It remains, however, to be proved, that the Tract now printed is really _Wyclyffe’s_; and this, the Editor admits, seemed to him an additional Reason for selecting it for Publication; inasmuch as it served at once to raise the Question, How far we have certain Grounds for attributing to _Wyclyffe_ the Writings that exist under his Name; nor is it perhaps too much to say, that this is a Subject which the learned World has never been in a Condition to consider fully. Yet there is no preliminary Question more deserving of Attention, if we would form a just Estimate of our Reformer’s Merits; for it must be evident to every reflecting Reader, that if we are in any Degree uncertain of the Genuineness of such Writings as are quoted under the Name of _Wyclyffe_, the Conclusions drawn from them, as to the Nature and Character of his Doctrines, must be in the same Degree uncertain, and destitute of Authority. In the present Case, the Grounds upon which the following Treatise has been assigned to _Wyclyffe_, are no more than these:—First, that it is found in a MS. Volume of the fourteenth Century, which contains several other Tracts, that are believed to be _Wyclyffe’s_. Secondly, that it has been ascribed to _Wyclyffe_, by Bishop _Bale_, Mr. _Lewis_, and, after them, by his more modern Biographers. These Remarks are not made with a Design to cast any Doubt on the Genuineness of the following Treatise. It is very probably by _Wyclyffe_, although we have no better Reason than the Authority of _Bale_ for thinking so. But if any Reader should entertain a Doubt on this Subject, deeming the Tract unworthy of our Reformer, (as many will doubtless feel it to be very different from what they would have expected from the Pen of _Wyclyffe_,) the Editor must confess himself unable to satisfy such Scruples; nor is he aware of any Argument by which the Authority of _Bale_ and _Lewis_ can be supported. The Conclusion, however, to which he desires to bring the Reader, and for the Sake of which he has hazarded these Remarks, is simply this, that until the various Treatises attributed to _Wyclyffe_ are collected, and rendered accessible to the Learned, it is vain to think of deciding the Question how far any given Tract is worthy or unworthy of his Pen. One other Particular, concerning the following Work, remains to be considered. Mr. _Vaughan_[9] tells us that “this is one of the Reformer’s Pieces that is to be found only in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin;” and this may, for aught we know, be true, although perhaps it only means that no other Copy of the Tract was elsewhere found by Mr. _Vaughan_. Certain, however, it is, that Bishop _Bale_ has entered the Treatise in two different Places of his Catalogue, and under two different Titles; from which we may infer, that in his Time, or in the Times of those from whom he copied, the Tract was found in two different Collections. In one place he enters it thus[10]:—(See No. 84 of _Lewis’s_ Catalogue.[11])