A

TREATISE

OF THE

THREE EVILS

OF

The Laft Times:

I. The SWORD,

II. The PESTILENCE,
III. The FAMINE;

And of their

Natural and Moral Caufes.

As alfo of the enfuing

Coming of ANTICHRIST;

According to the

NOTION of the ANCIENT FATHERS.

LONDON:

Printed by M. J. for R. KNAPLOCK at the
Bishop's-Head, R. and J. BON WICKE at the
Red-Lion, and H. CLEMENTS at the Half-
Moon in St. Paul's Church-Yard, 1711.

A

THE

PREFACE

T

HE following Treatife, especially that Part of it which concerneth The Antichrift, being founded on Principles entirely different from the Modern Opinions upon that Subject, must not be fent into the World without a short Preface, to engage the Favour, and obviate the Prejudices of the generality of Readers; who will be apt to condemn at first fight any thing, that shall contradict the current Opinions, though never fo agreeable to the Traditions of the first and purest Ages of the Church. This is evident from the ge neral Contempt thrown upon the Ancient Fathers and Lights of the Church, particularly as to their Notions of Catholick Communion, Church Cenfures and the Holy Eucharist, concerning all which they delivered their Opinions as plain as Words could make them; yet they are now forced to give way to the inconfiftent Schemes of Giddy Innovators. That most contemptibly Dull Projector, the Author of The Rights of the Christian Church, has his Admirers, who fet him up in oppofition to the Old fashioned Doctrines of Fefus Chrift and his Apoftles, as they were understood by Ignatius, Juftin, Irenæus, Tertullian, Cyprian, and other Primitive Writers upon thofe Subjects.

I. FAR be it from me that I should draw a Parallel betwixt thofe and the Cafe in hand, or fet thofe Controverfies on the fame foot with the Subject of this Difcourfe; either fide of this Queftion being at leaft Innocent, and having no relation to the Effentials of Chriftianity: Whereas the Defign of thofe is to deftroy Root and Branch, the very Principles of Revealed Religion. But this I must fay, that I could never yet conceive what Service it could do to the Reformed Cause, to asSert the Pope, or Church of Rome, to be The Great Antichrift, in Oppofition to the conftant Doctrines of the Ancient Church; whereas I think as on the one hand, the acknowledging the Church of Rome to be a moft Corrupt Church, and by confequence in that Senfe Antichriftian, (as from my Heart I firmly believe it is) is fufficient ta juftifie our Separation from her: So on the other hand, the deferting the Traditions of the Ancient Church, without any Neceffity for fo doing, muft needs have prejudiced many a Learned and Judicious Man; who might thence be tempted to conclude, that the Reformers, in other Cafes as well as that, defpifed the Doctrines of Antiquity, and were for letting up new Lights and new Interpretations of Scriptures, in Oppofition to thofe old ones, which the most primitive Ages had esteemed Orthodox.

II. St. PAUL writing to the Theffalonians, 2 Epift. Chap. 2. concerning this Man of Sin, or the Great Antichrift, gives them a Special Charge, v. 15. Therefore, Brethren, ftand faft, and hold the Traditions, which ye have been taught either by our Word or Epiftle

Epiftle; meaning, no doubt, especially the Traditions about the Perfonal Antichrift. For that this was St. Paul's Meaning, I have two very good Reafons to believe. 1. I prefume it will puzzle a Learned Man to explain that Chapter of the Pope or Church of Rome fo confiftently as to Satisfie his own Mind. 2dly, Which is to me no contemptible Authority, that all the Writers upon that Subject, through every Age of the Church till the Times of the Reformation, (beginning with the Waldenfes and Albigenfes) understood it in the fame Senfe, applying it (if not, in the fame that I do, to a Perfon yet to come) to fome individual Perfon to whom thofe Characters Should most properly belong. And how can we otherwife account for the concurrent Teftimonies of the Ancients about that matter, than by fuppofing that this was the Tradition of the Apoftles, particularly of St. Paul, to which he refers, v. 5. Remember ye not that when I was yet with you, I told you these things. And that from him and the other Apostles this Tradition was conveyed down to after Ages; particularly confidering that the most early Writers Speak exprefly in this Senfe. Irenæus, who was the Difciple of Polycarp, and by confe quence but one remove from the teaching of St. John, Hippolytus the Difciple of Irenæus, Cyprian, Origen, and Cyril of Jerufalem are no incompetent Witneffes of an Apoftolical Tradition, and are fo appealed to in other Cafes; and why in this particular Cafe we should be wiser than they, I confess I am at a loss to explain.

III. AND here I cannot but take notice of an Objection raised by the Judicious and Learned Mr. Mede, and fince reviv'd by Mr. Whiston

in