after others upon the Subject; but which have only, fo far as I can judge, tranfrently touch'd upon this Point.

In the Second Part of this Work, I have given Eftibius a thorough Examination; not omitting any one Confideration that he himself has thought material, and all in his own Method. 'Tis likely the Reader may blame us both for this, and me especially for answering an impertinent Objection; but fome of thefe Objections have given me Occafion to State Several Controverfies relating to the Subject anew, and to vindicate them from his Mifreprefentations,which,with fome, do the Work of Objections. If there are any that come not under either Denomination, the Reader will believe I have had my share in the Mortification; and he will be more ready to excuse me, when I have fbew'd him how this Controvertist manages himself, and where his Play chiefly lies; which is in retreating from Covert to Covert, and

back

back again in a Round. This he will frequently find him doing, when the Subject was only under his own Hands; and I am perfuaded a Man of this Kidney will never yield fo long as he has the leaft bold. And therefore I was the more willing to fhew my Refpects to the leaft Argument he offer'd, tho' I have been as short as was confiftent with my Defign. This is all I fhall Preface to the Reader in General.

But because its poffible Eftibius may be one of my Readers, and what will be fatisfactory to all others, may not be fo to him; Imuft beg leave to address my Self, in few Words, to him in Parti

cular.

Yon fee, Sir, I have attempted what You fay has not been hitherto attempted, a thorough Examination of Your Second Thoughts. As to the Style, in which I have treated You, I cannot fay it will be every where grateful: but it's not unlikely I fhou'd fail in that, when I

con'd

con'd not poffibly tell what Style You expected; for in an Advertisement affix'd to Your Book, You forbid Your Answerer a Jefting Style, as that which You will pass by with Scorn and Contempt; but when Mr. Turner, obferving Your Directions, plainly and ferionfly tells Yon, of obtruding on our

P. 54.

Saviour a meaning never intendFar. Th. ed, all the Answer You give him is, away with your Grave Reprimand; fo that I find You are refolv'd to be in an Oppofite Humour, as well as an Oppofite Argument, with Your Adversary. If he fefts, You are full of stiff Scorn; and if he's Grave, You can Laugh at him for it. And therefore not knowing in which Temper thefe Papers may find You, whether Magifterial or Witty, I have not confind my felf to either.

The next thing I am to account to You for, is, that I have fometimes fall'n in with the common Opinion in charging проп

*

upon Second Thoughts, Atheism, or fo. This I must confefs the Course of my Argument has led me to, more than once; but, if I have not sufficiently done it already, I here once for all, diftinguish both between Your Perfon and Your Opinion, and between Your Opinion and the Confequence of it; fo long as Yon difown the Confequence, I make it none of Your Opinion, and when you have not feen the Fault of your Opinion, I do not lay the Fault at Your Door. But perhaps it may be of use,in Order to yourVindication, to lay before You Some of the Grounds of this Sufpicion, in all of Your Readers, I have ever met with; and they are fuch as these,

im

First, they find You maintaining a downright Atheistic Principle, when You lay it down for an Axiom, materiale non poteft agere in immateriale, neque materiale in materiale. Whereas on the Contrary all Theifts must maintain this for an Axiom, That there is no Motion of Matter in the Univerfe, but what b proceed

proceeded, as a real Effect, from the Acting of an Immaterial Agent upon it. They find You endeavouring, but they think ineffectually, to avoid the Confequence, when You fay, to the Fa. Th. Objection, that God acts upon P. 134. Matter, We ought here to talk Philofophy, and not Divinity to explain our Philofophy. For they can fee no Reafon why this Propofition, Motion was originally communicated to Matter by fomething Immaterial; or this, God Ads upon all the Parts of the Material World, fhou'd be reckon'd only Divinity and not Philofophy too; So that Your Oppofing Philofophy and Divinity in this Place, does with them rather increafe, than remove the Sufpicion. Nor are they fatisfy'd with Your farther Anfwer, That the Modus of his Omnipotence Acting upon Second Caufes is Myfterious and Unconceiva ble, for the Axiom excludes the Poffibi lity, which is much more than not conceiving