VIII. But

77oe Introduction,
viii.

But after all, the Critics have been fomething
Puzzled about the Real Author, Who he was.
Macarius of Egypt has the Common Voice of
Every Age in his Favour. Dr. Cave i was firft
of the fame Opinion. But afterwards r did he
Afcribe them to the other Macarius, of Alexan-
dria. Pofjinus f reckons them the Work of a
Third { Macarius. But Dr. Cave has fufficiently
Confuted that Novelty: Returning atlaft to his
Firft Opinion in favour of our Egyptian. Du
Pin t wavers in his Opinion about the matter.
He inclines to Favour indeed our Egyptian, were
it not for a Difficulty from Gennadius Mafjilienfis,
which I mail confider by and by. He firft takes
the Homilies to be very t Antient. But after-
wards thinks them made by a later vMonk.

2. Even when Afcrib'd to Macarius Egypt iusy
Doubted has it been, whether he were lb pro-
perly the Author of them himfelf, or only the
Scribe11 thatPenn'd them down from the Mouth
of St. Antony his Tutor, and fo Tranflated them
into Greek.

3. If indeed St. Antony Died, as fome w affirm,
thirty Years before our Egyptian was born : We
may then venture, I own, to Conclude He could
never be Scribe to St. Antony.

4. If apy one fhould offer to Affirm, that thefe
Homilies were not Formally Penn'd by our Egy-
ptian, but Taken from his Mouth by the junior
Monks : That, if Allow'd, as it will no way
Prejudice our Author's Title to them y fo at the

* Hift. Liter. T. 1. r Tom. 2. p. 76.

f Prolegom in Thefaurum Afceticum.

« Bib. PP. Cent. iv. p. 5-6. v Ibid. p. j8.

u SzcAcla, Lipjiaca, 1684. from ToJJirms.

w Baronw, fojjinut, Du Pin, &c.

fame

The Introduction.

fame time ought it to Difpofe us, in his Favour,
to Forgive whatever Defects or Inaccuracies thefe
Homilies have fufficiently been charg'd with.

f . Waving the feeming Niceties in Chronology ^
I find no manner of Grounds for thinking that
either of the Macarii Paid any regular or conftant
Attendance upon St. Antony. What comes near-
eft to fuch a Suppofition, is this Facl:, which fhall
be eafily granted, viz. That our Egyptian confult-
ed him at times in the way of Vifit, and that too
upon occafion only. Thefe and the like Particu-
lars may at once give place to,

6. That moil Formidable Argument of All,
that would feem at once to Deprive our Egyptian
of the Honour of thefe Homilies, in Favour of
a Third Macarius. This by PoJJinus x and fome
y others is thought to be Unanfwerable. It is
Borrow'd purely from Gennadius z MaJJilienfis^ and
Refts with its whole Weight upon his fingle
Teftimony. His Words are Thefe, viz, Maca-
rius ilk sEgyptius S ignis £5? Firtutibus clarus ", unarn
tantiim ad Junieres Profeffionis fu# fcripfit Epi-
ftolam : in qua docet ilium per fe tic poffe fervire Deo^
qui conditioner Creationis fu<e cognofcens, ad-omnes
femetipfum inclinaverit Labores^ 6? Luclando atq-9
Dei Auxilium adversus omne quod in hac vitd fua-
ve eft Implorando, ad naturalem quoq-, perveniens
Puritatem^ Contiyicntiam^ velut Nature debitum^
munus Obtinuerit.

7. But fuffer me to fay, that this very Allega-
tion is far from being Decilive. For how eafy is
it to fay with a Du Pin^ that Gennadius was mis-
taken ? Or that he intended another Macarius?
Might I not afk, with Dr. b Cave, §>uidfi verb

x Prolegom. in Tkefaurum Afteticum.
y Acta- Lipfiaca. 1684, 1698.

* De Viris Uluftr. Cap. x. inter Op. Hieronymi ex edit. BeneJ.
I Bibl. Patr. Eng. Edit. p. ?6. * Hift. Liter. Tom. 2. p. 76.

Gennadius

3 6 The Introduction.

Gennadius de foils Macarij Epiftolis loquitur ? Quid
ftalia fcripferit, qua Gennadi] diligentiamfugerint^
cum non pauca fcripta fint qua fruftra apud Gen-
nadium quart pojfint ? Dr. Pritius a thinks it not
improbable, but that our Mac anus might, befides
thefe Homilie^ write %n Epiftle alfo, tho'that in-
deed but One. So at leaft Aubertus Miraus has
exprefly told b us in thefe Words, Idem Macari-
us iEgyptius fcripfit ad junior es Profefftonis fua
Monachos c Epiftolam, five Regulai?i qua fie
incipit, Milites ergo Chrifti, &c. Being then in
Latin, I am not very follicitous whether it be
any Translation or not. The Latin Manufcript
Epiftle of Macarius in the Bodleian Library Be-
gins otherwife in every Copy : One of which is
thought, with fome Probability, to be the very
fame with the Sarum Manufcript of the fame.

8. What I chufe to infill upon at this time, is
fomething entirely new, which fcems to me to
put the Matter in a True Light, and to End the
Difpute at once. And that is briefly This. In
the Greek Manufcript (which I mult own my
felf very Considerably Obliged to ) after the Gene-
ral Title, it is perhaps not unworthy of ourOb-
fervation, that the whole Book or Collection of
the Homilies is Infcrib'd in the Margin TI^s r
orujusoiv dewrnv, &c. As if the Fifty Homilies
were a Formal Epiftle. And again at the Begin-
ning of the Seven Additional Homilies (which I
never met with, or could hear ofelfewhere) there
occurs again the very fame Infcription to the fame
Symeon, with the Addition of thefe Words, 'E7rr-
s-oXrj c^6ur^, or the Second Epiftle: Plainly in-
timating, that the foregoing Fifty Homilies were

a Prsef. Generalis, §. xi.
b Biblioth. Ecclefiaftica Schol. in Gennadium.
c This is faid to be at Bruges in thtjefuits College there. As
alifo among the Remains oil'mel'tut's Library.

the

The Introduction.

the Firft Epiftle. Hence it is obvious to con-
clude, that the Homilies hereTrandated (which
is fometimes call'd the Book of Mac ar ins) are
the very fame with that One Epiftle Gennadius
fpeaks of ; But that the other Seven were proba-
bly never Seen or Known by Gennadius himfelf.

o. Did this Conjecture want Confirmation, I
would fub join the following Remark -y viz. That
the Sum or Contents which Gennadius gives of the
Doctrine of that Epiftle, feems at firft fight to
be the Shorteft, but withal the Trueft Abftract
of the Doctrine orSubftance of the Homilies ima-
ginable, as Du Pin has alfo obfervTd before me.
But let me Add, that they feem to Breath the
very fame Spirit which appears in the Character
of our Egyptian -, tho' that by the w^ay.

10. A nice Critic might perhaps difcover the
Fifty Homilies of our Author to be an Epiftle,
from two or three Words, nay, from one Jingle
ExprefHon, in that very Supplement to the Fif-
tieth, which I have added from the Manufcript.
The Words are thefe, viz. Aia -wXetovm $ in

jJ/xst^s- aXixg/vetas-, &c. Where, tho' I have
rendred indeed that Word &jn$&h&t only by Send-
ing, yet that very Sending is without all queftion in
the way of an Epiftle. Upon a Review of this Paf-
fage, I find my felf warping fo far to this way of
Thinking, that a little matter more might per-
haps make mePqfitive beyond all Recovery. But
therefore I flop my felf in time, that I may leave
it wholly to the Reader, to think with me as to
this Particular, if he fo pleafes, or if he had ra-
ther, to let it Alone, I love a little Liberty my
felf, and am by no means for Tying down ano-
ther, where Morality, Frutb, and Religion are in
No Danger.