing the Holy Apostles, and con∣versing with them, but they were of a very Eminent Character in the Church too; Men raised up to the highest pitch of Ho∣nour and Authority in some of the most famous Churches of the World; Chosen by the Apostles to preside in their own proper Sees; at Rome, at Antioch, at Smyrna; One of them set apart, by the express Command of the Holy Ghost, to be the Companion of the Great St. Paul in his Work of the Ministry; and the rest for the most part commended for their rare Endowments, in the inspired Writings of the Holy Scriptures deliver∣ed to us. And therefore we may be sure

that such Men as these must needs have been very carefully instructed in the My∣stery of the Gospel, and have had a most perfect and comprehensive Knowledg of the Faith, as it is in Jesus.

4. HAD they been some ordinary and obscure Writers, even of the Aposto∣lical Times, Men of no Note, no Au∣thority in the Church; tho' still whilst we had a good Account of their Inte∣grity, the very Advantage of the Age wherein they lived would have render∣ed their Discourses justly Venerable to us; yet should we not perhaps have been obliged to pay such a Deference to their Writings, as not to make Allowance for some little Defects or Mistakes that might have happen'd to them. But now having to do with Men, not only instru∣cted in common by the Apostles, with the other Christians of those days, but particularly bred up, and instituted by them: Having here the Writings of Men who had attained to such a perfect Knowledg in the Mystery of Godliness, and were judg'd to have been so well grounded and setled in it, as to deserve to be raised up by the Apostles themselves to the Government of such eminent Churches, as those over which these Holy Men were Over-Seers: It is plain that we cannot with any reason doubt of what they deliver to us, as the Gospel

of Christ; but ought to receive it, if not with equal Veneration, yet but with a little less Respect, than we do the Sa∣cred Writings of those who were their Masters and Instructers.

5. YET farther, Thirdly: The fol∣lowing Authors, were not only such E∣minent Men, and bred up under such mighty Advantages, and so well instru∣cted in the Knowledg of the Gospel, as I have now observed; but they were moreover Persons of a Consummated Piety, adorn'd with all those Christian Virtues they so affectionately recom∣mend to us. But especially, they were zealous Watchmen over their Churches; careful to instruct them in the true Faith and Doctrine of Christ, and no less care∣ful to preserve them against the Conta∣gion of those Heresies, which even in their days began to corrupt the Purity of it. Hence we read with what Ear∣nestness that Blessed Martyr Ignatius first, and then his Fellow-Disciple St. Polycarp, set themselves against those who would insinuate some Other Doctrines into the Minds of their People, than what the Apo∣stles had deliver'd unto them. What wise Directions they gave them for the Dis∣covery of such false Teachers; * 3.55 and how earnestly they exhorted them by keeping firm to their respective Bishops and Pres∣byters, and to the Apostolical Doctrine de∣livered

by them, to prevent their gain∣ing any Advantage against them.

6. WITH what Assurance do they deliver the Doctrine which they had re∣ceived? How confidently do they de∣clare it to be the true Doctrine of Christ? And exhort the Churches to whom they write, not to give any heed to such as would insinuate any Other Doctrine in∣to their Minds? And how did they themselves shew them by their own Ex∣amples, how they should avoid such Per∣sons? Insomuch that * 3.56 Irenaeus tells us, that if St. Polycarp at any time chanced to hear any One deliver any Other Do∣ctrine than what he had been taught, he did not only not give any Countenance to such an One; but was wont to stop his Ears at him, and cry out with Astonish∣ment and Grief, Good God! To what Times hast thou reserved me, that I should endure this? Nay he would not tarry in the same place with such a Person, but would leave the House, if he knew that any Hereticks were in it.

7. BUT of the Care which these Holy Men had to keep close in every the least Circumstance to the Doctrine and Practice of the Apostles, we cannot, I think, desire a fairer Instance to con∣vince us, than what † 3.57 Eusebius has re∣corded of the same Blessed Martyr.

How that hearing of the Difference be∣tween the Eastern and Western Churches about the Time of keeping Easter, he thought it worthy his Pains, at an ex∣treme old Age, to take a Journey as far as Rome for the composing of it. And notwithstanding all that Anicetus, who was then Bishop of that Church, could say to move him from his Practice; yet having this Ground for it, that St. John was wont to keep Easter as he did; the good Man held close to it, and would not hear of changing a Custom which that blessed Apostle had deliver'd to him.

8. AND when such was the Care which these Holy Writers had of hold∣ing fast, even to the least particular, of what they received from the Apostles, that they would not comply with the rest of the Church in such an indifferent matter, only because by so doing they should depart from the Practice of One of them; Surely we may with Confi∣dence depend upon the Doctrine which they deliver, as most pure and genuine; What our Saviour taught his Apostles, and his Apostles them. And what * 3.58 Ire∣naeus once said of his Master Polycarp, we may with equal Truth and Assurance apply to all the rest of those Fathers, whose Treatises I have here put together; That they taught evermore what they had received from the Apostles, which also they

deliver'd to the Church, and which only is the true Doctrine of Christ.

9. TO this general Piety of their Lives, and Care for the Truth and Pu∣rity of their Religion; let me add, Fourthly, their Courage and Constancy in the maintaining of it. How great this was I have already shewn, in the parti∣cular Accounts which I have given of the several Fathers whose Writings are here subjoyn'd. It shall suffice in this place to observe, that the most of them after having spent their Lives in a care∣ful administration of the great Charges to which they were called, were at last made perfect by Martyrdom; and un∣derwent the most exquisite Cruelties with a Courage and Constancy, worthy both of the Religion they profess'd, and of the eminent Characters which they had ob∣tained in the Church.

10. NOW tho' this do's not imme∣diately argue the Purity of their Do∣ctrine, yet being added to what I have before observed, will give us a new Ground to rely upon the Truth of what they deliver. For since we cannot rea∣sonably doubt but that such Persons as these, must needs have known what the Doctrine of the Apostles was; and have been perfectly instructed in that Religion which they were esteem'd able

and worthy to preach to others: We have in this a clear Demonstration of their Integrity both in their Teaching and Writing of it; and must conclude, That they who liv'd such excellent Lives, and took so much Pains in the Ministry of the Gospel; that stuck with such Firmness to it, notwithstanding all the Endeavours of their Enemies to the con∣trary; and chose rather to undergo the most bitter Deaths, than they would in any wise depart from it; have doubtless dealt most uprightly in this matter, and deliver'd nothing to us but what they took for the true Doctrine of Christ, and what therefore we may conclude, undoubtedly was so.

11. SUCH good reason then have we upon all these Accounts to look up∣on the Writings of these Holy Men, as containing the pure and uncorrupted Do∣ctrine of our Blessed Saviour and his A∣postles. But now, Fifthly, and to ad∣vance yet higher: These Writers were not only thus qualified by these Ordinary means to deliver the Gospel of Christ to us, but in all probability were endued with the Extraordinary Assistance of the Holy Spirit too. So that what they teach us, it not to be look'd upon as a mere traditionary Relation of what had been deliver'd to them, but rather, as an Authoritative Declaration of the Gospel of

Christ to us; tho' indeed as much infe∣rior to that of the Apostles and Evange∣lists, as their Gifts and Assistances were less than theirs.

12. FOR, (1st.) That the Extraor∣dinary Gifts of the Holy Spirit with which the Apostles were endued, and which the * 3.59 Holy Scriptures themselves tell us were in those days distributed to Other Believers, as well as unto Them, continu'd still in the Church after their departure; we have the express assur∣ance of † 3.60 Justin Martyr, one of the most ancient Writers, after those I have here subjoyn'd, to assure us. They were communicated not only to Men but ‖ 3.61 Wo∣men: And that we may be sure he spake nothing in this matter but what he could undeniably have made out, we find him boasting of it against Trypho the Jew, and urging it as an unanswerable Argu∣ment in the Behalf of Christianity, and against the Jews, from whom these Gifts had a long time been departed. And e∣ven in the Fathers, whose Writings are here put together, there appear sufficient Indications of the Continuance of these Extraordinary Powers.

13. THIS * 3.62 St. Clement manifestly declares in his First Epistle to the Co∣rinthians. He tells us that some in that Church not only had such Gifts, but

were even proud and conceited upon the account of them. Let a Man, says he, have Faith, i. e. such a Faith by which he is able to work Miracles; Let him be powerful to utter Mystical Knowledg; (for to that his Expression manifestly re∣fers;) Let him be wise in discerning of Speeches; Another Gift common in those Times: But still, says he, by how much the more he seems to excel Others, viz. upon the account of these extra∣ordinary Endowments, by so much the more will it behove him to be humble-minded, and to seek what is profitable to all Men, and not to his own Advantage. And St. Ignatius not only † 3.63 supposes that such Gifts might be in Others, but plain∣ly intimates, that he * 3.64 himself was en∣dued with a large Portion of them.

14. WHICH being so, we cannot doubt (2dly.) but that, as it was most reasonable, both the Apostles were care∣ful to set those in the chiefest Places of Honour and Authority in their several Churches, who were the most eminent for their Gifts; And that God was also pleased to grant to such Persons a more than ordinary Portion of the Holy Spirit, for the better discharge of those eminent Places to which they were called.

15. CONCERNING the former of these, we are told by St. Paul, Acts vi.

that when the Apostles thought it neces∣sary to establish a new Order of Mini∣sters in the Church, that might take care of those things, which they, who were of a higher Rank, could not find Leisure to attend to; tho' their Ministry were of the lowest Nature, and which requi∣red much lesser Capacities in those who were to discharge it, than theirs whose Business it was to Govern and Instruct the Church of Christ; yet they particu∣larly laid it down to the Brethren, as one of the Qualifications that was to be re∣quired in Those whom they chose for that purpose, that they should be Men well approved of, full of the Holy Spirit and of Wisdom, Vers. 3. And of One of them, viz. St. Stephen, it is particu∣larly observed, Vers. 8. That he was full of Faith and Power, and did Signs and great Wonders among the People. And when the Jews disputed against him, we read Vers. 10. That they were not able to stand against the Wisdom and Spirit by which he spake.

16. NOW if such were the Care which they took in the Choice of those who were to be admitted into the lowest Ministry of the Church; We cannot doubt but that they were certainly much more careful not to admit any into the highest Rank of Honour and Au∣thority in it, but what were in a yet

more eminent manner endued with the same Gifts. Hence * 3.65 St. Clement tells us, that The Apostles did prove by the Spirit the first Fruits of their Conver∣sions, and out of them set Bishops and Pa∣stors over such as should believe. And by which we must understand One of these Two things, and very probably they were both meant by it: Either that the Apostles made use of their own extraor∣dinary Gift of the Spirit (One † 3.66 Use of which was to discern and try the Spi∣rits of Others) in chusing Persons fitly qualified for the Work of the Ministry; Or else, that by the extraordinary Gifts of those whom they pitch'd upon, they perceiv'd that they were worthy of such an Employ, and therefore chose them out for it. And the Other ‖ 3.67 Clement yet more plainly speaks the same thing: That St. John being returned from his Banishment in Patmos, went about the Country near unto Ephesus, both to form and settle Churches, where he saw occa∣sion; and to admit into the Order of the Clergy, such as were mark'd out to him by the Spirit.

17. AND then for the Other thing observed; It is clear that the very Im∣position of Hands, did in those days con∣fer the Holy Spirit, in an extraordinary manner, upon Those who were ordain'd to the Ministry of the Gospel. This

St. Paul intimates in his First Epistle to Timothy, Ch. iv.14. where he exhorts him to stir up, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Gift, i. e. the extraordinary Power of the Holy Spirit, which, says he, is in thee by the Imposition of my hands. 2 Tim. i.6. And would you know how this Ceremony of setting him apart for such a Service came to endue him with such an extra∣ordinary Power; the same Apostle will tell you, 1 Tim. iv.14. That it was given unto him by Prophecy; with, or through the Imposition of Hands upon him. That is to say; God, who by his Prophets had before design'd and mark'd him out for that great Office, 1 Tim. i.18. upon the actual admission of him into it by the outward Rite of Laying on of Hands, and upon the solemn Prayers that were then withal made for him, did bestow the Gifts of his Blessed Spirit, in an ex∣traordinary manner upon him.

18. NOW this as will it afford us just cause to conclude that those Holy Men, whose Writings we have here col∣lected, were doubtless endued with a very large Portion of the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost: Whether we consider the Frequency of those Endow∣ments in the Age in which they lived; Or the extraordinary Strictness and Piety of their Lives; Or the Greatness of those Stations to which they were called in

the Church; Or lastly, the Judgment which the Apostles, who called them to those high Offices, were by the Spirit en∣abled to make of them; So, (3dly) If we look to those Accounts which still remain to us of them; they will plainly shew us that they were endued, and that in a very singular manner, with this Power and Gift of the Blessed Spirit.

19. OF Barnabas, the Holy Scripture it self bears Witness, that He was a good Man, full of the Holy Ghost, and of Faith, Acts xi.24. Hermas is another of whom St. Paul himself makes mention, Rom. xvi.14. as an early Convert to Christianity: And what extraordinary Revelations he had, and how he foretold the Troubles that were to come upon the Church, his following Visions sufficiently declare.

20 CLEMENT is not only spo∣ken of by the same Apostle, but with this advantageous Character too, that he was the Fellow-Labourer of that great Man, and had his Name written in the Book of Life, Phil. iv.3. And when we shall consider to how much lesser and worser Men these Gifts were usually commu∣nicated at that time; we can hardly think that so excellent a Man, and the Companion of so great an Apostle; em∣ployed first in the planting of the Gospel

with him, and then set to govern one of the most considerable Churches in the World, should have been destitute of it.

21. AS for St. Ignatius, I have before observed that he had this Gift; and by the help of it, warned the * 3.68 Philadelphi∣ans against falling into those Divisions, which he fore-saw were about to rise up amonst them.

22. POLYCARP not only Prophe∣cy'd of his own Death, but spake often times of things that were to come: And has this Witness from the whole Church of Smyrna, that nothing of all that he foretold ever failed of coming to pass ac∣cording to his Prediction.

23. IT remains then that the Holy Men whose Writings are here subjoyn'd, were not only instructed by such as were Inspir'd, but were themselves Inspir'd too. And therefore we must conclude, that they have not only not mistaken the Mind of the Apostles, in what they deli∣ver to us as the Gospel of Christ, but were not capable of doing of it. By conse∣quence, that we ought to look upon their Writings, * 3.69 tho' not of equal Authority with those which we call in a singular manner The Holy Scriptures; (because neither were the Authors of them called in so extraordinary a way to the writing

of them, nor endued with so eminent a Portion of the Gifts of the Blessed Spi∣rit for the doing of it; Nor have their Writings been judg'd by the common Consent of the Church in those inspir'd Ages of it, when they were so much bet∣ter qualified, than we are now, to judge of the Divine Authority of those kind of Writings, to be of equal Dignity with those of the Apostles and Evangelists;) yet worthy of a much greater Respect than any Composures that have been made since; however Men may seem to have afterwards written with more Art, and to have shewn a much greater Stock of humane Learning, than what is to be found, not only in the following Pieces, but even in the Sacred Books of the New Testament it self.

24. I SHALL add but One Consi∣deration more, the better to shew the true Deference that ought to be paid to the Treatises here collected, and that is, Sixthly: That they were not only writ∣ten by such Men as I have said, instru∣cted by the Apostles, and judg'd worthy by them both for their Knowledg and their Integrity, to govern some of the most eminent Churches in the World; and lastly, endued with the extraordinary Gift of the Holy Ghost; and upon all these Accounts to be much respected by us: But were moreover received by the

Church in those First Ages, as Pieces of a very great value, which could not be mistaken in its Judgment of them.

25. THE Epistle of St. Clement was a long time read publickly with the O∣ther Scriptures in the Congregations of the Faithful; made a part of their Bi∣ble, and was numbred among the Sacred Writings, however finally separated from them. And not only the Apostolical Ca∣nons, but our most ancient Alexandrian Manuscript, gives the same place to the Second, that it do's to the First of them: And Epiphanius after both, tells us, that they were both of them wont to be read in the Church in his Time * 3.70.

26. THE Epistle of St. Polycarp, with that of the Church of Smyrna, were not only very highly approved of by parti∣cular Persons, but like those of St. Cle∣ment, were read publickly too in the As∣semblies of the Faithful. And for those of Ignatius, besides that we find a mighty Value put upon them by the Christians of those Times, they are sealed to us by this Character of St. Polycarp;

That they are such Epistles, by which we may be greatly profited; For, says he, They treat of Faith and Patience, and of all things that pertain to Edification in the LORD.

27. THE Epistle of Barnabas is not only quoted with great Honour by those of the next Age to him, but as I have before shewn, is expresly called Catholick and Canonical. And in the ancient * 3.71 Sti∣chometry of Cotelerius, we find it placed the very next to the Epistle of St. Jude, and no difference put between the Au∣thority of the One and of the Other.

28. AND for the Book of Hermas, both Eusebius and St. Jerome tell us, that it was also used to be read in the Churches. In the same Stichometry, I before men∣tioned, it is placed in the very next Rank to the Acts of the Holy Apostles: And in some of the most ancient Manuscripts of the New Testament, we find it written in the same Volume with the Books of the Apostles and Evangelists, as if it had been esteem'd of the same Value and Au∣thority with them.

29. SO that now then we must either say that the Church in those days was so little careful of what was taught in it, as to allow such Books to be publickly read in its Congregations, the Doctrine where∣of it did not approve; Or we must con∣fess, that the following Pieces are deli∣ver'd to us, not only by the Learned Men of the First Ages of the Church, but by the whole Body of the Faithful, as con∣taining

the pure Doctrine of Christ; and must be look'd upon to have nothing in them, but what was then thought wor∣thy of all Acceptation.

30. NOW how much this adds to the Authority of these Discourses, may easi∣ly be concluded from what I have be∣fore observed. For since it is certain that in those Times the Extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost were bestowed, not only upon the Bishops and Pastors of the Church, (tho' upon them in a more eminent degree) but also upon a great many of the common Christians too: Since One particular Design of these Gifts was for the Discerning of Prophe∣cies, to judg of what was proposed by any to the Church, or written for the Use and Benefit of it: We cannot doubt but what was universally approved of and al∣low'd, not by a few Learned Men, but by the whole Church in those days; what was permitted to be publickly read to the Faithful for their Comfort and In∣struction; must by this means have re∣ceived a more than Humane Approbation; and ought to be look'd upon by us, tho' not of Equal Authority with those Books which they have deliver'd to us as strictly Canonical, yet as standing in the first Rank of Ecclesiastical Writings, and as con∣taining the true and pure Faith of Christ, without the least Error intermix'd with it.

CHAP. XI. Of the Subject of the follow∣ing Discourses; and of the Use that is to be made of Them.

That in the following Treatises, there is deliver'd to us a good account, both of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church, in the Apostolical Times. This shewn in several particulars. What they taught concerning God the Father, our Saviour Christ, and the Holy Ghost. Of An∣gels and Spirits. Of the rest of the Ar∣ticles of the Apostles Creed. Concern∣ing the two Sacraments of Baptism, and the Lord's Supper. Of the Holy Scri∣ptures, and the Divine Authority of them. What we meet with in these Trea∣tises concerning the Government of the Church. Of the Necessity of Communi∣cating with the Bishops and Pastors of it. Of Schismaticks, Hereticks, and A∣postates. Of their publick Assembling for the Service of God, and what was done by them in those Meetings. Of se∣veral other Instances of their Discipline; particularly, of their Fasting and Con∣fession of Sins. Of the Care which

their Bishops had of the whole Church. Of the Respect that was paid to them. Of their Martyrs; and the Venera∣tion which they thought due to them. Of their Practical Instructions, and how severe their Morality was; shewn in several particulars. That upon the whole, we may here see what the State of Christianity then was, and still ought to be.

1. AND now having shewn in the foregoing Chapter, what Defe∣rence we ought to pay to the Authority of those Holy Men, whose Writings I have here collected; it may not be a∣miss, in the Third place to enquire, What it is which they deliver to us; what ac∣count we find in them, of the Doctrine, and Discipline of the Church, in those Times in which they lived.

2. IT would be endless for me to go about to make a just Catalogue of all the Particulars of this kind that occur in the following Pieces; and I have already in a great measure perform'd it, in the Index which I have for that purpose subjoyn'd to them. I shall therefore here consi∣der only a few particulars, in such Points as may seem most worthy to be remark∣ed; and by them (as by a short Speci∣men shew) How the Judicious Reader may himself improve it, into a more par∣ticular

History of the Faith and Practice of the Church, in the best and most ancient State of it.

3. AND (1st.) for what concerns the Doctrines of those Times; there is hard∣ly any Point that is necessary to be believ∣ed or known by us, that is not very plain∣ly delivered in Some or Other of the fol∣lowing Pieces.

4. HERE we may read what we are to believe concerning the first Article of all of our Creed,* 3.72 God the Father. That he is One, Almighty, Invisible; the Creator and Maker of all things. That he is Omniscient, Immense; Neither to be comprehended within any Bounds, nor so much as to be perfectly conceived by us. That his Providence is over all things: And that we can none of us flee from him, or escape his Knowledg. That we are to believe in him, to fear him, to love him; And fearing him, to abstain from all Evil.

5. IF from thence we go on to the next Person of the Blessed Trinity, Our Saviour Jesus Christ;* 3.73 here we shall find all that either our Creed teaches us to profess concerning him, or that any Christian need to believe. That he Exi∣sted not only before he came into the World, but from all Eternity. That he is not

only the Son of God, but is himself also God. That in the fulness of Time he took upon him our Nature, and became Man: Was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified under Pontius Pilate; That he suffer'd for our Salvation, and was raised again from the dead, not only by the Power of the Father, but by his Own also. That he is our High-Priest and Protectour now, and shall come again at the End of the World, to judge the whole Race of Mankind. That there is no coming unto God but by him: Inso∣much that even the Ancient Fathers, who died before his Appearing, are yet saved by the same means that we are now.

6. AS for what concerns the Holy Spirit, the Third Person in the Glorious Godhead;* 3.74 he is here set out to us not on∣ly as a Person, but as distinct from the Father and the Son. And to shew what kind of Spirit he is; We may here see him joyn'd together in the same Worship with the Father, and our Saviour Jesus Christ.

7. AND now I am mentioning the Holy Spirit; let me add,* 3.75 that we may here see what is needful to be known, con∣cerning all the Other Spirits of an infe∣riour Nature. How the Holy Angels mi∣nister unto us; but especially then, when we have most need of them, at the time

of our Death. And that tho' the Devil may attacque us, and use all his Arts to draw us away from our Duty; yet it must be our own Faults if we are overcome by him, and therefore that we ought not to be afraid of him.

* 3.768. BUT to return to our Creed, and the Articles of it: Here we may farther see, both what a great Obligation there lies upon us to keep up a Communion of Saints in the Unity of the Church on Earth, and what is that true Fellowship that we ought to have with those, who are gone before us to Heaven. That it consists not in the Worship of any, tho' never so gloriously exalted by God; but in Love and Remembrance; in Thanks∣giving to God for their Excellencies, and in our Prayers to him, joyn'd with hear∣ty Endeavours of our own, to imitate their Perfections.

9. AND whilst we do this, we are here assured of the Forgiveness of our Sins too,* 3.77 through the Merits and Satis∣faction of Jesus Christ. And that not only of those which we committed be∣fore our Baptism; but of all such as we shall chance to fall into after, if we tru∣ly repent of them.

10. AS for the next Point, the Re∣surrection of the Body;* 3.78 it is not only as∣serted,

but at large proved too, in the following Discourses. There we may see, not only that there shall be a fu∣ture Resurrection; but that we shall be raised in the very same Bodies in which we go down into the Grave. And that being raised, we shall be judged by Christ according to our Works; and be either unspeakably rewarded,* 3.79 or exceeding∣ly punished, and that to all Eternity.

11. IF from the Articles of our Creed, we go on to the Sacraments of the Church:* 3.80 Here we have set out to us the great Benefit of our Baptism, and of what a mighty Concern it is to us in the business of our Salvation. And for the Other Sacrament; Here we are taught,* 3.81 that the Elements of Bread and Wine are the same (as to their Substance) after Con∣secration, that they were before; and are only in a Spiritual Sense, the Flesh and Blood of our Saviour Christ.

12. AND, Lastly; For that great,* 3.82 comprehensive Point of our Religion, the Foundation of our Faith, the Holy Scriptures: Here we may see what Opi∣nion these Holy Men had of the Divine Inspiration of them; what Deferences they paid to them, and how they look∣ed upon them to contain the true Words of the Holy Ghost.

13. SUCH is the Doctrine of Faith, that is here delivered to us. If from thence we pass; 2dly, to what concerns the Publick Order and Government of the Church, in the first Establishment of it: Here we may see by what Persons it was directed;* 3.83 and how exactly our own Church do's in this particular resemble the Primitive, perhaps beyond any other at this day in the World, in the Aposto∣lical Orders, of Bishops, Priests, and Dea∣cons.

* 3.8414. HOW necessarily they esteem'd it their Duty, to keep up a strict Com∣munion with these Governours, and how little they thought the very Name of a Church could belong to those who sepa∣rated from them, we are here likewise taught. And how light soever some may make of the Business of Schism now,* 3.85 yet it is plain these Holy Men had a ve∣ry different Apprehension of it, and hardly thought that such could be saved as continued in it.

* 3.8615. AND the same, or rather much worse, was their Opinion of Hereticks and Apostates. To the latter of which, as they seem even to have deny'd Re∣pentance; so 'tis manifest that without it, they thought the Others must perish. And in the mean time, they declare,

that we ought not to have any Commu∣nication with them: Only we must pray for them, that they may be converted, which yet they supposed would be very hard.

16. AS for those who continued in the Doctrine and Communion of the Church;* 3.87 here we may see how zealous they were in attending all the publick Offices of it. How constantly they assembled together for the Worship of God, notwithstanding all the Malice and Fury of their Enemies against them upon the Account of it. Here we may see, how from the begin∣ning they had their set Times and Places of Worship: And how they look'd upon such Offertories, both as more acceptable unto God, and more prevalent with him, than any Private Addresses that they could make to him.

17. IN these Assemblies, they not on∣ly put up their Prayers to God,* 3.88 but re∣ceived also the Holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper. And in that part of their Service, none officiated but either the Bishop himself, or he who was appoint∣ed, or allow'd, by him.

18. FOR this purpose they had in every such place of their Assembling,* 3.89 One Table or Altar, at which they per∣form'd this Service. And they com∣municated

after the same manner, that our Saviour Christ had set them the Example; of one common Loaf, which was broken and distributed to them, not of little separate and unbroken Wafers, as some now do.

* 3.9019. NOR was this yet all: In these Assemblies, the Holy Scriptures were read to them; and (as I have before shewn) some of the very Treatises I have here subjoyn'd, together with them. And the Bishop besides, himself instructed the People, and expounded the Doctrine of Christ to them.

* 3.9120. BY the Bishop were the Christians blessed, and joyn'd together in the Holy State of Matrimony. And indeed with∣out him was nothing done of all that pertain'd unto Religion.

* 3.9221. IN those Times the Clergy were marry'd, as well as Laity; nor do we find it esteem'd the least Scandal for them so to be.

* 3.9322. HERE we may see, what the an∣cient manner of Fasting was; and what was thought requisite to render such Ex∣ercises acceptable to God, and profita∣ble to our own Souls.

23. IN short,* 3.94 Here we may perceive what their Opinion was of Repentance for Sins; and how hardly they thought of those who were still Repenting, and yet still continuing to sin on, notwithstand∣ing their frequent Repentance. But es∣pecially, here we are told that we must finish our Repentance before we die; for that there is no place for Repentance af∣ter.

24. AND tho' they prescribe Con∣fession, as one Act of Repentance,* 3.95 and ne∣cessary to be perform'd in order to our Forgiveness; yet we find them advising it to be done to God only, and intimate to us that that alone was sufficient.

25. BUT the Care of their Bishops in those first times was not confin'd with∣in the narrow Bounds of their own Churches,* 3.96 but extended to All the Faith∣ful, wheresoever they were. And they were still ready to look to those who were at the greatest distance from them, whenever they thought their Advice or Authority might be either useful to them, or for the Honour and Benefit of their Religion.

26. FROM this,* 3.97 and from the gene∣ral Piety and Excellence of their Lives, joyn'd to the Greatness of their Cha∣racter

in the Church, came that mighty Respect, that was shewn to the Bishops in those days: And which how great it was, the following Treatises abundantly shew.

* 3.9827. BUT much greater was their Veneration for those, who not only Go∣vern'd well, and adorn'd their Holy Pro∣fession by an Exemplary Life, but con∣firm'd the Truth of it with their Blood. They were indeed of Opinion that no Man ought causelesly to expose himself unto Suffering:* 3.99 But if God called a Man to it, they doubted not but that our Sa∣viour Christ would both support him in his Conflicts, and most gloriously reward him for the enduring of them. Hence was it their Opinion, that Martyrdom blotted out all Sins: That they who suffer'd for the Faith, should have a Degree of Glory peculiar to themselves, above all Other Saints in God's King∣dom. And when God shew'd such re∣gard for them, they concluded that they could never almost do enough, to testifie their Respect to them.

* 3.10028. TO this we must ascribe the Care they took to gather up their Remains, the Honour which they gave to them, and the Solemnities with which they de∣posited them into the Earth. Hence came their Custom, which we here find,

of writing down the particulars of their Conflicts; and sending them abroad to the Churches round about. Hence their Anniversary Meetings at their Tombs and Monuments, Where they recited the Acts of their Martyrdoms, and some∣times made express Discourses in Praise of their Martyrs, and to exhort One Ano∣ther to the like Constancy.

29. BUT not to insist any longer on these Particulars: There is yet a (3d.) sort of Matters contain'd in these Dis∣courses, and those of no less Use to us, than either of the foregoing; and that is, the Practical Rules of Life, that are here deliver'd to us.

30. HERE we may see what Care we are to take,* 3.101 not only not to Sin our selves, but, as far as in us lies, not to let any that belong to us continue in Sin; least we also become Partakers of their evil Doings.

31. HERE we are taught not only to have a care of our Words and Actions,* 3.102 but of our very Thoughts and Desires: Which must not only not be indulged in any Instances of Sin, but not be suffer'd, if it be possible, to wander on any thing that is in the least measure wanton or ir∣regular.

32. IF we will hearken to these Ho∣ly Men; we must learn not only to do the Will of God, (but if it be his Plea∣sure) to endure patiently whatever he shall send upon us. We must consider, that Troubles and Afflictions are not only sent upon us to punish us for our Sins; but as Monitors too, to draw us off from them.

* 3.10333. TO convince us the more effe∣ctually of this; We are here shewn the mighty Danger of Riches, especially where Mens Hearts are in any degree set upon them; and how very hardly such Persons shall be saved. We are taught what Use we should make of our Abun∣dance, that so it may not prove a Snare to us. But especially, we are shewn the great Advantage of Alms-giving to this End; and what mighty Engagements there lie upon us to the Practice of it.

34. AND then, as for our Lives; We are here told,* 3.104 that a Christian must not only be Good, but Exemplary: He must shew the Truth of his Profession by a suitable Conversation; and be known by his Actions, rather than by his Words.

35. HE must pray for all Men, even for his very Enemies; nay, for the very Enemies of the Church; for Hereticks

and Schismaticks; for those of whom there is but little Hope that they will ever come to Repentance, or that God will give them Grace so to do.

36. HE must be kind and charitable to all Men; free from Envy and Con∣tention: He must neither raise any Dif∣ferences among his Brethren, nor follow any in the doing of it. To this End, he must carefully observe those Duties which relate to his Neighbour, as well as those he is to pay to God. He must obey Magistrates; must respect the Aged; must have a due Regard to all Men. Is he a Husband, a Parent, or a Child? He must then be sure to exercise himself in the several Duties becoming those seve∣ral Relations. In short; In the follow∣ing Writings we may see in all the Parts of our Duty towards God, our Neigh∣bour, and our Selves, what we are to do, and what to avoid: And are assured, that God both sees all our Actions now, and will reward or punish us for them hereafter to all Eternity.

37. AND thus have I given a short Prospect, of what is more largely con∣tain'd in the following Collection. I need not say either how useful a Variety of Matter it is, or how worthy to be known by all of us. But sure I am, who∣soever shall take the pains impartially to

compare what is here found, with the Sacred Writings of the New Testament; may be able both with Clearness and Certainty to understand whatever is re∣quisite to his Eternal Salvation: And that with much more Satisfaction and Se∣curity too, than from many Volumes of our later Writers; who for the most part spend a great deal of Time, and take much Pains, to Obscure rather than Ex∣plain, the most easie and intelligible Points of our Religion.

CHAP. XII. Of the Manner after which these Discourses are written; And the Simplicity of Stile used in them.

That the Writers of those Times used no Af∣fectation of Humane Eloquence; but deliver'd themselves with the greatest Plainness that they were able. This manner of Writing the best and most proper for Instruction. A short Account of the Occasion of the present Colle∣ction, and the Translation that is here made of the following Treatises.

1. THERE is yet one thing to be ob∣served by me, with Reference to the Discourses here subjoyn'd; and that is, Fourthly, concerning the Manner af∣ter which they are written, and that true primitive Simplicity, which appears in all the parts of them.

2. IT is one Property of Truth, that as it do's not need any Disguises, so nei∣ther does it seek any vain Ornaments of Humane Eloquence, to recommend it self to the Approbation of those to whom it is tender'd. When the Apostles preach'd the Gospel to the World, they did it not with Excellency of Speech, nor with en∣ticing Words of Mans Wisdom; but in the demonstration of Spirit and of Power. They gave such convincing Proofs of their Di∣vine Mission, as forced all indifferent Per∣sons to acknowledg their Authority: And they thought it after that, too mean a thing to endeavour to catch Mens Ears, when without any such Arts they had be∣fore captivated their Reason, and forced them to confess the Truth of what they deliver'd.

3. AND the same was the Method of those Holy Fathers who succeeded them. They knew the Excellency of their Do∣ctrine, and the mighty Influence which the Revelations it made of the Future

State, would be sure to have upon the Minds of all considering Men: And therefore they contented themselves to lay these things before them in a plain and simple manner; and with such an affe∣cted Sincerity, as is beyond all the high∣est Rhetorick in the World.

4. LET not then the Reader be sur∣prised, if in the following Discourses he meets with none of those Ornaments, that are wont to recommend the Writings of Others to his perusal. But rather let him consider, that he has here to do with Men who were above such a Care. Their business was to instruct not to please; to speak to Mens Hearts and Consciences, not to their Fancies: And they knew that this is evermore best done by a plain and unaffected Discourse; by solid Rules and substantial Motives, not by vain Words; which if they satisfie a Man at the pre∣sent, yet seldom leave any lasting Im∣pression behind them.

5. BUT of the Authors of the fol∣lowing Treatises, and of the Discourses themselves I have said enough, perhaps too much: Tho' yet I think no more than what was necessary to prepare the English Reader, for whom I am now chief∣ly concern'd, to a useful perusal of them. As for the present Collection, I shall on∣ly say thus much; that it is the first of

this kind that was ever set forth in our own Language; nor were the greatest part of the following Pieces, ever (that I know of) before translated into it.

6. I CONFESS, when I consider the great Usefulness of such a Work, and the high Esteem, which not only the Ancient Fathers, but the most Learned of all Ages have had of the Treatises here collected together; I have sometimes won∣dered, that among so many things as have of late been brought into the English Tongue, none has yet hitherto undertaken such a Task as this. But when I came to the Tryal, I soon found out what may perhaps have been one reason of it: Since, could I have foreseen the Difficulty of the Work, I much question whether I should ever have been persuaded to go about it. And this I say, not to magnifie any thing that I have done, which I have too much reason to fear will be far from deserving any great Commendation; but to suggest an Apology for whatever Defects those of greater Leisure, more Health, and better Abilities, shall chance to find in it, notwithstanding all the Care I have taken to guess aright at the Intention of my Authors, and to deliver what upon the best Examination I could make, I then took to be their Meaning.

7. I NEED not say any thing to con∣vince those who are at all acquainted with these Matters, and who are alone the competent Judges of the present Per∣formance, How hard oftentimes it is, with the help of the best Copies, to hit up∣on the true Meaning of an Author that lived so many Ages since, as those I have here collected. And what great Defects in many places there are, in the Copies I have here been forced to make use of, is not unknown to them. Had I whilst I was about this Work, been in another place, where I could have had recourse to the Assistance of a very Learned Friend; than whom none could have afforded me a better help in this particular, or would more readily have done it; I should have had much less reason to apprehend any Defects in it. But however, as it is, I am not aware of any great Errors that I have committed; and am in some hope that I have no where very much, nor at all ve∣ry dangerously, mistaken the Meaning of those Holy Men, whose Sense I have un∣dertaken to represent.

8. THIS I am sure of, that my De∣sign in this whole Undertaking, was to mi∣nister the best I could to the Interests of Truth and Piety: And I thought my self at this time, the rather obliged to do it from the Press, in that it has pleased God

in some measure to take me off, from the Ability of doing it, from the Pulpit.

9. IF it shall be ask'd how I came to chuse the Drudgery of a Translator, rather than the more ingenuous part of publishing somewhat of my own Com∣posing, it was in short this; Because I hop'd that such Writings as these would find a more general and unprejudiced ac∣ceptance with all sorts of Men, than any thing that could be written by any One now living: Who, if esteem'd by some, is yet in danger of being despis'd by more; whose Prejudice to his Person will not suffer them to reap any Benefit, by any thing, tho' never so useful, that can come from him; Whilst such Tracts as these may possibly receive a general Respect from all sorts of Persons; and meet not only with an Entertainment, but an Esteem too from All.

10. THESE were the Motives that first induced me to set about this Work; and in the Reasonableness of which should I chance to be mistaken, yet I cannot but persuade my self that the Honesty of my Intentions, shall excuse me to all indiffe∣rent Persons. Let Others then, to whom God has given better Opportunities, and greater Abilities, serve the Church in bet∣ter and higher Performances. It shall suf∣fice me in any way to minister to the

Souls of Men. And if by this present Undertaking I shall but in any measure have contributed to the reviving a true Sense of Piety and Devotion among us; but especially to the disposing of any num∣ber of Men to consider more seriously the fatal Consequences of our present Divi∣sions, and to labour what in them lies to the Composing of them; I shall heartily bless God, both that he first prompted me to undertake this troublesome Task, and has since enabled me, tho' amidst many Infirmities, to go through with it.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. cap. 16.
• † 1.2

  Idem, lib. III. cap. 12.
• ‖ 1.3

  Canon. Apo∣stol. Can. ult.
• * 1.4

  MS. Alexan.
• * 1.5

  Grot. Annot. in Phil. iv.3.
• † 1.6

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. cap. 12 Epiph. lib. I. Adv. Carpo••r. Hieronim. de Script. Eccles. Et Comment. in loc. Item lib. I. adv. Jo∣vin. Photii Cod. ••mem. 113, &c.
• * 1.7

  Vid. Eucher. Lugd. de Con∣tempt. Mundi▪ & Chron. Al∣••ert. Stad. in∣ter Testimo∣nia à ••unio Ci∣tat••.
• * 1.8

  Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. IV.
• † 1.9

  Hieron. in Isaiam, c. 52.
• ‖ 1.10

  De Adulte∣rat. lib. Origi∣nis.
• * 1.11

  Pearson Dis∣sert. de Success. prim. RR. PP. cum Append. Hen. Dodwel••i. Pearson. dis∣sert. Posthum. Cap. V. Num. 7.
• ‖ 1.12

  Dodwelli Dissert. singul. Cap. XV. pag. 220.
• ‖ 1.13

  Dodwell. Dissert. singul. Cap. XI. p. 151.
• * 1.14

  Clem. Epistle to the Corinth. Num. vii. p. 16.
• † 1.15

  De Adulte∣rat. Lib. Orig.
• ‖ 1.16

  Hist. Eccles. Lib. III. c. 34.
• * 1.17

  Dodwel Ad∣dit. ad Cap. VI. Dissert. Post∣hum. Pearson. Num. 22. pag. 215.
• † 1.18

  Vid. Euseb. Chron. An^o 97. Et in Euseb. Annot. Scalig. p. 205. b. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib III. cap. 18.
• * 1.19

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib III. cap. 34.
• † 1.20

  Apud Cote∣ler. Patr. Apo∣stol. Tom. I.
• * 1.21

  Vid. in An∣not. in Epist. Clem. in prin∣cip.
• † 1.22

  Annot. 2. p. 41.
• ‖ 1.23

  Baron. Annal. ad Ann. XCV. Num. 1.
• * 1.24

  Coteler. No••. in Clem. Epist. pag. 8••.
• † 1.25

  Dodwell. Append. ad Cap. VI. Dis∣sert. 2. Pear∣son, pag 219. Num. 24.
• † 1.26

  Epistle, c I. p. 9.
• ∵ 1.27

  Ibid. c. V. p. 15.
• * 1.28

  Chap. XLI. p. 56, 57.
• † 1.29

  Dodwel. loc. supr. cit.
• * 1.30

  Epist. chap. lix. pag 78.
• * 1.31

  Dodwel. loc. supr. cit. Add. Cave Hist. Li∣terar. in Cle∣ment. pag. 18.
• † 1.32

  Callovius Bibl. illustr. N. T. To. 2. Exam. prae••. Grot. in 1 Cor. p. 250. Voe∣tius Paralip. p. 1167, &c. Vid. Tentzel. Ex∣ercit. select. Exerc. 2. de Phoenice.
• * 1.33

  Vid. Callov. Oper. Socin. To. 2 pag. 487.
• ‖ 1.34

  Vid. Jun. Praefat. in E∣pist. Clem.
• * 1.35

  Vid. Baron. Annal. Anno· 95. Num. iii. &••.
• * 1.36

  Ten••zelius Dissert. select. de Phoeni••e. p. 3••. Et Num. xvi pag 45.
• ‖ 1.37

  Photii Bi∣blioth. Tmem. cxxvi. p. 306.
• † 1.38

  Tertullian. Origen. Cyril. Hierosolym. Euseb. Greg. Naz. Epipha∣nius, Synesius, Hieronym. Lactantius, &c. Jun. Notae in Clem pag. 34.
• * 1.39

  Tacitus An∣nal. libr. vi. num. 28.
• † 1.40

  Vid. Annot. Edit. Oxon. in loc. Bochar∣tus Hierozöic. in Phoenice, &c. apud Tent∣zel▪ p. 18, 19.
• ‖ 1.41

  Vid. Ed. Oxon. loc. cit. Adde Annot. Schotti in Photium, Tmem. cxxvi. pag. 3••••.
• * 1.42

  Aliis argu∣mentis, tum HOC IMPR••∣MIS. T••nt••el. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. cit. pag. 33.
• * 1.43

  Photii Bibl.
• * 1.44

  Vid. Praefat. Jun. in Edit. Oxon. 1633.
• † 1.45

  Anno 1647. Lond. 4to.
• * 1.46

  Edit. Colo∣mesii lectori, Cave. Hist. li∣terar. in Clem.
• * 1.47

  Edit. Colo∣mesii lectori, Cave. Hist. li∣terar. in Clem.
• † 1.48

  Athenae Oxon. 2 part▪ pag. 137, 138▪
• * 1.49

  Edit. Poly∣carp. & Ignat. Oxon. Anno 1644.
• * 1.50

  Epist. of Po∣lycarp, Numb. ix. pag. 93.
• † 1.51

  Ma••••. of Ig••. Numb. x. pag. 225.
• ‖ 1.52

  Epist of Po∣lycarp, numb. xiv. pag. 98.
• * 1.53

  Dallaeus in Pseudepigr. cap. xxxii. pa. 428. Larroque Observat. in Pearson, p. 69.
• ‖ 1.54

  Ignat. Epist. to the Romans, cap. v. p. 163.
• * 1.55

  Vid. Dal∣laeum & Lar∣roque loc. cit.
• * 1.56

  Photius Bibl. Tmem. cxxvi. pag. 305.
• † 1.57

  Proleg. ad Var. Sacr. in Polycarp.
• * 1.58

  Exercit. Se∣lect. Exerc. IV. num. 42. pag. 157.
• † 1.59

  Polycarp. E∣pist. num. xiii. p. 97.
• * 1.60

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. cap. 36.
• † 1.61

  Apud Usser. p. 24.
• ∵ 1.62

  Dissert. de Ignat. Epist. cap. ii.
• † 1.63

  Photii Bibl Tmem. cxxvi. p. 3••5.
• * 1.64

  De Scripr Eccles. in Po¦lycarp.
• ‖ 1.65

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV c. 1••
• * 1.66

  Iren. Epist. ad Florin. apud Euseb. Hist. Ec∣cles. lib. V. c. 20.
• † 1.67

  S. Maximus Prolog. in Dio∣nys Areop. Su••da•• in Po∣lycarp. &c. Vid. Usserii Dis••ert. de Script. Ign. p. 4.5. ••e••••zel. Exerc. Select. de Polyc. num. xxxvi, xxxvii.
• * 1.68

  Ad lib. iii. c. 3. Irenaei.
• † 1.69

  Lond. 1647. p. 31.
• ‖ 1.70

  U••serius An∣not. loc. cit. p. 72, 73.
• ‖ 1.71

  U••serius An∣not. loc. cit. p. 72▪ 73.
• * 1.72

  Victor 〈…〉〈…〉 he li∣ved anno 545.
• * 1.73

  Cave Hist. li∣ter. in Polyc. pag. 28. Le Moyné Prol. ad Var. Sacr. Tenzel. Exercit. Select. IV. de Polyc. num. xlix. Du Pin. Bibl. Eccl. in Poly∣carp. &c.
• † 1.74

  De Scriptis Ignatian. cap, xxxii.
• * 1.75

  Prol. a•• Var. Sacr. Tom. I. in Polycarp.
• * 1.76

  Vid. apud Tentzel. de Polycarp. Dis∣sert. IV. num. 41. pag. 157.
• † 1.77

  Exercit. Se∣lect. Exerc. IV. num. 42, &c. 47.
• * 1.78

  Usserius Dis∣sert. de Epist. Ignat. cap. VI. pag. 33.
• * 1.79

  Vid. Dissert. Usser. c. X, XI. p. 63, &c.
• † 1.80

  Ibid. c. XV. p. ••▪ 3.
• ‖ 1.81

  〈…〉〈…〉 p. 12.
• * 1.82

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 36. Photius Bibl. Tmem. cxxvi. p. 305.
• * 1.83

  Vid. Lar∣roque Observ. in Vind. Pears. p. 65, 66.
• * 1.84

  See 1 Tim. i.17.
• † 1.85

  Ephes. iii.20. Rom. xv.33.
• * 1.86

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. c. 36.
• ‖ 1.87

  Hieron. de Script. in Po∣lycarp.
• * 1.88

  Le Moyne Prolegom. ad var. Sacr.
• † 1.89

  Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iv. cap. 14.
• ‖ 1.90

  Dr. Cave's Lives of the Apostolical Fa∣thers in St. Po∣lycarp.
• * 1.91

  Vid. Vossii Praefat. in Ig∣nat ad Lecto∣rem.
• ‖ 1.92

  Vid. Vindic. Pearson in Proëm. p. 20.
• † 1.93

  Polycarp. E∣pist. Numb. xiii. pag. 97. Annot. Cotel. in loc. Poly∣carp. p. 486. B.
• ‖ 1.94

  Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. cap. 36.
• † 1.95

  Vid. Chrys. Orat. ad An∣tiochen.
• ‖ 1.96

  Libr. de Script. Illustr. cap. xvi.
• * 1.97

  Apud Pear∣son, Vindic. Ignat. Prole∣gom. pag. 20.
• * 1.98

  Pearson Vind. Ignat. par. I. cap. 3. pag. 27.
• † 1.99

  Ibid. cap. ii. pag. 8.
• ‖ 1.100

  Pearson ibid. pag. 8 ad 25. Comp. Testim. Cotelerii de Ignat. Et Usser. Dissert. Ignat.
• * 1.101

  Apud Pear∣son Vind. Ig∣nat. Proaem. pag. 20. Et Vind. par. i. pag. 8.
• ‖ 1.102

  See below, p. 228.
• † 1.103

  Evagrius lib. i. cap. 16. Nicephor. lib. xiv. cap. 44.
• ‖ 1.104

  Pearson dis∣sert. Chron. ii. cap. xiv ad xx.
• † 1.105

  Usher. Anno 169. Euseb. & in eum Va∣les. 167. Peti∣tus 175. &c. See below.
• * 1.106

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. v. cap. 8.
• ‖ 1.107

  Ibid. lib. iii. cap. 36.
• † 1.108

  Irenaeus, lib. iii. cap. 28.
• ‖ 1.109

  Apud Euseb. Epist. ad Flo∣rin. Hist. Ec∣cles. lib. v. cap. 20.
• † 1.110

  Orig. Homil. vi. in Luc. Et in Cantic. Pro∣leg.
• ‖ 1.111

  Ernest Tent¦zel. Ex••••••••. select 〈◊〉〈◊〉 11, 12 pag ••••.
• † 1.112

  Vossi•• Annot. passim. Pea••son vind. Ignat. Proleg. p 20.
• * 1.113

  Dissert. de Ignat. cap. iii.
• † 1.114

  Annot. in Ignat. Epist. pag 264, 265.
• ‖ 1.115

  Polycarp. E∣pist. num. x••ii. pag. 97.
• * 1.116

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 36.
• † 1.117

  Hieronym. de Viris Illustr. in Ignat.
• ‖ 1.118

  Vid. Isaac. Vess. Annot. loc. supr. cit.
• * 1.119

  Pag. 213.
• † 1.120

  See below, pag. 159.
• * 1.121

  Acts of Igna∣tius, numb. iv, v. pag. 221, 222.
• * 1.122

  Mat. xviii.3.
• † 1.123

  Metaphrast. apud Coteler. p. 991.
• * 1.124

  Niceph. Hist. Eccl. lib. II. cap. 35.
• ‖ 1.125

  Usher. Annot. in Act. Mart. Ignat. Num. iv.
• † 1.126

  Vid. Annot. in Concil. Oe∣co••▪ viii Con∣c••••. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Tom. viii. p. 994. D.
• * 1.127

  Homil. in S. Ignat. To. I. Fevardent. p. 499, 506 B. C.
• † 1.128

  Mountac. O∣rigin. Eccles. To. II. p. 211, 212.
• ‖ 1.129

  Vind. Ignat. Part. II. c. xii. p. 149.
• * 1.130

  Acts of Ignat. Num. V. p. 222.
• * 1.131

  Vind. Ignat. Part. II. p. 144.
• * 1.132

  Homil. in Ig∣nat. pag. 499. To. I. Fevar∣dent.
• † 1.133

  Ernest. Tent∣zel. Exercit. Select. III num. ii. p. 47.
• * 1.134

  Vid. Chry∣sost. Orat. in Laud Ignat. Theodoret. To. IV. p. 33. Dial. I Comp. Usser. Annot. in Epist. ad Anti∣och. pag. 107. Pearson. Vind. Ignat. part. II. p. 107.
• † 1.135

  Acts of Ignat. num. I, II, III. p. 219, 220, 221.
• ‖ 1.136

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. cap. 36.
• * 1.137

  Euseb. Chron. ab anno 69 ad 110. alii ad 116. vid. infr.
• * 1.138

  See his Epistles to the Phila∣delph. Smyrn. and to St. Poly∣carp.
• * 1.139

  Vid. Ignat Epist. & spe••••∣atim. ad Rom. num. ix. p. 167. Add. Act. Ignat. num. ix. p. 224.
• † 1.140

  Vid. Act. Ig∣nat. num. xiii.228.
• * 1.141

  Vid. Usserii Ann. in Act. Ignat. num. 37.
• * 1.142

  Vid. Scalig. in Euseb. ad Ann. 110.
• † 1.143

  Vid. Usser. Not. in Act Ig∣nat. num. ix. p. 39.40. Tent¦zel. Exerc. iii. p. 49.
• * 1.144

  Mart. apud Coteler.
• * 1.145

  Acts of Ig∣nat. num. ix. p. 224.
• † 1.146

  Mart. Ignat. apud Coteler. p. 1•• 02.
• * 1.147

  Vid. Usser. Annot. in Act. Ignat. p. 55 56.
• * 1.148

  Apud Usser. Annot. in E∣pist. ad Phila∣delph. Not. 82. Et in Append. p. 9.
• † 1.149

  Plin. Secand. Epist. lib. X. Epist. 97.
• ‖ 1.150

  Ibid. Epist. 98.
• * 1.151

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 33.
• † 1.152

  Apologet. cap. II.
• ‖ 1.153

  In voce 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.154

  Lib. III. c. 33 Hist. Eccles.
• ‖ 1.155

  Acta Mart. Ignat. num. xii. p. 227.
• † 1.156

  Euseb. ibid.
• * 1.157

  Annot. in Act. Martyr. Ignat. not. 39.
• † 1.158

  Vid. Ant. Pagi Critic. in Baron. ad Ann. 108.
• ‖ 1.159

  Apud Usser. loc. supr. Cit.
• * 1.160

  Le Moyne Prol. ad var. sac••.
• * 1.161

  Ibid.
• † 1.162

  Life of S. Po∣lycarp, p. 112. So the Roman Martyrologie.
• ‖ 1.163

  Le Moyne, Cave, &c.
• * 1.164

  Ibid.
• † 1.165

  Irenaeus lib. III. cap. 3. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. cap. 14. Vid. Tentzel. Ex∣erc. select. de Polyc. iii. §. 5.
• ‖ 1.166

  Tertul. de Praeser. Haeret. c. 32. Hieron. de Script. in Polycarp. Vid. Martyrol. Rom. Jan. xxvi.
• ∴ 1.167

  Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, numb. xii. p. 243.
• * 1.168

  Ibid. numb. xvii. p. 248.
• † 1.169

  See below, pag 244.
• * 1.170

  De Script. in Polycarp. So∣phron. Interp. Graec.
• † 1.171

  Le Moyne Prol. ad var. Sacr.
• * 1.172

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles▪ lib. i••. cap. 14.
• † 1.173

  Vid. Val••s Annot. ad Eu∣seb. Eccl. Hist. lib iv. cap. 14. Te••zel. Exer∣cit. de Poly∣carp. §. ix.
• * 1.174

  L•• M••yne Prolego••. ad var. Sacr.
• † 1.175

  Apud 〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.176

  Apud Tent∣zel. Exercit. Select. IV. p. 76, &c.
• * 1.177

  Dissert. Chron. part. II. à cap. 14. ad 20.
• † 1.178

  Euseb. Chron.
• ‖ 1.179

  Not. in Epist. Smyrn. 104, 105. Comp. Tentz. Exer∣cit. de Poly∣carp. §. xxi.
• ∴ 1.180

  Vid. Cave Hist. Eccles. in Polycarp.
• * 1.181

  Ad An. 150. Comp. Spond. Epitom. ibid.
• † 1.182

  Annot. in Euseb. lib. IV. c 8.
• ‖ 1.183

  Euseb. Chron. ann. 142.
• * 1.184

  Scalig. An∣not. in Euseb. p. 210.
• † 1.185

  Petav. in E∣piphan Haeres. xlvi. Anton. Pagi in Baron. ad ann. 150. num. iii. Her∣man. Contract. Marian. Scot. &c.
• ‖ 1.186

  Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 26.
• ‖ 1.187

  Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 26.
• † 1.188

  Ib. lib. IV. c. 13.
• * 1.189

  Vales. in lib. IV. c. 13. Eu∣seb. & infr. in c. 26. p. 73. Add. Ant. Pagi Critic. in Ba∣ron. ad ann. 154. num. iv.
• † 1.190

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 15. p. 104.
• * 1.191

  Scalig. An∣••••••adv. in Eu∣seb. pag. 221. num. 2••83.
• * 1.192

  De Glor. Mart. cap. LXXXVI.
• † 1.193

  Vid. Usser. Annot. in Act. Polyc. num. 77.
• † 1.194

  Vid. Usser. Annot. in Act. Polyc. num. 77.
• * 1.195

  Num. xvi. p. 247.
• ‖ 1.196

  De Morte Peregrini, p. 1006.
• * 1.197

  Le Moyne var. sacr. Prol. ad Tom. I.
• † 1.198

  So le Moyne corrects it, Prol. ad varia sacra: Reading for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.199

  Vid. Tent∣zel. Exercit. select. de Po∣lycarp. §. xxxiv.
• * 1.200

  Num. ix. p. 241.
• † 1.201

  Vid. Praef. Usser. ad Act. Ignat. & Poly∣carp. pag. ult. Comp. Tent∣zel. disp. IV. de Polyc. § iii, iv.
• ‖ 1.202

  Pearson Dis∣sert. Chron. part. II. c. 15.
• * 1.203

  Iren. contr. Haeres. lib. III. c. 3.
• † 1.204

  In Act. Po∣lyc. num. 104, 105.
• * 1.205

  Annot. in Euseb. p. 66. a
• ‖ 1.206

  Proleg. ad var. sacr.
• ∴ 1.207

  Dissert. Chron. par. II. c. 18.
• ** 1.208

  Ant. Pagi Critic. in Baron. ad Ann. 169. Tentzel. Exerc. select. de Polyc. § xxv.xxxi, &c.
• * 1.209

  Smith Epist. de VII. Asiae Eccles. Taver∣nier, Whee∣ler, &c. Vid. Tentzel. Ex∣ercit. Select. IV. §. XXXII, XXXIII.
• * 1.210

  Lib. IV. c. 15.
• † 1.211

  See below, p. 253.
• * 1.212

  Clem. Alex. Strom. Lib. II. p. 410. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. I. cap. 12. & lib. II. cap. 1.
• † 1.213

  In Act. IV.
• * 1.214

  Euseb. Chron. ad ann. CXVII.
• * 1.215

  Dion. lib. LXVIII. Xiphiline, &c.
• † 1.216

  Acts iv.36, 37.
• ‖ 1.217

  Apud Baron. Annal. ad ann. XXXIV num. 262. Comp. Dr. Cave in his Life, numb. 2.
• * 1.218

  Acts ix.27.
• † 1.219

  Galat. ii.
• ‖ 1.220

  Usher. Chro∣nol. ann. 45.46. Pearson. An∣nal. Paulin. ad ann. 48.
• * 1.221

  Acts xv. Comp. Galat. ii.
• † 1.222

  Galat. ii.11, 14.
• * 1.223

  Acts xv.36. Ann. Christi L. Pearson. LIII. Usserius.
• * 1.224

  Acts xiii.13.
• † 1.225

  Acts xv.36, 41.
• * 1.226

  Colos. iv.10.
• † 1.227

  2 Tim. iv.11.
• * 1.228

  Recognit. Clem. apud Baron. Annal. ad ann. LI. num. 52, 54. Et not. ad Mar••. Rom. Jun. xi.
• ‖ 1.229

  Ibid. Annal. num. 54.
• * 1.230

  Vid. in Vit. ejus Edit. O∣xon. Epist. p. 132.
• † 1.231

  Alexandr. Monach. En∣com. Barnabae.
• * 1.232

  Baron. Annal. ann. LI. num. 54.
• ‖ 1.233

  Hieron. de script. in Bar∣nab.
• † 1.234

  Baron. An∣nal. ann. 485.
• * 1.235

  Id. Annot. ad Martyrol. Rom. Jun. XI.
• ‖ 1.236

  Annal. ann. 485.
• * 1.237

  Apud Su∣rium. Jun. XI. To. iii.
• † 1.238

  Apud le Moyne Var. Sacr. Tom. l. p. 236.
• * 1.239

  Hist. Eccles. lib. XVI c. 37.
• † 1.240

  See le Moyne Prolegom. ad Var. Sacr.
• ‖ 1.241

  Alex. Mo∣nach. loc. ci∣tat. So Theo∣dorus Lector Collect. lib. II. p. 184.
• * 1.242

  Nilus Do∣xap. inter Var. Sacr. p. 236.
• ‖ 1.243

  Baron Annal. loc. supr. citar.
• * 1.244

  Tertull. de Pudicit. c. 20.
• ‖ 1.245

  De Script. Eccles. in S. Paulo.
• † 1.246

  Passim. Vid. Testim. Cote∣leril.
• * 1.247

  Contra Cel∣sum lib. I.
• ∴ 1.248

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 25.
• ‖ 1.249

  De Scriptor. in Barnab.
• † 1.250

  Annot. in Euseb. lib. III. c. 25.
• * 1.251

  Hist Eccles. lib. III c. 25.
• * 1.252

  Lection in Act. ii. num. 10. p. 44.
• † 1.253

  Cotel. Not. in Barnab. p. 7. B. C.
• * 1.254

  Vid. Clem. Alex Hieron. &c. inter Te∣stim. Coteler.
• ‖ 1.255

  Proleg. in Var. Sacr. in Polycarpo▪
• † 1.256

  Vid. Tentzel. Exercit. Se∣lect. de Polyc. § 38, 39. Praef. Usser. in Edit. Oxon. S. Bar∣nab. p. v.
• ‖ 1.257

  Coteler. Not. in Barnab. p. 7. C. Natal. A∣lex. Hist. Ec∣cles. Tom. I. §. I. p. 100. Le Moyne Pro∣leg. ad Var. Sacr.
• * 1.258

  Coteler. Not. in Barn. p. 5, 6. Natal. Alex. ibid. Le Moyne Prolegom. ad Var. Sacr.
• * 1.259

  Vid. Coteler. Not. in Bar∣nab. p. 6. E. 7. A.
• * 1.260

  Cotel. Not. ad Barnab. p. 5. D. Natal. A∣lex. Hist. Ec∣cles Saec. I. To. I. p. 100. Le Moyne Prol. ad var. sacr.
• † 1.261

  Huetius Ori∣gen lib. ii. Quaest. 13. p. 170, &c.
• ‖ 1.262

  Vid. Annot· Vossii in Bar∣nab. p. 310.
• * 1.263

  See 1 Cor. x.1, 4. Galat. iv.21. Ephes. v.31. Hebr. ix.8, 23▪ 24. x.1, &c.
• * 1.264

  See Hist. Crit. du v. T. Liv. iii. chap. vi.
• † 1.265

  Apud Euseb. Praeparat. E∣van ••. lib. VIII. cap 9.
• * 1.266

  Praepar. E∣vang. lib. VIII. c. 10. p. 376.
• † 1.267

  Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. II. c. 17.
• ‖ 1.268

  De Vit. Con∣templ p. 889.
• ∴ 1.269

  〈…〉〈…〉 ••••mnor. lib. V.
• * 1.270

  Vales. Annot. in Euseb. lib. II. c. 17. p. 30, 31.
• ‖ 1.271

  Hist. Eccles. lib. II. c. 17. p. 43, A. B. & p. 45. A. B.
• ∴ 1.272

  Bruno de Therapeut. dissert. p. 183, &c.
• * 1.273

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. loc. cit. p. 44. B.
• * 1.274

  Ibid. p. 45. B. C.
• ‖ 1.275

  Bruno de Therap. p. 193
• * 1.276

  Dissert. de Antichristo, c. VII.
• * 1.277

  Tatian. contr. Graec. p. 160. B. C.
• * 1.278

  Tatian. contr. Graec. p. 160. B. C.
• † 1.279

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Hist. Crit. du v. T. L••v. iii. chap. viii.
• * 1.280

  Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. VI. c. 19. p. 178.
• † 1.281

  Ibid. p. 179. Vid. Annot. Vales. p. 108, 109.
• * 1.282

  Dissert. de Antichristo, cap. VII.
• * 1.283

  Proleg. ad var. sacr.
• * 1.284

  Praefat. Usser. ad Edit. Oxon. p. 11. &c.
• * 1.285

  Is. Vossius Annot. in Barnab. p. 318.
• * 1.286

  Vid. Baron. Annot. ad Martyrol. Rom. Maii ix.
• † 1.287

  Vis. Second, num. iv.
• * 1.288

  Dr. Ham∣mond, & Mr. Dodwell. Vid. Cave Hist. liter. in Herm.
• ‖ 1.289

  Vision IV §. 3.
• * 1.290

  Hom. in Rom. lib. X. c. 16.
• † 1.291

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 3.
• ‖ 1.292

  Hieron. de Script. in Herm.
• * 1.293

  Lib. III.
• † 1.294

  In Vit. Pii Papae.
• ‖ 1.295

  Epist. I. at∣trib. Pio PP. p. 194. Edit. Blondell.
• * 1.296

  See Bellarm. de Script. §. I. p. 45. in Herm.
• † 1.297

  Annal. Eccl. in fine Anni 164
• † 1.298

  Spondan. E∣pitom. Annal. Baron. ad Ann. 159.
• * 1.299

  Vision III. num. VI. below, p. 348.
• * 1.300

  Vision I. num. 3. Vis. II. num. 2, 3.
• † 1.301

  See below, p. 326.
• * 1.302

  Annot. ad Ma••••. Rom. Ma•••• ix.
• † 1.303

  Pa on. An∣nal. E••cl••s. ad ann. ••••••
• * 1.304

  Vid. Marty∣rol. Rom. ad Ma••i ix. & Jul. xxvi.
• * 1.305

  Comp. Mar∣tyrol. Rom. Jul. xxvi. with Baron. Annal. A^o 162, 164, 166.
• † 1.306

  Martyol. Rom. Jul. xxvi.
• ∴ 1.307

  Annot. b. ad Martyrol. Rom. Maii ix.
• * 1.308

  Lib. IV. ad∣vers. Haeres. & apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 8.
• † 1.309

  Origen E∣narrat. in E∣pist. ad Rom. p. 411. D.
• ‖ 1.310

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 3.
• * 1.311

  Catalog. Script. in Herm.
• † 1.312

  De Incarnat. Verb. Tom. I. p. 55. D.
• ‖ 1.313

  Epist. Pasch. Tom. II. p. 39, 40.
• * 1.314

  Annot. ad Herm. p. 41.
• ‖ 1.315

  Annot. in Barnab. p. 9, 10.
• * 1.316

  Comment. in Habac. I. 14. ••ol. 83. D.
• * 1.317

  De Orat. cap. XII.
• † 1.318

  De Pudiciti••, cap. X.
• ‖ 1.319

  Vid. Testi∣mon. in Edit. Coteler. p. 28, &c.
• * 1.320

  Philocal. c. I.
• † 1.321

  Cassian. Col∣lar. xiii. c. 12.
• ‖ 1.322

  Contr. Col∣lator. c. XXX.
• ∴ 1.323

  Decret. Gratian. Dist. XV.
• * 1.324

  De Emend. Gratiani Dial. VI. p. 63, 64.
• * 1.325

  See Postev. Apparat. Tom. II. titul. Pastor.
• † 1.326

  Baron Annal. ann. CLIX. num. 5, 6.
• * 1.327

  Epist. ad A∣fros apud The∣odoret. Hist. Eccles. lib. I. cap. 8.
• † 1.328

  Script. Ec∣cles. Centur. I. in Herm.
• ‖ 1.329

  Jo. M. Brasi∣chellan. apud Labbaeum de Script. To. I. p. 791.
• * 1.330

  De Script. in Herm. Tom. I. p. 431.
• † 1.331

  Rivet. Critic. Sacr. lib. I. c. 12. Hoernbeck. Theol PP. To. I. Miscellan. Sacr. p. 91. Scultel. Me∣dulla PP. pag 375 Daillé de Script. Ignat. Larroque Ob∣serv. in Vind. Ignat Part. I. p. 19. Add. C••ve Hist. Li∣ter. p. 21, &c.
• * 1.332

  Praefat. in To. II. Dogm. Theol. c. 2. §. 6.
• † 1.333

  Notae in Herm. p. 43. C.
• * 1.334

  Alex. Natal. §. I. Tom. I. p. 103, 104.
• * 1.335

  Vind. Ignat. part. I. c. 4.
• † 1.336

  Defens. Fid. Nicaen. §. I. c. ••. p. 30.
• * 1.337

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 38.
• * 1.338

  De Script. in Clemente.
• † 1.339

  Phot. Cod. 112, 113.
• * 1.340

  Dissert. de Script. Ignat. cap. X.
• * 1.341

  Vid. Catal. Bevereg. Co∣dex Canon. Vindicat. 289.
• † 1.342

  Canon. LXXXV.
• * 1.343

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. ••••
• * 1.344

  Divinat. de Epist. Clem.
• † 1.345

  Beverege Cod. Canon. Vindic. lib. II. c. 9. §. 10. p. 286.
• ‖ 1.346

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 23.
• * 1.347

  See Divinat. Wendelin. ad secund Epist. Clem. Add. Coteler. An∣not. ad PP. A∣postol. p. 108.
• † 1.348

  Haeres. XXVII. num. 6.
• ‖ 1.349

  See Hieron. adv. Jovin. Tom. III. fol. 12. Photius Cod. 126. in Clem.
• † 1.350

  Wendel. Dio. de Clem. E∣pist.
• ‖ 1.351

  Notae ad Clem. p. 104, 105.
• ∵ 1.352

  Natal. Alex. Dissert. Hist. §. I. Tom. I. in Clem.
• † 1.353

  Barthius a∣pud Coteler. Not. in Herm. p. 44.
• ‖ 1.354

  Cotelerius ibid.
• † 1.355

  Burton Notes on S. Clement. p. 94.
• † 1.356

  Clem. Rom. ex MS Regio.
• * 1.357

  Ex Clem. A∣lexandrin.
• * 1.358

  Vid. Annot. Valesii in Eu∣seb. p. 18, 19.
• † 1.359

  Hist. Eccles. lib. I. c. 13.
• ‖ 1.360

  Testam. S. E∣phraem inter Oper. p. 788.
• * 1.361

  Evagrii Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. cap. 27.
• * 1.362

  Annal. Eccl. ann. XXXI. num. 60.
• † 1.363

  Epitom. An∣nal. Baron. Ann. XXXI. num. 22.
• ‖ 1.364

  Annot. ad O∣per. Ephraem. ••yr. p. 796.
• * 1.365

  Annot. in Euseb. Hist. Eccles. p. 25. A.
• † 1.366

  Apud Gra∣tian. Dist. XV. c. 3. Simon Hist. Crit. du N. T. ch. iii. p. 23.
• ‖ 1.367

  Exercit. in Baron. XIII. §. 31. p. 289.
• * 1.368

  Saecul. I. Vol. I. p. 266.
• † 1.369

  Nouvelle Bibl. Vol. I. p. 1.
• * 1.370

  Vid. apud Basnaginm Ex∣ercit. Hist. Crit. in Baron. ad ann. XLIII. num. 18. pag. 430.
• † 1.371

  Casaubon. Exerc. in Ba∣ron. XIII. p. 289. Montacu∣tius Orig. Ec∣cles. Tom. I. part. 2. p. 63. Cave Hist. Li∣teraria, §. I. p. 1. in Jesu Christo.
• * 3.1

  Bibl. Sanct. lib. II. in Paulo. Add. Frasse∣niun•• Disq. Bi∣blic. p. 731, &c.
• * 3.2

  So Chrysost. Theodoret, &c.
• † 3.3

  Theophy∣lact. in loc.
• * 3.4

  Tertull. adv. Marcion. lib. V. cap. xi. p. 476.
• ‖ 3.5

  Vid. Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. IV. c. 13.
• † 3.6

  Vid. Annot. Vales. in Eu∣seb. p. 60. A.
• * 3.7

  Tertull. de Prescript. cap XXXVI. pag. 215▪
• * 3.8

  Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. vi. p. 339.
• ‖ 3.9

  Rev. I 11.II.1.
• * 3.10

  Tertull. adv. Marcion lib. V. c. xvi••. p. 481. Epiphan. Hae∣res. xlii. num. xii.
• † 3.11

  Vid. L'Hi∣stoire Critique de Monsieur Simon sur le N. T. c. xv. p. 166.
• * 3.12

  Frassenius Disq. Biblic. p. 730, 731.
• * 3.13

  Sixt. Sinens. Bibl. sanct. lib. II. in St. Paulo.
• † 3.14

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 3.
• ‖ 3.15

  Hieron. de Script. Eccles. in St. Paulo.
• * 3.16

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. xxx. Comp. Hieron. in Ca∣tal. Script. Ec∣cles. in S. Petro.
• * 3.17

  Vid. Cave Hist. literar. p 9. Natal. A∣lex. §. I. Vol. I. p. 85. Du Pin. Bibl. Vol. I. p. 21.
• * 3.18

  Cave. Natal▪ Alex. Du Pin. ib. Hoornb. Theol. PP. p. 41. Rivet. Cri∣tic. Sacr. lib. I. c. lii.
• * 3.19

  Bona de Reb. Liturgic. lib. I. c. 8.
• † 3.20

  Leo Allatius Dissert. de Sym. part. I. p. 176.
• * 3.21

  Nat. Alex. § I. Vol. I. p. 490, &c.
• † 3.22

  Du Pin, Bi∣blioth. Eccles. Vol. I. p. 25, &c.
• ‖ 3.23

  Diatrib. de Symb.
• ∴ 3.24

  Voss. Dissert. de tribus Sym∣bolis.
• * 3.25

  Suicer. The∣saur. Eccles. To. II. Voce 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, p. 1••80. &c.
• † 3.26

  Spanhem. Introd ad Hist Eccles. § ••i. c. 3.
• ‖ 3.27

  Ernest Tent∣zel. Exercit. select. Exercit. I.
• ** 3.28

  Sam. Basnage Exercit. Hist. Crit. a•• Ann. XLIV. num. 17, 18.
• * 3.29

  Annot. in Pandect. Ca∣non. Oxon. To. II. p. 1. Id. Co∣dex Can. Vin∣dicat. c. 11, &c.
• † 3.30

  Vid. Albas∣pin. Obs. lib. I. c. 13. p. 28. De Marca a∣pud Bevereg. Annot. in Pan∣dect. p. 4. num. xii. Coteler. Not. in Patr. A∣postol. p. 327, 328. Du Pin Bibl. Eccles. Tom. I. p. 36. Natal. Alex. §. I. Vol. II. p. 138.
• ‖ 3.31

  Daillé de Pseu∣dep. Apostol. lib. III. Larroque Observat. in. Bevereg. Hoornbeck Theolog. Patr. p. 35, &c.
• * 3.32

  See this dis∣cuss'd at large by Bishop Usher, Dissert. ad Ig∣nat. cap. V, VI, XIX. p. 2.
• † 3.33

  Epiphan. Haeres. XXX. Ruffinus de Adulterat. libr. Origen. Tract. XXXV. in Matthaeum. Author Oper. Imperfect. in Math. inter Oper. Chry∣sost. ad Mat. x. & xxiv.
• ‖ 3.34

  Vid. Coteler. Not. in Script. PP. Apost. p. 343. Natal. Alex. §. I. Tom. I. p. 126 Du Pin Bibl. Vol. I. p. 80, 81.
• * 3.35

  Coteler. An∣not. in Script. PP. Apost. p. 113. A. 115. D. 403. A. 431. C. D. Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. lib. II. in Clement. Pos••evin. Apparat. p. 328. Bellarm. de Script. §. I. in Clement. Natal Alex. §. I. Tom. I. p. 129. Id. ibid. cap. de St. Ignat. p. 139. Du Pin. Biblioth. p. 81, 83, 102, &c.
• * 3.36

  Notae in Script. PP. A∣post. p. 431. C. D.
• † 3.37

  Surius ad Nov. xxiii.
• ‖ 3.38

  Allarius in Diatrib. de Sy∣meonum Scri∣ptis.
• * 3.39

  Du Pin ••i∣blioth. Tom. I. p. 89. r.
• † 3.40

  Vid. Geogr. sacr. à S. Paulo, p. 11, 43.
• * 3.41

  Ibid. p. 233. in Chersoneso.
• * 3.42

  Eccles. Hist. §. I. To. I. p. 95, 115.
• * 3.43

  Vid. Natal. Alex. §. I. To. I. p. 109. Labbe de Script. Ec∣cles. To. I. p. 3, &c.
• † 3.44

  Nouvelle Biblioth. To. I. p. 47, 48.
• ‖ 3.45

  Natal. Alex. §. I. Vol. I. p. 136. Labbe de Script. Tom. I. in Dionysio.
• * 3.46

  He might have added se∣veral others: See Bellarm. de Script. p. 56.
• † 3.47

  Du Pin-Nouvelle Bi∣blioth. To. I. p. 90.
• * 3.48

  Vid. Cave Hist. liter. §. IV. p. 177.
• † 3.49

  Vindic. Ig∣nat. part. I. c. 10.
• † 3.50

  Loc. supr. cit.
• * 3.51

  Daillé apud Pearson. loc. supr. cit.
• ‖ 3.52

  Dodwell de Sacerdot. Lai∣cor. cap. VIII. §. III. p. 389.
• * 3.53

  Mat. xxviii.19. Mark xvi.15.
• † 3.54

  Luke xxiv.49. Acts i.8. Acts ii.
• * 3.55

  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 35.
• * 3.56

  Epist. ad Flor. in num. apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. V. c. 20.
• † 3.57

  Euseb. Hist▪ Eccles. lib. v. c. ••6
• * 3.58

  Iren. adv. Haeres. lib. III. c. 30.
• * 3.59

  See 1 Cor. iv.12. Ephes. i.6, &c. Acts viii.14, 17.xix.6, &c.
• † 3.60

  Vid. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 15. Just. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 308.
• ‖ 3.61

  Ibid. p. 315.
• * 3.62

  S••e below, c▪ xlviii. p 66.
• † 3.63

  See his Salu∣tation to the Smyrnaans, p. 193, 194.
• * 3.64

  Epist. to the Philadelph § VII. p. 182. To the Tral∣lians. Sect. V. p. 149.
• * 3.65

  Clem. Epist. num. xlii. p. 58. num. xliv. p. 60.
• † 3.66

  1 Cor. xii.10. Heb. iv.12.
• ‖ 3.67

  Clem. Alex. de Divit. Salv. num. xlii. Eu∣seb. Hist. Ec∣cles. lib. III. c. 23.
• * 3.68

  Epist. to the Philadel∣phians, ch. vii. p. 182, 183. Add the Mar∣tyrdom of Igna∣tius, num. xii. p. 226.
• * 3.69

  Vid. Dod∣well. Dissert. in Iren. Prae∣fat. & Dissert. 2.
• * 3.70

  Epiphan. Haeres. xxx. num. 15.
• * 3.71

  Annot. in Epist. in Bar∣nab. p. 9, 10.
• * 3.72

  See the Index, God.
• * 3.73

  See ibid. in Christ.
• * 3.74

  See ibid. Trinity.
• * 3.75

  See the Index, Angel, De∣vil.
• * 3.76

  See ib. Peace, Unity, Mar∣tyrs, Re∣liques, &c.
• * 3.77

  See Repen∣tance.
• * 3.78

  See ibid. Re∣surrection.
• * 3.79

  Ibid. Punish∣ment.
• * 3.80

  See ibid. Sa∣crament, Ba∣ptism, &c.
• * 3.81

  See ib. Tran∣substantia∣tion.
• * 3.82

  See ibid.
• * 3.83

  See Bishops, ibid.
• * 3.84

  Ibid.
• * 3.85

  Ibid. See Schism.
• * 3.86

  Ibid. Here∣tick, Apo∣state.
• * 3.87

  See Index, Worship, &c.
• * 3.88

  See ibid. Sa∣crament, Bi∣shop.
• * 3.89

  See below, p. 110, 121, 198.
• * 3.90

  See below, p. 220.
• * 3.91

  See the Index, Marriage, Bishop.
• * 3.92

  Ib. See Priest.
• * 3.93

  Ibid. Fast.
• * 3.94

  Ibid. Repen∣tance.
• * 3.95

  Ibid. Con∣fession.
• * 3.96

  See Ignatius's Epistles and Martyrdom, &c.
• * 3.97

  See the Index, Bishop.
• * 3.98

  Ibid. Mar∣tyrs, and be∣low, p. 236.
• * 3.99

  See Index, Suffer.
• * 3.100

  Ibid. See Re∣liques, Mar∣tyrs.
• * 3.101

  See ibid. Sin.
• * 3.102

  See below, p. 321, &c.
• * 3.103

  See Index, Riches, Alms-giv∣ing, &c.
• * 3.104

  Ibid. Chri∣stian.