discovered who sat for the one, we cannot now be at any loss to determine who sat for the other.' (Dissertations on the Prophecies, vol. iii. pp. 226, 227, fourth edition.)

It is surprising that the Bishop should, after these observations, make the Pope the Image. The little horn is the Pope. But the portraits' of the little horn and the Beast' being so perfectly alike, it might fairly be presumed, if there was no other argument, that they were both drawn for the SAME PERSON; and, having before so clearly discovered who sat for the one, we cannot now be at any loss to determine who sat for the other.' Since therefore the little horn is the Pope, and the Beast and the little horn are 'the SAME PERSON,' nothing can be clearer than that the Pope is the Beast.

All difficulty arising from the consideration that the Beast must represent an empire, rather than an individual, is taken away by the simple reflection that Nebuchadnezzar's head of gold did, strictly speaking, represent the Babylonish empire, but yet that Daniel said to the king, THOU art this head. In like manner the Beast before us, strictly speaking, represents the Papal Roman Empire or the PAPACY: but yet we may say to the Pope, the KING of this mystic BABYLON, THOU art this Beast!

We wish to make this point clear: we grant that there is a difficulty at first sight, in allowing the Pope to be the Beast, inasmuch as the Beast must represent an Empire, not an Individual. But Nebuchadnezzar's head of gold represented an Empire not an

Individual; and yet Daniel said to him individually, Thou art this head!

Just so the Beast is the Papacy and yet the Pope, as Nebuchadnezzar, stands for the empire over which he presides. The Pope is therefore the Beast, and concentrates in himself the power of the Papacy.

And this explains another difficulty, which has been much mooted of late. It has been asked, 'Are we to look for an individual Antichrist yet to come? The doctrine of an individual Antichrist has been the doctrine of the Church in all ages, and is still retained by the Church of Rome. The Protestant churches, however, have since the Reformation, very naturally made the prophecies respecting Antichrist to centre in that great Antichristian power the Papacy. Are we then to look for an individual Antichrist yet to come?' We reply: An individual Antichrist has appeared; the little horn has appeared; the man of sin has appeared; the individual has appeared to whom "the dragon has given his power, and his SEAT, and great authority." That individual is the POPE, who," as God, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." The Pope is the great Antichrist. That Antichristian power, the Papacy, is considered as centered in him.

discovered who sat for the one, we cannot now be at any loss to determine who sat for the other.' (Dissertations on the Prophecies, vol. iii. pp. 226, 227, fourth edition.)

6

It is surprising that the Bishop should, after these observations, make the Pope the Image. The little horn is the Pope. But the portraits But the portraits' of the little horn and the Beast being so perfectly alike, it might fairly be presumed, if there was no other argument, that they were both drawn for the SAME PERSON; and, having before so clearly discovered who sat for the one, we cannot now be at any loss to determine who sat for the other.' Since therefore the little horn is the Pope, and the Beast and the little horn are 'the SAME PERSON,' nothing can be clearer than that the Pope is the Beast.

All difficulty arising from the consideration that the Beast must represent an empire, rather than an individual, is taken away by the simple reflection that Nebuchadnezzar's head of gold did, strictly speaking, represent the Babylonish empire, but yet that Daniel said to the king, THOU art this head. In like manner the Beast before us, strictly speaking, represents the Papal Roman Empire or the PAPACY: but yet we may say to the Pope, the KING of this mystic BABYLON, THOU art this Beast!

We wish to make this point clear: we grant that there is a difficulty at first sight, in allowing the Pope to be the Beast, inasmuch as the Beast must represent an Empire, not an Individual. But Nebuchadnezzar's head of gold represented an Empire not an

Individual; and yet Daniel said to him individually, Thou art this head!

Just so the Beast is the Papacy and yet the Pope, as Nebuchadnezzar, stands for the empire over which he presides. The Pope is therefore the Beast, and concentrates in himself the power of the Papacy.

And this explains another difficulty, which has been much mooted of late. It has been asked, 'Are we to look for an individual Antichrist yet to come? The doctrine of an individual Antichrist has been the doctrine of the Church in all ages, and is still retained by the Church of Rome. The Protestant churches, however, have since the Reformation, very naturally made the prophecies respecting Antichrist to centre in that great Antichristian power the Papacy. Are we then to look for an individual Antichrist yet to come?' We reply: An individual Antichrist has appeared; the little horn has appeared; the man of sin has appeared; the individual has appeared to whom "the dragon has given his power, and his SEAT, and great authority." That individual is the POPE, who, "as God, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." The Pope is the great Antichrist. That Antichristian power, the Papacy, is considered as centered in him.

CHAPTER II,

ORIGIN OF THE PAPAL POWER.

AND I STOOD UPON THE SAND OF THE SEA, AND SAW A BEAST RISE UP OUT OF THE SEA. Verse 1.

THE Papacy we shall consider presently, but first our office is to trace the origin of its power. One line from Gibbon throws light upon the sacred text:

Their temporal power,' that is, of the Popes, insensibly arose from the calamities of the times." (Vol. viii. p. 168.) These calamities of the times' were but too accurately shadowed forth by the foaming sea which St. John beheld. The table of contents prefixed to the eighth volume of the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, shows the state of society when Gregory the First arose. 'Misery of Rome. The tombs and relics of the apostles; birth and profession of Gregory the Roman; Pontificate of Gregory the Great or First; his spiritual office and temporal government.' Nor was the misery of Rome of an ordinary character. It was the depth of woe. About the close of the sixth century, Rome had