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, Sec. 39).
[64:2] _Contemporary Review_, February 1875, p.
Pages:
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254