errors as a reafoner, he is certainly more happy as a writer; for he has great merit in the management of the controverfy, in regard to acuteness, beauty, and energy of expreffion. Yet if we examine accurately his embellished arguments, nothing appears but fplendid colourings, arfully contrived to var◄ nish over the deformities of error.

In this answer to Thelyphthora, though internal evidence has not been wholly neglected, yet more attention has been paid to external; because the former has been already much attended to by fome learned gentlemen. In the remarks, which this book contains on certain paffages-which paffages confifted only of bold affertions, without any proof, or notice of former replies to the fame principles, it has been thought neceffary only to oppose positive affertions with some references to authors, if of material confequence in the controverfy, where the

fub

fubject might be found difcuffed at large, And as to general affertions, they deserve no more than general answers, and they have been treated in this manner, except when the occafion particularly demanded to defcend to particulars,-Indeed without descending to particulars, there is no probability of convincing an inquifitive reader

THE writer of the following pages has been careful to obviate every fuggeftion against the evidence of traditional testimony, by which the doctrines of CHRIST are conveyed to fucceeding ages. And, he flatters himself, that a fatisfactory vindication of the primitive Fathers, will be met with in this treatise-a vindication from the cenfures of a. certain writer, equally untrue as ungenerous. Being a man of no ceremony he has involved them all in the general accufation of lying, upon many occafions.-But who does not fee the falfity and defign of fuch charges?

A lye is to ftate fomething as matter of fact, which is not fuch, with an intention to deceive. Where is there, in the writings of the antient Fathers, any thing of this description? Where do they mifreprefent factswhere do they fhew the leaft inclination to deceive? Though those excellent men have most faithfully bore their testimony to the truth, yet they have been treated, as might be expected from a determined opposer of our ecclefiaftical establishment, with the greateft fcurrility. From what is said in answer, relative to the firft Saints of Chriftianity, if it does not make the author of Thelyphthora blush, it may probably make men of more modesty blush for him.

IT is most astonishing to conceive how the author under confideration, could have the affurance to quote Puffendorf, Grotius, and other writers of authority, who are all declared monogamifts and oppofers of all his leading

leading pofitions.-In reality his quotations in general are extremely partial-they are fo detached that they quite mifrepresent the meaning and intention of the author, in almost every important point.

BUT quitting Thelyphthora fora moment, to confider the fate of this answer to it.—It may be objected that this book only oppofes an expiring cause.-This is not an objection of weight, because other replies have been partial-this treats the subject more at large; and befides, as it is not written fo much from a defire of engaging in controverfy, as to convey general information, on the matters about which it treats, it is to be hoped that it will always be a work of utility, and that the lateness of its appearance will be no objection to the reading of it. Many decline reading controverfial books, merely from an idea that the fubject is trite; but there may be no impropriety in reminding

them

them, though they may be very tenacious of their opinion, that while new arguments can be, and really are, advanced, and old ones placed in a new and more convincing point of view, controverfy is not only worthy of their attention, but is a fpecies of writing which is the most instructive.

PROBABLY it may be further alledged, that there are in this production certain fubjects brought forward, that had better have been unnoticed. The author is not fenfible of having offended in this way, but is certainly blameable if he has treated any subject indelicately. There are certain matters, which, being neceffarily connected with fome of his principal positions, could not pafs unobserved; but he has endeavoured to exprefs them with as much modefty as intelligibility would permit. He fhould be extremely forry if he has faid any thing offensive to the feelings or delicacy of any one. He begs