He, under the name of Mithra, was worshipped as Mesites, or "the
Mediator"; she, as Aphrodite, or the "Wrath-subduer," was called
Mylitta, "the Mediatrix." He was represented as crushing the great
serpent under his heel; she, as bruising the serpent's head in her
hand. He, under the name Janus, bore a key as the opener and shutter
of the gates of the invisible world. She, under the name of Cybele,
was invested with a like key, as an emblem of the same power. *
* TOOKE'S Pantheon . That the key of Cybele, in
the esoteric story, had a corresponding meaning to that of Janus, will
appear from the character above assigned to her as the
Mediatrix.
He, as the cleanser from sin, was called the "Unpolluted god"; she,
too, had the power to wash away sin, and, though the mother of the
seed, was called the "Virgin, pure and undefiled." He was represented
as "Judge of the dead"; she was represented as standing by his side,
at the judgment-seat, in the unseen world. He, after being killed by
the sword, was fabled to have risen again, and ascended up to heaven.
She, too, though history makes her to have been killed with the sword
by one of her own sons, * was nevertheless in the myth, said to have
been carried by her son bodily to heaven, and to have been made
Pambasileia, "Queen of the universe." Finally, to clench the whole,
the name by which she was now known was Semele, which, in the
Babylonian language, signifies "THE IMAGE." ** Thus, in every respect,
to the very least jot and tittle, she became the express image of the
Babylonian "beast that had the wound by a sword, and did live."
* In like manner, Horus, in Egypt, is said to have cut
off his mother's head, as Bel in Babylon also cut asunder the great
primeval goddess of the Babylonians. (BUNSEN)
** Apollodorus states that Bacchus, on carrying his mother to heaven,
called her Thuone, which was just the feminine of his own name,
Thuoenus--in Latin Thyoneus. (OVID, Metam .) Thuoneus is
evidently from the passive participle of Thn , "to lament," a
synonym for "Bacchus," "The lamented god ." Thuone, in like
manner, is "The lamented goddess ." The Roman Juno was evidently
known in this very character of the "Image"; for there was a temple
erected to her in Rome, on the Capitoline hill, under the name of
"Juno Moneta." Moneta is the emphatic form of one of the Chaldee words
for an "image"; and that this was the real meaning of the name, will
appear from the fact that the Mint was contained in the precincts of
that temple. (See SMITH'S "Juno") What is the use of a mint but just
to stamp "images "? Hence the connection between Juno and the
Mint.
After what the reader has already seen in a previous part of this
work, it is hardly necessary to say that it is this very goddess that
is now worshipped in the Church of Rome under the name of Mary. Though
that goddess is called by the name of the mother of our Lord, all the
attributes given to her are derived simply from the Babylonian
Madonna, and not from the Virgin Mother of Christ. *
* The very way in which the Popish Madonna is
represented is plainly copied from the idolatrous representations of
the Pagan goddess. The great god used to be represented as sitting or
standing in the cup of a Lotus-flower. In India, the very same mode of
representation is common; Brahma being often seen seated on a
Lotus-flower, said to have sprung from the navel of Vishnu. The great
goddess, in like manner, must have a similar couch; and, therefore, in
India, we find Lakshmi, the "Mother of the Universe," sitting on a
Lotus, borne by a tortoise. Now, in this very thing, also Popery has
copied from its Pagan model; for, in the Pancarpium Marianum
the Virgin and child are represented sitting in the cup of a
tulip.
There is not one line or one letter in all the Bible to countenance
the idea that Mary should be worshipped, that she is the "refuge of
sinners," that she was "immaculate," that she made atonement for sin
when standing by the cross, and when, according to Simeon, "a sword
pierced through her own soul also"; or that, after her death, she was
raised from the dead and carried in glory to heaven. But in the
Babylonian system all this was found; and all this is now incorporated
in the system of Rome. The "sacred heart of Mary" is exhibited as
pierced through with a sword, in token , as the apostate Church
teaches, that her anguish at the crucifixion was as true an atonement
as the death of Christ;--for we read in the Devotional office or
Service-book, adopted by the "Sodality of the sacred heart," such
blasphemous words as these, "Go, then, devout client! go to the heart
of Jesus, but let your way be through the heart of Mary; the sword
of grief which pierced her soul opens you a passage ; enter by the
wound which love has made"; *--again we hear one expounder of the new
faith, like M. Genoude in France, say that "Mary was the repairer of
the guilt of Eve, as our Lord was the repairer of the guilt of Adam";
and another--Professor Oswald of Paderbon--affirm that Mary was not a
human creature like us, that she is "the Woman, as Christ is the Man,"
that "Mary is co-present in the Eucharist, and that it is indisputable
that, according to the Eucharistic doctrine of the Church, this
presence of Mary in the Eucharist is true and real , not merely
ideal or figurative"; and, further, we read in the Pope's decree of
the Immaculate Conception, that that same Madonna, for this purpose
"wounded with the sword," rose from the dead, and being assumed up on
high, became Queen of Heaven. If all this be so, who can fail to see
that in that apostate community is to be found what precisely answers
to the making and setting up in the heart of Christendom, of an "Image
to the beast that had the wound by a sword and did live"?
* Memoir of Rev. Godfrey Massy . In the
Paradisus sponsi et sponsoe , by the author of Pancarpium
Marianum , the following words, addressed to the Virgin, occur in
illustration of a plate representing the crucifixion, and Mary, at the
foot of the Cross, with the sword in her breast , "Thy beloved
son did sacrifice his flesh; thou thy soul--yea, both body and soul."
This does much more than put the sacrifice of the Virgin on a level
with that of the Lord Jesus, it makes it greater far. This, in 1617,
was the creed only of Jesuitism; now there is reason to believe
it to be the general creed of the Papacy.
If the inspired terms be consulted, it will be seen that this was to
be done by some public general act of apostate Christendom; (v 14),
"Saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an
image to the beast"; and they made it. Now, here is the important fact
to be observed, that this never was done, and this never could
have been done, till eight years ago; for this plain reason, that till
then the Madonna of Rome was never recognised as combining all the
characters that belonged to the Babylonian "IMAGE of the beast." Till
then it was not admitted even in Rome, though this evil leaven had
been long working, and that strongly, that Mary was truly immaculate,
and consequently she could not be the perfect counterpart of the
Babylonian Image. What, however, had never been done before, was done
in December, 1854. Then bishops from all parts of Christendom, and
representatives from the ends of the earth, met in Rome; and with only
four dissentient voices, it was decreed that Mary, the mother of God,
who died, rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven, should
henceforth be worshipped as the Immaculate Virgin, "conceived and born
without sin." This was the formal setting up of the Image of the
beast, and that by the general consent of "the men that dwell upon the
earth." Now, this beast being set up, it is said, that the beast from
the earth gives life and speech to the Image, implying, first,
that it has neither life nor voice in itself; but that, nevertheless,
through means of the beast from the earth, it is to have both life and
voice, and to be an effective agent of the Papal clergy, who will make
it speak exactly as they please. Since the Image has been set up, its
voice has been everywhere heard throughout the Papacy. Formerly
decrees ran less or more in the name of Christ. Now all things are
pre-eminently done in the name of the Immaculate Virgin. Her voice is
everywhere heard--her voice is supreme. But, be it observed, when that
voice is heard, it is not the voice of mercy and love, it is the voice
of cruelty and terror. The decrees that come forth under the name of
the Image, are to this effect (v 17), that "no man might buy or sell,
save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of
his name." No sooner is the image set up than we see this very thing
begun to be carried out. What was the Concordat in Austria, that so
speedily followed, but this very thing? That concordat, through the
force of unexpected events that have arisen, has not yet been carried
into effect; but if it were, the results would just be what is
predicted--that no man in the Austrian dominions should "buy or sell"
without the mark in some shape or other. And the very fact of such an
intolerant concordat coming so speedily on the back of the Decree of
the Immaculate Conception, shows what is the natural fruit of that
decree. The events that soon thereafter took place in Spain showed the
powerful working of the same persecuting spirit there also. During the
last few years, the tide of spiritual despotism might have seemed to
be effectually arrested; and many, no doubt, have indulged the
persuasion that, crippled as the temporal sovereignty of the Papacy
is, and tottering as it seems to be, that power, or its subordinates,
could never persecute more. But there is an amazing vitality in the
Mystery of Iniquity; and no one can ever tell beforehand what
apparent impossibilities it may accomplish in the way of arresting the
progress of truth and liberty, however promising the aspect of things
may be. Whatever may become of the temporal sovereignty of the Roman
states, it is by no means so evident this day, as to many it seemed
only a short while ago, that the overthrow of the spiritual power of
the Papacy is imminent, and that its power to persecute is finally
gone. I doubt not but that many, constrained by the love and mercy of
God, will yet obey the heavenly voice, and flee out of the doomed
communion, before the vials of Divine wrath descend upon it. But if I
have been right in the interpretation of this passage, then it follows
that it must yet become more persecuting than ever it has been, and
that that intolerance, which, immediately after the setting up of the
Image, began to display itself in Austria and Spain, shall yet spread
over all Europe; for it is not said that the Image of the beast should
merely decree , but should "cause that as many as would
not worship the Image of the beast should be killed" (v 15). When this
takes place, that evidently is the time when the language of verse 8
is fulfilled, "And all that dwell on the earth shall worship the
beast, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb
slain from the foundation of the world." It is impossible to get quit
of this by saying, "This refers to the Dark Ages; this was fulfilled
before Luther." I ask, had the men who dwelt on the earth set up the
Image of the beast before Luther's days? Plainly not. The decree of
the Immaculate Conception was the deed of yesterday. The prophecy,
then, refers to our own times--to the period on which the Church is
now entering. In other words, the slaying of the witnesses, the grand
trial of the saints, IS STILL TO COME. (see note below)
____________________
The Slaying of the Witnesses
Is it past, or is it still to come? This is a vital question. The
favourite doctrine at this moment is, that it is past centuries ago,
and that no such dark night of suffering to the saints of God can ever
come again, as happened just before the era of the Reformation. This
is the cardinal principle of a work that has just appeared, under the
title of The Great Exodus , which implies, that however much the
truth may be assailed, however much the saints of God may be
threatened, however their fears may be aroused, they have no real
reason to fear, for that the Red Sea will divide, the tribes of the
Lord will pass through dry shod, and all their enemies, like Pharaoh
and his host, shall sink in overwhelming ruin. If the doctrine
maintained by many of the soberest interpreters of Scripture for a
century past, including such names as Brown of Haddington, Thomas
Scott, and others, be well founded-viz., that the putting down of the
testimony of the witnesses is till to come, this theory must not only
be a delusion, but a delusion of most fatal tendency--a delusion that
by throwing professors off their guard, and giving them an excuse for
taking their ease, rather than standing in the high places of the
field, and bearing bold and unflinching testimony for Christ, directly
paves the way for that very extinction of the testimony which is
predicted. I enter not into any historical disquisition as to the
question, whether, as a matter of fact, it was true that the witnesses
were slain before Luther appeared. Those who wish to see an historical
argument on the subject may see it in the Red Republic , which I
venture to think has not yet been answered. Neither do I think it
worth while particularly to examine the assumption of Dr. Wylie, and I
hold it to be a pure and gratuitous assumption, that the 1260 days
during which the saints of God in Gospel times were to suffer for
righteousness' sake, has any relation whatever, as a half period, to a
whole , symbolised by the "Seven times" that passed over
Nebuchadnezzar when he was suffering and chastened for his pride and
blasphemy, as the representative of the "world power." *
* The author does not himself make the humiliation of
the Babylonian king a type of the humiliation of the Church. How then
can he establish any typical relation between the "seven times" in the
one case, and the "seven times" in the other? He seems to think it
quite enough to establish that relation, if he can find one point of
resemblance between Nebuchadnezzar, the humbled despot, and the
"world-power" that oppresses the Church during the two periods
of "seven times" respectively. That one point is the "madness" of the
one and the other. It might be asked, Was, then, the "world-power" in
its right mind before "the seven times" began? But waiving
that, here is the vital objection to this view: The madness in the
case of Nebuchadnezzar was simply an affliction ; in the other
it was sin . The madness of Nebuchadnezzar did not, so far as we
know, lead him to oppress a single individual; the madness of the
"world-power," according to the theory, is essentially characterised
by the oppression of the saints. Where, then, can there be the least
analogy between the two cases? The "seven times" of the Babylonian
king were seven times of humiliation , and humiliation
alone . The suffering monarch cannot be a type of the suffering
Church; and still less can his "seven times" of deepest humiliation,
when all power and glory was taken from him, be a type of the "seven
times" of the "world-power," when that "world-power" was to
concentrate in itself all the glory and grandeur of the earth. This is
one fatal objection to this theory. Then let the reader only look at
the following sentence from the work under consideration, and compare
it with historical fact, and he will see still more how unfounded the
theory is: "It follows undeniably," says the author, "that as the
Church is to be tyrannised over by the idolatrous power throughout the
whole of the seven times, she will be oppressed during the first half
of the 'seven times,' by idolatry in the form of Paganism, and during
the last half by idolatry in the form of Popery." Now, the first half,
or 1260 years, during which the Church was to be oppressed by
Pagan idolatry, ran out exactly, it is said, in AD 530 or 532;
when suddenly Justinian changed the scene, and brought the new
oppressor on the stage. But I ask where was the "world-power" to be
found up to 530, maintaining "idolatry in the form of
Paganism "? From the time of Gratian at least, who, about 376,
formally abolished the worship of the gods, and confiscated their
revenues, where was there any such Pagan power to persecute?
There is certainly a very considerable interval between 376 and 532.
The necessities of the theory require that Paganism, and that avowed
Paganism, be it observed, shall be persecuting the Church straight
away till 532; but for 156 years there was no such thing as a Pagan
"world-power" in existence to persecute the Church. "The legs of the
lame," says Solomon, "are not equal"; and if the 1260 years of Pagan
persecution lack no less that 156 years of the predicted period,
surely it must be manifest that the theory halts very much on one side
at least. But I ask, do the facts agree with the theory, even in
regard to the running out of the second 1260 years in 1792, at the
period of the French Revolution? If the 1260 years of Papal oppression
terminated then, and if then the Ancient of days came to begin
the final judgment on the beast, He came also to do something else.
This will appear from the language of Daniel 7:21, 22: "I beheld, and
the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints
of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the
kingdom ." This language implies that the judgment on the little
horn, and the putting of the saints in possession "of the kingdom" are
contemporaneous events. Long has the rule of the kingdoms of this
world been in the hands of worldly men, that knew not God nor obeyed
Him; but now, when He to whom the kingdom belongs comes to inflict
judgment on His enemies, He comes also to transfer the rule of the
kingdoms of this world from the hands of those who have abused it,
into the hand of those that fear God and govern their public conduct
by His revealed will. This is evidently the meaning of the Divine
statement. Now, on the supposition that 1792 was the predicted period
of the coming of the Ancient of days, it follows that, ever since, the
principles of God's Word must have been leavening the governments of
Europe more and more, and good and holy men, of the spirit of Daniel
and Nehemiah, must have been advanced to the high places of power. But
has it been so in point of fact? Is there one nation in all Europe
that acts on Scriptural principles at this day? Does Britain itself do
so? Why, it is notorious that it was just three years after the reign
of righteousness, according to this theory, must have commenced that
that unprincipled policy began that has left hardly a shred of
appearance of respect for the honour of the "Prince of the Kings of
the earth" in the public rule of this nation. It was in 1795 that
Pitt, and the British Parliament, passed the Act for the erecting of
the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth, which formed the beginning of
a course that, year by year, has lifted the Man of Sin into a position
of power in this land, that threatens, if Divine mercy do not
miraculously interfere, to bring us speedily back again under complete
thraldom to Antichrist. Yet, according to the theory of The Great
Exodus , the very opposite of this ought to have been the
case.
But to this only I call the reader's attention, that even on the
theory of Dr. Wylie himself, the witnesses of Christ could not
possibly have finished their testimony before the Decree of the
Immaculate Conception came forth. The theory of Dr. Wylie, and those
who take the same general view as he, is, that the "finishing of the
testimony," means "completing the elements" of the testimony, bearing
a full and complete testimony against the errors of Rome. Dr. Wylie
himself admits that "the dogma of the 'Immaculate Conception' [which
was given forth only during the last few years] declares Mary truly
'divine,' and places her upon the altars of Rome as practically the
sole and supreme object of worship" (The Great Exodus ). This
was NEVER done before, and therefore the errors and blasphemies of
Rome were not complete until that decree had gone forth, if even then.
Now, if the corruption and blasphemy of Rome were "incomplete" up to
our own day, and if they have risen to a height which was never
witnessed before, as all men instinctively felt and declared, when
that decree was issued, how could the testimony of the witnesses be
"complete " before Luther's day! It is nothing to say that the
principle and the germ of this decree were in operation long before.
The same thing may be said of all the leading errors of Rome long
before Luther's day. They were all in essence and substance very
broadly developed, from near the time when Gregory the Great commanded
the image of the Virgin to be carried forth in the processions that
supplicated the Most High to remove the pestilence from Rome, when it
was committing such havoc among its citizens. But that does in no wise
prove that they were "complete," or that the witnesses of Christ could
then "finish their testimony" by bearing a full and "complete
testimony" against the errors and corruptions of the Papacy. I submit
this view of the matter to every intelligent reader for his prayerful
consideration. If we have not "understanding of the times," it is vain
to expect that we "shall know what Israel ought to do." If we are
saying "Peace and safety," when trouble is at hand, or underrating the
nature of that trouble, we cannot be prepared for the grand struggle
when that struggle shall come.