# Who thinks the pope is the antichrist?



## Matthew1344

> vi. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God. - See more at: http://www.reformation21.org/confession/2013/07/chapter-256.php#sthash.80U8p0KK.dpuf



Is this still commonly believed among Presbyterians?


----------



## reaganmarsh

Hi Matthew,

Most confessionally Reformed folks I know -- Presbyterian and Baptist alike -- tend to deal with this statement along these lines: the Pope is one of many antichrists gone into the world (following, i.e., 1 Jn 2.18). 

That being said, I don't think that the Reformers were denying the plurality of 1 Jn 2.18, so much as they were emphasizing the utter antigospel preached by the RCC and promulgated by the Papacy.


----------



## Alan D. Strange

In the PCUSA, this was dropped in the 1903 revisions. In 1936, when the OPC was formed, most of the Confession was restored to its pre-1903 form. Several items were not, however, and this was among them. To be clear, the cited phrase (pope as antichrist) no longer appears in the OPC's version of the WCF. The PCA has the same version of the Standards as does the OPC. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Jake

That the Pope is the Anti-Christ is in the common confessional documents of Reformed Baptists, including the 1689 LBCF and 1742 Philadelphia Confession.

That the Pope is the Anti-Christ is in the original Westminster Confession of Faith. Most American Presbyterians do not have this in their confession any more. The PCA, OPC, ARP, and EPC have edited it out. The RPCNA introduces an exception here in their Testimony. Some small American denominations retain the original confession and so include the Pope as the Anti-Christ, but I don't know what standards of confessional adherence are in these denominations. This would include RPCUS, RPCGA, PRC, and RPC-Hanover. It would also include Scottish denominations like FCC, FPCoS, and FCoS.


----------



## earl40

"Commonly" believed no. Though I tend to believe such.


----------



## zsmcd

I would agree he is one of many. In my experience, many post mil puritans believed the pope to be the anti-Christ and that his fall would usher in the "golden age." Not sure if this was the idea put forth by the divines who wrote the WCF, but interesting to consider.


----------



## MW

Who thinks the pope is the antichrist? The pope does. Anti means in the place of. Vicar means in the place of. The antichrist is the vicar of Christ, which is what the pope calls himself. And one of their own has said, "I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist."

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward

2012 poll with 92 participants and 43 comments here:

Is the Pope the Antichrist, and the Man of Sin, foretold in Holy Scripture?
http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php/76233-Poll-Is-the-Pope-the-Antichrist

There are a number of other old threads on the board.


----------



## MichaelNZ

My pastor told me that the Reformed Churches of New Zealand removed the part about the Pope being the antichrist from the Westminster Confession not because we believe Roman Catholicism to be anything but an apostate church, but rather because we didn't want to say that the Pope is definitely THE antichrist.


----------



## johnny

There will never be a Christian Pope, those who unwisely accept that damnable role are unregenerate. You only have to read their pronouncements to see that they do not know God. And yes they are all Antichrist.


----------



## StephenG

One way that I have heard it described is that there is a difference between the person and the "seat" of Antichrist. That is, that though the man himself may not be _the_ Antichrist, he sits on that seat or takes on that mantle/title. 
I don't know the validity of that theory, but I do believe the Pope to be _an_ Antichrist, at the very least.
On a slightly lighter note: 
[video=youtube;87vo2jkmJUg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87vo2jkmJUg[/video]​


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever. Neither state totalitarianism, communism, or anything else is as spiritually dangerous as popery. The Pope is and remains the ultimate usurper of Christ on earth.


----------



## TylerRay

Virtually all Presbyterians of a Scottish orientation believe this.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tom Hart

The question ought to be, why do many no longer see Rome as antichrist? By its doctrine, it is anti-Christ.


----------



## Edward

TylerRay said:


> Virtually all Presbyterians of a Scottish orientation believe this.



What do you consider to be a "Presbyterian of a Scottish orientation"?


----------



## earl40

Edward said:


> TylerRay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Virtually all Presbyterians of a Scottish orientation believe this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you consider to be a "Presbyterian of a Scottish orientation"?
Click to expand...


I believe he may mean more "reformed" in thinking....in past history.


----------



## timfost

I think the American revisions are appropriate. Even if we can make an argument that the pope sees himself this way, I'm not persuaded that it makes him _the_ antichrist. My fear in using the definite article _the_ for the pope is that if he is not _the_ antichrist, those who hold to the original WCF are looking for the wrong thing and may be setting themselves up for a surprise. Certainly he should be on our radars as _an_ antichrist.


----------



## TylerRay

Edward said:


> TylerRay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Virtually all Presbyterians of a Scottish orientation believe this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you consider to be a "Presbyterian of a Scottish orientation"?
Click to expand...


One holding to the doctrine and worship adopted by the Church of Scotland during the Second Reformation.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

MW said:


> Who thinks the pope is the antichrist? The pope does. Anti means in the place of. Vicar means in the place of. The antichrist is the vicar of Christ, which is what the pope calls himself. And one of their own has said, "I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist."


Indeed...

"But not one of my predecessors has ever consented to use this so profane a title; since...if one Patriarch is called Universal, the name of Patriarch in the case of the rest is derogated. But far be this, far be it from the mind of a Christian, that any one should wish to seize for himself that whereby he might seem in the least degree to lessen the honour of his brethren. While, then, we are unwilling to receive this honour when offered to us, think how disgraceful it is for anyone to have wished to usurp it to himself perforce....Certainly Peter, the first of the apostles, himself a member of the holy and universal Church, Paul, Andrew, John,— what were they but heads of _particular communities?_...*Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Pope, is in his elation the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others*."

- Gregory the Great, "Epistles," in _Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers_, 5:18, 43; 7:33


----------



## Peairtach

I believe he is the Antichrist and Man of Sin spoken of in II Thessalonians, but there are other "lesser" (in a sense) antichrists - idols set up in the place of Christ, claiming the name "Christian", in the visible Church in order to deceive e.g. the antichrist of liberal theology.

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk


----------



## MichaelNZ

Reformed Covenanter said:


> I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever. Neither state totalitarianism, communism, or anything else is as spiritually dangerous as popery. The Pope is and remains the ultimate usurper of Christ on earth.



There isn't as much spiritual danger from Romanism these days, especially with the current pope. He may even be a universalist. I doubt the majority of priests and bishops believe that there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic church, which was taught by the Council of Florence. Rome has gone ecumenical and considers Protestants to be "separated brethren" rather than heretics. Their catechism says that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics.


----------



## TylerRay

MichaelNZ said:


> Reformed Covenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever. Neither state totalitarianism, communism, or anything else is as spiritually dangerous as popery. The Pope is and remains the ultimate usurper of Christ on earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't as much spiritual danger from Romanism these days, especially with the current pope. He may even be a universalist. I doubt the majority of priests and bishops believe that there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic church, which was taught by the Council of Florence. Rome has gone ecumenical and considers Protestants to be "separated brethren" rather than heretics. Their catechism says that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics.
Click to expand...


Are you saying that you don't see univeralism and ecumenism as spiritually dangerous?

Ecumenism is an excellent way for the Man of Sin to gain influence and work toward a consolidation of power.


----------



## Rich Koster

DCLXVI - six consecutive Roman numerals that add up to 666. Just a hint that the Vicar of Christ (Il Papa), the "head" of the Roman Church, may be seated as a impostor head of the church. The only Vicar between God and man is Jesus Christ, the biblically claimed, God ordained Head of the Body of Christ.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

MichaelNZ said:


> Reformed Covenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever. Neither state totalitarianism, communism, or anything else is as spiritually dangerous as popery. The Pope is and remains the ultimate usurper of Christ on earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't as much spiritual danger from Romanism these days, especially with the current pope. He may even be a universalist. I doubt the majority of priests and bishops believe that there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic church, which was taught by the Council of Florence. Rome has gone ecumenical and considers Protestants to be "separated brethren" rather than heretics. Their catechism says that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics.
Click to expand...


Are you actually serious? There is little spritual danger from Rome nowadays! I have heard it all now.


----------



## Megs

AFter much prayer and study, I have come to believe that the Papacy (including the current Pope) is Antichrist. I believe the book of Daniel describes the Papacy's origin and rise to power and that the book of Revelation describes its decline and ultimate destruction -- which will happen when it is at the height of leading a worldwide ecumenical movement against true religion (ie. a one world religion, economy, government) Given current events, that would mean that the Papacy is as ever great a danger as it has been in times past. It make speak ecumenically today, but its goal is still to turn people against Christ. Edwards wrote insightfully about Armageddon and the Last Great Opposition, ie. a time when Popery would unite with Islam and other religions to come against true Christianity ("Armageddon" - kind of like what is happening everywhere it seems today):

Jonathan Edwards’ (1703-1758) in A History of the Work of Redemption:

“Satan has ever had a dread of having his kingdom overthrown, and he had been apposing it ever since the day of Constantine the Great. To this end he has set up two mighty kingdoms of Antichrist and Mahomet, and brought in all the heresies, superstitions and corruptions, which there are in the world. But when he sees all begin to fail, it will rouse him up exceedingly. If Satan dreaded being cast out of the Roman Empire, how much more does he dread being cast out of the whole world!

“It seems as though in this last great opposition which shall be made against the church to defend the kingdom of Satan, all the forces of Antichrist and Mahometanism and heathenism will be united: all the forces of Satan’s visible kingdom through the whole world of mankind. And therefore it is said, that ‘spirits of devils… [shall] go forth unto the kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to gather them together to the battle of that great day of God Almighty’ (Rev. 16:14). And these spirits are said to come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet; that is, there shall be the spirit of Popery, and the spirit of Mahometanism, and the spirit of heathenism, all united. By the beast is meant Antichrist; by the dragon, in this book, is commonly meant the devil, as he reigns over his heathen kingdom; by the false prophet, in this book, is sometimes meant the Pope and his clergy, but here an eye seems to be had to Mahomet, whom his followers call the great prophet of God. This will be as it were the dying struggles of the old serpent, a battle wherein he will fight as one that is almost desperate.” (p. 375-376)

More on why I think what I do: https://theantipaschronicles.wordpress.com/ (work in progress)


----------



## Alan D. Strange

The true Vicar of Christ, the One who applies the merits and mediation of our Lord Jesus Christ to us who are members of His Church, is the Holy Spirit. 

One of the prime errors of the Roman Church with respect to this is that the Roman Church has put herself, and the Pope as her head, in the place of the Spirit: the Church, and the Pope especially, has sought to replace the Spirit of Christ, the only One who gathers and perfects the Church (albeit through means). 

In the Middle Ages particularly, Rome developed the doctrine of the church in preference to the doctrine of the work of the Holy Spirit. One must come to the doctrine of the church only after and through the doctrine of work of the Holy Spirit. Otherwise, the church becomes the agent of salvation and her sacraments must be regarded as acting ex opere operato (by the working of the work). This makes the means of grace ends in themselves, rather than means to lead us to Jesus Christ. Additionally, there are only two dominical sacraments (Holy Baptism and the Lord's Supper) and not seven. 

The Spirit brings Christ to us and us to Christ. This was the clarity brought to the church most pointedly in the work of Calvin (and his fellows), particularly in moving from Book II to Book III in Calvin's _Institutes_. One will not find this doctrine of the work of the Spirit in great medieval theologians with clarity (e.g., Lombard and Aquinas). It is very much to the point that Patrick cites Gregory I, who lived and wrote before this error had developed as it had latter, especially made clear by the errors promulgated and promoted by Lateran IV (1215).

Above, I clarified that such had been removed in the PCUSA in 1903, which point was retained by the OPC and PCA. This is not to say that there are not many in her number who still believe that the pope is antichrist (at least in some, if not an exclusive, sense). It is no longer something confessed together by those communions, but still held by many ministerial and lay members of those communions. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Reformed Covenanter said:


> I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever. Neither state totalitarianism, communism, or anything else is as spiritually dangerous as popery. The Pope is and remains the ultimate usurper of Christ on earth.



This is a great point. 

Even the anti-Christian American press treats the Pope (and other RC officials for that matter) with reverence and fealty. It is fascinating how the Pope is treated as _the_ authority on Christianity by so many in places of political and tv/print power in the United States.

They did this just as much for Benedict, who they generally despised, as John Paul II and Francis I whom they admire.


----------



## TheOldCourse

Reformed Covenanter said:


> MichaelNZ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reformed Covenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever. Neither state totalitarianism, communism, or anything else is as spiritually dangerous as popery. The Pope is and remains the ultimate usurper of Christ on earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't as much spiritual danger from Romanism these days, especially with the current pope. He may even be a universalist. I doubt the majority of priests and bishops believe that there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic church, which was taught by the Council of Florence. Rome has gone ecumenical and considers Protestants to be "separated brethren" rather than heretics. Their catechism says that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you actually serious? There is little spritual danger from Rome nowadays! I have heard it all now.
Click to expand...


I think this is, sadly, a pretty common opinion of Rome amongst evangelicals, even ostensibly Reformed ones. I know some members in good standing of my current PCA church regularly go on Roman Catholic retreats and such, not seeing the danger there because other "Protestants" (and I must use the term loosely) also attend.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

While not a magisterial teaching, but merely a _reflection _and _contemplation_, Rome offers the following denial of the purpose of our Lord's sacrifice:*

From the Christian confession that there can be only one path to salvation, however, it does not in any way follow that the Jews are excluded from God’s salvation because they do not believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel and the Son of God.* Such a claim would find no support in the soteriological understanding of Saint Paul, who in the Letter to the Romans not only gives expression to his conviction that there can be no breach in the history of salvation, but that salvation comes from the Jews (cf. also Jn 4:22). God entrusted Israel with a unique mission, and He does not bring his mysterious plan of salvation for all peoples (cf. 1 Tim 2:4) to fulfillment without drawing into it his "first-born son" (Ex 4:22). From this it is self-evident that Paul in the Letter to the Romans definitively negates the question he himself has posed, whether God has repudiated his own people. Just as decisively he asserts: "For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable" (Rom 11:29).*That the Jews are participants in God’s salvation is theologically unquestionable, but how that can be possible without confessing Christ explicitly, is and remains an unfathomable divine mystery.* It is therefore no accident that Paul’s soteriological reflections in Romans 9-11 on the irrevocable redemption of Israel against the background of the Christ-mystery culminate in a magnificent doxology: "Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How inscrutable are his judgments and how unsearchable his ways" (Rom 11:33). Bernard of Clairvaux (De cons. III/I,3) says that for the Jews "a determined point in time has been fixed which cannot be anticipated".

SRC: Paragraph 36, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...i_doc_20151210_ebraismo-nostra-aetate_en.html

Such is the onward march of Romanistic anti-Christ teachings. Sigh.


----------



## johnny

I was interested to find out that there are many Catholics who believe that there has been no legitimate Pope since the second Vatican council. They are called Sedevacantists.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedevacantism


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

They make me chuckle, "legitimate" pope. A self-refuting proposition.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith

I do.

Peairtach said it well: the Pope is *the* Antichrist and we are not even to pray for him, but there are other- antichrists- who are also a threat to the church.


----------



## Warren

Reformed Covenanter said:


> I do. Because the _physical_ threat from Romanism has declined, this opinion is less popular nowadays. However, the _spiritual_ danger from Rome is as great as ever.


I can agree with this. In the book "The Discovery of France," the author details why paganism never died, and well into the Enlightenment. Rather, paganism syncretized with Catholicism, so that small burgs would often war over "saints," looting them like totems.


----------

