fully collated the sheets, as they passed through the press, with the original edition published by Nelson; by which means some errors have been removed, which were introduced into the Oxford edition of 1816. The work entitled Corruptions of the Church of Rome, as stated above, has been reprinted several times; but upon comparing the later editions with the first and authentic one published by Hickes in 1705, several alterations and mistakes will be discovered. I have followed the first edition implicitly, except where the references were manifestly wrong. The Vindication of the Church of England had only been printed once before: I could therefore only copy that edition, which in some places appears to be inaccurate; and the original work was evidently written by the bishop in a hasty and careless manner. At the end of the second volume an Index will be found of the principal matters referred to in the first two volumes. Nelson published an index to the English works edited by himself, the substance of which will be found in the present one; but the reader, who compares the two, will find that which is now printed to be much more full, and to embrace many more subjects, though the separate articles may be expressed in fewer words. It also comprises the two treatises which Nelson did not publish; and I have added a list of the texts of Scripture referred to or explained in the two volumes of the English works.

In printing the Latin works, I made use of the folio edition published by J. E. Grabe in 1703; but as the sheets passed through the press, I collated them with the original editions, which had been published separately by Bull. No person, who is without experience in these matters, could imagine the numerous corrections, which it thus became requisite to make. The Harmonia Apostolica published by Bull in 1670 is perhaps the most scandalously printed book that ever issued from the press; and in a notice to the reader at the end he himself deplores the portenta typographica, which had been caused by his not being able to correct the sheets himself. Grabe evidently took great pains in preparing his own edition; and it may be said with truth, that he had to alter the text or the pointing in some hundreds of places. The MS. sent by Bull to the press, was probably not without some serious faults. Grammatical errors occasionally occur, which could hardly have been introduced by the printer; and these in almost every instance have been tacitly corrected by Grabe. There are cases, however, in which he altered Bull's Latinity without any sufficient reason. The indicative is frequently put for the subjunctive, and the subjunctive for the indica

• In the postscript to the reader, at p. 315, of vol. III. and in the preface to the Examen Censuræ, vol. IV. p. iv. Bull speaks of his handwriting, when he was in a hurry, being extremely bad, and almost illegible to himself.

tive, where either might be allowed to stand. Bull was in the habit of writing priori and posteriori in the ablative, which Grabe altered to priore and posteriore. In the same manner he changed analysim, hypothesim, hæresim, &c. into analysin, hypothesin, hæresin, &c.; and where Bull wrote non mihi latet, Grabe substituted the more usual form non me latet. Many more instances of this kind might be given, in which it cannot be said, that Grabe discharged the office of a faithful editor. It may be indifferent which form of construction or of spelling we adopt, or Grabe's method may have been the best but if we wish to know what rule was followed by writers of Latin at any particular period, and if the authority of bishop Bull is to be quoted, it is evident, that we must consult his original editions, and not the reprints which have been altered and corrected. In these cases, and wherever the original edition was not grammatically wrong, I have wished to restore Bull's own words; and by collating the two editions together, I venture to hope, that the work is now published much more accurately than it was by Grabe.

P In some instances I am afraid that I have been misled by Grabe, and too hastily adopted his alterations. Thus in the preface to the Harmonia Apostolica, p. viii. line 10. and in the Examen Censuræ, p. 73, line 15. Bull coupled antidotum with a feminine adjective. Grabe altered the adjective to the neuter; and so it is printed in the present edition. But I have since observed, that

The corrections which I have made, by consulting the first edition of the Harmonia Apostolica, are much too numerous to specify; but as an instance of the use of this collation, I would refer the reader to vol. III. p. 216. line 24, where the words ante et citra omnem vocationem divinam were omitted by Grabe; and as an instance, where one or two letters may make a difference in the meaning, I would refer to p. 271, line 9, where instead of faciliora, Grabe's edition has facilia.

Grabe added Annotations of his own at the end of some of the chapters. These are not always of much importance; and his Latin style was much less easy and perspicuous than that of Bull. They are printed in the present edition, and in a smaller type than the work itself. I have also preserved all the notes, which Grabe added in the margin or at the bottom of the page of his own edition, marking them with his own name, that they may be distinguished from those of the bishop. Grabe omitted to make this distinction. At the end of the volume he published an Index of the principal matters referred to, and also a list of the texts of Scripture which are quoted. Instead of reprinting this Index, I have constructed

writers of Bull's day considered the nominative to be antidotus (feminine) not antidotum. It is so used by Bacon (de Augm. Scient. in init.) and there are ancient authorities for it. Bull himself wrote antidotus in his Judicium Eccl. Cathol. p. 158, of this edition, which was altered by Grabe to antidotum.

a new one, which I trust will be found more convenient, as well as more complete. Grabe noted the contents of all the Latin works in one Index; but I have thought it better to separate the treatises upon Justification from those upon the Trinity: I have therefore placed an Index at the end of the fourth volume, which refers to the Harmonia Apostolica, Examen Censuræ, and Apologia; and another at the end of the sixth volume, which refers to all the works concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. Having made my own Index, I compared it with that of Grabe, and introduced whatever I had omitted, except where the matter appeared not to require such notice. The list of texts referred to in these volumes will also be found more complete. Since Grabe's folio edition is that which is in most general use, and to which reference is most frequently made by writers who have alluded to Bull's works, I have preserved in the margin of this edition the numbers of the pages as they stood in Grabe's edition.

The Examen Censuræ and Apologia were printed almost as inaccurately in the first edition as the Harmonia Apostolica; and Grabe appears to have become still more bold in altering the text according to his own fancy. He has also omitted not a few words which are material to the sense. Some notion may be formed of the arbitrary changes, which he introduced, by the following specimen :