(3) The Rev. Prebendary Ed. Miller is at present at work on a _Textual Commentary upon the Holy Gospels_, on the ground of Burgon’s Collection and his own researches. A specimen of this work (Matthew v. 44) is given in his _Present State of the Textual Controversy respecting the Holy Gospels_, which was printed for private circulation, and may be had of the author.[124] In this little pamphlet he takes up the question (p. 30) whether Origen in the _De Oratione_ 1 (De la Rue, i. 198; Koetschau, ii. 299, 22) quotes from Luke (vi. 28) or Matthew (v. 44), and decides for the latter. Koetschau is of the opposite opinion, giving “Luke vi. 28 (Matthew v. 44).” In the case of Patristic quotations, it will be seen that matters are frequently very complicated. It must be borne in mind, too, that the various writers did not use the same copy of the Scriptures all their life long. At different times and in different localities they must necessarily have had different copies before them. (4) It is further to be observed that in the case of controversial writings, such as those of Origen against Celsus, and Augustine against the Manichæans, the question must always be considered whether the Scriptural quotations found in them are quotations made by Origen and Augustine themselves, or taken by them from the writings they assail or refer to; and also whether the quotations have been made directly from a manuscript of the Bible, or from the works of a previous writer. Borrowing from an author without acknowledgment may have been a much more common thing in olden times than it is even at present.