a peculiar aptness in the prophetic language to express ecclesiastical tyranny and usurpation.

But, whatever use we may make of these facts, it is clear, on all hands, that the Roman emperor, as such, was thought to have no concern in the predictions concerning Antichrist; at least, that the more intelligent Christian writers of the three first centuries had no idea of his having any such concern in them: while, yet, they held very unanimously, that some future power was to arise in the church, in which those predictions would be completed.

II. This, in general, was the state of the controversy concerning Antichrist, till the downfal of the Western empire; when the bishop of Rome reared his head, and by degrees found means, amidst the ruins of that mighty power, to advance himself into the sovereignty of Rome, and, at length, of the Christian world: fixing his residence in the very seat and throne of the Cesars. It remains to see, in what light the reign of Antichrist was, thenceforth, considered by many eminent members of that church, which now called itself, and was, in a manner, universal. In other words, we are to inquire, now that the Imperial power, which the fathers would not acknowledge to be antichristian, had deserted Rome, whether

the Papal power, which took its place on the seven hills, did not, in the opinion of sober men, fill up all the measures of the prophetic characters, and perfectly correspond to that idea.

1. So early, as about the close of the sixth century, Gregory the First, or, the Great, as he is usually called, the most revered, and in some respects not undeservedly so, of all the Roman pontifs, in a famous dispute with the bishop of Constantinople, who had taken to himself the title of Oecumenical, or universal bishop, objects to him, the arrogance and presumption of this claim, and treats him, on that account, as the forerunner, at least, of Antichrist. His words are remarkable enough to be here quoted. I affirm it confidently, says he, that whoever calls himself universal bishop, or is desirous to be so called, demonstrates himself, by this pride and elation of heart, to be the forerunner of Antichrist.* And, again, From this presumption of his [in taking the name of the universal bishop] what else can be collected, but that the times of Antichrist are now at hand.

Quisquis se universalem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua Antichristum præcurrit. GREG. M. Op. Ep. xxx. l. 6. Par. 1533.

† In hac ejus superbia, quid aliud nisi propinqua jam Antichristi esse tempora designatur? Ep. xxxiv. l. iv.

It is to be observed of this Gregory, that he disclaimed, for himself, the title of Universal Bishop, as well as refused it to his aspiring brother of Constantinople. How consistently he did this, when at the same time, he exercised an authority, which can only belong to that exalted character, it is not my business to inquire. Perhaps, he did not advert to the consequence of his own actions: perhaps, like an able man, he meant to secure the thing, without troubling himself about the name: perhaps, he was jealous of a rival to this claim of Catholic authority, and would not permit the bishop of Constantinople to decorate himself with a title, which was likely to be favourable to the pretensions of that see, and injurious to his own. Whatever the reasons of his conduct were, the fact is, as I here represent it; and clearly shews that, in the judgment of this renowned Roman bishop, Antichrist had not yet been revealed in the person of the Roman emperor; and if ever he were to be revealed, that not a civil, but ecclesiastical character, agreed best with the prophetic descriptions of him.*

2. Pope Boniface III, had not, it seems, the scruples, whatever they were, of his predecessor, Greg

With all his merits, Gregory the Great, it is to be feared, had some antichristian marks upon him; and his adversary of the East

ory. He readily accepted, or rather importunately begged, this proud title of Oecumenical bishop, from the emperor, Phocas; and transmitted it to all his successors. And now, it might be expected, that the bishop of Rome would be Antichrist, in his turn. But, such was the fortune of that see, or the devotion of the faithful to it, that this charge was not presently brought against him as if the spirit of dominion, which had so long possessed that city, were a thing of course, and could not misbecome the bishop of Rome, though it looked so antichristian in him of Constantinople.

Other reasons concurred to save the honour of the the Papal chair. Its authority grew, every day, more absolute: and the tradition of the church (which had hitherto been the chief support of the doctrine concerning Antichrist) gradually sunk under the apprehension of that.power, to which alone it could, with any apparent propriety, be applied while the ignorance of the times became such, that, except perhaps in the minds of some few retainers to the see of Rome, their was scarce light enough left in the Christian world to point out the meaning of the prophecies; if its gross superstition would have

might have gone some way towards fixing them upon his grandeur, if he had but observed, that Antichrist, whoever he was, and whensoever to appear in the world, is clearly marked out in the prophecies, as having his seat in old Rome.

otherwise permitted the application of them to the sacred person of the pope.

3. Under the cover of all these advantages, the Man of sin had a convenient time to display himself, and to grow up into that full size and stature, in which he could no longer be overlooked, or mistaken, by those who had any knowledge of the prophecies, or skill in applying them. Accordingly we find that at the synod of Rheims, held in the Xth century,* Arnulphus, bishop of Orleans, appealed to the whole council, whether the bishop of Rome was not the Antichrist of the prophets; sitting in the temple of God; and perfectly corresponding to the marks, which St. Paul had given of him. In particular, speaking of John the XVth, who then governed the church of Rome, he apostrophized the assembly in these words-" What think ye, reverend fathers, of this man, seated on a lofty throne, and shining in purple and gold? Whom do ye account him to be? Surely, if destitute of charity, and puffed up with the pride of science only, He is ANTICHRIST, sitting in the temple of God, and shewing himself that he is God."+

* A. 991.

† Quid hunc, reverendi patres, in sublimi solio residentem, veste purpurea et aurea radiantem; quid hunc, inquam, esse censetis ? Nimirum, si charitate destituitur, solaque scientia inflatur et extolli