In Biblical prophecy, we read that “all the world wondered after the beast” (Rev. 13:3). When the Apostle John saw the harlot (a symbol of a false church) sitting on the beast, he humbly records, “I wondered with great admiration” (Rev. 17:6). Such language aptly describes the world-wide reaction to the new occupant of the papacy, Pope Leo XIV.
The Westminster Divines, and Protestants in general, saw the papacy as the ultimate fulfilment of all prophecies of the Antichrist, who is also called the man of sin and the son of perdition. For example, Francis Turretin wrote that it was “the common opinion of Protestants that the Pope is the Antichrist.” He added:
“This is the united and unswerving opinion of Protestants which they themselves expressed in numerous confessions: The Helvetic Confession, Article 17; The Belgic Confession, Article 36; The Scotch Confession…The Bohemian Confession, Article 3…The Anglican Confession…”
– 7th Disputation: “Whether it can be proven the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist” in Concerning our Necessary Secession from the Church of Rome and the Impossibility of Cooperation with Her
Protestant ministers in those days wrote many thorough, painstaking treatises about the Antichrist. For example, Thomas Manton (1620-1677) preached 18 sermons on the subject – see Volume 3 of his complete works. Nor did he think the subject unedifying and distasteful. All Scripture is profitable (2 Tim. 3:16), including what it teaches about the Antichrist and the Man of Sin. Thus Manton writes, “…the doctrine of Antichrist is a profitable doctrine, and a point very necessary to be preached and known.”
Protestants should solemnly remember what their forefathers taught and unflinchingly contend for it. Churches that ignore their teaching, or reject it, risk their complete subversion or destruction at the hands of Rome.
Indeed, they may already be infected by theory of the Jesuit scholar Francisico Ribera (1537-1591), who taught that the Antichrist would arise in the future. This idea is part of the Futurist method of interpreting prophecy. Or perhaps they are influenced by the Jesuit theologian Luis de Alcazar (1554-1613), who claimed that the Antichrist arose during the pagan Roman Empire. He popularised what is known as the Preterist method of interpreting prophecy. Protestant churches today should repent of their folly and return to the Biblical doctrine summarised in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 25, section 6:
“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 exalteth himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.”
For a brief explanation of the meaning of Antichrist, and how it applies to the papacy, see The Biblical Argument that the Pope is the Antichrist.
See also this Lecture on the Papacy.