tin gave Heathen Worship a deadly Wound, Chap. 3. when he publish'd his first Edict in Favour of Queft,16 Christians, an. Chr. 312. But after the Emperors were Chriftian; Heathenifm fays Dr. (3) Hammond, ftill continued in Rome and in the Empire, in fome Degree, till by the Coming of the Goths, and Vandals, and Huns, under Alaricus, Genfericus, and Attilas, the City and Empire of Rome was, all the Heathen Part of it, deftroy'd, and Christianity fully victorious over it The City having been taken by Alaricus and the Goths, an. Chr. 410, and by Genfericus and the Vandals an. 455.

The publick Worship of Heathenifm ceas'd in Rome, an. (4) Chr. 399. And this Religion was wholly, or in a manner wholly, extinct there by the End of the following Century. Theodofius the Younger, an. 423, speaks of Pagans, as if he thought there were none left in the Eastern Empire (as Dr. Cave, in his Apoftolici obferves pag. 315) Pagani, qui superfunt, quanquam jam nullos effe credamus, &c. Yet three Years after, he was forc'd to make another Law against them. This, fays Dr. Cave p. 316, it feems, was a parting Blow

For Heathenifm dwindled into Nothing: and that little, that was left, Crept into Holes and Corners, to bide its Head, according to the Prediction long fince of the Prophet Ifaiah, Chap. ii. v. 18, 19, 20. So that, if Heathen Rome be St. John's Babylon; we may date the Ruin of it from about the Year of Chrift, 500. Which fhews, where the thousand Years will end.

(3) In Apoc. xx v. 7. pag. 998. col. 2. (4) Tillem, des Emp. Tom. v. p. 305, 511, 513.)

Chap. 3. For, if these be counted from the Edict of Queft16 Conftantin an. 312; they will end in the fourteenth Century an. 1312. At which Time the Ottoman, or Turkish Empire had stood only eleven or twelve Years: as Mr. Whiston obferves [in his Efay on the Revelation pag. 181, 185.] But it is perhaps more probable, that they ought to be reckon'd from the Fall of Babylon. For this Fall, and the Confequences of it, are defcrib'd by S. John, in the three precedent Chapters, xviith, xviiith, xixth.

Now if the thousand Years be reckon❜d from this Fall, an. 500; they will end in the Year fifteen hundred. And we are fenfible, what Tragedies in Religion have been acted fince. And if Gog and Magog, Apoc. xx, v. 8, are Lr and C-n; who knows, how far their Reformations may be yet push'd, before the Coming of Anti-Christ in the End of the World, tho' we have no Reason to think it to be very far off?

IV. But whether the thousand Years of S. John be counted from the Year 312, or from the Year 500; thefe Confequences will follow:

First, that the Reign of Antichrift did not begin in the first thousand Years from the Birth of Christ. For till then, and for fome Centuries afterwards, Satan was bound, Apoc.

XX. V. 2.

Secondly, that thofe were happy, who were living Members of the Catholick Church in the first thirteen Centuries. Because they liv'd and reign'd with Chrift, Apoc. xx. v. 4. This is the first Refurrection, v. 5, to wit from Sin. Bleffed and Holy is be, who has Part in the firft

Refur

Refurrection on fuch the fecond Death [to wit, Chap. 3. Hell] has no Power, v. 6.

Quest 16 Thirdly, that thofe are ftill happy, who are living Members of the Catholick Church. For fince the Year thirteen hundred, her Faith has not been Chang'd.

Fourthly, that Mr. (5) Whiston's Dream of the Antichriftian State, beginning in the Year of Chrift 456, is contrary to Scripture. As his (6) nine whimsical Demonftrations, that the Papacy was to expire in the Year of Chrift 1716, are contrary to Experience. And he has liv'd to see himself fairly confuted, after all the Nicety of his Calculations from the Apocalypfe, and from the Tyranny of the little Horn.

V. But, if the thousand Years of S. John regard this mortal State, either from the Year 312, or from the Year 500; why does he fuppofe, that the Souls of the Martyrs only, and of other Saints who had not ador'd the Beast, liv'd and reign'd with Chrift in the thousand Years Apoc. xx. v. 4, 5? Because none reign with Christ over the Earth at prefent, but either his mortal, or his bleffed and immortal Servants. Of whom the words of (7) Grotius are very remarkable. As Chrift, fays he, from Heaven reigns over the Earth, fo do the Martyrs under bim reign over it, as appears by the miraculous Cures done at their Shrines, and by the publick Honour,

(5) In his Effay on the Revelation. pag. 82. (6) Ib. p. 271,272, &c. (7) Sicut Chriftus ex coelo in terras regnat, fic & Martyres fub Chrifto: nempe per dona fanationum, que confpiciebantur apud ipforum Memorias, & per banorem, quem ipfis Ecclefiæ palam habuere. Grot, in Apoc.

XX, V. 4.

Chap. 3. Honour, which the Church gave them. Nor does Queft 17 Grotius wholly exclude the other Saints. For upon the following Verfe [THE Rest of the DEAD LIVED NOT, till the thousand Years were over] Except the Martyrs, fays (8) he, and fuch as the Grace of God made equal to them.

Seventeenth QUESTION.

Does not the Spirit say exprefly, that in the latter Times fome fhall depart from the Faith, giving ear to feducing Spirits, and to the Doctrines of Devils, forbidding to Marry and commanding to abstain from Meats, which God has created to be receiv'd with Thanksgiving, 1 Tim. iv. v. 1. 3?

Y

ANSWER. ES. But did the Apostles teach the Doctrine of Devils, when they commanded the firft Chriftians (that converted Jews and Gentiles might be more easily cemented into one Communion) to abstain from B'ood, and from Strangled Meats, Acts xv. v, 28, 29? For were not these alfo created to be receiv'd with Thanksgiving? fince every Creature of God is Good: and nothing to be refus'd, if it be receiv'd with Thanksgiving, 1. Tim. iv. v. 3, 4.

Did the great and general Council of Calcedon, an. 451, teach the Doctrine of Devils; when

it

(8) Præter Martyres fcilicet, aut fi quos Dei gratia Mar tyribus æquavit. v. 5.

it decreed, (1) that it is NOT LAWFUL for a Nun Chap. 3. confecrated to God, or for a Monk TO MARRY. Queft17 And if found to do this, they shall be EXCLUDED FROM COMMUNION? And that (2) if a Diaconiffa married, and by fo doing affronted the Grace of God, both She and her Husband SHOULD BE EXCOMMUNICATED? Did the first Parliament of Queen Elizabeth, when it receiv'd the 4 first general Councils, one of which is this very Council at Calcedon, approve a Synod, which teaches the Doctrine of Devils? If not, the Catholick Church does not teach the DoEtrine of Devils, when the forbids Nuns, Monks, and others, who have vow'd Chastity, to marry.

Did S. Paul teach the Doctrine of Devils, 1 Tim. v. v. II, 12, when he faid of Widows, confecrated to God, they will marry, having DAMNATION, because they have cast off their firft Faith given to the Church? Let us hear Dr. (3) Hammond; They will relieve themselves BY MARRYING: which IS A GREAT CRIME in them, to wit, that of violating their Faith to the Church (a kind of conjugal Tie) that they would attend it alone, and not forfake it; which when they do, and return again to the World, what is it but giving the Church A BILL OF DIVORCE, AND MARRYING ANOTHER HUSBAND? I will not ask, whether

(1) Παρθένον ἑαυτὴν ἀναθεῖσαν τῷ δεσπότῃ θεῷ, ὡσαύ πως δὲ καὶ μονάζοντι μὴ ἐξεῖναι γάμῳ προσομιλεῖνο εἰ δέ γε ευρεθεῖεν τέτο ποιόντες, ἔςωσαν ἀκοινώνητοι. Conca Calced. Can. xvi. pag. 763. B. Tom. 4. Conc. Labb. (2) εἰ δέ γε · ἑαυτὴν ἐπιδῷ γάμῳ, υβρίσασα τὴν τὸ θεῖ χάριν ή τοιάυτη αναθεματιζέσθω, μετὰ τὰ αυτή συνα 1. Ibid. Can. xv. A. (3) Paraph. on 1 Tim. v. v. 11, 12. pag. 737.