« PreviousContinue »
nises; speaking of it as a Grand Event, which must come to pass before the last fall of the antichristian kingdom43.' Indeed this celebrated French divine says in a former page: this period shall make greater changes in the world, than were ever seen. Nay, if we should interpret these changes which ought to happen, only by those which fell out in the last age; surely we may say, that never were greater and more surprising alterations. In less than 20 or 30 years, a great part of the Christian world was reformed. And at the same time there were dreadful wars, troubles, and sheddings of blood, in Germany, in Flanders, in Holland, in England, and in France 44,
Since many persons have been taught to believe, that Jurieu has been extraordinarily happy in pointing out the period, near which the French Revolution was to happen ; I shall probably be regarded as chargeable with neglect for having omitted the mention of so important a circumstance. It is therefore incumbent on me to explain the reason of this omission, Mr. Winchester, after observing that Jurieu had foretold this Revolution and the abolition of titles, adds, and what is more extraordinary still, he predicted the Time, when it would happen, allowing himself a latitude of ten years, from 1780 to 179045.' The editor of a pamphlet, entitled Prophetic Conjectures, says, that Jurieu had specified, that a Revolution would be accomplished in France, between 1785 and 179546. And in a third pamphlet by Mr. Bicheno, this gentleman marks the following passage as a quotation from Jurieu. “The Tenth Part of the city which here fell, will, at some future time, appear to be the kingdom of France, where a Revo. lution will take place about the year 178547.' But, whatever be the cause, these statements, though they agree tolerably well with each other, are completely erroneous;
43 Vol. II. p. 240.
45 The Three Woe Trumpets, p. 35.
and no such passage, as that quoted by Mr. Bicheno, is to be found in Jurieu.
The fact is, that this Protestant divine was altogether mistaken as to the time. This is evident, even from what is printed in the title both of the French original and of the English translation of his work, as well as from numberless passages which are scattered through the body of it. Instead of having correct notions on the period of the French Revolution, he believed, that it would be accomplished before the expiration of the last century. Persuaded that it would happen three years and a half after a certain fixed date, he says, when speaking of this date, I strongly hope, that God intends to begin it at the time of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes48 ;' an event, which had taken place in 1685. He supposed, that in about 20 or 25 years after France should have ceased to constitute a part of the antichristian empire, that empire would totally fall“ ; and he pronounced it to be certain, that, in the beginning of the nes
age, this empire Must see its end. "If,' says he, • I should be mistaken 9 or 10 years, and that this empire should instead of ending in the year 1710, or thereabouts) run on until the year 1720, I do not think that any could justly treat me as a false prophet.— I suppose 30 years shall pass for the reuniting of all Christians, in the same communion, and that this union shall be effected about the year 1740.-45 years will be requisite to run over all the earth, and convert the nations that are strangers to the covenant.' Then, says he, add 45 to 1740, that will fall on the year 1785, in which shall come the glorious Reign of Christ on the earth".' Wild as these computations may appear, they were not framed at random. It is true, that in fixing his first date Jurieu committed a radical
But, supposing him to have been right in the foundation of his reckoning, he would not have been altogether unauthorised in asserting, that at the close of 30 years,
48 Vol. II. p. 229, 278.
49 P. 20, 244, 276.
and again at the conclusion of 45, some signal and glorious events might be expected to happen. This will be seen in ch. xxi.
The work of a countryman and a contemporary of Jurieu ought not here to be passed over in silence. It was written in 1685; and in 1688 a translation of it, now become extremely scarce, was published at London, entitled A New SYSTEME OF THE APOCALYPSES2. The same passages in the Revelation, which in England had been regarded by Dr. Goodwin, and in Holland by Jurieu, as capable of being referred to the future state of France, received also in France itself a similar application from this anonymous divine; though we are assured in his preface, that, in the composition of his own work, he had made no use of that of Jurieu. The internal marks of originality in this performance are indeed abundantly satisfactory 53.
To the witnesses, who have appeared in France, he applies, like Jurieu, the principal part of the with chapter; and, in the course of his remarks upon it, observes that St. John speaks not' of places, but of one place ;' and that place or street, which the text doth design,-seems beyond all contradiction to be FRANCE S.' And in a subsequent page, he not only declares, that he shall be much deceived, if there is not' A REVOLUTION IN FRANCE;' but adds that it is not to be questioned, that there will be a surprising change in that country, not merely with respect to religion, .but in reference TO JUSTICE, TO POLICY, TO THE FI. NANCES, AND TO WARS.' Indeed the symbol of an earth
52 Not two days had it been finished, before a number of French draa goons entered the residence of the author ; and plundering him of all that be possessed, excepting this treatise, obliged him to flee for refuge to a foreign country. Of our persecuted author his English translator declares, that he knew no man, who has been more happy in his explication of the prophecies which are yet unfulfilled, or who has accompanied what he says on futurity with more probable reasons.
53 So widely did Jurieu and our anonymous divine differ, with respect to certain parts of the Apocalypse, that they engaged in an amicable controversy on the subject. 54 P. 226
55 P. 232, 233.
quake is a political one; and as the prophet declares it to be a Great earthquake, our anonymous author might, with reason, expect, that it would shake the whole fabric of the Gallic government, and extend its alterations through every
part of it.
From the words already quoted, that a great voice from Heaven was heard, saying, come up hither, he infers, like Jurieu, that the French revolution would originate from the prince on the throne. He afterwards likewise observes, that as it is the king of France who contributeth most to the glory of the papacy; so it shall be the king of France, that shall contribute most to its ruins. Possibly it may be asked, is not this at variance with fact? On the contrary, it may be replied, it exactly corresponds with it, and the words of our divine have been literally accomplished. Did not Louis XVI. powerfully contribute, in various ways, to the progress, as well as the commencement, of the French revolution ; and will it not be ultimately found, that the whole of his conduct, however it might have been intended to operate, has in fact substantially contributed, not only to the ruin of popery in France, but of the papacy itself?
But, in confining myself merely to the expectations of our anonymous divine, I should not do him justice. Of his reasons an extensive specimen shall therefore be given.
Some,' says he, will doubtless ask, what reason I have to understand FRANCE, rather than any other kingdom, by this Tenth Part of the city, which is to fall after the earthquake? My reasons are these, 1. I presuppose that the city here spoken of is Babylon, or the papal empire, or the Romish church, which is the empire of Antichrist. This truth we have already proved. 2. I presuppose that France is one of the Ten Kingdoms that were to be formed out of the ruins of the Roman empire.--3. I presuppose France is one Street, and one part of the city, i. e. of the papal kingdom. Nor can any one deny but that the Gallican church, or the church of France, styles itself by the title
56 P. 232.
of the Catholic apostolic Roman church; that the pope reigns there over what is called spirituals; that he hath there his ministers and agents ; that he receiveth annates from thence; and that there is no arch-bishop or bishop in France, but who receives his mission and authority from the pope. 4. I suppose that France is the most beautiful and glorious kingdom of all those kingdoms which are tributary to the pope. They do so account it, by calling the king of France, the most Christian king, and the eldest son of the church. And it is worthy of remark, that, even in St. John's time, France was by way of excellency styled the Province; because of all the provinces of the Roman empire, France, which was then called Gaul, was the best and the most powerful. This is so certain, that the name does yet remain, and is attributed to the Southern part of France, which is styled Provence, from the Latin, provincia. It being therefore said in the text, that the Tenth Part of the city fell; the Holy Spirit did questionless intend by that expression, the most excellent part of all. So that it is from thence very natural to understand France by the Tenth Part of the city. Lastly, we have already observed, that it is not said that the two witnesses were killed, and that they lay unburied in the places or streets, in the plural number, but in the streets of the great city, in the singular; which is as much as to say, a Popish kingdom marked out by way of excellency. And therefore seeing the Holy Spirit had the most excellent of all the Popish kingdoms in his eye: and seeing we have seen the death, which in so surprising a manner hath befallen the witnesses in France, we may without any difficulty conclude, that it is France, which is the Tenth Part of the city that is to fall. It is
57 I meet with similar reasoning in earlier writers. • It is not said in the streets of the great city, but in the street, to wit,--that nation where the witnesses have most eminently borne their testimony against Antichrist. Apocalyptical Mysteries by H. K. Lond. 1667. Part I. p. 23. Dr. Good. win, who wrote his exposition in 1639, p. 165; and Haughton, in his Treatise on Antichrist, published in 1652, p. 117, have the same observation.