presbyter of the city of Ephesus, St. John convicted the Author, and condemned the book'.

Suppose now, for argument's sake, the Apocalypse not to be inspired, and not to be written by St. John.

Here is a book, speaking, as it were, from Heaven; speaking in the name of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Spirit; speaking in the name of John to the Bishops and Churches of Asia; that is, to those of St. John's own province; and arrogating the very functions which belonged to St. John himself, and to him alone; assuming the office of administering rebuke and correction to the Bishops of St. John's own jurisdiction.

Even if any one can bring himself to imagine that the seven Asiatic Angels-devout and holy men, like Polycarp-would have tolerated such presumptuous usurpation, (which is, indeed, incredible,) no one, I apprehend, will suppose, that the one Asiatic Archangel-I mean St. John-would have borne it. No; he would have treated the author of the Apocalypse as he treated Cerinthus. He would have condemned him as he condemned the Asiatic presbyter; and we should have known the author of the Apocalypse only as a second Diotrephes 2.

On the whole, then, we conclude, from the voice of the Angels, and from the silence of the Archangel, that the Apocalypse is inspired, and that its Author is St. John.

1 See "Lectures on Inspiration," Lect. V. p. 160.

2 3 John 9.

Before we confirm this conclusion by a brief appeal to internal evidence, let us observe, that this primitive testimony could not be invalidated by more recent allegations of a contrary kind, even if those allegations did not admit of being easily refuted on other ground in addition to those of lateness in time.

Concerning this matter of fact, I mean the genuineness of the Apocalypse, the testimony of the Asiatic Churches of St. John's own age is worth more than all the opinions of all subsequent time. The truth also is, that all sceptical surmises on this matter, which are but slight and partial, may be easily accounted for. First, (as we have shown,) from the erroneous imputation of Millenarian doctrines to the Apocalypse, which cast a temporary cloud over it; and, next, from the reserve practised by some Churches', (as, indeed, by our own,) not publicly reading the Apocalypse in their religious assemblies2; whence it came to pass, that the Apocalypse was not inserted in some lists of Books to be read in some Churches, and thence by some it was erroneously imagined not to be Canonical.

But these allegations, and all others of a like tendency, soon lost all credit; and the primitive

1 Conc. Laod. can. Ix. Other Churches pursued a different course. By a decree of the Fourth Council of Toledo, (A.D. 633, can. xvii.) a Presbyter was liable to excommunication, if he did not read the Apocalypse in the Church at a certain period of the year. See APPENdix K in the Author's Edition of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse, Lond. 1849, p. 203.

2 See Hooker, V. xx. 4.

belief concerning the inspiration and genuineness of the Apocalypse became universal. In the prophetic words of Eusebius',-"Though men dispute on this side and that concerning the Apocalypse, yet assuredly in due time its claims will be acknowledged, on the ground of primitive testimony.

V. If now we open the Book itself, every thing there harmonizes with this belief 3.

The Author calls himself John. I John, who am also your brother, and companion in tribulation *. John to the Seven Churches which are in Asia 5. I John saw these things, and heard them. Whom would this name, placed thus by itself, without any epithet or accompaniment, suggest? Whom but the Apostle and Evangelist, St. John? He, and he alone, was John; their brother, and their pastor, and their guide: and no one else in his age, writing to St. John's own Churches, would have ventured to assume the name of John, in this bold and unqualified simplicity.

Again: the Author writes from the isle of Pat

1 Euseb. iii. 24.

? See also St. Jerome, ad Dardan. Ep. 129.

I have not entered into the question of alleged discrepancy of style between the Apocalypse and St. John's Gospel. (Euseb. vii. 25.) This has been already noticed in "Lectures on Inspiration," ix. p. 220-2, and has been well discussed by Guerike, Einleitung in das N. T. § 60, p. 555. And, after all, the subject of the Apocalypse is so different from that of the Gospel, that arguments from style are scarcely admissible here. No one would argue from the Satires of Horace that he did not write the Odes. And yet how different is the style! 5 Rev. i. 4. 6 Rev. xxii. 8.

4 Rev. i. 9.

mos, where he was, for the testimony of the Lord Jesus; and we know that St. John was banished to that island by the Emperor Domitian, when he persecuted the Church'.

It may be asked, Why then does he not call himself an Apostle? We might ask, in reply, Why does not St. James? Why does not St. Jude? Why does not St. John himself, in his Epistles? The name John would suffice to identify him; and, by withholding the title of Apostle, and calling himself only a servant of God, and their brother in tribulations, he would show, that though he had the gift of prophecy, and was permitted to understand all mysteries, and to speak with the tongue of Angels', yet he was not elated above measure by the abundance of his Revelations ; the more he was exalted by God, the more he would humble himself with men; The secret of the Lord is among them that fear him*; and mysteries are revealed to the meek".

Further the Author of the Apocalypse, modest as he is in the description of himself, speaks, as we have seen, to the Angels of Asia with all authority: he distributes praise and blame like a Ruler and a Judge. Now, there was only one person then alive in the whole world who was entitled to use this language; and that one person was not only entitled to use it, by his double character as the last sur

1 See above, p. 19.

3 2 Cor. xii. 7.

21 Cor. xiii. 1, 2.
4 Psalm xxv. 13.

5. Ecclus. iii. 19.

viving Apostle, and as Metropolitan of Asia, but he was solemnly bound to use it. By reason of his office, he was obliged, in duty to CHRIST, Who called him to it, to speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority'. He was bound to be no respecter of persons; to be instant in season, out of season; to reprove, rebuke, exhort. This one person was ST. JOHN.

Again we find that the Author of the Apocalypse, who writes to the Seven Angels, or Bishops, gives them an Apostolic Benediction,-The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you 3.

And without all contradiction (says the Apostle) the less is blessed of the better, or greater. Therefore, again, we infer that the writer of the Apocalypse is some one greater than the Bishops of Asia. He is some one entitled to bless them. Now, there was one person in the world, and one alone, who, in a spiritual sense, was greater than the Bishops of Asia, and so was entitled to bless them, and might justly be expected to do so; and that person was ST. John.

VI. Finally, let us remember, that the Catholic Church throughout the world which is the Body of Christ, and to which He has promised His Spirit and His presence, receives the Apocalypse as Canonical Scripture and as the work of St. John.

1 Tit. ii. 15.

Rev. i. 4. xxii. 21.

2 2 Tim. iv. 2.

4 Heb. vii. 7.

5 Col. i. 28. Matt. xxviii. 20. John xvi. 13.