<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2013-10-15</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Alexis Jakobson</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>*Proofed title page(s).
*Reviewed structure.
*Checked division-marking material at heads and feet of divisions (HEADS, CLOSER, OPENER, ARGUMENT, EPIGRAPH, SIGNED, BYLINE, etc.).
*Added TYPEs to DIVs in order to validate.
*Checked for N=""s.
*Checked ^s.
*Checked placement and completeness of PBs.
*Checked for foreign, damage and missing-page GAPs, PROBLEMs, #, --.
*Checked for LBs, startqs / endqs, q;s, ABBRs, LETTERs and Qs.
*Checked for FIGUREs and decorated initials.
*Checked proofsheets and made corrections found there.
*Corrected <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s etc.
*Converted <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters">s to GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="[vendor name]".
*Revalidated.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B20810">
<STC T="W">C6886</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">[ocm]11200395</BIBNO>
<VID>204884</VID>
</IDG>
<GROUP>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>A DEMONSTRATION OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF THE Prote&s;tant Applications OF THE APOCALYPSE.</P>
<P>Together with the Con&s;ent of the Ancients Concerning the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI></P>
<P>By <HI>DRUE CRESSENER,</HI> D. D.</P>
<P><HI>LONDON:</HI> Printed for <HI>Thomas Cockerill,</HI> at the <HI>Three Legs</HI> in the <HI>Poultrey</HI> over-again&s;t <HI>Stocks-Market.</HI> M DC XC.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="dedication">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>TO THE QUEEN.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>MADAM,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_THE Intent of the&s;e Papers is to make a more certain Di&s;covery of the Sen&s;e of &s;ome Divine Oracles, which have foretold the Succe&s;&s;ive Revolutions of all the Great Empires, in which the Church of God was to &s;ojourn, till it &s;hould come to triumph over the Kingdoms of this World. If they prove to be &s;atisfactorily clear, Religion and Empire being the Subject-matter of them, They &s;eem to be the mo&s;t proper Object of the Meditation of Chri&s;tian Princes. We are now in the concluding part of the La&s;t of the&s;e Empires; And Your Maje&s;ty's Late Wonderful Succe&s;&s;es have &s;o promi&s;ing an A|&s;pect
<PB REF="3"> on that part of the Predictions, That they &s;eem to appropriate all Addre&s;&s;es of this kind to Your Royal Court.</P>
<P>I have therefore thought it a duty to offer that, which I have already publi&s;hed on this Subject, to the Hands of His Maje&s;ty; And Your Maje&s;ty's peculiar Share in the Throne does &s;eem to demand This of me, as the Re|mainder of a Debt from one that has once ap|proached it.</P>
<P>This Part is indeed the whole Strength and Foundation of the former, and for that rea&s;on ought to attend it to the &s;ame Place, to con|firm the Hopes of a Glorious Succe&s;s of both Your Maje&s;ties Endeavours for the Revival of the Oppre&s;&s;ed Reformation. <HI>Madam,</HI> We have already &s;een a very &s;urprizing beginning of this Recovery, in the late Providential man|ner of the Return of the Prote&s;tants of <HI>Savoy</HI> through the mid&s;t of their mo&s;t Inveterate, and mo&s;t Powerful Oppo&s;ers. The fir&s;t date of that General Suppre&s;&s;ion of the Prote&s;tant Pro|fe&s;&s;ion in <HI>Roman States,</HI> which in the Prophecy is called, <HI>The Death of the Witne&s;&s;es in Sackcloth,</HI> is &s;uppo&s;ed to commence from the La&s;t Con&s;ide|rable Abjurations of the new Converts abroad, &s;ome while after the Revocation of the Edict
<PB REF="3"> of <HI>Nants;</HI> And then, That which in the Pro|phecy is called, Their <HI>Re&s;urrection three days and an half after their Death,</HI> mu&s;t fall ju&s;t about the time that the <HI>Vaudois</HI> did Revive, and <HI>Re|&s;ettle</HI> the Publick Profe&s;&s;ion of their Religion, after their return to their Ancient Habita|tions.</P>
<P>The <HI>Vaudois,</HI> and their Neighbours, have been &s;o much the Main Body of the Witne&s;&s;es for many Ages before the Reformation, That &s;ince the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> Revival is agreed from the Pro|phecy to be in one particular place only, they may &s;afely be allowed to be the fir&s;t promi&s;ing beginning at lea&s;t of that Revolution. The <HI>Pro|per</HI> Kingdom of <HI>France</HI> did indeed &s;eem from the pre&s;ent Po&s;ture of Affairs, to be the mo&s;t likely to be the fir&s;t Scene of this Revival. <NOTE PLACE="marg">The other Treati&s;e, <HI>pag.</HI> 139, 140.</NOTE> But it has been &s;hewn, that there is nothing in the Prophecy that does fix the fir&s;t be|ginning of it there; And that the Per&s;ecu|tion in <HI>France,</HI> and <HI>Savoy,</HI> being executed by the &s;ame In&s;truments, may very well pa&s;s for one and the &s;ame thing.</P>
<P>This, <HI>Madam,</HI> is the fir&s;t encouraging Earne&s;t of that Great Deliverance, which the Oppre&s;&s;ed Church does groan for, and
<PB REF="4"> look up to Heaven, and to Your Protection to accompli&s;h.</P>
<P>But whatever may become of the&s;e re|mote Conclu&s;ions relating to pre&s;ent Affairs, it will be no prejudice to what I here offer, which is the only nece&s;&s;ary and Great Con|cern of the Prote&s;tant Interpretations, and the &s;ole foundation of them. It will here appear to remain &s;till firm, and un&s;haken, That the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> is the main Object of the Judgments of this Prophecy. The Foundation of a Building may be &s;etled up|on a Rock, though &s;ome parts of the Su|per&s;tructure &s;hould fall for want of an im|mediate and clo&s;e coherence with it. And if this fir&s;t Foundation be but once agreed on, and well regarded by all Parties of Prote&s;tants, it is ea&s;ie to &s;ee how influen|tial it mu&s;t needs be for the &s;trengthening of the Common Intere&s;t of the Reforma|tion. The dreadful Characters that are here &s;et upon the Common Enemy, and the Di|vine Intimations of the joint concern of all the Reformed Churches in the League a|gain&s;t them, as the Witne&s;&s;es, and People of God, And the Pre&s;ent Crying Mi&s;eries of their En&s;laved Brethren, are more than
<PB REF="4"> &s;ufficient to make them &s;ilence all their lit|tle Unnece&s;&s;ary Heats and Animo&s;ities again&s;t one another, and to make them unite with zeal to &s;trengthen the Hands of Your Ma|je&s;ties again&s;t the mo&s;t refined Barbarities of the Great Oppre&s;&s;or, that were ever yet heard of.</P>
<P>There are indeed but &s;mall Grounds to hope, That Prote&s;tants will of a &s;udden a|gree upon this Foundation, whatever Evi|dence there may be for it. The Enquiry into the&s;e matters is &s;o out of fa&s;hion, and lies under &s;o general a prejudice, that I found the Pre&s;s every-where affrighted from un|dertaking the Charge of this Publication. And I am bound to acknowledge, That nothing le&s;s could per&s;uade them to it, than the warm Recommendations of a Per|&s;on, whom Your Maje&s;ty's Favour has emi|nently rewarded for his Long continued La|bours in all the ways, by which the Church can be either piou&s;ly edified, or learnedly de|fended. It is indeed owing to My Lord Bi&s;hop of <HI>Chiche&s;ter,</HI> if any thing here does prove to be of Publick U&s;e.</P>
<PB REF="5">
<P><HI>Madam,</HI></P>
<P>This General Unconcern &s;eems chiefly to be the effect of the Popi&s;h Marriages in the Three La&s;t Reigns. Nothing was more the Doctrine of our Church to the end of the Reign of King <HI>James</HI> the Fir&s;t, than the Charge of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and Antichri&s;t, upon the <HI>Roman</HI> Church; but it &s;eemed &s;omething too rude a Charge, both to Church and Court, when the Queen came to be concerned in it; and none but &s;ome very few of the mo&s;t Sincere and Di&s;intere&s;ted among&s;t the Learn|ed, would appear in it.</P>
<P>I have therefore apprehended it to be the mo&s;t effectual way for the making this the Currant Study of the Age again, to pro|cure the Royal Stamp upon it, by Your Maje&s;ty's favourable regard of this Perfor|mance. I am encouraged to hope, That it may not di&s;plea&s;e the Impartial Exami|ners of it. And Your Maje&s;ty's Pious Zeal to promote True Religion and Vertue, has already began to make all good De&s;igns for the Prote&s;tant Intere&s;t, the Fa&s;hiona|ble Study of all about You. That we may
<PB REF="5"> long have the Powerful and Charming In|fluence of this Great Example for the im|provement of all U&s;eful Knowledge, is the Zealous Prayer of,</P>
<CLOSER><SALUTE>MADAM,</SALUTE>
<SIGNED><HI>Your</HI> MAJESTY'S <HI>Mo&s;t Obedient Subject,</HI> DRUE CRESSENER.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="preface">
<PB REF="6">
<PB N="i" REF="6">
<HEAD>THE PREFACE, Concerning the Strength and U&s;eful|ne&s;s of the Work, and the Confirmation of it by the Event; and the Defects of the Synchroni&s;ms.</HEAD>
<P>MOST Writers are &s;o happy, as to be able to think them&s;elves &s;ure of Readers enow; and all their care is to make them Courteous and gentle by a Preface. But there are &s;o few that can have the patience to hear of any thing about the <HI>Re|velations,</HI> that the great difficulty here is to get any Rea|ders at all, and to prevent the being &s;entenc'd without a Tryal.</P>
<P>That which does &s;o affright the World from the&s;e things, is the u&s;ual fancifulne&s;s, and loo&s;ene&s;s of Di&s;cour&s;es of this nature, and their great Confidence and A&s;&s;urance, with little or no care to make &s;ure of their foundation. I do therefore think it requi&s;ite to a&s;&s;ure all tho&s;e that look upon this, That the whole aim of my Endeavours here, is to re|&s;train all kind of Liberty of Imagination, and to force an A&s;&s;ent by clo&s;e, and clear proof, in&s;tead of &s;urprizing it by an Ingenious Scheme, and by the tempting agreements, and lucky likene&s;&s;es of Characters. My great fear indeed is, that the dry &s;trictne&s;s of the Rea&s;onings in it, will turn away more from
<PB N="ii" REF="7"> peru&s;ing it, than the &s;trength and cautiou&s;ne&s;s of it will plea&s;e. But that will &s;till the more clear my Attempt from the common Prejudice.</P>
<P>It may be &s;ome motive to the belief of this, That the only end of this &V;ndertaking was to find out a more &s;ati&s;|factory foundation for what the Excellent Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> has endeavoured to demon&s;trate in this way; Who&s;e known Re|putation for his impartial and cautious Judgment in the interpretation of other parts of Scripture, is &s;ufficient to &s;ilence all incon&s;iderate Prejudices again&s;t his Perfor|mances of this kind.</P>
<P>There have indeed been &s;ome very great Names of late <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grotius, <HI>Dr.</HI> Hammond, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></NOTE> among&s;t our &s;elves, who have excu&s;ed the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> from any concern in the Judgments of this Prophecy; and that, only by laying down another Scheme of Interpretation without any tolerable proof of it. But it is a &s;ufficient preju|dice again&s;t their Authority, that they are forced to &s;uch &s;hifts for their foundation, as the mo&s;t Judicious, and the mo&s;t skilful of the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Interpreters them&s;elves do cry <NOTE PLACE="marg">See the Pre|face to my former Trea|ti&s;e.</NOTE> out again&s;t, as things, that none, but <HI>Men out of their Wits,</HI> would own, and &s;uch as they affirm to be <HI>contrary to the general &s;en&s;e of all kinds of Interpreters, Jews and Chri&s;tians, Ancient and Modern.</HI> And when they come to &s;peak of the like kind of Phra&s;es, do declare that &s;en&s;e of them, which the&s;e New Men account mon&s;trous in the Interpretations of their Brethren, <HI>to be &s;o clear, that all, but tho&s;e that are blind, may ea&s;ily &s;ee it;</HI> Or &s;uch, as is <HI>agreeable both to the u&s;age of common Speech, and to the u&s;age of Scripture;</HI> Or &s;uch, <HI>as mu&s;t nece&s;|&s;arily be allowed:</HI> Which is a &s;ufficient Vindication of tho&s;e Learned Interpreters of our own, who have brought the &s;ame Charge again&s;t the&s;e Ingenious Innovators.</P>
<P>It would at the fir&s;t much &s;urprize any man to &s;ee the&s;e Learned Prote&s;tants &s;o bu&s;ie to ea&s;e the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> of this trouble from their Brethren, when all the thanks
<PB N="iii" REF="7"> that they can get for it from the mo&s;t Judicious of tho&s;e, who&s;e Cau&s;e they oblige by it, is to be called <HI>Madmen,</HI> and <HI>fools</HI> for their pains.</P>
<P>But in this they them&s;elves do &s;atisfy us. They ac|knowledge that they came to the Interpretation of the <HI>Re|velations</HI> with a de&s;ign to &s;erve by it; It was more to an&s;wer Objections again&s;t &s;ome &s;ingular Notions, than to un|fold the My&s;tery of that Prophecy. They came to force their way through the Difficulties, that the plain and ob|vious &s;en&s;e of the Vi&s;ions did lay in their way. And no|thing is more ordinary than to &s;ee men wre&s;t any part of Scripture, that will not comply with their fancy, for &s;ome particular Opinions. Their Expedient for Catholick &V;ni|on of all Chri&s;tian Churches by the Compliance of the <HI>Ro|man;</HI> Their A&s;&s;urace of the nece&s;&s;ity of the conveyance of a Right Succe&s;&s;ion, and Ordination by a Church that was not <HI>formally</HI> Idolatrous, &amp;c. were altogether incon&s;i&s;tent with the Prote&s;tant &s;en&s;e of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e.</HI></P>
<P>It is as evident on the other &s;ide from the clo&s;ene&s;s and cautiou&s;ne&s;s of Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s Explications, and the impar|tiality of his Judgment upon all other Occa&s;ions, that his whole aim was to make &s;ure of the clear and certain &s;en&s;e of the&s;e My&s;teries. He bad no private Opinion that he came to advance by it, or to make it a drudge to: And his way of life, and the warine&s;s, and the Ingenuity of his Spirit in all his other Expo&s;itions of Scripture, did &s;uffici|ently &s;ecure him that Character of him&s;elf, which his Mo|de&s;ty would only own, <HI>viz.</HI> his freedom from <HI>&s;tudium partium.</HI></P>
<P>But the pre&s;ent Age is &s;o generally prepo&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed with the Interpretations of the&s;e Learned Men, That it is further nece&s;&s;ary to remind tho&s;e, that look upon them as a great &s;ervice to the Church of <HI>England,</HI> That they are great No|velties <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>See Dr.</HI> Ber|nard<HI>'s Di&s;|cour&s;es,</HI> p. 139, <HI>to</HI> 160.</NOTE> in its Doctrine; and if continued in, will but ex|po&s;e it to the re&s;t of the Reformed Churches for departing
<PB N="iv" REF="8"> from them, and from its own fir&s;t Faith, only to uphold &s;ome Prerogatives of its own Reformation, to the under|valuing, and undermining of the grounds of theirs. It is manife&s;t <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>Third Part of the Sermon a|gain&s;t Idolatry,</HI> p. 69. <HI>And 6th Part of the Sermon again&s;t Rebel|lion,</HI> p. 316.</NOTE> by the Homilies approved of in our Articles as the faith of our Church, That the Charge of <HI>Babylon</HI> upon the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> is the &s;tanding Profe&s;&s;ion of the Church of <HI>England;</HI> And it conti|nued to be the <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg"><HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> Jewell, <HI>p.</HI> 373. <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> Abbot, Antichri&s;ti Demon&s;tratio, <HI>Archbi&s;hop</HI> Whitgift, <HI>Tract.</HI> 8. <HI>p.</HI> 349. <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> Andrews, Tortura Torti. <HI>Bi&s;hop</HI> Bil&s;on, <HI>p.</HI> 527. <HI>Bi|&s;hop</HI> Morton. <HI>Mr.</HI> R. Hooker<HI>'s Trea|ti&s;e of Ju&s;tification,</HI> &s;ect. 10, 57.</NOTE> currant Judgment of all the be&s;t Learned Members of it till the end of the Reign of King <HI>James</HI> the Fir&s;t: It was really believed in his time to be &s;o clear and important a part of their Faith, That both the Church, and the Court, did applaud the King in his publick defence of it, though he did thereby plainly endanger the honour of his Character, and the Intere&s;t of his Kingdom among&s;t all <HI>Roman-Catholick</HI> Princes. As appears by <HI>Le&s;&s;ius</HI>'s Epi&s;tle Monitory to them:</P>
<P>After that time, This Doctrine of the Homilies came to be more out of fa&s;hion, either to be civil to the Marriages of the &s;ucceeding Reigns, or to take away all the advantage that the Serapati&s;ts might have from hence again&s;t the nece&s;&s;ity of an uninterrupted Succe&s;&s;ion and Ordination in every Law|fully-con&s;tituted Church; Which might al&s;o &s;hew them the nece&s;&s;ity of uniting with the Church of <HI>England.</HI> It is cer|tain, that the extravagant Heats of tho&s;e times were e|nough to make Learned Men run into unnece&s;&s;ary Ex|tremes.</P>
<P>But the common Danger of late has now revived the Ancient Doctrine of the Church again, which the&s;e Novel|ties did contradict. All the be&s;t Learned in the Church have been engaged in charging the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> with <HI>formal</HI> Idolatry, in expo&s;ing all Expedients for &V;nion with it; in demon&s;trating the nece&s;&s;ity of a Separation
<PB N="v" REF="8"> from them, whatever becomes of the Succe&s;&s;ion; in di&s;own|ing of all kind of Right of Supremacy there, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>If therefore the Authority of the&s;e New Interpreters does &s;till prejudice any (that are otherwi&s;e curious) a|gain&s;t the&s;e kind of Enquiries, here is all this to make them very unea&s;ie under it, <HI>viz.</HI> That they rely upon &s;uch for it, as the be&s;t Judges among&s;t tho&s;e, who&s;e Cau&s;e they mo&s;t befriend by it, do impartially cry out again&s;t, as Men <HI>void of common Sen&s;e,</HI> for the grounds that they go up|on for it; and that they prefer the Judgment of the&s;e men in oppo&s;ition to the Doctrine of the Church of <HI>England</HI> it &s;elf, and of the be&s;t Learned, and the mo&s;t impartial De|fenders of it almo&s;t ever &s;ince the Reformation, and al&s;o in oppo&s;ition to the Judgment of all Reformed Churches be&s;ides.</P>
<P>I do moreover here pretend to lay a &s;urer and deeper foundation for the demon&s;tration of the Prote&s;tant Appli|cations, than has yet been offered; which may make my en|deavours for it at lea&s;t worth the examining. And for the better apprehending of the force of all, I will here give a general <HI>Idea</HI> of my whole proce&s;s in it.</P>
<P>The chief foundation of my De&s;ign, is the con&s;tant u&s;age of Figures of the like kind in the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel.</HI> For there is this great advantage from <HI>Daniel</HI>'s Figures, That they are both the Original Copy of that in the <HI>Reve|lations,</HI> and have al&s;o a great variety of like Schemes, and were almo&s;t all of them fulfilled before the writing of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> as it has been by the Con&s;ent of the Learned <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>See</HI> Con&s;ent of the Ancients <HI>at the end.</HI></NOTE> of almo&s;t all Parties, and Ages, agreed upon. This makes the &s;ignification of the Schemes of <HI>Daniel</HI> to be certainly determined, and to be &s;o many <HI>Data,</HI> and Rules for the determination of the like, but le&s;s known, Phra&s;es in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> I have therefore taken &s;ome pains to make &s;ure of the Interpretation of the Figures of <HI>Daniel</HI> in &s;uch a way of proof, as I hope may bear the mo&s;t critical Exa|mination,
<PB N="vi" REF="9"> which was never before clearly done, but is the mo&s;t requi&s;ite of any thing for a full &s;atisfaction about the &s;en&s;e of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e.</HI> For by this means I have redu|ced all the kinds of Schemes, &s;ignifying <HI>Dominion,</HI> to certain and uniform Definitions, which is a much larger Ba&s;is to e&s;tabli&s;h the Interpretation of the&s;e My&s;teries up|on, and which I found much wanting in Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s, and Dr. <HI>More</HI>'s Method. The Prophetical Terms in the <HI>Re|velations</HI> do by this appear to have been well known to the Apo&s;tle before; and the &s;ignification of the chief of them, to contain in them &s;o large a &s;pace of time, as determines their accompli&s;hment to many Ages after his time, which is a great confirmation of the Divine Authority of the Pro|phecy. This is the whole bu&s;ine&s;s of the Second Book, which ought to be the mo&s;t nicely, and attentively exa|mined.</P>
<P>But to make the demon&s;tration of this the more &s;ecure, I thought it mo&s;t convenient to make u&s;e of &s;ome of the mo&s;t undoubted, and acknowledged things about <HI>Babylon,</HI> and the Figure of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> which do the mo&s;t openly and unque&s;tionably determine the &s;cene of the&s;e things to one certain Empire; Whereby the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> which is proved nece&s;&s;arily to be the &s;ame with that in the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> is more certainly made known; and all the re&s;t of the Kingdoms there mentioned, more unavoidably confined in their particular &s;ignifications. This therefore was thought fit to be premi&s;ed in the Fir&s;t Book.</P>
<P>In the doing of this, I had another aim, which I ap|prehended to be of very u&s;eful importance; and that was to make &s;ure of the foundation of Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s Syncroni&s;ms; that is, That the Term of the Bea&s;t all over the <HI>Revela|tions,</HI> does denote but one and the &s;ame <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate of it; the want of a clo&s;e proof of which, gives a great advantage to the <HI>Grotian</HI> Interpretation, to evade the force
<PB N="vii" REF="9"> of his Demon&s;trations by taking that Term in various ac|ceptations. Dr. <HI>Moor</HI> has indeed taken great pains for this purpo&s;e; but I could not be &s;atisfied, till I found it more <HI>ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary</HI> for that term to be every-where but the &s;ame <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate, than his <HI>Eighteen Con|gruities,</HI> or Likene&s;&s;es, do &s;eem to make it.</P>
<P>The Third Book does apply the general Notions in the Two former, to the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> Thus far I have generally endeavoured to carry on my whole Pro|ce&s;s upon Principles common to all the &s;everal ways of Pro|te&s;tant Interpreters; and have therefore offered mine own particular Apprehen&s;ions about the Application, and fir&s;t date of the Reign of the Bea&s;t, by way of Queries only; that I might lay the &s;tre&s;s of the bu&s;ine&s;s upon a founda|tion large enough to fit almo&s;t all the different Judgments of Prote&s;tant Interpreters, and not venture it upon the nar|row bottom of one particular man's Fancy and Method; And I have made u&s;e of no Authorities to confirm any thing of moment, but the Con&s;ent of Papi&s;ts them&s;elves; And their Con&s;ent about almo&s;t all the Propo&s;itions in the Fir&s;t and Second Book, which are the Principles and foundation of the De&s;ign, was a very great confirmation to me of the &s;trength and certainty of all that follows.</P>
<P>But yet I am &s;o throughly &s;en&s;ible of the &s;trange and violent heats, that the &s;tudy of the&s;e things do generally po&s;&s;e&s;s all men with, that engage in it, that I mu&s;t de&s;ire that Ju&s;tice of the Reader not to be deterred from the per|u&s;al of this performance, by the confident Cen&s;ures of any that may ob&s;erve &s;ome &s;mall Conclu&s;ions here, not &s;o agreea|ble to their own Fancies. For the mo&s;t eminent and admi|red in other parts of Learning, have been found to be the mo&s;t ab&s;urd and gro&s;s in their Confident Mi&s;takes about the&s;e matters. Nothing indeed does make men &s;o obnoxi|ous to mi&s;takes here, as a more than ordinary mea&s;ure of quickne&s;s of Parts, and of a&s;&s;urance from great improve|ments
<PB N="viii" REF="10"> in other ways. If I have at all &s;ucceeded in this Attempt, I mu&s;t wholly attribute it, under God's a&s;&s;i&s;tance, to the peculiar &s;cepticalne&s;s of my nature, and the continual di&s;tru&s;t of my own Apprehen&s;ions and Performances, which would not &s;uffer me to fix upon &s;carce any thing, before I had by often repeated corrections of my fir&s;t thoughts about it, made it appear not only <HI>clear,</HI> but <HI>nece&s;&s;ary</HI> to me.</P>
<P>It is enough to revive the Curio&s;ity of the pre&s;ent Age for the examination of this Attempt, to reflect but upon the peculiar advantages of it, if performed. My De&s;ign <NOTE PLACE="marg">The U&s;eful|ne&s;s of the De&s;ign.</NOTE> is to give a clear and nece&s;&s;ary proof, That the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> is that Great Enemy of God's Church, which is much the bu&s;ine&s;s of the <HI>Revelations.</HI></P>
<P>And one very great advantage of this would be, That it would cut off many voluminous and intricate Di&s;putes, which take up &s;o much of the choice&s;t time of the Be&s;t Men. If it were once made &s;ure, That God had here &s;o openly expo&s;ed the di&s;tingui&s;hing marks of that Church, almo&s;t every one of <HI>Bellarmin</HI>'s Notes of his Church ought, with|out any di&s;pute, to be granted him. Nay, If that alone be but yielded, which the Je&s;uit <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>In v.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 11. Apocalyp&s;. <HI>No|tat.</HI> 4. <HI>item ante Nota|tion. See Preface to the Judgments of God upon the</HI> R. C.</NOTE> affirms to be <HI>nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> and the contrary of it to be <HI>not at all agree|able to the Enigmatical &s;tyle</HI> of the <HI>Revelations;</HI> that is, That the 1260 days are to be taken in a <HI>My&s;tical,</HI> and not in the <HI>literal</HI> &s;en&s;e; Tho&s;e Notes would be the &s;ure&s;t confirmation, that that Church mu&s;t be the Great <HI>Babylon.</HI> For as the <HI>My&s;tical</HI> acceptation of a <HI>Day</HI> in Scripture, is <HI>a Year,</HI> &s;o is it impo&s;&s;ible to apply the Characters an&s;we|ring to tho&s;e Marks in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to any Ruling Power be&s;ides, for the &s;pace of 1260 together, &s;ince the writing of the Prophecy.</P>
<P><HI>Ex. gr.</HI> Where-ever was there an Empire &s;ince the wri|ting of the Prophecy, but that of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, that <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Note"> was &s;o <HI>Univer&s;al</HI> for 1260 years together, as to have all that dwell upon Earth, Peoples, and Multitudes, and <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 8. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 17. 15.</NOTE>
<PB N="ix" REF="10"> Nations, and Tongues, to wor&s;hip it? What Ruling Power, but that, &s;o <HI>Ancient,</HI> as to have the <HI>Blood of Prophets, and Saints, and of all that were &s;lain upon Earth,</HI> of <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Note"> that kind for that &s;pace of time, to <HI>be found in it?</HI> What <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 24.</NOTE> Rule but that, had ever &s;o long a <HI>duration</HI> in the World, as to continue &s;et upon an Hill, much le&s;s upon <HI>&s;even Hills,</HI> <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Note"> for &s;o great a &s;pace of time, or &s;o as to an&s;wer the whole length of the time of the <HI>Saracen,</HI> and <HI>Turki&s;h</HI> Em|pires <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 9. 1, 13.</NOTE> in the Two fir&s;t Woes? Never had any other Church <MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="Note"> &s;uch an <HI>Amplitude,</HI> or <HI>variety of Believers,</HI> as to have <HI>all Nations drink of the Wine of her Fornication;</HI> or &s;o <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 3, &amp; <HI>c.</HI> 13. 7.</NOTE> as to have a <HI>bla&s;phemous power over all Kindreds, and Tongues, and Nations.</HI> None, but that, was ever &s;o eminently con&s;picuous for &s;o long a time for the <HI>Succe&s;&s;ion</HI> <MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="Note"> <HI>of its Bi&s;hops</HI> under one Supreme Patriarch, as to be the <HI>Living Image</HI> of all the Civil Dignities of the Empire, where <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 12, 14, 15.</NOTE> it was under one <HI>Supreme Church-Head exerci&s;ing all the power</HI> of the Civil Head, or with <HI>Imperium in Imperio.</HI> Nor did ever any Enemy of God's Church act for &s;o long a time like the <HI>Red Dragon</HI> in its bloody Laws again&s;t the <MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="Note"> Followers of the <HI>Lamb:</HI> And yet &s;o far <HI>agree with the Primitive Church in</HI> fundamental <HI>Doctrines,</HI> as to an|&s;wer the Character of a Fal&s;e Prophet with the Horns of <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 11.</NOTE> the Lamb (Chri&s;t), but &s;peaking like the Red Dragon to his Followers, as the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> has done. Whereever, but there, has there been &s;uch an <HI>union of Head and</HI> <MILESTONE N="7" UNIT="Note"> <HI>Members</HI> for that length of time, to apply the <HI>one mind</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 13, 17.</NOTE> of the Ten Kings to for their <HI>agreement</HI> together <HI>to give their power, and &s;trength, and their</HI> whole <HI>Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t?</HI> Never did any, but that Church, appear &s;o long together with &s;uch a medly of <HI>Sanctity</HI> in &s;ome <HI>Do|ctrines,</HI> <MILESTONE N="8, &amp; 10." UNIT="Note"> and outward appearances of a &s;trict <HI>holine&s;s of life,</HI> joined with other abominable Doctrines, and Practi&s;es; to qualify it for the Horns of the Lamb, and the Speech of the Dragon for the Idolatrous and cruel Commands of the <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 12, 15.</NOTE>
<PB N="x" REF="11"> Image; Or for having the Form of Godline&s;s in the latter <NOTE PLACE="marg">2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 1, 7.</NOTE> times, and yet denying the power thereof; Or for <HI>forbid|ding</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4. 3.</NOTE> <HI>to marry, and commanding to ab&s;tain from Meats,</HI> and yet maintaining <HI>Doctrines of Devils.</HI> What Deceiving Power, but that, did ever &s;hew &s;o wonderful <HI>an efficacy</HI> <MILESTONE N="9" UNIT="Note"> <HI>of its Doctrine,</HI> as to make <HI>the Kings of the Earth, and</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 2.</NOTE> <HI>all Nations, drunk with the Wine of its Fornication?</HI> Or where did God ever &s;end &s;uch an <HI>efficacious Delu&s;ion,</HI> as to make men &s;o <HI>&s;trongly to believe a lye;</HI> things clear con|trary <NOTE PLACE="marg">2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 11.</NOTE> to the common Sen&s;e and Rea&s;on of all Mankind? <MILESTONE N="11" UNIT="Note"> The <HI>Glory of Miracles</HI> never appeared any where &s;o long, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 14.</NOTE> to make good the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet's lying Wonders, and his</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Matth.</HI> 7. 22.</NOTE> <HI>deceiving all that dwell upon Earth by the means of them;</HI> And never was there, but in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, &s;o long a Reign of tho&s;e that <HI>prophe&s;ied in the name of</HI> <MILESTONE N="12" UNIT="Note"> <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> with Signs and Wonders, to a&s;&s;ure the <HI>Gift of Pro|phecy</HI> to them, and &s;o to an&s;wer the Character of the <HI>Fal&s;e</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 14. &amp; <HI>Mat.</HI> 24. 24.</NOTE> <HI>Prophet working Miracles to deceive</HI> the World, and <HI>even, if it were po&s;&s;ible, the very Elect.</HI> Nor ever had any Power upon Earth &s;o numerous <HI>Confe&s;&s;ions of its</HI> <MILESTONE N="13" UNIT="Note"> <HI>Adver&s;aries</HI> for the application of the&s;e Notes of his Church in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to verify the <HI>Te&s;timony of the Wit|ne&s;&s;es;</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 3.</NOTE> no Church or State in the World be&s;ide has made &s;uch an <HI>unhappy end</HI> of any thing near &s;o many of <HI>its Ene|mies,</HI> <MILESTONE N="14" UNIT="Note"> as the <HI>Roman,</HI> to a&s;&s;ure us, That it can be no|where but there, that the <HI>Image cau&s;ed all to be killed</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 15, 16, 17.</NOTE> <HI>that would not wor&s;hip it, nor receive its mark, and name;</HI> Nor did <HI>Temporal Felicity</HI> ever attend any other <MILESTONE N="15" UNIT="Note"> Religion for half the time of the <HI>Roman</HI> Reign to make it po&s;&s;ible to under&s;tand the <HI>Riches</HI> and <HI>Glory of</HI> Babylon <HI>to</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 16, 17.</NOTE> <HI>her la&s;t hour,</HI> of any thing el&s;e.</P>
<P>If it &s;hould here be &s;aid, That the&s;e 1260 years are to be verified of &s;ome Empire yet to come; It mu&s;t however be allowed, That the pre&s;ent <HI>Roman</HI> Church is as like that Antichri&s;tian Empire for all the time that it is to continue,
<PB N="xi" REF="11"> and that for 1260 years, as one thing can well be like ano|ther.</P>
<P>This would make one apprehend, That <HI>Bellarmin</HI> was perfectly infatuated to make choice of &s;uch things for the marks of his Church, as make it the very picture of <HI>Baby|lon</HI> the Great in the <HI>Revelations;</HI> and &s;hews the <HI>U&s;e, and great moment of the Notes of the Church, as delivered by Cardinal</HI> Bellarmin.</P>
<P>So al&s;o for other Intricate Controver&s;ies.</P>
<P><HI>E. G.</HI> If this Application of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> were once &s;ecured, who would much trouble him&s;elf to prove the <HI>for|mal</HI> Idolatry of the Church of <HI>Rome?</HI> when it appears here to be the <HI>Mother of Harlots,</HI> that has made <HI>all Na|tions</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 3.</NOTE> <HI>drink of the Wine of her Fornication;</HI> Or to de|fend any Reformed Church from the imputation of <HI>Schi&s;m?</HI> when there is &s;uch an expre&s;s Command to the <HI>People of</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>v.</HI> 4.</NOTE> <HI>God to come out of her,</HI> any ways, <HI>with,</HI> or <HI>without</HI> the countenance of Authority, that they <HI>be not partakers of her Sins,</HI> and &s;o <HI>receive of her Plagues.</HI> Or to contend much for the <HI>perpetual vi&s;ibility</HI> of the true People of God? when the Prophecy does &s;o expre&s;ly di&s;tingui&s;h betwixt them as unknown, and a Fal&s;e, Idolatrous, and Apo&s;tate Church, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibidem. <HI>Rev.</HI> 18. 4. &amp; <HI>c.</HI> 7.</NOTE> wherein they &s;ojourn, and does &s;et them forth as per&s;ons no ways to be known from tho&s;e, where they are, but by the Seal of God upon them, <HI>Rev.</HI> 9. 4. Or to fence off the Charge of <HI>Novelty?</HI> when <HI>all Nations</HI> are de&s;cribed to wor&s;hip a Fal&s;e Church for &s;o many Ages together: Or to prove the <HI>Fallibility,</HI> or Actual Errors of the <HI>General Councils</HI> of that Church? when it appears to have forced all the World to <HI>commit Fornication</HI> with it. Or to &s;pend <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>v.</HI> 3.</NOTE> much time again&s;t the Pope's <HI>Supremacy?</HI> when the mi&s;|chief <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 11, 12.</NOTE> of it is &s;o openly, and &s;o fully here &s;et forth.</P>
<P>It is another great Advantage of the proof of this Ap|plication, That the Evidence, by which it is to be proved, is &s;uch, as the Capacities of all, that are curious, are mo&s;t
<PB N="xii" REF="12"> fitted to apprehend, and to be the mo&s;t delighted with, <HI>viz.</HI> the Hi&s;tories of the Changes of Empires and Kingdoms; Figures that are ea&s;ie Objects of the Fancies and Imagina|tions of men, and are diverting Re&s;emblances of real things. So that nothing does &s;eem to be more likely to engage the Attention of all Prote&s;tants to the under&s;tanding of the dif|ference of their Religion from Popery, than this Method.</P>
<P>All the Controver&s;ial part of the proof again&s;t the <HI>Ro|mani&s;ts,</HI> has little or no critical curio&s;ity in it; little el&s;e but what is known by the common u&s;age of words in the Vul|gar Tongue. In almo&s;t every thing that is material we agree about the Tran&s;lation, which in many other Controver&s;ies makes a great part of the Di&s;pute. There is nothing here of Schola&s;tical intricacy, as mo&s;t other ways have. The Text, which is the ground of all, is generally agreed upon; The Hi&s;tories, that the Application refers to, are on both &s;ides granted; many Explications of Figures allowed to be plainly expre&s;&s;ed in the Text in general words; And the almo&s;t only thing in Controver&s;ie, is, What particular Interpreta|tion is the nece&s;&s;ary &s;en&s;e of tho&s;e general words compared with what is clearly known from the Text, and from the fre|quent u&s;e of tho&s;e words in Prophecies fulfilled, and from unque&s;tionable matter of fact in Hi&s;tory. So that a man of the &s;lowe&s;t parts, that can but rea&s;on warily and attentively about common Affairs, or apprehend the like Rea&s;onings of others, may be able enough with a &s;hort Chronology of the Times and Actions that the&s;e things refer to, to under&s;tand with ea&s;e all the proof that is nece&s;&s;ary for this matter. The only thing requi&s;ite indeed for this, is <HI>a patient Atten|tion,</HI> which the quicke&s;t Apprehen&s;ions are the lea&s;t di&s;po&s;ed for.</P>
<P>There is al&s;o this further advantage in this way of &s;et|ling mens minds, <HI>viz.</HI> That no Rea&s;onings will be more ea&s;ily <HI>retained in Memory,</HI> becau&s;e the&s;e are generally about things which are wholly the objects of <HI>Imagination</HI>
<PB N="xiii" REF="12"> and <HI>Sen&s;e;</HI> nor will any thing more fix and determine the thoughts of men to it, when it is once apprehended to be clear, without any apparent ground of doubt about it. For what can be a nobler, or more plea&s;ing entertainment of a mans mind, than to find the mo&s;t con&s;iderable actions of the civilized World for &s;o many Ages (and of the greate&s;t importance for him&s;elf to be acquainted with) &s;o <HI>particu|larly</HI> foretold, &s;o long before, and with &s;uch accurate Fi|gures of things exactly agreeable to them?</P>
<P>One peculiar <HI>Advantage</HI> I mu&s;t acknowledg to have re|ceived from it my &s;elf, which po&s;&s;ibly may be al&s;o of u&s;e to others in the like condition; and that was, The freeing me from all vain deluding hopes of any &s;uch Reformation in the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> as might make way for a general &V;nion of All Chri&s;tians. For we &s;ee it impo&s;&s;ible from this Prophecy, that <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;hould ever &s;o change it &s;elf, before its final de&s;truction. I was once very much taken with the mollifying Pleas of <HI>Grotius,</HI> and others of the Reconciling way; and apprehended it po&s;&s;ible for the chief Heads of the <HI>Roman</HI> Communion to conde&s;cend to an ex|pedient for a general Reconciliation. But when I came to be acquainted with Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s Demon&s;trations, and had compared them with the mon&s;trous eva&s;ions, and ab&s;urd &s;trains of wit, that <HI>Grotius</HI> and others were fain to flye to, to turn off the force of them, I gave over all thoughts of the comprehending way, and made it my bu&s;ine&s;s to exa|mine the &s;trength of his Foundation with all the critical caution that I could bring to it. Nothing did more con|firm me in my hopes to meet with a perfect &s;atisfa|ction in this way, than the great opinion I had of the abilities of the eminent <HI>Grotius,</HI> and the unnatural Artifi|ces and Eva&s;ions that I &s;aw him forced to, in contradiction to the known u&s;e of words, and &s;ometimes to his own ac|ceptation of them; one egregious in&s;tance of which, is that again&s;t the u&s;e of a day for a year, in the Prophecy of the
<PB N="xiv" REF="13"> 70 weeks; where he affirms that the original word for the <HI>Weeks,</HI> does always &s;ignifie a week of Years, and not of days; whereas it is plain to the contrary, that in all the places of Scripture where it is u&s;ed, it &s;ignifies literally on|ly a week of days, as the Learned <HI>Dr. More</HI> has very expre&s;|ly proved. <HI>My&s;tery of Godline&s;s, lib.</HI> 5. <HI>chap.</HI> 15. <HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</P>
<P>Another great advantage of this Interpretation, con&s;e|quent upon the former, and more immediately influencing the pre&s;ent &s;tate of Affairs, is, The great efficacy of it, for the uniting of all &s;ober Prote&s;tants together, for their common Intere&s;t: For here may they the mo&s;t livelily per|ceive them&s;elves to be all <HI>Brethren,</HI> and <HI>the People of God,</HI> &s;uppo&s;ed to be in one Common League together again&s;t that formidable <HI>Dragon,</HI> that &s;tands always ready either to deceive and inchant them, or to de&s;troy them. This &s;hews them not only the great folly, but al&s;o the ungodline&s;s of Schi&s;ms and Divi&s;ions upon unnece&s;&s;ary grounds, and of their lukewarm unconcern for the means of uniting them&s;elves to|gether in one body.</P>
<P>I will not mention other advantages in common to all the Prophetical parts of the N. T. The&s;e are enough to incline the Reader to make a tryal of what is here offered; e&s;pe|cially when it is withal con&s;idered, that my aim is &s;till further to improve the &s;tronge&s;t and cleare&s;t method of rea&s;oning about the&s;e things.</P>
<P>I am not in&s;en&s;ible, That the ground of many mens pre|judices again&s;t this &s;tudy, is, That the Interpreters are &s;o fanciful, as to apply the Prophecy to Times and Places near our&s;elves But the only fault in this, is the Application of things to particular places and times, without any clear ex|pre&s;s determination to them in the Prophecy. It is mani|fe&s;t, That if the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> be the main concern of this Prophecy, then both the times, and that quarter of the world wherein we live, mu&s;t be the &s;ubject matter of &s;ome of the Predictions in it: For they reach to the la&s;t
<PB N="xv" REF="13"> end of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and therefore mu&s;t comprehend in them both the pre&s;ent Fortunes and Dominions of that Church, which are now no where to any purpo&s;e, but in the&s;e <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Parts of <HI>Europe.</HI> And &s;ince I have my &s;elf appeared in this way, I am thereby obliged to remove all grounds of Prejudice, upon the account of any thing that I may &s;eem to have been too venturous in.</P>
<P>I have accounted it the true&s;t Rule for the Appli|cation of Prophecy, that concerns the whole Chri&s;ti|an Church, ever &s;ince the writing of it, to chu&s;e out on|ly the mo&s;t eminent Events, and &s;uch as were of the large&s;t Extent over <HI>Chri&s;tendom,</HI> both for Time and Place, and that do withal the be&s;t an&s;wer the Characters of the Text. And this Rule I make account, I have been &s;o careful to ob&s;erve, that I que&s;tion not, but that the E|vents which I have pitched upon, will by all impartial Judges be allowed to have had a fair and &s;trong Tempta|tion to them from the Prophecy it &s;elf.</P>
<P>This may appear fir&s;t from my Explication of the Vials. <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>The Judg|ments of God upon the</HI> Ro|man <HI>Church</HI> pag. 219.</NOTE> I thought my &s;elf forced by the clo&s;e and immediate Con&s;e|quences in the 14th Chapter of my former Treati&s;e, to fix the fir&s;t date of the Vials, to the Time &s;oon after the Refor|mation, That being the fir&s;t Victory over the Bea&s;t, after <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 15. 2.</NOTE> which the Plauges that were to humble the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, in order to its la&s;t ruin, did begin. And the Vials being agreed, not to end before the Ruin of <HI>Babylon,</HI> they mu&s;t therefore mea&s;ure out the chief Mortifications of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Church from the Reformation till that time; and I cannot but be confident, That I have pitched upon the mo&s;t eminent Mortifications, and tho&s;e withal, that do the mo&s;t ju&s;tly an&s;wer the Characters of their re&s;pective Vial in the Text.</P>
<P>Indeed, from the Con&s;ideration of tho&s;e great Humili|ations of the <HI>Roman</HI> Intere&s;t &s;ince the Reformation, which &s;eem to be equal to the Plagues of the fir&s;t Trumpets; and
<PB N="xvi" REF="14"> were at the &s;ame time with the Plague of the &s;ixth Trum|pet, and yet uncapable of being &s;ignified by it; I can|not think it po&s;&s;ible for them not to be &s;ignified by the Vials; &s;ince otherwi&s;e, tho&s;e eminent Plagues upon that Church, &s;ince the Reformation will have nothing in the Prophecy that repre&s;ents them; which yet were at lea&s;t as great Plagues to the <HI>Romani&s;ts,</HI> as the three fir&s;t Trumpets.</P>
<P>The Death, and the Re&s;urrection of the Witne&s;&s;es <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 7, 11. <HI>See the Judg|ments of God upon the</HI> Ro|man <HI>Church,</HI> pag. 100.</NOTE> <HI>in Sackcloth,</HI> is the chief of my Applications to pre&s;ent times. And I have taken &s;uch care in this, that I think I have proved it impo&s;&s;ible to have happened before our times; and by its nearne&s;s in the Prophecy to the end of the &s;econd Woe, which all con&s;iderable Prote&s;tants agree to be the <HI>Turki&s;h</HI> Ho&s;tilities; and by the time a&s;&s;igned <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid. <HI>chap.</HI> 8, &amp; 9.</NOTE> to the continuance of that woe, I have not without &s;uffici|ent warrant for it, confined it to this pre&s;ent time.</P>
<P>I &s;ee nothing yet, but what does very &s;urpri&s;ingly con|firm that Application. And it will not be improper, nor unplea&s;ant upon this occa&s;ion, to reflect upon the Confir|mation that has been given of them by the Event, contrary to what in all humane appearance might have been ex|pected.</P>
<P>The Re&s;urrection of the Witne&s;&s;es is there determined <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chap.</HI> 7. p. 107.</NOTE> to three years and an half, after the general Apo&s;tacy of the <HI>French</HI> Church. For the Death of the Witne&s;&s;es is proved to be the perfect Suppre&s;&s;ion of the Profe&s;&s;ion of Prote&s;tanti&s;m; and that is not, till the Profe&s;&s;ors of it <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chap.</HI> 6. <HI>p</HI> 91.</NOTE> that remain behind, <HI>renounce</HI> that Profe&s;&s;ion. And as the Character of their being in Sackcloth, does confine the place of this to a <HI>Roman</HI> State; So al&s;o has this been mo&s;t unexpectedly fulfilled by the return of the Prote&s;tants of <HI>Savoy,</HI> through the mid&s;t of their Enemies, contrary to all humane appearance. They re&s;etled their publick Wor&s;hip there, ju&s;t about that di&s;tance of time from
<PB N="xvii" REF="14"> the la&s;t con&s;iderable <HI>Abjurations</HI> of the new Converts, which was the mo&s;t proper Death of their witne&s;&s;ing Profe&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>I have indeed declared, That I thought it much more likely from the outward appearances of things, that this Re|volution &s;hould begin fir&s;t in the proper Kingdom of <HI>France.</HI> But I took care at the &s;ame time, to &s;hew that there was no|thing <NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 107, 139, 140.</NOTE> clear in the Prophecy that did fix it there. And Pro|vidence has accordingly thought fit to make choice of a more unthought-of manner of bringing this to pa&s;s; And yet the <HI>Savoy-per&s;ecution</HI> being carried on by the <HI>French</HI> Troops, <NOTE PLACE="marg">P. 140.</NOTE> and Coun&s;els, I did then &s;ignify, that it was to be accounted but the &s;ame place of the death of the Witne&s;&s;es.</P>
<P>I have in &s;ome places mentioned the Revocation of the Edict of <HI>Nants,</HI> as the date of the death of the Witne&s;&s;es, that being the great publick Act that made them &s;peech|le&s;s. But then I have more particularly explained my mean|ing about it, <HI>pag.</HI> 107. <HI>viz.</HI> That their la&s;t expiring is not to be accounted but from the la&s;t end of the Work of the Dragoons for the general Apo&s;tacy of that Church; For the Edict it &s;elf had an offer of Toleration in private to tho&s;e who were willing to &s;tay in the Kingdom. If &s;ome &s;hould think it fitter to date this time from the end of the <HI>Savoy-per&s;e|cution,</HI> then the three years and a half would end at the quiet e&s;tabli&s;hment of the <HI>Vaudois</HI> in their Profe&s;&s;ion &s;ome while after their return. And let none think the &s;mallne&s;s of the appearance of the <HI>Vaudois</HI> to be too incon&s;iderable to be thought of by the Prophecy. For be&s;ides that the <HI>Re&s;urre|ction</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chap.</HI> 7. <HI>Theor.</HI> 32.</NOTE> of the Witne&s;&s;es is to be but in one place at the fir&s;t, the <HI>Vaudois</HI> were for many Ages the only con&s;iderable Party of the Witne&s;&s;es. They may therefore be very well accounted the fir&s;t comfortable <HI>Earne&s;t</HI> of a more <HI>Univer&s;al</HI> Revival of the Silenced Churches in other places.</P>
<P N="2">2. From the Order in the Text I have al&s;o formerly de|termined, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Letter to</HI> H. P. E. <HI>at the end of the Trea|ti&s;e.</HI></NOTE> That the end of the pre&s;ent <HI>Turki&s;h</HI> War (as the la&s;t part of the Second Woe) could not be till &s;ome time
<PB N="xviii" REF="15"> after the fir&s;t Revival of &s;uppre&s;&s;ed Prote&s;tanti&s;m. This we now &s;ee fulfilled; And yet how contrary was this to all the outward po&s;ture of Affairs, almo&s;t ever &s;ince it was con|jectured, which was in the Year 87? The <HI>Turk</HI> &s;eemed be|fore to have been brought to the greate&s;t nece&s;&s;ity of making a Peace. But from that time almo&s;t ever &s;ince, they have had &s;uch &s;trange Di&s;orders, and New Changes in their Govern|ment, which tended all to the impoveri&s;hing and dividing of their State; that it was by all the be&s;t Judges of Pub|lick Affairs concluded, That it was impo&s;&s;ible for them to &s;ub&s;i&s;t any longer without it. And on the other &s;ide, there has been &s;uch loud Alarms of a more formidable Enemy on this &s;ide of the Empire, and &s;uch continual Importunities from the Allies in the <HI>French</HI> War, and from the Obliga|tions of the League of <HI>Ausbourg,</HI> to put an end to the <HI>Turki&s;h</HI> War, and &s;o &s;mall a diver&s;ion from the Confede|rates in it to uphold it, that all have thought that the Ge|neral Peace on that &s;ide mu&s;t have been precipitated. And yet we have &s;een it de&s;erred to this time; And the Order of the Prophecy for the end of the Second Woe after the <HI>Re|&s;urrection</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 14.</NOTE> of the Witne&s;&s;es, thereby ob&s;erved, and fulfilled again&s;t all human appearance.</P>
<P N="3">3. From my proof of the time of the <HI>full death of the Wit|ne&s;&s;es,</HI> I did determine, That there would be no &s;uppre&s;&s;ion <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>P.</HI> 92, 106. <HI>Letter to</HI> H. P.</NOTE> of the Prote&s;tant Profe&s;&s;ion, either in <HI>England,</HI> or in the <HI>Pa|latinate;</HI> which how miraculou&s;ly it has been verified a|mong&s;t us, we are all the joyful Witne&s;&s;es of. Nor does it appear, That the <HI>French</HI> in all their Deva&s;tations of the <HI>Palatinate,</HI> ever carried on the Dragoon work of Abjura|tion among&s;t them. And yet how contrary to all outward appearance of things here, was this Conjecture when it was declared, and &s;ome-while after it? The Project of getting a Complying Parliament to put the &s;trength of the Nation into Popi&s;h Hands, by nulling the Laws again&s;t it, was then in a fair likelihood of taking; But upon the con|tinual
<PB N="xix" REF="15"> change of Corporations &s;oon after, it &s;eemed to be out of all que&s;tion: And the fury with which the Bi&s;hops Con&s;tancy was entertained, and the Severities of the Eccle|&s;ia&s;tical Commi&s;&s;ion, were &s;ufficient Te&s;timonies of the Re&s;olu|tion that was then taken to bring the Ruling Religion to that &s;tate of Toleration, which might qualify them to be the <HI>Wit|ne&s;&s;es in Sackcloth.</HI> And who could ever have thought, that the mo&s;t Refined Politicians in the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hould have been &s;o unaccountably infatuated, as to chu&s;e &s;uch Methods, as tended the mo&s;t apparently to the ruine of all the fair hopes that their Cau&s;e was then in? Or that the <HI>French</HI> would be &s;o unready to oppo&s;e His Pre&s;ent Ma|je&s;ty's Expedition here, when they fore&s;aw it; and long be|fore had publickly threatned by their Amba&s;&s;ador, to re|venge all Attempts of that nature? And then for the <HI>Pala|tinate,</HI> There was no rea&s;on to imagine that the <HI>French</HI> Zeal for their new way of Conver&s;ions &s;hould not have been as hot, as the Flames that they put the whole Country into.</P>
<P N="4">4. It was nece&s;&s;ary for me in my way of applying the Vials, to make the mortifications of the Imperial, and truly Papal Party by the Reign of the pre&s;ent <HI>French</HI> King, to <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>P.</HI> 207. 241.</NOTE> be the Plague of the Fourth Vial upon the Bea&s;t; and the time of every Vial being found by tho&s;e that are pa&s;t, to be about the &s;pace of Forty years, I have judged from thence, that the pre&s;ent King there would not be longer a Plague of any moment to that Party, His Reign having continued for <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>P.</HI> 244.</NOTE> more than Forty years &s;ince the end of the <HI>Suedi&s;h</HI>-War; And what con&s;iderable Plague has he been of late, but to the <HI>Prote&s;tant Palatinate?</HI> And he has already be|gun to be a &s;pectator only of the Imperial and Papal Tri|umphs over him: And yet how contrary to all appearance of things was it, That the <HI>French</HI> King &s;hould not think of ta|king his advantage &s;ooner again&s;t the <HI>Spani&s;h, Imperial,</HI> and <HI>Papal</HI> Dominions? OR, That he &s;hould be willing to &s;tand at gaze only for a whole Campagne, while his new Conque&s;ts were forced from him?</P>
<P N="5"><PB N="xx" REF="16"> 5. I have only this further to add, That it is a mo&s;t &s;ur|prizing in&s;tance of Divine Providence, to croud &s;o many &s;trange and unu&s;ual Revolutions together, into one point of the time of a Prophecy of near 2000 years concern, and to fulfil the Predictions of them by &s;uch new and unexpected means. By the number of years a&s;&s;igned to the continuance of <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Judgments of God, chap.</HI> 8, 9. <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 9. Ibid. p. 253, 260.</NOTE> the <HI>&s;econd Woe,</HI> And by the <HI>Three days and an half of the death of the Witne&s;&s;es,</HI> and by the time of the begin|ning of the <HI>fifth Vial,</HI> Here are all the&s;e great Changes confined to the compa&s;s of le&s;s than Ten years, <HI>viz.</HI> The per|fect &s;ilencing of all the Reformed Churches in All Popi&s;h Territories; The Revival of them; The Advancement of one of them into a Popi&s;h Throne; The Revolt of the whole Kingdom there from the <HI>Roman Church;</HI> The la&s;t end of all <HI>Turki&s;h</HI> Wars; The General Mortification of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Intere&s;t in all its own Territories. And the&s;e we have &s;een begun to be accompli&s;hed by as strange means, &s;uch as the forcing a whole Nation to that, which they really ac|count Idolatry, by unheard of Artifices; The Change of the Supream Power of a Kingdom, the greate&s;t Confedera|cy of Prote&s;tant and Popi&s;h Princes, that was ever known; The Pope's Excommunications of the fierce&s;t Zealot of his Church, that ever appeared; The breaking of an handful of Men through the oppo&s;ition of a prepared and powerful Enemy; The &s;udden Conque&s;t of &s;everal Ea&s;tern Countries, and a new Revolution in their Government.</P>
<P>This wonderful Accompli&s;hment of Predictions that were particularly foretold, and confined to &s;o &s;hort a time after, and that al&s;o contrary to the appearing di&s;po&s;ition of affairs, may be a very rea&s;onable pre&s;umption for the truth of the Principles upon which they rely. But I have every where taken care upon the mention of the&s;e things, to forewarn <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> all, That whatever becomes of the&s;e conjectures, yet it will not affect the proof that I here offer for the Principles of the Prote&s;tant Applications. For loo&s;e things may be built
<PB N="xxi" REF="16"> upon a very &s;trong foundation. But I hope the&s;e will be found not to have been ra&s;hly applied; And then they will be a confirmation of the Demon&s;tration, <HI>&agrave; priori,</HI> here at|tempted, As Effects are u&s;ually in&s;tanced in, to demon|&s;trate the true Cau&s;es.</P>
<P>Indeed the chief end of publi&s;hing the other part fir&s;t, was to engage the curio&s;ity of the World to enquire after this, which was always the chief aim of my Studies about this Subject. For as I was extreamly &s;urprized, and plea|&s;ed with Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s Method in the Demon&s;trative way; &s;o could I not think his prece&s;s altogether clo&s;e enough for it, as it has before been ob&s;erved by others. And tho the Learned Dr. <HI>More</HI> has very &s;ufficiently &s;hown, that not|with&s;tanding the <HI>&s;tronge&s;t</HI> of the Objections again&s;t them, they may neverthele&s;s be mo&s;t of them true; yet I do not &s;ee that he has proved &s;ome of them, upon which the main &s;tre&s;s of the whole Application does lye, to be <HI>nece&s;&s;ary</HI> to be &s;o, which is the whole de&s;ign of the Synchroni&s;m. e. g. The Synchroni&s;ms &s;uppo&s;e for their foundation, that the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chap. and that in the Eleventh, are the &s;ame particular state of the Seven Headed Bea&s;t, which yet <HI>Grotius</HI> &s;uppo&s;es to be <HI>quite different</HI> things, and by that undermines the force of the Demon&s;tration. Dr. <HI>More</HI> endeavours to strengthen it, by finding a likene&s;s be|twixt the Bea&s;ts, in one Character of each; which is far from a Cogent nece&s;&s;ity.</P>
<P>Dr. <HI>More</HI> him&s;elf allows not the proof of the Synchro|ni&s;m betwixt the Bea&s;t, and the Two Witne&s;&s;es in the Ele|venth Chapter, from the end of the Kingdom of the Bea&s;t, and of the Sackcloth Prophecy of the Witne&s;&s;es, at the pa&s;&s;ing away of the Sixth Trumpet; nor does it &s;eem to be more <HI>nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> that the Forty Two Months of the time of the Bea&s;t, &s;hould end before the <HI>La&s;t Ruine</HI> of his Kingdom, or when it comes only to be <HI>broken;</HI> which yet is the whole &s;trength of what he adds to defend it.</P>
<PB N="xxii" REF="17" MS="y">
<P> The Third Synchroni&s;m betwixt <HI>Babylon,</HI> and the Healed Bea&s;t in the 13th Chap. &s;uppo&s;es the Bea&s;t to be the &s;ame <HI>particular</HI> time and state of <HI>Roman</HI> Power, without any proof; and yet <HI>Grotius</HI> and others &s;uppo&s;e them <HI>quite different.</HI> Dr. <HI>More</HI> endeavours to &s;how them to be <HI>nece&s;&s;arily</HI> the &s;ame, by Eighteen Congruities of Cha|racters, which (tho I think I am &s;ure, that many of them are not true, yet) are indeed &s;ufficient to make any Man &s;trongly per&s;uaded of the perfect identity of the Two Bea&s;ts; But they have nothing in them, that does <HI>nece&s;&s;arily</HI> de|termine them to the &s;ame particular state, and time of <HI>Ro|man</HI> Reign. And yet the whole &s;trength of the <HI>Demon|&s;trative</HI> proof of the Synchroni&s;ms depends upon the <HI>ne|ce&s;&s;ity</HI> of the&s;e Suppo&s;itions.</P>
<P>The Fourth Synchroni&s;m is the total contemporation of the 144000 with the Bea&s;t, upon the account of their state of mutual oppo&s;ition from the fir&s;t time of the <HI>Marked</HI> follow|ers of the Bea&s;t: But the utmo&s;t that this can prove, is, That they were Contemporaries from that time, where they are mentioned together; For the Party of the Bea&s;t were <HI>marked,</HI> to be di&s;tingui&s;hed from the <HI>&s;ealed</HI> Company: But the 144000 were <HI>&s;ealed,</HI> only to e&s;cape the Judgments of the Trumpets, which are no-where proved <HI>nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> nor to begin before the time of the Bea&s;t. And Dr. <HI>More</HI> does add nothing to &s;hew it <HI>nece&s;&s;ary;</HI> and yet the chief proof of the Connexion of the fir&s;t part of the Vi&s;ions with the latter, does depend upon this in the fir&s;t <HI>Synchroni&s;m</HI> of the &s;econd Part.</P>
<P>I cannot but further add, That Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s and Dr. <HI>More's</HI> Applications of the <HI>&s;eventh</HI> and <HI>eighth King,</HI> does &s;eem to render the <HI>Synchroni&s;ms</HI> altogether ineffectual for convincing a <HI>Papi&s;t.</HI> For after they had made the <HI>e&s;&s;ential difference</HI> betwixt the &s;ix fir&s;t Heads or Kings, to be no|thing but a different Title of the Civil Sovereign Power of <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>See Judg|ments of God,</HI> p. 4.</NOTE> <HI>Rome,</HI> they make the &s;eventh King to be nothing but a
<PB N="xxiii" REF="17"> change of the Religion of the &s;ixth King, retaining &s;till the &s;ame Title of the <HI>Sovereign Power,</HI> which was his <HI>e&s;|&s;ential difference</HI> from that before him. This &s;eems to be contrary to &s;ix Examples in the &s;ame Figure, and to almo&s;t &s;ix times as many in the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel.</HI> A <HI>Papi&s;t</HI> would therefore hold them to their true Notion of the &s;ixth Head, and then pretend, That the Imperial Title does continue &s;till as the &s;ixth Head, and that the <HI>Synchro|ni&s;ms</HI> cannot therefore take place, till that be changed.</P>
<P>All this I mention, only to &s;hew, That there is &s;till want|ing a clearer Evidence, to make good that excellent De&s;ign, towards which Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> did give the fir&s;t great &s;trokes, and for which he is to be acknowledged to have been the fir&s;t clear Light that God gave the World for the illu&s;tration of the&s;e dark My&s;teries, which now appear to be the worthie&s;t Entertainment of the be&s;t and the mo&s;t judicious &V;nder&s;tan|dings. This I have endeavoured to perfect: But I mu&s;t &s;till acknowledge, That tho I think my &s;elf &s;ure enough of the &s;trength of my Method for it, yet I do not pretend to that which is <HI>&s;trictly</HI> called <HI>Demon&s;tration;</HI> It is enough for me, if I can proceed but upon &s;uch clear grounds, and go on in &s;o clo&s;e a coherence from them, as to force the a&s;&s;ent of all wary and impartial Examiners of it, with as little doubt concerning it, tho not with &s;o <HI>Ab&s;olute</HI> a Certainty of it, as Mathematical Evidence u&s;es to do.</P>
<P>I dare however be confident, for the encouragement of the Reader, That if he has found any &s;atisfaction in the grounds of any Prote&s;tant Interpretations, that others affirm them|&s;elves to be <HI>Abundantly and Mathematically certain of,</HI> he will find them here much more cautiou&s;ly and &s;trongly &s;e|cured; and that the Elegant Sy&s;temes which have of late <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Mon&s;ieur</HI> Ju|rieu. <HI>Eclair|ci&s;&s;emens o&uuml; Sy&s;teme Nou|veau.</HI></NOTE> much &s;urprized the generality of tho&s;e that look into the&s;e things, have but a very blind and uncertain Foundation, without &s;uch a proof of the fir&s;t Principles of them as is here attempted.</P>
<PB N="xxiv" REF="18">
<P> I think I may al&s;o &s;afely venture to a&s;&s;ure the Friends of the <HI>Grotian</HI> way, That the lea&s;t degreee of impartiality in them will make them &s;ee it here &s;hewn to be <HI>MUCH MORE CERTAIN,</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>Preface to the Judgments of God upon the</HI> Roman <HI>Church.</HI></NOTE> That the chief Foundations of that Interpretation are contrary to the clear and obvi|ous &s;en&s;e of the Prophetical Terms, as well as to the gene|ral Judgment of Interpreters of all Parties in all Ages, according to the Cen&s;ure of the mo&s;t Judicious of the <HI>Ro|mani&s;ts; than it is,</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>La veritable clef de l'</HI> Apo|calyp&s;e, <HI>p.</HI> 115.</NOTE> That <HI>Grotius</HI> was <HI>Divinely In&s;pi|red,</HI> <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Ibid. <HI>Preface.</HI></NOTE> and that Mr. <HI>Baxter</HI> is the Greate&s;t Man in <HI>England</HI> among the <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> for &s;econding him <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Ibid. p. 115.</NOTE>; Or, That they have made Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s Sy&s;teme appear &s;o <HI>ab&s;urd,</HI> that it is to be <HI>abhorred,</HI> according to the extravagant and hypo|critical expre&s;&s;ions of a late Incendiary of that Church, to inflame Prote&s;tants again&s;t one another.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="list of propositions">
<PB REF="18">
<HEAD>A TABLE OF PROPOSITIONS</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">To be In&s;pected, when any Propo&s;ition or Corollary, or Rule is quoted, to avoid the trouble of turning to it in the body of the Book.</HEAD>
<PB REF="19">
<PB REF="19">
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="book">
<PB REF="20">
<HEAD>BOOK I.</HEAD>
<LIST>
<HEAD>Propo&s;itions, Rules and Corollaries.</HEAD>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 1. <HI>BAbylon,</HI> Revelat. 17. is the City of <HI>Rome</HI> in an Antichri&s;tian and Idolatrous Domination. From hence are drawn the&s;e Rules of Interpretation.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Rule</HI> 1. Words of a plain &s;ignification are to be taken in the 17th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> in that &s;en&s;e, in which they are generally taken in the World, unle&s;s it be incon&s;i&s;tent with &s;omething more clearly known.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Rule</HI> 2. Words of a my&s;tical &s;ignification mu&s;t follow the u&s;e of them among&s;t the Prophets, if not incon&s;i&s;tent with &s;omething more clearly known.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Rule</HI> 3. The &s;ame Words do &s;ignify the &s;ame things all over the Prophecy, unle&s;s there be clear grounds again&s;t it.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Rule</HI> 4. The different Judgments of Learned Men ought not to weaken our A&s;&s;ent to what appears &s;ufficiently clear after an impartial Examination, e&s;|pecially if it be commonly acknowledged.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 2. <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;ignifies the &s;ame thing immediately before, in, and after the 17th Chapter.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollary. Babylon</HI> is the &s;ame thing in the 14th Chapter, as it is in the re&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 3. The Judgment of <HI>Babylon</HI> in all Chapters, is the de&s;olation of <HI>Rome</HI> by Fire in the time of its Idolatrous Antichri&s;tian Domination.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollary. Babylon</HI> cannot be <HI>Rome-Pagan.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 4. Every one of the Eight Kings, <HI>Revelat.</HI> 17. reckoned up in order, <HI>v.</HI> 10, 11. is one of tho&s;e called the Seven Kings in General, <HI>v.</HI> 10.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollary.</HI> The Eighth King is one of the Seven Kings, who had been in Rule be|fore, and was returned into Power again.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 5. Every one of the Eight Kings, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 10, 11. is repre&s;ented by one of the Seven Heads of the Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. The Eighth King is one of the &s;even Heads that had ruled before, and was revived again.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. The Eighth King, called the Bea&s;t <HI>(v.</HI> 11.) is the Bea&s;t with that Head only, which is la&s;t in Rule.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 6. The Bea&s;t all over the 17th Chapter, is the Bea&s;t in the time of its la&s;t Ruling Head.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. The Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter, continues no longer than his la&s;t Ruling Head. Again&s;t <HI>Grotius</HI>'s Notion of the Bea&s;t after all his Heads.</ITEM>
<PB REF="20">
<PB REF="21">
<ITEM> <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2: The Ten Horns belong to the Bea&s;t no longer, than the time of his La&s;t Head. Again&s;t the &s;ame.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 7. The Bea&s;t all over the 17th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is a particular Sovereign of <HI>Rome</HI> in the time of its Idolatrous Rule.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 8. The Term of The Bea&s;t all over the 13th Chapter, does &s;ignify the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, &s;hown <HI>v.</HI> 1.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 1. By the Image, Mark, Name, and number of the Name of the Bea&s;t, <HI>chap.</HI> 13. is to be under&s;tood the Image, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 2. By the Bea&s;t with the Fal&s;e Prophet, and with the Image, Mark, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in all the other Chapters of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is to be under&s;tood the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, with all the &s;ame Attendants in Chap. 13.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 9. The Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, is a particular &s;tate of the Bea&s;t under one of its either Ruling Heads, or Horns, for all the time of the con|tinuance of the Head, or Horn.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 1. The Fal&s;e Prophet, or Second Bea&s;t, Image, Mark, Name, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> do in all the mentions of them in the 13th Chapter, belong to that particu|lar &s;tate of the Bea&s;t under either of one of its Heads, or Horns.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 2. The Bea&s;t with the Fal&s;e Prophet, Image, Mark, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in all other Chap|ters, &s;ignifies the &s;ame particular &s;tate of the Bea&s;t, that it is &s;igni|fied to be in the 13th Chapter, with the like Adjuncts.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 10. The Seven Heads, and the Ten Horns in the 13th and 17th Chapters, are the &s;ame things.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 1. The Bea&s;ts in the 13th and 17th Chapters, are one and the &s;ame parti|cular Bea&s;t in every &s;ucce&s;&s;ive &s;tate of the &s;ame Heads, or Horns.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 2. The Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, is the &s;ame particular &s;tate of the Bea&s;t with that in the 17th Chapter, for the whole time of its continuance.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 3. The wounded, and healed Head of the Bea&s;t, Chap. 13. is the &s;ame La&s;t Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t with that in the 17th Chapter.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 11. The Judgment of the Dead, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 18. is the General Judgment at Chri&s;t's Second Coming.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollary.</HI> The Reign of Chri&s;t over the Kingdoms of the World, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 15. is Chri&s;t's Second Coming in glory.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 12. The Bea&s;t that killed the Witne&s;&s;es, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 7. is the &s;ame particular time of <HI>Roman</HI> Rule with the Bea&s;t in the other Chapters.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 1. The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> is to continue till &s;ome &V;niver&s;al Reign of Chri&s;t over the Kingdoms of this World.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 2. The Bea&s;t, and the Two Witne&s;&s;es, Chap. 11. are Contemporaries for the whole time of the continuance of them both.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<PB REF="21">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="book">
<PB REF="22">
<HEAD>BOOK II.</HEAD>
<LIST>
<HEAD>PROPOSITIONS.</HEAD>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 13. THE Kingdom of the Son of Man, <HI>Daniel</HI> 7. 13, 14. is &s;ome Kingdom of Chri&s;t Je&s;us.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 14. The Kingdom of the Son of Man, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. is the Second Coming of Chri&s;t in glory.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollary.</HI> The Kingdom of the Son of Man is Chri&s;t's Second Coming to Judg|ment.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 15. The Fourth Kingdom in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the &s;ame thing with the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. The La&s;t Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is the &s;ame thing with the Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> &s;ignifies the &s;ame particular time of Reign with the Fourth Bea&s;t in the time of the Little Horn, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 3. The time of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> did not begin till after the di|vi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire into Ten Kingdoms.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 4. The time of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> is not yet pa&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 16. All over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel,</HI> By a Bea&s;t, as the common Subject of its Heads, and Horns, is meant a Ruling Nation, or People;</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Part.</HI> 1.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Part.</HI> 2. By the Heads, and Horns of that Bea&s;t, the &s;everal kinds of Supream Government in that Nation:</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Part.</HI> 3. And if they be &s;aid to come after one another, they denote &s;o many Suc|ce&s;&s;ive Governments in the &s;ame place.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Part.</HI> 4. But if they are de&s;cribed as ruling all at the &s;ame time, then they &s;ignify &s;o many divided Sovereignties in that one Ruling People, or Nation;</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Part.</HI> 5. And in both the kinds of them, each particular Head, or Horn, does &s;ignify the whole time of all the &s;everal &s;ingle Governours, that reign either in the &s;ame form of Government, when they &s;ignify &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Forms of Government, or in the &s;ame particular divi&s;ion, when they &s;ignify divided Kingdoms.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 1. Every whole Figure &s;ignifying Dominion, does all over <HI>Daniel</HI> &s;ignify a Ruling People, or Nation.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 2. The parts of whole Figures, &s;ignifying Dominion, do all over <HI>Daniel</HI> fol|low the Rule of the Heads and Horns of the Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<PB REF="22">
<PB REF="23">
<ITEM> <HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 3. An Head, and an Horn, are indifferently u&s;ed to &s;ignify the &s;ame Ruling Power of a Nation.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 4. The di&s;tingui&s;hing Character of a new Succe&s;&s;ion of an Head, or Horn, or of a new Succe&s;&s;ion of a different Government in the &s;ame place, is a new name of the Sovereign Power publickly e&s;tabli&s;hed.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 5. All parts of Figures &s;ignifying Dominion, do all over <HI>Daniel</HI> denote the whole &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Line of all the &s;ingle Per&s;ons, that reign either in the &s;ame form of Government, or in the &s;ame part of a divided Nation, or People.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<PB REF="23">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="book">
<PB REF="24">
<HEAD>BOOK III.</HEAD>
<LIST>
<HEAD>PROPOSITIONS.</HEAD>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 17. THE Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> when taken for the common Sub|ject of its Heads, or Horns, does &s;ignify the Rule of the <HI>Romans</HI> in general; The Seven Heads of it, the Succe&s;&s;ive Changes of the Government of that Nation; The Ten Horns, the divi&s;ion of that Em|pire into &s;o many &s;everal Sovereignties.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 18. The Three la&s;t Kings of the Eight, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 10, 11. are three Changes of <HI>Roman</HI> Government coming after one another in an immediate order.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 19. The Sixth King, <HI>Revelat.</HI> 17. 10. was the Imperial Government of <HI>Rome</HI> in the time of St. <HI>John.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 20. The Bea&s;t was that Supream Government of <HI>Rome</HI> which came next but one after the Imperial Government in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 21. An Head of the Bea&s;t is that &s;etled Sovereign Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> who&s;e Authority is owned for Supream by the City of <HI>Rome.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. Every Head of the Bea&s;t is at an end, when the City of <HI>Rome</HI> does own another &s;etled Power for Supream in the room of it.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. The Sixth Head was at an end, when the City of <HI>Rome</HI> owned ano|ther &s;etled Authority in the room of the Imperial Government, that had continued from the time of St. <HI>John.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 22. At the ruine of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire by the <HI>Heruli,</HI> and <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings of <HI>Italy,</HI> the Sixth Head was at the late&s;t at an end.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 23. The Bea&s;t called the Eighth King, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 11. is a Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> that is owned there for Supream at this pre&s;ent.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 1. The 42 Months of the Bea&s;t, <HI>Rev.</HI> 13. 5. are at lea&s;t 1260 <HI>Chaldaick</HI> Years.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 2. The 1260 days of the Two Witne&s;&s;es, <HI>Revel.</HI> 11. 3. are the &s;ame con|current time with the 42 Months of the Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Corollar.</HI> 3. The Two Witne&s;&s;es in Sackcloth, <HI>Revel.</HI> 11. 3. do repre&s;ent the whole True Church of Chri&s;t during all the time of the Reign of the Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Prop.</HI> 24. The Second Bea&s;t, <HI>Revel.</HI> 13. 11. is a Church-head owned for Supream over all the <HI>Roman</HI> Juri&s;diction, and di&s;tinct from the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<PB REF="24">
<PB REF="25">
<ITEM> <HI>Prop.</HI> 25. The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> is a Secular Sovereign Power of the <HI>Ro|mans</HI> confederated with an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Roman</HI> Head in an Anti|chri&s;tian Idolatrous League, and di&s;tinct from him.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. The Second Bea&s;t, <HI>Revel.</HI> 13. 11. is a Succe&s;&s;ion of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Per|&s;ons, having Supream Power in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Affairs.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. The Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet, are tho&s;e Two Secular and Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal Governours, which are at this pre&s;ent time acknowledged Supream by the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> and di&s;tinct from one another.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Coroll.</HI> 3. The Pre&s;ent Imperial, and Papal Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> are the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet. Concerning the Fir&s;t Appearance of the Bea&s;t.</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Query</HI> 1. Whether, at the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of the <HI>Italian Goths,</HI> there had not been at lea&s;t two &s;uch Changes of the Secular Govern|ment of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;ince the time of St. <HI>John,</HI> as might he called two different Heads of the Bea&s;t?</ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Query</HI> 2. Whether the Fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t was not upon the Conque&s;t of the <HI>Goths</HI> by <HI>Ju&s;tinian?</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="opinions">
<PB REF="25">
<HEAD>THE SEVERAL OPINIONS CONCERNING THE BEAST IN THE APOCALYPSE.</HEAD>
<P>IT is generally agreed by all the con&s;iderable In|terpreters of all Churches in this pre&s;ent Age, That <HI>Babylon</HI> and <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> in the Vi&s;ions of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> do &s;ignify &s;ome Idolatrous State of <HI>Roman</HI> Reign. For they all agree, that by <HI>Babylon,</HI> mu&s;t be meant &s;ome Domination of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>But there are three main Differences among&s;t them in re&s;pect of the Age to which they fix their Inter|pretations. <HI>Some</HI> do apply the&s;e Vi&s;ions to the Affairs of <HI>Rome-Heathen,</HI> and &s;o maintain, that the time of the concern of the&s;e Vi&s;ions is already pa&s;t. <HI>Others</HI> apply them to the times of Antichri&s;t, near the <HI>end of the World,</HI> who contend, that the matter of them is not yet begun to be fulfilled. And <HI>others</HI> again, Inter|pret them of the <HI>pre&s;ent times in which we live, and of ma|ny Ages pa&s;t,</HI> &s;ince the time of <HI>Rome-Heathen.</HI> There
<PB REF="26"> are &s;ome other Opinions, that are a mixture of the&s;e; but the&s;e are the only con&s;iderable Differences of the Interpreters of our pre&s;ent Age.</P>
<P N="1">1. Tho&s;e that lay this Scene in <HI>Rome-Heathen,</HI> they make The Bea&s;t con&s;idered as the common Subject of his Heads and Horns, to be the <HI>Roman Empire,</HI> or <HI>Na|tion.</HI> And when that Term is u&s;ed only for <HI>Him,</HI> who is called the <HI>Eighth King,</HI> it is then the <HI>Roman</HI> Nation under that particular King, or He him&s;elf Ruling the <HI>Romans.</HI> The <HI>Seven Heads,</HI> are Seven Per&s;ecutions of <HI>Roman</HI> Emperors, either of &s;o many <HI>&s;ingle</HI> Emperors, or of &s;o many <HI>kinds</HI> of per&s;ecuting Emperors.</P>
<P>Of this Opinion are the late&s;t of the <HI>Roman</HI> Inter|preters, and <HI>Grotius,</HI> and Dr. <HI>Hammond, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Tho&s;e that defer the Application of the&s;e things to &s;ome State of <HI>Rome, near the end of the World,</HI> are more uncertain. They will have many of the things that are &s;aid of <HI>Babylon</HI> alone by it &s;elf, to belong to <HI>Rome-Heathen;</HI> but far the greate&s;t part of the Account of it, and all that concerns the Hi&s;tory of the Bea&s;t, they determine to the time of the appearance of Anti|chri&s;t, three years and an half before the end of the World, according to the litteral Acceptation of that &s;pace of time, mentioned five &s;everal times within the compa&s;s of three Chapters. Therefore are they forced to make the <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> &s;ignify, <HI>The World of wicked Men in general,</HI> when taken for the <HI>common</HI> Subject of its Heads and Horns: But the <HI>particular</HI> State of it, when u&s;ed to &s;ignify the <HI>Eighth King</HI> only, they determine to be either &s;ome <HI>Roman</HI> Antichri&s;t, or (which is much the &s;ame) the Devil in Antichri&s;t in the time of the Reign of Antichri&s;t, as the 7th King in the <HI>Roman</HI> Territories. The <HI>Seven Heads,</HI> they would have to be <HI>Seven Ages</HI>
<PB REF="26"> <HI>of the World,</HI> with the &s;everal Tyrants again&s;t the Church of God in each of them; the Sixth of which was that Age in which St. <HI>John</HI> lived, becau&s;e it is &s;aid, <HI>Five are past, One is,</HI> which appears to be the ground of all this Opinion, that they may make the Sixth Head continue from St. <HI>John</HI>'s time, to the time of An|tichri&s;t, near the end of the World, whom they make to be the Seventh.</P>
<P>Of this Opinion, are almo&s;t all the <HI>Roman</HI> Interpre|ters, and ground them&s;elves for it upon the general Opinion of the <HI>Fathers,</HI> concerning the three years and an half of the Reign of Antichri&s;t, near the end of the World. And <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> &s;ays of them, that they think it <HI>&s;o certain,</HI> that there is no doubt to be made of it. <HI>Di&s;put. in Argument. totius, cap.</HI> 13. <HI>Apocal.</HI></P>
<P>But <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> him&s;elf is of another mind, and after twenty years Labour in this Study, &s;ays, <Q>That it is plain from the Characters of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Reve|lations,</HI> and from its Allu&s;ion to the Ten horned Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> That this whole Bea&s;t is nothing but the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. <HI>Di&s;putat. in Argument. cap.</HI> 13. <HI>Apocal.&mdash;</HI>And that to fly to the Kingdom of the whole World for the Bea&s;t, and to make the Seven Heads to be Seven Ages in it, is &s;o forced, and wre&s;ted an Interpretation, that any one may ob&s;erve it. <HI>Di|&s;put.</HI> 1^a. <HI>in cap.</HI> 17. <HI>Apoc.&mdash;</HI></Q>And that <HI>Ribera</HI>'s Opi|nion does offer a fair occa&s;ion to the Hereticks to ca|lumniate the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, as being at la&s;t to be an Apo&s;tate from the Faith.</P>
<P>On the other &s;ide, <HI>Cornelius &agrave; Lapide</HI> does thus cen|&s;ure the fir&s;t opinion, that interprets all of <HI>Rome</HI> Hea|then, and which therefore is forced to interpret the fir&s;t part of the Vi&s;ions of the ruin of the <HI>Jewi&s;h Common|wealth,</HI> or Synagogue, as <HI>Salmeron</HI> and <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> in par|ticular,
<PB REF="27"> &s;o al&s;o <HI>Grotius,</HI> and Dr. <HI>Hammond.</HI> He &s;ays of this opinion, <HI>in Prolegomen. in Apocal.</HI> <Q>That it is 1. an Innovation. 2. My&s;tical, not Hi&s;torical. 3. Of a Prophecy, it makes the Apocalyp&s;e an Hi&s;tory; for the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> &s;tate was down before the writing the&s;e things. 4. Be|cau&s;e it was again&s;t the agreeing-&s;en&s;e of the Fathers.</Q></P>
<P>He &s;ays further <HI>in the &s;ame place,</HI> <Q>That tho it was not flattery, yet it was only a Love to, and Reverence for the Apo&s;tolick See, and a zeal for the honour of it, that put <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> upon this opinion, as he him&s;elf does ingenuou&s;ly confe&s;s.</Q></P>
<P>But <HI>Ribera</HI> &s;ays po&s;itively, That he is blind that does not &s;ee, that the judging the Dead (v. 18. cap. 11. Apoc. which <HI>Grotius,</HI> and tho&s;e of <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI>'s way, interpret of the time of <HI>Rome-Heathen)</HI> cannot be fulfilled be|fore the time of the la&s;t Judgment, <HI>Comment. in cap.</HI> 10. <HI>Apocal. Numer.</HI> 20.</P>
<P>The Cen&s;ures of both the Two former Opinions, by the mo&s;t eminent of the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Interpreters, may ve|ry rea&s;onably plead an excu&s;e for a Third advanced in their &s;tead by the Prote&s;tants; and that is this,</P>
<P>That the Bea&s;t in general, is the <HI>Roman Empire;</HI> but when taken for the <HI>Eighth King,</HI> is <HI>The Pre&s;ent Ruling Power of the</HI> Roman <HI>Church:</HI> That the <HI>Seven Heads</HI> of the Bea&s;t, are Seven &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of <HI>Roman</HI> Government: That the <HI>Sixth</HI> of them, &s;aid to be in being at the time of the Vi&s;ion, is the Imperial Go|vernment: The change of that into another form, the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 10.</NOTE> <HI>Seventh King:</HI> And the next to that, The Antichri&s;ti|an Soveraignty of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, is the <HI>Eighth, which is of the Seven:</HI> And therefore the Three Years <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 11.</NOTE> and an half, &s;o often mentioned by Months and Days, mu&s;t be &s;o many Prophetical Years, as there are days in that Period, according to the Examples that there
<PB REF="27"> are in Scripture, to take a <HI>Day</HI> for a <HI>Year,</HI> in a Prophe|tical Sen&s;e.</P>
<P>For this they &s;eem to have all the Premi&s;es, which are the main foundation of their Conclu&s;ion, from the opinions of the <HI>Roman</HI> Interpreters them&s;elves. The General Notion of the Bea&s;t, for the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, they have from <HI>Alca&s;ar, Bellarmine,</HI> &amp;c. to whom agree <HI>Grotius,</HI> and Dr. <HI>Hammond.</HI></P>
<P>As al&s;o their acceptation of the Seven Heads for <HI>Ro|man</HI> Governours, from the &s;ame; Their making the Se|ven Heads to be &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Lines of <HI>Roman</HI> So|vereigns, each of which contains under it a long Suc|ce&s;&s;ion of &s;ingle per&s;ons of the &s;ame &s;ort, is according to <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI>'s Notion of the Heads: And <HI>Ribera,</HI> tho he makes them not <HI>Roman</HI> Heads, yet contends much for <NOTE PLACE="marg">In cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> &s;ect. 2.</NOTE> their being Seven general &s;orts of Sovereign Power, each of which contains under it a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of many <NOTE PLACE="marg">In cap. 17. <HI>Apoc.</HI> num. 15.</NOTE> &s;ingle Rulers of that kind, according to all the known Examples of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and other places of Scripture.</P>
<P>And then &s;ince the Prophecy &s;ays of one of the&s;e Kings, <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Sixth,</HI> That he was in being at the time of the Vi&s;ion; that could be no other &s;ort of Sove|reign Power, that contained a Succe&s;&s;ion of many &s;in|gle Per&s;ons under it, but the Imperial Government of the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P>And the determining of this does thereupon make it nece&s;&s;ary, that the re&s;t of the Heads or Kings &s;hould be other Titles of the Government of <HI>Rome;</HI> And what then can be pitched upon for this end, with more rea|&s;on, than tho&s;e other Changes of the Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> which are frequently recorded by the <HI>Roman</HI> Au|thors, Kings, Con&s;uls, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Whatever were the Five fir&s;t Kings, yet it is le&s;s du|bious, that that which is called the Bea&s;t, mu&s;t be the
<PB REF="28"> next Change of <HI>Roman</HI> Government but one, to the Im|perial, that was in Rule at the time of the Vi&s;ion. And the <HI>Roman</HI> Hi&s;tory does a&s;&s;ure us, That there has been at lea&s;t Two &s;uch Changes &s;ince that time; and that therefore The Bea&s;t mu&s;t be &s;omewhere in being at this pre&s;ent, in the Ruling Power of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> becau&s;e he is de&s;cribed to continue with <HI>Babylon</HI> and the Seven Hills, to the Univer&s;al Kingdom of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Therefore do they conclude, That it mu&s;t be the pre&s;ent Ruling Power of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> becau&s;e it is de&s;cribed to be a <HI>Roman-</HI>Church-Power, and it cannot po&s;&s;ibly be any where el&s;e than there.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="table of contents">
<PB REF="28">
<HEAD>THE HEADS OF THE BOOKS.</HEAD>
<LIST>
<LABEL>BOOK I.</LABEL>
<ITEM>THE Uniform Notion of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> all over the <HI>Revelation.</HI></ITEM>
<LABEL>BOOK II.</LABEL>
<ITEM>The Con&s;tant Signification of <HI>A Bea&s;t,</HI> and its Parts, all over <HI>Daniel.</HI></ITEM>
<LABEL>BOOK III.</LABEL>
<ITEM>The Particular Signification of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> and its Parts, in the <HI>Revelations.</HI></ITEM>
<LABEL>BOOK IV.</LABEL>
<ITEM>The Application of the Characters of <HI>The Bea&s;t.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="errata">
<PB REF="29">
<HEAD>ERRATA.</HEAD>
<P>The&s;e nece&s;&s;ary to be Corrected before the reading of the Book.</P>
<P>PAge 23. l. 27. for <HI>it, the,</HI> reade <HI>it: The.</HI> p. 105. l. 17. r. <HI>pag.</HI> 102. So al&s;o p. 107. l. 5. <HI>item.</HI> l. 22. r. the &s;ame. p. 108. l. 30. r. <HI>pag.</HI> 107. And l. 35. no full point. p. 130. l: <HI>pen.</HI> r. <HI>Prop.</HI> 7. p. 141. l. 12. for <HI>and with the Seventh King,</HI> r. <HI>revived.</HI> p. 180. l. 11. r. <HI>Corol.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 8. p. 192. l. <HI>ult.</HI> r. <HI>pag.</HI> 157, 158. In the Marg. r. <HI>chap.</HI> 4. <HI>lib.</HI> 3. p. 206. l. <HI>ult.</HI> and p. 207. l. 10. for 140. r. <HI>above</HI> 40. p. 211. l. 27. dele <HI>twice.</HI> p. 245. l. 28. r. <HI>Prop.</HI> 25. l. 30. r. <HI>Prop.</HI> 26. So al&s;o p. 247. l. 3. p. 270. l. 12. r. 261. Appendix. p. 19. l. 9. a full &s;top. l. 10. to be continued with l. 11. p. 26. l. <HI>ult.</HI> for <HI>never,</HI> r. <HI>after.</HI></P>
<P>Notes of References nece&s;&s;ary to be Corrected before reading.</P>
<P>P. 138. l. 20. &s;trike out ^a. p. 139. l. 1. &s;trike out ^b. p. 142. l. 36. r. ^a <HI>Con&s;uls.</HI> p. 143. l. 2. for ^c, r. ^b. l. 4. for ^d r. ^c. p. 158. l. 16. The Note ^e to be &s;et the line before; the Notes following ^e are anticipated in the References as far as ^l. And p. 165. l. 14. r. ^e <HI>Panciroll.</HI> and l. 23. for ^e r. ^f, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> p. 190. l. 17. r. <HI>this Chapter.</HI> p. 219. l. 12. r. <HI>Note</HI> ^s. p. 242. in the Marg. r. <HI>Note</HI> 5, 6, <HI>on Chap.</HI> 7. <HI>Lib.</HI> 3. p. 259. The Notes are right, but p. 266. the Notes an&s;wering them are po&s;tponed; for ^g, r. ^h; for ^h, r. ^i, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> to the end. p. 278. l. 8, 9. r. <HI>Notes on the 4th Chapter.</HI> p. 286. l. 23. r. ^m <HI>Paullus.</HI> ^b^b, ^c^c. p. 311. l. 6, 7. Notes ^b^b, ^c^c, tran&s;po&s;ed in the References, p. 315. P. 313. l. 2. r. <HI>Note</HI> ^b <HI>on the 5th Chapter.</HI> p. 315. l. 35. r. <HI>Note</HI> ^c <HI>on the 5th Chapter.</HI> p. 316. l. 8. r. <HI>Note</HI> ^m. l. 17. r. <HI>Note</HI> ^l <HI>on the 5th Chapter, Lib.</HI> 4. p. 317. l. 10. r. <HI>Ch.</HI> 5. l. 22. <HI>Notes</HI> ^b, ^c, ^d, ^e, <HI>on Chap.</HI> 4. <HI>and Note</HI> ^a, <HI>Chap.</HI> 5. <HI>Lib.</HI> 4. l. 23. r. <HI>Chap.</HI> 4. l. 24. r. <HI>Notes</HI> ^i, ^l, <HI>on Chap.</HI> 4. <HI>and</HI> ^i, <HI>on Chap.</HI> 5. <HI>Lib.</HI> 4.</P>
<P>Other Faults le&s;s Con&s;iderable.</P>
<P>P. 81. l. 36. for <HI>by &s;ome,</HI> r. <HI>by Him.</HI> p. 116. l. 23. &s;trike out <HI>po&s;&s;ible to be.</HI> p. 132. r. in the Marg. <HI>Chap.</HI> 6. <HI>Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>ibid.</HI> l. 23. to <HI>Nation,</HI> add, <HI>or his We&s;tern, and Ea&s;tern Empire.</HI> p. 143. l. 6. dele <HI>part la&s;t.</HI> p. 149. r. <HI>Chap.</HI> 2. <HI>Lib.</HI> 1. p. 172. r. <HI>Epagomenae,</HI> and el&s;ewhere. p. 180. l. 6. to Prop. 6. add Prop. 7. p. 238. l. 11. r. <HI>five days and a quarter.</HI> l. 14. r. <HI>Roman years.</HI> p. 251. l. 16. no full point. p. 288. l. 14. r. <HI>Ro|mijith &amp; Latinos.</HI></P>
<P>Proper Names and Latin Quotations &s;ometimes mi&s;taken.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="introduction">
<PB REF="29">
<HEAD>THE Introduction.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub"><HI>Concerning the Authority of the</HI> Apocalyp&s;e, <HI>which is &s;hewn to be unque&s;tionable.</HI></HEAD>
<P>_THE Book of the <HI>Revelations</HI> is acknow|ledged by all contending Parties, to be the only di&s;tinct Prophecy that we have of the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive fortunes of the Chri&s;tian Church, from its fir&s;t Settle|ment, to the end of the world. This they all agree in, for the matter and &s;cope of the whole Book, tho' they infinitely differ about the Explication of the &s;everal parts of it. And there cannot be a greater invitation to engage the curio&s;ity of any that are concerned for U&s;eful and Important Truths, than that Con&s;ideration. The great variety of the apprehen&s;ions of Inter|preters about the&s;e things, ought not to di&s;courage mens hopes of a clear Interpretation, more than the &s;ame differences among&s;t them about almo&s;t every other Book of Scripture: For it will be found, that they do almo&s;t as generally agree about the fir&s;t Grounds of the Interpretation of the&s;e Vi&s;ions, as about other Books of Scripture, that &s;eem to be le&s;s my&s;tical. The Language of Prophecy, already explained by accompli&s;hments, is in the&s;e things as &s;ure a Rule of Interpretation, as the more common Language of Scripture is for the other Books of it, that are more plain. And tho&s;e that &s;eem the mo&s;t impartial in the&s;e things, <NOTE PLACE="marg">M^r. <HI>Mede,</HI> B^p. <HI>U&s;her,</HI> D^r. <HI>More.</HI></NOTE> are very confident, that there are plain grounds upon that foun|dation to build a demon&s;trative Evidence of the Sen&s;e of the chief de&s;ign of the&s;e Vi&s;ions upon.</P>
<PB REF="30">
<P> With this encouragement, it will be fir&s;t enquired, What &s;ure grounds there are for the certainty of the Apo&s;tolical Authority of this Book, as the only foundation of all &s;atisfaction that can po&s;&s;ibly be had from the cleare&s;t Interpretation of it?</P>
<P>There are two ways by which the Authority of any Book of Scripture is &s;ecured to us: The Fir&s;t, An Univer&s;al Tradition concerning it in the fir&s;t Times of the Church, &s;oon after the writing of it; And the Other, The Determination of the Uni|ver&s;al Church concerning it, after &s;ome doubts and &s;cruples concerning it. And by both the&s;e ways of a&s;&s;urance is the Au|thority of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> &s;ecured.</P>
<P>Two of the fir&s;t Writers, after the writing of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> were, <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr,</HI> and <HI>Irenaeus. Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> was contempo|rary with tho&s;e who knew the Apo&s;tle who&s;e Name it bears, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Anno</HI> 160.</NOTE> and that conver&s;ed with him; and He, in his Dialogue with <HI>Trypho</HI> the <HI>Jew,</HI> pag. 308. quotes the Apo&s;tle St. <HI>John</HI> about the Thou&s;and Years, under the Name of, <HI>A certain man among&s;t them, who was one of the twelve Apo&s;tles of Chri&s;t, &s;peaking of that matter, in the</HI> Revelation <HI>which was given him;</HI> which all know to be the Subject of the 20th Chapter of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e.</HI> And accordingly does <HI>Eu&s;ebius,</HI> l. 4. c. 18. <HI>Eccl. Hi&s;t.</HI> quote <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr,</HI> as attributing the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> to the Apo&s;tle St. <HI>John.</HI></P>
<P>But <HI>Irenaeus</HI> does the mo&s;t &s;atisfactorily put an end to all Con|trover&s;ie about this in his time; and <HI>Irenaeus</HI> was contemporary with <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr.</HI> And to a&s;&s;ure us of the truth of what he affirms, he &s;ays he had it from <HI>Polycarp,</HI> who&s;e diligent Auditor <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 3. contra Haere&s;. cap. 3.</NOTE> he was; and <HI>Polycarp</HI> was a Di&s;ciple of St. <HI>John</HI> him&s;elf, and died a Martyr, and &s;o &s;ecures the truth of his Te&s;timony.</P>
<P>But <HI>Irenaeus</HI> his Te&s;timony concerning the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> is mo&s;t full in his fifth book <HI>contra Haere&s;. &s;ect. ult.</HI> where &s;peaking of the Number of Antichri&s;t, he &s;ays, That <HI>that Number was in all the ancient and approved Copies; and that he had it al&s;o confirmed to him by tho&s;e who had &s;een St.</HI> John <HI>face to face.</HI></P>
<P>There can hardly be given a more unque&s;tionable, or more particular Te&s;timony concerning the true Author of a Book at any di&s;tance from the time that it was wrote in, than this is. Here is a particular &s;earch after all the Copies of it, &s;oon after the writing of it, with the concurrent Te&s;timony of tho&s;e who knew the Author him&s;elf.</P>
<PB REF="30">
<P> And further to &s;hew the utter unlikelihood of any fal&s;ificati|on of the Name of the Author of it, a little after, &s;peaking of the Name of Antichri&s;t,<HI>&mdash;Knowing this,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>that if his Name</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 5. &s;ect. ult.</NOTE> <HI>were to have been openly known at this pre&s;ent time, it would certainly have been expre&s;sed by him who &s;aw the Revelation: for it is not long ago &s;ince he &s;aw it, but almo&s;t in this pre&s;ent Age, at the latter-end of the Reign of</HI> Domitian. The little di&s;tance betwixt the time of <HI>Irenaeus,</HI> and the time of the writing this Book, together with the care that he took to look into all the various Copies of it, and the Traditions of the Ear-witne&s;&s;es of the Apo&s;tle about it, and the confirmation of his own Te&s;timony in all this, by dying a Martyr him&s;elf, does &s;ilence all &s;cruples about the Apo&s;tolical Authority of this Book.</P>
<P>But yet about 100 years after the time of <HI>Irenaeus, Diony&s;ius</HI> of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Alexandria,</HI> in his Di&s;putes again&s;t the <HI>Millenaries</HI> of his time, does affirm, That many of his Predece&s;&s;ors did reject this Book: But then he &s;ays, <Q>It was becau&s;e they &s;aw it ob&s;cure, and full of too gro&s;s ignorance about the <HI>Millenarian</HI> &s;tate; not from any new knowledge they had got of the forgery of it.</Q> And their grounds were &s;o &s;mall for it, that tho' he was the chief Head of the <HI>Anti-millinarian</HI> Party, yet he &s;ays he believed it to be divinely in&s;pired; <Q>Tho' from the difference of the Style of it from that of the Go&s;pel and Epi&s;tles of <HI>John</HI> the Evangeli&s;t, he judged it to be wrote by &s;ome other <HI>John</HI> contemporary with him.</Q> And yet there are &s;ome expre&s;&s;ions in the <HI>Reve|lations</HI> &s;o peculiar to the Go&s;pel and Epi&s;tles of <HI>John</HI> the Evange|li&s;t, and u&s;ed by no other Apo&s;tle, that it mu&s;t be either He him&s;elf, or a very near Friend of his, that mu&s;t be the Author of them; &s;uch as are, <HI>The Lamb; The Word; The bearing record,</HI> or witne&s;s of the <HI>Word; They that pierced him, &s;hall &s;ee him; The Te&s;timony of Je&s;us Chri&s;t; He that overcometh; As I received of my Father,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>I will give unto him that is athir&s;t, of the fountain of the water of life freely;</HI> and <HI>Let him that is athir&s;t come; And who|&s;oever will, let him take of the water of life freely:</HI> Which are all expre&s;&s;ions peculiar to the Go&s;pel and Epi&s;tles of St. <HI>John.</HI></P>
<P>St. <HI>Jerem</HI> indeed &s;ays, That the <HI>Greek</HI> Church rejected the Autho|rity of it: But, as <HI>Baronius</HI> well ob&s;erves about it, <HI>An.</HI> 96. St. <HI>Jerom</HI> mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily mean <HI>that</HI> only of the meaner and lower part of the <HI>Greek</HI> Church; For, as he there &s;hews, almo&s;t every one of the <HI>Greek</HI> Fathers does quote it under the Name of St. <HI>John</HI> the
<PB REF="31"> Apo&s;tle. And <HI>Eu&s;ebius,</HI> who relates the di&s;&s;ent of &s;ome of the Ancients about it, and was the mo&s;t eminent Antiquary of the <HI>Greek</HI> Church, does name <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr, Irenaeus, Melito</HI> of <HI>Sardis, Theophilus Antiochenus, Origen, Diony&s;ius Alexandrinus,</HI> the chief Writers of the <HI>Greek</HI> Church before him, as A&s;&s;erters of the Apo|&s;tolical Authority of this Book.</P>
<P>If we go to the Judgment of after-Ages, we have the Uni|ver&s;al Con&s;ent of the Chri&s;tian Church for the Canonical Au|thority of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> after it had been &s;crupled by &s;ome; which is the other way of a&s;&s;uring the right Tradition of a Ca|nonical Book.</P>
<P>The third Council of <HI>Carthage,</HI> after the time of the&s;e &s;cruples of the <HI>Antimillenarians,</HI> and before the degeneracy of the Church, to which the aim of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> is applied by Prote&s;tants, <HI>viz.</HI> before the year 400, does in its 47th Canon ordain the Book of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> to be read in the Church, as Canonical Scrip|ture. And this Provincial Council is confirmed, to oblige the Univer&s;al Church, both the <HI>Greek</HI> and <HI>Latin,</HI> by the &s;ixth Synod in <HI>Trullo</HI> at <HI>Con&s;tantinople, Can.</HI> 2. <HI>Anno</HI> 707. But it was unque|&s;tionably a Decree of the <HI>Greek</HI> Church, where the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> had alone been &s;crupled.</P>
<P>But the mo&s;t authentick Evidence of this, is the Authority of the fourth Council of <HI>Toledo,</HI> when it could not po&s;&s;ibly be any Intere&s;t of the then Ruling Party of the Church to plead for the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> but might po&s;&s;ibly enough endanger the Intere&s;t of it; becau&s;e it was about the year 640. after the time that the Prote&s;tants Applications of that Book do generally date the degeneracy of the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> from. So that the &s;en&s;e of that Council is the Te&s;timony of an Adver&s;ary to the General Con&s;ent of the Church about the Tradition of this Book. The words of it are the&s;e:</P>
<P><Q>The Authority of many Councils, and the Synodical De|crees <NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Tole|tan. 4. Can. 16. about the year 640.</NOTE> of the holy Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome,</HI> have determined the Book of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> to have been wrote by <HI>John</HI> the Evangeli&s;t, and to be received among&s;t the Books divinely in&s;pired. And becau&s;e there are many that do not receive it for Authentick, and &s;corn to read it in the Church of God; if any one for the future &s;hall refu&s;e to receive it, or to read it in the Church, in the time of Ma&s;s, from <HI>Ea&s;ter</HI> to <HI>Whit&s;untide,</HI> he &s;hall be Ex|communicated.</Q></P>
<PB REF="31">
<P> By this it does appear how the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> came to lo&s;e its au|thenticalne&s;s among the meaner part of the Church: It was, it &s;eems, &s;o di&s;u&s;ed in the Church, that it pa&s;&s;ed for an u&s;e|le&s;s Book; the Interpretations that were given of it, were ei|ther &s;o fanciful, or &s;o little concerning the Times when it was neglected, that it pa&s;&s;ed among&s;t them for a kind of Book of Dreams, in which the Church was not concerned, and which none knew the meaning of. And this cannot much be wondred at, when it is con&s;idered how little regard is had to the&s;e <HI>Revelations,</HI> even in the&s;e days, unto which they are, by the be&s;t Learned among&s;t us, judged to belong in matters of the highe&s;t importance for the Church to know.</P>
<P>But as for that &s;ugge&s;tion, That <HI>Cerinthus</HI> was the Author of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> (which was always the mo&s;t current ground among&s;t tho&s;e who rejected the Authority of it), there is a&s;|&s;urance enough of the fal&s;hood of it out of <HI>Irenaeus;</HI> for he was the Scholar of <HI>Polycarp,</HI> who was the Di&s;ciple and Com|panion of St. <HI>John,</HI> (to whom <HI>Irenaeus</HI> every-where attributes <NOTE PLACE="marg">Eu&s;eb. l. 5. Eccle&s;. Hi&s;tor. c. 18.</NOTE> the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e),</HI> and writes again&s;t <HI>Cerinthus,</HI> and reports from <HI>Polycarp</HI> the great dete&s;tation that St. <HI>John</HI> had again&s;t <HI>Cerin|thus.</HI> And how ab&s;urd a thing would it be to imagine, that <HI>Irenaeus,</HI> after &s;o diligent, &s;o long and familiar a conver&s;ation with <HI>Polycarp,</HI> the Companion of St. <HI>John,</HI> as he particularly mentions of him&s;elf, &s;hould make the Apo&s;tle to be the Author <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 3. contra Haere&s;. cap. 3.</NOTE> of a Book which was really wrote by his wor&s;t Adver&s;ary to propagate his Errors?</P>
<P>Whatever was the true rea&s;on of the rejection of the Au|thority of this Prophecy, it is certain, That no Book of Scripture has had a more expre&s;s and unexceptionable Tradi|tion of its Apo&s;tolical Authority, &s;ince it was confirmed by the Te&s;timony of two Learned Martyrs &s;oon after the wri|ting of it, who al&s;o had &s;earched into all the Copies of it, and were confirmed in it by tho&s;e who were conver&s;ant with the Apo&s;tle him&s;elf that wrote it; and that in the very times that it was &s;crupled, it was believed to be Authentical by all the Eminently-learned Fathers of tho&s;e days; and that after the times that it had been &s;crupled, it was owned by the General Con&s;ent of the Chri&s;tian Church.</P>
<PB REF="32">
<P> This I thought fit to premi&s;e, for the full &s;atisfaction of tho&s;e that are altogether &s;ceptical in the fir&s;t foundation of the&s;e In|terpretations. But the <HI>Romani&s;ts,</HI> who&s;e whole concern it is to make every thing in this kind dubious, do agree with all other Chri&s;tian Churches in the World at this time about the unque&s;tionablene&s;s of the Canonical Authority of this part of the New Te&s;tament.</P>
<P>And now it may appear to be our Duty and Concern to en|quire with diligence after the be&s;t under&s;tanding that we can get of this Prophecy, when we con&s;ider what pre&s;&s;ing Mo|tives there are to it, more in this Book than in any other Book of Scripture be&s;ide. In the beginning; <HI>Ble&s;&s;ed is he that readeth,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Rev.</HI> 1. 3. &amp; 13. 9.</NOTE> <HI>and they that hear the words of this Prophecy.</HI> And again; <HI>If any man have an ear, let him hear.</HI> And the matter of it is &s;aid to be, <HI>The Revelation that God gave unto Je&s;us Chri&s;t, to &s;hew</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 1. 1.</NOTE> <HI>unto his Servants.</HI> And that who&s;oever &s;hould <HI>add to, or take</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 22. 18, 19.</NOTE> <HI>from the words of this Book,</HI> above any other, <HI>&s;hould have the plagues of God added to him,</HI> or <HI>his part of Eternal Life taken away.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 N="1" TYPE="book">
<PB N="1" REF="32">
<HEAD>The Fir&s;t BOOK.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">THE Uniform Con&s;tant Notion Of the Term of THE BEAST All over the <HI>REVELATIONS.</HI></HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. I.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Ground of the Method here u&s;ed. The fir&s;t Propo&s;i|tion, That</HI> Babylon <HI>is the City of</HI> Rome <HI>in an Anti|chri&s;tian and Idolatrous Reign. Scruples moved again&s;t it. The Demon&s;tration of it from the Text, confirmed by General Con&s;ent.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>NOne could be more di&s;po&s;ed to the common prejudi|ces again&s;t the &s;tudy of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> than I was at the time that I fir&s;t engaged in tho&s;e things. I had till then been &s;o almo&s;t wholly confin'd to &s;uch En|quiries as are the clo&s;e&s;t Exerci&s;e of Ratiocination, upon clear and &s;ure grounds, That I was come to have a natural aver&s;ion again&s;t all &s;uch loo&s;e Conjectures, as the Interpretations of tho&s;e Vi&s;ions are generally reputed to be.</P>
<P>But Mr. <HI>Mede</HI>'s <HI>Synchroni&s;ms,</HI> and his offers at Demon&s;tration in them, which I lighted on by chance &s;ome years &s;ince in a &s;olitary retirement, did tempt my curio&s;ity to enquire, What could be the ground of &s;uch a confidence in one of &s;o known a
<PB N="2" REF="33"> Character for a cautious and imparial Judgment in Scriptural <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE> Expo&s;itions. At the fir&s;t cur&s;ory view of his performance, I was extremely &s;urprized to &s;ee &s;uch fair grounds of a clear Ex|plication about &s;o intricate and ob&s;cure a Subject: And tho' up|on a more critical examination of the &s;trength of them, I found mo&s;t of his <HI>Synchroni&s;ms</HI> far &s;hort of a clo&s;e and cogent proof in them; yet I could not but think that the Subject might be capa|ble of a more certain determination to the Conclu&s;ion that he aimed at.</P>
<P>I did thereupon &s;et my &s;elf upon a particular &s;earch after a clo&s;er demon&s;tration of that Application that he had made of the main &s;cope of the&s;e Vi&s;ions; and at la&s;t thought I had arri|ved at what I was in &s;earch of.</P>
<P>The late dangerous Circum&s;tances that I apprehended the True Religion to be in, made me think I was obliged to com|municate my thoughts of the&s;e things to the Publick; And be|cau&s;e I knew that I &s;hould have a very &s;agacious Adver&s;ary, en|couraged by a Ruling Intere&s;t, engaged again&s;t me with all that &s;corn and fiercene&s;s that the charge of the Characters of <HI>Babylon</HI> upon the <HI>Roman Church</HI> does u&s;ually rai&s;e in them, I thought it nece&s;&s;ary to review the coherence of my former thoughts, and to take care that I never concluded upon any thing till I &s;hould &s;ee a moral nece&s;&s;ity at lea&s;t for it from the evidence of the Grounds upon which it depended. The great importance of the thing, made me think it worth all the&s;e pains; and the fear of betraying the Cau&s;e of Religion, in&s;tead of a&s;&s;i&s;ting it, and of giving a fal&s;e Charge, of &s;o heavy and dreadful a nature, upon &s;o large a part of the Chri&s;tian Church, made me conclude, That I could not be too &s;low and cautious in my determinations about the&s;e matters. And therefore, if the &s;crupulous Cauti|ou&s;ne&s;s, with which I examine this Subject, &s;hould &s;eem tedious and trouble&s;ome to any, the nature of the dangers that I de|&s;igned to avoid by it, and the aim that I propounded in it, of arriving at a certain and clear foundation of &s;atisfaction about the&s;e things, may very rea&s;onably excu&s;e it: And tho' I do not here pretend to any more Certainty or Demon&s;tration, than the Interpretation of another's meaning in a Writing is capable of, yet I am encouraged to hope, That I &s;hall be allowed, by tho&s;e that are Judicious and Impartial enough, to have here ar|rived at the aim that I propounded to my &s;elf, &s;o far at lea&s;t as I po&s;itively affirm or conclude.</P>
<PB N="3" REF="33">
<P> In this de&s;ign, the fir&s;t thing that offers it &s;elf, is that which &s;eems to be the cleare&s;t thing in the Prophecy, and may there|fore be apprehended to be the foundation of all the re&s;t; which is, That</P>
<Q>Babylon <HI>in the 17th Chapter of the</HI> Revelations, <HI>is the City of</HI> Rome <HI>in an Antichri&s;tian and Idolatrous Reign.</HI></Q>
<P>To abate the Evidence of this Propo&s;ition from the Angel's Interpretation; I found that there were not only various Opi|nions about the &s;ignification of <HI>Babylon,</HI> much different from what it is here made to be; but al&s;o that they were countenan|ced by Per&s;ons of the greate&s;t Authority for Integrity, Learn|ing, and a &s;ound Judgment. St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> makes <HI>Babylon</HI> in this place to be only the general City of Wicked Men all the World over; and tho&s;e that were mo&s;t conver&s;ant in the&s;e things &s;oon after his time, and the mo&s;t judicious in them, <HI>Prima&s;ius, An|dreas Cae&s;arien&s;is, Arethas,</HI> make it indifferent, to be <HI>Babylon</HI> in <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> or <HI>Rome,</HI> or <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> or the general Society of Wicked Men; and even Prote&s;tants them&s;elves do &s;ome of them agree to this, notwith&s;tanding the great advantage it would be to their Cau&s;e to have it to be the City of <HI>Rome</HI> only.</P>
<P>But then one cannot but be &s;urpriz'd again, to &s;ee the mo&s;t Learned and Judicious of the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;o very po&s;itive, That <HI>Babylon</HI> cannot po&s;&s;ibly be any thing but the City of <HI>Rome;</HI> as, <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>BAronius, Anno</HI> 45. Certi&s;&s;imum <HI>e&s;t nomine</HI> Babylonis, Romam <HI>Urbem &s;ignificari:</HI> It is <HI>mo&s;t certain,</HI> that by the name of <HI>Babylon,</HI> is meant the City of <HI>Rome.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Baronius,</HI> and <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Bellarmin.</HI> lib. 3. de Rom. Pontifice, cap. 13. <HI>Johannes in Apocalyp&s;i pa&s;|&s;im</HI> Roman <HI>vocat</HI> Babylonem;<HI>&mdash;&amp;</HI> aperte <HI>colligitur ex</HI> cap. 17. Apoca|lyp. <HI>&amp;c. John</HI> does every-where in the <HI>Revelations</HI> call <HI>Rome Babylon;&mdash;</HI>and this is <HI>manife&s;tly</HI> to be gathered from the 17^t^h Chapter of the <HI>Revela|tions,</HI> &amp;c.</NOTE> <HI>Bellarmin,</HI> <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ribera in</HI> cap. 14. Apocalyp. n. 30, 31. <HI>Huic (&s;c.</HI> Romae) <HI>conveniunt</HI> apti&s;&s;ime <HI>omnia, quae de</HI> Babylone <HI>dicuntur in hoc libro.&mdash;Atque illud</HI> imprimis, quod alii convenire non pote&s;t, v. 9.<HI>&mdash;Si ergo omnia conjunga|mus quae de</HI> Babylone <HI>dicuntur, planius eam</HI> Romam <HI>e&s;&s;e intelligemus.&mdash;Nam et&s;i quaedam ex &s;ingulis vel in congregationem malorum, vel in aliam urbem con|venire po&s;&s;ent, omnia profecto ni&s;i in</HI> Romam <HI>non conveniunt.</HI> All that is &s;po|ken of <HI>Babylon</HI> in this Book, does very exactly fit the City of <HI>Rome.&mdash;</HI>And <HI>that e&s;pecially which can agree with nothing el&s;e,</HI> v. 9.&mdash;If therefore we put all that is &s;poken of <HI>Babylon</HI> together, we &s;hall more plainly un|der&s;tand it to be <HI>Rome.&mdash;</HI>For tho' &s;omething in every mention of it might agree well enough with the Society of Wicked Men, or &s;uit with another City, yet All put together can agree to nothing but the City of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Malvenda</HI> de Antichri&s;to, pag. 184. in cap. 17, 18. <HI>Et</HI> non potuit mani|fe&s;tius Romam <HI>urbem veluti digito mon&s;trare.&mdash;</HI>He <HI>could not more manife&s;t|ly</HI> have pointed out the City of <HI>Rome</HI> with his finger.</P>
<P><HI>Le&s;&s;ius</HI> de Antichri&s;to.&mdash;Roma <HI>&agrave; Joanne vocatur</HI> Babylon, <HI>quia</HI> Babylon <HI>fuit figura</HI> Romae, <HI>quibus verbis</HI> aperte <HI>de&s;ignat</HI> Romam.&mdash;John <HI>calls</HI> Rome Babylon, <HI>as being the figure of</HI> Rome, <HI>by which name he does</HI> clearly <HI>&s;hew it to be</HI> Rome.</P>
<P><HI>Cornel. &agrave; Lapide, in</HI> cap. 17. Apoc. v. 2. <HI>Dico ergo</HI> Babylon <HI>hic e&s;t</HI> Roma. v. 9. <HI>Hoc enim</HI> nulli alteri ni&s;i &s;oli Romae <HI>competit:</HI> I &s;ay therefore, <HI>Baby|lon</HI> here is <HI>Rome.</HI> v. 9. For this can agree to <HI>nothing el&s;e but</HI> Rome.</P>
<P><HI>Et po&s;tea&mdash;</HI>7^m. <HI>Montibus</HI> patet <HI>denotari</HI> Romam. Virgil. Georg. 2. <HI>in fine.</HI> Sybill. lib. 6. 2. Horat. in Carmine &s;aeculari. Ovid. l. 1. de Tri&s;t. It that by the &s;even Hills is &s;ignified <HI>Rome.</HI> Virgil, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar.</HI> in cap. 13. Apoc. &s;ect. 5. Per&s;picu&egrave; <HI>enim a&s;&s;eruit</HI> 7^m. <HI>Be&s;tiae ca|pita e&s;&s;e</HI> 7^m. Romae <HI>montes.&mdash;Idem in</HI> cap. 7. Di&s;put. 1. <HI>Reliquis ergo Ex|po&s;itionibus rejectis, illa debet e&s;&s;e</HI> certa, <HI>quod docct</HI> Romam <HI>&s;ub</HI> Babylonis <HI>no|mine &s;ignificari.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Tyrinus</HI> the Je&s;uit, <HI>in</HI> cap. 17. Apoc. quotes <HI>Sixtus Senen&s;is, Bellarmine, Bo|zius, Suarez, Salmeron, Alcazar,</HI> mo&s;t of his own Order, as Maintainers of this Opinion.</P>
<P><HI>Bla&s;ius Viega,</HI> in cap. 17. Apocalyp&s;. &s;ect. 3.<HI>&mdash;Quare exi&s;timamus nomine</HI> Babylonis, Romam <HI>urbem &s;ignificari in hoc</HI> Apocalyp&s;ios <HI>Opere.&mdash;Nam quod</HI> Roma Babylonis <HI>nomine cen&s;eatur</HI> per&s;picuum <HI>e&s;t.&mdash;Et vere</HI> Romam <HI>Joannes</HI> clari&s;&s;imis <HI>Argumentis videtur indic&acirc;&s;&s;e,</HI> &amp;c.&mdash;We do therefore judge, That by the name of <HI>Babylon</HI> is meant the City of <HI>Rome</HI> in this Book of the <HI>Revelations:&mdash;</HI>For that <HI>Rome</HI> is called by the name of <HI>Babylon,</HI> is <HI>very clear,</HI> &amp;c.&mdash;But that <HI>Rome</HI> is meant by it, <HI>John</HI> &s;eems to have &s;hewn by <HI>very clear proofs</HI> of it.</P></NOTE> the mo&s;t zealous, and the mo&s;t skilled of all the Je&s;uits in the&s;e things. And from the great evidence that they think they &s;ee for it in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> they make great <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><HI>Baronius</HI> Anno 45. n. 8. <HI>Bellarmin.</HI> lib. 2. de Pontifice R^o cap. 2.</NOTE> outcries again&s;t the Prote&s;tants, as people that are given up to a reprobate mind, for denying <HI>Babylon</HI> in the 2 <HI>Peter</HI> 5. 13. to be <HI>Rome;</HI> and then &s;hew us the almo&s;t unanimous Con&s;ent of the Fathers concerning it. And <HI>Grotius,</HI> who has u&s;ed all the dexterity of his Wit to remove the Scene of the&s;e Vi&s;ions from the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> yet does upon the 9th and 18th Ver&s;es of this Chapter affirm, That there could not have been given more illu&s;trious Marks of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> than tho&s;e that are there expre&s;&s;ed of it.</P>
<P>This po&s;itive Te&s;timony for the unque&s;tionable Evidence of this Propo&s;ition again&s;t the doubts and waverings of others,
<PB N="4" REF="34"> is a great encouragement to expect as &s;ufficient a proof of it, from the grounds that are laid down for it in the Prophecy; which are now therefore to be con&s;idered.</P>
<P N="1">1. And fir&s;t, The Angel's promi&s;e, at the 7th Ver&s;e of this Chapter, to explain to the Prophet the my&s;tical expre&s;&s;ions of the <HI>Woman,</HI> and the <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> which he had invited him to the &s;hew of in the beginning of the Chapter, would make any judge he might with very good rea&s;on expect to &s;ee it performed by him in &s;o clear a manner as might tolerably an&s;wer the promi&s;e that he had before made of it.</P>
<P N="2">2. The Angel may be found thereupon de&s;cribing <HI>Babylon,</HI> by &s;uch Characters as were the individual and peculiar Characters of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> v. 9, &amp; 18. by its <HI>&s;even Hills,</HI> and its <HI>Reign over the Kings of the Earth:</HI> for there was no City in the World that ruled over the Kings of the Earth, and that was &s;eated up|on &s;even Hills, but that City only. But <HI>Rome</HI> was very eminent for this: It commanded the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> the <HI>We&s;t,</HI> the <HI>South,</HI> and &s;ome of the parts of the <HI>North,</HI> to the end of the then civiliz'd World. And <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>Varro</HI> lib. 4. de LL. <HI>Dies &s;eptimontium nominatus ab his &s;eptem montibus, in queis &s;ita urbs e&s;t.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Varro</HI> informs us of a yearly Fe&s;tival at <HI>Rome,</HI> that was called <HI>Dies Septimontium,</HI> to celebrate the memory of the &s;even Hills upon which the City was built.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Rome</HI> was al&s;o, at the time of this Explication, generally known by the appellatives of, <HI>The &s;even-hill'd City, The Queen and Lady of the World.</HI> It was not better known by the Letters of its own proper Name by per&s;ons of any fa&s;hion, than by the&s;e Appella|tives; as may be &s;een among&s;t all the famous Poets e&s;pecially of that Age, and who were generally e&s;teemed and read all over the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; as, <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><LG>
<L><HI>Virgil</HI> Georg. lib. 2. &amp; Aeneid. lib. 6.</L>
<L><HI>Septemque una (&s;ive muro) circumdedit arces.</HI></L>
<L>&mdash;And all</L>
<L>The &s;even-tow'r'd Hills has compa&s;s'd with one Wall.</L>
</LG></NOTE> <HI>Virgil,</HI> <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><LG>
<L><HI>Horace</HI> in carmine &s;aeculari.</L>
<L><HI>Diis, quibus &s;eptem placuere colles</HI></L>
<L><HI>Dicere carmen.</HI></L>
<L>To &s;ing unto the Gods, who love the place</L>
<L>Which the &s;ev'n Hills do grace.</L>
</LG></NOTE> <HI>Horace,</HI> <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><LG>
<L><HI>Ovid.</HI> Fa&s;tor. lib. 1.</L>
<L><HI>Sed quae de &s;eptem totum circum&s;picis orbem</HI></L>
<L><HI>Montibus, Imperii</HI> Roma, <HI>De&ucirc;mque locus.</HI></L>
<L>But Thou, who from thy &s;ev'n-hill'd Seat</L>
<L>See&s;t the World crouching at thy feet,</L>
<L><HI>Rome,</HI> in thy Gods and Empire Great.</L>
</LG></NOTE> <HI>Ovid,</HI> <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><LG>
<L><HI>Propertius.</HI></L>
<L><HI>Septem urbs alta juges toti quae prae&s;idet orbi.</HI></L>
<L>The Town that rules the World, advanc'd upon</L>
<L>The &s;ev'n Hills for its Throne.</L>
</LG></NOTE> <HI>Propertius,</HI> <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><LG>
<L><HI>Martial</HI> lib. 12. Epigr. 8.</L>
<L><HI>Terrarum Dea, gentiumque</HI> Roma,</L>
<L><HI>Cui par e&s;t nihil, &amp; nihil &s;ecundum.</HI></L>
<L><HI>Rome</HI> the Worlds Gode&s;s, by all Nations fear'd,</L>
<L>To whom no thing is like, no thing to be compar'd.</L>
</LG></NOTE> <HI>Martial,</HI> <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><LG>
<L><HI>Lucan.</HI></L>
<L><HI>Atque omnis</HI> Latio <HI>&s;ervit quae purpura ferro.</HI></L>
<L>&mdash;And every Crowned Head, and State,</L>
<L>Who to the <HI>Roman</HI> Arms &s;ubmit their Fate.</L>
</LG></NOTE> <HI>Lucan,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P N="4">4. And the&s;e Characters we find al&s;o expre&s;ly fixed to a cer|tain time, when they could not be under&s;tood of any other Place; as, <HI>The &s;even Hills where the Woman &s;itteth;</HI> that is, at this pre&s;ent time: <HI>The City which reigneth over the Kings of the Earth;</HI> that is, at <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ver. 9, &amp; 18.</NOTE> this moment; or at that time when the Angel &s;poke to the Apo&s;tle all along that Chapter, to unfold the My&s;tery to him.</P>
<P>From the&s;e plain Circum&s;tances, I could not think it would be any dangerous venture to be confident, That <HI>Babylon</HI> mu&s;t be <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<PB N="5" REF="34">
<P> For who can think it po&s;&s;ible for an Angel of God to pro|mi&s;e in the fir&s;t place to explain the my&s;tical terms of a Pro|phecy to an Apo&s;tle of Chri&s;t; then to go on immediately to perform it by Characters of them, which were very peculiar and individual Properties of things that were alone known to have them, and by which they were generally known and un|der&s;tood to be meant in the common conver&s;ation of the world: and to fix them al&s;o to a certain time when they were &s;o gene|rally u&s;ed; and yet after all this, that the Angel might under|&s;tand them in a much different &s;en&s;e? How then is it po&s;&s;ible to know the meaning of the plaine&s;t words in Scripture, if in &s;uch circum&s;tances as the&s;e an Angel of God could have given &s;uch an invincible temptation to the world to deceive them&s;elves, without any po&s;&s;ibility to prevent it? I could not therefore judge it po&s;&s;ible, that <HI>Babylon</HI> here &s;hould be any thing el&s;e but <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>This I was &s;till the more free in, becau&s;e I &s;aw it the confi|dence <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> of tho&s;e, who, tho' they make the outward Te&s;timony of a Church their ordinary Rule to judge of any divine infallible Truth, yet here &s;peak with all imaginable a&s;&s;urance about a thing which their Church never defined, upon the account of the over-bearing evidence of the Text for it: and this al&s;o freed me from all fear of any partial prejudice again&s;t their Church, that might make me too ready to join with the re&s;t in this great a&s;&s;urance.</P>
<P>As for the wavering Opinions of others about it, I knew it to be no &s;trange thing to find Learned and Worthy Per&s;ons of different Judgments about the mo&s;t certain, and even the mo&s;t undeniable Truths, either upon the account of former prejudi|ces, or want of &s;ufficient con&s;ideration, or from an unaccount|able indifference for &s;ome things, or from &s;ome peculiar propen|&s;ion to others; &s;o as &s;ometimes to maintain very plain Contra|dictions to the common &s;en&s;e of men; as it was of old ob&s;erved of the &s;ubtile&s;t Rea&s;oners in the world, That <HI>there was nothing &s;o ab&s;urd, which was not maintained by &s;ome or other of the Philo&s;ophers.</HI> I had read of very learned Scepticks, that doubted of the Certain|ty of Mathematical Demon&s;trations; had known many Judi|cious and Worthy Per&s;ons, that could not &s;ee any ab&s;olute Con|tradiction in the mo&s;t difficult Notion of <HI>Tran&s;ub&s;tantiation:</HI> and much more ea&s;ie is it for the be&s;t men to apprehend, That
<PB N="6" REF="35"> in the cleare&s;t Explication of a My&s;tery, as this is, there may po&s;&s;ibly be a further My&s;tery.</P>
<P>Let the rea&s;on of the indifference of others have been what it will, we are &s;ure, That if any my&s;tical Figure &s;hould be now &s;aid by an Angel to &s;ignifie the mo&s;t Chri&s;tian King with the <HI>Flower-de-Luces;</HI> or the mo&s;t Catholick King, who has the Gold Mines of <HI>America;</HI> or the Port, that rules over the <HI>Ea&s;t;</HI> we &s;hould mo&s;t a&s;&s;uredly conclude, That no other King now or hereafter could be meant by it, but the King of <HI>France,</HI> or <HI>Spain;</HI> nor any other Port in the World, but the <HI>Ottoman</HI> Port, or <HI>Con&s;tantinople.</HI> And it would be altogether incredible to us, That any learned Per&s;on &s;ome hundreds of years hence, that was ac|quainted with the common u&s;e of tho&s;e terms in this Age, &s;hould be &s;o extravagant as to think that this might be meant of any other <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> or <HI>Catholick</HI> King in the world be|&s;ides, or of &s;ome other great <HI>Ea&s;tern Port,</HI> &s;ome hundred years hence.</P>
<P>The MOST SATISFACTORY in&s;tance of the wild imaginations of Learned Men on &s;ome occa&s;ions, is the ex|ample that <HI>Bellarmin</HI> has given us of it in the very Ca&s;e before us. What&s;oever was the rea&s;on of it, it is certain that he is in expre&s;s terms repugnant to him&s;elf in two contradictory A&s;&s;er|tions about this thing: For in his &s;econd Book <HI>de Pontifice,</HI> cap. 2. <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Joannes in Apocalyp&s;i</HI> Romam <HI>pa&s;&s;im vocat</HI> Babylonem.<HI>&mdash;Et</HI> aperte <HI>col|ligitur ex cap.</HI> 17. <HI>Apocalyp&s;.&mdash;Alioqui re&s;pondeat nobis Vellenus.&mdash;Quaenam e&s;t illa</HI> Babylon, <HI>quae in Apocalyp&s;i imperat Regibus terrae?</HI> Bellarm. l. 2. de Pon|tifice Romano, cap. 2.</P>
<P>Ibid. <HI>Nec enim alia civitas e&s;t, quae Joannes tempore Imperium habuerit &s;uper Reges terrae quam</HI> Roma; <HI>&amp;</HI> noti&s;&s;imum <HI>e&s;t &s;upra &s;eptem colles</HI> Romam <HI>aedificatam e&s;&s;e.</HI> For neither was there any other City in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time, that reigned over the Kings of the Earth; and it was every-where known, that <HI>Rome</HI> was built upon &s;even Hills.</P></NOTE> he affirms, That it is plain from the 17th Chapter of the <HI>Re|velations,</HI> that <HI>Babylon</HI> is <HI>Rome;</HI> and &s;hews <HI>Vellenus,</HI> his Adver&s;ary, That <HI>it is not po&s;&s;ible it &s;hould be any thing el&s;e.</HI> And yet in the &s;ame Book, <HI>lib.</HI> 3. <HI>cap.</HI> 13. when he comes to &s;tate what <HI>Baby|lon</HI> is in that place of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg"><P>Re&s;pondeo, 1^o. <HI>Dici po&s;&s;e cum Augu&s;tino, Areta, Haymone, Beda, Ra|perto,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>non intelligi</HI> Romam <HI>per meretricem, &s;ed univer&s;am Diaboli civi|tatem, quae in Scriptur&acirc; &s;aepe vocatur</HI> Babylon. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Pont. Romano, cap. 13.</P>
<P>This was before ob&s;erved by <HI>Malvenda,</HI> p. 226. de Antichri&s;to.<HI>&mdash;Mirati impendio &s;umus,</HI> &amp;c. I do extremely wonder to find a new Author (i. e. <HI>Bellarmine)</HI> to think that this Bea&s;t may be either the <HI>Roman Empire,</HI> or <NOTE PLACE="marg">Bellarm. l. 3. de Pont. c. 15.</NOTE> the <HI>Congregation of wicked men.</HI></P></NOTE> <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>it may be &s;aid with St.</HI> Augu&s;tine, <HI>that it is not</HI> Rome. If &s;o eminent a per&s;on can print &s;uch an expre&s;s Contradiction in plain words, about an Opinion which he could think to be nece&s;&s;a|rily certain, and clearly expre&s;&s;ed in the Text at &s;ome times; and that in a Book of Controver&s;ie in the face of his Adver|&s;aries, and about &s;o very remarkable a matter; it cannot be at all &s;trange to find Learned Men barely differing from one another, in a matter which is apparently clear and certain.</P>
<P>And that remarkable Ob&s;ervation of the Je&s;uit <HI>Ribera,</HI> is a great Confirmation of this; namely, <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Hoc dicam, Ambro&s;ius, qui prius negaverat, tandem in cap.</HI> 17. <HI>veri|tate convictus</HI> Babylonem Romam <HI>&s;ignificare confe&s;&s;us e&s;t. Ribera</HI> in cap. 14. Apocalyp&s;. num. 30.</P>
<P>Idem in cap. 17. Apoc. v. 16. <HI>H&icirc;c jam nonnulli &s;criptores, qui aliter inter|pretati fuerint, veritate ips&acirc; coguntur nobis favere. Nam Ambro&s;ius</HI> Romam <HI>dicit e&s;&s;e</HI> Fornicariam.</P></NOTE> <HI>That &s;uch as had been of another mind</HI> in this Point, yet at la&s;t <HI>were forced to change</HI>
<PB N="7" REF="35"> <HI>their Opinion</HI> by the irre&s;i&s;tible evidence of the thing: which is a &s;ufficient in&s;tance, that men of Learning may hold out awhile again&s;t the cleare&s;t Truth; and that therefore their Authority is not to be weighed again&s;t any Conclu&s;ion that does other|wi&s;e appear undoubtedly clear to ones &s;elf, and to the genera|lity of the Judicious be&s;ides.</P>
<P>And now I may &s;eem to have been unnece&s;&s;arily tedious in the&s;e la&s;t Reflexions; But &s;ince I have found by long experi|ence, that the general prejudice to me, and to mo&s;t of the World be&s;ide, again&s;t the cleare&s;t things in the&s;e Vi&s;ions, was the &s;trange different Apprehen&s;ions of very Judicious Men about them; I thought my &s;elf obliged to &s;tay long enough upon the con&s;ideration of the in&s;ignificancy of that Scruple, to take off all the power of it for the future; and this will, it may be, prove to be of greater u&s;e, than it may at fir&s;t be apprehended to be.</P>
<P>After this &s;atisfaction about <HI>Babylon,</HI> the Subject of the pre|&s;ent Propo&s;ition, I found at the fir&s;t &s;ight, that what is attri|buted to <HI>Babylon</HI> in it, mu&s;t be acknowledged to be unque|&s;tionable, <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> as it has al&s;o the general &s;uffrage of the Interpre|ters.</P>
<P N="1">1. As namely, fir&s;t, that it is there &s;ignified to be <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg"><P>Grotius in cap. 17. Apocal. Mulier <HI>e&s;t</HI> Roma: <HI>&s;ed</HI> notandum <HI>cum urbe &s;imul notari</HI> Imperium urbis. The <HI>Woman</HI> is <HI>Rome:</HI> but it is to be ob&s;erved, That together with the City, is to be under&s;tood the <HI>Empire of the City.</HI></P>
<P>A manife&s;t proof of this, was the Cu&s;tom ob&s;erved by all the Go|vernours of the Provinces of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, when they returned from their &s;everal Governments to the City of <HI>Rome:</HI> They u&s;ed to lay down the En&s;igns of their Authority at the Gate of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> before they entred the City. <HI>Lib. ult. de Officio Procon&s;.</HI></P></NOTE> <HI>in Rule,</HI> or to be the <HI>Seat of Empire.</HI> For it has all the En&s;igns of Ma|je&s;ty, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 17. v. 1. 3, 4, 5.</NOTE> <HI>arrayed in Purple,</HI> and <HI>Scarlet colour,</HI> and <HI>&s;itting upon a Bea&s;t with &s;even heads, and ten horns,</HI> interpreted to be &s;o many Kings. And called <HI>Babylon the Great, the Great Whore.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. That it is an <HI>Idolatrous Rule,</HI> is a&s;&s;ured from the names of an <HI>Harlot,</HI> and a <HI>Whore,</HI> and of <HI>Fornication</HI> given it, which a|mong&s;t all the Prophets do commonly &s;ignify nothing el&s;e but Idolatry and Apo&s;tacy, when &s;poken of a City in the &s;ame manner.</P>
<P N="3">3. That it is al&s;o <HI>an Antichri&s;tian Tyranny,</HI> is plain from her being &s;aid to be <HI>&s;een drunken with the blood of the Martyrs</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 6.</NOTE> <HI>of Je&s;us.</HI></P>
<PB N="8" REF="36">
<PB N="9" REF="36">
<PB N="10" REF="37">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="11" REF="37">
<HEAD>CHAP. II. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The former Propo&s;ition made the Standard to judge</HI> what kind of Evidence <HI>is &s;ufficient to make one &s;ure of the Interpretation of any thing el&s;e in the Prophecy. And</HI> Four Rules <HI>of Interpretation drawn from it. The Plain|ne&s;s and &V;&s;efulne&s;s of them.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>I Was not &s;o vain as to think I had got much by the undoubted Certainty of the former Propo&s;ition, to give me any hopes of much better &s;atisfaction about the re&s;t of the Interpretation. For in all my former perplexities about the&s;e things, I never que&s;tioned the certainty of this. And be&s;ides, I &s;aw this to be generally acknowledged by tho&s;e, who yet differ from one ano|ther in almo&s;t every thing el&s;e.</P>
<P>But however, &s;ince this was the only certain truth, that was then known about the&s;e things, It was nece&s;&s;ary to enquire up|on what general Suppo&s;itions it did rely to make it u&s;eful for a foundation for further advances; according to the be&s;t method of finding out unknown Truths, where the Re&s;olution of one Problem di&s;covers many General Theorems at the end of it very u&s;eful for farther improvements; as it is al&s;o the mo&s;t ea&s;ie, &s;ure, and natural order of Science, from particular In&s;tances to draw forth the General Rule &s;uppo&s;ed in them for all like Ca&s;es.</P>
<P>And this great advantage have we from the certainty of this particular In&s;tance, That it determines both what kind, or degree of Evidence is &s;ufficient to make a man &s;ure of any other Conclu&s;ion in the&s;e matters; and al&s;o, what would be &s;ufficient grounds to &s;ecure any, that there was that degree of Evidence in it. For, whatever it is that makes this &s;ingle Truth appear to be &s;o unque&s;tionable, mu&s;t be acknowledged to be &s;ufficient to &s;ecure the certainty of any other Propo&s;ition that has the &s;ame grounds in it. And this I conceived to be of the greate&s;t im|portance in all further &s;earch into the&s;e Ob&s;curities, To have &s;uch a <HI>Criterion</HI> or Standard of the true value of every thing that &s;hould offer it &s;elf.</P>
<PB N="12" REF="38">
<P> Fir&s;t then, for the KIND of EVIDENCE, that from hence ap|pears &s;ufficient for ones a&s;&s;urance of any thing hereafter; it need be no greater, than that which makes men &s;ure of the meaning of any plain words of Scripture of unexceptionable Authority. For of that kind is the certainty of this In&s;tance. It is not an Evi|dence grounded upon the nece&s;&s;ary connexion betwixt the thing, and its e&s;&s;ential properties, as Mathematical Demon&s;trations are; or &s;uch, as it may be proved to be ab&s;olutely impo&s;&s;ible to be otherwi&s;e in the nature of the thing.</P>
<P>It would be hard to prove it ab&s;olutely impo&s;&s;ible from the nature of God's Veracity, that he &s;hould have a further my&s;te|rious meaning in expre&s;&s;ions, that &s;eem very plain to us, for &s;ome great good ends unknown to us. But yet this is &s;o con|trary to his ordinary way of revealing his mind, and &s;o &s;eem|ingly incon&s;i&s;tent with the perfection of his Veracity, that we cannot but be confident, that he means always, as plainly as he &s;peaks; unle&s;s he gives clear intimations to the contrary to a&s;&s;ure us, that he has an hidden meaning, either by its contra|diction to &s;ome Truths far more clearly known, or by the in|con&s;i&s;tency of the plain &s;en&s;e of the words with that wherewith it is joined, or the like.</P>
<P>From hence therefore it will be expected, that whatever <HI>ex|travagant, Metaphy&s;ical Rea&s;ons</HI> a man may have to doubt of it, one ought not to &s;cruple the certainty of any thing, that has the &s;ame grounds to make us &s;ure of it, that the &s;everal parts of this Propo&s;ition rely upon; for that would be of equal force a|gain&s;t the &s;en&s;e of the plaine&s;t Expre&s;&s;ions of Scripture. And be&s;ides, it would have the te&s;timony of the unanimous Judg|ment of all the differing kinds of Parties and Intere&s;ts in the World again&s;t it, whom we find to be all agreed about &s;ome of the parts of this Propo&s;ition, <HI>only</HI> from the plainne&s;s of the Ex|pre&s;&s;ions about them, notwith&s;tanding all the wild Po&s;&s;ibilities only of their being otherwi&s;e meant.</P>
<P>Wherefore it would be thought very rea&s;onable, that one &s;hould look upon the &s;everal grounds of this pre&s;ent In&s;tance, as &s;o many General Rules to a&s;&s;ure us of the certainty of every thing el&s;e in the&s;e Vi&s;ions, that was e&s;tabli&s;hed upon them.</P>
<P>For this end, it may be ob&s;erved, in the fir&s;t place, that the chief ground for concluding <HI>Babylon</HI> to be <HI>Rome in the Angel's ex|plication of it,</HI> and its Reign to be an Antichri&s;tian Tyranny
<PB N="13" REF="38"> again&s;t the Church of Chri&s;t, <HI>before the explication of it</HI> at the 6th ver&s;e, is the common u&s;age of the Expre&s;&s;ions in &s;uch a de|terminate known &s;ignification; e&s;pecially when compared with the Angel's promi&s;e to explain the My&s;tery with an intention to have it under&s;tood: It may therefore from hence be e&s;ta|bli&s;hed.</P>
<Q><HI>That what&s;oever is delivered in the 17th Chapter of the</HI> Revela|tions, <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Rule"> <HI>in expre&s;&s;ions of a known &s;ignification, ought to be taken <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>COrnel. &agrave; Lapide</HI> Prolegomen. in Apocalyp&s;. <HI>De Canonibus Interpretan|di,</HI> of the Rules of Interpreting. <HI>Augu&s;tinus,</HI> Lib. 3. de Doctrin&acirc; Chri&s;tian&acirc;, cap. 1. The <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> and <HI>all other Scripture,</HI> is to be taken ac|cording to the letter, as it does ordinarily &s;ignify, <HI>as much as may be;</HI> that is, <HI>unle&s;s</HI> that &s;en&s;e be found to be ab&s;urd, or contrary to &s;ound Faith, or good Manners.</P>
<P><HI>Ribera</HI> in cap. 6. Apoc. Numer. 51. <Q><HI>The propriety</HI> of the words (or their proper literal &s;ignification) is to be kept to, when there is <HI>no clear</HI> rea&s;on again&s;t it. And in <HI>cap.</HI> 7. <HI>numer.</HI> 1.&mdash;Becau&s;e, as it has been &s;aid, we mu&s;t not depart from the <HI>proper (literal) &s;en&s;e</HI> of the words, <HI>unle&s;s</HI> &s;ome plain rea&s;on forces us to it.</Q></P>
<P>Thomas de Albiis <HI>Tab. &s;uffrag. cap.</HI> 17. <HI>pag.</HI> 230, 231. <Q>THE BASIS of all other Interpretations is the <HI>literal &s;en&s;e,</HI> and <HI>only</HI> that which can be clear from the words; that is, which only can force the Under&s;tanding to an a&s;&s;ent.&mdash;And before&mdash;The Arguments which are to convince ones Faith, can <HI>only</HI> be fetched from the <HI>literal &s;en&s;e</HI> of the Holy Scripture. The <HI>other</HI> Sen&s;es, &s;ince they proceed <HI>only from the Wit</HI> of the Interpreter, it is clear, that they have the Authority of the Interpreter, <HI>but not of the Scripture</HI> divinely in&s;pired.</Q></P></NOTE> as it is generally u&s;ed to be under&s;tood in the World with the like con&s;truction, unle&s;s</HI> it <HI>be incon&s;i&s;tent with &s;omething more clearly known.</HI></Q>
<P>And next, the certainty, That it is here an Idolatrous &s;tate of <HI>Rome</HI> that it is de&s;cribed in, is grounded upon the nece&s;&s;ity of a my&s;tical &s;en&s;e of the terms of <HI>Harlot,</HI> and <HI>Whore</HI> here given to <HI>Babylon;</HI> and upon the known u&s;e of tho&s;e terms among&s;t the Prophets to &s;ignify the Idolatry and Apo&s;tacy of a Nation, or City. From hence then it may rea&s;onably be required to be granted,</P>
<Q>That where there is a nece&s;&s;ity for a My&s;tical Sen&s;e, that Sen&s;e is <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Rule"> to be taken which is the mo&s;t generally made u&s;e of by the Pro|phets, if not incon&s;i&s;tent with &s;omething more clearly known.</Q>
<P>After which might very rea&s;onably be urged, That &s;ince the Angel's Explication of the My&s;tery is in the mid&s;t of a very fre|quent u&s;e of the &s;ame peculiar and proper My&s;tical Expre&s;&s;ions in this Prophecy; that it cannot be doubted, but</P>
<P><HI>That the</HI> &s;ame <HI>peculiar, and proper Expre&s;&s;ions do &s;ignify all over the Prophecy the</HI> &s;ame <HI>things which they are &s;aid to &s;ignify in the 17th Chapter of the</HI> Revelations, <HI>unle&s;s there be &s;omething more clearly known again&s;t it.</HI></P>
<P>And this being an unque&s;tionable a&s;&s;urance, that the Angel's Explication was given to afford light to the re&s;t of the Prophecy, It does &s;eem as clearly to a&s;&s;ure us,</P>
<Q><HI>That the</HI> &s;ame <HI>Expre&s;&s;ions all over the Prophecy, explained, un|explained,</HI> <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Rule"> <HI>and commonly known, d^o &s;ignify the</HI> &s;ame <HI>things, unle&s;s there be plain grounds again&s;t it.</HI></Q>
<PB N="14" REF="39">
<P> The&s;e Rules &s;eem indeed to be the immediate, and nece&s;&s;ary Con&s;equences of the grounds of the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition; But that which made me the better &s;atisfied with them, was, That they are &s;o clear of them&s;elves, that any impartial Rea&s;oner about the&s;e things, would naturally &s;uppo&s;e them, and be in the con|tinual u&s;e of them, without any regard to the &s;trength of this Conclu&s;ion, from which they are fetched. They are &s;o obvi|ous, and ea&s;ie, and &s;o plain to the common Sen&s;e of all men; and accordingly &s;o generally acknowledged by all kinds of In|terpreters; That I &s;hould have thought it a very unnece&s;&s;ary <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> trouble to the Reader to have mentioned them, had it not been nece&s;&s;ary for the conviction of tho&s;e that are &s;ceptical in the&s;e matters; to make it appear to them from this undoubted Ex|ample, what are the plain, and known Rules to &s;ecure an In|terpretation upon.</P>
<P>I could not but &s;ee the great u&s;e of this Method, that it would certainly ea&s;e one of all the perplexities which the diffe|rent Judgments of Learned Men do ordinarily di&s;tract mens minds with, and would make me re&s;t fully &s;atisfied of any Con|clu&s;ion, that I &s;hould &s;ee truly inferred from &s;o plain a foun|dation.</P>
<P>Wherefore upon this account, and the experience I had had of the different Judgments of &s;ome Great Men about one of the plaine&s;t Conclu&s;ions that one could have met with in the former In&s;tance, I thought it worth the while to &s;et it up for a Rule for the future,</P>
<Q><P>That, The different <HI>Judgments of Learned Men, ougbt not to</HI> <MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="Rule"> <HI>weaken ones a&s;&s;ent to any thing, which upon an impartial exa|mination of it, appears clear, and undoubted, and is generally acknowledged.</HI></P>
<P><HI>[The Two following Chapters may be pa&s;&s;ed over by tho&s;e, who would only look at the clo&s;e Connexion of the Demon&s;tration.]</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">^b <HI>Ribera,</HI> Prooem. in Comment. in <HI>Apocal.</HI> <Q>This Book is a Prophecy, and has many things like the Old Prophets, and often alludes to them, and offers an opportunity from thence to find out the mo&s;t my&s;terious meaning of it: It has the <HI>&s;ame phra&s;es</HI> (or &s;tyle) with them, the <HI>&s;ame</HI> kind of Metaphors, and Allegories, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></Q></NOTE></P></Q>
<PB N="15" REF="39">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="16" REF="40">
<HEAD>CHAP. III. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Second Propo&s;ition,</HI> Babylon <HI>the &s;ame thing in all Chapters of the</HI> Revelations. <HI>The Third Propo&s;ition, That the Judgment of</HI> Babylon <HI>is the de&s;olation of it in the time of its Antichri&s;tian Reign.</HI> Babylon <HI>not</HI> Rome <HI>Pagan.</HI> Grotius <HI>examined.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE &s;ecure&s;t exerci&s;e of tho&s;e plain Rules of Interpreta|tion, which were found to be contained in the Fir&s;t Pro|po&s;ition, will be about &s;ome of the Characters of <HI>Babylon,</HI> who&s;e Explication is already known, and from whence they were drawn. The plaine&s;t Expre&s;&s;ions about <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;eem to be the account of the de&s;olation of it immediately before, and after the 17th Chapter, which does offer very fair grounds of a&s;&s;urance again&s;t the mo&s;t current Opinions concerning the particular time of that &s;tate, in which it has already been determined to be from the 17th Chapter. For the clearer proof of this, it may be ob&s;erved, That</P>
<Q>Babylon <HI>&s;ignifies the &s;ame particular &s;tate of the Idolatrous,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Antichri&s;tian Rule of</HI> Rome, <HI>immediately before, and after the 17th Chapter, that it &s;ignifies in that Chapter.</HI></Q>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;ignifies the &s;ame &s;tate of <HI>Rome</HI> immediately <HI>before the 17th Chapter, that it does in it.</HI> For immediately after the mention of <HI>Babylon</HI> the Great at the end of the 16th Chapter, and of the Judgment of it ju&s;t then approaching, at the pour|ing out of the 7th Vial; there comes one of the Angels of the &s;even Vials in the entrance of the 17th Chapter, and offers the Apo&s;tle an Explication of the My&s;tery of <HI>Babylon</HI> the Great, and of the Judgment of it; which in the common acceptation of any &s;uch relation of an Affair, all the World would under&s;tand to be meant of the &s;ame thing. Wherefore by Rule 1. it mu&s;t then be the &s;ame time of <HI>Babylon</HI> ju&s;t before the 17th Chapter, that is mentioned in that Chapter: &s;o al&s;o by Rule 3. <HI>Babylon</HI> the Great being a very peculiar My&s;tical Expre&s;&s;ion, mu&s;t &s;ignify
<PB N="17" REF="40"> in both the&s;e Chapters the &s;ame thing, &s;ince there is nothing more clearly known to hinder it.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;ignifies the &s;ame &s;tate of <HI>Rome after the 17th Chap|ter, that it does in that Chapter.</HI> For the 18th and 19th Chap|ters appear to be but one continued account of the Fortunes of the &s;ame <HI>Babylon,</HI> that had been mentioned but ju&s;t before in the 17th Chapter. As 1. The Significations of its Ruling Power, Chap. 18. 2, 16. and Chap. 19. 2. are ju&s;t the &s;ame very pecu|liar words with tho&s;e in the 17th Chapter, v. 1, 4, 5. So al&s;o 2. Its Idolatrous State is &s;ignified in the &s;ame Expre&s;&s;ions, Chap. 18. 3, 9. and Chap. 19. 2. with tho&s;e in the 17th Chapter, v. 1, 2, 4, 5. 3. The Antichri&s;tian Tyranny of <HI>Babylon,</HI> Chap. 18. 20, 24. and Chap. 19. 2. is &s;ignified to be the &s;ame with that Chap. 17. 6. And 4. Its la&s;t De&s;olation is expre&s;&s;ed in ju&s;t the &s;ame words, Chap. 18. 8, 9, 10, 19. and Chap. 19. 3. with tho&s;e in the 17th Chapter, v. 1, 16.</P>
<P>But to put this pa&s;t all &s;cruple, we find &s;carce one Interpre|ter that is not of the &s;ame mind.</P>
<P>If it be &s;o unque&s;tionable, that <HI>Babylon</HI> is the &s;ame time of the Antichri&s;tian Rule of <HI>Rome</HI> immediately <HI>before, after,</HI> and <HI>in</HI> the 17th Chapter, then it can hardly be doubted, but that</P>
<Q><P>Babylon <HI>is the &s;ame in the 14th Chapter with the re&s;t of the mentions</HI> <MILESTONE UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>of it in the other Chapters, by</HI> Rule 3. Nor but that</P>
<P><HI>The Judgment of</HI> Babylon <HI>in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th Chapters is the de&s;olation of</HI> Rome <HI>by Fire in the time of its</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 3:</NOTE> <HI>Antichri&s;tian Reign in tho&s;e Chapters.</HI></P></Q>
<P N="1">1. That the Judgment of <HI>Babylon</HI> in tho&s;e Chapters is <HI>the de&s;o|lation of it</HI> by Fire, is &s;ignified by the fulle&s;t Expre&s;&s;ions that could be u&s;ed for that purpo&s;e; &s;uch as the being utterly burnt with <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 18. 8, 21.</NOTE> fire; and &s;o burnt, that the &s;moak of it a&s;cended up for ever: And, the being thrown down with violence, &s;o as not to be found any more at all; but to be like a great Mil&s;tone ca&s;t into the Sea. All which are Expre&s;&s;ions taken out of the Prophets, to &s;ignify the utter de&s;olution of the City <HI>Babylon</HI> at the ruine of the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy. So that both the common, and u&s;ual <NOTE PLACE="marg">Jer. 50. 39. Jer. 51. 7, 8, 13, 35, 37. 45, 64.</NOTE> Sen&s;e, and the known u&s;e al&s;o of the&s;e Phra&s;es among&s;t the Pro|phets, do nece&s;&s;arily determine them to &s;ignify the utter de&s;o|lation
<PB N="18" REF="41"> of <HI>Babylon</HI> here at the la&s;t end of that Empire, that it does here my&s;tically &s;ignify, by <HI>Rule</HI> 1, and 2. that is, at the la&s;t end of the Antichri&s;tian Reign of <HI>Rome,</HI> which is in all the&s;e Chap|ters &s;ignified by <HI>Babylon</HI> (by <HI>Propo&s;it.</HI> 1. and 2.)</P>
<P N="2">2. And further, That this de&s;olation of <HI>Rome,</HI> is certainly <HI>in the time of its Antichri&s;tian Reign,</HI> is as evident, 1. Becau&s;e <HI>Baby|lon</HI> <MILESTONE N="1"> does in all tho&s;e places of the Prophets, to which the Cha|racters of it do here allude, &s;ignify the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Throne, or Monarchy. 2. And here is it al&s;o found to &s;ignify the City of <HI>Rome</HI> <MILESTONE N="2"> in its Antichri&s;tian Domination (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 1.) 3. And the de&s;o|lation <MILESTONE N="3"> of <HI>Babylon</HI> in the Prophets, for which the &s;ame Expre&s;&s;ions with the&s;e here are u&s;ed, does &s;ignify the la&s;t end of that Mo|narchy, or Ruling Power. 4. And be&s;ides, It is the general <MILESTONE N="4"> u&s;age of the Prophetical Writings, to &s;et out the la&s;t Ruine of a Ruling People by the de&s;olation of the chief City of that Nation at the &s;ame time. Thus is the Ruine of the Kingdom of <HI>I&s;rael, Judah, Egypt,</HI> and of the <HI>Babylonians,</HI> repre&s;ented by the De&s;ola|tions of <HI>Samaria, Jeru&s;alem, Noph</HI> and <HI>Babylon.</HI> 5. But more <MILESTONE N="5"> particularly is it &s;et forth in this Prophecy, that the de&s;olation of <HI>Babylon</HI> is not after the end of that Monarchy, which it here repre&s;ents. For <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> who&s;e Heads do repre&s;ent this City, and is him&s;elf called the King of it, is not dethroned till after the de&s;olation of <HI>Babylon</HI> in the 18th Chapter, as appears Chap|ters 19, 20.</P>
<P>And Chap. 16. 14, 19. The Judgment upon <HI>Babylon</HI> is be|twixt the meeting of the Strength of that Monarchy in <HI>Harma|geddon,</HI> and the la&s;t end of it in the 19th Chapter.</P>
<P>From hence it appears, That</P>
<Q>Babylon <HI>in none of the mentions of it in the</HI> Revelations, <HI>can be</HI> Rome <MILESTONE UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>Pagan.</HI></Q>
<P><Q>This may &s;afely be concluded from the name of <HI>The Whore</HI> here given to <HI>Babylon.</HI> For when a Nation or City is &s;aid in Scripture to commit Fornication, or to be an Harlot, It &s;ig|nifies that Nation or City to have apo&s;tatized from the True Religion to Idolatry (&s;ee the three fir&s;t Chapters of <HI>Ho&s;ea:)</HI> And therefore mu&s;t <HI>Babylon</HI> here &s;ignify <HI>Rome</HI> Chri&s;tian turned Idolatrous, which was not till after the time of <HI>Rome</HI> Pagan. The name of <HI>Harlot</HI> is indeed given to <HI>Nineveh,</HI> Nahum. 3. 4.
<PB N="19" REF="41"> But that Prophecy was after that of <HI>Jonah,</HI> in who&s;e time the people of <HI>Niniveh</HI> are &s;aid to have believed in God, and to have repented, <HI>Jonah</HI> 3. 5, 10. And &s;o the Idolatry of <HI>Nineveh</HI> after that time, was her Apo&s;tacy from the true Faith.</Q></P>
<P>But it is much more confirmed from the preceding Propo&s;i|tions: For <HI>Babylon</HI> is, in all the mentions of it, the &s;ame Antichri|&s;tian &s;tate of the Reign of <HI>Rome</HI> (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 2.)&mdash;And in that &s;tate of it, it is de&s;olated by Fire (by <HI>Propo&s;. praeced.)&mdash;</HI>But this was never known to have been done in the time of the Reign of <HI>Rome-</HI>Heathen. There was nothing that had the lea&s;t appearance of the de&s;olation of <HI>Rome,</HI> or of the di&s;&s;olution of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government, at <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI>'s Triumphs over Pagani&s;m; much le&s;s was there any thing like the lea&s;t part of the de&s;cripti|on of the de&s;olation of <HI>Babylon</HI> by fire, as it is here mo&s;t re|markably &s;ignified.</P>
<P>But <HI>Grotius</HI> and Dr. <HI>Hammond,</HI> to uphold their applications of the&s;e things to <HI>Rome-</HI>Heathen, will have <HI>Rome</HI> to be <HI>Babylon</HI> two hundred years after it was come under the Chri&s;tian Emperors, becau&s;e there were a part of the Senate, and now and then a Con&s;ul, that were Pagans, for that &s;pace of time after <HI>Con&s;tan|tine</HI>'s Triumph over Pagani&s;m; and therefore, that the la&s;t de|&s;olation of <HI>Babylon</HI> by fire, was at the burning of <HI>Rome</HI> by <HI>Totila, An.</HI> 546. where the &s;torm of the Enemies fury lay almo&s;t wholly upon the Pagan Party, and the Chri&s;tians were mo&s;t &s;aved by flying to the Churches.</P>
<P>In the fir&s;t place, it may here by the way be ob&s;erved, what becomes of the ground of Dr. <HI>Hammond</HI>'s confidence, That the things in the <HI>Revelations</HI> were all to be fulfilled in the Times next to the Age in which they were &s;een, from what is &s;aid Chap. 1. 1. <HI>Things that mu&s;t &s;hortly come to pa&s;s.</HI> For here are near five hundred years time allowed by the Doctor for the ful|filling them. And then he makes the <HI>Turks</HI> al&s;o to be foretold in them be&s;ides, by <HI>Gog</HI> and <HI>Magog,</HI> which requires &s;ome hundreds <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 20. 8.</NOTE> of years more; and yet the Doctor &s;peaks with a great confi|dence and a&s;&s;urance of the fulfilling of all, &s;oon after the time that the Prophecy was given.</P>
<P>But without further concern about that, let us now ob&s;erve the &s;trange ab&s;urdities of this Explication.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="20" REF="42" MS="y"> 1. According to this, <HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t be <HI>Babylon,</HI> or <HI>Rome</HI> for 200 years after that the <HI>Bayloni&s;h</HI> Throne in it had been pulled down, and when its conquering Enemy, the Chri&s;tian Church, had been for all that time triumphing in its room, in the Imperial Throne, in the publick Laws, in all parts of the Government, and in the publick places of Divine Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P N="2">2. And then <HI>Rome</HI> Chri&s;tian, whil&s;t it was the po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of a <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 20.</NOTE> Chri&s;tian Prince, mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed to be burnt, to bear the ven|geance of <HI>Rome</HI> Heathen, for &s;hedding the Blood of Chri&s;tian Saints and Martyrs, &s;o many years after that Heatheni&s;m had been there publickly triumph'd over.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Chri&s;tians al&s;o, who did then defend their City again&s;t <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 4.</NOTE> another Chri&s;tian Prince, mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed to be called upon from Heaven to come out of it, and &s;o to give up their Ma&s;ters Right to the Enemy, le&s;t they &s;hould be made to partake of the puni&s;hment of <HI>Rome,</HI> for its Heatheni&s;m 200 years before, to which they were the greate&s;t Enemies; for none was more zealous again&s;t Pagani&s;m, than <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> who was at that time Lord of <HI>Rome,</HI> as appears by the &s;everity of his Laws a|gain&s;t it.</P>
<P N="4">4. Of the &s;ame extravagant nature mu&s;t it be, to make the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 20.</NOTE> Heavens, the Apo&s;tles and Prophets, and all the faithful Chri&s;ti|ans in the City at that time, to triumph with joy at the burning of the Hou&s;es and Goods of mo&s;t Chri&s;tians, and a few Pagans together, and at the taking of a City by the Chri&s;tian <HI>Goths</HI> from the Chri&s;tian <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. And the burning not a third part of <HI>Rome,</HI> as <HI>Grotius</HI> con|fe&s;&s;es of this Exploit of <HI>Totila</HI>'s, and the &s;laughter of a few Pagans in it, mu&s;t be made to be, the giving <HI>Rome-</HI>Pagan double revenge for the Blood of the Prophets and Saints, and of all that were &s;lain upon the Earth by the Pagan Power of <HI>Rome</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 8. 6.</NOTE> all over the Empire: It mu&s;t be the giving <HI>Rome-</HI>Pagan the Cup of the Wine of the fiercene&s;s of the Wrath of God. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 16. 19&punc;</NOTE></P>
<P N="6">6. The Pagan Kings al&s;o of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, which had committed Fornication with <HI>Rome-</HI>Pagan &s;ome hundreds of years before, that is, had complied with the <HI>Roman</HI> Idolatry, mu&s;t in this way be &s;uppo&s;ed to be alive, to lament the &s;ad condition <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 9.</NOTE> of a Chri&s;tian City at the taking it by a Chri&s;tian Prince; or, at be&s;t, the Heathen Kings then in the World, no body
<PB N="21" REF="42" MS="y"> knows when&punc; within many hundred miles of that City, mu&s;t grievou&s;ly lament for the &s;laughter of &s;ome Pagan <HI>Romans,</HI> with whom they had been u&s;ed to comply in the Pagan Way. Nothing indeed does make <HI>Grotius</HI> more to be &s;u&s;pected of in|tending only to play with this Prophecy, or only to vex &s;ome hot Apocalyptical Men among&s;t his Adver&s;aries, than the &s;eemingly-wilful Application of the Kings of the Earth, that had committed Fornication with <HI>Babylon</HI> in the 18th Chapter, to the Pagan Senators of <HI>Rome;</HI> when he had but a few Ver&s;es be|fore, in the 17th Chapter, determined the &s;ame words to &s;igni|fie <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 2.</NOTE> the Kings of all the Nations of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P N="7">7. <HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t again be &s;uppo&s;ed in this way to have been in the height of her Wealth and Riches, by which &s;he is de&s;cribed in her Idolatrous &s;tate, as decked with Gold, and Pearls, and Precious Stones, at the time that &s;he was burnt by <HI>Totila:</HI> For it is &s;aid at the burning of her, That <HI>in that one hour was &s;o</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 17.</NOTE> <HI>great Riches brought to nought;</HI> which &s;uppo&s;es, that tho&s;e Riches mu&s;t be in her at the time of her De&s;olation. But this is quite contrary to the &s;tate of Pagani&s;m in <HI>Rome</HI> at that time, who&s;e Glory had been there laid in the du&s;t many Generations before.</P>
<P N="8">8. How mon&s;trous a force al&s;o upon the Text mu&s;t it be, to make <HI>Rome</HI> the Object of the fierce&s;t Wrath of God, at a time when &s;he was every-where owned for the Queen of all Chri|&s;tian Churches, only for having &s;aid in her heart &s;ome hundreds of years before, in her Pagan &s;tate, <HI>I &s;it as a Queen, and &s;hall know no &s;orrow?</HI> But, indeed, the plain words do repre&s;ent her <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 7.</NOTE> &s;aying in her heart, ju&s;t about the time of the&s;e la&s;t Plagues up|on her, <HI>I &s;it as a Queen,</HI> &amp;c. which does plainly &s;ignifie, That the Ruling State, in which <HI>Rome</HI> is to be at the time of this la&s;t end of her, is the Object of this Judgment: And this in <HI>Totila</HI>'s time, being a Chri&s;tian Government, the boa&s;t of the Reign of Chri&s;tianity then, under the term of <HI>&s;itting as a Queen,</HI> would, according to this, be the rea&s;on of the De&s;olation of it, under the Notion of a Pagan Empire.</P>
<P N="9">9. And what can that cry of the admirers of <HI>Babylon,</HI> v. 18. be under&s;tood of, but of <HI>Rome,</HI> as <HI>at that time</HI> the Seat of Em|pire?<HI>&mdash;What is like unto this great City?</HI> Now, what were the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 19.</NOTE> Pagans in <HI>Totila</HI>'s time the better for <HI>Rome</HI>'s being the Seat of a great Empire, which was contrary to their way? How come
<PB N="22" REF="43"> they to lament and compa&s;&s;ionate its lo&s;s of Empire? Or how indeed did it at all lo&s;e of its Empire, by changing Princes? Or wherein was it then &s;o great in Empire before the burning it, or &s;o le&s;s after it, when it had not been the Imperial or Royal Seat for above 100 years before that time; and was by the ta|king of it, but returned into the &s;ame hands that it had been in for near 50 years together but ten years before that time, and when pre&s;ently after it was returned again into the &s;ame hands that it was taken from, within a few months after the burning it, and was then repaired again?</P>
<P N="10">10. And this la&s;t Con&s;ideration of the return of the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperour again to the po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the City, within &s;o &s;hort a time; is evidence enough, That it is impo&s;&s;ible that <HI>Totila</HI>'s Exploit &s;hould be the burning of <HI>Babylon</HI> in this place, even by a Rule that <HI>Grotius</HI> him&s;elf has &s;et up about the &s;ignification of the word <HI>for ever,</HI> upon ver. 19th Chap. 3. where it is &s;aid, That <HI>the &s;moke of the burning of</HI> Babylon <HI>a&s;cended up for ever:</HI> He &s;ays, That whenever that term <HI>for ever</HI> is joined with the de|&s;truction of a City, it &s;ignifies, That it &s;hall not recover again of a long time; whereas <HI>Rome</HI> was re-built the next year after the burning a &s;mall part of it by <HI>Totila.</HI></P>
<P>I will not here in&s;i&s;t upon the &s;ignifications of a final De&s;ola|tion of <HI>Rome,</HI> upon tho&s;e emphatical expre&s;&s;ions, which at fir&s;t &s;eem to de&s;ign &s;uch a thing, becau&s;e I &s;ee all the &s;ame phra&s;es u&s;ed by the Prophets of the fall of Cities, as the Seats of Em|pire, which yet continued con&s;iderable Places after that, under other Rulers.</P>
<P N="11">11. But that which &s;eems the mo&s;t inexcu&s;ably to condemn <HI>Grotius</HI>'s fancy, is, That mo&s;t of the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions concerning the De&s;olation of <HI>Babylon,</HI> are u&s;ed in the Prophets for nothing but the end of a Monarchy that en&s;laved the Church of God; and which al&s;o they do of them&s;elves mo&s;t of them naturally &s;ignifie. Thus are the People of God commanded to come out of <HI>Babylon,</HI> ju&s;t before the overthrow of the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy; <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 8. &amp; 51. 6, 45.</NOTE> and the expre&s;&s;ion it &s;elf does naturally &s;ignifie, That the Body of the People out of whom they were to come, were <HI>Babylonians;</HI> and &s;o therefore mu&s;t the chief Body of <HI>Babylon</HI>'s People have been Idolatrous, and En&s;lavers of his People.</P>
<P>So al&s;o the rejoycing over <HI>Babylon</HI> at her fall, and the calling <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Jer.</HI> 50. 14, 48, 29.</NOTE> to the People of God to reward <HI>Babylon</HI> double of what &s;he had
<PB N="23" REF="43"> done to them, and the riches of <HI>Babylon</HI> at her de&s;olation, and the name of <HI>Babylon the Great,</HI> &s;aid at that time to be de&s;troyed, and her Greatne&s;s admired by tho&s;e that lamented her at the <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>I&s;a.</HI> 47. 8.</NOTE> time of her fall, and the Kings of the Earth who had commit|ted Fornication with her at that time bewailing her, do all na|turally &s;ignifie, That <HI>Babylon,</HI> at the time of her de&s;olation by fire, is then a Nation oppre&s;&s;ing the People of God, in great &s;plendor in that way, and bewailed by per&s;ons who them&s;elves had been partakers in her Glory; and &s;o are they u&s;ed by the Prophets from whence they are fetched, about the end of the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P>It is therefore impo&s;&s;ible, that <HI>Rome-</HI>Chri&s;tian burnt, &s;hould be <HI>Babylon</HI> de&s;olated by fire.</P>
<P N="12">12. It is al&s;o to be remembred, That the &s;ignification of <HI>Ba|bylon,</HI> in this very Prophecy, has been already concluded to be the City of <HI>Rome</HI> in an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Domination, <HI>Prop.</HI> 1. And therefore mu&s;t the fall of it be the la&s;t-end of that <HI>Roman</HI> Domi|nation, and not the la&s;t-end of the Favourers of it only. And then how incon&s;i&s;tent is it, to make the burning of <HI>Rome,</HI> in a Domination quite contrary to that Church-rule, which is cal|led <HI>Babylon,</HI> to be the ruine of <HI>Babylon?</HI></P>
<P N="13">13. To conclude, <HI>Grotius</HI>'s Explication of the Characters of falling <HI>Babylon,</HI> do &s;ome of them &s;uppo&s;e, That <HI>Rome</HI> at the ta|king it by <HI>Totila,</HI> was actually at that time a Seat of Empire; and the re&s;t, That it was a Pagan City; neither of which were true. The de&s;olation of it, he under&s;tands only of the lo&s;s of the Imperial Maje&s;ty of it, the di&s;tinction of the People of God from it; and the name of <HI>Babylon,</HI> he interprets of its being a Pagan City. Now <HI>Rome</HI> had not actually been the Seat of the Empire for above an hundred years before: <HI>Ravenna</HI> was the con&s;tant re&s;idence of the Emperours, and Kings of the <HI>Goths,</HI> and had left off being a Pagan City ever &s;ince the pub|lick Reformation of it by <HI>Con&s;tantine:</HI> for a few Pagan Temples cannot make the contrary Government of a City have the name of a Pagan City.</P>
<P>Here then we have a &s;ufficient earne&s;t of what <HI>Grotius</HI> is ca|pable of venturing at in the Interpretation of the&s;e Vi&s;ions, and is enough to prevent all the danger of being over-born in any thing here by the Authority of his Judgment only.</P>
<PB N="24" REF="44">
<P> And the mo&s;t <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Cornel. &agrave; Lapide</HI> in cap. 17. Apocalyp&s;. v. 2. <HI>Ex dictis patet,</HI> non e&s;&s;e probabile, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> From what has been &s;aid, it appears, That it is not probable, what a Learned Man has imagined, <HI>viz.</HI> That tho&s;e things which we meet with in this, and the following Chapter, may be under|&s;tood of the Sacking of <HI>Rome</HI> by <HI>Alaricus, Gen&s;ericus, Odoacer,</HI> and <HI>Totila;</HI> for tho&s;e Exploits were not done by Ten Kings, <HI>(as it is in the Text),</HI> but by &s;ingle Kings.&mdash;Nor were they &s;o con&s;iderable, as that &s;hall be, which is de&s;cribed in the following Chapter; that is, <HI>the la&s;t,</HI> and <HI>never-before-parallell'd</HI> Ruine of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>So al&s;o <HI>Malvenda,</HI> pag. 186. in cap. 19. v. 9. Apocalyp.&mdash;It is mani|fe&s;t, That this denotes the burning of <HI>Babylon,</HI> that is, of <HI>Rome in the end of the World.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Idem,</HI> pag. 187. <HI>Equidem &s;i cuncta, &amp;c.&mdash;</HI>For if what the H. Evangeli&s;t has delivered from the 11th ver&s;e (Chap. 18. <HI>Apocal.)</HI> be ob&s;erved,&mdash;one may &s;ee very plainly from thence, That <HI>John</HI> did undoubtedly pro|phe&s;ie of that &s;tate in which <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hould be about the end of the World.</P>
<P><HI>Bellarmin.</HI> lib. 4. de Pontif. cap. 4.&mdash;Nor is it any Objection again&s;t this, That <HI>Rome</HI> is to be laid wa&s;te, and burnt, according to <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 16. For this will not be till about the end of the World.</P>
<P><HI>Ribera</HI> in cap. 18. Apoc. v. 21.&mdash;But the Greatne&s;s of the Stone &s;ignifies &s;omething more, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>Babylon</HI> is to be utterly de&s;troyed,&mdash;&s;o that there &s;hall be no foot&s;teps of it to be &s;een. And v. 22.&mdash;After this manner do the Prophets u&s;ually &s;peak of Cities that are ruined. <HI>Jerem.</HI> 25.</P>
<P><HI>Malvenda</HI> de Antichri&s;to, pag. 185.&mdash;The fir&s;t Opinion, <HI>(viz.</HI> That <HI>Rome</HI> will be an Idolatrous Harlot in the time of Antichri&s;t) is probable, becau&s;e <HI>Rome,</HI> which is to be de&s;troy'd about the end of the World, mu&s;t be de&s;troy'd for &s;ome Crime again&s;t the Church of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Ribera,</HI> pag. 455. in cap. 14. Apoc. num. 44.&mdash;For that <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hall be utterly burnt, not only for its former &s;ins, but al&s;o for tho&s;e which it &s;hall commit in the la&s;t times, is <HI>&s;o manife&s;tly</HI> to be known from the&s;e words of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> that the <HI>&s;illie&s;t man in the world cannot deny it.</HI></P></NOTE> Eminent of the <HI>Roman</HI> Interpreters do al&s;o agree in this Opinion, and &s;hew it to be the mind of the <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> Notat. 13. Prooemial.&mdash;The Ancient Fathers&mdash;did agree, That the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire &s;hall continue till the City of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hall be burnt with corporeal Fire; and that al&s;o by Ten Kings.</NOTE> An|cient Fathers.</P>
<P>It is a great confirmation of the evidence of the&s;e inconve|niences again&s;t the making <HI>Babylon Rome-</HI>Heathen, That they have forc'd the mo&s;t judicious and ingenuous of the <HI>Roman</HI> Inter|preters rather to venture upon applying all to the City of <HI>Rome</HI> in an Apo&s;tacy from the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, about the end of the World, for three years and an half, acording to the time of forty two months, or twelve hundred and &s;ixty days, a&s;&s;igned for the Reign of <HI>the Bea&s;t;</HI> tho' they have thereby manife&s;tly endangered the Two Chief Notes of their Church, that is, <HI>&V;niver&s;ality</HI> and <HI>Infallibility:</HI> For <HI>Babylon</HI> mu&s;t then &s;educe All Nations, and All the Kings of the Earth; which mu&s;t at lea&s;t &s;ignifie all the Nations within the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire, which mu&s;t be va&s;tly greater than the re&s;t of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church: and then it would have the Authority of <HI>Rome</HI> it &s;elf at that time, and of all its Empire, to make it a fallible and deluding <HI>Roman</HI> Church, greater than any remaining part of that Church.</P>
<P>But the certain Ob&s;tacles again&s;t this are, fir&s;t, That <HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t thus be &s;uppo&s;ed to get the Conque&s;t of all Nations, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 18.</NOTE> and of all the Kings of the Earth, within three years time, (for that is made to be the time of her Reign); and not only to get &s;uch a miraculous Conque&s;t in that time, but al&s;o to make all Nations own her Idolatry in that &s;pace of time; which mu&s;t be a far greater Miracle than ever God <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 2.</NOTE> yet &s;uffered the Devil to work in the World; and that al&s;o again&s;t all the Light and Re&s;olution of mens Con&s;ciences to the contrary, which is a more difficult matter to bend again&s;t the Natural Cour&s;e of it, than the &s;ubject-matter of any other Miracle.</P>
<P><HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o by this, be &s;uppo&s;ed to advance all Mer|chants to an incredible Stock of Wealth, and Riches, with|in <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 18. 15.</NOTE> the &s;pace of three years and an half, by Foreign Traf|fique with her: For the&s;e Merchants are to be all that trade by Sea, and the Great Men, or Princes of the Earth. And how mon&s;trous a thing is this to think of Foreign Mer|chants <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 17.</NOTE> within &s;o &s;hort a time, when the bu&s;ine&s;s of but one
<PB N="25" REF="44"> ordinary Voyage does take up the be&s;t part of one of tho&s;e years?</P>
<P>This the chief Author of this Opinion, <HI>Ribera,</HI> does in|genuou&s;ly confe&s;s to be a very hard thing to imagine the manner of; and that He him&s;elf does account it a wonder|ful and miraculous thing; and thereby does &s;eem to al|low us the liberty of taking it for a kind of incredible thing, as Miracles before they are done are generally account|ed to be.</P>
<P>And then this makes it at lea&s;t very highly probable, That the time of forty two months, or of one thou&s;and two hun|dred and &s;ixty days of the Reign of <HI>Babylon,</HI> with <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> who carries her, and to who&s;e Seven Heads &s;he is always fixed, mu&s;t be under&s;tood in &s;uch a my&s;tical &s;en&s;e, as will give time enough for the things that are de&s;cribed to be done in that Reign, and according to the u&s;e of &s;uch parts of time in a my&s;tical &s;en&s;e among&s;t the Prophets, by <HI>Rule</HI> 3. which will make the time of <HI>Babylon</HI> to begin many Ages before the end of the World.</P>
<P>From hence then it appears, That we have this encou|ragement already for our hopes of a clear Determination of the Application of this Prophecy, <HI>(viz.)</HI> That there are but three ways yet pitched upon for the Application of it; that is, to <HI>Rome-</HI>Pagan, to <HI>Rome-</HI>Chri&s;tian, and to <HI>Rome</HI> about the end of the World: The fir&s;t of which has been found to be very Ab&s;urd, and the la&s;t Incredible. And this is an inviting fore-ta&s;t of the &s;atisfaction that may be expected from the more orderly and cautious Examinati|on of the Grounds of all clear Determinations concerning the&s;e Vi&s;ions.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="26" REF="45">
<PB N="27" REF="45">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Inferences drawn from the former Chapter, to di&s;cover the Nature of the Three la&s;t Heads of the Bea&s;t, and the time of the Reign of the la&s;t, called,</HI> The Bea&s;t. <HI>An Account of the Author's Method.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE determination of the Reign of <HI>Babylon</HI> to the times after the end of <HI>Rome-Pagan,</HI> which &s;eems now to be unque&s;tionable, does offer a very fair light for &s;ome general di&s;coveries about the My&s;tery of the Bea&s;t, and his Heads, which &s;eem by the order of them to be de&s;igned to be the Clue to direct us in the intricate Mazes of the&s;e Vi&s;ions.</P>
<P>For <HI>Babylon</HI> and <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> are repre&s;ented as in&s;eparable Com|panions in the 17th Chapter. <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> &s;eems to be confined to that City by his Heads, which are &s;aid to be the &s;even Hills up|on which the City is &s;eated. And &s;ince it is already known what City <HI>Babylon</HI> is, it cannot then be doubted but that <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> who is &s;aid to be a King, mu&s;t be the King of that City. So that if the Reign of <HI>Babylon</HI> has been clearly proved to be after the time of <HI>Rome-</HI>Pagan, the Reign of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o be al|lowed to be as long after that time.</P>
<P>Now if any part of the Reign of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> was in being &s;o long after the time of the Vi&s;ion, this does plainly determine what kind of Kings the Heads of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t be, who&s;e Suc|ce&s;&s;ions &s;eem to be given on purpo&s;e to mea&s;ure out the time betwixt the date of the Vi&s;ion, and the appearance of the la&s;t of them in Rule, called <HI>The Bea&s;t;</HI> for <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> is determined by the Prophecy to be the third King in order after Him who reigned at the time of the Vi&s;ion. He is &s;aid to be an Eighth to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 11.</NOTE> him that was a Sixth at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>From hence would any conclude, That &s;ince the eighth of the&s;e Kings, or <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> is found to be in Rule after the time of <HI>Rome-</HI>Pagan, that is, &s;ome hundreds of years after the time of the Vi&s;ion, that His Reign, and the other two Reigns before him from the time of the Vi&s;ion in St. <HI>John</HI>'s days, could not po&s;|&s;ibly be the Reign of three &s;ingle per&s;ons only; for there were near three hundred years betwixt the time of the Vi&s;ion, and
<PB N="28" REF="46"> the full end of <HI>Rome</HI> Pagan, before which the Reign of <HI>Babylon</HI> and <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> have been proved impo&s;&s;ible to be: And within that &s;pace of time there were above thirty Succe&s;&s;ions of &s;ingle Per&s;ons in the <HI>Roman</HI> Throne.</P>
<P>It would therefore next be nece&s;&s;ary to enquire from the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Hi&s;tory, what el&s;e the fir&s;t of the&s;e three Kings, who is &s;aid to Reign at the time of the Vi&s;ion, could po&s;&s;ibly be. It will appear from thence, that there was no other King of <HI>Rome</HI> at that time, but a &s;ingle Emperour. Wherefore &s;ince it has been found impo&s;&s;ible, that it &s;hould be the &s;ingle per&s;on of that Em|perour, who is meant by the King then Reigning; there is no|thing el&s;e that can be meant by it, but that form of the Supreme Government, which the Emperour's Title gave name to, or the Imperial Government then in power. And con&s;equently, by the &s;ame rea&s;on, mu&s;t all the three Kings, of which <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> is &s;aid to be the 8th, or la&s;t, be &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of <HI>Roman</HI> Government from the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>Since therefore the fir&s;t of the&s;e three Kings is known to be the Imperial Government in the days of St. <HI>John;</HI> all that &s;eems needful to be done to determine the time, and the particular form of <HI>Roman</HI> Government, that is called <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> is to en|quire from Hi&s;tory, what &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes there have been in the <HI>Roman</HI> Government &s;ince the time of the Vi&s;ion. For the next Change but one to the Imperial Government in tho&s;e days, mu&s;t certainly be <HI>the Bea&s;t.</HI> And <HI>Bellarmin</HI> is &s;o far of the &s;ame mind in this, That according to him, the true &s;tate of the dif|ference betwixt them and us in this Affair, is, whether the Im|perial Government at the time of the Vi&s;ion has ever &s;ince that time been cut off, which makes him take &s;uch pains to prove, That the &s;ame Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> Government continues unchanged to this day: And thus all the difficulty that remains, &s;eems according to him to be no more than to enquire after, and rightly judge of the matter of Fact from Hi&s;tory. For he grants, that nothing can be meant by <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> his Heads, and Horns, but <HI>Roman</HI> Power: Tho' he takes no notice of the di&s;tinction, and order of Succe&s;&s;ion among&s;t them.</P>
<P>THE SEEMING evidence of the Conclu&s;ions before men|tioned, even in the judgment of the mo&s;t Zealous, and the mo&s;t able Defender of the <HI>Roman</HI> Intere&s;t, is a very &s;atisfactory proof, that
<PB N="29" REF="46"> the Angel, that offered that Explication of the My&s;tery to the Apo&s;tle, did really intend to be under&s;tood, according as one would expect from the promi&s;e of an Explication of a My&s;tery from &s;o Divine a Per&s;on. And this is a great encouragement to any, that is willing to take the pains for it, to &s;earch after the true means to determine the right &s;en&s;e of this Explication. The Angel fir&s;t promi&s;es to unfold a My&s;tery, begins it in very known Expre&s;&s;ions, goes on in other Characters, that &s;eem to be clear. Who would not then po&s;itively conclude with him|&s;elf, that the main &s;trokes, and My&s;tical Characters in which it is expre&s;&s;ed, mu&s;t certainly be intelligible enough by &s;ome means in our power, e&s;pecially when we find &s;o many Excita|tions in this Prophecy to under&s;tand it?</P>
<P>But I &s;aw &s;o many mi&s;carriages in attempts in this way, and could find &s;o little clear &s;atisfaction in the mo&s;t cautious Inter|pretations, that I was afraid of nothing more, than of being &s;a|tisfied about the&s;e things too &s;oon. There are &s;uch fair Ap|pearances, and grounds for &s;trong Pre&s;umptions, That the greate&s;t danger lies in being too ready to clo&s;e with a &s;eemingly obvious Sen&s;e of the Angel's Explication. My aim was at a&s;&s;u|rance in the&s;e matters; and the be&s;t way for that, I concluded to be, To &s;earch for difficulties to counterpoi&s;e the too much prone|ne&s;s of my Inclination to ha&s;ten to a determination. There &s;eemed to be a great variety of &s;hows of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> which <HI>Grotius</HI> makes a great advantage of to the baffling of all the force of the be&s;t Demon&s;trations, drawn from the Synchroni&s;ms of the &s;everal de&s;criptions of it in the &s;everal Chapters.</P>
<P>There &s;eems al&s;o to be a great ambiguity in the notion of <HI>The Bea&s;t.</HI> There are no di&s;tingui&s;hing Characters of the Heads from <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> him&s;elf, nor of their Nature in general, nor of their Con&s;titutive differences from one another; and it &s;eem|ed but a pre&s;umption to make all the re&s;t of the Heads to take their determinate form from what was di&s;covered to be the na|ture of the &s;ixth Head; upon which neverthele&s;s does depend all the hopes of coming to a particular knowledge of the time of the Reign of <HI>The Bea&s;t:</HI> and without the knowledge of the particular time of that Reign, it is in vain to think of any thing of this nature.</P>
<P>The&s;e Con&s;iderations made me conclude, That the Angel's Explication did &s;uppo&s;e, and direct to &s;ome other known Key
<PB N="30" REF="47"> to come to a full under&s;tanding of his mind. It was obvious thereupon to apprehend, that <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> and his Heads, and Horns, being very my&s;tical kind of Expre&s;&s;ions, it was nece&s;&s;a|ry, for the clearer knowledge of them, to con&s;ult the common acceptation of them among&s;t the Ancient Prophets in like mat|ters to the&s;e here before us, according to <HI>Rule</HI> 2.</P>
<P>I was &s;oon &s;atisfied in this. I found by the unanimous <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P>BI&s;hop <HI>Andrews,</HI> p. 234. <HI>Re&s;pon&s;. ad Bellarm. Apolog.</HI> <Q>&s;peaking of Saint <HI>John</HI> in the <HI>Revelations.&mdash;</HI>He borrows that way of &s;peaking from <HI>Daniel,</HI> of whom he is almo&s;t every-where an Imitator. And imme|diately after, <HI>Vix enim reperias apud</HI> Joannem, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> You &s;hall &s;carce find a Phra&s;e in the <HI>Revelations</HI> of St. <HI>John,</HI> that is not taken out of <HI>Daniel,</HI> or &s;ome other Prophet.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Bellarmin,</HI> l. 3. de Pontif. c. 5. <HI>Jum vero,</HI> Daniel, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> <Q>Now <HI>Daniel</HI> in the 7th Chapter of that Prophecy, does very clearly de&s;cribe the &s;ame Four Kingdoms by Four <HI>Bea&s;ts,</HI> that is, the &s;ame with tho&s;e Four in his 2d Chapter, and which are the &s;ame <HI>Four Bea&s;ts</HI> that are mentioned in the De&s;cription of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> of the <HI>Revelations.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Bla&s;. Viega,</HI> in cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> v. 1, 2. <Q><HI>Sciendum e&s;t</HI> Danieli, <HI>cap.</HI> 7, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> It is to be con&s;idered, that there was a Vi&s;ion like to this, &s;hown to <HI>Da|niel</HI> in the 7th Chapter of that Prophecy, where the bu&s;ine&s;s is about Antichri&s;t, upon the Explication of which this Vi&s;ion of ours here does depend.</Q></P>
<P>See Mr. <HI>Medes</HI> Di&s;cour&s;e, <HI>Regnum quartum</HI> Danielis <HI>e&s;t Regnum</HI> Roma|norum.</P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar.</HI> &s;ect. 3. cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> v. 1.</P>
<P><Q><HI>Marina Be&s;tia</HI> (cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.)</HI> Evidenter <HI>re&s;picit quartam</HI> Be&s;tiam Da|nielis, <HI>cap.</HI> 7. &amp;c. <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> that aro&s;e out of the Sea (cap. 13. <HI>Revel.)</HI> does <HI>evidently</HI> relate to the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,&mdash;Quae etiam quatuor Regna, &s;ive Imperia (&s;c. in</HI> 7^o. <HI>cap.</HI> Dan.) du|bium non e&s;t <HI>in &s;tatu&agrave; ill&acirc;</HI> Danielis, <HI>cap.</HI> 2. 31. <HI>praefigurata fui&s;&s;e,&mdash;</HI>Be&s;ti|am Apocalypticam <HI>continere in &s;e tres priores Monarchias, quas dicitur apud</HI> Danielem <HI>devora&s;&s;e.</HI> Which Four Kingdoms, or Empires <HI>(viz.</HI> in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel)</HI> are unque&s;tionably foretold in the Statue, <HI>cap.</HI> 2. 31.&mdash;And <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the <HI>Revalations</HI> does contain in it (or is there de&s;cribed to be made up of) the&s;e three Monarchies, which it is &s;aid in <HI>Daniel</HI> to have devoured <HI>Idem in cap.</HI> 12. Apoc. <HI>v.</HI> 3. <HI>de</HI> 10. <HI>Cornibus.</HI></Q></P>
<P><Q><HI>&mdash;Non aliud fundamentum, &amp;c.</HI> There needs no other founda|tion for the Interpretation, but only to look out a conformable Ex|plication of it with that of the Ten Horns of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel;</HI> by which it is <HI>evident,</HI> that it &s;ignifies the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire.</Q></P>
<P><HI>See the References to the Third Chapter,</HI> Lib. 2. Note ^a. <HI>e&s;pecially</HI> Mal|venda <HI>and</HI> Ribera.</P></NOTE> con|&s;ent of Interpreters of all Parties, That the Terms of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> and his Heads, and Horns, and mo&s;t of his Characters, had a very unque&s;tionable reference to the frequent u&s;e of them about the &s;ame kind of Subject in the Prophet <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>But I was extremely &s;urprized to find al&s;o, That by the &s;ame Unanimous agreement of all the Con&s;iderable Interpreters of all Ages, excepting only &s;ome few of this la&s;t Age, it was granted, That the Terms of <HI>Bea&s;ts,</HI> and their Heads, or Horns, and indeed all other Figures and their parts &s;ignifying Domi|nion, as it is here in the&s;e Vi&s;ions, had but one con&s;tant, uni|form Signification in general all over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel;</HI> and that al&s;o in great variety of In&s;tances: And withal, That by the concurrent agreement of tho&s;e few al&s;o, that differed from the re&s;t, there needed nothing more to prove &s;uch a con&s;tant, uniform Signification of the&s;e Figures, but only this, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>The Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> or Kingdom, in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> was the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P>This gave me very confident hopes of fixing the &s;ame kind of my&s;tical Terms in the Vi&s;ions of the <HI>Apocalyps</HI> to &s;etled No|tions, and certain Definitions, and thereby of coming to &s;ome a&s;&s;urance about tho&s;e things, notwith&s;tanding all the ambigu|ous and various acceptations of the Expre&s;&s;ions, in which they were conveyed; which I accounted well worth all the clo&s;e&s;t application of my thoughts, as a thing of the mo&s;t u&s;eful importance to the World for the clear determination of the aim of this Prophecy, as well as for mine own particular &s;atisfa|ction and benefit.</P>
<P>I have therefore for this end endeavoured to demon&s;trate the con&s;tant, uniform acceptation of the Schemes of <HI>A Bea&s;t,</HI> and its parts, all over <HI>Daniel:</HI> And this requiring the certain know|ledge of the Interpretation of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> or Kingdom, in the Seventh Chapter of <HI>Daniel;</HI> and the determinate applica|tion of that, relying chiefly upon the determination of the un|doubted
<PB N="31" REF="47"> &s;ignification of the Kingdom of the Son of Man that &s;ucceeds that Fourth Kingdom; The&s;e make up the Demon|&s;tration of the de&s;ign of the Second Book from the Intrin&s;ick Ar|guments of the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> it &s;elf.</P>
<P>But the cleare&s;t proof of the &s;ignification of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the exact agreement of it with <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the <HI>Revela|tions;</HI> And that al&s;o in &s;ome &s;uch peculiar Characters among&s;t the re&s;t, as are impo&s;&s;ible to belong to more than one and the &s;ame Kingdom, and to the &s;ame time of that Kingdom: This therefore is added to the other Evidences that are drawn from the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> it &s;elf, as a mo&s;t undoubted confirma|tion, That the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> or Kingdom in <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the King|dom of the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P>Who indeed would not be ready to conclude with him&s;elf, before ever he comes to examine the grounds that there is for it, That &s;o general an agreement of all the differing Parties of In|terpreters for &s;o many Ages, as has been ob&s;erved, about My&s;ti|cal Expre&s;&s;ions, where there is &s;o great a &s;cope for Fancy to ex|patiate in, mu&s;t certainly have very plain and expre&s;s grounds for it in the Prophetical Writings, and very obvious to common ob&s;ervation? And this is another con&s;iderable thing to fortify the a&s;&s;urance that the &s;trength of the Proof it &s;elf does offer.</P>
<P>But the Characters in which <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the <HI>Revelations</HI> does &s;o exactly agree with tho&s;e of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and which are the &s;ure&s;t Proof, That that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel</HI> mu&s;t be the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans,</HI> are fetched from &s;everal di&s;tinct Shews of the <HI>Apocalyptick Bea&s;t</HI> in &s;everal Chapters: And the&s;e &s;everal Shows are by &s;ome Learned Men judged to be the Shows of different <HI>Bea&s;ts;</HI> whereas the proof of the exact agreement of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel,</HI> with that in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> from the &s;e|veral Characters of tho&s;e different Shows, does &s;uppo&s;e it to be but one and the &s;ame <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> in all tho&s;e Chapters.</P>
<P>This made it nece&s;&s;ary to &s;ettle the notion of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the 17th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and to &s;hew, that all the men|tions of that which is called <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in all the other Chapters, are but &s;o many Accounts of that one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> that it is found in in the 17th Chapter: And that therefore all the &s;everal Characters of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in tho&s;e &s;e|veral Chapters, are but the Characters of one and the &s;ame thing. And this it was requi&s;ite to prefix in the Fir&s;t Book
<PB N="32" REF="48"> before all other rea&s;onings that are fetched from the nature of that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> in the following Di&s;cour&s;es.</P>
<P>After the determination of the con&s;tant and &s;etled &s;ignifica|tion of a <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> and of the parts of it &s;ignifying Dominion, from the frequent u&s;e of tho&s;e Schemes in <HI>Daniel;</HI> The bu&s;ine&s;s of the Third Book is to apply the&s;e general Notions to <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and to the parts of it: And from the known &s;ignification of that Head of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> which in the Prophecy is &s;aid to reign at the time of the Vi&s;ion; and from the imme|diate Succe&s;&s;ion of the other two Reigns after it, to determine the time of that particular &s;tate of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> which is by way of eminency called <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> alone by it &s;elf, and the Eighth King; and which is the Great Subject of the&s;e Vi&s;ions.</P>
<P>And then the Explication of all the Uncouth Characters of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> is the la&s;t Fini&s;hing-work of this De&s;ign in the Fourth Book.</P>
<P>And this may give the Reader a di&s;tinct and comprehen&s;ive view of my whole De&s;ign at once, and of the Order of my Me|thod towards it.</P>
<PB N="33" REF="48">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="34" REF="49">
<HEAD>CHAP. V. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The di&s;tinct Notion of</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>enquired into. The Fourth Propo&s;ition, Every one of the Eight Kings, is one of tho&s;e called the Seven</HI> in general, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 10, 11. <HI>The Eighth King one of Seven, that were pa&s;t, revived. The Fifth Propo&s;ition, Every one of the Eight Kings, is one of the Seven Heads.</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>is</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>under the La&s;t Head. The Sixth Propo&s;ition, with its Corollaries. The Seventh Pro|po&s;ition,</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>is a Sovereign Power of</HI> Rome <HI>in its Idolatrous Antichri&s;tian State.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE foundation of all &s;atisfaction about the certain time of that Idolatrous Reign of <HI>Rome,</HI> that is &s;ignified by <HI>Baby|lon,</HI> does &s;eem to depend wholly upon the means that are offe|red from the Angel's Explication to determine the time of the Reign of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> which appears all over the Prophecy with that City as its in&s;eparable Companion. There &s;eems to be no other means left to fix that particular time, but the Succe&s;&s;ion of the Heads of <HI>The Bea&s;t;</HI> the three la&s;t Reigns of which &s;eem to be on purpo&s;e &s;ingled out from the general &s;um of the other five, and to be di&s;tinctly mentioned one after another, for no other end, but to direct us from the knowledge of the fir&s;t of the three (&s;aid then to be in Rule, when the&s;e words were &s;poken, and &s;o might ea&s;ily be known) to determine the parti|cular time of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> who is made to be the next Reign but one after that Ruling-Power, which was then in pre&s;ent po&s;|&s;e&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>But before any thing can be well &s;etled upon this bottom, the u&s;e of the Term of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t be fir&s;t &s;ufficiently cleared. For it &s;eems to have an ambiguous Signification in it, which may defeat all our hopes of fixing it to any determinate mean|ing.</P>
<P>Sometimes it &s;eems to &s;ignify a thing common to all the Seven Heads, when it is repre&s;ented as the common Subject of
<PB N="35" REF="49"> them all in their &s;everal &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Reigns; and &s;ometimes it &s;eems to &s;ignify nothing but one of its Heads in di&s;tinction to all the re&s;t. Wherefore it &s;eems to be the fir&s;t thing that is to be enquired after, Whether there can be any determinate and fixed &s;ignification &s;etled upon the u&s;e of this Expre&s;&s;ion: And the fear of mi&s;taking in &s;o fundamental a Point, made me think it nece&s;&s;ary to be very cautious of every &s;tep I made in it, and to have a di&s;tinct comprehen&s;ion of it, before I &s;etled my &s;elf upon it.</P>
<P>For this purpo&s;e I found it requi&s;ite to begin with this <HI>Propo|&s;ition</HI> as the ground of all that was to follow.</P>
<Q><HI>Every one of the Eight Kings reckon'd up in order</HI> (Rev. 17. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 4.</NOTE> 10, 11.) <HI>is one of tho&s;e called the Seven Kings in general,</HI> v. 10.</Q>
<P>Nothing can well be more plainly &s;ignified, than this in the Text after this manner; <HI>They are Seven Kings, Five are fallen, one</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 10, 11.</NOTE> <HI>is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, mu&s;t continue a &s;hort &s;pace; and the Eighth is of the Seven.</HI> What can more plainly &s;ignify the parting the whole &s;um of the Seven Kings men|tioned ju&s;t before, into <HI>five,</HI> and <HI>one,</HI> and <HI>the other;</HI> and <HI>an Eighth which is one of tho&s;e Seven?</HI> For who would ever under|&s;tand tho&s;e words otherwi&s;e, than in this plain &s;en&s;e. They are <HI>Seven</HI> Kings, <HI>Five</HI> of which <HI>Seven</HI> are <HI>fallen; One</HI> of them <HI>is,</HI> the <HI>other</HI> of the <HI>Seven</HI> is <HI>not yet come,</HI> &amp;c. And there is an <HI>Eighth,</HI> who <HI>yet</HI> is one of tho&s;e <HI>Seven</HI> before mentioned. So that every one of the <HI>Eight</HI> is one of the <HI>Seven,</HI> and therefore can there be but <HI>Seven Kings</HI> in all.</P>
<P>This indeed &s;eems to be &s;o very plain and nece&s;&s;ary, that it may be wondered why it &s;hould not be rather &s;uppos'd, than endeavoured to be proved, &s;ince there &s;eems to be no manner of ground for a doubt about it, but only upon the account of the <HI>Eighth King;</HI> who yet (to make all clear) is &s;aid expre&s;ly to be an <HI>Eighth</HI> which was one of the <HI>Seven,</HI> and is &s;o granted to be without di&s;pute. But yet it was thought needful to &s;e|cure this by the&s;e Reflexions upon it, becau&s;e there is a con|&s;iderable Authority again&s;t it in defence of a particular Hypo|the&s;is.</P>
<PB N="36" REF="50">
<P> That which is alledged from the Text to make it capable of another &s;en&s;e, is, <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Dr. <HI>More,</HI> Vol. 1. p. 647. <HI>Brightman,</HI> in V. 10. c. 17. Apoc.</NOTE> That the 7th King in the Order, is called, <HI>the other,</HI> and not the 7th; and that therefore he may be a King of a different nature, from tho&s;e Seven Kings which are &s;aid to be the Seven Heads; becau&s;e <GAP DESC="foreign"> in the <HI>Greek</HI> &s;igni|fies &s;ometimes a thing of another nature: And that to make up the number of tho&s;e Seven Kings, that are the Seven Heads, the 8th is &s;aid to be one of tho&s;e Seven.</P>
<P>But it is plain enough, that <HI>the other</HI> in that place denotes no new quality in the 7th King, but only refers to the &s;ignification of the number of the King ju&s;t before him, who is called <HI>one;</HI> And that King is called <HI>one</HI> by a very proper and familiar way of Speech, without any ground for the lea&s;t my&s;tery in it, &s;uch as this fol|lowing would now be accounted: The Seven Heads are Seven Kings, <HI>five</HI> are pa&s;t, <HI>one</HI> is at this pre&s;ent; after which would very naturally follow, and <HI>the other</HI> is not yet come: That is, <HI>the other of the &s;even,</HI> which is an u&s;ual and ordinary way of &s;peaking, if not more proper, than to &s;ay, <HI>five</HI> are pa&s;t, the <HI>&s;ixth</HI> is at pre&s;ent, and the <HI>&s;eventh</HI> is not yet come. And certainly the 7th would in the latter Example appear to be nothing but one of <HI>the &s;even</HI> Kings, who had at fir&s;t been called the &s;even Heads.</P>
<P>When with this we con&s;ider there is mention here made of an 8th, Can any thing be more manife&s;t, than that <HI>the other</HI> ju&s;t before it, is as certainly the 7th, as if it had been expre&s;ly &s;o called? and that the <HI>one</HI> before that, is the &s;ame with the 6th? And then of what can they po&s;&s;ibly be the Sixth, or the Seventh, but of tho&s;e Seven Kings, which were ju&s;t before &s;aid to be the &s;even Heads, and which immediately after the men|tion of them, were divided into <HI>five, one,</HI> and this <HI>other?</HI> There is certainly no manner of ground to think the <HI>one</HI> in this divi&s;ion, to be one of the Seven, more than <HI>the other.</HI></P>
<P>As for the Critici&s;m of <GAP DESC="foreign">, It is known, that <GAP DESC="foreign"> is ordinarily u&s;ed to &s;ignify another thing, or per&s;on individu|ally di&s;tinct from one mentioned before, without any other new quality in the One di&s;tinct from the Other, which had been be|fore &s;poken of, <HI>Matt.</HI> 4. 21. and 5. 39. and 12. 13. and 13. 8. Where the Seed was the &s;ame before it was Sown, and yet called <HI>other</HI> Seed. And to the &s;ame purpo&s;e every where in the <HI>New Te&s;tament.</HI> But that which does the mo&s;t plainly expre&s;s the &s;ame quality in the thing, which is called <GAP DESC="foreign">, in re&s;pect
<PB N="37" REF="50"> of that which hath been mentioned before it, is that known By|word of <HI>Ari&s;totle</HI> in his <HI>Ethicks,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">. A Friend is another &s;elf. And how&s;oever Philo&s;ophers may di|&s;tingui&s;h betwixt <GAP DESC="foreign">, and <GAP DESC="foreign">, yet in common &s;peech, they are promi&s;cuou&s;ly u&s;ed for one another.</P>
<P>I have in&s;i&s;ted the longer upon the perfect clearing of this, becau&s;e it is the foundation of all the Hi&s;torical Application that can be made of the 8th King, called <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> which is the great bu&s;ine&s;s of all our &s;earch; and I hope there needs no more now to make it unque&s;tionable, that the Seventh King is one of the <HI>whole &s;even</HI> mentioned before in <HI>general,</HI> in the fir&s;t words of the 10th <HI>Ver&s;e;</HI> and &s;o that every one of the Eighth Kings is al&s;o one of tho&s;e &s;ame Seven, &s;ince the Eighth is ex|pre&s;ly &s;aid to be one of the Seven.</P>
<P>To this the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Interpreters do generally agree. They <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> make the fir&s;t &s;even Kings to be the &s;even Heads, and the Eighth to be the Devil, common to them all; and &s;o no new Head, or new King di&s;tinct from tho&s;e &s;even, that are mentioned before him.</P>
<P>To recompence the length of the former Di&s;cour&s;e, here are the&s;e following fruits of it:</P>
<Q>The Eighth King is one of the &s;even that had been in Rule before it, and <MILESTONE UNIT="Corollar."> was returned into Power again.</Q>
<P>For the Eighth King is one of the &s;ame whole Seven men|tioned in general, that the re&s;t are comprehended in (by Prop. 4.) And therefore the whole Eight are really but Seven di&s;tinct Kings; and the Eighth comes after Seven of them di&s;tinctly reckoned up before him. The Eighth mu&s;t therefore be one of tho&s;e former Seven returned into Power again; according as it is intimated of him, That he is one of the Seven.</P>
<P>The <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> do apply that term, <HI>And is of the &s;even,</HI> to the Devil, as being in all the other Seven Kings. But then they make <HI>the being of the &s;even,</HI> the &s;ame with <HI>the being in the &s;even;</HI> whereas the word in the Original, <GAP DESC="foreign">, does properly &s;ignify the being one of that number of Seven ju&s;t before men|tioned, e&s;pecially when he appears here to be an Eighth in a &s;ucce&s;&s;ive order of Kings. For that &s;hows him to be a King
<PB N="38" REF="51"> alone by him&s;elf <HI>after the time</HI> of the former Seven Reigns; <HI>but yet one of them:</HI> And &s;o mu&s;t be one of them returned again.</P>
<P>It may next be ob&s;erved, That</P>
<Q><HI>Every one of the Eight Kings</HI> (Rev. 17. 10, 11.) <HI>is repre&s;ented by</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 5.</NOTE> <HI>one of the &s;even Heads of the Bea&s;t.</HI></Q>
<P>For every one of tho&s;e Eight Kings, is one of tho&s;e called the Seven Kings in General (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 4.): And tho&s;e called the Seven Kings in General, <HI>v.</HI> 10. are &s;aid to be the Seven Heads, as well as the Seven Hills are. The Text in the Ori|ginal is, <HI>The &s;even Heads are &s;even Mountains&mdash;and are &s;even</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">.&mdash;</NOTE> <HI>Kings,</HI> v. 9, 10. The Hills and Kings have the very &s;ame word <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>are,</HI> to affirm them equally to be the &s;even Heads, as it is al&s;o almo&s;t unanimou&s;ly agreed upon by all Interpreters.</P>
<P>And the eighth King is called <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> and is one of tho&s;e &s;even Kings; which denotes the relation of the &s;even Kings to the &s;even Heads of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>Wherefore every one of tho&s;e eight Kings mu&s;t be one of the &s;even Heads, that are &s;aid to be the &s;even Kings; becau&s;e every one of the eight Kings (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 4.) is one of tho&s;e &s;ame &s;even Kings, who are &s;aid to be the &s;even Heads.</P>
<P>The fear of this Con&s;equence, <HI>viz.</HI> That then the &s;eventh King mu&s;t be the &s;eventh Head, is the chief ground of that Opinion before mentioned, that would have the Seventh King in the Order to be none of tho&s;e &s;even Kings, which are ju&s;t before called the &s;even Kings in General, tho immediately after the mention of the whole &s;even in General, follows the account of them in order; and in that order the &s;eventh King has its proper place. But they will have the eighth King to be the &s;eventh Head of the Bea&s;t, which will appear from the follow|ing <HI>Corollary</HI> to be incon&s;i&s;tent with the plain expre&s;&s;ions of the Text.</P>
<Q>The Eighth King is one of the Seven Heads of the Bea&s;t, that was <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> pa&s;t, and revived again.</Q>
<P>For the Eighth King was one of the Seven Kings that was pa&s;t, and was returned into Power again by <HI>Coroll. Prop.</HI> 4. And all tho&s;e &s;even Kings reckoned up as pa&s;t before him, have been
<PB N="39" REF="51"> found to be &s;o many Heads of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 5.) Where|fore the eighth King mu&s;t be one of tho&s;e pa&s;t &s;even Heads that was revived again, &s;ince the eighth King was one of tho&s;e &s;even Heads (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 5.) And yet came after the time of them all: And therefore mu&s;t be one of them revived again.</P>
<P>This is &s;o far agreed to by tho&s;e who make the eighth King the &s;eventh Head, That they apprehend it to be the &s;ixth Head healed of a deadly wound: But it is manife&s;t, That by this, they make but &s;ix Heads upon <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in&s;tead of &s;even. For the Head of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> that was &s;een wounded to death, and healed again in the <HI>13th Chap. v.</HI> 3. could be but one and the &s;ame Head. It is ab&s;urd to make an Head wounded, and heal|ed again, to be more than one Head: And therefore does the Prophet de&s;cribe it but as one and the &s;ame Head. Wherefore &s;ince the maintainers of this Opinion do account the &s;ixth King of the &s;even to be the &s;ixth Head, and the &s;eventh King to be no Head, the eighth King, which is but the healing of the &s;ixth Head, cannot encrea&s;e the number; and &s;o they come at la&s;t to make but &s;ix Heads in all: For their &s;eventh Head, is but the &s;ixth healed again, whereas there were &s;even really di&s;tinct Heads &s;een in the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>By the preceding <HI>Corollary</HI> it appears, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Eighth King, called</HI> The Bea&s;t, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 11. <HI>&s;ignifies</HI> The Bea&s;t <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>with that Head only which was la&s;t in Rule.</HI></Q>
<P>For the eighth King is one of the &s;even Heads of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> that was pa&s;t, and revived again (by <HI>Corol. Prop.</HI> 5.) and was the eighth after the &s;even; and therefore mu&s;t be that Head of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> that was la&s;t in Rule.</P>
<P>Wherefore &s;ince the eighth King is called <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> and yet is found really to be but one Head of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> That term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> can &s;ignify nothing, but <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> with that particular Head only. And &s;o the Head is &s;aid to be <HI>the Bea&s;t;</HI> as the actions of Kings, are &s;aid to be the Actions of that People, or Nation, where they Reign.</P>
<P>This Interpretation is confirmed by the agreement of al|mo&s;t all Interpreters of all differing Parties, excepting one or two, without any Rea&s;on for their di&s;&s;ent, but only the up|holding of a particular Opinion; and among&s;t tho&s;e is that
<PB N="40" REF="52"> Opinion of <HI>Bellarmin,</HI> who would have the number <HI>Seven</HI> in this place to &s;ignifie collectively <HI>All the Emperours,</HI> becau&s;e that Seven is very u&s;ually taken in Scripture for a perfect number, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 3. de Pontif. c. 5.</NOTE> and then &s;ignifies <HI>All</HI> indefinitely, but more frequently in the <HI>Revelations</HI> than any where el&s;e: And yet all that know any thing of the difference betwixt the u&s;e of Seven when it is a perfect number, and when it is a broken number, cannot but &s;ee, that Seven here mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be taken for a definite, determinate number, by the plain di&s;tribution of it into <HI>Five, One, Another,</HI> and an <HI>Eighth</HI> which was one of the Seven; And this is &s;o common and known a thing, that there could not have been a plainer in&s;tance of the extravagancy of a Learned Man's imaginations about the mo&s;t clear and known things.</P>
<P>And yet after all, <HI>Bellarmin</HI> is &s;o far of Opinion with the re&s;t, as to affirm, That Antichri&s;t, or <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> is the la&s;t King of tho&s;e who &s;hall rule the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. <HI>Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Pontif. c.</HI> 15. Which is an agreement with the re&s;t in the preceding Con|clu&s;ion.</P>
<P>From the former Corollary, it does very immediately follow,</P>
<Q><HI>That</HI> the Bea&s;t, <HI>all over the 17th Chapter of the</HI> Revelations, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 6.</NOTE> <HI>does &s;ignifie</HI> the Bea&s;t <HI>with his la&s;t Ruling Head.</HI></Q>
<P>For <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> all over the 17th Chapter&punc; is that &s;tate of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in which he was &s;een in the 3^d ver&s;e, as does thus ap|pear:</P>
<P>After that &s;how of him, he is called all over that Chapter by the name of <HI>THE Bea&s;t,</HI> in reference to his having been &s;een before; which, in common u&s;e of Speech, determines him to be the &s;ame that had been there &s;hewn; and therefore, by <HI>Rule</HI> 1. he mu&s;t be all over the Chapter <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> that was &s;een in the 3^d ver&s;e.</P>
<P>Now of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> which was there &s;een, the Angel &s;ays, v. 8. That <HI>He was, and is not.</HI></P>
<P>And <HI>the Bea&s;t, which was, and is not,</HI> he &s;ays at the 11th ver&s;e, was the <HI>eighth King,</HI> who is known to be <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> with the la&s;t Ruling Head, <HI>(Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 5.) <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> therefore does &s;igni|fie nothing el&s;e all over the 17th Chap. <HI>Revel.</HI> but the &s;tate of it under its la&s;t Ruling Head.</P>
<PB N="41" REF="52">
<P> And tho' there were <HI>Seven Heads</HI> &s;een upon <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> yet it is expre&s;ly &s;aid, That all the other Heads would be pa&s;t before the Reign of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> or <HI>eighth King,</HI> v. 10. So that the &s;ight of him with the Seven Heads, was in effect the &s;eeing him with Six dead Heads, and <HI>One</HI> of the Seven only revived again; which is the &s;ame with the &s;ight of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> under its <HI>one la&s;t Ruling Head only.</HI></P>
<P>See then the &s;um of this Proof in &s;hort: <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> all over the 17th Chapter, is <HI>the Bea&s;t that was &s;een,</HI> v. 3. <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> that was there &s;een, had the peculiar Character of, <HI>Was, and is not;</HI> and <HI>the Bea&s;t that was, and is not,</HI> is &s;aid to be the <HI>eighth King;</HI> and the <HI>eighth King</HI> has been found to &s;ignifie nothing but <HI>the</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Corol. 2. Prop. 5.</NOTE> <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> with its la&s;t Ruling Head. Wherefore, to tye the fir&s;t part of this Chain to the la&s;t, <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> all over the 17th Chapter, is <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> with the la&s;t only of his Ruling Heads.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, &s;ince the my&s;tical meaning of the term of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> is &s;aid in one place to be the <HI>eighth King,</HI> that is, <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> under the la&s;t Ruling Head, by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 5. it mu&s;t have the &s;ame &s;ignification all over the Chapter, by <HI>Rule</HI> 3.<HI>&mdash;Babylon</HI> might as well &s;ignifie two &s;everal Cities in two different places of that Chapter, as <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> &s;everal Kings.</P>
<P>For a Te&s;timony of the great evidence of this Propo&s;ition, <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> we have the Unanimous Agreement of all Interpreters almo&s;t of all Ages, as well as of all Parties, excepting one or two of late again&s;t the Judgment of all tho&s;e, who&s;e greate&s;t Inte|re&s;t it &s;eems to be to admit of their new Contrivance, who yet will not venture upon it, meerly for their reputation. One would expect to find &s;ome very great nece&s;&s;ity alleged for another &s;en&s;e again&s;t &s;uch a &s;eeming evidence of the Text, and the confirma|tion of it by &s;o con&s;iderable a weight of Authority; and yet we do not find from <HI>Grotius</HI> the lea&s;t offer of a rea&s;on again&s;t this <NOTE PLACE="marg">In cap. 17. Apoc.</NOTE> &s;en&s;e, or for any other, to make us think that <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> may continue after his la&s;t Head in this Chapter, as he does make it to do in the time of its Ten Horns.</P>
<P>The Light of this Propo&s;ition does offer the&s;e following Con|&s;equences.</P>
<Q><P>The Bea&s;t <HI>in the 17th Chapter continues no longer than its la&s;t</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>Head.</HI></P>
<P><HI>For he lives by that Head all over that Chapter, (by</HI> Coroll. 2.
<PB N="42" REF="53"> Prop. 5.) <HI>and</HI> the Bea&s;t <HI>goes into perdition with that Head,</HI> ver. 11.</P></Q>
<Q><P><HI>The Ten Horns belong to</HI> the Bea&s;t <HI>no longer than his la&s;t Head.</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollary"></P>
<P><HI>For as they give their Kingdom to</HI> the Bea&s;t. v. 13. <HI>&s;o</HI> the Bea&s;t <HI>it &s;elf continues no longer than his la&s;t Head;</HI> Coroll. 1. Prop. 6.</P></Q>
<P>The knowledge of the <HI>Woman</HI> does acquaint us with the Countrey or Kingdom of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> her con&s;tant Confederate; and from thence it is manife&s;t, That</P>
<Q>The Bea&s;t, <HI>all over the 17th Chapter, is &s;ome particular Sove|reign</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 7.</NOTE> <HI>Power of</HI> Rome <HI>in the time of its Idolatrous Antichri|&s;tian Reign.</HI></Q>
<P>For <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> all over the 17th Chapter, is in the time of its la&s;t Ruling Head, and called the <HI>eighth King, (Prop.</HI> 6.) and therefore a particular Sovereign Power.</P>
<P>And the <HI>Woman,</HI> or <HI>Babylon,</HI> is repre&s;ented riding upon it at that time in great Maje&s;ty, and known to &s;ignifie <HI>Rome</HI> in its Idolatrous Antichri&s;tian Reign, <HI>Prop.</HI> 1. And be&s;ides, is de&s;cribed in confederacy with <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in that Chapter, v. 16, 17.</P>
<P><HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> is al&s;o &s;aid to be the <HI>eighth King,</HI> or the la&s;t Ruling Head of the Seven, which &s;ignifie the &s;even Hills of <HI>Rome,</HI> v. 9.</P>
<P>This does infallibly &s;hew <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> to be a Sovereign Power of the &s;even Hills. <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> then is tied to this City by his &s;even Heads, which are the &s;even Hills upon which it is built; and &s;o they cannot po&s;&s;ibly be &s;eparated, without <HI>Either</HI> cutting off the Heads from <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> and by con&s;equence that Head by which he lives, <HI>(Prop.</HI> 6.)<HI>&mdash;Or</HI> removing the City from the &s;even Hills upon which it is built: and therefore is it plainly im|po&s;&s;ible for <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> not to be the Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome</HI> all over the 17th Chapter.</P>
<P N="2">2. And that al&s;o &s;hews, That <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> exerci&s;es this Power over <HI>Rome</HI> in its Idolatrous Antichri&s;tian &s;tate; becau&s;e <HI>Babylon</HI> is but in that one &s;tate all over that Chapter, <HI>(Prop.</HI> 1. and <HI>Rule</HI> 3.) And the fir&s;t &s;hew of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> to which all the men|tions of <HI>the Fea&s;t</HI> afterward do relate by a Note of reference to that, has a <HI>Woman</HI> riding upon him in all that Antichri&s;tian &s;tate, which is her Character every-where el&s;e.</P>
<PB N="43" REF="53">
<P> This is &s;o plainly &s;ignified, that it is as unanimou&s;ly con&s;ent|ed to <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> in cap. 13. Apoc. &s;ect. 5. <HI>Auctores</HI> omnes, <HI>qui</HI> Romam <HI>Ethnicam,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>All Authors</HI> who judge <HI>Rome-</HI>Heathen to be meant by the name of <HI>Babylon,</HI> make <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> every-where to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.&mdash;And even tho&s;e who interpret <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> to &s;ignifie the whole multitude of wicked Men, under&s;tand it of the <HI>wicked Romans,</HI> not of tho&s;e in <HI>America,</HI> or out of the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</NOTE> by all &s;orts of Interpreters, as to almo&s;t any thing that is &s;aid of the&s;e things. <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><P>^a ALL the Maintainers of the &s;econd Opinion, which are the generality of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> with the Fathers, do all make <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> to be the times of Antichri&s;t, as the la&s;t Head.</P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> in cap. 13. Apoc. &s;ect. 5. <HI>Ii, qui</HI> (Be&s;tiam) <HI>Antichri&s;tum e&s;&s;e vo|lunt, eum con&s;tituunt ultimum e&s;&s;e</HI> Romanorum <HI>Imperatorum.</HI> Tho&s;e who make <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> to be Antichri&s;t, affirm him to be the la&s;t of the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperours.</P></NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="44" REF="54">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Manife&s;t Grounds for a &s;trong pre&s;umption, That the Term of</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>does &s;ignifie the &s;ame particular &s;tate of</HI> the Bea&s;t, <HI>all over the</HI> Revelations. <HI>The mentions of it in the 13th and 17th Chapters every way parallel.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>FOR a more full and determinate knowledge of the Nature and Characters of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> &s;o often mentioned in the&s;e Vi|&s;ions, it is very nece&s;&s;ary to examine, Whether every &s;hew of it be one and the &s;ame &s;tate of <HI>the Bea&s;t?</HI> For without &s;ome a&s;&s;u|rance of that, all our knowledge of this kind will be confined to the bounds of the 17th Chapter.</P>
<P>'Tis true, that by <HI>Rule</HI> 3. the Term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> being the &s;ame peculiar my&s;tical expre&s;&s;ion, there is great rea&s;on to judge, That it &s;ignifies every-where the &s;ame thing. But there &s;eems to be plain grounds given us to &s;u&s;pect the contrary; for there are &s;everal different &s;hews of it, as if it were purpo&s;ely de&s;igned to warn us thereby, that they were &s;o many new &s;tates of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> according to the variety of the &s;ucce&s;&s;ions of his Heads. Wherefore, in &s;earch of a more large and comprehen&s;ive know|ledge of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the 17th Chapter, one would be extreme|ly de&s;irous to find, that every mention of the &s;ame Term in all the other Chapters, did really &s;ignifie the &s;ame thing: for there|by we &s;hould have a great many more Properties and Circum|&s;tances to judge of him, and to determine his particular &s;ignifi|cation. The more Marks that one has of a Bea&s;t, the more ea&s;ie will it be to find him, and to di&s;tingui&s;h him from all others that may re&s;emble him.</P>
<P>The places where it would be judged to be the mo&s;t likely to find the Term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> to &s;ignifie the &s;ame thing with <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the 17th Chapter, are the Chapters ju&s;t <HI>before</HI> and <HI>after</HI> the 17th; and to them are we therefore directed for our fir&s;t beginning in this &s;earch.</P>
<P>And fir&s;t, The mention of <HI>the Bea&s;t, after</HI> the 17th Chapter, would be concluded could be nothing el&s;e but the continuation of the Hi&s;tory of <HI>the &s;ame Bea&s;t</HI> that is mentioned <HI>in</HI> the 17th
<PB N="45" REF="54"> Chapter: for we find no mention made of <HI>any other Bea&s;t,</HI> or of any <HI>new &s;hew of a Bea&s;t,</HI> betwixt the 17th Chapter and the 19th, where we &s;ee <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> brought upon the Stage again: And who would not thereupon conclude, That <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the 19th Chap|ter, with that Note of reference before it, did certainly &s;ignifie <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> that had been la&s;t di&s;cour&s;ed of in the 17th Chapter be|fore it? And therefore is this unanimou&s;ly agreed on among&s;t all Interpreters, That it is <HI>the &s;ame Bea&s;t</HI> in both places, as to the <HI>general Notion</HI> of <HI>the Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>And in that &s;en&s;e al&s;o is it granted to be <HI>the &s;ame Bea&s;t</HI> in the Chapters <HI>before</HI> the 17th: For it does indeed nece&s;&s;arily follow from the former; becau&s;e <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> before the 17th, mu&s;t be the &s;ame with <HI>that</HI> after it; for they have both the &s;ame peculiar Attendants, <HI>the fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> with the <HI>Image of the Bea&s;t,</HI> and <HI>the Mark</HI> of it. And therefore does <HI>Grotius,</HI> with one or two more, give general and comprehen&s;ive Notions of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> and <HI>fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> &amp;c. which are the &s;ame in all kind of &s;tates of <HI>the Bea&s;t;</HI> and the one he calls <HI>Idolatry,</HI> and the other <HI>Magick;</HI> but withal, applies the&s;e <HI>general</HI> Notions to very different things <HI>in particular,</HI> in tho&s;e &s;everal mentions of the Bea&s;t <HI>before</HI> and <HI>after</HI> the 17th Chapter. So that, in effect, he &s;till makes <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> and <HI>fal&s;e Prophet</HI> in one place, quite different things <HI>in particular,</HI> than they are in the other; and <HI>the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter,</HI> to be as different a thing from either of them: He would have the&s;e &s;eve|ral mentions of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> to be &s;o many &s;everal &s;tates of it; <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> under <HI>Ten Kings</HI> and <HI>Seven Emperours,</HI> &s;ignified by &s;o many <HI>Heads</HI> and <HI>Horns;</HI> &s;ometimes to be but <HI>One Emperour,</HI> and then to be <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> with <HI>One Head</HI> only; and <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> to be <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> with <HI>Ten Horns</HI> only, without any of its <HI>Seven Heads.</HI></P>
<P>But &s;ince there is little rea&s;on given for the proof of this, but only the divers &s;hews of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> it mu&s;t be very hard for any that is the lea&s;t impartial to &s;hut his eyes again&s;t &s;o many in|&s;tances of an exact likene&s;s and uniformity, in very particular Characters, in each of the &s;everal mentions of the&s;e Bea&s;ts, that would &s;trongly per&s;uade a man, that it was impo&s;&s;ible but that they &s;hould &s;ignifie <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame particular</HI> &s;tate of one and the &s;ame Bea&s;t. E&s;pecially, when he con&s;iders, That the Angel did very manife&s;tly intend that the&s;e Vi&s;ions &s;hould be under|&s;tood, and after &s;uch a manner as the generality of the World would conclude from the expre&s;&s;ions in them, where there is
<PB N="46" REF="55"> any plain ground for it. For example, It has been already a|greed, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII. &amp; XVII.</NOTE> That the term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify the &s;ame thing at lea&s;t <HI>in general, before, in,</HI> and <HI>after</HI> the 17th Chapter. And in every of tho&s;e Places he is certainly in a <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate, by the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Pag. praeced.</NOTE> particular Actions, and Characters, that are given him. Now would any one que&s;tion whether <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> were in one particular &s;tate of his Heads and Horns in the&s;e &s;everal places, when there are the&s;e particular Circum&s;tances and Characters that follow, which are the &s;ame in each particular de&s;cription?</P>
<P N="1">1. As they are in the 13th and 17th Chapters both de&s;cribed with &s;even Heads, and ten Horns, &s;o are they al&s;o characterized more peculiarly by one Head only of the &s;even. <HI>The one</HI> by his <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13. 3. Chap. 17. 11.</NOTE> <HI>healed Head,</HI> and the <HI>Mouth</HI> of it; <HI>The other</HI> by the <HI>8th King,</HI> or Head, which was one of the &s;even Heads.</P>
<P N="2">2. The peculiar Head that the one is de&s;cribed by, is an <HI>Head</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>wounded to death,</HI> and healed again; and under which <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> with the &s;ame Fal&s;e Prophet that he is found with in the 13th Chapter, does in all appearance come to his end; and that Head therefore mu&s;t be is La&s;t Head; and yet it cannot be di&s;tinct from the other Seven, becau&s;e it is but one of them healed, and it comes after them all, as the la&s;t of all, and &s;o mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be an Eighth, which was one of the Seven.</P>
<P>Now the Head of the other is expre&s;ly &s;aid to be an <HI>Eighth, which was one of the Seven.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. It is &s;aid of the <HI>one,</HI> that the <HI>World wondred at</HI> the Head <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13. 3.</NOTE> deadly wounded, and healed; And of the <HI>other,</HI> that the <HI>World</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap 17. 8.</NOTE> <HI>&s;hould wonder at The Bea&s;t, which was, and is not, and yet is,</HI> who is &s;aid to be the Eighth King, or Head; Which &s;eems to be the &s;ame.</P>
<P N="4">4. The <HI>one</HI> is &s;aid to <HI>ari&s;e out of the Sea,</HI> with the former Chara|cter of its Head wounded and healed again. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13. 1.</NOTE> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 17. 8.</NOTE></P>
<P>And the <HI>other</HI> to <HI>a&s;cend out of the Bottomle&s;s Pit,</HI> with the latter Character of <HI>Was,</HI> and <HI>Is not, and yet is,</HI> which &s;ignifies the &s;ame. And the word in the <HI>Greek</HI> for the bottomle&s;s Pit, <HI>The Aby&s;s,</HI> is the common term in the <HI>Septuagint</HI> to &s;ignify the <HI>Sea;</HI> and the <HI>Septuagint</HI> was the Copy that our Saviour and his Apo|&s;tles referred to in all their Di&s;cour&s;es and Writings.</P>
<P N="5">5. The <HI>one</HI> had <HI>Ten Kings</HI> in power with it, &s;ignified by its <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 17. 12.</NOTE> Ten Horns, who <HI>gave their power</HI> to it, which they had not at the time of the Vi&s;ion; the <HI>other</HI> aro&s;e up with <HI>Ten Horns</HI> upon
<PB N="47" REF="55"> it <HI>all crowned,</HI> which had no Crowns upon the <HI>Dragon</HI> in the Chapter before.</P>
<P N="6">6. The <HI>one</HI> is de&s;cribed by one particular <HI>mouth &s;peaking Bla&s;|phemies.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13. 1. Chap. 13. 5. v. 3.</NOTE></P>
<P>The <HI>other</HI> with one Head, who is that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> all over the 17th Chapter, who is &s;aid to be <HI>full of Bla&s;phemies; Prop.</HI> 6.</P>
<P N="7"><MILESTONE N="7"> 7. The City of the <HI>one,</HI> and the <HI>other,</HI> was the &s;ame <HI>Babylon</HI> in one particular &s;tate of Idolatrous and Antichri&s;tian Tyranny <HI>(Prop.</HI> 2.) and which is &s;aid to be <HI>fallen,</HI> in both, which one would judge &s;hould &s;ignify one and the &s;ame particular time of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 14. 8. Chap. 18. 2.</NOTE> that City. Other the &s;ame Characters in both I omit here to mention, becau&s;e they may be accounted not &s;uch particular Characters; As, that they have the <HI>&s;ame Enemies,</HI> the &s;ame kind of <HI>Friends,</HI> and make the &s;ame kind of <HI>Wars,</HI> and have the &s;ame variety of <HI>Succe&s;s</HI> and <HI>Lo&s;s</HI> in Battel.</P>
<P>To make them then &s;ignify two different &s;tates of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> (or of <HI>Roman</HI> Rule, as <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> is here agreed to &s;ignify) there mu&s;t at lea&s;t the&s;e unlikelihoods be dige&s;ted, <HI>(viz.)</HI> That all the&s;e Characters together, which are the &s;ame in both, mu&s;t be twice verified of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government, <HI>viz.</HI> That it had <HI>twice</HI> a Su|preme Government over it, which came after Seven before it, and yet was one of the Seven; and Ten Kings <HI>twice</HI> confede|rated with &s;uch a Power at <HI>two</HI> &s;everal Changes of <HI>Roman</HI> Power, in <HI>two</HI> &s;everal &s;tates of the &s;ame kind of Idolatry, and Antichri&s;tian Tyranny of <HI>Rome,</HI> and that <HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t have <HI>two</HI> eminent Ruines in the mid&s;t of all the&s;e &s;ame Circum&s;tances <HI>twice</HI> repeated: For the&s;e, and many other very peculiar Characters mu&s;t have been all at a time <HI>in conjunction,</HI> or have belonged alto|gether at the &s;ame time to each of the&s;e &s;ame repeated States of <HI>the Bea&s;t;</HI> Which would have been much like a Story of the throwing &s;o many Dice out of a Box at <HI>two</HI> &s;everal times into ju&s;t the &s;ame Order and Chances without any contrivance. For all the credit of this way of Interpretation lies wholly upon the affirmation of the Interpreters them&s;elves.</P>
<P>Would not this be to lay the plaine&s;t ground for an almo&s;t unavoidable delu&s;ion about the &s;en&s;e of a Prophecy? For who would ever take &s;uch a repre&s;entation of <HI>Two Bea&s;ts</HI> with &s;o <HI>exact</HI> a likene&s;s to one another in &s;o many <HI>peculiar</HI> Characters, with the &s;ame peculiar way of <HI>ri&s;e, marks, actions, make</HI> and <HI>cir|cum&s;tances,</HI> for two different States of that <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> and only be|cau&s;e
<PB N="48" REF="56"> they are <HI>Two &s;everal Shows</HI> of it? Can any one believe <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII. &amp; XVII.</NOTE> this of a Vi&s;ion, that men are exhorted to under&s;tand; and which an Angel of God comes on purpo&s;e &s;o to explain, as to make an Apo&s;tle of Chri&s;t apprehend, it was to tell him the my&s;tery of the&s;e things for the edification of the Chri&s;tian Church: And the Rules for interpreting of which, according to the common Apprehen&s;ions of Men in other Ca&s;es, he him|&s;elf <NOTE PLACE="marg">See CHAP. 2.</NOTE> gave an earne&s;t of in his own Explication? Certainly, un|le&s;s it can be proved to be impo&s;&s;ible for two Shows of a <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> to &s;ignify but one and the &s;ame &s;tate of it; one would be very apt from hence to be confident, That they are in the&s;e Chap|ters but <HI>Two Shows</HI> only of <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame</HI> &s;tate of <HI>the Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>After all this particular Examination, If we would be con|tent with ordinary proof, and &s;uch as makes men &s;ure of almo&s;t all other places of Scripture; that is, what the Context does, as it were of its own accord force one to be confident of; The Con&s;ideration of the Hi&s;tories of the&s;e <HI>Two Bea&s;ts,</HI> and of their order and dependance upon one another, would appear to be a &s;ufficient ground for a full conviction of the certainty of this Truth.</P>
<P>For it is very obvious to ob&s;erve, That the 17th Chapter comes in about the conclu&s;ion of the Hi&s;tory of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> of the 13th Chapter, for nothing, but to tell the Prophet, (as the In|terpreting Angel him&s;elf does &s;eem to intimate) what was meant <HI>by the Bea&s;t,</HI> and his <HI>Seven Heads,</HI> and <HI>Ten Horns,</HI> and by <HI>Great Babylon,</HI> which had been the Subject of all the four Chap|ters before it.</P>
<P>To &s;ecure us in this Per&s;ua&s;ion, we &s;ee that the bu&s;ine&s;s of the 17th Chapter is brought in immediately after the 16th by one of tho&s;e Seven Angels, with the Seven Vials, who had been ju&s;t before employed about the Seven la&s;t Plagues that were poured out upon the other <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> in the former Chapter: And the Introduction to all that this Angel had to communicate in the 17th Chapter, is an offer from him to &s;hew the Apo&s;tle the Judgment of that <HI>Great Whore,</HI> called <HI>Babylon the Great,</HI> which had been ju&s;t mentioned before by that very name of <HI>Babylon the Great</HI> in the Hi&s;tory of the other <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> at the end of the 16th Chapter. And then again, after the interpo&s;ing of the Inter|pretation of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the 17th Chapter, comes in the continuation of the Hi&s;tory of the &s;ame <HI>Babylon,</HI> and <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI>
<PB N="49" REF="56"> that had been broken off at the end of the 16th Chapter, and is carried on to the la&s;t end of them both in the 18th and 19th Chapters.</P>
<P>This does very plainly &s;hew, That the 17th Chapter comes in only to interpret tho&s;e My&s;tical Expre&s;&s;ions in the Chapter be|fore it, by a new Repre&s;entation of the &s;ame <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> and of the &s;ame <HI>Babylon,</HI> that had been the great Subject ju&s;t before di&s;|cour&s;ed of.</P>
<P>Now it is already a&s;&s;ured, That <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the 17th Chap|ter &s;ignifies but <HI>one particular &s;tate</HI> of it under its la&s;t Ruling Head, <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.&mdash;And therefore if it be the &s;ame with that mentioned in the other Chapter, that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> al&s;o mu&s;t be the &s;ame particular &s;tate of it under its la&s;t Head.</P>
<P>To &s;ecure us al&s;o &s;till further in the a&s;&s;urance of this, there is <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>Certum nam|que e&s;t Maris</HI> Be&s;tiam, <HI>de qu&acirc; in hoc,</HI> cap. (&s;c. cap. 13.)<HI>&mdash;Et</HI> Be&s;tiam <HI>illam cui</HI> Babylon <HI>in&s;idet.</HI> cap. 17. <HI>unam eandemque e&s;&s;e, ut di&s;ere Hieronymus.</HI> For it is certain, That <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> that is &s;aid to ari&s;e out of the Sea in this Chapter (that is the 13th Chapter) and that <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> upon which <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;it|teth, in the 17th Chapter, are but one and the &s;ame <HI>Bea&s;t.</HI></NOTE> the general Con&s;ent of all tho&s;e, who&s;e greate&s;t intere&s;t it may be to confound all the Significations of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> but who can have no manner of intere&s;t to affirm it, <HI>Almo&s;t unanimou&s;ly</HI> agree|ing, That <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> is all over the&s;e Vi&s;ions but <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame particular time</HI> of the Reign of the 8th King, <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Tho&s;e of the &s;econd Opinion, who take <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th Chapter for Antichri&s;t, and that in the 17th for the Devil; yet they interpret it to be the Devil in&s;piring Antichri&s;t, which is much the &s;ame thing.</NOTE> though they join the 7th with him; which is a very con&s;iderable Te&s;timony of the Evidence that there is for it in the Text. <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>ALca&s;ar</HI> in cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> &s;ect. 5. <HI>&amp; po&s;tea</HI> in cap. 17.</NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="50" REF="57">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII. &amp; XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Further attempted to be demon&s;trated, That</HI> the Bea&s;t <HI>in the 13th and 17th Chapters, are the &s;ame particular thing. The 8th and 9th</HI> Propo&s;itions, <HI>together with their</HI> Corollaries. <HI>The &s;trength of this Demon&s;tration.</HI> The Bea&s;t, <HI>his Image, Mark, Number, Name, in the 13th Chapter, and every-where el&s;e, defined, and di|&s;tingui&s;hed from the</HI> Second Bea&s;t <HI>in the 13th Chapter.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Evidence that has been in&s;i&s;ted upon in the former Chapter, is of the nature of that accumulative proof, which in Courts of Judicature does determine the be&s;t and wi&s;e&s;t men about the neare&s;t Intere&s;ts of men in this World. But notwith&s;tanding &s;o &s;trange a concurrence of &s;uch peculiar Circum&s;tances in <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> of the 13th and 17 Chapters, yet <HI>Grotius</HI> does make them to be very di&s;tinct &s;tates of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monar|chy; and therefore it will be requi&s;ite to &s;earch for a more co|gent and convincing proof, That they mu&s;t both nece&s;&s;arily be the &s;ame particular &s;tate of one only of the Heads of <HI>the Bea&s;t.</HI> The Con&s;equence of mi&s;taking in this &s;earch being no le&s;s than the falling into confu&s;ions about the fir&s;t grounds of all clear knowledge of the&s;e things, which would multiply into infinite Errors in the rea&s;oning upon them: It is therefore nece&s;&s;ary to u&s;e the greate&s;t circum&s;pection in it, and to advance in it but by &s;uch &s;hort &s;teps, as we may clearly &s;ee, that we tread firm and &s;ure in all the way towards it. And in this De&s;ign, that which is fir&s;t to be cleared, is, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Term of</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>all over the 13th Chapter does &s;ignify</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 8.</NOTE> <HI>only the</HI> Fir&s;t Bea&s;t <HI>&s;hown,</HI> v. 1.</Q>
<P>This &s;eems to be &s;ufficiently evident. For there is no men|tion of any other <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> be&s;ides in that Chapter, but of the <HI>Second Bea&s;t;</HI> and that it cannot &s;ignify the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> either <HI>before</HI> or <HI>after</HI> the fir&s;t mention of that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> there, may thus be &s;hewn in order.</P>
<P N="1"><PB N="51" REF="57"> 1. That it &s;ignifies nothing el&s;e <HI>before the mention</HI> of that <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> is agreed by all; becau&s;e there is no other <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> before that <HI>Se|cond,</HI> that it can &s;ignify: And <HI>four</HI> times is it &s;o called by the name of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> without any other addition; and <HI>twice</HI> is it &s;aid, that <HI>all the World,</HI> or the Earth, did <HI>wor&s;hip</HI> him, before the men|tion of the <HI>Second Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. And that the Term of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> does &s;ignify the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t</HI> al&s;o <HI>after the mention of the Second,</HI> is certain enough. For though thrice after the ri&s;e of the <HI>Second Bea&s;t,</HI> the Fir&s;t has a note of di|&s;tinction added to the Term of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> As <HI>The Fir&s;t Bea&s;t,</HI> and <HI>The Bea&s;t that was deadly wounded,</HI> &amp;c. yet when that Term has no note of di&s;tinction added to it, it does al&s;o &s;ignify the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t,</HI> as di&s;tingui&s;hed from the <HI>Second:</HI> So v. 14. where it is &s;aid of the <HI>Second Bea&s;t,</HI> that he had power to do Miracles in the &s;ight of <HI>The Bea&s;t;</HI> it is unque&s;tionable that by <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> is meant the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>In the &s;ame manner is the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> brought in after, as employed about the Affairs of the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t,</HI> to the end of the Chapter; Where it is di&s;tingui&s;hed from the &s;everal mentions of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> by the name of <HI>He,</HI> as the Agent about &s;omething <MILESTONE N="1"> that has the term of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> joined with it. For example, <HI>He</HI> gave life to the Image of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> which in the Ver&s;e before <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 15.</NOTE> was &s;aid to be the Image made to the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t; He</HI> made all men receive the Mark, and Name, and Number of the name of <HI>the</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 16.</NOTE> <HI>Bea&s;t:</HI> Which <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> all the World would under&s;tand in common con|&s;truction of &s;peech to &s;ignify a <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> different from <HI>him,</HI> who did all the&s;e things about the Affairs of <HI>the Bea&s;t;</HI> but more e&s;peci|ally, when it is found that this term of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> had <HI>four</HI> times <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13. v. 2, 3, 4.</NOTE> <HI>before</HI> the mention of the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> in the &s;ame Chapter been u&s;ed to &s;ignify the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t</HI> and <HI>once</HI> at lea&s;t <HI>after</HI> the appear|ance <MILESTONE N="2"> of the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> without any di&s;pute about it; and had <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14.</NOTE> been often mentioned after the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> with &s;ome other ad|dition <MILESTONE N="3"> to it: And yet the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> had never been clearly in|timated by the name of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> after the fir&s;t mention of its <MILESTONE N="4"> ri&s;e; but in every Ver&s;e after that, is &s;ignified in the Original <MILESTONE N="5"> only by a Verb in the Third Per&s;on, as acting in the Affairs of that which is called <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> which mu&s;t therefore certainly be &s;ome other <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> that is referred to by that Article of reference, as di&s;tinct from him, and as <HI>before</HI> known, and mentioned.
<PB N="52" REF="58"> Wherefore, <HI>by Rule</HI> 1, <HI>and</HI> 3. <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t all over the 13th Chapter &s;ignify the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</HI> And therefore</P>
<Q><HI>By the terms of the</HI> Image <HI>of</HI> the Bea&s;t, <HI>the</HI> Mark, Name, <HI>and</HI> num|ber <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> of the name <HI>of the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, mu&s;t be under|&s;tood, The</HI> Image, Mark, Name, and number of the Name <HI>of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</HI></Q>
<P>And after that, it &s;eems as nece&s;&s;arily to follow, That</P>
<Q><HI>By the Bea&s;t with the</HI> Fal&s;e Prophet, <HI>or Second Bea&s;t, and the</HI> Image, <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> Mark, Name, and number of the Name <HI>of the Bea&s;t in all the other Chapters, mu&s;t be under&s;tood, The Fir&s;t Bea&s;t of the 13th Chap|ter, with the &s;ame Attendance of that Bea&s;t mentioned in that Chapter.</HI></Q>
<P>The nece&s;&s;ity of this does appear from their being the &s;ame very peculiar Expre&s;&s;ions in tho&s;e Chapters, that they are in the 13th Chapter; and therefore by <HI>Rule the</HI> 3<HI>d.</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify the &s;ame <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t,</HI> and his Adjuncts, unle&s;s there were &s;ome|thing more clear again&s;t it.</P>
<P>But the grounds upon which a very worthy Per&s;on thinks <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede,</HI> p. 524. &amp; p. 708.</NOTE> otherwi&s;e, are far from being more clear. As</P>
<P N="1">1. That the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> ought to be &s;ome-where mentioned in the&s;e Chapters by the name of <HI>The Bea&s;t.</HI> For is it not e|nough <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Object."> that he is &s;ometimes &s;ignified by the name of <HI>the Fal&s;e Prophet?</HI></P>
<P>Nor <HI>2dly,</HI> is it any thing &s;o clear, That the Image of <HI>the</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Object."> <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> is the &s;ame with the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t;</HI> and that therefore in the mentions of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> and the Image of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> both together, by <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t be under&s;tood the <HI>Second Bea&s;t,</HI> or el&s;e there mu&s;t be a tautology, as he would have it. For there is no ap|pearance that the Image and the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t</HI> are the &s;ame thing. On the contrary, The Image of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> in the very expre&s;&s;ion of it, does &s;ignify another thing <HI>different</HI> from <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> it &s;elf, or &s;ome other thing that is <HI>only like</HI> the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>Now what &s;mall Rea&s;ons are the&s;e to alledge again&s;t the &s;o frequent and con&s;tant u&s;e of the Term of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> to &s;ignify the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t</HI> in the Chapter where the&s;e peculiar Characters of it are found with it; and where al&s;o it is granted by the &s;ame
<PB N="53" REF="58"> Per&s;on, that the Image of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> does really &s;ignify the Image of <HI>the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t?</HI> The known and frequent u&s;e of any peculiar Expre&s;&s;ions, is the Rule that all Judicious Per&s;ons recommend for the interpreting any other places of Scripture; and the An|gel's Example in his Interpretation of part of the&s;e Vi&s;ions, does &s;till further confirm it to be the Right Rule for the&s;e things.</P>
<P>Wherefore for the future, to avoid all unnece&s;&s;ary multipli|cation of words, I will make u&s;e of only the term of <HI>The Bea&s;t in,</HI> or <HI>of</HI> the 13th Chapter, to &s;ignify any mention of the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t</HI> from that Chapter, either <HI>before</HI> or <HI>after</HI> the 17th Chapter; becau&s;e in tho&s;e Chapters, <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> is every-where joined with the forementioned Attendants.</P>
<P>It will not be now very difficult from the former <HI>Corollaries</HI> to find, that <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> from the 13th Chapter, to the end of the mention of that Term in the&s;e Vi&s;ions, as well <HI>in the 17th Chap|ter,</HI> as <HI>in the re&s;t,</HI> is one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of its La&s;t Ruling Head: In order to which, it mu&s;t be fir&s;t advanced, That</P>
<Q>The Bea&s;t <HI>in the 13th Chapter &s;ignifies</HI> a particular &s;tate <HI>of</HI> the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 9.</NOTE> Bea&s;t <HI>under one of its either Ruling Heads or Horns, in all the time of its continuance.</HI></Q>
<P>The certainty of this is the mo&s;t nece&s;&s;ary to be in the fir&s;t place &s;ecured, becau&s;e the way that others take to confound all the Significations of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the &s;everal mentions of that Term, and to keep them from any particular determinate no|tion, by which they might be concluded to be the &s;ame parti|cular thing, is, To under&s;tand the Term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> every-where in <HI>a general</HI> notion, which may be allowed to be every-where the &s;ame; and yet the things with which it is joined, may &s;hew it to be meant of quite <HI>different</HI> &s;tates of <HI>the Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>But that this <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th Chapter, is in a <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate of one of its Heads, or Horns, does thus appear.</P>
<P><HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th Chapter has a &s;et time of continuance al|lotted to it, <HI>viz.</HI> the &s;pace of 42 months, as the Original is <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 5.</NOTE> agreed to &s;ignify.</P>
<P>And it is de&s;cribed as continuing for that time, with a very <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 6.</NOTE> haughty commanding <HI>Mouth.</HI> The <HI>Mouth</HI> is joined with the <HI>time</HI> of his continuance, and is mentioned again in the next words af|ter
<PB N="54" REF="59"> it; and he is de&s;cribed with that Mouth at his fir&s;t ri&s;e al&s;o as his peculiar Character; and in all tho&s;e three places it is &s;et out as an over-ruling, uncontrolable Mouth.</P>
<P>And &s;uch a <HI>Mouth</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify &s;ome <HI>particular</HI> Ruling Power, <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 2.</NOTE> when joined with <HI>a Bea&s;t</HI> that is &s;aid to have &s;o Univer&s;al a Do|minion: and for this particular Rule, of &s;ome &s;uch particular Power, for all the time of the continuance of the 42 Months of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> we have the general con&s;ent of all tho&s;e of the Inter|preters that are the mo&s;t concerned again&s;t this Propo&s;ition.</P>
<P>Now the <HI>Mouth</HI> that is &s;aid to be the Mouth of a Bea&s;t with Heads and Horns, as it is here, and that &s;o very remarkable a <HI>Mouth,</HI> mu&s;t belong either to one of the Heads, or to one of the Horns; as there is much the &s;ame de&s;cription of the Mouth of the little Horn in <HI>Daniel,</HI> Chap. 7. And an Head, or Horn of a Bea&s;t, that repre&s;ents Dominion, as it does here, does every|where in Prophecy &s;ignify a <HI>Ruling</HI> Head, or Horn; and there|fore with &s;uch a commanding Mouth added to it, mu&s;t cer|tainly &s;ignify a very particular commanding Head, or Horn, <HI>by Rule</HI> 2. unle&s;s it could be made more clear, that it is the Mouth of &s;uch a Head, as &s;ignifies one of the <HI>Seven Hills,</HI> which is not pretended by any, and &s;eems to be almo&s;t ab&s;urd but to mention.</P>
<P><HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> therefore with that Mouth, for all the time of his continuance, mu&s;t be in the particular &s;tate of that Head, or Horn.</P>
<P>And if <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> be in the particular &s;tate of any Ruling Head, or Horn, then by the Term of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> for all the time of his continuance, mu&s;t be under&s;tood at every mention of it, <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> with that particular Head or Horn. For &s;o is the Term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> generally u&s;ed to &s;ignify in Prophecy, when it is in any particular &s;tate of Heads or Horns. So all over the 17th Chap|ter of the <HI>Revelations</HI> &s;everal times <HI>(Prop.</HI> 6.)&mdash;&s;o al&s;o <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 11. and <HI>Dan.</HI> 8. 5, 6, 7, 8. and &s;o therefore <HI>(by Rule the</HI> 2<HI>d)</HI> mu&s;t it be here for <HI>all</HI> the time of its continuance in that &s;tate.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, that <HI>this Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th Chapter is de&s;cribed all over the Chapter by <HI>one</HI> of its Heads wounded to death, and healed. And <HI>A Bea&s;t</HI> with one, or more of its Heads at a time, does every-where in Prophecy &s;ignify that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> with that, or tho&s;e particular Ruling Powers at that time, even by the con&s;ent of
<PB N="55" REF="59"> tho&s;e who are mo&s;t difficult in the&s;e things; and the particular time is the 42 Months of his continuance. And therefore to what&s;oever the Mouth of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> belongs, <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> there mu&s;t be in a particular &s;tate of one of its Heads, <HI>by Rule</HI> 2.</P>
<P>And to &s;hew the u&s;e of the term of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> with, or with|out the mention of his Head, to &s;ignify the &s;ame <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate of it under that Head; That which is called <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> with <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 3.</NOTE> the Head <HI>wounded to death,</HI> and <HI>healed</HI> in <HI>one</HI> place, is in the <HI>other</HI> place of this Chapter called <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> who&s;e <HI>deadly wound was</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 12.</NOTE> <HI>healed,</HI> and The Bea&s;t <HI>who had a wound by a Sword, and did live,</HI> without any mention of his Head, to which neverthele&s;s that <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14.</NOTE> Circum&s;tance does unque&s;tionably refer; &s;o that by the bare term of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> wounded and healed, is &s;ignified <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> with that particular Head.</P>
<P>If any one would pretend after this, that the healed Head might &s;ignify one of the &s;even Hills (&s;aid to be the Heads, Chap. 17. 9.) He mu&s;t bring greater evidence for it <HI>by Rule the</HI> 2<HI>d,</HI> than the Prophetical u&s;e of an Head of <HI>a Bea&s;t</HI> for the Ru|ling Power of it is; which is not pretended by any. All that appears for it is, that the &s;even Heads, which were crowned in the Dragon, chap. 12. have no Crowns upon <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th Chapter immediately after, which may &s;eem to &s;hew, that the Heads in the 13th Chapter without Crowns, are Hills.</P>
<P>But that would be a rea&s;on for making the &s;even Heads no Kings in the 17th Chapter al&s;o, where they are &s;hown without <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 17. 10.</NOTE> Crowns, and yet are certainly &s;o many Kings. But from the 17th Chapter it is plain, that the time of their Crowns would be pa&s;t before <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> would come to be in that &s;tate, which he appears in in the 17th Chapter, and the 13th. For even according to <HI>Grotius</HI> him&s;elf, the &s;even Reigns would be pa&s;t be|fore the time of tho&s;e two Shows in each Chapter. And then was it not proper to repre&s;ent tho&s;e &s;even Heads without Crowns, that is, as Kings &s;even of who&s;e Reigns were pa&s;t? for that in being was an 8th, that was after the 7th.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, Since the 17th Chapter, which is the only ground for making tho&s;e &s;even <HI>Heads</HI> in the 13th Chapter to &s;ignify the &s;even <HI>Hills,</HI> does al&s;o make them to be &s;even <HI>Kings;</HI> The only way to know whether of the&s;e two any Character of an Head does mean, is to con&s;ider the nature of the Character, and whe|ther it be the propriety of an Hill, or of a King. Now of which
<PB N="56" REF="60"> of the&s;e two is it mo&s;t proper to &s;ay, whether of an <HI>Hill,</HI> or of <HI>a King,</HI> that it was <HI>deadly wounded, and healed</HI> again? And with which of them, by rea&s;on of that wound, might <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> him|&s;elf (who is de&s;cribed with a very Royal Dominion) be mo&s;t properly &s;aid to be wounded, and to have his deadly wound healed; or to <HI>have a wound by a &s;word, and yet to live?</HI> The very terms of the que&s;tion does &s;hew, that this is properly &s;aid of a <HI>King,</HI> who is the life of all the power of <HI>the Bea&s;t;</HI> but mo&s;t im|proper to be &s;aid of the <HI>Hill</HI> of a City, to which a <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> may belong.</P>
<P>But what&s;oever becomes of this wounded, and healed Head, we are a&s;&s;ured by the <HI>mouth</HI> of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> that <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th Chapter, for the whole time of its continuance, does &s;ig|nify <HI>The Bea&s;t in a particular &s;tate of one</HI> of its Heads, or Horns.</P>
<P>And from thence it is plain.</P>
<Q><HI>That the Affairs of the</HI> Second Bea&s;t, <HI>the Image, Mark, Name and</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>Number of the Name of</HI> the Bea&s;t, <HI>do every-where in the 13th Chap|ter belong to that particular &s;tate of the</HI> Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</Q>
<P>For the term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> &s;ignifies all over that Chapter, the <HI>Fir&s;t Bea&s;t</HI> only <HI>by Propo&s;it.</HI> 8. And that <HI>Bea&s;t</HI> does there &s;ignify, <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in one particular &s;tate of an Head, or Horn, for the whole time of his continuance <HI>(by Propo&s;it.</HI> 9.) Wherefore every thing that is there joined with the term of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> the <HI>Image, Mark,</HI> &amp;c. and the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> acting with him, do all belong to that <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate of <HI>the Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>And that does al&s;o further a&s;&s;ure us,</P>
<Q><HI>That</HI> the Bea&s;t, <HI>with the Fal&s;e Prophet, or</HI> Second Bea&s;t, <HI>and Image,</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>and Mark, and Name,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>in all the other Chapters, do &s;ignify the &s;ame</HI> particular &s;tate <HI>of</HI> the Bea&s;t <HI>with tho&s;e Attendants, in which it is in the 13th Chapter.</HI></Q>
<P>For <HI>(by Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 8.) <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> with all tho&s;e &s;ame At|tendants, is the &s;ame with that in the 13th Chapter. And <HI>(by Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 9.) <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> with tho&s;e Attendants in the 13th Chapter, is in a particular &s;tate of its Heads, or Horns. There|fore mu&s;t they <HI>all</HI> &s;ignify <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the &s;ame particular &s;tate every where el&s;e.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="57" REF="60">
<HEAD>CHAP. VIII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII, &amp; XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The</HI> Tenth Propo&s;ition, <HI>and its</HI> Corollaries, <HI>conclude The Bea&s;t of the 13th and 17th Chapters to be one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of the Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WE have now &s;ufficient grounds to conclude, That</P>
<Q>The &s;even Heads and ten Horns of the Bea&s;t in the 13th and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 10.</NOTE> 17th Chapters, mu&s;t &s;ignify the &s;ame things.</Q>
<P>For &s;ince they are in both Chapters the &s;ame very peculiar, and proper my&s;tical Expre&s;&s;ions; and &s;ince they are explained in the 17th Chapter, by <HI>Rule the third,</HI> they mu&s;t &s;ignify the &s;ame things.</P>
<P>But &s;till further, to confirm the force of that <HI>Rule</HI> in the pre|&s;ent Ca&s;e, and to make the thing unque&s;tionable, it is to be con&s;idered, That The Bea&s;t of the 13th Chapter, is one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of it both <HI>before</HI> and <HI>after</HI> the 17th Chapter <HI>(by Coroll.</HI> 1, and 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 9.) and &s;o the 17th Chapter does &s;tand in the body of the Hi&s;tory of that Bea&s;t of the 13th Chap|ter. We may al&s;o very plainly &s;ee, that the 17th Chapter is in|terpreted in that place only to explain the my&s;tical Significations of the &s;ame number of Heads and Horns upon a Bea&s;t to all ap|pearance every way the &s;ame with this, and of that <HI>Babylon</HI> that is the common &s;harer in the Fortunes of the Bea&s;t of the 13th Chapter, throughout all the account of him. For at the very <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 1.</NOTE> entrance into that Explication, it is &s;aid by the Angel, that he would &s;hew the Apo&s;tle the judgment of that <HI>Great Whore,</HI> cal|led <HI>Babylon,</HI> which was but ju&s;t before it, threatened with the Wrath of God in the Story of the other Bea&s;t at the conclu&s;ion of the 16th Chapter.</P>
<P>And then the Explication of this &s;ame kind, and number of things, of ju&s;t &s;o many Heads and Horns, as had been mentioned of the other Bea&s;t, is made by one of tho&s;e Angels with the &s;even Vials, who had been ju&s;t before employed about the judgments of the former Bea&s;ts all over the Chapter immediatly
<PB N="58" REF="61"> preceding this Explication. Who would not upon this con&s;i|deration conclude with him&s;elf, That the Angel's Explication of the &s;ame number of Heads and Horns in a new &s;how of a Bea&s;t, to all appearance the &s;ame with this other, who&s;e Hi&s;tory is on purpo&s;e there interrupted to make room for that new &s;how, did mo&s;t certainly refer to the &s;ame number of Heads and Horns of the Bea&s;t, which had all the way before been di&s;cour&s;ed of? E&s;pecially, when he &s;ees, that the Per&s;on that brings in all this new Scene, does expre&s;ly &s;ay, that it was to tell the Apo&s;tle what that particular judgment of <HI>Babylon</HI> was, which had but ju&s;t before been mentioned in the Hi&s;tory of the former Bea&s;t, and every-where made its companion; as al&s;o that the Inter|preter <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 16. v. 19.</NOTE> him&s;elf had but ju&s;t before been very bu&s;ie in the concerns of that Bea&s;t, which did but ju&s;t conclude where this new &s;how began, and which al&s;o this Angel &s;eems concerned to inter|rupt, only to give this Explication of what had been already &s;hewn.</P>
<P>Wherefore, unle&s;s it were very plainly incon&s;i&s;tent with &s;ome|thing el&s;e more clearly known, which is not by any pretended; the &s;even Heads, and ten Horns of the Bea&s;ts in the 13th and 17th Chapters, mu&s;t by this new enforcement <HI>of Rule the third,</HI> mo&s;t certainly &s;ignify the &s;ame things.</P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> does very well ob&s;erve to this purpo&s;e upon the 1&s;t Ver&s;e of the 13th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations;</HI> The &s;even Heads and ten Horns of this Bea&s;t are the &s;ame with tho&s;e of the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter: which is &s;o <HI>unque&s;tionably clear,</HI> that they them&s;elves, who would have the&s;e two Bea&s;ts to be different from one another, do yet agree, that the &s;even Heads, and ten Horns, have the &s;ame &s;ignification in both of the&s;e Bea&s;ts.</P>
<P>In con&s;equence of which it mu&s;t be inferred,</P>
<Q><HI>That the Bea&s;ts in the 13th and 17th Chapters in every &s;ucce&s;&s;ive &s;tate</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>of the &s;ame Heads or Horns, are one and the &s;ame</HI> particular <HI>Bea&s;t.</HI></Q>
<P>For the <HI>general</HI> &s;ignification of the Term of <HI>The Bea&s;t,</HI> as the common Subject of each <HI>Head,</HI> or <HI>Horn,</HI> is the &s;ame in both. And the Head, or Horn, is &s;uppo&s;ed to be the &s;ame in both, at the time of every &s;uch Succe&s;&s;ion. Wherefore the whole Bea&s;t in each Chapter, can be but one and the &s;ame Bea&s;t at any &s;uch time.</P>
<PB N="59" REF="61">
<P> And from thence it does at la&s;t ea&s;ily follow, That <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></P>
<Q>The Bea&s;t of the 13th Chapter is every way the &s;ame particular &s;tate of <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> the Bea&s;t with that of the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter, for the whole time of its continuance.</Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, under every the &s;ame &s;uc|ce&s;&s;ive Head, or Horn, is the &s;ame particular Bea&s;t with that in the 17th Chapter in that &s;ame &s;tate, by <HI>Coroll. praeced.</HI> And the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter, in the &s;tate of its la&s;t Ruling Head, is de&s;troy'd, (by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.) Wherefore it mu&s;t al&s;o be in the &s;tate of its la&s;t Ruling Head, that the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter mu&s;t be de&s;troyed. Now the Bea&s;t of the 13th Chapter is de&s;troy'd <HI>Chap.</HI> 19. 18. where it is the &s;ame particular &s;tate of it, that it is in the 13th Chapter, (by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 9.)&mdash;That particular &s;tate then, that the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter is in, is the &s;tate of it under its la&s;t Head; that is, the &s;ame with that of the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.</P>
<P>And that the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, is in this &s;ame &s;tate with that in the 17th Chapter, for the <HI>whole time of its continu|ance,</HI> is confirmed by <HI>Prop.</HI> 9. For it is, for its whole time, in that one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, the time of the Bea&s;t, under any one of his Heads, is the <HI>whole time</HI> of that Head; the Bea&s;t and his Head make but one <HI>whole</HI> thing all that time; and this cannot be any time apart from one another, without cea&s;ing to be <HI>that</HI> Head in Rule, or <HI>that</HI> Bea&s;t: Wherefore the two Bea&s;ts in the 13th and 17th Chapters being found to be one and the &s;ame Bea&s;t under its la&s;t Ruling Head, they mu&s;t be the &s;ame for their <HI>whole time.</HI></P>
<P>And if we con&s;ult the Characters of both of them in their &s;everal Chapters, they will be found to <HI>begin</HI> both in the &s;ame particular circum&s;tances of the la&s;t Head, as well as to <HI>end</HI> with it.</P>
<P>For the One <HI>begins</HI> at his <HI>ri&s;ing out of the Sea,</HI> Chap. 13. 1.</P>
<P>The Other, at his <HI>a&s;cent out of the bottomle&s;s Pit,</HI> (Chap. 17. 8.) which is &s;ignified in the Original by the &s;ame name of the <HI>Aby&s;s,</HI> which is known to be the u&s;ual word for the Sea.</P>
<P>The <HI>One</HI> ri&s;es up with an Head wounded and healed, and yet the la&s;t Head, ch. 13. 1. &amp; ch. 19. 20.</P>
<PB N="60" REF="62">
<P> The <HI>Other</HI> as an eighth King, which was one of the &s;even be|fore <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII. &amp; XVII.</NOTE> him; which is the &s;ame thing, becau&s;e the <HI>&s;even Heads</HI> &s;ig|nifie <HI>&s;even Kings, (Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 5.)</P>
<P>The <HI>One</HI> ri&s;es up with Ten Kings crowned upon him, ch. 13. 1.</P>
<P>The <HI>Other</HI> with the &s;ame Ten Kings receiving Power with him, ch. 17. 12.</P>
<P>Wherefore, the Bea&s;ts in the 13th and 17th Chapters do <HI>begin</HI> together, and <HI>end</HI> together, in the &s;ame &s;tate of their la&s;t Ruling Head of the Seven; and therefore are the &s;ame particular &s;tate of the Bea&s;t in both Chapters for the whole time of their conti|nuance.</P>
<P>We have then now both a clo&s;e and a demon&s;trative proof, from the Proprieties of the&s;e two Bea&s;ts, That they mu&s;t ne|ce&s;&s;arily be one and the &s;ame thing; and a copious variety al&s;o of very peculiar Circum&s;tances exactly the &s;ame in both, (as has been formerly more fully &s;hewn), to &s;ecure and confirm it. It has been al&s;o ob&s;erved, That the very Order and Dependance of the Accounts of the&s;e two Bea&s;ts upon one another, as they &s;eem to break into the continued relation of one anothers fortunes, would at the fir&s;t &s;ight &s;atisfie any impartial per&s;on of the &s;ame thing, without any farther &s;crupulous Examination. And with|al, it is confirmed by the <HI>almo&s;t unanimous</HI> Con&s;ent of <HI>all kind of</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> <HI>Interpreters,</HI> at lea&s;t, for their being one and the &s;ame Intere&s;t at the &s;ame time. <HI>[See References in the 7th Chapter.]</HI></P>
<P>And tho&s;e two or three only, that have of late differed from the <HI>general</HI> current of the re&s;t in all Ages, do not pretend to give any other rea&s;on for it, than that the Bea&s;ts in tho&s;e two Chap|ters are two &s;everal &s;hows, and therefore mu&s;t be two different &s;tates of the Bea&s;t: And how &s;mall a ground is that, again&s;t &s;o great a variety of convincing Evidences, and &s;o univer&s;al an Authority?</P>
<P>There are indeed &s;uch a variety of Circum&s;tances to make this Conclu&s;ion to appear unque&s;tionable at the fir&s;t cur&s;ory view of the Text, that it will appear to mo&s;t per&s;ons to have been too tedious and unnece&s;&s;ary a trouble, which has been here taken to &s;ecure it.</P>
<P>But the great u&s;e of the Certainty of this Propo&s;ition, will ju&s;tifie the care that has been taken to a&s;&s;ure it; for <HI>without it,</HI> the whole Prophecy will be found to be but a Rope of Sand, as it has al&s;o been made to be by tho&s;e who have been of another
<PB N="61" REF="62"> Opinion in this Point: but by the Certainty of it, the whole Prophecy is found to be all of one piece, and about the &s;ame &s;tate of things, tho' delivered in &s;everal Vi&s;ions; and there|by are we furni&s;hed with a greater variety of Circum&s;tances, to determine the nature of that which is the great Affair in them all.</P>
<P>From hence then it does now appear, That the wounded and healed Head in the 13th Chapter, is &s;o far from being one of the &s;even Hills of <HI>Rome,</HI> that</P>
<Q>The wounded and healed Head of the Bea&s;t, in the 13th Chapter, <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Coroll."> is the &s;ame la&s;t Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t with that in the 17th Chapter.</Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, is under the &s;ame la&s;t Ruling Head with that in the 17th Chapter, <HI>(Coroll. praeced.</HI> &amp; <HI>Prop.</HI> 9.) And the la&s;t Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter, called, <HI>The eighth King,</HI> was an Head that had been one of tho&s;e &s;even that were pa&s;t, and gone before it, and was now revived again, (by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 5.) Which is the &s;ame with A la&s;t Ruling Head of Seven, which was wounded to death, and healed again. The Bea&s;t therefore in the 13th Chap|ter, is certainly in the &s;tate of an Head wounded to death, and healed again. After the certainty of which, it will be a very extravagant thing to que&s;tion, Whether the wounded and healed Head, which the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter is under, be that wounded and healed Head which it is &s;aid in the Text to have?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="62" REF="63">
<HEAD>CHAP. IX. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XI.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The 11th Propo&s;ition, That the</HI> Judgment of the Dead, Revel. 11. 18. <HI>is the Judgment of the Dead at Chri&s;t's &s;econd Coming. The Three Creeds confirm it. The extravagance of the</HI> Grotian <HI>Interpretation of this</HI> Judging the Dead. <HI>The Reign of Chri&s;t over the Kingdoms of this World. His &s;econd Coming in Glory. The twelfth Propo&s;ition,</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>in the 11th Chap|ter, the &s;ame with</HI> The Bea&s;t <HI>in the other Chapters.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THere is now only the mention of the Bea&s;t in the 11th Chapter, remaining to be found to be the &s;ame &s;tate of it with tho&s;e in the other Chapters. After which, it will be very ea&s;ie to look through the whole proce&s;s of the&s;e Vi&s;ions, and to be thereby &s;atisfied of the con&s;i&s;tency of all the parts of them, and their mutual dependance upon, and relation to one another, notwith&s;tanding the &s;eeming interfering order of them.</P>
<P>For this purpo&s;e, it is to be ob&s;erved, fir&s;t,</P>
<Q><HI>That the</HI> Judgment of the Dead, Revel. 11. 18. <HI>is the Judgment of the Dead at Chri&s;t's &s;econd Coming.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 11.</NOTE></Q>
<P>For the phra&s;e of <HI>Judging the Dead,</HI> is always u&s;ed for the Day of Judgment all over the <HI>New Te&s;tament:</HI> And it is a <HI>fun|damental Article</HI> of the Chri&s;tian Faith, expre&s;&s;ed by tho&s;e pecu|liar words in the Apo&s;tles Writings, and put into the Apo&s;tles Creed in the &s;ame words; and &s;o was that peculiar expre&s;&s;ion always u&s;ed by the fir&s;t Fathers, and for nothing el&s;e; and in all the <HI>Three Creeds</HI> is it joined with Chri&s;t's &s;econd Coming; as it is al&s;o for the mo&s;t part found together with it in the <HI>New Te&s;tament.</HI> And this &s;hews the con&s;tant u&s;e of this expre&s;&s;ion by the whole Church in all times. Wherefore, to make the phra&s;e of <HI>Judging the Dead</HI> to &s;ignifie here, as &s;ome do, only the <HI>Re|venging the Cau&s;e of the Dead,</HI> is to change the &s;ignification of a very peculiar and generally-known expre&s;&s;ion, into a very un|common
<PB N="63" REF="63"> acceptation of it; and to do that, without &s;ome great nece&s;&s;ity for it, (for which there is here no apparent evidence pretended) is the way to licen&s;e men to allegorize all the Articles of our Belief away.</P>
<P>And be&s;ides, this acceptation of <HI>Judging the Dead</HI> for the avenging them, is beyond all example. <HI>Judging</HI> and <HI>Judgment</HI> in general are, indeed, ambiguou&s;ly u&s;ed in Scripture: but <HI>Judging the Dead</HI> is never any where made u&s;e of, but to &s;ignifie the Judgment at Chri&s;t's &s;econd Coming; and &s;o was it always taken by the Chri&s;tian Church in all Ages, and &s;o conveyed down by them in the &s;ame words in all the Ancient Creeds for &s;everal Ages, and joined with the mention of Chri&s;t's &s;econd Coming. So that of all the &s;hifts that <HI>Grotius</HI> is put to, for up|holding his Interpretation, there &s;eems none to be more mon|&s;trous, or that does more &s;hew his re&s;olution to cut all the Knots that he cannot unty, than this mi&s;erable &s;hift of making the <HI>Judging of the Dead</HI> here, to &s;ignifie the <HI>Revenging of the Dead.</HI></P>
<P>To a&s;&s;ure one &s;till further of this, it appears to be the &s;ame phra&s;e, by which it is granted, that the <HI>real</HI> Judging of the Dead is &s;ignified in the&s;e very Vi&s;ions, as <HI>Rev.</HI> 20. 12. <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Grot. in 20 Apoc. v. 12.</NOTE></P>
<P>It is al&s;o added in this 11th Chapter, v. 18. to make it more unque&s;tionable,<HI>&mdash;That thou &s;hould&s;t give the reward to thy &s;er|vants the Prophets, and to the Saints, and to them that fear thy Name, &s;mall and great.</HI> Which &s;hews, that it is <HI>a change of the &s;tate of the Dead them&s;elves,</HI> by the reward that is given to their faithful|ne&s;s; and this can be nothing but their reward at the &s;econd Coming of Chri&s;t to Judgment.</P>
<P>For betwixt Death and That, there is no other reward for the <HI>Prophets, and Saints, &s;mall and great,</HI> at one time, as is here expre&s;&s;ed;<HI>&mdash;The time of the Dead is come, that they &s;hould be judged; and that thou &s;hould&s;t give the reward,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>From hence it cannot but be concluded,</P>
<Q><HI>That the Reign of Chri&s;t over the Kingdoms of this World,</HI> Rev. 11. <MILESTONE UNIT="Corollary."> 15. <HI>is Chri&s;t's &s;econd Coming in Glory.</HI></Q>
<P>For fir&s;t, it is joined with judging of the Dead at the 18th ver&s;e: <HI>The time is come, that the Dead &s;hould be judged;</HI> that is, The time is now come, <HI>now,</HI> that <HI>thou ha&s;t taken to thee thy great</HI>
<PB N="64" REF="64"> <HI>power, and ha&s;t reigned,</HI> as ju&s;t before it is expre&s;&s;ed. That glorious Reign, and the Judging of the Dead, are very expre&s;ly joined together in the &s;ame Doxology of the four and twenty Elders, and &s;o ty'd to the &s;ame time, that if they be not contemporary, yet there is nothing comes in betwixt them: and therefore mu&s;t that Reign of Chri&s;t be at lea&s;t <HI>at the &s;ame time</HI> with his Coming in Glory. And what can &s;uch a glorious Kingdom of Chri&s;t be at that time, but his glorious Coming or Appearance? For &s;ince there is but <HI>one</HI> &s;econd Coming of Chri&s;t to be expected, his glorious Reign and his &s;econd Coming, fixed, as here, to one time, mu&s;t certainly be the &s;ame thing.</P>
<P>And that which &s;ecures them to be the &s;ame, without farther ground of &s;cruple, is, That this Reign of Chri&s;t is &s;aid to be Univer&s;al, <HI>over all the Kingdoms of this World;</HI> and al&s;o Eternal with his Father, <HI>for ever and ever,</HI> v. 15. Which can be nothing but his Kingdom of <HI>Glory.</HI></P>
<P>If it be objected, That Chri&s;t's Coming in Glory is the be|ginning only of a <HI>Spiritual</HI> and <HI>Heavenly</HI> Kingdom; whereas it is here &s;aid, The Kingdoms of <HI>this</HI> World are become the King|doms of Chri&s;t: It is to be con&s;idered, That the fir&s;t &s;hew of his Kingdom is <HI>agreed by all</HI> to be upon Earth at his Coming; and for the remaining part of it, it is here expre&s;&s;ed to be for <HI>ever and ever;</HI> and &s;o al&s;o a Kingdom in Heaven with his Father.</P>
<P>It may here be &s;ugge&s;ted, That this would make the Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory, and his Kingdom of Glory here upon <HI>Earth,</HI> to be but a momentary thing, only during the time of the Day of Judgment; whereas he is repre&s;ented in &s;everal places as reigning here in Glory with his Saints for a con&s;iderable time after the end of Antichri&s;t. But Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> has given this An&s;wer to that, That according to the Notion of the <HI>Day of Judgment</HI> among the <HI>Jews,</HI> from whom the New Te&s;tament did bor|row it, it was taken <HI>for a continuance of time for</HI> 1000 <HI>years together.</HI></P>
<P>But all that need be regarded for the pre&s;ent purpo&s;e in hand, is, That it is agreed by All Parties, That the beginning of the Judgment of the Dead, properly &s;o called, is not till the &s;econd Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory.</P>
<P>By this are we a&s;&s;ured now at la&s;t, That</P>
<Q><PB N="65" REF="64"> The Bea&s;t <HI>which killed the two Witne&s;&s;es,</HI> Rev. 11. 7. <HI>is the &s;ame time of</HI> Roman <HI>Rule with the Bea&s;t in the other Chapters.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 12.</NOTE></Q>
<P>For fir&s;t, This Bea&s;t in the 11th Chapter hath one of the mo&s;t peculiar di&s;tingui&s;hing Characters of that Bea&s;t; <HI>viz.</HI> The <HI>Bea&s;t that a&s;cendeth out of the bottomle&s;s pit;</HI> which is the very &s;ame Cha|racter with that of the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter, v. 8. in ju&s;t the &s;ame peculiar phra&s;e. And the &s;ame Character has that Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, in another different expre&s;&s;ion indeed, but of the &s;ame &s;ignification; <HI>viz.</HI> That it did <HI>ri&s;e out of the Sea;</HI> for the Sea is very ordinarily called in the <HI>Septuagint</HI> (which the <HI>Greek</HI> of the New Te&s;tament does generally conform to) by the &s;ame name of <HI>the Aby&s;s,</HI> which is here rendred the <HI>bottom|le&s;s pit.</HI></P>
<P>When therefore we &s;ee, in the Chapters after this 11th Chap|ter, the mention of a Bea&s;t that is to <HI>a&s;cend out of the bottomle&s;s pit,</HI> which is made his peculiar Character, to di&s;tingui&s;h him from other &s;tates of him under the &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of his Heads; and that here there is the &s;ame peculiar de&s;cription of &s;uch a Bea&s;t, with the name of <HI>THE Bea&s;t that a&s;cendeth,</HI> &amp;c. which plainly refers us to the &s;ame Character of a Bea&s;t &s;omewhere el&s;e mentioned: It mu&s;t certainly be the &s;ame with that Bea&s;t, or el&s;e there is no ground to believe a thing to be the &s;ame at two &s;everal mentions of it, tho' it has the &s;ame peculiar Character in both places, and a Note of reference in one of them to confine it to the &s;ame thing that had been before mentioned; which in this ca&s;e would be a violation of all the fir&s;t Three Rules, which have been judged to be the &s;ure&s;t ground for any Interrpetation.</P>
<P N="2">2. Be&s;ides, they both end at the expiration of the &s;ame &s;pace of time of 42 months, or the 1260 days of the Witne&s;&s;es in Sackcloth; which is the &s;ame &s;tate in both, becau&s;e it is the la&s;t &s;tate of them both.</P>
<P>The Bea&s;t in the 11th Chapter is al&s;o de&s;cribed to end ju&s;t before a glorious Reign of Chri&s;t, in the 7th Trumpet, which is accompanied with a Judgment of the Dead. So al&s;o does the Bea&s;t in the 19th Chapter come to an end ju&s;t before a Reign of Chri&s;t, which is accompanied with the Judgment of the Dead, chap. 20.</P>
<PB N="66" REF="65">
<P> And is not this a very good ground to be confident, that they are both the &s;ame Bea&s;t, when they are &s;aid to end at the ex|piration of the &s;ame peculiar &s;pace of time, and at the beginning of ju&s;t the &s;ame kind of peculiar Reign of Chri&s;t over all the world, and for ever and ever, and that is accompanied with the Judgment of the Dead? For &s;ince they are thus found, from the&s;e Circum&s;tances, to be contemporary, how can a Bea&s;t with &s;o peculiar Characters, that are the &s;ame in the other, and at the &s;ame time, be &s;uppo&s;ed to be quite another thing?</P>
<P>In both the mentions of the Bea&s;ts, we al&s;o find them <HI>warring again&s;t the &s;ame Martyrs,</HI> or <HI>Witne&s;&s;es</HI> of God, and Chri&s;t, and in both <HI>overcoming them,</HI> and <HI>being overcome</HI> by them, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>From hence may very &s;afely be determined, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Bea&s;t is to continue till the beginning of an &V;niver&s;al and Eternal</HI> <MILESTONE UNIT="Corollary."> Reign of Chri&s;t over the Kingdoms of this World.</Q>
<P>The&s;e four la&s;t Conclu&s;ions have al&s;o the Con&s;ent of many of the mo&s;t eminent Interpreters <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>RIbera,</HI> about the 15th ver&s;e of the 11th Chapter, in his Di&s;cour&s;e up|on Chap. 10. num. 20.</P>
<P><HI>Caecus e&s;t, qui non videt,</HI> &amp;c. He is blind, that does not &s;ee that the&s;e things cannot be, but after the ruin of Antichri&s;t, and at the time of the Judgment.</P>
<P><HI>Malvenda</HI> de Antichri&s;to, pag. 226.&mdash;No man of &s;en&s;e can doubt, but that the Bea&s;t in the 11th and 13th Chapters, is the &s;ame Bea&s;t.</P></NOTE> of the Church of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>Thus then do we find at la&s;t, That the term of <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> does &s;ignifie one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of his Reign in all the &s;everal Chapters where it is mentioned.</P>
<P>And from the la&s;t proof of this in the 11th Chapter, it ap|pears, That the Account of the la&s;t end of the Bea&s;t there, is before the Account of his fir&s;t ri&s;e in the 13th Chapter, and &s;o mentioned in the 11th Chapter, as a thing that was af|terwards to appear.</P>
<P>Which does &s;ufficiently a&s;&s;ure us, THAT the Order of the things in this Prophecy is many times tran&s;po&s;ed.</P>
<PB N="65" REF="65">
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="2" TYPE="book">
<PB REF="66">
<PB N="67" REF="66">
<HEAD>The Second BOOK.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">THE Con&s;tant Uniform Signification OF A BEAST, And its PARTS, All over <HI>DANIEL.</HI></HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. I.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Prophecy of</HI> Daniel <HI>the cleare&s;t Rule for the &s;ignifica|tion of</HI> A Bea&s;t, <HI>and its Ruling Parts.</HI> Porphyry's <HI>Objection again&s;t the Authority of it. The greate&s;t Con|firmation of the plainne&s;s of the Predictions in it. The Authority of the Book</HI> Daniel, <HI>proved. The 13th Pro|po&s;ition, The</HI> Kingdom of the Son of Man, <HI>in the 7th of</HI> Daniel, <HI>a Kingdom of Chri&s;t Je&s;us. The &s;ingularity of</HI> Grotius<HI>'s Notion of the</HI> Son of Man <HI>in that place, judg|ed to be Bla&s;phemy by the Sanhedrim.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WE have now our pro&s;pect very much enlarged, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE> by a multitude of known Marks of the Bea&s;t, which is found to be the &s;ame particular &s;tate of one of its Heads from the fir&s;t mention of him in Chap. 11. to the la&s;t end of his Hi&s;tory in Chapter 20. by which he is de&s;cribed to us in all his lineaments, with his Ri&s;e,
<PB N="68" REF="67"> his Mark, his Actions, and his End, and with a great many of his A&s;&s;i&s;tants and Dependants. And, I think, I could make un|que&s;tionable to any that were impartial and con&s;iderate enough, that one may come to a very &s;atisfactory determination from hence about the particular knowledge of him.</P>
<P>But becau&s;e I would continue firm to my fir&s;t de&s;ign of carry|ing on the proof all along in &s;o full and convincing a manner, as &s;hould be able to &s;atisfie the mo&s;t <HI>&s;ceptical</HI> &s;cruples, it will be much more u&s;eful to con&s;ult the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> for the con|&s;tant &s;ignification of the my&s;tical Phra&s;es that are made u&s;e of all over the&s;e Vi&s;ions in the <HI>Revelations;</HI> for there is a great deal more evidence of the determinate &s;ignification of <HI>a Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>general,</HI> and of the Heads, and Horns, and Actions of a Bea&s;t in that Prophecy. There are a multitude of In&s;tances there of the con&s;tant u&s;e of the&s;e figures in one and the &s;ame deter|minate Notion; and it is generally agreed, That St. <HI>John,</HI> by the like expre&s;&s;ions in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> does every-where allude to them, as the Original Copy of his Figures, and as a <HI>Nomen|clator</HI> to explain the meaning of them. <HI>[See References in the 5th Chapter.</HI></P>
<P>There is al&s;o this further advantage in the Prophetical U&s;ages of the my&s;tical Expre&s;&s;ions in <HI>Daniel,</HI> That there is the concur|rence of almo&s;t all Interpreters in the particular &s;ignification of them, who yet differ from one another about the &s;ignification of the &s;ame Expre&s;&s;ions in the <HI>Revelations:</HI> And as I found this to be of very great effect for the &s;ilencing of mine own Scruples, &s;o is it the mo&s;t certainly &s;atisfactory method for the generality of the World.</P>
<P>The Prophecies of <HI>Daniel</HI> have indeed that advantage above <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> any other My&s;tical Writings of that nature, that the things foretold in them, are &s;o plainly de&s;cribed, That all who have con&s;idered them, have in all Ages, till this latter, generally agreed about their Interpretation; <HI>One or two In&s;tances</HI> to the contrary in the &s;pace of &s;o many Ages will be no material ex|ception again&s;t it by <HI>Rule the 4th.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Porphyrie the Philo&s;opher,</HI> who is the fir&s;t that is &s;aid to be of a different mind from the re&s;t, yet gives &s;uch a rea&s;on for his con|fining the date and matter of the&s;e Prophe&s;ies to the times of <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> as does unque&s;tionably confirm the clearne&s;s <NOTE PLACE="marg">S. <HI>Hierom.</HI> Prooem. in <HI>Dan.</HI></NOTE> of his Expre&s;&s;ions in all his Vi&s;ions. St. <HI>Jerom</HI> acquaints us, that
<PB N="69" REF="67"> his rea&s;on for it was, <Q>Becau&s;e it &s;eemed plain to him, That the Author mu&s;t have lived about the times of <HI>Epiphanes,</HI> from the di&s;tinct Account he gives us in the 11th Chapter, of the Succe&s;&s;ions and Actions of the <HI>Syrian</HI> and <HI>Egyptian</HI> Kings under the names of the King of the <HI>North,</HI> and of the King of the <HI>South,</HI> till the time of <HI>Epiphanes.</HI> And &s;o he will have it to be an Hi&s;tory of what is pa&s;t, and not a Prophecy of things to come.</Q></P>
<P>Could there be a greater Te&s;timony of the clearne&s;s of Pro|phetical Expre&s;&s;ions, than to &s;ee a profe&s;t Enemy to it, acknow|ledge it to be &s;o very plain, that he could not believe it to be <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Cathol. Expo&s;. Eccle&s;. in</HI> Apoc. <HI>Tanta enim dictorum fides fuit, &amp;c.</HI> For the things were &s;o plainly fulfilled, that to Unbelievers he &s;eemed not to have foretold things to come, but to have related things before pa&s;t and done.</NOTE> any thing but <HI>an Hi&s;tory of things pa&s;t?</HI></P>
<P>As for his &s;u&s;picion of the Authority of it, that is as &s;atisfa|ctorily an&s;wered as need be.</P>
<P N="1">1. By our Saviour's owning the Prophecy, <HI>Matth.</HI> 24. 15. Which to Chri&s;tians is an undeniable proof, though it could not be &s;o to an Infidel.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Jo&s;ephus,</HI> who lived about the time of Chri&s;t (not two hundred years after <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes)</HI> does own the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> for the mo&s;t con&s;iderable of any that they had; and relates of it, That it was &s;hown to <HI>Alexander the Great,</HI> by <HI>Jad|dus</HI> the High-Prie&s;t, upon the account of the 8th Chapter, which did plainly foretel his Conque&s;t of the <HI>Per&s;ian;</HI> And that this was owned by <HI>Alexander,</HI> and rewarded with many great Privileges to the <HI>Jews,</HI> particularly that of being Tax-free every &s;eventh year, which, no que&s;tion, remained to <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI>'s Age as the publick Memorial of that Action. What an unaccounta|ble Forgery would that be, which &s;hould be able to impo&s;e &s;o &s;trangely upon one of the mo&s;t Learned Antiquaries in that Age, and make him take a Writing concerning his own Nation not Two hundred years old, for an Ancient Writing of Five hun|dred years &s;tanding?</P>
<P N="3">3. E&s;pecially, when we con&s;ider, that it had been long re|ceived into the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Canon of Scripture in <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI>'s days, and had been con&s;tantly u&s;ed in <HI>Greek</HI> Tran&s;lations in their Syna|gogues
<PB N="70" REF="68"> (as appears by our Saviour's Quotations) which is im|po&s;&s;ible for a forged Book, not much above One hundred years old, to have been.</P>
<P>After this a&s;&s;urance, <HI>Porphyry</HI>'s &s;u&s;picion that it was an Hi&s;to|ry of things &s;een by the Writer of it, is as great a confirmation as can be de&s;ired of the clearne&s;s of <HI>Daniel</HI>'s meaning in his Pro|phetical De&s;criptions in &s;ome parts of his Vi&s;ions; And the ge|neral concurrence of almo&s;t all Interpreters about the determi|nate &s;en&s;e of the re&s;t, is proof enough of the plainne&s;s of his Ex|pre&s;&s;ions in all.</P>
<P>For what can give one a plainer ground to pre&s;ume that it is ea&s;ie to arrive at a perfect knowledge of the &s;ignification of the My&s;tical Schemes of a Prophecy, than fir&s;t to &s;ee it accu&s;ed by <HI>an Enemy</HI> of having been wrote after the things were done, <HI>only upon the account of the clearne&s;s</HI> of the terms that are u&s;ed to ex|pre&s;s them; And next, to &s;ee all Interpreters of the mo&s;t diffe|rent Parties and Intere&s;ts unanimou&s;ly agreed upon the particu|lar Application of them?</P>
<P>This is an encouragement &s;ufficient to make one hope for the fulle&s;t &s;atisfaction from the Vi&s;ions of <HI>Daniel</HI> concerning the con|&s;tant &s;ignification of the &s;ame My&s;tical Terms in both Prophecies: In order to which, The fir&s;t thing, that it is the mo&s;t nece&s;&s;ary to be re&s;olved about, as the general Ba&s;is of all that is to follow, is this Propo&s;ition.</P>
<Q><HI>That the Kingdom</HI> of the Son of Man <HI>in</HI> Daniel <HI>the 7th, v.</HI> 13, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 13.</NOTE> 14. <HI>is &s;ome Kingdom of Chri&s;t Je&s;us upon Earth.</HI></Q>
<P N="1">1. <HI>That it is &s;ome Kingdom upon Earth,</HI> is manife&s;t from v. 27. where it is &s;aid, that it is the <HI>greatne&s;s of the Kingdom under the whole Heaven.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>That it is the Kingdom of our Je&s;us,</HI> is as certain, as it is, that our Je&s;us was the true <HI>Me&s;&s;ias.</HI> For there is no name of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias</HI> any-where &s;o peculiarly owned by Chri&s;t, as this name of the Son of Man is all over the Go&s;pel. And as by the note of reference joined with it, it mu&s;t refer to &s;ome u&s;e of that name in &s;ome places of the Old Te&s;tament, where it is before mentioned; &s;o do we find St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 24. 30. what place of the Old Te&s;tament that is. For our Saviour does there join that name of his with the very <HI>&s;ame</HI> Circum&s;tances that it is
<PB N="71" REF="68"> mentioned with here in <HI>Daniel.</HI> In that place of St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> and in all the other Go&s;pels be&s;ide in his Prophecy of his com|ing, he calls it the <HI>coming of the Son of Man in the clouds of Heaven with power and great glory,</HI> which is ju&s;t the &s;ame with that in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> about the <HI>coming of the Son of Man in the clouds of Heaven, and his waving an &V;niver&s;al Kingdom given him</HI> at the time of that Judgment, when there were infinite multitudes of An|gels attending.</P>
<P>It is mo&s;t certain from our Saviour's Examination before the High-Prie&s;t, That it was the commonly received Opinion of all men in tho&s;e days, That the name of the <HI>Son of Man</HI> in tho&s;e cir|cum&s;tances of his appearance that are mentioned in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> was the <HI>peculiar</HI> name of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> or of that eminent Chri&s;t, who&s;e coming was the great expectation of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Nation, and was appropriated to him alone. For upon that &s;olemn adjuration of the High-Prie&s;t to Je&s;us, to tell him whe|ther he were the Chri&s;t, which was <HI>the putting him to his Oath</HI> about it; the An&s;wer which our Saviour gives to it, is expre&s;|&s;ed in the&s;e very words of <HI>Daniel,</HI> viz. The <HI>Son of Man that was to come in the clouds of Heaven,</HI> Together with the Circum&s;tance of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Matth. 26. 64, 65, 66.</NOTE> <HI>&s;itting on the right hand of the power of God;</HI> The &s;ame with his Being <HI>brough near to the Ancient of days, who was upon his Throne</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 10, 13.</NOTE> <HI>with myriads of Angels about him:</HI> And this was &s;o pre&s;ently un|der&s;tood for an An&s;wer of his being the Chri&s;t, and &s;o <HI>generally,</HI> that the High-Prie&s;t thereupon forthwith <HI>rent his cloaths,</HI> and cryed that he had &s;poken Bla&s;phemy; and <HI>all the re&s;t</HI> about him judged him to be worthy of death.</P>
<P>To me therefore it looks like an Infatuation in &s;o under&s;tand|ing a Per&s;on as <HI>Grotius,</HI> To make the Son of Man in this 7th of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grot. in v. 13. cap. 7. Dan.</NOTE> <HI>Daniel</HI> to &s;ignify nothing but the <HI>Roman People;</HI> when he him&s;elf in his Comment upon the very &s;ame Expre&s;&s;ion, and joined with the &s;ame Circum&s;tances in the 24th of St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> v. 30. had acknowledged it to be &s;poken of Chri&s;t: And on St. <HI>Mat|thew</HI> 26. 64. does expre&s;ly &s;ay, that our Saviour's owning him|&s;elf there to be the Chri&s;t, does refer to the &s;ame way of expre&s;|&s;ing it in this 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI> And which is the mo&s;t to be admi|red, This he does without giving any account of any nece&s;&s;ity for it, from this or any other place, where it is u&s;ed, but thinks it &s;ufficient, that in this new &s;en&s;e it will uphold a new Hypo|the&s;is. This is therefore another plain in&s;tance again&s;t how
<PB N="72" REF="69"> clear a Light <HI>Grotius</HI> is able to &s;hut his eyes, to be con&s;tant to a new Invention, though again&s;t the unanimous agreement of all the World be&s;ides, and even to the hazarding of the Crime of Bla&s;phemy. For a Crime of that nature was it judged to be by the whole Sanhedrim of the <HI>Jews</HI> (as has been ju&s;t ob&s;erved) to give the incommunicable name of the <HI>Son of Man,</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> to any other, than to the true <HI>Me&s;&s;ias:</HI> And the error of their Judgment was only the fixing of that Crime upon him, who was the <HI>True</HI> Chri&s;t, to whom it did really belong.</P>
<P>It does indeed by this &s;eem to be a double Bla&s;phemy; fir&s;t to take away the proper Character of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias</HI> from the True Chri&s;t: And next, To give it away to a thing, that neither he him&s;elf, nor any el&s;e, ever thought to be the Chri&s;t.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="75" REF="69">
<HEAD>CHAP. II. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mat. XXIV.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The 14th Propo&s;ition,</HI> The Kingdom of the Son of Man, Dan. 7. <HI>is the &s;econd Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory. This demon&s;trated upon Four General Heads. Fir&s;t, From its being the &s;ame with</HI> the Kingdom of the Saints <HI>in that Chapter.</HI> 2. <HI>From its being the &s;ame with</HI> the Reign of Chri&s;t, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 15. 3. <HI>From its being the &s;ame with the beginning of</HI> the Re&s;urrection, <HI>Dan.</HI> 12. 2. <HI>This evinced in three Lemma's.</HI> 4. <HI>From its being the &s;ame with that which is determined by our Saviour, and the Apo&s;tles, to be the Second Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory. This confirmed in &s;ix Particulars. Dr.</HI> Hammond<HI>'s Objection again&s;t this, an&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>SINCE now it is undoubted, that the Kingdom of the Son of Man is &s;ome Kingdom of our Je&s;us, The Characters of it will make appear what Kingdom of his it is; and from a view of them, it may be re&s;olved, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Kingdom of the Son of Man in the 7th of</HI> Daniel, <HI>is the Se|cond</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 14.</NOTE> <HI>Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory.</HI></Q>
<P>One would ea&s;ily be per&s;uaded of this at the fir&s;t fight of the glorious Properties of it, and e&s;pecially upon the account of its <HI>&V;niver&s;al</HI> Command, and the <HI>Eternal</HI> Duration of it. For what el&s;e is his <HI>coming in Glory</HI> for, but to take po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the whole World, and to reign with his Father, and his Saints in it, to all Eternity? And though he delivers up his Kingdom to his Fa|ther at the la&s;t end, yet he has &s;o much &s;hare in it, as to have it here called <HI>his Everla&s;ting Kingdom:</HI> As el&s;ewhere it is &s;aid al&s;o; <HI>And he &s;hall reign for ever and ever.</HI> But it may be &s;aid, that this <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 11. 15.</NOTE> was verified of Chri&s;t at his fir&s;t coming: For at his A&s;cen&s;ion into Heaven, he is &s;aid <HI>to have all Power given unto him both in</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Matth. 28. 18.</NOTE> <HI>Heaven and Earth.</HI> It mu&s;t therefore be &s;hown, that by the Cha|racters of the Kingdom of the Son of Man in this place, it can|not
<PB N="76" REF="70"> be that <HI>&V;niver&s;al</HI> Power which was given to Chri&s;t at his <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE> A&s;cen&s;ion into Heaven, and his <HI>&s;itting on the Right hand of Power.</HI></P>
<P>For this purpo&s;e, it is to be con&s;idered, That the Kingdom of the Son of Man, and That of the Saints, in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the &s;ame Kingdom; for they both are de&s;cribed as beginning at the &s;ame time, at the de&s;truction of the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> and have the &s;ame Characters of an Univer&s;al and Eter|nal Dominion, which it is impo&s;&s;ible for two different Kingdoms to have at the &s;ame time.</P>
<P>And the Kingdom of the Saints has the&s;e Properties in it.</P>
<P N="1">1. To begin at the de&s;truction of a Kingdom, that did <HI>devour</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 21, 22.</NOTE> <HI>the whole Earth,</HI> and of a great tyrannizing Power in it, who did <HI>wear out the Saints of the Mo&s;t High;</HI> that is, at the de&s;truction of <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 26, 27.</NOTE> all the Enemies of the Church upon Earth; for thereupon it had his Dominion, and all Dominions under the whole Heaven.</P>
<P><HI>2dly.</HI> To be in the actual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the Obedience of <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14.</NOTE> <HI>All People, Nations,</HI> and <HI>Languages,</HI> and of <HI>All Dominions under Heaven.</HI></P>
<P><HI>3dly.</HI> To be <HI>Eternal,</HI> from that fir&s;t beginning of &s;uch an <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid. &amp; v. 27.</NOTE> Univer&s;al Dominion.</P>
<P>And this can be nothing but Chri&s;t's Second Coming in Glory: For tho' all Power both in Heaven and Earth was gi|ven unto him at his A&s;cen&s;ion into Heaven, yet St. <HI>Paul</HI> tells us, That <HI>all things then were not put under him,</HI> and that he had not <NOTE PLACE="marg">Heb. 2. 8.</NOTE> then <HI>put down all Authority, and Rule, and Power;</HI> nor had he <NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Cor. 15, 24, 25.</NOTE> <HI>put all his Enemies under his feet;</HI> which yet we &s;ee is nece&s;&s;ary to be done, to have His Kingdom be That of the Saints in this 7th of <HI>Daniel;</HI> and which, when it does comes to pa&s;s, St. <HI>Paul</HI> in the &s;ame places does &s;hew us to be his Coming in Glory.</P>
<P>But what appearance ever was there of &s;uch an Univer&s;al Kingdom of Chri&s;t on Earth in the time of the Ten <HI>Poman</HI> Per|&s;ecutions; or in the time of the <HI>Saracen</HI> and <HI>Turki&s;h</HI> Empires af|ter them? And what fourth Kingdom, that ruled over all the Earth, was de&s;troyed at the A&s;cen&s;ion of Chri&s;t into Heaven, into who&s;e Place and Dominion the Kingdom of Chri&s;t and his Saints did &s;ucceed?</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="77" REF="70"> 2. The Kingdom of the Son of Man, or of the Saints, ap|pears to have the &s;ame individual Characters with that &s;tate of the Church, which has been already &s;hewn (by <HI>Coroll. Prop.</HI> 11.) <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 11. 15.</NOTE> to be the time of Chri&s;t's Second Coming in Glory: For they <HI>both begin</HI> at the <HI>la&s;t end</HI> of a Kingdom, &s;ignified by A Bea&s;t, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 14, 26. Rev. 11. 15.</NOTE> which ruled over all the World, and at the <HI>end</HI> of the la&s;t Per&s;e|cution of the Church; and from that time they reign in triumph <HI>for ever and ever.</HI></P>
<P>They are <HI>both</HI> from their fir&s;t beginning over all the King|doms of the World, and Eternal: They are therefore de&s;cribed to reign in the &s;ame place for the <HI>&s;ame continuance</HI> of time, and <HI>at</HI> the <HI>&s;ame particular time;</HI> and it is impo&s;&s;ible for two different Kingdoms of the &s;ame nature to be in the <HI>&s;ame place,</HI> and <HI>at the &s;ame time.</HI> Wherefore, &s;ince the <HI>One</HI> of the&s;e is known to be the time of Chri&s;t's Second Coming in Glory, the <HI>Other</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o of nece&s;&s;ity be the &s;ame.</P>
<P>Accordingly do we find in <HI>both</HI> the circum&s;tances of <HI>War|ring again&s;t the Saints,</HI> and <HI>overcoming</HI> them ju&s;t <HI>before</HI> the begin|ning of them, and a famous remarkable Judgment accompany|ing them.</P>
<P N="3">3. To confirm this &s;till further from this Prophecy it &s;elf, if we compare the circum&s;tances of the Kingdom of the Son of Man in this Chapter, with the de&s;cription of the Re&s;urrection in the 12th Chapter, it will be unque&s;tionable. For the <HI>time, times,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 12. 2.</NOTE> <HI>and an half,</HI> in the 7th ver&s;e of the 12th Chapter, are &s;aid to end at the <HI>end of the Wonders</HI> that had before been prophe&s;ied of, and at the beginning of the la&s;t deliverance of the People of God from affliction. Now the <HI>end of the Wonders,</HI> or things of the Prophecy, is the <HI>awaking of tho&s;e that &s;leep in the du&s;t of the Earth,</HI> v. 2. which, by the circum&s;tances of <HI>Everla&s;ting Life,</HI> and <HI>Ever|la&s;ting Contempt,</HI> appears to be a Re&s;urrection of the Dead; and this mu&s;t certainly be the time of Chri&s;t's Coming in Glory. And then the <HI>time</HI> and <HI>times</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o end at this Second Coming of Chri&s;t, becau&s;e they are &s;aid to end at the conclu&s;ion of tho&s;e Wonders, which is, at the awaking of the Dead.</P>
<P>From hence it appears, That the&s;e <HI>times</HI> in the 12th Chapter, are the &s;ame particular time with the <HI>time,</HI> and <HI>times,</HI> and <HI>the dividing of time</HI> in the <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 25. For they are both of them the &s;ame length of time, and they both end at the la&s;t deliverance of the People of God from Per&s;ecution in this World. Tho&s;e in the 12th Chap|ter
<PB N="78" REF="71"> are de&s;cribed to end at <HI>the accompli&s;hment of a &s;cattering of God's</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mat. XXIV.</NOTE> <HI>People,</HI> ju&s;t before the awaking of the Dead, or Chri&s;t's Second Coming in Glory; and tho&s;e in the 7th Chapter are de&s;cribed to end at the <HI>de&s;truction of the little Horn,</HI> which is followed by an univer&s;al Reign of the Saints for ever; and therefore &s;hews the Per&s;ecution that preceded it, to be the la&s;t.</P>
<P>The <HI>times</HI> therefore in both Chapters, do end at the &s;ame time; and being both of the &s;ame length of duration, they mu&s;t therefore be the &s;ame particular time from the beginning to the end of it.</P>
<P>And hence it appears, That the Kingdom of the Son of Man in the 7th Chapter, is Chri&s;t's Second Coming in Glory, be|cau&s;e it begins at the end of the <HI>times</HI> in that Chapter, which are the &s;ame with the <HI>times</HI> in the 12th Chapter, which have ju&s;t now been proved to end at Chri&s;t's Second Coming in Glory.</P>
<P>And here it is well worth the ob&s;erving, what another wre&s;ting of plain words <HI>Grotius</HI> pre&s;ents us withal, about the <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Grot.</HI> in Dan. 12. 2.</NOTE> <HI>awaking of the Dead,</HI> ch. 12. v. 2.&mdash;He would have the Heathen <HI>Porphyry</HI> to be the be&s;t Interpreter of the&s;e words, who makes this ri&s;ing of the Dead to be nothing but the return of &s;ome per&s;ecuted <HI>Jews;</HI> and yet both <HI>Grotius</HI> and <HI>Porphyry</HI> confe&s;s, That <HI>the words are very wonderfully and artificially put together, to hint at the my&s;tery of the Re&s;urrection:</HI> So wonderfully indeed, as it is to be admired how they can be made to intend any thing el&s;e.</P>
<P N="4">4. Again, the very &s;ame peculiar words, and de&s;cription with the&s;e in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> about the <HI>coming of the Son of Man,</HI> does our Saviour u&s;e to &s;ignifie his <HI>Second Coming in Glory,</HI> Matth. 24. 30, 31. And withal, it may be plainly ob&s;erved, That he re|ferred to that place in <HI>Daniel</HI> in tho&s;e words, and that de&s;cripti|on, which it is therefore convenient in the fir&s;t place to be well &s;atisfied in.</P>
<P>It is affirmed by a very judicious and impartial Critick, That <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede.</HI></NOTE> the term of the <HI>Son of Man</HI> in that ver&s;e of St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> and which was &s;o familiar an expre&s;&s;ion with him to &s;ignifie his being the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> could be taken from no other place in the Old Te&s;tament, as the Name of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> but from this 7th Chap|ter of <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<PB N="79" REF="71">
<P> But &s;urely this will never more be que&s;tioned, when it is con&s;idered, That our Saviour, contrary to almo&s;t all the cu&s;tom of his Di&s;cour&s;es any where el&s;e, has quoted <HI>Daniel by name,</HI> but a few Ver&s;es before this 30th Ver&s;e, in the very &s;ame <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 15.</NOTE> continued Prophecy. When therefore, &s;oon after this, we find in that Ver&s;e, the &s;ame words and circum&s;tances with the&s;e here in <HI>Daniel,</HI> about the Coming of the Son of Man; how is it po&s;&s;ible for any man to que&s;tion, Whether our Saviour did mean the <HI>&s;ame thing</HI> with that which was &s;ignified in <HI>Daniel</HI> by the <HI>&s;ame words,</HI> unle&s;s there were &s;ome &s;o very clear ground again&s;t it, as to force him to que&s;tion it? Which will not here be found.</P>
<P><HI>Grotius</HI> therefore, our chief Adver&s;ary in the&s;e things, does allow, That the &s;ame expre&s;&s;ion, <HI>Matth.</HI> 26. 64. is a plain re|ference to this 7th of <HI>Daniel:</HI> which makes him to appear &s;o much the more extravagant in his fancy of quite another mean|ing in the &s;ame words, and de&s;cription of that place in <HI>Daniel,</HI> from what he determines them to &s;ignifie in St. <HI>Matthew.</HI></P>
<P>It is now therefore to be confirmed, That by the &s;ame de|&s;cription and words of Chri&s;t, <HI>Matth.</HI> 24. 30, 31. cannot be under&s;tood any thing but his <HI>Second Coming in Glory;</HI> which will appear from the&s;e following Con&s;iderations:</P>
<P N="1">1. The Coming of the Son of Man, <HI>Matth.</HI> 24. 30. is joined with the <HI>end of the world,</HI> for the time of it, as may be &s;een in the que&s;tion about it, v. 3. And there is no other mention of the end of the world to an&s;wer that que&s;tion in all the Chapter, but as it is included in this Coming of the Son of Man, and the <HI>&s;ending his Angels to gather all</HI> to Judgment after it. As for the phra&s;e in the Original to &s;ignifie the <HI>end of the world,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, it is the very &s;ame that is made u&s;e of <HI>Matth.</HI> 13. in three &s;everal places in that one Chapter, for the la&s;t end of the world, as by all is granted: for in the 39, 40, 49 ver&s;es, it is accompanied with the la&s;t di&s;crimination of the <HI>Good</HI> and the <HI>Evil.</HI></P>
<P>Now to evade this, it is alledged, That <GAP DESC="foreign"> here rendred <HI>the World,</HI> may &s;ignify here, as it &s;ometimes does, that <HI>pre&s;ent Age;</HI> and then the phra&s;e <GAP DESC="foreign">, is no more than the end of that pre&s;ent Generation.</P>
<P>But let the u&s;e of <GAP DESC="foreign"> alone by it &s;elf, be what it will, yet no|thing is more known, than that &s;ingle words mu&s;t follow the
<PB N="80" REF="72"> common u&s;e of the Phra&s;e that they are a part of, what&s;oever <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE> their &s;ignification is alone by them&s;elves; and the u&s;e of <GAP DESC="foreign"> we &s;ee by tho&s;e three places in one Chapter, is to &s;ignify and expre&s;s the end of the World.</P>
<P>For the &s;ame rea&s;on mu&s;t that &s;ame Phra&s;e in St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 28. 20. be taken in the &s;ame &s;en&s;e, becau&s;e, however dubious it may there be by rea&s;on of the thing of which it is &s;aid, yet &s;ince the &s;ignification of it is known to be determined in other places, the dubious u&s;e of it mu&s;t be determined by that which is clear, and undoubted. <GAP DESC="foreign">, u&s;ed by St. <HI>Paul,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. 11. is quite another expre&s;&s;ion, and can &s;ignify at be&s;t no more than the la&s;t Ages of the World.</P>
<P N="2">2. The coming of the Son of Man in that place of St. <HI>Mat|thew,</HI> is joined with the la&s;t di&s;criminating Act of the Good from the Bad, by the &s;ending his Angels out for that purpo&s;e, v. 31. which is certainly the &s;ame Circum&s;tance with that before|mentioned in St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 13. and which is twice in that Chap|ter joined with that, which is acknowledged to be the <HI>real</HI> end of the World. This is al&s;o further confirmed from the 31, 32, ver&s;es of the very next Chapter to this, which is but a conti|nuation of the Account of the coming of the Son of Man that is <NOTE PLACE="marg">Matth. 25.</NOTE> here mentioned: In tho&s;e ver&s;es of the 25th Chapter, there is the &s;ame circum&s;tance with that here mentioned of the coming of the Son of Man <HI>with his holy Angels</HI> to di&s;criminate the Good from the Evil: And that that Act of the Angel's in the 25 Chap|ter, is certainly at the Day of Judgment, is unque&s;tionable from the 46 ver&s;e, and is acknowledged by all.</P>
<P N="3">3. The <HI>coming of the Son of Man</HI> is &s;aid to be here <HI>with power, and great glory,</HI> and his Angels are employed with him; And &s;uch a glorious Coming as that with his <HI>Angels,</HI> is known every|where el&s;e to &s;ignify the &s;econd Coming of Chri&s;t: As in Saint <HI>Matthew</HI> 16. 27. where it is joined with the la&s;t Reward, and follows upon the di&s;cour&s;e of gaining, or lo&s;ing ones own Soul. As al&s;o 2 <HI>The&s;&s;alon.</HI> 1. 7. where that Appearance of Chri&s;t with his Angels, is certainly his coming to Judgment, v. 8. <HI>with flames of fire,</HI> v. 9. to the <HI>everla&s;ting</HI> de&s;truction of tho&s;e <HI>that obey not the Go&s;pel.</HI></P>
<P>There is al&s;o the &s;ame Circum&s;tance of his coming with his <HI>Angels in glory,</HI> St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 25. 31. where it is acknowledged that it &s;ignifies his coming to Judgment.</P>
<P N="4"><PB N="81" REF="72"> 4. This <HI>coming of the Son of Man</HI> in St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> is at the &s;ame time, that <HI>he &s;ends out his Angels with a great &s;ound of a Trumpet, to gather his Elect from all parts of the World;</HI> and that is a peculiar <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 31.</NOTE> Circum&s;tance of Chri&s;t's la&s;t coming: As is acknowledged in 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 4. 16. and in 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15. 52.</P>
<P N="5">5. The de&s;cription of his <HI>coming in the clouds of Heaven</HI> was the chief thing that made <HI>Grotius</HI> him&s;elf acknowledge, that this <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grot. <HI>in</HI> v. 30.<HI>&mdash;tum praecipue id, quod, &amp;c.</HI> Act. 1. 9, 11.</NOTE> mu&s;t be meant of our Saviour's la&s;t coming, becau&s;e it was &s;o promi&s;ed, <HI>Act.</HI> 1. 11. That he &s;hould <HI>come from Heaven upon a Cloud,</HI> ju&s;t as they then &s;aw him going into Heaven. And this is con|firmed by 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 4. 17. which is acknowledged to &s;ignify the la&s;t coming of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="6">6. To this may be added the con&s;ideration of the concurrence of mo&s;t of the&s;e &s;ame peculiar Circum&s;tances in places which do unque&s;tionably &s;ignify the <HI>la&s;t coming of Chri&s;t.</HI> As in the 31&s;t and 32d ver&s;es of the 25th Chapter, where we have almo&s;t ju&s;t the &s;ame crowd of particular Expre&s;&s;ions and De&s;criptions with tho&s;e in the 30th and 31&s;t ver&s;es of the 24th Chapter. There is the mention of his <HI>coming in glory,</HI> and <HI>with his Angels,</HI> and <HI>to gather the Elect from the</HI> re&s;t out of all Nations. So again in the 4th Chapter of 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> v. 16, 17. there are the Circum&s;tances of the <HI>Triumph,</HI> and of the <HI>Clouds,</HI> and the <HI>Angels</HI> employed in it, as here. And in the 27th ver&s;e of the 16th Chapter of Saint <HI>Matthew,</HI> we find the <HI>coming in glory,</HI> and <HI>the Angels,</HI> and the <HI>la&s;t Reward.</HI></P>
<P>Who can de&s;ire a more convincing Proof of the &s;ame &s;ignifi|cation of words in &s;everal places, than to &s;ee them thus joined with the &s;ame very many <HI>peculiar</HI> Circum&s;tances and Expre&s;&s;ions in all tho&s;e places? And therefore do we find an almo&s;t unani|mous <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> Con&s;ent among&s;t all &s;orts of Interpreters, that this <HI>coming of the Son of Man,</HI> St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 24. 30. mu&s;t be his &s;econd com|ing in glory. <HI>Grotius</HI> him&s;elf, in this, is forced to be of the &s;ame mind with the re&s;t.</P>
<P>Dr. <HI>Hammond</HI> indeed does here venture at a &s;train higher than ever his Friend <HI>Grotius</HI> could allow him&s;elf.</P>
<P>A great Objection is it judged by &s;ome to be, That it is &s;aid of this coming of the Son of Man in St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 24. that it &s;hould be <HI>immediately after the tribulation of tho&s;e days</HI> which were <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 29.</NOTE> a little before mentioned about the De&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> and the end of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> State. And the time of this &s;eems to him to be
<PB N="82" REF="73"> &s;till more nece&s;&s;arily determined to <HI>that Age</HI> by that <HI>Solemn</HI> A&s;&s;e|veration, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mat. XXIV.</NOTE> <HI>Verily, verily, I &s;ay unto you, This Generation &s;hall not pa&s;s, till all the&s;e things be fulfilled.</HI></P>
<P>In the fir&s;t of th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e places there will be found to be no ground for the exception, if it be con&s;idered from St. <HI>Luke, what is the Tribulation of tho&s;e days.</HI> It is there expre&s;&s;ed to be the <HI>being led away Captive into all Nations,</HI> and the <HI>treading down of</HI> Jeru&s;alem <HI>by the</HI> Gentiles, <HI>till the times of the</HI> Gentiles <HI>&s;hould be fulfilled:</HI> And th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n the <HI>immediately after the Tribulation of tho&s;e days,</HI> is a time that is yet to come: And the coming of the Son of Man (in St. <HI>Luke)</HI> in the &s;ame Di&s;cour&s;e with that other before-mention'd in St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> is found to be after this mention of the Capti|vity.</P>
<P>It will not be very hard in the next place to under&s;tand what things they are, who&s;e fulfilling is tied to <HI>that pre&s;ent Generation,</HI> if we do but look into the terms of the Que&s;tion in St. <HI>Mark,</HI> where we find it demanded about the ruine of the Temple <HI>only, What</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mark 13. 4.</NOTE> <HI>&s;hall be the &s;ign when all the&s;e things,</HI> that is about the Temple, <HI>&s;hall be fulfilled?</HI> which are the very &s;ame words with tho&s;e in the other Ver&s;e, that <HI>All th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e things &s;hould be fulfilled</HI> before that Gene|ration <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 30.</NOTE> &s;hould pa&s;s away, which do follow pre&s;ently after the men|tion <HI>of the Signs</HI> that &s;hould <HI>begin</HI> the whole Scene of the Prophecy, as if it were wholly re&s;trained to them. And then the meaning of <HI>All the&s;e things &s;hall be fulfilled,</HI> will be the &s;ame with that which the Je&s;uit <HI>Ribera,</HI> and mo&s;t others with him, do determine the &s;en&s;e of a <HI>like expre&s;&s;ion</HI> at the beginning, and at the end of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> to be: in both which places it is &s;aid of all the things in that Book, that they were <HI>things that mu&s;t &s;hortly be done,</HI> or fulfilled; <HI>That is,</HI> &s;ays <HI>Ribera</HI> of tho&s;e words, <HI>things that mu&s;t &s;hortly begin to be done; which,</HI> he &s;ays, <HI>is a common way of &s;peech in the World, and according to the u&s;age of Scripture.</HI> In this &s;en&s;e, all the things mentioned in the 24th of St. <HI>Matthew</HI> would be &s;aid to be fulfilled in that Generation, though nothing but &s;ome very remarkable beginning of them had been <HI>then</HI> to be ful|filled.</P>
<P>And yet if it were le&s;s intelligible, all that could be made of it, would be but this, That our Saviour had very much impli|cated the De&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> with his la&s;t coming to Judg|ment, in that Di&s;cour&s;e: For that the coming of the Son of Man there mentioned, is unque&s;tionably to be under&s;tood, of his
<PB N="81" REF="73"> <HI>coming to Judgment,</HI> is manife&s;t from what has been di&s;cour&s;ed more particularly about it. And the Objections again&s;t it are too incon&s;iderable to make it que&s;tionable.</P>
<P>Whatever other mentions of the coming of the Son of Man there may be, that may &s;eem to &s;ignify a &s;ooner appearance of Chri&s;t's Kingdom, cannot be of any moment again&s;t it: For the whole force of the Proof from this place in St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> lies upon the <HI>peculiar words</HI> and <HI>circum&s;tances</HI> that it is de&s;cribed by.</P>
<P>There are indeed &s;ome Exhortations of our Saviour, and his A|po&s;tles to per&s;ons then living, to watch again&s;t <HI>the day of this Lord's coming,</HI> as if by that <HI>coming</HI> were meant &s;ome coming in that Age; but that can be no argument for it. For we meet with the &s;ame Exhortations in places, where by all it is granted to concern only the la&s;t coming of Chri&s;t to Judgment. As in St. <HI>Matthew</HI> 25. 13. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15. 51, 52. 1 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 4. 15, 17. The rea&s;on and ap|plication of which in the <HI>The&s;&s;alonians,</HI> is given in the next Chapter following from the 1&s;t to the 7th Ver&s;e, from the un|certainty of the <HI>particular time, and &s;ea&s;on, when that la&s;t coming &s;hould be.</HI></P>
<P>Wherefore there &s;eems now to be nothing that is at all con&s;i|derable to make any ma<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> que&s;tion, whether the coming of the Son of Man in this place of St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> be the coming of Chri&s;t in glory. And from what has been advanced to make it clear, that our Saviour did refer to the coming of the Son of Man in <HI>Daniel,</HI> where there are the &s;ame words, and circum&s;tances of <HI>a glorious appearance with his Angels</HI> at the time of a <HI>great Judgment,</HI> and of an <HI>univer&s;al dominion of the Saints</HI> over all the Earth; it appears to be unrea&s;onable to doubt, whether this coming of the Son of Man in <HI>Daniel,</HI> be the &s;ame with it; and therefore we may &s;ecurely conclude, that <HI>the Kingdom of the Son of Man in the 7th Chapter of</HI> Daniel, <HI>is Chri&s;t's &s;econd coming in glory.</HI></P>
<P>I have endeavoured to &s;ecure this with the greater care, be|cau&s;e all hopes of any certain determination of the &s;en&s;e of this Prophecy &s;eems to depend upon it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="82" REF="74">
<HEAD>CHAP. III. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The</HI> 15th Propo&s;ition, <HI>The Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chap|ter of</HI> Daniel, <HI>is the &s;ame with the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Reve|lations. <HI>This &s;hown in</HI> 13 <HI>Particulars, and made un|que&s;tionable from the three la&s;t. The</HI> Corollaries <HI>of the</HI> 15th Propo&s;ition. 1. <HI>The Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revela|tions <HI>the &s;ame with the little Horn in the 7th of</HI> Da|niel. 2. <HI>The Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations <HI>the &s;ame with the Fourth Bea&s;t in</HI> Daniel 7. 3. <HI>The time of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations, <HI>is not till</HI> after <HI>the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire is divided into Ten Kingdoms.</HI> 4. <HI>The Reign of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations <HI>is not yet pa&s;t.</HI> Gro|tius<HI>'s Opinion of the Signification of the</HI> Son of Man, <HI>a &s;ufficient An&s;wer to all his Objections again&s;t the&s;e things.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>AFter the A&s;&s;urance that has been offered about the King|dom of the Son of Man, it will be convenient to improve the Knowledge that we have of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to determine the Signification of the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th of <HI>Daniel, immediately before</HI> that of the Son of Man. And by comparing that Fourth Kingdom with the Characters of that in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> it &s;eems to be very plain, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of</HI> Daniel, <HI>is the</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>BLa&s;. Viega.</HI> in cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> For the Interpretation of this place, it is to be known, that there was a like Vi&s;ion to this &s;hown to <HI>Da|niel</HI> in his 7th Chapter, upon the Explication of which this Vi&s;ion of ours in this place does depend.&mdash;Which Bea&s;t (of <HI>Daniel)</HI> according to the <HI>common Opinion of the Learned,</HI> is the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.&mdash;Be&s;ides the Fathers do <HI>generally</HI> under&s;tand that place of Antichri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> in cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> &s;ect. 3. In this place of the <HI>Revelations</HI> there is a <HI>manife&s;t</HI> relation to that in the 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI> But the Bea&s;t is the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire.</P>
<P><HI>Ibid. &s;ect.</HI> 5. Negari non pote&s;t; <HI>It cannot be denied,</HI> that in that Ten Horned Bea&s;t there is an allu&s;ion to that Fourth Bea&s;t of <HI>Daniel,&mdash;</HI>which is <HI>very plainly</HI> a Figure, and Symbol of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P><HI>Malvenda de Antichri&s;to,</HI> pag. 257. <HI>John</HI> does therefore call Antichri&s;t a Bea&s;t,&mdash;more e&s;pecially, that he might expre&s;s his Kingdom, and Mo|narchy, and to &s;hew that he wrote with the &s;ame Spirit that <HI>Daniel</HI> did, and that he prophe&s;ied of the &s;ame Bea&s;t which he al&s;o had foretold long before.</P>
<P><HI>Ribera</HI> in cap. 12. <HI>Apocalyp.</HI> numer. 11. For this, or a very like Bea&s;t did <HI>Daniel</HI> &s;ee in his 7th Chapter. After this, &s;ays he,&mdash;The&s;e therefore are the Ten Kings which <HI>Daniel</HI> foretold in tho&s;e words, and which <HI>John</HI> does here foretel.</P>
<P><HI>Ibidem, numer.</HI> 12. We &s;ee that <HI>Irenaeus</HI> makes them Ten Kings [after he had quoted <HI>Irenaeus</HI> for affirming that <HI>Daniel</HI> and <HI>John</HI> did &s;peak of the &s;ame Ten Kings] and that the Ten Horns of the Fourth Bea&s;t of <HI>Daniel</HI> are the &s;ame with the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Apocalyps.</HI></P></NOTE> <HI>&s;ame</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 15.</NOTE> <HI>thing with the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations.</Q>
<P>For it will be found, That that Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> hath &s;carce a Property belonging to him which may not be found in the Fourth Bea&s;t of the 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI> And there are a great many &s;uch very peculiar Marks in each of them, as &s;hew them to be nece&s;&s;arily the peculiar Properties of <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame</HI> thing. For Example,</P>
<P N="1">1. The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> has a very &s;trange and pecu|liar <NOTE PLACE="marg">Revel. 13. 2.</NOTE> make; It has the <HI>mouth of a Lyon,</HI> the <HI>feet of a Bear,</HI> and <HI>the</HI>
<PB N="83" REF="74"> <HI>body of a Leopard,</HI> Chap. 13. v. 2. which is enough to di&s;tingui&s;h him from all the Bea&s;ts in the World. It would much &s;urpri&s;e any one at the fir&s;t, to meet with &s;o <HI>uncouth</HI> an appearance of a thing that has three &s;uch &s;trange and unu&s;ual Characters, which cannot be &s;uppo&s;ed to be mentioned by chance; and yet have no kind of Interpretation given them, as many of the Chara|cters of that Bea&s;t have in the 17th Chapter.</P>
<P>But it thereby appears, that this Bea&s;t is plainly drawn from another Original Copy, <HI>viz. That Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of</HI> Daniel. And there it appears that that Bea&s;t had <HI>devoured</HI> three other <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 7, 19.</NOTE> Bea&s;ts, which where like to a <HI>Lyon,</HI> a <HI>Bear,</HI> and a <HI>Leopard.</HI> So that this Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> with the other three before it in the 7th Chapter, being interpreted afterwards to &s;ignify &s;o many Kingdoms; His <HI>devouring</HI> them there, can be nothing but <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 17, 23.</NOTE> the <HI>conquering</HI> them; and upon that conque&s;t, the having them <HI>added</HI> to him&s;elf. And &s;o the Kingdom &s;ignified by him, comes to be made up of tho&s;e three together, <HI>with that</HI> which was pro|perly his own Dominion before.</P>
<P>All the difference then betwixt them is, that the <HI>one</HI> is &s;aid to have <HI>devoured</HI> tho&s;e three, and the <HI>other</HI> is &s;hown with them di|ge&s;ted into <HI>his own Body.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. The parts in which the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations</HI> are &s;aid to be like tho&s;e three Bea&s;ts, are ju&s;t like the &s;ame parts of the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel.</HI> For the <HI>mouth</HI> which is &s;aid to be like that of a <HI>Lyon</HI> in the 13th of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and to be a <HI>mouth &s;peaking great things,</HI> and that was opened in Bla&s;|phemy <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 5.</NOTE> again&s;t God, is ju&s;t like the mouth belonging to the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> which <HI>&s;pake great words again&s;t</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 8.</NOTE> <HI>the Mo&s;t High.</HI></P>
<P>The Feet, which in that 13th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> are <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 2.</NOTE> &s;aid to be the <HI>feet of a Bear,</HI> who&s;e &s;trength we know lies in his Paws, were ju&s;t like the Feet of the <HI>other</HI> in <HI>Daniel,</HI> the <HI>Nails of</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 19.</NOTE> <HI>which were of bra&s;s, and brake all in pieces, and &s;tampt upon the re&s;idue with his Feet.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>whole Body</HI> of that in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> that was like a <HI>Leo|pard,</HI> or like the Third Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel</HI> (which being the &s;ame thing with the Third Kingdom in the 2d Chap|ter, did bear rule over all the Earth, v. 39.) is ju&s;t the &s;ame with that of the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> which <HI>devoured the whole Earth,</HI> ch. 7. 23. and &s;o had a Body of the &s;ame likene&s;s with the <HI>Leopard.</HI></P>
<P N="3"><PB N="84" REF="75"> 3. The Bea&s;t in <HI>the Revelations</HI> had <HI>Ten Horns</HI> upon it, ju&s;t as that <HI>Fourth in Daniel</HI> had; and the Ten Horns of <HI>both</HI> of them are &s;aid to &s;ignify <HI>Ten Kings.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 12. Dan. 7. 24.</NOTE></P>
<P>But here indeed is the difference betwixt them; that the <HI>one</HI> had Seven Heads, and Ten Horns; and the <HI>other</HI> nothing but the Ten Horns, and the Little Horn. But</P>
<P N="4">4. Since all the Heads of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> were pa&s;t and gone, excepting the la&s;t, <HI>(Prop.</HI> 6.) and &s;o that Bea&s;t is no|thing but the Bea&s;t under the La&s;t Head; all the difference then betwixt <HI>that</HI> in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and that in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is but this, That the <HI>one</HI> be&s;ides the <HI>Ten Horns</HI> had an <HI>Head,</HI> and the <HI>other</HI> an <HI>Eleventh Horn;</HI> and if this be all the difference be|twixt them, the fa&s;hion of their Figures &s;ignifies nothing; we are only to regard what they are both interpreted to repre&s;ent. Since therefore the Little Horn is &s;aid to repre&s;ent a remarkable <HI>bu&s;tling</HI> King, and the la&s;t Head of the Bea&s;t &s;ignifies nothing but the la&s;t King of Seven very <HI>formidable</HI> and turbulent, we have no rea&s;on at all to fear any difference betwixt them.</P>
<P N="5">5. Con&s;ider then what this <HI>Eleventh</HI> Horn was, and the Cha|racters <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 8. 21.</NOTE> of it. It had <HI>Eyes like the Eyes of a Man, and a Mouth &s;peaking great things,</HI> and <HI>a Look that was &s;touter than that of its Fel|lows.</HI> Surely, an Horn that has a <HI>Look,</HI> or Face, and <HI>Eyes,</HI> and a <HI>Mouth,</HI> can be nothing in the World, but an Head in the fa&s;hion of a Horn, <HI>an ill-&s;hap'd Head.</HI> For it had al&s;o Brains, and a Soul in it, by what it was able to &s;peak, and to act, and by ruling and commanding the whole Body. So that the whole Bea&s;t was &s;lain and burnt for the Crimes of that Horn, v. 11. This <HI>Horn</HI> then was in reality an <HI>Head,</HI> for it had all the Properties and Offices that an Head is known by. And therefore &s;ee next, how the Characters of it agree with tho&s;e in the la&s;t Head of the other Bea&s;t.</P>
<P N="6">6. The Mouth of the <HI>one,</HI> and the <HI>other,</HI> we have found to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 7. Rev. 13. 3, 5.</NOTE> be the &s;ame by their &s;peech, and both of the&s;e Bea&s;ts <HI>wondred</HI> at for their dreadfulne&s;s.</P>
<P N="7">7. The <HI>one</HI> had power given him to <HI>make war with the Saints,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 7.</NOTE> and <HI>to overcome them.</HI> The <HI>other</HI> was to <HI>wear out the Saints of the Mo&s;t High.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 25.</NOTE></P>
<P N="8">8. The <HI>one</HI> had power given him <HI>over all Kindreds, Tongues and Nations;</HI> and the <HI>other</HI> was the King of a Kingdom that had <HI>de|voured</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 7.</NOTE> <HI>the whole Earth,</HI> and <HI>trod it down.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 23.</NOTE></P>
<P N="9"><PB N="85" REF="75"> 9. Both the <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>other</HI> had Ten Kings at the &s;ame time with them in the &s;ame Kingdom.</P>
<P N="10">10. The <HI>one</HI> ari&s;eth out of a Kingdom divided among&s;t Ten <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 1.</NOTE> Kings, the <HI>other</HI> ari&s;eth up out of the Sea, and Waters &s;ignify Multitudes, and Tongues, and Nations, <HI>(Rev.</HI> 17.) It ari&s;eth <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 24.</NOTE> al&s;o with Ten Kings ready Crowned, which we cannot think could be all at the &s;ame moment that it aro&s;e; and &s;o it mu&s;t ari&s;e in a Kingdom divided among&s;t tho&s;e Ten, <HI>Revel.</HI> 13. 1.</P>
<P N="11">11. They <HI>both</HI> end with the Bea&s;t to whom they belong, and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 11. Coroll. 2. Prop. 6. Coroll. 1. Prop. 12. Dan. 7. 25.</NOTE> are <HI>both</HI> de&s;troyed at the beginning of Chri&s;t's Second coming in glory; at the beginning of his Univer&s;al Reign over all the World, which concludes with the judging of the Dead.</P>
<P N="12">12. The <HI>time of the continuance of both</HI> is exactly the &s;ame; The <HI>one</HI> a Time, Times, and half a Time (which by many Exam|ples in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and one In&s;tance in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is known to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 5.</NOTE> be three years and an half) and the <HI>other</HI> continues forty two Months.</P>
<P N="13">13. They <HI>both</HI> rule over the &s;ame place, over the whole Earth, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 7. Dan. 7. 23.</NOTE> over all Kindreds, and Tongues and Nations.</P>
<P N="14">14. And The Bea&s;t it &s;elf in <HI>both,</HI> is &s;aid to ri&s;e out of the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 1. Dan. 7. 3.</NOTE> Sea.</P>
<P>From all the&s;e put together, Though it could not be prov'd to be ab&s;olutely impo&s;&s;ible from their Characters for the two Kingdoms repre&s;ented by the&s;e two Bea&s;ts to be otherwi&s;e than one and the &s;ame Kingdom; yet how could a man of the mo&s;t wary and cautious judgment withhold from concluding, That it would be a very &s;trange thing, if two De&s;criptions agreeing together in &s;uch multitudes of mo&s;t peculiar Characters, never attributed to any Figures before, &s;hould not really mean one and the &s;ame thing? To hear of the Pictures of <HI>two</HI> Bea&s;ts de|&s;cribed thus <HI>exactly like</HI> one another in &s;uch a &s;trange make of all their Parts and Furniture, with the <HI>&s;ame</HI> Qualities and Actions belonging to them; the <HI>&s;ame</HI> manner of ri&s;e, the <HI>&s;ame</HI> time of continuance, and agreeing in the <HI>&s;ame</HI> peculiar way and circum|&s;tances of their Ruine; and <HI>both</HI> the&s;e Figures interpreted to &s;ignify the <HI>&s;ame</HI> things in all their Characters <HI>that are interpreted:</HI> And then to &s;ee the things wherein they &s;eem to differ in <HI>words</HI> and expre&s;&s;ions, to be found to be in <HI>reality</HI> and &s;ub&s;tance the <HI>&s;ame;</HI> &s;ure this would make any man forth with re&s;olve with him|&s;elf, that the&s;e two mu&s;t be the Pictures of the very &s;elf-&s;ame
<PB N="86" REF="76"> Bea&s;t: And (&s;ince they <HI>both</HI> are &s;aid to &s;ignify Kingdoms) that they mu&s;t repre&s;ent but <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame</HI> Kingdom. And if it &s;hould not be &s;o, he would conclude, that they were on purpo&s;e contriv'd by the Relator of them to deceive men into wrong Ap|prehen&s;ions of them, if he had given no plain intimation, that they could not po&s;&s;ibly be the &s;ame. For to mention a Proper|ty or two in one, which was not in the mention of the other, would &s;ignify little to make him think them of different kinds, where there were &s;uch &s;trange Agreements, unle&s;s the Relator had given &s;uch a property to the one, as could not be in the o|ther, from the plain de&s;cription of it, which is not the pre&s;ent Ca&s;e.</P>
<P>But after all this, from the three la&s;t Characters of each of the&s;e Bea&s;ts, it will appear to be ab&s;olutely impo&s;&s;ible that they &s;hould be any thing but <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame</HI> time of the &s;ame King|dom. They are <HI>both</HI> &s;aid to be de&s;troyed ju&s;t before the Univer|&s;al and Eternal Kingdom of Chri&s;t, that <HI>ruled over all the Earth,</HI> and that <HI>for ever:</HI> So that the de&s;cription of that, in tho&s;e two places, cannot po&s;&s;ibly &s;ignify more than one determinate King|dom over all the Earth; and when they were de&s;troyed, are &s;aid at that time both of them to rule over the &s;ame place, <HI>THE whole Earth,</HI> and for the &s;ame continuance of time before their de&s;truction. But it is ab&s;olutely impo&s;&s;ible that they &s;hould be two different Kingdoms over the &s;ame <HI>place</HI> at the &s;ame <HI>time, both</HI> de&s;troyed by a Third that &s;ucceeds in their place. The begin|ning of the Univer&s;al Reign of Chri&s;t with his Saints, when each of them were to be de&s;troyed, was the <HI>&s;ame time;</HI> and their Rule over the <HI>whole Earth</HI> at that time was over the <HI>&s;ame place:</HI> And be&s;ides, they had continued the <HI>&s;ame length of time</HI> over the &s;ame place before their de&s;truction; and were both de&s;troyed after the very &s;ame, <HI>and that</HI> a mo&s;t peculiar and unu&s;ual man|ner, that is, by fire; <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 11. <HI>Rev.</HI> 19. 20.</P>
<P>It is therefore unque&s;tionable, that the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the &s;ame with the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and e&s;pecially in the time of the Reign of the Little Horn: From hence it ap|pears, That</P>
<Q><HI>The</HI> La&s;t Head <HI>of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations, <HI>is</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Malvenda</HI> de Antichri&s;to, p. 224. <HI>Fixum,</HI> &amp; <HI>&s;tabile</HI> &amp; <HI>omnium quoque Con&s;en&s;u firmatum, &amp;c.</HI> It is <HI>&s;ure,</HI> and <HI>certain,</HI> and confirmed al&s;o by the <HI>Con&s;ent of All,</HI> that <HI>Daniel</HI> did under&s;tand by the Little Horn, and as it were point at with his Finger nothing el&s;e but Antichri&s;t, that was to come.</P>
<P><HI>Idem. pag.</HI> 253. It is the <HI>agreeing Opinion</HI> of the <HI>Fathers, and Interpre|ters,</HI> that Antichri&s;t is called the Little Horn.</P></NOTE> <HI>the &s;ame with</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> the Little Horn <HI>in the 7th of</HI> Daniel.</Q>
<PB N="87" REF="76">
<P> And therefore, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Term of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations, <HI>&s;ignifies the &s;ame</HI> particular <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> Roman Rule <HI>with the Bea&s;t in the 7th of</HI> Daniel <HI>in the time of the Little Horn.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Term of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> &s;ignifies the Bea&s;t with the La&s;t Head (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.)&mdash;And the La&s;t Head is the &s;ame with the Little Horn (by <HI>Coroll. praeced.)</HI> And the Rule of the La&s;t Head is a <HI>Roman</HI> Rule <HI>(Prop.</HI> 7.)</P>
<P>As al&s;o, That</P>
<Q><HI>The time of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations <HI>did not begin till</HI> after <HI>the</HI> Ro|man <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>Empire was divided into Ten Kingdoms.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Little Horn of the 4th Bea&s;t, which is the &s;ame with that in the <HI>Revelations</HI> (by <HI>Coroll. praeced)</HI> did not ari&s;e till <HI>after</HI> the Ten Kings were up; and be&s;ides, did &s;ubdue three of tho&s;e Ten, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 8, 24.</P>
<P>And from hence &s;till is it further confirmed, That the King|dom of the Son of Man, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. and the Reign of Chri&s;t over <NOTE PLACE="marg">Coroll. Prop. 11. &amp; Prop. 14.</NOTE> the Kingdoms of this World, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. are the &s;ame time of Chri&s;t's Second coming in glory. For they <HI>begin</HI> at the &s;ame time at the de&s;truction of the &s;ame Bea&s;t, and are <HI>univer&s;al</HI> from the beginning of them.</P>
<P>Thus does this la&s;t Propo&s;ition about the <HI>Fourth Kingdom,</HI> and the former about the <HI>coming of the Son of Man,</HI> much more &s;trengthen the proof of one another, and yet have evidence e|nough for them <HI>in them&s;elves,</HI> without any nece&s;&s;ary dependance upon one another; &s;o that either of them might have been &s;et alone by them&s;elves; but they are &s;till more abundantly cleared and &s;trengthned by the help of one another's Light.</P>
<P>It is therefore now manife&s;t, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Reign of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations <HI>is not yet pa&s;t.</HI> <MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="Corollar."></Q>
<P>For the Reign of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is the &s;ame with the Reign of the Little Horn in the 7th of <HI>Daniel (Corollar.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.) and is therefore to continue till the Second Coming of Chri&s;t; <HI>Prop.</HI> 14. and <HI>Corol.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 12.</P>
<PB N="88" REF="77">
<P> This is acknowledged by mo&s;t of the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Interpreters, who according to the general Opinion of the Fathers, do ex|pect the coming of Antichri&s;t at the end of the World, or ju&s;t <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> before the Second Coming of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>It mu&s;t be acknowledged, that both this Propo&s;ition, and the former, and their Con&s;ectaries are denied by <HI>Grotius,</HI> and others; but upon what &s;mall grounds for it, and again&s;t how great an evi|dence to the contrary, may be &s;een, <HI>Cap. ult. Lib.</HI> 1.&mdash;and <HI>cap.</HI> 2, 3, <HI>&amp;</HI> 15. <HI>Lib.</HI> 2. And le&s;t the Authority of great Names &s;hould have &s;till too much weight in it, to hinder ones full a&s;&s;ent to the&s;e pre&s;ent Conclu&s;ions, I would in the mean while have any one but reflect upon one of the Tenets of the <HI>Grotian</HI> way, to which they are forced, to maintain their Singularity in the pre&s;ent Ca&s;e; and that is <HI>their Opinion of the Kingdom of the Son of Man in the 7th Chapter of</HI> Daniel. For that is &s;ufficient to make one very much unconcerned at any thing that is built up|on it.</P>
<P>The <HI>modern Jews</HI> are ju&s;tly admired for denying, that by the Son of Man in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is meant the <HI>Me&s;&s;iah;</HI> But it is <HI>much more mon&s;trous</HI> in the&s;e men, <HI>fir&s;t</HI> to grant that the Name of the Son of Man is the mo&s;t familiar Name of Chri&s;t in the Go|&s;pel; <HI>and al&s;o,</HI> that the term of the Son of Man joined with the &s;ame Expre&s;&s;ions and Circum&s;tances in the Go&s;pels, that we find it with in <HI>Daniel,</HI> does plainly refer to this place in the 7th of <HI>Daniel: And that</HI> in the Go&s;pels, when joined with tho&s;e &s;ame Expre&s;&s;ions, it &s;ignifies the coming of Chri&s;t at the end of the World: <HI>And yet</HI> to maintain, that in <HI>Daniel</HI> it &s;ignifies not &s;o much as the <HI>power of Chri&s;t,</HI> but <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans</HI> only, and <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> the <HI>Roman</HI> fury again&s;t the <HI>Jews;</HI> notwith&s;tanding that that coming of the Son of Man is &s;et out in <HI>Daniel</HI> under the Character of an Univer&s;al and Eternal Kingdom of the Saints, upon the de&s;truction of all their Ene|mies upon Earth.</P>
<P>There could not well be a plainer In&s;tance to &s;hew, how po&s;|&s;ible it is for <HI>Grotius</HI> to be &s;ingular in his own fancy, where there is a clear evidence, and the general Authority of <HI>all Ages</HI> again&s;t him.</P>
<P>But a much more &s;atisfactory In&s;tance of the Confidence of a Learned Man again&s;t open day-light, is that of a Per&s;on who is e&s;teemed a great <HI>Critick</HI> in Hi&s;tory, about this Fourth King|dom
<PB N="89" REF="77"> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI> He does very po&s;itively a&s;&s;ert, and looks upon it to be &s;o known a thing, that he takes no pains at all to prove it, That it was the general Opinion of Interpre|ters <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sir</HI> John Mar|&s;ham.</NOTE> from the time of <HI>Jo&s;ephus,</HI> that the Little Horn of the Fourth Kingdom concerned <HI>only the times of</HI> Antiochus Epiphanes; whereas <HI>the contrary</HI> is as well known, as a <HI>general Tradition</HI> can be known by the Books of the Ancients, that are now remain|ing; namely, That it was the <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><HI>Idem, pag.</HI> 222. St. <HI>Hierome,</HI> and others, do mo&s;t <HI>clearly demon&s;trate,</HI> that <HI>Porphyry</HI>'s Opinion is a <HI>perfect madne&s;s.</HI> For <HI>all</HI> find it <HI>unque&s;tionable,</HI> both Jews and Chri&s;tians, that the Third and Fourth Bea&s;t are <HI>mo&s;t cer|tainly</HI> two di&s;tinct Bea&s;ts; &s;o that he is to be looked upon as a <HI>man of no &s;en&s;e,</HI> that can think otherwi&s;e.</NOTE> <HI>general Opinion</HI> in all Ages, that it did not at all concern the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy; as is made to appear more at large in my Di&s;cour&s;e concerning the Con&s;ent of Antiquity about the Fourth Kingdom in <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>And what more manife&s;t proof could be given of the po&s;&s;ibi|lity of a Learned Man's Authority again&s;t the mo&s;t evident Truths, than to &s;ee one &s;o po&s;itive again&s;t a generally known matter of Fact?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="90" REF="78">
<PB N="91" REF="78">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The &s;ame Four Monarchies prophe&s;ied of in</HI> Daniel, <HI>that are the Subject of the re&s;t of the Prophets in the</HI> Old Te&s;tament. <HI>The</HI> Sixteenth Propo&s;ition, <HI>The &V;ni|form Signification of A Bea&s;t, and of its Ruling Parts all over the Prophecy of</HI> Daniel. <HI>This demon&s;trated from</HI> not only <HI>the Figures of Bea&s;ts, but al&s;o from all the Figures &s;ignifying Dominion. The Bea&s;ts in the 8th Chapter the fir&s;t In&s;tance of it.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE certainty of the former <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> does open us a very fair pro&s;pect into the re&s;t of the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel.</HI> If it be certain, that the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is a Kingdom of the <HI>Romans;</HI> then there remains no more di&s;pute among&s;t the Interpreters, what Kingdoms <HI>in particular</HI> tho&s;e four <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d</HI> and <HI>7th Chapters</HI> are: And by that means it is al&s;o ap|parent, what the <HI>con&s;tant</HI> &s;ignification of a Bea&s;t, and of its <HI>parts, that &s;ignify Dominion,</HI> is all over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel.</HI> For if the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th Chapter be a <HI>Roman</HI> Kingdom, it will appear, that the Four in each Chapter, are tho&s;e Four Monarchies that &s;ucceeded after one another from the time of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI> to &s;ome Kingdom of Chri&s;t. And thus will the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> appear to be <HI>a &s;hort abridgment of the whole For|tunes of the Church of God from his own time to the end of the World.</HI></P>
<P>For the clearer apprehen&s;ion of which, it may be premi&s;ed for the u&s;e of tho&s;e who are not &s;o well skill'd in Hi&s;tory, That there has been <HI>four Great Empires,</HI> in which the Church of God hath &s;ojourned, &s;ince the fir&s;t total Captivity of the <HI>Jews.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>fir&s;t</HI> was that of the <HI>Babylonians,</HI> who were the fir&s;t Ruling Nation of the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> who began the total Captivity of the <HI>Jews,</HI> which happened in the time of <HI>Daniel</HI> him&s;elf; And of this have we the Prophecy in <HI>I&s;aiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel</HI> and <HI>Daniel.</HI> And the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Empire is &s;aid by <HI>Mega&s;thenes,</HI> in <HI>Jo&s;ephus,</HI> to have extended to <HI>Hercules</HI>'s Pillars.</P>
<PB N="92" REF="79">
<P> The <HI>next</HI> were the <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> who conquered the <HI>Babylonians,</HI> and who continued their Empire under the name of the <HI>Medes and Per&s;ians,</HI> as <HI>one entire people united into one Empire,</HI> till the time of <HI>Alexander the Great.</HI> And the Prophecy of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Conque&s;t we have in <HI>I&s;aiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel</HI> and <HI>Daniel;</HI> and the Hi&s;tory of it in <HI>Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, E&s;ther, Haggai</HI> and <HI>Zechariah.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy conquered, and &s;ucceeded the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> and appeared in its greate&s;t magnitude under <HI>Alexander</HI> the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> beginner of that Empire. But after his death, by the Fa|ctions of his Captains it was broken into a great many Divi|&s;ions, which were in a continual change of Ma&s;ters, till at la&s;t the whole power of the <HI>Greeks</HI> &s;etled it &s;elf in <HI>four</HI> di&s;tinct King|doms, <HI>viz. Egypt, Syria, Macedonia</HI> and <HI>Thrace,</HI> or <HI>Pergamus,</HI> which was the &s;ame Dominion with <HI>Thrace,</HI> though the name was changed.</P>
<P>From the <HI>Syrian</HI> Line of this <HI>fourfold</HI> Monarchy came <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> who made him&s;elf &s;o famous by his prophanation of the Temple of the <HI>Jews,</HI> of whom the things of the Little Horn in the 8th Chapter of <HI>Daniel</HI> were always interpreted.&mdash;And the Wars and Marriages of the <HI>Syrian</HI> and <HI>Egyptian</HI> Kings &s;et out in the 11th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> are exactly an&s;werable to the Hi&s;tory of them; &s;o that <HI>Porphyry</HI> concluded from that, that the whole Prophecy wat but an Hi&s;tory of what had been done before.</P>
<P>The Prophecies of this Monarchy are chiefly in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and hinted at in <HI>Zechariah,</HI> but very <HI>openly</HI> and <HI>plainly</HI> foretold in <HI>Da|niel</HI> many hundreds of years before the time of its Reign, and the Hi&s;tory of it is in the Books of the <HI>Maccabees.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Romans</HI> were the <HI>Fourth</HI> Conquerors: And, after their Conque&s;ts of the <HI>Graecians,</HI> were the mo&s;t <HI>formidable</HI> Empire <HI>that ever appeared:</HI> At the beginning of this Empire was our Saviour born; and the Prophecies about it are <HI>chiefly</HI> in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the <HI>New Te&s;tament;</HI> and the Hi&s;tory of the beginning of it in the Book of <HI>Maccabees,</HI> and the <HI>New Te&s;tament.</HI></P>
<P>It appears then by this, that the Prophecies of <HI>Daniel</HI> do con|cern the &s;ame Ruling Nations over the Church of God, that are foretold in the other Prophets. But <HI>Daniel</HI> is judged to be much more ob&s;cure than <HI>others,</HI> becau&s;e that which in <HI>others</HI> is &s;ignified by plain words, in <HI>Daniel</HI> is repre&s;ented by <HI>Figures</HI> and <HI>Hieroglyphicks.</HI> And yet tho&s;e Figures are found to be interpre|ted in mo&s;t places, and are of the &s;ame kind with tho&s;e that are
<PB N="93" REF="79"> &s;ometimes u&s;ed by the other Prophets to &s;ignify the &s;ame Ruling Nations; as the names of Bea&s;ts and Horns are often mention|ed amon&s;t the other Prophets for that purpo&s;e: But that which takes away all the fear of the unintelligiblene&s;s of the&s;e Figures, is the explication that is given <HI>by name</HI> of the Bea&s;ts, and their Horns, in the 8th Chapter, which is by all acknowledged to be very manife&s;tly determined; and is a clear in&s;tance of the <HI>ge|neral</HI> &s;ignification of tho&s;e my&s;tical Terms in all <HI>other</HI> parts of the Prophecy be&s;ides.</P>
<P>From hence it was, that there has been &s;o unanimous an agreement among&s;t the Interpreters of <HI>all former Ages</HI> concerning the particular Kingdoms that are &s;ignified by <HI>Daniel</HI>'s Figures; which in all rea&s;on ought therefore to determine, all Interpre|ters to the &s;earch of the <HI>con&s;tant</HI> &s;ignification of Bea&s;t, and their parts, in all tho&s;e places, to fix the notion of the Bea&s;t, and its Heads and Horns in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> For the Book of <HI>Da|niel</HI> is without any controver&s;ie owned by all to be the place to which tho&s;e uncouth Figures in the <HI>Revelations</HI> do refer, and from whence mo&s;t of the peculiar Phra&s;es for &s;uch things are tran&s;cribed: And from an attentive con&s;ideration of all the Fi|gures of Bea&s;ts, and their parts, in <HI>Daniel,</HI> one may ob&s;erve the <HI>con&s;tant uniform &s;ignification</HI> of them to be according to this fol|lowing Propo&s;ition.</P>
<P><HI>In all the Figures of Bea&s;ts in the Prophecy of</HI> Daniel. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 16.</NOTE></P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. <HI>By the Bea&s;t in</HI> general, <HI>as the common &s;ubject of its Heads or Horns, is &s;ignified a Ruling Nation, or People.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>2. <HI>By the</HI> Horns <HI>and</HI> Heads <HI>of a Bea&s;t, the &s;everal kinds of Su|pream Government in that Nation.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>3. <HI>And if they be de&s;cribed to come</HI> after one another, <HI>they &s;ig|nify &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive kinds of &s;etled Government over the &s;ame Kingdom.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>4. <HI>But if they be de&s;cribed to be</HI> in Rule all at the &s;ame time, <HI>they &s;ignify &s;o many di&s;tinct Sovereignties, or Kingdoms, of one and the &s;ame Ruling People.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>5. <HI>And in both the&s;e kinds do the &s;everal Heads or Horns &s;ignify the</HI> &s;etled <HI>continuance of that Succe&s;&s;ive Government, or divided Kingdom, to their la&s;t end.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
<PB N="94" REF="80">
<P> To make the proof of this the more full, and to &s;hew how <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VIII.</NOTE> <HI>uniform</HI> and con&s;tant to it &s;elf this Prophecy is in all its Figures, and that it may appear, that there is one con&s;tant and determi|nate &s;ignification in the u&s;e of them; I will prove by an <HI>indu|ction of all the particular In&s;tances,</HI> That this is a property in com|mon to all the Prophetical Figures of this Book, which &s;ignify Kingdoms, as The Bea&s;ts every-where do; That by every &s;uch Figure in <HI>general,</HI> as the common &s;ubject of its parts is to be under&s;tood the Rule of &s;ome particular Nation, or People; and by the <HI>parts</HI> and <HI>divi&s;ions</HI> of the &s;ame kind in it, that are &s;aid to denote Dominion, is meant the Supreme Government of that Kingdom. And if they be &s;aid to come <HI>after one another,</HI> they do denote the Succe&s;&s;ions of them in the &s;ame &s;tate: But if they be &s;aid to be <HI>all in Rule at the &s;ame time,</HI> they &s;ignify &s;o many di|vided Kingdoms in that Nation, or People.</P>
<P>This <HI>general</HI> proof from the uniform &s;ignification of all Fi|gures, and their parts, will give us the more a&s;&s;urance of the common u&s;e of all the&s;e Prophetical Schemes; and &s;o does make the Conclu&s;ions about any of the particular In&s;tances contained under it, &s;o much the &s;tronger, and the more undoubted.</P>
<P>Now there are Ten whole Figures in <HI>Daniel</HI> which are inter|preted to &s;ignify Kingdoms there, and they all confirm that general Ob&s;ervation: As may be &s;een by the particular In|&s;tances.</P>
<P>The Two Figures in the 8th Chapter concerning the <HI>Ram</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Daniel VIII.</NOTE> and the <HI>He Goat,</HI> are of the mo&s;t known &s;ignification of any, becau&s;e of the particular Interpretation that is there given of them; and therefore it will be the mo&s;t convenient to begin with them.</P>
<P>The Ram with its two Horns is &s;aid to be the Kings of <HI>Media</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 20.</NOTE> and <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> which does very plainly determine it to &s;ignify a <HI>mul|titude</HI> in the notion of it: The Kings of <HI>Media</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> cannot po&s;&s;ibly &s;ignify one &s;ingle per&s;on only, or only the per&s;on of <HI>Darius</HI> conquered by <HI>Alexander,</HI> though that Conque&s;t &s;eems to be the main thing there de&s;cribed.</P>
<P>The Ram therefore &s;aid with his two Horns to be the Kings of <HI>Media</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify a <HI>&s;ucce&s;&s;ion</HI> of <HI>Ruling Powers</HI> in that Dominion, &s;ince there was but one King of that Dominion at one time. And then the two Horns being joined with the
<PB N="95" REF="80"> &s;ingle mention of the Ram, and there being mentioned but ju&s;t two &s;orts of Kings, <HI>viz.</HI> of <HI>Media</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> that are &s;aid to be &s;ignified by the Ram with his two Horns; what can be plainer, than that the Ram under each of the&s;e two Horns does &s;ignify each of tho&s;e two &s;orts of Kings? For an <HI>Horn</HI> does very com|monly &s;ignify in Scripture the Ruling or Commanding Power of the thing with which it is joined. And the Ram being the &s;ame <HI>common &s;ubject</HI> of both the Horns, &s;ince the two Horns are found to be the two kinds of Kings, the Ram, of which they are the Horns, mu&s;t be the Kingdom of <HI>Media</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> of which they are the Kings; or, which is the &s;ame, the Ram mu&s;t be the <HI>common</HI> Ruling Nation of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> of which the Horns are the Kings.</P>
<P>For &s;ince the Ram with them is &s;aid in <HI>the whole</HI> to be <HI>the Kings of Media and Per&s;ia,</HI> and &s;ince his Horns are now found to be the <HI>Kings</HI> in that expre&s;&s;ion, the remaining &s;ignification for the Ram, as the common &s;ubject of both of them, mu&s;t be that which remains of what <HI>the whole</HI> is &s;aid to &s;ignify, and that is <HI>Media and Per&s;ia,</HI> or the Ruling Nation of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per|&s;ians.</HI> And though there were two different Lines of Kings in that Dominion, <HI>fir&s;t</HI> the <HI>Median</HI> Line, <HI>and then</HI> the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> as they are repre&s;ented by two different Horns, yet was the Domi|nion always counted one and the &s;ame common Kingdom; and both the Nations were always joined together, as one united People: Thus in the <HI>time of the Median Rule,</HI> the Laws of that common Kingdom are called the <HI>Laws of the Medes and Per&s;ians</HI> thrice in one Chapter, <HI>Dan.</HI> 6. And again, in <HI>the time of the Per&s;ian Rule,</HI> all over the Book of <HI>E&s;ther,</HI> is that one Kingdom called <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> and <HI>Media.</HI></P>
<P>But then to &s;hew the Succe&s;&s;ions of the two different &s;orts of Ruling Powers in this one Kingdom, the two Horns of the Ram are mentioned with this Remark<HI>&mdash;That which came up la&s;t, was</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 3.</NOTE> <HI>the highe&s;t,</HI> which &s;hews that they &s;ucceeded after one another; And the la&s;t of the two Horns being the la&s;t of the two Kings, that they are both &s;aid to be, mu&s;t be that which is la&s;t men|tioned in the Interpretation, or the King of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Line; which might well be repre&s;ented by an higher Horn than the <HI>Median</HI> Line ju&s;t before it, becau&s;e of the encrea&s;e of the Con|que&s;ts of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy from the time of <HI>Cyrus,</HI> &s;o as to
<PB N="96" REF="81"> have the Title of the <HI>Great King</HI> all over the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> where the Prophecy was given.</P>
<P>The He Goat indeed in that Chapter, at the fir&s;t men|tion of the Angel's Interpretation of him, may &s;eem to be but a &s;ingle Per&s;on; for he is &s;aid to be the <HI>King of Greece;</HI> But <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 21, 22.</NOTE> when we &s;ee a <HI>fir&s;t</HI> King in him, and then <HI>four</HI> Kingdoms after him, repre&s;ented by the &s;everal Horns of that Bea&s;t, It is altogether unque&s;tionable, that the He Goat him&s;elf is &s;omething that belongs in common to all his Horns, or Ruling Powers repre&s;ented by them: And that can be nothing but the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy, or the Ruling Time of the <HI>Greeks;</HI> The beginning of which is &s;ignified by the Conque&s;t of the Ruling Monarchy of the <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> that was before it, by <HI>Alexander the Great,</HI> called here the <HI>Great Horn;</HI> And the e&s;ta|bli&s;hment, and the continuance of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy from that e&s;tabli&s;hment of it under the four &s;etled Kingdoms of <HI>Macedonia, Syria, Egypt</HI> and <HI>Thrace,</HI> or <HI>Pergamus</HI> (which was the &s;ame) is &s;hewn by the <HI>four Horns</HI> coming up in the place of the <HI>fir&s;t Horn that was broken.</HI> For though there were more Kingdoms than four &s;oon after <HI>Alexander</HI>'s death, yet they were were in a perpetual change; and rather a tumultuous <HI>Scuffle</HI> of his Captains, than any determinate number of Kingdoms, till they came to be &s;etled in tho&s;e <HI>four.</HI> So that till <HI>then</HI> the whole Monarchy could not be &s;aid to have any particular form in it. Be&s;ides, that during the time of that &s;cuffle, or at lea&s;t the greate&s;t part of it, there were &s;ome or other of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Line remaining, who might well enough be looked upon as the continuance of the Reign of the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> Horn. But <HI>after that,</HI> the Monarchy &s;etled in the four mentioned divi&s;ions, till the <HI>Roman</HI> Conque&s;t. There is indeed a little Horn &s;aid to <HI>come out of one of the four.</HI> But <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 9.</NOTE> by that expre&s;&s;ion it appears, that it cannot well be taken for any thing el&s;e, than for a part of the Ruling Time of the &s;ame Horn which it <HI>came out of;</HI> and therefore is it generally judged to the &s;ingle Reign of <HI>Antiochus Epi|phanes.</HI></P>
<P>By both the&s;e Figures in the 8th Chapter it appears, that the Ruling <HI>Parts</HI> of a Figure do not only &s;ignify the &s;everal Governments in the Nation; but al&s;o the <HI>Succe&s;&s;ion</HI> of all the particular Per&s;ons in that form of Government.
<PB N="97" REF="81"> As the four Horns &s;ignify the Succe&s;&s;ion of all the Kings in tho&s;e Kingdoms, and the two Horns of the Ram <HI>all</HI> the Line of the <HI>Median</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Kings.</P>
<P>Of this the 11th Chapter is &s;till a further confirmation, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 11. 3, 4.</NOTE> where, after the Kings of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> there is the mention of the Realm of <HI>Greece,</HI> and of a mighty King, who &s;hould have a Kingdom, which &s;hould be broken, and divided towards the four Winds of Heaven: ju&s;t as in the <HI>other</HI> the four Horns are &s;aid to <HI>come up towards the four Winds of Heaven.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 8. 8.</NOTE> And a Kingdom broken, and divided towards the four Winds, can be nothing but a <HI>fourfold</HI> Kingdom; according as it is &s;aid in the other, that the great Horn being broken (&s;aid to be the fir&s;t King) <HI>four Kingdoms &s;hould &s;tand up in the Nations;</HI> And then two of the&s;e Divi&s;ions, according to the points of the Wind, are the &s;ubject of the greate&s;t part of that 11th Chapter, under the Names of the King of the <HI>North,</HI> and the King of the <HI>South;</HI> which though they &s;eem to &s;ignify but two &s;ingle Kings, yet are indeed a <HI>Succe&s;&s;ion</HI> of many Kings in each Divi&s;ion. And at la&s;t one of this Succe&s;&s;ion is there &s;et out as much more con&s;iderable for his Villany, than any of the re&s;t; ju&s;t as the Little Horn was in the 8th Chapter, which is there &s;aid to <HI>come out of</HI> one of the four Horns, to denote him to be a &s;ingle King of that Divi&s;ion.</P>
<P>And that all the&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions were very clear &s;ignifica|tions of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy, and of the Changes in it, till about the end of it, there can be no greater evidence than that Scoff of <HI>Porphyry</HI> the Philo&s;oper, mentioned by St. <HI>Jerom,</HI> who derides this part of the Prophecies of <HI>Da|niel,</HI> with a great a&s;&s;urance, that it mu&s;t have been wrote after the things were done, becau&s;e of the exact agreement of it with the particular Circum&s;tances of the Times, which it foretells.</P>
<P>From the&s;e two Chapters may it al&s;o be &s;een, That Kings <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> and Kingdoms are promi&s;cuou&s;ly u&s;ed for any intimations of Rule, whether in a Ruling Nation, or in a &s;ingle Per&s;on when it is &s;aid to be his Kingdom; As we ordinarily u&s;e the terms of the King of <HI>France,</HI> or of <HI>Spain,</HI> to &s;ignify the whole Monarchy of that Nation for all the time that it continues in power; and the terms of <HI>England</HI> and <HI>France</HI> for the Actions
<PB N="98" REF="82"> of the Kings of tho&s;e Places. For Example, The King of <HI>France</HI> and <HI>Spain</HI> have been always at war; <HI>England</HI> was the King of <HI>France</HI>'s Friend.</P>
<P>There is then a&s;&s;urance enough of the confirmation of the <HI>General Propo&s;ition,</HI> by the Examples of the 8th Chapter. <NOTE PLACE="marg">^a THeodoret. <HI>in cap.</HI> 7. Daniel. <HI>Utraque Cornua.]&mdash;</HI>Becau&s;e the <HI>Medes</HI> were al&s;o called <HI>Per&s;ians.</HI> Foreign Writers do al&s;o join them pro|mi&s;cuou&s;ly together.</NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="99" REF="82">
<HEAD>CHAP. V. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. II, &amp; VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>All Interpreters agreed, That the Five Kingdoms in the</HI> 2<HI>d and 7th Chapters, are the &s;ame Kingdoms, what|ever they be in particular. This attempted to be de|mon&s;trated from the Characters of each of them in both Chapters. The Fourth and Fifth in each of tho&s;e Chapters proved to be nece&s;&s;arily the &s;ame particular Kingdoms.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THere is now good ground to apprehend, that the Figures in <HI>Daniel</HI> were de&s;igned to be under&s;tood; And that there is an exact conformity among&s;t them in the <HI>general</HI> &s;ig|nifications of the &s;ame kind of Characters in every one of them, as the exact agreement of the Two figures in the 8th Chapter in the &s;ame <HI>general</HI> &s;ignification of <HI>A Monarchy,</HI> and the &s;everal Changes of the Ruling Power of that Monarchy has been &s;hown to be very plainly expre&s;&s;ed in the words of the Prophecy it &s;elf. And this is &s;ufficient to excite ones curio&s;ity to a more particular examination of the other Figures of that Book, which, th&ocirc; they have no &s;uch plain determinations of their &s;ignification, as the former, in expre&s;s words; yet are there &s;uch peculiar de&s;criptions of them in the explication that is given of them, as upon the fir&s;t, &s;erious reflections would make one very confident, that it was no hard matter either to come to the particular knowledg of them, or to find them conformable to the Rule of the pre&s;ent Propo&s;ition.</P>
<P>It is a con&s;iderable encouragement to our hopes of this na|ture, That it is <HI>almo&s;t unanimou&s;ly agreed upon by all the &s;everal parties of Interpreters,</HI> That the other Figures in the 2d and 7th Chapters, are the &s;ucce&s;&s;ions of the four famous Monarchies, from the time of the Prophet <HI>Daniel</HI> him&s;elf, till &s;ome univer&s;al Kingdom of Chri&s;t at the end of them.</P>
<P>Let us con&s;ider them both according to their de&s;criptions in each Chapter.</P>
<P>In the 7th Chapter there are Five Kingdoms repre&s;ented by <HI>four Bea&s;ts,</HI> and a Maje&s;tical appearance of <HI>the Kingdom of the Saints.</HI></P>
<PB N="100" REF="83">
<P> And in the 2d Chapter, there are Five Kingdoms repre&s;ent|ed di&s;tinct from one another by the <HI>Four &s;everal qualities</HI> of the parts of a <HI>Statue;</HI> and a <HI>Stone made a Mountain.</HI></P>
<P>If we can find the&s;e Five Kingdoms in each to be the very <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 2. 36.</NOTE> &s;ame Kingdoms in <HI>reality,</HI> as they &s;eem at the fir&s;t view of them to be from their being exactly the &s;ame number of Kingdoms, <MILESTONE N="1"> and from the extraordinary likene&s;s of the fifth of them in each, <MILESTONE N="2"> it will be ea&s;y from thence to conclude, what is the &s;ignification of any Figure in <HI>general,</HI> as di&s;tinct from the <HI>&s;everal parts</HI> of it, that are repre&s;ented with it in Rule and Power; which is the <HI>fir&s;t part of the Propo&s;ition.</HI></P>
<P>And here is this further encouragement, to ground our hopes of it upon, That it is unanimou&s;ly agreed by all Interpreters of <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> all Ages that are <HI>con&s;iderable,</HI> That they are the &s;ame Five King|doms in each of tho&s;e Chapters; th&ocirc; there be a different appre|hen&s;ion in &s;ome few of them from the re&s;t about the particular names of the&s;e Kingdoms.</P>
<P>But becau&s;e they have not di&s;tinctly proved the certainty of tho&s;e Grounds, upon which they build this common agreement, It may be u&s;eful for a con&s;tant a&s;&s;ured &s;atisfaction of this point, once for all to reflect upon the evidence that there is for it, and to put it into a clo&s;e and di&s;tinct order to make it unque&s;tion|able.</P>
<P>Con&s;ider then <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> That the 5th Kingdom in the 7th Chap|ter, <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 13, 14.</NOTE> mu&s;t be &s;ome <HI>Kingdom of Chri&s;t.</HI> For it was a <HI>Kingdom given to one like the Son of Man, by the Ancient of days,</HI> who had <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 9, 10.</NOTE> Ho&s;ts of Angels Mini&s;tring unto him; which cannot po&s;&s;ibly be any thing, but <HI>God him&s;elf;</HI> And the name of the Son of Man is &s;o peculiarly owned by Chri&s;t him&s;elf all over the Go&s;pels, That he cannot be more plainly known by the name of Chri&s;t, or of Je&s;us, than by that. And 'tis ob&s;erved by a very accurate <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. Mede.</NOTE> Critick, That there is no other place in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament</HI> that he could fetch this name of the Son of Man from, as a name of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> but from this very place of <HI>Daniel;</HI> The Circum|&s;tances of which our Saviour doth al&s;o expre&s;ly add to that name, in his Prophecy about the <HI>Coming of the Son of Man in the Clouds of Heaven with great glory,</HI> which we find in all the three Go&s;pels; and is the &s;ame with what is &s;aid here, <HI>Of the coming of the Son of Man in the Clouds of Heaven to the Ancient of days,</HI> with an infinite multitude of Angels about his Throne, and a very glorious appearance.</P>
<PB N="101" REF="83">
<P> Con&s;ider <HI>next,</HI> That this Kingdom of the Son of Man in the 7th Chapter, is &s;aid to be both <HI>Eternal</HI> and <HI>&V;niver&s;al,</HI> or over all the Earth. There could not well be more care taken to &s;igni|fie this, than there &s;eems to have been by the fullne&s;s of the expre&s;&s;ions for both of the&s;e; For <HI>The Eternity</HI> of it in &s;uch words as the&s;e, an <HI>Everla&s;ting Dominion, which &s;hall not pa&s;s away,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14.</NOTE> and <HI>a kingdom that &s;hall not be de&s;troyed;</HI> and <HI>a kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever;</HI> as if it had been on purpo&s;e to &s;top all &s;u|&s;picions of ambiguity in the u&s;e of the word <HI>everla&s;ting,</HI> and <HI>for ever.</HI> And then to a&s;&s;ure the real <HI>univer&s;ality</HI> of it&mdash;It is called, A Kingdom, that <HI>all people, nations and languages &s;hould &s;erve him,</HI> And the <HI>greatne&s;s of the kingdom under the whole Hea|ven.&mdash;</HI>And, <HI>All Dominions &s;hall obey him;</HI> And it did &s;ucceed in <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 27. v. 23.</NOTE> the place of a Fourth Kingdom upon Earth, which had <HI>de|voured the whole earth, and trod it down.</HI></P>
<P>If now we look into the 5th Kingdom, <HI>in the &s;econd Chapter,</HI> we &s;hall find ju&s;t the &s;ame Characters of it from the 44th Ver&s;e. It was to be <HI>&s;et up by the God of Heaven,</HI> It was <HI>never to be de&s;troyed,</HI> nor to be <HI>left to other people;</HI> but was <HI>to &s;tand for ever:</HI> which &s;ecures the <HI>Eternity</HI> of it from any &s;ucce&s;&s;ions after it. And the <HI>&V;niver&s;ality</HI> of it appears from its <HI>breaking in pieces, and con&s;uming all other kingdoms</HI> which had Ruled over all the Earth, e&s;pecially the <HI>Fourth</HI> Kingdom, which before it had <HI>&s;ubdued all things,</HI> even a third Kingdom, which <HI>bare Rule over all the</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 39, 40.</NOTE> <HI>earth.</HI></P>
<P>Here then are <HI>Two</HI> Kingdoms, <HI>Both without End, Both over all the Earth;</HI> and therefore <HI>Both</HI> in the <HI>&s;ame place.</HI> Let the Earth &s;ignify what it will, &s;ince it mu&s;t &s;ignify in both places at lea&s;t the Prophets Countrey, as all agree, this makes it appear, That the latter time of both, is mo&s;t undoubtedly the &s;ame, be|cau&s;e they are <HI>both at a time,</HI> (or eternal) in the <HI>&s;ame place,</HI> which no two di&s;tinct Kingdoms can properly be, that are of the &s;ame kind, as the&s;e are de&s;cribed to be, Both the <HI>Kingdoms of the God of Heaven,</HI> and &s;uch as began to be <HI>&s;et up in the days of the other Kings.</HI></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, they <HI>both</HI> began the Univer&s;ality of their Reign at the Ruin of a Power, which had <HI>devoured the whole earth,</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ch. 2. 39, 40. Ch. 7. 23, 26.</NOTE> which had <HI>broken in pieces,</HI> and con&s;umed all other Kingdoms, and did them&s;elves <HI>Rule over all the earth</HI> in the room of the for|mer; &s;o that they both then continue at the <HI>&s;ame time,</HI> in the
<PB N="102" REF="84"> <HI>&s;ame place;</HI> and the continuance of them both is to all <HI>eternity.</HI> And then they <HI>begin</HI> their Reign in that <HI>&s;ame place</HI> together: Or el&s;e, that which &s;hould come <HI>after</HI> the other, would put an end to it, which is a contradiction to the Eternity of either of them.</P>
<P>It &s;eems then to be ab&s;olutely impo&s;&s;ible, That the Fifth Kingdom in each of tho&s;e Chapters, &s;hould not be one and the &s;ame Kingdom of Chri&s;t, <HI>Eternal</HI> and <HI>&V;niver&s;al,</HI> and which began at the ruin of another univer&s;al dominion before it.</P>
<P>Now, if the Fifth Kingdom in each of the&s;e Chapters be the &s;ame, the Fourth al&s;o in each of them before it, mu&s;t be the &s;ame. For the Fourth Kingdom <HI>in each of tho&s;e Chapters,</HI> was the only Ruling <HI>power over all the earth,</HI> when it was de&s;troyed by the la&s;t. For by the de&s;truction of it, the Fifth got its do|minion <HI>over all the earth</HI> And &s;o the Fourth could not po&s;&s;ibly be more than one and the &s;ame Kingdom in <HI>each of the Chapters,</HI> becau&s;e the <HI>whole earth</HI> in each mu&s;t, as has been ob&s;erved, &s;ig|nify at lea&s;t the &s;ame place; and there could be but one King|dom in the <HI>&s;ame place</HI> at the <HI>&s;ame time,</HI> that each of them in tho&s;e Chapters is &s;aid to be de&s;troyed by the la&s;t. For they are both de&s;troyed by the <HI>&s;ame</HI> Fifth Kingdom, as has been &s;hown, at the <HI>&s;ame time,</HI> That is, at the beginning of the Univer&s;al Reign of that Kingdom in each Chapter. Two different Kingdoms cannot be de&s;troyed by a Third in the &s;ame place, and at the &s;ame time. And the Fourth Kingdom in each, is one Ruling <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 7. v. 27.</NOTE> Power over all the Earth at the time that the <HI>greatne&s;s of the Kingdom of the</HI> Fifth <HI>under the whole Heaven,</HI> began by the Con|que&s;t of it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="103" REF="84">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. II, &amp; VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Five Kingdoms in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter of</HI> Daniel, imme|diatly <HI>&s;ucce&s;&s;ive to one another. This agreed on by Interpreters; and particularly evinced upon &s;everal grounds. The nature of the&s;e Kingdoms &s;hewn, from their</HI> immediate Succe&s;&s;ion <HI>to one another. Not &s;ucce&s;&s;ive forms of Government in the &s;ame Nation; nor part of them of that kind. From hece nece&s;&s;ary, that they mu&s;t be the Four Monarchies. And therefore mu&s;t the Third in the</HI> 2<HI>d and the 7th Chapter be the &s;ame Kingdom. The Fir&s;t and Second al&s;o in both Chap|ters proved to be the &s;ame.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE &s;ure&s;t way to demon&s;trate the re&s;t of the&s;e five King|doms to be the <HI>&s;ame,</HI> is, to find, that tho&s;e <HI>in the Second Chapter</HI> are <HI>immediately &s;ucce&s;&s;ive</HI> to one another. For &s;ince the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> of the Kingdoms in the Second Chapter, is <HI>known</HI> to be the Dominion of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar,</HI> and <HI>the la&s;t</HI> of them to be &s;ome Kingdom of Chri&s;t, <HI>pag. praeced.</HI> If they be all in an <HI>immediate</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 38.</NOTE> &s;ucce&s;&s;ion from the fir&s;t to the la&s;t, that will &s;hew what kind of Kingdoms they mu&s;t needs be, to be able to fill up the di|&s;tance of time betwixt tho&s;e two Kingdoms by <HI>immediate</HI> Succe&s;|&s;ion; and thereby will make it appear from Hi&s;tory, what King|doms al&s;o they mu&s;t be in <HI>particular;</HI> and this will give light enough to find them to be the &s;ame with tho&s;e <HI>in the 7th Chapter.</HI></P>
<P>That the Five Kingdoms <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter</HI> are <HI>&s;ucce&s;&s;ive</HI> to one <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. II.</NOTE> another, is undoubted. For of the Second it is &s;aid&mdash;And <HI>after thee</HI> &s;hall ari&s;e another Kingdom; And of the Third, That it &s;hould <HI>bear Rule over all the Earth;</HI> and &s;o could it not be at the &s;ame time with any other that was different from it in the Earth, at lea&s;t where the Prophet lived; And it is agreed by all, that the Prophet's Countrey did belong to this Third King|dom. And then of the Fourth, that it &s;hould <HI>break in pieces,</HI> and <HI>con&s;ume all Kingdoms</HI> that had been before mentioned, and &s;o mu&s;t come after them.</P>
<PB N="104" REF="85">
<P> And then, That the&s;e <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter</HI> are all <HI>immediately</HI> &s;uc|ce&s;&s;ive <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. II.</NOTE> to one another, it is unanimou&s;ly agreed among&s;t all kinds of Interpreters, Jews and Chri&s;tians of all Ages that are any <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> thing <HI>con&s;iderable;</HI> which &s;hews it to be here &s;o plainly intima|ted, if not expre&s;&s;ed in words, That the common &s;en&s;e of all con&s;idering Per&s;ons would judge it to be &s;o from the u&s;ual ac|ceptation of &s;uch words as it is &s;ignified by. For how otherwi&s;e could tho&s;e, who differ from one another in almo&s;t every thing el&s;e, be &s;uppo&s;ed to be &s;o willing to agree together in this, where there may be a <HI>great di&s;advantage</HI> given again&s;t the Party, which they embrace, by allowing it, but no manner of advan|tage gained by it? The Jews would be much &s;urer of a de|fence for their deferring the coming of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> if the fir&s;t Four Kingdoms were not determined to be the Four Monarchies <HI>immediately</HI> &s;ucceeding one another; And it would not appear that Antichri&s;t went along with the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans,</HI> if the whole four were not found to be nece&s;&s;arily &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Em|pires, that came <HI>immediately</HI> after one another from the times of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar.</HI></P>
<P>The grounds of this agreement about the immediate Succe&s;|&s;ion of the&s;e Kingdoms from the Text, may be the&s;e.</P>
<P N="1">1. The mention of the number of them from the time of <HI>Ne|buchadnezzar</HI> to the Kingdom of Chri&s;t, &s;eems to be plainly ex|pre&s;&s;ed to be, to fore&s;hew the determinate time of that Kingdom. For there is nothing mentioned in any of the re&s;t (excepting that Tyranny in the la&s;t times of the Fourth Kingdom, which u&s;hers in the Kingdom of Chri&s;t) about any Religious concern, or any Action of God, which yet is ordinarily the bu&s;ine&s;s of every Divine Prophecy. <HI>Daniel</HI> does expre&s;ly tell <HI>Nebuchadnez|zar,</HI> that the end of his Dream was to <HI>make known</HI> to him from God, <HI>what &s;hould be in the latter days;</HI> And by the <HI>latter days</HI> mu&s;t be there under&s;tood at lea&s;t the latter days of tho&s;e King|doms which are the &s;ubject of the Dream, and therefore mu&s;t they include the <HI>days</HI> of the la&s;t of tho&s;e Five Kingdoms, or the time of the Kingdom of Chri&s;t therein mentioned. The <HI>whole number</HI> then &s;eems to be wholly for this end, to &s;hew how many Succe&s;&s;ions of Empire there &s;hould be betwixt the Reign of <HI>Ne|buchadnezzar</HI>'s Kingdom, and the Kingdom of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>For who would not a&s;&s;uredly conclude it to be for that end <HI>only,</HI> when there is nothing con&s;iderable &s;poken of the re&s;t of the
<PB N="105" REF="85"> number; And when the gloriou&s;e&s;t &s;tate of things that ever was mentioned, is &s;et forth in that <HI>la&s;t</HI> Kingdom with this Introdu|ction to the Interpretation of them all, that the whole &s;hew was to <HI>make known what &s;hould be in the latter days?</HI> And how could that be po&s;&s;ibly &s;hewn by &s;uch an orderly number, unle&s;s there had been no other Kingdoms betwixt them? This therefore does make it manife&s;t, that the Succe&s;&s;ion of the&s;e Kingdoms was <HI>immediate,</HI> to mea&s;ure out the exact time of the coming of Chri&s;t in glory.</P>
<P N="2">2. An orderly number, when joined with Succe&s;&s;ive Reigns, as it is here, under the names of a Third, and a Fourth King|dom (v. 39, 40.) is generally u&s;ed in &s;peech to &s;ignify an <HI>imme|diate</HI> orderly Succe&s;&s;ion: And who would ever call tho&s;e a Third, or a Fourth Kingdom from the Fir&s;t, which had two or three more coming in betwixt <HI>them</HI> and the Fir&s;t?</P>
<P N="3">3. And then the la&s;t of the Five is known to be <HI>immediately</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 2. 44. Chap. 7. 26.</NOTE> &s;ucce&s;&s;ive to the Fourth (pag. 120.) which is an in&s;tance, to &s;hew the manner of the Succe&s;&s;ion of all the re&s;t, unle&s;s there were any thing clearer again&s;t it, which is not by any pre|tended.</P>
<P N="4">4. The parts al&s;o of the <HI>Statue,</HI> which repre&s;ents the&s;e King|doms, are <HI>immediatly</HI> joined to one another, which mu&s;t denote a property in the things repre&s;ented &s;ome way an&s;werable to it; and that in Succe&s;&s;ive Kingdoms can be nothing el&s;e but the <HI>im|mediate</HI> Succe&s;&s;ion of them.</P>
<P>Upon the&s;e grounds it may &s;afely be concluded, That the&s;e Four Kingdoms <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter,</HI> do <HI>immediatly</HI> &s;ucceed one ano|ther; e&s;pecially when there is nothing offered again&s;t it; but on the contrary, as has been ob&s;erved, it has the unanimous Con|&s;ent of all the differing Parties of Interpreters: And by that it appears, that in the Judgment of all that have con&s;idered the&s;e things, it is &s;o plainly &s;ugge&s;ted from the Text, That, unle&s;s it be really &s;o, there is occa&s;ion given for an unavoidable delu&s;ion about &s;uch things of moment, as the great Tyranny of the la&s;t King of the Fourth Kingdom over the Church of God, and the Univer&s;al Eternal Kingdom of Chri&s;t &s;ucceeding it; and which the whole Prophecy was de&s;igned wholly to make known, as is expre&s;&s;ed, v. 28. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 2.</NOTE></P>
<P>It may therefore now be determined what kind of Kingdoms the&s;e <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter</HI> are.</P>
<PB N="106" REF="86">
<P> For they cannot po&s;&s;ibly <HI>be the</HI> Four Reigns of &s;o many &s;in|gle Per&s;ons, either in the &s;ame, or in different Nations: In which &s;en&s;e Kingdoms <HI>are</HI> &s;ometimes <HI>taken.</HI> For the Four longe&s;t &s;ingle Reigns that ever were heard of in an <HI>immediate</HI> Succe&s;&s;ion to one another, do not reach to half the number of years that there are from the time of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI> (here &s;aid <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 38.</NOTE> to be the fir&s;t) to any Kingdom of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>The&s;e Four Kingdoms then mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be &s;uch Succe&s;|&s;ions of Kingly Power, as include the times of a great many &s;in|gle Rulers in them. And then, They mu&s;t be <HI>either</HI> &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Forms of the Sovereign Power in the &s;ame Nation (as Chap. 8. 22. the changes of the governing Form of the &s;ame Nation are called different Kingdoms; and as the Monarchy of <HI>England,</HI> and the <HI>Saxon</HI> Heptarchy, may be &s;aid to be two diffe|rent Kingdoms.) <HI>Or el&s;e,</HI> they mu&s;t be Four Kingdoms of diffe|rent Nations in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to one another; <HI>Or &s;ome</HI> of them Forms of Government in the &s;ame Nation, and <HI>others</HI> the Rule of different Nations. For it &s;eems hardly po&s;&s;ibly to find any other acceptation of Succe&s;&s;ive Kingdoms, but in one of the&s;e &s;en&s;es.</P>
<P N="1">1. It is certain, that they cannot be Four Succe&s;&s;ive Forms of Sovereignty <HI>in the &s;ame Nation.</HI> For &s;ince the fir&s;t is known to be the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Nation, the end of that would then be the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 2. 38.</NOTE> end of all the Four, and the beginning of a Kingdom of Chri&s;t upon Earth.</P>
<P N="2">2. Neither can they be <HI>part of them</HI> Forms of Sovereignty <HI>in the &s;ame Nations.</HI> For the fir&s;t of them is known to be the <HI>Baby|lonian</HI> Nation, which had no differing Forms of Sovereignty in it, from the time of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI> to the la&s;t end of it; and therefore the fir&s;t mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy <HI>only:</HI> And the next in <HI>immediate</HI> &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to it, mu&s;t be the <HI>Per|&s;ian</HI> Monarchy upon the &s;ame account of its continuing in the &s;ame Monarchichal Form of Sovereignty, from the beginning of it under <HI>Cyrus,</HI> to the la&s;t Conque&s;t of it under <HI>Darius.</HI></P>
<P>But about the Third Kingdom <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter,</HI> there may be &s;ome que&s;tion; For that next the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> is repre&s;ented <HI>even</HI> in this very Prophecy, Chap. 8. 21, 22. with two &s;everal Forms of the Sovereign Power of it &s;ucceeding one another under the name of the Kingdom of the Fir&s;t King, and of a Fourfold Kingdom after him.</P>
<PB N="107" REF="86">
<P> But the Third al&s;o does appear to be <HI>nothing</HI> but the <HI>whole</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Dan.</HI> II, &amp; VII.</NOTE> <HI>time</HI> of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy from its Succe&s;&s;ion to the <HI>Per&s;ian, till its</HI> Conque&s;t by <HI>the Roman.</HI> For <HI>the</HI> Fourth, that is next to it, is already found to be the &s;ame with the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> pag. 121. And that Fourth in the 7th Chapter is already known to be a Kingdom of the <HI>Romans</HI> by <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.</P>
<P>The Third Kingdom therefore <HI>beginning</HI> immediately after the Second, or <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Conque&s;t, and <HI>ending</HI> but immediately before the <HI>Roman</HI> Conque&s;t <HI>(immediate Succe&s;&s;ion</HI> being common to all the Four) it mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be the <HI>whole</HI> continuance of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy from the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> to the <HI>Roman,</HI> becau&s;e the Fourth Kingdom is already known to be the <HI>Roman.</HI></P>
<P>Thus then do we at la&s;t find, that the&s;e Four Kingdoms <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter,</HI> mu&s;t be the Kingdoms of Four Ruling Na|tions immediately &s;ucceeding one another; and that it is at the &s;ame time determined what Nations they are in parti|cular.</P>
<P>From hence then it appears, that the Third <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d and the 7th Chapters,</HI> mu&s;t be the &s;ame Ruling Nation.</P>
<P>For the Third <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter,</HI> was immediately before that, which is the &s;ame Fourth in both Chapters, <HI>pag.</HI> 121. <HI>&amp; Paragr. praeced.</HI></P>
<P>And that Third <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter ruled over all the Earth,</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 39.</NOTE> <HI>therefore included</HI> in it any other Kingdom of the <HI>Prophet</HI>'s Earth that was de&s;troyed at the beginning of the &s;ame Fourth in the 7th Chapter. Now the Fourth <HI>in the 7th Chapter</HI> did <HI>break in pieces</HI> the <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 23.</NOTE> Third there that was before it; and therefore that Third <HI>in the 7th Chapter</HI> mu&s;t be the &s;ame with, or be included in the Third <HI>of the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter.</HI></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, by the term of <HI>all the Earth,</HI> mu&s;t at lea&s;t be under|&s;tood <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 2. 39.</NOTE> <HI>Judaea</HI> in Scripture, or the Prophet's Nation, according to the &s;en&s;e of <HI>all Interpreters;</HI> And all the Four Kingdoms of the <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 17.</NOTE> 7th Chapter are &s;aid to <HI>ari&s;e out of the Earth,</HI> or to be in Rule over it, and &s;o over <HI>Judaea.</HI></P>
<P>Wherefore the Third in the 2d and in the 7th being both over <HI>Judaea</HI> at lea&s;t, becau&s;e both <HI>over the Earth,</HI> and <HI>both de|&s;troyed;</HI> by the &s;ame Fourth they can be but one and the &s;ame Kingdom in <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame place.</HI></P>
<PB N="108" REF="87">
<P> There is no que&s;tion now to be made about the &s;amene&s;s of the Fir&s;t and Second in each Chapters; For &s;ince they are the Fir&s;t and Second to the &s;ame Third in both Chapters <HI>(&s;eg. praeced.)</HI> And that the u&s;e of the word Kingdom is found to &s;ig|nify a Ruling Nation <HI>(pag.</HI> 107.) And &s;ince the two fir&s;t <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter</HI> are already determined to be the <HI>Babylonians</HI> and <HI>Per|&s;ians (ibid.)</HI> The Prophetical u&s;e of the &s;ame words with the &s;ame things, is &s;ufficient <HI>(by Rule the</HI> 3<HI>d)</HI> to &s;atisfy any, that they &s;ignify the &s;ame things in both Chapters.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, that they are all repre&s;ented <HI>in the 7th Chapter</HI> to be great remarkable Kingdoms under the names of <HI>Great Bea&s;ts,</HI> and in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion after one another; And then, The Second be|fore the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy <HI>in the 7th Chapter,</HI> can be no other Kingdom but the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> as it is in this very Prophet al&s;o &s;hewn in the 8th Chapter 20, 21. And the Fir&s;t of the&s;e Succe&s;&s;ive Kingdoms <HI>in the 7th Chapter</HI> before the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> mu&s;t then be the <HI>Babylonian,</HI> which the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> conquered. For there were no other two great Kingdoms in tho&s;e times in a &s;ucce&s;&s;ive order to one another, before the <HI>Graecian</HI> Conque&s;t, called <HI>the Third, pag.</HI> 107. <HI>&amp; chap.</HI> 2. 39.</P>
<P>The whole number al&s;o of the Four Kingdoms <HI>in the 7th Chapter,</HI> &s;eem to be plainly for no other end, but only to mea&s;ure out the time of the la&s;t Kingdom of the Saints, about which all the concern of that Prophecy is, as may be &s;een at the 17th and 18th ver&s;es: where after the Interpreting Angel had &s;aid<HI>&mdash;The&s;e Great Bea&s;ts are Four Kings&mdash;</HI>without mentioning any thing of them, he adds<HI>&mdash;But the Saints of the Mo&s;t High &s;hall take tbe Kingdom, and po&s;&s;e&s;s it for ever&mdash;</HI>Wherefore, &s;ince the Three la&s;t of the&s;e Kingdoms are found to be the &s;ame with tho&s;e in the 2d Chapter about the &s;ame concern <HI>(pag.</HI> 123. <HI>&amp;</HI> 126.) and all the Five are the &s;ame number in the whole with the number of the&s;e here, for the &s;ame end; and are prophe|&s;ied of in the &s;ame Reign of the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy, which is the fir&s;t of them <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter, v.</HI> 38. and &s;o could not be|gin before that time. There &s;eems to be no manner of doubt, but that they are all the &s;ame Four in both Chapters. For other|wi&s;e there would have been a plain ground laid down for a de|lu&s;ion in this Chapter al&s;o, about the mo&s;t momentous things that can concern the Church of God, as has been ob&s;erved. And therefore do we find an unanimous Con&s;ent among&s;t all &s;orts of <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE>
<PB N="109" REF="87"> Interpreters, That, what&s;oever the&s;e Four Kingdoms be <HI>in par|ticular,</HI> yet that they mu&s;t certainly be <HI>the &s;ame</HI> Kingdoms in both Chapters.</P>
<P>Thus are we at la&s;t come to find not only, that the Five Kingdoms in <HI>each Chapter,</HI> are <HI>the &s;ame particular</HI> Kingdoms, but al&s;o what they all are by name.</P>
<P>And thereby is it manife&s;t, that the names of <HI>The Bea&s;t</HI> in general, does &s;ignify a Ruling Nation; and that the parts of <HI>A Bea&s;t</HI> &s;ignifying Dominion, does denote the Supream Powers of that Nation; which if they be repre&s;ented as exi&s;ting all at a time, do &s;ignify the divi&s;ion of that Empire into &s;o many Sove|reignties, as we &s;ee in the Ten Horns of the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter, according to the Propo&s;ition at fir&s;t laid down.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="110" REF="88">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. II, &amp; VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Objections again&s;t the making the Third Kingdom in the</HI> 2<HI>d and 7th of</HI> Daniel, <HI>the whole time of one Ruling Nation, an&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IT is <HI>unanimou&s;ly</HI> agreed among&s;t the Interpreters of all Parties, and Intere&s;ts, That the Four Kingdoms in the 2d and 7th Chapters of <HI>Daniel,</HI> are the &s;ame particular Kingdoms, how differing &s;oever they are from one another in the particular ap|plications of them.</P>
<P>It is al&s;o as <HI>generally</HI> agreed among&s;t them, that the two fir&s;t of the&s;e Kingdoms in each Chapter, are the <HI>Babylonian</HI> and <HI>Per|&s;ian</HI> Monarchies; But about the Third Kingdom in each Chap|ter, though acknowledged to be the Scheme of one and the &s;ame Dominion, there is not the &s;ame con&s;ent for the <HI>particular</HI> application of it.</P>
<P>At the fir&s;t mention of a difference, one would be apt to ad|mire what &s;hould make any one &s;ceptical in this matter, who affirms the other Two before this Third, to be known Kingdoms, and that all the Four do immediately &s;ucceed one another, as has been ob&s;erved to be acknowledged by all Parties. For all that &s;eems needful to be done for &s;uch an ones &s;atisfaction, is to de&s;ire him to enquire, what Kingdom it was of the &s;ame kind and nature with the <HI>Babylonian</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy (acknow|ledged to be the fir&s;t and &s;econd) that came immediately after the Second of the&s;e Kingdoms, or the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy. Since the Second is granted by all to be the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy, from the time of its fir&s;t great appearance in the World at its Conque&s;t of the <HI>Babylonian;</HI> who would not forthwith conclude, that the Third mu&s;t be that whole Monarchy which &s;ubdued the <HI>Per|&s;ian,</HI> and &s;ucceeded in its room, that is, the whole <HI>Graecian</HI> Mo|narchy?</P>
<P>This being the natural and obvious determination about it, and according to the <HI>common Rule</HI> of reading the &s;en&s;e of all o|ther places of Scripture, <HI>that is,</HI> from the known u&s;e of them in the Context; it would be imagined, that there mu&s;t certainly
<PB N="111" REF="88"> be &s;ome very great appearing nece&s;&s;ity, that could make <HI>Grotius,</HI> and &s;ome others of this la&s;t Age, to judge the Third Kingdom in both Chapters to be of quite another nature, than tho&s;e be|fore it, were; e&s;pecially &s;ince it is again&s;t the &s;en&s;e of all the An|cients, who have been found from St. <HI>Jerom</HI> to have been <HI>gene|rally</HI> agreed in making this Third, as well as all the re&s;t, to be the Succe&s;&s;ive Rule of an whole Nation.</P>
<P>The Opinion of the&s;e Innovators about the Third Kingdom, is, <HI>That it is the &s;ingle Reign of</HI> Alexander the Great; <HI>and that the Fourth Kingdom in both Chapters is the divi&s;ion of the</HI> Greek <HI>Monar|chy among&s;t his Ten Captains immediately after him.</HI></P>
<P>The Rea&s;ons that they rely upon for this new Opinion, again&s;t all the &s;eeming Ab&s;urdities that attend it, are chiefly the&s;e that follow.</P>
<P N="1">1. Becau&s;e, if the Third Kingdom in the 2d and 7th of <HI>Da|niel,</HI> were the whole <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy, then the Fourth mu&s;t be the <HI>Roman,</HI> which conquered the <HI>Graecians;</HI> and then the Kingdom of the Son of Man (Chap. 7.) which comes after the Fourth Kingdom there, mu&s;t not begin till after the end of all <HI>Roman</HI> Dominion upon Earth: and this is &s;uppo&s;ed to give too great an advantage to the <HI>Jews,</HI> to conclude, that Chri&s;t Je&s;us, at his fir&s;t appearance, could not be the King <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> or the Son of Man in his Kingdom. For he died about the beginning of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy, after the compleat Conque&s;t of the <HI>Grae|cian.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. This Objection will be thought to be much &s;trengthened from the Prophecies that our Saviour, and his Apo&s;tles, have given out about the time of the coming of the Son of Man, which &s;eems to repre&s;ent it to be the advancement of the Chri|&s;tian Church in the World, by the de&s;truction of the <HI>Jews,</HI> its Enemies, in that very Age when tho&s;e Prophecies were deli|vered, and therefore could not agree with the coming of the Son of Man in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> if the Fourth Kingdom there, be|fore the Kingdom of the Son of Man, were the <HI>Roman</HI> Mo|narchy.</P>
<P N="3">3. Again, If the Fourth Kingdom in <HI>Daniel</HI> were the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy, then the Little Horn in that Kingdom would be the &s;ame with the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> as appears from the exact agreement of the Characters of them both compared together. But it is thought impo&s;&s;ible that the Little Horn, and the Bea&s;t
<PB N="112" REF="89"> in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> &s;hould be the &s;ame. For the Little Horn was <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VIII.</NOTE> not to ari&s;e till the Fourth Kingdom was broken into Ten King|doms, Three of which it was to &s;ubdue, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 8. Whereas the time of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily have been &s;oon after that that Prophecy was given, which was long be|fore any &s;uch divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire: It is &s;aid both at the beginning, and at the end of the Book, <HI>That the time of tho&s;e</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 1. 1, 3.</NOTE> <HI>things was at hand;</HI> and that they <HI>&s;hould &s;hortly come to pa&s;s,</HI> and <HI>&s;hould &s;hortly be done.</HI> And to make this unque&s;tionable, The <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 22. 6, 7, 10.</NOTE> Prophet is commanded at the end of the Prophecy, <HI>not to &s;eal the Saying of the Prophecy of that Book,</HI> becau&s;e <HI>the time was at hand.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. It is mo&s;t agreeable to the Event, and to the other parts of the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel,</HI> to make the Fourth Kingdom to be the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy in the time of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Succe&s;&s;ors. For it has Ten Kings ari&s;ing out of it, to &s;ignify that variety of King|doms that his Captains did &s;et up after his death; And after the&s;e Ten, is there a Little Horn repre&s;ented, almo&s;t every way the &s;ame in every Character of it with the Little Horn in the 8th Chapter, which all agree to be <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> one of the Succe&s;&s;ors of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Captains.</P>
<P N="1">1. In the fir&s;t of the&s;e Rea&s;ons there is nothing to force a <MILESTONE UNIT="An&s;wer."> man again&s;t what is but the <HI>mo&s;t probable</HI> &s;en&s;e of the words, much le&s;s what has &s;eemed to be the <HI>nece&s;&s;ary</HI> &s;en&s;e of them, un|le&s;s it can be proved to be impo&s;&s;ible, that the Kingdom of the Son of Man in that place &s;hould be any thing but the <HI>fir&s;t coming</HI> of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias.</HI> But our Saviour has put us out of all fear of that. For he makes u&s;e of tho&s;e very words to &s;et out his <HI>&s;econd com|ing</HI> after his death, as may be &s;een in all the Go&s;pels that mention that Prophecy, <HI>Matth.</HI> 24. 30. <HI>Mark</HI> 13. 26. <HI>Luke</HI> 21. 27.</P>
<P>We may al&s;o be well a&s;&s;ured, that <HI>Daniel</HI> him&s;elf could not po&s;&s;ibly under&s;tand that <HI>Eternal &V;niver&s;al</HI> Kingdom of the Son of Man, of his <HI>fir&s;t coming.</HI> For in his 9th Chapter he &s;ets out the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 9. 26.</NOTE> <HI>Me&s;&s;ias</HI> by name, as delivered up at his fir&s;t coming into his Ene|mies hands, and cut off, and his City <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> and the Temple as de&s;troyed by them; which is quite contrary to &s;uch a glorious Kingdom, as he is de&s;cribed in the 7th Chapter to enjoy to all eternity; and which was at its fir&s;t appearance to de&s;troy a King|dom that ruled over all the Earth, and was contrary to it.</P>
<P N="2"><PB N="113" REF="89"> 2. The 2d Rea&s;on is of much the &s;ame force with the for|mer. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE> For though the Terms of the coming of the Son of Man, and of his Kingdom, &s;hould be found to be u&s;ed by our Savi|our, and his Apo&s;tles (in &s;ome peculiar circum&s;tances, and by way of allu&s;ion) to &s;ignify the de&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem;</HI> yet that it cannot be &s;o under&s;tood in this 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is cer|tain, becau&s;e it has &s;uch peculiar circum&s;tances there joined with it, as do always &s;ignify the la&s;t coming of Chri&s;t to judg|ment; as may be &s;een more at large in the proof of the <HI>14th Propo&s;ition.</HI> But it has al&s;o been found, that that place in the Go&s;pels which &s;eems to have the greate&s;t &s;trength in it, to &s;hew that the coming of the Son of Man, is to be under&s;tood of his coming only to the de&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily &s;ignify his la&s;t coming to judgment. See this Book, Chap. 2. the five la&s;t Pages.</P>
<P>There are indeed &s;ome Exhortations of our Saviour, and his Apo&s;tles, to Per&s;ons then living, to watch again&s;t the day of the Lord's coming, as if it were to be in that Age. But that can be no a&s;&s;urance of it. For there are the &s;ame kind of Exhorta|tions in places, which are by all acknowledged to belong to Chri&s;t's la&s;t coming to judgment only: As <HI>Mat.</HI> 25. 13. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15. 51, 52. 1 <HI>The&s;&s;al.</HI> 4. 15, 17. The rea&s;on, and application of which la&s;t, is given in the following Chapter from the 1&s;t to the 7th ver&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> becau&s;e of the uncertainty of the time of the Lord's Coming.</P>
<P N="3">3. The con&s;equence of the Third Rea&s;on may &s;afely be ac|knowledged, <HI>viz.</HI> That then the Bea&s;t with the Little Horn in <HI>Daniel,</HI> mu&s;t be the &s;ame with the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> For it has already been &s;ufficiently demon&s;trated &s;o to be in the proof of the <HI>15th Propo&s;ition, Coroll.</HI> 2. And as for the incon&s;i&s;tency of tho&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions in the fir&s;t and la&s;t Chapters of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> with the ri&s;e and continuance of the Little Horn in <HI>Daniel;</HI> it is an&s;wered by the &s;trength of the <HI>15th Propo&s;ition, and Corol.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 12. And by the familiar u&s;e of &s;uch kind of Expre&s;&s;ions (as tho&s;e of the <HI>time being at hand,</HI> and the <HI>doing things &s;hortly,</HI> and of their <HI>coming to pa&s;s very &s;hortly)</HI> to denote only the begin|ning of a &s;cene of Action within a little while, which requires a long time to fini&s;h it. As may be &s;een in particular in&s;tances in the An&s;wer to the Objection again&s;t the <HI>20th Propo&s;ition.</HI></P>
<PB N="114" REF="90">
<P> That which does the mo&s;t manife&s;tly evidence, how little tho&s;e that rai&s;e this Objection do believe it them&s;elves, is, that they all allow the <HI>Thou&s;and years</HI> in the 20th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to be literally under&s;tood, which is &s;ufficient to con|vince them, that the <HI>&s;hort time,</HI> and the <HI>time being at hand,</HI> and the <HI>coming &s;hortly to pa&s;s,</HI> cannot po&s;&s;ibly be under&s;tood of the la&s;t completion of the things in that Prophecy; and therefore that it can &s;ignify no more, than that they &s;hould <HI>&s;hortly begin</HI> to be fulfilled; as it is u&s;ually &s;aid of long continuance of time, that it is <HI>at hand,</HI> or that it will <HI>&s;hortly come,</HI> to &s;ignify that it will <HI>&s;hortly begin.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. All the &s;trength of the la&s;t Objection lies in the likene&s;s of the Little Horn in the <HI>7th Chapter,</HI> to that in the <HI>8th Chapter.</HI></P>
<P>But who could ever take the Two Little Horns in the <HI>7th and 8th Chapters,</HI> to be &s;o very like one another, that has but the lea&s;t patience to con&s;ider them impartially? It is &s;o plain, that the Little Horn in the 8th Chapter mu&s;t be <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> that it is <HI>generally</HI> agreed upon by almo&s;t all kind of Interpreters: But it is as plain, that the other in the 7th Chapter is &s;ucceeded by an Eternal, Univer&s;al Kingdom of the Son of Man, which <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 27.</NOTE> is called the <HI>Greatne&s;s of the Kingdom under the whole Heaven.</HI> Now was there any thing ever like this in the times immediately after the death of <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> who was near 200 years before Chri&s;t? or any thing like it at the end of the Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks</HI> many years after it, which was above 60 years before the birth of Chri&s;t?</P>
<P>And therefore do we find <HI>Grotius</HI> at &s;uch a pinch to reconcile the&s;e Incon&s;i&s;tencies, that he is forced to interpret the <HI>Son of Man</HI> to &s;ignify in this place the <HI>Roman Nation:</HI> Whereas the name of the Son of man, in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> was &s;o generally known a|mong&s;t the Jews to &s;ignify the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> that the High-prie&s;t imme|diately rent his Cloaths when he heard our Saviour making him&s;elf known by that name; and he and they forthwith con|cluded him guilty of Bla&s;phemy, becau&s;e they took him but for an ordinary Per&s;on, as has been before ob&s;erved in the proof of the <HI>13th Propo&s;ition.</HI> And nothing can more demon&s;trate the hardine&s;s of <HI>Grotius</HI> for the defence of a &s;ingular Opinion, than to &s;ee him venture at &s;o likely a danger of Bla&s;phemy to maintain his po&s;t.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="115" REF="90">
<HEAD>CHAP. VIII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>An &V;niver&s;al Tradition, for &s;ome hundreds of years after the time of the Prophecy of</HI> Daniel, <HI>That the Fourth Kingdom in the</HI> 2<HI>d and 7th Chapter, is the Kingdom of the</HI> Romans. <HI>This demon&s;trated from the Text, in</HI> 15 <HI>Particulars.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>LET us now &s;ee what mountains of ab&s;urd Con&s;equences mu&s;t be cut through, to avoid the formidable dangers that are pretended (upon the account of the forementioned Objections) to lie in the other way. It may well be imagined, That this new Invention mu&s;t put a very unnatural force upon the Text, and have very great inconveniences in it, becau&s;e it is again&s;t the Judgment of all the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Rabbies, both <HI>before</HI> and <HI>after</HI> Chri&s;t, for 900 years after the Prophecy was given, and till it came to appear to the <HI>Jews</HI> to be their great Intere&s;t to hinder the triumph of Chri&s;tianity over the Empire from being thought to be the Kingdom of the Son of Man de&s;troying the fourth Bea&s;t: And therefore &s;eemed it very u&s;eful for them to make the fourth Bea&s;t to be, not the <HI>Roman,</HI> but a part of the <HI>Grecian</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P>It is al&s;o again&s;t the whole current of all the Learned Chri&s;ti|an Fathers, at lea&s;t till St. <HI>Jerom</HI>'s time, near <HI>a thou&s;and years</HI> after the Prophecy was given, and above <HI>four hundred</HI> years after Chri&s;t: <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>HIeronyme</HI> in c. 7. <HI>Daniel.</HI> Let us therefore &s;ay, what <HI>All Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Writers</HI> have delivered, That in the end of the World, when the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans</HI> is to be de&s;troyed, there &s;hall be Ten Kings who &s;hall divide the <HI>Roman</HI> World among them&s;elves; and that there &s;hall be an <HI>Eleventh</HI> littleKing, that &s;hall ari&s;e, and overcome three of tho&s;e Ten Kings, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Ergo dicamus,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>quod omnes &s;criptores Eccle|&s;ia&s;tici</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">In cap. 7. Dan.</NOTE> <HI>tradiderunt.</HI> Which is almo&s;t as much as to &s;ay, That it was an Univer&s;al Tradition, or a Tradition of all the con&s;ider|able per&s;ons of the <HI>Catholick Church</HI> to his time, That the fourth Bea&s;t was the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy; and &s;o that the third Bea&s;t mu&s;t be the whole time of the <HI>Grecian</HI> Monarchy, from its &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> which is by all granted to be the &s;econd.</P>
<P>Is not this &s;ufficient to make any man confident, That the Prophecy does of its own accord offer this Interpretation to the common &s;en&s;e of men, when it thus appears to be the impar|tial Judgment of all the Learned World, <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Malvenda de Antichri&s;to,</HI> p. 222. For <HI>All, both Jews and Chri&s;tians,</HI> look upon it as <HI>unque&s;tionable,</HI> That the Third and Fourth Bea&s;ts are plainly di&s;tinct from one another; &s;o that he mu&s;t have <HI>lo&s;t his wits</HI> that can think otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>Maldonal.</HI> in c. 7. <HI>Dan.</HI> The fourth Kingdom is the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans;</HI> and &s;o <HI>all</HI> take it to be.</P>
<P><HI>Calovius,</HI> in c. 7. <HI>Dan. All agree,</HI> That the Fourth Kingdom is the King|dom of the <HI>Romans,</HI> as well the <HI>Ancients</HI> and the <HI>Jewi&s;h Church</HI> both <HI>be|fore</HI> and <HI>after</HI> Chri&s;t; and the <HI>Chri&s;tian-Church</HI> for the fir&s;t Four hundred years, as the <HI>Moderns.</HI></P></NOTE> both <HI>Jews</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE>
<PB N="116" REF="91"> Chri&s;tians, before there was any particular Intere&s;ts to be &s;er|ved by it.</P>
<P>It has al&s;o been, and is &s;till, the Judgment of even <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Pererius,</HI> in c. 7. <HI>Dan.</HI> This Fourth Bea&s;t, according as <HI>all</HI> interpret it to be, and as the <HI>matter it &s;elf does &s;hew</HI> it, did repre&s;ent the Figure of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P><HI>Malvenda,</HI> in c. 7. <HI>Dan.</HI> p. 222. That the Fourth Bea&s;t is the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, is <HI>certain,</HI> and <HI>agreed upon by all that profe&s;s the name of Chri&s;t.&mdash;</HI>The Reader then is thus to be &s;et in the Right Road, and the King's High|way.</P>
<P><HI>Ibid.</HI> S. <HI>Hierom</HI> and others, do <HI>very clearly</HI> &s;how, that <HI>Porphyry</HI>'s Opinion is a <HI>perfect madne&s;s.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar,</HI> Sect. 5. in c. 13. <HI>Apoc. It cannot be denied,</HI> but that there is a plain allu&s;ion in the Ten Horns of this Bea&s;t, to the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,&mdash;</HI>which does <HI>very plainly</HI> appear to be the Figure of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. <HI>Item</HI> Sect. 3. in v. 1. The Bea&s;t out of the Sea does <HI>evi|dently</HI> allude to the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel;</HI> and 'tis <HI>mo&s;t clear and evident,</HI> That that Fourth Bea&s;t of <HI>Daniel</HI> is the Figure of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire in an Idolatrous State.</P></NOTE> the mo&s;t Eminent of the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> tho' it be more for their Intere&s;t than any others, that the fourth Kingdom were any thing rather than the <HI>Roman;</HI> which does &s;ufficiently &s;hew that they are forced to allow it: For they can have no manner of advantage from that conce&s;&s;ion, and therefore mu&s;t it be the impartial &s;en&s;e of their minds; but it would &s;ave them a great deal of trouble to deny it, if they fairly could; and that &s;hews the evidence for it to be too clear: And this gives as &s;trong a pre|&s;umption again&s;t the po&s;&s;ibility of any other &s;en&s;e, as can almo&s;t be given from Authority.</P>
<P>It is therefore well worth the enquiry, What might be the grounds of &s;o univer&s;al and impartial an Agreement, among&s;t all the differing Parties of all &s;orts, about this third and fourth Kingdom.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t Rea&s;on that may be ob&s;erved for it, <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Theodoret,</HI> in c. 7. <HI>Daniel,</HI> Some would have the Fourth Kingdom to be the Rule of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Succe&s;&s;ors: But they &s;hould have remembred, that the Golden-Head was the <HI>Babylonians,</HI> and that the &s;econd Kingdom was the <HI>Per&s;ians;</HI> the third then <HI>mu&s;t</HI> be the <HI>Graecians;</HI> and the fourth the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ibid.</HI> But at pre&s;ent&mdash;I <HI>cannot but admire,</HI> that there &s;hould be &s;ome pious Men, who &s;hould take the Fourth Bea&s;t to be the <HI>Macedonian</HI> King|dom. For they &s;hould have con&s;idered, that the Third Bea&s;t has four Heads, which does <HI>openly &s;how</HI> the fourfold divi&s;ion of the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire after <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Death.&mdash;And then, that the Fourth Bea&s;t has Ten Horns,&mdash;And that they were but Four, and <HI>not Ten,</HI> that continued the Reign of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy after <HI>Alexander.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ibid.</HI> That ought to be ob&s;erved, that the Prophet &s;aw the Third Bea&s;t with Four Heads upon him; And the He-Goat (Chap. 8.) after the fir&s;t Horn was broken, to have had Four in the room of it, to make it <HI>clear, and unque&s;tionable,</HI> That the He-Goat, and the Third Bea&s;t were but one and the &s;ame thing.</P></NOTE> is the plain intimations in the Prophecy, That the third Kingdom is the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7.</NOTE> whole time of the <HI>Greeks,</HI> from the <HI>Per&s;ians</HI> to the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. As <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> in the Text it &s;elf, the third Kingdom has the &s;ame name of <HI>A Kingdom,</HI> that hinders all the re&s;t from being po&s;&s;ible to be under&s;tood of &s;ingle Kings, or of different Sove|reignties in the &s;ame Empire, <HI>pag.</HI> 106. There is the &s;ame ground then again&s;t the parting the Reign of <HI>Alexander</HI> and his Captains into a third and fourth Kingdom, which <HI>in reality</HI> are but one and the &s;ame Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. It is again&s;t all the &s;ignifications of Kingdoms be&s;ides, that are repre&s;ented by any whole Figures in this Book of <HI>Da|niel;</HI> and the common u&s;age of Prophetical Terms, e&s;pecially in the &s;ame Book, is the be&s;t Rule to determine their &s;ignification, <HI>by Rule</HI> 2. Now, by the confe&s;&s;ion of the&s;e men them&s;elves, and the unanimous con&s;ent of all Interpreters, every <HI>whole</HI> Figure that is &s;aid to &s;ignifie a Kingdom, does &s;ignifie <HI>the whole</HI> time of a Ruling Nation or People. In that one con&s;tant ac|ceptation, we find it in no le&s;s than <HI>Ten</HI> di&s;tinct Figures, not counting in this third Kingdom. There are eight mentioned, be&s;ides the third, in the 2d and 7th Chapters, and two in the 8th; for the Kingdom of the <HI>Stone,</HI> and of the <HI>Son of Man,</HI>
<PB N="117" REF="91"> are two of tho&s;e Schemes: So that there is at lea&s;t Ten to <HI>no|thing again&s;t it,</HI> That the third Kingdom is the whole time of the Monarchy of the <HI>Greeks</HI> after the <HI>Per&s;ians.</HI> And that which appears to be the con&s;tant u&s;e of expre&s;&s;ions in &s;o wi&s;e and ju|dicious a Writer, as the Prophet <HI>Daniel</HI> was, may be very &s;e|curely relied upon, as an unque&s;tionable ground to determine his meaning, whenever the &s;ame expre&s;&s;ion is u&s;ed in any other place, in which it is not &s;o clearly known. <HI>Rule</HI> 2, 3.</P>
<P N="3">3. It is again&s;t all the other known repre&s;entations of the different kinds of Supreme Powers in the &s;ame Nation all over <HI>Daniel,</HI> or the <HI>Revelations,</HI> that they &s;hould have two di&s;tinct Figures to repre&s;ent two different kinds of them, even accord|ing to the Interpretation of the&s;e men them&s;elves. For all the differences of Supreme Powers in the &s;ame Nation every-where el&s;e, are granted to be &s;et out by the parts or appurtenances of whole Figures: As, <HI>in the 8th Chapter,</HI> that which repre&s;ents the Succe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> after the <HI>Median</HI> Kings, in the &s;ame Nation of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> is the Two Horns of the Ram, not <HI>two different Bea&s;ts.</HI> And the four divi&s;ions of the <HI>Grecian</HI> Monarchy, with the Rule of the fir&s;t King, are &s;et out by four Horns, after one great Horn, which belonged all to the one He-Goat. The Ten Kings ari&s;ing out of the fourth Kingdom, and the One after them, are repre&s;ented by eleven Horns of one and the &s;ame Bea&s;t, <HI>in Chap.</HI> 7. 24. And the &s;ame Ten Kings in the fourth Kingdom of the Image, <HI>in the</HI> 2<HI>d Chapter,</HI> are &s;hewn by the Ten Toes of the Feet. The Seven &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Kings al&s;o of the Kingdom in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and the Ten Kings, who are all at a time in that <HI>Roman</HI> Rule, are repre&s;ented by the Seven Heads and Ten Horns of that One Bea&s;t. All which, if counted up together, will be found to be the odds of above Forty to <HI>Nothing,</HI> again&s;t the dividing of the &s;ingle Reign of <HI>Alexander,</HI> from tho&s;e who &s;ucceeded him in the &s;ame Nation, and again&s;t the repre&s;enting him by one <HI>whole</HI> Figure.</P>
<P N="4">4. The Third Kingdom is certainly that which &s;ucceeded the Second; and the Second by all is agreed to &s;ignifie the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Kingdom; and what a kind of Kingdom it was that &s;ucceeded the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> the Prophet him&s;elf informs us <HI>in the 8th Chapter;</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 21, 22.</NOTE> where the <HI>King of Greece,</HI> who overthrew the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy, does &s;ignifie the <HI>whole</HI> time of the <HI>Grecian</HI> Monarchy, with a fir&s;t Conquering King in it, and a four-fold Kingdom after
<PB N="118" REF="92"> him. And therefore here al&s;o mu&s;t this Third Kingdom, that &s;ucceeded the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> and is repre&s;ented in this 7th Chapter by One Bea&s;t, as that was in the Eighth, be the &s;ame time of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy from its Conque&s;t of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> to the end of it.</P>
<P N="5">5. The proper Character of the Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks</HI> (which <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Reign was but a part of) is a Kingdom fir&s;t under <HI>one</HI> King, then divided into <HI>four,</HI> and joyned together in one Figure, as appears in the 8th and 11th Chapters, where <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 8. v. 4.</NOTE> the Kingdom of the fir&s;t King is &s;aid to be <HI>divided towards the four winds of Heaven</HI> in both tho&s;e Chapters. Wherefore &s;ince the Third Kingdom in the 7th Chapter is &s;hown by a <HI>Leopard</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 6.</NOTE> <HI>with four Heads, and four Wings</HI> (to make &s;ure of the number Four) If that be <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Kingdom, it mu&s;t be his King|dom divided into four; and then it is the &s;ame with the whole <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy &s;etled in the four la&s;ting Kingdoms of it, mentioned as the one Kingdom <HI>in the 8th and 11th Chapters.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. Be&s;ides, that the Leopard with the four Heads, and four Wings, mu&s;t &s;ignify &s;uch a divided Kingdom, appears from all the &s;ignifications of Heads and Horns; and all the parts of Figures &s;ignifying Dominion in any place el&s;e of this Book, and of that of the Revelations. As in the 8th Chapter twice; in the 2d Chapter, in the feet and toes (the &s;ame with the fourth Bea&s;t and his Ten Horns in the 7th Chapter) pag. 104, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which al&s;o are Ten Kings in one Kingdom; and the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t in the Revelations, are of the &s;ame &s;ignification, <HI>Prop.</HI> 15. So that the Leopard being granted by all to be a <HI>Grae|cian</HI> Kingdom, there is at lea&s;t <HI>Five to nothing clear to the contrary,</HI> that the four-headed Leopard is <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Kingdom divided into four, which we know to be the fourfold Monarchy of the <HI>Greeks.</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. If <HI>Alexander</HI>'s &s;ingle Reign were the Third Kingdom &s;hown by the Third Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter, and his Ten Captains immediately after him were a fourth Kingdom &s;hown by the Fourth Bea&s;t with Ten Horns; then that Kingdom, which was repre&s;ented but as <HI>One</HI> and <HI>the &s;ame</HI> in the 8th and 11th Chapters of the &s;ame Prophet, would be repre&s;ented as One and Three.</P>
<PB N="119" REF="92">
<P> For there would be one Kingdom under <HI>Alexander</HI> alone, &s;hewn by the Third Bea&s;t, <HI>chap.</HI> 7. Another under his Ten Captains, &s;hown by the Fourth Bea&s;t; and a Third by the fourfold Kingdom of the four Horns of the He-Goat in the 8th Chapter: And thus <HI>one</HI> Kingdom &s;hown by <HI>one</HI> Bea&s;t <HI>only</HI> in the 8th Chapter, &s;hould be <HI>two</HI> Kingdoms &s;hown by two Bea&s;ts in the 7th Chapter, and a <HI>Third</HI> Kingdom be&s;ides, &s;hown by a part only of that one Bea&s;t in the 8th Chapter, which repre|&s;ented the whole time of them all; which would &s;uppo&s;e that the Prophet had no con&s;i&s;tency at all with him&s;elf in his Fi|gures; but that he did &s;et them down at all adventures in con|tradiction to one another: And this al&s;o mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed of him without the lea&s;t plain ground from any thing that he had &s;aid to countenance it; which is a &s;ufficient warrant to make us determine, that all this is more than the&s;e Men have any ground to affirm of him, and contrary to what he is every where repre&s;ented, <HI>viz.</HI> As a very profound wi&s;e Man; and even contrary to all the experience that we have of it in all the Figures, which are granted to be known, wherein he is ac|knowledged by All to ob&s;erve a con&s;tant and determinate u&s;age of them in <HI>one only</HI> &s;ignification.</P>
<P N="8">8. Again, when we &s;ee the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy after <HI>Alexander</HI> repre&s;ented as a fourfold Kingdom in known and plain terms in the 8th and 11th Chapters, to make the next Kingdom after him to be a tenfold Kingdom of his Captains in the 7th Chapter, is to &s;hut ones eyes again&s;t what the Prophet had plainly &s;aid in tho&s;e two Chapters: And which he &s;eems openly to refer to by the four Heads of the Leopard. And what a &s;trange contempt of a Prophe&s;y is it, to reject a Figure of a Kingdom, that has ju&s;t the &s;ame marks that it is &s;et out with in two open known places which expre&s;ly name it, and to take up with another in the &s;tead of it, that has &s;uch marks as that Kingdom was never before &s;et out with by the Prophet? That is, to pa&s;s by the Leopard with the four Heads (which yet is granted to be a part of the Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks,</HI> that is men|tioned in the 8th and 11th Chapters, by their own confe&s;&s;ion) and in&s;tead of it, to chu&s;e a Bea&s;t with Ten Horns repre&s;enting ten Kingdoms for the re&s;t of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy, which had before been <HI>twice</HI> called a fourfold Kingdom; but never a King|dom with Ten Kings in it?</P>
<P N="9"><PB N="120" REF="93"> 9. The Prophecies of <HI>Daniel</HI> we &s;ee were wrote by him&s;elf, <HI>Chap.</HI> 8. <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 9, 10. As <HI>Jo&s;ephus</HI> affirms of him al&s;o from the Ancients; and he did not conclude them till after the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy was begun under <HI>Cyrus, chap.</HI> 10. 1. So that he lived under the <HI>Babylonian</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchies, and names them both, <HI>and the Graecian:</HI> And he Prophecies of the whole <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy in particular under the Figure of a Bea&s;t, <HI>Chap.</HI> 8. as is by all granted.</P>
<P>When therefore we find in the 7th Chapter, ju&s;t before the 8th, the mention of three Kingdoms &s;ucceeding one another, repre|&s;ented by three Bea&s;ts, The Two fir&s;t of which the Prophet knew to be the <HI>Babylonian</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchies, (as all do grant) What ground in the world have we to que&s;tion, whe|ther he means by the third Bea&s;t, or third Kingdom, the whole <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy from its Conque&s;t of the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> &s;ince it is ac|knowledged, that in the very next Chapter after this 7th, he foretells that whole Monarchy of the <HI>Greeks,</HI> under the Figure of a Bea&s;t? There is certainly more ground from the Prophecy to conclude, that he means by the third Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter, the <HI>whole</HI> time of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy from its Con|que&s;t of the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> than that by the fir&s;t of the three mu&s;t be meant the whole <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy. For the <HI>Babylonian</HI> is not any where el&s;e &s;aid, by name, to be repre&s;ented under the Figure of a Bea&s;t, as the <HI>Grecian</HI> is in the 8th Chapter, immediately after.</P>
<P>We have rea&s;on therefore to be confident, that the Prophet, that under&s;tands by the fir&s;t and &s;econd Bea&s;ts, the <HI>Babylonian</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchies to <HI>their la&s;t end,</HI> cannot by the third un|der&s;tand <HI>only a part</HI> of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy after the <HI>Per&s;ian;</HI> and by the fourth, the remaining <HI>part of it.</HI> And if men may be allowed thus to di&s;regard all examples of the &s;ignifications of things of the &s;ame nature, they may chu&s;e any interpreta|tion that they can fancy; and with the &s;ame freedom may they maintain, That by the fir&s;t Bea&s;t is meant the &s;ingle per&s;on of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI> alone; and by the &s;econd, another Conqueror &s;ome Hundreds of years after; and by the third, <HI>Pompey;</HI> and by the fourth, what they plea&s;e: If they may interpret one of the&s;e Figures to be a &s;ingle per&s;on, There is as much rea&s;on to make them all of the &s;ame kind: And to affirm any thing thus <HI>at all adventures,</HI> without any regard to the known ex|amples
<PB N="121" REF="93"> of the &s;ame kind, is both again&s;t all the Rules of any other Interpretations of Scripture, and takes away all manner of hopes of being able to determine the &s;en&s;e of any Scripture.</P>
<P N="10">10. To this may be added, That the Order, and Time of the &s;everal Vi&s;ions, do confirm this Application of the four Bea&s;ts in the 7th Chapter, to the four &s;ucceeding Monarchies from the Prophets time.</P>
<P>For as the&s;e four Bea&s;ts have been found to be the &s;ame with the four Kingdoms in the 2d Chapter (Page 104, <HI>&amp;c.)</HI> &s;o does it appear from the time of the fir&s;t of them in the 2d Chapter, compared with that of the fir&s;t in the 7th, That they mu&s;t be both the whole <HI>Babylonian</HI> Monarchy, not any &s;in|gle Reign; becau&s;e that in the 2d is applied to <HI>Nebuchadnezzar;</HI> and that in the 7th was &s;een in the time of <HI>Bel&s;hazzar,</HI> after the death of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar;</HI> and therefore mu&s;t the fir&s;t King|dom in both Chapters &s;ignify an Empire common to <HI>Nebuchad|nezzar</HI> and tho&s;e that came after him; That is, the <HI>whole</HI> Mo|narchy. Now the 8th Chapter, who&s;e vi&s;ion was after that in the 7th Chapter, a&s;&s;ures us by the &s;ame kind of Figures, <HI>viz.</HI> by Two Bea&s;ts, That the two next Kingdoms are the <HI>Per|&s;ian</HI> and <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchies <HI>by name,</HI> to the time of <HI>their la&s;t end:</HI> And when the Prophet had thus &s;een afterwards the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> and <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchies repre&s;ented by the Figures of Two Bea&s;ts, Can it be with any manner of Rea&s;on thought, that he could Judge the 2d and 3d Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter, to be any other Kingdoms, than tho&s;e very &s;ame, which he had in the 8th Chapter &s;een repre&s;ented by the &s;ame kind of Figures, and which were made known to him to be Kingdoms, that &s;hould &s;ucceed in order to the fir&s;t in the 7th Chapter, and which he knew in the time of <HI>Cyrus,</HI> by his own experience, was verified of the <HI>Per&s;ian?</HI> E&s;pecially if it be con&s;idered, that there is not the lea&s;t intimation from him, to make any think the &s;econd and third Kingdoms in the 7th Chapter, to be different things from the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> and <HI>Graecian</HI> Kingdoms, <HI>known by name,</HI> in the 8th Chapter.</P>
<P N="11">11. It is impo&s;&s;ible, That the fourth Kingdom in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> &s;hould be a Kingdom of the <HI>Graecians,</HI> becau&s;e it was to be con&s;umed by the Kingdom <HI>of the Son of Man</HI> in the 2d Chap.
<PB N="122" REF="94"> which has been found to be mo&s;t unque&s;tionably &s;ome Kingdom of Chri&s;t upon Earth, <HI>by Prop.</HI> 13.</P>
<P>For the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy was totally de&s;troyed long before the Birth of Chri&s;t. And it has been ob&s;erved how mon&s;trous a &s;hift that of <HI>Grotius</HI> is upon this occa&s;ions, &s;uch as may very well amaze any one that con&s;iders <HI>it,</HI> and <HI>his great abilities</HI> toge|ther. To be con&s;tant to his Hypothe&s;is, he will have the King|dom <HI>of the &s;on of Man,</HI> &s;ignify the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans;</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 14, 22.</NOTE> <HI>the Kingdom of the Saints,</HI> to begin at the de&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;a|lem</HI> by the Auxiliary Armies of the <HI>Romans,</HI> who therefore mu&s;t be called the <HI>People of the mo&s;t High,</HI> becau&s;e The people, among&s;t whom God was to have his Church. But the extra|vagance of this, has been formerly con&s;idered; and nothing can give us better &s;atisfaction, what ab&s;urdities he is capable of owning for the &s;en&s;e of a Prophecy, when he has &s;et his heart upon a &s;uppo&s;ition, that needs it.</P>
<P N="12">12. The end of the Fourth Bea&s;t is at the de&s;truction of the little Horn. But if the Fourth Bea&s;t were the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monar|chy, The Little Horn mu&s;t be <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> as is by all granted; and then at the end of him, the whole time of that Monarchy mu&s;t be ended: Whereas the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy con|tinued above an Hundred years after his death.</P>
<P N="13">13. The Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t was to continue, till <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 22.</NOTE> the Saints came to po&s;&s;e&s;s an Univer&s;al Kingdom over all the World, which &s;ince it is acknowledged to &s;ignify a Reign of Chri&s;tianity in the World, is certain, could not happen till &s;ome Hundreds of years after <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes;</HI> and there|fore neither could he be the Little Horn; nor the Fourth Bea&s;t, the <HI>Graecian</HI> Empire.</P>
<P N="14">14. The <HI>Time, Times, and the dividing of Time,</HI> at the end of <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 25.</NOTE> which, The Little Horn, and the Fourth Bea&s;t to which it be|longs, are &s;aid to be de&s;troyed, are the &s;ame times with the time, times and an half, in the 12th <HI>Chapter, pag.</HI> But tho&s;e in the 12th Chapter end before Chri&s;t's coming to the la&s;t Judgment, <HI>ibid.&mdash;</HI>And therefore cannot the Little Horn, and the Fourth Bea&s;t, be any time of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P N="15">15. The Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter, is &s;o far from being any part of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy, that it is mo&s;t certainly the <HI>Roman:</HI> For as nothing can be under&s;tood by a Fourth Kingdom from <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI>'s Kingdom (agreed by all to be the <HI>Babylo|nian</HI>
<PB N="123" REF="94"> Monarchy) but the Reign of &s;ome Ruling Nation, which was a Fourth from the <HI>Babylonian,</HI> which is known there to be the Fir&s;t; &s;o hath it the individual Characters of the Bea&s;t <HI>in the Revelations,</HI> which has been already &s;hown to be a <HI>Roman</HI> Domi|nion, as may be &s;een <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="124" REF="95">
<PB N="125" REF="95">
<HEAD>CHAP. IX. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. VII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Recapitulation of the Demon&s;tration of the</HI> Sixteenth Propo&s;ition; <HI>And from thence &s;hown, that Heads and Horns are indifferently u&s;ed for the &s;ame thing; And that the di&s;tinction of one</HI> Succe&s;&s;ive <HI>Head, or Horn, from that before it, is,</HI> A new name of the Governing Power, <HI>after a</HI> &s;etled <HI>continuance of it.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>FRom the Conclu&s;ion in the foregoing Chapter, that the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th of <HI>Danel,</HI> is certainly the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Monarchy, and <HI>not any part of the Graecian;</HI> It does now ap|pear, what is the undoubted and known &s;ignification of all the Figures of Rule and Dominion in <HI>Daniel,</HI> which is the proof of the Propo&s;ition at fir&s;t laid down. For it now appears,</P>
<P>That the four fir&s;t whole Figures in the 2d and 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> are the <HI>Babylonian, Per&s;ian, Graecian</HI> and <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchies; And that the la&s;t Kingdom in each, &s;ignified by the <HI>Stone,</HI> and the Figure of the Appearance of the <HI>Son of Man,</HI> is the Rule of God's Church, or of the People of God; and then the two Figures in the 8th Chapter, are known to be the <HI>Per&s;ian,</HI> and <HI>Graecian</HI> Mo|narchies; And thus we find the fir&s;t part of the <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> abun|dantly a&s;&s;ured, <HI>That not only the Figure of a Bea&s;t, but any other</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Ob&s;erv:"> <HI>whole Figure all over the Prophecy of</HI> Daniel, <HI>does &s;ignify a Ruling Na|tion, or Monarchy.</HI></P>
<P>That for the re&s;t of the Propo&s;ition about the parts of the Fi|gures, <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Ob&s;erv."> we find that the two Horns of the Ram, and the fir&s;t and four Horns of the He Goat, do &s;ignify &s;o many Supream Powers in tho&s;e Ruling Nations. And in the fir&s;t of them, or the <HI>Per|&s;ian,</HI> tho&s;e Supream Powers appear to be &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Govern|ments of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> becau&s;e 'tis &s;aid of the two Horns of the Ram, that the <HI>highe&s;t of them came up la&s;t,</HI> where the dif|ference betwixt the Succe&s;&s;ive Horns is the Title of <HI>Media,</HI> or <HI>Per&s;ia.</HI> And in the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy it appears al&s;o, that the divers Supream Powers in it, &s;ignified by the Horns, are in a Succe&s;&s;ion over the &s;ame Nation of the <HI>Greeks</HI> in re&s;pect of the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> Horn, and the <HI>other</HI> four; For it is &s;aid that the <HI>fir&s;t was</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 8.</NOTE>
<PB N="126" REF="96"> <HI>broken,</HI> and in the place of <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> came up four others, that is, they came up after him; But the four Horns, in re&s;pect of one ano|ther, &s;ignify only the divi&s;ion of that Monarchy into four King|doms, becau&s;e they are &s;aid to come up all together in the room of the fir&s;t Horn. Which is exactly according to the Rule for their &s;ignification <HI>in this Propo&s;ition.</HI> And then a &s;ingle particu|lar King in one of the Divi&s;ions of this Monarchy, is &s;et out by <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 9.</NOTE> a little Horn, coming out of one of tho&s;e Horns, as <HI>a part only</HI> of the time of the whole Horn. The four Wings al&s;o, and the four Heads of the <HI>Leopard</HI> in the 7th Chapter, &s;hew us the four|fold Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks</HI> in that Monarchy. The ten Horns of the Fourth Bea&s;t do repre&s;ent the divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Mo|narchy into Ten Kingdoms; for they are repre&s;ented as being all up at the &s;ame time with the Little Horn. The ten Toes of the Image do al&s;o repre&s;ent the &s;ame thing.</P>
<P>It appears al&s;o from the four Heads of the Leopard, and the <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Ob&s;erv."> four Horns of the He Goat (which &s;ignify the &s;ame thing) <HI>that an Head and an Horn have the &s;ame general &s;ignification of the Supream Power of a Nation,</HI> and are indifferently u&s;ed to &s;ignify the &s;ame particular Supream Power in the &s;ame Nation.</P>
<P>It may al&s;o be ob&s;erved, that <HI>the di&s;tingui&s;hing Character of a</HI> <MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="Ob&s;erv."> <HI>new Succe&s;&s;ion of the Ruling Power in the &s;ame Kingdom, that is &s;et out by a new</HI> Head, <HI>or</HI> Horn, <HI>coming after another, is</HI> a new name <HI>of the Ruling Power</HI> publickly owned.</P>
<P>For though the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Rule was in the &s;ame Nation of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians</HI> with that of the King of <HI>Media,</HI> yet becau&s;e he had <HI>the name</HI> of the King of <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> in&s;tead of the King of <HI>Media,</HI> he is repre&s;ented by a <HI>new Horn</HI> of the &s;ame Bea&s;t. Many other differences were there in the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Line, as different Families, different behaviour to the Church of God, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> but all the&s;e made no change of that Horn for any other; and the &s;ame may be ob&s;erved by the Horns of the He Goat in the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monar|chy, where, though there were many other accidental Diffe|rences among&s;t the &s;ingle Per&s;ons comprehended under the &s;ame Horn, yet they continue notwith&s;tanding but <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame</HI> Horn.</P>
<P>It is al&s;o apparent from the Figure of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy, that <HI>it is the</HI> continuing Settlement <HI>of a Form of Government, which</HI> <MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="Ob&s;erv."> <HI>makes it an Head, or Horn, or a change of the Government of the body of a Nation.</HI> Thus we &s;ee it was in the four Horns of the Leopard,
<PB N="127" REF="96"> and He Goat, which did &s;ignify the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy when it came to <HI>a &s;etled</HI> appearance of four Kingdoms; whereas there was nothing to repre&s;ent the continued Scuffles of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Captains before that <HI>&s;etled</HI> Form of the Monarchy.</P>
<P>And further, That the&s;e <HI>parts of Figures do al&s;o repre&s;ent tho&s;e</HI> <MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="Ob&s;erv."> <HI>&s;everal Supream Governments for the</HI> whole time of their duration <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ribera <HI>in cap.</HI> 17. Apoc. <HI>numer.</HI> 15, 16.</NOTE> <HI>under all the &s;ingle Per&s;ons that are in the po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of them after one ano|ther,</HI> is certain from the continuance of the &s;everal Horns, and the Little Horn on the Fourth Bea&s;t, till the time of the la&s;t com|ing of the Son of Man; And al&s;o from the time of the Little Horn in the 8th Chapter, which is &s;aid to be in the latter time of the Kingdom of the four Horns: For before the time of that <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 25.</NOTE> Little Horn, there had been many Succe&s;&s;ions of &s;ingle Per&s;ons in each of the four Kingdoms, that is, in the Ruling time of each of the Horns.</P>
<P>Wherefore we may now mo&s;t certainly conclude, That the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> is every-where con&s;tant to it &s;elf in the &s;igni|fication of every one of its Figures, and that there is but <HI>one uni|form &s;ignification</HI> of the Prophetical Figures <HI>of the &s;ame kind</HI> through|out the whole Book; and therefore may one thereupon conclude with &s;till more a&s;&s;urance, That</P>
<Q><P><HI>By a Bea&s;t, as the common Subject of its Heads, or Horns, is &s;igni|fied a Ruling Nation, or</HI> People.</P>
<P><HI>By the Horns and Heads of a Bea&s;t, the &s;everal kinds of Supream</HI> &s;etled <HI>Government in it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>And that either in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to one another over the &s;ame place, if tho&s;e Heads and Horns be de&s;cribed to come after one another.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Or &s;o many di&s;tinct Sovereignties, or Kingdoms, of one and the &s;ame Ruling People, if they be de&s;cribed to be in Rule all at the &s;ame time.</HI></P>
<P><HI>And in both the&s;e kinds do the &s;everal Heads, or Horns, &s;ignify the continuance of that Government, or divided Kingdom, to their la&s;t End.</HI></P></Q>
<P>To this whole Di&s;cour&s;e, about the <HI>Sixteenth Propo&s;ition,</HI> do the generality of the <HI>Roman</HI> Interpreters agree, which all mu&s;t <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> nece&s;&s;arily do, who grant as they do, that the Fourth King|dom in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<PB N="128" REF="97">
<P> The only difference of &s;ome of them from the re&s;t is, that the Ten Kings, and the 11th after them, &s;hall be after the whole <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy is ruined, and has lo&s;t the name. <NOTE PLACE="marg">^a GRotius <HI>de jure</HI> B. <HI>&amp;</HI> P. L. 2. c. 9. Art. 3.<HI>&mdash;Populus e&s;t ex eo corporum genere, quod ex di&s;tantibus con&s;tat, &amp;c.</HI> The people are a Body of the kind of tho&s;e, which are made up of things di&s;tant from one another. <HI>Item,</HI> Art. 8. It matters not which way they are Governed, either by Monarchs, or by many, or by the multitude: For it is the &s;ame <HI>Roman</HI> people, under Kings, Con&s;uls, and Emperors.</NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="3" TYPE="book">
<PB N="129" REF="97">
<HEAD>The Third BOOK.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">THE Particular Signification OF THE BEAST, And its Heads, and Horns, In the <HI>REVELATIONS.</HI></HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. I.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Interpretation of The Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations, <HI>and</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE> <HI>of its Heads, and Horns, in the</HI> 17th Propo&s;ition. <HI>Three Objections an&s;wered. The incon&s;i&s;tency of the</HI> Roman <HI>Interpreters with them&s;elves.</HI> Bellarmin <HI>more Ingenuous, but forced thereby to give up the Cau&s;e.</HI> Grotius <HI>to mend the matter, runs into greater Ab&s;ur|dities than any of them. Conjectures about the fir&s;t Five Heads.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>AFTER the knowledge of the <HI>Con&s;tant &V;niform Signi|fication</HI> of a Bea&s;t, and of the Heads, or Horns of a Bea&s;t all over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel,</HI> any one would be ready to conclude with him&s;elf, That it was no hard matter now to determine the &s;ignification of the Heads, and Horns, and of the Bea&s;t it &s;elf, which is the Subject of all the
<PB N="130" REF="98"> latter part of the <HI>Revelations:</HI> &s;ince it has been already found, that all tho&s;e peculiar Figures of Empire, and Sovereignty, and the particular Phra&s;es and Style belonging to them in the <HI>Reve|lations,</HI> are ju&s;t the &s;ame with tho&s;e of the like kind in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and are not &s;o di&s;tinctly to be found in any other of the Pro|phets be&s;ides.</P>
<P>But the undoubted confirmation of this, is the a&s;&s;urance that we have of the <HI>15th Propo&s;ition.</HI> For by that it appears, That <HI>the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations <HI>is the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of</HI> Daniel, and that it has the &s;ame, and that a very great many mo&s;t pe|culiar Characters and Expre&s;&s;ions attributed to it, by which that Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel</HI> is de&s;cribed.</P>
<P>Wherefore according to all the Examples that are to be found in that Prophecy, from whence it appears that the&s;e Figures in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and the mo&s;t peculiar Expre&s;&s;ions about them are taken, it is unque&s;tionable, That</P>
<Q><P><HI>The Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations <HI>in its general notion, as the common</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 17.</NOTE> <HI>&s;ubject of its Heads, and Horns, does &s;ignify the Rule of the</HI> Romans <HI>in general.</HI></P>
<P><HI>The Seven Heads of it, &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of the Sovereign Power of that Nation.</HI></P>
<P><HI>The Ten Horns, the divi&s;ion of that Empire into &s;o many di&s;tinct Sovereignties.</HI></P></Q>
<P>There need no more be &s;aid for the proof of this, than that the Seven Heads are &s;aid to &s;ucceed in this order, <HI>Five, one, ano|ther,</HI> &amp;c. to &s;hew them to be &s;ucce&s;&s;ive, <HI>Revel.</HI> 17. and that the Ten Kings are de&s;cribed as acting all together with the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>For according to the &s;ignification of a Bea&s;t, and its Heads and Horns, with the&s;e Characters in <HI>Daniel,</HI> they mu&s;t &s;ignify &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Sovereign Powers, and &s;o many divided, di&s;tinct Kingdoms of one and the &s;ame Nation, <HI>by Prop.</HI> 16.</P>
<P>And the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> is the chief Example of the my&s;ti|cal u&s;e of Bea&s;ts, and their Parts, and to which all the Expre&s;|&s;ions about the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> are found to refer, <HI>Propo|&s;ition</HI> 15.&mdash;And the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> is certainly &s;ome <HI>Roman</HI> Rule, <HI>by Prop.</HI> 6.&mdash;Therefore by <HI>Rule the</HI> 2<HI>d,</HI> The Bea&s;t, its Heads, and Horns, do &s;ignify the Rule of the <HI>Romans</HI>
<PB N="131" REF="98"> under &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of the Sovereign Power, and divided into &s;o many di&s;tinct Sovereignties, as are repre&s;ented by its Seven Heads, and Ten Horns.</P>
<P>But it may po&s;&s;ibly be pretended, that there are clear grounds in the <HI>Revelations</HI> again&s;t the making the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> a Rule of Interpretation for the Figures in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> For the Figures in the <HI>Revelations</HI> have a different u&s;e from tho&s;e in <HI>Daniel.</HI> For example,</P>
<P N="1">1. There are three &s;everal &s;hows of one and the &s;ame <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy, and following immediately one after another from the 12th to the 18th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations;</HI> which accor|ding to the u&s;e of &s;uch &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of Figures in <HI>Daniel,</HI> mu&s;t &s;ig|nify three &s;everal Ruling Nations; <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. Be&s;ides, that one of the&s;e three Bea&s;ts is expre&s;ly de&s;cribed in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to the o|ther, Chap. 13. 2. But it mu&s;t be remembred, That it is ac|cording to the u&s;e of the Figures in <HI>Daniel,</HI> to repre&s;ent the &s;ame Kingdoms by <HI>different</HI> Figures in <HI>different</HI> Vi&s;ions; as in the 2d and 7th Chapters. And in the 8th Chapter, two of tho&s;e &s;ame Kingdoms by two new Bea&s;ts; and it is certain, that the two Shows in the 13th and 17th Chapters are in two &s;everal Vi&s;ions, and that they are one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of the Bea&s;t, <HI>by Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 10.</P>
<P>And though the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter be de&s;cribed to be in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to that in the 12th Chapter: yet 1. it is de&s;cribed, as a <HI>new</HI> Vi&s;ion of a Bea&s;t with the &s;ame proper marks upon it, which the <HI>other</HI> had before it, <HI>viz.</HI> the Seven Heads, and Ten Horns: And <HI>next,</HI> it mu&s;t be con&s;idered, That though they be two different Bea&s;ts; yet it is plainly &s;aid, That the one is <HI>Sa|tan,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 12. 9.</NOTE> or the Devil, and &s;o does &s;ignify only a &s;piritual Rule of the Devil in the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and no different Temporal Em|pire from the other; and then it &s;ignifies no more to the making two different Monarchies, than <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI>'s Image to the con&s;tituting of a new Monarchy of the <HI>Babylonians,</HI> di&s;tinct from that which was repre&s;ented by the Head of the other Image, Chap. 2.</P>
<P N="2">2. It will be further urged, that in the 13th Chapter, There are Two Bea&s;ts repre&s;ented as ri&s;ing up after one another, which according to <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. <HI>Part.</HI> 1. mu&s;t &s;ignify in <HI>Daniel</HI>'s way two different Ruling Nations.</P>
<PB N="132" REF="99">
<P> This would &s;ignify very much <HI>(by Rule the</HI> 2<HI>d)</HI> if the Text did not make it appear, that they were not &s;ucce&s;&s;ive to one another. But it is expre&s;ly &s;aid, That the Second Bea&s;t did exerci&s;e <HI>all the power of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t before him,</HI> and that all <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13. 12.</NOTE> for his Service, as appears v. 12. The Text does therefore ex|pre&s;ly affirm, that the power of them both is but one and the &s;ame power, or Ruling Nation. And yet to &s;how that the &s;ignifi|cation of a Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel</HI> does hold good in this u&s;e of it al&s;o, it will be explained how this Fir&s;t Bea&s;t does al&s;o &s;ignify the <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>ALca&s;ar,</HI> in cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> &s;ect. 6. By the Bea&s;t <HI>out of the Earth,</HI> is &s;ignified a multitude of Per&s;ons, as well as by the Bea&s;t that came out of the <HI>Sea.</HI> Ibid.&mdash;As well the <HI>one</HI> Bea&s;t as the <HI>other,</HI> are taken, <HI>not for &s;ingle Per&s;ons,</HI> but for a great Multitude, as the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> Ibid.&mdash;As the Bea&s;t <HI>out of the Sea</HI> does contain in it all the Nations of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; &s;o al&s;o does the Bea&s;t that came out of the <HI>Earth.</HI></NOTE> Rule of the <HI>Romans,</HI> but in another manner of Kingdom than that <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 18. See Refe|rences.</NOTE> of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t is, &s;o as that they are both in being at the &s;ame time. For this &s;econd will be found to &s;ignify their Church-Rule, as the fir&s;t does the Rule of the State, <HI>Prop.</HI> 24, <HI>&amp;</HI> 25.</P>
<P N="3">3. It may al&s;o be objected, That the two Horns of the &s;econd <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 11.</NOTE> Bea&s;t, Chap. 13. according to <HI>Daniel,</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify di&s;tinct So|vereignties, <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. <HI>Ob&s;ervat.</HI> 2, <HI>&amp;</HI> 4.</P>
<P>But &s;ince the&s;e Horns have no mark of Rule, or Dominion joined with them, and are particularly &s;aid to &s;ignify the like|ne&s;s of that Bea&s;t <HI>to a Lamb,</HI> that does &s;ufficiently &s;hew a parti|cular exception of them from the general Rule in <HI>Daniel.</HI> And yet they may al&s;o &s;ignify the two di&s;tinct Kingdoms, or Juri&s;|dictions of that Bea&s;t over the Temporal and Spiritual Affairs of that Nation.</P>
<P>After this, how manife&s;tly does it appear to be but a Contri|vance only to &s;erve a turn in <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Alca&s;ar,</HI> in <HI>Apoc.</HI> c. 12. <HI>de</HI> 10 <HI>Corn.</HI> It <HI>is mo&s;t evident,</HI> that the Ten Horns of the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> do &s;ignify the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire. But tho&s;e which are not <HI>Roman Commanders,</HI> cannot be the Horns of that Bea&s;t, <HI>Ibid.&mdash;Ribera</HI> under&s;tands by the Bea&s;t, the <HI>whole World,</HI> which does ea&s;ily fall to the ground of it &s;elf. For <HI>it is evident,</HI> that <HI>Da|niel</HI> did prophe&s;ie of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire <HI>only,</HI> viz. in the Ten Horns of the Fourth Bea&s;t, chap. 7.<HI>&mdash;Ibid.</HI> Another Opinion of his, is, that the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire &s;hall be Idolatrous, which Conjecture is very <HI>vain,</HI> and <HI>empty&mdash;</HI>For then it would be <HI>another</HI> Empire; as the Empire that is now in <HI>Greece,</HI> is quite different from that which is repre&s;ented by the Third Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel, Idem in cap.</HI> 17. v. 11.&mdash;But any one may ea&s;ily &s;ee, <HI>how forced</HI> all that Interpretation is.</NOTE> <HI>&agrave; Lapide, Ribera,</HI> and a number of o|ther <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> eminent Per&s;ons of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> to make the <HI>general</HI> no|tion of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to &s;ignify <HI>the World in general;</HI> and the &s;even Heads to be &s;even Ages of it, with the &s;everal Tyranni|cal Powers, which per&s;ecuted the Church of God in each of them, notwith&s;tanding that they are agreed with all other Interpreters about the Con&s;tant Uniform Signification of a Bea&s;t, and of its Heads, and Horns, all over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel;</HI> and that the fourth Bea&s;t there in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the par|ticular Monarchy of the <HI>Romans;</HI> and that the Little Horn of that Bea&s;t is the &s;ame with the la&s;t Head of this Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revela|tions?</HI> And yet <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Alca&s;ar,</HI> in cap. 12. <HI>Apoc.</HI> de 10 <HI>Cornibus.&mdash;Quod autem</HI> Roma|norum <HI>Imperium &s;it extinctum</HI> pror&s;us videtur certum; It &s;eems to be <HI>altoge|ther certain,</HI> that the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire is de&s;troyed. Again,&mdash;It is <HI>evident,</HI> that the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire is de&s;troyed, although the Provinces of it be in the po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of other Kings and Emperours.</P>
<P><HI>Ribera</HI> in cap. 12. <HI>Apoc.</HI> num. 14. <HI>de</HI> 10 <HI>Cornibus&mdash;</HI>That which the forementioned Writers apply to the Kingdom of the <HI>Romans,</HI> becau&s;e that is now <HI>altogether annihilated,</HI> we under&s;tand of the <HI>whole</HI> World, over which the <HI>Romans</HI> reigned.</P></NOTE> do they not &s;hew the lea&s;t intimation from the Text to countenance this Contradiction to their own Judg|ments about the &s;ame Words and Phra&s;es, nor offer to give any Example from the Figures of the like kind to ground their fancy upon.</P>
<PB N="133" REF="99">
<P> <HI>Bellarmin</HI> indeed is more ingenuous; he owns the known Sig|nification of Bea&s;ts in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and that the fourth of the 7th Chapter is in particular the &s;ame with that in the <HI>Revelations;</HI> and from the certainty of both does acknowledge, that the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> does &s;ignify in general the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; and that the Heads of the Bea&s;t mu&s;t be all Heads of the <HI>Romans;</HI> and that the time of that called the Bea&s;t, is not yet pa&s;t. And what more convincing proof can there be for the irre&s;i&s;tible Light that there is for the&s;e things, than to &s;ee &s;o able a Judge of the concern of his Church in this Affair, to be forced thereby to yield to it without any the lea&s;t &s;hew of advantage from it to &s;erve the Cau&s;e that he is &s;o zealous for? But e&s;pecially when we &s;ee him thereby forced to de&s;ert all the other Defences of his Bre|thren, and to reduce the whole merit of the Cau&s;e about the Charge laid again&s;t his Church, to this only i&s;&s;ue, <HI>viz.</HI> Whe|ther the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> Government, that was in Rule at the time of the Vi&s;ion, has been &s;ince that time cut off, and &s;uc|ceeded by another form of Government; which is to reduce the whole Di&s;pute about the matter of &s;o great importance in the con&s;equence of it, to a que&s;tion about the truth of a matter of fact only in Hi&s;tory, and which is given again&s;t him <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Tacitus</HI> ju&s;t about the time that the <HI>Revelations</HI> were wrote, reckons them up in this order in the beginning of his fir&s;t Book of Annals.<HI>&mdash;Kings</HI> were at fir&s;t the Governours of <HI>Rome. L. Brutus</HI> brought in the Con&s;ulary Government, and Liberty; <HI>Dictators</HI> were &s;et up upon occa&s;ion. The <HI>Decemvirs</HI> continued not above two years. The Con&s;ulary Power of the <HI>Tribunes</HI> of the Soldiers la&s;ted not long. The Domination of <HI>Cinna,</HI> and <HI>Sylla,</HI> was &s;oon ended, and <HI>Pompey</HI> and <HI>Cra&s;&s;us</HI> yielded to <HI>Cae&s;ar;</HI> and <HI>Le|pidus</HI> and <HI>Anthony</HI> to <HI>Augu&s;tus,</HI> who took all into his hands under the name of a Prince, or Emperour.</P>
<P><HI>Livy</HI> before him had given much the &s;ame account for all tho&s;e Govern|ments which had been up in his time, in his 6th Book. <HI>I have,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>in the five former Books given an account of all the Wars abroad, and the Sedi|tions at home, which the</HI> Romans <HI>have had from the fir&s;t building of the City, to the taking of it, under Kings, Con&s;uls, Decemvirs, Dictators, and Con&s;ulary Tri|bunes.</HI></P>
<P>So <HI>Onuphrius Panvicinus, in his Preface to his Fa&s;ti Con&s;ulares.</HI></P>
<P>&mdash;For the City was fir&s;t under <HI>Kings&mdash;</HI>Then &s;ucceeded <HI>Con&s;uls&mdash;</HI>and &s;ometimes under <HI>Decemvirs,</HI> and &s;ometimes under <HI>Tribunes</HI> of the Soldiers with Con&s;ulary Power; and &s;ometimes under <HI>Dictators.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus,</HI> in his <HI>Chronicon,</HI> gives the &s;ame account of the Change of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government from <HI>Kings</HI> to <HI>Con&s;uls,</HI> and from them to the <HI>De|cemvirs;</HI> and the Con&s;ulary Government again interrupted by the <HI>Military Tribunes;</HI> and during all the&s;e &s;paces of time, the intermixture of <HI>Dictators,</HI> upon the creation of whom all other Magi&s;tracies were at an end; all which ended at la&s;t in the <HI>Imperial</HI> Government.</P>
<P><Q><HI>The Je&s;uit</HI> Pererius <HI>confirms this upon the Fourth Bea&s;t of the 7th of</HI> Daniel.</Q></P>
<P><Q>&mdash;Why that Bea&s;t is without a name, and all the other three na|med,<HI>&mdash;Becau&s;e,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>in the</HI> other <HI>three Kingdoms there was but</HI> one kind, <HI>or form of Government. But the kinds of Government among&s;t the</HI> Romans <HI>were of</HI> &s;everal &s;orts. <HI>Fir&s;t</HI> Regal, <HI>then</HI> Con&s;ulary, <HI>after that partly</HI> Tri|bunitical, <HI>partly</HI> Con&s;ulary; <HI>&s;ometimes by</HI> Dictators, <HI>&s;ometimes by</HI> Empe|rours.</Q> Where he leaves out only the <HI>Decemvirs,</HI> who yet are &s;ufficiently known to have been a peculiar Government di&s;tinct from the re&s;t.</P>
<P>If it &s;hould be objected, That the <HI>Triumviri Rep. Con&s;tituendae,</HI> were as different a Government from all the&s;e, it is to be con&s;idered, that that was only the Rule of three &s;ingle Men for one turn only; And &s;ingle Per|&s;ons are no-where made an Head of a Bea&s;t. That of the fir&s;t Horn in the 8th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the King of <HI>Macedon,</HI> or <HI>Alexander,</HI> and his Heirs. <HI>Fene|&s;tella</HI> does al&s;o reject this as no Magi&s;tracy, <HI>cap.</HI> 21.</P>
<P>And the&s;e two forms of the&s;e Governments, which are the mo&s;t que|&s;tioned, <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Decemvirs,</HI> and the <HI>Dictators,</HI> have a very &s;ufficient war|rant for them from the be&s;t approved Writers of the <HI>Roman</HI> Affairs. <HI>Livy</HI> &s;ays of the <HI>Decemvirs,</HI> Book the IIId, in the 300th and fir&s;t year after the building of <HI>Rome,</HI> The Government of the City was changed from <HI>Con&s;uls</HI> to <HI>Decemvirs,</HI> as it had been before from <HI>Kings</HI> to <HI>Con&s;uls.</HI> And <HI>Fene&s;tella</HI> of the <HI>Dictators,</HI> chap. 8. of the <HI>Roman</HI> Magi&s;tracy,&mdash;that they were &s;o much the <HI>Supream Power</HI> of the Commonwealth, that there was no Appeal from them; and that they had the power of the Lives of the <HI>Roman</HI> Citi|zens, and the entire Juri&s;diction of the whole Commonwealth;&mdash;And that He was called the Ma&s;ter of the People for his Ab&s;olute Power.</P></NOTE> by <HI>Al|ca&s;ar,</HI> and by <HI>Ribera,</HI> in expre&s;s words, who &s;ays, that the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire is now at an end.</P>
<P>Therefore is it that <HI>Grotius</HI> is &s;o higly applauded for that Ma|&s;terpiece of his, in confounding the acceptation of a Bea&s;t, and its Horns, in <HI>Daniel,</HI> by denying the fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter to be a Rule of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which is the only true way to &s;trike at the root of any &s;etled Interpretation of the Bea&s;t, or its Heads, in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> But then we &s;ee it was nece&s;|&s;ary for him to run into a greater ab&s;urdity than any of the&s;e to maintain it, as his Opinion about the coming of the Son of Man has been already made to appear. And there need no other proof of the fal&s;ene&s;s of his Interpretation of the Heads of the Bea&s;t, than to be &s;atisfied, that the coming of the Son of Man in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the Kingdom of Chri&s;t. For that e&s;ta|bli&s;hes &s;uch an uniform acceptation of the &s;ignification of the Heads, and Horns of a Bea&s;t all over <HI>Daniel,</HI> as makes his new contrivance about the &s;even Heads of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to be again&s;t all the con&s;tant Prophetical u&s;e of them.</P>
<PB N="134" REF="100">
<P> From hence then it does &s;ufficiently appear, That the &s;even Heads of the Bea&s;t are &s;o many Sovereign Powers of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy; and becau&s;e they are di&s;tingui&s;hed into <HI>five, pa&s;t</HI> at the time of the Vi&s;ion, <HI>one</HI> then in being, and <HI>others to come,</HI> it is certain al&s;o, that they are &s;ucce&s;&s;ive; and therefore by <HI>Propo&s;ition the 16th&mdash;</HI>are they as many Changes of the Sovereign Power of that Empire, as there are Succe&s;&s;ions among&s;t them.</P>
<P>By almo&s;t all Prote&s;tant Interpreters, are the&s;e &s;even Heads de|termined to be at <HI>lea&s;t &s;even</HI> Succe&s;&s;ions of the Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome.</HI> But becau&s;e there is no ab&s;olutely certain a&s;&s;urance of more than <HI>three</HI> &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes from the Text, of which the &s;ixth is the fir&s;t Succe&s;&s;ion (there &s;ignified by <HI>five</HI> are pa&s;t, <HI>one</HI> is.) All that can therefore be po&s;itively affirmed about the num|ber of the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Ruling Powers, is, That the three la&s;t are certainly &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of the Ruling Power of the whole <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P>I di&s;pute not here the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Rule of the fir&s;t five Heads, but rather judge it to be highly probable, that they are the five different Changes of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government that are ordinarily accounted upon. <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Bellarmin, lib.</HI> 1. <HI>de Pontifice, cap.</HI> 2.</P>
<P>&mdash;But neither was the Commonwealth governed always by the &s;ame Heads. For in the beginning they had Con&s;uls and Tribunes (after he had before &s;uppo&s;ed <HI>Kings)</HI> And when they were taken away, <HI>Decem|virs, Con&s;uls</HI> and <HI>Tribunes</HI> were then recalled; and &s;ometimes had they <HI>Di|ctators,</HI> and &s;ometimes <HI>Military Tribunes with a Con&s;ulary Power.</HI></P>
<P>But if any will further contend to have the <HI>Senate</HI> and the <HI>Interreges,</HI> and the <HI>Triumviri Reipublic. Con&s;tituendae,</HI> to come in for a &s;hare of the Su|pream Government, then the five Governments before the <HI>Imperial,</HI> may be accounted to be tho&s;e which had been in Rule from the fir&s;t Succe&s;&s;ion of the Bea&s;t, to the third Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> ch. 7. that is, ever &s;ince the <HI>Roman</HI> Conque&s;ts of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy, and may be reckoned this way to be the <HI>Con&s;uls, Dictators, Senate, Interreges, Triumviri. Reip. Con&s;tituen|dae.</HI> It is indeed u&s;ual to account all the Characters that are given to every Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> from the time that it conquered the Bea&s;t that was before it; And according to that, the &s;even Heads may by &s;ome be thought nece&s;&s;ary to be accounted for from the end of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy.</P></NOTE> The <HI>Roman</HI> Hi&s;torians do reckon up the Changes of their Government in that order; <HI>Bellarmin</HI> him&s;elf, <HI>lib.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 2. <HI>de Pontifice,</HI> does reckon up the &s;ame number of the Governments of <HI>Rome.</HI> But yet it &s;eems not to be plainly a&s;&s;u|red to us, that the five fir&s;t Heads may not have been all five in Rule at the &s;ame time before the &s;ixth, or at lea&s;t not certain, but that they might have &s;ucceeded by more than one &s;ingle Head at a time. As in the He-Goat in the 8th Chapter of <HI>Da|niel,</HI> it might be &s;aid that there was one Horn fir&s;t, and four more after it, where there is a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of five Horns, and yet but one &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Change of the Ruling Power of the <HI>Greeks:</HI> that is, The divi&s;ion of that Monarchy into four, after the time of the &s;ingle Reign of one King over it.</P>
<PB N="135" REF="100">
<PB N="136" REF="101">
<PB N="137" REF="101">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="138" REF="102">
<HEAD>CHAP. II. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The</HI> Eighteenth Propo&s;ition, <HI>The Three la&s;t Kings of the Eight,</HI> Rev. 17. 10, 11. <HI>are Three</HI> immediately &s;ucce&s;|&s;e&s;&s;ive <HI>Changes of</HI> Roman <HI>Government. This demon|&s;trated.</HI> Bellarmin<HI>'s peculiar fancy of the &s;ignification of the number</HI> Seven. <HI>The Eighth King one of the Six fir&s;t returned into power. The</HI> Nineteenth Propo&s;i|tion, <HI>The Sixth King, the Imperial Government at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</HI> Grotius <HI>examined in that point. The</HI> Twentieth Propo&s;ition, <HI>The Bea&s;t is the next Government of</HI> Rome, <HI>but one, to the Imperial at the time of the Vi&s;ion. Dr.</HI> Hammond<HI>'s Objection from the time being at hand, an&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>WIthout any farther concern about the particular nature of the fir&s;t five Heads, or Kings, it may be ob&s;erved of the re&s;t, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Three la&s;t Kings of the Eight in the 17th Chapter, are Three</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 18.</NOTE> <HI>Changes of</HI> Roman <HI>Government coming after one another in an</HI> immediate <HI>&s;ucce&s;&s;ive Order.</HI></Q>
<P><NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>CU&s;pinian in Sextum Rufum, pag.</HI> 6. <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Cu&s;pinian. p.</HI> 95. <HI>in Ca&s;&s;iodori Chronicon.</HI> &s;hews, that <HI>Military Tri|bunes</HI> with Con&s;ulary Power diffe|red only in name from <HI>Con&s;uls.</HI></NOTE></P>
<P><HI>Con&s;uls</HI> were cho&s;en by the People of <HI>Rome</HI> at fir&s;t, that after the expul&s;ion of the <HI>Kings,</HI> the Power of the Kings might remain with them; <HI>ut penes illos Regia e&s;&s;et pote&s;tas.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Pancirollus in notit. Imperii Oriental. pag.</HI> 155. <HI>Appian</HI> &s;ays in his <HI>Syrian</HI> Hi|&s;tory, that the <HI>Romans</HI> &s;ent <HI>Praetors</HI> to the Army, which they called <GAP DESC="foreign">, that is, <HI>&s;ix Axes,</HI> becau&s;e the Con&s;uls did u&s;e to have twelve <HI>Axes,</HI> and as many <HI>bundles of Rods</HI> carried before them, after the manner of the <HI>Kings.</HI> [See in the Margent.]</P></NOTE> <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> That they are <HI>Three Changes</HI> of the Supream Govern|ment of the <HI>Romans,</HI> appears from their being every one repre|&s;ented by an Head of the Bea&s;t, which &s;ignifies a Rule of the <HI>Romans,</HI> Prop. 17. and from their being &s;aid to Reign one after another, v. 10, 11.</P>
<P>For Heads or Horns of a Bea&s;t &s;aid to come one after ano|ther do all over <HI>Daniel</HI> &s;ignify the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of the Su|pream Government of a Nation <HI>by Prop.</HI> 16.</P>
<P>And <HI>Daniel</HI> is the only Example of the u&s;e of &s;uch Propheti|cal Schemes: wherefore by <HI>Rule the</HI> 2<HI>d,</HI> they can &s;ignify nothing el&s;e here, but three &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Changes of the Soveraign Power of the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<PB N="139" REF="102">
<P><NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Thomas de Albiis Tabulae &s;uffragiales, p.</HI> 247.</P>
<P>And under the name of <HI>King</HI> it &s;elf, there are almo&s;t as many <HI>different</HI> &s;orts of Soveraign Power, as there are Kingdoms in the World; for there is not any Power of two different Kings that is altogether the <HI>&s;ame.</HI></P></NOTE> And next, That they do reign <HI>in an immediate &s;ucce&s;&s;ive</HI> Or|der, does appear from the Number of the La&s;t, which is &s;aid to be the Eighth. Whereas, if there had been any more than Two betwixt the Five, that were then &s;aid to be pa&s;t, and this which is called the Eighth, this La&s;t would have been more than an Eighth, according to the number of tho&s;e that had come in betwixt the Five and the La&s;t, be&s;ides tho&s;e Two that are mentioned.</P>
<P>This is further confirmed by the u&s;e of Numbers in <HI>Daniel,</HI> which denote the Succe&s;&s;ion of Ruling Powers. As in the four Kingdoms repre&s;ented by the four Metals in the Statue, Ch. 2. and &s;ignified to &s;ucceed one another; every Kingdom does <HI>im|mediatly</HI> &s;ucceed that before it. So al&s;o do the four Kingdoms in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel</HI> follow one another in an <HI>immediate</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 15. lib. 2.</NOTE> order. The Two Horns of the Ram in the 8th Chapter, one of which is &s;aid to come up after the other, are known to repre|&s;ent the <HI>immediate</HI> Succe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Government to that under the <HI>Median</HI> Kings. The fourth King of <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> after <HI>Cyrus</HI> in the 11th Chapter, v. 2. is known to be <HI>Xerxes</HI> in an <HI>imme|diate</HI> Succe&s;&s;ion from <HI>Cyrus.</HI></P>
<P>The Succe&s;&s;ion of the fir&s;t King, and of the four after him, &s;ignified by the Horns of the He-Goat in the 8th Chapter, may indeed &s;eem to be an exception to the re&s;t, becau&s;e the <HI>quadri|partite</HI> Divi&s;ion of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy did not <HI>immediately</HI> &s;uc|ceed the Reign of <HI>Alexander.</HI></P>
<P>But then neither is there any number there u&s;ed to denote an <HI>immediate</HI> Succe&s;&s;ion; There is no mention of a <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> and a <HI>&s;econd</HI> King, but only of a <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> and <HI>four Kings</HI> after him, which does not exclude the intervening of others betwixt them, as the name of a fir&s;t, or &s;econd, would do.</P>
<P>And yet, if it be well con&s;idered, The <HI>Quadripartite</HI> Divi&s;ion of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy was &s;o much the <HI>immediate</HI> next form of the Supream Rule of it to the Heirs of <HI>Alexander;</HI> that there was no other <HI>&s;etled</HI> Divi&s;ion of that Monarchy that came in between them; and that one would e&s;teem to be ground enough to call it the <HI>next immediate</HI> &s;ucce&s;&s;ive form of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Mo|narchy, when there was no other <HI>&s;etled</HI> form betwixt the Reign of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Heirs, and the fourfold Divi&s;ion of the Empire.</P>
<PB N="140" REF="103">
<P> Again, The Bea&s;t is never without one of his Heads, even in the time of his Ten Horns to his la&s;t ruine, by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 6. Wherefore upon the falling of one of his Heads, the next in or|der mu&s;t immediately ari&s;e, or el&s;e the Bea&s;t would be without an Head, and &s;o without any life in it. For the Ten Horns, from whence alone it could be &s;uppo&s;ed to have any life be&s;ides, are all in the time of the La&s;t Head, by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.</P>
<P>But &s;till further, it may ea&s;ily be perceived, That the three la&s;t Kings are &s;et down in order by the Angel, for no other end, but to &s;hew the time of the ri&s;e of the Eighth, called the Bea&s;t, and which is the only Subject-matter of all the Vi&s;ions.</P>
<P>To confirm this, it is plain, That there is none of the whole number of the&s;e Kings, but only the Eighth, who have any thing more mentioned of them, than barely the number, that they are known by, and the order in which they lie from that pre&s;ent time, when the&s;e things were &s;poken, to the time of the Reign of the Eighth. The Sixth is therefore only &s;aid to be the King, that was at that pre&s;ent time the Soveraign of the <HI>Romans,</HI> that it might be thereby known, how many Succe&s;&s;ions of the Ruling Power of that Monarchy there was to be from the time of the Vi&s;ion to the Reign of the Bea&s;t. Now if the order of the&s;e Succe&s;&s;ions had not been <HI>immediate</HI> to one another, this number would really have &s;ignified nothing for that De&s;ign; but would on the contrary have been a mo&s;t certain means of deluding men into a mi&s;take upon very clear and warrantable grounds for it, e&s;pecially &s;ince there is no intimation in the lea&s;t to incline a man to under&s;tand it otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P>Wherefore by <HI>Rule the fir&s;t,</HI> it may be relied upon, that the Succe&s;&s;ion of the three la&s;t Kings of the Eighth in the 17th Chapter, was <HI>immediate.</HI></P>
<P>And &s;o plainly does this appear to be intimated from the <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT.</NOTE> Text, that it has the almo&s;t unanimous Con&s;ent of all the dif|fering Parties of Interpreters. <HI>Bellarmin</HI> indeed has a very &s;ingu|lar fancy in this point; he would have the Seven Heads, or Kings, to &s;ignify here <HI>all the Emperours,</HI> becau&s;e the Number <HI>Seven</HI> is ge|nerally &s;o u&s;ed in the <HI>Revelations:</HI> Whereas nothing is more commonly known, than that when <HI>Seven,</HI> or <HI>Ten,</HI> are divided into broken numbers, as the number <HI>Seven</HI> is here into <HI>Five, One, another,</HI> &amp;c. they are never u&s;ed for a perfect number, or to &s;ignify <HI>All.</HI> And the mention of the <HI>Eighth,</HI> which was one
<PB N="141" REF="103"> of the Seven, does plainly a&s;&s;ure them to be ju&s;t <HI>Seven,</HI> and no more. What more remarkable In&s;tance can we have, how extravagantly &s;ingular a man of good &s;en&s;e, in other re|&s;pects, may be upon no manner of tolerable grounds for it?</P>
<P>If the three la&s;t Kings do immediatly &s;ucceed one another, then it is certain, that</P>
<Q>The Eighth King is one of the fir&s;t Six returned into Rule again. <MILESTONE UNIT="Corollary."></Q>
<P>For the Eighth King is one of the Seven that were pa&s;t before, returned into Rule again, <HI>Coroll. Prop.</HI> 4. And it cannot be the Seventh, becau&s;e the three la&s;t Kings; and therefore the Seventh and Eighth do immediatly &s;ucceed one another, <HI>Prop.</HI> 18. &s;o that if the Eighth were the Seventh, and with the Seventh King it would be but the Seventh continued in being, and therefore not an Eighth. The Eighth King mu&s;t therefore be one of the Six that were pa&s;t before it.</P>
<P>It cannot therefore now be doubted, but that</P>
<Q><HI>The Sixth King of the Eight in the 17th Chapter of the</HI> Reve|lations, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 19.</NOTE> <HI>was the Imperial Government of</HI> Rome <HI>at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Sixth King is the Sixth Head of the Bea&s;t, <HI>Prop.</HI> 5. And an Head or Horn of a Bea&s;t does in Prophecy &s;ignify a form of Supream Power in a Nation; And the continuance of that Form, under all the &s;ingle Per&s;ons that reign in it, till it be changed by another, <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. Now there was no other Go|vernment over <HI>Rome,</HI> when the Sixth King is &s;aid to be in Rule there, but only that of the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperours. The Sixth King then mu&s;t be the Government of the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperours till that was cut off by a Form of Government of another name. <HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 4. <HI>Prop.</HI> 16.</P>
<P>If it &s;hould be objected, That by the Sixth Head, or King, may be meant but one part of the Imperial Government, or tho&s;e only that were of the &s;ame Line or Family, or of the &s;ame Countrey, or of the &s;ame Religion, or the like; It may be re|plied, that there is no warrant for any other &s;ignification of a new Succe&s;&s;ive Head, or Horn, in the &s;ame Juri&s;diction, than that of a new name of the Governing Power. There were
<PB N="142" REF="104"> many other differences in the Succe&s;&s;ions of the &s;everal Kings of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> and <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchies, <HI>viz.</HI> &s;everal Lines and Fa|milies, &s;everal different Countries, but yet they were all com|prehended under one and the &s;ame Horn. The only plain Ex|ample that we have of the change of a &s;ingle Horn in the &s;ame Bea&s;t, which is the &s;ame with the change of an Head, <HI>Ob&s;erv.</HI> 3. <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. is that of the Two Horns of the Ram, <HI>Dan.</HI> 8. where all the difference betwixt the latter Horn and the fir&s;t, is, that the La&s;t was known by the name of the King of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> where|as the other was called the King of <HI>Media,</HI> in the &s;ame one King|dom of the <HI>Medes and Per&s;ians.</HI></P>
<P>There is therefore no warrant for making the Sixth King any thing el&s;e, but the <HI>whole time</HI> of the Imperial Govern|ment, till it was changed for a <HI>Roman</HI> Government of another name.</P>
<P>There is no kind of &s;cruple to be made again&s;t this upon the account of the name of King, which is common to all the Eight Kings. For that is known to be very dubiou&s;ly u&s;ed in Scri|pture, but e&s;pecially in Prophecy, to &s;ignify either a Kingdom, or a Government in a Nation of another kind than the Kingly Government. The mo&s;t certain Example of it is this pre&s;ent u&s;e of the word King, where it mu&s;t at lea&s;t &s;ignify an Empe|rour, which is a Government of another denomination; and &s;o different from that of Kings, that the <HI>Romans,</HI> which permit|ted the one, are &s;aid to have <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg"><HI>Hieron. Bal|bus de Corona|tione, c.</HI> 13. <HI>Julius Cae&s;ar, &amp;c. Julius Cae&s;ar&mdash;</HI>who when he had engro&s;&s;ed the Dictatorian and Regal Power to him&s;elf, becau&s;e he knew that the name of King was hated by the <HI>Romans,</HI> and even execrable to them; to decline the envy of it, in&s;tead of King, cho&s;e ra|ther to be called Emperour.&mdash;When <HI>Mark Anthony</HI> the Con&s;ul offered him the Diadem, he cried out aloud, that he was <HI>Cae&s;ar,</HI> and not a King, and threw away the Diadem.</NOTE> an hatred for the other.</P>
<P><HI>Grotius</HI>'s An&s;wer to this, is, That an Emperour had really the &s;ame power that a King had; But if that be &s;ufficient to qualify a Supream Power for the Name or Title of King, Then all the &s;everal different Rulers of the <HI>Roman</HI> State might as well have <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> that name, and &s;o be comprehended under the Five fir&s;t Kings here mentioned. For the Con&s;uls are &s;aid to have &s;ucceeded into all the Power and the Authority of the Kings that were be|fore them; And all the other kinds of Government had the &s;ame Authority: And though there &s;hould be &s;ome &s;mall diffe|rence
<PB N="143" REF="104"> in the degree of their Authority, yet that is no more, than is to be found betwixt <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ribera in cap.</HI> 17. <HI>Apoc. v.</HI> 10. <HI>numer.</HI> 15. But if any one &s;hould think it hard, and forced, that <HI>many Kings</HI> &s;hould be &s;ignified by the name of <HI>one</HI> King, and &s;hould think, that the&s;e &s;even are but &s;even &s;ingle Kings; let him know in the fir&s;t place, that all Expo&s;itors have under&s;tood, that in <HI>every one</HI> of the&s;e &s;even are comprehended a great many, and that never did any take them to be &s;even &s;ingle per&s;ons <HI>only,</HI> but <HI>Victorinus,</HI> who&s;e Opinion all do de&s;ervedly cry out again&s;t.&mdash;And then <HI>next,</HI> let him un|der&s;tand, that it is not unu&s;ual in Scripture, by <HI>one</HI> King to &s;ignify <HI>many</HI> of the like &s;ort, and as it were of one and the &s;ame Body, which is e&s;pecially to be ob&s;erved. So in <HI>Daniel</HI> 8. The Ram with the two Horns, does &s;ignify all the Kings of <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> &s;ucceeding one another in order, and making as it were but one body, who are therefore accounted but as one King. So that in <HI>Jeremiah,</HI> chap. 25. <HI>And they &s;hall &s;erve the King of</HI> Babylon 70 <HI>years,</HI> which it is impo&s;&s;ible to under&s;tand of one &s;ingle King.</NOTE> different <HI>&s;orts of Kings.</HI></P>
<P>As for the Plea, that the Name of a King denotes a &s;ingle Per|&s;on, almo&s;t <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ribera in cap.</HI> 1. <HI>Apocal. v.</HI> 3. <HI>numer</HI> 5. <HI>citat.</HI></P>
<P>We may &s;ay, that which is <HI>begun,</HI> is now done, or <HI>doing.</HI> Wherefore &s;ince tho&s;e things were &s;hortly to <HI>begin,</HI> he might well &s;ay, the things which &s;hall <HI>&s;hortly be done,</HI> although they were not &s;hortly to be <HI>ended.</HI> This is the <HI>common u&s;e</HI> of &s;peech, and the <HI>u&s;e</HI> of <HI>Scripture.</HI></P></NOTE> all the Examples in <HI>Daniel</HI> of that name do &s;how <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> that it does &s;ignify a Succe&s;&s;ion of many &s;ingle Per&s;ons in a King|dom, <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. <HI>Part the La&s;t.</HI> This <HI>Grotius</HI> takes no notice of, but thinks it argument &s;ufficient again&s;t it to call it <GAP DESC="foreign">, and <HI>quis unquam ita loquitur?</HI></P>
<P>To which <HI>Ribera</HI> does be&s;t an&s;wer on cap. 17. <HI>Apoc.</HI> pag. 528. That all <HI>Expo&s;itors</HI> have &s;aid &s;o; and never any but <HI>Victorinus</HI> &s;aid otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P>But in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> it is evident, That by the Four Bea&s;ts, called Four Kings, is meant four Kingdoms, and by the Fourth of the&s;e Kings, the <HI>Roman</HI> Commonwealth. For it is de&s;cribed in that &s;tate in which it conquered the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monar|chy, which was in the &s;tate of its Commonwealth. And <HI>Deut.</HI> 33. 5. and <HI>Judges</HI> 9. 16, 18. chap. 17. 6. ch. 18. 1. ch. 19. 1. ch. 21. 25. the name of <HI>King</HI> is given to <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> and the Judges of the <HI>I&s;raelites.</HI></P>
<P>And further, That this Sixth King cannot be any &s;ingle Ru|ler or Emperour, which is the chief thing pretended to by tho&s;e who will not have it to be the Imperial Government, is mo&s;t evident from this following Con&s;ideration; <HI>viz.</HI> That then the Eighth King, which is the Bea&s;t, would have been the next &s;in|gle Emperour but one after him. For the three La&s;t Kings do immediatly &s;ucceed one another by <HI>Prop. praeced.</HI> And then all the Characters and Attendants of the Bea&s;t mu&s;t have been found verified of the next Emperour but one after the time of the Vi|&s;ion. For by <HI>Prop. the 6th, Corol.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 10. The Bea&s;t in all the Chapters of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is one and the &s;ame particular &s;tate of it under one of its Heads. There mu&s;t then have been Ten Kings, <HI>that had no Kingdom at the time of the Vi&s;ion,</HI> who were yet &s;uch Ma&s;ters of &s;o many Kingdoms, in the time of the next Emperour but one to it, as that they &s;hould <HI>give their Kingdoms</HI> to that Emperour, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 12, 13.</P>
<P><HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t al&s;o have been <HI>&s;o burnt with fire,</HI> that it mu&s;t have been <HI>finally ruined,</HI> and have had all Soveraignty taken from it in the time of that Emperour, <HI>v.</HI> 16. But in Hi&s;tory we meet with <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 3.</NOTE> nothing like to this, much le&s;s is there any account from Hi&s;tory of the overcoming of any Emperour of <HI>Rome</HI> by the Chri&s;tians <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14.</NOTE>
<PB N="144" REF="105"> of tho&s;e days, nor that any Ten Kings confederated with that Emperour, were conquered by them, nor of any &s;uch Emperour that was de&s;troyed by the Armies of Chri&s;t; So that upon his <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 19. 19, 20. Rev. 20. 4.</NOTE> death there was any &s;uch glorious Reign of the Kingdom of Chri&s;t over the Kingdoms of this World, as is de&s;cribed imme|ately to &s;ucceed it.</P>
<P>But Hi&s;tory is very full of the accounts of the afflicted and per|&s;ecuted &s;tate of the Chri&s;tian Church in tho&s;e times, which is quite contrary to that glorious De&s;cription of the &s;tate of the Church immediatly after the times of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Reve|lations.</HI></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, that it has been proved, that that Bea&s;t was to con|tinue till the Second coming of Chri&s;t. <HI>Corol.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 12.</P>
<P>This &s;eems to have been well enough ob&s;erved by tho&s;e who would have the Bea&s;t in the 17th Chapter to &s;ignify a &s;ingle Em|perour: And therefore to evade tho&s;e Confequences, they are <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grotius.</NOTE> forced to make two or three di&s;tinct &s;tates of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> at the &s;everal mentions of him in chap. 13. chap. 17. chap. 19. But how evident it is that all the mentions of that Bea&s;t all over the <HI>Revelations,</HI> do &s;ignify but one and the &s;ame &s;tate of him under his la&s;t Head, may be &s;een by the whole pro|ce&s;s of the Demon&s;tration of the <HI>6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th Propo|&s;itions.</HI></P>
<P>The Sixth King, or Head, mu&s;t therefore nece&s;&s;arily be the Imperial Government of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>It is then unque&s;tionable, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Bea&s;t called the Eighth King, is that change of</HI> Roman <HI>Go|vernment,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 20.</NOTE> <HI>which was next but one to the Imperial Government of</HI> Rome <HI>at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t is the Eighth in immediate &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to the Sixth, which is the Imperial Government; <HI>Prop.</HI> 19. And it is The Bea&s;t under one of its Heads, which &s;ignifies Supream Go|vernment under the Succe&s;&s;ive Reigns of many &s;ingle Per&s;ons in that Government, <HI>Prop.</HI> 16. Therefore mu&s;t the Bea&s;t be the next <HI>Roman</HI> Government but one to the Imperial, that Ruled at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>By the preceding <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> it appears what Ab&s;urdities and Incon&s;i&s;tencies they mu&s;t fall into, who would have the time of
<PB N="145" REF="105"> the Bea&s;t pa&s;&s;ed over almo&s;t as &s;oon as it began. One would think, that there mu&s;t be &s;ome great nece&s;&s;ity that did force to the&s;e &s;treights; But the chief thing that is alledged for it from this Prophecy, is, That at the beginning of it, it is &s;aid, That <HI>the things were &s;hortly to come to pa&s;s,</HI> That <HI>the time was at hand:</HI> And again, at the end of it al&s;o, That <HI>they were things which mu&s;t &s;hortly be done;</HI> And that the <HI>Book &s;hould not be &s;ealed, becau&s;e the time was at hand.</HI> But the&s;e things have already been &s;ufficiently con&s;idered, <HI>pag.</HI> 114. And there is nothing more familiar in Speech, than to &s;ay of things, that require a great deal of time for the fini&s;hing them, that they ^d <HI>will &s;hortly be,</HI> in&s;tead of, They <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> will &s;hortly <HI>begin</HI> to be. As one might &s;ay at <HI>Ea&s;ter, All the Sum|mers work will &s;hortly be upon us; This Play will be acted pre&s;ently, though it be five hours in acting:</HI> So about the Birth of Chri&s;t, <HI>All things foretold of the times of the Me&s;&s;iah will &s;hortly come to pa&s;s.</HI> All the pretended nece&s;&s;ity then, comes now to be none at all.</P>
<P><HI>Grotius</HI> could not have reflected more upon the Judgment of the mo&s;t Eminent of the <HI>Roman</HI> Interpreters, than to think it to be &s;o plain, that the time of the Bea&s;t was long &s;ince pa&s;t, from &s;uch obvious grounds as the&s;e, and yet that this &s;hould never be found out by the mo&s;t Judicious of them; For it would &s;ave them all that trouble that they have, to make it out that their pre&s;ent Church is not concerned in the Affairs of the Bea&s;t, in which there would be no difficulty, if it were &s;o plain, that the time of the Bea&s;t is long &s;ince pa&s;t: And be&s;ides, it would keep them from granting &s;o much as they do, to the di&s;advantage of their Cau&s;e; whereas, in a concern of this nature, 'tis very un|&s;afe to yield to any thing, but what is nece&s;&s;ary to be granted; e&s;pecially &s;ince what they do yield to, does force them to &s;uch contradictions to what they allow to be the known &s;ignifications of a Bea&s;t, and its Heads or Horns, in other places, as we &s;ee in <HI>Ribera, &amp;c.</HI> or to matter of fact, as &s;hall be made to appear a|gain&s;t <HI>Bellarmin (Prop.</HI> 22.) who has granted &s;o far, as he has laid the whole &s;tre&s;s of the Controver&s;ie betwixt us upon the truth of Hi&s;tory.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="146" REF="106">
<PB N="147" REF="106">
<HEAD>CHAP. III. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The 21&s;t Propo&s;ition, What an Head of the Bea&s;t is, in di&s;tinction to an Horn. This determined by Eleven Arguments. What demon&s;trates an Head to be at an end. The Sixth Head at an end, when another Go|vernment was owned at</HI> Rome <HI>in the place of it.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>TO take away all di&s;pute that may ari&s;e about the di&s;tin|gui&s;hing Characters of an <HI>Head</HI> of the Bea&s;t in the time of the la&s;t Head, when there is ten Kingdoms to appear in the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire at the &s;ame time, &s;ignified by the ten Horns; This following Propo&s;ition is to di&s;tingui&s;h an <HI>Head</HI> from an <HI>Horn.</HI></P>
<Q><HI>An Head of the Bea&s;t is that &s;etled Sovereign Power of the</HI> Ro|mans, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 21.</NOTE> <HI>who&s;e Authority is owned to be Supream by the Go|vernment of the City of</HI> Rome.</Q>
<P N="1">1. That it mu&s;t be a <HI>&s;etled Sovereign Power,</HI> is confirmed from all the Examples of <HI>Daniel,</HI> where there are no Heads, or Horns to &s;ignify the Ruling Power of a Monarchy in the time of the <HI>un&s;etled</HI> Confu&s;ions of a Nation; As particularly the time of the <HI>Magi,</HI> in the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy, has nothing to di&s;tingui&s;h it from the re&s;t of it, nor the time of the Confu&s;ed Scuffles of <HI>Alexander</HI>'s Captains after his death. As may be &s;een in the 8th Chapter. Where there is no mention of any change of Horns after the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> great one, till the ri&s;ing of tho&s;e four, which did &s;ignify the four <HI>&s;etled</HI> Kingdoms of the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire. And <HI>next,</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. That an Head of a Bea&s;t mu&s;t be that <HI>Roman</HI> Power, <HI>who&s;e Authority is owned to be Supream by the Chief Government of the City of</HI> Rome, one would think were &s;ufficiently evident by the In|terpretation that the Angel him&s;elf has given of the &s;ignification of the &s;even Heads. For the &s;ame &s;even Heads, which he inter|prets <NOTE PLACE="marg">1.</NOTE> to be &s;even Kings of the <HI>Romans,</HI> do al&s;o &s;ignify the &s;even Hills of <HI>Rome,</HI> to which the City of <HI>Rome</HI> is in&s;eparably tied; which does very plainly &s;ignify, that all the &s;even Kings are Kings of the <HI>&s;even Hills,</HI> or of that City, which tho&s;e Hills do &s;ignify.</P>
<PB N="148" REF="107">
<P> What could be more clo&s;ely joined together in a Prophetical Scheme, to &s;hew them to be in&s;eparable Companions, than to make both Kings and City to be repre&s;ented by the very &s;ame Figure? And therefore does it &s;eem to be &s;o very extravagant <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Ribera,</HI> &amp;c.</NOTE> an Opinion of &s;ome, to make the fir&s;t five of the&s;e Heads to be perfect Strangers to the <HI>Romans,</HI> and their Affairs. Neither <HI>Bellarmin,</HI> nor <HI>Grotius him&s;elf,</HI> could have the confidence to a&s;&s;ert this, though it would have &s;erved their purpo&s;e better than any of tho&s;e other &s;trange Suppo&s;itions, that they have advanced to an&s;wer their Adver&s;aries.</P>
<P N="2">2. The whole time of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy is &s;et out by the Bea&s;t, and the &s;even Heads, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 15, and 16. And then the &s;even Heads being interpreted to &s;ignify the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> do plainly determine the City of <HI>Rome</HI> to be the Royal Seat of that Monarchy during the <HI>whole time</HI> of it. The Reign therefore of every Head mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily go along with the Authority of that City.</P>
<P N="3">3. No other Empire what&s;oever in all the Figures of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is &s;o &s;et out by its chief City, as this of the <HI>Romans</HI> is. So that the addition of the &s;even Hills to this Bea&s;t, does more in&s;epa|rably tye the Sovereign Authority of the Empire to this particu|lar City, and &s;eems to be added on purpo&s;e to expre&s;s &s;omething about <HI>this</HI> Empire, which had been omitted in all <HI>others,</HI> viz. The con&s;tant conjunction of the Sovereign Power of this Empire with the Authority of this City of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. And it was nece&s;&s;ary to do this, more than in the Figure of any other Monarchy, becau&s;e there are two kinds of Sovereign Powers in this Monarchy at one and the &s;ame time, that is, <HI>Heads</HI> and <HI>Horns;</HI> To di&s;tingui&s;h which, at lea&s;t in the time of the <HI>la&s;t Head,</HI> there is no other mark in the Text, but <HI>only</HI> the Au|thority of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> for the Head.</P>
<P N="5">5. The Authority of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> can be no more &s;epa|rated from the Sovereign Power of that Empire, than the Bea&s;t can be &s;eparated from all its &s;even Heads.</P>
<P N="6">6. The flouri&s;hing and decaying condition al&s;o of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy, is &s;et out by the flouri&s;hing and decaying condition of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> all over the Book of the <HI>Revelations.</HI> In the time of the &s;ixth Head, the whole Monarchy is de&s;cribed by the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 17. 4, 18.</NOTE> Reign of the City of <HI>Rome over the Kings of the Earth.</HI> In the time of the la&s;t Ruling Head, <HI>Rome</HI> is de&s;cribed in a Maje&s;tick
<PB N="149" REF="107"> Appearance to expre&s;s the Power of the <HI>Roman</HI> Rule <HI>over Peoples, and Multitudes, and Nations, and Tongues:</HI> And the ruinous and de&s;olate State of the <HI>City of Rome</HI> is afterwards made u&s;e of to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 16. 19. Chap. 18.</NOTE> &s;ignify the fall of that Empire, and the la&s;t end of all <HI>Roman</HI> Rule; All which is &s;ufficient evidence, That the <HI>City of</HI> Rome goes con&s;tantly along with the chief Head of that State.</P>
<P N="7">7. The Fates of the chief City of any other Empire, that is mentioned by the Prophets, do generally &s;ignify the condition of the chief Head, or of the Sovereign Power that goes along with that City; And the end of any &s;uch Ruling Power, or Empire, is expre&s;&s;ed to be at the lo&s;s of their Royal City. Thus is the flouri&s;hing and ruinous State of the <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> &s;et out by the like Characters of <HI>Samaria,</HI> that of <HI>Judah</HI> by <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> the ri&s;e and fall of the <HI>Babylonians</HI> by the glory or ruine of <HI>Baby|lon, &amp;c.</HI> And therefore by <HI>Rule the</HI> 2<HI>d.</HI> The Authority of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> mu&s;t go along with every Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Power, unle&s;s there were any thing clear again&s;t it, which is not pretended.</P>
<P N="8">8. But mo&s;t e&s;pecially mu&s;t this be true of an Head of the Bea&s;t, at the time that <HI>Rome</HI> enjoyed the En&s;igns and Badges of the chief Authority of the Empire; For that chief Authority is the <HI>di&s;tingui&s;hing mark</HI> of an Head of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>And therefore it is impo&s;&s;ible, that in the divi&s;ion of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire, either into Two Empires, or into Ten Kingdoms, that the Emperour of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> &s;hould be an Head of the Bea&s;t, or of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy, any longer than he was owned, and allowed either together <HI>with,</HI> or <HI>without</HI> another Partner, by the Senate and People of <HI>Rome, whil&s;t they did retain their u&s;ual Authority.</HI> For as long as they continued in that Au|thority, let their State be never &s;o much dimini&s;hed in compa|ri&s;on with what they had been, yet they had all the qualifica|tions that the Prophecy requires to be repre&s;ented by an Head of the Bea&s;t. They were &s;till the <HI>Ruling People</HI> of the 7 Hills, and the &s;ame continued Body with tho&s;e that reigned in the mo&s;t flouri&s;hing State of the City of <HI>Rome.</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">GRotius <HI>de jure B. &amp; P. L.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 9. <HI>Art.</HI> 3.<HI>&mdash;I&s;ocrates,</HI> and <HI>Julian</HI> af|ter him, have &s;aid, that Cities are immortal; that is, They may be &s;o, becau&s;e the People are of that kind of Bodies, which are made up of di&s;tant Parts, and fall under one name, which has one Soul, or Spirit in it. And that Spirit in a People is a full and perfect Society of Civil Life, the fir&s;t product of which is Government, the bond by which the Com|monwealth holds together the Vital Spirit which &s;o many thou&s;ands par|take in. Now the&s;e Artificial Bodies are ju&s;t like Natural Bodies. A <HI>Na|tural Body</HI> cea&s;es not to be the <HI>&s;ame</HI> for the change of &s;ome of the Particles of it, while the Species continues the &s;ame. So a River is &s;till the &s;ame, notwith&s;tanding the continual &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of Waters in it;&mdash;&s;o an out|ward acce&s;&s;ion may po&s;&s;ibly add to, or take from the dignity of a People, but not make it <HI>another People.&mdash;</HI>And the way that a People <HI>cea&s;es to be,</HI> is either by the ruine of the Body of it, when the Body of the People are lo&s;t by Earthquakes, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> or Wars, or Pe&s;tilence; or by the de&s;truction of the Species, or Soul of it; that is, of the Society of that People, either by <HI>Slavery,</HI> or by <HI>Subjection only to a new Authority.</HI> Artic. 4, 5, 6. <HI>Ibid.</HI> Artic. 8.</NOTE> As <HI>Grotius</HI> determines concerning the continuance of the &s;ame body of People in the <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> 9th Chapter of his Second Book, <HI>de jure Belli, &amp; Pacis.</HI> And therefore were they &s;till the commanding Authority of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire.</P>
<P N="9"><PB N="148" REF="108"> 9. This is very learnedly confirmed by <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P>Thus were the People of <HI>Rome</HI> the &s;ame under Kings, Con&s;uls and Emperours; And <HI>Artic.</HI> 11. are the &s;ame at this day, becau&s;e they &s;till retain that Society in Civil Government which they had formerly; and therefore the Imperial Power did always re&s;ide in them, as in the Body in which it lived. For whatever the People of <HI>Rome</HI> could have formerly done of right before the time of the Emperours, the &s;ame had they power to do upon the death of any Emperour, before there was ano|ther cho&s;en. The Election of the Emperours did al&s;o belong to the Peo|ple of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> and was oftentimes performed by the People, ei|ther <HI>alone,</HI> or by the <HI>Senate</HI> for them; And tho&s;e Elections, which were made by fir&s;t one, and then another Legion of the Army, were <HI>not valid</HI> by the right of tho&s;e Legions (for in a flitting Body there could be no certain right) but from the <HI>approbation of the People.</HI></P>
<P>It is no Objection again&s;t this, that by the Decree of <HI>Antoninus,</HI> all the Subjects of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire were made Citizens of <HI>Rome.</HI> For the re&s;t of the <HI>Roman</HI> Subjects got nothing more by that Decree, than what the Colonies, and free Cities of the Empire, and the <HI>Roman</HI> Provinces u&s;ed to have, which was to be partakers of the <HI>Roman</HI> Honours, and to have the privileges of <HI>Quirites;</HI> not that the Seat and Fountain of Government &s;hould be in other parts of the Empire, as it was at <HI>Rome.</HI> For that was not in the power of the Emperour to give, who could not change the Funda|mental Laws for the exerci&s;e of the Governing Power.</P>
<P>Nor was it any diminution of the Right of the People of <HI>Rome,</HI> that the Emperours cho&s;e rather to live at <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> afterwards, than at <HI>Rome.</HI> For then al&s;o did the whole People of <HI>Rome</HI> confirm and make va|lid the Election, which was made by a part of them at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> who for that are called the <HI>Byzantine Quirites,</HI> by <HI>Claudian;</HI> And tho&s;e of <HI>Rome</HI> did &s;till pre&s;erve the Prerogative of their City, and the honour of the pre|cedence of their Con&s;ul, which was no &s;mall Monument of their Original Right. Wherefore all the Right which tho&s;e of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> had to chu&s;e the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperour, did depend upon the Will of the People of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>To this purpo&s;e is that of <HI>Hieron. Balbus de Conventione, c.</HI> 13.&mdash;But &s;ometimes the Emperour was cho&s;en by the Army&mdash;who was then ac|counted rightly cho&s;en, if the Authority of the <HI>Senate,</HI> and <HI>People</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> did confirm it.</P>
<P><HI>Ludovic. &acirc; Rebeuberg.</HI> a <HI>Cae&s;arian</HI> Writer, <HI>cap.</HI> 3. <HI>de juribus Reg. &amp; Imp. Romanor. Charlemaign</HI> never called him&s;elf Emperour before he was anoint|ed and crowned by <HI>Pope Leo&mdash;</HI>The <HI>Romans</HI> with one Con&s;ent did give the Imperial Acclamations to <HI>Charlemaign;</HI> And when he was crowned by Pope <HI>Leo,</HI> they called him <HI>Cae&s;ar,</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tus&mdash;M. Fribeius, in the Comment&mdash;</HI>In which way of Acclamation, <HI>&s;ays he,</HI> the popular Election, both at <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> did at that time con&s;i&s;t. As <HI>Paulus Diaconus</HI> in <HI>Hi&s;tor. Mi&s;cella. &amp; Ana&s;ta&s;. Bibliothecarius,</HI> do te&s;tify.</P></NOTE> <HI>Grotius</HI> him&s;elf in that &s;ame Chapter, and the Comment on it; where he &s;hews as a Lawyer, That it was always acknowledged to be the right of the Senate, and People of <HI>Rome,</HI> to determine the next Suc|ce&s;&s;ion to the Government of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire in the time of every vacancy; That therefore all Elections of Princes and Laws were to be confirmed by them. So that the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Emperours were generally &s;o confirmed, and their Laws rati|fied by the Authority of the City of <HI>Rome;</HI> And to give autho|rity to their Government, they had one of the Con&s;uls, and a part of the Senate of <HI>Rome</HI> generally re&s;iding with them, as de|legated from that City, to give authority to their Orders, as long as there was a good corre&s;pondence betwixt the Ea&s;tern and We&s;tern Empires; And to &s;how which of the Seats of the Empire was the chief Fountain of the <HI>Roman</HI> Power, the Con|&s;ul of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> always had the precedence. So that as long as the Power of the <HI>Roman</HI> Senate and Con&s;uls did continue at <HI>Rome,</HI> which was till the Conque&s;t of <HI>Rome</HI> by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> the Sovereign Power of that City mu&s;t come in for a &s;hare at lea&s;t in the then Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t, which is all that is nece&s;|&s;ary to be here e&s;tabli&s;hed.</P>
<P N="10">10. And the way to make any man a <HI>Roman,</HI> in <HI>di&s;tinction</HI> to others that were Subjects of that Empire, was to make him a <HI>Citizen of</HI> Rome; which did manife&s;tly &s;hew, that no Power could be properly &s;aid to be the Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, that was without any Authority from the City of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P N="11">11. The City of <HI>Rome</HI> had al&s;o a very peculiar acknowledg|ment from the whole Government of the Empire, that it was the Head and Fountain of all the Power of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; and in a more eminent way, than we read of any other City be|&s;ides. For all the Governors of the Provinces, at their return from their Office, u&s;ed to lay down the En&s;igns of their Autho|rity at the Gates of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> before they entred the Town, in acknowledgment of the fir&s;t Fountain of their Ma|gi&s;tracy: which they did therefore thus &s;ignify to be re&s;igned up into <HI>her hands,</HI> when they returned home again. <HI>L. ult. de Officio Procon&s;.</HI></P>
<P N="12">12. Be&s;ides, That during the whole time of the divi&s;ion of the Empire, to the Reign of <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Cod.</HI> Ju&s;tinian. <HI>Praefat. Con&s;uetudo</HI> Romanae <HI>Urbis &s;equenda ab omnibus, quia</HI> Roma <HI>e&s;t</HI> Caput Orbis Terrarum. To this purpo&s;e do the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Em|perours before give the precedence to the City of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>So all over <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus</HI>'s Varior. p. 41, 112, 207, 302, 311, 319, 341, 348, 359, 361, 390, 396. <HI>Rome</HI> has the name of the <HI>Head of the World;</HI> with &s;uch Characters as the&s;e<HI>&mdash;in that City, where Honour does always re&s;ide&mdash;in the mo&s;t &s;acred City&mdash;none can be greater, than he to who&s;e care</HI> Rome <HI>is committed&mdash;</HI>not only <HI>Rome,</HI> tho <HI>in it are contained all things&mdash;what&s;o|ever is done in that City, is almo&s;t in the eyes of the whole World&mdash;If the Head of the World rejoyces, all the re&s;t mu&s;t do the &s;ame&mdash;not in the Provinces, but in the Head of all things.</HI> And this was ju&s;t before the Reign of <HI>Ju|&s;tinian.</HI></P></NOTE> <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> at lea&s;t, the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> though no longer the Seat of the Empire, was called, and ac|counted
<PB N="149" REF="108"> the Metropolis of it; and therefore was it for all that time called <HI>The Head of the World, the Head of all things:</HI> Where|fore by the Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire (that is by any <HI>Head</HI> of the Bea&s;t in di&s;tinction from an <HI>Horn)</HI> all would then have un|der&s;tood, That Authority, which was owned for Supream by the Senate and People of <HI>Rome;</HI> And it has been concluded that the Angel did &s;o explain his Figures, as all the World would under&s;tand the literal &s;en&s;e of them to be, if there were nothing clearer again&s;t it, Chap. 2.</P>
<P>It does therefore nece&s;&s;arily follow from hence,</P>
<Q><HI>That every Head of the Bea&s;t is at the end of its Reign, when the Au|thority</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>of the City of</HI> Rome <HI>does own another</HI> &s;etled <HI>form of Govern|ment for Supream in the room of it.</HI></Q>
<P>For then there is a <HI>new</HI> Head of the Bea&s;t con&s;tituted by <HI>Prop. preced.</HI> And this &s;hews us the nece&s;&s;ity of the following Con&s;e|quence; That</P>
<Q><HI>The &s;ixth Head was at an end when the City of</HI> Rome <HI>owned another</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> &s;etled <HI>Authority in the room of that Imperial Government, which had continued from the time of the Vi&s;ion.</HI></Q>
<P N="1">1. For every Head of a Bea&s;t is at an <HI>end,</HI> when another dif|fering form of &s;etled Government is owned for Supream by the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> by <HI>Corol</HI> 1. <HI>praeced.&mdash;</HI>And therefore mu&s;t the &s;ixth Head end with the end of that form of Imperial Govern|ment, which had continued from the time of the Vi&s;ion. For the &s;ixth Head is that form of Imperial Government, by <HI>Pro|po&s;ition</HI> 19.</P>
<P N="2">2. Again, The &s;ixth Head, and the Reign of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> are by the Angel declared to be the &s;ame <HI>Roman</HI> Rule that was in being at the time of the Vi&s;ion; For of both it is &s;aid, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 9, 10. 18.</NOTE> that they were then in Rule, and joined with the &s;even Hills in their Reign. And that Head was the <HI>Imperial</HI> Government at that time, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 19.</P>
<P>Wherefore, whenever that <HI>Imperial</HI> Power &s;hould be &s;o cut off from the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> that another &s;etled Form of Government &s;hould be owned in the &s;tead of it by the Authority of that City, who would not a&s;&s;ure him&s;elf, That the Imperial Rule, which
<PB N="152" REF="109"> had continued the Head of that City from the time of the Vi|&s;ion, and which was &s;aid by the Angel to be the &s;ame Ruling Power with which the City of <HI>Rome</HI> is de&s;cribed at that &s;ame time, mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily have then been at an <HI>end?</HI> It may therefore a&s;&s;uredly be concluded, that that &s;ixth Head was at an end, at the time that another <HI>different</HI> Form of Government was owned in the &s;tead of it at <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>This la&s;t Conclu&s;ion does invite ones curio&s;ity to enquire from the <HI>Roman</HI> Hi&s;tory, whether the Imperial Government were ever changed, or interrupted by any other <HI>&s;etled</HI> Form of Govern|ment &s;ince the time of the Prophecy. For &s;ince the next Form of Government to the Imperial, or &s;ixth King, is &s;aid &s;hould continue <HI>but a &s;hort &s;pace;</HI> and that then &s;hould ari&s;e that King, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 10, 11.</NOTE> or Government, called the Bea&s;t, which is the end of all our &s;earch, one may ea&s;ily &s;ee, that the di&s;covery of a Change in the Imperial Government will determine the time of the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, which is the next Form of <HI>Roman</HI> Government but one to the Imperial, that was in Rule at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>And the following Account have we from the <HI>Roman</HI> Hi&s;tory of all the con&s;iderable Changes of the Form of the Chief Go|vernment from the time of the <HI>Revelations.</HI></P>
<PB N="153" REF="109">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="154" REF="110">
<PB N="155" REF="110">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>An Account of the &s;everal changes of the form of the Government of</HI> Rome, <HI>from the time of the Vi&s;ion. The two Emperours were joynt-partners in the Govern|ment of the whole Empire, like the two Con&s;uls. The</HI> 22<HI>d Propo&s;ition, the &s;ixth Head was</HI> at late&s;t <HI>at an end upon the Fall of the We&s;tern Empire in</HI> Augu&s;tu|lus. <HI>The Barbarous Kings of</HI> Italy, <HI>The Ab&s;olute Ma&s;ters of</HI> Rome. <HI>Objections An&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Imperial Power continued the &s;ame from the time of the mention of it in this Prophecy under the name of <HI>the King,</HI> that was then in Rule, till about the year 160 after Chri&s;t, When <HI>Marcus Aurelius</HI> made <HI>Aelius Verus</HI> a &s;harer with him in the Imperial Power under the name of <HI>Augu&s;tus,</HI> whereas there had never been before &s;een two Emperors with the names of <HI>Augu&s;tus</HI> at the &s;ame time. And this was taken notice of for &s;o new a face of the Government, that &s;ome dated their <HI>Fa&s;ti</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Spartian <HI>in Ve|ro.</HI> Eutrop. 8.</NOTE> <HI>Con&s;ulares</HI> from thence, as a new Epocha <HI>of time.</HI></P>
<P>This way of taking others into the Society of the Empire with them, was followed by other Emperors afterwards; as <HI>Severus</HI> with his Son <HI>Caracalla; Caracalla</HI> and his Brother <HI>Geta,</HI> the <HI>Gordiani:</HI> And in their time was there another Government &s;et up, at <HI>Rome</HI> it &s;elf, called, the <HI>Twenty Men,</HI> who were cho|&s;en by the Senate to Admini&s;ter the Affairs of the whole Com|monwealth; and Amba&s;&s;adors were &s;ent to all the Provinces of the Empire to contain them under the obedience of the Senate. But this continued but a &s;hort time, and gave way to the exal|tation of <HI>Balbinus</HI> and <HI>Papienus</HI> to the Imperial dignity, by the choice of tho&s;e Twenty Men them&s;elves; and with the Inter|ruption of &s;ome &s;ingle Emperors after them, The &s;ame Social Form of Empire returned again in <HI>Valerian,</HI> with his Son <HI>Gallien.</HI> And there were afterwards &s;ometimes three, and &s;ometimes four <HI>Augu&s;tus</HI>'s together; which &s;eems to be much like the change of a <HI>Dictator</HI> into <HI>two Con&s;uls:</HI> And the <HI>Dictators</HI> and
<PB N="156" REF="111"> <HI>Con&s;uls</HI> are accounted two of the five Heads, or forms of Go|vernment, which were &s;aid to be pa&s;t at the time of the Vi|&s;ion.</P>
<P>Another change was there in the Imperial Government, When the Emperors became <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> and when the Laws of the Empire were made to conform to the Chri&s;tian Religion. This &s;eems to &s;ome to be a change of the Government much more remarkable than any Political change, and to de&s;erve to be one of the two forms of Government that we are in que&s;t of; And be&s;ides, it &s;eems to be plainly de&s;cribed in the 12th Chap. of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> as a very con&s;iderable change of the Government of the Empire under the &s;how of the Fall of the Dragon, upon which the Bea&s;t a&s;cends into the Throne pre&s;ent|ly after in the 13th Chapter.</P>
<P>The change of Religion again by <HI>Julian</HI> the Apo&s;tate, does thereupon &s;eem to put in for a title to another form; And th&ocirc; the time of his Reign was very &s;hort, yet it was as long as that of the <HI>Decemvirs,</HI> who are determined by mo&s;t of the approved Interpreters, to be one of the Five Heads that were pa&s;t at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, That his Reign was ju&s;t almo&s;t the very &s;ame length of time, that the Bea&s;t is &s;aid to Reign, That is, <HI>Three years and an half.</HI></P>
<P>The divi&s;ion of the Empire into the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> and <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> &s;eats, e&s;pecially when it came to be <HI>&s;etled</HI> by <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> &s;eems to have a very fair claim to the title of a new Head, or Change of the Imperial Government; And like to the &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of the Con&s;uls to the Kingly Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> which are made two of the five forms of <HI>Roman</HI> Government, that were pa&s;t at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>If it be &s;aid that the&s;e Emperors were rather two Heads, than <HI>one,</HI> like the repre&s;entation of <HI>two</HI> of the four Kingdoms in the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy, by two di&s;tinct Horns &s;ucceeding to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 8.</NOTE> the fir&s;t; It may be an&s;wered, That according to the account of all Hi&s;torians, Th&ocirc; they &s;eemed to have a divided Empire, yet they acted in almo&s;t all the publick affairs, as but <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">BEllarmin <HI>de Tran&s;lat. Imperii Occident. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 4.<HI>&mdash;Erat tamen, &amp;c.</HI> But &s;o common to them both was the whole Admini&s;tration of the Empire (that is, <HI>to both the We&s;tern and Ea&s;tern Emperour)</HI> that the Laws were made for the whole Empire, by the Authority, and in the name of <HI>both the Emperours.</HI> And if <HI>one</HI> of them died without Children, the Government of the whole Empire fell to the <HI>other.</HI></NOTE> <HI>One</HI> Go|vernment of the <HI>whole</HI> Empire; They had both their Authority confirmed at <HI>Rome,</HI> they owned the &s;ame Laws, and joyned together in the making of them; The Laws bear the names of both the Emperors; And no Laws could be made but by the
<PB N="157" REF="111"> con&s;ent of both the Princes: And if either of them died with|out Children, the other &s;ucceeded him in that part of the Em|pire.</P>
<P>The &s;upream Authority of <HI>Rome</HI> was divided betwixt them; part of the <HI>Roman</HI> Senate did always &s;it at <HI>Con&s;tantinople;</HI> one of the Con&s;uls did ordinarily belong to that City. There was in|deed a promi&s;cuous u&s;e of this right of chu&s;ing the Con&s;uls be|twixt the Two Imperial Seats, as <HI>Onuphrius Panurinus</HI> does &s;how, Lib. <HI>Fa&s;tor,</HI> pag. 290. <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> both the Con&s;uls were made at <HI>Rome, &s;ometimes</HI> both at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> &s;ometimes none at all; <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> one in the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> another in the <HI>We&s;t:</HI> So that as <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Panciroll. <HI>notit. Imp. Occident. p.</HI> 1.&mdash;But yet both the Princes (of <NOTE PLACE="marg">See <HI>Onuph. Panvi. Fa&s;tor.</HI> p. 61. and p. 290. where he gives a Chroni|cle of the <HI>Ea|&s;tern</HI> and <HI>We|&s;tern</HI> Con&s;uls.</NOTE> <HI>the Ea&s;t, and We&s;t)</HI> did always admini&s;ter the Affairs of the Empire by a <HI>joint con&s;ent;</HI> They made the Laws together, they governed the Army by con&s;ent, and cho&s;e the Con&s;uls, one of which re&s;ided at <HI>Rome,</HI> and the other at <HI>Con&s;tantinople;</HI> &s;o that they &s;eemed to be two halves of the Empire joined together.</NOTE> <HI>Pan|cirollus</HI> does very properly expre&s;s it, <HI>They &s;eemed to be Two half Empires joyned together.</HI></P>
<P>And accordingly in the <HI>Notitia Imperii,</HI> which was the Impe|rial &s;tandard of all the Dignities and Offices of the Empire both Civil and Military; and was in u&s;e <HI>in the time of this divi&s;ion of the Empire;</HI> The Military En&s;igns, and the Arms of the chief Dignities are there de&s;cribed, as repre&s;enting the perfect <HI>&V;nity</HI> of the <HI>Two</HI> Emperors in their de&s;ign of Governing the <HI>whole</HI> World. All the greater Civil-Magi&s;trates, as the <HI>Praefects,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Pancirol. <HI>Not it. Imp. Orient.</HI> pag. 40.</NOTE> <HI>Con&s;uls, Procon&s;uls, Vicarii,</HI> &amp;c. had always the Two Emperors Heads rai&s;ed upon gilded Pede&s;tals, and carried before them, as the En&s;igns of their Authority.</P>
<P><HI>Pancirollus</HI> admires That of the Correctors of <HI>Apulia,</HI> and <HI>Calabria,</HI> as the mo&s;t expre&s;&s;ive of the intent of all the re&s;t. <HI>Notit. dignitat. Occident.</HI> p. 87. And that of the Pre&s;ident of <HI>Dalmatia</HI> was much the &s;ame, <HI>pag.</HI> 91. <HI>ibid.</HI> It was <HI>Two Princes</HI> upon the top of a gilded Pillar, with their backs to one another; but &s;o clo&s;e joyned together, that they ended in one <HI>common</HI> Body. And of all the publick En&s;igns of Authority, he &s;ays, <HI>pag.</HI> 46. <HI>Notit. Orient.</HI> That the <HI>Heads, or Faces of the Princes, was the chiefe&s;t.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. The Military Dignities had the &s;ame Figure of the Princes Heads conjoyned, Engraven on a Gilded Plate on the back-&s;ide of a Book. And <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Panciroll. <HI>Notit. Imp. Orient. p.</HI> 56. <HI>de M. militum prae&s;entali.&mdash;</HI>The Badges of the Authority of this Dignity was, a Book upon a Che&s;t, covered with white Tapi&s;try&mdash;In the middle of it is a golden Plate, with the <HI>two gilt Faces of the Princes</HI> engraven in it.</NOTE> every Legion had the &s;ame drawn toge|ther with the Eagle in their Banners, be&s;ides the di&s;tingui&s;hing Figure of the Legion. The di&s;tingui&s;hing En&s;igns <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P>Panciroll. <HI>notit. Imper. Orient, p.</HI> 59. <HI>de Legionibus&mdash;</HI>Every Legion con&s;i&s;ted of ten Companies, the fir&s;t of which was called <HI>Milliaria&mdash;</HI>This had the charge of the Eagle (which was the chief En&s;ign in the Army) and the <HI>Faces of the two Princes.</HI> And pag. 46. Every Legion had the <HI>Princes Heads,</HI> with the Eagle, and they adored them upon the top of the Colours,&mdash;The fir&s;t Company pay their veneration to the Images of the Empe|rours; that is, to a Divine Repre&s;entation of Authority, and pre&s;ent at hand.</P>
<P>And <HI>Vegetius de re Militari&mdash;</HI>In the &s;econd Rank, after the Eagle, and the Images, &s;tands the 6th Troop<HI>&mdash;And adds&mdash;</HI>The <HI>Imaginiferi</HI> are tho&s;e that carry the Emperours Images.</P>
<P>Panciroll. <HI>Notit. Imper. Orient. &agrave; cap.</HI> 50. <HI>u&s;que ad cap.</HI> 60.</P>
<P><HI>Idem Notit. Imper. Occident. &agrave; cap.</HI> 20. <HI>ad cap.</HI> 28.</P>
<P>Panciroll. <HI>Notit. Imper. Oriental. cap.</HI> 39. <HI>pag.</HI> 70. <HI>Defen&s;ores.</HI> The Old Coin, that has two Serpents joined by the Tails, is a Type of the one common Power of the two Con&s;uls in both their Authorities.</P>
<P>The In&s;cription is <GAP DESC="foreign">. The twofold Rule of the two Con&s;uls.</P>
<P><HI>Prattica dalle Medaglie di</HI> Carlo Patino, <HI>pag.</HI> 150. The <HI>Romans</HI> u&s;ed to comprehend their Hi&s;tory in two or three words; as may be &s;een in the&s;e following Examples of Medals, <HI>Amor mutuus</HI> Augu&s;torum, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and <HI>p.</HI> 161. <HI>among the Abbreviations of the In&s;criptions of Medals, this is one,</HI> Augg. <HI>which is interpreted to be,</HI> Augu&s;ti duo.</P></NOTE>of every particular Legion had al&s;o generally the &s;ame &s;ignification; and that was &s;hown mo&s;t commonly by <HI>two circles</HI> of different co|lours <NOTE PLACE="marg">Pancirol. <HI>Notit. dignitat.</HI> l. 1. 252. c. 2. p. 35.</NOTE> <HI>Rounding a Ball,</HI> which <HI>Augu&s;tus</HI> fir&s;t ordered to &s;ignify the
<PB N="158" REF="112"> Rule of the World by the <HI>Romans; &s;ometimes</HI> by Two half Cir|cles conjoyned, and yet di&s;tingui&s;hed; <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> by a Circle or Ball, girt about with two different wreaths; <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> by two half Snakes ri&s;ing from a Ba&s;is, and meeting with their Heads in a Circle; <HI>Or</HI> by two half Hor&s;es, or Hawks, or Horns en|clo&s;ing a Ball, or &s;ome round figure; <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> by Half-moons, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And the <HI>Sagittarii</HI> had this plainly expre&s;&s;ed in theirs by a Cirlce about a Globe, and Two Eagles on each &s;ide of it, and the <HI>Two Emperors</HI> above it. The <HI>Mattiaci</HI> al&s;o by a White Globe encircled with two Rounds, Red and White, and above it the <HI>Faces of the Two Emperors:</HI> And much the &s;ame have the <HI>Tertia Diocle&s;iana Thebaeorum. Others</HI> that are more uncertain I will not mention. And the&s;e &s;eemed all to be done in imitation of the impre&s;s of the <HI>old Coynes,</HI> made to &s;ignify the Two Con|&s;uls Governing the one <HI>Roman</HI> State, which was repre&s;ented by <HI>Two Serpents joyn'd by their Tails,</HI> with this In&s;cription, <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Baronius, <HI>Anno</HI> 472. <HI>Odoacer</HI> made a Law, which he proclaimed by his <HI>Praefect Ba&s;ilius,</HI> in a full A&s;&s;embly of the Bi&s;hops in the <HI>Vatican,</HI> That <HI>after the decea&s;e of</HI> Simplicius <HI>(then Bi&s;hop of</HI> Rome) <HI>to avoid all di&s;turbance in the City, and prejudice to the Church, none &s;hould be cho&s;en without his knowledg.</HI> See al&s;o <HI>Petavius,</HI> Rationar. Temp. part. 1. lib. 7. cap. 3.</NOTE> <HI>The dou|bled &s;trength of the Two Con&s;uls.</HI> The Coyns al&s;o of the Empire, in the time of this divi&s;ion, had both the Emperors Heads, with this In&s;cription, <HI>The mutual love of the two Augu&s;ti.</HI></P>
<P>And whatever was there more like to the Con&s;uls of <HI>Rome,</HI> which are &s;aid to be one of the five Heads, that were pa&s;t at the date of the Prophecy, than the&s;e two Emperors?</P>
<P>After this came the We&s;tern Empire to be cut off by the Bar|barous Nations. <HI>Odoacer,</HI> who cut off the la&s;t Emperor <HI>Augu|&s;tulus,</HI> Reigned with his <HI>Heruli</HI> Sixteen years in his &s;tead; and how much he de&s;erved to be accounted a <HI>new</HI> Head of <HI>Rome,</HI> may appear by the power he had there to have a Law made, <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">Petavius, <HI>Rationar. Temp. l.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 3.&mdash;To prevent which (that is, the Commotions in the City about the Election of <HI>Laurentius,</HI> and <HI>Symma|chus,</HI> upon the death of Pope <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius)</HI> the whole Controver&s;y was re|mitted to the determination of King <HI>Theodoric,</HI> according to the Law made in that Ca&s;e by <HI>Odoacer.</HI> And he pronounced <HI>Symmachus</HI> Pope. And ma|ny Synods were about that Affair in the year 501, and &s;ome years after.</NOTE> <HI>That no Election of the Bi&s;hop of</HI> Rome <HI>&s;hould be valid, except it were confirmed by the King.</HI> And al&s;o, That in a <HI>Controver&s;ial Choice, The King &s;hould determine which of the Elected &s;hould &s;tand.</HI> This Law continued al&s;o under <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Hieron. Ruben&s;. Hi&s;tor. Raven. p.</HI> 131, 132. The year after was there another Council called by <HI>the Command of King</HI> Theodorick, from <HI>Ravenna.&mdash;</HI>The <HI>French</HI> Bi&s;hops mention their being called to <HI>Rome by his Command.</HI> And <HI>Pope Symmachus</HI> gives the King thanks, that <HI>he called the Council</HI> to meet at <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P><HI>See Tom.</HI> 2. <HI>Concil. de Synodis</HI> Romae <HI>&s;ub</HI> Symmacho.<HI>&mdash;Theodoric</HI> does there &s;hew the Letters of <HI>Symmachus</HI> him&s;elf to <HI>reque&s;t him to call</HI> the Fourth Synod.</P></NOTE> <HI>Theodorick,</HI> who &s;ucceeded <HI>Odoacer,</HI> together with his <HI>Goths;</HI> and <HI>Theodorick</HI> was in the ex|erci&s;e of it till the year 502. <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Pompon. Laetus</HI> of <HI>Odoacer.&mdash;</HI>The <HI>Romans</HI> at his fir&s;t entrance into the City, &s;alute him King of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Italy,</HI> and lead him to the <HI>Capitol</HI> with all the highe&s;t Honours. <HI>To the &s;ame purpo&s;e</HI> Blondus. <HI>Decad. l.</HI> 3. <HI>pag.</HI> 31.</P>
<P><HI>In decretal. di&s;tinct.</HI> 69. <HI>Odoacer</HI> is called by Pope <HI>Symmachus,</HI> the <HI>Mo&s;t Excellent King</HI> of the <HI>Romans.</HI></P></NOTE> And by his Authority were there frequent Synods of the Orthodox called at <HI>Rome,</HI> till &s;ome years after the year 501, th&ocirc; he him&s;elf was an <HI>Arrian;</HI> which &s;hows how ab&s;olute he was among&s;t them. And of the <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>De Tran&s;lat.</HI> Romani <HI>Imper. in</HI> Germanos. Tit. <HI>Qu&acirc; ratione facta e&s;t Imperii tran&s;latio&mdash;</HI>The <HI>Roman</HI> Power was transferred upon <HI>Odoacer</HI> fir&s;t by the Army, or by the &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Legions to him. 2. By the Nobility, and Senate of <HI>Rome.</HI> 3. By the Right of Conque&s;t. 4. By the Renunciation of <HI>Augu&s;tulus.</HI> 5. By the Con&s;ent of all <HI>Rome,</HI> and <HI>Italy,</HI> declared in the Capitol, as they u&s;ed to acknowledg their Lawful Em|perours.</P>
<P>Blondus, <HI>Decad. l.</HI> 3. <HI>p.</HI> 37. <HI>He there &s;hews&mdash;</HI>How <HI>Theodoric</HI> was re|ceived at <HI>Rome</HI> by the agreeing Con&s;ent, and Applau&s;es, and Acclamations of the <HI>Pope,</HI> the <HI>Senate,</HI> and <HI>People of</HI> Rome; And that he left <HI>Rome</HI> to its own Government by the <HI>Senate;</HI> but yet &s;o as that his <HI>Praefect</HI> did pre&s;ide over them.</P>
<P>Bellarm. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>de Tran&s;lat. Imper.</HI> Rom. <HI>in</HI> Germanos, <HI>cap</HI> 9. &s;ays, that <HI>Theodoric</HI> enjoyed the Empire of all <HI>Italy.</HI></P>
<P>The &s;tyle of <HI>Theodoric</HI>'s Letters-Pattents repre&s;ent him every-where as the Ab&s;olute Sovereign of the <HI>Romans,</HI> as much as ever the Emperours had been before him. In his Letter to the Senate of <HI>Rome,</HI> upon his Coronation Oath, <HI>Lib</HI> 10. <HI>Variar. Ca&s;&s;iodori&mdash;Our Goodne&s;s mu&s;t be a very command|ing thing, when we are overcome by our own Will, who are not bound to an&s;wer to any one el&s;e&mdash;becau&s;e we owe th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;e things to God only, and not to Man; Epi&s;tola</HI> 17. So al&s;o in the next Letter to the People of <HI>Rome&mdash;</HI>con&s;ider, How much kindne&s;s is intended you, when he &s;wears to you, <HI>who cannot be compelled.</HI> And &s;peaking of the Office of <HI>Praefect</HI> of the City of <HI>Rome, Epi&s;t.</HI> 4. <HI>lib.</HI> 6. &s;ays of him&s;elf in compari&s;on with tho&s;e <HI>Praefects&mdash;H&acirc;c &s;old ratione, &amp;c.</HI> In this <HI>only</HI> are we different from them, <HI>that we cannot be &s;ubject</HI> to any one el&s;e, who have <HI>none to judge us,</HI> or, to <HI>call us to account.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Sigonias</HI> &s;ays of him, <HI>lib.</HI> 16. <HI>de Occident. Imper.</HI> That <HI>Theodoric</HI> &s;et up a Kingdom in the <HI>We&s;t, every way mo&s;t like the old Empire</HI> there.</P></NOTE> &s;plendid receptions of both <HI>Odoacer,</HI> and <HI>Theodorick,</HI> at <HI>Rome,</HI> by the <HI>Pope,</HI> the <HI>Senate,</HI> and the <HI>People of</HI> Rome, and of the applau&s;es and &s;ubmi&s;&s;ions that were &s;hown them in acknow|ledgment of their Sovereignty, There are &s;ufficiene Te&s;timonies
<PB N="159" REF="112"> from the be&s;t approved Hi&s;torians of tho&s;e times; And the time of the Reign of the&s;e Barbarous Kings over <HI>Rome,</HI> was near 70 years.</P>
<P>The <HI>Lieutenants</HI> of <HI>Ju&s;tinian, Belli&s;arius,</HI> and <HI>Nur&s;es,</HI> &s;ubdued tho&s;e Kings of <HI>Italy;</HI> And thereby <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> who was but the Emperour of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> and which had been divided from the Authority of <HI>Rome</HI> for &s;o many years, comes to be re&s;tored to the Royal Seat of the Empire at <HI>Rome,</HI> which was <HI>another</HI> Change of the chief Government of that place: And thus it continued under the Command of the <HI>Exarchs</HI> of the <HI>Greek</HI> Emperors for near Two hundred years.</P>
<P>The <HI>Lombards,</HI> and the <HI>Franks,</HI> and the <HI>Pope</HI> together, &s;eem to make another Change of the Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> by the ruine of the <HI>Greek</HI> Emperors intere&s;ts in <HI>Italy;</HI> But th&ocirc; the <HI>Lombards</HI> &s;eemed to be the next Ma&s;ters of that Juri&s;diction, yet they never could &s;ucceed in their attempts to make them|&s;elves Ma&s;ters of <HI>Rome:</HI> For they were checked in it, by the Power of the <HI>Franks,</HI> under <HI>Pepin</HI> and <HI>Charlemain.</HI></P>
<P>But then upon a Confederacy betwixt the Pope and tho&s;e Kings of the <HI>Franks, Rome</HI> was left wholly free to it &s;elf, and <HI>Charlemaine</HI> was made Emperor of the <HI>Romans;</HI> and from him the Title continued to this day in the <HI>French</HI> and <HI>German</HI> Line, with &s;ome &s;mall intervals of vacancies.</P>
<P>Who would make any que&s;tion, whether here be not variety of Changes enough to make one conclude, That the Imperial Government, which was the Ruling Head in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time; mu&s;t have been long &s;ince at <HI>an end?</HI></P>
<P>One would indeed be more apt to judge from hence, That there hath been not <HI>only</HI> a Change of the <HI>Sixth</HI> Head &s;ince that time; but al&s;o four or five Heads be&s;ides in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to one another. But &s;ince we are already a&s;&s;ured, That the next Change but one to the Imperial Sixth Head, was to be the Bea&s;t, <HI>(Prop.</HI> 20.) And that the Bea&s;t was to continue from his fir&s;t ri&s;e under that Head, to the la&s;t coming of Chri&s;t in Glo|ry, (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 6. and <HI>Corol.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 12.) It is manife&s;t, that there can be but Two of the&s;e &s;everal Changes of Government, that can be Heads of the Bea&s;t; the latter of which mu&s;t con|tinue to the &s;econd coming of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>Wherefore to be able to know from the account of the&s;e Changes of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government, whether we are now in
<PB N="160" REF="113"> the times of the Bea&s;t, which is our chief concern; It is now to be enquired, Whether it can be a&s;&s;ured from thence, that the <HI>Sixth</HI> Imperial Head has been at <HI>an end,</HI> &s;ince the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>Now leaving all the re&s;t of the Changes to the particular de|fenders of them, one may upon mo&s;t undoubted grounds for it re&s;olve him&s;elf, That</P>
<Q><HI>At the ruine of the We&s;tern Empire by</HI> Odoacer, <HI>and the</HI> Go|thi&s;h <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 22.</NOTE> <HI>Kings of</HI> Italy, <HI>The Sixth Head was</HI> at late&s;t <HI>at an End.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Sixth Head was to be at an end, when another <HI>&s;et|led</HI> Government &s;hould be owned at <HI>Rome</HI> in&s;tead of the Impe|rial Government (by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 22.)&punc;</P>
<P>And at the ruine of the We&s;tern Empire by tho&s;e Kings, their Authority was <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Ca&s;&s;iodor. <HI>Variar. Lib.</HI> 5. <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 3. <HI>de Praefectur&acirc; Praetorian&acirc;.&mdash;</HI>No Dignity is equal in power to it.&mdash;And although other Dignities have their &s;et bounds, yet under that juri&s;diction does almo&s;t every thing come that is done in our whole Empire.<HI>&mdash;And in the Comment there by</HI> Bro&s;&s;ius.<HI>&mdash;Ammianus Marcellimus,</HI> lib. 21. affirms, That the <HI>Praefectura Praetoriana</HI> is much above all other Dignities, as <HI>Valentinian, Valens,</HI> and <HI>Gratian,</HI> have decreed, <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>c. de Officio Vicarii.</HI> And that with good rea&s;on; For the <HI>Praetorian Praefecture</HI> was a kind <HI>of Sovereignty of Command,</HI> but without the Purple; and that was the di&s;tinction betwixt the Sovereign, and the <HI>Praefectus Praetorio,</HI> that he had not the &s;acred Purple, nor the Imperial Badge of Authority.</NOTE> owned for &s;upream at <HI>Rome;</HI> as has been already made appear, from the publick reception of tho&s;e Conquerors at <HI>Rome,</HI> by the whole Authority of that City, the <HI>Pope,</HI> the <HI>Senate,</HI> and <HI>People of Rome,</HI> and their acclamations to them under the name of the King of <HI>Rome:</HI> And what other Authority does <HI>Bellarmin</HI> him&s;elf make nece&s;&s;ary for &s;uch an end, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Bellarm. <HI>de Tran&s;lat. Imp. Occid.</HI></NOTE> but that of the <HI>Pope?</HI></P>
<P>And the Exerci&s;e of this Power is manife&s;t from the whole Book of <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus Variarum,</HI> who was the Chancellor and chief Mini&s;ter of State to <HI>two</HI> or <HI>three</HI> of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings; For that <HI>whole</HI> Book is nothing but the &s;everal forms of the <HI>Letters Patents,</HI> as one may &s;ay, of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings for all the great Offices of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government, &s;uch as tho&s;e of <HI>Con&s;ul, Praefectus Praetorio,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Prefect of the City,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>And the Office of the <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> l. 1. Epi&s;t. 4. l. 11. Ep. 1. 8, 10. l. 12. Ep. 3. 56.</NOTE> <HI>Praefectus praetorio</HI> was immediately depending upon the &s;upream Imperial Power, and Command|ing all under him with an <HI>Imperial</HI> Authority.</P>
<P>But the mo&s;t a&s;&s;ured evidence of it is the Commands that we find from the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings to the Senate, by the &s;ame name <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Cu&s;pinian in Sextum Rufum, p.</HI> 8. <HI>De Imperatoribus.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Appian</HI> writes in the Proem of his Hi&s;tory, That <HI>Emperor</HI> was the name of the Generals of Armies of old; From whence he that Governed the Com|monwealth at his own plea&s;ure like a <HI>King,</HI> was called an <HI>Emperor.</HI> And they took that name upon them, becau&s;e the name of <HI>Emperor</HI> was more acceptable at <HI>Rome,</HI> than any other Title, which had a &s;how of Ab&s;olute Government.&mdash;And <HI>Julius Cae&s;ar,</HI> as <HI>Dion</HI> &s;ays, did take the name of <HI>Em|peror</HI> upon him, as <HI>omnium Rerum Dominus,</HI> from whom the Emperors after him took the name.</P>
<P>Thus were the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings really <HI>Emperors</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> under the name of <HI>Kings;</HI> They had the &s;ame Power, and differed only in <HI>Name.</HI></P></NOTE> of <HI>Rerum Dominus,</HI> <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor Variar.</HI> Lib. 1. Epi&s;t. 29, 31, 32, 33, 44. Lib. 4. Ep. 45, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></NOTE> that the Emperors had in <HI>di&s;tinction</HI> from all <HI>other</HI> Sovereigns, and in &s;uch terms as the&s;e, <HI>By the&s;e</HI> <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> Lib. 8. Ep. 2, 3, 4. Lib. 10. Ep. 18. Lib. 11. Ep. 1. pag. 658.</P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor.</HI> Lib. 8. Epi&s;t. 24. <HI>Clero Eccle&s;iae Romanae Athalaricus Rex.</HI> We decree by our Authority at this pre&s;ent, That if any one has an Action again&s;t any belonging to the <HI>Roman</HI> Clergy, That he Cite him to the <HI>Court of the Mo&s;t Ble&s;&s;ed Pope.&mdash;</HI>And if the Plaintiff has not right done him there, then he may go to the <HI>Secular Courts.</HI></P></NOTE> <HI>pre&s;ents we do ordain, By our Proclamation we do enjoyn,</HI> And <HI>know ye&mdash;le&s;t any one incur the &s;everity of our di&s;plea&s;ure. Give ye your Suffrages according to our Command;</HI> And <HI>know ye that we have</HI>
<PB N="161" REF="113"> <HI>given our &s;pecial Order:</HI> But E&s;pecially, ^n when we &s;ee them minding the Senate and People of <HI>Rome,</HI> that <HI>not only</HI> by the <HI>general con&s;ent of all</HI> Goths <HI>and</HI> Romans, THEY were cho&s;en their Kings and Governors, but that al&s;o they had taken an <HI>Oath of Allegiance</HI> to them; And if there &s;hould be any &s;cruple of a Superiour Authority in the <HI>Pope</HI> at that time, We find an <HI>Ordinance</HI> of the Kings, That ^o <HI>Clergy-men &s;hould indeed go fir&s;t to the Bi&s;hops-Court; But if they apprehended them&s;elves not righted there, they &s;hould from thence appeal to the Civil Courts of Judicature,</HI> which &s;hows which of the Courts was then accounted the Su|periour Juri&s;diction, even among&s;t the Clergy them&s;elves; And this will not be much wondred at, as any &s;trange thing, when it appeaas, That tho&s;e Kings made Edicts to Regulate the Or|dinations <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> Lib 8. Epi&s;t. 15. King <HI>Athalaricus</HI> to the Senate of <HI>Rome</HI> concerning their Agreement in the choice of that Pope, which his Father had named to them after the Impri&s;onment of Pope <HI>John</HI> by him, He calls it, their <HI>Obeying his Command in it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Idem,</HI> Lib. 9. Epi&s;t. 15. To Pope <HI>John.</HI></P></NOTE> of the Popes them&s;elves, and directed them to the Popes in &s;uch terms as the&s;e to publi&s;h, <Q>May your Holine&s;s know that we have at pre&s;ent decreed,&mdash;which we will have to extend to all Patriarchs and Metropolitans</Q>&mdash;And in the &s;ub&s;tance of the Edict; <Q>We allow no voice to any Clergy|man, that &s;hall be found to have been bribed for it. And then commands that a former decree of the Senate about it,</Q> be ob&s;erved&mdash;And with the de&s;ire of the Bi&s;hops Prayers, bids him take care to ob&s;erve his Edicts; and commands him to <HI>intimate this to the Senate and People, by the Praefect of the City,</HI> and to make it known him&s;elf to all the Bi&s;hops under him; And to <HI>intimate</HI> a thing, was the Law-term, to &s;ignify the making a publick Act of it. <HI>Panciroll. notit. Imp. Orient.</HI> p. 33.</P>
<P><NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothecarius</HI> records this of Pope <HI>John</HI> the fir&s;t, in the time of <HI>Theordoric;</HI> and of Pope <HI>Agapetus</HI> in the time of <HI>Theodahat.</HI></NOTE> It was al&s;o an ordinary thing, for the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings to &s;end the Popes in Amba&s;&s;y to the <HI>Greek Emperors.</HI></P>
<P>If now it be replied, That the Imperial Government was &s;till in being in the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Emperor, becau&s;e he had a part of the Senate of <HI>Rome,</HI> and one of the Con&s;uls with him, which was the Supream Authority of that City:</P>
<P>The utmo&s;t that can be pretended from that, is, That that <HI>Greek</HI> Emperor had as much <HI>Roman</HI> Authority on his &s;ide <HI>after</HI> the fall of the We&s;tern Empire, as he had <HI>before</HI> it; but that be|ing <HI>only one</HI> &s;hare of the Authority of <HI>Rome,</HI> It is plain, That tho&s;e Kings, who had the <HI>real</HI> Sovereignty of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> mu&s;t <HI>at lea&s;t</HI> be the <HI>other</HI> part of the &s;upream Govern|ment of it; And of the two, they mu&s;t unque&s;tionably be the mo&s;t <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><HI>Bellarmin,</HI> in his 9th Chapter, <HI>De Tran&s;latione Imp. Rom.</HI> Lib. 1. does &s;how that <HI>Odoacer</HI> was King of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Italy, again&s;t the Emperors will,</HI> and &s;o had no dependance upon him; and that <HI>Theodoric</HI> after him was made King of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Italy,</HI> by the <HI>con&s;ent of Zeno,</HI> as <HI>one Emperor</HI> did u&s;ually create <HI>another;</HI> &s;o that the&s;e Kings mu&s;t unque&s;tionably be qualified to be the Sovereigns of <HI>Rome,</HI> both for their independance on any other, and their po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of it by the &s;ame way that the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors u&s;ed to have it.</NOTE> properly the Sovereign Authority of <HI>Rome,</HI>
<PB N="162" REF="114"> which is the qualification of an Head of the Bea&s;t <HI>(Prop</HI> 21.)</P>
<P>This made <HI>Theodorick</HI> deal &s;o har&s;hly with Pope <HI>John,</HI> for Crowning the Emperor <HI>Ju&s;tin Roman</HI> Emperor at <HI>Con&s;tantinople;</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Petav.</HI> l. 7. c. 3. Part 1.</NOTE> For that did &s;how that it was then generally thought, that the conferring that Honour by the chief Mini&s;ter of <HI>Rome,</HI> was the giving him a <HI>Title</HI> to the Command of the Authority of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>In &s;hort, one need but con&s;ider who was the Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire before the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, to deter|mine, whether that Head were changed or no by that fall. It is certain, that if it were but one of the Imperial Thrones that was then the Head of it, it mu&s;t be the We&s;tern who had the chief Imperial Seat in his power, and then the Kings that &s;uc|ceeded him, mu&s;t be a new Head; but if they were <HI>both toge|ther</HI> the <HI>Roman</HI> Head, as is mo&s;t likely, then at the fall of the We&s;tern Power, and the &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of a new Regal Government in the &s;tead of it; the whole Government of the State mu&s;t be acknowledged to have been changed, and a <HI>new</HI> Head &s;et up in the room of it.</P>
<P>Wherefore in&s;tead of the whole Imperial Government in the Ea&s;tern and We&s;tern parts of the Empire, by this new con|que&s;t of <HI>Rome,</HI> There is a Succe&s;&s;ion of <HI>Kingly</HI> Government in the We&s;tern part, to &s;hare with the <HI>Imperial</HI> in the Ea&s;t: And of the Two, the Authority of the <HI>Kings</HI> mu&s;t be acknowledged to be the <HI>mo&s;t con&s;iderable part</HI> of the Head of <HI>Rome.</HI> But that the Imperial Government of <HI>Rome</HI> was then changed into <HI>another</HI> Form than what appeared before that conque&s;t, is no ways to be que&s;tioned.</P>
<P>There mu&s;t therefore nece&s;&s;arily be thereupon the appearance of a <HI>New Head;</HI> But whether it were the mixed form of Im|perial and Kingly Government <HI>together,</HI> that made that Head, or the Kingly Government <HI>alone,</HI> need not yet be determined.</P>
<P>It cannot be here Objected, That the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings could not be any part of a <HI>Roman</HI> Head upon the account of their being quite another Nation di&s;tinct from the <HI>Romans,</HI> and therefore not po&s;&s;ible to be any part of the &s;ame Bea&s;t by which the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire is repre&s;ented; and that there was then no other Head of the <HI>Romans</HI> at their Conque&s;t, but the Imperial Head at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> which continued the &s;ame for all the time of the Reign of tho&s;e Barbarous Kings of <HI>Italy;</HI> and &s;o was never put an end to by them.</P>
<PB N="163" REF="114">
<P> For it is well known, That tho&s;e Barbarous Nations were taken into <NOTE N="s" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Grot.</HI> in cap. 17. <HI>Apoc.</HI> v. 12.&mdash;The <HI>Goths</HI> were the fir&s;t that were made the Confederates of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as <HI>Procopius</HI> &s;hows, <HI>Gothic.</HI> l. 4. And that before the time of <HI>Maximinus,</HI> as we learn out of <HI>Jornandes.</HI></P>
<P>To the &s;ame purpo&s;e <HI>Onuphrius Panuvinus,</HI> Lib. <HI>Fa&s;tor.</HI> pag. 307.&mdash;The <HI>Romans</HI> a little before (that is before the time of <HI>Augu&s;tulus)</HI> had taken the <HI>Scythians, Alans,</HI> and <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> people into Society with them&mdash;The Dig|nity of the <HI>Roman</HI> Princes was &s;o dimini&s;hed about that time, That they were even forced by the&s;e Strangers, <HI>again&s;t their will,</HI> under the decent Name of <HI>A&s;&s;ociates</HI> and <HI>Confederates,</HI> to let them &s;hare all the <HI>Italick</HI> parts of the Empire with them.</P>
<P><HI>Grot. de jure Belli &amp; pacis,</HI> Lib. 2. c. 9. Art. 11. By the Decree of <HI>An|toninus,</HI> All within the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire were made Citizens <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Petavius &s;hows out of Idatus,</HI> That in the year 38. The whole Nation of the <HI>Goths</HI> were taken into Society with the <HI>Romans,</HI> and had Lands a&s;&s;igned them. <HI>Petav. Rationar. Temp.</HI> Lib. 6. c. 8.</P></NOTE> <HI>the Society</HI> of the <HI>Romans,</HI> and had Kingdoms and Territories a&s;&s;igned them within the bounds of the Empire, long before this la&s;t Conque&s;t of <HI>Italy,</HI> at the &s;ubver&s;ion of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>By the Decree of <HI>Antoninus,</HI> all that were within the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire were made <HI>Citizens of Rome,</HI> as <HI>Grotius</HI> ob|&s;erves, <HI>c.</HI> 9. <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>de jure B. &amp; P.</HI> And all over <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus Variar.</HI> <NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg"><P>So <HI>al&s;o all over Ca&s;&s;iodorus</HI>'s <HI>Variar.</HI> The <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings &s;tile them&s;elves <HI>Ro|man</HI> Princes.</P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> Lib. 3. Ep. 16. 18. Lib. 11. Ep. 1, 2. pag. 658, 659, 669.</P></NOTE> the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings &s;tile them&s;elves <HI>Roman Princes,</HI> and their Kingdoms <HI>Roman</HI> Empires: And <HI>Theodoric,</HI> who was the fir&s;t of them, had this Commi&s;&s;ion from the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperor <HI>Zeno,</HI> and the Senate, as may be &s;een in pag. 284, 285.</P>
<P><HI>Jornandes</HI> affirms, that the alliance betwixt the <HI>Romans</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Petavius</HI> in <HI>Theodor.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Goths</HI> began in the time of <HI>Maximinus;</HI> but it is certain, that in the time of <HI>Theodo&s;ius</HI> there was a very formal agreement be|twixt them; The whole Nation of the <HI>Goths</HI> delivered them|&s;elves up into the hands of the <HI>Romans,</HI> and they had Lands of the Empire a&s;&s;igned them for their habitation, and &s;o were Members of the <HI>Roman</HI> State. And &s;uch real Members were they of it in the time of <HI>Theodorick,</HI> that he was <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Jornandes de Reb. Geticis,</HI> Sect. 86. <HI>Zeno</HI> Adopts <HI>Theodorit</HI> for his Son&mdash;And he was made one of the <HI>Yearly Con&s;uls,</HI> which is the highe&s;t Office, and the greate&s;t Honour in the World.</P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodori Chronicon.</HI> p. <HI>ult.</HI> D. N. <HI>Eutharicus Cillica &amp; Ju&s;tinus Aug. Cae&s;.</HI></P></NOTE> made <HI>Con&s;ul</HI> of the Empire by <HI>Zeno;</HI> and <HI>Eutharicus</HI> his Son in Law after him.</P>
<P>But that which gives the be&s;t &s;atisfaction in this ca&s;e, is, that the <HI>Goths</HI> of <HI>Italy</HI> mu&s;t be either an <HI>Head,</HI> or an <HI>Horn</HI> of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Bea&s;t, according to the interpretation of all Prote&s;tants, who make the Ten Horns to be the divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire among&s;t the Barbarous Nations; and then &s;ince the King|dom of the <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy</HI> had the City of <HI>Rome</HI> for its &s;hare, it was much better qualified to be an <HI>Head,</HI> than an <HI>Horn</HI> (by <HI>Pro|po&s;.</HI> 21.)</P>
<P>The continuance of the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> Government at <HI>Con|&s;tantinople</HI> could not hinder the change of that Head, when there was a new face of Government at <HI>Rome:</HI> For be&s;ides that it has been demon&s;trated, that the e&s;&s;ential Character of an Head of the Bea&s;t, is the Government owned at <HI>Rome</HI> (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 21.) It appears al&s;o by almo&s;t all the known examples be&s;ides, of the changes of Government in a Monarchy, either in <HI>Daniel</HI> or the <HI>Revelations;</HI> That the continuance of the <HI>former</HI> Government, together with a <HI>new</HI> face of the Soveraign Power, is made to be a <HI>New Succe&s;&s;ion</HI> of the Sovereign Power of that Nation: The
<PB N="164" REF="115"> mo&s;t plain in&s;tance of it is in the Figure of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monar|chy in the 8th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> where after the end of the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> form of Government under the fir&s;t King, there &s;ucceeds a <HI>fourfold</HI> Kingdom, notwith&s;tanding that the <HI>Macedonian</HI> Sove|reignty, which was the fir&s;t King continued &s;till in being; for it was one of tho&s;e <HI>four</HI> Kingdoms. So al&s;o in the figure of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Monarchy ju&s;t before it, the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive changes of the So|vereignty are repre&s;ented by the Two Horns coming after one another, th&ocirc; the fir&s;t of them, That is, The King of <HI>Media</HI> was &s;till in being when the latter was in Rule, becau&s;e the King of <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> was al&s;o King of <HI>Media,</HI> and his Realm at that time called the Kingdom of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians.</HI> This al&s;o is confirmed from the Succe&s;&s;ion of this very &s;ame Imperial Head, which was a new head, notwith&s;tanding that the <NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Onuphr. Panuvinus,</HI> lib. <HI>Fa&s;tor.</HI> p. 61.&mdash;But the Con&s;ulary Dignity continued at <HI>Rome</HI> to the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Joh. Fer&s;ius Sile&s;ius protonotarius de p. Praet.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ju&s;tinian. Novell.</HI> 105. calls the Con&s;ul&s;hip, a Dignity that <HI>goes alway with the Imperial Power;</HI> &s;o that the Con&s;ulary Power &s;eems to be &s;o inter|woven with the Sovereignty, that it follows it of <HI>its own accord,</HI> and is ta|citly included in it, as &s;oon as the Scepter of the Empire is taken.</P>
<P>L. 6. <HI>Cod. Theodo&s;.</HI> The Emperors Decree, That all other Dignities &s;hall give place to that of Con&s;ul.</P>
<P><HI>Prattica dell. Medagglie de Carlo Pattin.</HI> Pag. 67. The greate&s;t part of the Money which the Emperors, <HI>Julius Cae&s;ar</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tus,</HI> cau&s;ed to be &s;tamp|ed, was called <HI>Con&s;ular Money,</HI> for the re&s;pect that they bore to that Su|pream Dignity.</P></NOTE> Con&s;ulary Government continued with it, th&ocirc; in &s;ubordination to the Imperial; much more mu&s;t this Government be a new Head, when that which was <HI>only</HI> Imperial, is turned into a Regal form at <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>There is therefore no longer any que&s;tion to be made, whe|ther the Imperial Government, which was the Sixth Head at the time of the Vi&s;ion be yet at an end.</P>
<PB N="165" REF="115">
<PB N="166" REF="116">
<PB N="167" REF="116">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="168" REF="117">
<PB N="169" REF="117">
<HEAD>CHAP. V. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XVII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The</HI> 23<HI>d Propo&s;ition, The Bea&s;t &s;ome</HI> Pre&s;ent <HI>Sovereign of</HI> Rome. <HI>The 24th. The</HI> 42 <HI>Months of the Bea&s;t at lea&s;t</HI> 1260 <HI>years. The</HI> 1260 <HI>Days of the Witne&s;&s;es the &s;ame particular time. The Two Witne&s;&s;es, the Repre&s;entatives of the whole Church en&s;lav'd by the Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>SInce it has been made unque&s;tionable from the preceding Propo&s;ition, That the Sixth King, or Head, has been pa&s;t for &s;ome hundreds of years. From thence it may as a&s;&s;uredly be concluded, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Bea&s;t called the Eighth King, is a Sovereign</HI> Roman <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 23.</NOTE> <HI>Power that is owned for Supream by the Authority of the City of</HI> Rome <HI>at this pre&s;ent.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Sixth King in being at the time of the Vi&s;ion, was certainly at an <HI>end</HI> after the ruine of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire by the <HI>Heruli</HI> and <HI>Goths (Prop.</HI> 22.)&mdash;And the Seventh King does immediately &s;ucceed the Sixth (by <HI>Prop. the 18th)&mdash;</HI>And the Seventh King was to continue but a &s;hort &s;pace <HI>(chap.</HI> 17. 10.) Whereas the number of years from the Ruine of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Em|pire to <HI>this pre&s;ent,</HI> is <HI>three times</HI> longer than the <HI>whole</HI> time of the &s;ixth Head from the date of the Vi&s;ion, and as long as the whole time of the other &s;ix Heads before.</P>
<P>Wherefore the <HI>Seventh King</HI> mu&s;t needs have been long &s;ince pa&s;t, and the <HI>Eighth King</HI> (called the Bea&s;t) have entred upon his Reign. For the Eighth King did immediately &s;ucceed the Seventh (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 18.)&mdash;And the Eighth King, or the Bea&s;t, is to continue till the Second coming of Chri&s;t (by <HI>Corollar.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 12.)&mdash;And therefore mu&s;t the time of the Bea&s;t be both begun already, and not yet pa&s;t; that is, mu&s;t be <HI>at pre&s;ent</HI> in being.</P>
<P>Upon the &s;ame grounds it appears, That.</P>
<Q><PB N="170" REF="118"> <HI>The forty two Months of the Reign of the Bea&s;t,</HI> Revel. 13. 5. <HI>are at lea&s;t</HI> 1260 <HI>Years.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 24.</NOTE></Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t is in being <HI>at this pre&s;ent</HI> (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 23.)&mdash;And he began his Reign &s;oon after the fall of the &s;ixth Head, becau&s;e the Seventh King was to continue but a &s;hort &s;pace, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 10.&mdash;And the &s;ixth Head was at late&s;t ended at the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire in <HI>Augu&s;tulus</HI> (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 22.)&mdash;which was above 1200 Years &s;ince. It is therefore impo&s;&s;ible, that the forty two Months of the Reign of the Bea&s;t &s;hould have a <HI>literal</HI> &s;ignifica|tion in this place. They mu&s;t then of nece&s;&s;ity be under&s;tood in a <HI>My&s;tical</HI> Signification (by <HI>Rule</HI> 2.)&mdash;and in &s;uch a <HI>My&s;tical</HI> Signification al&s;o, as mu&s;t make them contain in them above 1200 Years.</P>
<P>Now there is no Example in Prophecy of any &s;uch My&s;tical Signification of Time, as will make the&s;e forty two Months reach to 1200 Years, and make them le&s;s exceed that number of Years, than the My&s;tical u&s;e of Weeks and Days in &s;ome of the Prophe|cies. Weeks are by almo&s;t the <HI>&V;nanimous Con&s;ent</HI> of all Interpre|ters taken for &s;o many Years as they have days in them, in that famous Prophecy about the fir&s;t coming of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias</HI> into the World, in the 9th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> v. 24. under the name of the <HI>&s;eventy Weeks.</HI> This is an unexceptionable In&s;tance of the my&s;tical u&s;e of <HI>days</HI> for <HI>years.</HI></P>
<P>So al&s;o is the Year of Jubilee after 49 years called the end of &s;even Sabbaths, or weeks of years, <HI>Levit.</HI> 25. 8.</P>
<P><HI>Days</HI> al&s;o are made u&s;e of to &s;ignify <HI>Years</HI> in <HI>Ezekiel</HI> twice in one Chapter, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 4. 4, 6. and in the &s;ame manner in the Book of <HI>Numbers</HI> 14. 34.</P>
<P>Again&s;t the&s;e two la&s;t Examples it is pretended, That Days do not <HI>ab&s;olutely</HI> &s;ignify Years, but are only made <HI>the Types</HI> of Years. But this is no material Objection again&s;t this u&s;age of Days. For though in tho&s;e two places they be u&s;ed but as Types, yet it is ea&s;ie to ob&s;erve, that Types of things are ordinarily u&s;ed in the <HI>New Te&s;tament</HI> for the things them&s;elves after the Type is fulfilled in them; and in that u&s;e of them they &s;ignify the things <HI>ab&s;olutely,</HI> and <HI>not Typically;</HI> for a typical &s;ignification of any thing, is the &s;ignification of it before it is come to pa&s;s, which cannot be, when the Type is u&s;ed for the real thing it
<PB N="171" REF="118"> &s;elf <HI>then in being.</HI> And therefore in &s;uch a u&s;e of the typical word, it mu&s;t &s;ignify the thing <HI>ab&s;olutely only.</HI></P>
<P>Thus do we find the names of <HI>Temple, Altar,</HI> the <HI>Holie&s;t of Ho|lies,</HI> the <HI>Vail,</HI> the <HI>Pa&s;&s;eover-Lamb,</HI> u&s;ed to &s;ignify, the <HI>Chri&s;tian Church,</HI> the <HI>Communion, Heaven,</HI> this <HI>Earthly &s;tate, Chri&s;t Je&s;us,</HI> after the&s;e Types were accompli&s;hed, and &s;o after their <HI>typical</HI> time was pa&s;t.</P>
<P>By the &s;ame rea&s;on may any other Type be u&s;ed to &s;ignify a thing <HI>ab&s;olutely,</HI> as well as <HI>typically.</HI> And <HI>Days</HI> may for that rea|&s;on be as well &s;uppo&s;ed to &s;ignify <HI>Years ab&s;olutely</HI> in &s;ome places, becau&s;e u&s;ed to &s;ignify them <HI>typically</HI> in others, if there be any evidence again&s;t their <HI>literal</HI> acceptation, as there is here found to be.</P>
<P>Wherefore according to the&s;e Examples, e&s;pecially that of <HI>the</HI> 70 <HI>weeks,</HI> which is by all acknowledged, the 42 Months mu&s;t be con&s;idered, as containing &s;o many years in them as they have days in them; and the lea&s;t number of days that they can con|tain in them, is 1260. what&s;oever accounts of Months be taken either in the time of <HI>Daniel,</HI> or of St. <HI>John.</HI></P>
<P>If it &s;hould be hereupon enquired, <HI>What kind of Months</HI> the&s;e were, and <HI>how many days</HI> they did preci&s;ely contain in them, the relation that this account of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> has to the fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> will re&s;olve that difficulty. The 42 Months of the Bea&s;t in this place, are the Times of the <HI>Little Horn</HI> in that 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel</HI> (by <HI>Co|roll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.) And the Times of the Little Horn there, are &s;aid to be a <HI>time, times, and half a time;</HI> which therefore mu&s;t be the &s;ame with the 42 Months of the Bea&s;t, they being both of them the &s;ame time of the &s;ame Reign. Now the Time, <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14.</NOTE> Times, and an half, are in the 12th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations</HI> the &s;ame time of the Woman's abode in the Wilderne&s;s, which is <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 6.</NOTE> a little before &s;aid to be 1260 days. The 42 Months then, which is the &s;ame time of the Reign of the Bea&s;t with the Time, Times, and an half, mu&s;t al&s;o be but 1260 days.</P>
<P>By this then it appears, That the calculation of the&s;e Months mu&s;t be according to the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Account, where <HI>Daniel</HI> lived, when he wrote that Prophecy, to which this of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> does every-where refer. The <HI>Babylonians</HI> had but 30 days in their Months, and they were all of equal length; to which they added an Appendix of five days at the end of the
<PB N="172" REF="119"> Year, which the <HI>Greeks</HI> called the <HI>Epagomena,</HI> and &s;o made their Year to be 365 days. But without the <HI>Epagomena,</HI> three Years and an half make but 1260 days, which is the number that the&s;e Vi&s;ions about the Bea&s;t do &s;o often inculcate, and is 17 days &s;hort of the true Account of three years and an half in the <HI>Babylonian</HI> way.</P>
<P>And this is the only rea&s;on that I could ever find &s;atisfactory, Why, be&s;ides the <HI>Time, Times,</HI> and <HI>an half,</HI> there, is the mention of 42 <HI>Months,</HI> and 1260 <HI>days</HI> in the Prophecy, to expre&s;s the &s;ame number of years. For the <HI>Time, Times,</HI> and <HI>an half,</HI> with|out any thing el&s;e to re&s;train it, would have been under&s;tood to be <HI>three full years,</HI> and an half, according to the <HI>Chaldaick</HI> Ac|count, from whence that calculation was fetched, and &s;o would really have been 17 days longer, and have &s;ignified 17 years longer than they really were to be; whereas by this particular determination of them in the Prophecy to 1260 days, and 42 Months, they appear to want the Appendix of the five days, or <HI>Epagomena,</HI> at the end of every Year. And thus are we deli|vered from that fanciful Shift, that Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> was fain to fly to in his account of the different ways of expre&s;&s;ing the &s;ame time here, <HI>viz.</HI> That the Months were u&s;ed to &s;ignify the <HI>works of dark|ne&s;s,</HI> and the <HI>days</HI> the contrary: The Months being regulated by the cour&s;e of the Moon, and the days by that of the Sun.</P>
<P>The 42 Months then do appear by this to be 15 days &s;hort of the full length of <HI>Time, Times,</HI> and <HI>half a time,</HI> by being reckoned without the <HI>Epagomena;</HI> It may hereupon be very rea&s;onably imagined, that the 1260 Years &s;ignified by &s;o many days, may each of them al&s;o be reckoned without the <HI>Epagomena,</HI> or five days at the end of them; and then <HI>they</HI> will <HI>al&s;o</HI> want &s;ome &s;uch number of Years of their <HI>full</HI> account, and &s;o prove to be but 1243 Years.</P>
<P>From the former Propo&s;ition it may be concluded, That</P>
<Q><HI>The</HI> 1260 <HI>days of the Two Witne&s;&s;es,</HI> Revel. 11. 3. <HI>are</HI> 1260 <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>Years.</HI></Q>
<P>For the 1260 days of the two Witne&s;&s;es are the &s;ame length of time with the 42 Months of the Bea&s;t, <HI>pag. preced.</HI> And are de&s;cribed as the oppo&s;ite Party to the Bea&s;t, <HI>v.</HI> 7. and &s;o men|tioned in the &s;ame account as Contemporaries with him: And
<PB N="173" REF="119"> &s;ince they have the &s;ame length of time a&s;&s;igned to them for their continuance, it ought to be under&s;tood to &s;ignify the &s;ame thing without any clearer Evidence to the contrary (by <HI>Rule the</HI> 3<HI>d.)&mdash;</HI>Now by their Characters they appear to be capable of &s;o long a continuance. For they repre&s;ent a body of Men, and not two &s;ingle Per&s;ons only. It is &s;aid, that the Bea&s;t &s;hould <HI>make war with them.</HI> And the Bea&s;t is already known to &s;ignify a great Empire; And how can a great Empire be &s;aid to <HI>make war</HI> with two &s;ingle Per&s;ons, or Peoples, Kindreds, and Nations, as it is &s;aid of them, to <HI>&s;ee them lie dead,</HI> and not <HI>to &s;uffer them to be bu|ried?</HI></P>
<P>The 1260 days then of the two Witne&s;&s;es, do &s;ignify the &s;ame length of time, that the &s;ame number of days in the 42 Months of their Contemporary do &s;ignify, that is 1260 Years.</P>
<P>If the&s;e days do &s;ignify the &s;ame number of Years with the 42 Months, Then</P>
<Q><HI>The</HI> 1260 <HI>days of the two Witne&s;&s;es and the</HI> 42 <HI>Months of the Bea&s;t, do</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>&s;ignify the &s;ame</HI> coincident <HI>&s;pace of</HI> 1260 <HI>Years.</HI></Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t and the Witne&s;&s;es have the &s;ame length of con|tinuance <HI>(Prop.</HI> 24. <HI>&amp; Coroll.</HI> 1.)&mdash;And they are de&s;cribed to be Contemporaries, and the oppo&s;ite Party to one another, <HI>Rev.</HI> 11. 7. to 14. And therefore it is extravagant to fancy their time to be different, <HI>only becau&s;e</HI> it cannot be proved to be &s;trictly impo&s;&s;ible that they &s;hould not be the &s;ame from the beginning to the end. See Chap. 2. Book I.</P>
<P>From hence it may &s;afely be inferred, That</P>
<Q><HI>The two Witne&s;&s;es in Sackcloth,</HI> Rev. 11. 3. <HI>do repre&s;ent the whole</HI> <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>True Church in the time of its humiliation under the Bea&s;t.</HI></Q>
<P>For the two Witne&s;&s;es mu&s;t &s;ignify a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of Per&s;ons du|ring the &s;pace of 1260 Years, <HI>(Coroll. preced.)</HI> And they are &s;et out by Characters that are peculiar to the Repre&s;entations of the True Church in the times of its humiliation under its Adver&s;a|ries in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament.</HI> As by the peculiar Miracles of <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Aaron</HI> in the Land of <HI>Egypt,</HI> v. 6. By tho&s;e of <HI>Elijah,</HI> with <NOTE PLACE="marg">Exod. 7. 19. 1 Kings 17. 1. Zechar. 4.</NOTE> <HI>Eli&s;ha,</HI> v. 5, 6. And by the My&s;tical Characters of <HI>Jo&s;hua,</HI> and <HI>Zerubbabell,</HI> v. 4.</P>
<PB N="174" REF="120">
<P> By this it appears, That they mu&s;t refer to &s;ome twofold di|vi&s;ion of the whole Catholick Church that mu&s;t be generally known for 1260 years together; And in this re&s;pect the Rea&s;on why they are repre&s;ented by <HI>Two,</HI> may be either,</P>
<P N="1">1. The natural divi&s;ion of every well con&s;tituted People into <HI>Civil,</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Per&s;ons, the <HI>King,</HI> and the <HI>High-Prie&s;t,</HI> e&s;pecially where the Church of God is, which is the pre&s;ent Ca&s;e. As this does go along with all well-ordered Societies, &s;o it is exemplified in two of the In&s;tances here referred to out of the <HI>Old Te&s;tament.</HI></P>
<P>Or, 2. The Church may here be repre&s;ented by <HI>Two,</HI> upon the account of the known peculiar Character of the Chri&s;tian Church, <HI>in di&s;tinction to that of the Jews,</HI> all over the <HI>New Te&s;tament;</HI> where it is every-where repre&s;ented, as <HI>one</HI> Church made up of <HI>Jews</HI> and <HI>Gentiles, one</HI> Common Society with tho&s;e <HI>two</HI> great con&s;ti|tuent Parts in it; upon the account of which it was <HI>originally</HI> called the <HI>Catholick Church.</HI></P>
<P>Thus do we find &dagger; St. <HI>Paul</HI> almo&s;t continually in&s;i&s;ting upon this <HI>Two-fold</HI> di&s;tinction in the Church; and the chief ground of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rom. 3. 30. &amp; 4. 16. &amp; 9. 24. &amp; 10. 12. &amp; 11. 17. &amp; 15. 8, 9. 1 Cor. 1. 24. &amp; 7. 18, 19. Gal. 27. 8. &amp; 4. 22, 24. &amp; 6. 15, 16. Ephe&s;. 3. 6, 9.</NOTE> all his earne&s;t Motives to Unity, and Mutual Communion, for the making the Chri&s;tian Church <HI>but one</HI> thing, is, that all the World, both <HI>Jews</HI> and <HI>Gentiles,</HI> are but one Church of Chri&s;t. As <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 2. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. and Chap. 3. 6. and Chap. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. And this is every-where repre&s;ented by him, as the great My&s;tery of God, in the bringing the <HI>Gentiles</HI> to be one Church with the <HI>Jews,</HI> Ephe&s;. 1. 9. 3. 3, 9. <HI>Colo&s;.</HI> 1. 26, 27. This Book of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> does al&s;o generally run upon that di&s;tinction. As Chap. 5. 5. The number of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Elders gathered <HI>out of all Nations.</HI> And Chap. 7. 4, 9. <HI>The</HI> 144000 <HI>out of the Jewi&s;h Tribes,</HI> but figuratively taken; and the <HI>Great Multitude</HI> of all Nations. So al&s;o Chap. 14. 1, 6. The 144000, and all Nations, and Kindreds, and Tongues, and People. And Chap. 19. 4, 6. The 24 Elders repre&s;ent the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> part, and the Voice of the Great Multitude the <HI>Gentiles,</HI> though both figuratively. And the Church is every-where &s;et forth as the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Temple, or Synagogue, &s;et open to <HI>all people.</HI></P>
<P>This al&s;o we find every-where foretold in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament,</HI> as the <HI>peculiar di&s;tinction</HI> of the Church of the <HI>Me&s;&s;iah</HI> from that of the <HI>Jews, That</HI> it &s;hould be the Church of both <HI>Jews</HI> and <HI>Gen|tiles.</HI> And this does our Saviour al&s;o make the di&s;tingui&s;hing
<PB N="175" REF="120"> Badge of his Church. <HI>For this rea&s;on</HI> did he make choice of Bap|ti&s;m to be the Initial Rite of all Nations into his Church, which by the <HI>Jews</HI> had always before been made the <HI>di&s;tingui&s;hing Rite</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Matth. 8. 11. &amp; 21. 43. &amp; 22. 9. &amp; 24. 14. John 11. 52.</NOTE> betwixt them&s;elves, and the <HI>Gentile</HI> Pro&s;elites. He al&s;o upon the &s;ame account ordered the Memorial of his own Death to be the Communion-Fea&s;t, or the common Union of <HI>Jews</HI> and <HI>Gen|tiles</HI> in his Church, or the Communion of Saints of all kinds, in&s;tead of the <HI>Pa&s;chal Lamb,</HI> which was the di&s;tingui&s;hing Cere|mony of the Religion of the <HI>Jews</HI> from all the re&s;t of the World be&s;ides. And thus al&s;o does he him&s;elf &s;ignify his Church to be <HI>One Fold made up of two &s;orts of Sheep,</HI> John 10. 16.</P>
<P>But this does mo&s;t eminently appear in the Hi&s;tory of the Actions of the Apo&s;tles, after Je&s;us had committed the &s;ole ma|nagement of his Church to them. The chief Subject of the Book of their <HI>Acts</HI> is to &s;et forth this <HI>new appearance</HI> of the Chri|&s;tian Church with the&s;e <HI>Two</HI> different kinds of Members in it.</P>
<P>Indeed this <HI>twofold</HI> di&s;tinction of the Members of the Chri&s;tian Church had its foundation in the known divi&s;ion of the whole World into tho&s;e two general Parts of it, <HI>Jews,</HI> and <HI>Gentiles,</HI> both always before, and at the time of the writing this Prophecy. And this di&s;tinction was always pre&s;erved in memory by the frame of the <HI>Jewi&s;h Temple,</HI> and its di&s;tinction of the <HI>two Courts</HI> of the <HI>Jews,</HI> and <HI>Gentiles;</HI> and &s;o &s;eems to be the mo&s;t likely to be here referred to, becau&s;e the mo&s;t obvious, and commonly known divi&s;ion of the Church of God into <HI>Two.</HI></P>
<P>But what &s;trength &s;oever this Account of their being called <HI>Two,</HI> may &s;eem to have, yet the demon&s;tration of their real na|ture in general before given, does not at all depend upon it. This is intended only for a probable illu&s;tration of that Chara|cter. And &s;ince by the di&s;covery of their Nature, they mu&s;t re|pre&s;ent the whole Chri&s;tian Church for many Ages, there mu&s;t be &s;ome reference in this Character of it to &s;ome twofold divi|&s;ion of the Chri&s;tian Church, which mu&s;t di&s;tingui&s;h it from the <HI>Jewi&s;h;</HI> and none was better known for &s;uch, than that which has been here pitched upon; not that of the <HI>Old</HI> and <HI>New Te&s;ta|ment,</HI> nor that of the Churches of the <HI>Walden&s;es</HI> and <HI>Albigen&s;es,</HI> which &s;ome would have that number to refer to. <NOTE PLACE="marg"><P>^a THUS does <HI>Ribera</HI> interpret the three days and an half, in Chap. 11. v. 9.&mdash;that they &s;ignify that the Tyranny of Anti-chri&s;t &s;hall not be continued above <HI>three years and an half, according to that of</HI> Ezek. 4. <HI>I have given thee a day for a year;</HI> Though afterwards upon the 20th Chapter of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> he does in expre&s;s terms contradict this very In|terpretation; <HI>When ever,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>did Lyranus &s;ee a day taken for a year?</HI> And though in <HI>Ezekiel&mdash;</HI>God &s;aid, I have given thee a day for a year, yet what ground is this to take a day for a year in Scripture?</P>
<P>Alca&s;ar <HI>al&s;o upon the</HI> 2<HI>d ver&s;e, Chap.</HI> 11. Apocalyp&s;e, <HI>does determine,</HI> That the 42 months, and the 1260 days mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be taken in a <HI>my&s;tical,</HI> and not in a literal &s;en&s;e. <HI>Notatione quarta in ver&s;.</HI> 2. And they both agree with <HI>Bellarmin, l.</HI> 3. <HI>de Pont. c.</HI> 8. that the 42 months, and three years, and an half, mu&s;t be under&s;tood according to the <HI>Caldaick</HI> Ac|count.</P></NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="176" REF="121">
<PB N="177" REF="121">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The 25th Propo&s;ition, The Second Bea&s;t</HI> (Rev. 13.) <HI>an &V;niver&s;al Church-Head di&s;tinct from the Fir&s;t. The 26th Propo&s;ition; The Bea&s;t, A Secular Head confe|derated with an &V;niver&s;al Church-Head, but di&s;tinct from Him. The Second Bea&s;t a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of many &s;in|gle Per&s;ons. The Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet are the</HI> pre&s;ent Secular, <HI>and</HI> Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Roman <HI>Heads, or the</HI> Imperial <HI>and</HI> Papal Power. <HI>Objections an&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THere have been &s;ufficient grounds of A&s;&s;urance given, that the Bea&s;t is really in being at this pre&s;ent time; It is in the next place nece&s;&s;ary to enquire after tho&s;e Characters of him that do <HI>di&s;tingui&s;h</HI> him from all other Sovereign Powers upon Earth.</P>
<P>The greate&s;t difficulty in this Affair ari&s;es from the great re|&s;emblance, that there &s;eems to be, betwixt the <HI>Fir&s;t</HI> and the <HI>Se|cond</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 1, &amp; 11.</NOTE> Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations.</HI> For they are de&s;cribed as two di&s;tinct Sovereign Powers in one and the &s;ame <HI>Roman</HI> Dominion. The <HI>Second</HI> Bea&s;t is &s;aid to <HI>exerci&s;e all the power</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 12.</NOTE> <HI>of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t before him.</HI> And therefore do we find the&s;e two Bea&s;ts <HI>confounded together</HI> by many of the be&s;t e&s;teemed Inter|preters.</P>
<P>It may then be ob&s;erved in the fir&s;t place, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Second Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter of the</HI> Revelations, <HI>is</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>COrnel. &agrave; Lapide</HI> in cap. 13. <HI>Apoc.]</HI> The Two Horns, <HI>(i. e.</HI> of the &s;e|cond Bea&s;t) as <HI>Jo&s;eph. Aco&s;ta</HI> ob&s;erves (l. 2. de temp. Novi&s;s. cap. 17.) <Q>are the marks of the Epi&s;copal Dignity; That is, <HI>of the Mitre,</HI> or Epi&s;co|pal Crown; The Fal&s;e Prophet therefore does &s;eem by this to be &s;ome <HI>Apo&s;tate Bi&s;hop,</HI> and pretender to Religion.&mdash;It is not therefore the <HI>Mitre,</HI> but &s;ome <HI>Mitred Apo&s;tate,</HI> that is here taxed, who &s;hall treacherou&s;ly abu&s;e the&s;e Horns of (the Lamb) Chri&s;t, to propagate the Sect of <HI>Anti-Chri&s;t.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Bla&s;ius Viega,</HI> in Cap. 13. Apoc. Sect. 6.] <Q><HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is,</HI> and <HI>Irenae|us,</HI> L. 4. cap 28. &s;eem to me to have been more in the right, who take the Second Bea&s;t to be &s;ome eminent forerunner of Antichri&s;t, and re|markable Preacher;&mdash;or, as <HI>Irenaeus</HI> calls him, The Armour-bearer of Antichri&s;t.</Q></P>
<P>Tom. 2. <HI>Concilior. in decretis Pelagii &s;ecundi,]</HI> <Q>Upon the a&s;&s;uming of the Title of Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop by <HI>John,</HI> Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> Pope <HI>Pe|lagius</HI> the &s;econd writes thus to him&mdash;None of the Patriarchs ever u&s;ed <HI>&s;o prophane</HI> a word&mdash;And weigh well, my Brethren, what is next to follow, <HI>&amp;c.&mdash;</HI>For it comes very nigh to him, of whom it is written, He is the King over all the Children of Pride&mdash;When our Brother, and fellow Bi&s;hop <HI>John</HI> to the contempt of the commands of our Lord, the Precepts of his Apo&s;tles, and the Rules of the Fathers, does endea|vour by this name to be his forerunner.</Q></P>
<P>Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> pre&s;ently after him has much the &s;ame opinion of the &s;ame per&s;on, L. 4. Ep. 32.] <Q>By this haughtine&s;s of his, &s;ays he, what does he &s;how us, but that the time of <HI>Antichri&s;t</HI> is at hand, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and <HI>Ep.</HI> 36. <HI>Repeats the former words of</HI> Pelagius, <HI>and Ep.</HI> 38. <HI>&s;ays,</HI> That this is the <HI>la&s;t hour,</HI> as Chri&s;t had foretold of Antichri&s;t. All that was fore|told is now accompli&s;hed. The King of pride is at the door; and which cannot be &s;poken without horrour, An Army of Prie&s;ts is pre|pared for him. And L. 6. Ep. 24. And not to &s;peak of the wrong that is done to me (in particular) by it, If a Bi&s;hop is called Univer&s;al, The Univer&s;al Church falls to the ground, if that Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop chan|ces to fall; <HI>And Ep.</HI> 28. <HI>ad Cyriacum, to take away that name of pride&mdash;</HI>Who&s;oever de&s;ires to be Honoured again&s;t the Honour of God, (That is, in being called <HI>Univer&s;al)</HI> is not at all to be honoured; And becau&s;e Antichri&s;t, the Enemy of the Almighty, is near at hand, <HI>I do earne&s;tly be|&s;eech you,</HI> that he may find nothing that belongs to him, neither in the <HI>Manners,</HI> nor in the <HI>Name</HI> of the Prie&s;ts. And, <HI>Ep.</HI> 30. now I &s;ay boldly, That <HI>who&s;oever</HI> calls him&s;elf <HI>Univer&s;al Prie&s;t, or Bi&s;hop,</HI> he is by that ex|altation of him&s;elf the forerunner of Antichri&s;t&mdash;For as that wicked one would &s;eem to be God above all Men; &s;o the other exalts him&s;elf above all Bi&s;hops.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>a</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 25. See Refe|rences.</NOTE> <HI>Church-head owned for Supream over all the</HI> Roman <HI>Juri&s;di|ction, And</HI> di&s;tinct from the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t.</Q>
<P>For the <HI>Second Bea&s;t</HI> is &s;aid to exerci&s;e all the Power of the <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 12.</NOTE> Fir&s;t Bea&s;t; and therefore is a Supream Authority in that Nation.</P>
<P>And the exerci&s;e of this Power is to force men to a Religious <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 12, 13, 14.</NOTE> Wor&s;hip, and to make them make an <HI>Image</HI> to the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t to be wor&s;hipped by all the World; and he was to <HI>work Miracles to deceive men into this Wor&s;hip,</HI> which are all In&s;tances of an <HI>Eccle&s;i|a&s;tical</HI>
<PB N="178" REF="122"> Authority: And be&s;ides, has the name of the <HI>fal&s;e Prophet</HI> by way of eminence, <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 8. Wherefore he mu&s;t be a Church-Head, exerci&s;ing this Supream <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Authority over the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P>The de&s;cription of the Second Bea&s;t is al&s;o <HI>quite different</HI> from that of the Fir&s;t, and is &s;aid to be a <HI>Second</HI> Bea&s;t in reference to that <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> and therefore mu&s;t be <HI>another different</HI> Bea&s;t from the Fir&s;t. His great bu&s;ine&s;s al&s;o is to make men give wor&s;hip to the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, who is every-where <HI>di&s;tingui&s;hed</HI> from him by the name of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, which <HI>had been deadly wounded, but yet</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 12, 14.</NOTE> <HI>did &s;till live;</HI> All which is &s;ufficient to conclude them to be <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> in cap. 13. Apoc. Sect. 6.] <Q>It is <HI>evident</HI> from the Context, That the Bea&s;t <HI>out of the Earth,</HI> and the Bea&s;t <HI>out of the Sea,</HI> mu&s;t be two di&s;tinct Bea&s;ts. See al&s;o before, <HI>Viega, Pelagius, Gregorius M.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Mede</HI> in c. 13. Apoc. v. 1. See the next note <HI>Mede.</HI></P>
<P>See Note 6. of this Chap, <HI>Golda&s;tus,</HI> p. 349. <HI>Item Ibidem, Golda&s;t.</HI> p. 76. See there the Oath taken by the Electors, by the order of the Golden Bull, <Q>That I will chu&s;e a <HI>Temporal head</HI> for the Chri&s;tian World.&mdash;</Q></P>
<P>Pope <HI>Gela&s;ius,</HI> in the time of <HI>Theodoric</HI> King of <HI>Italy,</HI> in his Decree about the Council of <HI>Chalcedon, Concil. Caranzae.</HI> p. 282. &s;hows, <Q>That before the coming of Chri&s;t, the King u&s;ed to be the High-Prie&s;t; and &s;o was it in u&s;e among&s;t the Pagan Emperors: But when it was come to him that was the true King, and High-prie&s;t together, neither could the <HI>Em|peror</HI> take the name of <HI>High-prie&s;t,</HI> nor the <HI>High-prie&s;t</HI> the name of <HI>Em|peror.</HI> So that the Emperors have need of the Popes for the things of another life,&mdash;And the Popes of the Emperours for the things of this World.</Q></P>
<P>All the Concordats betwixt the Emperors and Popes are &s;aid to be to Unite the Royal Power, and the Prie&s;thood; as particularly that of the Emperor <HI>Henry</HI>'s giving up the right of <HI>Inve&s;titures</HI> to Pope <HI>Calixtus</HI> the 2d, and the Popes confirming the <HI>Regalia</HI> to the Emperor by the Scepter. Ab|bot <HI>Ur&s;purg.</HI> Chron. <HI>An.</HI> 1122.</P></NOTE> two <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> things <HI>really</HI> different from one another.</P>
<P>'Tis true; All the mi&s;chief, for which the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t is &s;o &s;tigmatized in this Prophecy, is that which is the <HI>whole bu&s;ine&s;s</HI> of the Second Bea&s;t; that is, <HI>Idolatrous Wor&s;hip, tyrannically im|po&s;ed by the Image,</HI> which the Second Bea&s;t &s;ets up; This the fir&s;t Bea&s;t a&s;&s;i&s;ts, and enforces by his Power; And <HI>upon this account</HI> are the&s;e Two Bea&s;ts repre&s;ented as <HI>one Confederacy.</HI> And there|fore the one is often comprehended in what is &s;aid to be done by the other, becau&s;e it is one common Intere&s;t that they <HI>both</HI> act in; and in which they <HI>both</HI> act at the &s;ame time. So that to &s;ignify the Activity of either of them, it is enough on many occa&s;ions to intimate the name of but one of them; as we &s;ee the name of <HI>either</HI> of the two Partners in a Trade does &s;ignify the concur|rence of the <HI>other</HI> in it, who was not named.</P>
<P>But that they are notwith&s;tanding <HI>both</HI> of them Supream Heads in their &s;everal ways, with an ab&s;olute Juri&s;diction belonging to them, appears from that Power of the Second Bea&s;t, by which he <HI>gave life to the Image</HI> of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, and impowered it <HI>to kill all</HI> who would not wor&s;hip it: For it is certain from that, <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 15.</NOTE> That the Second Bea&s;t him&s;elf mu&s;t have that Power of Life and Death to him&s;elf, which he gave to the Image, and therefore be Supream.</P>
<P>From hence it would be inferred, That</P>
<Q><HI>The Second Bea&s;t is a</HI> Pontifex Maximus <HI>of the</HI> Romans <HI>after the time of the Heathen Emperors.</HI></Q>
<P>For (by <HI>Propo&s;. preced.)</HI> the Second Bea&s;t mu&s;t be a Supream Church-Head of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which is a <HI>Pontifex Maximus.</HI> And
<PB N="179" REF="122"> (by the &s;ame <HI>Prop.)</HI> he mu&s;t be <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> from the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, who is another Supream Head of the <HI>Romans</HI> (by <HI>Propo&s;.</HI> 20.) And till the time of the Emperor <HI>Gratian,</HI> the <HI>Pontifex Maximus</HI> was not a really <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> Head of the <HI>Romans</HI> from the Emperors; the Emperors till then were both the <HI>Pontifex Maximus,</HI> and the Supream Civil Head.</P>
<P>And now it may be &s;afely determined, That</P>
<Q><HI>By the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations, <HI>is meant a</HI> Secular <HI>Sovereign</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Propo&s;it. 26. See Refe|rences.</NOTE> <HI>Power of the</HI> Romans <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Mede,</HI> in c. 13. Apoc. v. 1. <Q>The&s;e Two Bea&s;ts are tied to one ano|ther by the neare&s;t relation to one another; and both of them do <HI>toge|ther</HI> Reign over the &s;ame part of the World. The Fir&s;t, or Ten Horn'd Bea&s;t we may call <HI>The Secular Power;</HI> the Two Horned Bea&s;t, <HI>The Eccle|&s;ia&s;tical Power.</HI> And on <HI>v.</HI> 11. The fir&s;t Bea&s;t is a Secular Power; this an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, which does exerci&s;e the chief Mini&s;terial power of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t, and his Bla&s;phemies.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Aventin. Hi&s;tor. Boior.</HI> Lib. 7.] The Bull of Pope <HI>John</HI> again&s;t the Empe|ror <HI>Lewis,</HI> does there recount, <Q>That from the time of <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> the Empire was a <HI>Fiefe</HI> of the Papal power, and &s;o mu&s;t be conferred by the Pope, to be in union with him for the a&s;&s;i&s;ting the Church in its Acts.</Q></P>
<P>The Emperor, in An&s;wer to it, Challenges it to be his right to elect the Pope; &s;o that both agree, that they are to be immediately united to one another.</P></NOTE> <HI>confederated in an Idolatrous Anti|chri&s;tian Rule with an</HI> Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Supream Head of that Nation, which is</HI> di&s;tinct <HI>from it.</HI></Q>
<P>For the principal Agent is the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet;</HI> The de&s;ign and bu&s;ine&s;s of all the Power that is exerci&s;ed, <HI>Idolatrous Wor&s;hip;</HI> the In&s;trument that executes all the Orders about it, <HI>the Image</HI> which was made by the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet;</HI> and <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> joins in all, as the chief Supporter of it. And the Tyranny exerci&s;ed in it again&s;t the Followers of the <HI>Lamb,</HI> does &s;ufficiently &s;hew how <HI>An|tichri&s;tian</HI> a De&s;ign it is that they are engaged in; and the real di&s;tinction betwixt the Bea&s;t, and the Church-Head, his Con|federate, is a&s;&s;ured from <HI>Prop.</HI> 25.</P>
<P>This Confederacy does &s;hew the Second Bea&s;t to be no &s;ingle Per&s;on. For the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet</HI> continues to the end with the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t; and the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t is the Succe&s;&s;ion of many &s;ingle <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 15, &amp; 20.</NOTE> Per&s;ons in the &s;ame Form of Government, as an Head of a Bea&s;t is known here to &s;ignify; And therefore,</P>
<Q><HI>The Second Bea&s;t is a</HI> <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><HI>Alca&s;ar,</HI> in c. 13. Apoc. Sect. 6.] By the Bea&s;t <HI>of the Earth</HI> (or &s;e|cond Bea&s;t) is &s;ignified a multitude of per&s;ons, as well as by the Bea&s;t <HI>of the Sea</HI> (or the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t); as well the one, as the other of the&s;e Bea&s;ts, is the Scheme of a numerous multitude, and not of a &s;ingle per&s;on; as in the 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Succe&s;&s;ion of</HI> Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Per&s;ons having the</HI> <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>Supream Power in</HI> Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Affairs.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE></Q>
<P>Wherefore, without any further &s;crupulous &s;earch for the moment at which the Bea&s;t began his Reign, let the particular Change of the Government of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which made the Bea&s;t at fir&s;t to appear, be what it will, and never &s;o difficult to know, yet now it may be &s;afely concluded, That</P>
<Q><PB N="180" REF="123"> The Bea&s;t, <HI>and the</HI> Fal&s;e Prophet <HI>are tho&s;e two Forms of</HI> Secular <HI>and</HI> Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Government</HI> really di&s;tinct <HI>from one another,</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>which are</HI> at this pre&s;ent time <HI>acknowledged for Supream by the Authority of the City of</HI> Rome.</Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t is the la&s;t Ruling Head of the <HI>Romans</HI> by <HI>Corol.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.&mdash;And therefore is that which is owned for Supream at <HI>Rome,</HI> by <HI>Prop.</HI> 21.&mdash;And he is owned there for Supream at this pre&s;ent time, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 23.&mdash;And he is a <HI>Saecular</HI> So|vereign Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> di&s;tinct from an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Head there owned, and confederate with him, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 25.&mdash;And that Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Chief Head of <HI>Rome</HI> is the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 25.</P>
<P>Wherefore the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet, mu&s;t be tho&s;e <HI>Secular,</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Heads of <HI>Rome di&s;tinct</HI> from one another, who&s;e Authority in tho&s;e &s;everal kinds are <HI>at this pre&s;ent</HI> there owned.</P>
<P>If &s;o, Then how can one avoid from being a&s;&s;ured, That</P>
<Q><HI>The pre&s;ent</HI> Imperial <HI>and</HI> Papal <HI>Power, or Authority of</HI> Rome, <HI>are</HI> <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Corollar."> <HI>the</HI> Bea&s;t, <HI>and the</HI> Fal&s;e Prophet.</Q>
<P>For there are no other <HI>Secular,</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Sovereign Powers of <HI>Rome,</HI> who&s;e Authority in tho&s;e &s;everal kinds are there ac|knowledged for Supream, and as <HI>really di&s;tinct</HI> from one another, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Note</HI> 6. <HI>Corn. &agrave; Lapide.</HI></NOTE> but only the Papal and Imperial Power; and we are &s;ure that they mu&s;t be both of them in being at this pre&s;ent time by <HI>Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 26.</P>
<P>And be&s;ides, The pre&s;ent Imperial Power has all its title from the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> and was generally u&s;ed to have a <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><P>The <HI>German</HI> Writers, who defend the Imperial power from any de|pendancy upon the Papal, and therefore look upon the Coronation of the Emperor at <HI>Rome,</HI> as unnece&s;&s;ary; yet grant it to be the u&s;ual and com|mon form of confirming the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire upon him by the people of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Hieron. Balbus de Coronatione,</HI> Cap. 21. &s;ays, <Q>That the place a&s;&s;igned for the Coronation of the Emperor with the Imperial Crown, is at <HI>Rome:</HI></Q> For which he quotes <HI>Clem. Roman. de jurcjurand. &amp; D.</HI> c. <HI>venerabilem</HI> and &s;ays in his plea again&s;t the nece&s;&s;ity of the Crowning of the Emperor at <HI>Rome,</HI> <Q>That it is <HI>only po&s;itive Law</HI> that ordains it; whereas the Emperor is above all &s;uch kind of Law:</Q>&mdash;Which &s;hows however, That that was the Law, <Q>That the Coronation &s;hould be at <HI>Rome.</HI></Q> And makes this another Argument for his &s;ide, <Q>That th&ocirc; the Pope be ordained to be Inaugurated at <HI>Rome,</HI> yet that he di&s;pen&s;es with it, and &s;o therefore might the Emperor:</Q> <HI>Which intimates,</HI> That <HI>Rome</HI> is as properly the place from whence the <HI>Imperial Crown</HI> comes, as it is for the <HI>Papal Mitre.&mdash;</HI>And then concludes the Chapter, That it is not material where the <Q>Coro|nation be, provided it be done by the Pope, or his Legate;</Q><HI>&mdash;Which con|firms</HI> the Authority of it to be from <HI>Rome;</HI> and therefore adds, <Q>That before the Tran&s;lation of the Empire from the <HI>Greeks</HI> to the <HI>Germans,</HI> the Coronation u&s;ed to be performed by the <HI>Praefect of the City&mdash;</HI></Q>And that does manife&s;t, that the Pope in that Solemnity does &s;tand only as the Head of the People of <HI>Rome,</HI> in&s;tead of the <HI>Praefect</HI> of the <HI>City</HI> of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>Albericus <HI>in Indice, verbo Coron&acirc;,</HI> &s;ays] <Q>That the Emperor receives three Crowns, The fir&s;t of <HI>Silver</HI> in <HI>Germany,</HI> An <HI>Iron one</HI> in the Dutchy of <HI>Mil|lan,</HI> and a <HI>Golden one</HI> for the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</Q></P></NOTE> par|ticular Crown from thence; and the powers of it are acknow|ledged by the Authority of <HI>Rome</HI> to belong to them, <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><P>Ludovic. <HI>&agrave; Bebenburg,</HI> tho on the <HI>German</HI> or <HI>Cae&s;arian</HI> &s;ide, <HI>de juribus Regni &amp; Imp.</HI> Rom. <HI>pag.</HI> 5.] <Q>The Rea&s;on why he that is elected, is cal|led King of the <HI>Romans,</HI> is <HI>both</HI> in reverence to the Mo&s;t Holy <HI>Roman</HI> Church<HI>&mdash;and</HI> in honour of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> who&s;e People had formerly the Monarchy of the Empire. <HI>M. Freherus</HI> in Commentario.</Q>&mdash;<Q>Hence that proud Voice of <HI>Rome,</HI> at the Coronation of the Emperor <HI>Henry</HI> the VIIth, <HI>I confirm</HI> unto the Prince the Sovereign Power, with the Crown of Crowns, and give him command over the Cities and Nations of the World. Let the Eagles defend my Glory.&mdash;And in the Seal of <HI>Charles</HI> the IVth, with which the Golden Bull (the In&s;trument for the pre&s;ent manner of the Imperial Elections) is &s;ealed, and other publick In&s;tru|ments, The City of <HI>Rome</HI> is in the &s;tamp of it with this Motto,</Q></P>
<P><Q>Roma <HI>caput Mundi regit Orbis fraena rotundi.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Golda&s;t. <HI>Politic. Imperial. pars</HI> 5. <HI>p.</HI> 349.]<HI>&mdash;Sed po&s;tquam Chri&s;tiana &amp; Orthodoxa Religio, &amp;c.</HI> <Q>But after that the Chri&s;tian and <HI>Orthodox</HI> Religion prevailed, &s;o as to make a noi&s;e all over the World; And that by this means the High-Prie&s;ts <HI>(at Rome)</HI> came to be <HI>adored</HI> by Princes, Kings and Emperors with the greate&s;t humility, and a &s;ingular kind of devo|tion; it came to pa&s;s, that by the common Con&s;ent of all Chri&s;tian People, that of the two &s;everal States of the Chri&s;tian World, <HI>The one</HI> &s;hould be govern'd by the Popes, <HI>the other</HI> by the Emperors; But yet &s;o, that the Emperors &s;hould acknowledg both their Imperial Dignity and Power to proceed from the Popes of <HI>Rome,</HI> as the true Mediators and Interce&s;&s;ors for them.&mdash;But this is <HI>further confirmed</HI> by the Civil Law, which &s;uffers not the Imperial Maje&s;ty to be &s;ubject to any human Laws; but on the contrary, does openly declare it to be above all human Privileges and Laws.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Bellarmin</HI> &s;hews, <HI>Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Tran&s;lat. Imp.</HI> Roman. <HI>in Germanos&mdash;</HI><Q>That the pre&s;ent way of electing the Emperor was &s;etled by Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> the VIIth, in the Golden Bull, to confer the Power and Authority of Empe|ror of <HI>Rome</HI> upon the Per&s;on elected by them; and <HI>chap.</HI> 12. <HI>lib.</HI> 1. &s;ays, That all kind of Chri&s;tian Princes what&s;oever have acknowledged the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire to have been among&s;t the <HI>Germans</HI> ever &s;ince the Year 800.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Golda&s;tus</HI> in his <HI>Politic. Imperial. part.</HI> 1. <HI>p.</HI> 76. &s;ets down the particular form of the Oath, that the Electors take before their choice, to this effect.</P>
<P>I. N.<HI>&mdash;by the help of God, will chu&s;e a Temporal (or Secular) Head for all Chri&s;tian People; that is, a King of the</HI> Romans <HI>to be advanced to be Em|peror.</HI></P>
<P>And it is the Order of the Golden Bull, That they &s;hould not depart from the City of <HI>Francfort,</HI> till the major part of them have elected a Tem|poral Head for all Chri&s;tian People; that is, <HI>A King of the</HI> Romans <HI>to be created Emperor.</HI></P>
<P>Aventin. <HI>l.</HI> 6. <HI>Hi&s;tor. Boior.]</HI> Pope <HI>Adrian,</HI> in his Letter to the <HI>German</HI> Princes, tells them, <Q>That the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire was tran&s;lated from the <HI>Greeks</HI> to the <HI>Almaines,</HI> &s;o, as that their King was not called <HI>Roman</HI> Em|peror, <HI>till he was crowned by the Pope. Before</HI> his Con&s;ecration he was <HI>but King, after</HI> his Con&s;ecration he became <HI>Emperor.</HI> From whence then, &s;ays he, had he the Empire, but from <HI>Us?</HI> And afterwards gives this rea|&s;on for it&mdash;For <HI>Rome is our Seat;</HI> The Seat of the Empire is <HI>Aix,</HI> in the Fore&s;t of <HI>Ardenne.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Radevicus, <HI>l.</HI> 1. c. 16.] Frederic <HI>the Emperour, who had denied all Subjecti|on to Pope</HI> Adrian, <HI>yet in his very defence of him&s;elf for it &s;ays thus:</HI> <Q>The fir&s;t Voice in our Election we owe to the Archbi&s;hop of <HI>Mentz,</HI> and then to the other Electors in their Order; Our <HI>Regal</HI> Unction to the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Cologn</HI> and <HI>the la&s;t,</HI> which is <HI>the Imperial</HI> Unction <HI>only,</HI> we have <HI>from the Pope.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Ibidem. <HI>And Pope</HI> Adrian <HI>pre&s;ently after, in his Subjection to the Emperour, minds him,</HI> <Q>That his Magnificence had acknowledged, That it was the Pope that &s;et the Imperial Crown upon his Head.</Q></P>
<P>Cornelius &agrave; Lapide <HI>upon the 10th v. of the 17th chap. Apoc.]</HI> To confute that Opinion, that would have the &s;eventh King &s;ucceeding the Emperours, <Q>to be the Pope.</Q>&mdash;<Q>The &s;eventh, &s;ays he, is here &s;aid &s;hould continue but a little while, whereas the Pope and the Emperour have continued a long while together.</Q>&mdash;<Q>The Pope therefore did not &s;ucceed the Emperours in the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, but continues there together with Them; as we &s;ee now the mo&s;t Serene <HI>Ferdinand</HI> to be the Emperour of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and our mo&s;t Holy Lord <HI>Paul</HI> V. to be the High-Prie&s;t <HI>(or the Pope)</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church.</Q></P>
<P>Grotius <HI>in Re&s;pon&s;. de Antichri&s;to.]</HI> The <HI>German</HI> Princes chu&s;e the <Q>Em|perour; but their Choice mu&s;t have the Approbation of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> which has conferred their Right and Power upon the Pope: from that Approbation has the Emperour the Title of <HI>ROMAN EMPEROUR,</HI> and many things in <HI>Italy</HI> which belonged to the ancient <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; from whence comes the Homage that is done him for the Dutchies of <HI>Milan, Montferrat, Mantua,</HI> and many other Privileges there be|&s;ides.</Q></P>
<P><Q>Nor can it be &s;aid upon this account, That the Emperour is made by the Pope; for the Authority of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire was always the &s;ame, even when the Emperours were &s;ome <HI>Thracians,</HI> &s;ome of <HI>Illyricum,</HI> and &s;ome of <HI>Hungary:</HI> And &s;o was it afterwards with <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> and now with the Princes of <HI>Germany. See</HI> Grot. <HI>c.</HI> 9. <HI>lib.</HI> 2. <HI>de Jure Belli &amp; Pacis,</HI> and in the Commentary of it in <HI>Prop.</HI> 21.</Q></P>
<P>Lud. &agrave; Bebenburg. <HI>cap.</HI> 5.] It is apparent from Hi&s;tory, That <HI>Germany,</HI> <Q>even after the Divi&s;ion of the Empire of the <HI>Franks,</HI> was accounted a Kingdom by it &s;elf, that is, di&s;tinct from the Title of the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire.&mdash;M. <HI>Freherus</HI> in his Comment upon this:&mdash;Our Emperours at this time ob&s;erve this in their Title;<HI>&mdash;Emperour of the</HI> Romans, <HI>King of</HI> Hungary, Bohemia, Dalmatia, <HI>&amp;c. Ludovicus</HI> the Emperour, the Son of <HI>Pius,</HI> was called <HI>King of Germany,</HI> which was almo&s;t from the fir&s;t times of the divi&s;ion of the Territories of <HI>Charlemaigne.</HI></Q></P>
<P>He does al&s;o in the next Chapter &s;hew, <Q>That the &s;even Electors chu&s;e the Emperour, as a College, or as the Repre&s;entatives of all the Prin|ces and People that are &s;ubject to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; which Authori|ty is conferred upon them from the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> by the Golden Bull of <HI>Charles</HI> IV.</Q></P>
<P>If it &s;hall be objected, <HI>That the</HI> Con&s;tantinopolitan <HI>Emperours were the only true</HI> Roman <HI>Emperours, and were unju&s;tly deprived of their We&s;tern Domi|nions by the Pope:</HI> it is to be remembred, That the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Empe|rours them&s;elves confirmed the Title of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperours <HI>Lud. &agrave; Be|benburg. cap.</HI> 5. and M. <HI>Freherus</HI> in his Comment there, proves that Tran&s;|action betwixt the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> and <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperours, by the Authority of <HI>Ado, Rhegino, Philip</HI> of <HI>Bergamo, Platina, Voluterranus, Egnatius,</HI> e&s;pecially that of the Ea&s;tern Emperour <HI>Michael,</HI> which was publi&s;hed in St. <HI>Peter</HI>'s Church at <HI>Rome,</HI> and confirmed by Pope <HI>Leo.</HI></P></NOTE> as <HI>Kings</HI> and <HI>Emperors</HI> of the <HI>Romans,</HI> and they are owned for &s;uch by <HI>all Chri&s;tian Princes</HI> in their Treaties with them.</P>
<P>The <HI>Pope</HI> al&s;o, who confers this Right and Title of <HI>Roman</HI> Emperour, is by Cu&s;tom and Pre&s;cription the <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><HI>Clementin&punc; de &s;ententia &amp; re judicata.]</HI> That Law was made by Pope <HI>Clement</HI> V. again&s;t <HI>Henry</HI> VII. <Q>That in the time of the <HI>Interregnum,</HI> or Va|cancy after every Emperour's death, the Pope &s;hould have all the Power over the Imperial Countreys and Towns.</Q></NOTE> <HI>The Admini&s;tra|tor of the Empire in time of a Vacancy,</HI> and is the Repre&s;entative of the <HI>Senate</HI> and <HI>People</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> in whom the power of chu&s;ing or approving the Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire did always re&s;ide,
<PB N="181" REF="123"> how various &s;oever the way of chu&s;ing him was; as <HI>Grotius</HI> in|forms us in his Notes upon the 9th Chapter of his 2d Book, <HI>de jure Belli &amp; Pacis, &amp; Bellarm. de Tran&s;lat. Imp. Rom.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Note 1, &amp; 2. on Chap. 3.</NOTE></P>
<P>The&s;e Rights of the pre&s;ent <HI>Roman</HI> Emperor are al&s;o confirmed by that <HI>Civil Law,</HI> which was always in former times the <HI>Gene|ral Law</HI> of all Nations, and is &s;o now for the greate&s;t part of it; and his Title has been acknowledged by the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Em|perors them&s;elves. His Power in di&s;po&s;ing of the Fees of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire in <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><HI>Blondus, Trithemius, Sabellicus, Cu&s;pinian, &amp;c.</HI> and almo&s;t all Hi&s;torians, do blame the Emperour <HI>Rodolph</HI> of <HI>Hasburg,</HI> for &s;elling the Fees of the Im|perial Towns and Principalities in <HI>Italy:&mdash;</HI>But the Popes were well plea|&s;ed with it, becau&s;e it kept the Emperours at greater di&s;tance from them.</NOTE> <HI>Italy,</HI> he is continually in the exerci&s;e of, and has publick homage done him for the Dutchies of <HI>Milan, Mantua, Modena, Montferret, &amp;c</HI> and for other Rights in the&s;e Parts.</P>
<P><NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">Grot. <HI>Re&s;pon&s;. de Antichri&s;to in Not.</HI> 6. <HI>of this Chapter.]</HI></NOTE> His being of the <HI>German</HI> Nation, &s;ignifies no more again&s;t him, than it did again&s;t others, that they were of <HI>Thrace,</HI> or <HI>Dalmatia,</HI> or <HI>Hungary.</HI> Be&s;ides, there is a plain di&s;tinction in his Titles betwixt that of <HI>Cae&s;ar</HI> or the <HI>Emperor of the</HI> Romans, and his being King of <HI>Germany, Hungary, Bohemia.</HI></P>
<P>It can be no objection again&s;t this, That the Imperial Power has no exerci&s;e of Authority over the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> or over all the Juri&s;diction of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>For, 1. <HI>His Ab&s;ence from</HI> Rome, <HI>and from the particular Go|vernment</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> <HI>of it,</HI> is no greater Argument again&s;t his being the Head of that City, <HI>as it is a part of the Empire,</HI> than it was a|gain&s;t tho&s;e <HI>Roman</HI> Emperors, who fir&s;t left the City of <HI>Rome</HI> to its own di&s;po&s;al, and &s;eated them&s;elves at <HI>Ravenna;</HI> And tho the Authority of the pre&s;ent Emperor be <HI>now</HI> le&s;s at <HI>Rome,</HI> than it was in the days of tho&s;e Emperors; yet as long as he is &s;till owned there as Lord paramount of the whole Empire of that City, a <HI>particular privilege of exemption</HI> from the execution of his Orders among the inhabitants of <HI>Rome,</HI> is no more than the a&s;|&s;erting it to be a <HI>privileged place</HI> within the extent of his Juri&s;|diction: Be&s;ides, that it is by <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><P>The Popes them&s;elves pretend no other Right to the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> than the Donations of their Emperours; and the&s;e were upon occa&s;ion re|called: The mo&s;t famous in&s;tance of which was no later than the year 963. when Pope <HI>Leo</HI> VIII. made a mo&s;t &s;olemn Renunciation of all the Imperial Donations that had been given to his Predece&s;&s;ors, and this for Him&s;elf and his Succe&s;&s;ors, to the Emperour <HI>Otho</HI> I. and his Succe&s;&s;ors; and to this &s;ub&s;cribed the Archbi&s;hops, Cardinals, and all the Clergy there, and the Con&s;uls, Senators, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and all the Civil Governours of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> and the Papacy, as is recorded by <HI>Theodoric &agrave; Nyem.</HI> There was indeed continual Differences betwixt the Popes and Emperours about the&s;e Dona|tions, and the Popes were not wholly in the free po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the Govern|ment of it, till it was given away by the Emperour <HI>Charles</HI> IV. who in lieu of it had the Golden Bull to chu&s;e the Emperour of the <HI>Romans</HI> in <HI>Germany. Blondus</HI> in his 2^d <HI>Decad. lib.</HI> 10. gives that account of Pope <HI>Innocent</HI> VI. <Q>That he would not give him the Imperial Crown, but upon this Condi|tion, <HI>That he &s;hould not keep his publick Meetings there, nor make any Order a|bout the</HI> Romans, <HI>without the advice of the Pope; and that he &s;hould not keep any con&s;tant Court at</HI> Rome <HI>or in</HI> Italy.</Q></P>
<P>Thus was the Emperour <HI>Sigi&s;mund</HI> brought afterwards to do much the &s;ame thing by Pope <HI>Eugenius,</HI> about the time of the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> and that under the name of, <HI>Confirming the Donations of</HI> Con&s;tantine, <HI>and of the other Princes.</HI></P></NOTE> the con&s;ent of the Emperors them&s;elves, that they exerci&s;e no temporal Superiority there; And that Power which they have lo&s;t there, is only upon the account of <HI>their power there exerci&s;ed before them</HI> by a <HI>Church-Head,</HI> according to the Letter of the Prophecy. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 12.</NOTE></P>
<P N="2">2. As for the incon&s;iderablene&s;s of his Power or Authority <HI>over the Juri&s;diction of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire,</HI> it is no more than what is foretold of him in the Figure of the Bea&s;t. For it is ex|pre&s;ly &s;ignified in the Figure, that he &s;hould be but the Head <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 1 &amp; chap. 17. 12.</NOTE> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, when it was divided into <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><P>Aventinus <HI>in Annal. Boior. lib.</HI> 7.] <HI>Eberhard</HI> Archbi&s;hop of <HI>Saltzbourg,</HI> about the year 1240. de&s;cribes the U&s;urpations of the Papal Authority over the Imperial, with application to the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e.&mdash;</HI><Q>The Emperour, &s;ays he, is now no more than a Name: the Ten Kings who have parted the World among&s;t them, do De&s;troy it rather than Go|vern it.&mdash;Under them is grown up that <HI>little Horn, which has Eyes, and a Mouth &s;peaking proud things.&mdash;</HI>What can be clearer than this Prophecy? Turn over the Annals; all the &s;trange things which our Ma&s;ter fore|warn'd us of, are already come to pa&s;s.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Ludovic. &agrave; Bebenburg. de Jurib. Reg. &amp; Imp. Rom. cap.</HI> 9] &s;hews, <Q>That the Imperial Authority &s;tands upon the &s;ame Title that <HI>Charlemagne</HI> left to his Sons by Inheritance; the way by Election &s;ucceeded into the &s;ame Right; and &s;o the Imperial Power has &s;till the &s;ame Title over the Lands and Kingdoms that were &s;ubject to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, tho he is not in the actual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of them.</Q></P></NOTE> Eleven di&s;tinct
<PB N="182" REF="124"> Sovereignties, repre&s;ented by the Ten Horns, with Crowns upon them, and the la&s;t Ruling Head among&s;t them. And therefore mu&s;t the Head be really but a <HI>titular</HI> Head of that whole Empire, and not in the actual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of all the Juri&s;diction of it; And &s;ince the Bea&s;t is a Roman <HI>Secular</HI> Power in being at this pre|&s;ent, by <HI>Coroll. preced;</HI> And there is no other Secular Power of the Empire, who is acknowledged to be &s;uperiour to all the re&s;t, by the Authority of the City of <HI>Rome, but he alone;</HI> The &s;mal|ne&s;s of his Dominions cannot hinder him from being a <HI>Secular</HI> Head of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, He is in the actual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion and exerci&s;e of many priviledges, by which he is every-where owned for the <HI>Chief Head</HI> of all Chri&s;tian Princes: For this rea&s;on is it, That <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg">Bellarmin. <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 5. <HI>de Tran&s;lat. Imp. Rom.]</HI> proves, <Q>That the We&s;tern Emperours Title to that part of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire was acknowledged by all Princes, and <HI>particularly</HI> by the Emperour of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> after the confirming that Title upon <HI>Charlemagne. And chap.</HI> 12. <HI>&s;hews</HI> the &s;ame to have been owned to the <HI>German</HI> Emperours by all Chri&s;tian Princes ever &s;ince the year 800. <HI>And cap.</HI> 5. <HI>lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Pontifice,</HI> gives this proof of it: That for this cau&s;e the <HI>German</HI> Emperour has the precedence of all other Kings, tho far more con&s;iderable and powerful than him&s;elf. <HI>And next,</HI> That he has the Con&s;ent of the Repre&s;entatives of the People of <HI>Rome</HI> for it.</Q> <HI>Ludovic. &agrave; Bebenburg. de Jurib. Reg. &amp; Imp. cap.</HI> 11. <HI>does fir&s;t &s;hew,</HI> <Q>That the Imperial Coronation mu&s;t certainly give the Emperours more than a Name; and that therefore it does give them a Title of Superiority over all the Territories that were under the Juri&s;diction of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, tho they be not now <HI>de facto,</HI> or actually, under the Emperour's Power; as that he can legitimate Ba&s;tards in them, in order to Inheritance; re|&s;tore tho&s;e that have been publickly di&s;graced, to their Reputation again; make Laws, and &s;uch-like things, which of right are only re&s;erved to the Imperial Power to do. And unle&s;s the King of the <HI>Romans</HI> got &s;ome|thing which he had not before, by being made Emperour, he could not be &s;aid to be <HI>advanced to the Imperial Dignity,</HI> which is the word in the Election: <HI>Rex Romanorum in Cae&s;arem promovendus, &amp; Imperator futurus;</HI> and then the Law would be for <HI>words</HI> only, and not for <HI>things,</HI> contrary to <HI>C. Communia de Leg.</HI> 2. <HI>&amp; extr. de elect. C. Commi&s;&s;a.</HI></Q> and the difference of the <HI>Names</HI> would intimate no difference betwixt the <HI>Things,</HI> contrary to <HI>Jura</HI> 21. <HI>di&s;tinct. C. Clerus &amp;c. de Codicel. l. &s;i idem.</HI></NOTE> he, and his Amba&s;&s;adors have the <HI>precedence</HI> given them in all pub|lick Appearances; And upon this account al&s;o is he in <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg"><P>See <HI>Ludovic. &agrave; Bebenburg. Not. praecedent.]</HI></P>
<P><HI>Idem cap.</HI> 15. &s;hews how the Emperour has the <HI>mediate</HI> Power in all King|doms under the Juri&s;diction of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and the Kings the <HI>im|mediate</HI> Power.</P>
<P>To the &s;ame purpo&s;e is that <HI>p.</HI> 191, <HI>&amp;</HI> 200. <HI>S. Rom. Imp. Jus Publicum.&mdash;</HI><Q>The Emperour alone has the Power of Legitimating of Ba&s;tards, of re&s;to|ring the Di&s;graced: and pre&s;cription beyond the Memory of Man a|gain&s;t Imperial Rights, is of no validity.&mdash;An Order of the Imperial Chamber is an Univer&s;al Juri&s;diction over all the Subjects of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as well tho&s;e that are its <HI>immediate,</HI> as tho&s;e that are its <HI>more re|mote</HI> Subjects.</Q></P></NOTE> the ex|erci&s;e of &s;ome <HI>Right re&s;erved</HI> to him over the Subjects of other Princes, in ca&s;e of the denial of Ju&s;tice to them, or of the ne|glect of it; and in ca&s;es of Appeal, though <HI>not with any power over the per&s;ons of Princes.</HI> Whether this be fit, and allowable, I will not di&s;pute: It is certain, that the&s;e <HI>Rights</HI> he has a long time been in actual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of, which u&s;ually confirms a Right, and are acknowledged to be his due by the Authority of the City of <HI>Rome</HI> at this pre&s;ent, and <HI>not</HI> allowed to <HI>any other</HI> Prince be&s;ide. So that there is none el&s;e that has the lea&s;t ap|pearance of being the one Secular Head of <HI>Rome</HI> in the mid&s;t of Ten Horns, or the divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire into Ten Kings.</P>
<P>If it &s;hould be further urged, That tho&s;e dreadful Acts of <HI>Antichri&s;tian Tyranny</HI> over the whole World, which are attributed to the Bea&s;t, do very little &s;uit with the Power of the Imperial Government at pre&s;ent.</P>
<P>It mu&s;t be con&s;idered, That there is a plain de&s;cription of two different States of the Power of the Bea&s;t in the Prophecy it &s;elf: The <HI>fir&s;t</HI> before the Ri&s;e of the Second Bea&s;t, or Fal&s;e Pro|phet; and there he is de&s;cribed as acting upon his own bot|tom; and it is &s;aid that <HI>all the World did wor&s;hip him,</HI> and that he had power over <HI>all Tongues and Nations,</HI> &amp;c. And that <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 8.</NOTE> does very well an&s;wer any time of the <HI>Imperial</HI> enforcement of the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion by their <HI>Laws,</HI> and their Execution of the <HI>Acts of Councils,</HI> before the Popes had got the whole Superiority
<PB N="183" REF="124"> into their Hands. For then the Imperial Power was the only <HI>Roman</HI> Power that was wor&s;hipped, or who&s;e Will and Law about Religion was &s;et up for the <HI>Laws of God</HI> to the World.</P>
<P>But then there is <HI>another</HI> State of the Power of the Bea&s;t after the Ri&s;e of the Second Bea&s;t, or Fal&s;e Prophet, where all his <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 12.</NOTE> Power is exerci&s;ed before his face by <HI>another;</HI> and in that &s;tate the charge of <HI>Anti-chri&s;tian Tyranny</HI> over the whole World does belong to the Bea&s;t, as he is <HI>confederated</HI> with tho&s;e who act all the&s;e things; and it is attributed to the Bea&s;t <HI>only,</HI> upon the ac|count of his continuing &s;till the <HI>Secular Head</HI> of that Confede|racy; As any Cruelty done by the Officers of any Army again&s;t the Enemy, is &s;aid to be <HI>all</HI> done by the General.</P>
<P>But to &s;hew us, that all this mi&s;chief was chiefly chargeable upon his Confederates, and In&s;truments only; We &s;ee all that Tragical part acted by the <HI>Image</HI> of the Bea&s;t which was in&s;pired by the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> who is de&s;cribed as the principal Actor in all the Blood&s;hed and Murther of tho&s;e, who would not <HI>wor&s;hip the Bea&s;t,</HI> or <HI>his Image;</HI> And that <HI>this Image</HI> is a thing quite <HI>di|&s;tinct</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 15, 16, 17.</NOTE> from the Bea&s;t, will be made afterwards to appear; as al&s;o how both the <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> and his <HI>Image,</HI> are the Objects of the fal&s;e Wor&s;hip enjoined.</P>
<P>But yet after all, It cannot but be acknowledged, that it is every way more certain, and unque&s;tionable, that the pre&s;ent <HI>Papal</HI> Power mu&s;t be the Fal&s;e Prophet, how dubious &s;oever his real di&s;tinction from that, which is called the Bea&s;t, may &s;eem to be. For the Character of the Fal&s;e Prophet cannot po&s;&s;ibly fit <HI>any other</HI> Church-Head of <HI>Rome</HI> at this time in being, <HI>but</HI> <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Note the fir&s;t upon the fifth Chapter.</HI></NOTE> <HI>only</HI> that Power. And the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet</HI> mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be now in being, becau&s;e the Bea&s;t (his individual Companion, whoever he is, to the la&s;t end of them both) is certainly now in being. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 19.</NOTE> <HI>Propo&s;.</HI> 23.</P>
<PB N="184" REF="125">
<PB N="185" REF="125">
<PB N="186" REF="126">
<PB N="187" REF="126">
<PB N="188" REF="127">
<PB N="189" REF="127">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="190" REF="128">
<PB N="191" REF="128">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The fir&s;t Query, Whether at</HI> Ju&s;tinian<HI>'s Recovery of</HI> Italy <HI>from the</HI> Goths, <HI>there had not been Two Changes of</HI> Roman <HI>Government &s;ince the time of the Vi&s;ion?</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THus far there &s;eems to be a general agreement among&s;t al|mo&s;t all kind of con&s;iderable Interpreters, who make The Bea&s;t to be a <HI>Roman</HI> Power in being at this pre&s;ent time; and this &s;eems &s;ufficient for the main u&s;e that is to be made of this kind of knowledg.</P>
<P>But becau&s;e Mens minds are u&s;ually very unea&s;y under &s;uch a general a&s;&s;urance of the main foundation, without a more par|ticular determination of the fir&s;t ri&s;e, of the time of the <HI>con|tinuance,</HI> and the <HI>la&s;t period</HI> of &s;o formidable a power as that of the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet is de&s;cribed to be; I will now proceed to propound my apprehen&s;ions about tho&s;e particular circum&s;tances; which is &s;o much the more nece&s;&s;ary, becau&s;e almo&s;t all the applications of the many Characters and Proper|ties of the Bea&s;t, do &s;eem to depend upon &s;uch a particular de|termination.</P>
<P>And becau&s;e I know it will be difficult to prevail with any who have framed to them&s;elves an Hypothe&s;is of their own about the&s;e things, to &s;ee any convincing proof for the way that I make choice of; To be civil to the Under&s;tandings and A&s;&s;uran|ces of <HI>others,</HI> I will now propound my own particular Applica|tion under the name of Queries, in&s;tead of Propo&s;itions, th&ocirc; to my &s;elf they may appear to be of much the &s;ame &s;trength.</P>
<P>I would therefore <HI>fir&s;t</HI> have it con&s;idered,</P>
<Q><HI>Whether at the time of</HI> Ju&s;tinian<HI>'s Conque&s;t of the</HI> Italian <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Query"> Goths, <HI>there had not been,</HI> at lea&s;t, <HI>Two &s;uch Changes of the</HI> Secular <HI>Soveraign Power of</HI> Rome, <HI>&s;ince the time of the Vi&s;ions about the Bea&s;t, as might be called Two different Heads of the Bea&s;t?</HI></Q>
<P>For the <HI>Secular</HI> Soveraign Power of <HI>Rome</HI> at the time of the Vi&s;ion, was the Imperial Government and Sixth Head (by
<PB N="192" REF="129"> <HI>Prop.</HI> 19. and 5.)&mdash;And the Imperial Government as the Sixth Head was changed, <HI>at late&s;t,</HI> upon the ruin of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Em|pire by the <HI>Heruli</HI> and <HI>Goths</HI> (by <HI>Prop.</HI> the 22.)&mdash;There re|mains then nothing more to be done for the determining of this que&s;tion, than to &s;how, That the Succe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Heruli,</HI> and <HI>Goths,</HI> to the Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> and <HI>Italy,</HI> did make a <HI>new</HI> Head of the Bea&s;t: For then it will not be que&s;tioned, but that, the Conque&s;t of the <HI>Goths</HI> by <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> did al&s;o make the other Head that <HI>was to be revived.</HI></P>
<P>That the Succe&s;&s;ion of tho&s;e Barbarous Kings at <HI>Rome</HI> did make a <HI>new</HI> Head of the Bea&s;t, appears from the definition of an Head of the Bea&s;t <HI>(Prop. the 21&s;t.)</HI> For upon the ruin of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire by the&s;e Kings, and their Reign over <HI>Rome,</HI> and <HI>Italy;</HI> The Supream <HI>Secular</HI> Power of <HI>Rome</HI> was changed, and another owned there in the place of it. Th&ocirc; the <HI>one</HI> part of the Imperial Head remained &s;till &s;ound at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> yet by the change of the <HI>other</HI> part of it, which did more immediately pre&s;ide over the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> the Soveraign power of the <HI>Ro|mans</HI> came to be divided betwixt a <HI>King</HI> and an <HI>Emperor:</HI> And &s;o, that which was a form of Government <HI>purely Imperial</HI> before, came to be a mixture of Kingly and Imperial Government.</P>
<P>For that the <HI>new Kings</HI> of <HI>Italy,</HI> and the <HI>Ea&s;tern Emperours,</HI> made &s;till but <HI>one</HI> Supream form of <HI>Roman</HI> Government, th&ocirc; divided in the Seats of their Empire, appears from the &s;tate of the Imperial Government before the ruin of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire by the&s;e Barbarous Kings. The <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> and <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperor were then but one, and the &s;ame Imperial Head, Th&ocirc; they had Two different Kingdoms; they had both of them their Autho|rity <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. xvii. pag. 157, 158.</NOTE> from the <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P>SEe <HI>Note the &s;econd on Chap.</HI> 3. Grotius <HI>de Jure Bell. &amp; Pac. lib.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 9. <HI>Art.</HI> 11. and in the Annotat.</P>
<P><HI>Onuphrius Panvinius lib. Fa&s;tor.</HI> does frequently make mention of the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> and <HI>Roman</HI> Con&s;uls, and &s;hews them to have been indif|ferently cho&s;en from either of tho&s;e Cities. See <HI>Pancirollus</HI> in <HI>Note</HI> 2. <HI>Chap.</HI> 4.</P></NOTE> &s;ame people and Senate of <HI>Rome;</HI> and therefore were there <HI>half</HI> the Senate, and <HI>one</HI> of the Con&s;uls, ordinarily re&s;iding at <HI>Con&s;tantinople.</HI> The Laws al&s;o of the Empire were joyntly &s;ub&s;cribed by both, and do now in the Code bear the names of both the Emperors; and it is the Subject of a great part of <HI>Pancirollus</HI>'s Explication of the <HI>Notitia Imperii,</HI> to &s;how, that the Military En&s;igns, and the Arms of the chief Dignities of the Empire, were almo&s;t every one of them Figures on purpo&s;e contrived by the Emperors, and given by their Authority to re|pre&s;ent the <HI>&V;nity</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire all over the World un|der the divided &s;hares of the Two Imperial Heads of it, as has <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ch. 17.</NOTE> been before ob&s;erved, page 148. And thus were the Two
<PB N="193" REF="129"> Empires, but like the Two Provinces of the Two Con&s;uls of <HI>Rome,</HI> which neverthele&s;s were but <HI>one &V;nited</HI> Supream Govern|ment of the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P>Now all the change of this Imperial Partner&s;hip in the Go|vernment, by the change of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, was the in|troducing the <HI>Kingly</HI> power into that &s;hare of the Empire.</P>
<P>For in every thing el&s;e, The new Kings ob&s;erved <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Sigonius de Occident. Imper. lib.</HI> 15.] <HI>Odoacer</HI> did humble the Authority of the Senate and Con&s;uls,&mdash;but in every thing el&s;e he retained the <HI>Old Con&s;titutions of the Commonwealth,</HI> and the Rights and Names of the Magi|&s;trates;&mdash;gave the Bi&s;hops and Churches their due re&s;pect.&mdash;And &s;peaking of <HI>Theodorick</HI> after him, <HI>lib.</HI> 16.&mdash;He retained the <HI>Roman</HI> Magi|&s;trates; and becau&s;e he reigned <HI>by the Emperour's Favour, and the Con&s;ent of the Senate,</HI> he laid a&s;ide his own Country Habit, and wore the Purple and the Royal Robes;&mdash;He &s;et up a Kingdom every way like the ancient We&s;tern Empire.</P>
<P><HI>Joan. Fer&s;ius Sile&s;ius de Praefectura Praetor.] Theodoric</HI> retained &s;till the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Laws and Cu&s;toms, and the <HI>very &s;ame Magi&s;trates;</HI> &s;o that the Citizens of <HI>Rome</HI> were <HI>a&s;hamed</HI> to create them them&s;elves.</P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. lib.</HI> 3. <HI>Variar. Ep.</HI> 43.] <HI>Theodoric</HI> &s;ays, <Q>We delight in governing according to the Laws of the <HI>Romans,</HI> whom we de&s;ire to maintain by our Arms.</Q><HI>&mdash;And all over that Book, nothing is more frequent than</HI> <Q>the mention of the <HI>Roman</HI> Commonwealth for the Kingdom of the <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy.</HI></Q> <HI>And the whole bu&s;ine&s;s of it is,</HI> The Kings or Governours Letters for the admini&s;tration of the Civil Government after the &s;ame manner, and by the &s;ame kinds of Magi&s;trates, that the We&s;tern Empire had been go|vern'd by before.</P>
<P><HI>Hieron. Rubeus Hi&s;tor. Ravennat.</HI> pag. 867. <HI>&s;peaking of the</HI> Gothi&s;h <HI>Govern|ment in</HI> Italy:&mdash;<Q>But altho <HI>they changed not any</HI> Roman <HI>Con&s;titutions,</HI> as the Senate, the Praefects, the Comites, the Curators, and the like; yet they did ordinarily model them after their own fa&s;hion, but yet all in imitation of the <HI>Roman</HI> Laws and Dignities.</Q></P>
<P><HI>And pag.</HI> 128. <Q>Then began <HI>Italy</HI> to breathe, and flouri&s;h again; and <HI>Theodoric,</HI> when he &s;aw the <HI>Romans,</HI> whom he had an affection for, very much bent upon their <HI>ancient Liberties,</HI> he commanded all things &s;hould be admini&s;tred by <HI>Roman</HI> Magi&s;trates;&mdash;He committed the whole Government of the City to the Senate and People of <HI>Rome;</HI> but &s;o, as that he him&s;elf cho&s;e the Praefect of the City.</Q></P></NOTE> the <HI>old form</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> of Government which they found in u&s;e at their coming to the Crown, as appears from all the Hi&s;tory of their Government; They changed no <HI>Roman</HI> Cu&s;tom, &s;ays <HI>Rubeus.</HI> And it may <NOTE PLACE="marg">H. Rubeus Hi&s;tor. Raven. p. 128, 167.</NOTE> more particularly be &s;een in <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus</HI>'s <HI>Variarum,</HI> That they re|tained all the &s;ame Magi&s;trates, by which the Government of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire was admini&s;tred.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire was in the time of <HI>Zeno</HI> Emperor of the <HI>Ea&s;t;</HI> and <HI>Zeno</HI> could not be le&s;s a part of the Supream Government of <HI>Rome after</HI> the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Em|pire, than he was <HI>before</HI> the fall of it; becau&s;e he had his part of the Senate of <HI>Rome,</HI> and the choice of one of the Con&s;uls &s;till continued to him all the the time of <HI>Odoacer</HI> the Conqueror's Reign; and <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P>Jornandes, <HI>who was the</HI> Gothi&s;h <HI>Bi&s;hop of</HI> Ravenna, <HI>in the time of the Reign of the</HI> Goths <HI>in</HI> Italy, <HI>gives this account of King</HI> Theodoric, <HI>in his Book</HI> De Rebus Geticis, <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 86.] <Q><HI>Zeno,</HI> upon the report that he heard of <HI>Theo|doric,</HI> then cho&s;en King of the <HI>Goths,</HI> invites him into the City; and re|ceiving him with Honour, placed him among&s;t the Nobles of his Palace.&mdash;And after that; to &s;hew him greater Honour, he adopts him his Son for the Wars, and gave a Triumph in the City at his own Co&s;ts;&mdash;then made him Con&s;ul in Ordinary, which is the highe&s;t Honour in the Empire&mdash;But <HI>Theodoric,</HI> weary of living idle, begs of <HI>Zeno</HI> that he would give him leave to try his Fortunes for the recovery of <HI>Italy,</HI> which had been a part of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and contained in it that City, which was Head and Lady of the World.<HI>&mdash;For it is better,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>that I, who am your Son, &s;hould po&s;&s;e&s;s that Kingdom by your Gift, than one that tyrannizes over your Senate and Commonwealth; for if I be Conquerour, I &s;hall hold it as your Gift and Favour.</HI></Q>&mdash;Which <HI>Zeno</HI> hearing, did yield to his de&s;ire, and &s;ent him away with Honour, recommending the Senate and People of <Q><HI>Rome</HI> to his Care.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Blondus</HI> Decad. l. 3. pag. 32. <HI>&s;peaking of</HI> Theodoric<HI>'s Petition to</HI> Zeno: <Q>&mdash;When <HI>Zeno</HI> had reported this to the Senate, they voted, That it was not only very rea&s;onable, but that it ought freely to be offered him of their own motion; wherefore <HI>Zeno,</HI> when he had honoured <HI>Theodoric</HI> with a con&s;ecrated Veil <HI>(which was then the &s;ure&s;t Confirmation of the Empe|rour's Grant for any thing),</HI> &s;ent him away, with a recommendation of <HI>Italy,</HI> and the Senate and People of <HI>Rome,</HI> to his Care.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Carolus Sigonius</HI> de Occid. Imp. lib. 15. <HI>concerning this Grant to</HI> Theodo|ric.&mdash;<Q><HI>Zeno</HI> thereupon gives him a Grant of <HI>Italy,</HI> by a publick In|&s;trument <HI>(per Pragmaticum),</HI> putting a con&s;ecrated Veil upon his Head.</Q></P>
<P><HI>De Tran&s;lat. Imp. Rom. in German.&mdash;</HI>Among&s;t the re&s;t of the proofs that he gives of the Tran&s;lation of the We&s;tern Empire upon <HI>Odoacer</HI> and the <HI>Goths,</HI> brings this for one; <Q>That <HI>Theodorick</HI> had the Grant of it by the Con&s;ent of the whole Imperial Senate; for which he quotes <HI>Sigebert, Abbas Ur&s;pergen&s;is,</HI> &amp;c. And that he was the <HI>Emperour's adopted Son,</HI> and made Con&s;ul, which was next in Dignity to the Emperour, and had a con&s;e|crated Veil from him, which he &s;ays was the Imperial Purple. And that Pope <HI>Symmachus</HI> was &s;ubject to him; and that he governed all the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Italy.</HI></Q></P>
<P>Ibid. <HI>As for the Name of</HI> King, <HI>he proves from</HI> Baldus, <HI>Examp. Col. fin. de probat. &amp; in lib. penultim. C. de donat. inter Vir. &amp; Uxor.</HI> <Q>That a King in his Kingdom, is the &s;ame with an Emperour: the Emperours ordina|rily called them&s;elves <HI>Kings</HI> as well as <HI>Cae&s;ars, Augu&s;ti, &amp; Emperours.</HI></Q></P></NOTE> by his own Authority did <HI>Zeno</HI> fir&s;t make <HI>Theodorick,</HI> who Conquered <HI>Odoacer, one of the</HI> Roman <HI>Con&s;uls, Adopted him</HI> for his Son <HI>like a new Cae&s;ar,</HI> then <HI>gave him</HI> a formal Commi&s;&s;ion for the Government of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Italy,</HI> as the Emperor <HI>u&s;ed to</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> <HI>create another Emperor</HI> to &s;hare with him in the Government; and <HI>from that time</HI> was there much the &s;ame Union in the Publick Acts of the Government betwixt the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings, and the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperors, that there had been <HI>before</HI> betwixt the <HI>Ea&s;t|ern</HI> and <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors. Accordingly do we find the dates of the <HI>Decretals</HI> of the Popes of tho&s;e days, to have the mention of the years of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings, as well as tho&s;e of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperors.</P>
<P>As for their <HI>occa&s;ional differences,</HI> That was no more than what u&s;ed to be &s;ometimes betwixt the two Emperors, and mu&s;t ne|ce&s;&s;arily be &s;ometimes betwixt <HI>the mo&s;t united</HI> Soveraigns, as it is expre&s;ly intimated by <HI>Sigonius,</HI> as the Ca&s;e between <HI>Zeno</HI> and <HI>Odoacer,</HI> Lib. 15. <HI>de Imperio Occid. Zeno,</HI> &s;ays he, took <HI>Odoacer</HI>'s Inva&s;ion of <HI>Italy</HI> &s;o ill, that he would have <HI>no Society of the Em|pire</HI> with him; which &s;hows by the way, That the <HI>Agreement</HI> of the Emperors with the following Kings of <HI>Italy,</HI> was <HI>the &s;ame kind of &s;ociable Government</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, that
<PB N="194" REF="130"> had been <HI>before</HI> u&s;ed among&s;t the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> and <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors. Thus was <HI>Theodorick</HI> <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P>See <HI>Not. praeced.&mdash;And</HI> Sigonius <HI>de Occid. Imp.</HI> l. 16. <HI>&s;ays of</HI> Theo|doric, <Q>That he conformed him&s;elf to the Purple of the <HI>Roman</HI> Princes, and laid away the Habit of his own Country, becau&s;e he was made King of <HI>Italy</HI> by the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperour and Senate.</Q> <HI>And</HI> Blondus <HI>&s;ays, pag.</HI> 37. <HI>Decad. l.</HI> 3. <Q>That <HI>Theodoric</HI> was received at <HI>Rome</HI> with the applau&s;e of the Senate and all the people.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Hieron. Rubeus Hi&s;tor. Ravennat.</HI> pag. 122. <HI>&s;ays,</HI> <Q>That <HI>Zeno</HI> and the Senate conducted <HI>Theodoric</HI> out of the City in his Robes of State.</Q></P></NOTE> cho&s;en King of <HI>Italy,</HI> and of <HI>Rome,</HI> by <HI>Zeno</HI> and the <HI>whole Senate,</HI> and with pomp accompanied by them out of the City in his Robes of State; He is received at <HI>Rome</HI> for their King with the Applau&s;es, and Acclamations of the Peo|ple, and the Honours of the Senate.</P>
<P>After a &s;mall difference with <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius</HI> the next Emperor, in <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> l. 1. Ep. 1. <HI>Theodoric</HI> to <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius;</HI> wherein tho&s;e mentioned expre&s;&s;ions are found, and among&s;t them an Acknowledgment <Q>of frequent Me&s;&s;ages from <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius,</HI> To love the Senate,</Q> To ob&s;erve the <HI>Roman</HI> Laws, To take care of all the Members of <HI>Italy; which &s;hews</HI> how much the We&s;tern Empire was &s;till accounted by the Ea&s;tern Emperours to <Q>be a part of the <HI>Roman</HI> State, as it had been before, in Union with the Ea&s;tern.</Q></NOTE> the beginning of his Reign, <HI>Theodoric</HI> begs Peace of him, with an acknowledgment of his Superiority over all the World; and moves him to it by this con&s;ideration, That <HI>the&s;e two Common|wealths of the Ea&s;t and We&s;t, were always one body under the former Princes; And there ought to be but one Will, and one Judgment in the Kingdom of the</HI> Romans.</P>
<P>And <HI>Onuphrius Pauvinius</HI> ob&s;erves, <HI>Fa&s;tor.</HI> pag. 308. That <HI>Theodoric</HI> enjoyed the Government of <HI>Italy, by the con&s;ent</HI> of <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius;</HI> and the very <HI>difference</HI> betwixt them at the begin|ning of <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius</HI> his Reign does &s;how, what opinion <HI>Theodo|ric</HI> had of his being the Emperor's <HI>partner</HI> in the Government of the <HI>We&s;t:</HI> For upon <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius</HI>'s conferring the honour of <HI>Con&s;ul,</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tus</HI> upon <HI>Chlodoreus</HI> King of the <HI>Franks, Theodoric</HI> is <NOTE PLACE="marg">Pomponius Lae|tus.</NOTE> &s;aid to have declared War again&s;t him, for the Provinces of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>A manife&s;t in&s;tance does he give of his owning the <HI>&s;ame con|junction</HI> with the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Empire, that the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors be|fore him did te&s;tify by their <HI>joynt</HI> Suffrages, in chu&s;ing of each of their Con&s;uls. He &s;ends to that Emperor to joyn his Suffrage with his own in <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> lib. 2. Ep. 1. <HI>Theodoric</HI> does fir&s;t acquaint the Empe|rour <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius,</HI> That he him&s;elf has cho&s;en <HI>Felix</HI> for Con&s;ul; and then re|commends him to him to join his Suffrage with him, according to the old Cu&s;tom of the joint Con&s;ent of both the Ea&s;tern and We&s;tern Princes in that Choice.</P>
<P><HI>Onuphr. Panvinius Fa&s;tor. p.</HI> 61. <HI>&amp; p.</HI> 290.] &s;hews how the Con&s;uls were cho&s;en at <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> in the time of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings, and gives a particular Account of all the Con&s;uls of the We&s;t and Ea&s;t.</P></NOTE> the choice of <HI>Felix</HI> for that years Con&s;ul, that he might &s;how his care of both the Common|wealths; And <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Onuph. Panvinius Fa&s;tor.</HI> p. 308. Anno 507. <HI>Cum Ana&s;ta&s;io Augu&s;to Con&s;ul Venantius Theodoric Comes dome&s;ticorum.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Verientius, Theodoric</HI>'s <HI>Comes dome&s;ticorum,</HI> was cho&s;en <HI>Con&s;ul</HI> with the <HI>Emperor Ana&s;ta&s;ius.</HI> And the <HI>joynt con&s;ent</HI> of the two Emperors in the choice of their Con&s;uls, was one of the mo&s;t remarkable te&s;timonies of their perfect concord in the &s;ame common Government of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire: For the <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">See <HI>in Note</HI> 25. <HI>chap.</HI> 4. <HI>Ju&s;tinian. Novell.</HI> 105. 6. <HI>Cod. Theodo&s;. Tit.</HI> 6, 7.</NOTE> Con&s;ulary dignity was always accounted the next in Degree and Honour to that of Emperor.</P>
<P>In the time of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings we do al&s;o find the ancient En&s;ign of Honour continued to be carried before tho&s;e of the Con&s;ulary Dignity, which had been <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">See <HI>chap.</HI> 17. <HI>Pancirollus</HI> about the En&s;igns of Authority carried before all the great Magi&s;trates in the time of the divi&s;ion of the Empire.</NOTE> u&s;ed ever &s;ince the divi|&s;ion of the Empire, to &s;ignify the <HI>&V;nity</HI> of the two Emperors in the <HI>Roman</HI> Government; And which <HI>Pancirollus</HI> &s;ays (p. 46.
<PB N="195" REF="130"> <HI>Notit. Orient.)</HI> That it was the <HI>chiefe&s;t</HI> of all the En&s;igns of Pub|lick Authority; And that was, to have the <HI>Heads of both the Princes</HI> of the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> and <HI>We&s;t</HI> carried before them upon a Mace: As may be &s;een in the Forms of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings Letters to the new Elected Con&s;ulary Magi&s;trate, <HI>Ca&s;&s;iod. Var.</HI> Lib. 6. Epi&s;t. 20. <HI>Vultus quinetiam Regnant&ucirc;m, &amp;c. The Faces of the Princes are car|ried before thee in Pomp, That thou may&s;t be Reverenced for the Autho|rity of the Governors.</HI> And again, <HI>The name of Con&s;ul be&s;peaks thee to be Merciful:</HI> And the <HI>Images of the Princes declare that thou oughte&s;t to be feared.</HI> And there were Two and Twenty of the&s;e Con&s;ulary Magi&s;trates in the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Divi&s;ion, which appear to <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> have continued to the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian. Pancirol. Notit. Imp. Orient.</HI> p. 249. The &s;ame Figure had the chief Military General engraven upon the back&s;ide of a Book, <HI>Id.</HI> pag. 56.</P>
<P><HI>Athalaricus</HI> <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> l. 8. Ep. 1. <HI>Vos avum no&s;trum in ve&s;tr&acirc; civitate cel&s;is curulibus extuli&s;tis. Vos genitorem meum in Itali&acirc; palmatae claritate deco|r&acirc;&s;tis.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar.</HI> l. 11. Ep. 1. It appears by the Letter of <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus</HI> to the Senate, That <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> had taken advantage of the Death of <HI>Theodoric</HI> to invade the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Territories in <HI>Illyricum,</HI> while things were un&s;etled under the young Prince <HI>Athalaricus</HI> and his Mother; but that he was well repul&s;ed in the Attempt, and that the <HI>Goths</HI> had gained upon the Ea&s;tern Empire in the&s;e parts.&mdash;<Q>In the very beginning of her Reign <HI>(&s;ays hc of</HI> Amala&s;untha <HI>and</HI> Athalaricus) when Attempts are u&s;ually made, by rea|&s;on of the un&s;etledne&s;s of new Changes, the Army made the <HI>Danube</HI> part of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, in &s;pight of the Prince of the Ea&s;t. It is well e|nough known what the Invaders met with; which I purpo&s;ely omit, le&s;t the Genius of a Social Prince (that is, <HI>then in a League of Peace)</HI> &s;hould put on the blu&s;h of a Traytor.</Q></P></NOTE> after <HI>Theodoric,</HI> Sollicites the favour of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> that they might continue <HI>in Peace and &V;nion, as his Father</HI> had done; and commemorates the former Emperors kindne&s;&s;es, in making his Grandfather <HI>Con&s;ul</HI> at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> and his Father <HI>Con&s;ul in Italy;</HI> For his Father <HI>Eutharicus</HI> was <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Chronicon</HI> pag. 702.] <HI>D. N. Eutharicus Cillica, &amp; Ju&s;tinus Aug. Co&s;.</HI> <Q>And there does <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus</HI> de&s;cribe the Pomp in which <HI>Eutharicus</HI> ap|peared at <HI>Rome</HI> in the time of his Con&s;ul&s;hip, after which he returned to his Father <HI>Theodoric</HI> to <HI>Ravenna.</HI></Q></NOTE> Con&s;ul with the Emperor <HI>Ju&s;tin;</HI> and his Father's Con&s;ul&s;hip in <HI>Italy</HI> is an evident &s;ign of the joynt &s;uffrages of both the Princes for the Con&s;ul of <HI>Rome,</HI> e&s;pecially when it appears, that <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><HI>Onuph. Panvin. Fa&s;tor.</HI> p. 308. Anno 510. <Q><HI>Eutharicus Con&s;ul Orientalis, cum Boethio Occidentali.</HI></Q></NOTE> <HI>Lutharicus</HI> was once the Con&s;ul of the <HI>Ea&s;t, viz.</HI> when he was Collegue with <HI>Roatheus</HI> the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Con&s;ul. <HI>Onuph. Panci. Fa&s;tor. Anno</HI> 510.</P>
<P>He profe&s;&s;es the &s;trength of his Kingdom to lye in his good corre&s;pondence with the Emperors; and mentions <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iod. Variar.</HI> l. 8. Ep. 10.] <Q>He was al&s;o made your Son for the Wars, in order to a clo&s;er Union.&mdash;This Name you will more fitly be&s;tow upon &s;o young a Man as I am, &s;ince you have given it to tho&s;e that were much older.</Q></NOTE> his Fa|ther's being his <HI>adopted Son,</HI> like tho&s;e who were made <HI>Augu&s;ti</HI> or <HI>Partners</HI> of the Empire by others, and de&s;ires the &s;ame for him&s;elf.</P>
<P><HI>Amala&s;untha,</HI> and <HI>Theodohadus,</HI> after the death of <HI>Athalaricus,</HI> &s;end the &s;ame profe&s;&s;ions of Amity, and de&s;ire <HI>an &V;nion</HI> be|twixt the Two Kingdoms, as that which was then confirmed by long <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iod. Var.</HI> l. 10. Ep. 1, 2.</NOTE> Cu&s;tom, and become <HI>like a Law</HI> betwixt them: And they both &s;end to the Emperour for leave to tran&s;port <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ca&s;&s;iod. Var.</HI> l. 10. Ep. 8.] <HI>Ju&s;tiniano Aug. Amala&s;untha Regina.&mdash;</HI><Q>For it is fit that the <HI>Roman</HI> World &s;hould be embelli&s;hed by your a&s;&s;i&s;t|ance, which the love of your Serenity does illu&s;trate.</Q></P>
<P>And <HI>Theod.</HI> Ep. 9.] <Q>It is but fitting that you &s;hould willingly grant us tho&s;e things, which, if we were negligent of, we ought to be &s;tirred up by your Clemency to &s;et about; for, without que&s;tion, all mu&s;t be very plea&s;ing to you, what&s;oever &s;hall be done by us for the Ornament of <HI>Ita|ly,</HI> becau&s;e it is to your Honour, when&s;oever the Glory of our Common|wealth is advanced.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>Marble</HI> for the Ornament of <HI>that</HI> Roman <HI>World, and Commonwealth, which they expre&s;s his glory to be concerned in;</HI> and <HI>Theodohadus</HI> in particular &s;ends his recommendation of a Petitioner to him about the Affairs of the Church at <HI>Ravenna, notwith&s;tanding</HI> that <HI>Ravenna</HI> was <HI>Theodahadus</HI> his Royal Seat: But the <HI>Goths</HI> being <HI>Arrians,</HI> they committed the chief care of the <HI>Orthodox</HI> to the Emperour.</P>
<PB N="196" REF="131">
<P> <HI>Vitiges</HI> pleads with the <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><HI>Idem</HI> l. 10. Ep. 32.] <HI>Vitiges R. Ju&s;tiniano Aug.&mdash;</HI><Q>That you may do after your u&s;ual manner, that both the Commonwealths may continue in Concord, and that according to the manner of the Princes that have gone before, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></Q></NOTE> Emperour <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> for Peace in the &s;ame &s;tile; &s;hows him <HI>how much</HI> Rome, <HI>the Head of the world, had &s;uffered by the War, moves him to Peace, by the con&s;ideration of the advantage of both parts of the</HI> Roman <HI>Commonwealth by it,</HI> and the Examples of all former Princes; and &s;ollicites the <NOTE N="s" PLACE="marg"><HI>Idem</HI> l. 10. Ep. 33.] <HI>Magi&s;tro officior. Vitiges R.&mdash;</HI><Q>For tho I may be thought to have de&s;erved le&s;s of you, yet have &s;ome regard to the <HI>Roman</HI> Liberties, which by the Tumults of War are every-where violated.</Q></NOTE> concur|rence of the great Men of that Court with him in that motion, <HI>upon the account of the common Liberty of the</HI> Roman <HI>Nation.</HI></P>
<P>The Senate al&s;o of <HI>Rome</HI> it &s;elf u&s;es the &s;ame motive to <HI>Ju|&s;tinian</HI> for Peace, <NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ca&s;&s;iod. Var.</HI> l. 11. Ep. 13.] <HI>Ju&s;tiniano Aug. Senatus Urbis Romanae.&mdash;</HI><Q>It is a very ju&s;t and nece&s;&s;ary thing to petition for the &s;ecurity of the <HI>Roman</HI> Commonwealth, of one that is a pious Prince of it, becau&s;e it is rea&s;onable for you to de&s;ire all that may contribute to our Advantage or Liberty, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></Q></NOTE> <HI>becau&s;e</HI> Rome <HI>ought to be his care,</HI> and there|fore not to be &s;uffered to be ruined upon his account; And that it was his Agreement only with the <HI>Goths,</HI> that made that City find favour with them, becau&s;e of his concern <HI>in the common In|tere&s;t of the</HI> Romans.</P>
<P>And well worth the peru&s;ing for this purpo&s;e, is <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ibidem.</HI> <Q>Be not thou the cau&s;e of my Ruine, who ha&s;t always con|tributed to the Joy of my Life&mdash;Do not ruine by Di&s;cord, whom thou oughte&s;t to defend by War.&mdash;Joyn Councels (with the King) and unite your Forces, that what&s;oever may be to my Advantage, may redound to your Glory.</Q></NOTE> That <HI>Pro|&s;opopaeia,</HI> which the Senate repre&s;ents to <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> in the name of the City of <HI>Rome, as his peculiar City,</HI> that <HI>ought to be his care</HI> and concern; and that he ought to maintain Peace and Unity with the <HI>Goths</HI> for her &s;ake.</P>
<P>It is al&s;o a remarkable ob&s;ervation of <HI>Joh. Fer&s;ius Sile&s;ius</HI> to this purpo&s;e in his Book <HI>de Praefect. Praetor.</HI> That <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> de|manded of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> King as the condition of the Peace, That he &s;hould never &s;et up his Statue, without <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s in an higher eminency than his own, and at the Right hand, as the more Honourable place; which confirms the former Cu|&s;tom of <HI>&s;etting up both the Princes Statues</HI> to &s;ignify <HI>one</HI> Empire in <HI>common</HI> to them both, th&ocirc; the Emperour would have the prece|dence.</P>
<P>Again, <HI>both</HI> the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperours and <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings had the name of <HI>Rerum Domini,</HI> or Lords of the World, from <HI>the &s;ame City of</HI> Rome, which was then called, <HI>The Head of all things.</HI> Of the Emperours, it is unque&s;tionable; and <NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg"><HI>Idem</HI> l. 11. Ep. 1, 8, 10. l. 12. Ep. 3, 5, 6, 11, 18.</NOTE> of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings it is no le&s;s certain, from <HI>Lib.</HI> 11. and 12. <HI>Ca&s;&s;iod. Varia|rum,</HI> in above Twenty &s;everal in&s;tances of that Title. And <HI>both Emperour and King</HI> were repre&s;ented <HI>together</HI> in <HI>Italy</HI> at lea&s;t, as the one conjoyned Soveraign Authority of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as appears from the before cited form of the Kings Letters to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Pag. 186.</NOTE> the new elected Con&s;ulary Magi&s;trate, where the Heads of <HI>both the Princes</HI> are &s;aid to be carried before them.</P>
<P>And accordingly we find the Dates of the Pontificates in tho&s;e times, to have the King of the <HI>Goths,</HI> as well as the <HI>Ea&s;t|ern</HI>
<PB N="197" REF="131"> Emperour &s;ignified in who&s;e time the <HI>Popes lived.</HI> The Wars betwixt the <HI>Goths</HI> and <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> are no greater objection again&s;t their being One Head of the <HI>Romans,</HI> than the Civil Wars be|twixt the Two Con&s;uls, <HI>Sulla,</HI> and <HI>Cinna, &amp;c.</HI> Or the Wars betwixt the Two Emperours of the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> and <HI>We&s;t,</HI> who yet for a while, at lea&s;t, are <HI>acknowledged by the chief Adver&s;aries</HI> of my opinion to have been one of the Heads of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>From hence then it may be certainly concluded, That &s;o con|&s;iderable a change of the Form of the Sovereign power of <HI>Rome</HI> is &s;ufficient to give it the name of one of tho&s;e two la&s;t Kings of the Eight, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 10, 11. which &s;hould come <HI>imme|diately after</HI> that Imperial Sixth Head which Ruled at the time of the Vi&s;ion; for it has all the qualifications of one of tho&s;e Kings; That is, it is a change of the Supreme Government of <HI>Rome.</HI> And to know what kind of change of that Govern|ment is &s;ufficient for the Title of one of the&s;e Kings, one mu&s;t con&s;ult the Examples of tho&s;e, which were pa&s;t <HI>be|fore it.</HI></P>
<P>It is certain, That the five fir&s;t changes (called the <HI>five</HI> Kings <HI>pa&s;t,</HI> and <HI>one</HI> in being) could be nothing but the change of the name <HI>of the Civil Sovereign power,</HI> let them be what they will in particular: For there was <HI>one</HI> and <HI>the &s;ame Religion</HI> in them all. There are then <HI>five</HI> plain in&s;tances in the &s;ame Figure, to ju&s;tify the making of this change of the name of the Civil <HI>Roman</HI> Government at the ruin of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Em|pire to be one of tho&s;e Two Kings of the Eight, which were to come after the Imperial Sixth Head, that was the King at the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, There is al&s;o the example of the Ten Horns, or Ten Kings (repre&s;ented by them) to &s;how the difference betwixt the Supreme powers, which they &s;ignified, to be nothing but <HI>outward civil</HI> differences. For tho&s;e Ten Kings are &s;aid to be of one and the &s;ame Religion, to be of <HI>one mind,</HI> and to agree together in fal&s;e Wor&s;hip. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 13, 17.</NOTE></P>
<P>Here are then <HI>Sixteen</HI> in&s;tances in the &s;ame Figure, to &s;how that the change of the <HI>Civil Form</HI> of <HI>Roman</HI> Government by the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings was &s;ufficient to make them to be accounted one of tho&s;e Two Kings that were to come after the Sixth King, that Ruled in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time.</P>
<PB N="198" REF="132">
<P> If further we con&s;ult the u&s;ages of the Figures in <HI>Daniel,</HI> that &s;ignify Kings, we &s;hall find there, that the <HI>only note of di|&s;tinction</HI> to know different Kings by, is &s;ome outward civil dif|ference, either upon the account of a different Dominion, or for being another name of the Civil Government in the &s;ame Dominion; and the number of the in&s;tances of that kind in that Prophecy are about Thirty.</P>
<P>So that there &s;eems to be no manner of rea&s;on, why this change of the <HI>name</HI> of the Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> by the <HI>Goths</HI> &s;ucceeding the Imperial, &s;hould not be one of tho&s;e Two Kings, that were to come after the Imperial, &s;ince All the Eight Kings are agreed to be &s;o many changes of the <HI>Roman</HI> Go|vernment.</P>
<P>And th&ocirc; it &s;hould be &s;aid, That the <HI>change of the Religion</HI> of the Empire by <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> was one of tho&s;e Kings; yet &s;ince the different kind of the Civil Government under the &s;ame Religion, have been found to be the difference be|twixt <HI>all</HI> the Kings <HI>be&s;ides,</HI> that are figuratively mentioned in <HI>Daniel,</HI> or the <HI>Revelations;</HI> This con&s;tant u&s;age of Pro|phetical expre&s;&s;ions, in above Sixty In&s;tances, is &s;urely war|rant enough to make that remarkable change of the Civil Form of the Sovereign Power, at the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Em|pire, to be <HI>another</HI> King, th&ocirc; the Religion might continue the &s;ame.</P>
<P>Now if this change of the name of the Civil Government by the <HI>Goths,</HI> were either the Seventh or Eighth King after the Imperial, then it mu&s;t make a <HI>new</HI> Head, becau&s;e it is one of the <HI>fir&s;t and cleare&s;t Propo&s;itions</HI> that has been advanced, That every one of tho&s;e Eight Kings are one of the Seven Heads of the Bea&s;t, by <HI>Prop.</HI> the <HI>5th.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">^q <HI>Idem</HI> l. 10. Ep. 15.</NOTE></P>
<PB N="199" REF="132">
<PB N="200" REF="133">
<PB N="201" REF="133">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="202" REF="134">
<PB N="203" REF="134">
<HEAD>CHAP. VIII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Second Query, Whether the Reign of the Bea&s;t did not begin with</HI> Ju&s;tinian<HI>'s Conque&s;ts of the</HI> Italian Goths? <HI>This endeavoured to be demon&s;trated. Eighteen Objections an&s;wered.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>AFTER what has been &s;aid for the making the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings <HI>one</HI> of the Eight Kings, it will ea&s;ily be granted, that <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of the <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy</HI> mu&s;t make <HI>another</HI> new Head, becau&s;e it had the &s;ame qualifications that the <HI>other</HI> before it had for being one of the Two Kings after the Imperial, that ruled at the time of the Vi&s;ion; that is, It was a very re|markable change of the <HI>name</HI> of the Civil Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> which is the only con&s;tant difference betwixt all the Changes in the &s;ame Empire, that are to be found in <HI>Daniel,</HI> or the <HI>Revelations;</HI> And Examples are the Rules that are to be fol|lowed in Interpretations (by <HI>Rule</HI> 2, and 3.) Now if this be once granted, it &s;eems to be &s;carce worth the making it a que&s;tion,</P>
<Q><HI>Whether the fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t were not upon the Conque&s;t of the</HI> <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Query"> Goths <HI>in</HI> Italy <HI>by</HI> Ju&s;tinian?</Q>
<P>For the Bea&s;t is in being at this pre&s;ent (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 23.) And he could not ari&s;e either before or after <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t.</P>
<P N="1">1. <HI>Not after it.</HI> For at that time there had been at lea&s;t two Changes of the <HI>Secular</HI> Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> &s;ince the time of the Vi&s;ion (by <HI>Query</HI> 1.)&mdash;And the la&s;t of the&s;e two Changes is the Bea&s;t (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 20.)</P>
<P N="2">2. The Bea&s;t could <HI>not</HI> ari&s;e <HI>before</HI> that time. For then at <HI>Ju|&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t there would have been another Change of the Civil Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> and &s;o would the Bea&s;t have been put an end to; but the time of the Bea&s;t is not yet pa&s;t (by <HI>Prop.</HI> 23. and <HI>Coroll.</HI> 4. <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.) Now if the fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t could be neither before, nor after <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t, it mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be at the &s;ame time with it.</P>
<PB N="204" REF="135">
<P> The whole &s;trength of this proof does lie upon the general Notion of Heads, and Horns, in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and the <HI>con&s;tant mark</HI> of their di&s;tinction from one another; And the <HI>mark</HI> of their di&s;tinction from one another in all the known Examples of Figures in both the&s;e Prophecies, is nothing, but either a di&s;tinct juri&s;diction, or a different name of the Civil Government, and not any differences from one another in point of <HI>Religion,</HI> or <HI>any other accidental qualifications.</HI></P>
<P>The differences of the Heads, or Horns, that are de&s;cribed to be in Rule in the &s;ame Kingdom all at one time, are nothing but di&s;tinct civil Juri&s;dictions in that one Monarchy.</P>
<P>The differences betwixt Succe&s;&s;ive Heads, or Horns, in re|gard of the Succe&s;&s;ive Change of the &s;tate of the Bea&s;t, are no|thing <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ob&s;erv. 4. Prop. 16.</NOTE> but new names of the Civil Sovereign Power of that Mo|narchy. If the change be from one to many, then it &s;ignifies the divided &s;tate of that Monarchy, and the change of the Mo|narchical Form of it into many di&s;tinct Principalities ruling in it; as may be &s;een in the Example of the Fourth Bea&s;t with the Ten Horns, in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and in the He-Goat, of the 8th Chapter, with the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> Horn, and the other <HI>four</HI> after him. If the Change be repre&s;ented by &s;ingle Heads, or Horns, coming after one another, then every Head, or Horn, &s;ignifies a new name of the Ruling Power of that Monarchy, without any divi&s;ions in it. So, as has been &s;hown, does the Second Horn of the Ram of the 8th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> &s;ignify the Suc|ce&s;&s;ion of the Sovereign Power over the &s;ame Nation of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> by the name of the King of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> in the place of the King of <HI>Media.</HI> And the &s;ix fir&s;t Heads of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> that are de&s;cribed as &s;ucceeding in order, do all &s;ig|nify the &s;everal changes of the name of the chief Ruling Power of the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P>By the&s;e Examples it appears, That the only Con&s;titutive or E&s;&s;ential difference of an Head of the Bea&s;t, is a new different name of the Civil Power that rules in chief; And therefore there &s;eems to be no ground from the known Examples of the &s;ignification of Succe&s;&s;ive Heads, or Horns, to make the ri&s;e of the Chri&s;tian Religion, in the Imperial Head, by <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> to be a new King of the Seven, whenas the <HI>&s;ame civil Form of Govern|ment</HI> continued under the <HI>&s;ame name</HI> of the Imperial Govern|ment, or the Government of Emperors.</P>
<PB N="205" REF="135">
<P> If the many in&s;tances of this kind in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the <HI>Revelations,</HI> which (counting the three &s;hows of the Seven Heads, and Ten Horns in the <HI>Revelations)</HI> are more than &s;eventy, be of any force, then the Imperial Government cannot be &s;aid to be changed by the Succe&s;&s;ion of a new King, till there be another different Form of Civil Government &s;et up at <HI>Rome</HI> in its place, under <HI>another name;</HI> And then the Imperial Form, which is &s;aid to be in being at the time of the Vi&s;ion, will continue the &s;ame, till the <HI>We|&s;tern</HI> Empire was cut off by the <HI>Heruli,</HI> and <HI>Goths</HI> of <HI>Italy;</HI> which will &s;hew it to be nece&s;&s;ary for the return of the Imperial Rule again over <HI>Rome,</HI> by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> to be the <HI>Eighth, which was one of the Seven,</HI> that is, <HI>the &s;ixth returned into being again.</HI></P>
<P>The Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t with <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> may be thus further con|firmed.</P>
<P>The Bea&s;t is the Eighth King, <HI>and was of the Seven,</HI> Rev. 17. 11. and therefore was one of the Seven Kings, who had been in Rule before, and was returned into it again (by <HI>Coroll. Prop.</HI> 4.) But he could not have been the Seventh King, that was in Rule before, becau&s;e then he would have been the Seventh &s;till conti|nued, and not a new King with the name of an Eighth. <HI>See Coroll. Prop.</HI> 18.</P>
<P>The Bea&s;t therefore mu&s;t have been either the Sixth King, that is, the Imperial Government returned into Rule again, or one of the other five <HI>before</HI> it. But before the time of <HI>Ju&s;ti|nian</HI> there was neither any re&s;tauration of the Imperial Govern|ment of <HI>Rome,</HI> that was fallen from it <HI>before,</HI> nor any new revi|ving of any of the <HI>other five</HI> Governments of <HI>Rome,</HI> which were before the Imperial.</P>
<P N="1">1. It will be objected, That this would make the Imperial Head <MILESTONE UNIT="Objections."> to continue unchanged from the time of the Vi&s;ion, to the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire; whereas the Sixth Head &s;eems plainly to be repre&s;ented to have its deadly wound upon the Dragon at <HI>Con|&s;tantine</HI>'s <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 12.</NOTE> Conver&s;ion of the Imperial Head to Chri&s;tianity. For immediately after that, in the 13th Chapter, is the Bea&s;t &s;hown with his <HI>Head wounded to death,</HI> and <HI>yet healed again,</HI> after the Dragon had been &s;aid in the 12th Chapter to have been thrown down from Heaven.</P>
<P>All that can be made appear from the fall of the Dragon (&s;up|po&s;ing <MILESTONE UNIT="An&s;wer."> the Application of it to the fall of Pagani&s;m by <HI>Con&s;tan|&s;tine</HI>'s Conver&s;ion) is, That the <HI>Reign of Diabolical Rage in the</HI>
<PB N="206" REF="136"> <HI>Imperial Head again&s;t the Chri&s;tan Church,</HI> was then at an end, and that <HI>Chri&s;tianity</HI> was mounted on the Throne <HI>in&s;tead</HI> of it. But there is no manner of hint about the end of the Imperial <HI>Head it &s;elf,</HI> or of the change of it for a new Head; It is <HI>only</HI> the change of the Reign of the Devil in that Head, and therefore is it &s;aid to be <HI>Satan</HI> only ca&s;t down: And though one would judge this to be a great change of Affairs, yet there was no rea&s;on from hence to make the lo&s;s of the Dragon's Power the <HI>end of an Head,</HI> becau&s;e his Power never was <HI>the beginning of one;</HI> The Imperial Head had not its denomination or di&s;tinctive Character from the other Heads upon the account of the power of the Dragon in it, and therefore it cannot cea&s;e to be an Head, <HI>only</HI> for having that power ca&s;t out of it.</P>
<P><HI>That it was not the power of the Dragon that was the di&s;tingui&s;hing Character</HI> of the Imperial Head from tho&s;e that were before it, is certain. For the Red Dragon with the Seven Heads and Ten Horns, mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be &s;ome <HI>Roman</HI> Power per&s;ecuting the Church of God: And then it mu&s;t 1. Either begin at <HI>Pompey</HI>'s Conque&s;t of <HI>Judaea,</HI> which was in the time of the Con&s;ulary Go|vernment, and continued in the Dictator&s;hip of <HI>Julius Cae&s;ar;</HI> and &s;o the Red Dagon would be in one or two Heads <HI>more</HI> be|&s;ides the Imperial, and therefore could not be <HI>the mark of di&s;tin|ction</HI> betwixt them and the Imperial: If &s;o, then the continu|ance of the Imperial Government <HI>without the Dragon in it,</HI> has all rea&s;on to be accounted the <HI>&s;ame Head</HI> &s;till, &s;ince the Dragon was no part of the e&s;&s;ential difference of the Imperial Head from the two others that went before it; and therefore does the ca|&s;ting out of the Dragon out of the Imperial Head, make no change of that Property which made it an Head: Or, 2dly, The Dragon mu&s;t be the <HI>Roman per&s;ecution</HI> of the Chri&s;tians. And then the Imperial Head would have been begun <HI>a long time before</HI> the time of the Dragon in it; which would plainly &s;how, that as the Imperial Government was an Head of the Bea&s;t <HI>before it was po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed</HI> by the Dragon, &s;o mu&s;t it continue the &s;ame Head of the Bea&s;t <HI>after it was di&s;po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ed</HI> of the Dragon.</P>
<P N="2">2. And whereas this Opinion &s;eems to be countenanced from the immediate con&s;equence of it in the 13th Chapter, which is <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 3.</NOTE> the appearance of an Head wounded to death, and healed again; It is to be con&s;idered, that the maintainers of this Opinion them|&s;elves do allow at lea&s;t 140 years &s;pace, betwixt the Fall of the
<PB N="207" REF="136"> Dragon, and the Ri&s;e of that other Bea&s;t: And then there is no Argument at all from the nearne&s;s of the two Vi&s;ions to one another, either to interpret that Fall of the wounding of any of the Seven Heads, or to make &s;o little a di&s;tance of &s;pace be|twixt the Fall, and the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>There is a plain mention of <HI>a flood ca&s;t out of the Dragon's</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 12. 15.</NOTE> <HI>mouth,</HI> which in Prophetick Language &s;ignifying an <HI>inundation of va&s;t multitudes of People,</HI> does give opportunity and time enough for the wounding of the Head, and the <HI>healing it again;</HI> and this di&s;tance betwixt them is by our Adver&s;aries &s;aid to be 140 years.</P>
<P>Indeed this very 13th Chapter does &s;hew the power of the Dragon to be <HI>wholly &s;piritual,</HI> con&s;idered by him&s;elf; For he is repre&s;ented here as active as he was before he was ca&s;t down; which &s;hews that he was only <HI>an Evil Spirit in one of the Heads,</HI> and <HI>not the Head it &s;elf.</HI> For then his ca&s;ting down would have been <HI>the Dragon's deadly wound,</HI> as the Head of the Bea&s;t, that was before pa&s;t, is repre&s;ented to be &s;o wounded; whereas the Dragon is as much in action <HI>after</HI> his fall, as he was <HI>before.</HI> He was then the &s;ame &s;piritual Power when he was <HI>in the Head,</HI> and when he was <HI>ca&s;t out of it;</HI> and therefore <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> from it.</P>
<P N="3">3. It will be further urged, that this would make the Impe|rial Head continue an Head of the Bea&s;t after it was turned Chri&s;tian, whereas the Heads of the Bea&s;t are &s;aid to have the <HI>names of bla&s;phemy</HI> upon them.</P>
<P>But it is known, that things are called by the name of that which is mo&s;t predominant among&s;t them; And &s;ince the time of the Chri&s;tian Emperors in that Head was incon&s;iderable, in compari&s;on of the time of Heatheni&s;m, the Objection has no weight in it.</P>
<P N="4">4. But then it &s;eems harder to an&s;wer that Character upon the Seventh Head, or <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings.</P>
<P>It will not be &s;o very difficult if it be con&s;idered, That the Seventh Head is the <HI>mixed form of Imperial and Regal Government;</HI> For it is not hard to find the beginning of that degeneracy of Chri&s;tianity, which is called <HI>Bla&s;phemy,</HI> in the e&s;tabli&s;hed <HI>Roman</HI> Religion <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P>WE find in St. <HI>Augu&s;tine,</HI> contra <HI>Fau&s;tum,</HI> lib. 20. c. 2. [which was near an 100 years before this time] that the <HI>Manachees</HI> would have the Orthodox to be like the Pagans. <HI>And</HI> Fau&s;tus <HI>thence &s;ays,</HI> Ye have turned the Idols of the Pagans into Martyrs, whom you wor&s;hip with the &s;ame kind of Invocations: And the Edicts of <HI>Valens</HI> and <HI>Theodo&s;ius</HI> again&s;t <HI>the Adorations of the Image of Chri&s;t,</HI> confirms it; <HI>Ho&s;pinian.</HI> pag. 49.</P>
<P>The Wor&s;hip of the Saints by Invocation, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> &s;eems to be very near a|kin to the Wor&s;hip of the Le&s;&s;er Gods among&s;t the Heathens, and then it mu&s;t needs be <HI>Bla&s;phemy.</HI></P>
<P><HI>H. Salmeron praelud.</HI> 7. <HI>in Apocalyp&s;.]</HI> gives this very rea&s;on, why by <HI>Ba|bylon the Harlot,</HI> mu&s;t be under&s;tood <HI>Rome Heathen,</HI> viz. becau&s;e it did wor|&s;hip the Images of all the Gods in <HI>the Pantheon,</HI> as the Saints.</P></NOTE> of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Empire at that time. And however different the <HI>Goths</HI> might be from the <HI>Romans</HI> in Opinion, yet we have <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Petavius Ration. Temp. part.</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 6. <HI>c.</HI> 2. <HI>de Theodorico.]&mdash;</HI>And tho according to the Religion of his Country, he was of the <HI>Arrian</HI> Sect, yet he defended the Rights and Liberties of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church with all faith|fulne&s;s.</P>
<P><HI>And</HI> Sigonius <HI>&s;ays of</HI> Odoacer <HI>before him,</HI> That he gave the Bi&s;hops and the Churches their due re&s;pects, <HI>lib.</HI> 15. <HI>de Imp. Occident.</HI> And <HI>Baron. Anno</HI> 476. that he gave the Catholick Church no trouble in Church-matters.</P>
<P>But &s;ufficient In&s;tances of the pre&s;ervation of the Rights of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church by the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings may be found in <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus</HI>'s Book of <HI>Variar.</HI> As <HI>Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Ep.</HI> 28. <Q>There is fir&s;t <HI>Theodoric</HI>'s Profe&s;&s;ion, that he ought not to force Religion upon any; not upon <HI>Jews.</HI> Lib. 3. Ep. 45.&mdash;He mentions the Defenders of the Rights of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church (Commi&s;|&s;ioners &s;etled by him&s;elf) and upon their complaint of an Injury, enjoins his Deputy by all means to right them according to the former grants to the <HI>Roman</HI> Church. <HI>Lib.</HI> 4. <HI>Ep.</HI> 20. orders the Re&s;titution of Gifts taken away from the Church.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Athalaricus,</HI> after him, makes Laws about the Election of the <HI>Roman</HI> Bi|&s;hops, and Clergy, <HI>Lib.</HI> 8. <HI>Ep.</HI> 15. <HI>Ep.</HI> 24. <HI>l.</HI> 9. <HI>Ep.</HI> 15.</P>
<P>The Church-Annals do al&s;o give an account of many Synods that were called by <HI>Theodoric</HI> for the good of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church; for which <HI>Baronius</HI> gives him this Character, <Q>That though he were a Barbarian, <HI>Arrian,</HI> He|retick, and Stranger, yet notwith&s;tanding the importunity of the Schi&s;|maticks, he &s;hewed &s;o very great a Reverence to the Church,</Q> or See Apo|&s;tolick. <HI>Baron.</HI> Ann. 501.</P></NOTE> <HI>Petavius</HI> his acknowledgment, That <HI>Theodorick</HI> who&s;e Reign was the be&s;t part of the whole time of the Reign of the
<PB N="208" REF="137"> <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy,</HI> did <HI>defend the Rights and Liberties of the</HI> Roman <HI>Church with the greate&s;t care and faithfulne&s;s;</HI> And we find much the &s;ame account of tho&s;e who &s;ucceeded him. <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE></P>
<P>We are al&s;o informed, that in the point <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><HI>Sanders de Vi&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">b. Monarch. p.</HI> 220. In the Honour of the Saints, the <HI>Arri|ans</HI> do al&s;o agree with us. <HI>Quaere.</HI></NOTE> of the Honour of the Saints, the <HI>Arrian Goths</HI> were of the &s;ame Opinion with the <HI>Romans;</HI> and they are al&s;o charged with the giving Chri&s;t di|vine wor&s;hip, though they judged him to be but a Creature, which is apprehended to be an Idolatrous Wor&s;hip.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, The <HI>names of Bla&s;phemy</HI> are not &s;aid to be <HI>on all</HI> the Heads; whereas to make it appear that there were Crowns up|on <HI>every</HI> Horn of the Ten, it had been &s;aid ju&s;t before<HI>&mdash;Ten Horns, and upon his Horns Ten Crowns&mdash;</HI>which &s;eems to make a difference betwixt that, and what is &s;aid of the Seven Heads; <HI>and on his Heads the names of Bla&s;phemy&mdash;</HI>not on <HI>his Seven Heads.</HI></P>
<P>And tho there &s;hould be but &s;ix of the Heads bla&s;phemous, that were enough to &s;ay of them, that <HI>the names of Bla&s;phemy</HI> were on them; as indefinite ways of &s;peech are often u&s;ed in Scrip|ture. For Example: <HI>The Ten Kings,</HI> it is &s;aid, <HI>&s;hould burn the Whore,</HI> which no one would judge nece&s;&s;ary to be done by <HI>every</HI> one of the Ten. So is it &s;aid that the Four Bea&s;ts, <HI>Dan.</HI> 7. 17. (&s;aid to be Four Kings) <HI>&s;hall ari&s;e out of the Earth,</HI> though the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 16.</NOTE> Fir&s;t, or <HI>Babylonian,</HI> were then almo&s;t pa&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Grotius,</HI> Apoc. 12. 1. <HI>ob&s;erves,</HI> That the Di&s;ciples were often called the <HI>Twelve,</HI> when there were not &s;o many of them toge|ther, as particularly St. <HI>John</HI> 20. 24. after the death of <HI>Judas.</HI></P>
<P>He does al&s;o there furni&s;h us with another An&s;wer to this, that the names of bla&s;phemy are upon the Seven Heads in the 13th Chapter, to &s;ignify the Idolatrous State of the <HI>Seven Hills,</HI> or of the <HI>Roman</HI> Reign, when the Crowns were upon the <HI>Horns,</HI> or when the Empire was divided into &s;o many Sovereigns; But the Crowns were upon the <HI>Seven Heads</HI> in the 12th Chapter to &s;hew, that then there was no other Seat of <HI>Roman</HI> Reign, but the <HI>Seven Hills.</HI> In this way the <HI>names of bla&s;phemy</HI> have no re|&s;pect to the <HI>Seven Kings,</HI> that are &s;ignified by the Seven Heads, but <HI>only to the Seven Hills,</HI> which they do al&s;o repre&s;ent, or the City of <HI>Rome</HI> in the time of the Ten Kings. This indeed, and no other way, does give a very good rea&s;on, why all the Heads &s;hould be crowned in the 12th Chapter, and none in the 13th.</P>
<PB N="209" REF="137">
<P> If it be &s;till urged, That the Bea&s;t it &s;elf, of which <HI>every one of them</HI> are the Heads, is &s;aid to be <HI>full of Bla&s;phemy;</HI> that is ea&s;ily an&s;wered; For by the Bea&s;t there, is meant only that <HI>one pecu|liar</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 3.</NOTE> <HI>&s;tate</HI> of it under its la&s;t Head, <HI>Prop.</HI> 6.</P>
<P>And for the <HI>other</HI> Examples of Bea&s;ts in <HI>Daniel,</HI> we find no Characteri&s;tick Note of <HI>Bla&s;phemy,</HI> or Idolatry, upon them; All that they are &s;et out for, as any ways dreadful, is <HI>only</HI> the <HI>fierce|ne&s;s</HI> of their power in their Horns, or their Paws, or in their Teeth, or in their prevailing Conque&s;ts.</P>
<P>And tho&s;e Bea&s;ts in particular, of which this in the <HI>Revelations</HI> is de&s;cribed to be made up of, <HI>viz,</HI> A <HI>Lion,</HI> a <HI>Bear,</HI> and a <HI>Leo|pard,</HI> are &s;uch as both in their own natures are given to de&s;troy, and ruine; And are &s;o &s;et out, and that in conjunction with one another in Scripture, as the de&s;troyers of God's People. So do we find the <HI>Lion</HI> and the <HI>Leopard</HI> joined together, <HI>Jerem.</HI> 5. 6. The <HI>Lion and the Bear,</HI> Amos 5. 19. Prov. 28. 15. And in the 13th of <HI>Ho&s;ea</HI> 7, 8. <HI>We have them all three together.</HI></P>
<P>And very great Criticks in the&s;e things, though Defenders of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dr. <HI>Moor,</HI> B. Be&s;tia.</NOTE> the Idolatrous quality of all the Heads, and Horns of the Bea&s;t, yet acquaint us, that the <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Dr.</HI> Moor <HI>in his Alphabet of Prophetical Iconi&s;mes,</HI> Vol. I. pag. 598.<HI>&mdash;Literar. B. Be&s;tia.</HI></P>
<P><Q>Great Empires are called Bea&s;ts, not only for their Idolatry, but al&s;o for their bloody Tyranny, as <HI>Grotius</HI> has ob&s;erved upon <HI>Mat.</HI> 20. Where Chri&s;t declares the difference betwixt his Di&s;ciples, and the Kings of the <HI>Gentiles.</HI> This oppo&s;ition, &s;ays he, &s;hews, why the Empires of the World are &s;et out among&s;t the Prophets by the Figures of Bea&s;ts; but the King|dom of Chri&s;t by the Image of a Man, the Son of Man. Where by Bea&s;ts <HI>Grotius</HI> mu&s;t under&s;tand <HI>Feras,</HI> and then it will properly an&s;wer the u&s;e of the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> in the <HI>Septuagint</HI> in the &s;ame way, <HI>viz.</HI> for wild Bea&s;ts, and has almo&s;t the &s;ame likene&s;s of &s;ound, and derivation with it&mdash;otherwi&s;e the Kingdoms of the World might have been called <GAP DESC="foreign">, as the Four Bea&s;ts in the 4th Chapter of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> and not <GAP DESC="foreign">.</Q></P></NOTE> proper &s;ignification of a Bea&s;t in <HI>Da|niel,</HI> according to the word in the Original, <GAP DESC="foreign"> is only a <HI>great living Creature.</HI> It is indeed rendered by the <HI>Septuagint</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, to expre&s;s the terror of it; But that, according to the general u&s;e of it by the <HI>Septuagint,</HI> &s;ignifies only a <HI>fierce Bea&s;t,</HI> to denote the conquering power of it, without the lea&s;t intimation of <HI>Ido|latry</HI> in it. And <HI>Grotius</HI> him&s;elf, who will have the notion of a Bea&s;t to be nothing el&s;e but an <HI>Idolatrous Empire,</HI> yet on St. <HI>Mat|thew</HI> 20. 25. ob&s;erves, that therefore are the Empires of the World repre&s;ented by Bea&s;ts, upon the account of their <HI>Tyran|nizing</HI> Power; but the Reign of Chri&s;t by the Figure of a Man: And <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>Malvenda de Antichri&s;to, pag.</HI> 257. <HI>John</HI> does therefore call Antichri&s;t a Bea&s;t&mdash;that he might &s;ignify that his Per&s;ecution will be the fierce&s;t&mdash;But that under that name is very properly &s;ignified terrible and dreadful Empires for their fiercene&s;s and cruelty, St. <HI>Jerome,</HI> &amp;c. all agree.</NOTE> <HI>Malvenda</HI> &s;ays, that St. <HI>Jerome,</HI> and all be&s;ides, did agree, that formidable Empires were properly &s;ignified by that name for their fiercene&s;s and cruelty.</P>
<P>And to the &s;ame purpo&s;e does <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ribera in v.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 11. <HI>Apocalyps, item in v.</HI> 1. <HI>cap.</HI> 13. <HI>Be&s;tia,</HI> <Q>Though among&s;t the <HI>Latines</HI> it be a general word, yet here it does properly &s;ig|nify a fierce, and hurtful Bea&s;t, as the <HI>Latins</HI> them&s;elves under&s;tand <HI>Be&s;ti|ar<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">i;</HI> that is, tho&s;e that fight with Bea&s;ts, and that are &s;ent to the Bea&s;ts. Which al&s;o the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> does make appear, which our Apo&s;tle al|ways makes u&s;e of, and is properly applied to tho&s;e Animals that do mi&s;|chief by poy&s;on, or by biting. Upon this account is it, that c. 11. num|ber. 19. we &s;aid out of <HI>Arethas,</HI> &amp;c.</Q> And St. <HI>Jerome</HI> interprets <HI>Daniel</HI>'s Four Bea&s;ts to be Four Kingdoms; And &s;ays, <Q>And this is to he noted, that the Fiercene&s;s and Cruelty of Kingdoms is &s;ignified by the name of Bea&s;ts<HI>&mdash;Arethas</HI> does al&s;o &s;o interpret it, and &s;hows the holy <HI>Methodius</HI> and St. <HI>Hippolitus</HI> to be of the &s;ame mind.</Q></NOTE> <HI>Ribera</HI> quote St. <HI>Jerome,</HI> and <HI>Arethas.</HI></P>
<P>It is al&s;o worth the ob&s;erving, that in tho&s;e very days, when the&s;e Vi&s;ions were wrote, The <HI>Roman</HI> People, and Empire, were called by the name of <HI>Great Bea&s;t</HI> by their own Heathen Authors, who meant no more by that Expre&s;&s;ion than the &s;elf|willed, commanding nature of the Body of a People, or Empire.
<PB N="210" REF="138"> Thus does <HI>Suetonius</HI> repre&s;ent <HI>Tiberius</HI> his Cen&s;ure of his Friends for per&s;uading him to take the Government upon him, as <HI>Men that were ignorant what a Great Bea&s;t an Empire was,</HI> Quanta Bellua e&s;&s;et Imperium, In <HI>Tiberio,</HI> Art. 24. And <HI>Horace,</HI> Ep. 1. Lib. 1. calls the <HI>Roman</HI> People <HI>Bellua multorum Capitum,</HI> A great many-headed Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>As for the common u&s;e of the Heads, and Horns of a Bea&s;t, there are near 60 In&s;tances <HI>again&s;t nothing that is plain to the con|trary,</HI> That they &s;ignify only differences of the Civil Form of the Government, without any reference to Idolatrous Wor&s;hip that is any where expre&s;ly mentioned: Thus in the fir&s;t Six Heads of the Dragon, and Bea&s;t, <HI>thrice</HI> in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> in the Ten Horns of the Fourth Kingdom of the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> in the Four Heads of the <HI>Leopard</HI> there, in the Horns of the two Bea&s;ts in the 8th Chapter.</P>
<P N="5">5. But it may be urged, That there was a change of the Civil Form of the Imperial Government <HI>before</HI> the times of the <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy.</HI> There was a divi&s;ion of the Empire into <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> and <HI>We&s;t,</HI> by <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> and two <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> Juri&s;dictions &s;eated at <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tantinople.</HI> This divi&s;ion came to be perfectly &s;etled at the death of the fir&s;t <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> and continued in that e&s;tate for near 80 years; And this al&s;o not as <HI>two</HI> divided Kingdoms (which mu&s;t have been repre&s;ented by two Heads, or two Horns, according to all the Examples of divi&s;ions of Sovereignty in <HI>Da|niel,</HI> or the <HI>Revelations)</HI> but as <HI>two halves</HI> of one and the &s;ame <HI>Roman</HI> Empire by a <HI>joint</HI> and <HI>common</HI> concern of both tho&s;e parts, for the Government and Admini&s;tration of the whole <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as has been before ob&s;erved, much after the manner of the <HI>Two Con&s;uls</HI> of the &s;ame <HI>Roman</HI> Commonwealth. This then &s;eems to be a new face of the Imperial Power, as different from the fir&s;t, as the Con&s;uls &s;eemed to be from the Regal Power.</P>
<P>But the encrea&s;e of the number of the Ruling Per&s;ons, that have the &s;ame <HI>name,</HI> and <HI>title,</HI> is known by &s;everal In&s;tances not to be a change of that kind of Government. The Con&s;uls were &s;ometimes <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><HI>Cu&s;pinian in Chronic. Ca&s;&s;iodori. pag.</HI> 264. The <HI>Triumvirate</HI> gave the Con&s;ul&s;hip to as many of the Princes as they pleas'd.</NOTE> <HI>more</HI> than <HI>two,</HI> &s;ometimes <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">In <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodorus Chronicon.</HI> it may be ob&s;erved, that <HI>Pompey,</HI> in the di&s;tur|bances of the Commonwealth, continued alone the only Con&s;ul, and there was no other Choice at the u&s;ual time; And &s;o was <HI>Lepidus</HI> in the time of the <HI>Triumvirat. Cu&s;pinian. in Chronic. Ca&s;&s;iodor. pag.</HI> 250. <HI>&amp; pag.</HI> 262.</NOTE> but <HI>one.</HI> The <HI>military Tri|bunes with the power of Con&s;uls,</HI> were <HI>&s;ometimes more,</HI> &s;ometimes <HI>fewer</HI> <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Fene&s;tilla de Magi&s;trat. Romanis, c.</HI> 16.</P>
<P>There were therefore Three Military Tribunes created with the power of Con&s;uls, and were continued with great variety for their number; <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> they were Twenty, <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> more, <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> fewer. Or as this is corrected by <HI>Cu&s;pinian as wrongly printed in the Pandects (F. de Orig. juris)</HI> At fir&s;t Six, afterwards Eight, or &s;omewhat more: As <HI>Livy</HI> writes in his Fifth Book, <HI>Cu&s;pinian in Ca&s;&s;iodori Chronicon. p.</HI> 95.</P></NOTE> in a very great variety. And the Imperial Power it &s;elf, before this e&s;tabli&s;hment of the Two Empires, was in the hands of &s;ometime <HI>two,</HI> &s;ometimes <HI>three,</HI> and once of <HI>four,</HI> and yet were not the&s;e changes in the &s;ame form of Government ever accounted
<PB N="211" REF="138"> any other than the &s;ame <HI>Con&s;ulary, Tribunal</HI> and <HI>Imperial</HI> Govern|ment: Nor were the two <HI>Czars</HI> of <HI>Mu&s;covy</HI> of late accounted any thing more than the &s;ame Government by Emperors, that it was <HI>before;</HI> nor was the encrea&s;ing or dimini&s;hing the &s;etled num|ber of Senators at &s;everal times, the making a new Senate; and the having two <HI>different</HI> Seats of Supream Authority, is not much more than the <HI>two Provinces</HI> of the <HI>two Con&s;uls</HI> of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. If the di&s;tance betwixt the end of the Imperial Head, and the ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t &s;hould &s;eem to be too far a&s;under for the de|&s;cription of the ri&s;e of the <HI>Man of Sin,</HI> 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 7, 8. Which &s;eems to intimate, that it &s;hould be <HI>immediatly after the end of the Imperial Power.</HI></P>
<P>It may be an&s;wered, That the Particle, <HI>then,</HI> in that expre&s;|&s;ion<HI>&mdash;And</HI> then <HI>&s;hall be revealed&mdash;</HI>is very often in Scripture u&s;ed, where there is a great di&s;tance of time betwixt that which went <HI>before,</HI> and that which it introduceth.</P>
<P><HI>Grotius</HI> does upon this ver&s;e acquaint us, that the Partitle <GAP DESC="foreign">, or <HI>then,</HI> does very ordinarily in Scripture connect very di|&s;tant times together, of which he there gives many Ex|amples.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides, by the <HI>Seventh King</HI> that is de&s;cribed to come betwixt <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 10.</NOTE> the Imperial Government, and the Bea&s;t, mu&s;t be meant ano|ther form of Government of &s;ome &s;hort continuance after the fall of the Imperial Head; And the time that is a&s;&s;igned here for it, is but <HI>&s;eventy</HI> years, which is but the Age <HI>of one &s;ingle per&s;on;</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">I&s;a. 23. 15.</NOTE> whereas tho&s;e that do the mo&s;t oppo&s;e this way, do make the Seventh King to continue near <HI>twice as long.</HI></P>
<P>But that which does the mo&s;t clearly &s;hew the little weight there is in the Particle <HI>then</HI> in this place to &s;ignify the immediate Succe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Man</HI> of <HI>Sin,</HI> upon the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, is the Opinion of almo&s;t all Interpreters, concerning the <HI>fir&s;t</HI> ri&s;e and appearance of the <HI>Man of Sin.</HI> For they generally agree, that it was either a good while <HI>before</HI> the ruine of that Empire, or &s;ome while <HI>after;</HI> and any one that con&s;iders in what a &s;tate of humiliation the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> were under the <HI>Arrian</HI> Kings of the <HI>Heruli</HI> and <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy immediately</HI> upon the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, mu&s;t conclude, that that was a very improper po&s;ture of the <HI>Roman</HI> Affairs, to fix the <HI>revealing</HI> of the <HI>Man of Sin</HI> to.</P>
<PB N="212" REF="139">
<P> But that which does the mo&s;t fully an&s;wer this Objection, is, that the <HI>Man of Sin,</HI> and the <HI>Bea&s;t in the Revelations,</HI> may not be exactly the &s;ame thing; the <HI>Man of Sin</HI> may be the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> and then why may <HI>he</HI> not be thought to make &s;ome &s;hew of him&s;elf before the full ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t; though his full-grown appearance was not till after the Reign of the Bea&s;t?</P>
<P N="7">7. If it be further objected, That the Imperial Line, that was <HI>begun</HI> in <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> was <HI>cut off</HI> from the Rule of <HI>Rome</HI> at the depri|vation of <HI>Leo I&s;aurus,</HI> and the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperors by the Pope; and therefore that the Emperors from <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> could not be the Bea&s;t, &s;ince the Bea&s;t was to continue in being till the &s;econd coming of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>It is to be con&s;idered, That the conferring of the Title of <HI>Roman</HI> Emperor upon <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> not long after, did continue the Succe&s;&s;ion of the Imperial Head to this day: And if there had been a perfect Inter-Reign from the end of <HI>Leo I&s;aurus</HI> to <HI>Char|lemaigne,</HI> that would not have di&s;continued the Imperial Head. For &s;ince there was <HI>no other</HI> Secular Head of <HI>Rome</HI> owned for Su|pream there in the room of the Imperial, during that &s;pace of time, the Imperial Head &s;till continued without the <HI>inter|po&s;ition of any other.</HI> For the <HI>Lombard Kings,</HI> who were the only appearing Power of <HI>Italy</HI> be&s;ides, were &s;o far from being owned for Supream at <HI>Rome</HI> in the room of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperors, that the <HI>Pope</HI> <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><HI>Petavius Rationar. Temp. Part. I. Lib.</HI> 8. <HI>cap.</HI> 7. <HI>&s;peaking of</HI> Ai&s;tulphus <HI>King of the</HI> Lombards&mdash;<Q>And then he delivered to the Pope, by the Ab|bot <HI>Fulrade,</HI> the Exarchat of <HI>Ravenna,</HI> and the Five Cities, that is, <HI>Anco|na,</HI> and the four Towns of the <HI>Picene</HI> Territory, and other adjacent.</Q></NOTE> had all their mo&s;t con&s;iderable Territories given him by <HI>Pepin,</HI> the Father of <HI>Charlemaigne;</HI> And <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ludovic. &agrave; Bebenberg</HI> quotes the <HI>Hi&s;toriae Francorum</HI> for what follows&mdash;<Q>Pope <HI>Stephen,</HI> the Succe&s;&s;or of <HI>Zacharias,</HI> about the Year 753. anointed <HI>Pepin,</HI> and his two Sons, <HI>viz. Charles</HI> (afterwards <HI>Charlemaignc)</HI> and <HI>Ca|rolomannus,</HI> for Kings of the <HI>Franks,</HI> and obliged the Princes of the <HI>Franks</HI> to chu&s;e none of any Family, than the&s;e, whom he had made choice of by the Providence of God to <HI>defend the Apo&s;tolick See.</HI> And &s;o <HI>Pepin</HI> en|ters that year into <HI>Italy</HI> for that very purpo&s;e.&mdash;Upon this account it is very probable, that the Chronicle of St. <HI>Martin,</HI> and others of the &s;ame Opinion, have &s;aid, that Pope <HI>Stephen</HI> tran&s;lated the Empire from the <HI>Greeks</HI> to the <HI>Germans.</HI> For &s;ince the bu&s;ine&s;s of the Emperor is to defend the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, and to exalt the (Head of it) the Pope (as appears <HI>Di&s;t.</HI> 6. <HI>Tibi Domino)</HI> and to protect the Clergy (96 <HI>Di&s;tinct. c. ult.)</HI> and the Holy Churches, as other Kings and Princes are (23. <HI>q.</HI> 5. <HI>c. Principes, &amp;c. Admini&s;tratores)</HI> And &s;ince <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> and his Son <HI>Leo,</HI> required to do this by Pope <HI>Stephen</HI> again&s;t the <HI>Lombards</HI> (as appears <HI>Ext. de Elect. venerabilem in ult. glo&s;&s;&acirc;)</HI> did refu&s;e to do it; therefore did Pope <HI>Stephen</HI> chu&s;e <HI>Pepin,</HI> and <HI>Charles, &amp;c.</HI> and their Succe&s;&s;ors, <HI>&amp;c.&mdash;</HI>And for the contrariety of Chronicles, we ought to &s;tand to the Chronicle of the <HI>Franks</HI> abovementioned, which &s;eems to have been wrote by a <HI>Frank,</HI> who therefore was well acquainted with the Tran&s;action of this Tran&s;la|tion. For this Hi&s;tory of the <HI>Franks</HI> in this matter concerning <HI>Charle|maigne,</HI> is taken out of the Writings of the Abbot <HI>Rhegius</HI> of the Dioce&s;e of <HI>Triers,</HI> who has rea&s;on to be thought to be well acquainted with the Hi&s;tory of the Princes of his own Countrey.</Q></P>
<P>The &s;um of the Canon-Law, printed at <HI>Venice,</HI> with the Privileges of almo&s;t all Monarchs and Popes, by the Title of the <HI>Speculum</HI> of Popes, Em|perors and Kings, <HI>does affirm the Tran&s;lation of the Empire from the</HI> Greeks <HI>to the Franks, to have been done by Pope</HI> Stephen, <HI>about the Year</HI> 753. Ludovicus <HI>a</HI> Bebenburg, <HI>attributes to</HI> Pepin, <HI>Ann. Dom.</HI> 753. <HI>and</HI> A. Ro&s;ellus, <HI>to the Year</HI> 755. <HI>and</HI> Marinus <HI>to the &s;ame Year.</HI> De Tran&s;lat. Imp. <HI>Rom.</HI> in <HI>Ger|manos,</HI> &s;ect. Quod Tran&s;latio Imp. non facta erat per Papam.</P>
<P><HI>And</HI> Bellarmin. <HI>L.</HI> 1. <HI>de Tran&s;latione Imp.</HI> Romani <HI>in</HI> Germanos, <HI>cap.</HI> 12. grants that <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> conquered <HI>Italy</HI> 20 years before he was Crowned by the Pope. </P></NOTE> <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> him&s;elf <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> was within &s;ome years after <HI>Leo I&s;aurus</HI> owned by the Pope for the Royal Defender of the Liberties of <HI>Rome,</HI> and of the Church, though he had not the Title of Emperor till many years after.</P>
<P>If any &s;hould di&s;pute the Right of <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> becau&s;e the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Emperor was <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><HI>Bellarmin.</HI> in his Fir&s;t Book <HI>de Tran&s;lat. Imp.</HI> Rom. <HI>in</HI> Germanos, <HI>c.</HI> 12. does give an account of the Succe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Emperors to <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> and of the owning the Title of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors. And <HI>cap.</HI> 5. To the &s;ame purpo&s;e, <HI>Ludovic. &agrave; Bebenberg, in note</HI> 6. <HI>on the 6th Chapter. M. Frehems</HI> his Commentator.</NOTE> unju&s;tly depo&s;ed, They may as well que&s;tion the Right of Succe&s;&s;ion in <HI>mo&s;t of the Emperors before.</HI> Po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion, and <HI>not Right,</HI> was that which did always confirm the Imperial Title: And it will be hard to find <HI>any con&s;tant</HI> way of Succe&s;&s;ion, or Election, in the Imperial Line before <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> to found a right upon. <HI>Sometimes</HI> the Emperor was elected by the Army, <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> by the People, <HI>&s;ometimes</HI> adopted by ano|ther Emperor. All that can be found <HI>con&s;tant</HI> about it, is, that generally they u&s;ed to have <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Grot. de Jure B. &amp; P. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 9. note 1. chap. 3. <HI>&amp; Hieron. Balbus de Coronatione, cap.</HI> 13. in the &s;ame note, and the Comment there on <HI>Lu|dovic. &agrave; Bebenburg.</HI> See al&s;o <HI>Lip&s;ius</HI> of the&s;e Acclamations, 2. <HI>Elect. cap.</HI> 10.</NOTE> the <HI>Acclamations of the People of Rome,</HI> and <HI>the Approbation of the Senate,</HI> which were freely given
<PB N="213" REF="139">
<NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">Of <HI>Charlemaign</HI>'s Acclamations all Hi&s;torians &s;peak.</NOTE> to <HI>Charlemaigne.</HI> From whom there has been continued a Suc|ce&s;&s;ion of the Imperial Line to this time. It is certain that be|fore <HI>Julius Cae&s;ar, the Maje&s;ty of the</HI> Roman <HI>Kingdom</HI> was in the <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Paulus Merula de Legibus Romanis, pag.</HI> 58.&mdash;<Q>The Juri&s;dictions were bounded: The Senate had more Authority than the Magi&s;trate; The Common People had the greate&s;t Authority: In <HI>all the People toge|ther</HI> was the Maje&s;ty of the Commonwealth.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Cu&s;pinian in Sextum Rufum. pag.</HI> 6.</P>
<P><Q>The Con&s;uls Rods were hung down when they came into a full A&s;|&s;embly of the People, becau&s;e the Maje&s;ty of the People of <HI>Rome</HI> was greater than that of the Con&s;uls.</Q></P></NOTE> People of <HI>Rome;</HI> And to commit Trea&s;on, was <HI>in Maje&s;tatem Populi</HI> Romani <HI>peccare.</HI> And it was a generally continued cu&s;tome by the Emperors, to receive the confirmation of their Title from the Acclamations of the People.</P>
<P N="8">8. But it may be here urged, That the Imperial Head was manife&s;tly di&s;continued in the time of the Tumults of <HI>Italy</HI> under the <NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Petavii Rationar. Temp. Part. I. L.</HI> 8. <HI>c.</HI> 13.</NOTE> <HI>Berengarii,</HI> when there were &s;uch frequent changes of the Kings of <HI>Italy.</HI></P>
<P>This can be of no more force than the former, excepting the Ceremony of anointing <HI>Berengarius</HI> King at <HI>Rome,</HI> by Pope <HI>John</HI> the Xth. But his Reign was &s;o <HI>very &s;hort</HI> after it, and the Suc|ce&s;&s;ions of tho&s;e after him &s;o like a <HI>mere &s;cuffle</HI> of Competitors to the Kingdom; and be&s;ides, not owned as heads of <HI>Rome;</HI> that there is no rea&s;on to account it any <HI>&s;etled</HI> change of the Imperial Head <HI>(Prop.</HI> 21. <HI>part</HI> 1.)</P>
<P><HI>Hugo</HI> of <HI>Arles</HI> had indeed the Principality of <HI>Rome</HI> with <HI>Ma|rozia,</HI> but he was pre&s;ently ca&s;t out of it again: Be&s;ides, that <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ibid. cap.</HI> 14.</P>
<P><Q>The <HI>German</HI> Writers account <HI>Conrad,</HI> and <HI>Henry Auceps,</HI> Emperors in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to <HI>Ludovicus</HI> the immediate Emperor before them <HI>[and then there will not be above</HI> 8 <HI>years of vacancy]</HI> others reject the&s;e two, becau&s;e they were not anointed and crowned by the Pope&mdash;But the <HI>Ger|mans</HI> do much di&s;pute the nece&s;&s;ity of that.</Q></P></NOTE> the Kings of <HI>Germany,</HI> with whom the Imperial Title of <HI>Rome</HI> had continued by right of Succe&s;&s;ion from <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> till that time, did &s;till retain the &s;ame right in appearance, becau&s;e they were <HI>neither</HI> formally di&s;owned by the City of <HI>Rome, nor</HI> had any other &s;et up there in their place; For the Kingdom of <HI>Italy</HI> was then accounted a particular Juri&s;diction by it &s;elf, <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> from the City of <HI>Rome;</HI> And the Pope was by that time almo&s;t ab&s;o|lute in that City. So that all that could be inferred from hence would be, that the Fal&s;e Prophet acted <HI>for a little time</HI> without the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P N="9">9. And this la&s;t Ob&s;ervation may occa&s;ion a Scruple, How the Emperors can be &s;aid to be an Head of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> when &s;ome hundreds of years they have had no more than the <HI>bare Title</HI> of it.</P>
<P>The ea&s;ie An&s;wer to this, is, That all that is required to make an Head of the Bea&s;t, is to be <NOTE N="&s;" PLACE="marg"><HI>See Note the 6th, on the 6th Chapter.</HI></NOTE> <HI>a &s;etled Secular Authority owned for Supream at</HI> Rome. And 'tis no wonder that he &s;hould be called an Head of it, and have &s;o little power, or influence over it. For all his power was to be <HI>exerci&s;ed before him by ano|ther</HI> Church-Head <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> from him. It cannot be thought ne|ce&s;&s;ary <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 12.</NOTE>
<PB N="214" REF="140"> for the Emperor to be particularly re&s;ident at <HI>Rome,</HI> to be the Head of <HI>Rome;</HI> For then the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperors ever after the making <HI>Ravenna</HI> the Imperial Seat by <HI>Honorius,</HI> mu&s;t have cea&s;ed to have been the Heads of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P N="10">10. It may then be replied, That the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Empe|rors, in the time of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings of <HI>Italy,</HI> had the Title of the Imperial Head of <HI>Rome,</HI> and upon that account &s;hould &s;eem not to have been changed from the time of the Vi&s;ion.</P>
<P>But it mu&s;t be remembred, That it is not &s;ufficient to have <HI>a Title only,</HI> but that Title mu&s;t be <HI>owned by the chief Authority</HI> of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> for the &s;ole <HI>Secular</HI> Sovereign Power of it. Whereas it has been made to appear, that in the Reign of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings of <HI>Italy,</HI> the <HI>Con&s;tantinopolitan</HI> Emperors were far from being owned for the <HI>only Sovereigns of</HI> Rome; For they were no further owned to have any thing to do there, than what the <NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg">All Hi&s;torians give an account of the Impri&s;onment of Pope <HI>John</HI> the Fir&s;t, for crowning the Emperor <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> in the <HI>Ea&s;t;</HI> and of the ab&s;olute Sovereignty of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings over the City of <HI>Rome. See Notes on the 4th Chapter, Lib.</HI> 3.</NOTE> Kings of the <HI>Goths,</HI> who were then in the <HI>real</HI> and actual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of <HI>Rome,</HI> did allow them, as <HI>Partners</HI> with them in the Honour of the Title of that City.</P>
<P N="11">11. It may al&s;o be objected, That the Emperors have been very often in Wars with the Popes, which is contrary to the &s;trict <HI>Confederacy</HI> that is every-where expre&s;&s;ed to be betwixt the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet.</P>
<P>But &s;ince they have been notwith&s;tanding at a con&s;tant agree|ment in the great de&s;ign of their Confederacy, which is per&s;ecu|tion for <HI>fal&s;e Wor&s;hip,</HI> their occa&s;ional differences about other things is not to be regarded, <HI>at mo&s;t</HI> not more than the Diffe|rences betwixt the Popes, and the <HI>Ten Kings,</HI> who yet give their Kingdom to the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P N="12">12. How al&s;o can the Ten Kings be &s;aid to have given their power to the Bea&s;t about the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> when they were many of them <HI>Arrians,</HI> at the <HI>greate&s;t di&s;tance</HI> from the Religion of <HI>Rome?</HI></P>
<P>The An&s;wer to this is, That they were &s;oon brought under the Authority and See of <HI>Rome; France, Spain,</HI> and all <HI>Ju&s;ti|nian</HI>'s Conque&s;ts, changed about the <HI>end</HI> of that Age.</P>
<P N="13">13. If it be &s;aid, That when the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire was di|vided into Ten Kingdoms di&s;tinct from one another, there could be no one Secular Head that could de&s;erve to be called the Bea&s;t.</P>
<PB N="215" REF="140">
<P> It may be an&s;wered, That the Bea&s;t is but <HI>&s;uch an Head</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as has a <HI>&s;uperior</HI> Right to the Authority of the chief City of the Empire, while the whole body of it is <HI>di|vided</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 21.</NOTE> into ten Sovereignties; and by that Right has a claim to a Juri&s;diction <HI>paramount</HI> to them all: And &s;uch is the claim of the pre&s;ent Emperors to <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg"><HI>See Notes</HI> ^m <HI>and</HI> ^n <HI>on the 6th Chapter.</HI></NOTE> re&s;erved Rights over all the divided Kingdoms of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. And there is at pre&s;ent &s;o great and publick an acknowledgment of the <HI>German</HI> Emperor's Supe|riority over over other Kings, <HI>only as he is</HI> Roman <HI>Emperor;</HI> That, as has been ob&s;erved, he is &s;uffered to have the precedence of Kings, who have both a much larger Dominion than he, and a much ancienter Title; and who take place of him, <HI>before</HI> he has the Imperial Title, when he has nothing but his Hereditary Countries.</P>
<P>But that which is chiefly to be regarded for the qualifying him for this character of an Head among&s;t the Ten Horns, is, That he is properly &s;aid to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Civil Head of tho&s;e Ten Kings in one common De&s;ign that they are all engaged in, becau&s;e he is &s;o acknowledged to be by the Fal&s;e Prophet, who manages them all for that end, and gives Him the Title of their <HI>Head</HI> in it.</P>
<P N="14">14. It may be further enquired, How it can be &s;aid, That the Imperial Power has &s;ubdued three Kings, as it is &s;aid of the <HI>Little Horn</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel?</HI></P>
<P>It is an&s;wered, That what&s;oever is &s;aid there of the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> is to be under&s;tood of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> in his <HI>joint confederacy</HI> with the Fal&s;e Prophet, as <HI>one Thing</HI> engaged in one De&s;ign: And then what&s;oever is done by the Fal&s;e Prophet in that De&s;ign, will be &s;aid to be done by the Bea&s;t; &s;o that the &s;ubduing of the three Kings, may thus be, either <NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Hierom. Rubeus Hi&s;tor. Ravennat. pag.</HI> 145. &s;ays, <Q>That <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> built that Magnificent Temple of <HI>Sancta Sophia,</HI> in memory of his <HI>Per&s;ian, Van|dalic</HI> and <HI>Gothick</HI> Victories.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Cu&s;pinian. de Ca&s;aribus, pag.</HI> 139. <Q>gives an account of <HI>Beli&s;arius</HI>'s Expedi|tion again&s;t the <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> and that he entred in a Triumph into <HI>Con&s;tanti|nople</HI> for that Conque&s;t. And pag. 140. &s;ays, That he had a mo&s;t Pom|pous Triumph from the Spoils of the <HI>Vandals,</HI> being then Con&s;ul in ordinary. And pag. 141. &s;ays, That when <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> had recovered <HI>Italy,</HI> and &s;ubdued <HI>Africa</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> he put the Glory of his Victories into his Titles.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>Ju&s;tinian's Con|que&s;ts,</HI> or <NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> &s;uppo&s;es the rooting out of the <HI>Goths</HI> and <HI>Lombards,</HI> and the Power of the <HI>Greek</HI> Emperors out of <HI>Italy,</HI> may an&s;wer this Character.</NOTE> the Pope's <HI>Excommunications,</HI> and <HI>deprivations</HI> of <HI>&s;ome</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> <HI>three</HI> remarkable Sovereign Powers.</P>
<P N="15">15. A great objection again&s;t this Opinion about the time of the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, is this following e&s;teemed to be, <HI>viz.</HI> That the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t was <HI>at the &s;ame time</HI> with that of the Ten Kings. For <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 12. it is &s;aid, That tho&s;e Ten Kings &s;hould receive power as Kings <HI>one hour with the Bea&s;t;</HI> And that the term of <HI>one hour</HI> does &s;ignify in the Original, <HI>at the &s;ame time.</HI> Now it is known, that the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire was divided into Ten &s;etled Kingdoms at the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire; the Bea&s;t therefore
<PB N="216" REF="141"> mu&s;t ari&s;e about the &s;ame time: and this was almo&s;t <HI>a whole Age</HI> before the Conque&s;t of <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P N="1">1. There is no clear grounds for any nece&s;&s;ity of &s;uch a &s;igni|fication of the word in the Original, that is rendred <HI>one hour.</HI> On the contrary, To render <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>at the &s;ame time,</HI> is at be&s;t but a very rare, and unu&s;ual acceptation of it, if it &s;hould be ever found to be u&s;ed <HI>at all</HI> in that &s;ignification, which is much to be que&s;tioned. And therefore is it, that we find not this Interpretation of <GAP DESC="foreign"> to have been thought on, till this pre&s;ent Age; And even now the greate&s;t number of Tran&s;la|tions have nothing of this &s;en&s;e in them.</P>
<P>The proper &s;ignification of <GAP DESC="foreign">, as it is in the Accu&s;a|tive Ca&s;e, is, as it is rendered, <HI>for one hours &s;pace,</HI> which in a Prophetical Style &s;ignifies, <HI>a &s;hort &s;pace of time.</HI> And then it may be ea&s;ily under&s;tood to &s;ignify, that tho&s;e Kings &s;hould Reign like Kings with the Bea&s;t for a little time; but, as it follows, that they &s;hould <HI>give their Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t after it,</HI> and &s;o appear to be like the Slaves of the Bea&s;t, for his u&s;e and &s;er|vice.</P>
<P N="2">2. Or, if it &s;hould &s;ignify, <HI>about the &s;ame time,</HI> yet it might be under&s;tood only of the Reigns of the&s;e Kings <HI>together</HI> with the Bea&s;t at <HI>any</HI> the &s;ame time of both. For to <HI>receive power as Kings at the &s;ame time with the Bea&s;t,</HI> may be under&s;tood of <HI>any time</HI> of their Reign <HI>together</HI> in conjunction with the Bea&s;t, and not nece&s;&s;arily of their <HI>beginning</HI> to reign at the &s;ame time with it. On the contrary, it is certain, by the con&s;ent of all, that mo&s;t of the&s;e Ten Kings had <HI>begun to receive power as Kings</HI> long before others, and &s;o could not po&s;&s;ibly be &s;aid to <HI>begin</HI> their power <HI>all together</HI> at the &s;ame time with the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>If the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t &s;hould be counted from the fir&s;t ap|pearance of Ten Kingdoms in the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, the Reign of the Bea&s;t mu&s;t be already pa&s;t. For it will be found, that there were Ten Kingdoms erected there before the Year 420. As 1. The <HI>Almans,</HI> who had been long a <HI>Roman</HI> Province, had a King in <HI>Julian</HI>'s time; and after the conque&s;t of him, <NOTE N="z" PLACE="marg"><HI>Cu&s;pinian. de Ca&s;ar. pag.</HI> 102. mentions <HI>Julian</HI>'s League with the <HI>Al|mains:</HI> and <HI>p.</HI> 112. the <HI>Huns</HI> invading <HI>Epirus in Valens's Reign.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Julian</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> made a League with that People. <NOTE N="aa" PLACE="marg"><HI>Petav. Ration. Temp. Part. I. lib</HI> 6. <HI>cap.</HI> 10. does particularly reckon up the chief Divi&s;ions of the&s;e Inva&s;ions of the Barbarians.</NOTE> 2. The <HI>O&s;tro-Goths.</HI> 3. The <HI>We&s;t Goths.</HI> 4. The <HI>Hunns,</HI> who were all three up about the Year 378. 5. The <HI>Suevi.</HI> 6. The <HI>Allans.</HI> 7. The <HI>Vandalls.</HI> 8. The <HI>Burgundians.</HI> 9. The <HI>Franks;</HI> and be&s;ides the&s;e, were
<PB N="217" REF="141"> the <HI>Vandals</HI> in <HI>Africa;</HI> and <HI>Silingii,</HI> another &s;ort of <HI>Vandals</HI> in that part of <HI>Spain</HI> that is called <HI>Baetica,</HI> be&s;ides other Divi&s;ions of Principalities among&s;t the&s;e People.</P>
<P N="3">3. Again, In the &s;ignification of, <HI>at the &s;ame time,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> might denote the Reign of the&s;e Ten Kings <NOTE N="bb" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Alca&s;ar in cap.</HI> 13. <HI>Apoc. &s;ect.</HI> 3.</P>
<P><Q>For what, I pray, does <HI>one hour</HI> &s;ignify, but that the&s;e Kings do Reign all together at <HI>one</HI> and the <HI>&s;ame time?</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Theodoret. in cap.</HI> 7. <HI>Dan. de</HI> 10. <HI>Regibus.</HI></P>
<P><Q>It is therefore manife&s;t, that there &s;hall Ten Kings ari&s;e up <HI>all to|gether.</HI></Q></P></NOTE> altogether at <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> the &s;ame time with one another; which the order of the words does make far more natural; For whereas it had been ju&s;t be|fore &s;aid, that they <HI>had not</HI> any of them <HI>any Kingdom as yet;</HI> it here follows in this order in the Original, <HI>but power as Kings,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>they receive with the Bea&s;t,</HI> where <GAP DESC="foreign"> is more na|turally joined with the <HI>Kings,</HI> than with the <HI>Bea&s;t.</HI> And then it &s;ignifies, That neverthele&s;s the&s;e Kings &s;hould all reign to|gether <HI>At the &s;ame time</HI> in the Reign of the Bea&s;t, to denote the &s;trange Divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire at that time.</P>
<P>And this was very proper and convenient to be &s;ignified, be|cau&s;e the Seven Kings ju&s;t before, had been de&s;cribed to <HI>&s;ucceed,</HI> or to <HI>come after</HI> one another; to di&s;tingui&s;h which from the&s;e Ten Kings, it might be on purpo&s;e made their Character, that the&s;e did reign <HI>all together.</HI> But this is only upon the &s;uppo&s;ition of this &s;ignification of <GAP DESC="foreign">, for which, after all, there is no nece&s;&s;ity.</P>
<P N="4">4. But however, That it cannot &s;ignify the ri&s;e of the&s;e Ten Kings <HI>at the &s;ame time witb the fir&s;t appearance of the Bea&s;t,</HI> is deter|mined by the de&s;cription of the Little Horn in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> which, is &s;aid there, &s;hould ari&s;e <NOTE N="cc" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Bla&s;ius Viega in cap.</HI> 13. <HI>Apoc. &s;ect.</HI> 2. &s;hews, <Q>That it was the Opi|nion of all the Ancients, according to St. <HI>Jerom,</HI> that Antichri&s;t (the Little Horn) &s;hould ari&s;e after the Divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire among&s;t Ten Kings.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Theodoret. in cap.</HI> 7. <HI>Dan.</HI> <Q>It is therefore, &s;ays he, manife&s;t, that the Prophet does here foretell, that about the end, Ten Kings &s;hall ari&s;e up all together;</Q> And that Antichri&s;t &s;hould be the la&s;t after them. So <HI>Irenaeus, l.</HI> 5. <HI>contra Haer. c.</HI> 24. <HI>&amp; Aretas in c.</HI> 13. <HI>Apoc. &amp; Ausburtus in cap.</HI> 17.</P></NOTE> <HI>after the Ten Kings:</HI> And <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 24.</NOTE> the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> are unque&s;tio|nably the &s;ame particular <HI>Roman</HI> Rule <HI>(Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.) and therefore has it been already concluded, that the Bea&s;t <HI>can|not ari&s;e till after</HI> the Ten Kings <HI>(Coroll.</HI> 3. <HI>Prop.</HI> 15.)</P>
<P N="16">16. But it will be then demanded, How <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s re&s;taura|tion of the Imperial Head, can be the <HI>next</HI> Change <HI>but one</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Sovereignty after the time of the Vi&s;ion? For the Divi|&s;ion of the Empire into Ten Sovereignties before him, would be accounted at lea&s;t one Change of the Sovereign Power of that Empire, as the <HI>four</HI> Horns of the <HI>He Goat,</HI> in the 8th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> was a <HI>new &s;tate</HI> of the <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchy. If &s;o, then the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire mu&s;t unque&s;tionably be another Change of the <HI>Roman</HI> Rule; and thus would there have been an 8th King from the Sixth, that ruled in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time, <HI>before</HI> Ju&s;tinian.</P>
<PB N="218" REF="142">
<P> To re&s;olve this Scruple, it mu&s;t be con&s;idered, That there are two <HI>different kinds of Sovereign Power</HI> repre&s;ented in the Bea&s;t; the <HI>one</HI> by his <HI>Heads,</HI> and the <HI>other</HI> by his <HI>Horns.</HI> And the <HI>next</HI> Change of Sovereignty <HI>but one</HI> to that, which ruled in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time, which con&s;titutes the 8th King, or the Bea&s;t, is a &s;ucce&s;|&s;ion of an <HI>Head</HI> of the Bea&s;t, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 20, 21.</P>
<P>And that <HI>Head</HI> is called <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> as a thing <HI>di&s;tinct from the Ten Horns;</HI> for the Ten Horns are &s;aid to <HI>give their Kingdom to the Bea&s;t,</HI> who before had been &s;aid to be the Eighth King, and is one of the Seven Heads, by <HI>Prop.</HI> 5. <HI>Coroll.</HI> It matters not therefore at what time the Ten Horns aro&s;e. For they were but &s;o many Sovereignties in the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> from that Eighth King, which is the <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> or an <HI>Head</HI> of the Bea&s;t; and who were confederated with him: And to know the time of that <HI>Confederacy,</HI> it mu&s;t be enquired <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> what was the <HI>next</HI> &s;ucce&s;&s;ive <HI>Head but one</HI> to the Imperial, that was up at the time of the Vi&s;ion. For, <HI>be&s;ides</HI> the Ten Kings, there was to be an <HI>Head</HI> among&s;t them, whom they &s;hould <HI>all join with;</HI> And the Ten Kings were <HI>but</HI> &s;o many different <HI>Horns,</HI> which &s;ignify a di|vi&s;ion of the Empire, and <HI>not a &s;ingle &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Head of it</HI> &s;uperior to them all, which is here enquired after, according to the <HI>mark</HI> that has already been given to know an Head by.</P>
<P N="17">17. This would al&s;o be another difficulty again&s;t deferring the appearance of the Bea&s;t till the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> viz. That the Reign of the Bea&s;t, and the time of the Woman in the Wil|derne&s;s, do begin and end together; and the Woman is &s;aid to fly into the Wilderne&s;s pre&s;ently after her delivery of the Man|child, that is, pre&s;ently after the Conver&s;ion of the Imperial Throne, 200 years before <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s time.</P>
<P>But it is by almo&s;t all agreed, that that fir&s;t mention of the Woman's flying into the Wilderne&s;s, is an anticipation, becau&s;e after &s;everal great Actions intervening, it is repeated again at the 14th ver&s;e; and there repre&s;ented but as a preparation to re&s;t in the Wilderne&s;s; and then the Dragon <HI>ca&s;t out a flood after her,</HI> whil&s;t &s;he was flying, &s;o that &s;he was not at re&s;t then, till after that flood was &s;wallowed up by the Earth, which was ju&s;t before the ri&s;ing of the Bea&s;t out of the Sea, <HI>chap.</HI> 13.</P>
<P N="18">18. In the <HI>la&s;t place</HI> it may be objected, That from the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire in <HI>Augu&s;tulus,</HI> to the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> was no new <HI>Roman</HI> Government in the <HI>We&s;t,</HI> becau&s;e the Barbarous Kings,
<PB N="219" REF="142"> and their People, were not <HI>Romans,</HI> and therefore mu&s;t, if any thing, be a <HI>new Bea&s;t,</HI> and not a <HI>new Head</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Bea&s;t; and then all the time of their Reign will be but an <HI>Interregnum</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Government; and <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s return there, will be but the continuance of the Sixth Head.</P>
<P>But it is &s;ufficient an&s;wer to this, that the ten Barbarous Kings which are made to be the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t, are thereby repre&s;ented as Members of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as has been ju&s;t now ob&s;erved: And moreover it does appear, that the <HI>Goths,</HI> who &s;ucceeded in the room of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors, had been long before made the Confederates, and Members of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. <HI>See</HI> Note ^y, on Chap. 4.</P>
<PB N="220" REF="143">
<PB N="221" REF="143">
<PB N="222" REF="144">
<PB N="223" REF="144">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="224" REF="145">
<HEAD>CHAP. IX. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>A &s;hort Account of the &s;everal Opinions of Interpreters, that differ from the Propo&s;itions before demon&s;trated. Their incon&s;i&s;tency with the Analogy of Prophecy. The Shifts that they are forced to flye to, to maintain them.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>BY the &s;ame Light which has cleared up mine own Applica|tions of the Prophecy, it may be &s;een upon what grounds I depart from the Apprehen&s;ions of others about it.</P>
<P N="1">1. It is much to be admired, That there ever &s;hould have been any at all, much more any of the Ancients, that had been con|ver&s;ant <NOTE PLACE="marg">Andreas Cae|&s;ar, Aretas, Primatius, Be|da, &amp;c.</NOTE> in this Study, that &s;hould apprehend it po&s;&s;ible for the whole bu&s;ine&s;s of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and the Bea&s;t in the Revelations, to be nothing but a My&s;tical and Spiritual &s;tate of the Chri&s;tian Church, in relation to the whole World of the Wicked in ge|neral, and not to any particular Empire of the World, more than other.</P>
<P>For the Angel in the 17th Chapter does &s;o expre&s;ly &s;ignifie <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 1.</NOTE> his de&s;ign there to be to unfold the My&s;tery of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and the Bea&s;t that had been before mentioned; and does thereupon de|termine the meaning of them to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, by &s;uch ge|nerally known, and peculiar marks, that the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> them|&s;elves, who&s;e only intere&s;t, and con&s;iderable concern it is, to divert the &s;cene of the&s;e Vi&s;ions from the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> do yet almo&s;t unanimou&s;ly in this latter age, acknowledg to their Ad|ver&s;aries, That there is nothing more certain and unque&s;tiona|ble, than, That &s;ome particular &s;tate of the Domination of <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Con&s;ent of Antiquity, &amp;c.</NOTE> <HI>Rome,</HI> mu&s;t be meant by them. The ground of this paradoxi|cal Fancy of the Ancients, will be afterwards enquired into.</P>
<P N="2">2. It is in the next place very near as extravagant to grant, That &s;ome particular &s;tate of <HI>Roman</HI> Rule, mu&s;t be the great object of the&s;e Vi&s;ions; and yet to make the Figure of the Bea&s;t in general, to &s;ignifie the World, and the Heads of the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ribera, &amp;c.</NOTE> Bea&s;t either &s;o many &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Ages, or &s;o many di&s;tinct &s;ucce&s;|&s;ive Empires in it.</P>
<P>For by all the Examples of Bea&s;ts and their Ruling parts all <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 16.</NOTE> over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel,</HI> (which is generally agreed to be
<PB N="225" REF="145"> the original pattern of the Prophecy of the Revelations) it is acknowledged by the&s;e very per&s;ons them&s;elves, That a Bea&s;t does con&s;tantly &s;ignifie the Rule or Empire of <HI>one</HI> particular Na|tion <HI>only;</HI> and therefore mu&s;t the Heads al&s;o &s;ignifie &s;o many Supreme Powers in that Nation <HI>only.</HI> But the mo&s;t inexcu&s;a|ble thing in this opinion is, That the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is granted by the&s;e &s;ame per&s;ons to be nothing but the particular Nation of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which yet is the exact picture <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 15.</NOTE> of this Bea&s;t in the Revelations.</P>
<P>But then to grant, <HI>3dly,</HI> That the Bea&s;t and his Heads do &s;ignifie nothing but <HI>Roman</HI> Power; and after that, to make the Seven Heads not to be &s;o many <HI>di&s;tinct</HI> Powers, but to be taken <NOTE PLACE="marg">Bellarm. &amp;c.</NOTE> <HI>collectively</HI> for <HI>All</HI> the Rulers of one kind, or for <HI>All</HI> the Empe|rors, is to out-face the plain expre&s;&s;ions of the Text, which di|vide the number <HI>Seven</HI> into <HI>Five, One, Another,</HI> and an <HI>Eighth</HI> that is one of the Seven; and it is well known, that when the number Seven is &s;o expre&s;ly divided into parts, it is never u&s;ed collectively, or for an indefinite multitude.</P>
<P N="4">4. As contrary to the known u&s;e of tho&s;e My&s;tical Expre&s;&s;i|ons, is it to make the Seven Heads of the Bea&s;t to be &s;o many <HI>&s;ingle per&s;ons only</HI> of <HI>Rulers.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grotius, &amp;c.</NOTE></P>
<P>For it is evident all over the Book of <HI>Daniel,</HI> That Heads and Horns of Bea&s;ts do &s;ignify all the &s;ingle Per&s;ons that Rule in that Divi&s;ion, or Form of Government, that is &s;ignified by <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 16.</NOTE> each Head and each Horn.</P>
<P N="5">5. And &s;till more incon&s;i&s;tent is it, to make the Bea&s;t and his Seven Heads to be <HI>Roman</HI> Powers, and yet Antichri&s;t, &s;igni|fied by the Eighth King, which was one of the Seven, not to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mo&s;t of the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Inter|preters.</NOTE> come till after the end of all <HI>Roman</HI> Rule; or that the Fourth Bea&s;t in the Tenth of <HI>Daniel,</HI> &s;hould be the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; and yet the little Horn of that Bea&s;t not to appear till after the de&s;truction of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>For this would make the little Horn of the Bea&s;t, to be no Horn of it, but to appear after the ruin of the Bea&s;t, who&s;e Horn it is; which is a contradiction.</P>
<P N="6">6. Of much the &s;ame nature, is that Ab&s;urdity, That the Bea&s;t, called the 8th King, is Antichri&s;t, a little before the end of the World; and yet that <HI>Babylon,</HI> that is de&s;cribed to go all <NOTE PLACE="marg">The &s;ame.</NOTE> along with it, and to be de&s;troyed before it, is <HI>Rome</HI> Heathen.</P>
<P N="7"><PB N="226" REF="146"> 7. Nor does it much help the matter, to affirm, That <HI>Baby|lon</HI> does &s;ignifie both <HI>Rome</HI> Heathen, and <HI>Rome</HI> in the time of Antichri&s;t, about the end of the World.</P>
<P>For by by <HI>Prop.</HI> 2. and 3. it is evident, That <HI>Babylon</HI> is in all <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ribera, &amp;c.</NOTE> the mentions of it in the Revelations, one and the &s;ame &s;tate of <HI>Rome,</HI> in the Reign of the Bea&s;t, and in which it is de&s;troyed.</P>
<P N="8">8. That Opinion which makes the Heads of the Bea&s;t to be &s;ingle Per&s;ons, and yet the Reign of the Bea&s;t to continue at <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grot. Dr. <HI>Ham|mond.</HI> Prop. 6. and Coroll.</NOTE> lea&s;t to the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> is incon&s;i&s;tent with the determina|tion of the term of the Bea&s;t in the Prophecy, to the la&s;t Head of the <HI>Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>For if the Bea&s;t be nothing but the Bea&s;t under its la&s;t Head, and all the Seven Heads be but &s;o many Succe&s;&s;ions of &s;ingle Rulers only, it is impo&s;&s;ible that the time of the Bea&s;t &s;hould continue many years after the time of St. <HI>John,</HI> for the Sixth Head was then in Rule, <HI>Rev.</HI> 17. 10.</P>
<P N="9">9. And upon the &s;ame grounds it is impo&s;&s;ible, That the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t &s;hould be after the time of the la&s;t <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grot. Dr. <HI>Ham|mond.</HI> Corol. 1. Prop. 12.</NOTE> Head of the Bea&s;t; or that the time of the la&s;t Head of the Bea&s;t, &s;hould be yet pa&s;t, becau&s;e the Bea&s;t continues to the Second Coming of Chri&s;t, and is the &s;ame with the Reign of its la&s;t Head, <HI>Prop.</HI> 6. and its Corollaries.</P>
<P N="10">10. Among&s;t tho&s;e Opinions which make the Heads of the Bea&s;t to be &s;o many Succe&s;&s;ions of <HI>Roman</HI> Power, I could not entertain any of them about the <HI>con&s;titutive difference</HI> of one Head from another, but that which made it to con&s;i&s;t only in the &s;et|led change of the name of the Civil Power; becau&s;e that was the only known difference of Succe&s;&s;ive Horns in <HI>Daniel,</HI> ch. 8. and of the five fir&s;t Succe&s;&s;ive Heads in the <HI>Revelations;</HI> and be|&s;ides, the only difference betwixt all kinds of Heads or Horns, upon the &s;ame Bea&s;t, <HI>who&s;e &s;ignification is agreed on,</HI> is nothing but the different name of the Civil Power, either from its peculiar Terrritory in tho&s;e that are repre&s;ented to rule all at a time, in a divided Monarchy, or from the different appellation in tho&s;e that &s;ucceed one another in an intire Empire. So is it above &s;ixty times in the agreed examples of <HI>Daniel</HI> and the <HI>Revelations.</HI> See di&s;cour&s;e on Query the 2d.</P>
<P>And therefore I could not but look upon <HI>Alca&s;ar</HI>'s determina|tion of the Seven Heads to Seven <HI>Roman</HI> Per&s;ecutions of the Church, as arbitrary; and much more the opinion of tho&s;e
<PB N="227" REF="146"> Prote&s;tants, who agree that the only Con&s;titutive Difference of the Six fir&s;t Heads of the Bea&s;t, is nothing but a different name of the Civil Power; for they were all Six of the &s;ame <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede.</HI> Dr. <HI>More.</HI></NOTE> Religion); and yet will make the Two la&s;t Succe&s;&s;ions of the Eight, which compleat the Seven Heads, to be nothing but Two Changes of Religion under the &s;ame Civil Head with the Sixth. For this is to make a new Rule for the difference of the Two la&s;t Succe&s;&s;ions, without any ground for it from the Pro|phecy, and contrary to all the known and acknowledged Ex|amples, either in the re&s;t of the Heads of the &s;ame Bea&s;t, or in the Heads and Horns of other Bea&s;ts; and gives great advan|tage to the Papi&s;ts to de&s;pi&s;e the Prote&s;tants Application. The Pleas for it may be &s;een an&s;wered, in An&s;wer to Objection 1, 2, 3, again&s;t the 2<HI>d Query.</HI></P>
<P N="11">11. There is &s;o plain a di&s;tinction in the Second Bea&s;t of the <HI>13th</HI> Chapter, from the fir&s;t Bea&s;t there, and the one &s;o mani|fe&s;tly <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mo&s;t Prote|&s;tants. Prop. 24, &amp;c.</NOTE> &s;et forth as an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Power under the Character of the Fal&s;e Prophet, in di&s;tinction to the other, who&s;e Image and Honour he is altogether employed to advance, that I could never yield to make them but one and the &s;ame thing, <HI>viz. The Papal Power only:</HI> But yet becau&s;e they make but one joint Confederacy for the intere&s;t of a fal&s;e Religion again&s;t the true Church, they are therefore &s;ometimes promi&s;cuou&s;ly u&s;ed to &s;ignifie the actions of one another in that common concern; and the <HI>Image,</HI> and <HI>Babylon,</HI> are in the &s;ame manner u&s;ed. Thus is <HI>Babylon</HI> &s;aid to be fallen, chap. 14. 8. to &s;ignifie the decay of the Power of the <HI>Image;</HI> and the Bea&s;t in the 17th chapter is &s;aid to have the Power and Strength of the Ten Kings given him, which belongs properly to the <HI>Image</HI> of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P N="12">12. It &s;eems to be a very unnatural force upon the Text, to make the Seventh King none of the Seven Heads, in chap. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dr. <HI>More,</HI> &amp;c.</NOTE> 17. 10.</P>
<P>For it is manife&s;tly reckon'd up in order, as one of tho&s;e Seven Kings, which in the beginning of that ver&s;e, are &s;aid to be the Seven Heads; and without making it one of the Seven Heads, there will be but Six Heads upon the Bea&s;t in the 13th chapter. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 4, &amp; 5.</NOTE> For it is agreed that it was the Sixth King, and Sixth Head that was there wounded; and it mu&s;t be the &s;ame Head that was <HI>&s;een</HI> healed; which al&s;o is agreed to be the Eighth King, and la&s;t Ruling Head: If therefore the Seventh King were no Head,
<PB N="228" REF="147"> there would be no new Head after the Sixth, but only the Sixth healed of a wound, whereas there were Seven really di&s;tinct Heads <HI>&s;een</HI> upon the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>That which is pleaded for the ground of this Opinion, is an&s;wered in the An&s;wer to the 1&s;t, 2d, and 3d Objections again&s;t the Second Query.</P>
<P>It will much confirm the &s;trength of the whole Proce&s;s of the Propo&s;itions before laid down, to ob&s;erve to what &s;trange &s;hifts tho&s;e Interpreters have been put, that own any part of the Demon&s;tration, and yet will &s;tand out again&s;t the Conclu&s;ion.</P>
<P>Tho&s;e that own <HI>Babylon</HI> to be <HI>Rome,</HI> but not the pre&s;ent <HI>Rome Chri&s;tian,</HI> are forced to make it to be, Either <HI>Rome Pagan</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Alca&s;ar, Groti|us, Dr. <HI>Ham|mond.</HI></NOTE> Two hundred Years after the Empire was turned Chri&s;tian, and was then burnt in the po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of a Chri&s;tian King, by a Chri|&s;tian Emperor: Or, To make it to be <HI>Rome</HI> a little before the end of the World, grown prodigiou&s;ly rich by Foreign Traf|fick, <HI>Rev.</HI> 18, 19. and having brought the Kings of the earth, under her Subjection, <HI>v.</HI> 3. in the &s;pace of Three Years and an <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ribera, &amp;c.</NOTE> half: Or, To make it to be both <HI>Rome Heathen,</HI> and <HI>Rome</HI> at the end of the world, which &s;hould cry, <HI>I &s;it as a Queen, and &s;hall &s;ee no &s;orrow,</HI> v. 7. and which &s;hould not have the <HI>Pagan</HI> Power of it abated, or ended, for above a Thou&s;and Years after it began to be <HI>Rome Chri&s;tian;</HI> all which are &s;uch mon&s;trous In|con&s;i&s;tencies, as to make any conclude them to be impo&s;&s;ible.</P>
<P>Tho&s;e that own <HI>Babylon</HI> to be <HI>Rome,</HI> and the la&s;t Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t to be Antichri&s;t about the end of the World; and that the whole Seven Heads are &s;o many immediate Succe&s;&s;ions of Ruling Powers; to make the Sixth Head continue from <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ribera, &amp;c. Mo&s;t Papi&s;ts. Rev. 17 10.</NOTE> the time of St. <HI>John</HI> (when it is by the Text &s;ignified to be in Rule) to the time of the Seventh King, that is, (in their opinion) to a &s;hort &s;pace before the end of the World, they are forced to make the Sixth King to be of a much longer Conti|nuance than the Imperial Government at <HI>Rome,</HI> that was the King in being at the time of the Vi&s;ion: For they own, that the Imperial Government was long &s;ince at an end at <HI>Rome,</HI> and therefore are they forced to make their Sixth King to be all tho&s;e per&s;ecuting Powers of the World, that reach from the time of the Vi&s;ion, to about the end of the World; in con&s;equence of which it is nece&s;&s;ary for them to make the Bea&s;t in general, to
<PB N="229" REF="147"> be the <HI>whole World,</HI> and the re&s;t of the Heads &s;o many Succe&s;&s;i|ons of either per&s;ecuting Ages, or Monarchies of it; and this is &s;o contrary to the known acceptation of a Bea&s;t, and its Heads or Horns, for <HI>one Ruling Nation only,</HI> all over the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel,</HI> (as it is by the&s;e very per&s;ons acknowledged), that no|thing could make it appear to what a forced &s;hift they were fain to flye to avoid the bringing in of Antichri&s;t into the <HI>Roman</HI> Church many Ages ago, if they &s;hould have granted the Sixth Head at the time of the Vi&s;ion to have been the then Ruling Imperial Power of <HI>Rome</HI> only.</P>
<P>But a much more apparent &s;hift is it in tho&s;e, who think them&s;elves forced <HI>to</HI> own the Bea&s;t to be but one &s;ingle Nation only, or the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; and the la&s;t ruling Head <HI>to be</HI> An|tichri&s;t <NOTE PLACE="marg">Bellarm. &amp;c.</NOTE> about the end of the World; and the Head in Rule at the time of the Vi&s;ion, <HI>to be</HI> the Imperial Government; but after all this for fear of bringing in Antichri&s;t into the <HI>Roman</HI> Church too &s;oon, <HI>to make</HI> the Seven Heads to &s;ignifie <HI>collectively,</HI> all the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperors either at <HI>Rome</HI> or <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> or at <HI>Vienna;</HI> whereas the number <HI>Seven</HI> is apparently here divided into broken numbers, which does as certainly determine the Heads to that definite number in an immediate Succe&s;&s;ion to one another. And nothing could have made it appear how &s;o well a ver&s;ed under&s;tanding in the Critical u&s;e of words as <HI>Bellarmine</HI>'s was, re&s;olved to outface his own Knowledg, to avoid a dange|rous Con&s;equence; for if he had allowed the Seven Heads to have been ju&s;t &s;o many <HI>Succe&s;&s;ive</HI> Changes of the Rule of the <HI>Romans,</HI> he mu&s;t certainly have made the Sixth Head end at the Succe&s;&s;ion of the Kingly Government of <HI>Rome</HI> upon the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, tho the Imperial Government at <HI>Con&s;tanti|nople;</HI> had been part of the Sixth Head: For the change of the other part of it at <HI>Rome,</HI> did make a new Change of the whole Government, that is, from Imperial, to the mixt Form of King|ly and Imperial together; as the Tribunes with the Con&s;ulary Power, were a Change of the Con&s;ulary Head of the Go|vernment.</P>
<P>But of all the forced &s;hifts that we meet with, the mo&s;t Para|doxical and ab&s;urd are tho&s;e of the <HI>Grotian</HI> way; they grant <NOTE PLACE="marg">Grot. Dr. <HI>Ham|mond.</HI></NOTE> the Bea&s;t to be the Idolatrous <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; and the Heads to be Succe&s;&s;ive Changes of <HI>Roman</HI> Rulers; and the time of the Bea&s;t to continue at lea&s;t to the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian:</HI> and yet
<PB N="230" REF="148"> make the la&s;t Ruling Head of the Bea&s;t to be at an end with the Reign of <HI>Domitian,</HI> which is <HI>Contrary</HI> to all the Repre&s;entations of the Bea&s;t in the 17th chapter, as ending with his la&s;t Head: <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 6. Corol. ibid.</NOTE> they do al&s;o by this make the Ten Horns to be a long time after the la&s;t Head, which are &s;aid expre&s;ly to give their Kingdom to the Eighth King, or the Bea&s;t under the la&s;t Ruling Head. They do al&s;o make the Seven Heads of the Bea&s;t to be but &s;o many &s;in|gle Per&s;ons, <HI>contrary</HI> to the known &s;ignification of the Heads and Horns of Bea&s;ts all over <HI>Daniel.</HI> They do al&s;o make the different Shows of the &s;ame Bea&s;t in the 11th, 13th, and 17th Chapters, to be really di&s;tinct Bea&s;ts from one another; with|out any ground for it, but the different Shows of them, <HI>con|trary</HI> to what the exact re&s;emblance of their Characters to one another, would make any judg them to be; and <HI>contrary</HI> to the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Fir&s;t Book.</NOTE> plain demon&s;tration of their being but one and the &s;ame thing from the Characters of them; and <HI>contrary</HI> to the &s;en&s;e of al|mo&s;t all kind of Interpreters, e&s;pecially tho&s;e of the <HI>Roman</HI> Party, who cry out again&s;t the main foundations of this Opini|on, as nothing but the extravagancies of men without any <NOTE PLACE="marg">Preface to my former Trea|ti&s;e. The Judg|ments of God, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></NOTE> &s;en&s;e in them, tho the whole bu&s;ine&s;s of all the pains that is taken by the&s;e Contrivances, is to remove the charge of Idolatry from the Church of <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>Tho&s;e that own the Fourth Bea&s;t in the Seventh of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> to be the particular Nation of the <HI>Romans,</HI> and yet will make the little Horn of the <HI>one,</HI> and the la&s;t Head, or Eighth King in <HI>the other,</HI> to come after the de&s;truction of the Bea&s;ts to which they belong, <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mo&s;t of the <HI>Romani&s;ts.</HI></NOTE> &s;how, that they value not Contradictions, to keep off Antichri&s;t from appearing in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church. And tho&s;e that own the la&s;t time of the Bea&s;t to be about the end of the world, and yet will make <HI>Babylon</HI> that accompanies the Bea&s;t to the la&s;t, to be <HI>Rome Pagan,</HI> mu&s;t have much the &s;ame contempt <NOTE PLACE="marg">The &s;ame.</NOTE> of the plain intimations of the Prophecy; and tho&s;e al&s;o that can think, That <HI>Babylon</HI> is not the &s;ame thing, but &s;everal va&s;tly di&s;tant States of <HI>Roman</HI> Rule in the &s;everal mentions of it, or both <HI>Rome Pagan,</HI> and <HI>Rome</HI> near the end of the World. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 2, &amp; 3.</NOTE></P>
<P>Tho&s;e of the Prote&s;tants that make the Change of Religion in the Imperial Head, to be a new Head, &s;eem to be &s;o wholly intent upon the Charge of Antichri&s;tiani&s;m upon the Church <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mo&s;t Prote|&s;tants.</NOTE> of <HI>Rome,</HI> that they neglect all known and acknowledged Ex|amples
<PB N="231" REF="148"> of the difference of the Heads of Bea&s;ts, to fix their Charge; And to hold to it, they are forced to wre&s;t the na|tural and plain &s;en&s;e of the 10th ver&s;e of the 17th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and to find out &s;ome far fetched Critici&s;ms to make it good; As the making of the 7th of tho&s;e Seven Kings, that are &s;aid to be the &s;even Heads, to be none of tho&s;e Heads: And <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dr. <HI>More,</HI> 648.</NOTE> as the making <GAP DESC="foreign"> to denote the Seventh King to be quite different from the re&s;t, does appear to be. <HI>See Prop.</HI> 4.</P>
<P>They are al&s;o forced to make the wounded, and the healed <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede.</HI></NOTE> Head, to be two di&s;tinct Heads of the &s;even, which is contrary to the plain Expre&s;&s;ions of the Prophecy, which mention it to <HI>be &s;een</HI> but as one and the &s;ame Head wounded and healed; and is al&s;o contrary to the common acceptation of a Head wounded and healed, which can be but one Head.</P>
<P>Others of them are forced to make the Seventh King, and the Eighth, to be the &s;ame thing, and for that end to tran&s;po&s;e the latter end of the 10th ver&s;e, and to make it come after the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mon&s;ieur <HI>Ju|rieu</HI> Accomp. des Prophe|cies, pag. 190. 2d Edit. Mo&s;t Prote|&s;tants.</NOTE> beginning of the 11th, contrary to the natural order of the Text.</P>
<P>Tho&s;e that would fix all the Charge of the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet, upon the <HI>Papal</HI> Power only, are forced to make nothing of the plain Characters by which they are di&s;tingui&s;hed from one another, when named together, nor of the Change of the name of the Civil Government of the <HI>Romans</HI> at the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, though that was the only difference betwixt the fir&s;t &s;ix Heads of the Bea&s;t, according to their own Opinion. For the fir&s;t &s;ix Heads were all of the &s;ame Religion, that is, Pagans: And upon this account is it, that mo&s;t of them are forced to make the fir&s;t appearance of the Bea&s;t to be of a very uncertain date; that is, according to their fancy about the fir&s;t great ap|pearance of the Papal Power, which cannot well be fixed: Whereas the fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t mu&s;t have been a very vi&s;ible and remarkable Change of the Supream Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> from that which was the 7th Ruling Power of it to the 8th, called the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>It is upon this account, that &s;ome of tho&s;e who incline to the former Opinion, and yet do plainly &s;ee, that the Bea&s;t mu&s;t be a Change of the form of the Civil Power of the Empire, do therefore make the Ten Kings with the Papal Power, to be the Bea&s;t, that is, the Eighth King, or la&s;t Ruling Head. But what <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 6.</NOTE>
<PB N="232" REF="149"> an ab&s;urdity do they fly to in this, when it is manife&s;t, that the Ten Kings were the Ten Horns, and none of the Seven Heads.</P>
<P>Others of them indeed defer the Ri&s;e of this <HI>Papal Bea&s;t,</HI> to that manife&s;t Change of the Imperial Power at the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire in <HI>Augu&s;tulus,</HI> as the end of the true Chri&s;tian Em|perors, who are their Seventh King; but then they are forced to make nothing of the &s;ucceeding Sovereign Power of the <HI>Ita|lian</HI> Kings of <HI>Rome,</HI> who were as Ab&s;olute Sovereigns of it, not|with&s;tanding their Royal Seat at <HI>Ravenna,</HI> as any of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors had been from the time of <HI>Honorius,</HI> who fir&s;t made <HI>Ravenna</HI> the Imperial Seat. They are al&s;o forced to pa&s;s over the Change of the Regal and Imperial Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> to the pure Imperial Government at the recovery of <HI>Rome</HI> by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> as of no account for a new Head, though they mu&s;t own the <HI>Ea|&s;tern</HI> Emperors to have been as much Sovereigns of <HI>Rome</HI> at this Re-conque&s;t of it, as the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> were before the lo&s;s of it, and when they were the acknowledged Sixth Head. This appears from the Power of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperors Exarchs after the reco|very of the <HI>We&s;t.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 N="4" TYPE="book">
<PB N="233" REF="149">
<HEAD>The Fourth BOOK.</HEAD>
<HEAD TYPE="sub">THE Application of the Characters OF THE BEAST In the <HI>REVELATIONS.</HI></HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. I.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The force of the Applications of the Characters of the</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE> <HI>Bea&s;t to confirm the fir&s;t date of his Reign. A Caution to tho&s;e who have taken up with a former Hypothe&s;is. The uncouth Compo&s;ition of the Bea&s;t, of the Parts of</HI> a Lyon, <HI>of</HI> a Leopard, <HI>and</HI> of a Bear, <HI>applied to an ab&s;olute exactne&s;s. The</HI> Ri|&s;ing of the Bea&s;t out of the Sea; <HI>The Continuance of his Reign</HI> for 42 Months.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>AFTER the more clo&s;e and demon&s;trative way of proof, that has been made u&s;e of to determine the particular nature, and fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, It will much confirm the knowledge that is now had of him, to &s;ee how ea&s;ie and natural the Application of all the other Circum&s;tances of his Hi&s;tory will appear to be upon this foundation.</P>
<PB N="234" REF="150">
<P> And this may &s;erve for an additional proof <HI>&agrave; po&s;teriori,</HI> as the Demon&s;trations of the principles of natural things by their cau|&s;es are much &s;trengthned by their perfect agreement with all the effects that we can apply them to, or with all that experi|ence does teach us of them. But yet it mu&s;t always be remem|bred, That though the Application of an In&s;tance or two &s;hould &s;eem to be &s;omething har&s;h, or forced; That no man ought for that to que&s;tion the former Conclu&s;ions, unle&s;s upon a new examination he can find them <HI>le&s;s nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> than they did at fir&s;t appear. <HI>No man ought to doubt of a plain and manife&s;t truth, be|cau&s;e he &s;ees it to be &s;eemingly incon&s;i&s;tent with &s;ome other Conclu|&s;ions that are deduced from it,</HI> which are not &s;o plain and ne|ce&s;&s;ary.</P>
<P>I know not of any &s;uch har&s;hne&s;s in any of the Applications that I am now going to make, but rather think them &s;o well agreeing with the Characters of the Text, that they are enough to &s;urprize one into an admiration of the Congruity of them. But I interpo&s;e this as a convenient Caution to tho&s;e who may find a convincing evidence in the proof of the maint Point, to which the Applications are fixed; but by rea&s;on of &s;ome preju|dices, and long u&s;e of a former Hypothe&s;is, may not think &s;ome of the Applications &s;o well fitted to the Prophecy, as they will imagine their own to be. For this will be apt to make them judge many things, which to all others would appear <HI>very tole|rable at lea&s;t,</HI> to be har&s;h and uncouth to them.</P>
<P>To begin then with the figure and compo&s;ition of the Bea&s;t; It is &s;aid to be in the &s;everal parts of it like a <HI>Lyon,</HI> a <HI>Leopard,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 2.</NOTE> and a <HI>Bear,</HI> which do manife&s;tly refer to its being the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> which is there repre&s;ented immediately after the account of the Three Kingdoms &s;hown by <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 7, 23.</NOTE> tho&s;e Three Bea&s;ts, and is &s;aid to have devoured them. And tho&s;e Three Bea&s;ts are agreed to be the <HI>Babylonian, Per&s;ian</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Book the IId.</NOTE> <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchies: The Bea&s;t here is repre&s;ented as con&s;i&s;ting of the&s;e Kingdoms, as the parts of his Body; which if it has any reference to the <HI>Roman</HI> State at the particular Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t with <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify, That it &s;hould be that particular <HI>Roman</HI> Power which was in po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of <HI>Greece, Babylon</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> or that part of <HI>A&s;ia</HI> which belonged to the <HI>Babylonians</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians.</HI> And then it does very clearly &s;ignify, That the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t &s;hould be at the advancement of the <HI>Ea&s;tern Em|pire</HI>
<PB N="235" REF="150"> to the Government of <HI>Rome?</HI> And does not that &s;uit well enough with <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of <HI>Italy?</HI></P>
<P>This would tempt one to be very confident, That this was de&s;igned as a very plain Character to know the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t by, &s;ince there is no &s;uch mention of any of the Parts of the&s;e Bea&s;ts, in the Dragon in the Chapter ju&s;t before, which yet is the &s;ame kind of Figure with this, and is known to &s;ignify the <HI>Ro|man</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 12.</NOTE> State <HI>a long time after</HI> that it had been in po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of <HI>Greece</HI> and <HI>A&s;ia.</HI> And one would be very apt to judge, That what is repre&s;ented as <HI>particular</HI> to the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter, and was omitted in the Dragon, which yet is known to be the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Empire, mu&s;t be added as a mark of di&s;tinction of the one from the other. But if others will have this mark of the Three Bea&s;ts to belong to the general nature of the Bea&s;t, as it &s;igni|fies the <HI>Roman</HI> Conque&s;t at its fir&s;t appearance after the de&s;tru|ction of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy, it will not prejudice my Opinion. It is enough to &s;how, That as this Bea&s;t does &s;ignify the parti|cular &s;tate of it under its la&s;t Ruling Head; So this character of the Parts of it does <HI>mo&s;t exactly</HI> agree with that, which I make to be the la&s;t Ruling Head at its fir&s;t Ri&s;e, <HI>in di&s;tinction</HI> to all o|ther &s;tates of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>The <HI>ri&s;ing of the Bea&s;t out of the Sea,</HI> is known to &s;ignify, that it <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 1.</NOTE> &s;hould ari&s;e out of great Commotions, and by great Wars and Tumults. For &s;o are <HI>many Waters</HI> interpreted by the Angel him|&s;elf, to &s;ignify in this Prophecy, chap. 17. 15. <HI>Multitudes, and Peo|ples,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">I&s;a. 8. 7. &amp; 17. 12. Jer. 46. 8.</NOTE> <HI>and Tongues, and Nations,</HI> which being added to the nature of tho&s;e <HI>Waters in the Sea,</HI> do determine it to &s;ignify great com|motions of tho&s;e <HI>Multitudes,</HI> and <HI>Nations.</HI> And certainly this does very well &s;uit with that &s;trange bu&s;tle which <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> made in the World by his Wars with the <HI>Goths,</HI> and <HI>Vandals,</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> and with his Conque&s;ts of tho&s;e People at his taking po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire. <HI>The a&s;cending of the Bea&s;t out of the Bottomle&s;s Pit,</HI> Rev. 17. 8. is the &s;ame thing; as the Sea is u&s;ually called by the name of the <HI>Aby&s;s</HI> in Scripture, which is the word here u&s;ed for the <HI>Bottomle&s;s Pit.</HI></P>
<P>I could never meet with any &s;atisfactory Account from any o|ther <HI>Hypothe&s;is</HI> concerning the date of the fir&s;t appearance of the Bea&s;t, why the whole time of its continuance, both in <HI>Daniel,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 25. Rev. 13. 5. &amp; Chap. 12. 14.</NOTE> and the <HI>Revelations,</HI> &s;hould be expre&s;&s;ed by a <HI>Time, Times, and half a time,</HI> or 4<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Months,</HI> which is the &s;ame <HI>(Coroll.</HI> 2. <HI>Prop.</HI> 24.)
<PB N="236" REF="151"> For one would be apt to conclude, that <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>ALca&s;ar. Notat.</HI> 4. <HI>ad v.</HI> 2. <HI>cap.</HI> 11.</P>
<P>All the Per&s;ecutions of the Church are &s;et out by three years and an half. Three days and an half refer to a Week. <HI>And on chap.</HI> 12. We have &s;een, that by 1260 days are &s;ignified three years and an half, accor|ding to the <HI>Graecian</HI> and <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Account. We have al&s;o there &s;een, that the &s;pace of three years and an half is to be taken my&s;tically, and that by it is &s;ignified in the middle of a week of &s;even years.</P></NOTE> <HI>the three, and an half,</HI> in that expre&s;&s;ion, mu&s;t have a reference to &s;ome <HI>&s;even,</HI> as the whole number of it. <HI>Three years, and an half,</HI> is in it &s;elf &s;o pre|ci&s;e, and unu&s;ual a determination of the whole time of a thing; and the whole number <HI>&s;even,</HI> &s;o commonly u&s;ed in the Old and New Te&s;tament, to &s;ignify the <HI>whole</HI> of things of the &s;ame kind, that it mu&s;t be thought to be very likely to be here referred to; <HI>e&s;pecially,</HI> when it is al&s;o con&s;idered, That the number <HI>&s;even</HI> is very frequently in u&s;e all over the Book of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e: Alca&s;ar</HI> has ob&s;erved, that it is made u&s;e of there no le&s;s than forty times. <HI>Epi&s;t. Dedicat. Comment. in</HI> Apocalyp.</P>
<P>The three years and an half, of the preaching of Chri&s;t, to which the&s;e three years and an half, are &s;aid to allude, are al&s;o in the 9th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> la&s;t ver&s;e, made to be a reference to half a week of years.</P>
<P>With this it is al&s;o to be ob&s;erved, That the other two fa|mous Prophecies concerning the Captivities of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church (which is every-where made the &s;cheme of the Chri&s;tian Church.) The fir&s;t about the 70 years Captivity by <HI>Jeremiah,</HI> and the o|ther of the 70 weeks Captivity, till the time of the <HI>Me&s;&s;ias</HI> (which is mentioned with the former in the 9th Chapter of <HI>Daniel)&punc;</HI> They both have the number <HI>&s;even</HI> for their <HI>denominator,</HI> and common mea&s;ure. And from <HI>Jacob</HI>'s <HI>&s;even years</HI> &s;ervice for <NOTE PLACE="marg">Gen. 29. &amp; Chap. 21. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Leah</HI> and <HI>Rachel,</HI> and from the Liberty of an <HI>Hebrew</HI> Servant at the end of <HI>&s;even years;</HI> It appears, that the &s;pace of <HI>&s;even years</HI> was the known &s;pace of time for <HI>&s;ervitude</HI> among&s;t the <HI>Jews,</HI> where the Prophecies were delivered. And the &s;even years that we are now enquiring after to fix the half of them to, mu&s;t be &s;ome &s;even years of the Bondage of the Church, though with &s;ome light&s;ome intervals.</P>
<P>As this does make it very likely, That the <HI>Time, Times, and an half,</HI> of the Tyranny of the Little Horn, or Bea&s;t, over the Church of God, does certainly refer to &s;ome whole number of &s;even Times: &s;o is it now worth the enquiring, to what <HI>parti|cular &s;even</HI> Prophetical Times they are referred.</P>
<P>This difficulty in the way, that I have found my &s;elf deter|mined to by the Prophecy, is ea&s;ily re&s;olved. For if the fir&s;t ap|pearance of the Bea&s;t be at <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of <HI>Italy, the Time, Times, and half,</HI> of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and Little Horn of the Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> are ju&s;t as long a &s;pace of time, as it was
<PB N="237" REF="151"> from the fir&s;t beginning of the Captivity of the <HI>Jews</HI> under the <HI>A&s;&s;yrians</HI> (who were much the &s;ame Kingdom with the <HI>Babylo|nians)</HI> in the 9th year of the Reign of <HI>Ho&s;ea,</HI> to the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P>For that Captivity of the Ten Tribes, by <HI>Salmana&s;ar,</HI> was in <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Petav.</HI> Rat. Temp. part. 1. l. 2. cap. 2. in Ezechia. Part. 2. l. 1. c. 4. in fine.</NOTE> the 3993d year of the <HI>Julian</HI> Period, and 720 years before Chri&s;t. If to this be added the Year of our Lord, when <HI>Beli&s;a|rius</HI> carried <HI>Vitiges,</HI> the King of the <HI>Italian Goths,</HI> in triumph with him to <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> which was <HI>Anno Dom.</HI> 540, there will be ju&s;t the &s;ame number of 1260 years to the beginning of the Reign of the Bea&s;t at <HI>Rome,</HI> for the fir&s;t half of the &s;even Pro|phetical <HI>years of years,</HI> without their <HI>Epagomena,</HI> or the five days at the end of them, as is determined in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> And tho the <HI>Goths</HI> did after that Triumph of <HI>Beli&s;arius,</HI> get head again in <HI>Italy,</HI> yet the example that we have of the computation of <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Petav.</HI> Rat. Temp. part. 2. l. 3. c. 12.</NOTE> the 70 years Captivity, from the fir&s;t carrying away of <HI>Jehoia|kim,</HI> long before the final De&s;olation, is a very plain Rule given for the fixing of the date of the Conque&s;t of a Nation in Pro|phecy. For <HI>Beli&s;arius</HI>'s Conque&s;t of the <HI>Goths</HI> at the taking of <HI>Vitiges</HI> their King, was exactly the &s;ame kind of Conque&s;t of them, as <HI>Nebuchadnezzar's</HI> Conque&s;t of <HI>Judaea</HI> at the carrying a|way their King <HI>Jehoiakim</HI> in Fetters, though the Line of their Kings continued to the end of <HI>Zedekiah.</HI></P>
<P>By this it appears, That from the <HI>fir&s;t times</HI> of the Bondage of God's Church at the beginning of the great Captivity of the <HI>Jews,</HI> to the la&s;t end of it at the ruine of the Fourth Kingdom in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> &s;ucceeded there by the Kingdom of the <HI>Son of Man;</HI> there is ju&s;t the &s;pace of &s;even Prophetical years, or in the phra&s;e of <HI>Daniel, &s;even Times,</HI> of which <HI>the one half begins</HI> with the Captivity of the Ten Tribes, and <HI>ends</HI> at the fir&s;t ap|pearance of the Reign of the Bea&s;t; and <HI>the other half</HI> is the times of that Reign. At the end of which the great Prophetical Week of Times is accompli&s;hed, or the times of the Servitude and Bondage of the People of God: For as &s;even years was the allotted time in the Law for the &s;lavery of a Servant, &s;o did that time &s;eem to be made the Type of this great &s;tate of Bondage.</P>
<P>To confirm this, We &s;ee the end of the <HI>Time, Times, and half,</HI> declared to be the end of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Captivity, <HI>Daniel</HI> 12. 7. Which does clearly &s;how, that tho&s;e Times were only a part of that <HI>whole</HI> Captivity; and where they appear to be the ju&s;t half,
<PB N="238" REF="152"> and to be called <HI>three, and an half,</HI> who would not a&s;&s;ure him|&s;elf, that they mu&s;t refer to the whole number of <HI>&s;even Times, or years of years,</HI> which was the whole time of that Captivity?</P>
<P>And thus comes the whole time of that long Captivity of the <HI>Jews,</HI> to be mea&s;ured out to our admiration by the&s;e two halves of it, from the fir&s;t time of the Captivity of the Kingdom of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> (as the 70 years from the fir&s;t Captivity of <HI>Jehoiakim)</HI> to the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, or Little Horn, and from the beginning of that Reign, to the end of it.</P>
<P>But if the 1260 years in both the halves &s;hould be al&s;o ac|counted without the five days, or the <HI>Epagomena,</HI> at the end of each year in them, ju&s;t as three times, or three years, and an half, are here but 1260 days, then they would be 18 years &s;hort of that number of years; and then the fir&s;t half of the whole &s;even would end ju&s;t about <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s entrance upon the Throne in the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> or at <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI>'s being crowned by Pope <HI>John,</HI> four years before, in acknowledgment of his Right over the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. And this might be &s;o much a more remarkable date of the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, becau&s;e this is &s;aid by <HI>Petavius, Ration. Temp. Part. I. L.</HI> 7. <HI>cap.</HI> 3. to have been the fir&s;t In&s;tance of the Crowning of an Emperor by the Pope. And this was near 18 years before the other date from <HI>Beli&s;arius</HI>'s Triumph over the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings, and made remarkable by the change of the com|mon <HI>Aera ab &V;. C.</HI> for that of the year of our Lord pre&s;ently after by <HI>Diony&s;ius Exiguus;</HI> and by the beginning of a new <HI>Dige&s;t</HI> and <HI>Code</HI> of Laws by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> which have continued ever &s;ince to be the acknowledged &s;tandard of Civil Law to all Nations, though properly nothing but the Laws of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>The other half al&s;o of the Time, or the 1260 years of the Bea&s;t, mu&s;t thereupon be concluded to end 18 years &s;ooner, or &s;oon after the Year 1760.</P>
<P>It has indeed been already determined, that the fir&s;t ap|pearance of the Bea&s;t was at <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of the <HI>Goths.</HI> But though his fir&s;t publick formal appearance might be <HI>not till then,</HI> yet the time of his Reign might very well be accounted from the time of his fir&s;t Inauguration, or Coronation, for that De&s;ign, by the Fal&s;e Prophet, &s;ince it &s;eemed to be but one con|tinued De&s;ign for the Elevation of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperor into the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Throne. And &s;o was that Action of Pope <HI>John</HI> inter|preted by the <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy,</HI> as a tran&s;lation of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Em|pire
<PB N="239" REF="152"> upon him; and upon that account was the Pope &s;o clo&s;ely impri&s;oned at his return by the King of the <HI>Goths,</HI> as it co&s;t him his life. The fir&s;t date then of the 42 months of the Bea&s;t's Reign, may very well begin at his fir&s;t Coronation by the Pope, as the <HI>Eighth King</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> or the &s;even Hills.</P>
<P>But after all, it is to be ob&s;erved, That there is an apparent ground from the Prophecy for the apprehending the two halves of the <HI>&s;even times</HI> of years not to be altogether of an equal length. The mention of a <HI>Time, Times, and an half,</HI> is indeed ground enough to make one conclude, that they refer to an <HI>whole week of times,</HI> of which they are three and an half. But then to &s;hew, that this latter half was of a different length from the other three and an half before them; the&s;e latter are indu&s;triou&s;ly explained in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to be no more than three years and an half without the five days, which were u&s;ually added to the twelve <HI>Babylonian</HI> Months in every year: Which &s;eems to be a plain ex|ception there put in to di&s;tingui&s;h them from all other Accounts of <HI>Babylonian</HI> years, that had not that limitation added to them, and therefore more particularly to &s;hew their difference from the fir&s;t three and an half in the <HI>&s;even times.</HI></P>
<P>According to this, The fir&s;t three times and an half, ought to be accounted according to the <HI>full</HI> number of days in the <HI>Ba|bylonian</HI> year, or with the addition of the five days, or <HI>Epago|mena,</HI> after the other Twelve Months; which would make e|very one of the&s;e fir&s;t half of the &s;even Times to contain five days more in it, than is accounted in every one of the latter half: And then the fir&s;t Three Prophetical Times and an half before the Reign of the Bea&s;t would be 17 years more than 1260 full years; which would make them reach from the fir&s;t <HI>A&s;&s;yrian</HI> Captivity of the <HI>Jews,</HI> to the year 558 after Chri&s;t, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Petav.</HI> Rat. Temp. l. 7: c. 5. in fine.</NOTE> when <HI>Beli&s;arius</HI> made an end of the la&s;t remainder of all the op|po&s;ers of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of the We&s;tern Empire, <HI>viz.</HI> the Nation of the <HI>Huns;</HI> the Times of the Reign of the Bea&s;t, the latter half would by this account not begin till about the year 558: and if they were full 1260 <HI>Babylonian</HI> years, they would then reach to about the year 1820 for their La&s;t End. But by the &s;ame rea&s;on, that they are made to be but 1260 years, or 17 years &s;hort of the full account of the three Times and an half; <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> every of tho&s;e 1260 years as has been ob&s;erved, may be judged
<PB N="240" REF="153"> to want five days in them; and then they would reach but to ju&s;t the year 1800.</P>
<P>And this I account to be the true way of determining the number of the years in both the halves of the <HI>Week of Times</HI> here referred to. For the indu&s;trious care, that the Prophecy &s;eems to take in three Chapters of the <HI>Revelations</HI> to limit the number of years contained in the latter half of that great week, is &s;ufficient ground to conclude, that the former half of it before the Times of the Bea&s;t, which has no &s;uch limitation in it, is to be accounted according to the received Cu&s;tom of the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Nation, for their number of days in a year, to which all this pe|culiar calculation of the Times does refer. For the Exception expre&s;ly put in to the one half, is a confirmation of the common way of account in the other half, where there is none.</P>
<P>Thus may we ob&s;erve, That this great Tribulation of the do|mination of the Bea&s;t, does in that re&s;emble the time of the greate&s;t Tribulation that ever befel the <HI>Jews,</HI> as it is characte|rized by our Saviour. The days that this &s;hould have in it in proportion to the other half of the &s;even before it, are <HI>&s;hortned for the Elects &s;ake.</HI></P>
<P>And all the grounds that there are for the &s;hortning of the length of 1260 years by the <HI>Chaldaick</HI> and <HI>Greek</HI> Account, with|out the additional five days, expre&s;ly referred to in the Prophe|cy, do al&s;o prove, that the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, who&s;e time is mea|&s;ured out by the&s;e years, could not be about the Year 450. for then his time would now have been almo&s;t ju&s;t run out. For 1260 <HI>Chaldaick</HI> years would be but 1242, which added to 450, would make but 1692 for the end of the Bea&s;t. And yet that is the time to which the fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t is fixed by the mo&s;t Judicious of the Prote&s;tants, that take other ways for the &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of the Eighth King, called The Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>But in the &s;horte&s;t account of the&s;e years they appear however to be &s;o prodigious a length of time for the Reign of One Ty|rannical Kingdom over the Church of God, in compari&s;on with any other of the Four Monarchies (by which the whole <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> time of the Captivity of the Church of God is mea&s;ured out in the 7th of <HI>Daniel)</HI> That that is a very &s;ufficient Rea&s;on for the particular mention of them, as the half of &s;ome week of years: For by that, this Antichri&s;tian Tyranny is &s;et out by that which is the mo&s;t remarkable Circum&s;tance in it, <HI>viz.</HI> The continuance
<PB N="241" REF="153"> of it in the la&s;t Monarchy of the Four, as long as all the re&s;t of the time of the &s;lavery of the Church under all the other Three Monarchies, and that al&s;o in but the one part of the Fourth Monarchy.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="242" REF="154">
<HEAD>CHAP. II. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Character of an</HI> Eighth, which was one of the Seven, <HI>explained; of</HI> was, <HI>and</HI> is not, yet is; <HI>Of coming after a</HI> Seventh, <HI>which &s;hould</HI> continue but a &s;hort &s;pace: <HI>Of the</HI> changing of Times, and Laws: <HI>Of the</HI> Ten Kings <HI>reigning</HI> one hour with the Bea&s;t: <HI>Of the</HI> Image of the Bea&s;t.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>TO go on with the re&s;t of the Characters of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> The Imperial Head cut off by the <HI>Goths,</HI> and re&s;tored by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> does very naturally agree with the Chara|cter of its being an <HI>Eighth King, which was one</HI> of the <HI>Seven.</HI> Be|cau&s;e <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 11.</NOTE> it was the Sixth of tho&s;e Seven Kings at the time of the Prophecy, and an Eighth in the time of its Re&s;tauration by <HI>Ju|&s;tinian.</HI> And it is a &s;trange thing to &s;ee how others are forced to make <HI>either</HI> their Eighth King to be the &s;ame with their Seventh, <HI>or</HI> their Seventh King to be none of the &s;even Heads, to uphold their Interpretation.</P>
<P>And that al&s;o &s;hows, How the Imperial Head re&s;tored by <HI>Ju|&s;tinian,</HI> was the Head <HI>wounded to death, and healed again;</HI> ch. 13. 3. And the Bea&s;t that <HI>was,</HI> and <HI>is not,</HI> and <HI>yet is,</HI> ch. 17. 8. which do but &s;ignify the &s;ame thing with its being the <HI>Eighth, which was one of the Seven</HI> that had been once pa&s;t before. For all tho&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions &s;ignify no more, than that the Imperial Head <HI>was,</HI> before it was deadly wounded by the <HI>Goths, then cea&s;ed to be,</HI> while the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings were the Kings of <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Italy;</HI> and afterwards <HI>was healed again</HI> by the return of the Imperial Rule over <HI>Rome</HI> in <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P>Where by the way may be ob&s;erved, how ju&s;tly the continu|ance of the <HI>Roman</HI> Imperial Power in the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> after the ruine of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, does an&s;wer the Character of, <HI>and yet is,</HI> at the time when it had but a &s;mall &s;hare in the Authority of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> together with the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings. See the Account of their <NOTE PLACE="marg">Note 20, 21. on Chap. 18.</NOTE> Union in the choice of their Con&s;uls, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But whereas the fir&s;t of the&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions &s;eems to belong <HI>only to an Head</HI> of the Bea&s;t, and <HI>the other</HI> is &s;aid of the Bea&s;t <HI>indefinitely;</HI> It is to be con&s;idered,
<PB N="243" REF="154"> that the notion of the Bea&s;t, is the Bea&s;t in the particular &s;tate of its la&s;t Head <HI>(Prop.</HI> 6.)&mdash;which is the healed Head <HI>(Coroll.</HI> 3. <HI>Prop.</HI> 10.)</P>
<P>As for the Riddle of <HI>was,</HI> and <HI>is not,</HI> and <HI>yet is,</HI> The Learned <NOTE PLACE="marg">Vol. 1. p. 642.</NOTE> Dr. <HI>More</HI> has &s;hown, that that is to be under&s;tood of the Bea&s;t, as it was &s;ubject to tho&s;e &s;everal changes of one and the &s;ame &s;tate of it, and not to be tied to any one &s;et particular time, when tho&s;e incon&s;i&s;tent Characters were really verified of it <HI>al|together,</HI> as &s;everal compounded Names of things are found to be in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament.</HI> For to under&s;tand it literally of the &s;ub|&s;tance of the Bea&s;t, is an open contradiction; or to under&s;tand tho&s;e Characters about the &s;ame qualification of it in <HI>the &s;ame</HI> re|&s;pect at the &s;ame time. And yet it cannot but be &s;een, that in the time of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings, it was very near being verified to the greate&s;t nicety about the Imperial Government. It <HI>was</HI> Su|pream at <HI>Rome before</HI> them, it <HI>was not</HI> &s;o <HI>in</HI> their time; <HI>and yet it was</HI> owned for its &s;hare <HI>with</HI> them in the Authority of it.</P>
<P>But to make out this difficulty by applying the&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions only to a quality of the Bea&s;t, that <HI>was,</HI> and <HI>was not,</HI> and <HI>yet was</HI> (as Dr. <HI>More</HI> does to the Idolatry of the <HI>Romans)</HI> is con|trary to that, which has been proved to be the con&s;tant accep|tation of the Bea&s;t <HI>(Prop.</HI> 6)&mdash;that is, The particular &s;tate of it under the Eighth King, which therefore mu&s;t be the thing of which, <HI>was, is not,</HI> and <HI>yet is,</HI> mu&s;t be verified.</P>
<P>The Character of his being an <HI>Eighth</HI> after a Seventh King, <HI>which &s;hould continue but a &s;hort &s;pace,</HI> agrees very well with the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ch. 17. 10.</NOTE> Re&s;tauration of the Imperial Rule after the Reign of the <HI>Goths</HI> in <HI>Italy.</HI> For their whole time was not above &s;eventy years, which <NOTE PLACE="marg">I&s;a. 23. 15.</NOTE> is but the Age of one Man, and is by the Prophet <HI>I&s;aiah</HI> called the days of one King; and is a very &s;hort &s;pace of time in compa|ri&s;on with tho&s;e Kings betwixt whom it &s;tands, and to who&s;e time of Reign the reference is made. For tho&s;e &s;eventy years were as nothing in compari&s;on of either the Imperial Rule <HI>before</HI> it, which had continued for above five hundred years; or of that <HI>after</HI> it, which has already continued above a thou&s;and years. And be&s;ides, it is a &s;horter &s;pace of time than is attributed to the Seventh King, by almo&s;t all others who do not make him to be a &s;ingle Emperor.</P>
<P>The changing of <HI>Times,</HI> and <HI>Laws,</HI> attributed to the Little Horn in <HI>Daniel,</HI> may &s;ignify no more than appearing like a new
<PB N="244" REF="155"> Lawgiver in the Church. But if it be de&s;ired to &s;ee this more particularly verified of the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian;</HI> Is it not &s;ufficient for that purpo&s;e, that His <HI>Code</HI> was then made the &s;tanding Law of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and has ever &s;ince continued to be &s;o? And that the <HI>Epocha,</HI> that <HI>Diony&s;ius Exiguus</HI> did then bring in of the Year of our Lord, again&s;t the old <HI>Epocha ab urbe condit&acirc;,</HI> has ever &s;ince been ob&s;erved? But I rather &s;tick to his Settlement of the Laws of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church.</P>
<P>There is no manner of difficulty about the Ten Kings, which <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 12.</NOTE> are &s;aid to Reign with the Bea&s;t either <HI>one hour,</HI> or <HI>at the &s;ame time.</HI> For the number Ten is u&s;ually taken in Scripture for an uncertain multitude of tho&s;e things of which it is &s;aid to be the number; and in &s;uch a long &s;ucce&s;&s;ion, and change of King|doms, as it is here joined with, and where there is no other cir|cum&s;tance to &s;hew it to be a definite number, it ought in all rea|&s;on to be taken in that &s;en&s;e; that is, for an uncertain multi|tude of Kingdoms, that were to be &s;et up with the Bea&s;t in the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, according as they are repre&s;ented by Horns of that Bea&s;t, which is agreed to be the particular <HI>Ro|man</HI> Monarchy, <HI>Prop.</HI> 16.</P>
<P>For it is unimaginable, That ever that definite number of Ten Kingdoms &s;hould be found to have been con&s;tant under all tho&s;e Changes of Ma&s;ters, that the Divi&s;ions of the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire have have been &s;ucce&s;&s;ively ruled by. I am &s;ure in the time of the <HI>Saxon</HI> Heptarchy in <HI>England,</HI> it could not be &s;o: And many other In&s;tances of the like nature might be produced again&s;t it. But however, it is not que&s;tioned by tho&s;e, who maintain the definite number, but that the&s;e Ten Kings were up in Rule <HI>at the &s;ame time</HI> with <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI> That they &s;hould have their fir&s;t Ri&s;e with him <HI>at one</HI> and <HI>the &s;ame time,</HI> is not at all nece&s;&s;ary from the Text, though the &s;ignification of <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;hould be granted to be <HI>at the &s;ame time.</HI> See pag. 216.</P>
<P>But indeed the common, and unforced &s;ignification of that Expre&s;&s;ion, is <HI>one hour,</HI> that is, a &s;mall time, as has been ob|&s;erved: And then all that could be made of it, would be, That tho&s;e Ten Kings, which are &s;aid to have received no Kingdom in St. <HI>John</HI>'s time, <HI>yet &s;hould receive power as Kings,</HI> or as free In|dependent Sovereigns, for a &s;mall time with the Bea&s;t; and that only, till, as it is &s;aid, they &s;hould <HI>give their power, and &s;trength, and Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t;</HI> that is, Till they &s;hould &s;ubmit them|&s;elves,
<PB N="245" REF="155"> and their Kingdoms to that <HI>Roman</HI> U&s;urpation, which the Imperial Authority &s;hould &s;et up, and be the Secular Head of; which will be better under&s;tood, when it is explained what the <HI>wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t,</HI> and of his <HI>Image,</HI> is.</P>
<P>For that end it will be now requi&s;ite to enquire what the <HI>Image of the Bea&s;t</HI> can be determined to be. It &s;eems at fir&s;t to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13, 14.</NOTE> be a figurative Expre&s;&s;ion, and &s;o capable of variety of Inter|pretations; but there will be peculiar marks enough found of it in the Text to determine it to one certain thing.</P>
<P>But before we enter upon that, it is to be premi&s;ed, That the mention of the <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> and his <HI>Image,</HI> is a very manife&s;t allu&s;ion to the <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Panciroll. de Notitia Imp. Orient.</HI> pag. 46. <HI>gives the examples</HI> of rai&s;ing the Emperour's Image, and carrying it about, to denote his Exaltation to the Empire. <HI>And</HI> pag. 47. <HI>gives the examples</HI> of breaking the Emperour's Images, or the throwing them down, to &s;ignifie the end of his Reign, or his being Depo&s;ed.</NOTE> common cu&s;tome of the <HI>Romans</HI> at that time, to rai&s;e the Emperors Image in all publick places at his election to that Dig|nity, and to continue the adoration of it during the time of his Reign, and to pull down, and break tho&s;e Images at the end of every re&s;pective Reign. The Emperor's Image, and the wor&s;hip given to it, was the publick &s;ignification of his being in power: And that they might have the fairer Title to Adora|tion, <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><HI>Panciroll.</HI> pag. 47. <HI>Notit. Imp. Orient.</HI> &s;hews the way of con&s;ecrating the Images of the Emperours, and the unlawfulne&s;s of &s;elling them after it; no le&s;s than <HI>Crimen lae&s;ae Maje&s;tatis,</HI> or High-Trea&s;on.</NOTE> they were con&s;ecrated with a form of words, as the Idols that were dedicated to the honour of the Gods: And &s;o &s;acred were they after that, accounted to be, that it was High-trea&s;on for any to &s;ell them after Con&s;ecration.</P>
<P>The Bea&s;t then, and his Image, are here joined together with a reference to the wor&s;hip of the Emperors, and their Images. <HI>The Fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> who is the contriver of this Image, has been already found to be a Church-Head with Supream Authority over the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and that he is <HI>really</HI> di&s;tingui&s;hed from the Bea&s;t, who is the Secular Head of it. <HI>Prop.</HI> 24.</P>
<P>And this Fal&s;e Prophet is determined to be in particular, the Papal Authority, <HI>(Coroll.</HI> 3. <HI>Prop.</HI> 25.)</P>
<P>The Characters of this Image in the Text are to be next con|&s;idered.</P>
<P>It is &s;aid to be the <HI>Image of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t, which had the deadly</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 13.</NOTE> <HI>wound, and was healed again.</HI> It was then the Image of the Im|perial <HI>Roman</HI> Rule re&s;tored again by <HI>Ju&s;tinian, Coroll.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 5. <HI>&amp; Query</HI> 2.</P>
<P>Now <HI>an Image</HI> of any thing, is &s;omething made after the like|ne&s;s of the thing of which it is the Image; And particularly, in this Ca&s;e it mu&s;t have as great a likene&s;s to its Original, as
<PB N="246" REF="156"> the Images of the Emperors u&s;ed to have to the Emperors them&s;elves.</P>
<P>But then this Image is different from all Carved Images of the Emperors: For it is &s;aid to <HI>have life</HI> put into it; and therefore mu&s;t it be a <HI>living</HI> likene&s;s to its Original. That which it repre|&s;ents, is the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> State, which is &s;aid to have power over all <HI>Kindreds, and Tongues, and Nations.</HI> This Image then mu&s;t al&s;o be a <HI>living Supream Power over all tbe &s;ame Juri&s;diction;</HI> for otherwi&s;e it cannot be a living likene&s;s of the former. A Carved Image is indeed but the dead likene&s;s of &s;ome &s;ingle Per|&s;on. But an Image of a Publick State, <HI>that is alive,</HI> as this is, mu&s;t be &s;ome Ruling Power in the &s;ame State, that has a very <HI>lively re&s;emblance</HI> to it; for it is in being at the &s;ame time with it; the Bea&s;t and his Image are ordinarily de&s;cribed to be together. And the Image is made in honour of the Bea&s;t, and &s;o mu&s;t, like the Images of the Emperors, be within the bounds of the Authority of the Bea&s;t; And be&s;ides, is made by a Fal&s;e Pro|phet in the exerci&s;e of the Power of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<P>This <HI>living Image</HI> then, mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily be an Univer&s;al Rule of the World, like to that of the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> State. And accordingly we find it <HI>&s;peaking, and commanding all the World to wor&s;hip it,</HI> chap. 13. 15. <HI>forcing all men to receive the mark of it, and to take the name of it,</HI> v. 16. which &s;hows the extent of its Power to be as large as that of the Imperial Power, its Origi|nal. It had al&s;o power of life and death in it, v. 15.&mdash;which is the peculiar Prerogative of Supream Power.</P>
<P>Now this was all for nothing el&s;e but the enforcing of Fal&s;e Wor&s;hip, which it was in&s;pired with life by a fal&s;e Prophet to effect. And one of the Puni&s;hments was Excommunication, <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 14. v. 17.</NOTE> <HI>That men might not buy or &s;ell,</HI> which was an u&s;ual puni&s;hment <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><HI>Selden de Synod.</HI> l. 1. cap. 7. <HI>De effectibus Excommunicationis.</HI> He that was excommunicated, with either <HI>greater</HI> or <HI>le&s;&s;er Excommunication,</HI> was &s;aid to be <GAP DESC="foreign">; And the effects of them, were Separation from Conver&s;e, from the Synagogue, from the publick A&s;&s;emblies, from all the People and Commonwealth of the <HI>Jews.&mdash;</HI>And he that was ac|cur&s;ed with <HI>Cherem,</HI> was not to have any <HI>Commerce</HI> with any, but ju&s;t &s;o much as to get Victuals.</NOTE> of the Elders of the Synagogues among&s;t the <HI>Jews.</HI> All which de|notes it to be an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Power, equal to the <HI>Secular</HI> Power for the univer&s;ality of its Juri&s;diction: Indeed what kind of Power within the &s;ame Bounds and Territories can it po&s;&s;ibly be, but <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical,</HI> that can be a <HI>living Image</HI> of the <HI>Secular</HI> Ex|erci&s;ing Supream Authority at the &s;ame time with it, and in the &s;ame places, as this is de&s;cribed?</P>
<P>This Image therefore mu&s;t be a <HI>Church-Rule</HI> equal to that of the State; And &s;ince the Juri&s;diction of it is Univer&s;al, or Ca|tholick, and al&s;o <HI>Roman,</HI> can it be any thing el&s;e but the <HI>Roman-Catholick-Church?</HI>
<PB N="247" REF="156"> And &s;ince all the life that it has, is in&s;pired into it by the Fal&s;e Prophet, who is already known to be the Pa|pal Power <HI>(Corol.</HI> 3. <HI>Prop.</HI> 25.) what plainer de&s;cription could we have had of the <HI>Roman-Catholick-Church under the Pope?</HI> Or what can there be that is a <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Leo Sermo</HI> 1. <HI>de Natali Apos.] Rome</HI> has a larger Juri&s;diction in its Spiri|tual Reign, than it had formerly in its Worldly Empire.</P>
<P><HI>Bellarm. l.</HI> 5. <HI>de Pontif. c.</HI> 6.] From whence it appears, That the Pope is greater than the Emperour, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Stenelius Eugubinus lib.</HI> 1. <HI>de Donat. Con&s;tant.]</HI> By the Exaltation of the Papacy, <HI>Rome</HI> has recovered a Greatne&s;s very little different from that of the Ancient Empires, &s;ince all Nations from the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> to the <HI>We&s;t</HI> reverence the Pope of <HI>Rome</HI> in the &s;ame manner as they formerly did the Emperours.</P>
<P>See the expre&s;&s;ions of Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> VII. of his own Authority, <HI>Greg.</HI> 7. <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 37.</P>
<P>The <HI>Roman Ceremonial, l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 2. &s;hews this to be the manner of inve&s;ting the Pope with his Authority: <Q><HI>I inve&s;t Thee with the Authority of Pope, that Thou mai&s;t Rule over the City and the World,</HI> Urbi &amp; Orbi.</Q></P></NOTE> more exact living Image of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> State under the Imperial Power? For the Head of it has a Juri&s;diction equal to the Head of the State: Both <HI>Pope</HI> and <HI>Em|peror</HI> have long &s;ince had the Title of <HI>The Lords of the World;</HI> They have both a <HI>Triple Crown,</HI> tho for different Juri&s;dictions. They are both called <HI>King of Kings.</HI> The body of the Image is ju&s;t the &s;ame with that of the Bea&s;t. The <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Juri&s;di|ctions are parted out exactly according to the divi&s;ions of the <HI>Civil</HI> Government of the Empire. The <HI>Patriarchs, Archbi&s;hops</HI> and <HI>Bi&s;hops,</HI> had their Ranks and Places every-where according to the Divi&s;ions of the Provinces of the State; and the name of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical <HI>Dioce&s;&s;es</HI> did ari&s;e from the di&s;tinction of the &s;e|veral Civil Dioce&s;&s;es of the Empire by <HI>Con&s;tantine.</HI> And it is e&s;tabli&s;hed by the Canons of <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><HI>Concil.</HI> 6^o <HI>in Trullo, Can.</HI> 37. The Canon which was made by the Fa|thers, we do al&s;o ob&s;erve, which &s;ays thus: <HI>If any City be, or &s;hall be new rai&s;ed by the Royal Power, the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Dignity &s;hall follow the Publick and Civil &s;tate of it.</HI></NOTE> two Synods, That if any City were newly rai&s;ed by the Emperor, the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Dignities there &s;hould be conformed to it. So that the Church and State did run parallel to one another through the whole Body of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, ju&s;t like the Arteries and Veins in the Body of Man, and ob&s;erved the &s;ame proportion every-where to one another. <NOTE PLACE="marg">^a <HI>MAlvenda de Antichri&s;to,</HI> pag. 234. <HI>de</HI> 10 <HI>Cornibus&mdash;</HI>The number Ten is very often in Scripture u&s;ed indefinitely for a great many.</NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="248" REF="157">
<PB N="249" REF="157">
<HEAD>CHAP. III. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P>Wherein the Wor&s;hip of the Beast, and of his Image, doth con&s;i&s;t.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>BY the proce&s;s of the former Chapter we have all the Confederates in the de&s;ign of the Bea&s;t di&s;covered to us. There is the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> State for the <HI>Bea&s;t with his la&s;t Head;</HI> The <HI>Image and fal&s;e Prophet</HI> for the <HI>Roman</HI> Catholick Church, and the Pope. <HI>The ten Kings giving their Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t;</HI> for tho&s;e <HI>Roman</HI> Catholick Kings, who <HI>force</HI> their Sub|jects to &s;ubmit to the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion, enjoyned by the Papal Power, or Imperial Authority.</P>
<P>And now it is to be examined, what is meant by Wor&s;hip|ing the Bea&s;t, and his Image.</P>
<P>It is certain, in the fir&s;t place, That the words here u&s;ed to expre&s;s the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, and his Image, are the &s;ame with tho&s;e which were in u&s;e at the time of the Vi&s;ion, to &s;ignifie the Adoration given to the Emperors, and their Images, publickly &s;et up. <GAP DESC="foreign">, and <HI>adorare</HI> were the terms, in common u&s;e among&s;t the <HI>Greeks</HI> and <HI>Latines</HI> of tho&s;e times to expre&s;s that profound Reverence which was paid to the Emperor and his Image. And then there &s;eems to be no|thing more required to make Application of this Phra&s;e, but only to &s;how what obedience was given to the <HI>Secular</HI> and <HI>Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Authority of <HI>Rome,</HI> by all the World, from the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P>But becau&s;e we find that the <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>GRotius in Decal.]</HI> Nor did the fir&s;t Chri&s;tians think it contrary to their Religion to fall down before the Emperours Images: But when they afterwards joined the Images of fal&s;e Gods with their own, they cho&s;e to endure any thing, rather than to wor&s;hip them.</NOTE> fir&s;t Chri&s;tians did pay that Reverence before-mentioned to the Emperors and their Images, as well as the <HI>Pagans;</HI> It is manife&s;t, that there mu&s;t be &s;ome|thing more here meant, than a bare external Civil Veneration of the higher Powers as the Ordinance of God.</P>
<P>It mu&s;t be &s;omething very much like the Wor&s;hipping of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI>'s Image, and of tho&s;e <HI>Babylonian</HI> Kings, in &s;uch a manner, as not to be allowed the exerci&s;e of the true Reli|gion: And nothing le&s;s than this, can an&s;wer the Character of the <HI>man of &s;in,</HI> 2 The&s;. 2. 4. who is &s;aid to <HI>exalt him&s;elf above all that is called God, or that is wor&s;hipped: So that be as God &s;itteth</HI>
<PB N="250" REF="158"> <HI>in the Temple of God, &s;hewing him&s;elf, that he is God.</HI> And by the con&s;ent of all Interpreters, that Prophecy does certainly be|long to that &s;tate of things that is repre&s;ented by the Bea&s;t and his Image.</P>
<P>By this then it appears, that <HI>by the Wor&s;hip</HI> here mentioned, mu&s;t be under&s;tood, the <HI>giving of Divine honours,</HI> or the pecu|liar Prerogatives of God, or Chri&s;t, to the Bea&s;t, or his Image; that is, to the <HI>Civil</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tical</HI> Authority of the <HI>Ro|mans,</HI> after the Re&s;tauration of the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> Govern|ment in the We&s;t.</P>
<P>The unque&s;tionable way to effect this, would be to make <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Grot. <HI>Re&s;pon&s;|de Antichri&s;to, pag.</HI> 77. I dete&s;t every thing that be|longs to the Spirit of Anti|chri&s;t; (that is, the impo&s;ing, per&s;ecuting Spirit.) And that has ap|peared not on|ly near the <HI>Ty|ber,</HI> but about the Lake <HI>Le|manus,</HI> and in other places.</NOTE> the Arbitrary will and plea&s;ure of the Supreme Authority of the <HI>Roman</HI> State, or the Church, to be acknowledged for the Law of God, Divinely in&s;pired, or to be publickly obeyed as &s;uch by outward compliance with it: This is certainly to &s;et up ones own will for the will of God; and &s;o to &s;tand ones &s;elf in the place of God to the World. And if this be exerci&s;ed with an irre&s;i&s;tible power over the Univer&s;al Church of Chri&s;t upon Earth, it is plainly the <HI>&s;howing</HI> ones &s;elf <HI>to be a God in the Temple of God.</HI> For there could nothing el&s;e be under&s;tood by the <HI>Tem|ple of God,</HI> after the De&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> but the Chri&s;tian Church, which al&s;o has that name in &s;everal places of the &s;ame Apo&s;tle's Writings.</P>
<P>A &s;till much higher improvement of this Wor&s;hip is it, if it be enjoined as <HI>nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation</HI> to believe the&s;e Arbitrary De|crees to be the In&s;pirations of God, and to obey them.</P>
<P>But <HI>e&s;pecially</HI> if the&s;e Decrees be not only about things left in|different by the Word of God, but are al&s;o Injunctions <HI>contrary</HI> to the Will and Word of God; For this is to <HI>oppo&s;e</HI> and <HI>exalt ones &s;elf above God in the Temple of God;</HI> And if this be done with the &s;hew of the Authority of God him&s;elf in it, this is to <HI>oppo&s;e all that is called God, &s;hewing him&s;elf to be God.</HI> For he does certain|ly make him&s;elf very near as ab&s;olute a Sovereign of a Nation, who does unju&s;tly exerci&s;e all the Acts of the Sovereign Power of it, again&s;t the will of the undoubted Prince of it, but yet un|der the name of <HI>his Authority,</HI> as he that does it by an open U&s;ur|pation of the Title of the Sovereign Power.</P>
<P>This Power and Authority is carried on with a &s;till greater arrogance and claim of divinity in it, if it pretends to a Title of <HI>Infallibility</HI> in all that it can enjoin. For as this Divine Attribute
<PB N="251" REF="158"> is the fundamental ground of all the highe&s;t Acts of Faith in God; &s;o is it a claim of an infinite power in men; and does give <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Thomas de Albiis,</HI> in his <HI>Tabulae Suffragiales,</HI> does the be&s;t lay open the dreadful Con&s;equences of e&s;tabli&s;hing Infallibility in any Head of the Church, or any where, where it really is not. <HI>Tab.</HI> 20, 21. This Claim, in reference to the Pope, he proves there to be the Mother of all Here&s;ies, and the wor&s;t of all &s;ins, becau&s;e if tho&s;e who claim it &s;hould err, it would lead all the Church into the &s;ame, without any po&s;&s;ibility of remedy. There is the &s;ame rea&s;on for that Claim in any Governing-part of the Church, where that Privilege really is not.</NOTE> Authority to all the Acts of their own Will, frees them from <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> all Bounds and Mea&s;ures, or Rules to di&s;tingui&s;h betwixt Truth and Fal&s;hood; &s;ets them out of the reach of all humane Ju|dicature, and makes their Will and Plea&s;ure the la&s;t Appeal for all Controver&s;ies; and their Arbitrary Deci&s;ions to be the Ora|cles of God.</P>
<P>How incon&s;iderable does the Wor&s;hip of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI>'s Image appear to be, in compari&s;on with this profound Venera|tion of the Soul and Con&s;cience, given to the arbitrary, fal&s;e and wicked Decrees of either ignorant or de&s;igning Men, un|der the Character of the Word and Will of God?</P>
<P>And all the&s;e particulars are made good in the matter be|fore us, <HI>by the Imperial Laws,</HI> and their Sanctions, and Edicts, to force their own Faith in indifferent things. And the Errors of General Councils upon the Con&s;ciences of the whole Chri|&s;tian Church Catholick, to be a&s;&s;ented to as <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P>It had been the common &s;tile of Councils, ever &s;ince the Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> to publi&s;h their Decrees under the Title of <HI>Things Divinely In&s;pired.</HI> Thus does <HI>Socrates</HI> &s;hew, <HI>lib.</HI> 1. <HI>cap.</HI> 6. <HI>Ep.</HI> That <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> there &s;ays of the Decree of the 300 Bi&s;hops at <HI>Nice,</HI> <Q>That it was to be looked upon as the Sentence of God him&s;elf.</Q> And <HI>ibid. Ep.</HI> 4. <HI>To the Churches,</HI> he &s;ays of all Councils,&mdash;That what&s;oever is decreed in the Holy Councils of Bi&s;hops, the &s;ame is to be attributed to the will of God.</P>
<P>Cardinal <HI>Julian</HI>'s Harangue to the Deputies of the <HI>Bohemians</HI> in the Coun|cil of <HI>Ba&s;il,</HI> tells them, <Q>That the Decrees of Councils are not le&s;s to be believed than the Go&s;pel, becau&s;e it is THEY that give AUTHORITY to the Scriptures.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>Divine Truth,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences.</NOTE> and many times as <HI>nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation:</HI> and the giving of the <HI>Secular</HI> Arm to execute the like Injunctions of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church.</P>
<P>Of this kind al&s;o are the unwarrantable Acts of Councils, and the unlawful Canons of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, inforced by the <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P>By vertue of &s;uch Orders from that Power, as the&s;e Determinations in the Decretals and Glo&s;&s;es do authorize, <HI>viz.</HI> That the Pope of <HI>Rome</HI> is by the Order of God &s;et over the Nations and Kingdoms; That it belongs to the Pope to depo&s;e the Emperour, and all other Kings and States, and to a&s;&s;ign them Deputies.&mdash;That the Pope is to be e&s;teemed the Vicar of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, for all things here upon Earth, in Heaven, and Hell.&mdash;That he can make that which is &s;quare to be round, Inju&s;tice to be Ju&s;tice; that which is nothing, to be &s;omething.&mdash;That he has an Ab&s;olute Power of Judg|ing, and that ju&s;tly, <HI>Again&s;t the Law of Nature, Nations, and of particu|lar Countreys, Human and Divine, above and again&s;t Right, again&s;t all Decrees and Orders of Council.&mdash;That he can di&s;pen&s;e with the Injunctions of the Apo&s;tles.&mdash;</HI>And the&s;e Glo&s;&s;es the Popes do recommend to the Publick, as AUTHENTICK. <HI>See Jus Canonic. Gregor.</HI> 13.</P>
<P><HI>Aventin. lib.</HI> 6. <HI>Hi&s;tor. Boior.</HI> mentions the Emperour <HI>Henry</HI>'s Charge a|gain&s;t Pope <HI>Pa&s;chal, Ann.</HI> 1107&mdash;He &s;ays there of the Papal Power,&mdash;That they take an Oath of every Bi&s;hop to own all that for Law, that they &s;hall &s;ay.</P>
<P>This Oath is de&s;cribed, <HI>lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Decret. Tit.</HI> 24. where they &s;wear <HI>to obey all the Popes Commands, and to a&s;&s;i&s;t him again&s;t all that &s;hall oppo&s;e them&s;elves.</HI></P></NOTE> Papal Authority, and the Church of <HI>Rome, as nece&s;&s;ary to Salva|tion;</HI> and as dictated by an <HI>Infallible Authority,</HI> with the claim of Infallibility, as an in&s;eparable Prerogative of their <HI>Au|thority.</HI></P>
<P>Of the &s;ame Nature is the exerci&s;e <HI>of the power of the Keys</HI> in that Church, by which they confine all Divine Favour, and all Right to the Kingdom of Heaven, to the Communion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, and only as <HI>Roman,</HI> and by which they pretend to have the Power of the Cur&s;es of God, and of Eter|nal Damnation in their Hands, to pronounce again&s;t all tho&s;e who own not that Divine Authority, and Infallible Spirit in them, by which they appear, <HI>as in the place of God,</HI> in the Church.</P>
<P>For by this does the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> appear manife&s;tly to <HI>&s;it as a Godde&s;s in the Church Catholick;</HI> to which all mu&s;t &s;ub|mit with all the outward Wor&s;hip of their Bodies, and the in|ward Veneration of their Souls, as the only Oracle of God,
<PB N="252" REF="159"> in all its Deci&s;ions and Definitions of Faith and Wor&s;hip, and as the immediate Voice and Thunder of God from Heaven in all its Anathema's and Excommunications: And all this about matters, which <HI>either</HI> were never made to be the Will of God, by any other Authority, but the meer Will of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church; <HI>Or</HI> which are known to be ab&s;olutely contra|ry to the revealed Will of God, <HI>the Light of Natural Con&s;ci|ence,</HI> and to the common Sen&s;e and Rea&s;on of mankind, which is the <HI>Candle of the Lord;</HI> and the mo&s;t fundamental <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prov. 20. 27.</NOTE> Criterion of the Truth or Fal&s;hood of Revelations or In|&s;pirations.</P>
<P>But &s;ome will que&s;tion, whether all this can amount to the charge of commanding Men to Wor&s;hip the Bea&s;t and his Image with Divine Honours, tho the&s;e things &s;hould be done without any warrant from God for them; becau&s;e God him&s;elf is intended for the only Object of all that Wor&s;hip that is thus enjoyned.</P>
<P>This doubt may &s;oon be re&s;olved by what Men would judge of the Wor&s;hip of <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI>'s Image, tho he &s;hould have pretended, that it was the peculiar Pre&s;ence of the God of <HI>I&s;|rael,</HI> as well as his own Image; and that it was to be Wor&s;hip|ped upon the account of that immediate Union of the True God with him&s;elf and his Image. Or by what Men can think of the Wor&s;hip given to <HI>Simon Magus,</HI> under the &s;uppo&s;ition of his being the <HI>Father, Son,</HI> and <HI>Holy Gho&s;t,</HI> at &s;everal appea|rances; Whether would the Adoration be excu&s;ed, for being intended to the True God?</P>
<P>I would but demand of any &s;orts of Chri&s;tians, what they would think of &s;uch an unbounded Power as has been men|tioned, in any Party of Men, from whom they differ, which &s;hould now ari&s;e with the&s;e Claims of Superiority and Juri&s;|diction over the Univer&s;al Church of Chri&s;t upon Earth, and &s;hould <HI>force</HI> Mens Con&s;ciences to acknowledge the&s;e Claims to be due <HI>by Divine Right,</HI> and &s;hould <HI>really</HI> think them to be &s;o, upon as <HI>&s;light Grounds,</HI> as the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> does now be|lieve its own pretences upon; and &s;hould exerci&s;e the&s;e new powers with as zealous de&s;igns for God's Service, as they of that Church &s;eem to do? It would be hardly po&s;&s;ible for any of a differing Party to forbear the charging of this new Pre|tender with the Character of &s;itting <HI>like a God in the Temple of</HI>
<PB N="253" REF="159"> <HI>God,</HI> or in the Chri&s;tian Church. For he that requires meer human Laws to be accounted Divine In&s;piration, which yet are nothing but his own will; he plainly makes his own will a Divine Law: And if he forces it upon all the World for &s;uch, he makes his own will the Univer&s;al Lord of the Con&s;ciences of Men, which is the peculiar Prerogative of God alone.</P>
<P>Without all que&s;tion, if the King of <HI>France,</HI> and the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> of his <HI>Clergy,</HI> &s;hould u&s;e the &s;ame methods and pretences that they have done to the Prote&s;tants, to force the Con&s;ciences of the Papal Party all over the World to the Opinions of the <HI>Gallican</HI> Church, they would not &s;tick to charge him with the Character of u&s;urping upon the peculiar Prerogative of God in his Church.</P>
<P>I do take it all this while for granted, That the Claim for this Univer&s;al Power in the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> and to the Title of Infallibility, is unwarrantable; and that is &s;o ea&s;ie a thing to be &s;atisfied about, that I think it not needful here to dilate upon it. There needs no better &s;atisfaction to be had about it, than what the &s;lightne&s;s of the grounds that are alledged for this Authority, compared with the va&s;t importance of the thing that they are to prove, does at the fir&s;t &s;ight offer to any that are impartial. But others have made it their bu&s;ine&s;s, and to <HI>them I remit it.</HI></P>
<P>The unwarrantablene&s;s of this Claim is &s;uppo&s;ed in the Ob|jection: And if that be once granted, let the intention of the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> be never &s;o fair in its Exerci&s;e of this Power, the in&s;tance above-mentioned will make it &s;ufficiently clear, how ju&s;t the charge of the <HI>Wor&s;hip of the Image</HI> is due to it: tho it &s;hould exerci&s;e this power over the whole Church of God, within much more moderate bounds than it is known to do. The reality of their intention may without any difficulty be believed; For it was long &s;ince foretold, that the time would come, that <HI>who&s;oever killed</HI> the true Members of Chri&s;t, <HI>&s;hould</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">John 16. 2, 4.</NOTE> <HI>think that he did God &s;ervice in it.</HI> And it is &s;aid <HI>to be foretold</HI> on purpo&s;e, that <HI>when the time &s;hould come, we &s;hould remember, that it had been told us of them.</HI> St. <HI>Paul</HI> does give the example of it <NOTE PLACE="marg">Acts 22. 3, 4. Acts 26. 9, 10, 11.</NOTE> in him&s;elf; he verily thought with him&s;elf, that he <HI>ought to do many things contrary to the Name of Je&s;us of Nazareth,</HI> and ac|cordingly did them: For he &s;hut up the Saints in Pri&s;on; when they were put to Death, he gave his Voice again&s;t them:
<PB N="254" REF="160"> <HI>He even compelled them to bla&s;pheme; and was exceeding mad again&s;t them;</HI> and yet <HI>was zealous towards God,</HI> while he was Per&s;ecu|ting that way unto the death: And yet &s;urely none would ever maintain, that the zealous intention of the&s;e cruel Actions would excu&s;e them from the guilt of Inhumanity and Murder.</P>
<P>The &s;incerity of the Intention in all the&s;e Diabolical acts of Antichri&s;tian Tyranny, does only denote, how ab&s;olute the power of the Devil is in them, by the power he has over them to make them believe, that it is the doing God &s;ervice all the while, that they are acted by the Rage of the De|vil.</P>
<P>Wherefore it may now be &s;afely concluded, That the great malignity of the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t and his Image, does lie in the Acknowledgment of an <HI>&V;niver&s;al Arbitrary Juri&s;diction over the Con&s;ciences of all Men,</HI> in the Governing-Power of the <HI>Roman</HI> State and Church.</P>
<P>I need add nothing el&s;e to make the Character of it com|prehen&s;ive enough of all the particulars included in it.</P>
<P>For this unbounded Power, e&s;pecially when &s;ecured by the Plea of Infallibility, does comprehend in it all the Tyrannical impo&s;itions that can en&s;lave the Souls of Men, to give an Ab|&s;olute and Divine Reverence to the Supreme Power. An un|grounded belief of an Infallible Spirit in Men in the exerci&s;e of their Juri&s;diction over the Con&s;cience, does oblige a Man to a blind Faith in them for every the mo&s;t ab&s;urd and extra|vagant thing that they affirm; and to a blind obedience to all their mo&s;t Unrea&s;onable and Arbitrary Injunctions. It binds him to renounce all u&s;e of his Under&s;tanding, that &s;hould en|able him to di&s;cover a fal&s;hood; and to &s;tifle all the Light of Con&s;cience in him, which would make him di&s;cern betwixt good and evil: And by this means does it not only lay a Man open to the in&s;pirations and illu&s;ions of the Devil, but to take them al&s;o for the <HI>Oracles of God;</HI> and makes him uncapable of the Grace of Repentance.</P>
<P>This does make it ea&s;ie to under&s;tand how the Wor&s;hippers of the Bea&s;t do al&s;o <HI>Wor&s;hip the Dragon, who gives Power to him.</HI> For this Power being not of God, but of the Dragon, and for his &s;ervice, as it is expre&s;ly &s;aid to be; the Wor&s;hip that is paid to it, is, the Wor&s;hipping of that <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ribera</HI> on 16 <HI>B. cap.</HI> 13. moves a Doubt, How Antichri&s;t, that is to deceive the World with a fal&s;e &s;hew, can per&s;wade them to wor&s;hip the De|vil, or Dragon?&mdash;And thereupon &s;ays, The Interpreters do thus an|&s;wer:&mdash;Men &s;hall wor&s;hip Antichri&s;t: But becau&s;e he &s;hall have his Power from the Devil, by wor&s;hipping of Him, they &s;hall wor&s;hip the Devil. So <HI>Aretas, Primatius, Ausbertus, Haymo, Ambro&s;ius An&s;elmus.</HI></NOTE> Dragon, or of the Devil, for who&s;e &s;ervice it is. Be&s;ides, that the Devil or Dragon is
<PB N="255" REF="160"> repre&s;ented as the con&s;tant companion of the Bea&s;t to the la&s;t, and &s;o mu&s;t be the In&s;pirer and Manager of the Bea&s;t in all he does. And then the Devil may be &s;aid to be as really in the Throne again, as he was in the Red Dragon; &s;o that the Dragon by that, does become the Life and Soul of the Bea&s;t; and both together make one and the &s;ame Body of Sovereign Power that is wor&s;hipped.</P>
<P>And this does very well expre&s;s the Tyrannical Per&s;ecutions of the Faithful Members of Chri&s;t by the <HI>Roman</HI> Powers, which is almo&s;t the whole Character of the Red Dragon in the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 12. 3.</NOTE> Chapter before this; and for which he wears tho&s;e bloody Colours.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="256" REF="161">
<PB N="257" REF="161">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>An E&s;&s;ay to apply the Idolatrous Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, to the Imperial Power. The Church no Monarchy before</HI> Con&s;tantine. <HI>With him came in the Monarchical Form of Church-Government, with an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Se|nate. The Re&s;emblance of the Imperial Power in the Church, both as to the Legi&s;lative, and Executive part of the Government, with the Civil Power in conjunction with the</HI> Roman <HI>Senate. The fir&s;t Ground of the Au|thority of the Bi&s;hops of</HI> Rome.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Charge of the Idolatrous Wor&s;hip before-mentioned, may &s;eem at the very fir&s;t &s;ight to be ju&s;t enough for the <HI>Wor&s;hip of the Image,</HI> or of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> and of the Papal Authority, which is the Head and life of it; But it may not appear to be &s;o ea&s;ie to apply the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t to the <HI>Secular Imperial Power.</HI></P>
<P>For a clear &s;atisfaction in this, It will be convenient to take a view of the different &s;tates of the Church, <HI>when under Per&s;ecu|tion,</HI> and <HI>when advanced to the Imperial Throne.</HI> It is <HI>very evident,</HI> that the Catholick Church, however united it might be, yet was certainly no Monarchy in the times before <HI>Con&s;tantine.</HI> The Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> who is the only pretender to the Sovereignty at that time, is &s;ufficiently known to have had then but a very li|mited Juri&s;diction; and nothing did pa&s;s for a Law of the Church, but what was decreed by the Common A&s;&s;embly of the Governours of it.</P>
<P>The Church did much re&s;emble the Union and Government of the States of the United Provinces. The Bi&s;hop and his Clergy were the &s;tanding Authority of every particular Juri&s;|diction; and the People and inferior Clergy were generally the Electors of the Bi&s;hops into their particular places; and the general A&s;&s;embly of them all in Council, was the Supream Au|thority of the Church: By them were Laws made, and they were accounted the la&s;t Appeal for the determination of all ma|terial Controver&s;ies about Juri&s;diction.</P>
<PB N="258" REF="162">
<P> Upon <HI>Con&s;tantine's Conver&s;ion</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">THe Je&s;uit <HI>Pererius Di&s;p.</HI> 5. <HI>in Apocalyp&s;in, De Con&s;tantino.&mdash;</HI><Q>Then was the Imperial Maje&s;ty fir&s;t brought into the Church, and the Church came to be armed again&s;t its Enemies with two Swords; <HI>The one the Temporal Sword,</HI> in the hands of Seculars, (or Laics), and of Chri&s;tian Princes; <HI>the other Spiritual,</HI> in the hands of the Church-Prelates, but <HI>chiefly</HI> that in the Papal Power.</Q></NOTE> there appeared a <HI>new form</HI> of Government in the Church. That which before was but an Ari&s;tocracy, comes now to be a Monarchy under <HI>an Emperor,</HI> and <HI>an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Senate;</HI> but yet with &s;o much deference to the Emperor, as he might evidently be perceived to be the Su|pream Governour of the whole Church. It was <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> &s;ummoned the Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> and pre&s;ided there, <HI>Eu&s;eb. vit. Con&s;tantin.</HI> l. 1. c. 37. l. 3. c. 6. And before had commanded and en|joyned the meeting of the Synod of <HI>Arles, Eu&s;eb.</HI> l. 10. c. 5.</P>
<P>The Council of <HI>Sardica</HI> was &s;ummoned by the Order of the two Empe|rours <HI>(Con&s;tantius</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tans.) Sozomen</HI> l. 3. c. 10. The Synodical Epi&s;tle of that Council in <HI>Theodoret.</HI> l. 2. c. 8. &s;ays, <Q>The Emperours, well-belo|ved of God, gathered us together, from divers Cities and Provinces, and have ordered us to hold a Synod in the Town of <HI>Sardica. So al&s;o</HI> Atha|na&s;ius, <HI>Apol.</HI> 2. <HI>of the &s;ame thing:</HI> By the Edict of the mo&s;t religious Em|perours, <HI>Con&s;tans</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tantius.</HI></Q></P>
<P>The Second General Council at <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> was &s;ummoned by the command of the Emperor <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> as <HI>Socrates</HI> expre&s;ly &s;ays, <HI>l.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 8. <HI>&amp; Theodoret. l.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 9. that they were a&s;&s;embled by the Letters of the Em|peror.</P>
<P>The Synodical Epi&s;tle of the Council, 1 <HI>Tom. Concil.</HI> expre&s;&s;es their be|ing a&s;&s;embled at the Emperor's Command; and de&s;ire him to confirm their Decrees by his Judgment and Seal.</P>
<P>The Third General Council at <HI>Ephe&s;us; Epi&s;t. Synodal. ad Theodo&s;. apud Cyrill. Tom.</HI> 4. <HI>Concil.</HI> We pre&s;ent our Per&s;ons in the Synod that you have commanded, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And they de&s;ire leave of the Emperor, with all humili|ty, to go to their &s;everal homes, till the bu&s;ine&s;s was determined.<HI>&mdash;And the Emperor in his confirmation of it, &s;ays,</HI> The Emperor duly in|formed of all, is well &s;atisfied, that the Holy Synod has done all things Canonically.</P>
<P>Soon after this does <HI>Theodo&s;ius</HI> call another Council at <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> and &s;ays of <HI>Dio&s;corus</HI> to that Council&mdash;<Q>We give Him according to the Canons of the Holy Fathers Authority, and the fir&s;t Seat there:</Q> <HI>Baronius</HI> calls it u&s;urping upon the Rights of the Pope.</P>
<P>The Fourth General Council at <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> is &s;aid, in the Acts of the Council, to be called by the Decree of the mo&s;t Pious Emperors, <HI>Valentinian,</HI> and <HI>Marcian.</HI> The Emperor <HI>Marcian</HI> be&s;peaks them as the chief among&s;t them, pre&s;cribes them their bounds in their Di&s;putes, not to &s;ay any thing contrary to the Council of <HI>Nice.</HI> The Judges of the A&s;&s;embly were appointed by the Emperor, and the Senate &s;at there with Him as the Pre&s;idents, and Moderators of the A&s;&s;embly, who correct the Pope's Le|gats in their Demands, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And <HI>Eu&s;ebius,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Doryletum,</HI> appeals to them, and conjures them by the &s;afety of the Emperors, next to the Holy Trinity, <HI>which was a plain evidence, who were then accounted the Highe&s;t Au|thority among&s;t them under God.</HI> And in the conclu&s;ion of that Action, all give thanks to the Emperors, the Judges, and the Senate. <HI>Actione prima Concil.</HI> Chalced.</P>
<P>Pope <HI>Leo</HI> in his Epi&s;tle to the Emperor <HI>Marcian,</HI> tells him, <Q>That he had thought his Clemency would have granted him his de&s;ire to have the Sy|nod at a more convenient Sea&s;on.&mdash;But &s;ince his love for the Catho|lick Faith would have the A&s;&s;embly to be at that time&mdash;that he had &s;ent his Legat to it to &s;upply his place.</Q></P>
<P>In the fifth Action of the Synod at <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> it is ordered, that a Defi|nition of Faith be brought in by &s;ome Bi&s;hops appointed for that purpo&s;e&mdash;And in the &s;ixth it is &s;aid, that after the Emperor <HI>Marcian</HI>'s Speech. the <HI>Emperor's Definition of Faith</HI> was read, which had been mentioned in the fifth Action.</P>
<P>The Emperor in the &s;ame Action confirms the Acts of the Council, and threatens the Contemners of it with condign puni&s;hment; the &s;ame does he mention in his Letter to <HI>Palladius.</HI></P>
<P>But nothing does more &s;hew the Cu&s;tom of calling Synods to be by the <HI>Supream Civil Power,</HI> than the exerci&s;e of this Right in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church by the <HI>Arrian</HI> Kings of <HI>Italy,</HI> after the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire. Several Synods were called at <HI>Rome</HI> by tho&s;e Kings to appea&s;e the Divi&s;ions of that Church and Clergy. <HI>Tom.</HI> 2. <HI>Concil. In Synodis Tempore</HI> Symmachi.</P>
<P>By the command of the mo&s;t Religious King, <HI>&s;ays the Fourth Synod&mdash;</HI>and that the King had &s;ignified, that the Pope him&s;elf had de&s;ired him by his Letters to appoint the Synod,&mdash;and that the Synod pre&s;umed not to de|clare any thing in that Affair <HI>without the knowledge of the King;&mdash;</HI>and that Pope <HI>Symmachus</HI> was commanded by the King to engage with his Adver|&s;aries there&mdash;And that according to the command of the Prince, they had power allowed them; But that they did re&s;tore him all <HI>the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Right, both within, and without the City.</HI></P>
<P>The Fifth General Council was &s;ummoned by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> and the Pope <HI>Vigilius</HI> bani&s;hed by the Emperor for not obeying the Summons.</P>
<P>The Sixth General Council is &s;aid to have been &s;ummoned by the De|cree of the Emperor <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> at <HI>Con&s;tantinople&mdash;</HI>The Emperor there &s;eated in the Highe&s;t <HI>Place,</HI> with the Con&s;uls and Judges on his &s;ide.&mdash;And the Emperor fir&s;t gave order for the Di&s;pute, and after it by the Empe|ror's command the fir&s;t Action was concluded. <HI>Actio prima, Concil.</HI> 6.</P>
<P>In the &s;econd Action the Emperor pre&s;ides again<HI>&mdash;Prae&s;idente Imper. Pii&s;&s;imo.</HI></P>
<P>In the third Action the Emperor again pre&s;ides.&mdash;The Emperor, and the Judges do there con&s;ult together about a Pa&s;&s;age in the Fifth Synod&mdash;And the Judges determine with the Synod.</P>
<P>In the fourth Action the &s;ame Emperor pre&s;ides.</P>
<P>Pope <HI>Agatho</HI> in the &s;econd Action tells the Emperor, <Q>If he offers him|&s;elf to render ready <HI>Obedience</HI> to the things that had been commanded him <HI>by the &s;acred Patent</HI> of his mo&s;t Clement Fortitude, and &s;ays&mdash;to fulfil the obedience of <HI>my Service&mdash;</HI>according to the mo&s;t pious <HI>Command</HI> of your Clemency&mdash;for the <HI>Obedience</HI> which <HI>we owe.</HI></Q></P>
<P>In the fifth Action the Emperor pre&s;ides&mdash;orders <HI>Macarius</HI> to bring forth his Te&s;timonies&mdash;And by the Emperor's Command the Action was fini&s;hed.</P>
<P>In the &s;ixth the Emperor pre&s;ides&mdash;is applied to by the Pope's Legats, to de&s;ire that he would command the true Copies of the Book cited by <HI>Maca|rius,</HI> to be &s;ent for, and the Emperor did accordingly order it to be done the next Se&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>In the ninth the Emperor pre&s;ides, and orders tho&s;e of the Synod <HI>of one Party</HI> to declare them&s;elves.</P>
<P>The Emperor pre&s;ides al&s;o in the 10th and 11th Actions, and then or|ders his Deputies, two Patricians, and two Excon&s;uls to pre&s;ide in his room for the future, becau&s;e he had heard the Principal things him&s;elf&mdash;They continued till the 18th Action.</P>
<P>And in the 18th Action the Emperor pre&s;ides, and the Council <HI>fir&s;t</HI> &s;ub|&s;cribe to the Acts, and <HI>then</HI> the Emperor.</P>
<P>Thereupon does the Emperor <HI>i&s;&s;ue out</HI> his Edicts to the <HI>People of the We&s;t,</HI> to confirm all that had been decreed.</P>
<P>The Seventh General Council is &s;aid to be called by the Emperor <HI>Con|&s;tantine,</HI> and <HI>Irene</HI> his Mother in their Letters Patents, and that at the Re|que&s;t of <HI>Thara&s;ius,</HI> Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople;</HI> and the Council it &s;elf &s;ays it was by that pious Decree, <HI>Action.</HI> 7.</P>
<P>The Council of <HI>Frankford</HI> celebrated &s;oon after in the <HI>We&s;t,</HI> is by <HI>Char|lemaigne,</HI> in his Letters to <HI>Elipard,</HI> Archbi&s;hop of <HI>Toledo,</HI> &s;aid to have been &s;ummoned <HI>by his Command.</HI> He pre&s;ided there, and the Circular Letter of the Synod is di&s;patched in his Name. So are the Councils of <HI>Arles, Aix, Tours, Chalons, Mentz,</HI> about the &s;ame time &s;aid to be &s;ummoned by the Command of the Emperor <HI>Charles.</HI> There was al&s;o a Synod at <HI>Rome</HI> &s;aid to be &s;ummoned by <HI>Charles,</HI> in the time of Pope <HI>Adrian,</HI> as <HI>Gratian</HI> affirms, <HI>D.</HI> 6. <HI>C. Adrianus</HI> 22.</P>
<P>And in the Council of <HI>Francford</HI> does <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> give a very remar|kable proof of the Imperial Authority. For by his countenancing it, it condemned the famous Second Council at <HI>Nice,</HI> and with it the Four Coun|cils that were held at <HI>Rome</HI> before it, about the &s;ame bu&s;ine&s;s, in the years 713. 716. 742. 768.</P>
<P>And even after the depriving of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperor of his Right in <HI>Italy,</HI> yet do the Popes then date their Councils according to the year of the Reign of tho&s;e Emperors, as it always before had been the Cu&s;tome; as that of Pope <HI>Zachary</HI> at <HI>Rome</HI> again&s;t <HI>Gode&s;calcus.&mdash;</HI><Q>In the Reign of our mo&s;t pious Lord the Emperor <HI>Con&s;tantine Augu&s;tus,</HI> the &s;ix and twen|tieth year of his Reign.</Q></P>
<P>All the &s;everal Kings in the <HI>We&s;t</HI> had al&s;o the &s;ame Authority for the &s;ummoning of Provincial Councils, as may be every-where ob&s;erved in the Tomes of the Councils.</P>
<P>The Eighth General Council is &s;aid by the Bi&s;hops of it, <HI>Action</HI> 6. That it was &s;ummoned by the Emperor <HI>(Ba&s;ilius)</HI> crowned of God<HI>&mdash;And in the 7th Action,</HI> That the Emperor had u&s;ed all diligence to get the Legats of other Patriarchs, as well as tho&s;e of <HI>Rome,</HI> and had thereby a&s;&s;embled an Univer&s;al Council.</P>
<P>But Pope <HI>Stephens</HI>'s Letter to <HI>Ba&s;ilius</HI> is the be&s;t Te&s;timony of it&mdash;<Q>What evil has the <HI>Roman</HI> Church done? Has it not, according to the cu&s;tom of the former Synods at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> &s;ent its Legats at thy Command?</Q></P>
<P>And the Emperor him&s;elf &s;ays in the Preface to this Council, That the Divine Benignity <HI>having committed the Helm of the &V;niver&s;al Ship</HI> to his care, he had taken care before all things to appea&s;e the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Storms.</P>
<P>The Popes Legats did indeed pre&s;ide in this Council. But it is the fir&s;t, where-ever they can be found to have done &s;o.</P>
<P><HI>Radevicus</HI> &s;ays of the Council of <HI>Pavie,</HI> that was called to judge of the Schi&s;m betwixt <HI>Alexander</HI> the Second, and <HI>Victor</HI> the Second, in the Year 1160. That the Emperor <HI>Frederick</HI> did declare, that he &s;ummoned it by his Authority, according to the cu&s;tom of the Ancient Emperors. <HI>And in his Decree for it to the Bi&s;hops, expre&s;&s;es the &s;ame thing. Radevic. c.</HI> 51. <HI>&amp; deinceps.&mdash;</HI>And all their meeting in Council a&s;&s;erts his Authority from the Examples of <HI>Con&s;tantine, Theodo&s;ius, Ju&s;tinian, Charles</HI> and <HI>Otho.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Aeneas Sylvius, Ep.</HI> 34. &s;ays of the Council of <HI>Ba&s;il,</HI> That it was called by the King of the <HI>Romans,</HI> with the permi&s;&s;ion of the King of <HI>France.</HI></P></NOTE> the Emperor <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Refe|rences at the end of the Fourth Chap|ter.</NOTE> that <HI>&s;ummoned the General Councils</HI> at his plea&s;ure; He often <HI>pre&s;i|ded</HI> him&s;elf in them, and managed the Di&s;putes there, and ap|pointed others to pre&s;ide in his ab&s;ence. <HI>All Applications were made to him,</HI> as the Supream Authority among&s;t them, when he was pre&s;ent; And tho&s;e that were <HI>the Judges of the A&s;&s;embly</HI> in his ab&s;ence, were <HI>delegated</HI> from him; <HI>His will</HI> was con&s;ulted upon all occa&s;ions; The <HI>definition of Faith,</HI> that the Council &s;ub|&s;cribed to, was many times <HI>propo&s;ed by him,</HI> and it was called the Emperor's definition of Faith; and <HI>after the Bi&s;hops, the Em|peror &s;ub&s;cribed to the Acts of the Councils in the la&s;t place, and as the la&s;t</HI> confirmation of it; and then was the Councils &s;aid to be <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Concil. Arelaten&s;e. &s;ub Carolo M. Ann.</HI> 823. <HI>cap.</HI> 26.</P>
<P>The&s;e things we have decreed &s;hould be &s;ent to our Lord the Emperor, be&s;eeching his Clemency, that if there be <HI>any thing here omitted,</HI> it may be &s;upplied by his prudence; If <HI>any thing unrea&s;onable,</HI> that it may be corrected by his judgment; <HI>If any thing be well determined,</HI> that it may have its effect by His A&s;&s;i&s;tance, the Divine Aid concurring with it.</P>
<P><HI>Eutychius</HI> in <HI>Origen,</HI> &s;ays, That the Bi&s;hops of the Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> upon <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI>'s re&s;igning up him&s;elf, and his whole Empire to them, by the <HI>laying down of his Sword</HI> before them, <HI>did begirt him with his Sword</HI> again for the defence of the Faith.</P>
<P><HI>Eu&s;eb. de vit&acirc; Con&s;tantin. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 35. <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> tells the Bi&s;hops there, <Q>That they are Bi&s;hops for the things <HI>within the Church,</HI> and he appointed by the Grace of God to be Bi&s;hop over the things <HI>without the Church.</HI></Q> And <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 37. <HI>ibid.</HI> that he called a Synod, as if God had appointed him to be the Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P><HI>Concil. Milevitan.</HI> under the Emperors <HI>Arcadius</HI> and <HI>Honorius, cap.</HI> 11. <Q>It was al&s;o decreed, that Legats &s;hould be &s;ent from this Honourable Council to obtain from the mo&s;t Glorious Emperors, what&s;oever they &s;hall judge u&s;eful again&s;t Hereticks, Pagans, or their Super&s;titions.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Novell.</HI> 42. <HI>Cod. Ju&s;tinian. Ju&s;tinian</HI> gives this account of the Depo&s;i|tion of the Patriarch <HI>Mennas,</HI> by him, after he was condemned by the Coun|cil. <Q>We according to the <HI>U&s;age of the Imperial Power,</HI> have our &s;elves al&s;o re&s;olved upon this Law. For whenever the A&s;&s;embly of Bi&s;hops have eje|cted any out of the Prie&s;tly Thrones, as <HI>Ne&s;torius, Eutyches, Arius, Macedo|nius, Eunomius,</HI> and others<HI>&mdash;The Imperial Power did agree to it.</HI></Q></P></NOTE> confirmed, or made valid, and not before; For the Emperor had a <HI>negative Voice</HI> in all they did, as well as the chief power in the doing it, whenever he plea&s;ed to concern him&s;elf in it: Af|ter the conclu&s;ions of the&s;e A&s;&s;emblies, that which made their Definitions and Decrees to be <HI>univer&s;ally</HI> received and obeyed, was <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Concil. Arelaten&s;e. &s;ub Carolo M. Ann.</HI> 823. <HI>cap.</HI> 26.</P>
<P>The&s;e things we have decreed &s;hould be &s;ent to our Lord the Emperor, be&s;eeching his Clemency, that if there be <HI>any thing here omitted,</HI> it may be &s;upplied by his prudence; If <HI>any thing unrea&s;onable,</HI> that it may be corrected by his judgment; <HI>If any thing be well determined,</HI> that it may have its effect by His A&s;&s;i&s;tance, the Divine Aid concurring with it.</P>
<P><HI>Eutychius</HI> in <HI>Origen,</HI> &s;ays, That the Bi&s;hops of the Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> upon <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI>'s re&s;igning up him&s;elf, and his whole Empire to them, by the <HI>laying down of his Sword</HI> before them, <HI>did begirt him with his Sword</HI> again for the defence of the Faith.</P>
<P><HI>Eu&s;eb. de vit&acirc; Con&s;tantin. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 35. <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> tells the Bi&s;hops there, <Q>That they are Bi&s;hops for the things <HI>within the Church,</HI> and he appointed by the Grace of God to be Bi&s;hop over the things <HI>without the Church.</HI></Q> And <HI>l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 37. <HI>ibid.</HI> that he called a Synod, as if God had appointed him to be the Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P><HI>Concil. Milevitan.</HI> under the Emperors <HI>Arcadius</HI> and <HI>Honorius, cap.</HI> 11. <Q>It was al&s;o decreed, that Legats &s;hould be &s;ent from this Honourable Council to obtain from the mo&s;t Glorious Emperors, what&s;oever they &s;hall judge u&s;eful again&s;t Hereticks, Pagans, or their Super&s;titions.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Novell.</HI> 42. <HI>Cod. Ju&s;tinian. Ju&s;tinian</HI> gives this account of the Depo&s;i|tion of the Patriarch <HI>Mennas,</HI> by him, after he was condemned by the Coun|cil. <Q>We according to the <HI>U&s;age of the Imperial Power,</HI> have our &s;elves al&s;o re&s;olved upon this Law. For whenever the A&s;&s;embly of Bi&s;hops have eje|cted any out of the Prie&s;tly Thrones, as <HI>Ne&s;torius, Eutyches, Arius, Macedo|nius, Eunomius,</HI> and others<HI>&mdash;The Imperial Power did agree to it.</HI></Q></P></NOTE> the Emperor's Edicts for that purpo&s;e, which were pub|li&s;hed with the Threats of <HI>Anathema</HI>'s, as well as Civil Puni&s;h|ments: <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><P>See <HI>Cod. Theodo&s;. Tit. de Haereticis. Item Cod Ju&s;tiniani Tit. de Epi&s;copis, &amp; Clericis. Item de Apo&s;tatis.</HI></P>
<P>So al&s;o was it in the times of the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings of <HI>Italy,</HI> after the ruine of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire. <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar. l.</HI> 9. <HI>Ep.</HI> 15. King <HI>Athalaricus</HI> to Pope <HI>John</HI> concerning the Conditions of the Elections of Bi&s;hops.</P>
<P><HI>Novell.</HI> 434. <HI>Ju&s;tiniani,</HI> Orders that no Bi&s;hops be &s;ued <HI>without an Impe|rial Command</HI> for it. And Pope <HI>Pelagius</HI> the Fir&s;t, upon the choice of <HI>Pau|linus,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Aquileia,</HI> in his Letters to <HI>Nar&s;es,</HI> de&s;ires him to &s;end the principal of the Faction to <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> and gives this rea&s;on for it, that <HI>Totila</HI> him&s;elf would not &s;uffer the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Milan</HI> (who con&s;ecrated <HI>Paulinus)</HI> to be created without his leave fir&s;t had in writing for it.</P>
<P><HI>Cod. Theodo&s;. Novel. Valentin. l.</HI> 2. <HI>Tit.</HI> 12. The Emperor <HI>Valentinian</HI> for|bids the Bi&s;hops to be Judges of the per&s;ons of Bi&s;hops, and that in any Ci|vil, or Criminal Cau&s;es, but that they &s;hould come before the Secular Judges, unle&s;s they go by con&s;ent to the Bi&s;hops Courts.</P>
<P><HI>Liberatus in Breviario, c.</HI> 22. gives an account of <HI>Belizarius</HI>'s &s;etting up, and depo&s;ing one Pope after another,&mdash;And that <HI>Anthimus</HI> being depo&s;ed by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> gave up his <HI>Pallium</HI> (or Epi&s;copal Robe) to the Emperor.</P>
<P><HI>Gregory</HI> the Great, in the Ca&s;e of <HI>Januarius,</HI> does expre&s;ly order his Legat to go according to the Laws of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Code&mdash;And of <HI>Januarius&mdash;</HI>It mu&s;t be con&s;idered, that it was done perfectly again&s;t the Laws, to draw him by force out of the Church, which, he &s;ays, ought to be puni&s;hed as High-Trea&s;on, <HI>l.</HI> 11. <HI>Ep.</HI> 54.</P>
<P><HI>Sigonius de regno Italiae, l.</HI> 5. The Emperor <HI>Lotharius</HI> declares for a Coun|cil at <HI>Pavie,</HI> to regulate the Clergy; thereupon follow'd a great Di&s;order at <HI>Rome.</HI> But Pope <HI>Leo,</HI> in his Letter to <HI>Lotharius,</HI> affirms, <Q>That he did ob&s;erve his Laws, and his Predece&s;&s;ors, and would always ob&s;erve them; de&s;iring him al&s;o, that <HI>the Roman Law might be kept</HI> for the future, as it had been before.</Q></P></NOTE> And the Executions of the Canons of the Church up|on irregular and di&s;obedient Bi&s;hops, by Deprivations, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> was by the Imperial Authority. The Church-Rights were &s;till in|deed pre&s;erved for a while in Elections, Church-goods, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But the whole External Government of it was managed by the Imperial Authority, in almo&s;t as ab&s;olute a manner as the Civil Government. <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Concil. Milevitan,</HI> See Note ^c of this Chapter, <HI>&amp; ibid. Canon.</HI> 17. They de&s;ire an Imperial Law to enforce the Canon of the Council upon Con|temners.</P>
<P>The Emperor <HI>Marcian</HI> in <HI>Action.</HI> 6. <HI>Concil. Chalcedon.&mdash;</HI><Q>After the decla|ration of the Catholick Faith by the Holy Synod, we have thought it ju&s;t and expedient to take away all di&s;pute and contention about it for the fu|ture. And therefore, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> where he proceeds to the inflicting puni&s;hment.</Q> upon the &s;everal Offenders again&s;t the Canons.</P></NOTE> They made Laws <HI>about Apo&s;tates,</HI> and Hereticks, and their Books, <HI>about Churches, about the regulation</HI> of the Cler|gy in Elections of Bi&s;hops, <HI>about the Qualifications, and Depo&s;itions of Bi&s;hops.</HI> And the&s;e Laws were very ordinarily executed upon Bi&s;hops according to the Emperor's will.</P>
<P>But that which does the mo&s;t fully &s;hew, what &s;hare the Em|perors had in the Government of the Church, and in the Ca|nons of Councils, is the 45th of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Novels, where all the Canons of Councils are turned into Laws of the Empire. Indeed the general definition of the Law in the <HI>Code,</HI> together
<PB N="259" REF="162"> with the explication of it there, does expre&s;ly determine the <HI>will of the Emperor</HI> to be the only rule and mea&s;ure of Law either in Church or State.</P>
<P>The general definition of a Law, is in the&s;e terms. <HI>Whatever</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">C. de Offic. Principis.</NOTE> <HI>the Prince declares to be his Plea&s;ure, has the force of a Law;</HI> upon which it follows; <HI>Wherefore, whatever the Emperor does appoint by the Sub&s;cription of the Bi&s;hops, or decrees of his own knowledge, or does publickly declare by word, or does command by Edict, does appear to be a Law.</HI> Where it is evident, That the <HI>Acts of Councils</HI> be|came Laws of the Empire <HI>only</HI> by the Emperor's will in Coun|cil, and had nothing in them to enforce them upon tho&s;e, who would di&s;&s;ent from the Council as erroneous, <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Sozomen. l.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 10. By the Order of the two Emperors it was decreed, That the Bi&s;hops of each Party &s;hould meet at a &s;et day at <HI>Sardica,</HI> a City of <HI>Illiricum.</HI></P>
<P>The Synodical Epi&s;tle of that Council &s;ays the &s;ame. So al&s;o <HI>Bal&s;amon</HI> in his Preface to that Council. And <HI>Socrat. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 16.</P></NOTE> before the Em|peror's command for it.</P>
<P>We do accordingly &s;ee what effect the fear of the Imperial Authority had upon the Councils them&s;elves. For all the Coun|cils a&s;&s;embled under <HI>Arrian</HI> Emperors, were of the &s;ame mind with the Emperor that called them; And if &s;ome &s;hould think, that it was rather the judgment of their own Con&s;ciences, they mu&s;t then allow, that the generality of the Governours of the Church were really <HI>Arrians,</HI> and &s;incerely Orthodox, within the &s;pace of le&s;s than thirty years. It is certain that the <HI>Arrian</HI> Coun|cil of <HI>Ariminum</HI> was more than twice as numerous as the bigge&s;t General Councils be&s;ides; The Councils <HI>indeed</HI> were of the &s;ame mind with the Emperor that called them; And it is well worth the ob&s;erving, how the Bi&s;hops of the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> and <HI>We&s;t</HI> divided at the <HI>Sardican</HI> Council about the bu&s;ine&s;s of <HI>Athana&s;ius,</HI> according to the different minds <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">See Note ^c, and ^f, of this Chapter, <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop.</NOTE> of <HI>Con&s;tantius</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tans,</HI> who &s;ent them thither.</P>
<P>By this then it appears, that the Imperial Authority did from its fir&s;t owning of the Chri&s;tian Religion, look &s;o big in the Church, that tho&s;e of the highe&s;t Character in it, did <HI>bow down</HI> to its will and plea&s;ure. And when withal it is con&s;idered, that all the Parts of the Catholick Church were under this <HI>Roman</HI> Government, it is plain, That the proper appellative of the Chri|&s;tian Church at that time, was the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, becau&s;e <HI>Ro|man</HI> and <HI>Catholick</HI> were of the &s;ame import, when all the World was <HI>Roman;</HI> And <HI>the Principle of Political &V;nity</HI> among&s;t them all, which made them one Body, and one Church in the face of the World, was their owning the <HI>Roman Emperor;</HI> with his <HI>Eccle&s;ia|&s;tical Senate</HI> (or General Council) for their Supream Ruler and Governour.</P>
<PB N="260" REF="163">
<P> It appears then, that the Imperial Power was the Supream Au|thority at that time in the Church upon Earth. General Coun|cils were but his Senate; And whether they were in the right or the wrong, it was his con&s;ent that gave them their <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Baronius, Anno</HI> 418. about the Schi&s;m of <HI>Boniface</HI> and <HI>Eulalius</HI> for the Papacy. <HI>Symmachus,</HI> Governor of the City, writes to the Emperor <HI>Ho|norius.</HI></P>
<P><Q>Becau&s;e it belongs to your Piety to determine it, I thought I ought forthwith to con&s;ult <HI>Your Maje&s;ty</HI> about it. <HI>Thereupon</HI> Honorius <HI>writes back&mdash;</HI>We command <HI>by Our Po&s;itive Order,</HI> that <HI>Boniface</HI> do forthwith leave the Place, and obey the Cele&s;tial Commands; (that is, <HI>the Imperial Order) idem Anno</HI> 419. <HI>which was obeyed.</HI></Q></P>
<P>So was it ordained by <HI>Athalaricus,</HI> King of <HI>Italy,</HI> after the fall of the <HI>We|&s;tern</HI> Empire, that in ca&s;e of wrong, the Clergy &s;hould appeal to the Secular Court. <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor. Variar. l.</HI> 8. <HI>Ep.</HI> 24. <HI>&amp; l.</HI> 9. <HI>Ep.</HI> 15.</P>
<P>So al&s;o does <HI>Ju&s;tinian, Novell.</HI> 123. <HI>command</HI> the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> to exe|cute an Order of his<HI>&mdash;jubemus Epi&s;copum</HI> Romanum.</P>
<P>See Dr. <HI>Barrow</HI>'s Supremacy of the Pope, from page 324, to 372. In|&s;tances of Emperors appealed to in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Affairs, Popes not inter|medling.</P>
<P>The <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> appeal from the Council of <HI>Arles</HI> to the Emperor <HI>Con&s;tan|tine</HI> (after two Councils appointed by him to decide the difference) who does thereupon a&s;&s;ign them to meet at the Council of <HI>Milan.</HI> S. <HI>Augu&s;tin. contra Cre&s;con. l.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 71. and <HI>Ep.</HI> 162. <HI>&amp;</HI> 68.</P>
<P>And <HI>Flavian,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> was beaten and bani&s;hed for ap|pealing to the Court of <HI>Rome</HI> from the Synod at <HI>Ephe&s;us. Petav. Ratio. Temp. part</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 6. <HI>c.</HI> 19.</P></NOTE> actual force for a general outward compliance; and without this Im|perial A&s;&s;ent, we find &s;carce any Symbol of Faith, or Canons of di&s;cipline publickly or univer&s;ally enjoined, after the Emperors were become Chri&s;tians: But after the Decrees of either of tho&s;e kinds were concluded upon in Council, it was the Emperor's Sanctions, and Edicts, that gave them the effectual <HI>force of a Law to the whole Church;</HI> which &s;hows the Emperor's &s;hare in the <HI>Le|gi&s;lative Power</HI> of the Church, to be near a-kin to his Power in the Senate about Civil Affairs; but at lea&s;t very near as great in the Councils as the Papal Authority was afterwards, before it came to its full height.</P>
<P>And then in the Execution of the Laws and Canons of the Church, the Imperial Authority appears every-where to be the la&s;t re&s;ort, and the la&s;t Power that they <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Hieron. Rubeus Hi&s;tor. Ravennat. p.</HI> 180. The Archbi&s;hops of <HI>Ravenna</HI> do there contend with the Popes of <HI>Rome</HI> for the Superiority. <HI>John</HI> the Arch|bi&s;hop had many of the <HI>Italian</HI> Bi&s;hops of his Party in it.</P>
<P>And <HI>Sigonius de Regno Ital. l.</HI> 2. <HI>&amp; Blondus. Decad.</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 9. <HI>Ann.</HI> 608. gives an account of this Conte&s;t of <HI>Ravenna</HI> with <HI>Rome</HI> all the days of Pope <HI>Martin</HI> the Fir&s;t, <HI>Eugenius</HI> the Fir&s;t, <HI>Vitalian,</HI> and <HI>Adeodat.</HI> They would have no <HI>Pallium</HI> nor Con&s;ecration from <HI>Rome</HI> in acknowledgment of any dependance upon them.</P>
<P>S. <HI>Hierom. ad Evagre.&mdash;</HI><Q>If you di&s;pute about the Authority of the whole World, <HI>Orbis major e&s;t Urbe&mdash;</HI>Where&s;oever there is a Bi&s;hop, whether at <HI>Rome,</HI> or <HI>Eugubium,</HI> at <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> or <HI>Rhegium,</HI> he is of the &s;ame Dig|nity, and of the &s;ame Prie&s;thood.</Q></P>
<P>Cardinal <HI>Cu&s;an, l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 12. &s;hews that all Bi&s;hops are equal&mdash;But the execution of their Office is bounded by Human Laws, and Orders, which if they come to cea&s;e, tho&s;e Differences of Greater and Le&s;s, return again to their natural Right, that is, to an Equality.</P>
<P><HI>Aeneas Sylvius, Comment. l.</HI> 2.</P>
<P>Before the Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> every Bi&s;hop lived independent in his own Juri&s;diction.</P></NOTE> appeal to for redre&s;s, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Dr.</HI> Barrow, <HI>p.</HI> 324. <HI>to p.</HI> 372. Grot. <HI>in. Decal. Praecep.</HI> 2. Note the 3d.</NOTE> or for correction of Church-Governours; which &s;hews it to have had al&s;o the full po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of <HI>the Executive Power;</HI> And ac|cordingly do we find the Title of the <HI>&V;niver&s;al Bi&s;hop</HI> of the Church, in re&s;pect of the External Government of it, a&s;&s;umed by <HI>Con&s;tantine.</HI></P>
<P>In this &s;tate did the Imperial Authority continue in the Church, when the exerci&s;e of its power was the mo&s;t unblame|able. So that here was a <HI>Roman Catholick Church</HI> e&s;tabli&s;hed from the very fir&s;t appearance of the Imperial Throne in the Church; and no other <HI>Political &V;nity</HI> was there then of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Church, but only this Imperial Head&s;hip. The particular Juri&s;diction of the <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ludovic. Bebenberg. de jurib. R. &amp; Imp. Romanor. pag.</HI> 142. <HI>In Commentar. M. Freherus.</HI></P>
<P>&mdash;<Q>When the Emperor <HI>Henry</HI> had objected to the <HI>Romans,</HI> why again&s;t the cu&s;tom of their Ance&s;tors they had cho&s;en them a Pope without the leave of the King; The Pope excu&s;ed him&s;elf, that he was cho&s;en by force; but that he would not be con&s;ecrated, till he did perfectly under|&s;tand by an Emba&s;&s;y, that both the Emperor and the Princes had con|&s;ented to his Election.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Hieron. Balbus de Coronatione, cap.</HI> 14. <Q>It had been an ancient Cu&s;tom, that the Clergy and People of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hould nominate the Pope; After which it was in the Emperor's power to confirm or invalidate the Election, and as he plea&s;ed, either to admit him, or to &s;ub&s;titute another in his room; <HI>c. Agatho</HI> 63. <HI>di&s;tinct.</HI> And this Cu&s;tom continued to the time of Pope <HI>Adrian, Anno</HI> 815.&mdash;who would have changed it&mdash;But the old Cu&s;tom obtained again, of expecting the Pope's Confirmation from the Emperor, as <HI>Platina</HI> ob&s;erves in <HI>Gregor</HI> 9. in the Year 1072. <HI>Gregory</HI> was reconciled to the Emperor <HI>Henry&mdash;</HI>who confirmed him Pope, as it was then the cu&s;tom.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Caronza Concil. &s;umma, pag.</HI> 437. <HI>Severinus Papa in locum Honorii &s;ubrogatus ab I&s;aacio&mdash;Hexarcho in Pontificatu confirmatur, &amp;c.&mdash;</HI><Q><HI>Severinus</HI> was con|firmed Pope by <HI>I&s;aac</HI> the Hexarch of <HI>Italy.</HI> For the Election by the People and Clergy was not accounted valid in tho&s;e days, unle&s;s the Emperors, or their Exarchs, had confirmed them.</Q> <HI>Platina &s;ays the &s;ame in</HI> Severinus; <HI>And</HI> Blondus <HI>the &s;ame with this of</HI> Caranza, <HI>l.</HI> 9. <HI>Decad.</HI> 1. and adds, That the Confirmation was put off for a year and an half, becau&s;e <HI>I&s;aac</HI> did not go from <HI>Ravenna</HI> to <HI>Rome</HI> before.</P>
<P><HI>Sigebert</HI> in his Chronicle mentions a Council held by <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> at <HI>Rome</HI> before he was crowned Emperor, by virtue of his being made De|fender of the Church by <HI>Adrian&mdash;</HI>And there <HI>Adrian</HI> and 150 Bi&s;hops did confer the Right of chu&s;ing the Pope, upon <HI>Charles,</HI> and of ordering the Apo|&s;tolick See, and the Dignity of the Prince. The &s;ame is mentioned by <HI>Gratian, D.</HI> 69. <HI>c. Hadrianus</HI> 22. And by <HI>Sigonius de Regno Ital. l.</HI> 4.</P>
<P>In the time of the Emperor <HI>Ludovicus,</HI> the Son of <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> upon Pope <HI>Stephen</HI>'s being elected contrary to the Order, without the Emperor's Command<HI>&mdash;Stephen</HI> to mend the matter, makes this Order in the Canon. <HI>Quia Sancta, D.</HI> 52.</P>
<P>Becau&s;e the <HI>Roman</HI> Church &s;uffers great Violences at the Death of the Pope, when the Election is made without the Emperor's knowledge; We ordain, That when the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> is to be cho&s;en, that he be elected in a full A&s;&s;embly of the Bi&s;hops and Clergy, and in the pre&s;ence of the Senate and People; and &s;o being cho&s;en in the pre&s;ence of the Legate of the Emperor, that he be con&s;ecrated.</P>
<P><HI>Baronius, Anno</HI> 827. &s;ays of the Election of Pope <HI>Valentinus,</HI> That his Con&s;ecration was deferred till the Emperour &s;hould be con&s;ulted a|bout it.</P>
<P>Pope <HI>Leo</HI> the Eighth, <HI>Anno</HI> 963. makes this Order in behalf of the Em|peror <HI>Otho&mdash;</HI><Q>That according to the Example of <HI>Adrian,</HI> Bi&s;hop of the Apo&s;tolick See, who granted unto the Emperor <HI>Charles</HI> the ordering the Apo&s;tolick See&mdash;That he likewi&s;e, with all the Clergy did con&s;titute, and by his Authority corroborate to his Lord <HI>Otho</HI> (fir&s;t King of the <HI>Theutons)</HI> and to his Succe&s;&s;ors in the Kingdom of <HI>Italy,</HI> The power of chu&s;ing a Succe&s;&s;or, and of di&s;po&s;ing of the Bi&s;hop of the Sovereign Apo&s;tolick See: and for that purpo&s;e, that the Archbi&s;hops, and Bi&s;hops &s;hould take inve&s;titure from him&mdash;And that none for the future &s;hould take upon them the power of electing, or con&s;ecrating the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> or of any other See, without the Con&s;ent of the &s;aid Emperor.</Q> <HI>D.</HI> 63. <HI>in Synodo</HI> 23. <HI>The Title of the Canon in Gratian is&mdash;The Election of the Bi&s;hop of</HI> Rome <HI>does of right appertain to the Emperor.</HI></P></NOTE> Bi&s;hoprick of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> was in no o|ther account for Supremacy, than the re&s;t of the Epi&s;copal Ju|ri&s;dictions, and all of them were confined to their own parti|cular Territories.</P>
<P>But it was reputed ju&s;t and fitting at the coming in of the Emperors into the Church, that the Bi&s;hop of their Ruling City &s;hould have a mark of di&s;tinction from the re&s;t, as an honour due to the Emperor's Court, and Re&s;idence; And thus came the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> to have the precedence of all other Bi&s;hops in the Church; And upon the &s;ame account had <HI>Con&s;tan&s;tinople</HI> the
<PB N="261" REF="163"> &s;econd place to that of <HI>Rome,</HI> when that City became the Seat of a new Empire.</P>
<P>This Primacy gave the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> a great advantage over the Intere&s;ts of their Fellow-Bi&s;hops; And being become very nece&s;&s;ary to the Emperors for upholding their Power in the mid&s;t of the Inva&s;ions of the Barbarous Nations, the Emperors were willing to enlarge their Authority, to make u&s;e of it for the management of their own Affairs; And after that the Divi|&s;ions of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire were &s;etled in &s;o many Sovereign Princes, that Church-Authority, which they them&s;elves had now lo&s;t in tho&s;e &s;everal Kingdoms, they were not unwilling to be&s;tow upon the Chief Bi&s;hop of their City; and &s;o by &s;mall ad|vances he came at la&s;t to get the Title of <HI>Occumenical Bi&s;hop,</HI> and <HI>&V;niver&s;al Head</HI> of the Church of Chri&s;t upon Earth.</P>
<P>But yet &s;till did the Emperors retain their Power of the &s;etting up of every new Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome;</HI> The Emperors <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><HI>This is thus well expre&s;&s;ed by</HI> John Wex <HI>de Antichri&s;to, p.</HI> 119. <Q>And &s;o the Ten Kings delivered to the Bea&s;t their Kingdoms which they had got at the di&s;&s;olution of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, according to <HI>Apoc.</HI> 17. 12. For after that the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire was broken in pieces, all the Kingdoms of the <HI>We&s;t</HI> did join again together in one body, that by the bonds and tye of the <HI>Babyloni&s;h</HI> Super&s;tition of the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> they might fight again&s;t the Lamb.</Q></NOTE> Con&s;ent was &s;till held nece&s;&s;ary for the confirmation of the Election, as the Chief Power upon Earth, that gave him his Authority; And upon this account he was &s;et up <HI>as the Emperor's Deputy and Creature,</HI> to be the Univer&s;al Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, in all the divi|ded Kingdoms of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, which now would own no other <HI>Secular</HI> Head of the Churches in them, but tho&s;e So|vereigns which ruled them; And thus came the divided <HI>Roman</HI> Empire to be ^n <HI>one entire thing again,</HI> and the &s;everal Kings in it to own <HI>one Roman Head</HI> again &s;et up by the Imperial Authority.</P>
<P>Things continued not long in this <HI>mere &s;piritual</HI> and Eccle&s;i|a&s;tical State. The new Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Head u&s;ed all ways to make him&s;elf univer&s;ally acknowledged for &s;uch: And to that end, as Head of the Church, he a&s;&s;umes a power of executing the Ca|nons of Councils upon Sovereign Princes, to the depriving them of their Kingdoms, if they refu&s;ed to execute the Orders of the Church upon all tho&s;e that were di&s;obedient to it, and that even to the puni&s;hment of death.</P>
<P>From hence then we have a perfect <HI>Idea</HI> of <HI>the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, and of his Image,</HI> from the fir&s;t Ri&s;e of the la&s;t Ruling Head, or of the Imperial Power re&s;tored by <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P>The Imperial Authority was at fir&s;t the &s;ole Head of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Catholick Church; Afterwards the Submi&s;&s;ion of the divi|ded States of the Empire to one Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Sovereign, who was &s;et up by the Emperor, made this new Empire <HI>the exact</HI>
<PB N="262" REF="164"> <HI>Image</HI> of the fir&s;t, in re&s;pect of the Church-Government of it; And the Manager and Contriver of this new Model, is in Hi|&s;tory, <HI>the Bi&s;hop of</HI> Rome; and is in the Prophecy called, <HI>the Fal&s;e Prophet.</HI></P>
<PB N="263" REF="164">
<PB N="264" REF="165">
<PB N="265" REF="165">
<PB N="266" REF="166">
<PB N="267" REF="166">
<PB N="268" REF="167">
<PB N="269" REF="167">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="270" REF="168">
<HEAD>CHAP. V. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Four Grounds for the applying of the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t to the Imperial Power: How the Fal&s;e Prophet does</HI> Exerci&s;e all the Power of the Fir&s;t Bea&s;t, <HI>cau&s;es all the World to Wor&s;hip him; makes them make an Image to him; Gives Life to that Image, and makes All receive its Mark,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>BY the Ob&s;ervations in the preceding Di&s;cour&s;e, it is ea&s;ie to &s;ee, How ju&s;tly the <HI>Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t</HI> may be applied to the Imperial Authority after the degeneracy of the Chri&s;tian Religion.</P>
<P N="1">1. For the Imperial Authority, as has been ob&s;erved, <HI>p.</HI> 221. was <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> a long while the only commanding Head of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Religion, and the <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>SOcrates Proam.</HI> in <HI>l.</HI> 5. <Q>We have therefore in the whole cour&s;e of out Hi&s;tory given an account of the Emperor's intere&s;t in it; becau&s;e that &s;ince they began to embrace the Chri&s;tian Religion, Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Affairs did &s;eem very much to depend upon them; &s;o that the mo&s;t eminent Councils were in times pa&s;t, and are at this day &s;ummoned by their con&s;ent and procurement.</Q> See Notes on the third Chapter, ^b, ^c, ^d, ^e, ^f, ^g, ^i, ^k.</P>
<P>The Emperours had always the Right of Inve&s;ting Church-Governours <Q>in their &s;everal juri&s;dictions, till the Council of <HI>Worms,</HI> in the year 1122. And then the Emperour <HI>Henry</HI> the 3d. wearied with the vexations occa|&s;ioned him by the Popes, gave up his Right of the <HI>Staff and the Ring (the Ceremonies of the inve&s;titure)</HI> to Pope <HI>Calixtus</HI> the 2d. <HI>Aventin. Hi&s;tor Boior. l.</HI> 6.</Q></P>
<P>The Abbot of <HI>Ur&s;perg,</HI> in his Chronicle, gives the form of this Con|cordat betwixt the Emperour and the Pope. <Q>And the Pope in return, agrees for the future, That the Elections of the Bi&s;hops and Abbots, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> &s;hould be performed in his pre&s;ence, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And that He that was Elected &s;hould receive the <HI>Regalia</HI> of the Emperour, by the <HI>Scepter:</HI> And this was called, the <HI>Uniting of the Royal Power with the Prie&s;thood,</HI> and long endea|voured after, under that Name.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Cardinal Cu&s;an. Concordia Catholic. c.</HI> 6, 7, 8, 9. Affirms, <Q>That every Em|perour and Prince in their &s;everal Juri&s;dictions are of God alone, and that it belongs to the Emperours to &s;ummon General Councils, and to regulate the Procedures in them; and to every Prince to do the &s;ame in his re&s;pective Territory for National and Provincial Councils.&mdash;And that if the Pope be negligent in the&s;e things, the Emperour ought to make u&s;e of his Authority in all &s;uch Ca&s;es,&mdash;That the Emperour always pre&s;ided in the Councils, a&s;&s;i&s;ted with fifteen or twenty of the Nobles of his Court, whom he made to take place before all.&mdash;And He, and his Legats propounded the matters that were to be con&s;idered.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Pererius in Apoc. Di&s;p.</HI> 5. <HI>de Con&s;tantino&mdash;</HI><Q>Then came the <HI>Imperial Maje&s;ty</HI> fir&s;t into the Church, which was then Armed with both the Swords, <HI>&amp;c.&mdash;</HI>For though from the fir&s;t, The Church had that Sword, <HI>(viz.</HI> the Secular Sword) yet then fir&s;t began the facility and conveni|ency of exerci&s;ing it again&s;t whom&s;oever it plea&s;ed.</Q></P></NOTE> only Soveraign Authority upon Earth, that was acknowledged in all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Affairs; &s;o that all obedience given to the erroneous Acts of tho&s;e Councels, was really an obedience to the Emperors will only: For tho&s;e things had no obliging power in them to overrule the Con|&s;cience upon the account of the Councels Authority; And therefore &s;ince it had been long before that time received as a maxime by tho&s;e who owned that Councel, <HI>That all was there done by the</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Socrates, l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 6. <HI>Ep.</HI> 4. <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> unto <HI>the Churches, He there tells them,</HI> <Q>That what&s;oever is decreed in the Holy Councils of Bi&s;hops, is to be attributed to the Will of God. <HI>And of the Sentence of the Council of</HI> Nice <HI>in particular,</HI> Ibid. <HI>Ep.</HI> 2. <HI>to the Church of</HI> Alexandria,&mdash;For that which has been agreed upon by the 300 Bi&s;hops, is to be taken for no|thing but the determination of <HI>God him&s;elf.&mdash;</HI>The Holy Gho&s;t re&s;i|ding in the minds of &s;uch worthy per&s;ons, and in&s;piring them with the Divine Will of <HI>God him&s;elf.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Concil. Con&s;tantinop. Univer&s;al.</HI> 6. Action. 17. <HI>&s;ub finem.</HI> The Council thus &s;peaks: <Q>We have pronounced a definitive Sentence, free from Error, cer|tain, and Infallible, by the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of the Holy Spirit.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>in&s;piration of the Holy Gho&s;t;</HI> The Emperour's mere will was thereby made a <HI>Divine Law,</HI> obliging the Con|&s;cience, under the notion of the immediate will of God, whenever the things enjoyned were really no part of his de|clared will. And thus came the Emperours to make good the Title of <HI>Their</HI> <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Cod. Ju&s;tinian. tit. Trinitat. l.</HI> 3. <HI>Theodo&s;. &amp; Valentinian. Hormi&s;dae. P. P.&mdash;</HI>According to tho&s;e Laws which have already been made <HI>by our Divinity&mdash;</HI>How much <HI>Our Divinity</HI> abhors&mdash;And <HI>Novell.</HI> 126. A mo&s;t manife&s;t con&s;titution <HI>Of Our Deity, No&s;tri Numinis.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Baronius, Anno.</HI> 419. <HI>Honorius</HI> the Emperour gives this order to <HI>Symma|chus,</HI> Praef. <HI>Urb.</HI> upon the information &s;ent him about the Schi&s;m of <HI>Boni|face</HI> and <HI>Eulalius.&mdash;</HI>We <HI>Command</HI> that <HI>Boniface</HI> forthwith depart, and obey our <HI>Cele&s;tial Command.</HI> <Q>And <HI>Symmachus</HI> in An&s;wer to <HI>Honorius</HI>'s fur|ther <HI>order to receive</HI> Boniface, <HI>returns this,&mdash;</HI>We having publi&s;hed the <HI>Cele&s;tial Decree&mdash;</HI>every one was rejoyced at it.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Pancirol. Notit. Imp. Orient. p.</HI> 109. <Q>The Emperour did fir&s;t &s;ub&s;cribe his name to the Re&s;cript, before any el&s;e. <HI>A. A. Manu Divina.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Ibidem.</HI> p. 172. 6. And thus u&s;ed the Prince to &s;ub&s;cribe his Hand. <HI>A.</HI> <Q><HI>M. D.</HI> That is, <HI>Augu&s;t. Manu Divina. Novel. Valentinian. l. de Homicidio. ca|&s;u&mdash;</HI>And tho&s;e who had the Emperours hand to their Letters, are &s;aid to be pricked, or pointed down by the <HI>Divine Hand, lib.</HI> 4. <HI>c. de Advocat. dicitur. jamjam. Ju&s;tinian</HI> calls this, A <HI>Divine</HI> Marking out<HI>&mdash;Divinam &s;ubnotationem. l.</HI> 1. <HI>in fin. c. de Ju&s;tin. c. confirmand.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Accordingly had the Emperours Letters-Patents the name of</HI> Sacra, <HI>in di&s;tin|ction to all other Licen&s;es.</HI></P>
<P>So <HI>Zeno Lib. penult. c. de Re Militari&mdash;</HI><Q>We allow none for the future to be Li&s;ted either in their Hor&s;e, or Foot, without the Commendatory Letter of our <HI>Divinity, &s;ine numinis no&s;tri &s;acra probatoria.&mdash;And after|wards&mdash;</HI>That they only be li&s;ted on the Confines, or in the Li&s;ts, who have a Licen&s;e for it from <HI>Our Divinity, Probatorias (&s;c.</HI> Sacras) <HI>a no&s;tra Divinitate.</HI></Q></P>
<P>And <HI>Pancirol. Notit. Imp. Orient. pag.</HI> 255. Ob&s;erves in general, That the <Q>Actions and Affairs of the Emperours have every where in the Civil Law, the epithete of <HI>Divine;</HI> as His <HI>Divine Indulgence,</HI> His <HI>Divine Dele|gation,</HI> His <HI>Divine Sanction,</HI> His <HI>Divine Hou&s;e,</HI> &amp;c.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>Divinity</HI> (which was before the &s;tile of their common Edicts) upon much more proper and real grounds than ever before was thought of; and the obedience that was given to their will in &s;uch things under the notion of the dictate of the Divine Spirit, and as nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation to be believed, was the giving them a Divine Honour, and the <HI>wor&s;hipping of their will, as the Will of God.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. All the honour and preference that is given to the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Church, is &s;aid even by General Councels, which did fir&s;t
<PB N="271" REF="168"> di&s;tingui&s;h this Church from the re&s;t, to be given it only, be|cau&s;e <HI>Rome</HI> was the Imperial City of the World; All the Wor&s;hip then that is given to the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, is given it only in Honour of the Imperial Authority of that City; and &s;o the wor&s;hipping of that Church, is the wor&s;hipping of that Authority. <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><HI>Concil. Con&s;tantinopol. &s;ub Gratiano, &amp; Theodo&s;io Canon</HI> 5. So <HI>Socrates,</HI> l. 5. c. 8. And <HI>Sozomon</HI> gives this Rea&s;on for it, <HI>l.</HI> 7 <HI>c.</HI> 9.&mdash;<Q>Becau&s;e that <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> had not only the &s;ame name, and a like Senate and Magi|&s;trates with <HI>Rome;</HI> but did al&s;o carry the &s;ame En&s;igns of Authority after the manner of <HI>Rome,</HI> and was equal to old <HI>Rome</HI> in all Rights and Ho|nours.</Q></NOTE> The &s;econd General Councel at <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> did decree, That the <HI>Bi&s;hop of</HI> Con&s;tantinople <HI>&s;hould be the next in precedence to the Bi&s;hop of</HI> Rome, <HI>becau&s;e that City was new</HI> Rome; And this is thus explained by the Fathers of the 4th General Councel of <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> at their confirmation of equal Privi|ledges to the See of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> with tho&s;e of the See of <HI>Rome. The Fathers,</HI> &s;ay they, <HI>gave the See of old</HI> Rome <HI>its Pri|viledges upon the account</HI> <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Concil. Chalcedon &s;ub Mareiano &amp; Valentin.</HI> Canon 28.&mdash;<GAP DESC="foreign"><HI>&mdash;for its being the Reigning City.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Baronius, Anno.</HI> 448&mdash;Cites <HI>Valentinian</HI>'s acknowledgment of the See of <HI>Rome,</HI> Novell. 14. <Q>That the merit of St. <HI>Peter,</HI> the Dignity of the City, and the Authority of the Synod, were the foundations of its Pri|macy&mdash;If there had been a <HI>Divine Right,</HI> it would have been a di|minution to it to &s;peak of the other.</Q></P>
<P>And in the year 451.&mdash;He quotes <HI>Galla Placidia</HI>'s Letter to her Son <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> about that Affair, who &s;ays there, <Q>That it did become them to keep up a due reverence to the City of <HI>Rome, becau&s;e it is the Lady of all the re&s;t.</HI></Q></P>
<P>A clear evidence of the ground of the Primacy of the See of <HI>Rome,</HI> is that Law of the Emperour <HI>Leo,</HI> l. 6. l. 15. and in &s;in. c. <HI>de Sacro&s;. Eccle&s;.</HI> which was made a little while after the Councel at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> when the Empire of <HI>Rome</HI> in the We&s;t was ju&s;t falling, <Q>We judge, and or|dain, &s;ays he, That the Mo&s;t Holy Church of this Mo&s;t Religious City of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> the Mother of our Piety, and of all Chri&s;tians of the Orthodox Religion, and the Mo&s;t Holy See of this Royal City, for ever have for the future, in con&s;ideration that it is the Imperial City, All Pri|viledges, and Honours over the Creations of Bi&s;hops, Right of Prece|dence before all others, and all other things, which they &s;hall be known to have had either before, or during our Reign. And that this continu|ed, appears from <HI>l.</HI> 16. <HI>c. de Sacro&s;. Eccle&s;iis.</HI> The Church of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> is Head of all other Churches.</Q></P>
<P>Upon this account al&s;o was it, as <HI>Guicciardin</HI> ob&s;erves, <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>Hi&s;tor.</HI> That the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Ravenna</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> &s;o often di&s;puted the Pri|macy with the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> becau&s;e that it was thought that the chief Seat of the Church followed the re&s;idence of the Imperial Power. And the Arch-bi&s;hop of <HI>Ravenna</HI> in particular, refu&s;ed to receive the Pall from the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> in acknowledgment of the &s;uperiority of the Pope, for the Reign of four Popes together, <HI>viz. Martin.</HI> 1. <HI>Eugenius</HI> 1. <HI>Vitalian</HI> and <HI>Adeodat;</HI> and they were therefore called <HI>Autocephali,</HI> or <HI>Self-headed,</HI> by the Popes, in memory of it. <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothec.</HI> in the&s;e Popes lives &s;ays, that it was again&s;t the Supremacy that they contended.</P></NOTE> <HI>of the Imperial Authority of it; upon the &s;ame account did the Hundred and fifty Bi&s;hops (at</HI> Con&s;tantinople) <HI>give the &s;ame Priviledges al&s;o to the See of</HI> New-Rome; <HI>judging it in all rea&s;on fit, That a City adorned with a Senate, and an Imperial power, &s;hould enjoy the &s;ame Priviledges with Old</HI> Rome, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 span"> <HI>like unto it, to have the tokens of Maje&s;ty in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Affair.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Synod in Trullo</HI> gives the general rea&s;on of this, from <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 word"> Ancient Canon of the Church in its Thirty eighth Canon; which was, <HI>That the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical dignities &s;hould follow the Impe|rial Orders for the precedence of the Cities to which they did belong.</HI> And <HI>Baronius</HI> him&s;elf does openly acknowledg this, <HI>An.</HI> 39. 10. <HI>The Ancients,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>ob&s;erved no other Rule in in&s;tituting the Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical Sees, than the divi&s;ion of Provinces, And the Prerogatives before e&s;tabli&s;hed by the</HI> Romans.</P>
<P>But the Authority of the Councel of <HI>Chalcedon</HI> in the parti|cular Ca&s;e of the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> is an unan&s;werable evidence; for it was the bigge&s;t of all the fir&s;t four famous General Councels, which Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> did reverence as the four Go|&s;pels. And this was there carried <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><P>See the conte&s;t betwixt the Pope's Legats, and the Councel about this Affair, <HI>Concil. Chalcedon. Action.</HI> 16. where it was in fine determined again&s;t the Legats by the Judges and Council.</P>
<P><HI>Bellarmin</HI> acknowledges this in his Preface to his Book <HI>de Pontifice.</HI> The <HI>Greeks,</HI> &s;ays he, oppo&s;ed this (That is, the Univer&s;al Supremacy of the Pope) in the Council of <HI>Chalcedon</HI> in the year 451.</P></NOTE> <HI>again&s;t the will</HI> of the Bi|&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> th&ocirc; then at the greate&s;t height that he ever had been, which does manife&s;t the &s;en&s;e of the Councel to be contrary to the tenure that the Pope claimed to hold by. And further, That this was the true aim of the Councel, does ap|pear, not only from Pope <HI>Leo</HI>'s Exception again&s;t this Decree, but al&s;o by the oppo&s;ition that there was ever after betwixt the Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> and the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> about the precedence, till the time of <HI>Boniface,</HI> who got the Title of Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop; but yet not without much oppo&s;ition from
<PB N="272" REF="169"> the <HI>Greeks</HI> upon the account of the change of the Seat of the Empire to <HI>Con&s;tantinople.</HI> By this then it appears, that the Impe|rial Power was the principal object of the Wor&s;hip that was given to the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, becau&s;e it was given to that Church only in veneration of that Power. For that for who&s;e &s;ake a thing is honoured, is the principal object of that honour. And <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Platina in Bonifacio tertio.</HI> He obtained of the Emperor <HI>Phocas,</HI> <Q>That the Seat of St. <HI>Peter&mdash;</HI>&s;hould be called, and e&s;teemed to be the Head of all Churches; but yet not without great contention about it, many affirming, that there ought to be the nr&s;t and chief See of the Church, where the Head of the Empire was.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothecarius in Bonifacio</HI> 3. He obtained of <HI>Phocas,</HI> <Q>That the Apo&s;tolick See of St. <HI>Peter</HI> &s;hould be the Head of all Churches; whereas the Church of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> did write it &s;elf the chief of <HI>all Churches.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Caranza Concil. Summa.</HI> p. 369. <HI>Bonefacius</HI> 3.&mdash;He obtained, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> <Q>That the See of St. <HI>Peter</HI> &s;hould be accounted the Head of all Churches, which Title the Church of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> did challenge to it &s;elf, evil Princes favouring it, and affirming that the chief See (of the Church) ought to be there where the Head of the Empire was, that is, at <HI>Con|&s;tantinople.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Gregor. M.</HI> ju&s;t before <HI>Boniface,</HI> is full of the mention of the Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI>'s claim to the Title of Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop, in his 4th, 6th, and 7th Book of his Epi&s;tles.</P></NOTE> <HI>Boniface</HI> the Third, notwith&s;tanding all his good &s;ervices to <HI>Phocas,</HI> could not get the Title of Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop, without much oppo&s;ition from the <HI>Greeks,</HI> upon the account of the change of the Seat of the Empire to <HI>Con|&s;tantinople.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. The chief Head and Life of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church is the Pa|pal Authority; 'Tis that which is the contriver of that Image, and is al&s;o the evil &s;pirit of it, that in&s;tigates it to all the mi&s;|chief that it does. Now the Popes of <HI>Rome</HI> were nothing, but <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Edictum, &s;ive Decretal. Pap. Hilarii, Ep.</HI> 11. About the Year 476. when the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire fell into the hands of the Barbarians, and &s;o the Pope &s;eemed to be the &s;ole Head of the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> It has al&s;o been de|creed by the Laws of Chri&s;tian Princes, That what&s;oever the Bi&s;hop of the Apo&s;tolick See &s;hould upon examination pronounce concerning Churches, and their Governours, &s;hould with reverence be received, and &s;trictly ob|&s;erved.</P>
<P><HI>Dr.</HI> Barrow<HI>'s Pope's Supremacy,</HI> p. 244. &s;peaking of the Epi&s;copal Sees be|fore the time of <HI>Con&s;tantine&mdash;</HI>&s;o &s;tood the Order of Church-Dignities, till it was confirmed by the Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> backed with Imperial Authority&mdash;What before was <HI>but cu&s;tom,</HI> by &s;o Augu&s;t a Sanction became <HI>Univer&s;al Law,</HI> and with &s;uch veneration, as by &s;ome was accounted immutably and everla&s;tingly obligatory, as appears in Pope <HI>Leo</HI>'s Maxims.</P>
<P>This does be&s;t appear from the ground of the Supremacy of the Pope, which was becau&s;e they were the Bi&s;hops of the Emperor's chief Seat; And al&s;o from the Authority by which they came by it, which was by the <HI>Impe|rial Laws,</HI> by whom their Primacy was e&s;tabli&s;hed. See <HI>Not. preced</HI> And they were &s;et up, and depo&s;ed, by the Emperors at plea&s;ure, and were created by them.</P></NOTE> the Emperours Creatures. No Election of the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> was valid till after the <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Caranza. Concil. &s;umma in Severino. Ann. Dom.</HI> 634. <Q><HI>Severinus</HI> was &s;et up in the room of Pope <HI>Honorius</HI> by <HI>I&s;aacius</HI> the Emperor's Exarch (or Deputy in <HI>Italy.)</HI> For in tho&s;e days the Election of the Clergy and Peo|ple was not accounted valid, unle&s;s the Emperors, or their Exarchs did confirm it. <HI>After he had before ob&s;erved in</HI> Pelagius <HI>the Second, Ann. Dom.</HI></Q> 580. <Q>That <HI>Pelagius</HI> was created Pope without the <HI>Roman</HI> Prince's Autho|rity, again&s;t the <HI>u&s;ual cu&s;tom.</HI> For in tho&s;e days nothing was done by the Clergy in the Election of the Pope, without the Emperor's Approbation. But there was no conveniency at that time of &s;ending to (the Emperor at) <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> becau&s;e <HI>Rome</HI> was then be&s;ieged by the <HI>Lombards.</HI> But he afterwards begged pardon for it by his Legat <HI>Gregory.</HI></Q></P>
<P>But in <HI>Adrian</HI> the Third he does thus more <HI>remarkably confirm this Cu&s;tom.</HI> This Pope <HI>(Ann. Dom.</HI> 888.) was &s;o &s;tout, as in the beginning of his Pon|tificate to bring in this Law to the Senate and People, That the Authority of the Emperor &s;hould not be waited for before the Creation of the Pope.</P>
<P>This was &s;o commonly acknowledged, that it appears, that the Popes u&s;ed to <HI>pay a &s;um of money</HI> to the Emperors for their Confirmation. <HI>Canon. Agath.</HI> 21. <HI>Can. di&s;tinct.</HI> 63. See Note ^1 on Chapter the Fourth.</P>
<P><HI>Onuphrius Panvinius</HI> gives an account of the fir&s;t Ri&s;e of this Cu&s;tom at <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Conque&s;t of <HI>Italy.</HI></P>
<P>In <HI>Pelag.</HI> 2. <Q>The <HI>Goths, &s;ays he,</HI> being beaten out of <HI>Italy</HI> by <HI>Nar&s;es,</HI> and <HI>Italy</HI> together with the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> being made a part of the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Em|pire, under <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> the Emperor, by the Authority of Pope <HI>Vigilius,</HI> there was a <HI>New Cu&s;tom</HI> brought up in the A&s;&s;emblies for the Elections of the Popes; which was, that upon the death of the Pope, there &s;hould forthwith be an Election made by the Clergy, the Senate, and the People, after the manner <HI>of the Right of Majors.</HI> But the new elected Pope could not be con&s;ecrated, or ordained, before his Election was confirmed by the Emperor at <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> nor before he had the Emperor's Letters-Patents for his Con&s;ecration in order to enter upon the Papal Juri&s;diction: For the obtaining of the grant of which, the new Elect was to &s;end a &s;um of Mo|ney to the Emperor. After which he was con&s;ecrated, and admini&s;tred the Bi&s;hoprick of <HI>Rome.</HI> Before that time the Pope was cho&s;en, and con|&s;ecrated the &s;ame day.</Q></P>
<P><HI>This is farther confirmed by</HI> Guicciardin, <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>Hi&s;tor.</HI></P>
<P><Q>In the&s;e times (of the Exarchs, &s;et up by <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> in <HI>Italy)</HI> the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> had no Civil Power, and for their degeneracy from the ancient purity of their Manners, were not much admired, or reverenced by men, pa&s;&s;ing their lives under the &s;ubjection of the Emperors, without the Au|thority of whom, or their Exarchs, they dur&s;t not receive, nor exerci&s;e the Papacy, although they had been elected by the Votes of the Clergy, and the People of <HI>Rome.</HI> So <HI>Sabelli. Aenead.</HI> 8. <HI>l.</HI> 5.</Q></P>
<P><HI>And Cu&s;pinian de Cae&s;aribus, pag.</HI> 144.</P>
<P><Q>But I find the Magi&s;tracy of the Exarchate fir&s;t &s;et up by the Emperor <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> (the Younger) that he &s;hould be in a manner the Emperor's Vice|gerent in <HI>Italy;</HI> and with &s;o great Authority, that he that was created Pope at <HI>Rome,</HI> was fir&s;t to have his Approbation. And pag. 149. <HI>Gregory</HI> was &s;ent by Pope <HI>Pelagius</HI> to the Emperor <HI>Mauritius</HI> to beg his pardon for &s;uffering him&s;elf to be proclaimed Pope without his leave.</Q> For the no|mination of the Pope was then held to be of no effect, unle&s;s the Emperor had confirmed it.</P>
<P>Pope <HI>Agatho,</HI> about the Year 673. writes to the Emperor <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> acknowledges the City of <HI>Rome</HI> to be the Servant of his Mo&s;t Chri&s;tian Em|pire, and has this an&s;wer to his Reque&s;t from the Emperor; That by the Imperial Command he was di&s;charged <HI>at his reque&s;t</HI> from that which the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> u&s;ed to pay for his Ordination; but yet upon this condi|tion, That the Election of the Pope &s;hould not pa&s;s on to Con&s;ecration till the Emperor had been advi&s;ed of it, and had expre&s;ly commanded it, accor|ding to the <HI>Ancient Cu&s;tom, L.</HI> 6. <HI>Pontifical. in Agathone.</HI> And <HI>D.</HI> 63. <HI>c. Aga|tho</HI> 21.</P>
<P>Pope <HI>Adrian,</HI> in a Synod at <HI>Rome,</HI> with the Univer&s;al Con&s;ent of the Great Men there, Bi&s;hops, Abbots, and others there a&s;&s;embled, gives <HI>Char|lemaigne</HI> the Authority of chu&s;ing the Pope, and of ordering the Apo&s;tolick See. <HI>D.</HI> 63. <HI>c. Adrianus</HI> 22.</P>
<P>And <HI>Gratian</HI> mentions the <HI>Anathema</HI> there pronounced again&s;t all that &s;hould do contray to that Decree, and the confi&s;cation of his Goods, if he did not repent.</P>
<P>The Oath that was to be taken for the Dutchies, which were given the Pope, as well for all other, was this; <Q>I promi&s;e to be faithful to my Lord <HI>Charles,</HI> and his Heirs, without Fraud, or Covin, all the days of my life. <HI>Sigonius de Regno Ital. l.</HI> 4.</Q> which does &s;ufficiently &s;hew the dependence and &s;ubjection of the Popes to the Emperor for all that they have.</P>
<P><HI>Anno</HI> 796. <HI>Leo</HI> the Third &s;ucceeded <HI>Adrian</HI> the Fir&s;t, who forthwith &s;ends an Amba&s;&s;adour to <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> to acquaint him with his Election, pre&s;ents the Keys of the Confe&s;&s;ion of St. <HI>Peter</HI> to him, that is, the Keys of the Sepulchre, and the Standard of the City, in token of homage <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">nd fealty. <HI>Baron. An.</HI> 796.</P>
<P>816. <HI>Stephen</HI> the Fifth &s;ucceeded <HI>Leo</HI> the Third, <Q>and, &s;ays <HI>Aimoinus, l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 103. <HI>contrary to Law</HI> was cho&s;en, and con&s;ecrated without the Em|peror's Order for it.</Q> But then he ha&s;tens into <HI>France</HI> to get his Con&s;ecra|tion of the Emperor, &s;ending two Legats before him to beg it. And to make amends, he makes this Order, before quoted in the Canon, <HI>Quia &s;an|cta, D.</HI> 53. <HI>G. quia &s;ancta</HI> 28. <Q>Becau&s;e the <HI>Roman</HI> Church &s;uffers great violences at the death of the Pope, for having the Elections and Con&s;e|crations of the Succe&s;&s;or made without the Emperor's knowledge, again&s;t the Canons, and the u&s;ual cu&s;tom; the Emperor's Emba&s;&s;adors that &s;hould hinder the Scandals, being not there, We ordain, That when the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> is to be made, the Bi&s;hops and all the Clergy being a&s;&s;embled, he be elected in the pre&s;ence of the Senate, and People, and be thereupon con&s;ecrated in the pre&s;ence of the Emperor's Emba&s;&s;adors.</Q></P>
<P>817. And though <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI> a year after was cho&s;en, and con&s;ecrated <Q>with|out waiting the Emperor's Order, yet he acknowledges his fault to the Emperor, and begs pardon, becau&s;e the Papal Honour was forced upon him again&s;t his Will. <HI>Aimoin. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 105.</Q></P>
<P>The Emperor <HI>Lotharius,</HI> not long after, does therefore make a new Or|der; That the Emperor him&s;elf, or in his ab&s;ence, his Deputies &s;hould a&s;|&s;i&s;t at the Con&s;ecration of the Pope. This he commands to be ob&s;erved for the future.</P>
<P>827. At the death of <HI>Valentin, Gregory</HI> the Fourth &s;ucceeded; And, as <HI>Sigonius</HI> relates, <HI>l.</HI> 4. <HI>de Regno Ital.</HI> 1. His Con&s;ecration was deferred, becau&s;e the Emperor's Deputy was ab&s;ent.</P>
<P>845. <HI>Sergius</HI> the Second &s;ucceeded <HI>Gregory</HI> the Fourth, and was forced to be con&s;ecrated before the Emperor was acquainted with it; upon which the Emperor <HI>Lewis</HI> marches to <HI>Rome</HI> with an Army.</P>
<P>847. After <HI>Sergius,</HI> was <HI>Leo</HI> the Fourth cho&s;en, and con&s;ecrated the &s;ame day <HI>again&s;t the Law,</HI> without &s;taying for the Emperor's Order; and the <HI>Ro|mans</HI> excu&s;ed them&s;elves for it to the Emperor, that they were &s;urrounded with the <HI>Sarazens,</HI> and <HI>Leo</HI> him&s;elf, that he was forced to it by them. But yet <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothecarius,</HI> in that Pope's Life, &s;ays, that the People were in great fears of the Emperor's re&s;entment of it. And the &s;ame Pope, up|on the Emperor's &s;ending his Son <HI>Lewis</HI> to &s;et the Church in right or|der, profe&s;&s;es to him, That he did ob&s;erve the Commands of <HI>him&s;elf,</HI> and <HI>his Predece&s;&s;ors,</HI> and <HI>always would ob&s;erve them.</HI></P>
<P>855. <HI>Benedict</HI> the Third &s;ucceeded next but one to <HI>Leo</HI> the Fourth, and was con&s;ecrated without the Imperial Order; but was fain to be cho&s;en a|gain, and confirmed by the Emperor's Authority. <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;. Biblioth. in Be|nedicto.</HI></P>
<P>858. <HI>Nicolas</HI> the Fir&s;t was cho&s;en pre&s;ently after the death of <HI>Benedict,</HI> which the Emperor <HI>Lewis</HI> ha&s;ted to <HI>Rome</HI> to prevent, but found the Election pa&s;t; and <HI>Nicolas</HI> ab&s;conded, to &s;hew that he was forced to it for fear. He was a few days after con&s;ecrated in the pre&s;ence of the Emperor. <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;. Nicol.</HI> 1.</P>
<P>867. <HI>Adrian</HI> the Second &s;ucceeds without the Emperor's Order, or the a&s;&s;i&s;tance of his Deputies, though they were in the Town; the Emperor being then deeply engaged in War with the <HI>Sarazens.</HI></P>
<P>875. <HI>John</HI> the Eighth, or Ninth, &s;ucceeds <HI>Adrian</HI> the Second, makes <HI>Charles the Bald,</HI> Emperor of <HI>Rome,</HI> upon condition that the Pope &s;hould no longer wait for the Emperor's confirmation, <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hould be left wholly to the Pope's di&s;po&s;al; <Q>And <HI>from that time,</HI> &s;ays <HI>Sigonius,</HI> the Title of Empe|ror began to be wholly the gift of the Pope.</Q></P>
<P>885. <HI>Adrian</HI> the Third, after <HI>John,</HI> gets a Law made, That for the future there &s;hould be no expectation of the Emperor's Confirmation.</P>
<P>961. But then the Emperor <HI>Leo</HI> the Fir&s;t, takes <HI>Rome,</HI> puts the Pope to flight, and the <HI>Romans</HI> &s;wear Fealty to him, with this expre&s;s Clau&s;e, That they &s;hould never chu&s;e and con&s;ecrate a Pope without the Con&s;ent and Choice of the Emperor <HI>Otho,</HI> and his Heirs: Then a&s;&s;embles a great Coun|cil at <HI>Rome,</HI> where Pope <HI>John</HI> was depo&s;ed, and <HI>Leo</HI> the Eighth &s;ub&s;tituted in his place by the Emperor's Approbation; And the <HI>Old Law,</HI> that there &s;hould be no con&s;ecration of the Pope without the Emperor's Order, was renewed by the Authority of the Pope, and another Council, and <HI>Anathe|ma</HI> and Bani&s;hment was the puni&s;hment of the Di&s;obedient. <HI>D.</HI> 63. <HI>C. In Synodo</HI> 23. See Note ^l on the Thirteenth Chapter. <HI>Theodor. &agrave; Niem.</HI> &s;ays, He &s;aw the Patent, from whence this was drawn, pre&s;erved at <HI>Florence</HI> in te&s;timony of the Imperial Dignity, and he lived under <HI>John</HI> the XXIIId.</P>
<P>The Emperor <HI>Henry</HI> the Second, upon complaint of great Di&s;orders of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, goes in the year 1046. to <HI>Rome,</HI> there depo&s;es <HI>Gregory</HI> the Sixth, and fets up <HI>Clement</HI> the Second, and the <HI>Romans</HI> &s;wear to him, that they would <HI>never</HI> chu&s;e them any Pope <HI>without his Con|&s;ent.</HI> And upon the meeting of a great Council there, it is ordained that the New-elected Pope &s;hall not be &s;o accounted <HI>till the Authority of the Em|peror</HI> &s;hould confirm it; and that the Pope ought not to be created without his Authority. <HI>Petr. Damian. in lib. Grati&s;. Platina, &amp; Onuphr. in Cle|ment.</HI> 2.</P>
<P>The Council of <HI>Lateran, Ann.</HI> 1055. order the Election of the Pope to be begun by the Cardinals, and the re&s;t of the Clergy and People to con&s;ent to it; <HI>and adds,&mdash;</HI>&s;eeing neverthele&s;s <HI>the Honour due</HI> to our dear Son <HI>Henry,</HI> who is at pre&s;ent held for King, and to be Emperor afterwards, as we have granted to him, and his Succe&s;&s;ors, who &s;hall obtain this right in per&s;on of the Apo&s;tolick See.</P>
<P>In the Synod at <HI>Rome,</HI> in the Year 1106. is that dreadful Charge drawn up again&s;t <HI>Gregory</HI> the Seventh, or <HI>Hildebrand,</HI> for a&s;piring to the Papacy, <HI>without either the Con&s;ent of the Emperor of the</HI> Romans, <HI>or the Senate, or People.</HI></P>
<P>In the Year 1107. the Emperor <HI>Henry</HI> the Third &s;ets forth a Remon|&s;trance again&s;t Pope <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI> the Second, and concludes, <Q>That although by Right, and force of <HI>Arms,</HI> he could retain the <HI>Ancient Cu&s;tom,</HI> ob&s;erved of &s;o long time by &s;o many Holy Fathers touching the Election of the Popes, and the Right of Inve&s;titures, yet he &s;hould not much trouble him&s;elf about it, if they would return him the E&s;tates and Chattels which they retained by the Gifts of the Laity, and would content them&s;elves with the Title. <HI>Aventin. Hi&s;tor. Boior. L.</HI> 6.</Q></P>
<P>And upon taking Pope <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI> Pri&s;oner by <HI>Henry,</HI> it was &s;worn to by the Pope, That the Right of confirming or inve&s;ting the new cho&s;en Bi&s;hop, &s;hould be always in the Emperor, and none &s;hould dare to own them be|fore they were inve&s;ted by the Emperor's Command.</P>
<P><HI>Sigebert</HI> &s;ays thus concerning this Affair, <HI>Chron. Ann.</HI> 1111. The King or Emperor would u&s;e the <HI>Authority which the Emperors had</HI> u&s;ed &s;ince the time of <HI>Charlemaigne, for</HI> 300 <HI>years, and more, under</HI> 63 <HI>Popes.</HI></P>
<P>1118. <HI>Gela&s;ius</HI> the Second &s;ucceeded <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI> the Second, and was created without the knowledge of the Emperor <HI>Henry,</HI> who thereupon returns from <HI>Padua</HI> to <HI>Rome,</HI> and con&s;ecrates <HI>Gregory</HI> the Eighth in his place.</P>
<P>1165. <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI> the Third was confirmed Pope by the Council of <HI>Wurtz|bourg,</HI> where this Remarkable Decree was made, <Q>That for the future, no Pope &s;hould be created but after the <HI>Ancient Fa&s;hion,</HI> by the Con&s;ent of <HI>the Emperor. Aventin. Hi&s;t. Boior. L.</HI> 6.</Q></P>
<P>And afterwards, That the Pope &s;hould be called only <HI>Nuntius Chri&s;ti,</HI> and not to be the Rival of the Imperial Power. And an oath was there|upon taken by all there pre&s;ent.</P>
<P>The Univer&s;ities of <HI>Oxford</HI> and <HI>Paris</HI> agree about the Year 1404. that the Emperor has right of Patronage to the Pope, and to the <HI>Roman</HI> Church. That the Election of the Pope does not appertain of divine Right to the Cardinals, but to the People; and the Confirmation of him, to the Emperor. <HI>Epi&s;t. Univer&s;it. Paris Editae A. Hutten. Ann.</HI> 1520.</P></NOTE> Emperor's confirmation of him; and was the Imperial Authority, that did many times call them <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Nothing is more common in the Hi&s;tory of the Church, than the &s;um|monings and depo&s;itions of Popes by the Emperors.</NOTE> to an account for their irregular actions, and depo&s;e them. The u&s;ual Titles that the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> gave their Emperors, were, <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Guicciard. Hi&s;tor. L.</HI> 4.</P>
<P><Q>In this time (of the Exarchat, that is, after <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s recovery of <HI>Italy)</HI> the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> had no Civil Power&mdash;pa&s;&s;ing their lives <HI>under the &s;ubjection of the Emperors,</HI> without the Authority of whom, or of their Exarchs, they <HI>dur&s;t not</HI> receive, or exerci&s;e the Pontifical.</Q> And therefore their Addre&s;&s;es to the Emperors mu&s;t be proportionably &s;ubmi&s;&s;ive, as follows.</P>
<P>601. <Q><HI>Gregory the Great,</HI> who by the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> is made the Example of a Good Pope, in his Second Book, <HI>Ep.</HI> 62. <HI>&amp;</HI> 65. to the Emperor <HI>Mauri|tius,</HI> hath the&s;e Expre&s;&s;ions.</Q></P>
<P><Q>He is guilty before the Almighty, who in all that he &s;ays, or does, is not clear towards <HI>His Mo&s;t Serene Lords,</HI> and I the <HI>Unworthy Servant of Your Piety,</HI> If, <HI>&amp;c.&mdash;</HI>And I, when I &s;peak thus to <HI>My Lords,</HI> what am I but <HI>du&s;t,</HI> and <HI>a Worm of the Earth,</HI> &amp;c.&mdash;Power is given <HI>My Lords</HI> from <HI>Heaven</HI> over all men. I have committed, will Chri&s;t &s;ay, my Prie&s;ts (or Bi&s;hops) into thy hands. And, <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>Ep.</HI> 64. my tongue cannot expre&s;s the favour that I have received of the Almighty, and of the mo&s;t Serene Emperor, <HI>My Lord.</HI> And, <HI>Ep.</HI> 52. I have &s;ent him to the <HI>Feet of My Lords.</HI></Q></P>
<P>And yet <HI>Gregory</HI> &s;peaks boldly enough to him, when he reproves him as his Confe&s;&s;or, <HI>L.</HI> 2. <HI>Ep.</HI> 64. And, <HI>L.</HI> 6. <HI>Ep.</HI> 11. to <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Antioch,&mdash;</HI><Q>All that are advanced into Holy Orders, ought always to give thanks for it to Almighty God, and always pray to God for the Life of our mo&s;t Pious and mo&s;t Chri&s;tian <HI>Lord</HI> the Em|peror.</Q></P>
<P>Pope <HI>Agatho, Concil.</HI> 6. <HI>Act.</HI> 2. and 4. tells the Emperor <Q>That he gave ready obedience to the things that were commanded him by the Sacred Letters Patents of his mo&s;t Clement Fortitude.&mdash;And that again, To do his due obedience to the Emperor, in making the Bi&s;hops of tho&s;e parts Addre&s;s them&s;elves to the Mo&s;t Pious Feet of his Goodne&s;s.&mdash;calls <HI>Rome</HI> the Servant City of his mo&s;t Serene Empire&mdash;often u&s;es&mdash;according to your mo&s;t Pious Command.&mdash;And&mdash;we be&s;eech you upon the bended knees of our Soul.</Q></P>
<P>800. <HI>Ado Viennen&s;is in Chronic. An.</HI> 798. <HI>Aimoin. l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 90. Refute the Coronation of <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> by Pope <HI>Leo.&mdash;</HI>And that after the <Q>Accla|mations of the People, He was <HI>adored</HI> by the Pope after the <HI>manner of the former Emperors.</HI></Q></P>
<P>And <HI>Salvian, in Epi&s;tolam ad Parentes,</HI> Explains what is meant by the manner of the Ancient Emperors. He &s;ays, <Q>That <HI>As Servants, they ki&s;&s;ed the feet of their Ma&s;ters.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>An.</HI> 854. Pope <HI>Leo</HI> the 4th writes to the Emperour <HI>Lotharius,</HI> <Q>That he ob&s;erved His and his Predece&s;&s;ors Commands; and &s;hould always ob|&s;erve them. <HI>Di&s;.</HI> 10. <HI>c.</HI> 9.</Q></P>
<P><HI>An.</HI> 1158. Pope <HI>Adrian</HI> the 4th, <Q>Together with all the Cardinals and Clergy, &s;end to the Emperour <HI>Frcderick,</HI> and acknowledg him Lord, and Emperour of the City, and of the World, <HI>Urbis &amp; Orbis, Raderius de Ge&s;tis Frederici.</HI> l. 1. c. 22.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Paulus Diaconus de Ge&s;t. Longobard.</HI> c. 37. who was near tho&s;e times&mdash;<Q><HI>Phocas,</HI> &s;ays he, at the reque&s;t of Pope <HI>Boniface,</HI> did Decree, That the See of the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hould be the Head of all Churches; becau&s;e that the Church of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> did write it &s;elf the fir&s;t of all Churches. See Note ^g on this Chapter.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>Our Lords the Emperors; Our Mo&s;t Gracious and Pious Lords;</HI> and &s;ub&s;cribed them&s;elves, <HI>Their meane&s;t Ser|vants:</HI> And that which is the chief flower of their Authority, their, Univer&s;al Head&s;hip, or <HI>Supremacy over the Catholick Church,</HI> was begged <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Boniface</HI> the 3<HI>d</HI> did &s;o far acknowledg this Title of Univer&s;al Head, to be the Emperour's favour, That he has the Emperour's grant for it pro|claimed at <HI>Rome,</HI> in a Council of 62 Bi&s;hops. <HI>Platina</HI> in <HI>Boniface</HI> 3.</P>
<P><HI>Sigonius</HI> &s;ays, That <HI>Boniface</HI> &s;ent an Emba&s;&s;y to <HI>Phocas</HI> to de&s;ire it; by which means he obtained that Decree.</P></NOTE> of the Emperor <HI>Phocas</HI> by <HI>Boniface,</HI> and could not be obtained but by the drudgery of an approbation of Murder and A&s;&s;a&s;&s;ination; and then al&s;o not without <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg"><P>The Conte&s;t about the Univer&s;al Head&s;hip appears plainly to have continued from the Order of the Council of <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> for the place of the Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople.</HI></P>
<P>The Law of the Emperors <HI>Leo</HI> and <HI>Anthemius,</HI> l. 16. c. <HI>in fin. de Sacro&s;. Eccle&s;.</HI> for the &s;uperiority of the See of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> was &s;oon after that Council.</P>
<P><HI>Pelagius</HI> the 2<HI>d.</HI> condemns <HI>John,</HI> Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> for that claim, and &s;o does <HI>Gregory</HI> the <HI>1&s;t.</HI> after him. See Note ^g on this Chapter.</P>
<P><HI>Platina</HI> &s;ays in <HI>Boniface</HI> 3. <Q>Though his pretentions were not always obeyed, yet there has ever &s;ince that time been a Schi&s;m betwixt the <HI>Greek</HI> and the <HI>Latin</HI> Church.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Bellarmin.</HI> in <HI>Praefat. in lib. de Pontifice.</HI> <Q>The <HI>Greeks</HI> oppo&s;ed (the Popes Supremacy) in the year 451. in the Council of <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> and in the year 600. declare the Bp. of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> Univer&s;al Bi&s;hop.</Q></P></NOTE> great conte&s;ts again&s;t it, as an u&s;urpation upon the Rights and Liberties of other Churches, to mind him by who&s;e favour <HI>only</HI> he came to po&s;&s;e&s;s it. For the Emperor <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg"><HI>Cu&s;pinian de Cae&s;aribus,</HI> p. 140. <HI>Mauritius</HI> wrote to Pope <HI>Gregory,</HI> <Q>To obey <HI>John,</HI> Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> as if Head Patriarch of all others.</Q></NOTE> <HI>Mauritius,</HI> ju&s;t before, had commanded Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> to acknowledg <HI>John,</HI> Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> for the Univer&s;al Head. There is great rea&s;on then to account the Honour &s;hown to the Papal Authority, and his Clergy, which are the Life and Soul of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, to be an honour done to the Power that rai&s;ed him, and &s;up|ported him.</P>
<P N="4">4. The Wor&s;hip that is given to the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion, may well be called the Wor&s;hip of the Imperial Authority, becau&s;e it is the <HI>Secular Arm</HI> that makes the Church-Laws to be obey|ed; and thereby it does appear, That it is the owning of
<PB N="273" REF="169"> the&s;e Laws by the Secular Power for its own will and com|mand, that gives all the life and force to them, and that there|fore they are obeyed as the Laws and Will of that Power only. The Church might make what Laws it plea&s;ed, to the Con&s;cien|ces of men. Their <HI>Anathema's</HI> would not have been much re|garded by tho&s;e, who knew them to be unwarrantable: But that which &s;ets the edge upon them, is the Secular Arm of the Civil Power.</P>
<P>'Tis then the Secular Arm, that is in reality the chief thing that is wor&s;hipped, or who&s;e will is complied with as the Will of God, and as the Law of his Religion. It is therefore very properly the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, both <HI>before the divi&s;ion</HI> of the Empire, when all the Secular Authority was only Imperial, and al&s;o after the appearance of the <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Canon.</HI> 3. <HI>Concil. Lateranen&s;.</HI> 1. <Q>The Secular Powers are enjoyned to take an Oath to pro&s;ecute Hereticks, to the Rooting them out of their Territories&mdash;And tho&s;e Princes that neglect to do thus, are to be Excommunicated, and their Subjects Ab&s;olved of their Oath of Alle|giance to them; and their Lands to be expo&s;ed to the Seizure of Catho|licks.</Q></P>
<P>See Note ^c and ^f on Chapter 4. The Council of <HI>Milan</HI> and <HI>Arles,</HI> &s;end to their Emperours to make their Decrees effectual.</P>
<P><HI>Aeneas Sylvius,</HI> afterward Pope <HI>Pius</HI> 2d. Epi&s;t. l. 53. <Q>We are all of the &s;ame Faith with our Princes; If they were Idolaters, we &s;hould be &s;o too; and &s;hould deny, not only the Pope, but Chri&s;t him&s;elf al&s;o, if the Se|cular Power did but pre&s;s us to it.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Otho Fri&s;ius. in prol.</HI> l. 4. <HI>Chronic.</HI> <Q>There are two per&s;ons &s;et up in the Church, The Sacerdotal, and the Regal; the one to execute the Eccle&s;i|a&s;tical Cen&s;ures by the Spiritual Sword; the other carries the Material Sword to execute the Secular Sentences. And as Spiritual po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ions are under the juri&s;diction of the Spiritual Sword; &s;o are the Dignities of this World, as Dutchies, Counties, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> under the juri&s;diction of the Material Sword.</Q></P></NOTE> Ten Kings in it, be|cau&s;e <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> <HI>they</HI> are found to <HI>give their Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t,</HI> or to that Religion which the Imperial Authority does &s;et up. For this end alone is it, that the Imperial Authority has its confir|mation at pre&s;ent from <NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Golda&s;t. Polit. in Imperial. H.</HI> 1. pag. 72. Speaking of the In&s;tallation of the <HI>Roman</HI> Kings, or Emperours, <Q>They do then require an Oath from the Supream Monarch of the whole World, To defend the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, to exterminate Hereticks, and to &s;ecure the Dignity of the Pope by all manner of ways.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Glabar. l.</HI> 1. <HI>Hi&s;tor. in fine. Benedict</HI> the 9th made this Decree, <Q>That none &s;hould be called, or taken for Emperour, but He, whom the Pope for his good behaviour &s;hall make choice for a fit per&s;on for the Common|weal, and upon whom he &s;hall &s;et that Imperial Crown, which is a Golden Apple &s;et with Jewels; and a Cro&s;s in the middle of it, <HI>viz.</HI> To denote the end of his power to be to defend the Church.</Q></P>
<P>And &s;uch is every Imperial Crown of every particular Prince.</P>
<P><HI>Clementina unica de jure jurando,</HI> Gives the Oath that the Emperour takes to defend the Rights of the Church.</P></NOTE> the Head of the Church, that it may enforce the Spiritual Power of the Church; and by this means do both the Civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Power come to be Wor|&s;hipped in one and the &s;ame Act of obedience.</P>
<P>From hence it is now ea&s;ie to apprehend how the fal&s;e Pro|phet <HI>does exerci&s;e all the power of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t before him.</HI> For <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 12.</NOTE> &s;ince the fir&s;t Bea&s;t is found to be the Imperial power, the ex|erci&s;e of all his power mu&s;t be an Univer&s;al Supremacy over the <HI>Roman Catholick</HI> Church; and this does very well an&s;wer the Popes exerci&s;e of the power of both the <HI>Roman</HI> Swords. And it is &s;aid to be done <HI>before the fir&s;t Bea&s;t,</HI> as that &s;ignifies in Honour of him, or in Honour of the chief &s;eat of the Em|pire.</P>
<P>The <HI>fir&s;t</HI> great effect of this power, is <HI>to cau&s;e all the world to</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>wor&s;hip the fir&s;t Bea&s;t;</HI> And that is, when the Papal Authority does <HI>either</HI> make the World receive the Imperial Laws, and their Sanctions of Councils as the Will of God about the way to Salvation; or make them receive the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion it &s;elf, as the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t, only upon the account of its being the Doctrine of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, which has all the Authority, that it lays claim to, from the will of the Emperors, only in veneration to the Maje&s;ty of that Empire, and the Supream Ruler of it; or when the Pope does make the Emperors to be
<PB N="274" REF="170"> owned for the <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Gregor.</HI> 7. <HI>Ep. poll.</HI> 18. <HI>l.</HI> 6. <HI>Richard,</HI> Prince of <HI>Capua,</HI> takes this as part of his Oath to the Pope&mdash;<Q>I will acknowledg the Emperour <HI>Henry</HI> for every thing el&s;e, and will Swear fealty to him, when I &s;hall be exhorted to it by thee, or thy Succe&s;&s;ours, always with the exception of the Holy Church, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></Q></P>
<P>And it is the general practice of that Church, in ca&s;e of the Emperor's failure of this Defence of the Church, or in ca&s;e of Here&s;ie contrary to it, He is to be depo&s;ed.</P></NOTE> defenders of the Faith of that Church by a Divine Commi&s;&s;ion to them from his hands, at their confirma|tion in the Imperial Dignity; and thus recommends them under that Sacred Character as the immediate and &s;pecial Ordinance of God in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, who&s;e will mu&s;t be &s;ubmitted to in their commands for the owning of the Infallibility of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, or the <HI>Divine in&s;piration</HI> of it in all things.</P>
<P>The <HI>next</HI> exerci&s;e of the Fal&s;e Prophets power, is by all the deceitful Arts of per&s;ua&s;ion to get <HI>the World to make an Image to</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13 14.</NOTE> <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> which does &s;et out the great indu&s;try of the Papal Power upon its exaltation to the Supremacy over the Church, to make the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Rome</HI> to be as Univer&s;al an Empire over the World, as the <HI>Civil</HI> &s;tate of it was; and &s;o to be <HI>the Image</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>When this was obtained, it is &s;aid, That <HI>he had power al&s;o to</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 15.</NOTE> <HI>give life to this Image;</HI> and que&s;tionle&s;s all will own the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> to have almo&s;t all its <HI>life</HI> from <NOTE N="s" PLACE="marg"><P>This appears from the Oath that all the dignified Clergy of the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> take at their Creation; the form of which is thus &s;et down, <HI>Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>Decret. Tit.</HI> 24. <Q>I <HI>N. N.</HI> by the Grace of God, and of the Apo&s;tolick See, Bi&s;hop of <HI>&amp;c.</HI> will a&s;&s;i&s;t for the retaining of the <HI>Roman</HI> Pa|cy, and the <HI>Regalia</HI> of St. <HI>Peter,</HI> and to the maintaining them again&s;t eve|ry Man; I will take care to pre&s;erve, encrea&s;e, defend, and further the Rights, Honours, Priviledges, and Authority of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, of our Lord the Pope, and his Succe&s;&s;ors; I will pro&s;ecute, and &s;uppre&s;s to my power, all Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, and Rebels again&s;t our Lord the Pope.</Q></P>
<P>Add to this, the Oath that the Emperour and Kings take at their Co|ronation to defend the Rights of the Apo&s;tolick See, and then the Papal Authority &s;eems to be the &s;ole Head of the Image, and the in&s;pirer of it.</P></NOTE> the Papal Authority in it.</P>
<P>Of which there could be no more lively a proof, than to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>make the Image &s;peak, and cau&s;e all to be killed that would not wor|&s;hip it;</HI> And does not this very exactly agree with the Decrees and Canons of that Church put in execution by its own Courts of Judicature, and by the concurrence of the Secular Arm, which it makes its Officers and Executioners? It is known, That any di&s;|&s;ent from the Faith of that Church, is judged by them to be Here|fie, and that the puni&s;hment of Here&s;ie is death. And &s;ince all the Government of the Church is made a Papal Monarchy, and the Pope the Supream Head of it, it is very properly &s;aid, that he does cau&s;e the Church to do all the&s;e things.</P>
<P>The la&s;t mentioned exerci&s;e of the Fal&s;e-Prophet's power, is <HI>to make all men receive a mark in their hand or forehead,</HI> or to <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13 16, 17.</NOTE> have the <HI>name of the Bea&s;t,</HI> or the <HI>number of his name.</HI></P>
<P>This &s;eems to be very <HI>my&s;tical</HI> at the fir&s;t &s;ight of it: But the cu&s;tom of all the Ea&s;tern parts, to give their Soldiers, and Slaves, a mark to know them for their own, does make it plain, that it is to be under&s;tood of &s;ome <NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Malvenda de Antichri&s;to,</HI> Pag. 434. Let it therefore be taken for clear and undoubted, which all the Fathers did unque&s;tionably teach, That this number of the name of the Bea&s;t 666, does not relate to either the birth, or death of Chri&s;t, <HI>or to any kind of duration, or &s;pace of time;</HI> but that it is to be the real name of Antichri&s;t&mdash;And he there mentions <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> and <HI>Latines.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar in</HI> c. 13. <HI>Apoc. de Charactere Be&s;tiae.&mdash;</HI><Q>The Mark, &s;ays he, is not here any thing di&s;tinct from the number, and the name, 1. becau&s;e it is &s;aid the Mark, <HI>or</HI> the Name, <HI>or</HI> the Number of the Name, which does not intimate <HI>three di&s;tinct things, but only</HI> three di&s;tinct Names of the &s;ame things. 2. Becau&s;e Chap. 20. <HI>Apoc.</HI> it is &s;aid, That all that had not re|ceived the Mark of the Bea&s;t, did Reign with Chri&s;t, where the Mark in|cludes in it the Name and Number. 3. Becau&s;e <HI>Chap.</HI> 14. 9. It is &s;aid al&s;o of the puni&s;hment of the followers of the Bea&s;t, That it was to tho&s;e who &s;hould receive the Mark, where all that had the <HI>name</HI> and the <HI>number</HI> are al&s;o comprehended.</Q></P>
<P>He there al&s;o adds, <Q>That it was the Cu&s;tom for Soldiers to receive the name of their Prince in their Skin. So <HI>Vegelius, l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 8. and <HI>l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 5. Soldiers are Li&s;ted by being pricked in the Skin with the name of the Prince or General. So <HI>Lip&s;ius, l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 9. Quotes <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Code for it, St. <HI>Augu&s;tine, Chry&s;o&s;tom,</HI> and <HI>Prudentius.</HI></Q></P>
<P>The Society of <HI>Bacchus</HI> were thus marked with an Ivy-leaf.</P></NOTE> peculiar <HI>mark</HI> and <HI>name,</HI> which does di&s;tingui&s;h tho&s;e of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church from all other Chri&s;tians. But that which does the be&s;t open the my&s;tery of the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions, is that ob&s;ervation of <HI>Grotius</HI> upon
<PB N="275" REF="170"> this place, <HI>That it was a common fa&s;hion in St.</HI> John<HI>'s time</HI> for every Heathen God to have a particular Society, or Fraternity belonging to him; and the way of admitting any into the&s;e fraternities was, 1. By giving them &s;ome Hieroglyphick <HI>mark</HI> in their <HI>Hands,</HI> or <HI>Forehead,</HI> which was accounted Sacred to that particular God; as that of an <HI>Ivy-leaf</HI> to own them&s;elves of the fraternity of <HI>Bacchus.</HI> 2. By Sealing them with <HI>the Letters of the name</HI> of that God. And, 3. with that <HI>number,</HI> which the <HI>Greek</HI> Letters of their name did make up; for the Numeral Cyphers of the <HI>Greeks</HI> were the Letters of the Alphabet. Thus the <HI>Greek</HI> Letters of the Name of the <HI>Sun,</HI> did in all make up 608. And therefore his fraternity were marked with XH.</P>
<P>A very great confirmation of this way of interpreting <HI>the Name,</HI> and <HI>Number of the Name,</HI> is <HI>Irenaeus</HI>'s Te&s;timony from <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Irenaeus</HI> l. 5. c. 24.</NOTE> the mouth of tho&s;e who had received it from St. <HI>John,</HI> <Q>That the Number of the Name of the Bea&s;t is the number ex|pre&s;&s;ed in tho&s;e <HI>Greek</HI> Letters, of which the Name of the Bea&s;t is made up, according to the u&s;ual computation of the <HI>Greeks</HI> by the Letters of their Alphabet; and which in the pre&s;ent in&s;tance mu&s;t in all make up the number of 666.</Q></P>
<P>This indeed is not to be meant of the Sealing of any &s;uch Marks upon the fle&s;h of the followers of the Bea&s;t in a <HI>literal &s;en&s;e;</HI> yet by Analogy it mu&s;t be under&s;tood of &s;ome particular marks of di&s;tinction betwixt the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> and others; and then what does more fitly &s;uit with this, than the <HI>Greek</HI> name of <HI>Latinos,</HI> which does exactly fill up the number of 666, or the number of the Bea&s;t? What was more likely to be de&s;ign|ed by it in the Text, than this, &s;ince this was the known di|&s;tingui&s;hing name of the We&s;tern <HI>Romans</HI> from tho&s;e of the Ea&s;t, after the divi&s;ion of the Empire? And in the whole Body of the&s;e Vi&s;ions about the Bea&s;t, I make no que&s;tion but all the Characters are <HI>&s;uch, as all the World might ea&s;ily know them,</HI> when they came to be fulfilled. Now it is evident, That in all the &s;olemn Acts of the Empire, and in <HI>General Councils,</HI> This di|&s;tinction was always ob&s;erved betwixt tho&s;e of the <HI>Greek</HI> and <HI>Latin</HI> Church; and that name of the <HI>Latins</HI> had the We&s;tern Bi|&s;hops, Princes and Potentates; e&s;pecially among&s;t that people in who&s;e Language the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> was writ, That is, <HI>The Greeks.</HI></P>
<PB N="276" REF="171">
<P> That which does extreamly confirm this is, <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ibid. Alca&s;ar</HI> again&s;t tho&s;e, who would have this name to be different from all things that were then known.<HI>&mdash;Aenigma's,</HI> &s;ays he, or dark <Q>Riddles are made for that end, <HI>not that things before unknown</HI> &s;hould be known by them; but that things before known, &s;hould be concealed in the dark terms of the Riddle from tho&s;e to whom the Riddle is given to be revealed. This Truth is &s;o clear to me, that I cannot &s;ufficiently ad|mire tho&s;e, who fancy, That this Number 666 was here given to &s;ignifie a name, that was before unknown to the Church; and he quotes <HI>Arethus</HI> upon this place to the &s;ame purpo&s;e,&mdash;That thereby was &s;ignified, that the great things there mentioned about the Bea&s;t, did not relate to things who&s;e Names were unknown; but to a Name then very well known.</Q></NOTE> That the name of <HI>Latins</HI> was &s;o well known to &s;ignify the <HI>Romans</HI> about the time of the Vi&s;ion, That <HI>Irenaeus</HI> does pitch upon this, as one of the mo&s;t likely names that did an&s;wer the number of the <NOTE PLACE="marg">L. 5. c. 24. <HI>Contra Haeres.</HI></NOTE> Bea&s;t, with this Rea&s;on for it; <HI>For they are the Latines,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>who are now in Rule.</HI></P>
<P>So that he takes a <HI>Latin</HI> and a <HI>Roman</HI> for the &s;ame thing in his time. Wherefore to have the <HI>mark, name,</HI> and <HI>number of the name</HI> of the Bea&s;t, may very well &s;ignify the having and owning the name of a <HI>Roman,</HI> or <HI>Roman-Catholick,</HI> as that is the &s;ame thing with the name of a <HI>Latin,</HI> and is a word of di&s;tinction betwixt a Member of the <HI>Roman,</HI> and of any other communion of Chri&s;tians.</P>
<P>It is very remarkable to this purpo&s;e, according, as has been by others ob&s;erved, that this does very happily an&s;wer the fondne&s;s of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church for the <HI>Latin Tongue,</HI> as that which they would have generally known to be the peculiar Language of their Church in di&s;tinction to both the common Language of the World about any other Affairs, and to the Language of any other Churches.</P>
<P>Thus it is decreed, That notwith&s;tanding the very change of the Language of <HI>Rome</HI> it &s;elf, none of the publick Offices of the Church &s;hall be in any other Language than <HI>Latin;</HI> And that the Word of God it &s;elf &s;hall be conveyed to the people in no other Language, nor any other Tran&s;lation allowed to be Authentick, but that of the <HI>Vulgar Latine;</HI> &s;o that they will not allow <HI>either</HI> God to &s;peak to his people, <HI>or</HI> his people to &s;peak to him, but in the <HI>Latin</HI> Tongue; and by this do they di&s;tingui&s;h them&s;elves, as the publick <HI>Shibboleth,</HI> by which they are known all the World over. St. <HI>Hierom</HI> gives an in&s;tance in his cen&s;ure of <HI>Ruffinus</HI>'s Tran&s;lation of <HI>Origen</HI> into <HI>Latin,</HI> How naturally any one would judge the Language of <HI>Babylon</HI> to be the <HI>Latin</HI> Tongue, <HI>Apolog. adver&s;. Ruffin. You alone,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>are &s;uffered to tran&s;late the poy&s;on of Hereticks, and to drink to all Nations out of the Cup of</HI> Babylon.</P>
<P>There cannot &s;urely be found a more remarkable badge, or token, to be publickly and univer&s;ally known by, than this <HI>mark in the mouth</HI> of the Bea&s;t, compared with the name of a <HI>Roman,</HI> that every one that enters him&s;elf into their Commu|nion mu&s;t li&s;t him&s;elf under. 'Tis as manife&s;t and publick a
<PB N="277" REF="171"> mark to know them by in their mixtures with other Commu|nions, as the Badges of the Order are to di&s;tingui&s;h <HI>the Knights of Maltha,</HI> in all places of the World where they are. And the name and number of the name here mentioned, is que&s;ti|onle&s;s &s;uch a manife&s;t and remarkable name, <HI>as all the World may take notice of,</HI> becau&s;e it is to be received by all men; and chiefly becau&s;e all the re&s;t of the Characters of the Bea&s;t are of the &s;ame <HI>General,</HI> and <HI>Publick</HI> cognizance. And one may well que&s;tion the truth of the Application of any of the Characters of &s;o univer&s;al a Rule, as that of the Bea&s;t is found to be, which is not applied to &s;omething that is very &s;ignal, and ma|nife&s;t to the &s;en&s;es of all the World.</P>
<P>It is no manner of con&s;iderable objection again&s;t this, That the true word in the <HI>Greek</HI> is <GAP DESC="foreign"> with an <HI>Iota</HI> only: For nothing is more ordinary than to <NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg">The &s;ame Author &s;hows, That <HI>Latinos</HI> is to be read with an <HI>ei</HI> <Q>Dip|thong, and quotes <HI>Mekertius,</HI> who &s;ays, That the indifferent Vowels, or <HI>Vocales ancipites,</HI> are u&s;ed by the Ancient <HI>Greeks</HI> to be doubled in the pronunciation (or to be made long like Dipthongs) and cites <HI>Augu&s;tinus de Numi&s;m.</HI> and <HI>Lip&s;ius de Antiqu&acirc; Pronunciatione, Cap.</HI> 8. who there &s;hows, that the <HI>Romans</HI> formerly did write <HI>I Vowel</HI> by <HI>ei</HI> Dip|thongs.</Q></NOTE> u&s;e <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>Dipthong</HI> for <HI>Iota,</HI> when it is a long Vowel. <HI>Irenaeus</HI> his acceptation of it in that way, is an unque&s;tionable Authority for it. For he was one of the <HI>Greek</HI> Fathers. And it is a very &s;trange &s;lighty ex|ception that <HI>Grotius</HI> does make to this, as if this were no|thing <NOTE PLACE="marg">Re&s;pon&s;. de An|tichri&s;to.</NOTE> but the u&s;ual mi&s;take of Stone-cutters; whereas we &s;ee nothing more ordinary among&s;t the old <NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg">The &s;ame Author &s;hows, That <HI>Latinos</HI> is to be read with an <HI>ei</HI> <Q>Dip|thong, and quotes <HI>Mekertius,</HI> who &s;ays, That the indifferent Vowels, or <HI>Vocales ancipites,</HI> are u&s;ed by the Ancient <HI>Greeks</HI> to be doubled in the pronunciation (or to be made long like Dipthongs) and cites <HI>Augu&s;tinus de Numi&s;m.</HI> and <HI>Lip&s;ius de Antiqu&acirc; Pronunciatione, Cap.</HI> 8. who there &s;hows, that the <HI>Romans</HI> formerly did write <HI>I Vowel</HI> by <HI>ei</HI> Dip|thongs.</Q></NOTE> <HI>Latin</HI> Poets, in imitation of the <HI>Greeks;</HI> Or, however it would be but the taking of the word <HI>Latinos</HI> after the Ancient way of the <HI>Latins.</HI></P>
<P>The Fal&s;e Prophet's puni&s;hment of tho&s;e who had not the mark or name of the Bea&s;t, is ju&s;t the &s;ame with <NOTE N="z" PLACE="marg">The effect of the Papal Excommunications for this purpo&s;e, does ap|pear from the Bull of Pope <HI>Martin</HI> the 5th. in confirmation of the Council of <HI>Con&s;tance,</HI> and to be found at the end of it,&mdash;<Q>Which commands all Emperours, Princes, Lords, and all Civil Magi&s;trates, as well as Eccle|&s;ia&s;tical, to expell all Hereticks out of their Territories, not to &s;uffer them to make Contracts, or to exerci&s;e any kind of Merchandize among&s;t them.</Q></NOTE> the Pa|pal-Excommunications: For the hindering them from the Market, or <HI>from buying and &s;elling,</HI> was one of the effects of the Excommunications of the <HI>Jews.</HI></P>
<PB N="278" REF="172">
<PB N="279" REF="172">
<PB N="280" REF="173">
<PB N="281" REF="173">
<PB N="282" REF="174">
<PB N="283" REF="174">
<PB N="284" REF="175">
<PB N="285" REF="175">
<PB N="286" REF="176">
<PB N="287" REF="176">
<PB N="288" REF="177">
<PB N="289" REF="177">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="290" REF="178">
<HEAD>CHAP. VI. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>&V;nder the name of the Bea&s;t, is comprehended all his under-Agents in the &s;ame de&s;ign. How the</HI> ten Kings give their Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t. <HI>How the Cha|racter of</HI> &s;peaking like the Dragon, <HI>can agree with a Chri&s;tian Bi&s;hop: It cannot be any thing el&s;e.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE particular in&s;tances explained in the former Chapter, do clearly &s;how, that the exerci&s;e of the Power of the fal&s;e Prophet, does in all the parts of it regard the Bea&s;t, as the principal concern of his de&s;ign.</P>
<P><HI>The Wor&s;hip,</HI> that he promotes, is the <HI>Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t. The Image</HI> that he cau&s;es to be made, is an Image made in honour of the Bea&s;t it &s;elf: And the <HI>Wor&s;hip</HI> that is given to it, is becau&s;e of its being the Image of that Bea&s;t <HI>that was deadly wounded, and was healed again.</HI> And the <HI>mark, name,</HI> and <HI>number of the name,</HI> is the name of the Bea&s;t, by which all Men were to own them&s;elves the peculiar &s;laves of the Bea&s;t: And this is no more than what the Character of that Power, which the fal&s;e Prophet did exerci&s;e in all the&s;e ways, does plainly intimate to us; for it is &s;aid to be the Power of the Bea&s;t it &s;elf, <HI>ex|erci&s;ed hefore him:</HI> And therefore mu&s;t the exerci&s;e of it be on|ly upon his account; and tho&s;e that were employed in it, were therefore but his Mini&s;ters, and In&s;truments in it.</P>
<P>All which does &s;ignifie to us, That the <HI>Supremacy of the Pope, the Infallibility of the Church of</HI> Rome, <HI>the blind Submi&s;&s;ion</HI> and Veneration that is paid to it, <HI>the taking the name of a</HI> Roman Catholick, <HI>the confining of all the publick Offices</HI> of Religion and Devotion to God, and of the lively Oracles of God, to the old <HI>Roman</HI> Language: That all the&s;e things are done in honour of the Univer&s;al Imperial Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> or of the Em|pire of the City of <HI>Rome;</HI> and that in the time of the Impe|rial Authority over <HI>Rome</HI> re&s;tored by <HI>Ju&s;tinian:</HI> And therefore are all the&s;e things &s;ignified to be the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, un|der the la&s;t Ruling Head; becau&s;e it is <HI>not a Civil</HI> honour that is given to this Empire, and the Head of it; But the giving
<PB N="291" REF="178"> them the <HI>Prerogative of Almighty God,</HI> the Power of &s;etting up a Spiritual Authority, which &s;hall give Law to the Con&s;ci|ences of Men, according to their own will and plea&s;ure, and &s;hall have the Spirit of God confined to their Arbitrary pro|ceedings; and the Cur&s;es of God to di&s;po&s;e of at their will, again&s;t all that di&s;&s;ent from them.</P>
<P>The Bea&s;t therefore is the final Object of all the Wor&s;hip <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> and Honour that is given: and therefore does generally com|prehend in it all the under-Actors and In&s;truments in this De|&s;ign, where he is mentioned alone.</P>
<P>Thus ln the <HI>17th.</HI> Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> there is no men|tion of <HI>the fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> or <HI>of the Image,</HI> but only of the Bea&s;t, and of the magnificent appearance of his Empire under the name of <HI>Babylon.</HI> And therefore <HI>by the Bea&s;t</HI> mu&s;t there be un|der&s;tood all his Mini&s;ters and In&s;truments joyned with him, ac|cording to the nature of the &s;everal Characters that he is joyned with.</P>
<P>As in the time of the <HI>Mayres</HI> of the Palace in <HI>France, by the name of the King,</HI> mu&s;t many times be under&s;tood the will of tho&s;e <HI>Mayres</HI> to the prejudice of the Royal Authority, becau&s;e it was the King's Power that was exerci&s;ed by them: And all the Honour and Obedience that they had, was upon the account of their being authorized by him. So al&s;o do the Actions and Honour of the <HI>fal&s;e Prophet,</HI> and <HI>the Image,</HI> go under <HI>the name</HI> of the Bea&s;t in that <HI>Chapter,</HI> tho in reality they have been much to the diminution of the Imperial Authority.</P>
<P>It is enough to qualifie them, to be comprehended under the name of <HI>the Bea&s;t,</HI> that they concur with the Bea&s;t in his great de&s;ign of making all the World to &s;ubmit to an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Authority of his own Creating, as the acknowledgment of the Honour of his Empire. For all the Wor&s;hip that is here|by promoted, is, The Honour &s;hown to the Imperial Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which is &s;ubmitted to as the only ground for any hopes of Salvation: And that not upon the account of its being the <HI>Catholick Church of Chri&s;t,</HI> but for that which is at pre&s;ent a contradiction to it, <HI>viz.</HI> for being the <HI>Roman-Catholick Church.</HI></P>
<P>Wherefore, when the ten Kings are &s;aid <HI>to give their Power,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 13.</NOTE> <HI>and Strength, and Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t,</HI> it is to be under&s;tood of their concurrence to advance the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion, as the Impe|rial
<PB N="292" REF="179"> Religion of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which was fir&s;t &s;et up, and pro|moted by the Imperial Authority, and &s;o &s;till continues to be defended, and protected by it; and therein does the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t more eminently appear, becau&s;e of the &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion of crowned Heads to it, who have no Superior upon Earth, but God alone. For it is very difficult to under&s;tand how ten Kings can be &s;uppo&s;ed to be <HI>of one mind,</HI> and <HI>to agree to give their Kingdoms</HI> to the Wor&s;hip of any Power upon Earth, but only in this way of an Uniformity in a common Religion, which is &s;et up by the Will, and to the Honour of ano|ther.</P>
<P>And here it is to be ob&s;erved, how exactly the Prophecy, and the Event, do agree with one another in re&s;pect of the Or|der, which is ob&s;erved in the Text. The Bea&s;t is de&s;cribed <HI>as beginning</HI> the Scene fir&s;t, and &s;etting the de&s;ign on foot: And the fal&s;e prophet and the Image come in afterwards to <HI>perfect</HI> and accompli&s;h it; which was very punctually verified by the beginning of the Univer&s;al Monarchy of the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> under the Imperial Authority, and the advancement of it into a perfect Tyranny by the <HI>Roman</HI> Hierarchy. So that after a while, the Fal&s;e-prophet &s;eems to take the power of the Bea&s;t out of his hands, and to exerci&s;e it before his face; and then the Bea&s;t had little to do him&s;elf in the management of it, and &s;eemed only to give Authority to what was done by others; which is al&s;o now manife&s;t from the common cour&s;e of the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Church in their proceedings again&s;t Hereticks. They judge, condemn, and pronounce &s;entence again&s;t them, and <HI>then deli|ver</HI> them over to the Secular power, who are <HI>the executioners of</HI> the Sentence. All that the Civil power does in it, is but to follow the commands of the Church, and to &s;trike the la&s;t &s;troke only, which is all that can make them be &s;aid to <HI>have an hand</HI> in it.</P>
<P>And th&ocirc; it mu&s;t be confe&s;&s;ed, that the Secular part in it, is that which does the mo&s;t effectually per&s;uade to the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t; yet it is plain, That the Church is the <HI>principal Agent</HI> in that al&s;o; becau&s;e they overawe the Civil Power into com|pliances with them, which does very naturally an&s;wer the power of the Image in the Prophecy, <HI>to cau&s;e</HI> all tho&s;e who would not wor&s;hip it, to be killed.</P>
<PB N="293" REF="179">
<P> The Fal&s;e-prophet is the Head of this Image, and &s;o is the chief manager of this Church-Tyranny; and therefore is it ac|cordingly &s;aid of him, That <HI>he &s;pake like a Dragon,</HI> or like that Red Dragon in the 12th Chapter ju&s;t before, and found to be the Devil raging again&s;t the followers of the Lamb.</P>
<P>If any one &s;hould que&s;tion, <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>COrnelius &agrave; Lapide, in c.</HI> 13. <HI>Apoc. v.</HI> 11. <Q>The Two Horns (accord|ing to <HI>Jo&s;ephus Aco&s;ta,</HI> l. 2. <HI>De temporibus Novi&s;&s;.</HI> c. 17.) are the <HI>En&s;igns of the Epi&s;copal Dignity,</HI> viz. <HI>the Mitre,</HI> or the <HI>Epi&s;copal Crown.</HI> It &s;hould &s;eem therefore by this, That this fal&s;e Prophet &s;hould be &s;ome <HI>Apo&s;tate Bi&s;hop,</HI> a great pretender to Religion.&mdash;It is <HI>not</HI> therefore the <HI>Mitre,</HI> but &s;ome <HI>Mitred Apo&s;tate</HI> that is here &s;et out, who &s;hall trea|cherou&s;ly abu&s;e the&s;e Horns of Chri&s;t <HI>(the Lamb)</HI> to propagate the Party of Antichri&s;t.<HI>&mdash;And before, when he had reckon'd up the &s;everal opi|nions about the</HI> 2<HI>d Bea&s;t,&mdash;</HI>In the fourth place, <HI>&s;ays he,</HI> the be&s;t opini|on is that of <HI>Irenaeus, Tertullian, Ribera, Viega,</HI> and others, who by this Bea&s;t under&s;tand &s;ome <HI>Eminent Pa&s;tor of the Church,</HI> the forerunner, and Preacher up of Antichri&s;t.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Viegas, in c.</HI> 13. <HI>Apoc. v.</HI> 11. after the mention of the opinion of others; But <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is,</HI> and <HI>Irenaeus,</HI> to me &s;eem to have been much more in the right, who under&s;tand by the 2d Bea&s;t, &s;ome <HI>Eminent Preacher,</HI> the <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="3 letters">erunner of Antichri&s;t; The Armour-bearer of Antichri&s;t, as <HI>Irenaeus.</HI></P></NOTE> whether &s;o dreadful a character of a Bea&s;t &s;peaking like a Dragon, or like the Devil, can belong to a Chri&s;tian Bi&s;hop of &s;o great eminency in the Church of Chri&s;t, as the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> is; he may ea&s;ily be &s;atisfied, if he con&s;iders, that by his de&s;cription he ought to be <HI>nothing le&s;s</HI> than &s;uch a per&s;on. For that he mu&s;t be the Head of a <HI>Roman</HI> Church extended over all the World, has been &s;hown from his Character of being a Church-Head over the &s;ame extent of dominion, that the Bea&s;t did Rule in. For he <HI>exerci&s;ed all the power of the Bea&s;t:</HI> And then, that he mu&s;t have the &s;how of the chief Head of the Chri&s;tian Church, appears from his having <HI>Two Horns like a Lamb.</HI> For the &s;ignification of <HI>a Lamb,</HI> all over the Book of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is nothing but the <HI>per&s;on of Chri&s;t.</HI> It would indeed have a more plain reference to the other men|tions of that word, if it were &s;aid, like <HI>THE</HI> Lamb. But we have <HI>Grotius</HI>'s Authority for it upon this place, which in Cri|tici&s;me is of the be&s;t account, when Impartial, That <HI>nothing is more ordinary in Scripture, then to</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ribera</HI> upon this place of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> after he had pleaded for the indefinite &s;ignification of, <GAP DESC="foreign">, from the ab&s;ence of the Article, concludes,&mdash;<Q>But yet this which I have &s;aid of Articles, is not al|ways ob&s;erved by the <HI>Greeks.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Alca&s;ar</HI> upon the &s;ame, <Q>The Article is wanting, and yet it is an allu&s;ion to the Lamb, <HI>Cap.</HI> 5.</Q></P></NOTE> <HI>omit the Article of reference be|fore a word, which &s;hould denote its relation to the former mentions of it,</HI> where yet the &s;en&s;e does &s;hew it to be nece&s;&s;ary to be under|&s;tood.</P>
<P>It appears then from the de&s;cription of him, that he mu&s;t be as it were <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Malvenda de Antichri&s;to,</HI> pag. 348. quotes <HI>Irenaeus</HI> for making Anti|chri&s;t a pretender to be Chri&s;t upon Earth. And <HI>Lactantius</HI> affirming, that he &s;hould fal&s;ly <HI>pretend</HI> him&s;elf <HI>to be Chri&s;t.</HI> And <HI>pag.</HI> 349. &s;ays, That it is the <HI>con&s;ent of the Fathers,</HI> That Antichri&s;t &s;hall take away Idols&mdash;<Q>And &s;hall &s;et him&s;elf up in the Temple of God, as <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes</HI> had his own Image put into the Temple at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> who yet Wor&s;hip|ped his own Country Gods, and obtruded them upon the <HI>Jews.</HI> He contends indeed, That the Temple of God, in which Antichri&s;t mu&s;t &s;it, is the Temple of <HI>Jeru&s;alem.</HI> But <HI>Pererius</HI> the Je&s;uit upon the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> quotes <HI>Theodoret, Dama&s;cene,</HI> and others of the Fathers, Interpret|ing it of the Chri&s;tian Church: For that, &s;ays he, is the only true Temple of God.</Q> And then Antichri&s;t mu&s;t be like Chri&s;t the Head of the Church.</P>
<P>And, pag. 351. <HI>Malvenda</HI> &s;hows how Antichri&s;t &s;hall pretend him&s;elf <Q>to be true God, according to the <HI>agreeing &s;en&s;e of the Fathers, viz.</HI></Q> As <HI>Nebuchadnezzar, Alexander</HI> the Great, and <HI>Julius Cae&s;ar;</HI> the latter of which did certainly do no more than order him&s;elf <HI>a like wor&s;hip</HI> with the gods. And <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> who is made the Type of Antichri&s;t, did &s;et up the Statue of <HI>Jupiter Olympius</HI> in the Temple, as well as his own: And is &s;aid by <HI>Malvenda,</HI> to have Con&s;ecrated the Temple of <HI>Je|ru&s;alem</HI> to <HI>Jupiter Olympius,</HI> and the Temple on Mount <HI>Gerizim</HI> to <HI>Ju|piter Ho&s;pitalis.</HI> It is not therefore nece&s;&s;ary, according to <HI>Malvenda,</HI> that Antichri&s;t &s;hould &s;et him&s;elf up as the one &s;upreme God, or Chri&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Irenaeus,</HI> pag. 483. <HI>Edit. Era&s;mi de Antichri&s;to.&mdash;</HI><Q>Of whom the Apo&s;tle in the 2d Epi&s;tle to the <HI>The&s;&s;alonians&mdash;</HI>He &s;hall &s;it in the Temple, en|endeavouring to &s;how him&s;elf to be Chri&s;t.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Bellarmin</HI> al&s;o &s;ays, <HI>Lib.</HI> 1. <HI>de Pontif. cap.</HI> 1. <Q>That by the <HI>common agree|ment of all Chri&s;tians,</HI> Antichri&s;t is under&s;tood to be &s;ome <HI>Eminent</HI> Fal&s;e <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI></Q></P></NOTE> a <HI>Vice-Chri&s;t,</HI> or pretend to be the Vicar of Chri&s;t, which is the &s;ame, as both of them are al&s;o the &s;ame with an <HI>Antichri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>Be&s;ides, this Bea&s;t thus de&s;cribed in one place with <HI>Two Horns like a Lamb,</HI> in the other Chapters is called the <HI>Fal&s;e Prophet;</HI> To acquaint us, that the Horns of the Lamb were but the out|ward &s;how of the Chri&s;tian Spirit. So that if we put the&s;e two Characters of him together, and then add the other of his <HI>&s;peaking like a Dragon,</HI> and con&s;ider that the name of a <HI>Dragon</HI> is very ordinary in this Book, and that it every where el&s;e relates to the repre&s;entation of the Devil in the <HI>12th</HI> Chapter ju&s;t be|fore this, as <HI>a raging Red Bloody Dragon;</HI> What can more mani|fe&s;tly denote him to be <HI>A Fal&s;e Prophet in Sheeps cloathing, but in|wardly</HI>
<PB N="294" REF="180"> <HI>a Ravenous wolf?</HI> How could this have been more clearly expre&s;&s;ed in a Prophecy, where <HI>the Lamb</HI> and <HI>the Dragon</HI> are in a very peculiar manner, and very commonly re&s;trained to &s;igni|fie <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> and <HI>the Devil?</HI> And what could more openly &s;how us the difference betwixt <HI>the Dragon</HI> in the 12th Chapter, and <HI>the Bea&s;t</HI> in the 13th. th&ocirc; both enemies to the Chri&s;tian Church in the &s;ame Seven Headed, Ten Horned Empire, or better &s;atisfy us why there needed two different figures of Dragon and Bea&s;t, to &s;ignify tho&s;e two kind of Ho&s;tilities again&s;t the Church of Chri&s;t?</P>
<P>For by this it appears, that the <HI>Bea&s;t and the Fal&s;e Prophet</HI> were to be in outward appearance the mo&s;t directly contrary to <HI>the Dragon,</HI> that could be, and even to look like Chri&s;t him&s;elf; and therefore that this Fal&s;e Prophet mu&s;t really be &s;uch an one of that Kind, as our Saviour calls <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P>See <HI>Malvenda Not. praeced.</HI> And the Fathers <HI>agree&mdash;</HI><Q>That Anti|chri&s;t &s;hall take away the Wor&s;hip of fal&s;e Gods. See <HI>Irenaeus, Not. Praeced.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Arethas, in V.</HI> 11. <HI>c.</HI> 13. <HI>Apoc.</HI> Two Horns of the Lamb&mdash;<Q>be|cau&s;e he &s;hall feign him&s;elf to be kind and benign, that he may de|ceive.</Q></P>
<P><Q><HI>Idem, in v.</HI> 14. He doth Miracles, That Antichri&s;t might be thought to be Chri&s;t.</Q></P></NOTE> a <HI>Fal&s;e Chri&s;t,</HI> or a fal&s;e pretender to be his Deputy, and Vicar upon Earth; The Cha|racter of which kind of <HI>Fal&s;e Chri&s;ts, and Fal&s;e Prophets,</HI> in <HI>being able to deceive the very elect</HI> by their great Wonders and Signs, is ju&s;t the &s;ame with the power of this eminent Fal&s;e Prophet <HI>for doing great wonders</HI> al&s;o, <HI>for deceiving all tho&s;e that dwell upon</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 14.</NOTE> <HI>earth by the Miracles which he had power to do.</HI></P>
<P>Wherefore the <HI>&s;peaking like a Dragon</HI> in this Fal&s;e Prophet, with the appearance of a <HI>Lamb,</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignify his &s;peaking or commanding under the vizard of the Vicar of Chri&s;t, the &s;ame kind of acts of Cruelty and Tyranny for an Idolatrous wor|&s;hip, which the Red Dragon was active in again&s;t <HI>the Woman</HI> in the Chapter ju&s;t before. The profe&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;tianity is now we &s;ee &s;o far from excu&s;ing the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> from the Cha|racter of the Fal&s;e Prophet, That it <HI>is nece&s;&s;ary</HI> for him to be a <HI>more eminent</HI> Profe&s;&s;or of that Religion, than any other per&s;on in the Church, to be capable of having it applied to him.</P>
<P>And the enforcing of fal&s;e-wor&s;hip by all the Arts of Cru|elty, under the pretence of the Authority of Chri&s;t, does therefore fill up the whole Character that is given, of his having the Horns of a Lamb, and &s;peaking like the Red Dragon; for nothing does more re&s;emble the nature of the Devil, than An|tichri&s;tian Tyranny under the Mask of Piety.</P>
<P>Well therefore may the Dragon be &s;aid <HI>to give his power to the</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 2, 3.</NOTE> <HI>Bea&s;t,</HI> &s;ince the Devil may be &s;afely enough &s;uppo&s;ed to in&s;pire this de&s;ign of carrying on this Adoration of the <HI>Roman</HI> Power,
<PB N="295" REF="180"> and of that Church, by force of Arms, and &s;anguinary Laws, like the Reign of the <HI>Red Dragon</HI> in the time of Heathen per|&s;ecution de&s;cribed in the Chapter ju&s;t before.</P>
<P>By this may be under&s;tood the true meaning of the <HI>ca&s;ting</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 9.</NOTE> <HI>down of the Dragon with the Seven Heads and the Ten Horns, out of Heaven,</HI> in the 12th Chapter. For as that Figure has the proper mark of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire in the Seven Heads; &s;o mu&s;t it be the Devil in&s;piring the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire to bloody Acts again&s;t the followers of the Lamb, who are &s;aid to <HI>have overcome him by not</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 11.</NOTE> <HI>loving their lives unto the Death:</HI> Wherefore the ca&s;ting down of the Dragon out of Heaven, can &s;ignify nothing el&s;e, but the mor|tifying of the Pagan Power again&s;t the Chri&s;tian Church, after the conver&s;ion of the Imperial Head to the Chri&s;tian Reli|gion.</P>
<P>For &s;ince the Bea&s;t is found to ari&s;e with <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> and the fall of the <HI>Roman</HI> Dragon is in the Text de&s;cribed to be <HI>before</HI> the time of the Bea&s;t, and yet to be <HI>after</HI> the time of St. <HI>John;</HI> the Dragon can be no other raging power of the Devil Reign|ing at <HI>Rome,</HI> and Tyrannizing over the Chri&s;tian Church, but only the Devil raging in the Heathen Emperors before the Con|ver&s;ion of <HI>Con&s;tantine.</HI> From the time of <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> to the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> there was no &s;uch <HI>Roman</HI> Tyranny exerci&s;ed again&s;t the Chri&s;tians, that had the lea&s;t &s;how of &s;o dreadful an appearance; and what&s;oever any profe&s;&s;ed Chri&s;tian Emperors might do in that kind, mu&s;t be <HI>under the appearance of the qua|lities of the Lamb,</HI> and &s;o be another Bea&s;t different from the Dragon; It is certain, that at this appearance of Chri&s;tianity upon the Imperial Throne, this Prophecy was apprehended to be <HI>&s;o plainly fulfilled,</HI> That <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI>'s Effigies was &s;et up in pub|lick over his Palace-Gate, trampling upon a wounded Dragon, <HI>which,</HI> &s;ays <HI>Eu&s;ebius, was done to &s;ignifie his conque&s;ts of tho&s;e Ty|rants</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 3. <HI>de Vita Con&s;tan|tini.</HI></NOTE> <HI>that oppre&s;&s;ed and per&s;ecuted the Church, at the in&s;tigation of the Devil, in allu&s;ion to the Books of the Prophets, where the Devil thus raging again&s;t the Church, is called a Dragon.</HI> And <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> him|&s;elf <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Socrat. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 6.</NOTE> in his Epi&s;tle to <HI>Eu&s;ebius</HI> for the repairing of the Churches, calls his conque&s;t of <HI>Licinius,</HI> who was the la&s;t of the per&s;e|cuting Heathen Emperors, <HI>The foiling of the Dragon,</HI> and <HI>the re|&s;toring of Chri&s;tian Liberty to all Men.</HI></P>
<P>By the &s;ame rea&s;on, what&s;oever is expre&s;&s;ed to follow the Dragons fall, and to be before the ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, mu&s;t be un|der&s;tood
<PB N="296" REF="181"> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire turned Chri&s;tian before the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian;</HI> and therefore the Dragons <HI>ca&s;ting a flood of water out of his mouth to carry away the Woman</HI> with it, mu&s;t be under|&s;tood <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 12. 15.</NOTE> of &s;ome great inundation of multitudes of Pagan people upon the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, that was able to have carried away, and to have buried the true Church in it. For <HI>waters</HI> are in|terpreted to &s;ignifie multitudes of people in the 17th Chapter; <HI>A Flood</HI> therefore mu&s;t denote <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Victorinus in v.</HI> 15. <HI>cap.</HI> 12. <HI>Apoc.</HI> <Q><HI>The Waters</HI> which he ca&s;t out, do &s;ignify the Army that followed him.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Ribera</HI> on the &s;ame place; <Q>Interpreters <HI>agree,</HI> That by the <HI>Waters,</HI> Per|&s;ecution (that is, <HI>of multitudes)</HI> is under&s;tood.&mdash;The Devil &s;ent an Army to Per&s;ecute the Saints that fled into the Wilderne&s;s. <HI>Sabo Tyconius&mdash;</HI>He ca&s;t out <HI>Waters</HI> after her&mdash;That is, the Violence of Per&s;ecutors.<HI>&mdash;And afterwards&mdash;</HI>It &s;ignifies an Army of Per&s;e|cutors.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Andreas, Primatius, Haymo,</HI> and <HI>Ausbertus,</HI> &s;ay the &s;ame, and quote that of <HI>P&s;alm</HI> 122.&mdash;<Q>When Men ro&s;e up again&s;t me.</Q> To which may be added many other places in the <HI>P&s;alms</HI> concerning the Floods, and Water-floods.</P></NOTE> &s;ome very extraordinary over|flow of &s;uch multitudes; And was there ever any thing more exactly an&s;werable to this, than that prodigious inundation of barbarous Nations over all the We&s;tern Empire, pre&s;ently after the full accompli&s;hment of the Victory of Chri&s;tianity over Heatheni&s;m about the times of <HI>Theodo&s;ius?</HI> St. <HI>Jerome</HI> de&s;cribes tho&s;e times, with the characters of the la&s;t di&s;mal &s;tate of things, which &s;hould be the forerunners of the end of the World.</P>
<P><HI>The &s;wallowing up of this flood by the Earth, to help the Woman,</HI> can <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 16.</NOTE> thereupon be nothing el&s;e, but the Leagues that were made with the&s;e people, with the &s;everal allotments of habitation to them within the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as one people with the <HI>Romans;</HI> and their entrance thereupon into the Church. And <HI>thus</HI> comes the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire to appear <HI>with Ten Kingdoms</HI> in it, &s;hown by the <HI>Ten Horns;</HI> and this was <HI>the helping of the Woman,</HI> becau&s;e the Church by this got her freedom and peace, and gained the&s;e <HI>Barbarians</HI> to her.</P>
<P>But the Dragon is &s;aid to <HI>be &s;till in great fury again&s;t the Woman,</HI> and therefore <HI>went to make War with the remnant of her &s;eed, which</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 12. 17.</NOTE> <HI>keep the Commandments of God, and have the Te&s;timony of Je&s;us Chri&s;t;</HI> where we may ob&s;erve a plain di&s;tinction made betwixt <HI>the Seed of the Woman:</HI> The <HI>Warr,</HI> that the Dragon makes, is with that part of her Seed, <HI>which keep the Commandments of God,</HI> and <HI>have the Te&s;timony,</HI> or are the Witne&s;&s;es or Martyrs of Je&s;us Chri&s;t; which intimates, that the <HI>Re&s;t of her Seed</HI> &s;hould de|part from the Commandments of God, and from the truth of the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P>By this we have a new &s;cene opened about the enmity of the Dragon again&s;t the Church; The Time of it is after the Settle|ment of the Divi&s;ions of the Empire in tho&s;e Kings of the Barbarians, &s;ignified by the <HI>&s;wallowing up of the great flood by the earth,</HI> That is, after the ri&s;e of the Ten Kings in the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire; and the party again&s;t whom this War is carried on,
<PB N="297" REF="181"> are the Godly Seed of the Woman; not again&s;t all her Seed, but again&s;t tho&s;e <HI>only, who keep God's Commandments,</HI> and are the <HI>Witne&s;&s;es</HI> or the Martyrs <HI>of Je&s;us,</HI> or as they are el&s;ewhere called, <HI>The Witne&s;&s;es in Sackcloth.</HI></P>
<P>How this was brought to pa&s;s, That which does immediate|ly follow this de&s;ign of the Dragon, does inform us: For im|mediately upon it, appears <HI>a Bea&s;t</HI> with all the &s;ame Emblems of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, that the Dragon had; and to him the Dra|gon <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 13. 1.</NOTE> is &s;aid <HI>to give his Power, and his Seat,</HI> and <HI>great Authority;</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">v. 2.</NOTE> And thus does the Dragon fulfill the intention that he had ju&s;t before, to War with the cho&s;en Remnant of the Womans Seed: He does not appear him&s;elf in it, but in&s;pires another &s;et up in his place to do it. By which it is evidently &s;ignified, That this new war with the dutiful part of the Womans Seed, is not managed by any <HI>Roman</HI> Power, which is openly known to be the profe&s;&s;ed Enemy of God, and of the Chri&s;tian Religion, as that Government of the Empire was, which had the open ap|pearance of the Devil's management in it; And if it were not <HI>&s;uch a Power</HI> that &s;hould appear like an open profe&s;&s;ed Enemy of the Chri&s;tian Religion, it mu&s;t be <HI>&s;uch</HI> as mu&s;t profe&s;s that Re|ligion; and out of a pretended zeal to it, exerci&s;e all the Ty|ranny of the Devil, or Dragon, again&s;t the true profe&s;&s;ors of it. For all the great bu&s;ine&s;s of the Bea&s;t, is Religious wor&s;hip; and if that Religion be not profe&s;&s;ed enmity to the Chri&s;tian (be|cau&s;e that would make it the open &s;how of the Dragon, as it was before his fall) It mu&s;t then be a zealous outward profe&s;|&s;ion of the Chri&s;tian Religion, to per&s;ecute and to de&s;troy the true maintainers of it.</P>
<P>This does determine the time of the fir&s;t &s;ettlement of the Woman in the Wilderne&s;s, for the &s;pace of a Time, Times and an half. For th&ocirc; it be &s;aid, <HI>Chap.</HI> 12. 6. That She fled in|to the Wilderne&s;s; yet it is not there &s;aid, that &s;he was &s;etled there; but only, that &s;he <HI>had a place prepared</HI> for her there, to be <HI>fed for One Thou&s;and two Hundred and Sixty days.</HI> And be|&s;ides, after many great Actions intervening, &s;he is &s;aid at the 14th Ver&s;e to be but then in a condition to fly into the Wilderne&s;s; and after &s;he was flying thither, the Dragon ca&s;t out a flood after her, and hindred her &s;ettlement there, till that was &s;wal|lowed up; and therefore did her Time, Times, and Half-time, begin but ju&s;t at the &s;ame time with the Dragon's per&s;ecuting
<PB N="298" REF="182"> <HI>the remnant of her Seed,</HI> which was ju&s;t at the fir&s;t ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, and &s;o confirms the Synchroni&s;m of the Woman and the Bea&s;t for their whole time.</P>
<P>We are therefore now to enquire from the Hi&s;tory of the Chri&s;tian Church, how it can be &s;aid, that <HI>from the time of Ju|&s;tinian,</HI> all the true Profe&s;&s;ors of the Chri&s;tian Faith, were <HI>forced</HI> by Tyrannical u&s;age to wor&s;hip the Will of the Chri&s;tian <HI>Roman</HI> Emperors about matters of Religion, thereby to fit the Cha|racters here given to the Bea&s;t, <HI>to the Imperial Head re&s;tored in the We&s;t?</HI></P>
<P>And thus we find, that at the Time that the Chri&s;tian Church (The Woman) was &s;ecured in the Two Imperial Seats of the Ea&s;t and We&s;t (the two Wings of a great Eagle) from all the inundations of Pagan people (or from the face of the Serpent) The Devil did then &s;et up per&s;ecution in the <HI>Roman</HI> Throne, again&s;t the true and faithful Members of the Chri&s;tian Church, (The Remnant of the Seed of the Woman, which keep the Commandments of God) while &s;he her &s;elf was in the Wilderne&s;s, or in a place of &s;ecurity.</P>
<PB N="299" REF="182">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="300" REF="183">
<PB N="301" REF="183">
<HEAD>CHAP. VII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The particular point of the fir&s;t date of the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, enquired after in order. The fir&s;t conception and progre&s;s of the chief Malignity of the Bea&s;t. It entred with</HI> Theodo&s;ius, <HI>and was &s;etled by</HI> Ju&s;tinian: <HI>And appears to have been the enforcing of &V;niver&s;al Con|formity by Penalties able to make the generality of the World to comply again&s;t their Con&s;ciences.</HI> Ju&s;tinian<HI>'s peculiar Talent in the &s;etling this Method for Con|formity.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>FRom the former Account of the over-ruling Authority of the Chri&s;tian Emperors in all Church-Affairs, and of the great veneration which they had for the Councils a&s;&s;embled un|der them, it is obvious for any one to conclude, That they lay very open to the danger of requiring <HI>Divine Honours</HI> to be given them. For this mu&s;t needs make them very apt to command many things (which God has left free and undetermined) to be received for Points of Faith nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation, as <HI>in&s;pired by the Holy Gho&s;t</HI> in Council. And it is evident, that in &s;uch a ca&s;e, the will of him that enjoins &s;uch things, is taken for the Will of God; and &s;o he may very well be &s;aid to require the Honour of God to be given to his own will.</P>
<P>One cannot but think it very probable upon this account, that &s;uch a kind of Wor&s;hip, as is called the <HI>Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t,</HI> was &s;ometimes enjoined before the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, &s;ince there were many <HI>Erroneous</HI> Councils before that time; And, <HI>it may be,</HI> many things in <HI>Orthodox</HI> Councils made to be In&s;pirations of the Holy Gho&s;t, and pre&s;&s;ed upon the Con&s;ciences of men, <HI>as Di|vine Oracles,</HI> nece&s;&s;arily to be obeyed, which were but the mere Arbitrary Injunctions of men.</P>
<P>But yet, though the &s;ame kind of Wor&s;hip might have been commanded before his appearance, yet it could not be the <HI>wor|&s;hip of the Bea&s;t,</HI> till it was the owning of the <HI>Roman Authority</HI> for the Will of God <HI>in tho&s;e particular Circum&s;tances</HI> of Antichri&s;tian
<PB N="302" REF="184"> Idolatry, and Tyranny, in which it is de&s;cribed to be all over the Prophecy; And this it came not to be, till it was the wor|&s;hip of the la&s;t Ruling Head, in the mid&s;t of the &s;everal divided Kingdoms of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, according to the de&s;cription of it in the &s;how of the Figure: <HI>Chap.</HI> 13. 17.</P>
<P>And be&s;ides, there is one <HI>peculiar circum&s;tance</HI> in the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, which was never fulfilled till the time of his Reign; and that is, an <HI>actual conformity of all the whole world</HI> to it. How peremptory &s;oever the command for that Wor&s;hip might be be|fore, yet it will appear, that it could not long obtain among&s;t all tho&s;e that were of a contrary judgment, <HI>before the &s;etled e&s;ta|bli&s;hment</HI> of it at the new return of the Imperial Government in the <HI>We&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>The rea&s;on that I give for this, is, becau&s;e the Laws and Commands of the Emperors for Uniformity, <HI>either</HI> had not be|fore that time any penalties in them &s;ufficient to make <HI>all the world</HI> to comply with them, <HI>or</HI> were hindred from any <HI>&s;etled</HI> continued <HI>execution</HI> of them. The Penalties annexed to their Laws for Conformity, were generally either nothing but <HI>Anathe|ma's,</HI> which Di&s;&s;enters would not value, <HI>or</HI> deprivations of Cler|gy-men, and Military men; And the pulling down, and con|fi&s;cating the publick Meeting-place, <HI>or</HI> prohibitions to <HI>all</HI> men a|gain&s;t coming into the Imperial City: And there was no force in the&s;e Penalties for an Univer&s;al Conformity; And the Com|motions in the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire would not allow the other &s;evere and more general Penalties to have any con&s;tant effect.</P>
<P>We &s;ee <HI>Honorius</HI> &s;oon after, alledging this rea&s;on for his re|newing his Commands for the terrifying of Hereticks, <HI>viz.</HI> <Q>be|cau&s;e he was then delivered from the fear of <HI>Attalus</HI> the Ty|rant, and <HI>Alaricus</HI> the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> King. Now, &s;ays he, that <HI>the Oracle</HI> is taken away, by whom they were encouraged to the exerci&s;e of their Heretical Super&s;tition, Let all the Enemies of the Holy Law know, that they &s;hall be puni&s;hed with Bani&s;h|ment, and al&s;o to blood, if they will dare to meet &s;till in pub|lick. <HI>Hieron. Rubeus. Hi&s;tor. Ravennat. lib.</HI> 2. <HI>pag.</HI> 78.</Q></P>
<P>Wherefore it can never be thought that there was any thing of this General Conformity in the 4th, or 5th Centuries, <HI>either</HI> in the Reign of the Orthodox, or <HI>Arrian</HI> Emperors. <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> &s;eems to have gone as high in his Commands as mo&s;t that came after him, till the time of <HI>Theodo&s;ius:</HI> We have <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">SEE Note the 8th. on the 2d Chapter, <HI>Socrates,</HI> l. 1. c. 6.</NOTE> in his Edicts,
<PB N="303" REF="184"> and Epi&s;tles, all the great apprehen&s;ions that the World had of General Councils, <HI>as immediately in&s;pired</HI> by the Holy Gho&s;t, <HI>as the only</HI> Warrants for Unity and Uniformity, and <HI>as ve&s;ted with a power</HI> of denouncing the Cur&s;es of God upon Di&s;&s;enters; We find there <HI>the &s;uppre&s;&s;ion</HI> of all their <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Eu&s;eb. de Vita Con&s;tantini.</HI> l. 3. c. 63. To the Hereticks&mdash;<Q>We Enact, and Command by this Law, That none of you &s;hall dare hereaf|ter to meet at Conventicles&mdash;and that all tho&s;e places, where you were wont to keep clo&s;e meetings, be demoli&s;hed; provided al&s;o, that you &s;hall not keep any&mdash;meetings, either in publick, or in private Hou&s;es, or in remote places. <HI>c.</HI> 64. And threatned their maintainers with puni&s;h|ments.</Q></NOTE> Conventicles, <HI>the depo&s;ing</HI> of di&s;&s;enting Bi&s;hops; and which &s;eems more terrible than any thing that we find in his Succe&s;&s;ors, <HI>the</HI> <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><HI>Socrates, l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 6. <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> to the Bi&s;hops and People&mdash;<Q>For as &s;oon as he be taken, our plea&s;ure is, That his Head be &s;tricken off his Shoulders. <HI>Sozom. l.</HI> 1. <HI>c.</HI> 21.</Q></NOTE> <HI>penalty of death</HI> threatned to tho&s;e that &s;hould conceal any of <HI>Arrius</HI>'s Books, and not deliver them up to be publickly burned; but there was nothing in all this, that did oblige <HI>the generality</HI> of the <HI>Arrians</HI> to <HI>Church Com|munion.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Laws</HI> of <HI>Theodo&s;ius</HI> were indeed &s;omething more &s;evere, and of more force for a general conformity <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Cod. Ju&s;tinian. lib.</HI> 1. <HI>de Summa Trinitat. Theodo&s;. Edict. ad pop. Con&s;tan|tinop.</HI> We will have all the people of our Empire be of that Religion, which St. <HI>Peter</HI> the Apo&s;tle delivered to the <HI>Romans;</HI> and which it is manife&s;t that <HI>Pope Dama&s;us</HI> does now follow, and <HI>Peter</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Alexandria.&mdash;</HI>And we command tho&s;e that follow this Law, to take the Name of <HI>Catho|lick Chri&s;tian</HI> upon them;&mdash;and the re&s;t, only the name of Hereticks&mdash;we decree &s;hall be cha&s;ti&s;ed by <HI>a Divine Vengeance fir&s;t</HI> (by Excommunica|tion) and <HI>afterwards</HI> al&s;o, by the Revenge of the motions of our own mind, as Heaven &s;hall incline us.</P>
<P>And all over the <HI>Theodo&s;ian Code. Tit. de Haereticis,</HI> there are nothing but Laws, either for pulling down the Meeting-hou&s;es of Hereticks, or for puni&s;hing them, and that even to Bani&s;hment. So <HI>Cod. Theodo&s;. l.</HI> 15. <HI>Tit.</HI> 5. <HI>de Haereticis, l.</HI> 16. <HI>Tit.</HI> 4. <HI>de his, qui &s;upra Religionem contendunt. Lex &s;e|cunda, item lex tertia, c.</HI> 67. <HI>de Haereticis, l.</HI> 21. <HI>item l.</HI> 26. And Inqui&s;itors appointed, <HI>l.</HI> 9, 13, 15, 31, 32, 35, 52. <HI>Cod. de Haereticis.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Socrates, l.</HI> 3. <HI>c.</HI> 4. The Emperour <HI>Ba&s;ilicus</HI>'s Edict there, does mention and enforce <HI>Theodo&s;ius</HI>'s Laws, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>Laicks be puni&s;hed with Bani&s;hment and Confi&s;cation of Goods, and Bi&s;hops with Deprivation.</HI></P></NOTE> to the <HI>Roman</HI> Church. But what&s;oever force the&s;e Laws might have, yet we may be &s;ure, that the inundation of the Barbarous Nations (who <NOTE PLACE="marg">Baron. <HI>Anno</HI> 585.</NOTE> were generally <HI>Arrians)</HI> all over the whole Empire a few years after, mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily put an end to that General Unifor|mity.</P>
<P><HI>Socrates,</HI> who lived in tho&s;e times, does indeed tell us, That <NOTE PLACE="marg">Socrat. <HI>l.</HI> 5. <HI>c.</HI> 2. 4. 20.</NOTE> as <HI>Gratian</HI> before him had granted a <HI>general Toleration,</HI> &s;o <HI>Theodo|&s;ius</HI> con&s;trained none of the Sects to be of his Communion, but gave them the free exerci&s;e of their Religion in publick without the Walls of the City.</P>
<P>But <HI>Sozomen, lib.</HI> 7. <HI>cap.</HI> 4, and 5. and <HI>Theodor.</HI> 5. 15. a&s;&s;erts the quite contrary of <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> that he made Decrees for pu|ni&s;hing the <HI>Arrians</HI> with the greate&s;t Severities. To the &s;ame purpo&s;e <HI>Philo&s;torgius, l.</HI> 9. <HI>c.</HI> 19.</P>
<P>If indeed we come narrowly to &s;earch into the Laws of <HI>Theo|do&s;ius, Arcadius</HI> and <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Honorius <HI>ad</HI> Heraclian. <HI>Co|mit.</HI> Afric&acirc;, <HI>An.</HI> 411. <HI>Sciant omnes Sanctae legis inimici plectendos &s;e poe|n&acirc; &amp; pro&s;cri|ptionis &amp; &s;an|guinis, &s;i ultra convenire in publicum tenta|verint.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Honorius,</HI> one may very rea&s;onably que|&s;tion <HI>Socrates</HI>'s fidelity in this account of tho&s;e times; However, the Confu&s;ions of the Empire by the Inundations of the Barba|rians, till the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, may with all rea&s;on be judged to have given a continual interruption to the execution of the &s;evere&s;t Laws of this kind, at lea&s;t to that general Con|formity, which is made the Character of the Power of the Bea&s;t; And then, the momentary appearance of this Power of the Bea&s;t for &s;o incon&s;iderable a time, can be taken for nothing, but his endeavour to appear, and which upon its fir&s;t ri&s;e was im|mediately cru&s;hed.</P>
<PB N="304" REF="185">
<P> It is certain, that <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>Concil. Ephe&s;in,</HI> Canon 8. Upon the complaint of the <HI>Cyprian</HI> Bi&s;hops again&s;t the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Antioch</HI>'s u&s;urped juri&s;diction over them. They Or|dain, <Q>That all u&s;urped juri&s;diction of any Bi&s;hops over another's Pro|vince, &s;hall be, <HI>ip&s;o facto,</HI> void;&mdash;And that&mdash;le&s;t the fear of any Mans power &s;hould creep in, under a &s;hew of an Holy Function, and &s;o we &s;hould lo&s;e that Liberty in&s;en&s;ibly and unawares, which our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t did purcha&s;e with his own Blood.</Q></NOTE> the <HI>Ephe&s;ine</HI> Council, not long after the time of <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> had made an excellent provi&s;ion again&s;t any incroachment of any one part of the Chri&s;tian Church over the re&s;t; &s;o that though there might be &s;ome irregular exerci&s;e of the Imperial Authority, yet whenever any con&s;iderable Dioce&s;e &s;hould have &s;tood up for their Liberty, though again&s;t the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, they had a right to plead for it from that Council.</P>
<P>In this e&s;tate did things continue till the fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, and then the <HI>Arrian Goths</HI> being the Ma&s;ters of <HI>Rome,</HI> and the <HI>We&s;t,</HI> there was a compo&s;ition betwixt them and the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Emperors for a <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><P>It appears from <HI>Ca&s;&s;iodor Variar. L.</HI> 10. <HI>Ep.</HI> 26. <Q>That the <HI>Gothi&s;h</HI> Kings did not pre&s;s any in <HI>Italy</HI> to their way.<HI>&mdash;Theodate</HI> to <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> &s;ays there,&mdash;Since the Deity &s;uffers <HI>many</HI> Religions to be, we dare not enjoyn <HI>one alone</HI> to be followed: For we remember it is &s;aid, That Men mu&s;t &s;a|crifice <HI>willingly</HI> to the Lord, <HI>not at the command</HI> of any one to <HI>force</HI> them to it.&mdash;With good rea&s;on therefore does your Piety invite us to that, which <HI>the Commands of God</HI> do require.</Q> And in the time of <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> before, <HI>The|doric</HI> forced him to leave off per&s;ecuting the <HI>Arrians</HI> in the <HI>Ea&s;t.</HI> And <HI>Zeno</HI> and <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius</HI> before <HI>Ju&s;tin,</HI> are repre&s;ented as Lovers of Peace and Union, rather than a &s;trict Conformity; of which <HI>Zeno's Henoticon</HI> is an example.</P>
<P><HI>Petavius</HI> &s;ays of the Emperour <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius,</HI> That he gave every Man li|berty to profe&s;s what Sect he plea&s;ed. <HI>Rationar. Temp.</HI> Part 1. l 7. c. 3.</P>
<P><HI>Theodoric.</HI> to all the <HI>Jews, lib.</HI> 2. <HI>ep.</HI> 27. <HI>Ga&s;&s;iodor Variar.</HI> <Q>We cannot, <HI>&s;ays Command</HI> Religion, becau&s;e <HI>none</HI> is to be <HI>compelled</HI> to believe again&s;t his Will.</Q></P></NOTE> mutual Tolleration of <HI>Orthodoxy</HI> and <HI>Ar|riani&s;m</HI> in their re&s;pective Juri&s;dictions; And before that, had the Emperors <HI>Zeno</HI> and <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius</HI> contrived a form of Faith for a Comprehen&s;ion and Union, and did connive at a general Liberty of Con&s;cience.</P>
<P>But the Emperor <HI>Ju&s;tin,</HI> after them, begins the Project of an <HI>&V;niver&s;al Conformity to the</HI> Roman <HI>Religion.</HI> At the &s;ollicitations of Pope <HI>Hormi&s;da,</HI> he makes <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Petav. Rationar. Temp.</HI> Part. 1. <HI>l.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 3. <HI>Item Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothe|car.</HI> in <HI>Hormi&s;d&acirc;.</HI></NOTE> an Union betwixt the <HI>Greek</HI> and the <HI>Latin</HI> Church, which had been in a Schi&s;m again&s;t one ano|ther near forty years; After that, in Pope <HI>John</HI>'s time, &s;ets out &s;everal Edicts again&s;t <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Petav. ibidem Item Blondus de Inclinat. Rom. Imp. in Occidente.&mdash;</HI>Pag. 37. <Q>Pope <HI>John,</HI> in who&s;e time (the Emperour) <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> being wholly &s;et upon rooting out all the Here&s;ies throughout the Ea&s;tern parts, deprived all the Bi&s;hops of that Sect of their Places, and put their Mini&s;ters out of their Churches.</Q><HI>&mdash;And a little after,</HI> not only the <HI>Eutichyan</HI> Here&s;y, but <HI>all kind of different Parties</HI> were &s;uppre&s;&s;ed throughout all the <HI>Ea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothecar.</HI> to the &s;ame purpo&s;e in <HI>Joanne</HI> 1.</P></NOTE> the Hereticks, and heavily per&s;ecutes them; &s;o as even to &s;uppre&s;s all kind of Here&s;ie throughout the <HI>Ea&s;tern</HI> Empire: But he was forced by <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius Bibliothec. in Joanne</HI> 1. <Q>gives an account of <HI>Theodoric</HI>'s &s;end|ing Pope <HI>John</HI> in an Emba&s;&s;y to <HI>Ju&s;tin,</HI> to acquaint him, That he would ruine all the Catholicks in <HI>Italy,</HI> if he did not re&s;tore the <HI>Arrians</HI> in the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> to their Dignities and Churches: And that <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> did thereupon com|ply with him.</Q></NOTE> <HI>Theodorick,</HI> king of <HI>Italy,</HI> to de&s;i&s;t; and &s;o his De&s;ign came to nothing.</P>
<P>But however, there was &s;o good a Corre&s;pondence by this means &s;etled betwixt the Emperor, and the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome, for that common Intere&s;t,</HI> that the Emperor &s;ubmits to be crowned by the Pope, which was the <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><HI>Petav. Rationa. Temp.</HI> Part 1. <HI>l.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 3. The Emperour received the <Q>Pope with all honour, and was the fir&s;t that received the Imperial Crown at the Popes Hands. <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;. Bibliothec. in Joanne</HI> 1.</Q></NOTE> fir&s;t Example of that kind, and got the name of <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><HI>Hieron. Rubeus, Hi&s;tor. Ravennat.</HI> pag. 141. <HI>Item Ana&s;ta&s;. Bibliothec. in Joanne</HI> 1.</NOTE> <HI>the Orthodox,</HI> for his Piety to the Church.</P>
<P>This good Corre&s;pondence betwixt the <HI>Secular</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|cal</HI> Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> was the only means to carry on an <HI>&V;niver&s;al &V;niformity</HI> in the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion. For the Imperial Authority was now confined to a very &s;mall Juri&s;diction, and the re&s;t of the Empire was divided into &s;everal Kingdoms, which had no other <HI>Secular</HI> Sovereign to command them, but their own particu|lar Kings. There was therefore no other way of reducing them all to one Religion, but by the advancement of a <HI>Spiritual Roman</HI> Authority to be <HI>the principle of &V;nity</HI> among&s;t them, who&s;e bu|&s;ine&s;s it &s;hould be to overawe the Con&s;cience with the Cur&s;es
<PB N="305" REF="185"> of the Church, for the enforcing the execution of the Imperial Penalties.</P>
<P>For as the Imperial Laws were <HI>for every thing el&s;e</HI> the &s;tanding Laws of the&s;e divided Kingdoms, &s;o the only way to make their Edicts and Sanctions of Councils <HI>about Church-matters</HI> to take place among&s;t them, was to have them confirmed and enforced by the Authority of an Univer&s;al Head of the Church. And though the Church Head &s;eems by this to be <HI>the principal</HI> in all this Affair, yet the Temporal Penalties of the Laws, being <HI>the only certain</HI> means to effect an Univer&s;al Conformity, and this Sovereign Head of the Church him&s;elf being al&s;o a Creature of the Imperial Power to carry on his de&s;ign of Uniformity in the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion, as has been ob&s;erved; all the Obedience that <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 22.</NOTE> is given by other Princes, and their Subjects, is really nothing but the Wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, or of the Imperial Religion; and they <HI>give their Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t,</HI> when they force their Sub|jects to &s;ubmit to that <HI>Religion.</HI></P>
<P>There was nothing that could make it look more like the wor&s;hipping of that <HI>Roman</HI> Authority, than this Submi&s;&s;ion of the Ten Kings, who were ab&s;olute in their Kingdoms, and had as much right to appoint the Laws of Religion to their Subjects, as the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperor had in his own Territories; But by this conformity to the <HI>Romans,</HI> they did &s;eem to lay down their <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> Crowns at the feet of that Nation, and to adore them, as the great <HI>Dictators</HI> and <HI>Oracles</HI> of the Will of God.</P>
<P>There is indeed not the lea&s;t appearance of &s;o general an Uniformity at the end of the Reign of the Emperor <HI>Ju&s;tin,</HI> who, as has been ob&s;erved, was not able &s;o much as to bring it about within the bounds of his own Territories.</P>
<P>But <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> immediately after him, appears in this De&s;ign like a new Blazing-&s;tar in the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> whom all the World began to be afraid of. One would indeed from a cur&s;ory view of his Hi&s;tory, be apt to entertain no other Idea of him, than as a very eminent Conqueror, and Re&s;torer <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg"><P>Therefore is <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> cho&s;en out by the people of <HI>Rome</HI> in their in|&s;urrection again&s;t Pope <HI>Innocent</HI> the <HI>1&s;t.</HI> as the example of the greate&s;t <HI>Roman</HI> Prince for the Emperour <HI>Conrad</HI> to re&s;emble; in favour of whom they declared in the&s;e Ver&s;es,</P>
<Q><L>Imperium Teneat, Romae &s;edeat, Regat Orbem,</L>
<L>Princeps Terrarum, ceu fecit Ju&s;tinianus.</L></Q>
<P>As <HI>Sigonius,</HI> Lib. 11. <HI>de Regno Italiae</HI> does give the account of it; &s;o <HI>Procopius de Bello Per&s;ico</HI> makes <HI>Vitiges,</HI> King of the <HI>Goths,</HI> in his Letter to <HI>Cho&s;roes</HI> King of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> give <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> this Character;&mdash;<Q>That it is his Nature to be always coveting of new things, to which he had no Right.&mdash;And that he did aim at the whole World, and every Mans Kingdom.</Q> And in his de&s;cription of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Buildings, in his fir&s;t Oration, de|&s;cribes <HI>Ju&s;timan</HI>'s Statue upon a Pillar, holding a Globe in his Left hand, <HI>to &s;ignify his Conque&s;t of the World;</HI> and &s;tretching out the Fingers of his Right Hand towards the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> to Command the <HI>Barbarians</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians,</HI> not to advance any further upon the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire: without any Armour, or Sword; or Spear; but <HI>only with a Cro&s;s</HI> upon the Globe, to &s;ignify by what power he gained his Victories.&mdash;Which if it were to corrupt the Chri&s;tian Religion, was a Magnificent &s;how of a Fal&s;e pretender to the power of Chri&s;t.</P></NOTE> of the Imperial Authority in the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire. But as that made him eminent and re|markable enough to be taken notice of for the <HI>beginning,</HI> or <HI>the re&s;toring</HI> of a new Head of the Bea&s;t, &s;o did the great Bu&s;tle which he made in Church-matters, &s;ignalize him as much for laying the fir&s;t foundation of a general Uniformity in Religion.</P>
<PB N="306" REF="186">
<P> His Contemporary <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Praefat. in Cod. Ju&s;tiniani.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Procopius,</HI> gives a Character of him, that &s;hows how much the Affairs of the Church were the concern of his heart; He &s;ays of him, <HI>That</HI> Ju&s;tinian <HI>was &s;o continually ta|ken up with Church-men in private for the determining the niceties of matters of Faith, that he lo&s;t his be&s;t time among&s;t them, which he &s;hould have &s;pent about his more weighty Coneerns;</HI> And we do ac|cordingly find him as fierce, and &s;evere in his Injunctions for a general conformity to the Definitions that were made about them.</P>
<P>In the <HI>beginning</HI> of his Reign, He &s;ets out <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Lib.</HI> 5. <HI>Cod. Ju&s;tinian. de &s;umm&acirc; Trinitate.</HI></NOTE> an Edict concern|ing his Faith, therein threatens all who &s;hould di&s;&s;ent from it; that they &s;hould have no manner of indulgence. And that upon the di&s;covery of them, they &s;hould &s;uffer the Law as profe&s;&s;ed Hereticks, which was to be bani&s;hed the <HI>Roman</HI> Territories, and which was never executed upon the generality of Di&s;&s;enters be|fore. And here does his Faith appear to be made the <HI>Rule</HI> and <HI>mea&s;ure of Orthodoxy</HI> to the whole Empire upon a Penalty which had terror enough in it.</P>
<P>This Faith he &s;ends to Pope <HI>John</HI> for his concurrence with him in it; And tells him, <HI>that he did it to conform all to the Church of</HI> Rome; <HI>that it was always his de&s;ire to pre&s;erve the &V;nity of the A|po&s;tolick See,</HI> and the &s;tate of the Holy Churches of God; And for that purpo&s;e <HI>to bring all the Ea&s;tern Churches under his &s;ubjection,</HI> and <HI>to unite them to the See of his Holine&s;s.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ibid. l.</HI> 8, 9, <HI>&amp;</HI> 10.</NOTE> Pope <HI>John</HI>'s An&s;wer to him does repeat the &s;ame thing out of his Letter, with great thanks to him&mdash;As, that he did <HI>pre|&s;erve the Faith of the</HI> Roman <HI>Church,</HI> and did <HI>bring all el&s;e under the &s;ubjection of it,</HI> and did <HI>draw them into the &V;nity of it.</HI></P>
<P>Therein al&s;o does <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> expre&s;ly call the Church of <HI>Rome; the Head of all Churches,</HI> and de&s;ires a Rule of Faith from the Pope for the Bi&s;hops of the <HI>Ea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>The Pope on the other &s;ide confirms the Emperor's Faith to be the <HI>only true Faith,</HI> and that which the <HI>Roman</HI> Church did al|ways hold; and that <HI>who&s;oever &s;hould contradict that Faith, mu&s;t judge him&s;elf to be none of the Catholick Church.</HI> And all this Inter|cour&s;e betwixt the Pope and the Emperor is in&s;erted into the <HI>Code</HI> of the Imperial Law, <HI>as the Standard</HI> and <HI>Rule for all</HI> to con|form to, under the Penalty of being judged to be Hereticks, that &s;hould either deny the Faith, or the Authority of the Church that enjoin'd it; and the <NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg"><HI>L.</HI> 5. <HI>c. de Haereticis.</HI></NOTE> Penalties again&s;t Hereticks was ba|ni&s;hment.</P>
<PB N="307" REF="186">
<P> Though the Emperor's Faith &s;hould be accounted Orthodox, yet the inducing &s;uch a new Penalty, which &s;hould force it upon the Con&s;ciences of all men, as &s;o nece&s;&s;ary to &s;alvation, that a man could not po&s;&s;ibly be a Member of the Catholick Church without the profe&s;&s;ion of it, was certainly unwarrantable, and <HI>the fir&s;t beginning of that Tyrannizing Power</HI> in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, which made the whole World to conform to all its Arbitrary Decrees, and to wor&s;hip it with a blind obedience to all its mo&s;t unrea&s;onable Commands.</P>
<P>But the <HI>mo&s;t publick In&s;tances</HI> of the effects of the Emperor's zeal for Uniformity, are the Synods that were called by him. The <HI>fir&s;t</HI> was that under <HI>Mennas,</HI> again&s;t <HI>Anthimus, Severus,</HI> and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Petav. <HI>Ration. Temp. part.</HI> 1. <HI>lib.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 7.</NOTE> others, where after the condemnation of their Opinions, they, and <HI>all the other Hereticks</HI> with them, were bani&s;hed by the Empe|ror's Edict, <HI>and very great Penalties,</HI> &s;ays <HI>Evagrius,</HI> l. 4. c. 11. <HI>were enjoined for all &s;uch as maintained their Opinions:</HI> This indeed was the only means to arrive at a general Uniformity, and <HI>Ju|&s;tinian</HI> had <HI>the fir&s;t glory</HI> of it.</P>
<P>But this was nothing to his Behaviour in the Controver&s;ie about the <HI>three Chapters,</HI> and in <HI>the fifth General Council,</HI> as it is called, which being after his Conque&s;ts of <HI>Africa</HI> and <HI>Italy,</HI> found his Spirit in a right di&s;po&s;ition to affect to exalt the Imperial Authority in the Church.</P>
<P>He fir&s;t publi&s;hes a Book about tho&s;e things, and pa&s;&s;es a cen|&s;ure <NOTE PLACE="marg">Petav. <HI>Ration. Temp. ibidem.</HI></NOTE> upon <HI>the three Chapters</HI> again&s;t the will and &s;ollicitations of his Clergy; then <HI>forces Mennas,</HI> the Patriarch of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> with the re&s;t of the Patriarchs, to &s;ub&s;cribe to it; &s;ends for <HI>Pope Vigilius,</HI> and after much reluctance he at la&s;t gets him to &s;ub|&s;cribe with the re&s;t.</P>
<P>The next year <HI>Vigilius</HI> publi&s;hes a Decree, in which, <HI>with a Salvo</HI> to the Council of <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> he does expre&s;ly condemn <HI>the three Chapters. Ju&s;tinian</HI> not content with this, u&s;es all means with <HI>Vigilius,</HI> by threats and contumelies, to condemn them <HI>ab&s;olutely</HI> without any mention of the Synod of <HI>Chalcedon;</HI> but being not able to break him to it, to &s;hew him that the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> was &s;et up for nothing but to be the Emperor's Property, and to promote a general Conformity to the Imperial Religion; <HI>Again&s;t the Pope's will</HI> he calls a General Council at <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> for this end; which had <HI>always</HI> been the method of the former
<PB N="308" REF="187"> Emperors <HI>to unite</HI> the Differences about Religion, and to make the whole Church conformable to their minds.</P>
<P>The Pope in the mean while declares again&s;t this A&s;&s;embly, <HI>not</HI> upon the account of any claim of a Superior Authority in him&s;elf above that of the Emperor; <HI>but becau&s;e</HI> he judged the Emperor's mind to be contrary to the Council of <HI>Chalcedon;</HI> And it was accounted a kind of Sacrilege to revoke any thing that was decreed in Council.</P>
<P>But neither could the Authority of the Pope, nor of the re&s;t of the Clergy, hinder the Council from doing, <HI>as Councils u&s;ed to do,</HI> that is, from being of the &s;ame mind with their Empe|ror; And &s;o, as <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> would have it, they condemned the <HI>three Chapters,</HI> and pronounced an <HI>Anathema</HI> upon all tho&s;e who &s;hould defend them, or any part of them, by the Authority of the Council of <HI>Chalcedon:</HI> Whereas it is manife&s;t, that in that Council, the chief of the&s;e things were particularly examined, and <HI>Ibas,</HI> and <HI>Theodoret,</HI> the Authors of the&s;e Writings, were re|ceived by the Synod as Orthodox, and the <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Concil. Chalcedon. Action.</HI> 8<HI>va.&mdash;</HI>Which when he had &s;aid, <Q>All the Bi&s;hops cried out, <HI>Theodoret</HI> is worthy of his Seat in the Church; Let the Church receive its Orthodox Pa&s;tour, <HI>&amp;c. And Action.</HI> 9. <HI>c.</HI> 10. The Popes Legat <HI>Pa&s;cha&s;ius,</HI> in the name of all the re&s;t, pronounces, That upon reading the Votes of the mo&s;t Reverand Bi&s;hops, <HI>Ibas</HI> was appro|ved by them. For upon a review of his Epi&s;tle, we acknowledg him to be Orthodox; and for this, Decree him to be re&s;tored to his Bi&s;hoprick, and that the Church, from whence he was unju&s;tly put out, be re|paired.</Q></P>
<P>And this Approbation of the Council of <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> is quoted by Pope <HI>Vigilius,</HI> again&s;t <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> in his Con&s;titution&mdash;And <HI>decrees the contrary to him, with this preamble,&mdash;</HI>We, <HI>following the judgment of the Holy Fathers&mdash;And afterwards&mdash;</HI>The&s;e things therefore we having ordered with cau|tion and diligence.</P></NOTE> Epi&s;tle of <HI>Ibas</HI> in particular, declared to contain in it no heretical Opinion.</P>
<P>Here was as great an in&s;tance of Imperial Authority over a Council, as could well be given, to make them define his Will to be <HI>an In&s;piration of the Holy Gho&s;t, contrary to matter of fact.</HI> And the Pope, and his own Clergy, were &s;ufficient Witne&s;&s;es of it to the World, by refu&s;ing to &s;ub&s;cribe to that fal&s;hood about a thing, which their Eyes might be the Judges of in the Acts of the Council of <HI>Chalcedon.</HI></P>
<P>In that Synod does <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> al&s;o Authorize a new way of <HI>Ana|thema's</HI> in the Church; and that was <HI>to cur&s;e the dead,</HI> whom he judged not to have been right in the Faith, which was a practi&s;e never before heard of; And therein among the re&s;t he cur&s;es <HI>Origen,</HI> who in his time was accounted one of the <HI>mo&s;t eminent Fa|thers</HI> of the Church <HI>for &s;anctity of life, for profound Learning,</HI> and his <HI>great Services</HI> to the Church. So that if it has plea&s;ed God to par|don him, and &s;ome of the re&s;t, their Speculative Errors, they po&s;|&s;ibly may be tho&s;e <HI>Saints in Heaven, again&s;t which the Bea&s;t is &s;aid to open his mouth in bla&s;phemy,</HI> Rev. 13. 6.</P>
<P>But be&s;ides this, he brings in fa&s;hion another way of cur&s;ing in the Council, which all the Rational World cannot but look upon as very &s;trangely extravagant; and that was <HI>to anathematize all &s;uch, who did not damn all tho&s;e whom they called Hereticks:</HI> Which
<PB N="309" REF="187"> certainly was one of the highe&s;t Acts of Tyranny over the Con|&s;ciences of the Univer&s;al Church, and which of all their Injun|ctions was the mo&s;t difficult to &s;ub&s;cribe unto. For what&s;oever accommodating Interpretations men may find out to &s;ub&s;cribe to a form of Faith, which they do not believe in the common &s;en&s;e of the words, yet they can never ju&s;tify them&s;elves in pro|nouncing the Cur&s;es of God <HI>upon all tho&s;e</HI> who do not &s;ub&s;cribe to it. And yet both this and the former way of Cur&s;ing was from that time continued in the Church.</P>
<P>Never was there before, &s;uch an appearance <HI>all at one time</HI> of a new a&s;&s;uming Power over the Church of God, as in the con|duct of all that bu&s;ine&s;s of the three Chapters; in&s;omuch that it was generally enough taken notice of to make <HI>the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t</HI> appear a very &s;trange, and new thing, and to make <HI>the World wonder after the Bea&s;t,</HI> as it is &s;aid of him. The Books of <HI>Facundus,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Hermiana,</HI> again&s;t that Emperor, for the&s;e Arbitrary Proceedings, are a &s;ufficient Te&s;timony, what noi&s;e the&s;e things did at that time make in the World; and nothing could have made them to be &s;o &s;lightly pa&s;&s;ed over in Hi&s;tory, but the greater Extravagancies of the Popi&s;h Councils that came afterwards.</P>
<P>That Bi&s;hop tells him, <NOTE N="s" PLACE="marg"><HI>Facundus Hermianen&s;. ad Ju&s;tinian.</HI> Lib. 12. c. 3. <HI>&amp;</HI> cap. 5.</NOTE> <Q>That it was not lawful for the Emperor to intermeddle in this manner in the Office of the Prie&s;t: &s;hows him the Example of <HI>&V;zziah</HI> and <HI>Dathan,</HI> and that none but Chri&s;t alone can have a Kingdom together with a Prie&s;thood; That his Book was again&s;t the Decrees of the Council of <HI>Chalcedon;</HI> and that no Emperor but he, did ever before change the Decrees of a Council of his own head; bids him look up into Heaven with the Eye of Faith, and there &s;ee all tho&s;e Ble&s;&s;ed Fathers, which he had accur&s;ed, now Inha|bitants of Heaven:</Q> And &s;peaking of the like haughtine&s;s of the Emperor <HI>Zeno&mdash;</HI><Q>As if, &s;ays he, <HI>the Faith of all the Churches</HI> did depend upon the Emperor's Will, and as if <HI>none</HI> mu&s;t be|lieve otherwi&s;e <HI>than the Emperor &s;hould command</HI> him to be|lieve.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Baronius</HI> al&s;o does cen&s;ure him, as guilty of great Arrogance in pre&s;uming to &s;et forth the&s;e Decrees concerning the Catho|lick Faith. <HI>Anno</HI> 546.</P>
<P>However, we find <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> &s;till keeping his point again&s;t them all; he defends this cur&s;ing of the Dead in a publick Edict of
<PB N="310" REF="188"> the Confe&s;&s;ion of his Faith, and turns the Council into a Law of the Empire, <HI>Novell.</HI> 42. The Pope all this while, who&s;e Au|thority is pretended to be &s;o ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary to the making of a Council, declared him&s;elf <HI>contrary</HI> to all this, was bani&s;hed <NOTE PLACE="marg">Petav. <HI>Ration. Temp. part.</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 7.</NOTE> for it, and &s;o ill handled in it, that it was at la&s;t the cau&s;e of his Death. So that here was a very clear appearance of the Imperial <HI>Roman</HI> Authority in the Church, which appears to be <HI>the only &s;oul and head</HI> of this, which is called the fifth General Council. For it could not have its name of a Council of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church from any at that time, but the Bi&s;hops there a&s;&s;embled, and the Imperial Authority, which confirmed it.</P>
<P>To pretend that it was afterwards confirmed by another Pope, and &s;o made a Council, is to give the Pope a power to change the nature of things; For if it wanted its due Authority at that time, it mu&s;t be <HI>no</HI> Council <HI>at all;</HI> and the Pope may as well be allowed to turn all the Religious Meetings of Bi&s;hops, that ever were, into Councils at his plea&s;ure.</P>
<P>There was then nothing here, but <HI>the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t</HI> alone, without the Fal&s;e Prophet to a&s;&s;i&s;t him. But that all the Irre|gularities of the&s;e Procedures are chargeable upon the <HI>Roman</HI> Church as the beginning of the Tyrannical Exerci&s;e of their Power, is manife&s;t enough <HI>from tbe confirmation</HI> of this Fifth Council, by almo&s;t all the <HI>Roman</HI> Councils after.</P>
<P>And now came tho&s;e Laws about Hereticks and Apo&s;tates, in fa&s;hion, which were always found to do the greate&s;t &s;ervice <HI>to &V;niformity</HI> in the <HI>Roman</HI> Religion; and tho&s;e were &s;uch as had a &s;ufficient Penalty in them to oblige all to obey them; &s;uch as the&s;e, <NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg"><P>Lib. 5. <HI>Cod. de Haereticis.</HI></P>
<P>It is a good ob&s;ervation of <HI>Du Ple&s;&s;is Mornay,</HI> in his <HI>My&s;tery of Iniquity,</HI> page 100. That <HI>Pelagius</HI> the fir&s;t, in <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s days, who confirmed the 5th Council, and de&s;ired the aid of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> again&s;t the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Milan.</HI> and <HI>Aquileia,</HI> was the fir&s;t Pope, that made a Decree to employ the <HI>Secular</HI> Arm again&s;t tho&s;e who &s;hould be condemned of Schi&s;m, or Here&s;ie.</P></NOTE> <HI>that Hereticks were not to continue within the bounds of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire:</HI> And Hereticks were defined by <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Law, to be <HI>all &s;uch who did not communicate in the Church, although they did call them&s;elves Chri&s;tians;</HI> But tho&s;e who were of the Church, were enjoined by <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg">See Note ^d on this Chapter.</NOTE> another Law, <HI>to be called Catholicks.</HI></P>
<P>Of the &s;ame kind is that <NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg"><HI>Cod. Ju&s;tinian. de Apo&s;tatis.</HI></NOTE> other Law again&s;t Apo&s;tates, <HI>that their E&s;tates &s;hould be expo&s;ed to &s;ale;</HI> and another, That <NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg"><HI>Lib.</HI> 19. <HI>Cod. de Haereticis.</HI></NOTE> <HI>none but the Children of Orthodox Parents &s;hould be capable of the right of &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to the E&s;tates of their Parents.</HI> And <HI>Petavius</HI> is &s;ufficient Authority to make any believe, that he did <HI>by an innumerable</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Petav. <HI>Ration. Temp. part.</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 7. <HI>c.</HI> 5.</NOTE> <HI>company of Edicts pre&s;s the Faith and Di&s;cipline of the</HI> Roman <HI>Church.</HI> And of what nature tho&s;e Edicts were to force Conformity, may be apprehended from the Character of him, which <HI>Petavius</HI> does
<PB N="311" REF="188"> immediately add to it, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>in the whole cour&s;e of his life, he was eminent for</HI> <NOTE N="z" PLACE="marg"><P>See Note ^m on this Chapter, <HI>Vitiges</HI> to <HI>Cho&s;roes Procopius.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Tribonianus</HI> his great Coun&s;ellour in the making his Laws, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> is &s;et out by Hi&s;torians, as a contemner of all Religions. <HI>Cu&s;pinian de Cae&s;aribus,</HI> pag. 141.</P></NOTE> <HI>Oppre&s;&s;ion, Covetou&s;ne&s;s and Perfidiou&s;ne&s;s.</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Ibidem.</NOTE></P>
<P>If we put all the&s;e things together, and con&s;ider that all the Imperial Edicts were generally publi&s;hed with the Stile of <NOTE N="aa" PLACE="marg"><P>See Note ^p on this Chapter, and <HI>Novell. Ju&s;tiniani</HI> 126. in particular&mdash;A manife&s;t con&s;titution of <HI>our Deity, No&s;tri numinis.</HI> And <HI>Novell.</HI> 114. <HI>Ju&s;&s;ionis Divinae.</HI> And <HI>Panirollus</HI> ob&s;erves, That <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> gave the u&s;ual Character of the Emperours Sub&s;criptions <HI>(A. M. D.)</HI> the name of a <HI>Di|vine Mark, Divinam &s;ubnotationem.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> the Father of <HI>Ju&s;tinianus junior, Anno. Dom.</HI> 683. orders the Archbi&s;hop of <HI>Ravenna</HI> to go to <HI>Rome</HI> to be Con&s;ecrated; <HI>Divali ju&s;&s;ione,</HI> by his Divine, or Sacred Command, <HI>Lib. Pontifical.</HI></P></NOTE> <HI>Our Divinity, Our God-head;</HI> and that <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> does in particular turn <NOTE N="bb" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Onuphtius Panvinius</HI>'s Ob&s;ervation in <HI>Pelagio</HI> 1. in Note ^i on the 4^t^h Chapter.</NOTE> all the Erroneous Canons of the Church into Imperial Law; And that he was the fir&s;t that made the <NOTE N="cc" PLACE="marg"><HI>Novell.</HI> 45. <HI>de Epi&s;cop. &amp; Cler.</HI> We Decree, that tho&s;e things that are defined by the <HI>Holy Canons,</HI> have as much force among&s;t them, as if they were written in <HI>Civil Laws.</HI></NOTE> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI>'s Crea|tion to depend upon the Emperor's Confirmation. And that <NOTE N="dd" PLACE="marg"><HI>Novell.</HI> 131.&mdash;And therefore we decree according to their <HI>(the Council</HI>'s) Determinations, that the mo&s;t Holy Pope of Old <HI>Rome</HI> be the fir&s;t of all Bi&s;hops; the mo&s;t ble&s;&s;ed Bi&s;hop of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> which is New <HI>Rome,</HI> to have the next place after the Holy Apo&s;tolick See of Old <HI>Rome.</HI></NOTE> he <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Novel.</HI> 45.</NOTE> was the fir&s;t that made the Primacy of the Pope, a Law of the Em|pire. It will not be thought to be an hard Cen&s;ure of him to think, that the Character of <HI>&s;itting in the Temple of God, and &s;hewing him|&s;elf there as God,</HI> may be fitly enough applied to him as <HI>the fir&s;t appearance</HI> of that Anti-Chri&s;tian Supremacy in the Chri&s;tian Church, after the divi&s;ion of the Empire among&s;t &s;o many Sove|reign Ab&s;olute Princes. It is certain, That by his Conque&s;ts of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire, and his &s;uppre&s;&s;ion of <HI>Arriani&s;m</HI> in all the parts of it, and by the conver&s;ion of the <HI>Arrian</HI> Kingdoms in <HI>France</HI> and <HI>Spain,</HI> about the &s;ame time, to the <HI>Roman</HI> Faith; There was a very fair Appearance of a <HI>General Submi&s;&s;ion</HI> to the <HI>Roman</HI> Reli|gion, for which the Ten Kings are &s;aid <HI>to give their Kingdoms to the Bea&s;t,</HI> and to be <HI>of one mind,</HI> and <HI>to agree together</HI> in it.</P>
<P>'Tis certain, that his <NOTE N="ee" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Example was upon all occa&s;ions quoted afterwards for the Imperial ab&s;olutene&s;s in Church-Affairs, and for his Obligations upon the Church of <HI>Rome.</HI> See <HI>Sigonius</HI> in Note ^n on this Chapter<HI>&mdash;ceu fecit Ju&s;ti|nianus.</HI> So for all Commemorations of Donations to the Church, he is or|dinarily put in with <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> and <HI>Charlemaigne,</HI> as the three remarkable Rai&s;ers of that Church.</P>
<P>Cardinal <HI>Zabarella de Schi&s;mate,</HI> about the Year 1406. contends that it be|longs to the Emperor to &s;ummon the Council, as <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> and <HI>Charle|maigne</HI> did.</P></NOTE> Example was &s;o taking, that the de|&s;ign of an <HI>&V;niver&s;al Conformity</HI> was ever after pro&s;ecuted with great &s;ucce&s;s.</P>
<P><HI>Gregory the Great,</HI> the be&s;t Bi&s;hop that they ever had after tho&s;e times, did <NOTE N="ff" PLACE="marg">See <HI>Baronius,</HI> Ann. 591. <HI>&amp; Bolerus Rel. Univer. part.</HI> 2. <HI>lib..</HI> 4. for the&s;e Exploits of <HI>Gregory</HI> the Fir&s;t.</NOTE> not long after clear <HI>Egypt</HI> of the <HI>Agnoitae, Africa</HI> of the <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> and <HI>Arrians,</HI> and by <HI>Gennadius,</HI> the Emperor's Ex|arch, converted the <HI>Arrian Goths,</HI> and bani&s;hed the re&s;t out of <HI>Italy.</HI></P>
<P><HI>The Succe&s;&s;ors</HI> of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> continued al&s;o to be acknowledged the Supream Governours of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, and were &s;o ac|knowledged <NOTE N="gg" PLACE="marg"><P>See Note the 23d on the 21&s;t Chapter, e&s;pecially that of <HI>Guicciardin</HI> there.</P>
<P><HI>Benedict.</HI> the Second obtained of the Emperor by Letters-Patents&mdash;<Q>That he that &s;hould be cho&s;en Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> by the common Agreement in full A&s;&s;embly, &s;hould be owned for Bi&s;hop, <HI>without expecting either the Em|peror's, or the Exarch's Con&s;ent&mdash;</HI>which was never known &s;ince the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> the Fir&s;t. <HI>Mornay, My&s;tere d'inquite, pag.</HI> 128:</Q></P>
<P><HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> Junior, to Pope <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> he &s;ent him <HI>(&s;acram)</HI> his Letter to com|mand him <HI>to come to</HI> Con&s;tantinople, and the Pope is &s;aid to have obeyed the Imperial <HI>Commands</HI> in it. <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;. Biblioth. Con&s;tantius.</HI></P>
<P><Q><HI>Guicciardin</HI> &s;hows, that the Popes always dated their Bulls according to the year of their Lord <HI>the Emperor</HI>'s Reign, <HI>Imperante N. Domino no&s;tro.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Anno</HI> 1046. <HI>Gregory</HI> the Sixth is <HI>depo&s;ed</HI> by a Council held in <HI>Lom|bardy</HI> by <HI>the Emperor's Order&mdash;</HI>The words of the Council are, <Q>That he was depo&s;ed by a <HI>Canonical,</HI> and <HI>Imperial</HI> Cen&s;ure. <HI>Sigebert. in Chronic.</HI></Q></P>
<P><HI>Anno</HI> 1160. <Q><HI>Frederick,</HI> upon a Schi&s;m betwixt two Popes, <HI>Victor</HI> the Fourth, and <HI>Alexander</HI> the Third, &s;ummons a Council at <HI>Pavie,</HI> according to the Cu&s;tom of the Ancient Emperors; <HI>And thus &s;ummons the Bi&s;hops to meet,</HI> Having under&s;tood by the Decrees of the Popes, and the Decrees of the Church, that when there happens a Schi&s;m in the <HI>Roman</HI> Church by the di&s;&s;ention of two Popes, we ought to &s;ummon <HI>the one,</HI> and <HI>the other,</HI> and to determine the difference by the Advice of the Orthodox<HI>&mdash;at the day of meeting declares,</HI> that <HI>the right</HI> of a&s;&s;embling them, did belong <HI>unto him.</HI> For &s;o, <HI>&s;ays he,</HI> did <HI>Con&s;tantine, Theodo&s;ius, Ju&s;tinian, Charle|maigne. Radevicus, l.</HI> 2. <HI>&agrave; cap.</HI> 52. <HI>ad c.</HI> 65.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Grotius Re&s;pon&s;. de Antichri&s;to. Gregory the Great</HI> acknowledges the Emperor to be <HI>His Lord,</HI> and obeys his Edicts. And the <HI>Imperial Power</HI> was very magnificently exerci&s;ed <HI>upon the Popes them&s;elves</HI> by the <HI>Otho</HI>'s; And <HI>Rome</HI> had its Magi&s;trates &s;et over it, that were &s;worn to the Emperor.</P>
<P><HI>Onuph. Panvin. l. de Fa&s;tis, pag.</HI> 61. From the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> the Power of the Con&s;uls cea&s;ed at <HI>Rome;</HI> And it was governed by the Emperor's <HI>Exarchs,</HI> and by a <HI>particular Duke</HI> over the City of <HI>Rome. Hieron Rubeus Hi&s;to. Ravennat.</HI> Anno 590.</P>
<P><HI>Alberic. de Rofat.</HI> a Famous Lawyer &s;hows, <HI>in verbo</HI> Roma&mdash;that <HI>Rome</HI> was <HI>under the Emperor's di&s;po&s;al</HI> to the time of <HI>Innocent</HI> the Second, and that the Popes acknowledged the Emperors <HI>their Lords.</HI></P></NOTE> by the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome;</HI> Their ordinary Style was, <HI>Our Lords the Emperors,</HI> and them&s;elves <HI>their meane&s;t Servants.</HI> They got indeed not long after the Title of <HI>&V;niver&s;al Bi&s;hop</HI> over all the whole Church; but it was then known to be got <NOTE N="hh" PLACE="marg"><P>See Note ^m on Chap. 4. and the Note ^g, <HI>ibidem.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ludovic. Bebenburg de jurib. Reg. &amp; Imp. Rom. Edit. Heidelbergi, pag.</HI> 46.&mdash;<Q>The <HI>Greeks</HI> a long while before the Tran&s;lation of the Empire to <HI>Charle|maigne,</HI> were departed from the obedience of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, &s;etting up the <HI>Church of Con&s;tantinople</HI> for their Head. And becau&s;e that Church did write it &s;elf the fir&s;t of all Churches: <HI>Phocas</HI> the Emperor<HI>&mdash;at the reque&s;t of</HI> Boniface <HI>the Third,</HI> decreed that the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hould be <HI>the Head of all Churches.</HI></Q></P></NOTE> by the Emperor's Allowance, and Protection in it; And the <HI>very opening the Pantheon</HI> for the wor&s;hip of the Saints, was wholly <NOTE N="ii" PLACE="marg"><P><HI>Ana&s;ta&s;. Bibliothec. in Bonifacio Quarto.</HI></P>
<P>At the &s;ame time he begg'd of the Emperor <HI>Phocas,</HI> the Temple called <HI>Pantheon,</HI> which he made the Church of the Ble&s;&s;ed Virgin, and all the Martyrs.</P></NOTE> by the Emperor's Grant and Favour.</P>
<PB N="312" REF="189">
<P> But notwith&s;tanding this Grant, we &s;ee <NOTE N="kk" PLACE="marg">See Note ^b, ^c, ^e, ^x, on this Chapter.</NOTE> the Imperial Juri&s;|diction over the Councils &s;till continuing; <NOTE N="ll" PLACE="marg">See the Sixth General Council in Note ^b on this Chapter.</NOTE> The Sixth Gene|ral Synod is acknowledged in the Acts of it, <HI>to be called</HI> by the Emperor <HI>Con&s;tantine, to be wholly managed</HI> either by him&s;elf, or &s;uch as he deputed in his ab&s;ence, <HI>to be confirmed by him,</HI> and to be made an Imperial Law <HI>by his Edict,</HI> for the ob&s;ervance of it. <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Concil. Uni|ver&s;.</HI> 6. <HI>Action.</HI> 18.</NOTE> Therein al&s;o do we find Pope <HI>Honorius</HI> anathematized for an He|retick; But <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Fifth Council, with all the Extravagancies of it, <HI>though called, managed, and enforced</HI> by the Emperor's <HI>&s;ole</HI> Power <HI>again&s;t</HI> the will of Pope <HI>Vigilius,</HI> is there made <HI>a perpetual</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Concil.</HI> 6. <HI>in</HI> Trullo <HI>A|ction.</HI> 18. <HI>Edit.</HI> Con|&s;tantin.</NOTE> <HI>Rule</HI> for the Church, and of equal Authority with the <HI>fir&s;t four</HI> famous Councils, which <HI>Gregory the Great</HI> did reverence like the four Go&s;pels, and <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Faith there celebrated by Pope <HI>Agatho,</HI> as a great Pattern.</P>
<P>Thus did things continue till that famous Breach betwixt the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> and the <HI>We&s;t</HI> about the Point of <HI>Image-wor&s;hip;</HI> and yet at that time did <HI>Gregory</HI> the Second, who rebelled again&s;t the Em|peror <HI>Leo I&s;aurus,</HI> call him <HI>the King</HI> and <HI>Head of the Chri&s;tians.</HI></P>
<P>And long after that, did the <NOTE N="mm" PLACE="marg"><P>See Notes ^i, ^l, ^x^x, on this Chapter</P>
<P><HI>Platina in Pelag.</HI> 2. <Q>[<HI>Pelagius</HI> having been elected by the Clergy, and People, without &s;taying for the Emperor's leave, becau&s;e the <HI>Lombards</HI> did then be&s;iege the City, &s;ent <HI>Gregory</HI> his Deacon to excu&s;e it to the Emperor at <HI>Con&s;tantinople]</HI> Becau&s;e, <HI>&s;ays</HI> Platina, the Election of the Clergy &s;ignified nothing in tho&s;e days without the approbation of the Emperor.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Blondus, Decad.</HI> 1. <HI>l.</HI> 9. <HI>de Severino</HI> 1. <HI>&amp; Honorio&mdash;</HI><Q>Then was that Cu&s;tom ob&s;erved, that he that was cho&s;en Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> was not crown|ed till the Exarch came from <HI>Ravenna</HI> to confirm him.</Q></P>
<P><HI>D.</HI> 63. <HI>c. Hadrianus.</HI> 22. <HI>&amp; Sigonius de Reg. Ital. l.</HI> 4. By the Con&s;ent of all the Great Men of <HI>Rome,</HI> there a&s;&s;embled, it was agreed that <HI>Charlemaigne</HI> &s;hould have the power of electing the Pope, and of ordering the <HI>Roman</HI> Church.</P>
<P><HI>D.</HI> 63. <HI>c. in Synodo</HI> 23.</P>
<P>Pope <HI>Leo</HI> the Eighth, <HI>Anno</HI> 963. in a Synod at <HI>Rome,</HI> con&s;ents to that Canon, That none &s;hall be elected Pope but by the Emperor's leave. The Title of the Canon in <HI>Gratian</HI> is&mdash;<Q>The Election of the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> belongs of right to the Emperor.</Q></P>
<P><Q>And al&s;o two years before, at his reception at <HI>Rome,</HI> Ann. 961. the <HI>Ro|mans</HI> &s;wear Fealty to him, and that they would never elect a Pope with|out his leave, nor ordain him without the Con&s;ent and Election of the Emperor <HI>Otho,</HI> and the King his Son. <HI>Luitprand. l.</HI> 6. <HI>c.</HI> 6.</Q></P>
<P><HI>Aventin, l.</HI> 5. <HI>Annal. Boiar.</HI> <Q>Till his time <HI>(Gregory</HI> the 7th) the Popes u&s;ed to be cho&s;en by the <HI>Clergy, Nobility, People,</HI> and <HI>Senate;</HI> and <HI>above all</HI> came in the <HI>Emperor</HI>'s Authority to confirm it.</Q></P>
<P><Q>The Council of <HI>Worms</HI> &s;ays the &s;ame of <HI>Gregory. Sigonius de Reg. Ital. lib.</HI> 9.</Q></P>
<P><Q>The Diet of <HI>Ratisbonne</HI> 1322. publi&s;hed a long Decree again&s;t Pope <HI>John</HI> XXII. and among&s;t other things declare again&s;t the Pope's Election <HI>without the Emperor.</HI> Aventin. <HI>l.</HI> 7.</Q></P></NOTE> Popes not only continue to be <HI>confirmed</HI> by the Emperors, but al&s;o to <HI>be cho&s;en</HI> by them. But &s;ince it was nece&s;&s;ary for this univer&s;al conformity to the <HI>Roman</HI> Wor&s;hip, to be managed by a <HI>Church-Head</HI> after the divi&s;ion of the Empire into &s;o many ab&s;olute <HI>Civil</HI> Sovereigns, there can be no di&s;pute in this ca&s;e about the Imperial &s;hare in the wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t, though the Papal Power &s;hould <HI>afterwards</HI> appear to be the almo&s;t only active thing in this Affair. For it mu&s;t ne|ce&s;&s;arily be &s;o, to fulfil that which is &s;aid of the Fal&s;e-prophet, that <HI>he did exerci&s;e all the power of the fir&s;t Bea&s;t,</HI> and <HI>cau&s;ed the World to wor&s;hip that Bea&s;t,</HI> and made men <HI>make an Image to it,</HI> which they mu&s;t wor&s;hip under pain of death; For the power of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church under the Pope, does exactly an&s;wer the&s;e things; and this being all done in honour of the Imperial Command of the City of <HI>Rome,</HI> makes it &s;till the wor&s;hip of the Imperial Power.</P>
<PB N="313" REF="189">
<PB N="314" REF="190">
<PB N="315" REF="190">
<PB N="316" REF="191">
<PB N="317" REF="191">
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="318" REF="192">
<PB N="319" REF="192">
<HEAD>CHAP. VIII. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. XIII.</NOTE></HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The fir&s;t date of the Idolatry of the</HI> Roman <HI>Church very early. The wor&s;hipping of Images, or Saints, in honour of the True God, Idolatry, &s;hown from</HI> Ho&s;ea 4. 15. <HI>and chap.</HI> 8. 13. <HI>compar'd with chap.</HI> 13. 2. <HI>So al&s;o chap.</HI> 8. 5. <HI>Idolatry begun in</HI> Ju&s;tinian<HI>'s days, proved from the Second Council of</HI> Nice. <HI>The</HI> 82<HI>d Canon of the Synod in</HI> Trullo. <HI>From the Zeal of</HI> Serenus. <HI>From the</HI> 26. c. Epi&s;c. &amp; Clero. <HI>Saint-wor&s;hip in u&s;e before St.</HI> Augu&s;tin<HI>'s days, and unque&s;tionably in his time &s;hown from the Accu&s;ation of</HI> Fau&s;tus <HI>the</HI> Manichee. <HI>The occa&s;ion of this. Idolatry not enforced by effectual Laws till</HI> Ju&s;tinian<HI>'s Reign.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>I Have been the more particular in the Explication of <HI>the wor|&s;hip of the Bea&s;t,</HI> becau&s;e that is made in the Prophecy to be the chief malignity of his Power. For the exerci&s;e of his Ty|ranny over the Con&s;ciences of Men is <HI>that which gives life and &s;pirit to all</HI> the Corruptions of the True Religion, which the <HI>Ro|man</HI> Church &s;ets up for the indi&s;pen&s;able Laws of the Chri&s;tian Faith. The Idolatry of the Church of <HI>Rome alone by it &s;elf</HI> would want the greate&s;t part of the frightful Appearance, in which the Bea&s;t is de&s;cribed; and which the enforcing it upon the Con&s;ci|ences of all men by the &s;ecular Arm, has &s;et it forth into the &s;en&s;e and feeling of the World.</P>
<P>But be&s;ides the Characters of the Malignity of the Bea&s;t which are generally &s;umm'd up in the Wor&s;hip of him, there is al&s;o a particular de&s;cription in the 17th Chapter of the <HI>Idolatrous &s;tate</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church under the name of <HI>Babylon,</HI> the <HI>Great Whore,</HI> which is a known term among&s;t the Prophets to expre&s;s the Ido|latry of a Nation, which had been the True Church of God.</P>
<P>And this charge of Idolatry is brought again&s;t the Church by the Prophets, <HI>not only</HI> when they wor&s;hipped &s;trange Gods, <HI>but al&s;o</HI> when they wor&s;hipped the True God by corporeal Repre|&s;entations; as it has been &s;ufficiently made out of late by the
<PB N="320" REF="193"> di&s;putes about <HI>Aaron</HI>'s and <HI>Jeroboam</HI>'s Calves; and may be &s;uffi|ciently &s;hown from that one place in <HI>Ho&s;ea,</HI> chap. 4. 15. <HI>Though thou I&s;rael play the Harlot, yet let not Judah offend, and come ye not</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See the Dean of St. <HI>Paul</HI>'s Di&s;cour&s;e of the Idolatry of the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> and Pa|pi&s;ts not mi&s;|repre&s;ented.</NOTE> <HI>to Gilgal, neither go ye up to Bethaven nor &s;wear the Lord liveth&mdash;</HI>where their Idolatry is made to con&s;i&s;t in a Religious <HI>Oath</HI> to Je|hovah, or to <HI>the true God</HI> in the places where the <HI>Calves</HI> were placed.</P>
<P>And that they did really intend all that wor&s;hip to the True God, appears further from Chap. 8. v. 13. <HI>They &s;acrifice fle&s;h for the Sacrifices of my Offerings, and eat it; but the Lord accepteth them not.&mdash;</HI>And that they applied them&s;elves to the Calves in tho&s;e Sacrifices, appears from Chap. 13. 2. <HI>They &s;ay of them, Let the men that &s;acrifice, ki&s;s the Calves&mdash;</HI>which does all belong to <HI>E|phraim,</HI> and to <HI>Samaria,</HI> who had ju&s;t before been mentioned for their Calves; &s;o that their <HI>&s;wearing by the Lord,</HI> and their <HI>&s;acrificing of his Offerings&mdash;</HI>which are &s;aid before to be done at <HI>Gilgal,</HI> and <HI>Bethaven,</HI> the places of the wor&s;hip of the Calves, cannot po&s;&s;ibly be under&s;tood of any other intention of wor&s;hip, than to the True God in the pre&s;ence of tho&s;e Calves. So again Chap. 8. v. 5. <HI>Thy Calf, O Samaria, hath ca&s;t thee off; mine Anger is kindled again&s;t thee&mdash;</HI>where the <HI>kindling God's wrath again&s;t them</HI> is called <HI>their being ca&s;t off by their Calf,</HI> as they had repre&s;ented the pre&s;ence of God in his Hou&s;e by that figure.</P>
<P>Now for this kind of Idolatry we need not be long in &s;eeking, after the recovery of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire by <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI></P>
<P>We find, that in the Second Council of <HI>Nice,</HI> about 200 years after, that they in&s;i&s;ted, <HI>Act.</HI> 7. upon the <HI>old Tradition and pra|ctice</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>An. Dom.</HI> 787. Petav.</NOTE> of the Univer&s;al Church for the u&s;e of <HI>Images;</HI> which though it cannot be verified of &s;o long a practice of the Church as they pretend, nor (it may be) of that degree of honour, which they defined, for <HI>any time</HI> before, yet we cannot think &s;uch an A&s;&s;em|bly of men, from all parts of the World, &s;o <HI>impudent,</HI> as to plead <HI>ancient Tradition,</HI> and <HI>long practice</HI> for that, to which there had been nothing like in u&s;e of the Church before their time.</P>
<P>But the proof of it, which they alledge out of the 82d Canon of the Sixth Council in <HI>Trullo,</HI> which was near an hundred years before that time, is a very clear in&s;tance of &s;uch practices in the <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>An. Dom.</HI> 707. Petav.</NOTE> Church &s;o little a while after <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI> That Canon ordains, That <HI>the Image of Chri&s;t, as the Lamb of God, &s;hould be received among&s;t the re&s;t of the Venerable Images&mdash;</HI>which gives us to under&s;tand,
<PB N="321" REF="193"> that <HI>Images</HI> were then frequent in Churches. And the 73d Ca|non of that Council does intimate to us, what u&s;e was made of the Images that were made to repre&s;ent the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t; For it ordains, That <HI>Adoration &s;hould be given to Chri&s;t by the figure of the Cro&s;s; and to &s;hew their reverence to it, that it &s;hould never be en|graven upon the Church-floor, le&s;t it &s;hould &s;eem to be trampled under foot, and triumphed over.</HI></P>
<P>By both the&s;e Canons it did appear, that Images were then commonly u&s;ed with great <HI>veneration,</HI> if <HI>not adoration,</HI> in the &s;er|vice of God.</P>
<P>So common a practice as this, not much above 100 years af|ter the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> may very &s;afely be concluded to have been begun in his days; And indeed it is evident to have been then in u&s;e by that celebrated Act of <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Baronius, <HI>Anno</HI> 591.</NOTE> <HI>Screnus Bi&s;hop of Mar&s;eils,</HI> in <HI>breaking the Images</HI> that he found to be adored in his Churches; And this was but about 40 years after the death of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> and mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed to have been &s;ome while in u&s;e before it came to be &s;o gro&s;ly abu&s;ed, as to &s;tir up the zeal of <HI>Serenus</HI> to break them, which Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> the Fir&s;t tells him never any Bi&s;hop before him ever did.</P>
<P>And <HI>Ho&s;pinian</HI>'s Account of the fir&s;t occa&s;ion of Images in the Church, <HI>Hi&s;tor. Monachatus, pag.</HI> 49. does agree well with this. He makes the Irruption of the Barbarians upon all the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, to have been the occa&s;ion of introducing the cu&s;tome of Images, which they had been always u&s;ed to in their Pagani&s;m, and were indulged in it upon their conver&s;ion in a new way: and their Irruption was long before the time of <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI> There al&s;o he affirms, that <HI>Gregory</HI> him&s;elf was the E&s;tabli&s;her of the <HI>Invocation of Saints,</HI> and of the <HI>u&s;e of Images,</HI> which might well be looked upon as the earne&s;t of <HI>&s;piritual fornication</HI> in the Church, before they came to be openly adored; and therefore might de|nominate the Church <HI>an Harlot,</HI> as that name may well enough be given to an Adultere&s;s, from her fir&s;t entertaining of the &s;olli|citations of her Paramour.</P>
<P>But even in the days of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> according to <HI>Caranza</HI>'s Ex|plication of the &s;econd Canon of the Second Synod of <HI>Tours,</HI> it appears, that Images were &s;o commonly received in the Church, that there was a place &s;et a part for them upon the Altar, called by the name of the <HI>Armarium; Caranza Annotat.</HI> on 2d Canon&punc; Synod the Second.</P>
<PB N="306" REF="194">
<P> And it appears from the 26th Law of <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI>'s Code, <HI>Tit. de Epi&s;cop. &amp; Clero,</HI> that the <HI>Image of the Cro&s;s,</HI> and the <HI>Reliques of the Saints,</HI> were looked upon to be &s;o holy, as to be thought fit to have an Imperial Law made, that they &s;hould not be &s;et up in any Prophane, or Common Places, but only in Religious Hou&s;es. <HI>We decree,</HI> &s;ays that Law, <HI>that none &s;hall endeavour to bring in the</HI> Venerable Cro&s;s, or <HI>the Reliques of the Holy Martyrs, into places made u&s;e of for the Peoples Sports, or into the Temple of Fortune&mdash;For now there is no want of Con&s;ecrated, or Religious places to put them in.</HI></P>
<P>But there was another kind of &s;piritual Fornication, which was <HI>certainly</HI> in common u&s;e before the beginning of the Sixth Century; and that was, <HI>The Invocation of Saints;</HI> And this Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> has given an excellent account of, in his Di&s;cour&s;es up|on the <HI>Doctrine of Devils,</HI> 1 Epi&s;t. <HI>Timoth.</HI> 4. 1.</P>
<P>And St. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> does acquaint us what the re&s;t of the World thought in tho&s;e days, of the practices of the Orthodox of this kind, <HI>Lib.</HI> 20. <HI>cap.</HI> 2. <HI>contra Fau&s;tum. Fau&s;tus</HI> the <HI>Manichee</HI> is there repre&s;ented by him as accu&s;ing the Orthodox Party of being per|fectly like the Pagans, in the&s;e words&mdash;<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Idola Paga|norum verti&s;tis in Martyres, quos Votis &s;imi|libus colitis.</NOTE> <HI>You have turned the Pagan Idols into Martyrs, which ye wor&s;hip with the &s;ame kind of In|vocation.</HI></P>
<P>And <HI>Vigilantius</HI> was a known Stickler in tho&s;e days again&s;t the Super&s;tition of <HI>Saint-wor&s;hip</HI> in the Church: And his Adver&s;ary St. <HI>Hierom</HI> him&s;elf does commend him for it; and many Bi&s;hops were there of his Party.</P>
<P>Indeed it may ea&s;ily be ob&s;erved, that with the conver&s;ion of the Empire from Heatheni&s;m to Chri&s;tianity, after that the Im|perial Throne was come into the Church, were by degrees in|troduced mo&s;t of the Ancient Ways of the Heathen Wor&s;hip, with a <HI>new name</HI> only of &s;ome Chri&s;tian Ceremony to cover it. So that in effect, it was <HI>Heatheni&s;m new chri&s;tened,</HI> or with a <HI>Chri&s;tian name upon it.</HI> As may be more at large &s;een in the <HI>Third Part of the Church-Homily again&s;t Idolatry.</HI> And thus came in fir&s;t the Invocation of Saints in imitation of the le&s;&s;er Gods of the Hea|thens, of which there was afterwards a mo&s;t remarkable In&s;tance of <HI>Boniface</HI> the Third's Con&s;ecration of the <HI>Pantheon</HI> for the wor|&s;hip of the <HI>Virgin</HI> and of <HI>all the Saints,</HI> which had been before dedicated to the Wor&s;hip of the <HI>Mother of the Gods,</HI> and <HI>all the Le&s;&s;er Gods.</HI></P>
<PB N="307" REF="194">
<P> But till the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> the&s;e Idolatrous Cu&s;toms were not pre&s;&s;ed upon the Con&s;ciences of men; whereas in his time it was made a Law, that all that did not communicate in the Church, where the&s;e things were practi&s;ed, &s;hould be <NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg"><HI>L.</HI> 5. <HI>Cod. de Haereticis.</HI></NOTE> <HI>bani&s;hed</HI> the <HI>Roman</HI> Dominions under the name of Hereticks. And thus, though there might have been the wor&s;hip of the Devil in the&s;e Adorations of <HI>Daemons,</HI> or of <HI>Souls departed,</HI> as Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> does very critically ob&s;erve, yet it was not the <HI>wor&s;hip of the Bea&s;t,</HI> and of the <HI>Dragon,</HI> till it was <HI>inforced</HI> by that Power and Authori|ty which the Dragon re&s;igned up to the Bea&s;t, and which has been found to have had the fir&s;t beginning of its uninterrupted Settle|ment in the Reign of <HI>Ju&s;tinian.</HI> Before that time, as it has been &s;hown, all the endeavours that were made for it, were by &s;ome means or other put a &s;top to, and forced to be laid down again. But <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> upon his reuniting the mo&s;t con&s;iderable part of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Empire with the <HI>Ea&s;tern,</HI> was in a very fit capacity to accompli&s;h the De&s;ign of an <HI>&V;niver&s;al Conformity</HI> to the Wor&s;hip of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church; And he did accordingly lay hold of that advantage, and by his Laws, and the execution of them, did very effectually compa&s;s his De&s;ign.</P>
<P>The <HI>Ten Kings</HI> al&s;o, or the re&s;t of the Crowned Heads, with|in the compa&s;s of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, were not wanting on their parts to contribute their a&s;&s;i&s;tance to him at that time. They did <HI>&s;o unanimou&s;ly give their Kingdoms, and their Power and Strength</HI> to this De&s;ign of the <HI>Roman</HI> Head or Bea&s;t (as the Prophecy ex|pre&s;&s;es it) that at the end of that Age, there was no con&s;idera|ble appearance of any other Faith and Wor&s;hip in publick all over the extent of the old <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, but only that of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church.</P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="195">
<PB REF="195">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB REF="196">
<PB N="3" REF="196">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="4" REF="197">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="5" REF="197">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="6" REF="198">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="7" REF="198">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="8" REF="199">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="9" REF="199">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="10" REF="200">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="11" REF="200">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="12" REF="201">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="13" REF="201">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="14" REF="202">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="15" REF="202">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="16" REF="203">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="17" REF="203">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="18" REF="204">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="19" REF="204">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="20" REF="205">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="21" REF="205">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="22" REF="206">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="23" REF="206">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="24" REF="207">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="25" REF="207">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="26" REF="208">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="27" REF="208">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="28" REF="209">
<GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB REF="209">
<PB REF="210">
<P>
<PB REF="210"> <HI>APPENDIX.</HI></P>
<P>THE CONSENT OF THE ANCIENTS Concerning the Fourth Bea&s;t In the VII^t^h Chapter of <HI>Daniel;</HI> AND THE BEAST In the <HI>REVELATIONS.</HI></P>
<P><HI>LONDON:</HI> Printed for <HI>Thomas Cockerill,</HI> at the <HI>Three Legs</HI> in the <HI>Poultrey</HI> over-again&s;t <HI>Stocks-Market.</HI> M DC XC.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="appendix">
<PB REF="211">
<PB N="3" REF="211">
<HEAD>APPENDIX.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD>CHAP. I.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>Te&s;timonies of the be&s;t Learned Men amongst the</HI> Jews, <HI>and</HI> Chri&s;tians, <HI>both of the</HI> Roman <HI>and</HI> Reformed Church, <HI>concerning the General Agreement of the Ancients in making the</HI> Fourth Bea&s;t <HI>in the</HI> 7^t^h <HI>of</HI> Da|niel, <HI>to be the Reign of the</HI> Romans.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>IT may &s;eem to have been very evidently demon&s;trated from a full and clo&s;e Examination of the Prophetical Schemes in the Book of <HI>Daniel,</HI> That the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th Chapter, is the <HI>Kingdom of the Romans.</HI> But all the rational proof that can be brought for it, will not be able to free it from very &s;trong &s;u&s;picions, if that be true which <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>Prophetica pars libri</HI> Danie|lis, <HI>&s;ive po&s;teriora&s;ex capita, qua|tuor illius Vi&s;iones continent, qui|bus res quidem una eademque &s;ed diver&s;is modis indicatur.&mdash;Primam, &s;ecundam &amp; quartam Vi&s;ionem</HI> (i. e. <HI>cap.</HI> 7, <HI>&amp;</HI> 8, <HI>&amp;</HI> 11, <HI>&amp;</HI> 12.) <HI>de</HI> Antiochi Epi|phanis <HI>temporibus intelligunt fe|r&egrave; omnes, qui po&s;t</HI> Jo&s;ephum <HI>e&acirc; de re &s;crip&s;erunt.</HI></NOTE> Sir <HI>John Mar&s;ham</HI> has po&s;itively affirmed about it in his <HI>Canon Chronicus,</HI> pag. 610. <HI>Edit. Lip&s;. viz.</HI> That <HI>almo&s;t all tho&s;e who wrote after the time of</HI> Jo&s;ephus, <HI>about the Vi&s;ions in that 7th chapter, as well as tho&s;e in the 8th and 11th chapter of</HI> Daniel, did under&s;tand them of the Exploits of <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes:</HI> For this would make any think, that are &s;wayed by great Authorities, (as the genera|lity of the world are), That this general agree|ment of the Ancients in their Applications of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th Chapter, to the <HI>Grecian</HI> Monarchy, mu&s;t in all rea&s;on be thought to be the mo&s;t obvious and natural &s;igni|fication of the place; and this would &s;hake the whole founda|tion of all that has been demon&s;trated of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revela|tions,</HI> which relies all upon the uniform Acceptation of the like Schemes in <HI>Daniel,</HI> from the Certainty of the &s;ignification of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th Chapter.</P>
<PB N="4" REF="212">
<P> Wherefore, be&s;ides the clo&s;e Proof of it from the Prophecy it &s;elf, it will be very requi&s;ite to &s;hew, in further confirmation of this Conclu&s;ion, That it is &s;o far from being the general a|greement of the Ancients, that the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel</HI> does &s;ignifie any thing el&s;e, that it is certainly their almo&s;t unanimous Con&s;ent, That it is nothing but the Empire of the <HI>Romans.</HI> This will both take off all &s;u&s;picion of the &s;trength of the proof that has been given for it, and add a new confirmation of it, from Authority, from the general Con&s;ent of all Writers of different Parties, Opinions, and Intere&s;ts, That it is the mo&s;t ea&s;ily offer|ed from the Prophecy, and the mo&s;t obvious of any other Inter|pretation of it.</P>
<P>But that al&s;o which makes this De&s;ign the more nece&s;&s;ary, is, the Rule that the <HI>Roman</HI> Church has &s;et up for the Orthodox way of interpreting Scripture, in the &s;econd Se&s;&s;ion of the Council of <HI>Trent,</HI> Can. 3. <HI>viz. That none &s;hould pre&s;ume to interpret Scripture again&s;t the unanimous Con&s;ent of the Fathers:</HI> By which we have the Approbation of the chief Adver&s;ary in our pre&s;ent Ca&s;e, for the &s;oundne&s;s of any thing that has this Authority for it; and the mouths of all its Members are hereby &s;topped from op|po&s;ing that which is &s;o confirmed.</P>
<P>For a clearer &s;atisfaction in this, I will give the Tradition of it from the &s;everal Writers in every Century of the fir&s;t Ages after Chri&s;t. But for tho&s;e that may account that either tedious or uncertain, it will be &s;ufficient to hear what the Modern Au|thors of all Parties have delivered as the common Con&s;ent of the Ancients.</P>
<P>As for the Judgment of the mo&s;t Learned of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, it has been particularly &s;hewn, in the Preface to my <NOTE PLACE="marg">Judgments of God upon the <HI>Roman</HI> Church.</NOTE> Second Part, That their be&s;t Commentators, <HI>Malvenda, Viega, Alca&s;ar, Pererius,</HI> do with a great deal of Heat and Zeal affirm, That <HI>All</HI> find it <HI>unque&s;tionable, both</HI> Jews <HI>and</HI> Chri&s;tians; That it is <HI>commonly agreed upon by all</HI> that profe&s;s the Name of Chri&s;t, That it is the <HI>common Road,</HI> and the <HI>King's High-way;</HI> That it is the <HI>common Opinion of the Learned;</HI> That <HI>all do</HI> interpret it &s;o; <HI>viz.</HI> That the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> is the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire; and look upon it as a <HI>perfect madne&s;s,</HI> and to &s;hew ones felf <HI>void of &s;en&s;e,</HI> to think otherwi&s;e. <HI>Ga&s;par Sanctius</HI> gives a re|markable rea&s;on to this purpo&s;e, why it is needle&s;s to name any of the Ancients of this Opinion; and that is, <HI>Becau&s;e there is no</HI>
<PB N="5" REF="212"> <HI>Body that &s;ays otherwi&s;e.</HI> And this Te&s;timony of the <HI>Romani&s;ts</HI> is &s;o much the more unque&s;tionable, becau&s;e they can make no ad|vantage of it by affirming it, but, on the contrary, do thereby grant the main Foundation of their Adver&s;aries Applications of the <HI>Revelations</HI> to their Church, which makes their Judgment a|bout the Con&s;ent of the Ancients in this, appear to be clear and impartial.</P>
<P>Mr. <HI>Mede</HI> may be more rea&s;onably &s;u&s;pected of partiality, becau&s;e of his particular engagements in the Interpretations of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e:</HI> but yet never do we find his Integrity que&s;tioned for mi&s;repre&s;enting the Opinions of the Authors that he quotes. And thus does he &s;peak of the Application of the <HI>Fourth Kingdom</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> pag. 964.<HI>&mdash;This has been the con&s;tant Tra|dition of the Church, &s;ince the Apo&s;tles days to this la&s;t</HI> &s;aeculum, <HI>and was of the Church of the</HI> Jews, <HI>before and at our Saviour's time,</HI> viz. <HI>That it was the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Rabbi Abarbenel</HI>'s Te&s;timony is &s;ufficient for the Con&s;ent of the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Comment in <HI>Dan.</HI> Pag. 42. Col. 1.</NOTE> <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Writers, being known to be one of the mo&s;t Learned of their Nation.<HI>&mdash;Our Ma&s;ters</HI> (&s;ays he) <HI>are right in THEIR TRADITION, That the</HI> Fourth Bea&s;t <HI>does &s;ignifie the</HI> Roman <HI>Emperours;</HI> whereby it appears to have been the <HI>common Tradi|tion</HI> of the Learned <HI>Jews.</HI></P>
<P>Here then have we the mo&s;t impartial Judgment of the Learned Moderns of <HI>All Parties,</HI> Jews and Chri&s;tians, That both the Ancient Fathers, and the Ancient Rabbi's are all unanimous in this Interpretation of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>But the mo&s;t authentick Te&s;timony of the Con&s;ent of the An|cients in this, is that of St. <HI>Jerom,</HI> who is known to have been the mo&s;t curious and diligent in his &s;earch into the Writings of the Learned in his time, as appears from his Book <HI>De Scriptoribus Eccle&s;ia&s;ticis.&mdash;</HI>In his Explication of the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> after he had animadverted upon <HI>Porphyry</HI>'s Opinion as a <HI>perfect madne&s;s,</HI> who would have the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> to be a part of the <HI>Grecian</HI> Monarchy, he concludes thus:<HI>&mdash;Let us therefore affirm that which ALL ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS have delivered to us, That about the end of the World, when the King|dom of the</HI> Romans <HI>is to be de&s;troyed, there &s;hall be Ten Kings, who &s;hall divide the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire among&s;t them&s;elves; and there &s;hall ari&s;e after them an eleventh &s;mall King,</HI> &amp;c. Where we &s;ee plainly, that by the Bea&s;t its &s;elf was univer&s;ally under&s;tood the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire.
<PB N="6" REF="213"> This he affirms to have been an Univer&s;al Tradition of Church-writers before him. And what is there almo&s;t in the whole Body of our Religion, that has a more Authentick Te&s;ti|mony of being an <HI>unque&s;tionable Tradition of the &V;niver&s;al Church?</HI></P>
<P>And this is further confirmed by the <HI>general Cu&s;tom</HI> of the Chri&s;tians in the fir&s;t Ages to pray for the Safety of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, le&s;t the Ruin of <HI>that</HI> &s;hould bring on the times of Anti|chri&s;t, and the end of the world, as <HI>Tertullian</HI> does affirm of them in that known place of his <HI>Apology;</HI> and <HI>Lactantius, Theophylact,</HI> St. <HI>Jerome,</HI> and <HI>Oecumenius,</HI> are cited by <HI>Bellarmin</HI> in confirmation <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 3. <HI>De Pontif.</HI> Cap. 5.</NOTE> of the &s;ame general Cu&s;tom of the Church in After-times. And it is apparent from all the mentions of Antichri&s;t among&s;t the Fathers, That they make him to be the &s;ame with the <HI>Little Horn</HI> of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel;</HI> which &s;hews, that they made the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> to be certainly after the time of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy, becau&s;e the end of it with the <HI>Little Horn</HI> was to bring on the end of the World. Therefore does <HI>Era&s;mus,</HI> in his Comment upon <HI>cap.</HI> 29. <HI>lib.</HI> 20. <HI>Augu&s;tin. ad Marcellin.</HI> reckon up <HI>Lactantius</HI> with St. <HI>Jerom</HI> to affirm, That <HI>all Writers had agreed in that Opinion, That the times of Antichri&s;t was to be after the divi&s;ion of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire,</HI> as it is &s;et out by the <HI>Ten Kings</HI> and <HI>Little Horn</HI> of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>The&s;e Te&s;timonies about the general Sen&s;e of the Ancients of all Churches about this Point, may &s;eem to be a &s;ufficient proof of their Judgments about it: But becau&s;e &s;ome of late very * eminent for Learning and Ingenuity, have fancied another In|terpretation of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t;</HI> and e&s;pecially, becau&s;e one of them, &dagger; as much famed for an Antiquary as any of them, has po&s;itively affirmed it to be the general Judgment of the Ancients, That the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> is quite another thing than the <HI>Romans;</HI> it may be more &s;atisfactory, to &s;et down here the Tradition of every Century of the Chri&s;tian Church concerning this, almo&s;t ever &s;ince the <HI>Romans</HI> came to be that <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> at their Conque&s;t of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="7" REF="213">
<HEAD>CHAP. II.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The particular Tradition of the Con&s;ent of the Ancients in every Century &s;ince the time of Chri&s;t, in their Appli|cation of the</HI> Fourth Bea&s;t <HI>in the 7th of</HI> Daniel, <HI>to the Reign of the</HI> Romans.</P>
</ARGUMENT>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="century">
<HEAD>FIRST CENTURY.</HEAD>
<P>THE <HI>Chaldee</HI> Paraphra&s;t on the Prophets, is the mo&s;t an|cient Evidence, but Scripture, what was the current Opinion of the times near our Saviour about the Four Monarchies of <HI>Daniel;</HI> for he both lived about tho&s;e times, and his Expo&s;ition was always reverenced by the <HI>Jews,</HI> as of &s;o un|que&s;tionable Authority, that <HI>none ever dared to contradict it,</HI> &s;ays <HI>Lyranus,</HI> in Comment. on <HI>cap.</HI> 8. <HI>I&s;ai.</HI> And <HI>Galatinus,&mdash;That they reverence it almo&s;t as much as the Text it &s;elf.</HI> So that this may be very well accounted the Sen&s;e of the whole Body of the <HI>Jews</HI> in tho&s;e days.</P>
<P>He has not, indeed, any Comment upon the Book of <HI>Daniel:</HI> But in his Paraphra&s;e upon the four la&s;t Ver&s;es of the fir&s;t Chap|ter of <HI>Zechariah,</HI> the <HI>Four Horns</HI> there, <HI>that &s;cattered the Men of Judah and Jeru&s;alem,</HI> he determines to be <HI>Four Kingdoms</HI> capti|vating the <HI>Jews.</HI> And &s;o al&s;o on the 6th Chapter, v. 5. he men|tions the &s;ame four Kingdoms coming after one another. What he did particularly under&s;tand by the&s;e four Kingdoms, is plain|ly expre&s;&s;ed in the Paraphra&s;e upon <HI>Habakkuk</HI> 3. 17. concerning the end of the Nations that &s;hould captivate the <HI>Jews: For,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>the Kingdom of</HI> Babel <HI>&s;hall not remain, nor exerci&s;e Dominion in</HI> I&s;rael; <HI>the Kings of</HI> Media <HI>&s;hall be &s;lain, and the &s;trong Ones of</HI> Grecia <HI>&s;hall not pro&s;per; the</HI> Romans <HI>&s;hall be rooted out, nor &s;hall they gather Tribute at</HI> Jeru&s;alem. Now it was always agreed, That what&s;oever the <HI>Four Kingdoms</HI> in the 7^t^h of <HI>Daniel</HI> were in particu|lar, yet that they were four &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Monarchies that &s;hould mea|&s;ure out <HI>the whole time of the Captivity</HI> of the Church of God from the <HI>Babylonian</HI> Conque&s;t of the <HI>Jews,</HI> to the time of the Kingdom of the Son of Man; and that the end of this Captivity was to be at
<PB N="8" REF="214"> the end of the Times of the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> as it is al&s;o expre&s;ly &s;aid, <HI>Dan.</HI> 12. 7. When therefore <HI>Zechariah,</HI> who was one of the next Prophets to <HI>Daniel in the Captivity,</HI> is by the Paraphra&s;t deter|mined to &s;ignifie four &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Kingdoms <HI>captivating</HI> the <HI>Jews,</HI> or <HI>&s;cattering</HI> them (which is <HI>Daniel</HI>'s own expre&s;&s;ion for it, <HI>ibid.)</HI> And when the only Conquerours and En&s;lavers of that Nation are mentioned by the &s;ame Paraphra&s;t to be the <HI>Babylonian, Per|&s;ian, Grecian,</HI> and <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchies; it is manife&s;t, That he does thereby determine the four Kingdoms <HI>captivating</HI> the Church of God in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> to be tho&s;e four Monarchies only; and therefore, That the la&s;t of the four is the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy. And this is &s;ufficient to &s;hew it to be then the general Opinion of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church at that time, That the fourth Kingdom in the 7th chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> was the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P>And this Opinion of the <HI>Jews</HI> in tho&s;e times, was made to be the Faith of Chri&s;tians al&s;o in tho&s;e days by our Saviour him|&s;elf, (&s;o far, at lea&s;t, as to a&s;&s;ure that fourth Kingdom not to belong to the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy, which is all the pre&s;ent Con|cern), in his Prophecies every-where about the Kingdom and Coming of the Son of Man; which has been found unque&s;ti|onably to be meant of the &s;ame Kingdom that in the 7th of <HI>Da|niel</HI> is al&s;o called, <HI>The Kingdom of the Son of Man, and of the Saints,</HI> as may be &s;een in the Proof of the 13th and 14th <HI>Propo&s;itions.</HI> And then that Kingdom of the Son of Man being &s;ignified by Chri&s;t not then to be come, nor to be expected till at lea&s;t &s;ome while after his Death, that is, not till long after the end of the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy; and yet being de&s;cribed in <HI>Daniel</HI> to come to the de&s;truction of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> or Kingdom there, does make it &s;ure, That that <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> and Kingdom, could not cer|tainly be any part of the Reign of the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire; and there|fore mu&s;t it be that which &s;ucceeded the Reign of the <HI>Greeks,</HI> or the Reign of the <HI>Romans,</HI> if the <HI>Third Bea&s;t</HI> before it were the beginning of the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire, as it is here by all acknowledg|ed to be.</P>
<P>A &s;till more particular Determination of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> and Kingdom in <HI>Daniel,</HI> to the time of the <HI>Romans,</HI> is that exact Pi|cture of the &s;ame Kingdom in the <HI>Revelations</HI> of St. <HI>John;</HI> and that al&s;o fixed to <HI>Rome,</HI> as the Seat of its Empire. See <HI>Propo&s;.</HI> 15. Which all the Ancients before <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> looked upon to be &s;o plainly &s;et out as a <HI>Roman</HI> Domination, that there was no
<PB N="9" REF="214"> doubt of it. And this is a la&s;ting Te&s;timony of the Sen&s;e of the Chri&s;tian Church about it in tho&s;e times. And when St. <HI>Paul,</HI> before this, de&s;cribes the la&s;t Coming of Chri&s;t, as the Son of Man in his Kingdom, 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. he does it with ju&s;t the &s;ame de&s;cription of it, and of that eminent <HI>Oppo&s;er</HI> of the Church of God, ju&s;t before his Coming, as the Coming of the Son of Man is &s;et out in the 7th chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> by the De&s;truction of the <HI>Little Horn</HI> of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> which therefore could no ways belong to the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy that was pa&s;t. And then, by his appeal to their knowledge of what it was, that <HI>did then with|hold</HI> that Enemy from appearing, he plainly intimates, That that <HI>Antichri&s;t</HI> mu&s;t come after the time of that Ruling Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which was then Reigning. This al&s;o does &s;hew, That it was a commonly-known thing among&s;t the Chri&s;tians of tho&s;e days, that the time of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> or Kingdom that was next before the Second Coming of Chri&s;t, was not then pa&s;t, as the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire was. And this may &s;uffice for the Judgment of the Apo&s;tolical times, about the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>All the&s;e places in the New Te&s;tament are &s;till further con|firmed by the general Sen&s;e of Antiquity about them.</P>
<P>Whether the fourth Book of <HI>E&s;dras</HI> be of &s;o ancient a date as the fir&s;t Century, or no; yet that it was writ not long after, may rea&s;onably be pre&s;umed from St. <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI>'s Quotation of it in &s;everal places, (as a Book of ancient Tradition in his time); As in <HI>Epi&s;t. ad Horontian.</HI> 2. <HI>ad Lucam Commentar.</HI> And e&s;pecially in <HI>Libro de Bono Mortis;</HI> where he que&s;tions, Whether that <HI>E&s;dras</HI> were not older than <HI>Plato?&mdash;</HI>And the 4th Book of <HI>E&s;dras</HI> doth plainly determine the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel,</HI> to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire. 2 <HI>E&s;dr.</HI> 12. 11. where the <HI>Roman</HI> Eagle is called, <HI>The Kingdom that was &s;een by Daniel;</HI> and called, chap. 11. 39, 40. <HI>The la&s;t Remainder of the Four Bea&s;ts,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="century">
<HEAD>CENTURY II.</HEAD>
<P>It is ea&s;ie now to demon&s;trate the Con&s;ent of almo&s;t every one of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Writers in the following Ages, for the Application of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel</HI> to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, from their Agreement about the time of the Coming of the Son of Man in the 7th of <HI>Daniel:</HI> For they generally under&s;tanding that of the Second Coming of Chri&s;t Je&s;us into the World,
<PB N="10" REF="215"> mu&s;t make the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> or Kingdom that it is there de&s;cri|bed to de&s;troy, to continue till that time, and therefore cer|tainly not po&s;&s;ible to be the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy; and then, &s;ince it is as manife&s;t that the fir&s;t of tho&s;e four Bea&s;ts is &s;aid to be <HI>Ne|buchadnezzar</HI>'s <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 2. 44. &amp; 7. 2.</NOTE> Kingdom, or the <HI>Babylonians,</HI> the fourth from thence mu&s;t at farthe&s;t be the <HI>Romans.</HI></P>
<P>But I will only pick out tho&s;e among&s;t them that have men|tioned &s;omething relating to this <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> together with that Coming of the Son of Man.</P>
<P><HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> is the next con&s;iderable Remainder of Antiquity after the times of the Apo&s;tles: In his Dialogue with <HI>Trypho</HI> the <HI>Jew,</HI> he cites the 7th chapter of <HI>Daniel</HI> to prove <HI>the Second Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory to be generally expected by all Chri&s;tians after the times of that ACC&V;RSED One, who is there &s;et out as &s;peaking great words again&s;t the Mo&s;t High;</HI> and who is there by <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI> judged to be <HI>ju&s;t then at hand,</HI> who&s;e <HI>time, times, and half a time,</HI> he &s;ays, <HI>Daniel had foretold.&mdash;</HI>By which it appears, That the Opinion of <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> was, That the <HI>Little Horn</HI> of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> did &s;ignifie &s;ome King, who &s;hould appear out of the Empire in which he him&s;elf lived; and &s;o did &s;uppo&s;e the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.<HI>&mdash;Trypho</HI> does al&s;o ac|knowledge, That <HI>that Prophecy did make the</HI> Jews <HI>expect one like the Son of Man, who &s;hould take upon him an Eternal Kingdom;</HI> that is, their Me&s;&s;iah; which did plainly exclude the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire from being any thing of the fourth Kingdom. For upon the end of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> or Kingdom, in that place of <HI>Daniel,</HI> immedi|ately &s;ucceeds the Kingdom of the Son of Man; whereas the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire had then been pa&s;t for near 200 years, and yet there had been no appearance of their Me&s;&s;iah. And thus have we, in this Te&s;timony, both the Judgment of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Church in tho&s;e days about this matter, in <HI>Trypho</HI>'s words; and the Con|&s;ent of <HI>All Chri&s;tians</HI> at that time, in <HI>Ju&s;tin</HI>'s.</P>
<P><HI>Irenaeus,</HI> not long after <HI>Ju&s;tin, lib.</HI> 5. <HI>cont. Haere&s;. cap.</HI> 21. does fir&s;t mention <HI>Daniel</HI>'s de&s;cription of the end of the la&s;t of the four Kingdoms, by the divi&s;ion of it among&s;t the Ten la&s;t Kings,&mdash;&s;ignified by the <HI>Ten Horns</HI> of the fourth Bea&s;t.&mdash;And then a little after,&mdash;<Q><HI>But yet &s;till much more manife&s;tly hath</HI> John, a Di&s;ciple of our Lord, &s;et out to us in the <HI>Apo|calyp&s;e,</HI> the la&s;t time of it; and the Ten Kings, who are in it, among&s;t whom that Empire, which NOW REIGNETH,
<PB N="11" REF="215"> &s;hall be divided, <HI>declaring what were tho&s;e Ten Horns that were &s;een by</HI> Daniel.&mdash;And again,<HI>&mdash;Daniel</HI> did diligently fore|&s;ignifie the dividing and &s;haring of the fourth Kingdom at the end of it, by the <HI>Ten Toes</HI> of the Image.&mdash;And &s;peaking of the Number of the Bea&s;t, which he had before made to be a time of the fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> cap. 24. he pitches upon <HI>Latinos,</HI></Q><HI>&mdash;Becau&s;e his Kingdom,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>hath that Name;</HI> which we know mu&s;t be the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy.&mdash;And <HI>Irenaeus</HI>'s Te&s;timony may pa&s;s for the Sen&s;e of the mo&s;t judicious of the Fathers at that time; for he appears to have been the mo&s;t di|ligent Searcher into the Book of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the <HI>Revelations,</HI> of any of the fir&s;t Ages. See <HI>lib.</HI> 5. <HI>contra Haere&s;. cap.</HI> 24. <HI>He had</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 3. cap. 3.</NOTE> <HI>enquired of tho&s;e that had &s;een St.</HI> John <HI>face to face, and of tho&s;e that had given the cleare&s;t Rea&s;ons for their Expo&s;itions of the</HI> Revelations, <HI>and had examined all the ancient and approved Copies of it.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="century">
<HEAD>CENTURY III.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Tertullian,</HI> pre&s;ently after <HI>Irenaeus,</HI> in his Book again&s;t the <HI>Jews,</HI> after having quoted <HI>Daniel</HI> cap. 2. about the Second Co|ming of Chri&s;t, adds:<HI>&mdash;Of which Second Coming, the &s;ame</HI> Daniel <HI>al&s;o &s;ays, And behold one like the Son of Man, coming in the Clouds of Heaven;</HI> which is in the 7th chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and mu&s;t therefore by him be expected to come at the end of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> there, of which he &s;ays, in his Apology to the Em|perour,<HI>&mdash;The Divi&s;ion of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire into Ten Kings, brings on Antichri&s;t.&mdash;</HI>According to the de&s;cription of the ri&s;ing up of the 11^t^h Horn of the 4th Bea&s;t after the Ten. And again &s;ays, That <HI>that time of Antichri&s;t was at hand;</HI> which therefore mu&s;t be in the time of the <HI>Roman</HI> Kingdom, and &s;o mu&s;t the Fourth Bea&s;t, to which that Horn did belong, be the &s;ame Kingdom.</P>
<P><HI>Hippolytus Martyr. de con&s;ummatione Mundi.]&mdash;</HI><Q>I bring, <HI>&s;ays he,</HI> the te&s;timony of a Witne&s;s worthy to be believed, the Prophet <HI>Daniel,</HI> cap. 2, &amp; cap. 7. <HI>where he &s;ays,</HI> That the <HI>fir&s;t Bea&s;t &s;ignifies the</HI> Babylonian <HI>Kingdom, and the fourth &s;ignifies the</HI> Romans. And then, about the Ten Horns,&mdash;Who are the&s;e, but the Empire of the <HI>Romans,</HI> and the Little Horn, Antichri&s;t?</Q><HI>&mdash;And a ltttle before,&mdash;</HI><Q>This Prophecy will per&s;uade all that have any judgment in them, That the four Kingdoms in the 2d and 7th chapter, are the &s;ame.</Q></P>
<PB N="12" REF="216">
<P> St. <HI>Cyprian. lib.</HI> 2. <HI>adver&s;us Judaeos,&mdash;</HI><Q>&s;peaking of the Stone, Chri&s;t, who in the la&s;t times &s;hall become a Mountain in re|ference to the Kingdom of the God of Heaven, <HI>Dan.</HI> 2. which was to &s;ucceed the 4th Kingdom there.&mdash;And <HI>ad Novatia|num,</HI> upon that of St. <HI>Jude,</HI> ver. 14. Behold the Lord cometh with Thou&s;ands of his Saints, <HI>&s;ays,</HI> It is ju&s;t the &s;ame with the De&s;cription in <HI>Daniel,</HI> cap. 7. v. 9, 10.</Q> Which &s;hows his Opini|on of the Fourth Kingdom, which was to come before it, to be, That it was not yet pa&s;t, and therefore not the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire; and there was nothing el&s;e that it could then be, but the <HI>Roman.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Lactantius,</HI> &s;oon after him, hath a particular Application of the times of the Fourth Bea&s;t, and of all the Account of it in <HI>Da|niel,</HI> to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, lib. 7. cap. 16.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="century">
<HEAD>CENTURY IV.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Methodius</HI> in his Revelations upon that of St. <HI>Paul,</HI> 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2. 6.<HI>&mdash;What is it then</HI> (&s;ays he) <HI>that &s;hall be taken away, but the</HI> Ro|man <HI>Empire?</HI> Which refers to that <HI>Man of Sin,</HI> who is there de|&s;cribed by the Apo&s;tle, as the &s;ame with the little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Athana&s;ius</HI> in <HI>Synop&s;. de S. Scriptor.&mdash;Daniel</HI> al&s;o (&s;ays he) <Q><HI>&s;aw Vi&s;ions of the Con&s;ummation;</HI> two about the Kingdoms, <HI>(viz.</HI> cap. 2, &amp; 7.) and two more about the Coming of Chri&s;t, and the De&s;truction of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> and about the Coming of Antichri&s;t, <HI>(viz.</HI> cap. 9, &amp; cap. 11.)</Q>&mdash;So that by the Con|&s;ummation-Vi&s;ions of the Kingdoms, he mu&s;t under&s;tand the Prophecies of the Succe&s;&s;ions of the Four Monarchies to the end of the World; and therefore that the Fourth could not be the <HI>Grecian,</HI> but the <HI>Roman.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Eu&s;ebius Cae&s;arien&s;is</HI> is &s;aid by <HI>Jerom</HI> to have wrote three Vo|lumes, and <HI>Apollinarius</HI> five, again&s;t <HI>Porphyry,</HI> who made the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> to be the Reign of the <HI>Greeks</HI> after <HI>Alexander,</HI> again&s;t all the current of Interpreters before, who had determined it to be the <HI>Roman. See</HI> Jerom<HI>'s Preface before</HI> Daniel.</P>
<P><HI>Victorinus</HI> (&s;uppo&s;ed to be <HI>Afer) in Apocalyp&s;in.</HI> c. 13. upon the mention of the <HI>Ten Crowned Horns,</HI> chap. 13.&mdash;<Q><HI>The&s;e Ten Horns</HI> (&s;ays he) <HI>and Ten Crowns,</HI> Daniel <HI>al&s;o did &s;et forth before, and that Antichri&s;t &s;hould pull up Three of them.</HI></Q>&mdash;After he had before interpreted <HI>that Bea&s;t and its Horns of the</HI> Roman <HI>Em|pire.</HI></P>
<PB N="13" REF="216">
<P> <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tom</HI> on 2 <HI>The&s;&s;alon.</HI> 2. 6. &s;peaking of that <HI>that did with|hold the coming of the Man of Sin,</HI> after he had determined it to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, adds:&mdash;<Q>For as the <HI>Babylonians</HI> and <HI>Medes</HI> were de&s;troyed, who were before the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, &s;o &s;hall this Empire it &s;elf be ruined by Antichri&s;t, and He by Chri&s;t.</Q><HI>&mdash;And this doth</HI> Daniel <HI>deliver to us with great Evi|dence.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="century">
<HEAD>CENTURY V.</HEAD>
<P><HI>I&s;idorus Pelu&s;iota,</HI> in his 218th Epi&s;tle, &s;ays thus of the Vi&s;ion of the Four Bea&s;ts in the 7th of <HI>Daniel:&mdash;</HI><Q>That Vi&s;ion of the Divine <HI>Daniel,</HI> &s;o <HI>generally known and talked of in all places,</HI> does compare the Monarchies of the <HI>A&s;&s;yrians,</HI> the <HI>Medes,</HI> and <HI>Macedonians,</HI> to a <HI>Lion,</HI> a <HI>Bear,</HI> and a <HI>Leopard.</HI> But the Fourth Bea&s;t &s;ets forth the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</Q></P>
<P>And <HI>Sulpicius Severus Sacr. Hi&s;tor. lib.</HI> 2. has the &s;ame Four Kingdoms &s;pecified, as foretold by <HI>Daniel</HI> in the four Metals of the Statue in the 2d Chapter, which have the &s;ame Characters with tho&s;e in the 7th.</P>
<P><HI>Jerom</HI> is &s;o much of this Opinion him&s;elf in his Comment up|on <HI>Daniel,</HI> that almo&s;t all his de&s;ign in it is to expo&s;e <HI>Porphyry</HI> the Philo&s;opher, for interpreting the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> and the <HI>Little Horn</HI> of it, to be the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire, and <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes</HI> in it: And to &s;hew the Paradoxicalne&s;s of that Interpretation, he &s;ays upon the latter-end of the 11th Chapter, That <HI>all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Writers</HI> did under&s;tand the Fourth Bea&s;t, and the Ten Horns, and Eleventh little One in it, of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and the di|viding it among Ten Kings, and of Antichri&s;t that &s;hould &s;ub|due Three of them.</P>
<P>And when he heard that <HI>Rome</HI> was taken by the Barbarous Nations, he concluded, that the Man of Sin was ju&s;t at hand, in relation to the <HI>Ten Kings,</HI> and the <HI>Little Horn. Epi&s;t. ad Gau|dentium.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Theodoret,</HI> after him, is &s;o clear in this, all over his Comment upon <HI>Daniel,</HI> that it mu&s;t be tran&s;cribed, to take all that he &s;ays about it.&mdash;<Q>He <HI>Wonders</HI> how any Men of Learning could make the Fourth Bea&s;t to be the <HI>Macedonian</HI> Kingdom, when the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire was &s;o expre&s;ly repre&s;ented in the 8th Chapter, by the <HI>He-Goat</HI> with the Four Horns, and applied to it by the Angel, and when the Third Bea&s;t in the 7th
<PB N="14" REF="217"> Chapter had four Heads to &s;et out the &s;ame thing.</Q> <HI>Comment. in cap</HI> 7. <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>But what can our Modern Interpreters an&s;wer to that of his, again&s;t the <HI>Jews</HI> in his time, who were much of the &s;ame Opi|nion in their Application of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t,</HI> and the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> to the <HI>Greek</HI> Empire, and that of the <HI>Kingdom of the Son of Man</HI> to the return of the per&s;ecuted <HI>Jews?&mdash;</HI><Q>Very properly (&s;ays he) may that be applied to the&s;e <HI>Jews,</HI> that which the Prophet hath long &s;ince &s;aid of them,<HI>&mdash;And thou ha&s;t put on an Whores forhead, and refu&s;e&s;t to be a&s;hamed,</HI></Q> Jeremiah 3. 3. Ibidem.</P>
<P><HI>Cyril. Hiero&s;olymitanus,</HI> and <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> upon the 2 <HI>The&s;&s;alon.</HI> 2. 6, 7. &s;peaking of the time that the <HI>Man of Sin</HI> was to be revealed,<HI>&mdash;When the times of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire &s;hall be fulfilled,</HI> &s;ays one; and the other, That <HI>he &s;hould appear after the falling of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire into pieces.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Andreas</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Cae&s;area,</HI> &s;ome while at lea&s;t after the time of St. <HI>Ba&s;il,</HI> whom he quotes <HI>cap.</HI> 44. in <HI>Apocalyp&s;.</HI> at the men|tion of the <HI>Ten Horns</HI> of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> chap. 17.<HI>&mdash;The&s;e Ten Horns, or Kings,</HI> (&s;ays he) Daniel <HI>al&s;o &s;aw.&mdash;</HI>And then determines <HI>Babylon</HI> (the City of the Bea&s;t, and the Kings) to be <HI>Rome,</HI> according to the Opinion of the ANCIENT <Q>DO|CTORS, <HI>for many rea&s;ons; but CHIEFLY,</HI> becau&s;e on the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> that is, the <HI>Roman Empire,</HI> were &s;een the <HI>Ten Horns;&mdash;</HI>And al&s;o becau&s;e Antichri&s;t, when he comes, is to <HI>appear as King of the</HI> Romans, <HI>&V;NDER PRE|TENCE OF RESTORING THEIR EMPIRE.</HI></Q> Whence he makes it the Con&s;ent of the Ancient Doctors, That the Fourth Bea&s;t is the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, an Argument to prove the Bea&s;t of the <HI>Revelatious,</HI> that was like it, to be &s;o too; and therefore <HI>Babylon</HI> to be <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>So al&s;o does <HI>Arethas</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Cappadocia,</HI> in his Comment up|on the <HI>Revelat.</HI> chap. 13. refer the &s;how of the Bea&s;t with the <HI>Ten Horns</HI> there, to that of the <HI>Fourth Bea&s;t</HI> in <HI>Daniel;</HI> and ap|plies it to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</P>
<P>But Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> the Great does more po&s;itively apply the <NOTE PLACE="marg">N. B.</NOTE> Reign of the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> to his own times; which was certainly a time of <HI>Roman</HI> Rule. In his 38 <HI>Epi&s;t. ad Con&s;tant. lib.</HI> 4. he applies all the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel</HI> concerning the <HI>Little Horn,</HI> or <HI>Antichri&s;t,</HI> to tho&s;e that would arrogate to them&s;elves the Title
<PB N="15" REF="217"> of the Bi&s;hops of the whole <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, as the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Con|&s;tantinople</HI> did then pretend.&mdash;<Q><HI>The King of Pride,</HI> &s;ays he, <HI>is near at hand; And, which ought hardly to be &s;poken, he has al&s;o an Ar|my of Prie&s;ts prepared for him;</HI></Q> in allu&s;ion to the Little Horn, as the &s;ame with The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> who was accompa|nied, and a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Fal&s;e Prophet.</P>
<P>Becau&s;e after this, there is no different mention of any other Interpretation of the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel, Ambro&s;ius Ausber|tus</HI> may be the general Repre&s;entative of the Opinion of all tho&s;e of latter date, till the time of the Reformation&mdash;He, upon the 13th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> makes <HI>the Bea&s;t under the healed Head, to be the &s;ame with the Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t in</HI> Daniel.&mdash;And upon the 17th Chapter <HI>compares that Bea&s;t with the Fourth Bea&s;t in</HI> Daniel;&mdash;And there adds<HI>&mdash;For what can be under&s;tood by the Fourth Bea&s;t, but the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire, in which tho&s;e Ten Kings are mentioned, after whom Antichri&s;t is to ari&s;e?</HI></P>
<P>It may therefore now be &s;afely concluded, as the lea&s;t that can be inferred from the&s;e Te&s;timonies of the Ancients, That never was any Learned Man more mi&s;taken about a matter of Fact, of which he could hardly avoid the having a clear &s;ati&s;|faction about, than Sir <HI>John Mar&s;ham</HI> has been in his Judgment about this part of the Vi&s;ions of <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="16" REF="218">
<HEAD>CHAP. III.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>What the Ancients do</HI> expre&s;ly <HI>agree in about the Schemes of the Fourth Bea&s;t. in the 7th of</HI> Daniel. <HI>Why they much differed from one another in &s;ome particular Cha|racters of it. The &V;&s;e that is to be made of their &V;nanimous Agreement in &s;ome things. The</HI> Nece&s;&s;ary Con&s;equences <HI>of what the Ancients do expre&s;ly a|gree in.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>FRom the preceding Te&s;timonies of the Fathers, it appears, That however different the Ancients might have been in particular Opinions about the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> yet they are found unanimou&s;ly to agree in the&s;e Ge|neral Conclu&s;ions.</P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. That the notion of the Fourth Bea&s;t in general, as <NOTE PLACE="marg">CONSENT of the Anci|ents.</NOTE> the common &s;ubject of all its Horns, is, The <HI>Roman</HI> Mo|narchy.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. That the Ten Horns of it, are a divi&s;ion of that Monarchy into &s;o many &s;everal Kingdoms under Ten Kings.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. That the Little Horn of that Bea&s;t is Antichri&s;t, that &s;hould have a Kingdom within the bounds of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</ITEM>
<ITEM>4. That the Kingdom of Antichri&s;t &s;hould continue, till it &s;hould be de&s;troyed by the Second Coming of Chri&s;t, after the time that they wrote in.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<P><HI>Victorinus</HI> was indeed &s;ingular about the la&s;t of the&s;e. For he judged Antichri&s;t to have been a &s;ingle Emperor of <HI>Rome</HI> about the time of the Vi&s;ion. But that was e&s;teemed as very extrava|gant by others. <Q>Some think (&s;ays <HI>Augu&s;tine ad Marcellin. Lib.</HI> 20. <HI>cap.</HI> 19.) that <HI>Nero</HI> is meant by the <HI>Man of Sin,</HI> 2 The&s;&s;al. 2. 4. But I <HI>extremely admire</HI> at their pre&s;umption, or their ra&s;h Con|jectures.</Q></P>
<P>Many other Agreements of the Ancients about the&s;e matters are in&s;tanced in by <HI>Bellarmine, Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Pontifice,</HI> &s;ome of which
<PB N="17" REF="218"> mu&s;t indeed be granted; But they are &s;uch, as are no ground of concluding upon the &s;en&s;e of the place to which they refer; be|cau&s;e they them&s;elves do often acknowledge them&s;elves to be in|capable Judges of the determinate Signification of tho&s;e things, upon the account of their ignorance of the Event, that they re|ferred to, and by which alone they apprehended them capable of being certainly known.</P>
<P>Thus <HI>Theodoret</HI> upon the 12th Chapter of <HI>Daniel</HI> 8, 9. where the Prophet profe&s;&s;es he <HI>under&s;tood not what he heard;</HI> And the Angel confirms it to be, becau&s;e <HI>the words were &s;ealed up;</HI> but af|terwards <HI>many &s;hould under&s;tand&mdash;</HI>explains it thus&mdash;<Q>But when the thing &s;hall come to pa&s;s, they &s;hall plainly under&s;tand the things that were foretold.</Q></P>
<P>So al&s;o <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is,</HI> concerning the <HI>number of the name</HI> of the Bea&s;t, <HI>Revel.</HI> 13.&mdash;<Q>The exact knowledge (&s;ays he) of the number, and of every thing el&s;e be&s;ides, that is delive|red <HI>about Antichri&s;t,</HI> Time and Experience will di&s;cover to Pru|dent and Sober Enquirers.</Q></P>
<P>And <HI>Irenaeus</HI> upon the &s;ame matter judges it to have been on <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 5. cont. Haere&s;. cap. ult.</NOTE> purpo&s;e concealed, that it might not be known, till it came to be fulfilled&mdash;And after Cautions put in again&s;t Conjectures&mdash;<Q>'Tis therefore, (&s;ays he) much the &s;urer way to &s;top our Conjectures till the Prophecy be fulfilled.&mdash;</Q></P>
<P>And this is given as a general Rule for every thing of this nature, that is not very plain and clear before the Event; By which it appears, That the Fathers did not think them&s;elves in a capacity to determine the meaning of the particular Circum|&s;tances in the Prophecies about Antichri&s;t, becau&s;e they were generally agreed, that he was &s;till to come; And that therefore the particular Characters of his appearance did depend upon E|vents in after-times for the clear under&s;tanding them.</P>
<P>Now all tho&s;e Opinions, for which <HI>Bellarmin</HI> cites the Con&s;ent <NOTE PLACE="marg">N B.</NOTE> of the Fathers, are &s;uch as depend upon this Suppo&s;ition; That <HI>the Time, Times, and the dividing of Time,</HI> which is the time a&s;|&s;igned to the continuance of the Little Horn in the 7th of <HI>Da|niel,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Dan. 7. 25.</NOTE> do not &s;ignify any longer time than Three years and an half, according to the common acceptation of <HI>A Time</HI> in the Pro|phecy of <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>Upon this account it is, that many Fathers have agreed, that Antichri&s;t mu&s;t be a &s;ingle Per&s;on; and con&s;equently, That the
<PB N="18" REF="219"> Ten Kings &s;ignified by the Ten Horns, mu&s;t al&s;o be &s;o many &s;ingle Kings, as well as the Little Horn, that denotes Antichri&s;t; It is al&s;o for this rea&s;on, that they agree, That the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire mu&s;t be ruined at his appearance, by the Ten Kings, <HI>viz.</HI> becau&s;e by this his Time is made to be but Three years and an half before the end of the World, or the Second Coming of Chri&s;t, unto which the time of the Little Horn is de&s;cribed to continue.</P>
<P>The Fathers indeed might ea&s;ily be induced to take <HI>the Times,</HI> or 1260 <HI>days</HI> of Antichri&s;t, in the literal &s;en&s;e; becau&s;e they li|ving under the Reign of the Sixth Head of the Bea&s;t, which had ruled from the time of the Vi&s;ion, they &s;aw no nece&s;&s;ity for that &s;en&s;e, in which days and weeks are u&s;ed among&s;t the Pro|phets, and &s;o were then obliged to judge according to the Fir&s;t Rule of all &s;ound Interpretation. Chap. 2. Book I. of this Part.</P>
<P>But the Agreement of the Fathers in the&s;e things, is not &s;o perfectly <HI>&V;nanimous,</HI> as <HI>Bellarmin</HI> would make it to be.</P>
<P><HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr,</HI> in his Dialogue with <HI>Trypho</HI> the Jew concern|ing this very place in <HI>Daniel,</HI> tells him, That by <HI>A Time,</HI> the <HI>Jews</HI> them&s;elves under&s;tand &s;ometimes an 100 years, accor|ding to which (&s;ays he) <HI>the Man of Sin</HI> mu&s;t needs reign 355 years.</P>
<P>And <HI>Augu&s;tin. ad Marcellin. Lib.</HI> 20. <HI>cap.</HI> 19.&mdash;Some (&s;ays he) under&s;tand by <HI>the Man of Sin,</HI> not one Prince only, but, as it were, <HI>an whole Body,</HI> that is, a great Multitude of Men.</P>
<P>And <HI>Prima&s;ius,</HI> &s;peaking of the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="2 letters"> c. 19. <HI>Apoc.</HI></NOTE> that is, &s;ays he, the Devil, and Antichri&s;t, or his Chief Ru|lers, and his <HI>whole Body.</HI></P>
<P>So al&s;o do we find in the Te&s;timonies of <HI>Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolitus, Lactantius, Victorinus, Jerom,</HI> that they made the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t to be no more than <HI>a Divi&s;ion of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire;</HI> whereas <HI>Bellarmin</HI> pretends, that the Fa|thers are agreed, that they &s;ignify the utter de&s;truction of that Empire.</P>
<P>And <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is</HI> does expre&s;ly contradict him in this in his Te&s;timony; where he &s;ays, <Q>That <HI>mo&s;t of the Ancient Doctors</HI></Q> did under&s;tand Ten Kings of <HI>the Roman Empire,</HI> by the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t.</P>
<PB N="19" REF="219">
<P> There are many other things, for which <HI>Bellarmin</HI> brings the Con&s;ent of the Fathers, in which he has been found to be much mi&s;taken; particularly by Bi&s;hop <HI>Andrews. Re&s;pon&s;. ad Bellarmin.</HI></P>
<P>Now from the former Con&s;iderations about the Agreement, and the differences of the Opinions of the Ancients, it may be ob&s;erved, That their Te&s;timonies about things that the Church has not po&s;itively defined, as the pre&s;ent ca&s;e is, are of the na|ture of all other humane Te&s;timony. Where they <HI>all agree</HI> in a &s;en&s;e of <HI>which they were capable Judges</HI> in their time, it is a very great pre&s;umption, that it is the plain and obvi|ous &s;en&s;e of that place; But where they differ from one another, their Authority is to be re&s;olved into the &s;trength of the grounds of their particular Opinions: And tho&s;e among&s;t them who in any particular circum&s;tances &s;peak things contradictory to what was &s;o generally agreed on from the plain evidence of the Text, may be as little our concern, as the Paradoxical Opinions of &s;ome Learned Men in our own Age. They them&s;elves, we have &s;een, do acknowledge them&s;elves uncapable Judges of mo&s;t of the things in the Prophecy of Antichri&s;t, and the ab&s;olute need there was of further time and experience of the Events, to be able to &s;peak with any likelihood of truth about them.</P>
<P>The u&s;e therefore that is to be made of the&s;e Agreements of the Ancients about the places of the Prophecy, of <HI>which they were capable Judges</HI> at that time, is, To confirm the natural &s;en&s;e that is offered from the Text, and not to give any a prejudice again&s;t new &s;en&s;es of the Prophecy about &s;uch things in this Age, &s;o many Ages &s;ince it was wrote: And as &s;trong a pre&s;umption is it again&s;t the fixing of the full accompli&s;hment of the Prophecies of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to any Events before, or in the <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Grotius.</HI> Dr. <HI>Hammond.</HI></NOTE> time of the Fathers, to &s;ee them &s;o generally to agree in their &s;ilence about any &s;uch Interpretation. It would indeed be matter of a&s;toni&s;hment to us, if the things of the&s;e Prophecies &s;hould have been pa&s;t before the times of the&s;e Learned Inqui|rers into the meaning of them; And yet that they &s;hould una|nimou&s;ly agreee, that they were not to be fulfilled till a long time after.</P>
<PB N="20" REF="220">
<P> From the General Agreement of the Ancients in the things at fir&s;t mentioned, the&s;e &s;eem to be nece&s;&s;ary Con&s;equences, that they mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed to own.</P>
<P N="1">1. That by the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> mu&s;t be <NOTE PLACE="marg">Con&s;equences.</NOTE> under&s;tood a Kingdom of the <HI>Romans</HI> to the <HI>la&s;t end</HI> of the Bea&s;t, with all its Horns. For by the &s;ame rea&s;on that they took that Bea&s;t to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy in any part of its time, they mu&s;t al&s;o own it to be the &s;ame in all the mentions of it, or in any time of its Horns; As the Third Bea&s;t is the Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks</HI> in in all the time of its four Heads, or its four Horns, <HI>cap.</HI> 7. <HI>&amp; cap.</HI> 8. They were all &s;aid in the 8th Chapter, to be the King of <HI>Grecia:</HI> that is, One Ruling Nation at fir&s;t united, and afterwards divided. And therefore the Little Horn, and the Ten of the Fourth Bea&s;t, mu&s;t be as much <HI>Roman</HI> Sove|reigns, as the Little Horn, and the five other in the He-Goat, Chap. 8. were <HI>Graecian</HI> Rulers.</P>
<P>And this &s;hews how contradictory it was to the notion of the Fourth Bea&s;t, in which all the Fathers agreed, to make the Ten Kings in it, to be <HI>De&s;troyers</HI> and Ruiners of the <HI>Roman</HI> Kingdom, as &s;ome of the Fathers did imagine. And therefore by the Ruine of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, they mu&s;t be under&s;tood to mean nothing but the ruining the <HI>entire form</HI> of it, as the breaking a thing in pieces is called the ruine and de&s;truction of it; but no more the end of the <HI>Roman</HI> Kingdom, than the four Horns of the Goat were the end of the Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. From hence al&s;o does it follow, That the Ten Horns, and the Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t, are a time of <HI>Roman</HI> Rule.</P>
<P N="3">3. That the Kingdom of Antichri&s;t, or the Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t, is to begin among the <HI>Romans,</HI> after the divi|&s;ion of that Monarchy into Ten Kingdoms, and is to continue from its fir&s;t Ri&s;e to the Second Coming of Chri&s;t in Glory. For the Little Horn continues with the Fourth Bea&s;t till it is de|&s;troyed by the Kingdom of the Son of Man.</P>
<P N="4">4. That the notion of a Bea&s;t all over <HI>Daniel,</HI> is <HI>the Monarchy of one Conquering Nation only from the time of its Conque&s;t to the la&s;t end of it.</HI> For there is a general Agreement, that the other Three Bea&s;ts in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> do &s;ignify the <HI>Babylonian, Per&s;ian</HI> and <HI>Graecian</HI> Monarchies, till they came to be &s;ubdued. And the
<PB N="21" REF="220"> Two Bea&s;ts in the 8th Chapter are &s;aid expre&s;ly to be of the &s;ame kind; The Ram is called <HI>the Kings of Media and Per&s;ia;</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 20. V. 3.</NOTE> and the <HI>Two Horns,</HI> are repre&s;ented as ri&s;ing up <HI>the one after the other,</HI> to denote the &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> to the <HI>Median</HI> Line, till he is there &s;ubdued by the He-goat: The He-goat al&s;o, tho he be called the King of <HI>Greece</HI> in the &s;ingle Per&s;on, yet is &s;aid to have four Kings &s;ucceeding after one great one, &s;et forth by a <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 21, 22.</NOTE> fir&s;t great Horn, and four ri&s;ing up after it, and is de&s;cribed to continue to the latter time of that Kingdom, who&s;e Character is <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 23.</NOTE> owned to be the fourfold Kingdom.</P>
<P N="5">5. That the &s;ignification of Heads and Horns of Bea&s;t all over <HI>Daniel,</HI> is, The &s;everal Supreme Powers in that Nation, which <MILESTONE N="1"> is repre&s;ented in general by the Bea&s;t. If the&s;e Heads, or Horns, be &s;aid <HI>to come one after another,</HI> they denote a &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of &s;o ma|ny <MILESTONE N="2"> different Supreme Magi&s;tracies in the &s;ame place; But if re|pre&s;ented as ri&s;ing up <HI>altogether,</HI> they &s;ignify the divi&s;ion of that <MILESTONE N="3"> Nation into &s;o many di&s;tinct Sovereignties, or Kingdoms; And al&s;o the <HI>continuance</HI> of each Succe&s;&s;ion of the Succe&s;&s;ive Heads, or <MILESTONE N="4"> Horns, and <HI>the continuance</HI> of each divi&s;ion of the Contemporary Heads, or Horns, till the change of either of them.</P>
<P>This all agree in, about the four Heads of the Leopard in the 7th Chapter, which &s;ignify &s;o many di&s;tinct Kingdoms in the <HI>Greek</HI> Monarchy; and about the &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Horns of the Ram in the 8th Chapter, which &s;ignify the Succe&s;&s;ion of the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> to the <HI>Median</HI> Government in the &s;ame Nation of the <HI>Medes</HI> and <HI>Per&s;ians;</HI> according as that Kingdom is called both under the <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 8, 12, 15.</NOTE> <HI>Median,</HI> and under the <HI>Per&s;ian</HI> Kings, as thrice in <HI>Daniel</HI> 6. un|der the <HI>Medes,</HI> and all over the Book of <HI>E&s;ther</HI> in the time of the <HI>Per&s;ians.</HI> The Horns of the He-goat al&s;o in the 8th Chapter, are agreed to repre&s;ent fir&s;t the united Monarchical Government of the <HI>Greeks</HI> under one King, and then the Succe&s;&s;ion of the four|fold Kingdom of the <HI>Greeks</HI> after it.</P>
<P>'Tis true, the Little Horn coming out of one of the four in the 8th Chapter (agreed to be but one &s;ingle King) makes no change in that fourfold Kingdom, though he be de&s;cribed as coming after the four. But then it is plainly intimated, that he is not an Horn di&s;tinct from the other four, but only a part of that, <HI>out of which</HI> he is &s;aid to come, and not to come <HI>after</HI> it.</P>
<PB N="22" REF="221">
<P> Wherefore here are eleven acknowledged In&s;tances of the proof of the beforementioed Rule about the &s;ignification of Heads, and Horns; And then for the remaining Ten Horns of the Fourth Bea&s;t, and Little One after them in the 7th Chap|ter, there wants nothing to a&s;&s;ure their conformity to it, but to prove, that they belong to the &s;ame Nation that is repre&s;ented by the Fourth Bea&s;t there. And that is a&s;&s;ured from the pre|ceding Con&s;equence. For the&s;e Horns are but parts of that Bea&s;t, which in the whole time of it, &s;ignifies but one Nation only.</P>
<P>The Fathers indeed do &s;eem generally to agree, That the Lit|tle Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t, and con&s;equently the Ten before him, can be nothing but <HI>Roman</HI> Powers, what&s;oever is pretended to the contrary. <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is,</HI> in his Te&s;timony before|cited, expre&s;ly &s;ays, <Q>That the <HI>Ancient Doctors</HI> made <HI>Babylon</HI> in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to be <HI>Rome,</HI> becau&s;e they looked upon the Bea&s;t there (who&s;e City <HI>Babylon</HI> is) to be the &s;ame with the Little Horn upon the Fourth Bea&s;t, or the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire.</Q> And <HI>Bel|larmin</HI> does as good as &s;ay the &s;ame, <HI>Lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Pontif. c.</HI> 16. The <HI>Fathers</HI> &s;ay, that Antichri&s;t was to come as a Monarch of that Empire, the Seat of which had been at <HI>Rome.</HI></P>
<P>Thus for in&s;tance, When <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> tells <HI>Trypho</HI> that Anti|chri&s;t (&s;ignified by the Little Horn) <HI>was ju&s;t at hand</HI> when the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire was then flouri&s;hing, who could under&s;tand that of any thing but the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire? When <HI>Irenaeus</HI> gue&s;&s;es his name to be <HI>Latinos,</HI> becau&s;e that, he &s;ays, was the name of his Kingdom, he does plainly fix him upon the <HI>Romans.</HI> When <HI>Tertullian</HI> makes the Ten Kings of <HI>the Roman Empire</HI> to bring on Antichri&s;t, and &s;ays, <HI>That his time is at hand,</HI> that is, in the height of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, he intimates the &s;ame thing. <HI>Hip|polytus</HI> makes him to ari&s;e among&s;t the Ten Kings, whom he calls the Kings of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. <HI>Cyprian,</HI> and all the Fa|thers, that make the Kingdom of the Stone, or of the God of <NOTE PLACE="marg">V. 44.</NOTE> Heaven, in the 2d Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> the &s;ame with that of the Son of Man in the 7th Chapter, mu&s;t al&s;o judge the Fourth Kingdom before it, in each to be the &s;ame; And the Fourth Kingdom in the 2d Chapter is &s;aid to be the &s;ame Kingdom in &s;ub&s;tance, when it was <HI>entire,</HI> and when <HI>divided,</HI> ver&s;e 40, 41. <HI>Lactantius</HI> applies the whole account of the Fourth Bea&s;t to the
<PB N="23" REF="221"> <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. <HI>Victorinus</HI> doth certainly &s;eat Antichri&s;t, or the Little Horn, among&s;t the <HI>Roman</HI> Rulers.</P>
<P>Tho&s;e indeed that came after the time of <HI>Augu&s;tine,</HI> did ma|ny of them think, that <HI>Antichri&s;t was to de&s;troy all the Power of</HI> Rome. The only ground that they alledge for it, is, That in the Second Epi&s;tle of the <HI>The&s;&s;alonians,</HI> chap. 2. where it is &s;aid, <HI>That that did withhold</HI> at the pre&s;ent time, mu&s;t <HI>be taken away,</HI> and then &s;hould the <HI>Man of Sin</HI> be Revealed. This <HI>that did with-hold,</HI> they Interpreted to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. And yet &s;ince they afterwards Interpret <HI>Babylon</HI> in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to be <HI>Rome,</HI> which is openly de&s;cribed to be the City of <HI>Antichri&s;t</HI> (the &s;ame with the little Horn) whom they agreed to continue till about the end of the World, they did thereby plainly &s;hew, that they meant nothing el&s;e <HI>by the taking away</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Em|pire in the forecited place, but <HI>only the change of the Monarchical Imperial form of it, not the la&s;t end of all</HI> Roman <HI>Rule; According as</HI> Tertullian <HI>&s;ays, that they prayed for the Lives of the Emperors to put off the coming of</HI> Antichri&s;t <HI>in the end of the World.</HI> As for tho&s;e among&s;t them that did not under&s;tand <HI>Rome</HI> by <HI>Babylon,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">See the Refe|rences to the <HI>1&s;t</HI> Chap. Book 1.</NOTE> we &s;ee that the Je&s;uits them&s;elves look upon them as extra|vagant in it.</P>
<P>Wherefore the Ten Horns, and the Little one after them, may now be counted by the expre&s;s Con&s;ent of the Fathers, as con|formable to the General Rule for all the re&s;t of their kind.</P>
<P N="6">6. It does al&s;o now appear from this Agreement of the Fathers concerning <HI>Bea&s;ts, and their parts,</HI> &s;ignifying Domi|nion, That they had no other mark for their difference be|twixt either Succe&s;&s;ive, or Contemporary Horns, but <HI>only the different Changes of the Supream Civil Power of Monarchies.</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. Nor any other con&s;titutive difference betwixt Succe&s;&s;ive Heads or Horns, but a <HI>different name or title of the Supream Power.</HI> The &s;econd Horn of the Ram was di&s;tingui&s;hed from the fir&s;t only by <HI>the name</HI> of the King of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> in&s;tead of that of <HI>Media,</HI> over the &s;ame Nation, <HI>Dan.</HI> 8. 3, 20.</P>
<P N="8">8. And by their Agreement, that the four Heads of the Leopard in the 7th Chapter, was the &s;ame time of <HI>Graecian</HI> Empire with the four Horns of the He-goat in the 8th Chap|ter, it appeared, That they made <HI>Heads and Horns to be promi&s;|cuou&s;ly u&s;ed for the &s;ame thing</HI> in different Schemes of the &s;ame Monarchy.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="24" REF="222">
<HEAD>CHAP. IV.</HEAD>
<ARGUMENT>
<P><HI>The Agreements of the Ancients about the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations. <HI>Eight Queries about the Nece&s;&s;ary Con|&s;equences of the Ancients Con&s;ent concerning the Fourth Bea&s;t in</HI> Daniel, <HI>and the Bea&s;t in tbe</HI> Revelations, <HI>for the more particular determination of the Characters of the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations. <HI>The Rea&s;on of the Con|trariety of &s;ome of the Opinions of the Fathers, to their general Agreements about the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of</HI> Daniel, <HI>and the Bea&s;t in the</HI> Revelations. <HI>The Application of the Bea&s;t, to the</HI> Roman <HI>Church in all Ages.</HI></P>
</ARGUMENT>
<P>THE Con&s;ent of the Ancients about the nature of the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the nece&s;&s;ary Con&s;equences of what they expre&s;ly con&s;ent in, do di&s;cover what they mu&s;t agree in concerning the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> For,</P>
<P N="1">1. The Fathers are well enough known to make that which from the 13th, to the end of the 19th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> is peculiarly called The Bea&s;t (as one <HI>particular</HI> &s;tate of it only in the latter time of it) to be that, to which they give the name of Antichri&s;t. See <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. They do upon this account make that <HI>particular</HI> Reign of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> to be <HI>the &s;ame</HI> with the Reign of the Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel, the &s;ame</HI> with the Man of Sin in the 2d Chapter of the Second Epi&s;tle to the <HI>The&s;&s;alo|nians, the &s;ame</HI> al&s;o with the Bu&s;tling King in <HI>Daniel</HI> 11. 36. For as they called all the&s;e by the name of <HI>Antichri&s;t,</HI> &s;o <HI>Bellarmin</HI> a&s;|&s;ures us, <HI>lib.</HI> 3. <HI>de Pontif. cap.</HI> 1. That <HI>by the common con&s;ent of all Chri&s;tians,</HI> by Antichri&s;t is under&s;tood but <HI>one certain Eminent Fal&s;e Chri&s;t.</HI> In the Te&s;timony al&s;o of <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is</HI> may be &s;een the Agreement of the <HI>Ancient Doctors,</HI> That The Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> and the <HI>Little Horn</HI> in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> were <HI>the &s;ame</HI> thing, becau&s;e they accounted them both to be Antichri&s;t.</P>
<P N="3"><PB N="25" REF="222"> 3. The Fathers do al&s;o own with the Text, the &s;even Heads of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Rev. 17. 10, 11.</NOTE> the Bea&s;t to be &s;ucce&s;&s;ive Ruling Powers, five of which were pa&s;t <HI>at the time of the Vi&s;ion,</HI> one of them at that time in being, and two Kings more which were to come to make up the whole Seven, the latter of which Two was to be &s;uch an Eighth, as &s;hould be one of the Seven.</P>
<P N="4">4. They did al&s;o agree that <HI>Babylon,</HI> that went along with the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> was the City of <HI>Rome.</HI> This appears from <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is</HI>'s Te&s;timony, and <HI>Bellarmin</HI>'s Quotations of the Fathers for this Expo&s;ition, <HI>Lib.</HI> 2. <HI>de Pontif. cap.</HI> 2. where he concludes it to be the Opinion of the Fathers, <HI>That</HI> John <HI>in the</HI> Apocalyp&s;e <HI>did every-where call</HI> Rome, Babylon.</P>
<P>Now <HI>from</HI> the forementioned Particulars, in which the An|cients are found generally to agree about the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th Chapter of <HI>Daniel,</HI> and the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations;</HI> and <HI>from</HI> the immediate, and nece&s;&s;ary Con&s;equences before deduced from them, I would propound it to the Impartial Con&s;idera|tion of all the World, whether to make the Ancients con&s;tant to them&s;elves, they ought not to be judged to agree al&s;o in tho&s;e unavoidable Con&s;equences of the Conclu&s;ions, in which they are &s;o unanimous.</P>
<P>That the general Notion of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> as it <MILESTONE N="1" UNIT="Query"> is the <HI>common &s;ubject</HI> of its Heads and Horns, mu&s;t &s;ignify, <HI>the Particular Monarchy of the</HI> Romans, till the la&s;t ruine of it. This does nece&s;&s;arily follow, 1&s;t, From the fourth Con&s;equence of <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 3.</NOTE> their Agreements about the Fourth Bea&s;t in the 7th of <HI>Daniel.</HI> For by that the general Notion of every Bea&s;t is to be <HI>&s;ome Parti|cular</HI> Monarchy to the la&s;t end of it. And 2dly, From their <NOTE PLACE="marg">See 4th Agree|ment in this Chap.</NOTE> Unanimous Agreement about <HI>Babylon</HI> in the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> before|mentioned, which does nece&s;&s;arily determine it to be the <HI>Roman</HI> Monarchy.</P>
<P>Wherefore if &s;ome of the Fathers have interpreted the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to &s;ignify, a great Multitude of Kingdoms, tyrannizing over the Church of God, They do plainly contra|dict that, which before they had agreed to be the natural and obvious &s;ignification of <HI>A Bea&s;t</HI> in Prophecy, by the almo&s;t Unanimous Con&s;ent of all Interpreters, that is, a <HI>particular Kingdom only;</HI> Whereas in this way, they make one Bea&s;t &s;ig|nify as many, as a multitude of Bea&s;ts every-where el&s;e;
<PB N="26" REF="223"> and for which al&s;o they do not alledge any the lea&s;t warrant from the Text.</P>
<P>Whether the Ancients mu&s;t not, according to their other ge|neral <MILESTONE N="2" UNIT="Query"> Agreements, make the Heads and Horns of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to be &s;o many Sovereign Powers among&s;t the <HI>Romans;</HI> <MILESTONE N="1"> and the Heads to be &s;o many &s;everal kinds of Supream Magi&s;tracy <MILESTONE N="2"> over the &s;ame Juri&s;diction of the <HI>Romans?</HI> For they are de|&s;cribed to &s;ucceed one another. <HI>Revelat.</HI> 17. 10, 11. And the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t to be the Divi&s;ion of the <HI>Roman</HI> Monar|chy into Ten really di&s;tinct Kingdoms. (For they are repre&s;en|ted <MILESTONE N="3"> to be in power all at a time. <HI>Revel.</HI> 17. 12, 13.) According to the fifth Con&s;equence of their Agreement about the Figure of <NOTE PLACE="marg">CHAP. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>Tho&s;e therefore of the Fathers, who make the &s;even Heads to be either &s;o <HI>many Ages</HI> of the World, or &s;o many di&s;tinct <HI>Monar|chies,</HI> do contradict their Agreement with the re&s;t about the like Figures in <HI>Daniel;</HI> And when others make the Ten Horns to be the <HI>di&s;&s;olution</HI> of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, though they were the Ten Horns of that Bea&s;t, that &s;ignifies the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire to the la&s;t end of it, they forget how incon&s;i&s;tent they are with them|&s;elves.</P>
<P>Whether by the common Con&s;ent of the Fathers in their other <MILESTONE N="3" UNIT="Query"> Agreements, the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> as it is the <HI>particular &s;tate</HI> of the Bea&s;t under its la&s;t Ruling Head, can be any thing but a <HI>Roman</HI> Sovereign? For it is an Head of the <HI>Roman</HI> Bea&s;t, <NOTE PLACE="marg">By Con&s;eq. 4. Chap. 3.</NOTE> and therefore by the former Con&s;equence mu&s;t be a Sovereign of the <HI>Romans:</HI> It is al&s;o the &s;ame with the Little Horn of the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> which by Con&s;equence the &s;econd, Chapter the 3d, is a <HI>Roman</HI> Sovereign.</P>
<P>Whether the Agreements of the Fathers do not nece&s;&s;arily <MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="Query"> make the 6th Head of the Bea&s;t to be the whole Imperial Government of <HI>Rome?</HI> They agree, that the 6th Head <NOTE PLACE="marg">3d Agree|ment in this Chap.</NOTE> was (according to the Text) in power at the time of the Vi&s;ion; And it mu&s;t then be either the <HI>Roman</HI> Emperor, or the Imperial Government; but it could not po&s;&s;ibly be the &s;ingle per&s;on of any <HI>Roman</HI> Emperor. For then the next &s;ingle Em|peror but one mu&s;t have been the 8th King, called the Bea&s;t; Whereas the Fathers are found to agree, that Antichri&s;t, the <NOTE PLACE="marg">4th Agree|ment, Chap. 3.</NOTE> &s;ame with the Bea&s;t, or 8th King, was not come into power in their time, which was never the &s;ucce&s;&s;ion of many &s;ingle Em|perors
<PB N="27" REF="223"> from the time of the Vi&s;ion. Be&s;ides, By the 5th Con|&s;equence of their Agreements about the Figures of <HI>Daniel.</HI> Chap. 3. They make every Head and Horn of Bea&s;t to contain in it all the &s;ingle Rulers of the &s;ame kind.</P>
<P>Whether, according to the agreeing Judgment of the An|cients, <MILESTONE N="5" UNIT="Query"> the Sixth Head of the Bea&s;t mu&s;t not be the Imperial Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> till at lea&s;t the taking away of that Form of Government in that Juri&s;diction? For by the 5th Con&s;equence of their Agreements. Chap. 3. An <HI>Head,</HI> or <HI>Horn</HI> of Bea&s;t &s;ig|nifies a kind of Supream Power in a Nation to the la&s;t end of that kind of <HI>Magi&s;tracy,</HI> or <HI>Kingdom.</HI></P>
<P>And therefore tho&s;e of the Fathers, that made the Sixth Head to be at an end at the Change of the Imperial Power from Pagani&s;m to Chri&s;tianity, did contradict the Unanimous Con|&s;ent of all the re&s;t with them&s;elves about the nature of every Head and Horn in <HI>Daniel,</HI> which they made to be <HI>one kind of Su|pream Civil Power</HI> to the la&s;t end of it, without any regard to the different behaviour of &s;ome of the &s;ingle Per&s;ons of that kind towards the Church of God, in compari&s;on with others. The Favour and Protection of the <HI>Jews</HI> from &s;ome of the <HI>Babylonian, Per&s;ian, Graecian</HI> Kings, did not in the Fathers Opinion make different Heads, or Horns of the Bea&s;ts, to which they did belong.</P>
<P>Whether, according to the Opinions of the Ancients, in <MILESTONE N="6" UNIT="Query"> which they unanimou&s;ly agreed, The <HI>Seventh King,</HI> or Head, mu&s;t not be that which changed the Imperial Power of <HI>Rome</HI> at the end of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors? For the Imperial Government <MILESTONE N="4" UNIT="Query"> of the <HI>Romans</HI> was certainly the Sixth Head; and that mu&s;t then nece&s;&s;arily be either that Imperial Government only, which was particularly owned by the Senate, and People, and Clergy of <HI>Rome;</HI> or the whole Imperial Government of the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, over <HI>Rome, Con&s;tantinople, Britain,</HI> &amp;c. Now at the Fall of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors in <HI>Augu&s;tulus,</HI> there was a Change of the Im|perial Form of <HI>Roman</HI> Government, which&s;oever of the&s;e kinds was the Sixth Head. For the Barbarous Kings, that &s;ucceeded, <MILESTONE N="1"> were owned as the &s;ole Sovereigns of <HI>Rome,</HI> by the Pope, Senate, People and Clergy. And if it were the whole Imperial Govern|ment <MILESTONE N="2"> at <HI>Rome&punc;</HI> and <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> which was the Sixth Head, then the Change of it into the mixt form of Imperial, and Kingly Government of <HI>Rome,</HI> or of the <HI>Romans,</HI> by the owning the <HI>Go|thi&s;h</HI>
<PB N="28" REF="224"> Kings as the Sovereigns of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Part, mu&s;t be the Seventh King. For they were as much a part of the Supream Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> as the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Emperors, which they &s;uc|ceeded. And it has been found by the 6th and 7th Nece&s;&s;ary <NOTE PLACE="marg">Chap. 3.</NOTE> Con&s;equences of the Agreeing Opinions of the Fathers, That a new Name of the Civil Sovereign Power of a Nation, does con|&s;titute a new Succe&s;&s;ive Head or Horn of a Bea&s;t. So is it in the la&s;t Horn of the Ram, Chap. 8. which is agreed by the Fathers to be the Change of the name of the King of <HI>Media,</HI> to that of the King of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> though the King of <HI>Per&s;ia</HI> was al&s;o King of <HI>Media,</HI> who was the fir&s;t Horn. And &s;o was it in the four Horns of the He-goat, <HI>ibidem.</HI> Though one of the&s;e four be the &s;ame with the fir&s;t Horn. And the Change of the whole pure Impe|rial Goverment into that of either Kingly alone at <HI>Rome,</HI> or into that of the mixt form of Kingly and Imperial, over the whole remaining Empire, was as real a new appearance of the Sove|reign Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> as either of tho&s;e two In&s;tances.</P>
<P>After this, it is not to be que&s;tioned, but that according to <MILESTONE N="7" UNIT="Query"> the Fathers, The Eighth King called the Bea&s;t, and Antichri&s;t, mu&s;t be that Sovereign Civil Power of the <HI>Romans,</HI> which &s;uc|ceeded <NOTE PLACE="marg">Agreements.</NOTE> the Barbarous Kings at <HI>Rome.</HI> For that mu&s;t be the King that was next to the Seventh. And this exactly agrees with the Text; For the Eighth King, called The Bea&s;t, is &s;aid to be <HI>of the Seven;</HI> As the Imperial Government re&s;tored by <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> who &s;ubdued the <HI>Italian</HI> Kings, was the Eighth Change of the Sovereign Power of <HI>Rome,</HI> but really nothing but the Sixth Head re&s;tored again.</P>
<P>It does al&s;o as nece&s;&s;arily follow from the Agreements of the <MILESTONE N="8" UNIT="Query"> Fathers about the con&s;titutive difference of Heads and Horns from one another; That that which is repre&s;ented by the Fal&s;e Prophet, cannot be the &s;ame thing with that which is called the Bea&s;t; <HI>viz.</HI> Becau&s;e the Bea&s;t is really nothing but an Head of the Bea&s;t, which by con&s;equence the 6th, Chap. 3. does denote <NOTE PLACE="marg">Prop. 6.</NOTE> a Civil Power of the <HI>Romans;</HI> whereas the Fal&s;e Prophet is de|&s;cribed as an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Power, employed in the &s;ervice of that Civil Power. See <HI>Revelat.</HI> 13, 12, 14.</P>
<P>But yet they might very well agree, That the Bea&s;t, and the Fal&s;e Prophet, might be u&s;ed promi&s;cuou&s;ly to &s;ignify the really di&s;tinct Actions of one another; becau&s;e they were joined toge|ther in one Confederacy; And the names of any Confederates,
<PB N="29" REF="224"> or Partners, in any thing, are commonly u&s;ed to expre&s;s the Actions of one another in the common De&s;ign. So <HI>Prima&s;ius</HI> upon the 13th of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> concerning them both&mdash;<Q>Both of them, &s;ays he, are every-where to be under&s;tood in conjunction&mdash;And pre&s;ently after&mdash;It is manife&s;t, that both the Bea&s;ts are one and the &s;ame body <HI>(of men)</HI> and exerci&s;e the &s;ame wicked Wor&s;hip; &s;o that the Fir&s;t is &s;aid to fight for the fal&s;e Shows of the Second.</Q></P>
<P>Thus I have drawn down the Con&s;equences of the General Con&s;ent of the Ancients, to mine own particular Opinion concern|ing the fir&s;t date of the Ri&s;e of the Bea&s;t, and the particular <HI>Roman</HI> Power that is now &s;ignified by that Term.</P>
<P>But that which is to be ob&s;erved for the General Confirma|tion of the Conclu&s;ion, in which almo&s;t all Prote&s;tants agree in, is, That if it be &s;ure, as may appear from the 4th Query, That the Sixth Head of the Bea&s;t is the Imperial Government at the time of the Vi&s;ion, then there need nothing be granted to prove <HI>the Bea&s;t and the Fal&s;e Prophet to be the Civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Power of</HI> Rome <HI>at this pre&s;ent,</HI> but only to demon&s;trate from Hi&s;tory, That there has certainly been two Changes of the Sovereign Power of the <HI>Romans</HI> &s;ince the time of St. <HI>John.</HI> For they did agree, That Antichri&s;t, from his fir&s;t appearance, mu&s;t continue <NOTE PLACE="marg">4th Agree|ment, Chap. 3. 3d Agree|ment, this Chap.</NOTE> till the Second Coming of Chri&s;t; and that the next Change of the Sovereignty of the <HI>Romans</HI> but one, after the time of the Vi&s;ion, mu&s;t be the Eighth King, or the Bea&s;t, and Antichri&s;t; And therefore at the beginning of the la&s;t of tho&s;e two Changes of the Government of the <HI>Romans,</HI> &s;ince the time of St. <HI>John,</HI> mu&s;t the Kingdom of Antichri&s;t have begun, when&s;oever that does appear from Hi&s;tory to have happened.</P>
<P>And what&s;oever the Fathers have delivered contrary to this, concerning the <HI>Time, Times, and half a Time</HI> of the Bea&s;t, as but three years and an half, mu&s;t have been acknowledged by them to contradict their General Agreements in other things more plain; and from <HI>Experience,</HI> which they often mention, as the only means to determine the meaning of &s;ome My&s;tical Expre&s;|&s;ions that regarded future Times, they would have learnt that tho&s;e Times were nece&s;&s;arily to be under&s;tood in a My&s;tical Sen&s;e, and not as they ordinarily &s;ignify; according to the frequent Examples in Scripture of &s;uch a My&s;tical Signification of parts of <NOTE PLACE="marg">See Corol. 1. Prop. 23. Rule 2.</NOTE> time, and the true Rule of Interpretation in &s;uch like Ca&s;es.</P>
<PB N="30" REF="225">
<P> For a clearer &s;atisfaction about the contrariety and incon&s;i|&s;tency of &s;ome of the particular Opinions of the Fathers, with the Conclu&s;ions in which they agree with the Unanimous Judg|ment of the re&s;t; it may be convenient to inquire into the grounds, or rea&s;ons of their Paradoxical Fancies about the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations,</HI> which contradicted the General Agreement about the &s;ignification of A Bea&s;t, and its Ruling Parts, in the Prophecy of <HI>Daniel.</HI></P>
<P>For this purpo&s;e it is in the fir&s;t place to be con&s;idered, That it is a true Ob&s;ervation of the Learned <HI>Grotius,</HI> That the Rea&s;on why the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> was not added at fir&s;t to the re&s;t of the Books <NOTE PLACE="marg">In Praefat. ad <HI>Apocal.</HI></NOTE> of the <HI>New Te&s;tament,</HI> which did afterwards give ground for que|&s;tioning the Canonical Authority of it, was, That it did &s;o openly point at the <HI>Roman</HI> Government, as the great Enemy of God, that it lay concealed in a few hands among&s;t the Chri&s;tians of the fir&s;t times, for fear of exa&s;perating the <HI>Romans</HI> again&s;t them. This does St. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome,</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> make to be the ground, why St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;poke &s;o my&s;teriou&s;ly about the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire in <NOTE PLACE="marg">In 2. Ep. <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI></NOTE> his Prophecy about Antichri&s;t, 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 6. when he &s;ays, And <HI>now ye know, what doth withhold;</HI> the Rea&s;on they give for it, is, That if the Apo&s;tle had openly named the <HI>Romans,</HI> they would have accounted him, and all the Faithful, very pe&s;tilent Mem|bers of their Government.</P>
<P>This fear of the then Ruling Power, together with the Profe&s;&s;i|ons of their ignorance of the application of the Characters of Anti|chri&s;t, becau&s;e they look'd upon their times as not at all concerned in tho&s;e things, may be very rea&s;onably judged to be the cau&s;e of the little care that the Fathers took to be wary in the Interpretati|ons that they gave of this Book. For they e&s;teemed it to be both a dangerous &s;tudy, and al&s;o relating to things that they could not well judge of; and al&s;o to future times, in which they &s;hould not &s;hare; And might therefore (as <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome,</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> do expre&s;ly &s;ay) bring them&s;elves unnece&s;&s;arily into great danger. And <HI>Jerom,</HI> in his An&s;wer to 11. q. <HI>ad Alga&s;iam,</HI> and <HI>Prima&s;ius</HI> upon 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 6. to the &s;ame purpo&s;e. This Account may the more ea&s;ily be allowed from the general neglect of the Book of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> even in this Age, to which the chief things in <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede,</HI> Bp. <HI>U&s;her,</HI> &amp;c.</NOTE> it are by the &s;evere&s;t Examiners of the Sen&s;e of Scripture judged to belong; &s;o as to be even laid a&s;ide out of the Calendar for <NOTE PLACE="marg">* <HI>Homilies</HI> of the Church of <HI>England,</HI> p. 69, and p. 316.</NOTE> the daily readings of Scripture by Prote&s;tants them&s;elves, &dagger; who
<PB N="31" REF="225"> neverthele&s;s do give the pre&s;ent Church of <HI>Rome</HI> the name of <HI>Babylon.</HI></P>
<P>It is then no great wonder, That <HI>Irenaeus,</HI> and <HI>Hippolytus,</HI> and &s;ome other of the Fathers, whil&s;t the <HI>Roman</HI> Government con|tinued Pagan, &s;hould be &s;o willing to make the Bea&s;t in general to be the World, and the Seven Heads of it to be &s;even Wicked Ages of the World, as the &s;um, or Recapitulation (as <HI>Irenaeus</HI> calls it) of all the Apo&s;tate times; For in that way, the Sixth Head, &s;aid in the Prophecy to be then in being, was not more applied to the <HI>Romans,</HI> than to all the other Wicked Nations in the World at that time; and the la&s;t Head, called the Bea&s;t, would not concern the then <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, becau&s;e it was not to come till after the end of that pre&s;ent Reigning Age.</P>
<P>And their willingne&s;s to take this &s;afe way, might make them ea&s;ie to be &s;atisfied with &s;uch &s;mall grounds as the&s;e for it, <HI>viz.</HI> 1. That the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> is &s;ignified, Chap. 13. 2. to <NOTE PLACE="marg">1. Dan. 2. 40. and 7. 7, 23.</NOTE> contain all the Four Bea&s;ts of the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> in his own Body; though that be the &s;ame with what is &s;aid of the Fourth Bea&s;t alone, that is, that he had devoured the other three. But this Apprehen&s;ion might ea&s;ily induce them, fir&s;t to fancy the Bea&s;t to be at lea&s;t all tho&s;e Four Monarchies that are mentioned in <HI>Da|niel;</HI> And 2. when that was done, they might as ea&s;ily thereupon be brought to extend the notion of it to contain the whole World in it, from the repre&s;entation of the Seven Heads upon it, the num|ber &s;even being then generally accounted in the Learning of the Jews and Chri&s;tians, to be a &s;ignification of the whole &s;um of the kind of things, with which it was joined; And then it was ob|vious to fancy the Seven Heads to be &s;ome &s;even parts of time, that &s;hould mea&s;ure out that bla&s;phemous, or ungodly time of the World, from the fir&s;t beginning of it, to the la&s;t end of it. And yet all the ground for this was nothing but that mention of the parts of the Four Bea&s;ts in the 7th of <HI>Daniel,</HI> in the make of the Body of the Bea&s;t in the 13th Chapter of the <HI>Revelations,</HI> which the Fourth Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel</HI> is &s;aid to have devoured.</P>
<P>The Fathers that came after the time of <HI>Con&s;tantine,</HI> and that &s;aw the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire turned Chri&s;tian, could not, it &s;eems, ever bring it into their minds to think, That God would ever &s;uffer the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire to relap&s;e again into Infidelity, or to appear in the dreadful Characters of the Tyranny of the Bea&s;t a|gain&s;t the Church; And yet they mu&s;t &s;tand to that, if they al|lowed
<PB N="32" REF="226"> <HI>Babylon</HI> to be <HI>Rome,</HI> or the future times of the Bea&s;t to be|long to the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire. They therefore interpret <HI>Babylon</HI> to be the General City of all Wicked Men all the World over, and the Bea&s;t to be the World of Wicked Men; and the Seven Heads to be either all the Tyrannical Powers of the World that had, or &s;hould per&s;ecute the Church of God, or all the Wicked Em|perors only of that Time, Heathen, or <HI>Arrian.</HI></P>
<P>That which might the more ea&s;ily di&s;po&s;e them to this, was the Clamours of the <HI>Arrians</HI> and <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> again&s;t the then Ortho|dox Party, that they were the People of that <HI>Babylon,</HI> that is &s;o dreadfully &s;et out in the <HI>Revelations.</HI> For it was very obvious for any, that had zeal enough, to make the Change of Religi|on to be the Change of one of the Heads of the Bea&s;t; and &s;o to account the Sixth Head to be the Heathen Emperors only, the Seventh King to be the &s;hort continuance of Imperial, and profe&s;&s;ed <HI>Arriani&s;m,</HI> under <HI>Con&s;tantius, Valens,</HI> &amp;c. as the time of the Seventh King is de&s;cribed; And the Eighth King, called The Bea&s;t, to be the return of that which the&s;e called Idolatry and Bla&s;phemy (but others Orthodoxy) under the re&s;t of the Emperors that &s;ucceeded, and that were in the time of this Charge in power.</P>
<P>If we con&s;ider, That by &s;ome of the be&s;t Learned, and Cau|tious <NOTE PLACE="marg">Mr. <HI>Mede.</HI> Dr. <HI>More.</HI></NOTE> Interpreters of this pre&s;ent Age, the change of Religion in the Imperial Head, is made to be the end of the Reign of that Head, it will appear very rea&s;onable to judge, That the&s;e Clamours of their Adver&s;aries might be thought to have &s;ome ground for them, if they &s;hould allow The Bea&s;t, and Heads, to be <HI>Roman</HI> Powers only: And this Con&s;ideration might very well make them conclude, that <HI>Babylon</HI> could not be <HI>Rome,</HI> nor the Heads of the Bea&s;t to be &s;o many Succe&s;&s;ions of <HI>Roman</HI> Govern|ment, at lea&s;t if they thought it to be undoubted, That the then called Orthodox Party could not po&s;&s;ibly be concerned in the Characters of the Bea&s;t. For,</P>
<P>That the Orthodox were then charged by their Adver&s;aries with the Application of <HI>Babylon,</HI> and the Bea&s;t, to them, is evi|dent. That which is the cleare&s;t In&s;tance of this nature, is that which <HI>Bede,</HI> in his Preface to his Comment upon the <HI>Reve|lations,</HI> &s;ays of <HI>Tyconius,</HI> an Eminent <HI>Donati&s;t,</HI> and whom he commends for his Interpretation&mdash;He there &s;ays, That <HI>Ty|conius,</HI> who had &s;uffered in the Cau&s;e of the <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> with the
<PB N="33" REF="226"> re&s;t of his Brethren, That he did apply all the Per&s;ecutions in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to the Actions of the then pre&s;ent Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> again&s;t tho&s;e of his Party: And <HI>Prima&s;ius,</HI> another of his Followers, does al&s;o in his Comment upon this Book, affirm much the &s;ame of him in his Preface. So al&s;o does the Imper|fect Work upon St. <HI>Matthew</HI> (wrongly attributed to <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome)</HI> charge the Governing party of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church about the &s;ame time, with much the &s;ame accu&s;ations in &s;everal places of it; and <HI>Bellarmin</HI> informs us, Lib. 3. <HI>de Pontif.</HI> c. 11. That <HI>the Orthodox</HI> Africans <HI>were called</HI> Romani&s;ts <HI>by the</HI> Arrians, as a name of reproach.</P>
<P>Whatever was the true Rea&s;on of this new Interpretation of the name of <HI>Babylon,</HI> it is certain, that it was again&s;t the opinion of all the Fathers before, as the mo&s;t Learned of the <HI>Roman</HI> In|terpreters do often acquaint us; and as may be &s;een from <HI>Ire|naeus</HI> in particular, <HI>Lib.</HI> 5. <HI>Contra Haere&s;.</HI> And from <HI>Tertullian</HI> in <HI>Apolog. Victorinus,</HI> &amp;c. And there could be no greater Rea&s;on to move them to it, than the clamours of that di&s;contented Party.</P>
<P>But after the inundation of the Barbarous Nations all over the <HI>Roman</HI> Empire, and the &s;ettlement of their &s;everal King|doms within the Bounds of it, <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is,</HI> and <HI>Arethas,</HI> as if they had now plainly &s;een the divi&s;ion of that Empire among&s;t the Ten Kings, repre&s;ented by the Ten Horns of the Bea&s;t, &s;eem to be not &s;o well &s;atisfied about the My&s;tical way of Interpretation, which they had received from tho&s;e before them. But yet for fear of fixing the Characters of <HI>Babylon</HI> upon the then pre&s;ent times of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, they are very cau|tious of determining any way: They &s;how how many mean|ings <HI>Babylon</HI> may have in it; it may either be <HI>the whole World</HI> of the Wicked in general, or <HI>Babylon</HI> in <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> or Old <HI>Rome,</HI> or New <HI>Rome;</HI> and the Seven Heads of the Bea&s;t may be either all the wicked Emperours, or Seven Ages of the World, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And yet when they come to bethink them&s;elves again, <HI>Babylon mu&s;t &s;ome|times</HI> be <HI>Rome</HI> with them, according to the Ancient Fathers; and yet that it <HI>cannot</HI> be Old <HI>Rome,</HI> becau&s;e that had lo&s;t all Ma|je&s;ty of Empire, (And then what <HI>Rome</HI> can it be el&s;e?) And that Antichri&s;t, when he comes, mu&s;t be a Monarch of <HI>Rome.</HI> See <HI>Andreas Cae&s;arien&s;is</HI> on the 13th and 17th Chapters of the <HI>Revelations.</HI></P>
<PB N="34" REF="227">
<P> All which &s;hows, That the only thing that can be depended upon, as the Authoritative &s;en&s;e of the Ancients, is their Gene|neral Agreement about the nature of the 4th Bea&s;t in <HI>Daniel,</HI> and about the relation of the Bea&s;t in the <HI>Revelations</HI> to it; And the immediate con&s;equences of that unanimous con&s;ent.</P>
<P>If now it &s;hould be thought to be a great prejudice again&s;t the clearne&s;s and ea&s;ine&s;s of the Prote&s;tant Applications of the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e</HI> to the Church of <HI>Rome;</HI> That that Interpretation was never heard of for many Ages together, after the time that the beginning of the Apo&s;tacy of the <HI>Roman</HI> Church is dated from by Prote&s;tants: <HI>Baronius</HI>'s Te&s;timony concerning it, is a &s;uf|ficient An&s;wer to that, who (as <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Divers Di&s;|cour&s;es, p. 119.</NOTE> Dr. <HI>Barnard</HI> ob&s;erves) does acknowledg, That there was not an Age in which &s;ome Learned Man or other did not appear in this charge of Antichri&s;tiani&s;m upon the Church of <HI>Rome.</HI> And we have already &s;een the Charge of the <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> and <HI>Arrians;</HI> and if that &s;hould be e&s;teemed to be nothing but the unrea&s;onable clamours of Hereticks, Pope <HI>Gre|gory</HI>'s <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 4. Epi&s;t. 38.</NOTE> complaint of the &s;ame nature, again&s;t that Antichri&s;tian Supremacy of the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> which came after|wards to be the Title of the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> is unexception|able. <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 6. Ep. 28.</NOTE></P>
<P>But pre&s;ently after that Age, when <HI>Baronius</HI> him&s;elf &s;ays, <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>An.</HI> 900. Art. 1, 2, 3.</NOTE> That the <HI>Abomination of De&s;olation</HI> &s;eemed to have been brought into the Church, <HI>Arnulphus,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Orleans,</HI> in his Speech to the Synod of <HI>Rheims,</HI> appeals to the whole Synod, whether <NOTE PLACE="marg">Synod. <HI>Rheim.</HI> Cap. 25, 26, 27, 28. <HI>A. D.</HI> 991. <HI>Mornay</HI> My|&s;ter. Iniquity. p. 213.</NOTE> the behaviour of the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> did not in their opinion fully an&s;wer the Character of Antichri&s;t <HI>&s;itting in the Temple of God?&mdash;</HI>And thereupon applies the 2 <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 2. 4, 6, 7. to the <HI>Falling in pieces of the</HI> Roman <HI>Empire, and the Elevation of the Papa|cy upon the ruines of it.</HI></P>
<P>But after that Pope <HI>Gregory</HI> the 7th, called <HI>Hildebrand,</HI> had a while &s;hown him&s;elf, there were frequent clamours of this na|ture. <HI>Aventinus,</HI> an Hi&s;torian of that Church, &s;ays, That <HI>the</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">Lib. 5.</NOTE> <HI>Greate&s;t part of Good, Ingenuous, Faithful, and Clear-&s;pirited Wri|ters did hold, That THEN begun the Empire of Antichri&s;t.</HI> And accordingly do we find the whole Clergy of the Dioce&s;s of <HI>Liege,</HI> in their An&s;wer to Pope <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI>'s Letter, who had been <HI>Hildebrand</HI>'s Scholar, applying the Rage of the Devil in <NOTE PLACE="marg">2. Vol. <HI>Concil.</HI> p. 809. Edit. <HI>Colon.</HI></NOTE> the <HI>Apocalyp&s;e,</HI> again&s;t the true Church, to the Popes Actions;
<PB N="35" REF="227"> And the Emperour <HI>Henry</HI> (who was with them) in his Letters to the Chri&s;tian Princes, does al&s;o in expre&s;s words apply the Characters of Antichri&s;t in the <HI>The&s;&s;.</HI> 1 <HI>Ep.</HI> 2. to <HI>Pa&s;chal.</HI> The Bi&s;hop of <HI>Florence</HI> al&s;o at the &s;ame time did publickly Preach, that <HI>Antichri&s;t was then born,</HI> which made Pope <HI>Pa&s;chal</HI> go in per|&s;on <NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Platina</HI> in <HI>Pa|&s;chal.</HI> 2.</NOTE> to <HI>Florence,</HI> and call a Council there to admoni&s;h him to de&s;i&s;t.</P>
<P>Their own St. <HI>Bernard</HI> tells us fir&s;t, That he had heard <HI>Nor|bart,</HI> <NOTE PLACE="marg">About the Year 1125. Epi&s;t. 56.</NOTE> of great repute for Holine&s;s, affirm with a prote&s;tation, That he did mo&s;t certainly know that Antichri&s;t &s;hould be re|vealed in that Generation. And <HI>Bernard</HI> him&s;elf does al&s;o call <NOTE PLACE="marg">In Cantic. Serm. 33. Epi&s;t. 125.</NOTE> the Pope Antichri&s;t; and &s;ays, That the Bea&s;t of the <HI>Apoca|lyp&s;e,</HI> to whom <HI>was given a Mouth &s;peaking Bla&s;phemies, and to make War again&s;t the Saints,</HI> does &s;it in the Chair of St. <HI>Peter.</HI></P>
<P>But <HI>Everhard,</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Saltzburg,</HI> in the time of <HI>Gregory</HI> the <NOTE PLACE="marg">About <HI>A. D.</HI> 1230.</NOTE> 9th, at the A&s;&s;embly at <HI>Ratisbonne,</HI> doth the mo&s;t particularly prove the Time of the Bea&s;t, as the 8th King of the <HI>Romans,</HI> to have been come ever &s;ince the time of <HI>Hildebrand</HI> at lea&s;t, from the end of the Imperial Power that was the Sixth Head, and the divi&s;ion of the Empire among&s;t the Ten Kings. <HI>Aventin.</HI> Lib. 7. 545.</P>
<P>This was the judgment of &s;uch as were of the <HI>Roman</HI> Com|munion: But ever &s;ince the fir&s;t great appearance of the <HI>Albi|gen&s;es,</HI> which was before the year 1170. there has been a con|tinuation of this Accu&s;ation again&s;t the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, by whole Bodies of Churches, divided from that Communion.</P>
<P>Tho&s;e that have the curio&s;ity to &s;ee a more particular account of the Tradition of the Charge of Antichri&s;t upon the <HI>Roman</HI> Church, from the be&s;t Learned of its own Members, may con|&s;ult <HI>Du Ple&s;&s;is Mornay,</HI> in his <HI>My&s;tery of Iniquity;</HI> and Dr. <HI>Bernard</HI> in his Fourth Di&s;cour&s;e, from page 119. where there is an ac|count more particularly of the Learned Men of this Opinion in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> both in the times of its Papal &s;tate, and &s;ince the Reformation.</P>
</DIV2>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="publisher's advertisement">
<PB REF="228">
<HEAD>Books Printed for <HI>Thomas Cockerill,</HI> at the <HI>Three Legs</HI> in the <HI>Poultrey.</HI></HEAD>
<P>THE Works of the Late Reverend Divine Mr. <HI>Stephen Charnock,</HI> B. D. &s;ometimes Fellow of <HI>New Colledge</HI> in <HI>Oxon.</HI> Folio, 2 Vol.</P>
<P><HI>Speculum Theologiae in Chri&s;to:</HI> or, A View of &s;ome Divine Truths, which are either practically exemplified in Je&s;us Chri&s;t, &s;et forth in the Go&s;pel, or may ea&s;ily be deduced from them: By <HI>Edward Polhill</HI> of <HI>Bur|wa&s;h</HI> in <HI>Su&s;&s;ex,</HI> E&s;q; 4^o.</P>
<P><HI>Precious Faith</HI> con&s;idered in its Nature, Working and Growth; By <HI>Ed|ward Polhill,</HI> E&s;q; in 4^o.</P>
<P><HI>Geography Rectified:</HI> or, A De&s;cription of the World, in all its King|doms, Provinces, Cities, Towns, Seas, Rivers&punc; Bays, Capes, Forts; their Ancient and pre&s;ent names, Inhabitants, Scituation, Hi&s;tories, Cu&s;toms, Governments, <HI>&amp;c</HI> and al&s;o their Commodities, Coins, Weights and Mea|&s;ures, with tho&s;e of <HI>London,</HI> illu&s;trated with about 80 new Maps; the whole Work perform'd according to the Accurate Di&s;coveries of Modern Authors. In 4^o. 2<HI>d Edition.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Chri&s;tus in Corde:</HI> or, The My&s;tical Union between Chri&s;t and Be|lievers, con&s;ider'd in its Re&s;emblances, Bonds, Seals, Priviledges and Marks: By <HI>Edward Polhill,</HI> E&s;q; in 8^o.</P>
<P><HI>A Practical Grammar;</HI> or, The Ea&s;ie&s;t and &s;horte&s;t way to initiate young Children in the Latin Tongue; by the help whereof a Child of Seven years old may learn more of the grounds of that Language in Three months, than is ordinarily learnt in a years &s;pace by tho&s;e of a greater age in a Common Grammar School; Publi&s;hed for the u&s;e of tho&s;e that love not to be tedious: To which are added Tables of Mr. <HI>Wal|ker</HI>'s Particles, by the a&s;&s;i&s;tance whereof young Scholars may be better enabled to peru&s;e that Excellent and mo&s;t u&s;eful Treati&s;e: By <HI>F: Phila|math.</HI> Ma&s;ter of a Free-School. In 8^o.</P>
<P>A Dialogue between a <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Prie&s;t and an <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> Prote&s;tant; where|in the Principal Points and Arguments of both Religions are truly prepa|red, and fully examined by <HI>Matth. Pool,</HI> Author of the <HI>Synop&s;is Critico|rum.</HI> In 12^o.</P>
<P><HI>Familiaria Colloquia Opera</HI> Chri&s;topheri Helvici, <HI>D. &amp; Profe&s;&s;o|ris Gre&s;&s;en&s;is olim ex</HI> Era&s;mo Roterodamo, Ludovico Vive, <HI>&amp;</HI> Schor|tenio <HI>Halio &s;electa, Editio Decima Quarta, ad pri&s;tina exemplaria denuo recognita.</HI> 12^o.</P>
<P><HI>School of Manners:</HI> or, Rules for Childrens Behaviour; By the Author of the <HI>Engli&s;h Exerci&s;e for School-boys.</HI> 12^o.</P>
<P>Gradus ad Parna&s;&s;um; <HI>five, Novus Synonymorum, Epithetorum &amp; Phra&s;i|um Poeticarum The&s;aurus, Elegantiae, Flavi&s;&s;as Poeticas, Parna&s;&s;um Poe|ticum, The&s;aurum</HI> Virgilii Smetium, <HI>Januam Mu&s;arum alio&s;que id genus Li|bros ad Poe&s;in nece&s;&s;arias complectens.</HI></P>
<P>Some Sermons upon Regeneration, Faith and Repentance, preach'd at the Merchants Lecture in <HI>Broad&s;treet.</HI> By <HI>Thomas Cole.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Marriage Promoted.</HI> In a Di&s;cour&s;e of its Ancient and Modern Practice, both under <HI>Heathen</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Commonwealths; and how far it may be practicable and commodious to the pre&s;ervation of the&s;e Kingdoms. By a Per&s;on of Quality.</P>
<PB REF="228">
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</GROUP>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
