CHAPTER V.

FROM AUGUSTINE TO LUTHER.

"In the latter times some shall depart from the faith." 1 Tim. 4: 1. "Others were tortured not, accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection."-Heb. 11: 35.

PRE-M

sus.

RE-MILLENNIALISM, we hold, is Apostolic; but in reviewing the testimony of the early church on the question of Chiliasm, it is of course admitted that they mixed errors with the doctrine. We remember that "the mystery of iniquity" worked in Paul's day, and we have read his solemn prediction in his farewell charge given to the church at EpheAn English writer has well observed, "I do not appeal to the writings of the early Christians as authority; so far from it, I regard their writings as the history of truth perverted; so that while on the one hand I should be surprised to find any truth taught by the apostles, unnoticed in the Fathers, I should be almost equally surprised to find it taught Scripturally and unincumbered by human additions, so early did the apostacy begin to work." Above antiquity, tradition or human opinion, in the words of Burnet, we should always require a higher witness, viz: the Bible." This is the first. But we highly esteem the faith of that church whose characteristics, says Milner, were "to believe, to love, and to suffer." "Whatever is first," says Tertullian, "is true, whatever is later is adulterate," and Mr. Faber has truly said: "If a doctrine totally unknown to

THE MILLENNIUM-ITS FALL.

111

the primitive church, which received her theology immediately from the hands of the apostles, and which continued long to receive it from the hands of the disciples of the apostles, springs up in a subsequent age, let that age be the fifth century, or let it be the tenth century, or let it be the sixteenth century, such doctrine stands on its very front, im pressed with the brand of mere human invention."* Such, we argue, is Post-millennialism, and such also Anti-millennialism, of which we are now to speak, after first giving the character of the times.

Having now arrived in our history of Millennarianism at the commencement of the fifth century, when the great apostacy had begun, and this Apocalyptic truth was deemed a heresy and accounted unpopular, we here purpose giving, through the combined testimony of many voices, a brief but fuller account of its decline. Paganism was fallen, but the Papacy was hastening to its birth, and even in its embryo was hung all over with idolatry. From Gibbon, Neander and Mosheim, we learn that in the fourth century monks, monasteries, convents, penance, church councils, with church control of conscience, excommunication, the perfume of flowers, the smoke of incense, wax tapers in the churches at noon day, prostrate crowds at the altar drunk with fanaticism or wine, imprinting devout kisses on the walls and supplicating the concealed blood, bones, or ashes of the saints, idolatrous frequenting martyrs' tombs, pictures and images of tutelar saints, veneration of bones and relics, gorgeous robes, tiaras, croises, pomp, splendor and mysticism, were seen everywhere, and were the order of the day; and says Mosheim "The new species of philosophy imprudently adopted by Origen and many other Christians, was extremely prejudicial to the cause of the gospel, and to the beautiful simplicity of its celestial doctrines," and Gibbon writes that

*Primitive Doctrine of Election, p. 158.

"If in the beginning of the fifth century Tertullian or Lactantius had been suddenly raised from the dead to assist at the festival of some popular saint or martyr, they would have gazed with astonishment and indignation at the profane spectacle which had succeeded to the pure and spiritual worship of a Christian congregation." Martyr worship was very common, and Eunapius the Pagan, A. D. 396, exclaimed, "These are the gods that the earth now-a-days brings forth, these the intercessors with the gods-men called martyrs: before whose bones and skulls, pickled and salted, the monks kneel and lay prostrate, covered with filth and dust." The mystery of iniquity worked like leaven, and to use the words of Coleridge, "The Pastors of the Church had gradually changed the life and light of the gospel into the very superstitions they were commissioned to disperse; and thus paganized Christianity in order to christen Paganism." Dr. Cumming remarks that "The great multitude consisted of embryo papists, and what we call Pusyism in the nineteenth century, was the predominating religion of the fourth." Milner says that "while there was much outward religion the true doctrines of justification were scarcely seen." All of this Dr. Duffield does not hesitate to affirm was the genuine offspring of the allegorical system and Platonic philosophy of Origen, who made the church on earth the mystic kingdom of heaven. "Vigilantius," says Elliott, "remained true, and was the Protestant of his times," but Jerome, remarks Dr. Cumming," became utterly corrupted," and Augustine, as Elliott has shown, scarcely escaped the universal contagion. Eusebius said "the church of the fourth century looked like the very image of the kingdom of Christ,” but it was not the Millennium, as he dreamed, says Cumming, but the mystery of iniquity, ripening and maturing. It rapidly approached its predicted maturity, and Antichrist loomed into view. Such was the character of the times, and need we wonder that the true Millennium was laid aside, and

APOSTACY OF THE TIMES.

113

with it the Apocalypse that taught it? "Rome," says Burnet, "always had an evil eye on the Millennium!" Truly spoken! Says Newman, the Roman Catholic writer: "Whereas at first certain texts were inconsistently confined to the letter, and a Millennium was in consequence expected; the very course of events, as time went on, interpreted the prophecies about the church more truly," &c., i. e. in a mystical or anagogical manner.

Continuing our quotations on this point, we give the testimony of Bishop Russell, of Scotland, a strong Anti-millennarian, who writes as follows: "It is worthy of remark, that so long as the prophecies regarding the Millennium were interpreted literally, the Apocalypse was received as an inspired production, and as the work of the apostle John; but no sooner did theologians find themselves compelled to view its annunciations through the medium of allegory and metaphorical description, than they ventured to call in question its heavenly origin, its genuineness, and its authority. Dionysius, the great supporter of the allegorical school, gives a decided opinion against the authenticity of the Revelation." Joseph Mede truly says of the Anti-millennarians of the fourth century, "They denied the Apocalypse to be Scripture, nor was it re-admitted till they thought they had found some commodious interpretation of the thousand years." Dr. Cumming observes, "Some divines of the fourth century rejected the Apocalypse, on the ground that it contained, as they alleged, prophecies of what they erroneously believed to be a carnal Millennium; just in the same way as some persons still argue that the Bible cannot be God's word, because it contains truths that cross their prejudices." Dr. Elliott testifies, that from the Constantinian revolution in the eastern empire, with but few exceptions, we find the Apocalypse "passed over in silence by the great Greek Fathers of the remainder of the fourth century;" and he also shows that nearly all who rejected it, were evidently under preju

dices against, and misconceptions of the Apocalyptic doctrine of a Millennium. The pointed testimony of Prof. Stuart is as follows: "In the end of the fourth century to guard against Chiliasm, quite a number doubted the genuineness of the Apocalypse,-did not receive it as canonical, and carefully abstained from appealing to it, but after this period we find only here and there a solitary voice raised against it, until at length the reception became all but universal. When the question of Chiliasm had ceased to excite any special interest in the churches all opposi

tion to the Apocalypse either ceased or became quite inactive and indifferent." Gibbon, too, adds his testimony to this remarkable fact, and says: "In the Council of Laodicea, A. D. 360, the Apocalypse was tacitly excluded from the sacred canon, by the same churches of Asia to which it was addressed; and we may learn from the complaint of Sulpicius Severus, that their sentence had been ratified by the greater number of Christians of his time." And to sum up this array of evidence with regard to the Millennium, as held by the church up to this period, together with its rejection, as also that of the Apocalypse, we give the following striking and truthful language of Horatius Bonar. On Rev. 20th chapter, he writes :—

"In the first centuries great stress was laid upon this passage. It was considered the stronghold of Chiliasm-so strong and decided was its testimony deemed, that the Antichiliasts deemed their only escape from it, was the total denial of the Apocalypse. Chiliasm, and the Apocalypse, were deemed inseparable. They could only get rid of the former, by rejecting the latter. They never thought it possible to deny that the Apocalypse taught Chiliasm. This was not disputed; and hence those who disliked Chiliasm could not tolerate the Apocalypse. It was not till the church had learned to Platonize, or had taken lessons in the school of Origen, that they could condemn Chiliasm without disputing the inspiration of the Revelation."