Wesley Corpus

that both alleged what was true; that in a point of so little importance the Apostles varied themselves; some of them observing it on the fourteenth day of the moon, and others not. But, be this as it may, it can be no proof, either that Polycarp was not a holy man, or that he was not favoured with the extraordinary, as well as ordinary, gifts of the Spirit. 9. With regard to the narrative of his martyrdom, you affirm, “It is one of the most authentic pieces in all primitive antiquity.” (Page 124.) I will not vouch for its authenticity; nor therefore for the story of the dove, the flame forming an arch, the fragrant smell, or the revelation to Pionius. But your attempt to account for these things is truly curious. You say, “An arch of flame round his body is an appearance which might easily happen, from the common effects of wind. And the dove said to fly out of him, might be conveyed into the wood which was prepared to consume him.” (Page 229.) How much more naturally may we account for both, by supposing the whole to be a modern fiction, wrote on occasion of that account mentioned by Eusebius, but lost many ages ago! But whatever may be thought of this account of his death, neither does this affect the question, whether during his life he was endued with the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. 10. There is one of those whom you style apostolic Fathers yet behind, of whom you talk full as familiarly as of the rest: I mean, Hermas: “To whom,” you say, “ some impute the fraud of forging the Sibylline books.” (Page 37.) It would not have been amiss, if you had told us, which of the ancients, whether Christian, Jew, or Heathen, ever accused him of this. If none ever did, some will be apt to think it is giving a person but hard measure, to bring an accusation against him which never was heard of till sixteen hundred years after his death.