The Beast From The Sea
-The Two Babylons Alexander Hislop
Chapter VII
Section II
The Beast from the Sea
In the old Babylonian system, after the worship
of the god of fire, As the world formerly was in danger of being burnt up,
so now it was in equal danger of being drowned. In the Mexican story
it is said to have actually been so. First, say they, it was
destroyed by fire, and then it was destroyed by water. The Druidic
mythology gives the same account; for the Bards affirm that the
dreadful tempest of fire that split the earth asunder, was rapidly
succeeded by the bursting of the Lake Llion, when the waters of the
abyss poured forth and "overwhelmed the whole world." In Greece we meet with the very same story.
Diodorus Siculus tells us that, in former times, "a monster called
Aegides,
who vomited flames, appeared in Phrygia; hence spreading along Mount
Taurus, the conflagration burnt down all the woods as far as India;
then, with a retrograde course, swept the forests of Mount Lebanon,
and extended as far as Egypt and Africa; at last a stop was put to it
by Minerva. The Phrygians remembered well this
CONFLAGRATION and the FLOOD which FOLLOWED it." Ovid, too, has a
clear allusion to the same fact of the fire-worship being speedily
followed by the worship of water, in his fable of the transformation
of Cycnus. He represents King Cycnus, an attached friend
of Phaethon, and consequently of fire-worship, as, after his friend's
death, hating the fire, and taking to the contrary element that of
water,
through fear, and so being transformed into a swan. In India, the
great deluge, which occupies so conspicuous a place in its mythology,
evidently has the same symbolical meaning, although the story of Noah
is mixed up with it; for it was during that deluge that
"the lost Vedas," or sacred books, were recovered, by means of the
great god, under the form of a
FISH. The "loss of the Vedas" had evidently taken
place at that very time of terrible disaster to the gods, when,
according to the Purans, a great enemy of these gods, called
Durgu,
"abolished all religious ceremonies, the Brahmins, through fear,
forsook the reading of the
Veda,...fire lost its energy, and the
terrified stars retired from sight"; in other words, when idolatry,
fire-worship, and the worship of the host of heaven had been
suppressed. When we turn to Babylon itself, we find there also
substantially the same account. In Berosus, the deluge is represented
as coming after the time of Alorus, or the "god of fire," that is,
Nimrod, which shows that there, too, this deluge was symbolical. Now,
out of this deluge emerged
Dagon, the fish-god, or god of the
sea. Beings in
fish suits
tend a Pillar of Light--Tree of LIfe Equivalent to Oannes in the religion of the
Philistines at Philistia (in what is now Israel) was a human-bodied,
fish-tailed deity called Dagon. Further to the
west, Pharos in northern
Egypt was said to be the home of
'the Old Man of the Sea' - a shape-shifting
amphibious deity known as Proteus, son
of Oceanus and renowned among the ancient Greeks as an oracle.
Significantly, their traditional legends specifically claimed that he
often sheltered in a cave to avoid the heat of Sirius.
From See how Apollo (Abbadon, Apollyon)
changed his shape to a dolphin. See
Nimrod and the Musical connection in Babylon The concocters of these Mysteries saw that if
they could only bring men back again to
idolatry in any shape, they could
soon work that idolatry so as
substantially to re-establish the very
system that had been put down. Thus it was, that, as soon as the
way was prepared for it, Tammuz was
introduced as one who had allowed himself to be slain for the good of
mankind. A distinction was made between good serpents and bad
serpents, one kind being represented as the serpent of Agathodaemon,
or the good divinity, another as the serpent of Cacodaemon, or the
evil one. * * WILKINSON. In Egypt, the Uraeus, or the
Cerastes, was the good serpent, the Apophis the evil one.
It was easy, then, to lead men on
by degrees
to believe that, in spite of all appearances to the contrary,
Tammuz, instead of being the patron of serpent-worship in any
evil sense, was in reality the grand enemy of the Apophis, or great
malignant serpent that envied the happiness of mankind, and that in fact
he was the very seed of the woman who was destined to bruise the
serpent's head. By means of the APOPIS Click for data Britannica Members also called Apep, Apepi,
or Rerek, ancient Egyptian demon of chaos, who had the form of a serpent and, as the foe of the sun
god, Re, represented all that was outside the ordered cosmos. Although many serpents symbolized
divinity and royalty, Apopis threatened the underworld and symbolized evil. Each night
Apopis encountered Re at a particular hour in the sun god's ritual
journey through the underworld in his divine bark. Seth, who rode as
guardian in the front of Re's bark, attacked him with a spear and
slew him, but the next night Apopis, who could not be finally killed,
was there again to attack Re. The Egyptians believed that they could
help maintain the order of the world and assist Re by performing rituals against Apopis, it was just as easy to identify Nimrod and Noah, and to make it appear that the great
patriarch, in the person of this his favoured descendant, had
graciously condescended to become incarnate anew, as Dagon, that he might bring mankind back again to
the blessings they had lost when Nimrod was slain. Certain it is,
that Dagon was worshipped in the Chaldean Mysteries, wherever they were established, in a character that
represented both the one and the other. OANNES Mesopotamian amphibious being
who taught mankind wisdom. Oannes,
as described by the Babylonian priest Berosus, had the form of a fish but with the head of a man under his fish's head and under his fish's
tail the feet of a man. In the daytime he came up to the seashore of
the Persian Gulf and instructed mankind in writing, the arts, and the
sciences. Oannes was probably the emissary of Ea, god of the freshwater deep and of wisdom. The 'fish' is an old and very suggestive symbol in the
Mystery-language, as is also 'water.' Ea or
Hea was the god of the sea and Wisdom, and the sea serpent was one of his emblems, his priests being 'serpents' or Initiates. Thus one sees why Occultism places Oannes
and the other Annedoti in the group of those ancient 'adepts' who were called 'marine' or 'water dragons' -- Nagas. The Indian "Naga" is similar to that of many ancient nations.
Click for some pictures and collected quotations. Serpent
worship was and is
popular among more primitive people. Click for an index of articles and pictures. Berossus describes
Oannes as follows: "At Babylon there was (in these times) a great resort of people of various nations, who inhabited
Chaldaea, and lived in a lawless
manner like the
beasts of the field. In
the first year there appeared, from that part of the Erythraean sea
which borders upon Babylonia, and animal destitute of reason [sic] by
name Oannes,
whose whole body (according to the account of Apollodorus) was that
of a fish;
that under the fish's
head he had another head, with feet also below, similar to those of a man,
subjoined to the fish's tail. His voice too, and language, was articulate and human;
and a representation of him is preserved even to this day. (From
Ancient Fragments, by Isaac Preston Cory.) Naga (Sanskrit) Serpent; the symbol of immortality and wisdom, of renewed births, of secret knowledge and, when
the tail is held in the mouth, of eternity. The nagas or serpents of
wisdom are, therefore, full initiates: "the first Nagas -- beings wiser than Serpents -- are the 'Sons of Will
and Yoga,' born before the complete separation
of the sexes, 'matured in the man-bearing eggs produced by the power (Kriyasakti) of the holy
sages' of the early Third Race" (SD 2:181).
These first
nagas were the original
human
adepts, who were later
symbolized by the terms serpents and dragons. "These 'originals' -- called to this day in China
'the Dragons of Wisdom' -- were the first disciples of the
Dhyanis, who were their instructors; in short, the primitive adepts of the Third Race,
and later, of the Fourth and Fifth Races. The name became universal,
and no sane man
before the Christian era would ever have confounded the man and the
symbol" (SD 2:210). Hierophant [from Greek hierophantes from
hieros sacred + phainein to show] A
revealer of sacred
mysteries; title given
to the highest
adepts in the temples
of antiquity, who taught and expounded the Mysteries. The attributes
of a hierophant were those of Hermes
or Mercury, being both expounder and mystagog or conductor of souls. In Hebrew an equivalent is found in the hierarchy
of the 'elohim. Many names of man-gods refer to archaic
hierophants, such as Orpheus, Enoch,
etc. The hierophants of ancient Egypt handed down the sacred teachings, some of which
were, however, lost by the deaths of hierophants before they had
completed their message because, due to the degeneration which had
come upon the West, they were unable to find appropriate pupils to
receive the wisdom. During the celebration of the
ancient
Mysteries, the
hierophant in the drama
of the Mysteries represented the demiurge, the Third Logos, opening or revealing the mysteries of
the universe and, in consequence, of human nature to the neophytes.
He was thus the sacred teacher. In the previous system, the grand mode of
purification had been by fire. Now, it was by water that
men were to be purified. Then began the doctrine of baptismal
regeneration, connected, as we have seen, with the passing of Noah
through the waters of the Flood. Then began the reverence for holy
wells, holy lakes, holy rivers, which is to be found wherever these
exist on the earth; which is not only to be traced among the Parsees,
who, along with the worship of fire, worship also the Zereparankard,
or Caspian Sea, and among the Hindoos, who worship the purifying
waters of the Ganges, and who count it the grand passport to heaven,
to leave their dying relatives to be smothered in its stream; but
which is seen in full force at this day in Popish Ireland, in the
universal reverence for holy wells, and the annual pilgrimages to
Loch Dergh, to wash away sin in its blessed waters; and which
manifestly lingers also among ourselves, in the popular superstition
about witches which shines out in the well-known line of
Burns-- * The name Tammuz, as applied to
Nimrod or
Osiris,
was equivalent to Alorus or the "god of
fire," and seems to have been given to
him as the great purifier by fire. Tammuz is derived from
tam, "to
make perfect," and muz, "fire," and signifies "Fire the perfecter," or "the
perfecting fire." To this meaning of the name, as well as to the
character of Nimrod as the Father of the gods, the
Zoroastrian verse alludes when it says: "All things are the progeny
of ONE FIRE. The Father perfected all things, and delivered them to
the second mind, whom all nations of men call the first." (CORY'S
Fragments)
Here Fire is declared to be the Father of all; for all
things are said to be its progeny, and it is also
called the "perfecter of all things." The second mind is evidently the child
who displaced Nimrod's image as an object of worship; but yet the
agency of Nimrod, as the first of the gods, and the fire-god, was
held indispensable for "perfecting" men. And hence, too, no doubt,
the necessity of the fire of Purgatory to "perfect" men's souls at
last, and to purge away all the sins that they have carried with them
into the unseen world. ** OVID, Fasti. It was not a little
interesting to me, after being led by strict induction from
circumstantial evidence to the conclusion that the purgation by fire
was derived from the fire-worship of
Adon or Tammuz, and that by water had
reference to Noah's Flood, to find an express statement in Ovid, that
such was the actual belief at Rome in his day. After mentioning, in
the passage to which the above citation refers, various fanciful
reasons for the twofold purgation by fire and water, he concludes
thus: "For my part, I do not believe them; there are some (however)
who say that the one is intended to commemorate Phaethon, and the
other the flood of Deucalion." If, however, any one should still think it
unlikely that the worship of Noah should be mingled in the ancient
world with the worship of the Queen of Heaven and her son, let him
open his eyes to what is taking place in Italy at this hour [in 1856]
in regard to the worship of that patriarch and the Roman Queen of
Heaven. The following, kindly sent me by Lord John Scott, as
confirmatory of the views propounded in these pages, appeared in the
Morning Herald, October 26, 1855: "AN ARCHBISHOP'S PRAYER TO THE
PATRIARCH NOAH.-POPERY IN TURIN.--For several consecutive years the
vintage has been almost entirely destroyed in Tuscany, in consequence
of the prevalent disease. The Archbishop of Florence has conceived
the idea of arresting this plague by directing prayers to be offered,
not to God, but to the patriarch Noah; and he has just published a
collection, containing eight forms of supplication, addressed to this
distinguished personage of the ancient covenant. 'Most holy patriarch
Noah!' is the language of one of these prayers, 'who didst employ
thyself in thy long career in cultivating the vine, and gratifying
the human race with that precious beverage, which allays the thirst,
restores the strength, and enlivens the spirits of us all, deign to
regard our vines, which, following thine example, we have cultivated
hitherto; and, while thou beholdest them languishing and blighted by
that disastrous visitation, which, before the vintage, destroys the
fruit (in severe punishment for many blasphemies and other enormous
sins we have committed), have compassion on us, and, prostrate before
the lofty throne of God, who has promised to His children the fruits
of the earth, and an abundance of corn and wine, entreat Him on our
behalf; promise Him in our name, that, with the aid of Divine grace,
we will forsake the ways of vice and sin, that we will no longer
abuse His sacred gifts, and will scrupulously observe His holy law,
and that of our holy Mother, the
Catholic Church,' &c.; The collection concludes with a new prayer,
addressed to the Virgin Mary, who is invoked in these words: 'O
immaculate Mary, behold our fields and vineyards! and, should it seem
to thee that we merit so great a favour, stay, we beseech thee, this
terrible plague, which, inflicted for our sins, renders our fields
unfruitful, and deprives our vines of the honours of the vintage,'
&c.; The work contains a vignette, representing the patriarch
Noah presiding over the operations of the vintage, as well as a
notification from the Archbishop, granting an indulgence of forty
days to all who shall devoutly recite the prayers in
question.--Christian
Times" In view of such rank Paganism as
this, well may the noble Lord already referred to remark, that surely
here is the world turned backwards, and the worship of the old god
Bacchus unmistakably restored! Now, this god of the sea, when his worship had
been firmly re-established, and all formidable opposition had been
put down, was worshipped also as the great god of war, who, though he
had died for the good of mankind, now that he had risen again, was
absolutely invincible. In memory of this new incarnation, the
25th of December, otherwise Christmas
Day, was, as we have already seen,
celebrated in Pagan Rome as "Natalis
Solis invicti," "the birth-day of the
Unconquered Sun." We have equally seen that the very name of the
Roman god of war is just the name of Nimrod; for Mars and
Mavors, the two well-known names of the Roman war-god, are evidently
just the Roman forms of the Chaldee "Mar" or "Mavor," the
Rebel.
Thus terrible and invincible was Nimrod when he
reappeared as Dagon, the beast from the
sea. If the reader looks at what is
said in Revelation 13:3, he will see precisely the same thing:
"And I saw one of his heads as it
were wounded unto death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the
world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon, which gave power
unto the beast, and they worshipped the
beast, saying, Who is like unto the
beast? who is able to make war with him?" Such, in all respects, is
the analogy between the language of the prophecy and the ancient
Babylonian type. Do we find, then, anything corresponding to
this in the religious history of the Roman empire after the fall of
the old Paganism of that empire? Exactly in every respect. No sooner
was Paganism legally abolished, the eternal fire of Vesta
extinguished, and the old serpent cast down from the seat of power,
where so long he had sat secure, than he tried the most vigorous
means to regain his influence and authority. Finding that persecution
of Christianity, as such, in the meantime would not do to destroy the
church symbolised by the sun-clothed Woman, he made another tack
(Rev 12:15): "And the serpent cast
out of his mouth a flood of water after
the woman, that he might cause her to
be carried away of the
flood." The symbol here is certainly
very remarkable. If this was the dragon of fire, it might have been
expected that it would have been represented, according to popular
myths, as vomiting fire after the woman. But it is not so. It was a
flood of water that he cast out of his mouth. A single glance at the old Babylonian type will
show that the water cast out of the mouth of the serpent must be the
water of baptismal
regeneration. Now, it was precisely at
this time, when the old Paganism was suppressed, that the doctrine of
regenerating men
(infants) by baptism, which had been
working in the Christian Church before, threatened to spread like a
deluge over the face of the Roman empire. * * From about AD 360, to the time of the Emperor
Justinian, about 550, we have evidence both of the promulgation of
this doctrine, and also of the deep hold it came at last to take of
professing Christians. It was then precisely that our Lord Jesus
Christ began to be popularly called Ichthys, that is, "the
Fish," manifestly to identify him with Dagon. At the end of the
fourth century, and from that time forward, it was taught, that he
who had been washed in the
baptismal font was thereby born
again, and made pure as the virgin snow. This flood issued not merely from the mouth of
Satan, the
old serpent, but from the mouth of him who came to be recognised by
the Pagans of Rome as the visible head of the old Roman Paganism.
When the Roman fire-worship was suppressed, we have seen that the
office of Pontifex Maximus, the head of that Paganism, was abolished.
That was "the wounding unto death" of the head of the Fiery Dragon.
But scarcely had that head received its deadly
wound, when it began to be healed again. Within a few years after the
Pagan title of Pontifex had been abolished, it was revived, and that
by the very Emperor that had abolished it, and was bestowed, with all
the Pagan associations clustering around it, upon the Bishop of Rome,
who, from that time forward, became the grand agent in pouring over
professing Christendom, first the ruinous doctrine of baptismal
regeneration, and then all the other doctrines of Paganism derived
from ancient Babylon. When this Pagan title was bestowed on the Roman
bishop, it was not as a mere empty title of honour it was bestowed,
but as a title to which formidable power was annexed. To the
authority of the Bishop of Rome in this new character, as Pontifex,
when associated "with five or seven other bishops" as his
counsellors, bishops, and even metropolitans of foreign churches over
extensive regions of the West, in Gaul not less than in Italy, were
subjected; and civil pains were attached to those who refused to
submit to his pontifical decisions. Great was the danger to the cause
of truth and righteousness when such power was, by imperial
authority, vested in the Roman bishop, and that a bishop so willing
to give himself to the propagation of false doctrine. Formidable,
however, as the danger was, the true Church, the Bride, the Lamb's
wife (so far as that Church was found within the bounds of the
Western Empire), was wonderfully protected from it. That Church was
for a time saved from the peril, not merely by the mountain
fastnesses in which many of its devoted members found an asylum, as
Jovinian, Vigilantius, and the Waldenses, and such-like faithful
ones, in the wilderness among the Cottian Alps, and other secluded
regions of Europe, but also not a little, by a signal interposition
of Divine Providence in its behalf. That interposition is referred to
in these words (Rev 12:16): "The earth opened her mouth and swallowed
up the flood, which the dragon cast out of his mouth." What means the
symbol of the "earth's opening its mouth"? In the natural world, when
the earth opens its mouth, there is an earthquake; and an
"earthquake," according to the figurative language of the Apocalypse,
as all admit, just means a great political convulsion. Now, when we
examine the history of the period in question, we find that the fact
exactly agrees with the prefiguration; that soon after the Bishop of
Rome because Pontiff, and, as Pontiff, set himself so zealously to
bring in Paganism into the Church, those
political convulsions began in the civil empire of Rome, which never ceased till the framework of that
empire was broken up, and it was shattered to pieces. But for this
the spiritual power of the Papacy might have been firmly established
over all the nations of the West, long before the time it actually
was so. It is clear, that immediately after Damasus, the Roman
bishop, received his pontifical power, the predicted "apostacy" (1
Tim 4:3), so far as Rome was concerned, was broadly developed. Then
were men "forbidden to marry," * and "commanded to abstain from
meats." * The celibacy of the clergy was
enacted by Syricius, Bishop of Rome, AD 385. (GIESELER) Then, with a factitious doctrine of sin, a
factitious holiness also was inculcated, and people were led to
believe that all baptised persons were necessarily regenerated. Had
the Roman Empire of the West remained under one civil head, backed by
that civil head, the Bishop of Rome might very soon have infected all
parts of that empire with the Pagan corruption he had evidently given
himself up to propagate. Considering the cruelty with which Jovinian,
and all who opposed the Pagan doctrines in regard to marriage and
abstinence, were treated by the Pontifex of Rome, under favour of the
imperial power, it may easily be seen how serious would have been the
consequences to the cause of truth in the Western Empire had this
state of matters been allowed to pursue its natural course. But now
the great Lord of the Church interfered. The "revolt of the Goths,"
and the sack of Rome by Alaric the Goth in 410, gave that shock to
the Roman Empire which issued, by 476, in its complete upbreaking and
the extinction of the imperial power. Although, therefore, in
pursuance of the policy previously inaugurated, the Bishop of Rome
was formally recognised, by an imperial edict in 445, as "Head of all
the Churches of the West," all bishops being commanded "to hold and
observe as a law whatever it should please the Bishop of Rome to
ordain or decree"; the convulsions of the empire, and the extinction,
soon thereafter, of the imperial power itself, to a large extent
nullified the disastrous effects of this edict. The "earth's opening
its mouth," then--in other words, the breaking up of the Roman Empire
into so many independent sovereignties--was a benefit to true
religion, and prevented the flood of error and corruption, that had
its source in Rome, from flowing as fast and as far as it would
otherwise have done. When many different wills in the different
countries were substituted for the one will of the Emperor,
on which the Sovereign Pontiff leaned, the influence of that Pontiff
was greatly neutralised. "Under these circumstances," says Gieseler,
referring to the influence of Rome in the different kingdoms into
which the empire was divided, "under these circumstances, the Popes
could not directly interfere in ecclesiastical matters; and their
communications with the established Church of the country depended
entirely on the royal pleasure." The Papacy at last overcame the effects of the
earthquake, and the kingdoms of the West were engulfed in that flood
of error that came out of the mouth of
the dragon. But the overthrow of the imperial
power, when so zealously propping up the spiritual despotism of Rome, gave
the true Church in the
West a lengthened period of comparative
freedom, which otherwise it could not have had. The Dark Ages
would have come sooner, and the
darkness would have been more intense, but for the
Goths and Vandals, and the political convulsions that attended their
irruptions. They were raised up to scourge an apostatising community,
not to
persecute the saints of the Most High, though these, too, may have
occasionally suffered in the common distress. The hand of Providence
may be distinctly seen, in that, at so critical a moment, the earth
opened its mouth and helped the woman. To return, however, to the memorable period
when the pontifical title was bestowed on the Bishop of Rome. The
circumstances in which that Pagan title was bestowed upon Pope
Damasus, were such as might have been not a little trying to the
faith and integrity of a much better man than he. Though Paganism was
legally abolished in the Western Empire of Rome, yet in the city of
the Seven Hills it was still rampant, insomuch that Jerome, who knew
it well, writing of Rome at this very period, calls it "the sink of
all superstitions." The consequence was, that, while everywhere else
throughout the empire the Imperial edict for the abolition of
Paganism was respected, in Rome itself it was, to a large extent, a
dead letter. Symmachus, the prefect of the city,
and the highest patrician families, as well as the masses of the
people, were fanatically devoted to the
old religion; and, therefore, the
Emperor found it necessary, in spite of the law, to connive at the
idolatry of the Romans. How strong was the hold
that Paganism had in the Imperial city, even after the
fire of Vesta was extinguished, and State support was withdrawn from
the Vestals, the reader may perceive from the following words of
Gibbon: "The image and altar of Victory
(Nike) were indeed removed from the
Senate-house; but the Emperor yet spared the statues of the
gods which
were exposed to public view; four hundred and twenty-four temples or chapels
still remained to satisfy the devotion of the people, and in every
quarter of Rome the delicacy of the Christians
was offended by the fumes of idolatrous
sacrifice." The words of Gibbon in reference to this are
very striking. While fully admitting that, notwithstanding the
Imperial laws made against Paganism, "no peculiar hardships" were
imposed on "the sectaries who credulously
received the fables of
Ovid, and obstinately rejected the
miracles of the Gospel," he expresses his surprise at the rapidity of
the revolution that took place among the Romans from Paganism to
Christianity. "The ruin of
Paganism," he says--and his dates are
from AD 378, the year when the Bishop of Rome was made Pontifex, to
395--"The ruin of
Paganism, in the age of Theodosius, is
perhaps the only example of the total
extirpation of any ancient and popular superstition; and may therefore deserve to be considered as a
singular event in the history of the human mind."...After referring
to the hasty conversion of the senate, he thus proceeds: "The
edifying example of the Anician family [in embracing Christianity]
was soon imitated by the rest of the nobility... The citizens who subsisted by their own industry, and the populace who were
supported by the public
liberality, filled the churches of the Lateran
and Vatican with an incessant throng of devout proselytes.
The decrees of the senate, which proscribed the
worship of idols, were ratified by the general consent of the
Romans; the splendour of the capitol was defaced, and the solitary
temples were abandoned to ruin and contempt. Rome submitted to the
yoke of the Gospel... The generation
that arose in the world, after the
promulgation of Imperial laws, was ATTRACTED within the pale of the
Catholic Church, and so RAPID, yet so
GENTLE was the fall of Paganism, that
only twenty-eight years after the death of Theodosius [the elder],
the faint and minute vestiges were no longer visible to the eye of
the legislator." Now, how can this great and rapid revolution be
accounted for? Is it because the Word of the Lord has had free course
and been glorified? Then, what means the new aspect
that the Roman Church has now begun to assume? In exact proportion as
Paganism
has disappeared from without the Church,
in the very same proportion it appears
within
it. Pagan dresses for the priests,
Pagan festivals for the people, Pagan doctrines and ideas of all
sorts, are everywhere in vogue. The testimony of the same historian, who has
spoken so decisively about the rapid conversion of the Romans to the
profession of the Gospel, is not less decisive on this point. In his
account of the Roman Church, under the head of "Introduction of Pagan Ceremonies," he thus speaks: "As the objects of religion were
gradually reduced to the standard of the imagination, If, in the beginning of the fifth century,
Tertullian or Lactantius had been suddenly raised from the dead, to
assist at the festival of some popular saint or martyr, they would
have gazed with astonishment and indignation on the profane spectacle
which had succeeded to the pure and spiritual worship of a Christian
congregation. As soon as the doors of the church were thrown
open, they must have been offended by the smoke of incense, the
perfume of flowers, and the glare of lamps and tapers, which diffused at
noon-day a gaudy, superfluous, and, in their
opinion, sacrilegious light." Gibbon has a great deal more to the
same effect. Now, can any one believe that this was accidental? No.
It was evidently the result of that unprincipled policy, of
which, in the course of this inquiry, we have already seen such
innumerable instances on the part of the Papacy. * * Gibbon distinctly admits this.
"It must ingenuously be confessed," says he, "that the ministers of
the Catholic Church imitated the profane model they were so impatient
to destroy." On the other hand, he could not but equally
see, that if bearing the title, around which, for
so many ages, all the hopes and affections of Paganism had clustered, he
should give its votaries reason to believe that he was willing to
act up to the original
spirit of that title, Which alternative, then, was Damasus likely to
choose? The man that came into the bishopric of Rome, as a
thief and a robber, over the dead bodies of above a hundred of his
opponents,
could not hesitate as to the election he should make. The result shows that he had acted in
character, that, in assuming the Pagan title of Pontifex, he had set
himself at whatever sacrifice of truth to justify his claims to that
title in the eyes of the Pagans, as the legitimate representative of
their long line of pontiffs. There is no possibility of accounting
for the facts on any other supposition. It is evident also that he
and his successors were ACCEPTED in that character by the Pagans,
who, in flocking into the Roman Church, and rallying around the new
Pontiff, did not change their creed or worship,
but brought both into the Church along with them. The reader has seen
how complete and perfect is the copy of the old Babylonian Paganism,
which, under the patronage of the Popes, has been introduced into the
Roman Church. He has seen that the god whom the Papacy worships as
the Son of the Highest, is not only, in spite of a Divine command,
worshipped under the form of an image, made, as in the days of avowed
Paganism, by art and man's device, but that attributes are ascribed
to Him which are the very opposite of those which
belong to the merciful Saviour, but which attributes are precisely
those which were ascribed to Moloch, the fire-god, or Ala Mahozim,
"the god of fortifications." He has seen that, about the very time when the
Bishop of Rome was invested with the Pagan title of Pontifex, the
Saviour began to be called Ichthys, or
"the Fish," thereby identifying Him with Dagon, or the
Fish-god;
and that, ever since, advancing step by step, as
circumstances would permit, what has
gone under the name of the worship of Christ, Lastly, he has seen that the Sovereign Pontiff
of the so-called Christian Church of Rome has so wrought out the
title
bestowed upon him in the end of the fourth century, as to be now
dignified, as for centuries he has been, with the very "names of
blasphemy" originally bestowed on the old Babylonian pontiffs.
* * The reader who has seen the first
edition of this work, will perceive that, in the above reasoning, I
found nothing upon the formal appointment by Gratian of the Pope as
Pontifex, with direct authority over the Pagans, as was done in
that edition. That is not because I do not believe that such an
appointment was made, but because, at the present moment, some
obscurity rests on the subject. The Rev. Barcroft Boake, a very
learned minister of the Church of England in Ceylon, when in this
country, communicated to me his researches on the subject, which have
made me hesitate to assert that there was any formal authority given
to the Bishop of Rome over the Pagans by Gratian. At the
same time, I am still convinced that the original statement was
substantially true. The late Mr. Jones, in the Journal of Prophecy, not
only referred to the Appendix to the
Codex Theodosianus, in proof of such an
appointment, but, in elucidation of the words of the Codex, asserted in express
terms that there was a contest for the office of Pontifex, and that
there were two candidates, the one a Pagan, Symmachus, who had
previously been Valentinian's deputy, and the other the Bishop of
Rome. (Quarterly Journal of
Prophecy, Oct. 1852) I have not been
able to find Mr. Jones's authority for this statement; but the
statement is so circumstantial, that it cannot easily be called in
question without impugning the veracity of him that made it. I have
found Mr. Jones in error on divers points, but in no error of such a
nature as this; and the character of the man forbids such a
supposition. Moreover, the language of the Appendix cannot easily
admit of any other interpretation. But, even though there were no
formal appointment of Bishop Damasus to a pontificate extending over
the Pagans, yet it is clear that, by the rescript of Gratian (the
authenticity of which is fully admitted by the accurate Gieseler), he
was made the supreme spiritual authority in the Western Empire
in all religious
questions. When, therefore, in the year
400, Pagan priests were, by the Christian Emperor of the West, from
political motives, "acknowledged as public officers"
(Cod. Theod., ad POMPEJANUM,
Procons), these Pagan priests
necessarily came under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, as
there was then no other tribunal but his for determining all matters
affecting religion. In the text, however I have made no allusion to
this. The argument, as I think the reader will admit, is sufficiently
decisive without it. Now, if the circumstance in which the Pope has
risen to all this height of power and blasphemous assumption, be
compared with a prediction in Daniel, which, for want of the true key
has never been understood, I think the reader will see how literally
in the history of the Popes of Rome that prediction has been
fulfilled. The prediction to which I allude is that which
refers to what is commonly called the "Wilful King" as described in
Daniel 11:36, and succeeding verses. That "Wilful King" is admitted
on all hands to be a king that arises in Gospel times, and in
Christendom, but has generally been supposed to be an Infidel
Antichrist, not only opposing the truth but opposing Popery as well,
and every thing that assumed the very name of Christianity. But now,
let the prediction be read in the light of the facts that have passed
in review before us, and it will be seen how very different is the
case (v 36): "And the king shall do according to his will; and he
shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall
speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper
till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined
shall be done. Neither shall he regard the god of his fathers, nor
the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself
above all." So far these words give an exact description of the
Papacy, with its pride, its blasphemy, and forced celibacy and
virginity. But the words that follow, according to any sense that the
commentators have put upon them, have never hitherto been found
capable of being made to agree either with the theory that the Pope
was intended, or any other theory whatever. Let them, however, only
be literally rendered, and compared with the Papal history, and all
is clear, consistent, and harmonious. The inspired seer has declared
that, in the Church of Christ, some one shall arise who shall not
only aspire to a great height, but shall actually reach it, so that
"he shall do according to his will"; his will shall be supreme in
opposition to all law, human and Divine. Now, if this king is to be a
pretended successor of the fisherman of Galilee, the question would
naturally arise, How could it be possible that he should ever have
the means of rising to such a height of power? The words that follow give a distinct answer to
that question: "He shall not REGARD * any god, for he shall magnify
himself above all. BUT, in establishing himself,
shall he honour the god of fortifications (Ala Mahozim), and a god,
whom his fathers knew not, shall he honour with gold and silver, and
with precious stones and pleasant things. Thus shall he make into
strengthening bulwarks ** [for himself] the people of a strange god,
whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory; and he shall cause
them to rule over many, and he shall divide the land for
gain." * The reader will observe, it is
not said he shall not worship any god; the
reverse is evident; but that he shall not regard any, that his own
glory is his highest end. ** The word here is the same as above rendered
"fortifications." Such is the prophecy. Now, this is exactly what
the Pope did. Self-aggrandisement has ever been the grand principle
of the Papacy; and, in "establishing" himself, it
was just the "god of Fortifications" that he honoured. The worship of
that god he introduced into the Roman Church; and, by so doing, he
converted that which otherwise would have been a source of weakness
to him, into the very tower of his strength--he made the very
Paganism of Rome by which he was surrounded the bulwark of his power.
When once it was proved that the
Pope was willing to adopt
Paganism under Christian names, the
Pagans and Pagan priests would be his most hearty and staunch defenders.
And when the Pope began to wield lordly power
over the Christians, who were the men that he would recommend--that
he would promote--that he would advance to honour and power? Just the
very people most devoted to "the worship of the strange god" which he
had introduced into the Christian Church. Those only who were heartily attached to the apostacy
(and none could now be more so than genuine Pagans) were favoured and
advanced. Such men were sent from Rome in all directions, even as far
as Britain, to restore the reign of
Paganism--they were magnified with
high titles, the lands were divided among them, and all to promote
"the gain" of the Romish see, to bring in "Peter's pence" from the
ends of the earth to the Roman Pontiff. But it is still further said, that the
self-magnifying king was to "honour a
god, whom his fathers knew not, with
gold and silver and precious stones." The principle on which
transubstantiation was founded is unquestionably a Babylonian principle, but
there is no evidence that that principle was applied in the way in
which it has been by the Papacy. Certain it is, that we have evidence that no
such wafer-god as the Papacy worships was ever worshipped in Pagan
Rome. "Was any man ever so mad," says Cicero, who himself was a Roman
augur and a priest--"was any man ever so mad as to take that which he
feeds on for a god?" Cicero could not have said this if anything like
wafer-worship had been established in Rome. But what was too absurd
for Pagan Romans is no absurdity at all for the Pope. The host, or
consecrated wafer, is the great god of the Romish Church. That host
is enshrined in a box adorned with gold and silver and precious
stones. And thus it is manifest that "a god" whom even the Pope's
Pagan
"fathers knew not," he at this day honours in the very way that the
terms of the prediction imply that he would. Thus, in every respect,
when the Pope was invested with the Pagan title of Pontifex, and set
himself to make that title a reality, he exactly fulfilled the
prediction of Daniel recorded more than 900 years before. But to return to the Apocalyptic symbols. It
was out of the mouth of the "Fiery
Dragon" that "the flood of water" was
discharged. The Pope, as he is now, was at the close of the
fourth century the only representative of Belshazzar, or
Nimrod, on
the earth; He was equally, of course, the legitimate
successor of the Roman "Dragon of
fire." When, therefore, on being
dignified with the title of Pontifex, he set himself to propagate the
old Babylonian doctrine of baptismal
regeneration, that was just a direct
and formal fulfilment of the Divine words, that the great Fiery Dragon should
"cast out of his mouth a flood of water to carry away the Woman with
the flood." He, and those who co-operated with him in this
cause, paved the way for the erecting of that tremendous civil and
spiritual despotism which began to stand forth full in the face of Europe
in AD 606, when, amid the convulsions and confusions of the nations
tossed like a tempestuous sea, the Pope of Rome was made
Universal Bishop; Then by his own act and deed, and by the
consent of
the UNIVERSAL PAGANISM of Rome, he was actually the representative of Dagon;
and as he bears upon his head at this day the mitre of Dagon, so
there is reason to believe he did then. * * It is from this period only that
the well-known 1260 days can begin to be counted; for not before did
the Pope appear as Head of the ten-horned beast, and head of the
Universal Church. The reader will observe that though the beast above
referred to has passed through the sea, it still retains its
primitive characteristic. The head of
the apostacy at first was Kronos, "The Horned One." The head of
the apostacy is Kronos still, for he is the beast "with seven head
and ten horns." Could there, then, be a more exact fulfilment
of chapter 13:1 "And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a
beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and
upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the names of
blasphemy...And I saw one of his heads as it had been wounded to
death; and his deadly wound was healed, and all the world wondered
after the beast"? Counter added 1.17.05 6:33p
........... there speedily followed the worship of the god of water
or the sea. 
........... civilised the Babylonians, taught them arts and sciences, and instructed
them in politics and religion.
What could this mean? As the water came
out of the mouth of the dragon--that must mean doctrine, and of course,
false
doctrine. But is there nothing more
specific than this? 
........... the rites and ceremonies were introduced that seemed
most powerfully
...........
to effect the senses of the vulgar.
than the adoption by successful rebels
of the methods
they were accustomed to condemn
in the forces they deposed.
--Will and Ariel
Durant
........... he might count on popularity,
aggrandisement and glory.
...........
has just been the worship of that
same Babylonian divinity,
........... with all its rites and pomps and ceremonies, precisely
as in ancient Babylon.
........... Gratitude and self-interest alike would conspire to
this. Jovinian,
........... and all who resisted the Pagan ideas and Pagan
practices,
........... were excommunicated and
persecuted.
........... for the Pagans manifestly ACCEPTED him as such.
and when the ten chief
kingdoms of Europe recognised him as
Christ's Vicar upon earth, the only centre of unity, the only source
of stability to their thrones.
