A

COLLECTION

O F

TRACT S.

I. A Differtation on 2 Theff. ii.
I, ---- 12. In which it is shown,
that the Bishop of Rome is the man
of fin, &c.

II. A letter to a friend, concerning
the end and defign of prayer.
Or
the reasonableneffe of praying to
an unchangeably wife, powerful and
good God. In answer to the ob-
jections of the modern infidels.
III. A poftfcript to the letter on
prayer, concerning the views which
we ought to have in praying; the
drawing up proper forms ; the use
of fcripture language; the confef-
fion of fuch fins only, as we
are conscious we have been guilty of.

IV. The 30th differtation of Maximus Tyrius, concerning this question, Whether we ought to pray to God, or no?

Tranflated from the Greek.

V. Remarks on the foregoing differtation of Maximus Tyrius.

VI. The doctrine of prædeftination reviewed. Or the nature of the councils and decrees of God; and the rife and occafion of the fcripture language concerning them,

VII. A brief account of Calvin's

caufing Servetus to be burned, at Geneva, for an beretic.

The THIRD EDITION, corrected and inlarged.

To which are now added, by way of SUPPLEMENT.

VIII. A Defence of the Brief ac

count of Calvin's treatment of Ser

vetus.

IX. A brief account of Archbishop
Laud's cruel treatment of Dr.

Leighton.

X. An effay, concerning the belief of things, which are above reafon. And,

A general preface.

By GEORGE BENSON, D. D.

LONDON:

Printed and Sold by J. WAUGH, in Gracechurch-street; J. NOON, in Cheapfide; A. MILLAR, in the Strand; J. DAVIDSON, in the Poultry; R. KING, in Fore-ftreet; M. COOPER, in Pater-nofter-Row; and J. ROBINSON, in Ludgate-street. MDCCXLVIII.

PREFACE

To this COLLECTION of

TRACT S

T

HERE have already been two
editions of feven of the following
Tracts, printed feparately. And,
by the advice of fome friends, they
are now collected into one volume,

with fome additions and alterations.

A popish Priest (as it was thought) wrote against the Pfalter's-Hall Anti-popish Sermons. And he published at the end of that work, "An extract out of Bishop Montague's appeal, (Chap. V. p. 149, &c.) concerning Mahomet; offered to the confi"deration of Mr. Chandler, and of The Au"thor of The Differtation, on 2 Theff. ii." Bishop Montague's character, and his great leaning towards Popery, are very well known. And, indeed, whoever would have made intereft at Court, and flood fair for preferment, in that reign; when a Popish Queen bore fo great a fway, could not take a more effectual method; than by attempting to prove, that the Pope was not Antichrift, The man of fin,

or the tyrannical and oppreffive power prophefied of, in holy fcripture: who would apoftatize from pure Chriflianity; corrupt the religion of Jefus; and perfecute the true profeffors of it.

The confequences of the fpread of Popery are fo horrible; and our danger, from the deteftable and unprovoked rebellion 1745, is fo fresh in our minds; the zeal of Popish emiffaries is fo great, and their diligence (after repeted difappointments) fo conftant, reftlefe and unwearied, that Proteftant divines fhould never be off their guard; but ought to take all fair methods of fortifying the minds of their own people; and guarding them against that amazing apoftafy, and every tendency thereto.

Our first reformers were convinced that this grand corruption of the pure religion of Jefus was planely foretold. And accordingly, they made ufe of this, as one argument, among many others, to overthrow Popery; and to confirm the Proteftant religion, and the free use of the Scriptures.

This continued to be the prevailing opinion of the greatest and best of our English divines, till the latter end of the reign of King James the firft. But then, our Princes, marrying into popish families, gave a check to this fort of language; and rendered the opinion quite ungenteel and unfashionable. It was not the way to preferment; nor looked upon, as a proper complaifance to the Court, to point out the Bishop of Rome as the man of fin, &c. And

Bishop

The PREFACE.

Bishop Montague was among the most forward and zealous to beat down fuch an opinion. He, therefore, racked his invention to prove Mahomet to be the perfon, and not the Pope. But (though, by fuch methods, he rose to a Bishoprick, and was a favorite divine at court) his arguments are nevertheleffe vain and inconclufive. For,

(1.) Suppofe Conftantinople to ftand upon feven bills. It is notorious that antient Rome did fo likewife. And Conftantinople was not the city, which then reigned over the Kings of the earth. Whereas these two marks were both united in St. John's prophetic defcription of spiritual Babylon; the feat of idolatry, perfecution, and all manner of vice, Rev. xvii. 9; 18.

(2.) This man of fin was prophesied of, as one that would come with all power, and figns, and lying wonders. Now the learned men among the Mahometans allow that their prophet worked no miracles; and Mahomet himfelf, in the Koran, lays no claim to them. Whereas the pretences to miracles, in the Church of Rome, are notorious and numberleffe.

(3.) If authorities could fignifie any thing, we might confront the authority of Bishop Montague, not only with that of the great and incomparable Sir Ifaac Newton, and a vast number of the most learned and best of the Proteftant divines; but even with that of Eftius, who was a more learned man than Bishop Montague, and a profeffed Papift. For, in his

notes

1