98 Mark xvi. 15.

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

100 As in the case of Mahometanism, for instance.

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

102 Matth. xxiii. 15.

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

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

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

106 Is. lx. 22.

107 Matth. xiii. 31, 32.

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

109 Could it be foreseen, that nothing of this sort would happen? When the Reformation was set on foot in Germany, Luther and his adherents resolved to carry it on in the spirit of the Gospel, that is, by pacific measures. But how soon did passion and policy strike in, to drive them from this purpose! The Catholics were intolerant: the Reformed grew powerful: and then, what was too naturally to be expected, followed.

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

110 An eminent writer, with the view, indeed, of disgracing the Reformation, hath set this matter in a very just light: “Que nos freres, says he, ouvrent donc les yeux; qu’ils les jettent sur l’ancienne Eglise, qui durant tant de siécles d’une persecution si cruelle ne s’est jamais échapée, ni un seul moment, ni dans un seul homme, & qu’on a vûë aussi soûmise sous Diocletien, et même sous Julien l’apostat, lorsqu’elle remplissoit deja toute la terre, que sous Neron & sous Domitien, lorsqu’elle ne faisoit que de naitre: c’est la qu’on voit veritablement le doigt de Dieu.”
Hist. des Variations, l. x. c. 53.

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

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

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

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

113 What is here said of the scriptural division of time, with regard to the affairs of the Church, is enough for my purpose. There is another division of time, in the prophetic scriptures, with regard to the kingdoms of the world; concerning which the reader may consult Bishop Kidder’s Dem. of the Messiah, Part iii. ch. ix.; and especially Mr. Mede’s Apostasy of the latter times, ch. xi.

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

115 1 Ep. John, iv. 3.

116 Ἀντίχριϛος—ἀντι, in the sense either of pro, or contra.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

124 A. 991.

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

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

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

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

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

130 Cave, H. L. v. ii. 278. Rog. de Hoveden, Annal. Pars Post. p. 681. Ed. Franc. 1601.—In this age [XIIth], was composed a very remarkable tract on the subject of Antichrist, which may be seen in Mede’s Works, p. 721.—Mr. Mede supposes, and seems indeed to have proved, that the true doctrine of Antichrist was, and was intended to be, a mystery, or secret, till the 12th century. Whence it follows that the testimonies, hitherto alledged, are only passionate or declamatory exaggerations, or to be esteemed, as he says, pro parabolicè et κάτ’ αὔξησιν dictis, declamatorum more. Works, p. 722.

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

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

132 See, especially, the famous speech of Everhard, bishop of Saltzbourg, at the assembly of Ratisbonne, in the time of Gregory the IXth; inserted at large in Aventinus, Ann. Boior. l. vii. p. 684. The following extracts from it will be thought curious. Hildebrandus ante annos centum atque septuaginta primus specie religionis Antichristi imperii fundamenta jecit. p. 684.

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

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

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

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

134 Purgat. 32.

135 Epistolarum sine titulo Liber. Ep. xvi. p. 130. Basil. 1581.—Many strokes in this epistle are, to the last degree, severe and caustic. Addressing himself to Rome, “Illa equidem ipsa es, says he, quam in spiritu sacer vidit Evangelista.—Populi et gentes et linguæ, aquæ sunt super quas meretrix sedes; recognosce habitum. Mulier circumdata purpurâ, et coccino, et inaurata auro, et lapide pretioso, et margaritis, habens poculum aureum in manu suâ, plenum abominatione et immunditiâ fornicationis ejus.—Audi reliqua. Et vidi (inquit) mulierem ebriam de sanguine sanctorum, et de sanguine martyrum Jesu. Quid siles?”—And so goes on to apply the prophecies of the Revelation to the church of Rome, in terms that furnish out a good comment on the famous verse in one of his poems—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

144 Hor. 1 Ep. vi. 15.

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

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

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

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

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

150 Isai. lxv. 17.—2 Pet. iii. 4. 13.

151 Rev. x. 7.

152 Daniel xii. 10.

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

154 Hence, the allusion of our great poet,

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

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

157 Ezekiel xiii. 9.

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

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

160 Jeremiah xxxiv. 3.

161 Ezek. xii. 13.

162 See Grotius on Matth. xxvi. 23.

163 As to the authority of this extraordinary book (although the discussion of this point be foreign to my present purpose) it may be proper to acquaint such persons, as have not made the inquiry for themselves, and are perhaps incapable of making it, with the sentiments, which our ablest writers have entertained of it.

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

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

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

164 Mal. i. 11.

165 Lament. i. 15.

166 Isaiah xl. 20.

167 Ezek. xx. 47.

168 Isaiah ii. 2.

169 Chap. xvii.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

177 As appears from his backwardness to publish his discoveries, and from his unconcern about the reception of them. But see his Letter to Mr. Hartlib, Ep. 96, p. 881; and compare with his answer to Dr. Twisse, Ep. 51, p. 811. See also Ep. 98, to Mr. Hartlib, Aug. 6, 1638, not long before his death, in which are these words:

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

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

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

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

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

182 The sounding of the seventh trumpet.

183 Ch. x. 7.

184 Ch. xi. 15.

185 The reader may form a distinct idea of the method, in which the whole book of the Apocalypse is disposed, by observing that it is resolvable into THREE great parts.

The FIRST part, is that of the Epistles to the seven churches, contained in the three first chapters, and is not at all considered by Mr. Mede.

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

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

This THIRD division may, further, be considered as consisting of TWO parts. The FIRST contains, in ch. xi, a summary view of what should befal the Christian Church, contemporary with the events deduced in the second part concerning the Empire; and is given in this place, in order to connect the second and third parts, and to shew their correspondence and contemporaneity. See Mr. Mede’s Clavis, p. 424; and Comment. Apocalypt. p. 476.

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

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

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

But the truer answer to the difficulty I take to be, That the sealed book is represented under the idea of a book, properly so called, which, upon being opened, presents to the eye the several objects and schemes of the prophecy, distinctly delineated on the roll, or volume, when it comes to be unfolded, and which, therefore, must needs be considered as a large one. The open book, on the other hand, is to be regarded, not as a real, but metaphorical book; and is not produced to be read or contemplated, after a gradual evolution of it, but to be eaten, at once, by the prophet; like that book, to which it alludes, and from which the imagery is taken, in the visions of Ezekiel [ii. 8. and iii. 1, 2, 3.]—to eat a book, being, in the hieroglyphics, to meditate upon, and to digest, its contents. So that this book, to distinguish it from the other, is named a little book: not, that the revelations, conveyed by it, are less considerable, or less numerous, than the other, but that the use, to which it is put, required only that it should be spoken of, as a book simply; the diminutive form being here suggested in the term βιβλαρίδιον, that the metaphor of eating it might seem the easier; and (because the former sealed book was of an immense size) might, under this idea, present itself the more naturally, and give less offence, to the imagination.