The Second Advent Manual
1290 AND 1335 DAYS, OR YEARS
The third prophetic period, which is considered a fundamental part of Mr. Miller’s calculations, is that contained in the 12th of Daniel 5:12-the 1335 days, with which the 1290 are intimately connected. The only material objections against Mr. Miller’s views of this text, I believe, are,” 1. We cannot tell what the event is from which the periods are to be dated;” or 2. If we can tell what the event is, “we know not when it took place.” TSAM 59.2
As an attempt has also been made to pervert the evident design and meaning of this text, as to the events it predicts to take place at the termination of the periods it contains, a few remarks in reference to those particulars should be made. TSAM 59.3
What, then, are the events contemplated in the portion of prophecy connected with these prophetic periods, and which are to take place at their termination? The three verses so inseparably connected,—the last in the prophecy,—are a part of the answer to the question of Daniel, (v. 8,) which referred directly to the wonders which had just passed before his mind in the vision, (vs. 1-3,) and which in the remarks on the last period considered,—the 2300 years,—have been shown to be, 1. The reign of Christ. 2. The judgment scene. 3. The resurrection. 4. The glorification of the righteous. “These wonders” had apparently closed up the vision, (v. 4,) when there appeared “other two,” besides the angel of the vision, (v. 5,) one of whom inquired, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders? (v. 6.) The answer to this question is given verse seventh. “And I heard,” says Daniel, (v. 8,) “but I understood not:” and, as if incapable of repressing his anxiety,—and perhaps encouraged by hearing the answer to the other question—“then said I,” he continues, “O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?” TSAM 59.4
What Daniel “heard” that he did not fully understand, it is impossible to tell any farther than the matters which precede his question, and the answer to it imply. It is very clear that his question referred to the “wonders” stated. “I heard” all that was said of the wonders. “I heard the” question, “How long to the end of” them? “I heard” the answer,—that they were to “be finished” when the predicted political dispersion “of the holy people” should be “accomplished,”—which makes this vision synchronize in its termination, with the seven times and the 2300 years-these wonders also come at the last end of the indignation, the cleansing of the sanctuary and the deliverance of the host. TSAM 60.1
Daniel’s question does not appear to refer directly to the time of the events brought to view, though the answer, besides removing all doubt as to the propriety of feeling or even expressing an anxiety in reference to it, by giving an apparently gratuitous statement of the time, without any intimation of reproof, would imply that he referred in part to that. TSAM 60.2
It is more clearly intimated that Daniel wished to have a fuller disclosure, 1. Of the fate and history of the truth-an object of the deepest interest to the heart of every true man of God. 2. Of the future character and condition of “his people,” as these must be determined by the manner in which they should regard the truth; and, 3. Of his own personal prospects. TSAM 60.3
The answer agrees with this supposition. TSAM 61.1
“Go thy way, Daniel.” It is not consistent fully to remove the veil now, “for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.” But I may gratify you part. As to thy people, the church, “many shall be purified, and made white, and tried;”-a most encouraging declaration, inasmuch as it implies a great increase of numbers, superior attainments, and persevering fidelity under affliction; “but the wicked shall do wickedly;” “iniquity shall abound.” As to the truth, “none of the wicked shall understand” or regard it; “but the wise shall understand.” And as to the “end of these things” to yourself, Daniel, “from the time that the daily (sacrifice) shall be taken away and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be 1290 days. Blessed is he that waiteth and cometh to the 1335 days.” TSAM 61.2
“But go thou thy way till the end be, (the end of these wonders,) for thou shall rest (the condition of the righteous dead from their decease till the resurrection, Revelation 6:11; 14:13,) and stand in thy lot” (or, more literally, stand up for, i. e., be raised from the dead, to receive thy part in the inheritance) “at the end of the days.” TSAM 61.3
Here Daniel is informed. 1. That he must he satisfied “till the end,” when the “wonders” to which his question referred will undoubtedly “be finished.” 2. That: “the end” shall come “at the end of the days.” 3. That his reward will take place at the same time that those who wait and come, who am purified, and made white, and tried, who live through all the wickedness of the wicked, are “blessed.” TSAM 61.4
4. By the evident bearing of Daniel’s question, and the connection of his reward, as to time, with those who are blessed at the end of the 1335 days, we are assured that the righteous dead and the righteous living participate alike in the glories then to he revealed; and we have also another statement of the time when the “wonders” referred to take place. See Newton on Proph., p. 622. Dr. A. Clarke, Dr. Gill, and Poole, notes. TSAM 61.5
One clause in this portion of prophecy, which we cannot but consider of the first importance, on account of its bearing upon individual character, has been made the occasion of no small degree of contempt and ridicule on the part of our enemies. It is this-the wise shall understand. Only to quote this text seriously, we are thought at once to lay claim to some supernatural endowments of wisdom upon the mysteries of prophecy, which exposes a person to the suspicion, if not the direct charge, of “fanaticism”—perhaps “insanity.” As a maxim in theology, which applies to the whole field of practical and experimental religion, the principle of this text is asserted from every truly evangelical pulpit in the Christian world; and why should so many of those who fill these pulpits, and their hearers, take the same position in reference to their second advent brethren that the infidel and neologist take in reference to the whole church? “The wise shall understand!” “The wise man built his house upon a rock!” “The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God!” Have these, and other portions of the word of God, too numerous to mention, no meaning? are or they now to be thrown away? Surely those who would harbor a supposition of the kind are the one to make an apology for pretensions to fancied endowments. They are the ones who assume to be “wise” enough to decide a question without “hearing it,” or without even using the means which man always must use, in his present condition, especially in a case where the plain word and the grace of God are his only hope of success. TSAM 62.1
Or if the offensive text is used with particular reference to the events and times of the prophecy in which it stands,—as the best commentators have supposed (see Clarke on vs. 4 and 9,) and as the Hebrew and some other versions positively and clearly assert,—and we can obtain a satisfactory understanding of the prophecy in these respects, we shall certainly rejoice that our attention has been called to the subject,—that we have been favored with the means and opportunities for understanding it,—and above all for a consciousness that God has disposed us by his Spirit to use these means, as all the means of salvation must be used to become effectual. If others prefer to sneer and mock, rather than to take this course, they will have no complaint to make, hut against themselves, if they are “in darkness, and that day overtakes them as a thief!” TSAM 62.2
We pass to consider objection 1. What is the event from which these periods are to be dated? TSAM 63.1
“From the time that the daily (sacrifice) shall be taken away and the abomination that maketh desolate set up.” TSAM 63.2
What may this “daily,” and “abomination that maketh desolate,” be? The word abomination is applied as a general name of every substitute for the true worship of God-the most revolting idolatry, or the nominally true worship corrupted and perverted Deuteronomy 12:31. Jeremiah 8:12. Ezekiel 16:50. Revelation 17:4, 5. Daniel uses the word in reference to both of these forms of wickedness, chap 9:27, where the instruments of effecting and perpetuating the desolation of the city and sanctuary are spoken of; but to which of them does it apply “in this text! We may be assisted in settling its true application by determining the meaning of “the daily.” Upon the meaning of this very ambiguous term, there are but two, or at farthest three, opinions. The older and more prevalent opinion applies it to the Jewish worship; a few apply it, in a secondary or figurative sense, to the true Christian worship, of which the Jewish was typical; recently it has been applied, and I think it will be seen to be the true application, to Paganism. That it cannot apply to the Jewish worship is evident from this circumstance, which has been an insurmountable difficulty with every commentator who has attempted it; these periods, understood literally or figuratively, and dated from any “taking away” of that worship, cannot possibly bring us to the events predicted, or to any other events worthy of note. And this circumstance, if there were no other, would be sufficient to settle the question that the Jewish worship cannot be intended by “the daily.” There is no agreement between its history “and the words of the prophecy” which speak of it, supposing the “daily” “to relate” to the Jewish worship. TSAM 63.3
Again; the Jewish worship is never called the daily or daily sacrifice, in any other part of the word of God. There would be as much propriety in calling it the yearly, monthly, weekly, evening, or morning sacrifice, as the daily sacrifice. TSAM 64.1
The word occurs, as a proper name, only in the book of Daniel; and in each of the five places in which it is found, the word “sacrifice” is in italics, implying that the original would not authorize its insertion, but that the translators introduced it to express what they supposed to be the sense of the passage. TSAM 64.2
The only other translation of the word rendered “daily,” of which I have any knowledge, is equally obscure as the received text. It would read “the continual,” or “constant.” (Hengstenbergh.) But it is evident that if the Jewish worship had been intended by Daniel, he would have made use of a term which could not have been misunderstood. TSAM 64.3
Can anything be done, then, to determine the application of that word? Have we any other source of light? I think we have. It. is the principle of analogy, or comparison. “Comparing spiritual things with spiritual.” I cannot state that principle, in its application to the present case, in a more striking manner than by giving an item of Mr. Miler’s experience, as stated by himself. I insert this at length for two reasons. 1. As a striking instance in which God has signally honored the principle he has given to guide us in the study of his word. 2. To induce others to follow so worthy and successful an example. Preaching on this text, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God,” etc., he dwelt upon the mode of studying the Bible. He said— TSAM 64.4
“I was once a deist, and continued so for twelve years; and I will tell you how I came to be a deist. I was taught to read the Bible from my youth, by my father and mother, and at school. But 1 was taught in such a manner that it seemed to be full of contradictions, I used to go to our minister, when he called at our house, and ask him what such and such texts meant, and how to reconcile those which appeared so contradictory. He would say, ‘You cannot understand it.’ I would ask, Do you understand it? ‘No,’ he would say. Well, did God mean to keep us in the dark? O, it is, revealed in a mystical manner.’ But is not God a wise God? and could not he make it plain? Is he not just and good, and will he punish us for not understanding that which is a mystery They at last would have nothing to do with me. I looked upon the Bible as priestcraft, and became a deist. I continued so till I came out of the service. I was in the army two years and a half. TSAM 65.1
“In the month of May, 1816, I was brought under conviction, and O, what horror filled my soul! I forgot to eat. The heavens appeared like brass, and the earth like iron. Thus I continued till October, when God opened my eyes; and O, my soul, what a Saviour I discovered Jesus to be! My sins fell like a burden from my soul: and then how plain the Bible seemed to me! It all spoke of Jesus; he was in every page and every line. O, that was a happy day! I wanted to go right home to heaven; Jesus was all to me, and I thought I could make everybody else see him as I saw him, but I was mistaken. TSAM 65.2
“During, the twelve years I was a deist, I read all histories I could find; but now I loved the Bible It taught of Jesus! But still there was a good deal of the Bible that was dark to me. In 1818 or 19, while conversing with a friend! To whom I made a visit, and who had known and heart me talk while I was a deist, he inquired, in rather a significant manner, ‘What do you think of this text, and that?’ referring to the old texts I objected to while a deist. I understood what he was about, and replied-If you will give me time, I will tell you what they mean. ‘How long time do you want?’ I don’t know, but I will tell you, I replied, for I could not believe that God had given a revelation that could not be understood I then resolved to study my Bible, believing I could find out what the Holy Spirit meant. But as soon as I had formed this resolution the thought came to me—‘Suppose you find a passage that you cannot understand, what will you do?’ This mode of studying the Bible then came to my mind:—I will take the words of such passages, and trace them through the Bible, and find out their meaning in this way. I had Cruden’s Concordance, which I think is the best in the world; so I took that and my Bible, and set down to my desk, and read nothing else, except the newspapers a little, for I was determined to know what my Bible meant. I began at Genesis, and read on slowly; and when I came to a text that I could could [sic] not understand, I searched through the Bible to find out what it meant. After I had gone through the Bible in this way, O, how bright and glorious the truth appeared! I found what I have been preaching to you. I was satisfied that the seven times terminated in 1843. Then I came to the 2300 days; they brought me to the same conclusion; but I had no thought of finding out when the Saviour was coming, and I could not believe it; but the light struck me so forcibly I did not know what to do. Now, I thought, I must put on spurs and breeching; I will not go faster than the Bible, and I will not fall behind it. Whatever the Bible teaches, I will hold on to it. But still there were some texts that I could nor understand.” TSAM 65.3
So much for his general mode of studying the Bible. On another occasion he stated his mode of settling the meaning of the text before us-the meaning of “the daily.” “I read on,” said he, TSAM 66.1
“And could find no other case in which it was found, but in Daniel. I then took those words which stood in connection with it, ‘take away.’ He shall take away the daily, ‘from the time the daily shall be taken away,’ etc. I read on, and thought I should find no light on the text; finally I came to 2 Thessalonians 2:7, 8. “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work, only he who now letteth, will let, until he be taken out of the way, and then shall that wicked be revealed,” etc. And when I had come to that text, O, how clear and glorious the truth appeared! There it is! that is ‘the daily!’ Well, now, what does Paul mean by ‘he who now letteth,’ or hindereth? By ‘the man of sin,’ and ‘the wicked,’ Popery is meant. Well, what is it which hinders Popery from being revealed? Why, it is Paganism; well, then, ‘the daily’ must mean Paganism.” TSAM 66.2
This led Mr. Miller to believe that the “daily” of Daniel was Paganism, or idolatry. TSAM 66.3
If anything were wanting to confirm this view of the daily, it is found in the exact agreement of history with “the words of the prophecy.” There are two or three predicted cases of the taking away of the daily in the prophecy of Daniel. The first is in Daniel 8. In speaking of the operations of the “little horn,” it is said—“And by him the daily was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. (Daniel 11.) And an host was given him against the daily by reason of transgression” (v, 12.) But here the question comes up—What power is denoted by the “little horn” of Daniel 8.? TSAM 67.1
I believe our opposers have become united in applying it to Antiochus Epiphanes. The absurdities of this application have been so often pointed out, not only since, but long before, the present agitation of the subject began, that I shall not state them here. 14 TSAM 67.2
Now, whatever may be denoted by this little horn, it is the only power brought to view after the division of Alexander’s kingdom, down to the time when the sanctuary is to be cleansed, and the last end of the indignation comes; enough, one would think, to assure us that it never could apply to any single individual, for the last end of the indignation has not yet come, nor has the sanctuary been cleansed. TSAM 67.3
As this vision evidently harmonizes with the other visions of Daniel in its scope and design, this little horn must correspond with the fourth kingdom of the other visions, as the ram and he-goat do with the second and third, and the fourth kingdom must be Rome-Rome in its comprehensive character,—pagan and papal, a unit or divided. TSAM 67.4
Was Paganism “taken away by” the Roman civil power? We present the following statement of the most important and well-known transactions in the history of the church and the world, which we believe to be intended by this prophecy. It refers to Constantine, the first Christian Emperor. TSAM 67.5
“A. D. 324. His first act of government was the despatch of an edict throughout the empire, exhorting his subjects to embrace Christianity.”—Croly, p. 55. TSAM 68.1
What can be meant by the “sanctuary” of Paganism? Paganism, and error of every kind, have their sanctuaries, as well as truth. These are the temples or asylums consecrated to their service. Some particular and renowned temple of Paganism may, then, be supposed to be here spoken of. Which of its numerous distinguished temples may it be? One of the most magnificent specimens of classic architecture is called the Pantheon. The name signifies “the temple or asylum of all the gods.” The “place” of its location is Rome.-Goodrich’s Universal His, and Guthrie’s Geog., p. 606. TSAM 68.2
The idols of the nations conquered by the Romans were sacredly deposited in some niche or apartment of this temple, and in many cases became objects of worship by the Romans themselves. Could we find a temple of Paganism that was more strikingly “his sanctuary?” Was Rome, the city or place of the Pantheon, “cast down by” the authority of the state? Read the following well-known and remarkable facts of history: TSAM 68.3
“The death of the last rival of Constantine had scaled the peace of the empire. Rome was once more the undisputed queen of nations. But, in that hour of elevation and splendor, she had been raised to the edge of a precipice. Her next step was to be downwards and irrecoverable. The change of the government to Constantinople still perplexes the historian. It was an act in direct repugnance to the whole course of the ancient and honorable prejudices of the Roman mind. It was the work of no luxurious Asiatic, devoted to the indulgences of eastern customs and climates, but of an iron conqueror, born in the west, and contemptuous, like all Romans, of the habits of the orientals; it was the work of a keen politician, yet it was impolitic in the most palpable degree. Yet Constantine abandoned Rome, the great citadel and throne of the Caesars, for an obscure corner of Thrace, and expended the remainder of his vigorous and ambitious life in the double toil of raising a colony into the capital of his empire, and degrading the capital into the feeble honors and humiliated strength of a colony.” Croly, p. 207-8. TSAM 68.4
Was there a host given to the state or government of Rome “by reason of transgression?” And, if so, what transgression? We should suppose, at first sight, that, if a host was given against Paganism by reason of transgression, the transgression must be on the part of Paganism. What particular enormity could it be? What is the transgression which God has uniformly interposed to punish? Is it not brought to view in the following brief but frightful item of history? TSAM 68.5
“A. D. 303. The progress of the faith stirred up the last paroxysm of expiring Paganism. The sovereigns, Maximian and Galerius,—ferocious soldiers, and owing their elevation to the sword,—had already been secret persecutors in their camps and palaces. The superstition of the mother of Galerius; the insolence of the tyrant himself, inflated by recent Persian victory; the artifices of the priesthood, dreading the rapid extinction of their shrines; and the cold and infirm nature of Diocletian, perhaps alarmed at the growing multitude of the Christians,—had worked together, until the whole vengeance exploded in one burst of popular, kingly, and military persecution. The 23rd of February of the year 303, the day of the festival of the Terminalia was appointed for levelling to the ground the principal church of Nicomedia, the imperial residence. On the next day, the General Decree of persecution was issued, commanding (1) the instant demolition of all the Christian places of worship; (2) the death of all who dared to worship; (3) the delivery of the Scriptures to be burned; (4) the confiscation of all property belonging to the churches; (5) the acceptance by the tribunals of every charge brought against a Christian, the refusal of every complaint brought by a Christian, and, finally, the exclusion of the whole body from the protection of the law.”—Croly, p. 205. See Fox’ Book of Martyrs. TSAM 69.1
If ever the Almighty interposed to avenge the injuries of His people, might we not expect it in this case? Supposing Paganism to be intended by the daily, we have here a most literal and exact fulfillment of this prophecy of the little horn in the history of Rome and its doings in reference to Paganism. TSAM 69.2
The great subject of the vision of Daniel 8., to which the question (v. 13) refers, is, the condition of the church and the chosen inheritance, “trodden under foot.” Now, what agents are brought to view, in the most clear and striking representations of the word of God, as sustaining this relation to the church and the promised land? Daniel, in speaking of the city and sanctuary, chap 9., says, “For the overspreading of abominations, (plural,) he shall make it desolate even till the consummation.” As this prophecy, so far as the agent are concerned, has become history, there can be no mistake about its meaning. The desolation was completed by Rome, to whom Christ undoubtedly refers, Luke 21:20, as one of the agents of the work; it has been perpetuated by Rome, Pagan or Papal, and the Mohamedans, till the present time. TSAM 69.3
Paganism and Popery are also brought to view, as the great organizations of depravity by which the church has been “trodden under foot.” The little horn of Daniel 7. (Popery) is to “make war and prevail against the saints until the judgment;” the same power that Paul and John saw “destroyed by the brightness of Christ’s coming.” TSAM 69.4
There can be no doubt that Paul spoke of Pagan Rome and Popery in 2 Thessalonians 2., or that the former is “what withheld,” that the latter “might be revealed in his time.” TSAM 70.1
John is still more clear. The “great red dragon,” Revelation 12:3, is the admitted symbol of Pagan Rome. After he and his angels had fought and prevailed not, vs. 7, 8, still, determined to make war with the woman and her seed, 17, he gives his seat, and power, and great authority, unto the beast, (Popery,) xiii. 2; and the same world that worshipped the dragon, worships the beast also, 3, 4; also chap 17:1, 7, 15. TSAM 70.2
All the arguments from analogy will be seen, we think, to be in favor of Mr. Miller’s supposition that this “daily,” or continual, denotes Paganism. TSAM 70.3
By the different forms of Paganism,—which was the daily, or then existing abomination of Daniel’s day, and the “transgression of desolation,” Popery,—“the church has been trodden under foot “from the days of the kings of Assyria unto this day.” TSAM 70.4
On this supposition, also, the question of the vision might be thus paraphrased—“How long the vision” which gives Paganism and Popery “to tread both the” church and her inheritance “under foot?” Or to give a still more specific construction,—as the question, considered in relation to the previous statements of the angel, with the answer, and subsequent communications, seem to indicate that it was intended to be understood,—it might be thus paraphrased—1. How long the vision which gives both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? 2. How long shall the Pagan abomination tread them under foot? and 3. How long shall Popery tread them under foot? The answer to each part is given in the vision and the subsequent prophecy. 1. The sanctuary shall be cleansed at the time appointed. 2. “He—‘the little horn’—(Rome while a unit,) shall take away the daily”—Paganism (Daniel 8:11,12) 3. “They”—the conquerors of the Roman empire—“shall take away the daily, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.” (Daniel 11:31) “And from the time that the daily shall be taken away and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be 1290 days. Blessed is he that waiteth and cometh to the 1335 days. But go thou thy way till the end be, for thou shalt rest and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.” TSAM 70.5
Will the prophecy in all these cases apply to Paganism? If the days are understood literally, I do not know of any taking away of Paganism from which these periods can bring us to the events spoken of; we must therefore understand them to mean years, as the best of the old writers have supposed. TSAM 71.1
But if the periods are to be dated from a taking away merely, we should not know but it might be the acts of imperial Rome that were referred to, only as time should determine; the text, however, is very exact. The periods are to be dated “from the time that the daily-Paganism-shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up;” a later act must therefore be referred to. TSAM 71.2
As it is generally believed that Christ referred to the armies of pagan Rome,—Matthew 24:15,—the question may arise-Can “the daily and the abomination of desolation” both refer to Paganism? Ans. Christ undoubtedly referred to that abomination of which Daniel spoke as the instrument of desolating Jerusalem, for it was that of which he was speaking; and of course it is not to be supposed that he referred to any other abomination than that which Daniel had predicted should do that work “of vengeance”—unless Christ may be understood, as in some other mixed prophecies, to refer also to the papal abomination, or antichrist, who should “sit in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God:” which should be the signal to the church that “the desolation thereof was nigh.” If we understand Christ literally, the prediction of “Daniel the prophet,” to which he refers, must be that in chap 9:27. TSAM 71.3
Paganism or Popery might either of them, however, be called “the abomination that maketh desolate” when one was spoken of by itself, though, when spoken of in connection, the then present desolation might more properly and clearly be called the daily, to distinguish it from that form of the desolation which was to take its place, and of course was yet future. It is very remarkable that Paul is just about as ambiguous as Daniel is supposed to be in speaking of the existing scourge of the church in his day; 2 Thessalonians 2:5-8. Paul calls the pagan empire of Rome “He who now letteth, or hindereth;” and which was to continue “until he be taken out of the way; and then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.” The view in each case is identical, the terms employed so similar, that there is hardly a difference. See Dr. Clarke’s notes on the words of Paul TSAM 71.4
2. When did the event referred to in the prophecy take place? The event, for the date of which we are now to inquire, is not the giving of the saints into the hand of Popery, but the change of religion in western Rome, which gave to the Catholic faith—“the abomination that maketh desolate,” the “place” and the power to act the part of Paganism. When was this abomination placed in a position to start on its career of usurpation, blasphemy and blood? TSAM 72.1
The date of the acts of the Christian emperors, as they are called, is well known. It is also well known that the same agents which destroyed the empire, restored Paganism. It must be the Paganism of these conquerors of the empire which gave place to Popery, and to the transition then effected, the prophecy refers. We wish to know its date. That France and other nations of western Rome were pagan up to the time of the conversion of Clovis, A. D. 496, we have abundant proof. TSAM 72.2
“In the west, Remegius, bishop of Rheims, who has been called the Apostle of the Gauls, labored with great zeal to convert idolaters to Christ; and not without success, especially after Clovis, king of the Franks, had embraced Christianity.”—Mosheim, vol. 1, p. 379. TSAM 72.3
And still farther. “It is said that the conversion of Clovis gave rise to the custom of addressing the French monarch with the titles of Most Christian Majesty, and Eldest Son of the Church; for the kings of the other barbarous nations which occupied the Roman provinces, were still addicted to idolatry, or involved in the errors of Arianism.”—Ib., vol. 1, p. 315. TSAM 73.1
The part taken by Clovis in behalf of the Catholic faith, after his conversion, is clearly brought to view by these extracts from Mosheim. But we wish to present to our readers a more extended view of his history, with the chronology of the important events of his life. We quote from Gifford’s History of France, pp. 32, 39. TSAM 73.2
Speaking of the marriage of Clovis, which took place A. D. 493, the history says—“The court of Burgundy, fearful of offending a young prince whose arms were everywhere victorious, granted his request, and the princess Clotilda was accordingly espoused to him. The death of their first son, who, with the king’s consent, received baptism, notwithstanding the earnest remonstrances and soothing persuasions of his wife, inspired him with aversion to the Christian religion. His conversion took place 496. TSAM 73.3
Between that time and 508, “by alliances,” “capitulations,” and conquests, “the Arborici,” the “Roman garrisons in the west,” Brittany, the Burgundians and the Visgoths, were brought into subjection. TSAM 73.4
“A. D. 508. It was on his return from this (last) expedition 15 that he received, at the city of Tours, the ambassadors of Anastasius, emperor of the East, who sent him the title and insignia of patrician and consul, and conferred on him the dignified appellation of August. The new patrician, after dismissing the ambassadors, returned to Paris, which he made the capital of his empire. Success had hitherto attended all the plans of Clovis; and, allowing for the ferocious and martial spirit which then prevailed, he had preserved his fame from any material pollution; but his good fortune and his heroism appear to have forsaken him at the same time. It was probably to wipe out the infamy incurred by the commission of so many crimes, that he founded a great number of churches and monasteries. It was probably from similar motives that he assembled a council of thirty-three bishops in the town of Orleans, A. D. 511. We learn from history 16 that it was not only assembled by his orders, but that hat fixed on the topics of discussion. The: assembling of the council of Orleans was the last remarkable event in the life of Clovis, who died the same year, at the age of forty-five, and was buried in the church of St. Peter and St. Paul, which he had caused to be built.” See also Howel’s Int. of Gen. Hist., vol. 3, pp. 342-347. TSAM 73.5
Paganism in the Western Roman Empire, though it doubtless retarded the progress of the Christian faith, especially in those nations which were molested, as in the case of England, 17 by the inroads of the barbarous clans, who continued idolaters,—henceforth had not the power, if it had the disposition, to suppress the Catholic faith, or to hinder the encroachments of the Roman pontiff. TSAM 74.1
From that time, the Papal abomination was triumphant, so far as Paganism was concerned. Its future contests were with the other Christian sects, who were always treated as heretics; and with princes, who were always treated as rebels, or dividers of the body of Christ. The prominent powers of Europe gave up their attachment to Paganism only to perpetuate its abominations in another form; for Paganism only needed to be baptized to become Christian, in the Catholic sense;-they became wedded to it as a matter of policy, and when the interests or vengeance of its presiding minister made the demand, their possessions and thrones,—perhaps their lives,—must be laid on the altar. TSAM 75.1
We pass to consider the condition of the See of Rome, as indicated by the history of the ruling Pope at that time, and his relation to the kings of the earth. Symmachus was Pope from 498 or 9 to 514 His pontificate was distinguished by these remarkable circumstances and events:— TSAM 76.1
1 He “left Paganism” when he entered “the church of Rome.” TSAM 76.2
2 He found his way to the Papal chair by striving with his competitor even unto blood.-Du Pin. TSAM 76.3
3 By the adulation paid to him as the successor of St. Peter. “How greatly the ideas of many had advanced, respecting the powers of the bishop of Rome, cannot be better shown than by the example of Ennodius, the insane flatterer of Symmachus, who, among other extravagant expressions, said—The Pontiff judges in the place of God.”—Mosh., vol. l, p. 389. TSAM 76.4
4 By the excommunication of the emperor Anastasius. The position of Symmachus against the emperor was not to punish the latter as a heretic, but to bear down, whenever prudence would permit, every thing which dared to oppose his authority. TSAM 76.5
Read the following from Du Pin. It shows the interesting position of the bishop at an important point of the contest. According to Baronius, the emperor was excommunicated 499. This letter was probably written about 503. TSAM 76.6
“The sixth letter of Symmachus is his apology, wherein he vindicates himself from the crimes charged upon him by the emperor. After calling upon the whole city of Rome to witness that he had never warped from the faith he had received in the church of Rome, since he left Paganism, he reproves him (the emperor) for despising the authority of the Holy See, and of the bishop who was successor to St. Peter. He maintains that his dignity is higher than that of the emperor. ‘Let us compare,’ says he to him, ‘the dignity of a bishop with that of an emperor. There is as great difference between them as between the things of this earth, whereof the latter has the administration, and the things of heaven, whereof the former is the dispenser. Wherefore the office of a bishop is at least equal, if not superior, to yours. Honor God in us, and we will honor him in you; but if you have no respect for God, you cannot claim that privilege from him whose hand you despise. You say I have excommunicated you with the consent of the senate. In this I have done nothing but followed the righteous example of my predecessors. You say that the senate has evil entreated you. If you think that you are abused by exhorting you to separate from heretics, can it be said that you would have treated us well when you would have, forced us to join with heretics? You say that what Accasius has done does not at all concern you; if it be so, trouble yourself no more about him, join no more with his followers. If you do not this, it is not we that excommunicate you, but yourself, by joining yourself to one that is excommunicated.”—History of Ecclesiastical Writers, vol. 1, p. 527. Dublin, 1722. TSAM 76.7
The contest between the bishop and the emperor was but a continuation of the quarrel which arose between the churches of the East and West upon the introduction of this clause: “Thou who wast crucified for us!” as an appendage to the established devotions of the church in the days of the emperor Zeno. Anastasius adopted the “Henoticon” of Zeno-a sort of compromise, which in the present case only served to make three parties of two. But Symmachus was not satisfied with that. TSAM 77.1
“He charged the emperor, and his bishop, Accasius, and others, with contempt for the council of Chalcedon, and some other things. But in reality, as many facts demonstrate, Accasius became thus odious to the Roman pontiff because he denied by his actions the supremacy of the Roman See. TSAM 77.2
“The Greeks defended the character and memory of their bishop against the aspersions of the Romans. This contest was protracted till the following century, when the pertinacity of the Romans triumphed, and caused the names of Accasius and Peter Fullo to be stricken from the sacred register, and consigned, as it were, to perpetual infamy.”—Mosh. vol. 1, p. 369. TSAM 77.3
A word of this triumph of “Roman pertinacity,” and we have done with this point. By the strength secured to the Catholic cause in the west, and the agency of the vicars and other agents of the See of Rome, of whom we hear at this time in several nations, the Papal party in Constantinople were “placed” in a position to justify open hostilities in behalf of their master at Rome. In 508 the whirlwind of fanaticism and civil war swept in fire and blood through the streets of the eastern capital. TSAM 77.4
“The people of Constantinople were devoid of any rational principles of freedom; but they held as a lawful cause of rebellion the color of a livery in the races, or the color of a mystery in the schools. The Trisagion, with and without this obnoxious addition, was chanted in the: cathedral by two adverse choirs, and, when their lungs were exhausted, they had recourse to the more solid arguments of sticks and stones: the aggressors (Catholics) were punished by the emperor, and defended by the patriarch; and the crown and mitre were staked on the event of this momentous quarrel. The streets were instantly crowded with innumerable swarms of men, women, and children; the legions of monks, in regular array, marched, and shouted, and fought, at their head. ‘Christians! this is the day of martyrdom! let us not desert our spiritual father! anathema to the Manichæan tyrant! he is unworthy to reign!’ Such was the Catholic cry; and the galleys of Anastasius lay upon their oars before the palace till the patriarch had pardoned his penitent, and hushed the waves of the troubled multitude. The triumph of Macedonius was checked by a speedy exile; but the zeal of the flock was again exasperated by the same question—‘Whether one of the Trinity had been crucified?’ On this momentous occasion, the blue and green factions of Constantinople suspended their discord, and the civil and military powers were annihilated in their presence. The keys of the city and the standards of the guards were deposited in the forum of Constantine-the principal station and camp of the faithful, (the Catholics.) Day and night they were incessantly busied either in singing hymns to the honor of their God, or in pillaging and murdering the servants of their prince. The head of his favorite monk, the friend, as they styled him, of the enemy of the Holy Trinity, was borne aloft on a spear; and the firebrands which had been darted against heretical structures, diffused the undistinguishing flames over the most orthodox buildings. The statues of the emperor were broken, and his person was concealed in a suburb, till, at the end of three days, he dared to implore the mercy of his subjects. (Popery is triumphant.) Without his diadem, and in the posture of a suppliant, Anastasius appeared on the throne of the circus. The Catholics, before his face, rehearsed the genuine Trisagion; they exulted in the offer, which he proclaimed by the voice of a herald, of abdicating the purple; they listened to the admonition that, since all could not reign, they should previously agree in the choice of a sovereign; and they accepted the blood of two unpopular ministers, whom their master, without hesitation, condemned to the lions.”—Gibbon A. D. 508-514. TSAM 78.1
This first outbreak in the East was followed by a still more important “rebellion,” in which Vitalian, whom Gibbon styles “the champion of the Catholic faith,” “depopulated Thrace, and exterminated sixty-five thousand of his fellow-Christians.” TSAM 79.1
As the part taken by Vitalian exhibits in a striking light the desolating character of Popery at this time, we give also what Du Pin says of him. Vol. pp. 531, 532. TSAM 79.2
“Vitalian, general of the cavalry of the emperor Anastasius, rose in arms against him and came with his army towards Constantinople. He made religion the pretence of his revolt, and declared that he had taken arms for no other reason but to protect the Catholics, and restore Macedonius to the See of Constantinople. The emperor was forced to make peace with him, upon condition that a council should the called to regulate the affairs of the church, by the advice of the Bishop of Rome. This obliged the emperor to write to pope Hormisdas, successor of’ Symmachus, to pray him that he would be mediator for pacifying these commotions, and that he would labor to restore the unity of the church.” 18 TSAM 79.3
We now invite our modern Gamaliels to take a position with us in the place of the sanctuary of Paganism, (since claimed as the “patrimony of St. Peter,”) in 508. TSAM 79.4
We look a few years into the past, and the rude Paganism of the northern barbarians is pouring down upon the nominally Christian empire of Western Rome-triumphing everywhere-and its triumphs everywhere distinguished by the most savage cruelty; Christians and Christian priests are slaughtered in cold blood, or deem it a mark of peculiar mercy when their petitions, that life only may be spared, are granted them. The empire falls, and is broken into fragments. One by one the lords and rulers of these fragments abandon their Paganism, and profess the Christian faith. In religion, the conquerors are yielding to the conquered. But still Paganism is triumphant. Among its supporters there is one stern and successful conqueror. More through fear than respect, he is allowed to make a Christian princess his wife. But soon he also bows before the power of the new faith, and becomes its champion. He is still triumphant, but, as a hero and conqueror, reaches the zenith at the point we occupy, A. D. 508. TSAM 79.5
In or near the same year, the last important subdivision of the fallen empire is publicly, and by the coronation of its triumphant “monarch,” christianized. TSAM 80.1
The pontiff for the period on which we stand, is a recently converted Pagan. The bloody contest which placed him in the chair was decided by the interposition of an Arian king. He is bowed to, and saluted as filling “the place of God on earth.” The senate is so far under his power that, on suspicion that the interests of the See of Rome demand it, they excommunicate the emperor. In this contest we hear the Pope “speaking great things and blasphemies,” and assuming “to change times and laws.” And by the power of his spiritual and military agents, who are posted as their service is required, 19 to use the figurative language of the Bible, in referring to civil and ecclesiastical dignitaries, he points to “the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof,” and demands their subjection to his will; and in 508 the mine is sprung beneath the throne of the Eastern Empire. The result of the confusion and strife it occasions, is the humiliation of its rightful lord. Now, the question is,—At what time was paganism so far suppressed as to make room for its substitute and successor; the Papal abomination? When was this abomination placed in a position to start on its career of blasphemy and blood? Is there; any other dale for its being “placed” or “set up” in the room of Paganism but 508? If the mysterious enchantress has not now brought all her victims within her power, she has taken her position, and some have yielded to the fascination. The others are at length subdued, “and kings, and peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues,” are brought under a spell, which prepares them, even while “drunken with the blood of saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus,” to “think they are doing God service,” and to fancy themselves the exclusive favorites of heaven, while becoming an easier and richer prey for the damnation of hell. TSAM 80.2
Commencing the prophetic periods of the text at this date, and understanding them as our most able commentators have done, and as they must be understood, (for supposing them to mean literal days, they bring us to nothing worthy of note,) by the first period, 1290 days, or years, the only one now fulfilled, we are brought to the date of events of the most sublime and important character in the history of the church or the world. At the termination of the other, the 1335 days or years, we most assuredly expect the fulfilment of what remains: Daniel, with all the righteous dead, will stand in his lot; the living; righteous will be changed, and, “glorified together,” they “shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and as the stars forever and ever.” The first period terminated in 1798, the last will terminate in 1843. TSAM 81.1