( 8 )

SECT. I.

JSsezv Readings , vjherein the Editor toohastily follows Dr. Mills.

I. Matt. vi. iz.

T HE Doxology is omitted at the End ofthe Lord’s Prayer , c'-n tr» x. r. but Ithink very wrongfully. Dr. Mills indeed arguesthat it was not- in the Gospel according to theNazarenes, from St. Jeroms Silence about it inhis Comment on this Passage; which is no man-ner of Consequence, unless he had first provedthat Jerom notes every Difference between thetwo Gospels. Besides, supposing the Gospel ofthe Nazarenes to have wanted this Doxology,it does not follow, that it was not originally aPart of St. Matbews Gospel, which * Mills him-self contends was quite different from the other.On the other Hand, for the Genuineness of thisDoxology, we have an internal Evidence of greatStrength. Every one knows that oUr Lord com-piled his Prayer out of JewiJh Forms; but thevery Learned Mr. Gregory has shewn that thisDoxology occurs in those Forms. It is thereforehighly congruous to suppose, that our Lord tookboth the one and the other into his Prayer: Sothat if the Authorities against this Doxology weremuch stronger than they really are, they would

* Pro/. l\ Q . 4-.

be