P. 665. in Rev. 20.5.

He will never perfuade any one who believes that Chrift and his Apostles were the only arbitrary Founders and Interpreters of the Chriftian Religion, that for 1000 Tears after Conftantine the Church was purer than it was before; or that there were fewer falfe Doctrines by publick Authority eftablifh'd in many Churches. Thus Monfieur Le Clerc.

Animadv.

Dr. Hammond do's not go about to perfuade any one of this. His words are, The Church was for that Space freed from fuch Heathen perfecuters, and purified from Such avowed mixtures of thofe vile unchriftian practices.

P. 666. in Rev. 20. 8.

It is true indeed that Gyges was fometime Ruler of Lydia; but the Kings that fucceeded him were not therefore, as I remember, called Gyge; tho' it be affirmed by Grotius, and after him by Dr. Hammond who abfurdly deduces it from this place. Thus Monfieur Le Clerc.

Animadv.

Dr. Hammond only fays that the Princes of Lydia are called Gygx, which is lightly deduced from hence: His meaning is that Gyga is lightly deduced from Gog. Our Monfieur changes the Doctors words, and instead of From hence puts From this place, and then by this place understands this place in the Revelation, viz. Rev. 20. 8.; and by this wonderful artifice he would perfuade us that Dr. Hammond deduces the name Gyge from this place. And now he thinks he hath advantage enough against him, and fails not to chastise him very severely.

P. 666. in Rev. 20. 7.

He takes it for certain that not only Alaricus fpared the Chriftians, none but Heathens, but also cus and Attila did the fame.

fieur Le Clerc.

Animadv.

and destroyed that GenferiThus Mon

Dr. Hammond's words are thefe, After that the Emperours were Chriftians, Hea thenifm still continued in Rome, and in I 4

the

the Empire in fome degree, till by the coming of the Goths, Vandals and Hunnes, under Alaricus, Genfericus and Attilas, the City and Empire of Rome was all the Heathen part of it deflroyed, and Christianity fully victorious over it. Every one fees that here is a great difference both as to Words and Senfe, between that which the Doctor really fays, and that which our Monfieur makes him to fay.

2

P. 668, in Rev. 22. 1.

He defcribes to us, for instance, the happy condition of the Chriftians from Conftantine to the Year 1300, living under the Dif cipline of Church-Governours, and a most pure Church during that interval, and most worthy of Chrift. Thus Monfieur Le Clerc.

Animadv.

Here is fcarce a word of all this in Dr. Hammond upon this Chapter. He do's not mention the Year 1300, &c. All that he fays that can be thought to look this way is in the firft words of Note a. The five firft verfes (fays he) of this chapter belong to the business of the former chapter, the defcription of the Christian Church in its flourishing condition.

P. 668.

P.668. in Rev. 22.3.

If allegorical Divinity were argumentative as the Schoolmen Speak, poffibly fome or other might be deceived by thefe allegorical Interpretations, and think that Chrift approved of all the Excommunications that were denounced by Church-Governours, from the time of Conftantine for ten Ages. Thus Monfieur Le Clerc.

Animadv.

Our Monfieur reprefents Dr. Hammond's Interpretations in his Annotation on this place as having a tendency to perfuade men, that Chrift approved of all the Excommunications that were denounced by ChurchGovernours for ten Ages; whereas in the Doctors Annotation there is nothing either of ten Ages, or of Chrift's approving the Excommunications denounced by ChurchGovernours. The Doctor fays indeed that the power of excommunicating exercised by Bishops is acknowledged to be the Power of God or Chrift, but can any one infer hence that Chrift approves of all Excommunications pronounced by Bishops? If fo then Christ hath approved of all the Excommunications that have been denounced

by

by them (not only for ten Ages, but) from the beginning of Chriftianity to this day; for the power exercifed by Bishops was as much the Power of Christ in other Ages as in the Ten.

Thus I have given Inftances, by which the Reader may judge how faithfully our Monfieur hath reprefented Dr. Hammond's Words and Senfe, and should have added more if I had not thought them more than fufficient. It is apparent that it was refolved that Dr. Hammond fhould be exposed; and if he did not afford matter justly deferving reprehenfion, that our Monfieur fhould fupply that want out of his own ftore, and therefore his piece is rightly call'd a Supplement.

SECT