“Tbe Household of God’? Series, PRINCES OF HIS PEOPLE 1 ST. JOHN THE EVANGELISTAihil Obstat. G. H. JOYOR, 8.3, Censor Deputatus, ‘ ‘Emprimater, EDM. CAN, SURMONT, Vicarius Generatis. Weormowasrensi, ‘die Decembria, 1022 PRINCES OF HIS PEOPLE ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST (IL) , BY Cc. C. MARTINDALE, S.J. BURNS OATES & WASHBOURNE LTD. LONDON 28 ORCHARD STREET, 8-10 PATERNOSTER ROW, Wr EC.4 AND AT MANCHESTER, BIRMINGHAM, AND GLASGOW 1922 Al rights reservedPrinted in England 10 D. M. M. In gratitude for your long affection ; and not forgetting distant times, when the Apocalyptic lightnings mingled too frighteningly with the nursery firelight as it flickered through the tall wire fender, and when the four shadowy horsemen kept moving grimly by. You helped a small finger to spell out the difficult long words—chrysolite, amethyst—and lit up for me the lovely colours of the Foundations and the Gates. (But you never pointed out that the golden city was “transparent,” and her streets, to me, wore somehow too metallic.) Nor shall I forget the sea, one summer, misty under sunlight. It was difficult not to think that “strong angels” were standing over it, just too bright for me to see them, tho outermost sontinels of God. The “sound of many waters” has always come back to me through the Baby- onian noises. And you, in great part, T have to thank for that. In hope, then, of heaven's Revelation, Yours, | 0.0. M.INTRODUCTION Tuesr few pages are not a Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John, any more than the studies of Saints, which compose other volumes of this series, are biographies. In those studies I have tried to give a sufficiently vivid idea of the living man or woman, so that readers might feel they had come into contact with a real person, and might, I hope, love that which they thus met. For when you love a Saint, you begin without more ado to grow like him, Thus it was my hope to serve practical religion, and not merely to give all possible information about a certain subject, for that could be got, if it was wanted, out of longer books. Nor did I want to usurp the task of specialists, and enter into all sorts of detailed criticism. Even such criticism and enalysis as there was had no purpose save a constructive one—to show the parts only for the sake of making it more easy to contemplate the living whole. . I should like here to do something similar for the Book of the Apocalypse—for it is no dead Book, but & Book inspired by, and alive with, the Holy Ghost, and containing supernatural visions meant by God for our instruction, ‘The Apocalypse, then, is an inspired Book, forming vii— Introduction part of the New Testament. It is true that it may be more generally useful at one moment of the Church’s history than at another—say, at the beginning of the Christian era, or towards the close of all history alike —but it can never be useless. The pose of almost cynical amusement taken by some, when they hear that anyone is studying the Apocalypse, appears to be a very sacrilegious impertinence. Its author promises quite special blessing to those who “read it aloud” and listen to and keep its words. On those who wi fally add to or subtract from them, he pronounces a grave condemnation, Moreover, it has been loved at all times by Catholic Saints ; it can be read and re- read, with passionate, thrilled interest—I have not rarely noticed—by children; and unlimited consola- tion and encouragement can be drawn by all from its many passages of incomparable beauty, tenderness, and sublimity. It is with a sort of horror that T have noticed how those who speak superficially, if not frivolously, about it, fasten on, as though representa- tive of the whole, precisely those passages which in a sense are least so, or on images which, if at first sight unintelligible or even grotesque, would, after a little trouble, lose all their grotesqueness and reveal much far from recondite significance. There are, then, certain points, which would all have to be treated fully in a true Commentary, on which Thardly touch at all, save most briefly in this Intro- duction, One is the question of authorship. I have no doubt that the “John” who so simply ~ Introduction ix placos his name at the head of the Book—who writes as one having unquestioned and general authority in the Asian churches—who takes it for granted that his Missive will be everywhere read aloud, as he directs, and will be regarded as absolutely intangible and sacrosanct; that this men who writes in Greek while he thinks in Aramaic; whose very diction presents, together with its extraordinary divergences from, such singular alliances with, that of the Fourth Gospel, and the links are precisely those very subtle ones which do more to consolidate a connection than mere obvious coincidences; whose doctrine and, so to call it, spiritual imagination are so profoundly akin to those of the Ewangelist—is in fact none other than the author of the Fourth Gospel and of the three Hpistles of St. John; that is to say, John, the son of Zebedee, the Beloved Disciple of Our Lord, And when we add that an early, very widespread, and almost unanimous tradition says the same, and that the divergences in the tradition would never have come about save on account of certain doctrinal pre- occupations, we may be sure that we know who the author of the Apocalypse really was. ‘ ‘As for the problom of the language, it certainly is very great; but neither into that do we wish to go in detail. Enough to say that in every superficial way the apocalyptic diction, with its amazing mistakes in sheer Greek grammar and syntax, its violent dis- locations, its foreign use of words and constructions, is seemingly as unlike as can be to that of the Fourth Gospel, despite the connecting links that we have= Introduction mentioned. Hence the difficulty felt by many in ascribing the two documents to the same anthor. Indeed, not only is the Greek of the Apocalypse unlike that of the Gospel, but unlike any Greek any- where—at least, so far as discoveries permit us as yet to judge. And even allowing for the extraordinary things St. John wanted to say in this book, and the extraordinary condition of soul in which he was while saying them, the problem, we think, remains, It is by no means forbidden to us to surmise that St. John’s disciples may have smoothed or improved the Greck of the Gospel without modifying the sense of what its author said; and this hypothesis appeals to us personally, though by no means exclusively. We are most ready to insist that one and the selfsame man may be able to write in very different styles, bub he must have some special reason for writing now almost in one language and again in another. And we cannot at present see a cogent reason for St. John having chosen such very different styles in the case of these two books. Sir W. M. Ramsay, indeed, thinks that John deliberately, or perhaps automatically, writing the body of the Apocalypse in the way that was most familiar to him, then saw that in the covering letter to the Seven Churches he was writing a better and more lucid Greekyand then, liking it, developed quickly in this line, till in the Greek of the Gospel he really “found himself.” P, Allo, some- what similarly, thinks that John, at “hard labour” in the quarries of Patmos, could only, as it were, jot down quite rough drafts of what he meant to say, Introduction xi d neither time nor opportunity for polishing are even for writing them with that care which he could bestow on the Fourth Gospel, composed at his ease in Ephesus. But John at least had time and opportunity to put the material of the Apocalypse together into the amazingly intricate design in whicl it as a matter of fact exists; and this, to my thinking, was a far more difficult task than writing rather slowly in good Greek, had he been able to use that. T still think that John in his exile was deprived of that assistance which he could rely on at home, and wrote as he did partly because that was his natural way of writing, and partly because he wrote under the shock, so to say, of so fierce an ecstasy that even such literary graces as he might himself have added were quite out of the question, The problem of the date at which the Apocalypse was written remains. Tradition is far vaguer on point. St. Irenzeus says definitely that John “ saw the Apocalypse under the Emperor Domitian (4. 96), while in exileat Patmos. Other authorities, however, put that exile under Nero. Others, again, offer dates as early as the reign of Claudius (4. 54), and as late as Trajan (d. 117). : I do not mean to spend time on this, and will. only say that P. Allo thinks that both interior and tradi- tional evidence make the last two years of Domitian’ 's reign by far the most probable time for the writing of the Apocalypse. Nor will I do more than mention what appeals to me personally, that John, having written down at quite different periods what mayxii Introduction almost be called his “lights in prayer,” his visions and his ecstasies, profited by his exile in Patmos— after all, we do not know for cortain how he was occupied there, or whether he was actually condemned to hard labour in the quarries—to construct his scattered papers into book-form. That something of the sort happened is suggested to me by the way in which, first, he seems to have all his material under his eye from the outset. He alludes, eg., to “the” heavenly Altar with the definite article, as if it had been already spoken of, though he will not, in fact, utilise it till later; and, again, he has many sym- bolical visions of the same thing, which seems to suit a long history of contemplation rather than one con- tinuous eestasy. It will, too, account for some of the passages of the Apocalypse being far more Jewish in tone than others: his mood may have differed on different occasions, perhaps even according to what he had been reading or talking about, and this may have reflected itself in his way of writing, or in his choice of symbols. ‘Two points, however, we must make quite clear. There is absolutely nothing in the Apocalypse which even inclines us to think it was not written in its entirety by one man; and we must have no temptation to assign a later rather than an earlier date to it, as though thereby we could avoid certain passages being sheer predictions, as would be those, for instance, which allude to Emperors who reigned after Nero, had the Book been written under Nero, We have no notion, even if we allow the Book to have been written Introduction xiii at different times, which parts were written first, and we have no desire to hint that prediction plays no rt in prophecy. ; Paving wail ‘his, we may sum up by suggesting as probable the idea that the Apocalypse consists of accounts of visions seen, and, perhaps, consigned to writing, at different times, and that they were thus put together by St. John himself during his exile, in st years of Domitian, Sanaa similarly I want to say that I have had no intention of making a-verse by verse interpretation of the Apocalypse’s meaning. I certainly repeat that jt mast have a meaning, and that we are right to try to see what it is, But we have very little authorita- tive Catholic tradition to guide us in any detail. What we can do is this: first, help ourselves by making sure of such historical and material facts as we can; then, consider what the minds of the writer’s contemporaries certainly, or probably, had in them and what first they would have discerned in the words they read; and, finally, with all reverence, what St, John’s mind may well have had in it as he wrote. When, then, we settle on this or that as the meaning of any passage, we offer it as a probable meaning only for the most part; nor do we dare to say that St. John may not have meant more than that ; we suggest, throughout, that he probably meant at least that. We can hope to reach a probably reliable inimum. ys this labour Jost? Please God, no. It would be so were we to try to tie John’s prophecies down toxiv Introduction this or that event or person belonging to human history ; but there is no limit to the sublimity of the ideas, nor, again, to the practical moral value, as for the government of life, so for the interpretation of the world’s history, which are to be derived from his inspired visions, so long as they are not approached at random and arbitrarily, I make few references to learned authorities, Ancient Catholic writers have seemed to me more religiously useful than most modern works, When, for example, was St. Bede not lovable? But modern research has worked miracles for the understanding of the material envelope, so to say, of John’s doctrine. Professor Ramsay’s books, for example, have recon- structed for us much of the world John lived in; Doctor Swete’s learned, serene, devout volume was, I- dare say, more valuable than any to one unfamiliar with Apocalyptic writing generally until the appari- tion of a masterpiece, L’Apocalypse, by Pare BB, Allo, O.P., a book not only unsurpassed, but which it may be very difficult ever to surpass. ‘The following pages were written long before I ever saw that book ; but I have been careful to check them by its help, and have added a few dotails from it. But, in this particular material, it is best, perhaps, to follow no one exactly, nor, where so much must necessarily remain but probable, need one fear to offer as such the results of personal study and prayer. CONTENTS Ixrropverion : 5 a. - vii PART I THE NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF THE APOCALYPSE I, Proruucy aNp Apocatyese - a : 1 IL, Tue Sreucroe oF THe ArocaLyess : - JIT, Tae Recreranrs ov THe APocanyese - + PART I THE APOCALYPSE OF ST, JOHN I. Taw Sanuratioy axp THe Manpatory Vistow IL, Taz Lurrens 70 tax Seven Onvxonss or Asta - IIL Tme Avocatvese or tas Furuse - = Tax Eerosvs 55 Bas xvTHE APOCALYPSE OF ST. JOHN PART I THE NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF THE APOCALYPSE . I PROPHECY AND APOCALYPSE Sn, Jouy’s Apocalypse seems to define itself. Its title is: John’s Apocalypse, or Revelation ; its first words, The Revelation of Jesus Christ. And this word Apocalypse, or the Removal of tho Veil or Covering, is not only frequent in the Greek Old ‘Testament, but not rare on the lips of St, Paul. Paul looks for the unveiling of God’s righteous judg- ment (Rom, ii, 5) and for that of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. i. 7); and all Nature yearns for the revealing of the Sons of God (Rom. viii. 19), of that world of supernaturalized humanity, already inaugurated in us, St, John tells, by grace, but not yet made manifest (1 Hpist, iii. 2), Tho Mystery which from eternal times had been kept secret is now, through the Spirit, revealed in Christ to the Church (Rom. xvi. 25) ; to Paul personally “excess” of revelations had been given (2 Cor. xvii. 7); indeed, he holds his Gospel, not from man, nor from human instruction, 12 The Apocalypse of St. John but from revelation directly made to him by Christ (Gal. i. 12), Even to the Faithful, along with other special preternatural gifts, like prophecy, or “ speak- ing with tongues,” the graces of spiritual insight, or of interpretation, or of “apocalypse,” were, in those early days, freely and mysteriously entrusted.! But St. John’s written document can be placed in @ more accurate setting; nor, as literature, and speaking widely, is it alone of its kind. It-had always been told that the person and period of the Messiah would be marked by a special out- pouring of the Spirit: I will pour out My Spirit upon alll flesh : your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your’ old mon shall’ dream dreams, your young men shall see visions; and also upon the servants and the hand- maids in those days I will pour out My Spirit (Joel ii. 28). St. Peter, quoting this ancient prophecy at Jerusa- lem, declared that it was then actually being fulfilled (Acts ii. 17) ; and the same Spirit of Prophecy—the more manifest for its all but unbroken silence of centuries—revealed itself in the passionate preaching of the Baptist; was pre-eminent in Our Lord Him- self; followed the footsteps of the Apostles; and swept like a wave over the earliest Church, Indeed, it is significant that in those days, when the theo- logical expression of the dogma of the Third Person in the Most Holy Trinity was so undeveloped, writers + P, Allo holds that “apocalypse” ad, however, acquired an almost technical sense in the New Testament: the mani- festation of Christ as Lord and Judge. Prophecy and Apocalypse 3 like St. Justin will almost exclusively speak of the Holy Spirit in terms of that activity of His which had beon so supremely noticeable, and call Him by preference the Spirit of Prophecy. Nor did prophecy mean, exclusively, prediction of the future. ‘The witness given by (and to) Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy.” Prediction might cer- tainly be included in prophecy, though in a sense all prophecy was a “ witnessing to Christ,” and witness given by Christ, truly present by His power before and after, as during, His life on earth. And again, all witnessing to Christ was, in a wide sense, prophecy ; all true inspired proclamation, all genuiue transcendent encouragement, exhortation, and pre- cept—nay, the most practical advice, political even, is included in the writings of the Prophets. Prophets established and developed, inspired or purified, what Hebrew priests or legislators or kings had begun or forwarded or organized. Even to the work of the Apostles prophets might give analogous service. Not but what, in much of their work, all theso—priest, king, or Apostle—might be prophets too; but there was no necessity for a prophet to be anything else save prophet. Within their number, however, some were to be found who must be called, in a special way, apoca- lyptists; though, again, their distinguishing mark may almost be said to consist in a greater intensity, or depth, or sublimity of vision, rather than in any quite separate function or spiritual gift, while their * Seo also 0. Lattey, Religion of Soriptures, III. (Hoffer),4 The Apocalypse of St. John intention is scarcely at all—as the Prophets’ often is—some practical object to be realized here and now; and they write, for the most part, not only under inspiration, bub in ecstasy. No doubt, too, apocalyptists dwelt by preference on the end of all things, and used a language of very specialized sym- bolism; but ordinary prophets used much allegory, too, of word and act, and perceived spiritual values under, or through, material forms; they, too, dwelt on the ultimate destiny of the people and the world ; they, too, had visions unsurpassably sublime, Perhaps it may be said, not too fancifully, that the habitual gaze of the prophet is focussed on humanity, for the inspired lifting it up to God; that of the apocalyptist upon God, s0 as to descend thence upon humanity, and to interpret and direct it in terms of that ineffable contemplation. But the prophet might well be granted, at times, the apocalyptist’s focus, and in the collected works of such prophets as wrote down what they felt or saw are many “apoca- lyptic” passages ; while in the apocelyptists, and even in St. John, there may be more purely “pro- phetic” and quite practical elements. And, as we shall see, the content of both prophet’s and apoca- lyptist’s vision might be manifold—for example, an actual or imminent persecution ; a general moral * Such are Isa, xiii., xxiv. Ixv,; even in the historical or Mosaic books such passages occur: i, (iii.) Kings xxii.; Gen. xv. 49, Ezekiel thi agent sets towards” and constantly writes “ spocalyps too, often Jool and Zachariah, but itis Daniel who should be reckoned the first example of almost pure apocalypse, Prophecy and Apocalypse 5 truth, sach as the conflict of right and wrong; and, the end of the world. All these might be included in ono contemplation, and the focus of sight might shift rapidly, as it were, from one depth to another in the perspective. The special gifts of prophecy and apocalypse diminished rapidly after the first or second Christian generations, and, indeed, were at all times dangerous, difficult to control, exposed to subjectivism and even imitation, But all great Christian saints who have spoken a message to the nations, like St. Bernard or St. Francis Xavier, have a true claim to the name “prophet” in the wider sense, and a Curé d’Ars in the narrower; while St, Peter Damian, and still more St. Vincent Ferrer and some of the women saints, like St. Bridget, can be reckoned as true Christian apocalyptists. And of false prophets there have been legion. How is the symbolic language, in which apoca- lyptists expressed their doctrine, to be accounted for? God might, of course, reveal, dictate, the sym- bols as directly as He might the doctrine, And, of course, the whole message of the apocalyptist (in the case, say, of Daniel, or St. John, or any canonical work) is inspired. But it is clear that much of the symbolical language, and even the forms of the language, are traditional and “derived.” This is a literary origin. Let me, before illustrating that, point out two psychological ways in which any writer might come to write under symbolic imagery, whether traditional or not.6 The Apocalypse of St. John Sometimes the spiritual intuition might be so pure and sublime that in no way, save by symbols, could it be suggested to one who had not shared it. The notion might be so tremendous, unaccustomed, im- patient of formule and phrases, that some other vehicle than definitions for the intellect must be sought. Somewhat thus, Plato, whon he felt his scientific statements grown too thin, too skeleton- like in outline for the surpassing glory, on the one hand, and for average intelligence on the other, took refuge in his “myths,” Often the seer would himself feel his choice of symbol to be painfully, even ludi- crously, inadequate. Perhaps St. John himself felt regretful when certain symbols seemed the tradition- ally correct material to use. Certainly he eliminates much from the material supplied to him by those whom, like Ezekiel, he none the less is following. St. Ignatius, without any doubt, chafed when he had to uso the image of three “ spinet-keys,” separate and yet somehow joined, to describe his vision of the Trinity. Sometimes, ingeed, the symbolism may be so vagne as to be almost as shapeless as that which it is fain to picture, yet significantly so, as in most metaphors drawn by Hzekiel from light. Or, again, it may be almost brutally concrete, a statement of the divine revelation in confessedly alien material, as when he describes God in terms of flashing metals ; or when Ignatius says he “ saw” Our Lord or Mary, yet denies that he beheld either limb or size or form ; or when St. Margaret Mary says she “saw” the Sacred Heart, and then describes it as a crystal . Prophecy and Apocalypse 7 globe or a sun. Again and again ecstatics, who constantly use the words “to see,” “to hear,” and descrfbe forthwith sights and sounds, deny that eye or ear perceived anything whatsoever. The intuition has to clothe itself in thoughts, and these cannot emerge into the reflex consciousness without some robe of imagery, supplied by the imagination, and in the longrun through the senses, This is always so when they are to be stated in words. Now it is observation, or reading, which supplies us with such images and words, the material for sym- bolism; and though it is true that an active mind can recast, rearrange, group them, yet it cannot quite disregard them, even at its most inventive. Very likely, too, the nucleus of the image, the substantial point where the analogy holds good, may be quite small and simple. The poetic fancy may proceed to develop or decorate this after the revealing light has passed, or at least in its after-glow. So, too, may deliberate reflection. The Saints often warn us not to confuse what, in such circumstances, we picture to ourselves with what the divine light really showed us Such, then, is the psychological process when a 4 It is equally true, as I said, that reflection can simplify a largo and elaborate image which memory had inherited and retains, John quite “ de-humanizes” Ezekiel’s concrete image of the Eternal God. It is interesting to watch the Hebrews, whose whole duty it was to do without religious imagery as far ‘as might be, continually yielding to their artistic imagination, So, too, St. John of the Cross, whose whole theory tended to the rejection of “images,” yields in his lyrics to an unequalled beauty of constructive, pictorial, and sensuous imagination. See “On God's Holy Hills,” i., pp. 181, 187, ete.8 The Apocalypse of St. John man first experiences, whether by natural flash of intuition or by divine revelation, some abstract or spiritual fact, and then seeks to express it in terms of the imagination and then in words, Quite opposite is the process when a man first per- ceives some natural object or even idea, and then, in the flash of intuition, or inspired, sees how it stands for or symbolizes or contains an ulterior or spiritual fact. The connection may indeed be quite slight and superficial. May not this have been what happened when the sheer assonance of words proved the link between what was seen and what was ultimately thought, as when Jeremiah sees an almond branch— the Hebrew word for that is shaked—and is thus reminded that Yahweh “will watch” (shoked) over His word to perform it (Jer. i. 12). Amos, seeing a basket (Layitz) of fruit, finds flashing into his mind the assurance that “the end (ketz) is come upon My people.” The dgopuri, the send-off, would here then have been a thing seen of which the name sounds like a word which for, the Prophet has a religious significance, and God, using this machinery through which to work, strikes from the man a prophetic idea and cry. But when Jeremiah again notices (i, 13) a “seething caldron,” he quite naturally sees sym- bolized in it the imminent turmoil of the nations that 80 preoccupied him; then, joining itself to his first perception, comes the detail that the caldron fronts from the north; this reinforces and perhaps makes explicit the idea—latent, doubtless, already in the mind of a man strongly concerned even by natural Prophecy and Apocalypse 9 bent with political happenings, present or probable— that the trouble is destined to break out from the * great Northern Empire. Again God uses this as the material that He will inspire.? It is this divine inspiration, of which we are guaranteed independently, that turns what else were a mere intuition into a prophecy. ‘There were crowds of contemporary “false prophets,” religious poli- ticians quite capable of making shrewd surmises about the future, and who thought and talked of things in much the same way; their psychological processes, so far as their sheer mechanism was con- corned, need have differed in no way from those of the inspired prophet, nor is there any rationalism in trying to follow out the way in which that mechanism worked, St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross, and any student of mysticism, constantly do it, What we know by divine guarantee, but only thus (though we might independéntly surmise it), is that God Himself puts an electric spark, as it were, into that mechanism, sets it in motion, or at least uses it when it has been in any, even human, way set moving—either uses the natural sight of the “ branch” or the “ basket,” and even the thoughts to which the sight gives rise, as the material into which to put the soul of inspiration, or causes the sight to suggest those thoughts, or, finally, directly causes the prophet to look at and notice the natural object. In a word, it is more 1 Thave not, of course, the hardihood to assert that this 2as the “ psychological machinery " of inspiration here, but it could have been,10 The Apocalypse of St. John likely God will use the psychical equipment of the man He made than totally supersede it. It is a Catholic principle that Grace attends on Nature: gratia sequitur naturam ; and just as our whole works are “ grace-works,” supernatural, so we must keep it clear that whatever the human mechanism, the natural coefficient, in an inspired seer, he is to be said, quite roundly, to have had supernatural visions. It must throughout this book be recalled that not only was St. John inspired to write his visions down, but that the visions were supernatural in themselves. Again, not only direct vision of an object, but memory of any experience, may serve as the starting- point. Such memories a man of powerful spiritual imagination may lay hold of, and (always, in the case of the prophet, under inspiration) forcefully remodel them to suit a higher end. ‘This is less spontaneous, usually, but can be richer in results, Thus, un- doubtedly, Ezekiel made use—with more or less de- liberation, that we cannot judge of—of those colossal monsters, hunan-headed, yinged, lion or bull bodied, which he saw when in captivity in Babylon. Strongly coloured by these are his descriptions of those strange creatures that support God’s throne; and again, the throne itself is an indefinitely glorified version of some earthly piece of craftsmanship. Something in this way, St, Aloysius, who had no really creative imagination, laboriously adapted the whole of a ducal court and its etiquette to portray the angelic service of heaven, ‘The use made by Ezekiel of the Babylonian beasts is reflected in that made by St. John of Ezekiel’s Prophecy and Apocalypse 7 strange creations in their turn. For such imagery as forcibly struck popular imagination, after it had bepn used by some famous seer, tended rapidly to fix itself and become traditional. Symbols repeated themselves again and again across the generations. Poet after poet, artist after artist, re-used the ancient forms, dear to the national feeling and consecrated now by religion. The influence of Daniel on apoca- lypses properly so-called was enormous. But on the lips of lesser men these forms of speech naturally grew to seem glib or hackneyed, or to be misapplied. A genius would re-soul them with his own spiritual power. Such a genius was St. John, He left nothing of the apocalyptic imagery just as he found it, and almost everything he used he immeasurably improved. ‘Yet even a genius is not all the time at the crest of his inspiration-wave ; the impulse may flag ; and then, even as he writes, he does so laboriously and will cease so communicatively to express all that he has within him; it may, indeed, in its full significance, be latent to himself. Even a poet scarcely realizes all his meaning; and a prophet need not know, either, the full bearing of his words. There are here principles that make it much safer for us to study the symbolism of St. John. We need scarcely ever find ourselves left to mere conjecture. Sometimes we cannot tell what he means; we may seldom feel sure we know all that he means; but we can always have good reason for relying that we are on the right track and not yielding to arbitrary, sub- jective fancy.The Apocalypse of St. John We see first that he could use much traditional symbolism that was meaningful to a Jew, or to a Judaic convert, of his period, but that need not appeal to us, alien in blood and distant in time and space. We need not feel half impious if imagery dear to their minds cannot be of value toours. Even the meaning of details may be quite lost to us, and for ever, having never been anything save locally applicable, and understood not even by men of the ensuing generation, or non-Asiatics, Indeed, we may think that the fact that the book was known to be by John sufficed to carry it far abroad; but again, that the book was precisely this book, and half-unintelligible to a Gaulish or even a Roman Christian, would make it looked on with discomfort, embarrassment, and might even end by throwing doubts upon its author- ship. + Further, we aro made alert to distinguish the sub- stance of the symbol from its decoration or elabora- tion, to discern the only vital point of contact, and not to waste time trying to evolve an interpretation for each detail of a picture, seeing that they are there only to make it vivid and to “carry it across.” Not even in the Parables ought we to expect to find an equal amount of doctrinal applicability in each detail of the story. Again, wo are invited to expect that in some cases the sight of a material object will have come first— for example, a volcano, a meteor, a waterfall—and then the material event or fact may be half deserted for the sake of the spiritual thing suggested by it, Prophecy and Apocalypse 18 In other cases, some overwhelming spiritual concept will have come first—for example, the Holy Trinity, ox the presence of Christ in the Church—and then the image may be offered almost under protest, as the poor, yet best, algebraic formula, almost, of what it seeks to convey. And we should add that these two sorts of symbols unite at least in this—they are there to reveal, each in its measure, the Hidden. But another kind exists, not to reveal, but to conceal. It is chosen, not by poetic preference, nor in helpless ecstasy, but ecause it would have been dangerous to speak plainly. Much, if not most, apocalypse was written to encourage the Faithful during, or on the eve of, persecution. Thus the latter part of Daniel clearly envisages the period of Antiochus Epiphanes; and John’s Apocalypse alludes to the reigns of Domitian and Nero, and to the Asiatic troubles generally. The Christian community would have been worse endangered should its literature be seen to attack the Government or to preach “disloyalty.” Thus certain parts of such apocalypses wonld be written, quite deliberately, “in cipher.” And other things were too holy to be alluded to save under veils, as, for example, the Eucharist. We shall, then, remember that some of an apoca- lypse will probably deal directly and primarily with historical facts, some with a spiritual truth. So it were futile to try to interpret such a document as, in all its parts equally, history disguised ; or, again, to refuse to look for any interest in historical facts on4 The Apocalypse of St. John the part of its writer. No one Key will open all its locks. A reader will, then, be wise to start, when Possible, from ascertainable elements, such as the conditions of the Apocalyptist’s times and environ. ment; the necessary, or probable, contents of his memory; the normally probable or possible limits of his self-expression, and then only go on to seek for transcendental meanings. Yet he should also be carefal to remember that the Seer is never dealing with human happenings merely for their own cake. Shall we say that there aro, or may be, quite five Ierla in an apocalyptist’s consciousness ? © can see concrete facts—e, 1. this emperor—and may deal with thom directly, thoweh sometimes in cipher. (He sees thom, however, under the light of morality, or worship ; in connection with religion.) He may see them, too, as typical thus, not merely one war, or persecution, or martyrdom, or city; but a universal and world-long straggle between opposing ideas, or an undying witness, or materialist civilize: tion as a whole. He may then also see, in man’s soul, or in the world at large, supernatural influences, tendencies triumphs, defeats and transmutations, ° And, shifting still further his perspective, he may contemplate a world composed of the spiritual Prototypes, the truer realities of all these shadow. transitory, departmental things, an “ideal” world >” Finally—and here, perhaps, he is his truest self he will contemplate God Himself, and descend thence, Prophecy and Apocalypse 15 with troubled wing and anxious eye, towards humanity ; or, again, rest singing his wild yet solemn hymn of ecstasy, eye fixed on the Divine. T'were a matter of preternatural delicacy, and yet audacity, to try thus to diagnose and evaluate the psychic level of a prophet’s consciousness on each occasion, especially as he may pass rapidly from one to the other and back again, or even may be “seeing” more than one perspective at a time.! Enough to have formulated some principles for scanning evi- dence, some hints towards the formation of a judg- ment; to provide some hope at least of seeing through John’s eyes, of hearing with the ears of those to whom his book was for the first time read. The rest we must leave to tho guidance of God’s Spirit and to the permissions of the Church. For, once more, we shall never forget that whether we be right or wrong in our views on the human coefficient, the human psychological machinery, we are certain about the divine coefficient, the guaranteed inspiration. How- ever wholly an inspired book is its human author's book, it is also wholly that of its divine Author. Ina Tine—John’s words have God for Author. Not all prophets wrote down what they said, and, doubtless, not all apocalyptists what they saw. Yet 1 4 crude illustration ; Stand in front of a plate-glass window. ‘You can usually see either what is behind the glase or the reflections upon it, With a little effort you can see ‘the two at the same time—e.g., the image of yourself and the objects dis- played beyond, and even the reflection of the street behind you. And all the while you may be thinking of the price of a dress, of national economic conditions and general social history. But it is difficult to keop all this equally in your eye or in your mind.16 The Apocalypse of St. John a certain number of apocalypses, Jewish, Christian, and mixed, have survived besides St.-John’s. The most important, save, of course, Daniels, which is a canonical book and inspired, is the Book of Enoch, supposed to be compiled of fragments written at various dates between 166 and 64 3.0, With its name may be associated the Book of the Secrets of Enoch, perhaps a.p. 1-50; both of these contain much imagery which is used by St. John too, such as the ‘Tree of Lifo;! angels, of course, figure largely in them, as indeed they do, with increasing frequency, in Jewish literature, from the Persian Captivity onwards. But the Apocalypse of Baruch, lator, it is thought, than the Fall of Jerusalem (70), is in many ways yet closer to St. John’s. The fall of Rome, and the New Jerusalem, millenarian expectations which excited even Christians, and references to the Messianic triumph which, St. Irenwus says, were even thought to have originated with Christ Himself, are noticeable in it. Finally, the Fourth Book of Esdras, probably written under Domitian, and there- fore contemporary, it seems likely, with the completed form of the Apocalypse, is planned out—at least, in the part that concerns us—into seven visions, It is on the whole pessimistic, though rained Jerusalem is to be restored, Messiah is to come, and Rome, under the figure of an eagle, is judged by the Messiah, under the figure of a lion. Of other Jewish books, like the * Some material may be ealled, even, the “commonplace” of apocalypse—falling stars, earthquakes, eagles, lions, trumpets, and certain numbers, > Prophecy and. Apocalypse Ww Assumption of Moses, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Apocalypses of Adam, of Elijah, and of Zephaniah ; the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the ‘Sibylline Oracles (Jewish and Christian), the last- named has perhaps most points of contact with St. John’s work, though I do not mean by saying that to suggest that he had so much as read these books— very dull, on the whole, exaggerated and artificial— still less, that he quotes or even uses them. Some, indeed, or most, are posterior to him. The samo literary dialect is, to a varying degree, used in all of them: that is all. Some Christian (or Gnostic) apocalypses are known, like the Anabaticon Pauli and the Apocalypse of Peter, of which a large frag- ment survives, was once highly thought of, and made a good fight to get into the canon; on the other hand, St. John's Apocalypse here and there shared the suspicion which finally grew too strong for that of Peter. The fourth-century Apocalypse of Paul is stigmatized by Augustine as no less silly than pre- sumptuous in its claim to narrate the “ secret words” hejrd by St, Paul in ecstasy (2 Cor. xii, 4); and the Greek Apocalypse of St. John relates the further visions of that Apostle on Mount Tabor. Apart from the apocalyptic passages in the Gospels, and those in St Jude's and St. Peter's Epistles, there is no canonical New Testament apocalypse save St. John’s, These names, however, have been mentioned to make it clear that John's work, though unique in inspirational dignity and spiritual character, and, indeed, in sheer literary value, was not, in its literary 218 The Apocalypse of St. John character, an isolated phenomenon ; it takes its place in a stream of literature flowing across whole con- turies, Notice, however, that John’s book was the first to bear, explicitly, the name apocalypse. Other documents either imitated this or have been so named by critics who saw that they were of the same literary genre as St. John’s. I need spend no time over pagan “apocalypses,” like the Hermetic writings, which offered, in Greco-Rgyptian circles and elsewhere, pictures of the other world and the like, At least they show how preoccupied people then were with sach problems, and that St. John’s Apocalypse would have found a sympathetic audience. While, then, it is clear that John’s mind was soaked with the works of the great men wo have mentioned, especially Daniel, Ezekiel, and Zechariah, we cannot say that he ever used, consciously or at all, any of the other apocalypses that were cireu- lating in his time, The most we can say is that he was absolutely at home in the apocalyptic atmo- sphere, and was so familiar with its special phraseo- logy and favourite symbolism that he used these naturally and by preference, and could count on being understood, temperamentally and in the mass, if notin each detail, by his immediate readers. Besides, as I said above, quite apart from his sheer artistry— for, despite what a Greek-formed taste would con- sider his imperfections, the other apocalypses as sheer literature come nowhere near John’s—his tremendous personality would anyhow recast what he borrowed; he scarcely ever quotes, save where Prophecy and Apocalypse. 19 the ancient phrasing was so perfect that any sub- stantial alteration would have seemed sacrilege, or when (apparently) he introduces, as St. Paul does, fragments of Christian hymns already dear to Chris- tian feeling. Even so, he rather explicitly alludes to what his readers knew so well than reproduces it. ‘Ab the outset he stamps his personality on the work by prefixing to it his own name and whereabouts, and speaks clearly to men who knew’ and had had dealings with him, unlike the other apocalyptists, who took the names of ancient seers and saints— Enoch, Baruch—and threw their compositions back into a half-mythical past. Besides, the contents and inspiration of St. John’s Apocalypse are sundered from those of all the rest by the gulf which, when all is said, separates Christianity from the purest, even, of prophetic Judaism; he puts the ancient words to the service of 2 quite new doctrine, and to my feeling’ it is almost an offence to compare his glorious book to anything else whatsoever. I THE STRUCTURE OF THE APOCALYPSE John was commanded by God to write down the visions he had seen, and in obedience to this he com- posed the Book of the Apocalypse. He did this according to a singular and complicated plan, to which he adheres very closely. I shall try to set forth this plan, but no more than sufficiently, leaving out some of its minor articulations. These can bey 20 The Apocalypse of St. John found elaborately developed in the book by P. Allo and, with perhaps less accuracy, elsewhere. ‘Thus I shall not point out, save here and there, how John dovetails his visions, inserting part of a following theme into that which he is actually relating, or, if you will, causing a section of the actual symbolic narrative to look forward to the next. This would take up too much room, fascinating as it is to work it out, May the following scheme, then, be regarded as somewhat simplified, for the sake of brevity and clearness. The book falls into four main parts : (1) isi. 8—A brief general prologue; title, author- ship, sanction of the whole work; ‘salutation of its destined recipients, and ascription of praise to «Christ.