pope, to whom these prophetic passages refer, but the ascendancy of the Roman See, gradually and at first imperceptibly acquired, exercised through a long series of ages, and destined at length to be destroyed by the power of the Lord Jesus. He shall consume it by the spirit of his mouth," the influence of his holy word, and "destroy it by the brightness of his rising," at that period, when the millenial glory of the Church shall commence, and pure and undefiled religion shall be triumphant and universal.

I cannot close these cursory remarks without adverting to the instructions we may derive from this melancholy detail. It exhibits, in the first place, a striking confirmation of the truth of Christianity. Had there been no prophetic notices of the great defection and corruption which at an early period marked the Christian Church, it might have been objected that the gospel had perished, like the inventions of men; and because

rity prevailed over all, it was natural to think and expect, that the true notion of antichrist would be stifled, and that the doctors of the church would endeavour to give another turn and interpretation to the passage (2 Thes. ii. 1-12.) That night of ignorance was so thick and dark, that there was hardly here and there a single star to be seen in the whole hemisphere. But no sooner was there any glimmering or dawning of a reformation, than the true notion of antichrist, which had been so long suppressed, broke out again. As early as the year 1120, a treatise was published concerning antichrist, wherein the faithful are admonished, "that the great antichrist was long ago come, that it was in vain to expect any other, and that he was already advanced to full age." (Mede's Works, B. iii. p. 721.) The Waldenses and Albigenses propagated the same opinions in the same century. That the Pope was antichrist, was the general doctrine of the first reformers every where. Here in England, it was advanced by Wickliffe, and was learnedly established by Bishop Jewel. It is no wonder that in the last Lateran council the Pope gave commandment to all preachers, that no man should presume to speak of the coming of antichrist." Bp. Newton's Dissertations, Vol. II. p. 130.

it seemed no longer the care of providence, that the divinity of its origin was a gratuitous and unsupported assumption. But so far is the fact of its corruptions from invalidating its claims, that it strengthens and supports them. The first teachers of Christianity foretold these corruptions; and the awful contrast between the primitive state of the Church, in the purity of its principles, the simplicity of its ritual, the benevolence of its spirit and moral excellence of its members, and the subsequent state of the Church under the darkness, intolerance, and oppression of the papal yoke, exhibits a minute accomplishment of sacred prophecy.

In the second place, the discussion illustrates the danger of neglecting the Scriptures, and departing from the practical acknowledgment of their sufficiency. This was the latent source of that prolific and wide spreading contagion, which infected the Church; the germ of that luxuriance and verdure which extended its deadly shade to surrounding nations. Hence arose the ascendancy and independency of the clergy, the multiplication of offices in the Church, the introduction of unnumbered ceremonies, the substitution of outward forms for spiritual religion, and the various evils which prepared the way for the civil establishment of Christianity, and capacitated the Church for becoming first the ally, and then the engine of secular power. An inviolable regard to the directions of Scripture, and the sacred maxims of our divine Teacher and Lord, would have rendered it morally impossible for these innovations and evils to have prevailed in the Christian Church.

The detail which has now occupied your attention, should, in the last place, excite our gratitude to God for the liberty we enjoy, and the privilege, which no power on earth can justly take from us,

of worshipping God according to the dictates of our consciences. The characteristic feature of the "Man of Sin," "the mystery of iniquity," is the admission of FORCE in matters of religion; and whatever sect or denomination of Christians employs force and secular power in its support, so far approximates to the spirit of Popery, and identifies itself with the essential principle of the antichristian system.

"Let Cæsar's dues be ever paid

"To Cæsar and his throne;

"But consciences and souls were made

"To be the Lord's alone."*

* I cannot close this lecture, without introducing on this subject, the sentiments of the great and amiable FENELON. They exhibit a striking instance of a powerful mind, rising above all the littleness and sectarianism of the most intolerant communion, and daring, even under the meridian of civil and ecclesiastical despotism, to address the following "directions for the conscience of a king."

66

"Above all things never force your subjects to "change their religion. No human power can "invade the impenetrable recesses of the human "heart. Force can never convince men; it can only make them hypocrites. When kings med"dle with religion, instead of protecting it, they "place it in bondage. Allow to all legal toleration, not in approving all as indifferent, but in suffering with forbearance, that which God suffers, and in endeavouring to reclaim men by "mild persuasion."†

66

66

Sur toute chose ne forcez jamais vos sujets changer de religion. Nulle puissance humaine ne peut forcer le retranchement impénétrable de la liberté du cœur. La force ne peut jamais persuader les hommes; elle ne fait que des hypocrites. Quand les rois se mêlunt de religion au lieu de la protégér, ils la mettent en servitude. Accordez a tous la tolerance civile, non en approuvant tout comme indifferent, maiz en souffrant avec patience, tout ce que Dieu souffre, et en tachunt de ramener les hommes par un douce persuasion.—Direction pour la conscience d'un Roi, par FENELON.

LECTURE IX.

ON THE GENIUS AND TENDENCY OF THE
PAPAL RELIGION.

THERE are two methods of ascertaining the tendencies of a principle, or class of principles: either by reasoning from the principles themselves, and stating their natural and legitimate operation: or by referring to the general temper and conduct of those who maintain them. It must be confessed, that there is considerable difficulty in the application of these tests. An opponent is in danger of selecting from the class in question, those which he may deem most obnoxious, and without sufficiently taking into account, the counteraction of other associated principles, he may ascribe to those which he has selected, the entire and exclusive formation of character. Hence he may attach moral consequences, which in point of fact were never practically drawn from them. On the other hand, the references to actual character, may proceed on so partial and limited a range of instances, that they may afford no characteristic specimen of the tendency of the controverted principles. The man may be better or worse than his creed. The circumstances in which he is placed, the effect of early culture, local connections and prevailing opinions-the operation of law, of manners, and of other systems of religion-may all unite in modifying and restraining the positive in

fluence of his own principles, and bring out a far different result, from what might have been previously anticipated.

In order to an accurate conclusion on the subject of tendency, our reasonings beforehand should. be proved to be natural and just; and we should consider how far the principles in question, are essential or accidental parts of the system; and ascertain the degree of importance attached to them by their abettors. Our references to character should clearly shew, that it is the moral effect of such principles; that it necessarily rises out of them; and that the induction is formed on an enlarged scale of observation. If for instance, I wished to prove the danger of sceptical opinions, by their practical tendencies, my reasonings would not be confuted by telling me, that some avowed infidels were honest and benevolent, sober and temperate. It would be enough for the argument, if I could shew that these qualities did not arise out of infidel principles; that they proceeded from considerations of interest, or were the effect of educational habits, which their subsequent scepticism had not been able to eradicate. If it could be made to appear, that the natural and uncounteracted influence of sceptical opinions was subversive of all personal and social virtue, and that the general effect on character was bad, so that vicious irregularities characterised the professors of infidelity, the reasonings in this case would be supported by the facts, and the facts would explain and illustrate the reasonings.

In ascertaining the genius and tendency of the papal religion, it must never be forgotten that there is a large portion of scriptural truth mingled with it, and that in numerous instances, its direct and positive influence is beneficially neutralised. This is particularly the case in our own country, where the rights of conscience are protected by