A Reply to Dr. Lightfoot's Essays Part 12
Haer._ iii. 3, 4. It should be ii. 22, 5.
[51:3] _Ibid._ p. 181.
[51:4] _H.E._ iii, 24.
[52:1] _H.E._ ii. 23.
[52:2] _Ibid._ iii. 11.
[52:3] _Ibid._ 16.
[52:4] _Ibid._ 19, 20.
[52:5] _Ibid._ 32.
[52:6] _Ibid._ iv. 8.
[52:7] _Ibid._ 11.
[52:8] _Ibid._ iv. 22.
[53:1] _H.E._ ii. 15.
[53:2] _Ibid._ vii. 25.
[54:1] _H.E._ iii. 18.
[54:2] _Ibid._ 19, 20.
[54:3] _Ibid._ 20.
[54:4] _Ibid._ 20.
[54:5] _Ibid._ 23.
[54:6] _Ibid._ 24.
[55:1] I am much obliged to Dr. Lightfoot for calling my attention to the accidental insertion of the words "and the Apocalypse" (_S.R._ i.
p. 433). This was a mere slip of the pen, of which no use is made, and the error is effectually corrected by my own distinct statements.
[55:2] _H.E._ iii. 39.
[56:1] _Contemporary Review_, January 1875, p. 183 [_ibid._ p. 51].
[57:1] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 337 ff. [_ibid._ p. 59 ff.]
[58:1] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 339 [_ibid._ p. 62].
[59:1] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 340 [_ibid._ p. 63].
[59:2] _S.R._ i. p. 263 f. I have introduced numbers for facility of reference.
[60:1] Dr. Lightfoot says in this volume: "The reading 'most' is explained in the preface to that edition as a misprint" (p. 63, n. 2).
Not so at all. "A slip of the pen" is a very different thing.
[60:2] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 341 [_ibid._ p. 64].
[61:1] _Ueber d. Urspr. u.s.w. des Christennamens_, p. 7, Anm. 1.
[61:2] _Zeitschr. wiss. Theol._ 1874, p. 211, Anm. 1. I should have added that the priority which Lipsius still maintains is that of the text, as Dr. Lightfoot points out in his _Apostolic Fathers_ (part ii.
vol. i. 1885, p. 273, n. 1), and not of absolute origin; but this appears clearly enough in the quotations I have made.
[61:3] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 841 [_ibid._ p. 65].
[62:1] _S.R._ i. p. 259 f.
[62:2] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 342 [_ibid._ p, 65 f.]
[62:3] _S.R._ i. p. 259.
[63:1] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 342. In a note Dr.
Lightfoot states that my references to Lipsius are to his earlier works, where he still maintains the priority and genuineness of the Curetonian Epistles. Certainly they are so: but in the right place, two pages further on, I refer to the writings in which he rejects the authenticity, whilst still maintaining his previous view of the priority of these letters [_ibid._ p. 66].
[64:1] Calvin's expressions are: "Nihil naeniis illis, quae sub Ignatii nomine editae sunt, putidius. Quo minus tolerabilis est eorum impudentia, qui talibus larvis ad fallendum se instruunt" (_Inst. Chr.
Rel._ i. 13, -- 39).
[64:2] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 342.
[64:3] _Op. Theolog._ 1652, 11, p. 1085.
[64:4] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 342 [_ibid._ p. 66].
Dr. Lightfoot refers to Pearson's _Vindiciae Ignat._ p. 28 (ed. Churton).
[65:1] _Exam. Concilii Tridentim_, 1614, i. p. 85 (misprinted 89).
[65:2] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 343 [_ibid._ p. 67].
[67:1] _Critici Sacri_, lib. ii cap. 1; _Op. Theolog._ 1652, ii. p. 1086.
[67:2] _Vind. Ignat._ 1672, p. 14 f.; Jacobson, _Patr. Apost._ i.
p. x.x.xviii.
[67:3] _Op de Theolog. Dogmat., De Eccles. Hierarch._ v. 8 -- 1, edit.
Venetiis, 1757, vol. vii.
[68:1] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p. 343 f. [_ibid._ p. 67 f.]
[70:1] _Die Kirche im ap. Zeit._ p. 322.