In both these passages, submission follows giving of thanks, without any similitude in the ideas which should account for the transition. It is not necessary to pursue the comparison between the two epistles further. The argument which results from it stands thus: No two other epistles contain a circumstance which indicates that they were written at the same, or nearly at the same time. No two other epistles exhibit so many marks of correspondency and resemblance. If the original which we ascribe to these two epistles be the true one, that is, if they were both really written by St. Paul, and both sent to their respective destination by the same messenger, the similitude is, in all points, what should be expected to take place. If they were forgeries, then the mention of Tychicus in both epistles, and in a manner which shows that he either carried or accompanied both epistles, was inserted for the purpose of accounting for their similitude; or else the structure of the epistles was designedly adapted to that circumstance; or, lastly, the conformity between the contents of the forgeries, and what is thus indirectly intimated concerning their date, was only a happy accident. Not one of these three suppositions will gain credit with a reader who peruses the epistles with attention, and who reviews the several examples we have pointed out, and the observations with which they were accompanied. No. II. There is such a thing as a peculiar word or phrase cleaving, as it were, to the memory of a writer or speaker, and presenting itself to his utterance at every turn. When we observe this, we call it a cant word, or a cant phrase. It is a natural effect of habit; and would appear more frequently than it does, had not the rules of good writing taught the car to be offended with the iteration of the same sound, and oftentimes caused us to reject, on that account, the word which offered itself first to our recollection. With a writer who, like St. Paul, either knew not these rules, or disregarded them, such words will not be avoided. The truth is, an example of this kind runs through several of his epistles, and in the epistle before us abounds; and that is in the word riches (λoutos,) used metaphorically as an augmentative of the idea to which it happens to be subjoined. Thus, "the riches of his glory," "his riches in glory," ""riches of the glory of his inheritance," "riches of the glory of this mystery," Rom. ch. ix. 23, Ephes. ch. iii. 16, Ephes. ch. i. 18, Colos. ch. i. 27 ; "riches of his grace," twice in the Ephesians, ch. i. 7, and ch. ii. 7; "riches of the full assurance of understanding," Colos. ch. ii. 2; "riches of his goodness," Rom. ch. ii. 4; "riches of the wisdom of God," Rom. ch. xi. 33; "riches of Christ," Ephes. ch. iii. 8. In a like sense the adjective. Rom. ch. x. 12, "rich unto all that call upon him ;" Ephes. ch. ii. 4. "rich in mercy;" 1 Tim. ch. vi. 18, "rich in good works." Also the adverb, Colos. ch. iii, 16, "let the word of Christ dwell in you richly." This figurative use of the word, though so familiar to St. Paul, does not occur in any part of the New Testament, except once in the epistle of St. James, ch. ii. 5, "Hath not God chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith?" where it is manifestly suggested by the antithesis. I propose the frequent, yet seemingly unaffected use of this phrase, in the epistle before us, as one internal mark of its genuineness. No. III. There is another singularity in St. Paul's style, which, wherever it is found, may be deemed a badge of authenticity; because, if it were noticed, it would not, I think, be imitated, inasmuch as it almost always produces 'embarrass ment and interruption in the reasoning. This singularity is a species of digression which may probably, I think, be denominated going off at a word. It is turning aside from the subject upon the occurrence of some particular word, forsaking the train of thought then in hand, and entering upon a parenthetick sentence in which that word is the prevailing term. I shall lay before the reader some examples of this, collected from the other epistles, and then propose two examples of it which are found in the Epistle to the Ephesians. 2 Cor. ch. ii. 14, at the word savour: "Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place; for we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life; and who is sufficient for these things? For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God, but as of sincerity, but as of God; in the sight of God speak we in Christ." Again, 2 Cor. ch. iii. 1, at the word epistle. "Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you? or of commendation from you? ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in the fleshly tables of the heart." The position of the words in the original, shows more strongly than in the translation that it was the occurrence of the word IOTOÀN which gave birth to the sentence that follows: 2 Cor. chap. iii. 1. Ει μη χρηζομεν, ὡς τινες, συστατικων επιστολων προς ύμας, η εξ ύμων συστατικών; ή επιστολη ήμων ύμεις είτε, εγγεγραμμένη εν ταις καρδίαις ήμων, γινωσκόμενη και αναγινωσκόμενη ύπο πανίων ανθρωπων, φανερωμένοι ότι εστε επιστολη Χριστε διακονηθεισα ὑφ' ήμων εγγεγραμμένη 8 μελανι, αλλά πνευματι Θεου ζωντος· εκ εν πλαξι λίθιναις, αλλ' εν πλαξι καρδιάς σαρκιναίς. Again, 2 Cor. ch. iii. 12, &c. at the word veil: "Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech; and not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished. But their minds were blinded; for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament, which veil is done away in Christ; but even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart: nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away (now the Lord is that spirit; and where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty). But we all, with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the spirit of the Lord. Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.” Who sees not that this whole allegory of the veil arises entirely out of the occurrence of the word, in telling us that "Moses put a veil over his face," and that it drew the apostle away from the proper subject of his discourse, the dignity of the office in which he was engaged: which subject he fetches up again almost in the words with which he had left it; "therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not." The sentence which he had before been going on with, and in which he had been interrupted by the veil, was, "seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech." In the Epistle to the Ephesians, the reader will remark two instances in which the same habit of composition obtains; he will recognize the same pen. One he will find, chap. iv. 8-11, at the word ascended: "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is of it but that he also descended first unto the lower parts the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some, apostles," &c. The other appears, chap. v. 12—15, at the word light: "For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret: but all things that are reproved, are made manifest by the light; (for whatsoever doth make manifest, is light; wherefore he saith, Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give. thee light :) see then that ye walk circumspectly." No. IV. per Although it does not appear to have ever been disputed that the epistle before us was written by St. Paul, yet it is well known that a doubt has long been entertained concerning the persons to whom it was addressed. The question is founded partly in some ambiguity in the external evidence. Marcion, a heretick of the second century, as quoted by Tertullian, a father in the beginning of the third, calls it the Epistle to the Laodiceans. From what we know of Marcion, his judgment is little to be relied upon; nor is it fectly clear that Marcion was rightly understood by Tertullian. If, however, Marcion be brought to prove some copies in his time gave v Acoding in the superscription, his testimony if it be truly interpreted, is not diminished by his heresy; for, as Grotius observes, "cur meâ re mentiretur nihil erat causæ." The name Ep, in the first verse, upon which word singly depends the proof, that the epistle was written to the Ephesians, is not read in all the manuscripts now extant. I admit, however, that the exter that |