'frequently alluded to in the Holy Scriptures, and de nominated the Coming of Jefus Chrift23. To fuppofe, as bp. Newton and many others have done, that the coming of Chrift is not the commencement of the millennium, but the day of judgment; is to fuppofe, that antichriftianism and ecclefiaftical tyranny will continue to prevail till the end of the world. Contrary as this is to the most exprefs prophecies, fome writers, having this paffage in view, and perceiving that the latter conclufion would evidently follow from the admiffion of the former, have avowed this melancholy and difpiriting opinion. The words of St. Paul, which have just been quoted, fignify,' fays Slichtingius, that the man of fin * would remain till the coming of Christ, and would be deftroyed by his coming.' Now the coming of Chrift, adds this celebrated commentator, is here to be explained of his advent on the day of Judgment.

At the fame time I feel no hesitation in admitting, that the Theffalonian Chriftians, as well as thofe of other countries, in confequence of the coming of Chrift being an equivocal expreffion, and of their being uninftructed with respect to the millennium, probably did, in the time of St. Paul, understand it in a literal fenfe, and conceive it to fignify the awful day of Chrift's coming to Judgment24. At that period the apocalypfe was not pub

23 Let. to Hurd, p. 20. 24 Nor is this mifconception wonderful. For the old prophets, for the most part,' I am now quoting from Mede, fpeak of the coming of 'Chrift indefinitely and in general, without that distinction of First and * Second coming, which the Gospel out of Daniel hath more clearly taught ' us. And fo confequently they fpake of the things to be at Christ's com⚫ing indefinitely and altogether, which we, who are now more fully in'formed by the revelation of the gospel of a two-fold coming, must apply ' each of them to its proper time: those things which befit the state of his * firft coming unto it; and fuch things as befit the state of his second coming, * unto his fecond.' p. 755

lished

lished; and when published, its meaning, as well as that
of Daniel, was destined, during many centuries, to be
very imperfectly penetrated. Of what they foretold
even the prophets themselves had sometimes a very im-
perfect idea. Thus in the xiith ch. of Daniel (v. 8),
that prophet says, and I heard, but I understood not; and
the angel of the vifion is reprefented in v. 9 as faying
unto him, go thy way, Daniel: for the words are clofed
up and fealed till the time of the end. On this paffage
an intelligent commentator, who wrote 150 years fince,
has the following remarks. 'Therefore the forefaid
myfteries, especially thofe about the times of Anti-
chrift, God intended to conceal and hide for a certain
'time, and only to reveal the fame in the last time.
'And unto this place our Saviour feemeth to have re-
'spect when he faith, that no man knoweth the day and
hour, not so much as the angels of heaven, but the
Father only, Mat. xxiv. 15, 36. And when he saith,
'it is not for you to know the times, which the Father
hath put in his own power. A&ts i. 7. Wherefore
'Chrift exhorteth the present age, that they would be
watchful, because they knew not the time of the end:
'forafmuch as it was to be hidden from the former ages,
'left the long distance of the time being known should
'hinder the duty of watchfulness. But in the time of
'the end-it feemeth that it is to be revealed: not unto
'the world, on whom the end shall come as a thief in the
night, especially the last part of the last time: but unto
'the faints 25,' unto those that are genuine Christians and
honeft inquirers after truth.

** Tho. Parker of New-England on Daniel, 1646, p. 132.

APPEN.

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER XII.

ON THE CORRUPTIONS WHICH PREVAILED IN

I

THE FOURTH CENTURY.

HAVE stated (and I know not whether the statement may not have startled fome of my readers), 26 that almoft every kind of ecclefiaftical ufurpation was introduced, and almost every fpecies of fuperftition encouraged, in the fourth century. The hiftoric extracts, intended to confirm and to elucidate this affertion, are more nume. rous, than the nature of the prefent work would have authorized, had not a number of reasons, in this particu lar cafe, concurred to recommend their infertion. This copiousness of citation I have been encouraged to introduce; because an affertion of fuch weight, on the very face of it, seemed to require for proof a long series of well attested particulars; because facts of this description it was in my power to produce, from as high and as unex ceptionable authority, as can be appealed to on the fubje&t; because the investigation of it will be hereafter serviceable in directing us to the true interpretation of one of the apocalyptic visions27; because it refpects a period, which constitutes one of the most interesting portions of ecclefiaftical history; and because perfons in general are, I believe, unapprized of the extent to which the affertion is

26 The reign of Conftantine, and the fourth century in general, some have represented in a highly favourable point of view. The Gospel was ́ ́enabled,' says bishop Hallifax, at length, under the auspices of Con'stantine, to establish itself, in profperity and PURITY, throughout the ⚫ provinces of the Roman empire.' Serm. on Proph. p. 313.

I particularly allude to all the latter part of ch. vii, of the Rev.

true.

true, and of the rapidity with which Christianity was changed and effentially debased. Nor are these all the reasons which may be alleged to justify the introduction of the present appendix. This inquiry is of great importance in afcertaining the period of the coming of the man of fin; in determining whether that prediction is to be exclufively applied to the Roman pontiffs; in qualify. ing us to judge whether the emperor Constantine does in truth ftand convicted of the charge of notorious antichristianism; and in deciding a question, which must probably have fometimes arifen in the inquiring mind, did this celebrated prince render upon the whole a real fervice to the religion of Jefus, when he embraced the external profeffion of it, and accelerated its general diffufion; whilst at the fame time he brought about an unnatural union between the church and the state, placed himself at the head of the former as well as the latter, and substantially aided the attempts of thofe, who laboured with fuch fatal fuccefs to paganize Christianity, by incorporating with it not à few of the fpeculative opinions, and many of the fuperftitious practices, which before belonged to heathenifm?

It is from the judicious and learned Mofheim that the extracts are principally taken 28. To him indeed it might have been fufficient to have barely referred the reader, had the facts, which are moft decifive and throw the strongest light on the topics propofed, lain together, unintermingled with other matter. But, befides that the greater part of my readers would in all probability have omitted to confult Mofheim at all, it deserves to be noticed, that thefe facts are difperfed over his Internal Hiftory of the Church during the fourth century, which alone occupies upwards of 70 very closely printed octave

19 And from the 2d edition of Dr. Maclaine's Tranflation.

pages.

pages. To fuperadd fome particulars from other writers was also expedient. But that the reader may exactly know, how much of the prefent appendix belongs to Mosheim, I have, through the greater part of it, made no addition in the text to the facts alleged by him; and when I have, intimation is given of it. Of the additional observations fome are transcribed from the accurate Lardner: and of the notes the greater part are taken from a writer, in whofe commendation it is not easy to speak fufficiently high; I mean from Dr. Jortin, who, by introducing, in his Life of Erafmus, and in his Remarks on Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, quotations from various authors, often running to a confiderable length, and scattered with great profufion, has annexed the ftamp of his approbation to this mode of conducting a work.

It may be asked, why, in an account of the corrup tions of the fourth century, is not an appeal directly made to ancient instead of modern authorities? why are not paffages tranflated and transcribed from fuch well known hiftorians, as Socrates, Sozomen, and Eufebius? I an fwer, that all the writers of that time were tinctured with prejudices; that they were far from having fuch enlarged views of things as a judicious and industrious modern is capable of acquiring; and that I know no writers of an tiquity in whose statements the public could justly place so strong a confidence, as in those of Jortin, Lardner, and Mofheim. The reader will readily difcern, where I have given only the fentiments, and where the words, of Mofheim; as in the former cafe I have omitted the use of inverted commas.

The first step of the bishops, in changing the ancient government of the church, fays Mofheim in his account of the Fourth Century, 'was an entire exclufion of the people from all part in the administration of ecclefiaftical affairs; and afterwards they, by degrees, divefted even