C «5 )
mired Origen had so absolutely pronounced theAuthor of that Book .
We see then that during the three first Centu-ries, the golden Age of the Church, the Writingswhereof are considered as the Standard of writ-ten Tradition for pure Christianity , no more thantwo Catholicks can be produced, and they too inthe Heat of Controversy, who have questionedSt. John the Apostle’s Title to the Revelations.
If therefore the Fathers, in the following Age ,had universally rejected that Book , the presentChristian Church could not have been blamed foradmitting it into her Canon, upon the infinitelysuperior Testimonies of those earlier Times,whose Agreement is decisive, in all other Fa 5 fs >that concern Religion. But this is by no Meansthe Case .
For in all this fourth Century, we do not findeither Council or Father exprestly denying the Ge-nuineness or Canonical Authority of the Revelations.
. All the Evidence against it is negative or report-ed at second Hand. Thus we find it wanting in seve-: ral Catalogues of these Times, particularly in that' of the elder Cyril, in the 60 th Canon of the Council' of Laodicea, as also in those of Gregory Nazidnzenand Philaftrius. Amphilochius in his Iambicks toSeleucus fays it was received by some , but rejectedby more. Lastly Jerom, in his Epistle to Darda-; nus, owns that the Greeks of his Time did notadmit it among the Canonical Scriptures. But nosingle Writer in all this Period, expressly and in1 his own Name rejects the Revelations.
On the contrary, the Fathers of all Churches,