He "Sitteth in the Temple of God."

51

above all on earth by whatever name called, who held office under God, or were venerable in the eyes of men? Did they not, both in theory and in practice, during many centuries, claim the sovereign place in the world? Is it not thus written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kingdom of Babylon? "The Roman Pontiff has been appointed by God over the nations and over the kingdoms." "All men, whatever be their rank, when they come into the presence of the Pope ought to bow the knee three times before him, and kiss his feet." "As far as the sun surpasses the moon, so far does the Pope surpass the Emperor." And was not this to be the opposite of Him who came not to be ministered unto, but to minister? who said, "Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's ;" and who, when Satan offered Him all the kingdoms of the world, rejected them with Divine scorn? Was it not to be the opposite of Him who said, "My kingdom is not of this world?" Was it not to be Antichrist ?

The next thing said respecting the Man of Sin is, that he "sitteth in the temple of God." There is now no literal temple of God on earth. The Church is now the only temple of God. And when Antichrist is said to sit in the temple of God, this implies that he was to rise in the very centre of the professing Church, and not in the world outside the Church. If it be asked how it could be the temple of God, when it became the seat of Antichrist? it is answered, the words are used in a divided and not in a composite sense, as when the blind are said to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He arose in what was the temple of God before he arose, and which ceased to be God's temple when he sat in it, just as a blind man ceased to be blind when he began to see. Is Antichrist to arise within the Church of God? then does not this set aside the idea that he was one of the Roman emperors, or that he is a king who is afterwards to rise, or that he is to be an embodiment of Atheism or Pantheism ? Is not this feature applicable to the Roman Pontiffs? Do not they occupy the very centre of the Church? Is not the Roman Pontiff seated in the temple in a sense that is emphatical? Is not a see or a seat the name of a bishopric? And does not the Pope occupy the Roman See? Is it not his glory that he fills the seat of St. Peter? Is he not the universal Bishop, and, as such, is not the whole Church his see? Does he not sit in, and fill, the whole temple? To no man that ever was, or ever will be on earth, will the words "he sitteth in the temple of God" be so applicable as to him who, as universal Bishop, has the whole Church as his official seat. Sitting in the temple of God implies, further, that he was not to be an open and avowed enemy of Christ and His

Church, but rather professedly the first among his adherents and friends; that he was not to hide himself in secret places, but to manifest himself openly; and this implies that he was to have power to persuade men that he was not Antichrist, but the head of the Church of Christ-and as the high priest alone entered the Holy of Holies where God dwelt, his "sitting in the temple" implies that he was to be the high priest of a religion, and that he was not merely to enter the temple, as the Jewish high priest did, once in the year, but to sit in the temple, in imitation of our great High Priest, who dwells in God's tabernacle, and sits at God's right hand.

In concluding our examination of this remarkable passage of Scripture, the thoughts must be massed together, and, if there be less of exposition and argument, the deficiency must be ascribed to want of space and not of evidence. It is said that he "sitteth in the temple of God," showing himself that he is God. It is not said saying that he is God, but showing that he is God-claiming titles that belong to God, and assuming the power to do what can only be done by God. Is not "Father" the special and distinctive name of God in New Testament times? And has not the Bishop of Rome taken to himself the name of Father? Has he not taken to himself names descriptive of the Divine attributes? He calls himself "Holy Father." He calls himself "Holiness" in the abstract, which is the sum of all that is Divine. He claims infallibility. He claims the power of forgiving sins, which none but God can do. He claims the power of cursing, which is one of the most awful prerogative acts of Jehovah, as" the dreadful and the terrible God." As God's residence was called "His holy hill," so an inherent holiness is claimed for the Holy See, which, it is alleged, either finds its occupant holy or makes him so. He claims to be the Head of the whole Church. He claims the power of prescribing, decreeing, commanding, forbidding, and that all men ought to yield him implicit faith and obedience. He claims powers of dispensing with what is right, which is more than God can do. He claims the power to canonize men who have been in the world of spirits during centuries, and to dedicate temples and altars to them, and he commands men to worship them. He claims to have dominion over souls even in the future state of existence, and that their welfare or misery there is dependent upon him. In the "Extravagants" he is called "King of kings and Lord of lords." Albanus says: "A Pope canonically elected is a God in the earth"-a form of expression which has been often imitated, and in the "Clementines" he is called "Our Lord God the Pope." Thus does he show himself that he is God.

The Mystery Working.

53

In the above verses we have a description of what Antichrist would be when fully revealed: And now ye know what withholdeth that he may be revealed in his time." We hold that it can be successfully maintained, by the conjoint evidence of John and Daniel compared with history, that that which withheld was the Roman Empire in its Pagan form. While the Pagan Roman Empire stood, no such system as fullydeveloped Popery was possible. It was not possible, because the Roman Emperor was Pontifex maximus, and there could not have been two high priests of Rome at the same time. It was not possible, because Popery claims the power of both swords, and its temporal power was imposible while the empire stood. God had set a time for the revelation of the Man of Sin, and till that time came the Pagan empire prevented his full advent. There is some concealment mingled with every prophetic revealment, in order to test men's moral integrity. If it had been clearly asserted that Antichrist was to rise in Rome, and therefore could not do this till the empire was overthrown, this would have been inconsistent with the Divine decree to permit the existence of Antichrist, because it would have made it impossible to doubt on the subject. The subject has therefore been so revealed that doubt is not impossible to those who are inclined—and yet there is light sufficient to form a conclusion having moral certainty.

Antichrist was not yet revealed, but he was already working: "For the mystery of iniquity doth already work." Till the period of revelation it was to be a mystery-something hidden from the wisest and most prudent of men! And was it not the case that no man knew that the Pope was to be Antichrist till after his revelation? Did not some of the best and holiest of men lend their influence to increase tendencies which issued in Romanism, not knowing what they did? Did not good men who were Bishops of Rome claim powers and accept homage which they would have rejected had they known whither it led. It is called the mystery of iniquity. Both in its rise and during its reign, it was to be the cause of iniquity, and yet the iniquity was to be veiled. It was professedly the cause of God, while in heart it was the cause of Satan. This mystery of iniquity was already working. It was working in the region of elements and principles-working in the region of the invisible world, under the direction of seducing spirits. It had not yet taken its place, either on the political or ecclesiastical platform, under the management of men who were consciously and deliberately shaping its course. It was still consciously working only

under the management of him whom John calls the spirit of Antichrist, and who had raised up many Antichrists even so early as the apostles' times: "As ye have heard that Antichrist cometh, and even now there are many Antichrists." How could there be many Antichrists, and yet only one who is the Antichrist? The Lord had many who were called His anointed, before His Anointed one came. These were all types of, and prepared the way for, the coming of Christ. And just so Satan had many Antichrists on a small scale, who were types of and prepared the way for the one Antichrist, in whom they all merged. There were many Antichrists in the days of John, because there were already many professing Christians who were opposed to the person and the work of Christ. These, however, were merely Antichrists, because they were only opposed to particular aspects of Christ's person and work. But there was an Antichrist coming, who was to be opposed to a whole Christ-the full-blown mystery of iniquity opposed to the mystery of godliness. In the various errors of these early times the mystery of iniquity was already working. When some of these errors passed into the back-ground outside the Church, and others began to assume form as parts of a system, when they became in all their various and opposing forms blended into one conglomerate, this was the revelation of the mystery. It was now a realized fact which had taken its place in history.

The revelation of the mystery of iniquity was hindered as yet, but there was a time coming, however, when it would be so no longer: "Only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way." He that letteth was taken away by the removal of the civil Government from Rome. It was transferred first to Constantinople. After its removal again to the West its seat was in Ravenna, and not in Rome; and after its overthrow by the barbarians, when the empire was reconstructed, the seat of it was placed not only out of Rome, but out of Italy. Was not the removal of the empire from Rome a most unlikely thing? Was it not a master-stroke in the providence of God, to bring it about that men of their own accord, and against all the laws of association, and in the face of all the laws of political expediency and military strategy, should take away the seat of Government from that worldrenowned city? And if in our day every man who can think recognizes the necessity and importance of the civil Government being restored to Rome, does not this make the special providence of God in its removal the more conspicuously apparent? And if the restoration of the seat of the civil power to Rome be incompatible with the temporal power of the Pope,

The Mystery Doomed.

55

does not that prove that in former ages it was the existence of the Pagan empire which hindered, and its being taken out of the way which produced, his revelation.

The Man of Sin, though originally in the form of a servant, and in the fashion of a man, spurned the limits of creaturehood, and took upon him the form of God, and exalted himself above all that is called God. In this he showed himself to be Antichrist, the opposite of Him who, though in the form of God, made himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was found in fashion as a man. Because Christ humbled himself, "God also hath highly exalted Him;" and because the Man of Sin exalted himself, he shall be destroyed: "Whom the Lord will gradually consume with the breath of his mouth, and shall utterly annihilate by the brightness of his personal presence." The Lord will show him to be Antichrist by his doom. This doom is to have two stages. First, a gradual consuming by the Spirit of Christ's mouth. By the Spirit of Christ's mouth is to be understood the Holy Spirit applying Christ's Word. He is, therefore, to be gradually consumed during a period of some length by the Word and Spirit of God. And, secondly, he is to be utterly annihilated by our Lord's personal presence. Now, is it not the case that we see the first of these processes begun and going on in the Church of Rome, and that nothing corresponding to it is to be found elsewhere in Christendom? It began at the Reformation. It began by the Word and Spirit of God, and has been carried on by them. And there has been a gradual consuming of the Popish power since then. Its dominion over the kings of the earth has lessened. Its interdicts, and anathemas, and excommunications have lost their power. Its massacres and crusades are matters of the past. Its miracles are now like angel's vists. Its 'bated breath and apologetic tone, with its unabated claims have, to some extent, reversed its symbol in the Apocalypse, and it has now the face of a dragon, while among the powers of the world it has the voice of a lamb. Its temporal power is diminished and tottering to its fall, and the successor of him who set his sandalled foot upon the neck of emperors is now maintained in existence by foreign bayonets. This gradual consuming of the Popish power by the Spirit of Christ's mouth is a proof that it is Antichrist.

The Apostle proceeds to speak of the causes to which the origin of Antichrist is due. And first, the efficient cause is Satan. In the establishment of Christianity there was a twofold process. First, there was an inward working of the Spirit on the minds of men. And the coming of the Man of Sin is to be by an inward working of Satan. The inward