Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][merged small]

power of the horn is limited, in Dan. vii. 25, to three times and a half; that of the beast in Rev. xiii. 7, to forty-two months, which is precisely three times (years,) and a half. From this circumstance, added to other characteristical resemblances, it is manifest, and has appeared so to the most eminent protestant commentators, that this little horn is a symbol of the same power, as is represented in Rev. xiii. by the beast with two horns, which Mr. Penn acknowledges to be the papacy.

4th. The episcopal character of the power, designated by the horn, is marked by the singular circumstance, of this horn having eyes, like the eyes of a man. There is in this, a manifest allusion to the Greek word, for a bishop, IXOTOS, which literally signifies an overseer.

The argument of Mr. Penn, against this application of the symbol, founded on what is termed the prescriptive belief of the primitive church, seems entitled to no weight. For we are assured in the "for this from you, as well as the other bishops, whom our epistle equally concerns; and we most anxiously expect it, that the deep "sorrow we feel on account of this new species of tares which an "enemy is sowing so abundantly, may, by this cheering hope, be "somewhat alleviated; and, together with the apostolic benediction "which we bestow on you and your fellow bishops, we heartily invoke "on yourself and them a continual increase of spiritual gifts, for "the good of the Lord's flock.

"Given at Rome, at St. Mary the Greater, June 29, 1816, the

" 17th year of our Pontificate.

"POPE PIUS VIL."

Scriptures, that even the prophets understood not their own predictions. This prescriptive belief, therefore, when strictly analyzed, appears to consist of nothing more, than the unauthorized conjectures of the uninspired writers called the Fathers, concerning the manner of the accomplishment of Daniel's prophecy, before events had thrown light upon its fulfilment.

The second leading point, wherein Mr. Penn has seen it proper to deviate from the general system of protestant exposition, consists in his having denied that the existence of the prophetical period of 1260 years, can with certainty be inferred, from the writings of Daniel and St. John. In his reply to my strictures, he lays much stress upon the period not being expressly mentioned in the Scriptures. Now I would ask Mr. Penn, whether the Roman empire which he discovers in the beast of the Apocalypse, or the papal power which he discerns in the two-horned beast, be any where mentioned in the Scriptures by their proper names? If it be possible, then, as Mr. Penn himself allows, to form undoubted deductions from the Scriptures, with respect to the prophetical designation of a secular and spiritual empire, though that empire be not mentioned by name; may not the characters likewise of a chronological period be so clearly marked, and the interpretation of those characters so determinately prescribed, by the analogy of some other similar number,

with respect to which there is a common agreement among Jewish, and Catholic, and Protestant expositors, as to render it not a matter of rational doubt, what specific period is designed by the number which is the subject of investigation, even though that period be no where expressed without the same enigmatical disguise which is common to the whole system of prophetical truth, and one of the ends of which is expressly declared to be, that though the wise shall understand, yet none of the wicked shall comprehend the important, but mysterious revelation of the divine purposes? Now, it was shown in my former preface, that by such principles the existence of the prophetical period of 1260 years, is certainly discoverable from the Scriptures. In his reply to my strictures, however, the author of the Christian's Survey wholly passes over that part of my argument which is derived from the analogy of the seventy weeks of Daniel with the period in question, in which much of the strength of my reasoning

consists.

But Mr. Penn reasons, that because a controversy of some years existed between Mr. Faber and myself, on the subject of the commencement and close of that prophetical period, therefore the period itself is unintelligible in point of fact, and uncertain, hypothetical and equivocal. This argument would indeed confine the range of intelligible scriptural truth, within very narrow limits, for what parts of

the evangelical system have not in a similar manner been the subjects of controversy? And to quote an example nearer in point, does it follow (I repeat the question) because Daniel's prophecy of seventy weeks is still the subject of controversy, as to its commencement and end, that therefore the period itself is uncertain, equivocal and unintelligible?

I might proceed to offer some remarks on Mr. Penn's notion respecting the thousand years mentioned in Rev. xx. and his mode of explaining the prophecies regarding the conversion and restoration of the Jews; but I should thereby be led into too wide a field of discussion. I shall however very briefly place before the reader, some of the consequences which flow from Mr. Penn's scheme of the Millennium. According to his theory, when Innocent III. preached a crusade for the extirpation of the Albigenses and Waldenses, when the Inquisition kindled throughout Catholic Europe the flames of persecution, when the fires were lighted in Smithfield, when the festival of St. Bartholomew in France was dyed with streams of protestant blood, at all these periods Satan was chained in the bottomless pit, and all these events are included in the Millennium which he would substitute for the opinion, which, with whatsoever variation of subordinate circumstances, is generally received in the protestant church, an opinion which the author of the Chris

tian's Survey classes with "the decoys of system and "the fascinations of fancy!"

Mr. Penn further treats the sentiment, that the Roman empire is to be broken in Palestine, as a fond vision, and the generally received exposition of the prophecies respecting the restoration of Israel, as a Judaizing fiction. But let him not forget, that both these opinions were entertained by one of the profoundest scriptural critics, and most sagacious interpreters of prophecy, that the last or any other age ever produced; I mean the late Bishop Horsley. If Mr. Penn instead of calling these opinions hard names, had offered scriptural arguments against them, he would probably have found some at least among their numerous advocates, prepared to meet him, and to discuss with a calm and Christian spirit, the foundation of their own speculations on these high subjects. But we must protest against either Jerome or Augustine, or any of the fathers, being cited as authorities in interpreting prophecies, which were unfulfilled in their time. With these remarks I shall take my leave of Mr. Penn, assuring him how much pleasure it affords me in any instance to agree with him, which I cordially do, in his practical remarks upon an event which I no less than he believe to be near at hand, the second advent of our Lord. Would that Christians could always agree in all things! But since this cannot be in the present

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »