: Such was the king's dream and Daniel gave him also the interpretation of it. He told him that the head of gold signified his own kingdom, which then bore almost universal rule, and was called the great Babylonian Empire, from its chief city Babylon, which was the wonder of the whole world for its power and great strength. But Daniel foretold that a second kingdom should arise, signified by the breast of silver, which, though inferior to the first, should yet take its place. And this came to pass; for we read in the Bible that Babylon was taken by Cyrus, king of the Medes and Persians, and its king Baltassar slain in the midst of an impious banquet, in which he was drinking from the sacred vessels which had been brought from the temple at Jerusalem. The kingdom of the Medes and Persians thus became uppermost, and bore sway for a time; till, as the Prophet went on to foretel, and as truly came to pass, it was subdued in its turn by another kingdom, signified by the belly and thighs of brass. This was the kingdom of Macedonia in Greece, which was to yield in the course of time to another and yet mightier empire, likened to the legs of iron, because, as "iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things, so this kingdom should be strong as iron, and break in pieces and bruise." And all this was exactly fulfilled; the great Roman Empire subdued almost the whole world with power against which nothing could stand; and had just reached the very topmost point of its glory when our blessed Lord was born. Such, then, were the first four kingdoms whose rise and fall exactly answered to the prophecy concerning them in this wonderful vision; but what was the fifth? What was the "stone cut out without hands," which was to arise in the latter days of the fourth empire, and to break the whole image in pieces, and itself to become a great mountain and fill the whole earth? The Prophet gives the interpretation of this as clearly as of the others. "In the days of these kings" (the fourth kingdom) “shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, and it shall stand for ever and ever." Now there never has been any difference of opinion among Christians as to the application of this prophecy. No one has ever doubted but that the kingdom of God here spoken of is the Christian Church, which our blessed Lord came upon earth to found. Let us consider, then, a little more attentively how the Christian Church is described to us in this prophecy. It is described to us as a kingdom; and that surely not in a figurative, but in a real sense, unless those other four kingdoms spoken of were figurative too, which we know they were not. If the Babylonian, the Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman, were real empires, surely the empire which was to spring up in the reign of the last of these and to take its place, must be real too. In some particulars, certainly, it was to be unlike the others: it was to have a mysterious beginning, represented by the "stone cut out without hands," whereas they, as the image of a statue implies, were the work of man; it was never to come to an end, whereas they were to be broken in pieces till they should become like chaff on the summer threshing-floors; in a word, they were the kingdoms of men, but this is called the kingdom of the God of heaven. Still, in other respects, it was to be like them; they were kingdoms, so should this also be a kingdom; they were universal kingdoms, not strictly speaking, but so called because they bore sway over many nations, and were confessedly supreme on earth; and so this also should be a universal kingdom, only in a sense still truer and more complete. Thus spoke the prophet Daniel concerning the Church of Christ, and the voices of all the prophets join in the same strain. The very multitude of prophecies of this description makes it impossible to quote them; but any one who has ever read with attention either the books of the Prophets or the Psalms cannot fail to have observed that the leading idea which they convey concerning the Church of Christ is that of a kingdom. Now we would just ask, If the Protestant view, that Christ's religion is only a set of doctrines, or a feeling, or a sense of duty, is the true one, how can we say that the prophecies have been fulfilled which so uniformly represent Him as coming upon earth to found a kingdom? kingdom is something very different from a doctrine or a A feeling; it may embody doctrines and call forth feelings; but itself must be something outward and visible, with distinct laws and abiding ordinances, and rulers of various degrees, deriving their commission from its king. Why, then, did the prophets speak of that which our Lord was to establish as a kingdom, if it was to have none of these things? Shall we say that prophecy has failed: that holy men of old, speaking as they were moved of the Holy Ghost, represented that as a kingdom which, after all, was not to be at all like a kingdom, was not to have any of the characteristics of a kingdom? As But let us turn to the New Testament, and compare the history of the establishment of our Lord's Church there given us with this language of prophecy. And here the first thing that strikes us is, that these same titles, king and kingdom, are still applied to our Lord and His Church. Thus the angel Gabriel, in announcing His birth to His blessed Mother, said of Him, "that the Lord God should give unto Him the throne of David His father, and that He should reign in the house of Jacob for ever." a king He was inquired after by the Wise Men of the East; as "the King of the Jews" His life was sought by Herod; as a king He rode into Jerusalem before His Passion. "Art Thou a king, then?" asked Pilate; and He answered him, "Thou sayest." "Hail, King of the Jews!" was the cry of the insulting soldiery, bearing wit ness to the truth even in their mockery; and the title King of the Jews," in spite of the objections of the chief priests and elders, was written upon His cross. In like manner, His Church is called a kingdom. "The kingdom of heaven is at hand," was the declaration of His forerunner, the holy Baptist. "The kingdom of heaven is at hand!" so preached the Apostles when our Lord sent them forth on their first mission; and "the kingdom of heaven" is the name constantly given by Himself to His Church, in all the parables in which He prophetically traces out her history through the days to come. He says the "kingdom of heaven" is "like a tree,” net," "like a marriage-supper;" so that all these, the tree, the net, the marriage-supper, are mere images of the like a Church, but the kingdom of heaven is her own proper title. Thus much no one can dispute; the only question is, What is the meaning of these words 'king' and 'kingdom?" Some Protestants would say that the kingdom of Christ is only a general expression meaning all Christians; others that it means the invisible company of the elect; but all agree that it has no outward bond of unity, no government; that is to say, that it has nothing which makes up a kingdom in the ordinary sense of the word; for if the word 'kingdom,' as generally used, means any thing, it certainly means a society of men bound together by obedience to certain laws and to a certain head. Let us look a little further, then, into the New Testament history, and see whether we do not find there any traces of such a society having been indeed established. We read that our blessed Lord chose from among His disciples twelve men whom He called Apostles, to whom He gave commission to go and teach others, and promised that He would be with them even to the end of the world, thereby indicating that He would be with those who should come after them as well as with themselves; for, as they well knew, they were not to escape the common lot of humanity, but long before "the end of the world" they would have entered into their rest. Moreover, from among these twelve He chose one who was called Simon, and to him He committed, in an especial manner, the headship of the kingdom He was about to found: "I will give unto thee," He said, "the keys of the kingdom of heaven;" He gave him a new name also, the name of Peter, which signifies a rock or stone, and which seems, therefore, to have a direct reference to the prophecy of Daniel that we have been considering: "I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." And by and by, after our Lord had gone back into heaven, and the Apostles had received the promised gift of the Holy Ghost, we see St. Peter, the appointed chief, stepping forth, as it were, with his golden key to open the door of the kingdom: "Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice and spoke to them ;" and "they that received his word were baptised, and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.". And what did these three thousand do? Did each of them go his separate way, carrying with him, perhaps, some new truth in his mind and some new feeling in his heart, to work them out as might seem good to himself? No; we are told that " they continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship;" that is, they joined a certain visible body in obedience to certain visible rulers ; "the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." But as yet the company of believers, though sufficient in numbers to be called "a multitude," were only of the children of Israel: presently the time came when the promise of the gathering in of the Gentiles was to be fulfilled; and again St. Peter unlocked the gates of the kingdom, and threw them wide open to all nations (see Acts x. xi.). Thus did the stone begin to grow into "a great mountain," inasmuch as the Church became Catholic, that is, universal, the Church of the nations; and it went on growing and increasing in divers lands and throughout. succeeding ages, until the Roman empire was broken in pieces and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloor, even as the prophet Daniel had declared that it would, and this new kingdom arose in majestic grandeur out of its ruins. But did the Church, by becoming Catholic, cease to be one? Did the church of one place cut itself off from the church of another? Did believers every where arrange themselves in independent bodies according to their own particular tastes? Assuredly not; the stone, as it grew into a mountain, did not thus split into fragments; the Church, though it spread from land to land, continued one; one, not by a mere hidden bond, knitting together the elect, as some Protestants would say, but by a real outward visible oneness; it was not only one spirit," but " body," even as it had "one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, above all, and through all, and in aM." It was one in government: it had "one Lord," even the Lord Jesus Christ, the real King of the kingdom; and as He was no longer visibly present to rule His kingdom in person, it was ruled, in His name and with His one |