1. THE next Piece that follows in the present Collection, is the Epistle of St. Polycarp to the Philippians. In placing of which I have follow'd the Example, not so much of our most Reverend Edit. Polycarp. & Ignat. Oxon. Anno 1644. Archbishop Vsher, as of St. Polycarp himself: Though in the Order of Time the Epistles of Ignatius 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 Passages 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 exercise all Patience after the Examples of those Holy Men whom they had seen among them; he particularly instances in Epist. of Polycarp, Numb. ix. pag. 93. Ignatius as one of them. Now the Ma •• . of Ig • . Numb. x. pag. 225. 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 Sentence pronounced upon him by the Emperour 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 enforcing his Exhortation to them to follow the Examples of Ignatius, and the rest of those excellent Men whom he there names, he subjoyns; Being confident 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 Martyrdom.

4. IT was then about the time of Ignatius'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 Epist of Polycarp, numb. xiv. pag. 98. 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 Epistle; viz. that it must have been just about the time of St. Ignatius's Death: It being no way probable that had Ignatius 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 Epistle was written; but also to shew how groundless the Exception of those Dallaeus in Pseudepigr. cap. xxxii. pa. 428. Larroque Observat. in Pearson, p. 69. 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. Ignatius, which they are resolved by all means to reject as none of his. For indeed were not Men willing to be contentious, 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 before them the Sufferings of St. Ignatius, and exhorts them to follow the Example of his Patience? But 'tis evident 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 Rudeness of the Souldiers that guarded him; and of which the Ignat. Epist. to the Romans, cap. v. p. 163. blessed Martyr himself 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 Vid. Dallaeum & Larroque loc. cit. 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 together? St. Polycarp, either by the Computation 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 received 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 Account 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 concerning whom he so diligently enquired? I am sure Photius Bibl. Tmem. cxxvi. pag. 305. 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 Reflection or other upon it.

8. LET me add yet more, that neither 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 Disadvantage of this Epistle, had they had but the least Grounds so to do. I shall instance only in Two; the first, the late Learned Divine of Leyden, Proleg. ad Var. Sacr. in Polycarp. Monsieur le Moyne: Who tho' he judged the Passage relating to St. Ignatius's Epistles, which was wanting in his Manuscript, to be abrupt, and would from thence argue against the Authority of it; yet has made no Reflection on the Words immediately 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, Exercit. Select. Exerc. IV. num. 42. pag. 157. 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 Digression, 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 consequently this Epistle in order of time ought to have been placed after those which the other wrote immediately before it: Yet was it fit to give this the Precedency in the following Collection, both as containing a most proper Introduction 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 Polycarp. Epist. num. xiii. p. 97. 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 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. cap. 36. Eusebius transcribed it out of the Original Greek; and so we find it in our Antient Apud Usser. p. 24. Latin Version, which is all that remains of that Part of this Epistle. And from whence our Learned Arch-Bishop Dissert. de Ignat. Epist. cap. ii. Usher with great reason concludes, that St. Polycarp caused the Copies of St. Ignatius's Epistles to be immediately 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 together with those of Ignatius, and commonly placed at the front of them; they mutually help'd to secure one another: Whilst the rest of his Epistles, for want of being thus collected together, have for a long time been so utterly lost to the World, that neither Photii Bibl Tmem. cxxvi. p. 3 • 5. Photius, nor St De Scripr Eccles. in Polycarp. Hierome, nor Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV c. 1 • Eusebius, nor even Irenaeus himself, the Disciple of St. Polycarp, seems to have had any particular Catalogue of them.

13. INDEED for what concerns the last of these, I mean Iren. Epist. ad Florin. apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. V. c. 20. 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 S. Maximus Prolog. in Dionys Areop. Su • da • in Polycarp. &c. Vid. Usserii Dis • ert. de Script. Ign. p. 4.5. • e •• zel. Exerc. Select. de Polyc. num. xxxvi, xxxvii. 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 Ad lib. iii. c. 3. Irenaei. Fevardentius out of Victor Capuanus; and reprinted by Bishop Lond. 1647. p. 31. Usher in his Appendix to Ignatius. In which as there are some things which neither Father U • serius Annot. loc. cit. p. 72, 73. Halloix, nor our Learned U • serius Annot. loc. cit. p. 72▪ 73. Vsher could approve of, as written by St. Polycarp; so the Distance of Victor 〈…〉 he lived anno 545. 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 distinguishing the Works of the Antient Fathers who lived any long time before him; not to say any thing of the Passages themselves ascribed to St. Cave Hist. liter. in Polyc. pag. 28. Le Moyné Prol. ad Var. Sacr. Tenzel. Exercit. Select. IV. de Polyc. num. xlix. Du Pin. Bibl. Eccl. in Polycarp. &c. Polycarp, but little agreeable to the Apostolical Age: All these Considerations have justly restrained 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 Genuine Work of this Holy Man; and worthy of that great Character which Antiquity has given of it. Even Monsieur De Scriptis Ignatian. cap, xxxii. 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 Prol. a • Var. Sacr. Tom. I. in Polycarp. le Moyne goes yet farther; he declares that he does not see how any one can entertain the lest Suspicion against it: That there is not perhaps 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 reject as spurious.

16. INDEED so general is the reception which Vid. apud Tentzel. de Polycarp. Dissert. IV. num. 41. pag. 157. Learned Men on all sides have given to this Epistle, that I might well omit any further Discourse in Confirmation of the Credit and Authority 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 Exercit. Select. Exerc. IV. num. 42, &c. 47. Tentzelius, in his Exercitation upon this Epistle: Who tho' he allows it to be undoubtedly Genuine, yet supposes it to have been corrupted by the same hand that we confess Usserius Dissert. de Epist. Ignat. cap. VI. pag. 33. did corrupt the Epistles 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 Monsr Daillé himself, one of the greatest 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 Epistle 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 nothing in the Epistle, as it now is, dangerous in Point either of Faith or Manners; or that might not have well enough been written by St. Polycarp. But now this was not the Case with the Epistles of Vid. Dissert. Usser. c. X, XI. p. 63, &c. St. Ignatius; which not only laboured under many Impertinencies unbecoming the Character of that Great Man, but was fraught with many things that were altogether fabulous: Nay if we may credit Arch-Bishop Ibid. c. XV. p. • ▪ 3. Usher, had some Passages in them that tended 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 〈…〉 p. 12. Disagreement of the Copies 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 Demonstration of their having been changed 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 compared with those Editions that had before been extant of them But neither does this Exception appear against the present Epistle, which agrees with what is quoted both by Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 36. Photius Bibl. Tmem. cxxvi. p. 305. Eusebius and Others out of it; and thereby clearly shews our present Copy to be sincere and un-corrupted.

19. SEEING then there is nothing but a mere Conjecture for the Depravation of this Epistle, and such just Reason 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 conclude, that for any thing yet appears to the contrary, we not only have the Genuine Epistle of St. Polycarp, but that Epistle free from any designed Corruptions 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 Vid. Larroque Observ. in Vind. Pears. p. 65, 66. Daillé, continued and abetted by his Learned Defender Monsieur Larroque, tho' without any more weight of Reason than what had been before fully answer'd by our most Learned and judicious Bishop Pearson: Namely; That this Epistle originally 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 Epistle originally went no farther; And that in what follows there is a flat Contradiction to what went before; the Close of the Epistle speaking of Ignatius as if he were still alive, whom the true Popolycarp had before set forth to the Philippians 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 fully 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 Polycarp 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 Objection 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 Apostles, 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 See 1 Tim. i.17. beginning, and Ephes. iii.20. Rom. xv.33. 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 Corinthians: 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. Clement's, but pieced on to the end of his Epistle by some other hand, merely because the Doxology seem'd to imply his having concluded there.

23. BUT to lay aside Conjectures, and proceed to that, which will put a final 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 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. c. 36. Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, as a part of this Epistle. If therefore it be the Addition 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 foregoing, was for several Hundreds of Years wont to be publickly read in the Churches of Asia: So Hieron. de Script. in Polycarp. St. Jerome expresly assures us; or as his Interpreter Sophronius renders him, in the Synod or Convention of Asia. By which a Le Moyne Prolegom. ad var. Sacr. Learned Man supposes we are to understand some common Meetings of the Christians in those Parts, answerable to the like Assemblies of the Gentiles there; And that in these this Epistle was wont to be read to them.

25. HENCE Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iv. cap. 14. 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 Manners. Which being so, it can hardly be supposed but that so inquisitive a Searcher 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 Epistle 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 contrary.

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 following 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 Apostolical 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 Dr. Cave's Lives of the Apostolical Fathers in St. Polycarp. Dr. Cave, having a just Respect to the Worth of a Piece so highly applauded among the Ancients, 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 subjoyn'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 never 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, whatever 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 Judicious and Worthy Dr. Cave.

1. BEFORE I enter upon that Account which it will be fitting for me to give of the Epistles of St. Ignatius, (the next that follow in the present Collection;) it will be necessary for me to observe, 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 concerning 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 exceedingly 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 Florentine Manuscript with six of the Epistles of this Holy Martyr mentioned by Eusebius, 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,Vid. Vossii Praefat. in Ignat ad Lectorem. That St. Ignatius did write such Epistles as those we have here translated: 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 deny'd by Some, is yet I think now universally allow'd even by Vid. Vindic. Pearson in Proëm. p. 20. those who are the greatest Opposers of those Epistles which we affirm to be his. That he wrote to those particular Churches to which the Epistles here subjoyn'd are addressed, we have both St. Polycarp and Eusebius to assure us. For, first; Polycarp. Epist. Numb. xiii. pag. 97. Annot. Cotel. in loc. Polycarp. p. 486. B. 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. Polycarp'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 every 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 imagined, upon. Seeing therefore we cannot with any reason suppose, either that St. Polycarp did not know of Ignatius's writing to these Churches; nor is it probable, 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 himself 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 consequence, that what we now have is no other Collection, than what he made, and by that means help'd to preserve to after 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 presided; 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 Conclusion 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 Philippians.

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 Hist. Eccles. lib. iii. cap. 36. Eusebius himself has given us of this Matter. 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 Epistles as these of which we are now speaking. And that, as he goes on, in this following Order. First, from Smyrna Vid. Chrys. Orat. ad Antiochen., where he tarried some time with his Old Acquaintance and Fellow-Disciple St. Polycarp, he wrote to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians and Romans: And being gone farther on his Way to Troas, he from thence wrote to the Philadelphians, and Smyrneans; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and a particular Letter to Polycarp, the Bishop of Smyrna.

8. I SAY nothing to the Testimony of Libr. de Script. Illustr. cap. xvi. 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 Apud Pearson, Vindic. Ignat. Prolegom. pag. 20. 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 unworthy 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 Authors; 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 sufficient 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 Descriptions which St. Pearson Vind. Ignat. par. I. cap. 3. pag. 27. Polycarp and Ibid. cap. ii. pag. 8. Eusebius have left us of those which they took to be the Authentick Epistles of this Holy Man; and with the numerous Quotations which the Pearson ibid. pag. 8 ad 25. Comp. Testim. Cotelerii de Ignat. Et Usser. Dissert. Ignat. Ancient Fathers have taken out of them; and which all occur in the same Words, in our present Copies 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 Comparisons of this kind; that Monsieur Apud Pearson Vind. Ignat. Proaem. pag. 20. Et Vind. par. i. pag. 8. Daillé himself could not deny but that we have the same Epistles now, that Eusebius, 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 written by him, must before that time have been utterly lost, or otherwise destroyed out of the World: It being very improbable that had the true Epistles been still remaining, neither so inquisitive a Searcher 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 eminent 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 glorious Martyrs of Christ, to determine.

13. WE read in the See below, p. 228. Acts of the Martyrdom of this Blessed Saint, with what a mighty Care those who went with him to Rome, and were the Eye-Witnesses 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 Evagrius lib. i. cap. 16. Nicephor. lib. xiv. cap. 44. Historians observe, there was a Festival Solemnity established upon that Occasion; and Annually observed to the very time in which they wrote, in remembrance of it. But was the Church then so careful of a few dead Bones of such a Saint as this, and did they esteem them as so great a Treasure; and yet had they so little regard to his Writings, the last Testimonies of his Affection 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 Antiquity? This is, I confess, to me so very improbable, that I could almost as easily believe the Holy Scriptures themselves 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 themselves, 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. Polycarp 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 Martyr, his dear Friend and Fellow-Disciple. Now St. Polycarp suffer'd not according to the earliest Computation of our accurate Bishop Pearson dissert. Chron. ii. cap. xiv ad xx. Pearson till the Year of our Saviour 147. And Usher. Anno 169. Euseb. & in eum Vales. 167. Petitus 175. &c. See below. others suppose it to have been yet later. Hitherto therefore it is certain that the true Epistles of Ignatius continued in the Church: It being 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 together; 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 himself professes a most diligent Collector of whatever fell from that Holy Man. That he had the Epistles of St. Ignatius, Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. v. cap. 8. Eusebius assures us; who particularly takes notice of his quoting several Passages out of them. And one of his Quotations Ibid. lib. iii. cap. 36. he mentions out of the Works of Irenaeus which still remain: And of which though the Greek be lost, yet the Old Irenaeus, lib. iii. cap. 28. Latine Version, as well as the Greek of Eusebius, shews us, that it was taken out of the Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans, 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 otherwise, the Difference between what the one quoted, and the other read in his Copy of those Epistles, would presently 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. Polycarp 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 particular: Seeing he himself tells us how careful 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 Apud Euseb. Epist. ad Florin. Hist. Eccles. lib. v. cap. 20. himself declares, had also the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians; at the end of which the Epistles of Ignatius 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 Authentick, 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 Testimony of Irenaeus, before alledged, add that of Orig. Homil. vi. in Luc. Et in Cantic. Proleg. Origen, who began to live some time before the other died. Now this Father has not only spoken of these Epistles, 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 upon all these Accounts utterly uncapable of such a Change, as is without the Authority of one single Writer, only upon I know not what Conjectures, supposed 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 engaged 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 Ernest Tentzel. Ex •••• . select 〈◊〉 11, 12 pag •• . Learned Man advancing in Opposition to the Authority of these Epistles, that our Copies, though exceedingly 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 Manuscript 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 mistaken, and perhaps even the pieces of some Sentences corrupted, either by the Carelesness or Ignorance of the Transcribers; 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 Vossi • Annot. passim. Pea • son vind. Ignat. Proleg. p 20. 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 extant; 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 concluded 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 Archbishop Dissert. de Ignat. cap. iii. 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. Polycarp, be Genuine or no. Nor do's Annot. in Ignat. Epist. pag 264, 265. Isaac Vossius himself deny but that there are some things in it that may seem to render it suspicious; though more to prove it to be Authentick. For 1st, Polycarp. Epist. num. x • ii. pag. 97. St. Polycarp expresly assures us that Ignatius had written to him; so both Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 36. Eusebius and Hieronym. de Viris Illustr. in Ignat. S. Hierome teach us to understand his Expression; They mention the Epistle to Polycarp, as distinct from that to the Church of Smyrna: And 2dly, Vid. Isaac. Vess. Annot. loc. supr. cit. 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 Pag. 213. 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 following Translation of these Epistles. The Copies from which I did it were those of Isaac Vossius and Bishop Usher; comparing both as I had Occasion with the late Edition of Cotelerius. In the See below, pag. 159. Salutation 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 Florentine 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 especially of this Author, I shall allow Bishop 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 manifestly 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 telling 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 modestly 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 Copy 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.

1. IN the foregoing Chapter I have given such an Account of the Epistles 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 truly 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 Consideration of this last and noblest part of his Life, I cannot but think it will be expected from me to give some Account of the foregoing Passages of it: That so we may here have at once a full View of this Great Saint; and perceive 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 Acts of Ignatius, numb. iv, v. pag. 221, 222. Emperour at his Examination, namely, that of Theophôrus. Now this according 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 Signification, we are told by some of the Writers of his Life, that St. Ignatius was the Child whom our Blessed Saviour took in his Arms, and set before his Disciples as a Pattern of Humility, when he told them, That unless they should be converted, Mat. xviii.3. 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 Theophorus; One who was Born, or Carried by God. And thus not only Metaphrast. apud Coteler. p. 991. Metaphrastes and Niceph. Hist. Eccl. lib. II. cap. 35. Nicephorus among the Greeks; but as our Learned Usher. Annot. in Act. Mart. Ignat. Num. iv. Bishop Usher tells us, some Syriac Writers more ancient than they, both interpret this Name, and give an Account of its being attributed to this Blessed Martyr.

5. BUT as Stories of this kind seldom lose in the relation, so we find the Vid. Annot. in Concil. Oeco • ▪ viii Conc •• . 〈◊〉 Tom. viii. p. 994. D. Latines making a farther Improvement 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 Homil. in S. Ignat. To. I. Fevardent. p. 499, 506 B. C. 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 Endeavour of a late Mountac. Origin. Eccles. To. II. p. 211, 212. Learned Writer of our own Country, to give Countenance to such a Fable; and which if not destitute of all Probability, yet at least wants any good Authority to support it: And as our Learned Vind. Ignat. Part. II. c. xii. p. 149. Bishop Pearson very reasonably conjectures, was first started about the time of the VIIIth General Council, by the Party of that Ignatius 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 Acts of Ignat. Num. V. p. 222. Holy 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 Vind. Ignat. Part. II. p. 144. 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; namely, 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 Constancy 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 Homil. in Ignat. pag. 499. To. I. Fevardent. St. Chrysostome tells us, that he was intimately acquainted with the Holy Apostles, 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 Ernest. Tentzel. Exercit. Select. III num. ii. p. 47. late Author has endeavoured from a Passage in Abulfaragius, set out by our Incomparable 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 chosen, by the Apostles that were still living, to be Bishop of Antioch, the Metropolis of Syria; and whatever Anastasius pretends Vid. Chrysost. Orat. in Laud Ignat. Theodoret. To. IV. p. 33. Dial. I Comp. Usser. Annot. in Epist. ad Antioch. pag. 107. Pearson. Vind. Ignat. part. II. p. 107., received Imposition of Hands from them.

10. HOW he behaved himself in this great Station, tho' we have no particular 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 Acts of Ignat. num. I, II, III. p. 219, 220, 221.. Where we are told that he was a Man in all things like unto the Apostles; that as a good Governour, by the Helm of Prayer and Fasting, by the Constancy of his Doctrine and Spiritual Labour, he opposed himself to the Floods of the Adversary: That he was like a Divine Lamp illuminating the Hearts of the Faithful by his Exposition of the Holy Scriptures; and lastly, that to preserve his Church, he doubted not freely and of his own accord, to expose himself to the most bitter Death. This is in general the Character of his Behaviour 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 Hist. Eccles. lib. III. cap. 36. Eusebius tells us, and as his Epistles still remaining abundantly testifie, was so careful of all the other Churches, to confirm them in a sound Faith, and in a constant Adherence to their Holy Religion; was certainly much more vigilant to promote the Interests of Piety within his own Diocese, which was bless'd with his Government above Euseb. Chron. ab anno 69 ad 110. alii ad 116. vid. infr. 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 ceasing of the Persecution there, how did he rejoyce at it? And require all the neighbouring See his Epistles to the Philadelph. Smyrn. and to St. Polycarp. 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 towards his own Church, and his Care of all the Others round about him: And by which he became in such an extraordinary Favour with them, that they thought nothing could be sufficient to express 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 Vid. Ignat Epist. & spe •• atim. ad Rom. num. ix. p. 167. Add. Act. Ignat. num. ix. p. 224. Messengers on the way to attend him, and to communicate to his Wants. And what is yet more, they were generally their Bishops themselves that came to meet him; and thought it a singular Happiness to receive some Spiritual Exhortations from him. And when he was Dead, they paid such an Honour to his Memory, as to account the Vid. Act. Ignat. num. xiii.228. 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 Vid. Usserii Ann. in Act. Ignat. num. 37. Ages after taken 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 instituted a Yearly Festival in Memory of him.

13. AS for what concerns the Circumstances 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 Vid. Scalig. in Euseb. ad Ann. 110. Learned Men to account for; but may easily be resolved, and I believe most truly too, into the over-ruling Hand of the Divine Providence. And that is; of the sending of this Holy Man from Antioch as far as Rome to suffer. For whatever the Design of the Vid. Usser. Not. in Act Ignat. num. ix. p. 39.40. Tentzel. Exerc. iii. p. 49. Emperour may have been in it; Whether he intended to increase his Sufferings by a Journey so wearisom, and attended with so many bitter Circumstances 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 overcome his Constancy, and have drawn him away from his Faith: Or lastly, Whether, as Mart. apud Coteler. Metaphrastes tells us, upon his consulting 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 Blessed 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 Complyance 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 Exhortations of this great Man, from Antioch even to Rome it self. And we are accordingly told with what mighty Comfort and Satisfaction they received his Instructions; and as the Acts of Ignat. num. ix. p. 224. Authors of his Acts express it, Rejoyced to partake in his Spiritual Gift.

15. NAY but if we may believe Metaphrastes as to the Effect which the Sufferings of this Holy Man had upon the Mind of the Emperour, the Church received yet greater Benefit by his Death. For Trajan Mart. Ignat. apud Coteler. p. 1 • 02., says he, hearing of what had been done to Ignatius, and how undauntedly he had undergone the Sentence 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 exercised 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 commanded that the Christians should indeed be searched out, but that being discover'd they should not be put to Death; Only 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 another Vid. Usser. Annot. in Act. Ignat. p. 55 56. Author of his Acts not yet set forth; and from whom he seems to have taken his Story, only with the Addition 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 account, 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 written by Apud Usser. Annot. in Epist. ad Philadelph. Not. 82. Et in Append. p. 9. Tiberianus President of Palaestina Prima, the Other of Plin. Secand. Epist. lib. X. Epist. 97. Pliny the Younger Pro-Praetor of Bythinia. And the Answer of Ibid. Epist. 98. 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 Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 33. Eusebius from Apologet. cap. II. Tertullian gives us of the Emperour's Order, as to this matter; but which In voce 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . 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 Rescripts 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 Lib. III. c. 33 Hist. Eccles. Eusebius, but may in general be concluded from the Acta Mart. Ignat. num. xii. p. 227. Prayer which this Holy Saint made at his Martyrdom: Where, say our Acts, He intreated the Son of God in behalf of the Churches, that he would put a stop to the Persecution; and restore Peace and Quiet to them. But these were only Local Persecutions, as Euseb. ibid. Eusebius calls them, and proceeded rather from the Fury of the People, and the Perverseness of some particular Governours, 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 agreed in what Year to fix it. Eusebius in his Chronicle places it in the Year of Christ CX. Marianus Scotus CXII. Annot. in Act. Martyr. Ignat. not. 39. Bishop Usher yet sooner in the Year CVII. And lastly to name no more, our most exact Vid. Ant. Pagi Critic. in Baron. ad Ann. 108. 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 Earthquake fell out at Antioch, and from which Trajan himself hardly escaped: Which as Apud Usser. loc. supr. Cit. 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 eminent 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 written 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-Witnesses of his Encounters. This Account was first publish'd from two very ancient Manuscripts by our most Reverend Arch-Bishop Usher, in the Appendix to his Edition of Ignatius, Ao 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 Learned Cotelerius of the Writings of the Apostolical 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 History to the Vulgar Reader, had I translated 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.

1. THERE is not a greater Difference between the Learned Men of the present Times concerning the Epistle of St. Barnabas, than there was among the Ancient Fathers heretofore, 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 Vid. Baron. Annot. ad Martyrol. Rom. Maii ix. 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 Vis. Second, num. iv. 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 Dr. Hammond, & Mr. Dodwell. Vid. Cave Hist. liter. in Herm. Greatest Criticks may be allow'd, in applying the Great Affliction of which he speaks in another of his Vision IV §. 3. Visions, to the Destruction of Jerusalem then at hand; it is evident that this Book must have been written within 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 Hom. in Rom. lib. X. c. 16. Origen in his Homily upon that place of St. Paul before mentioned, delivers it as his Opinion, that it was the Hermas there spoken of who wrote this Book. But Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 3. Eusebius do's more; He tells us that it was the received Opinion in those days, that it was composed by him. And that it continued to be so in the Age after, Hieron. de Script. in Herm. St. Hierome witnesses; who speaks yet more positively 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 Lib. III. the Author of the Poem against Marcion under the Name of Tertullian, viz. that it was written by Hermes Brother to Pope Pius; and in which not only the In Vit. Pii Papae. Authors of the Pontifical ascribed to Pope Damascus, and of the pretended Epist. I. attrib. Pio PP. p. 194. Edit. Blondell. Decretal Epistles of the ancient Bishops of Rome, but the Martyrologists of the Middle Ages, Bede, Ado, &c. have generally 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 See Bellarm. de Script. §. I. p. 45. in Herm. Time renders it altogether incredible, that a Person of some considerable Age at St. Paul's writing his Epistle, should have lived so long as that Pope's Brother is said to have done: Whom the Annal. Eccl. in fine Anni 164 Cardinal himself observes to have been living CLXIV. Years after Christ; that is to say, CVII. Years after the writing of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans. And this his Epitomator Spondan. Epitom. Annal. Baron. ad Ann. 159. Spondanus was aware of: And therefore 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, Hermas 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 Vision III. num. VI. below, p. 348. Vision: Where he is said to have been formerly unprofitable to the LORD upon 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 knowledg how he was converted, than what his Condition was before: It is probable from several Passages in his Vision I. num. 3. Vis. II. num. 2, 3. Book, that he was brought over to Christianity himself, 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 towards 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 See below, p. 326. Cares, to supply them in their Extravagances, and often times did not behave 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 convince him of his Faults, in thus neglecting his Family, but to give them Grace to hearken to his Admonitions, and to embrace at once both the Christian 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 conjecture, in that it pleased God to vouchsafe such extraordinary Revelations to him; and to employ him in several Messages to his Church, both to correct their Manners, and to warn them of the Tryals 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 faithfully 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 Roman Martyrologie, his Death was not unsuitable 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 Annot. ad Ma •• . Rom. Ma •• ix. 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 Pa on. Annal. E • cl • s. ad ann. ••• , That having undergone many Labours and Troubles in the time of the Persecution under Aurelius, (and that too without any Authority) he at last rested in the LORD, July XXVI. and which is therefore observed in Commemoration of him. And here is indeed 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 Vid. Martyrol. Rom. ad Ma • i ix. & Jul. xxvi., 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 rembembred by St. Paul, and the Brother of Pope Pius, to whom the Comp. Martyrol. Rom. Jul. xxvi. with Baron. Annal. Ao 162, 164, 166. Passages mention'd July XXVI. do manifestly belong: And erred only in applying the Character of Martyol. Rom. Jul. xxvi. Pastor to the latter, which, with the Treatise of which we are now discoursing, ought, as the Annot. b. ad Martyrol. Rom. Maii ix. 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. Lib. IV. advers. Haeres. & apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 8. Irenaeus quotes it under the very Name of the Scripture. Origen Enarrat. in Epist. ad Rom. p. 411. D. Origen, tho' he sometimes moderates his Opinion of it, upon the account of some who did not, it seems, pay the same Respect with himself to it; yet speaking of Hermas being the Author of this Book in his Comments 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. Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 3. Eusebius tells us, that tho' being doubted of by Some, it was not esteem'd Canonical, yet was it by Others judged a most necessary Book, and as such read publickly in the Churches. And St. Catalog. Script. in Herm. Hierom having in like manner observed that it was read in some Churches, makes this Remark upon it, That it was indeed a very profitable Book; and whose Testimony was often quoted by the Greek Fathers. De Incarnat. Verb. Tom. I. p. 55. D. Athanasius places it in the same rank with the Books of Scripture, and calls it a most useful Treatise: And in Epist. Pasch. Tom. II. p. 39, 40. another place tells us, That tho' it was not strictly Canonical; 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 heretofore, that it was not only openly read in the Churches, but in some of the most ancient Manuscripts of the New Testament, is joyned together with the other Books of the Holy Scriptures. An Instance of this Annot. ad Herm. p. 41. 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 Inspired Writings. As may be seen in that which the same Annot. in Barnab. p. 9, 10. Author has published out of a Manuscript in the King's Library, in his Observations upon St. Barnabas; and in which St. Barnabas's Epistle is placed immediately before the Revelations, 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 Comment. in Habac. I. 14. • ol. 83. D. 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. De Orat. cap. XII. Tertullian, who spake if not honourably yet calmly of it whilst a Catholick, being become De Pudiciti • , cap. X. Montanist, rejected it, even with Scorn. And most of the other Vid. Testimon. in Edit. Coteler. p. 28, &c. Fathers who have spoken the highest of it themselves, yet plainly enough insinuate, that there were those who did not put the same Value upon it. Thus Philocal. c. I. Origen mentions some who not only deny'd, but despis'd its Authority. And Cassian. Collar. xiii. c. 12. Cassian having made use of it in the Point of Free-Will, Contr. Collator. c. XXX. 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 Decret. Gratian. Dist. XV. Pope Gelasius had ranked it among the Apochryphal Books, may be seen at large in the Observations of De Emend. Gratiani Dial. VI. p. 63, 64. 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 See Postev. Apparat. Tom. II. titul. Pastor. 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 Baron Annal. ann. CLIX. num. 5, 6. Baronius himself, tho' he delivers not his own Judgment concerning 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 Epist. ad Afros apud Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. lib. I. cap. 8. St. Athanasius, and which by no means proves any such Errour to be in it. But Script. Eccles. Centur. I. in Herm. 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 Jo. M. Brasichellan. apud Labbaeum de Script. To. I. p. 791.: They censure it as full of Heresies and Fables: Tho' this De Script. in Herm. Tom. I. p. 431. 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 Rivet. Critic. Sacr. lib. I. c. 12. Hoernbeck. Theol PP. To. I. Miscellan. Sacr. p. 91. Scultel. Medulla PP. pag 375 Daillé de Script. Ignat. Larroque Observ. in Vind. Ignat Part. I. p. 19. Add. C • ve Hist. Liter. p. 21, &c. 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 into the Canon of Holy Scripture, yet otherwise paid a very great Deference to it; so the more moderate part of the Learned Men of our present Times, esteem it as a Piece worthy of all Respect, and clear of those Faults which are too lightly charged by some Persons upon it. Thus Praefat. in To. II. Dogm. Theol. c. 2. §. 6. Petavius, none of the most favourable Critics upon the Ancient Fathers, yet acknowledges, as to the present Book, that it was never censured by any of the Ancients as guilty of any false Doctrine or Heresie; and especially as to the Point of the Holy Trinity. Notae in Herm. p. 43. C. Cotelerius, one of the latest Editors of it, esteems it as an Ecclesiastical Work of good note, and a great Defence of the Catholick Faith against the Errors of Montanism: Whose Judgment is not only follow'd by their late Historian Alex. Natal. §. I. Tom. I. p. 103, 104. Natalis Alexander, but is made good too in the Defence of it against 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 judicious Persons, who have at large justified it against the chief of those Exceptions that have been taken at it; the One, the most Excellent Bishop Vind. Ignat. part. I. c. 4. Pearson in his Vindication of St. Ignatius; the Other the Learned Dr. Defens. Fid. Nicaen. §. I. c. • . p. 30. Bull, in his Defence of the Nicene Faith, in the Point of our Blessed Saviour's Divinity; and which he largely shews our present Author to have been far from doing any Prejudice unto.

15. SUCH then have been the different 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 matter; 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 deny'd. And for the other Two, it must be considered, that tho' such Visions as we there read of, being no longer continu'd to these latter Ages, may warrantably 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 frequent; 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 Subject any farther: Nor will I add very much to what I have before said with relation to St. Clement and his First Epistle, concerning that Part which still remains 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, Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. 38. 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. De Script. in Clemente. Jerome is more severe; he represents it to us as rejected by them: And Phot. Cod. 112, 113. Photius after him, calls it a Spurious Piece. And not to mention any more; our most Reverend Bishop Dissert. de Script. Ignat. cap. X. 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 Vid. Catal. Bevereg. Codex Canon. Vindicat. 289. 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 Canon. LXXXV. Canons, one of the most early Collections of this kind.

19. NOR does Hist. Eccles. lib. III. c. •• 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 mention'd, as that. But yet if the Conjecture of Divinat. de Epist. Clem. Wendeline, approved by a very, Learned Beverege Cod. Canon. Vindic. lib. II. c. 9. §. 10. p. 286. Man of our own Country may be admitted; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. IV. c. 23. Eusebius himself 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 continue to read it for our Instruction, together 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 favours 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 Person, 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 Corinthians) was yet indeed the See Divinat. Wendelin. ad secund Epist. Clem. Add. Coteler. Annot. ad PP. Apostol. p. 108. first written. And for being read in the Churches, Haeres. XXVII. num. 6. Epiphanius expresly tells us, that this Epistle, no less than the foregoing, was in his time wont to be publickly 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 See Hieron. adv. Jovin. Tom. III. fol. 12. Photius Cod. 126. in Clem. 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 other Ecclesiastical Writers of those Times: But this having been done at large by Wendel. Dio. de Clem. Epist. Wendeline first, and since by Notae ad Clem. p. 104, 105. Cotelerius, and his perpetual Transcriber Natal. Alex. Dissert. Hist. §. I. Tom. I. in Clem. Natalis Alexander, I shall forbear; and conclude with this, That it is an Epistle, tho' not of equal Value with the Other, 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 unworthy 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 Latin Version, which is by Barthius apud Coteler. Not. in Herm. p. 44. some much complained of, tho' by Cotelerius ibid. 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 Burton Notes on S. Clement. p. 94. himself warrants us to return is this: That taking what has been said by the Antients before mentioned, in the strictest 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 Constitutions and Recognitions, which are also publish'd under the same Name; but are generally acknowledged to be none of his, as in the prosecution of this Discourse I shall take occasion more particularly 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 Reader 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.

Clem. Rom. ex MS Regio. FOR the LORD himself being 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 within; 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 Hypocrisie,) 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 therefore thy Body appears, so let thy Soul be seen by its good Works. And the Male with the Female, neither Male nor Female; — Ex Clem. Alexandrin. 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 darken the Reason; but rather having dispell'd the Mist arising from them, and being full of Shame, shall by Repentance have united both his Soul and Spirit in the Obedience of Reason; then as Paul, says, there is in us neither Male nor Female.