provided of God to receive the saints in the resurrection, wherein to refresh them with an abundance of all spiritual good things, in recompense of those which in the world we have either despised or lost. For it is both just and worthy of God, that his servants should there triumph and rejoice, where they have been afflicted for his Name's sake. This is the manner of the heavenly kingdom."

Besides the testimony above adduced, Tertullian mentions it as a custom of his times for Christians to pray, "that they might have part in the first resurrection." And Cyprian, who flourished about A. D. 220, informs us, that the thirst for martyrdom which existed among Christians arose from their supposing, that those who suffered for Christ would obtain a more distinguished lot in his kingdom. From which we may perceive how highly practical that doctrine was, which could make men even court death, and take joyfully the spoiling of their goods, and to suffer torture, not obtaining deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection Heb. xi.

3. Having brought forward these eminent testimonies from those fathers of the two first centuries who are known to us, or rather whose words have come down to us; the next step in the inquiry will be into the voice of the Church from Origen to Jerome inclusive; for with Origen a new era commenced in the history of prophetic interpretation; and Jerome and Augustine were almost the last of the fathers of any eminence who preceded the authoritative establishment of the papacy. Origen flourished about the middle of the third century: Jerome died about A. D. 420; and the papacy was (as many suppose) firmly established by Justinian in 533: and in the century that intervened between Jerome and this period, there arose no one on the side of genuine Christianity who may not be considered a feeble follower of that father; whilst during the whole of that same century those idolatrous practices and deviations from the true faith, which led on to the maturing of the papal apostacy, had been rapidly spreading and acquiring strength.

As the system of interpretation, which now commenced with Origen, greatly affected the sense of holy writ, and became so popular in the end as insensibly to carry away with it the majority of Christians, it must of course be viewed as having greatly affected the voice of the Church; and it consequently becomes an important question, how far the system of

fathers into their writings, and which was the fruit merely of their own individual judgment; but to exhibit that system of expounding and applying scripture, which seems to have been as yet handed down uninterruptedly among them.

Origen was compatible with the mind of the Spirit, as exhibited in the holy scriptures.

It is likewise important to observe, that up to the time of Origen, and also in his time, the system of exposition which characterised the two first centuries, was still prevalent. Owing, however, to the great influence of the learning and talents of Origen, his allegorizing system soon began to obtain with many; insomuch that Nepos, a pious and talented bishop of Egypt, was prompted to write a book, entitled "The Reprehensions of Allegorizers,' which was specially directed against those who now began to explain the Millennium figuratively. After the death of Nepos, Dionysius, a zealous disciple of Origen, became bishop of Alexandria; and perceiving that the views of Nepos overthrew the principle of his master's system, he laboured to refute them; and of his success in drawing over one Coracion, with certain of his followers, in the villages of Arsenoita, Eusebius preserves the account, (lib. vii. c. 22-24.) But he relates also, that Dionysius, in the pursuit of his object, was led to question the canonical authority of the Apocalypse; from which a fair inference may be drawn, that he found himself hard pressed by passages in that book. Mosheim, in his Ecclesiastical History, observes, "that long before this controversy an opinion had prevailed, that Christ was to come and reign a thousand years among men, before the entire and final dissolution of this world;"-"that this opinion had hitherto met with no opposition;""and that now its credit began to decline principally through the influence and authority of Origen, who opposed it with the greatest warmth, because it was incompatible with some of his favourite sentiments." (vol. i. p. 284.)

In regard to the system of interpretation struck out by Origen, and which was adopted with modifications and varieties by so many others, the best way of briefly conveying an idea of its general character, and of shewing, that the opinion here expressed of it is not that of an individual writer, will be to bring forward two or three instances, displaying the manner in which it has been reprobated by eminent expositors in subsequent times. Jerome, who had himself, though unconsciously, in a measure imbibed the leaven of it, does nevertheless condemn it; but his opinion may be shewn by a reference to Luther's, who says, in his Annotations on Deuteronomy, "That which I have so often insisted on elsewhere, I here once more repeat; viz. that the Christian should direct his first efforts toward understanding the literal sense (as it is called) of scripture, which alone is the substance of faith and of Christian theology; -which alone will sustain him in the hour of trouble and

temptation; and which will triumph over sin, death, and the gates of hell, to the praise and glory of God. The allegorical sense is commonly uncertain, and by no means safe to build our faith upon; for it usually depends on human opinion and conjecture only, on which, if a man lean, he will find it no better than the Egyptian reed. Therefore, Origen, Jerome, and similar of the fathers, are to be avoided, with the whole of that Alexandrian school, which, according to Eusebius and Jerome, formerly abounded in this species of interpretation. For later writers unhappily following their too much praised and prevailing example, it has come to pass, that men make just what they please of the Scriptures, until some accommodate the word of God to the most extravagant absurdities; and, as Jerome complains of his own times, they extract a sense from Scripture repugnant to its meaning: of which offence, however, Jerome himself was also guilty." Ann. in Deut. cap. i. fo. 55. Dr. Mosheim observes: "After the encomiums we have given to Origen, &c., it is not without deep concern we are obliged to add, that he also, by an unhappy method, opened a secure retreat for all sorts of errors, which a wild and irregular imagination could bring forth." And after noticing that he abandoned the literal sense, and divided the hidden sense into moral and mystical, or spiritual, he adds: "A prodigious number of interpreters, both in this and the succeeding ages, followed the method of Origen, though with some variations; nor could the few, who explained the sacred writings with judgment and a true spirit of criticism, oppose with any success the torrent of allegory that was overflowing the Church." Ch. Hist. cent. iii. part 2. sect. 5. 6. Milner, in his Church History, says somewhat similar:-"No man, not altogether unsound and hypocritical, ever injured the Church of Christ more than Origen did. From the fanciful mode of allegory, introduced by him, and uncontrolled by scriptural rule and order, there arose a vitiated method of commenting on the sacred pages; which has been succeeded by the contrary extreme,-viz. a contempt of types and figures altogether. And in a similar way his fanciful ideas of letter and spirit tended to remove from men's minds all just conceptions of genuine spirituality. A thick mist for ages pervaded the Christian world, supported and strengthened by his allegorical manner of interpretation. The learned alone were considered as guides implicitly to be followed; and the vulgar, when the literal sense was hissed off the stage, had nothing to do but to follow their authority, wherever it might lead them. Vol. i. page 469.

A very considerable number, however, of Christians, decidedly the majority, did nevertheless continue, sometime after Origen, to maintain the millennarian view. So difficult indeed

is it to depart consistently, and all at once, from a beaten track, that even Origen himself is now and then betrayed into statements, which are only reconcileable on the millennarian system of interpretation. Take, for example, the following passage against Celsus, (lib. iii.)—"We do not deny the purging fire of the destruction of wickedness, and the renovation of all things." And again, in his thirteenth Homily on Jeremiah, he says: "If any man shall preserve the washing of the Holy Spirit, &c. he shall have his part in the first Resurrection; but if any man be saved in the second resurrection only, it is the sinner that needeth the baptism by fire. Wherefore, seeing these things are so, let us lay the Scriptures to heart, and make them the rule of our lives; that so, being cleansed from the defilement of sin before we depart, we may be raised up with the saints, and have our lot with Christ Jesus."

Of those fathers from Origen to Jerome who decidedly took the millennarian view, the most eminent was Lactantius, who flourished in the time of Constantine the Great, about A. D. 310. He was considered the most learned of the Latin fathers, and his works abound with testimonies to the matter in hand. A specimen is here given from his book, De Divinis Institutionibus; which example is selected in preference, because there will, by-and-by, be a further use for it. Speaking of the coming of God to judge the world he says: "But when he shall do that, and shall restore the just that have been from the beginning unto life, he shall converse among men a thousand years, and rule them with a most righteous government. This the Sibyl elsewhere proclaims, saying, Hear me, O ye men, the eternal King doth reign, &c. Then they that shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but by the space of those thousand years shall generate an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy and dear to God. And they that shall be raised from the dead shall be over the living as judges. And the Gentiles shall not be utterly extinguished; but some shall be left for the victory of God, that they may be triumphed over by the just, and reduced to perpetual servitude. About the same time the prince of devils, the forger of all evil, shall be bound with chains, and shall be in custody all the thousand years of the heavenly empire, under which righteousness shall reign over the world." Chap. xxiv.

Methodius, bishop of Olympus, who suffered martyrdom under Decius about A. D. 312, says, in his book on the resurrection, written against Origen,* "It is to be expected that at the

* The book is not known to be extant, but the passage here quoted is cited, with others, by Proclus in Epiphanius. See the Paris Edition of the Works of Methodius, by Combesis, 1644.

conflagration the creation shall suffer a vehement commotion, as if it were about to die; whereby it shall be renovated, and not perish; to the end that we, then also renovated, may dwell in the renewed world, free from sorrow. Thus it is said in Psalm civ: 'Thou wilt send forth thy Spirit, and they shall be created, and thou wilt renew the face of the earth,' &c. seeing that after this world there shall be an earth, of necessity there must be inhabitants; and these shall die no more, but be as angels, irreversibly in an incorruptible state, doing all most excellent things."

For

Epiphanius, who flourished about A. D. 365, mentions the doctrine being held by many in his time, and speaks favourably of it himself. Quoting the words of Paulinus, bishop of Antioch, concerning one Vitalius, whom he highly commends for his piety, orthodoxy, and learning, he says: "Moreover others have affirmed that the venerable man should say, that in the first resurrection we shall accomplish a certain millennary of years," &c.; on which Epiphanius observes: "And that indeed this millennary term is written of, in the Apocalypse of John, and is received of very many of them that are godly, is manifest.' Lib. iii. 2.

But the most important testimony, in regard to the prevalence of this doctrine during the fourth century is, the countenance given to it by the council of Nice, called by Constantine the great, A. D. 325. This council, besides their definition of faith and canons ecclesiastical, set forth certain dus or forms of ecclesiastical doctrines. Some of these are recorded by Gelasius Cyzicenus, (Hist. Act. Con. Nic.) among which is the following, on the last clause of the Nicene Creed, "I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.' "The world was made inferior (upoтxpos) through foreknowledge: for God saw that man would sin; therefore we expect new heavens and a new earth, according to the holy scriptures, at the appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. And as Daniel says: (Chap. vii. 18.) The saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom. And there shall be a pure and holy land, the land of the living and not of the dead; which David forseeing with the eye of faith exclaims: I believe to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living,the land of the meek and humble. Blessed, saith Christ, (Matt. v. 5.) are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. And the prophet saith: (Isaiah xxvi. 6.) "The feet of the meek and humble shall tread upon it." Thus the majority of the Church must, at the period of this council, have still held to the primitive method of interpretation.*

*Dupin, in his Ecclesiastical History, whilst he admits the existence of the