Eureka - An Exposition of the Apocalypse - John Thomas
Chapter 15 13.
The Laodicean State CONTINUED The Laodicean State, typified by the Apocalyptic ecclesia at Laodicea, is parallel with the Seventh Seal Period from its opening to the Fall of the apocalyptic Babylon after the appearing of "The Ancient of Days." From a.d. 324 to a.d. 1864-'8, or thereabout. See Vol. 1, p. 428 2. Second General Division of the Seven Sealed Scroll The Seventh Seal, Seven Trumpets, and the Six Vials to the appearing of Christ "as a thief;" exhibiting the development of the Ten Horns of Daniel's Fourth Beast in the wounding of the Sixth Head and the establishment of the Seventh; (Apoc. 8) the subversion of the Greek Catholic Dynasty of Constantinople, (Apoc. 9) the rising of Daniel's eleventh Episcopal Horn, or Eighth Head, that speaks blasphemies, and "as a Dragon;" (Apoc. 13:1-5, 11-18; 17) the war of the Saints and Witnesses with this power; their subjugation, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heaven at the ending of the Sixth Trumpet; (Apoc. 11:3-12; 12:14, 16, 17; 13:6-10) judgments upon their enemies, the Horns, Eighth Head, and Image; (Apoc. 16:1-11) and the preparation of their way (Apoc. 16:12-14). TIME OF EVENTS From a.d. 324 to the Fall Seasons of a.d. 1864-'8, or thereabout. Summary of Chapter 13 The Apostle John, standing upon the Sand of the Sea, beholds a Beast ascending out of the sea, even that beast he alluded to in Ch. 11:7, as the destroyer of the Witnesses. Like the Dragon, it had Seven Heads and Ten Horns; and its power, throne, and great authority, it acquired from the Dragon. Thus it divided the Habitable with the Dragon; so that the inhabitants thereof worship the Dragon and the Beast. Upon the Seven Heads he saw a Name of Blasphemy, to which was given a Mouth like a Lion, with which he gave utterance to the great things and blasphemies he conceived. He sees them in continuance forty and two months, in the course of which long period they make war upon the saints and at length overcome them. After the ascending of this beast from the sea, John beholds another beast ascending out of the earth, having Two Horns and speaking as a Dragon. After his ascent, he sees this beast in contemporaneous existence with the other; and of like constitution with the wounded head of the Ten-Horned Beast. John also sees an Image of the Wounded Head, which the Two-Horned Beast caused to be set up; and to which all on the earth of every degree were subjected. The Name of the Beast symbolically revealed. Translation Apoc. 13 1. And I stood upon the Sand of the Sea, and I saw ascending out of the Sea a Beast, having Seven Heads and Ten Horns: and upon his horns Ten Diadems, and upon his heads a Name of Blasphemy. 2. And the beast which I saw was like to a Leopard, and his feet as of a Bear, and his Mouth as the mouth of a Lion: and the Dragon yielded to him his power and his throne, and extensive authority. 3. And I saw one of his heads as if wounded to death: and the plague of his death was healed; and there was wondering in the whole earth after the beast. 4. And they worshipped the Dragon which yielded dominion to the Beast; and they worshipped the Beast, saying, Who is like to the Beast? Who is able to make war with him? 5. And there was given to him a Mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and there was granted to him license to practise. Forty-Two Months. 6. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy concerning the Deity, to have blasphemed his Name, and his Tabernacle, and those who tabernacle in the heaven. 7. And it was given to him to make war with the Holy Ones, and to overcome them: and there was given to him dominion over every tribe and tongue and nation. 8. And all the dwellers upon the earth shall worship him, of whom there hath not been written the names before the foundation of the world, in the book of the Life of the Lamb that hath been slain. 9. If any one have an ear, let him hear. 10. If any gathereth together a captivity, into captivity he goes away; if any shall kill with the sword, it behoves that he be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and faith of the saints. 11. And I saw another Beast ascending out of the Earth; and he had Two Horns like to a Lamb, and he spake as a Dragon. 12. And all the dominion of the former beast he exerciseth in his sight: and he causeth the earth, and the dwellers therein, that they worship the former beast whose plague of his death was healed. 13. And he performs great signs, so that he even causeth fire to descend out of the heaven into the earth in sight of the men. 14. And he deceiveth the dwellers upon the earth through the signs which it was given to him to perform in the sight of the beast, commanding the dwellers upon the earth to make an Image to the beast which hath the plague of the sword, and lived. 15. And it was given to him to give spirit to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast might both speak and practise, that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 16. And he causeth all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the bond, that there should be given to them a mark upon their right hand, or upon their foreheads; 17. and that no one be able to buy or to sell, but he having the mark, or the Name of the Beast, or the Number of his Name. 18. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath the understanding, count the Number of the Beast: for it is a Man's Number, and his number is Six Hundred and Sixty-six. I. Beast of the Sea

1. Preliminary Remarks

In the first year of Belshatzar, the prophet Daniel saw in a vision of the night, Four Beasts. The first resembled a Lion; the second, a Bear; the third, a Leopard; but the fourth was like nothing seen among beasts. "It was diverse from all the beasts that were before it," which signifies, according to the interpretation given in Ch. 7:23, "diverse from all kingdoms." The vision was communicated to him with special reference to this incongruous fourth beast. It had a head, and upon his head Eleven Horns, and claws of brass, and teeth of iron. Daniel saw it arise in a stormy period out of the Great Sea; and he perceived that it continued until the Ancient of Days came, when, judgment having been given to the Holy Ones, or Saints of the Most High Ones, they destroyed it with fire and sword. This simple statement of facts identifies the Fourth Beast of Daniel with the Scarlet-colored Beast of John in Apoc. 17:3, 11. The light shed upon the subject in these texts, reveals that the head seen by Daniel was the Sixto-Octavian, or the last; and gives us to understand what was concealed from the prophet, that the nameless beast he saw had Eight Heads. John's Scarlet Beast "goeth into perdition." Daniel saw this consummation; and John saw the perdition inflicted by the same agents -- by the Lamb, and his called and chosen, and faithful companions -- the Saints (Ch. 17:14). Now, a beast with an eighth head and ten horns, contemporary with the advent of the Ancient of Days, implies its previous existence, either under seven heads coevally extant, or under seven heads successively existing. The revelator disposes of this alternative by telling John that five of the heads had fallen, that the sixth was in being in his day, and that the seventh had not then as yet come. Hence this succession of heads, and development of horns upon the imperial head. implies the subjection of the Fourth Beast to successive revolutionary changes. Daniel saw one revolution connected with its horns, in which an Eleventh Horn, with Eyes and Mouth, came up upon the head after the ten horns, of which it rooted up three; but in regard to the head he saw nothing. "I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things" (Dan. 7:8) -- the Papacy in power. Thus there is a great lack of particulars in Daniel's vision, which the Deity "reserved in his own power," as not important to be made known at that time. He gave Daniel a general outline of "the matter," in symbol and its description; but he deferred the details, or a more particular representation, until he should give them to "the Son of Man" in actual manifestation. When the Son had received them of the Father, he sent his messenger and signified them to John in Patmos. Among the signs exhibited were the Great Fiery-Red Dragon, the Catholic Dragon, the Beast of the Sea, the Name of Blasphemy, the Beast of the Earth, the Image of the Beast, and the Woman-Bearing Scarlet-Beast. All these apocalyptic signs are contained in Daniel's Fourth Beast. They are a symbolical analysis of this beast, which they exhibit in its chronological, geographical, and constitutional relations at different periods of its long and eventful, or its "dreadful and terrible," career. Thus, Daniel's Fourth Beast commences its career with the Foundation of Rome, b.c. 753, and does not finish it until after the advent of Christ and the resurrection, of which long period 2,621 years are now in the past. It was predestined to "devour the whole earth, and to tread it down, and to break it in pieces" (Dan. 7:23). This is the extent of what is styled in Apoc. 16:14, "the earth and the whole habitable" -- its territorial dominion in its amplest extent; and comprehending the countries represented by the dynastic sovereignties of the gold, the silver, the brass, the iron, and the clay, of Nebuchadnezzar's Image. This is the whole earth, and exhibits the reason why Britain, France, and Russia, elements of Daniel's Fourth Beast, have been so much occupied of late in China, Cochin-China, India, Mexico, Algiers, and Central Asia. These countries added to Europe, Turkey, and America, are "the whole earth" subdued to the authority of the Fourth Beast. But, besides Daniel's Four Beasts, and their appendages, the prophet saw a class of people, for whose sake all things consist (2 Cor. 4:15). These he styles, "the Saints of the Most High Ones." They are the Seed of the Woman, against which the Fourth Beast in many centuries of his career, would have great and deadly "enmity;" for all the elements of said beast are "the Serpent" and his seed; or, in the words of Christ, "the Devil and his angels" (Matt. 25:41; Gen. 3:15). He was to make war upon them, and to prevail against them till the end of "a time, times, and the dividing of a time," when the Ancient of Days would come, and join them in the execution of judgment unto the utter and complete destruction of their enemy. Now this, in the estimation of Deity, is an all important matter; and all worthy of ample illustration for the support and strengthening of "the faith and patience" of the sufferers in so long and sanguinary a conflict with the beast. Hence the signs apocalyptically exhibited to John. This one, especially, which he calls attention to as "the Beast ascending out of the Sea;" for, like Daniel's beast, it makes war upon them, and overcomes them; yea, and kills their allies, the witnesses (Apoc. 11:7; 13:7): but then, there is hope in their end. For, as this great sea monster "gathereth them into a captivity and killeth them with the sword" -- fills his prisons with them and puts them to death; so the serpent-seed he represents are to receive measure for measure, heaped up and shaken down; or, as Daniel expresseth it, "he shall be slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame." "Here is the patience and faith of the Saints." But the saints were not to be scattered over "the whole earth," or fourth-beast habitable in its amplest signification; but, for two distinct, and partly parallel periods of 1260 years, to be fed and nourished in the Two Wings of the Great Eagle. Because of the Serpent's relations to them in the wilderness, or Court of the Gentiles, in their long antagonism, it was deemed necessary for the illustration of the times, to exhibit the Fourth Beast analytically. And this is the analysis with reference to him in his conflicts with the saints. The Fourth Beast made war upon them from the crucifixion of the Captain of their salvation, until a.d. 324. Daniel did not see this war in his vision; but John saw it; and predicted that the saints would come out of the conflict victorious. This victory we have seen celebrated in the twelfth chapter, tenth and eleventh verses. In this relation the fourth beast appears as "the Great Fiery-Red Dragon." While this constitution of power obtained, its jurisdiction extended over "the whole habitable," but not over "the whole earth," as when the Ancient of Days comes. Had this particular been revealed to Daniel, it might have been in these words, "And the Great Fiery-Red Dragon made war upon the Saints; but the Saints overcame him, and cast him out of the heaven." But the Spirit condescended to be more specific; and instead of this brief and summary statement, represented the stages of the conflict ultimating in that result, in the prophetic symbols of the first six seals. But the Fourth Beast, though vanquished in this war of two hundred and ninety-one years, was not subdued: for afterwards, as we have seen, he put on a new uniform, and in all the sanctimonials of Laodiceanism, "he went away to make war with the Remnants of the Woman's Seed." He was the Fourth Beast in catholic uniform; and although he inflicted great cruelties upon the saints, he did not overcome them, nor have they as yet conquered him. But Daniel saw the saints conquered by the Fourth Beast. That is true in part. He saw them conquered by a horn of the fourth beast, styled "a Little Horn that had eyes, like the eyes of a man, and a Mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows." This Little-Horn power subdued them, and prevails against them until the Ancient of Days come. Representative of this prevalance, we have the symbols of this thirteenth chapter. The Beast of the Sea, like the Catholic Dragon, who, since the cession of his throne, has assumed the uniform of Mohammed, is the enemy of the saints; and for the very obvious reason, that the Mouth of the Sea-Monster is the veritable Mouth of Daniel's Little Horn whose "very great things" John characterizes as "blasphemy concerning the Deity to have blasphemed his Name, and his tabernacle, and those tabernacling in the heaven." And for the same reason the Beast of the Earth is their enemy; for the Speaking Image he sets up is the embodiment of the same Mouth which commands all to be killed Who will not worship it. This command brings it into collision with the Saints, who worship no power but the Deity in manifestation. Hence war ensues between them and the beasts. This is the war Daniel saw; and both he and John testify that the Saints were prevailed against; while John goes further and explains the prevalence by saying their allies, the Two Witnesses, were killed. In this thirteenth chapter, we have presented to us Daniel's Fourth Beast under the analytic symbols of the Dragon, the Beast of the Sea, the Beast of the Earth, and the Image of the Beast. The throne of the Dragon was Rome, so long as the Roman Senate existed there, and the Seven Heads of the Dragon were incomplete. But when this throne was "yielded," and the Roman Senate expired, the throne of the Dragon was confined to Constantinople exclusively. The jurisdiction the Dragon-Power was able to reserve extended over all the habitable Eastward, of a line following the Rhine up to its point of nearest proximity to the source of the Danube, that is, half way between Strasburg and Basle; thence down the Danube to Belgrade; and thence southwardly to Dyrrachium, now called Durazzo, and across the Adriatic and Mediterranean to the Syrtis Major and the great Desert of Africa. All to the eastward of this line was the Constantinopolitan Dragon, or Greek division of the Great Roman Eagle, and comprehended Msia, or Bosnia, Servia, and Bulgaria: Thrace, or Roumelia; Macedonia, Greece, Asia Minor, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Egypt. This was a great diminution of the original Dragon dominion; still it was ample, and sovereign over rich and fertile regions. The Beast of the Sea divided the Roman habitable with the Catholic Dragon of the East. They are the two limbs of Nebuchadnezzar's Image. The dominion of this Sea Monster was, as John predicted, "extensive". It ruled all the habitable to the Westward of said line, including France, Spain, the Roman Africa, Italy, and the region between the Alps and the Rhine, Danube, and Save, anciently known under the names of Rhania, Noricum, and Pannonia, but in our times as Switzerland, half Suabia, Bavaria, and Austria and the western part of Hungary. In this outline I have not included England, Scotland, and Ireland, for reasons which need not be mentioned in this place. The beast, which John styles "another Beast," and which he says "ascended out of the earth," came up among the Horns of the Sea Beast, and after they had made their appearance (Dan. 7:8, 24). The Beast of the Earth was to be "diverse" from the Beast of the Sea, and to subdue three of its horns. These three horn-territories were so much of the Dragon Fourth Beast habitable taken from the Beast of the Sea; and conferred upon it the Roman characteristic. A map of Central Europe will exhibit the Beast of the Earth with sufficient accuracy. Its acquisition of Rome conferred upon it the quality of holiness in the estimation of its worshippers; so that by them it came to be styled "the Holy Roman Empire." It comprehended Italy, Austria, Bavaria, Hungary, and Germany to the North and Baltic seas. Its secular throne, in the beginning, was at Aix-la Chapelle, but afterwards at Vienna; and its spiritual seat in Rome. The Beast of the Earth is an extension of Daniel's Fourth Beast northwards, through the forests of Germany, in which the Romans of the old world could never effect a permanent settlement. The Beast of the Sea emerged after the collapse of the Western Empire in 475 a.d. It was superceded by the Holy Roman Empire, or Beast of the earth in 800. The Dragon represented the military power of eastern Rome centred in Constantinople which fell to the Turkish Power in 1453. As, then, the moon hath her different phases, called new, half, gibbous, and full, nevertheless the same moon; so also Daniel's Fourth Beast hath his phases, which are different constitutional manifestations, yet the beast remains the same to the end of his "dreadful and terrible" career. He has nearly passed through his Sea-Beast and Earth-Beast phases; that is, in certain relations: but there yet awaits him a vast extension, and a constitutional development of thirty years duration which will be final. In this future and last phase of his existence, he will stand before the nations in his most dreadful and terrible aspect, scarlet of body with sin and blood, with his Sixto-Octavian Head diademed with Ten Horns, and a Drunken Harlot sitting upon his back. Thus panoplied with the Mystery of Iniquity in Church and State, he will have consummated the mission revealed to Daniel, in the full discharge of which, he was to "devour the whole earth, and tread it down, and break, it in pieces." Having accomplished this, "he goeth into perdition," where in the popular abyss, he is bound for a thousand years (Apoc. 17:11; 20:1-3). 2. The Prophetic Stand-Point of the Vision Daniel reclined upon his bed and dreamed; but John stood upon the Sand of the Sea, and saw things bearing resemblances to what he deemed sufficiently striking to establish their identity. Daniel says that it was stormy in his vision; or, as he expresses it, "the four winds of the heaven strove." But in this thirteenth chapter John says nothing about a strife of winds; but simply "I stood." I take it therefore that there is a sense in which John's standing is equivalent to storminess of the situation. Any one who has stood upon the sea shore, especially if rocky, will know that the situation is not characterized by silence, or the absence of noise. On the contrary, the roar of the waters is incessant. If the sea were quiescent as a pond, then to stand upon its beach would be to experience the silence and solitude of the boundless prairie. Such a standing for observation of phenomena would be symbolical of times of tranquillity and peace. But this could not be the nature of John's standing; for no such politico-ecclesiastical organizations could ascend into a position to command, or rather, to divide the command of, the world in halcyon days undisturbed by the storms of war and conquest. His standing then upon the margin of the roaring waters was significant of the storminess of the times, when what he "saw" should ascend to dominion "in the whole earth," en hole te ge. He stood, and the roar he heard was "the multitude of many peoples, making a noise like the noise of the seas; the rushing of nations, making a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters." Such a roaring of the waters implies a tumult of the sea from the strife of words. This implication places John and Daniel side by side as spectators of the storm. Daniel saw the four winds lashing the sea into fury; east, west, north, and south winds, all blowing upon the same sea. No ship could live in such a storm. Each of Daniel's four beasts, or dominions, was brought up out of the sea by the four winds of his vision. The Fourth Beast was brought up thereby; and so was his Sea-Beast development; and John apocalyptically beheld the same four winds as he "stood upon the Sand of the Sea, and saw." This leads me to remark as to the time of his standing. He stood there while the Four Winds continued the storm. The winds producing the roar of the sea, were "the four winds of the earth," which, in their blowing, gave voice to the first four trumpets, which in my Tabular Analysis, Vol. 2 p. 114, are styled, "Wind Trumpets." And from this tabular exposition I would transfer the "note" in Vol. 2 pg. 115, as appropriate to the place. It reads thus: "The judgments of these four winds culminate in the development of the Seventh Head, which 'continues a short space'; and of the Ten Diademed Horns of the Beast that rises out of the sea; in the 'wounding as it were to death' of its Sixth Head; and in the consequent cession by the Dragon of his power, throne and dominion over the affected Third Part, which before the blowing of those winds, was a constituent of his empire". The time of this stormy period is indicated on p. 115 of that volume, as "from a.d. 395 to a.d. 554-'59, the epoch, or beginning, of the darkened day and night in the third of them, being equal to a period of 159-'64 years." The reader will please compare what is written here concerning the "time of events," and correct what he finds on p. 115 under this caption, by this erratum. Now the time represented by John's standing on the sand, was all the time of the sounding of the four wind-trumpets, to the end of the darkened day and night in their third part. This was a long period; but defined by the work done as revealed in this chapter. It was a period of 405 years. This was the time of his symbolic standing upon the Sand of the Sea, beholding the development of the Fourth Beast, in its Seventh Head, Ten Horns, and Little Horn, with Man's Eyes and a Lion's Mouth. The four hundred and five years are composed of 164, from the beginning of the first trumpet to the darkening of Rome's day in the epoch of the Pragmatic Sanction, or settlement of Italian affairs, by Justinian, a.d. 554-'9. "Under the Exarchs of Ravenna," says Gibbon, "Rome was degraded to the second rank." Rome had hitherto been imperial or regal, under the Sixth and Seventh Heads of the Dragon; but she was now, as the consequence of the blowing of the four wind-trumpets, neither the one nor the other; but a city which had "reigned over the kings of the earth" (Apoc. 17:18), now degraded to a rank in which she exercised no sovereignty at all. She was therefore now in a state of eclipse both in respect of the luminaries of her day and night; for "the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise" (Apoc. 8:8, 12). The reader will please connect, by reference, what I am now writing with what appears in Vol. 3 pp. 68-75. The phrase "the third part of the day," and "the third part of the night," implies a whole day, and a whole night, each equal to the third part three times repeated. With the Jews, a day and a night were each twelve hours long; so that "a third part of" a day would be four hours; and "a third part of" a night, also four hours; in all eight hours. Now there is a certain class of Laodicean speculators in apocalyptic mysteries, who style themselves "Literalists," and who would have us to believe that day and night signify nothing more than what is ordinarily meant by these terms! So that they would reduce us to the absurdity of believing, that the events of the four trumpets culminated in the darkening of the natural sun, moon, stars, day and night, for the short period of only eight literal hours! But this folly is too ridiculous for an argument against it, or for a serious refutation. The "day" and the "night" must be proportional to the subject treated of. The subject is the obscuration of the luminaries of a political universe -- of a dominion. These are things of centuries. Their day and their night, is their day-time and their night-time of ages. Hence a time is a minor cycle contained in the aeon, or aeon, of their duration. The aeon of the Sea-Monster's Mouth is three cycles and a half, or three times and a half, or three days and a half, or 1260 years and as a cycle, or circle, is geometrically divisible into three hundred and sixty equal parts. A time or day, is a year of years, or 360 lunar years. Rome's lights which ruled her day and night times were not eclipsed for a whole day and a whole night: but only for a third of each of these times. Had she lost her rule for a whole day and a whole night, her ruling would have been suppressed for seven hundred and twenty years, or a dual of times: but as it was, her day-time and her night-time only ceased shining two hundred and forty years, which are the sum of the thirds predicted; for the third of a daytime of three hundred and sixty years is one hundred and twenty years: and the third of a night-time of three hundred and sixty years; is also one hundred and twenty years; and these two periods of one hundred and twenty years each added together give two hundred and forty years. Now if these 240 years be added to a.d. 559, the epoch of Rome's degradation, it gives the sum a.d. 799; when, if my exposition of the symbolic time of the Fourth Trumpet be correct, history ought to testify Rome's restoration to the imperial dignity from which she had been degraded by the will of the Catholic Dragon. Now John informs us, that he stood and saw the ascending of the Sea-Beast and the ascending of the Earth-Beast: this then was the period of his standing -- he stood while they were ascending. The latter Beast was developed imperially, with Rome for its tempo-spiritual throne, a.d. 799. Hence John's standing upon the Sand of the Sea reaches, in its significance, to this date, or to the end of the 240 years. Add then these years to the terminal epoch of the fourth trumpet, and we have a period of 405 years -- a stormy period, which changed the face of the world; and laid the foundation of a polity, which, after a lapse of more than a thousand years, is manifest in the existing constitution of modern europe. 3. The Sand of the Sea But John in his symbolic standing "stood upon the Sand of the Sea". There must be some meaning in this standing upon the sand. In the tenth chapter the "mighty angel" stands upon the earth and sea; and in the fifteenth, John's brethren, and John himself, therefore, are seen standing upon the transparent sea, no longer mingled with fire; evincing that they had gotten the victory over the Ten Horned Beast, and the Image of the Sixth Head of the Beast, which had ascended out of the stormy sea while John stood upon the sand thereof. But here John stands not upon the earth to view the ascent of the Beast of the Earth; nor upon the sea to behold the ascent of the Beast of the Sea; but upon the sand of the sea to see the ascent of them both. Jeremiah says, that the Deity placed the sand for a bound of the sea -- ch. 5:22. This is true in a natural sense; when, therefore, the sand of the sea is introduced into symbolical prophetic writing, it must be taken to represent the bound, shore, or limit, of the symbolical sea. But the sand of the sea is also the similitude for a multitude of people. Thus Hosea predicts the multitude into which Israel shall be developed in the day of their glory under this figure, saying in Ch. 1:10, "the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered": and sand also in the sense of multitude we find used apocalyptically in chapter 20:8, where the hosts of the post-millennial Gog and Magog, or Dragon released from confinement in the abyss, are compared to the Sand of the Sea. Now John was "a man wondered at," a man of sign, or as we say in our vernacular, a representative man; and his actions and postures, like Daniel's and Ezekiel's, were dramatic. Hence John upon the sand represented that portion of "the great multitude which no man can number" (Apoc. 7:9) existing contemporaneously with the ascending of the beasts out of the sea; and who refused to worship the Image of the Beast, and would not receive his mark, nor the number of his name (ch. 13:15; 15:2). The position they occupied in the four hundred years of the ascending of the monsters of the sea and the earth, was that of neutral observers of events; whose antipathies were against their old enemy the Catholic Dragon, who was compelled by the four wind-trumpet powers to "yield his power, throne and an extensive dominion" to the Ten Horns. The judgments of the four wind-trumpets were not sent against the servants of the Deity, sealed in their foreheads with the Father's name (chap. 7:3; 14:1) whom John represented; but upon the catholic worshippers of daimonia and idols (ch. 9:20). Hence John's multitude in the Wings, or extremities, of the Great Eagle, had the sympathy of "the barbarians" who rushed in upon the Dragon's domain to establish kingdoms for themselves. The saints and witnesses being at war with the Dragon (ch. 12:17), his enemies, "the barbarians," would naturally be their friends; so that, while the Dragon and the barbarians were in tempestuous and stormy conflict, their multitude in the Roman Africa and the Alpine regions would hear the roar of the tempest-tossed sea, standing as it were upon the shore. 4. The Sea In the Hebrew tongue any collection of waters is termed seas as in Gen. 1:10, "The gathering together of the waters, he called seas." The word before us in the original is thalassa, on which the lexicon says, "when Homer uses it of a particular sea, he means the Mediterranean, for he calls the outer sea Okeanos, Ocean, and holds it to be a river. Herodotus calls the Mediterranean the inside sea; and the Ocean, the outside sea; the Latins called it mare nostrum, "Our Sea" as it is geographically and apocalyptically. What Matthew in ch. 8:20, calls thalassa, Luke in ch. 8:23, terms limne, a lake, or, an inland sea. "Many waters," says Daubuz, "upon the account of their noise, number, and disorder, and confusion of their waves, are the symbol of peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues. The symbol is so explained in Rev. 17:15. And in Jer. 47:2, waters signify an army, or multitude of men. The comparison of the noise of a multitude to the noise of mighty or many waters, is used by Isaiah in ch. 17:12, 13, much after the same manner as Homer compares the noise of a multitude to the noise of the waves of a sea in a storm." "Sea, clear and serene, denotes an orderly collection of people, in a quiet and peaceable state." "Sea, troubled and tumultuous, signifies a collection of men in motion and war. Either way, the waters signifying people, and the sea being a collection of waters, the sea becomes the symbol of people, gathered into one body politic, kingdom, or jurisdiction, or united in one design." "The resemblance between the noise of an enraged sea, and the noise of an army, or multitude in commotion is obvious, and frequently taken notice of by the prophets." Daubuz truly remarks, that "the accomplishment of a prophecy must be considered, and consequently applied according to the signification of the terms by which it is expressed. This signification is either symbolical or literal. But it happens sometimes that there are occasions in which the event appears to be suitable to both these. The first signification, if the terms are in their nature symbolical, is the principle in the intention; the second, if joined with the other, is only concurrent. If both suit the terms, the first (or symbolical) must always have the preference, as being the more noble, and worthy of the Holy Spirit's care to foretell it; and then we may give way to the latter, where it will concur. The principal event is that which answers fully to the majesty and first intention of the symbols; in which God does, as it were, speak in His own dialect, and so is always of greater extent, and more comprehensive than any other. The secondary event of a symbolical prediction is, when such an event, being also concomitant with the other, answers more nearly to the literal signification of the terms in which the symbolical prediction is expressed; and, as it were, alters the nature of the symbols, as if they were literal characters of the things meant by them. An example will set this in a clear light. The prophet Nahum predicts the overthrow of Nineveh in these words: 'with an overrunning flood he will make an utter end of the place thereof' (Ch. 1:8). An overrunning flood is the symbol of desolation by a victorious enemy. The accomplishment, however, showed the signification to be two-fold, that is, symbolical and also literal. Diodorus informs us, that in the third year of the siege, the river being swollen with continual rains overflowed part of the city, and broke down the wall for twenty furlongs; and the enemy entered the breach that the waters had made, and took the city." According to the same principles, the Sand of the Sea, and the Sea itself may be rightly viewed in the chapter before us. The events in their accomplishment show that the signification of the Sea is both symbolical and literal. Daniel's vision of the ascendency of the Horns plainly shows, that their manifestation was in connexion with the literal Latin Sea, the Mediterranean. His words are, "the four winds of the heaven strove upon the Great Sea." This was the name given to the Mediterranean, or Sea in the midst of the earth, by the Hebrews. He describes the four beasts that came up out of it, as four dominions: and in the interpretation, the Sea is styled the Earth; and the beasts arising out of it, are termed kings (Ver. 17, 3). Compare the symbol in verse 3, with the signification in verse 17: thus, "Four beasts came up from the sea (upon which the winds strove); diverse one from another;" and now read the explanation, "These great beasts which are four are four kings which shall arise out of the earth". Now the fourth king was the "dreadful and terrible" one. He came up with his body, head, and horns Out of the Great Sea, in the sense of arising out of the countries by which the sea is almost enclosed as a lake. Here is a blending of the symbolical and the literal; and so, that in the interpretation, the symbolical is anchored to the literal; by which I mean, that we must not go away to the Baltic, and Atlantic, and German Oceans, to find the fourth beast and his heads and horns; but must confine our investigations to those countries which in the days of the prophecy had outlets upon the Great Sea. Now, what Daniel beheld arising out of the sea as the results of the storms of war upon it, John also saw in part from his Patmian standpoint ascending from the same sea and in the same sense. He saw the kingdoms and empires of Modern Europe so far as their origin was Mediterranean, ascending from this sea. He stood literally upon its Patmian Shore, in a numerous cluster of its islands, which were as but the sands of its coast; and from this, as the representative of a multitude occupying the wings of this sea-region, he saw kingdoms arise from the symbolic sea inhabiting the literal maritime earth enclosing the Latin Sea, of which he has presented us with a symbolical description in the chapter we have in hand. 5. The Bottomless Pit "The Beast that ascendeth out of the Bottomless Pit" -- Ch. 11:7 In the apocalypse there are the earth, the sea, the sand of the sea, the abyss, and the pit of the abyss. All these terms have their own special signification where they occur. The sea, the sand of the sea, and the abyss styled in the Common Version, "the bottomless pit," are related to the Beast of ch. 11:7 and chapter 13:1. In the former text, it is said to ascend out of the abyss, and in the latter, out of the sea. But, though the terms expressive of the place of origin are two different ones, there are not two different beasts, but one and the same beast only. But then, why are these two different terms employed with reference to the same beast? There must be a reason for it. In elucidation of this inquiry, then, I remark in addition to what has already been written in Vol. 3. p. 85, that, though in the Septuagint and certain texts of the New Testament, abyss, or abussos, is identical with the sea and deep, yet symbolically and apocalyptically, sea and deep do not represent all that is intended to be conveyed by the word. The Empire at its Greatest Extent. Abussos is derived from a priv. and bussos, the depth, and therefore signifies, that which is not, or has not been, fathomed; hence, in general, boundless, exhaustless. The apocalyptic terms above recited are terms of extension. The sea and the earth of this chapter are coextensive with the Mediterranean and its countries to the Rhine, and Danube; these were a deep that had been politically bounded, or fathomed: but, what of that vast unmeasured, or boundless, region beyond? That region styled in John's time, Germania, European and Asiatic Sarmatia, and Scythia, beyond the Rhine, the Danube, the Carpathian Mountains, the Dniester, the Black Sea, the Caucasian Mountains, and the Caspian Sea? This was a wild, unsubdued wilderness stretching along the northern frontier of the Great Roman Eagle, inhabited by swarms of fierce barbarians, whom the Romans were unable to fathom, or to bring within the appreciable depths of the earth and sea. They were an unorganized confused multitude -- an abyss of which no conqueror or legislator had been able to reach the bottom. But how changed this country of the abyss since John stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw arise out of the Latin Sea and the Earth, the Beasts of the Sea and Earth! Since then the Abyss has been fathomed, and no longer erupts its wild barbaric hordes in destructive inundations, whereby suddenly and without warning, cities and rural districts are plundered and reduced to smoking ruins. The abyss, which was "the Northern Hive" from which swarmed forth the destroying agents of the first four trumpets, sounded against the Roman Earth and Sea, is now the area of Germany from the Rhine and Danube to the Baltic, Bohemia, Poland, the Great Russian empire, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. In the times of the ascending of the Sea Beast, these were the ultramarine, abyssal fountains of the Great Sea; which, when broken up, roared forth their floods and tempests, and developed upon the Latin Habitable the Ten-Horn Kingdoms of Modern Europe. Hence the reason why the same beast is attributed to different sources. He came latent, or hidden, as it were, being as yet undeveloped, from the outlying abyssal region, when the Barbarians of the North rushed in upon the sea, and the rivers, and the fountains of waters, belonging to the Catholic Dragon: and he came up above the waters of the sea when the invading hosts of the abyss effected settlements upon the Dragon-territory, and were developed into the Ten Diademed Horns of the Beast. But, very different to this is the speculation culled from "Horsley's Sermon on the Descent of our Lord into Hell." He says, "the abyss is where the wicked spirits are reserved in chains unto the great day. This abyss is situated in the central regions of the earth, and therefore is below the sea. It is therefore not impossible that in the ascent of the Beast (Rev. 13:1; 17:8) two different ideas may be combined. He might be described as arising out of the sea in reference to his secular and political resurrection; and as ascending out of the abyss, or region of condemned spirits, with relation to his spiritual removal. Moreover, even if he ascended from Hades, the sea might be the medium of his ascent; and there is a peculiar fitness in its being so represented, to denote his arising out of the commotions and struggles of the nations, the symbolical sea." "According to the Jews," says Daubuz, "the abyss was a place under the earth, in the most internal parts of it, and was thought to be a great receptacle of waters as a reservatory to furnish all the springs or rivers. And this opinion was not only held by the Egyptians, Homer, and Plato, but also by some of the modern philsophers. And Seneca seems to be of the same opinion. And in this sense, the abyss symbolically signifies a hidden multitude of confused men." 6. The Beast "A Beast," says Daubuz, "is the symbol of a tyrannical, usurping power or monarchy, that destroys its neighbors or subjects, and preys upon all about it, and persecutes the church of God? "The four beasts in Dan. 7:3, are explained in ver. 7, of four kings or kingdoms, as the word king is interpreted, ver. 23. "In several other places of Scripture wild beasts are the symbol of tyrannical powers; as in Ezek. 34:28, and Jer. 12:9, where the beasts of the field are explained by the Targum, of the kings of the heathen and their armies. "Among profane authors, the comparison of cruel governors to savage beasts, is obvious. And Horace calls the Roman People a many-headed beast -- Lib. 1, Ep. 1 ver. 76. And as for the Oneirocritics, wild beasts are generally the symbols of enemies, whose malice and power is to be judged of in proportion to the nature and magnitude of the wild beasts they are represented by. 'As a roaring lion and a ranging bear; so is a wicked ruler over the poor people'" (Prov. 28:15). Upon the principle of this proverb the beasts of the apocalypse are symbolical of wicked rulers. They are "dreadful and terrible" to the choicest of mankind; for it is written, "the beast that ascendeth out of the abyss," said the Spirit, "will make war upon my two witnesses, and will overcome them, and kill them" (Apoc. 11:7); and the same thing is affirmed of the beast of the sea in ch. 13:7, as, "and it was given unto him to make war with the Saints, and to overcome them;" but in relation to these, which he overcomes, or treads them, as the Holy City, under foot, it does not say that he kills them as he killed the witnesses. Truly, "as a roaring lion and a ranging bear," have these apocalyptic beasts been to the poor saints and witnesses over whom they have tyrannized for ages. The general description of this symbolized dominion is, that it has "seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten diadems, and upon his head the Name of Blasphemy." These are few words, but they comprehend much of an interesting and important character. I shall take them in their order, and proceed to treat therefore of 7. The Seven Heads of the Beast "The Head of a beast answers to the supreme power, and that whether the supreme power be in one single person or in many. For as the power abstractly is not considered, so neither the persons abstracted from their power; but both in concreto, make up this head politic. And, therefore, if the supreme power be in many, those many are the head, and not the less one head for consisting of many persons, no more than the body is less one body for consisting of many persons." -- Daubuz. The Beast of the Sea has seven heads as well as the Pago-Catholic Dragon. They are the same heads, and identify the Dragon and the Beast as apocalyptically diverse constitutional developments of the same power. The only difference of the two series of heads symbolically viewed is, that the Dragon series is diademed, while the Beast series is not. In the latter symbol the Horns, not the Heads, are diademed; but in the case of the Dragon it was the heads and not the horns. This diversity, of course, is significative of some peculiarity, and has to be explained when we come to the further consideration of the horns. The reader will please to turn to what has been written concerning the heads of the Dragon in the previous chapter. What is found there is equally applicable to the heads of the Sea Beast, and need not, therefore, be repeated here. Leaving the heads, then, for the present, I proceed to a further exposition of the horns. 8. The Ten Diademed Horns of the Beast "Horns are the symbols of power, exerted by strength of arms because such beasts as have horns make use of them as their arms. "As the symbol of strength they are used in Psa. 18:2. They are also used to denote the regal power; and when they are distinguished by number, they signify so many monarchies. Thus horn signifies a monarchy in Jer. 48:25; and in Zech. 1:18, the Four Horns are the four great monarchies which had each of them subdued the Jews. See also Dan. 8:20-22. "The Horn of David in Psa. 132:18, is explained by the Targum of a glorious king to arise out of the house of David. "It appears from Valerius Maximus, that the ancient Romans understood horns as the symbol of regal government; and the images of the gods, kings and heroes, among the heathen, were adorned with horns as a mark of their royalty and power. "Horns upon a wild beast are not only expressive of powers, but also of such powers as are tyrannical, ravenous and at enmity with God and his saints, as in Dan. 8" -- Daubuz. The Horns of the Sea Monster represent Ten Kingdoms established by the Barbarians of the Abyss upon all that Mediterranean territory conquered by them from the Roman Dragon. This appears from the testimony that "the Dragon yielded to him his power, and his throne, and an extensive jurisdiction" -- ver. 2. In relinquishing it to the beast, he yielded them to his appendages, the horns and mouth as well. In ch. 17:12, John was informed that the ten horns were symbolical of kingdoms: "the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdoms as yet;" that is, they had received no kingdom at the time the interpreter was talking with John. Daniel gives the same record in ch. 7:23. He had said that he wished to know the truth represented by the ten horns upon the fourth beast's head; upon which it was stated to him that "the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise;" and those in ver. 9, are styled "the thrones" which are to be "cast down" when the Ancient of Days comes to sit in judgment upon them. And this judgment John indicates in the words: "These (Ten Horns) shall make war upon the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them; for He is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him (the Saints of the Holy City) are called chosen and faithful" (Apoc. 17:14). The geographical extent of the Roman Habitable upon which the barbaric tribes of the abyss established themselves with Feudal Sovereignty, was the Mediterranean West. They have to be enumerated by the names they bore in the period when they were engaged in the work of establishing themselves upon that territory. The symbol, as we shall see, requires at least eleven abyssal tribes -- ten for the horns, and one or more for the Seventh Head. The following is the list that seems to me authorized by history: 1. Huns; 2. Vandals; 3. Visigoths; 4. Burgundians; 5. Gepida 6. Lombards; 7. Franks; 8. Suevi; 9. Alans; 10. Bavarians. These were the founders of the Horn-Kingdoms of the Beast. This divided form of Mediterranean Europe has continued for ages, even to the present time; though the number of its divisions has not always, nor is it now, ten. The prophecy does not require that the number of the kingdoms should be invariable. They were ten in the period of their foundation, and from this fact have acquired the symbolic designation of the Ten Horns. So that though their number might be reduced onehalf, the power that might be established over the territory they originally occupied would, to that extent, be represented as the Ten Horns. "The emergence of the wild beast of the sea," says Mr. Lord, "is not to be regarded as having been accomplished in a moment, or a brief space, but as having occupied such a period as would naturally be required for the invasion of the empire (of the Catholic Dragon) by many separate tribes migrating from vast distances, engaging in numerous wars, and, finally, after victory, establishing new and independent governments. Nor are the chiefs who rule them after the conquest of parts of the empire, to be considered as having assumed that relation in which they are symbolized by the horns while they remained, as in France for a long period, in subordination to Rome. They emerged from the sea as dynasties, when, by concession or victory, they became rulers of portions of the empire in independence of that power. The institutions of the horns, therefore, took place at different periods, and they were those that subsisted when the conquest of the (Western) empire was completed and the imperial power extinguished" -- a.d. 476. On the conquest of Italy and termination of imperial authority by the deposition of Augustulus by Odoacer, the Herulian Goth, a.d. 475, the barbarians of the apocalyptic abyss held possession of the whole western division of the Latin Sea, with the exception of a part of Gaul, and were distributed under ten kingly governments. 1. The Huns, erupting from the Scythian region of the Alps, crossed the Volga, the Don, the Dnieper, the Dniester, and planted themselves in the vicinity of the Danube, and, therefore, styled Hungary, a.d. 370. Under Attila, a.d. 451, they descended into Thrace, about thirty miles from Constantinople; then turning westward into Macedonia, he wheeled north into Pannonia, a part of Hungary; and thence, passing through Noricum, a part of Austria and Bavaria, crossed the Danube and the Rhine near their sources, and pursued his march through Belgium almost to the English Channel. He then crossed the Seine, and descended to the Loire, whence he turned eastward, recrossing the Seine, the Rhine and the Danube near their sources; thence he descended into Lombardy, from which, repassing through Noricum and Pannonia, he again crossed the Danube, where he died at his seat of government. This was the course of the Great Blazing Star of the third wind-trumpet, the remains of whose dominion exists in the Horn-Kingdom of Hungary. 2. The Vandals descended from the Swedish section of the abyss, and entered Gaul, a.d. 406. They soon passed into Spain, and after occupying a part of that Mediterranean province nearly twenty years, a.d. 427, crossed into Roman Africa, wrested it from the Catholic Dragon, set up an independent kingdom under Genseric, and ruled it until a.d. 533. The kingdom was founded under the sounding of the second wind-trumpet, when a Great Mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea. 3. The Visigoths, or Western Goths came originally from Sweden with the Ostrogoths, or Eastern Goths. The Visigoths, as the "hail and fire mingled with blood" of the first trumpet, after their separation from the Ostrogoths, who encamped between the Dnieper and the Dniester, descended upon Greece under the leadership of Alaric, and afterwards, having ravaged Illyria, Lombardy and Italy, laid siege to Rome. In a.d. 408, they passed from Italy into the south of France, and maintained a kingdom there till a.d. 506, when, being driven by the Franks into Spain, they wrested a part of it, Gallicia, from the Suevi, and in a.d. 585, extended their sway over the whole peninsula. 4. The Burgundians issued from the Germania region of the abyss east of the Vistula. They established themselves in Belgic Gaul a.d. 407. After a few years they obtained possession of Savoy, and subsequently of Gaul on the Rhone, and maintained a separate kingdom till a.d. 524, when they were conquered by the Franks. On the division of the Frank kingdom, it again became a separate state, and continued such most of the time for several centuries. 5. The Gepidae migrated from the Scandinavian country west of the Baltic, now called Sweden. They crossed the sea and proceeded southeasterly across the Dnieper, and encamped between that river and the Don. From thence they passed westward into Hungary and thence radiated to Illyria, now styled Dalmatia, in which they established themselves on the Adriatic Bay of the Mediterranean, after the death of Attila in a.d. 453. Ardaric, the king of the Gepidae, erected his throne in the palace of Attila, whence he exercised royal authority over the old country of Dacia, from the Carpathian hills to the Black Sea. The kingdom of the Gepidae continued until a.d. 566, when it was destroyed by the Lombards. 6. The Lombards migrated originally from Scandinavia, ascending thence nearly due south to the Danube. On the dissolution of the empire of Attila, a.d. 455, whose standard they followed, they took possession of a portion of Pannonia, a part of Hungary. Subsequently to the conquest of the Gepidae, they extended their possessions as far as Bavaria, a.d. 568; they invaded and conquered Italy, where they maintained themselves till near the close of the eighth century, when they were "plucked up by the roots" (Dan. 7:8). 7. The Franks is a name assumed by a confederacy of German tribes, inhabiting that section of the abyss lying between the Lower Rhine and the Weser. It signifies the Freemen. In Gibbon's day, their original territory was in part enclosed within the Circle of Westphalia, the Landgravate of Hesse, and the Duchies of Brunswick and Lunenburg, now absorbed by the Prussians in their transitory confederation of Northern Germany. In their inaccessible morasses, redolent of mud, water, and frogs, they used to shake defiance at the Roman arms. When the time arrived for the ascending of the Diademed Horns out of the sea, they instinctively obeyed the summons of the First Trumpet, and in a.d. 407, entered Gaul, and within a few years established a kingdom upon the Rhine, which they continued to maintain and advance, until in the sixth century it extended over the whole territory embraced in modern France. 8. The Suevi filled the interior Germanian countries of the abyss from the banks of the Oder to those of the Danube. A short time before the sounding of the first trumpet, they united with the Alemanni. They passed through Gaul, conquered Gallicia in Spain, and maintained themselves there as a Diademed Horn of the Sea till a.d. 585, a space of one hundred and seventy-seven years. 9. The Alans migrated from the Asiatic Sarmatia, lying between the Black and Caspian Seas. They passed from this section of the abyss into Germania, being joined on their march by the Vandals, who had previously descended from Scandinavia, and had halted in European Sarmatia, between the Dnieper and the Don. In Germany their forces were still further increased by the accession of the Suevi. Thus strengthened, the Alans, who did not remain in Gaul with the Vandals and Sueves, crossed the Pyrenees into Spain, where they divided; the Suevi settling in Gallicia, the Alans in Portugal, and the Vandals in Vandalitia. After sustaining a separate government eight or nine years, they were incorporated by conquest with the Vandals and Sueves, and passed with the Vandals under Genseric into Africa. Another body of Alans had settled between the Rhine, the Seine, and the Loire. They repulsed Attila from Orleans, their capital, on his invasion of Gaul, a.d. 451, and were stationed in the centre of the army by which he was defeated at the great battle of Chalons. On his invasion of their territory, a.d. 453, they were supported by the Goths, and gained another victory. a.d. 464, they invaded Italy, and laid Liguria, the southern part of Sardinia, waste. Clovis, king of the Franks, extended his conquests over their territory as far as the Loire, a.d. 485, but they continued to subsist as a separate people till a.d. 507, or thereabouts, when they were conquered by the Franks. 10. The Bavarians. The present Bavaria in the time of the Romans formed part of the Dragon empire, known as Vindelicia and Noricum. Besides South Bavaria, Vindelicia also embraced the south-eastern part of the kingdom of Wurtemberg; while Noricum comprehended the Archduchy of Austria, Styria, Carinthia, and part of Carniola. The Jesuit Gordon in his Opus Chronologicum, referring to a.d. 511 says "Theodon, the first king of Bavaria, dies." We are not informed how long he had reigned; but Mr. Elliot thinks we may date it as before a.d. 493. The Bavarian Horn is noticed by Gibbon as forming one of the boundaries of the Ostrogothic kingdom of Italy under Theodoric: "He reduced," says he, "the unprofitable countries Rhitia (the Tyrol), Noricum, Dalmatia, and Pannonia, from the source of the Danube and the territory of the Bavarians." And again he says, "the Lombard kingdom extended east, north, and west, as far as the confines of the Avars, the Bavarians, and the Franks of Austrasia and Burgundy;" and Muller: "the Bavarians had now (that is, about the end of the sixth century) given name to Noricum." Such, then, is my list of the ten notable abyssal horns of the sea. Though separate dynasties, they are very properly united in a single symbol, and exhibited as one great combination of tyrannical states, from the identity of their origin in the abyss, the oneness of their policy (ch. 17:13), and the similarity of these rulers. This European Commonwealth was composed of monarchies that were all feudatories of the Dragon; for Gibbon shows, that they all adopted, in a great degree, the laws of the ancient empire as their common law. They all came at length to submit themselves to the Papal Yoke; a power which was rising with them out of the sea, whose system of falsehood they co-operated in imposing upon their subjects at all hazards. They may truly be styled the Papal Horns; for their history has proved them to have been, in all their past career, the blind instruments of "the Name of BLASPHEMY" that sits upon the Seven Heads. In the foregoing enumeration of the horns of the sea, I have made no mention of the Saxons and Danes, who issued forth from the Scandinavian and Germanian abyss against the Dragon province of Britannia. In all the lists of the horns I have seen, the Saxons have been made to figure as one; and, consequently, the Anglo-Saxons of Britain, now styled England, have been set down as one of the horns of the Beast. But this classification of England with the horns cannot be admitted. It is true that the Saxons and Angles issuing from Holstein and Schleswig, a.d. 449, conquered Britannia. But, instead of constituting themselves one horn, they founded seven kingdoms, styled Kent, Essex, Sussex, Wessex, East Anglia, Mercia, and Northumberland. These were called the Saxon Heptarchy; and were as distinct and independent kingdoms as any of their ten contemporaries upon the Continent. Another objection to England being numbered with the ten, is that she is not a country of the Great-Sea world. The ten horns were to ascend out of the Mediterranean upon which Daniel saw the tempest raging. Gaul, Spain, Italy, Illyria, Africa, and Dacia, are political sections of a terrene, whose waters, directly or indirectly mostly discharge themselves into the Mediterranean. But the British Isles afar off have no relation to it at all. As Origen says in Hom. 6, a.d. 230, "The Britons are divided from our world." They are no part of the Sea Monster's interior maritime territory. Even in modern times they are three kingdoms, not a single horn only; and those three horns, the horn of England, the horn of Scotland, and the horn of Ireland, are more imperial than regal, and more Oriental than European. Another objection to Britain being numbered among the ten horns is, that though, indeed, she is ruled ecclesiastically by a name of blasphemy, her constitution is, in word and deed, opposed to "the Name of Blasphemy" upon the heads of the Beast. The ten horns all worship this Name, and recognize it as their Holy Father; and maintain ambassadors at his court; and exercise their influence to uphold him in glory and power, that his supposed relations with the heavenly world may, by his favor and blessing, be caused to redound to their spiritual and temporal prosperity. He is their Mouth in all spiritual utterances, "speaking great things and blasphemies concerning the Deity, his Name, his Tabernacle, and them that dwell in the heaven" (ch. 13:5, 6). But, blasphemous as Britain is in her constitutional ecclesiasticism, she protests against, and repudiates, the Chief Blasphemer of the world. She does not belong to the politico-ecclesiastical system, or body politic, of which he is the Mouth. She sends no ambassador to the Court of Rome; and though there may be spiritual imbeciles who have real, and crafty politicians who have feigned, reverence for the Roman God and the mummery of his superstition, the heart of the British peoples is hardened against them with the impenetrability of adament. This hostility is known and understood at Rome, where the will, but not the power, has always existed to reduce Britain to subjection to the so-called "Holy See." In witness of this, there is the Spanish Armada equipped and sent against England in the days of Elizabeth, at the instigation of the Court of Rome, that by the thumb-screw arguments of the Inquisition, the British nation might be brought within the pale of the Mediterranean Sea Monster, beyond which no heretical soul can be saved! No, the United Kingdom of England, Scotland and Ireland was never one of the ten horns. The taint of imperiality, as it were, was indelibly infixed in British soil by the Dragon. The Saxons and Angles from the abyss did not expel him. The Dragon withdrew, and told the Britons to defend themselves. Invaded by the Picts and Scots, they invited the Saxons and Angles to come over and help them. The Celts were repelled; but when the war was over, the Saxons refused to leave, and made the heptarchial settlement for themselves. Nearly fourteen centuries have passed since these events; and the Dragons carved in relief upon the interior of the House of Lords, are now the appropriate symbol of British power. The real ruler at Constantinople, the throne of the Dragon, is Britain, who claims "the Sick Man" there, as her "ancient and faithful ally." Her interests are intimately associated with the destiny of the Turkish empire, more especially with that part of it termed Syria and Egypt. If the British power in any way be an element of the beast, it can only be in connexion with its body, which is like unto a Leopard." As the power indicated by the words, "Sheba and Dedan, and the Merchants of Tarshish and the young lions thereof," in Ezek. 38:13, she becomes identified with Daniel's third beast, the four-winged and four-headed Leopard, which is to have its dominion taken away when the Ancient of Days comes; but which, before it loses its dominion thus, is to come into collision With "the feet of the Bear." 9. The Ten Diadems "And upon his Horns ten Diadems." The Horns on the Dragon had no diadems upon them; because the nations of the abyss had not then issued forth to erect kingdoms upon the Roman Habitable. But in the chapter before us, the Dragon-Horns of the sea are exhibited with diadems upon them, indicating that they were not Republics; but States, whose chief magistrates were enthroned, and diademed, and who would figure in the unmeasured Court of the Gentiles (ch. 11:2) as "the Crowned Heads of Europe." The diadems upon the ten horns is a symbolical rebuke of the foolish prediction of republican politicians and prophets, who deceive their worshippers with the conceit, that the kingdoms of Europe are to become republics after the type of the "Model Republic" of this western world! A horn with a diadem upon it is nowhere to be found, in sacred or profane heraldry, as the symbol of a republic. It always represents a kingly power, or dominion. The Gothic nations of the Abyss acquiesced in the military leaders who had led them to victory, and founded States upon the Roman territory, being recognized as kings, and decorated with diadems, by the Dragon-power. Hence they were kingdoms in their beginning; and will continue kingdoms until the Ancient of Days shall come, and by their overthrow, transfer the many diadems of these horns of the sea to his own glorious and snowy head (Apoc. 19:12; 1:14; 11:15). The very reverse of these republican prophecies is the real truth of the matter. Instead of the kingdoms of the world becoming republics, all the republics of the world will become kingdoms. This will be a great blessing to mankind, who have proved themselves incompetent for self-government upon wise and righteous principles, under any form of rule they may devise. It is the Divine purpose to bless mankind in Abraham and his seed. This is the great gospel prophecy of the word (Gal. 3:8, 9): and when the nations rejoice in peace and security under their own vines and fig-trees, they will be interested in nobler themes than the crude, unprofitable and lying vanities of those who now deceive them. Their political interests will be supervised by kings, who will then reign "by the grace of God". It will be theirs to command of their own sovereign will and pleasure; and for all nations simply to obey without question or dispute; for then, "judgment will be given to the Saints;" who will take the kingdom and the dominion under the whole heaven, and possess them for a thousand years and more (Dan. 7:22, 27, 18; Apoc. 20:4, 6). Then the universal world will be "ruled in righteousness," and truly "blessed in Abraham and his seed." A few last words may be added in reference to the diadems, which I find collected by the industry of Mr. Elliott, from Gibbon, and other writers with whom the reader will never probably become acquainted. What follows, he says, he has borrowed from Lelewel's great work on the coinage of the Middle Age. "It is well known," says Elliott, "that the barbarian Gothic or German kings, after their first conquests, were almost all anxious to receive appointment from the Roman emperor as Masters-General or Patricians of the empire" of the Dragon; "the appointment being equivalent to that of Viceroy; and most useful above all in order to legitimize their government in the eyes of their Roman subjects, who in respect of number immensely exceeded the barbarian population that had conquered them. In the negotiations and treaties on which matter, it was usually stipulated by the Roman emperors, and agreed to by the barbaric kings, that the Diademed Bust and names of the emperors should be stamped upon the barbarian coinage (at least on their gold coins) not the Gothic princes' own. Hence there was a semi-Roman state of the Gothic coinage, as Lelewel calls it, for a century more or less, from about a.d. 450 to 550; the Vandals of Africa forming however an exception apparently, and acting more or less independently in this respect. At length Clovis the Frank, at the opening of the sixth century, had the plenary sovereignty of Gaul awarded to him by the Byzantine emperor, with the title of Consul and Augustus, and the Diadem of Pearls as its badge and token: a grant renewed in a.d. 532 to Clovis' children, by Justinian, with full power over the coinage; and engagement that his purely Frank money should have the privilege of currency assured to it throughout the whole Roman empire. In the course of the sixth century, the example of Clovis was followed by others of the princes; the Lombards coming last about a.d. 600. "On the whole, it appears that at the opening of the sixth century, not only did the several Gothic princes exercise in their respective dominions the prerogatives of supreme sovereignty, but also had begun to appropriate to themselves the Roman Diademic Badge of such sovereignty; and that at the close of the century their assumption of the diadem, in sign of it, had become universal." In connection with these remarks he gives an engraving illustrating the reservation of the diadem to the Dragon, which was not assumed by the horns in their beginning. I conceive that the apocalyptic reason of this is found in the Dragon symbol of ch. 12. In this all the Seven Heads are diademed or sovereign; but the horns not. The idea then is this, that the horns were not to be diademed in their own absolute right, until the Seventh head had passed away; when the Romano-Gothic Sea Monster would stand before the world with Seven undiademed Heads and Ten Diademed Horns. The first coin of the engraving is Burgundian On one face is the diademed bust of the Dragon-emperor, Anastasius, and on the other, Sigismund, king and consul. The second, is a coin of the Suevi, with the bust, diademed, of the emperor Honorius on one side; and on the other, Richiarius, king. This was issued by the Suevi twenty-seven years after the death of Honorius, and his name stamped upon it out of regard to Roman imperial authority. A third coin is Ostrogothic. It was issued during the reign of the Seventh Head, while Theodoric was king of Italy, and Justinian was emperor. On one face is the diademed bust of the Dragon-emperor; and on the other, a wreath with the monogram of the king in the centre. There is another Ostrogothic coin about the size of a quarter dollar, with the diademed bust of Justinian on the one side; and the name and office of the ruler, king Witiges, on the other. I would remark here, that these two last-mentioned coins are evidence that the Ostrogothic kings of the Seventh Head, who reigned in Rome, did not consider the emperors of the Sixth Head as abolished from all influence in the affairs of Italy; but only "wounded as it were to death;" for here is evidence of the Sixth and Seventh Heads of the Dragon uniting in the coinage of the realm, which only mutually recognized governments and dynasties are free to do. Gibbon, writing of the first two kings of the Seventh Head, Odoacer and Theodoric, says of the former, that "he abstained, during his whole reign from the use of the purple and diadem;" and of the latter, he says, that "from a tender regard to the expiring prejudices of Rome, he declined the name, purple, and diadem of the emperors;" though "he assumed the whole substance and plenitude of imperial prerogative". This was the simple difference between the Imperial Sixth, and the Regal Seventh, heads of the Dragon and the Beast. Had Odoacer and Theodoric assumed "the name, purple and diadem of the emperors" when they reigned in Rome sovereigns of Italy, their government would have been a mere continuation of the Sixth Head. The substance and plenitude of sovereign prerogative remained, only the form of its constitutional administration was changed. This change in the form of the supreme power, with its exclusion from Africa, Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia, Majorca, and Minorca, then possessed by the Vandalic Horn, established a marked dissimilarity between the Sixth and Seventh Heads. The fifth coin of the engraving I regard as a very remarkable one. It is a coin of the Vandals, about the size of an English shilling. Upon one side is the front figure of a man, standing upon an altar. From each shoulder projects a wing with four little circles in each, as if he were an angel, or were identified with an angelic mission. From his waist to his ankles is a four-square in which are inserted four rows of precious stones, three in a row, or twelve in all, and strikingly resembling the Jewish High Priest's breastplate of righteousness on which were engraved the names of the twelve tribes. In his extended right hand he holds a globe surmounted with a cross; and in his extended left, a rude representation of a trumpet. On the other side, is the legend Genser Augustus, and underneath, a star of considerable magnitude. The age of this coin is over fourteen hundred years. Genseric was an Arian catholic, and the ally of the Circumcellions against the Dragon persecutor of the Donatists. Hence, when he conquered Africa and the islands of the Mediterranean from the Dragon, he proclaimed himself the Augustus of the Catholic world, as the word "Augustus" after his name, and the globe and cross in his right hand, upon the coin, evince. Having delivered the Donatists from the bloody persecutions of the Catholics, they, doubtless, gave him to understand, that they hailed him as one of the Angels of the Four Trumpets and the deliverer of the true church. Hence, the wings on his shoulders with four little circles upon them; and the four-square plate of Twelve Stones. All that Mr. Elliott has to say upon this interesting coin, is to correct Lelewel's reading of the name from Jensi to Genser; but, to my mind it is a striking indication that the Donatists of Africa, contemporary with the sounding of the Four Trumpets, were sufficiently advanced in apocalyptical exposition, to discern the true character of the times in which they lived, and their own ecclesiastical relations to them. The "terrible Genseric" and his Donatists clients, were neither Preterists, Futurists, nor Literalists; but rational interpreters of the Apocalypse as a symbolic prophecy of events concurrent with the conflict of the Saints with the powers that be, to be explained in the light of history. In this, Vandal barbarians of the fifth century far transcended the intelligence of the "ripest" and brightest scholars of our age! Besides these he gives two other coins, one of the Franks, and the other of the Visigoths, to show that the diadem came at length to be adopted by the Gothic kingdoms, without regard to the Diadem Bust of the emperors. This was after the fall of the Seventh Head. 10. The Name of Blasphemy "And upon his Heads a Name of Blasphemy." The name of a person or thing, according to the Hebrew style, frequently imports the quality or state thereof. Thus in Ruth 1:20, "and she said unto them, call me not Naomi," that is, pleasant, "but call me Mara," that is bitter; "for Yahweh hath dealt very bitterly with me." And thus, when it is said in Isaiah 7:14, "she shall call his name Immanuel," the meaning is, that the Son of the Virgin there spoken of should be "Ail," or Eternal Power, "with us," Israel, dwelling in their midst. And so in Luke 1:32, "He shall be called the Son of the Highest," is, He shall be the Son of the Highest. Names of men are sometimes taken for the men themselves. Thus in Acts 1:15, "the number of the names," that is, the number of the men. And thus in Virgil, Sylvius, "Albanum Nomen," an Alban Name, is Sylvius, a man of Albania. Isaiah 30:27, it is said "The Name of Yahweh cometh from far, His anger burning, and the burden thereof heavy; His lips are full of indignation, and His tongue as a devouring fire." Here name obviously denotes a person, an individual of great power, developing great anger and fiery indignation. It is the name styled by Moses in Deut. 28:58, "the glorious and fearful Name, Yahweh Elohim:" for the repudiation and blasphemy of which Judah and Benjamin, with a multitude of Levi, have been banished from their country, and tormented among the Nations for nearly eighteen hundred years. Name also is equivalent to power. This appears from Acts 4:7, where the rulers demanded of the apostles, saying to them, "by what power, or name, have ye done this?" -- and in ver. 30, they pray that "wonders may be done by the name of Jesus," that is, by his power. Hence, the Jesus Name is a name of glory and power, as well as a name of holiness and truth, and is styled by Paul "a Name above every name; that at the Name of Jesus every knee shall bow" (Phil. 2:9, 10). But name not only denotes the existence, quality, or state of a person, power, or other thing, singly considered; it also denotes these things in multitudinous manifestation. Thus, in Jer. 13:11, Yahweh caused "the whole house of Israel, and the whole house of Judah" to cleave unto Him, "that they might be to me, saith he, for a people, and for a name, for a praise, and for a glory." Here is a name inclusive of the whole nation. There are numerous instances in the prophetic writings where name is representative of many, too numerous to be quoted here. The gods of the nations were so many names, whether idols or founders of sects. In this sense, name denotes an object of worship, invocation, or reverence. Thus, in Mic. 4:5, "all people walk, every one in the name of his God; we will walk in the name of our God." To walk in the name of any one is, first, to have said name constitutionally placed upon the walker; and, secondly, to shape the course of life according to the precepts and institutions of such name. Every one that does this is in said name; and, therefore, denominationally a part, or element, of that name. Thus, the Nomen Latinum, or Latin Name, the Nomen Anglicanum, or Anglican Name, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and a host of others, are all names of Gods in which the peoples walk. They are specially related to the Romano-Gothic Beast of the Abyss, which John testified would be gemon onomaton blasphemias, full of Names of Blasphemy (Ch. 17:3). All the peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues, constituting the body politic of the fourth-beast system of nations, "walk every one in the name of his god," glorying in the Latin Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Heads; the Anglican Name of Blasphemy in Canterbury, York, and Dublin; and in all the other blasphemies, to which the names of Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and others too numerous to mention, are attached. But, while all the people walk every one in the precepts of these "worshipful names" of the unmeasured Court of the Gentiles, "the remnant of the woman's seed, who keep the commandments of the Deity, and have the testimony of the anointed Jesus," will walk in the name of their God alone. First, believing "the truth as it is in Jesus," the Name of the Deity has been constitutionally placed upon them, according to the command that all such believers be "immersed into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:15, 16; Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 8:12, 16): and secondly, being taught to observe the all things the apostles were commanded to teach (Matt. 28:20), they walk in the name of the Deity as constituents of that name; having no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness; but, as the grace of Deity which brings salvation teacheth, they "deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and live soberly, righteously, and godly, in the present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the appearing of the glory of the great Deity, and of their Saviour, the anointed Jesus" (Tit. 2:12). This is the Name which, in Ch. 13:6, is styled His Name -- the name of the Deity, blasphemed by the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Heads, and by all the other names which fill up the body politic of the Beast. The Name of Blasphemy is a power; and like the Beast over which it presides is, or rather has been, in centuries of its career, a "dreadful and terrible" power. It is an Episcopal Name, because it is the embodiment of those audacious "Eyes" Daniel was so observant of in his vision. He saw a Little Horn come up among, and after, the ten. It was not like the other horns. These had no eyes in them; nor had they any mouth. If they had possessed these, there would have been twenty eyes and ten mouths. But a different constitution of the evil was predetermined. One pair of Eyes and one Mouth were to suffice for the Little Horn and all its ten associate horns. Had there been eleven pairs of eyes instead of one pair, there would have been eleven names of blasphemy upon the sea-monster's heads, which would have been incongruous, and a cause of inextricable confusion. The eyes Daniel saw were "like the eyes of a man." And not only so, but they were representative of a man; for, speaking of the glare, or fierce piercing look, of the eyes, he says, in Ch. 7:20, "whose look was more stout that His fellows." They represented a human power, whose function was pre-eminently that of supervision over certain styled "his fellows." His official state, therefore, was that of an episkokos, or a Bishop. His look being "more stout" than his fellows of the episcopal order, he would, therefore, claim superiority over all spirituals; and to be entitled above all to the veneration and homage of mankind. Such an Overseeing Name as this would be, within the sphere of his jurisdiction, a Bishop of bishops, such as Constantine claimed to be when he assumed headship over all the catholic churches of the Dragon empire. But this Nomen Latinum, or Latin Name upon the Seven Heads, was not only a Supreme Bishop, but it was also a Name of Blasphemy. It was itself a blasphemy, and an utterer of blasphemy. A power claiming to be what it is not, is a blasphemy. Thus, certain of the synagogue of Satan in the ecclesia at Smyrna claimed to be Jews, when they really were not. This false claim is styled "their blasphemy" (Apoc. 2:9): because, being false, it injured the fair fame and reputation of those in Christ who were Israelites indeed. Blasphemy is a thing but little understood by those who most glibly use the word in their denunciation of what they term heresy. In the Court of the Gentiles, in which the truth is trodden under foot by "the Spirituals of wickedness in high places" -- the Clergy -- everything is blasphemy, which, however Scriptural it may be, exposes their word-nullifying traditions to the well-merited contempt of mankind. Against this exposition they rend their garments instead of their hearts, put dust upon their heads, and with eyes and hands upturned to heaven, cry out blasphemy! But this is all theatrical. Mere sound has no terrors for the friends of truth. The clerical orders, whose apocalyptic chief is this Name of Blasphemy, are like him, essentially a blasphemy; because they arrogate to themselves the prerogatives of Christ and his Brethren, to which they have not the remotest or slightest Scriptural pretension. Being of the world, and speaking under the impression of the world, as proved by the world hearing and hiring them, their alleged identity with the members of the Divine Family, injures the reputation thereof, which is the import of the word blaspheme. For an order of men to claim to be "Vicars of Jesus Christ upon earth," that is, his official substitutes, by Divine appointment; or to be his ambassadors and plenipotentiaries to the nations, by the same authority; and for them to be notoriously deficient of the least proof substantiatory of their high pretentions, is to convict themselves of falsehood; and when self-convicted liars and hypocrites claim to be the brethren and intimates of honest and righteous men, on the principle of a man being known by the company he keeps, the reputation of those excellent people is injured, or, in other words, blasphemed, in the estimation of the Deity, and of those "who hold the testimony of the anointed Jesus." Thus, the Albigenses among whom the faithful may be found, in the twelfth century testified to their generation, saying, "We must not obey the Pope and Bishops, because they be wolves to the ecclesia of Christ" -- quia sini lupi ecclesis Christi. They repudiated the Name of Blasphemy and the clerical ministers of his name, as the transformed ministers of the Satan, who pretended to be ministers of righteousness, but were really nothing more than wolves in sheep's clothing of the most ravenous and ferocious description. They protested against them as the orders of that Dreadful and Terrible Name of Blasphemy, enthroned upon the Seven Heads of the Fourth Beast. This name they denounced as the Antichrist, the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition -- the Antichrist, because he set himself up as the Vicar of Christ; that is, the Divinely deputed substitute of Christ, as indicated by the word Antichristos, from anti, in the place of, christos, the Anointed One, or Christ: they denounced this Name as the Man of Sin in maturity, or full manifestation. They did not regard the Man of Sin substitute for Christ as an individual man, but as an order of ecclesiastical rulers, a Name, or Body, with its Eyes, Mouth, and subordinate members. Being an imperial spiritual human power, its chief ruler would be a man, the supreme representative for the period of his reign, of the power that created him for adoration, as "the god of the earth" -- quem creant adorant, whom they create they worship. And thirdly, they denounced this Man of Sin name of Blasphemy, as the Son of Perdition; because the power, in the Scarlet-Beast phase of it, is foredoomed, "and goeth into perdition" (Apoc. 17:11): and because Paul, in writing of the same power, whom he styles ho anomos, the Lawless One, as well as the Man of Sin, terms him likewise the Son of Perdition, "whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his presence" (2 Thess. 2:8). BLASPHEMY Reproduced from Watchman! What of the Night? this is a representation of a painting which was hung in the Genoese Arch in Rome, depicting Pope Leo X as the Light of the world. Beneath the painting is the Inscription: "The world hath Unveiled its Light; the King of Glory has come forth" Cp. this claim and illustration with Revelation 10:1. It may not be uninteresting to the reader to peruse, in their own words, the views entertained by the witnesses of Jesus concerning this Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Heads, over seven hundred years ago. The following is from a remarkable tract written by one of them, in a.d. 1120, for the express purpose of vindicating himself and friends for separating from communion with this name. It professes to be an answer to the question, "What is Antichrist?" which it thus proceeds to answer: "Antichrist is a falsehood or deceit varnished over with the semblance of truth, and of the righteousness of Christ and his Spouse, yet in opposition to the way of truth, righteousness, faith, hope, love, as well as moral life. It does not respect any one particular person ordained to any degree, or office, or ministry; but it is a System of Falsehood (Name of Blasphemy) opposing itself to the truth, coveting and adorning itself with a shew of beauty and piety, yet very unsuitable to the ecclesia of Christ, as, by the names and offices, the Scriptures and the sacraments and various other things may appear. The system of iniquity thus perfected, with its officiating ministers, great and small, supported by those who are induced to follow it with an evil heart and blindfold -- this is the congregation or composition of things (the Name, or Body) which, taken together, comprises what is called Antichrist, or Babylon, the Fourth Beast, the Harlot, the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, all of which are titles given to it in the Holy Scriptures. His ministers are called false prophets, lying teachers, the ministers of darkness, the spirit of error, the Apocalyptic Harlot, the Mother of Fornication, clouds without water, trees without leaves, twice dead, plucked up by the roots, wandering stars, Balaamites, and Egyptians. "He is termed Antichrist, because being disguised under the semblance of Christ and his ecclesia, he oppugns or opposes the salvation purchased by Christ, and truly administered in his (Christ's) own ecclesia, which salvation the faithful are made partakers of by faith, hope, and love. Thus he counteracts the truth by the wisdom of this world, by false religion, by feigned holiness, by ecclesiastical power, secular tyranny, riches, honors, dignities, and the pleasures and allurements of this world. "It is notorious, therefore, that Antichrist never has been brought forth without a concurrence of all the things now mentioned, so as to form a system of hypocrisy and falsehood (or Blasphemy); that is to say, there must be a concurrence of the wise of this world, ecclesiastical orders, pharisees, ministers, and doctors; the secular power and the people of the world, all mixed up together: all these combined make up the Man of Sin, and that Wicked One complete. For, though Antichrist was conceived so long since as the times of the apostles (see 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7) he was then only in his infancy (in embryo) wanting members both inward and outward. Consequently, he was the more easily detected, destroyed, and cast out of the ecclesias, being then unshapen and wanting utterance. As yet, he was destitute of that plausible, imposing, judicial or determinative wisdom which he afterwards attained; he wanted those hypocritical ministers (the clergy), and human appointments, and the outward show of those religious orders which were necessary to give him perfection. As he was destitute of those riches and endowments necessary to allure persons to his service, and enable him to multiply, protect, and defend his adherents, so he also needed the Secular Power to compel men to forsake the truth, and embrace a system of falsehood. Wanting these requisites, his deceitful practices had not their full effect -- he was young and tender, and with difficulty got a footing in the ecclesias. But growing up in his members, that is, in his blind and dissembling ministers (the clergy) and in worldly subjects, he gradually arrived at maturity when men whose hearts were set upon this world, but blind in the faith, multiplied in the ecclesias, and by the union of church and state (in the time of Constantine), got the power of both into their own hands." After describing the wickedness of this Name of Blasphemy which arrogated Divine honor, the writer adds, "Christ never had an enemy to be compared with this; one so able to pervert the way of truth into falsehood; insomuch that the true ecclesia, with her children, is trodden under foot by it (Apoc. 11:2). The worship that pertains to God alone is transferred to Antichrist; to the creature, male and female, deceased -- to images, to carcasses, and relics. The sacrament of the eucharist (the Lord's Supper), is converted into an object of adoration, and the worshipping of God alone is prohibited. The Saviour is robbed of his merits, and the sufficiency of his grace in justification, regeneration, the pardon of sins, sanctification, establishment in the faith, and spiritual nourishment -- ascribing all these things to his own authority -- to a mere form of words -- to the intercession of saints and to the fire of purgatory. Thus people are seduced from Christ, their minds are drawn off from seeking those blessings in him, by a lively faith in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and teaching his followers to expect them by the will and pleasure and works of Antichrist. "A third work of Antichrist consists of this, that he attributes the regeneration of the Holy Spirit unto the mere external rite, baptizing infants in that faith, teaching that thereby baptism and regeneration must be had, on which principle he confers and bestows orders (Apoc. 13:16, 17) and, indeed, grounds all his christianity, which is contrary to the mind of the Holy Spirit. He places all his religion and holiness in going to mass (as his Protestant relations now do in 'going to church') in which he has mingled together all kinds of ceremonies, Jewish, Heathen, and Christian; and by means thereof, the people are deprived of spiritual food, seduced from the true religion, and the precepts of God, and bolstered up with vain and presumptuous hopes. All his works are done to be seen of men, that he may glut himself with insatiable avarice; and to accomplish this, every thing is set to sale. He allows of open sins without ecclesiastical censure, and even the impenitent are not excommunicated. He does not rule or maintain his unity by the Sword of the Spirit, but by means of the Secular Power (the Horn in which the Eyes are set) using that to effect spiritual ends (ch. 13:12, 15). He hates and persecutes, and searches after, and plunders, and destroys the members of Christ (ch. 13:7, 15). These are some of the principal of the works of Antichrist against the truth, but the whole are past numbering or recording. These are the most prominent features of that monstrous power. "On the other hand, he makes use of an outward confession of the faith, and therein are verified the words of the apostle -- 'they profess in words that they know God, but in works they deny him.' He covers his iniquity by pleading the length of his duration, and the multitude of his followers; concerning which it is said in the Apocalypse, that 'power is given him over every tribe, language, and nation; and all that dwell upon the earth should worship him' (ch. 13:7, 8). He covers his iniquity by pleading the spiritual authority of the apostles, though the apostle expressly says, 'we can do nothing against the truth; and, 'there is no power given us for destruction'. He boasts of numerous miracles, even as the apostle foretold -- 'whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all miracles and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness' (2 Thess. 2:9, 10; Rev. 13:13, 14), also. He has an outward show of holiness, consisting in prayers, fastings, watchings, and alms deeds; of which the apostle testified, when he said, 'Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.' "Thus it is that Antichrist covers his lying wickedness as with a cloak or garment, that he may not be rejected as a pagan or infidel, and under which disguise he can go on practising his villanies boldly like a harlot. But it is plain both from the Old and New Testaments, that Christians are bound by express command to separate themselves from Antichrist. "In the New Testament we read that the Lord is come and hath suffered death, that he might gather together in one the children of God (John 12); and in the book of Revelation, he warns by his voice, and charges his people to go out of Babylon, saying, 'Come out of her, my people, and be not partakers of her sins, that ye receive not of her plagues; for her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquity' (Rev. 18:4, 5). The apostle Paul says the same -- 'Have no fellowship with unbelievers -- come out from among them, and be ye separate' (2 Cor. 6:16). "From what has been said, we may learn wherein consists the wickedness and perverseness of Antichrist, and that God commands his people to separate from him, and join themselves to the Holy City, Jerusalem (Apoc. 11:2). And since it hath pleased God to make known these things to us by his servants, believing it to be his holy will according to the Scriptures, and admonished thereto by the command of the Lord, we do inwardly and outwardly depart from Antichrist. We hold communion and maintain unity one with another, freely and uprightly, having no other motive thereto but to please the Lord, and seek the salvation of our souls. Thus, as the Lord is pleased to enable us, and so far as our understandings are enlightened into the path of duty, we attach ourselves unto the truth of Christ, and his ecclesia, how mean soever she may appear in the eyes of men. "We, therefore, have thought it good to make this declaration of our reasons for departing from Antichrist, as well as to make known what kind of fellowship we have, to the end that, if the Lord be pleased to impart the knowledge of the same truth to others, those that receive it may love it together with us. It is our wish also, that if others are not sufficiently enlightened they may receive assistance from this service, the Lord succeeding it by his blessing. While, on the other hand, if any have received more abundantly from him, and in a higher measure, we desire with all humility to be taught and better instructed, that so we may rectify whatever is amiss." Such is a specimen of the testimony of the two prophet-witnesses, who, as lights, "stood before the god of the Earth," the Name of Blasphemy, the pretended Vicar of Jesus Christ, the Eyes of the Antichrist; and which "tormented them who dwelt upon the earth" (Apoc. 11:4, 10). This testimony was delivered in the darkest period of the day of blasphemy, when men avowed their convictions in the face of ruin, captivity, torments, and death. But they were valiant for the truth; and though power was on the side of the oppressor, a power that roared from the "Mouth of a Lion," and made nations tremble, and kings upon their thrones; yet were they undaunted in its presence in their earnest contention for the faith once for all delivered to the Saints. The secret of their energy was "the power of the Deity," "the testimony of the anointed Jesus" which they held, "the word of the Deity which is living and powerful," understood and lovingly and heartily believed. Their enlightened testimony filled the clerical orders of Antichrist with madness; and caused them to roar forth blasphemies against them, with terrible threatenings and slaughters. But in all the onslaught of the enemy, the Name of Yahweh in which they were entrenched, was their strong tower. The Name of Yahweh, and the Name of Blasphemy, were the two great rival names of the situation. Between them there can be no peace or compromise. The Name of Blasphemy on the Seven Heads has learned this by grievous experience; and discovering that the strength of the Eternal Name in the great conflict resided in "the word," he strove mightily to suppress it. But the greater his efforts in this direction, the more strenuous and determined were the witnesses to keep the Scriptures before the people. They learned the Bible by heart -- Biblia ediscunt memoriter; and as we have seen by quotations in their declaration, they did not neglect to study the Apocalypse, by which they were enabled to discern the times in which they lived. This the contemporaries of Constantine were enabled to do; and a hundred years afterwards, the Donatists also, as evinced by the device of the Vandal coin; the Albigenses likewise of this twelfth century; and Peter Jurieu, who discerned in his own day, a.d. 1687, the death of the witnesses, and interpreted the fall of "the Tenth of the Great City" of France, a hundred years before it came to pass; and Bicheno, a century later, who discerned their resurrection in his own times; to say nothing of the author, about seventy years later still, lest he should seem to boast of things beyond his measure. But all these, and how many more who can tell, by the help of the Apocalypse were enabled to answer the question, "Watchman, what of the Night?" and to discern things in the Body Politic of Romano-Gothic society in their true relations to the Divine Name, which would otherwise have been inscrutable. But this Name of Blasphemy was not only essentially and constitutionally a blasphemy, but it was an utterer of blasphemies also. To blaspheme required something more than "eyes, like the eyes of a man." These were necessary to constitute it an episcopal name; but that this Overseeing Name, or Power, might give utterance to its purely fleshly thinkings, it was indispensable that it be furnished with a mouth. Therefore it was, that Daniel in his vision, in considering the Little Horn that came up after and among the ten, saw that it had a Mouth as well as Eyes. He does not inform us what the mouth looked like; whether it were like the mouth of a man, a bear, a lamb, or other animal. John the apostle was appointed to supply this information in the chapter in hand. It is very certain, however, that the mouth of a lamb would have been a very unfit symbol to represent it by, even upon Daniel's showing; for he testifies, that it was "a Mouth speaking very great things against the Most High" (ch. 7:8, 20, 25); or, as John expresses it, "great things and blasphemies" (ver. 5). Between, the gentle, timid, voice of a lamb, and roaring blasphemies, there is no resemblance; but, on the contrary, from the nature of the thing spoken, we would expect that the organ of utterance would be symbolized by something ferocious and terrible; and because, likewise, all pertaining to the Fourth Beast "is dreadful and terrible." The name of blasphemy, then, is the embodiment of the Eyes and Mouth of Daniel's Little Horn, in their episcopal relation to the ten horns. It is the latin see, without which there was no point of union between them. When it came to be enthroned, and they came to acknowledge its authority in all their kingdoms, it became their "holy father" and they sons in his "holy keeping," of whom, the first of the ten that recognized "his holiness," is surnamed "the Eldest Son of the Church." But commentators and "recent editors," who have undertaken to mend the Greek text, are greatly puzzled to determine whether the reading should be onoma blasphemias, a Name of Blasphemy, or onomata blasphemias, Names of Blasphemy. Griesbach has adopted the latter reading; which, a note to the "Revised Version" says, "is received by all the recent editors except Bengel. Heinrichs also mentions it as the superior reading. But Ewald, Zullig, and De Wette, disapprove it, the last considering it as an accommodation to ch. 17:3; and Hengstenburg regards the question as one of difficult decision. "I recommend," says the Annotator, "the the marginal note of the English Version be retained: "or, names." In other words, he was at a loss to say which it should be, therefore, they might split the difference between, the margin and the text. Mr. Elliott bows reverently to the authority of the "recent editors," and speculates upon it accordingly. Lord also falls into the same line; and speaks of "the names of blasphemy on the heads of the Dragon!" This is certainly a newly found apocalyptic item not revealed to John; who affirms nothing about names of blasphemy on the heads of the Dragon. But, Mr. Lord falls into this error from the assumption, that the correct reading is names; and from the fact that the heads of the Dragon, and the heads of the Beast, are the same heads; and hence, the latter having names upon them, these names must have been on the Dragon likewise! But, it is refreshing to find four discerning men in such a crowd of the kind -- Bengel, Ewald, Zullig and De Wette. These affirm the truth. It ought to read name, not names; and doubtless, De Wette has given a true reason of the difficulty among their recencies, namely, "an accommodation to ch. 17:3." But this is not the principal reason. It is this. They could not see how One Name could rest upon Seven Heads. If it had said, and one and the same name upon each of the seven heads, they might have interpreted it of one and the same inscription upon each; and there would have been no trouble with the text; but simply as it now reads, with the understanding that "the heads are Seven Kings," how One Name of Blasphemy was to be on these, sent them all adrift in doubt and speculation. But, the solution of the difficulty is easy and apparent when understood. The key to the matter is in the signification of the Seven Heads, which requires another sort of wisdom than that by which the "recent editors" are inspired, to discern. Said the angel to John, "Here is the mind that hath wisdom. The Seven Heads are Seven Mountains on which the Woman (or Name of Blasphemy) sitteth. And there are Seven Kings: five are fallen, and one is and the other is not yet come; and when he (the Seventh Head) cometh, he must continue a short space" -- ch. 17:9, 10. In other words, the seven heads of the Beast and the Dragon, which are the same, have a two-fold signification; they represented the Seven Ruling Headships of the Fourth Beast, which down to the fall of the seventh, has existed in the Seven-Hilled City, rome, as the capital of the dominion. The Name of Blasphemy came to be enthroned there; not contemporarily with the Seven Ruling Headships, or Forms of Government; but after they had passed away; and when it had Rome to itself without the rival presence of the ancient Senate, or Roman emperors, as at the date of this writing Feb. 3, a.d. 1867. Hence, the Name of Blasphemy was not, as Mr. Lord intimates, an arrogation of the prerogatives of the Deity, assented to by these several pagan and catholic forms of Government, obtaining in Rome from the foundation of the city; but a distinct and independent head, or Form of Government, the Germano-Roman with its own audacious Eyes, and "exceeding dreadful" Mouth, with "iron teeth" (Dan. 7:19). It sat upon the seven mountains as the spiritual overseer of the Secular Powers of Europe, who "gave their power and strength to it," that it might rule "until the words of the Deity shall be fulfilled" (Apoc. 17:13, 17); it became to them a bond of union -- the Eyes, Mouth and Brain of the Romano-Gothic Body Politic, symbolized by this Seven Headed and Ten-Horned Monster of the Sea. 11. The Body of the Beast "And the Beast which I saw was like unto a Leopard, and his Feet were as of a Bear" -- (Verse 2). The Leopard and the Bear elements of the Ten-Horned Monster of the Sea, indicate its identity with two others than the fourth, of the four beasts of Daniel's vision. The second beast-dominion he saw ascend out of the Mediterranean Earth, symbolized by the Great Sea (ch. 8:3, 17), was "like to a Bear", which was appointed to "devour much flesh"; and the third beast was "like to a Leopard"; and "dominion was given to it." The Bear in this vision answers to the "Breast and the Arms of Silver"; and the Leopard to the "Belly and Thighs of Brass" -- of the image-representation exhibited to Nebuchadnezzar, of what shall be in the last of the days -- beacharith yomaiyah. In the interpretation he was told that the silver section of the image was a kingdom that would be inferior to the Babylonian, which was his; and that the brass kingdom, the third section thereof, should "bear rule over all the earth." This was equivalent to saying, that the Leopard is symbolical of a kingdom bearing rule over the whole earth. Now history, that is Daniel himself, informs us, that the kingdom which arose after Nebuchadnezzar's was the Two-Armed, or Two-Horned, Silver bear, or ram, kingdom of the Medes and the Persians: and that the third kingdom, reckoning that of Babylon as the first, was the goat-kingdom of Grecia. The Medo-Persian empire comprehended one hundred and twenty-seven provinces, stretching from India to Ethiopia (Esther 1:1). These were distributed into "three ribs," or presidencies, of which Daniel's jurisdiction was the first. The three ribs in the Mouth of the Bear are symbolical of these political divisions. Among the provinces of the Bear were Egypt, Armenia, Syria, and Asia Minor to the Bosphorus. These all came in due time to be annexed to the Dragon empire, or Daniel's Fourth Beast; so that the Bear became a constituent of the Dragon, and its four paws, armed with claws of brass, became the Sea-Monster's apocalyptic "feet," with which it is yet in our future, "the last of the days," to "break in pieces, and to stamp the residue" (Dan. 7:19). But the Leopard had a more extensive dominion than the Bear. This Greek kingdom was to "bear rule over all the earth." It commenced its predicted career about b.c. 330, under its "first king," Alexander surnamed "the Great." It extended from Macedonia into what is now a part of British India and styled the Punjaub: but notwithstanding it exceeded the dominion of the Bear it fell far short of "bearing rule over all the earth" -- the earth, as defined by the symbol of the Great Sea. Now, Daniel was given to understand that the four beasts he saw rising out of the Mediterranean Earth, would all co-exist at the coming of the Ancient of days (ch. 7:12): and that, at that extraordinary time of trouble, the fourth beast body politic shall be abolished; but that the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard shall remain, only without dominion, and that for "a season and a time; or, as John expresses it, "for a thousand years." This was equivalent to saying that the Bear and the Leopard, and, consequently, the Lion, national organizations, or bodies politic, should be extant at the coming of Christ "as a thief," in the Sixth Vial period. In order, therefore, to represent this truth, the Leopard, and the Bear, and the Lion, symbols are constituted elements of the Ten-Horned Sea Monster, which is to continue in political life till the advent, as appears from the testimony that "the ten horns shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them" (ch. 17:14). In Daniel's four beasts, each succeeding beast absorbed the dominion of its predecessor; so that the Bear may be said to have devoured the Lion; and the Leopard to have swallowed the Bear; and the Ten-Horned Fourth Beast to have eaten up the Leopard; so that in the Fourth Beast would be contained the Lion, the Bear, and the Leopard, in addition to appendages peculiar to itself. This is shown by John in his Sea Monster, who shows the Leopard he had gorged in "his body," and the Bear he had devoured in "his feet". But it is customary to style Daniel's Fourth Beast "the Roman Empire," by which is meant the dominion exercised by Rome and Constantinople, until the latter city came to be possessed by the Turks, a.d. 1453, when it fell, or passed away. It is true, it does symbolize said Roman Empire, but it also symbolizes a vast deal more. The Roman Empire, of which Gibbon wrote the decline and fall, has never yet embraced within its jurisdiction the hundred and twenty-seven provinces of the Medo-Persian Bear, which it is necessary it should have done that its Leopard-Body might "bear rule over all the earth," and that it might stand upon its Bear-Feet, and with these feet "break in pieces and stamp the residue." John's Sea Monster with the Bear-Feet and Leopard-Body, represents Daniel's Fourth Beast in its amplest development of the last of the days. It answers to Nebuchadnezzar's Image at the crisis of its demolition by The Stone. When John's Beast of the Sea comes, in fact, to stand upon its four brazen-clawed Bear-Feet, its dominion will consist of the Russian Empire, Continental and Mediterranean Europe, Persia, Ethiopia, Libya, Togarmah, Egypt and Syria. When the throne of the Russian Autocrat is transferred to Constantinople, the Apocalyptic Bear-Feet, armed with Brazen or Greek Claws, will also be enthroned there, and be prepared for the work that remains of "stamping the residue". This residue that yet remains to be stamped, are the "many countries" to be "overthrown," inclusive of Turkey, Egypt and part of the Glorious Land. Edom, Moab and part of Ammon, will evade the stamping process. These three countries will be "the front" of the forces of "Sheba, and Dedan, and the Merchants of Tarshish and the Young Lions thereof" -- the Anglo-Indian Leopard empire of the latter days (Ezek. 38:1-6, 13; 11:40-44). The part which Britain has to enact in "the time of the end," when "the Eastern Question" is to be Scripturally resolved, clearly indicates that she is not one of the ten horns. She is not of their world, but the Oriental section of the Sea Monster's Leopard Body -- a world peculiar to herself, and as distinct from them as Canada and the United States. In the approaching scramble for the effects of the expiring Sick Man of Ottomania, she will most likely secure for herself, or at least take possession of, Egypt and Syria. But Daniel shows that whatever power may primarily become seized of these countries, will not be able to prevent their being stamped by the Feet of the Bear. "The land of Egypt shall not escape" the power of the King of the North; "but he shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt." From this conquest he will proceed into the Holy Land. The war between the belligerents will then be transferred to this country, upon which the Oriental Power must necessarily retire. The conflict waged will be furious; for the Northern Power, symbolized by John's Scarlet-colored Beast, will "go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many. And he shall pitch the tents of his entrenched camp between the seas unto the mountain of the glory of the holy." This brings him to Jerusalem, which he besieges and captures (Zech. 14:2). Upon this the Oriental Leopard falls back upon Edom, Moab and Ammon, beyond the Jordan and the Dead Sea. At this crisis the face of Yahweh is flushed with fury, and he goes forth against the invader (Ezek. 38:18; Zech. 14:3). As the Stone-Power, he smites the Image upon the feet, and shatters it into fragments. The Bear, the Lion and Leopard, inclusive of the British section of the last, lose their dominion; but as Assyria and Egypt are annexed to Israel (Isa. 19:23-25) and the tide of war is rolled back from Syria, north and west, upon the countries of the Ten Horns, and of the Two-Horned beasts, over which the Name of Blasphemy presides as their prophet, priest and king. This solution of the Eastern Question ushers in the solution of the Roman Question, neither of which can be finally disposed of until the Ancient of days, that is, Jesus Christ, come; and he give authority and power to his brethren, the Saints, to execute the judgment written in ch. 13:10; which is, as David expressed it, to slay the beast (the Fourth Beast in Apocalyptic manifestation), destroy his body in the burning flame, and take away the dominion of the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard (ch. 7:11, 12). The slaying of the beast is the utter extermination of the Greek and Latin Catholic governments by the power of the sword; and the taking away of the dominion of the Lion, the Bear, the Leopard, or that of the Asiatic Powers, is the binding of the Dragon, casting him into the abyss, shutting him up, and setting a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more for "a season and a time," or "a thousand years." From these premises, then, it will be seen that this Apocalyptic Sea-Monster is not exclusively the Romano-Gothic Ten-Horn constitution of Papal Mediterranean Europe, but symbolical likewise of the Byzantine, or Greek Empire, as indicated by the Leopard-Body and Bear-Feet; for, that the Bear is Greek as well as the Leopard, Daniel shows by testifying that the Fourth Beast "had Nails of Brass" (ch. 7:19); and in his prophecy brass is the symbol of the dominion of "the brazen-coated Greeks." Because, therefore, this Beast of the Sea symbolized the dominions of the whole eastern and western Mediterranean world, all the "kindreds, and tongues, and nations," styled Apocalyptically "the whole earth," in subjection to them, are said to have "wandered after the beast," and to have "worshipped" both the Dragon and the Beast -- Vers. 3, 4. The populations inhabiting Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, Greece, "worshipped" the imperial power enthroned in Constantinople, and that only; while the populations of Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul, "worshipped" the Constantinopolitan and the new Gothic powers as well. This two-fold worship of the subjects of the Franks, Burgundians, Lombards, Visigoths, Suevi, and so forth, may be familiarly illustrated by numerous modern instances. Thus, Egypt is a part of the Turkish empire, and at the same time a quasi independent kingdom under its own hereditary king, who acknowledges the suzerainty of the Sultan; so that the Egyptians may be said to worship the king, and also to worship the Sultan, and to say in their ignorance, "Who is like unto the Sultan? Who is able to make war with him?" The question is very appropriate with regard to the Beast, if not to the Sultan; for, as the Beast is the symbol of power bearing rule over all the Mediterranean Earth, where is the power able to make war with it? Men know of none, because they know not the purpose of Yahweh. But, in the tenth verse of this thirteenth chapter, He has in effect declared that there is a power able to make war with the Beast, and to bind and slay him; for as he has made war with the Saints and Witnesses, bound them in captive chains, and conquered and killed them, so he is to be bound and killed with the sword, when judgment shall be executed upon him, by the very victims of his "exceeding dreadful and terrible" tyranny, after they shall have been raised from among the dead, and strengthened for the war. 12. The Mouth of the Beast "2. And his Mouth as the Mouth of a Lion. 5. And there was given unto him (the Beast of the Sea) a Mouth speaking great things and blasphemies. 6. And he opened his Mouth in blasphemy concerning the Deity, to have blasphemed his Name, and his Tabernacle, and those who tabernacle in the heaven." Every living, and many inanimate, things, have their mouth in a literal or figurative sense. In man, it is the hollow between the jaws, shut or opened by the lips, which are, therefore styled "the doors of the mouth." In him, it is the outlet of that which defiles, or of wisdom, graciousness, and blessing. It is that which proceedeth out of the mouth by which the character of the inward man is in a great degree determined. A man whose mouth speaks the wisdom of the Deity, gracious words, and blessing, and whose conduct is in conformity with what he speaks, is one whose heart is right with the Deity, and from which no blasphemy can find utterance: "the heart of the wise teacheth his mouth," therefore, "the mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment" (Prov. 16:23; Psa. 37:30) But the Mouth of the Beast evidently doth not belong to mouths of this class; for it "speaks blasphemies concerning the Deity." Hence, the heart of the Beast must be desperately wicked; for "out of the fullness of the heart the mouth speaketh." The character of the inward Beast, therefore, or of that system of things spiritual and temporal, doctrinal, practical and political, hidden in the symbols before us, must be essentially "the Mystery of Iniquity in all the deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish" (2 Thess. 2:7, 10). The Mouth of the Beast is the mouth of the wicked in their politico-religious organization. It is a mouth which "speaketh vanity," and "poureth out evil things:" the words thereof "are smoother than butter, but war is in their heart; their words are softer than oil, yet are they drawn swords." With this Mouth "the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom Yahweh abhorreth. Through the pride of his countenance he will not seek, the Deity is not in all his thoughts. His ways are always grievous; thy judgments, O Yahweh! are far above out of his sight: as for all his enemies, he puffeth at them. He hath said in his heart, I shall not be moved; for I shall never be in adversity. His Mouth is full of cursing, and deceit, and fraud; under his tongue is mischief and vanity. He sitteth in the lurking-places of the villages: in the secret places doth he murder the innocent; his eyes are privily set against the poor. He lieth in wait secretly as a lion in his den; he lieth in wait to catch the poor, when he draweth him into his net. He croucheth and humbleth himself, that the poor may fall by his strong ones. He hath said in his heart, God hath forgotten: He hideth his face; he will never see it" (Psa. 10:3-11). If John had written this as descriptive of the Lion-Mouth of the Beast, nothing could have more accurately recorded what have been the facts developed in the many centuries of its wickedness and blasphemies. The words proceeding out of it have been "softer than oil" towards its worshippers; but they have been "drawn swords" against the poor saints and witnesses of the anointed Jesus. He has puffed at his enemies; for, though but feeble in arms, he has set the most powerful of his enemies at defiance; and by his spiritual thunders reduced them to the most abject submission. The Name of Blasphemy speaking by his Lion-Mouth, declares the eternity of his rule; and that he shall "see no sorrow" from which he shall not ultimately be delivered: "He saith in his heart, I shall not be moved; for I shall never be in adversity" (Apoc. 18:7); and, as for cursing, deceit, fraud, mischief and vanity, his mouth is indeed full; for in the atmosphere of these he lives, and moves, and has his being. The judgments of the Deity are indeed "out of his sight" far above him. He discerns them not. This is highly characteristic of him at the present time. Even his worshippers are hating him, and making him desolate and naked, as it has long since been predicted they would (Apoc. 17:16); yet so blind are his eyes with which he surveys the world, and so infatuate and unteachable his obdurate and beastly heart from his long surfeit and intoxication of blood (verse 6), that he can see nothing; so that, persisting in his obstinacy, the fate of the blind when they undertake to lead the blind, will come upon him in an hour when he thinks only of future glory, and he will suddenly "go into perdition," and there will be none to help. When a man becomes a spokesman for another he is regarded as a mouth to him. This was the case with Aaron. He was appointed for a mouth to Moses, who was slow of speech, and of a slow tongue; and Moses was to be to him in the place of God (Exod. 4:16). Hence, Aaron was Moses' prophet, who spoke as he was moved by Moses. So of all in old time who spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit; they became mouths to Him who moved them to speak; and therefore, it is written, "the Deity spake to the fathers by the prophets." There were such mouths of the Deity in the ecclesia at Corinth. They were styled prophets, and their utterances, prophesyings; or, speaking unto men to "edification, and exhortation, and comfort" (1 Cor. 14:3). And so also in relation to the worshippers of the Beast. They needed a Prophet to teach and build them up in their superstition, and to be for them a bond of union in all things pertaining to it. As they designated their superstition "the Holy Catholic Apostolic," they required a Prophet, who should be the Mouth of that system; and would expound and defend it against the Holy Scriptures, Deity Himself, and all who claimed to be His witnesses. The utterances of this Mouth would be his prophesyings; and by no means to be despised by those who should enjoy the favor of the Beast; or, of that Name of Blasphemy upon his heads. The requirements of the worshippers were provided for by the Dragon, who gave them "a Mouth speaking great things and blasphemies"; and to the Mouth himself, he "gave authority over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations;" so that "all that dwell upon the (Mediterranean) earth should worship him, whose names are not written, from the foundation of the world, in the book of the life of the Lamb slain." To these millions of worshippers, upon whom the Deity sent "a strong delusion that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" -- the Mouth given became the spokesman of Anti-christendom -- "the Mouth of the False Prophet," or Name of Blasphemy -- (Apoc. 16:13; 17:3). He is styled a false prophet, because his utterances, or prophesyings, are mere fraud, deceit, and vanity; because the signs, and lying wonders wrought in the presence of the Beast-authorities by him, are an imposture, and his preaching, allocutions, decrees, and so forth, the falsehoods of a lying oracle, by which they are deceived who have received the mark of the beast, and who worship his image (Apoc. 19:20). His end is perdition by being "cast alive into the Lake of Fire burning with brimstone." A Name of Blasphemy with Eyes only, might look more stoutly and defiantly than its fellows; but, however full it might be of "great things and blasphemies," it could give no expression to them without a mouth. We have seen how Aaron was Moses' Mouth, or prophet; so, upon a like principle, the reigning Pope for the time being is the Mouth, or Prophet, of the Name of Blasphemy; and therefore, of "the broad church," which is the National Superstition of all the Horn-Kingdoms. The Eyes and the Mouth, then, of Daniel's Little Horn, though in his vision placed in that horn only, represent a sovereign order of ecclesiastical officials, the Papal Dynasty, which is Eyes and Mouth both to the Ten Horns and to the Beast of the earth. Daniel says nothing of any other mouth pertaining to his Fourth Beast than this mouth of the Little Horn upon his head. He speaks of his "great iron teeth," however; we must therefore, by the omission, no doubt designed, understand that these iron teeth belong to the Little Horn mouth. Iron is as much the symbol of the power of Rome, as brass is of that of Constantinople. If the teeth had been of brass, we must have looked to Constantinople for the Mouth; but the teeth being of iron, our attention is directed to Rome. The teeth being of iron, also connects the Mouth with the iron section of Nebuchadnezzar's image; and the iron band of the Babylonian Stump (Dan. 4:15). This metal symbolizes the fourth dominion, as appears from ch. 2:40: "the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron; forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things; and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise." First, the Lion of Babylon, or the golden section of the image; then, the Bear of Medo-Persia, or the silver; third, the Leopard of Grecia, or the brazen; and fourth, the Dragon of Rome, or the iron. These are the four general phases of "the kingdom of men," from the time of Nimrod to the future coming of the Ancient of Days to supersede it by "the Kingdom of God." The iron symbolizes the last: whether therefore it be a log, a band, a tooth, or a toe. if they be of iron, they are all related to the Latin section of the kingdom of men. But, was the mouth, with its "great iron teeth," like the mouth of a man? No: the human element of the thing signified, had been sufficiently indicated by "the Eyes, like the eyes of a man." These represented a mystical man, the Antichrist. But, was he Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Latin, Turk, Jew, or infidel? This may be determined by the Mouth of the Monster of the Sea; for whatever the mouth is, such also is the man, or beast, that owns it. No; the mouth was not like the mouth of a man; "his Mouth," says the apostle, "was as the mouth of a Lion," and with "great iron teeth," according to Daniel. It was therefore not only a Roman Mouth, but a Babylonian Mouth also: for the Lion is the symbol of the old Babylonian organization of the kingdom of men. Hence, his mouth was like the mouth of Daniel's first beast; his feet like his second's; and his body like that of his third. This symbolization connects Babylon with Rome. Had the teeth been silver and the mouth like that of a leopard, the Name of Blasphemy would have been Persian and Greek; but, as given by John and Daniel, it can only be Latin and Babylonian. The following remarks of Daubuz on the apocalyptic identity of Rome and Babylon are quite in point here: "Babylon in the Revelation," he says. "is Rome, not only on account of Rome's being guilty of usurpation, tyranny and idolatry, and of persecuting the church of God in the same manner as the old literal Babylon was, but also on the account of her being, by a successive devolution of power, the successor of the pretended rights of Babylon. The literal Babylon was the beginner and supporter of tyranny and idolatry, first by Nimrod or Ninus, and afterwards by Nebuchadnezzar; and therefore in Isaiah 47:12, she is accused of magical enchantments from her youth or infancy; namely, from the very first origin of her being a city or nation. "This city and the whole empire thereof was taken by the Persians under Cyrus. The Persians were subdued by the Macedonians, and the Macedonians by the Romans: so that Rome succeeded to the power of the old Babylon. And it was her way to adopt the worship of the false deities she had conquered: so that by her own acts she became the Heiress and Successor of all the Babylonian idolatry, and of all that was introduced into it, by the immediate successors of Babylon, and by consequence of all the idolatry of the earth. "Rome Catholic, corrupted by dressing up the idolatry of Rome Pagan in another form, and forcing it upon the world, because the successor of the old literal Babylon in tyranny and idolatry, and may therefore be properly represented and called by the name of Babylon; it being the usual style of the prophets to give the name of the head, or first institution, to the successors, however different they may be in some circumstances; even as in Ezek. 37, the Messiah is called David, as being successor to David; and as the Christian church, though chiefly composed of Gentiles, is called, Gal. 6:16, by the name of Israel, as successively inheriting, in a spiritual sense, the promises made to the literal Israel. So Rachel, in Jer. 31:15, Matt. 2:18, is put for the town, or women inhabiting the town of Bethlehem, wherein was the sepulchre of the literal Rachel, of which, consequently, those inhabitants were still in possession. And so the Persians and Moguls call the Ottoman Turks by the name of Roumi, i.e. Romans, because in possession of the country and capital enjoyed by the ancient Romans. Roman Catholicism identified with Babylonian mythology. Hislop's Two Babylons clearly demonstrates the links of Romanism with Paganism, and shows from the records of history and archaeology how the former superimposed the latter upon Apostolic Christianity. Pagan feasts and rites were given "Christian" names, and introduced into the worship of the church. The doctrines of Romanism exist in ancient Pagan religions; whereas the basic doctrines of the Scriptures do not. Basic to the teaching of Catholicism is the worship of the Mother and the Son. The following drawings, taken from Hislop's Two Babylons identifies the two systems. "Lastly, that Babylon is Rome is evident from the explanation given by the angel in Rev. 17:18, where it is expressly said to be that great city which ruleth over the kings of the earth: no other city but Rome being in the exercise of such power at the time when the vision was seen." The lion and the teeth, then, demonstrate beyond all doubt, that the Beast's organ of utterance is Romano-Babylonian, having its seat, or throne, upon the Seven Heads, or Mountains. In other words, it is the Roman Government headed up in the Pope. This is the Name of Blasphemy, or blasphemous body-corporate, with its Eyes and Mouth, which has reigned over the Ten Horns for many ages. This sovereignty, like all others, had a beginning, as it will also have an end. It did not begin to reign as a Roman Power till all the Seven Heads of the Dragon-Beast had fulfilled their course; then that which hindered his manifestation would be totally and completely removed; for it is evident, that no Mouth like the Papal Government could co-exist in the same city with another sovereign power. Thus, if Rome were to become the capital of the kingdom of Italy, the Pope could only continue there as the Eyes and Mouth of the Horn-kingdoms without temporal sovereignty. Before these kingdoms were established, he was neither the Eyes nor Mouth of the Little Horn; but simply "Head of all the Churches" of the Graeco-Latin, or Dragon, empire. He had no imperial or royal authority; but only that sort of influence that attaches to the Chief Bishop of the capital of a dominion. In a.d. 554, and onward for many years, the Universal Latin Bishop was subject to the Exarchs of Ravenna, the Viceroys of the Emperors of Constantinople, in all things secular; while in spirituals he was acknowledged by his lord and master to be supreme. In after ages, however, he became greater than he who had created him; and when he opened his mouth in the roarings of his blasphemy he made all the beasts of the field to tremble. His heart was lifted up as the heart of Lucifer in his pride; and with a truly Babylonian Mouth, in the stoutness of his presumption, said, "I will ascend into the heavens, I will exalt my throne above the stars of Ail: I will sit also upon the Mount of the congregation in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High" (Isa. 14:12-14). But there is a limit to human arrogance and blasphemy. The Romano-Babylonian Mouth of the Beast has long since passed the zenith of self-exaltation and presumption; and is now but the shadow of a name. The fate of the Babylonian Lucifer awaits him. He will be brought down to Sheol, to the sides of the pit; and though once the Mouth that made the world to tremble, and did shake kingdoms, he will be cast out as an abomination, and reproach of all peoples; for his dominion is the land of graven images, and they are mad upon their idols. 13. The Development of the Romano-Babylonian Name of Blasphemy When the fiftieth day after the crucifixion had fully come, the apostles were all with one accord in one place, NOT IN Rome, but in Jerusalem. In obedience to the Lord's command, they were tarrying in this city until they should be endued with power from on high to execute the mission entrusted to them. Nor had they long to wait; for about nine in the morning of that day, they were all visibly and audibly filled with the Holy Spirit, and proceeded to speak as they were moved by the Spirit. This extraordinary inflation of the apostles with Spirit when noised abroad, caused a multitude of people to assemble to behold this marvellous exhibition of the supernatural. Among these were "strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes," who had come from the Capital of the empire to celebrate the Passover, the Wave Offering of the Sheaf, and the Feast of First Fruits, according to the Mosaic Law. Being devout Jews and proselytes, they were zealous for the law, and earnestly intent upon all the sacrificial observances it prescribed. They were acquainted with Jews of Nazareth; and with the miracles, and wonders, and signs, with which the Deity had attested his claims to the Messiahship; and had witnessed also his ignominious execution by the wicked hands of his enemies. For anything they knew, he was still in death, and securely confined within its gates; so that, whatever they might have thought of him, while living, they had doubtless settled it in their minds, that, though a man of excellent deportment, and of gracious and benevolent disposition, he was self-deceived. Was he not dead? And could a dead man be the Christ of God for the redemption of his people? With these convictions, these devout Roman strangers stood before Peter and the rest of the apostles. They saw upon their heads Spirit, blazing in cloven-tongues of flame, the symbol of many languages in which they were declaring the wonderful works of the Deity. Astonished at the sublime eloquence outflowing from these illiterate Galilaean fishermen, they said one to another, "What meaneth this?" They had seen nothing like it in Rome, nor yet in Jerusalem, before; and there were none that could expound it, save the Eternal Spirit before whom they stood. Moved by this Divine Power, Peter standing up with the Eleven, replied to their inquiry, by saying, "Hearken ye unto my words." Why did not James, or John, "the beloved disciple," or some other apostle, rather than Peter, who, they afterwards learned, had thrice denied his Lord, stand up and invite them to hearken to his words? This inquiry would certainly be mooted before their return to Rome. They perceived that Peter was, on this Pentecostian occasion, the Mouth of the Apostolic Body; nor was he a Babylonian Mouth, nor a Roman Mouth, but the Mouth of Deity, in the sense of the Deity speaking by him. Why was this? To this question it would be replied, that the Spirit had given the Keys of the Kingdom of the Heavens to Peter according to a previous promise through Jesus Christ, who had said, "I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon the earth, shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon the earth, shall be loosed in the heavens" (Matt. 16:19). What they saw and heard was in fulfilment of this promise, and of what had been spoken by the prophet Joel. Their attention being gained by this, they were furthermore informed by Peter, the Holder of the Keys, that all that had recently been transacted in Jerusalem connected with the crucifixion, was "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of the Deity." He charged them directly with the murder of Jesus, saying, "him ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." They had demanded his life, and imprecated the curse of his blood upon them and their children. But, continued Peter, the Deity hath delivered him from death, and placed him at the right hand of power in the heaven, there to remain until the time shall come for Deity to give him the throne of his father David; in proof of which, he shed forth the Spirit which they saw upon the heads of the apostles, and heard in all the languages of the empire. The result of this discourse of the Spirit by the mouth of Peter, was the conviction, that the same Jesus they had crucified was alive again, and by the Deity made both Lord and Christ. These devout Jews and proselytes of Rome were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, What shall we do?" They perceived that they were involved in the greatest of crimes from which they knew not how they could be loosed. The import of their question was therefore, What must we do to be loosed from the consequences of our iniquity? Again it was Peter who took up the question put to all the apostles; for "Peter said unto them, Repent, and be immersed every one of you for the Name of Jesus Christ, epi to onomati, unto remission of sins," eis aphesin harnartion. This command of the Spirit was new doctrine indeed to these Roman strangers from the Capital; but their conviction of its truth, "caused them to cease sacrificing and offering" (Dan. 9:27) according to the law; and gladly receiving Peter's word, to be immersed for the Name. They were now immersed believers of the things concerning the kingdom of the Deity and the Name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38; 8:12). Peter by the use of his Key had opened the door of the prison in which they were bound, and gave them liberty in loosing them from their sins: and what he had done upon earth was ratified in the heavens, according to the words of Jesus. Having thus become Christadelphians, or Brethren of the Christ they had crucified and slain, they had placed themselves in such a position, that, on their arrival in Rome, they would be regarded as apostates from Judaism; and no longer worthy of fellowship in the Synagogue of the Jews. It can easily be conceived what an excitement would be created in the Jewish community of Rome. They would, of course, tell the story of what they had seen, heard, and done; but, from the temper of the Jews in those days, we may know that, if they had no other evidence than their own assertion, they would be accused of falsehood and blasphemy; and accounted as worthy of a like fate with the Nazarene. But, the Spirit in Jerusalem had provided for such an eventuality in Rome and elsewhere. He knew that "the Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven," after the feasts were over, would have to return to their several countries and friends; and he knew also, that such extraordinary facts and doctrines as he had prepared for mankind, required no less than the attestation of Deity in his co-operation with his witnesses. Hence, he not only moved Peter to specify the condition upon which believers of the Gospel of the Kingdom might be loosed from all past sins; but he moved him also to promise the baptized "the gift of the Holy Spirit." Filled sufficiently with this, they would be prepared for any emergency that might arise. What, then, was necessary to equip these new converts for the work of introducing the gospel of Jesus Christ among the Jews of Rome? It was necessary that all things they had heard from the apostles should be brought to their remembrance; and that they should be guided into all the truth (John 14:8-14). This was as needful for them in Rome as for the apostles in Jerusalem. But more was required than this. It was necessary that what they affirmed as truth of Deity issuing from their mouth, should be acknowledged by Him as such; that their hearers might believe for the work's sake. In this case, their faith would "stand not in the wisdom of men, but in the power of the Deity." In short, it was necessary, that they should have all "the diversities of gifts" constituting "the Manifestation of the Spirit;" such as the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, faith as it were, to remove mountains, gifts of healing, the working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, diverse kinds of tongues, and the interpretation of tongues (1 Cor. 12:4-10). Now, these gifts they would no doubt receive by the imposition of the hands of Peter, after the manner recorded of him, when the apostles sent him and John down to Samaria for a like purpose; who, when they arrived, "prayed for them that they might receive holy spirit: then laid they hands upon them and they received holy spirit" (Acts 8:15-17). In this way the gifts were imparted when apostolically and evangelistically bestowed. Thus equipped, these "strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes," would be transformed into a company of "prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers;" or saints perfected for the work of the ministry, for the formation in Rome of the Body of Christ, and its edification; until it should attain to perfect manhood in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of the Deity -- "to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that thenceforth it be no more composed of babes, tossed to-and-fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive." All among these circumcised strangers from Rome, having the moral qualifications specified by Paul in his letters to Timothy and Titus, would be, doubtless, thus spiritually equipped through the instrumentality of Peter, who, with the rest of the apostles, would request them, as Brethren of Christ, to devote themselves with all earnestness to "speaking the truth in love" to the Brethren in Moses; not in Rome only, but in all Italy, as opportunity might serve: not forgetting, of course, this necessary principle of action, that they be faithful to the original elements of the doctrine delivered to them; and that they so build upon the foundation, that the converts they might make might "grow up into him in all things who is the Head," and therefore both Eyes and Mouth of the Body; or, as Peter styles him, "the Chief Shepherd and Bishop (episcopos) of their souls." "From whom the whole Body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working of the Spirit in the measure of every part (whether a prophet, evangelist, pastor or teacher) maketh increase of the Body unto the edifying of itself in love" (Eph. 4:9-16). These instructions would be endorsed by all the apostles, among whom John would tell them, that he and the rest had declared unto them what they had seen and heard, that they might have fellowship with them; "and truly," said he, "our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ, in whom is no darkness at all;" so that, if they walked in the light, they would have "fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ would cleanse them from all sin" (1 John 1:3-7). On their arrival in Rome, they would be, whether many or few would matter not, the Body of Christ in that city -- the Holy Apostolic Ecclesia on the Seven Heads. They were a company of Christadelphians, Christou adelphoi, or Brethren of Christ, who believed into him through the word of Peter and the Eleven (John 17:20). This was the day of small things, which they did not despise. They had no temple, cathedral, or synagogue in which they could meet on their return, a.d. 33. Even seventeen years after they met in the house of Priscilla and Aquila, two Jews, who made tents for a living, Acts 18:2; Rom. 16:5. In this place, Paul mentions twenty-six by name, and alludes to others connected with them. Some of them, doubtless, were the original "strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes"; but there is nothing extant to distinguish them from the rest. When Paul wrote to the ecclesia in Rome, he speaks of Tryphena and Tryphosa "who labor in the Lord." These may have been two of them, but there is no certainty. Whatever their names may have been, matters not now; they are no doubt on record in the heavens. They were apostolically "in the Lord," and were prepared to state "the truth as it is in Jesus," and to illustrate it, and to prove it, infallibly, or without making mistakes. This infallibility resided not in a Pope or a single bishop. There was no Bishop or Pope of Rome at that early day besides Tiberius Caesar, who was the Pontifex Maximus of the whole empire. There were bishops of the ecclesia in Rome; for these "prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers," newly arrived from Jerusalem, were the presbyters, or elders, and overseers, or episcopoi, of their wonderful, though little, community, whose mission it was, first, to separate a people for the name of Christ; and secondly, to subvert the superstition of the capital. These saints, as the Star-Angel of the Ecclesia in Rome (Apoc. 1:20) were infallible teachers and rulers, whose infallibility was not of themselves, but of Holy Spirit ministered to them by Peter and the Eleven. This guided them into all the truth, and brought all things to their remembrance; so that thus they acquired a mouth and wisdom from Christ, which all their adversaries were not able to gainsay or successfully to resist (Luke 21:15). At this early date, a.d. 33, all that were in Rome called saints, were "the beloved of the Deity." It was not then necessary to go to Rome to be "canonized" by a pope. They had been made saints at Jerusalem by the word, which called them to that holiness without which no man can see the Lord (John 17:17; Rom. 1:7). These spiritually-endowed saints were the Mouth of the Deity; first, to the Jews; and some years afterwards, to the Gentiles, of Rome. For a few years, they preached the gospel to none but Jews; so that for that space, the ecclesia in that city was composed solely of the circumcised. It is not surprising, therefore, that the pagans should make no distinction between the Ecclesia and the Synagogue. They regarded them all as Jews; so that, when Claudius commanded all Jews to depart from Rome, Aquila and Priscilla, though Christians, had to leave. But, before the publication of this edict, Peter had opened the door of faith to Gentiles, as recorded in Acts 10 and 11. The news of this soon reached Rome, and the Mouth of Deity was opened there to the same effect. Pagans were invited to "the obedience of faith for His name," that they might become "the tabernacle of the Deity, and dwellers in the heaven," together with the saints already separated from the Synagogue. But for this extension of the Ecclesia, the edict of Claudius would have left none of the saints in Rome. It expelled all natural Jews, without regard to their belief; so that, in this crisis, the Ecclesia there would become in appearance entirely Gentile. But, when the edict became obsolete, the Jewish members would many of them return; nevertheless, the Jewish influence in the Ecclesia would predominate no more. From this sketch of the origin of things in Rome, the reader will easily perceive how Peter, the apostle of the Circumcision, and the Two Keys, came in after times to occupy so prominent a position in the capital. When the strangers of Rome returned from Jerusalem, they would unquestionably speak more about Peter than the rest, because he was chief speaker. From this fact, he would acquire the title "Prince of the Apostles" and Holder of the Keys: and though there is no reliable evidence that he ever was in Rome (and, if he ever had been there, the account of it would hardly have been omitted from the Acts), the part he enacted was so conspicuous, that his relation to Rome in the introduction of the gospel there, would seem almost like his personal presence. In process of time, this would be affirmed, like many other imaginary things, to be a fact; and then, when popes came into fashion, they would seek to sanctify the imposition by styling Peter "the first pope!" In the earliest years of the ecclesia in Rome, its faith was spoken of throughout all the empire. Its members presented their bodies a living sacrifice, and were not conformed to the world; but were transformed by the renewing of their mind; which was characterized by unanimity, a disregard of high things, and association with men of low estate. The Star-Angel that ruled them was neither "Bishop of Rome," "Universal Bishop," nor "Pope;" but a presbytery, or eldership, of inspired men of low degree in society, whose only ambition it was to be "glorified together with Jesus Christ." They would have rejected with indignation and contempt the idea of being united with the State, or any state, as "the Church by law established." Their mission was to convert sinners from the error of their way, not to form alliances with them; for they well knew that the friend of the world is the enemy of God (James 4:4; 1 John 2:15). But this state of ecclesiastical affairs, so highly commendable, did not continue very long undisturbed by "unlearned questions and strifes of words," which do not edify. Peter's use of the Second Key entrusted to him, and to him only, to the exclusion of all successors in Caaesarea and elsewhere, aroused all the latent prejudices of the Jewish mind, whether identified with the Synagogue or the Ecclesia. The Jewish element of the Body of Christ soon found themselves in the minority; and that the uncircumcised were rejoicing in things which Peter said nothing about, when, by the use of the First Key, he opened the door of faith to them. Some of them were Judaistically disposed, while others who had been added from the Synagogue were but partially enlightened, and developed themselves as "false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily (or with a secret purpose) to spy out the liberty which the Gentile party had in Christ Jesus, that they might bring it into bondage." These false brethren stood up in all the ecclesias of Christ, and became the occasion of much trouble and anxiety to Paul, who was "preacher, apostle, and teacher of the Gentiles" (2 Tim. 1:11). Thus, Paul being especially the apostle of the uncircumcision, and Peter the apostle of the circumcision, in Corinth the Judaizers said they were of Cephas, or Peter; while their opponents, who advocated liberty from Mosaic bondage, said they were of Paul. The same condition of things manifested itself in Rome. The false brethren there were zealous for Peter, in whom they boasted as the Prince of the Apostles and Holder of the Keys. Their dogma was, that "it was needful to circumcise the Gentile converts to Christ, and to command them to keep the law of Moses, or they would not be saved" (Acts 15:1, 5): and, although this was contradicted by all the apostles as well as Paul, they continued to teach it; and with so much success, that the leaders of the faction and their disciples throughout Asia Minor, all turned away from Paul (2 Tim. 1:15); whom they did not hesitate to speak of evilly and with disrespect. The false brethren in Rome were not behind their brethren in the provinces in zeal for the propagation of their traditions. By their fruits they were proved to be "grievous wolves, not sparing the flock; and speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them." Their party was in secret alliance with the Synagogue; and their purpose seems to have been to Judaize Christianity, and then to use it in this corrupt form to turn the idolators from Jupiter to Moses, and subordinately, to Christ. In this way they would draw disciples after them, and thus acquire importance and influence in the world, which they clearly perceived were not to be obtained by devotion to the unadulterated Word. The interests of Christ's flock they measured by their own selfishness, which was promoted by the assumption of clerical lordship over the multitude of them that believed. Paul alludes to these "grievous wolves," overlaid with wool, styled by Christ Jesus, "false prophets who come in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves," in his letter to the saints in Rome, ch. 16:17, saying, "I beseech you, brethren, mark them who cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine you have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not the Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." They caused divisions and offences, which, when viewed in the light of the apostolic teaching, and that of the Star-Angel which presided over them, were clearly seen to be such. Now, it was from this Judaizing Faction in the Ecclesia at Rome all those evils sprung, which afterwards attained maturity as "the Church of Rome." The false brethren of this anti-apostolic faction were the outward expression of that "Mystery of Iniquity" which Paul said "doth already work." In the beginning, it worked cautiously until it gained sufficient hold to make it careless of appearances. It aimed at the establishment of a Hierarchy, or Sacred Order of Rulers, whose authority should be supreme over all. This Order is styled by Paul "the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition." So long as primitive apostolic equality was maintained among the presbyters, or overseers, of the ecclesia, there was no scope for the exhibition of such a tendency. The apostles were not lords over the faith of their brethren in Christ, but helpers of their joy. All the ecclesias were classed into rulers and ruled; but the rulers were no less governed by the authority of Christ in all their administrations, than the ruled were in all their religious practices. They were subject one to another, and clothed with humility. But, when a zeal for the doctrines and commandments of men, and a striving for power and dominion over one another took the place of the simplicity which is in Christ, the Mystery of Iniquity began to crop out, first, in the separation of the elders into a distinct order; and afterwards, in one particular presbytery usurping supremacy over the rest. Originally the distinction of clergy and laity did not exist. The professors of Christianity were all brethren in Christ; and their several ecclesias, the clergies, kleroi, or heritages, of the Deity. The elders, or the episcopal presbyters, were exhorted by Peter to "feed the flock of the Deity, episcopizing it willingly; but not as lording over the heritages." The ecclesial heritages, or clergies, composed the flock, which the elders were to episcopize, or oversee, not for their own sordid interests, but for the benefit of the flock itself. But soon after the breaking up of the Mosaic Commonwealth by the Romans a.d. 70, the Judaizers changed the relations of things. They argued, that now the Levitical Order was removed, the Elderships of the ecclesias should take its place; and as the tribe of Levi was Yahweh's clergy, lot, or heritage under the law, so the Elderships should now be regarded as his clergy under the gospel; not forgetting to put in a claim for Levi's tithes and other perquisites. Whatever might have been thought of the claim, and the argument to enforce it, matters not; the Judaizing Presbyters and Deacons became the "priest and Levites" of the growing apostasy; and soon after ripened into a Hierachy, or "Holy Order," called "The Clergy," in contradistinction to the multitude, whom they styled ho laos, the Laity, or common people. Having successfully usurped the birthright of Christ's brethren, and imposed themselves upon the Deity as his charge, or lot, an element of "the blasphemy of them who say they are Jews( and are not, but the synagogue of the Satan" (Apoc. 2:9), they were prepared to push onwards for the Satan's throne. About the middle of the second century, a very important change occurred promotive of this unhallowed ambition. The innovation then taking place, was a marked distinction between the Bishop and the Elder; in consequence of which a third kind of office was created; so that, instead of Episcopal Elders, or bishops and deacons, we come to read in ecclesiastical authors of bishops, presbyters and deacons. In a collection of epistles attributed to Ignatius, this novel and unscriptural distinction frequently and officially obtrudes upon the reader. This novelty soon came to be generally admitted, and paved the way for pernicious results. The adoption of the idea laid the foundation for the dominion of a Clerical King, or Pontiff, with clerical officials; a kingdom which, having originated in the Mystery of Iniquity, could not possibly ultimate in any other manifestation than that which has filled the habitable with hypocrisy and crime for sixteen hundred years. The passage alluded to in Ignatius is in a letter from him to Polycarp: "Attend to the Bishop," says he, "that God may attend to you. I pledge my soul for theirs, who are subject to the Bishop, presbyters, and deacons. Let my part in God be with them." No man guided by the Spirit into all the truth could write in such a style as this. Again, in his epistle to the Ephesians, ch. 6, it is said, "the more silent a man finds the bishop, he ought to reverence him the more": on which Dr. Campbell remarks, that "one would be tempted to think this has originated with some opulent ecclesiastic, who was far too great a man for preaching; at least, we may say, it seems an oblique apology for those who have no objection to anything implied in a bishopric, except the discharge of its duties. No one whose notion of the duties of a bishop correspond with the prophet Isaiah's idea of a watchman, ch. 56:10, would have thought taciturnity a recommendation." The passage must have been an interpolation, or if Ignatius really wrote it, he must have been in league with the Judaizers. Surely he could not have been ignorant that Paul required a bishop to be "able by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convince the gainsayers; for there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision; whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake." A silent bishop would be of no use in such a diocese. To talk down vain talkers who had made such a progress as this, would require an amount of words that would effectually destroy the reputation of any bishop for a taciturn, and therefore worshipful official. The writers in the interest of the Latin Name of Blasphemy have fabricated a list of what they style "Bishops of Rome." The first fifty-six they have named "Saints," in their sense of the word, which signifies one decreed to be holy by an official act of the pope! This sounds infinitely ridiculous in the ears of an enlightened believer, who knows that all true Christians, without distinction of class or order, are made saints by "the obedience of faith," independently of the acts and decrees of popes, bishops, presbyters, or councils. The memory of the faithful and humble presbyters who ruled the Ecclesia in Rome, is insulted and blasphemed by papal canonization. Though men of low degree, and despised by the wise and prudent of their day, they were men of whom Rome, the common sewer of nations, has never been worthy; but of all blasphemies ever uttered to their disparagement, that of being declared "saints," in the Romish sense of the word, is the greatest of all. Of the said fifty-six, the catholic bishop Sylvester, who flourished in apostasy in the reign of Constantine, is reckoned the thirty-fourth saint from the apostle Peter, to whom they lyingly assign a reign of twenty-four years in Rome, as the first pope! The only reign of Peter in Rome was after the manner of his reign in America or Britain at this day, where his doctrine may be believed and obeyed. Where this reigns, Peter reigns; nay, more, Christ and the Father reign; for, said the Lord Jesus to his apostles, "he that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth Him that sent me" (Luke 10:16). This saying constitutes the Father, Christ, and the Apostles, as one authority; and the only authority to which obedience should be rendered in spiritual affairs. Where this authority rules, everything works to the self-edification of the body in love. Had its members continued faithful to this supremacy, there would have been no scope for sovereign bishops and popes. But the Divine authority fell into disuse. It was no longer, what saith the Scripture? but, what saith the Bishop? And in later times, what saith the Bishop of Rome, or the Pope? An incredible number of volumes have been written to propagate and defend the old wife's fable of Peter's popeship, with Mark, Barnabas, and all others, as his subordinate clergy. Having planted him upon the Seven Heads, with these for his college of Cardinal Princes, they have, as a consequence, claimed Rome as the throne of spiritual dominion, and the Bishop there as the only true undoubted Christian Pontiff! And thus, by such a lying conceit, Peter, Mark, Barnabas, and their Company, are, in effect, made the inception of the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Hills! Ecclesiastical writers refer to the third century as the time when the doctrine, order, and worship, instituted by the apostles, under went a memorable and manifest change. The theology of the Judaizers had, to a great extent, drawn off the attention of professors from "the simplicity that is in Christ Jesus," and fixed it on a Hierarchy, particularly in Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, and Carthage, which, by this time, had become numerous, and ranked among their adherents many wealthy citizens. Professors of Christianity were now very numerous, and therefore, of no little consequence in the estimation of the government, which favored or repressed them as reasons of State dictated. In this century, a system of ecclesiastical management was introduced, aptly styled by some, the Episcopal System of Church Law. It got rid of the trouble of consulting the laity, or common people, on the affairs of their respective ecclesias; it introduced sacerdotal or priestly authority; it set up as many principalities as there were bishoprics; it acknowledged the Bishop in Rome as the first in order, but nothing more; and to consummate the whole, it eventually deprived the so-called laity of all right to be consulted about their own affairs. This state of things, when compared with that exhibited in the Acts of the Apostles, indicates a notable falling away; of which, the following quotation from Mosheim will give the reader some idea: "The most respectable writers of that age," says he, "have put it out of the power of an historian to spread a veil over the enormities of ecclesiastical rulers. For, though several yet continued to exhibit to the world illustrious examples of primitive piety and christian virtue (these were the "few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments," and the "little strength" of Philadelphia that had "kept the word, and had not denied the name of Christ" -- Author) yet many were sunk in luxury and voluptuousness; puffed up with vanity, arrogance, and ambition; possessed with a spirit of contention and discord, and addicted to many other vices that cast an undeserved reproach upon the holy religion of which they were the unworthy professors and ministers. In many places the bishops assumed a princely authority, particularly those who had the greatest number of churches under their inspection, and who presided over the most opulent assemblies. They appropriated to their evangelical functions the splendid ensigns of temporal majesty. A throne, surrounded with ministers, exalted above his equals the servant of the meek and lowly Jesus; and sumptuous garments dazzled the eyes and minds of the multitude into an ignorant veneration for their arrogated authority. Presbyters,followed their example, neglected their duties, and abandoned themselves to the indolence and delicacy of an effeminate and luxurious life. Deacons imitated their superiors, and the effects of a corrupt ambition were spread through every rank of the Sacred Order." In treating of the progress of episcopal authority he remarks that "the prelates of the third century imperceptibly changed the language of exhortation into that of command, scattered the seeds of future usurpations, and supplied, by scripture allegories and declamatory rhetoric, their deficiency of force and of reason. They exalted the unity and power of the church, as it was represented in the episcopal office, of which every bishop enjoyed an equal and undivided portion. Princes and magistrates, it was often repeated, might boast an earthly claim to a transitory dominion; it was the episcopal authority alone which was derived from the Deity, and extended itself over this and over another world. The Bishops (it was said) were the Vicegerents of Christ, the successors of the Apostles, and the Mystic Substitutes of the High Priest of the Mosaic law. Their exclusive privilege of conferring the sacerdotal character, invaded the freedom both of clerical and popular elections; and if, in the administration of the church, they still consulted the judgment of the presbyters (or elders), or the inclination of the people, they most carefully inculcated the merit of such a voluntary condescension. The bishops acknowledged the supreme authority which resided in the assembly of their brethren (of the episcopal order); but in the government of his peculiar diocese, each of them exacted from his flock the same implicit obedience as if that favorite metaphor had been literally just, and as if the shepherd had been of a more exalted nature than that of his sheep. This obedience, however, was not imposed without some efforts on one side, and some resistance on the other. The democratical part of the constitution was, in many places, very warmly supported by the zealous or interested opposition of the inferior clergy. But their patriotism received the ignominious epithets of faction and schism; and the episcopal cause was indebted for its rapid progress to the labors of many active prelates who, like Cyprian of Carthage, could reconcile the arts of the most ambitious statesman with the christian virtues which seem adapted to the character of a saint and martyr. "The same causes," he continues, "which at first had destroyed the equality of the presbyters, introduced among the bishops a pre-eminence of rank, and from thence a superiority of jurisdiction. As often as in the spring and autumn they met in provincial synod, the difference of personal merit and reputation was very sensibly felt among the members of the assembly, and the multitude was governed by the wisdom and eloquence of the few. But the order of public proceedings required a more regular and less invidious distinction; the office of perpetual presidents in the Councils of each province was conferred on the bishops of the principal city, and these aspiring prelates, who soon acquired the lofty titles of Metropolitans and Primates, secretly prepared themselves to usurp over their episcopal brethren the same authority which the bishops had so lately assumed above the college of presbyters. Nor was it long before an emulation of pre-eminence and power prevailed among the metropolitans themselves, each of them affecting to display, in the most pompous terms, the temporal honors and advantages of the city over which he presided; the numbers and opulence of the christians, who were subject to their pastoral care; saints and martyrs who had arisen among them, and the purity with which they had preserved the tradition of the faith, as it had been transmitted through a series of orthodox bishops from the apostle, or the apostolic disciple, to whom the foundation of their church was ascribed. From every cause, either of a civil or of an ecclesiastical nature, it was easy to foresee that Rome must enjoy the respect, and would soon claim the obedience, of the provinces. The society of the faithful bore a just proportion to the capital of the empire; and the Roman church was the greatest, the most numerous, and, in regard to the West, the most ancient of all the christian establishments, many of which had received their religion from the pious labors of her missionaries. Instead of one apostolic founder, the utmost boast of Antioch, of Ephesus, or of Corinth, the banks of the Tyber were supposed to have been honored with the preaching and martyrdom of the two most eminent among the apostles; and the Bishops of Rome very prudently claimed the inheritance of whatever prerogatives were attributed, either to the person, or to the office, of St. Peter. The bishops of Italy and of the provinces were disposed to allow them a primacy of order and association (such was their very accurate expression) in the christian aristocracy. But (in the third century) the power of a monarch was rejected with abhorrence, and the aspiring genius of Rome experienced, from the nations of Asia and Africa, a more vigorous resistance to her spiritual, than she had formerly done to her temporal, dominion. The patriotic Cyprian who ruled with the most absolute sway the church of Carthage and the provincial synods, opposed with resolution and success the ambition of the Roman Bishop, artfully connected his own cause with that of the eastern bishops, and, like Hannibal, sought out new allies in the heart of Asia. If this Punic war was carried on without any effusion of blood, it was owing much less to the moderation than to the weakness of the contending prelates. Invectives and excommunications were their only weapons; and these, during the progress of the whole controversy, they hurled against each other with equal fury and devotion. "From the imperious declamations of Cyprian, we should naturally conclude that the doctrines of excommunication and penance formed the most essential part of religion, and that it was much less dangerous for the disciples of Christ to neglect the observance of the moral duties, than to despise the censures and authority of their bishops. Sometimes we might imagine that we were listening to the voice of Moses, when he commanded the earth to open, and to swallow up, in consuming flames, the rebellious race which refused obedience to the priesthood of Aaron; and we should sometimes suppose that we heard a Roman Consul asserting the majesty of the republic, and declaring his inflexible resolution to enforce the rigor of the laws. 'If such irregularities are suffered with impunity (it is thus that the Bishop of Carthage chides the lenity of his colleague) if such irregularities are suffered, there is an end of episcopal vigor; an end of the sublime and divine power of governing the church, an end of christianity itself.' Cyprian had renounced those temporal honors which it is probable he would never have obtained; but the acquisition of such absolute command over the conscience and understanding of a congregation, however obscure or despised by the world, is more truly grateful to the pride of the human heart than the possession of the most despotic power, imposed by arms and conquest on a reluctant people. "A perpetual stream of strangers and provincials flowed into the capacious bosom of Rome. Whatever was strange or odious whoever was guilty or suspected might hope, in the obscurity of that immense capital, to elude the vigilance of the law. In such a various conflux of nations, every teacher, either of truth or of falsehood, every founder, whether of a virtuous or criminal association, might easily multiply his disciples or accomplices. The christians of Rome, at the time of the persecution of Nero, a.d. 61, in which Paul suffered death, are represented by Tacitus as amounting to a very great multitude. The church in Rome was undoubtedly the first and most populous in the empire" -- not first in order of beginning, but in that of influence; "and we are possessed of an authentic record which attests the state of religion in that city about the middle of the third century, and after a peace of thirty-eight years. The clergy at that time consisted of One Bishop, (named Cornelius, and of the Babylonian Mouth Order,) forty-six presbyters, seven deacons, as many subdeacons, forty-two acolytes, and fifty readers, exorcists, and porters. The number of widows, of the infirm and of the poor, who were maintained by the oblations of the faithful, amounted to fifteen hundred. From reason, it may be estimated that the Christians in Rome were about fifty thousand. The populousness of that great capital will not surely have been less than a million of inhabitants, of whom christians might constitute at the most a twentieth part." In the middle of the third century, this Cornelius figures as the Roman Mouth of that section of professors who now assumed to themselves the title of "the Holy Catholic Church." The spirit of the Lion fully possessed him: and he spoke with all the loftiness and inflation of his prototype in Babylon. A council was convened in Rome while he was in office, which decreed the propriety of excommunicating the founder of the Novatians, who could no longer tolerate the episcopal arrogance and corruption of the times. In writing to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, on the decrees of the council, he undertakes to delineate the character of Novatus, who, judged by an enemy, would appear a very disreputable person. The extracts given by Eusebius (himself also an enemy to Novatus) from the letters of Cornelius, show the latter to have been truly a wolf in sheep's clothing. He speaks of Novatus "aspiring to the episcopate" which he styles a "precipitate ambition," and a folly. He speaks of "the artifice and duplicity," "the perjuries and falsehoods, the dissocial and savage character," "the devices and wickedness," of "that artful and malicious beast." The crime of Novatus consisted in maintaining that the Christian ecclesia was a society where virtue and innocence should reign; and whose members, from their entrance into it, were undefiled by any enormous crime. This most Scriptural position, consequently, caused him to regard every society which readmitted heinous offenders to communion, after the custom in Rome, as unworthy the title of a Christian ecclesia. This gave Cornelius and his adherents mortal offence, which was greatly aggravated by the Novatians obliging such as came over to them from the Catholics to be reimmersed, as a necessary preparation for entering their society. By the maintaining of this impregnable position, the nominally Christian body in Rome and elsewhere was rent in twain. There was now a large minority who repudiated the system of things described in the above citations from Gibbon and Mosheim; and who, in so doing, renounced all allegiance to the episcopate of the Apocalyptic "Synagogue of the Satan." The Novatian minority regarded Cornelius as the prince of this synagogue in Rome, denied the Christianity of what he called "the Holy Ecclesia," and claimed that the true apostolic faith and discipline was with the Novatians or Puritans, and with them alone. This being the issue between Cornelius and Novatus, and knowing, on credible testimony, the awful corruption of morals that prevailed, we are at no loss to perceive the bitterness and malignity that inspired the epithets of Cornelius. A man who was contending earnestly for purity would be careful, for the sake of consistency, if for no other reason, to avoid such offences against morality as Cornelius accuses him of. "We have seen," says he to Fabius, "within a short time, an extraordinary conversion and change in Novatus. For this most illustrious man, and he who affirmed with the most dreadful oaths, that he never aspired to the Episcopate, has suddenly appeared a bishop, as thrown among us by some machine!" Novatus, doubtless, affirmed the truth, that he did not aspire to the Roman Episcopate, as constituted by the novel episcopal system of church law; but had no objection to act as bishop, presbyter, or elder, with others, upon a pure and Scriptural foundation. The means by which he was appointed such, the jealous Cornelius likens to "some machine" projecting him into their midst. The appearance of Novatus, claiming to be Bishop of the Only True Ecclesia in Rome, ordained an elder by three sympathizing elders from an Italian province, would create quite a sensation; especially when his presence there was hailed, and his ordination endorsed, by a large minority of the original community. We can imagine how Bishop Cornelius felt by supposing what would be the feeling of Pius IX, the present successor of Cornelius, if a second Novatus were now to appear in Rome, endorsed by nearly half the Catholics of St. Peter's alleged patrimony, as the only true successor of the apostle! Bishop Pius would no doubt be in a foaming rage, and open his lion-mouth in the most orthodox Babylonian style. He would defame and curse his rival in the fashion and phraseology peculiar to Roman Holiness, which claims universal and absolute authority over all. Cornelius though neither universal nor absolute, yet spoke as an episcopal lion's whelp who felt the spirit of future greatness moving within, and said, "this dogmatist, this pretended champion of ecclesiastical discipline, when he attempted to seize and usurp the episcopate not given him from above (whence Cornelius claimed to have received it) selected two desperate characters as his associates, to send them to some small, and that the smallest, parts of Italy, and from thence, by some fictitious plea, to impose upon three bishops there, men altogether ignorant and simple, affirming and declaring, that it was necessary for them to come to Rome in all haste, that all the dissension that had there arisen might be removed through their mediation in conjunction with the other bishops. When these men had come, being, as before observed, but simple and inexperienced in discerning the artifice and villany of the wicked, they were shut up with men of the same stamp with himself, and at the tenth hour, heated with wine and surfeiting, they forced them, by a kind of shadowy and empty imposition of hands, to confer the episcopate (pertaining to the ecclesia in Rome) upon him; which, though by no means suited to him, he claims by fraud and treachery. This was the roaring of the Lion-like Mouth, a.d. 251. The epithets sounded out against poor Novatus and his brethren, who were doing the best in their power to organize a Scriptural association, by which the original Apostolic faith and discipline introduced by the converted "Jews and proselytes" from Jerusalem, and strengthened afterwards by Paul's personal ministration for two whole years, might be maintained and perpetuated in Rome; and the Apostasy then so advanced there might be broken up, or restrained: the epithets which denounced this holy enterprise, and the unproved and reckless assertions accompanying them, are in themselves a justification of it. Cornelius claimed to be in possession of Holy Spirit; and therefore, when voted into office by his copresbyters, to have received "the episcopate from above;" all his sanguinary and blasphemous successors claim the same things; but his fruits and theirs clearly evince that the only spirit that has worked in them all is the spirit peculiar to "the children of disobedience." We know, by experience, how readily "fellows of the baser sort," pretending to great conscientiousness, and zeal for religion, busy themselves, for the promotion of their own wicked purposes, in defaming and bearing false witness against men whose lives are devoted to the propagation and defence of the truth. These were evidently the weapons of Cornelius wielded against the company of brethren convened in Rome. The wine and surfeiting story was most likely trumped up for the occasion. The author has been vilified, by so-called "elders," after the same fashion. The same sort of accusation was circulated against the Lord himself; so that we can endorse the truth and justice of an observation of Dr. Jortin, that "we should not trust too much to the representations which christians, after the apostolic age, have given of the heretics of their times. Proper abatements must be made for credulity, zeal, resentment, mistake and exaggeration." It is easy to perceive how deeply Cornelius' episcopal pride was wounded, from the following words: "This asserter of the gospel then," says he, "did not know that there should be but one Bishop in a catholic ecclesia -- en katholike ecclesia. Novatius and Novatus both knew that, whatever there should be in a catholic church, there ought to be in a Scriptural ecclesia, more than one. If the original episcopal plurality had not been departed from, there would have been no place found for an Episcopal Monarch in Rome. Cornelius was such a king in embryo. The "shadowy and empty imposition of hands," which he attributes to Novatus, had made him such; and it is the same sort of imposition, by which all bishops according to "church law," are imposed upon credulous and deceived communities. Sixteen bishops ordained Cornelius, and three ordained Novatus; the whole nineteen claiming to possess the Spirit. Which was the bishop from above? Cornelius was ordained first. True; and Saul was ordained before David. Priority therefore, determines nothing. The anointing of David was the repudiation of Saul. And so it proved with reference to the Five Episcopal Bodies in Rome. The organization of the New Ecclesia in the capital of the empire was, Providentially, the first step to the spuing of the Catholic Synagogue of the Satan out of the Spirit's Mouth (Apoc. 3:16); and to the leaving it upon the Seven Heads, "a wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked," carcass; then after to be galvanized by imperial power and authority into a political existence, the judicial termination of which is waiting at the door. It seems that Cornelius avenged his wounded dignity, in true papal fashion, upon the bishops who ordained Novatus; for he says, "one of these, not long after, returned to his church, mourning and confessing his error, with whom also we communed as a layman, as all the people present interceded for him, and we sent successors to the other bishops, ordaining them in the place where they were." The successors sent were probably to rule catholic churches formed by the divisions endorsing the corrupt practices and lay discipline of the Cornelian church in Rome. The following extract from a writer on ecclesiastical affairs will finish what we have to offer in regard to the development of the Name of Blasphemy previous to the reign of Constantine. "Novatianus was an elder or presbyter in the church at Rome about the a.d. 251, at which time Cyprian flourished at Carthage. He was a man of extensive learning, and the author of several publications in defence of the doctrine of the Trinity and other subjects. His address is said to have been eloquent and insinuating, while his morals were irreproachable. He beheld with just indignation the depravity of the church in his day, and sighed over its abominations. Within the space of a few years, Christians had been caressed by one emperor, and persecuted by another. In the day of prosperity many persons rushed into the church who had never seriously counted the cost; and, like the stony-ground hearers in our Lord's parable of the sower, when persecution overtook them, they denied the faith, and reverted to idolatry. When the storm had subsided, they returned again to the church; and the bishops, who were much more concerned about the number and respectability of their congregations, than they were for the purity of communion and the free circulation of brotherly love among the members, encouraged all this, to the disgust of Novatian and all considerate persons. On the death of Fabian, who had sustained the character of bishop, one Cornelius, copresbyter with Novatian, who was a vehement partisan for taking in the multitude, was put in nomination for the bishopric. Novatianus opposed him, but ineffectually; and seeing no prospect of reformation in the church, but, on the contrary, a tide of immorality prevailing, he withdrew, and was joined by a number of the friends of reform. The consequence was, that Cornelius, irritated, it is said, by Cyprian, who was similarly situated, through the remonstrances of virtuous men at Carthage, and who was exasperated beyond measure with one of his elders, whose name was Novatus, and who had quitted Carthage and gone to Rome to espouse the cause of Novatianus, called a council, and got a sentence of excommunication against the latter. In a little time the friends of Novatianus formed themselves, or, at any rate, were formed into a church, which invested him with the pastoral office. The example was followed in various places, and Puritan churches were formed all over the empire, and flourished during the succeeding two hundred years. Afterwards, when penal laws (enacted by catholic emperors) obliged them to lurk in corners, and worship God in private, they became distinguished by various names, and a succession of them continued to the Lutheran reformation. "It has been truly said," continues the same writer, "that it is next to impossible to avoid being misled in perusing histories of heretics. They are all written by interested ecclesiastics, who study to blacken the character of those whom they describe, in the most bitter terms that malice can invent. Novatianus is held up by these writers as the first ANTIPOPE, because he withdrew from the communion of a corrupt church. The stigma of Antipope is ridiculous; for, at that time, there was no pope in the true sense of the word; nor for jubilees of years after his day. They call Novatianus the author of the heresy of Puritanism; whereas Puritanism, or the object for which the puritans, or Cathari, as they were styled, contended, was a virtue, and not a heresy. In contending for purity of fellowship they were sustained by the concurrent voice of prophets and apostles. Novatianus was by no means singular in that respect even in the age in which he lived. Tertullian had quitted the church fifty years before, for the very same reason; and Privatus, who was an old man in the time of Novatianus, had, with several more, repeatedly remonstrated against the departures which had taken place from apostolic institution, and as they could get no redress, had withdrawn, and formed separate congregations, or worshipped God in private. These ecclesiastical writers attribute to Novatian what they regard as the crime of originating innumerable congregations in every part of the Roman empire; and yet he had no other influence over them than what his example gave him. The real friends of Christ and his cause everywhere saw the same ground of complaint, and sighed for relief; and when the standard of return to first principles was once lifted up, thousands gathered themselves around it; they saw the propriety of a remedy for a crying evil, and applied it to their own relief. In truth, so far are the charges of heresy and schism brought against Novatian from being well founded, that his memory ought to be embalmed in the recollection of the faithful for his zealous adherence to the cause of truth and virtue." In tracing the development of the Name of Blasphemy, we now advance to the era of Constantine. Sixty years after the death of Cornelius, who died in exile at Civita Vecchia, a.d. 252, "the Catholic and Apostolic Church, Mother of the Faithful," was invested with the sunshine of imperialism, and constituted the religion of the State. The bishop of the Anti-novatian association in Rome now became "the Bishop of Rome," and a spiritual prince of the empire. Before this change of fortune, he had but a bare precedency in respect of rank which had been tacitly yielded to him as bishop of the church in the metropolis of the empire. As to authority, Irenaeus, bishop in Lyons, on account of his personal character, was of ten times more authority even in the West than Victor, bishop in Rome; and Cyprian of Carthage, than Stephen of Rome, who excommunicated him. "But," says Dr. G. Campbell, "matters underwent a very great change after christianity had received the sanction of a legal establishment. Then, indeed, the difference between one see and another, both in riches and in power, soon became enormous. And this could not fail to produce, in the sentiments of mankind, the usual consequences. Such is the constant progress in all human politics whatever. In the most simple state of society, personal merit, of some kind or other, makes the only noticeable distinction between man and man. In politics purely republican, it is still (many years ago when these words were penned) the chief distinction. But the further ye recede from these, and the nearer ye approach the monarchical model, the more does this natural distinction give place to those artificial distinctions created by riches, office, and rank. "When Rome was become immensely superior, both in splendor and in opulence, to every western See, she would with great facility, and as it were naturally, (if nothing very unusual or alarming was attempted,) dictate to the other Sees in the west; the people there having had, for several ages, very little of the disputatious dogmatizing humor of their brethren in the east. It no doubt contributed to the same effect, that Rome was the only See of very great note which concurred with several of them in language; Latin being the predominant tongue among the western churches, as Greek was among the eastern. It was natural for the former, therefore, to consider themselves as more closely connected with the Roman Patriarch than with the Constantinopolitan, or any of the other oriental patriarchs. A similar reason, when not counteracted by other causes, operated among the Greeks, to make them prefer a Grecian patriarch before a Latin one. "Sylvester was the catholic saint, whom Constantine recognized as the Bishop of Rome and Patriarch of the West. The papists reckon him as the thirty-fourth pope. But, we know from history, that popes had not yet come into fashion. The spirit of a pope, however, wrought in him mightily; and when he opened his mouth, his utterances showed what he would do when power should be given to him by the Dragon. Take the following as an illustration: The Nicene Creed having been subscribed, Constantine, the Man-Child of Sin, who presided at the council, transmitted its canons and decrees to Sylvester, who, in the thirteenth council that had been held in Rome, at which were present two hundred and seventy-five bishops, ratified them in the following Babylonian style: 'We confirm with our mouth that which has been decreed at Nice, a city of Bithynia, by the three hundred and eighteen holy bishops, for the good of the catholic and apostolic church, Mother of the faithful. We anathematize all those who shall dare to contradict the decrees of the Great and Holy Council which was assembled at Nice (a.d. 325), in the presence of that most pious and venerable prince, the emperor Constantine.' And to this all the bishops answered, 'We consent to it.' Nebuchadnezzar himself could not have spoken more loftily and lion-like. He that dared to call in question their utterances was deemed unworthy of all blessings human and Divine; for, if Constantine be worthy of the belief, their voice was not the voice of men, but of 'the successors of the apostles, who had been established as priests and gods upon earth'" -- Vit. Const. 50.3. 100.6.21. This recognition of the Catholic clergy by the unbaptized and imperial president of their church, as "priests and gods upon earth," was very flattering to their vanity and pride of life. They had instructed their imperial patron that this was their Scriptural relation to the sons of men. In their case, however, it was a mere assumption of Divine honors, and undeserved. In the days of the apostles, that which was spoken to Israel, might be truly applied to them, and to those who believed into Jesus through their word, saying, "I said, Ye are gods." The Lord Jesus explained in what sense this saying was applicable to Israel, but not to mankind at large. Thus, "if He (the Spirit) called them gods, unto whom the word of the Deity came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of the Deity?" The Jews considered this as "making himself equal with God" (John 5:18; 10:33-36). The gospel teaches, that a people to whom the Word of the Deity is sent, and who receive it, become Sons of God; and are, in this sense, gods. This Word was first sent to Israel, and then to the Gentiles. And who obeyed it in the love of it, became Sons of God by adoption through Jesus Christ. This is the Scriptural status of all true Christadelphians, or Brethren of Christ. This is a great honor, and an extraordinary manifestation of love on the part of the Father, the contemplation of which caused John to exclaim, "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the Sons of God;" and lest any should say, that this sonship pertained exclusively to a future state of existence, he adds concerning the faithful, "beloved, we are now the Sons of God;" which was equivalent to saying, "we are now gods upon the earth;" and he continued, "it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is" (1 John 3:1-3). But, though it be true that such men are "gods upon earth," and also "priests," it is a mere blasphemy in the mouth of the Man-Child of Sin, when applied to the corrupt and arrogant clergy of the Laodicean Apostasy. The gifts of the Spirit had been withdrawn; and State-Church Catholics were left to their own delusions. The Spirit had raised up a testimony against them, by which He "spued them out of his mouth," as "wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:" for He only recognizes them as "priests and gods upon earth," in the Scriptural sense, who, having believed the things concerning the kingdom of the Deity and the Name of Jesus Christ, have been immersed, and walk in purity, "even as He is pure;" a condition of things that could not possibly be affirmed of Constantine and the professional ecclesiastics whom he delighted to honor. Such, however, was the blasphemous assumption of the Catholic clergy, both Greek and Latin. Though utterly unworthy, by ignorance of the truth, by perversion of Apostolic institutions, and impurity of life, they claimed to be "priests and gods upon earth." But, though nothing but the spued-out ejecta of the Spirit's mouth, they were, in a certain relation of things, "priests and gods upon earth." They were the "priests and gods upon earth" pertaining to the Laodicean Apostasy; and acknowledged by the Man-Child of Sin "in his estate." According to Gibbon's authorities, there were eighteen hundred of these gods upon the Roman earth; of whom one thousand were enthroned in the Greek, and eight hundred in the Latin provinces of the empire. Episcopal thrones were closely planted along the banks of the Nile, on the sea coast of Africa, in the proconsular Asia, and through the southern provinces of Italy. The episcopal gods of Gaul and Spain, of Thrace and Pontus, reigned over an ample territory, and delegated their rural suffragans to execute the subordinate duties of the pastoral office. A god's diocese might be spread over a province, or reduced to a village; but all the gods possessed an equal and indelible character; they all blasphemously claimed to derive the same powers and privileges from the Apostles, from the people, and from the laws. The whole body of these priests and gods of Antichrist, was exempted by Sin's imperial Man-Child, from all service, private or public, all municipal offices, and all personal taxes and contributions, which pressed upon the laity with intolerable weight; and the duties of their clerical profession, deemed holy by the strongly deluded, was accepted as a full discharge of their obligations to the republic. The gods of the Catholic heaven were regularly assembled in the spring and autumn of each year; and these synods diffused the spirit of ecclesiastical discipline and regulation through the hundred and twenty provinces of the Roman world. The Archdeity, or metropolitan bishop, was empowered, by the laws, to summon the suffragan daemons of his province; to revise their conduct, to vindicate their rights, to declare their faith, and to examine the merit of the candidates who were elected by the clergy and people to supply the vacancies of the episcopal college. The chief gods, or primates, of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Carthage, and afterwards of Constantinople, who exercised a more ample jurisdiction, convened the numerous assemblies of their dependent gods. But the convocation of great and extraordinary synods was the sole prerogative of the god who filled the imperial Dragon throne. Whenever the emergencies of the spiritual department of his estate required this decisive measure, the emperor dispatched a peremptory summons to the episcopal deities, or the deputies of each province, with an order for the use of post-horses and a competent allowance for the expenses of their journey. The Council of Nice was convened by this authority, a.d. 325. It was assembled by "the Mother's" imperial protector and proselyte, to extinguish, by their final sentence, the subtle disputes which had arisen in Egypt on the subject of the Trinity. Three hundred and eighteen gods obeyed the summons of their imperial creator whom Gibbon styles "their indulgent master." The inferior gods or daemons, of every rank and denomination, have been computed at two thousand and forty-eight; the Greeks appeared in person: and the consent of the Latins was expressed by the legates of the Archdeity of Rome. The session, which lasted about two months, was frequently decorated by the presence of the imperial Man-Child, who claimed to be God of gods upon earth, as expressed in the title, Bishop of bishops. Leaving his guards at the door, he seated himself (with the permission of the divine council) on a low stool in the middle of the hall, an eminent illustration of Satan's "darling sin," which is said to be "Pride that apes humility." "He listened with patience," says Gibbon, "and spoke with modesty; and while he influenced the debates, Constantine humbly professed that he was the minister, not the judge, of the successors of the apostles, who had been established as priests and as gods upon earth." Of all these gods of the apostasy, those of Antioch, Alexandria, Carthage, Constantinople and Rome, were the chief. They were, however, not only the chief of many, but they were rival gods, whose principle it was rather to reign in hell than to serve in heaven. Lust of power and love of contention were the ruling characteristics of them all; at least such is the testimony of a contemporary of those turbulent times. "If I must speak the truth," says Gregory Nazianzen, "this is my resolution to avoid all councils of the bishops; for I have seen no good end answered by any synod whatever; for their love of contention and their lust of power are too great even for words to express." In the reign of Constantine's son and successor, Rome had become a most seducing object of sacerdotal ambition. In the episcopal order, the Bishop of Rome was the first in rank among the gods, and distinguished by a sort of pre-eminence over all the others. He surpassed all his companion deities in the magnificence and splendor of the temple over which he presided, in the extent of his revenues and possessions, in the number and variety of his ministers, in his influence over the deluded people, and in his sumptuous and splendid manner of living. Ammiamus Marcellinus, a Roman historian, who lived in the reign of Constantius, referring to this subject, says: "It was no wonder to see those who were ambitious of human greatness contending with so much heat and animosity for that dignity; because, when they obtained it, they were sure to be enriched by the offerings of the matrons, of appearing abroad in great splendor, of being admired in their costly coaches, sumptuous in their feasts, outdoing sovereign princes in the expenses of their table." No wonder that Pretextatus, the pagan Prefect of the city, should say, "Make me Bishop of Rome, and I'll be a Christian, too!" As a further illustration of the pass at which the Mystery of Iniquity had arrived in Rome, it may be added that Liberius, the bishop, died a.d. 366, and that a violent contest arose respecting his successor in the throne of blasphemy. The Catholics were divided into two factions, one of which elected Damasus to that dignity, while the other chose Ursicinus, a deacon. The party of Damasus prevailed, and obtained his ordination of the godship. The other party, enraged at its failure, set up separate meetings, and eventually had their favorite ordained also. This occasioned great disputes among the pious laity, as to which of them should possess the episcopal dignity; and to such an extremity was the dispute carried, that great numbers on either side were killed in the quarrel; no fewer than a hundred and thirty-seven persons having been put to death in the very "temple of the God" itself! "How much more rationally," remarks Ammianus, "would those pontiffs consult their true happiness, if, instead of alleging the greatness of the city as an excuse for their manners, they would imitate the exemplary life of some provincial bishops, whose temperance and sobriety, whose mean apparel and downcast looks, recommended their pure and modest virtue to the Deity, and his true worshippers." This lively picture drawn by Ammianus of the wealth and luxury of the gods in the fourth century, "be, comes the more curious," says Gibbon, "as it represents the intermediate degree between the humble poverty of the apostolic fishermen and the royal state of a temporal prince, whose dominions extend from the confines of Naples to the banks of the Po." Damasus was contemporary with "Theodosius the Great," who, on his advancement to the imperial office, evinced a fervid zeal for Trinitarianism. He addressed a letter to the divided Catholics of Constantinople, and told them that "it was his pleasure that all his subjects should be of the same profession as Damasus, Bishop of Rome, and Peter, bishop of Alexandria; that their church alone should be denominated 'Catholic' who worshipped the divine Trinity as equal in honor, and that those who were of another opinion should be deemed heretics, be regarded as infamous, and subject to other punishments. This was an imperial constitution of the Trinitarian gods of Rome and Alexandria as the standards of orthodoxy. This was an advance upon their rivals of Antioch, Carthage and Constantinople; still it was a divided glory which did not satisfy the ambition of the god upon earth residing in Rome. We are now, then, arrived at a great crisis in the development of tile "Name of Blasphemy upon the Heads;" that is, at a period in which the second stage of its growth was nearly consummated -- a period which may be expressed by the epochal years a.d. 380-410. The beginning of this period is illustrated by the exaltation of Theodosius to the imperial office, and is marked by the sack of Rome by the tribes of Germany and Scythia, under the command of Alaric, who visited the sanguinary intolerance, blasphemy, corruption and crimes of the Catholics and their God in Rome, with the "hail and fire mingled with blood" of the First Wind-Trumpet. Theodosius was one of the most intolerant and persecuting of the Catholic emperors of the Sixth Head of the Dragon. We have seen how he set up his will and pleasure as the rule of his subjects' faith and conscience. This is further illustrated by his expulsion of all from Constantinople who would not subscribe the Nicene confession of faith. In a.d. 383, he issued two edicts against "heretics;" the first, prohibiting them from holding any assemblies; and the second, forbidding them to meet in fields or villages. These edicts would be especially oppressive to "the Angel having the Seal of the living God." engaged in sealing His servants in their foreheads (Apoc. 7:2, 3): and, as though this were not enough, he followed it up by a law in which he forbade heretics to worship, or to preach, to ordain bishops, or presbyters, commanding some to be banished and others rendered infamous and deprived of the common privileges of citizens. This intolerant and wicked oppressor is surnamed "the Great," and by scribes of the same superstition declared to be "very dear to the Catholic Church." It was not to be supposed, however, that the Lord Jesus at the right hand of Power, to whom his brethren and servants are infinitely dearer, would permit these oppressions to pass away unavenged. He, therefore, let loose the four winds against the "earth, the sea and the trees" of the empire, by which it was extinguished in its western third, and the "god upon earth." not yet become "the god of the earth" in Rome, was reduced almost to a nonentity. The six days pillage and slaughter of the inhabitants of the Queen City, was a terrible but richly-deserved calamity, and, at the same time, a blow that prostrated her dignity and honor in the dust. A city which, with the strength of iron, had broken in pieces and subdued all things; and had boasted of her reign over the kings of the earth, was now trampled under foot of barbarians, and insolently compelled to become a sport, and to sue for peace. This was a great discouragement and check to the ambition of the Bishop of Rome. Hitherto, he had based his claim to the first rank among "all called god, or an object of worship," upon the greatness of the city in which he officiated. A canon of the Council of Chalcedon expressly declares this principle of primacy in voting equal privileges to the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople, because the last, then called New Rome, was also the Royal City. Leo, of Old Rome, however, indignantly rejected this co-equality in primacy, he would be first. But the time had now arrived to pour out the Divine wrath upon her which had been accumulating against her for over eleven hundred and sixty years. Her imperial and metropolitan dignity was doomed to suffer a total eclipse; so that, when it had departed, it would be necessary for the man who had "become a god," to invent some new theory whereby his dignity might be prevented from taking its departure likewise. The proud and luxurious bishop was hurled into the lowest depths of misery. Had Ammianus Marcellinus beheld him after being spoiled by Alaric, he would have seen a blasphemer smitten of the God of heaven for his sins, and there would be nothing, at this crisis, Pretextatus would desire less than to be Bishop of Fallen Rome. The following extract from a letter of Pelagius, an eye-witness of the pillage, will give the reader some idea of the change of fortune that had come over the bishop since the days of Ammianus and Pretextatus, when princely magnificence and luxury were the rule of episcopal life: "This dismal calamity," says he, "but just over, and you yourself are a witness how Rome, that commanded the world, was astonished at the alarm of the Gothic trumpet, when that barbarous and victorious nation stormed her walls and made her way through the breach. Where were then the privileges of birth and the distinctions of quality? Were not all ranks and degrees levelled at that time, and promiscuously huddled together? Every house there was a scene of misery, and equally filled with grief and confusion. The slave and the man of quality were in the same circumstance, and everywhere the terror of death and slaughter were the same, unless we may say the fright made the greatest impression on those who had the greatest interest in living." Thus, then, the glory of the city having departed, the glory of the bishop built upon it had departed also. A god located in a city of inferior rank, with no other prestige, could not expect to command the world. As the city faded into insignificance and contempt among barbarians, so would he unless he "changed his base," and commenced to operate upon their ignorance and credulity from a new position. In a hundred and thirty-six years from its sack by Alaric, Rome was to be left a dreary solitude, without man or beast within its walls for forty days and more. It was time, therefore, that some pretension should be set up that would so awe the world, that a Divine supremacy should be accorded to its bishop altogether independent of the former plea. The pretension that seemed to meet the urgency_ of the situation, was that of the Bishop of Rome being the lineal successor of the apostle Peter; and that by virtue of this successorship, he possessed the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and had Divinely intrusted to him the power of binding and loosing. The clergy were all assumed to be the successors of the apostles; but the Bishop of Rome claimed to be successor of "the Prince of Apostles," and that, therefore, he was the Prince-god of all clerical "gods upon earth." But, upon what could this pretension be based so as to give it plausibility? It is true that Christ promised to give the keys to Peter, whom he pronounced "blessed;" it is also true that he fulfilled the promise; and furthermore, it is true that when Peter declared his conviction, in common with the rest of the apostles, that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, the Lord said to him, that upon this rock He would build His ecclesia, against which the gates of the unseen should not prevail (Matt. 16:15-19). But, in all this there was not a word, no, not a hint, of any one else than Peter; much less of such an ignorant, corrupt, and degraded blasphemer as the bishop of Rome. How, then, could what was promised and fulfilled to Peter, a Jewish fisherman of Galilee, be made applicable, even plausibly so, to a proud and luxurious man of fashion in Rome? This was a work and great labor to be done! A labor which only craft and falsehood, operating upon the grossest ignorance and superstition, could finish with success. Paul testifies in Gal. 2:7, 8, that the gospel of the circumcision was intrusted to Peter, the ministration of which constituted his apostleship of the circumcision. Hence, as "the strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes" received the gospel in Jerusalem from the Spirit through him, a relationship was established between him and them, which two hundred and twenty years after came to be styled by Cyprian, "Petri cathedram, atque ecclesiam principalem, unde unitas sacerdotalis exorta est" -- that is, the Chair of Peter, and the principal ecclesia whence priestly unity proceeds. But is it not ridiculous to style a little company of disciples of the Spirit in Rome, Peter's Chair, because they heard the truth from his mouth? The "strangers of Rome" were only a small portion of his audience on the day of Pentecost. Besides them, there were "devout Jews" from every nation under the Roman heaven. When they returned, they would plant ecclesias in their homes, every one of which upon the same principle would be a Chair of Peter! But, craft, which deceives the ignorant and the simple, has no use for reason. Assertion without proof is all that it requires. The crafty ecclesiastics of the apostasy affirmed it; and it suited the policy of the aspiring bishops of the imperial city to adopt it. If it were conceded that the Church in Rome was Peter's Chair, would not the man that occupied it as chief bishop of the church be Peter's successor; and if Peter's successor in office, must he not officially inherit all that is predicable of Peter? He would be "Vicar of the Blessed Peter" -- Peter in every respect, save in personal identity. This was the position assumed by "the Name of Blasphemy upon the Heads of the Beast;" and ultimately conceded by the Horns, which the judgments of the first four trumpets upon the Catholic West developed, when they gave in their adhesion to that Name; in evidence whereof the following gleanings of Mr. Elliott from divers sources will amply show: He styles it, "the mighty fact" first privately spoken out by Boniface I., a.d. 419-22, to the Thessalian and Illyrian bishops. "The Blessed Peter," says he, "to whom the height of priesthood was conceded by the word of Jesus Christ;" "on whom, we read, was placed the foundation of the universal ecclesia:" "on whom its government and supreme power rested:" "this, therefore, by ecclesias spread over the whole world, is established to be as the Head of its own members; from which whosoever cuts himself off, becomes exiled from the Christian religion." After this the Legate of Celestine, the bishop of Rome, a.d. 431, in the Council of Ephesus before all Antichristendom, said, "It is a thing undoubted, that the holy and most blessed Peter, the Exarch and Head of the apostles, the pillar of the faith, the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom; and to him was given the power of binding and loosing sin; which Peter still lives and exercises judgment in his successors, even to this day and always." In the same style, bishop Leo's deputies, some twenty years later, in the Council of Chalcedon, proclaimed him "Head of All Churches;" and this evidently because, as the Council itself said, "Peter spoke in Leo!" On similar grounds the headship of the Antichristian Body and the world was claimed by Leo himself, in his letters and orations. In a sermon of St. Peter's day, he thus expressed himself before his Roman audience: "There are those, O Rome, who advance thee to this glory as a holy nation, an elect people, a sacerdotal and royal city complete through the Holy Seat of the Blessed Peter, head of the World; thou hast a wider rule by the divine religion than by earthly domination." In these words he evidently applies 1 Pet 2:5, to the Roman See and people in communion with it. This is a specimen of the blasphemy of the Name, which perverts what the apostle says to the saints concerning their spiritual status, and applies it to the basest of mankind. Leo said that he, as Bishop of Rome, was officially "both the guardian of the catholic faith, and of the traditions of the fathers." Leo's immediate successor was Hilary. The spirit of Leo had passed with the office to him, so that what Leo had affirmed, he readily accepted as his rightful prerogative. In the estimation of these men, "whoever disputed the primacy and authority of the Roman See, as being that rock on which by Christ's own ordinance Christ's universal church was built, was none other than the Devil or Antichrist." Hence, the incense of the Tarragonese bishop's reference to him as officially the "Vicar of Peter; unto whom, forthwith from after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the keys of the kingdom belong, for the illumination of all," was an odor of a sweet smell. From a.d. 492 to 496, Gelasius figured as Bishop of Rome, which was then the throne of the Seventh Head, the Gothic Kings of Italy. But though subject to Theodoric, he strenuously asserted his Divine supremacy over all kings and emperors. In a letter to Faustus, he wrote: "Things divine are to be learned by the secular potentates (the Horns of the Beast) from bishops, above all from the Vicar of the Blessed Peter"; and in a letter to the emperor in Constantinople, whom he excommunicated, a.d. 494, he writes: "There are two authorities by which the world is governed, the Pontifical and the Royal; the sacerdotal order being that which has charge of the sacraments of life, and from which thou must seek the causal of thy salvation. Hence, in divine things, it becomes Kings to bow the neck to Priests; specially to the Head of Priests, whom Christ's own voice has set over the universal church." But, to be Vicar of Peter was to be only the Vicar of a Vicar. There was a step still higher on the ladder of episcopal ambition, which the Blasphemer of Rome was ready to mount when opportunity presented. Two consecutive councils at Rome, held a.d. 494 and 495, recognized and accepted his words as those of the Vicar of Christ: "The Holy Roman Church," says he, "is preferred to other ecclesias by no synodical canons; but it obtains the primacy by the evangelical voice of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, saying, Thou art Peter. The Roman Church is therefore the chief seat of the apostle Peter, not having spot, nor wrinkle, nor any such thing;" "having authority over the whole church for its general superintendence and government." This same Gelasius, as if determined indelibly to affix the character of blasphemy to the Name he represented, styles the apostle, "our Saviour the Blessed Peter," because of the words spoken to him, "whatsoever thou shalt bind, etc.; so that none living are excepted from the church's authority of the keys; but only the dead." But, in after times, not even the dead were excepted. At the close of the Council in a.d. 495, when Gelasius had finished, the assembled bishops shouted, six times repeated, "We see that thou art the Vicar of Christ." There was more in the significance of the words of those episcopal shouts than they intended. Vicarium christi te videmus! was in effect saying, "We see that thou art ho Antichristos, the Antichrist!" Vicarius answers to the word anti, that is, instead, or supplies the place of another; hence, as a substantive, a deputy, a substitute, a vicegerent, locum-tenens, vicar. "We see that thou art a substitute for Christ!" and a substitute for Peter! And that thou art above every thing called god or is worshipped! Anti-Christos is the Greek for Vicarius Christi. This "was blaspheming those who dwell in the heaven;" it was injuring greatly the reputation of the Father and the Son among men, for an ignorant and profane Gentile, who proclaimed in council the words noster Salvator Beatissimus Petrus, "our saviour the most blessed Peter," to announce himself as their substitute and all-powerful representative upon earth. A Vicar-Christ is Anti-Christ; and though they did not mean to make that application, yet in shouting what they did, they for once proclaimed the truth to the world from the Seven Hills. This same Gelasius at the Council of a.d. 494, had authoritatively drawn up a list of the Scriptures to be received as Canonical and Divine. The first list is headed, "The Order of the Books of the Old Testament, which the Holy and Catholic Roman Church receives and venerates; digested by the Blessed Father Gelasius, with seventy bishops." This includes the Apocryphal Books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Esdras, Judith, and 1 Maccabees. The second list gives the books of the New Testament as still received. In a fourth list the writings of "the Fathers;" as Cyprian, Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, &c: and ending, "the rest, which are composed by heretics or schismatics, the Catholic and Roman Church by no means receives." A list of about one hundred of the Apocryphal writings, not to be received, is then subjoined; among which are the Opuscula of Tertullian and Lactantius, and of the Apocalyptic Commentators, Victorinus and Tychonius. All these, with their authors, the concluding clause consigns to eternal damnation: "with their authors and the admirers of the authors we declare to be damned to an indissoluble bond in eternity." Thus, like his predecessor Leo, he set himself up as the supreme arbiter and judge in all matters of faith! At the opening of the sixth century, Symmachus was the official Antichrist and Antipeter. The Bishop of Rome was called Papa, or English, Pope. "He was declared," says Gibbon, "in a numerous synod to be pure from all sin, and exempt from all judgment." Nevertheless, this self-deceiver and liar, as John styles all such, 1 John 1:8, was a subject of Theodoric, King of Italy. Though he claimed an ample dominion in heaven and earth, he had not yet been able to exalt his Trinitarian Holiness above an Arian King. He was a turbulent and unruly subject, and made himself obnoxious to his royal master. Theodoric in consequence, summoned a council to meet at Rome, a.d. 501, to judge of certain charges against him. But, when convened, the Council demurred to entering on the matter, on the ground of incompetency; considering that the party accused was supreme above all ecclesiastical jurisdiction. And a little after, as the climax of blasphemy, another Roman Synod, with Symmachus himself presiding and consenting, in the most solemn manner, adopted a book written by Ennodius in defence of the resolutions of the former synod; in which it was asserted, "that the Pontiff is judge in the place of Deity, and can be judged by no mortal." Assuredly there can be no mistake that we have before us an Order of Men, or a Name, answerable to Daniel's "god of guardians, exalting himself, and magnifying himself above every god, and speaking marvellous things against the God of Gods;" "to Paul's Man of Sin, Son of Perdition, and Lawless One;" and John's "Name of Blasphemy, and Mouth like the mouth of a lion, speaking great things and blasphemies." No person, or succession of persons, could be more like Lucifer of Babylon, more arrogant, more proud, more blasphemous, or more lawless. The reader will doubtless have perceived, that the falsehood lying at the bottom of all these blasphemous assumptions, is, that the clergy, as they style themselves, are the successors of the apostles and ambassadors of Jesus Christ; and that, consequently, all that is affirmed of the apostles, the true ambassadors of Christ, is truly affirmable also of them! Ignatius spoke of bishops as eis topon Theou, in the place of God; and Cyprian says, that every bishop within his own diocese, is a priest of God, and a judge appointed in the place of Christ. But there were professors of Christianity in the apostles' days, who, in effect, claimed the same things. The Spirit speaks of these as men "who say they are apostles (sent ones) and are not, but are liars (Apoc. 2:2); and Paul styles them, "False apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ -- the ministers of Satan, transforming themselves as ministers of righteousness, after the example of their master." Whoever says he is a successor of the apostles, in so saying affirms that he is an apostle; which signifies "one called and sent of God as Aaron was." Hence, Jesus styled himself the Deity's apostle: and all who say that he called and sent them to preach the gospel affirm the same thing. But where did the clergy, so-called, get their dogma of Apostolic succession from? The answer is, from tradition and Scripture falsely interpreted. So long as the Star-Angel Presbytery shone in an ecclesia, the Spirit shined in its midst. That ecclesia was the dioikesis, jurisdiction, or diocese, of the presbytery; which was in the stead of the apostles, who could not be everywhere at once. It was the gift of the Spirit that made the Star-Angel Eldership what it was. It was concerning this spirituallyendowed order in each ecclesia that Paul wrote in saying, "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable to you." The Star-Angel consisted of many bishops in an ecclesia, not of one only. It was in the place of the Deity, as Moses was instead of God to Aaron. It was the Vicar of God, and the Vicar of Christ, in the particular ecclesia that rejoiced in its presence; and it was this, because of the Spirit being in the elders to guide them into all the truth. But the Star-Angels, which had power to abuse, as well as to use, the spiritual gifts, did not continue to be faithful stewards of the mystery of Christ; they fell away from the faith as apostolically delivered; and having become apostate, the Spirit was withdrawn, and nothing remained of the Star-Angels but presbyteries of vain and self-conceited ecclesiastics, each presbytery being ruled by an ignorant bishop, whose wisdom shone brightest when he spoke the least. But though "the Spirit had spued them out of his mouth," they claimed the same relation to God, to Christ, and to men -- a claim, which being no longer endorsed by Deity, became mere arrogance, falsehood, and blasphemy. Thus, they claimed to be traditionally without the Spirit, what they were with it -- apostles, ambassadors, and vicars, of Christ and of God. But, evil men, when left to their own resources, always wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. They flourish in deception. Being sensual, not having the Spirit, as the clergy have ever been even to this day, when they appealed to Scripture in support of their impious pretensions, they wrested it to their own destruction. They refer to the words of Jesus to the eleven, which they ridiculously enough apply to themselves. He said to the apostles, say they, "Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world." Now, they continue, this must refer to us, as well as to the apostles; for they did not live to the end of the world, which has not even yet come. It must, therefore, mean, "I will be with you, and your successors, to the end of time." But, some of these clergy are very learned, if not very wise and candid, men; and they know, that the English version of Matt. 28:20, is not a correct transcript of the original, idou ego meth' humon eimi pasas tas humeras, heos tes sunteleias tou aiovos. This, they know, ought not to be rendered, "lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world;" but, "Behold, I am with you all the days, until the end of the age." There is nothing about "successors" in this. We are expressly told that Jesus Christ spoke these words to "the eleven disciples." The promise was to them, and it was strictly and literally fulfilled; for we are informed in Mark 16:20, that "they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them;" and he tells us also, how the Lord worked with them; it was by "confirming the word" they preached, "by the signs following thereupon" -- epakolouthounton. In this way, he was with the eleven apostles, and also with the twelfth, Matthias, and with Paul, and their co-laborers, "all the days" of the Mosaic Dispensation, from the Day of Pentecost first after his resurrection, "till the end of the age," when it was abolished in the subversion of Judah's Commonwealth by the Roman power; a period of about thirtyseven years. But, as to the clergy, Apostolic successors, and ambassadors of Christ, as they style themselves, the application of the text to their Satanic Order, is a gross imposition upon the ignorance and credulity of their strongly-deluded worshippers. The Scripture, and the facts in their case, are against them. The Lord's promise was to co-work with eleven men preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom and Name; he did not promise to co-work with an impious order of imposters, who are ignorant of its first principles, and therefore could not make an intelligible statement of that Gospel to save their lives. Christ Jesus never promised to confirm, or bear witness to the truth of any teaching or preaching, by signs, and wonders, and divers miracles, and distributions of Holy Spirit (Heb. 2:4), other than the preaching of "The Word." It was the preaching of this alone that he confirmed and attested; not the blasphemous and contradictory foolishness enunciated by the ecclesiastical mountebanks, and martexts, of "the times of the Gentiles," among whom they have substituted their own traditions, which they style "divinity," for the Word, which they have nullified, and made contemptible thereby. The clergy do not preach the Word the apostles preached, and which it was the function of the apostleship to do. No men can therefore be their successors in apostleship who do not preach the same things. Faithful men, who have learned the things Paul preached, and are also able to teach them to others, are the only Apostolic succession possible (2 Tim. 2:2). These faithful men, men full of faith, cannot be found in any of "the Names and Denominations," Apocalyptically styled "Abominations" (ch. 17:5), of the excluded and unmeasured Court of the Gentiles (ch. 11:2). They are only to be found in "the House of Deity;" which is not a clerical bazaar, or temple, dedicated to fictitious entities canonized by the Apostasy; but "the ecclesia of Deity;" which Paul says, "is the Pillar and base of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). This is neither the Catholic nor Protestant organizations; but a company of Scripturally-enlightened and obedient believers, who have accepted the Deity's invitation to His kingdom and glory; of which they are all, without distinction of class or order, both the heirs and heritage, or clergy, of the Lord (James 2:5; Rom. 8:17). Apostolic succession, then, as contended for by all ranks, orders, and degrees of the Antichristian clergy, is a mere fiction of the carnal mind. The only succession coeval in its origin with the Apostolic age they can truthfully claim to be partakers of, is, as successors of those troublers in God's Israel, who, "by good words and fair speeches, deceived the hearts of the simple." As successors of Satan's apostles, they have built upon his foundation a superstructure which crowned itself with the Tiara upon the Seven Heads. This enormous blasphemy could not have been developed apart from the Satanic dogma of Apostolic succession, any more than the worship of Mary, as Queen of Heaven, and the Saints, as intercessors and mediators, could have been invented apart from the mythological dogma of the "immortal soul" in mortal flesh, separately existing after death. The one is as vain an imagination as the other. But vain and fallacious as it is, it has been a very profitable fiction to them all, from the Mouth of Blasphemy on the Seven Hills, to the most recent imitation thereof in the Mormon settlements of Utah. In this section of the thirteenth chapter, I have traced the development of the Name to the reign of the Seventh Head in the time of Theodoric, the Arian King of Italy, and his Trinitarian subject, Symmachus, the Bishop of Rome, who was now all ready to avail himself of anything that might present, whereby he could improve his fortune; and, instead of being a servant of heretical rulers, he could assume sovereignty for himself. But of this hereafter. I proceed now to consider the subject of the third verse of the chapter in hand. 14. The Wounding of One of the Heads "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been wounded unto death" -- verse 3. John saw one of the heads, which were common to the Dragon and the Beast, "as if it had been wounded unto death." This is as much as to say, that when he saw it lying prostrate, its death was only in appearance; it was not like the five heads that had preceded it. They were killed outright, never to recover sovereignty on the Seven Hills. But not so this Sixth Headship; for, though it seemed to be politically dead to all future sovereignty in Rome, where its supremacy no longer existed, yet the time would arrive when a like form of government would be located within its walls; and Imperial Headship, as an Eighth Sovereignty, once more elevate "the Eternal City" to the command of the world -- in the words of Leo III., to "a wider rule through divine religion, than by the power of earthly domination;" or more correctly, "through the working of the Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all the deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish." The head had received a severe wound, but not a fatal one; for, says John, "the plague of its death was healed." The apostle informs us that he saw "one of the heads" in this severely wounded condition; but he does not tell us which one of the seven it was. This he leaves us to find out for ourselves. Is the mystery, then, impenetrable? I think not. Let us see. In Ch. 17:10, the Revelator tells him, in speaking of the Seven Heads, "they are seven sovereign powers; five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh he must continue a short space." One is; that is, at the time he was speaking to John in Patmos. The Heads being attached to the Seven Mounts upon which Rome sits, we have only to ascertain what form of Sovereign Power obtained there while John was residing in Patmos. This is well known to have been the Imperial; which is a sovereignty headed up in one or more emperors, uniting in themselves the supreme, civil, spiritual, and military authority of the state. As five sovereign powers had fallen, this must have been the sixth, and only the sixth, because "the other," or seventh, had not then as yet come. Now, when the sovereign powers of a state fall, they are prostrated by wounding to death. This was the case in the fall, or removal of the five, especially the fifth, to make way for the sixth, which continued a long space in Rome, or over five hundred years; the Imperial Senate residing on the Seven Hills, and the Imperial Court of the West in Ravenna, and the Imperial Court of the East in Constantinople. This Imperial Sixth Head ruled all the Thirds of the Roman habitable; but, at the end of these centuries, the imperial authority was to be suppressed in Rome, and over the Third Part attached to the jurisdiction of that city. This was to be effected by wounding as if to death. The blowing of the fourth wind-trumpet inflicted the wound by which it was prostrated; so that when John saw it, it had the appearance of a dead head. This death state of the head was a necessary condition for the development of its successor in sovereign power. So long as the sixth flourished in political life on the Seven Hills, a successor could not exist in Rome. The death of the Sixth was indispensable to the manifestation of the Seventh. And it may be noted here that there is nothing more said about the seventh head in this chapter than that the beast had seven heads. It does not seem to perform any important part in the prophecy; nevertheless, as a seventh potentate, coming in between the sixth and the eighth, its presence upon the arena was highly important to the preparation of the way of the full grown Man of Sin. In John's time, "the other," or the seventh, "had not yet come; and when he cometh he must continue a short space." This "short space" was a period of great events. In the course of it, and during the nine decades that ushered it in, the TenHorn Sovereignties established themselves upon the western imperial third of the Roman Orb; Rome's imperial dominion was abolished, and, in place thereof, a regal sovereignty was developed upon the seven mountains known in history as the Gothic Kingdom of Italy. This was the Seventh Head, which was only to continue "a short space," or sixty years. This passing away of the Sixth Head from Old Rome at the time of its successor, the Seventh Head's inauguration, is thus symbolized in Apoc. 8:12, "and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened." The other two thirds were still unsmitten and left to shine in their proper spheres -- two thirds of the sun, two thirds of the moon, and two thirds of the stars: that is, the imperial Sixth Head retained its position in Constantinople, from whence it continued to exercise rule and authority, in all matters, civil and ecclesiastical, over the other unsubdued two thirds of the Roman world. Under the rule of the Gothic Arian Seventh Head, there was no scope for the development of the imperial tendencies of the Trinitarian Bishop of Rome. However, he might long for Universal Headship over all spiritual concerns of the Roman habitable, his subordination to an Arian kingship was an insuperable obstacle. So long as Arianism was king in Rome, he could not include Italy and that city in his universality. Hence, the policy of Symmachus and his successors would be to procure the ruin of the Seventh Head, and to prevent the return of the Sixth; so that Rome, being freed from the presence of both king and emperor, opportunity would be afforded for their own development into an Image of the Sixth Head upon the Seven Hills. But of the wounding of the Imperial Sixth, and the establishment of the Regal Seventh, Heads, I need not treat in this place. It will be sufficient here to refer the reader to pages 71,75, Vol. 3, for the historical exposition thereof, with this explanatory remark, that the obscuration of Rome's imperial "day and night" would not cease with the fall of the Seventh Head; but with the inauguration of the Eighth Head, or Image of the Sixth, upon the Seven Hills. 15. The Healing of the Deadly Wound "And the plague of his death was healed" -- Verse 3 "His deadly wound," as it reads in the English version, is he plege tou thanatou autou, in the original, which I have rendered, the plague of his death. The word plege, rendered wound, occurs fifteen times in the apocalypse. In five other places it is very properly rendered stripes; and in a sixth, Luke 10:30, it would have been better translated, laid on stripes, than "wounded" -- plegas epithentes. The judgments of the fifth and sixth trumpets, in the aggregate, are styled "plagues" Ch. 9:20; and the judgments the two prophets were able to inflict, are also styled "plagues" (Ch. 11:6). The judgments of the Seven Vials are thrice termed the seven plagues in Ch. 15; and the hail-storm that descends out of the heaven upon men, under the last vial is called a plague in Ch. 16:21. The plague of death that afflicted the Sixth Head, was a smiting plague; for, as the result of it, the sun, moon, and stars of the Roman heaven are said to have been "smitten". Hence, also, in Ch. 13:13, it is referred to as he plege tes machairas, the plague of the sword. The warlike operations of Odoacer, king of the Heruli, against Romulus Augustulus; and those of Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, against Odoacer, who, on the deposition of Augustulus, had become, by the title conferred upon him by Zeno, emperor of the Eastern Third, the Patrician Representative of the Sixth Head. These judgments by the sword, ultimating in the establishing of Theodoric in Rome as king of Italy, a.d. 493, made up the plague of the seeming death of the Sixth Head. And, in this place, it will be right to state the reason why I have not reckoned the Heruli and the Ostrogoths as two of the ten horns. No barbarians, the throne of whose dominion was on the seven mountains, could be horns. Rome is the throne of the Heads, not of the Horns. Hence, there must be reckoned ten horns and one head contemporary with the continuance of the "short space" of Seventh Head Ascendancy in Rome. Neither can the Exarchate of Ravenna nor the Dukedom of Rome, as Sir Isaac Newton and others suppose, be horns; for the former was the representative of the Sixth Head in Italy, and the latter, together with the Exarchate, are defective in this material attribute, that they were destitute of diadems; all the horns have diadems, but they had none. "It was healed," says John. The plague of the death by the sword was healed. To heal a death plague is to cause to live that which was smitten. This is the interpretation put upon the phrase in the fourteenth verse in the words, "the beast which had the plague of the sword, and did live." To heal is to institute a process of recovery. Healing is often a slow process, and always requires time; and the severer the injury to the constitution of the patient, the longer the time required for the recovery of health and strength. It is the same whether the patient be a sick man, or an enfeebled power. Time is demanded for a cure. It was so in the matter of restoring imperial dominion to Rome. There could, however, be no healing of "the plague of the sword," that Imperialism might live and flourish again in the Seven-Hilled City, so long as the Regal Seventh Head exercised sovereignty therein. While this reigned in conjunction with the Ten Horns, Rome's wounded imperialism was unhealed. The worship of "the peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues," or "many waters" of the Roman Habitable, upon which the woman sits, was an e pluribus unum. It was no longer a worship, or political homage and allegiance, rendered to a Sole Emperor reigning in Constantinople; but it was a worship in which "they wondered after the beast in all the earth," or empire; so, that "they worshipped the Dragon which yielded authority to the Beast; for the Seventh Head belonged both to the Dragon and the Beast; and the Ten horns, as we have seen by their coinage, acknowledged the supremacy of the Emperor in Constantinople, whose Vice-Kings they claimed to be: while, at the same time, they recognized the Seventh Head as a legitimate sovereignty. The constitution of things was analogous to the United States system of powers, in which citizens owe a divided allegiance to their native state and to the general government -- they worship the American Eagle, which gives authority to the State-Feathers of its wings and they worship the Feathers. This is well understood. There is, however, this difference in the similitude, that whereas a Visigoth and a Frank, first worshipped their respective Horn-States; and secondly, the general government in Constantinople. Now, a Marylander or a Virginian first worships at Washington, and afterwards subordinately at Richmond or Annapolis. The comparison, however, is sufficiently close for illustration of the saying "they worshipped the Dragon which yielded authority to the Beast; and they worshipped the Beast, saying, Who is like to the Beast? Who is able to make war with him?" -- Ver. 4. None. No beast-dominion can stand before him; for, as Daniel says of the System of Powers represented by the Dragon and the Beast, it is "dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth; it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the brazen clawed feet of it" (Ch. 7:7, 19). The history of Modern Europe amply shows the truth of the Beast's invincibility. It is the predominant dominion upon the earth; and rules the so-called civilized nations of Europe, Asia, Africa, America, and Australia. But oceans of blood have been shed in the past 1,335 years of its existence, in attaining to a dominion so extended. This sanguinary and all-conquering career commenced with war between the imperial and regal potentates of Rome and Constantinople, which, after twenty years' continuance with various fortune to the combatants, ultimated in the removal and final death of the Seventh Head; which marked the termination of the "short space" of its reign. As, then, the removal of the Seventh Head was an indispensable prerequisite to the healing, or causing imperialism to live again in Rome, I shall now proceed to an historical sketch of its suppression, and then return to the exhibition of the healing of "the plague of the death," which had been inflicted upon its predecessor by the sword; which will afford scope, also, for accompanying the Name of Blasphemy in further development, until we find it seated imperially upon the seven heads. 16. The Rise and Decollation of the Seventh Head The Roman Empire of the West was extinguished a.d. 476-479, by the conquering sword of the king of the Heruli, Odoacer. This ruler reigned in Rome about fourteen years, when he was succeeded by the renowned Theodoric, the Ostrogoth, the Arian king of Italy. This prince was born in the neighborhood of Vienna, and educated at Constantinople with care and tenderness. On his father's death he had succeeded to the hereditary throne of the Amali, who were subsidized as defenders of the frontier by the government of Constantinople. His people murmured at this arrangement, until he found it necessary to withdraw from the service of the emperor, and to lead them to some enterprize by which their fortunes would be improved. Having determined on this course he wrote to the emperor Zeno in the following words: "Although your servant is maintained in affluence by your liberality, graciously listen to the wishes of my heart! Italy, the inheritance of your predecessors, and Rome itself, the Heart and Mistress of the world, now fluctuate under the violence of Odoacer, the Mercenary. Direct me, with my national troops, to march against the tyrant. If I fall, you will be relieved from an expensive and troublesome friend; if, with the divine permission, I succeed; I shall govern in your name, and to your glory, the Roman Senate, and the part of the republic delivered from slavery by my victorious arms." Theodoric's proposal was accepted by the Byzantine Court. He marched against the tyrant in the depth of a rigorous winter, and after many obscure and bloody battles, he descended from the Julian Alps and displayed his invincible banners on the confines of Italy. The conflict between Odoacer and Theodoric was severe; but at length the former capitulated, and, being removed by death, the royalty of Theodoric was proclaimed by the Ostrogoths, "with the tardy, reluctant, ambiguous consent of the Emperor of the East." After this manner the Seventh Head was developed and established upon the Seven Hills; the Dragon tardily, reluctantly and ambiguously ceding to it "his power, and his throne, and extensive jurisdiction" (ch. 13:2). Theodoric reigned thirty-three years, from a.d. 493 to a.d. 526. Among the barbarian Horns of the West the victory of Theodoric had spread a general alarm. But as soon as it appeared that he was satiated with conquest and desired peace, terror was changed into respect, and they submitted to a powerful mediation, which was uniformly employed for the best purposes of reconciling their quarrels and civilizing their manners. A wife, two daughters, a sister and a niece, united the family of Theodoric with the kings of the Franks, the Burgundians, the Visigoths, the Vandals and the Thuringians, and contributed to maintain the harmony, or at least the balance, of the great western Republic of the horns. He reduced, under a strong and regular government, the unprofitable countries of Rhetia, Noricum, Dalmatia and Pannonia, from the source of the Danube and the territory of the Bavarians, to the kingdom erected by the Gepidae on the ruins of Sirmium. His greatness awakened the jealousy of Anastasius, the emperor of the east, who ravaged the sea-coast of Calabria and Apulia, but the activity and moderation of Theodoric were soon rewarded by a solid and honorable peace. He maintained with a powerful hand the balance of the Horn-Powers of the west, till it was at length overthrown by the ambition of Clovis, king of the Franks, whose progress he checked in the midst of their victorious career. By the Visigoths he was revered as a national protector and guardian of their infant prince. Under this respectable character, the king of Italy restored the praetorian praefecture of the Gauls, reformed some abuses in the civil government of Spain, and accepted the annual tribute and apparent submission of its military governor. The sovereignty of the Seventh Head was established from Sicily to the Danube, and from Belgrade to the Atlantic ocean, and the Greeks themselves have acknowledged that Theodoric reigned over the fairest portion of the western empire. "From a tender regard to the expiring prejudices of Rome," says the historian, "the barbarian declined the name, the purple and the diadem of the emperors; but he assumed, under the hereditary title of king, the whole substance and plenitude of imperial prerogative. His addresses to the eastern throne were respectful and ambiguous; he celebrated in pompous style the harmony of The Two Republics, applauded his own government as the perfect similitude of a sole and undivided empire (or Head), and claimed above the kings of the earth (the Diademed Horns) the same pre-eminence which he modestly allowed to the person or rank of Anastasius." "They worshipped the Dragon, and they worshipped the Beast," which is further illustrated by Gibbon, who continues: "the alliance of the East and West was annually declared by the unanimous choice of two consuls; but it should seem that the Italian candidate, who was named by Theodoric, accepted a formal confirmation from the sovereign at Constantinople." The fifteen regions of Italy were governed according to the principles and even the forms of Roman jurisprudence. The civil administration, with its honors and emoluments, was confined to the Italians, for whom were reserved the arts of peace, and the Goths were used for the service of war and public defence. These barbarians held their lands and benefices as a military stipend; at the sound of the trumpet they were prepared to march under the conduct of their provincial officers, and the whole extent of Italy was distributed into the several quarters of a well-regulated camp. With the protection, Theodoric assumed the legal supremacy of the Catholic Church. He was riot ignorant of the dignity and importance of the Bishop of Rome, to whom was now appropriated the name of Pope. When "the chair of St. Peter" was disputed by Symmachus and Lawrence, they appeared at his summons before the tribunal of an Arian king, and he confirmed the election of the one he most approved. At the end of his life, in a moment of jealousy and resentment, he prevented the choice of the Romans, by nominating a pope in the palace of Ravenna. This produced great excitement, which he controlled, and the last decree of the Senate was enacted to extinguish, if it were possible, "the scandalous venality of the papal elections." The reign of Theodoric was mild, tolerant and promotive of the prosperity, security, and happiness of the people. But his ungrateful subjects could never be cordially reconciled to the origin, the religion, or even the virtues of the Gothic conqueror; past calamities were forgotten, and the sense or suspicion of injuries was rendered still more exquisite by the present felicity of the times. The religious toleration which Theodoric had the glory of introducing into the Catholic world, was painful and offensive to the Trinitarian zeal of the Italians. They dared not disturb the armed heresy of the Goths; therefore, they sought to vent their pious and cowardly rage by falling upon the rich and defenceless Jews. Their persons were insulted, their effects were pillaged, and their synagogues were burnt by the mad populace of Rome and Ravenna, inflamed by the most frivolous or extravagant pretences. A legal inquiry was instantly directed by the king; who, as the authors of the tumult had escaped, condemned the whole community to repair the damage; and the obstinate bigots who refused their contributions, were whipped through the streets by the hand of the executioner. This simple act of justice exasperated the discontent of the Trinitarians, who applauded the merit and patience of these so-called "holy confessors;" and from three hundred pulpits deplored the persecution of the church. "At the close of a glorious life," says Gibbon, "the king of Italy discovered he had excited the hatred of a people whose happiness he had labored so assiduously to promote; and his mind was soured by indignation, jealousy and the bitterness of unrequited love." Thus were embittered the relations between the Gothic Head and the Trinitarian Italians, who were devoted to the traditions of the Council of Nice, whom Theodoric suspected of a secret and treasonable correspondence with the Byzantine representative of the Head smitten by the sword. The powers of this government were then in the hands of Justinian, who already meditated the extirpation of heresy, and the reconquest of Italy and Africa; in other words, the healing of the plague of the sword, with which imperialism had been smitten in these countries, as it were, to death. A rigorous law which was published at Constantinople to reduce the Arians by the dread of punishment within the pale of the Catholic orthodoxy, awakened the just resentment of Theodoric, who claimed for his distressed brethren of the East the same indulgence which he had so long granted to the Trinitarian Catholics of his dominions. At his stern command, the Bishop of Rome, with four illustrious senators, embarked on an embassy. The singular veneration shown to the Bishop, who was the first pope that had visited Constantinople, was punished by Theodoric as a crime; and a mandate was prepared in Italy to prohibit, after a stated day, the exercise of the Catholic worship. "by the bigotry of his subjects and enemies," says Gibbon, "the most tolerant of princes was driven to the brink of persecution." The celebrated Boethius, a Roman senator, philosopher and minister of state, his father-in-law the patrician Symmachus, and Albinus, also a senator, were accused of treason for "hoping the liberty of Rome," and actually inviting the Emperor Justinian to deliver Italy from the Goths; in other words, to undertake the healing of the wounded head that it might live. The suspicions of Theodoric were probably not groundless, and could only be appeased by their blood. They were executed, and the treason charged assumed a terrible reality in succeeding reigns. Gold coin issued in the name of Theodoric King of Ostrogoths. He reigned from a.d. 493 to 526. On the death of Theodoric, August 30, a.d. 526, the throne of the Seventh Head was occupied by his grandson, Athalaric, aged ten years, with his mother Amalasuntha as guardian and regent of the kingdom of Italy. She ruled the country about eight years, during which a spirit of discord and disaffection prevailed, and the Goths supported with reluctance the indignity of a female reign. Her son Athalaric dying, she caused it to be announced to the Senate of Rome and the Emperor of Constantinople, that she and Theodatus, her cousin, had jointly ascended the throne of Italy. But this regal partnership was soon dissolved by Theodatus, by whose orders she was first imprisoned, and then strangled in the bath, a.d. 535. The emperor Justinian, who had recently "plucked up by the roots" the Vandal Horn in Africa, beheld with joy the dissensions of the Goths in Italy, who were feebly and unworthily governed by Theodatus. He considered the opportunity as favorable for the healing of his wounded authority over Italy. He demanded therefore the abdication of the Gothic king, and the surrender of the ancient provinces of the empire. Though agreed to by the weakness and imbecility of Theodatus, its execution was prevented by his assassination, and the elevation of Vitiges to the throne. Justinian, however, was not to be thwarted in this way. He ordered Belisarius to invade Italy with the forces of the empire, and to wrest it from the Goths. The invasion was easy, but the expulsion of two hundred thousand warlike barbarians in arms, proved to be a work of great difficulty. Having recovered Sicily, the general of Justinian landed his forces in Italy, a.d. 536. From the capture of Naples he proceeded against Rome, which had been left to a feeble garrison, and the fidelity of its citizens. "But", says Gibbon, "a momentary enthusiasm of religion and patriotism was kindled in their minds. They furiously exclaimed, that the Apostolic Throne should no longer be profaned by the triumph or toleration of Arianism; that the tombs of the Caesars should no longer be trampled by the savages of the north; and, without reflecting, that Italy must sink into a province of Constantinople, they fondly hailed the restoration of the Roman emperor as a new era of freedom and prosperity. The deputies of the pope and clergy, of the Senate and people, invited the lieutenant of Justinian to accept their voluntary allegiance, and to enter the city whose gates would be thrown open for his reception." He readily accepted their allegiance, and made his entrance at the Asinarian gate, while the Gothic garrison departed without molestation along the Flaminian way; and the city after sixty years' servitude, was delivered from the yoke of the barbarians. The keys of Rome were sent to the throne of the emperor Justinian, to whom they were delivered by the Gothic commander of the garrison, who refused to accompany his troops in their retreat. But Vitiges was not idle. During the winter season he collected an army of one hundred and fifty thousand men. With these forces he beseiged Belisarius in Rome for more than a year. The city was greatly distressed. The general pitied the sufferings of the people, whose loyalty to the emperor had notably decayed, while their discontents proportionately increased. "Adversity," says Gibbon, "had awakened the Romans from the dreams of grandeur and freedom, and taught them the humiliating lesson, that it was of small moment to their real happiness, whether the name of their master was derived from the Gothic or the Latin language." Among the disaffected was Sylverius, the incumbent of the recently erected "Apostolic Throne." A letter subscribed by him was intercepted, which assured the king of the Goths, that the Asinarian gate, adjoining to the Lateran church, should be secretly opened to his troops. On this proof of treason, he was summoned to attend at the headquarters of Belisarius, and there to give an account of himself. The ecclesiastics who followed the pope, were detained in an anteroom, and he alone was admitted into the presence of the general. Belisarius was silent, but the voice of reproach and menace issued from the mouth of Antonina, his imperious wife. Being convicted of the treason, the pretended successor of St. Peter was despoiled of his pontifical ornaments, clad in the mean habit of a monk, and embarked without delay for a distant exile in the east, and was afterwards either slain or murdered upon a desolate island. At the emperor's command, the clergy of Rome proceeded to the choice of a new bishop; they therefore elected a deacon Vigilius, who had purchased the papal throne by a bribe of two hundred pounds of gold. From these circumstances the reader will perceive the relation in which the bishop of Rome stood to the imperial power in the first half of the sixth century. He was still subject to the civil authority though spiritual "Head of all the Churches" of the empire. The imperial authority was now in Rome again in power, or maintained by force of arms. Had this been permanent the pope would never have become a temporal sovereign; but would have lived and died the servant of the emperors. Hence, the removal of this pressure was necessary to the setting up of an imperial episcopal image upon the seven hills. The decollation of the Seventh Head, and the reduction of Rome to a subordinate rank among cities, would accomplish this; and therefore the calamities of the times as developed in this Gothic war. Succours arriving from Constantinople, Rome was delivered from the Goths, who raised the siege, and fell back upon Ravenna. This well fortified city was at length captured by Belisarius, who also obtained possession of Vitiges the Gothic king, whom he sent prisoner to Constantinople, a.d. 539. By these reverses they lost their king, an inconsiderable loss truly, their capital, their treasures, the provinces from Sicily to the Alps, and the military force of two hundred thousand barbarians magnificently equipped with horses and arms. Yet all was not lost. Totila the nephew of the captive king was chosen to succeed him; and, at the head of five thousand soldiers, generously undertook the restoration of the kingdom of Italy. Having routed twenty thousand Romans near Faenza, he crossed the Po, and traversing the Apennine, laid siege to Naples, which he reduced; and then retracing his steps, laid siege to Rome, whose Senate and people he calmly exhorted to compare the tyranny of the Greeks with the blessings of the Gothic reign. Totila was chaste and temperate; and none were deceived who depended on his faith or his clemency. By his virtues in contrast with the vices of the officials, who served the interests of imperialism, a new people, under the appellation of Goths, was insensibly formed in his camp. The situation of the imperialists had already become desperate; and the return of Belisarius to save the country he had subdued in the first war, was pressed with equal vehemence by his friends and enemies. He reluctantly accepted the painful task of supporting his own reputation, and retrieving the faults of his successors. The sea being open to the Romans, he entered the port of Ravenna. From thence he addressed both the Goths and Italians in the name of Justinian, his gracious master, who, he said, was inclined to pardon and reward. But not a man was tempted to desert the standard of the Gothic king. Belisarius soon discovered that he had been sent by Justinian to remain the idle and impotent spectator of the glory of the young barbarian Totila. This he by no means approved; and, in an epistle to the emperor, exhibited a lively picture of the crisis, which caused him great distress. "Most excellent prince," says he, "we are arrived in Italy, destitute of all the necessary implements of war, men, horses, arms, and money. In our late circuit through the villages of Thrace and Illyricum, we have collected with extreme difficulty, about four thousand recruits, naked, and unskilled in the use of weapons and the exercises of the camp. The soldiers already stationed in the province are discontented, fearful and dismayed; at the sound of an enemy, they dismiss their horses, and cast their arms on the ground. No taxes can be raised, since Italy is in the hands of the barbarians; the failure of payment has deprived us of the right of command, or even of admonition. Be assured, Dread Sir, that the greater part of your troops have already deserted to the Goths. If the war could be achieved by the presence of Belisarius alone, your wishes are satisfied; Belisarius is in the midst of Italy. But, if you desire to conquer, far other preparations are requisite: without a military force, the title of general is an empty name. It would be expedient to restore to my service my own veterans and domestic guards. Before I can take the field, I must receive an adequate supply of light and heavy armed troops; and it is only with ready money that you can procure the indispensable aid of a powerful body of the cavalry of the Huns." In the meantime, the siege of Rome was closely pressed by Totila, a.d. 546. The inhabitants were gradually reduced to feed on dead horses, dogs, cats, and mice, and eagerly to snatch the grass, and even the nettles, which grew among the ruins of the city. The failure of Belisarius to throw supplies into the place, left Rome without protection to the mercy or indignation of Totila; by whose instrumentality the Deity was inflicting plagues upon the Trinitarian adherents of the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Hills. The continuance of hostilities had embittered the national hatred; the Arian clergy were ignominiously driven from Rome; Pelagius, the archdeacon, returned without success from an embassy to the Gothic camp; and a Sicilian bishop, the envoy or nuncio of pope Vigilius, was deprived of both his hands, for daring to utter falsehoods in the service of the Trinitarian church and state. At length on Dec. 17, the Goths were treacherously admitted into the city. As soon as daylight had displayed the entire victory of the Goths, Totila devoutly visited the so-called tomb of St. Peter; but while he prayed at the altar, twenty-five soldiers and sixty citizens, were put to the sword in the vestibule of the temple. The archdeacon Pelagius stood before him with "the gospel" in his hand, and exclaimed, "O Lord, be merciful to your servant." "Pelagius," said Totila, with an insulting smile, "your pride now condescends to become a suppliant." "I am a suppliant," he prudently replied, "God has now made us your subjects. and as your subjects we are entitled to your clemency." At his humble prayer the lives of the Romans were spared, and the passions of the hungry soldiers restrained. But they were rewarded with the freedom of pillage. The next day he pronounced two orations, to congratulate and admonish the victorious Goths, and to reproach the Senate, as the vilest of slaves, with their perjury, folly, and ingratitude. Yet he consented to forgive their revolt. Against the city he appeared inexorable; and the world was astonished at the fatal decree, that Rome should be changed into a pasture for cattle. The firm and temperate remonstrance of Belisarius suspended the execution; and Totila was at length persuaded to preserve Rome as the ornament of his kingdom. Having demolished one third of the walls in different parts, and stationed an army about fifteen miles from the city to observe the motions of Belisarius, he marched with the remainder of his forces into Lucania and Apulia. The Senators were dragged in his train, and afterwards confined in the fortress of Campania; the citizens with their wives and children, and the pope and his clergy of all ranks and degrees, were dispersed in exile; and during forty days and more Rome was abandoned to desolate and dreary solitude. A golden medallion of Justinian issued in 534 commemorating his military successes in the West that provided the means whereby he could extend assistance to the Bishop of Rome, proclaiming him to be head of all the churches. And here it would be well for the reader to pause, and reflect upon this chasm of forty days in the life of "the Mistress of the World" -- "the Woman, that Great City," which in the apostles' day, and ecclesiastically in ours, "reigneth over the regal powers of the earth" (ch. 17:18). If the foundation of Rome be correctly stated at 753 years before the birth of Jesus Christ, the "Eternal City," so called, became a vacant space twelve hundred and ninety-nine years after. This chasm of forty days is nearly the central epoch of the city's existence. Twelve hundred and sixty years afterwards, Totila was represented by Napoleon, crowned emperor and king of Italy by the Pope. Totila was not unlike his modern representative in some respects. He had but little respect for Rome or its bishop. He filled Rome with darkness, so that no political lights, civil or ecclesiastical, shone in it for forty days; so also, Napoleon, as the executive of the Fifth Vial, poured vengeance upon Rome; and filled the kingdom, of which it is the seat or throne, with darkness. When Totila consented not to reduce it to a pasture for cattle, but to leave it a vacant and standing monument of the wrath of heaven, he carried off the pope with him into captivity; and 1260 years after, Napoleon degraded the city to a subordinate rank, and transferred the pope from a throne to captivity at Fontainbleau. Thirteen hundred and twenty years (1320) have now elapsed since this notable forty days of solitude; and it is exceedingly probable that but few more years will elapse ere this renowned centre of crime, blasphemy, and everything unclean and hateful, finds itself submerged in the unfathomable depths of a solitude, whose silence will never again be broken by the trumpet, or its darkness dispelled by a glimmering of light (ch. 18:22, 23). After this forty days of solitude the city was reoccupied by Belisarius, who sent its keys (for there were then no "St. Peter's keys" to send) a second time to Justinian. But the imperialists were unable to hold it. In a.d. 549, the Goths laid siege to it again, and took it. Totila no longer desired to destroy the edifices of Rome, which he now respected as the throne of the Gothic kingdom; the Senate and people were now restored, and the means of subsistence were liberally provided. He reduced the cities of Rhegium and Tarentum; and annexed Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica. At every step of his victories, he repeated to Justinian his desire of peace, applauded the concord of their predecessors, and offered to employ the Gothic arms in the service of the Dragon-empire. But, Justinian, true to the character of "the king who" should "do according to his will" (Dan. 11:35), was deaf to the voice of peace; but he neglected, through indolence, the prosecution of the war. From this slumber he was aroused by Vigilius, "the Head of all the churches" of his estate, and the patrician Cethagus, who appeared before his throne, and adjured him in the name of the Deity and the people, to resume the conquest and deliverance of Italy. An army was assembled, and under the command of Narses, was ordered to march against the Goths. Totila, conscious that the clergy and people of Italy aspired to a second revolution, resolved to risk the Gothic kingdom on the chance of a day, in which the valiant would be animated by instant danger, and the disaffected might be awed by mutual ignorance. The decisive battle was fought at Taginas, about ninety-five miles from Rome, in July, a.d. 552. The Goths were defeated, and Totila was slain. Narses, having paid his devotions to "the blessed Virgin," his imaginary goddess, and peculiar patroness, whose inspiration he professed had revealed to him the day, and the word of battle, advanced towards Rome, which did not long delay his progress. The keys of the city were for the third time sent to Justinian, under whose reign it had been five times taken and recovered. "But the deliverance of Rome," says Gibbon, "was the last calamity of the Roman people." Three hundred youths of the noblest families, who were hostages in the hands of the Goths, were slain by Teias, the successor of Totila. "The fate of the Senate suggests an awful lesson of the vicissitude of human affairs. All the fortresses of Campania were stained with patrician blood. After a period of thirteen centuries, the institution of Romulus expired; and if the nobles of Rome still assumed the title of senators, few subsequent traces can be discovered of a public council, or constitutional order. Ascend six hundred years, and contemplate the kings of the earth soliciting an audience, as the slaves or freemen of the Roman Senate!" In the following March, a.d. 553, was fought the battle of the Draco, in which the new king was slain. While exchanging his buckler his uncovered side was pierced with a mortal dart. "He fell, and his head exalted upon a spear, proclaimed to the nations that the Gothic kingdom was no more." Thus, after a reign of sixty years, the Seventh Head of the Dragon and the Beast was destroyed from the Seven Hills. The Roman Senate and the Gothic kingdom became extinct together. Their place was filled by the Exarchs of Ravenna, who were the representatives in peace and war of the Constantinopolitan Dragon. But, though this power, after the agitation of a long tempest, had regained possession of Italy, the wounded Sixth Head was not yet "healed;" neither indeed could it be until Rome again became the throne of an imperial dominion. Instead of this, on the fall of the Seventh Head, whose "short space" had passed away with the death of Teias, the former Mistress of the World was dethroned. The civil state of Italy was fixed, a.d. 554, by a pragmatic sanction of twenty-seven articles, which the emperor Justinian promulgated at the request of the pope, who was still a subject, ruled by the emperor's lieutenant resident in Ravenna. Justinian introduced his own jurisprudence into the schools and tribunals of the west; and ratified the acts of Theodoric and his immediate successors. Under the Exarchs of Ravenna, Rome was degraded to the second rank among the cities of the empire. The regulation of weights and measures was delegated to the pope and municipal senate. But, however benevolent their edicts, the power of rulers is most effectual to destroy; and twenty years of the Gothic war had consummated the distress and depopulation of Italy; so that "a strict interpretation of the evidence of Procopius," says Gibbon, "would swell the loss of Italy above the total sum of her present inhabitants." The Sixth and the Seventh Heads which hindered the manifestation of the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Hills being taken out of the way, scope was now afforded for its development into the Eighth Head of the Beast. From the epoch of the settlement of Italy a.d. 554-559, and during the ensuing two hundred and forty years of Rome's eclipse, the greatest, or most influential subject in the degraded city, was the pope. There was no constitutional superior therein to over-awe or keep him down. In the times of the Seventh Head, which was Arian, he was in great trouble, and especially during the Gothic war. Indeed, he has always fallen upon troublous times when he has had for ruler or neighbor, an independent king of Italy. It is so at this day. A king of Italy naturally enough claims Rome for the capital of his kingdom, which is incompatible with the sovereignty and independence of the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Hills. JUSTINIAN'S EMPIRE IN 565 The victories of Belisarius and Narses over the Goths of Italy and the Arians of North America extended the influence of Justinian in the West and enabled the "deadly wound" of the sixth head of the beast "to be healed" at the expense of the 7th or Gothic head (Rev. 13:3). Thus the Dragon throne in Constantinople gave "power unto the beast" (v. 4). Having, then, put the reader in possession of so much of history as will enable him to identify the Seventh Head; and having brought him down to the epoch of its decollation, or destruction, which was necessary for the subsequent "healing" of the wounded Sixth Head of Rome's imperialism; it behooves us to pause in our exposition, that we may bring up arrears in regard to the development of the Name of Blasphemy upon the heads. When this is sufficiently advanced we shall have brought the ecclesiastical into line with the civil; and be prepared to carry them on together until the healing process is completed in their expansion into the Eighth Head upon the Seven Hills, as symbolized in this thirteenth chapter by the Beast of the Earth with Two Horns like a lamb, and speaking as a Dragon. 17. the Development of the Romano-Babylonian Name of Blasphemy (Continued from page 228) The Name of Blasphemy is the Eye and Mouth, or ecclesiastical element of the Eighth Head. As we have seen, this ecclesiastical constituent of the Beast was working upwards towards enthronization over all, anterior to the establishment of the Ten Gothic Horns upon the Roman Habitable. When the citizens and clergy of Rome were seized with a spirit of patriotism and superstitious zeal, a.d. 536, "they furiously exclaimed," says Gibbon, "that the Apostolic Throne should no longer be profaned by the triumph or toleration of Arianism." Belisarius was then at the gates, and the Gothic king in possession of the city. Hence, the people of that day evidently recognized two thrones in contemporary existence within the walls -- the Secular Throne of the king of Italy; and the Ecclesiastical Throne of the Archbishop and Patriarch of Rome. In Italy, the "Apostolic Throne" was overshadowed by the Secular; and as the Patriarch of Constantinople was in domestic slavery under the eye of his master, the Greek emperor, as he is at this day under the Sultan; so the Patriarch of Rome, occupying a distant and dangerous station amidst the Barbarians of the West, was the enthroned slave of his master, the king of Italy; who, while he professed great reverence for the throne of St. Peter, did not hesitate to chastise his pretended successor when convinced of disloyalty to the Gothic throne. But as to this Apostolic throne. Whence its origin; by what authority was it established? John was informed that "the Dragon gave him his power, and his throne, and an extensive jurisdiction." This was the constitutional source of all the Bishop of Rome's preeminence. He obtained no honors, privileges, and immunities from the kings of the Seventh Head. He derived all he possessed from the emperors of the East and of the West; who were the great and powerful patrons by whom he was acknowledged as a god of gods upon earth. His development, however, into an enthroned god was gradual and progressive. In the Canons of the Council of Chalcedon, a.d. 450, the Bishop of Rome is styled, "Beatissimus Papa urbis Romae, qui est caput omnium ecclesiarum," i.e.; the most blessed Pope of Rome, who is "the Head of All Churches." About five years before this the western emperor, Valentinian III., and the eastern emperor, Theodosius II., unitedly published an imperial edict, or law, in which the Bishop of Rome is styled, "Director of Universal Christendom." In this edict, the presumptuousness of resistance to the Holy See was sharply rebuked, the whole body of bishops bidden to do nothing without his approbation, and the universal clergy to obey him as their ruler. "From this time" (a.d. 445) says Ranke, "the power of the Roman Bishops grew up under protection of the Roman Emperor himself." He was their especial patron, and predicted as such, as we have already seen in what is testified concerning the Dragon in the second verse of this chapter. We come now to that remarkable epoch of four years, extending from a.d. 529 to 533. This belongs to the earliest years of Justinian, who began to reign in Constantinople, a.d. 527. The Catholics of Italy, then subject to the Arian kings of the Seventh Head, were greatly attached to him as "worshippers of the Dragon and the Beast," because as Gibbon says, "he trod the narrow path of inflexible and intolerant orthodoxy. After a schism of thirty-four years, he reconciled the proud and angry spirit of the Roman Pontiff, and spread among the Latins a favorable report of his pious respect for the Apostolic See. The thrones of the East were filled with (Trinitarian) Catholic bishops devoted to his interests, the clergy and monks were gained by his liberality, and the people were taught to pray for their sovereign as the hope and pillar of the true religion." In this epoch of his reign, and by his care, the Roman Civil Jurisprudence was digested in what Gibbon styles," the immortal works of the Code, the Pandects, and the Institutes." These, "the public reason of the Romans, have been silently or studiously transfused into the domestic institutions of Europe; and the laws of Justinian still command the respect or obedience of independent nations." "The Code, Pandects, and Institutes were declared to be the legitimate system of civil jurisprudence; they alone were admitted in the tribunals, and they alone were taught in the academies of Rome, Constantinople, and Berytus. Justinian addressed to the Senate and provinces his Eternal Oracles; and his pride, under the mask of piety, ascribed the consummation of this great design to the support and inspiration of the Deity." In the theological character drawn of him by Gibbon, he says, that he sympathized with his subjects in their superstitious reverence for living and departed saints: his Code, and more especially his Novels, confirm and enlarge the privileges of the clergy; and in every dispute between a monk and a layman he was inclined to pronounce that truth, and innocence, and justice were always on the side of the church. His fancy was amused by the hope or belief of personal inspiration; and that he had secured the patronage of the Virgin, and St. Michael the archangel. Among the titles of imperial greatness, the name of Pious was most pleasing to his ear; to promote the temporal and spiritual interest of the Catholic church was the serious business of his life; and the duty of father of his country was often sacrificed to that of defender of the Catholic faith. Justinian was a bigoted tyrant; and his reign a uniform yet various scene of persecution. He surpassed his indolent predecessors, both in the contrivance of his laws against heretics and the rigor of their execution. He assigned three months for the conversion or exile of all such; and if he still connived at their precarious stay, they were deprived, under his iron yoke, not only of the benefits of society, but of the common birthright of men and religionists. The residue of pagans, Jews, and Samaritans were equally obnoxious to his theological ire. The last were exterminated with fire and sword; and the once fruitful province of Samaria was converted into a desolate and smoking wilderness. It has been computed that one hundred thousand Roman subjects were extirpated in this Samaritan war. "But in the creed of Justinian," says the historian, "the guilt of murder could not be applied to the slaughter of unbelievers: and he piously labored to etablish with fire and sword the unity of the Catholic faith." Such was Justinian, the diademed representative of the Dragon from a.d. 527 to a.d. 565; and of Daniel's Little Horn King, who worked according to his will; to whom the Patriarch of Rome was greatly indebted in the establishment of his self-exaltation "over all called god or sebasma" -- an object of veneration. His "policy" was that of an ecclesiastical ruler of the class typified by Constantine the great." "Never prince," says Dupin, "did meddle so much with what concerns the affairs of the Church, nor make so many constitutions and laws upon the subject. He was persuaded that it was the duty of an emperor, and for the good of the State, to have a particular care of the church, to defend its faith, to regulate external discipline, and to employ the civil laws and the temporal power to preserve it in order and peace." Although the Bishop of Rome had himself claimed supremacy over all other bishops of the Roman earth, including the Patriarch of Constantinople, this claim had not been imperially, or Dragonically, recognized, until the publication of a Decretal Epistle from Justinian to the Pope, dated March, a.d. 533. "It is hence evident," says Gothofred, the editor of the Justinian Code, cited by Cunninghame, "that they who suppose Phocas to have been the first who gave imperial recognition to the primacy of the Roman See over that of Constantinople are in error: Justinian having acknowledged it before." "And the King (the Dragon-Power of the Apocalypse) shall do according to his own will -- And in his estate (or empire) he shall honor the god of guardians (the Bishop of Rome): even a god whom his (pagan) fathers knew not shall he honor with gold and silver, and precious stones and things desired. Thus shall he do in the Bazaars of the Guardians (temples dedicated to fictitious saints and angels) with a foreign god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory" (Dan. 11:36-39). The form of this acknowledgment is found in the aforesaid Decretal Epistle; from the Latin copy of which, as given in Elliot's Notes, I have translated the following extracts for the information of the English reader. "Justinian the Victorious, the Pious, &c., always August, to John the Most Holy Archbishop of the Sacred City Rome, and Patriarch. Rendering honor to the Apostolic Throne and to your Holiness -- we hasten to bring to the knowledge of your Holiness all things which pertain to the state of the churches: because we have always a great desire to preserve the unity of your Apostolic Throne, and the state of the holy churches of God which hitherto obtains, and unchangeably continues, nothing to the contrary intervening. Therefore we have hastened both to subject and to unite to the Throne of your Holiness all the priests of the whole eastern region -- For we neither suffer anything that pertains to the state of the churches, although what is agitated may be manifest and indubitable, that may not be known also to your Holiness, who is the Head of All the Holy Churches. For through all, as it is said, we hasten to increase the honor and authority of your throne." After this follows a statement of certain heresies then existing in regard to the person of Christ; also of Justinian's own belief, and its orthodox agreement with the dogmas of the four preceding General Councils of Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, in conformity with the creed of the Roman See -- "Accordingly," says he, "all priests, following the doctrine of your Apostolic Throne, so believe and confess and preach." The epistle then proceeds. "Whence we have hastened to bring this to the knowledge of your Holiness by the Most Blessed Bishops Hypatius and Demetrius, that the things be not concealed from your Holiness which are wickedly and judaically denied by some few monks according to the falsehood of Nestorius. We intreat therefore your paternal affection, as by your letters addressed to us and to the Most Holy Bishop of this Sacred City (of Constantine) and your brother Patriarch (and because he has written by the same (bishops), hastening in all things to follow the Apostolic Throne of your Blessedness) made manifest to us that your Holiness may acknowledge all who rightly confess the things aforesaid, and may condemn the falsehood of those who may dare judaically to deny the right faith. For so both the love of all increases more towards you, and the authority of your throne: and the unity of the holy churches which is to you will be maintained undisturbed: when through you all the most blessed bishops of those which pertain to you shall have learned the pure doctrine of your Holiness." This letter was written to the Bishop of Rome then subject to the king of Italy, while Justinian was meditating the re-conquest of the country. Three years after, Rome was besieged by Belisarius. The letter was exceedingly flattering to the Bishop's pride and ambition, in that he found himself authoritatively seated upon the Seven Hills as enthroned head over all ecclesiastical affairs of the Roman world. But the Seventh Head, which was Arian, did not coincide with Justinian in the acknowledgement of the Pope as the Head of all churches. The Arian Catholic churches repudiated his headship; they were therefore, being heretics, the natural enemies of Justinian and his Universal Bishop, whose policy could not be established until the Seventh Head was abolished, and the Arians suppressed. Hence, the invasion of Italy; the sympathy of the Trinitarians in Rome with the invader; and the persecution of heretics of every variety of belief; and the location of the Dragon's Viceroy in Ravenna, instead of Rome. The settlement of Italy by Justinian according to the Pragmatic Sanction, granted at the Pope's request, a.d. 554, by reducing Rome to the second rank, left the Apostolic Throne therein free from the overshadowing and blighting presence of a sovereign temporal authority; and thus "the Dragon gave to him his power and his throne and an extensive jurisdiction," saying in the 131st of the Novels, "we ordain that the Most Holy Pope of the Elder Rome be the first of all priests" -- even in that Rome, which in the 9th of the Novels he styles, "the native country of the laws, the fountain of the priesthood." The Seventh Head being destroyed, and the Bishop of Rome acknowledged by the Catholic Dragon of the East, as the Pontiff of the empire, the next desideratum was that he should be acknowledged by all the Horns of the West. This implied their conversion from paganism and Arianism to what Justinian styles "the right faith," and the "pure doctrine of his Holiness." These Horns belong to the times of Imperialism, which was worshipped by them in the Western Emperor while there was one, and afterwards in the Eastern. They were the Diademed Viceroys of Rome, and Constantinople, being Masters-General and Patricians of the empire -- a political relation to Imperialism which legitimized their governments in the estimation of their Roman subjects, who greatly exceeded the number of their barbarian conquerers. The beginning and the ending of this political relationship, with but slight recognition of them in the long interval of 1335 years, are the subject of Apocalyptic symbolization. The beginning was the seed or elements of things in the period of politico-ecclesiastical organization; the ending, the ripe harvest and vintage (Apoc. 14) in the period of analysis or dissolution: so as that in some sort, the beginning was typical of the ending. The rude-Horn Governments holding this relation to Imperialism, with the Lawyers and Clergy of their kingdoms practitioners and professors of Roman law and Roman Theology, easily accepted the legislation of Justinian in favor of the Pope and their own interests legal and ecclesiastical. A clergy the great majority of whom were Trinitarian, and Viceregal administrations, partly pagan and partly Arian, were the constitutional elements of the situation in the sixth century. The clergy of the kingdoms recognized and sympathized with the Pope and his patrons the Emperor of the East: and operated upon the barbarian kings and governments as imperial and papal missionaries for their conversion to "the right faith," and "the pure doctrine of his Holiness," in other words, to the Roman Catholic Trinitarian Superstition. A Council of Constantinople during the reign of Justinian, as depicted on a fresco in the Vatican. The support of Justinian elevated the Bishop of Rome to the status of Head of all the Churches, and laid the foundation for the greatest influence of the Papacy. So the "deadly wound was healed" as predicted (Rev. 13:3), and Trinitarianism triumphed over Arianism (belief in One God) -- Publishers. Here, then, in this beginning were the Little Horn of the East (Dan. 8:9, 12, 23-25), the Catholic Dragon of Constantinople; and the Papal Eyes and Mouth, occupying the so-called Apostolic Throne upon the Seven Mountains, the Name of Blasphemy; and the Gothic Horns. Of these, the Vandal Horn, which was Arian, and defiant both of the Pope and the Emperor, had been "plucked up by the roots" by the forces of Justinian under Belisarius. The horn of the Gepidae was transferred to the Chagan of the Avars, the representative for two hundred and thirty years of the modern kingdom of Hungary. These were hostile to the Apostolic Throne. The opposition of the rest was gradually overcome. Clovis, king of the Franks, on occasion of a victory. embraced the faith of Rome, a.d. 496; and so being the first, received the title, which has been handed down through more than thirteen centuries, to his successors the kings of France, of Eldest Son of the Church. In the sixth century the rest of the Horns gave in their adhesion to the Papal Faith. Recared was the first papal king of Spain. He reigned from a.d. 586 to a.d. 589. "The royal proselyte," says Gibbon, "immediately saluted and consulted Pope Gregory, surnamed the Great, a learned and holy prelate, whose reign was distinguished by the conversion of heretics and infidels. The ambassadors of Recared respectfully offered upon the threshold of the Vatican his rich presents of gold and gems; they accepted, as a lucrative exchange, the hairs of St. John the Baptist, a cross which enclosed a piece of the true wood, and a key that contained some particles of iron, which had been scraped from the chains of St. Peter." The Lombard Horn was the last of the ten to renounce Arianism, for "the pure doctrine of his Holiness" of Rome. This occurred a.d. 600, through the instigation of Gregory the Great, who encouraged his co-religionist, Theodelinda, the Queen of the Lombards, to propogate the Nicene faith among her victorious savages "Her devout labors," says Gibbon, "still left room for the industry and success of future missionaries; and many cities of Italy were still disputed by hostile bishops. But the cause of Arianism was gradually suppressed by the weight of interest and example, and the controversy, which Egypt had derived from the Platonic school, was terminated, after a war of three hundred years, by the final conversion of the Lombards of Italy." Thus was the Bishop of Rome developed into "the Mouth" of the great Viceregal Rrepublic of the West; and after this manner was fulfilled the oracle, saying, "And there was given to him (the Beast of the Sea) a Mouth." It was a mouth like the mouth of the symbol of Babylon, "the mouth of a lion." When it spoke it roared forth thunderings and blasphemies, far more hideous than ever defiled the ears of pagan or Mohammedan -- a Mouth that still gives utterance to "blasphemies against the Deity to blaspheme his Name and his Tabernacle, and them that dwelleth in the heaven." But, notwithstanding Justinian's Decretal Epistle, and the professed desire of his servant, the Patriarch of Constantinople, "in all things to follow the Apostolic Throne" of Rome's Blessed One (!), the emperors and patriarchs, their immediate successors, did not partake of this desire. As the political stability and ecclesiastical organization of the West increased and progressed, the influence of the Oriental Catholic Power, enfeebled and almost extinguished by the victorious Persians and Avars, was greatly impaired; and had become in Italy little more than an ancient name, venerable chiefly for its antiquity and past renown. This emboldened the Pope in his schemes of absolute independence, and generated a spirit of rivalry and hostility between Rome and Constantinople. The patriarchs of Constantinople, who were scarcely less arrogant and ambitious than the popes, perceiving the advantages accruing from universal ecclesiastical supremacy, refused to acknowledge the Headship of "the Most Holy Archbishop of the Sacred City of Rome," and claimed it for themselves. These equal pretensions of the rival episcopal thrones of the East and West involved them in continual strifes, which were very considerably augmented by the course of John "the Faster," who, in a council held in the sixth year of the reign of the Emperor Maurice, a.d. 588, assumed the title of Universal Bishop, which was confirmed to him by the council. This assumption was equivalent to a claim of spiritual lordship over the pope and over all the Gothic Horns, as well as over the countries now embraced in the Ottoman empire. This had been decreed by Justinian to the Bishop of Rome fifty years before, and was now a part of the constitution of the empire, which a council had neither the power nor the right to reverse. This invasion of his rights, Pelagius II., then pope, vehemently opposed as an execrable, profane and diabolical procedure. Though Rome was no longer an imperial city, and "Mistress of the World," she was supposed to be the Throne of St. Peter, which Pelagius regarded as a better foundation for the seat of an universal bishopric than the enfeebled and tottering imperiality of Constantinople; but his invectives and arguments were equally despised, and his indignation was soon after quieted in death. He was succeeded in the a.d. 590, by Gregory the First, surnamed "the Great," a voluminous writer, and, though superstitious in the extreme, not entirely untalented. His works are still extant, and in great repute with the worshippers of the Beast. The following artful epistle, written by him to his imperial master, Maurice, at Constantinople, in consequence of John the Faster assuming the title of Universal Bishop, casts considerable light upon the history of the times, and may, therefore, with advantage to the reader be inserted here, illustrative also of the deceitful and lying utterances of the Babylonian Mouth. "Our Most Religious Lord," says he, "whom the Deity hath placed over us, among other weighty cares belonging to the Empire, labors, according to the just rule of the sacred writings, to preserve peace and charity among the Clergy. He truly and piously considers that no man can well govern temporal matters, unless he manages with propriety things divine also; and the peace and tranquillity of the commonwealth depend upon the quiet of the universal church. For, Most Gracious Sovereign, what human power or strength would presume to lift up irreligious hands against your Most Christian Majesty, if the clergy, being at unity among themselves, would seriously pray to our Saviour Christ to preserve you who have merited so highly from us? Or what nation is there so barbarous as to exercise such cruelty against the faithful, unless the lives of us who are called priests, but in truth are not such, were most wicked and depraved? But whilst we leave those things which more immediately concern us, and embrace those things for which we are wholly unfit, we excite the barbarians against us, and our offences sharpen the swords of our enemies, by which means the commonwealth is weakened. For what can we say for ourselves, if the people of God, over whom, however unworthily, we (the pope) are placed, be oppressed by the multitude of our offences? -- if our example destroy that which our preaching should build, and our actions, as it were, give the lie to our doctrine? Our bones are worn with fasting, but our minds are puffed up!" This is a hit at John the Faster. "Our bodies are covered with mean attire, but in our hearts we are quite elated! We lie grovelling in the ashes, yet we aim at things exceedingly high! We are teachers of humility, but patterns of pride, hiding the teeth of wolves under a sheep's countenance! The end of all is to make a fair appearance before men, but God knoweth the truth! "Therefore, our Most Pious Sovereign hath been prudently careful to place the church at unity, that he might the better compose the tumults of war and join their hearts together. This verily is my wish also, and for my own part I yield due obedience to your sovereign commands" -- the pope still a subject, and without temporal power. "However, since it is not my cause, but the Deity's it is not myself only but the whole church that is troubled, because religious laws, venerable synods, and the very precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ are disobeyed by the invention of a proud and pompous speech" -- alluding to John the Faster's title of Universal Bishop. "My desire is, that our most religious sovereign would lance this sore, and that he would bind with the cords of his imperial authority the party affected, in case he (John) makes any resistance. By restraining him the commonwealth will be eased; and by the paring away of such excrescences the empire is enlarged. Every man that has read the gospel knows that, even by the words of our Lord, the care of the whole church is committed to St. Peter, the apostle -- the Prince of all the apostles." Then follows the quotation of John 21:15-17; and Matt. 16:18, 19. "Behold! He hath the keys of the kingdom, and the power of binding and loosing is committed to him. The care and principality of the whole church is committed to him; and yet he is not called 'Universal Apostle' -- though this holy man, John my fellow-priest, labors to be called 'Universal Bishop!' I am compelled to cry out" -- from jealousy, envy and vexation, doubtless -- "O the corruption of times and manners! Behold the barbarians (the Gothic Horns) are become lords of all Europe; cities are destroyed, castles are beaten down, provinces depopulated, there is no husbandman to till the ground, idolators rage and domineer over christians; and yet, priests, who ought to lie weeping upon the pavement in sackcloth and ashes, covet names of vanity, and glory in new names and titles. Do I, Most Religious Sovereign, in this plead my own cause?" -- doubtless nobody else's. "Do I vindicate a wrong done to myself, and not maintain the cause of Almighty God and of the church universal? Who is he who presumes to usurp this new name against both the law of the gospel and of the canons? I would to God there might be one called Universal without doing injustice to others!" -- that is, the Bishop of Rome. We know that many priests of the church of Constantinople have been not only heretics, but even the chief leaders of them. Out of that school proceeded Nestorius, who, thinking it impossible that God should be made man, believed that Jesus Christ, the Mediator between God and man, was two persons, and went as far in infidelity as the Jews themselves. Thence came Macedonius, who denied the Holy Ghost, consubstantial to the Father and the Son, to be God. If, then, every one in that church assumed the name by which he makes himself the Head of all good men, the Catholic Church, which God forbid should ever be the case, must needs be overthrown when he falls who is called Universal. But, far from christians be this Blasphemous name, by which all honor is taken from all other priests, while it is foolishly arrogated by one. It was offered to the Bishop of Rome by the reverend council of Chalcedon, in honor of St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles; but none of them either assumed or consented to use it, lest, while this privilege should be given to one, all others should be deprived of that honor which is due unto them. Why should we refuse this title when it was offered, and another assume it without any offer at all? This man (John the Faster) contemning obedience to the Canons, should be humbled by the commands of our Most Pious Sovereign. He should be chastised who does an injury to the Holy Catholic Church; whose heart is puffed up, who seeks to please himself by a name of singularity, by which he would elevate himself above the emperor! We are all scandalized at this. Let the author of this scandal reform himself, and all differences in the church will cease. I am the servant of all priests, so long as they live like themselves; but if any shall set up his bristles (bristles belong to swine; so that by implication the Clergy are admitted by Gregory to be a swinish multitude) contrary to God Almighty and the Canons of the Fathers, I hope in God that he will never succeed in bringing my neck under his yoke -- not even by force of arms. The things that have happened in this city in consequence of this new title, I have particularly declared to Sabinianus, the deacon, my agent. Let, therefore, my religious sovereigns (Maurice and Theodosius), think of me, their servant, whom they have always cherished and upheld more than others, as one who desired to yield them obedience, and yet am afraid to be found guilty of negligence in my duty at the last awful day of judgment. Let our most pious sovereign either vouchsafe to determine the affair, according to the petition of the aforesaid Sabinianus, the deacon, or cause the man, so often mentioned, to renounce his claim. In case he submits to your just sentence or your favourable admonitions, we will give thanks to Almighty God, and rejoice for the peace of the church procured by your clemency. But if he persist in this contention, we shall hold the saying to be most true. 'Everyone that exalteth himself shall be abased.' And again it is written, 'Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.' In obedience to my sovereign, I have written to my brother priest both gently and humbly, urging him to desist from this vain glory. If he give ear unto me, he hath a brother devoted unto him; but, if he continue in his pride, I foresee what will befall him -- he will make himself His enemy of whom it is written, 'God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble'." This artful epistle, so replete with the finesse of the politician, and the envy of the priest, does not appear to have produced the desired effect. John the Faster, whose fasting had worn his bones and puffed up his mind, soon afterward vacated his "blasphemous name" by death; but this did not relieve Gregory of his distress; for Cynacus, who succeeded him as Patriarch of Constantinople, adopted the same superimperial and pompous title as his predecessor. Having had occasion to dispatch some agents to Rome, in the letter which he wrote to Gregory, he so much displeased him by assuming the title of "Universal Bishop," that the pope withheld from the agents somewhat of the courtesy to which they considered themselves entitled, and, of course, complaint was made to the emperor Maurice of the neglect which had been shown them. This caused the emperor to write to Gregory, advising him to treat them in future in a more friendly manner and not to insist so far on punctilios of style, as to create a scandal about a title and to fall out about a few syllables. To this Gregory replied, "that the innovation in the style did not consist much in the quantity and alphabet; but the bulk of the iniquity was weighty enough to sink and destroy all. And therefore I am bold to say," says this pontifical representative of infallibility, "that whoever adopts or affects the title of 'Universal Bishop,' has the pride and character of Antichrist, and is in some manner his forerunner in this haughty quality of elevating himself above the rest of his order. And indeed both the one and the other seem to split upon the same rock; for, as pride makes Antichrist strain his pretensions up to godhead, so whoever is ambitious to be called the only, or Universal Prelate, arrogates to himself a distinguished superiority, and rises, as it were, upon the ruins of the rest." But, notwithstanding the good words and fair speeches of his former letter, Gregory's heart was full of venom and bitterness against Maurice and his family. Neither of these epistles caused the obnoxious title to be suppressed; and if Maurice had not been moved out of the way by a revolution, the "blasphemous name" would have adhered to Constantinople as the Apostolic Throne. But the heart of Gregory, the last of the "sainted popes," was made glad by the murder of Maurice, his wife and nine children, by a rebel and orthodox usurper named Phocas, who was peaceably acknowledged in the provinces of the east and west. Gibbon describes him as a monster, of diminutive and deformed person, grossly ignorant and steeped in lust, drunkenness and brutality. Such was the abandoned villain of the baser sort, who occupied the throne of the Catholic Dragon about eight years from a.d. 602 to a.d. 610. "As a subject and a christian," says Gibbon, "it was the duty of Gregory to acquiesce in the established government; but the joyful applause with which he salutes the fortune of the assassin has sullied, with indelible disgrace, the character of the saint. The successor of the apostles might have inculcated with decent firmness the guilt of blood and the necessity of repentance: he is content to celebrate the deliverance of the people and the fall of the oppressor; to rejoice that the piety and benignity of Phocas have been raised by Providence to the imperial throne; to pray that his hands may be strengthened against all his enemies; and to express a wish, perhaps a prophecy, that, after a long and triumphant reign, he may be transferred from a temporal to an everlasting kingdom." In his epistle to Phocas he says, "We are glad that the benignity of your piety hath arrived at the imperial dignity. Let the heavens rejoice, and the earth exult, and the people of the universal republic until now vehemently afflicted become hilarious on account of your benignant deeds." This base flattery, doubtless, predisposed the sanguinary tyrant to favor and promote the ambitious views of the pope, at the expense of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Such a biophthoros drakon, life-destroying Dragon, as he was styled, the worthy rival of the Caligulas and Domitians of the first age of the empire, was a very fit and proper patron to legislate the Bishop of Rome into the Universal Bishop of the world, the All-Overseeing Eye of the Apostasy. "In a.d. 604, just before the death of Gregory," Dr. Barton says, "Phocas wrote to him, proposing an orthodox confession of faith, acknowledged the supremacy of the Roman See, was very liberal to the Roman churches, and allowed the Pantheon to be converted to christian purposes: all which must have been extremely gratifying to a pope in the seventh century." But Gregory did not long rejoice in "the benignity of Phocas' piety," being removed by death this year. He was succeeded by Boniface III, who had no scruple about adopting the proud and "blasphemous name." His election was confirmed by Phocas (an imperial privilege which was formally abandoned a.d. 684) whom he importuned to bestow upon him the exalted title of Universal Bishop, with the privilege also of transmitting it to all his successors. "The profligate emperor," says Jones, "to gratify the inordinate ambition of this court sycophant, deprived the bishop of Constantinople of the title which he had hitherto borne, and conferred it upon Boniface, at the same time declaring the Church of Rome to be Head of all other churches." Thus Phocas confirmed what Justinian had ordained seventy-five years before. Justinian had given the pope his power, throne and jurisdiction; Phocas confirmed the same with the original and additional gift of the imperial title, universal overseer; by which he attained a rank ecclesiastically superior to the emperor; and at the prospect of which Gregory professed to be greatly scandalized. The authorities for this are Paul the Deacon, who says of Phocas, "Being entreated by Pope Boniface, he ordained that the throne of the Roman and apostolic church be the Head of All Churches; because the Constantinopolitan church declared that it was first of all churches"; and Anastasius who in his Ecclesiastical History on the a.d. 606 observes, "This (Boniface) obtained from Phocas the Prince, that the Apostolic Throne of the Blessed Apostle Peter should be the Head of all churches; because the Constantinopolitan church declared that she her self was the first of all churches." Gordon and Baronius make the date of the edict, a.d. 606; Muratori, a.d. 607. In addition to Paul and Anastasius, Ado in his Chronikon, repeats their testimony, and adds, "Phocas, being entreated by Boniface the Roman Pontiff elsewhere, the rabble of idolatry in the old temple which was called the Pantheon being removed, ordered that it be dedicated a church of the Blessed Mary always a Virgin, and of All the Martyrs: that, where at one time the worship not of the Gods but of the Daemons was performed, there continually the memory of all the saints might be preserved." The "Annals of Italy" assign the decree of Phocas to the a.d. 607; upon which as a Note, Gieseler adds the following curious versified notice of Phocas' grant by Godfrey of Viterbo, in his Pantheon, about a.d. 1186. Tertius est Papa Bonifacius ille benignus Qui petit a Phocamunus per secula dignum, Ut sedes Petri prima sit. Ille dedit. Prima prius fuerat Constantopolitana: Est modo Romana, meliori dogmate clara. The following version is close enough to give the mere English reader the sense; Pope Boniface the third is he benign Who sought fit gift of Phocas for all time, That Peter's Chair the first may be. He gave't. The First of rank Byzantine was before; 'Tis Roman now, more fam'd by doctrine pure. This title, or name of spiritual power, was regarded by the popes as a splendid gift. It was, as Gregory the Seventh remarked, "unicum nomen in mundo, the only name in the world. There was no other name like it, distinguishing one son of pride from another. Father and Universal Bishop exalted the Bishop of Rome to the rank of "God of the earth," a title always coveted by those who filled the imperial office of the Seven Hills. Until the tide of successful villainy turned, the pope adored the Piety of the execrable monster; and a pillar was erected called "the Pillar of Phocas," to commemorate his "innumerable benefits," conferred upon his Italian subjects; in other words, upon the Pope and his clergy. It was a Corinthian fluted column of Greek marble, standing upon a pyramid of seven steps. "In 1813, the Duchess of Devonshire having made an excavation around it, an inscription," says Elliott, 'was discovered on the base, stating that a gilt statue had been placed on the top of it to the emperor Phocas, by the then Exarch of Italy, in the a.d. 608." Dr. Burton in his book on Rome, gives the inscription at full. The date is thus defined. Die Prima Mensis August. Indict. Und. ac Pietatis ejus Anno Quinto;" the 11th of the Indiction, and the 5th of the reign of Phocas. Now of that indiction the first was the year 598; the eleventh, the year 608: and as Phocas began his reign a.d. 602 or 603, its fifth year comes also to a.d. 608. The occasion of the honor is stated to be, "Pro innumerabilibus Pietatis ejus Beneficiis, et pro Quiete procurata Italie, ac conservata Libertate" -- For the innumerable benefits of his Piety, and for the Repose procured for Italy, and Liberty preserved. Dr. Burton justly refers this to his concessions to the Pope. Thus the four years from a.d. 604 to a.d. 608, are notable in the history of Phocas' aggrandizement of the Papal See: and from a.d. 529 to a.d. 604, are seventy five years; and from a.d. 533 to a.d. 608, are also seventy five years:" or the difference between Daniel's 1335 of ch. 12:12, and "the time, times, and the dividing of a time," of his ch. 7:25, and 12:7. Papists and Protestants seem to agree in assigning the constitutional beginning of the Papacy to this epoch of the reign of Phocas. Luther, in his Table Talk, says, "the Pope and Turk both began almost at one time under the emperor Phocas." Osiander dated from the same, "a Foca Imperatore, qui Papatum, seu Primatum, publico edicto stabilivit" -- by the emperor Phocas, who established the Papacy, or Primacy, by a public decree. And Bullinger, an early protestant, speaks of the Papacy having been established by Gregory I, and the Decree of Phocas. In fact, an imperial decree was indispensable to its establishment. The Bishops of Rome had made pretensions of a high and lofty character before the times of Justinian and Phocas; but their claims to supremacy, however approved by clerical adherents and canons, were of no account in a legal or constitutional point of view. Their pretensions to supremacy over all, only demonstrated the pride of their hearts, and the spirit of Antichrist therein, which, as Gregory truly said, would make him who was possessed of it "strain his pretensions up to Godhead". But an Italian or Roman subject of the empire, lay or clerical, might have strained to bursting after godhead, they could never have attained it without the sanction of an imperial edict which had the force of law. The reader will perceive this readily, aided by the illustrative supposition, that Pope Brigham Young of Utah, as respectable a pretender to godhead as Boniface the third, or any other blasphemer before or after him should proclaim himself Universal Overseer and Father of this consolidated despotism, the United States; his proclamation would only be the subject of ridicule and contempt with all the names and denominations of the day; but, if the factions in Congress, with the idea that in some way their interests would be promoted, were to pass a bill constituting said Brigham, Father of all men and Universal Overseer, with the approval of the President, the case would be wonderfully altered! The power and authority of Brigham would be enthroned in every family; he would be ex officio Judge of the Faith, and Head of all the churches of "The Union." This would be no matter of ridicule; but a subject of great fear and trembling to all not of his church; for all "the names and denominations" in relation to Mormonism being heretical, the bill or decree constituting him Pope and Universal Bishop, would place them all at his disposal. All this we can comprehend, feel, and appreciate; and would be thoroughly convinced that there was more in the name than "punctilio of style and a few syllables". If such a decree were promulgated in this country, it would convulse society from one end of it to the other. We should feel that our liberty had taken to itself wings and fled. This was the unrest and the apprehension of the Italians and citizens of Rome, when the emperor Maurice tacitly permitted the Byzantine Brigham, John the Faster, to proclaim himself, with the aid and consent of a counoil of Constantinople, Universal Bishop. The murder of Maurice by Phocas was therefore regarded as a joyful and auspicious event; especially when it was discovered, that he could be used in putting down Byzantine arrogance, and in transferring the "Blasphemous Name," as Gregory styled it, to the city of Rome. This gave repose to Italy, and restored liberty to the adherents of the Antichrist in Rome. And who else, even upon Romish principles and upon Papal authority, could the Bishops of Rome from Boniface downwards be than the Antichrist Name? Gregory the First, whom Papists surname "the Great," the last Bishop of Rome they have decreed to be "a saint," and with them a great authority, says, as already quoted, "I am bold to say, that whoever adopts, or affects the title of 'Universal Bishop' has the pride and character of Antichrist, and is in some manner his forerunner in his haughty quality of elevating himself above the rest of his order." John the Faster adopted the title and held on to it, and Cynacus, his successor, also. They were therefore either the Antichrist, or his Forerunner; they could not have been the Antichrist however much like him; because Paul, who styles him ho Anomos, the Lawless One, teaches that he will be in supremacy till the reappearance of Christ to destroy him; and their supremacy fell under the dagger of Phocas: they must, therefore, have been his Forerunner; and he who obtained the coveted title, Boniface the Third, the first Bishop of Rome who wore it, and their successor in it, and all of whose successors adopt it and glory in it, must be, according to Gregory, an incarnation of papal infallibility, the first of the order and name termed in Scripture, "The Antichrist." And doubtless Gregory was correct; and, like Caiaphas the High Priest, prophesied the truth without believing or knowing it. The Man-of-Sin Power, born of the Woman about two hundred and ninety five years previous, was now transferred by this Decree of Phocas from the successors of Constantine to the Universal Bishop upon the Seven Hills. This "Only Name in the World" was now the Eyes and Mouth of the Man of Sin. So long as Italy remained a province of the Greek empire it was politically allied with the Eastern Roman Horn of Dan. 8:9; but, as the power of this receded, that of the Universal Bishop advanced; until, Constantinople losing all dominion in Italy, the Bishop became the Eyes and Mouth of the Little Western Horn of Dan. 7:8; when, in its after-growth, it reached the fullness of the stature of the Man-of-Sin Power, as we shall hereafter see. The Antichrist who in a.d. 312, was a babe of sin, was now, in a.d. 604-'8, a young man, and still in his growth. He was not yet of full age; nor would he be, until the Two Horned Beast should rise up out of the earth among the already existing ten horns. The development of this Lamb-Horned Beast and the Image of the Wounded Head, would consummate the healing of that head. We have not yet quite arrived at that point in the vision. I must therefore pause again in tracing the development of "the Name of Blasphemy upon the Heads," and proceed to consider the period allotted to the Mouth, during which it is Divinely permitted to "speak great things and blasphemies; and to open in blasphemy concerning the Deity (pros ton Theon) to blaspheme his Name and his Tabernacle, and the dwellers in the heaven." 18. The Forty and Two Months "And authority was given unto him to practise forty and two months" -- Verse 5. The first question here is, What is the thing for which the personal pronoun "him" stands in the text? The answer is, It is the Beast; or that politico-ecclesiastical constitution symbolized by the monster of the sea: as, "Who is like unto the Beast? Who is able to war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth, &c.; and authority was given unto him to practise forty and two months." The next question is, By whom was the authority given to the Beast to practise for that period? The answer is, that it was given by Him who alone knew how long the practising was to continue. That is to say, the authority was given by the Deity, Who ordains all things, and Who foreshowed the period in the text before us. "The powers that be are ordained of the Deity" (Rom. 13:1): "He hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of the habitation of all nations of men" (Acts 17:26). No nation can permanently extend its bounds, or perpetuate any system of government, beyond the limitation of His predetermined, and prearranged, times. The forty and two months are the Divinely authorized period of the Beast's practising; at the end of which, the European Commonwealth which it symbolizes for that period, will pass into the phase predetermined for it in Apoc. 17. The third question is, What is to be understood by the indefinite expression "to practise"? Authority was given unto the Beast of the Sea to practise -- poiesai. In the seventh verse the word polemon is prefixed to poiesai; as, "It was given unto him to make war polemon poiesai, with the saints." Hence the fifth verse, I take it, is elliptical, and expounded by the seventh. But, was he to practise against the saints successfully or otherwise? The use of the word in Daniel when treating of the same subject, shows that "practise" implies prevailing and prospering in what it might undertake against them. Speaking of the Little Roman Horn that "waxed exceeding great" and "cast the truth to the ground," it is said, "it practised and prospered;" and of the same power, it is said in another verse, "he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper and practise, and shall destroy the mighty ones and the people of the Holy Ones. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify in his heart, and by prosperity shall destroy many (Dan. 8:24, 25, and 12). Now this shows, that the practising of the power was mischievous and destructive; and that it prospered by policy, craft, and all belligerent operations; and, as the prophecy has more especial reference to "the people of the Holy Ones," who, in Daniel and John's revelations, are the most important community, for whose sake are all things (2 Cor. 4:15), the prosperous practising is especially equivalent to the treading of the Holy City under foot of the Gentiles forty and two months (ch. 11:2): to the making war, overcoming, and killing of the two witnessing prophetic bodies, by which, as by two lamps standing before the deified Name of Blasphemy, the light of the truth and liberty was caused to shine (ch. 11:7, 3, 10, 4); to the leading of the saints into captivity, and killing them with the sword (ch. 13:10); equivalent also, to the saints being given into the hand of the Little Episcopal Horn-power which prevails against them until the expiration of a time and times and a dividing of a time (Dan. 7:21, 25). The fulfilment of these testimonies converges in the practising of the Beast of the Sea, the Papal Body Politic, which the Deity, for the developing of his own wise purposes, authorized so to do, as indicated in the text. And as this practising of mischief of which the saints are the victims, is for forty and two months, it follows that the periods similarly indicated in ch. 11:2 and ch. 13:5, are the same period; and consequently begin and end at the same epochs; that is, the forty and two months are the period of the prosperous and destructive practising of the papalized ten horns, and of the down-treading of the Holy-City body politic by them: and as this practising continues in all this period, we may accept the Common Version, "power was given unto him to continue forty and two months," as correct by implication. The fourth question is, What duration, or length of time, is signified by forty and two months? Is this period long or short? Is it forty-two months of days, or forty and two months of years? In other words, is it 1260 days or 1260 years? Is it a literal period, or is it symbolical of the real time? By what rule can the truth of the matter be ascertained? My answer is, that the truth is determined by the rule of facts, which are stubborn things. This rule, however, cannot be generally used. It is of no use to the blind who are unworthy to read the opened book, and to look upon it (ch. 5:3, 4, 5). It is a rule for the blessed who read, and understand the words of this apocalyptic prophecy (ch. 1:3). Such are not blind. They can see, or discern, the facts; for they are discernible by the light of the Spirit's testimony, which "is hid to them that are lost, in whom the god of this aeon hath blinded the minds of them who believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the Image of the Deity, should shine into them" (2 Cor. 4:3, 4). The facts are predicable of two irreconcilably hostile parties, represented in the former section of this thirteenth chapter by the Beast of the Sea; or, the Ten Kingly Governments of Modern Europe subject to the spiritual authority of their Universal Bishop, of the one part; and by the Deity's Name, Tabernacle, Dwellers in the heavens, or saints, of the other part. Now one who cannot Scripturally define the Deity's Name, or distinguish a saint from a sinner, cannot define the facts developed in the history of the saints and witnesses, in their antagonism to popery in all the kingdoms of the Papacy, by which the period in question is determined. Many of that exceedingly dark body, styled "the clergy," not knowing what a saint is, and who say that The Apocalypse is all in the future, declare that the forty and two months belong to the future likewise; and are to be understood of 1260 days, or three and a half literal years; in which a personal, or individual Antichrist will be manifested, and severely persecute the saints; by which they mean the pious of their several "names of blasphemy," of which the scarlet-colored beast is full; but which they term collectively "the Church of God!" Others of these professional leaders of the blind into the ditch, tell their unfortunate victims that The Apocalypse is all long ago fulfilled; and, consequently, that the forty and two months are buried in the oblivion of a remote antiquity! The real saints are ignored by both these parties of extremists. The conflict of the past twelve centuries between the Papal Powers of Western Europe and the Saints and Witnesses, they regard as simply a conflict between the Powers, and heretics and revolutionists inimical to law and order. The oceans of righteous blood shed by the Papal Powers, inspired by their Universal Bishop, go for nothing. What were they but the turbulent riffraff of society; were not the saints God's "hidden ones," the pious and orthodox professors of the ages, who passed current as good Catholics in churches and monasteries, but in their hearts silently repudiated the blasphemies of their church? These never imagined that the Universal Bishop was the Antichrist; and if he had been that substitute for Christ, would not they, as the saints, have known it? Against these "saints" of the church of Rome there was no warfare for forty and two months of days, or years; therefore, say these futurists, the period in question is in the future, and will be short. But this is mere clerical ignorance and folly. The Deity has no saints in the Church of Rome, nor in the Protestant churches of Antichristendom. He has a people therein, even as he had among the idolators of Corinth (Acts 18:10), who become saints by believing the gospel of the kingdom and name, coming out from among the unclean, and being immersed into Jesus as the Christ. Such, cease to be Pagans, Catholics, and Protestants, and become "the sanctified in Christ Jesus;" the Brethren of Christ, the Seed of the Woman, "who keep the commandments of the Deity, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Now, it is a fact, that there was a separate and distinct community of such saints, who existed in all the twelve hundred and sixty years succeeding the Donatist trials in the reign of Constantine, which transpired in the epoch a.d. 312-316. It is also a fact, that during all that long period they were denounced as heretics, and persecuted as such, by the constituted authorities of the state; first, by the emperors for nearly three hundred years; and then by the Ten Horns, inspired by their Universal Bishop, to whose spiritual authority and Eyeship the last of them was converted, a.d. 600, and into whose hands the witnesses and saints were delivered by Justinian and Phocas; and who ceased not to make war upon them during many more centuries, until they silenced their testimony against Romish superstition and the Name of Blasphemy upon the seven hills. This was the Beast's practising and prospering against the saints -- the practising of the Mouth and Horns for forty and two months. Not forty and two literal days or literal months only; for such a supposition would be contrary to historic facts; but for forty and two months of literal years, extending over twelve long and tedious centuries and sixty years beside. This, then, is the literal time symbolized by forty and two months in ch. 11:2, and ch. 13:5. The periods indicated in these two texts are parallel. The beginning of the one is the beginning of the other; consequently, they both end together. These identical periods do not have, as some suppose, a double commencement and a double termination, each seventy-five years apart. They have only one common beginning, and one ending in common, the one with the other. For this period the Holy City was to be trodden down; and for the same period, the Horns and the Mouth, and the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Hills, were "to continue," or practise with one mind; and to agree, and give their power and authority, or kingdom, unto the Beast, until the words of the Deity shall be fulfilled (ch. 17:13, 17). But, at the end of this forty and two months' period, or 1260 years, a change is to come over the spirit of their dream, and they are to hate what for that number of years they have been in love with: for, speaking of the Horns in relation to Rome's sovereignty, the Spirit said to John, "These (Horns) shall hate the Harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire" (ch. 17:16). This hostility of the governments, which have been the willing instruments of the Universal Bishop for nearly thirteen centuries, indicates a change in their relations to Rome; and, consequently, a new political combination of the Powers of our Modern World. This is indicated by the Scarlet-colored Beast of chapter seventeen -- "the peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues," ecclesiastically subject to Rome, under the Eighth Head in the eve of the crisis of its destruction by the sword and "the burning flame." This 1260 is a very remarkable prophetic cipher. It is founded on the number of the generations from the birth of Abraham to that of Jesus Christ (Matt. 1:17); though the generations of the cipher do not average so many years each as those of the post-Abrahamic. These generations averaged fifty years and a fraction each; but the generations, or months, of the cipher, not more than thirty years each; but in the number forty and two they agree. Thus 30 x 42 = 1260, or three years and a half of years. This cipher is variously stated in prophecy. In Dan. 8:25 and 12:7; and in Apoc. 12:14, it is written "a time, and times, and the dividing of, or half, a time;" in Apoc. 12:6; 11:3, it is written, "a thousand two hundred and sixty days;" and in ch. 11:2 and ch. 13:5, it is written forty and two months. The aforesaid times in Daniel, together with his 1335, which is 75 years more than 1260; and the forty and two months of Apoc. 11:2 and 13:5, all terminate at the same crisis; at that, namely, of "the time of the dead." But the "thousand two hundred and threescore days" of sackcloth witnessing (ch. 11:3) and of woman feeding (ch. 12:6, 14 ) do not end at that time; their ending being in the epoch of a.d. 1572-'6, marked by the Papal Massacre of Bartholomew's Day, which was 1260 years after the Donatist Trials, or flight of the woman towards the wilderness; the ending of their testimony in the presence of the god of the Roman earth; and the beginning of the first war by which the Ten Horns crushed them in all their kingdoms, a.d. 1685. For three lunar days and a half, which are equal to three months and a half of years, that is, to 105 years; for this period the witnesses lay politically defunct in the Great City; but, after the end of it, in the epoch a.d. 1789-'93, they rose again to political life, and ascended to power. This was 1260 years from the notable epoch of the Dragon-Emperor Justinian's acknowledgement of the Bishop of Rome as the Head of all the churches of the empire; and of the promulgation of a system of law adapted to the circumstances of the times, created by the establishment of Catholicism upon the ruin of paganism; and adopted by all the Horns as the public reason of their courts of law; an epoch of four years from a.d. 529 to a.d. 533, from which, I doubt not, are to be reckoned the 1335 and 1290 of Dan. 12:11, 12; the latter being thirty, and the former seventy-five, years in excess of the forty and two months; the epochal termination of the 1290 being a.d. 1819-'23; and that of the 1335, a.d. 1864-'68. The only question, then that remains under this head is, Admitting that the forty and two months are 1260 years, when did this long period begin? The answer is, that it commences at the epoch when the Dragon Power of Constantinople, then in possession of Rome and Italy, gave to the Roman Patriarch, as the Greatest Pontiff of the East and West, the ecclesiastical power the emperors had hitherto themselves exercised after the example of Constantine, and his throne of the Seven Hills; and an universal jurisdiction, as it is written in the second verse of this chapter, saying, "and the Dragon ceded to him his power, and his throne, and extensive jurisdiction." This important transfer of supreme spiritual authority was legally executed by Phocas, when he proclaimed Boniface the Third the Universal Bishop, with the right of transmitting the title, and the jurisdiction it represents, to his successors, "per secula," for ages. It is by virtue of this decree of Phocas that Pius IX. and all his predecessors are constitutionally "Pontifex Maximus" of Belgium, France, Spain, Portugal, Naples, Sardinia, Lombardy, Venetia, Hungary, and Bavaria -- modern names representative of the original Ten Horns converted to the Nicene Trinitarianism of the Bishop of Rome. When he exalted the Pope to this lofty position, in which he was above all possible episcopal rivalry and confirmed Justinian's acknowledgment of him, as "Head of all the churches," and consequently Judge of the Faith; in so doing, he gave the saints into the hand, or power, of the Universal Bishop, or Eyes and Mouth of Daniel's Little Horn (ch. 7:25): for all reputed "heretics" were turned over to him as their judge. All who were not Trinitarian Catholics were heretics with Justinian, Phocas, and the Bishop of Rome. They recognized none as saints who did not belong to their "Holy Apostolic Catholic Church." They were as ignorant in this matter as "the clergy" of our own day. Had ten thousand saints been arrayed before them with "the Father's Name written in their foreheads" (ch. 14:1), they would have condemned them all for pestilent and contumacious heretics, with whom no faith should be kept, and who ought not to be permitted to live. The truth relatively to the spiritual and temporal powers that be, styled by Paul, "the spirituals of wickedness in the heavenlies," has always been heretical and pestilent; because, in the mouth of the saints, it testifies against them and their traditions. It was to be expected, therefore, that, when the pope's claims of being Christ's substitute on earth, and arbiter of all doctrinal affairs, should be legally established, the saints would find themselves in the hand of a roaring lion ready to devour. He now claimed to be the constitutional and lawful shepherd and bishop of their souls; but the saints disputed this blasphemous pretension, and refused to accept him in any such capacity. They denounced him as the Antichrist, and lawless usurper of the titles and honors which belong to Christ alone, and declared that they would die rather than be numbered among his flock, or submit to his usurpation. Thus, the issue was formed between them: and there was but one alternative for them, submission or death. Hence, the power of the Universal Bishop was more "dreadful and terrible" than that of the Saracen Apollyon, who offered all catholic idolators, conversion, tribute, or the sword. But, tribute would not redeem the life of a saint; the ravening lion of the Seven Hills must have absolute and abject submission to his pontifical supremacy, or he would mercilessly drink their blood, and destroy all that belonged to them with fire and sword. Such was the practical import of the phrase in Dan. 7:25, "the saints shall be given into his hand." It mattered not what country of the Horns the saints might reside in, the Lion-Mouth upon the Seven Hills, with his chasm' odonton, his gaping jaws of iron teeth (Dan. 7:7, 19) could seize and devour them on the spot; for the catholic priests and secular orders of the states, the hyenas of his kingdom, were jealous in executing his ferocious mandates, to revel with him in the blood of the slain. Thus, the Catholic Woman became "drunken with the blood of the Saints, and with the blood of the Witnesses of Jesus" (ch. 17:6). Now, the legal beginning of this murderous administration of irresponsible ecclesiastical power, was made, as the reader may see, the beginning of the forty and two months. "The saints shall be given into his hand during (ad) a time, and times, and the dividing of time." Hence, they must have been given into his power at the beginning of the period specified, or they could not have been subject to him during the period. The delivering of the saints into his hand at the first must be taken as the starting point in the calculation. There is no clue in Daniel to the epoch of this delivery. John, however, in showing whence the Eyes and the Mouth of the Beast derived their power, and the use they would make of it against the saints with the historical description of the Dragon's grant, enables us to say, with considerable assurance, that the forty and two months began in the epoch of a.d. 604-608. In all the subsequent 1260 years, the Papal Powers have practised prosperously against the Saints and Witnesses for the supremacy of Jesus against that of the Universal Bishop, unicum nomen in mundo. They have trodden them under foot, made successful war upon them, and killed them in all the streets of the Great City -- the Witnesses for 1260 years after the Justinian epoch; the Saints for 1260 years after the Phocean epoch. This is the testimony of authentic history, and cannot be gainsaid by any one intelligent therein, who knows what saints and witnesses for Jesus are. Of course, this Phocean quadrennial epoch being accepted as the time when the saints were given by the Dragon into the power of the Little Horn, Eyes and Mouth, "the time, and times, and half a time," or forty and two months, must now be in the quadrennial epoch of termination, which is from a.d. 1864 to a.d. 1868. We who have lived in this epoch have witnessed great events, indicating a breaking up of the politico-ecclesiastical constitution of the Papal Kosmos, or Order of Things. Naples, Sardinia, Lombardy, Venetia, and the Italian Duchies, are merged in the Kingdom of ltaly; the military element of the Little Horn, Austria, has been excluded from the Holy Land of the Romish Satan; and the Universal Bishop of the Horn Governments is smitten with the paralysis of death. Every thing in the Western Third of the Roman Earth is in a transition state. Nothing is settled, neither can be. The present lull is only preparatory to the tripartite division of the Great City under the Seventh and Last Vial; when the Beast under the Eighth Head, in the last stage of its existence, will be prepared for perdition at the hand of "the King of kings and Lord of lords" -- the kings and lords, who are "the called, and chosen, and faithful," who follow him whithersoever he goes, in all his judicial enterprises of war and conquest -- Apoc. 17:14; 14:4. 19. Speaking Great Things and Blasphemies "And a mouth was given to him speaking great things and blasphemies" -- verse 5. The Mouth given to the Beast of the Sea was like a lion's mouth; and he delighted to compare himself thereto. His official utterances, or the things affirmed of him, by those who created and worshipped him, far transcended the utterances of the proud and impious rulers of the old Babylonian Lion. The last of these, styled by Isaiah, "Lucifer, son of the morning," the Belshatzar of history, said, "I will ascend into heaven; I will exalt my throne above the stars of Ail --; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High" -- ch. 14:13, 14; and on the eve of his being brought down to Sheol, he lifted himself up against the Lord of heaven, and praised the images of silver and gold, of brass, iron, wood, and stone, which see not, nor hear, nor know (Dan. 5:23). These were the speakings of the Mouth of the old Lion of Babylon; but proud and impious as they were, they fell short of the "great things and blasphemies" which roared from the throat, or by the sanction, of the Universal Bishop of the Ten-Horned Monster of the Sea. This Babylonian Mouth, which has come down to us from the darkest ages of the clerical apostasy, when it opens its iron-teethed jaws, can give expression to nothing but great things of vanity and falsehood, and things defamatory of the Deity and the Saints. "He opened his mouth unto blasphemy concerning the Deity, to blaspheme his Name, and his Tabernacle, and the dwellers in the heaven." Jesus Christ, the apostle Peter taught, was the only name given among men whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12). This name was the Father, whom no man hath seen, nor can see, by His power manifested in the flesh, crucified, and afterwards justified or perfected. This crucified and glorified Name, in the very nature of things, can have no substitute or vicar. The substitute or vicar of such a Name, must be all in reality that is affirmed of the original, who must be set aside necessarily to make room for the Vicar. For a man to be a genuine Vicar of Christ, he must be what Jesus was as the Father's Vicar, or Mediator: sin must have been condemned in his flesh, and he himself a character "without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing." Compare this necessity with what the popes really are, who affirm that they are the Only Name in the World, unicum nomen in mundo, and the enormity of their blasphemy of the Deity's Name will readily be seen. Prior to the dates here given, Italy was divided into a number of small States (including the Papal States) Duchies and Kingdoms. In 1860, Garibaldi, the revolutionary "with his thousand redshirts", overran Sicily and crossed to the mainland. King France II of Naples fled before him, and meeting King Victor Emmanuel, Garibaldi rode with him in triumph through liberated Naples. Garibaldi's military successes enabled him to unite most of Italy. For a time Rome, guarded by French troops, escaped, and Venice was retained by Austria. In 1866, however, Garibaldi acquired Venice. In 1870, the Franco-Russian war, demanded the recall of French troops in Rome and the city was occupied by Garibaldi, and proclaimed the capital of Italy. The pope retired into seclusion at the Vatican, stripped of all political power. His temporal status destroyed, the Vatican became his "prison" in which he remained as head of the Catholic Ecclesiastical empire. In 1929, however, Mussolini signed a concordat with the Papacy, and the Vatican again became an independent State within a State. This restored temporal power to the Papacy, and paved the way for the system to be politically recognised in the international sphere. Since then popes have travelled widely in arousing support for their system. The present pope is using the freedom thus gained to great advantage in extending the political influence of the Church. This will lead to the development required by Rev. 17:3 -- Publishers. "Great things" are affirmed of the Mouth, which it sanctions ex officio. A celebrated monk of the time of Hildebrand puts these lying words into the mouth of Jesus Christ, as addressing the pope, and given in the original Latin text by Elliott. "I have delivered into thy hands the keys of my whole universal church, and have placed thee over it as Vicar for me; and, if these be few things, I have also delivered to thee the kingdoms. Yea, the king (or emperor) being removed from the midst, I have granted to thee the right of the whole vacant Roman empire." The orator of the tenth Session of the fifth Lateran Council thus speaks of Constantine's removal of his imperial throne to Byzantium, afterwards named Constantinople: "Constantine, breathed upon by divine grace from above, fully ceded the sceptre of the empire of the world and city to the true and proper Lord -- to the Deity, and to the man in his own Roman seat, Sylvester, the Pontifex Maximus, in the primeval and natural right of Christ, the eternal priest; and he sought another throne by Apostolical concession, and erected it in Byzantium under the obedience of the Apostolic throne." It is true that the Dragon granted the Mouth his throne in old Rome, but it was not at the time alleged; the orator, doubtless, referred to "the Decretals of Constantine," proved to have been forged by the popes. In the reported Decree of Pius the First, he says, "The people may not accuse a bishop; bishops are to be judged by the Deity, who has chosen them as Eyes to himself." Speaking of the Episcopacy in general, Boniface I., styles it "the watchtower of Episcopacy;" and the Greek emperor, in writing to the Roman Synod, a.d. 681, says, "we show that the priests are the Eyes of the Church." So Boniface I. speaks of the pope under the name of Peter, saying, "The most blessed apostle Peter looks upon thee as his own eyes, in what way soever thou shalt use the office of Chief Ruler. Neither can it not be most suitable for thee, who art constituted perpetual Shepherd of the Lord's sheep." Also, Innocent IV., a.d. 1245, in his sentence against the Emperor Frederick, says, "We ought to perceive, in regard to the height of apostolic dignity, that it is for THE Eye of most intimate considering of the faults of all christians." Hence, the Universal Bishop is well represented by the "Eyes like the eyes of a man," in Daniel's Little Horn. The symbol of a Lion's Mouth speaking great things is eulogistically ascribed by Pope Nicolas I., in the ninth century, to Pope Leo, styled "the Great," the earliest founder of the temporal dominion of the Universal Bishop. He says, "save only the imitator namely of that Lion of whom it is written, 'the Lion of the Tribe of Judah hath conquered,' divinely exalted, opening the mouth, makes the whole world, and also the emperors themselves to tremble; as well it calls the mind to piety, it might entirely overthrow the catholic religion." And so Hincmar, speaking of the same Leo, says, "Leo the Great by the greatest roaring from the city Roma, being the capital namely of the globe, thunders loudly through the whole world." In the words of Shakespeare's King John: "Here's a large mouth indeed, That spits forth death and mountains, rocks and seas." In the time of Charlemagne, a.d. 799, a Roman council enacted precisely the same part as that convened by Theodoric. The Pope having been accused, the Council declined to hear his accusers; declaring that he who was judge of all men, was above being judged by any other than himself; and on his coming in, and asserting his innocence, he was considered as acquitted. Thus Urban II., a.d. 1090, "that the divine right of judging concerning every church is of the pope alone; and that he himself is subject to the judgment of none." Afterwards in the Canon Law, collected and published in the eleventh century, it was said: "It is certain that the Supreme Pontiff was called God by the pious prince Constantine; it is manifest that Deity cannot be judged by men." Daubuz who quotes this, styles the Canon Law and Decretals the Pope's Oracle; "the Decretal Epistles are enumerated with the canonical scriptures." They are the true expression of the papal mind. This claim that he was irresponsible to any laws, human or Divine, by which he identified himself with the anomos or Lawless One of Paul, continued to be urged in the fifteenth century. So a.d. 1463, on Paul II dismissing Platina from office after his election, and Platina's threatening to bring the case before the judges of the Rota. Paul fiercely replied, "Thou wilt call us to account before the judges! As if thou wert ignorant that all laws are placed in the coffer of our breast! I am Supreme Pontiff; and I can at the pleasure of my soul both rescind and approve the acts of others." And again the Roman Council, a.d. 877, declared that "Christ himself willed that the pope be the head of us all, in his stead upon earth." No one upon earth called a god, or worshipful individual, could plead exemption from subjection to the power of the keys in the hand of the Universal Bishop. Thus, Gregory the Seventh on excommunicating the emperor Henry IV., said, "I cannot find, that when the Lord confided to Peter the power of the keys, he made any exception in favor of kings." One of his dictates was "that all princes shall kiss the feet of the Pope alone." Raynald relates an exemplification which occurred a.d. 1515. The arrangement made by Paris, bishop of Pisaurum, Master of Ceremonies to the Pope, who was present on the occasion, was that the French king should kneel thrice on approaching the enthroned Pope; and first kiss his feet, ere he kissed his hand and face. Among the "great things" of this Mouth is the dogma that all kingdoms are held of the pope. In support of this, Ducange, from Glaber Rodulphus, a.d. 900, quotes the popes "optimum decretum" following: "No prince shall impudently desire to bear the sceptre of the Roman Empire, or be called Emperor, or wish to be, except he whom by probity of manners the Pope of the Roman See shall convey as fit for the Republic, and to him he will commit the imperial badge." It has been said, says Elliott, that pope Constantine, a.d. 708, was the first pope that claimed the right of confirming temporal princes in their kingdoms. His successors claimed to make kings and depose them. An authentic account of the deposition of the race of Clovis by Pope Zachary in the eighth century, affords an instance of this: also, at a subsequent period, the disposal of the emperorship of the Two-Horned Beast of the Earth, as a fief of St. Peter, by Gregory VII; who deposed Henry, emperor of Germany, and conferred the diadem on Rodulphus in the words: Petra dedit Petro, Petrus diadema Rodulpho. In this, Gregory styles the apostle, Petra; and the pope, Petrus: the plain English of which is, Peter gave the German Empire to the Pope; and the Pope gave its crown to Rodulphus; though the apostle did not know that such an empire would ever exist! But, no lying blasphemy is too absurd to issue forth from the Draco-Lion Mouth of the Beast. In a.d. 1303, we have another illustration of this sort of blasphemy in the case of Boniface, who, in his confirmation of Albrecht in the Emperorship, declared that it was by Papal authority, as Christ's Vicar, or personal and official substitute, that the Imperial Diadem had been transferred from the Greek Empire to Charlemagne and his successors, at the crisis, namely, when the healing of the Sixth Head was commenced. "And the Germans attend here," said Boniface, "because, just as the empire was transferred from others to themselves, so Christ's Vicar, the successor of Peter, has the power of transferring the empire from the Germans to any others soever, if he will; and this without injury of right" -- a declaration humbly submitted to and confessed by Albrecht. France was declared by Gregory VII., to be tributary to Rome; and England, as also Spain, Saxony, etc., and Naples. The subjection of John of England, and after his deposition, the redonation to him by Innocent III., of the kingdom as a Papal fief; also his disposal of the German Emperorship in the case of Philip and Otho, are notorious. And Daubuz states from the letters of Pius II., that he proposed to the Turkish Sultan to give him a legal title to the Greek empire he already possessed by right of conquest, if he would assist him against his rebellious children. There was no blasphemy too gross for papal acceptance. Whatever of this kind was offered to them, they accepted as their due. They claimed sovereignty over the land and sea, known or undiscovered; and the claim was recognized by the Horn Governments. This was exemplified in the Papal grants of the Indies to Spain and Portugal. After the conquest of the latter in the Far East, the king of Portugal sent an embassy to Rome, which arrived there and had an audience of Pope Leo, on March 25, 1514, and acknowledged his right to them. The oration, which was highly commended by the pope himself, is given in full by Roscoe, and quoted by Elliott in these words: "Listen to the orator of the embassy. For a moment he hesitates, as overcome by a sense of the majesty of him he is addressing." "Fear and trembling," he exclaims, "have come over me, and a horrible darkness overwhelmed me." Then, reassured by the Pope's serene aspect towards him -- "that divine countenance, which shining," he says, "as the sun, had dispersed the mists of his mind" -- he proceeds to the objects of his mission: narrates the eastern conquests of the Portuguese arms; addresses the pope as the Supreme Lord of all; and speaks of these conquests as the incipient fulfilment of God's sure promises. "Thou shalt rule from sea to sea, and from the Tyber River to the world's end;" "the kings of Arabia and Saba shall bring gifts to thee; yea, all princes shall worship thee, all nations shall serve thee;" and under thy auspices, "there shall be one fold and one Shepherd." That is, he explains the promised universal latter-day subjection of the world to Christ, as meant of its subjection to the Pope and the Portuguese discoveries and victories over the heathen, as signs that that consummation was at hand. And he concludes by a solemn act of adoration to the Pope, as his king's Lord and Master: "Thee, as the true Vicar of Christ and God, the Ruler of the whole Christian Republic, we recognize, confess, profess obedience to, and adore: in thy name adoring Christ, whose representative thou art." A letter from the king of Portugal accompanied this oration, and was addressed, "To Our Father and Lord Leo X." On the ground, then, that the uttermost parts of the earth were given to the Pope for a possession, as Christ's Vicar, the king of Portugal prayed the pope to confer on the crown of Portugal a right to all countries inhabited by infidels the Portuguese might hereafter discover; the promise being added that he would spread the Catholic religion in them, establish the authority of the Pope, and so augment the flock of the Universal Bishop. This was too good an opportunity to be lost of grandly exercising his alleged prerogative of giving nations and countries to whom he pleased. A bull was forthwith issued granting to the Portuguese all they might discover from Cape Non to India. In a.d. 1493, after the discovery of America by Columbus, a like application was made by Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain to Pope Alexander VI; the same pleas and promises accompanying it of extending the dominion of the Pope. The Bull which decreed the grant, enacted that all westward of an imaginary line passing from pole to pole, and one hundred leagues west of the Azores, should belong to the Spaniards, all eastward to the Portuguese. In the judgment of the Horn-Governments, these pontifical grants were regarded as constituting an unimpeachable title, and a guarantee against interference and attack. Under Elizabeth of England, however, the validity of the grant was not admitted. For on the Spanish ambassador's reclamation against Drake, a.d. 1580, for having navigated seas which were in the dominion of Spain, the British Queen replied, that "the English did not recognize in any manner the property which the king of Spain attributed to himself, nor the pretended girl of a Pope, who had no right to dispose of countries and seas which did not belong to him." Even in our own days, and in the time of his deep temporary humiliation under the first Napoleon, who had filled his kingdom with darkness (ch. 16:10) the same "extensive jurisdiction" was asserted. "Let them learn," said Pius VII., in his excommunication of that potentate, June 10, 1809, "that they are subjected by the laws of Jesus Christ to our throne, and to our commandment." This was truly a "great thing," and in keeping with the arrogance of Celestin III., a.d. 1191, who kicked the secular diadem from the head of Henry VI., in token of his right to assign kingdoms to whom he pleased, and to take them away. The fact is thus described by Roger of Hoveden. "But the Lord Pope sat in the political chair holding the golden imperial crown between his feet; and the emperor bowing his head received the crown, and the empress in the same manner, from the feet of the Lord Pope. But the Lord Pope in stantly struck with his foot the emperor's crown, and cast it upon the ground; signifying that he had the power of deposing him from the empire, if he were undeserving of it. The Cardinals, however, lifted up the crown and placed it on the emperor's head." "He hath set me," said another pope, "even as prince over all nations, to root out, and to pull down, to destroy and to build." Indeed, there is no end to "the great things and blasphemies" to which this Papal Mouth of the Gentile Beast has given, and continues to give utterance: for as Cardinal Bellarmine says (writing under the sanction of the pope) expressly, "that every title which is in scripture given to Christ, appertains also to the Pope;" and to guard against misapprehension, he gives a copious enumeration of them. This is truly "blasphemy against the Deity, manifested in the Flesh," and called Christ; the effect of which is to blaspheme his name, and his Tabernacle, and them who tabernacle, camp, tent, or dwell in the heaven; that is to say, Jesus Christ and his brethren the saints. But to notice, or reproduce here, all the blasphemies and great swelling words of this mouth, which, all toothless as it has become, have issued from it, would be to write all the past and current history of the Papacy. Under this section head I have presented the reader with specimens whereby he may be able to identify among "the powers that be" that particular power symbolized by the Mouth and the Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Heads. This is enough for exposition. I shall therefore pass on from the further consideration of "the great things and biasphemies" of him who in his latest manifestation as Pius IX. styles himself in his address to Mortara, "the Father of all the faithful," to the brief exposition of 20. The Name and Tabernacle of Deity, and Those who Dwell in the Heaven After what I have written concerning The Name in Vol. 1 pp. 98-114; 275-383; 368-372 and 395-400, I need say very little about it in this section. In this chapter 13, we have two Names which are antagonistic -- the blaspheming name, "whose number is six hundred three score and six", the number indicative of The Man of Sin-power; and the Name he blasphemes, which is written upon the foreheads of the 144,000 -- ch. 14:1. In ch. 13:6, it represents Christ and his Brethren, who, in antagonism to the Papal Blasphemer, constitute the Name of Deity. The phrases "his name," "his tabernacle," and "them that dwell in the heaven," are all synonymous with the phrase in the seventh verse, "the saints," of whom Christ is "the Head." The Deity dwells in them, and therefore they are his temple, habitation, or tabernacle; as Paul writes to the saints in Corinth, "Ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their Deity, and they shall be my people" (2 Cor. 7:16). They are the tabernacle "built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, the foundation corner-stone being Jesus Christ himself: in whom all the building fitly framed together increaseth for a Holy Name in the Lord: in whom ye are builded together for an habitation of the Deity in Spirit" (Eph. 2:20-22). But Christ and the Saints are not only the Name and Tabernacle of the Deity, but they are also, "those who dwell in the heaven." The phrase "in the heaven" is Apocalyptically equivalent to "in the heavenlies in Christ" -- en tois epouraniois en Christo (Eph. 1:3). Paul tells the saints in Ephesus, that he with them were "blessed with all spiritual blessings" in these heavenlies; in which they and Christ, though the latter is at the Right Hand of the Divine Majesty, and they in Ephesus and elsewhere, were regarded as sitting together (Eph. 1:20; 2:6). A heavenly is a constituted supernal state. It may be Divinely constituted, or constituted by human authority. We have these two kinds of heavenlies in Paul's letter to the saints in Ephesus. In ch. 6:12, he alludes to the heavenlies constituted by human authority. The Common Version styles them "High Places;" but Paul used the same word to indicate them as that rendered "heavenly places" in ch. 1:3, 20; 2:6. There is no reason why the translation should not be uniform after the manner of the original. I see that in the Italian Version this uniformity has been observed. In this, in all the places of the epistle where Paul uses en tois epouraniois, the phrase is represented by ne' luoghi celesti, in places celestial. The French Version is also uniform, rendering it dans les lieux celestes. The German is less uniform than the English; and in ch. 6:12, excludes the things mentioned there from heaven altogether, and puts them unter dem Himmel, under the heaven. It is, however, to be remembered that Paul so expresses himself as not to be misunderstood by the enlightened. He defines the heavenlies in which they "sit together with Christ" as being "in Christ;" but he omits the phrase "in Christ" when he speaks of the heavenlies in which "the spirituals of wickedness" are found. Hence, the two kinds of supernal states are characterized by being "in Christ" or not in Christ; which is equivalent to being out of Christ -- outside, or not included in the things, of which the manifestation of Deity in the Flesh is the great and glorious centre. But the Heavenlies in Christ are not luoghi, lieux, or places, but states, the foundation of which is laid in Jesus Christ -- Deity manifested in the Flesh. "The Man Christ Jesus" is a real man. When on earth he was "holy, harmless, undefiled, and sinless," as to character; yet imperfect as to his material nature. He is now perfect -- a perfect man "justified by spirit," and therefore incorruptible and immortal -- a perfect character or moral nature, developed by Divine power, or spirit, into a perfect material nature. But Christ is also an allegorical man, as Hagar and Sarah were two allegorical women; the former representing the Mosaic Covenant; the latter, the New, or Abrahamic, Covenant. From the days of Moses until the Day of Pentecost, a.d. 34, the whole twelve tribes were constitutionally in their mother Hagar, or the Jerusalem system then in existence, and in bondage with her children. But on that celebrated day a new system was initiatorily developed, the Sarah Covenant, styled "the Jerusalem above the Mother of us all." Isaac was Sarah's son, and allegorically slain, and allegorically raised. The saints are all in Isaac; for "in Isaac shall thy seed be called." This seed is Christ; not Jesus only; but that great multitude also which no man can number. This "One Body" of people headed up in Deity is the allegorical or figurative Christ. They are the children of the promise as Isaac was; the free-born sons of Sarah the free woman. This is their state, without regard to the place or country of earth or heaven, where they might be supposed to be. But, if there had been no literal or personal Christ, there could have been no such Christ-State for Jews and Gentiles. Jesus of Nazareth was allegorically "a number which no man could number." He himself taught this, saying, "he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit:" and, "Father, I pray for them who shall believe into me (eis eme) through the apostles' word: that they all may be one in us" (John 10:5; 17:20, 21). Though few compared with the whole race of man, it is a great company absolutely -- a people taken out from all the generations and the nations for the Divine Name. "He shall increase," said John the Immerser; "but I must decrease." Jesus increased, or grew, into a Divine and "chosen generation;" while John has dwindled down into a mere Baptist Denomination, which is either ignorant of, or opposed to "the truth as it is in Jesus." The heavenlies in Christ are two states answering to the two places of the tabernacle of Moses. One of these states is not yet manifested on earth; the other is. Hence, one may be said to be visible, and the other invisible; yet the saints, not sinners, who are quickened with him, and raised with him, sit together in both with him, and He with them. Now the solution of this mystery turns wholly upon the meaning of the phrase "in him." What is it then, to be in him? It is to be where Paul places the saints in Thessalonica, namely, en Theo patri, kai Kurio lesou Christo, in Deity the Father, and the Lord Jesus Anointed. The saints are all in this manifestation of Deity. Being in Jesus and the Father, they must be, in a certain sense, where Jesus and the Father are. Alluding to this fact, Paul says in Heb. 12:23, "We are come to the Deity the Judge of all, and to Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant", and so forth. But Paul says that Jesus is at the Father's own Right Hand. True; but he also says, that "being justified by faith, we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand." In other words, we have admission to the Father in heaven by faith; and when a person is permitted access to a place, and avails himself of the permission, he is in some sense certainly there; and when there in this certain sense, he is "dwelling in the heaven" in the presence of "the Judge of all." Now the two places of the Mosaic tabernacle were the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place, which were divided the one from the other by the Vail. Even so it is with "the holies, the true tabernacle which the Lord pitches, and not man (Heb. 8:2). There are the Holy Heavenly State and the Most Holy Heavenly State, divided by the Flesh. The Holy must be entered before the Most Holy can be reached; and to pass corporeally from one into the other, the individual must put on incorruptibility and become immortal; for, so long as he is in mortal flesh he is outside, or rather, an element of the Vail which must be rent; though by faith and constitution in Christ, he is within it. How, then, does a sinner come to "dwell in the heaven?" By being "transformed in the renewing of his mind" "by knowledge" (Rom. 12:2; Col. 3:10); that he may discern and do "that good and acceptable and perfect will of the Deity." In other words, by believing the gospel of the Kingdom and Name; and being immersed into and upon that Name. In so doing, he enters into the Holy Heavenly State. By faith in "the truth as it is in Jesus," and obedience, he puts on Christ, and is therefore, "in Him;" and being in him, he is constitutionally holy or a saint; and sitting together with him in the Most Holy, not personally, or corporeally rather; but by faith. This is his present adoption through Jesus Christ, by which he becomes a son of Deity, of Abraham, Sarah, and Isaac, and a brother of Christ himself (Gal. 3:26-29); and a "dweller in the heaven." But there are heavenlies beyond the pale of the Christ-Body. These are Supernal States in which Paul locates principalities, powers, world-rulers of the darkness of the times of the Gentiles, which he styles "this aeon," and the spirituals of the wickedness enthroned throughout the earth. These heavenlies are constituted providentially or instrumentally by human authority and power after "the course of this world;" and are the tabernacle of "the Prince of the power of the Air, the Spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience" (Eph. 2:2). This Prince-power and Spirit of the Air is Sin's Flesh; whose spirit pervades all sublunary human constitutions, styled "thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers," which Paul specifies as "things in the heaven," or "the Air" (Col. 1:16). In such an unclean heaven as this, are found the Ten-Horned, and Two-Horned, Beasts, the Name of Blasphemy, the Lion-Mouth, and the Image of the Beast, or False Prophet, the God of the Earth -- all things of power, in short, emanating from falsehood and superstition. The dwellers in this Air, or Heaven, are not the Saints. In their days of Apocalyptic prophecy the two witnessing prophets had power to shut this heaven that there should be no rain from it; and as often as they willed during 1260 years, to turn the popular waters into blood, and to smite the earth with all war-plagues (ch. 11:6). The dwellers in this Aerial are the civil and ecclesiastical orders of society; such as, emperors, kings, diplomatists, nobles spiritual and laical, legislators, magistrates, priests, clergymen, parsons, and all of that class, styled by the apostle "spirituals of the wickedness" which reigns in "the Court of the Gentiles without the temple." Between this heaven and "the Heavenlies in Christ" there is implacable and uncompromising hostility. No peace can be permanently established in the earth till one or other of these heavens be suppressed or subjugated: and who can doubt which of these heavens shall be shaken, be rolled up as a scroll, and be made to pass away with the great tumult of war? The heavenlies, or high places, of this world are decreed to Yahweh and his Anointed Body; who, by the thunders and lightnings issuing from the throne newly set in the heaven, shall take the dominion under the whole heaven, and possess it during the Olahm and beyond (ch. 11:15; 4:1-5; Dan. 7:18, 22, 27). This is the fiat of Eternal Wisdom and Power. The Seventh Vial, the last blast of the Seventh Trumpet, is to pour out its fury upon the Air, the secular and spiritual constitution of which will thereby be thoroughly and radically changed. The things now in the Air will be transferred to "them who dwell in the heaven" in Christ; who, having passed through the Vail of the Flesh which divides the Heavenlies, in the putting on of immortality, will be manifested as the Most Holy Heavenly in Christ; and the Air, filled with their glory, will become the New Heavens, in which righteousness will dwell forever. The Air will then no longer be malarious with the pestiferousness of secular and spiritual demagogues, who "with good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." The Prince of the Power of the Air will then be the Spirit that works in the children of obedience -- the truth incarnated gloriously in Jesus and his Brethren; who, in the highest sense, will be those who dwell in the heaven." It was against the Saints, who, in the times of the Gentiles, constitute the Name, the Tabernacle, and them who dwelt in the Heaven in Christ, that the Ten-Horned Beast opens his Leo-Babylonian Mouth in blasphemy; and makes war, till the end of the Forty and Two Months of Years. In blaspheming Jesus and his Brethren, he blasphemes the Deity, on the principle laid down by Christ, that what is done to, for, or against, his brethren, is done to, for, or against him. The Lion-Mouth of the Apocalyptic Babylon spoke evil of them in words of the most acrid bitterness. He denounced them as heretics, accursed, the children of the Devil, the spawn of hell -- not a blasphemous epithet was there that the pope and his agents did not heap upon them. The prophetic writings, though set aside for the purposes of truth and edification, were resorted to for names of infamy by which to make them odious to those who worship the beast and his image; and the evil symbols and appellations therein employed by the Spirit to prefigure the Apostasy and its "spirituals of the wickedness," this Mouth of Blasphemy applied to the Saints. In this it blasphemed the Deity himself. This principle is well illustrated in Ezek. 35, where a statement made by Edom concerning Israel and their country is styled blasphemy against the mountains of Israel, because it was false. Edom said, as he also says to this day, "these two nations and these two countries shall be mine, and we will possess it, though Yahweh were there." Now, He had promised the land to Jacob, and to him he will give it for an everlasting inheritance. Hence, every saying subversive of this purpose is blasphemy against the country, and blasphemy and boasting against the Eternal Spirit: for, if Edom's purpose of possession could possibly be established, the Deity's veracity would be destroyed, and his character for faithfulness overthrown. "Thus," in making false statements concerning the destiny of Israel, Judah, and their country, O Edom, saith Yahweh, "with your mouth ye have boasted against Me, and have multiplied your words against Me; I have heard: so that when the whole earth rejoiceth, I will make thee desolate." By Edom is here represented what John symbolizes by the Beast and his Image, etc. Hence, to blaspheme or speak evil and injuriously of God's people, and promises, is regarded by Him as blasphemy against Himself. 21. War with the Saints "And it was given to him to make war with the Saints, and to vanquish them" -- Verse 7 This Beast that vanquishes the saints is the same that in ch. 11:7, is referred to as destined to make war against the Two Witnesses. There is, however, this difference of result observable in the Beast's war upon the Saints "who dwell in the heaven;" and his war against the Witnessing Prophets who had power to shut his heaven, that it should not rain in their days of the prophecy -- he vanquishes the Saints, but does not "kill them;" but in regard to the Two Prophets, he both vanquishes and kills them. The reason is this: he could not kill the Saints as a body politic, exercising power and authority in the Court of the Gentiles; because, not being politicians and political partisans, they never possessed them: it is therefore stated simply, that they were vanquished or overcome by the war. Hence, we find nothing about the saints rising from death until "the time of the dead" when Christ appears. But, in the case of the Two Witnesses, or politico-ecclesiastical communities opposed to the Horns and their Lion Mouth, they were politically killed, and lay dead and unburied in the platea of the Great City three lunar days and a half of years, and afterwards became the subject of a political resurrection and ascension into the heaven of the Beast. The Saints who dwell in the heaven in Christ have never been there yet. A better resurrection and ascension than that of the Two Witnesses is in reserve for them. The reader is referred to my eleventh chapter for particulars about the Beast's war upon the Witnesses. The Saints of the Holy City shared in much of their affliction, and are still trodden under foot; and will continue so to be, until the synchronous termination of the Forty Two months and 1335 years. After what I have written in that chapter of Vol. 3, it is unnecessary here to repeat the story of the war. The Saints were killed by thousands in the war because they would not worship the Beast's Image. This was the fate of multitudes who did not dwell in the heaven; for the slaughter by the Beasts was often indiscriminate, on the principle that "the Lord would know his own;" for even Catholics dwelling in witnessing communities were not exempted from massacre and flame. History is copious in the narration of the sanguinary persecutions and crusades raised against them by the Pope, who promised forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation to volunteers in his wars with the saints and witnesses, all of whom he blasphemed as "emanating from the pit of the abyss." These volunteers responded to his incentives with enthusiasm; and in reporting the execution of their mission, would say, "we have spared neither age nor sex; we have smitten every one with the edge of the sword." Besides being subject to massacre, they were at all times by the canon law deprived of all civil privileges; and it was declared "homicidas non esse qui excommunicatos trucidant," that they who butcher the excommunicated are not murderers. 22. The Patience and Faith of the Saints "Here is the patience and the faith of the Saints" -- Verse 10 When we read in the seventh verse, that exousia, authority, rule, dominion or jurisdiction, was given to the Beast," and consequently to his Lion Mouth, over every tribe, and tongue and nation, we know that the Beast represents the system of government existing in the outcast and unmeasured Court of the Gentiles (ch. 11:2): that is, over the tribes, tongues, and nations, of those countries, in which the Holy Polity in Christ, the Saints, and the Earth, or Witnesses, helping them, have contended for 1260 years against the Papacy. The Saints, or true believers, have always known, though sinners, and sceptical professors, their kin, have not, that although their conflict with the secular and ecclesiastical rulers of the world would be proximately disastrous; yet, that finally they would themselves be the victors, and the personal avengers of the atrocious cruelties they had endured. They have always known what the Beast is that is politically "worshipped by all that dwell upon the (Romish) earth;" and by which they have in ages past been vanquished: and being of that class that hath ears, they have heard "what the Spirit saith to the ecclesias." They have understood what the destiny of "the Powers that be," which have led them into captivity and killed them by the sword, is decreed by the Eternal Spirit to be. They know that this Beast, with all its appendages of heads, horns, mouth, feet, and Name of Blasphemy, aggregately symbolizing the governments of the nations, are themselves to be led captive, or taken violent possession of; and to be destroyed by the judicial two-edged sword in the hands of the Saints. They knew that the honor of executing vengeance upon the nations, and punishments upon the people; of binding their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; and of executing the judgment written, when the Ancient of Days should come, was, in the wisdom and justice of the Deity, assigned to them (Psa. 149:6-9; Dan. 7:22). By this knowledge, they were energized to endure for the time-being the atrocious cruelty inflicted upon them by the great iron teeth of the Lion-Mouth. They endured in hope of this honor, and waited for it in faith. It was their patience and their faith that the time would come, after the lapse of the forty two months, when they would slay Daniel's Fourth Beast, give his body politic to the burning flame, and deprive the other three Beasts of their dominion, which they would possess 1000 years (Dan. 7:11, 12; Apoc. 20:4). This has never been "the patience and the faith" of the worshippers of the Beast "who dwell upon the earth." These, who constitute "the Names and Denominations of Christendom," do not believe that the power leading "heretics," so-called, into captivity, or, in the language of the Inquisition, "immuring" them, shall itself be "immured" in the binding of its kings and nobles with chains: nor that such a power having killed "heretics" by the million with the sword, shall in like manner be by them destroyed. They of whose names there has been no record (hou gegraptai) from the foundation of the world, in the book of the slain Lamb's life have no ear to hear such doctrines as this. The waiting for and belief of these things is a characteristic of the true believers, "who dwell in the heaven," though pilgrims and sojourners upon the earth, and trodden under foot of the Gentiles; for where their treasure is, there is their heart, or affections, also. This tenth verse of ch. 13 is parallel with ch. 14:8-12. That is, the mission of the Second and Third Angels outlined in this passage is executive of the judgment written against the Beast in ch. 13:10 -- ei tis, if any, etc., rendered "he that killeth, etc.; the outline shows that the "any" refers to Babylon, the great city, and the worshippers of the Beast and his Image; and that these are to be "tormented with fire and brimstone," or "destroyed in war" (ch. 11:18) "in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb." The saints are waiting for this. It is the patience of those "who keep the commandments of the Deity and the faith of Jesus;" for so it is written in ch. 14:12, to which the reader is referred. Because the Great City, or "Christendom," has shed the blood of the saints and witnesses of Jesus, blood is to be given it to drink until it shall fall to rise no more. As "a great hail out of the heavens," the saints are to descend upon Babylon, and to "reward her even as she rewarded them, and to double to her according to her works" (ch. 16:21; 18:6). They are to execute this judgment strengthened by Omnipotence co-working with them (ch. 14:13); in the time of the end, after they shall have been raised from the dead, and been commissioned (ch. 18:20). When this patience and faith is satisfied, the saints, living and raised, will no longer be in a waiting position. They will rejoice in victory, and "sing the song of Moses, the servant of the Deity, and the song of the Lamb" (ch. 15:3). There will then be no systems of government such as now exist. The Ten-horned Beast, the Two-horned Beast, the Image of the Beast, the Scarlet-colored Beast, and the drunken Harlot he carries, will all have been destroyed as "the destroyers of the earth." Not a trace of them will be left; for they are all to be carried away as the wind sweeps off the chaff of the summer threshing-floors. No place on the earth will be found for them; for the Power that smites them will become as a great Mountain filling the whole earth (Dan. 2:35, 44). "Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. Here are they who keep the commandments of the Deity and the faith of Jesus;" all others are simply "the worshippers of the beast and his image," the mark of whose name is in their foreheads sealing them to death. 23. Names Written from the Foundation of the World In the English Version, the eighth verse reads, "and all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him (the Beast) whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." This is generally taken to mean that "the Lamb was slain from the foundation the world" -- slain in the typical sacrifices of the Mosaic law. However this may be, the phrase "from the foundation of the world" in this place does not refer to the slaying of the Lamb, but to the writing of certain names in the Book of Life. This is evident from the parallel passage in ch. 17:8, "and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder whose names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world." This is expository of the former on this point. The Book of Life is essentially that of the Lamb slain; for there is no book registering names for eternal life, that has not been sprinkled with the blood of Jesus. The slain Lamb's Book of Life is the Book of the Abrahamic Covenant, dedicated with the blood of Jesus, the Mediator of the New Covenant; and in this Book their names are not written who are ignorant of the promises, and, therefore, faithless of the Gospel preached to Abraham, and afterwards in the name of Jesus Christ. These worshippers and wonderers are "alienated from the life of the Deity through the ignorance that is in them" (Eph. 4:18). The slain Lamb's Book of Life, whose first page was written at the foundation of the world in the days of Moses, promises the incorruptible, undefiled, and unfading inheritance reserved in the heavens to those, and to such only, "who are kept by the power of Deity (the gospel of the kingdom Rom. 1:16) through faith, for the salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Pet. 1:4, 5); or "at the appearing (the apocalypse) of Jesus Christ -- ver. 7. The promise is "in thee, Abraham, and in thy Seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed;" and "all the land which thou seest to thee will I give it, and to thy Seed, for ever" (Gen. 12:3, 7; 13:15). This is a promise of eternal life and of an eternal inheritance to Abraham and his Seed; for they must be made incorruptible and immortal to enable them to possess a country "for ever." Nor can any sane person be in doubt as to what country is promised to Abraham and his Seed for ever; for it is plainly and expressly stated to be the land Abraham saw with his eyes when he was seventy-five years old -- the land lying between the Mediterranean and the Euphrates, at present a province of the Draco-Ottoman empire. Now, Moses and Paul teach that the Seed connected with the father of the faithful in the promise, was to be manifested in the line of Isaac; and that the said Seed was to be the personal and mystical Christ; or the One Body, whose head is Jesus and the Father; in other words, Jesus Christ. "To Abraham and to the Christ," says Paul, "were the promises made, and confirmed 430 years before the Mosaic law was given." He then states that when "the faith came;" that is, when the truth was manifested through the slaying of the Lamb of the Deity, men and women became the children of Deity by obedience to it; for the faith was made known to all nations for obedience of faith (Rom. 16:26; 1:5). Believers became children of the Deity by this obedience; for, he says, "Ye are all children of Deity in Christ Jesus through the faith." But, if they were not in Christ, though they might be believers, they were not His children; but mere worshippers of the Beast in the times of the Beast. Those believers only are "in Christ Jesus" who have entered into that heavenly state "through the faith;" or through the way pointed out in the one faith. This way is indicated in the words of Paul, who tells the believer of the truth by what process he may become a son of Deity; how he may get into Christ, and by consequence, be Christ's brother; and, therefore, a son of Abraham in the highest sense; an heir of the Deity, a joint-heir with Christ; and thereby entitled to the eternal life and inheritance promised to Abraham 430 years "before the foundation of the world". His words are, "As many as have been immersed into Christ have put on Christ; and if ye be Christ's, then are ye the Seed of Abraham, and Heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:26-29; Rom. 8:17). This is the Covenant of life in Christ confirmed by his blood, and styled Apocalyptically, "the Book of the life of the Lamb slain." Every one who can prove Scripturally that he is in Christ, and, therefore of Abraham's Seed, thereby demonstrates that his name has been written in that book from the foundation of the world. For, "known unto the Deity are all his works from the beginning of the world" (Acts 15:13). If any one be a son of Deity he is one of "his works;" for says Paul to the sons of Deity in Ephesus, "we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works" (ch. 2:10). Then every one of his children was known to Him by name when he laid the foundation of the aion and kosmos (both rendered world in the English Version) in the Abrahamic Covenant. To deny it, would be to say that the Deity did not know all his works from the beginning. But he did know them; and, therefore, it is said in the verse before us of the dwellers on the earth in contrast with the dwellers in the heaven, of "whom there has not been written from the foundation of the world the names in the book of the life of the Lamb that had been slain." The sentence resting upon these is "Depart from me, ye cursed that work iniquity; I never knew you" (Matt. 7:21-23; 25:41). Such are the wonderers after the Beast of all clerical orders, and names, and denominations of blasphemy, of which his body politic is full (Apoc. 17:3). Thus, "whosoever is not found written in the Book of Life is cast into the Lake of Fire, in which the Beast and False-Prophet powers are to be destroyed by the all-conquering saints (ch. 19:20; 20:15; Matt. 25:41). II. The Beast of The Earth (The Two-Horned Beast) "And I saw another beast ascending out of the earth, and he had Two Horns like to a Lamb, and he spake as being a Dragon" (Apoc. 13:11). John saw this while standing on "the sand of the sea." Would he see the Ten Horn dominions ascending out of the sea, and not see a more remarkable dominion than any of them rising up in the midst of them? He says, "I saw another beast;" so that while he was seeing and standing, he saw two dominions, or systems of government, the one arising from among the peoples inhabiting the countries of the west washed by the Mediterranean, the other from among those of Middle Europe, which he styles "the earth." "The Earth" is an extensive inland portion of the globe, not included in the Roman empire when the Apocalypse was communicated to John in Patmos. In modern times, it is represented by the territory of the Austrian, Prusso-German, and Russian empires. Out of a portion of this region John saw the Two-Horned Beast arise; so that when it had arisen and established itself, there were contemporary with it Seven independent Horns, and its own Two Horns in the midst of the original ten. Between what John saw, and what Daniel beheld while considering the Horns of the Fourth Beast (ch. 7:3, 24), there is a remarkable identity. They both saw the rising up of the same dominion, concerning which each of them recorded particulars not specially noticed by the other. Daniel's and John's ten horns represent the same European Powers. Now Daniel says that 'while he was considering these horns, there came up among them another Little Horn;" which is equivalent to the information derived from John, and while he stood looking at the Tenhorned Beast, he saw "another beast coming up out of the earth." The most notable diversity here between John and Daniel is, that what Daniel styles a Little Horn, John terms a Beast with Two Horns, and speaking as being a Dragon. This diversity is instructive. A horn represents a Dynasty, or succession of potentates. This appears from the two horns of the Ram in Dan. 8, representing the Dynasty of the Medes, and the Dynasty of the Persians; and for two years, both of them contemporary on the same beast. John's description of the dominion shows that the Beast of the Earth has Two Contemporary Dynasties, both of which are Dragonic, or Imperial. But Daniel shows the same things, only in a different way. For, that his Little Horn is imperial, a dominion ruled by emperors, he affirms in saying, that the power should subdue three of the ten horns that had existence before it. It was to rule over three conquered kingdoms besides its own: and that it was to be a double-headed imperiality; or, a dominion under two contemporary successions of potentates, he represents by the Little Horn, for one succession of secular emperors; and by the Eyes and Mouth for the other succession of pontifical emperors, styled Popes. This constitution of things makes it "diverse from the ten horns." There were no independent Eyes and Mouth for each of them. If there had been a pair of Eyes and a Mouth for each horn there would have been a Pope for each kingdom: or ten contemporary popes, as well as ten contemporary kings. But this would have been confusion worse confounded than it was. On the contrary, one pope or Papal Dynasty, was deemed sufficient for the whole ecclesiastical requirements of the worshippers of the Beast, both of the earth and sea. One pope, one emperor, seven independent, and three vassal kingdoms, south and west of the Rhine and Danube, represented by John's two Beasts, is the politico-ecclesiastical and Apocalyptical constitution of Modern Europe, from a.d. 800 to a.d. 1793. Revolutions have often seriously disturbed this constitutional order. There have been rival contemporary popes and emperors, and more and fewer kings. At present, everything is subjected to this revolutionary disturbance. But, we have in this place more particularly to do with what John saw while he stood on the sand of the sea, viewing the rising up of this new imperial dominion of the west, which Daniel intimates was not only to arise "among the ten horns," but "after them." The Temporal Power of the Papacy in Italy. The above map depicts the Papal States on the eve of the establishment of the Holy Roman Empire in a.d. 800. Gibbon records that in 758 Pepin gave to the Pope the "States of the Church" -- three kingdoms in Italy: The Exarchate of Ravenna, the Kingdom of the Lombards, and the State of Rome. These were confirmed by Charlemagne, and were represented by the triple crown worn by the Pope (see p. 265). These Papal States remained until 1870 when they were taken over by Garibaldi, and the Papacy was stripped of its temporal power, the Pope becoming a "prisoner in the Vatican". It was restored by the Concordat signed with Mussolini in 1929 at which time the Vatican became an independent state, and the Italian Government agreed to compensate the Papacy for the loss of independence in 1870! In the conquests of Charlemagne, by which the Papal power was extended in the West, three of the horns were "plucked up by the roots" -- which Eureka identifies with the "horns of the Vandals, Lombards, and the Huns, fulfilling the requirements of Dan. 7:8. Bible prophecy has been remarkably vindicated in world events -- Publishers. This is highly important information, and guards us against the error of searching for the Two-Horn Dominion before the appearance of the Ten Gothic kingdoms, or during the time of their appearing. Nor may we search for it while the Seventh Head occupied Rome. That sovereignty had to pass away before an Imperial Eighth could occupy the Seven Hills. This brings us to the time of the settlement of Italy by Justinian's Pragmatic Sanction, a.d. 554. But taking our stand upon this settlement, and surveying the western world we can discern nothing answerable to Daniel's Little Horn with Eyes and Mouth, and John's Beast of the Earth. We can see Rome reduced in rank among cities, and deprived of all sovereignty: the dominion of Constantinople established in part of Italy; and the Bishop of Rome still devoid of temporal authority, and subject to the Viceroy of the Great Emperor or Dragon, called the Exarch of Ravenna. Two hundred and forty years, however, after this settlement, a great revolution had been developed in the European Body Politic. The Constantinopolitan sovereignty and Exarch were no longer found in Italy; three of the Ten-Horn kingdoms had been subdued by a new power; the Bishop of Rome was exalted into a pontifical potentate with temporal jurisdiction over the so-called Patrimony of St. Peter, or "States of the Church;" and Rome was raised from her degradation and eclipse to imperial sovereignty; and, as Gibbon testifies, was afterwards "revered by the Latins as the Metropolis of the World, and the Throne of the Pope and Emperor who from the Eternal City derived their title, their honors, and the right or exercise of temporal dominion". This New Dominion of the Two Dynasties styled "the Pope and Emperor", is John's Two-Horned Beast of the Earth; and Daniel's Little Horn with Eyes like eyes of a man, and a Mouth speaking very great things, whose look was more stout than any of the Ten. Its rise must be looked for after the Emperor of the East had lost his sovereignty in Italy. The Constantinopolitan Exarchate of Ravenna was conquered by the Lombards, a.d. 752, which gave the preponderance in Italy to them; and placed the Bishop of Rome very much at their mercy. It was between this date and a.d. 799 that the Two-Horned Beast arose. This interval was the period in which the Bishop of Rome passed from under the sovereignty of the Emperor of the East into an alliance with the New Imperial Dominion of the West, known in history as "the Holy Roman Empire" of Middle Europe. 24. The Ascending of the Beast out of the Earth The originating and establishing, which constitute the ascending, rising, or coming up of a dominion, are a work of power, conflict, conquest, and of time. The commencement of such a work is preceded by what is now commonly styled a situation; or concurrence of circumstances and agents, which, when a certain impetus is imparted to them impels them in a certain course to results, neither contemplated nor capable of being controlled. This obtains in regard to the ascending of the Two-Horned Beast out of the earth. The circumstances of the time, the questions agitated, and the ambitions of the leading spirits of the day, acting and reacting upon one another, was the situation which originated and ultimately developed the dominion symbolized by Daniel and John respectively. The Eighth Century had its Roman Question as well as this so called "Enlightened Nineteenth;" and Italy, then as now, was the arena of superstition, papal intrigue, political ambitions, and war. Part of it, afterwards absurdly termed "St. Peter's Patrimony," was included in the Exarchate of Ravenna, which belonged to the Eastern Roman Dragon of Constantinople, whose emperor Leo Isauricus, was sovereign of Rome, and therefore master of the Bishop of Rome; but by the decree of Phocas, a.d. 607, or 608, the chief of all the bishops, and Head of all the churches of the Apostasy, which was territorially co-extensive with the dominions symbolized by John's Beast of the Earth and Sea. The rest of Italy was occupied by the kingdom of Lombardy, and the rising Republic of Venice. The Bishop of Rome was as little able to protect himself then against these potentates, as he is now against Victor Emmanuel and the Red Republicans; nor was the Emperor of the East able to protect him, if he had been willing, more efficiently than the Austrian of a.d. 1866. He was in a very uncomfortable position, being liable to a change of masters at very short notice; neither of whom were at all congenial to his mind as the Infallible Judge of heretics, and their, to him, perverse abominations. A united Italy, and Rome for its capital, was the cry of the Lombards, or Langebards, (Long Beards) and their warlike kings. These Bearded Revolutionists wanted Rome, but the Eastern emperors did not want to part with it. It was a city of the Dragon dominion, and they intended to keep it; and to preserve it, or rather deliver it from idolatry and the worship of demonials -- ta daimonia kai eidola (ch. 9:20) if they could. They had recovered possession of it when they conquered the Seventh Head therein enthroned; and they had no idea of allowing an Eighth Head to establish itself upon the Seven Hills; much less would they consent, that the Lombard Horn should make it the capital of its dominion. The Bishop of Rome also was opposed to the Long Beards (and he has never liked to see Long Beards about him since, remembering the trouble they gave him in the eighth century; hence, at this day he forbids "his children" to wear beards, inasmuch also as it is the symbol of revolution, and a desire for the possession of Rome to the prejudice of his interests,) as he preferred subjection to a master afar off in Constantinople, than to a prying and troublesome supervisor at hand. He had been in this case under the Gothic kings, when they ruled as the Seventh Head in Rome. But it was by no means to his liking. He would prefer independence of all governments; but as the time had not quite come for that, he would rather be subject to Constantinople, than to the Lombards at the door. Thus far in this exposition we have seen that Italy, the Heaven of the gods of the Roman system, experienced a variety of fortunes after it lost its ancient masters, and before it fell, as we shall see, into the hands of the founder of the Two-Horned Episcopal dominion. In the sounding of the fourth wind-trumpet it was entirely subdued by the Herulian Goths, who came from the extremity of the Black Sea. They held it for a short time, and were succeeded by the Ostrogoths, or Seventh Head. These acknowledged the Wounded Imperial Head, restricted to the Eastern and Illyrian Thirds, and still reigning in Constantinople, as their superior in rank, but not in jurisdiction. The Seventh Head was at last subdued by Belisarius and Narses, the generals of Justinian, the reigning emperor of the Wounded Sixth Head, who having "plucked up by the roots" the Vandal Horn of the Sea Monster, had the pleasure of uniting Italy and Africa once more to the Eastern Roman, or Greek empire; but not of so healing the Gothic sword-wound as to restore the city Rome to its former imperial rank among the cities of the empire. This pleasure was reserved, as we shall see, for a great conqueror, the influence of whose victories is felt in the constitution of Europe to this day. The Western Empire, which took its rise as a separate State on the death of Theodosius, a.d. 395, was wholly subverted by Odoacer, the king of the Heruli; and Rome, its capital, was now in the middle of the eighth century, a second-rate city, the residence of a mere duke, and an ambitious and turbulent prelate, called the Universal Bishop, and subject to the authority of the Eastern emperor's viceroy, styled the Exarch, whose seat of government was in Ravenna, near the Adriatic, and 117 miles distant from Rome. Soon after the subversion of the Seventh Osttogothic Head, a great part of Italy was seized by Alboin, king of the Lombards, who made Pavia the seat of government. Autharis, a successor, embraced the catholic superstition about a.d. 586, in its Arian form, which was highly offensive to the Universal Bishop; who could have no more fellowship with him, than Pius IX. with Victor Emmanuel, the modern king of Lombardy, who lies under the Papal ban of excommunication for coveting his neighbor's goods. Liberty of conscience, so odious to the papal mind, was allowed under all the Lombard kings; and Rotharis was so moderate and indulgent, that during his reign, most cities of Italy had two bishops, one Trinitarian, and the other Arian. But king Grimoald, about a.d. 668, influenced by the bishop of Bergamo, renounced the tenets of Arius. His successors followed his example; so that Arianism was in a short time forsaken by the Lombard nation. Grimoald was succeeded by Luitprand, whose great qualities were in some measure obscured by his unbounded ambition. Not satisfied with the extensive dominions left him by his predecessors, like Victor Emmanuel, he formed the design of making himself sole master of Italy, which, of course, necessitated the conquest of the Exarchate, and the expulsion of the imperial authority from the country. This project was favored a.d. 726, by the edict of Leo. Isauricus, then emperor of Constantinople, where theological disputes had long mingled, with affairs of State. He zealously prohibited the worship of images; ordering all the statues to be broken in pieces, and the paintings in the Trinitarian Bazaars of Guardian Saints, whose worship also was forbidden, to be pulled down and burnt. The populace, whose devotion extended no further than such objects, and the monks and secular priests interested in supporting the mummery, were so highly provoked at this innovation, that they publicly revolted in many places; and in Italy swore to live and die in defence of their idols. In these times of extreme ignorance and barbarism the dispute about image and picture worship was a very grave and vital question with both Trinitarians and Arians; the solution of which led to very important and mighty results. In view of these, I have thought it would be in place to present the reader, in a condensed form and as a distinct section, what history supplies upon this subject. 25. The Image-Worship Question Nothing, perhaps, can more strikingly illustrate the difference between the Christians we read of in the New Testament, and those who professed to be "orthodox christians" of the flock of the one Shepherd, styled the Universal Bishop, than the fierce disputes of the eighth and ninth centuries, concerning the worship of images. For these symbols of dead men and women, whose factitious immortalities are supposed to be in a heaven "beyond the realms of time and space," Apostolic Christians had no respect. They had renounced image-worship when they became Christians; and, as his little children, were earnestly exhorted by the disciple beloved of Jesus, among the last words he addressed to them, to "keep themselves from idols" (1 John 5:21). The use of pictures in churches preceded that of images, the first notice of which is in the censure of the council of Illiberis, three hundred years after the birth of Jesus. The first introduction of a worship of stocks and bones was in the veneration of the cross, and of relics. The "immortal souls" of saints and martyrs, whose intercession was implored, were supposed to be seated at the right hand of God; and their worshippers imagined that they showered gracious, and often supernatural favors around their tombs, whose disgusting contents they touched and kissed as memorials of their merits and sufferings. From such memorials the transition was easy to delineations of the deceased by painting or sculpture. At first, the experiment of paying them religious honors was made with caution and scruple. Gradually, however, the honors of the original were transferred to the copy; and he who began by worshipping three gods devoutly prayed before the image of a dead person; and the pagan rites of genuflexion, luminaries and incense, became hart of the ritual of the Greek and Roman superstition in which was firmly established the use and worship of images before the end of the sixth century. The style and sentiments of a Byzantine hymn will show the gross idolatry of this worship. "How can we with mortal eyes contemplate this image, whose celestial splendor the host of the heaven presumes not to behold? He who dwells in heaven condescends this day to visit us by his venerable image: He who is seated on the cherubim, visits us this day by a picture which the Father has delineated with his immaculate hand, which he has formed in an ineffable manner, and which we sanctify by adoring it with fear and love." These images of Christ were styled acheiropoietoi, made without hand; and were circulated in the camps and cities of the eastern empire, as objects of worship, and instruments of miracles. But, in the beginning of the eighth century, in the full magnitude of the abuse, an apprehension was awakened among the Greeks, that the incessant charge of the Jews and Mohammedans that they were idolaters, might possibly be true. The murmurs of many simple and rational people arose against the superstition. They appealed to the evidence of texts, of facts, and of the primitive times, and secretly desired the reformation of the church. Of this party was Leo the Third, who, from the mountains of Isauria, ascended the throne of the East. He is styled the Iconoclast, or Image-breaker. Though inspired with hatred of images, in the outset of an unsettled reign, during ten years of toil and danger, he submitted to the meanness of hypocrisy, bowed before the idols he despised, and satisfied the Universal Bishop, the special patron of the idols, with the annual profession of his orthodoxy and zeal. In the reformation he attempted, his first steps were moderate and cautious; but resistance and invective, and the urgency of his friends, provoked him to more active measures. The existence and use of religious pictures were proscribed; the churches of Constantinople and the provinces were cleansed from idolatry; the images of Christ, the Virgin, and the saints were demolished; the sect of the Iconoclasts was supported by the zeal and despotism of six emperors; and the East and West were involved in a noisy conflict of one hundred and twenty years. It was, however, with reluctance that the patient east was brought to abjure its sacred images; they were fondly cherished, and vigorously defended by the more violent zeal of the Italians, stimulated to sanguinary resistance by the pretended Vicar of Christ. "It is agreed," says Gibbon, "that in the eighth century, the dominion of the popes was founded on rebellion, and that the rebellion was produced and justified by the heresy of the Iconoclasts." This is equivalent to saying, that the dominion of the popes and their clergy was founded on idolatry and their zeal for its support. This is true, and upon this basis the pope stands before the world as the "Pontifex Maximus" of Roman Idolatry, in which character he is the striking counterpart or "Image" of the pagan imperial pontiffs of the Sixth Head of the Beast. Two original epistles from Gregory II., founder of the papal monarchy, to the emperor Leo Isauricus are still extant. "During ten pure and fortunate years," says he, "we have tasted the annual comfort of your royal letters, subscribed in purple ink with your own hand, the sacred pledges of your attachment to the orthodox creed of our fathers. How deplorable the change! How tremendous the scandal! You now accuse the catholics of idolatry; and by the accusation you betray your own impiety and ignorance. To this ignorance we are compelled to adapt the grossness of our style and arguments; the first elements of holy letters are sufficient for your confusion; and were you to enter a grammar school, and avow yourself the enemy of our worship, the simple and pious children would be provoked to cast their horn-books at your head." After this not very complimentary salutation, the episcopal apologist of Catholic idolatry attempts the usual distinction between the idols of the pagans and the idols of the Catholics. The former, he affirms, were the fanciful representations of phantoms or demons, at the time when the true God had not manifested his person in any visible likeness. The latter, he says, are the genuine forms of Christ, his mother, and his saints, who had approved, by a crowd of miracles, (styled by Paul "all power, and signs, and lying wonders") the innocence and merit of this relative worship, which he lyingly asserted had been in perpetual use from the Apostolic age. To the impudent and humane Leo, more guilty than a heretic, he recommends peace, silence, and implicit obedience to his spiritual guides of Constantinople and Rome. He defines the limits of civil and ecclesiastical powers. To the civil he appropriates the body; to the ecclesiastical, the "immortal soul;" the sword of justice is in the hands of the magistrate: the more formidable weapon of excommunication is entrusted to the clergy; and in the exercise of their Divine commission, a zealous son will not spare his offending father: the Successor of St. Peter may lawfully chastise the kings of the earth! "You assault us, O Tyrant," he continues, "with a carnal and military hand: unarmed and naked, we can only implore the Christ, the prince of the heavenly host, that he will send unto you a devil, for the destruction of your body and the salvation of your soul. You declare, with foolish arrogance, I will despatch my orders to Rome; I will break in pieces the image of St. Peter; and Gregory, like his predecessor, Martin, shall be transported in chains, and in exile, to the foot of the imperial throne. Would to God that I might be permitted to tread in the footsteps of the holy Martin; but may the fate of Constans serve as a warning to the persecutors of the church. After his just condemnation by the bishops of Sicily, the tyrant was cut off in the fulness of his sins by a domestic servant: the saint is still adored by the nations of Scythia, among whom he ended his banishment and his life. But it is our duty to live for the edification and support of the faithful people; nor are we reduced to risk our safety on the event of a combat. Incapable as you are of defending your Roman subjects, the maritime situation of the city may perhaps expose it to your depredation; but we can remove to the distance of four and twenty stadia, to the first fortress of the Lombards, and then -- you may pursue the winds. Are you ignorant that the popes are the bond of union, the mediators of peace, between the East and the West? The eyes of the nations are fixed on our humility, whom all the kingdoms of the west hold as a God upon earth, whose image, St. Peter, you threaten to destroy. The remote and interior kingdoms of the west present their homage to Christ and His Vicegerent; and we now prepare to visit one of their most powerful monarchs, who desires to receive from our hands the sacrament of baptism. The Barbarians (the Ten Horns) have submitted to the yoke of the gospel, while you alone are deaf to the voice of the shepherd. The pious barbarians are kindled into rage; they thirst to avenge the persecution of the East. Abandon your rash and fatal enterprize; reflect, tremble, and repent. If you persist we are innocent of the blood that will be spent in the contest: may it fall on your own head." The character of Leo, says an ecclesiastical writer, has been so blackened by catholic partizans, that it is difficult to form a just estimate of it; but when we consider that he not only condemned the worshipping of images, but also rejected relics, and protested against the intercession of saints, we cannot doubt of his possessing considerable strength of mind, while it may help us to account for much of the obloquy that was cast upon him. The first assault of Leo against the idols of Constantinople had been witnessed by a crowd of strangers from Italy and the West, who related with grief and indignation the iconoclasm of the emperor. But on the reception of his proscriptive edict, they trembled for their domestic deities -- "the demonials and idols of gold, silver, brass, stone, and wood" (Apoc. 9:20). The edict abolished the images of Christ and the virgin, of the angels, martyrs, and saints, from all the churches of Italy; and a strong alternative was presented to the Roman High Priest of the New Idolatry, namely, the imperial favor as the price of his compliance, or degradation and exile, as the penalty of his disobedience. Gregory did not hesitate which to accept. Without depending on prayers or miracles, he boldly armed against his imperial master, and by pastoral letters, excited the Italians to resistance. At the signal given, Ravenna, Venice, and the cities of the exarchate and Pentapolis, which adhered to the cause of idol-worship, unfurled the banner of rebellion. They swore, as fools only would swear, to live and die in defense of the Bishop of Rome and the demonials; and even the Lombards were ambitious to share in the war, not so much in the interest of the pope and his idols, as for the sake of expelling the Dragon Power from Italy, that the entire country might be theirs. The statues of Leo were destroyed, and the tributes of Italy withheld; magistrates and governors were elected, and the creation of an orthodox emperor was proposed. Gregory II. and his successor of the same name, were condemned at Constantinople as the authors of the revolt, and every attempt was made, either by fraud or force, to seize their persons and assassinate them. But these attempts did not succeed. The Greeks were thwarted and massacred; and at Ravenna, the Exarch himself was slain. To punish this flagitious treason, and to restore his dominion in Italy, the Dragon cast out of his mouth water as a flood; in other words, the imperial government of Constantinople sent a fleet and army into the Adriatic to depopulate and lay waste the country. But the earth opened her mouth and swallowed up the flood. In a hard-fought day the idolators prevailed. The imperialists retreated to their galleys, but the populous sea coast poured forth a multitude of boats; and the slaughter is said to have been so great that the waters of the Po were deeply infected, so that during six years the people abstained from eating the fish of that river. But, in the midst of these broils, while defending idolatry and promoting the rebellion with all his influence, Gregory II. was stopped short in his roaring blasphemies. "He was extremely insolent," says an impartial writer, "though he died with the character of a saint." He was succeeded in the Roman Bishoprick, a.d. 731, by Gregory III., who entered with great spirit and energy into the measures of his predecessors. The following epistle addressed by him to the emperor, on his elevation, is an amusing illustration of his arrogance and blasphemy. "Because you are unlearned and ignorant," says he, "we are obliged to write to you rude discourses, but full of sense and the word of God. We conjure you to quit your pride, and hear us with humility. You say that we adore stones, and walls, and boards. It is not so, my Lord; but these symbols make us recollect the persons whose names they bear, and exalt our grovelling minds. We do not look upon them as gods; but if it be the things of Jesus, we say, 'Lord help us.' If it be the image of his mother, we say, 'Pray to your Son to save us.' If it be of a martyr, we say, 'St. Stephen, pray for us.' We might, as having the power of St. Peter, pronounce punishment against you; but, as you have pronounced the curse upon yourself, let it stick to you. You write to us to assemble a general council, of which there is no need. Do you cease to persecute images, and all will be quiet; we fear not your threats." "No sooner," says Gibbon, "had they confirmed their own safety, the worship of images, and the freedom of Rome and Italy, than the popes appear to have relaxed in their severity, and to have spared the relics of the Byzantine dominion. Their moderate counsels delayed and prevented the election of a new emperor, and they exhorted the Italians not to separate from the body of the Roman Monarchy. The Exarch was permitted to reside within the walls of Ravenna, a captive rather than a master; and till the imperial coronation of Charlemagne, the government of Rome and Italy was exercised in the name of the successors of Constantine." Rome and her territory were now reduced to narrow limits, extending from Viterbo to Terracina, and from Narni to the mouth of the Tyber. Nominally subject to Constantinople, still they were really without any other protection than they who were slaves by habit could create for themselves. They had become free by an accident, the effect of the grossest superstition; so that when the excitement was allayed, their liberty was the object of their amazement and terror; and they were devoid of knowledge, or virtue, to build the fabric of a commonwealth. Their scanty remnant, as at this day, the offspring of slaves and strangers, was despicable in the eyes of the victorious barbarians; who, as often as they expressed their most bitter contempt of a foe, called him a Roman; "and in this name," says the bishop Luitprand, "we include whatever is base, whatever is cowardly, whatever is perfidious, the extremes of avarice and luxury, and every vice that can prostitute the dignity of human nature." It must be remembered that the popes were the Eyes and Mouth of this Name -- the unicum nomen in mundo; so that Luitprand's definition of it is true of that Name of Blasphemy on the Seven Hills; by whose authority in their now transition state from the dominion of the Little Horn of the East, to that of the Little Horn of the West, their foreign and domestic counsels were moderated. His alms, his preachings, his correspondence with the kings and bishops of the west his recent services in the interest of idolatry, and so forth, accustomed the idol worshippers of Rome to consider him as the first magistrate or Prince of the city. The pretended humility of the popes was not offended by the title of Lord; and coins of the date a.d. 772 are extant bearing the face and inscription of the popes, who now commenced a career of temporal ambition which was insatiable; and demanded exaltation "above every thing called god, or is worshipped." Having thus by rebellion freed themselves from all but a nominal subjection to the Constantinopolitan Dragon, the great object of these ambitious blasphemers was now to preserve themselves in their feebleness from falling a prey to the Lombards, who longed for a united Italy with Rome for their capital. The love of arms and rapine was congenial to them; and they were irresistibly tempted by the disorders of Italy, the nakedness of Rome, and the unwarlike profession of her new chief, to embrace the present opportunity of effecting what would have been, if successful, the healing of the Seventh Head of the Beast. This, however, was not the Providential indication to be fulfilled. It was the Imperial Head, not the Regal, that was to be healed, or re-established as an Eighth head upon the Seven Hills. But the Lombards did not know this; and in the confident hope of success, marched to the conquest of Spoleto and Rome. The storm, however, evaporated without effect; but alarmed the country with a vexatious alternative of hostility and truce, which caused a feeling of insecurity for life and property on every side. Hence, a Protector of the Roman People against the Lombards was the great desideratum of the time. The Lombards were now masters of the Exarchate, and as ambition is only increased by accession of dominion, they began to lay claim to the Roman Dukedom, and to Rome itself. In order to enforce his demand, Astolphus marched an army towards the city, reducing many places in its vicinity, and threatening to put the inhabitants to the sword, if they refused to acknowledge him as their sovereign. The Romans hesitated, complained, used prayers and entreaties, and offered presents, but all in vain. Stephen III., then pope, alarmed at the severity of his message, sought to appease him by a solemn embassy; but all was useless, for the one desire of Astolphus was to govern Rome. Time, however, was gained by negotiations, till the friendship of an ally and avenger beyond the Alps was secured. This ally appeared on the arena in the person of Pepin, son of Charles Martel, who governed the French monarchy with the humble title of Mayor or Duke; but who by his signal victory over the Saracens, had saved his country, and perhaps Europe, from the Mohammedan yoke. Zachary, predecessor of Stephen, and successor to Gregory III., an aspiring and crafty politician, had attached Pepin to his interests by resolving a case of conscience in his favor. He desired to know whether a prince incapable of governing, or a minister invested with royal authority, and who supported it with dignity, ought to have the title of king? Zachary decided in favor of minister Pepin; and the French clergy supported his pretensions, because he had restored to them the lands of which his father had robbed them. The pope's decision silenced all scruples. Pepin threw his master, Childeric III., into a monastery; and caused himself to be crowned king with all orthodox solemnity at Soissons by Boniface the bishop of Mentz, the famous apostle of Rome's idolatry to the Germans. Stephen, made sensible that nothing but force could avail against Astolphus, resolved to crave the protection of Pepin; who, mindful of his obligations to Zachary, readily promised him assistance. A treaty was concluded between them at the expense of the Constantinopolitan Dragon, and the Lombard Horn of the Beast. On his visit to Paris, Stephen reanointed Pepin with the unction of papal holiness, declaring him and his son Charles, known afterwards as Charlemagne, Protector of the Romans; in return for which honors, Pepin promised to make a donation of the Exarchate and Pentapolis to the Romish Church. Pepin's presence in Italy, at the head of a French army, caused Astolphus to sue for peace, and he obtained it, on condition that he should deliver up to the pope, not to the emperor, all the places he had taken. He consented; but when Pepin had returned, he resumed his former position, and laid siege to Rome. In this extremity, Stephen again had recourse to his protector the king of France; but apprehensive of fatiguing the zeal of his transalpine allies, enforced his complaint and request by an eloquent letter in the name and person of St. Peter himself. This blasphemous forgery is too remarkable to be here omitted. It runs thus: "Peter, called an apostle by Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, etc. As through me the whole catholic, apostolic, and Roman church, the Mother of all other churches, is founded on a rock: and to the end that Stephen, Bishop of the beloved church of Rome, and that virtue and power may be granted by our Lord to rescue the church of God out of the hands of its persecutors: To you most excellent princes, Pepin, Charles, and Carloman, and to all the holy bishops and abbots, priests and monks, as also to dukes, counts, and people, I, Peter the apostle, conjure you, and the Virgin Mary, who will be obliged to you, gives you notice and commands you, as do all the thrones, dominations, etc. If you will not fight for me, I declare you by the Holy Trinity, and by my apostleship, that you shall have no share in heaven." Whether Pepin believed this forgery or not, he obeyed the summons, and delivered Rome from its peril a second time. An early coin of Pepin, father of Charlemagne, who laid the foundation of the Carlingian dynasty of the Franks. The penny has no more than the king's name Pipi(nus) and an RP representing rex Pipinus, or King Pepin -- Publishers. Meanwhile, Constantine Copronymus, who had succeeded Leo Isauricus, informed of the treaty between the king of France and the Pope, by which the latter was to be put into the possession of the Exarchate and Pentapolis, remonstrated by his ambassadors against that agreement, offering to pay the expenses of the war. But Pepin replied, that the Exarchate belonged to the Lombards, who had acquired it from the East by arms, as the Romans had originally done; that the right of the Lombards was now in him, so that he could dispose of that territory as he thought proper. He had bestowed it, he said, on St. Peter, that the Catholic faith might be preserved in its purity, free from the damnable heresies of the image-breaking Greeks; and all the money in the world, he added, should never make him revoke that gift, which he was determined to maintain to the church with the last drop of his blood. Before Pepin returned to France he renewed his donation to what he called St. Peter, yielding to the Catholic church represented by the Popes the Exarchate -- Romagna and Marca d'Ancona, with twenty-one cities therein, to be held by them for ever; the kings of France retaining the superiority as Protectors of the Romans. Thus was the sceptre of temporal dominion added to the keys, the sovereignty to the priesthood, which was enriched by the spoils of the Lombard kings and the Roman emperors. It was a novelty among the Horns, and the beginning of the Two-Horned Beast of the Earth, and the Image of the wounded head, or of the Imperial Sixth. After this double chastisement, the Lombards languished about twenty years in languor and decay. "On either side," says Gibbon, "their expiring monarchy was pressed by the zeal and prudence of Pope Adrian I., the genius, the fortune, and greatness of Charlemagne the son of Pepin; these heroes of the church and state were united in public and domestic friendship, and while they trampled on the prostrate, they varnished their proceedings with the fairest colors of equity and moderation." A quarrel between Adrian and Desiderius, the last of the Lombard kings, caused the latter to ravage the Patrimony of St. Peter, and to threaten Rome itself. In order to avert the pressing danger, Adrian sent privately to Charlemagne, not only imploring his aid, but inviting him to the conquest of Italy. Having a pique of his own to avenge, he accepted the invitation with great satisfaction. Being determined to pluck up the Lombard kingdom by the roots, he passed the Alps by an unexpected route, with an overwhelming force, and falling suddenly upon the enemy, struck them with such terror that they fled in the utmost confusion. He besieged Desiderius in his capital with great vigor. While the siege was progressing under the conduct of his uncle, he visited Rome for the celebration of Easter. The pope received his deliverer in the most pompous manner, the magistrates and judges walking before him with their banners, and the clergy, always ready to flatter and fawn upon the world's heroes, and to blaspheme those who dwell in the heaven, repeating, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord!" After Charlemagne had gratified his curiosity, and confirmed his father's donation to St. Peter, he returned to the camp before Pavia, which, after a blockade of two years, was surrendered by Desiderius with the sceptre of the kingdom. Thus ended the power of the Lombards a.d. 774, after it had continued two hundred and six years. The Vandalic Horn had been annexed to Italy by Belisarius, and Italy now became the property of Charlemagne; so that the Horn of the Vandals, and the Horn of the Lombards, both included in Italy, were two of the three horns Daniel predicted would fall before the Little Horn, with Eyes and Mouth, and be "plucked up by the roots." The third will appear in the sequel. The question, however, concerning images, was still far from settlement, either at Rome or Constantinople, but continued to agitate the Laodicean Apostasy for many years. During the reign of Constantine Copronymus, a synod was held at Constantinople to determine the controversy. It decreed, that "every image of whatsoever materials made and formed by the artist, should be cast out of the christian churches (as they styled their temples) as a strange and abominable thing," adding an "anathema upon all who should make images or pictures, or representations of God, or of Christ, or of the Virgin Mary, or of any of the saints," condemning it as "a vain and diabolical invention" -- deposing all bishops, and subjecting the monks and laity who should set up any of them, in public or private, to all the penalties of the imperial constitution. Paul I., then Roman Pontiff, sent his legate to Constantinople, to admonish the emperor to restore his beloved idols to their temples; threatening him with excommunication in case of refusal. But the Dragon chief treated his message with the contempt it richly deserved. On Paul's decease, a.d. 768, the Lion-Mouth of the Beast was represented for one year by a bishop named Constantine, who condemned the worship of idols, for which he was tumultuously deposed, and Stephen IV., a furious defender of them, substituted in his place. He forthwith assembled a council in the Lateran, where they abrogated all Constantine's decrees, deposed all the bishops he had ordained, annulled all his baptisms and chrisms, and as some historians relate, after having beat him and used him with great indignity, made a fire in the church and burned him to death. After this cruel disposition of this papal specimen of "holiness" and "infallibility," they annulled all the decrees of the Dragon's council, ordered the restoration of the idols, and cursed that execrable and pernicious synod, giving the absurd and blasphemous reason for the use of images -- "that if it was lawful for emperors, and those who had deserved well of their country, to have their images erected, but not lawful to set up those of God, the condition of the immortal God would be worse than that of man." The fortunes of the demonials and idols were at length revived in the East. As soon as Irene reigned in her own name and that of her son Constantine Porphyrogenetus, she undertook the ruin of the Iconoclasts. The first step of her future persecution was a general edict for liberty of conscience; after which she convened a general council at Nice, a.d. 787, at which the legates of the Roman Pontiff Adrian, attended, and her domestic slave the Patriarch of Constantinople, who presided. This counsel of three hundred and fifty bishops unanimously pronounced, that the worship of images is agreeable to Scripture and reason, to the fathers and councils of the church. The acts of this council are still extant; "a curious monument," says Gibbon, of "superstition and ignorance, of falsehood and folly." An illustration of the judgment of these bishops on the comparative merit of image-worship and morality, may be found in the reply of one to a certain monk, that "rather than abstain from adoring Christ and his mother in their holy images, it would be better to enter every brothel, and visit every prostitute, in the city." During the five succeeding reigns the contest was maintained with unabated rage and various success between the idolators and the breakers of idols. At length the enthusiasm of the times ran strongly against the Iconoclasts; and the emperors who stemmed the torrent were exasperated and punished by the public hatred. The final victory of the idols was achieved by Theodora, a.d. 842. Her measures were bold and decisive. She ordered her Iconoclast Patriarch a whipping of two hundred lashes in commutation of the loss of his eyes; the bishops trembled, the monks shouted, and the demonials and idols of all metals and woods were triumphant. Rome and Italy were jubilant; while the Latins of Germany, France, England and Spain, lagged behind in the race of superstition. They admitted the idols into their spiritual bazaars, not as objects of worship, but as memorials of faith and history. Nevertheless, idolatry advanced with silent and insensible progress; but, as Gibbon remarks, "a large atonement is made for their hesitation and delay, by the gross idolatry of the ages which precede the reformation, and of the countries both of Europe and America, which are still immersed in the gloom of superstition." 26. The Further Development of the Beast of the Earth "In the twenty-six years," says Gibbon, "that elapsed between the conquest of Lombardy and his imperial coronation, Rome, which had been delivered by the sword, was subject, as his own, to the sceptre of Charlemagne. The people swore allegiance to his person and family; in his name money was coined, and justice was administered; and the election of the popes was examined and confirmed by his authority. Except an original and self-inherent claim of sovereignty, there was not any prerogative remaining which the title of emperor could add to the Patrician of Rome." By the gift conferred upon the pretended Vicar of Christ by Pepin for the remission of his sins and the salvation of his soul, the world beheld for the first time a bishop invested with the prerogatives of a temporal prince: with the choice of magistrates, the exercise of justice, the imposition of taxes, and the wealth of the palace of Ravenna. In the plucking up the Lombard Horn by the roots, the inhabitants of the duchy of Spoleto sought a refuge from the Storm, shaved their heads after the Roman fashion, declared themselves the servants and subjects of St. Peter, and completed by this voluntary surrender, the circle of the Ecclesiastical State, or Patrimony of Saint Peter, as it existed previous to the first French Revolution. "That mysterious circle," says Gibbon, "was enlarged to an infinite extent by the verbal or written donation of Charlemagne, who, in the first transports of his victory, despoiled himself and the Greek emperor of the cities and islands which had formerly been annexed to the Exarchate. But in the cooler moments of absence and reflection, he viewed, with an eye of jealousy and envy, the recent greatness of his ecclesiastical ally. The execution of his own and his father's promises was respectfully eluded: the king of the Franks and the Lombards asserted the inalienable rights of the empire; and in his life and death, Ravenna, as well as Rome, was numbered in the list of his metropolitan cities. The sovereignty of the Exarchate melted away in the hands of the popes: they found in the Archbishops of Ravenna a dangerous and domestic rival: the nobles and people disdained the yoke of a priest: and in the disorders of the times, they could only retain the memory of an ancient claim, which, in a more prosperous age, they have revived and realized." It was realized when "the Image of the Beast" was created by the Beast of the Earth in after ages. Charlemagne (742-814)was King of the Franks (French) (768-814), and Holy Roman Emperor (800-814). The eldest son of Pepin, he inherited Neustria, the NW half of the Frankish kingdom in 768 and annexed the remainder on his brother Carloman's death in 771. Responding to Lombard threats against the papacy, he led two armies into Italy and took the Lombard throne in 773. He undertook a long (772-804) and brutal conquest of Saxony, which he forcibly converted to Christianity. In 788 he annexed Bavaria, and defeated the Avars of the middle Danube (791-96, 804). He was crowned Emperor of the West by Pope Leo III in 800, thus reviving the concept of the Roman Empire, and completing the West's split with the Byzantine Empire. A large, physically impressive man, he was the most powerful ruler in early medieval Europe. He was politically ambitious and able, and recognising the importance of education, sponsored schools throughout his realm. However, he regarded his lands as private property and willed them to his sons. Therefore, after his death, his Empire fragmented. France became separated from Central Europe, and the Holy Roman Empire was centred in Germany -- Publishers. It was after the Nicene synod, and under the reign of Irene, that the Roman Pontiffs of the Latin Idolatry consummated the separation of Rome and Italy from the Dragon of the East, by the translation of the empire to the less orthodox Charlemagne. The popes were compelled to choose between the rival nations, which had been alienated from each other by the question concerning the demonials and idols for so many years. In that schism of the Apostasy the Romans had tasted of freedom, and the popes of sovereignty. The Greek Dragon had restored the idols, but he had not restored the Calabrian estates and the Illyrian diocese, which the Iconoclasts had torn away from the so-called successors of St. Peter. This embezzlement of Peter's goods, pope Adrian regarded as practical heresy to be punished with excommunication unless speedily repented of. The Greek emperors took a different view of the subject, and were more disposed to demand the restoration of the Exarchate, and the return of the pope from treason and rebellion to the allegiance of his rightful sovereign. But the popes had gone too far to recede; and besides Charlemagne was now the real owner of the Exarchate of Rome, and his right and power the pope was unable to alienate or abolish. Charlemagne was the Patrician of Rome, and Protector of the Romans, and consequently the Master and Protector of the pope who was too feeble to circumvent his policy had he been so disposed. His interests, therefore, attached him to Charlemagne: and it was only by reviving the western empire that they could pay their obligations to him, or secure their establishment. "By this decisive measure," says Gibbon, "they would finally eradicate the claims of the Greeks; from the debasement of a provincial town the majesty of Rome would be restored: the Latin christians would be united under a supreme head in their ancient metropolis; and the conquerors of the west would receive their crown from the successors of St. Peter. The Roman church would acquire a zealous and respectable advocate; and under the shadow of the Carlovingian power, the Bishop might exercise with honor and safety, the government of the city." But Adrian did not live to witness the execution of the projects he had formed for the exaltation of the Roman church and the French monarchy. This rising up of a grand dominion was to be consummated by his successor, Leo III., who immediately sent to Charlemagne the standard of Rome, begging him to send some person to receive the oath of fidelity from the Romans; a most flattering instance of submission, as well as a proof that the sovereignty of Rome at that time belonged to the kings of France. Three years after, two nephews of the late pope attacked him in the street, dispersed the unarmed multitude, wounded him in several places, and dragged him half dead into the church of St. Mark. He made his escape by the assistance of friends, who sent him under an escort to Charlemagne. He received him with all possible marks of respect, sent him back with a numerous retinue of guards and attendants, and went soon after to Italy in person to do him justice. On the arrival of the French monarch at Rome, he spent six days in private conference with the Pope; after which he convoked the bishops and nobles, to examine the accusation brought against the pontiff. "The apostolic see," exclaimed the bishops, "cannot be judged by man." Leo, however, spoke to the accusation: he said the king came to know the cause, and no proof appearing against him, he purged himself by oath. A more extraordinary scene soon followed this trial of the pope. On the festival of Christmas, a.d. 799, as the king assisted at mass in St. Peter's temple, in the midst of the ecclesiastical ceremonies, and while he was on his knees before the altar, the Roman Pontiff advanced and put an imperial crown upon his head. As soon as the people perceived it, they cried, "Long life and victory to Charles the most pious Augustus, crowned by the hand of God! Long life to the great and pacific Emperor of the Romans!" The head and body of Charlemagne were consecrated by the royal unction. During the acclamations, Leo conducted him to a magnificient throne, prepared for the purpose, and as soon as he was seated, after the example of the Caesars, he was saluted or adored by the pontiff, declaring that, instead of the title of Patrician, he should henceforth style him Emperor and Augustus. Leo then presented him with the imperial mantle, with which being invested, Charles returned amid the acclamations of the populace to his palace. The pope had unquestionably no right to proclaim an emperor, but Charles the Great was worthy of the imperial ensigns; and though in a certain sense a successor to Augustus, he is justly considered as the founder of the New Empire of the West, from the establishment of which Europe dates a new era. That dominion was not unworthy of its title; for its founder reigned at the same time in France, Spain, Italy, Germany and Hungary -- the last of the three horns plucked up by the roots before him; the Horns of the Vandals, the Lombards, and the Huns. After a bloody conflict of eight years the relics of the nation submitted, and the rapine of the Huns, for two hundred and fifty years, enriched the victors or decorated the temples of France and Italy. After the plucking up of the Hungarian Horn, the New Dominion was bounded by the conflux of the Danube with the Teyss and the Save, with the unprofitable provinces of Istria, Liburnia and Dalmatia. The rest of the Ten Horns, which had degenerated into petty sovereignties, revered the power of Charlemagne, implored the honor and support of his alliance, and styled him their common parent, the sole and supreme emperor peror of the West. Two-thirds of the western empire of Rome were subject to him; while the other third was still possessed by the Dragon of Constantinople, in conflict with the Saracens, whose mission was to torment, but not to kill, the body politic of the east, during two periods of five months of years each (Apoc. 9:5, 10). It is worthy of note here, that in treating of the enemies with which Charlemagne had to contend, the historian expresses his surprise that he should prefer attacking the poverty of the North to the riches of the South. "It was an effect of his moderation," says Gibbon, "that he left the maritime cities under the real or nominal sovereignty of the Greeks -- The three and thirty campaigns laboriously consumed in the woods and morasses of Germany, would have sufficed to assert the amplitude of his title by the expulsion of the Greeks from Italy and the Saracens from Spain. The weakness of the Greeks would have ensured an easy victory, and the holy crusade against the Saracens would have been prompted by glory and revenge, and loudly justified by religion and policy." But the historian did not know, or at least recognize the truth, that Charlemagne and the Saracens were the sword of Yahweh appointed to work out His purpose, which He had revealed to his servants through the apostle John. He did not intend Charlemagne and the Saracens to destroy one another. He gave the Saracens a mission against the demonial anti idol worshippers of the East and South, and when they exceeded it, he caused the grandfather of Charlemagne, named Charles Martel, to give them a signal overthrow at Chalons, a.d. 732. He treated the first Napoleon in the same way at Moscow. Charlemagne's mission was precisely that which excited Gibbon's surprise. He was not employed by the Eternal Spirit against the maritime dominions. Hence, what Gibbon styles "his moderation." The Providential work before him was an operation in which the Romans with all their skill and power could hayer succeed. His work was the subjugation of Germany. This is why he laboriously consumed thirty-three campaigns in the woods and morasses of Germany. These constituted "the Earth" out of which the Two-Horned Dominion was to ascend -- the Middle Europe of our time. This was to be the arena of the Little Horn among the Ten. Besides founding a dominion over the population of these woods and forests, he was to pluck up by the roots three of the Ten Horns. This enlarged his mission to the work of annexing Italy and Hungary to his Mitteleuropische Reich, or Middle European Kingdom, as the Germans style it. By the annexation of Italy, he also annexed the Roman Church with its Universal Bishop; and in so doing he inserted a pair of Eyes and a Mouth into his Horn, of which he regarded himself as the ruling brain. Here, then, was an imperial ecclesiastical dominion, consisting of the episcopal orders and lay nobility under a secular chief, as the ruling power. This imperial constitution of the Beast of the Earth was predicted by John in the words, elalei hos drakon, he spake as being a Dragon. The reader is well aware that a dragon is the symbol, both in Heraldry and the Apocalypse, of the dominion of an emperor, not of a simple king. This new power was an emperorship among neighboring kingdoms; and the large admixture of the clerical orders with the lay nobles, over whom they preponderated in the administration of state affairs, constituted it an Episcopal Power. Charlemagne seems to have foreseen that the claims of the clergy, though inactive against himself, would be urged in after times, and at length overshadow his throne. He determined, therefore, to assert the independent right of monarchy and conquest. Hence, the year before his death, a.d. 813, he summoned a parliament at Aix-la-Chapelle, where he asked every one present whether they would be pleased that he should give his son Louis, afterwards styled "the Pious," the title of Emperor, and they assenting made him his colleague in the empire. At this coronation he commanded Louis to take the crown from the altar, and with his own hands, without intervention of pope or bishop, to place it on his head, as a gift which he held from his father from God, and from the nation. Charlemagne became king of the Franks in 768 a.d.. He was a skilled warrior, and extended his influence over the neighbouring states. He was appealed to by the Pope to defend Rome from the Lombards. He decisively defeated them, and forced them to submit to his rule. On the eve of the year 800 he was crowned Emperor of what was then termed the Holy Roman Empire. His vast kingdom, with its many provinces, included most of the countries in Europe. Significantly, his eastern borders roughly followed the line taken by the Iron Curtain of today. On the death of Charlemagne, his empire was divided up among his sons, and mutual hostility was manifested by them. This led to the Treaty of Verdun in 843 after which France, Germany and Italy emerged as the most powerful European nations. France remained independent, and the Holy Roman Empire was identitled with Germanic rule -- Publishers. Charles the Great died a.d. 814, aged 72 years, having reigned forty-eight years, and as an emperor fourteen. His sceptre was transmitted from father to son in a lineal descent of four generations, and the ambition of the popes was reduced to the empty honor of crowning and anointing these hereditary princes who were already invested with their power and dominions. 27. Two Horns Like A Lamb's The dominion ascending out of the earth and planted in Middle Europe, had that peculiarity in its constitution that would entitle it to be Apocalyptically and symbolically represented by "two horns like to a lamb." A horn is a dynastic symbol -- a symbol of power. A dominion having two horns is a sovereignty dominated by a plurality of dynastic or ruling orders, which, in their speaking or ruling, "as a dragon," are imperial. But these two imperial dynastic orders are not compared to the horns of an antelope or a buffalo; if to the former, it would have indicated something analagous to swiftness; or to the latter, to endurance and strength; but they are likened to a lamb. Every one knows the characteristics of a lamb -- meek, patient, inoffensive, and unresisting under the knife of the slayer. It is the Apocalyptic symbol of Deity sacrificially manifested in the flesh, through which the lamb-like characteristics were displayed. But it is not in this sense that we find the lamb's horns illustrative of the character of the Beast of the Earth; for the prophecy itself shows that its ruling characteristics are the very reverse of inoffensiveness and meekness; for it causes all who do not obey its mandates to be killed. But a lamb being symbolical of "the Shepherd and Bishop of souls," comes also to represent things ecclesiastical. The true believers, or the saints, are all in the Lamb, because they are "in Christ," and constitute "his body the Ecclesia." They are, in other words, invested or clothed with the lambskin, and the horns of an animal are appendages of its skin. Hence, "horns like a lamb" would fitly symbolize a body ecclesiastical claiming to be Christian; and such a claimant might pass for Christian, if things were not affirmed of it incompatible with the principles of Christ. A truly Christian body would not set up an Image of the wounded sixth head of the beast to be worshipped upon the pain of death. This the Beast of the Earth was to do; and since he arose, has done. We are, therefore, under the necessity of concluding that whatever ecclesiastical domination may be represented by the sheep's clothing, "pallium," or state mantle, it is not a real sheep dominion, but a counterfeit one -- the Dominion of the Romish Dragon in Sheep's clothing. Such was the dominion of which Charlemagne was the founder in the eighth, and beginning of the ninth, centuries. These were the age of the Romish Bishops, as the eleventh and twelfth centuries were of the Popes. The Carlovingians and the Bishops were the Beast of the Earth in its primary phase. The position assumed by Charlemagne was military, civil and ecclesiastical. He was head of the church and head of the state. "The sovereign," says Hallam, "who maintained with the greatest vigor his ecclesiastical supremacy was Charlemagne. Most of the capitularies of his reign relate to the discipline of the church. Some of his regulations are such as men of high-church principles would, even in modern times, deem infringements of spiritual independence." He enacted of his own will that "no legend of doubtful authority should be read in the churches, but only the canonical books, and that no saint should be honored whom the whole church did not acknowledge. These were not passed in a synod of bishops, but enjoined by the sole authority of the emperor, who seems to have arrogated a legislative power over the church which he did not possess in temporal affairs. Many of his other laws relating to the ecclesiastical constitution, are enacted in a general council of the lay nobility as well as of the prelates, and are so blended with those of a secular nature, that the two orders may appear to have equally consented to the whole. But whatever share we may imagine the laity in general to have had in such matters, Charlemagne himself did not consider even theological decisions as beyond his province; and in more than one instance, manifested a determination not to surrender his own judgment, even in questions of that nature, to any ecclesiastical authority. This mosaic now In the Lateran is attributed to Leo III who laid the basis of the Holy Roman Empire or two-horned beast of the earth (Rev. 13:11) when he crowned Charlemagne on December 25,799. It depicts Peter (seated) extending the Ecclesiastical Pontificate authority to Leo (left) and the Political power to Cherlemagne (right) -- Publishers. "This part of Charlemagne's conduct is duly to be taken into the account, before we censure his vast extension of ecclesiastical privileges. Nothing was more remote from his character than the bigotry of those weak princes who have suffered the clergy to reign under their names. He acted upon a systematic plan of government, conceived by his own comprehensive genius, but requiring too continual an application of similar talents for durable execution. It was the error of a superior mind, zealous for religion and learning, to believe that men (the clergy) dedicated to the functions of the one, and possessing what remained of the other, might, through strict rules of discipline, enforced by the constant vigilance of the sovereign, become fit instruments to reform and civilize a barbarous empire. It was the error of a magnanimous spirit to judge too favorably of human nature, and to presume that great trusts would be fulfilled, and great benefits remembered. "It is highly probable, indeed, that an ambitious hierarchy did not endure without reluctance this imperial supremacy of Charlemagne, though it was not expedient for them to resist a prince so formidable, and from whom they had so much to expect. But their dissatisfaction at a scheme of government incompatible with their own objects of perfect independence, produced a violent recoil under Louis the Debonair (Charlemagne's son and successor) who attempted to act the Censor of ecclesiastical abuses with as much earnestness as his father, though with very inferior qualifications for so delicate an undertaking. The bishops (the Romish Wolves in sheep's clothing) accordingly, were among the chief instigators of those numerous revolts of his children which harrassed this emperor. They set upon one occasion, the first example of a usurpation which was to become very dangerous to society, the deposition of sovereigns by ecclesiastical authority. Louis, a prisoner in the hands of his enemies, had been intimidated enough to undergo a public penance; and the Bishops pretended that, according to a canon of the church, he was incapable of returning after to a secular life, or preserving the character of sovereignty. Circumstances enabled him to retain the empire, in defiance of this sentence; but the church (the two horns like a lamb) had tasted the pleasures of trampling upon crowned heads, and was eager to repeat the experiment. Under the disjointed and feeble administration of his posterity in their several kingdoms the Bishops availed themselves of more than one opportunity to exalt their temporal power. Those weak Carlovingian princes, in their mutual animosities, encouraged the pretensions of a common enemy. Thus, Charles the Bald, and Louis of Bavaria, having driven their brother Lothaire from his dominions, held an assembly of some bishops, who adjudged him unworthy to reign, and after exacting a promise from the two allied brothers to govern better than he had done, permitted and commanded them to divide his territories. After concurring in this unprecedented encroachment, Charles the Bald had little right to complain when, some years afterwards, an assembly of bishops declared himself to have forfeited his crown, released his subjects from their allegiance, and transferred his kingdom to Louis of Bavaria. But, in truth, he did not pretend to deny the principle which he had contributed to maintain. Even in his own behalf he did not appeal to the rights of sovereigns, and of the nation they represented. 'No one,' said this degenerate grandson of Charlemagne, 'ought to have degraded me from the throne to which I was consecrated, until, at least, I have been heard and judged by the Bishops, through whose ministry I was consecrated, who are called the Thrones of God in which God sitteth, and by whom he dispenses his judgments; to whose paternal chastisement I was willing to submit, and do still submit myself'." These are very remarkable passages, and throw considerable light upon the episcopal and ecclesiastical character of the new dominion of the earth. "It seemed," says Hallam, "as if Europe was about to pass under as absolute a domination of the hierarchy, as had been exercised by the priesthood of ancient Egypt, or the Druids of Gaul." Such was the appearance of things which did not belie the reality; so that the appearance, the reality, and the Apocalyptic representation thereof are found to be in harmony. What could more fitly symbolize a dominion in which the episcopal orders were the controlling element than a Beast with two horns like a Lamb, and speaking as a Dragon? The sheep's clothing was a mantle of the imperiality, and strikingly significant when we come to know the customs peculiar to the Romish, or Latin church. Dr. Keith quotes from "Rome in the XIXth Century," the following: "There is a peculiar sort of blessing given to two lambs on Jan. 21, at the church of St. Agnes without the walls; from the sainted fleeces of which are manufactured, I believe, by the hands of nuns, two holy mantles called pallj, which the pope presents to the Archbishops as his principal shepherds." This was a literal investiture with sheep's clothing, which was completed in the Mitre with its two horns, originally springing up right and left over each ear. In one of his notes, Mr. Elliott informs the reader, that the Jesuit, Joseph Acosta, after approvingly stating the common patristic idea that the second Beast symbolized "a multitude of Antichrist's preachers on whom are the horns of a lamb, because through hypocrisy they pretend that they are saints," proceeds to express his opinion that probably some eminent church dignitary, supporting Antichrist, might very possibly be specially intended; because of two Lamb's horns being the symbol of the episcopal dignity: "quendam acerrimum Antichristi defensorem; eum merito non regem, aut militem, sed virum in ecclesia insignem, quod duo agni cornua episcopalis dignitatis insigne sint." Another Jesuit named Lacunza in considering the beast of the earth's Lamb-like horns, seems to have recognized their identity with the priesthood to which he belonged. "Our priesthood it is," he exclaims, "and nothing else, which is here signified under the metaphor of a beast with two horns like those of a lamb." Elliott also quotes from a work styled "The Church of our Fathers" in which the author in his chapter on the Mitre, observes how at the opening of the eleventh century, shortly after the Pope's complete subordination of the Western Clergy to himself, the first sproutings, as it were, of the two horns began to show themselves: and how the mitre then in England "arose into two short points, not raised before and behind as now, but right and left over each ear." He illustrates from figures on the font in Winchester Cathedral, as given in the Vetusta Monumenta. Bonanni remarks that the Greek Bishops do not use the mitre. It is a Latin distinctive. Thus, the Spirit foreseeing that the Latin Episcopacy of the Western division of the Apostasy would symbolize its ecclesiastical dignity by a two-horned mitre and the fleeces of lamb, adopted them for the Apocalyptic symbol of a dominion to arise in the midst of Europe, the most striking characteristic of which would be its hierarchial and episcopal, so-called "Holy Roman," constitution. In other words, the two episcopal Lamb's horns are to the Beast of the Earth what the "Eyes like the eyes of a man" are to Daniel's Little Horn. The eyes and the Lamb's horns represent the same constituent of the dominion -- the ecclesiastical orders of abbots, bishops, archbishops, cardinals and popes; a hierarchy of "Holy Orders" so-called which still support and overshadow the secular thrones of the Latin world. Charles the Fat was the last emperor of Charlemagne's family. From his abdication to the establishment of Otho the First may be deemed a vacancy of seventy four years. His father Henry the Fowler, by birth a Saxon, was elected, by the suffrage of the nation, to save and institute the kingdom of Germany. Its limits were enlarged on every side by his son, the first and greatest of the Othos. In the north, he propagated the two-horned superstition by the sword, and subjected the Slavic nations of the Elbe and Oder to its authority. He planted German colonies in the marshes of Brandenburg and Sleswig; and the king of Denmark, and the dukes of Poland and Bohemia confessed themselves his tributary vassals. At the head of a victorious army, he passed the Alps, subdued the kingdom of Italy, delivered the Pope, and finally fixed the crown of the Two-Horned Romish Episcopal Dragon in the name and nation of Germany. "From that memorable era" (a.d. 962) says Gibbon, "two maxims of public jurisprudence were introduced by force and ratified by time; first, that the prince, who was elected in the German diet, acquired at that instant, the subject kingdoms of Italy and Rome: Second; But that he might not legally assume the titles of emperor and Augustus, till he had received the crown from the hands of the Roman Pontif". The popes had not yet reached the height of their ambition. The secular constituent of the Beast was still the imperial master of the popes. This will appear from the established order of their election from a.d. 800 to a.d. 1060. On the death of a pope, the seven cardinal-bishops of Ostia, Porto, Velitra, Tusculum, Praeneste, Tibur, and the Sabines, the suburban dioceses of the Roman province, recommended a successor to the suffrage of the college of cardinals, and their choice was ratified or rejected by the applause or clamor of the Roman people. But the election was imperfect; nor could the pontiff be legally consecrated till the emperor, the Advocate of the Church, had graciously signified his approbation and consent. The imperial commission examined, on the spot, the form and freedom of the proceedings; nor was it till after a previous scrutiny into the qualification of the candidates, that he accepted an oath of fidelity, and confirmed the donations which had successively enriched the patrimony of St. Peter. In the fiequent schisms, the rival claims were submitted to the sentence of the emperor; and in a synod of bishops he judged, condemned, and punished, the crimes of a guilty pontiff. Otho the First imposed a treaty on the senate and people, who engaged to prefer the candidate most acceptable to his majesty: his successors anticipated or prevented their choice; and bestowed the Roman benefice, as they bestowed the bishoprics of Cologne or Bamberg, on the chancellors or preceptors. It is unnecessary to adduce any further historical illustration of this two-horned dominion of the earth. Enough has been cited for its identification. The history of the Holy Roman or German empire is the history of the Beast of the earth with two horns like a Lamb, and speaking as a Dragon. I shall therefore conclude this section in the words of Gibbon, that in the fourteenth century "the hereditary monarchs of Europe (the Ten Horns) confessed the pre-eminence of the German Caesar's rank and dignity; he was the first of the christian (catholic) princes, the temporal head of the great Republic of the West; to his person the title of majesty was long appropriated; and he disputed with the Pope the sublime prerogative of creating kings and assembling councils. The oracle of the civil law, the learned Bartolus, was a pensioner of Charles IV; and his school resounded with the doctrine, that the Roman emperor was the rightful sovereign of the earth from the rising to the setting sun. The contrary opinion was condemned, not as an error, but as a heresy, since even the gospel had pronounced, 'And there went forth a decree, that all the world should be taxed'." 28. The Episcopal Beast Causeth the Earth To Worship The First Beast "And he exerciseth all the authority of the first beast in its presence; and causeth that the earth and the dwellers therein worship the first beast, the plague of whose death was healed" -- Verse 12. It is evident, from the last clause of this verse, that "the first beast" referred to in that clause is not the whole of the Ten Horns, nor all the Seven Heads, but only one particular head. We are authorized to say this, because "the plague" is, in the third verse, affirmed of "one of the heads" of the Beast of the Sea -- of only one of them. This is the special import of the phrase in this clause; but in the first clause of the text, "the first beast" must be understood in a more general sense. The Episcopal Power "exerciseth all the authority of the first beast in its presence" -- enopion. Though the secular authority of the emperors of the Holy Roman dominion, on the accession of the Saxon line, did not extend over France, which is one of the ten horns, the episcopal authority of the dominion was dominant in all the countries of Europe. It may therefore be truly said, that the Episcopal Beast of the Earth exercised all the authority of the first beast's horns "in its presence." This "presence" is illustrated by Daniel's Little Horn standing contemporaneously in the midst of the Ten Horns; and besides occupying its own German territory, also standing upon that of the Vandals, Lombards, and Huns. From these considerations, it is regarded in the prophecy as the chief authority among the powers of the imperial republic of the west. In fact, this thirteenth chapter is a symbolical exposition of the constitution of Modern Europe in its civil and ecclesiastical relations. It does not undertake to exhibit it in all the phases it has assumed in the course of over a thousand years; but only an heraldic representation sufficiently striking for a ready recognition by those servants of the Deity who have made themselves acquainted with the things that have been, and those which do exist. The recognition of the "Holy Apostolic" Caesars by the hereditary monarchs of Europe, as the supreme majesty of their political system, as testified in the concluding words of the previous section, constituted their order "the Sun" of the European firmament. The reader will please bear this in mind, for it was upon this Sun that the Fourth Angel poured out his vial; and in so doing scorched men with fire (Apoc. 16:8, 9). Now, this Imperio-Episcopal, or Little Horn, power "causeth that the earth and the dwellers therein worship the first beast, the plague of whose death was healed." In other words, causeth that the tribes, and tongues, and nations referred to in the seventh verse, worship, or do homage to, the Sixth Head, or form of government, common to the Dragon and Beast of the Sea. The phase "the First Beast" is evidently elliptical; and stands for "the Sixth Head of the First Beast;" for this was the only head of the Seven that was healed, or restored to sovereignty in Rome. The re-establishment of Imperialism upon the Seven Mountains, signalized by the coronation of Charlemagne, Emperor of the Romans, by the hand of the Chief Bishop of the New Empire, was the healing of the Sixth Head so grievously wounded by the Gothic sword. Rome was no longer in the rank to which she had been reduced by Justinian's "Pragmatic Sanction" of a.d. 554. This ordinance placed her among the cities of the second rank in the Graeco-Roman, or Byzantine, empire; but by her becoming the capital of the Holy Romano-Francic, and afterwards Romano-Germanic, dominion, she was restored to the imperial, or dragonic, sovereignty; and the plague of her death was healed. This was a great revolution in the fortunes of the so-called "Eternal City." By the restoration of Western Imperialism, an Eighth Form of Government, styled in Apoc. 17:8, "the beast that was, and is not, yet is," was established upon the Seven Mountains. In the seventeenth chapter, the two-horned episcopal element of the Beast of the Earth is replaced by the Great Harlot Mother of the Churches of the Gentiles; while the secular element is expanded into the Scarlet-colored Beast, symbolical of Ezekiel's Magogian confederacy of powers, which is the last phase of Daniel's Fourth Beast -- the Eighth Head in its final manifestation, which, John says, "is of the Seven, and goeth into perdition" -- a confederacy in which the European imperiality and royalties combine against Christ, and the Saints in the war of the great day of God Almighty (Apoc. 17:14; 16:14; 19:19-21). But the development of the Sixth Head of the Beast into the Eighth, was not only the healing of the plague of death, but it signalized the termination of the third part of the day, and the third part of the night, during which the third of the sun, moon, and stars of the Roman Firmament, Heaven, or Aerial, were to be darkened, or eclipsed, by the judgment of the Fourth Wind-Trumpet (Apoc. 8:12). This period of two hundred and forty years having elapsed, Charlemagne, the Sovereign of Rome and Italy, was no longer content with the substance of imperial authority, and the title of Patrician of Rome inherited from Pepin, which only represented the service and alliance of the Frank monarchs as Protectors of the Roman Pontiff and his church: he was ambitious of shining in the splendor of imperiality, as the coequal in the Roman Air of the Constantinopolitan emperors. This honor, however, he was providentially restrained from till the 240 years were expired; but after this, as have already seen, on Dec. 25, 799, he added to his title of Patrician, that of Augustus, and Emperor of the Romans. Thus the eclipse of the third of Rome's day ended, the plague of the first Beast's death was healed, and all of whom there hath not been written the names in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, were caused to wonder or adore (ch. 17:8). 29. Fire Descending from the Heaven "And he works great wonders, so that he causeth fire also to descend out of the heaven into the earth in the presence of the men" -- Verse 13 The wonder-worker is the Beast of the Earth, or New Power; hence the semeia wrought must have been such "wonders" as military and ecclesiastical human powers have the ability and are known to work. In other words, they were wonderful, or remarkable, events, brought to pass by fraud and battle, "in the presence of the men" of the tribes, tongues, and nations of the European "Wilderness" (ch. 17:3). The thirty-three campaigns of Charlemagne in the woods and forests of Germany, in which he subjugated the pagan aborigines of that country, and imposed upon them the superstition of the Roman Priesthood, were among the wonders whereby fire was caused to descend upon them out of the heaven. The wars of Otho the First, by which the limits of his kingdom, which his father, Henry the Fowler, had transferred from the French to the Germans, were enlarged on every side; and by which the Ten-Horned Superstition was propagated northward, and forced upon the Sclavonian nations of the Elbe and Oder; the marches of Brandenburg and Sleswig, Poland and Bohemia -- were also "great wonders, causing fire to descend out of the heaven," in which the Two-Horned Beast of the Earth was enthroned. The "fire" which descended was the consuming wrath of the Little Horn, ministered by this military apostle of the Dragon-speaking Beast of the Earth, Otho the First. "Fire," says Daubuz, "with such adjuncts as betoken that it is not put for light, denotes destruction, or torment, great sickness, war and its dismal effects; and is thus used in Isa. 42:25; 66:15; Ezek. 22:20-22; Zech. 13:9. So Persecution is represented by fire, 1 Peter 1:7; 4:12; 1 Cor. 3:13, 15. So in the Andromache of Euripides, ver. 147, dia puros, through fire, signifies through murder. And thus Sophocles calls the mischief done by the Sphinx to Thebes, 'a foreign flame of mischief'." Fire from heaven signifies the commination of persons in authority -- their denunciations of vengeance and punishment, as well as their wrath and fury in actual manifestation. Fire proceeded out of the mouth of the Deity's two prophets, symbolized by the two olive trees and two candlesticks (Apoc. 11:5). The reader will note the different sources of the Beast's fire, and the fire of the Two Witnesses. The fire of the Beast comes from "the heaven" in which the Beast reigns; but the fire of the Two Prophets proceeds out of their mouth. They devoured their enemies with this fire; in other words, they killed them. Their enemies are Apocalyptically symbolized by the Beast of the Sea and the Beast of the Earth, and the Image of the Sixth Head of the Beast, which is the False Prophet that worketh wonders in the presence of the Ten Horns, by which he deceiveth them that had received the mark of the Beast, and them that worshipped his Image (ch. 19:20). These made war upon all the inhabitants of the European Wilderness who did not worship them, whether they were Slavic pagans, the Two Witnesses, or the Saints. The Slavonians and the Witnesses fought the fire of the Beast's heaven with the fire of their own power, though in the end they had to succumb; the fire of their mouth was extinguished by the prevailing of the Beast against them. But the fire of the Two Horned Beast's heaven, which the authorities of that aerial were able to cause to flame forth with scorching and destructive effect, did not consist solely in war and its calamities. Had the Beast consisted solely and simply of a secular military power, its fire would have been restricted to its warlike operations; but it did not. It is also an ecclesiastical power; therefore its fire must be more or less of an episcopal character. Ecclesiastical fire is the flashing and forked lightnings of episcopal wrath, thundered against kings, nations, and peoples obnoxious to its displeasure. This fire used to be consuming and terrible, and was ministered by the Two Horns like a Lamb, or the Romish Episcopacy, whose judicial fire is its anathemas, or curses, and excommunications, executed by the secular authorities in all the Horn-Kingdoms of the European Commonwealth. These are sometimes called "the Thunders of the Vatican," whence they rolled forth, echoing through the heaven by the co-operation of the clergy. These lightnings and thunderbolts, as the Romanists themselves style them, were hurled by Pope Innocent, the Roman Jupiter Tonans, in the Council at Lyons against the emperor Frederick, a.d. 1245, to the great terror of the bystanders. "These words," says the record, "uttered in the midst of the Council struck the hearers with terror as might the flashing thunderbolts. When, with candles lighted and flung down, the Lord Pope and his assistant prelates flashed their lightning fire terribly against the emperor Frederick, now no longer to be called emperor, his procurators and friends burst into bitter wailing, and struck the thigh or breast. 'That day,' said one of them, 'that day of wrath, of calamity, and of woe!'" The flinging down of lighted candles from an elevated position by the excommunicators, a mimic representation of fire from heaven, was the usual accompaniment of the solemn and great excommunication pronounced annually at the feast Cana Domini by the Pope in person, his Cardinals and his Priesthood, against all heretics from the elevated Vestibule of the Lateran Temple at Rome; and was directed to be practised by the Romish Bishops elsewhere also on certain solemn occasions. In the nineteenth century and in Protestant countries we have no experience of the effects of this ecclesiastical fire from heaven. It is now as harmless as the faintest sheet lightning. Even in Italy the papal bolts are ineffective and despised. Not so, however, in centuries past. The estate or person of the excommunicated might be attached by the magistrate; and marks of abhorrence and ignominy attended these penalties. They were to be shunned, like men infected with leprosy, by their friends, their families, and servants. Two attendants only remained with Robert, king of France, who on account of an irregular marriage, was put to this ban by Gregory V. and a Roman Council, a.d. 997. The Beautes de l' Histoire de France, p. 104, thus describes the result: "Excommunication was at this epoch a terrible weapon in the hands of the sovereign Pontiff. Every one fled with horror from him who had been struck by it. The lords broke off all commerce with the king. There hardly remained any attendants with him to serve him. And these threw all the fragments of his table into the fire rather than eat them." The mere intercourse with a proscribed person incurred the "lesser excommunication," or privation of the sacraments, and required penitence and absolution. In some places, a bier was set before the door of an excommunicated individual, and stones thrown at his windows. Every where the excommunicated were debarred of a regular burial. Their carcasses were supposed to be incapable of corruption, which was thought a privilege unfit for those who had died in so irregular a manner. But as excommunication, which descended from the heaven only upon one and perhaps an obdurate sinner, was not always efficacious, the Lamb-Horned constituent of the Beast had recourse to a more scorching and comprehensive punishment. For the offence of a nobleman, the ecclesiastical power put a county, for that of a prince, his entire kingdom, under an interdict, or suspension of religious offices. No stretch of tyranny was more fiery than this. During an interdict, the Saints' Bazaars, in which the clergy "who have the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name" trade their wares, were closed, the bells silent, the dead unburied, no rite but those of sprinkling and extreme unction performed. This fiery wrath descended upon those who had neither partaken of, nor could have prevented the offence, which was often but a private dispute, in which the pride of a pope or bishop had been wounded. This fire issuing from the Beast's heaven and descending episcopally "in the presence of the men," or "of the beast," ver. 14, was the motive power of the machinery worked by the clergy, the lever by which they moved. "From the moment," says Hallam, "that these interdicts and excommunications had been tried, (and they originated subsequently to the ascent of the Beast out of the earth,) the powers of the earth might be said to have existed only by sufferance." The party scathed by this episcopal lightning had no remedy but submission. He who disregards such a sentence, says Beaumanoir, renders his good cause bad. "One is rather surprised," continues Hallam, "at the instances of failure, than of success, in the employment of these spiritual weapons against sovereigns, or the laity in general. It was perhaps a fortunate circumstance for Europe, that they were not introduced, upon a large scale, during the darkest ages of superstition. In the eighth or ninth centuries they would probably have met with a more implicit obedience. But after Gregory the Seventh (the notorious Hildebrand, elected pope a.d. 1073) as the spirit of ecclesiastical usurpation grew more violent, there grew up by slow degrees an opposite feeling in the laity, which ripened into an alienation of sentiment from the church, and a conviction of that sacred truth, which superstition and sophistry have endeavoured to eradicate from the heart of man, that no tyrannical government can be founded on a divine commission." I shall close this section with the remark, that Hallam's so-called "sacred truth," is in direct opposition to Paul's declaration in Rom. 13:1, that "there is no power but from Deity; and that existing powers have been put under Deity." The tyrannical governments of "the Earth" and "the Sea," are ordained of Him as his sword, to punish with war and other tormenting oppressions, the evil doers of the Apostasy for their abominations, and blasphemies uttered against Him "to blaspheme his name, his tabernacle, and the dwellers in the heaven;" until the time shall come to give judgment to the saints, whose mission it will then be "to execute vengeance upon the nations and punishment upon the people; to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron: to execute upon them the judgment written: this honor have all the Saints" (Psa. 149:7-9). This will be "fire descending from the Deity out of heaven, and devouring them," at whatever epoch it may flame. 30. The Image of the Beast "And he deceives the dwellers upon the earth through the wonders which it was given to him to have worked in the presence of the beast; saying to the dwellers upon the earth, to have an Image made to the beast that hath the plague of the sword, and lives. 15. And it was given to him to give spirit to the Image of the beast; that the Image of the Beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the Image of the Beast should be put to death." On account of the difficulties and ill success of commentators in the exposition of the Image of the Beast here spoken of, Vitringa has said, "est in hac parte prophetiae quod interpres cruciat" -- it is in this part of the prophecy that the interpreter is tormented. It would be no profit to the reader to specify their failures, for they are legion. The Image of the Beast has not only tormented them, but they have sadly tormented the Image, until it has been reduced to no Image at all. The commentators have commented upon one another, satisfactorily proving each other wrong; but when asked, what is the true solution of the mystery, they give no sign; so that we have to conclude, that what Doddridge confesses of himself is applicable to them all, saying, "what the Image of the Beast is, distinct from the Beast iself, I confess I know not." But before we approach the Image these words of the text demand attention in passing, "and he deceives the dwellers upon the earth through the wonders which it was given him to work in the presence of the beast, etc." The word rendered "deceives" is plana, which also signifies, to lead astray, cause to wander; metaphorically, to mislead, deceive, cause to err. Understanding from the previous section what the semeia, wonders, or miracles, were by which the wonder-working Beast was enabled to cause fire to descend from the heaven, we may thence determine the nature of the deception practised. The dwellers upon the earth were "deceived" in being led astray by clerical fraud, and episcopal and military violence; which is characterized by Paul as "the working of the Satan with all power and signs, and lying wonders, and with all the deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish" (2 Thess. 2:9). The Beast of the Sea, or Sixth and Seventh Head, Ten Horns, and Mouth; that is, so much of it as is contemporary with Apocalyptic times: the Beast of the Earth, or Little Horn and Eyes of Daniel's vision, and the Image of the Beast -- are all symbolical of "the Satan;" and were all manifested after the same kind of "working," which Paul subdivides into all kinds of dunamis, and semeia, and lying terata, which cover the whole ground of military, civil, and ecclesiastical violence, oppression, and fraud. After the death of Charlemagne the Holy Roman Empire became Germanic in character instead of French as under him -- Publishers. He deceives through his wonder-working in the presence of the Beast. To what result does he deceive the dwellers upon the earth, or inhabitants of the territory of the Holy Germano-Roman dominion? To the making of an Image of the Beast that had the plague of the sword, and lives. In other words, in the metaphorical deception, or deceiving operation, there is a conflict of powers resulting in the development and compulsory establishment of the Image of the Beast. But, who is the instrumental deceiver and wonder-worker causing the development and establishment of the Image? The Beast of the Earth. True. But the Beast of the Earth is an aggregate of powers almost co-ordinate; such as the episcopal or ecclesiastical, and the secular imperial. Which of these orders in the state was the wonder-working deceiver? Exclusively neither. The wonder-working consisted in the bitter and sanguinary, conflicts between the Crown and Mitre, the two-horned symbol of the Romish Hierarchy; the result of which was the triumph of the Mitre over the Imperial Crown; by which the Hierarchy became independent of the secular order of the dominion. This Sovereign and Imperial Hierarchy, capitalized by the Dynasty of the Popes, and known commonly as the Papacy, is the Image of the Beast. This wonder-working of the Lamb-Horned Beast is said to be transacted "in the presence of the beast." This phrase is equivalent to that in the thirteenth verse, "in the presence of the men" -- enopion ton anthropon: "the beast" in the one phrase being symbolical of "the men" in the other. Here is one Beast wonder-working in the presence of another Beast. Did not Daniel's Little Horn work its wonders in the midst of the Ten Horns when, coming up after them and among them, it plucked up three of them by the roots, and incorporated their peoples and annexed their territory to its own? After the same manner the Hierarchial and Imperial Orders of the Lamb-Horned, or Mitred Beast, waged their intestine conflicts in the presence of the Ten Horns of the Beast of the Sea. In 1866, we had an example in point when Prussia, Austria, and Italy, countries of the Lamb-Horned Beast, were wonder-working in internecine war, in the presence of the rest of the European Powers who stood as spectators of the strife. The wonder-working deceit was to develop an eikon, an image or likeness. Not an original, but a resemblance to something that had previously existed. As the prophecy is a symbolical revelation of powers to be developed in the Court of the Gentiles during the 1260 years of the subjection, or down-treading of the saints, the image to be developed was the likeness of some previously existing power. It was to be an image the counterpart "to the Beast that hath (ho echei in the present tense) the plague of the sword, and lives." What beast is this? I have shown that the Sixth Head of the Beast of the Sea was that which had been smitten with a deadly plague by the Gothic Sword; I have also shown that when Charlemagne founded the Imperial Lamb-Horned dominion, that the Sixth Form or Head, was healed, or came to life again in the West; and the New Empire became the Eighth Form of Government, or Head, upon the Seven Mountains. This being consummated, it became "the Beast that lives." The Image was to be a likeness of this living Eighth Head; in fact, a co-ordinate dynasty in the Holy Germano-Roman Habitable; an independent ecclesiastical imperial dynasty -- an imperium in imperio, occupying the relative position to the Lamb-Horned Beast, that the Blasphemous Mouth does to Daniel's Little Horn. The wonder-working deceiving power directed the deceived to have an Image made to the Beast that lives. The English Version of this text is what may be styled a free translation, and reads, "And deceiveth them that dwell upon the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell upon the earth that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live." But the rendering I have given at the head of this section, is more literal. The word legon is rendered saying. The power of deception, or ability to deceive, the dwellers upon the earth is acquired, dia ta sumeia ha edothe auto poiesai, through the wonders which it was given him to have worked; hence what he said to the deceived or misdirected being the "saying" of a power, would be equivalent to an authoritative mandate, which it had the ability to enforce. The command of the power in the ascendant was poiesai eikona to therio, to have made an Image to the Beast; or, more conformable to our idiom, to have an Image made to the Beast. The English Version "did live," as the rendering of ezese, implies that the Beast, to whose likeness the Image was to be conformed, did live once; but was not in existence in the epoch of the creation of the image. The original word is indefinite. It leaves the time of the living undefined. The living of the Beast is affirmed in the announcement of its death plague having been healed; and the absence in the premises of any intimation of subsequent death. Hence, the indefinite present and lives, kai ezese is the best rendering of the word in the text -- they were directed to make an image to the Lamb-Horned Beast then, at the time of the creation of the Image, in hale and vigorous existence. But the Image was not to be a mere form of government; it was to be both living and powerful. To this end, it was given to the thaumaturgic deceiver, douvai pneuma te eikovi tou therion, to give spirit to the Image of the Beast; so that it might perform all the functions of a potent and formidable despotism. This is implied in the words, "that the Image of the Beast might both speak, and cause as many as would not worship the Image of the Beast that they should be put to death." This was a terrible inspiration -- a speaking Image murderously hostile towards all men, of all ranks and degrees, who would not bow down obediently to its sovereign behest. Such an imperiality was "a Mouth speaking very great things against the Most High" -- (Dan. 7:8, 25); a Lion-Mouth, speaking great things and blasphemies against God to blaspheme his Name and his Tabernacle, and the dwellers in the heaven Apoc. 13:2, 5, 6; or, in the words of the eleventh verse, elale hos drakon, it spake as a Dragon; in other words, as being itself a Dragon, or imperial. This Dragonic Image was the arrogant, blaspheming, and ferocious speaking constituent, or Mouth, of the Lamb-Horn Beast of the Earth; and the great enemy that "made war against the Two Prophets, and the Saints, and overcame them" (ch. 11:7; 13:7, 15). Whosoever did not receive and would not submit to its oracular utterances were anathematized by it, and scathed with its fire from the heaven, or were excommunicated and penally destroyed as Heretics beyond the protection of law, the killing of whom was declared to be no murder. This Dragon-speaking Image decreed their extermination, and pronounced curses against all who should protect or harbor them while alive, or when dead give them any other than the burial of a dog. It decreed also the subordination of the secular powers to the spiritual, for the purpose of their extermination; and against them excited crusades, with the usual promise of remission of sins to the wretches who should bear its mark. Thus, pursuing its victims unto blood, which it drank in copious draughts unto lascivious intoxication (Apoc. 17:5, 6), it illustrated the oracle in the text, that "as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed." 31. The Image of the Beast Historically Identified The reader will remember what has already been stated concerning the relative position of the ecclesiastical and secular powers of the Lamb-Horned Dominion, as established by Otho the First, a.d. 962. It may, however, be as well to remark again in this place, that, when Otho fixed the imperial crown in the name and nation of Germany, he established the two following maxims of public jurisprudence; 1. That the prince, who was elected in the German diet, acquired, from that instant, the subject kingdoms of Italy and Rome. 2. But that he might not legally assume the titles of emperor and Augustus, till he had received the crown from the hands of the Roman Pontiff. By the first maxim the election of the emperor by the secular electors of the empire made him the lord of the pope; who had no more power to withhold the crown and titles from the emperor elect, than the archbishop of Canterbury, whose function it is to crown the king of England, could withhold the crown and titles from the inheritor of the British throne. In the time of Otho, the Archbishop and Patriarch of Rome was to the Germano-Roman emperor, what the archbishop of Canterbury is to the king of England, namely, at once both chief subject, and chief bishop, of the respective beasts, or dominions. The bishop of Rome was elected by the college of cardinals, with the ratifying approval of the Roman people; but he could not be legally consecrated until the emperor had graciously signified his approbation and consent. This being the ecclesiastical and civil constitution of the Lamb-Horned Beast, it is plainly to be perceived, that there was nothing in the body politic answerable to the Image of the Beast that lives. The years preceding the time of Hildebrand were a period of long and disgraceful servitude for the so-called "Apostolic See." In reference to this Gibbon says, "the Roman Pontiffs of the ninth and tenth centuries, were insulted, imprisoned, and murdered, by their tyrants; and such was their indigence after the loss and usurpation of the ecclesiastical patrimonies, that they could neither support the state of a prince, nor exercise the charity of a priest." In the course of this long series of scandal, there were two sister-prostitutes named Marozia and Theodora, whose influence was founded on their wealth and beauty, and their political and amorous intrigues. Their influence was sovereign, and the most devoted of their paramours were rewarded with the Roman Mitre, to which the Tiara had not yet been added. The bastard son, the grandson, and the great grandson of Marozia "a rare genealogy" of papal holiness, were seated in the chair of St. Peter, and it was at the age of nineteen that her grandson, John XII, became the Head of the Latin Church. Drunkenness, murder, discords, and gaming dishonored his profession, and disgraced the man. His simony was undisguised; and his blasphemous invocation of Jupiter and Venus, the consummation of his impiety. He lived in public adultery with the matrons of Rome; the Lateran palace was turned into a school of prostitution; and his rapes of virgins and widows deterred the female pilgrims from visiting the alleged tomb of St. Peter, lest, in so doing, they should be violated by his pretended successor. Charges were at length urged against him in a Roman synod in the presence of Otho the Great, who degraded him a.d. 967; an evident proof that the Image of the Beast was still a power in the undeveloped future, and had the design of Otho the third been carried into effect, a.d. 998, of abandoning the ruder countries of the North, to erect his throne in Italy, and to revive the institutions of the Roman monarchy, the Image of the Beast would have appeared in the likeness of the secular imperiality of Augustulus, a.d. 479; instead of in the likeness of that of the Lamb-Horned dominion, founded by Charlemagne and Otho the First. But though the utmost licentiousness reigned in "the Eternal City," where six popes were deposed, two murdered, and one mutilated, the temporal power of the clergy generally was cherished and exalted by the superstition or policy of the Saxon dynasty, which blindly depended on their moderation, and fidelity to the imperial crown. The bishoprics of Germany were made equal in extent and privilege, superior in wealth and population, to the most ample states of the military order. This was an important stride towards the troublesome development of the wonder-working deceiver. As long as the emperors retained the prerogative of bestowing on every vacancy these ecclesiastical and secular benefices, their cause was maintained by the gratitude or ambition of their friends and favorites. The personal and local conflicts of the popes in the tenth century, left them no leisure, if they had possessed the capacity, to perfect the great system of temporal supremacy which was to deprive the emperors of their prerogatives pertaining to the ecclesiastical affairs of the empire. In this age, they looked rather to a vile profit from the sale of episcopal confirmations, or of exemptions to monasteries. The vices of the popes and their clergy were less dangerous to the secular imperialism of the Beast, than their virtues, whatever they might be. All writers concur in stigmatizing the dissoluteness and indecency that prevailed among the clergy. The bishops were obtruded upon their sees, as the supreme pontiffs were upon that of Rome, by force or corruption. A child of five years old was made archbishop of Rheims; and the see of Narbonne was purchased for another at the age of ten. By this relaxation of morals the Lamb-Horned Hierarchy began to lose its hold upon the prejudices of mankind. This favored the success of "Heresy" so-called; and the increase of secular authority and power in the nomination and investiture of spiritual fiefs. This power was exercised with the grossest rapacity. If the ancient canons against simony had been enforced, the church would almost have been cleared of its ministers. Affairs continued to wax worse and worse in the eleventh century, until reform was indispensable to avert the impending ruin of the dominion. The German emperors of the House of Saxony conferred bishoprics in general by direct nomination; while the popes were nominated for suffrage by the seven cardinal-bishops of the Roman province, and their election by the college confirmed by the emperor. But in a.d. 1047, an explicit fight of nomination was conceded to Henry III, as the only means of rescuing the Roman church from the disgrace and depravity into which it had fallen. He appointed two or three popes of a very superior character to the illegitimate progeny of Marozia. This high imperial prerogative, however, was precluded from the possibility of its exercise, by the infancy of his son and successor, Henry IV, and by the factions of that minority. Pope Nicolas II, published a decree in a.d. 1059, which restored the fight of nomination and election to the Cardinals of Rome; but leaving the confirmation of the pope elect to Henry, "now king and hereafter to become emperor," and to such of his successors as should personally obtain that privilege. This decree is the foundation of that celebrated mode of election in a conclave of cardinals, which has ever since determined the Headship of the Speaking Image of the Beast. It was intended, not only to exclude the franchise of the citizens of Rome, who by their rabble-violence had forfeited their primitive right, but as far as possible to prepare the way for an absolute emancipation of the papacy from the control of the secular imperial chief of the Beast of the Earth; reserving only a precarious and personal concession to the emperors, instead of their ancient legal prerogative of confirmation. "The real author of this decree," says Hallam, "and of all other vigorous measures adopted by the popes of that age, whether for the assertion of their independence, or the restoration of discipline, was Hildebrand, archdeacon of the church of Rome, by far the most conspicuous person of the eleventh century. Acquiring by his extraordinary qualities an unbounded ascendancy over the Italian clergy, they regarded him as their chosen leader, and the hope of their common cause. He had been empowered singly to nominate a pope on the part of the Romans, after the death of Leo IX, and compelled Henry III. to acquiesce in his choice of Victor II. No man could proceed more fearlessly towards his object than Hildebrand, nor with less attention to conscientious impediments. Though the decree of Nicolas II, his own work, had expressly reserved the right of confirmation of the young king of Germany (Henry IV), yet, on the death of this pope, Hildebrand procured the election and consecration of Alexander II without waiting for any authority. During this pontificate he was considered as something greater than the pope, who acted entirely by his counsels. On Alexander's decease, Hildebrand, long since the real head of the church, was raised with enthusiasm to its chief dignity, and assumed the name of Gregory VII. His plans, however, not being sufficiently mature to throw off the secular yoke of the Beast altogether, though he acted as pope from the day of his election, he declined to receive consecration until he had obtained the consent of the king of Germany. But this moderation was not of long continuance. The situation of Germany speedily afforded scope for the ambitious display of the wonder-working deceiving power. Henry IV., through a very bad education, was arbitrary and dissolute; the Saxons were engaged in a desperate rebellion, and secret disaffection had spread among the princes to an extent of which the pope was much better aware than the king. He began the contest between the Church and the Empire, the Mitre and the Crown, the Lamb-Horned Eyes of the Dragon-Horn, or in plain terms, between the spiritual and temporal orders of the Holy Germano-Roman dominion, by excommunicating some of Henry's ministers on pretence of simony, and made it a ground of remonstrance that they were not instantly dismissed. His next step was to publish a new decree against lay investitures. The abolition of these was a favorite object of Gregory, and formed an essential part of his general scheme for emancipating the spiritual, and subjugating the temporal power. The ring and crosier, it was asserted by the papal advocates, were the emblems of that power which no monarch could bestow; but even if a less offensive symbol were adopted in investitures, the dignity of the Romish Hierarchy was lowered, and its "purity" (!) contaminated, when its highest ministers were compelled to solicit the patronage or the approbation of laymen. But interest in the question of investitures was suspended by other more extraordinary and important dissensions between the Church and the Empire. The pope, after tampering some time with the disaffected party in Germany, summoned Henry IV. to appear at Rome, and vindicate himself from the charges alleged by his subjects. Such an outrage naturally exasperated a young and passionate monarch. Assembling a number of bishops and other vassals at Worms, he procured a sentence that Gregory should no longer be obeyed as lawful pope. But the time was passed for those high prerogatives of former emperors. After a.d. 1073, the relations of dependence between Church and State were now about to be reversed; in other words, the time had come to erect the Romish Hierarchy, under its chief bishop, into a supreme independent imperial monarchy, after the model of the secular, but superior to it: or as it is Apocalyptically expressed, "to have an Image made of the beast that lives." Gregory had no sooner received accounts of the proceedings at Worms, than he not only excommunicated Henry, but sentenced him to the loss of the kingdoms of Germany and Italy, releasing his subjects from their allegiance, and forbidding them to obey him as sovereign. This was another act initiatory of what might have seemed to be a romantic project of making himself the lord of "Christendom," by not only dissolving the jurisdiction which kings and emperors had hitherto exercised over the various orders of the clergy, but also by subjecting to the papal authority all temporal princes, and rendering their dominions tributary to the See of Rome. This Gregory VII. undertook with great audacity. He proposed to "cause all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive the mark" of supreme papal authority, in which he and his successors, "through the wonders which" their party "had power to work in the presence of the beast," were successful. Solomon, king of Hungary, dethroned by his brother Geysa, had fled to the emperor of Germany for protection, and renewed the homage of Hungary to the Secular Imperiality of the Lamb-Horned Beast. Gregory, who favored Geysa, exclaimed against this act of submission; and said in a letter to Solomon, "You ought to know that the kingdom of Hungary belongs to the Roman Church; and learn that you will incur the indignation of the Holy See (the Eyes of the Little Horn) if you do not acknowledge that you hold your dominions of the pope, and not of the emperor!" This presumptuous declaration, and the neglect it met with, brought the quarrel between the Secular Horn, or empire, and the Lamb-Horned Eyes, or church, to a crisis. In his circular letters he repeatedly asserts, that "bishops are superior to kings, and made to judge them," expressions alike artful and presumptuous, and calculated for bringing in all the churchmen of the world to his standard. Gregory's purpose is said to have been to engage in the bonds of fidelity and allegiance to the so-called Vicar of Christ, as King of kings and Lord of lords, all the monarchs of the earth, and to establish at Rome an annual assembly of bishops, by whom the contests that might arise between kingdoms and sovereign states were to be decided; the rights and pretences of princes to be examined; and the fate of nations and empires to be determined. The haughty pontiff knew well what consequences would follow the flaming thunderbolts of the heaven. The German bishops came over to his party forthwith, and drew along with them many of the nobles; the brand of civil war still lay smouldering, and a bull properly directed was sufficient to set it in a blaze: and those very princes and bishops who had assisted in deposing Gregory, gave up their emperor to be tried by the pope, whom they solicited to come to Augsburg for that purpose. Henry suddenly finding himself almost insulated in the midst of his dominions, had recourse, through panic, to a miserable expedient. He crossed the Alps at Tyrol, accompanied only by a few domestics, with the avowed determination of submitting and seeking absolution of Gregory, his tyrannical oppressor, who was then at Canossa, on the Apennines, a fortress belonging to his faithful adherent the Countess Matilda. It was in the unusually severe winter of a.d. 1077. At the gates of this place he presented himself as a humble penitent. He alone was admitted into the outer court of the castle, where, being stripped of his robes, and wrapped in a woollen shirt and with naked feet and fasting, he was obliged to remain for three days in the month of January, while Gregory, shut up with his devout and affectionate Matilda, refused to admit him to his presence to kiss his feet. Matilda's attachment to Gregory and hatred of the Germans were so great, that she made over all her estates to the Image of the Beast in process of creation: "and this donation," says the historian, "is the true cause of all the wars which since that period have raged between the emperors and the popes. She possessed, in her own right, a great part of Tuscany, Mantua, Parma, Reggio, Placentia, Ferrara, Modena, Verona, and almost the whole of what is now called the Patrimony of St. Peter, from Viterbo to Orvieto; together with part of Umbria, Spoleto, and the March of Ancona." On the fourth day the emperor was permitted to throw himself at the feet of the pope, who condescended to grant him absolution, after he had sworn obedience to the pontiff in all things, and promised to appear at Augsburg on a certain day to learn the pope's decision whether or not he should be restored to his kingdom, until which time he also promised not to assume the imperial insignia. Thus while Henry got nothing but disgrace, his abject humiliation elated Gregory with great exultation, who now regarded himself, and not altogether without reason, as the lord and master of all the crowned heads of "the Earth" and "the Sea," called "Christendom;" so that, in several of his letters, he said, it was his duty "to pull down the pride of kings." This extraordinary accommodation exceedingly disgusted the provinces of Italy. Their indignation at Gregory's arrogance, happily for Henry, overbalanced their detestation of his meanness. All Lombardy took up arms against the pope, while the pope was raising all Germany against the emperor. The Germans chose Rodolph, duke of Swabia, who was crowned at Mentz. Gregory affected to be displeased that he was crowned without his order; and declared he would acknowledge as emperor and king of Germany him of the two rivals who should be most submissive to the Holy See. But as Henry would not submit, he sent a golden crown to Rodolph with the inscription upon it, Petra dedit Petro, Petrus, diadema Rodolpho; importing that it was given by virtue of the right to confer crowns from the apostle Peter! The donation was accompanied by an anathema against Henry prophetic of the aspirations of the rising Image-power. The anathema concludes with an apostrophe to St. Peter and St. Paul, saying, "Make all men sensible, that, as you can bind and loose every thing in heaven, you can also upon earth take from, or give to, every one according to his deserts, empires, kingdoms, principalities -- let the kings and princes of the age then instantly feel your power, that they may not dare to despise the orders of your church; let your justice be so speedily executed upon Henry, that nobody may doubt but that he falls by your means and not by chance." But Gregory's success in his immediate designs was not answerable to his intrepidity. Henry both subdued the German rebellion and carried on the war with so much vigor in Italy, that he was crowned in Rome by the archbishop of Ravenna, whom he had caused to be elected pope by the name of Clement III., instead of Gregory, who had taken refuge in the castle of St. Angelo, whence he defied, and again excommunicated the conqueror. In the meanwhile the castle was besieged, but the emperor being called off into Lombardy, Roger Guiscard, his Norman ally, effected his release and gave him asylum at Salerno, where he soon after died. His mantle, however, descended upon his successors, especially Urban II., and Paschal II., who strenuously persevered in the great contest for Ecclesiastical Independence, or the full development of the Image of the Beast. Henry V. steadily refused to part with the right of investiture and the secular or lay constituent of the Lamb-Horned Dragon was still committed in open hostility with the Papal Hierarchy of "the Earth" for fifteen years of his reign. But Henry V. being stronger in the support of his German vassals than his father, Henry IV. had been, none of the popes with whom he was engaged had the boldness to repeat the measures of Gregory VII. At length, a.d. 1122, each party grown weary of this ruinous contention, a Concordat, or treaty of agreement, was arranged between the emperor and the pope, Calixtus II., which put an end by compromise to the question of ecclesiastical investitures. By this compact the emperor resigned for ever to the rising Image-Power the investiture of the bishops of the dominion by the ring and crosier, and recognized the liberty of elections. But in return, it was agreed that elections should be made in his presence, or that of his officers; and that the new bishop should receive his temporalities from the emperor by the sceptre. By this concordat the imperial order preserved its feudal sovereignty over the estates of the Episcopal Hierarchy, which possessed nearly half the lands in Europe, in defiance of the language which had recently been held by the pontificals. In the terms of this compromise the success of the emperor and the pope seemed pretty equally balanced; but from subsequent effects it is apparent to which party the intrinsic advantages of victory belonged: the events which followed, or "the wonders it was given him to work, in the presence of the beast," after the settlement of this great and sanguinary controversy about investitures, evinced beyond all dispute, that the See of Rome had conquered; or in other words, that the creation of the Image, or likeness to the Constantinian Sixth Head of the Beast, revived in the dominion founded by Charlemagne, was completed in the establishment of the absolute monarchy of papal Rome. Gregory VII, is universally regarded as the founder of this unlimited imperiality. "He may be called," says Hallam, "the common enemy of all sovereigns, whose dignity as well as independence mortified his infatuated pride." He conveniently exhibited St. Peter as a great feudal suzerain, or legitimate lord of all the countries and kingdoms of the earth. The gross and universal superstition of the Latin world admitted that the fullness of Christ's lordship in heaven and earth had been by Christ himself transferred to Peter, and therefore to the incarnate daemons, the popes, who blasphemously style themselves the Vicars of Christ, and successors of that apostle. Admitting this monstrous and illogical falsehood, it was not difficult for such "dwellers upon the earth" to assent to the ambitious claims of the Roman Pontiff. The liberties of the national churches of the diademed horns of the Beast of the Sea, were as completely destroyed by papal arrogance, as those of the churches of the Lamb-Horned dominion, whose emperors had sustained the principal brunt of the war. By a papal constitution inspired by Hildebrand, no bishop in the Latin church was permitted to "buy and sell," or exercise his functions, until he had received the confirmation of the Roman See; "a provision," says Hallam, "of vast importance, through which, beyond perhaps any other means, Rome has sustained, and still sustains, her temporal influence, as well as her ecclesiastical supremacy." The National Churches now found themselves subject to an undisguised and irresistible despotism, whose favorite policy it became to harass all prelates with citations to Rome. Gregory VII. obliged the metropolitans to attend in person for the pallium, or holy lambskin, in which the wolves of that Episcopal order are officially clothed; and bishops were summoned even from England and the northern kingdoms to receive the commands of their spiritual monarch, the Papal Mouth of the Dragon-Image. From the time of Gregory VII., no pontiff of the Image-monarchy thought of awaiting the confirmation of the emperor of Germany, as in earlier ages, before he was installed in "the throne of St. Peter." On the contrary, it was claimed that the emperor himself was to be confirmed by the pope. When Frederick Barbarossa came to receive the imperial crown at Rome, he omitted to hold the stirrup of Adrian IV., who, in his turn, refused to give him the usual kiss of peace; nor was the contest ended but by the emperor's acquiescence, who was content to follow the precedents of his predecessors. This same Adrian in a letter reminded Frederick that he had conferred upon him the imperial crown, and was willing to bestow, if possible, greater benefits. This letter excited a great ferment among the German princes, in a congress of whom it was delivered. "From whom, then," one of the papal legates, or ambassadors, rashly inquired, "does the emperor hold his crown, except from the pope?" This so irritated a prince of Wittelsbach, that he was with difficulty prevented from cleaving the priest's head with his sabre. It was Adrian IV. who bestowed the kingdom of Ireland upon Henry II., King of England; and in the grant declared that all islands were the exclusive property of St. Peter, which was only an indirect assertion, that they all belonged to the Image of the Beast, of which the popes are the absolute, omnipotent, and oracular chiefs. But the epoch when the arrogant and usurping spirit of the Papal Image of the Beast was most strikingly displayed was the pontificate of Innocent III. In each of the three leading objects pursued by Rome, namely, independent sovereignty, supremacy over the Latin church, and control over the princes of the earth, it was the fortune of this pontiff to conquer. This is the testimony of history. He completed the iconic, or image, fabric, founded by Gregory VII., and promoted steadily by his successors. He realized that fond hope of so many of his predecessors, a dominion over Rome and the central parts of Italy -- the territory of the Image of the Beast; given to the Roman See by the countess Matilda, and yielded after long dispute by the emperor Otho IV. on his coronation at Rome by Innocent III., who bore the keys from a.d. 1198 to a.d. 1216. "This," says Hallam, "is the proper era of that temporal sovereignty which the Bishops of Rome possess over their own city, though still prevented by various causes, for nearly three centuries, from becoming unquestioned and unlimited." The maxims of Gregory VII. were now matured by more than a hundred years, and the right of trampling upon the necks of kings had been received, at least among ecclesiastics, as an inherent attribute of the Image of the Beast; or the system of power based upon forgery, murder, and wonderful deceit, commonly styled The Papacy. "As the sun and the moon are placed in the firmament," said Innocent III.,"the greater as the light of the day, and the lesser of the night; thus are there two powers in the church; the pontifical, which as having the charge of souls, is the greater; and the royal, which is the less, and to which the bodies of men only are intrusted." Intoxicated with these ideas which he succeeded in establishing, he deemed no quarrels of princes beyond the sphere of his jurisdiction. His foremost gratification was the display of unbounded power. His letters, especially to ecclesiastics, are full of unprovoked rudeness. As impetuous as Gregory VII., he is unwilling to owe anything to favor; he seems to anticipate denial, heats himself into anger as he proceeds, and where he commences with solicitation, seldom concludes without a menace. With such a temper and with such advantages, he was formidable beyond all his predecessors, and well qualified for the time "to speak" as the official incumbent of the Image-Mouth which "spake as a dragon;" and caused on every side the lightning of the Roman Heaven to thunder over the heads of princes. He claimed the right to confirm the election of the emperors of the Lamb-Horned dominion; and in a decretal epistle, declares the pope's authority to examine, confirm, anoint, crown, and consecrate the emperor elect, provided he shall be worthy; or to reject him if rendered unfit by great crimes, such as sacrilege, heresy, perjury, or persecution of the Roman church; in default of election, to supply the vacancy; or, in the event of equal suffrages, to bestow the empire upon any person at his discretion. "The noonday of Papal dominion," says Hallam, "extends from the pontificate of Innocent III., inclusively to that of Boniface VIII., or, in other words, through the thirteenth century. Rome inspired during this age all the terror of her ancient name. She was once more the mistress of the world, and kings were her vassals." Such was the Image of the Imperial Head of the Ten-Horned Beast healed of its death-plague by Charlemagne, created by "the false Prophet," or Roman Hierarchial constituent of the healed head, "that wrought the wonders in the presence of the Beast of the Earth, with which he deceived them who received the mark of the beast, and them who worshipped his image" (Apoc. 19:20). This Image-Monarchy is styled "the Kingdom of the Beast" in ch. 16:10; and was obnoxious to the vial-wrath of the fifth angel, by which it was filled with darkness. The judgments of this vial and those who have thus far transpired under the sixth, had reduced the image to very limited territorial and temporal dimensions. They are so inconsiderable that the Image may be said to be in the article of death; for beyond the very narrow limits of the little territory yet remaining to the pope, the papal government, however loud and fiercely it may roar, can no longer "cause as many as will not worship the image of the beast to be put to death;" nor can it cause all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark upon their right hand, or upon their foreheads; nor can it prevent men buying and selling any sort of spiritual or temporal merchandize they please. This is the condition of the Image in the latter half of the nineteenth century, which may be styled the dying hour of the life imparted to it by the wonder-working Pseudoprophet of the Lamb-Horned Beast. But while the Temporal Image is at death's door, there is considerable vitality in the Pseudoprophet, or Roman Hierarchy, itself. This has been evinced in the concourse of bishops at Rome under pretence of celebrating the martyrdom of Peter in that city of fraud and abomination; or, as it is termed by the Spirit in ch. 18:2, "the habitation of daemons, and the hold of every foul spirit, and cage of every unclean and hateful bird." Of this Pseudoprophetic power, Pius IX, is officially, in 1867, the distressed and wailing mouth. How different his utterances from those of Gregory VII and Innocent III! When they roared princes and nations trembled; when he tries to roar, his roar becomes a wail of "heart-rending griefs," and they laugh, having no longer any fear of papal interdicts and curses; and continue their "machinations the most implacable" for the subversion of the authority of what he styles "the Apostolic See." But the Pseudoprophet Hierarchy, with all the vitality that lingers in its constitution, will never be able to galvanize the old shattered image into its ancient vigor. If it continue to exist in dilapidation, it is only tolerated until "the Hour of Judgment" be fully come to execute the sentence written concerning the Beast and its wonder-working deceiver that created the Image, saying, "These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone" (ch. 19:20; 20:10). Thus, in conclusion of this section, we have seen that after a conflict of more than four hundred years from Charlemagne to Innocent III., the ecclesiastics of all the hierarchies of Europe were united in one vast organization with the Bishop of Rome as their supreme legislative and judicial head, and a single ecclesiastical government established over the whole Roman church after the model of that of the Woman's Man-Child of Sin, developed in the person and power of Constantine the Great. This development of the Man-Child into the fulness of the age and stature of The Man, or image of the beast, is denominated by Romanists themselves a monarchy. "All catholic doctors agree in this," says Bellarmine, "that the ecclesiastical government committed to men by God is a monarchy." "If the monarchial is the best form of government," says another, "as we have shown, and it is certain that the church of God instituted by Christ its head, who is supremely wise, ought to be governed in the best manner, who can deny that its rule ought to be monarchial?" Accordingly, the canonists, or skilled interpreters and practitioners of ecclesiastical law, are accustomed to style the Bishop of Rome a king. "The pope," say they, "may be called a king. He is the Prince of princes, and Lord of lords. He is, as it were, a God on earth. He is above right, superior to law, superior to the canons. He can do all things against right and without right. He is greater than all the saints except Peter. Some say he is greater than an apostle, and not bound by the commands either of Peter or Paul. His sentence prevails against the judgment of the whole world. His sole will is instead of reason in the bestowment of ecclesiastical offices. He does not commit simony in selling benefices. He may deprive any one of his office without any cause. He is able to free from obligation in matters of positive right, without any cause, and they who are so released are safe in respect to God. He can take away a possession from one church and give it to another, even without a cause; and no one can say unto him, Why doest thou so? He is not bound by treaties. The Pope and Christ make one consistory. He can make justice of injustice. He can change the substance of things, and make a thing out of nothing. He can change squares into circles" -- Febronii de Statu Eccl. lib i. c. ix. p. 527. Such was the Iconic Man in the noonday of his existence, the number of whose name is 666. Is not this the Antichrist? Could any power arise in the world more deserving of the name? Is not this Image-power, Anomos, The Lawless One, whose coming Paul predicted would be "after the working of the Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish?" It can be no other than "the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called god, or Sebasma, an object of veneration; so that he in the temple of the god sits as a god, publicly exhibiting himself that he is a god." And yet in view of all the record extant concerning this Iconic Man of Sin, there are protestors who affirm that the papal dynasty is not the Antichrist, and that his revelation is still in the future! Can blindness be more complete than that which cannot see the Lawless One in him whose worshippers declare to be superior to law and above right? If the Antichrist have not been in full manifestation before the world for the past six hundred years, there need be no apprehension of his future advent. But, as we have seen elsewhere, Antichrist and vicar of Christ, or Vice-Christ, are synonymous expressions; so that in this vainglorious title of the papal power it stands confessed as Antichrist, the Image Man of Sin, for the worship or reprobation of mankind. 32. The Utterances of the Speaking Image "And it was given to it to give spirit to the Image of the Beast, that the Image of the Beast might both speak, and cause as many as would not worship the Image of the Beast, that they should be put to death" -- Verse 15. To have power to speak, and to cause to put to death; or to decree and to enforce its decrees, was the result of spirit, pneuma, being imparted to the Image. A monarch, or pontiff king, who made laws and issued decrees, but could not enforce them, or cause them to be executed, would be an image without spirit. That which is necessary to a monarchy for the execution of its laws and ordinances is its spirit or power; and when a king can no longer cause his will to be respected; when he decrees and threatens, and his utterances are laughed at or despised, he is a vox et pratera nihil, a mere voice, his spirit has departed; and he ceases to be a power in the world of powers, which respect nothing which cannot itself be respected. Such is the present condition of what remains of the Sixth, or Imperial Head of the Beast. It can order all Heretics to be roasted and exterminated, who defiantly refuse to abandon their heresy, and to worship or honor and obey it. But in none of its "catholic provinces" can its episcopal officials execute its commands. Neither they, nor the secular authorities, dare venture upon the experiment; because, like the rulers of old, "they fear the people." All it dare attempt now is the canonization of murderers, who used to roast Jews, burn heretics, and try to exterminate protestants. This has been ostentatiously done in Rome by Pius IX. and his bishops in 1867. Their transformation of these bloodhounds of the Papacy into Romish Saint-Protectors, or Mahuzzim, demonstrates what the Image of the Beast would do even now, if its spirit or power to do or practise, had not departed; and shows that the mind of the Romish Hierarchy is to-day as hateful, stagnant and unclean as ever. But happily for mankind in the fairest countries of the earth, they can only typify their disposition towards robbery and murder by canonizing thieves and sanguinary wretches of a former age. By thus gnashing their teeth at the living, they give expression to their "heart-rending griefs" that they can no longer "cause as many as will not worship the Image of the Beast to be put to death." But in the days of Innocent III., the great things and blasphemies spoken of by the Image, or Iconic Lion-Mouth, were something more than sound and fury signifying nothing harmful. They were terrific roarings that made all the beasts of the Roman wilderness to tremble. Lucius III. and Innocent III., by formal decrees, required heretics to be seized, condemned, and delivered by the bishops to the civil magistrates, to be capitally punished, and enjoined the princes and magistrates to execute on them the sentences denounced by the canon and civil laws. "Supported," says the Iconic Mouth, "by the presence and energy of our beloved son Frederick, the illustrious Emperor of the Romans, by the council of our brethren, other patriarchs, archbishops also, and numerous princes, who have assembled from different parts of the world, we rise by this decree against all heretics, and by apostolical authority condemn every sect, by whatever name it is designated "In the first place, therefore, we subject the Cathari, the Paterini, the Poor Men of Lyons, the Passagini, and the Arnaldists (Witnesses clothed in sackcloth -- ch. 11:3), to a perpetual anathema; and as some claim authority to preach ("buy and sell" without money or price, the Divine mission of the Saints -- ch. 13:7), although the apostle saith, 'How can they preach except they be sent?' all who venture to preach, either publicly or privately, without authority from the Apostolic See, or the bishop of the place, and all who dare to think and teach otherwise in respect to the sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, or baptism, or the remission of sins, or matrimony, or the other sacraments of the church than the Holy Roman Church preaches and practices; and generally, all whom the Roman Church, or individual bishops in their dioceses, or the clergy themselves, when the seat is vacant, with the concurrence, if necessary, of the neighboring bishops, shall judge to be heretics, shall be bound with the same bond of perpetual anathema. All their harborers, and defenders, and all who yield them any patronage or favor, we consign to the same sentence. "And as it sometimes happens that the severity of ecclesiastical discipline is condemned by those who do not understand its virtue, we ordain that clergymen who are clearly convicted of the aforesaid errors, shall be divested of the prerogatives of their order, deprived of their benefices, and delivered to the secular power to be appropriately punished, unless, immediately on the detection of their error, they voluntarily return to the Catholic faith, and consent publicly, at the will of the bishop of the diocese, to abjure their heresy, and make a proper satisfaction. But a layman, who is infected with that pest, unless abjuring the heresy and making satisfaction, he instantly flies to the orthodox faith, is to be left to the will of the secular power to suffer a vengeance in correspondence with his crime. They, moreover, who shall be found marked by the mere suspicion of the church, unless they demonstrate their innocence in a manner suited to the nature of the suspicion, and to their rank, shall be subjected to the same sentence. But they who, after having abjured their error, or cleared themselves in a trial by their bishop, shall be convicted of relapsing to the heresy they have abjured, we order to be left to the severest sentence without further hearing, and their goods appropriated to the churches which they served, according to the canons. "We add, moreover, by the advice of the bishops, and the suggestion of the emperor and his princes, that each archbishop and bishop shall himself, or by his archdeacon, or other honest and suitable persons, once or twice a year, go through the parish in which it is reported that Heretics reside, and compel three or more men there of good reputation, or the whole population if it seem expedient, to swear that should any one know persons who are heretics, or any who hold secret assemblies, or differ in life or manners from the usage of the faithful, he will endeavor to point them out to the bishop or archdeacon. And the bishop or archdeacon shall call the accused before him, and unless they clear themselves to his satisfaction, or should they, after having cleared themselves, relapse to their former heresy, they are to be punished according to his judgment. "If from a superstitious objection to oaths, any of them should refuse to swear, they are on that account to be adjudged heretics, and smitten with the punishment which has been mentioned. "We enact, moreover, that counts, barons, prefects, and consuls of cities and other places, at the admonition of the archbishops and bishops, promise under oath, that whenever they shall be required by them, they will boldly and efficiently aid the church against heretics and their accomplices, and study in good faith, according to their duty and power, to execute in the cases of which we have spoken, the ecclesiastical in the same manner as the imperial laws. And should they refuse to observe their oath, they shall be divested of their offices which they enjoy and become ineligible to others. They shall, moreover, be excommunicated, and their lands put under an interdict of the church. A city that excites resistance to these decrees, or neglects at the admonition of the bishop to punish those who resist, shall be deprived of the commerce of other cities, and divested of its episcopal rank. "All favorers also of heretics, as condemned to perpetual infamy, we order to be debarred from the office of advocates, from giving testimony, and from all civil employments." Similar canons were enacted a.d. 1215, by the fourth Lateran council under Innocent III., the most famous general council of the middle ages, at which over 1000 bishops and abbots attended, and ambassadors also from most of the kingdoms, in which the Lion Mouth decrees, that should a civil lord, on being required and admonished by the church, neglect to clear his territory of this heretical nuisance, let them be bound by the metropolitan and other bishops of the province with the bond of excommunication; and should he refuse to make satisfaction within a year, let it be signified to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare his vassals to be freed from allegiance to him, expose his land to be seized by Catholics, who, exterminating the Heretics, may possess it without opposition, and preserve it in the purity of the faith Catholic ascendancy has witnessed many years of religious warfare during which the Church has persecuted those who have dared to oppose its pretensions. The above medals were struck in France, 1685. The one of the left has the caption: Heresies Extinguished. The one on the right has the caption: Religious victorious: and beneath the Temple of Calvin overthrown. "Catholics who assume the sign of the cross ('the Mark of the Beast') shall gird themselves to the extermination of the Heretics, shall enjoy the indulgence, and be fortified by the sacred privilege, which are conceded to those who go to the relief of the Holy Land." These enactments were incorporated in the decretals of Gregory IX., and became the law of the Image-State. Thus the Latin Hierarchy decreed the ruin and sanguinary extermination of all who dissented from its superstition, and refused to pay it the honor and obedience it required. In the epoch of the full manifestation of this ferocious power the Two Witnesses, styled in the above decrees "heretics," had become by their influence and doctrine very formidable antagonists to the pope and his clerby. At the beginning of the thirteenth century, the provinces of Languedoc, Provence, Catalonia, and all the surrounding countries, comprising the whole of the South of France, with the Pyrenees and a part of Spain, were peopled with an industrious and intelligent race of men, addicted to commerce and the arts, but generally fostering religious views exceedingly hostile to "the great things and blasphemies" of the Leo-Dragonic Mouth of the Image, or Imperio-Babylonish Hierarchy of Rome. They were styled Albigenses from the province of Albi, in the south of France, in which they flourished in considerable numbers. In the whole of this southern district, they not only dissented, but bore a lively testimony against Romish superstition and idolatry, and the vicious lives of the clergy. The author of the Belgian Chronicle, from Caesarius, a.d. 1208, says: "The error of the Albigenses prevailed to that degree, that it had infected as much as a thousand cities; and if it had not been repressed by the swords of the faithful, I think that it would have corrupted the whole of Europe." David Hume, though regarding them as enthusiasts, bears witness to their moral excellence. "Pope Innocent III.," says he, "published a crusade against the Albigenses, a species of enthusiasts in the south of France, whom he denominated Heretics, because like all other enthusiasts, they neglected the rites of the church, and opposed the power and influence of the clergy. And these sectaries, though the most innocent and inoffensive of mankind, were exterminated with all the circumstances of extreme violence and barbarity." Ebrard of Bethune, who wrote a.d. 1212, says, "they call themselves Vallenses, because they 'abide in the Valley of Tears,'" alluding to their situation as witnessing in sackcloth, in the Valleys of Piedmont. Their opinions are thus recited from an old manuscript by the Centuriators of Magdeburg: "In articles of faith, the authority of the holy scripture is the highest, and for that reason it is the rule of judging: so that whatsoever agreeth not with the word of God, is deservedly to be rejected and avoided. "The decrees of fathers and councils are so far to be approved, as they agree with the word of God. "The reading and knowledge of the holy scriptures is free and necessary for all men, the laity as well as the clergy; yea, and the writings of the apostles and prophets are to be read rather than the comments of men. "The sacraments of the Church of Christ are two, baptism and the supper of the Lord. "The receiving in both kinds for priests and people was instituted by Christ. "Masses are impious; and it is insanity to say masses for the dead. "Purgatory is an invention of men; for they who believe, come into eternal life; and they who believe not, into eternal condemnation -- (credentes enim, invitam aeternam venire -- come, not go, as generally translated -- Author). The Vale of Tears. It was in the Waldensian Valleys, chiefly of Savoy and Piedmont, depicted above, that the anti-Catholic protesting communities mainly took refuge. Their opposition was maintained despite the most savage of persecutions by adherents of the Roman Catholic Church: persecutions by adherents of the Roman Catholic Church: persecutions that continued for several centuries -- Publishers. "The invocating and worshipping of dead saints is idolatry. "The Church of Rome is the Babylonian Harlot. "We must not obey the Pope and the Bishops; because they are the wolves of the Church of Christ. "The pope hath not the primacy over all the churches of Christ, neither hath he the power of both swords. "That is the Ecclesia of Christ which heareth the sincere word of Christ, and useth the sacraments instituted by him, in what place soever it exist. "Vows of celibacy are inventions of men, and occasions of sodomy. "So many orders are so many characters of the Beast. "Monkery is a stinking carcass. "So many superstitious dedications of temples, commemorations of the dead, benedictions of animals, pilgrimages, so many forced fastings, so many superfluous festivals, those perpetual bellowings of unlearned men, and the observations of the other ceremonies, manifestly hindering the teaching and learning of the word, are diabolical inventions. "The marriage of priests is lawful and necessary." The following testimonies concerning the holders of the foregoing truths, the Romanists will allow to be unexceptionable. They are the testimonies of Reinerius and Thuanus. Reinerius flourished about a.d. 1254; and his testimony is the more remarkable as he was a Dominican, and Inquisitor-General. "Among all the sects," says he, "which still are or have been, there is not any more pernicious to the Church than that of the Leonists. And this for three reasons. The first is because it is older; for some say that it hath endured from the time of Pope Sylvester; others from the time of the apostles (doubtless, 'the Saints' of ch. 13:7). The second reason, because it is more general; for there is scarce any country wherein the sect is not. The third, because when all other sects beget horror in the hearers by the outrageousness of their blasphemies against God ('the Earth that helps the Woman' in her hostility to Rome) this of the Leonists hath a great show of piety; because they live justly before men, and believe all things rightly concerning God, and all the articles which are contained in the creed; only they blaspheme the church of Rome and the clergy, whom the multitude of the laity is easy to believe." The candid and impartial historian, Thuanus, says, "Peter Waldo, a wealthy citizen of Lyons, about the year of Christ, 1170, gave name to the Waldenses. He, leaving his house and goods, devoted himself wholly to the profession of the gospel, and took care to have the writings of the prophets and apostles translated into the vulgar tongue. When now in a little time he had many followers about him, he sent them forth as his disciples into all parts to propagate the gospel. Their fixed opinions were said to be these: that the Church of Rome, because she hath renounced the true faith of Christ, is the Babylonian Harlot (Babylonicam meretricem esse) and that Barren Tree which Christ himself hath cursed, and commanded to be rooted up; therefore we must by no means obey the pope, and the bishops who cherish his errors; that the monastic life is the sink of the church, and a hellish institution; its vows are vain, and subservient only to the filthy love of boys: the orders of the presbytery are the marks of the great beast which is commemorated in the Apocalypse; the fire of purgatory, the sacrifice of the mass, the feast of the dedications of temples, the worship of saints, and propitiations for the dead, are inventions of Satan. To these, the principal and certain heads of their doctrine others are affixed concerning marriage, the resurrection, the state of the soul after death, and concerning meats." From these testimonies it will be easy for the reader to discern the issue formed in the thirteenth century between the Lamb-Horned Beast and his Image, of the one part, and the Two Witnesses and the Saints of the Holy City, of the other. The spread of "Heresy" so alarmed the Ecclesiastical Power, that it determined to "cause all both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark" in token of their subjection, or be exterminated by fire and sword. Hence these decrees already cited. To carry these into effect, the first crusade was proclaimed of papal idolators against what they called Heretics, and the murderous Inquisition was first erected, the one to subdue their bodies, the other to enslave their minds. "It is enough to make the blood run cold," says one, whose episcopal succession from the apostles had come to him through those mendacious and sanguinary thieves and robbers, the popes, "to read of the horrid murders and devastation of this time, how many of these poor innocent Christians were sacrificed to the blind fury and malice of their enemies. It is computed, that in France alone were slain a million. The consequences of these atrocious barbarities are thus narrated by Thuanus, himself a Romanist. "Against the Waldenses," saith he, "when exquisite punishment availed little, and the evil was exasperated by the remedy which had been unseasonably applied, and their number increased daily, at length complete armies were raised; and a war of no less weight (ch. 11:7, and 13:7) than what our people had before waged against the Saracens, was decreed against them: the event of which was, that they were rather slain, put to flight, spoiled everywhere of their goods and dignities, and dispersed here and there, than that, convinced of their error, they repented. So that they who at first had defended themselves by arms (ch. 11:5, 6) at last overcome by arms (ch. 11:7) fled into Provence and the neighbouring Alps of the French territory, and found a shelter for their life and doctrine in those places. Part withdrew into Calabria, and continued there a long while, even to the pontificate of Pius IV. Part passed into Germany, and fixed their abode among the Bohemians, and in Poland and Livonia. Others turning to the west, obtained refuge in Britain." In short, for the details are too copious to be narrated here, the Iconic Man-Power at length succeeded in its work of carnage and death. It overcame and put to death all opposition to its authority. By the co-operation of the imperial and regal horns of Egyptian and Sodomite Europe, styled "the secular arm," it trampled the saints of the Holy City under its impious and lawless feet; and prostrated the two sackcloth witnessing prophets in political death. But their anastasis in 1789-'92, when, exactly 1,260 years from Justinian's decree imparting spiritual supremacy to the pope, they again stood upon their feet (estesan epi tous podas auton) was the death knell of the terrific Image throughout the world. Since that reign of terror the Iconic Man became incurably sick. The facies Hippocratica pervades his senile and idiotic countenance; and like his brother of Constantinople is tottering on the verge of an abyss; into which when he falls, he will receive a measure, heaped up and shaken down, even "double" at the hands of his innocent and unoffending victims, such as in the day of his power, he meted out to them (ch. 13:10; 17:14; 18:6, 20; 15:2). "Here is the patience of the Saints" -- this is what all true and genuine saints believe and are waiting for; and such are they who keep the commandments of the Deity, and the faith of Jesus (ch. 13:10; 14:12). 33. The Sign of the Beast "And he caused all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the enslaved, that a sign should be given to them upon their right hand, and upon their foreheads" -- Verse 16 There was no class of European society unsubjected to the authority of the Lamb-Horned, or episcopal constituent of the Beast of the Earth; hence, what Ecclesiastical Power did with the concurrence of "the Secular Arm," the Beast is said to do. "He causes" is therefore to be understood of the Lamb-Horned Beast, or Daniel's Little Horn with Eyes and Mouth. No general imposition of a charagma, impressed sign, stamp, or mark, was enjoined upon Europeans by the authority of any of the Ten Horns. Their subjects received it; but it was in obedience to the decrees of a foreign ecclesiastical power. This charagma was a characteristic sign; so that wherever it was observed, it would be known that the bearer was claimed by the Beast as his vassal. The charagma is styled in ch. 19:20, to charagma tou theriou, the beast's sign or mark; because it was characteristically employed by the Latin Hierarchy before the Image was set up as an independent monarchy. At the time the Apocalypse was given, and long both before and after, it was a common practice for slaves, soldiers, and devotees, to bear the imprint of those who claimed, or were supposed to claim, absolute control over them. The impression was generally on the forehead or the hand, in token of servitude. Speaking of the custom for slaves, an old author says, "literarum notis inuri," branded with marks of letters; so that the slaves was styled "literatus," or "lettered." Ambrose says, "charactere domini inscribuntur servuli," "slaves are inscribed with the mark of the master;" and Petronius notes the "forehead" as the place of the sign. Soldiers were marked in "the hand" by the name of the emperor. In Lev. 19:28, the Israelites were forbidden to imprint any marks upon themselves; for it was an idolatrous practice: and continued to the present time by the Hindoos, who mark themselves on the forehead with the "charagma," or characteristic emblem, of the god they are devoted to. Now, the spirit, in allusion to this ancient custom and practice, predicted, that the Beast of the Earth would distinguish itself by a certain character, sign, or mark, as the symbol of its faith and power which it would impose, under the severest pains and penalties upon all recusants, upon every soul without exception under its dominion. What the characteristic symbol would be is not revealed. It was to be a sign of its own selection; and for the universal adoption of which, it was to be terrifically zealous. Commentators have thought that this emblematic mark consists of the three Greek letters, cx", of the last verse of his chapter, which stands for 666; and that the phrase, in verse 17, "the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name," is equivalent to the intimation, that the mark, name, and number, are all the same. I have no objection to the idea, that the triliteral sign cx", is a representative number symbolical of "the name of the beast," and of the numerals contained in the name; but I do object to the notion, that this triliteral is emblematic of "the sign" imposed by the legislative enactments of the Beast upon all its subjects without exception. The sign of the Beast is not apocalyptically signified; but is simply styled to charagma, the sign or mark, and is left to history and public notoriety for its identification. The "charagma," then, is to be considered as something apart, and distinct from the name and number of the name of the Beast. History and public notoriety show, that all the worshippers of the Clerical Hierarchy are impressed with a sign emblematic of their spiritual profession and operation, as soldiers to their emperor, slaves to their master, and devotees to their god. The fulfilment of this stands out palpably in the ecclesiastical institutions of the west. Boniface VIII., who ascended the throne of the Pontifical Image, a.d. 1294, declared in the decree "Unam Sanctam," that "it is essential to the salvation of every human being that he be 'subject' to the Roman Pontiff;" and prefixing thereto the words, "whosoever obeys not as the scripture declares, let him die the death." In accordance with this, both the secular priests and those of the monastic orders, took on themselves the vow of obedience, and received the Romish Sign upon their hands, in public token thereof. This is evident from the "Pontificale Romanum" p. 49, (a.d. 1627) on the Ordination of Priests. "Tum Pontifex cum oleo catechumenorum inungit unicuique ambas manus, simul junctas, in formam crucis;" that is, then the Bishop anoints both the hands of each of the catechumens, joined together "in the form of a cross:" and before handing them the cup and paten, or plate, "Producit manu dextra signum crucis super manus illius quem ordinat;" that is, he makes with the right hand "the sign of the cross upon the hand" of him whom he ordains. The soldiers of the papacy enrolled for the murder and extermination of "Heretics," were to wear upon their vesture the Papal Cross, from which sign they acquired the name of "crusaders." In the words of the fourth Lateran Council, "crucis assumpto charactere," the mark of the cross being assumed, the Pontiff-king, through his anointed priests, imposed the sign of his order upon all other classes of his subjects. All these without exception were compelled to receive it through episcopal confirmation and the clerical ordinance of infant sprinkling, or "rhantism," which the worshippers of the beast, absurdly enough, term "baptism!" -- in which ordinances of the Apostasy, the sign of the cross is impressed upon the "forehead." This was to be the "charagma" imposed according to Canon 9, Sess. 7, of the Council of Trent, entitled "De Charactere;" that is, "Concerning the Mark;" which states the doctrine thus: "Si quis dixerit in tribus Sacramentis, baptismo, scilicet, confirmatione, et ordine, non imprimi 'characterem' in anima, hoc est signum quoddam spirituale et indelebile unde ea iterari non possunt, anathema sit:" that is, if any one shall speak against the three sacraments, to wit, baptism, confirmation, and ordination, that the "Mark" should not be impressed upon a soul (this is a certain spiritual and indelible sign, whence they cannot be repeated) let him be accursed." "Character," in ecclesiastical Latin, is the equivalent of "charagma" in the text. On this Canon, Chemnitz, in his Ex. Dec. Cone. Trid., observes, "And perhaps God permits that they should contend so pertinaciously in defending the opinion of 'the mark' in confirmation and orders (he ought to have added 'in baptismo') that it may be manifested among whom that mark may be, and is found, of which much may be said." "Their chrism," says Junius, "by which in the sacrament of confirmation (as they call it,) they make servile unto themselves the persons and doings of men, 'signing them in their foreheads and hands:' and as for the sign left by Christ, and of the holy sacrament of baptism, 'they make it void.' For whom Christ joined to himself by 'baptism,' this Beast maketh challenge unto them by her greasy chrism; which he doubteth not to perfer before baptism both in authority and efficacy." The Crusaders fought on behalf of the Catholic Church and displayed the "mark of the beast" in the form of a cross. The above Crusaders represent the Orders of the Hospitallers, the Teutonics, and the Templars. The armies of these Orders were answerable only to the Pope -- Publishers. Besides the reception of the charagma from the clergy, there was to be a repetition of the Sign of the Cross by the people themselves, as appears from Bellarmine's "Dottrina Christiana Breve," in which a master asks his disciple, "In che consiste principalmente la Fede di Christo?" that is, In what principally consists the faith of Christ? To which he is made to reply, "In due misteri principali, che sono rinchiuisi nel Segno della Santa Crosce;" that is, In two principal mysteries, which are included in the Sign of the Holy Cross," adding, "II segno della Santa Croce si fa mettendo primo la mano destra al capo, dicendo, in nome del Padre; poi sotto al petto, dicendo, e del Figliuolo: finalmente alia spada sinistra, ed alia destra, dicendo e dallo Spirito Santo;" that is, The Sign of the Holy Cross is made by putting first, the fight hand to the head, saying, "In the name of the Father;" then under the heart, saying, "and of the Son;" finally on the left shoulder, and on the fight, saying, "and of the Holy Spirit." In this way the devotees of the superstition were to sign themselves with the Beast's Sign in token of their bondage to him. These slaves of sin have great confidence in the efficacy of this sign as a defense against all sorts of invisible demoniacal influences. The sign of the cross, with the hand dipped in "holy water," is a great terror to the Devil, who is said to hate it exceedingly! They call it "the Sign of the Holy Cross;" as if that which brought the curse of the law upon Jesus for hanging upon it, could be holy. It would be as reasonable to say Holy Gallows, on which murderers are hanged, as Holy Cross. There is nothing holy pertaining to the Beast. Hence, its sign is like itself accursed, and significant of the perdition that awaits all who glory in it. But the Ecclesiastical Power was not satisfied with imposing its "sign" and "character" upon its willing devotees, as a spiritual and indelible impression imparting holiness to the crossed; it used the mark as a token of disgrace to heretics who had renounced their convictions to save their lives. It obliged them to wear upon their breasts two crosses of a different color from their clothes, to quit places suspected of heresy, and to establish themselves in cities zealous for their Romish idolatry, where the eyes of all would be fixed upon them by the cruciferous costume they were condemned to wear. The Sign of the Cross is the universal character of the Apostasy, both in its Romish and Protestant manifestations. It is erected upon their temples, or spiritual bazaars, and upon the flags of Protestant and Papal nations, as well as upon the hands and foreheads of individuals. The Papists impress the sign on these with water and "greasy chrism" in rhantism, confirmation, and orders, as already shown; while Protestants, or anti-papal rebels, still retaining the character, less frequently parade the sign in the practice of their superstition. They pertinaciously hold on to their institutions of the sign, rhantism, confirmation, and orders; though they do not sketch the character, charagma or mark, upon the hands or forehead in the observance of each. Millions of them think that, if the Sign received from their Roman Mother is impressed on the forehead rhantismally, it need not be repeated in confirmation or ordination; because none are admitted to these Papistical ordinances who have not been previously signed with the Sign of the Cross in what they call "baptism," but which is no baptism at all. The correctness of this statement may be verified by reference to the Mass Book of the "Harlots" of Britain and the United States, styled "The Book of Common Prayer." Thus, when the priest pours, or sprinkles, water upon the upturned face of an infant, he falsely affirms that he baptizes it in the name of the Father, etc., and then proceeds to say, "We receive this child into the congregation of Christ's flock, and do Sign him with the Sign of the Cross." In the book authorized by the Protestant Episcopal Harlot of America, is a marginal appendix to this, saying, "Here the minister shall make a Cross upon the child's forehead." I do not know if the Maternal Harlot of England, "as by law established," would permit the sign of the cross to be omitted in rhantism on any consideration; if she would not, then we are bound to admit, that her American Daughter is more accommodating than she: or as politicians would say, "more liberal;" for she has inserted a note to the effect that, "if those who present the infant shall desire the Sign of the Cross to be omitted, although the Church knows no worthy cause of scruple concerning the same, yet, in that case, the minister may omit that part." The omission then of the betokening charagma does not impair the supposed efficacy of the sprinkling or pouring. The sprinkling and Signing of the Cross are two actions pertaining to one and the same ecclesiastical ordinance. The old Roman Mother will not permit either action to be omitted. Her disobedient grand-daughter in America thinks the sign might in some cases be dispensed with, seeing that the thing signified may be obtained by the sprinkling alone. She thinks it, however, safer to hold on to the sanctifying use of both actions; she therefore orders this "charagma" of the Beast be observed. But, certain of the Babylonian Harlot's progeny, born after her British Daughter, and styled apocalyptically, "Names of Blasphemy and the Abominations of the Earth;" but, historically and currently, "Protestant Dissenters" -- do not see why the Sign of the Cross may not be permanently omitted in rhantism, as their Episcopalian relations have dispensed with it in Confirmation and Ordination without their supposed virtue being impaired. Hence, therefore, the more to spite their Babylonian Mother, they have suppressed the cross-signing, and retain the sprinkling "as its equivalent." This, however, does not alter their spiritual relations to the Beast; for though they omit a constituent of the outward sign, they pertinaciously adhere to the "sign-ordinance" invented for them, and delivered to them by their acknowledged mother, the Babylonian Harlot; of whose golden wine cup they have imbibed copious and intoxicating draughts. The Nonconformist Sign-ordinance is the Romish "baptism," undecorated by the movement of the operator's finger crosswise upon the forehead. Dissenting "sorcery" contents itself with applying "holy water" to the forehead of an unconscious babe in the form of drops, and leaving them to assume what shape, or charagma, regenerating, sanctifying or dedicating, grace, may give them! It is the "grace" in aqueous suspension that produces the magical effects attributed to the rhantismal ordinance of the beast by his worshippers. Some of them style it "subvenient," others "prevenient," and perhaps others again may regard it as postvenient, and some not venient at all. Upon this matter they are not agreed. They are all, however pretty well agreed that the "grace" is what they call "Holy Ghost," or an invisible regenerating and sanctifying afflation from the object of their adoration, which they say is "without body or parts," dwelling beyond the bounds of space!" This spiritual essence, it is pretended, "sanctifies the water to the mystical washing away of sin;" that is, makes the water holy; so that, in whatever form applied to the new born Hindoo, Mohammedan, Greek, Latin, Protestant, or Jewish, babe, the grace in aqueous solution, or suspension, "spiritually," or mystically, "regenerates" it; so that it is "born again, and made an heir of everlasting salvation," and "released from sin!" This is the theory of "subvenient grace," as taught by the Romish and Protestant Episcopal Churches of England and America, to which also Episcopal Methodism claims relation as mother and sister; and which all rhantist names and denominations recognize as Christians, though not of such an advanced type as themselves. In 1848, or thereabouts, an heretical opposition to this theory was started within the pale of the English Harlot by a Mr. Gorham. He was shocked at the conclusion to which this theory led. Christ said to Nicodemus, "Except a man be born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God;" which was equivalent to saying, he cannot be saved. The idea that water in any form was essential to salvation was intolerable to this episcopal priest. He had no objection to admit that "grace" was essential; but he could not brook the notion that it was conveyed to a babe only through the sanctified water. But, if not, why make the water holy by the infusion of "grace"? He contended that the "mystical washing" or "spiritual regeneration," ensued through the "grace" operating or coming upon the babe before the water in the drops and sign of the cross were impressed upon the forehead. Hence, the term prevenient, a coming before. The ridiculous issue between subvenient and prevenient grace greatly agitated the whole Protestant kingdom. Though the courts and council of the nation were appealed to, nothing could be determined in solution of the difficulty. If grace came before, it might also come after, the use of water; so that "saved by grace," in the mouth of the Beast's worshippers, might supersede the Beast's rhantism, miscalled by them "baptism," altogether. And at this conclusion the quakers have long since arrived. They make no use of water in any form; but pretend that they have been mystically washed and regenerated by grace, styled by them "the light within!" "If the light within you be darkness," said Christ, "how great is that darkness?" This great darkness is common to them and all baby-sprinklers; for the operation of their traditions is to leave them all without grace and salvation in verity and truth. Well might Junius say, "as for the sign left by Christ and of the holy sacrament of baptism, they make it void." In order that the uninitiated may know what the Beast's Hierarchy means by the word "sacrament" and the connection therewith of "sign," or "charagma," I will quote from the catechism of the American Episcopal Harlot. In this it is asked, "What meanest thou by this word 'sacrament?' Answer; I mean 'an outward and visible sign' of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us; ordained by Christ himself; as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof. Question; How many parts are there in a sacrament? Answer; Two; 'the outward visible sign,' and the inward spiritual grace. Question; What is the outward visible sign or form in Baptism? Answer; Water; wherein the person is baptized, In the name of the Father," and so forth. This is the dogma of the Babylonian Mother, also from whom her harlot progeny receive it. The Mother and her Protestant Daughters are not all of one mind exactly concerning "the outward sign." They all agree that the proper subject to be "charagmatized" is an unconscious babe, Hindoo, Mohammedan, Greek, Latin, Protestant, or Jew. In other words, that intelligence, belief, and repentance are unnecessary for the subject of the Sign of the Beast, or the outward part of what the Beast's Hierarchy styles "baptism." They all agree that the outward sign, or "charagma," is to be made "visible" by the use of water; and that the water is to be "rhantized," or sprinkled, on the forehead; but they do not all agree that the spiritual wizard who performs the legerdemain should figure a cross with his dripping finger. Many of them say, that the Holy Water sprinkled is "sign" or "form" enough without the cross-figuration. In this opinion they differ from their Babylonian Mother who with tridentine indignation, pronounces them to be "accursed;" which no doubt they are. As already quoted, "if any one shall say," said she, "that in baptism the character (or sign of the cross) should not be impressed upon a soul, let him be accursed." This little difference excepted, they furthermore agree in the general, that this rhantismal ordinance of the Beast was "ordained by Christ himself." A greater lie was never uttered by the children of the Devil (John 8:44). The Babylonian Mother herself denies this. The late Archbishop Hughes, in his controversy with Breckenridge, the Presbyterian, in 1833, I think it was, candidly confessed, that Infant Rhantism was not taught in the New Testament, as Protestants stupidly and ignorantly affirm; but was decreed by the authority of the Latin Church, from which all baby-sprinklers have received it. This is true. It is emphatically the Beast's outward and visible sign; which, as Junius saith, "has made void the sign left by Christ." If what the Beast's hierarchy teaches those that wonder after it as "the inward and spiritual grace" conveyed to the sprinkled baby be true, there can be no use for "the sign left by Christ." The clergy teach that the babe in the work performed, in opere operato, receives the "Holy Ghost;" by which it is washed, sanctified, regenerated, released from sin, made a living member of Christ's holy church, and an heir of everlasting salvation in the kingdom of heaven! Is not that parsonic aqueous manipulation of a baby's forehead a wonderful piece of sorcery or conjuration? Are not the spiritual performances of those clerical jugglers well styled "sorceries" in Apoc. 9:21; 18:23, and they themselves "sorcerers" in ch. 22:15? Yea, verily; they are those without the city "who love and invent a lie." In view of this "inward and spiritual grace" thus magically acquired by a babe, what possible use can there be in "the Sign left by Christ?" It can do no more for believing adults of the most Scriptural intelligence and Abrahamic disposition, than the Sign of the Beast is said to do for its worshippers. Even supposing a babe were a proper subject of baptism (the reader, not drunk with Babylonian Wine, will excuse the supposition by way of argument) the "reverend" sorcerers ignore both faith and repentance. It will not do to say that these are in the god-parents or sponsors, who answer for the babe. The doctrine of Christ knows nothing of such substitutional representatives in baptism. The "one faith," the "one hope" and the "one baptism," are a personal affair; no one can believe, or hope, or be baptized, for another; for "without faith it is impossible to please God; for he that cometh to God (and they say, "he," the babe, "coming to thy holy Baptism;" and, therefore, in baptism, to God) must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them who diligently seek him." A babe cannot do this, and, therefore, no operation of which a babe is the passive automaton can be anything but disgusting and blasphemous before God. Besides, it is notorious that under the shadow of the archiepiscopal palace at Lambeth, god-fathers and sponsors are often hired from the neighboring cabstand at a shilling a head, to make "baptismal vows" for baby candidates they never expect or wish to see again, after returning to their cab from the clerical bazaar! These profane Jehus, as "sureties," undertake that the babe shall "renounce the Devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires of the same, and the sinful desires of the flesh; so that he shall not follow, nor be led by them!" But this blasphemous farce is not played only by these sons of the whip; it is substantially played off by all orders and degrees of the Beast's worshippers. All the royal family, nobility, gentry and clergy of England, have, by proxy in rhantism and personally in confirmation, vowed to do the same things. Yet all the world knows that their vows are unheeded and unperformed; for what else are these orders than the embodied "pomp and glory of the world" revelling in "the sinful desires of the flesh" by which they are led! They are the blind misleaders of the blind; for like priests, parson and minister, or by whatever name the public sorcerer may be known, who administers or performs the rhantismal conjuration, so are the people led. By proxy they promise to "constantly believe God's holy word, and obediently to keep his commandments," while they are as ignorant of what He requires them to believe and do, as if He had never spoken since He placed man upon the earth. The effect of all this upon papist, protestant and dissenter, is the inwrought supposition that they are baptized members of Christ's church, and heirs of everlasting life! This is what Paul terms a strong delusion and believing a lie (2 Thess. 2:11). They have substituted "the Sign of the Beast" for "the Sign of Christ" -- or Rhantism of Babes for the Baptism of Adults, enlightened by "the truth as it is in Jesus;" so that the whole rhantized world is unbaptized and "alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart" (Eph. 4:18). There is one remarkable absurdity not to be pretermitted in this exposition of the Sign of Beast. Its "reverend" sorcerers say that the water they use is sanctified by the Holy Ghost to the mystical washing away of sin, and that the babe, sprinkled on the forehead with this sanctified water, is released from sin, and sanctified with the Holy Ghost! Now, the question is, what sin is this ghostly sanctified babe released from? The apostle saith "sin is the transgression of law;" what law has a babe transgressed who is without speech and without volition? Every one not drunk or insane knows that a babe is not an actual transgressor; and, therefore, has no sins to be released from. But, as they refer to the fact, that "all men are conceived and born in sin," it is to be inferred that this is the sin to be released from -- "original sin," as causing the flesh to be what it is. There is no other sort of sin a babe can be released from. To be released from sin is to be released from subjection to it, and from the penalty thereby incurred. Does such a release result from the subjection of a babe to the "outward visible sign?" Is it released from sin's flesh and its "emotions?" If so, how does it come to be sick or to die? The punishment of sin is death, a sentence passed upon all the descendants of Adam, eph' ho pantes hemarton, in whom all sinned -- Rom 5:12. Upon this federal principle, the babe sinned in Adam, and, therefore, falls sick and dies, although it has committed no sins. What a monstrous absurdity in the face of these stubborn facts, to say that sanctified water (supposing it were really sanctified) or the essence of holiness supposed to be in it, releases a babe from the only sin that can be imputed to it, seeing that it is released from none of the evils that sin entails! If the inward spiritual grace said to be contained in the outward visible sign released the babe from sin, it would be freed from "all the ills that flesh is heir to," and live forever. In such an event the Sign of the Beast would be a wonderful institution; but as it accomplishes nothing claimed for it by the "reverend divines" who practise it, there is no other conclusion that can be arrived at than that it is a sign characteristic only of those who obey and worship the Beast, "of whom there has not been written the names in the book of life of the Lamb from the foundation of the world" -- ch. 13:8; 17:8. But, before closing this section it will be proper to make a brief statement of the sign left by Christ and made void by the Sign of the Beast. For the information, then, of sincere and candid inquirers after the truth, it may be remarked that the SIGN LEFT BY CHRIST is the "One Baptism." It is the institution to which all must subject themselves as evidential of their obedience to the faith; for as Rhantism is the Sign of obedience to the Beast, so Baptism is the Sign of obedience to Christ. Its constituents are a proper subject, sufficient water, and the action indicated in the word. A proper subject is one who has been "taught of God" (John 6:44, 45). God's teaching finds access to a man's mind by the study of the Scriptures, which are sufficient for instruction in righteousness, and the development of a man of God (2 Tim. 3:16). A man thus taught believes "the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 8:12); and, in acquiring this faith, finds himself possessed of an enlightened mind, a love for the truth he believes, and a disposition such as Abraham possessed; in other words, he is a subject of a "faith that works by love," and "purifies the heart" (Gal. 4:6; Acts 15:9). Such an one as this, having the "one faith" and the "one hope" is the only proper subject of the "one baptism." Baptism being the institution that affords scope for the obedience of faith, and obedience to the faith, can only be Scripturally and rightly observed by a true believer -- a believer of "the truth as it is in Jesus." The religious use of water is of no efficacy to any other kind of subject. No invention can supply the lack of an intelligent belief of the gospel of the kingdom in the person to be baptized. He must be "dead to sin," that he may be "baptized into Christ's death," who "died for sin once;" for it is only the dead, in this sense, who are released or freed from sin (Rom. 6:1, 3, 10, 7). The quantity of water is not sufficient if the subject cannot be buried therein. In whatever place there are persons "ordained for eternal life," sufficient water will always be found. The quantity required is indicated by the word immersion, which is the English synonym for the Greek word baptisma. "We are buried with Christ," says Paul, "through the baptism into the death" of Christ. The action of baptism is, therefore, a burial in water as a sign of burial with Christ; which signified burial no one can be the subject of who does not believe "the things of the name of Jesus Christ." The phrase used by Christ in his conversation with Nicodemus, indicates the quantity of water, and the action inseparable from baptism -- "Except a man be born of water and spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God." To be born of anything is to emerge from that thing in which the subject of birth had been previously concealed. Hence, no one can be "born of water" unless he had been covered with, or put out of sight, in water. The action of baptism is, therefore, clearly a burying in water, or immersion, and an emergence from it. This is a sign based upon the burial of Christ crucified for our offences, and his resurrection for our justification (Rom. 4:25); and signifies that the subject, having Christ in him by faith (Eph. 3:17), is crucified, dead, buried and risen together with him, to walk in newness of life. Such is the sign left by Christ for the mystical washing away of sins. If there were no literal or actional washing, as in the Sign of the Beast, there could be no mystical washing away. In the Beast's sign there is no faith in the subject, no literal washing, and, consequently, no basis for a mystical or emblematical washing. The absence of faith in the subject is substituted by the bungling conceit of putting "holy ghost" in the water, and apply it homeopathically for an emblematic washing, where there is no sign-washing at all! Look now, gentle reader, upon this picture, then upon that. Contrast the Sign of the Beast with the Sign left by Christ, and you will easily perceive that the one is a mere invention of the drunken Sorceress of Babylon, authoritatively delivered to, and reverently received by, the worshippers of the Beast; while the other has the Scriptural impress of Christ's image and superscription evincing its Divine authority; and has been recognized by the faithful in all the ages and generations since it was delivered, as the only true sign, betokening "the Father's name written in the foreheads of the redeemed" (Apoc. 14:1, 3, 4). 34. Buy or Sell "And (causes) that no one be able to buy or sell, save he that hath the sign, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name -- (verse 17). In commenting upon this, bishop Newton remarks, "If any dissent from the stated and authorized forms, they are condemned and executed as heretics; and in consequence of that they are no longer suffered 'to buy or sell;' they are interdicted from traffic and commerce, and all the benefits of civil society. So Roger Hoveden relates of William the Conqueror, that he was so dutiful to the pope that 'he would not permit any one in his power to 'buy or sell' anything, whom he found disobedient to the Apostolic Throne.' So the canon of the council of Lateran under the pope Alexander III., made against the Waldenses and Albigenses, enjoins, upon pain of anathema, that 'no man presume to entertain or cherish them in his house or land, or exercise traffic with them.' The synod of Tours in France, under the same pope, orders under the like intermination, that 'no man should presume to receive or assist them, no, not so much as to hold any communion with them in 'selling or buying,' that being deprived of the comfort of humanity, they may be compelled to repent of the error of their way.' Pope Martin V., in his bull set out after the council of Constance, commands in like manner, that 'they permit not the heretics to have houses in their districts, or enter into contracts, or carry on commerce, or enjoy the comforts of humanity with Christians.' 'In this request,' as Mede observes, 'the False Prophet 'spake as a dragon'." For the Dragon Diocletian published a like edict, that no one should sell or administer anything to the Christians, unless they had first burnt incense to the gods, as Bede also rehearseth in the hymn of Justin Martyr: on illis emendi quidquam Aut vendendi copia: Nec ipsam haurire aquam Dabatur licentia, Antequam thurificarent Detestandis idolis. That is, 'they had not the power of buying or selling anything, nor were they allowed the liberty of drawing water itself, before they had offered incense to detestable idols.' Popish excommunications are therefore, like heathen persecutions; and how large a share the corrupted clergy, and especially the monks of former, and the Jesuits of latter times, have had in framing and enforcing such cruel interdicts, and in reducing all orders and degrees to so servile a state of subjection, no man of the least reading can want to be informed." Now, this is all true and satisfactory as far as it goes; but it does not bring out all the truth contained in the prohibition of the text. The Scriptural use of the phrase "buy or sell" is not restricted to dealing in dry goods, groceries, and other kinds of secular daily traffic among the people. Spiritual wares are merchandise as well as silks, linen, tea and sugar. The Spirit deals in the choicest kinds of merchandise, which He offers to the public upon the most advantageous terms. His business advertisement is conceived in the most liberal spirit, and runs thus: "Ho! every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money: come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price." He then proceeds to expostulate with people for wasting their means in buying mere sawdust of dishonest bakers, who sell it to them for bread. "Wherefore," saith he, "do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labor for that which satisfieth not? Hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye good (bread), and let your soul delight itself in fatness. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will cut off to you the covenant of the hidden period (or future age), the sure mercies of David" (Isa. 55:1-3). In this advertisement, the article offered for sale is the truth -- the good things covenanted to David; concerning which He saith to men, "Buy the truth and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding" (Prov. 23:23): that is, buy these four things; but when you have acquired them, see that you do not part with them for any consideration. The truth, then, is the spiritual merchandise to be bought and sold without money or price. The Spirit and His agents, "faithful men who are able to teach others" (2 Tim. 2:2), are the sellers, and those who seek to understand it, are the buyers. The commodities they offer for sale, under the Divine commission contained in Apoc. 22:17, are tried gold, white raiment and eye-salve, with many gifts thrown in to induce purchase. The Apocalyptic advertisement is found in ch. 3:18, thus: "I counsel thee," saith the Spirit and the Bride, "to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eye-salve, that thou mayest see." All this is valuable merchandise that has been freely offered to them who dwell upon the habitable now occupied by the Dragon, the two Beasts, and the Image of the Sixth Head of the Beast. I say, it has been liberally offered for sale in these dominions, and extensively purchased; but it is not so now. A rival establishment has been opened, professedly to sell the same goods; but instead of selling "wines on the lees well refined" (Isa. 25:6); that "cheereth Elohim and men" (Judges 9:13); they introduced a poisonous and intoxicating substitute, which stole away the brains of all who purchased it. This noxious compound, which causes ramollissement du cerveau, or softening of the brain, and rottenness of the bones, is Apocalyptically styled, Babylonian wine of fornication (ch. 17:2-5). Under the influence of this "imported liquor," they refused the cheering and strengthening, but not intoxicating, wines of the Spirit; and gave all their custom to the False Prophet, whose "Mouth" speaks from the Seven Hills, and who distinguishes himself with the skin and horns of a lamb. This principal of the rival establishment, who enriches himself "with all deceivableness," knowing that his success in business depended upon the continued intoxication and infatuation of his customers, secured for himself, by good words and fair speeches, which deceive the hearts of the simple, an exclusive license to sell spiritual merchandise. The original firm, however, protested against the fraud, and would not submit to the exclusion; but continued to sell the true and genuine bread, wine, and precious things, to the few who wished to buy. But, in process of time, the fraudulent traders had so thoroughly established themselves, and so perverted the tastes of the people, "both rich and poor, small and great, free and enslaved," that nothing genuine was in demand. Their monopoly was sustained by the corrupt governments of the world; by which they were authorized to maintain it by any measures they deemed most effectual. They were not slow to avail themselves of this permit. They accordingly decreed, that "no one should buy or sell, save he that had the sign" of their establishment. He alone was "ordained" to sell the merchandise of the Lamb-Horned Prophet; and the worshippers of the Beast, who, by christening, were known as recognized customers, were alone permitted to buy of the ordained, or appointed, agents, what they were taught to esteem as "dainty and goodly things" (ch. 18:14). In other words, it was decreed, that no one should preach and administer ordinances unless licensed or ordained so to do, by the recognized spiritual authority; which saith, "as some claim authority to preach," or sell dainty and goodly things by auction, "all who venture so to do, either publicly or privately, without authority from the Apostolic Throne, or Bishop of the place, shall be bound with the bond of a perpetual curse." Preaching and administering ordinances constitute the Apocalyptic selling of the text. Hence to sell canonically is "to perform every act of sacerdotal function among the people" who buy. No one has power to do this among the rhantized, or "christened" worshippers of the False Prophet ecclesiastical power, save he who is "canonically ordered to dispense the word of God and his holy sacraments, within the rails of the Altar, as a minister of the Apostolic succession." Hence, also, it is decreed in Article XXIII. of the superstition of the Anglo-American daughter of the Babylonian Mother, that "it is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching or ministering the sacraments in the congregation, before he be lawfully called, and sent to execute the same:" or Apocalyptically, "no one shall sell, save he that hath the sign;" that is, the christening sign, which the Pseudoprophet-Corporation styles "baptism;" and in its Article XXVII., declares to be, "not only a Sign of profession, and Mark of difference, whereby christian men are discerned from others that be not christened; but is also a sign of regeneration whereby they are visibly signed and sealed." No one is to sell, or buy, bread and wine at communion, who is not thus visibly signed and sealed; nor can he sell, or dispense, though he hath this sign, unless he be also canonically, or "lawfully, chosen and called to this work by men who have public authority, given unto them in the congregation, to call and send ministers into," what they term, "the Lord's vineyard." So that, it may be clearly perceived, that there can be no selling of the dainty and goodly things of the Latin section of the Apostasy, in any of its Romish and Protestant subdivisions, by any one, unless he be the subject of three Babylonish ordinances, namely, Rhantismal Christening, Episcopal Confirmation, and the Ordering of Priests. The confirmation is not ceremonially observed by all the Beast's Names of Blasphemy (ch. 17:3); though in effect it is: for the Dissenting Administrator of Ordinances is the episkopos, overseer or bishop, of his flock; and it is part of his duty to catechise the lambs he has marked into the status quo they are supposed to be put, by the manipulation of bishops of greater dignity. An "ordained minister" is the nonconformist equivalent for an "ordered priest." A worshipper of the Pseudo-prophet-Corporation of the Gentile Court, acquires the right to sell by "ordination;" though as a tradesman, he is distinguished by different terms, according to the taste of the buyers among whom he is most popular. By different classes of customers he is styled priest, bishop, minister, parson, pastor, elder, evangelist, and so forth; all of whom, though generally envious and jealous rivals, for the most part claim to be ambassadors and ministers of Jesus Christ, and successors of the apostles. To this dignity the grace of ordination is supposed to elevate them! Before the operation of ordering and consecrating (inferiors are "ordered," not consecrated; and ordered inferior when "consecrated," or made holy, is called a Bishop!) these were laymen, or laics, mere people; but ex opere operato, from the work performed, they are instantly transformed, by the mighty magic of the conjuration, into Christ's ministers, and ambassadors to the world; and are empowered to pardon sinners, and to accompany murderers to the gallows with "the consolations of religion!!" For, say they, pointing to the thief upon the cross, "While the lamp holds out to burn, The vilest sinner may return!" And, to show how instantaneous the operation is, they sing, "Between the stirrup and the ground, He pardon sought and pardon found!" A horseman would not be many seconds in falling from the stirrup to the ground; but this is deemed long enough by a pretended seller of the truth, or dispenser of the word, to atone for a life of crime; though that word declares, that if men live after the flesh they shah die; and that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him (1 John 3:15; Rom. 8:13). In this matter of selling spiritual dainties and goodly things, seeing that it is a mere mock auction fraud, the Peter Funk operators aim to pass off their worthless merchandise with as much as possible of the glitter and polish as can be derived from the letter of Scripture, which, in their blasphemous use of it, is truly, as they say, killing. Assuming to be the legitimate successors of the apostles, whom the Spirit appointed to sell the truth, or bread, wine, and milk, without money and without price, they appropriate the words addressed exclusively to them; and think, by a like formula and action, to be endued with their authority! By this process, a "consecrated" craftsman undertakes to transform a "made" deacon into an "ordered" priest of great official excellency and high dignity. The formula and action of the conjuration are exhibited in the Protestant "Ordering of Priests." The deacon humbly kneels before his lord the bishop, who laying his "consecrated" hands upon him, says, "Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands: whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained". From this the reader will perceive, that the salaried sin-pardoners are not confined to the parent establishment. Article XXXVI. of the Anglo-American Harlot, which all babysprinklers recognize as a Christian church and orthodox, says, that this ordering hath nothing in it superstitious and ungodly! But the enlightened believer taught of God knows that it is nothing else than ungodly and blasphemous superstition. Here are men, who eight times confess in their Litany, that they are "miserable sinners," which is no doubt literally true, meet together in sanctimonious convention to consecrate and ordain one another "to the Order and Ministry of Priesthood," which they declare is done "by the will of our Lord Jesus Christ." This is one of the lies of ignorance or something worse. Neither Christ nor his apostles ever commanded "miserable sinners" to do any other thing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, than to believe the gospel of the kingdom and be immersed into that name. "Miserable sinners," nor any other kind of sinners, can do anything else according to the will of Christ. They can only defile and blaspheme; God does not hear sinners (John 9:31), and their most sanctimonious demonstrations are to Him mere "abominations of the earth" (Apoc. 17:5): but "the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayers; but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil" (1 Pet. 3:12; Prov. 15:8, 9, 26, 29): and who are greater evil-doers than the clergy of all orders and degrees, who, in the name of the Lord, filch from their customers their hard earnings for that which is not bread, and their labor for that which satisfieth not? No evil can be greater in his sight than to sell lies, and to palm them off upon ignorant buyers as the truth of God. Their dainties and goodliest things exposed for sale in their bazaars, dedicated to Mahuzzim, or Guardian Saints Protectors, which they term churches, and houses of God, are mere trash and trumpery; and the crisis rapidly approaches, when "these merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more" (Apoc. 18:11). 35. The Name of the Beast and Number of His Name "Here is wisdom. Let him that hath the understanding compute the number of the beast; for it is a man's number, and the number of it is, cx", or Six Hundred and Sixty Six." Upon the Seven Heads of the Beast of the Sea is "a Name of Blasphemy" (ch. 13:1). "This is the Name of the Beast" enthroned upon the Seven Hills, which is the topographic signification of the Seven Heads (ch. 17:9). This name belongs to the Beast and is represented by a man's number; and a man's number is significant of the man's name to which the number belongs. In other words, the name is indicative of the Man himself -- the Image of the Sixth Head of the Beast, adored by the Pseudoprophet Hierarchy, by which he was created -- quem creant adorant. The name to be ascertained, then, is the Name of "the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, who opposeth and exalts himself over every one called a god, or sebasma, worshipped; so that he sitteth in the temple of the god as a god, publicly showing himself that he is a god." This Man of Sin is not a single person; but an order of men, ruling imperiously, and imperially, in Rome -- the Man-Image set up for worship there. All things have their names, and this Man-Image is no exception to the rule. What then is his Name? -- the name of the power represented by the Image? It is evidently not literally revealed, or we should be able to read it plainly in the prophecy. It is like every thing else in this wonderful book. It is revealed in an enigma. An enigma is a dark saying in which a known thing is obscurely expressed. Wise men in all ages have found satisfaction in presenting some of their choicest ideas in the form of enigma. This was characteristic of the teaching of Solomon, and of Jesus, who was wiser than he. The teaching of the Spirit has also been distinguished from the beginning by the presentation of "wisdom" in this form, which is characteristic of the Apocalypse throughout. How easy it would have been for the Spirit to have told the servants of the Deity plainly the Name of the Man of Sin. But no: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings to search out a matter:" He has therefore chosen to adapt himself to the genius of the Greek tongue in which He spoke, and to the customs prevalent in society when the Apocalypse was signified to John. The particular custom in the premises was that of indicating the names of sevasmata, or objects of veneration, reverence, or worship, such as gods, emperors, masters, and so forth, by the numbers of their names; that is by the numerical values of the letters constituting the name, enigmatically represented by the sum total expressed in the ordinary way. This statement will be unintelligible to a mere English reader, seeing that the letters of the English alphabet of which our names are composed are destitute of numerical values. We represent numbers by Arabic figures, not by letters; while these were the common numerical signs of the Greek. Thus, a man's name, or a god's name, written inGreek, would not only indicate the man, or the god, but would represent a sum total when added up, which, when specified in letters, would not be the name itself, but the symbolic number, or enigma, of the name. Thus, the mystics of Egypt spoke of "the messenger of the gods," or Thouth, under the number 1218 because the Greek letters composing the name Thouth, computed according to their numerical value, when added up made that total. The following example will make the matter plain, and easy to understand: Name of the God. Numerical Value of each Letter. Th -- Q, w, 800. Qwn -- qa, b, ih or, In this instance, the enigma would be to give the number of the god, a, b, ih, and to require from this total, his name. Now, in the text before us the Number of the Man's Name is given as cx". This is the total, and expressed in our figures is equal to 666. In this case the riddle is, the sum total, or Number of the Name, being given, what is the Name of the Man of Sin; or of the Beast's Name of Blasphemy upon the Seven Heads, or Hills? There need be no doubt about the correctness of cx", 666; for Irenaeus, who became overseer of the ecclesia in Lyons about 70 years after John received the Apocalypse, testifies to its correctness in the most positive manner; and also says, that the number of the name is according to the cipher of the Greeks through whose letters it is expressed; that is, it is a name in a Greek form, and as such the enigma must be explained. What then is the solution of the riddle? Irenaeus was of opinion that Lateinos, was the name. He says, that "the name Lateinos contains the number of 666; and it is very likely, because the last kingdom is so called, for they are Latins who now reign; but in this we will not glory." From this it is evident, that he regarded the subject of the name as a royalty, not a person -- the Latin Kingdom. Irenaeus living so near the time when the Apocalypse was given, may have received the name through his friend Polycarp from John himself. Irenaeus used to attend the expositions of Polycarp, whom he styles "that blessed apostolical presbyter." He says, "Polycarp related to us his converse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord;" and in respect to what he told his hearers, Irenaeus says, "I wrote them not on paper, but on my heart; and ever since, through the grace of God, I retain a genuine remembrance of them." It is hardly probable that Polycarp, a member and presbyter of the ecclesia in Smyrna, would converse with John, and not seek to learn from him the probable solution of this enigma of the name of the Antichrist. If John told him Lateinos, it is easy to see how Irenaeus came by it. Hippolytus, a brother member and successor to Irenaeus in Lyons, urges the probability of the same name Lateinos in his writing concerning the Antichrist, more distinctly and decidedly than he. "The plague of the first beast," says he, "was healed, and he shall cause the Image to speak, that is, to be powerful: and it is manifest to all, that the rulers are now Latins, Lateinoi: transmuted therefore into the name of one man, it becomes Lateinos." Hence, Hippolytus plainly regarded Lateinos as the name of the speaking Image made powerful by the Lateinoi, or Latins; which image he regards as "one man," and that man the Antichrist of whom he was treating. But an objection has been raised to this name, that the orthography of the Greek word is Latinos, not Lateinos; giving the number 661, cxav, , not 666, cx". But this is an objection of no weight; for both Irenaeus and Hippolytus spell the word with the diphthong ei pronounced i long in Latin words; in which the long i at length superseded the ei, as it used to be written in the oldest Latin authors, as appears from the sentence quoted by commentators from Ennius -- "Quam primum cascei populei tenuere Lateinei" -- At first the ancient people were Latins. It is of no consequence what "fathers" after Irenaeus and Hippolytus thought of the word and of other solutions deemed admissible by the worshippers of the Beast. We are better able to judge correctly than they. The two writers upon the subject nearest to John raised no question about the spelling of the word; but adopted Lateinos, in word and orthography, as the least objectionable that could be supposed; and yet more worthy of acceptance by us by its appropriateness to what we have traced out as the Image of the Sixth Latin Head of the Beast, and the Man of Sin. All speculations based upon the Hebrew (though the Jews used their letters for numerals as well as the Greeks) in the solution of the enigma are excluded, because the text is Greek, not Hebrew. If the Hebrew had had anything to do with the solution there would doubtless have been an intimation to that effect, saying, "the number of his name, which in the Hebrew tongue is rsm and in the Greek tongue he hath his number cx"," after the formula in ch. 9:11. But in the absence of such intimation we need not trouble ourselves about the Hebrew names suggested by commentators whose display of "ripe scholarship," has embarrassed, without throwing a ray of light upon the subject. At the time when the Apocalypse was given, the Sixth or Imperial form of government obtained in Rome. This was established by Augustus Caesar, whose native tongue was Latin. All the affairs of state were conducted in Latin; so that, until this language was superseded legislatively and executively by the Greek, it might truly be said in the words of Irenaeus, "Latini sunti qui nunc regnant" -- the Latins are they who now reign. But in process of time, the supreme power passed from those of the Latin tongue to those whose vernacular was the Greek. Had Irenaeus lived in the days of Justinian, he would have said, "Graeci sunt qui nunc Romanis imperant" -- the Greeks are they who now rule over the Romans. The question would not have been of race, but of language. Was the Antichrist, or Man of Sin, to be a Greek or a Latin? Or, was the Image, endowed with the faculty of speech by the Pseudoprophet constituent of the Beast, to speak in Latin or Greek? In other words, was the Image-Man to legislate and promulgate his decrees and blasphemies in the Latin or Greek, as the language of the state? If the language of the Image-monarchy were Greek, then Lateinos could not be the name of the Iconic-power. Its name would then be Hellen, and its enigmatical number rkg, or 123. Thus, It is evident, then, that the Man of Sin was not to be a Greek Power. Now, we have seen in the course of this exposition, that the Latin Imperial Executive became extinct, when the Western Roman Empire was superseded by the Seventh Head and the Ten Gothic Horns, a.d. 493. Three hundred and six years after, a.d. 799, it was revived by Charlemagne, when the Latin language, which by decree of Pope Vitalian, a.d. 666, was made the religious tongue, began again to assert its supremacy in the state. Vitalian's was an early move towards the ecclesiastical development of the Latinity of the Name. The Centuriator Bale says, "Vitalian sent monk-orators into England about a.d. 666, which from Christ's birth is the number of the beast, that they might confirm waverers in receiving the papistic faith, and that they might sign their own faithful with the mark of Antichrist. He commanded Latin hours, Latin songs, Latin idolatrous and devotional ceremonies, and other frivolous trumpery, rites, &c., all to be performed in the temples in the Latin tongue, according to the Greek word Lateinos, which by numeral letters fulfills the predicted number of th About four hundred years after Charlemagne, the Latin had become fully established as the language of the Pontifical kingdom and empire of the Man of Sin; or Image of the Imperial Latin Head, revived in the Beast of the Earth. When the empire of the Caesars came to assume the form of Eastern and Western Limbs, as symbolized in Nebuchadnezzar's Image; and after the Gothic kingdoms had appeared, the Greeks appropriated to themselves the name of Romans: and bestowed upon all the kingdoms, in ecclesiastical fellowship with the See of Rome, the name of Latins. These Western Romans were not averse to the appellation; so that thenceforward it became the recognized name of the second universal monarchy -- "a new species of despotism," says Dr. Geo Campbell truly, "never heard of, or imagined before, whose means of conquest and defence were neither swords nor spears, fortifications nor warlike engines, but definitions and canons, sophisms and imprecations; and that by such weapons, as by a kind of magic, there should actually be reared a second universal monarchy, the most formidable the world ever knew, -- will, to latest ages, afford a matter of astonishment to every judicious inquirer." This universal monarchy of the west pervaded all its kingdoms; and though they legislate in the modern languages of the nations, the officials of the Pontifical despotism, in whatever kingdom or republic they may have established themselves, use not the languages of the worshippers of the Beast; but Transact all their swindling traffic in the language of Pagan Rome: and as Dr. Henry More expresses it, they Latinize in every thing. "Mass, prayers, hymns, litanies, canons, decretals, bulls are conceived in Latin. The papal councils speak in Latin. Women themselves pray in Latin. Nor is scripture read in any other language, under popery, than Latin. Wherefore the council of Trent commanded the vulgar Latin to be the only authentic version. Not do their doctors doubt to prefer it to the Hebrew and Greek text itself, which was written by the prophets and apostles. In short, all things are Latin; the pope having communicated his language to the people under his dominion, as the mark and character of his empire." If Dr. More, who himself wrote in Latin, instead of saying "as the mark and character," had written "as the name of his empire," he would have been correct. Thus, no power upon the earth has so exclusive a claim to the name of Lateinos as the Iconic Power of the Seven Hills. All that pertains to it is Latin, and names are invented and conferred upon things in view of that most striking characteristic. The names of many modern powers are the names of the languages of their executives and dominant races; as the French power, the Spanish power, the Greek Power, the English power, and, as in the case before us, the Latin Power. Their several languages are characteristic of each; no wonder then that the Latin, the tongue in which the Image speaks, should be selected by the Eternal Spirit as the basis of its name. But, in conclusion of this chapter, does Lateinos solve the enigma cx", or 666? Let us see: Name of the Power Numerical Value of the Letters 300 200 Lateinos = Lateino" equal to 666 = cx" the Number of the Name. Another name, or title, has been suggested by Mr. Clarke, which is equivalent to Lateinos. This is He Lative basileia, or The Latin Kingdom. Thus: Name of the Power Numerical Value of the Letters The ho basilieia lateinos or Latin Kingdom On this suggestion of Clarke's, Mr. Elliott remarks, "it is indeed so remarkable that, were it but the name of a man, I should have thought that the Divine spirit had it also in view, as an alternative solution involving the word Latin in its more usual, though not the mystical orthography. But that which alone completely answers to every requirement of the sacred enigma, and which I therefore fully believe to be the one intended by the Spirit is Irenaeus' solution Lateinos." Mr. Elliott and others have searched for the name of the Beast among the names of individuals, supposing that the name was to be some name previously borne by some distinguished man. Hence they have pitched upon Romulus, who is supposed to have founded Rome, the capital of the Latin kingdom. But Romulus is neither Romanus nor Lateinos. They have been thus misled by the words "the number of the beast is the number of a man;" upon which one of them remarks, "the number of his name, or the number of a man, being a Latin name derived from that of Romulus, a man who founded Rome pagan, and so peculiar to a man, viz. the pope, who is the foundation of Rome papal. Hence, their reading in exposition is, "the number of the beast is the number of Romulus!" But the number of Romulus, or Romulos, is aum" or 1446, not 666. Cx" not the enigmatical number of Romulos; and therefore, if the man referred to were a distinguished individual of antiquity, Romulus cannot be the man. But the reference in the text is not to a man existing anterior to the Beast; but one contemporary with the dominion founded by Charlemagne, which still exists in a dilapidated condition. The expository reading of the passage is, "the number of the name of the Image of the Sixth, or Imperial Latin Head, of the healed, or revived, dominion of the West, is the number of the name of the Man-of-Sin power; and that number is six hundred and sixty-six." Such is the wisdom enigmatically set forth by the Spirit for the computation of those of his servants, who have the understanding. No other solution of the enigma is so in harmony with historical and still existing facts. There was no Pontiff king reigning in Rome over a kingdom professing Christianity in the days of John, Polycarp, Irenaeus, and Hippolytus. But they all expected that there would be such an one; and that a dynasty would rule it, whose name in Greek would be numerically 666. They judged that its most obvious character would cause it to be styled Latin. This they expected as the Antichrist Power, to be revealed when that which hindered its manifestation in their day was taken out of the way. What they expected, we behold -- a Latin Pontifical Kingdom, whose Pontiff-King claims to be Christ's Substitute on earth, and Successor to the Apostle of the Circumcision; the Name of Blasphemy whose pontifical throne has been for ages established on the Seven Hills; and though reigning in a country whose vernacular is the Italian, ignoring this language, and "speaking" only in that of his pagan fathers to whom he was unknown (Dan. 11:38): could any name be more appropriate to such a power than Latin, in the sense of the Latin Power, or the Antichrist? No other, I believe. Volume 5 The conquests of Napoleon as predicted in Revelation 16:1-11 changed the national face of Europe and provided the basis upon which the political trends of the Sixth Seal have since developed. He brought to an end the Holy Roman Empire, and laid the foundation for the termination of the temporal power of the Papacy (since restored by Mussolini of Italy) in 1870. To demonstrate his power, on December 2, 1804, in the cathedral of Notre Dame at Paris, Napoleon took the imperial crown from the hands of Pope Pius VII, whom he had summoned from Rome, and placed it on his head. This was to illustrate his supremacy over both political and religious authorities. This drawing by contemporary artist Jacques Louis David depicts Napoleon crowning himself emperor. Jacques David became court painter to Napoleon. FOREWORD TO VOLUME FIVE The original Edition of Eureka was divided into three volumes, so that the Author's Preface in what we have published as Volume Four should also be read in conjunction with the present Volume. Since Eureka was first published, and since the death of its Author, world events have followed the pattern of prophecy as laid down in the Word, and expounded by him in Elpis Israel, Eureka and other works. For example, the Middle East was wrested from Turkish power during the course of World War I, and the Empire as such terminated shortly afterwards. In these events the political Euphrates has continued to "dry up" in accordance with Rev. 16:12, and the "way of the Kings out of the sun's rising" has been in course of "preparation". The Balfour Declaration inviting the Jewish people to return to their ancient homeland, and establish therein a national home, opened the way for prophecies of the restoration to commence. And in other, equally dramatic events, the expositions of the Author have been remarkably vindicated. World War II saw the emergence of Soviet Russia as a world power, followed by the demand for the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel. The post-war world has witnessed the consolidation of these developments, including the division of Europe into two parts through which can be seen the formation of the two feet of the Image seen by Nebuchadnezzar in his dream. Coinciding with that, the world has witnessed a tremendous advancement in the invention and manufacture of weapons of war of such destructive potentiality as to threaten the future of civilisation, answering to the requirements of the demoniac agitation indicated by Revelation 16:14. It is surely of the highest significance that mankind today has in its hands such forces of destruction as could render the earth uninhabitable if ever they were used to the fullest extent possible. For this is the very condition anticipated by The Apocalypse in Chapter 11:15: "And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth". Never before have these words the significance that they have today! Elsewhere the Lord told his Apostles: "Men's hearts will fail them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth; for the powers of heaven shall be shaken -- And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh" (Luke 21:26-28). How important it is, in these closing days of the Gentiles, that The Apocalypse should be studied, in order that a better appreciation of things to come should be developed. Eureka is outstanding in providing a help to that end; and we esteem it an honour to be associated with the issuance of a new Edition of what must rate as the outstanding exposition of The Apocalypse available -- particularly in view of the blessings pronounced by Christ upon those who read it with understanding (Rev. 1:3). As the Author of Eureka wrote: "The Apocalypse was given to the end that the servants of Deity who are keeping their garments might be able to discern the signs of the times preceding the apocalypse of Christ; and the real nature of things extant in their several generations. No believer understanding this prophecy could be seduced into fellowship with the clerical institutions of this world; because he would see them in all their native deformity and sin". It will be noticed by the discerning Reader, that the mammoth task that engaged the Author of Eureka, particularly in view of his limited resources, resulted in some of the last chapters of The Apocalypse being treated more scantily than the earlier ones. Where we have deemed it helpful we have added comments of our own in the form of footnotes to supplement those of the Author, and further information on these chapters (Chapter 17 onwards) can be obtained from the verse by verse exposition of the Book of Revelation in The Christadelphian Expositor. In his preface to the final volume of Eureka, the Author declared that it was only with the help of Yahweh that he was able to complete the task he set himself. We feel somewhat similar in regard to the publication of this new Edition. We have been plagued with problems in producing it, but gradually these have been overcome, and it is with great relief, profound thankfulness to Yahweh, and deep appreciation to those who have assisted us, that we are enabled at last to place this final Volume in the hands of the Reader. We trust that he derives the pleasure from reading it that it has been ours in re-examining it and preparing it for reprinting. Logos Publications January, 1986 THE APOCALYPSE Genesis is the Book of Beginnings; Revelation is the Book of Endings. Genesis tells us how it began; Revelation explains how it will end. The Apocalypse, as with all of Christ's teaching, is rooted in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. Its character is Hebrew. It has been assessed that Matthew, the Hebrew Gospel contains ninety-two quotations from and references to the Old Testament; the Epistle to the Hebrews has one hundred and two; but The Apocalypse has two hundred and eighty five. Christ thus endorsed the writings of Moses. He said to the Jews by the mouth of Abraham in parable: "They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them; if they believe not Moses and the prophets neither will they believe though one rose from the dead" (Luke 16:29-31). Further, he declared: "Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his words, how shall ye believe my words?" (John 5:47). Christ thus endorsed both Genesis and Revelation as Divinely inspired. An equal warning is given in the Law as in The Apocalypse, against those whose teaching weakens the point or significance of either. See Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:19 -- Publishers.