Who or What is the Pope?

[Ralph Waldvogel]

I am Reformed in my Christian theology generally but have concerns about Reformed eschatology in particular. Although I have considered myself an amillennial Protestant continuist historicist, I am wondering whether the Bishop of Rome/papal system is the Antichrist, the False Prophet, Mystery Babylon, or all three. I would welcome any comments on this topic.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

The American revisions to the WCF do not make the same definitive claims. The original version retains the explicitness as to that Antichrist language.

Probably the most we PCA or OPC members without taking scruples to the WCF can say is that the Pope is an antichrist yet not the Man of Sin.

By the way, welcome to the PB, Ralph! We are looking forward to many fruitful discussions with you in the future.

Our site contains a wealth of edifying and informative content. For starters, I recommend you start at the following link to get a sense of the basic ground rules:
https://www.puritanboard.com/help/terms

Then review this:
https://www.puritanboard.com/help/9th-commandment/

Please update your signature per the requirements shown at the link in my sig below so that we may properly address you in the future.

Lastly, if you are so inclined, after you have made 25 posts, you can post something about yourself in the following Members Only thread that may be of interest to others. It is a running commentary on the interests and goings on of our members that is not viewable by non-members, nor searchable by internet search bots:

https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/who-are-you-guys-tell-us-a-little-about-yourself.91462/

 

[Romans922]

The pope is the antichrist

https://www.christcovenantrpc.org/audio/conferences-lectures/pope-is-antichrist/

https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=122817111239

https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=115181422204

 

[Parakaleo]

I heard of a Roman Catholic priest who was once presented with all the biblical evidence that identifies the pope as the Antichrist. His response was that, while the case seems to be undeniable, the conclusion is (for him) unthinkable.

 

[Gforce9]

I heard of a Roman Catholic priest who was once presented with all the biblical evidence that identifies the pope as the Antichrist. His response was that, while the case seems to be undeniable, the conclusion is (for him) unthinkable.

This is part of the difficulty in dealing with R.C.'s. The evidence can be so overwhelming, but, because of their pre-commitment, they cannot go where the evidence leads. This was the case for their scholar, Joseph Fitzmyer, who agreed that Romans sure looked to be teaching the Protestant view of justification, but he couldn't go there....because he was Catholic.

More than one R.C., when walked through the details of the creed of Chalcedon (particularly the troubling little part about each nature of Christ retaining it's own attributes), which they lay claim to as their own, then challenged on the corporeal presence of Christ in multiple places at the same time, cry "it's a mystery". Yep, a mystery that violates sacred Scripture and recognized church councils....... It is hard to combat jello...

 

[DTK]

This was the case for their scholar, Joseph Fitzmyer...

You are dead on regarding Fitzmyer.

 

[DTK]

I heard of a Roman Catholic priest who was once presented with all the biblical evidence that identifies the pope as the Antichrist. His response was that, while the case seems to be undeniable, the conclusion is (for him) unthinkable.

Yes, it follows the mindset of certain Romanists, two of which I cite below...

Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), Spiritual Exercises, Rule 13: That we may be altogether of the same mind and in conformity with the Church herself, if she shall have defined anything to be black which appears to our eyes to be white, we ought in like manner to pronounce it to be black. For we must undoubtingly believe, that the Spirit of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of the Orthodox Church His Spouse, by which Spirit we are governed and directed to Salvation, is the same; . . . See Henry Bettenson, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. (London: Oxford University Press, 1963), p. 260.

and

Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621): If, however, the Pope should err by enjoining vices and forbidding virtues, that is, he will enjoin a particular work, although it would be actually vice, but not obvious vice, or prohibit a good work but not an obvious good work, the Church would be bound to believe vices to be good, and virtues to be evil, unless she would be willing to sin against conscience.
Latin text: Si autem Papa erraret praecipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, id est, praecipiendo aliquod opus, quod esset revera vitiosum, sed non manifeste vitiosum, vel prohibendo opus virtutis, sed non manifeste opus virtutis teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, et virtutes malas, nisi vellet conscientiam peccare. Roberti Bellarmini, De Controversiis, Tomus Primus, De Romano Pontifice (Neapoli: Apud Josephum Giuliano, 1856), Liber Quartus, Caput 5, p. 495.

 

[Dachaser]

I am Reformed in my Christian theology generally but have concerns about Reformed eschatology in particular. Although I have considered myself an amillennial Protestant continuist historicist, I am wondering whether the Bishop of Rome/papal system is the Antichrist, the False Prophet, Mystery Babylon, or all three. I would welcome any comments on this topic.

Would say that if there is to be a final Antichrist, Beast, man of Sin, will not be the Pope, as to me that would be more of the False prophet role being fulfilled, as the Church of Rome will be the one to unit all worlds religions under one banner...