St. John Henry Newman on the City of the Antichrist

Lecture 3. The City of Antichrist

{77} THE Angel thus interprets to St. John the vision of the Great Harlot, the enchantress, who seduced the inhabitants of the earth. He says, “The woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” The city spoken of in these words is evidently Rome, which was then the seat of empire all over the earth,—which was supreme even in Judæa. We hear of the Romans all through the Gospels and Acts. Our Saviour was born when His mother, the Blessed Virgin, and Joseph, were brought up to Bethlehem to be taxed by the Roman governor. He was crucified under Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor. St. Paul was at various times protected by the circumstance of his being a Roman citizen; on the other hand, when he was seized and imprisoned, it was by the Roman governors, and at last he was sent to Rome itself to the emperor, and eventually martyred there, together with St. Peter. Thus the sovereignty of Rome, at the time when Christ and His Apostles preached and wrote, which is a matter of historical notoriety, is forced on our notice in the New Testament itself. It is undeniably meant by the Angel when he speaks of “the great city which reigneth over the earth.”

The connexion of Rome with the reign and exploits of Antichrist, is so often brought before us in the controversies of this day, that it may be well, after what I {78} have already had occasion to say on the subject of the last enemy of the Church, to consider now what Scripture prophecy says concerning Rome; which I shall attempt to do, as before, with the guidance of the early Fathers.

1.

Now let us observe what is said concerning Rome, in the passage which the Angel concludes in the words which I have quoted, and what we may deduce from it.

That great city is described under the image of a woman, cruel, profligate, and impious. She is described as arrayed in all worldly splendour and costliness, in purple and scarlet, in gold and precious stones, and pearls, as shedding and drinking the blood of the saints, till she was drunken with it. Moreover she is called by the name of “Babylon the Great,” to signify her power, wealth, profaneness, pride, sensuality, and persecuting spirit, after the pattern of that former enemy of the Church. I need not here relate how all this really answered to the character and history of Rome at the time St. John spoke of it. There never was a more ambitious, haughty, hard-hearted, and worldly people than the Romans; never any, for none else had ever the opportunity, which so persecuted the Church. Christians suffered ten persecutions at their hands, as they are commonly reckoned, and very horrible ones, extending over two hundred and fifty years. The day would fail to go through an account of the tortures they suffered from Rome; so that the Apostle’s description was as signally fulfilled afterwards as a prophecy, as it was accurate at the time as an historical notice.

This guilty city, represented by St. John as an abandoned woman, is said to be seated on “a scarlet-coloured {79} monster, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.” Here we are sent back by the prophetic description to the seventh chapter of Daniel, in which the four great empires of the world are shadowed out under the figure of four beasts, a lion, a bear, a leopard, and a nameless monster, “diverse” from the rest, “dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly;” “and it had ten horns.” This surely is the very same beast which St. John saw: the ten horns mark it. Now this fourth beast in Daniel’s vision is the Roman Empire; therefore “the beast,” on which the woman sat, is the Roman Empire. And this agrees very accurately with the actual position of things in history; for Rome, the mistress of the world, might well be said to sit upon, and be carried about triumphantly on that world which she had subdued and tamed, and made her creature. Further, the prophet Daniel explains the ten horns of the monster to be “ten kings that shall arise” out of this Empire; in which St. John agrees, saying, “The ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet, but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” Moreover in a former vision Daniel speaks of the Empire as destined to be “divided,” as “partly strong and partly broken.” [Dan. ii. 41, 42.] Further still, this Empire, the beast of burden of the woman, was at length to rise against her and devour her, as some savage animal might turn upon its keeper; and it was to do this in the time of its divided or multiplied existence. “The ten horns which thou sawest upon him, these shall hate” her, “and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh and burn her with fire.” Such was to be the end of the great city. Lastly, three of the kings, perhaps all, are said to be subdued by Antichrist, who {80} is to come up suddenly while they are in power; for such is the course of Daniel’s prophecy: “Another shall rise after them, and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings, and he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws; and they shall be given into his hands until a time, times, and the dividing of time.” This power, who was to rise upon the kings, is Antichrist; and I would have you observe how Rome and Antichrist stand towards each other in the prophecy. Rome is to fall before Antichrist rises; for the ten kings are to destroy Rome, and Antichrist is then to appear and supersede the ten kings. As far as we dare judge from the words, this seems clear. First, St. John says, “The ten horns shall hate and devour” the woman; secondly, Daniel says, “I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another little horn,” viz., Antichrist, “before whom” or by whom “there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots.”

2.

Now then, let us consider how far these prophecies have been fulfilled, and what seems to remain unfulfilled.

In the first place, the Roman Empire did break up, as foretold. It divided into a number of separate kingdoms, such as our own, France, and the like; yet it is difficult to number ten accurately and exactly. Next, though Rome certainly has been desolated in the most fearful and miserable way, yet it has not exactly suffered from ten parts of its former empire, but from barbarians who came down upon it from regions external to it; and, in the third place, it still exists as a city, whereas it was to be “desolated, devoured, and burned with fire.” {81} Fourthly, there is one point in the description of the ungodly city, which has hardly been fulfilled at all in the case of Rome. She had “a golden cup in her hand full of abominations,” and made “the inhabitants of the earth drunk with the wine of her fornication;” expressions which imply surely some seduction or delusion which she was enabled to practise upon the world, and which, I say, has not been fulfilled in the case of that great imperial city upon seven hills of which St. John spake. Here then are points which require some consideration.

I say, the Roman Empire has scarcely yet been divided into ten. The Prophet Daniel is conspicuous among the inspired writers for the clearness and exactness of his predictions; so much so, that some unbelievers, overcome by the truth of them, could only take refuge in the unworthy, and, at the same time, unreasonable and untenable supposition, that they were written after the events which they profess to foretell. But we have had no such exact fulfilment in history of the ten kings; therefore we must suppose that it is yet to come. With this accords the ancient notion, that they were to come at the end of the world, and last for but a short time, Antichrist coming upon them. There have, indeed, been approximations to that number, yet, I conceive, nothing more. Now observe how the actual state of things corresponds to the prophecy, and to the primitive interpretation of it. It is difficult to say whether the Roman Empire is gone or not; in one sense, it is gone, for it is divided into kingdoms; in another sense, it is not, for the date cannot be assigned at which it came to an end, and much might be said in various ways to show that it may be considered still existing, though in a mutilated and decayed state. But if this be so, and if {82} it is to end in ten vigorous kings, as Daniel says, then it must one day revive. Now observe, I say, how the prophetic description answers to this account of it. “The wild Beast,” that is, the Roman Empire, “the Monster that thou sawest, was and is not, and shall ascend out of the abyss, and go into perdition.” Again mention is made of “the Monster that was, and is not, and yet is.” Again we are expressly told that the ten kings and the Empire shall rise together; the kings appearing at the time of the monster’s resurrection, not during its languid and torpid state. “The ten kings … have received no kingdom as yet, but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” If, then, the Roman Empire is still prostrate, the ten kings have not come; and if the ten kings have not come, the destined destroyers of the woman, the full judgments upon Rome, have not yet come.

3.

Thus the full measure of judgment has not fallen upon Rome; yet her sufferings, and the sufferings of her Empire, have been very severe. St. Peter seems to predict them, in his First Epistle, as then impending. He seems to imply that our Lord’s visitation, which was then just occurring, was no local or momentary vengeance upon one people or city, but a solemn and extended judgment of the whole earth, though beginning at Jerusalem. “The time is come,” he says, “when judgment must begin at the house of God” (at the sacred city); “and, if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved,”—(i.e., the remnant who should go forth of Zion, according to the prophecy, that chosen seed in the Jewish Church which received Christ {83} when He came, and took the new name of Christians, and shot forth and grew far and wide into a fresh Church, or, in other words, the elect whom our Saviour speaks of as being involved in all the troubles and judgments of the devoted people, yet safely carried through); “if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear,”—the inhabitants of the world at large? [Note 1]

Here is intimation of the presence of a fearful scourge which was then going over all the ungodly world, beginning at apostate Jerusalem, and punishing it. Such was the case: vengeance first fell upon the once holy city, which was destroyed by the Romans: it proceeded next against the executioners themselves [Note 2]. The empire was disorganized, and broken to pieces by dissensions and insurrections, by plagues, famines, and earthquakes, while countless hosts of barbarians attacked it from the north and east, and portioned it out, and burned and pillaged Rome itself. The judgment, I say, which began at Jerusalem, steadily tracked its way for centuries round and round the world, till at length, with unerring aim, it smote the haughty mistress of the nations herself, the guilty woman seated upon the fourth monster which Daniel saw. I will mention one or two of these fearful inflictions.

Hosts of barbarians came down upon the civilized world, the Roman empire. One multitude—though multitude is a feeble word to describe them,—invaded France [Note 3], which was living in peace and prosperity under the shadow of Rome. They desolated and burned town and country. Seventeen provinces were made a desert. {84} Eight metropolitan cities were set on fire and destroyed. Multitudes of Christians perished even in the churches.

The fertile coast of Africa was the scene of another of these invasions [Note 4]. The barbarians gave no quarter to any who opposed them. They tortured their captives, of whatever age, rank, and sex, to force them to discover their wealth. They drove away the inhabitants of the cities to the mountains. They ransacked the churches. They destroyed even the fruit-trees, so complete was the desolation.

Of judgments in the course of nature, I will mention three out of a great number. One, an inundation from the sea in all parts of the Eastern empire. The water overflowed the coast for two miles inland, sweeping away houses and inhabitants along a line of some thousand miles. One great city (Alexandria) lost fifty thousand persons [Note 5].

The second, a series of earthquakes; some of which were felt all over the empire. Constantinople was thus shaken above forty days together. At Antioch 250,000 persons perished in another.

And in the third place a plague, which lasted (languishing and reviving) through the long period of fifty-two years. In Constantinople, during three months, there died daily 5,000, and at length 10,000 persons. I give these facts from a modern writer, who is neither favourable to Christianity, nor credulous in matters of historical testimony. In some countries the population was wasted away altogether, and has not recovered to this day [Note 6].

Such were the scourges by which the fourth monster {85} of Daniel’s vision was brought low, “the Lord God’s sore judgments, the sword, the famine, and the pestilence.” [Ezek. xiv. 21.] Such was the process by which “that which withholdeth,” (in St. Paul’s language) began to be “taken away;” though not altogether removed even now.

And, while the world itself was thus plagued, not less was the offending city which had ruled it. Rome was taken and plundered three several times. The inhabitants were murdered, made captives, or obliged to fly all over Italy. The gold and jewels of the queen of the nations, her precious silk and purple, and her works of art, were carried off or destroyed.

4.

These are great and notable events, and certainly form part of the predicted judgment upon Rome; at the same time they do not adequately fulfil the prophecy, which says expressly, on the one hand, that the ten portions of the Empire itself which had almost been slain, shall rise up against the city, and “make her desolate and burn her with fire,” which they have not yet done; and, on the other hand, that the city shall experience a total destruction, which has not yet befallen her, for she still exists. St. John’s words on the latter point are clear and determinate. “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hole of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird;” [Rev. xviii. 2.] words which would seem to refer us to the curse upon the literal Babylon; and we know how that curse was fulfilled. The prophet Isaiah had said, that in Babylon “wild beasts of the desert should lie there, and their houses be full of doleful creatures, and owls should dwell there, and satyrs,” or wild beasts “dance there.” [Isa. xiii. 21.] {86} And we know that all this has in fact happened to Babylon; it is a heap of ruins; no man dwells there; nay, it is difficult to say even where exactly it was placed, so great is the desolation. Such a desolation St. John seems to predict, concerning the guilty persecuting city we are considering; and in spite of what she has suffered, such a desolation has not come upon her yet. Again, “she shall be utterly burnt with fire, for strong is the Lord God, who judgeth her.” Surely this implies utter destruction, annihilation. Again, “a mighty Angel took up a stone, like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence, shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.”

To these passages I would add this reflection. Surely Rome is spoken of in Scripture as a more inveterate enemy of God and His saints even than Babylon, as the great pollution and bane of the earth: if then Babylon has been destroyed wholly, much more, according to all reasonable conjecture, will Rome be destroyed one day.

It may be farther observed that holy men in the early Church certainly thought that the barbarian invasions were not all that Rome was to receive in the way of vengeance, but that God would one day destroy it by the fury of the elements. “Rome,” says Pope Gregory, at a time when a barbarian conqueror had possession of the city, and all things seemed to threaten its destruction, “Rome shall not be destroyed by the nations, but shall consume away internally, worn out by storms of lightning, whirlwinds, and earthquakes.” [Note 7] In accordance with this is the prophecy ascribed to St. Malachi of Armagh, a mediæval Archbishop (A.D. 1130), which declares, “In the last persecution of the Holy Church, {87} Peter of Rome shall be on the throne, who shall feed his flock in many tribulations. When these are past, the city upon seven kills shall be destroyed, and tile awful Judge shall judge the people.” [Note 8]

5.

This is what may be said on the one side, but after all something may be said on the other; not indeed to show that the prophecy is already fully accomplished, for it certainly is not, but to show that, granting this, such accomplishment as has to come has reference, not to Rome, but to some other object or objects of divine vengeance. I shall explain my meaning under two heads.

First, why has Rome not been destroyed hitherto? how was it that the barbarians left it? Babylon sank under the avenger brought against it—Rome has not: why is this? for if there has been a something to procrastinate the vengeance due to Rome hitherto, peradventure that obstacle may act again and again, and stay the uplifted hand of divine wrath till the end come. The cause of this unexpected respite seems to be simply this, that when the barbarians came down, God had a people in that city. Babylon was a mere prison of the Church; Rome had received her as a guest. The Church dwelt in Rome, and while her children suffered in the heathen city from the barbarians, so again they were the life and the salt of that city where they suffered.

Christians understood this at the time, and availed themselves of their position. They remembered Abraham’s intercession for Sodom, and the gracious announcement made him, that, had there been ten righteous men therein, it would have been saved. {88}

When the city was worsted, threatened, and at length overthrown, the Pagans had cried out that Christianity was the cause of this. They said they had always flourished under their idols, and that these idols or devils (gods as they called them) were displeased with them for the numbers among them who had been converted to the faith of the Gospel, and had in consequence deserted them, given them over to their enemies, and brought vengeance upon them. On the other hand, they scoffed at the Christians, saying in effect, “Where is now your God? Why does He not save you? You are not better off than we;” they said, with the impenitent thief, “If thou be the Christ, save Thyself and us;” or with the multitude, “If He be the Son of God, let Him come down from the Cross.” This was during the time of one of the most celebrated bishops and doctors of the Church, St. Augustine, and he replied to their challenge. He replied to them, and to his brethren also, some of whom were offended and shocked that such calamities should have happened to a city which had become Christian [Note 9]. He pointed to the cities which had already sinned and been visited, and showed that they had altogether perished, whereas Rome was still preserved. Here, then, he said, was the very fulfilment of the promise of God, announced to Abraham;—for the sake of the Christians in it, Rome was chastised, not overthrown utterly.

Historical facts support St. Augustine’s view of things. God provided visibly, not only in His secret counsels, that the Church should be the salvation of the city. The fierce conqueror Alaric, who first came against it, exhorted his troops “to respect the Churches of the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, as holy and inviolable sanctuaries;” and he gave orders that a quantity of plate, consecrated {89} to St. Peter, should be removed into his Church from the place where it had been discovered [Note 10].

Again, fifty years afterwards, when Attila was advancing against the city, the Bishop of Rome of the day, St. Leo, formed one of a deputation of three, who went out to meet him, and was successful in arresting his purpose.

A few years afterwards, Genseric, the most savage of the barbarian conquerors, appeared before the defenceless city. The same fearless pontiff went out to meet him at the head of his clergy, and though he did not succeed in saving the city from pillage, yet he gained a promise that the unresisting multitude should be spared, the buildings protected from fire, and the captives from torture [Note 11].

Thus from the Goth, Hun, and Vandal did the Christian Church shield the guilty city in which she dwelt. What a wonderful rule of God’s providence is herein displayed which occurs daily!—the Church sanctities, yet suffers with, the world,—sharing its sufferings, yet lightening them. In the case before us, she has (if we may humbly say it) suspended, to this day, the vengeance destined to fall upon that city which was drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. That vengeance has never fallen; it is still suspended; nor can reason be given why Rome has not fallen under the rule of God’s general dealings with His rebellious creatures, and suffered (according to the prophecy) the fulness of God’s wrath begun in it, except that a Christian Church is still in that city, sanctifying it, interceding for it, saving it. We in England consider that the Christian Church there has in process of time become infected with the sins of Rome itself, and has learned to be ambitious and cruel after the fashion of those who possessed the place aforetimes. Yet, if it were what many would make it, if it were as reprobate as {90} heathen Rome itself, what stays the judgment long ago begun? why does not the Avenging Arm, which made its first stroke ages since, deal its second and its third, till the city has fallen? Why is not Rome as Sodom and Gomorrah, if there be no righteous men in it?

This then is the first remark I would make as to that fulfilment of the prophecy which is not yet come; perhaps through divine mercy, it may be procrastinated even to the end, and never be fulfilled. Of this we can know nothing one way or the other.

Secondly, let it be considered, that as Babylon is a type of Rome, and of the world of sin and vanity, so Rome in turn may be a type also, whether of some other city, or of a proud and deceiving world. The woman is said to be Babylon as well as Rome, and as she is something more than Babylon, namely, Rome, so again she may be something more than Rome, which is yet to come. Various great cities in Scripture are made, in their ungodliness and ruin, types of the world itself. Their end is described in figures, which in their fulness apply only to the end of the world; the sun and moon are said to fall, the earth to quake, and the stars to fall from heaven [Note 12]. The destruction of Jerusalem in our Lord’s prophecy is associated with the end of all things. As then their ruin prefigures a greater and wider judgment, so the chapters, on which I have been dwelling, may have a further accomplishment, not in Rome, but in the world itself, or some other great city to which we cannot at present apply them, or to all the great cities of the world together, and to the spirit that rules in them, their avaricious, luxurious, self-dependent, irreligious spirit. And in this sense is already fulfilled a portion of the chapter before us, which does not apply to heathen Rome;—I {91} mean the description of the woman as making men drunk with her sorceries and delusions; for such, surely, and nothing else than an intoxication, is that arrogant, ungodly, falsely liberal, and worldly spirit, which great cities make dominant in a country.

6.

To sum up what I have said. The question asked was, Is it not true (as is commonly said and believed among us) that Rome is mentioned in the Apocalypse, as having especial share in the events which will come at the end of the world by means, or after the time, of Antichrist? I answer this, that Rome’s judgments have come on her in great measure, when her Empire was taken from her; that her persecutions of the Church have been in great measure avenged, and the Scripture predictions concerning her fulfilled; that whether or not she shall be further judged depends on two circumstances, first, whether “the righteous men” in the city who saved her when her judgment first came, will not, through God’s great mercy, be allowed to save her still; next, whether the prophecy relates in its fulness to Rome or to some other object or objects of which Rome is a type. And further, I say, that if it is in the divine counsels that Rome should still be judged, this must be before Antichrist comes, because Antichrist comes upon and destroys the ten kings, and lasts but a short space, but it is the ten kings who are to destroy Rome. On the other hand, so far would seem to be clear, that the prophecy itself has not been fully accomplished, whatever we decide about Rome’s concern in it. The Roman Empire has not yet been divided into ten heads, nor has it yet risen against the woman, whomsoever she stands for, nor has the woman yet received her ultimate judgment. {92}

We are warned against sharing in her sins and in her punishment;—against being found, when the end comes, mere children of this world and of its great cities; with tastes, opinions, habits, such as are found in its cities; with a heart dependent on human society, and a reason moulded by it;—against finding ourselves at the last day, before our Judge, with all the low feelings, principles, and aims which the world encourages; with our thoughts wandering (if that be possible then), wandering after vanities; with thoughts which rise no higher than the consideration of our own comforts, or our gains; with a haughty contempt for the Church, her ministers, her lowly people; a love of rank and station, an admiration of the splendour and the fashions of the world, an affectation of refinement, a dependence upon our powers of reason, an habitual self-esteem, and an utter ignorance of the number and the heinousness of the sins which lie against us. If we are found thus, when the end comes, where, when the judgment is over, and the saints have gone up to heaven, and there is silence and darkness where all was so full of life and expectation, where shall we find ourselves then? And what good could the great Babylon do us then, though it were as immortal as we are immortal ourselves?

---

Notes

1. 1 Pet. iv. 17, 18. Vide also Jer. xxv. 28, 29. Ezek. ix. 6.

2. Vide Is. xlvii. 5, 6.

3. A.D. 407. Vide Gibbon, Hist. vol. v. chap. 30.

4. A.D. 430. Vide Gibbon, Hist. vol. vi. chap. 33.

5. A.D. 365. Ibid. vol. iv. chap. 26.

6. A.D. 540. Ibid. vol. vii. chap. 43.

7. Greg. Dial. ii. 15.

8. Vide Dr. Burton, Antiq. of Rome, p. 475.

9. August. de Urbis Excidio, vol. vi. p. 622. ed. Ben. de Civ. Dei, i. l-7.

10. Vide Gibbon, Hist. vol. v. chap. 31.

11. Ibid. vol. vi. chap. 35, 36.

12. Vide Isaiah xiii. 10, etc.

St. John Henry Newman on the Times of the Antichrist

Lecture 1. The Times of Antichrist

{44} THE Thessalonian Christians had supposed that the coming of Christ was near at hand. St. Paul writes to warn them against such an expectation. Not that he discountenances their looking out for our Lord’s coming,—the contrary; but he tells them that a certain event must come before it, and till that had arrived the end would not be. “Let no man deceive you by any means,” he says; “for that Day shall not come, except there come a falling away first,”—and he proceeds “and” except first “that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.”

As long as the world lasts, this passage of Scripture will be full of reverent interest to Christians. It is their duty ever to be watching for the advent of their Lord, to search for the signs of it in all that happens around them; and above all to keep in mind this great and awful sign of which St. Paul speaks to the Thessalonians. As our Lord’s first coming had its forerunner, so will the {45} second have its own. The first was “One more than a prophet,” the Holy Baptist: the second will be more than an enemy of Christ; it will be the very image of Satan, the fearful and hateful Antichrist. Of him, as described in prophecy, I propose to speak; and, in doing so, I shall follow the exclusive guidance of the ancient Fathers of the Church.

I follow the ancient Fathers, not as thinking that on such a subject they have the weight they possess in the instance of doctrines or ordinances. When they speak of doctrines, they speak of them as being universally held. They are witnesses to the fact of those doctrines having been received, not here or there, but everywhere. We receive those doctrines which they thus teach, not merely because they teach them, but because they bear witness that all Christians everywhere then held them. We take them as honest informants, but not as a sufficient authority in themselves, though they are an authority too. If they were to state these very same doctrines, but say, “These are our opinions: we deduced them from Scripture, and they are true,” we might well doubt about receiving them at their hands. We might fairly say, that we had as much right to deduce from Scripture as they had; that deductions of Scripture were mere opinions; that if our deductions agreed with theirs, that would be a happy coincidence, and increase our confidence in them; but if they did not, it could not be helped—we must follow our own light. Doubtless, no man has any right to impose his own deductions upon another, in matters of faith. There is an obvious obligation, indeed, upon the ignorant to submit to those who are better informed; and there is a fitness in the young submitting implicitly for a time to the teaching of their elders; but, beyond this, one man’s opinion is not better {46} than another’s. But this is not the state of the case as regards the primitive Fathers. They do not speak of their own private opinion; they do not say, “This is true, because we see it in Scripture”—about which there might be differences of judgment—but, “this is true, because in matter of fact it is held, and has ever been held, by all the Churches, down to our times, without interruption, ever since the Apostles:” where the question is merely one of testimony, viz., whether they had the means of knowing that it had been and was so held; for if it was the belief of so many and independent Churches at once, and that, on the ground of its being from the Apostles, doubtless it cannot but be true and Apostolic.

This, I say, is the mode in which the Fathers speak as regards doctrine; but it is otherwise when they interpret prophecy. In this matter there seems to have been no catholic, no formal and distinct, or at least no authoritative traditions; so that when they interpret Scripture they are for the most part giving, and profess to be giving, either their own private opinions, or vague, floating, and merely general anticipations. This is what might have been expected; for it is not ordinarily the course of Divine Providence to interpret prophecy before the event. What the Apostles disclosed concerning the future, was for the most part disclosed by them in private, to individuals—not committed to writing, not intended for the edifying of the body of Christ,—and was soon lost. Thus, in a few verses after the passage I have quoted, St. Paul says, “Remember ye not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” and he writes by hints and allusions, not speaking out. And it shows how little care was taken to discriminate and authenticate his prophetical intimations, that the Thessalonians {47} had adopted an opinion, that he had said—what in fact he had not said—that the Day of Christ was immediately at hand.

Yet, though the Fathers do not convey to us the interpretation of prophecy with the same certainty as they convey doctrine, yet, in proportion to their agreement, their personal weight, and the prevalence, or again the authoritative character of the opinions they are stating, they are to be read with deference; for, to say the least, they are as likely to be right as commentators now; in some respects more so, because the interpretation of prophecy has become in these times a matter of controversy and party. And passion and prejudice have so interfered with soundness of judgment, that it is difficult to say who is to be trusted to interpret it, or whether a private Christian may not be as good an expositor as those by whom the office has been assumed.

Now to turn to the passage in question, which I shall examine by arguments drawn from Scripture, without being solicitous to agree, or to say why I am at issue, with modern commentators: “That Day shall not come, except there come a falling away first.” Here the sign of the second Advent is said to be a certain frightful apostasy, and the manifestation of the man of sin, the son of perdition—that is, as he is commonly called, Antichrist. Our Saviour seems to add, that that sign will immediately precede Him, or that His coming will follow close upon it; for after speaking of “false prophets” and “false Christs,” “showing signs and wonders,” “iniquity abounding,” and “love waxing cold,” and the like, He adds, “When ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.” Again {48} He says, “When ye shall see the Abomination of Desolation … stand in the holy place … then let them that be in Judea flee into the mountains.” [Matt. xxiv. 16, 33.] Indeed, St. Paul also implies this, when he says that Antichrist shall be destroyed by the brightness of Christ’s coining.

First, then, I say, if Antichrist is to come immediately before Christ, and to be the sign of His coming, it is manifest that Antichrist is not come yet, but is still to be expected; for, else Christ would have come before now.

Further, it appears that the time of Antichrist’s tyranny will be three years and a half, or, as Scripture expresses it, “a time, and times, and a dividing of time,” or “forty-two months,”—which is an additional reason for believing he is not come; for, if so, he must have come quite lately, his time being altogether so short; that is, within the last three years, and this we cannot say he has.

Besides, there are two other circumstances of his appearance, which have not been fulfilled. First, a time of unexampled trouble. “Then shall be great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be; and except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved.” [Matt. xxiv. 21, 22.] This has not yet been. Next, the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world—”And this Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations, and then shall the end come.” [Matt. xxiv. 14.]

Now it may be objected to this conclusion, that St. Paul says, in the passage before us, that “the mystery of iniquity doth already work,” that is, even in his day, as if Antichrist had in fact come even then. But he would {49} seem to mean merely this, that in his day there were shadows and forebodings, earnests, and operative elements, of that which was one day to come in its fulness. Just as the types of Christ went before Christ, so the shadows of Antichrist precede him. In truth, every event of this world is a type of those that follow, history proceeding forward as a circle ever enlarging. The days of the Apostles typified the last days: there were false Christs, and risings, and troubles, and persecutions, and the judicial destruction of the Jewish Church. In like manner, every age presents its own picture of those still future events, which, and which alone, are the real fulfilment of the prophecy which stands at the head of all of them. Hence St. John says, “Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that the Antichrist shall come, even now are there many Antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.” [1 John ii. 18.] Antichrist was come, and was not come; it was, and it was not the last time. In the sense in which the Apostles’ day might be called the “last time,” and the end of the world, it was also the time of Antichrist.

A second objection may be made as follows: St. Paul says, “Now ye know what withholdeth, that he (Antichrist) might be revealed in his time.” Here a something is mentioned as keeping back the manifestation of the enemy of truth. He proceeds: “He that now withholdeth, will withhold, until he be taken out of the way.” Now this restraining power was in early times considered to be the Roman Empire, but the Roman Empire (it is argued) has long been taken out of the way; it follows that Antichrist has long since come. In answer to this objection, I would grant that he “that withholdeth,” or “hindereth,” means the power of Rome, for all the ancient {50} writers so speak of it. And I grant that as Rome, according to the prophet Daniel’s vision, succeeded Greece, so Antichrist succeeds Rome, and the Second Coming succeeds Antichrist [Note 1]. But it does not hence follow that Antichrist is come: for it is not clear that the Roman Empire is gone. Far from it: the Roman Empire in the view of prophecy, remains even to this day. Rome had a very different fate from the other three monsters mentioned by the Prophet, as will be seen by his description of it. “Behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns.” [Dan. vii. 7.] These ten horns, an Angel informed him, “are ten kings that shall rise out of this kingdom” of Rome. As, then, the ten horns belonged to the fourth beast, and were not separate from it, so the kingdoms, into which the Roman Empire was to be divided, are but the continuation and termination of that Empire itself,—which lasts on, and in some sense lives in the view of prophecy, however we decide the historical question. Consequently, we have not yet seen the end of the Roman Empire. “That which withholdeth” still exists, up to the manifestation of its ten horns; and till it is removed, Antichrist will not come. And from the midst of those horns he will arise, as the same Prophet informs us: “I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another little horn; … and behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.”

Up to the time, then, when Antichrist shall actually appear, there has been and will be a continual effort to manifest him to the world on the part of the powers {51} of evil. The history of the Church is the history of that long birth. “The mystery of iniquity doth already work,” says St. Paul. “Even now there are many Antichrists,” [1 John ii. 18.] says St. John,—”every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God; and this is that spirit of the Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come, and even now already is it in the world.” [1 John iv. 3.] It has been at work ever since, from the time of the Apostles, though kept under by him that “withholdeth.” At this very time there is a fierce struggle, the spirit of Antichrist attempting to rise, and the political power in those countries which are prophetically Roman, firm and vigorous in repressing it. And in fact, we actually have before our eyes, as our fathers also in the generation before us, a fierce and lawless principle everywhere at work—a spirit of rebellion against God and man, which the powers of government in each country can barely keep under with their greatest efforts. Whether this which we witness be that spirit of Antichrist [Note 2], which is one day at length to be let loose, this ambitious spirit, the parent of all heresy, schism, sedition, revolution, and war—whether this be so or not, at least we know from prophecy that the present framework of society and government, as far as it is the representative of Roman powers, is that which withholdeth, and Antichrist is that which will rise when this restraint fails.

It has been more or less implied in the foregoing remarks, that Antichrist is one man, an individual, not a power or a kingdom. Such surely is the impression left on the mind by the Scripture notices concerning him, after taking fully into account the figurative character {52} of prophetical language. Consider these passages together, which describe him, and see whether we must not so conclude. First, the passage in St. Paul’s Epistle: “That day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, who is the adversary and rival of all that is called God or worshipped; so that he sitteth as God in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God … Then shall that Wicked One be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming … whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders.”

Next, in the prophet Daniel: “Another shall rise after them, and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times, and the dividing of time. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.” Again: “And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished … Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the Desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces, and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.” [Dan. vii; xi.] Let it be observed, that Daniel elsewhere describes other kings, and that the event has shown them {53} certainly to be individuals,—for instance, Xerxes, Darius, and Alexander.

And in like manner St. John: “There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things, and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His Name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them; and power was given him over all kindreds and tongues and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” [Rev. xiii.]

Further, that by Antichrist is meant some one person, is made probable by the anticipations which, as I have said, have already occurred in history, of the fulfilment of the prophecy. Individual men have arisen actually answering in a great measure to the above descriptions; and this circumstance creates a probability, that the absolute and entire fulfilment which is to come will be in an individual also. The most remarkable of these shadows of the destined scourge appeared before the time of the Apostles, between them and the age of Daniel, viz., the heathen king Antiochus, of whom we read in the books of Maccabees. This instance is the more to the purpose, because he is actually described, (as we suppose) by Daniel, in another part of his prophecy, in terms which seem also to belong to Antichrist, and, as belonging, imply that Antiochus actually was what he seems to be, a type of that more fearful future enemy of the Church. This Antiochus was the savage persecutor of the Jews, in their latter times, as Antichrist {54} will be of the Christians. A few passages from the Maccabees will show you what he was. St. Paul in the text speaks of an Apostasy, and then of Antichrist as following upon it; and thus is the future of the Christian Church typified in the past Jewish history. “In those days went there out of Israel wicked men, who persuaded many, saying, Let us go and make a covenant with the heathen that are round about us: for since we departed from them, we have had much sorrow. So this device pleased them well. Then certain of the people were so forward herein, that they went to the king, who gave them licence to do after the ordinances of the heathen; whereupon they built a place of exercise at Jerusalem, according to the custom of the heathen; and made themselves uncircumcised, and forsook the holy covenant, and joined themselves to the heathen, and were sold to do mischief.” Here was the Falling away. After this introduction the Enemy of truth appears. “After that Antiochus had smitten Egypt, he returned again, … and went up against Israel and Jerusalem with a great multitude, and entered proudly into the sanctuary, and took away the golden altar, and the candlestick of light and all the vessels thereof, and the table of the shew-bread, and the pouring vessels, and the vials, and the censers of gold, and the veil, and the crowns, and the golden ornaments that were before the temple; all which he pulled off. And when he had taken all away, he went into his own land, having made a great massacre, and spoken very proudly.” After this he set fire to Jerusalem, “and pulled down the houses and walls thereof on every side … Then built they the city of David with a great and strong wall, … and they put therein a sinful nation, wicked men, and fortified themselves therein.” Next, “King Antiochus wrote {55} to his whole kingdom, that all should be one people, and every one should leave his laws: so all the heathen agreed according to the commandment of the king. Yea, many also of the Israelites consented to his religion, and sacrificed unto idols, and profaned the sabbath.” After this he forced these impieties upon the chosen people. All were to be put to death who would not “profane the sabbath and festival days, and pollute the sanctuary and holy people, and set up altars, and groves, and chapels of idols, and sacrifice swine’s flesh and unclean beasts,” and “leave their children uncircumcised.” At length he set up an idol, or, in the words of the history, “the Abomination of Desolation upon the altar, and builded idol altars throughout the cities of Juda on every side … And when they had rent in pieces the books of the law which they found, they burnt them with fire.” It is added, “Howbeit many in Israel were fully resolved and confirmed in themselves not to eat any unclean thing, wherefore they chose rather to die … and there was very great wrath upon Israel.” [1 Mac. i.] Here we have presented to us some of the lineaments of Antichrist, who will be such, and worse than such, as Antiochus.

The history of the apostate emperor Julian, who lived between 300 and 400 years after Christ, furnishes us with another approximation to the predicted Antichrist, and an additional reason for thinking he will be one person, not a kingdom, power, or the like.

And so again does the false prophet Mahomet, who propagated his imposture about 600 years after Christ came.

Lastly, that Antichrist is one individual man, not a power,—not a mere ethical spirit, or a political system, not a dynasty, or succession of rulers,—was the universal {56} tradition of the early Church. “We must say,” writes St. Jerome upon Daniel, “what has been handed down to us by all ecclesiastical writers, that, in the end of the world, when the Roman Empire is to be destroyed, there will be ten kings, to divide the Roman territory between them, and that an eleventh will rise up, a small king, who will subdue three of the ten, and thereupon receive the submission of the other seven. It is said that ‘the Horn had eyes, as the eyes of a man,’ lest we should, as some have thought, suppose him to be the evil spirit, or a demon, whereas he is one man, in whom Satan shall dwell bodily. ‘And a mouth speaking great things;’ for he is the man of sin, the son of perdition, so that he dares to ‘sit in the Temple of God, making himself as if God.’ ‘The beast has been slain, and his carcase has perished;’ since Antichrist blasphemes in that united Roman Empire, all its kingdoms are at one and the same time to be abolished, and there shall be no earthly kingdom, but the society of the saints, and the coming of the triumphant Son of God.” And Theodoret: “Having spoken of Antiochus Epiphanes, the prophet passes from the figure to the Antitype; for the Antitype of Antiochus is Antichrist, and the figure of Antichrist is Antiochus. As Antiochus compelled the Jews to act impiously, so the Man of Sin, the son of perdition, will make every effort for the seduction of the pious, by false miracles, and by force, and by persecution. As the Lord says, ‘Then will be great tribulation, such as never was from the beginning of the world till this time, nor ever shall be.” [Note 3]

What I have said upon this subject may be summed up as follows:—that the coming of Christ will be immediately preceded by a very awful and unparalleled {57} outbreak of evil, called by St. Paul an Apostasy, a falling away, in the midst of which a certain terrible Man of sin and Child of perdition, the special and singular enemy of Christ, or Antichrist, will appear; that this will be when revolutions prevail, and the present framework of society breaks to pieces; and that at present the spirit which he will embody and represent is kept under by “the powers that be,” but that on their dissolution, he will rise out of their bosom and knit them together again in his own evil way, under his own rule, to the exclusion of the Church.

It would be out of place to say more than this at present. I will but insist on one particular circumstance contained in St. Paul’s announcement which I have already in part commented on.

It is said there will “come a falling away, and the man of sin will be revealed.” In other words, the Man of Sin is born of an Apostasy, or at least comes into power through an apostasy, or is preceded by an apostasy, or would not be except for an apostasy. So says the inspired text: now observe, how remarkably the course of Providence, as seen in history, has commented on this prediction.

First, we have a comment in the instance of Antiochus previous to the actual events contemplated in the prophecy. The Israelites, or at least great numbers of them, put off their own sacred religion, and then the enemy was allowed to come in.

Next the apostate emperor Julian, who attempted to overthrow the Church by craft, and introduce paganism back again: it is observable that he was preceded, nay, he was nurtured, by heresy; by that first great heresy which disturbed the peace and purity of the Church. {58} About forty years before he became emperor, arose the pestilent Arian heresy which denied that Christ was God. It ate its way among the rulers of the Church like a canker, and what with the treachery of some, and the mistakes of others, at one time it was all but dominant throughout Christendom. The few holy and faithful men, who witnessed for the Truth, cried out, with awe and terror at the apostasy, that Antichrist was coming. They called it the “forerunner of Antichrist.” [Note 4] And true, his Shadow came. Julian was educated in the bosom of Arianism by some of its principal upholders. His tutor was that Eusebius from whom its partizans took their name; and in due time he fell away to paganism, became a hater and persecutor of the Church, and was cut off before he had reigned out the brief period which will be the real Antichrist’s duration.

And thirdly, another heresy arose, a heresy in its consequences far more lasting and far-spreading; it was of a twofold character; with two heads, as I may call them, Nestorianism and Eutychianism, apparently opposed to each other, yet acting towards a common end: both in one way or other denied the truth of Christ’s gracious incarnation, and tended to destroy the faith of Christians not less certainly, though more insidiously, than the heresy of Arius. It spread through the East and through Egypt, corrupting and poisoning those Churches which had once, alas! been the most flourishing, the earliest abodes and strongholds of revealed truth. Out of this heresy, or at least by means of it, the impostor Mahomet sprang, and formed his creed. Here is another especial Shadow of Antichrist. {59}

These instances give us warning:—Is the enemy of Christ, and His Church, to arise out of a certain special falling away from GOD? And is there no reason to fear that some such Apostasy is gradually preparing, gathering, hastening on in this very day? For is there not at this very time a special effort made almost all over the world, that is, every here and there, more or less in sight or out of sight, in this or that place, but most visibly or formidably in its most civilized and powerful parts, an effort to do without Religion? Is there not an opinion avowed and growing, that a nation has nothing to do with Religion; that it is merely a matter for each man’s own conscience?—which is all one with saying that we may let the Truth fail from the earth without trying to continue it in and on after our time. Is there not a vigorous and united movement in all countries to cast down the Church of Christ from power and place? Is there not a feverish and ever-busy endeavour to get rid of the necessity of Religion in public transactions? for example, an attempt to get rid of oaths, under a pretence that they are too sacred for affairs of common life, instead of providing that they be taken more reverently and more suitably? an attempt to educate without Religion?—that is, by putting all forms of Religion together, which comes to the same thing;—an attempt to enforce temperance, and the virtues which flow from it, without Religion, by means of Societies which are built on mere principles of utility? an attempt to make expedience, and not truth, the end and the rule of measures of State and the enactments of Law? an attempt to make numbers, and not the Truth, the ground of maintaining, or not maintaining, this or that creed, as if we had any reason whatever in Scripture for thinking that the many will be in the right, and the {60} few in the wrong? An attempt to deprive the Bible of its one meaning to the exclusion of all other, to make people think that it may have an hundred meanings all equally good, or, in other words, that it has no meaning at all, is a dead letter, and may be put aside? an attempt to supersede Religion altogether, as far as it is external or objective, as far as it is displayed in ordinances, or can be expressed by written words,—to confine it to our inward feelings, and thus, considering how variable, how evanescent our feelings are, an attempt, in fact, to destroy Religion?

Surely, there is at this day a confederacy of evil, marshalling its hosts from all parts of the world, organizing itself, taking its measures, enclosing the Church of Christ as in a net, and preparing the way for a general Apostasy from it. Whether this very Apostasy is to give birth to Antichrist, or whether he is still to be delayed, as he has already been delayed so long, we cannot know; but at any rate this Apostasy, and all its tokens and instruments, are of the Evil One, and savour of death. Far be it from any of us to be of those simple ones who are taken in that snare which is circling around us! Far be it from us to be seduced with the fair promises in which Satan is sure to hide his poison! Do you think he is so unskilful in his craft, as to ask you openly and plainly to join him in his warfare against the Truth? No; he offers you baits to tempt you. He promises you civil liberty; he promises you equality; he promises you trade and wealth; he promises you a remission of taxes; he promises you reform. This is the way in which he conceals from you the kind of work to which he is putting you; he tempts you to rail against your rulers and superiors; he does so himself, and induces you to imitate him; or he promises you illumination, {61}—he offers you knowledge, science, philosophy, enlargement of mind. He scoffs at times gone by; he scoffs at every institution which reveres them. He prompts you what to say, and then listens to you, and praises you, and encourages you. He bids you mount aloft. He shows you how to become as gods. Then he laughs and jokes with you, and gets intimate with you; he takes your hand, and gets his fingers between yours, and grasps them, and then you are his.

Shall we Christians allow ourselves to have lot or part in this matter? Shall we, even with our little finger, help on the Mystery of Iniquity, which is travailing for birth, and convulsing the earth with its pangs? “O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united.” “What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye separate,” … lest you be workers together with God’s enemies, and be opening the way for the Man of Sin, the son of perdition.

Notes

1. Chrysostom in loco.

2. [ο anomos].

3. Jerom. in Dan. vii.; Theodor. in Dan. xi.

4.[prodromos ‘Antichristou].—”Now is the Apostasy; for men have fallen away from the right faith. This then is the Apostasy, and the enemy must be looked out for.”—Cyril. Catech., 15, n. 9.

St. John Henry Newman on the Religion of Antichrist

Lecture 2. The Religion of Antichrist

{62} ST. JOHN tells us that “every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is that spirit of Antichrist, which even now already is in the world.” It was the characteristic of Antichrist, that he should openly deny our Lord Jesus Christ to be the Son of God come in the flesh from heaven. So exactly and fully was this description to answer to him, that to deny Christ might be suitably called the spirit of Antichrist; and the deniers of Him might be said to have the spirit of Antichrist, to be like Antichrist, to be Antichrists. The same thing is stated in a former chapter. “Who is the Liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? he is the Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father;” [1 John ii. 22, 23.] from which words, moreover, it would appear that Antichrist will be led on from rejecting the Son of God to the rejecting of God altogether, either by implication or practically.

I shall now make some further observations on the characteristic marks of the predicted enemy of the Church; and, as before, I shall confine myself to the interpretations of Scripture given by the early Fathers.

My reason for doing so is simply this,—that on so difficult a subject as unfulfilled prophecy, I really can {63} have no opinion of my own, nor indeed is it desirable I should have, or at least that I should put it forward in any formal way. The opinion of any one person, even if he were the most fit to form one, could hardly be of any authority, or be worth putting forward by itself; whereas the judgment and views of the early Church claim and attract our special regard, because for what we know they may be in part derived from traditions of the Apostles, and because they are put forward far more consistently and unanimously than those of any other set of teachers. Thus they have at least greater claims on our attention than those of other writers, be their claims little or great; if they are little, those of others are still less. The only really strong claim which can be made on our belief, is the clear fulfilment of the prophecy. Did we see all the marks of the prophecy satisfactorily answered in the past history of the Church, then we might dispense with authority in the parties setting the proof before us. This condition, however, can hardly be satisfied, because the date of Antichrist comes close upon the coming of Christ in judgment, and therefore the event will not have happened under such circumstances as to allow of being appealed to. Nor indeed is any history producible in which are fulfilled all the marks of Antichrist clearly, though some are fulfilled here and there. Nothing then is left us, (if we are to take up any opinion at all,—if we are to profit, as Scripture surely intends, by its warnings concerning the evil which is to come,) but to go by the judgment of the Fathers, whether that be of special authority in this matter or not. To them therefore I have had recourse already, and now shall have recourse again. To continue, then, the subject with the early Fathers as my guides. {64}

1.

It seems clear that St. Paul and St. John speak of the same enemy of the Church, from the similarity of their descriptions. They both say, that the spirit itself was already at work in their day. “That spirit of the Antichrist,” says St. John, “is now already in the world.” “The mystery of iniquity doth already work,” says St. Paul. And they both describe the enemy as characterized by the same especial sin, open infidelity. St. John says, that “he is the Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son;” while St. Paul speaks of him in like manner as “the adversary and rival of all that is called God, or worshipped;” that “he sitteth as God in the Temple of God, setting forth himself that he is God.” In both these passages, the same blasphemous denial of God and religion is described; but St. Paul adds, in addition, that he will oppose all existing religion, true or false, “all that is called God, or worshipped.”

Two other passages of Scripture may be adduced, predicting the same reckless impiety; one from the eleventh chapter of Daniel: “The king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished … Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the Desire of women, nor regard any god—for he shall magnify himself above all.”

The other passage is faintly marked with any prophetic allusion in itself, except that all our Saviour’s sayings have a deep meaning, and the Fathers take this in particular to have such. “I am come in My Father’s Name, and ye receive Me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.” [John v. 43.] This they consider {65} to be a prophetic allusion to Antichrist, whom the Jews were to mistake for the Christ. He is to come “in His own name.” Not from God, as even the Son of God came, who if any might have come in the power of His essential divinity, not in God’s Name, not with any pretence of a mission from Him, but in his own name, by a blasphemous assumption of divine power, thus will Antichrist come.

To the above passages may be added those which speak generally of the impieties of the last age of the world, impieties which we may believe will usher in and be completed in Antichrist:—

“Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased … Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried: but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.” [Dan. xii. 4, 10.] “In the last days perilous times shall come, for men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof:” [2 Tim. iii. 2-5.] “scoffers walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of His coming?” [2 Pet. iii. 3, 4.] “despising government, presumptuous … self-willed, not afraid to speak evil of dignities … promising men liberty, while themselves the servants of corruption:” [2 Pet. ii. 10, 19.] and the like.

2.

I just now made mention of the Jews: it may be well {66} then to state what was held in the early Church concerning Antichrist’s connexion with them.

Our Lord foretold that many should come in His name, saying, “I am Christ.” It was the judicial punishment of the Jews, as of all unbelievers in one way or another, that, having rejected the true Christ, they should take up with a false one; and Antichrist will be the complete and perfect seducer, towards whom all who were previous are approximations, according to the words just now quoted, “If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.” To the same purport are St. Paul’s words after describing Antichrist; “whose coming,” he says, “is … with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, because they received not the love of the Truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned who believed not the Truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

Hence, considering that Antichrist would pretend to be the Messiah, it was of old the received notion that he was to be of Jewish race and to observe the Jewish rites.

Further, St. Paul says that Antichrist should “sit in the Temple of God;” that is, according to the earlier Fathers, in the Jewish Temple. Our Saviour’s own words may be taken to support this notion, because He speaks of “the Abomination of Desolation” (which, whatever other meanings it might have, in its fulness denotes Antichrist) “standing in the holy place.” Further, the persecution of Christ’s witnesses which Antichrist will cause, is described by St. John as taking place in Jerusalem. “Their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, (which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt,) where also our Lord was crucified.” {67}

Now here a remark may be made. At first sight, I suppose, we should not consider that there was much evidence from the Sacred Text for Antichrist taking part with the Jews, or having to do with their Temple. It is, then, a very remarkable fact, that the apostate emperor Julian, who was a type and earnest of the great enemy, should, as he did, have taken part with the Jews, and set about building their Temple. Here the history is a sort of comment on the prophecy, and sustains and vindicates those early interpretations of it which I am reviewing. Of course I must be understood to mean, and a memorable circumstance it is, that this belief of the Church that Antichrist should be connected with the Jews, was expressed long before Julian’s time, and that we still possess the works in which it is contained. In fact we have the writings of two Fathers, both Bishops and martyrs of the Church, who lived at least one hundred and fifty years before Julian, and less than one hundred years after St. John. They both distinctly declare Antichrist’s connexion with the Jews.

The first of them, Irenæus, speaks as follows: “In the Temple which is at Jerusalem the adversary will sit, endeavouring to show himself to be the Christ.”

And the second, Hippolytus: “Antichrist will be he who shall resuscitate the kingdom of the Jews.” [Note 1]

3.

Next let us ask, Will Antichrist profess any sort of religion at all? Neither true God nor false god will he worship: so far is clear, and yet something more, and {68} that obscure, is told us. Indeed, as far as the prophetic accounts go, they seem at first sight incompatible with each other. Antichrist is to “exalt himself over all that is called God or worshipped.” He will set himself forcibly against idols and idolatry, as the early writers agree in declaring. Yet in the book of Daniel we read, “In his estate shall he honour the god of forces; and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold and silver, and with precious stones and pleasant things. Thus shall he do in the most strongholds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory.” [Dan. xi. 38, 39.] What is meant by the words translated “god of forces,” and afterwards called “a strange god,” is quite hidden from us, and probably will be so till the event; but anyhow some sort of false worship is certainly predicted as the mark of Antichrist, with this prediction the contrary way, that he shall set himself against all idols, as well as against the true God. Now it is not at all extraordinary that there should be this contrariety in the prediction, for we know generally that infidelity leads to superstition, and that the men most reckless in their blasphemy are cowards also as regards the invisible world. They cannot be consistent if they would. But let me notice here a remarkable coincidence, which is contained in the history of that type or shadow of the final apostasy which scared the world some forty or fifty years ago,—a coincidence between actual events and prophecy sufficient to show us that the apparent contradiction in the latter may easily be reconciled, though beforehand we may not see how; sufficient to remind us that the all-watchful eye, and the all-ordaining hand of God is still over the world, and that the seeds, sown in prophecy above two thousand years since, {69} are not dead, but from time to time, by blade and tender shoot, give earnest of the future harvest. Surely the world is impregnated with the elements of preternatural evil, which ever and anon, in unhealthy seasons, give lowering and muttering tokens of the wrath to come!

In that great and famous nation over against us, once great for its love of Christ’s Church, since memorable for the deeds of blasphemy, which leads me here to mention it, and now, when it should be pitied and prayed for, made unhappily, in too many respects, our own model—followed when it should be condemned, and admired when it should be excused,—in the Capital of that powerful and celebrated nation, there took place, as we all well know, within the last fifty years, an open apostasy from Christianity; nor from Christianity only, but from every kind of worship which might retain any semblance or pretence of the great truths of religion. Atheism was absolutely professed;—and yet in spite of this, it seems a contradiction in terms to say it, a certain sort of worship, and that, as the prophet expresses it, “a strange worship,” was introduced. Observe what this was.

I say, they avowed on the one hand Atheism. They prevailed upon a wretched man, whom they had forced upon the Church as an Archbishop, to come before them in public and declare that there was no God, and that what he had hitherto taught was a fable. They wrote up over the burial-places that death was an eternal sleep. They closed the churches, they seized and desecrated the gold and silver plate belonging to them, turning, like Belshazzar, those sacred vessels to the use of their impious revellings; they formed mock processions, clad in priestly garments, and singing profane hymns. They annulled the divine ordinance of marriage, resolving it {70} into a mere civil contract to be made and dissolved at pleasure. These things are but a part of their enormities.

On the other hand, after having broken away from all restraint as regards God and man, they gave a name to that reprobate state itself into which they had thrown themselves, and exalted it, that very negation of religion, or rather that real and living blasphemy, into a kind of god. They called it LIBERTY, and they literally worshipped it as a divinity. It would almost be incredible, that men who had flung off all religion should be at the pains to assume a new and senseless worship of their own devising, whether in superstition or in mockery, were not events so recent and so notorious. After abjuring our Lord and Saviour, and blasphemously declaring Him to be an impostor, they proceeded to decree, in the public assembly of the nation, the adoration of Liberty and Equality as divinities: and they appointed festivals besides in honour of Reason, the Country, the Constitution, and the Virtues. Further, they determined that tutelary gods, even dead men, may be canonized, consecrated, and worshipped; and they enrolled in the number of these some of the most notorious infidels and profligates of the last century. The remains of the two principal of these were brought in solemn procession into one of their churches, and placed upon the holy altar itself; incense was offered to them, and the assembled multitude bowed down in worship before one of them—before what remained on earth of an inveterate enemy of Christ.

Now, I do not mention all this as considering it the fulfilment of the prophecy, nor, again, as if the fulfilment when it comes will be in this precise way, but merely to point out, what the course of events has shown to us in {71} these latter times, that there are ways of fulfilling sacred announcements that seem at first sight contradictory,—that men may oppose every existing worship, true and false, and yet take up a worship of their own from pride, wantonness, policy, superstition, fanaticism, or other reasons.

And further, let it be remarked, that there was a tendency in the infatuated people I have spoken of, to introduce the old Roman democratic worship, as if further to show us that Rome, the fourth monster of the prophet’s vision, is not dead. They even went so far as to restore the worship of one of the Roman divinities (Ceres) by name, raised a statue to her, and appointed a festival in her honour. This indeed was inconsistent with exalting themselves “above all that is called god;” but I mention the particular fact, as I have said, not as throwing light upon the prophecy, but to show that the spirit of old Rome has not passed from the world, though its name is almost extinct.

Still further, it is startling to observe, that the former Apostate, in the early times, the Emperor Julian, he too was engaged in bringing back Roman Paganism.

Further still, let it be observed that Antiochus too, the Antichrist before Christ, the persecutor of the Jews, he too signalized himself in forcing the Pagan worship upon them, introducing it even into the Temple.

We know not what is to come; but this we may safely say, that, improbable as it is that Paganism should ever be publicly restored and enforced by authority for any period, however short, even three years and a half, yet it is far less improbable now than it was fifty years ago, before the event occurred which I have referred to. Who would not have been thought a madman or idiot, before that period, who had conjectured such a portentous {72} approximation towards Paganism as actually then took place?

4.

Now let us recur to the ancient Fathers, and see whether their further anticipations do not run parallel to the events which have since happened.

Antichrist, as they considered, will come out of the Roman Empire just upon its destruction;—that is, the Roman Empire will in its last days divide itself into ten parts, and the Enemy will come up suddenly out of it upon these ten, and subdue three of them, or all of them perhaps, and (as the prophet continues) “shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws, and they shall be given into His hand until a time, and times, and the dividing of time.” [Dan. vii. 25.] Now it is very observable, that one of the two early Fathers whom I have already cited, Hippolytus, expressly says that the ten states which will at length appear, though kingdoms, shall also be democracies. I say this is observable, considering the present state of the world, the tendency of things in this day towards democracy, and the instance which has been presented to us of democracy within the last fifty years, in those occurrences in France to which I have already referred.

Another expectation of the early Church was, that the Roman monster, after remaining torpid for centuries, would wake up at the end of the world, and be restored in all its laws and forms; and this, too, considering those same recent events to which I have referred, is certainly worth noticing also. The same Father, who anticipates the coming of democracies, expressly deduces from a passage in the xiiith chapter of the Apocalypse, that {73} “the system of Augustus, who was founder of the Roman Empire, shall be adopted and established by him (Antichrist), in order to his own aggrandizement and glory. This is the fourth monster whose head was wounded and healed; in that the empire was destroyed and came to nought, and was divided into ten diadems. But at this time Antichrist, as being an unscrupulous villain, will heal and restore it; so that it will be active and vigorous once more through the system which he establishes.” [Dan. vii. 27, 49.]

I will but notice one other expectation falling in with the foregoing notion of the re-establishment of Roman power, entertained by the two Fathers whom I have been quoting; viz., one concerning the name of Antichrist, as spoken of in the xiiith chapter of the Revelation: “Here is wisdom,” says the inspired text; “let him that hath understanding count his number, for it is the number of a man, and his number is six hundred threescore and six.” Both Irenæus and Hippolytus give a name, the letters of which together in Greek make up this number, characteristic of the position of Antichrist as the head of the Roman Empire in its restored state, viz., the word Latinus, or the Latin king.

Irenæus speaks as follows: “Expect that the empire will first be divided into ten kings; then while they are reigning and beginning to settle and aggrandize themselves, suddenly one will come and claim the kingdom, and frighten them, having a name which contains the predicted number (666); him recognize as the Abomination of Desolation.” Then he goes on to mention, together with two other words, the name of Lateinos as answering to the number, and says of it, “This is very probable, since it is the name of the last empire;—for the Latins” (that is, the Romans) “are now in power.” [Note 2] {74}

And Hippolytus: “Since … the wound of the first monster was healed … and it is plain that the Latins are still in power, therefore he is called the Latin King (Latinus), the name passing from an empire to an individual.” [Note 3]

Whether this anticipation will be fulfilled or not, we cannot say. I only mention it as showing the belief of the Fathers in the restoration and re-establishment of the Roman Empire, which has certainly since their day been more than once attempted.

It seems then, on the whole, that, as far as the testimony of the early Church goes, Antichrist will be an open blasphemer, opposing himself to every existing worship, true and false,—a persecutor, a patron of the Jews, and a restorer of their worship, and, further, the author of a novel kind of worship. Moreover, he will appear suddenly, at the very end of the Roman Empire, which once was, and now is dormant; that he will knit it into one, and engraft his Judaism and his new worship (a sort of Paganism, it may be) upon the old discipline of Cæsar Augustus; that in consequence he will earn the title of the Latin or Roman King, as best expressive of his place and character; lastly, that he will pass away as suddenly as he came.

5.

Now concerning this, I repeat, I do not wish to pronounce how far the early Church was right or wrong in these anticipations, though events since have seriously tended to strengthen its general interpretations of Scripture prophecy.

It may be asked, however, What practical use is there in speaking of these things, if they be doubtful? {75}

I answer, first, that it is not unprofitable to bear in mind that we are still under what may be called a miraculous system. I do not mean to maintain that literal miracles are taking place now every day, but that our present state is a portion of a providential course, which began in miracle, and, at least at the end of the world, if not before, will end in miracle. The particular expectations above detailed may be right or wrong; yet an Antichrist, whoever and whatever he be, is to come; marvels are to come; the old Roman Empire is not extinct; Satan, if bound, is bound but for a season; the contest of good and evil is not ended. I repeat it, in the present state of things, when the great object of education is supposed to be the getting rid of things supernatural, when we are bid to laugh and jeer at believing everything we do not see, are told to account for everything by things known and ascertained, and to assay every statement by the touchstone of experience, I must think that this vision of Antichrist, as a supernatural power to come, is a great providential gain, as being a counterpoise to the evil tendencies of the age.

And next, it must surely be profitable for our thoughts to be sent backward and forward to the beginning and the end of the Gospel times, to the first and the second coming of Christ. What we want, is to understand that we are in the place in which the early Christians were, with the same covenant, ministry, sacraments, and duties;—to realize a state of things long past away;—to feel that we are in a sinful world, a world lying in wickedness; to discern our position in it, that we are witnesses in it, that reproach and suffering are our portion,—so that we must not “think it strange” if they come upon us, but a kind of gracious exception if they do not; to have our hearts awake, as if we had seen Christ and {76} His Apostles, and seen their miracles,—awake to the hope and waiting of His second coming, looking out for it, nay, desiring to see the tokens of it; thinking often and much of the judgment to come, dwelling on and adequately entering into the thought, that we individually shall be judged. All these surely are acts of true and saving faith; and this is one substantial use of the Book of Revelation, and other prophetical parts of Scripture, quite distinct from our knowing their real interpretation, viz., to take the veil from our eyes, to lift up the covering which lies over the face of the world, and make us see day by day, as we go in and out, as we get up and lie down, as we labour, and walk, and rest, and recreate ourselves, the Throne of God set up in the midst of us, His majesty and His judgments, His Son’s continual intercession for the elect, their trials, and their victory.

---

Notes

1. Iren Hær. v. 25. Hippol. de Antichristo, § 25. St. Cyril of Jerusalem also speaks of Antichrist building the Jewish Temple; and he too wrote before Julian’s attempt, and (what is remarkable) prophesied it would fail, because of the prophecies.—Vide Ruff. Hist. i. 37.

2. He adds, that he himself prefers one of the other words.

3. Hippol. de Antichristo, § 50. The Greek text seems corrupt.

Islam is a Religion of Antichrist

First, notice that Islam is ‘a’ religion of Antichrist, not ‘the’ religion of Antichrist. How do we know? The infallible Bible tells us:

1 John 2:22-23 – “Who is a liar, but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denies the Father, and the Son. Whosoever denies the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesses the Son, hath the Father also.” [Islam denies the Trinity and considers calling God as Father as blasphemous]

1 John 4:3 – “And every spirit that dissolves Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he comes, and he is now already in the world.” [Islam claims that Jesus is not Divine but merely a prophet]

2 John 1:7 – “For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an antichrist. [Islam denies that Jesus is the Divine Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity who became man]

Islam is only the pre-cursor of ‘the’ religion of Antichrist. All the brutality and killing of anyone who disagrees, as shown throughout the centuries, will be used in the religion of Antichrist. Notice that Islam also denies the Divinity of Jesus Christ, which also agrees with the religion of Antichrist since the Antichrist will declare himself as both Messiah and God. Because of apostasy, Islam is now the world’s single largest religion, having exceeded Catholicism in numbers.

There is the propaganda being promoted by the MSM (main stream media) in a widespread way today that Islam is a religion of peace. Never in its history has that been the case. Just look at the hundreds of years before the Crusades throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa, and look at how they continually tried to take over Europe. Only miraculously won battles prevented that. The other major lie today is the claim of a dichotomy between radical Islam and Islam. They are one and the same, as shown by the Koran, and in practice since how many Muslims speak out against Sharia Law, killing (beheading common) and taxing if one does not convert? Only the atheistic communists are in the same brutality league as Islam as shown by the data collected by organizations which monitor human rights. In the past, various religious Orders were established to ransom Christians captured by Muslims. So if there is sufficient profit to be made, Islam may let a non-Muslim live.

Our Lady also explains how Islam is a manifestation of Antichrist.

Click here to see some gruesome photos of the “religion of peace” eliminating those who disagree with them. The text is Polish but the photos are language independent. WARNING! This has very graphic photos! This will be how the religion of Antichrist will also operate.

“Mohammed brought … things only evil and inhuman”

Manuel Paleologus: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

Iraq shows how true this is. Islam is the model for the religion of the Antichrist.

Pope Benedict XVI said this at Regensberg:

‘I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) of part of the dialogue carried on – perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara – by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.[1] It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than those of his Persian interlocutor.[2] The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur’an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship between – as they were called – three “Laws” or “rules of life”: the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Qur’an. It is not my intention to discuss this question in the present lecture; here I would like to discuss only one point – itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole – which, in the context of the issue of “faith and reason”, I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.

In the seventh conversation (διάλεξις – controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: “There is no compulsion in religion”. According to some of the experts, this is probably one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur’an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the “Book” and the “infidels”, he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness that we find unacceptable, on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”[3] The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. “God”, he says, “is not pleased by blood – and not acting reasonably (σὺν λόγω) is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats… To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death…”.[4]’

Those who applaud any form of tampering of the Holy Gospels or adaptation of My Teachings will no longer be able to claim that they serve Me

You can only uphold the Truth, for I Am the Truth. Deny the Truth and you deny Me

Monday, June 30th, 2014 @ 23:50

My dearly beloved daughter, you, My dear followers, must know that the gates of Hell will never prevail against My Church, although much of My Church on Earth will be crushed, as foretold. But, the Truth can never die. My Word will never die out nor will My Teachings be forgotten by those who are in true union with Me. 

Only those who remain true to My Word can say they are part of My Church on Earth. Those who applaud any form of tampering of the Holy Gospels or adaptation of My Teachings will no longer be able to claim that they serve Me. Should a holy servant of Mine dare to proclaim an alternative doctrine to the one given to man by My apostles and the prophets, before My Time, they will be immediately expelled. 

I warn all those who embrace anything, which is deemed to be sacred – but which is formed by human hands and creation – and who accept this as Mine, that I will cast you out, for you will no longer be able to call yourselves My servants. And should you lead souls into error, your punishment will begin in your time and will continue long after you depart from this life. 

My Anger is unknown to you, because you have yet to witness it. But know this. You who will betray Me already know who you are, for your faith has already weakened. Many of you have already fallen and your weakness will be your downfall. You will betray Me; deny Me and embrace My enemies, for you will be so caught up in the new religion – the secular humanism, which will come as a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing to devour you – that I will be forgotten. Your ambition and desire to please those enemies of Mine, who will rise to great heights, within the echelons of My Church – will blind you to the Truth. This will be the cause of your demise and all those whom you will pull into grave error.

It is when My Church turns My Teachings upside down; inside out and back to front, that you will know that the time has come for the antichrist to take centre stage. Those who worship the beast will sign their own death warrant and will hand over their free will, a Sacred Gift from God, to My enemies. Once you swear an oath to this new false doctrine, you will be guilty of crucifying Me and your punishment will be severe. 

Why, you may ask, would you be punished for your obedience to your elders? The answer is simple. When you swore an oath to serve Me, you agreed to uphold the Truth. When you break this oath, because of your obedience to those enemies of Mine to come, then it is not I, Jesus Christ, you will serve.

You can only uphold the Truth, for I Am the Truth. Deny the Truth and you deny Me. When you deny Me, as a servant of God, you will no longer be fit to instruct God’s children towards their Eternal Salvation.

Your Jesus

The Furious Dragon will rise

3966-Message from Our Lady Queen of Peace, transmitted in 04/15/2014

Dear children; give yourself to Jesus and let His grace transform you and sanctify you. These days, you shall live deeply the mystery of the cross of Christ. He gave Himself for love of each of you. Do not offend Jesus. Repent. Without repentance you can not achieve conversion. Bend your knees in prayer. You are heading towards a painful future. The Furious Dragon will rise [Antichrist]. He throws fire on my poor children and the pain will be great. I suffer for what comes to you. I love you. Give me your hand and I will lead you to the One who is the only true Savior. Courage. This is the message I give you today in the name of the Holy Trinity. Thank you for permitting Me to reunite with you here once more. I bless you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Be at peace.

Prophet Pedro Regis

Benjamin Creme – Maitreya’s anti-John the Baptist – on Francis

Excerpts from http://thatthebonesyouhavecrushedmaythrill.blogspot.ca/2014/03/benjamin-creme-on-pope-francis.html

Maitreya is the Antichrist, and Benjamin Creme, his promoter, is the “anti-John the Baptist” for the Antichrist. The False Prophet (Francis) will support the Antichrist, therefore the Antichrist will support him.

Benjamin Creme on Pope Francis

This is from Share International’s gnostic – scrub that – occult website, which predicts the emergence of a new ‘World Teacher’ called Maitreya.

I know that readers would say, as I would say, ‘Benjamin Creme would say that, because he’s basically a loon’. However, it is worthwhile just for the record to note that he said it.

Q. Do you know if Pope Francis is being impressed or inspired by a [Ascended] Master in his various speeches against greed, the powerful economic powers of the world, and against the pure form of capitalism that still is so attractive to many rich sections of society?

A. He is inspired by Maitreya.

A false and lawless leader will rise to power

January 25, 2014

Jesus comes holding His Mournful Heart. He says: “I am your Jesus, born Incarnate.” 

“I come, once again, to reiterate that title alone does not make a worthy leader. It is what is accepted in the heart as Truth which makes the person worthy or unworthy. If he believes the reality of the facts can be twisted to suit his own agenda, he is not a good leader and unworthy of your affiliation.”

“You must begin to accept this, for in the future a false and lawless leader will rise to power [the Antichrist – Maitreya]. He will bring a false peace into the world. It will all be a delusion. Many will be tricked into believing in him just as many have followed false leaders in the past. He will not have Truth in his heart, but Satan’s deceit.”

“I warn you now. Do not be tricked by who believes in him. Pay attention to what I am saying to you today.”

Holy Love

Signs – Joining Israel with Palestine

God the Father: The antichrist is now ready to reveal himself

Wednesday, August 7th, 2013 @ 18:50

My dearest daughter, the world must prepare for the arrival of the greatest enemy of humanity since My children were placed on this Earth.

The antichrist is now ready to reveal himself and his plan is this. He will wait until wars rage everywhere. Then he will step in and create a false peace in the state of Israel by joining them with Palestine in an unlikely alliance. Everyone will lavish praise on him. He will not stop there, for he will move at a pace which will astonish many and he will negotiate peace agreements in many war-torn nations. Again, he will be praised and then be admired, with an extraordinary devotion by billions all over the world.

Then all will seem well. Very soon he will become involved with philanthropy and he will link up with the main world banks to create a new, powerful, financial institution. Many businesses and political leaders will become embroiled with his many plans. Soon a new monstrosity will be created, in the name of kick-starting the world’s economy. This will be the new Babylon, the centre of all power, from which the world’s elite and rich will trade. It will be seen to be the source of great news, so that people will benefit in every way from jobs, to the homes they live in and to the food they feed their families with.

All glory will surround the antichrist. Then he will, along with the false prophet, create a global partnership, which will be presented as the greatest humanitarian initiative. The world will applaud this new Babylon and everyone will clamour to try and gain even just a tiny foothold within its centre.

The new Babylon, all will be told, is to glorify the great one, to promote the environment, to embrace mother earth and to rid the world of poverty from the riches, which will pour from its vile mouth.

When this takes place, the Hand of My intervention will turn the world on its axis. I Am not going to stand by without warning My children of the consequences of embracing this abomination, created in the depths of Hell and inflicted upon humanity. My great signs will be given to show all those who embrace and accept this insult in My Holy Name.

I will shake the world and it will tilt. No man will be able to ignore My intervention. Then I will throw fire upon one third of the Earth. Soon, famine will be seen, but not by My Hand – it will be by the deliberate contamination of the Earth by the antichrist. As he and his cohorts inflict wickedness upon unsuspecting people in many nations, I will strike back.

While this suffering will be hard to endure, have no fear, children, for it will be short. My Love is great for all of you, but My Justice is swift and My punishment great.

You must not accept what is brought before you. When you see the man of peace, the antichrist, receive accolades and awards for his great works in war-torn countries, know that My Intervention is close.

You must remain in union with My Son, Jesus Christ, at all times and pray that the Sacraments will be made available to you by loyal priests and clergy during the times of trials which lie before you.

My Will, will be done.

Nothing can, nor will, stop the Final Covenant where My Son will Reign in Peace from being fulfilled.

Your beloved Father

God the Most High