Romanism and the Reformation FROM THE STANDPOINT OF PROPHECY. BY H. GRATTAN GUINNESS, D.D., F.R.A.S., Author 0/ “ Light for the Last Days," “ The Approaching End of the Age,' etc. ÿonbüu : J. NISBET & CO., Berners Street ; MORGAN AND SCOTT, 12, Paternoster Buildings. MDCCCXCJ. [All rights reserved.י] Butler A Tanxf.b, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. PREFACE. THE following lectures were delivered, by request, under the auspices of the Protestant Educational Institute, at Exeter Hall, in the spring of this year. That Institute exists to do a much needed work—to keep alive, especially in the hearts of the rising generation, some measure of in-telligent sympathy with the Protestant traditions of our country. England’s Protestantism has long been England’s glory, and the direct cause of her unrivalled prosperity and peculiar pre-eminence among the nations of Europe. That Protes-tantism is now sustaining a double attack, from without and from within. Yet few seem fully alive to the danger. The late Lord Beaconsfield saw it clearly enough however. “ Your empire and your liberties are more in danger at this moment,” he said, “ than when Napoleon’s army of obser-vation was encamped at Boulogne.” What would he have said had he lived to see the present position of aifairs ! The Reformation of the sixteenth century, which gave birth to Protestantism, was based on Scripture. It gave back to the world the Bible. It taught the Scriptures ; it exposed the errors and corruptions of Rome by the use of the sword of the Spirit. It applied the prophecies, and accepted their practical guidance. Such Reformation work requires to be done afresh. We have suffered prophetic anti-papal truth to be too much forgotten. This generation is dangerously latitudinarian—indifferent to truth and error on points on which Scripture is tremendously decided and absolute! v clear. PREFACE. IV These lectures, simple and popular as they are, will, it is hoped, open many minds to perceive that the Bible gives no uncertain sound as to Romanism, and that those who will be guided by its teachings must shun an apostasy against which the sorest judgments are denounced. The lectures are given as delivered, with the exception of the first and last, which have been extended and modified. In recasting and enlarging the opening lecture on the Daniel foreview, and the closing one on the Reformation, I have availed myself of the valuable help of my beloved wife, who has for so many years been my fellow labourer both in literary and evangelistic work. I shall rejoice if these lectures obtain a wide circulation, for they contain, I am sure, truth for the times,—truth deeply and increasingly needed, not only for the preservation of the civil and religious liberties of our country and empire, but for the practical guidance of the people of God in these last days. H. GRATTAN GUINNESS. Harley House, Bow, E., June L·1887 ,/־. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. From the first appearance of these lectures in the form in which they were originally published, I have been urged to produce a cheap popular edition suited for wide-spread dis-tribution. I do so now the more willingly because the need of testimony to Protestant Truth is increasing instead of diminishing. Romanism and Ritualism are making exten-sive progress year by year, and seriously imperil “The Protestant Religion and Liberties of England.” The duty of diffusing information on the true character and history of “ Romanism and the Reformation ” is one which presses on God’s faithful people in these days. The apathy of many as to the present crisis only increases the danger, and intensifies the call for clear and cogent teaching suited to counteract the Rome ward tendencies of these times. The testimony of Scripture, especially of the “ sure word of Prophecy,” should be set forth afresh, as in the days of the Reformation, that those in danger of departing from the faith once delivered to the saints may be warned, and those who have so departed may he delivered. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but spiritual, and mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds. Our combat is with error, therefore let us diffuse the Truth. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION Books and pamphlets bearing on the questions at issue, and taking the side of Truth, should be circulated by the mil-lion. Let our readers do what they can in this direction, without delay, committing the result to Him who has promised that His word shall not return to Him void, but shall accomplish the ends for which He has sent it. H. GRATTAN GUINNESS. Harley House, Bow, London, E. May 1st, 1891. CONTENTS. LECTURE I. PAGES The Daniel Foreview of Romanism........................1-21 Fighting again the Reformation battle, p. 1—Recent Romish encroachments, p. 2—Protestant apostasy, p. 3—Subjects of following Lectures, p. 4—Three sets of prophecies regarding Romanism, p. 7—Brief history of Rome, p. 8—Conversion of Constantine, p. 10—Gregory I., Bishop of Rome, p. 11— Bishopric developed into the Papacy, p. 11—A theocracy on earth, p. 12—European servitude to Papal rule, p. 13—Climax of Papal aggression; Innocent III., p. 14—Boniface VIII.; blasphemous claims in his “ Unam Sanctum,” p. 15—From Rome to Avignon, p. 18—The Reformation, p. 18—Decline of Papal authority, p. 10—Daniel’s condensed, comprehensive, prophetic summary, p. 19. LECTURE II. The Daniel Foreview of Romanism (Second Part) . . 22-44 Dan. vii. 712,16-27־, the story of the Papacy, p. 22—Rome the “fourth beast,” p. 24—Continuity of the rule of Rome in its double aspect, Pagan and Papal, p. 24—The Papacy symbolised by the “little horn,” p. 26: (1) Its place, p. 27 ; (2) Time, p. 27 ; (3) Nature, p. 27 ; (4) Moral character, p. 28—Foxe’8 “Acts and Monuments,” p. 30—Birks’ “First two visions of Daniel,” p. 32; (5) Lawlessness, p. 32; (6) Persecution of the saints, p. 33—Killing of “ heretics ” and persecuting of “saints” the same, p. 34—(7) Its duration, p. 39; (8) Its doom, p. 39—Daniel’s prophecy gives the political aspect, p. 40—Romish influence vastly weakened in the world generally, p. 40—Correspondence of the prophecy and its historic fulfilment, p. 42—Evidence of Divine inspira-tion of Daniel, p. 43. LECTURE III. Paul’s Foreview of Romanism.........................45-84 Romish ecclesiastical power, p. 45—The predicted apostasy in the Church, p. 46—The Antichrist, p. 50—The place occu-pied by the Antichrist, p. 55—The character of the Antichrist, CONTENTS. vi PAGES p. 56—Tlie attitude of tho Antichrist, p. 57—Paul’s “ Man of sin” and Daniel’s “little horn” identical, p. 59: (1) Both are Roman ; (2) They have the same chronological point of origin; (3) Both exalt themselves against God; (4) Both small at commencement, and become exceeding great; (5) Both claim to be teachers of men ; (6) Both are persecutors —Historical facts : a tremendous apostasy, p. 61—Tyndale on the growth of Papacy, ,p. 62—The Pope as God on earth, p. 64—The confessional, p. 66—The Jesuits, p. 66—Lying wonders ; Bishop Jewell on False Miracles, p. 67—Calvin on saintly relics, p. 69—The decretal epistles, p. 71—Romanism the outcome and climax of the predicted apostasy, p. 72— Romanism at variance with Scripture on all important points of faith : (1) Traditions to be regarded as the Word of God ; (2) Forbidding to search the Scriptures; (3) The Church alone can interpret Scripture; (4) The Pope, not Christ, really the head ; (5) Some sins not involving spiritual death ; (6) Justification not by faith ; (7) Sacramental confession to a priest essential ; (8) Priestly power of absolution ; (9) Super-abundant merit of “works”; (10) Purgatory; (11) The mass a propitiatory sacrifice ; (12) Celibacy of the clergy ; (13) Worship of angels and saints; (14) Worship of images ; (15) The Virgin Mary and the saints mediators—Creed of Pope Pius IV., p. 80—The recent council of the Vatican, p. 80 —Rome’s reply to the Reformation, p. 81—Agreement of prophecy and history respecting the Papacy, p. 83. LECTURE IV. John’s Foreview of Romanism...................................85-109 The politico-ecclesiastical characler of Romanism, p.S5— Apocalyptic Prophecy, p. 85—The key to the Apocalypse, p. 88—The “beast” of John identical with the “ little horn ” of Daniel, p. 90 : (1) Both are Roman ; (2) Period the same ; (3) Both have a mouth ; (4) Both speak the same things ; (5) Both have great dominion ; (6) Both make war with the saints ; (7) The duration of both is the same ; (8) Their end is the same, as to manner and time—Evidence sustaining this interpretation, p. 93—Fall and overthrow of the Papal power, p. 98—“ Babylon the Great” Christian not heathen Rome, p. 99—Marks identifying Papal Rome with Babylon the Great, p. 101—Extravagant magnificence of the harlot Church, bloody persecutions, the Inquisition, the Chamber of HoiTors, pp. 102-109. LECTURE V. Interpretation and Use of these Prophecies in Pré· Reformation Times..................................110-136 Importance of an interpretation which has produced blessed results, p. Ill—Which interpretation is likely to be right, that of the persecuted or that of the persecutors ? p. 112— CONTENTS. vii PAGES Antagonistic schools of Interpretation are to be expected, p. 112—The Futurist School, p. 113—History of prophetic In-terpretation in the early Christian centuries from Apostolic times to fall of Roman Empire, pp. 116-124—Ditto in the Dark Ages from the fall of Rome to Gregory VII., pp. 124-126—Ditto in the darker pre-Reformation centuries from Gregory VII. to the Reformation, pp. 12G-136. LECTURE VI. Interpretation and Use of these Prophecies in Reforma- tion Times.........................................137-15.) A de־formed Church needing to be re-formed, p. 137—Re-formers viewed the Papal as the Antichristian system : so Luther, pp. 140-142 ; Melanchthon, p. 143; Zwingle and others, p. 144; Calvin, p. 144; Tyndale, p. 146; Knox, p. 147 ; Rid-ley, p. 149 ; Latimer, p. 149 ; Jewell, p. 150 ; Cianmer, p. 151 ; Bradford, p. 153—The Reformers opposed the Church of Rome on doctrinal and practical, as well as prophetic, grounds, p. 153—Futurism rejects the use which all the Reformers made of Scripture, p. 154—We must not accept Rome’s judgment of herself, p. 157—The prophetic barriers against Romish error should be jealously guarded, not׳ carelessly thrown down, p. 157—The Papal Church is presented in Scrip-ture as the masterpiece of Satan, p. 108. LECTURE VII. Interpretation and Use of these Prophecies in Post- Reformation Timer . ........................160-184 An era of light and liberty commenced with Luther, p. 160 —The Reformation followed by a Papal reaction, p. 161—The harlot Church rides the beast, p. 163—Rome’s reply to the Reformers’ use of the prophecies, p. 164—Protestant wit-nesses and martyrs discerned the true historic interpreta-tion, p. 166—Progress of interpretation during the last two and a half centuries traced, p. 166—Quotations from Mede, &166 ; Westminster Confession of Faith, p. 168 ; Sir Isaac ewton, p. 169; Jurieu, p. 172; a Huguenot work (Condem-nation of Jansenist propositions by Pope Clement XI.) ; Rob-ert Fleming, p. 175; De Cheseaux, p. 176 ; Bishop Newton, p. 177—Progressive interpretation during the present century in the light of current history, p. 178—Faber, Cunninghame, Keith, Bickersteth, p.178—Bishop Wordsworth, p. 179—Dean Alford, p. 179—Elliott’s “ Hone Apocalypticæ,” p. 180—Pro-lessor Birks’ “ First Elements of Sacred Prophecy,” p. 181— The impregnability of the Historic Interpretation, p. 182— Futurism mischievous and self-condemned, p. 183. CONTENTS. viii PÀGXS 185-231 232-244 LECTURE VIII. Double Foreview of the Reformation .... Is there no prophecy relating to the Reformation P p. 185 —Two kinds of prophecy, the acted and spoken, p. 186—Pro-testantism is a late, limited, and imperfect return to Primi-tive Christianity in the end of the age, p. 188—Brief history of the Reformation, p. 189—The Reformation nota beginning but a return, p. 190— The Reformation gave to the world a new ecclesiastical system, p. 191—And produced Protestant kinqdoms, p. 191—It was clearly foreshadowed in the history of Israel, p. 192—Analogies between the Jewish Restoration and the Christian Reformation, p. 193—Romanism merely Christianized Paganism, p. 19/—Analogy between Jewish and Christian witnesses, p. 198—To condemn the Christian Reformation is in principle to condemn the Jewish Reforma-tion, p. 200—New Testament prophecies of the Reformation 201—Symbolism of the Apocalypse, p. 203—The Apoca-yptic visions form a complete history of the Church and of the world to the end of the age,p. 203—Rev. x. and xi. 1-11 a symbolic vision of the Reformation, p. 204—The “ Mighty Angel ” Christ Himself, p. 205—The gift of the “ little open book” what?, p. 205—Luther finding a “rare book” in Erfurt Library, p. 206—The Reformation hid in that Bible ! p. 208—Power of the Word of God, p. 208—Diffusion of the Scriptures, p. 209—The Bible in Germany, p. 209—The Bible in France, p. 210—A great commission ; revival of Gospel preaching, p. 211—Luther as a preacher, p. 212—Complete separation from Rome essential, p. 213—A separate Evan-gelic Church, p. 214—The two witnesses and their work, p. 215—“Through much tribulation”; faithful witnesses in East and West, p. 219—The witnesses silenced, p. 224—Their resurrection in the Reformation, p. 226—Chronological con-firraation, p. 229. Concluding Remarks on the Practical Bearing of the Subject.................................................. Confirmation of Inspiration of Scripture, p. 232—A Guide-Book, proved for the past* is trustworthy for the future, p. 234 —The doom of the Papacy ; decline of Romanism, p. 234— Present desperate but futile effort for renewed ascendency, p. 236—Quotation from Colquhoun, p. 237—The issue : England Protestant or Papal ? p. 239—Need of arming ourselves with knowledge, p. 241—Ritualism, p. 242—The only Mediator, p. 243. LECTURE I. THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. LECTURE I. THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. FIFTY years ago the eminent statesman Sir Robert Peel said, with remarkably clear foresight : “ The day is not distant, and it may be very near, when we shall all have to fight the battle of the Reformation over again.” That day has come. It has been upon us for some time. It has found us unprepared, and as a result the battle is to some extent going against us. More than three centuries of emancipation from the yoke of Rome—three hundred years of Bible light and liberty—had made us over-confident, and led us to under-estimate the power and iufluence of the deadliest foe, not only of the gospel of God, but also of Protestant England. Britain’s honourable distinction of being the leading witness among the nations for the truth of the gospel and against the errors of Romanism had come to be lightly esteemed among us. Our fathers won this distinction through years of sore struggle and strife ; they purchased it with their best blood, and prized it as men prize that which costs them dear. It had cost us nothing, we were born to it ; we knew not its value by contrast as they did. In the early part of this century the power of Rome was in these lands a thing of the past, and it seemed to be fast decaying even in other lands. The notion grew up among us that there was no need to fear any revival of that deadly upas tree, which is the blight of all that is great and good, pure and prosperous. The light of true knowledge had for ever dispelled the dark fogs of superstition, so it was sup-posed; mediaeval tyrannies and cruelties cloaked under a x B ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 2 pretence of religion conld never again obtain a footing in these lands of light and liberty. We might despise and deride the corruptions and follies of Rome, but as to dread-ing her influence—no. She was too far gone and too feeble to inspire fear, or even watchfulness. This was all a delusion, and we have been roughly un-deceived. The difficult and dangerous crisis through which England is now passing is the direct result of the course of action taken under this delusion, and God only knows what the ultimate consequences may be. A serpent may bo scotched, yet not killed ; it may retain life enough to turn and inflict on its foe a fatal wound. The ground may be purged from a destructive weed, but the little remnants left behind may sprout and spread so as speedily to pervade the plot anew. It has been thus with Romish influence in Pro-testant England. ״ Let facts speak. Fifty years ago there were not five hundred Roman priests in Great Britain ; now there are two thousand six hundred. Fifty years ago there were not five hundred chapels ; now there are fifteen hundred and seventy-five. Fifty years ago there were no monasteries at all in Britain; now there are two hundred and twenty-five. There were even then sixteen convents, but now there are over four hundred of these barred and bolted and impene-trable prisons, in which fifteen thousand Englishwomen are kept prisoners at the mercy of a celibate clergy, who have power, unless their behests are obeyed, to inflict on these hapless and helpless victims torture under the name of pen-anee. Fifty years ago there were but two colleges in our land for the training of Roman Catholic priests—i.e. of men bound by oath to act in England as the agents of a foreign power, the one great object of which is avowed to be the dismemberment of our empire and the ruin of our influence in the world ; now there are twenty-nine such schools. And, strangest of all, England, who once abolished monasteries and appropriated to national uses the ill-gotten gains of Rome, is now actually endowing Romanism in her empire 3 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. to the extent of over a million of money per annum. The exact amonnt is £1,052,657. Results even more serious have arisen from the dropping on the part of evangelical Christianity of its distinctive testi-mony against Romish doctrine and practice. An apostasy has taken place in the Reformed Church of England itself, and multitudes of its members, uninstructed in the true nature and history of the Church of Rome, and ignorant óf the prophetic teachings of Scripture about it, have rejoiced in a return to many of the corruptions of doctrine and prac-tice which their forefathers died to abolish. Our reformed faith is thus endangered both from without and from within, and it can be defended only by a resolute return to the true witness borne by saints and martyrs of other days. We must learn afresh from Divine prophecy God’s estimate of the character of the Church of Rome if we would be moved afresh to be witnesses for Christ against this great apostasy. As Protestants, as Christians, as free men, as philanthro-pists, as those who are acquainted with the teachings of history, we deplore the existing state of things ; we regard all these changes as a retrograde movement of the most dangerous character, and we feel constrained to renew the grand old protest to which the world owes its modern ac-quisitions of liberty, knowledge, peace, and prosperity. We recognise it as a patent and undeniable fact, that the future of our race lies not with Papists, but with Protestants. Its leading nations this day are not Papal Italy, Spain, and Portugal, but Protestant Germany, England, and America. What has made the difference ? The nations that embraced the Reformation movement of the sixteenth century have never since ceased to advance in political power, social pro-sperity, philanthropic enterprise, and general enlightenment ; while the nations that refused it and held fast to the cor-ruptions of Rome have as steadily retrograded in all these respects. “ By their fruits ye shall know them.” The present course of lectures is intended to arouse fresh attention to the great controversy between the Church of ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 4 Rome and evangelical Churches. In this war the Roman army stands on one side, and Protestantism in one unbroken phalanx on the other. The regiments of Rome wear but one scarlet uniform, fly but one Papal flag, and use in their religious ceremonies but one dead language—Latin; the Protestant army, on the other hand, consists of many divi-sions, clad in differing uniforms, flying different flags, and speaking different tongues. But, like the composite hosts of Germany in the struggle with France, they are all the stronger for their voluntary union ; they can cordially join in the great struggle. The secondary denominational differ-enees existing between Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Nonconformists are all lost sight of in their common conflict with Rome ; and the sole issue is between those who hold to the old gospel of Christ, and those who teach another gospel —which is not another. Our subject in these lectures is Romanism and the Reforma-tion from the standpoint of prophecy : that is, we propose to give you, not any merely human view of the subject, but the Divine view ; not the opinions of the lecturer about it, but the teachings of prophets and apostles, the judgment of the only wise God as expressed in His sacred word, in this blessed Divine revelation which sheds its beams on every subject of interest to the people of God. It is a fact, that though the canon of Scripture was closed ages before Roman-ism began to exist, and fifteen centuries before the Reforma-tion, yet it presents the Divine judgment as to both. The Bible records the past in its histories and the future in its prophecies, which are simply history written beforehand. It expresses moreover moral judgments as to the individuals it describes and the acts which it records, and it similarly expresses moral judgments respecting the individuals and actions which it predicts. It warned the Church against the wdles of Rome Papal, even from the days of Rome Pagan. John, the victim of Nero and Domitian, painted for posterity pictures of the martyrs of the Inquisition, and of the cruelties of tyrants more merciless than the Cæsars. 5 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. In viewing this question from the standpoint of prophecy, consequently, our object is, not merely to trace the fulfilment of sacred prediction in the broad facts of history, as a proof of the inspiration of Scripture—though our lectures must of course do that—but it is even more to present the Divine view of the Roman Papal system, to show what infinite re-probation and abhorrence Scripture pours upon it, and what an awful doom it denounces against it. If we know what God thinks of any system, we know what we ought to think of it and how we ought to act towards it. Fore-warned is forearmed. Had the youth of the last two or three generations of England been carefully instructed in the Scriptures bearing *on this subject, we should not have lived to see our country troubled and in peril of dismember-ment through Jesuit intrigues, nor our national Church divided against itself, to its own imminent danger, and one section of it relapsing into the apostasy from which the Reformation had delivered it. Let me first define distinctly the three terms in our title— Romanism, the Reformation, and Prophecy. Let me answer the questions—What is Romanism ? What was the Refor-mation ? What is Prophecy ? I. Romanism is apostate Latin Christianity—not apo-state Christianity merely, but apostate Latin Christianity. The Greek Church, the Armenian Church, the Coptic Church are all apostate in greater or less degrees, and the Protestant Church itself has no small measure of apostasy in it ; but it is of Romanism, or Latin Christianity, alone that we now speak, because it is the great and terrible power of evil so largely predicted by the prophet Daniel and by the Apostle John; it is the special apostasy which bulks most largely in prophecy, and it is the culmination of Christian apostasy. It includes all whose public worship is conducted in Latin and who own allegiance to the Pope of Rome. Dean Milman’s history of the Church of Rome is called “ The History of Latin ChristianityArchbishop Trench ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 6 speaks of Qregorjr the Great as ‘.‘the last of the Latin Fathers, and the first in the modem sense of the popes,” and says he “ did more than any other to set the Church forward on the new lines on which it mnst travel, to con-stitute (kjjatin Christianity with distinctive features of its own, such as broadly separate it from Greek.”1 Bonmnism is this Latin Christianity become apostate. II. The Reformation was,.A pbiMíXII£,J3b^nQN- apostate ChristiaíüTX, accomplished between three and four centuries ago in this country, in Germany, and some other countries of Europe. One feature of this great movement was the abandonment of the use of Latin in public worship, and the translatif the Scriptures into living languages, so that all nations might read the word of God in their own tongue, and understand for themselves its sacred messages. The names of Luther, Zwingle, Erasmus, Tyndall, Knox, Calvin, Latimer, Ridley, Cranmer, Hooper, and others, are associated with this “ Reformation.” III. And, in the third place, Prophecy is the divinely given MIRROR OF the future. “ Things not seen as yet ” are reflected on its surface with more or less distinctness. They may^be partially discerned beforehand, and clearly identified when the time of fulfilment comes. Thus the first advent of Christ was shown, though but as in a glass darkly, thousands of years before it took place ; and so the tragic episodes of the siege of Jerusalem were presented to the mind of Moses ages before the city was even built. ,Raman-ism and the Reformation both lay afar in the distant future when Daniel and John foresaw their history; but their pro-phetic visions and writings reflect both one and the other with a distinctness and clèarness which is the exact equi-valent of their magnitude and importance in the history of the Church and of the world. Bear in mind these three brief definitions : I. Romanism is apostate Latin Christianity. 1 “ Medieval Church History,” p. 14. 7 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. II. The Reformation was a return to primitive non-apo-state Christianity accomplished three centuries ago. III. Prophecy is the mirror of the future. Let us next inquire, What is this Romanism, or Latin Christianity, as distinguished from Greek, or Protestant, or any other form of the faith of Christ ? As to its doctrines and practices, we will answer this question later on in our course of lectures, quoting from its own acknowledged standards. For the present we must confine ourselves to a consideration of its history. But before I give you a brief outline of this, L may state that there are three distinct sets of prophecies of the rise, character, deeds, and doom of Romanism. The first is found in the book J3f JDaniel, the second in the epistles of Paul, and the third in the letters and Apocalypse of John ; and no one of these three is com-píete in~1tséTfT It is only by combining their separate features that we obtain the perfect portrait. Just as we cannoT derive from one gospel a complete life of Christ, but in order to obtain this must take into account the records in the other three : so we cannot from one prophecy gather a correct account of antichrist ; we must add to the particulars given in one those supplied by the other two. Some features are given in all three prophecies, just as the death and resur-rection of Christ are given in all four gospels. Others are given only in two, and others are peculiar to one. As might be expected from the position and training of the prophet who was a statesman and a governor in Babylon, Daniel’s foreview presents the political character and relations of Romanism. The Apostle Paul’s foreview, on the other hand, gives the ecclesiastical character and relations of this power ; and John’s prophecies, both in Revelation xiii. and xvii., present the combination of both, the mutual relations of the Latin Church and Roman State. He uses composite figures, one part of which represents the political aspect of Romanism as a temporal government, and the other its religious aspect as an ecclesiastical system. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 8 In this lecture we deal with Daniel’s political fore view, with his predictions of the great power of evil which was revealed to him as destined to arise in the fourth empire, and which he describes in chapter vii. of his book. Before we consider this prophecy you must allow me briefly to recall a few well-known historical facts, that none can deny or question. The last twenty-five centuries of human history—that is, the story of the leading nations of the earth since the days of Nebuchadnezzar—has been divided into two chronologi-cally equal parts, each lasting for about twelve and a half centuries. During the first half of this period four great heathen empires succeeded each other in the rule of the then known earth—the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires. They lasted from the eighth century before Christ to the fifth century of our era, and ended with the fall of the last emperor of Rome, Romulus Augustulus, Ía.d. 476. During the second half of this period no one great empire has ever ruled over the whole sphere dominated {by these old pagan governments. Power has been more \ divided, and modern kingdoms have replaced ancient empires. A commonwealth of nations has for the last twelve hundred years existed in the territory once governed by old Rome, and no monarch has ever succeeded in subjecting them all to himself. This makes a broad distinction between ancient aiid modern times, and the dividing line is the fall of the old Banian empire, the break up of the last form of ancient civilization, the one which preceded our modern Christian civilization. Rome itself—that great and ancient city—was founded about the beginning of the־ long period I have named, and has therefore been in existence for nearly two thousand six hundred years, though for many centuries it had but a local reputation. Gradually it rose to importance, and in the second century before Christ it attained supremacy in the earth. After that it was for about five hundred years the magnificent metropolis of the last and mightiest of the 9 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. four great empires of antiquity, tbe seat of its government,— the very heart and centre of the then known world. Nineveh and Babylon had each in its day been great metropolitan cities of wonderful size, wealth, and influence; but the realms they ruled were small compared to those over which Rome in its zenith of power exercised her imperial sway. She was for long ages, in the esteem of all civilized nations as well as in her own, “ mistress of the world.” Her proud pre-eminence of position was based on an unequalled degree of military strength and power. It was a rule, not of right, but of might, and it subjected the world to itself. Remains still extant, not only in all parts of Europe, but in Africa and Asia, and above all in Rome itself, sufficiently attest the wide extent of the sway of Rome, the luxury of her princes and people, and the refinements of her civilization. Roman roads, Roman camps, Roman baths, Roman coins, statues, and remains of every kind abound even in our own little isle, some of which have been examined with interest by most of us. Roman laws, Roman literature, and the funda-mental relation of the Latin language to the languages of modern Europe afford.clearer evidences still of the universal, mighty* and long-enduring influence of the ancient masters of the world. Uj^to the beginning of the fourth century of our era Rome was ajmgan city, and the emperor was the high priest of its religion. The ruins of its old heathen shrines still adorn the city. The Pantheon, which is now a church dedi-cated to the Virgin Mary and all the martyrs, was formerly a heathen temple dedicated to Cybele and all the gods of the ancient mythology. But in the fourth century of our era heathenism fell prostrate before that faith of Christ which for three centuries Rome had persecuted and sought to ex-terminate ; the religion of Jesus of Nazareth overthrew the religion of Jupiter Olympius, and the Emperor Constantine established Christianity as the creed of the world. Rgme had become the seat of a Christian bishop before that date, and in the division and decay of the Roman empire which ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 10 soon followed, this bishop, owing to his metropolitan posi-tion^ecameaperson of great importance and the head of Latin Christianity. As other rulers passed away, and as the power of Rome waned before the hordes of Gothic and Vandal invaders, the Christian bishopric, sole survival of the old institutions in Rome, raised its head like a rocky reef in the midst of a wild expanse of roaring billows. It remained when all else failed around it. At first it had itself been a small, weak, new thing under the shadow of a great, mighty, and ancient power. But time brought changes, and gradually it became the stable, strong, and only ancient thing in the midst of the turbulent young Gothic nations into which the fragments of the old Roman domi-nions slowly crystallized. To these rude and recently evan-gelized people the Church of Rome was naturally the mother Church, and the Bishop of Rome the chief of Christian bishops. The tendency of the Latin episcopate thus enthroned in the old metropolis of the world, in the midst of ignorant, superstitious, and child-like Gothic nations, was to become first a monarchical, and then an imperial power. This ten-dency was deep and enduring; it worked for centuries, till at last it produced that singular blasphemous usurpation and tyrannical government which we call the Papacy. The rise of this power was, like all great growths, gradual and slow. From the middle of *the fifth century to the end of the thirteenth—i.e. for between eight and nine hundred years—it was steadily waxing greater and greater, rising higher and higher, reaching forth its branches more widely, and making more extravagant claims and pretensions. Time would of course fail me to trace the rise of ecclesiastical power in the Middle Ages to the monstrous proportions it assumed in the thirteenth century. After the conversion of Constantine, when Chri&tianit^-became thç. ,Established religion of the Roman world, the Church passed rapidly from a state of persecution, poverty, and distress to one of honour, wealth, and ease ; and it degenerated as rapidly from its early purity. Covetousness and avarice came in like a Il THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. flood, and ecclesiastical power became an object of eager t ambition, even to ungodly men. The bishop was a wealthy, influential, worldly dignitary, instead of a humble Christian pastor. Opulence poured in upon the priesthood, alike from the fears and the affections of their converts, and their intellectual superiority over the barbarian nations had the effect of increasing still more their ascendency. The time came when they alone retained any semblance of learning, or could prepare a treaty or write a document, or teach princes to read. By a variety of sordid frauds they contrived to secure to the Church immense wealth and an enormous share of the land. But they recognised their own subjection to the secular power, and respected mutually each other’s in-dependence. Claimsjo supremacy over.other bishops began however before long to be advanced by the bishops of Rome, sometimes on one ground and sometimes on another, but it was long before they were admitted. Papal authority indeed made no great progress beyond the bounds of Italy until the end of the sixth century. At this period the celebrated Gregory I., a talented, active, and ambitious man, was Bishop of Rome. He stands at the meeting place of ancient and mediæval history, and his in-fluence had a marked effect on the growth of Latin Chris-tianity. He exalted his ovrn position very highly in his correspondence and intercourse with other bishops and with the sovereigns of western Europe, with whom he was in constant communication. Claims that had previously been only occasionally suggested were now systematically pressed and urged. He dwelt much on the power conferred on the bishops of Rome in the possession of the keys of the king-dom of heaven, which were committed to Peter and his sue-cessors. The Gothic nations were too ignorant to unravel the sophistries of this clever and determined priest, and they permitted him to assume a kind of oversight of their eccle-siastical matters. His successor, Boniface III., carried these pretensions still higher. He was the last of the bishops of Rome and the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 12 first of the popes. In his days the claim to supremacy over all other bishops was, not only definitely made, but it was acknowledged by the secular power and confirmed by an imperial edict. The wicked usurper Phocas, to serve his own selfish purposes, conceded to Boniface III. in a.d. 607 the headship over all the Churches of Christendom. A pillar is still standing in Rome which was erected in memory of this important concession. This was a tremendous elevation, the first upward step on the ladder that led the bishops of Rome from the humble pastorate of a local Church to the mightiest throne in Europe. But still all that was claimed or granted was simple episcopacy, though of a universal kind ; no thought of secular government existed at this period. The matter however did not stop here. This supreme episcopal jurisdiction led to constant interferences of the Roman bishop in the affairs of the various nations of Christendom, and to ever-increasing pretensions to authority in matters secular as well as ecclesiastical, until five hundred years later, in a.d. 1073, Pope Gregory VII. took a great stride in advance and established A THEOCRACY ON EARTH. He was the first who claimed, as the representative of ..Deity, to be above all the kings in the world. This proud and self-exalting man strove, and strove successfully, not only to emancipate the spiritual power from all control by the State, not only to secure for it absolute independence, but, further, to subject the secular power of princes to the spiritual power of priests, and thus to establish at Rome in his own person and in the succession of the Roman pontiffs an absolute and supreme ruler of the world. Nor did he propound this new and startling doctrine as a theory only. With daring audacity he excommunicated the German em-peror Henry IV., released his subjects from allegiance to him, and forbade them to obey him as sovereign.1 He 1 “ Wherefore, trusting in the justice and mercy of God, and of His 13 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. actually succeeded in exacting humiliating concessions from the emperor, and yet he subsequently bestowed his king-dom on another. This pope turned the bishopric of Rome into a universal and unlimited monarchy} and the sovereigns of Europe wrere unable to oppose his unprecedented usur-pations. He established also an undisguised and irresistible despotism over the national Churches in other lands, by enacting that no bishop in the Catholic Church should enter on the exercise of his functions until the pope had confirmed his election, a law of far-reaching and vast im-portance, by which perhaps more than by any other means Rome sustained for centuries her temporal power as well as her ecclesiastical influence. Many of the constant quarrels between our own early English kings and the popes of Rome, as well as many similar feuds on the Continent, arose out of this flagrant usurpation of national rights and invasion of national liberties. It virtually took from the Churches the power to appoint their own bishops, and placed them under a foreign despotism. The clergy of all nations were by this time enslaved to the Papacy, and by obeying its bulls of excommunication and giving effect to its interdicts they placed in the pope’s hand a lever to move the world. During the interdict the churches in a country were all closed, bells silent, the dead unburied ; no masses could be performed, no rites except those of baptism and extreme unction celebrated. This state of things was so dreadful to a superstitious age, that monarchs were obliged to yield lest their people should revolt. The result of every such interdict was an increase to the power of the Papacy, and blessed mother, the ever-blessed Virgin Mary, on your authority (that of St. Peter and St. Paul), the aboVe-named Henry and all his adherents I excommunicate and bind in the fetters of anathema ; on the part of God Almighty, and on yours, I interdict him from the government of all Germany and of Italy. I deprive him of all royal power and dignity. I prohibit every Christian from rendering him obedience as king. I absolve all who have sworn or shall swear allegiance to his sovereignty from their oaths.”—Milman : “ History of Latin Christianity,” vol. iv., p. 121. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION H they soon brought all refractory rulers in Europe to terms. When the maxims of Gregory VII. had been acted out for a century, and the power to trample on the necks of kings had come to be regarded by church men as an inherent right of the Papacy, the proud, spirit of Papal aggression reached its climax. The period of climax may be dated from the pontificate of Innocent IIL, a.d. 1198. The leading objects which the Roman pontiffs had steadily pursued for centuries seemed at last attained : independent sovereignty, absolute supremacy over the Christian Church, and full control over the princes of Europe. The historian Hallam says of this man : “ He was for-midable beyond all his predecessors, perhaps beyond all his successors. On every side the thunder of Rome broke over the heads of princes.”1 He excommunicated Sweno, king of Norway ; threatened the king of Hungary to alter the succession ; put the kingdom of Castile under an interdict ; and when Philip Augustus of France refused at his bidding to take back his repudiated wife, Innocent did not hesitate to punish the whole nation by putting France also under the same dreaded penalty, until her king humbly submitted to the pope’s behest. King John of England and Philip Π. of Aragon were both constrained to resign their kingdoms and receive them back as spiritual fiefs from the Roman pontiff, who claimed also the right to decide the election of the emperors of Germany by his confirmation or veto. “The noonday of Papal dominion extends from the pontificate of 1 “ The three great sovereigns of western Europe, the kings of Ger-many, of France, and of England, had seen their realms under Papal interdict, themselves under sentence of excommunication. But the Papal power under Innocent not only aspired to humble the loftiest : hardly one of the smaller kingdoms had not already been taught, or was not soon taught, to feel the awful majesty of the Papacy. From the Northern Ocean to Hungary, from Hungary to the Spanish shore of the Atlantic, Innocent is exercising what takes the language of protec■ tive or parental authority, but which in most cases is asserted by the teniUe interdict.”—Milman: “History of Latin Christianity,” vol. v., p. 305. 15 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM; Innocent III. inclusively to that of Boniface VIII., or, in other words, throughout the thirteenth century. Home in-spired during this age all the terror of her ancient name ; she toas once more the mistress of the world, and ־kings were her vassals.”1 Innocent III. claimed also the right to dispense with both civil and canon law when he pleased, and to decide cases by the plenitude of his own inherent power. He dispensed also with the obligation of promises made on oaths, under-mining thus the force of contracts and treaties. The military power of the Papacy dates also from this man, as the crusades had left him in possession of an army. Sys-tematic persecution of so-called heretics began also in this pontificate. The corruptions, cruelties, and assumptions of the Papacy had become so intolerable, that protests were making themselves heard in many quarters. It was felt these must be silenced at any cost, and a wholesale slaughter of heretics was commenced with a view to their extermination. The Inquisition was founded, the Albigenses and Waldenses were murderously persecuted, and supersti-tion and tyranny were at their height. From this century Papal persecution of the witnesses for the truth never ceased until the final establishment of Protestantism at the end of the seventeenth century. In a.d. 1294 Boniface VIII. became pope, and by his superior audacity he threw into the shade even Innocent III. He deserves to be designated the most usurping of mankind, as witness his celebrated bull TJnam Sandam. In this document the full claims of the Papacy come out. We have noted several ever-increasing stages of Papal assump-tion already, but now we reach the climax—the claim which, if it were a true one, would abundantly justify all the rest ; we reach the towering pinnacle and topmost peak of human self-exaltation. What was the claim of Boniface VIII. ? It was that 1 Hallam : “ History of the Middle Ages,” p. 368, 4th ed. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 16 THE POPE REPRESENTS GOD UPON EARTH. As this claim is the most extraordinary and audacious ever made by mortal man, I will state it, not in my own words, but in the words of the highest Papal authority. In the summary of things concerning the dignity, authority, and infallibility of the pope, set forth by Boniface VIII., are these words : “ The pope is of so great dignity and excel-lence, that he is not merely man, but as if God, and the vicar of God (non simplex homo, sed quasi Deus, et Dei vica-rius). The pope alone is called most holy, . . . Divine monarch, and supreme emperor, and king of kings. . . . The pope is of so great dignity and power, that he consti-tutes one and the same tribunal with Christ (faciat unum et idem tribunal cum Christo), so that whatsoever the pope does seems to proceed from the mouth of God (ab ore Deo). . . . The pope is as God on earth {papa est quasi Deus in terra).״ That wdiich was claimed by Boniface VIII. in the thirteenth century has been claimed ever since by a succession of popes down to Pius IX. and Leo XIII. in the nineteenth century. The pope speaks to-day as the vicar of Christ, as God’s vice-gerent. The great oecumenical council of 1870 proclaimed him such, and declared him to be infallible ! A professor of history in the Roman university, writing on the council of 1870, uses the following language, which strikingly expresses the Papal ideal : “ The pope is not a power among men to be venerated like another. But he is a power altogether Divine. He is the propounder and teacher of the law of the Lord in the whole universe ; he is the supreme leader of the nations, to guide them in the way of eternal salvation ; he is the common father and universal guardian of the whole human species in the name of God. The human species has been perfected in its natural qualities by Divine revelation and by the incarnation of the Word, and has been lifted up into a supernatural order, in which alone THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. 17 can it find its temporal and eternal felicity. The treasures of revelation, the treasures of truth, the treasures of righteousness, the treasures of supernatural graces upon earth, have been deposited by God in the hands of one man, who is the sole dispenser and keeper of them. The life-giving work of the Divine incarnation, work of wisdom, of love, of mercy, is ceaselessly continued in the ceaseless action of one man, thereto ordained by Providence. This man is the pope. This is evidently implied in his designation itself, the vicar of Christ. For if he holds the place of Christ upon earth, that means that he continues the work of Christ in the world, and is in respect of us what Christ would be if He were here below, Himself visibly governing the Church.”1 Do you hear these words ? Do you take them in ? Do you grasp the thought which they express ? Do you per-ôeive the main idea and central principle of the Papacy ? The pope is not simply man, but “as if God” and “the vicar of God,” as God on earth. No wonder the sentence is addressed to every pope on his coronation, “ Know thou art the father of princes and kings, and the governor of the world ” ; no wonder that he is worshipped by cardinals and archbishops and bishops, by priests and monks and nuns innumerable, by all the millions of Catholics throughout the world ; no wonder that lie has dethroned monarchs and given away kingdoms, dispensed pardons and bestowed indulgences, canonized saints, remitted purgatorial pains, promulgated dogmas, and issued bulls and laws and extra-vagants, laid empires under interdicts, bestowed benedictions, and uttered anathemas ! Who is like unto him on the earth ? What are great men, philosophers, statesmen, conquerors, princes, kings, and even emperors, of the earth compared to him ? Their glory is of the earth, earthy ; his is from above, it is Divine ! He is the representative of Christ, the Creator and Redeemer, the Lord of all. He is as Christ ; he takes 1 Cited in “ The Pope, the Kings, and the People.” By Rev. William Arthur, M.A., vol. i , p. 211. C ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 18 the place of Christ. He is as God, as God on earth. This blasphemous notion is the keystone of the entire Papal arch ; it is the stupendous axis on which the whole Papal world has rotated for ages, and is rotating at this hour. But to complete this very brief sketch of the history of Romanism, I may just remind you that the long and chequered decline of Papal dominion may be dated from the pontificate of Boniface VIII., from the end of the thirteenth century. Early in the next century Clement V. took the strange and fatal step of removing the seat of Papal govern-ment from Rome to Avignon, where it remained for seventy years, greatly to the detriment of its authority and power. There it was to some extent dependent־ on the court of France, and it also lost the affections of Italy and the prestige of Rome. Then came the great schism which seriously weakened and discredited the Papacy. Rival popes ruled at Rome and Avignon. Corruption and rapacity, demoralization and disaffection rapidly increased, and there supervened that darkest hour of the night which precedes the dawn. Ere long Wycliffe, the morning star of the Reformation, arose, nnd at last came the blessed movement itself, with Martin Luther and the rest of the reformers, which de-livered Germany, England, and other lands from the Papal yoke, dividing Christendom into two camps, Romanist and Protestant. Vainly did Rome seek with frantic efforts to arrest or reverse this movement ! Hecatombs of martyrs, oceans of blood, centuries of wars could not stop it. At the beginning of the 16th century Rome boasted that not a single heretic could be found ; now Christendom contains a hundred and fifty millions of those whom the Papacy calls heretics, and whom it would exterminate by fire and sword if it could. It did succeed in crushing out the Reformation movement in France, Spain, and Italy by awful Inquisition tortures, by bloody massacres, by cruel wars, by the revoca-tion of the Edict of Nantes, by the deeds of such men as Philip of Spain with his armada, and the Duke of Alva with 19 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. his cruelties in the Netherlands. Rome recovered some of the ground she lost in the Reformation, and she still exer-cises spiritual power over a hundred and eighty millions of mankind. Though her temporal power was overthrown for a time in the French Revolution, and to the joy of Italy brought to an end in 1870, her claim to it is in no wise abated, nor her pretension that she has a right to rule the world. The religion of Rome has so disgusted the conti-nental nations, that, knowing nothing better, they have drifted into practical infidelity, and with one consent they have to a large extent despoiled the Church of her revenues, secularized her property and her religious houses, and repu-diated her interference in their respective governments. For the last five hundred years the authority of the Papacy has been declining. “ Slowly and silently receding from their claims to temporal power, the pontiffs hardly protect their dilapidated citadel from the revolutionary con-eussions of modern times, the rapacity of governments, and the growing aversion to ecclesiastical influence. Those who know what Rome has once been are best able to appreciate what she is. Those wrho have seen the thunder-bolt in the hands of the Gregories and the Innocents will hardly be intimidated at the sallies of decrepitude, the impotent dart of Priam amid the crackling ruins of Troy.” So wrote Henry Hal lam in the early part of this century ; and while the fall of the temporal power has since taken place, and carried to low-water mark that steady ebb tide of Papal influence which he alleges, yet there has been dur-ing the last half century a revival of Romish influence in Protestant nations, which Hallam probably did not expect. I must not pause to estimate the causes or the importance of this revival here, but shall have occasion to allude to it again later on. Let me now propose to you a puzzle. It is to condense into some brief, simple sentences, which could be read in a few minutes, an accurate, comprehensive, graphic summary of the thirteen hundred years of Papal history. Milman’s ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 20 “ History of Latin Christianity ” is here on the table. It occupies nine octavo volumes, and would take weeks to read. Ranke’s “ History of the Popes ” is in three volumes, and does not cover the whole subject. D’Aubigné’s “ History of the Reformation ” is in five volumes, and takes up only one episode of the long story. The Papacy has existed for thirteen centuries, has had to do with forty or fifty gene-rations of mankind in all the countries of Christendom. Its history is consequently extremely complicated and various. It embraces both secular and ecclesiastical matters, and has more or less to do with all that has happened in Europe since the fall of the old Roman empire. The time is long, the sphere vast, the story exceedingly complex. I want you to tell it all, in outline at least, in a narrative that you could read in less than five minutes or write in ten. You must bring in every point of importance : the time and circum-stances of the origin of the Papacy, its moral character, its political relations, its geographical seat, its self-exalting utterances and acts, its temporal sovereignty, and a com-parison of the extent of its dominions with those of the other kingdoms of Europe ; its blasphemous pretensions, its cruel and long-continued persecutions of God’s people, the duration of its dominion, its present decay, and the judg-ments that have overtaken it ; and you must moreover add what you think its end is likely to be, and explain the rela-tion of the whole history to the revealed plan of Divine pro-vidence. You must get all this in—not in the dry style of an annual Times summary of the events of the year—but in an interesting, vivid, picturesque style, that will impress the facts on the memory, so that to forget them shall be impossible. Can you do it? I might safely offer a prize of any amount to the person who can solve this puzzle and write this story ns I have described. But hard, even impossible? as it would be for you to do this, even if you perfectly knew the history of the last thirteen centuries, how infinitely im-possible would it be if that history lay in the unknown and 21 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. inscrutable future, instead of in the past and present ! If no eye had seen, nor ear heard it ; if it was an untraversed continent, an unseen world, a matter for the evolution of ages yet to come—who then could tell the story at all, much less in brief ? Now this is precisely what the prophet Daniel, by inspira-tion of the omniscient and eternal God, has done. He told the whole story of the Papacy twenty-five centuries ago. He omitted none of the points I have enumerated, and yet the prophecy only occupies seventeen verses of a chapter which can be read slowly and impressively in less than five minutes. This is because it is written in the only language in which it is possible thus to compress multum in parvo, the ancient language of hieroglyphics. God revealed the future to Daniel by a vision in which he saw, not the events, but living, moving, speaking hieroglyphics of the events. These Daniel simply describes, and his description of them consti-tutes the prophecy written in the seventh chapter of his book. Our consideration of this remarkable prediction we must however postpone for the present, as we have already claimed your attention long enough for one lecture. LECTURE IL THE DANIEL FOREVTEW OF ROMANISM. Second Part. ALLOW me to commence this lecture by reading to you Uaniel’s description of the divinely designed hieroglyph by which the history of Rome was prefigured. He has previously described the hierolgyphics of the Babylonian, Persian, and Grecian empires, and then he says : After this I saw in the. night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly ; and it had great iron teeth : it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it : and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it ; and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots : and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool : His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him : thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake : I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had then dominion taken away : yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. ... I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things. These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast* which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass ; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet ; and of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell ; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was moiro 23 23 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. stoat than his fellows. I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them ; until the Ancient of days oame, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High ; and the timo came that the saints possessed the kingdom. Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverso from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise : and another shall rise after them ; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws : and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him. In these verses you have the entire story of the Papacy, and what is more, you have its future as well as its past, the judgment of God as to its moral character and deserts. And how vivid the colouring, how graphic the picture ! I wish I could paint, or, better still, display in action before your eyes, such a dreadful and terrible and exceedingly strong wild beast, with its brazen claws and iron teeth, and ravening, ferocious nature, with its ten horns and its strange, head-like “ little horn,” able to see and speak and blaspheme the Almighty, so as at last to bring down destruction on the beast itself ! I wish I could let you watch it,—rending and tearing its enemies, breaking their bones in pieces, devouring their flesh, and in wanton, fierce ferocity stamp-ing on and trampling with its brazen-clawed feet what it cannot consume ! If you had learned the A B C of the language of hieroglyphics you would at once recognise that such creatures as this are figures of godless empires, king-doms which are brutal in their ignorance of God, in their absence of self-control, in their bestial instincts ; which love bloodshed and are reckless of human agony, selfish, terrible, cruel, mighty. They represent and recall proud military heroes, like Julius Caesar, who trample down all that oppose them; cruel despots, who oppress their fellows; reckless conquerors like Tamerlane and Napoleon, to whom the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 24 slaughter of millions of mankind was a matter of no moment. This is the generic signification of all such hieroglyphs. But we are not left to guess the meaning and application of this particular monster. The symbol has a Divine in-terpretation. “The fourth beast,” we read, “shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth.” That, beyond all question, was Rome, as all historians agree—the fourth and last of the great universal empires of antiquity. The monster repre-sents Rome, her whole existence as a supreme or ruling power, after the fall of the Greek or Macedonian beast before her attacks (u.C. 197). It represents therefore the history of Borne for over 2,000 years in the past, and on into a time still future ; for, be it well noted, this beast ravages and rules, and his characteristic little horn blasphemes and boasts, right up to the point when empires like to wild beasts come to an end, and “ the Son of man and the saints of the Most High take the kingdom and possess it for ever.” It is important that wre should clearly grasp one great historical fact ; i.e. the rule of Rome has never, since it first commenced, ceased to exist, save once, for a very brief period during the Gothic invasions. It has changed in cha-racter, as we have seen, but it has continued. Rome ruled the known world at the first advent of Christ, and still rules hundreds of millions of mankind, and will continue so to do right up till the second advent of Christ. So this prophecy teaches ; for not until the Son of man takes the dominion of the earth, and establishes a kingdom that shall never pass away, is the fuonster representing Roman rule destroyed. The rule of Rome, we repeat, has never ceased. It was a secular pagan power for five or six centuries ; it has been an ecclesiastical and apostate Christian power ever since, that is to say, for twelve or thirteen centuries. There lay a brief period between these two main stages, during which professing Christian emperors ruled from Rome, followed by an interval when, for a time, it seemed as if the great city had received a fatal blow from her Gothic 2S THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. captors. It seemed so ; but it was not so, for the word of God cannot be broken. The rule of Rome revived in a new form, and was as real under the popes of the thirteenth century as it had been under the Cæsars of the first. It was as oppressive, cruel, and bloody under Innocent III. as it had been under Nero and Domitian. The reality Avas the same, though the forms had changed. The Cæsars did not persecute the witnesses of Jesus more severely and bitterly than did the popes ; Diocletian did not destroy the saints or oppose the gospel more than did the Inquisition of Papal days. Rome is one and the same all through, both locally and morally. One dreadful wild beast represents her, though the symbol, like the history it prefigures, has two parts. There was the undivided stage, and there has been the tenfold stage. The one is Rome pagan, the other Rome Papal ; the one is the old empire, the other the modern pontificate ; the one is the empire of the Cæsars, the other is the Roman Papacy. I speak broadly, omitting all detail for the present. We shall find more of that when Ave come by-and־by to John’s later foreview. Daniel’s was a distant vieAv in the days of Belshazzar, too distant altogether for detail. No artist paints the sheep on the hillside if the hill be fifty miles off ; he may sketch its bold outline, but he omits minor detail. So Daniel’s distant foreview, dating from 2,500 years ago, shows the two great sections of Roman history—the un-divided military empire, followed by the commonwealth of Papal Christendom, the latter as truly Latin in character as the former ; and he shows the end of Rome at the second advent of Christ. But he refrains from encumbering his striking sketch with confusing political details. He does not fail hoAvever to delineate fully the moral and religious fea-tures of the power ruling from Rome during the second half of the story, the power symbolized by the proud, intelligent, blasphemous, head-like “ little horn ”of the Roman beast. To this he devotes, on the contrary, the greater part of the prophecy ; and I must ask you now carefully to note the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 26 various points that prove this horn to be a marvellous pro-phetic symbol or hieroglyph of the Roman papacy, fitting it as one of Chubb’s keys fits the lock for which it is made, perfectly and in every part, while it refuses absolutely to adapt itself to any other. The main points in the nature, character, and actings of this “ little horn,” which we must note in order to discover the power intended, are these : 1. Its place : within the body of the· fourth empire. 2. The 1period of its origin : soon after the division of the Roman territory into ten kingdoms. 3. Its nature : different from the other kingdoms, though in some respects like them. It was a horn, but with eyes and mouth. It would be a kingdom like the rest, a mon-archy ; but its kings would be overseers or bishops and prophets. 4. Its moral character : boastful and blasphemous ; great words spoken against the Most High. 5. Its lawlessness : it would claim authority over times and laws. 6. Its opposition to the saints : it would be a persecuting power, and that for so long a period that it would wear out the saints of the Most High, who would be given into its hand for a time. 7. Its duration : “ time, times and a half,” or 1,260 years. 8. Its doom : it would suffer the loss of its dominion before it was itself destroyed. “ They shall take away its dominion, to consume and destroy it to the end.” Here are eight distinct and perfectly tangible features. If they all meet in one great reality, if we find them all characterizing one and the same power, can we question that that is the power intended ? They do all meet in the Roman Papacy, whose history I have just briefly recalled, and we are therefore bold to say it is the great and evil reality predicted. A few words on each of these points, to convince you that this is the case. 2 7 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. 1. Its place. No one can question that the Papacy is a Romany as distinguished from a Greek or an oriental, power. Its seat is the seven-hilled city ; its tongue is the Latin lan-guage of Caesar and of Pliny and of Tacitus ; its Church is the Church of Rome, and is the only Church that is or ever has been named from a city. Others have been named from countries or from men ; the Papal Church alono bears the name of a city, and that city is Pome. The Papacy fulfils the first condition therefore. 2. Its time. We have shown that the last Bishop of Rome and the first pope was Boniface III., a.d. 607. Now the western empire of Rome came to an end with the fall of Romulus Augustulus, a.d. 476 ; that is, 130 years earlier. During that time the ten kingdoms were forming in the body of the old empire, and during that time the simple pastor of the Church was transformed into a pope. The little horn grew up among the ten. The Papacy developed synchronously with the Gothic kingdoms. 3. Its nature. The power symbolized by the little horn is of course a kingdom, like all the other ten ; but it is not merely this. It is “ diverse,” or different, from all the other ruling dynasties with which it is associated. It is a horn of the wild beast, but it has human eyes and a human voice, denoting its pretensions to be a seer, or prophet, and a teacher. It takes the oversight of all the ten, it is an over-seer or bishop, and it has “ a mouth speaking great things.” Its paramount influence depends, not on its mere material power, for it is small as a kingdom, a “ little horn,” but on its religious pretensions. Does not this exactly portray the Papacy ? Was it not diverse or different from all the Gothic kingdoms amid which it existed? Was it a mere kingdom ? Nay, but a spiritual reign over the hearts and minds as well as the bodies of men—a reign established by means, not of material weapons, but of spiritual pretensions. It was founded not on force, but on falsehood and fraud, and the superstitious fears of the half-civilized and ignorant Gothic kingdoms. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 28 The popedom has always been eager to proclaim its own diversity from all other kingdoms. It claims “ a princedom more perfect than every human princedom,” surpassing them “ as far as the light of the sun exceeds that of tho moon.” It arrogates to itself a character as superior to secular king-doms as man to the irrational beasts. Its laws are made not with the best human wisdom ; but auctoritate, scieniid, ac plenitndine, with the fulness of Divine knowledge and the fulness of apostolic power. Is not the Papacy sufficiently diverse from all the rest of the kingdoms of western Europe to identify it as the little horn? What other ruling monarch of Christendom ever pretended to apostolic authority, or ruled men in the name of God ? Does the pope dress in royal robes ? Nay, but in priestly garments. Does he wear a crown ? Nay, but a triple tiara, to show that he reigns in heaven, earth, and hell ! Does he wield a sceptre ? Nay, but a crosier or crook, to show that he is the good shepherd of the Church. Do his subjects kiss his hand ? Nay, but his toe ! Verily this power is “ diverse ” from the rest, both in great things and little. It is small in size, gigantic in its pretensions. It is, or was for centuries, one among many temporal kingdoms in Europe. It is the only one which claims a spiritual authority and universal dominion. 4. Its moral character. The salient feature here is the “ mouth speaking very great things.” Great words spoken against the Most High, and “ a look more stout than his fellows.” Audacious pride and bold blasphemy must charac-terize the power that fulfils this point of the symbol. We ask then, Has the Papacy exhibited this mark also ? Time would fail me to quote to you verbatim its great words, its boastful self-glorifications, and its outrageous blasphemies against God! You will find pages of them quoted in my work on “ The Approaching End of the Age,” and volumes filled with them exist, for Papal documents consist of little else. The Papal claims are so grotesque in their pride and self-exaltation, that they almost produce a sense of the comic, and that feeling of pitying contempt with which one 29 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. would watoh a frog trying to swell itself to the size of an ox ! I must however mention some of the claims contained in these “ great words,” which will show you the nature of Papal blasphemies. It is claimed, for instance, that “no laws made contrary to the canons and decrees of Roman prelates have any force,” that “ the tribunals of all kings are subject to the priests,” that “no man may act against the discipline of the Roman Church,” that “ the Papal decrees or decretal epistles are to be numbered among the canonical Scriptures,” and not only so, but that the Scrip-tures themselves are to be received only “ because a judg-ment of holy Pope Innocent was published for receiving them.” It is claimed that “ emperors ought to obey, and not rale over pontiffs ” ; that even an awfully wicked pope, who is a “ slave of hell,” may not be rebuked by mortal man, be-cause “ he is himself to judge all men and be judged by none,” and “ since he was styled God by the pious prince Constan-tine, it is manifest that God cannot be judged by man ” ! They claim that no laws, not even their own canon laws, can bind the popes; but that just as Christ, being maker of all laws and ordinances, could violate the law of the sabbath, be-cause He was Lord also of the sabbath, so popes can dispense with any law, to show they are above all law ! It is claimed that the chair of St. Peter, the see of Rome, is “ made the head of the world ” ; that it is not to be subject to any man, “ since by the Divine mouth it is exalted above all.” In the canon laws the Roman pontiff is described as “ our Lord God the pope,” and said to be “ neither God nor man, but both.” But the climax of assumption, the keystone of the arch of Papal pretension, is probably to be found in the “ extravagant ” of Boniface VIII., the JJnam Sanctam, which runs thus : “ All the faithful of Christ by necessity of salvation are subject to the Roman pontiff, who judges all men, but is judged by no one.” “This authority is not human, but rather Divine. . . . Therefore we declare, assert, define, and pronounce, that to be subject to the Homan pontiff is to every human creature altogether necessary for salvation” ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION ;0 All these claims were incessantly and universally urged all down the centuries by the popes of Rome, and are still advanced, as boldly as ever, in official decretals, bulls, extravagants, decisions of canonists, sentences of judges, books, catechisms, sermons, and treatises of all kinds. There is no mistaking what they amount to. The pope claims Divine inspiration, his words are to be received as the words of God ; no laws can bind him, he is supreme over all ; the very Scriptures derive their authority from him ; implicit obedience to him is the only way of salvation. He is exalted above all, supreme over all nations, kings, emperors, princes, bishops, archbishops, Churches, over all the world; he is as God on earth, and as such to be worshipped and obeyed. Let me quote you from his own lips some of the great words of the little horn. The following language affords a mere sample of thousands of such Papal blasphemies. “ The greatness of priesthood began in Melchisedek, was solemnized in Aaron, continued in the children of Aaron, perfected in Christ represented in Peter, exalted in the universal jurisdiction, and maní-tested in the pope. So that through this pre-eminence of my priest-hood, having all things subject to me, it may seem well verified in me, that was spoken of Christ, ‘ Thou hast eubdued all things under His feet, sheep and oxen, and all cattle of the field, the birds of heaven, and fish of the sea,’ etc. : where it is to be noted that by oxen, Jews, and heretics, by cattle of the field, pagans be signified; ... by sheep and all cattle are meant all Christian men, both great and less, whether they be emperors, princes, prelates, or others ; by birds of the air you may understand angels and potentates of heaven, who be all subject to me, in that I am greater than the angels, and that in four things, as afore declared, and have power to bind and loose in heaven, and to give heaven to them that fight in my wars ; lastly, by the fishes of the sea, are signified the souls departed, in pain or in purgatory. “ All the earth is my diocese, and I am the ordinary of all men, having the authority of the King of all kings upon subjects. I am all in all and above all, so that God Himself and I, the vicar of God, have but one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do. In all things that I list, my will is to 6tand for reason ; for I am able by the law to dispense above the law, and of wrong to make justice in correcting laws and changing them. . . . Wherefore if those things that I do be said not to be done of man, but of God, what can you make me but God ? Again, if prelates of the Church be called and counted of Constantine for gods, I then, being above all prelates, seem by this reason to be above all gods. Wherefore no marvel if it be in my power to change times and times, to alter and abrogate laws, to dispense with all things, yea, with the precepts of Christ ; for where Christ biddeth 31 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM,; Peter put up his sword, and admonishes His disciples not to use any outward force in revenging themselves, do not I, Pope Nicholas, writing to the bishops of France, exhort them to draw out their material swords? And whereas Christ was present Himself at the marriage in Cana of Galilee, do not I, Pope Martin, in my distinction, inhibit the spiritual clergy to be present at marriage feasts, and also to marry? Moreover where Christ biddeth us lend without hope of gain, do not I, Pope Martin, give dispensation for the same ? What should I speak of murder, making it to be no murder or homicide to slay them that be excommunicated ? Likewise against the law of nature, item against the apostles, also against the canons of the apostles, I can and do dispense ; for where they in their canon command a priest for fornication to be deposed, I, through the authority of Sylvester, do alter the rigour of that constitution, considering the minds and bodies also of men to be weaker than they were then. “After that I have now sufficiently declared my power in earth, in heaven, in purgatory, how great it is, and what is the fulness thereof in binding, loosing, commanding, permitting, electing, confirming, dis-posing, dispensing, doing, and undoing, etc., I will speak now a little of my riches and of my great possessions, that every man may see by my wealth, and abundance of all things, rents, tithes, tributes, my silks, my purple mitres, crowns, gold, silver, pearls and gems, lands and lord-ships. For to me pertaineth first the imperial city of Rome, the palace of Lateran ; the kingdom of Sicily is proper to me ; Apulia and Capua be mine. Also the kingdom of England and Ireland, be they not, or ought they not to be, tributaries to me ? To these I adjoin also, besides other provinces and countries, both in the occident and orient, from the north to the south, these dominions by name. [Here follows a long list.] What should I speak here of my daily revenues, of my firstfruits, annats, palls, indulgences, bulls, confessionals, indulte and rescripts, testaments, dispensations, privileges, elections, prebends, religious houses, and such like, which come to no small mass of money ?... Whereby what vantage cometh to my coffers it may partly be con-jectured. . . . But what should I speak of Germany, when the whole world is my diocese, as my canonists do say, and all men are bound to believe ; except they will imagine (as the Manichees do) two beginnings, which is false and heretical ? For Moses saith, In the beginning God made heaven and earth ; and not, In the beginnings. Wherefore, as I began, so I conclude, commanding, declaring, and pro-nouncing, to stand upon necessity of salvation, for every human creature to be subject to me” (Fox : “ Acts and Monuments,” vol. iv., p. 145). It is futile to allege that the Papacy does not make these claims and speak these great ־words against God, but in His name and as His representative. The answer is patent. This prophecy foretells what the power predicted would do, not what it would profess to do. Does the Papacy give God the glory, or does it glorify itself ? י Facts cannot be set aside by false pretences. Satan disguises himself as an ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 3* angel of light. The head of a Christian Church would not overtly array himself against Christ ; if he does so, it will be under semblance of serving Him.1 The Papacy has abundantly branded on her own brow this particular of the prophecy—the boastful, blasphemous claim to Divine authority and absolute dominion. It has assumed Divine attributes, and even the very name of God, and on the strength of that name claimed to be above all human judgment. 5. Lawlessness was the next feature we noted in the little horn. We have given above some specimens of the Papal claim to set aside all laws Divine and human. “ The pope has also annulled the only surviving law of paradise, con-firmed by the words of Christ. The Lord ordained, ‘ What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.’ The pope ordains, ‘ We decide also that, according to the sacred canons, the marriages contracted by priests and deacons be dissolved, and the parties brought to do penance.’ The Papacy has further annulled the second commandment, given on the mount by the lips of God—in theory, by the childish and false distinction between heathen idols and Christian images ; and in practice, by hiding it from the people, and blotting it out from the catechisms of general instruction. The pope has further annulled the main laws 1 “Let us suppose a rebel in some distant province to forge the royal seal and handwriting, and pretend to act in the name of the sovereign. He then claims to himself entire and unreserved allegiance. He abro-gates whatever laws he pleases, and enacts contrary ones in their room. He enforces his own statutes by the severest punishments against those who still adhere to the old laws of the kingdom. He clothes himself with the robes of state, applies to himself the royal titles, claims immunity from the laws, even of his own enacting ; and pretends that all the statutes derive their sole force from his sanction, and must borrow their meaning from his interpretations. Last of all, he banishes, strips of their goods, imprisons, and puts־ to death all those subjects who abide by the laws of the king and reject his usurpation. Surely, in this case, the pretence of governing in the monarch’s name does not excuse, but aggravates the rebellion. It lessens greatly, it is true, the guilt of the deceived subjëcts, but increases, in the same proportion, the crime of their deceiver ” (Bmxs : “The First Two Visions of Daniel,” 33 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. of the gospel. He forbids the cup to the laity, although the Lord Himself has commanded, ‘ Drink ye all of it.’ He for-bids the people of Christ, in general, to use the word of God in their own tongue; though Christ Himself has charged them, * Search the Scriptures.’ He forbids the laity to rea-son or converse on the doctrines of the gospel ; though St. ,Peter has commanded them, ‘ Be ye ready to give a reason of the hope that is in you.’ The pope, finally, sanctions the invocation of saints and angels : though St. Paul has warned us, ‘ Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels ’ ; though St. John has renewed the charge to the disciples of Christ, ‘ Little chil-dren, keep yourselves from idols ’ ; and an angel from heaven renews the caution, in his words to the same holy apostle, ‘ See thou do it not, for I am thy fellow servant ; worship God.’”1 6. Systematic and long continued persecution of the saints is one of the most marked features of the little horn of the prophecy. It is predicted that he should “ wear out the saints of the Most High.” His first great characteristic is blasphemous opposition to God ; his next salient feature is oppressive cruelty towards men : and just as Christ allowed His people to suffer ten persecutions under the pagan em-perors of Rome, so he allowed His faithful witnesses to be worn out by the cruelties of Papal Rome. “ They shall be given into his hand.” The Church has to tread in the foot-steps of Christ Himself, who resisted unto blood striving against sin, and was put to death by the power of Rome. She is called to the fellowship of His sufferings ; and while they secured the salvation of our race, hers have not been unfruitful, for the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church. But we must compare the facts of history with the pre-diction of prophecy on this point, to see how deeply this mark is engraved on the Papacy as upon no other power 1 Brass ; “ First Two Visions of Daniel,” pp. 258, 250. פ ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 34 that has ever existed in the earth. That the Church of Rome and her Papal head have persecuted largely and long, none can pretend to deny ; in fact, so far from denying it, Rome glories in it, and regards it as one of her great merits. Other nations have now abandoned as unsound “ the bloody tenet of persecution.״ Rome retains it still, approves it theoretically, and would carry it out as vigorously as ever practically, if she could. Other powers have persecuted to a small extent and occasionally, in the past, but never syste-matically and by law throughout ages. All but Rome now hold religious liberty to be an inherent right of man. Rome has, on the other hand, persecuted on principle, and steadily from the seventh century right on to the French Revolution and to some extent almost to the present time. She does so still in the secret recesses of her nunneries and monasteries, under the name of penance. Why else does she require shops for the sale of instruments of bodily torture, such as exist this day in London ? Rome’s contention is, not that she does not persecute, but only that she does not persecute saints. She punishes here-tics—a very different thing. The first would be wicked, the last she esteems laudable. In the Rhemish New Testament there is a note on the words “ drunken with the blood of saints,” which runs as follows: “Protestants foolishly ex-pound this of Rome, because heretics are there put to death. But their blood is not called the blood of saints, any more than the blood of thieves or man-killers, or other malefac-tors ; and for the shedding of it no commonwealth shall give account.” This is clear. Rome approves the murder of “heretics,” and fully admits that she practises her principles. The question therefore becomes this, Are those whom Rome calls “heretics” the same as those whom Daniel calls “saints”? If so, the identification of the Papacy is as complete in this respect as in all the previous points. In order to arrive at an answer to this question, let us take Rome’s own definition of a heretic. The following state-ments are from authorized documents, laws, and decrees of 35 THE DAINEL FORE VIEW OF ROMANISM the Papacy, dating from the time of Pope Pelagius in the sixth century, twelve hundred years ago. “ Schism is an evil. Whoever is separated from the apostolic see is doubt-less in schism. Do then what we often exhort. Take pains that they who presume to commit this sin be brought into custody. ... Do not hesitate to compress men of this kind, and if he despise this, let him he crushed by the public powers.״ This, it will be observed, makes a want of perfect submission to the pope, even though no false doctrine or evil practice be alleged, a ground for persecution. Pope Dama-sus, whose election to the pontificate was secured by a hundred and thirty-seven murders, authorizes persecution of those who speak against any of the holy canons, and adds, “ It is permitted neither to think nor to speak differently from the Roman Church.” This is one of the canons which it is blasphemy to violate ; and he who ventures to differ, even in thought, on any point whatever from the! Roman Church is therefore a heretic. Hundreds of decisions on detailed examples of heresy are all summed up in this one. The Roman decrees everywhere supply similar definitions. Whatever is short of absolute, unconditional surrender of all freedom of act or word, or even of thought and conscience, is heresy. Every evangelical Christian in the world is there-fore, according to Romanist oanons, a heretic, and as such liable to “ punishment.” And moreover Rome frankly ad-mits that it is only where she cannot in the nature of things carry out her ecclesiastical discipline that she 1s justified in,refraining from persecution. The Papacy teaches all her adherents that it is a sacred duty to exterminate heresy. From age to age it has sought to crush out all opposition to its own dogmas and corruptions, and Papal edicts for persecution are innumerable. The fourth Lateran Council issued a canon on the subject, which subsequently became an awful instrument of cruelty. For long ages it was held and taught universally that whoever fell fighting against heretics had merited heaven. Urban IT. issued a decree, acted on, alas ! to this day in ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 36 Ireland, that the murder of heretics was excusable. u We do not count them murderers who, burning with the zeal of their Catholic mother against the excommunicate, may happen to have slain some of them.” If not absolutely murdered, heretics might be ill treated ad libitum, according to an ordinance of Gregory IX., who writes to the Arch-bishop of Milan : “ Let those understand themselves to be absolved the debt of fidelity, homage, and all manner of service, who were bound by any compact, however firmly ratified, to those who have fallen into heresy.” Systematic persecution and extermination of heretics among their sub-jects was constantly enjoined on kings and emperors ; such were required solemnly to swear on their coronation that they would, according to their power, faithfully render their service to the pope. If they neglected to do it, the sovereign pontiff would declare the vassals free and give their realms *to rigid Papists who would more effectually persecute. If monarchs became heretics themselves, they were to be de-posed and anathematized. Thus Pius V. “issued a bull for the damnation and excommunication of Queen Elizabeth and her adherents,” cutting her off from “ the unity of the body of Christ,” depriving her of her crown and kingdom, and pronouncing a curse on her and on all who continued to obey her. The laws of the Papacy on this subject increase in malig-nity from the beginning down to modern times. Bellarminc argues for the necessity of burning heretics, a practice which Luther had asserted to be contrary to the Spirit of God. He says : “ Experience teaches that there is no other remedy; for the Church has proceeded by slow steps, and tried all remedies. First, she only excommunicated. Then she added a fine of money, and afterwards exile. Lastly, she was compelled to come to the punishment of death. For heretics despise excommunication, and say that those light-nings are cold. If you threaten a fine of money, they neither fear God nor regard men, knowing that fools will not be wanting to believe in them, and by whom they may 37 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. be sustained. If you shut them in prison, or send them into exile, they corrupt those near to them with their words, and those at a distance with their books. Therefore the only remedy is, to send them betimes into their own place.” “Under these bloody maxims those persecutions were carried on, from the eleventh and twelfth centuries almost to the present day, which stand out on the page of history. After a signal of open martyrdom had been given in the canons of Orleans, there followed the extirpation of the Al bigen ses under the form of a crusade, the establishment of the Inquisition, the cruel attempts to extinguish the Waldenses, the martyrdom of the Lollards, the cruel wars to exterminate the Bohemians, the burning of Huss and Jerome, and multitudes of other confessors, before the Reformation ; and afterwards the ferocious cruelties prac-tised in the Netherlands, the martyrdoms of Queen Mary’s reign, the extinction, by fire and sword, of the Reformation in Spain and Italy, by fraud and open persecution in Poland, the massacre of Bartholomew, the persecutions of the Hugue-nots by the League, the extirpation of the Vaudois, and all the cruelties and perjuries connected with the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. These are the more open and con-spicuous facts which explain the prophecy, besides the slow and secret murders of the holy tribunal of the Inquisition.” 1 A Romanist loriter, who deplored the persecuting policy of his Church—Professor Rossetti—writes : “ It makes the heart of the true Christian bleed to think of this fatal error of the Latin Church, which by persecuting others laid the foundation of her own irreparable ruin. That the opinions held by these so-called heretics were most injurious to the Church of Rome cannot be denied, but the means taken to destroy them were, of all others, the most likely to strengthen them, and render them more deeply rooted. Daniel and St. John foretold that Satan’s delegate would use horrid cruelties, and inundate Babylon with the blood of Christ’s 1 BiitKS : “First Two Visions of Daniel,” pp. 248, 249. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 38 martyrs ; and the pope, to prove that he was not that dele-gate, did nse horrid cruelties, and caused Rome to overflow with the purest of Christian blood ! ” So Sismondi, the historian, writes: “To maintain unity of belief the Church had recourse to the expedient of burning all those who separated themselves from her ; but although for two hundred years the fires were never quenched, still every day saw Romanists abjuring the faith of their fathers and embrac-ing the religion which often guided them to the stake. I11 vain Gregory IX., in A.D. 1231, put to death every heretic whom he found concealed in Rome. His own letters show that the heretics only increased in numbers.” It must never be forgotten that all Rome’s ordinances against heresy, all its statutes of persecution, remain in its canon law unabrogated, unchanged, and—as the Papacy is infallible in its own esteem—unchangeable, “ irreformable.” Its present disuse of persecution practically is the result of the heavy judgments which have, since the Reformation, and especially since the French Revolution, overtaken it. It has now no army and no Inquisition of its own, nor is any single kingdom in Europe willing any longer to act as its executioner. It lacks the power—it utterly lacks the power—to persecute directly or indirectly. It can only stir up sedition and revolt in Protestant countries, and thus endeavour to injure and weaken Protestant powers, as it is doing to-day in Ireland and in the United States. It is too weak politically to defy modern society by reintroducing mediaeval tortures, massacres, religious crusades, and the auto de fê. But it is as willing as ever, and awaits the opportunity only. As a drunkard may retain his vicious appetite when he has no longer the means of gratifying it, so Rome—long drunken with the blood of saints—is re-strained from further maddening and debasing draughts of her dreadful beverage by nothing but inability to procure them. The Papacy, by justifying as righteous all the hor-rible persecutions of the past, attests her readiness to renew them whenever the opportunity may serve. 39 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. As I shall have to recur to this subject when treating of St. John’s foreview of Romanism, I will add nothing further on this point. I have said enough to show that this sixth mark of the little horn attaches most distinctly to the Papacy, and indicates it alone among all the powers that have ever held sway on the Roman earth. . It has martyred by millions the saints of God, the best and holiest of men. Its persecuting edicts range over the entire period of its existence; the present pope has endorsed them by his approval of the syllabus of Pius IX., and he threw over them the mantle of infallibility. 7. Its duration. A certain definite ,period is assigned to the rule of the little horn. That period is expressed in symbolic language, harmonious with the symbolic or hiero-glyphic character of the whole prophecy. It is “ time, times and a half,” or “ 1,260 days.” This is a miniature symbol of the true period, just as the beast is a miniature symbol of the empire, and the little horn of the Papacy of Rome. Scripture elsewhere gives us the scale on which it is to be enlarged, “a year for a day.” It means therefore 1,260 years. The political supremacy and the persecuting power of the see of Rome were to last for this period and no longer. We have shown you that the popedom dates from the begin-ning of the seventh century. Twelve and half centuries added brings us to the end of the nineteenth century—in other words, to the days we live in, and in which Rome has ceased to be governed by its popes and has become the capital of the kings of Italy. I have no time to expound this chronological point· fully to you this evening. If you wish to study it, you will find it carefully and exactly treated in my recent work, “ Light for the Last Days.” But it leads me to the final point in this identification. 8. The doom of the predicted power. What is the end of this symbolic little horn ? “ They shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.” “ The beast was slain, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame.” This last clause of the prophecy is of course ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 40 not yet fully accomplished, as it is the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven that brings about the final consummation (v. 13). Speculations about the future we leave to futurists, and therefore it might at first sight seem as if we ought to say nothing on this point of the prophecy. But it is not so. .This doom consists clearly of two parts : first, the consuming and destroying to the end ; and then the end itself, symbolized by the slaughter of the beast, the committal of his body to the burning flame. Now the first part of this doom is fulfilling, and has been fulfilling ever since the Reformation, and especially ever since the French Revolution; though the second part is still future. We ask, Has there not been going on for the last few centuries a process by which the once mighty power of the Papacy has been sensibly consumed,—a weakening process, analogous to consumption in the human frame,—a wasting decay tend-ing to extinction ? It must be borne in mind that this prophecy of Daniel takes up the political aspect of the great antichrist, not his religious character. It views him as a monarch of the Roman world, not as a bishop of the Christian Church. We come to that aspect of his career presently, when we take up Paul’s foreview. Here it is one horn among ten, one kingdom among ten Latin kingdoms, though in some senses ruling over them all. The question is, Has there not been such a decay and diminution of Papal sovereignty, such a wast-ing and weakening of Papal power, such a loss of revenue, influence, and territory, as may be fairly said to fulfil this prediction ? Now I mentioned some facte at the beginning of this lecture which indicate a very considerable growth of Papal influence in England during the last fifty years. Many so fix their gaze on these facts as to ·get an impression that Romanism is gaining ground in the world generally. This is very far from being the case, as a glance at the compara-tive positions of the Papacy in the thirteenth century and the two following ones, with its position now in the nine- 41 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. teenth, will show. Then Rome actually exercised the “ dominion ” which she can now only claim. Thent with the consent of his barons, the king of England agreed to hold his kingdom as the pope’s feudatory, and to pay him annu-ally 0De hundred thousand marks as an acknowledgment. Can you imagine Queen Victoria and the lords and commons , of England agreeing to that sort of thing now ? Then the great and valiant emperor of Germany stood for three winter days and nights barefoot in the courtyard of “His Holiness,” waiting for the honour of an audience, in which he might beg the pope’s pardon for having acted as an independent monarch ! Can you imagine the Kaiser Wilhelm, of Berlin, doing that now P Then wherever he pleased the pope could suspend all the observances of religion, even to the burial of the dead and the marriage of the living, in any country with which he was offended. In what kingdom could he do so now P Long after his absolute dominion was gone, the pope had what were called concordats with different nations, in which it was agreed that, in return for the pope’s spiritual support, they would uphold him by their armies and navies. All these have come to an end ; not a nation in Europe lifted a finger to help him when the last vestige of his temporal dominion was violently taken away. Direct political power he now has none, though his position as head of the apostate Roman Church gives him still immense indirect influence. The ten kings as such have entirely shaken off his yoke, and he himself has no longer any sovereign jurisdiction. His territories are taken away, as well as his dominion. The wealth, which was once enormous, is equally gone ; the immense landed estates belonging to the convents are, for the most part, confiscated to secular uses. But the greatest fact of all in this con-nexion is the number of those who have rejected his religious pretensions. At the Lateran Council, in 1513, after all the so-called heretics had been silenced by fire and sword, an orator, addressing the pope, said, “ The whole body of Chris-tendom is now subject to onfe head, even to thee ; no one 42 ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. now opposes, no one now objects.” To-day there are about a hundred and fifty millions of Protestants in the world ! Has not the dominion of the Papacy been consumed ? Can a few thousand perverts in England weigh much against this stu-pendous fact, that 150,000,000 of mankind are no more subject to the Pope of Rome than to the Lama of Tibet ? When we take into account all the twelve centuries of Papal history, and remember that this emancipation belongs to the last three only, we must admit that the predicted con-sumption has made considerable progress. The political dominion and the temporal possessions are gone ; the Papacy is no longer a kingdom, but only an ecclesiastical power, and, counting the Greek Church, there are far more so-called Christians outside than inside the pale of the apostate Latin Church, of which it is the head. This feature of the prediction is then as clearly applicable to Romanism as all the rest. Let me inquire, can any one suggest any other power in which all these marks, or the majority of them, meet ? They are eight in number, and definite in character. The prophecy lays its finger on the place where we are to find the great enemy—Rome ; on the point of time in the course of history at which we may expect to see him arise—the division of the Roman territory into a commonwealth of kingdoms ; it specifies the nature of the power—politico-ecclesiastical ; its character—blasphemously self-exalting, lawless, and persecuting; it measures its duration—1,260 years ; and specifies its doom—to have its dominion gradually consumed and taken away, and then to be suddenly destroyed for ever, because of its blasphqjnous assumptions, by the epiphany in glory of the Son of man, introducing the king-dom of God on earth. The proof that the Papacy is the power intended is strictly cumulative. If it answered to one of these indications there would be a slight presumption against it ; if to several, a strong one ; if to the majority, an overwhelming one ; while if it answer to all, then the proof that it is the power intended 43 THE DANIEL FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. becomes to candid minds irresistible. There is not a single clause in the prophecy that cannot be ,proved to fit the Roman Papacy exactly, except the last, which is not yet fulfilled. Rome, which in her pagan phase defiled and destroyed the literal temple of God at Jerusalem, in her Papal days defiled and destroyed the anti-typical spiritual temple of God—the ,Christian Church. Was it not worthy of God to warn that Church beforehand of the coming of this dreadful antichris-tian power, and to cheer her in all the sufferings she would have to endure from its tyranny by a knowledge of the issue of the great and terrible drama ? Was it not right that the Roman power, pagan and Papal, should occupy as paramount a place on the page of Scripture as it has actually done on the page of history p The eighteen Christian centuries lay open before the eye of the omniscient God, and no figure stood out so prominently in all their long course as that of the great antichrist. The pen of inspiration sketched him in a few bold, masterly strokes ; and there is no mistaking the por-trait. In subsequent lectures I shall have much to say to you of the antichristian doctrines and practices of the Papacy. To-night we have but studied the broad outline drawn in the days of Belshazzar, which forms a broad foundation for what must follow. Notice, in conclusion, the evidence of inspiration afforded by this wonderful prophecy. Could Daniel foresee the things that were coming on the earth ? How should he happen to light on the notion that there would be four universal em-pires, and four only, and that after the fourth there would arise—what the world had never seen before—a common-wealth of ten kingdoms ? How could he depict so strange and peculiar a power as the Papacy ? How could he con-ceive it P A little, weak kingdom, yet controlling all king-doms !—a human dynasty like any other, yet exalting itself against God, and slaughtering His saints !—a power so wicked that heaven itself is moved for its destruction, and the whole Roman earth ruined on its account ! Supposing for a mo- ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 44 ment this was a sketch from imagination : how comes it that history has so wonderfully realized it ? The prediction did not produce its own fulfilment, for they who fulfilled it denied its application to themselves. It was not concocted to fit the events, for the events did not begin for a thousand years after it was published. The events were not arranged by men to fit the prophecy, for they extend over forty sue-ccssive generations. There is no solution of the problem save the true one : “ Holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ” ; “ He revealeth the deep and secret things : He knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with Him.” Let me then solemnly charge you, reverence this holy volume, heed its warnings, dread the judgments it denounces, believe its promises, obey its precepts, study its sacred pre-dictions ; for be ye very sure it is the inspired word of the only living and true God, who is, as Nebuchadnezzar declared of old, “ a God of gods, a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets.” LECTURE III. PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. YOU will remember that in my last lecture I stated that the three foreviews of Romanism presented in pro-phecy by Daniel, Paul, and John respectively, have three distinctive characters. Daniel gives mainly its political relations and its broad moral features; Paul presents its ecclesiastical relations and its religious features ; and John, by the two compound hieroglyphs which he employs and which wre will consider in the next lecture, exhibits the com-bination of the two aspects—a politico-ecclesiastical power. He shows also the changing relations between its contrasted yet united elements during their long joint career, and fore-tells the distinctive doom of each. It must never be forgotten that the Roman Papacy was for long ages an absolute, unlimited, tyrannical monarchy, a worldly, secular government. It had its territorial dominions, its provinces, cities, and towns ; it had its court, its nobles, its ambassadors, its army, its police, its legislature, its juris-prudence, its laws, its advocates, its prisons, its revenues, its taxes, its exchequer, its mint, its arsenals, its forts, its foreign treaties, and its ambitious, selfish plans and policy, just as much as any mere secular kingdom. But it was also some-thing very different—it was the head of the Latin Church ; it was a great ecclesiastical power ; it was a religion as well as a government. As such it had its dioceses and parishes, its spiritual hierarchy of archbishops, bishops, priests, and deacons, its theological schools and colleges and professors, its abbots and deans, its councils and synods and chapters, its monasteries and convents, its orders of mendicant and 45 ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 46 other friars, its services and sacraments, its creeds and con-fessions, its doctrines and discipline, and its penances and punishments. Romanism is a comprehensive term, including both these widely different organizations. Both had their centre in the seven-hilled city, and both regarded the Roman pontiff as head. Just as in the old pagan times the Coesars themselves had been both emperors and high priests of the national religion, so the popes in medioeval times were fountain-heads of authority both in the kingdom and in the Church. The ecclesiastical position of the emperors was however rather a name than a reality ; while that of the popes was most real. They were practically and effectively head in both realms. From his remote point of view, in the Babylonian era, the statesman-prophet Daniel saw mainly the ,political status of the Papacy. From his five-hundred-years-later stand-point, under the empire of Rome, the Christian Apostle Paul saw and foretold most clearly the ecclesiastical charac-ter of the coming antichrist; and this evening we are to consider this latter fore view of Romanism,—we are to study it as a Church system. I must ask you at your leisure to study very carefully three or four passages in the writings of the Apostle Paul, especially the third and fourth chapters of his first letter to Timothy, and the second chapter of his second Epistle to the Thessalonians. You will see that Paul’s fore view consists of two parts : the first gives a general view of a great apostasy, which would in due time arise in the Church ; and the second a carefully drawn portrait of the power in which that apostasy would be headed up. He had even previously predicted the apostasy in his parting address to the elders of the Church at Ephesus, recorded in Acts xx. He had told them that there would arise—not from the outside world, but from among themselves, the pastors or bishops of the Church—“ grievous wolves, not sparing the flock.” “ Of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them ; therefore watch, and remember how I ceased not to warn 47 PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. you.” This was but a brief and passing glance into the dark future ; but the momentary glimpse suffices to show the out-line of the evils which time was to develop, and which Paul so fully predicted later on. Ten pagan persecutions lay be-fore the Church ; but Paul does not predict them. Myriads of Christians were to do literally what he did figuratively, to fight with wild beasts in Roman amphitheatres ; but the Apostle’s prophetic gaze rests not on any such spectacle. No ! a worse evil by far was to befall the Church : an enemy was to arise in her midst, an apostasy was to originate in her bosom, and eat like a cancer into her vitals. Her own leaders were to mislead her ; her very pastors, instead of feeding the flock, would feed on it, and devour it like raven-ing wolves. Perverse pastors, selfish, mercenary bishops, would draw away disciples after themselves, instead of drawing them to Christ as Paul had done. He had coveted no man’s silver or gold, as he reminds them : but these apostate bishops who should arise would be of a wholly different character, robbing and oppressing the Church as wolves the flock ; they would be the direct opposites of the Good Shepherd who gave His life for the sheep, and of the apostolic ministry which follows in His steps. This first warning prediction of the Apostle Paul was addressed, it is true, especially to the elders or bishops (Ιπίσκοτΐοΐ) of Ephesus ; but in view of all that has happened since, it is easy to see that the Ephesian bench of bishops were at any rate representative, for the ,words are a pro-diction of the ecclesiastical corruption that culminated in the Papacy. It strikes the key-note as to the nature of the evil from which the Church was destined to suffer so long and so widely. The pagan persecutions, which threatened to ex-terminate the early generations of Christians, were harmless to the Church compared to the internal corruption and cruel tyranny introduced by her own bishops later on. Paul’s foreview, from the first, was of an ecclesiastical evil, one arising not from the throne of the emperors but from the bench of bishops, not outside but inside the Church. You ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 48 will feel the importance of this fact later on in our course more than you can do now ; I urge you to take special note of it. In the picture of the coming apostasy which Paul draws in 1 Timothy he adds many an additional and dark detail. After giving practical precepts for the organization and government of the infant Church, and specifying the qualifi-cations essential in its bishops and deacons (one of which was that they should be married men), and after summing up the faith of Christ in a brief epitome of “ the mystery of godliness,״ he writes—and we may well believe he did so with a heavy heart : “ Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils ; speaking lies in hypocrisy ; having their conscience seared with a hot iron ; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving, for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” Here we have, not only a prediction that there would he an “ apostasy,” or falling away from the faith in the Christian Church, but a description of its origin and character. Its origin was to be satanic ; its doctrines were to be doctrines of devils, or demons. It was to assume authority, and to lay down laws and prohibitions. Promi-nent among these wras to be the prohibition of marriage; that is, of the very relationship which the inspired apostle had just previously enjoined on bishops and deacons in the words, “ A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife ; . . . one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all ־ gravity ” ; and in the words, “ Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.” Marriage, although thus divinely ordained, would be prohibited, and meats, though created to be received with thanksgiving, woulc} 49 PAULS FORE VIEW OF ROMANISM. be forbidden. Thus the apostasy wo aid be marked by a departure from primitive faith and pure religion, and by the authoritative inculcation in its place of asceticism—the sab-etitution of an external religiousness, and self-imposed sacri-fices, for true holiness of heart. For this external self-denial was not true holiness, but a cover for the reverse. Its professors would be hypocrites and liars, men so sinful as to have lost their conscience against sin ; “ spealcing lies in hypocrisy ; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.” This feature of false profession reappears in the correspond-ing prophecy in 2 Timothy concerning the “ last days,” in which the abettors and adherents of the apostasy are de-scribed as men “ having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.” These men were not then to be open opponents of godliness, but, on the contrary, they would be great professors. They were to have a form of godliness : but only a form—a form covering no reality ; a hollow form, a hypocritical form. Thus the two great Pauline prophecies of the apostasy in “ the latter times ” and “last days” warn the Church, not against professed irreligionists, but against professed religionists, against covert enemies of the Gospel : men cloaked in the garment of self-denial and superior sanctity ; clever imitators of the apostles, like the magicians of Egypt, who withstood Moses, not by denying his miracles, but by counterfeiting them ; cunning men, who should “ creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away withdiver3 lusts ”; and withal educated men, men of letters, “ ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” Mark this well : the men whom Paul described as the leaders of the apostasy which he foresaw were not 70w, ignorant infidels, but learned hypo-crites, lying professors of religion, and self-deceived ascetics. It is in this same strain that he writes also to the Thessa-lonians. The coming of Christ, he tells them, would not take place before the occurrence of an “ apostasy,” or falling away from the faith. This apostasy was to result from the working of what he calls “ the mystery of iniquity”—a remark- E ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 50 able expression, in direct contrast to the “ mystery of godli-ness,״ from which the apostasy is a departure. (Comp. 1 Tim. iii. 16.) The iniquity in question was hidden. It was a “mystery.” People did not recognise it as iniquity; they were deceived by it. From this “ mystery of iniquity ״ w״as to spring in due time “ the man of sin,” whose coming was to be “ after the working of Satan.” Tho outcome and issue of this Satan-inspired apostasy would be “ all deceiv־ ableness of unrighteousness” “ lying wonders” and the belief of lies under the influence of “ strong delusion ” on the part of those who had “ pleasure in unrighteousness.” All this is consistent. These Pauline prophecies teach the same thing. They warn the Church against the same danger. They predict the same sort of apostasy; an apostasy marked, not by open hostility to the gospel, not by the denunciation of godliness and the unblushing profession of infidelity or atheism, but by “hypocrisy,” “deceit,” a “form of godliness,” external religiousness, the practice of asceti-cism, cloaking corruption—by a beautiful garment of light covering the form of the very prince of darkness. But this apostasy was to have a head, and the coming and character of that head are the great subject of Paul’s Thessalonian prophecy. A mistaken apprehension of his firsf letter to them had led the Thessalonians to expect an immediate advent of Christ, and in his second epistle Paul sets himself to correct this error by further instruction as to the future. He tells them of something that was destined to precede the return of Christ, a great apostasy, which would reach its climax in the manifestation of a certain mighty power of evil ; to which* he attaches three names, and of which he gives many particulars similar to those which Daniel gave of his “little horn,” such as the place and time of its origin, its nature, sphere, character, conduct, and doom. The names which the apostle gives to this head of the apostasy in this prophecy are “ that man of sin, . . . the son of perdition,” and “ that wicked ” or “ lawless ” one. 51 PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. These expressions might convey to the mind of superficial readers the idea that the predicted head of the apostasy would be an individual. Careful study however shows this to be a false impression—an impression for which there is no solid foundation in the passage. The expressions them-selves, when analysed grammatically, are seen to bear another signification quite as well, if not better, and the context demands that they be understood in a dynastic sense. “ The man of sin,” like “ the man of God,” has a broad, extended meaning. When we read “ that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works,” we do not suppose it means any one individual man, although it has the definite article. It indicates a whole class of men of a certain character, a succession of similar individuals. The use of the indefinite article (analogous to the omission of the article in Greek) does indeed limit an expression of the kind. A man of sin could be only one, just as a king of England could mean only an individual. The king, on the other hand, may include a whole dynasty. A king has but the life of an individual, the king never dies. When, in speaking of the Jewish tabernacle in Hebrews, Paul says that into the holiest of all “ went the high priest alone once every year,” he includes the entire succession of the high priests of Israel. That a singular expression in a prophecy may find its ful-filment in a plurality of individuals is perfectly clear from John’s words, “ As ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even so now are there many antichrists.”1 1, The following legal distinction should be borne in mind in weighing this point. It is given in “Blackstone s Commentary,” book i., chapter!. Persons are divided by the law into either natural persons or artificial. Natural persons are such as are formed by the God of nature ; artificial ,are such as are created and devised by human laws for the purposes of society and government, which are called corporations or bodies politic.” Thus there is a sort of perpetual person in whom a community subsists, as well as the person whose life is confined within the limits of one indi-vidual existence. Each is equally real, and either may be spoken of in the singular. “ The parson of a parish ” may mean either a man or a succession of men. So “the pope of Romo” may intimate one single bishop or the long succession,—a perpetual person. So “the man of sin.” See on this subject a careful investigation in “The Apostasy Predicted by St. Paul,” by Dr. 0. Sullivan (Curry, Dublin). ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 52 Any doubt or ambiguity as to the true force of the ex-pression “ the man of sir* ” is however removed by a consider-ation of the context of this passage. Grammatically it may mean either an individual or a succession of similar individ-uals. The context determines that it actually does mean the latter. “ The mystery of iniquity,” in which this man of sin was latent, was already working in Paul’s day. The apostasy out of which he was to grow was already in exist-ence. “ The mystery of iniquity doth already work.” The man of sin, on the other hand, was to continue till the second advent of Christ, which is still future ; for he is destroyed, as it is distinctly stated, only by the brightness of the epiphany. The interval between Paul’s days and those of the still future advent was then to be tilled by the great apostasy in either its incipient working as a mystery of iniquity or its open manifestation and great embodiment in the career of “the man of sin and son of perdition.” That career must conse-quently extend over more than a thousand years, for the process of gestation is certainly briefer than the duration of life. In this case of the man of sin the two together occupy at least eighteen centuries. What proportion of the period can we assign to the hidden, mysterious growth of this power, and what to its wonderfully active and influential life ? The life must of course occupy the larger half, to say the least of it, and therefore, as no individual lives on through ages, we may be sure that it is a succession of men, a dynasty of rulers, that is intended by the ambiguous expression. We, students of the nineteenth century, may be sure of this, though the students of early centuries could not. Paul himself probably supposed that the antichrist he foretold would be an individual, for it is not always given to prophets to understand the messages they are inspired to deliver. “ Not unto themselves, but unto us ” they minister, as Peter tells us. At any rate, the early Church thought so, as their writings prove. They expected an individual antichrist, who should be followed by an immediate advent of Christ. Put it must be remembered that the apostles anr| PAUL'S PORE VIEW OF ROMANISM. the early Church knew nothing of the eighteen centuries of delay which have actually taken place. They conld not have guessed or even conceived that well-nigh two thousand years would pass before the second advent. They expected it in their own day. Paul wrote as if he himself would see it : “We who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Jjord”; and no revelation was given the effect of which would have been to rob the early Church of that sweet and sanctifying hope. On the contrary, the prediction of the apostasy and the antichrist who should head it up are pur־ posely so worded as not to extinguish that hope. Even in Daniel, where chronological limits are assigned to the Roman “ little horn,” the expression which conveys them is symbolic, and could be interpreted with certainty only by the fulfilment. No duration at all is mentioned in this prophecy by Paul, only the two limits. “Already ” the apostasy was developing, and it would not be destroyed till the advent. That much was clearly revealed, but not the length of the interval be-tween the starting-point in apostolic days in the first century, and the advent, which has not yet—in the nineteenth—taken place. There was a good reason for the form of the pro-phecy—for the ambiguous use of the singular number. It neither asserted nor excluded a dynastic meaning. Time alone could decide, and time has decided. Bearing this in mind, let us now look at Paul’s prophetic portrait of the great antichristian power he foresaw and foretold. It is a strange one, with marked and most peculiar features. He is represented as seated in the temple or house of God; i.e. the Church, “the habitation of God through the Spirit,” God’s dwelling-place—a sacred sphere, the most sacred on earth. There in the midst, exalted and enthroned, sits a sinful mortal, an enemy of God, a “ man of sin,” en-gaged in receiving from a multitude of deluded apostate Christians worshipful submission and adoration. Beneath him, like a dark cloud or vapour, out of which he has arisen, is a “ mystery of iniquity.” There is a chronological date ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 54 upon the cloud. Close examination shows inscribed on it the words, “ doth already work,״ indicating its existence in Paul’s day, eighteen centuries ago. On one side lies a broken arch, covered with Roman sculpture. This arch had at one period blocked the way from the dark under cloud to the exalted seat occupied by the “ man of sin.” In Paul’s day it stood firm, a massive hindrance ; but he foresaw that it would be “taken out of the way.” By some mighty stroke it has been rent, and lies in fragments. The barrier has been “ taken out of the way.” Through the ruinous gap the mystery of iniquity has come up into the holy place in the form of “all deceivableness of unrighteousness.” Mingled with a vast mass of deceit there are certain leading lies, which are firmly believed, and many “ lying wonders.” The countenance of the “ man of sin ” is marked by pre-tended sanctity. There is in it a look of elevation, marred by pride. The features are full of power and intelligence. His head is circled with a crown of a peculiar form, unlike that worn by ordinary kings, and upon it is the title “ King of kings and Lord of lords,”—implying that he is ruler both of the Church and of the wrorld, because as God on earth. His hand is lifted in the attitude of one bestowing Divine favours. His semblance is that of benignity and blessing, while the spirit of the man is that of the great adversary. Behind him, half concealed, is a dark'figure difficult to make out, with a face full of malignity. There is a gleam of defiance in his eye, and a deadly purpose in his aspect. He too wears a crown, and the name written on it in yellow, sulphurous letters is, “ god of this world.” He stands close to the “ man of sin,”—too close to be seen by the worship-ping multitude,—directing and inspiring all his utterances and all his movements. With extraordinary skill he wields a world-wide power through this chosen agent; a power which has been exercised in various ways for six thousand years, deluding men to their destruction, but which reaches its climax in this combination of Satanic craft with ecclesi-astical exaltation. By the mouth of the “ man of sin ” he 55 PAULS FORE VIE IV OF ROMANISM. speaks to the multitude thronging the holy temple, or house of God, in a tone of authority, commanding them to submit to his teachings and guidance, and to abase themselves in his presence. His words are, “Fall down and worship me.” The deluded multitude blindly obeys him, as though his voice was the voice of God ! , Under the feet of the “man of sin״ are two venerable volumes, bearing the titles “Laws Human and Divine.״ He is trampling on them both, treading them under-foot ! Some in the crowd are pointing to this fact, and stand in a protesting attitude. In the distance there are prophets and apostles looking on. Far above—a perfect contrast in every respect to the self-exalting “ man of sin ”—is seen the self-humbling and self-sacrificing Son of God. He too is seated, seated on a radiant throne, from which celestial glory is streaming. His attitude is that of one coming in judg-ment for the destruction of the “ man of sin ״ and his sinful worshippers. Many of the protestors are looking at him in anticipation of His advent, and seem to have something of His likeness. The face of the man of sin is the face of a false apostle, the dark face of a Judas. Written upon the wall of the temple, in letters of light, just above the proud, false, central figure, is the name “ son of perdition.” The man of sin is a Judas—a secret enemy while a seeming friend—a “familiar friend,״ yet a fatal foe who betrays with a kiss and a “ hail, master ! ״ There are several features in this portrait which I must ask you specially to notice. Observe the place occupied by the man of sin—the “ temple ״ or house of God. This is not, and cannot be, any Jewish temple. Paul, who uses this expression in his prophetic portrait of Romanism, employs it both in Corinthians and Ephesians with reference to the Christian Church. In the second Epistle to the Corinthians, writing to Gentile Christians, he says, “ Ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them.” In Ephesians he calls the Church “ a holy temple,״ a “ habitation of God through ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 56 the Spirit”; and he would never have applied it to the Jewish temple, which, with all other Jewish things, he regarded as mere shadows of Christian realities. To Paul emphatically the temple of God was the Church of Christ. This is the temple in which his prophetic eye saw the man of sin seated. It is no question of his bodily location in any structure of wood and stone, but of something far higher. The temple of God is that “spiritual house” in which He dwells. It is built of “ living stones,” of true believers. It is here that the man of sin was to usurp the place of God. This is the “ mystery,” the dread danger, the deadly evil, predicted by the Apostle. It is no person in a temple of stone, but a power in the Christian Church. Observe next the character of the man of sin. He is at once an imitation of Christ, and a contrast to Him. He occupies His position, but is totally unlike Him, and opposed to Him. He has usurped His place and His pre-rogatives; but, so far from truly representing Him, he represents His great enemy. A3 Christ acts for God, so the man of sin acts for Satan, who indeed produces him for this very purpose. His coming is “after the working of Satan.” Christ and he are antagonistic powers : the power of light, and the power of darkness; the majesty of heaven, and the might of hell. And as the Son of God humbled Himself, so the “ man of sin ” exalts himself. There is infinite self-abasement in the one, the Divine nature stooping to humanity ; and infinite self-exaltation in the other, the human and satanic assuming to be Divine. Observe here that it is not asserted that the man of sin will say that he is God, but that he will shoio himself as such. The words are, “He as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God ” or is Divine, or a Divine being (άποΒακννντα iavrov otl carl Ocoç). There is no article here before the name God. The expression indicates that the man of sin would show himself by acts and professions to be possessed of superhuman and Divine dignity, authority, and power. 57 P AU VS FO RE VIEW OF ROMANISM. Observe the position of the man of sin. Notice the word καθίσαι, “ sitteth,” and connect with it καθίδρα, a seat, a word which occurs three times in the New Testament. It is used twice with reference to the seats in the temple of those who sold doves, who turned the house of God into a house of merchandise and den of thieves ; and once in the sentence, “ the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.” From καθίδρα comes “ cathedral,” “ the bishop’s seat,” and also the expression ex cathedra ; as when we say the pope speaks ex cathedra, or from his seat, officially. There, in that exalted cathedral position, and claiming to represent God, the man of sin was to act and abide as the pretended vicar, but real antagonist, of Christ, undermining His authority, abolishing His laws, and oppressing His people. Observe the words, “ who opposeth.” It is possible effectually to oppose another without being his avowed antagonist ; so the professions of the predicted power might be friendly, while his actions would be those of an opponent of the gospel of Christ. We have said that the principles which were ultimately to produce the man of sin had already begun to operate in Paul’s own day. His words are, “ The mystery of iniquity doth already work and these principles would continue to work until the full development of the apostasy, and its final destruction at the second advent : that is, throughout the eighteen Christian centuries. The sphere of their opera-tion therefore cannot be the Jewish temple, which was destroyed in the first century, but must needs be the pro-fessing Christian Church. 'An important point in the prophecy is the existence in apostolic times of a certain restraining power, withholding while it lasted the manifestation of the man of sin. Paul, for good reasons, speaks of it in guarded language, as “ he who letteth,” or “ that which hinders.” What it was Paul knew, and the Thessalonians knew from him : “ Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you ? ” The early Church—from whom alone we can learn what Paul told them by word of mouthr but refrained from committing ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 58 to writing—has left it on record that the Apostle had told them that this hindering power was the dominion of the Roman Ccesars; that while they continued to reign at Rome, the development of the predicted power of evil was impos-sible. Hence it would seem that Rome would be the seat of the man of sin. During the continuance of the Roman empire there was no opportunity for him to rise ; he would only be manifested on its fall. While the Cæsars reigned he could not appear, but when they passed away he would succeed them. Notice particularly that, jusf as the expression, “he that letteth,” comprehends the line or succession of the Ccesars, so the expression, “ he that sitteth,” may well comprehend an analogous line or succession of rulers. Both expressions refer to dynasties, and not to individuals. The distinctive names given by Paul to the great head of the apostasy are expressive of his character. They are the “ man of sin,” the “ son of perdition,” and “ that wicked ” (ο άνομος, the lawless one). First, it was to be to an extra-ordinary extent sinful itself, and the occasion of sin in others; secondly, it would be like Judas, and share his doom; and, thirdly, it would set at defiance all laws, whether human or Divine. It would be inspired by Satan, and, on account of its evil character and actions, it would be doomed to destruction ; it would eventually “ go to its own place ”— the bottomless pit, from whence it emanated. Its doom was to fall in two stages : the Lord Himself would consume it by the spirit of His mouth, and destroy it by the brightness of His epiphany, or advent in power and glory. There would be first a consumption, thon a destruction. It would continue until the second coming of Christ—a statement which, as you will observe, involves the Lord’s return before the millennium, since there can be -no millennium under the reign of the man of sin, nor prior to his utter destruc-tion. Let us now compare this portrait of the man of sin drawn by the Apostle Paul with the portrait of the self-exalting 59 PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. power foretold by Daniel, which we studied last week. The comparison will demonstrate their identity. 1. Both are Roman. The self-exalting horn or head repre-sented by Daniel is Roman; it belongs to the fourth or Roman empire. So also does Paul’s man of sin, for the imperial government seated at Rome needed to be removed in order to make way for its rise and dominion. It was to be the successor of the Cæsars at Rome. They have the same geographical seat. 2. They have the same chronological point of origin : both arise on the fall of the old undivided empire of Rome. And they have the same chronological termination : Daniel’s little horn perishes at the coming of the Son of man in glory, and Paul’s man of sin is destroyed at the epiphany. 3. Both exalt themselves against God. Daniel mentions the proud words of the blasphemous little horn, and Paul the audacious deeds of the man of sin, showing himself as Divine. 4 Both begin as small, inconspicuous powers, and develop gradually to very great and influential ones. 5. Both claim to be teachers of men. Daniel’s little horn was to have eyes, as a bishop, or overseer (the meaning of the word bishop, ¿7τίσκοπος, is overseer) ; and that he was to have a mouth, that is, that he was to be a teacher ; while Paul assigns to the man of sin ecclesiastical eminence, a proud position in the temple of God, or Christian Church. 6. Both are persecutors. Daniel describes the little horn as a persecutor wearing out the saints, and Paul speaks of the man of sin as “opposing,” and calls him “ the lawless one.” To sum up. The two have the same place—Rome; the same period—from the sixth century to the second coming of the Lord in glory ; the same wicked character, the same Lawlessness, the same self-exalting defiance of God, the same gradual growth from weakness to dominion, the same epi-scopal pretensions, the same persecuting character, the same twofold doom. These resemblances are so important, so numerous, so ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 60 comprehensive, and exact, as to prove beyond all question that the self-exalting, persecuting power predicted by Daniel and this man of sin foretold by Paul are one and the same power. Even Romanists admit this to be the case, and call the power thus doubly predicted the antichrist. In the Douay Bible, with notes, issued under Romish authority, and bearing the signatures of Cardinals Wiseman and Manning, the “ man of sin ” is interpreted as follows : “ ‘ He sitteth in the temple of God,’ etc. By all these words is described to us the great antichrist, . . . according to the unquestionable authority and consent of the ancient Fathers.” Rome allows thus that the “ little horn ” of Daniel and the “ man of sin ” of Paul foreshow one and the same power, and admits that power to be the antichrist. So far then for our examination of the prophecies of the Roman antichrist, given, some of them a thousand, and others five hundred years before the actual appearance of the predicted power. Strange and incomprehensible must these prophecies have appeared, both to those who gave them and to those who received them. Little could they imagine the tremendous scale, both geographical and chronological, on which they were to be fulfilled ! They understood clearly that an awful apostasy was to intervene between the early Church and the advent ; but how far it would extend and how long it would last they knew not, and could not know. A terrible enemy to God and to His Church was to arise, strange as it might seem, in that Church itself ; and yet it was to have its seat in Rome, which was in their day the throne of the pagan persecutors of Christianity. How could these things be ? Much was revealed, but much was left still utterly mysterious, and which time only could interpret. Turn now from the prophecy to the history, and let the latter interpret the former. We see what was predicted, let us ask what has happened. What are the historical facts ? The history of the Christian Church does not record a steady 61 PAUL'S FO RE VIE IV OF ROMANISM. progress in the pathway of truth and holiness, an uninter־ rupted spread of the kingdom of God on earth. On the contrary, it tells the story of a tremendous apostasy. Even in the first century, as we learn from the New Testament, there set in a departure from the gospel, and a return to certain forms of ritualism, as among the Galatians. In the Second and third centuries, antichristian doctrine and anti-Christian practices, sacramentananism and sacerdotalism, invaded the Church, and gradually climbed to a command-ing position, which they never afterwards abandoned. In the fourth century, with the fall of paganism, began a worldly, imperial Christianity, wholly unlike primitive apostolic Christianity, a sort of Christianized heathenism; aud in the fifth and sixth centuries sprang up the Papacy, in whose career the apostasy culminated later on. The mighty Caesars had fallen ; Augustus, Domitian, Hadrian, Diocletian, were gone ; even the Constantines and Julians had passed away. The seat of sovereignty had been removed from Home to Constantinople. Goths and Yandals had overthrown the western empire; the once mighty political structure lay shivered into broken fragments. The imperial government was slain by the Gothic sword. The Caesars were no more, and Rome was an actual desolation. Then slowly on the ruins of old imperial Rome rose another power and another monarchy—a monarchy of loftier aspira-tions and more resistless might, claiming dominion, not alone over the bodies, but over the consciences and souls of men ; dominion, not only within the limits of the fallen empire, but throughout the entire world. Higher and higher rose the Papacy, till in the dark ages all Christendom was subject to its sway. “ Under the sacerdotal monarchy of St. Peter,” says Gibbon, “ the nations began to resume the practice of seek-ing on the banks of the Tiber their kings, their laws, and the oracles of their fate.” And this was a voluntary sub-mission. As a kingdom, the Papacy was not at that time in any position to enforce it. Not by military power, but by ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 62 spiritual and religious pretensions, did the Bishop of Rome attain supremacy in the Church and in the world ; it was by his lofty claim to be the vicegerent of Christ, by his assump-tion that he was as God on earth,—it was by means of his episcopal position that he attained by degrees supreme power, not in the Church only, but in the world. The growth of this power to these gigantic proportions was a most singular phenomenon. Tyndale, the Reformer, speaking of it, says : “ To see how the holy father came up, mark the ensample of the ivy. First it springeth up out of the earth, and then awhile creepeth along by the ground, till it find a great tree. Then it joineth itself beneath, unto the body of the tree, and creepeth up a little and a little, fair and softly. At the beginning, while it is yet thin and small, the burden is not perceived ; it seemeth glorious to garnish the tree in winter. But it holdeth fast withal, and ceaseth not to climb up till it be at the top, and even above all. And then it sendeth its branches along by the branches of the tree, and over-groweth all, and waxeth great, heavy, and thick; and it sucketh the moisture so sore out of the tree and his branches, that it choaketh and stifleth them. And then the foul, stink-ing ivy waxeth mighty in the stump of the tree, and becometh a seat and a nest for all unclean birds, and for blind owls, which hawk in the dark, and dare not come to the light. “ Even so the Bishop of Rome, now called pope, at the beginning crope along upon the earth, and every man trod on him. As soon as there came a Christian emperor, he joined himself to his feet and kissed them, and crope up a little, with begging now this privilege, now that. . . . And thus, with flattering and feigning and vain superstition, under the name of St. Peter, he crept up, and fastened his roots in the heart of the emperor, and with his sword climbed above all his fellow bishops, and brought them under his feet. And as he subdued them by the emperor’s sword, even so, after they were sworn faithful, he, by their means, climbed up above the emperor, and subdued him also, and made him 63 PAULS FORE VIE W OF ROMANISM. stoop unto his feet and kiss them. . . . And thus the pope, the father of all hypocrites, hath with falsehood and guile perverted the order of the world, and turned things upside down.” “ All the kings of the west reverence the pope as a God on earth,” said Gregory IL, and he spoke truly. Sismondi déscribes how Pepin and the Franks received him as a divinity. His dogmas were regarded as oracles ; his hulls and sentences as the voice of God. “The people think of the pope as the one God that has power over all things in earth and in heaven.” Marcellus, addressing the pope at the Lateran Council, said, “Thou art another God on earth”; and “ our Lord God the pope ” was an oft accepted title. These are facts, substantial facts of history, which can be proved by countless documents, and which indeed no Ro-manist will deny. The people rendered and the pope received worship—the worship due to God alone. At the coronation of Pope Innocent X., Cardinal Colonna, in his own name and that of the clergy of St. Peter’s, addressed the following words to the pope, “kneeling on his knees”: “Most holy and blessed father! head of the Church, ruler of the world, to whom the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed, whom the angels in heaven revere, and the gates of hell fear, and all the world adores, we specially venerate, worship, and adore thee ! ” What blasphemous exaltation is here ! Have not Paul’s words been fulfilled ? Has not this man of sin, sitting in the temple of God, shown himself that he is God, or allowed himself to be treated as Divine, nay, even claimed to be so treated? He allowed himself to be styled “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world,” because he gave and sold indulgences for sin. He was even more merciful than Christ ; for He left souls in purgatory, and the pope took them out ! He could command even the angels of heaven, and add saints to the celestial choir, raising dead men to form part of heaven’s hierarchy as “ saints,” and causing them henceforth to be worshipped by the Church on earth. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 64 In all this the pope was as God upon earth. It was his to speak and govern as God ; it was the world’s to bow down, to believe, and to obey. See him in his robes of more than kingly royalty, with his crown of more than terrestrial dominion—not one, bat three, three in one, a triple crown. The proud tiara of the Papacy symbolizes power on earth, in heaven, and in hell ; in all three the pope claims to rule. He is far above all kings. He is the vicegerent of God, the regent of the universe ! He never rises from his pontifical throne to any person whom-soever, nor uncovers himself before mortal man. He does not even condescend to honour any human being by the least inclination of his head. His nuncios and legates take prece-dence of the ambassadors of all crowned heads. Cardinals, the chief princes of the Church, adore his holiness upon their bended knees, kissing his right hand, and even his feet ! At his coronation they set him on the high altar of St. Peter's, and adore him as the representative of Deity. He is carried in lofty state on men’s shoulders, beneath a canopy hung with fringe of gold. People, prelates, princes, and cardinals exalt and worship him with the most solemn ceremonies. He is head of the universal Church, arbiter of its rights and privi-leges. He wears the keys, as the sign of his power to open the gates of heaven to all believers. He holds two swords, as judging in things temporal and spiritual. He is “ the sole and supreme judge of men, and can himself be judged of no man.” He is the husband of the Church, and as such wears a ring, indicating her perpetual betrothal to himself. Thou-sands upon thousands kneel before him ; they struggle to get near his person ; they stretch forth their hands to obtain his indulgences, and crave his quasi-Divine benediction, that “ smoke of smoke,” as Luther called it. The deluded multi-tude rend the air with acclamations at his approach. In his processions all is gorgeous magnificence. Swiss guards and other attendants form his cortège, in scarlet cloaks, embroi-dered with gold, with silver maces and rich caparisons, silk housings, red velvets, purples, satins laced with gold, long 65 PAU VS FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. flowing robes sweeping the ground, some crimson, some black, some white, and caps adorned with precious stones, and hel- ־ mets glittering in the san. His litter is lined with scarlet velvet, fringed with gold, and he himself is clothed in a white satin cassock, with rochet, stole, and mozette, all of red velvet if it is winter, or of red satin if it is summer. At his adora-tion by the canons and clergy of St. Peter’s, he is clothed in a white garment and seated on a throne, and thus attired he “presides in the temple of the Lord.” Mark these words : he “ presides in the temple of the Lord.” I took them from Picart’s description of the Roman ceremonial, a Roman Catholic authority. It is the Roman-ists themselves who use this significant phrase of the Papal pontiff : he “ presides in the temple of the Lord.” Exalted to this position, he is incensed, and the cardinals, one at a time, in solemn, deliberate state and idolatrous submission, kiss his hand, his foot, and even his stomach. He is sur-rounded by cardinals, archbishops, bishops, abbots, priests, and princes. Enormous fans of peacocks’ feathers are carried on either side of his chair, as used to be done to the pagan monarchs of olden times. He directs the affairs of the greatest empire upon earth, governing by an almost infinite number of men, whom he keeps constantly in subjection to himself, and from whom he demands frequent periodical account. He distributes spiritual gifts, and exalts to the highest preferments, not only on earth, but also in heaven : for is it not his to make bishops and archbishops, to canonize whom he will, and to decree their perpetual memorial and wdrship in the world ? All power is delivered unto him. He forgives sins ; he bestows grace ; he cancels punishments, even in purgatory ; he restores the lapsed ; he excommunicates the rebellious ; he can make that which is unlawful, lawful ; he cannot err ; his sentences are final, his utterances infallible, his decrees irreformable. 0 dread dominion ! 0 dizzy height ! 0 bias-phemous assumption ! 0 sublime, satanic tyranny ! who is Jike unto thee, thou resuscitated Cæsar, thou false Christ ץ ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 65 Lord of the conscience, thon sittesfc there as a very deity, quasi Deus, as God. Thou sittest supreme, as thine own words are ,witness, “in the temple of the Lord” ! Look again at the confessional, where every priest sits as an image of the pope his master, with the sacred consciences of men and women beneath his feet, as though he were a god ! For mark, he searches the heart, the very secrets of the soul ; he demands the discovery and confession of all its sins; he makes himself master of all its thoughts and intents; he sits in that temple, the temple of the human conscience, which God claims solely for Himself. Oh, awful position ! And there he presumes to reign, to decide, to absolve from sin ; “Absolvo te,” I absolve thee, is his word. The sinner regards him as holding the place of Jesus Christ. This Romish work is a witness that it is so. This is the Ursuline Manual. Here, in the chapter for the direction of those who go to confession, and every Papist does, are these words, “ Confessors should not be viewed in any other light than . . . as holding the place of Jesus Christ ” (p. 177). And again, on p. 182, “ When you leave the confessional, do not disturb your mind by examining whether you have been confessed well, or have forgotten any of your sins ; but rest assured that, if you have made your confession with sincerity, and the other requisite dispositions, you are, according to the exp’ess decisions of the Council of Trent, fully absolved from every sin.” “Who can forgive sins, but God only?” See how the “ man of sin ” sits in God’s temple, and robs Him of His place and His prerogative ! Look at this other book. It is t]1e volume of the laws and constitution of the Jesuits. Here, on p. 10, the Jesuit is taught that his superior, whoever he may be, must be re-cognised, reverenced, and submitted to with perfect and complete subjection of act and thought, as occupying the place of Jesus Christ. Thus the priest in the confessional, and the superior in the Jesuit order, and the bishop and archbishop and cardinal, all reflect the sacerdotal supremacy of the pope, who sits there in God’s very temple, the temple 67 PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. of conscience and of the Christian Church, as a usurping god —quad Deus, as if God Himself. But we must pass on from this point, the position as-sumed by the man of sin in the Church of God, and ask whether Romanism has fulfilled the other predictions of St. Paul as to “ lying wonders ” and “ signs,” or false miracles, and the deceits of unrighteousness. Has she employed these as a means of gaining “ power,” deluding her votaries that she might the more effectually enslave them ? To exalt the priesthood, and especially its head, the Papal highpriesty Rome has spared nothing. She has trampled alike on the intellect and conscience of mankind, and despised the eternal well-being of souls by inducing them to believe lies. The man of sin was to come with all power and signs and lying wonders, in all deceivableness of unrighteousness. Just as the apostles wrought miracles to confirm the gospel they preached—or rather, as the Lord wrought with them and confirmed the word with signs following—so Satan would work with antichrist, endorsing his pretensions with false miracles designed to overthrow the gospel. Bishop John Jewell, of Salisbury, wrote in the sixteenth century: “ Of the first sort of false miracles, we have seen an infinite number in the days of our fathers in the kingdom of antichrist. Then was there an appearance of spirits and visions of angels : our lady came swimming down from heaven ; poor souls came creeping and crying out óf purga-tory, and jetted abroad ; and kept stations, casting flakes of fire, and beset highways, and bemoaned their cases, the pains and torments were so bitter. “ They sought for help, and cried for good prayers ; they cried for dirges, they cried for masses of requiem, for masses of scala cœli, for trentals of masses. Hereof grew portsale of pardons, and hereof grew the province of purgatory, the most gainful country that ever was under the city of Rome. “ But these miracles were no miracles at all ; they were devised by subtle varlets and lazy lordanes for a purpose, to 68 ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. get money. Oftentimes the spirit has been taken and laid in the stocks ; the angel has been stript ; the good lady has been caught ; the conveyance of the miracle has appeared ; the engines, and sleights, and the cause, and the manner of the working have been confessed. “ In those days idols could go on foot ; roods could speak ; bells could ring alone; images could come down, and light their own candles ; dead stocks could sweat, and bestir them-selves ; they could turn their eyes ; they could move their hands ; they could open their mouths ; they could set bones and knit sinews ; they could heal the sick, and raise up the dead. “ These miracles were conveyances and subtleties, and indeed no miracles ; the trunks by which they spake, the strings and wires with which they moved their faces and hands, all the rest of their treachery, have been disclosed. These are the miracles of which Paul speaks—miracles in sight, in appearance, but indeed no miracles. “ . . . It was also arranged that the saints should not have power to work in all places. Some wrought at Canter-bury, some at Walsingham, some at York, some at Buxton, some in one place, some in another, some in the towns, some in the fields. Even as Jeremiah said among the Jews, chapter xi., ‘ According to the number of thy cities wrere thy gods.’ Hereof grew pilgrimages and worshipping of images, and kissing of reliques ; hereof grew oblations, and enriching of abbeys ; every man had his peculiar saint on whom he called; every country was full of chapels, eveinj chapel full of miracles, and every miracle full of lies. “ These miracles are wrought by antichrist ; they are his tools, wherewith he worketh ; they are his weapons, where-with he prevaileth ; they are full of lying, full of deceitful-ness, and full of wickedness : so shall antichrist prevail, and rule over the world. By these miracles he shall possess the ears, the eyes, and the hearts of many, and shall draw them after him.” 1 1 Jewell on 2 Thessalonians, p. 245. 69 P AU VS FO RE VIEW OF ROMANISM. It was alleged that miracles were not only wrought by the saints, but even by the relics of the saints. In Calvin’s tractate on the subject of relics, he proves that the great majority of the relics in use among Romanists are spurious, having been brought forward by impostors, so that every apostle is made to have three or four bodies, and every saint two or three, and that the garments of Christ are almost infinite in number ! As His body ascended to heaven, relics of it were not of course available; but spnrious relics of everything He ever used or handled have been multiplied ad nauseam. Even the body of Christ has not escaped ; the teeth, the hair, and the blood are exhibited in hundreds of places ; the manger in which He was laid at His birth, the linen in which He was swaddled, His cradle, the first shirt His mother put on Him, the pillar against which He leant in the temple, the water-pots that were at the marriage in Cana of Galilee, and even the wine that was made in them, the shoes that He used when He was a boy, the table on which He observed the Last Supper, and hundreds of simi-lar things are shown—many of them in a number of places —to this day. And as to the relics connected with our Lord’s sufferings and death, they are just innumerable. The fragments of the true cross scattered over the globe would, if catalogued, fill a volume. “ There is no town, however small, which has not some morsel of it ; and this not only in the principal cathedral church of the district, but also in parish churches. There is scarcely an abbey so poor as not to have a specimen. In some places larger fragments exist, as at Paris, Poictiers, and Rome. If all the pieces which could be found were collected into a heap, they would form a good ship load ; though the gospel testifies that a single individual was able to carry the real cross. What effrontery then thus to fill the whole world with fragments which it would take more than three hundred men to carry! . . . In regard to the crown of thorns, it would seem that its twigs had been planted that they might grow again ; other-Avise I know not how it could have attained such a size· ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 70 . . . I would never come to an end were I to go one by one over all the absurd articles they have drawn into this service. At Rome is shown the reed which was put into our Saviour’s hands as a sceptre; . . . the sponge which was offered to Him containing vinegar mixed with gall. How, I ask, were those things recovered ? They were in the hands of the wicked. Did they give them to the apostles that they might preserve them for relics, or did they them-selves lock them up that they might preserve them for some future period? What blasphemy to abuse the name of Christ by employing it as a cloak for such drivelling fables ! ”1 Among the images that Rome worships, a certain class are miraculous. The figure on the crucifix of Burgos, in Spain, is said to have a beard which grows perpetually, and there are similar ones in three or four other places. The stupid people believe the fable to be true. Other crucifixes are said to have spoken—a whole number. Others shed tears, as for instance one at Treves, and another at Orleans. From others the warm blood flows periodically. Miraculous images of the virgin are even more numerous. As they hold that the body of the virgin ascended to heaven like that of her Son, they cannot pretend to have her bones like those of the saints. Had it been otherwise, they would have given her a body of such size as would fill a thousand coffins. But they have made up for this lack by her hair and her milk. There is no town however small, no monastery or nunnery however insignificant, which does not possess some of this— some in small, others in large quantities. As Calvin says : “Had the breasts of the most holy virgin yielded a more copious supply than is given by a cow, and had she con-tinued to nurse during her whole lifetime, she could scarcely have furnished the quantity which is exhibited. I would fain know,” he asks, “ how it was collected so as to be pre-served until our time. Luke relates the prophecy which 1 “ Admonition Showing the Advantages which Christendom might Derive from an Inventory of Relics.”—Calvin : Tracts, vol. i., p. 289. 71 PA un S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. Simeon made to the virgin, but he does not say that Simeon asked her to give him some milk.״ The fabrication of these relics was a lucrative trade throughout the middle ages ; especially were dead bodies invested with sacredness by attaching to them the names of saints and martyrs. Tou-louse, for instance, thinks it possesses six bodies of the apostles : James, Andrew, James the Less, Philip, Simeon, and Jude ; but duplicates of these bodies are also in St. Peter’s and other churches in Rome. Matthias has also another at Treves ; and there are heads and arms of him existing at different places sufficient to make up another body. What shall we say of the spirit that encourages the belief in lies and deceives men in this style ? The degrada-tion inflicted on the ignorant and unlearned by these fables is terrible, as any one who watches their effect in Ireland or on the Continent is aware. Whether the miracles of the man of sin be real or pretended, true or false, it matters little. The main point is, they are directed to establish falsehood. “ He relies for his success on the effects to be wrought in human minds by wonders and deceits ac-complished in the energy of Satan.” He employs wonders and deceits, a pretence to miraculous powers. Romanism has availed herself of such fraudulent practices to an enor-mous extent, and has profited by them both financially and otherwise. But lying wonders to impose on the ignorant and super-stitious masses were not the only means by which the Papacy attained its power in the middle ages; spurious documents, impostures of another kind, were used to in-fluence the royal, noble, and educated classes. Principal among these were the celebrated decretal epistles, a forgery which produced the most important consequences for the Papacy, though its spurious nature was ultimately detected. Gibbon writes : “ Before the end of the eighth century, some apostolical scribe, perhaps the notorious Isidore, composed the * decretals * and the ‘ donation of Constantine ’—the two magic pillars of the spiritual and temporal monarchy of the 72 ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. popes. This memorable donation was introduced to the world by an epistle of Pope Adrian I., who exhorts Charle-magne to imitate the liberality and revive the name of the great Constantine.”1 Their effect was enormous in advancing both the temporal power and the ecelesiastical supremacy of the popes. The donation of Constantine founded the one, and the false decretals the other. The latter pretended to be decrees of the early bishops of Rome limiting the inde-pendence of all archbishops and bishops by establishing a supreme jurisdiction of the Roman see in all cases, and by for-bidding national councils to be held without its consent. “Upon these spurious decretals,” says Mr. Hallam in his “ History of the Middle Ages,” “ was built the great fabric of Papal supremacy over the different national Churches—a fabric which has stood after its foundation crumbled beneath it, for no one has pretended to deny for the last two cen-turies that the imposture is too palpable for any but the most ignorant ages to credit.” It is evident then that Romanism has fulfilled this part of the prophecy of the “man of sin,” even him whose coming was to be after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders and all deceivableness of unrighteous-ness. The power of the popes was built up on frauds and deceits of this character, and has been maintained over all the nations subject to it ever since by pretended miracles, spurious relics, lying wonders, and unrighteous deceits. And all these have been employed to oppose the gospel and establish falsehood. In considering the ecclesiastical aspect of Romanism, we must never forget that it is the outcome and climax of the predicted apostasy, whose features Paul describes in Timothy. We must close this lecture with a few remarks on the departure from the faith which occupies so prominent a place in that description. Some should “ depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, 1 Gibbon : “ Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,'’ chap. xlix. 73 P AU VS FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. speaking lies in hypocrisy, forbidding to marry, and com-manding to abstain from meats.״ The faith must of course here be taken in a broad sense, as including all the doctrines and commandments of the Christian religion. The apostasy was to be marked by a departure from this faith, by the teach-ing of false doctrines, and the inculcation of anti-scriptural pra-ctices. That Popery is completely at variance with the Bible on all the important points of the faith of Christ may be safely asserted, and can be abundantly proved. We can select but a few of the principal points. 1. The Apostle Paul teaches that the Holy Scriptures are able to make us “ wise unto salvation,” that they are capable of rendering the man of God “ throughly furnished ” ; and James speaks of the engrafted word of God as “ able to save the soul.” The true doctrine therefore is that Scripture contains all that is necessary to salvation. What is the doctrine of Romanism on this point ? One of the articles of the Council of Trent asserts that, not only should the Old and New Testaments be received wTith reverence as the word of God, but also “ the unwritten traditions which have come down to us, pertaining both to faith and manners, and pre-served in the Catholic Church by continual succession.” In considering this decree, and its fatal effects in exalting mere human traditions to the level of Divine revelation, one is reminded of the solemn words ,which close the Apocalypse : “ If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.” Christ taught, on the contrary, that tradition was to be rejected whenever it was opposed to Scripture. “ Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition ? ” “ In vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” “ Laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men.” “ Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition.” 2. Again. The Bible teaches us the duty of reading and searching the Scriptures. The Lord Jesus Himself said, “ Search the Scriptures ” ; but Romanism forbids the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 74 general reading of Scripture, asserting that such a use of the word of God in the vulgar tongue causes more harm than good, and that it must never he practised except by special permission in writing obtained from a priest. If any presume to read it without that, they are not to receive absolution. Booksellers who sell the Bible to any desiring to obtain it are to have penalties inflicted upon them, and no one is to purchase a Bible without special license from their superior. This is extended to receiving a gift of the Bible. 3. The true faith teaches us that every man is bound to judge for himself as to the meaning of Scripture. “ Prove all things, hold fast that which is good.״ “ To the law and to the testimony : if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.״ But the Council of Trent decrees, that “ no one confiding in his own judgment shall dare to wrest the sacred Scriptures to his own sense of them contrary to that which is held by holy mother Church, whose right it is to judge of the meaning.” If any one disobeys this decree he is to be punished accord-ing to law. 4. Scripture teaches us most abundantly that Christ is the only head of the Church. God gave Him to be the head over all things to the Church, which is His body ; but Romanism teaches that the pope is the head of the Church on earth. “ The pope is the head of all heads, and the prince, moderator, and pastor of the whole Church of Christ, which is under him,” says Benedict XIV. ; and the Douay catechism,taught in all Papal schools, says, “He who is not in due connexion and subordination to the pope must needs be dead, and cannot be counted a member of the Church.״ 5. Scripture teaches us that the wages of sin is death, and “ that whoever shall keep the law, and yet offend in one point, is guilty of all.” “ Cursed is every one that continu-eth not in all thing3 which are written in the book of the law to do them. ״ But Popery teaches that there are some 75 PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. sins which do not deserve the wrath and curse of God, and that venial sins do not bring spiritual death to the soul. 6. The Bible teaches us that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law, and that we are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. But Popery denounces this doctrine. The Council of Trent asserted that whosoever should affirm that we are justified by the grace and favour of God was to be accursed, and so all those who hold that salvation is not by works, but by grace. 7. Scripture teaches us to confess sin to God only. “ Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Thy sight.״ “ Every one of us shall give account of him-self to God.” “ If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” But Romanism denies this, and says that sacramental confession to a priest is necessary to salvation, and that any one who should denounce the practice of secret confessions as contrary to the institution and com-mand of Christ and a mere human invention, is to be ac-cursed. 8. Scripture teaches us, again, that God only can forgive sins, and that the minister’s duty is simply to announce His forgiveness. “ Repentance and remission of sins ” was to be preached in His name among all nations. “ God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them ; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” He commanded us to preach to the people, that “through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.” The Council of Trent as-serts, on the contrary, whosoever shall affirm that the priest’s absolution is not a judicial act, but only a ministry to declare that the sins of the penitent are forgiven, or that the confes־ sion of the penitent is not necessary in order to obtain abso-lution from the priest, let him be accursed. 9. Scripture teaches us that no man is perfectly righteous, and certainly that none can do more than his duty to God. “ If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves.” “ In Thy ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 6ך sight shall no man living be justified.״ “ When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants : we have done that which was our duty to do.” The Council of Trent, on the contrary, asserts that the good works of the justified man, his fasts, alms, and penances, really deserve increase of grace and eternal life, and that God is willing, on account of His most pious servants, to forgive others. It teaches that a man may do more than is requisite, and may give the overplus of his good works to another. 10. Scripture teaches us that faith in Christ removes sin and its guilt, “ that the Lamb of God taketh away the sin of the world,” that by His death Christ put away our sins, that “ the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin.” But Romanism teaches that the venial sins of believers have to be expiated by a purgatory after death, and that the prayers of the faithful can help them. The Creed of Pope Pius IV. contains the clause : “ I constantly hold that there is a pur-gatory, and that the souls detained therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful.” 11. Scripture teaches us that “ by one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified,” that He was once offered to bear the sins of many. But Romanism as-serts, on the contrary, that in each of the endlessly repeated masses in its innumerable churches all over the world there is offered to God “a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead.” 12. Scripture, as we have already shown, teaches us that the marriage of the ministers of Christ is a lawful and honourable thing. Peter was a married man ; Paul asserts his liberty to marry, and says that a bishop must be the hus-band of one wife, having his children in subjection with all gravity, and that the deacons also must be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. Romanism, on the other hand, teaches “ that the clergy may not marry, and that marriage is to them a pollution.” 13. Scripture says, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy 77 PAULS FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. God, and Him only shalt thou serve.״ Barnabas and Paul with horror forbade the crowds to worship them, and the angel similarly forbade John, saying, “ See thon do it not.״ Romanism enjoins the worship both of angels and saints and their relics. “ The saints reigning together with Christ are to be honoured and invocated ; they offer up prayers to God for us, aud their relics are to be venerated.״ 14. The Bible again teaches that images are not to be worshipped. “ Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor servo them.״ “ I am the Lord : My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images.״ But Roman-ism teaches her votaries to say, “ I most firmly assert, that the images of Christ, and of the mother of God ever virgin, and also of the other saints, are to be had and retained, and that due honour and veneration are to be given to them.״ 15. And above all, Scripture teaches us that there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus, neither is there salvation in any other. But Romanism teaches that there are other mediators in abun-dance besides Jesus Christ, that the Virgin Mary and the saints are such. “ The saints reigning together with Christ offer prayers to God for us.״ I must not go further, and contrast Bible and Romish teachings on the subject of the Lord’s supper, extreme unction, and a multitude of other points, but may say, in one word, that there is not a doctrine of the gospel which has not been contradicted or distorted by this system, and that it stands branded before the world beyond all question as fulfilling Paul’s prophecy of the apostasy—that it should be characterized by departure from the faith. Perhaps I cannot give you a better idea of the distinctive teachings of Romanism as to controverted points of doctrine, than by reading to you the Creed of Pope Pius IV. This creed was adopted at the famous Council of Trent, held in the sixteenth century, when the doctrines of the Reforma-tion were already widely diffused through Europe, and joyfully accepted and held by the young Protestant Churches ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 78 of many lands. The Council of Trent was indeed Homes reply to the Reformation. The newly recovered truths of the gospel were in its canons and decrees stigmatised as pesti-lent heresies, and all who held them accursed ; and in opposition to them this creed was prepared and adopted. It commences with the Nicene Creed, which is common to Romanists and Protestants ; but to this simple and ancient “ form of sound words ” it adds twelve new articles which are peculiar to Rome, and contain her definite rejection of the doctrines of Scripture recovered at the Reformation. “1. I most firmly admit and embrace apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions, and all other constitutions and observances of the same Church. “ 2. I also admit the sacred Scriptures according to the sense which the holy mother Church has held, and does hold, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures ; nor will I ever take or interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers. “ 3. I profess also, that there are truly and properly seven sacraments of the new law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and for the salvation of mankind, though all are not necessary for every one; namety, baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony ; and that they confer grace ; and of these, baptism, confir-mation, and orders cannot be reiterated without sacrilege. “ 4. I also receive and admit the ceremonies of the Catholic Church received and approved in the solemn administration of all the above said sacraments. “5. I receive and embrace all and every one of the things which have been defined and declared in the holy Council of Trent concerning original sin and justification. “ 6. I profess likewise that in the mass is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead ; and that in the most holy sacrifice of the euchar-1st there is truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord 79 PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. Jesus Christ ; and that there is made a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, which conversion the Catholic Church calls transubstantiation. “ 7. I confess also, that under either kind alone, whole and entire Christ and a true sacrament are received. “ 8. I constantly hold that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful. “ 9. Likewise that the saints reigning together with Christ are to be honoured and invocated ; that they offer prayers to God for us ; and that their relics are to be venerated. “ 10. I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, and of the mother of God ever virgin, and also of the other saints, are to be had and retained, and that due honour and venera-tion are to be given them. “11. I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people. “12. I acknowledge the holy catholic and apostolic Roman Church, the mother and mistress of all Churches ; and I promise and swear true obedience to the Roman bishop, the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles and vicar of Jesus Christ. “ 13. I also profess and undoubtedly receive all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred canons and general councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trent ; and likewise I also condemn, reject, and anathematize all things contrary thereto, and all heresies whatsoever, condemned, rejected, and anathematized by the Church. “ This true catholic faith, out of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess, and truly hold, I, N., promise, vow, and swear most constantly to hold and profess the same whole and entire, with God’s assistance, to the end of my life ; and to procure, as far as klies in my power, that the same shall be held, taught, and preached by all who are under me, or are entrusted to my care, by virtue of ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 80 my office. So help me God, and these holy gospels of God.” This Creed of Pope Pius IV. is the authoritative Papal epitome of the canons and decrees of the Council of Trent· The importance of this council “ depends upon the considera-tions, that its records embody the solemn, formal, and official decision of the Church of Rome—which claims to be the one holy, catholic Church of Christ—upon all the leading doctrines taught by the reformers ; that its decrees upon all doctrinal points are received by all Romanists as possessed of infallible authority ; and that every Popish priest is sworn to receive, profess, and maintain everything defined and declared by it.” 1 As an illustration of its reception and maintenance in the present day by the infallible head of the Romish Church, and by the whole conclave of Roman Catholic bishops, I refer you to their action in the comparatively recent Council of the Vatican. See the almost incredible spectacle of 1870 ! See those seven hundred bishops of the Church throughout the world gathered in Rome at the high altar of St. Peter’s. See them and hear them ! In this Romish book, entitled “ The Chair of Peter,” p. 497, is a description of the scene. “The pope recited in a loud voice the profession of faith, namely the Creed of Nice and Constantinople, together with the definitions of the Council of Trent, called the Creed rf Pope Pius IV. ; after which it was read aloud from the amoo by the Bishop of Fabriano ; 1 then for two whole hours,’ to use the words of one of the prelates present, ‘ the cardinals, patriarchs, primates, archbishops, ·bishops, and other fathers of the council, made their adhesion to the same by hissing the Gospel at the throne of the head of the Church.’ A truly sub-lime spectacle, those seven hundred bishops from all parts of the earth, the representatives of more than thirty nations, and of two hundred millions of Christians, thus openly making W. CunninghamE, D.D. : “ Hifctorical Theology,״ vol. i., p. 483. 81 PAULS FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. profession of one common faith, in communion with the one and supreme pastor and teacher of all ! ” Yes; the Creed of Trent, the canons and decrees of Trent, the Creed of Pius IV., those twelve articles which Rome has added to the ancient Nicene Creed, the sacrifice of the mass, transubstantiation, communion in one kind, the seven sacraments, traditions, Romish interpretation, Popish ceremouies, justification by works, purgatory, invocation of saints, indulgences, the worship of images, the absolute supremacy of the pope as the vicar of Christ, and no salva-tion out of union and communion with him, and submission to him : they confessed and professed them all, and swore adhesion to them, and kissed the holy Gospels in solemn token thereof before heaven and earth. 0 Creed of Pius—or Impious as he deserved rather to be called; 0 doctrines of Trent, “solemn, formal, official” de-cisión of the Church of Rome upon all the great doctrines taught by the Reformers, Bornes reply to the Reformation, her deliberate final rejection and anathema of its blessed teachings and confessions drawn from the holy word of God ; 0 Creed of Trent and of the impious priest whose word supplants the wrord of God with fables and bias-phemies and lies : thou art the awful decision of apostate Latin Christendon on the controversy of ages, A decision to which Rome must now unchangeahly adhere, sealed, sealed as infallible, confessed to be irreformable ! 0 momentous fact ! 0 fatal Creed of Trent ! thou art a millstone round the neck of the Roman pontiff, the cardinals, the arch-bishops, the bishops, the priests, the people of the whole Papal Church—a mighty millstone that must sink them in destruction and perdition ! There is no shaking thee off. Alas! they have doomed themselves to wear thee; they have wedded and bound themselves to thy deadly lies ; they have sealed, have sworn to thee as infallible and irreform-able, and condemned themselves to abide by thee for ever ! It is done. Bornes last word is spoken. Her fate is fixed, fixed by her own action, her own utterance, her own oath. In- G ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 82 dividuals may escape, may flee the system ; but as a Church it is past recovery, and utterly beyond the reach of re-formation. Oh that thousands might escape from it while yet there is time ! Oh that they would hear the earnest, the urgent call, “ Come out of her, My people ” ! Oh that they would wake from their blind and abject submission to the tyranny of hypocrites while there is room for repent-anee ! And now, in conclusion. We have shown briefly but clearly that Romanism is the offspring of a mystery of in-iquity which began to work in apostolic times ; that it is characterized by hypocrisy, by asceticism, by the prohibition of meats and marriage, by superstition .and idolatry, by the worship of relics and images, of saints and angels, by the multiplication of mediators, by false miracles, by lying signs and wonders, and by doctrines and decrees antagonistic to the teachings and commands of Christ. We have shown that the Papal pontiffs have exalted themselves above all bishops, and above all kings, that they have fabricated new articles of faith and new rules of discipline ; that they have altered the terms of salvation ; that they have sold the pardon of sins for money, and bartered the priceless gifts of grace for selfish gain; that they have bound their deadly doctrines on the souls of countless millions by monstrous tyrannical threats and denunciations ; that they have pertinaciously rejected the light of truth ; that they have resolutely and wrathfully resisted those who have rebuked their impiety ; that they have thundered against them their bulls and interdicts, their excommunications and anathemas ; that they have made war with them, and with the faithful saints of many ages, and prevailed against them, and worn them out with long and cruel persecutions, with infamous and inhuman massacres ; that they have waged against them no less than a war of extermination, wielding in this the whole strength and machinery of the resistless Roman empire, as well as the spiritual forces of the apostate Christian Church ; that with the mighty worhing of Satan} with all power, signs, PAUL'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. 83 and miracles of falsehood they have opposed Christ, have op-posed His doctrines, His precepts, His people, and His cause, and in opposing Christ have opposed God Himself, and made war with Him who is the Lord of heaven and earth, and have uttered against Him their daring prohibitions and anathemas ; that they have enthroned themselves in His holy temple, and trampled on His sacred laws, and trodden down His saints and servants, and arrogated to themselves His place, and power, and prerogatives ; and while perpe-trating acts of enormous and indescribable wickedness, have blasphemously claimed to be His sole representatives both in the Church and in the world, to be inspired by His spirit, to be infallible in their teachings and decrees, to be Vice-Christs, to be Vice-Gods—in other words, to be as Christ, and as God Himself visibly revealed upon the earth. We have further shown that prophets and apostles foresaw and foretold the rise, reign, and doom of such a great apos-tato power, describing it as a “ little horn ” of the fourth or Roman empire, possessed of intelligence and oversight, having a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies ; a power both political and ecclesiastical; a Roman ruler, yet an overseer in the Christian Church; a power arising on the break up of the old Roman empire, and co-existing with the kings of its divided Gothic state ; a power inspired by Satan, and prevailing by means of false miracles and lying wonders; a power springing from a “ mystery of iniquity ” and cliarac-terized by all deceivableness of unrighteousness ; a lawless, self-exalting power, claiming Divine prerogatives, and re-ceiving from deluded millions the submission and homage which should be rendered to God alone; a power character-ized by exceeding personal sinfulness, and by the widespread promotion of sin in others ; above all, a persecuting power, a power making war with the saints, and wearing them out, and prevailing against them throughout its long career of proud usurpation and triumphant tyranny. These inspired words of prophecy and those indisputable facts of history agree. The Roman Papacy is revealed by the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 84 far-reaching light of the divinely written word. Its portrait is painted; its mystery is penetrated; its character, its deeds are drawn; its thousand veils and subterfages are torn away. The unsparing hand of inspiration has stripped it, and left it standing upon the stage of history deformed and naked, a dark emanation from the pit, blood-stained and blasphemous, blindly struggling in the concentrated rays of celestial recognition, amid the premonitory thunders and lightnings of its fast approaching doom. LECTURE IV. JOHN'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. IN' the three preceding lectures we considered first the political character and relations of Romanism, as pre-figured in the prophecies of Daniel ; and next its ecclesias-tical character and relations, as predicted in the epistles of Paul. We have now to consider the combination of these two aspects, or the politico-ecclesiastical character of Romanism, as presented in the prophecies of John. The Apocalypse, or “ Revelation of Jesus Christ,” is an advance on all other prophecies. It gives the complete story of Christ’s kingdom, exhibiting it both from an ex-ternal and an internal point of view, and unveiling its political as well as its ecclesiastical history. In its faithful reflection of the future it gives central prominence to the Roman power and apostasy. On this subject it enters into detail, and exhibits the mutual relations of the Latin Church and Roman State, using composite figures for this purpose,— figures one part of which represent the political aspect of Romanism as a temporal government, and the other its religious aspect as an ecclesiastical system. Two great fore views of Romanism are given in the Apocalypse : that concerning its rise and reign in chapter xiii., and that relating to its decline and fall in chapters xvii.-xix. Both of these prophecies are double. The first is the prophecy of “the beast” and the “false prophet”; the second is that of “ the beast ” and the “harlot.” The false prophet acts for “the beast,” the harlot rides upon “the 85 ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 86 beast.” In each case there are two powers, perfectly dis-tinct yet closely connected. The “ beast ” and “ false pro-phet ” can neither be confounded nor separated. Similarly, the “ beast ” and “ harlot ” are associated. The beast carries the harlot during all her long career of crime and cruelty, and they both come to their ruin in the same judgment era of the vials of God’s righteous wrath which terminate the present dispensation. Before considering the interpretation of these wonderful Apocalyptic visions, it will be necessary to devote a few moments to the relation which exists between the prophecies of Daniel and those of John. We are exhibiting the pro-phecies of Romanism as a whole, and in order to this it is necessary to trace the simple yet profound connexion be-tween the foreview granted to the Jewish prophet in Babylon in the days of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, and that given to the Christian apostle in Patmos, in the days of Domitian. The prophecies of Daniel and the book of Revelation may be considered as two parts of a single prophecy ; their subject is the same, and their symbols are the same. They reveal the course of cruel, idolatrous Gentile empires, followed by the eternal kingdom of God ; and in doing this they employ the same symbols. Daniel revealed the four empires ; John the fourth only, for the first three had in his time passed away. Babylon, Persia, Greece had fallen ; but Rome was still in the zenith of its greatness, destined to endure for many ages, and to rule, even to our own day, a large section of the human race. To John therefore was shown with considerable fulness, the fnture of .the Roman power. The Apocalypse contains a marvellous foreview of the rise, reign, decline, and fall of the Roman Papacy, of the sufferings and triumphs of the saints of God during.its continuance, and their enthronement at its close. The Roman empire is presented to Daniel and to John under one and the same striking and special symbol, a ten-horned wild beast. Daniel saw the Medo-Persian empire as 87 /OffATS FORE VIEW OF ROMANISM. a two-horned ־ram, one horn being higher than the other (Dan. viii. 3). He saw the Grecian empire as a four-homed goat (Dan. viii. 8-22) ; and he saw the Roman empires as a ten-horned wild beast. Thus these three great empires as seen by Daniel were two-horned, four-horned, ten-horned. This is remarkable and easy to be remembered. Now Daniel’s ten-horned beast reappears in the Apocalypse. Here we have an important link between the Old Testament and the New, and a clue to the meaning of the last book of Scripture. Let ns try to be clear on this point. The four wild beasts represent Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome. The fourth is ten-horned. This ten-horned beast of Daniel reappears in the Apocalypse, the divinely given symbol of the fourth and final earthly empire. You see it in chapters xii., xiii., and xvii. of the book of Revelation. Compare now the passages. First, Daniel vii. 7 : “ I saw in the night visions, and be-hold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong ex-ceedingly; and it had ten horns.” Next, Revelation xii. 3 : “ A great red dragon, having ten horns.” Revelation xiii. 1 : “ I saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having ten horns.” Lastly, Revelation xvii. 3 : “ A scarlet coloured beast, having ten horns.” It is universally admitted that this fourth, or ten-horned beast, represents the Roman empire. The angel himself so interprets it. I want you particularly to notice the fact that we are not left to speculate about the meaning of these symbols ; that the all-wise God who selected them, and gave them to us, has condescended to give us their interpretation. All these principal visions are divinely interpreted. First, as to the vision of the fourfold image there is an inspired interpretation of a most detailed character. You remember the words with which it begins, “This is the dream, and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.” Then in the vision of the four wild beasts there is the interpretation beginning thus, “ So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.” So with the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 88 vision of the second and third empires in Daniel viii., there is the interpretation. Daniel says : “I heard a man’s voice . . . which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision,” and so forth. The same method is followed in the Apocalypse. The opening vision of the seven candlesticks is interpreted. Yon remember the words, “The seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven Churches.” And similarly, the vision of the woman seated on the seven-headed, ten-horned beast, in chapter xvii., is interpreted : every part of it is interpreted. Observe the angel’s words : “I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns/’ Mark in your Bibles, if you will, these four sentences in the angelic interpretation : “ The beast which thou sawest.” “ The ten horns which thou sawest.” “ The waters which thou sawest.” “ The woman which thou sawest.” These four sentences are the key to the Apocalypse. The beast, the horns, the waters, the woman are all interpreted ; and their interpretation involves, or carries in it, the inter-pretation of the Apocalypse. The seven heads of the beast are also interpreted, and so interpreted as to tie down the symbol to the Roman empire. For the angel mentions an important note of time ; he says of the seven heads, “ five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come.” The heads of this beast then, when the vision was revealed, Avere past, present, and future ; five were past, the sixth then existed, the seventh was not yet come. This demonstrates the power in question to be the Roman empire. The then reigning power in John’s day was symbolized by the sixth head of a seven-headed beast. This is certain. And the then reigning power was that of the Caesars of pagan Rome. This is equally certain. Therefore the Roman Cæsars were represented by the sixth head of the symbolic beast. Now, to make assurance doubly sure, mark the closing sentence in the angelic interpretation : “ The woman which thou 89 JOHN'S FORE VIEW OF ROMANISM. sa west is that city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” Note the words, “which reigneth” (ή εχονσα βασιλείαν), or as it is in Latin, “ quce habet regnum.” The words in the Vulgate are, “Et mulier quam vidisti, est ci vitas magna, quæ habet regnum super reges terræ” : “and the woman which thou sawest is the great city which has (or holds) the kingdom (or government) over the kings of the earth.” The great city “ which reigneth,” not which did reign, nor which shall reign, but “ which reigneth,” or was actually reigning then. What great city was reigning then over the kings of the earth ? Rome, and none other. Rome then is the power which is signified. We have now got the key to the Apocalypse ; we are no louger lost in a crowd of uninterpreted symbols. The beasts of Daniel and John are empires. The ten-horned beast is the Roman power. This beast appears three times in the Apocalypse ; it is expounded by the angel. This ex-pounded symbol is the key to the entire prophecy. “ And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion : and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. And I saw one of his beads as it were wounded to death ; and his deadly wound was healed : and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon that gave power unto the beast : and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast ? who is able to make war with him ? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and bias-phemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to bias-pheme His name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to over-come them : and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” The head is the governing power in the body. The heads of this beast represent successive governments. Mark the “ deadly wound ״ inflicted on the last of its seven heads, and the marvellous healing of that wound, or the revival of the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. go slain head or government, then mark the tyrannical and dreadful doings of this revived or eighth head. It becomes a great and terrible enemy of God’s people, a Roman enemy —not an early Roman enemy, not a pagan Cæsar, not a Nero or a Domitian, but one occupying a later place, a final place ; for none succeeds him in that empire, since it is foretold that his destruction will be accomplished at the advent of Christ in His kingdom. A comparison of this Roman enemy of God’s people described by John with the “ little horn ” foreshown by Daniel, demonstrates the important fact of their identity. They are one and the same. Observe the following points : I. The persecuting horn seen by Daniel is a horn of tho Roman empire ; it is a Roman horn. And the persecuting héad seen by John is a head of the Roman beast. In this they are alike. Each is Roman. II. The persecuting horn grows up in the later, or divided state of the Roman empire ; it rises among the ten Gothic horns. The persecuting head seen by John also grows up in the same later state of the Roman empire, for it follows the seven heads, and is the last. The sixth was said by the angel to be in existence in John’s time, and the seventh was to last only a short season,—be wounded to death, and then revived in a new and final and peculiarly tyrannical and persecuting form. The “little horn” in Daniel belongs to the later ten-horned, or Gothic, period of the Roman empire ; and the revived head of the empire seen by John belongs to the same period. You will note this point—their ,period is the same. This is a second mark of their identity. III. Each has a mouth. Now here is a very distinct and remarkable feature. The other horns and heads were dumb ; but this speaks. Of the persecuting Roman horn we read in Daniel, it had “ a mouth and of the persecuting Roman head we read in John, “there was given unto him a mouth.” IV. In each case this mouth speaks the same things. Of the mouth of the Roman horn Daniel says, in chapter vii., 91 JOHN'S FORE VIEW OF ROMANISM. “ it spake great things ” (v. 8), “ the great words which the horn spake” (v. 11), “very great things” (u. 20), “great words against the Most High” (v. 25). While of the Roman head in the Apocalypse John says: “There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and bias-phemies. . . . And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven ” (Rev. xiii. 6). The horn speaks ; the head speaks : each speaks great things ; each speaks blasphemies. This striking correspondence is a further indication of their identity. Each has στόμα λαλούν μζγάλα (Dan. vil. 8). στόμα λαλούν μζγαλα (Rev. xiii. 5). The expression is exactly the same in the Septuagint. trans-lation of Daniel and in the Apocalypse. V. The horn has great dominion. It plucks up three horns ; it has “ a look more stout than his fellows ” (v. 20) ; it makes war and prevails; its great “dominion” is eventu-ally taken away and destroyed ; “ they shall take away his dominion” (v. 26). Similarly the head has great dominion; “ power was given him over all kindreds and tongues and nations.” The application of these words should not be pressed beyond the sphere to which they belong. In that sphere, for a certain period, the power of the horn or head was to be supreme and universal. In the fact of their dominion they are alike. VI. Each makes ivar with the saints : each is terrible as a persecutor of God’s people. Daniel says : “ The same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. . . . He shall wear out the saints of the Most High. . . . They shall be given into his hand until a time, and times, and the dividing of time.” John says “It was given unto him to make war with the saints and to overcome them ” (Rev. xiii. 7) ; “ He shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them” (Rev. xi. 7). John describes the method of this warfare, in what way and for what ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 92 reason the “saints” or “martyrs of Jesus” “should be killed ” (Rev. xiii. 15) ; and it is of these martyrs the voice from heaven says, “ Blessed ,are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth : yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours ; and their works do follow them ” (Rev. xiv. 13). In their persecution of the saints Daniel’s “ horn ” and John’s revived “ head ” are alike. VII. The duration of each is the same. This too is a noteworthy feature. The duration of the persecuting horn is mystically stated in Daniel as “ time, times, and the divid-ing of time,” or three and a half times (Dan. vii. 25). And the duration of the persecuting head in the Apocalypse is stated to be forty-two months. “Power was given unto him to continue forty and two months” (Rev. xiii. 5). And these are the same period. This will appear from a com-parison of the seven passages in which this period occurs in Daniel and the Apocalypse ; in these it is called 1,260 days, forty-two months, and three and a half times. Now 1,260 days are forty-two months, and forty-two months are three and a half years. What these symbolic periods represent is another question ; our point here is their identity. The persecuting horn and persecuting head are exactly the same in their duration. This is another proof of the sameness of the reality they represent. VIII. They end in the same manner and at the same time. This completes the evidence of their identity. The per-secuting horn is slain by the Ancient of days revealed in judgment, and the glory of His kingdom (Dan. vii. 9-11, 22). The persecuting head is slain by the “ King of kings and Lord of lords” revealed in that judgment in which He treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. The judgment is the same (Rev. xix. 11, 20). The “ little horn ” and revived “ head ” then, are alike in place, time, character, authority, persecuting action, duration, and doom. They arise at the same point ; they last the same period ; they do the same deeds ; they come to their end at the same moment, and by the same revelation of Christ in 93 JOHN'S FORE VIE W OF ROMANISM. the glory of His kingdom. They cannot prefigure two powers absolutely alike in all these respects ; but one and the same. Even the Church of Rome admits their identity. It teaches that both are symbols of the same great perse-cuting power. The way is now clear to consider the interpretation of this prophecy. It is indeed determined already by this very identification. The little horn of Daniel prefigures, as we have proved before, the Papacy of Rome. So then does this revived head. We will examine briefly the evidences which sustain this conclusion ; but as we have already sketched the history, we need not dwell at any length on the different points. We will take the prophetic features in tbe order in which we have already presented them, considering first the facts relating to the rise, and then those concerning the reign, of the power in question. First then as to its rise. The predicted head rises from the Homan empire. It is therefore Roman. So is the Papacy. We have called the system which owns the pope as head Romanism, because its seat is the seven-hilled city. Secondly, the predicted persecuting power grows up in the second stage of Roman history. It is the seventh or last head of the old empire revived. Now this is the exact position of the Papacy. The Papacy belongs to the second or Christian stage of the Roman empire. It grew up among its Gothic horns or kingdoms. It was the revival of a power which had been slain. When the pagan empire was over-thrown the Papal rose in its place. First the Caesars ruled in Rome, then the popes. The Goths overthrew the Roman em-pire in the fifth century ; Romulus Augustulus abdicated the imperial dignity in a.d. 476. This was the “ deadly wound ” of the seventh head. From that date the Papacy grew with freedom, grew up among the Gothic horns or kingdoms. Note this feature—the Papacy belongs to the second or Christian stage of the Roman empire. It was a horn among the Gothic horns. It was a revived head. The power of the Cæsars lived again in the universal dominion of the popes. 94 ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. The Papacy was small at its beginning, but grew to great dominion; it exercised as wide a sway as the Caesars it succeeded ; all Europe submitted to its rule ; it claimed, and still claims, a power without a rival or a limit. Hallam, as we have already remarked, says of the thirteenth century, the noonday of Papal power : u Borne inspired during this age all the terror of her ancient name. She was once more mistress of the 100rld, and kings were her vassals.” 1 Remem-ber the proud title taken by the popes, rector orhis—ruler of the world. In this also the Papacy fulfils the prophecy. Observe, secondly, that extraordinary feature both in Daniel and the Apocalypse, the mouth of this power. Both the horn, in Daniel, and the head, in John, has a mouth, στόμα λαλουι׳ μεγάλα—“a mouth speaking great things.” This feature is marvellously fulfilled in the Papacy. What a mouth has that Latin ruler ! What a talker ! what a teacher! what a thunderer ! How has he boasted himself and mag-nified himself, and excommunicated and anathematized all who have resisted him ? Has the world ever seen his equal in this respect ? All the Gothic kings were his humble ser-vants. He was, by his own account, and is, the representative of Christ, of God, ruler of the world, armed with all the powers of Christ in heaven, earth, and hell. He is infallible; his decrees are irreformable. A mouth indeed is his, a mouth speaking great things ! Notice, in the third place, his warring with the saints. In the Apocalypse wre read, “ It was given to him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them.” I will not do more here than remind you of the fact that, terribly as the saints suffered under the Cæsarô of pagan Rome, they suffered far more terribly and far longer under Papal Rome. Let the massacres of the Albigenses, the Waldenses, the Hussites, the Lollards, the massacres in Holland and the Netherlands, the massacre of St. Bartholomew, the massacre in Ireland in 1641, the tortures of the Inquisition, the 1 Hallam : “ History of the Middle Ages,” Fourth Edit., p. 368. 95 JOHN S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. fires of the stake kindled over and over in every country in Europe—let these speak and testify to the fulfilment of prophecy. Yes ; the Papacy has made war with the saints, and overcome them, and worn them out, and would have totally crushed and annihilated them, but for the sustaining hand and reviving power of God. In its prolonged, cruel, and universal persecution of the saints, the Papacy has falfilled this solemn prophecy. Notice, in the fourth place, the predicted duration of this persecuting power. Daniel mysteriously announces its duration as three and a half times; John as forty-two months. The symbolical nature of the prophecy, as well as the vastness of the subject, forbid us to take these times literally. As the beast is symbolic, and its various parts symbolic, so the period of its persecuting head is symbolic. You find this period mentioned seven times over in Daniel and Revelation, and called 1,260 days, forty-two months, and also three and a half “times.” These are, as we have said, the same period. Calculate for yourself, and you will find it so. Now, both in the law and prophets, a day is used as the symbol of a year. Moses, Ezekiel, Daniel use it thus. The seventy weeks of Daniel, or 490 days to Messiah, were fulfilled as 490 years; that is, they were fulfilled on the year-day scale. On this scale the forty-two months, or 1,260 days, are 1,260 years. We ask then, Has the Papacy endured this period ? An examination of the facts of history will show that it has. From the era of its rise in the sixth century, at the notable decree of the emperor Justinian, constituting the Bishop of Rome head of all the Churches in Christendom, a.d. 533, 1,260 years extended to 1793, the date of the tremendous Papal overthrow in the French Revolution. Here we have a fact of great importance. Note it well. To this we add the further fact, that from the analogous decree of the emperor Phocas, confirming the headship of the pope over Christendom, in the year 607, 1,260 years extended to 1866-7, the initial date of the recent remarkable overthrow of Papal governments which* culminated in the loss of the ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 96 pope’s temporal power in 1870. In that year the Papacy assumed the highest exaltation to which it could aspire, that of infallibility, and lost the temporal sovereignty, which it had held for more than a thousand years. Thus the predicted period has been fulfilled. What an evidence is this! The Papacy has fulfilled the prophecy, not only in its geographi-cal and historical position, its moral character, its political power, its blasphemous pretensions, its tyrannical career, but in its very chronology,—in the point of its rise, the period of its duration, the era of its decline, the crisis of its overthrow. We have already directed your attention to the fact that the Papacy is a complex power, and requires complex symbols for its préfiguration. It is both a secular and an ecclesiasli-cal power; and the ecclesiastical power has arrogated to itself the right to create the secular, or endow it with Divine authority, and has also wielded the energies of the secular power in pursuance of its own unholy ends. Revelation xiii. represents both these organizations as “ beasts.” The one is represented as a ten-horned, the other as a two-horned beast. The former rises, as does each of the beasts of Daniel, from the sea; the latter rises from the earth. The one springs up in storm, the other in stillness. Striving and warring winds attend the birth of the one ; the other grows up quietly from a low, terrestrial origin, like an ivy plant or a noxious, earth-born weed. The ten horns of the one are strong iron kingdoms; the two horns of the other are gentle and lamb-like. The two beasts stand side by side ; they act together in everything. The earth-born beast is the “ prophet ” of the sea-born beast, and he is a ‘4false prophet.” He compels subjection to the secular power, especially to its new head, that head which had been slain and healed. He establishes an idolatrous worship of that head, or a submission to it as Divine in authority. He “ exercises ” all the power of the ten-horned beast in his warfare against the saints and servants of God. He works false miracles, and accomplishes lying wonders, and even brings down^re upon earth in imitation of the prophets of 97 JOHN'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. the Lord ; that is, he causes judgments to descend on those who resist. He uses the instrument of excommunication, a weapon of celestial authority, and wields it with terrible effect. He lays kingdoms under interdicts, and nations under anathemas. He makes idplatry compulsory, deliver-ing to the secular arm all who refuse to render it, that they may be put to death. He prohibits all dealings with so called “ heretics,” all traffic and communion with them. He allows none to buy from them, and none to sell to them. He institutes the system which is now called “boycotting,” a system of persecution which was freely wielded by the Popish priest-hood in the middle ages, and is still employed, as we know, in certain Papal lands. How could the mutual relations of the political and eccle-siastical powers in the apostate Roman empire be better represented than by these wonderful symbols ? Here are a monarchy and a ,priesthood in close, nefarious association ; the priesthood anoints the monarchy, serves it, uses it. To-gether they rule, and together they persecute. No symbol can represent everything, no parable can correspond in all respects with the reality it depicts. It is surely enough if the principal features and primary relations are exhibited in the symbol, or reflected by the parable. This is just what is done in the apocalyptic prophecy. Look at the facts. The Papacy has been a political power for more than a thousand years. The popes of Rome have been secular monarchs. They have possessed territories, levied taxes, laid down laws, owned armies, made wars. The Papal monarchy has been for ages an integral part of the Roman empire. The Papacy has also been a sacerdotal power, and is so still. While its temporal government has fallen, its spiritual remains. Further, the Papacy is served by an extensive sacerdotal organization, embracing about a thousand bishops and half a million of priests. This organization controls the convictions and actions of two hundred millions of persons, belonging to more than thirty nations. If the best symbol to represent the Roman empire with its rulers be a ten-horned ber.st, H ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 98 what better symbol to represent the Papal hierarchy than a two-horned beast, whose horns are like those of a lamb, while it has the voice of a dragon ? And what better name for that hierarchy could be found than the “ false prophet ” ? Does it not pretend to utter the messages of heaven ? And as Moses and Elijah called down the fire of God’s judgments on the enemies of Israel, has not this hierarchy brought down again and again, in the estimation of millions, the judg-ments of God on those who have resisted its will, whether individuals or nations ? Has not this been one of its most tremendous and irresistible weapons ? Read the history of the middle ages and of the sixteenth century. AVhat nation in Europe has not been laid from time to time under Papal interdicts, and compelled by these means to submit to the decisions of the Roman pontiff ? And has not the priest-hood too been the author and instigator of a wholesale system of idolatry and persecution ? Has it not employed the power of the State in enforcing idolatry, and cruelly per-secuted to death millions of the faithful who would not bow the knee to the modern Baal ? In all this history only too faithfully corresponds to prophecy. Deep calls to deep, and the utterances of inspiration are caught up and echoed by the experience of generations. The voices of the prophets come back in thunder from the course of ages, and the proof that God has spoken reverberates throughout the world. Having briefly considered John’s prophecy concerning the rise and reign of the Papal power, we have now to glance at his prediction of its fall and overthrow'. This you will find in Revelation xvii.-xix. We have not time to read these chapters now; you are doubtless.familiar with them, and will do wrell to study them carefully and thoroughly. They contain the second complex or duplicate prophecy concerning Romanism—the career and judgment of “ Babylon the Great.’ In this prophecy John beholds the ten-horned beast repre-seuting the Roman empire bearing a mystical woman, dressed in purple and scarlet, decked with gold, precious stones, and pearls 5 a harlot, and the mother of harlots and abomina- 99 fOHN'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM, tions, the guilty paramour of kings, the cruel persecutor of saints ; intoxicated, but not with wine—drunken with the blood of the saints and of the martyrs of Jesus. What a vision ! what a prophecy ! You remember the angel’s interpretation of this vision : “ The woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” We showed that that city was Rome, indisputably Rome. That Babylon the Great means Rome is admitted by Romanists themselves. Cardinal Bellarmine says that “ Rome is signified in the Apocalypse by the name of Babylon.” Cardinal Baronins admits that “ all persons confess that Rome is denoted by the name of Babylon in the Apocalypse of John.” Bossuet ob-serves that the features are so marked, that it is easy to decipher Rome under the figure of Babylon (Rome sous la figure de Babylone). But, while admitting that Babylon the Great, seated on the seven hills, means Rome, Papal interpreters assert that it means heathen Rome, and not Christian Rome —the Rome of the Cæsars, and not that of the popes. In reply to this, we answer, first, that the name upon the harlot’s brow is “ mystery,” and that heathen Rome was no mystery. The true character of heathen Rome was never concealed. On the other hand, Christian Rome is a “ mystery ” ; it is not what it seems. In profession, it is Divine; in character, satanic. We say, in the second place, that there is a marked and intentional contrast in the Apocalypse between the two cities Babylon and Jerusalem, which is overlooked by the Papal interpretation. Babylon, in the Apocalypse, is a city and a harlot; Jerusalem, in the same book, is a city and a bride. The former is the corrupt associate of earthly kings ; the latter, the chaste bride of the heavenly king. But the latter is a Church; the former then is no mere heathen metropolis. The contrast is between Church and Church ; the faithful Church and the apostate Church. In the third place, we point to the fact that the judgment described in Revelation xviii. falls on Babylon when her sins ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 100 had reached to heaven; that is, in the darkest part of her career. But when Alaric destroyed Rome in a.d. 410 that city had improved, it had become Christian ; it was purified at that time from its pagan idolatries. Nor had it then sunk into the darkness of the Papacy. It was not in the fifth century that Rome reached the utmost height of her iniquity. The capture of the city by the soldiers of Alaric, when it was neither pagan nor Papal, could not have been the judgment here foretold. In the fourth place, we point to the fact that the destruc-tion of Babylon foretold in the Apocalypse is total and final ; as a great “mill-stone ” she is plunged into the deep ; there is no recovery. This cannot refer to the mere burning of Rome in a.d. 410, for that event was speedily followed by the complete restoration of the city. When the Babylon of Revelation xviii. falls, the smoke of its burning goes up for ever; it is found no more at all. In the fifth place, we point to the fact that the foretold destruction of Babylon is accomplished by the horns or govern-ments which were ,previously subject to her rule. We freely admit that the Goths destroyed ancient Rome, but the Goths were not previously subject to Rome. The Gothic nations did not first submit to Rome obediently, and then cast her off, and rend, and trample, and destroy her. All this how-ever these nations did in the case of Papal Rome. For cen-turies they were subject to her sway ; then they cast her off. Look at the French Revolution ; see the deeds of France. Look at Italy in 1870. See the Continent to-day. In the sixth place, we point to the fact that the foretold destruction of Babylon is immediately to be followed by “ the marriage of the Lamb.” This is clearly foretold in Revelation xix. But the capture of Rome by Alaric was not followed by that event. Alaric captured Rome fifteen centuries ago, while the marriage of the Lamb is still future. This utterly excludes the notion that the destruction of Rome by Alaric is the judgment intended, and that Babylon the Great represents pagan Rome. And as Babylon the ‘a־׳nes White L JOHN'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. v 101 _______________________________________________áílM&VvSj¿N1y Great does not represent Rome pagan, it mnst represent Rome papal ; there is no other alternative. Now, in conclusion, read this wonderful prophecy concern-ing “ Babylon the Great ” in the clear and all-revealing light of history. 1 ask those of you who have read the history of the last eighteen centuries, did not Rome Christian become af harlot ? Did not Papal Rome ally itself with the kings of the earth ? Did it not glorify itself to be as a queen, and call itself the Mistress of the World ? Did it not ride upon the body of the beast, or fourth empire, and govern its actions for centuries ? Did not Papal Rome array itself in purple and scarlet, and deck itself with gold aud precious stones and pearls? Is not this its attire still? We appeal to facts. Go to the churches and see. Look at the priests ; look at the cardinals ; look at the popes ; look at the purple robes they wear ; look at their scarlet robes ; see the en-crusted jewels ; look at the luxurious palaces in which they live ; look at the eleven thousand halls and chambers in the Vatican, and the unbounded wealth and glory gathered there; look at the gorgeous spectacles in St. Peter’s at Rome, casting even the magnificence of royalty into the shade. Go and see these things, or read the testimony of those who have seen them. Shamelessly Rome wears the very raiment, the very hues and colours, portrayed !,,on the pages of inspired prophecy. You may know the har-lot by her attire, as certainly as by the name upon her brow. But to come to the darkest feature. Has not the Church of Rome drunk most abundantly the precious blood of saints and martyrs? We appeal to facts. What of the Albi-gen ses in the thirteenth century ? What of the Waldenses from the thirteenth century on to the time of Cromwell and the commonwealth ? You have not forgotten Milton’s poem about them, those memorable lines. And what of the perse-cutions of Protestants in France, those dreadful persecutions mercilessly continued for more than three hundred years ? What of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the revoca״ ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 102 tion of the Edict of Nantes ? What of the fires of Smith-field ? What of the terrible Inquisition ? Stay, I will take you to the Inquisition. You shall enter its gloomy portals ; you. shall walk through its dark pas-sages ; you shall stand in its infernal torture* chamber ; you shall hear the cries of some of its victims ; you shall listen to their very words. What agonies have been suffered in these sombre vaults, unseen by any human eyes save those of fiendish inquisitors ! What cries have been uttered in this dismal place which have never reached the open world in which we live. Locked doors shut them in ; stone walls stifled them. No sound escaped, not even that of a faint and distant moan. But now and then a victim found re-lease ; one and another have come forth from the torture-chamber pale and trembling, maimed and mutilated, to tell the things they experienced when in the hands of the holy inquisitors. We shall call in some of these as witnesses. This book is Limborch's “ History of the Inquisition.” It tells the story of its origin seven hundred years ago, and of its establishment and progress in France, Spain, Italy', Portugal, Poland, Sicily, Sardinia, Germany, Holland, and other parts of the world; it describes its ministers and methods, its vicars, assistants, notaries, judges, and other officials ; it describes the power of the inquisitors, and their manner of proceeding. It unveils their dread tribunal ; opens their blood-stained records ; describes their dungeons, the secret tortures they inflicted, the extreme, merciless, unmitigated tortures, and also the public so called “ acts of faith,” or burning of heretics. What a record ! What a world of tyranny and intolerable *anguish compressed into that one word—the Inquisition! Tyranny over the con-science ! Men in the name of Jesus Christ stretching and straining, maiming and mangling their'fellow men, to com-pel them to call light darkness, and darkness light ; to call the Gospel of Christ a lie, and the lie of Satan truth ; to confess that wrong is right, and acknowledge right is wrong; to bow down to man and worship him as God ; to call the 03י rOHN'S FORE VIE n OF ROMANISM. teachings of Christ heresy, and the teachings of antichrist Divine ! Tremendous was the power of that dread tribunal. In Spain and Portugal it completely crushed the Reforma-tion. No secrets could be withheld from the inquisitors ; hundreds of persons were often apprehended in one day, and in consequence of information resulting from their ex-aminations under torture, thousands more were apprehended. Prisons, convents, even private houses, were crowded with victims ; the cells of the inquisition were filled and emptied again and again ; its torture-chamber was a hell. The most excruciating engines were employed to dislocate the limbs of even tender women. Thousands were burned at the stake. The gospel was gagged and crushed, and Christ Himself in the persons of His members subjected to the anguish of a second Golgotha. Let us look into the chamber of horrors in the Spanish Inquisition. “ The place of torture,” says a Spanish his-torian, quoted by Limborch, p. 217, “ the place of torture in the Spanish Inquisition is generally an underground and very dark room, to which one enters through several doors. There is a tribunal erected in it in which the inquisitor, inspector, and secretary sit. When the candles are lighted, and the person to be tortured brought in, the executioner, who is waiting for him, makes an astonishing and dreadful appearance. He is covered all over with a black linen gar-ment down to 111s feet, and tied close to his body. His head and face are all concealed with a long black cowl, only two little holes being left in it for him to see through. All this is intended to strike the miserable wretch with greater terror in mind and body, when he sees himself going to be tortured by the hands of one who thus looks like the very devil.” The degrees of torture are described by Julius Clarus and other writers quoted by Limborch. They were various, and included the following : 1. The being threatened to be tortured. 2. Being carried to the place of torture. 3. The stripping and binding. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION, 104 4. The being hoisted np on the rack. 5. What they called “ sqnassation.” This was the torture of the pulley. Besides this there was the torture of the fire, or chafing-dish full of burning charcoal applied to the soles of the feet. Then there was the torture of the rack, and of another instrument called by the Spaniards “ escolero ” ; then that of the pouring water into a bag of linen stuffed down the throat ; and that of iron dice forced into the feet by screws ; and of canes placed crosswise between the fingers, and so compressed as to pro-duce intolerable pain ; then the torture of cords drawn tightly round various parts of the body, cutting through the flesh ; and of the machine in which the sufferer was fixed head downwards ; and, lastly, the torture of red-hot irons applied to the breasts and sides till they burned to the bone. Here, on p. 219, is the account of the stripping of victims, men and women, preparatory to torture ; the stripping from them of every vestige of clothing by these holy inquisitors, and how they put on them short linen drawers, leaving all the rest of the body naked for the free action of the tor-mentors. Here, on page 221, is the account by Isaac Orobio of what he suffered when in their hands. It was towards evening, he says, when he was brought to the place of torture in the Inquisition. It was a large, underground room, arched, and the Avails covered with black hangings. The candlesticks were fastened to the wall, and the whole room enlightened with candles placed in them. At the end of it there was an inclosed place like a closet, where the inquisitor and notary sat at a table ; so that the place seemed to him as the very mansion of death, everything appearing so terrible and awful. Then the inquisitor admonished him to confess the truth before his torments began. When he answered that he had told the truth, the inquisitor gravely protested that since he was so obstinate as to suffer the torture, the holy office would he innocent (what exquisite hypocrisy !) if he should even expire in his torments. When he had said this, they put a linen garment over his body, 105 JOHN'S FO RE VIE W OF ROMANISM. and drew it so very close on each side as almost squeezed him to death. When he was almost dying, they slackened all at once the sides of the garment, and, after he began to breathe again, the sudden alteration put him to the most grievous anguish and pain. When he had overcome this torture, the same admonition was repeated, that he would confess the truth in order to prevent further torment. As he persisted in his denial, they tied his thumbs so very tight with small cords as made the extremities of them greatly swell, and caused the blood to spurt out from under his nails. After this he was placed with his back against a wall and fixed upon a bench ; into the wall were fastened iron pulleys, through which there were ropes drawn and tied round his arms and legs in several places. The execu-tioner, drawing these ropes with great violence, fastened his body with them to the wall, his arms and legs, and especially his fingers and toes, being bound so tightly as to put him to the most exquisite pain, so that it seemed to him just as though he was dissolving in flames. After this a new kind of torture succeeded. There was an instrument like a small ladder, made of two upright pieces of wood and five cross ones sharpened in front. This the torturer placed over against him, and by a single motion struck it with great violence against both his shins, so that he re-ceived upon each of them at once five violent strokes, which put him to such intolerable anguish that he fainted away. After this he came to himself, and they inflicted on him a further torture. The torturer tied ropes about Orobio’s wrists, and then put these ropes about his own back, which was covered with leather to ,prevent his hurting himself ; then falling backwards he drew the ropes with all his might till they cut through Orobio’s flesh, even to the very bones. And this torture was repeated twice, the ropes being tied about his arms at the distance of two fingers’ breadth from the former wound, and drawn with the same violence. On this the physician and surgeon were sent for out of the neigh-bouring apartment to ask whether the torture could be con- ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 106 tinned without danger of death. As there was a prospect of his living through it, the torture was then repeated, after which he was bound up in his own clothes and carried back to his prison. Here, opposite to this recital, is a picture representing these various tortures. After prolonged im-prisonment, Orobio was released and banished from the kingdom of Seville. Before we let fall the curtain upon this awful subject let us listen for a moment to some of the words of William Lithgow, a Scotchman, who suffered the tortures of the Inquisition in the time of James I. After telling of the diabolical treatment he received, which was very similar to that I have just described, he says, “Now mine eyes did begin to startle, my mouth to foam and froth, and my teeth to chatter like the dobbling of drumsticks. Oh, strange, in-human, monster man-manglers ! . . . And notwithstand- ing of my shivering lips in this fiery passion, my vehement groaning, and blood springing from my arms, my broken sinews, yea, and my depending weight on flesh-cutting cords, yet they struck me on the face with cudgels to abate and cease the thundering noise of my wrestling voice. At last, being released from these pinnacles of pain, I \vas handfast set on the floor with this their ceaseless imploration : ‘ Con-fess, confess, confess in time, or thine inevitable torments ensue.’ Where, finding nothing from me but still innocent, —‘ 011 ! I am innocent. 0 Jesus, the Lamb of God, have mercy on me, and strengthen me with patience to undergo this barbarous murder—’ ” Enough! Here let the curtain drop. I should sicken you were I to pursue the subject*further ; it is too horrible, too damnable. Here in this paper I have some of the ashes of the martyrs, some of their burned bones. I have bits of rusted iron and melted lead which I took myself with these hands from the Quemadero in Madrid, the place where they burned the martyrs, not far from the Inquisition. It wras in the year 1870 that I visited it, just before the great oecumenical 107 JOHN'S FOREVIEW OF ROMANISM. conncil was held at Rome, by which the pope was pro-claimed infallible. I was in Spain that spring, and visited the newly opened Quemadero. I saw the ashes of the martyrs. I carried away with me some relics from that spot, which are now lying upon this table. Hear me, though in truth I scarcely know how to speak upon this subject. I am almost dumb with horror when I think of it. I have visited the places in Spain, in France, in Italy most deeply stained and dyed with martyr-blood. I have visited the valleys of Piedmont. I have stood in the shadow of the great cathedral of Seville, on the spot where they burned the martyrs, or tore them limb from limb. I have stood breast-deep in the ashes of the martyrs of Madrid. I have read the story of Rome’s deeds. I have waded through many volumes of history and of martyro-logy. I have visited, either in travel or in thought, scenes too numerous for me to name, where the saints of God have been slaughtered by Papal Rome, that great butcher of bodies and of souls. I cannot tell you what I have seen, what I have read, wrhat I have thought. I cannot tell you what I feel. Oh, it is a bloody tale ! I have stood in that valley of Lucerna where dwelt the faithful Waldenses, those ancient Protestants who held to the pure gospel all through the dark ages, that lovely valley with its pine-clad slopes which Rome converted into a slaughter-house. Oh, horrible massacres of gentle, unoffending, noble-minded men! Ob, horrible massacres of tender women and help-less children! Yes; ye hated them, ye hunted them, ye trapped them, ye tortured them, ye stabbed them, ye stuck them on spits, ye impaled them, ye hanged them, ye roasted them, ye flayed them, ye cut them in pieces, ye violated them, ye violated the women, ye violated the children, ye forced flints into them, and stakes, and stuffed them with gunpowder, and blew them up, and tore them asunder limb from limb, and tossed them over precipices, and dashed them against the rocks ; ye cut them up alive, ye dismem-bered them ; ye racked, mutilated, burned, tortured, mangled, ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 108 massacred holy men, sainted women, mothers, daughters, tender children, harmless babes, hundreds, thousands, thousands upon thousands ; ye sacrificed them in heaps, in hecatombs, turning all Spain, Italy, France, Europe, Christian Europe, into a slaughter-house, a charnel house, an Akeldama. Oh, horrible ; too horrible to think of ! The sight dims, the heart sickens, the soul is stunned in the presence of the awful spectacle. 0 harlot, gilded harlot, with brazen brow and brazen heart ! red are thy garments, red thine hands. Thy name is written in this book. God has written it. The world has read it. Thou art a mur-deress, 0 Rome. Thou art the murderess Babylon— “ Babylon the Great,” drunken, foully drunken ; yea, drunken with the sacred blood which thou hast shed in streams and torrents, the blood of saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. Were there nought else by which to recognise thee, 0 persecuting Church of Borne, this dreadful mark would identify thee. This is thy brand ; by this we know thee. Thou art that foretold Babylon. We know thee by thy place. We know thee by thy proud assumptions, by the throne on which thou sittest, by those seven hills, by the beast thou ridest, by the garments thou wearest, by the cup thou bearest, by the name blazoned on thy forehead, by thy kingly paramours ; by thy shameless looks, by thy polluted deeds ; but oh, chiefly by this, by thy prolonged and dreadful persecution of the saints, by those massacres, by that Inqui-sition, by the fires of that burning stake. Mark how its ruddy flames ascend ; see how its accusing smoke goes up to heaven ! In this sacred prophecy behold thy picture, read thy name ; read, ay, read thy written *doom. The French Revo-lution broke upon thee ; it was a stage in thy judgment, and no more. The beast who carried thee for centuries in abject submission turned against thee, cast thee off, stripped thy garments from thee, rent thee with its horns. It was fore-told it would be so. It is fulfilled, but that fulfilment is not the end. It is but the beginning of the end. Tremble, for thy doom is written from of old. The hand upon the Avail 109 JOHN'S FORE VIEW OF ROMANISM. has written it ; the finger of Almighty God has engraved it. Dreadful have been thy sins ; dreadful shall be thy punish-ment. Thou hast burned alive myriads of the members of Christ, thou hast burned them to cinders and to ashes : thy doom is to be burned ; thy doom is the appalling flame whose smoke ascends for ever. !have done. Prophecy has spoken; history has fulfilled its utterance. Rome pagan ran its course ; Rome Papal took its place. “Babylon the Great ” has risen, has reigned, has fallen ; her end is nigh. “Come out of her, My people,” come out of her before the final judgment act in the great drama of the apostasy. “ Come out of her,” saith your God, “ that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” For as a millstone cast by a mighty ANGEL INTO THE SOUNDING DEEP, SHE SHALL WITH VIOLENCE BE THROWN DOWN, AND SHALL BE FOUND NO MOUE FOR EVER. LECTURE V. INTERPRETATION AND USE OF THESE PROPHECIES IN PRE-REFORMATION TIMES. J^OMANISM—foretold. Such has been our subject in the four previous lectures—the Scripture ,prophecy, and the Papal history. That a deep and widespread apostasy has taken place in the Christian Church ; that this apostasy has produced paganised forms of Christianity, the chief of which is that of the Romish Church ; that the apostasy of the Romish Church has culminated in the Papacy ; that the Papacy has lasted through long centuries, and lords it still over half Christendom ; that it has persecuted the faithful unto blood, striving for the destruction of the gospel of God as if it were deadly heresy, and for the extermination of the saints of God as of accursed heretics; that it would have been completely triumphant still but for the glorious Refor-mation, which burst its bonds, emancipated the enslaved consciences of millions, and created a new departure in the convictions and actions of the Avorld,—such are the facts with which history presents us. They are broad, unquestion-able facts, which are so notorious as to be beyond all con-troversy, so long lasting as to fill the records of a thousand years. And that this great apostasy was foretold; that it was foretold ages before its accomplishment by Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles; that Daniel dwelling in Babylon foretold it, and John, the exile in Patmos, and Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles ; that these men, sur-rounded as they were by ancient heathenism, and knowing nothing by the evidence of their senses or by observation of ni PRE-REFORMA TION INTERPRETERS. the complete corruption of Christianity which has since darkened the world, as a long and awful eclipse of the Sun of righteousness—that these men, prophets and apostles, living in antecedent times, should have predicted the ex-traordinary events which have come to pass, and should have painted them in vivid colours on the venerable pages of ther writings they have left us ; and that those predictions have for eighteen centuries confronted apostate Christendom with their accusations, and reflected as in a faithful mirror the entire history of its ways : this is the profound prophetic truth we have endeavoured to elucidate. We have now to study the interpretation and use of these marvellous prophecies by the Christian Church. How has thé Christian Church understood and employed them ? Of what practical benefit have these prophecies been to her during the last eighteen centuries ? It is evident that they were written for her guidance, protection, and sanctification. The prophecies of Paul and John are addressed to Christian Churches. The voice of inspiration expressly invites the whole Church to study them, and the Church has obeyed this command. She has read, marked, learned, and inwardly digested the “ sure word of prophecy.” What moral effect has it had upon her ? To what■ extent has it guided her footsteps and sustained her hopes ? If these prophecies have proved to be a mighty power in her history ; if they have preserved the faith of the Church in times of general apostasy ; if they have given birth to great reformation movements ; if they have inspired confessors, and supported martyrs at the stake; if they have broken the chains of pi'iestcraft, superstition, and tyranny, and produced at last a return on the part of many many millions of men to a pure, primitive Christianity,—they have answered their purpose, and justified their position in the sacred Scriptures of truth. Nor may we lightly esteem that inter-pretation which has produced such results. Had the prophe-cies been misinterpreted, applied otherwise than according to the mind of the Spirit, we cannot believe that they would have been thus productive of blessed consequences. The ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. 112 fact that, understood and applied as they were by the re-formers, they have produced spiritual and eternal good to myriads of mankind is a proof that they were rightly applied, for “ by their fruits ye shall know them ” is true, not only of teachers, but of their teachings. Protestantism, with all its untold blessings, is the fruit of the historic system of inter-pretation. On the other hand, all that leads us to expect that the sufferers under antichristian tyranny would correctly inter-prêt the prophetic word written for their guidance and support prompts also the expectation that their persecutors would as surely wrongly interpret it. As apostate Jews wrongly interpreted the prophecies of the Old Testament, so we should expect apostate Christians wrongly to interpret those of the New. In our study of the last eighteen centuries of interpretation we shall not expect to find the true inter-pretation therefore among the apostates, but among the faith-ful ; not among the persecutors, but among the persecuted ; not among those who have waged war against the gospel of Christ, but among those who have confessed its pure teach-ings, and sealed that confession with their blood. We shall not be surprised to find antagonistic schools of prophetic intrepretation, but, on the contrary, we shall expect such ; and we shall expect the apostates and persecu-tors to belong to one school, and the faithful confessors and martyrs to another. If an officer of justice arrest a man because he perceives that he answers exactly to a description of a notorious criminal published by the Government as a help to his identification, is it likely that the man himself will admit that the description fits him ? He will of course deny the correspondence, but his denial will carry no weight. On turning to the history of prophetic interpretation this is precisely what we find. With many varieties as to detail we find there have existed, and still exist, two great opposite schools of interpretationt the Papal and the Protestant, or the futurist and the historical. The latter regards the prophecies of Daniel, Paul, and John as fully and faithfully setting 113 PRE-REFORMATION INTERPRETERS. forth the entire course of Christian history ; the former as dealing chiefly with a future fragment of time at its close. The former, or futurist, system of interpreting the pro-phecies is now held, strange to say, by many Protestants, but it was first invented by the Jesuit Ribera, at the end of the sixteenth century, to relieve the Papacy from the terrible stigma cast upon it by the Protestant interpretation. This interpretation was so evidently the true and intended one, that the adherents of the Papacy felt its edge must, at any cost, be turned or blunted. If the Papacy were the predicted antichrist, as Protestants asserted, there was an end of the question, and separation from it became an imperative duty. There were only two alternatives. If the antichrist were not a present power, he must be either a past or a future one. Some writers asserted that the predictions pointed back to Nero. This did not take into account the obvious fact that the antichristian power predicted was to succeed the fall of the Cæsars, and develop among the Gothic nations. The other alternative became therefore the popular one with Papists. Antichrist was future, so Ribera and Bossuet and others taught. An individual man was intended, not a dynasty ; the duration of his power would not be for twelve and a half centuries, but only three and a half years ; he would be an open foe to Christ, not a false friend ; he would be a Jew, and sit in the Jewish temple. Speculation about the future took the place of study of the past and present, and careful comparison of the facts of history with the predictions of prophecy. This related, so it was asserted, not to the main course of the history of the Church, but only to the few closing years of her history. The Papal head of the Church of Rome wras not the power delineated by Daniel ;and St. John. Accurately as it answered to the description, it was not the criminal indicated. It must be allowed to go free, and the detective must look out for another man, who was sure to turn up by-and-by. The historic interpretation was of course rejected with intense and bitter scorn by the ^Church it denounced as Babylon and tfyp power it branded I ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 114 as antichrist, and it is still opposed by all who in any way uphold these. It is held by many that the historic school of interpretation is represented only by a small modern section of the Church. We shall show that it has existed from the beginning, and includes the larger part of the greatest and best teachers of the Church for 1,800 years. We shall show that the Fathers of the Church belonged to it ; that the most learned mediaeval commentators belonged to it, that the confessors, reformers, and martyrs belonged to it, and that it has included a vast multitude of erudite expositors of later times. We shall show that all these have held to the central truth that prophecy faithfully mirrors the Church's' history as a whole, and not merely a commencing or closing fragment of that history. It is held by many that the fiiturist school of interpretation is represented chiefly by certain Protestant commentators and teachers, who deny that the prophecy of the “ man of sin ” relates to the Pope of Rome. We shall show that the futurist school of interpretation, on the contrary, is chiefly represented by teachers belonging to the Church of Home ; that the popes, cardinals, bishops, and priests of that apostate Church are all futurists, and that the futurist interpretation is one of the chief pillars of Romanism. Two interpretations of prophecy are before us, the historic and the futurist. The historical school of interpretation regards these pro-phecies as reflecting the history of the fourth or Roman empire, in all its most important aspects, from first to last, including especially the dark apostasy which has long pre-vailed in Christendom, the testimony and sufferings of God’s faithful people amid this apostasy, and the ultimate triumph of their cause. On the other hand, the futurist school of interpretation regards these prophecies as dealing almost exclusively with the distant future of the consummation; regards them as dealing chiefly, not with what has been for the last eighteen hundred years, but with what will be in some final spasm at 5״ PRE-REFORMATION INTERPRETERS. the close. The war against the saints waged by the Roman “ little horn ” of the prophecies of Daniel, the proud usurpa-tions of the “ man of sin,” and his antagonism to the cause of true religion, foretold by Paul, the blasphemous preten-8ions and persecuting deeds of the revived head of the Roman empire set forth in the prophecies of John—all these are /regarded by this futurist school as relating to a brief future period, immediately preceding the second advent. The futurist school denies the application of these important practi-cal prophecies to the conflicts of the Church during the last eighteen centuries. It robs the Church of their practical guidance all through that period. This is the position taken by the Church of Rome, this is the position taken by the popes, cardinals, archbishops, bishops, and other great teachers of that apostate Church. This is the prophetic interpretation they have embodied in a thousand forms, and insisted upon with dogmatic authority. This has been the interpretation of proud Papal usurpers, of cruel persecutors, of merciless tyrants, of the Romanist enemies of the gospel and of the saints and servants of God. We shall find, on the other hand, as we study the subject, that the historic interpretation of prophecy, the interpreta-t-ion which condemns Rome, and which Rome consequently condemns, grew up gradually with the progress of events and the development of the apostasy of Latin Christianity ; that it slowly modified its details under the illuminating influence of actual facts, but that it retained its principles unaltered from age to age ; that it ïvas defended by a multitude of earnest students and faithful expositors ; and that it shaped the history of heroic struggles and of glorious revivals of spiritual life and testimony. This is the interpretation whose hist071j during fifteen centu-ries we proposo to review this evening. We shall divide these fifteen centuries into three periods : I. The period extending from apostolic times to the fall of the Roman empire in the fifth century. II. The period extending from the fall of the Roman empire ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. i !6 and rise of the Papacy in the fifth century to its exaltation under the pontificate of Gregory VIL (or Hildebrand), the founder of the Papal theocracy in the eleventh century. III. The period from Gregory VII. to the Reformation. First, then, let us glance at the history of prophetic inter-pretation in the interval extending from apostolic times to the fall of the Roman empire in the fifth century. This was the period of the so-called Fathers of, the Christian Church. A multitude of their writings remain to us, containing, not only almost countless references to the prophecies in question, but complete commentaries on Daniel and the Apocalypse. It is boldly claimed by many that the Fathers of the first five centuries held the futurist interpretation of these books. We deny the correctness of this position, and assert that the Fathers of the first five centuries belonged to the historical school of interpretation. It was impossible for them, owing to the early position which they occupied, rightly to antici-pate the manner and scale of the fulfilment of these wondrous prophecies ; but as far as their circumstances permitted they correctly grasped their general significance, and ad-hered to that interpretation which regards prophecy as fore-telling the whole course of the Church’s ,warfare from the first century to the second advent. It is impossible at this time to do more than present a brief summary of the views of the Fathers on this subject, and to name and refer you to their works. 1. The Fathers interpreted the four wild beasts of prophecy as representing the four empires, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Here we have the foundation of the historical inter-pretation of prophecy. Take ak an instance the words of Hippohytus on the great image and four wild beasts of Daniel : “ The golden head of the image,” he says, “ is identical with the lioness, by which' the Babylonians were represented; the shoulders and the arms of silver are the same with the bear, by which the Persians and Medes are meant ; the belly and thighs of brass are the leopard, by which the Greeks who ruled from Alexander onwards ίμ־ο Π 7 PRE-REFORMATION INTERPRETERS. intended; the legs of iron are the dreadful and terrible beast, by which the Romans who hold the empire now are meant; the toes of clay and iron are the ten horns which are to be ; the one other little horn springing up in their midst is the antichrist ; the stone that smites the image and breaks it in pieces, and that filled the whole earth, is Christ, whd comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world.” 1 This statement is remarkable for its clearness, correctness, and condensation, and expresses the view held still by the historic school. Hippolytus says, in the treatise on “ Christ and Anti-christ ” : “ Rejoice, blessed Daniel, thou hast not been in error; all these things have come to pass” (p. 19). “Already the iron rules ; already it subdues and breaks all in pieces ; already it brings all the unwilling into subjection ; already we see these things ourselves. Now we glorify God, being instructed by thee ” (p. 20). 2. The Fathers held that the ten-horned beasts of Daniel and John are the same. As an instance, Irenæus, in his book “ Against Heresies,” chap, xxvi., says : “ John, in the Apocalypse, . . . teaches us what the ten horns shall be which were seen by Daniel.” 3. The Fathers held the historic interpretation of the Apo-calypse. As Elliott says, none of the Fathers “ entertained the idea of the apocalyptic prophecy overleaping the chrono-logical interval, were it less or greater, antecedent to the consummation, and plunging at once into the times of the consummation.” 2 Here, for example, is the commentary of Vidorinus on the Apocalypse of John, written towards the end of the third century. This is the earliest commentary extant on the Apocalypse as a whole. In this, the going forth of the white horse under the first seal is interpreted of the victories of the gospel in the first century. This view, you will observe, involves the historical interpretation of the entire book of Revelation. Yictorinus interprets the woman 1 Hippolytus: vol. i., p. 447. 2 Elliott: “Horæ Apocalypticæ,” vol. iv., p. 299, 4th ed. ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION 118 clothed with the sun, having the moon under her feet, and wearing a crown of twelve stars on her head, and travailing in her pains, as “ the ancient Church of fathers, prophets, saints, and apostles ” ; in other words, the Judœo-Christian body of saints. He could not, of course, point to fulfilments which were at his early date still future, but he recognises the principle. 4. The Fathers held that the little horn of Daniel, the man of sin foretold by Paulf and the revived head of the Homan empire predicted by John, represent one and the same power ; and they held that power to be the antichrist For example, Origen, in his famous book, “Against Celsus,” thus expresses himself (bk. vi., chap. xlvi.). After quoting nearly the whole of Paul’s prophecy about the man of sin in 2 Thessa-lonians, which he interprets of the antichrist, he says : “ Since Celsus rejects the statements concerning antichrist, as it is termed, having neither read what is said of him in the book of Daniel, nor in the writings of Paul, nor what the Saviour in the gospels has predicted about his coming, we must make a few remarks on this subject. . . . Paul speaks of him who is called antichrist, describing, though with a certain reserve, both the manner and time and cause of his coming. . . The prophecy also regarding antichrist is stated in the book of Daniel, and is fitted to make an intelligent and candid reader admire the words as truly Divine and pro-phetic ; for in them are mentioned the things relating to the coming kingdom, beginning with the times of Daniel, and continuing to the destruction of the world.” Jerome, in his commentary on the book of Daniel (chap, vii.), says, with reference to the little horn which has a mouth speaking great things, that “ it is the man of sin, the son of perdition, who dares to sit in the temple of God, making himself as God.”1 5. The Fathers held that the Homan empire was the “ let or hindrance, referred to by Paul in 2 Thessalonians, which 1 “ Est enim homo peccati, filius perditionis, ita ut in templo Dei sedero audeat, íaciens se quasi Deum.” 119 PRE-REFORMATION INTERPRETERS. kept back the manifestation of the “man of sin” This point is of great importance. Paul distinctly tells us that he knew, and that the Thessalonians knew, what that hindrance was, and that it wq,s then in existence. The early Church, through the writings of the Fathers, tells us what it knew upon the subject, and with remarkable unanimity affirms thàt this “let,” or hindrance, was the Roman empire as governed by the Ccésars ; that while the Cæsars held imperial power, it was impossible for the predicted antichrist to arise, and that on the fall of the Cæsars he would arise. Here we have a point on which Paul affirms the existence of knowledge in the Christian Church. The early Church knew, he says, what this hindrance was. The early Church tells us what it did know upon the subject, and no one in these days can be in a position to contradict its testimony as to what Paul had, by word of mouth only, told the Thessalonians. It is a point on which ancient tradition alone can have any authority. Modern speculation is posi-tively impertinent on such a subject.1 1 As to the “let” or hindrance to the manifestation of the “ man of sin” referred to in 2 Thess. ii., Mr. Elliott says : “ We have the con. senting testimony of the early Fathers, from Irenœus, the disciple of the disciple of St. John, down to Chrysostom and Jerome, to the effect that it was understood to be the imperial ·power ruling and residing at Rome.”—“ Horæ Apocalypticæ,” vol. iii., p. 92. Irenæus held that the division of the Roman empire into ten king-doms would immediately precede the manifestation of antichrist. In his work, “Against Heresies,” book v., chap, xxx., he says, “Let them await, in the first place, the division of the kingdom into ten; then, in the next place, when these kings are reigning, and beginning to set their affairs in order and advance their kingdoms, (let them learn) to acknow־׳ ledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself, and shall terrify those sons of men of whom we have been speaking, having a name containing the aforesaid number (666), is truly the abomination of desolation.” Thus, according to Irenæus, the manifestation of antichrist required the previous overthrow of the then existing Roman empire. Tertullian’s “ Apology ” thus describes the habit of the Christian Church of the second century to pray for the security of the Roman empire, in the knowledge that its downfall would bring the catastrophe of the reign of antichrist and the ruin of the world. Addressing the “ rulers of the Roman empire,” he says : “ We offer prayer for the safety of our princes to the eternal, the true, the living God, whose favour, beyond all others, they must themselves desire. . . . Thither we ROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION. t20 What then was the view of the early Church ? Look at the words of Tertullian. Quoting Thessaloniaris, he says : “ Now ye know what detaineth that he might be revealed in his time, for the mystery of iniquity doth already work ; only he who now hinders must hinder until he be taken out of the way. What obstacle is there but the Roman state ; the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce antichrist, . . . that the beast antichrist, with his false prophet, may wage war on the Church of God?”1 In his magnificent “Apology,” addressed to the rulers of the Roman empire, Tertullian says that the Christian lift our eyes, with hands outstretched, because free from sin ; with head uncovered, for we have nothing whereof to be ashamed ; finally, without a monitor, because it is from the heart we supplicate. And without ceasing for all our emperors we offer prayer. We pray for life prolonged ; for security to the empire. . . . With our hands thus stretched out and up to God, rend us with your iron claws, hang us up on crosses, wrap us in flames, take our heads from us with the sword, let loose the wild beasts upon us,—the very attitude of a Christian praying is the preparation for all punishment. Let this, good rulers, be your work, wring from us the soul, beseeching God on the emperor’s behalf. Upon the truth of God and devotion to His name put the brand of crime. . . . There is also another and a greater necessity for our offering prayer in behalf of the emperors, nay, for the complete stability of the empire, and for Roman interests in general. For we know that a mighty shock impending over the whole earth—in fact, the very end of all things, threatening dreadful woes—is only retarded by the continued existence of the Roman empire. We have no desire then to be overtaken by these dire events; and in praying that their coming may be delayed, we are lending our aid to Rome’s duration.”—“ Apology,” §§ 30-32. (“ Est et alia maior nécessitas nobis orandi pro imperatoribus, etiam pro omni statu imperii rebusque Romanis, qui vim maximam universo orbi imminentem ipsamque clausulam sæculi acerbitates horrendas comminantem Romani imperii commeatu scimus retardan.”—Tertul-lian: “Apologeticum,” § 32.) Jerome writes to the same effect in h’is commentary on 2 Thess. ii. : “He who now letteth, or hindereth.” “ Ut qui tenet nunc teneat, etc. Donee regnum quod nunc tenet, de medeo auferatur, prius qua anti-christus reveletur.” “ Μ όνον b κατόχων &ρτι è'us ík μέσου ·γενψαί' τουτέστιν ή αρχή ή Ρωμαϊκή 6ταν άρθrj έκ μέσον, rare εκείνος . . . "Ωσπερ yàp ai πρό τούτου κατελύθησαν βασιλειαι, οΐον η Μήδων υπό Βαβυλωνίων, η Βαβυλωνίων υπό Π(ρσών, η Περσών υπό Μακβδόνων, η Μακεδόνων υπό 'Ρωμαίων* οΰτω καί αϋτη υπό τού Άντιχρίστου, κάκεινος υπό τού Χρίστου.”—Chrysostom : “ Homily on 2 Thessalonians ii. 6-9.” 1 Tertullian : “ On the Resurrection,” chaps, xxiv., xxv. 121 PRE-REFORMATION INTERPRETERS. Church—not himself, mark, but the Christian Chnrch— prayed for the emperors, and for the stability of the empire of Rome, because they knew “ that a mighty shock impend-ing over the whole earth—in fact, the very end of all things, threatening dreadful woes—was only retarded by ihe con-tinned existence of the Roman empire.”1