against the church, and to make their little finger heavier than otherwife their loins would have been. It deferves to be remarked, that even in the opinion of a bishop of Rome, Gregory the great, who fat in the chair at the end of the fixth century, whofoever affected the title of universal bishop, hè was the antichrift, or the forerunner of antichrift. 'I fpeak it confidently, fays he, that whofoever 'calleth himself the univerfal bishop, or defireth 'fo to be called, in the pride of his heart he doth ⚫ forerun antichrift.' When John, then bishop of Conftantinople, firft ufurped this title, Gregory made answer, By this pride of his, what thing elfe is fignified, but that the time of antichrist is now at hand?' Again, he says, on the fame occafion, The king of pride approacheth; and, which is wicked to be spoken, an army of priests ' is prepared +.' It cannot be denied, indeed, that the title of univerfal bishop, or patriarch, was given to the bishop of Rome in the year 451, in the council of Chalcedon and that it was alfo given to the patriarchs of Conftantinople and Alexandria, in the years 449, 518, 519, 533, 534, 536. But Gregory understood this title in another fenfe, than it had before his time. He understood it in that fense wherein they gave it to the Pope afterwards, viz. That he is the fole bifhop, and univerfal head of all the members of Chrift, both paftors and fimple believers, who prefers himself to them all, who carries himself as their general fuperintendant, Dr. Newton, ubi fupra. F and who keeps them under the yoke of his dominion. Taking the name in this fenfe, Gregory fays, it is a name of vanity, a temptation of diabolical ufurpation; a name of blafphemy, a name invented by the first apoftate, the devil: and he infifts on the comparison which he makes of the univerfal bishop, with the devil, and with antichrift. Leo IX. though a Pope himself, in the eleventh century, disapproved of the title of univerfal triarch, and fays, That he is not the husband's friend, who wants to be loved in the husband's place: That, on the contrary, he is the brideman, and pimp of Antichrift, who exalteth him• felf above all that is called God *.' .C pa As early as the year 1120, a Treatise was pub-' lished concerning Antichrift, wherein the faithful were admonished, That the great Antichrift was long ago come, and by the permiffion of God advanced in years. And the author having defcribed the corrupt ftate of the church at that time, fays, this state of men (not a fingle man) is Antichrift, the whore of Babylon, the fourth beaft of Daniel, that man of fin and fon of perdition, 'who is exalted above every God, fo that he fitteth in the temple of God, that is, the church, fhowing himself that he is God; who is now come, with all kind of feduction and lies in them that perish +.' It claims our attention on this branch of the argument, that the coming of the wicked one was *Picteti. La Theol. Chret. Vol. II. p. 384. to be with all power, and figns, and lying wonders, 2 Theff. ii. 9.; and who does not know that wonders or miracles are the boaft of the Romish church? The Popish legends, ftuffed with lying wonders, furnish out a moft affecting comment on this text. Bellarmine, who ftrained every nerve in fupport of Popery, reckons the glory of miracles a note of the Catholic church. But our apoftle affigns them as a distinguishing character of the man of fin. The oftentation of miracles is peculiar to the church of Rome. The Jews are deftitute of miracles, the Mahometans disclaim them, and profess to propagate their religion, not by virtue of miracles, but by fire and fword; which by the way is one good reason why, not Mahomet, but the Pope is to be understood by the man of fin. The reformed churches content with the miracles wrought by Christ and the apoftles, feek no other. But the Papifts glory in miracles. Hence none is held as a faint among them, who is not faid to have been famous for miracles. No reliques, no remarkable fepulchres to which pilgrimages are wont to be made, which are not celebrated for the fame of miracles. There was printed at London, about four and twenty years ago, a book, intitled, The miraculous powers of the Church of Chrift afferted, through each fucceffive century from the apostles, down to the prefent time. Whence the Author infers, that the Catholic church is the true church of Chrift. But, unhappily for the church of Rome, it turns out, that the glories in her shame; for what the pretends as a mark of the spouse, proves her to be the great whore, the mother of harlots *. That the Pope of Rome is the Enemy, evinced from Paul's Prophecy, 1 Tim. iv. 1, 2, 3. A S the apostle defcribed the man of fin, to the Theffalonians, fo alfo to his beloved Timothy, 1 Epift. iv. 1, 2, 3. Having mentioned the great articles of the mystery of godliness, he next informs him, concerning fome of the leading parts of that myftery of iniquity, which was to be unmasked in the latter times. And he shows, in three particulars, wherein it should confift. doctrines concerning dæmons. 2. In forbidding to marry. And, 3. In commanding to abftain from meats. 1. In In examination of which particulars, we fhall find, that the church of Rome is the apoftate fpoken of. The Spirit fpeaketh exprefly, that in the latter times fome fhall apoftatife from the faith, giving heed to feducing fpirits, and doctrines of damons, as the word properly is. 1. The leading line in the apoftacy is giving heed to feducing fpirits and doctrines of dæmons, which does not fignify, that the apoftacy should proceed from the inftigation of evil fpirits, or devils; for that may be faid of all wickednefs, and what is common to all, cannot distinguish one from ano See Turret. De Seceffione, Difput. VII. fe&t. 38. Dr. Newton on the prophecies, Vol. II. p. 408. ther. As the apoftates were to have a finful doctrine concerning marriage and meats, analogy requires, that they were to fin in their doctrine concerning dæmons. So they are described as giving heed to doctrines of dæmons, where as one, viz. Dr. Newton, well obferves, the genitive cafe is not to be taken actively, as if dæmons were the AUTHORS of these doctrines; but paffively, dæmons being the fubject of them. Thus, a doctrine of vanities, is a doctrine concerning vanities, Jer. x. 8. The doctrine of the Lord, is the doctrine concerning the Lord, Acts xiii. 12. So the fourfold doctrine mentioned, Heb. vi. 2. is the doctrinè concerning the four important points there named. And, by the fame conftruction, doctrines of dæmons are doctrines about, concerning, or relating to dæmons *. 1 Now, what are dæmons? Our version, as we fee, reckons them the fame with devils. But it cannot be denied, that though the word damon is generally taken in this fenfe in facred fcripture; efpecially in the four gofpels, yet among the heathens it fignifies a god, a tutelary angel, or a genius. According to the theology of the Gentiles, dæmons were middle powers between the fovereign gods and mortal men. And of thefe dæmons there were reckoned two kinds; one were the fouls of men, deified, or canonized, after their death: the other were fuch as had never been the fouls of men, nor ever dwelt in mortal bodies. Now, it appears from one paffage, at leaft, in the New Teftament, that * See Willifon's Popery, another gofpel, page 51. |