( >02 )

liver; the History of Opinions that prevailed in hisTime, concerning Ecclesiastical Writers, seldom ornever adding his own Judgment. In a Word, theformer of these two Passages contains Jerom'sJudgment in Favour of St. Peter's Second Epistleand accounts for the Difficulty objected to it in thelatter, i. e. the Diversity of Style between it and thefirst Epistle . And yet our Author, knowing allthis has patched up a Testimony from both thePassages, as jointly declaring against the Authori-ty of that Second Epistle. The World has heardmuch of Priescraft in PerfeBion. Behold herea pregnant Instance of Deis craft in PerfeBion ! *Soon after the Days of ferom , this Epistle wasgenerally owned to be Canonical. So that our An-notator having no more Authorities to alledge a-gainst it, he next falls foul on those venerableAssemblies that decided in Favour of this contro-verted Book . The future Currency of this Epistlehe imputes to the growing Darkness of the Age,and the Blindness of Monkif Times. The De-crees of Councils are represented as founded onmere Intrigue, like those of ‘Brent , and the ancientFathers that assisted therein, are charged with ar-bitrary Proceedings. But sure I am, to use someof our Author’s own Words on this Occasion, hehas not made so many sine Discoveries by his Cri-tical Taste. They are the mere Off-fpring of a

* As to real Diversity of Style between the First and SecondEpistles of St. Piter, tho’ it is allowed by Mills, it is denied by o-thers, as capable judges as himself. Particularly the Learned andAcute Ellis Da-Pin (Hist. of Can. of Script. Vol. III. c. z.) affirms,that we find the fame Energy and Brevity and the fame turn ofphrase and Periods in the Second Epistle oi Peter, as the First.

Li-