The Second Advent Manual

19/24

THE TIME TIMES AND HALF A TIME; 1260 DAYS, OR YEARS, AND 42 MONTHS

The “time, times and a half,” or its equivalents, express the period, during which “the saints were to be given into the hand of the little horn,” (Popery,) Daniel 7:25,—the “two witnesses were to prophesy in sackcloth,” Revelation 11:3, “the holy city was to be trodden under foot,” Revelation 11:2; the church was to be in “the wilderness,” Revelation 12:6, 14; and “the beast that made war with the saints and overcame them was to continue,” Revelation 13:5. TSAM 82.1

The period in any one of these cases evidently synchronizes with all the rest. In the different forms in which they occur, they express the period of the legalized depression of the true church, and of the relative condition of her great persecutor, Popery. TSAM 82.2

The only objections against Mr. M’s. view of this period, which are worthy of our consideration, are TSAM 82.3

1. “Let us suppose it to commence where we may, it is to end with the destruction of Popery, at the coming of Christ, and the introduction of the millennium.” TSAM 82.4

2. “It is difficult, if not impossible, to tell where it begins.” TSAM 82.5

1. Does the period end with the destruction of Popery at the coming of Christ? In applying this period to the history of Popery and the church, there are several points which demand our particular attention. TSAM 82.6

1st. It became a persecutor, “the abomination that maketh desolate,” before “any authoritative effort to give supremacy to the See of Rome.” 2nd. It is to continue to make “war with the saints,” after its “dominion is taken away;” and to “prevail against them, until the Ancient of Days shall come, and judgment shall be given to the saints of the Most High, and the time comes that the saints possess the kingdom.” TSAM 82.7

3. This prophetic period is in every case stated to give the time of the dominion of Popery over the true church. “They, the saints, shall be given into his hand.” “The holy city shall they tread under foot.” “And power was given unto him to continue forty-two months.” 4. It could not be in the nature of the case that such an event could take place till after the nominally Christian faith had gained the ascendency over Paganism. This is very clearly intimated both by Daniel and John. TSAM 82.8

Daniel says, chap 11:31, in speaking of the conquerors of Rome, “They shall take away the daily, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.” John, in speaking of Popery as the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, which sat upon the beast, says, Revelation 17., “God hath put in their hearts (the kings) to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.” Daniel says again, “And they shall take away his dominion to consume and destroy it unto the end, 7:26. John adds, 17:16, “These shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate, and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.” France, during the reign of Clovis, was the principal actor in placing “the abomination;” and France under Napoleon was the prime mover in the drama which brought the desolator into desolation. ‘By a very common error,’ says Mr. Croly, ‘it has been conceived that the close of the 1260 years was to be the extinction of the Papacy, but the prophet says no more: than that it shall be the end of its power over the saints. Its end is predicted to subsequent, and cotemporaneous with the great battle of God Almighty. At this moment, the Popedom, shaking off the sackcloth and dust of the French Revolution, is rising; into a haughty stature and strength, ominous of the part it is yet to perform, and in the midst of which it shall be extinguished by the last avenging judgments of heaven. ’ TSAM 83.1

We have seen that the final change in the religion of Western Rome from Paganism to the Christian faith, was so far effected as to place the latter in the ascendency in A. D. 508. TSAM 83.2

2. When did the bishop of Rome receive “authority,” “power” and “dominion” over the saints! TSAM 83.3

That Popery is the power denoted by the “little horn” of Daniel 7. is clear, inasmuch as the description of it will apply to no other power. No Daguerreotype likeness can agree better with the original than this description does with Popery. Nearly all Protestant writers on the prophecies (excepting a few who have recently written with the avowed design of opposing Mr. Miller’s calculations) agree in the opinion that Popery is intended by this power.-Set: Mr. Dowling’s note, p. 18: and Dr. Clarke on 2 Thessalonians, chap 2. TSAM 83.4

To ascertain the commencement of the prophetic period named for the triumph of Popery, we must take particular notice of the facts stated in the prophecy upon its history prior to the saints being given into his hand. TSAM 84.1

1. It was to rise “after” the division of Rome into ten kingdoms. TSAM 84.2

2. It was to “subdue” three “kings” or kingdoms. 20 TSAM 84.3

3. These were to be “three of the first” kings, or kingdoms. TSAM 84.4

4. The period is to be dated from the time that “power was given unto him.” TSAM 84.5

Before A. D. 483 the following ten kingdoms had risen in western Rome. TSAM 84.6

1. The Huns, about A. D. 356. TSAM 84.7

2. The Ostrogoths, 377. TSAM 84.8

3. The Visigoths, 378. TSAM 84.9

4. The Franks, 407. TSAM 84.10

5. The Vandals, 407. TSAM 84.11

6. The Sueves and Alans, 407. TSAM 84.12

7. The Burgundians, 407. TSAM 84.13

8. The Heruli and Turingi, 476. TSAM 84.14

9. The Saxons, 476. TSAM 84.15

10. Lombards in the north of Germany, 483, in Hungary, 526.-See Meede, Newton, etc. TSAM 84.16

Have we any account of three of these being “plucked up” (conquered) by, or in behalf of, Popery? The wars in behalf of the Catholic faith began early in the sixth century. The fall of the first of these kingdoms by the agency of Popery, and its date, is thus noticed by Du Pin, who was himself a Catholic. “Gaul was divided between the Burgundians and Franks. The Burgundians were Arians: the Franks were more happy, for most of the nation followed their king, Clovis, who had embraced Christianity, and was baptized in 496. The power of the Burgundians having been destroyed in 524, the Catholic religion flourished throughout France, under the kings of the first race.”—Du Pin’s Ecclesiastical; History, vol. 2, p. 257, London, 1724. TSAM 84.17

The kingdom of the Vandals in Africa, who were also Arians, fell A. D. 533 before the arms of Justinian, emperor of the east; a war which was from beginning to end avowedly a Catholic war. TSAM 85.1

The war against the Ostrogoths, in Italy, commenced A. D. 534, by the same army which had conquered the Vandals, and in March, A. D. 538, the Pope was placed in quiet possession of the capital-Rome. TSAM 85.2

We have before us a work on The Apocalypse, by Rev. George Croly, of England, published in 1827, and dedicated to the Right Rev. Thomas, Lord Bishop of Salisbury, in which he gives the detailed history of the acts from which the supremacy of the Pope is to be dated. We give an extended quotation from his work, with the references and original extracts, which we consider decisive testimony of the time when Popery was “set up,” that is, when the saints were formally and publicly given into its hands. TSAM 85.3

See, also, “Prospects of the Church of Christ,” by Hon. G. T. Noel, p. 100; “Political Destiny of the Earth,” by Wm. Cunninghame, Esq., p. 28. Encyclopedia of Rel. Knowl., art. Antichrist. TSAM 85.4

Mr. Croly, pp. 113-117, says: TSAM 85.5

A. D. 533, the Pope was declared Head of all the Churches, by the Emperor Justinian. TSAM 85.6

The circumstances of a transaction so pregnant with the most momentous results to the Christian world, are to be found at large in the annals of Baronius, the chief Romish Ecclesiastical historian. 21 TSAM 85.7

Justinian being about to commence the Vandal war, an enterprise of great difficulty, was anxious previously to settle the religious disputes of his capital. The Nestorian heresy had formed a considerable number of partisans, who, conscious of the Emperor’s hostility to their opinions, had appealed to the bishop of Rome. To counteract the representations of Cyrus and Eulogius, the Nestorian deputies, the Emperor sent two distinguished prelates, Hypatius, bishop of Ephesus, and Demetrius, bishop of Phillippi, in the character of envoys, to Rome. TSAM 85.8

Justinian had been remarkable for taking an unkingly share in the dubious theology of the time: he felt the passions of a disputant; and to his latest day enjoyed the triumphs of controversy with the delight of a zealot, as he sometimes signalized them by the fury of a persecutor. On this occasion, whether through anxiety to purchase the suffrage of the Roman bishop, the patriarch of the west, whose opinion influenced a large portion of Christendom; or to give irresistible weight to the verdict which was to be pronounced in his own favor; he decided the precedency which had been contested by the bishops of Constantinople from the foundation of the city, and in the fullest and most unequivocal form declared the bishop of Rome the chief of the whole ecclesiastical body of the empire. TSAM 86.1

His letter was couched in these terms: “Justinian, pious, fortunate, renowned, triumphant, Emperor, consul, etc., to John the most holy Archbishop of our city of Rome, and patriarch. TSAM 86.2

“Rendering honor to the apostolic chair, and to your holiness, as has been always and is our wish, and honoring your blessedness as a father; we have hastened to bring to the knowledge of your holiness all matters relating to the state of the churches. It having been at all times our great desire to preserve the unity of your apostolic chair, and the constitution of the holy churches of God which has obtained hitherto, and still obtains. TSAM 86.3

“Therefore we have made no delay in subjecting and uniting to your holiness all the priests of the whole east. 22 TSAM 86.4

“For this reason we have thought fit to bring to your notice the present mailers of disturbance; though they are manifest and unquestionable, and always firmly held and declared by the whole priesthood according to the doctrine of your apostolic chair. For we cannot suffer that anything which relates to the state of the church, however manifest and unquestionable, should be moved without the knowledge of your holiness, who are the Head of all the Holy Churches, 23 for in all things, as we have already declared, we are anxious to increase the honor and authority of your apostolic chair.” TSAM 86.5

The letter then proceeds to relate the matter in question, the heresy of the monks, and the mission of the bishops, and desires to have a rescript from Rome to Epiphanius, archbishop of Constantinople, giving the papal sanction to the judgment already pronounced by the Emperor on the heresy. It further mentions that the archbishop had also written to the pope, “he being also desirous in all things to follow the apostolic authority of his blessedness.” TSAM 86.6

The Emperor’s letter must have been sent before the 25th March, 533, For, in his letter of that date to Epiphanius, he speaks of its having been already despatched, and repeats his decision, that all affairs touching the church shall be referred to the Pope, “Head of all bishops, and the true and effective corrector of heretics.” 24 TSAM 87.1

In the same month of the following year, 534, the Pope returned an answer repeating the language of the Emperor, applauding his homage to the See, and adopting the titles of the imperial mandate, He observes that among the virtues of Justinian, “one shines as a star, his reverence for the apostolic chair, to which he has subjected and united all the churches, it being truly the head of all; 25 as was testified by the rules of the fathers, the laws of princes, and the declarations of the Emperor’s piety.” TSAM 87.2

The authenticity of the title receives unanswerable proof from the edicts in the “Novellæ” of the Justinian code. TSAM 87.3

The preamble of the 9th states that “as the elder Rome was the founder of the laws; so was it not to be questioned that in her was the supremacy of the Pontificate.” TSAM 87.4

The 131st, on the ecclesiastical titles and privileges, chapter 2, states: “We therefore decree that the most holy Pope of the elder Rome is the first of all the, priesthood, and that the most blessed archbishop of Constantinople, the; new Rome, shall hold the second rank after the holy apostolic chair of the elder Rome.” 26 TSAM 87.5

The supremacy of the Pope had, by those mandates and edicts, received the fullest sanction that could be given by the authority of the master of the Roman world. But the yoke sat uneasily on the Bishop of Constantinople; and on the death of Justinian the supremacy was utterly denied. The Greek, who wore the mitre in the imperial city of the east, must have looked with national contempt on a pontiff whose city had lost the honors of the imperial residence, and whose person was in the power of the barbarians. Towards the close of the sixth century, John, of Constantinople, surnamed for his pious austerities the Faster, summoned a council and resumed the ancient title of the See, “Universal Bishop.” The Roman bishop, Gregory the Great, indignant at the usurpation, and either hurried away by the violence of controversy, or, in that day of monstrous ignorance, unacquainted with his own distinctions, furiously denounced John, calling him an “usurper aiming at supremacy over the whole church,” and declaring, with unconscious truth, that whoever claimed such supremacy was anti-Christ. The accession of Phocas at length decided the question. He had ascended the throne of the east by the murder of the Emperor Mauritius. The insecurity of his title rendered him anxious to obtain the sanction of the patriarch of the west. The conditions were easily settled. The usurper received the benediction of the Bishop of Rome, and the Bishop in 606 vindicated from his rival patriarch the gorgeous title, that had been almost a century before conferred on the papal tiara by Justinian. He was thenceforth “Head of all the churches,” without a competitor, “Universal Bishop” of Christendom. 27 That Phocas repressed the claim of the Bishop of Constantinople, is beyond a doubt. But the highest authorities among the civilians and annalists of Rome spurn the idea that Phocas was the founder of the supremacy of Rome; they ascend to Justinian as the only legitimate source, and rightly date the title from the memorable year 533. 28 TSAM 87.6

And referring again to these transactions, pages 8 and 9, he says: TSAM 88.1

“On reference to Baronius, the established authority among the Roman Catholic annalists, I found the whole detail of Justinian’s grants of supremacy to the Pope, formally given.-The entire transaction was of the most authentic and regular kind, and suitable to the importance of the transfer. The grant of Phocas was found to be a confused and imperfect transaction, scarcely noticed by the early writers, and, even in its fullest sense, amounting to nothing beyond a confirmation of the grant of Justinian. The chief cause of its frequent adoption by the commentators, seemed to be its convenient coincidence with the rise of Mahometanism.” 29 TSAM 88.2

But these provisions of the Justinian code could not go into effect in favor of the Bishop of Rome at the time they were issued, because Rome and Italy were then in possession of the Ostrogoths,—who, being strongly attached to the Arian faith, were as violently opposed to the religion of Justinian, as they were envious of his imperial wealth and power. It was not till the conquest of Rome, in March, 538, that the Catholic bishop could exercise the power with which he had been clothed by the Emperor. The Vandal war, which commenced in 533, and the Italian war, the result of which was the conquest of Rome in 538, were prompted by the same spirit, as they were a part of the same object, which gave existence to the ecclesiastical provisions of the code; for proof we refer to Gibbon, the most minute historian, in our language, of the events of those times. He tells us that Justinian, even during the reign of his uncle Justin, “assumed the powers of government,” and “already meditated the extirpation of heresy, and the conquest of Italy and Africa, (ch. 39;) and that on receiving the news of the success of Belisarius against the Vandals in Africa, after he had “celebrated the Divine goodness and confessed in silence the merit of his successful general, impatient to abolish the temporal and spiritual tyranny of the Vandals, proceeded without delay to the full establishment of the Catholic church.”—Decline and Fall, vol. 7, page 150. TSAM 89.1

And again, in speaking of the. conquest of Italy, he says: “When Justinian first meditated the conquest of Italy, he sent ambassadors to the kings of the Franks, and adjured them, by the common ties of alliance and religion, to join in the holy enterprise against the Arians.” TSAM 89.2

This war commenced in 534. On the approach of Belisarius, several cities forsook their Gothic and heretical sovereign, who retired before the armies of the Catholic Emperor, and, after deciding in council to delay the “offensive operations of war till the next spring,” allowed Belisarius without opposition to enter Rome. While he was on his way to the city, the “Romans furiously exclaimed, that the apostolic throne should be no longer profaned by the triumph or toleration of Arianism.” “The deputies of the Pope and clergy, of the senate and people, invited the lieutenant of Justinian to accept their voluntary allegiance, and to enter the city, whose gates would be thrown open for their reception.” TSAM 90.1

“Belisarius entered Rome December 10th, 536. The first days, which coincided with the old saturnalia, were devoted to mutual congratulation and public joy, and the Catholics prepared to celebrate, without a rival, the approaching festival of the nativity of Christ.” “But the senate, the clergy, and the unwarlike people trembled, as soon as they understood that he had resolved, and would speedily be reduced, to sustain a siege against the powers of the Gothic monarchy.” “The Goths commenced the siege in March, 537.” In the extremities of the siege, Belisarius apprehended the most fatal results from the “despair and treachery” of the citizens. “On the proof or suspicion of treason, several senators were banished, and the Pope, Sylverius, was despoiled of his pontifical ornaments, and embarked for a distant exile in the east. At the Emperor’s command, the clergy of Rome proceeded to the choice of a new bishop, and, after a solemn invocation of the Holy Ghost, elected the deacon Vigilius, who had purchased the papal throne by a bribe of two hundred pounds of gold.” TSAM 90.2

“The whole nation of the Ostrogoths had been assembled for the attack, and was almost entirely consumed in the siege of Rome. If any credit be due to an intelligent spectator, one third at least of their enormous host was destroyed in frequent and bloody combats under the walls of the city.” Vitijes, king of the Goths, being informed that another detachment of the Roman army, under “John the Sanguinary,” was spreading devastation through other portions of his kingdom, “before he retired made a last effort either to storm or to surprise the city.” This effort was fruitless, and in the month of March, 538, the Goths ended the siege, and retired from the city. TSAM 90.3

“One year and nine days after the commencement of the siege, an army, so lately strong and triumphant, burnt their tents and tumultuously passed the Milvian bridge.” 30 TSAM 91.1

An extract from a work written by Edward King, Esq., F. R. S. A. S., and published in London in 1798, we believe gives the true idea of the prophecy, as to the commencement and termination of this prophetic period. The author cannot of course be suspected of any partiality to “Millerism.” TSAM 91.2

“Is not the Papal power, at Rome, which was once so terrible, and so domineering, at an end.” TSAM 91.3

“But let us pause a little. Was not the end, in another part of the Holy Prophecies, foretold to be at the END of 1260 years? and was it not foretold by Daniel to be at the END of a time, times, and half a time? which computation amounts to the same period. TSAM 91.4

“And now let us see; hear; and understand. THIS IS THE YEAR 1798.-And just 1260 years ago, in the very beginning of the year 538, Belisarius put an end to the empire and dominion of the Goths, at Rome. TSAM 91.5

“He had entered the city on the 10th of the preceding December, in triumph, in the name of Justinian, Emperor of the East, and had soon after made it tributary to him; leaving thenceforward, from A. D. 538, no Power in Rome, that could be said to rule over the earth-excepting the ECCLESIASTICAL PONTIFICAL POWER.” TSAM 91.6

“It is true, that, after this entry of Belisarius, Rome was twice re-taken by Totila and the Goths. But instead of setting up any empire there, he, the first time, carried away all the Senate, and drove out all the inhabitants; and, the second time, he was himself soon defeated and killed, and Rome was recovered for Justinian by Narses. TSAM 91.7

“Still, however, no dominion, ‘no power ruling over the would, ever had any seat there, any more, except the papal.’ For the Duke of Rome, appointed by Longinus, in 568, was no more than a subordinate civil office; and even under the Exarch. Whilst the Exarch of Ravenna (at the same time that he was, in reality, no residing power at Rome) was, at most, himself only a subordinate officer under the Emperor of the East. And the dominion and power of the Emperor of the East was quite different and distinct from what could at all properly be called the Roman Power. For nothing could, by any means, fairly come under such a description, but either the dominion of the Western Emperor, or the dominion of the kings of the Goths, or the Papal dominion. TSAM 92.1

“We have reason to apprehend, then, that the 1260 years are now completed, and that we may venture to date the commencement of that period, not, as most commentators have hitherto done, either from Pepin’s giving the Pope Ravenna, or from Charlemagne’s determining and adjudging the Pope to be God’s Vicar on earth, but from the end of the Gothic power at Rome. Because both those other circumstances were only (like subsequent gifts, or acquisitions of territory and revenue) mere augmentations of splendor, and confirmations of that state of Ecclesiastical Supremacy, in which the Papal Power had been left at Rome By Belisarius, on his diving out the Goths and ruining their kingdom.” TSAM 92.2

On the Fall of Popery we refer again to Mr. Croly, p. 100. He says— TSAM 92.3

“On the 10th of February, 1798, the French army, under Berthier, entered Rome, took possession of the city, and made the Pope and the cardinals prisoners. Within a week Pius VI was deposed; Rome was declared a Republic; the tree of liberty was planted; and the city and the states were delivered up to a long series of the deepest insults, requisitions, military murders, and the general injury and degradation of the feelings and property of all classes of the people. Pius VI. died in captivity. Pius VII. was dragged across the Alps to crown Napoleon, was held in duress, and was finally restored only on the fall of the French Empire. The papal independence was abolished by France, and the son of Napoleon was declared King of Rome.” See also Their French Revolution, Vol. 4, p. 246, and Allison’s History of Europe. TSAM 92.4

To these extended, but important extracts, but one remark needs to be added. The efforts which resulted in the actual supremacy of the See of Rome by placing the haughty Vigilius in full possession, in 538, were commenced as early as 533: so, in its fall, the first shock of the earthquake which prostrated the Papal throne to the dust in 1798, was given in 1793, when the Republic of France “declared that death was an eternal sleep; that Christianity was an imposture; and that there was no God!” (Croly, p. 61.) TSAM 93.1

The 1260 years must begin somewhere within the period of these transactions,—the writing of the letter of Justinian to the Pope, the issuing of the “Novellæ,” and the conquest of the city of Rome. So their end must be dated within the period of the corresponding transactions, the laws of the republic which abolished Popery in France, and the captivity of the Pope in his ancient capital by the republican armies. Mr. Miller adopts the date in both cases when the events were completed. TSAM 93.2