commencement of the fifth century. The letter used to be ascribed to
Jerome; Erasmus referred it to Sophronius; but Baronius says it was
written "by an egregious forger of lies," ("egregius mendaciorum
concinnator,") who lived after the heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches
had been condemned. I am not at all anxious to enter upon that point of
criticism; that the letter is of very ancient origin cannot be doubted.
This document would lead us to conclude, that so far from the tradition
regarding the Virgin's assumption being general in the Church, it was a
point of grave doubt and discussion among the faithful, many of whom
thought it an act of pious forbearance to abstain altogether from
pronouncing any opinion on the subject. Whoever penned the letter, and
whether we look to the sensible and pious sentiments contained in it, or
to its undisputed antiquity, the following extract cannot fail to be
interesting[112].

[Footnote 111: The letter is entitled "Ad Paulam et Eustochium
de Assumptione B.M. Virginis." It is found in the fifth volume
of Jerome's works, p. 82. Edit. Jo. Martian.]

[Footnote 112: Baronius shows great anxiety (Cologne, 1609, vol.
i. p. 408) to detract from the value of this author's testimony,
whoever he was; sharply criticising him because he asserts, that
the faithful in his time still expressed doubts as to the matter
of fact of Mary's assumption. By assigning, however, to the
letter a still later date than the works of Sophronius, Baronius
adds strength to the arguments for the comparatively recent
origin of the tradition of her assumption. See Fabricius
(Hamburgh, 1804), vol. ix. p. 160.]

"Many of our people doubt whether Mary was taken up together with her