Note 117 — SERMON VII. PROPHECIES CONCERNING ANTICHRIST. 1 Ep. John ii. 18.

Grotius says, “Sicut Anticæsarem dicimus qui contra Cæsarem se Cæsarem vult dici atque Cæsar haberi, sic Antichristus est qui se vero Christo opponit eo modo ut ipse Christus haberi velit.” Op. t. iv. p. 490.—The learned commentator did not reflect, that words are not always used according to the strict import of their etymologies. False Christs, we will say, are, in the strict sense of the word, Antichrists. But the question is, in what sense this word is used of the person called, by way of eminence, The Antichrist. This must be collected from the attributes given to him in the prophecies themselves, not from the rigorous etymology of the term. The case was plainly this. St. John is speaking of the false Christs, who had appeared in his time; and, to disgrace them the more effectually in the minds of those to whom he writes, he brands them with the name of Antichrists: not so much respecting the exact sense of the word, as the ideas of aversion, which, he knew, it would excite. For the tradition of the church concerning Antichrist, had made this appellation, of all others, the most opprobrious, and hateful.—Besides, it is not so clear, as Grotius supposes, that the strict sense of the word, Antichristus, must be—is, qui se vero Christo opponit eo modo ut ipse Christus haberi velit. Cæsar, who generally expressed himself with exact propriety, thought fit, on a certain occasion, to assume the name and character of, Anticato. Was it Cæsar’s purpose to say, or was it his ambition to pretend, “that he opposed himself to the true Cato, EO MODO ut ipse Cato haberi vellet?”