164 



REV. E. L. LANGSTON, M.A., ON 



Empire of Eome over either Greece, Medo-Persian, or the Baby- 

 lonian Empires, but we note that in the last stages of this strong 

 mighty empire there is to be an element of instability and weak- 

 ness, and we are not left in doubt as to what that weakness really 

 is, for Daniel ii. 41 reveals the cause of the trouble. 



Dan. ii. 41, " And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes pait 

 of potter's clay and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; 

 but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch 

 as thou sawest the iron mixed w^ith miry clay. And as the toes 

 of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom 

 shall be partly strong and partly broken. And whereas thou 

 sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves 

 with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to another, 

 even as iron is not mixed with clay." 



What is this clay ? What does it typify ? The gold represent- 

 ing Babylon stands for absolute sovereignty residing in the 

 absolute will of the monarch. The silver and the brass showed 

 the limitations of the monarchy ; first, by the hereditary aristo- 

 cracy, and then by the great men of the kingdom and the military 

 party. The further descent in iron showed the further limitations 

 of the monarchy by the power of the people. Therefore the 

 brittle clay must be something which lessens the power of govern- 

 ment still more. Now what can this clay mean but the ** demos, " 

 the power of the people seen in the democracy? The type is a 

 very expressive one, for what is more brittle than burned clay? 

 And what is more fickle than Vox Populi? Another evidence of 

 this is seen in the time of the appearance of the clay; it is not 

 in evidence until it appears in the feet period of the vision of 

 " the times of the Gentiles." Now this is exactly in accord 

 w^th the solid facts of history. The first appearance of the clay 

 principle possibly coincided with the great French revolution, at 

 the close of the eighteenth century. There had been many a 

 revolution in preceding centuries, but they had been merely move- 

 ments on the part of the people to dethrone a wricked or tyrannical 

 king, with a view to enthroning a much better man, which, of 

 course, they did not always succeed in doing. But the French 

 revolution had characteristics about it that no preceding revolution 

 ever had. It was a deliberate attempt by the people to dethrone 

 monarchy and seize the sovereignty for themselves. The monarch* 

 claimed to rule by Divine right, which had been the attitude of 

 the Gentile kings ever since the days of Nebuchadnezzar till the 

 overthrow^ of German and Eussian monarchies ; our King to-day 

 claims to rule by Divine right. Not only did the French revolu- 

 tion seek to dethrone monarchy ; but it had a more far-reaching, 

 ambitious policy, and that was to dethrone Deity. It was a revolt 

 against the Divine Ruler as w^ell as against the earthly ruler. 

 They denied the existence of God and refused to worship Him, 



