30 Author of the in it, and areCure that he would makeno ufe of it, foit is denyed that any footfieps of itappear in this Epiflk; and if any thingof folid, convincing, unpainted Eloquence be intended in it, it is evident that St. Paulneither did,nor juftly could confefs himfelf un- acquainted with it; onlyhe made aConceffiou of the Objeétion made againft him by the Falfe Teachers to manifeft how they could obtain no manner of advantage . thereby. 4. Neither are theother Epiffles ofSt. Paul written in fo low and homely a Syle as is (tuyfoftPro- pretended. Chryfoffome fpeaking of himtells us, üvep %r ñnror tÀu54ep » rúre y>6asui am. n Ep. ad and thatfor his Eloquence he was efteemed Mercury by the Gentiles: Somewhat bath Rom. been fpoken hereunto before, whereunto I (hall nowonly add the Words of a Perfòn who was no incompetent Judge in thins of this nature. *um, faith he, orations aeZá..snxor, Pe g ix sCor.r t.6, ipfius totam indokm& xapailiîpá proprius conficlera, nullamego in ipfo Platone fimilem gran- dikquentiarn quoties ¢Qt libuit Dei Myfferia detonare, nullam inDemoffhene pawndnva7ria, comper f me fateor, meatier animas velmeta Divini Judicif perterrefacere, vel commonefa- cere, vel ad centemplandamDei bonitatem attrahere, vel adpietatis &mifericordie officia conflituit adhoetari, nullam deniq; vel in ipfo Ariffotele 6 Galeno preflantifJìmir alioquin artificibus, magirexatram docendi Methodum invenio. When Iwell confider the Genius and Cbsratter ofthe Speech andStyle of this ApoJtle, I confiß I never found that Grandure in Plato himfelf, as in him, whenbe thundereth out the Myfferies of God i nor that Gravity andVehemeney inDemofthenes as in him, when he intends to terrifie the minds of men, with a dread of the Judgements ofGod, or wouldwarn them, or draw them to the contemplationof his Goodneß, or the performance of the Duties ofPiety andMercy; Nor do Ifind a moreexarz Method ofTeaching in tbofe great and excellent Mailers, Ariftotic, and Galen, than inhim. Soit is plainly, fo the GreekFathers almot withone confent do teflifie, fo do molt of the Latinesalfo, fo the bell Learned of the later Critickr, and fo may it be defended againft any oppofitfon. And Hieromhimfelf, who takes moil Liberty to cnfure his Style, doth fo far in other placesforget his own temerity therein, as to cry out againft thofe, who dreamed as he fpeaks, that St. Paul was not throughly acquainted with all propriety of Speech. Andhe whowas the firff that ever fpakeword about any defect of thiskind, though as able to judge as any one what ever who hath finer palled his Cenfure unto the famepurpofe, was inan evidentmiffake in the very inflance which he pitched on to confirm his Obfervation. This was hymens, one of the .firft and molt Learned of the GreekEatherr; For affirming that there were many hyperbata in the StyleofthisApoffle which render it unevenand difficult, he confirms hisAffertion with an inftance in 2 Cor. 4.4. Inwhom theGodofthisWorld, bath blinded the minds of them which believe not : For, faithhe, theWords should naturally have been thus placed ; In whom Godhail, blinded the-mindsofthem that in this world believe not. So toobviate a Foolifh.Sophifm in the halentinians, anHyperbaton muff be fuppofed in the Apoftles Style, when indeed there is not the leali colour of it. Upon the whole matter then, I Mall confidently affert, that there is nomannerofdefel.t in any of his Writings; and that every thing, (confider the matter and nature ofit, the Perfan inwhofe name he fpake, and thofi to whomhe wrote) is expreffed as it ought to befor the end propofed, and not otherwife. And hence itis, that becaufe of the variety of the Subje t Matter trea- ted of, and difference among theperfins towhomhe wrote, that there is alto variety in his way and mannerof expreg -eng iaimfelf in fundry of his Epiftles : And in many of them, there is fuch a difcovery and manifeftation of folid Eloquence, and pure Ele- gancy ofSpeech, that theObfervation ofthem in anyWriting, is far from havingany weight to prove it noneofhis. 4,13, It may thenbe granted, though it be not proved, that thereis Come diffimilitude of Style between this and the reft of theEpiftles ofSt. Paul; and the Reafons of it are fuf- ficiently manifeft. TheArgument treated ofin thisEpijile, is divers from that ofmolt of theother ; many circumffances in thofe to whomhe wrote ungular, the fßringof his reafonings, andway ofhis arguings, peculiarly fuíteduntohis Subje&Matter, and the condition of thofe unto whomhe wrote. Befides in the Writing of this Epiffle there was in him an efpecial Frame and incitation of Spirit, occafioned by many Occurrences relating unto it.. 1-lis intenfe love, and near relation in the fjefh, unto them to whom he wrote, affectionately remembred by himfelf, and expreffed in a manner inimitable, Rom. 9. r, 2, 3. did doubtlefs exert it felt, inhis treating abouttheirgreateft and neareft concernment. Theprejudices and enmity of Come of them againft him, recorded in feveral placesofthe Ails, and remembredby himfelf in fome other of his Epiftles, lay alfo under hiseonfideration. Muchof theSubbjeä that he treated about, was matter of Controverfie,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=