( -6i )

good and bad, without Distinction. He is so farfrom saying that he had forgot whether theThought was his or another's , that he expresslytells us it was another’s , and names his Author.He did not send Austin to a numberless Multitudedf Greek Authors, but to fix only by Name, di-recting him at the same Time to particular Placesin those Writers; and in the End he shortens hisLabour by pointing out one single Commentator ;in whose Works he might be sure to find the Pas-sage in Question. • We see also that the Nonsensein the End of Jerome' s Answer is altogether aBlunder of the Distourjers. Lastly , He injuresAustin by saying, Greek was a Language he un-derstood not, and worse still at p. 66. where hesays, That Father understood Greek as little as hedid Hebrew . The contrary to this appears frommost of his Writings: Which tho’ they do notargue him to have been critically conversant inGreek, do yet abundantly evince, that he wasqualified to know the Sentiments of a Commenta-tor in that Language.

After he has done persecuting the learned Je-rome with Imputations equally false and imperti-nent, he returns to his Subject, the Revelations■,and fays, p. 73. " The Reader has heard what" Opinion Jerome had of them, which I adviseu him to remember carefully. For he observes" in his Catalogue of illustrious Men, that St. Den-<c nis had written a very just Critique on the Re-" velations. And the Reader has seen what thisu Critique was, which ascribed this Book to an-lc other Author, and tended as no less than to{c destroy its whole Authority If the Reader

y " carefully