B

To the Reader.

Efore I come to the worke it felfe I know my Rea der will require fatisfaction in two things which I hold my felfe obliged to give, in the first to the Proteftant, in the latter to the Romanist. 1. It will be objected to me as the Jewish Tradition tels us was objected to Mofes by his Antagonists, who char-' ged him with bringing Magicall operations among them, that he brought Straw into Egypt, a country abounding with Corne fo it will be faid that I trouble the World with needleffe repetitions, that I write an Iliad after Homer, and do that work which hath long since been done much bet ter by our Proteftant Heroes, and that Ni! dictum eft quod non eft dictum prius: and particularly that this point of Infallibility bath been difcuffed by that formidable Adverfary of Rome the most acute Mr. Chillingworth, Lord Falkland, Dr. Hammond, and lately by our Learned Mr. StillingAleet: To thefe my Apology is, 1. That the clamorous importunity of Popish Writers doth force us to these repetitions it being the praclife of most of their prefent Controvertifts boldly to urge thofe things in English as unanswerable which they know have been fo folidly difproved in Latin that they neither can nor have pretended to Anfwer. 2. I have made it my indeavour as much as I could to avoid repetitions, which are as difpleafing to me as they can be to the Reader, which if I have in many places ftumbled upon, bath rather been the neceffity of the thing or an unhappy chance then choice and defigne. 3. The Reader I hope will

it

find Kova nawas; if I had known of any Author, who had in nof fo fhort a compafle and plain Method contracted and diffolved the ftrength of the Popish caufe in this great point, I had willingly fuperfeded; nor did I intrude my felf into this work, but was invited to it by diverse worthy and learned friends, and afterwards incouraged in it by the approbation of fuch perfons, whofe judgments I think almost all the learned part of England doth reverence. 4. Here is a new plea (viz concerning the fufficiency of the Teftimony of the prefent Church and the Infallibility of Oral Tradition (not at all confidered

Mr. Chillingworth, nor fully difcuffed by any other that I know of, (except the ingenious Lord Falkland, who handles it quite another way, and hath left room for fome Gleanings after his harvest.) Nor is it debated by Mr. Stillingfleet, whofe Adverfaries led him to things of another nature. And befides it is known to diverfe; that this Treatife was prepared for the Prefs before Mr. Stillingfleet's excellent Difcourfe came out,though retarded by fome unhappy occurrences which it is needleffe here to recount.

The fecond particular is this: The Papifts will pretend,that the Doctrines I charge upon them, and the Teftimonies which I alledge against them, are onely the particular opinions of private Doctors, and not of their whole Church. My defence is this.

1 The Authors which are here introduced, are not pedan tick Writers, but fuch as are of prime note and highest esteem in the Church of Rome, and the most zealous and confiderable Champions of their cafe, and fuch (for the generality of them,) whofe writings came forth with the character of their Churches approbation upon them, concerning whom it will be very difficult to perfwade any intelligent man, either that Such perfons did not understand the fenfe of the Church of Rome, as well as the Objector) or that they did knowingly contradict the doctrine of their Church, or would be permitted... foto do without any cenfure upon them

2 The Teftimonies of thofe Authors are undoubtedly fufficient for that end for which I alledge them, which is to shew the falfenefs of thofe doctrines, and the weakness of thofe ar 14 guments which are disbelieved and difproved by their own learnedeft and ftouteft Champions, by which it may appear tò all impartial perfons that it is not the ignorance nor prejudice of Proteftants, (as fome of their Writers have the Effronte ry to affert) which makes them reject the Popish Tenets, but meerly the want of Truth and evidence therein, confeffed (as you will fee all along in the following Treatife) by their own Brethren, and that it is a defperate madness in any Papift to hazard his everlasting concernments upon fuch principles, as fo many of their acutest Scholars do publickly disavow: And that this is really the cafe of the unhappy Romanist I refer thee to the fubfequent Difcourfe.

The INDEX.

Pag. 1. 1. By the fame arguments by which the Papifts derogate from the Authority of Scrip S.2, 3

1