But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words,
and seal the book, even to the time of the end:
many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Daniel 12:4
"Pierre Jurieu (1637-1713), minister of the French Protestant church in Rotterdam published a book on the Papacy, which made considerable stir.' Jurieu identified the Roman Catholic Church
with the mystic Babylon of Revelation, and saw the antichrist in the Papacy.
This proposition, of course, was not a new thing, having been held by Luther, and long before him by the Waldensians and other opponents of the papal theocracy.
But in Jurieu's book this teaching was presented with rigorous logic and a remarkable abundance of arguments.
Fiercely attacked by the French priest and celebrated critic, Richard Simon (1618-1712),' Jurieu defended himself in his book on the fulfillment of prophecy.' Simon answered without delay,' and then Jacques-Benigne Bossuet (1627-1724), bishop of Meaux, decided to enter the debate.' Jurieu had proved that "the Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18 is antichristian, papal Rome, not pagan Rome."
In contrast to Jurieu, Bossuet maintained that "as a constant tradition among the Fathers since the beginnings of Christianity, Babylon, whose fall was predicted by St. John, was conquering Rome with her empire; and so falls to the ground the Protestant system, which fails to seek, as the Fathers do, the fall of a great empire and of a Rome mistress of the universe through her victories, rather than the fall of a Christian church, which St. Peter's chair put at the head of the Christian churches."'
In order to "vindicate the insult made to St. Peter's chair by those who consider it as the seat of the antichristian kingdom," Bossuet adopts the Praeterist system of the Jesuit, Alcazar (1554-1613), according to which the first twenty chapters of the book of Revelation have been entirely fulfilled in the past history of pagan Rome. Coming to chapter 17, he says: "St. John explains clearly that the beast and the woman are, in the main, the same thing, both being Rome with her empire."'
Bossuet, nevertheless, perceived the difficulties of his position. After he had resolutely set aside the futuristic interpretation of the book of Revelation, he admitted that its prophecies might have a further fulfillment in the last days.
He said: "I cannot consent to the argument of those who put off the fulfillment at the end of the age." But a little farther on we find: "Who is not able to see that it is very easy to find a connected and literal explanation of Revelation, perfectly fulfilled in the sack of Rome under Alaric, without excluding any other possible fulfillment at the end of the age ?""
Everybody knows how the jansenists have separated their cause from the cause of Protestantism. But they also vehemently attacked the Jesuits, considered as responsible for the constitution Unigenitus (1713), by which Pope Clement XI condemned Quesnel.
Fighting at the same time against both Protestants and Catholics who approved the constitution, a Jansenist brought out a very interesting book on spiritual Babylon.
First appears this statement: "I repudiate with abhorrence the impious idea that the Babylon of St. John is the Roman Church ;" and then the author adds: "I assert without any fear that the Roman court, with her pride, her false pretensions, her teachings, her deportment; briefly, all the corruption found in her and the spirit so radically opposed to her church and to the see of St. Peter that animates her, constitute the Babylon of St. John."
This idea was welcomed by an Italian Benedictine monk from Bergamo, Giangirolamo Caleppio."
A Jansenist also, Caleppio laments the apostasy of the Catholic Church; he says God will finally reject her, and order the faithful Christians to come out of this spiritual Babylon.
At the same time when Caleppio's first dissertation was printed, a Jesuit from Chile, Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz (1731-1801), began the study of Biblical prophecies.
Banished from Spain and all Spanish possessions with the other
Jesuits, he had settled in the town of Imola, near Bologna. Having lost every hope of being reestablished in his former office, after his order had been suppressed by Pope Clement XIV (1773), Lacunza dedicated himself to long meditations and wrote a large book, in Spanish, upon the second coming of our Lord.
-*-Lacunza reminded the followers of Bossuet that pagan Rome has never been guilty of fornication with the kings of the earth;
-*-that the destruction threatened to Babylon cannot be a past event, as it belongs to the seven last vials;
-*-that Alaric's invasion, which did not bring the total ruin of ancient Rome, happened when Rome had already made a profession of Christianity.
He then impugns the futurist interpretation, according to which Rome will be ruined when, having ceased to be Catholic, it will be pagan again. He thinks Protestants have taken an unfair advantage of the prophecies in their controversy with Catholicism, but acknowledges that they have mingled truth with fables. Then he concludes:
"Rome, not idolatrous but Christian, not the head of the Roman Empire, but the head of Christendom, and center of unity of the true church of the living God, may very well without ceasing from this dignity, at some time or other incur the guilt, and before God be guilty of fornication with the kings of the earth, and amenable to all its consequences. And in this there is not any inconsistency, however much her defenders may shake the head. And this same Rome, in that same state, may receive upon herself the horrible chastisement spoken of in the prophecy." "
In France, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, Abbot Bernard Lambert (1738-1813) came to the same conclusion: "We must either boldly contradict Revelation's prophecy on the terrible catastrophe threatened to Rome, or frankly admit that these threatenings concern Christian Rome and will be delayed until a time still future."
No wonder the books of fathers Lacunza and Lambert were put in the Index of prohibited books. It is only strange that those of Jean-Pierre Agier (1748-1823) escaped the same fate. A Jansenist and a Galilean, he presented the same theories.
Explaining Revelation 17 in his "Comm. sur l'Apoc.," t. II, Paris, 1823, p. 124, Agier says, concerning Babylon: "Christian Rome, present Rome."
To be sure, the Protestant position must be very strong in order to draw out such admissions from writers who were born in Catholicism and remained Catholic until their death."
Ministry 1938/AlfredVaucher
and seal the book, even to the time of the end:
many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Daniel 12:4
"Pierre Jurieu (1637-1713), minister of the French Protestant church in Rotterdam published a book on the Papacy, which made considerable stir.' Jurieu identified the Roman Catholic Church
 |
| Jurieu |
This proposition, of course, was not a new thing, having been held by Luther, and long before him by the Waldensians and other opponents of the papal theocracy.
But in Jurieu's book this teaching was presented with rigorous logic and a remarkable abundance of arguments.
Fiercely attacked by the French priest and celebrated critic, Richard Simon (1618-1712),' Jurieu defended himself in his book on the fulfillment of prophecy.' Simon answered without delay,' and then Jacques-Benigne Bossuet (1627-1724), bishop of Meaux, decided to enter the debate.' Jurieu had proved that "the Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18 is antichristian, papal Rome, not pagan Rome."
 |
| Bossuet |
In contrast to Jurieu, Bossuet maintained that "as a constant tradition among the Fathers since the beginnings of Christianity, Babylon, whose fall was predicted by St. John, was conquering Rome with her empire; and so falls to the ground the Protestant system, which fails to seek, as the Fathers do, the fall of a great empire and of a Rome mistress of the universe through her victories, rather than the fall of a Christian church, which St. Peter's chair put at the head of the Christian churches."'
In order to "vindicate the insult made to St. Peter's chair by those who consider it as the seat of the antichristian kingdom," Bossuet adopts the Praeterist system of the Jesuit, Alcazar (1554-1613), according to which the first twenty chapters of the book of Revelation have been entirely fulfilled in the past history of pagan Rome. Coming to chapter 17, he says: "St. John explains clearly that the beast and the woman are, in the main, the same thing, both being Rome with her empire."'
Bossuet, nevertheless, perceived the difficulties of his position. After he had resolutely set aside the futuristic interpretation of the book of Revelation, he admitted that its prophecies might have a further fulfillment in the last days.
He said: "I cannot consent to the argument of those who put off the fulfillment at the end of the age." But a little farther on we find: "Who is not able to see that it is very easy to find a connected and literal explanation of Revelation, perfectly fulfilled in the sack of Rome under Alaric, without excluding any other possible fulfillment at the end of the age ?""
 |
| Pope Clement XI |
Fighting at the same time against both Protestants and Catholics who approved the constitution, a Jansenist brought out a very interesting book on spiritual Babylon.
First appears this statement: "I repudiate with abhorrence the impious idea that the Babylon of St. John is the Roman Church ;" and then the author adds: "I assert without any fear that the Roman court, with her pride, her false pretensions, her teachings, her deportment; briefly, all the corruption found in her and the spirit so radically opposed to her church and to the see of St. Peter that animates her, constitute the Babylon of St. John."
This idea was welcomed by an Italian Benedictine monk from Bergamo, Giangirolamo Caleppio."
A Jansenist also, Caleppio laments the apostasy of the Catholic Church; he says God will finally reject her, and order the faithful Christians to come out of this spiritual Babylon.
At the same time when Caleppio's first dissertation was printed, a Jesuit from Chile, Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz (1731-1801), began the study of Biblical prophecies.
Banished from Spain and all Spanish possessions with the other
 |
| Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz |
-*-Lacunza reminded the followers of Bossuet that pagan Rome has never been guilty of fornication with the kings of the earth;
-*-that the destruction threatened to Babylon cannot be a past event, as it belongs to the seven last vials;
-*-that Alaric's invasion, which did not bring the total ruin of ancient Rome, happened when Rome had already made a profession of Christianity.
He then impugns the futurist interpretation, according to which Rome will be ruined when, having ceased to be Catholic, it will be pagan again. He thinks Protestants have taken an unfair advantage of the prophecies in their controversy with Catholicism, but acknowledges that they have mingled truth with fables. Then he concludes:
"Rome, not idolatrous but Christian, not the head of the Roman Empire, but the head of Christendom, and center of unity of the true church of the living God, may very well without ceasing from this dignity, at some time or other incur the guilt, and before God be guilty of fornication with the kings of the earth, and amenable to all its consequences. And in this there is not any inconsistency, however much her defenders may shake the head. And this same Rome, in that same state, may receive upon herself the horrible chastisement spoken of in the prophecy." "
In France, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, Abbot Bernard Lambert (1738-1813) came to the same conclusion: "We must either boldly contradict Revelation's prophecy on the terrible catastrophe threatened to Rome, or frankly admit that these threatenings concern Christian Rome and will be delayed until a time still future."
 |
| Agier |
Explaining Revelation 17 in his "Comm. sur l'Apoc.," t. II, Paris, 1823, p. 124, Agier says, concerning Babylon: "Christian Rome, present Rome."
To be sure, the Protestant position must be very strong in order to draw out such admissions from writers who were born in Catholicism and remained Catholic until their death."
Ministry 1938/AlfredVaucher