Chapter 10

98Mark xvi. 15.99The reader may see many of them collected, and the general argument from them well inforced, by Mr. Bullock, in hisVindication, Part II.100As in the case ofMahometanism, for instance.101What the Philosopher Celsus thought of such a project, we learn from a curious passage in Origen. It being usual with the Christians of that time, as of every other,to pray for the conversion of the whole world to the Christian faith, the philosopher laughs at the extravagance of this petition. He observes upon it, ὅτι ὁ τοῦτο οἰόμενος οἶδεν οὐδέν. The words are not easily translated. But themeaningof them is, That he regarded an universal agreement in one mode of religious belief, as a perfect chimæra: and theturnof the words is so contrived, as to express the utmost contempt of those, who, in their supreme ignorance of mankind, could entertain so senseless an idea.Contr. Celsum, l. viii.sub. fin.102Matth. xxiii. 15.103Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make anew covenantwith the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers—but this shall be my covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, after those days, saith the Lord,I will put my Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, &c. Jer. xxxi. 31-33. See also Jer. iii. 16.104For behold,I create new heavens and a new earth: and theformer shall not be remembered nor come into mind. Is. lxv. 17.105TheGentilesshall see thy righteousness, and all Kings, thy glory: And thou shalt becalled by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name. Is. lxii. 2.106Is. lx. 22.107Matth. xiii. 31, 32.108Si enim et hostesexertos, non tantùm vindices occultos, agere vellemus,deesset nobis vis numerorum et copiarum?Tertull. Apologet.c. 37.109Could it beforeseen, that nothing of this sort would happen? When theReformationwas set on foot in Germany, Luther and his adherents resolved to carry it on in the spirit of the Gospel, that is, bypacific measures. But how soon did passion and policy strike in, to drive them from this purpose! The Catholics were intolerant: the Reformed grew powerful: and then, what was too naturally to be expected, followed.If it be said, that the Gospel hath not been always propagated,without force; I acknowledge, it has not: but then I observe, 1. that it was incontestably so propagated, till the conversion of the Roman empire; in which event, alone, the prophecies appear to have had a reasonable completion. 2. that theforce employed, has generally been the force of one Christian sect, directed against some other (in which scandalous contentions the prophecies have no concern), not in the propagation of Christianity itself in unbelieving countries. 3. that theway of force, when professedly used against unbelievers, though, insomecases, it has contributed to the enlargement of Christ’s kingdom, has yet, inothers(where, too, the utmost force and zeal were combined) very signally failed of success; of which thecrusades against the Mahometansafford a striking instance: and 4. lastly, that we expect thefinal universalprevalence of the Christian faith from the same spiritual arms only, which were first employed with such success in the propagation of it.110An eminent writer, with the view, indeed, of disgracing the Reformation, hath set this matter in a very just light: “Que nos freres, says he, ouvrent donc les yeux; qu’ils les jettent sur l’ancienne Eglise, qui durant tant de siécles d’une persecution si cruelle ne s’est jamais échapée, ni un seul moment, ni dans un seul homme, & qu’on a vûë aussi soûmise sous Diocletien, et même sous Julien l’apostat, lorsqu’elle remplissoit deja toute la terre, que sous Neron & sous Domitien, lorsqu’elle ne faisoit que de naitre:c’est la qu’on voit veritablement le doigt de Dieu.”Hist. des Variations, l. x. c. 53.The finger of God, as the learned writer says, was indeed conspicuous in this conduct of the primitive Christians, because it fulfilled the prophecies (so unlikely to be fulfilled) concerning themannerin which Christianity was to obtain an establishment in the world. If the conduct of thereformedhad not this merit, it was because the prophecies did not extend to the reformation of Christian religion, but to the introduction and first settlement of it. The agents, in this last work of Providence, were therefore left to the natural influence of their passions, and they acted too frequently as those passions impelled them.For the rest, how far thegeneralprecepts of the Gospel require a passive submission and non-resistance to outrageous intolerance, whether absolutely, and in all cases, is a point of nice discussion; in which I take no part, at present, because I am not now making the apology of thereformed, but shewing the completion of the prophecies concerning thepropagatorsof Christianity: and the wonder to see them so punctually completed, is not lessened, but increased, by supposing, that the precepts of the Gospel leave mankind to the free use of their natural rights, in the case of extreme violence and injustice.111The vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lye: though it tarry, wait for it, because it shall surely come, it will not tarry.Habakkuk, ii. 3.112By the wordTyranny, here and elsewhere in these discourses, as applied to the Pope, I would be understood to mean, thatsuper-eminent dominion, which he exercised, or claimed arightof exercising, over the princes and states of his communion, in all affairs both temporal and spiritual.—I use the word (somewhat improperly, perhaps) for the sake of brevity, as I know of no other single term, that so well expresses my meaning.113What is here said of the scriptural division oftime, with regard to the affairs of theChurch, is enough for my purpose. There is another division of time, in the prophetic scriptures, with regard to thekingdoms of the world; concerning which the reader may consultBishop Kidder’sDem. of the Messiah, Part iii. ch. ix.; and especially Mr.Mede’sApostasy of the latter times, ch. xi.114Matth. xxiv. 24. Mark xiii. 21.1151 Ep. John, iv. 3.116Ἀντίχριϛος—ἀντι, in the sense either ofpro, orcontra.117Grotius says, “SicutAnticæsaremdicimus qui contra Cæsarem se Cæsarem vult dici atque Cæsar haberi, sicAntichristusest qui se vero Christo opponiteo modout ipse Christus haberi velit.”Op.t. iv. p. 490.—The learned commentator did not reflect, that words are not always used according to the strict import of their etymologies.False Christs, we will say, are, in the strict sense of the word,Antichrists. But the question is, inwhatsense this word is used of the person called, by way of eminence,The Antichrist. This must be collected from the attributes given to him in the prophecies themselves, not from the rigorous etymology of the term. The case was plainly this. St. John is speaking of thefalse Christs, who had appeared in his time; and, to disgrace them the more effectually in the minds of those to whom he writes, he brands them with the name ofAntichrists: not so much respecting the exact sense of the word, as the ideas of aversion, which, he knew, it would excite. For the tradition of the church concerningAntichrist, had made this appellation, of all others, the most opprobrious, and hateful.—Besides, it is not so clear, as Grotius supposes, that the strict sense of the word,Antichristus, must be—is, qui se vero Christo opponit eo modo ut ipse Christus haberi velit. Cæsar, who generally expressed himself with exact propriety, thought fit, on a certain occasion, to assume the name and character of,Anticato. Was it Cæsar’s purpose to say, or was it his ambition to pretend, “that he opposed himself to the true Cato,EO MODOut ipseCatohaberi vellet?”118Eusebius mentions,Judas, H. E. l. vi. c. 2; andDionysius, E. H. l. vii. c. 10.—Others, seemed to expect that Antichrist would appear as the Messiah of the Jews; but in the person of a Roman Emperor; as will be explained presently. See the next note.119See many citations to this purpose in Dr. Lardner’sCred.p. ii. v. p. 210, 11, 12.120Jerom, in Dan. vii. Mede, p. 657.121Quisquis se universalem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione suâ Antichristum præcurrit.Greg. M.Op. Ep. xxx. l. vi.Par.1533.122In hâc ejus superbiâ, quid aliud nisi propinqua jam Antichristi esse tempora designatur? Ep. xxxiv. l. iv.123With all his merits, Gregory the Great, it is to be feared, had some Antichristian marks upon him; and his adversary of the East might have gone some way towardsfixingthem upon hisGrandeur, if he had but observed, that Antichrist, whoever he was, and whensoever to appear in the world, is clearly marked out in the prophecies, as having his seat inold Rome.124A. 991.125Quid hunc, reverendi patres, in sublimi solio residentem, veste purpureâ et aureâ radiantem; quid hunc, inquam, esse censetis? Nimirum, si charitate destituitur, solâque scientiâ inflatur et extollitur,Antichristusest,in templo Dei sedens, et se ostendens tanquam sit Deus.Usser.de Christian. Eccl. successione & statu, c. ii. p. 36. Lond. 1613.—IllyriciCat. Test. Ver.p. 1558.Officin. Jacob. Stoër et Jacob. Chouël.—This Arnulph, Bishop of Orleans, was esteemed, in his day, the wisest and most eloquent of all the Gallican prelates. Arnulphus—de quo sic initio ejus synodi scriptum est—Inter omnes Galliarum episcopos sapientiâ et eloquentiâ clarissimus habebatur. Ib.126“Ecclesiam vanitatis, &Sedem Satanævocabat.”Usser.de Christian. Eccl. succes. & statu, c. 7. s. xxiv. p. 196.—In Apocalypsin scripsisse testatur Bostonius Buriensis.Cave, H. L. vol. ii. p. 131.Oxon.1743.127Plerique omnes boni, aperti, justi, ingenui, simplices, tum imperium Antichristi cœpisse, quod ea quæ Christus servator noster tot annos ante nobis cantavit, evenisse eo tempore cernebant, memoriæ literarum prodidêre.Annal. Boiorum, l. v. p. 591. Ingolstad. 1554.128Cave, H. L. vol. ii. p. 258. Conc. Flor. 1104.Usser.De Christ. Eccl. succ. & stat.c. v. s. v. p. 109.129Ministri Christi sunt, et serviunt Antichristo[Serm. sup. Cantic.xxxiii.]—It is true, by Antichrist, he seems not to mean the Pope, but, in general, an evil principle, which then domineered in the church. Yet he refers us to the famous passage in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, ch. ii. And he tells us in his 56th epistle, that he had heard one Norbert, a man of exemplary piety, say, That Antichrist would be revealed in that age. Hence it seems probable, that some one person or power was in his eye. After all, he says, that Norbert’s reasons did not satisfy him. Yet, in another epistle, he asserts expressly—Bestia illa de Apocalypsi, cui datum est os loquens blasphemias, et bellum gerere cum sanctis,Petri cathedram occupat, tanquam leo paratus ad prædam. Ep. cxxv: which was, in other words, to call the Pope, Antichrist. It is evident that St. Bernard applied the prophecies in the Revelation to the successor of St. Peter.—I mention these things so particularly, to shew, what his sentiments on this head really were; which have been misrepresented by hasty writers, who transcribe from each other, without examining, themselves, the authorities, they quote.130Cave, H. L. v. ii. 278.Rog. de Hoveden, Annal.Pars Post.p. 681. Ed. Franc. 1601.—In this age [XIIth], was composed a very remarkable tract on the subject of Antichrist, which may be seen in Mede’s Works, p. 721.—Mr. Mede supposes, and seems indeed to have proved, that thetruedoctrine of Antichrist was, and was intended to be, a mystery, or secret, till the 12th century. Whence it follows that the testimonies, hitherto alledged, are only passionate or declamatory exaggerations, or to be esteemed, as he says,pro parabolicè etκάτ’ αὔξησινdictis, declamatorum more.Works, p. 722.I admit the truth of the observation: but hold, that theuseof the deduction, here made, is not in the least affected by it. For my purpose in giving this catalogue of witnesses to the doctrine of Antichrist, was not tojustifythat doctrine, in thetrue, that is, Protestant sense of it (for then, not only the preceding testimonies, but even some of the following, would have been omitted) but merely to shew that the general, at least, and confused idea of some such doctrine did, in fact,subsistin the ancient Christian church. That what idea they had of this doctrine was founded on theprophecies, is clear from the terms in which they express themselves. And, though the doctrine itself was very imperfectly conceived, and inconsequentially applied by them, still their language shews that they had some notion ofa corrupt spiritual power, which was, in their sense of the prophets,to domineer in the church of Rome: whence I draw this conclusion (for the sake of which, this whole deduction is made), That the present application of the prophecies concerning Antichrist to papal Rome, is not wholly new and unauthorized; as the prejudice, I am here combating, supposeth it to be.131Vitringain Apoc. p. 747. Amst. 1719.Usser.De Eccl. succ. & stat. c. 6 and 8.Thuanus, l. vi. s. 16. vol. i. p. 221. Ed. Buckley.132See, especially, the famous speech of Everhard, bishop of Saltzbourg, at the assembly of Ratisbonne, in the time of Gregory the IXth; inserted at large in Aventinus,Ann. Boior.l. vii. p. 684. The following extracts from it will be thought curious. Hildebrandus ante annos centum atque septuaginta primus specie religionisAntichristiimperii fundamenta jecit. p. 684.Flamines illiBabyloniæ[meaning the Bishops of Rome] soli regnare cupiunt, ferre parem non possunt, non desistent donec omnia pedibus suis conculcaverint, atquein templo Dei sedeant, extollanturque supra omne id, quod colitur. Ib.Nova consilia sub pectore volutat, ut proprium sibi constituat imperium,leges commutat, suas sancit; contaminat, diripit, spoliat, fraudat, occidit, perditus homo ille (quem Antichristum vocare solent) in cujus frontecontumeliæ nomenscriptum est, “Deus sum, errare non possum,”in templo Dei sedet, longè latéque dominatur.Ib.—Reges decem pariter existunt—Decem Cornua—Cornuque parvulum—Quid hâc prophetiâ apertius? p. 685.133Matth. Paris, ad ann. 1253. p. 874. ed. Watts, 1640.134Purgat. 32.135Epistolarum sine titulo Liber. Ep. xvi. p. 130. Basil. 1581.—Many strokes in this epistle are, to the last degree, severe and caustic. Addressing himself to Rome, “Illa equidem ipsa es, says he, quam in spiritu sacer vidit Evangelista.—Populi et gentes et linguæ, aquæ sunt super quas meretrix sedes; recognosce habitum. Mulier circumdata purpurâ, et coccino, et inaurata auro, et lapide pretioso, et margaritis, habens poculum aureum in manu suâ, plenum abominatione et immunditiâ fornicationis ejus.—Audi reliqua. Et vidi (inquit) mulierem ebriam de sanguine sanctorum, et de sanguine martyrum Jesu. Quid siles?”—And so goes on to apply the prophecies of the Revelation to the church of Rome, in terms that furnish out a good comment on the famous verse in one of his poems—Gia Roma, hor Babylonia false è ria—Numberless passages in the writings of Petrarch speak of Rome, under the name ofBabylon. But an equal stress is not to be laid on all of these. It should be remembered, that the Popes, in Petrarch’s time, resided at Avignon; greatly to the disparagement of themselves, as he thought, and especially of Rome; of which this singular man was little less than idolatrous. The situation of the place, surrounded by waters, and his splenetic concern for theexiledChurch (for under this idea, he painted to himself the Pope’s migration to the banks of Avignon) brought to his mind the condition of the Jewish church in the Babylonian captivity. And this parallel was all, perhaps, that he meant to insinuate in most of those passages. But, when he applies the prophecies to Rome, as to theApocalypticBabylon (as he clearly does in the epistle under consideration) his meaning is not equivocal: and we do him but justice to give him an honourable place among theTestes Veritatis.136See the catalogue of his works in Cave’s Hist. Lit. vol. ii. App. p. 63; in which is the following book of Dialogues. Dialogorum libri quatuor; quorum—quartus Romanæ Ecclesiæ sacramenta, ejus pestiferam vocationem,Antichristi regnum, fratrum fraudulentam originem atque eorum hypocrisim, variaque nostro ævo scitu dignissima, perstringit.137Mandantes omnibus, &c.—tempus quoque præfixum futurorum malorum, velAntichristi adventum—prædicare, vel asserere, nequaquam præsumant.Bin. Conc.Lateran.v.sub LeoneX.Sess.xi.p.632.138M. d’Alembert, indeed, goes further. He acquaints us, that thischargeis now out of date, and that nobody, either within or without the Romish communion, makes it any longer. For, speaking of a public inscription at Geneva, in whichthe Pope is called Antichrist, he animadverts on this disgrace of that Protestant people, and very kindly suggests to them what their improved sentiments and language should be on that subject.As for the Catholics(says he, very gravely,)the Pope is regarded by them, as the Head of the true Church: By sage and moderate Protestants, he is seen in the light of a sovereign prince, whom they respect, though they do not obey him: But, in an age like this,he is no longer Antichrist in the opinion of anybody. “Pour les Catholiques, le Pape est le chef de la veritable Eglise; pour les Protestants sages & modérés, c’est un Souverein qu’ils respectent comme Prince sans lui obéir:mais dans un siécle tel que nôtre, il n’est plus l’Antichrist pour personne.” Encyclopedie, Art.Geneve.—If the present age be, here, truly characterized, it was high time, or rather it was too late, to found this Protestant Lecture.139Rompons leurs liens, dit-il, et rejettons leur joug de dessus nos têtes.Bossuet, H. V.l. i. c. 26.140Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.Rev. xviii. 4.141Il [Luther] condamnoit les Bohemiens qui s’etoient separez de nôtre communion, et protestoit qu’il ne lui arriveroit jamais de tomber dansun semblable Schisme.Bossuet, Hist. des Variat.l. i. p. 21.Par.1740. And again, p. 28; Apres, dit-il [Luther,] que j’eus surmonté tous les argumens qu’on proposoit, il en restoit un dernier qu’à peine je pus surmonter par le secours de Jesus Christ avec une extrême difficulté & beaucoup d’angoisse;c’est qu’il falloit écouter l’Eglise.—One sees for what purpose M. Bossuet quotes these passages, and others of the same kind, from the writings of Luther. However, they shew very clearly how deep an impression the idea of Schism had made on the mind even of this intrepid Reformer.142Contra Bullam Antichristi—a tract of Luther, so called, against the Bull of Leo X.143Luther reconnoit après la rupture ouverte, que dans les commencemens il étoitcomme au desespoir—Bossuet, H. V.c. 26.144Hor. 1 Ep. vi. 15.145Grotius was more than a great, he was a fashionable man. No wonder therefore that, under the influence of two such prejudices, his opinions should find followers; which yet they would scarce have found with us, if the political state of that time had not been athirdprejudice in their favour. See the Bishop of Gloucester’s Sermon,On the rise of Antichrist.146“The folly of interpreters has been, to foretell times and things by this prophecy, as if God designed to make them prophets.”Sir I. Newton, p. 251.147“God gave this, and the prophecies of the Old Testament, not to gratify men’s curiosities by enabling them to foreknow things; but that, after they were fulfilled, they might be interpreted by the event; and his own providence, not the interpreter’s, be then manifested thereby to the world.”Sir I. Newton, p. 251.148“’Tis a part of this prophecy, that it should not be understood before the last age of the world; and therefore it makes for the credit of the prophecy, that it is not yet understood.”Sir I. Newton, p. 251.149St. Jerom, who lived in this time, speaks in the very terms, here supposed,Romanus orbisRUIT. Ep. iii.150Isai. lxv. 17.—2 Pet. iii. 4. 13.151Rev. x. 7.152Daniel xii. 10.153Mede, More, Daubuz, Vitringa, and, above all, the learned Founder of this Lecture.154Hence, the allusion of our great poet,—or from behind the moonIn dim eclipse disastrous twilight shedsOn half the nations, andwith fear of changePerplexes monarchs—P. L. i. 596.155See these two works, published together, under the title ofArtemidori Daldiani et Achmetis Sereimi F. Oneirocritica, by Nicolaus Rigaltius.Lutet.1603.156Non enim credo,nullo perceptoaut cæteros artifices versari in suo munere, aut eos, qui divinatione utantur, futura prædicere.Cic. de Fato, c. 6.157Ezekiel xiii. 9.158See Dr. Lancaster’sSymbolicalandAlphabetical Dictionary, prefixed to his abridgment of the Commentary on the Revelations, by Mr. Daubuz.159See this objection urged by Mr. Collins in hisGrounds and Reasons, &c. p. 220. Lond. 1737.160Jeremiah xxxiv. 3.161Ezek. xii. 13.162See Grotius on Matth. xxvi. 23.163As to theauthorityof this extraordinary book (although the discussion of this point be foreign to my present purpose) it may be proper to acquaint such persons, as have not made the inquiry for themselves, and are perhaps incapable of making it, with the sentiments, which our ablest writers have entertained of it.Mr. Mede, a capable inquirer, if there ever was any, says roundly—“The Apocalypse hath more human (not to speak ofdivine) authority, than any other book of the New Testament besides, even from the time it was first delivered.”Works, p. 602.—And to the same purpose, Sir Isaac Newton—“I do not find any other book of the New Testament so strongly attested, or commented upon so early, as this of the Apocalypse.”Observations on Daniel, &c. page 249.Thus, these two incomparable men. What some minute critics have said, or insinuated to the contrary, is not worth mentioning; farther, than just to observe, that, if the authority of this momentous book be indeed questionable, the church of Rome could hardly have failed long since to make the discovery, or to triumph in it.Hoc Ithacus velit, et magno mercentur Atridæ.164Mal. i. 11.165Lament. i. 15.166Isaiah xl. 20.167Ezek. xx. 47.168Isaiah ii. 2.169Chap. xvii.170The learned Bishop Andrews says expressly—“You shall scarce find a phrase in the Revelations of St. John, that is not taken out of Daniel, or some other prophet.”Vix reperias apud Johannem phrasin aliquam, nisi vel ex Daniele, vel ex alio aliquo prophetâ desumptam.Resp. ad Bellarm. Apol. p. 234.171An eminent writer gives an exact idea of it, in these words—“The style [of the Revelations] is very prophetical, as to the things spoken: And very hebraizing, as to the speaking of them. Exceeding much of the old prophets language and matter adduced to intimate new stories: And exceeding much of the Jews language and allusion to their customs and opinions, thereby to speak the things more familiarly to be understood.” Dr.Lightfoot,Harm. of the N. T.p. 154, London, 1655.172I have heard it affirmed, on good grounds, that the late Dr. Samuel Clarke, being asked in conversation by a friend, whether, as he had taken much pains to interpret the other books of Scripture, he had never attempted any thing on the Revelations, replied,He had not; but that, notwithstanding, he thought he understood every word of it: Not meaning, we may be sure, that he knew how to apply every part of that prophecy, but that he understood thephraseology, in which it was written; which a man, so conversant as he was in the style of scripture, might very well do.—Calvin, indeed, has been commended for making the opposite declaration: And, it may be, with good reason: For (not to derogate in any respect from the character of this great man) the language of the Scriptures, and especially of the prophetical scriptures, was in no degree so well understood in his time, as it was in that of Dr. S. Clarke.173“As for me, I am conscious of my weakness and unworthiness; being, when these kind of thoughts first possessed me, looking another way with a prejudice incompatible to this.”General Pref. to Mede’s Works, p. 20, from a MS Letter.174He printed only a few copies of hisClavis Apocalypticain 1627, at his own expence, and for the use of his friends.Pref. to his Commentary.175His Commentary, on the principles of hisClavis, did not appear till 1632.176“I am by naturecunctabundusin all things, but in this [his Exposition] let no man blame me, if I take more pause than ordinary.” MS Letter inGen. Pref.p. 22. And again, in a Letter of replyad animadversiones Ludovici de Dieu, “Eo ingenio sum (delicatulo, an moroso) ut nisi ubi interpretatio commodè et absque salebris eat, nunquam mihi satisfacere soleam.”Works, p. 569. Yet of thissageman, could the Bishop of Meaux allow himself to speak thus negligently—Il s’est rendu de nos jours célébre en AngleterrePAR SES DOCTES REVERIESsur l’Apocalypse.Hist. des Var.l. xiii. p. 257. But M. de Meaux knew what he did, when heaffectedthis contempt of Joseph Mede. He was then at liberty to turn himself from the ablest advocate of the Protestant cause, to theweakest; I mean, M. Jurieu, whose indiscretions afforded, indeed, ample scope for the raillery of this lively prelate. Mr. Mede was not a man to be confuted in this way, and still less by a fanciful and ill-supportedExposition of the Apocalypse.177As appears from his backwardness to publish his discoveries, and from his unconcern about the reception of them. But see his Letter to Mr. Hartlib, Ep. 96, p. 881; and compare with his answer to Dr. Twisse, Ep. 51, p. 811. See also Ep. 98, to Mr. Hartlib, Aug. 6, 1638, not long before his death, in which are these words:“I have not been very obtrusive unto men, to acquaint them with my notions and conceits—for some of them that are but lately known have lain by me above these twenty years.” P. 883.178The point of the Pope’s being Antichrist, as a dead fly, marred the savour ofTHAT OINTMENT—meaning the merit he had of being known to entertain some opinions; then much cherished by the ruling clergy. Ep. 56, p. 818. He says afterwards of himself, in the same Letter,I thank God, I never made any thing hitherto the caster of my resolution, but reason and evidence, on what side soever the advantage or disadvantage fell.179His friends speak much of his chearful disposition.—But I draw this conclusion from the tenour of hislifeandwritings; and, above all, from that famous declaration which he made in confidence to a friend, that,if he might but obtain a Donative sine curâ, of so much value as, together with his fellowship[of Christ’s College in Cambridge,]should enable him to keep a horse, for his recreation, he would set up his staff for this world.App. to his Life, p. 40.—The simplicity of this declaration, makes one confident of its truth. And a man of so moderate desires, was in no danger of having his tempersouredby disappointments.180Siquidem, quæ isti tuo Vaticinio jam, ut dixi, cognito, cætera contemporaverint Vaticinia, iisdem procul dubio temporibus sunt applicanda; quæ autem præcedunt, non nisi de præcedaneis; quæ succedunt, pariter de succedaneis eventibus sunt interpretanda.Clavis Apocalyptica, in Mede'sWorks, p. 432.181From ch. iv. to the end of ch. ix: And from ch. x. to the end.182The sounding of the seventh trumpet.183Ch. x. 7.184Ch. xi. 15.185The reader may form a distinct idea of the method, in which thewholebook of the Apocalypse is disposed, by observing that it is resolvable intoTHREEgreat parts.TheFIRSTpart, is that of theEpistlesto the seven churches, contained in the three first chapters, and is not at all considered by Mr. Mede.TheSECONDpart (with which Mr. Mede begins his commentary) is that of theSealed Book, from ch. iv. to ch. x; and containsthe fates of the Empire, or its civil revolutions, yet, with a reference, still, to the state and fortune of the Christian Church.TheTHIRDpart, is that of theOPEN BOOK, with what follows to the end; and exhibits in a more minute and extended view,the fates of the Christian Church, especially during its Apostacy, and after its recovery from it.ThisTHIRDdivision may, further, be considered as consisting ofTWOparts. TheFIRSTcontains, in ch. xi, a summary view of what should befal the Christian Church, contemporary with the events deduced in thesecondpart concerning the Empire; and is given in this place, in order to connect thesecondandthirdparts, and to shew their correspondence and contemporaneity. See Mr. Mede’s Clavis, p. 424; and Comment. Apocalypt. p. 476.TheSECONDpart of the last division, from ch. xii. to the end, gives a detailed account of what should befal the Christian Church in distinct, and, several of them, synchronical visions.It has been thought by some an objection to Mr. Mede’s scheme, “That the prophecy of theopen book, (which contains, according to him, all the remaining visions to the end of the Revelations) is not only, for thesubject, more considerable, but, for thesizeof the volume, larger, than the Prophecy of thesealed book; whereas, the name given to it, βιβλαρίδιον, orlittle book, seems very clearly to express the contrary.”If this objection be thought material (for I do not find that Mr. Mede condescends to take any notice of it) itmight, perhaps, be obviated by supposing, That thelittle bookcontains the xith chapter, only, being a compendium of thethirddivision, and inserted in this place to shew the contemporaneity of thetwo lastand principal parts; and that all which follows to the end, is to be regarded as a sort ofcommenton the little book, or larger explication of its contents: As if the design had been to consult our weakness, in presenting us,first, with an abridged view of a great scheme, andthen, in drawing it out at large, for our more distinct information.But thetrueranswer to the difficulty I take to be, That thesealed bookis represented under the idea of abook, properly so called, which, upon being opened, presents to the eye the several objects and schemes of the prophecy, distinctly delineated on theroll, or volume, when it comes to be unfolded, and which, therefore, must needs be considered as alargeone. Theopen book, on the other hand, is to be regarded, not as a real, butmetaphoricalbook; and is not produced to be read or contemplated, after a gradual evolution of it, but to beeaten, at once, by the prophet; like that book, to which it alludes, and from which the imagery is taken, in the visions of Ezekiel [ii. 8. and iii. 1, 2, 3.]—toeat a book, being, in the hieroglyphics, tomeditate upon, and todigest, its contents. So that this book, to distinguish it from the other, is named alittle book: not, that the revelations, conveyed by it, are less considerable, or less numerous, than the other, but that theuse, to which it is put, required only that it should be spoken of, as abooksimply; the diminutive form being here suggested in the term βιβλαρίδιον, that the metaphor ofeatingit might seem the easier; and (because the formersealedbook was of an immense size) might, under this idea, present itself the more naturally, and give less offence, to the imagination.

98Mark xvi. 15.

99The reader may see many of them collected, and the general argument from them well inforced, by Mr. Bullock, in hisVindication, Part II.

100As in the case ofMahometanism, for instance.

101What the Philosopher Celsus thought of such a project, we learn from a curious passage in Origen. It being usual with the Christians of that time, as of every other,to pray for the conversion of the whole world to the Christian faith, the philosopher laughs at the extravagance of this petition. He observes upon it, ὅτι ὁ τοῦτο οἰόμενος οἶδεν οὐδέν. The words are not easily translated. But themeaningof them is, That he regarded an universal agreement in one mode of religious belief, as a perfect chimæra: and theturnof the words is so contrived, as to express the utmost contempt of those, who, in their supreme ignorance of mankind, could entertain so senseless an idea.Contr. Celsum, l. viii.sub. fin.

102Matth. xxiii. 15.

103Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make anew covenantwith the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers—but this shall be my covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, after those days, saith the Lord,I will put my Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, &c. Jer. xxxi. 31-33. See also Jer. iii. 16.

104For behold,I create new heavens and a new earth: and theformer shall not be remembered nor come into mind. Is. lxv. 17.

105TheGentilesshall see thy righteousness, and all Kings, thy glory: And thou shalt becalled by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name. Is. lxii. 2.

106Is. lx. 22.

107Matth. xiii. 31, 32.

108Si enim et hostesexertos, non tantùm vindices occultos, agere vellemus,deesset nobis vis numerorum et copiarum?Tertull. Apologet.c. 37.

109Could it beforeseen, that nothing of this sort would happen? When theReformationwas set on foot in Germany, Luther and his adherents resolved to carry it on in the spirit of the Gospel, that is, bypacific measures. But how soon did passion and policy strike in, to drive them from this purpose! The Catholics were intolerant: the Reformed grew powerful: and then, what was too naturally to be expected, followed.If it be said, that the Gospel hath not been always propagated,without force; I acknowledge, it has not: but then I observe, 1. that it was incontestably so propagated, till the conversion of the Roman empire; in which event, alone, the prophecies appear to have had a reasonable completion. 2. that theforce employed, has generally been the force of one Christian sect, directed against some other (in which scandalous contentions the prophecies have no concern), not in the propagation of Christianity itself in unbelieving countries. 3. that theway of force, when professedly used against unbelievers, though, insomecases, it has contributed to the enlargement of Christ’s kingdom, has yet, inothers(where, too, the utmost force and zeal were combined) very signally failed of success; of which thecrusades against the Mahometansafford a striking instance: and 4. lastly, that we expect thefinal universalprevalence of the Christian faith from the same spiritual arms only, which were first employed with such success in the propagation of it.

If it be said, that the Gospel hath not been always propagated,without force; I acknowledge, it has not: but then I observe, 1. that it was incontestably so propagated, till the conversion of the Roman empire; in which event, alone, the prophecies appear to have had a reasonable completion. 2. that theforce employed, has generally been the force of one Christian sect, directed against some other (in which scandalous contentions the prophecies have no concern), not in the propagation of Christianity itself in unbelieving countries. 3. that theway of force, when professedly used against unbelievers, though, insomecases, it has contributed to the enlargement of Christ’s kingdom, has yet, inothers(where, too, the utmost force and zeal were combined) very signally failed of success; of which thecrusades against the Mahometansafford a striking instance: and 4. lastly, that we expect thefinal universalprevalence of the Christian faith from the same spiritual arms only, which were first employed with such success in the propagation of it.

110An eminent writer, with the view, indeed, of disgracing the Reformation, hath set this matter in a very just light: “Que nos freres, says he, ouvrent donc les yeux; qu’ils les jettent sur l’ancienne Eglise, qui durant tant de siécles d’une persecution si cruelle ne s’est jamais échapée, ni un seul moment, ni dans un seul homme, & qu’on a vûë aussi soûmise sous Diocletien, et même sous Julien l’apostat, lorsqu’elle remplissoit deja toute la terre, que sous Neron & sous Domitien, lorsqu’elle ne faisoit que de naitre:c’est la qu’on voit veritablement le doigt de Dieu.”Hist. des Variations, l. x. c. 53.The finger of God, as the learned writer says, was indeed conspicuous in this conduct of the primitive Christians, because it fulfilled the prophecies (so unlikely to be fulfilled) concerning themannerin which Christianity was to obtain an establishment in the world. If the conduct of thereformedhad not this merit, it was because the prophecies did not extend to the reformation of Christian religion, but to the introduction and first settlement of it. The agents, in this last work of Providence, were therefore left to the natural influence of their passions, and they acted too frequently as those passions impelled them.For the rest, how far thegeneralprecepts of the Gospel require a passive submission and non-resistance to outrageous intolerance, whether absolutely, and in all cases, is a point of nice discussion; in which I take no part, at present, because I am not now making the apology of thereformed, but shewing the completion of the prophecies concerning thepropagatorsof Christianity: and the wonder to see them so punctually completed, is not lessened, but increased, by supposing, that the precepts of the Gospel leave mankind to the free use of their natural rights, in the case of extreme violence and injustice.

The finger of God, as the learned writer says, was indeed conspicuous in this conduct of the primitive Christians, because it fulfilled the prophecies (so unlikely to be fulfilled) concerning themannerin which Christianity was to obtain an establishment in the world. If the conduct of thereformedhad not this merit, it was because the prophecies did not extend to the reformation of Christian religion, but to the introduction and first settlement of it. The agents, in this last work of Providence, were therefore left to the natural influence of their passions, and they acted too frequently as those passions impelled them.

For the rest, how far thegeneralprecepts of the Gospel require a passive submission and non-resistance to outrageous intolerance, whether absolutely, and in all cases, is a point of nice discussion; in which I take no part, at present, because I am not now making the apology of thereformed, but shewing the completion of the prophecies concerning thepropagatorsof Christianity: and the wonder to see them so punctually completed, is not lessened, but increased, by supposing, that the precepts of the Gospel leave mankind to the free use of their natural rights, in the case of extreme violence and injustice.

111The vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lye: though it tarry, wait for it, because it shall surely come, it will not tarry.Habakkuk, ii. 3.

112By the wordTyranny, here and elsewhere in these discourses, as applied to the Pope, I would be understood to mean, thatsuper-eminent dominion, which he exercised, or claimed arightof exercising, over the princes and states of his communion, in all affairs both temporal and spiritual.—I use the word (somewhat improperly, perhaps) for the sake of brevity, as I know of no other single term, that so well expresses my meaning.

113What is here said of the scriptural division oftime, with regard to the affairs of theChurch, is enough for my purpose. There is another division of time, in the prophetic scriptures, with regard to thekingdoms of the world; concerning which the reader may consultBishop Kidder’sDem. of the Messiah, Part iii. ch. ix.; and especially Mr.Mede’sApostasy of the latter times, ch. xi.

114Matth. xxiv. 24. Mark xiii. 21.

1151 Ep. John, iv. 3.

116Ἀντίχριϛος—ἀντι, in the sense either ofpro, orcontra.

117Grotius says, “SicutAnticæsaremdicimus qui contra Cæsarem se Cæsarem vult dici atque Cæsar haberi, sicAntichristusest qui se vero Christo opponiteo modout ipse Christus haberi velit.”Op.t. iv. p. 490.—The learned commentator did not reflect, that words are not always used according to the strict import of their etymologies.False Christs, we will say, are, in the strict sense of the word,Antichrists. But the question is, inwhatsense this word is used of the person called, by way of eminence,The Antichrist. This must be collected from the attributes given to him in the prophecies themselves, not from the rigorous etymology of the term. The case was plainly this. St. John is speaking of thefalse Christs, who had appeared in his time; and, to disgrace them the more effectually in the minds of those to whom he writes, he brands them with the name ofAntichrists: not so much respecting the exact sense of the word, as the ideas of aversion, which, he knew, it would excite. For the tradition of the church concerningAntichrist, had made this appellation, of all others, the most opprobrious, and hateful.—Besides, it is not so clear, as Grotius supposes, that the strict sense of the word,Antichristus, must be—is, qui se vero Christo opponit eo modo ut ipse Christus haberi velit. Cæsar, who generally expressed himself with exact propriety, thought fit, on a certain occasion, to assume the name and character of,Anticato. Was it Cæsar’s purpose to say, or was it his ambition to pretend, “that he opposed himself to the true Cato,EO MODOut ipseCatohaberi vellet?”

118Eusebius mentions,Judas, H. E. l. vi. c. 2; andDionysius, E. H. l. vii. c. 10.—Others, seemed to expect that Antichrist would appear as the Messiah of the Jews; but in the person of a Roman Emperor; as will be explained presently. See the next note.

119See many citations to this purpose in Dr. Lardner’sCred.p. ii. v. p. 210, 11, 12.

120Jerom, in Dan. vii. Mede, p. 657.

121Quisquis se universalem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione suâ Antichristum præcurrit.Greg. M.Op. Ep. xxx. l. vi.Par.1533.

122In hâc ejus superbiâ, quid aliud nisi propinqua jam Antichristi esse tempora designatur? Ep. xxxiv. l. iv.

123With all his merits, Gregory the Great, it is to be feared, had some Antichristian marks upon him; and his adversary of the East might have gone some way towardsfixingthem upon hisGrandeur, if he had but observed, that Antichrist, whoever he was, and whensoever to appear in the world, is clearly marked out in the prophecies, as having his seat inold Rome.

124A. 991.

125Quid hunc, reverendi patres, in sublimi solio residentem, veste purpureâ et aureâ radiantem; quid hunc, inquam, esse censetis? Nimirum, si charitate destituitur, solâque scientiâ inflatur et extollitur,Antichristusest,in templo Dei sedens, et se ostendens tanquam sit Deus.Usser.de Christian. Eccl. successione & statu, c. ii. p. 36. Lond. 1613.—IllyriciCat. Test. Ver.p. 1558.Officin. Jacob. Stoër et Jacob. Chouël.—This Arnulph, Bishop of Orleans, was esteemed, in his day, the wisest and most eloquent of all the Gallican prelates. Arnulphus—de quo sic initio ejus synodi scriptum est—Inter omnes Galliarum episcopos sapientiâ et eloquentiâ clarissimus habebatur. Ib.

126“Ecclesiam vanitatis, &Sedem Satanævocabat.”Usser.de Christian. Eccl. succes. & statu, c. 7. s. xxiv. p. 196.—In Apocalypsin scripsisse testatur Bostonius Buriensis.Cave, H. L. vol. ii. p. 131.Oxon.1743.

127Plerique omnes boni, aperti, justi, ingenui, simplices, tum imperium Antichristi cœpisse, quod ea quæ Christus servator noster tot annos ante nobis cantavit, evenisse eo tempore cernebant, memoriæ literarum prodidêre.Annal. Boiorum, l. v. p. 591. Ingolstad. 1554.

128Cave, H. L. vol. ii. p. 258. Conc. Flor. 1104.Usser.De Christ. Eccl. succ. & stat.c. v. s. v. p. 109.

129Ministri Christi sunt, et serviunt Antichristo[Serm. sup. Cantic.xxxiii.]—It is true, by Antichrist, he seems not to mean the Pope, but, in general, an evil principle, which then domineered in the church. Yet he refers us to the famous passage in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, ch. ii. And he tells us in his 56th epistle, that he had heard one Norbert, a man of exemplary piety, say, That Antichrist would be revealed in that age. Hence it seems probable, that some one person or power was in his eye. After all, he says, that Norbert’s reasons did not satisfy him. Yet, in another epistle, he asserts expressly—Bestia illa de Apocalypsi, cui datum est os loquens blasphemias, et bellum gerere cum sanctis,Petri cathedram occupat, tanquam leo paratus ad prædam. Ep. cxxv: which was, in other words, to call the Pope, Antichrist. It is evident that St. Bernard applied the prophecies in the Revelation to the successor of St. Peter.—I mention these things so particularly, to shew, what his sentiments on this head really were; which have been misrepresented by hasty writers, who transcribe from each other, without examining, themselves, the authorities, they quote.

130Cave, H. L. v. ii. 278.Rog. de Hoveden, Annal.Pars Post.p. 681. Ed. Franc. 1601.—In this age [XIIth], was composed a very remarkable tract on the subject of Antichrist, which may be seen in Mede’s Works, p. 721.—Mr. Mede supposes, and seems indeed to have proved, that thetruedoctrine of Antichrist was, and was intended to be, a mystery, or secret, till the 12th century. Whence it follows that the testimonies, hitherto alledged, are only passionate or declamatory exaggerations, or to be esteemed, as he says,pro parabolicè etκάτ’ αὔξησινdictis, declamatorum more.Works, p. 722.I admit the truth of the observation: but hold, that theuseof the deduction, here made, is not in the least affected by it. For my purpose in giving this catalogue of witnesses to the doctrine of Antichrist, was not tojustifythat doctrine, in thetrue, that is, Protestant sense of it (for then, not only the preceding testimonies, but even some of the following, would have been omitted) but merely to shew that the general, at least, and confused idea of some such doctrine did, in fact,subsistin the ancient Christian church. That what idea they had of this doctrine was founded on theprophecies, is clear from the terms in which they express themselves. And, though the doctrine itself was very imperfectly conceived, and inconsequentially applied by them, still their language shews that they had some notion ofa corrupt spiritual power, which was, in their sense of the prophets,to domineer in the church of Rome: whence I draw this conclusion (for the sake of which, this whole deduction is made), That the present application of the prophecies concerning Antichrist to papal Rome, is not wholly new and unauthorized; as the prejudice, I am here combating, supposeth it to be.

I admit the truth of the observation: but hold, that theuseof the deduction, here made, is not in the least affected by it. For my purpose in giving this catalogue of witnesses to the doctrine of Antichrist, was not tojustifythat doctrine, in thetrue, that is, Protestant sense of it (for then, not only the preceding testimonies, but even some of the following, would have been omitted) but merely to shew that the general, at least, and confused idea of some such doctrine did, in fact,subsistin the ancient Christian church. That what idea they had of this doctrine was founded on theprophecies, is clear from the terms in which they express themselves. And, though the doctrine itself was very imperfectly conceived, and inconsequentially applied by them, still their language shews that they had some notion ofa corrupt spiritual power, which was, in their sense of the prophets,to domineer in the church of Rome: whence I draw this conclusion (for the sake of which, this whole deduction is made), That the present application of the prophecies concerning Antichrist to papal Rome, is not wholly new and unauthorized; as the prejudice, I am here combating, supposeth it to be.

131Vitringain Apoc. p. 747. Amst. 1719.Usser.De Eccl. succ. & stat. c. 6 and 8.Thuanus, l. vi. s. 16. vol. i. p. 221. Ed. Buckley.

132See, especially, the famous speech of Everhard, bishop of Saltzbourg, at the assembly of Ratisbonne, in the time of Gregory the IXth; inserted at large in Aventinus,Ann. Boior.l. vii. p. 684. The following extracts from it will be thought curious. Hildebrandus ante annos centum atque septuaginta primus specie religionisAntichristiimperii fundamenta jecit. p. 684.Flamines illiBabyloniæ[meaning the Bishops of Rome] soli regnare cupiunt, ferre parem non possunt, non desistent donec omnia pedibus suis conculcaverint, atquein templo Dei sedeant, extollanturque supra omne id, quod colitur. Ib.Nova consilia sub pectore volutat, ut proprium sibi constituat imperium,leges commutat, suas sancit; contaminat, diripit, spoliat, fraudat, occidit, perditus homo ille (quem Antichristum vocare solent) in cujus frontecontumeliæ nomenscriptum est, “Deus sum, errare non possum,”in templo Dei sedet, longè latéque dominatur.Ib.—Reges decem pariter existunt—Decem Cornua—Cornuque parvulum—Quid hâc prophetiâ apertius? p. 685.

Flamines illiBabyloniæ[meaning the Bishops of Rome] soli regnare cupiunt, ferre parem non possunt, non desistent donec omnia pedibus suis conculcaverint, atquein templo Dei sedeant, extollanturque supra omne id, quod colitur. Ib.

Nova consilia sub pectore volutat, ut proprium sibi constituat imperium,leges commutat, suas sancit; contaminat, diripit, spoliat, fraudat, occidit, perditus homo ille (quem Antichristum vocare solent) in cujus frontecontumeliæ nomenscriptum est, “Deus sum, errare non possum,”in templo Dei sedet, longè latéque dominatur.Ib.

—Reges decem pariter existunt—Decem Cornua—Cornuque parvulum—Quid hâc prophetiâ apertius? p. 685.

133Matth. Paris, ad ann. 1253. p. 874. ed. Watts, 1640.

134Purgat. 32.

135Epistolarum sine titulo Liber. Ep. xvi. p. 130. Basil. 1581.—Many strokes in this epistle are, to the last degree, severe and caustic. Addressing himself to Rome, “Illa equidem ipsa es, says he, quam in spiritu sacer vidit Evangelista.—Populi et gentes et linguæ, aquæ sunt super quas meretrix sedes; recognosce habitum. Mulier circumdata purpurâ, et coccino, et inaurata auro, et lapide pretioso, et margaritis, habens poculum aureum in manu suâ, plenum abominatione et immunditiâ fornicationis ejus.—Audi reliqua. Et vidi (inquit) mulierem ebriam de sanguine sanctorum, et de sanguine martyrum Jesu. Quid siles?”—And so goes on to apply the prophecies of the Revelation to the church of Rome, in terms that furnish out a good comment on the famous verse in one of his poems—Gia Roma, hor Babylonia false è ria—Numberless passages in the writings of Petrarch speak of Rome, under the name ofBabylon. But an equal stress is not to be laid on all of these. It should be remembered, that the Popes, in Petrarch’s time, resided at Avignon; greatly to the disparagement of themselves, as he thought, and especially of Rome; of which this singular man was little less than idolatrous. The situation of the place, surrounded by waters, and his splenetic concern for theexiledChurch (for under this idea, he painted to himself the Pope’s migration to the banks of Avignon) brought to his mind the condition of the Jewish church in the Babylonian captivity. And this parallel was all, perhaps, that he meant to insinuate in most of those passages. But, when he applies the prophecies to Rome, as to theApocalypticBabylon (as he clearly does in the epistle under consideration) his meaning is not equivocal: and we do him but justice to give him an honourable place among theTestes Veritatis.

Gia Roma, hor Babylonia false è ria—

Numberless passages in the writings of Petrarch speak of Rome, under the name ofBabylon. But an equal stress is not to be laid on all of these. It should be remembered, that the Popes, in Petrarch’s time, resided at Avignon; greatly to the disparagement of themselves, as he thought, and especially of Rome; of which this singular man was little less than idolatrous. The situation of the place, surrounded by waters, and his splenetic concern for theexiledChurch (for under this idea, he painted to himself the Pope’s migration to the banks of Avignon) brought to his mind the condition of the Jewish church in the Babylonian captivity. And this parallel was all, perhaps, that he meant to insinuate in most of those passages. But, when he applies the prophecies to Rome, as to theApocalypticBabylon (as he clearly does in the epistle under consideration) his meaning is not equivocal: and we do him but justice to give him an honourable place among theTestes Veritatis.

136See the catalogue of his works in Cave’s Hist. Lit. vol. ii. App. p. 63; in which is the following book of Dialogues. Dialogorum libri quatuor; quorum—quartus Romanæ Ecclesiæ sacramenta, ejus pestiferam vocationem,Antichristi regnum, fratrum fraudulentam originem atque eorum hypocrisim, variaque nostro ævo scitu dignissima, perstringit.

137Mandantes omnibus, &c.—tempus quoque præfixum futurorum malorum, velAntichristi adventum—prædicare, vel asserere, nequaquam præsumant.Bin. Conc.Lateran.v.sub LeoneX.Sess.xi.p.632.

138M. d’Alembert, indeed, goes further. He acquaints us, that thischargeis now out of date, and that nobody, either within or without the Romish communion, makes it any longer. For, speaking of a public inscription at Geneva, in whichthe Pope is called Antichrist, he animadverts on this disgrace of that Protestant people, and very kindly suggests to them what their improved sentiments and language should be on that subject.As for the Catholics(says he, very gravely,)the Pope is regarded by them, as the Head of the true Church: By sage and moderate Protestants, he is seen in the light of a sovereign prince, whom they respect, though they do not obey him: But, in an age like this,he is no longer Antichrist in the opinion of anybody. “Pour les Catholiques, le Pape est le chef de la veritable Eglise; pour les Protestants sages & modérés, c’est un Souverein qu’ils respectent comme Prince sans lui obéir:mais dans un siécle tel que nôtre, il n’est plus l’Antichrist pour personne.” Encyclopedie, Art.Geneve.—If the present age be, here, truly characterized, it was high time, or rather it was too late, to found this Protestant Lecture.

139Rompons leurs liens, dit-il, et rejettons leur joug de dessus nos têtes.Bossuet, H. V.l. i. c. 26.

140Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.Rev. xviii. 4.

141Il [Luther] condamnoit les Bohemiens qui s’etoient separez de nôtre communion, et protestoit qu’il ne lui arriveroit jamais de tomber dansun semblable Schisme.Bossuet, Hist. des Variat.l. i. p. 21.Par.1740. And again, p. 28; Apres, dit-il [Luther,] que j’eus surmonté tous les argumens qu’on proposoit, il en restoit un dernier qu’à peine je pus surmonter par le secours de Jesus Christ avec une extrême difficulté & beaucoup d’angoisse;c’est qu’il falloit écouter l’Eglise.—One sees for what purpose M. Bossuet quotes these passages, and others of the same kind, from the writings of Luther. However, they shew very clearly how deep an impression the idea of Schism had made on the mind even of this intrepid Reformer.

142Contra Bullam Antichristi—a tract of Luther, so called, against the Bull of Leo X.

143Luther reconnoit après la rupture ouverte, que dans les commencemens il étoitcomme au desespoir—Bossuet, H. V.c. 26.

144Hor. 1 Ep. vi. 15.

145Grotius was more than a great, he was a fashionable man. No wonder therefore that, under the influence of two such prejudices, his opinions should find followers; which yet they would scarce have found with us, if the political state of that time had not been athirdprejudice in their favour. See the Bishop of Gloucester’s Sermon,On the rise of Antichrist.

146“The folly of interpreters has been, to foretell times and things by this prophecy, as if God designed to make them prophets.”Sir I. Newton, p. 251.

147“God gave this, and the prophecies of the Old Testament, not to gratify men’s curiosities by enabling them to foreknow things; but that, after they were fulfilled, they might be interpreted by the event; and his own providence, not the interpreter’s, be then manifested thereby to the world.”Sir I. Newton, p. 251.

148“’Tis a part of this prophecy, that it should not be understood before the last age of the world; and therefore it makes for the credit of the prophecy, that it is not yet understood.”Sir I. Newton, p. 251.

149St. Jerom, who lived in this time, speaks in the very terms, here supposed,Romanus orbisRUIT. Ep. iii.

150Isai. lxv. 17.—2 Pet. iii. 4. 13.

151Rev. x. 7.

152Daniel xii. 10.

153Mede, More, Daubuz, Vitringa, and, above all, the learned Founder of this Lecture.

154Hence, the allusion of our great poet,—or from behind the moonIn dim eclipse disastrous twilight shedsOn half the nations, andwith fear of changePerplexes monarchs—P. L. i. 596.

154Hence, the allusion of our great poet,

—or from behind the moonIn dim eclipse disastrous twilight shedsOn half the nations, andwith fear of changePerplexes monarchs—P. L. i. 596.

155See these two works, published together, under the title ofArtemidori Daldiani et Achmetis Sereimi F. Oneirocritica, by Nicolaus Rigaltius.Lutet.1603.

156Non enim credo,nullo perceptoaut cæteros artifices versari in suo munere, aut eos, qui divinatione utantur, futura prædicere.Cic. de Fato, c. 6.

157Ezekiel xiii. 9.

158See Dr. Lancaster’sSymbolicalandAlphabetical Dictionary, prefixed to his abridgment of the Commentary on the Revelations, by Mr. Daubuz.

159See this objection urged by Mr. Collins in hisGrounds and Reasons, &c. p. 220. Lond. 1737.

160Jeremiah xxxiv. 3.

161Ezek. xii. 13.

162See Grotius on Matth. xxvi. 23.

163As to theauthorityof this extraordinary book (although the discussion of this point be foreign to my present purpose) it may be proper to acquaint such persons, as have not made the inquiry for themselves, and are perhaps incapable of making it, with the sentiments, which our ablest writers have entertained of it.Mr. Mede, a capable inquirer, if there ever was any, says roundly—“The Apocalypse hath more human (not to speak ofdivine) authority, than any other book of the New Testament besides, even from the time it was first delivered.”Works, p. 602.—And to the same purpose, Sir Isaac Newton—“I do not find any other book of the New Testament so strongly attested, or commented upon so early, as this of the Apocalypse.”Observations on Daniel, &c. page 249.Thus, these two incomparable men. What some minute critics have said, or insinuated to the contrary, is not worth mentioning; farther, than just to observe, that, if the authority of this momentous book be indeed questionable, the church of Rome could hardly have failed long since to make the discovery, or to triumph in it.Hoc Ithacus velit, et magno mercentur Atridæ.

Mr. Mede, a capable inquirer, if there ever was any, says roundly—“The Apocalypse hath more human (not to speak ofdivine) authority, than any other book of the New Testament besides, even from the time it was first delivered.”Works, p. 602.

—And to the same purpose, Sir Isaac Newton—“I do not find any other book of the New Testament so strongly attested, or commented upon so early, as this of the Apocalypse.”Observations on Daniel, &c. page 249.

Thus, these two incomparable men. What some minute critics have said, or insinuated to the contrary, is not worth mentioning; farther, than just to observe, that, if the authority of this momentous book be indeed questionable, the church of Rome could hardly have failed long since to make the discovery, or to triumph in it.

Hoc Ithacus velit, et magno mercentur Atridæ.

164Mal. i. 11.

165Lament. i. 15.

166Isaiah xl. 20.

167Ezek. xx. 47.

168Isaiah ii. 2.

169Chap. xvii.

170The learned Bishop Andrews says expressly—“You shall scarce find a phrase in the Revelations of St. John, that is not taken out of Daniel, or some other prophet.”Vix reperias apud Johannem phrasin aliquam, nisi vel ex Daniele, vel ex alio aliquo prophetâ desumptam.Resp. ad Bellarm. Apol. p. 234.

171An eminent writer gives an exact idea of it, in these words—“The style [of the Revelations] is very prophetical, as to the things spoken: And very hebraizing, as to the speaking of them. Exceeding much of the old prophets language and matter adduced to intimate new stories: And exceeding much of the Jews language and allusion to their customs and opinions, thereby to speak the things more familiarly to be understood.” Dr.Lightfoot,Harm. of the N. T.p. 154, London, 1655.

172I have heard it affirmed, on good grounds, that the late Dr. Samuel Clarke, being asked in conversation by a friend, whether, as he had taken much pains to interpret the other books of Scripture, he had never attempted any thing on the Revelations, replied,He had not; but that, notwithstanding, he thought he understood every word of it: Not meaning, we may be sure, that he knew how to apply every part of that prophecy, but that he understood thephraseology, in which it was written; which a man, so conversant as he was in the style of scripture, might very well do.—Calvin, indeed, has been commended for making the opposite declaration: And, it may be, with good reason: For (not to derogate in any respect from the character of this great man) the language of the Scriptures, and especially of the prophetical scriptures, was in no degree so well understood in his time, as it was in that of Dr. S. Clarke.

173“As for me, I am conscious of my weakness and unworthiness; being, when these kind of thoughts first possessed me, looking another way with a prejudice incompatible to this.”General Pref. to Mede’s Works, p. 20, from a MS Letter.

174He printed only a few copies of hisClavis Apocalypticain 1627, at his own expence, and for the use of his friends.Pref. to his Commentary.

175His Commentary, on the principles of hisClavis, did not appear till 1632.

176“I am by naturecunctabundusin all things, but in this [his Exposition] let no man blame me, if I take more pause than ordinary.” MS Letter inGen. Pref.p. 22. And again, in a Letter of replyad animadversiones Ludovici de Dieu, “Eo ingenio sum (delicatulo, an moroso) ut nisi ubi interpretatio commodè et absque salebris eat, nunquam mihi satisfacere soleam.”Works, p. 569. Yet of thissageman, could the Bishop of Meaux allow himself to speak thus negligently—Il s’est rendu de nos jours célébre en AngleterrePAR SES DOCTES REVERIESsur l’Apocalypse.Hist. des Var.l. xiii. p. 257. But M. de Meaux knew what he did, when heaffectedthis contempt of Joseph Mede. He was then at liberty to turn himself from the ablest advocate of the Protestant cause, to theweakest; I mean, M. Jurieu, whose indiscretions afforded, indeed, ample scope for the raillery of this lively prelate. Mr. Mede was not a man to be confuted in this way, and still less by a fanciful and ill-supportedExposition of the Apocalypse.

177As appears from his backwardness to publish his discoveries, and from his unconcern about the reception of them. But see his Letter to Mr. Hartlib, Ep. 96, p. 881; and compare with his answer to Dr. Twisse, Ep. 51, p. 811. See also Ep. 98, to Mr. Hartlib, Aug. 6, 1638, not long before his death, in which are these words:“I have not been very obtrusive unto men, to acquaint them with my notions and conceits—for some of them that are but lately known have lain by me above these twenty years.” P. 883.

“I have not been very obtrusive unto men, to acquaint them with my notions and conceits—for some of them that are but lately known have lain by me above these twenty years.” P. 883.

178The point of the Pope’s being Antichrist, as a dead fly, marred the savour ofTHAT OINTMENT—meaning the merit he had of being known to entertain some opinions; then much cherished by the ruling clergy. Ep. 56, p. 818. He says afterwards of himself, in the same Letter,I thank God, I never made any thing hitherto the caster of my resolution, but reason and evidence, on what side soever the advantage or disadvantage fell.

179His friends speak much of his chearful disposition.—But I draw this conclusion from the tenour of hislifeandwritings; and, above all, from that famous declaration which he made in confidence to a friend, that,if he might but obtain a Donative sine curâ, of so much value as, together with his fellowship[of Christ’s College in Cambridge,]should enable him to keep a horse, for his recreation, he would set up his staff for this world.App. to his Life, p. 40.—The simplicity of this declaration, makes one confident of its truth. And a man of so moderate desires, was in no danger of having his tempersouredby disappointments.

180Siquidem, quæ isti tuo Vaticinio jam, ut dixi, cognito, cætera contemporaverint Vaticinia, iisdem procul dubio temporibus sunt applicanda; quæ autem præcedunt, non nisi de præcedaneis; quæ succedunt, pariter de succedaneis eventibus sunt interpretanda.Clavis Apocalyptica, in Mede'sWorks, p. 432.

181From ch. iv. to the end of ch. ix: And from ch. x. to the end.

182The sounding of the seventh trumpet.

183Ch. x. 7.

184Ch. xi. 15.

185The reader may form a distinct idea of the method, in which thewholebook of the Apocalypse is disposed, by observing that it is resolvable intoTHREEgreat parts.TheFIRSTpart, is that of theEpistlesto the seven churches, contained in the three first chapters, and is not at all considered by Mr. Mede.TheSECONDpart (with which Mr. Mede begins his commentary) is that of theSealed Book, from ch. iv. to ch. x; and containsthe fates of the Empire, or its civil revolutions, yet, with a reference, still, to the state and fortune of the Christian Church.TheTHIRDpart, is that of theOPEN BOOK, with what follows to the end; and exhibits in a more minute and extended view,the fates of the Christian Church, especially during its Apostacy, and after its recovery from it.ThisTHIRDdivision may, further, be considered as consisting ofTWOparts. TheFIRSTcontains, in ch. xi, a summary view of what should befal the Christian Church, contemporary with the events deduced in thesecondpart concerning the Empire; and is given in this place, in order to connect thesecondandthirdparts, and to shew their correspondence and contemporaneity. See Mr. Mede’s Clavis, p. 424; and Comment. Apocalypt. p. 476.TheSECONDpart of the last division, from ch. xii. to the end, gives a detailed account of what should befal the Christian Church in distinct, and, several of them, synchronical visions.It has been thought by some an objection to Mr. Mede’s scheme, “That the prophecy of theopen book, (which contains, according to him, all the remaining visions to the end of the Revelations) is not only, for thesubject, more considerable, but, for thesizeof the volume, larger, than the Prophecy of thesealed book; whereas, the name given to it, βιβλαρίδιον, orlittle book, seems very clearly to express the contrary.”If this objection be thought material (for I do not find that Mr. Mede condescends to take any notice of it) itmight, perhaps, be obviated by supposing, That thelittle bookcontains the xith chapter, only, being a compendium of thethirddivision, and inserted in this place to shew the contemporaneity of thetwo lastand principal parts; and that all which follows to the end, is to be regarded as a sort ofcommenton the little book, or larger explication of its contents: As if the design had been to consult our weakness, in presenting us,first, with an abridged view of a great scheme, andthen, in drawing it out at large, for our more distinct information.But thetrueranswer to the difficulty I take to be, That thesealed bookis represented under the idea of abook, properly so called, which, upon being opened, presents to the eye the several objects and schemes of the prophecy, distinctly delineated on theroll, or volume, when it comes to be unfolded, and which, therefore, must needs be considered as alargeone. Theopen book, on the other hand, is to be regarded, not as a real, butmetaphoricalbook; and is not produced to be read or contemplated, after a gradual evolution of it, but to beeaten, at once, by the prophet; like that book, to which it alludes, and from which the imagery is taken, in the visions of Ezekiel [ii. 8. and iii. 1, 2, 3.]—toeat a book, being, in the hieroglyphics, tomeditate upon, and todigest, its contents. So that this book, to distinguish it from the other, is named alittle book: not, that the revelations, conveyed by it, are less considerable, or less numerous, than the other, but that theuse, to which it is put, required only that it should be spoken of, as abooksimply; the diminutive form being here suggested in the term βιβλαρίδιον, that the metaphor ofeatingit might seem the easier; and (because the formersealedbook was of an immense size) might, under this idea, present itself the more naturally, and give less offence, to the imagination.

185The reader may form a distinct idea of the method, in which thewholebook of the Apocalypse is disposed, by observing that it is resolvable intoTHREEgreat parts.

TheFIRSTpart, is that of theEpistlesto the seven churches, contained in the three first chapters, and is not at all considered by Mr. Mede.

TheSECONDpart (with which Mr. Mede begins his commentary) is that of theSealed Book, from ch. iv. to ch. x; and containsthe fates of the Empire, or its civil revolutions, yet, with a reference, still, to the state and fortune of the Christian Church.

TheTHIRDpart, is that of theOPEN BOOK, with what follows to the end; and exhibits in a more minute and extended view,the fates of the Christian Church, especially during its Apostacy, and after its recovery from it.

ThisTHIRDdivision may, further, be considered as consisting ofTWOparts. TheFIRSTcontains, in ch. xi, a summary view of what should befal the Christian Church, contemporary with the events deduced in thesecondpart concerning the Empire; and is given in this place, in order to connect thesecondandthirdparts, and to shew their correspondence and contemporaneity. See Mr. Mede’s Clavis, p. 424; and Comment. Apocalypt. p. 476.

TheSECONDpart of the last division, from ch. xii. to the end, gives a detailed account of what should befal the Christian Church in distinct, and, several of them, synchronical visions.

It has been thought by some an objection to Mr. Mede’s scheme, “That the prophecy of theopen book, (which contains, according to him, all the remaining visions to the end of the Revelations) is not only, for thesubject, more considerable, but, for thesizeof the volume, larger, than the Prophecy of thesealed book; whereas, the name given to it, βιβλαρίδιον, orlittle book, seems very clearly to express the contrary.”

If this objection be thought material (for I do not find that Mr. Mede condescends to take any notice of it) itmight, perhaps, be obviated by supposing, That thelittle bookcontains the xith chapter, only, being a compendium of thethirddivision, and inserted in this place to shew the contemporaneity of thetwo lastand principal parts; and that all which follows to the end, is to be regarded as a sort ofcommenton the little book, or larger explication of its contents: As if the design had been to consult our weakness, in presenting us,first, with an abridged view of a great scheme, andthen, in drawing it out at large, for our more distinct information.

But thetrueranswer to the difficulty I take to be, That thesealed bookis represented under the idea of abook, properly so called, which, upon being opened, presents to the eye the several objects and schemes of the prophecy, distinctly delineated on theroll, or volume, when it comes to be unfolded, and which, therefore, must needs be considered as alargeone. Theopen book, on the other hand, is to be regarded, not as a real, butmetaphoricalbook; and is not produced to be read or contemplated, after a gradual evolution of it, but to beeaten, at once, by the prophet; like that book, to which it alludes, and from which the imagery is taken, in the visions of Ezekiel [ii. 8. and iii. 1, 2, 3.]—toeat a book, being, in the hieroglyphics, tomeditate upon, and todigest, its contents. So that this book, to distinguish it from the other, is named alittle book: not, that the revelations, conveyed by it, are less considerable, or less numerous, than the other, but that theuse, to which it is put, required only that it should be spoken of, as abooksimply; the diminutive form being here suggested in the term βιβλαρίδιον, that the metaphor ofeatingit might seem the easier; and (because the formersealedbook was of an immense size) might, under this idea, present itself the more naturally, and give less offence, to the imagination.

Back to Index Next