cient to obferve, that that was not then the religion of the kings of the earth, who are reprefented in the prophecy as having one mind, in fubmitting in thofe matters to one head; which uniformity was fo far from taking place during the reign of Paganifm, that though the religions of the Heathen nations had one common general name, they were really very different religions; and their common name imports no more than the religion of the nations.

V. As to the third diftinguishing character of the power defcribed, relating to the means of acquiring and fupporting fuch enormous authority; though this is a character really distinct from the fecond, which relates to the nature of the authority, and its extent; yet, as was formerly hinted, the fame paffages in the prediction give a plain account of both, fhewing, that the means of it would be, on the part of the kings and kingdoms, a voluntary furrender of power, they agreeing and being of one mind in that matter; and on the part of the head fubmitted to, deceiving and intoxicating, Rev. xvii. 2. 4. 13. &c. chap. xviii. 3. This may reasonably be confidered as having a natural connection with the above character of fmall intrinfic fecular power; which must make the acquifition of fo enormous and abfolute power in other refpects the effect of methods very different from conqueft; in all which the oppofition to the most notour things in the character and hiftory of the old Pagan empire feems fo obvious, that it is not needful to infift on it. Mean time it is not fit to overlook a remark that has been made on this strange furrender of what the kings of the earth have been always fo jealous of, this furrender of power, fo voluntary, fo extenfive, and durable, "That it is a thing of fo fingular a na

ture, that it has a particular fitness to fhow, how "far the predicting of it must be beyond the reach "of human fagacity and of chance."

VI. As to the fourth character, which relates to the crimes charged on the power defcribed, particular attention feems due to the furprifing conformity on this head, between the predictions of Daniel and John, and between both and the most notour facts in hiftory, thewing, that this part of the complex defcription in view is exceeding far from being applicable to the Pagan Roman power, or any other fuch power, but what now exifts.

It is of ufe to begin this head with anfwering objections; after obferving, that if it is a character of truth and just reafoning, that impartial inquiry into objections fuggefts new confirmations of what is objected to, that maxim is eminently applicable to the prefent cafe. It is the chief objection against our finding diftinguishing characters of any crimes of the prefent Romifh powers, in the paffages in view, That the crimes defcribed in them have an obvious refemblance to thofe of the old Pagan empire; particularly blafphemy, fpiritual whoredom, or idolatry, and perfecution.

. It is certain, that the fact cannot be denied, that there is an obvious and complex resemblance between the crimes of the beaft and thofe of the ancient Paganifin; but it is no lefs certain, that there is alfo fuch a refemblance between the crimes of ancient and modern Rome in matters of religion, and religious worship in particular. Though it cannot be expected, that writers of that communion fhould own the refemblance, fo far as it takes place, to be criminal, but that rather they fhould make it prudential; yet they cannot, with any fhow of reafon, deny, that in external rites it is very extenfive, after this has been fo convincingly made out, not merely by their oppofers, but by fuch a man of their own communion as Polydore Virgil; befides the great facility with which others may, and do, perhaps without much learning, yet with fufficient evidence, run the parallel between the rites of an

cient and modern Rome, from the most uncontested accounts of both.

This being the cafe, let us fuppofe the prophecies in view had told, in a direct and explicit manner, that after the fix idolatrous fovereign powers of Rome, the Pagan emperors fhould be at an end; and after a feventh fucceffion of fovereigns, but not idolatrous powers, had intervened for fome time, an eighth fovereign, and feventh idolatrous power, of a new kind, thould arife, who would eftablish and propagate an aftonishing refemblance of, the old fuperftitions through the divided kingdoms of the old empire if all this were faid in the most explicit manner, who could avoid owning it to be a furprifingly clear, a circumftantial, and hiftorical kind of defcription of the Romish power that reigns now, and has done fo for ages paft?

But if it is not in the most explicit ftyle, it is in a ftyle more fuitable to prediction, that all this is afferted in the paffages in view, and that in fuch a way as requires no laborious or diflicult deduction.

1. The head of Rome defcribed is not described merely by the general criminal character of oppofing the truth, which might really agree to a future new head of that city and empire, without any confiderable refemblance to the old ones, but that refemblance itself feems a chief thing in the prophetic defcription; and when he is called one of the feven, is it not the moft natural comment, that he would bear too great a refemblance to the firft fix, by reviving and procuring extenfive regard to an image of the old fuperftitions through the empire, after that intereft had received a deadly wound under the fixth head, when the fovereign fecular powers abandoned and oppofed it? which things are a ufeful key to the expreffions about giving life to the image of the beast, and healing his wound after one of his heads (which muft relate to the fixth) had been, as it were, wounded to death. See ch. xii.

Ff

3. & 15.

3. & 15. which can be proved to be parallel to chap. xvii. by all the chief arguments needful to prove any thing of that kind.

A variety of proofs concur to fhow, that the reviving a refemblance of the old corrupt religion of the empire would have in it that guilt of apoftafy which is expreffed in Daniel, by changing the laws of religion; and which is a chief peculiar character of the crimes of the beaft, diftinguishing them from thofe of the Pagan emperor. This apoftafy is proved by every argument that fhows the converfion of the empire to have happened in the interval between the fixth idolatrous head, declared to be that which exifted in John's time, or the Heathen emperor, and the feventh. This appears, as is hinted above, from chap. xvii. 10. 11.; which flows, that there would be a feventh intervening head, which, tho' a fovereign head, would not be an idolatrous one. It appears from the things neceffarily implied in a deadly wound given to the beaft. Seeing the beast is not a particular corner, but the body of the empire, not confidered fimply as a body-politic, but as an idolatrous body, a wound to the beast must be a wound to that idolatry, not merely in a corner, but through the body of the empire; which is confirmed, inftead of being contradicted, by calling the wound a wound in one of the heads, Rev. xiii. 3. In y 14. it is the beaft itfelf that is faid to be wounded

an extentive wound to the intereft of idolatry through the empire muft therefore be intended. A wound unto death muft be a wound threatening ruin and extinction. Such an extenfive wound to falfe religion is neceffarily connected with a propor tional advancement of the true one. It is not merely connected with it, but upon the matter coincides with it, and feems but another name and notion of extenfive reformation through the empire. The fame happy revolution is likewife implied in the defeat and downfall of the dragon, defcribed in chap.

xii. who (as was in part proved above) was the beaft's predeceffor in the fame feat, and fame extenfive empire. That downfall, intervening between the reign of the dragon and the rife of the beaft, has a ftriking conformity with the other intimations of the converfion of the empire; and all of them confirm the conclufion in view, that apo ftafy is one of thofe crimes of the beaft that diftinguish him from the Pagan emperors, and fhew, that the predictions about him cannot be applied to them. And it is a confirmation of this, when confidered jointly with other things, that though whoredom, taken in a figurative fenfe, denotes, in fcripturestyle, the crime of idolatry; it is chiefly when it is aggravated by apoftafy, and breach of covenant: fo that that crime, fo much infifted on in the charge against mystical Babylon, that rules the beaft, is more applicable to an apoftate church, than to an empire that never had been a church.

2. But though thefe crimes, idolatry and apostafy, are, in fcripture, juftly called abominations; and the laft mentioned is manifeftly an evil not ap-: plicable to Pagan Rome, and therefore a characteriftic of more modern Romifh powers; it deferves ftill more particular attention, that it is one thing for any fociety to be chargeable with fuch evils themselves, and quite another thing to be the fource or mother of fuch abominations to other kingdoms; which character has evidently a peculiar pre-eminence in the defcription of the feducing power in view, as it is no lefs evident, that it is a character not applicable to Pagan Rome; other kingdoms, conquered by her, as was above hinted, having rather been the mothers or fources of her abominations, while the, notwithstanding all her faults, contributed rather to their becoming more civilized and reformed from barbarity.

Attentive perufal of the predictions in view, may eafily fatisfy the impartial and inquifitive, how much

Ff2

they