To insist upon this, however, is not at all my present purpose. About the true reading of S. Luke ii. 14, (which is _not_ the reading of Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford,) there is clearly no longer any room for doubt. It is perhaps one of the best established readings in the whole compass of the New Testament. My sole object is to call attention to the two following facts:— (1) That _the four oldest Codices which contain S. Luke_ ii. 14 (B, א, A, D, A.D. 320-520), and two of the oldest Versions, conspire in exhibiting the Angelic Hymn _incorrectly_. (2) That we are indebted to _fourteen of the Fathers_ (A.D. 240-434), and to the rest of the ancient Versions, for the true reading of that memorable place of Scripture. II. Against all this, it is urged (by Tischendorf) that,— 1. IRENÆUS sides with the oldest uncials.—Now, the Greek of the place referred to is lost. A Latin translation is all that survives. According to _that_ evidence, Irenæus, having quoted the place in conformity with the Vulgate reading (iii. c. x. § 41,—“_Gloria in excelsis Deo et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis_,”) presently adds,—“In eo quod dicunt, _Gloria in altissimis __DEO__ et in terra pax_, eum qui sit altissimorum, hoc est, supercaelestium factor et eorum, quae super terram omnium conditor, his sermonibus glorificaverunt; qui suo plasmati, hoc est hominibus suam benignitatem salutis de caelo misit.” (_ed._ Stieren, i. 459).—But it must suffice to point out (1) that these words really prove nothing: and (2) that it would be very unsafe to build upon them, even if they did; since (3) it is plain that the Latin translator exhibits the place in the Latin form most familiar to himself: (consider his substitution of “excelsis” for “altissimis.”) 2. Next, ORIGEN is claimed on the same side, on the strength of the following passage in (Jerome’s version of) his lost Homilies on S. Luke:—“Si scriptum esset, _Super terram pax_, et hucusque esset finita sententia, recte quaestio nasceretur. Nunc vero in eo quod additum est, hoc est, quod post pacem dicitur, _In hominibus bonae voluntatis_, solvit quaestionem. Pax enim quam non dat Dominus super terram, non est pax bonae voluntatis.” (_Opp._ iii. p. 946.) “From this,” (says Tischendorf, who is followed by Tregelles,) “it is plain that Origen regarded εὐδοκίας as the true reading; not εὐδοκία—which is now thrice found in his Greek writings.”—But,