A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

St. IGNATIUS.

IGNATIUS Sirnamed Theophorus a 1.1, was the Successor of Evodius b 1.2 in the Episcopal See * 1.3 of Antioch, about the year of our Lord 70. He governed this Church for the space of almost Forty years with admirable Prudence and Constancy, and at last suffered Martyrdom in the Tenth year of the Reign of Trajan, when this Holy Prelate having professed the Faith even in the presence of the Emperor himself with great Courage, (if we may believe the Acts of his Martyr∣dom) was condemned to be exposed to wild Beasts in the Amphitheatre at Rome: And he is reputed to have wrote his Epistles to several Churches in the way as he was carried a Prisoner in Chains to that City, for maintaining the truth of the Christian Religion; but since there are very great diffi∣culties concerning the number and different Editions of these Epistles, it will be necessary to draw up their History, and to produce the Testimony of Authors that have mentioned them since his time.

Immediately after the death of this holy Martyr, Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna, his Disciple, colle∣cted these Epistles, and sent them to the Christians of Philippi, as appears from a Letter that he wrote to them, and which cannot be questioned without contradicting not only Eusebius, S. Jerom, and Photius, the most renowned Criticks of Antiquity, but also S. Irenaeus himself the Disciple of S. Poly∣carp, who cites this Epistle, and commends it in these words: There is an Epistle of Polycarp to the Christians of Philippi, which is extremely accurate, and very proper to shew the character of the Faith, and the Doctrine of the Truth, to those that take any care of their Salvation. Moreover, we have not only an approbation of S. Polycarp's Epistle by S. Irenaeus, to prove the Authority of S. Ignatius's, but it is likewise evident, that this Father had read these Epistles: Irenaeus (says Eusebius) was not igno∣rant of the Martyrdom of S. Ignatius, and mentions his Epistles in these words: Thus one of our Bre∣thren being condemned for maintaining the Faith, to be exposed to the wild Beasts, said, c 1.4 I am the Wheat of God, and shall be ground by the Teeth of wild Beasts, that I may become the Bread of Jesus Christ. The words recited by S. Irenaeus in Lib. 5. contra Haeres. cap. 28. are also found at present in the Epistle of S. Ignatius to the Romans. Origen hath cited the Epistles of S. Ignatius, and that which he produceth in two several places, is read in those that are now extant. I have found it written (says he in his 6th Homily on S. Luke) in the Epistle of a certain Martyr, I mean Ignatius Bishop of Antioch, who was exposed to wild Beasts at Rome, I have found it written (I say) very elegantly, that the Virginity of Mary was unknown to the Prince of this World. This passage is word for word in

the Epistle of S. Ignatius to the Ephesians. The Second passage quoted by Origen is in his Commen∣tary on the Canticles. We remember (says he) the Expression of a Saint named Ignatius in speaking concerning Jesus Christ, my Love is Crucified, and I do not believe that he ought to be reprehended on this Account. These are the Testimonies taken from Authors who wrote in the Second and Third Centuries; in the Fourt, Eusebius cites the Epistles of S. Ignatius, declares their number, and gives us a Catalogue of them. He says in the Third Book of his History, chap. 36. that this Holy Martyr being carried from Asia into Italy confirmed the Churches of the several Cities, through which he passed, in the Faith, and admonished them to avoid Heresies by constantly adhering to the Tradition of the Apostles; and that being arrived at Smyrna, where (l) Polycarp was then Bishop, he wrote four Letters; The first to the Church of Ephesus, wherein he mentions Onesimus their Pastor; The se∣cond to the Magnesians, wherein he speaks of Damas their Bishop; The third to the Trallians, where he names Bishop Polybius; And the last to the Church of Rome, wherein he intreats the Romans not to deprive him through the fervour of their Prayers of the Crown of Martyrdom. Afterwards he recites a large Fragment of this Epistle, and adds, that being departed from Smyrna, and arrived at Troas, he wrote to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Philadelphians, as ••••so to the Church of Smyrna; and particularly to S. Polycarp their Bishop, recommending to him the care of the Church of Antioch, as unto a good Pastor worthy of those Apostolical times. He 〈◊〉〈◊〉 likewise a Fragment of the Epistle to the Inhabitants of Smyrna, and confirms what he had before alledged by the Attestations of S. Irenaeus and S. Polycarp. It is evident from this passage, that in the time of Eusebius there were Seven Letters, which were esteemed un∣doubtedly to be S. Ignatius's, and that they were the very same with those that are still extant, be∣cause they were written from the same places, to the same Persons, and on the same Subject, and contain all the Passages that are produced by Eusebius word for word, after whom these very Epistles were unanimously allowed by the whole Church, and cited by an infinite number of Ecclesiastical Authors. S. Athanasius who could not be led by the Authority of Eusebius, whose History perhaps he had never seen, sets down in his Book of the Synods, a passage of this ancient Bishop, which is in the Epistle to the Ephesians. S. Chrysostom in the Oration, that he made in Commendation of S. Igna∣tius, recites this famous Sentence taken from his Epistle to the Romans: Would to God that I might ere long fight with Beasts, and in another Oration, if that be really his, d 1.5 he quotes a passage of the Epistle to S. Polyoarp.

S. Jerom acknowledgeth the Seven Epistles of S. Ignatius mentioned by Eusebius to be Genuine: they are reckoned in his Catalogue of Authors, and cited by him in divers other places of his Works. The Learned Theodoret uses the Authority of the Letters of this Father, as certainly written by him, against the Hereticks, and in his Dialogues produceth many large Passages out of the Epistles to the Smyrneans, Ephesians, and Trallians, that are expressed after the very same manner, as they are Printed in the Editions of Vossius and Bishop Usher. Gelasius likewise cites a passage of the Epistle to the Christians of Smyrna on the same Subject in his Treatise concerning the two Natures of Jesus Christ: The Author of the Book of the Divine Attributes, ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite, produceth a Sentence taken from that to the Romans. S. Ephrem in the sixth Century (according to the report of Photius, God. 228.) hath cited the Writings of S. Ignatius: Gildas de Excidio Britanniae, produceth a large passage of the Epistle to the Romans: The Monk Jobius (as it is related by Photius, Cod. 222.) quotes another of that to the Smyrneans: Leontius opposeth the Authority of S. Ignatius to the Here∣ticks in Lib. de Sect. Act. 3. Anastasius Sinaita of the Seventh Century, in his Book Entituled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (The Guide) sets down a passage taken from the Epistle to the Romans, and Antiochus a Monk of Pa∣lestine, in his 124th Homily to Eustathius, concerning the Honour, that is due to the Bishops, recites many passages of those to Polycarp, the Philadelphians and Trallians. S. Maximus acknowledgeth the Works of S. Ignatius, and Theodorus in the Eighth Century (whom Photius mentions Cod. 1.) produceth divers passages thereof, as also Andreas Cretensis a Writer of the Ninth Century, in Hom. 2. de Virgine; and Singelus, in his Panegyrick upon S. Dionysius the Areopagite: To these may be added, Simeon Meta∣phrastes in the Tenth Century, Honorius Bishop of Autun in the Twelfth, Nicetas Choniates in the Thirteenth; and Lastly, Nicephorus Callistus in the Fourteenth: This shews that the Epistles of S. Ig∣natius have been allowed by the Church in all Ages, as authentick Records; but the modern Grecians since the time of S. Joannes Damascen have used other Letters, that are not named by Eusebius, whereas before, the Seven Epistles mentioned by Eusebius and S. Jerom were only cited.

Having produced the several Testimonies of the Ancients, concerning the Epistles that are attribu∣ted to S. Ignatius, we shall now proceed to shew what Judgment hath been given by the Moderns concerning the same, and for the better understanding of this matter, it seems to be necessary in the beginning, to set down a Catalogue of the different Editions of these Epistles that have been made in our time.

The first Edition of the Epistles of S. Ignatius, was published at Paris, Anno Dom. 1494. which did not contain any of the Seven that are recited by Eusebius, but only the Three Latin Letters, one whereof

was written to the Virgin Mary, and the other two to S. John. In the Year 1498, Eleven were Printed in Latin, which being revised by Clictovaeus were Reprinted at Strasburg in 1502, 1515, and 1527, as also by Henry Peter at Basil, in 1520. Not long after Champerius added three others, and one written to Maria Cossobolita, which he caused to be Printed at Colen, by Quentelius in 1536. together with the Commentaries of Dionysius Carthusianus on the Works attributed to S. Dionysius the Areopagite; afterwards they were Printed at Antwerp in 1540. at Alcala in 1541. at Basil in 1530, and 1540. at Zurick in 1546, 1550, 1557, and 1560. at Paris in 1569, 1575, and 1610. at Colen in 1570, at Basil in 1569, and 1628. at Louvain in 1568. and at Antwerp in 1572. In the Year 1557, they were set forth at Colen, according to the Version of Perionius, Pacaeus gave us the Greek Text. In 1557, 1558, and 1562 Morellus procured them to be Printed in Greek, at Paris in Octavo. Moreover Gesner published them in Greek, in 1559, with the Translation of Brunnerus. In the Year 1566. they were published at Antwerp, being corrected from certain Manuscripts by Vairlenius, and Printed by Plantin. Mestraeus set forth a new Edition of them in 1608. Vedelius a Protestant caused them to be Printed with large Annotations in Quarto, at Geneva, Anno Dom. 1623. Lastly, Usher having observed, that three English Divines had formerly quoted a passage of S. Ignatius, in the very same words as it is expressed by Theodoret, which was not inserted in the Greek Text, nor in the Vulgar Translations, judged that it might not be difficult to find some Manuscripts of the Original Epistles of S. Ignatius in England; Whereupon having made Enquiry, he happened to meet with two, one in the University of Cambridge, (in Caius College Library;) and another in a private Library of one Richard Mountague, which contained an ancient Version of those Epistles very different from the Vulgar; and afterwards having compared this Translation, with the passages recited by the Fathers, he perceived that it exactly agreed with them, quite through; for which reason, when he set out a new Edition, e 1.6 of the Epistles of S. Ignatius he used them, and cau∣sed the places that were added by the Modern Greeks, to be distinguished, in the Greek Text by red Characters. Not long after, the Learned Isaac Vossius found in the Library of Florence a Greek Ma∣nuscript of the same Epistles, which had been perused about an Hundred years before by Turrianus, wherein the Greek Text perfectly answered to the Version published by Usher, and so he published the Greek Original of S. Ignatius. f 1.7

We may Learn from the knowledge of these Editions, that the Epistles of S. Ignatius ought to be divided into three Classes. The first contains those Three that are only extant in Latin, written to the Virgin Mary and S. John. The Second comprehends those that are in Greek, whereof Euse∣bius and S. Jerom make no mention, which being five in number g 1.8, are cited by some Modern Greeks. In the Third Rank, are comprized those Seven Epistles mentioned by Eusebius h 1.9, but these are ei∣ther such as were published before the Editions of Vossius and Usher; or such as are conformable to their Copies, that is to say, more concise, and more simple.

We must likewise distinguish three several Opinions concerning these Epistles: The first is, of those that allow them all, even the three which are written only in Latin, as Faber, Roffensis, Driedo, Ma∣rianus Victorius, Canisius and Halloixius. The last of whom, tho' Living in a clearer Age than the former; yet was not a better Critick than any of them that were before him. We may also reckon almost in the same Rank, those that admit all the Greek Letters, wherein they follow the Opinion

of Cardinal Bellarmin, Bar•…•… and P•…•…vin. The Second is of those who reject all. Calvin was the chief Promoter of this Op•…•…ion, being followed by the Centuriators, by Socinus, and even, after the Editions of Usher and Vossi••s, by 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Albertinus and Daill••, who have used their utmost Endeavours to ruin the Credit of their 〈◊〉〈◊〉. The Third Opinion is that of those who keeping the middle way, ascribe to S. Ig•…•…ius only the Seven Epistles, that are recited by Euse∣bius and S. Jerom, disallowing all the rest as Supposi••••ious, and owning that there were some Addi∣tions in the others. This has been formerly observed by very Learned Men, even before the Editions of Vossius and Usher appeared, as by Che••••itius, Perkins, Cook and Vedelius, who tho' separated from the Communion of the Church of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, yet were very able Criticks. But since their Editions, the judicious of both persuasions as R••vet, Grotius, Pet••vius, Labbaeus, and the Author of the Offices of the Holy Sacr •…•…ent, have acknowledged that the Seven Epistles of S. Ignatius, which had been corrupted by many Additions, were restored to their Original purity in Vossius's Greek Edition, and in the Ver∣sion published by Usher. M•…•… is the only Person among the Learned, that maintains the contra∣ry Opinion, affirming that the Original Text of those Letters is contained in the ancient Greek Edi∣tion, whereas it is retrenched and corrupted in the later of Vossius. I had almost forgotten to observe, that Usher and some others after him, have rejected the Epistle of S. Ignatius to S. Polycarp; and therefore reckon only fix as Genuine. Thus we have represented the different Opinions concerning the Epistles of S. Ignatius; let us now consider which side we ought to take.

First it is certain, that the Three Latin Epistles, whereof Two are written to S. Iohn, and the Third to the Virgin Mary are forged. S. Bernard is the First that quotes them in his 7th Sermon, on the Psalm Qui habitat; they were unknown to the ancient and modern Grecian Writers; they were never extant in Greek, and the affected gingling of words that appears therein, shews that they were Composed in Latin, and by one of that Nation. Besides they are written in a mean Style, and they are full of useless Notions unworthy of S. Ignatius.

Secondly, neither can it be doubted, but that the Five Greek Letters, which are not quoted by Eusebius and S. Jerom are in like manner counterfeit. For had they been extant when these Authors lived, it were impossible but they should have seen or heard of them. And is it credible that having seen them, they should take no notice of them, when they made a Catalogue of the Epistles of S. Ig∣natius? 2. They were not only unknown to Eusebius and S. Jerom, but likewise to all the Greek Fa∣thers, whose Testimonies we have produced, and who have all cited only the Seven Epistles men∣tioned by Eusebius, the others being quoted only by the more modern Writers: They contain many things that do not agree with the time of S. Ignatius, for there are some Heresies named which did not appear until a great while after his Death: We find an account of Subdeacons, Lecturers, Chanters, Porters, Exorcists, and of those that were called among the Grecians 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Readers. Now who knows not that these Orders were established after the Decease of S. Ignatius? They mention al∣so Assemblies of Virgins, Lent, the Sabbath, Festivals, &c.

Thirdly, it must be confessed that the Epistles of S. Ignatius such as they were before the Editions of Usher and Vossius, were corrupted, and different from those that are cited by the ancient Writers. 1. Because the passages cited by Theodoret and others, are not conformable to those which we may find in the vulgar Edition. 2. Because if we compare the ancient Edition with Vossius's, it will evi∣dently appear, that the later is not an Epitome of the former, but that the other is a kind of a Pa∣raphrase of this last: for the greater part of the passages which are extant in the ancient Edition, and are not to be found in Vossius's, are Explanations and Paraphrases, or thoughts added afterward, that have no manner of coherence with the rest, and wherein one may find a plain difference in the Style and Doctrine. 3. There are divers things contained in the Vulgar Edition, that cannot belong to the time of S. Ignatius, and which might give an occasion justly to doubt of their Authority, before the Editions of Usher and Vossius were published. As for Example, in that to the Trallians we find the Names of Theodotus and Cleobulus; there are certain passages that confute the Opinion of Satur∣ninus concerning Marriage, and the Errors of Praxeas, mention is also made therein of the Nicolai∣tans, of the lesser Orders, &c. things that by no means suit with those primitive Ages of the Church.

I have now only to enquire whether the seven Epistles, according to the Edition of Vossius were written by S. Ignatius, and the first Question that offers it self to our Examination, is whether this Father wrote any Epistles at all: To which I reply, that it cannot be reasonably doubted: For, 1. This matter of Fact is attested by all Antiquity. 2. It is proved by the above-cited Tradition, that the Authors who saw S. Ignatius, as S. Polycarp, and those that lived immediately after him, as Irenaeus and Origen, knew and quoted these Epistles. Now to believe that they were falsly attributed to him even in their time, is in my opinion great Nonsense; therefore it ought to be taken for gran∣ted, that S. Ignatius wrote Epistles; And who can imagine, that those are not Genuine that were collected by S. Polycarp? Or what likelihood is there that they were lost between S. Polycarp's death, and Eusebius's time, and that others were substituted in their room? Wherefore Eusebius had the Original Epistles of S. Ignatius, and they that succeeded him, whose Testimonies we have already al∣ledged, having without doubt preserved the Seven that are mentioned by him, it cannot be affirmed with any probability that they have cited fictitious Epistles. From whence we ought to conclude, that since all the Passages produced by them may be found word for word in the Editions of Usher and Vossius, it is very probable that they contain the Authentick Epistles of S. Ignatius in their Ori∣ginal Purity. And this Argument is of so much the more force, because this is not only true in the resemblance of one or two Passages, for it were not to be admired that they should agree, since they might have been inserted by an Impostor; but in a very great number that are cited by different

Authors, which makes it much more certain. Besides, there is nothing in these Epistles that does not agree with the Person, and Time of S. Ignatius; there are no Defects in the Chronology, nor any Anachronisms, which are usually found in Supposititious Works; there is no mention made of any Heretick that lived after S. Ignatius; the Errors that are refuted belong to his time, as that of the Simo∣nians and Ebionites concerning the Passion and Divirsity of Jesus Christ; the Tradition of the Church is confirmed according to Eusebius: He speaks of those Gifts of the Holy Spirit that were visible in the Church; he cites very few Passages out of the Holy Scriptures; he imitates the Style of S. Paul, and intermingles nothing of prophane Learning. Upon the whole matter, these Epistles are written with great simplicity, and bear an Apostolical Character; thus all the Arguments that evince the Falsi∣fication, or the Corruption of the other Epistles, invincibly prove the Truth and Purity of these. But this will appear yet further from the Answers to the Objections propounded by Salmasius, Blondel, and Daill••, which we shall set down and confute in a few words, replying only to those that may be alledged against the seven Epistles, as they are Printed in the Edition of Vossius, and omitting the others which do not relate to our Opinion.

Objection, 1. Our Adversaries not being able to produce any considerable Testimonies, at least such as can be esteemed to be of sufficient Authority, and being unwilling to appear to be the first Authors of the Opinion which they maintain, have sought for the Author of the Stichometria, which is pre∣fixed to the Works of Syncellus and Theophanes, and is commonly attributed to Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, tho' it is not certain whether it is his or not. This Stichometria is a Catalogue of the Sacred Books both Canonical and Apocryphal, together with the number of their Verses, at the end whereof are annexed, The Apocryphal Books of the New Testament, the Voyages of St. Peter, and The Doctrine of the Apostles, of St. Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Hermas; from whence M. Daille concludes, that this Author hath inserted the Epistles of S. Ignatius among the Apocryphal and Coun∣terfeit Writings.

Answer. First, This Author calls all those Books Apocryphal that are not Canonical, and in this sense the Epistles of S. Ignatius may be reckoned under this Denomination, as the Book of the Pastor, which is styled Apocryphal by those that do not receive it as Canonical, tho' it is very ancient, and was certainly written by him whose Name it bears.

Secondly, This Author doth not mention the Epistles of S. Ignatius or S. Polycarp, and there is no probability that he intended to do it, because his design is to make a Catalogue of the Sacred Wri∣tings both Genuine and Apocryphal; now what Analogy is there between this and the Epistles of S. Ignatius, which being written a long time after the Death of the Apostles, could not be comprized amongst the Books of the Holy Scripture? And indeed if the Epistles of S. Ignatius, and S. Poly∣carp ought to be rejected as fictitious, because this Author hath inserted their Names among the Apo∣cryphal Books of the New Testament, we must likewise reject the Epistle of S. Clement, whose Name is found immediately before; therefore it must necessarily be inferred, that he intended to reject some other Books that were ascribed to S. Clement, to S. Ignatius, and to S. Polycarp, and that the Word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ought to be understood with relation to these three last; for after having said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Doctrine of the Apostles, he adds without specifying any thing else, of Clement, Ignatius, and Po∣lycarp, that is to say, the Books in like manner Entituled, The Doctrine of Clement, The Doctrine of Ignatius, and The Doctrine of Polycarp; this is the plain sense of that Passage.

Thirdly, Altho' it were granted, that this Author had rejected the Epistles of S. Ignatius, which is not true, of what weight could his Testimony be, against the Tradition that we have even now alledged?

Object. 2. It is said, that these Epistles were unknown to S. Justin, to S. Clement of Alexandriae, and to all the ancient Writers before Eusebius.

Ans. Tho' this were true, yet there are many Books whose Truth is not called in question, that are mentioned by Eusebius alone, and by no other ancient Author; but besides, we have already shewn, that these Epistles are cited by S. Polycarp, S. Irenaeus, and Origen, and that the Passages which they produce, are found in those Letters that we have.

Object. 3. The style (say they) of the Epistles attributed to S. Ignatius, is very different from that of this Father; it is full of lofty Expressions and affected Epithets, which is very far from the sim∣plicity of the Apostolical Times. They say moreover, that the Inscriptions of these Letters are long and full of pompous Epithets.

Ans. The Objections taken from the Style are of little moment; for who hath informed these modern Criticks how S. Ignatius writ? However it is not true, that the Style of these Epistles is far from the simplicity of the ancient Christians; on the contrary, it is very simple, and extremely na∣tural: It must be confessed indeed, that there are some Epithets and compound Words, but this agrees with the Asiatick style, which is generally more florid than that of other Nations? It might also be added, that we find the like Epithets in the Epistle of S. Clement, and in other ancient Authors. The inscriptions are not longer than S. Paul's Epistles, and in the Editions of Usher and Vossius they are not so large nor so magnificent as in the Vulgar, as well as in that of the Epistle to the Romans recited by Metaphrastes.

Object. 4. This Objection is the first of those that are taken from the Contents of the Epistles themselves. It is said, that the Author writes against the Opinion of Saturninus, who believed that Jesus Christ suffered only in Appearance; and of Theodotus, who imagined that our Saviour was a mere Man. Now these two Hereticks are later than S. Ignatius.

Ans. The fast of these Errors was maintained by Simon Magus and Menarder; the other was asserted by Cer••a••us and E••ton, Hereticks who lived in S. Ignatius's time.

Object. 5. This is the principle, or the only Objection that hath any difficulty, it is taken from an Expression in the Epistle to the Magnesians, That the Eternal Word proceeded not from Silence, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which seems to be said purposely against the Errors of the Valentinians, who first used the word Silence as a Term of Art.

Ans. If there were no Answer to be given to this Objection, I should rather chuse to affirm, that this Passage is added, than merely on this account to reject the Epistles that are acknowledged as Au∣thentick by all the Ancients. There are many Books wherein some Editions have been made, which make them appear later than they really are; and we find some of this sort in the Bible, in Homer, and in almost all the Ecclesiastical and Prophane Authors. But there is no necessity to make use of this answer, since we have several others that are sufficient to afford reasonable Satisfaction to the Im∣partial and Judicious Reader.

For 1. It is not true that S. Ignatius here speaks of the Silence of the Valentinians, or of any other Notion of the Hereticks that is like it, he only declares, that the Word of God is not like unto that of Men, which comes from, or follows after Silence. These are his Words: There is but one God who hath made himself manifest by his Son Jesus Christ, who is the Eternal Word of God, that doth not proceed from Silence, and that is in all things like unto him that sent him. The main design of S. Ignatius in this place, is to Establish our Saviour's Divinity against the Ebionites. He shews that he is God, be∣cause he is the Word or the Speech of God, which being Eternal, is not preceded by Silence as that of Men. This Explication is natural and liable to no difficulty, though M. Daillé hath thought fit to censure it as Impertinent; however there is none that reads this Passage but will readily grant, that this Sense is most proper and very conformable to the Intention of the ancient Writers, who endea∣voured to demonstrate the Difference that there is between the Word of God and that of Men. S. Augustin, in his Homily concerning the Nativity of Jesus Christ, makes use of the very same Com∣parison, without having any regard to the Valentinians; Quod est (says he) hoc Verbum? Quod dictu∣rus antea non silebat, quo dicto, non siluit qui dicebat: And S. Fulgentius, Lib. 3. ad Trasim. cap. 28. Idem Verbum nullo potuit coerceri silentio, quia ipse Patris est sempiterna locutio. That which is affirmed by M. Daillé, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was used by the Valentinians, may be true, but they oftener used the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, neither is the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 peculiar to the Valentinians, it is commonly ap∣plied in Greek to signifie To go or come forth. Besides S. Ignatius says not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which may signifie, that the Word of God came not forth after Silence as that of Men.

2. Valentinus and his Disciples did not affirm, that the Word came from Silence. The Word ac∣cording to their fantastical Imagination, came from the Spirit and the Truth, and not from the Deep and from Silence.

3. The Opinion of Valentinus concerning Silence, was devised and propagated before his time, for all that speak of his Heresie observe, that he revived the ancient Errors of the Gnosticks. Eusebius declares in Lib. 2. de Theolog. Eccles. cap. 9. that Simon Magus often talked of Silence among his Followers: Secundum impiu•• (says he) Haereticorum principem, qui, impia dogmatizans, pronunciavit dicens, erat Deus, & Sige; which comes nearer to the Error, that is supposed to be confuted by S. Ignatius. S. Irenaeus attributes this Opinion to all the Gnosticks, as also Tertullian, S. Epiphanius, and S. Augustin. S. Gre∣gory Nazianzen, Orat. 23. and after him Ellas Cretensis, charge it upon the Gnosticks. This shews, that tho' the Author of the Epistle to the Magnesians should have opposed the Error of those that maintain that the Word proceeded from Silence, yet this doth not hinder but that it might have been written by S. Ignatius.

4. It is not certainly known, whether Valentinus had not already began to divulge his Errors even before the Death of S. Ignatius, since it is evident that S. Polycarp survived this Arch-Heretick, and tho' he was not declared to be the Ring-leader of this Party till afterwards, yet he might even then have taught some of his pernicious Doctrines, to which S. Ignatius might allude. These four Answers are solid, and every one of them separately might be sufficient to convince any Man; but the first in my opinion is most natural.

Object. 6. In the Epistle to the Christians of Smyrna, mention is made of certain visible Princes that shall be judged, if they do not believe in Jesus Christ. Now what probability is there, (say they) that S. Ignatius should speak this of the Emperors and Kings of his time?

Ans. Why may not this be affirmed of the Unbelieving Emperors and Kings that were Con-temporary with S. Ignatius? Since Tertullian and S. Justin have declared as much of the Emperors of their time, and that too in the presence of the Emperors themselves. Moreover it is not necessa∣ry to understand the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 only of Emperors and Kings, since it may signifie all that arein∣vested with any Authority.

Object. 7. In the Epistle to the Romans we find this Expression, That he was led by the Leopards, which are Soldiers. This Explication (say they) is needless, and the Comparison is childish.

Ans. And I say that the Similitude is very natural, and that the Explication was necessary. Bochart indeed affirms, that the word Leopard was not used untill the time of Constantine; but how does he know it? It is in the Acts of the Passion of S. Perpetua and S. Felicitas; Aelius Sparti∣anus, in the Life of Geta, thinks, that it was an old Word at the time when he wrote his Hi∣story.

Object. 8. In the Epistle to the Philadelphians, he speaks of Penitents that were publickly received by the Church, whereas (say they) in the first Ages, they that had once fallen were not afterward

readmitted into the Communion of the Church; neither was there any Penance that ended in Reconciliation.

Ans. There is nothing in the Epistle to the Philadelphians concerning publick Penitence who had committed enormous Crimes; this is a mere Imagination. It is only declared, that they that had de∣parted form the Church should obtain Pardon for their Fault, if they repented thereof by re-entering into it, that is to say, if they re-united themselves to the Church, from which they were separated. It is certain, that Hereticks and Schismaticks returning to the Church were always readmitted. Beside, the Example of the young Man who was reconciled by S. John, after he had been for a long time Captain of a Troop of Highway-men, and of many others, shew, that Penance was then in use; and Morinus evidently proves, that in the two first Centuries Absolution was granted more easily than in the third.

Object. 9. Onesimus Bishop of Ephesus, who died before S. Ignatius, is cited by Name in this Epistle.

Ans. This Onesimus is not he that was the Disciple of S. Paul, whom others affirm to have been Bishop of Beraea: And besides even the Onesimus, mentioned by S. Paul, might be living when S. Ignatius wrote this Epistle, since that of S. Paul to Philemon was written from Rome about the year of our Lord 64, therefore tho' Onesimus might be 26 years old then, yet he could not have been a∣bove 70 years of Age about the year 107, or 108, when S. Ignatius Composed these Works, which is no very extraordinary thing.

Object. 10. The Author of the Epistles attributed to S. Ignatius cites (as they say) several Apo∣cryphal Books. He produceth in the Epistle to the Smyrneans a Sentence concerning Jesus Christ, taken from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. Who can believe this of S. Ignatius?

Ans. This is no unusal thing among the Ancients. S. Jerom gives us the same passage of S. Ig∣natius, and Papias hath likewise quoted the Gospel according to the Hebrews. S. Clement, in his E∣pistle to the Corinthians, uses some Expressions as taken from the Holy Scriptures which are not there, as is observed by Photius, Cod. 126. S. Jude also cites the Book of Enoch. And besides, we cannot positively affirm, that the Gospel according to the Hebrews is cited by S. Ignatius, for he only pro∣duceth a Sentence, as knowing by Tradition that it was uttered by Jesus Christ. Thus S. Clement and S. Barnabas set down the Words of our Saviour, which they had either heard spoken by him, or had received from those by whom he was seen in the Flesh. Lastly, this Passage in S. Ignatius is quoted by S. Jerom, as belonging to the Gospel according to the Hebrews; but Origen produces it out of the Book, entituled, The Doctrine of S. Peter, which shews that it was a very common Expression.

Object. 11. The ardent desire of suffering Martyrdom, expressed by S. Ignatius, is (according to their Judgment) too excessive.

Ans. This hath been admired in the Epistle to the Romans, by the ancient Christians; the same Ardor appears likewise in S. Cyprian, in Germanicus a Martyr of Smyrna, and in many others. Cer∣tainly they must needs have but a very little knowledge of Antiquity, who deny that the Primi∣tive Christians were inflamed with a fervent desire of suffering Martyrdom, and a Man shews that he is but meanly skilled in Divinity, if he blames this Passion, when it neither does, nor says any thing that is impudent or indecent. And this is the case of S. Ignatius, who, in testifying an earnest desire of becoming a Martyr, uttered no Expressions but such as were very prudent, and very moderate: Let us read his Epistle to the Romans with the same Spirit as he wrote it, and we shall be so far from censuring it with the modern Criticks, that we shall admire it as much as the Ancients did.

Object. 12. S. Paul doth not mention the Ephesians in all his Epistles, as it is affirmed by the Author of the Epistle to the Ephesians: Therefore, &c.

Ans. He doth not say that S. Paul mentioned the Ephesians in all his Epistles, but throughout the whole Epistle that he wrote to them, (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) and composed altogether for their use.

Object. 13. He declares that he saw Jesus Christ, which, S. Chrysostom says, is not true.

Ans. The passage which is meant by them signifies only, that he knew and believed the real Incarnation of Jesus Christ. And after all, it was not impossible for S. Ignatius to have seen our Saviour.

Object. 14. He gives an account of the Errors of certain Hereticks that abstained from the Eu∣charist; now there were not any such (says M. Daillé) in the time of S. Ignatius, but afterwards when these Epistles were counterfeited.

Ans. Who hath informed him, that there were no such at the time when these Epistles were forged, and none before? These Hereticks are the Docetae, who believed that Jesus Christ suffered only in appearance, whose Heresie was very ancient.

Object. 15. He affirms, that the Romans might easily have delivered him from his Persecutor, why then did they not do it?

Ans. He doth not declare that they were absolutely able to deliver him, but only that he was ready to undergo Martydom, if they did not prevent it; that they might easily do whatever they thought fit, that is, use their endeavours to rescue him from Death; but for his part, he could not find a better opportunity of suffering for Jesus Christ.

Object. 16. He promiseth to send a Book to the Ephesians; but how could he do it when he was going to be put to Death?

Ans. His meaning is, That he would write a second Letter to them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a second

small Vol•…•…, upon two Cond•…•… First, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 God should 〈◊〉〈◊〉; a••d Secondly, in case the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 should want it. He •…•…ght well hope to write another▪ having had the liberty to write the former.

〈…〉〈…〉 they) too much A••••ogance and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in these Epistles; the 〈…〉〈…〉 the knowledge of Celesti•••• things, Se multa sapere in Deo, and that he knew the 〈…〉〈…〉 and Stations of the Angel••.

Ans. All this might be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by an ancient Bishop, that had acquired the Reputation of S. Ig▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉; all the Chris•…•… might likewise boast that they were endued with the knowledge of Ce∣le•…•…al Things, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 especially Bishops. S. Ig••••tius immediately adds after the Words cited in the Objection, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 knowledge I have, I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••ot p••••••ed up, but I measure my self. He says nothing of Angels, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 had been said before by S. Paul.

Object. 18. What reason is there, that S. Ignatius should be sent to Rome to be exposed to wild Beasts in the Amphitheatre of that City, as if Persons condemned to this sort of Punishment, were not executed in all the great Towns, where Shews were exhibited? Why must he be brought thither by ••ea and Land, a way so far about?

Ans. If we may believe the History of the Martyrdom of S. Ignatius, he was sent to Rome by the express Command of the Emperor. However, if this were not true, it is ordained by the Law, 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Crimin•…•…, condemned to be to•••• in pieces by wild Beasts, should be conveyed to Rome 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Emperor's Permission; (which ought to be understood of consider∣able Malefactors;) such were the Ring-leaders of Factions, and the Bishops among the Christians▪ e∣specially so famous a Bishop as that of Antioch. The way through which he was conducted thither was the ordinary Road; for to come to Rome out of Syria, it is necessary to go to Smyrna or to Ephesius, a•…•…eward to cross the Hellesp••nt, and so to Br••nd••sium, and from thence to Rome.

Object 19. The last Objection which is the cause why all the others were made, is taken from the different Orders of Bishops and Priests, who are often distinguished in the Epistles that are attributed to S. Ignatius▪ It is supposed that this distinction was not made untill the third Age of the Church, from whence it is concluded that these Epistles are none of his.

Ans▪ This Supposition being false, the whole Objection must consequently fall of it self, and tho▪ we had no other Proo••s of the distincton of Bishops and Priests in the second Century, than the Epistles of S. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ye•• we ought not to doubt thereof, and instead of inferring from thence that these Letters are Counter••elt, it may well be concluded on the contrary, that the different Or∣ders of Bi••hops and Priests, were established in S. Ignatius's time, since they are found in the E∣p•…•…es that have been acknowledged by all the antient Writers as certainly belonging to him: But there are many other Testimonies which make it appear, that there was a distinction between Bishops and Priests even in the second Age of the Church. Hegesippus, for Example, gives us a Catalogue of the Bishops of Jerusalem; can this be said to be a List of the Priests of that City? 〈◊〉〈◊〉 hath made another of the ancient Bishops of Asia, and Eusebius hath compiled that of the principal Cities throughout the whole World since the time of Jesus Christ▪ Therefore there must of necessity have been always in the Church, Persons called Bishops, who presided over Churches and Priests. The Martrys of Ly••ns style Pothinus Bishop, and S. Irenaeus Priest. The anonymous Author, cited by Eusebius against the Cataphrygians, distinguishes Priests from Bishops. And there are infinite numbers of Testimonies and Arguments, by which it may be proved that there was some difference made between Priests and Bishops even in the second Century; but we shall insist no longer on this Subject: And I am afraid that I have already tired the Reader's patience in refu∣••ing all the Objections that have been alledged against the Epistles of S. Ignatius, but I judged it necessary for the confirmation of their Authority.

It remains only, for the conclusion of our Critical Enquiries concerning these Epistles, to give some account of that to S. Polycarp. I know not what reason Usher might have to reject it, since it plainly belongs to the number of the Seven that are mentioned by Eusebius, who clearly distinguisheth it from that which was written to the Inhabitants of Smyrna. S. Jerom follows Eusebius in this particu∣lar. Et propri•• (says he) ad Polycarpum. It is true indeed, that here he cites a Passage of the Epistle to the Smyrneans as appertaining to that of S. Polycarp, but this may only be an Error as to matter of Fact, and it very frequently happens, that in Citations one Work is taken for another. A notable mark of the Truth of this Epistle is that in the Manuscript of Florence, it is found to be different from the Vulgar Edition, as well as the six others that are esteemed Authentick, whereas all the rest which are forged do not vary in this Manuscript from the ordinary Editions; this shews, that the Author of these Letters, is the same Person that made the Additions in the real Epistles of S. Ig∣natius, and that all those that are purged from these Additions in the above-cited Manuscript of Florence, and in the Edition of Vossius, are undoubtedly genuine.

The Cronological Order of these seven Epistles is this: First, it is certain that they were all writ∣ten by S. Ignatius when he was in Bonds, and as he was conveyed from Antioch to Rome to be ex∣posed to wild Beasts in that City. Secondly it is likewise evident, that four of them were made at Smyrna, where he re••••ded, perhaps, for some considerable time; these four in the Edition of Vossius and in S. Jerom are put in this following Order; the Epistle to the Ephesians, to the Magnesians, to the Trallians, and the last to the Romans. It cannot be precisely determined, whether this be the Order wherein they were written, or whether they were all composed at the same time. It is probable that the Epistle to the Romans is the last, because he declares therein, that he wrote to the other Churches, and that he went chearfully to suffer Martyrdom: It seems to have been made when he was ready to depart, being wearied with the long stay of his Guards in that place; so great was his Passion to suffer Martyrdom.

He wrote the three others at his departure from Smyrna whilst he stayed at 〈◊〉〈◊〉, from whence he was obliged to go to Naples. The Epistles to the Smyrneans and to S. Polycarp seem to have been written together, and that to the Philadelphians last, because it is expressed in the later, that the other Cities had sent several Bishops and Priests into Syria; and in the Epistle to S. Polycarp, he chargeth him to depute a fit Person for the Episcopal Function in that Country. However there is a more probable conjecture to prove, that the two others were written after that to the Philadelphians, according to S. Jerom's Opinion, because S. Ignatius declares therein, that he was ready to embark for N••ples, and that this was the reason why he could not write to the other Churches, which shews, that the time of his departure drew near when he Composed them. He there mentions his Martyr∣dom, as a thing certainly to be accomplish'd. S. Ignatius in his Epistle to the Christians of Smyrna, confutes the Error of those that denied that Jesus Christ took upon himself the human Nature; that he assumed a real Body, and that he actually suffered: He affirms, that those Hereticks neglected the Poor and the Widows, and separated themselves from the publick Prayers of the Church, and from the Eucharist, because they did not believe that it was the Body of Jesus Christ, which had been nailed to the Cross for our sakes, and afterwards rose again from the Dead: He admonisheth the Smyrneans to avoid Divisions as the Original of all Evil, to obey their Bishop, to honour the Priests and Deacons, and to do nothing contrary to the Precepts of their Bishop, without whose Assistance (saith he) it is not lawfull even to Baptize, or to celebrate the Agapae or Love-feasts.

In the Epistle to S. Polycarp, he gives excellent Counsels to this Bishop; he advises him to endea∣vour to preserve Union in his Church, to watch continually over his Flock, and to apply convenient Remedies to their Distempers, to reprove those that offend, with Charity and Gentleness, to pray to God incessantly and to sue for his Grace. In short, to labour without Intermission as a faithfull Servant and Soldier of Jesus Christ, who being invisible and impassible, made himself visible and mor∣tal for our sakes. He admonisheth him to take care of the Widows, not to despise the meanest People, not to suffer any thing to be done without his Concurrence, and to do nothing himself but what is con∣formable to the Will of God, to enjoyn Women to please their Husbands, and Husbands to love their Wives, as also to recommend to them Chastity, accompanied with Humility, and to inform the Chri∣stians, that their Marriage when performed, according to the Will of God, ought to be solemnized in the Presence of the Bishop. Afterward he exhorts all the faithfull, to submit to their Bishop, Priests and Deacons, and to work out their own Salvation. Lastly, directing his Discourse to S. Polycarp, he advi∣seth him to call a Synod, and to ordain a Bishop to be sent into Syria.

In the Epistle to the Ephesians, he testifies his Joy in seeing Onesimus their Bishop, who came to him with a Deacon named Burrus, and two other Believers; he admonisheth them to live Holily, in perfect Unity among themselves, and in Obedience to their Bishop and Priests; he declares, that they that do not joyn with the Bishop and are not present at the publick Service of the Christians, over which the Bishops preside, are without the pale of the Church, and deprived of the Celestial Food. Afterward he warns them to beware of Heresies, to avoid the Company of Hereticks, and to believe that Jesus Christ is God, who was incarnate, that he is impassible as he is God, and passible as he is Man. Lastly, after having commended their Piety, he exhorts them to pray to God, for all sorts and conditi∣ons of Men, frequently to assemble together, to make publick Prayers and Supplications, and inviolably to preserve Faith and Charity; he affirms that the Prince of this World, that is to say, the Devil, was ig∣norant of the Virginity of Mary, of her Child-birth, and of the Death of our Lord: He promiseth to send to them a little Book, that is to say, a Letter concerning the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, and he intreats them to pray to God for him.

In the Epistle to the Magnesians, he exhorts the Christians of that Church to be obedient to their Bishop Damas, who came to see him, to do nothing without him, and to live in Unity one with ano∣ther. He admonisheth them not to suffer themselves to be led away with vain Opinions, not to live like Jews but as Christians, to believe in Jesus Christ, who is the Word of God that doth not proceed from Silence, but was sent by God the Father, and is our only hope. At last he desires them to remem∣ber him in their Prayers.

In the Epistle to the Philadelphians, he Congratulates their Union, he exhorts them to avoid cor∣rupt Doctrines, and advises them not to follow those that are the Abetters of Schisms ond Divisions a∣mongst them, and to concur in every thing with their Bishop. Lastly, he refutes the Arguments of those that refused to believe any thing, but what was written in the Old Testament, and declares that the Gospel is the perfection of that which was prefigured in the old Law.

In the Epistle to the Trallians, he commends their Union, and the Submission and Respect that they shewed towards their Bishop, Priests and Deacons, and exhorts them to persevere in this Union, and to beware of Hereticks. He expounds the Orthodox Doctrines of the Catholick Church, that Jesus Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, that he was really Man, that he actually suffered and died, and not in appearance, as some Hereticks said.

Lastly, in the Epistle to the Romans, he expresseth his Zeal, and ardent desire of suffering Martyrdom, and entreats them not to take this glorious Crown from him, by preventing his being exposed to wild Beasts in the Amphitheatre of Rome.

Upon the whole matter, all these Epistles are ••ull of very wholsom Precepts, and usefull Exhortations; they are extremely worthy of a Christian, of a Bishop, and of a Martyr▪ and are all full of Warmth and Piety. One cannot read them, without perceiving every where, that this Holy man was anima∣ted with a Zeal truly Divine for the Salvation of Souls, for the fulfilling of the Law of Jesus Christ, and for the preservation of his Doctrine. In every thing that he says, he appears to be full of Love to

our Saviour, of affection towards his Brethren, of Care for the Discipline of the Church, and of Ardour for the blessing of Peace. In short, let Criticks that are of a contrary Opinion say what they please, I dare maintain that these Epistles deserve to be well esteemed, and to be admired by all those who profess to have any Respect for Books of Piety.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Sirnamed Theophorus.] This is not an an Epi∣thet, but his Sirname. Some have believed, that he was that young Child, whom Jesus Christ placed in the middle of his Apostles, and that from thence he took the Name of Theophorus, but this is a vain Ima∣gination without any Ground, not supported by the Testimony of any ancient Author; and besides, it con∣tradicts the Opinion of S. Chrysostom, who declares that S. Ignatius never saw our Saviour in the Flesh.
• b 1.2

  The Successor of Evodius.] S. Chrysostom, Theodo∣ret, and the Author of the Chronicle of Alexandria affirm, that he was ordained by S. Peter; but Eusebius, S. Jerom and the other ancient Ecclesiastical Writers, place Evodius between S. Peter, and S. Ignatius.
• * 1.3

  S. Ignati∣us.
• c 1.4

  Wild Beasts, said.] In citing the Testimony of any Author, we say, as he says, or as he writes, without using any Choice; and it ought not to be concluded from thence, that S. Irenaeus only produ∣ced a remarkable Expression of S. Ignatius, without taking it from any of his Works, for it is much more probable, that he took it from his Epistle to the Romans, because it is found there word for word.
• d 1.5

  If that be really his.] We find this Oration in the sixth Tome of his Works, it is Entituled, Quod unus ••it Veteris & Novi Testamenti Legislator. It hath been cited by Pope Adrian 1. in his Epistle to Charles the Great. Epiphanius the Deacon hath likewise al∣ledged it against Gregorius Neocaesariensis; it is quoted also by Theodosius in the Second Council of Nice. The style doth not seem to be that of S. Chrysostom, as being full of Allegories; some say that it seems to have been written about the time of the declining of the Roman Empire, through the Incursions of the Barbarous Nations, which are mentioned therein; nevertheless, it may be understood of the inroads of the Arabians that were made under the Reign of the Emperor Valens. Others think that this passage is put in since.
• e 1.6

  He made use thereof in preparing a new Edition.] The first Edition of Usher was Printed at Oxford, Anno Dom. 1644 It contains 1. A preliminary Disserta∣tion. 2. The Six Epistles of S. Ignatius in Greek, wherein all that is not in the ancient Version is di∣stinguished by Red Characters. 3. The counterfeit Letters. 4. The ancient Latin Translation. 5. Se∣veral Notes. In the Year 1647. he published another Edition which he calls Appendix Ignatiana, in which he inserted the Greek Text, published by M. Vos∣sius in 1646. as also a new Translation. He added therein 1. The ancient Records of the Martyrdom of S. Ignatius, which bear the Name of Philo. 2. The Letters of Tiberianus, Pliny and Trajan concerning the Constancy of the Martyrs. 3. The entire Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, concerning the Martyrdom of S. Polycarp. 4. Annotations on the Acts of the Epi∣stles of S. Ignatius.
• f 1.7

  To publish the Greek Original of S. Ignatius. His Edition was Printed at Amsterdam, Anno Dom. 1646. It contains, 1. The seven Original Epistles, excepting that to the Romans, as they were ▪written in his Greek and Latin Manuscripts. 2. The Greek Epistles falsly attributed to S. Ignatius, which are not cited by Eusebius. 3. The three Latin Letters to the Virgin Mary, and S. John. 4. The seven Greek and Latin Epistles, as they were in the former Editions. 5. The Epistle of S. Barnabas, together with Notes on the whole Work. The Editions of Cotelerius and of Maderus at Helmstadt in Octavo, are not different from that of Vossius, which hath been lately Reprin∣ted at London, in 1680.
• g 1.8

  Which being five in Number.] We find at the beginning, the Epistle of Maria Cassobolita: afterward the first Epistle of S. Ignatius to this Mary; the Se∣cond to the Inhabitants of Tarsus; the Third to the Antiochians; the Fourth to Hero a Deacon of the Church of Antioch; and the last to the Philippians.
• h 1.9

  The seven Epistles mentioned by Eusebius.] They are written according to the Order observed by M. Vossius, First to the Christians of Smyrna; the Se∣cond to S. Polycarp; the Third to the Ephesians; the Fourth to the Magnesians; the Fifth to the Philadel∣phians; the Sixth to the Trallians, and the Seventh to the Romans. Moreover we may distinguish Four an∣cient Editions of the Epistles of S. Ignatius; the First contained only these seven that were known to Eusebius, and the other ancient Writers without a∣ny Additions; the Second comprehended only these seven Epistles, but with several Additions; Pearson had a Manuscript of them; which Copy had been used by Gobarus, Anastacius Antiochonus, and the Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle, in the Third there are the seven Authentick Epistles without Interpolations, to∣gether with the counterfeit; such are those of the Version of Usher, and the Greek Manuscript of M. Vos∣sius, and these were perused by S. Joannes Damascenus and Antonius: The Fourth is that of the seven Ge∣nuine Epistles, together with the Additions, and the others that were forged, which is the Vulgar.