( 10 )

with us, and none expressly or necestarily againstus. The Apostolical Constitutions exhibit theDoxology ; nor have we any Reason to thinkthem interpolated in that Particular, tho’ Millsto favour his Side of the Question, takes it forgranted. Chryfqflom , the oldest Greek Com-mentator now extant on this Part of St. Mat-thew's Gospel, has the Doxology both in hisText and Commentary. Soon after him Isidore of Pelusium cites the Prayer , and also the Dox-ology, Lib. 4. Ep. 24. It is confessed that Ori-geu, Gregory Nyfsen and Cyril, when they areprofessedly explaining this Prayer , omit the Dox-ology. But this very Circumstance makes themless competent Evidences against this Passage :For they probably expound the Prayer , not as aPart of Scripture, but of the publick Liturgy ,that the People might know what they prayedfor at such Times. But it is well known thatthe People uttered only the petitionary Part ofthat Prayer , the Doxology being reserved forthe Priest alone. It is no Wonder therefore thatthey omitted what did not come within theirDelign. But what has most of all prejudicedlearned Men against the Doxology is, that itoccurs in the Greek Liturgies, subjoined to othersas well as the Lord s Prayer, * and that it is notmade a Part even of that Prayer , but is a Sortof Response or Epipbonema , in which the Peo-ple had no Share ; and from the Liturgies they

* In Renatidot *s Collection of Eaflern Liturgies, I have notobserved a single Instance of the Doxology, being the Response,or of its being subjoined to any other save the Lord’s Prayer .

suppose