vials, thofe feven laft plagues in which is filled up the wrath of God?* But, if once we adopt the belief of the continuity and indivifibility of the Apocalypfe (always excepting the little book), it is plain, that by far the greater part of the Archdeacon's interpretations cannot be admitted, becaufe they are founded upon its non continuity and divifibility.

II. I fhall now proceed to offer a few obfervations on some particular expofitions of the Archdeacon, premifing that it is not my intention to notice every little matter in which I happen to diffent from him.

1. His expofition of the first fix feals I of course cannot admit; becaufe, extending as it does from the afcenfion of our Lord to the day of judgment, it feems to me to militate against the whole chronology of the Apoc. alypfe. Yet his principle of expounding the four firft feals is fo very fatisfactory, that I cannot but think it highly deserving of serious attention; and, if I mistake not, the Archdeacon himself points out what is probably the right interpretation of them. Till now I never met with any thing fatisfactory on the subject: and I forbore to treat of it in my own Differtation, both on that account, and because it has no connection with the 126) days to the confideration of which I was peculiarly directing my attention. Hence I merely stated in a note, that I could not believe with Bp. Newton that the rider on the white horfe under the first seal could fymbolize the age of Vefpafian, because the homogeneity of the Apocalypfe required us to fuppofe him the fame as the rider on the white horfe defcribed in the 19th chapter. But that rider is plainly the Meffiah: whence I inferred with Mede, that the other rider must be the Messiah likewife; and that his going forth conquering and to conquer denoted the rapid propagation of the Gospel in the pure apoftolical age. Yet, though I approved of Mede's interpretation of the first feal, I could not but fee his inconfiftency in referring the three riders in the three fucceeding feals to claffes of Roman emperors: for homogeneity, as the Archdeacon very juftly and forcibly argues, requires us to fuppofe that there must be fome degree of analogy, fome common bond of connection, between all the four riders and all the four horfes under the four first feals. Bp. Newton avoids the inconfiftency of Mede, by interpreting the four riders to denote four fucceffive claffes of Roman emperors; but then he equally, though in a different manner, violates homogeneity by teaching us, that the rider on the white horfe in the 19th chapter is Chrift, but that the rider on the white horse of the firft jeal reprefents the age of Vefpafian. I entirely agree with the Archdeacon, that the 19th chapter must be our clue for interpreting the four firft eals; and confequently, fince the first feal must relate to the Spiritual victories of Chrift in the apoftolical age, the three other feals muft depict three fucceffive flates of the Church. These four periods the Archdeacon does not attempt precifely to divide from each other, obferving both truly and beautifully that the progrefs of corruption was gradual, and that its tints melted into each other like the colours of the rainbow. The first period is that of primitive Chriftianity: the fecond is that of internal diffenfions leading to bloodshed: the third is that of spiritual bondage and a dearth of religious knowledge: and the fourth is that of perfecution. The Archdeacon thinks, that the vengeful character of the fecond jeal is

* Rev. xv. 1. See Bp. Newton's very able Dissert. on Rev. xv.

to be seen distinctly in the fourth century, though its commencement' may be fixed from the end of the second century: that the abuses of the third feal did not arrive at their height till the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth centuries, though their origin may be traced fo early as in the fecond century: and that the perfecution of the fourth, though it did not attain its utmost horror till the twelfth century, began in fome measure, under the influence of the fecond feal, with the reign of Conftantine, increased under that of Theodofius, and feems to have been in pofitive existence, at leaft fo far as edicts in favour of perfecution are concerned, under that of Honorius. The cry of the martyrs, described in the fifth feal, he fuppofes to be the cry of all thofe who have fuffered in the caufe of Chrift, whether by the inftrumentality of pagans or papists. And their cry is at length heard, and produces the opening of the fixth feal, which ufhers in the awful day of general retribution. The Archdeacon argues, and I think with much appearance of reason, that the rider of the third feal does not carry a pair of balances (as we read in our 'common tranflation), but a yoke, expreffive of that fpiritual bondage, which commenced indeed in the fecond century, but was fully matured by the agents of Popery: and, agreeably to this expofition, he conceives the dearth to be," not a famine of bread nor a thirst of water, but of hearing the words of the Lord."

Let us now fee, whether an interpretation of the feals cannot be given, founded upon the Archdeacon's own principle of homogeneity, and yet according with what I believe to be the right chronological arrangement of the Apocalypfe.

I am not aware, that we are neceffarily bound to suppose that each apocalyptic period terminates precisely when another commences. St. John indeed exprefsly tells us, that the first woe ceases before the fecond begins, and that the fecond ceafes before the third begins: whence we muft conclude, that the three periods of the three laft trumpets are not only fucceffive, but that each entirely expires before the commencement of another. Refpecting the duration of all the other periods he is totally filent : whence, although we are obliged to suppose them fucceffive in point of commencement, it is by no means equally clear that we are obliged to look upon one as terminated when another begins. As far as induction goes, we may rather infer the contrary: for it seems needlefs for the Apoftle fo carefully to inform us, that each woe terminates before its fucceffor commences, if fuch were likewise the cafe with every other apocalyptic period. We may conclude then, that the influence both of each feal and of each vial probably extends into the peculiar period of its fucceffor.

On thefe grounds, fuppofe we say, with the Archdeacon, that the first feal reprefents the age of primitive chriftianity: that the jecond reprefents that of fiery zeal without knowledge, commencing towards "the end of the fecond century when the western rulers of the Church, and the wife and moderate Irenèus, were feen to interpofe and exhort the furious bishop of Rome to cultivate Chriftian peace," and extending fo far as to include the schifm of the Donatifts and the bitter fruits of the Arian controverfy and that the third reprefents that of spiritual bendage and religious dearth, which began like its predeceffor in the fecond century, but extends through all the worft periods of popery. Suppose we further

:

fay, flightly varying from the Archdeacon, that the fourth exhibits to us what may emphatically be termed the age of perfecution, not indeed of perfecution inflided by the Church, but of perfecution fuffered by the Church. This may be conceived to commence about the year 302 or 304 with the dreadful and general perfecution of Diocletian. Other perfecutions indeed there had been before this; but none either of equal violence or of equal extent, none under which the Church could appear fo emphatically fubject to the powers of death and hell, none under which the flaughter was fo great as to cause the fymbolical horse to affume a hue pale and livid-green like that of a half putrid corpfe.* The confequences both of all the other perfecutions, and we may fuppofe peculiarly of the Diocletian one, are exhibited to us under the fifth feal. St. John beholds the fouls of the martyrs under the altar, and hears them crying with a loud voice for the juft vengeance of heaven against their perfecutors. Their prayer is heard, and is in a measure answered under the fixth feal; though it will not be completely answered until the great day of retribution," until their fellow-fervants also, and their brethren, that should be killed as they were," in fubfequent days of popifh bigotry, "fhould be fulfilled." The fixth feal is opened; and, at the very time when the affairs of the Church appear at the lowest ebb, the reign of perfecuting paganism is fuddenly brought to an end, and christianity is publicly embraced and supported by Conftantine. This great revolution is portrayed indeed under images borrowed from the day of judgment : but, although the Archdeacon applies the fixth feal literally to the day of judgment itself, he is too skilful a biblical critic not to know that the very images which it exhibits are repeatedly ufed by the ancient prophets and even by our Lord himself to defcribe the fates of empires. The reason feems in fome measure at least to be this: the downfall of any falfe religion or of any antichriflian empire may be confidered as an apt type of the last day, when retribution will be fully dealt out to all the enemies of God.t

The first feal then exhibits the Church of a spotlefs white colour, and under the influence of a heavenly rider. The fecond exhibits her of a red colour, and under the influence of a spirit of fiery zeal and internal difcord. The third exhibits her as changed to black, and beginning to be fubjected to a grievous yoke of will-worship and to experience the horror of a spiritual famine. The fourth exhibits her under the last and most

"There were other perfecutions before, but this was by far the most confiderable, the tenth and laft general perfecution, which was begun by Diocletian, and continued by others, and lafted longer and extended farther and was fharper and more bloody than any or all preceding; and therefore this was particularly predicted. Eufebius and Lactantius, who were two eye-witnesses, have written large accounts of it. Orofius afferts, that this perfecution was longer and more cruel than all the paft; for it raged inceflantly for ten years by burning the churches, profcribing the innocent, and laying the martyrs. Sulpicius Severus too defcribes it as the most bitter perfecution, which for ten years together depopulated the people of God; at which time all the world almost was stained with the facred blood of the martyrs, and was never more exhausted by any wars. So that this became a memorable era to the Christians, under the name of the era of Diocletian, or as it is otherwise called the era of martyrs." Bp. Newton's Differt. on Seal V.

↑ See Mede, Bp. Newton, and the Archdeacon.

...

dreadful perfecution of paganism, as having affumed a livid cadaverous hue, as beftridden by death, and pursued by hell, as experiencing the excifion of a fourth part of her members throughout the whole Apocalyptic earth or the Roman empire, and we may add as falling into danger of the fecond death through constrained apoftacy. The fifth exhibits to us the fouls of the martyrs; and represents their blood, like that of Abel, as erying to God for vengeance upon their perfecutors. And the fixth fymbolically defcribes the overthrow of paganism and the establishment of Chriftianity.

The feventh feal introduces the feptenary of the trumpets.

We are now arrived at the days of Conftantine: but St. Paul had predicted, that a great apoftacy fhould take place, and that a power which he ftyles the man of fin fhould be revealed, after he that letted, or the Western Roman empire, had been taken out of the way. In exact accordance with this

prophecy of St. Paul, St. John proceeds to defcribe under the four firft trumpets the removal of him that letted; and then, at the founding of the fifth, the great apoftacy in both its branches commences in the felf-fame year, and the man of fin is revealed.

Such is the interpretation, which I give of this part of the Apocalypfe, and which appears to me to accord better with its probable chronological arrangement than that brought forward by the Archdeacon.

2. After my general objections to the Archdeacon's arrangement, it may be almost fuperfluous to ftate, that, if there be any cogency in those objections, his application of the fifth trumpet or the firft woe to the Gnostic must be deemed inadmiffible. Yet, fince he has objected to the common expofition of this trumpet as relating to the rife of Mohammedifm and the ravages of the Saracens, it may be expedient to fay a few words on the fubject.

The Archdeacon supposes, that the fixth trumpet or the fecond woe does not relate exclufively to the Turks, as moft modern commentators have imagined, but to all the profeffors of Mohammedifm, Saracens as well as Turks; and confequently that it begins to found in the year 606, whence the rife of Mohammedifm is moft properly dated. Such an expofition of the two firft woes does not feem to me to accord with the Archdeacon's own very excellent principle of homogeneity. In addition to the fifth and fixth trumpets being alike ftyled woes, the prophecies contained under each of them bear a moft ftriking resemblance to each other, infomuch that there is nothing else in the whole Apocalypfe that is at all fimilar either to the one or to the other of them. Yet, befides their being reprefented as fucceffive and as conftituting two diftinct woes, there is a fufficient degree of difference between them to fhew plainly that they cannot relate precifely to the fame people and the fame event. Now, independent of the Gnoflics not harmonizing with the chronology of the Apocalypfe (if there be any force in my general objection,) I cannot but think homogeneity violated by referring the one prophecy to the Gnostics and the other to the Mohammedans. There is a greater difference between the actions of the Gnoftics and the actions of the Mohammedans, than the obvious fimilarity of the two predictions will warrant; and at the fame time there is a lefs ftriking refemblance between their principles, than the predictions feem to require. The actions of the Gnoflics and the

་

actions of the Mohammedans were totally unlike; and I can fee no reason why the principles of the Gnoftics fhould be thought to refemble thofe of the Mohammedans more than the principles of many other Chriftian beretics. But, in the cafe of the Saracens and the Turks, we exactly find at once the required fimilarity and the required diffimilarity: and, while homogeneity is thus preferved inviolate, the chronology of the Apocalypfe (fuppofing it to be, as I have attempted to prove it to be, one continued vifion) remains perfectly unbroken. With fo much in favour of Mede's interpretation, I cannot feel my faith in it shaken by the Archdeacon's objections. I fully agree with him, that the fallen ftar of the fifth trumpet cannot mean Mohammed: but this objection is removed by the interpretation which I have given of it. His three next objections do not feem to me infurmountable. The fymbolical darkness of the fifth trumpet I do not conceive to mean the darkness of preceding herefies: it began to iffue out of the bottomlefs pit or hell, when the falfe prophet retired to the cave of Hera to vent his impofture. I cannot fee, why we are bound to conclude that the darkness must extend to the whole christian world, merely because it is faid that the fun and the air were darkened; any more than we ought to fuppofe the whole natural world darkened, because a great smoke darkened the fun and the air to the inhabitants of a particular country. The regions, in which the Waldenfes moft flourished, certainly did escape in a remarkable manner the incurfions of the Sar. acens ; and I think, with Bp. Newton, that this escape is a fufficient fulfilment of the prophecy. The fifth objection is invalid, fuppofing the prediction to relate to the Saracens in particular, and not to the Mohammedans in general, The Saracens indeed fubfifted as a nation more than 150 years, juft as the Gnoftics continued as a fect more than 150 years; but they fubfifted as an unfettled nation, anfwering to the character of a woe inflicted by locufts, exactly 150 years. In the fixth objection there is fome weight, but I cannot allow it to counterbalance the arguments in favour of Mede's interpretation. In prophecies avowedly defcriptive we not unfrequently meet with a mixture of the literal with the fymbolical. Thus, in the final battle of Armageddon, if we compare the defcription of it with other parallel prophecies, Chrift is probably a literal character, the kings of the earth and their armies are certainly literal characters, and the beaft is just as certainly a fymbolical character. Apply this remark to the Archdeacon's objection, that commentators, in order to refer the fifth trumpet to the Saracens, fometimes expound it literally and fometimes fymbolically; and perhaps it may not be thought wholly unanswerable.* So again whatever might have been the ftate of the Turkish nation before it is mentioned by St. John, it was certainly, immediately before the period of its fuppofed introduction into the Apocalypfe, divided into four fultanies; and those four fultanies were feated upon the Euphrates: whereas the rife of Mohammedifm from the cave of Hera in Arabia can by no ingenuity be transferred to the Euphrates. It is not fufficient to say, that the Saracens were at a subfequent period feated upon the Euphrates: a prophecy relating to the rife of Mohamedfm, must commence from Arabia.† With regard to the propriety of confidering the Saracens and the Turks as woes, the Archdeacon cannot object to it even according to his own definition of a woe :‡ for Pref. p. xvii.

* P. 249, 250, 251.

+ P. 271.