xiv. In the Codices B, E, and in the Syrian translation, this doxology occurs at the conclusion of ch. xvi. In codex A it occurs in both places ; whilst in Codex D**, the words are wanting entirely, and they seem not to fit into either of the hvo places. If the doxology be put at the conclu sion of ch. xiv., Paul seems to promise to those Christians weak in faith, of whom he had spoken, a confirmation of their belief. But it seems unfit (unspassend) in this connection to call the Gospel an eternal mystery, and the doxology seems here to interrupt the connection between chs. xiv. and xv. ; and at the conclusion of ch. xvi. it seems to be superfluous, since the blessing had been pro nounced already in ver. 24. We, however, say that this latter circumstance need not have prevented the apostle from allowing his animated feelings to burst forth in a doxolog,y, especially at the con clusion of an epistle which treated amply on the mystery of redemption. We find an analogous instance in Eph. 20, 21, where a doxology occurs after the mystery of salvation had been mentioned : we are therefore of opinion that the doxology is rightly placed at the conclusion of ch. xvi., and that it was in some codices erroneously transposed to the conclusion of ch. xiv., because the copyist considered the blessing in xvi. 24 to be the real conclusion of the epistle. In confirma tion of this remark we observe that the same codices in which the doxology occurs in ch. xvi. either omit the blessing altogether, or place it after the doxolog,y.
VI. Interpreters of the Epistle. —Chrysostom is the most important among the fathers who at tempted to interpret this epistle ; he enters deeply, and with psychological acumen, into the thoughts of the apostle, and expounds them with sublime animation. Among the reformers Calvin is dis
tinguished by logical penetration and doctrinal depth ; Beza by his grammatical and critical knowledge. [The Commentaries of Melanchthon, Strasb. 1540; of Bucer, Bas. 1562 ; and of Brent, Francf. i564, may also be mentioned among those of the Reformers ; also that of C. Ferme, Edin. 1654 translated into English by W. Skae, and edited with the Commentarius of And. Melville by W. L. Alexander, D.D., Edin. 1849. Of more recent works the number is great. The following are of most importance :—Willet, Hexapla,1611; Locke, Paraphrase and Notes, Land. 1733 ; Turretin, Prelect., Lausan. 1741 ; Taylor, Paraphrase and Notes, Lond. 1745; Baumgarten, Ausie,gung, Halle 1749 ; Carpzov, Stricture, Helmst. 1758; Schmidt, Annott., Lips. 1777 ; MOMS, Preded., Lips. 1794 ; Bohme, Comment. Perpet., Lips. i8o6 ; Tholuck, Auslegung, Berl. 1824, 5th ed. 1856, translated into English by Menzies, 2 vols., Edinb. Bib. Cabinet 1833-36 ; Flatt, Vorlesungen, Tiib. 1825 ; Riickert, Commenter, Leipz. 1831 ; Stuart, Com mentary, Andover, U. S., 1832, Lond. 1833 ; Reiche, Erkldrung,2 vols., Gott. 1833-34 ; Glock ler, Erkliirung, Leipz. 1834; Kollner, Comma:tar, Darmst. 1834 ; Olshausen, Bibl. Commenter, Konigsb. 1835, translated in Clark's For. Theol. Library ; Hodge, Commentary, 1835, new edition 1864, reprinted at Edinburgh 1864 ; Fritzsche, Comment. Perpet., 3 vols., Berol. 1836-43; De Wette, Kurze Leipz. 1835, 3d ed. 1841 ; Umbreit, Auslegung (` auf dem Grunde des A. T.'), Gotha 1856 ; Haldane, Exposition, 3 vols., Edin. 1842, 3d ed. ; Jowett, Exposition, 2d ed., 1839 ; Brown, Analytical Exposition, Edin. 1857 ; Turner, New York, 1859 ; Philippi Commenter, 3 vols., Francof. 1852 ; Van Hengel, Interpretatio, Silv. Duc., i854.]—A. T.