# Mahometanism in its Relation to Prophecy/Appendix

APPENDIX.
Note I.
The reader will have observed, that in the foregoing treatise we have not touched upon that portion of St. John's Apocalypse which relates to the seven vials, and which is given in the fifteenth and sixteenth chapters of this mysterious book. The reason was this, we confined ourselves to that which more immediately referred to the subject on which we were specially treating. But as, in a work lately published by Dr. Cumming, a most extraordinary interpretation has been advanced for one of the symbolical figures given by St. John in the sixteenth chapter, relating to the pouring out of the sixth vial, I think it right to make some remarks upon that very startling supposition of the earnest and eloquent writer.
Agreeing with Dr. Cumming in his interpretation of the drying up of the Euphrates mentioned in the twelfth verse, I confess I cannot agree in his interpretation of the thirteenth verse. What does St. John tell us in this thirteenth verse: "And I saw from the mouth of the dragon, and from the mouth of the beast, and from the month of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs: (ver. 14): "for they ​are the spirits of devils working signs: and they go forth unto the kings of the whole earth to gather them to battle against the great day of the Almighty God."—(ver. 16)—"And he shall gather them together into a place, which is called in Hebrew Armageddon."
Now I have no doubt whatever that this very remarkable passage of the Apocalypse refers to the very period to which Dr. Cumming and Mr. Elliot (from whom the former appears to borrow his interpretation) refer it; I have no doubt that it refers to the very period in which we ourselves are now living, and that it predicts the tremendous conflict of all nations, in which I apprehend that our own England is already unhappily embarked,—a conflict which evidently is foretold as disastrous in its issue for all the powers engaged. But I cannot agree that either Dr. Cumming or Mr. Elliot have given a satisfactory solution for the symbol of "the three unclean spirits," which St. John describes as resembling frogs issuing out of the mouths of three other symbolical personages. Dr. Cumming gravely tells us that he thinks the third of these unclean spirits issuing from "the mouth of the false Prophet" is—will the Catholic reader believe it?—Puseyism!!! Now I think even Dr. Cumming, with all his ingenuity, and all his eloquence (and no one can read his books and not perceive that he is a very eloquent and a very ingenious writer), would find it difficult to show how Dr. Pusey or how Tractarianism has fulfilled St. John's declaration, that the special work of these three un​clean spirits was to gather the kings of the earth together to battle. What in the world has Tractarianism had to do with the present deplorable European complication, and the deadly conflict resulting from it?
No, there must be some other explanation better than this: and what may that be?
I understand by the three unclean spirits what I am now going to put before my reader. The spirit from the mouth of the dragon being evidently the spirit that now specially proceeds from the devil, must clearly represent that influence which we see most noxious and most prevalent at the present day, and as to this Dr. Cumming so far agrees with us in explaining this of the spirit of infidelity, which there can be no doubt is the most prevalent and most noxious influence now at work in this nineteenth century. This spirit might well be described by St. John as issuing from the mouth of the dragon, that is, of the devil.
The second spirit, which comes from the mouth of the beast, I conceive to be "the spirit of worldly policy." It comes from the mouth of the beast, that is, it comes from those who represent and direct the secular organization of mankind, that is, from the kings and potentates; for I have already shown that "the beast" symbolizes that "secular organization." This spirit of worldly policy calls upon the kings of the earth to wage war in behalf of "the integrity of the Ottoman empire," that is, in behalf of a power that has for centuries desolated the whole East, trodden Oriental ​Christendom under its feet for nearly 1260 years, and upheld the most blasphemous and obscene system of religion that ever existed upon earth. Now if a hundred years ago any one had predicted that in the year 1855 all the most enlightened and civilized nations of Christian Europe would have been leagued together to uphold the integrity of the Mahometan empire, such a prophet would have been looked upon as a doating visionary; or if, for any antecedent reasons, he were considered as at all worthy of credit, it would at least have been said that such a prediction could only be credible upon one hypothesis, namely, that the sense of Christian faith should have been nearly rooted out from the minds of Christian rulers by a prevalent spirit of infidelity on the one hand, and of an overwhelming spirit of worldly policy on the other. Now it is precisely these two spirits to which we believe that St. John refers. The other spirit, namely, "the spirit that proceeds from the mouth of the False Prophet," which Dr. Cumming explains of Tractarianism, we believe to be the evil spirit of Mahometanism; we believe it to be that most powerful devil which originally inspired Mahomet, the False Prophet, and which now combining with the spirit of worldly policy, and the spirit of infidelity, that is, with two other very powerful devils, that direct the workings of fallen men, has, alas! succeeded in gathering together the kings of the earth in the unholy confederation, which the intelligence of each successive day more and more sadly ​confirms. And it is a remarkable fact, that the same potentates who are combining in this impious war are every day more and more throwing off the mask, and openly avowing their utter hatred of Catholicity. Look at what is now going on in Piedmont and in Spain, where the ruling power declares its determination to strip the Church of Christ of all its temporal possessions! Look at Germany,—the same odious and impious policy reigns in the Grand Duchy of Baden, in the kingdom of Prussia, and I am sorry to add, even in Austria! We heard a great deal lately of the piety of the young Emperor of that mighty state, how he had swept away all the iniquitous enactments of the Emperor Joseph, and had given complete liberty to the Church. But I grieve to say this is far from being the case. I lately saw a letter from a distinguished ecclesiastic, high in the Emperor's favour, and holding a very conspicuous position in Vienna, in which the writer affirms the very reverse. He praises the Emperor himself, whom he represents as a young man of pious and Catholic feelings, but he affirms that the Church is as much enslaved by the secular government at the present moment, as it was in the worst times that are passed.
If we consider all these things, we shall not be surprised at what follows in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth verses of this same chapter. We are there conducted to the same awful catastrophe, which we have already contemplated in the concluding chapter of this ​work. There is, however, one very important fact referred to in this prophecy, which is not noticed in those we have already considered. No sooner does the seventh angel pour out his vial upon the air, than St. John tells us a great earthquake ensued, "Such as never hath been since men were upon the earth."
Now, we have already seen, that by the term earthquake, we should understand war. The war, then, which ensues after "the gathering of the kings of the earth to battle," is to be the most terrible and the most destructive war that has ever been since men first met each other on the field of battle. One of the results of this conflict St. John describes to be the division of the great city into three parts. By this expression I believe he means, that the civilized world will be divided into three parts: in what way this will be fulfilled, it is not for us to conjecture, but time will show. One thing is clear, St. John tells us that this tripartite division of the civilized world will immediately precede the destruction of the mystic Babylon.—(See ver. 19). But in the twentieth verse there is a very remarkable expression: "And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found." This would seem to denote the destruction of all insular powers, of every vestige of provincial and communal government, every power being absorbed into the general despotic centralizing force, ruling the whole, and levelling everything that had heretofore diversified the body politic, as we see mountains diversifying the physical landscape. ​The twenty-first verse foretells a plague of great hail coming down from heaven upon men. This may signify, at least it seems to me that it symbolizes, what we have already seen described in the latter verses of the eleventh chapter of Daniel, namely, the irruption of the King of the North into the provinces of Europe, Asia, and Africa to the south of his dominions. We need not say how we believe that this prediction will be fulfilled. But a vast storm of mighty hail, such as that described by St. John, would aptly symbolize the irruption of mighty hosts from the north, bearing down upon the decayed and disorganized populations, whether of Turkey, on the one hand, or of Germany, Italy, France, and Spain, on the other. It is a remarkable fact, whatever be the ground for such an opinion, that there is a very prevalent belief on the continent, that Europe is now on the verge of a great political and social catastrophe, very analogous to what occurred at the close of the old Roman empire. When I was at Munich, in 1844, I heard this conviction expressed in the most positive terms by the late illustrious Görres, and it was shared by all other politicians and men of reflection with whom I conversed, whether at Munich, or generally on the continent. I do not think the events of 1848 can in any way have tended to diminish this conviction, or make it less prevalent; while the subsequent rush of Europe into the arms of absolutism, is certainly no sign of returning health. These violent changes from the extremes of democracy to the extremes of despo​tism, are very like the alternations of ague and burning fever in a patient at the last stage of physical decay, and on the eve of death. Paris may well be looked upon as the capital of modern civilization, as the great centre of all the characteristic elements of the nineteenth century. It is the opinion of all thinking men, and especially of pious men, in that capital, that modern Europe is a perfect transcript of the lower Roman empire on the eve of its dissolution. The degradation of Spain and Portugal, and their South American colonies, is proverbial. No one can travel through the fair provinces of the Italian Peninsula, and not remark the same political decay. Everywhere one beholds traces, only too apparent, of the existence of the most destructive elements; the old hereditary reverence for religion becoming weaker and weaker; infidelity making fresh inroads in every quarter; the antagonism between the State and the Church becoming more pronounced every hour; and the most deplorable political theories absolutely depriving men of all common sense. Whichever way we look, everything is like Babel, a perfect chaos of every sort of evil principle. We have already shown in the course of this work, that while the secular world is thus hastening on to destruction, there is, blessed be God, a corresponding revival of vital religion and earnest devotion in the Church of God, as if God were preparing His Church for that solemn hour, in which the warning voice will be heard in accents unmistakeable, "Come out of her, my ​people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues." In some way or other God will interpose in behalf of His Catholic Church, when the dreadful hour comes. She will suffer a terrible persecution, we doubt not, but it will be a persecution to purify and prepare her for such an epoch of glory, for such a destiny of sublime magnificence, as passes the mind of man to conceive, but which, great and glorious as it will be, will not exceed the glowing predictions of the prophets, Babylon will fall; Nabuchodonozor's metallic statue will be broken in pieces; but these events usher in the empire of the Church, the triumph of Catholicism; a period wherein mankind, under the benign influence of St. Peter's successor, will develop all the hidden resources of a holy and a Christian civilization.
Note II.—On the Name of Mahomet.
It appears, that amongst the Byzantine Greek authors, there are many different modes of writing the name of the false Prophet, Mahomet. St. John Damascene, in his work, Περὶ Αἱρεσίων, "On Heresies," writes his name thus, Μαμέδ ἐπονομαζόμενος (p. 111); while in another work, Διάλεξις Σαρακήνου καὶ Χριστιάνου, i. e., "Conference between a Christian and a Saracen," he thus writes it, ἦλθεν ὁ Μουχαμέθ, (St. John Damascen. p. 470, tom. i.), while Ephremius writes it Μωάμεδ.—(Ephremius de Manuele Comnene, Corpus Byz. Hist. p. 199, ed. Bonn.) And Constantinus Por​phyrogenitus (ibid, pp. 92, 93), writes it Μονχούμετ and Μουάμεδ; and Cedrenus adopts very much the same mode (Hist. Comp. p. 738, tom. 1.): οὖτος ὁ Μωάμεδ ὁ καὶ Μουχούμετ, κ. τ. λ. We have, therefore, in these four authors no fewer than five different modes of writing the name of Mahomet: Μαμέδ, Μουχαμέθ, Μωάμεδ, Μουάμεδ, Μουχούμετ. But it is evident every one of these are more or less an approximation to the original Arabic name of the great impostor: and although used by Greek authors, they are not the proper Greek version of his name; and so Cedrenus, Zonaras, and Euthymius, when interpreting the mystical number 666, translate the name of the false Prophet into the word, which we have already given in the body of this work, as the Hellenic version of his ill-omened name Modyerse.—(See Cornelius à Lapide, Comment. in Apocalypsin, cap. xiii. p. 231; and Salmeron, in his Præludia in Apocalypsin.)
Note III.
There was perhaps not one of the ancient fathers, who had a more intense devotion to the great mystery of our Blessed Lord's Incarnation, than that great light of the Eastern Church, St. John Damascene. This is evident in all his writings, especially in his great and admirable treatises in defence of holy images, impugned, as they were, by the Iconoclast heretics. This divinely-illuminated father, com​menting on these words of St. Paul's second Epistle to the Thessalonians, ii. 7, "only he, that now holdeth, doth hold, until he be taken out of the way," answers the question as to whom the Apostle there refers, thus: "Τὴν Ρωμαίων βασιλείαν φησί. ταύτης γὰρ πληρουμένης, ὀ ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται," that is, "the Apostle refers to the Roman empire. And when that is removed, Antichrist cometh." Now the force of the words is very striking, "ὀ ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται," "Antichrist cometh;" the saint might have said "Antichrist shall come," but he says "cometh;" that is, "cometh immediately." There was to be no delay, no sooner was the Roman empire to be removed, than Antichrist, the Man of Sin, was to be at once revealed, "ἔρχεται ὀ ἀντίχριστος." Now, bearing these remarkable words in mind, is it likely, assuming the accuracy of the Patristic tradition, that on the breaking up of the Roman empire Antichrist was speedily to appear; is it likely, I say, that his coming should have been delayed for more than twelve hundred years? All the fathers of the Church, with one consent, affirm that the existence of the Roman empire was what delayed the coming of Antichrist, and that. when that empire was removed, then he was to appear, and they all unanimously affirm that this was the meaning of the Apostle's words: now can anything be conceived more utterly at variance with such a statement, than the one we so often hear, that Antichrist is still to come? But if we look into another ​passage in the writing of this same St. John Damascene, I think it is pretty clear, that he regarded Mahomet as the great Antichrist: this passage is in his Homily for Holy Saturday (tom. i ii. p 832). "Μισήσωμεν οὖν τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὐτοῦ, πᾶς ὅστις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Χριστὸν υἱὸν τοὕ θεοῦ καὶ Κύριον, ΑΝΤΙΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ ἔστιν. ἐάν τις εἴπη, ὅτι δουλός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστὸς, κλείσωμεν τὰς ἀκοάς, εἴδοτες ὅτι ψεύστής ἐστι, καὶ ἀλήθεια ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν." that is, "Let us hold God's enemies in detestation, Every man that confesseth not that Christ is the Son of God and Lord, is ANTICHRIST. If any man shall say that Christ is a servant, let us stop our ears, knowing that he is a liar, and the truth is not in him." Now who was it that said that Christ was not the Son of God, nor the Lord, but merely a servant of God? It was Mahomet in his Alcoran; and the learned Dominican editor of St. John Damascene, in his note to this passage, at the foot of the page, appends these words: "Hæc contra MAHOMEDEM, qui in Alcorano frequentissimè inculcat Christum Dei servum esse, nec proindè Deum." Now St. John Damascene was an eyewitness of the first commencement of Mahometan desolation; and although he was not in the same position that we are in the nineteenth century, to take a general survey of Mahometan history in all its enormity, and in all its hideous conformity with the descriptions of the Prophets, he could scarcely have used words more expressive to ​proclaim his conviction that Mahomet was the Man of Sin, the chief Antichrist, he who was to be revealed on the breaking up of the old Roman empire. And if we turn to another homily of the same holy father on the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, we shall see with what fervour he implores the Mother of God to intercede with her Divine Son, that He would deliver the Church from the cruel tyranny of Mahomet, saying, "All hail to Thee, by whom the wild, savage, ravenous dog of Ishmael is smitten as though by a sword!"—"Χαῖρε δι᾿ ἧς ξιφοκτονεῖται ὁ Βαρβαρόγενής τε καὶ φιλομάκελλος κύων Ισμαήλ." And so from that day to this, whatever partial relief has been granted to the Church of God from the desolating persecution of this cruel Antichrist, the annals of her history assure us that it has been granted by God at the special intercession of His ever blessed Mother. And now that we seem to be drawing near to that great consummation for which the Church of God has been so long praying, the final destruction of Mahomet, it will not be uninteresting to the Catholic reader to hear what was revealed to the blessed Father Leonard, of Port Maurice, a short time before his holy death. It was made known to him, that when the Church of God should solemnly define the ancient belief of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God to be an article of Divine faith, then three great and wonderful things should ensue. There would be a tremendous war all over the world, with ​awful desolation and calamities such, as had never been witnessed upon earth before. The empire of Mahomet would utterly be destroyed; and that great and universal peace and benediction of mankind, so often foretold by the Prophets, would be ushered in. This remarkable prediction of the blessed Leonard was communicated to me by one of the most learned and devout priests of the Church of France, the Abbé Gaume.
Fiat citò.