Larger font
Smaller font
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font

    August 12, 1886

    “The Saxons Enter Britain” The Signs of the Times 12, 31, p. 484.

    “WHILST Italy was ravaged by the Goths, and a succession of feeble tyrants oppressed the provinces beyond the Alps, the British island separated itself [A.D. 409] from the body of the Roman empire. The regular forces, which guarded that remote province, had been gradually withdrawn; and Britain was abandoned without defense to the Saxon pirates, and the savages of Ireland and Caledonia. The Britons, reduced to this extremity, no longer relied on the tardy and doubtful aid of a declining monarchy. They assembled in arms, repelled the invaders, and rejoiced in the important discovery of their own strength... Britain was irrecoverably lost. But as the emperors wisely acquiesced in the independence of a remote province, the separation was not embittered by the reproach of tyranny or rebellion; and the claims of allegiance and protection were succeeded by the mutual and voluntary offices of national friendship.This revolution dissolved the artificial fabric of civil and military government; and the independent country, during a period of forty years, till the descent of the Saxons, was ruled by the authority of the clergy, the nobles, and the municipal towns.”—Gibbon, Dec. and Fall, chap. 31, par. 41, 42.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.1

    “Here, then, in the year 409, was our England an independent State. In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle—the curious but meager record of early events, which is supposed to have existed in the time of Alfred, and even to have been party compiled by that great king—there is the following entry which singularly agrees with the chronology of Greek and Latin historians:—SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.2

    “‘A. 409.—This year the Goths took the city of Rome by storm, and after this the Romans never ruled in Britain, and this was about eleven hundred and ten years after it was built. Altogether they ruled in Britain four hundred and seventy years since Caius Julius first sought the land.’”—Knight’s History of England, chap. 4, last paragraph.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.3

    “It was to defend Italy against the Goths that Rome in the opening of the fifth century withdrew her legions from Britain, and from that moment the province was left to struggle unaided against the Picts. Nor were these its only enemies. While marauders from Ireland, whose inhabitants then bore the name of Scots, harried the West, the boats of Saxon pirates, as we have seen, were swarming off its eastern and southern coasts. For forty years Britain held bravely out against these assailants; but civil strife broke its powers of resistance, and its rulers fell back at last on the fatal policy by which the empire invited its doom while striving to avert it,—the policy of matching barbarian against barbarian. By the usual promises of land and pay a band of warriors was drawn for this purpose from Jutland in 449, with two caldermen, Hengist and Horsa, at their head. If by English history we mean the history of Englishmen in the land which from that time they made their own, it is with this landing of Hengist’s war-band that English history begins. They landed on the shores of the Isle of Thanet at a spot known since as Ebbsfleet. No spot can be so sacred to Englishmen as the spot which first felt the tread of English feet.”—Green’s England, chap. 1, par. 17.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.4

    “Hengist and Horsa, who, according to the Anglo-Saxon historians, landed in the year 449 on the shore which is called Ypwinesfleet, were personages of more than common srot. ‘They were the sons of Wihtgils; Wihtgils son of Witta, Witta of Weccta, Wecta of Woden.’ So says the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and adds, ‘From this Woden sprung all our royal families.’ These descendants, in the third generation, from the great Saxon divinity, came over in three boats. They came by invitation of Wyrtgeone—Vortigern—king of the Britons. The king gave them land in the southeast of the country, on condition that they should fight against the Picts; and they did fight, and had the victory wheresoever they came. And then they sent for the Angles, and told them of the worthlessness of the people and the excellences of the land. This is the Saxon narrative.”—Knight’s England, chap. 5, par. 6.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.5

    “The work for which the mercenaries had been hired was quickly done, and the Picts are said to have been scattered to the winds in a battle fought on the eastern coast of Britain. But danger from the Pict was hardly over when danger came from the Jutes themselves. Their fellow-pirates must have flocked from the Channel to their settlement in Thanet; the inlet between Thanet and the mainland was crossed, and the Englishmen won their first victory over the Britons in forcing their passage of the Medway at the village of Aylesford. A second defeat at the passage of the Cray drove the British forces in terror upon London; but the ground was soon won back again, and it was not till 465 that a series of petty conflicts which had gone on along the shores of Thanet made way for a decisive struggle at Wippedsflett. Here, however, the overthrow was so terrible that from this moment all hope of saving Northern Kent seems to have been abandoned, and it was only on its southern shore that the Britons held their ground. Ten years later, in 475, the long contest was over, and with the fall of Lymne, whose broken walls look, from the slope to which they cling, over the great flat of Romney Marsh, the work of the first English conqueror was done.”—Green’s England, chap. 1, par. 18.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.6

    Other such events followed fast, of which we will now have Gibbon to tell the story, and close the narrative of the Saxon conquest of Britain:—SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.7

    “While the kingdoms of the Franks and Visigoths were established in Gaul and Spain, the Saxons achieved the conquest of Britain, the third great diocese of the Prefecture of the West.”SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.8

    “About forty years after the dissolution of the Roman government, Vortigern appears to have obtained the supreme, though precarious command of the princes and cities of Britain. That unfortunate monarch has been almost unanimously condemned for the weak and mischievous policy of inviting a formidable stranger, to repel the vexatious inroads of a domestic foe.... Vortigern could only balance the various perils, which assaulted on every side his throne and his people; and his policy may deserve either praise or excuse, if he preferred the alliance of those barbarians, whose naval power rendered them the most dangerous enemies and the most serviceable allies. Hengist and Horsa, as they ranged along the eastern coast with three ships, were engaged, by the promise of an ample stipend, to embrace the defense of Britain; and their intrepid valor soon delivered the country from the Caledonian invaders.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.9

    “The Isle of Thanet, a secure and fertile district, was allotted for the residence of these German auxiliaries, and they were supplied, according to the treaty, with a plentiful allowance of clothing and provisions. This favorable reception encouraged five thousand warriors to embark with their families in seventeen vessels, and the infant power of Hengist was fortified by this strong and seasonable reenforcement. The crafty barbarian suggested to Vortigern the obvious advantage of fixing, in the neighborhood of the Picts, a colony of faithful allies: a third fleet of forty ships, under the command of his son and nephew, sailed from Germany, ravaged the Orkneys, and disembarked a new army on the coast of Northumberland, or Lothian, at the opposite extremity of the devoted land. It was easy to foresee, but it was impossible to prevent, the impending evils. The two nations were soon divided and exasperated by mutual jealousies. The Saxons magnified all that they had done and suffered in the cause of an ungrateful people; while the Britons regretted the liberal rewards which could not satisfy the avarice of those haughty mercenaries. The causes of fear and hatred were inflamed into an irreconcilable quarrel. The Saxons flew to arms; and if they perpetrated a treacherous massacre during the security of a feast, they destroyed the reciprocal confidence which sustains the intercourse of peace and war.—Gibbon, Dec. and Fall, chap. 38, par. 32, 33.SITI August 12, 1886, page 484.10


    (To be continued.)

    “The Restoration of the Papacy” The Signs of the Times 12, 31, pp. 486, 487.

    THAT our own country will play an important part in the restoration of the Papacy to that place where it can make war upon the saints, we are fully satisfied. And that causes are now at work which will bring it about, we regard as certain. Not that the Papacy as such will gain power here, for that we do not believe. But that the organization that does secure the power will exert it in favor of the institutions of the Papacy, and by the help of the Papacy. In the words of the prophecy, he “causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.” Revelation 13:12.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.1

    In this country the spirit of anarchy is rife as well as in Europe. The conflict between labor and capital is growing more and more bitter. The so-called labor element is so unsteady, and so violent in its methods, that capitalists are becoming afraid to invest in large enterprises, and capital by the millions lies unused in bank vaults. In connection with these things there is a large train of evils which al see and which many dread, but which we cannot here take time to trace. Now in the midst of all these troubles, and upon them in great measure as its capital, there is rapidly rising into prominence a party which traces all these evils directly to the “secular character of the Constitution of our country,” and proposes to rectify all these difficulties by a religious amendment to that instrument. This party argues that God is not once named in the Constitution; that neither Christ nor his religion is recognized there; that the Bible receives no legal sanction as the law of the Nation; that under this order of things the tests of the Christian religion are not applied in this country; that, consequently, the land is filling up with multitudes of foreigners who bring the baser elements of European society with them; that all the troubles that afflict the land—the strikes, the floods, the cyclones, &c., &c.,—are but the judgments of God upon the Nation for its terrible shortcoming in the matter of the deplorably secular Constitution; and that the only remedy, the only possible escape, is to so amend the National Constitution that in it God will be declared to be the Sovereign, Christ, the King, and the Bible the law, of the Nation, and so “place all Christian laws, institutions and usages of our Government upon an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land.”SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.2

    This is not a Catholic movement. It is essentially Protestant; it originated with Protestants, and is carried on by Protestants, though willing to enlist the Catholics wherever practicable. And though directly contrary to Protestant principles, it is favored by almost all denominations of Protestants. It will be seen at a glance that such a scheme, if successful, would be nothing short of union of Church and State. For when Christian laws, Christian institutions, and Christian usages become a part of the fundamental law of the land, the State becomes the great conservator of the Christian religion. Religious tests must be applied, obedience to religious precepts must be enforced, and in all disputes the State becomes the expounder of Christianity; the State by its judicial authority decides what is, and what is not, a Christian law, a Christian institution, or a Christian usage. For the main question is not whether such a movement, if successful, would be a union of Church and State, this is conceded by all, except those who advocate it, and it is not to be expected that they would concede it; but the question is, Will it be successful. We verily believe that it will. The great majority of the nation do not yet so believe. Thousands do not believe that it will succeed; other thousands do not believe that, even were it successful, there would ever any such evil follow, that any such menace to liberty would attend it, as has always attended such an illicit connection. And in this very unbelief lies one of the most probable elements of its success. With the history before them, of all such unions, it is difficult for men in this enlightened age to realize that there could be any danger of a repetition of such things. But all such doubts rest upon an overweening confidence in human nature. Human nature is the same in all ages. Religious bigotry and priestly ambition are ever the same whether found in the sixteenth century or in the nineteenth. Clothed with the civil power Protestant religionists who are ambitious to obtain it, and their oppressiveness will be as cruel as would be that of Catholics in like circumstances.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.3

    What then are the evidences of the success of the religious amendment movement?—First, and the greatest of all is, of course, the prophecy. There stands the scripture, Revelation 13:11-17, which describes the rise and work of a power in the earth, and every specification of the scripture is fully met by our own nation, and not one of the specifications is met by any other nation. That scripture speaks of this power “saying to them that dwell on the earth that they should make an image to the beast which had the wound by a sword and did live.” The beast is the representative of that union of Church and State which formed the Papacy. An image to the beast, therefore, could not be formed otherwise than by a union of Church and State, and with such union formed by Protestants. For if formed by Catholics it would be but a part of the beast itself and not a likeness. But when such a union is formed by Protestants, as it is in defiance of Protestant principles, it is simply a formation of an image, a likeness, to the Papacy. It is true that while the prophecy is an evidence to us who believe in this application of it, it can be an evidence to others only by our giving to them evidence of the justness of the application. But when the prophecy so plainly points out that such a thing shall be; and we see working before us in this nation the very thing which the prophecy shows; then with confidence we point to this as proof that our application of the prophecy is correct.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.4

    Aside from this however, there are many evidences which point strongly towards the success of the movement. We repeat, Almost all the Protestant churches favor it. The Prohibition Party in most of the States favors it. The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union favors it. True the women cannot vote; but they can influence a multitude of votes. But it is not absolutely certain that the women will not yet have the right to vote—the party which is working for the religious amendment, favors woman suffrage also; and if they do obtain the right, they will vote for the religious amendment. The movement will have the almost undivided support of the workingmen throughout the nation. And besides all these the Catholics favor it. Yea, the men who lead in the movement are willing, and even glad, to receive the support of the Catholic Church. Now take the churches, the Prohibition Party, the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, the workingmen, the Catholics, and all the politicians who will go as they see the tide going, and bring all these together at the polls and the movement would carry. The probability that it would is increased by another element that enters largely into the subject. That is, the argument that is swung in on every possible occasion by the advocates of this amendment, to the effect that to oppose this movement is to support atheism, and that, in fact, all such opposition is atheism. There are thousands of people who might not really favor the amendment, yet rather than to be set down and treated as atheists, they would hesitate to oppose it.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.5

    There is one thing that yet remains to be mentioned,—the thing that underlies this whole subject; the one thing upon which all these parties, churches, and people, heartily unite; the one thing that is the key of the whole movement; the one thing which in itself carries the evidence of the success of the proposition to form a religious amendment to the Constitution,—that is, the Sunday and its protection, the “American sabbath,” and its preservation. This has already been the leading question in States, and it is fast becoming the leading question in the Nation. Almost all the pulpits of the land denounce the “desecration” of Sunday and demand laws for its protection; the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union works earnestly for Sunday and for laws to enforce its observance; the Prohibitionists resolve that man needs the Sunday sabbath; the workingman in all occupations must have his Sunday rest, and to make it sure he must have half of Saturday besides; the Catholic Plenary Council earnestly appeals to all Catholics without distinction to use their influence and power as citizens to assist in the movement for a better observance of Sunday; politicians in political conventions will move, and give, rousingly, “three cheers for the triumph of this great principle” of the religious Sunday enforced by law; the Spiritualists join in the cry; and the National Reform Party gathers them all into one grand movement to amend the National Constitution so that Sunday, the one grand distinguishing institution of the Papacy, may be declared by law to be the Christian sabbath, and so that all people shall be compelled to observe it as such. Now we say, Let this question be agitated but a few years more, and let it be brought to a vote with the Sunday as the test, as it surely will be, and its success is certain.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.1

    And just as surely as its success is certain, the union of Church and State is sure and persecution inevitable. Thus will be formed the image to the beast—the likeness to the Papacy—and he “causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast [the Papacy], whose deadly wound was healed.” So shall apostate Protestantism exalt the Papacy in this country and compel all, under civil pains and penalties, to do her honor. When this question is viewed in the light of these events of fact which are occurrent before the eyes of all people, the imminence of the terrible ordeal that is involved in it is startling.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.2

    The discussion of the question of persecution, we are compelled to defer to another article.SITI August 12, 1886, page 486.3


    “The End of the Tribulation of Those Days” The Signs of the Times 12, 31, p. 487.

    “WHEN, where, and who, was the last martyr? My neighbor thinks it was in 1778, but we cannot find it in any book that we have. Christ said: ‘Immediately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light.’ Now what we want to get at is, What great event shows the end of the days of tribulation?”SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.1


    Your neighbor is mistaken; there have been several martyrs since 1778. In 1780 there was a woman burned by the Inquisition in Spain; and in the same country, in 1826, a Jew was burned, and a Quaker schoolmaster hanged by the same power. In Italy, as late as 1850-1855, there was severe persecution, and at Fermo one person died under torture. This is the latest martyrdom of which we know; and we think that it is the last one. You will find it mentioned in Eugene Lawrence’s “Historical Studies,” in the article “Dominic and the Inquisition,” fifth paragraph from the end. In the same article you will find mention of the woman burned in 1780; and in the “Encyclopedia Britannica,” article “Inquisition,” you will find mention of the deaths of the Jew and the Quaker.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.2

    It is a mistake to so interpret the scripture referred to as to make it reach to the last martyr. The scripture says, “after the tribulation of those days.” Now occasional and local persecution, with three or four, or a half-dozen martyrs in a century, could not properly be called tribulation, much less could it be the tribulation referred to in the text. “Such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” Matthew 24:21, 29. This could be no less than universal, a flood poured upon the whole church, and so great that, except the days had been shortened, there had been none “elect” surviving. Therefore when this great general persecution ceased, then if may be said the tribulation ended. This brings us to your last question: “What great event shows the end of the days of the tribulation?”SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.3

    We believe there is an event clearly marked by a date upon which we may definitely fix as the end of the tribulation upon the church. The Inquisition was the great arm—the tribulum, threshing sledge—of the Papacy in the dreadful tribulation which it laid upon the church of Christ for ages; and the Order of the Jesuits was the strength of the Inquisition. On this point we could present a volume of evidence, but we have space for hardly more than a word. Here is one testimony:—SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.4

    “A Jesuit plotted with Mary of Scotland for the assassination of Elizabeth. Another strove to blow up James I. and the English Parliament with gun-powder. The Jesuits were charged with being constantly on the watch to assassinate William of Orange, and Henry of Hanover. Anthony Passevin, a Jesuit, is stated by Manrovieff, the church historian of Russia, to have taught the Polish Catholics to persecute the Greek Christians, and to have plunged Russia and Poland in an inexpiable war. Jesuits were constantly gliding over Europe from court to court, engaged in performing the mandates of popes and kings; and, if we may trust the records of history, the fatal vow of obedience was often employed by their superiors to crush the instincts of humanity and the voice of conscience.”—Historical Studies, Loyola and the Jesuits.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.5

    Here is another:—SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.6

    “To what country of Europe shall we turn where we are not able to track the Jesuit by his bloody foot-prints? What page of modern history shall we open and not read fresh proofs that the papal doctrine of killing excommunicated kings was not meant to slumber in forgotten tomes, but to be acted out in the living world? We see Henry III. falling by the dagger. Henry IV. [both of France] perishes by the same consecrated weapon. The King of Portugal dies by their order. The great prince of Orange is despatched by their agent, shot down at the door of his own dining-room. How many assassins they sent to England to murder Elizabeth, history attests. That she escaped their machinations is one of the marvels of history... In the Gunpowder Plot we see them deliberately planning to destroy at one blow the nobility and gentry of England. To them we owe those civil wars which for so many years drenched with blood the fair provinces of France. They laid the train of that crowning horror, the St. Bartholomew Massacre. Philip II. and the Jesuits share between them the guilt of the ‘Invincible Armada,’ which instead of inflicting the measureless ruin and havoc which its authors intended, by a most merciful Providence became the means of exhausting the treasures and overthrowing the prestige of Spain. What a harvest of plots, tumults, seditions, revelations, torturings, poisonings, assassinations, regicides, and massacres has Christendom reaped from the seed sown by the Jesuits.”—Wylie’s History of Protestantism, book 15, chap. 5, par. 5.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.7

    And here is one more:—SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.8

    “Its [the Order of Jesuits] services to Roman Catholicism have been incalculable. The Jesuits alone rolled back the tide of Protestant advance when that half of Europe which had not already shaken off its allegiance to the Papacy, was threatening to do so, and the whole horrors of the counter-reformation are theirs singly.”—Encyclopedia Britannica, art., Jesuits, par. 11.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.9

    As the Inquisition was the tribulum by which the Papacy inflicted such sore tribulation upon the church, and as the Order of the Jesuits was the strength of the Inquisition, therefore we believe that the abolition of the Order of the Jesuits is the event that marks the end of the tribulation. They had been expelled from Portugal in 1753, from France in 1761, and from Spain in 1767; but these decrees could not be permanently successful as long as the Jesuits retained their Order intact, and had the support of the Pope. But it was not long before the Pope was forced to turn against them, and the final crash came. Of this event we give the following narrative:—SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.10

    “At last came the final blow that was to shatter into pieces the great army of Loyola. For more than two centuries the Jesuits had been lighting the battles of Rome. To exalt the supremacy of the Pope, they had died by thousands in English jails and Indian solitudes, had pierced land and sea to carry the strange story of the primacy to heathen millions, and to build anew the medieval church in the heart of Oriental idolatry. And now it was the Pope and Rome that were to complete their destruction. BY a cruel ingratitude, the deity on earth whom they had worshiped with a fidelity unequaled among men, was to hurl his anathemas against his most faithful disciples. France and Spain elected Pope Clement XIV. upon his pledge that he would dissolve the Order. He issued his bull July 21, 1773, directing that, for the welfare of the church and the good of mankind, the institution of Loyola should be abolished.”—Historical Studies, Id.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.11

    For these reasons we believe that the abolition of the Order of Jesuits is the event, and July 21, 1773, is the date, when “the tribulation of those days” ended.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.12


    NOTE.—The Jesuits were restored in 1814, by Pope Pius VII.; but not to their persecuting power. In the different countries of Europe since that time the Order has been expelled and restored several times, and even by the Papacy once. But Pius IX., after his return from Gaeta in 1849, gave them its entire confidence till the day of his death, and in his Vatican decrees is seen the crowning triumph of Jesuit Ultramontanism.SITI August 12, 1886, page 487.13

    Larger font
    Smaller font