But, ftrange as this vifion appeared to the facred prophet, the Papal history is found to realize all the wonders of it: And, backward as we may be to interpret this vision of a church, profeffedly Christian, that church herself is fo little fcandalized at the imputation of thefe crimes, that fhe is ready to avow them all; the two firft, directly and openly; and the laft, when fet in a certain light, and explained in her own manner. In fhort, the prides herself in the extent of ber fway [f], and the fire of

[f] Not held of the civil power, or acknowledged to be so held, but ufurped upon it, and infolently directed against it; as is well known from ecclefiaftical history. -The Pope is not Antichrift: God forbid! (fays the good Abbé Fleury, with a zeal becoming a member of the Papal communion.) But neither is he impeccable, nor has he an abfolute authority in the church over all things both temporal and spiritual-Le pape n'eft pas l'Antichrift; à Dieu ne plaife; mais il n'eft pas impeccable, ni monarque abfolu dans l'eglife pour le temporel et pour le fpirituel [4eme difc. fur l'hift. ecclefiaftique, p. 173. Par. 1747, 12°.]

The Pope, he fays, is not an abfolute monarch in the church over all things temporal and spiritual: That is, he ought not to arrogate to himself the power of an abfolute monarch; for that the pope affumes to be such a mo

ber

ber zeal [g], and only quibbles with us about the meaning of the term, idolatry.

narch, and, in fact, exercised this fupreme monarchical power in the church, through many ages, the learned and candid writer had indifputably fhewn, in the difcourse, whence these words are quoted. But now this monarchical fovereignty in all things temporal, as well as Spiritual, is certainly one prophetical note or character, by which the person or power, ftyled antichriftian, is diftinguished. Let the Pope, then, be what he will, we are warranted by M. Fleury himself to conclude, that he hath, at least, this mark of Antichrift.

[g] In the perfecution of heretics; which M. Boffuet regards as fo little dishonourable to his communion, that he thinks it a point not to be called in queftioncalls the use of the fword in matters of religion, an undoubted right-and concludes, that there is no illufion more dan gerous than to confider TOLERATION, as a mark of the true Church-l'exercife de la puiffance du glaive dans les matieres de la religion & de la confcience; chofe, que ne peut être revoquée en doute le droit eft certain-il n'y a point d'illufion plus dangereufe que de donner LA SOUFFRANCE pour un caractere de vraye Eglife. Hist. des Var. 1. x. p. 51. Par. 1740, 12o.

Thus, this great doctor of the catholic Church, towards the close of the laft century. And just now, another eminent writer of that communion very roundly defends the murder of the Bohemian martyrs at Constance, and (what is more provoking ftill) the fraud

Το

To cut the matter fhort, then, and to keep clear of those endless debates concerning the worship of Images, of the Cross, and of the Hoft in the celebration of the Mass; debates, which a dextrous fophift may find means to carry on with a fhew of argument, and with fome degree of plaufibility: To fet afide, I say, all these topics, let it be observed, at once, That idolatry, in the fcriptural sense of the word, is of two forts, and confifts either, 1. in giving the honour due to the one true God, as maker and governor of the world, to any other suppofed, though fubordinate god; Or, 2, in and ill-faith, through which the pious and tenderhearted Fathers of that council rushed to the perpetration of it. M. Crevier, Hift. de l'Univerfité de Paris, t. iii. l. vi. p. 435, &c. Par. 1761, 12o.- Can it be worth while to spend words in fixing this charge of intolerance on the church of Rome, when her ablest advocates, as we fee, even in our days, openly triumph in it? But, then, hath fhe forgotten who it was that the prophet saw, drunken with the blood of the faints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Fefus-Rev. xvii. 6 ? Alas, no: But the wonders, by what figure of speechheretics are called Saints; and rebels to the Pope, Martyrs of Jesus.

giving the honour due to Chrift, as the fole mediator between God and Man, to any other fuppofed, though fubordinate, mediator. The former, is the idolatry forbidden by the Jewish law, and by the law of Nature: The latter, is Chriftian idolatry, properly fo called, and is the abomination, prohibited and condemned, in fo fevere terms, by the law of the Gospel.

Now, whether the former fpecies of idolatry be chargeable on the church of Rome or not; and whether the crime of that fpecies, may not be incurred by honouring the true object of worship, through the medium of fome fenfible image: Whatever, I fay, be determined on these two points (which, for the prefent, fhall be fet afide) the other species of idolatry is, without all doubt, chargeable on any Christian church that shall adopt or acknowledge, in its religious addreffes, another mediator, befides Chrift Jefus,

But the church of Rome (I do not say, in the private writings of her divines, but) VOL. II. N

in

in the folemn forms of her ritual, publickly profeffes, and, by her canons and councils, authoritatively enjoyns, the worship of faints and angels, under the idea of mediators and interceffors: not indeed in exclufion of Christ, as one, or, if you will, as chief mediator, but in manifeft defiance of his claim to be, the fole mediator. This charge is truly and juftly brought against that Church, as it now ftands, and hath ftood, for many ages; and cannot, by any fubterfuge whatsoever, be evaded [b]. And

[b] Sée Vitringa Apocalypf. Exp. p. 603, and the authors cited by him: But, above all, fee Mr. Mede's exquifite and unanfwerable difcourfe, entitled, The Apoftacy of the latter times.

"Tis true, the Bishop of Meaux is pleased to divert himself with one part of this discourse; I mean, that part, which contains [ch. xvi. and xvii.] the learned writer's interpretation of Daniel's prophecy, concerning the Gods Mahuzzim. He finds fomething pleasant in this idea, or rather in this hard word, which he repeats fo often, and in such a way, as if he thought the very found of Mahuzzim, was enough to expose the comment and Commentator to contempt. Hift. des Var. 1. xiii. p. 260, 261. But, after all, the ingenious Prelate would have done himself no difcredit by being

there