The Two Babylons (1903)
Download: PDF — The Two Babylons (1903)
THE
TWO BABYLONS
ALEXANDER·HISLOP
THE LIBRARY of VICTORIA UNIVERSITY Toronto
THE TWO BABYLONS
OR
THE PAPAL WORSHIP
PROVED TO BE
THE WORSHIP OF NIMROD AND HIS WIFE
With Sixty=one Woodcut Illustrations from
NINEVEH, BABYLON, EGYPT, POMPEII, &c.
BY THE LATE
REV. ALEXANDER HISLOP
OF EAST FREE CHURCH, ARBROATH
Popular Edition
LONDON
S. W. PARTRIDGE & CO. 8 & 9 PATERNOSTER ROW
1903 EMMANUEL
4.9219
29-8-32 TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
LORD JOHN SCOTT,
AS A TESTIMONY OF RESPECT
FOR HIS TALENTS, AND THE DEEP AND ENLIGHTENED INTEREST
TAKEN BY HIM IN THE SUBJECT OF
PRIMEVAL ANTIQUITY;
AS WELL AS AN EXPRESSION OF GRATITUDE FOR
MANY MARKS OF COURTESY AND KINDNESS
RECEIVED AT HIS HANDS;
IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED
BY HIS OBLIGED AND FAITHFUL SERVANT,
THE AUTHOR.
CONTENTS.
NOTE BY THE EDITOR, . . . . . . . . . . . vii
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION, . . . . . . . . . . viii
PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION, . . . . . . . . . . . xi
INTRODUCTION, . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
CHAPTER I.
DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER OF THE TWO SYSTEMS, 4
CHAPTER II.
OBJECTS OF WORSHIP.
Section I. Trinity in Unity, . . . . .
CHAPTER III.
FESTIVALS.
Section I. Christmas and Lady-day, . . . . .
CHAPTER IV.
DOCTRINE AND DISCIPLINE.
Section I. Baptismal Regeneration, . . . . . . . . . . 129
,, II. Justification by Works, . . . . . . . . . . 144
,, III. The Sacrifice of the Mass, . . . . . . . . . 156
,, IV. Extreme Unction, . . . . . . . . . . . 165
,, V. Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead, . . . . . 167 CONTENTS.
CHAPTER V.
RITES AND CEREMONIES.
Section I. Idol Processions, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
,, II. Relic Worship, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
,, III. The Clothing and Crowning of Images, . . . . . 181
,, IV. The Rosary and the Worship of the Sacred Heart, . 187
,, V. Lamps and Wax-Candles, . . . . . . . . . . . 191
,, VI. The Sign of the Cross, . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
CHAPTER VI.
RELIGIOUS ORDERS.
Section I. The Sovereign Pontiff, . . . . . . . . . . . 206
,, II. Priests, Monks, and Nuns, . . . . . . . . . . . 219
CHAPTER VII.
THE TWO DEVELOPMENTS HISTORICALLY AND PROPHETICALLY CONSIDERED.
Section I. The Great Red Dragon, . . . . . . . . . . . 225
,, II. The Beast from the Sea, . . . . . . . . . . . 242
,, III. The Beast from the Earth, . . . . . . . . . . 256
,, IV. The Image of the Beast, . . . . . . . . . . . 263
,, V. The Name of the Beast, the Number of his Name—the Invisible Head of the Papacy, . . . . . . . . . . . 269
CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
APPENDIX, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
INDEX, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 NOTE BY THE EDITOR.
HAD the lamented Author been spared to superintend the issue of the Fourth Edition of his work, it is probable he would have felt himself called upon to say something in reference to the political and ecclesiastical events that have occurred since the publication of the last Edition. By the authoritative promulgation of the dogma of the Pope's Infallibility, his argument as to the time of the slaying of the Witnesses, and his identification of the Roman pontiff as the legitimate successor of Belshazzar have been abundantly confirmed.
It is gratifying to the Author's friends to know that the work has been so favourably received hitherto, and that no one, so far as we are aware, has ventured to challenge the accuracy of the historical proofs adduced in support of the startling announcement on the title page. But it is deplorable to think that, notwithstanding all the revelations made from time to time of the true character and origin of Popery, Ritualism still makes progress in the Churches, and that men of the highest influence in the State are so infatuated as to seek to strengthen their political position by giving countenance to a system of idolatry. If Britons would preserve their FREEDOM and their pre-eminence among the nations, they should never forget the Divine declaration, "Them that honour Me I will honour, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed."
It only remains for the Editor to say that the work has been carefully revised throughout, and a few trifling errors in the references have, in consequence, been corrected. One or two notes also, enclosed in brackets, have been added, and the Index has been somewhat extended.
R. H.
BLAIR BANK, POLMONT STATION, N.B., January, 1871.
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
Since the appearing of the First Edition of this work, the Author has extensively prosecuted his researches into the same subject; and the result has been a very large addition of new evidence. Somewhat of the additional evidence has already been given to the public, first through the columns of the British Messenger, and then in the publication entitled "The Moral Identity of Babylon and Rome," issued by Mr. Drummond of Stirling. In the present edition of "The Two Babylons," the substance of that work is also included. But the whole has now been re-written, and the mass of new matter that has been added is so much greater than all that had previously appeared, that this may fairly be regarded as an entirely new work. The argument appears now with a completeness which, considering the obscurity in which the subject had long been wrapped, the Author himself, only a short while ago, could not have ventured to anticipate as a thing capable of attainment.
On the principle of giving honour to whom honour is due, the author gladly acknowledges, as he has done before, his obligations to the late H. J. Jones, Esq.—to whose researches Protestantism is not a little indebted—who was the first that directed his attention to this field of inquiry. That able, and excellent, and distinguished writer, however, was called to his rest before his views were matured. His facts, in important instances, were incorrect; and the conclusions at which he ultimately arrived were, in very vital respects, directly the reverse of those that are unfolded in these pages. Those who have read, in the Quarterly Journal of Prophecy, his speculations in regard to the Beast from the Sea, will, it is believed, readily perceive that, in regard to it, as well as other subjects, his argument is fairly set aside by the evidence here adduced.
In regard to the subject of the work, there are just two remarks viii the author would make.
The first has reference to the Babylonian legends. These were all intended primarily to commemorate facts that took place in the early history of the post-diluvian world. But along with them were mixed up the momentous events in the history of our first parents. These events, as can be distinctly proved, were commemorated in the secret system of Babylon with a minuteness and particularity of detail of which the ordinary student of antiquity can have little conception. The post-diluvian divinities were connected with the ante-diluvian patriarchs, and the first progenitors of the human race, by means of the metempsychosis; and the names given to them were skilfully selected, so as to be capable of divers meanings, each of these meanings having reference to some remarkable feature in the history of the different patriarchs referred to. The knowledge of this fact is indispensable to the unravelling of the labyrinthine subject of Pagan mythology, which, with all its absurdities and abominations, when narrowly scrutinised, will be found exactly to answer to the idea contained in the well-known line of Pope in regard to a very different subject:—
"A mighty maze, but not without a plan."
In the following work, however, this aspect of the subject has, as much as possible, been kept in abeyance, it being reserved for another work, in which, if Providence permit, it will be distinctly handled.
The other point on which the author finds it necessary to say a word, has reference to the use of the term "Chaldee," as employed in this work. According to ordinary usage, that term is appropriated to the language spoken in Babylon in the time of Daniel and thereafter. In these pages the term Chaldee, except where otherwise stated, is applied indiscriminately to whatever language can be proved to have been used in Babylonia from the time that the Babylonian system of idolatry commenced. Now, it is evident from the case of Abraham, who was brought up in Ur of the Chaldees, and who doubtless brought his native language along with him into Canaan, that, at that period, Chaldee and Hebrew were substantially the same. When, therefore, a pure Hebrew word is found mixed up with a system that confessedly had its origin in Babylonia, the land of the Chaldees, it cannot be doubted that that term, in that very form, must have originally belonged to the Chaldee dialect, as well as to that which is now commonly known as Hebrew. On this ground, the author has found himself warranted to give a wider application to the term "Chaldee" than that which is currently in use.
And now, in sending forth this new Edition, the author hopes he can say that, however feebly, he has yet had sincerely an eye, in the whole of his work, to the glory of "that name that is above every name," which is dear to every Christian heart, and through which all tribes, and peoples, and kindreds, and tongues, of this sinful and groaning earth, are yet destined to be blest.
In the prosecuting of his researches, he has found his own faith sensibly quickened. His prayer is, that the good Spirit of all grace may bless the work for the same end to all who may read it.
PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.
In giving the Third Edition of this work to the public, I have little else to do than to express my acknowledgments to those to whom I am under obligations, for enabling me thus far to bring it to a successful issue.
To Mr. Murray, of Albemarle Street, London; Mr. Vaux, of the British Museum; and Messrs. Black and Messrs. Chambers, Edinburgh, I am specially indebted for permission to copy woodcuts belonging to them. Individual woodcuts, from other sources, are acknowledged in the body of the work. To Mr. John Adam, the artist, who has executed the whole of the woodcuts, with a few exceptions, I have to express my obligations for the spirit and artistic skill displayed in their execution; and I do so with the more pleasure, that Mr. Adam is a native of Arbroath, and the son of a worthy elder of my own.
I have also acknowledgments of another kind to make. Considering the character of this work—a work that, from its very nature, required wide, and, at the same time, minute research, and the consultation of works of a very recondite character; and, taking also into view not only the very limited extent of my own library, but the distance of my abode from any of the great libraries of the land, where rare and expensive works may be consulted, the due preparation of such a work was attended with many difficulties. The kindness of friends, however, has tended wonderfully to remove these difficulties. From all quarters I have met with the most disinterested aid, of which I retain a grateful and pleasing remembrance. To enumerate the different sources whence help has come to me, in the prosecution of my task, would be impossible. There are three individuals, however, who stand out from the rest whom I cannot pass over without notice. Each of them has co-operated (and all spontaneously), though in different ways, in enabling me thus far to accomplish my task, and their aid has been of the most essential importance.
To Mrs. Barkworth, of Tranby Hall, Yorkshire (whose highly cultivated mind, enlightened zeal for Protestant truth, and unwearied beneficence need no testimony of mine), I am signally indebted, and it gives me pleasure to acknowledge it.
I have also to acknowledge my deep and peculiar obligations to one who chooses to be unknown, who, entirely on public grounds, has taken a very lively interest in this work. He has spared neither expense nor pains, that, every incidental error being removed, the argument might be presented to the public in the most perfect possible form. For this purpose he has devoted a large portion of his time, during the last three years, to the examination of every quotation contained in the last edition, going in every case where it was at all possible, to the fountain-head of authority. His co-operation with me in the revisal of the work has been of the greatest advantage. His acute and logical mind, quick in detecting a flaw, his determination to be satisfied with nothing that had not sufficient evidence to rest upon, and yet his willing surrender to the force of truth whenever that evidence was presented, have made him a most valuable coadjutor. "As iron sharpeneth iron," says Solomon, "so doth a man sharpen the countenance of his friend." I have sensibly found it so. His correspondence, by this stimulus, has led to the accumulation of an immense mass of new evidence, here presented to the reader, which, but for his suggestions, and objections too, might never have been discovered. In the prosecution of his investigation he has examined no fewer than 240 out of the 270 works contained in the accompanying list of "Editions," many of them of large extent, all of which are in his own possession, and not a few of which he has procured for the purpose of verification.
His object and mine has been, that the argument might be fairly stated, and that error might, as far as possible, be avoided. How far this object has been attained, the references and list of "Editions" will enable each reader competent to the task, to judge for himself. For myself, however, I cannot but express my high sense of the incalculable value of the service which the extraordinary labours of my kind and disinterested friend have rendered to the cause of universal Protestantism.
But while making mention of my obligations to the living, I may not forget what I owe to the dead. To him whose name stands on the front of this work, I am, in some respects, pre-eminently indebted, and I cannot send forth this edition without a tribute of affection to his memory. It is not for me to speak of his wit, and the brilliancy of his conversational powers, that captivated all who knew him; of the generous unselfishness of his nature, that made him a favourite with every one that came in contact with him; or of the deep interest that he took in the efforts at present being made for improving the dwellings of the working-classes, and especially of those of his own estate, as well as in their moral and religious improvement. But I should be liable to the charge of ingratitude if I contented myself, in the circumstances, with the mere formal dedication, which, though appropriate enough while he was alive, is now no more so when he is gone.
The time and the circumstances in which his active friendship was extended to me, made it especially welcome. His keen eye saw at a glance, as soon as the subject of this work came under his attention, the importance of it; and from that time forward, though the work was then in its most rudimentary form, he took the deepest interest in it. He did not wait till the leading organs of popular opinion, or the great dispensers of fame, should award their applause; but, prompted by his own kindly feeling, he spontaneously opened up a correspondence with me, to encourage and aid me in the path of discovery on which I had entered.
His own studies qualified him to appreciate the subject and pronounce upon it. For many years he had deeply studied the Druidical system, which, with the haze and mystery around it, and with its many points of contact with the patriarchal religion, had a strange and peculiar fascination for him.
For the elucidation of this subject, he had acquired most valuable works; and what he possessed he was most ready to communicate. In the prosecution of my inquiries, I had met with what to me seemed insuperable difficulties. He had only to know of this to set himself to remove them; and the aid derived from him was at once precious and opportune; for through his acquaintance with Druidism, and the works received from him, difficulties disappeared, and a flood of light irradiated the whole subject. If, therefore, the reader shall find the early history of superstition, not only in our native land, but in the world at large, set in a new and instructive light in these pages, he must know that he is essentially indebted for that to Lord John Scott. In one, who was an entire stranger, being thus prompted to render efficient assistance to me at such a time, I could not but thankfully recognise the hand of a gracious Providence; and when I reflect on the generous, and humble, and disinterested kindness with which the four years' correspondence between us was conducted on his part,—a correspondence in which he always treated me with as much confidence as if I had been his friend and brother,—I cannot but feel warm and tender emotions, mingling with the thoughts that spring up in my bosom. Friendship such as his was no ordinary friendship. His memory, therefore, must be ever dear to me; the remembrance of his kindness ever fragrant.
Unexpected was the stroke—now, alas! near three years ago—by which our correspondence was brought to an end; but painful though that stroke was, and solemnising, there was no gloom attending it. The "hope full of immortality" cheered his dying bed. For years back he had found the emptiness of the world, and had begun to seek the better part. His religion was no sentimental religion; his fear of God was not taught by the commandment of men. His faith was drawn directly from the inspired fountain of Divine truth. From the time that the claims of God to the homage of his heart had laid hold on him, the Word of God became his grand study, and few men have I ever known who held with a more firm and tenacious grasp the great truth that the Word of God, and that Word alone, is the light and rule for the guidance of Christians; and that every departure from that Word, alike on the part of Churches and individuals, implies, as he himself expressed it, "going off the rails," and consequently danger of the highest kind. As his religion was Scriptural, so it was spiritual. In one of his earliest letters to me, he avowed that the bond of "spiritual religion" was that by which he felt himself specially bound to those whose character and spirit showed them to be the true sheep of Christ's pasture; and in accepting the dedication of my work, he particularly stated, that the interest that he took in it was not as a mere matter of literary curiosity, but as being "fitted to teach great truths, which the world is not very willing to learn."
This, in the connection in which he wrote it, evidently had special reference to the great doctrine of "regeneration." His mind was deeply penetrated with a sense of the majesty of God, and the "awfulness" of our relations to Him, in consequence of the sin that has entered the world, and has infected the whole human race, and therefore he vividly realised the indispensable necessity of Mediation and Atonement, to give hope to sinful man in prospect of the grand account.
The origin of that earnestness and attachment to spiritual religion which he manifested in his last years, was, as I was assured by a relative now also gone to his reward, the perusal of the tract entitled "Sin no Trifle." Deep was the impression that tract had made. He read it, and re-read it, and continually carried it about with him, till it was entirely worn away. Under the impressions springing from such views of sin, he said to an intimate friend, when in the enjoyment of health and vigour, "It is easy to die the death of a gentleman, but that will not do." His death was not the death of a mere gentleman. It was evidently the death of a Christian.
The circumstances in which he was removed were fitted to be peculiarly affecting to me. In reply to a letter—the last which I received from him—in which he expressed deep interest in the spread of vital religion, I was led, in pursuance of the theme to which he himself had specially referred, to dwell more than ever before on the necessity not merely of having hope towards God, but of having the question of personal acceptance decisively settled, and the consequent habitual possession of the "joy of salvation," and as one special reason for this, referred to the fact, that all would be needed in a dying hour. "And who can tell," I added, "how suddenly those who are surrounded with all the comforts of life may be removed from the midst of them?" In illustration of this, I referred to the affecting case of one whom I had known well, just a short while before, lost along with his family in the Royal Charter. Having made a large fortune in Australia, he was returning home, and when on the point of setting foot on his native shores, with the prospect of spending his days in ease and affluence, suddenly father and mother, son and daughter, were all engulfed in a watery grave.
My letter concluded with these words: "In view of such a solemnising event, well may we say, What is man? But oh, man is great, if he walks with God, and the divine words are fulfilled in his experience, 'God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.' That this may be more and more the experience of your Lordship, is my earnest desire." When I wrote this I had not the least suspicion that I was writing to a dying man. But so it proved to be. Only a few days after he received this, he was smitten with his death-sickness. From his dying bed he sent me a kindly memorial of his affectionate remembrance, and in his painful illness he manifested the supporting power of faith, when faith has respect to the truth as it is in Jesus, and appropriates Him as a personal and Almighty Saviour.
EDITIONS OF WORKS QUOTED OR REFERRED TO IN THIS WORK.
Adam's Roman Antiquities, . . . . .
Bilney (British Reformers), . . . . .
NameLocationAuthor(s)Eusebii Chronicon,. . . . .
<tr><th>Name
Location
Author(s)
Page Number
Josephus (Græcé),
. Basle,
Justini Hist. (Hist. Rom. Script.),
{ Aurelii, Allobrog. }
Justinus Martyr,
Wurtzburg,
Justus Lipsius,
London,
Juvenal,
London,
Kennedy's Ancient and Hindoo Mythology,
London,
Kennett's Roman Antiquities,
London,
Kitto's Cyclopædia,
Edinburgh,
Kitto's Illustrated Commentary,
London,
Knox's History of Reformation,
Edin.,
1846-48
Knox (British Reformers),
London,
S. D.
Lactantius,
Cambridge,
Lafitan, Mœurs des Sauvages Americains,
Paris,
Landseer's Sabean Researches,
London,
Layard's Babylon and Nineveh,
London,
—— Nineveh,
London,
Livius,
Amsterdam,
Lorimer's Manual of Presbytery,
Edinburgh,
Lucan. de Bell. Civ.,
Leyden,
Lucianus,
Amsterdam,
Lucretius,
Oxford,
Lycophron (Poet. Græc. Min.),
Geneva,
Macrobius,
Sanct. Colon.
M'Gavin's Protestant,
Glasgow,
Maimonides More Nevochim,
Basle,
Maitland on the Catacombs,
London,
Mallet's Northern Antiquities,
London,
Mallet,
London,
Manilius,
Berlin,
Martialis Epigrammata,
Leyden,
Massy, Memoir of Rev. G.,
London,
Maurice's Indian Antiquities,
London (See Note).
Mede's Works,
London,
Middleton's Letter from Rome,
London,
Milner's Church History,
London,
Milton's Paradise Lost,
London,
Minutius Felix,
Leyden,
Missale Romanum,
Paris,
Do. do.,
Vienna,
Missionary Record of Free Church,
Edinburgh,
Moor's Hindoo Pantheon,
London,
Morgan's (Lady) Italy,
London,
Moses of Chorené,
London,
Müller's Dorians,
Oxford,
Mulleri Fragmenta,
Paris,
1846-51
Newman's Development,
London,
Niebuhr's Roman History,
London,
Nonnus de Phil. Oriental. et Dionysiaca,
Leipsic,
Orphic Hymns (Poet. Græc.),
Paris,
Ouvaroff's Eleusinian Mysteries,
London,
NameLocationAuthorYearOvidii Opera,.
<tr><th>Name
Location
Author(s)
Page Number
Stockii Clavis,
Lipsice,
Strabo,
Basle,
Suidas,
Geneva,
Symmachi Epistolæ,
Douai,
Tacitus,
Dublin,
Taylor's Mystic Hymns of Orpheus,
Chiswick,
—— Pausanias
London,
Tertulliani Opera,
Paris,
Theocritus (Poet. Græc. Min.),
Cambridge,
Theopompus (Müller),
Paris,
Thevenot, Voyages,
Paris,
Thuani Historia,
London,
Todd's Western India,
London,
Toland's Druids,
Edinburgh,
Tooke's Pantheon,
London,
Trimen's Architecture,
London,
Trogus Pompeius (Hist. Rom. Script.),
{ Aurel. <br> Allobrog. }
Turner's Anglo-Saxons,
London,
Usher's Syllogé,
Dublin,
Valerius Maximus,
Venice,
Vaux's Nineveh,
London,
—— Antiquities of the British Museum,
London,
Virgilius,
Paris,
Vitruvius de Architectura,
Leipsic,
Vossius de Idololatria,
Amsterdam,
Walpole's Ansayri,
London,
Wilkinson's Egyptians,
London,
1837-41
Williams's Missionary Enterprises,
London,
Wilson's India 3000 Years Ago,
Bombay,
—— Parsee Religion,
Bombay,
Wylie's Great Exodus,
London,
Xenophontis Opera,
Paris,
Zonaras,
Bonn,
Zosimus (Rom. Hist. Script. Græci. Min.),
Frankfort,
Note.—Of Maurice's "Indian Antiquities" in the copy quoted, except where otherwise stated, the 1st, 2nd, and 7th vols. are 1806; the 3rd, 1794; the 4th and 5th, 1800, and the 6th, 1812.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
FIG. PAGE
Woman with Cup from Babylon, . 5
Do. do. from Rome, . 6
Triune Divinity of Ancient Assyria, . 17
Do. do. of Pagan Siberians, . 17
Goddess Mother and Son, from Babylon, . 19
Do. do. do. from India, . 19
Janus and his Club, . 27
Diana of Ephesus, . 29
Three-Horned Head of Togrul Begh, . 33
Assyrian Hercules, or Zernebogus, . 33
Horned Head-Dresses, . 35
Three-Horned Cap of Vishnu, . 36
Tyrian Hercules, . 37
Winged Bull from Nimrúd, . 38
Do. do. from Persepolis, . 38
Centaur from Babylonia, . 42
Do. from India, . 43
Osiris of Egypt, . 44
Egyptian High Priest, . 45
Egyptian Calf-Idol, . 46
Assyrian Divinity, with Spotted Fallow-Deer, . 47
Bacchus, with Cup and Branch, . 48
An Egyptian Goddess, and Indian Crishna, crushing the Serpent's Head, . 60
Baal-Berith, Lord of the Covenant, . 70
Dove and Olive Branch of Assyrian Juno, . 79
Circe, the Daughter of the Sun, . 88
The Yule Log, . 98
Roman Emperor Trajan burning Incense to Diana, . 100
Egyptian God Seb, and Symbolic Goose, . 101
The Goose of Cupid, . 102
Sacred Egg of Heliopolis, and Typhon's Egg, . 108
Mystic Egg of Astarte, . 109
Juno, with Pomegranate, . 111
Two-Headed God, . 134
Cupid with Wine-Cup and Ivy Garland of Bacchus, . 140
Symbols of Nimrod and Baal-Berith, . 142 FIG.
Ceres, Mother of Bar, “the Son,” and of Bar, “the Corn,” . 160
Sun-Worship in Egypt, . . . . .
THE TWO BABYLONS.
"And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH."—REV. xvii. 5.
INTRODUCTION.
THERE is this great difference between the works of men and the works of God, that the same minute and searching investigation, which displays the defects and imperfections of the one, brings out also the beauties of the other. If the most finely polished needle on which the art of man has been expended be subjected to a microscope, many inequalities, much roughness and clumsiness, will be seen. But if the microscope be brought to bear on the flowers of the field, no such result appears. Instead of their beauty diminishing, new beauties and still more delicate, that have escaped the naked eye, are forthwith discovered; beauties that make us appreciate, in a way which otherwise we could have had little conception of, the full force of the Lord's saying, "Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: and yet I say unto you, That even Solomon, in all his glory, was not arrayed like one of these." The same law appears also in comparing the Word of God and the most finished productions of men. There are spots and blemishes in the most admired productions of human genius. But the more the Scriptures are searched, the more minutely they are studied, the more their perfection appears; new beauties are brought into light every day; and the discoveries of science, the researches of the learned, and the labours of infidels, all alike conspire to illustrate the wonderful harmony of all the parts, and the Divine beauty that clothes the whole.
If this be the case with Scripture in general, it is especially the case with prophetic Scripture. As every spoke in the wheel of Providence revolves, the prophetic symbols start into still more bold and beautiful relief. This is very strikingly the case with the prophetic language that forms the groundwork and corner-stone of the present work. There never has been any difficulty in the mind of any enlightened Protestant in identifying the woman "sitting on seven mountains," and having on her forehead the name written, "Mystery, Babylon the Great," with the Roman apostacy.
"No other city in the world has ever been celebrated, as the city of Rome has, for its situation on seven hills. Pagan poets and orators, who had no thought of elucidating prophecy, have alike characterised it as 'the seven hilled city.'" Thus Virgil refers to it: "Rome has both become the most beautiful (city) in the world, and alone has surrounded for herself seven heights with a wall."* Propertius, in the same strain, speaks of it (only adding another trait, which completes the Apocalyptic picture) as "The lofty city on seven hills, which governs the whole world."† Its "governing the whole world" is just the counterpart of the Divine statement—"which reigneth over the kings of the earth" (Rev. xvii. 18). To call Rome the city "of the seven hills" was by its citizens held to be as descriptive as to call it by its own proper name. Hence Horace speaks of it by reference to its seven hills alone, when he addresses, "The gods who have set their affections on the seven hills."‡ Martial, in like manner, speaks of "The seven dominating mountains."§ In times long subsequent, the same kind of language was in current use; for when Symmachus, the prefect of the city, and the last acting Pagan Pontifex Maximus, as the Imperial substitute, introduces by letter one friend of his to another, he calls him "De septem montibus virum"—"a man from the seven mountains," meaning thereby, as the commentators interpret it, "Civem Romanum," "A Roman Citizen."|| Now, while this characteristic of Rome has ever been well marked and defined, it has always been easy to show, that the Church which has its seat and headquarters on the seven hills of Rome might most appropriately be called "Babylon," inasmuch as it is the chief seat of idolatry under the New Testament, as the ancient Babylon was the chief seat of idolatry under the Old. But recent discoveries in Assyria, taken in connection with the previously well-known but ill-understood history and mythology of the ancient world, demonstrate that there is a vast deal more significance in the name Babylon the Great than this. It has been known all along that Popery was baptised Paganism; but God is now making it manifest, that the Paganism which Rome has baptised is, in all its essential elements, the very Paganism which prevailed in the ancient literal Babylon, when Jehovah opened before Cyrus the two-leaved gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron.
That new and unexpected light, in some way or other, should be cast, about this very period, on the Church of the grand Apostacy, the very language and symbols of the Apocalypse might have prepared us to anticipate. In the Apocalyptic visions, it is just before the judgment upon her that, for the first time, John sees the
Scilicet et rerum facta est pulcherrima Roma Septemqueuna sibi muro circumdedit arces.
Apostate Church with the name Babylon the Great "written upon her forehead" (Rev. xvii. 5). What means the writing of that name "on the forehead"? Does it not naturally indicate that, just before judgment overtakes her, her real character was to be so thoroughly developed, that everyone who has eyes to see, who has the least spiritual discernment, would be compelled, as it were, on ocular demonstration, to recognise the wonderful fitness of the title which the Spirit of God had affixed to her. Her judgment is now evidently hastening on; and just as it approaches, the Providence of God, conspiring with the Word of God, by light pouring in from all quarters, makes it more and more evident that Rome is in very deed the Babylon of the Apocalypse; that the essential character of her system, the grand objects of her worship, her festivals, her doctrine and discipline, her rites and ceremonies, her priesthood and their orders, have all been derived from ancient Babylon; and, finally, that the Pope himself is truly and properly the lineal representative of Belshazzar. In the warfare that has been waged against the domineering pretensions of Rome, it has too often been counted enough merely to meet and set aside her presumptuous boast, that she is the mother and mistress of all churches—the one Catholic Church, out of whose pale there is no salvation. If ever there was excuse for such a mode of dealing with her, that excuse will hold no longer. If the position I have laid down can be maintained, she must be stripped of the name of a Christian Church altogether; for if it was a Church of Christ that was convened on that night, when the pontiff-king of Babylon, in the midst of his thousand lords, "praised the gods of gold, and of silver, and of wood, and of stone" (Dan. v. 4), then the Church of Rome is entitled to the name of a Christian Church; but not otherwise. This to some, no doubt, will appear a very startling position; but it is one which it is the object of this work to establish; and let the reader judge for himself, whether I do not bring ample evidence to substantiate my position.
CHAPTER I.
DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER OF THE TWO SYSTEMS.
In leading proof of the Babylonian character of the Papal Church, the first point to which I solicit the reader's attention, is the character of Mystery which attaches alike to the modern Roman and the ancient Babylonian systems. The gigantic system of moral corruption and idolatry, described in this passage under the emblem of a woman with a "Golden Cup in Her Hand" (Rev. xvii. 4), "making all nations drunk with the wine of her fornication" (Rev. xvii. 2; xviii. 3), is divinely called "Mystery, Babylon the Great" (Rev. xvii. 5). That Paul's "Mystery of iniquity," as described in 2 Thess. ii. 7, has its counterpart in the Church of Rome, no man of candid mind, who has carefully examined the subject, can easily doubt. Such was the impression made by that account on the mind of the great Sir Matthew Hale, no mean judge of evidence, that he used to say, that if the apostolic description were inserted in the public "Hue and Cry," any constable in the realm would be warranted in seizing, wherever he found him, the Bishop of Rome as the head of that "Mystery of iniquity." Now, as the system here described is equally characterised by the name of "Mystery," it may be presumed that both passages refer to the same system. But the language applied to the New Testament Babylon, as the reader cannot fail to see, naturally leads us back to the Babylon of the ancient world. As the Apocalyptic woman has in her hand a cup, wherewith she intoxicates the nations, so was it with the Babylon of old. Of that Babylon, while in all its glory, the Lord thus spake, in denouncing its doom by the prophet Jeremiah: "Babylon hath been a Golden Cup in the Lord's hand, that made all the earth drunken: the nations have drunken of her wine; therefore the nations are mad" (Jer. li. 7). Why this exact similarity of language in regard to the two systems? The natural inference surely is, that the one stands to the other in the relation of type and antitype. Now, as the Babylon of the Apocalypse is characterised by the name of "Mystery," so the grand distinguishing feature of the ancient Babylonian system was the Chaldean "Mysteries," that formed so essential a part of that system. And to these mysteries, the very language of the Hebrew prophet, symbolical though of course it is, distinctly alludes, when he speaks of Babylon as a "golden cup." To drink of "mysterious beverages," says Salverté, was indispensable on the part of all who sought initiation in these Mysteries.* These "mysterious beverages" were composed of "wine, honey, water, and flour."† From the ingredients avowedly used, and from the nature of others not avowed, but certainly used,‡ there can be no doubt that they were of an intoxicating nature; and till the aspirants had come under their power, till their understandings had been dimmed, and their passions excited by the medicated draught, they were not duly prepared for what they were either to hear or to see.
If it be inquired what was the object and design of these ancient "Mysteries," it will be found that there was a wonderful analogy between them and that "Mystery of iniquity" which is embodied in the Church of Rome. Their primary object was to introduce privately, by little and little, under the seal of secrecy and the sanction of an oath, what it would not have been safe all at once and openly to propound. The time at which they were instituted proves that this must have been the case. The Chaldean Mysteries can be traced up to the days of Semiramis, who lived only a few centuries after the flood, and who is known to have impressed upon them the
image of her own depraved and polluted mind.§ That beautiful but abandoned queen of Babylon was not only herself a paragon of unbridled lust and licentiousness, but in the Mysteries which she had a chief hand in forming, she was worshipped as Rhea,|| the great "Mother" of the gods, with such atrocious rites as identified her with Venus, the Mother of all impurity, and raised the very city where she had reigned to a bad e grand seat at once of idolatry
Fig. 1.
Woman with cup ** from Babylon.—(KITTO's Biblical Cyclopedia.)
she had reigned to a bad eminence among the nations, as the grand seat at once of idolatry and consecrated prostitution. †† Thus
was this Chaldean queen a fit and remarkable prototype of the "Woman" in the Apocalypse, with the golden cup in her hand, and the name on her forehead, "Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of harlots and abominations of the earth."
(Fig. 1.) The Apocalyptic emblem of the Harlot woman with the cup in her hand was even embodied in the symbols of idolatry derived from ancient Babylon, as they were exhibited in Greece; for thus was the Greek Venus originally represented,* and it is singular that in our own day, and so far as appears for the first time, the Roman Church has actually taken this very symbol as her own chosen emblem. In 1825, on the occasion of the jubilee, Pope Leo XII. struck a medal, bearing on the one side his own image, and on the other, that of the Church of Rome symbolised as a "Woman," holding in her left hand a cross, and in her right a cup, with the legend around her, "Sedet super universum," "The whole world is her seat." ^† (Fig. 2.) Now the period when Semiramis lived,—a period when the patriarchal faith was still fresh in the minds of men, when Shem was still alive,^‡ to rouse the minds of the faithful to rally around the banner for the truth and cause of God, made it hazardous all at once and publicly
Fig. 2.
Woman with cup from Rome, on reverse of medal.—(ELLIOTT's Horx.)
to set up such a system as was inaugurated by the Babylonian queen. We know, from the statements in Job, that among
For evidence on this subject, see Appendix, Note A.
ELLIOTT's Horc, vol. iv. p. 30.
For the age of Shem see Genesis xi. 10, 11. According to this, Shem lived 502 years after the flood, that is, according to the Hebrew chronology, till B.c. 1846. The age of Ninus, the husband of Semiramis, as stated in a former note, according to Eusebius, synchronised with that of Abraham, who was born B.c. 1996. It was only about nine years, however, before the end of the reign of Ninus, that the birth of Abraham is said to have taken place.—(Syncellus, p. 170. Paris, 1652.) Consequently, on this view, the reign of Ninus must have terminated, according to the usual chronology, about B.c. 1987. Clinton, who is of high authority in chronology, places the reign of Ninus somewhat earlier. In his Fasti Hellenici (vol. i. p. 263) he makes his age to have been B.c. 2182. Layard (in his Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. p. 217) subscribes to this opinion. Semiramis is said to have survived her husband forty-two years.—(Syncell., p. 96.) Whatever view, therefore, be adopted in regard to the age of Ninus, whether that of Eusebius, or that at which Clinton and Layard have arrived, it is evident that Shem long survived both Ninus and his wife. Of course, this argument proceeds on the supposition of the correctness of the Hebrew chronology. For conclusive evidence on that subject, see Appendix, Note B.
patriarchal tribes that had nothing whatever to do with Mosaic institutions, but which adhered to the pure faith of the patriarchs, idolatry in any shape was held to be a crime, to be visited with signal and summary punishment on the heads of those who practised it.
"If I beheld the sun," said Job, "when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness; and my heart hath been secretly enticed, and* my mouth hath kissed my hand; this also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge; for I should have denied the God that is above" (Job xxxi. 26-28). Now if this was the case in Job's day, much more must it have been the case at the earlier period when the Mysteries were instituted. It was a matter, therefore, of necessity, if idolatry were to be brought in, and especially such foul idolatry as the Babylonian system contained in its bosom, that it should be done stealthily and in secret. Even though introduced by the hand of power, it might have produced a revulsion, and violent attempts might have been made by the uncorrupted portion of mankind to put it down; and at all events, if it had appeared at once in all its hideousness, it would have alarmed the consciences of men, and defeated the very object in view. That object was to bind all mankind in blind and absolute submission to a hierarchy entirely dependent on the sovereigns of Babylon. In the carrying out of this scheme, all knowledge, sacred and profane, came to be monopolised by the priesthood,† who dealt it out to those who were initiated in the "Mysteries" exactly as they saw fit, according as the interests of the grand system of spiritual despotism they had to administer might seem to require. Thus the people, wherever the Babylonian system spread, were bound neck and heel to the priests. The priests were the only depositaries of religious knowledge; they only had the true tradition, by which the writs and symbols of the public religion could be interpreted; and without blind and implicit submission to them, what was necessary for salvation could not be known. Now compare this with the early history of the Papacy, and with its spirit and modus operandi throughout, and how exact was the coincidence! Was it in a period of patriarchal light that the corrupt system of the Babylonian "Mysteries" began? It was in a period of still greater light that that unholy and unscriptural system commenced, that has found such rank development in the Church of Rome. It began in the very age of the apostles, when the primitive Church was in its flower, when the glorious fruits of Pentecost were everywhere to be seen, when martyrs were sealing their testimony for the truth with their blood. Even then, when the Gospel shone so brightly, the Spirit of God bore this clear and distinct testimony by Paul: "The mystery of iniquity doth already work."
(2 Thess. ii. 7). That system of iniquity which then began it was divinely foretold was to issue in a portentous apostacy, that in due time would be awfully "revealed," and would continue until it should be destroyed "by the breath of the Lord's mouth, and consumed by the brightness of His coming" (1bid. v. 8). But at its first introduction into the Church, it came in secretly and by stealth, with "all deceivableness of unrighteousness." It wrought "mysteriously" under fair but false pretences, leading men away from the simplicity of the truth as it is in Jesus. And it did so secretly, for the very same reason that idolatry was secretly introduced in the ancient Mysteries of Babylon; it was not safe, it was not prudent to do otherwise. The zeal of the true Church, though destitute of civil power, would have aroused itself, to put the false system and all its abettors beyond the pale of Christianity, if it had appeared openly and all at once in all its grossness; and this would have arrested its progress. Therefore it was brought in secretly, and by little and little, one corruption being introduced after another, as apostacy proceeded, and the backsliding Church became prepared to tolerate it, till it has reached the gigantic height we now see, when in almost every particular the system of the Papacy is the very antipodes of the system of the primitive Church. Of the gradual introduction of all that is now most characteristic of Rome, through the working of the "Mystery of iniquity," we have very striking evidence, preserved even by Rome itself, in the inscriptions copied from the Roman catacombs. These catacombs are extensive excavations underground in the neighbourhood of Rome, in which the Christians, in times of persecution during the first three centuries, celebrated their worship, and also buried their dead. On some of the tombstones there are inscriptions still to be found, which are directly in the teeth of the now well-known principles and practices of Rome. Take only one example: What, for instance, at this day is a more distinguishing mark of the Papacy than the enforced celibacy of the clergy? Yet from these inscriptions we have most decisive evidence, that even in Rome, there was a time when no such system of clerical celibacy was known. Witness the following, found on different tombs:—
"To Basilius, the presbyter, and Felicitas, his wife. They made this for themselves."
"Petronia, a priest's wife, the type of modesty. In this place I lay my bones. Spare your tears, dear husband and daughter, and believe that it is forbidden to weep for one who lives in God."* A prayer here and there for the dead: "May God refresh thy spirit," proves that even then the Mystery of iniquity had begun to work; but inscriptions such as the above equally show that it had been slowly and cautiously working,—that up to the period to which they refer, the Roman Church had not proceeded the length it has done now, of absolutely "forbidding its priests to 'marry.'" Craftily and gradually did Rome lay the foundation of its system of priest-
Dr. MAITLAND's Church in the Catacombs, pp. 191, 192.
craft, on which it was afterwards to rear so vast a superstructure. At its commencement, "Mystery" was stamped upon its system.
But this feature of "Mystery" has adhered to it throughout its whole course. When it had once succeeded in dimming the light of the Gospel, obscuring the fulness and freeness of the grace of God, and drawing away the souls of men from direct and immediate dealings with the One Grand Prophet and High Priest of our profession, a mysterious power was attributed to the clergy, which gave them "dominion over the faith" of the people—a dominion directly disclaimed by apostolic men (2 Cor. i. 24), but which, in connection with the confessional, has become at least as absolute and complete as was ever possessed by Babylonian priest over those initiated in the ancient Mysteries. The clerical power of the Roman priesthood culminated in the erection of the confessional. That confessional was itself borrowed from Babylon. The confession required of the votaries of Rome is entirely different from the confession prescribed in the Word of God. The dictate of Scripture in regard to confession is, "Confess your faults one to another" (James v. 16), which implies that the priest should confess to the people, as well as the people to the priest, if either should sin against the other. This could never have served any purpose of spiritual despotism; and therefore, Rome, leaving the Word of God, has had recourse to the Babylonian system. In that system, secret confession to the priest, according to a prescribed form, was required of all who were admitted to the "Mysteries;" and till such confession had been made, no complete initiation could take place. Thus does Salverté refer to this confession as observed in Greece, in rites that can be clearly traced to a Babylonian origin:—"All the Greeks, from Delphi to Thermopylæ, were initiated in the Mysteries of the temple of Delphi. Their silence in regard to everything they were commanded to keep secret was secured both by the fear of the penalties threatened to a perjured revelation, and by the general CONFESSION exacted of the aspirants after initiation—a confession which caused them greater dread of the indiscretion of the priest, than gave him reason to dread their indiscretion."† This confession is also referred to by Potter, in his "Greek Antiquities," though it has been generally overlooked. In his account of the Eleusinian mysteries, after describing the preliminary ceremonies and instructions before the admission of the candidates for initiation into the immediate presence of the divinities, he thus proceeds:—"Then the priest that initiated them called 'Iεγοφαντης [the Hierophant], proposed certain QUESTIONS, as, whether they were fasting, &c., to which they returned answers in a set form."‡ The etcetera here might not strike a casual reader; but it is a pregnant etcetera, and contains a great deal. It means, Are you free from every violation of chastity? and that not merely in the sense of moral impurity, but in that factitious sense of chastity which Paganism always cherishes. Are you free from the guilt of murder?—for no one guilty of slaughter, even accidentally, could be admitted till he was purged from blood, and there were certain priests, called Köes, who "heard confessions" in such cases, and purged the guilt away.† The strictness of the inquiries in the Pagan confessional is evidently implied in certain licentious poems of Propertius, Tibullus, and Juvenal.‡ Wilkinson, in his chapter on "Private Fasts and Penance," which, he says, "were strictly enforced," in connection with "certain regulations at fixed periods,"§ has several classical quotations, which clearly prove whence Popery derived the kind of questions which have stamped that character of obscenity on its confessional, as exhibited in the notorious pages of Peter Dens.
The pretence under which this auricular confession was required, was, that the solemnities to which the initiated were to be admitted were so high, so heavenly, so holy, that no man with guilt lying on his conscience, and sin unpurged, could lawfully be admitted to them. For the safety, therefore, of those who were to be initiated, it was held to be indispensable that the officiating priest should thoroughly probe their consciences, lest coming without due purgation from previous guilt contracted, the wrath of the gods should be provoked against the profane intruders. This was the pretence; but when we know the essentially unholy nature, both of the gods and their worship, who can fail to see that this was nothing more than a pretence; that the grand object in requiring the candidates for initiation to make confession to the priest of all their secret faults and shortcomings and sins, was just to put them entirely in the power of those to whom the inmost feelings of their souls and their most important secrets were confided? Now, exactly in the same way, and for the very same purposes, has Rome erected the confessional. Instead of requiring priests and people alike, as the Scripture does, to "confess their faults one to another," when either have offended the other, it commands all, on pain of perdition, to confess to the priest,|| whether they have transgressed against him or no, while the priest is under no obligation to confess to the people at all. Without such confession, in the Church of Rome, there can be no admission to the Sacraments, any more than in the days of Paganism there could be admission without confession to the benefit of the Mysteries. Now, this confession is made by every individual, in SECRECY AND IN SOLITUDE, to the priest sitting in the name and clothed with the authority of God,\* invested with the power to examine the conscience, to judge the life, to absolve or condemn according to his mere arbitrary will and pleasure.
This is the grand pivot on which the whole "Mystery of iniquity," as embodied in the Papacy, is made to turn; and wherever it is submitted to, admirably does it serve the design of binding men in abject subjection to the priesthood.
In conformity with the principle out of which the confessional grew, the Church, that is, the clergy, claimed to be the sole depositiaries of the true faith of Christianity. As the Chaldean priests were believed alone to possess the key to the understanding of the Mythology of Babylon, a key handed down to them from primeval antiquity, so the priests of Rome set up to be the sole interpreters of Scripture; they only had the true tradition, transmitted from age to age, without which it was impossible to arrive at its true meaning. They, therefore, require implicit faith in their dogmas; all men were bound to believe as the Church believed, while the Church in this way could shape its faith as it pleased. As possessing supreme authority, also, over the faith, they could let out little or much, as they judged most expedient; and "RESERVE" in teaching the great truths of religion was as essential a principle in the system of Babylon, as it is in Romanism or Tractarianism at this day. It was this priestly claim to dominion over the faith of men, that "imprisoned the truth in unrighteousness"† in the ancient world, so that "darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness the people." It was the very same claim, in the hands of the Roman priests, that ushered in the dark ages, when, through many a dreary century, the Gospel was unknown, and the Bible a sealed book to millions who bore the name of Christ. In every respect, then, we see how justly Rome bears on its forehead the name, "Mystery, Babylon the Great."
CHAPTER II.
OBJECTS OF WORSHIP.
SECTION I.—TRINITY IN UNITY.
IF there be this general coincidence between the systems of Babylon and Rome, the question arises, Does the coincidence stop here? To this the answer is, Far otherwise. We have only to bring the ancient Babylonian Mysteries to bear on the whole system of Rome, and then it will be seen how immensely the one has borrowed from the other. These Mysteries were long shrouded in darkness, but now the thick darkness begins to pass away. All who have paid the least attention to the literature of Greece, Egypt, Phenicia, or Rome are aware of the place which the "Mysteries" occupied in these countries, and that, whatever circumstantial diversities there might be, in all essential respects these "Mysteries" in the different countries were the same. Now, as the language of Jeremiah, already quoted, would indicate that Babylon was the primal source from which all these systems of idolatry flowed, so the deductions of the most learned historians, on mere historical grounds, have led to the same conclusion. From Zonaras† we find that the concurrent testimony of the ancient authors he had consulted was to this effect; for, speaking of arithmetic and astronomy, he says: "It is said that these came from the Chaldees to the Egyptians, and thence to the Greeks." If the Egyptians and Greeks derived their arithmetic and astronomy from Chaldea, seeing these in Chaldea were sacred sciences, and monopolised by the priests, that is sufficient evidence that they must have derived their religion from the same quarter. Both Bunsen and Layard in their researches have come to substantially the same result. The statement of Bunsen is to the effect that the religious system of Egypt was derived from Asia, and "the primitive empire in Babel."‡ Layard, again, though taking a somewhat more favourable view of the system of the Chaldean Magi, than, I am persuaded, the facts of history warrant, nevertheless thus speaks of that system:—"Of the great antiquity of this primitive worship there is abundant evidence, and that it originated among the inhabitants of the Assyrian plains, we have the united testimony of sacred and profane history. It obtained the epithet of perfect, and was believed to be the most ancient of religious systems, having preceded that of the Egyptians (Egyptiis vero antiquiores esse MAGOS Aristoteles auctor est in primo de Philosophia libro.—Theopompi Frag.).” “The identity,” he adds, “of many of the Assyrian doctrines with those of Egypt is alluded to by Porphyry and Clemens;” and, in connection with the same subject, he quotes the following from Birch on Babylonian cylinders and monuments: —“The zodiacal signs .
. . show unequivocally that the Greeks derived their notions and arrangements of the zodiac [and consequently their Mythology, that was intertwined with it] from the Chaldees. The identity of Nimrod with the constellation Orion is not to be rejected.”† Ouvaroff, also, in his learned work on the Eleusinian mysteries, has come to the same conclusion. After referring to the fact that the Egyptian priests claimed the honour of having transmitted to the Greeks the first elements of Polytheism, he thus concludes:—“These positive facts would sufficiently prove, even without the conformity of ideas, that the Mysteries transplanted into Greece, and there united with a certain number of local notions, never lost the character of their origin derived from the cradle of the moral and religious ideas of the universe. All these separate facts—all these scattered testimonies, recur to that fruitful principle which places in the East the centre of science and civilisation.”‡ If thus we have evidence that Egypt and Greece derived their religion from Babylon, we have equal evidence that the religious system of the Phenicians came from the same source. Macrobius shows that the distinguishing feature of the Phenician idolatry must have been imported from Assyria, which, in classic writers, included Babylonia. “The worship of the Architic Venus,” says he, “formerly flourished as much among the Assyrians as it does now among the Phenicians.”§
Now to establish the identity between the systems of ancient Babylon and Papal Rome, we have just to inquire in how far does the system of the Papacy agree with the system established in these Babylonian Mysteries. In prosecuting such an inquiry there are considerable difficulties to be overcome; for, as in geology, it is impossible at all points to reach the deep, underlying strata of the earth's surface, so it is not to be expected that in any one country we should find a complete and connected account of the system established in that country. But yet, even as the geologist, by examining the contents of a fissure here, an upheaval there, and what "crops out" of itself on the surface elsewhere, is enabled to determine, with wonderful certainty, the order and general contents of the different strata over all the earth, so is it with the subject of the Chaldean Mysteries. What is wanted in one country is supplemented in another; and what actually "crops out" in different directions, to a large extent necessarily determines the character of much that does not directly appear on the surface.
Taking, then, the admitted unity and Babylonian character of the ancient Mysteries of Egypt, Greece, Phenicia, and Rome, as the clue to guide us in our researches, let us go on from step to step in our comparison of the doctrine and practice of the two Babylons—the Babylon of the Old Testament and the Babylon of the New.
And here I have to notice, first, the identity of the objects of worship in Babylon and Rome. The ancient Babylonians, just as the modern Romans, recognised in words the unity of the Godhead; and, while worshipping innumerable minor deities, as possessed of certain influence on human affairs, they distinctly acknowledged that there was ONE infinite and Almighty Creator, supreme over all.* Most other nations did the same. "In the early ages of mankind," says Wilkinson in his "Ancient Egyptians," "the existence of a sole and omnipotent Deity, who created all things, seems to have been the universal belief; and tradition taught men the same notions on this subject, which, in later times, have been adopted by all civilised nations."† "The Gothic religion," says Mallet, "taught the being of a supreme God, Master of the Universe, to whom all things were submissive and obedient."—(Tacit. de Morib. Germ.) The ancient Icelandic mythology calls him "the Author of every thing that existeth, the eternal, the living, and awful Being; the searcher into concealed things, the Being that never changeth." It attributeth to this deity "an infinite power, a boundless knowledge, and incorruptible justice."‡ We have evidence of the same having been the faith of ancient Hindostan. Though modern Hinduism recognises millions of gods, yet the Indian sacred books show that originally it had been far otherwise. Major Moor, speaking of Brahm, the supreme God of the Hindoos, says: "Of Him whose Glory is so great, there is no image" (Veda). He "illumines all, delights all, whence all proceeded; that by which they live when born, and that to which all must return" (Veda).§ In the "Institutes of Menu," he is characterised as "He whom the mind alone can perceive; whose essence eludes the external organs, who has no visible parts, who exists from eternity . . . the soul of all beings, whom no being can comprehend."|| In these passages, there is a trace of the existence of Pantheism; but the very language employed bears testimony to the existence among the Hindoos at one period of a far purer faith.
…