4. St. John's construction of his bestial hieroglyphic, with respect to its succession of heads, is built upon the physical economy of animals; which forbids the living existence of any animal in a headless state. p. 248. (1.) But Bp. Walmesley's interpretation of the seven Roman heads produces the extraordinary zoölogical result, that an animal may live and thrive and discharge all his natural functions without the least apparent inconvenience, even when he has no head at all. p. 248.

(2.) Yet the bishop's own familiar use of the term head, when speaking of the pretended head of the Church, might have taught him, that a head, in the language of prophecy, denotes not an individual governor but a form of government administered by any given number of successive individuals. p. 252.

5. Remarks on the wonderful accuracy, with which the symbol of the Roman wild beast has been constructed. p. 254.

II. The second objection, brought by Mr. Rutter against the protestant mode of computation, is that we must have some more direct proof that the 1260 days mean 1260 years, than the mere possibility of such a computation deduced from two texts in Numbers and Ezekiel. p. 256.

1. A direct proof, from the Apocalypse itself, that St. John employs days to denote years. p. 257.

2. A second proof, from the necessity of the case, as exemplified in the short period of three days and a half during which the witnesses lie dead. p. 259.

3. A third proof, deduced from the practice of Bp. Walmesley himself in his computation of the twice mentioned apocalyptic five months, and therefore plainly unobjectionable in the eyes of an orthodox Romanist. p. 260.

III. The third objection against the protestant mode of computation is built upon, what Mr. Rutter deems, an abso

lute proof that the 1260 days CAN NOT denote the same number of literal years. These days, he asserts, relate primarily to the tyranny of a single individual, Antiochus Epiphanes. But, when they primarily relate to a single individual, they мUST BE literal days. Therefore, when they ultimately relate to a future expected Antichrist, they мUST in that case be literal days also. p. 267.

1. Mr. Rutter's conclusion does not follow from his premises, even if those premises be admitted. p. 267. (1.) The brief continuance of the alleged type does not prove the brief continuance of the alleged antitype. p. 267.

(2.) Mr. Rutter violates the principle of analogical homogeneity, in pronouncing the little horn to be a single individual, while yet he acknowledges the ten horns of the Roman beast and the four horns of the Macedonian beast to be ten kingdoms and four kingdoms. p. 267.

2. But his premises cannot be admitted. Where did Mr. Rutter ever find the 1260 days applied by the prophet to the tyranny of Antiochus Epiphanes ? p. 270. 3. His principle moreover is erroneous: for chronological prophecies are, from their very nature, INCAPABLE of a twofold application. p. 272.

IV. The last objection against the protestant mode of computation is built upon Christ's promise of perpetuity to the Catholic Church. p. 272.

1. Errors in Mr. Rutter's statement of this objection. p. 274. (1.) He calls my system a new one, as if I were the first who ever thought of applying the prophecies of Daniel and St. John to the Papacy. p. 274.

(2.) He represents me, as denominating the Papacy an Antichristian kingdom, and as pronouncing the Pope no better than Antichrist: whereas the application of such a character to the bishop and Church of Rome stands in direct opposition to my declared sentiments respecting

respecting the great Antichrist foretold by St. John and Daniel. p. 275.

2. The best mode of ascertaining the force of Mr. Rutter's present objection is to throw it into the form of a regular syllogism. p. 276.

(1.) It rests wholly upon the gratuitous assumption, that the Church of Rome is EXCLUSIVELY the Catholic Church of Christ. p. 276.

(2.) Mr. Rutter's attempt to perplex the question by the case of the Romish missionaries. p. 284.

(3.) He does not perceive that his objection recoils upon his own system of interpreting the tyranny of the little horn. p. 290.

DISSERT. V.

Respecting various points at issue between the Romanists and the Protestants, which bear upon the interpretation of prophecy. p. 294.

THERE are several points at issue between the Romanists

and the Protestants, besides the proper mode of computing the 1260 days. p. 294.

1. Romish objection against protestant commentators drawn from their mutual discrepancy. p. 294.

1. They differ not with regard to the great outlines of prophetic interpretation. p. 295.

2. The objection, such as it is, manifestly recoils against popish commentators. p. 298.

3. Its obvious utility to the Jews against Christians in gene

ral. p. 299.

4. Were the real fact stated to the Popish laity, no argument could have been framed upon it p. 302.

II. A

II. A discussion of the character of the apocalyptic harlot, as set forth by Popish writers. p. 302.

1. Argument from history. Rome pagan was never burned with fire by the northern warriors. p. 305.

2. Argument from the Bible. The apocalyptic Babylon, when once subverted, is never to rise again. p. 307. III. A discussion of Mr. Rutter's opinion, that an expositor, who has once acknowledged himself mistaken on any single point, is never afterwards worthy of the least credit on other points. p. 309.

1. A perfect expositor cannot reasonably be expected. p. 310.

2. As little can such an expositor be expected from the declaration of Daniel respecting the mode in which his prophecies will be interpreted. p. 312.

3. Mr. Rutter's inversion of the expository telescope. p. 314.

IV. A discussion of Mr. Rutter's opinion, that the orthodoxy of the Romish Church is proved by the success of her missionaries among the pagans. p. 316.

V. A discussion of Mr. Rutter's asseveration, that, if the only true Church of Christ be not the Catholic Church, it is impossible to discover any Church which answers to Daniel's description of standing for ever. p. 320.

1. In this asseveration, he falls into the old paralogism of gratuitously identifying the Romish Church and the Catholic Church. p. 321.

2. The absurdity of his attack on the Church of England, wherein he contends that she can claim no higher antiquity than the reign of Henry VIII. p. 324. VI. A discussion of Mr. Rutter's allegorical spiritualization of the two Hebrew kingdoms: wherein he makes Judah a type of the Romish Church, and Israel a type of all heretics and schismatics whether Greeks or Protestants. p. 331.

1. The consequences, which flow from Mr. Rutter's system

as to Judah. p.

332.

2. The'

2. The consequences, which flow from his system as to Israel. p. 336.

3. Mr. Rutter's own mode of managing his system. p. 343. 4. A statement of the genuine sense, in which we are to un

derstand those Scriptures that represent Israel and Jerusalem as a joint type of the Catholic Church of Christ. p. 345.

(1.) The condition of ancient Israel. p. 345.

(2.) The condition of the Christian Church, as foretold by prophecy, and as attested by history. p. 346. VII. A discussion of the golden rule of St. Vincent of Lerius, as advocated and recommended by Mr, Rutter.

p. 355.

1. The real import of the protestant doctrine, that the revealed word of God is the SOLE rule of faith. p. 356. 2. The principle, on which Protestants employ a body of men to expound the Bible to the people, notwithstanding their maintenance of this doctrine. p. 359.

3. The principle, on which the Church of England requires subscription to her Articles and Homilies, notwith

standing her members maintain the doctrine in question. p. 366.

4. The case of those, who refuse subscription. p. 373.

DISSERT. VI.

Respecting the scriptural

use of the word Mystery. p. 376.

SECT. I.

On the general use of the word Mystery in Holy Scripture. p. 376.

THE idea, conveyed to the early gentile converts by the scriptural use of the word Mystery, must have been that of the ancient pagan Mysteries. p. 376.

1. An