Gregory places the brand of anti-Christ upon him who usurps the title of universal bishop. This presumes to usurp this new name against both the law of the gospel and of the canons? We know that many priests of the church of Constantinople have been not only heretics, but even the chief leaders of them. If, then, every one of that church assumes the name by which he makes himself the head of all good men; the Catholic church, which God forbid should ever be the case, must needs be overthrown when he falls who is called UNIVERSAL. But, far from Christians be this blasphemous name, by which all honor is taken from all other priests, while it is foolishly arrogated by one. man (John), contemning obedience to the canons, should be humbled by the commands of our most pious sovereign. He should be chastised who does an injury to the holy Catholic church! whose heart is puffed up, who seeks to please himself by a name of singularity, by which he would elevate himself above the Emperor ! We are all scandalized at this. Let the author of this scandal reform himself, and all differences in the church will cease. I am the servant of all priests, so long as they live like themselves-but if any shall vainly set up his bristles, contrary to God Almighty, and to the canons of the fathers, I hope in God that he will never succeed in bringing my neck under his yoke-not even by force of arms." These urgent letters of Gregory appear to have been unavailing. The patriarch John, indeed, was soon afterward removed by death from his archiepiscopal dignity; but Cynacus, who succeeded him as bishop of Constantinople, adopted the same pompous title as his predecessor. Having had occasion to despatch some agents to Rome, in the letter which he wrote to the Roman pontiff Gregory, he so much displeased him by assuming the appellation of "universal bishop," that the latter withheld from the agents somewhat of the courtesy to which they considered themselves entitled, and, of course, complaint was made to the emperor Mauritius of the neglect which had been shown them. This circumstance extorted a letter from the Emperor at Constantinople to the bishop of Rome, in which he advises him to treat them, in future, in a more friendly manner and not to insist so far on punctilios of style, as to create a scandal about a title, and fall out about a few syllables. To this Gregory replies, "that the innovation in the style did not consist much in the quantity and alphabet; but the bulk of the iniquity was weighty enough to sink and destroy all. And, therefore, I am bold to say,' says he, "that whoever adopts, or affects the title of UNIVERSAL BISHOP, has the pride and character of anti-Christ, and is in some manner his forerunner in this haughty quality of elevating himself above the rest of his order. And, indeed, both the one and the other seem to split upon the same rock; for as PRIDE MAKES ANTI-CHRIST STRAIN HIS PRETENSIONS UP TO GODHEAD, So whoever is ambitious to be called the only or universal prelate, arrogates to himself a distinguished superiority, and rises, as it were, upon the ruins of the rest.”* Let * Epist. Greg. 1. vi. Ep. 30. Pope Boniface soon after obtains this very title for himself and successors. the reader ponder well the sentence last quoted, in this epistle of Gregory, confessedly one of the most eminent of the Roman bishops, and who has, by them, been canonized as SAINT Gregory; in which he places the brand of anti-Christ on whoever assumes this title, and then judge whether we are not justified in pronouncing the era of the papal supremacy, when only two years after Gregory's death, pope Boniface III. sought for and obtained the title of UNIVERSAL BISHOP, as the date of the full revelation of ANTI-CHRIST. We do but repeat the opinion so emphatically expressed by SAINT GREGORY only a few years before the actual occurrence of this remarkable event in the history of Popery. Boniface, who succeeded to the Roman See in 605,was so far from having any scruples about adopting this "BLASPHEMOUS TITLE," that he actually applied to the emperor Phocas, a cruel and bloodthirsty tyrant, who had made his way to the throne by assassinating his predecessor; and earnestly solicited the title, with the privilege of handing it down to his successors. The profligate emperor who had a secret grudge against the bishop of Constantinople, granted the request of Boniface, and after strictly forbidding the former prelate to use the title, conferred it upon the latter in the year 606, and declared the church of Rome to be head over all other churches. Thus was Paul's prediction accomplished, “THE MAN OF SIN" revealed, and that system of corrupted Christianity and spiritual tyranny which is properly called POPERY, fully developed and established in the world. The title of UNIVERSAL BISHOP, which was then obtained by Boniface, has been worn by all succeeding popes, and the claim of supremacy, which was then established, has ever since been maintained and defended by them, and still is, down to the present day. § 26.-Henceforward the religion of Rome is properly styled POPERY, OR THE RELIGION OF THE POPE. Previous to the year 606, there was properly no POPE. It is true that in earlier ages the title of pope, which is derived from the Greek word лaллaç, father, in its general and inoffensive sense, had been used as a frequent title of bishops, without distinction. Siricius, bishop of Rome, was probably the first who assumed the name as an official title, toward the close of the fourth century, and it was afterward claimed exclusively by the popes of Rome, as the appropriate designation of the sovereign pontiffs. This arrogant claim has long since been quietly conceded by other Christians, and the title has been exclusively enjoyed, These facts are related by Baronius and other Romish historians. "Quo tempore intercesserunt quædam odiorum fomenta inter eundem Phocam imperatorem atque Cyriacum Constantinopolitanum. Hinc igitur in Cyriacum Phocas exacerbatus in ejus odium imperiali edicto sancivit, nomen universalis decere Romanum tantum modo ecclesiam, tanquam quæ caput esset omnium ecclesiarum, solique convenire Romano pontifici; non autem episcopo Constantinopolitano, qui sibi illud usurpare præsumeret. Quod quidem hunc Bonifacium papam tertium ab imperatore Phoca obtinuisse, cum Anastasius Bibliothecarius, tum Paulus diaconus tradunt." Spondan, Epitom. Baron. Annal. in annum 606. † See Coleman's Christian Antiquities, page 76. Popery not Catholic. Calling things by their right names without dispute and without envy.* When we say, therefore, that previous to A. D. 606, there was no POPE, we mean, of course, in the present exclusive sense of the word, as the supreme sovereign pontiff, and boasted head of the universal church. Till this time, notwithstanding the prior origin of many popish corruptions, Popery or the Roman Catholic religion in its present form, as a distinct and compacted system, had no existence. This is the epoch of its origin and birth. Papal supremacy then bound, and still binds its discordant elements into one, and should this claim be given up, the whole anti-Christian system would fall to pieces, like the portions of an arch, when the key-stone is removed. The historian is therefore fully justified in applying to this system, the distinctive and appropriate terms, popish, popery, and their cognates. In the words of that singular but forcible writer, John Rogers, when assigning his reasons for not employing the terms Catholic or Roman Catholic, by which papists prefer to be designated, "We are far, very far from intending or wishing to hurt the feeling, or pain the mind of any member of the kirk of Rome; but we intend to follow a plan scriptural and reasonable, and to write with grammatical and philosophical propriety. We desire not to be, and not to appear to be offensive or insulting; but to be orderly, or to conform to method and rule. We desire not to give displeasure or pain, but to have definitude or precision. We aim to be accurate or correct, and to employ words in their right and true meaning. We avoid using Catholic and Roman Catholic, on five grounds; in order to be analogical, in order to be logical, in order to oppose papal bigotry, in order to oppose papal pride, and in order to oppose papal persecution." The word Catholic means universal, and since the Romish is not a universal church, it is evidently incorrect to call that communion the Holy Catholic church. To avoid this impropriety, some employ the terms Roman Catholic, but here again is a manifest impropriety, as that cannot be universal in any sense, which is not absolutely so, and to apply the term Catholic or universal, to that which must be limited by the adjective Roman, or any other word denoting speciality, is evidently a contradiction in terms. For these reasons this system will be designated in the present work, by the names, ROMANISM, POPERY, &c., and the adjectives, Romish, Papal, &c., not as terms of reproach, but simply because they are more consistent with historical accuracy and truth, than any others which could be selected. If we occasionally employ, therefore, the terms Catholic or Roman Catholic, we wish *Father Gahan, in his History of the Church (page 335), mentions, apparently with approbation, the following whimsical derivation of the title Papa, or Pope: "Some writers say that the word Papa comes from the initial letters of these four words, Petrus, Apostolus, Princeps, Apostolorum (i. e., Peter the apostle, prince of the apostles), which being abbreviated with a punctum or colon after each of the four initial letters, coalesced in progress of time into the word Papa, without any intermediate punctuation." † See "Anti-popopriestian," by John Rogers, page 76. Consequences of the establishment of the papal supremacy. it to be distinctly understood that we do so, simply as a matter of courtesy or convenience, and not because we for a moment admit the propriety of the application of either of these terms to the antiChristian system of Rome. CHAPTER VI. PAPAL SUPREMACY-THE ACTORS IN ITS ESTABLISHMENT-THE TYRANT PHOCAS-THE SAINT GREGORY, AND THE POPE BONIFACE. § 27. THE bestowment of the title of Universal Bishop by Phocas, the tyrant, upon Boniface III., bishop of Rome, THE FIRST OF THE POPES, and the consequent establishment of papal supremacy, was the memorable event that embodied into a system and cemented into one the various false doctrines, corrupt practices, and vain and superstitious rites and ceremonies, which had arisen in earlier ages, to deface the beauty and mar the simplicity of Christian worship. Before this event, the bishop of Rome had no power to enforce his decisions upon other churches and bishops; and, as we have already seen, in many instances they might reject his decrees, without forfeiting their standing, as constituent portions of the so called Catholic church; now they were compelled to submit to his mandates, as the spiritual sovereign of the world, or be branded with the name of heretics. Before this, the false doctrines which arose, and the superstitious heathen ceremonies which were adopted into Christian worship, might be believed or practised in one church or province and rejected in another; so that the corruptions which had long since towered to a greater height at Rome than anywhere else, were still but partially diffused over the Christian world. Immediately upon the establishment of papal supremacy, the gigantic errors and corruptions of Rome were rendered binding upon all. Before this time, while there was no supreme earthly head to enforce uniformity, a variety of liturgies and forms of worship were adopted in different places, some of them in a greater and others in a less degree conformable to the spirit of the New Testament; now, by the sovereign decrees of his HOLINESS THE POPE, all must be conformed to the standard of Rome. In the ages that preceded the establishment of papal supremacy, "we are not to think," observes Mosheim, "that the same method of worship was uniformly followed in every Christian society, for this was far from being the case. Every bishop, consulting his own private judgment, and taking into consideration the nature of the times, the genius of the country in which he lived, and the character and Biography of Phocas the tyrant, who bestowed upon the popes the title of Universal Bishop. temper of those whom he was appointed to rule and instruct, formed such a plan of divine worship as he thought the wisest and the best. Hence that variety of liturgies which were in use, before the bishop of Rome had usurped the supreme power in religious matters, and persuaded the credulous and unthinking, that the model, both of doctrine and worship, was to be given by the mother church, and to be followed implicitly throughout the Christian world." (Mosheim, vol. i. p. 385.) § 28. As it was owing to the decree of the emperor Phocas, constituting him supreme Universal Bishop and head of the universal church, that the proud prelate of Rome was thus enabled to tyrannize over the whole of Christendom, and mould and fashion the churches at his will, it may be necessary that we retrace our steps for four or five years, and relate with some minuteness the origin and character of the man who conferred on him this power, that we may see whether this doctrine, so essential to the very existence of Popery, viz. the papal supremacy, come from heaven or of men. mistake not, we shall find that its origin is from beneath, and that the principal agent in establishing it, was one of the most guilty of the human race, approaching very near, if he did not altogether reach the idea of consummate or universal depravity, embodied in his great master, THE DEVIL. If I This Phocas was a native of Asia Minor, of obscure and unknown parentage, who entered the army of the emperor Mauritius as a common soldier. Having attained the rank of a centurion, a petty officer, with the command of a hundred men, he happened in the year 602 to be with his company on the banks of the Danube, when he headed a mutiny against the Emperor among his troops, caused himself to be tumultuously proclaimed leader of the insurgents, and marched with them to Constantinople. "So obscure had been the former condition of Phocas," says Gibbon, "that the Emperor was quite ignorant of the name and character of his rival; but as soon as he had learned that the centurion, though bold in sedition, was timid in the face of danger, Alas! cried the prince, 'if he is a coward, he will surely be a murderer.'" § 29. Upon the approach of Phocas to Constantinople, the unfortunate Mauritius, with his wife and nine children, escaped in a small bark to the Asiatic shore; but the violence of the wind compelled him to land at the church of St. Autonomus, near Chalcedon, from whence he despatched Theodosius, his eldest son, to implore the gratitude and friendship of the Persian monarch. For himself, he refused to fly; his body was tortured with sciatic pains, his mind was enfeebled by superstition; he patiently awaited the event of the revolution, and addressed a fervent and public prayer to the Almighty, that the punishment of his sins might be inflicted in this world, rather than in a future life. The patriarch of Constantinople "consecrated the successful usurper in the church of St. John the Baptist. On the third day, amidst the acclamations of a thoughtless people, Phocas made his public entry in a chariot drawn by |