網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

the oracles of Sibyls; he moreover pretends to have seen the remains of the places in which the seventy-two interpreters were confined in the Egyptian pharos, in Herod's time. The testimony of a man who had had the misfortune to see these places, seems to indicate that he might possibly have been confined there himself.

did not reckon the Apocalypse among the canonical books. It is very singular that Laodicea, one of the churches to which the Apocalypse was addressed, should have rejected a treasure designed for itself; and that the bishop of Ephesus, who attended the council, should also have rejected this book of St. John, who was buried at Ephesus.

St. Irenæus, who comes afterwards, and It was visible to all eyes that St. John who also believed in the reign of a thou- was continually turning about in his grave, sand years, tells us, that he learned from causing a constant rising and falling of the an old man, that St. John wrote the Apo- earth. Yet the same persons who were calypse. But St. Irenæus is reproached {sure that St. John was not quite dead, with having written, that there ought to were also sure that he had not written the be but four gospels, because there are but Apocalypse. But those who were for the four quarters of the world, and four car-thousand years' reign, were unshaken in dinal points, and Ezekiel saw but four their opinion. Sulpicius Severus, in his animals. He calls this reasoning a de-Sacred History, book xi., treats as mad monstration. It must be confessed, that { and impious those who did not receive Irenæus's method of demonstrating is the Apocalypse. At length, after numequite worthy of Justin's power of sight. rous oppositions of council to council, the Clement of Alexandria, in his Electa, { opinion of Sulpicius Severus prevailed. mentions only an Apocalypse of St. Peter, The matter having been thus cleared up, to which great importance was attached. the Church came to the decision, from Tertullian, a great partisan of the thou-which there is no appeal, that the Apocasand years' reign, not only assures us that lypse is incontestably St. John's. St. John foretold this resurrection and reign of a thousand years in the city of Jerusalem, but also asserts that this Jerusalem was already beginning to form itself in the air, where it had been seen by all the Christians of Palestine, and even by the Pagans, at the latter end of the night, { for forty nights successively; but, unfortunately, the city always disappeared as soon as it was day-light.

Every Christian communion has applied to itself the prophesies contained in this book. The English have found in it { the revolutions of Great Britain; the Lutherans, the troubles of Germany; the French reformers, the reign of Charles IX. and the regency of Catherine de Medicis: and they are all equally right. Bossuet and Newton have both commented on the Apocalypse; yet, after all, Origen, in his preface to St. John's the eloquent declamations of the one, and Gospel, and in his homilies, quotes the the sublime discoveries of the other, have oracles of the Apocalypse; but he like-done them greater honour than their wise quotes the oracles of Sibyls. And commentaries. St. Dionysius of Alexandria, who wrote about the middle of the third century, says, in one of his fragments preserved by Eusebius, that nearly all the doctors rejected the Apocalypse as a book devoid of reason; and that this book was com--Newton, to whom such a study was posed, not by St. John, but by one Cerinthus, who made use of a great name to give more weight to his reveries.

The council of Laodicea, held in 360,

SECTION II.

Two great men, but very different in their greatness, have commented on the Apocalypse, in the seventeenth century;

very ill suited; and Bossuet, who was better fitted for the undertaking. Both gave additional weapons to their enemies by their commentaries; and, as has else→

where been said, the former consoled mankind for his superiority over them, while the latter made his enemies rejoice.

It was entitled Apocalypse, because in it he exposed the dangers and defects of the monastic life; and Melito's Apocalypse, (Apocalypse de Méliton), because Melito, Bishop of Sardis, in the second century, had passed for a prophet. This bishop's work has none of the obscurities of St. John's Apocalypse. Nothing was ever clearer. The bishop is like a magistrate saying to an attorney, "You are a forger, and a cheat-do you comprehend me?" The Bishop of Bellay computes, in his Apocalypse or Revelations, that there were

The Catholics and the Protestants have both explained the Apocalypse in their favour, and have each found in it exactly what has accorded with their interests. They have made wonderful commentaries on the great beast with seven heads and ten horns, with the hair of a leopard, the feet of a bear, the throat of a lion, the strength of a dragon; and, to buy and sell, it was necessary to have the character and number of the beast, which num-in his time ninety-eight orders of monks ber was 666.

endowed or mendicant, living at the expense of the people, without employing themselves in the smallest labour. He reckoned six hundred thousand monks in

Bossuet finds that this beast was evidently the Emperor Dioclesian, by making an acrostic of his name. Grotius believed that it was Trajan. A curate of St. Sul-Europe. The calculation was a little pice, named La Chétardie, known from strained; but it is certain that the real some strange adventures, proves that the number of the monks was rather too beast was Julian. Jurieu proves that the large. beast is the Pope. One preacher has deHe assures us that the monks are enemonstrated that it was Louis XIV. Amies to the bishops, curates, and magisgood Catholic has demonstrated that it is tratesWilliam, King of England. It is not easy to make them all agree.

There have been warm disputes concerning the stars which fell from heaven to earth, and the sun and moon, which were struck with darkness in their third parts.

There are several opinions respecting the book that the angel made the author of the Apocalypse eat, which book was sweet to the mouth and bitter to the stomach. Jurieu asserted that the books of his adversary were designated thereby; and his argument was retorted upon himself.

That, among the privileges granted to the Cordeliers, the sixth privilege is, the certainty of being saved, whatever horrible crime you may have committed, provided you belong to the Order of St. Francis

That the monks are like apes; the higher they climb, the plainer you see their posteriors.

That the name of monk has become so infamous and execrable, that it is regarded by the monks themselves as a foul re{proach, and the most violent insult that can be offered them.

My dear reader, whoever you are, minister or magistrate, consider attentively the following short extract from our

There have been disputes about this verse:-" And I heard a voice from hea-bishop's book:ven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder; and I heard the voice of harpers harping on their harps." It is quite clear, that it would have been better to have respected the Apocalypse, than to have commented upon it. Camus, Bishop of Bellay, printed, in the last century, a large book against the monks, which an unfrocked monk abridged.

"Figure to yourself the Convent of the Escurial or of Mount Cassino, where the cœnobites have everything necessary, use{ful, delightful, superfluous, and superabundant-since they have their yearly revenue of a hundred and fifty thousand, four hundred thousand, or five hundred thousand crowns; and judge whether Monsieur l'Abbé has wherewithal to allow }

{

himself, and those under him, to sleep? after dinner.

That to maintain, as the orthodox do, that in the divine essence there are several distinct persons, and that the Eternal is not the only true God, but that the Son and the Holy Ghost must be joined with him, is to introduce into the church of Christ an error the most gross and dangerous, since it is openly to favour poly

That this distinction, of one in essence, and three in person, was never in Scripture

"Then imagine an artisan or labourer, with no dependence except on the work of his hands, and burdened with a large family, toiling like a slave, every day, and at all seasons, to feed them with the bread of sorrow and the water of tears; and say, which of the two conditions is pre-emi-theism— nent in poverty." That it implies a contradiction, to say This is a passage from the Episcopul that there is but one God, and that, neverApocalypse, which needs no commentary.theless, there are three persons, each of There only wants an angel to come and which is truly God— fill his cup with the wine of the monks, to slake the thirst of the labourers who plough, sow, and reap, for the monasteries. But this prelate, instead of writing a That it is manifestly false; since it is useful book, only composed a satire. certain that there are no fewer essences Consistently with his dignity, he should than persons, nor persons than essences— have stated the good as well as evil. He That the three persons of the Trinity should have acknowledged that the Bene-are, either three different substances, or dictines have produced many good works, accidents of the divine essence, or that and that the Jesuits have rendered great essence itself without distinctionservices to literature. He might have blessed the brethren of La Charité, and those of the Redemption of the Captives. Our first duty is to be just. Camus gave too much scope to his imagination. St. François de Sales advised him to write moral romances; but he abused the ad

vice.

ANTI-TRINITARIANS.

That, in the first place, you make three Gods

That, in the second, God is composed of accidents; you adore accidents, and metamorphose accidents into persons

That, in the third, you, unfoundedly and to no purpose, divide an indivisible subject, and distinguish into three that which within itself has no distinction

That if it be said, that the three person

THESE are heretics who might pass for other than Christians. However, theyalities are neither different substances in acknowledge Jesus as Saviour and Medi- the divine essence, nor accidents of that ator; but they dare to maintain, that no- essence, it will be difficult to persuade thing is more contrary to right reason than ourselves that they are anything at all what is taught among Christians concerning the Trinity of persons in one only divine essence, of whom the second is begotten by the first, and the third proceeds from the other two

That this unintelligible doctrine is not to be found in any part of Scripture

That it must not be believed that the most rigid and decided Trinitarians have themselves any clear idea of the way in which the three hypostases subsist in God, without dividing his substance, and consequently without multiplying it—

That St. Augustin himself, after adThat no passage can be produced which vancing on this subject a thousand reasonauthorises it; or to which, without in any-ings alike dark and false, was forced to wise departing from the spirit of the text, confess that nothing intelligible could be a sense cannot be given more clear, more said about the matter. natural, or more conformable to common They then repeat the passage in this fanotions, and to primitive and immutablether, which is, indeed, a very singular truthsone:- When," says he, "it is asked

what are the three, the language of man in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the fails, and terms are wanting to express blood and these three are one." Calthem." "Three persons has, however, met acknowledges that these two verses been said-not for the purpose of express- are not in any ancient Bible: indeed, it ing anything, but in order to say some-would be very strange if St. John had thing and not remain mute." "Dictumspoken of the Trinity in a letter, and said est tres persona, non ut aliquid diceretur, sed ne taceretur."-DE TRINIT. lib. v. сар. 9

That modern theologians have cleared up this matter no better.

That, when they are asked what they understand by the word person, they explain themselves only by saying, that it is a certain incomprehensible distinction, by which are distinguished in one nature only, a Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost

That the explanation which they give of the terms begetting and proceeding, is no more satisfactory; since it reduces itself to saying, that these terms indicate certain incomprehensible relations existing among the three persons of the Trinity

That i may be hence gathered that the state of the question between them and the orthodox is, to know whether there are in God three distinctions, of which no one has any definite idea, and among which there are certain relations of which no one has any more idea.

not a word about it in his Gospel. We find no trace of this dogma, either in the canonical or in the apocryphal gospels. All these reasons, and many others, might excuse the Anti-Trinitarians, if the councils had not decided. But, as the heretics pay no regard to councils, we know not what measures to take to confound them. Let us content ourselves with believing, and wishing them to believe.

APOCRYPHA-APOCRYPHAL. [FROM THE GREEK WORD SIGNIFYING hidden.]

It has been very well remarked, that the Divine writings might, at one and the same time, be sacred and apocryphal; sacred, because they had undoubtedly been dictated by God himself; apocryphal, because they were hidden from the nations, and even from the Jewish people.

That they were hidden from the nations before the translation executed at Alex{andria, under the Ptolemies, is an acknowledged truth. Josephus declares it in the answer to Appian, which he wrote after Appian's death; and his declaration has not the less strength because he seeks to strengthen it by a fable. He says, in his history, that the Jewish books being all-divine, no foreign historian or poet had ever dared to speak of them. And, im{mediately after assuring us that no one had ever dared to mention the Jewish laws, he adds, that the historian Theopom

From all this they conclude, that it would be wiser to abide by the testimony of the Apostles, who never spoke of the Trinity, and to banish from religion for ever all terms which are not in the Scriptures-as Trinity, person, essence, hypostasis, hypo static and personal union, incarnation, generation, proceeding, and many others of the same kind; which being absolutely devoid of meaning, since they are repre-pus, having only intended to insert somesented by no real existence in nature, can thing concerning them in his history, God excite in the understanding none but false, struck him with madness for thirty days; vague, obscure, and undefinable notions. but that, having been informed in a dream To this article, let us add what Calmet that he was mad only because he had says in his Dissertation on the following wished to know divine things, and make passage of the Epistle of John the Evan- them known to the profane, he asked pargelist"For there are three that beardon of God, who restored him to his record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one and there are three that bear witness

senses.

Josephus, in the same passage, also relates, that a poet, named Theodectes,

having said a few words about the Jews in his tragedies, became blind, and that God did not restore his sight until he had done penance.

As for the Jewish people, it is certain that there was a time when they could not read the divine writings; for it is said in the second book of Kings, (chap. xxii. ver. 8,) and in the second book of Chronicles, (chap. xxxiv. ver. 14,) that in the reign of Josias they were unknown, and that a single copy was accidentally found in the house of the high-priest Hilkiah.

Ecclesiasticus, though the style is still the same.

The two first books of Maccabees, though written by a Jew. But they do not believe this Jew to have been inspired by God.

Tobit, although the story is edifying. {The judicious and profound Calmet affirms, that a part of this book was written by Tobit the father, and a part by Tobit the son; and that a third author added the conclusion of the last chapter, which says that Tobit the younger expired at the age of one hundred and twenty-seven years, and that he died rejoicing over the destruction of Nineveh.

The twelve tribes which were dispersed by Shalmanezer, have never re-appeared; and their books, if they had any, have been lost with them. The two tribes The same Calmet, at the end of his which were in slavery at Babylon, and al- preface, has these words: "Neither the lowed to return at the end of seventy story itself, nor the manner in which it is years, returned without their books, or at told, bears any fabulous or fictitious charleast they were very scarce and very defec-acter. If all Scripture histories, containtive, since Esdras was obliged to restore them. But, although during the Babylonian captivity, these books were apocryphal-that is, hidden, or unknown to the people, they were constantly sacred, -they bore the stamp of divinity,-they were, as all the world agrees, the only monument of truth upon earth.

We now give the name of apocrypha to those books which are not worthy of belief; so subject are languages to change! Catholics and Prostestants agree in regarding as apocryphal in this sense, and in rejecting

The prayer of Manasseh, King of Judah, contained in the second book of Kings.

The third and fourth books of Maccabees.

The fourth book of Esdras; although these books were incontestably written by Jews. But it is denied that the authors were inspired by God, like the Jews.

The other books, rejected by the Protestants only, and consequently considered by them as not inspired by God himself, are

The book of Wisdom, though it is written in the same style as the ProTerbs.

ing anything of the marvellous or extraordinary, were to be rejected, where is the sacred book which is to be preserved ?"

Judith; although Luther himself declares that "this book is beautiful, good, holy, useful, the language of a holy poet and a prophet animated by the Holy Spirit, which had been his instructor," &c.

It is indeed hard to discover at what time Judith's adventure happened, or where the town of Bethulia was. The degree of sanctity in Judith's action has also been disputed; but the book having been declared canonical by the council of Trent, all disputes are at an end.

Baruch, although it is written in the style of all the other prophets.

Esther.-The Protestants reject only some additions after the tenth chapter. They admit all the rest of the book; yet no one knows who King Ahasuerus was, although he is the principal person in the story.

Daniel.-The Protestants retrench Susannah's adventure, and that of the children in the furnace; but they retain Nebuchadnezzar's dream, and his grazing with

« 上一頁繼續 »