The Papal Millennium
THE MILLENNIUM IN JEWISH BELIEF
On Pentecost Sunday the apostle Peter spoke of the Times of Restitution, as a season of blessing and refreshment (Acts 3:19-21). For his Jewish audience he was presenting a familiar belief that held the 6,000 years from creation would be followed by a special 1,000 year Sabbath “day.” This belief goes back to before the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD.1 Eusebius the church historian attributes millennial (1,000 year) preaching as standard Jewish belief that now was superseded by church hierarchy’s claimed spiritual understanding. In this “superseding” Eusebius was wrong.
Eusebius, who did not believe in the Millennium, records the “heresy” of: “Nepos a bishop in Egypt … [who] taught that the promises given to the holy men in the scriptures should be understood more as the Jews understood them, and supposed there would be a certain millennium of sensual luxury on this earth … he asserts there will be an earthly reign of Christ” (Ecclesiastical History, Book 7:23).2
What a difference the political misfortunes suffered by the Jewish community in Diaspora would make!
Three hundred years later, the Jewish position was completely reversed. Rabbi Abaye (died 339 AD) lived outside the reach of Rome. His writings are preserved in the Babylonian Talmud. Rather than a period of blessing, Abaye citing Hosea 6:2 envisioned 2,000 years of desolation. By the mid 19th century, Rabbi Kattina, citing Isaiah 2:11, would write: “Six thousand years shall the world exist, and one [thousand, the seventh], it shall be desolate, as it is written, ‘And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day’ ” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 97a3).
The slow recovery of the most ancient Jewish tradition promising blessings has come with the fresh energy from the re-establishment of Israel and the recapture of Jerusalem. One 21st century Jewish reframing posits:4
“The final era, in which we presently find ourselves, is bounded by the years 4,000 to 6,000 — 240 CE to 2240 CE. It has so far included what one may certainly view as the prophetically predicted “birth pangs of the Messiah.” Perhaps the three prayers of Shabbat, identified as Tur — the Shabbat of Creation, the Shabbat of Sinai, and the Shabbat of the World to Come [emphasis added] — are meant to correspond to the three eras of history preceding the seventh millennium.” After reviewing the horrors of the 20th century Jewish Holocaust and then the elation of the founding of Israel, Rabbi Blech continues, “we are not yet at the end of history … [this] is a beginning that portends the complete fulfillment of all our prayers.”5
THE MILLENNIUM IN CHRISTIAN TEACHING
For the Jews, one final war with Rome (132-135) ended in disaster. At the same time, the church leaders focused on the heavenly promises of to the church only. Any concept of an earthly kingdom was now heresy. The words of Jesus to Pilate were upon the lips of the church, “My kingdom is not of this world.” With time, Christian belief mixed with Greek philosophy would decry a “sensual” and “carnal” earthly kingdom.
The first explicit setting forth that the 6,000 years from creation is to be followed by a 1,000 year millennium of blessing comes from the epistle attributed to the compassionate disciple Barnabas. This writing holds to many clear apostolic teachings. For example, there is no hint of Jesus as “God the son.” Nevertheless, it appears to have been authored by a Gentile Christian writing in the name of Barnabas (though some of the editorial board believe it was by Barnabas, the companion of St. Paul).
Augustine
City of God, Book 20:23 — What Daniel Predicted Regarding the Persecution of Antichrist, the Judg- ment of God, and the Kingdom of the Saints.
“Daniel prophesies of the last judgment in such a way as to indicate that Antichrist shall first come, and to carry on his description to the eternal reign of the saints. For when in prophetic vision he had seen four beasts, signifying four kingdoms, and the fourth conquered by a certain king, who is recognized as Antichrist, and after this the eternal kingdom of the Son of man, that is to say, of Christ, he says, My spirit was terrified, I Daniel in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me, etc. Some have interpreted these four kingdoms as signifying those of the Assyrians, Persians, Macedonians, and Romans. They who desire to understand the fitness of this interpretation may read Jerome’s book on Daniel, which is written with a sufficiency of care and erudition. But he who reads this passage, even half asleep, cannot fail to see that the kingdom of Antichrist shall fiercely, though for a short time, assail the Church before the last judgment of God shall introduce the eternal reign of the saints.”
“God made in six days the work of his hands; and he finished them on the seventh day, and he rested the seventh day and sanctified it. Consider, my children, what that signifies, he finished them in six days. The meaning of it is this: that in six thousand years God will bring all things to an end. For with him one day is a thousand years; as he himself testifies saying, ‘Behold this day shall be as a thousand years.’ Therefore, children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, shall all things be accomplished. And what is that he says; and he rested the seventh day: he means this; that when his son shall come, and abolish the season of the Wicked One, and judge the ungodly; and shall change the sun and the moon, and the stars; and he shall rest gloriously in the seventh day” (Epistle of Barnabas 15:3-6).6
If the date of the millennium was to be established, from the outset it was clear that the widely read Greek Septuagint Old Testament set forth a markedly different chronology from the Hebrew Masoretic text. In 303, Eusebius, author of the Ecclesiastical History, compiled the chronology of the Chaldeans, Assyrians, Medes, Lydians, Persians, Hebrews, Egyptians, and Greeks, plus listings of the Greek Olympiads, the rulers of the Greek city-states, the Macedonians, and the Romans.
Eusebius was engaged in a scholarly exercise to align history. As his earlier comments against Nepos demonstrate, he was not motivated to use chronology as a tool to predict the millennium. He was opposed to such beliefs. Of special importance, buried in all the tables of Eusebius’s chronicles, he included one Septuagint-based calculation that pointed to the year of the birth of our Lord as 5199 AM (“Year of the World,” Anno Mundi in Latin).
Church hierarchy opposition to the notion of a millennium continued and grew. Eusebius wrote against Cerinthus who was active around the time of the writing of Barnabas: “Cerinthus, by means of revelations which he pretended were written by a great apostle, also falsely pretended to wonderful things, as if they were showed him by angels, asserting, that after the resurrection there would be an earthly kingdom of Christ, and that the flesh, i.e. men, again inhabiting Jerusalem, would be subject to desires and pleasures. Being also an enemy to the divine Scriptures, with a view to deceive men, he said that there would be a space of a thousand years for celebrating nuptial festivals … For one of the doctrines that he taught was, that Christ would have an earthly kingdom” (Ecclesiastical History, Book 3:28).
AUGUSTINE AND ANTICHRIST
Until the Reformation, the voice of Augustine would dominate the Latin medieval worldview.7 Unknown to him, his focus on Antichrist would lay the groundwork for dissent within the church and the eventual recovery of belief in the millennium. Augustine (354-430), bishop of Hippo in present day Tunisia, wrote the City of God (Civitas Dei) in response to pagan charges that Christianity was to blame for Rome’s fall in 410:
“The City of God has been described as the most important book for the understanding of western Christendom after the Bible, an opinion which gains support in part from the medieval manuscript tradition, as nearly 400 copies and fragments of the text survive from the period between the fifth and fifteenth centuries.”8
These four hundred copies of selections from City of God’s nearly half million words were the product of a time when both parchment and scribes who could handwrite were very precious and rare. Through Augustine one line of prophetic interpretation still shone in the darkness. He emphatically taught that after the fall of Rome, Antichrist would arise. In keeping the prophecies of Antichrist alive, City of God was to create difficulties for the medieval church and state that increased with time:9
“For what does he [Paul] mean by ‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now holdeth, let him hold until he be taken out of the way: and then shall the wicked be revealed?’ [2 Thessalonians 2] I frankly confess I do not know what he means. However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, ‘Only he who now holdeth, let him hold until he be taken out of the way,’ refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, ‘Only he who now reigneth, let him reign until he be taken out of the way.’ ‘And then shall the wicked be revealed:’ no one doubts that this means Antichrist” (Augustine, City of God, Book 20:19).
Augustine’s exposition of these Antichrist prophecies was an embarrassment to the Catholic Church. While he was one of their most esteemed teachers, his writings needed to be censored. My copy of The City of God from a Catholic Press with a proper Imprimatur from Francis Cardinal Spellman, Archbishop of New York removed 27 of 30 chapters from Book 20 — including the two chapters cited here.10 Augustine incorrectly taught that the hoped for “short” persecution of Antichrist would be 1260 literal days and not 1260 literal years of Antichrist’s war against the saints of the most high (Daniel 7:21).
THE PROBLEM OF CHARLEMAGNE
Accepting Eusebius’ Septuagint-based calculation that placed the birth of Christ at 5199 AM would set the year 800 AD as the first year of the millennium. St. Jerome (378) adopted this then-distant date. During the period 400-600 AD twelve writers followed Jerome and Eusebius.11 Both St. Jerome and St. Augustine warned of Antichrist’s persecution as the world would come to an end. Despite the church’s downplaying the importance of watching for the close of the 6,000 years, there was a continuing interest in when this might be. The encyclopedia of Isidore of Seville (614) is usually credited with the final popularization of the Septuagint chronology pointing to the year 800 as the first year of the millennium. Another ten writers followed Isidore’s lead.12
The year 800 AD was to be one of the most momentous in European history. On Christmas Day, December 25, the year 799 AD had closed (Christmas was considered New Year’s Day, hence this was the first day of 800 AD.) The coronation of Charlemagne as the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire took place at old St. Peter’s basilica in Rome. An insightful account of this coronation which here we quote at length is given by Prof. Peter Wilson:13
“In December 795 Leo III notified Charlemagne of his election as pope, a favor normally reserved for the Byzantine emperor. Nonetheless, contingency rather than systematic planning characterized the next five years leading to Charlemagne’s coronation.
Coins such as this aroused public sentiment against the Pope. The image of a devil emerges when the coin is inverted. The Latin phrase translates as, “From a bad crow, a bad egg.”
Three aspects stand out. First, the Empire was a joint creation of Charlemagne and Leo III, ‘one of the shiftiest occupants of the throne of St. Peter.’ Accused of perjury and adultery, Leo was unable to assert authority over the Roman clans, who orchestrated a mob which attacked him in April 799, nearly cutting out his eyes and tongue — acts of mutilation considered to render the victim unfit for office. Already at his accession, Leo had sent Charlemagne a banner and the keys to St. Peter’s tomb, symbolically placing papacy under Frankish protection. Charlemagne was reluctant to assume this responsibility, which could require him to judge and remove a wayward pontiff.
A generation later, the Frankish chronicler Einhard claimed Leo sprang the idea of an imperial coronation when Charlemagne finally visited Rome in November 800. We should not be misled by this typical hagiographic device stressing Charlemagne’s supposed modesty in not seeking worldly ambition. The details were agreed in advance and carefully choreographed, with the participants fully aware they were taking a significant step. Leo rode 12 miles from Rome to meet Charlemagne, double the usual distance accorded a mere king. The ambassador from the patriarch of Jerusalem was on hand to present the keys to the Holy Sepulcher. Although the actual site was in Arab possession since 636, this act symbolized Charlemagne’s assumption of the ancient Roman mission of protecting Christianity. Finally, the choice of Christmas Day 800 for the coronation was deliberate. This was not only a central Christian holy day, but that year fell on a Sunday and was believed to be exactly 6,000 years since the Creation.”
John of Modena, born in 738, penned the following passage, at the conclusion of his copy of the Chronicle of Isidore as the year 800 came:
“From … the birth of my poor and unhappy person … [to] the most Christian and pious Lord Charlemagne, king of the Franks and the Lombards in Italy, there are 62 years. From the creation of Adam until the present year … there are 6000 years.”14 A contemporary chronicle which mentions the arrival of the year 6000 AM during the year of Charlemagne’s coronation is the Annales Augiensis, noting simply “ad an. 800: 6000 ab initio mundi” (“AD year 800: 6000 from the beginning of the world”).15 More than 685 years later, Isidore’s system of chronology was still in use amongst the Catholic Portuguese.16
Thus, the Holy Roman Empire state and the Roman Catholic church began their millennium in 800 with an epoch-defining event of European history. In 1799 this church-state millennium would end. A new vision of government, a state without the church, would be forced upon Europe by the new and energized French Republic.
AFTER THE CATHOLIC MILLENNIUM
Today, Richard Landes, a Catholic scholar, maintains that the overall response of the Latin church was to quietly abandon the Septuagint and to set forth the Hebrew Masoretic text as the most accurate transmission of the word of God. This set the problem of 6000 AM more than a thousand years into the future from Charlemagne:17
“Few Christian teachings more directly concerned and excited the commoners than chiliasm [editor note: “chiliasm” means belief in the millennium], with its promise of a time of heavenly peace, dreamlike prosperity here on earth, and a justly ferocious punishment for sinners, particularly those who had abused their power by oppressing the poor and defenseless. Chiliasm has, therefore, always had a distinctly subversive political character, and ruling groups invariably oppose it, often violently wiping out any traces.”
If the enthusiasm for the momentous 6000 AM was restrained, it is because careful readers of Jerome and Augustine now had three troubling questions to consider:
First, as long as Byzantium (Rome) was even nominally involved in granting titles to the Popes and kings in Western Europe, the Roman Empire could still be said not to have fallen. This irrespective of reality — in the coronation of Charlemagne, the break with Byzantium was clear. The reign of Charlemagne often marks the beginning of the Middle Ages, where all outward appearance of the refinements of Roman civilization were lost.18 However, it was essential that the title of Roman Empire be used. If Rome was gone — the worrisome prophecies of Daniel were due for fulfillment. Antichrist was to follow. Was the Holy Roman Empire really Rome?
Second, there was the nagging problem of setting prophetic events in proper order. Antichrist was to arise and persecute the church before the “eternal reign of the saints” which sounded like the millennium. Now after 800 it was the 7th millennium and the church and state were firmly in control. What happened to the prophecies of Antichrist?
Third, if the millennium of blessing was now in progress, how could the church countenance persons like Pope Leo III, who had an abysmal moral reputation? The accusations about Charlemagne’s moral reputation were also abysmal. While current sensibilities might be shocked that Charlemagne had five legitimate wives and five concubines, the church tolerated this.19 However, Charlemagne had some proclivities so sinful that even the church shuddered.20 Was this what the church should expect of the eternal reign of the saints?
All of these concerns would cause a thoughtful Christian reflection, but in those evil times, the only safe course would be to keep one’s head bowed in prayer. Low murmurs against the Papal Millennium and the Pope as Antichrist would continue. They would become more insistent and widespread as the centuries rolled on, the abuses of church authority would become more flagrant and deadly, in the end even the flawed church invention of “purgatory” for souls not really good enough for heaven would be turned into a mockery by the selling of indulgences. All of this would culminate with Martin Luther nailing his 95 theses on the door of Wittenberg church 500 years ago.
— Br. Richard Doctor
(1) Goldberg, Sylvie Anne, “Questions of Times: Conflicting Time Scales in Historical Perspective,” Jewish History, Volume 14, Number 3, (2000), pages 267-286.
(2) The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, translated by Christian Frederick Cruse (1850), reprinted by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI (1974), is used for all citations.
(3) English translation accessed from www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.97a
(4) Blech, Benjamin, Redemption, Then and Now, Pesah Haggada with Essays and Commentary by Rabbi Benjamin Blech, Menorah Books, Jerusalem (2017), page 17.
(5) Blech, op. cit., page 74.
(6) Hone, William, Jeremiah Jones, William Wake, The Apocryphal New Testament (1820), reprinted as The Lost Books of the Bible, Bell Publishing, NY (1979).
(7) Landes, Richard, “The Fear of an Apocalyptic Year 1000: Augustinian Historiography, Medieval and Modern,” Speculum, Volume 75, Number 1, (Jan. 2000), page 98.
(8) Haney, K., “The Reception of St. Augustine’s ‘City of God’ in Anglo-Norman Canterbury,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Volume 74, (2011) pages 59-85.
(9) Augustine, bishop of Hippo, City of God, Marcus Dods (translator), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, Volume 2. Edited by Philip Schaff, Buffalo, NY, Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1887. All citations taken from this translation, now on-line.
(10) St. Augustine, City of God, Image Books (1958).
(11) Landes, R., Apocalyptic Expectations, in Werner Verbeke, Daniel Verhelst, and Andries Welkenhuysen (editors), The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages, Leuven (Belgium): Leuven University Press (1985), page 211, chart. ISBN 90.6186-259-0. Authors pointing to the beginning of the millennium as 800 AD and the year of their writings are: Orosius (416), Prosper Tiro (433), Gallican Chronicle (452), Victorius of Aquitane (457), Hydatius (468), Marcellinus Comes (518), Cassiodorus (519), Maitritensis 134 (534), Victor Tonnon (567), Gregory of Tours (571), Marius of Avenches (581), John of Biclaro (590).
(12) Landes, R., op. cit., authors pointing to the beginning of the millennium as 800 AD following Isidore of Seville and the years of their writing are: Fredegar (642), Merov. genealogy, Florentinus, Ambros. H, Paris BN, Vat. reg. 294 (673), Bodlian 113 (675), Berne 219 (699), BL add., Berne 611 (727).
(13) Wilson, Peter H., Heart of Europe, A History of the Holy Roman Empire, The Belnap Press of Harvard University, Cambridge, MA (2016), page 26.
(14) Landes, R., op. cit., page 197.
(15) Landes, R., op. cit., page 198, footnote 235.
(16) Grafton, A., “Dating History: The Renaissance & the Reformation of Chronology,” Daedalus, Volume 132, Number 2, (2003), page 74.
(17) Landes, R., “The Fear of an Apocalyptic Year 1000: Augustinian Historiography, Medieval and Modern,” Speculum, Volume 75, Number 1 (Jan. 2000), pages 97-145.Brown, Peter, “Mohammed and Charlemagne” Henri Pirenne, Daedalus, Volume 103, Number 1 (Winter, 1974), pages 25-33.
(19) Wilson, op. cit., Tree of the Carolingians.
(2) Hafner, Susanne, “Charlemagne’s Unspeakable Sin,” Modern Language Studies, Volume 32, Number 2, (2002), pages 1-14.