Works
I know the same Phrases may be used to express like matters of diverse and sundry times; but here is not only Identity of phrases, but, together with the same phrases, the same frame of things with their circumstances, and those such as are not appliable to many times. And though I am not of the same mind with Theocritus Iustus, (his name is Daniel Lawenus ) to draw all the Apocalypse to the Jews, upon no other ground but communion of phrases; yet I know nevertheless, that to compare Scripture with Scripture is none of the least helps to understand Scripture.
3. I have dwelt all this while upon the Second Vision of Kingdoms, I come now 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to say somewhat of the First, Dan. 2. v. 44.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And in the days of these Kings or Kingdoms; that is, say I, during the days of those Kingdoms, while the days of this Dominion of the Gentiles yet lasted, before these days of their dominion ended. I lay the Emphasis upon days. But here you stumble, and make inference as if I had said, or the Prophet either, In or during all the days of those Kingdoms, or during the days of all those Kingdoms, Babylonian, Persian, and Greek, as well as Roman. I cannot but marvel to see you make so strange of an expression not only frequent in Scripture, but common and usual in every language. If I should say, such or such a thing was done in the days of the Saxon, or in the days of the British Kings; would you infer or understand me, as if I meant in all the days of those Kings, or in the days of all those Kings, or some of them only? If I should say such a thing was done in the days of Popery, must I needs mean all the days of Popery, or some part of them only, and so no more but while those days were yet in being? It is said, Ruth 1. 1. It came to pass in THE DAYS when the Judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. I hope this famine was but in some part of those days, or in the days of some of those udges, not all of them. It is an expression Elliptical, if you will, but yet most ordinary. Judge. 15. 20. Samson judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty years: but the Philistines days were forty years: so he judged but in the latter part of them. 2 Sam. 21. 1. There was a famine in the days of David 3 years. Vide Ezra 4. 7. Isaiah 7. 1. Ier. 23. 6. So Matth. 2. 1. In the days of Herod the King, Jesus was born in Bethlehem; that is, in the latter end, or about the last two years of his reign. So [ In the days of those Kingdoms of the Gentiles ] is, during them and in the latter part of them, as the nature of the thing spoken of sufficiently argues, which was to destroy the last Kingdom, which had destroyed and sw •• owed the former three: I mean the second swallowed or possessed the first, the third the second, the fourth the third; and so in a sense, by the destruction of the fourth, the Stone destroyeth all the rest as contained therein: For the Stone smites neither the Golden part, nor the Silver, nor the Brass immediately, but only the feet of Iron and Clay; and yet by that blow was the Brass, the Silver and the Gold destroyed also, inasmuch as they all came by succession to the Iron. I added besides in my last, that the dissipation of the Gold, Silver and Brass, together with the Iron, might be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 typi (not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as you change it,) because the parts of the Image in the Type could not succeed one another in time as the Kingdoms signified by them did; and so the Image appeared to be dissipated all at once in Vision, though the Kingdoms were not so, save only in the sense before named.
I added one thing more, which came then to mind when I saw you urge so hard upon all the four Kings; That Kings might be taken Elliptically also, as well as days, (though that of days be undefinite rather) viz. In the days of those Kingdoms, that is, someone of them. I gave for an example of such an Ellipsis that of Iephtah, Judge. 12. 7. And Iephtah was buried in the Cities of Gilead, that is one of them. Here you • ollicite the interpretation as not right, you would have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Cities of Gilead to be, By the inhabita • ts of the Cities of Gilead: But besides that you cannot show any where in Scripture 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 • ou • ed, the verses following would check such an interpretation, where three more Judges are named, with the time of their rule and places of their burial, as Iephtah was; which is sufficient, I think, to persuade that Iephtah 's place of burial was named likewise, and not meant the persons who buried him. But why should you labor to win this one place from me, who quoted it not as if there were no more, but as that which was most present to my memory? For the thing it self, it is a ruled case amongst the Grammarians, that you may not think I devised it for an Evasion. I have observed many Examples thereof, which I know not now where to find; only there comes one to mind like that of Iephtah, 2 Chron. 35. 24. where it is said, that Josiah was buried 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Sepulchers of his fathers, which we translate [ one of the Sepulchers. ] But in the mean time, till your own observation shall furnish you with more Examples, I will exscribe such as my Grammarian affords me. Psal. 1. 3. Erit sicut arbor plantata 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ad rivos aqu • rum, h. e. juxta Ibn Ezram, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ad aliquem rivorum aquae. Ion. 1. 5. Et Jonah descendit ad latera Navis, h. e. ad unum e lateribus. Zach. 9. 9. Et super pullum natum asinarum, h. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pullo ex una asinarum. Yea and with a numeral word, 1 Sam. 18. 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 per duas affinitate conjunges te mecum hodie, h. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 per alteram e duabus. Et sic Targum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hujus generis sunt, Latrones exprobraverunt ei, Matth. 27. 44. i. alteruter e latronibus, ut exponitu • , Luc. 23. 39. Item scriptum est in Prophetis, John. 6. 45. h. e. in aliquo Prophetarum. I suppose these will be sufficient to induce you to let Iephtah 's bones rest in one of the Cities of Gilead.
Thus much of my Interpretation, now of yours. You would have, In the days of those Kingdoms, to be expounded, After the days of them; and because I answered it not, but only rejected it in my last, you suppose the authority you brought therefore was sound and good. I now answer therefore, and say first, That besides that it is contrary to the native property of the preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 so to be interpreted, (it being decurtate of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 inter ) so the Examples you bring are far enough from proving it. Let us examine them. The first is, Exod. 2. 11. And it came to pass 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in those days when Moses was grown, &c. I say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [ Days ] here are the days of the Egyptian bondage and servitude. What shall we do with [ After ] here? The next is in the same Chap. verse 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, when those days of Egyptian servitude had now continued long, and were not yet ended, &c. You see here is no need of any After, and you cannot deny but it may be thus expounded. If it may, I will never make an Anomaly of signification, where the natural and usual will serve turn. Secondly, Could it be shown that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes signified [ After, ] yet in this place the nature of the thing spoken of will not admit that signification. The Stone hewn out of the mountain is interpreted by Daniel to be a Kingdom which should begin in time, that is, the Kingdom of Christ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not that he hath a • coeternal with his Father, which hath no beginning. This Kingdom of Christ should smite the Fourth Kingdom, and at length destroy it; therefore this Kingdom must needs be whilst the Fourth Monarchy was yet in being, and not begin after it: For how can that which comes after smite that which before had ceased to be? or how can that which was not till after, destroy that which was destroyed before itself was? Therefore the nature of the Subject will not admit 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be here taken for [ After, ] but requires it should be maintained in its proper and natural signification.
4. That I may therefore gather all this Controversy into a short sum, I find your Tenet to stand charged with three not tolerable Inconveniences of interpretation. The one in the first Vision, where you interpret, In the days of those Kingdoms, to be After the days of them: where the matter spoken of will no ways bear it, though the Preposition would. The second in the second Vision, where you will be forced to interpret, until the time came the Saints possessed the Kingdom, until some 200 years before that time. A third is, That you are forced, for making good your Exposition of the Kingdoms, to deprive the Church of those principal passages of Scripture whereon she hath always grounded her faith of the Second coming of Christ. If I found mine charged with any one such, I should begin to misdoubt the truth thereof. I might add a fourth, That besides all these, you forsake that Exposition and Application of these Kingdoms which the Church hath universally followed from her infancy. And who can easily be persuaded that the Doctors of the Church immediately following the Apostles, and while some of the Apostles disciples were yet living, should be ignorant of the meaning of so main a Prophecy, whereupon depended the demonstration of the verity of Christ's coming; and that too whilst those disputes were still hot between the Jews and Christians? The Fathers are to be considered here not in respect of greater learning or infallibility of Spirit than ours, but as Testes & Custodes doctrinae primitus acceptae; because it cannot be presumed they could be ignorant of it, being so near, or would change it, being so pious and good.
Now the inducements which should persuade an Opinion burdened with such inconveniences had need be very powerful. But when I examine everything, I find the main and only pillar which you suppose will bear up your building against all assaults whatsoever, to be but a weak one, namely, That nothing was revealed to Daniel which was contained in S. John's sealed Book; because none could open that Book but Christ, and he opened it not till his Revelation shown to John. That there is a flaw in this illation is apparent, because there are two main and principal matters of the argument of that Book which cannot be denied to have been revealed before, namely of Antichrist • persecution, and of the Second coming of Christ to judgment: the first whereof was revealed to S. Paul (though out of another Book;) the other is plentifully revealed throughout the New Testament, before S. John saw his Visions. I answered therefore before, and answer still, That the Subject matter of the Apocalyptical Book is not that which was never in no sort revealed before, but never in that order, form and particularity of Fates, Acts and Circumstances, wherein it was revealed then. The subject of that Prophetical history is the Roman Empire, together with the Church or Kingdom of Christ contained therein: the one is equally the subject thereof as well as the other. Now it is not denied but the Church or Kingdom of Christ was revealed before, both for the Being, Quality, Fate, and Prevailing, not to the Apostles only, but to Daniel also: why not then the Roman Empire? In the same sense wherein that which concerned the one was revealed before, or remained sealed till now, in that sense was that revealed or sealed till now which concerned the other. Here you brought a Catalogue of divers particulars concerning the Fourth Monarchy revealed to Daniel; but to what purpose I cannot devise, unless you could prove there were no other particulars of Succession, Fates and Acts, which were still to remain sealed until the Lamb should reveal them to S. John. For I affirmed not, that no particulars of the Roman Kingdom were revealed to Daniel; but that not those which were now first revealed to S. John: As, namely, none of the Acts and Fates of this Fourth Kingdom were particularized to Daniel; but those of the latter end of it only, when the Horn was to rule the rest, which concerned the former part of his time, were represented to him only in general & in imagine confusa; the more ample and large decyphering thereof being deferred till Christ himself should come and unfold all unto S. John, when also Daniel 's most particular part was yet to be revealed much more particularly in the Metropolis, quality of Blasphemy, degrees and manner of destruction. That which I have said of the Roman Empire, partly revealed and partly sealed, must be accommodated also to the history of the Church or Kingdom of Christ, the other part of the subject of this Apocalyptical Book; which though it were in some degree revealed before, yet never in such order and specification of Fates and Circumstances as now. The consideration of the one will easily clear the scruple you make concerning the other. And for conclusion, you must remember that I yield you all this time your sense of the sealing and unsealing the Apocalyptical Book, which you know some interpret to a far other purpose.
I have a little time, and paper enough left: I will look over your Papers, and answer such particulars more as I think need answering.
- 1. I know not what it is you contend for about the Two States of Christ's Kingdom. If you grant the Kingdom of Christ at his Second coming shall be of a different state from that of his First, you grant as much as serves my turn; and the Kingdom is neither more nor less eternal, because some State thereof is not eternal. An infant when it comes to be adultus is the same numero still; but the stature is not the same, but diverse.
- 2. You affirm the duration of the Fourth Kingdom holds proportion with the legs, because the three former do with their parts. If they do, tell me how your Third Kingdom of Alexander and his progeny, which lasted but 18 years, holds proportion with the belly of the Image: I think it will be but a girt belly. The Persian Monarchy, represented by breast and arms, lasted about 200 years, that is, ten or eleven times as long as your Third Kingdom did. If this proportion holds in this Image, the breast and arms must be ten or eleven times as long as the belly. And if you read belly and thighs, the proportion will be a great deal worse: For I suppose you make your Fourth Kingdom 280 years long: the same proportion therefore which 280 hath to 18, your legs must have to the belly and thighs, that is, quindecupla.
- 3. Whatsoever time of Messiah 's appearing Almighty God pointed out by Daniel 's 70 weeks, yet I believe not that any Jew before the Event could infallibly design the time without some latitude; because they could not know infallibly where to pitch the head of their account, until the Event discovered it: yet in some latitude they might. I think we have as good skill in that computation as the Jews could have, and yet you see we yet vary about it after so many hundred years. And if yourself in this difference follow Mr. Broughton 's way, you may as soon persuade me there is no Sun in heaven, as make me believe it. And though it mattereth not much what I think or think not, yet in this I dare say that all the Learned men of note in Christendom are of my mind. And for my part, I cannot but think it a prodigium that any man should think otherwise, and I suppose yourself are so far of my judgment.
- 4. If you make the Fourth Beast hornless before his destruction, you will make Daniel both at odds with himself and the Angel his interpreter. If the Horn continue until the Ancient of days comes to give Judgment to the Saints of the most High, and until the time came that the Saints possessed the Kingdom, verse 22. or if he continue until the Judgment sit, and they take away his dominion, and the Kingdom be given to the people of the Saints of the most High, verse 26, 27. how was he Hornless when the Ancient of days sat in Judgment to destroy him, and give his body to the burning flame? This I should have taken notice of in another place, but I then forgot it; yet I said there that which was sufficient to overthrow it. I would not have such an Evasion in my Opinion.
- 5. Though all the Four Kingdoms have respect to the Jews, as those who were all that time to be in bondage under them: yet it doth not follow that the beginning of each Kingdom should be counted from the time they were first possessed of Palestine, but from the time the Caput regni should be given unto the people which were next to succeed. Nor is that Observation solid, That those Kingdoms were called Beasts, for the beastly usage of God's people: the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Heb. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , signifies naturally Animal. And you will not, I know, say so of the quatuor Animalia, in the Apocalypse, though we translate them also four Beasts. The congregation of Israel, as we translate it, Ps. 68. 10. is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies Coetus & Caterva, that notion may be applied to Kingdoms and States also: So the type is so much the more concise, by reason of the ambiguity of the word in those languages. But whether it be this or that, I affirm nothing, nor is it much to the purpose either way.
And thus I think I have not left anything of moment unanswered. I had no other end in all this, but to let you see I have sufficient grounds to be persuaded of my Tenet, and to be averse from yours. Whether others can be persuaded by them or not, that I know not; nor do I arrogate so much ability to myself, as to persuade others what I am persuaded of myself. There is more goes to persuasion than Reasons or Demonstrations, and that is not in my power. I desire not you should make any Reply, but the contrary; for I am now resolved to answer no more, whatsoever you should send. You know as much of my Opinion, and my grounds for the same, as I would desire of any man's; and I think I perfectly understand yours, and where your chief strength lies. Why should then either of us both spend our time any further to no purpose? Thus desiring the Father of lights to guide us in the way of Truth, and to open our eyes to see where we see not, I rest and remain still
Your very loving Friend, Joseph Mede.
Christ's College, Octob. 21.
EPISTLE XIII.
Dr. Twisse 's First Letter to Mr. Mede.
Good Mr. Mede,
AMongst many fruits of my acquaintance with Dr. Meddus, this hath been one of the chiefest, that he hath brought me acquainted with yourself, though not de facie, yet de meditationibus, and that in the opening of Mysteries. I was so happy as to light upon two Copies of your Clavis Apocalyptica, thereby to gratify both myself and my friend: I was beholden to Dr. Meddus for the one, and to Mr. Briggs for the other. Since that I have seen divers Manuscriptpieces of yours, whereof I make precious accompt. Your distinction of Fata Imperii, & Fata Ecclesiae, the one contained in the Seals, the other in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , doth exceedingly affect me, as a Key of great use for the opening of these Mysteries. Your interpretation of the Seals proceeds, in my judgment, with great evidence of illustration. And in the last place, your Exposition of the Trumpets hath taken me quite off from the Vulgar opinion that formerly hath been so common. For all which I most heartily thank you. And did it become me to profess so much, who am nothing worth, I should be apt to say, you are as dear in my affection as to any friend you have. I beseech you go on to perfect the good work you have begun in the Revelation, and in other mysterious passages; for the clearing whereof I well perceive, by the blessing of God, you have attained to a very singular faculty. I seem to discern a providence of God in causing the opinion of a Thousand years Regnum Sanctorum to be blasted as an Error by the censure passed upon the Chiliasts, to take men off from fixing their thoughts too much on that in those days, when the accomplishment was so far removed; but with purpose to revive it in a more seasonable time, when Antichrist's kingdom should draw near to an end.
Concerning which I have something to propose, in searching after more particular satisfaction. But I know not whether yet I may be so bold with you; and besides, I fear to divert you from your so weighty and so profitable studies: yet they are such, as withal I have thought with myself of accommodating an Answer. But though my heart serve me not to communicate them to you at this time; yet surely I shall make them known to Doctor Meddus. A friend of mine also hath this day given into my hands certain Disputations upon divers mysterious points in Daniel and the Revelation. In one of them he disputes of this Thousand years Regnum Sanctorum with variety of Reasons pro & con; but inclining rather to the contrary. A very ingenuous man he is, and a great student in Mr. Brightman. If I may have liberty to communicate these things unto you, and that it might be without offense to your more weighty studies, I would so use this liberty, as not to nourish myself in idleness, but withal to employ myself in answering whatsoever I find therein to the contrary.
At this time give me leave to propose to your consideration, Whether that fear of a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 almost of our Protestant profession may not be avoided; and the three days and an half, Rev. 11. not signify a space of time succeeding the continuance of those Witnesses, but intermixed with it. My Reason is this; The two Witnesses signify all the Witnesses giving testimony to God's truth, not contemporating, but succeeding one another for many generations; against all which the Beast warred, and prevailed against some in one age, some in another. Every ones Testimony seems to be finished in his death. And as long as Antichrist reigneth, God hath his Witnesses in some place or other prophesying in sackcloth. But this I submit to your better judgment. I shall heartily desire God to bless your labors; and at this time, desiring to be commended unto your love, I rest,
Newbury, Nov. 2. 1629.
Yours in all truth of hearty affection, William Twisse.
I would entreat you to take into your consideration one thing more. S. Paul writes, Rom. 11. that the conversion of the Jews shall be by way of provocation from the Gentiles; Whether this provocation doth not imply some great Prosperity wherewith God shall bless his Christian Church; and what in this kind comparable to the ruin of Antichrist, and the consequents thereof?
EPISTLE XIV.
Mr. Mede 's Answer to Dr. Twisse 's First Letter, concerning the 1000. years Regnum Christi, as also of the Clades Testium, and of the Jews Conversion.
Worthy Sir,
THat any man so learned and judicious as I have heard yourself to be should conceive any Meditations of mine worthy not only of approbation, but of so much affection, I must ascribe it (if they be but in any degree such as you make them) to God's goodness towards me, who hath in any sort enabled me to endeavor ought whereby I might not live in the world altogether unprofitably. I know and am conscious of mine own weakness and insufficiency in many points of knowledge which others have: yet if this one thing be my Talent, though but a single one, I have sufficient wherefore continually to thank the Almighty, and to beseech him that my husbanding thereof may be, by his gracious instinct, such as may be some occasion of further light to others, in some manner of recompense of what I have and still daily do receive from others.
But whatsoever my Speculations be, this I am sure of, that I am not a little obliged to yourself, for your so kind and affectionate entertainment of them, as rests not in them only, but extends even to the person of the Author, otherwise utterly unknown unto you. Wherefore, for my part, if I should not reciprocally answer you, I should show myself of too unworthy a disposition.
As for my Interpretation of the Seals and Trumpets, where I leave others and take a way of mine own, I do it to maintain an Uniformity of notion in the Prophetical Schemes and Allegories throughout the Scripture; which I am persuaded were once no less familiar and usual to the Nations of the Orient, than our poetical Schemes and Pictures are to us.
And the only way for us to learn the meaning of them is, by finding out that Uniformity I speak of, by comparing the several applications of them together, and such other helps as remain unto us. But whether some of the Interpretations usually given of the Seals and Trumpets will abide this Touch-stone, yourself, I know, can judge. Such voluntary Interpretations may delight the Fancy, and commend the Wit of their Author; but they will not satisfy him that cannot think any man's Wit a footing firm enough to rest his Faith upon.
FOR the Thousand years Regnum Christi, it was time for it to be silent under Regnum Antichristi; and the Reign of the Martyrs in the first Resurrection to be cried down, when Antichrist was blasphemously to advance them beforehand to a Reign derogatory to the glory of Christ their Lord, to be as compeers with him in the office of his Mediation, and pattakers of the honor and worship which was due to him alone.
I speak not here altogether at random: For after the opinion of the Chiliasts was cried down, (when the sentence of Damasus had once given it the deadly blow) they fell to expound this Reign of the Martyrs, in the twentieth of the Apocalypse, of the Idolatrous reign of them, which themselves had then devised, by occasion of those signs and wonders said then to be wrought by the power of the Martyrs upon such as touched their Relics and approached their Sepulchers.
Two of the ancientest Commentators extant after the Chiliasts opinion became silent, are Andreas Caesariensis and Aretas, in whom you shall find what I say, even totidem verbis. The words of Andreas are these; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Quin reliquis quoque sanctis Martyribus, qui pro Christo mortem perpessi sunt, neque mysticae Bestiae, qui Diabolus est, characterem, hoc est, imaginem Apostasy ipsius, susceperunt, judicandipotestas data est, per qu • m Daemones, ut ob oculos videmus, judicare non desinunt, [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] usque ad present is seculi consummationem cum Christo glorificati, à piis rursum Regibus fidelibusque Principibus adora • i [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] & divinâ denique virtute contra omnem corporum morbum frandemque & vim Daemonum conspicue donati • Aretas almost in the same words: Ex quo igitur (inquit) neque capti sunt hi ( scil. decollati isti ) neque per impudentiam, neque per opera mala insigniti, merito cum Christo & vixerunt & regnârunt, idque usque ad consummati • nem. Quemadmodum videmus cliam sub fidelibus Regibus atque Principibus, dum adorantur, contra omnem etiam corporis infirmitatem ac Daemonum energiam ostendunt datam sibi à Deo gratiam. Nam quia (inquit) non adorârunt Bestiam, neque imaginem ejus; idcirco etiam vixerunt, id est, vivorum opera praestiterunt, miraculorum videlicet patrationem.
Yet even S. Augustine and Primasius applied this Prophecy of the Martyrs, (though not to the adoration of them, yet) to that preeminence of honor then given them in the Assemblies of Christians, and their power of working miracles after death. Vid. de Civil. Dei lib. 20. cap. 9. cum cap. 9. lib. 22.
And if with Mr. Brightman and others we begin the Thousand years from Constantine, there is no place of Scripture for a Papist to urge for Saint-worship like unto this, because the time will fit so just; For it began much about that time, though the Papist had rather have it thought to be ab initio, which Andreas notwithstanding expressly denies: Etenim (saith he) quae nunc per experientiam rcrúmque eventum videntur Sanctorum miracula, meritorúmque praemia, quando Evangelistae Ioanni haec patefiebant adhuc fatura erant.
I shall be glad to see your Quaere 's and Answers to them: But before I received yours, I had written to Doctor Meddus, that my thoughts would be diver • ed, and my time taken up about some other business between this and Christmas: whereupon he transcribed them not. My brains are so narrow, that I can tend and mind but one thing at once, whatsoever it be; and therefore I must desire my friends to bear with that imperfection, as also with my slowness, even when I go about anything, especially to write and digest.
CONCERNING your Quaere of the Clades Testium, I cannot see how it can be referred to any other time than to about the end of their 1260 days mourning-prophecy; because that which immediately follows their reviving, after 3 days and a halflying dead, is not appliable to any other time save that only: as namely, so great an Exaltation as is implied by ascending up to heaven in a cloud; such a great Earthquake or commotion as should be at the same hour, whereby the Throne of the Beast should be so much shaken; and lastly, the expiring at the same time of the second Woe, or sixth Trumpet. These are not appliable to any time save the times of the Beast • s declining and period, and consequently to the end of the 1260 days of the Witnesses wearing sackcloth; and should fall out when they were now putting off their sackcloth, and when some of them had done it already: For so the word is to be turned, When they were now about to finish their prophecy or days of sackcloth, &c. Besides, it suits with the method of Divine Providence; God Almighty having ever used to usher in any great Exaltation of his Saints with some desperate Extremity and Calamity immediately foregoing it: Whence is that Theological proverb, Cùm duplicantur lateres, tunc venit Moses. When was David in a more desperate distress, than when he was instantly to be exalted to the Throne of Judah, namely, at the burning of Ziklag? what a straight were Moses and the children of Israel brought into a little before Pharaoh and his host were to be drowned in the Red sea? The most grievous, extreme and dangerous persecution that ever the Church felt, was then when Christianity was ready to be exalted unto the Throne of the Empire; I mean that of Diocletian.
Moreover, there is a Sin whereof the whole body of the Reformation is notoriously guilty; which nevertheless is accountend no Sin, and yet such an one, as I know not whether God ever passed by without some visible and remarkable judgment. This seems to call for a scourge before Antichrist shall go down: And that may be, as far as I know, this feared Clades Testium. I will not name it, because it is invidious, and I am not willing to be drawn to say so much for the probability thereof in this case as perhaps I could.
But to speak somewhat more particularly of this Clades; I know not whether it should immediately precede the pouring out of the fifth Vial, or the fourth. If we were secure of the present dangers and fears, I should incline most to think it should precede the fifth Vial, in respect of that fall of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which instantly ensues the Witnesses reviving. Secondly, The time of three days and a half is the time during which the Witnesses should lie for dead, without appearance of life or motion; not the time wherein they should be dying or killing; for that may be much longer, and grow also by degrees, (as also the natural Body of man sometimes dies so, the feet first, and so upward.) The three days and a half are not to be reckoned therefore (as seems to me) until all should be dead, and no motion of life anymore appear. Thirdly, I conceive not this Clades to be such as should extinguish the persons or whole materials (as I may so speak) of the Reformed Churches, but the public Fabric of the Reformation, for joy whereof the Witnesses were about to finish their time of mourning. For that the party of men remaining of that dissolved building of Reformation should be great, (though they lay as dead) may be gathered by the strength they should in so short a time, as after three years and a half, recover, to the no small terror of the Beast which slew them, &c. It would make somewhat perhaps for understanding the degree of this Clades, if we could certainly tell what were that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , wherein the Witnesses should lie for dead; and whether those of the nations, tongues and people, which should hinder the putting of them into graves, were friends or foes. They may seem to be friends: for if they had been once buried, there would have been but small hope of so soon a reviving again and standing upon their feet. You know what the Pharisees said, when they would have our Savior made sure for rising again the third day.
By the way, because you use in your Letter the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I suppose your copy of my Specimina is misdistinguished: For I referred not that word to the Calamity of the Witnesses, but to Gentium, idest, Idololatrarum in Ecclesiae atrio stabulantium: So there should be a comma at 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
FOR your second Quaere, of the Provocation of the Jews by the Gentiles: Methinks that which was to be unto the Jew as a Provocation to Jealousy, is expressed by S. Paul to be that Salvation which was then come unto the Gentiles, and not any other thing yet to come; as also the same Apostle saith, he used to magnify and inculcate so much his Title of Apostle of the Gentiles to the same end. And if the Prosperity of the Christian Religion would have done it, by comparing it with their misery; there hath been already sufficient in that respect to have moved them to jealousy ere this.
For my part, I incline to think that no such thing will provoke them; but that they shall be called by Vision and Voice from Heaven, as S. Paul was; and that that place of Zach. chap. 12. verse 10. They shall see him whom they have pierced, and that of Matth. 23. verse 39. Ye shall not see me henceforth, till you say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord, seems to imply some such matter. They will never believe that Christ reigns at the right hand of God, until they see him. It must be an invincible evidence which must convert them after so many hundred years settled obstinacy. But this I speak of the body of the Nation; there may be some Praeludia of some particulars converted upon other motives, as a forerunner of the great and man Conversion.
I pray consider seriously that pattern of S. Paul 's Conversion, so differing from all other men's that ever were, and how fitly his condition before it resembles that of the Jews in their bitter obstinacy against Christ and Christians. Why did Christ vouchsafe so strange a call to that man above other men? was it not a pledge or pattern of something that should be vouchsafed his Nation? I know not whether S. Paul 's meaning, but I am sure his words, 1 Tim. 1. verse 16. may be applied to what I mean. But all this I write tumultuously and in some other distractions, and therefore I would not have you heed it further than to consider of it at your more quiet meditations. Nihil affirmo, sed propono.
I had thought, when I began, to propound something to your further meditations out of the seventh of Daniel: But you see I am grown past a Letter, and can scarce any longer make my Characters legible; and therefore here, with my best respect to yourself, I end, desiring God to enlighten us daily more and more in the knowledge of his Truth: and so I remain
Yours to be commanded in all the duties of Friendship, Joseph Mede.
Christ 's College, Nov. 11. 1629.
EPISTLE XV.
Mr. Mede 's Answer to Dr. Meddus, touching the Day of Judgment.
Worthy Sir,
I Have now found some little time to make some kind of Answer to your Letter of the last week save one. You desire me to point out the particulars wherein I differ from that Lutheran: But this I cannot do without making a censure of the whole Discourse, which would ask me some labor, and besides I have not now the Book by me. But by the way, the Stationer which told me he had six of them, was deceived: Indeed he had six Books, which he thought to be the same, but, four of them were Discourses of Law, by some error sorted together with them.
You secondly desire me to point out the places of the Old and New Testament appliable to my Tenet of the Day of Judgment: Where I understand not well whether you mean of the Regnum to be then, or of the acception of the word [Day] for a long space of time, even of a thousand years. But I suppose you mean the former, to which therefore I will say something, the rather because I know you will communicate it to Doctor Twisse, to whom I had intended some such thing in my Letter I sent by you to him: but time would not suffer me to write it then, having spent both it and my paper in other discourses before I was aware. That which I have to say is this.
The Description of the Great Day of Judgment, Dan. 7.
THE Mother-Text of Scripture whence the Church of the Jews grounded the name and expectation of the Great Day of Judgment, with the circumstances thereto belonging, and whereunto almost all the descriptions and expressions thereof in the New Testament have reference, is that Vision in the seventh of Daniel, of a Session of Judgment when the Fourth Beast came to be destroyed: Where this great Assizes is represented after the manner of the great Synedrion or Consistory of Israel; wherein the Pater Iudicii had his Assessores, sitting upon Seats placed Semicircle-wise before him, from his right hand to his left. I beheld (saith Daniel, verse 9.) till the Thrones or Seats were pitched down, (namely, for the Senators to sit upon; not thrown down, as we of late have it:) and the Ancient of days (Pater consistorii) did sit. &c. And, subaudi I beheld, till the Judgment was set, (that is, the whole Sanhedrim) and the books were opened, &c.
Here we see both the form of Judgment delineated, and the name of Judgment expressed; which is afterwards yet twice more repeated: First, in the amplification of the tyranny of the wicked Horn, verse 21, 22. which is said continued till the Ancient of days came, and IVDGMENT was given to the Saints of the most High; i. Potestas judicandi ipsis facta. And the third time in the Angel's interpretation, verse 26. But the IVDGMENT shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion to consume and destroy it to the end. Where observe also that cases of Dominion, of Blasphemy and Apostasy, and the like, belonged to the jurisdiction of the great Sanhedrim.
From this description it came that the Jews gave it the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Day of Judgment and the Day of the Great Judgment; whence in the Epistle of S. Jude, verse 6. it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Judgment of the Great Day.
From the same description they learned that the destruction then to be should be by fire, because it is said verse 9. His throne was a fiery flame, and his wheels burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth before him: and verse 11. The Beast was slain, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame.
From the same fountain are derived those expressions in the Gospel, where this Day is intimated or described; The Son of man shall come in the clouds of heaven. The Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his holy Angels: Forasmuch as it is said here, Thousand thousands ministered unto him, &c. and that Daniel saw One like the Son of man coming with the clouds of Heaven, and he came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him, (or placed him) near him, &c.
Hence S. Paul learned that the Saints should judge the world, because it is said, that many Thrones were set, and verse 22. by way of Exposition, that Judgment was given to the Saints of the most High.
Hence the same Apostle learned to confute the false fear of the Thessalonians, that the day of Christ's second coming was then at hand; Because that day could not be till the Man of Sin were first come, and should have reigned his time appointed: Forasmuch as Daniel had foretold it should be so, and that his destruction should be at the Son of man's appearing in the clouds; whose appearing therefore was not to be till then. This is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in S. Paul; whom the Lord (saith he) shall destroy at the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of his coming. Daniel's wicked Horn, or Beast acting in the wicked Horn, is S. Paul's Man of Sin, as the Church from her Infanc • e interpreted it.
But to go on: While this Judgment sits, and when it had destroyed the Fourth Beast, the Son of man which comes in the clouds receives dominion, and glory, and a Kingdom, that all people, nations and languages should serve and obey him, verse 14. which Kingdom is thrice explained afterwards to be the Kingdom of the Saints of the most High, verse 18. These four Beasts (saith the Angel) are four Kingdoms which shall arise. But ( viz. when they have finished their course) the Saints of the most High shall take the Kingdom, &c. Again, verse 22. The wicked Horn prevailed, until the time came that the Saints possessed the Kingdom. Again, verse 27. When the fourth Beast, reigning in the wicked Horn, was destroyed, the Kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole heaven, is given to the people of the Saints of the most High, &c.
These Grounds being laid, I argue as followeth:
The Kingdom of the Son of man and of the Saints of the most High in Daniel begins when the Great Judgment sits.
The Kingdom in the Apocalypse, wherein the Saints reign with Christ a thousand years, is the same with the Kingdom of the Son of man and Saints of the most High in Daniel. Ergo, It also begins at the Great Judgment.
That the Kingdom in Daniel and that of a 1000 years in the Apocalypse are one and the same Kingdom, appears thus:
First, Because they begin ab eodem termino, namely, at the destruction of the Fourth Beast: That in Daniel, when the Beast (then ruling in the wicked Horn) was slain, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame, Dan. 7. verse. 11, 22, 27. That in the Apocalypse, when the Beast and the false Prophet (the wicked Horn in Daniel ) were taken, and both cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone, Apoc. 19. ver. 20, 21, &c.
Secondly, Because S. John begins the Regnum of a thousand years from the same Session of Judgment described in Daniel; as appears by his parallel expression borrowed from thence.
- Daniel says, Chap. 7.
- S. John says, Chap. 20.
- V. 9. I beheld till the Thrones were pitched down—and the Judgment (i. Judges) sat.
- V. 4. I saw Thrones, and they sat upon them.
- 22. And Judgment was given to the Saints of the most High.
- And Judgment was given unto them.
- And the Saints possessed the Kingdom; viz, with the Son of Man who came in the clouds.
- And the Saints lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Now if this be sufficiently proved, That the thousand years begin with the Day of Judgment; it will appear further out of the Apocalypse, that the Judgment is not consummate till they be ended: For Gog and Magog 's destruction and the universal Resurrection is not till then: Therefore the whole thousand years is included in the Day of Judgment.
Hence it will follow, That whatsoever Scripture speaks of a Kingdom of Christ to be at his second appearing or at the destruction of Antichrist, it must needs be the same which Daniel saw should be at that time, and so consequently be the Kingdom of a thousand years which the Apocalypse includes between the beginning and consummation of the Great Judgment.
Ergo, That in Luke 17. from verse 20. to the end.
And that in Luke 19. from the 11. verse to the 15. inclusively.
And that in Luke 21. verse 31. When ye see these things come to pass, know that the Kingdom of God is at hand. See what went before, viz. The Son of man's coming in a cloud with power and great glory; borrowed from Daniel.
And that in 2 Tim. 4. 1. I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom.
By these we may understand the rest; taking this for a sure ground, That this expression of [The Son of man's coming in the clouds of heaven] so often inculcated in the New Testament, is taken from and hath reference to the Prophecy of Daniel, being nowhere else found in the Old Testament. As our Savior also calls himself so frequently [The Son of man,] because Daniel so called him in that Vision of the Great Judgment, and that we might look for the accomplishment of what is there prophesied of in him. It was not in vain, that when our Savior quoted the Prophecy of Daniel, he added, He that readeth him, let him understand. Certainly the great mystery of Christ is chiefly and most distinctly revealed in that Book; which God the Father of lights so enable us with his Spirit, that we may understand to his glory and our own comfort. Amen.
I pray compare this with the Paper I sent you of the Four Monarchies, which I called The A. B. C. of Prophecy; and with the latter end of my Specimina de mille annis; and with my Interpretation of Praeconium Tubae VII. You shall find the grounds of all this in them.
I have no copy of this I now send: I would desire you when you are weary with reading it, to send me it again, that I may get it transcribed, to save me a labor another time, when some other friend shall make a Quaere to like purpose. I find ever and anon inconvenience for want of such a provision. I will send you it again presently. Before Christmas will be time enough. I desire to be remembered to Master Doctor Twisse; to whose Letter I shall make some Answer when I get some leisure; now I have none.
Yours, Joseph Mede.
Christ's College, Novemb. 25. 1629.
EPISTLE XVI.
Dr. Twisse his Second Letter to Mr. Mede.
Worthy Sir,
I Pray forgive me this once in interrupting your more momentous meditations, Thankfulness urgeth me to express that your Letter is a Jewel unto me; making me partaker of such fruits, and giving me interest in such affections. I profess you have strange conceits, I mean for the worthiness of them; they possess me with admiration: especially that touching the manner of the Jews Conversion. Those passages of Scripture, and the reference of them which you make, I do consider with Reverence; and the particular relation S. Paul makes of himself, as first tasting of that Grace, in reference to the like which were to succeed: had he made mention of the miraculous operation in his Conversion, as he doth of God's Long-suffering and Patience, the Congruity had been absolute. Yet I seem to discern something whereby that may be argued also to be implied, for otherwise in likelihood he was not the first.
Yet to object, (for your Ingenuity I perceive gives me leave,) S. Paul was a particular person, and then travelling on the way: The Conversion we speak of is of a Nation, and that wonderfully dispersed in the world; the like manner of Christ's appearing unto whom for their Conversion is hard to conceive. And besides, I seem to conceive evidence from 2 Cor. 3. 15, 16. that their Conversion shall be wrought from amongst themselves by reading Moses and the Prophets: for it is the veil laid before their Hearts which hinders them from discerning the end of the Law, which is Christ; which veil shall be taken away, and being taken away they shall be turned unto Christ. Yet I confess the Text saith not, when the veil is taken away, they shall be turned to the Lord; but rather, when they shall be turned to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Yet again so it is said, Luk. 7. 47. that many sins were forgiven her, for she loved much; yet by the scope of the Parable there proposed, the formal truth appears to be this, She loved much, for many sins were forgiven her. So here it may be argued, that the taking away of their veil is the cause of their turning to the Lord: for the position of the veil is that which hinders them from discerning him; therefore the removing of the veil is the making may for the discerning of him by that in Moses. Yet I seem to see how this may be answered; The veil hinders from discerning him in the Law of Moses: but if God be pleased to manifest his Son by sight, the veil can no way hinder that. And why may not the like miraculous favor be shown to them as well as to S. Paul; their obstinacy being greater, and sealed with greater blasphemies than his was? May it not be said that therefore this Apparition was made to S. Paul, that he might have Apostolical authority independent on men, as well as the rest of the Apostles? And cannot the spirit of illumination clear all, and that from Moses, as well as it did in the heart of the Gentiles, who had not so much as Moses to direct them?
As for Provocation; how can Salvation on the Gentiles part be it unto the Jews, seeing the Jews (such is their blindness) cannot acknowledge any such condition of the Gentiles? Yet I confess the judgment of flesh and blood may teach them, that the Gentiles becoming Christians are turned to the worship of the God of Abraham, as appears by their embracing of the Old Testament as the Word of God: yet this hitherunto hath nothing moved them; yet a time may come it may, and the Prosperity of our Church also. And it is said, that they shall obtain mercy by the mercy shown unto us, Rom. 11. 31.
As for the black time to be expected; if so, it seems to be wondrous great, if not greater than all that went before. For the time hath been, the strong man hath so far possessed the House of God in peace, that scarce here and there a Witness hath been found openly to contest against him in this or that particular: And the days of the persecution of the Walden • es were wonderful heavy times: And we have seen many black days for many years. And if it be so, as I doubt it is too probable, and most congruous to God's course indeed in the exaltation of his Church, I doubt it will concern our England most: yet God grant we may be of the number of those that suffer, that within three days and a half we may be raised and reign with Christ at his coming.
But will you not make us acquainted with that Sin you intimate that cries for vengeance? we are loath to adventure our conjectures, but we dare promise to join in mourning for it. But I heartily thank you for all, and particularly for that Speculation of the untimely advancing of the Martyrs to a Reign derogatory to the Mediation of our Lord; a bitter fruit of too irregular animosity against the Chiliasts, and of very ponderous consideration in this case. I have done, with some sorrow for putting out of your mind better thoughts: I assure you the place you are pleased to afford me in your good affections I esteem as a part of the best happiness I enjoy in friends, and heartily wish I may not be unworthy of it. I heartily commend yourself and your precious studies to the Blessing of God, and rest,
Yours in all true Affection, Will. Twisse.
Newbury, Nov. 16. 1629.
EPISTLE XVII.
Mr. Mede's Answer to Doctor Twisse his Second Letter, concerning the two Wars of the Beast against the Witnesses, as also of the manner of the Jews Conversion.
SIR,
I Owe an answer to your Letter, though I can scarce find time to attend it. Some I have now gotten, and therefore desire you to vouchsafe to read and accept these few lines.
The Apocalypse mentions two Wars of the Beast: one to be in medio Testium luctu, during the time of the Witnesses mourning-prophecy; another when the Witnesses began to make an end of mourning. The first, while the Court of the Temple was wholly trodden down and profaned by the Gentiles: the latter, when it began to be purged, and so the cause of the Witnesses mourning to be removed. In these two Wars we may observe in the description these differences. First, The intermedium bellum is said to be against the whole Body of the Saints, Chap. 13. ver. 7. And it was given unto him to make war with the Saints, and overcome them: But the Bellum novissimum or last War is against the Prophets or Witnesses only: The Beast which ascends out of the bottomless pit shall make war with the Witnesses, and overcome and kill them, Chap. 11. v. 7. This difference is remarkable and to be considered for the better understanding of this last War, and how it differs from that formerly against the Waldenses, &c. Secondly, In the former his prevailing and success is absolute, so that all kindreds, tongues and nations submit unto him, and worship him, Ch. 13. v. 7, 8. But in the latter some of the people [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c] and of the kindreds and tongues and nations shall be an obstacle to the perfecting and securing his victory, as not suffering him when he shall have slain the Witnesses to bury them and make them sure, in hope to recover them. Thirdly, The first prevailed many ages; this latter but three days and an half. Add, if you well, (though it be included in the former) the first advanced his Dominion to that height it came to; this latter shall occasion his utter ruin and downfall.
These differences I thought good to propound to your consideration, to intimate that the seantling of this last War cannot be well taken from that against the Waldenses and Albegenses, &c. as being to be of another kind; namely, an extermination of the Reformed Pastors out of their places and Churches, and not a general extermination of the Body of the Reformed people, which are too many to be dealt with according to former violence, and shall remain to terrify the Beast, and revenge the Clades of their Prophets before almost they shall have done rejoicing over them.
FOR my conceit of the manner of the Jews Conversion; though it often solicits me to give credence to it, as best becoming the greatest work that ever God yet did for that people, for whom in former times he shown so many wonders: yet I will ingeniously confess, the grounds I have hitherto found seem not to myself sufficient to build a firm assent upon; but only by a kind of concinnity induce to a pleasing, but a wavering, conjecture. And therefore it were to little purpose to contend much for that wherein myself have no sufficient confidence. I use to object to myself, That the appearing of Christ in heaven belongs to the time of his Second coming: But the Jews must be converted before then, lest they all should perish amongst the enemies of his Kingdom, whereof they would be the principal. I salve it with a supposition of some latitude in that appearance, as being first to be ushered with some preparation or praeludium towards the Jewish Nation, before his great and universal Appearing to the whole world to judgment. So Cestius Gallus, the President of Syria, compassed Jerusalem with an Army, by way of anticipation, three years before the final and fatal siege by Vespasian, to be for a warning to the believing Jews, to flee into the mountains of Arabia, according to our Savior's sign given them, Luk, 21. ver. 20.
For strengthening of such a supposition, methinks I discern in S. Malthew, (the Hebrew Evangelist) Chap. 24. v. 30. two such Appearances intimated: The one in the words, Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and all the Tribes of the earth shall mourn, (out of Zach. 12. v. 10, 11, 12.) The other in the words following, And they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory, (out of Dan. 7.) But here I find a rub, which I cannot yet get over: For this appearing of the sign of the Son of man in heaven, as well as his coming in the clouds with great glory, is said to be immediately after the tribulation of those days; that is, (as I am wont to expound it) soon after the long tribulation of the Jewish Nation shall be ended: But their tribulation shall not end till they be converted: Ergo their Conversion must needs precede the sign of the Son of man in heaven there mentioned. Here I stick.
But your Objections I think I could answer thus. As first, to that of the Jews Conversion to be wrought by the taking away the veil from their hearts, 2 Cor. 3. I could answer, That that is the Internal cause of their Conversion, or, if you will, the act of the Spirit of God illuminating and converting them; as he that takes away the film from the eyes of him that sees not, or the hood from him that is hoodwinkt, does by that act make him see: But I speak of the External cause or means of the Jews Conversion, such as in the ordinary administration of God is the preaching of the Word; but extraordinarily may be by Miracle, as was in the Conversion of Paul, who nevertheless had the Mosaical veil taken from his heart, as well as the rest of his Nation when they are converted shall have.
But by the way, because you mention that place Luk. 7. 47. give me leave to add, That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies in Scripture not only Quia or quoniam, but also the redditive thereto, which is Ideo, propterea; because namely the Hebrew particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 answers, signifies both: as appears Psal. 116. v. 10. compared with 2 Cor. 4. 13. ubi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Hebraeo à Paulo exponitur 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And Gen. 22. 17. item Eccles. 8. 6. See our English. In both which places 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is both the causal Quoniam, and the redditive thereto Ideo. Now the Scripture is wont to extend the Greek words it useth unto the full notion of the Hebrew or Chaldee to which they answer, (as may be proved by many Examples) though in the Greeks use they signified not so. This Dialect is called Lingua Hellenistica, (spoken by the Hellenists or Greekish Jews which lived dispersed under the Greek Empire) whose property is to accommodate verba Graeca notioni Orientis: But no such ground can be shewn (I think) for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quando, to signify the redditive tunc.
To your other Objection, How such a Vision could be manifested to the Jews dispersed in several parts of the world; I could answer, That a Vision or Apparition in Heaven may be seen to the greatest part of the world at the same time (as Stars and Comets are:) how else shall the Appearing of our Savior in the clouds of Heaven, at his coming to Judgment, be seen at once to so many Nations of the world?
But here is one thing more considerable from the miraculous Conversion of S. Paul, upon supposal that that of the Jews may be like it; viz. That though many were present with S. Paul at that time, yet none saw the apparition of Christ, nor heard him speak, but Paul alone, for whose sake he appeared. The rest saw indeed a strange light, and heard the voice of Paul replying and answering, but they heard not the voice, nor saw any that spake unto him; which therefore made them astonished. Compare Acts 9. 7. (where it is said, They heard Paul's voice ) with Acts 22. 9. (where it is said, They heard not the voice of him that spake unto him. ) And take heed here of some of our English Bibles, which have put in a [ not ] where it should not be, as they have done the like in other places. Fie upon such careless Printers. But to the matter; What if the like be at the Jews Conversion, to wit, that they alone shall see and hear the voice of Christ, but none of the Gentiles amongst whom they dwell, though perhaps some strange light for a testimony may at that instant surprise the whole world, to the astonishment of the Nations therein? Consider that of Matt. 24. 27. and the places of the other Evangelists answering thereto.
And what if the Jews upon such an apparition may have, as S. Paul had, an Ananias too, or (as they expect) an Elias, to instruct them? So you know the ancient Christian Church believed, from Mal. 4. 5. Mat. 17. 11. Ecclus. 48. 10. For though the Fathers as well as the Jews might err concerning the person and circumstances of this Elias, yet it follows not presently but the substance of the opinion might be true. But I will not discover all my roving Speculations, unless I had better ground for them; lest perhaps I should make you more than wonder at me. Howsoever it be, I suppose it is no sin to conceive magnifice and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of so great a work of God towards a people for whom he hath formerly shown so many wonders; especially this being to be the greatest work of mercy and wonder that ever he did for them; far beyond the bringing them forth of Egypt and leading them in the wilderness, &c. Consider it.
Besides, it may be there is a precedent already extant: Sure I am, when I had entertained this conceit into my meditation, I was led by I know not what providence (as I was searching some other matter) to find an History of the greatest multitude of Jews that ever, I think, were converted since the Apostles times, to have been convinced by such a miraculous apparition in every respect as I had apprehended.
The Story (if it be true) happened about some 570 years after Christ, in the days of Justinus the Greek Emperor, (though Bigneus puts it a hundred years before) in the kingdom of the Omerites (some write Homerites ) in Arabia Felix: where the Jews in those parts (being a strong party) had challenged to a public Disputation a Christian City and Kingdom in that Tract, upon condition that if they could not convince the Christians by strength of Reason and Scripture, they would become Christians; if they could, they required the Christians should turn Jews.
The Disputation was performed for three days together sub dio, in a full assembly of the King, his Peers and people, between Gregentius Bishop of Tephra, and Herbanus champion for the Jews who were there assembled with him. The third day Herbanus required to end the controversy, that if Jesus of Nazareth were indeed living and reigning in Heaven, and if those who worshipped him had any power with him, that he would upon their prayers manifest himself from Heaven, and they would then believe in him. Thereupon all the multitude of Jews cried out in derision, Ostende nobis Christum tuum. Vae! quia fiemus Christiani, &c.
The conclusion was, that Christ Jesus, after a dreadful Thunder and Lightning, appeared from Heaven with beams of glory, walking upon a purple cloud, with a Sword in his hand, and a Diadem of inestimable beauty upon his head, and over the Assembly uttered a voice, Appareo vobis in oculis vestris ego crucifixus à Patribus vestris. Which having spoken, the cloud took him presently out of their sight. The Christians shouted, Domine, miserere; the Jews were all stricken blind, and received not their sight till they were all baptized.
This Story (whereof I tell you but the brief) hath been long unknown to these Western parts, and was brought in our time from the Eastern among divers other Greek Manuscripts, and published in Greek and Latin by Nicolaus Gulonius in octavo, under the name of Gregentii Archiepiscopi Tephrensis Disputatio cum Herbano Iudaeo. The beginning is imperfect: In the end is the Story I have related. I have seen and used that Book, but could not be owner of it. But the Latin translation is inserted into the Bibliotheca Patrum of the edition of Colen, in the fifth Tome, pag. 919. which if you read, I could wish you would join with it the Story of the Martyrium Omeritarum published by Baronius out of a Vatican Manuscript, in his sixth Seculum about the middle. It is worthy your reading, and supposed to have happened a little before this Conversion of the Jews I speak of: which Baronius nevertheless then knew not of, as being published after he had written that Tome. The Persecution was raised by Dunaan a Jew, who had gotten the Kingdom of the Omerites, and meant to extinguish the Christian City and Dition of Nargan, which was subject, as many other small Reguli were, to that Kingdom, &c.
If this Story be true, it makes much for a probability of such a conjecture for the future. If it be counterfeit, at least it argues that some, many ages ago, thought such a mean not unlikely: For Poets themselves are wont to feign Verisimilia. So howsoever, I am not the first that thought of such a matter.
That which you say of S. Paul 's miraculous Conversion, that by it he had Apostolical authority immediate and independent, as having his Mission from Heaven, and not from Men; I acknowledge it. But that this should be the only end of his so being converted, I suppose it is not necessary. For it might have pleased God to have converted him by an ordinary mean, and yet have given him a Mission for his Apostleship by an immediate and extraordinary way. The immediateness of Apostolical Mission depended not upon such a miraculous Conversion, though it pleased God at one and the same time, by one and the same miraculous manifestation, both to convert him to the Faith of Christ, and send him to be an Apostle to the Gentiles.
But it is now time to give over. I have been tedious and troublesome, I know, and perhaps not well busied in spending so many words and paper about a wavering and uncertain Speculation. But because in my first Letter I had unawares discovered my fancy, I was somewhat solicitous till I had more fully explained myself, lest I might seem to believe much upon very little reason, or be supposed to be more confident in this conceit than I am. But he that seeks for that which is yet to find, must be poring as well where it is not as where it is. God Almighty, the Father of Lights, direct us in the search of his Truth, and give us grace, when we find it, to use it to his Glory and our own Salvation. To whose protection I commend your self, not forgetting my best respect, who am
Your assured Friend, Joseph Mede.
Christ's College, Decemb. 2. 1629.
I shall bid you farewell for this year, and write shorter Letters the next, that so I may hold out. I have made a saltus in my Meditations by these Discourses of the Great Day. I am not come to it yet: I have much to think of, and bring to more perfection, which is preceding to it; The Witnesses, Dragon, Beast, &c.
EPISTLE XVIII.
Mr. Mason 's Letter to Mr. Mede, touching the Millenaries.
Good Mr. Mede,
I Think myself much indebted unto you, that you do so freely communicate unto me your learned Writings. I wish I had been more conversant in studies of this nature, that I might in some sort be able to talk with you in your own language. But you have had the happiness to follow these studies with good leisure and much opportunity; and I (to say nothing of other wants) have been hindered both with businesses of my place and weakness of my body, that I have scarce had time to think on anything but what hath been necessary for my present employment; and so it happeneth to me in my studies as to poor men in getting of their living, we have nothing but from hand to mouth. The consciousness of these wants maketh me to write so seldom and so slightly: Else, if I had anything in my thoughts that might be fit for your reading, I would be as free in communicating my studies with you as you are in imparting yours unto me; especially in this business, wherein you have travelled with such success. I only now can say, that I wish I may see the full finishing of your intended Work, and so do others abroad also: but yet I had rather stay your leisure, till you have concocted all according to your mind, than to hasten you forward before the time. Dr. Potter hath read your former Papers which you committed to Mr. D. and by occasion thereof hath proceeded to read others of the same Argument; which when I understood, I desired him to peruse two Writings of Dr. Gerhard of the same Argument, both purposely intended against the Millenaries: the one is in the second part of his Disputationes Theologicae, Disp. 3. de novis Fanaticis; the other in the ninth Tome of his Common Places, Loc. de Consummatione seculi, cap. 7. p. 442, &c. Upon the reading of those Treatises he sent a Letter expressing his mind and judgment concerning them, which I received this evening: And because I know you desire to hear the opinion of Learned men, I have sent down enclosed herein so much of his Letter as concerneth that business. Which I did the rather also, because I suppose this may give you oc •• sion to answer such grounds as Gerhard hath laid to the contrary. Perhaps, if you consider him well, you may find a tacit Answer to that which you object against S. Jerome, for laying an imputation on the Mellenaries, as if they dreamed of Earthly Pleasures in this Kingdom of our Lord; for he saith that (as Dr. Gerhard thinks) of the Cerinthians and Jews, not of the ancient Fathers; how truly, I leave it to your consideration and judgment. In the Margin of your Notes on Justin Martyr I noted a place to the same purpose in Lactantius: It is in black lead, and may easily be wiped out, if it be nothing to your purpose. Dr. Potter signified in a former Letter, that he had a purpose to write to you; perhaps he is not yet ready for that which he meaneth to say: but if he send his Letter this way, I will take care to send it down by your Carrier. In the mean while, and ever, I commend you and your studies to the Blessing of the Almighty; and so for this time I leave you.
Your ever assured Friend, Henry Mason.
S. Andrew's Undershaft Decemb. 10. 1629.
EPISTLE XIX.
Dr. Potter his Letter to Mr. Mason, touching the Millenaries.
Good Mr. Mason.
I Have read those two large and learned Discourses of Gerhard against the Millenaries, and find him (as his woe • t is) to be very diligent both in recounting the Opinions of other men and in the establishing of his own. By him I see, the conceit is ancient among our later Writers, and favored by many ignorant and fanatical spirits; which I confess casts much envy upon the Conjecture. But yet methinks, First, the consent of so many great and worthy Lights of the ancient Primitive Church doth more honor and countenance the opinion, than it can be disgraced or obscured by these late blind abettors. Secondly, The Anabaptists and their fellows are confident, where Mr. Mede doth but modestly conjecture; and that, Thirdly, upon other and better grounds than their dreaming doting heads ever thought of. Lastly, The Devil himself may sometime speak truth, and so may his disciples, with an ill intention, or at hazard;
I suppose no Learned man or Christian can deny that the Nation of the Jews shall be once hereafter called by God's mercy to the Faith, and that their general Conversion will bring with it a great and glorious alteration in the Church; and therefore that Kingdom of our Lord upon earth, howsoever in some circumstances it may not answer our hopes, (which may be ungrounded and deceived) yet for substance it seems an indisputable Truth. But Prophecies are Mysteries till their accomplishment; let us therefore leave them to God and to Posterity:— 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . I have received Philostrates and Origen, &c.
C. P.
EPISTLE XX.
Mr. Mede's Second Letter to Dr. Meddus, containing four grounds why the First Resurrection, Rev. 20. is to be taken literally; with some other Observations concerning the difference between the State of the New Jerusalem and the State of the Nations walking in the light thereof: as also concerning the time of the Regnum Christi.
Worthy Sir,
I Sent the fourth sheet I promised to the Bury -Carrier yesterday, with a note therein, promising to make some Answer to your Quaere today, to be delivered to the Carrier as he passed through Newmarket, but some 4 or 5 miles from the place where I am. When I had thus done, some hour or two after I received a transcript of another of yours dated August 14, of the conformation of the taking of Wesel —But to the Quaere, which I must answer but briefly, till I have a better and more free occasion to enlarge upon particulars. The full resolving thereof depends upon so large an explication of the Economy of God in the restitution of Mankind as cannot be comprised in a Letter. And I am somewhat unwilling to discover what I think, unless I could do it fully; which made me abstain in my Specimina from any explication of that First Resurrection, save to name it only.
But howsoever when at first I perceived that Millennium to be a State of the Church consequent to the times of the Beast, I was a verse from the proper acception of that Resurrection, taking it for a rising of the Church from a dead estate; as being loath to admit too many Paradoxes at once: yet afterward more • etiously considering and weighing all things, I found no ground or footing for any sense but the Literal.
For first, I cannot be persuaded to forsake the proper and usual importment of Scripture-language, where neither the insinuation of the Text it self, nor manifest tokens of Allegory, nor the necessity and nature of the things spoken of (which will bear no other sense) do warrant it. For to do so, were to lose all footing of Divine testimony, and instead of Scripture to believe mine own imaginations. Now the 20 th of the Apocalypse, of all the Narrations of that Book, seems to be the most plain and simple, most free of Allegory and of the involution of Prophetical figures; only here and there sprinkled with such Metaphors as the use of speech makes equipollent to vulgar expressions, or the former Narrations in that Book had made to be as words personal or proper names are in the plainest histories; as Old Serpent, Beast, &c. How can a man then in so plain and simple a narration take a passage of so plain and ordinarily-expressed words (as those about the First Resurrection are) in any other sense than the usual and Literal?
Secondly, Howsoever the word Resurrection by itself might seem ambiguous, yet [unspec 2] in a sentence composed in this manner [ viz. Of the dead, those which were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, &c. lived again when the thousand years began; but the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were ended ] it would be a most harsh and violent interpretation to say that [ Dead, ] and consequently [ Living again from the dead ] should not utrobique be taken in the same meaning: For such a speech in ordinary construction implies, That some of the dead lived again in the beginning of the thousand years, in that sense the rest should live again at the end of the thousand years; and e contrà, In what manner the rest of the dead should live again at the end of the thousand years, in that manner those who were beheaded for Jesus lived again in the beginning of the thousand years; which living again of those some is called the First Resurrection.
Thirdly, Though the ancient Jews (whilst they were yet the Church of God) [unspec 3] had no distinct knowledge of such an order in the Resurrection as First and Second, but only of the Resurrection in gross and general, to be in die Iudicii magni; yet they looked for such a Resurrection, wherein those that rose again should reign some time upon earth, as appeareth, Wisd. 3. from the first to the eighth verse inclusive; where it is expressly said, That the Souls of the Righteous which were departed should in the time of their visitation shine, and that they should judge the nations, and have dominion over the people, and their Lord should reign forever. See the place and consider it. This opinion is here and there also dispersed in the Chaldee Paraphrase and in the Talmud, as of ancient Tradition; and is the opinion of the Jews at this day, who as they look not for the Kingdom of their Messiah until Dies Iudicii magni, so they expect that their forefathers (at least such as were just and holy) should rise at the beginning of the same, and reign in the land of Israel with their offspring under Messiah. I can hardly believe that all this smoke of Tradition could arise but from some fire of Truth anciently made known unto them. Besides, why should the holy Ghost in this point speak so like them, unless he would induce us mutatis mutandis to mean with them? In fine, the Second and Universal Resurrection with the State of the Saints after it, now so clearly revealed in Christianity, seems to have been less known to the ancient Church of the Jews than the First and the State to accompany it.
Lastly, This was the Opinion of the whole Orthodox Christian Church in the Age [unspec 4] immediately following the death of S. John, (when yet Polycarp. and many of the Apostles Disciples were living) as Justin Martyr expressly affirmeth; whose passage to that purpose, when I return again to Cambridge, I will send you, illustrated with some Notes, and the reading in one place restored from a corruption crept thereinto by fraud or otherwise. A testimony absolute, without all comparison, to persuade such as rely upon Authority and Antiquity. It is to be admired, that an Opinion once so generally received in the Church should ever have been cried down and buried. But those Times which extinguished this brought other Alterations into the Church besides this; Et quidem sic fieri oportuit.
I will say something more, observed perhaps by few of those which have knowledge enough of the rest; namely, That this Opinion of the First Resurrection was the true ground and mother of prayers for the dead, so anciently received in the Church, which were then conceived after this manner. Vt partem haberent in Resurrectione prima. See Tertullian, who first mentions them. The reason was, because this having part in Resurrectione prima was not to be common to all, but to be a privilege of some, namely, of Martyrs, and Confessors equipollent to them, if God so would accept them. Moreover, the belief of this Prerogative of Martyrs in Resurrectione prima was that which made the Christians of those times so joyously desirous of Martyrdom. These things will perhaps seem strange, but they will be found true, if duly examined.
Thus I have discovered my opinion of the thing which I suppose the Scripture hath revealed shall be: But de modo how it shall be I would willingly abstain from determining. We must be content to be ignorant of the manner of things, which for the matter we are bound to believe. Too much adventuring here, without a sure guide, may be dangerous, and breed intolerable fancies, as it did among some in those ancient times; which occasioned, as may seem, the death and burial of the main Opinion itself so generally at first believed.
Yet thus much I conceive the Text seems to imply, That these Saints of the First Resurrection should reign here on earth in the New Jerusalem in a state of beatitude and glory, partaking of Divine presence and Vision of Christ their King; as it were in an Heaven upon earth, or new Paradise immutable, unchangeable, &c.
Secondly, That, for the better understanding of this Mystery, we must distinguish between the State of the New Jerusalem and State of the Nations which shall walk in the light thereof; they shall not be both one, but much differing. Therefore what is spoken particularly of the New Jerusalem, must not be applied to the whole Church which then shall be: New Jerusalem is not the whole Church, but the Metropolis thereof and of the New world. The State of the Nations which shall walk in her light though happy and glorious, yet shall be changeable, as appears by the commotio • of the Nations seduced at the end of the Thousand years. But the State of those wh • dwell in the New Jerusalem shall be extra omnem mutationis aleam; Blessed are thos • who have part in the First Resurrection, for on them the Second Death hath no power.
I differ therefore from Piscator, and agree with Alstedius, That the Saints of th • First Resurrection should reign on Earth during the Millennium, and not in Heaven.
I differ from both, in that I make this State of the Church to belong to Secundus Adventus Christi or Dies Iudicii Magni, when Christ shall appear in the clouds of Heaven to destroy all the professed enemies of his Church and Kingdom, and deliver the creature from that bondage of corruption brought upon it for the sin of man: Whereas they make it to precede the Day of Judgment and Second coming. Though this Notion may seem to make but little alteration of the thing believed; yet it is of no small moment to facilitate the understanding of Scripture, and puts upon the thing itself another nature than is conceived by those who apprehend it otherwise. In a word, Ours conceive this State to be ante Diem Iudicii: Others (though wrongfully) suppose the ancient Chiliasts to have held it to be post Diem Iudicii. But the truth is, it is neither before nor after, but ipsa Dies Iudicii, ipsum tempus Secundae apparitionis Christi. And it is to be remembered here, that the Jews, who gave this time the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Day of Judgment, and from whom our Savior and his Apostles took it, never understood thereby but a Time of many years continuance, yea some ( mirabile dictu ) of a thousand years: and the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Day of Judgment is more frequent in their Writings than in the New Testament it self. It is mentioned I know not how many times in the Chaldee Paraphrase of that little Book of Ecclesiastes. The word [ Day ] is in the Hebrew notion used ordinarily for tempus, yea longissimum: as in the Prophets, for the seventy years Captivity; for the time of their great and long Captivity; for the time of their pilgrimage in the wilderness, Psal. 95. according to the LXX. and S. Paul's translation Hebr. 3. The day of temptation in the wilderness, when your Fathers tempted me, and proved me, and saw my works forty years. See the thirteenth verse of that chapter, where a Day includes every Day. So should Day be taken in the Lord's Prayer, for the time of this our life. Compare it with S. Luke, whose words are, Give us every day our daily bread. See the longest day of all days, in the last words of S. Peter 's last Epistle, in the Greek and Latin; (for our English obscures it with a general expression) It is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , dies aeternitatis.
There came forth that year I conceived my Specimina of that Millennium, a Discourse by a Lutheran with this Title, Vero-similia historico-Prophetica de Rebus in novissimo die eventuris, pio studio cujusdam 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . He conceals his name; it is a little, but elaborate, Discourse. He hath the same notion of Dies novissimus which I had of Dies Iudicii. I found with no little admiration a great part of my private Speculations of this matter in that Tractate. Spying it in the Catalogue, and guessing what it meant by the Title. I laid for it at London: There came but two. I got them both, one for a friend, another for myself. I have used means for more Copies, but they cannot, say the Merchants, be heard of. Mine is now lent away; when I can recover it, I will send it you. Thus I take my leave, lest I seal too late. God keep us.
Dalham-Hall, Aug. 18.
Yours, Joseph Mede.
Post-script.
Now I have done, I repent me of so tumultuary and confused a Discourse of so great a Mystery, wherein so much is wanting to give it light and evidence. I must desire you therefore to keep it to yourself, and to pardon the fault you have been an occasion of in putting me upon it.
EPISTLE XXI.
Dr. Meddus his Letter to Mr. Mede, touching Dr. Twisse 's Answers to nine Quaere's about Regnum Sanctorum.
Worthy Sir, and my dear Friend,
THis hath been unto me no pleasant time, being much weakened by this months bleeding and a pain in my right arm. I have done with the Lutheran; though doing all with my own hand, I have been longer about it than Dr. Twisse was, having the help of divers hands. I now send it back with many thanks. You may remember in the beginning of November I sent you a Letter from Dr. Twisse, when I wrote he had besides some Quaere's to have proposed unto you concerning the thousand years Regnum Sanctorum; but he durst not be so bold, yet left it free unto me to do as I thought good: But then propounding other things, and being loath especially to hinder you in the going forward as with another part of the Revelation, so with the clearing of 2 Pet. c. 3. And besides, your inhibition was then a command unto me, to make no more demands till after these late Holy-days. But now, in hope of your favorable bearing with me, I shall adventure to make his Quaere's and Answers known unto you: yet with this caution, that neither they, nor your judgment or censure of the Lutheran Book, (which I once desired) may retard your other meditations; nor to give answer thereunto but at your best leisure and conveniency. Now to the Quaere's and Answers.
Quaere 1. As concerning the persons to be raised, which are expressed Rev. 20. 4. to be only Martyrs, and Piscator will have it proceed only of such: Now this is very strange, considering that undoubtedly some never suffering Martyrdom have been as great in the favor of God as any Martyrs; as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the Virgin Mary.
Answ. This may be helped two ways. First, by such an interpretation of Martyrdom as may be extended much further then to the suffering of death for the testimony of Christ, Secondly, by comparing this of Rev. 20. 4. with other places, as namely with Rev. 5. 10. & 11. 18. where the same grace is extended to them that fear God's Name, to small and great.
Object. But then here followeth a contrary inconvenience, that so it shall be extended unto all.
Answ. Yet is it not said, To all that fear God's Name.
Quaere 2. Concerning the Communion between the Saints raised from their graves, and the people then living and remaining on the earth, called the nations that are saved, that is, from the fire, whereby the earth and the works thereof shall be burned, 2 Pet. 3. 10. Alstedius will have the Saints raised to be Doctors of the Church, taking no notice of any distinction of male and female; though of both Sexes there have been both Saints and Martyrs. Rev. 21. 24. it is said, that the nations shall walk in the light of New Jerusalem; and if the Saints shall reign over the Nations, there must be a Communion, such as is between Governors and persons governed. And this Government shall be undoubtedly in reference to the Worship of God. Now consider,
-
1. What Communion can such Bodies as ours have with glorified bodies, considering that when Moses came down from the Mount, his countenance did so shine that the Israelites could not endure to look him in the face?
Answ. First, this glorious luster may be qualified so far as to be without offense.
Secondly, The world being restored, why may not the mortal Bodies of men be something altered also? Surely God can proportion it.
-
2. Whether shall the Bodies of the Saints raised be covered or naked? It seems very incongruous they should be naked; neither can we devise in any congruity a glorified Body should be covered: What raiment were any fit covering for such? Neither is it congruous their glory should be covered, as Moses 's face was with a Veil.
Answ. As Angels appeared, their faces shining like lightning, and their raiment white as snow, (which aspect, terrible at the first, by familiar conversation might prove not terrible;) so Light may be as a garment to the Saints raised.
-
3. Whether Christ and the Saints raised shall eat and drink. One Mr.—a Minister in Lincolnshire, maintains they shall, (as I have heard from a noble person) and for his opinion alledgeth that of our Savior, I will not from henceforth drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God, Mar. 14. 25. Add to this Luk. 14. 15. One sitting at table with Christ said, Blessed is he that eateth bread in the Kingdom of God. This he meant (as did all the Jews ) of the Kingdom of the Messias on earth; which opinion our Savior doth no where correct. Otherwise what use will they have of the Restauration of the world? Yet this is very hard to concoct, 1. That Christ and his Saints all glorified should come from Heaven, to eat and drink on earth; which comes near to the vile opinion of Cerinthus, that for a 1000 years God's Saints should live on earth in carnal pleasures. 2. In this case it seems their Bodies should be exposed to excrements, which is not to be endured in Bodies glorified.
Answ. 1. No more than our Savior's was after his Resurrection; or Angels, who sometimes did eat with the Patriarchs.
Answ. 2. If so, yet not for necessity, much less for satisfaction to the flesh; but for other reasons, as Christ did eat with his Apostles after his Resurrection.
Quaere 3. Then there will be no place for such desires, as to be dissolved and to be with Christ, Philip. 1. 23. and to be removed out of the body, and to dwell with the Lord, 2 Cor. 5. 8. For then to be dissolved will be to be absent from the Lord, and to dwell in the body will be to be present with the Lord.
Ans. 1. Though death will not then be comfortable in this respect, yet it may in other respects, as it brings freedom from seducing, which afterwards shall be incident to Gog and Magog.
Ans. 2. As Methuselah lived above 900 years a little before the Flood; so in the Restauration of the world why may not men live a 1000 years? I speak not of the Saints raised, but of those that shall walk in the light of new Jerusalem.
Quaere 4. Christ's Kingdom shall have no end, Luk. 1. 33. Dan. 7. 14. But this Kingdom of Christ shall last but a 1000 years, and then Gog and Magog shall prevail so far, as not only to invade all the Nations that walk in the light of new Jerusalem, but even to besiege the beloved City, that is, new Jerusalem itself, Rev. 20.
Ans. 1. But not prevail over new Jerusalem, but be forthwith consumed with fire: and then Christ's Kingdom continuing still shall be translated from earth to Heaven.
Ans. 2. Christ's Kingdom shall succeed other kingdoms, but no kingdom shall succeed this; and in that respect it is said to be everlasting: But Christ must resign his Kingdom to his Father, that God may be all in all. 1. Cor. 15.
Quaere 5. Christ's coming is not till the restoring of all things, Acts 3. 21. But the restoring of all things followeth after the consumption of Gog and Magog, Rev. 20. 11. and Rev. 21. 1. Ergo Christ's coming shall not be till after Gog and Magog 's ruin; Ergo not a 1000 years before.
Ans. It is said, that before his face that sat upon the throne, heaven and earth fled away, &c. But it is not said, that then it began to fly away, to wit, after the destruction of Gog and Magog.
Quaere 6. 'It is very strange that Gog and Magog should adventure to besiege new Jerusalem; the Devil and his Angels might as well adventure to besiege Heaven.
Answ. True, if Gog and Magog knew the condition of new Jerusalem so well as the Devil and his Angels know the condition of Heaven.
Quaere 7. Shall all that oppose Christ's truth be consumed with fire at that day? Consider, Paul opposed the Gospel for a while, yet was a chosen vessel of God; and many that do not oppose, may yet be reprobates.
Ans. 1. Yet at that day all such to whom the Lord coming in a flaming fire shall render vengeance for not obeying the Gospel of Christ Jesus, 2 Thess. 1. 8. shall be none of God's Elect.
Ans. 2. But some of God's Elect perhaps may be converted that very day.
Quaere 8. What shall become of Infants found alive at that day, not only of God's children, but of others also?
Ans. 1. If consumed in the same fire with their ungodly parents, this will be no more strange than that which fell out in the conflagration of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Ans. 2. Yet they may be of the number of those that escape, if so it please God; and hereunto, to wit, that it should so please God, I should rather incline.
Quaere 9. From heaven we look for a Savior that shall transform our vile bodies, and make them like unto his glorious body, Phil. 3. ult. Ergo at Christ's coming all the Saints that remain alive shall be so transformed.
Ans. So they shall before that Day of Judgment ends; for it continueth a 1000 years.
Quaere 10. They that then are found alive shall be caught up in the air? and ever be with the Lord; I mean the godly: But if there shall be a 1000 years reign on earth, what need they be caught up in the air, and how ever be with the Lord from thenceforth, if they and their posterity after them continue for the space of a 1000 years subject to mortality?
These were his Ten Quaere's, and Answers unto Nine of them; with which Contemplations (he wrote) his heart served him not to acquaint you, or to entreat your judgment in the way of correction or confirmation and addition, but left it unto me. The Father of lights illuminate our hearts with all saving light to his Glory, the good of his people, and our own comforts in Christ Jesus. So I rest,
6. Ian. 1629.
Yours ever, Sam. Meddus.
EPISTLE XXII.
Mr. Mede 's Answer to the Tenth Quaere, about the 1000 years Regnum Sanctorum.
SIR,
BY reason of this late indisposition I was not fit for any matter of study till yesterday: howsoever, I considered than Dr. T. his Answers to the Objections, and applaud them, finding through them all a right and dexterous apprehension of the thing questioned, which many are very uncapable to conceive. But because he leaves the last unanswered, I suppose it was tacitly reserved to me for Tithe, himself having answered Nine. I will therefore, as well as I can, propound what I had before conceived might be answered to such an Objection; wherein you shall also perceive in part wherein I differ from the Lutheran.
- 1. Therefore, It is not needful that the Resurrection of those which slept in Christ, and the Rapture of those which shall be left alive together with them into the Air, should be at one and the same time: For the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , first and then or afterwards, may admit a great distance of time, as 1 Cor. 15. 23. Everyone (or, all mankind) shall rise in their order, Christ the first-fruits (that is, first, ) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 afterwards they that are Christ's, at his coming. Here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , afterwards, notes a distance of time of above a thousand and a half of years, as we find by experience. Suppose therefore this Rapture of the Saints into the Air be to translate them to Heaven; yet it might be construed thus, The dead in Christ (that is, for Christ, namely, the Martyrs) shall rise first; afterwards, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ( viz. a thousand years after) we which are alive and remain shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, and meet the Lord in the Air, and so (from thenceforth) we shall ever be with the Lord. Thus Tertullian seems to understand it, who interprets 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or as it is in ver. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of Martyrs; namely, such as die propter Christum, for Christ, by means of Christ, through Christ, for Christ's sake; taking 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as noting the cause or means of their death. So Piscator expounds the like speech, Apoc. 14. 13. Blessed are the dead which die 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 id est, propter Dominum, for the Lord; Beza, qui Domini causâ moriuntur, which die for the Lord's sake.
- 2. If thus to restrain 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seem not so fully to answer the Apostle's scope and intention, which seems to be a general consolation to all that die in the faith, a fruition of Christ: then may we give it the largest sense, and yet say, That it is not needful that the Resurrection of those which died in Christ should be all at once or altogether; but the Martyrs first, in the First resurrection; then (after an appointed time) the rest of the dead in the Last resurrection; afterward, when the Resurrection shall be thus complete, those which remain alive at Christ's coming shall together with those which are risen be caught up into the clouds, to meet the Lord in the Air, and from thenceforth be eternally with him. And so the reason why those which Christ found alive at his coming were not instantly translated should be in part, that they might not prevent the dead, but be consummate with them.
-
3. Both these Interpretations suppose the Rapture of the Saints into the Clouds to be for their present translation into Heaven. But suppose that be not the meaning of it; for the words, if we weigh them well, seem to imply it to be for another end, namely, To do honor unto their Lord and King at his return, and to attend upon him when he comes to judge the World: Those (saith the Text) which sleep in Jesus, will God bring with him; he saith not, carry away with him. Again, They and those which are alive shall be caught up together in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the Air; to meet the Lord's coming hither to Judgment; not to follow him returning hence, the Judgment being finished. Besides, it is to be noted, that although in the Hebrew notion the Air be comprehended under the name of Heaven, yet would not the Apostle here use the word Heaven, but the word [ Air, ] as it were to avoid the ambiguity, lest we might interpret it of our translation into Heaven.
If this be the meaning, then are those words [ We shall ever be with the Lord ] thus to be interpreted; After this our gathering together unto Christ at his coming, (so the Apostle calls this Rapture, 2 Thess. 2. 1. ) we shall from henceforth never lose his presence, but always enjoy it, partly on earth, during his reign of a 1000 years, and partly in Heaven, when we shall be translated thither. For it cannot be concluded, because the Text saith, the Saints after their rapture on high should thenceforth be ever with the Lord; Ergo, they shall from thenceforth be in Heaven; for no Heaven is here mentioned. If they must needs be with Christ there where they are to meet him, it would rather follow, they should be ever with him in the Air, than in Heaven; which I suppose none will admit. And otherwise the Text will afford no more for Heaven than it will for Earth; nay, the words [ he shall bring them with him ] make most for the latter.
- 4. I will add this more, namely, what may be conceived to be the cause of this Rapture of the Saints on high to meet the Lord in the Clouds, rather than to wait his coming to the Earth. What if it be, that they may be preserved during the Conflagration of the earth and the works thereof, 2 Pet. 3. 10. that as Noah and his family were preserved from the Deluge by being lift up above the waters in the Ark; so should the Saints at the Conflagration be lift up in the Clouds unto their Ark, Christ, to be preserved there from the deluge of fire, wherein the wicked shall be consumed? There is a Tradition of the Jews founding this way, which they ascribe unto one Elias a Jewish Doctor, whose is that Tradition of the duration of the World, and well known among Divines, Duo millia Inane, duo millia Lex, duo millia dies Messiae; viz. Sex mille annos duraturus est Mundus. He lived under the second Temple about the first times of the Greek Monarchy; so that it is no device of any latter Rabbies, but a Tradition anciently received amongst them whilst they were yet the Church of God. I will transcribe it, because it hath something remarkable concerning the 1000 years: It sounds thus.
Traditio domûs Eliae. Iusti quos resuscitabit Deus non redigentur iterum in pulverem. (He means of the First and Particular Resurrection before the General, which the Jews acknowledge and talk much of. See Wisdom, chap. 3. ab initio ad finem v. 8.) Si quaeras autem, Mille annis istis quibus Deus Sanctus Benedictus renovaturus est mundum suum (de quibus dicitur, Et exaltabitur Dominus solus in die illo, Es. 2. 11.) quid justis futurum sit; sciendum, quod Deus Sanctus Benedictus dabit illis alas quasi aquilarum, ut volent super facie aquarum: unde dicitur (Psal. 46. 3.) Propterea non timebimus cùm mutabitur terra. At forte (inquies) erit ipsis dolori seu afflictioni. Sed occurrit illud (Esa. 40. 31.) Exspectantibus Dominum innovabuntur vires, efferentur alâ instar aquilarum. The Hebrew words are in Gemara Sanhedrin, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Tradition of the house of Elias. The just whom God shall raise up (viz. in the First Resurrection) shall not be turned again to dust. Now if you ask, How it shall be with the just in those Thousand years wherein the Holy Blessed God shall renew his world, whereof it is said (Esa. 2. 11.) And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day; you must know, that the Holy Blessed God will give them the wings as it were of Eagles, to fly upon the face of the waters: whence it is said (Psal. 46. 3.) Therefore shall we not fear, when the Earth shall be changed. But perhaps you will say, it shall be a pain and affliction to them. Not at all, for it is said (Esa. 40. 31.) They that wait upon the Lord, shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings as Eagles.
I have no more left. Mr. Doctor may add this to my Placita Iudaeorum. Thus with my best respects to yourself and him, I rest,
Yours, &c. I. M.
Post-script.
Add unto this that of our Savior, Where the body is, there shall the Eagles be gathered together.
EPISTLE XXIII.
Dr. Twisse his Third Letter to Mr. Mede, touching some obscure passages in Daniel.
Worthy Sir,
I Am sorry you are offended to have those your learned Discussions of that difficult place in Daniel, touching the LXX weeks, communicated. I confess I travel'd not a little for the gaining of them; first at Oxford, where I first discovered some track of them; then at London, by my good friend Dr. Meddus his means, first with Mr. Mason my good friend and ancient acquaintance, than with Mr. D. What account soever you make of them, I assure you I shall make never a whit the less reckoning of your learned pains. Good reason your account should proceed according to the exactness of your own judgment in these Studies; but to me truly they are rare notions: The rather, because I perceive your care is equal in maintaining congruity both with the Hebrew Text, and with the computation of years upon su • h grounds as the world affords. Yet as in the course of your contemplations you should light upon any further or fuller satisfaction, I should think myself very happy to have my desire satisfied in being made partaker of them; and of the opinion of that most reverend Prelate Dr. Usher, the Lord Primate of Armagh, concerning the same, which you gained of him by conference. Otherwise I shall bethink myself of a course to obtain it from himself, which I conceive to be very possible more ways than one.
I desired by Dr. Meddus to obtain your interpretation of three particulars in Daniel. Dan. 7. 12. As concerning the rest of the Beasts, they had their dominion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. Conradus Graserus, in his Historia Antichristi, seems to interpret it of the lasting of each of the three first national Monarchies, after the death of each first Monarch; which in my judgment is as appliable to the fourth Beast as to the three first. The other is, Dan. 7. 8. touching the little Horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up: which Graserus applies to Mahomet, and his rending of three Provinces from the Roman Monarchy, namely, Syria, Egypt, and Africa. I had rather understand it of Antichrist, as Moulin doth. But whether it be of Provinces rent from the Empire by Antichrist, or by others about his rising and what they are, I am to seek. And of the reconciling of this with that Rev. 17. 12. where it is said, that the ten horns are ten kings, which receive power as kings one hour with the Beast. Good Sir, pardon my over-great boldness.
I have sent my Copy of your Paraphrase of the last of Peter, and your Discourse of that Fiery judgment, to be considered of as you think good, and according to your motion. When Peter saith, His beloved brother Paul in all his Epistles speaks 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he addeth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are some things 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , though some few Copies read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as Beza observeth; yet little reason that should carry it. Hemingius reads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and for the perverting of those things, gives instance in the Millenaries. But if the embracing of that opinion from a Text of Scripture were the corrupting of it, were not Peter himself far more liable thereunto in this Epistle than Paul? I know some to the contrary have observed something in Paul against the opinion of the Thousand years Regnum Sanctorum, as namely Piscator: I have heard of no writer that from Paul 's Text hath pleaded for it. I looked you would have noted something concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which to my judgment seems a singular phrase.
I will observe carefully to retain your LXX Weeks by me without communicating them to any. As for Doctor Potter, he hath seen, upon my knowledge, your Specimina upon the Seals and Trumpets, as also your Generals, and, if I be not deceived, that of Regnum Lapidis and Regnum Montis in Daniel. The rest I will communicate unto him very shortly; as Placita Iudaeorum, and your Notes upon Justin, or what else soever you shall desire, either to him or any other; and that in your own Name, that he may know your good affection towards him, by your desire to gratify him in such special pieces of no vulgar contemplation. I desire to commend yourself and worthy studies to the blessing of God, and rest,
Newbury, March 5. 1629.
Your very loving Friend much obliged, W. Twisse.
EPISTLE XXIV.
Mr. Mede 's Third Letter to Dr. Meddus, touching the explanation of some obscure passages in Daniel, mentioned in the foregoing Letter of Dr. Twisse.
SIR,
I Have nothing upon the seventh of Daniel but what you have seen in those two Discourses, viz. The purport of the four Kingdoms in Daniel; and secondly, The Description of the Great Day of Judgment, Dan. 7. Both which I sent you written with my own hand, to be communicated to Dr. Twisse; and the latter being sent me back to take a Copy for myself, I returned it again unto you.
As for those three Chapters of the Apocalypse, I have not yet done a word; and see so much business now coming upon me, that I know not when I shall begin. For I can do nothing in those things but in silence, and security of not being distracted. In the mean time I must desire my friends to content themselves with those short Specimina concerning those Chapters which they had at the beginning of my communication of my Meditations on these things. And it may be, if I had not communicated them to so many till they had been more full and perfect, I had been ere this time more forward than I am.
Concerning your three Questions, I have chosen to make answer to them this Festival-week; not knowing after it be past when I shall have so much leisure again. And first I will begin with the two last.
Quaest. 1. If the Horn with eyes and mouth, speaking words against the most High, &c. in Daniel, or the fourth Beast ruling in that Horn, be the same with S. John's Bestia novissimi capitis; and consequently the ten Horns, amongst which that Horn ruled, the same Kingdoms which S. John saw typed by the like number of Horns; as the Church from her infancy believed: how can S. John, who saith, that his ten Kings receive their kingdoms at the same time or hour with his Beast, be reconciled with Daniel, who saith, the wicked Horn rose up after them?
Resp. I translate not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Dan. 7. 24. After them, but, Behind them, as the Greek doth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and take the meaning implied to be, that the ten Kings were not aware of the growing up of the little Horn, till it overtopped them. The learned in the Tongues know that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signify as well Behind in place, as After in time; and the first as often and frequently every whit as the latter: So also Post in Latin is indifferently either Loci or Temporis. The translation cannot be excepted against, as either new or strained: The sense is obvious and most agreeable to the event; and so we shall not need seek any other way to avoid the appearance of contradiction. Otherwise it were not impossible to expound [ After them ] to be in order of number, and not in order of time, which we in English would express, And another shall rise up besides them, that is, besides the ten, and so make the eleventh. But we shall not need so harsh and unusual a way. Besides, it might be granted, that the little Horn, in respect of his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and height of dominion, was after the ten Kings, though his beginning were at the same time when they began.
Quaest. 2. What were those three Kings which the little Horn is said to have displanted, (Dan. 7. 8.) or, as the Angel interprets, (v. 24.) brought down or humbled, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which the Vulgar turns humiliabit; the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Irenaeus, deminorabit, vel (ut in alio exemplari) dehonorabit; Vatablus, opprimet; Junius, deprimet?
Resp. In my larger interpretations of the Trumpets (in Rev. 8 ) you have at the end of the second Trumpet a Table of Ten Kings or Kingdoms whereinto the Roman Empire was divided about Anno 456 and forward: The offspring of which Nations, through many alterations, (partly by the inconstancy of human things, partly occasioned by the further enlargement of the Christian Faith) are the body of most of the Kingdoms and States of Christendom at this day. Look upon the Table, and then I answer you thus.
The three Kings which Daniel saith the Antichristian Horn should depress and displant, to advance himself, were those whose Dominions extended into Italy, and so stood in his light.
First, That of the Greeks, whose Emperor Leo Isaurus, for the quarrel of Image-worship, he excommunicated, and made his subjects of Italy revolt from their allegiance.
Secondly, That of the Longobards, (successors to the Ostrogoths ) whose Kingdom he caused by the aid of the Franks to be wholly ruined and extirpated, thereby to get the Exarchate of Ravenna (which since the revolt from the Greeks the Longobards were seised on) for a Patrimony to S. Peter.
Thirdly, The last was the Kingdom of the Franks itself, continued in the Empire of Germany; whose Emperors from the days of Henry the fourth he excommunicated, deposed and trampled under his feet, and never suffered to live in rest, till he made them not only to quit their interest in the Election of Popes and Investitures of Bishops but that remainder also of Jurisdiction in Italy, wherewith together with the Roman name he had once infeoffed their Predecessors.
These were the Kings by displanting or (as the Vulgar hath) humbling of whom the Pope got elbow-room by degrees, and advanced himself to that height of Temporal Majesty and absolute greatness, which made him so terrible in the world. See in the Table 3, 9, 10.
Quest. 3. How those words in Dan. 7. ver. 12. are to be interpreted and applied, viz. As concerning the rest of the Beasts, they had their dominion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
Resp. Before I answer, it must be known and remembered, that for that [ As concerning ] there is nothing in the Original but the Copulative Vau, which, as the sense requires, is to be translated not only copulatively, but disjunctive, adversative, causaliter, ordinative, and sometimes as a particle of similitude, and the like; it being of it self as a Materia prima. In the latter part of this sentence it is translated adversative, viz. Yet, [Yet their lives, &c.] for which in the Original is nothing but the same Conjunction Vau.
This premised, I answer,
First, If Beasts here be meant of the three first Beasts, it is to be taken by way of a Parenthesis, implying a tacit answer to a question: For Daniel having spoken so largely of the destruction of the Fourth Beast, and nothing of the other, it might be asked, Yea, but what became of the former three? He answers, As concerning them also, they had their dominion taken away; but their lives were prolonged for a time and a season; that is, they reigned their time, and then had their dominion taken away. And thus our Translators seem to have understood it, and accordingly to have sitted their translation, by turning Vau [As concerning. ] This is an easy and smooth interpretation, nor do I see any sufficient reason why it should not satisfy.
Secondly, But some of the Hebrew Commenters understand not Beasts here of the three Beasts forementioned, but of other Beasts, that is, other States and Kingdoms then reigning in the world, at what time the fourth Beast should be destroy • d; That these also, as well as the Fourth Beast and his limbs, should have their Kingdoms taken away, though not at the same instant, yet some time after. And so Vau shall not need be translated [ As concerning, ] but [ Also;] Also the rest of the Reasts, &c As for the word Beasts to be taken here for other Kingdoms as well as the Four great ones, it needs make no scruple. For we shall find it so in the next Chapt. where it i • said of the Medo-Persian Ram (verse 4.) that no Beasts might stand before him, that is, no S • ate or Kingdom was able to resist his power: So here may The rest of the Beasts be the States and Kingdoms contemporary with the fourth Beast. And this interpretation would sound well with the words of S. John in the end of the 19. Chapter, where it being said that the Beast and False Prophet were cast into the fire (as Daniel saith of hi • fourth Beast, chap. 7. v. 11.) it followeth, And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, &c. as if he had meant to express this of Daniel, And the rest of the Beasts had their dominion taken away, &c. But the difficulty then will be, how the latter part of the words should be taken, viz. Yet (or And, or But) their lives were prolonged for a season and time. The Rabbins take it for some season and time after the fourth Beast was destroyed; and R. Solomen, at the time of the war of Gog and Magog, which they look for soon after then • stitution, upon the destruction of the fourth Beast. But whether can this stand with S. Paul 's assertion, that the fourth Beast terminating in the Man of sin shall be destroyed at the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or appearing of Christ's coming? How should any Beasts lives be prolonged for a season and time after that coming? Or should we expound this season and time of a thousand year after, when the last and final execution of Christ upon his enem • e is to be? But Daniel seems to join the appearance of Christ in the clouds to receive a Kingdom with this destruction of the rest of the Beasts together with the fourth Beast, and so not to admit of such a distance. Let others judge.
Thirdly, But I will not conceal that I have suspected there might possibly be a third Interpretation far • d •• ering from them both, and which would make the Vision fully to agree with the Angel's interpretation: But the words then must be construed much otherwise than they use to be: viz. Daniel in the former verse mentioning precisely the Body of the Beast to be given to the flames, it should follow thus; And as the Body was burned and destroyed, so the rest of the Beast ( viz. the t • n Horns and ruffling Horn ) had their dominion (at the same time the Body was burned) taken away; and prolongation of life was given them for a season and time, viz. until I saw one like to the Son of man coming in the clouds, &c. that is, they reigned till the Son of man came in the clouds, &c. The reason why I thought of this Interpretation is, because the word which we tra • slate here plurally, is, as it is pointed in the Original, of the singular number, namely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; whereas if it were the plural, it should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; for that, say the Chaldee Grammarians, is the difference between the singular and the plural Emphatick, that the one hath Scheva [ • ] in the penultima, the other hath Camets [ • ] And so we render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with Scheva in this Chapter singularly [ Beast, ] twice in the following verses of this Chapter; viz. verse 19, & 23. The reason which moved the Interpreters to translate it here plurally was, because the Affixes following are all plural, [their dominion, their lives. ] But this may be because that remainder of the Beast under the Horns consisted of many Kingdoms, and in that respect the dominion and duration thereof is expressed with plural Affixes, as of many.
March 31.
Yours, Joseph Mede.
Post-script.
My paper straightens me and my time; and I have been a 3. or 4. times troubled while I was writing this last way of Interpretation; which made me so blurr and blot, and scarce know what I did. I should else have expressed myself more plainly and fully.
EPISTLE XXV.
A more distinct and perspicuous expression of the last of those three ways to interpret that twelfth verse of Dan. 7.
I Confess my skill in the Chaldee is no more but Grammatical, yet thus much a little smattering in Grammar could teach me; and so made me seek in what sense it might be translated singularly, notwithstanding the plural Affixes following it, and what this rest or remainder of the Beast (if it be so turned) might be.
First, I observed that in the destruction of the Fourth Beast immediately before mentioned, the Body of the Beast was precisely and particularly named; whereby I began to conceive the Remainder here spoken of might be the Beast's Horns, that is, the eyed and mouthed Horn with that Decarchy of Horns subject to him, which the Holy Ghost would tell us was destroyed at the same time, and together with the Body of the Beast: And so the Text to be construed thus, The Body of the Beast was destroyed, and given to the burning flame; And the rest of the Beast also (viz. the Horns) had their dominion taken away, after that a continuance of life had been given them for a season and a time. Thus interpreted, it would answer to that part of the Angel's interpretation, verse 25. which saith, that the State of the Beast under the wicked Horn 's dominion should last a time, and times, and half a time; whereunto otherwise there will be nothing answering in the Vision.
Secondly, The Kingdom of the Son of man immediately following the expiration of this season and time in the Vision, would answer to that in the Interpretation, verse 22. The Horn prevailed against the Saints, until the Ancient of days came and the Saints possessed the Kingdom.
Thirdly, It is certain that the Session of Judgment described in the Vision sat to destroy the wicked Horn; for so saith the Angel, verse 26. But the Judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion: And Daniel himself in the Vision expected to see that in special; for as soon as the Bench was set, and the Books were opened, verse 10. I beheld then, (saith he, verse 11.) because of the voice of the great words which the Horn spake, viz. he looked what would become of the Horn. Something then should seem to follow in special concerning it, else Daniel was frustrate of his looking: But what follows? I beheld until the Beast was slain; This is something, but general only: And his Body destroyed; This indeed is special, but not that which Daniel looked after: For how would these hang together, [ I looked to see what would become of the Beast's horn, and, I saw his Body destroyed? ] should it not seem rather to follow, to answer Daniel 's looking, And the rest of the Beast also, that is, not the Body only or people of the Beast's dominion were destroyed, but the Horns also, with their Captain-horn who spake the big words, (that is, the State then domineering) had their dominion taken away after they had enjoyed it a season and a time?
Lastly, Those words of the Angel's interpretation, verse 26. The Judgment shall sit, and take away his dominion, (that is, the Horn 's dominion) seem to have reference to that passage in the Vision which saith in the same words, that the rest of the Beast had their dominion taken away. The reason of the plural Affixe 's answering to a singular Antecedent being, because this rest of the Beast had in it a plurality of Kingdoms. according to the rule of the Grammarians, That a singular Antecedent to be taken collectively or distributively, may have a plural number answer to it. This was my adventure.
EPISTLE XXVI.
Mr. Burnet 's Letter to Mr. Mede, touching the Provostship of Trinity College near Dublin.
SIR,
I Am bold to write unto you, though a stranger, to certify you that I hear Dr. Bedle, Provost of Trinity College in Ireland, is chosen Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland, which is valued worth 600 l. per annum, appointed thereto by the King; howbeit some time will be ere he leave the College: in the mean space I am bold to entreat your Answer, to know if you will accept the place of Provost if you be chosen thereto, as you were wrote to by my Lord. Primate formerly before Mr. Bedle went. I am now writing to my Lord Primate an Answer of Letters this day I received from him, and do certify him of this accident; for it was but this week that the King granted it, and no Letter is yet gone over. I sent the Book you sent me long since to my Lord Primate. I dwell at the sign of the Golden fleece in Lombard-street, and shall expect your Answer next return; and so I commend you to God Almighty, resting
London, April 12.
Your loving Friend, Francis Burnet.
EPISTLE XXVII.
Dr. Ames his Letter to Mr. Mede, touching Lawenus his Censure of his Clavis Apocalyptica.
Good Mr. Mede.
I Showed your Clavis to one much given unto those Studies, and desired his censure; which having at length received, I send herewith unto you, desiring from you to receive what you think fit to be opposed: You shall perceive his full meaning out of the printed Treatise adjoined. He seemeth to me to carry all to the Jews, upon no other grounds than communion of Phrases. Thus with hearty salutations to you and Mr. Chapel, I rest
Franeker, Oct. 11.
Your loving Friend, W. Ames.
EPISTLE XXVIII.
A Second Letter from Dr. Ames, touching Mr. Mede 's Defense.
SIR,
YOur Answer to Lawenus I have received, (that you be no longer in suspense) and like so well, that I shall long to see more of your Notions in that kind: yet methinks that Millenary state spoken of may well be understood of the Church raised from a dead condition, and so continued for that space. We have here no News but of Silva-Ducis straitly and hopefully besieged by our Army; the Enemy (as it seemeth) not being in case to bring an Army into the field. Thus with salutations to yourself, Mr. Chapel, &c. I rest
Franeker, May 27.
Your loving Friend, W. Ames.
EPISTLE XXIX.
Mr. Mede his Third Letter to Archbishop Usher, excusing his unwillingness to accept the Provostship of Trinity College in Ireland: containing also an account of Lawenus his Animadversions upon his Clavis, and his Answer; together with his Explication of Ezek. 4. 6, &c.
Right Reverend and my most Honoured Lord,
I Make no question but your College is far better provided of a Provost than it would have been of me, who never could persuade myself I was fit to be the Head and Governor of the only Seminary of a Kingdom. And therefore though my name were the Second time brought upon the Stage, yet was it without consent or privity of mine. Indeed a Proposition was made unto me upon Mr. Bedle 's pre • erment (and before the news thereof was sent to him) whether I would accept the place, in case I were again chosen thereto. Unto which because I answered not by a direct and categorical denial, but only alleged divers reasons, both from mine own unfitness in divers respects, and other circumstances which might and did deter me therefrom, leaving them who made the motion to infer the conclusion; it pleased some (to whom I am yet beholden for their affection) so to interpret it, as if in modesty only I had by such a kind of answer concealed my willingness: which as soon as I understood and that some (Sir Nathaniel Rich by name) endeavored upon the motion of some others to procure me to be named by his Majesty, I presently took him off, and that so effectually as he stirred no more; though perhaps I was not a little blamed by some of my friends for so doing. But enough of this.
For my Clavis, I am afraid that Reverend Archbishop your Lordship nameth values it far more than it deserveth; though it may be something I have by God's goodness discovered toward the better understanding of that Book; which if I have, the praise be to God alone, to whom it is only due.
But I cannot imagine what those Additions thereto should be, which your Lordship saith you received out of the North of Ireland. I sent a Copy or two to Franeker to Doctor Ames; he sends one of them to Daniel Lawenus, an ancient Student in those parts in that Prophecy, (whose Apparatus to a bigger volume of many years study was printed the same year,) desiring his censure of it. He finding it not to suit with his Notions, wrote presently Stricturae in Clavem Apocalypticam, not knowing my name, but calling me Synchronista; and sometimes seemed to be very angry in his confutation of me, though he agreed with me in the mainest Paradox of all. He sends it to Doctor Ames, as I suppose not intending me. But the Doctor dispatcheth it to me, together with his printed Book, for my better understanding his meaning; desires to receive again from me what I thought fit to oppose by way of defense. Thus unwittingly I made myself work, yet such as in the doing I at length found some benefit by, having my torpid thoughts revived and quickened, and the second time more able to wield any notions than they were at the beginning. But I should admire if your Lordship had seen a Copy of this. For besides that I sent into Friseland, I conceive not how any other should get abroad, having, as I thought, kept mine own Copy private in my study.
That touching the years of Israel and Judah, I know not what it should be, unless that the 40. years of Judah 's sin, for which the Prophet lay so many days upon his right side, were the years of Manasseh Idolatry, to which the Scripture particularly ascribes their captivity, 2 Kings 24. 3. & ch. 23. 26. Ier. 15. 4. Which I thought had been a novelty, and cried 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but since I find it to be the opinion of R. Kimchi, whom I suppose also the first author thereof. Salianus adds Hieronymus (not Josephus) de Prado, & Funccius; but I never looked them. It was but a conjecture, which, had it been new, I conceived would not have been altogether unacceptable to your Lordship, whom yet far be it from me to teach or inform, but only to be better instructed or confirmed by your Lordship's profounder judgment.
Presently after my Clavis was printed, I drew, at the entreaty of some friends, Specimina Interpretationum Apocalypticarum ad amussim Clavis Apocalypticae; which finding beyond my expectation or merit to be accepted, I have since gone more largely through some part thereof, as The Description of the Theatrum Apocalypticum, chap. 4. The 6 Seals and 7 Trumpets unto the 11. Chapter: The rest is yet but Specimina, as it was in the beginning; the last Chapter whereof I once sent your Lordship, namely de Millennio. But could I have gotten an orthographical Scribe, I would have sent your Lordship all ere this, both Specimina and the larger Expositions upon the first half. But I had no such of mine own, and those who have are not so kind as to lend them for any hire. And for myself, I should never get through that which is mine own, without everlasting mending, blurring, and pausing at every sentence to alter it. I am exceedingly sorry for the death of Buxtorf and Amama, especially the latter, as being but now in store, and one that had a natural genius to enlighten the Text of Scripture, and to find the notion of the Sacred language.
If Ireland will not spend the remainder of my Pamphlets, if your Lordship have opportunity to send them, I shall willingly entertain them again, their fellows being all gone.
Thus with my most humble Service remembered to your gracious Lordship, desiring the God of Heaven to bless and preserve your Grace, I rest, and am
Christ 's College, May 4. 1630.
Your Lordship's, most ready to be commanded, Joseph Mede.
EPISTLE XXX.
My Lord of Armagh his Letter to Mr. Mede, commending his Comment on the Apocalypse and his learned Conjectures upon the Succession of the Babylonian Kings in Berosus, &c.
Worthy Sir,
I Received long since your most accurate Explication of the principal Chapters of the Revelation, together with your learned Conjectures upon the succession of the Babylonian Kings recorded in the fragments of Berosus and Megasthenes. I cannot sufficiently commend either the one or the other; but acknowledge myself to have learned from you in both what otherwise would never have come into my mind. I am now in hand with a Treatise De Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Primordiis, setting down as much as may be found in the Manuscripts that remain of our Nation touching that Argument. I have entered also upon the Determination of the Controversies which concern the Chronology of the Sacred Scripture: wherein I shall in many places need your help. I desire to hear from you of the state of things there: and so recommending all your godly studies and endeavors unto the blessing of our good God, evermore rest
Armagh, August 10. 1632.
Your most assured loving Friend, Ia. Armachanus.
EPISTLE XXXI.
Mr. Mede 's Answer to a Doubt touching some Variations between the Hebrew Text and the Hellenists, and some smaller corruption crept into the Hebrew copies.
I Have heard alleged; If any corruption had crept into the Hebrew Text at or before our Savior's time, the holy Apostles and Penmen of the New Testament would have restored it, or somewhere intimated it. But what if they did so, and yet we had rather follow the Masorites than them?
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
i. Sed fuit cul • us eorum erga me mandatum hominum edoctum or edoctus
i. Frustrà vero reverentur me mandata •• minum docentes: viz. referring Docentium to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 frustrà reverentia eorum mei qui docent mandata hominum.
See 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the same Prophet for frustrà, cap. 45. 9. ibid. versibus 18, 19. item cap. 49. 4.
The Masorites might have pointed it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as they do often elsewhere, Yod for Van; yea in the Chaldee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be pointed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Then it would be, Frustrà cultus eorum meimandata hominum docens, and never a letter altered but Yod into Van.
It is to be noted that the Prophet calls Idols and Idol-worship often in this book 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , i. Vanity.
Acts 15. 17. out of Amos 9. 12.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c.
The Hebrew now reads marvelous differingly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
But the Lxx. read, and the Apostles ratify it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vt passid • ant residuum Edom. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vt requirant Deum (vel Dominum) reliqui hominum.
For the Lxx. often translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , more than 40. times, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 above an 100.
— 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
The Hebrew hath now in place of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a clean contrary sense, and inconsequent to what goes before. I know how it is wont to be salved.
But did not the Lxx, and the Apostle with them, read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which without anymore ado is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and makes the sense coherent with what went before? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 differ not very much. See the same construction of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the same Prophet, chap. 14. 15.
But in these and other such, it may be said, the Apostles accommodated to the capacity of the times, and so followed the LXX as a known and received Translation, but not either to correct the then Hebrew reading by it, or prefer that of the Hellenists before it.
But what will they say, if sometimes the Apostles follow a reading differing both from the Septuagint and Hebrew, even where the LXX and Hebrew exactly agree together?
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
The words included in the parenthesis are a brief comprehension of what went before, and interlaced only for explication sake. So that the words quoted out of the Prophet directly are only these:
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
But first, there are no such words in Jeremiah; that which sounds like them is in Zacharias.
Secondly, the Hebrew in Zacharias, and the LXX agreeing with it, have something which S. Matthew hath not, and S. Matthew again something which neither of them have.
-
Hebr.
- 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
-
LXX.
- 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Here the Hebrew hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the LXX, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which S. Matthew hath not.
On the other side, S. Matthew hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which neither Hebrew nor LXX have: Besides, the Seventie's Greek here differs almost every word from S. Matthew 's.
First, it may seem the Evangelist would inform us, that those latter chapters ascribed to Zacharias, (viz. the 9, 10, 11, &c.) are indeed the Prophecies of Jeremiah, and that the Jews had not rightly attributed them. Certainly, if a man weighs the Contents of some of them, they should in likelihood be of an elder date than the time of Zacharias; namely, before the captivity: For the subjects of some of them were scarce in being after that time. And the Chapter out of which S. Matthew quotes, may seem to have somewhat much unsuitable with Zechariah 's time; as, a Prophecy of the destruction of the Temple, then when he was to encourage them to build it: and how doth the sixth verse of that Chapter suit with his time? There is no Scripture saith they are Zechariah's, but there is Scripture saith they are Jeremiah's, as this of the Evangelist. As for there being joined to the Prophecies of Zacharias, that proves no more they are his, than the like adjoining of Agur 's Proverbs to Solomon 's proves they are therefore Solomon's; or that all the Psalms are David's, because joined in one Volume with David 's Psalms. Hocprimum.
Secondly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here in S. Matthew is the first person singular, not the third plural, as we are wont to translate it: For it answers to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Hebrew. The same person and number must also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be, whether the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be paragogical, or an ancient slip of the Scribe. For the Syriac translates it dedi, and in the Hebrew it answer to to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . All this to be so the words following evince, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . How will it cohere else? They gave, &c. as the Lord commanded me. Must it not needs be, I gave? &c.
Thirdly, the Evangelist for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 would, as should seem, have us read— 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which is, adverbum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or, as S. Matthew more freely translates, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . See 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Esther, chap.
- 1. v. 8, 15, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 often in that Book. If it be considered how aukwardly those words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 stand in that sentence, and how disturbed they make the Syntax, it will breed suspicio mendi. And if one of the Apostles of our Lord play here the Critick, it is no sin to follow him, say the Masorites what they will.
-
2.
Reg.
20. 12, &
c. Isaiah,
chap. 39.
tot.
are but two Copies of the same history,
yet are there two or three differences, questionless from the hand of the Scribe;
as
2 Reg. 20. Isaiah 39 Ver, 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ver. 1. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 2. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 1.
If it be apparent one letter is changed for another here, why may it not be in other places?
I durst show no such conceits as these, but to so great an Antiquary as your Lordship, to whom the possibility of corruption by writing is so well known, or rather the impossibility of the contrary. Who knows what time will discover, cum Elias venerit?
EPISTLE XXXII.
Mr. Mede 's Answer to Mr. Osbourn 's Quaere's, touching some passages in Daniel and the Revelation.
Qu. 1. WHether Daniel and the Revelation are Prophecies transfused into one another, or that Daniel reaches no farther than the destruction of Jerusalem.
Answ. I conceive Daniel to be Apocalypsis contracta, and the Apocalypse Daniel explicate, in that where both treat about the same subject; namely, what was revealed to Daniel concerning the Fourth Kingdom but summatim and in gross was shown to S. John particulatim, with the distinction and order of the several Fates and Circumstances which were to betide and accompany the same. And that therefore Daniel 's Prophecy is not terminated with the First, but reacheth to the Second coming of Christ; as appears by the description of that glorious coming, and the great Judgment, Dan. 7. and his prophecy of the Resurrection, Chap. 12. This hath been the constant Tradition of the Church from the Apostles days to this last Seculum, and was of the Church of the Jews before and at our Savior's time. And if the Apostles had ever taught the Church otherwise, it could never so timely, so wholly, so generally have been forgotten.
Quest. 2. How was the Book of Apocalyptical predictions sealed until the Lamb opened it, Apoc. 5. if Daniel and the other Prophets wrote anything of them?
Answ. Whatsoever the meaning be of that sealing and unsealing the Apocalyptical Book, it cannot be so far urged, as to infer the Contents thereof were in no wise • evealed until that unsealing; that is, until S. John saw his Revelation. For the contrary is apparent; First, of the Day of Judgment, and Resurrection at Christ's glorious coming in the clouds; which is the main But and scope of the Apocalypse, and yet was foretold by Daniel or some other of the Prophets: or else upon what Scripture did the Church of the Jews found their faith concerning both? Secondly, The Reign of Antichrist • which should precede that glorious coming, is no small part of the argument of the Apocalypse; yet was that revealed before S. John saw his Visions; if you will not grant to and by Daniel, yet you must by S. Paul, 2 Thess. 2. which was at least 40 years before the Apocalypse was given. But he that considers S. Paul well will find, that he borrowed that piece and the ground of his Demonstration from Daniel; of which more by and by.
In a word, The Fourth Kingdom and that tyrannical Dominion which should forego the Son of man's coming in the clouds of heaven, was revealed summatim & in genere before S. John 's Visions; but the series rerum gerendarum therein from the First to that Second and glorious appearing of Christ, particulatim & in specie, was never revealed or unsealed till then.
Quest. 3. All things go round: That which is, is that which was, and that which shall be: What therefore though the expressions in S. John be the same with those in Daniel? yet may the times and things prophesied of not be the same.
Answ. 'It is true, all things go round, and the course of Divine government runs in a circle or repetition of the lame things: So that the Fates and Sequels of things foretold in the Prophets may be again and again repeated, and the Prophecies of them as it were often fulfilled; namely, by way of Analogy, but not of Propriety. But whither tends this? I suppose to make the ruffling Horn in Daniel and S. John's blaspheming Beast to be diverse, though the expression and description be the same. If this be it, I meet with it thus: The Vision of the Son of man's coming in the clouds of heaven, Dan. 7. is in propriety the Second and Glorious coming of Christ; as appears by that coming so often described from thence in the New Testament, and our Savior's using of the title of the Son of man with reference thereto, as who, though now he appeared in humility, yet was the same which one day (as Daniel prophesied) should appear so gloriously. [ Vid. Matth. 26. 64. Mark 14. 62, &c. Adhibe John 12. 34, &c. ]
But if this be so, then that Dominion which Daniel saw immediately to precede this coming, must be in propriety that Tyranny of the wicked one, which should precede that Second and Glorious coming of Christ. Ergo, not the Tyranny of Antiochus Epiphanes, but of Antichrist. And upon this ground did S. Paul build that Demonstration of his, 2 Thess. 2. That the Day of the Lord could not be at hand; to wit, because the Kingdom of that wicked one (which Daniel had foretold he should abolish at the appearance of his coming) was not yet in the world.
Quest. 4. Whether Nebuchadnezzar 's Image contained more Kingdoms than were then in the world, or whereof himself was Master.
Answ. More Kingdoms than were then in the world, I see no reason why it might not; nay why it should not: For it was a Vision of Kingdoms that were to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 afterward (verse. 29, & 45.) and the Kingdom of Christ one amongst them: Yet was Rome a Kingdom then as well as Macedon or Persia.
Contain more Kingdoms than were comprehended in the Provinces he was Master of, I am sure it did; namely, that of Macedon, no part of which, neither of the rest of Greece, was ever subject to the Babylonian Monarchy; nor anymore, but some of their Colonies of the Asian shore to the Persian. Nor is this so strange, since the form and shape of the Image consists not in the identity of place and bounds of Dominion, (though for a great and the principallest part it were the same) but in the order of succession which each Kingdom was to have to that which went before it; namely one of them should subdue and inherit another, till a fifth Kingdom came, which should never be subdued or destroyed, nor left (as the rest were) to another people.
Quest. 5. Whether Daniel 's Visions (there where the Angel expoundeth them) be so mystical, as not in propriety expounded by the Angel.
Answ. I understand the Interpretation of every Vision according to the propriety of the Letter, and not to be a new Allegory needing another mystical interpretation: yet for all this I see no more necessity why the Roman Kingdom should be described (if Daniel anywhere describes it) from its situation to the West, (as those of the Seleucidae and Lagidae are by North and South, ) than the Persian is by the East. For the Holy Ghost chooseth such Characters for distinction as he listeth, nor is tied to one way of characterizing, but doth it variously. Besides that Character of West -situation being common to the third kingdom, and anticipated in the vision thereof, chap. 8. 5. could not distinguish the fourth from it.
Quest. 6. Whether Daniel understood not his own Visions; especially when the Angel told him the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as in that from the tenth Chapter to the end.
Answ. 'It is one thing to understand the Interpretation of a Vision, another to understand the Application of the Interpretation; namely, to what times and places it belongeth. Where the Angel gave Daniel the Interpretation or meaning of the similitude of any Vision, I doubt not but he understood what such similitude meant, as that by Beasts were meant Kingdoms, by Horns Kings, and the like. But the Application of the Interpretation (unless where the Angel sometimes applied it) I believe he understood not, especially in the last Vision, where himself says so: I heard, saith he, but I understood not. And no marvel, for the Angel tells him, Those words were closed up and sealed, till the time of the end. And it is to be observed, that in that last Prophecy the Vision is not described, but the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Interpretation only reported. The Vision out of the last verse of the tenth Chapter may seem to have been some Book or Writing, which either conveniently could not, or the Holy Ghost thought not fit to describe.
Decemb. 17. 1632.
Ios. Mede.
EPISTLE XXXIII.
Sir William Boswell's Letter to Mr. Mede, touching some of his Books sent him.
Good Mr. Mede,
I Know the Judgment and current of rhe world is for present thanks upon kindness; Non me qui caetera vincit Impetus. Above four months since (with Letters from Mr. P. full of your and his Affection) I received four Copies of your Comment upon the Apocalypse: a large time to make accounts and acknowledgment; true, but both are so much the riper and better seasoned. My thanks I shall ever be renewing. Your Books I sent, one to Domenico Molins, a most learned, noble Gentleman of Venice: Another, by my Lord Ambassador Anstruther, and his Chaplain (one Mr. Johnson ) an honest learned friend of mine, into Germany. The third I bestowed upon Dr. Rivet (long and lately Professor of Divinity in Leyden, now Tutor to the Prince of Aurange his Son,) whose name and extraordinary worth you know by his works. The fourth I send to Scholars and acquaintance here. Some Animadversions I am promised, which I forbear to touch at present. In general, it is commended for a modest, discreet, learned, regular, and of all in that list most verifiable, discovery; if you forbear your Millenarian Fancy. Copies are very much sought; and certainly these parts would have taken off above two hundred, if sent at first. It is an error and fault in our Printers, Visum non fieri extramittendo. In a word, you have set their teeth on edge: and I am pressed by many to procure them sight of all other things you have written; by name, your large notes upon 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ad Tim. 4. 1. they will come very seasonably; because there is in hand (since, and by order of the Synod of Dort ) a new Translation of the Bible into Dutch, with marginal Annotations at large, to be printed in a folio Copy, wherein the Translators (understanding English perfectly) acknowledge the use and excellency of our last and authentic English Translation. Dan. Heinsius likewise tells me by Letter, that he is upon the New Testament; in what manner I shall know at meeting. I find the Zone here for Ecclesiastic Affairs temperate at present and quiet, though now and then producing Capreas saltantes, and such trifling Meteors which busy natures will be raising; as if to keep within the lists of obedience, and to do their work plainly and quietly, were but a Dulman 's part. —Sic volvere Parcas! The Treaty between these Vnited and the other Catholic Provinces is slow-footed, & inter futura contingentissima.—Si quid in hac scena scire aves, aut aliud quicquam à vetere veróque amico velis, fac sciam. For I shall ever love Joseph Mede as an honest old friend, and think upon him tanquam Academiam in Academia, being his most affectionate to serve him,
Hague 31/21 Maii 1633.
William Boswell.
An Advertisement.
THat the Reader may the better understand the occasion and purport of the following Epistle, he is to know that after Mr. Mede had published his Clavis and Commentary upon the Apocalypse, Mr. Haydock of Salisbury, an aged Gentleman, acquainted him with some Objections he had against the form of the Seven-sealed Book expressed in his Apocalyptic Scheme, viz. 1. That the ancient form of Books was in several sheets of Parchment, fastened at one end only, and so rolled up together. ( Hence those expressions in Psal. 40. 7. Hebr. 10. 7. & Luke 4. 17.) 2. That the form of the Seven-sealed Book (Apocal. 5. ) ought to be such as might satisfy the Lamb' s intention, which had an eye unto Prius and Posterius in regard of the sequel of the ensuing History: For that part which belongs to the First Seal ought to be viewed before the Second or the rest were opened; whereas in the form of the modern Books ( according to which form Mr. Mede had described the Seven-sealed Book in his Scheme ) no use can be made of any part or leaf in the Book, until all the Seven Seals be opened. But in the form of the Roll, when every part or leaf hath its several Label inserted in the proper distance, with a Seal and several impressions of Emblematical Signature, each several leaf being taken and unsealed in order, the several matter therein contained will appear, and no more of any of the rest till they be opened in order.
Thus far Mr. Haydock. The Transcript of his Letter (for the Original could not be met with) being imperfect, was not fit to be printed. He also acquainted Mr. Mede in his Letter with a purpose he had to represent in lively Pictures the Apocalyptic Visions, and sent him the Pictures of the Cherubims done by himself, for a Specimen of his skill in that Art, wherein he had exercised himself for many years, having in his younger days translated out of Italian and published the works of Io. Paolo Lomazzo concerning The Art of Painting.
The form of the Book sealed with seven Seals, and of the Book unsealed, according to Mr. Haydock's opinion, is represented in the following page.
EPISTLE XXIV.
Mr. Mede's Letter to Mr. Haydock, wishing him to perfect his design of representing the Apocalyptic Visions in lively Pictures, and applauding his ingenious observation upon the form of the Seven-sealed Book.