It was John Knox's exposition of Daniel chapter 7 that brought about the reformation in Scotland or rather should I say brought it to a head in Scotland. And what I propose tonight is just to give you an overview on it. I've nothing new to say from it. What has been written has already been written upon this great chapter by mighty men of God and so I've just culled some of their thoughts and we trust that they will encourage you. You might not necessarily agree with me and with my interpretation of it, that's entirely your choice but there have been plenty of those who have gone before who have expounded this chapter as I give it to you tonight. Daniel chapter 7 and verse 1. In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed. And he wrote the dream and told the sum of the matters. Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea, and the four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. The first was like a lion and had eagle's wings. And I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it. And behold another beast, a second like to a bear, and it raised up itself on the one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it, between the teeth of it and they said thus, Unto it arise, devour much flesh. After this I beheld, and lo, another like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl. The beast had also four heads, and dominion was given to it. After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, and it had great iron teeth. It devoured and broke 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. I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots. And behold, in this horn were eyes, like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things. And I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool, His throne was like the fiery flame, and his quails as a burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him. Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The judgment was set, and the books were opened. I beheld then because of the voice of the great word which the horns speak. I beheld, even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. I saw in the night visions, and behold one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion and glory, and a kingdom that all people, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. I think now that the visit of Pope Benedict is over, there is time for quiet reflection amongst able believing Christians as to what has taken place. One of the most disturbing aspects of the whole visit for me was the accommodation that was given to him by those who take the name of Protestant and even Reformed. Here in Northern Ireland, amongst those who met the Pope at the formal reception in Holyrood in Edinburgh, were representatives of the three main Protestant churches, the Archbishop of Armagh, Alan Harper, the Reverend Dolan Kerr, a former Methodist president and the Rev. Dr. Donald Watts who is the Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland. Of course the Presbyterian Moderator, Dr. Hamilton, he made the news by explaining why he had refused to meet the Pope in person and shake his hands. It all sounds very good, doesn't it? But all he meant by that was that in the official line-up that there was to meet the Pope, at Westminster Abbey, he just refused to stand and, as it were, shake his hands and to greet the Roman Pontiff. And yet I thought it was very ironic that the General Assembly's Secretary, Dr Watts, was shown just doing that exact same thing on the news media and he seemed to have a very warm and hearty interchange with the Roman pontiff. So if the moderator couldn't do it, men and women, the clerk of the General Assembly had no qualms whatsoever in doing it. But Dr Hamilton did attend the ecumenical service, evening vespers or prayers as the Anglicans like to call it, in Westminster Abbey. And there, although he didn't shake hands with the Pope, he worshipped with the Pope. And to me it makes very little difference whether he shook his hand or he didn't shake his hand because in the exact same week in which the Pope came to visit our once great nation Dr. Hamilton said that of course as a Presbyterian he accepted the Roman Catholic Church as a Christian Church and he accepted the Roman Pontiff as a Christian leader. Well if he does, as I said to you last week, if he accepts what the Pope of Rome teaches. We're not just talking about one section. That is what I think some would like us to narrow it down to in our confession of faith and the chapter on the church where it states that the Pope cannot be the head of the church but is that Antichrist within the church. I think there are some people would just like to say well that's the only bone of contention that we have with the Roman church. But the whole way of salvation that is taught within the Westminster Confession of Faith is at variance with the way of salvation that is taught by the Church of Rome. People say of course Rome doesn't believe in salvation. Of course Rome believes in salvation. But Rome believes in salvation through her sacraments and through her ordinances and not through Christ and through him alone. So if the way of salvation as is taught by the Roman Pontiff is right, then the way of salvation that Dr Hamilton subscribed to when he subscribed his name to the confession of faith is wrong because the two can't be one and the same because they're a total variance one with the other. So his symbolical gesture of not shaking hands with the Roman Pontiff was nothing more than just an empty symbolical gesture and it was just hollow in the extreme. There were other, of course, deeper gestures throughout the Pope's visit. Some of you may have read of them and took note of them. Remember when he stopped to pray at the spot where Sir Thomas Moore was put to death. We do well to remember who Sir Thomas Moore actually was. Rome says he was one of their martyrs. Well, he was a butcher. He was the Lord Chancellor and as the Lord Chancellor he was one of the main inquisitors of just Bible-believing people in England and he was responsible for putting to death many of them. For what crime? For treason? No. For murder? No. What was their crime? that Thomas More put them to death for, for reading William Tyndale's English New Testament. Nothing less, nothing more. So when the Pope comes and talks about a great martyr, well we'll have to just look a little deeper in the history books to find out what this martyr really was. I was intrigued also to read concerning the stole which he chose to wear on the first occasion ever of a Roman pontiff to Westminster Abbey. that's his scarf, he looked very grand in it. The scarf that he wore or that long stole at the front, it belonged to Pope Leo XIII. I'm sure you don't know who Pope Leo XIII is any more than I do but Pope Leo XIII, as we read from the history books, cardinalised a Dr John Henry Newman. who was a convert in Victorian times to the Roman Church. But more than that, he was the author in 1896 of the Nolidity of Anglican Orders. And this is an ironic thing, it's not just some obscure minor ecclesiastical matter. In 1998 the then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger who as the Prefect for want of a better name of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he issued a commentary which listed Pope Leo XIII's declaration that Anglican orders are absolutely null and utterly void as one of the teachings to which Roman Catholics must give firm and definitive assent. It is not, he avered, divinely revealed, but one of the truths connected to revelation by historical necessity. And according to Ratzinger, it is a necessity to believe, as a Roman Catholic, that the ordination of all in the Anglican orders is absolutely null and void. That's the irony. Here he was with Rowan Williams and Rowan Williams was embracing and welcoming him as a fellow great leader of the Christian Church and all the time the Pope was wearing the stole of a previous Pope who declared that Anglican orders are null and void. And when Rome and her co-patriots in the ecumenical movement come on the news media they don't like to portray it do they? That they believe that all other ordinations are null because they're outside of the Roman Church. That's exactly the statement that the Roman Pontiff carried into Westminster Abbey and which very, very few in any of the news media wanted to pick up upon. One English writer noted, Pope Benedict came to reclaim Westminster Abbey for the Benedictine monks who were ejected by Elizabeth I While twice verbally reminding the congregation that he is the successor to St Peter, he symbolically reminded us that only Roman orders have validity. In the symbolism of the stole was the assertion that Pope Leo XIII was right and that Anglican orders remain utterly null and absolutely void. And yet Rowan Williams welcomed him. Yet Archbishop Harper went to welcome him as did all the regional leaders of the main Protestant and so-called reformed churches here in the British Isles. This is where we are men and women. I said last week to you that Ridley said Antichrist has come to this land and it's as if he has bewitched the leadership of the land. And that's just what it was to me as I looked on upon that very strange type of scene. Here we have a man saying that your ordinations are all null and void and the ones who he is saying that to are welcoming him and embracing him with open arms. Somebody has to be bewitched for such a meeting to take place and for such a scenario even to be put into place. We've looked in our past studies with you at the historical testimony of the Church concerning Antichrist. We don't need to go over all of that again. But I would refer you back to it. Because today, Evangelical Protestants, Reformed Evangelical Protestants, who hold that the Roman Antichrist is the Antichrist, they are a minority within Reformed Evangelical numbers. But it wasn't always so. and I give you a long list of names in the weeks that have gone by and I said to you again, if we're wrong on this one, well there's a lot of other people wrong on it too. Well I would prefer to stand with them than to stand with the neo-evangelicals of this day. Those who tell us that we have to witness to the Pope and in order to witness to him we have to worship with him. That's the argument of some evangelicals today within Irish Presbyterianism. it's worth reminding them that he was not named the son of perdition for nothing. Tonight we're going to come and consider the scriptural evidence which teaches us that the papacy is the antichrist. The protestant reformers that we alluded to the Puritans that we referred you to, the great evangelical leaders of the great awakenings in this land and right across America, such as John Wesley, such as George Whitby, all of these men, they did not merely identify the papacy as the Antichrist out of some sectarian rant or just as some thing of Protestantism of that day, they did it because they simply believed that he was the great enemy of the gospel of Jesus Christ and their bold claim, for bold it is, their bold claim was founded upon the word of God. John Knox's exposition of the little horn in Daniel chapter 7 was a sermon that God greatly used to stir the religious conscience and soul of the land of Scotland. In Daniel chapter 7, if you turn with me to it, we have a prophetical preview of the world's four ancient empires and it's given in emblematic form. We have the lion in verse 4 and that represents the lion and the eagle's wings represents Babylon. And then we have the bear in verse 5 and that represents the Medo-Persian empire. And then we have the leopard and the leopard of course was the emblem of ancient Greece, that great civilisation that spanned all of known mankind. And then there was a more terrible and a more dreadful beast appeared and that was Imperial Rome. We read about it in verse 7. And I saw in the night visions and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible and strong exceedingly and it had great iron teeth. The iron speaks of Rome. and there was no empire ever known for its sternness, for its ferocity and for how it stumped to pieces its enemies and took all before it and it took no prisoners. Firstly it tells us that from the head of the fourth beast this Roman Empire would emerge the little horn. I consider it the horn, this is the emblem of strength. In all ancient writings the horn is still the emblem of strength and of power. and behold there came up among them another little horn before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots and behold in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth speaking great things. Now if you take time to compare the similarities between the little horn of Daniel 7 and that of the papacy, there are some very startling resemblances that we have to draw your attention to. And that was what intrigued the likes of John Knox and the Protestant reformers. In verse 8 we are taught concerning the origin of the little horn. It would come from Imperial Rome, the fourth great world empire. History teaches us that when the Roman Empire collapsed in approximately 476 AD, its territory was divided into ten lesser kingdoms. And history teaches us that from this territory the papacy, the little horn, arose. And this was a kingdom claiming not only temporal power but claiming spiritual power. One whose power grew throughout the Middle Ages to such an extent that the great emperors of Europe they came trembling and knocking at the door of the Vatican when the Pope dared to issue his bold and decrees of declamation against the emperors of the great states of Europe. That was the power that the Pope of Rome had. He could raise up armies from one nation to go on to take over another nation and when that decree was issued it was like a licence for some of his cohorts or followers to take the sword in hand and to invade your country. So it wasn't without significance that we read about this little horn growing up that was going to have great power. It was the fall of imperial Rome which gave rise to papal Rome. When the emperors sat in Rome of course they wouldn't book any other world power to sit in the same place. No two world powers were going to sit in the same place. But the Roman Empire was divided and when the western part collapsed what happened? The power was moved and when the power was moved out of Rome, the city of Rome, then the so-called Bishop of Rome stepped into the void and he claimed, of course he claimed to have the spiritual power, but now then he claimed to have the temporal power that seemed to be vacated by the fall of the Roman Empire itself. Turn with me over to 2 Thessalonians for a moment. This is Paul's exposition in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 concerning the Antichrist. I was preaching on this chapter on Sunday night in Annolone and in preparing for it because I had alluded to the Puritans so much I thought well I will read what Thomas Manton said on it. But Thomas Manton in volume 3 of his sermons has a whole set of sermons based on 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 and if you want to really research it in depth and you have plenty of time throughout the winter months well you can read through it. But Manton expounded it verse by verse nearly phrase by phrase and he left no stone unturned in his exposition. If you look at verse 6 and verse 7, it says, Now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work. Now that was prior to this time, Paul was saying. Only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. There are many Reformed commentators who believe that what is referred to here, what withholdeth, is the Roman Empire. and he who now let us will let was the Roman Emperor. You may say well who would believe that? Well the great Dr Gill believed it, the great Henry Matthew believed it just to name a few that are on my shelves at home in the study, just a few. I would be very happy to stand where Matthew Henry stood on any issue. or where the great Baptist commentator Dr Gilles did. In verse 8 note the symbolism. In Daniel 7 in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth speaking great things. This little horn that was going to arise it had eyes and a mouth which Knox believed were meant to symbolise a man or a succession of men. And Knox recognised this as being Papal Rome and he said it was a body or multitude of people under a wicked head including a succession of persons occupying the same situation. And the papacy as we know it is centred on a man or a succession of men known as the papacy or the Popes of Rome. And those who were at the first visit of the Pope in 1982 to Scotland We all felt the irony of it as the then moderator of the Presbyterian Church in Scotland received an welcome to Roman Antichrist under the statue of John Knox, the very man who taught from Daniel chapter 7 that the papacy and the Popes of Rome who occupied that throne in the papacy were the line of Antichrist. He speaks of the pride of the little horn. He speaks great things. Look at verse 11, verse 20, verse 25. And papal Rome has always made great claims and outrageous claims. The anti-biblical errors of the papacy with the passing of the century, they have grown, they have developed. They have grown from something that was an error into something that is a blasphemy. Let me give you some illustrations. In AD 788 the papacy introduced that the relics of saints are to be worshipped. It was one of the greatest money making rackets in Europe of its day and bones and blood and relics of various saints were carried all over Europe and brought to cathedrals and brought to churches and the Jew people came and they paid their hard earned money to see bones of what we don't know. to see liquefied blood of what we don't know. But they came to see it and they worshipped it and Rome sanctioned it. In 1079 priests were forbidden to marry. In 1190 indulgences were introduced and they were taught that they could shorten time in purgatory. And of course in order to encourage bride people to go to the mosque at Billy Houston Park in Glasgow. The church in Scotland was offering indulgences. Of course it's all very high tech nowadays. You went to the internet and you downloaded it from the internet and if you went to the mosque then your years in purgatory were shortened somewhat. Of course if you go to the Bible you'll look from cover to cover and find no reference to purgatory. It is an invention of man. Nothing else. It's an awful reality, men and women, that all our fellow Roman Catholic countrymen believe that their loved ones go into this imaginary place where further purging is necessary. And that's through the prayers of the priest whom they pay and through the masses that will be said by the priest whom they pay that their loved ones get out of purgatory. Can you imagine what must go through the mind of those dear Roman Catholic people and they never know when those loved ones are going to get out of purgatory. In 1215 the communion bread and wine became the mystical body and blood of Christ when the Roman priest pronounces the words Hoc est corpus meum, this is my body. You know, what a blasphemy. There is nothing so blasphemous as the Mass. Knox said he feared one Mass in Scotland more than he did before an army. When a priest can call down the second person of the Trinity and transform him in that little wafer into what he teaches is the very blood and sinews and tissues of the humanity of Jesus Christ. Now if that is not blasphemy we have lost the meaning of the word. I believe even for a protestant who knows the Bible to be in the place where the Mass is offered is an absolute disgrace. And there are many today of course protestant people And they say, well we have to show our respects, don't we? And they go to the mass, the funeral mass. Well, of course we have to show our respects. And I wouldn't show any disrespect. But I wouldn't go to the mass. Because then I would be showing disrespect to Jesus Christ. And who is more important? In 1215 sins were to be confessed to a priest in order to obtain forgiveness. These are just some of the great claims of Rome. In 1220 the wafer, which is to the Romanists the body of Christ, was to be adored. In 1508 the Ave Maria, the Hail Mary, as a prayer was introduced for all the faithful. And yet you know you'll hear this being asked for. on some sound secret or songs of praise or whatever it will be and somebody will put the request in, oh they want to hear the Ave Maria sung and then some operatic singer will come and sing it in such a nice way that everybody will just be taken away from it. But it's an absolute blasphemy. The tradition of the church in 1545 was pronounced as of equal authority to the written scripture. In 1546 the Apocrypha is decreed as a part of the Bible. In 1854 the Virgin Mary was pronounced as being conceived as without sin, despite Romans 3 and 23 being in the Bible. We've forgotten these things men and women. Our Protestant people have forgotten them, conveniently forgotten. For Dr. Hamilton to say this is a Christian church it is a lie, an absolute lie. In 1870 the Pope was made infallible in his official pronouncements so when he sits in that chair and what he states from that chair is supposed to be absolutely infallible. In 1922, you see the blasphemy is right up to date. Mary is a redeemer along with Christ in 1950. Mary was taken to heaven without dying. The pride of the little horn is not lessened but the passing of the years and the representative of that little horn and that whole system comes into the very establishment of the church in England and in symbolic gesture tells the church in England I don't recognise any of your ordination. They're all null and void except they're within the Roman Church and duped and bewitched Anglicans still believe that they're going to have unity with this man. I think this is nowhere better illustrated than in the reason for the Pope going to beatify Cardinal Neumann, make him a saint In order for the Pope to canonise someone and make him a saint. Can you even think of that? We're talking about that. Can you even think of that? The Pope of Rome making anybody a saint. It's God who makes saints. Saints are made at conversion and at regeneration. It's not the work of a man, it is the work of God in the heart of man. But, this is the teaching of Rome. In order for someone to be made a saint, a miracle has to take place, in fact four miracles has to take place in the name of that saint. And this current Pope, he recognised the healing of Deacon Jack Sullivan in 2001 as a miracle resulting from the intercession of the venerable servant of God John Henry Newman. Now the teaching of the Roman Church is this, it believed that God works miracles through people in heaven. And for someone to proclaim blessed are his heavenly intercession to be accepted he must be judged responsible for a miracle on earth which is always a physical healing and thus we're speaking here about people who have died John Henry Newman he's supposedly going to heaven and people here on earth pray to John Henry Newman and then he intercedes and miracles are performed as a result of his intercession. No there is not one verse in the Bible to support such mumbo-jumbo And yet this is the reason that Newman is being elevated to what is called the Sainthood within the Roman Church. This is an absolute attack on the mediatorship of the Lord Jesus Christ. There is one man who intercedes between God and men and he's the man Christ Jesus. And we recognise none other than Christ as the sole mediator between God and men. Christ and Christ alone. And that's what Protestantism does. Protestantism takes away the priesthood. and takes away that order of priests and puts Christ in its place. Protestantism takes away the relics, takes away the shrines and puts Christ in its place. Protestantism takes away purgatory, Protestantism takes away the confessional and what does Protestantism put in the place? Christ. With nothing to offer the people other than Christ and Christ alone. In Daniel 7 21-25 references made to the continual conflict that the forces of the little horn would have with the saints of God. Out beheld in the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High God, and think to change times and laws, and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times, and the dividing of times. This little horn was going to do battle with the saints of God. And Rome has been responsible for the wholesale slaughter of millions who have opposed her down through the centuries. We would be very foolish, wouldn't we, to say that the papacy is not anti-Christ. There are other passages that co-operate this Old Testament exposition by John Knox. There are such passages as 2 Thessalonians 2, 3-12. John Calvin remarked on 2 Thessalonians 2 that a 10 year old boy should be able to see the papacy described in 2 Thessalonians 2. So as you go down it you can just judge how much you can see from it. Another portion of scripture which our Protestant forefathers emphasised and we read that last week but we never got to it, was Revelation chapter 17. Let's just note a few verses. I just want to finish this tonight with you and we'll not come back to it. Verse 3. It's interesting that Rome here takes upon herself the title of Holy Mother Church. We read in verse 3, He carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness And he saw a woman sit upon a scarlet-coloured beast full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. Verse 3 speaks of names full of blasphemy. And you only need to stop to look at the names that the Pope gives to himself. His Holiness, the Chief Shepherd, the Holy Father, the Lord God the Pope. Now I want you to stop and think on that for a minute. The Lord God the Pope. When the Roman Pontiff is introduced these are his titles. You know when you go to official occasions and official functions people are introduced and this is Lord so and so and this is this and this and that and the whole list of titles and names are given. This is how they would introduce the Pope. The father of princes and kings. The ruler of the world. The vicar of Christ on earth. What a tragedy that a Presbyterian moderator would give credence to such claims of blasphemy that the Pope of Rome is the Lord God, the Pope and the Vicar of Christ, the representative of Christ on earth. Verse 3 refers to seven heads and ten horns. Well, the Bible leaves us in no doubt about this interpretation. In verse 9, Rome as a city is situated on seven hills. Those Protestant reformers, they didn't look for any other city when they saw Rome in Revelation 17. Verse 12, the ten horns are the ten territories into which the Roman Empire was divided before the papacy emerged. In verse 4, she is red in colours of purple and scarlet, the very same colours that Pope Benedict made so much of at his coronation so called. In verse 5 she's given the title of Mystery Babylon. Well to find out what is meant by Mystery Babylon you'll have to go back to the book of Genesis chapter 11 and see what Mystery Babylon is and see how God judged Mystery Babylon and all those Chaldean mysteries. The world does not understand the true nature of Romanism. In truth someone wrote about her, she is nothing more than baptised paganism. Mystery Babylon, baptised paganism. Verse 6 tells us that she is drunk with the blood of the martyrs. You don't need to read in Dr Cook's book of the martyrdom of the five English bishops in the reign of Bloody Mary. and how horrific a death those men died. I heard old Bishop Daly a few weeks ago saying that he found it hard to believe that a man called to holy orders, his words, Father Chesney, could have been involved in the Cloddy bombing which murdered nine innocent people, Protestant and Roman Catholics. You know, reviewing the pages of history, I don't find it hard to believe at all that a Roman priest could be involved in such bloody deeds because we read of the blood of the martyrs that Romans shed in generations gone by. She was drunk with the blood of the martyrs. We don't hold the papacy to be anti-Christ out of any malice toward a Roman Catholic countryman. It's our duty and love to point our Roman Catholic countrymen to the Lord Jesus Christ alone as the way of God's salvation and alone as the way of God's mercy. And as I have said to you, in uplifting Christ we'll have to take down everybody who puts himself in the place of Christ. And that's what is necessary in this age that we live in. say a practical word about the practical challenges of our stand against the papacy. The view that the papacy is the Antichrist is not some novel or ideological view of Ian Harris. No. It's a historic view and it has sound, I believe, biblical basis. And you and I in this age of apostasy were called to reaffirm who we are. We're called to reaffirm that we are for all that Christ is for and we are against all that Christ is against. And we often sing that hymn, who is on the Lord's side who will serve the King? And sadly today there are many and they want to run away from the battle. Or they say, well we'll just preach the gospel in this church. Well we do. But we've got also to defend it. We've got to say that we're for all that Christ is for, but we're also against all that Christ is against. I add that we're not against the right of Roman Catholics to worship or practice whatever they believe to be right, even though we know it to be an error in the light of God's word. We don't take religious liberties away from others that we claim for ourselves. But apostate Protestantism which welcomed this current Pope to our land will share in the doom and the destruction that the papacy will share in itself. That is a truth that is very unpalatable to a lot of evangelical people today. Two great truths stand out in the preaching that brought the Protestant Reformation. The just shall live by faith. What a truth to proclaim. not by the works of Romanism, not by the meritorious works that men can do supposedly in the scheme of salvation that Rome propounds, but the just shall live by faith. And two, that the papacy was the antichrist of scripture. It was a message for Christ, and we say amen to that, but it was also a message against antichrist. To this historic school of thought we could add a great cloud of witnessism. We could append their names to it and they sealed that conviction, many of them, with their own martyred blood. Stingly, the great Geneva reformer, he wrote these words. The papacy has to be abolished but it can no more thoroughly be righted than by the word of God. Because as soon as the world receives this in the right way, it will turn away from the Pope without compulsion. And we have the weapon in our hand that can turn hearts away from the Pope of Rome. It's not our Protestant rhetoric, it's the Word of God. Let's keep up the preaching of the Word of God, that glad tidings of mercy to all men. May we live to see in our own land what other countries have experienced even in recent generations. We think of Latin America so called because of its allegiance to the Latin Church turned around through the preaching of the cross of Jesus Christ. Evangelical Protestantism in its many various forms is growing faster there than any other part of the world. God can do it here again in Europe. God can stir the slumbering consciences of the multitudes, but it will be done through the sword of the word of God and through none other. We have no other weapon, but let us learn to use it. And as Old Svingley said, as soon as the world receives it in the right way, it will turn away from the Pope without compulsion. May the Lord hasten the day, brethren and sisters. in which we'll see multitudes of our fellow Roman Catholic countrymen and friends and neighbours brought to faith in Christ through the Word of God, through the preaching of the Word of God and turned away from the papacy and all of the false doctrines of the Church of Rome and brought to saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. And may we live to see the day in which we'll see a revival of old-fashioned biblical Protestantism in this land. and a day in which men and women will gladly once again rededicate themselves to the cause that our reformed forefathers stood for and stood to the death eventually for.