Times
And Signs: Or The Evidence That The End Is Near, continued
The
date of the decree is given by one as A.D. 606, and another
A.D. 608, which gives two years' uncertainty as to the beginning,
and, therefore, ending of the period. But the date is sufficiently
definite and exact for all practical purposes. The appearance
of the eleventh horn is, doubtless, to be reckoned from the
date of the edict which constituted it a power in Europe.
It is true it was at first merely an ecclesiastical power,
but history shows that it very soon became a political power,
exercising secular authority in the territory provided for
it by the displacement of three of the original ten horns,
and, in addition to that, claiming and exercising imperial
jurisdiction over contemporary " crowned heads. "
The
plucking up of the three horns did not precede the advent
of the eleventh horn, but followed as the consequence of it.
An interval would elapse between the one thing and the other.
The eleventh horn would be some time erect before the three
fell: how long is not stated. It would necessarily be very
short in the symbol; but then the events and times represented
by the symbol were on the historical scale; and, therefore,
a momentary interval on the head of the beast, would represent
an interval of years in the course of history. It is not stated
that the three horns were plucked up before the commencement
of the time, times and a half; it is stated the eleventh horn
prevailed for that time; but this does not exclude the self-evident
conclusion that the plucking up of the three horns would be
within the period of the eleventh horn's prevalence. The plucking
up of the three horns was, in fact, part of its " prevalence
" and, therefore, would necessarily transpire within the period
of its ascendency. Hence, we do not find that three kingdoms
were given to the Pope the moment he appeared, but we do find
that he received them about a century afterwards.
In
a work published in 1782 entitled, " The History of Modern
Europe, with an account of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire, and a view of the progress of Society, from the rise
of the Modern Kingdoms to the Peace of Paris, in 1763,
" there occurs the following statement, on page 47: --
"
Before Pepin returned to France, he renewed his donation
to St. Peter, yielding to Stephen and his successors the
Exarchate; AEmelia, now Romagna; and Pentapolis, now Marca
d'Ancona, with all the cities therein, to be held by them
for ever; the kings of France, as patricians, retaining
only an ideal superiority, which was soon forgotten.
THUS WAS THE SCEPTRE ADDED TO THE KEYS, THE SOVEREIGNTY
TO THE PRIESTHOOD, AND THE POPES ENRICHED WITH THE SPOILS
OF THE LOMBARD KINGS AND THE ROMAN EMPERORS. In the three
states here mentioned, the reader will recognise three of
the ten kingdoms that appeared on the declension of the
empire, viz.:--l--Ravenna (the Exarchate); 2--Heruli and
Turingi (AEmelia, now Romagna); and 3--Lombardy (Pentapolis).
"
Dr.
Keith's version of the matter is as follows: --
"
The Exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lombards, and
the State of Rome, were subject to the secular dominion
of the church of Rome, and mainly form, to this hour, 'the
States of the Church,' over which the Pope, as a temporal
sovereign, exercises sovereignty, and wears the 'TRIPLE
CROWN,' as if in obvious token that three of the first
kingdoms were rooted up before him. " ---Signs of the Times,
page 22.
The
eleventh horn had eyes: it could, therefore, see the other
horns; while the other horns being without eyes, could not
see it. What political peculiarity of the Papacy corresponds
with this symbol? Obviously its priesthood. The institution
exists in the territory of all the other horns, and by means
of it Rome is made privy to the concerns of every power in
Europe; while these powers are unable to penetrate the secrets
of Rome, on account of the fidelity which the priesthood have
always maintained to their ecclesiastical chief. History affords
perpetually-recurring illustrations of the political power
which Papal Rome was enabled to exert in all the realms of
Europe, through this system of espionage, which she was enabled
to maintain through her priests. It is remarkable that the
Papal Power should be known in diplomatic language as " The
HOLY SEE. "
The
eleventh king was to be " diverse from the first (ten) " (Dan.
7v 24). It required no ingenuity to make out the diversity
between the Pope and the crowned heads of Europe. The Pope
does not belong to the order of kings. His appearance in Europe
was a new political phenomenon. Such a personage had never
appeared before as a sacerdotal imperial despot, claiming
not only the actual sovereignty of the three territories transferred
to his secular dominion, but divinely-conferred jurisdiction
over every sovereign in Europe. This character was not assumed
by the Roman Pontiffs all at once, but it had grown to full
development before the Papacy was more than two centuries
old.
In
the days of Pope Gregory VII it ripened to maturity. Of this
Pope it is recorded that " he engaged the Church in an open
war with the sovereigns of all nations. " He formed a purpose
to " engage in the bond of fidelity and allegiance, to the
Vicar of Christ, as king of kings, and lord of lords, all
the potentates of the earth, and to establish at Rome
an annual assembly of bishops, by whom the contests which
might arise between kingdoms and sovereign states were to
be decided--the pretensions of princes to be examined, and
the fate of nations and empires to be determined. " So far
did he succeed in his scheme of supremacy, that Henry 4v,
Emperor of Germany whom he had summoned to his presence as
a delinquent, applied for absolution at the Gates of Canosa,
a fortress in the Appenines, where Gregory happened to be
resident at the time, " and being stripped of his robes, and,
wrapt in sackcloth, he was obliged to remain in an outer court
three days, in the month of January, bare-footed and fasting,
before he was permitted to kiss the feet of His Holiness.
The haughty pontiff condescended to grant him absolution,
after he had sworn obedience to His Holiness in all things.
"
Gregory,
elated by his triumph, and now looking upon himself, not altogether
without reason, as the lord and master of all the crowned
heads in Christendom, said in several of his letters which
were written at the time, that it was his duty to " pull down
the pride of kings. " In accordance with this sentiment, he
wrote to Solomon, a refractory king of Hungary, " You ought
to know the kingdom of Hungary belongs to the Roman Church;
and learn that you will incur the indignation of the Holy
See, if you do not acknowledge that you hold your dominions
of the Pope, and not of the Emperor. " He subsequently
deposed Henry 4v, in the words " In the name of Almighty God,
and by your (the council's) authority, I prohibit Henry, the
son of our Emperor Henry, from governing the Teutonic
Kingdom,
and Italy; I release all Christians from their oath of allegiance
to him, and I strictly forbid all persons from serving or
attending him as king. "
He
appointed a successor to Henry, one Rodolph, and sent him
a golden crown, with an address, in which, after depriving
Henry of strength in combat, and condemning him never
to be victorious, he delivers himself of the following
apostrophe to Peter and Paul, in which the nature of his pretensions
as their pretended successor becomes apparent: " Make all
men sensible that as you can bind and loose everything in
heaven, you can also upon earth TAKE FROM OR GIVE to every
one, according to his deserts, empires, kingdoms, principalities.
Let the kings and princes of the age then instantly feel
your power, that they may not dare to despise the orders of
your church. "
These
sentiments Gregory VII left as an heritage to his successors,
and they have continued to be the animating spirit of the
Roman See to the present day, illustrating the statement of
the vision that the eleventh horn, with eyes, should be "
diverse from the first (ten), " and should have a " look more
stout than his fellows. "
The
horn had a mouth. This indicates that it would in some sense
presume to speak to the others, and the speaking could not
be for the purpose of mutual deliberation, because the others
had no mouths, and, therefore, no conversation could take
place; the speaking, therefore, could only take the form of
legislative dictation: the eleventh horn would presume to
make law to the others. The applicability of this to the Papacy
is abundantly manifested in the last paragraph.
The
words it spoke were " great words against the Most High, "
not words in the verbal sense: " words " here has a more comprehensive
signification than the dictionary meaning. It imports the
policy of the power spoken of, as represented and expressed
by its utterances .over the whole period of its existence.
These are " the words " by which the indignation that destroys
the beast is evoked. Now these words, in order to be " against
the Most High, " need not to be verbally directed against
Him. They need not take the form of denunciations of the Almighty.
In
the Scriptural sense, everything uttered against the truth
is uttered against the Almighty, though it may be couched
in the language of allegiance. Hence, for the Papacy to "
speak great words against the Most High, " it is not necessary
for her to have formally fulminated her denunciations against
the Deity. If her ecclesiastical creed and her ecclesiastical
policy have practically involved the repudiation of His truth,
and His people, her " words " have been none the less, but
all the more, " against the most High " for being framed in
the language of sanctimonious pretence.
We
have only to enquire whether the policy of Rome has or has
not been one of arrogant presumption and destructive opposition
to everything in which the name and honour of God are involved;
and we have not to go far for the answer. No one having any
knowledge of history, and any understanding of the truth,
can be ignorant that Papal Rome has, from the beginning of
its days, " spoken great words against the Most High, " and
" made war with, and prevailed against, the saints.
" Her career, since the day her bishop was crowned universal
Dictator-ecclesiastical, has been an unbroken chapter of enormities
perpetrated against God and man. During the long period of
her ascendancy, she has well merited the designation bestowed
upon her by the Spirit in vision to John, in the Isle of Patmos.
She has been the sum of all abomination--the hold of every
foul spirit--the " MOTHER of harlots and ABOMINATIONS of the
EARTH " (Rev. 17v 5).
She
is well-styled " MYSTERY, " and more apppropriately still,
the MYSTERY OF INIQUITY " (2 Thess, 2v 7). She has been iniquity
mystified--iniquity veiled--iniquity dressed in a robe of
religious pretence--iniquity tricked out in the splendid paraphernalia
of regal pomp and civil authority--iniquity of the deepest
dye, draped in holy garments--a whited sepulchre of mystified
iniquity, showing a beautiful exterior, and inviting all nations
to worship at its cursed shrine of " rottenness and dead men's
bones " ; and all nations have gone and bowed the knee, and
garnished this grave of the saints with costly things, proving
themselves the seed of the accursed rejecters of Jesus, who
honoured the tombs of the prophets, and thereby were held
by Jesus to be proved accomplices of those who killed them,
and put them in their graves.
The
LITTLE HORN imposture--this proud, wilful, stout-looking pretentious,
audacious, blasphemous, saint-killing power, which has prevailed
against all divine things for twelve centuries, in accordance
with the words of Daniel--this depraved, hypocritical, corrupt,
iniquitous, tyrannical, and murderous Church of Rome, with
which it is now becoming fashionable at religious meetings
to bandy compliments, and speak respectfully of, and which
blinded and becrazed " charity " would make room for,
and
deal liberally with, as an institution " doing good " in its
own way, and " advancing the cause of Christ under the banners
of the Catholic religion " ; this execrable mistress of witchery,
whose cunning arts of simulated kindness, and ornaments of
learning and fascinations of venerable pedigree, are, in England,
entrapping thousands upon thousands into the bondage which
it was the boast of this country to have escaped three hundred
years ago--this system of unmixed iniquity is further introduced
to our notice in Rev. 17v 3, 4, as a gaudy, betrinketed, whorish
woman, drunk with the blood of saints, and having in her hand
a cup of abominable liquor, with which she intoxicates kings.
The
appropriateness of this figure will be seen at a glance. The
Church of Rome pretends to be the faithful spouse of the absent
bridegroom; whereas she acts the part of a prostitute of the
most profligate and abandoned type. She coquets with the kings
of the earth, and administers to them free libations of her
bemuddling doctrines, with which " all nations are drunk.
" She commits fornication with them, for her loves and her
aims are confined to the worldly objects she can accomplish
in her ecclesiastical dealings with them. She revels in lust
and lucre, and is drenched in all her garments with the reeking
blood of the righteous slain, whom she has put to death for
their testimony.
This
LITTLE-HORN blaspheming prevailing power, is further spoken
of as a " king doing according to his will " (Dan. 11v 36),
exalting and magnifying himself above every power (Heb., ail),
and speaking marvellous things against the God of gods;
which is an exact description of the Pope's presumption, as
historically illustrated. It is said he should not regard
the God of his fathers nor the desire of women. This is also
descriptive of him. The emperors of Rome--the " fathers "
or predecessors of the Pope--were Pagans, and worshipped the
deities of Pagan mythology. The Pope disregarded these, and
set up a god which the emperors " knew not, " viz., the triune
God of their superstition, and the Virgin Mary, whom they
" honoured with gold and silver, and precious stones,
" in erecting begemmed and garnished temples to their worship.
He was to " disregard the desire of women. " He should be
a celibate, " forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain
from meats. " (1 Tim. 4v 3). How signally this has been fulfilled,
history testifies. The whole hierarchy of Rome, from the Pope
in " the chair of St. Peter " to the mendicant friar, are
under a bond to remain in bachelorhood, and thus they set
at naught the " desire of women, " and fulfil the prophecy.
" He shall magnify himself above every God, " and "shall
prosper till the indignation be accomplished. " His existence
and supremacy will, therefore, continue till the return of
Christ; for the indignation is not accomplished until he come
to " tread the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty
God " (Rev. 19v 15), and to pour out the wine of HIS wrath
into the cup of His indignation, without mixture (Rev. 14v
10).
These
prophecies are reproduced by Paul in 2 Thess. 2v 3-10. The
church at Thessalonica had been agitated with ideas of the
imminence of Christ's appearing. Paul writes to quiet their
apprehensions on the subject, and reminds them of what he
had told them while he was with them (verse 5), namely, that
before that day of Christ would come, there should be a widespread
departure from the truth, and a subsequent and consequent
development of " that Man of Sin, the son of perdition, who
opposeth and EXALTETH HIMSELF ABOVE ALL THAT IS CALLED GOD,
or that is worshipped, so that he as God sitteth in
the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. "
These
words of Paul amount to a paraphrase of the words of Daniel.
There is, however, a feature in them which is lacking in Daniel's
representation of the matter. Paul connects the development
of the " Man of Sin " with the " falling away " that was to
come, and intimates by the concatenation of his words, that
the one was to result from the other--that the revelation
of the " Man of Sin " was to be the result of the falling
away from the truth. This is an important addition to the
information communicated by Daniel, without which, the identification
of the power represented would not have been so complete as
it is. There is nothing in Daniel to indicate that the appearance
of the little horn of the fourth beast was to be connected
with God's operations among men by the truth. For anything
there is in Daniel to the contrary, the little horn might
have represented a heathen power, like Babylon, or like the
original ten horns, having no germinal connection with anything
pertaining to God; but, by Paul's words, we are enabled to
see that this little horn was to be the political offspring
of an apostasy which was to take place among those professing
the truth of Christ.
This
leads us straight to the Papacy, for the fact is notorious
that the Papacy which has ruled the political and ecclesiastical
destinies of Europe for twelve centuries, is nothing more
nor less than the political incorporation of the principles
developed as the result of a departure from the truth on the
part of the early professing Christians. In the Papacy,
therefore, we behold the MAN OF SIN predicted by Paul, and
the system which is to be " consumed with the spirit of his
(Christ's) mouth, and destroyed with the brightness of his
coming. " So long as the brethren, as a whole, were faithful
to the truth, it was impossible for this Man of Sin to be
revealed, and, therefore, it was impossible for Christ's coming
to take place, because the coming of Christ was to occur for
the destruction of the Man of Sin.
There
was another obstacle in the way at the time that Paul wrote.
" Ye know, " says he, " what withholdeth, that he might be
revealed in his time. " The " Man of Sin " was to be the supreme
power in the state. Before this could be accomplished, Paganism
in high places had to be abolished. The Pope, as the professed
" Vicar of Jesus Christ, " claiming to be " King of Kings
and Lords of Lords, " could never be politically developed
in Europe until the Roman empire was revolutionised, and changed
from a Pagan to a professed Christian power. The paganism
of Rome was, therefore, an obstruction. It was that " withholding
" the revelation of " the Man of Sin. " But the hindrance
was to be " taken out of the way, " and " THEN shall that
Wicked be revealed, " etc. We know, as a matter of history,
that Paganism, in due time, was taken out of the way, and
that the way was thereby opened for the uprise of the Little
Horn on the head of the fourth or Roman (symbolic) beast,
which, as " a Man of Sin, " should prevail against the saints
for 1,260 years, and exalt himself in the earth above every
object of worship.
There
are some who hold that this " Man of Sin " is a particular
person--an individual of extraordinary audacity and impiety,
who has yet to appear and theoretically abjure the existence
of the Almighty, and offer himself to all the world as the
object of worship. But such take an extremely narrow and utterly
untenable view of the matter. All they rely upon is the phrase
" Man of Sin " ; but this no more proves the personality of
the power referred to, than do Paul's other words, " THE OLD
MAN, " prove that he meant a literal octogenarian, whose company
we were to avoid, in " putting off the old man with his deeds.
" If the " he " applied to the Man of Sin, prove the personality
of the power referred to, what is to be made of the " he "
applied to the " what withholdeth " ? " HE who now letteth
(or hindereth) will let (or hinder) until HE be taken
out of the way. " There was a " HE " existing in Paul's days,
obstructing the development of the " Man of Sin, " and who
was in due time to be removed to make way for his impious
successor. Who was this? Let the individualists answer. Was
there a particular man living in Paul's day, whose
death or deposition was necessary to the appearance of the
" Man of Sin " ? If the answer is " Yea, " who was it? and
how is it that eighteen hundred years have elapsed since his
death, and yet the " Man of Sin " of the individualist has
never made his appearance? A full confrontage of this difficulty
will demolish the individual theory.
The
obstruction in the way of Paul's Man of Sin was the faithfulness
of the brotherhood, and the political supremacy of Paganism.
Both these barriers vanished in course of time, and up rose,
in the historical arena, that monstrosity which has overshadowed
the historic page with records of transcendent cruelty and
iniquity. Historically, the Pope is absolutely THE MAN OF
SIN; for throughout all the generations of the Papacy, the
Pope has been the only man in the earth in his position. The
system of the Papacy is essentially a ONE-MAN system. The
theory of the system does not admit of more than a single
head. It has happened once or twice that there have been rival
Popes, but this was an anomaly never sanctioned by the system.
Politically the Pope is the " MAN OF SIN, " whoever the Pope
may happen to be. The individuality of the man is entirely
absorbed in the position. No individual man is essential to
constitute the Popeship. The Popeship has always found
a man to fill it, whoever has lived or died, which shows that
it is the office or position which Paul contemplated when
he spoke of the revelation of the " Man of Sin. " One man
filled the " MAN-OF-SIN " OFFICE when that which hindered
was taken out of the way; and another entirely different man
will be in it when Jesus is manifested to destroy the whole
system.
Those
who individualise and futurise the " Man of Sin " are in the
habit of literalising the period of the Little Horn's prevalence.
" Time, times, and an half, " to them are literal three-and-a-half
years, at some undiscoverable time in the future, during which
" the ANTI-CHRIST " of their theory will appear on the scene,
rise to the summit of universal power, and come to his end
by divine interposition. How this theory can be entertained
by an intelligent mind on a full review of the bearings of
the case, it is difficult to conceive. It involves several
anomalies of the most palpable kind. In the first place, if
the time, times, and a half of Daniel's fourth beast are literal
and future, of course the little horn represents a power yet
to appear; and, in that case, the political visions shown
to Daniel and John take no notice of the greatest political
phenomenon of the fourth-beast period of the world's history.
Daniel is shown the fourth-beast, and told about the fourth-beast
kingdom, and put in possession of details respecting it, but
is withheld all information of the most prominent, extraordinary,
and longest-lived feature of the system, viz., the PAPACY.
The most astounding phase of the fourth-beast history is left
out of the symbolism of the fourth-beast period! He receives
no information of a persecuting regal imposture, which should
lift its head and voice over all the kings of the Continent,
for more than 1,260 years, and trample under foot the truth
and the friends of the truth all that time; but he is particularly
enlightened with reference to an insignificant three-years-and-a-half,
during which a daring man is only to equal (for he could not
surpass) the impiety and cruelty exhibited by the Roman Pontiffs
for more than a half-score centuries!
The
suggestion has only to be stated to be condemned. How utterly
incongruous, that in a symbol, confessedly extending over
a chronological period of 2,000 years, an incident of only
three-and-a-half literal years' duration should receive a
place as its most conspicuous feature--a period of utter insignificance
as history goes. Again, such an assumption would make the
vision teach that the saints were not to be prevailed against
in the course of history, EXCEPT DURING THREE-AND-A-HALF
YEARS AT ITS CLOSE, and would place in a curious position
the fact, that as a matter of history, the Papacy has spoken
great words against the Most High, and prevailed against the
saints for a PERIOD OF UPWARDS OF 1,200 YEARS. Besides,
of what service would the vision be, if its applicability
were confined to a single oppressor, and a period of three-years-and-a-half
at the close of history? Especially as it is denied by those
who maintain this theory, that there is any clue to the time
when the Man of Sin may be expected to appear. As it could
in that case only interest those contemporary with that epoch,
it would throw the vision into the corner, as a thing destitute
of spiritual utility for all time, and only possessing the
kind of interest attaching to any prodigy--a view of the matter
eminently derogatory to God, in view of the fact that it was
communicated by Him for enlightenment, encouragement, and
guidance.
The
literal theory is puerile and untenable. It is utterly unworthy
of consideration, and can never be entertained where a broad
and competent view of the facts is taken. The historical view
of the matter, which is " the truth of the matter, " gives
utility and importance to the vision. We read in it the consoling
assurance that " the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men,
" and that the " practising and prospering " of human wickedness
and presumption in the earth, has a determined end--that the
triumphing of the wicked, like the waves of the sea, has an
appointed bound that it cannot pass--that the times of the
Gentiles are fixed and defined, and that standing where we
are, we can look forward with intelligent expectation to their
early expiry, and the glorious manifestation of the Ancient
of Days, in righteousness to judge and make war, and destroy
them that destroy the earth.
With
righteous triumph may we hail the day of Rome's perdition.
Her history shows a dark and dreadful retrospect. No language
can adequately depict the enormity of her crimes. The Pagan
murderer of the apostles, the Papal blasphemer of the truth,
and destroyer of the saints, " Great Babylon, " has heaped
to herself wrath against the day of wrath. Her crimes are
without number and without measure. For a long period of centuries,
she has prevailed against everything divine. She has waged
open war against the word of God. She has done her utmost
to extirpate it from-among mankind. She has made the study
of it a crime, and the possession of it a capital offence.
She has trampled the truth under her feet, and drenched the
earth with the blood of unresisting victims, who loved it,
and counted not their lives dear unto them in defence of it.
She has invented and established every kind of abomination
in doctrine and practice. For ages, she has held up a mortal
man as an object of universal adoration, above all on earth
called God, or worshipped. To this living idol, she has commanded
the ascription of more than mortal honours, and ordered all
who would not bow down to the image to be cast into the furnace
of fiery affliction, of persecution, bonds, imprisonments
and death.
She
has deified the ghost of a dead woman, and commanded the world
to worship " the Queen of heaven, " under the blasphemous
title of " the Mother of God. " She has burlesqued and brought
to mockery the truth of the miraculous conception. She has
enjoined prayer to dead men, and taught men to look to them
for guardianship. The world, drunk with the wine of her abomination,
has responded to the injunction, and elected their " patron
saints, " to whom they address their ignorant devotions, and
whose guardianship they invoke upon the temples of their superstition
by calling them after their names.
She
has changed the memorials of Christ's death into objects of
worship, telling her dupes that the touch of her lying priests
transmutes the emblematic bread and wine into the veritable
essence of Christ's nature; and she has degraded the intelligent
observance of the institution, commanded for the affectionate
participation of all the members of Christ's household, into
a scene of superstitious and meaningless mummery, enacted
by her foul-handed priests. She holds up as objects of faith
and acts of obedience, dead men's bones, musty relics, crosses,
genuflexions, bodily penances; and exacts money from the pockets
of her dupes on the iniquitous pretence of imparting spiritual
benefit.
She
has descended to the unutterable infamy of selling licentiousness
for gain--pretending to give liberty to sin with impunity,
for money--blasphemously professing to avert the course of
eternal justice for a consideration in cash! She has invented
the chimera of purgatory, and befooled the deluded masses
of mankind into the belief that she had power, for money,
to liberate " departed souls " from its custody.
There
is no religious folly of which she has not been guilty. She
has arrogated the power to forgive sins, and by her priests
in " the Confessional, " has enforced the most execrable inquisition
into the private affairs of her devotees, especially women,
in whose " spiritual interests " her celibate scoundrels have
professed a solicitude which has only been the cloak of their
lust. She has established nests of infamy throughout the world,
in the name of spiritual purity and seclusion; and in convents
and nunneries, carries on secret abominations and cruelties,
of which the unutterable heinousness will only be fully known
.when " Great Babylon comes into remembrance before God, "
and the time arrives to give unto her " double for all her
sins. " She has decreed the heathen fiction of the immortality
of the soul to be the cardinal point of the Christian faith,
and has exalted the Pagan dreams of Hell and Elysian Fields,
to the same eminence. She has turned away from the truth,
and given heed to fables. She has made lies her refuge.
From
the sole of the foot to the crown of the head, she is one
mass of spiritual putrefaction; and when to this is added
her great swelling words of vanity, her proud looks, and rapacious
deeds, her wicked principles and cruel acts, her malignant
hostility to the truth in every shape and form, and her implacable
persecution by rack torture, fire and death, of all who professed
it, whom she could get into her power, the picture of her
enormities is complete. Yet, like the adulterous woman, "
she wipeth her mouth, and saith, I am innocent. " In the language
imputed to her in the Apocalypse, she says, " I sit a queen,
and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow " (Rev. 18v 7).
|